of^ 


„sss^ 


^ 


C<^i'-''-#'^Z^ 


4^z 


"2 


/  (L^'      /J  ^7 


/ 


^ 


^r^ 


^^1 


X 


.A    V      ^    '  ^^  '^-     ^ 


•  N 


\ 


s>.    \         ^ 


■   / 


\ 


V 


\        J 


^  s: 


-  ^ 


HJIP'Wff'?"'"^ 


REPORT 


x>f  tB8 


DEBATES  AND  PROCEEDINGS 


OP    THB 


CONVENTION 


roR  taa 


REVISION  OF  THE   CONSTITUTION 


iiy^'^^jiui/ 


TBB  STATE  OF  KiNTBCRV. 


1849. 


R.  SUTTON,  OFflClAL  REPORTER  TO  TTi    JONVSlKTlON'. 
"WM.  TANNER  ,fe  J.  W.  FiNNELL,  PRINTERS  TO  fFE  CONVENTION. 


F&AXKFORt,   KENTUCKY. 

PRlNtED  AT  THE  OFFICE  OF  A.  G.  HODGES  6t  C6., 

FRAJfKFOBT   COMMOXTTEALTH. 

1849. 


vl  V I 


OOCUMEMS 
D£PT. 


A    TABLE 

Showfog  the  qualified  voters  for  the  years  1847  and  1848,  and  the  number  of  rotes  cast  for 
the  call  of  the  Convention  in  1847  and  1848. 


B  §d  B 


goo 
5r,-  dS  5ad  oS 

i?"*  «'~'  kSS!  c» 

>^  ^c  ^^  "c 

'S.o  -'"  ^.2 


c  i"-5  3fl 


J=» « 


©■ 


-is 


Adair  county, 1 ,452  1 ,086  1 ,507  1 ,090 

Allen  county, 1,228  853  1,413  859 

Anderson  county, 998  698  1,086  800 

Ballard  county, 699  615  728  654 

Barren  county, 2,871  1,719  2,939  1,981 

Bath  county, 1,861  1,304  1,823  1,412 

Boone  county, 1,863  1,254  1,865  1,433 

Bourbon  county, 1,819  841  1,773  964 

Bracken  county, 1,510  1,009  1,586  1,114 

Boyle  county, 1,112  371  1,136  596 

Breathitt  county, 547  453  590  383 

Breckinridge  county,      -        -        -        -        -        -  1,689  1,055  1,745  1,139 

Bullitt  county, 1,130  879  1,165  850 

Butler  county,         - 850  510  875  593 

Caldwell  county, 1 ,886  1 ,599  1 ,860  1 ,504 

Callowav  county, 1,206  959  1,206  1,070 

Campbell  coun^, 1,282  1,225  1,447  1,116 

Casey  county, 960  448  938  620 

Carroll  countv, -  846  614  923  809 

Carter  county, 828  837  908  885 

Christian  countv,             2,086  1,298  2,138  1,462 

Clarke  county, ' -  1,665  999  1,719  1,015 

Clay  county, 697  505  750  599 

Clinton  county, 760  668  897  640 

Crittenden  county, 905  638  947  778 

Cumberland  countv, 985  787  971  644 

Daviess  county,     " 1,751  940  1,933  1,251 

Edmonson  county,  -        -        »        -        -        -  619  384  647  483 

Estill  county, 960  562  1,011  678 

Fayette  county, 2,603  903  2,584  1,328 

Fleming  county, 2,321  1,754  2,311  1,635 

Floyd  countv, 920  695  961  746 

Franklin  county, 1,593  863  1,723  1,065 

Fulton  county, 602  574  631  514 

Gallatin  county, 786  560  813  677 

Garrard  connty, 1,576  1,159  1,563  1,009 

Grant  county. -  1,051  696  1,098  745 

Graves  county, 1,523    "       1,420  1,576  1,395 

Greenup  county,  -        -        -                 ...  1^532  950  1,597  1,245 

Green  county, 2,313  1,762  2,365  1,032 

Grayson  county, 1,075  575  1,127  690 

Hancock  county, 523  304  560  341 

Hardin  county, 2,331  1,473  2,384  1,455 

Harlan  county, 631  417  661  417 

Hopkins  county, 1,751  1,566  1,813  1  612 

Hickman  county, 633  530  656  572 

Harrison  county, 2,001  1,397  2,060  1  358 

Hart  county, 1,323  1,195  1,345  l'li3 

Henderson  county, 1 ,476  576  1 ,467  950 

Henry  county, 1,840  1,244  1,849  1,382 

Jefferson  county, 6,737  4,831*  1,774  1  747 


MS7204 


£ 


si 


e 

^  QO 


Sao 
ox 


Jessamine  county,           .•.----  1 ,280 

Johnson  county,      ..-.-.-.  549 

Kenton  county, 2,080 

Knox  county, --1 ,036 

Laurel  county, 715 

Larue  county, 919 

Lawrence  county,            -        -        -        -        -        -  8^7 

Letcher  county,       -         -         -        -         -        -        -  339 

Lewis  county, 1 ,232 

Lincoln  county,       .-.-...  1,315 

Livingston  county,          ......  822 

Logan  county, -        -  2,047 

Louisville  city,f — 

Madison  county,              2,517 

Marion  county, -  1 ,710 

Mason  county, 2,729 

Marshall  county,    -        -        -        -        -        -        -  793 

McCracken  county, -  603 

Meade  county, 1,006 

Mercer  county,        ...-•-..  2,118 

Monroe  county,       .-.-...  1,152 

Morgan  county,       -        -        -        -        '        -        -  1,167 

Montgomery  county, 1 ,352 

Muhlenburg  county, 1 ,477 

Nelson  county,        -        -        -        -        -        -        -1 ,967 

Nicholas  county, '-1 ,587 

Ohio  county, '1 ,463 

Oldham  county,      -        -        -        -        -        -        -  1 ,038 

Owen  county,          - 1, 627 

Owsley  countyj        - 516 

Pendleton  county, 1 ,214 

Perry  county,           -        -        -        -     '   -        -        -  457 

Pike  county,            -        -  781 

Pulaski  county,       -------  2,156 

Rockcastle  county,          - 790 

Russell  county,       -------  868 

Scott  county, 1,807 

Shelby  county, 2,299 

Simpson  county,     ----'--  952 

Spencer  county,      -        .        .        .        i        .        -  i ^012 

Todd  county, 1,322 

Trigg  county,  .....--l  ^337 

Trimble  county, 921 

Taylor  countyiJ      -        -        '        -        -        -        -  — — — 

Union  county,         .......  1,300 

Warren  county, 2,100 

Washington  county, 1,672 

Wayne  county.      *-...-..  1,436 

Whitley  county,     -        -        i.        -        -        .        .  985 

Woodford  county;           ...;.-;.  1,244 

Total                136,945 


2^ 

^> 
793 
427 

1,483 
912 
473 
674 
754 
241 

1,025 
851 
531 

1,251 


1 ,325 

570 

2,560 

1,091 

777 

981 

956 

365 

1,336 

1,436 

808 

2.016 


905 
398 

1,822 
852 
548 
758 
769 
202 

1,175 
964 
544 

1,372 


1,430 

2,566 

1,655 

817 

1,768 

1,105 

2,073 

2,845 

2,278 

613 

824 

611 

511 

742 

648 

784 

1 ,022 

793 

1,190 

2,125 

1,227 

993 

1,230 

1,004 

813 

1,225 

898 

1,122 

1 ,398 

1,124 

1,000 

1,539 

1,001 

1,017 

2,007 

1,185 

1,336 

1,713 

1,486 

1,055 

1,510 

1,184 

762 

1,073 

802 

902 

1 ,674 

1,036 

455 

566 

480 

586 

1,210 

799 

251 

463 

301 

621 

807 

548 

1,817 

25305 

1,979 

321 

802 

478 

519 

919 

521 

774 

1,839 

743 

1,589 

2,317 

1,610 

789 

924 

745 

600 

1,007 

676 

900 

1,383 

943 

1,052 

1,384 

1,102 

591 

994 

673 

879 

1,002 

1,264 

1,144 

1,289 

2,131 

1,516 

1,064 

1,770 

1,208 

1.020 

1,426 

1,036 

712 

1,021 

704 

545 

1,255 

765 

92,639    139,922    101,828 


•  This  includes  the  vote  of  Louisville  in  1847. 
part  of  Green; 


+  See  Jefiferson.    t  New  county  formed  out  of 


o 

Tf 

00 

f^ 

fe*" 

O 

1— 1 

H 

o 

iz; 

'> 

H 

as 
"5 

> 

O 
1-^ 

^ 

o 

o 

>>1 

o 

O 

>^ 

5 

fcd 

o 

o 

- 

t3 

S 

H 

1 

12: 

Uj 

« 

H 

a 

t3 

H 

o 

«; 

W 

fe 

S 

o 

<1 

■-3 

02 

C5 

H 

n 

^ 

w 

i^ 

Ui 


^  am 


S. 


H^ 


^^-^-fi  s  i.=  =^ i-^   c.s~-T3±3 


-3 

-a 


>.t^ 


>. 

i< 

>.        t< 

W           .- 

>^. 

o 

^         ff 

-^ 

=           g    t^ 

CS 

5      o^^ 

P>,0 

.  "  >-■  c  a" 

W    qj'i^ 

^feW'goS 

^  p  542  «*  §  3 


K    C    S    C  S    >^0    =    G'S 


>.-!zi 


t:,^' 


fe^^"^ 


.w 


O   <v   ^ 

"SdS  o 


c  rt  3 


S'^  s  s-5  toS-^ 


o  5  o ^s 

C^    3    O    ^    3 

■i:  S  fl  §  s 


O   ?. 


^  S  S  o 


5t> 


"rt.t: 


(5    0^3=1, 


^33    = 

o  o  o  _3 

O    <U    K  -^ 


H.2  CS  a3  a!  «  S'  o 


(E  05  4; 


-2      S  £ 


^^ 


^  ^  £ 

-  rt  cS  rt 


et  a  a  a^  ei  a  dJS  CS  it  (t  K  si 


i->  • 


n  1-  *?  fcT  9 


c  ^  £=  ^  £  >»£  ^ 

o3  rt   ctf  rt  o5  ^  c3  rt   ._ 


fe 


,  .o  .      pi; 

'W-^*^  to 

SSSWogg 

Cos  5*3  B 
,  rt«C  o  £  3  t« 

;  'J  'jj  e  :5  e  s 


60 


d^ 


'tally's  2;^  g-^x 


t.  firsts  o  o  U3 


a^^ 


«    H    rt    Si    -  .i    «    «    « 


s  _ 


•^     pj^     ^.^     ^J^     l..^     ,._     ^.^     B_«     •— -K     ^~«     ►—     H— \     ,ji     fcC     i.^     ,J     p_^     ^.J     ^^     ^^     (^ 


rt  eS  cS 

£22 

eS  ce  ed 


fi.:?  aW 

t'^  5  a 

J  si's 

O  "7;  h_  1-9 

3  i>^oa 

c«  et  u  V 


PhWW 


.  est>, 


<u 


fl  «  3  - 


o  o  o 


ii       « 


fl    3 


2  S  8 


^^  «  i: 


5  Sc 


5    (^ 


IkSw^ 


^^2 


o   o  AJ 


^£ 


1"  iri  -2  J4  o 
L.   £   O   O    S 


■  S 


5i£l§   «S 

j-o  5  »  <ii 


a 

^  c  I-*  a 

<ri  o  c    ^ 
^►■3  o  c 

i^  2  c 


02 


Wc^.^J 


c 

CO    <li  •-■ 


a  S  *  <» 
OPhOCC  o 

as  5t3  s  3    •> 


THE  CONVENTION. 


REPORTED    FOR    THE    CONVENTION 


a*  sws^®»9  ®3siaaj?  ;*a*:a»<s>am®3iit '. 


MONDAY,  OCTOBER  1,  1849. 
The  members  elected  to  the  Convention  to  re- 
adopt,  amend,  or  change  the  Constitution  of  this 
State,  assembled  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, at  the  city  of  Frankfort,  in  the  Capitol  of  the 
State,  this  day,  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  pro- 
visions of  "an  act  to  call  a  Convention,"  ap- 
proved January  13,  1849,  in  words  following, 
to-wit : 

Sec.  1.  Be  it  enactedhyihe  General  Assembly  of  the 
Comfnonwealth  of  Kentucky,  That  a  Convention,  for 
the  purpose  of  re-adopting,  amending  or  chang- 
ing the  Constitution  of  the  State,  be  called,  to 
be  held,  commencing  on  the  first  day  of  Octo- 
ber, 1849,  and  to  continue  from  day  to  day  till 
the  business  thereof  shall  be  completed,  with 
power  to  adjourn  and  re-assemble  at  such  times 
as  it  may  deem  proper,  in  the  town  of  Frank- 
fort, in  the  Capitol  of  the  State;  and  said  Con- 
vention shall  consist  of  as  many  members  as 
compose  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  no 
more;  and  they  shall  be  apportioned  among  the 
several  counties  in  the  same  manner  and  propor- 
tion that  Representatives  are,  by  the  law  appor- 
tioning Representatives  among  the  several  coun- 
ties, approved  February  29th,  1848. 

Sec.  2.  That  it  shall  bethe  duty  of  the  Sher- 
iffs, and  other  returning  officers,  at  the  next 
general  election  to  be  held  for  Representatives, 
after  the  passage  of  this  act,  to  open  a  poll  at 
their  several  places  of  voting,  for  Delegates  to 
said  Convention;  and  all  citizens  entitled  to 
vote  for  Representatives  shall  have  the  right  to 
vote  for  Delegates. 

Sec.  3.  That  the  Sheriffs  shall,  within  ten 
days  after  the  election  of  Delegates  to  said  Con- 
vention, severally  deliver  to  each  individual 
who  shall  have  been  elected  a  Delegate,  a  cer- 
tificate of  his  election  as  a  Delegate;  and  shall, 
within  twenty  days  after  said  election,  transmit 
a  copy  thereof  to  the  Secretary  of  the  State,  for 
the  time  being,  which  certificate  shall  be  in  the 
form  following,  viz:  "Be  it  known  to   all   to 

whom  these  presents  shall  come.  That  I 

sheriff  of  the  county  of 


in  my  full  county,  by  an  election  held  on  the 

days  of  August,  1849,  bv  the  electors  of  my 

said  county,  qualified  according  to  law,  caused 

to  be  chosen  — ^ ■ ,  for  my  said 

county,  to  represent  the  same  in  the  Convention 

to  be  held  in  the  town  of  Frankfort,  on  the  first 

2 


day  of  October,  1849,  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
adopting,  altering  or  amending  the  Constitution 

of  the  State.     Given  under  my  hand  this 

(Jay  of ,  1849:"    Provided,  That  in  case 

of  the  resignation  or  death  of  any  member  who 
may  be  elected  a  Delegate  to  said  Convention, 
that  in  such  case  the  Governor  shall,  upon  infor- 
mation, issue  a  writ  to  the  Sheriff  of  the  county 
where  such  vacancy  may  occur,  authorizing  him 
to  hold  an  election  at  the  earliest  time  practica- 
ble, to  elect  other  Delegates  to  fill  any  vacancy 
thus  occurring. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  President,  Printer,  and  oth- 
er proper  ofiicers  of  said  Convention,  and  each 
Delegate  thereof,  shall  receive,  as  a  compensa- 
tion for  their  services,  the  same  allowance  and 
mileage,  to  be  paid  bv  the  Treasurer,  upon  the 
warrant  of  the  2d  Auditor,  as  is  now  allowed  by 
law  to  the  Speakers,  Officers,  Members'  and 
Public  Printer,  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State. 

Sec.  5.  That  the  Sheriffs  and  other  officers  of 
the  election,  shall  be  liable  to  all  such  fines  and 
penalties,  for  failing  to  discharge  the  several  du- 
ties imposed  by  this  act,  as  are  now  imposed 
upon  them,  bylaw,  for  a  failure  to  perform  their 
duty  in  conducting  other  general  elections;  and 
all  persons  who  shall  be  found  guilty  of  casting 
illegal  votes  for  Delegates,  shall  be  liable  to  all 
the  pains  and  penalties  now  inflicted  by  law  for 
illegal  voting. 

Sec.  6.  That  when  two  or  more  counties  vote 
together,  the  Sheriffs  shall  meet  at  the  Court 
House  of  the  county  to  compare  the  polls  at  the 
same  place  and  time  when  and  where  they  meet 
to  compare  the  polls  for  Representatives;  and 
the  certificate  to  the  Delegate  from  such  coun- 
ties shall  be  given  by  the  /Sheriffs  of  those  coun- 
ties. 

Sec.  7.  That  the  Sheriffs  of  the  several  coun- 
ties in  this  State  shall  be  governed  by  the  same 
laws  now  in  force  regulating  the  comparison  of 
the  polls  for  Representatives. 

Sec.  8.  That  said  Convention,  when  so  as- 
sembled, shall  have  authority  to  cause  to  be 
printed,  at  the  cost  of  the  State,  all  such  of  their 
proceedings,  debates,  <fcc.,  as  deemed  proper. 

Sec.  9.  Be  it  further  enacted,  That  in  case  of 
the  failure,  by  death,  sickness,  or  other  cause, 
of  the  Sheriff  of  any  county  to  attend  to  com- 
pare the  list  of  votes  in  his  county,  it  shall  be 
the  duty  of  the  County  Court  Clerk,  or  Deputy 
of  such  Clerk,  to  attiend  with  the  list  of  votes 


10 


of  said  county,  and  make  the  comparison,  and 
in  every  respect  perform  the  same  auties  which 
the  SherifiF  would  have  to  perform  were  he  act- 
ing, and  the  Clerk  to  receive  the  same  compen- 
sation allowed  the  Sheriffs  for  similar  services, 
and  shall  be  liable  to  the  same  penalties  for  a 
failure  to  discharge  the  duties  hereby  imposed. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  rose  in  his  seat  at  11 
o'clock  and  called  the  Convention  to  order.  He 
then  said — Gentlemen,  as  a  preliminary  step  to 
the  organization  of  this  Convention,  I  propose 
to  call  Col.  Ceo.  W.  Joh:jston  cf  Shelby  county 
to  the  Chair  temporarily,  in  thero  any  objec- 
tion? [Several  voices — None.]  There  appears 
to  be  no  objection  to  the  proposition.  Co? .  John- 
son will  have  the  goodness  to  take  tjie  C'lair. 

M".  JOHNSTON  look  the  Chcii  accordingly. 

Mr.  DESHA  moved  that  Mr.  Kellt  of  Wash- 
ington county  act  as  Clerk  to  tlie  Convention 
temporarily. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  IRWIN  then  rose  and  said — A  Clerk  hav- 
ing been  selected,  I  move  that  a  committee  be 
appointed  to  wait  iipon  the  Secretary  of  State  to 
obtain  a  list  of  the  Delegates  who  have  been  rc' 
turned  to  this  Convention. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  move  to  alter  that  resolu- 
tion so  that  it  shall  read  that  a  committee  be  ap- 
pointed to  verify  the  credentials  of  the  members; 
and  let  the  committee  get  their  information  in  re- 
gard to  the  credentials,  in  the  best  ^way  they 
can. 

Mr.  IRWIN.    I  have  no  objection. 

Mr.  GREY.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  first  plan 
suggested  would  be  the  proper  mode  of  proceed- 
ing. The  Secretary  of  State  certainly  has  the 
correct  returns  from  all  the  counties  in  the  State 
of  the-  members  elected  to  this  Convention,  and 
it  appears  to  me  unnecessary  to  appoint  a  com- 
mittee to  examine  those  credentials.  If  the  Secre- 
tary of  State  Avill  produce  the  list  made  from  the 
returns  of  the  proper  officers,  it  will  be  sufficient; 
and  if  there  should  then  be  any  doubt  as  to  the 
correctness  of  the  returns  in  any  particular  case, 
there  might  be  a  committee  appointed  to  exam- 
ine and  report  on  the  right  of  the  person  return- 
ed aselected.  Iseenonecessity  forgoingthrough 
all  these  details.  It  is  perfectly  useless  to  ex- 
amine all  these  credentials,  inasmuch  as  we  have 
the  returns  of  the  proper  officers  of  the  several 
counties.  I  hope  tne  first  motion  will  prevail, 
and  that  the  amendment  will  be  withdrawn  or 
voted  down.  Many  members  may  not  have  in 
their  possession  the  certificates  delivered  to  them 
or  returned  by  the  Sheriff  of  the  counties,  and  I 
think  it  would  be  better  that  the  Secretary  of 
State  should  return  to  us  a  list  of  members  elect- 
ed which  has  been  the  practice  in  other  Conven- 
tions. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  It  is  a  matter  of  very  little 
importance  how  the  credentials  are  obtained. 
With  regard  to  the  mode  of  proceeding,  appoint 
a  committee  and  it  caii  report  in  five  minutes. 
We  are  not  to  depend  on  a  Secretary  of  State. 
I  met  Mr.  Secretary  a  few  minutes  ago  upon  the 
'stairs,  and  I  mentioned  to  him  that  it  was  prob- 
able a  committee  would  be  appointed  to  wait 
upon  him  to  obtain  a  list  of  members  as  return- 
ed by  the  Sheriffs  of  the  counties.  Now  sup- 
pose acme  of  these  certificates  should  be  lost? 


One  way  of  proceeding  will  answer  as  Veil  as 
another;  but  it  shows  tnat  we  are  not  to  depend 
upon  any  officer  as  to  who  is  elected  or  not.  Our 
committee  can  ascertain  the  facts  in  a  few  min- 
utes, and  if  there  be  a  contested  election  it  will 
require  the  future  action  of  this  Convention. 

Mr,  IRWIN.  I  had  no  idea,  being  a  young 
man,  of  taking  any  interest  in  the  organization 
of  the  Convention,  but  I  thought  it  seemed  to  be 
our  first  duty  to  call  for  a  roll  of  delegates.  I 
enquired  from  the  Secretary  of  State  and  he  in- 
formed me  that  he  had  a  roll  already  made  out, 
which  is  now  in  his  office.  If  we  go  into  an  ex- 
amination as  suggested  by  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  it  will  occupy  all  day. 
I  think  it  better  to  take  the  course  first  propos- 
ed, and  if  any  case  of  contested  election  should 
hereafter  appear,  it  may  be  investigated  by  a 
committee.  I  insist  that  the  motion  shall  be 
put  as  first  presented. 

The  CHAIR.  Do  I  understand  the  gentle- 
man fro  m  Logan  to  have  accepted  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson? 

Mr.  IRWIN.    No,  sir. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment, audit  was  negatived. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  original  res- 
olution, and  it  was  adopted. 

The  CHAIR.  Of  how  many  shall  the  com- 
mittee consist? 

A  MEMBER.     Three. 

The  CHAIR.    How  shall  they  be  appointed? 

A  MEMBER.     By  the  Chair. 

The  CHAIR.  If  there  be  no  objection,  Mr. 
Irwin,  Mr.  Meriwether,  and  Mr.  Turner  will  be 
the  committee. 

The  committee  then  retired  to  wait  upon  the 
Secretary  of  State  and  in  a  few  minutes  returned, 
when 

Mr.  IRWIN,  on  behalf  of  the  committee,  re- 
ported that  they  had  discharged  the  duty  intrust- 
ed to  them,  and  received  from  the  Secretary  of 
State  certain  papers  one  of  which  was  the  list  of 
members  returned,  and  another  was  in  relation 
to  a  contested  election  or  tie  vote,  all  of  which 
he  submitted  to  the  Convention. 

The  CHAIR.  If  there  be  no  objection  the 
Clerk  will  call  the  roll  of  members  to  ascertain 
if  there  be  a  quorum  in  attendance. 

The  Clerk  called  the  roll  accordingly;  from 
which  it  appeared  that  the  following  gentlemen 
are  the 

MEMBERS  OF  THE  CONVENTION. 

Richard  Appeeson,  of  Montgomery. 
John  L.  Ballingeb,  of  Lincoln. 
John  S.  Baelow,  of  Monroe. 
William  K.  Bowling,  of  Logan, 
Alfeed  Boyd,  of  Trigg. 
William  Beadley,  of  Hopkins. 
Luther  Brawner,  of  Estill  and  Owsley. 
Francis  M.  Beistow,  of  Todd. 
Thomas  D.  Beown,  of  Hardin, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  of  Jefferson. 
Charles  Chambers,  of  Boone. 
William  Chknault,  of  Madison. 
James  S.  Cheisman,  of  Wayne. 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  of  Simpson. 
Heney  R.  D.  Coleman,  of  Crittenden. 
Benjamin  Copelin,  of  Hart. 
William  Cowpee,  of  Livingston. 
Edward  Curd,  of  Calloway  and  Marshall. 


11 


i 


Garret  Davis,  of  Bourbon. 

Lrcrrs  Desha,  of  Harrison. 

Archibald  Dixox,  of  Henderson. 

J  AXES  DmLET,  of  Fayette. 

Chasteex  T.  DrxAVA.x,  of  Warren. 

Bevjamix  F.  Edwards,  of  Nicholas. 

MiLFORD  Elliott,  of  Pulaski. 

Greex  Forrest,  of  Marion. 

N^ATHAX  Gattker,  of  Adair. 

Selucius  Garfield,  of  Fleming. 

Jaxes  H.  Garrard,  of  Clay,  Letcher  and  Perry. 

Richard  D.  Gholsox,  of  Ballard  and  McCrackeii. 

Thomas  J.  Gocgh,  of  Meade. 

XixiAX  E.  Grey,  of  Christian. 

Jajces  Guthrie,  of  City  of  Louisville. 

James  P.  Hamiltox,  of  Larue. 

Bex.  H.tEDix,  of  Nelson. 

JoHx  Hargis,  of  Morgan  and  Breathitt. 

VixcEXT  S.  Hat,  of  Butler  and  Edmonson. 

William  Hexdrix,  of  Grant. 

AxDREW  Hood,  of  Clarke. 

Thomas  J.  Hood,  of  Lawrence  and  Carter. 

Mark  E.  Hcstox,  of  Spencer. 

Jascs  W.  Irwix,  of  Logan. 

Alfred  M.  Jacksox.  of  Muhlenburg. 

Thomas  James,  of  Hickman  and  Fulton. 

William  Johxsox,  of  Scott. 

George  W.  Johxstox,  of  Shelby. 

George  W.  Kataxavgh,  of  Anderson. 

Charles  C.  Kellt,  of  Washington. 

James  M.  Lackey,  of  Floyd,  Pike  and  Johnson. 

I*eter  Lashbooke,  of  Mason. 

Thomas  X.  Lixdset,  of  Franklin. 

Thomas  W.  Lisle,  of  Green. 

Willis  B.  Machex,  of  Caldwell. 

George  W.  Maxsfield,  of  Allen. 

Alexax-der  K.  Marshall,  of  Jessamine. 

Martix  p.  Marshall,  of  Fleming. 

William  C.  Marshall,  of  Bracken. 

William  X.  Marshall,  of  Taylor. 

Robert  D.  Maupix,  of  Barren. 

Richard  L.  Mates,  of  Graves. 

Nath.\x  McClcre,  of  Russell. 

JoHx  H.  McHex"rt,  of  Hancock  and  Ohio. 

David  Meriwether,  of  Jefferson. 

William  D.  Mitchell,  of  Oldham. 

Thomas  P.  Moore,  of  Mercer. 

JoHX  D.  Morris,  of  Christian. 

James  M.  Xesbitt,  of  Bath. 

JoxATHAX  Newctm,  of  Laurcl  and  Rockcastle. 

Hugh  Xewell,  of  Harrison. 

Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  of  Henry. 

Hkxrt  B.  Pollard,  of  Greenup. 

William  Prestox,  of  City  of  Louisrille. 

JoBsaois  Price,  of  Garrard. 

Labkjh  J.  Proctor,  of  Lewis. 

JoHX  T.  Robixsox,  of  Carroll  and  Gallatin. 

Thomas  Rockhold,  of  Whitley. 

JoHX  T.  Rogers,  of  Barren. 

Ira  Root,  of  Campbell. 

Jakss  Rcdd,  of  City  of  Louisville. 

laxATirs  A.  Spaldixg,  of  Union. 

JoHX  W.  Stkvexsox,  of  Kenton. 

James  W.  Sto\-e,  of  Hardin. 

Michael  L.  Stoxter,  of  Cumberland  and  Clinton. 

Albert  G.  Talbott,  of  Boyle. 

JoHX  D.  T.atloe,  of  Mason. 

William  R.  Thompsox,  of  Bullitt. 

JoHX  J.  Thurmax,  of  Grayson. 

Howard  Todd,  of  Owen. 

Philip  Triplxr,  of  Daviess. 


Squire  Turxer,  of  Madison. 
JoHX  L.  Waller,  of  Woodford. 
Hexrt  Washixgtox,  of  Breckinridge. 
JoHX  Wheeler,  of  Pendleton. 
Ax-DREw  S.  White,  of  Shelby. 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  of  kelson. 
Robert  X.  Wickliffe,  of  Fayette. 
George  W.  Williams,  of  Bourbon. 
Silas  Woodsox,  of  Knox  and  Harlan. 
Wesley  J.  Wright,  of  Trimble. 

The  CHAIR  then  announced  tliat  a  m^ority 
of  Delegates  had  an3;wered  to  their  names. 

oath  of  mekbebs. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  There  is  not  in  the 
law  calling  this  Convention  any  form  of  oath 
prescribed  to  be  taken  by  the  members  of  this 
body;  it  seems  to  me  however  proper  that  an 
oath  should  be  administered  to  support  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States.  I  wUl  therefore 
submit  a  resolution  to  that  effect,  if  it  meet  the 
approbation  of  the  Convention. 

The  CLERK  read  the  resolution  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  an  oath  to  support  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  be  administered  to 
the  members  of  this  Convention. 

Mr.  GUTHRIE.  I  move  to  amend  the  resolu- 
tion ?o  that  it  shall  read,  "That  the  members  be 
qualified  by  taking  an  oath  to  support  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  and  be  faithful  and 
true  to  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky." 

Mr.  WICKLIFFE.    I  desire  so  to  modify  it. 

Mr.  HARDUf .  I  have  a  form  of  oath  drawn 
up  which  I  will  read  to  the  Convention.  It  is 
in  these  words: 

"You  solemnly  swear  to  sapport  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  ana  to  continue  true 
and  faithful  to  the  State  of  Kentucky  as  long  as 
you  remain  a  member  of  this  Convention." 

I  think  we  ought  to  be  true  to  KentucW  as 
well  as  to  support  the  Constitution  of  the  iJni- 
ted  States.       

Mr.  WICKLIFFE.  The  only  difference  be- 
tween my  colleague  and  myself  is  this,  that  he 
confines  the  fidelity  of  members  to  the  contin- 
uance of  the  Convention,  whereas  I  go  beyond 
it. 

The  resolution  as  modified  was  then  adopted. 

The  members  were  then  called  by  counties 
and  the  oath  was  administered  to  them  by  Chief 
Justice  Marshall,  of  the  Appellate  Court. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  by 
general  consent,  his  resolution  was  amended  by 
ading  the  words,  "and  that  the  oath  be  adminis- 
ter^ by  Chief  Justice  Marshall." 

OFFICKBS  or  THB  CQMVXNTIOK. 

Mr.  IRWIX  offered  the  following  resolution: 
Resolwd.  That  a  committee  of  five  be  appoint- 
ed by  the  Chair,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  report 
what  officers  are  necessary  to  the  proper  organi- 
zation of  this  Convention. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  I  had  not  the  pleasure  to 
hear  my  colleague  sufficiently  to  know  what  ob- 
ject he  lias  in  view.  We  know  very  well  that  ac- 
cording to  parliamentary  usage,  we  are  to  have 
a  President,  Chairman, 'or  Speaker,  or  whatever 
else  he  may  be  called.  We  know  very  well  that 
we  are  to  have  a  Clerk,  a  Secretary  if  vou  please. 
We  know  another  thing  very  well,  ttat  we  are 
I  also  to  have  a  Door  Keeper  and  a  Sergeant- at- 


mmm 


Vi 


Arms.  "Whether  we  shall  need  an  Assistant 
Clerk  and  an  Assistant  Sergeant-at  Arms,  is  a 
Question  that  may  be  enquired  into  hereafter. — 
How  then  can  the  necessity  grow  up  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  a  committee  to  inquire  what  officers 
are  necessary?  I  will  ask  my  colleague  where 
is  this  committee  to  get  its  information?  Are 
they  to  get  it  from  the  Governor?  Are  they  to 
get  it  from  the  Secretary  of  State?  Or,  are  they 
to  get  it  from  the  innumerable  candidates  who 
are  pressing  us  here?  No.  Where  then  will 
you  get  it?  What  then  is  your  object?  We  have 
come  here  under  an  expression  of  public  opin- 
ion from  the  mouth  of  the  Big  Sandy  to  Mills 
Point,  and  from  Louisville  to  Cumberland  Moun- 
tain, that  there  is  to  be  no  party  here,  which 
will  by  postponement  endeavor  to  produce  an 
organization  that  may  favor  their  purposes — 
though  I  do  not  say  that  such  is  intended.  But 
we  do  know  that  we  can  now  proceed  as  well  in 
the  organization  of  the  House  as  far  as  respects 
the  President,  the  Secretary,  a  Door  Keeper  and 
a  Sergeant-at- Arms,  as  we  can  after  this  commit- 
tee shall  have  gone  into  an  enquiry  on  this  sub- 
ject. Of  whom  the  committee  shall  enquire  if 
they  do  go  out,  the  Lord  in  his  mercy  only 
knows,  for  I  do  not.  I  hope  we  shall  now  pro- 
ceed. I  do  not  know  if  there  is  any  chance  to 
get  the  yeas  and  nays  on  this  resolution,  but  I 
should  be  glad  to  get  them.  I  want  to  see  who 
is  for  postponement.  We  know  that  no  good 
can  grow  out  of  it.  Every  member  of  this  House 
knows  as  much  as  he  will  know  after  this  com- 
mittee shall  have  sat  and  reported  with  all  possi- 
ble solemnity  to-morrow.  If  we  go  to  the  House 
of  Commons  of  Great  Britain  we  find  that  they 
have  a  Speaker  there.  If  we  goto  the  House  of 
Lords,  we  shall  find  a  Chancellor.  If  we  go  to  the 
Houseof  of  Hepresentatives in  Congress, we  finda 
Speaker  there,  and  in  the  Senate  a  Vice  President. 
Why  did  we  call  you  to  the  Chair,  sir?  Because  it 
was  necessary  to  nave  some  one  to  put  the  ques- 
tion, and  preserve  order.  There  is  no  necessity 
for  a  committee.  I  hope  we  shall  now  proceed 
to  the  election  of  a  President  of  this  Convention. 
Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  My  colleague  ap- 
pears a  little  worried.  He  ascribes  to  me  the  pa- 
ternity of  the  resolution,  but  I  did  not  offer  it. 
The  gentleman  from  Logan  had  the  honor  of  be- 
ing the  mover  of  this  resolution;  but  neverthe- 
less the  proposition  meets  my  approbation,  and 
I  shall  with  great  cheerfulness  vote  for  it — not 
for  the  purpose  of  seeking  information  abroad 
from  the  sources  indicated,  but  in  obedience  to  a 
propriety  of  action  Avhich  should  govern  a  body 
constituted  like  this  and  brought  together  for  the 
purposes  that  this  is.  There  is  no  law — no  reg- 
ulation— no  parliamentary  rule  in  existence  that 
applies  to  this  body,  prescribing  its  authority, 
its  powers,  or  its  duties  in  reference  to  tlie  elec- 
tion of  officers  necessary  to  the  proper  transac- 
tion of  its  business.  Tnere  is  perhaps  a  variety 
of  opinion,  as  to  the  number  of^  ofiicers  that  this 
body  should  appoint.  Whether  we  shall  have 
the  number  that  has  been  selected  by  the  Legis- 
lative Department  of  this  Government  in  times 
gone  by,  is  a  question  respecting  which  the  com- 
mittee may  well  enquire.  I  therefore  most 
cheerfully  agree  with  the  mover  of  this  prop- 
osition tnat  it  is  right  and  proper  that  a  com- 
mittee should  take  ttie  matter  in  charge  and  re- 


Bort  upon  it.  We  have  no  resolution  to  select  a 
loor-keeper  or  a  Sergeant-at-Arms,  but  we  know 
that  these  officers  Avill  be  necessary  as  well  as  a 
presiding  officer;  and  I  find  tliat  the  resolution 
of  the  member  from  Logan  is  drawn  in  accor- 
dance with  the  precedents  set  by  conventions  in 
other  States — first  a  temporary  organization,  and 
then  a  committee  to  report  officers.  With  this 
explanation,  and  assigning  the  authorship  of  the 
resolution  to  its  appropriate  source,  I  shall  vote 
for  its  adoption. 

Mr.  APPERSON".  I  have  a  resolution  which 
I  desire  to  offer  as  a  substitute.  It  is  in  these 
words: 

Resolved,  That  we  now  proceed  to  the  election 
of  a  President  to  preside  over  the  deliberations 
of  this  Convention. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  will  accept  the  substitute. — 
I  had  no  particular  object  in  presenting  the  res- 
olution. I  offered  it  because  I  thought  it  the 
usual  course  pursued  on  such  occasions,  but  if 
the  House  think  it  proper  to  go  on  now  with  the 
election  of  Officers,  I  shall  make  no  opposition 
to  that  course.  Had  it  not  been  however  for  the 
delay  occasioned  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
I  have  no  doubt  the  report  would  have  been  made 
by  this  time. 

Mr.  GUTHRIE.  I  move  that  we  disagree  to 
the  acceptance  of  the  substitute  by  the  memVjer 
from  Logan.  I  have  no  idea  of  a  vote  of  this 
House  being  got  rid  of  in  that  way. 

Mr.  McHEStRY.  This  seems  to  me  to  be  a 
very  unusual  motion.  I  am  not  very  well  ac- 
quainted with  parliamentary  proceedings,  but 
I  have  always  understood  that  the  mover  of  q, 
resolution  might  accept  a  modification  of  it  at 
his  discretion:  the  House  can  then  move  to 
amend,  but  certainly  it  is  not  competent  for  the 
House  to  disagree  to  the  gentleman's  acceptance 
of  a  modification  of  his  proposition.  But  what  I 
chiefly  rose  for  was  to  move  to  amend  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Logan  as  it  now 
stands,  by  adding  the  words,  "and  proceed  to 
make  such  election  without  nominating  any  par- 
ticular candidate." 

Mr.  GUTHRIE.  I  desire  to  move  an  amend- 
ment which  I  hold  in  my  hand: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  members 
be  appointed  to  report  what  officers  are  necessary 
for  the  better  transaction  of  the  business  devolv- 
ing upon  the  Convention. 

The  CHAIR.  The  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Ohio  will  have  precedence. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  accept  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman  from  Ohio,  and  as  I  understand  it,  it 
now  becomes  the  original  proposition. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I,  as  the  mover  of  the  origin- 
al resolution  have  not  accepted  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio. 

Mr.  M'HENRY.  Well,  tlien,  I  desire  to  have 
it  put  to  the  House.  As  remarked  by  a  gentle- 
man who  has  preceded  me,  it  is  expected  in  the 
organization  of  this  body,  and  in  all  our  pro- 
ceedings here,  that  we  shall  notbegovemou  by 
party  tactics  or  party  policy.  If  every  man  shall 
vote  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  judg- 
ment, we  shall  be  more  apt  to  get  officers  unbi- 
ased by  party  feeling  than  we  shall  bo  by  hav- 
ing particular  candidates  nominated  and  liaving 
those  only  voted  for  as  lierctofore.  My  only  ob- 
ject is  to  present  to  the  Convention  a  mode  of 


'  J 


^■■p 


13^ 


organization  bv  pursuing  which  we  shall  elect 
officers  who  will  be  free  from  party  drill,  party 
bias,  and  party  policy,  on  either  side. 

Mr.  HARDI^  calledfor  the  yeas  and  nays,  and 
they  were  ordered,  and  being  taken  resulted 
thus:  veas  55,  nays  41.  So  the  amendment  was 
agreed  to. 

Those  who  voted  in  the  affirmative  were, 
William  K.  Bowling,     Nathan  McClure 


Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt, 
William  Chenault, 
Garret  Davis, 
James  Dudley, 


John  H.  McHenry, 
David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell, 
John  D.  Morris, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price, 


CJ  allies   i^  LlVllC  *  ,  ly  viiiA.:'v.ii    J.   »*w, 

Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,    Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
Milford  Elliott,  John  T.  Rogers, 


Selucius  Garfield, 
James  H.  Garrard, 
Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  Guthrie, 
Ben.  Hardin, 
Vincent  S.  Hay, 
William  Hendrix, 
Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston, 
James  W.  Irwin, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James, 
George  W.  Johnston, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Martin  P.  Marshall, 
William  C.   Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes, 

Those  who  voted  in  the  negative  were, 


Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd, 
James  W.  Stone, 
Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor, 
Wm.  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett, 
Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White, 
Robert  X.  Wickliffe, 
George  W.  Williams, 
Silas  Woodson — 55. 


Richard  Apperson, 
John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow, 
Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley, 
Charles  Chambers, 
James  S.  Chrisman. 
Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha, 
Archibald  Dixon, 
Benj.  F.  Edwards, 
Green  Forrest, 
N^athan  Gaither, 
Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Jfinian  E.  Grey, 
John  Hargis, 
Andrew  Hood, 


William  Johnson, 
Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly, 
James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield, 
Alex.  K.  Marshall, 
William  X.  Marshall, 
Thomas  P.  Moore, 
James  M.  Xesbit, 
Jonathan  Xewcum, 
Hugh  Newell, 
William  Preston, 
John  T.  Robinson, 
Thomas  Rockhold, 
Ign.  A.  Spaulding, 
Jolin  W.  Stevenson, 
Charles   A.  Wickliffe, 
WesleyJ.Wright-41. 


The  question  was  then  about  to  be  put  on  the 
substitute  offered  by  the  gentleman  fi^om  Louis- 
ville, (Mr.  Guthrie.) 

Mr.  GUTHRIE.  I  do  not  design  to  go  into  an 
argument  on  this  subject.  We  have  met,  and  ma- 
ny of  us  are  unacquainted  with  each  other,  and 
it  is  necessary  to  decide  what  officers  we  are  to 
have.  We  might  decide  that  we  would  elect 
first  a  President,  then  Clerk,  then  a  Door  Keep- 
er, and  so  on,  but  it  seems  to  me  it  would  be 
more  in  accordance  with  what  is  due  to  a  delib- 


erative body  that  we  should  determine  first  what 
officers  are  necessary  to  the  transaction  of  the  bu- 
siness and  then  proceed  to  their  election.  Deem- 
ing it  proper  that  we  should  so  proceed  I  have 
moved  the  substitute.  Of  course  it  is  only  my 
individual  opinion  against  the  opinion  of  a  dis- 
tinguished gentleman  who  moved  the  original 
proposition. 

Mr.  HARDIN".  I  did  not  hearvery  well  when 
the  question  was  stated,  and  I  do  not  perceive 
that  we  have  gained  anything  by  the  vote  that 
has  been  taken.  I  understand  now  it  is  upon 
the  simple  proposition  of  the  postponement  of 
tlie  election  of  officers  necessarv  forthe  complete 
organization  of  this  House.  tS-ell,  Sir,  do  we 
not  know  as  well  now  as  we  will  after  the  com- 
mittee report,  that  a  President  is  necessary,  that 
a  Secretary  is  necessary,  that  a  Door  Keeper  is 
necessary,  and  that  a  Sergeant-at-Arms  is  ne- 
cessary. After  we  have  a  President  and  Secreta- 
ry then  this  proposition  for  a  further  organiza- 
tion of  the  House  can  be  put  to  the  House.  We 
have  every  information  that  this  committee  can 
obtain.  If  the  object  be  that  it  shall  be  done 
with  solemnity  I  am  sure  it  is  just  as  solemn  to 
elect  a  President  now  as  it  will'  be  after  dinner 
or  to-morrow  morning.  At  what  time  is  the 
committee  to  report?  When  they  please.  And 
when  will  they  please?  They  may  delay  as  long 
as  they  choose.  I  do  hope  that  we  shall  now 
proceed  to  the  election  of  a  President,  and  then 
to  the  election  of  a  Clerk.  Whether  w^e  go  on 
to  the  election  of  a  Door  Keeper  is  a  matter  of 
but  little  importance;  but  let  us  at  least  give  to 
the  House  an  organization  that  we  know  it  needs. 
I  have  not  heard  from  either  of  the  gentlemen 
what  is  the  object  to  be  obtained  by  the  commit- 
tee. Is  it  expected  that  they  can  get  any  infor- 
mation that  we  do  not  now  possess?  None  in 
the  world.  I  do  hope  then  that  the  House  will 
vote  down  the  proposition.  I  did  not  under- 
stand the  nature  of  the  proposition  upon  which 
we  have  voted.  I  thouglit  it  was  that  we  would 
proceed  with  the  election.  I  am  sure  the  gen- 
tleman from  the  county  of  Ohio  thought  we 
would  have  a  right  to  vote  for  whom  we  pleased. 
You  may  put  in  nomination  A,  B,  C  or  D,and  I 
might  nevertheless  vote  for  Z,  if  there  were  such 
a  name  in  the  Convention.  All  then  that  we 
have  obtained  by  the  veas  and  nays  amounts  to 
nothing.  We  have  teen  voting  on  nothing  at 
all,  (laughter)  and  if  my  friend  imagines  he 
has  accomplished  anything  I  beg  leave  to  say 
that  he  is  greatly  mistaken. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  There  is  no  member  who 
would  regret  more  than  I  would  to  see  a  difficul- 
ty arise.  I  have  a  resolution  which  I  think  will 
satisfy  all  parties,  alfd  it  is  simply  to  require  the 
committee  to  report  in  thirty  minutes. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  rose  to  offer  as  a  sub- 
stitute a  resolution  in  these  words: 

Resolved,  Tliat  the  officers  of  this  Convention 
shall  be  a  President,  a  Secretary,  an  Assistant 
Secretary,  a  Door  Keeper,  and  a  Sergeant-at- 
Arms. 

The  CHAIR.  The  question  is  first  upon  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Boyle. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  understand  that  we  are  get- 
ting further  than  any  parliamentary  law  will 
authorize  us  to  go.  This  substitute  altogether 
supercedes  the  original  proposition,  and  it  will 


14 


not  be  necessary  to  vote  on  these  dJflferent  propo- 
sitions if  this  substiute  be  entertained. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  apprehend  my  friend 
from  Madison  is  in  error.  My  friend  from  Mont- 
gomery offers  the  original  resolution;  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville  offers  a  substitute,  and 
the  gentleman  from  Boyle  offers  an  amendment; 
now  the  question  is,  whether  the  amendment  be 
to  the  substitute  or  to  the  original  resolution 
which  has  been  already  amended.  If  it  be  to 
the  substitute,  it  is  in  order.  If  it  be  to  the  reso- 
lution offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Montgome- 
ry, it  is  in  order,  for  the  friends  of  the  resolution 
may  amend  and  perfect  their  measure  before  a 
vote  can  be  taken  upon  the  substitute. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  The  amendment  is  offered 
to  the  substitute  of  the  Gentleman  from  Louis- 
ville, (Mr.  Guthrie.) 

The  CHAIR.  I  have  been  under  the  impres- 
sion that  the  friends  of  an  original  resolution 
have  a  right  to  perfect  it.  Even  after  an  amend- 
ment has  been  acted  upon,  the  gentleman's  propo- 
sition would  be  in  order  as  a  substitute  for  the 
substitute. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  As  far  as  my  resolution  is 
concerned,  I  have  no  anxiety  to  press  it.  I  am 
perfectly  ready  to  go  into  an  election  of  officers; 
but  if  the  resolution  for  that  purpose  fails,  I 
want  to  submit  an  amendment  according  to  the 
proposition  I  have   offered. 

Mr.  BROWN.  It  seems  to  me  we  are  piling  res- 
olution upon  resolution,  substitute  upon  substi- 
tute, and  amendment  upon  amendment.  If  I 
understand  the  position  of  the  question  it  is 
this:  the  ^original  proposition  offered  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Logan  was  amended  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Montgomery.  The  gentleman  from 
Louisville  offered  a  substitute;  the,  gentleman 
from  Boyle  now  offers  an  amendment  to  that  sub- 
stitute; the  proper  and  legitimate  question  then 
is  on  the  amendment  that  is  offered  to  the  sub- 
stitute. The  other  is  out  of  order  until  this  ques- 
tion is  first  put. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  It  does  seem  to  me  that  we 
are  getting  things  so  tangled  up  here  that  we  had 
better  now,  before  going  further,  submit  them  to 
this  committee  and  let  them  untangle  them.  I 
understand  that  what  is  said  and  done  here  is  to 
be  reported,  and  I  do  not  intend  to  put  any  thing 
on  paper,  or  say  anything  myself  that  shall  be 
brought  up  in  judgment  arainst  me  hereafter. 
One  word  however  in  regard  to  a  remark  which 
fell  from  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Har- 
din.) I  wish  to  say  that  I  have  ho  desire  to  pro- 
voke either  his  satire  or  his  ire.  He  wants  to 
get  rid  of  the  host  of  candidates  here  who  are 
seeking  the  offices  which  this  Convention  may 
make.  Now  I  do  not  knowTiow  it  is  witli  him, 
but  down  our  way  just  before  the  August  elec- 
tion we  like  to  have  the  friendship  of  all  such 
gentlemen  as  are  seeking  office  here  at  our  hands. 
This  is  a  Republican  Govenmient;  and  I  like  to 
meet  all  candidates,  I  do  not  care  whether  it  is 
for  a  Secretary's  place,  or  that  of  Door-Keeper,  or 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  or  any  other  office  that  they 
seek.  They  are  free  men  and  have  a  right  to  be 
here,  and  if  they  press  the  gentleman  hard  I  have 
no  doubt  he  has  a  very  good  way  of  getting 
clear  of  them.  He  can  wiui  a  wink  or  a  motion 
of  his  finger  get  rid  of  all  candidates  for  small 
offices.     I  think  it  would  be  best,  if  it  be  within 


the  parliamentary  rule,  to  move  to  lay  all  these 
resolutions  on  the  table  for  the  present,  and  if  I 
can  get  any  one  to  second  that  motion  I  will 
make  it. 

The  motion  being  seconded,  the  question  was 
put  and  agreed  to. 

NEW  MEMBER. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  discover  upon 
looking  at  the  list  of  Delegates  the  name  of  a 
gentleman  who  has  not  been  enrolled  and  sworn, 
although  he  has  his  credentials  in  his  possession 
— I  mean  the  gentleman  from  Casey,  (Mr.  Cof- 
fey.) I  desire  that  he  now  be  registered  and 
sworn  as  a  Delegate  to  this  Convention. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  would  enquire  why  he  was 
not  sworn  at  first. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  His  name  was  not 
on  the  printed  li.st. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Has  he  got  the  certificate  of 
election? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  He  has  a  certificate 
of  election  from  the  Sheriff. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  no  doubt  if  the  Sheriff 
of  Casey  had  done  his  duty,  the  gentleman  was 
properly  entitled  to  his  seat  here;  but  my  difii- 
culty  is  whether  he  is  here  in  such  a  manner 
that  we  can  recognize  him  as  a  member.  If  I 
understand  the  facts  they  are  these:  The  Sheriff 
of  Casey  county  returned  that  there  was  a  tie 
between  the  gentleman  who  desires  to  take  his 
seat  and  another  individual.  When  he  did  that 
his  official  power  was  at  an  end.  The  official 
return  has  remained  in  tlie  office  of  the  Secretary 
of  State  from  August  until  within  a  few  days. 
Since  then  the  two  competitors  by  agreement  be- 
tween  themselves  referred  the  matter  to  arbitra- 
tion, and  the  arbitrators  decided  in  favor  of  the 
gentleman  who  is  now  here,  because  four  indi- 
viduals who  refused  to  vote  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  election,  were  permitted  to  come  and 
vote  afterwards — contrary  to  law,  contrary  to 
the  act  of  Assembly,  and  contrary  to  the  usages 
of  parliamentary  bodies.  Upon  that  the  Sheriff 
has  assumed  the  power  to  make  another  return. 
Now  the  difficulty  is  whether  the  Sheriff,  after 
having  made  one  return  can  make  another;  and 
whether  the  gentleman  sliall  be  permitted  to 
come  in  and  be  qualified  now,  without  having 
the  facts  come  before  us  in  some  other  way.  I 
supposed  that  when  the  Slieriff  had  made  one 
return,  his  function  was  at  an  end;  but  that  if  a 
committee  were  to  report  that  the  original  return 
was  wrong,  and  report  the  facts  of  the  case,  it 
would  then  be  a  question  for  us  to  detennine 
whether  we  could  not  permit  him  to  take  his  seat. 
But  in  the  present  case  I  apprehend  that  the 
Sheriff's  last  return  is  without  authority  of  law 
and  we  cannot  receive  it.  I  have  no  doubt  that 
he  should  have  returned  this  gentleman  at  first, 
if  the  circumstances  areas  1  understand  them; 
but  when  the  gentleman  gets  his  seat  I  want  him 
to  get  it  according  to  law. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  very  sure  that 
the  Delegate  from  Casey  is  properly  here,  and 
that  if  his  name  had  been  on  the  list  and  he  had 
been  called  at  first  he  would  have  been  swoni 
without  opposition;  and  I  hope  that  will  be  the 
case  now.  It  is  our  duty,  as  I  understand  it,  to 
identify  the  members  of  tliis  body.  In  tlie  coun- 
ty of  CSasey  there  was  a  contest,  and  at  the  close 


15 


of  the  polls  the  Sheriff  taade  out  his  report  in 
which  ne  stated  that  there  was  a  tie.  There  is 
no  provision  in  the  law  which  covers  this  case. 
Vacancies  may  be  filled  when  caused  bv  death 
Of  resignation,  but  here  was  a  failure  to  elect,  so 
lar  as  appears  by .  the  papers.  It  appears  that 
the  people  of  Casey  county,  governed  by  first 
principles,  determined  to  supply  the  omission 
of  the  law,  and  by  consent  of  friends  on  all  sides 
to  submit  the  poll  book  to  two  gentlemen  to  ex- 
amine and  ascertain  which  one  of  them  had  a 
majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  county  of 
Casey.  "Where  tlere  was  a  difierence  of  opinion 
in  regard  to  any  vote,  an  umpire  was  agreed  up- 
on to  determine  the  question.  This  was  done, 
and  the  Sheriff  though  he  returned,  as  I  under- 
stand, a  tie  vote  to  the  Secretary's  office,  has  giv- 
en, upon  an  investigation  by  this  tribunal, 
voluntarilv,  and  mutually,  friendly  and  cordial- 
ly selected,  by  all  p£irtics,'a  certificate  of  election 
to  the  gentleman  now  present.  I  therefore  see 
no  reason  why  the  gentleman  should  be  kept  out 
of  his  seat.  There  will  be  no  law  violated,  he 
has  certainly  been  elected  by  the  voters  of  Casey 
county,  he  is  now  here  to  be  qualified,  and  I 
move  that  he  be  permitted  to  take  his  seat. 
The  question  was  taken  and  the  motion  agreed 
to. 

Mr.  COFFEY  then  presented  himself  And  the 
oath  was  administered  to  him  by  Judge  Jiunes 
Simpson  of  the  Appellate  Court. 

ELECTION  OF  OFFICEES. 

Mr.  APPEKSOX  submitted  a  resolution  a? 
follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  officers  of  this  Convention 
be  a  President,  a  Secretary,  an  Assistant  Secre- 
tary, a  Door  Keeper,  and '  a  Sergeant-at- Arms, 
and  that  we  now  proceed  to  the  election. 

After  a  brief  conversation  between  Mr.  A.  K. 
MARSHALL  and  Mr.  APPERSON  on  a  point 
of  order,  the  resolution  was  agreed  to. 

The  CHAIR  then  announced  that  nomina- 
tions for  the  office  of  President  were  in  order. 

Mr.  APPERSOX  nominated  Mr.  Dixox. 

Mr.  HARGIS  nominated  Mr.  Gutheie. 

Mr.  PRESTON  enquired  how  the  vote  should 
be  taken,  whether  vit>a  voce  or  by  ballot. 

Mr.  APPERSOX  uuderstood  that  it  should  be 
viva  toce. 

Mr.  BULLITT  concurred  that  viea  voce  was  the 
usual  practice,  and  that  it  should  be  adhered  to. 

The  CHAIR  announced  that  the  vote  would 
be  so  taken. 

The  roll  was  then  called,  and  the  result  was 
announced  to  be: 

Foe  Mk.  Gctheik — 

John  S.  Barlow, 

Alfred  Boyd, 


William  Bradley, 
Luther  Brawner, 
James  S.  Chrisraan, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey. 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott, 


Green  Forrest, 
Xathan  Gaither, 
Selucius  Garfield, 
James  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson, 
John  Hargis, 
William  Hendrix, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly, 
James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield, 


Alex.  K.Marshall, 
William  X.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Maves, 
David  Meriwetlier, 
William  D.  Mitchell, 
Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris, 
James  M.  Xesbitt, 
Jonathan  Xewcum, 
Hugh  Xewell, 
Elijah  F.  Xuttall, 


Henry  B.  Pollard^W 
John  T.  Robinson, 
Ira  Root, 

Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  W.  Stevenson, 
James  W.  Stone, 
Squire  Turner, 
John  Wheeler, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  X.  Wickliffe, 
Wesley  J.  Wright — 50. 

Dixox — 
Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Martin  P.  Marshall, 
"William  C.  Marshall, 
Xathan  McClure, 
John  H.  McHenry, 
William  Preston, 
Jolinson  Price, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers, 
James  Rudd, 
John  D.  Taylor, 
"V\'m.  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett, 
John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington, 
Andrew  S.  White, 
George  W.  Williams, 
Silas  Woodson — 43. 


For  Mr. 
Richard  Apperson, 
John  L.  Ballinger, 
William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault, 
Garret  Davis, 
James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Thomas  J.  Grough, 
Xinian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin, 
Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew  Hcy)d> 
Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston, 
James  W.  Irwin, 
Thomas  James, 
George  W.  Johnston, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey, 

For  Xathan  Gaither — Wm.  Johnson. 
For  Gaebet  Davis — Albert  G.  Talbott. 

The  CHAIR  proclaimed  that  the  Hon.  James 
Guthrie,  of  the  City  of  Louisville,  having  re- 
ceived a  majority  of  all  the  votes  given,  was  du- 
ly elected  President  of  the  Convention. 

Messrs.  HUSTOX  and  HARDIX  were  ap- 
pointed a  committee  to  conduct  Mr.  Guthrie  to 
the  Chair. 

The  PRESIDEXT  having  assumed  the  station 
to  which  he  had  been  elected,  rose  and  address- 
ed the  Convention  as  follows: 

Gextlemen  OF  THE  Context! ox: — I  return  you 
my  sincere  thanks  for  the  honor  you  have  con- 
ferred upon  me,  particularly  so,  as  it  has  been 
unsolicited  on  my  part,  ancl  unexpected.  I  am 
unpracticed  in  the  duties  of  the  Chair,  though  I 
have  been  a  long  time  in  a  deliberative  body, 
and  I  shall  therefore  have  to  claim  your  kind  in- 
dulgence, aid  and  assistance  in  the  discharge  of 
my  duties.  We  have  convened  here,  selected 
from  different  counties,  and  I  may  truly  say  in 
regard  to  myself,  totally  irrespective  of  politics; 
and  I  believe  it  is  the  case  with  many  of  us  who 
are  in  this  Convention.  We  are  to  make  a  Con- 
stitution for  the  people  of  Kentucky,  under 
which  all  are  to  live,  and  under  which  the 
rights  of  all  are  to  be  secured.  All  that  I  have 
to  say  to  the  members  of  the  Convention  upon 
this  occasion  is,  that  we  should  practice  the  same 
forbearance  and  discretion  that  our  constituents 
in  selecting  us  have  practiced,  and  by  mutual 
concession  and  forbearance  endeavor  to  agree 
upon  the  best  Constitution— one  that  will  best 
promote  the  interests  of  all.    Without  saying 


^mmmmmf 


H 


16 


more,  and  with  confidence  that  I  shall  have  the 
aid  and  assistance  and  forbearance  of  all,  I  beg 
to  return  yovi  niv  sincere  thanks. 

The  PRESIDENT  stated  the  next  bixsiness  in 
order  to  be  the  election  of  Secretary,  for  which 
office  nominations  were  then  in  order. 

Mr.  APPERSON  nominated  Mr.  Thomas  J- 
Helm,  of  Barren  conntv. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  nominated  Mr.  Joseph 
Christopher,  of  Jessamine. 

The  roll  was  called,  and  the  result  was  an- 
nounced as  follows: 

For  Mr.  Helm,    -        ...        90 
For  Mr.  Christopher,  -         -         -  7 

The  PRESIDENT  proclaimed  that  Mr.  Thos. 
J.  Helm,  having  received  a  majority  of  all  the 
votes  given,  was  duly  elected  Secretary  to  the 
Convention. 

Mr.  Helm  presented  himself,  and  the  oath  of 
office  w'as  administered  to  him  by  Judge  James 
Simpson  of  the  Appellate  Court. 

On  motion,  the  Convention  adjourned  to  10 
o'clock  to-morrow  morning. 


TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  2, 1849. 

ELECTION    OF   OFFICERS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER  it  was 
Resolved,  That  in  all  future  elections  of  offi- 
cers for  this  Convention,  after  the  first  ballot, 
and  on  each  succeeding  ballot,  the  candidate  hav- 
ing the  lowest  number  of  votes  shall  be  dropped, 
and  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  shall  be  ne- 
cessary to  make  an  election. 

ASSISTANT  SECRET AEY. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  that  nomina- 
tions for  tlie  Office  of  Assistant  Secretary  were 
now  in  order. 

Mr.  FORREST  nominated  Mr.  W.  S.  Knott. 

Mr.  W.  N.  MARSHALL  nominated  Mr.  T.  D. 

TlLFORD. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  nominated  Mr.  V.  Monroe. 
Mr.  SPALDING  nominated  Mr.  B.  C.  Allin. 
Mr.  WHITE  nominated  Mr.  T.  W.  Brown. 
Mr.  STONE  nominated  Mr.  Samuels. 
Mr.  HARDIN  nominated  Mr.  Slaughter. 
Mr.  RUDD  nominated  Mr.  Pollard. 
The  vote  having  been  taken,  the  PRESIDENT 
announced  the  result  as  follow^s: 
Mr.  Tilford  received        -        -        30  votes. 
Mr.  Monroe  received       -        -        19  votes. 
Mr.  Allin  received  -        -        17  votes. 

Mr.  Samuels  received      -         -  9  votes. 

Mr.  Pollard  received        -         -  8  votes. 

Mr.  Brown  received         -        -  6  votes. 

Mr.  Knott  received  -        -  5  votes. 

Mr.  Slaughter  received    -        -  3  votes. 

There  being  no  choice,  the  Convention  pro- 
ceeded to  a  second  vote.  (Mr.  Slaugliter's  name 
having  been  first  withdrawn  by  Mr.  Hardin,)  with 
the  following  result; 

Mr.  Tilford  received        -        -        32  votes. 

Mr.  Monroe  received       •        -        21  votxis. 

Mr.  Allin  received  -         -         18  votes. 

Mr.  Samuels  received      -        -  8  votes. 

Mr.  Pollard  received       -        -  8  votes. 

Mr.  Knott  received  -        -  7  votes. 

Mr.  Brown  received         -       -         4  votos. 


No  one  having  a  majority  of  votes,  the  Con- 
vention proceeded  to  a  third  vote,  with  the  fol- 
lowing result: 

Mr.  Tilford  received        -        -        33  votes. 

Mr.  Monroe  received        -         -        22  votes. 

Mr.  Allin  received  -         -         18  votes. 

Mr.  Pollard  received        -         -  9  votes. 

Mr.  Knott  received  -         -  8  votes. 

Mr.  Samuels  received      -        -  6  votes. 

There  being  still  no  election,  the  Convention 
proceeded  to  a  fourth  vote,  with  the  following 
result,  Mr.  Pollard's  name  having  been  with- 
drawn by  Mr.  Rudd: 

Mr.  Tilford  received    -        -        -    34  votes. 

Mr.  Monroe  received    -        -        -    25  votes. 

Mr.  Allin  received       -        -        -    20  votes. 

Mr.  Knott  received      -        -        -    18  votes. 

There  being  yet  no  election  the  Convention, 
proceeded  to  a  fifth  vote,  the  list  of  candidates 
under  Mr.  Meriwether's  resolution  being  reduced 
to  three,  with  the  following  result: 

Mr.  Tilford  received    -         -         -    40  votes. 

Mr.  Monroe  received    -        -        -    31  votes. 

Mr.  Allin  received       -        -        -    26  votes. 

There  was  still  no  choice,  and  the  Convention 
proceeded  to  a  selection  from  the  two  remaining 
candidates,  with  the  following  result: 

For  Mr.  Tilford,  .        .        -    52  votes. 

For  Mr.  Monroe,  -        -        -    45  votes. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  that  Mr.  Tilford 
had  received  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  given, 
and  that  he  was  duly  elected  the  Assistant  Sec- 
retary to  the  Conventien. 

Mr.  Tilford  accordingly  entered  upon  the  dis- 
charge of  his  duties. 

SERGEANT- AT -ARMS. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  that  nominations 
were  now  in  order  for  the  office  of  Sergeant-at- 
Arms. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  nominated  Mr.  J.  D.  McClure. 

Mr.  BARLOW  nominated  Mr.  Joseph  Gray. 

Mr.  CLARK  nominated  Mr.  Humphreys. 

Mr.  JAMES  nominated  Mr.  Joseph  W.  Allen. 

Mr.  G.  W.  JOHNSTON  nominated  Mr. 
Sanders. 

Mr.  KELLY  nominated  Mr.  Booker. 

The  vote  was  taken  with  the  following  result: 

Mr.  Gray  received  -        -         -         26  votes. 

Mr.  Sanders  received       -         -        20  votes. 

Mr.  McClure  received      -        -        19  votes. 

Mr.  Booker  received         -         -         15  votes. 

Mr.  Humphreys  received         -        13  votes. 

Mr.  Allen  received  -        -        -  4  votes. 

There  being  no  choice,  the  Convention  proceed- 
ed to  a  second  vote,  when 

Mr.  Gray  received    -        -        -        24  votes. 

Mr.  Sanders  received      -        -        22  votes. 

Mr.  McClure  received      -         -         19  votes. 

Mr.  Booker  received        -        -        16  votes. 

Mr.  Humphreys  received         -        15  votes. 

Mr.  Allen  received  -        -        -         1  vote. 

There  being  still  no  choice,  the  Convention 

f»roceeded  to  a  third  vote,  Mr.  Allen  having  the 
owcst  vote,  being  dropped,  and   Mr.   Booker 
was  withdrawn. 
Mr.  Sanders  received      -        -        32  votes. 
Mr.  Gray  received  -        -        -        27  votes. 
Mr.  McClure  received      -        -        20  votes. 
Mr.  Humphreys  received         -        17  votes. 


17 


There  being  no  choice,  the  Convention  pro- 
ceeded to  a  fourth  vote,  when 

Mr.  Sanders  received      -        -        43  votes. 

Mr.  Gray  received    -         -         -        30  votes. 

Mr.  McClure  received      -        -        23  votes. 

On  a  fifth  vote  between  the  two  remaining 
candidates, 

Mr.  Sanders  received       -        -        57  votes. 

Mr.  Gray  received   -        -        -        40  votes. 
'  Mr.  Sanders  having  received  a  majority  of  all 
the  votes  given,  was  declared  dulv  elected,  and 
he  entered  upon  the  discharge  of  "his  duties. 

DOOR   KEEPER. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  that  nomina- 
tions were  now  in  order  for  the  office  of  Door 
Keeper. 

Mr.  JAilES  nominated  Mr.  Johx  M.  Helms. 

Mr.  BOYD  nominated  Mr.  C.  C.  Green. 

Mr.  PRICE  nominated  Mr.  Horace  Smith. 

Mr.  McHENRY  nominated  Mr.  Elish.\  Brown. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  nominated  Mr.  Will.  R. 
Campbell. 

Mr.  DESHA  nominated  Mr.  J.^^mes  G    Leach. 

Mr.  IRWIN  nominated  Mr.  Greenup  Keene. 

Mr.  IRWIN  said:  While  I  am  up,  I  desire  to 
say  a  few  words  in  explanation  of  the  circum- 
stances surrounding  tne  gentleman  whom  I 
have  put  in  nomination  for  Door  Keeper.  Mr. 
Keene  is  a  gentleman  of  intelligence,  of  very 
agreeable  manners,  and  I  sincerely  believe  would 
make  a  most  excellent  officer;  but  the  chief  merit 
of  his  case,  sir,  consists  in  the  object  he  has  in 
view  with  the  means  to  be  raised  by  the  salary 
attached  to  the  office.  He  is  the  father  of  Mrs. 
James  W.  Davidson,  of  the  county  of  Logan, 
whose  husband,  some  time  since,  while  at  the 
Muhlenburg  Court,  was  stricken  down  with  dis- 
ease, and  died  in  a  few  hours.  She  is  an  ele- 
gant and  amiable  lady,  with  several  children,  in 
very  embarrassed  circumstances;  and  the  object 
of  Mr.  Keene,  the  father,  is  to  secure  a  little 
home  and  a  few  acres  of  land  for  his  widowed 
daughter  and  grand  children.  Mr.  Keene  has 
some  claims  upon  his  country.  In  the  war  of 
1812,  he  became  a  soldier,  and  I  understand  that 
a  distinguished  gentleman  upon  this  floor  can 
bear  testimony  to  his  manly  bearing.  I  believe, 
sir,  that  in  voting  for  Mr.  Keene,  we  shall  not 
only  secure  a  good  officer,  but  shall  have  the 
additional  consolation  of  knowing  that  we  have 
wiped  away  the  widow's  tears  and  secured  a 
home  to  the  fatherless. 

Mr.  ROOT  nominated  Mr. Samuel  C.  Bristow. 

The  vote  was  taken,  with  the  following  result: 

Mr.  Keene  received  -        -         19  votes. 

Mr.  Helms  received  -        -        17  votes. 

Mr.  Green  received  -        -        -        14  vot«s. 

Mr.  Brown  received         -        -        14  votes. 

Mr.  Campbell  received     -        -        14  votes. 

Mr.  Leach  received  -        -        -        10  votes. 

Mr.  Smith  received .        -        -  6  votes. 

Mr.  Bristow  received       -        -  3  votes. 

There  being  no  election,  the  Convention  pro- 
ceeded to  a  second  vote,  Mr.  Bristow's  name  be- 
ing withdrawn,  when 

Keene  received  -  -  -  19  votes. 
17  votes. 
16  votes. 


Mr 

Mr.  Helms  received 

Mr.  Brown  received 


13  votes. 
10  votes. 


Mr.  Campbell  received    - 
Mr.  Leacn  received  - 
Mr.  Smith  received         -        -  8  votes. 

On  a  third  vote  being  taken,  Mr.  Leacli  having 
been  withdrawn  and  Mr.  Smith  dropped. 


24  votes. 
21  votes. 
19  votes. 
18  votes. 
14  votes. 


Mr.  Green  received  - 
3 


14  votes. 


Mr.  Helms  received 

Mr.  Brown  received 

Mr.  Keene  received 

Mr.  Campbell  received 

Mr.  Green  received  - 

A  fourth  vote  was  taken,  when 

Mr.  Helms  received         -        -        30  votes. 

Mr.  Brown  received         -        -        26  votes. 

Mr.  Keene  received  -        -        21  votes. 

Mr.  Campbell  received    -        -        19  votes. 

On  a  fifth  vote, 

Mr.  Helms  received         -        -        36  votes. 

Mr.  Brown  received         -        -        31  votes. 

Mr.  Keene  received         -        -        29  votes. 

On  a  sixth  vote, 

Mr.  Helms  received     -        -        -    49  votes. 

Mr.  Brown  received    -        -        -    48  votes. 

Mr.  Helms  having  received  a  majority  of  aU 
the  votes  given,  was  declared  duly  elected,  and 
he  entered  upon  the  discharge  of  his  duties. 

RULES  OF  ORDER. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  submitted  the  following 
resolution: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee,  consisting  of  sev- 
en members,  be  appointed  by  the  President, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  prepare  and  report  a 
set  of  rules  for  the  government  of  the  Conven- 
tion. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  moved  to  substitute,  in  lieu 
thereof,  the  following: 

Resolved.  Tliat  the  rules  of  order  which  gov- 
erned the  House  of  Representatives  of  Kentucky 
at  its  late  session,  be  adopted  for  the  govern- 
ment of  this  Convention  so  far  as  they  are  ap- 
plicable, and  that  said  rules  be  referred  to  a 
committee,  consisting  of  five  members,  with  di- 
rections to  report  such  alterations  or  amend- 
ments as  in  their  judgment  may  be  deemed  ne- 
cessary. 

Pendine 


these  resolutions,  on  motion,  the  Con- 


vention adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  3,  1849. 

The  Journal  of  yesterday  having  been  read, 

Mr.  HARDIN  rose  and  stated,  that  he  had 
heard  some  apprehension  expressed  as  to  the 
correctness  of  the  last  vote  for  the  Door  Keeper 
of  tHs  Convention  yesterday.  The  vote,  he  was 
aware,  was  taken  by  a  very  able  and  experienced 
Clerk,  but  it  was  also  taken  by  members  of 
the  Convention,  some  of  whom  were  of  opinion 
that  Mr.  Brown  received  49  votes,  and  Mr.  Helms 
48,  and  not  49  for  Mr.  Helms  and  48  for  Mr. 
Brown,  as  reported. 

After  a  brief  conversation,  it  was  agreed  that 
the  roll  should  be  called,  so  that  if  any  gentle- 
man's vote  was  improperly  recorded,  a  correc- 
tion could  now  be  made. 

The  roll  was  called  accordingly,  and  as  no 
error  was  pointed  out,  the  election  of  Mr.  Helms 
remained  undisturbed. 


18 


fiULES  OF   ORDEU. 

The  first  business  in  order,  was  the  conside' 
ration  of  the  resolution  offered  yesterday  by  Mr. 
Meriwether,  which  was   in  tliese  words: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee,  consisting  of  sev- 
en members,  be  appointed  by  the  President, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  prepare  and  report  a 
Bet  of  rules  for  the  government  of  the  Conven- 
tion. 

And  the  substitute  of  Mr,  MITCHELL  as  fol- 
lows: 

Resolved,  That  tlie  rules  of  order  which  gov- 
erned the  House  of  Representatives  of  Kentucky 
at  its  late  session,  be  adopted  for  the  government 
of  this  Convention,  so  far  as  they  are  applicable, 
and  that  said  rules  be  referred  to  a  committee, 
consisting  of  fiive  members,  with  directions  to 
report  such  alterations  or  amendments  as  in  their 
judgment  may  be  deemed  necessary. 

Mr.  HARGIS  said  he  desired,  if  it  were  in 
order,  to  offer  a  substitute  for  both  the  resolutions. 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  three  be  ap- 
pointed to  digest  and  report  certain  rules  to  gov- 
ern the  action  of  this  Convention,  and  so  far  as 
applicable,  that  the  same  shall  conform  to  the 
parliamentary  rules  of  the  Congress  of  the  Uni- 
ted States. 

He  observed,  that  he  was  of  opinion  that  this 
Convention  was  a  little  above  the  Legislature;  at 
least  he  apprehended  their  constituents  so  re- 
garded it. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  the  difference  be- 
between  the  gentleman's  proposition  and  that 
"which  he  submitted  yesterday  was  simply  a  dif- 
ference between  "three"  and  "seven;"  for  the 
rules  of  Congress  would  be  before  the  committee, 
and  they  might  select  such  as  in  their  judgment 
were  applicable.  The  committee  would  like- 
wise have  before  them  the  rules  of  the  Legisla- 
ture of  Kentucky,  from  which  also,  they  could 
make  a  selection.  Why  then  was  it  necessary  to 
make  any  special  reference?  It  was  surely  a 
very  important  question  whether  a  committee 
should  consist  of  five,  three,  or  seven!  A  bare 
amendment  to  strike  out  and  insert  three,  five,  or 
seven,  would  have  accomplished  the  gentleman's 
object. 

Mr.  HARGIS  was  of  opinion  that  there  was  a 
difference  between  the  two  resolutions.  Wheth- 
er the  Parliamentary  rules  of  Congress  would 
be  before  the  committee  he  was  not  advised. 
The  resolution  spoke  only  of  the  rules  of  the 
Legislature,  and  the  good  people  of  Kentucky, 
their  constituents,  he  apprehended,  looked  for 
somethirig  in  this  body  a  little  above  that. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  suggested  that  the  gen- 
tleman from  Morgan  and  Breathitt  had  mistaken 
the  substitute  of  the  gentleman  from  Oldham  for 
the  original  proposition.  The  original  resolu- 
tion made  no  reference  to  the  rules  of  the  Legis- 
lature. 

Mr.  HARGIS  replied,  that  he  knew  no  other 
proposition;  and  at  his  request  they  were  again 
read. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  said  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Jefferson,  as  he  understood  it, 
•was  to  raise  a  committee  whose  business  it 
would  be  to  digest  a  system  of  rules  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Convention;  but  the  object  which 
he  had  in  view,  in  offering  his  substitute,  was  to 
provide  some  rules  for  toe  immediate  govern- 


ment of  the  Convention  until  other  rules  were 
reported  by  the  committee.  The  resolution  of- 
fered here  as  a  substitute,  provides  that  the  rules 
which  governed  the  House  of  Representatives  of 
Kentucky  at  its  last  session,  shall  be  adopted,  so 
far  as  applicable  to  this  House,  and  then  refer- 
red to  the  committee  to  report  such  alterations 
and  amendments  as  were  deemed  necessary. 
Until  they  did  report  these  would  be  the  rules 
for  the  government  of  this  Convention.  His  ob- 
ject was  to  facilitate  business. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  the  gentleman's" 
explanation  Avas  evidence  that  his  proposition 
would  defeat  its  own  object.  The  gentleman 
wished  to  adopt  the  rules  of  the  State  Legisla- 
ture. Now,  on  looking  over  these  rules,  it  would 
be  found  there  was  one  requiring  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds  for  their  alteration.  If  they  were  adopted, 
the  report  of  the  committee  must  first  get  a  vote 
of  two-thirds  in  order  to  secure  its  adoption; 
and  the  effect  would  be  to  place  them  in  a  posi- 
tion where  they  could  get  none  other  than  the 
rules  of  the  Legislature,  without  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds,  and  the  question  would  be  eternally 
arising  in  the  House  as  to  the  applicability  of  a 
rule — for,  "so  far  as  applicable,"  says  the  gentle- 
man's proposition.  He  thought  it  better  to  be 
without  rules,  for  a  day  or  two,  than  to  have 
those  which  would  create  a  controversy  as  to 
their  applicability. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  said  the  substitute,  to  him,  did 
not  appear  obnoxious  to  the  objection  made  by  the 
gentleman  from  Jefferson.  Tlie  adoption  of  the 
rules  and  their  reference  to  a  committee  would  be 
simultaneous.  The  resolution  is  an  entire  thing, 
and  must  be  taken  together.  The  power  to  alter 
and  amend  is  not  posterior  in  point  of  time  to 
their  adoption.  Then,  the  rule  requiring  a  two- 
third  vote  for  their  alteration  would  not  be  appli- 
cable, because  it  would  conflict  with  the  power 
to  alter  or  amend.  It  might  be  that  questions 
would  occasionally  arise  as  to  the  applicability 
of  the  rules  to  this  body,  but  it  was  better  to 
have  some  rules,  even  if  this  question  did  arise, 
than  to  have  none  at  all. 

Mr.  DAVIS  said  he  comprehended  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Oldham  precisely 
as  that  gentleman  had  explained  it,  and  in  that 
form  he  was  opposed  to  it.  He  thoiight  the 
proposition  of  tne  gentleman  from  Jefferson  a 
proper  one,  and  that  it  ought  to  be  adopted. 
He  understood  that  the  rules  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  of  the  State  of  Kentucky  pro- 
vide for  a  call  for  the  previous  question.  The 
consequence  would  be,  as  there  was  no  previous 
question  in  committee  of  the  whole,  when  in  the 
House  the  previous  question  might  be  sprung  up- 
on every  proposition.  He  desired  in  this  Con- 
vention that  every  gentleman  who  offered  a  prop- 
osition for  its  consideration  should  have  an  op- 
portunity of  calling  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
every  one  he  might  choose  to  submit.  If  a  prop- 
osition were  submitted  in  committeeof  the  whole, 
and  was  found  to  be  unacceptable  to  the  majori- 
ty, he  did  not  want  that  majority  to  have  an  op- 
portunity by  going  into  the  House  and  calling 
for  and  sustaining  the  previous  question  to  stifle 
and  suppress  the  question  on  a  proposition  vo- 
ted down  in  committee.  In  other  words,  he 
wanted  a  system  of  rules  which  would  enable 
each  member  to  have  a  call  of  the  yeas  and  nays 


19 


on  his  proposition  in  committee  of  the  whole,  as 
well  as  in  the  House,  and  he  tnisted  the  motion. 
of  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson  would  prevail, 
and  the  committee  constituted  under  it  would  so 
establish  the  rules  of  this  House. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  Mr.  MITCH- 
ELL'S propceition,  and  it  was  rejected,  and  the 
original  resolution  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER  was 
adopted. 

The  PRESIDENT  then  named  the  following 
gentlemen  as  the  committee  on  rules  under  the, 
resolution  just  adopted:  Messrs.  Meriwether 
Dixon,  Davis,  McHenrj,  Barlow,  Mitchell,  and 
Irwin. 

MODE   QF  PROCEEDING. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Mr.  President,  I 
rise  to  submit  some  resolutions,  not  proposing 
any  specific  proposition  to  change  or  alter  the 
Constitution,  but  to  indicate  the  views  which  I 
have  at  this  early  hour  as  to  the  mode  and  man- 
ner by  which  we  shall  approach  the  labors  which 
lie  before  us.  I  desire  to  have  the  resolutions 
read,  and  if  it  is  the  pleasure  of  the  House  to  con- 
sider them  now,  I  will  give  such  explanations  as 
occur  to  me  with  regard  to  them,  that  they  may 
be  comprehended  by  those  who  hear  me. 

Mr.  2*UTTALL.  I  would  make  a  suggestion 
tomy  friend  from  Xelson  (Mr.  Wickliffe.)  Had 
we  not  better  first  elect  Public  Printers?  When 
the  important  business  of  the  Convention  is  about 
to  be  brought  before  us  in  a  tangible  shape,  we 
ought  to  be  enabled  to  have  the  documents  prin- 
led,  that  we  may  form  deliberate  opinions  upon 
them. 

Mr.  PRESIDENT.  The  resolutions  are  be- 
fore the  Convention,  and  therefore  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Henry  is  not  now  in  or- 
der. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  am  aware  of  that,  but  I 
suggest  that  the  gentleman  withdraw  his  resolu- 
tions; then  we  can  proceed  to  the  election  of  a 
Printer,  afterwhich  the  gentleman's  resolutions 
wUl  be  first  in  order. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  resolutions  pro- 
pose no  change  of  principle;  but  only  indicate 
the  appointment  of  certain  committees  to  whom 
the  body  will  refer  certain  duties  to  be  performed 
in  the  preparation  of  business. 

The  Resolutions  were  then  sent  up  to  the  Sec- 
retary's Desk  and  read  as  follows: 

1.  Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  nine  Dele- 
gates be  appointed,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  re- 
port such  "  amendments  or  changes  "  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  Kentucky,  as  they  may  deem  neces- 
sary in  the  provisions  thereof  which  relate  to 
the  election  and  appointment,  term  of  oflice, 

Sowers  and  duties  of  the  Governor,  Lieutenant 
ovemor.  Secretary  of  State,  and  such  other  ex- 
ecutive civil  officers  whose  duties  ordinarily  are 
required  to  be  discharged  at  the  Seat  of  GK)vem- 
ment. 

2.  That  a  similar  committee  be  appointed  to 
report  such  " amendments  or  changes"  as  may 
be  necessary  in  the  Constitution  of  Kentucky, 
in  the  provisions  thereof  which  relate  to  the  ap- 
pointment, qualifications,  term  of  office,  duties 
and  powers  of  all  other  executive  or  ministerial 
civil  officers  whose  jurisdiction  and  powers  mav 
be  confined  to  counties,  districts,  cities,  or  towns. 

3.  That  a  like  committee  be  appointed  to  re- 
port what  "  amendments  or  changes  "  are  neces- : 


sary  in  that  portion  of  the  Constitution  of  Ken- 
tucky concerning  the  Militia,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  officers  thereof 

4.  That  a  committee  of  nine  Delegates  be  ap- 
pointed to  report  what  "amendments  or  changes" 
are  necessary  to  be  made  in  so  much  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  Kentucky  as  concerns  the  Legisla- 
tive Department  of  the  Grovemment. 

5.  That  a  committee  of  fifteen  Delegates  be 
appointed  to  report  what  "amendments  or  chang- 
es' are  necessary  in  that  portion  of  the  Consti- 
tution of  Kentucky  that  relates  to  the  Court  of 
Appeals,  the  appointment  of  the  Judges  and 
Clerk  thereof. 

6.  That  a  committee,  to  consist  of  fifteen  Del- 
egates, be  appointed  to  report  what  "amendments 
or  changes  are  necessary  to  be  made  in  that 
portion  of  the  Constitution  of  Kentucky  which 
relates  to  the  appointment  of  the  Judges  of  in- 
ferior Courts,  ana  officers  thereof,  and  uie  tenure 
of  their  offices. 

7.  That  a  committee,  to  consist  of 
Delegates,  be  appointed  to  report  what  "amend- 
ments or  changes"  are  necessary  to  be  made  in 
the  Constitution  of  Kentucky  in  relation  to  the 
County  Courts,  the  qualifications  and  mode  of 
appointment,  and  the  tenure  of  office  of  the 
Justices  and  Clerks  tliereof. 

8.  That  a  committee,  composed  of 
Delegates,  be  appointed  to  report  what  "amend- 
ments or  changes"  are  necessarv  to  be  made  in 
any  of  the  miscellaneous  provisions  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  Kentucky;  and  that  said  commit- 
tees have  power  to  report  from  time  to  time,  until 
their  labors  are  completed. 

Mr.  WALLER.  Mr.  President,  I  wish  to  offer 
a  resolution  as  a  substitute.  Similar  resolu- 
tions were  adopted  in  the  Conventions  of  the 
States  of  Virginia  and  New  York. 
The  Secretary  read  the  Resolution  as  follows: 
Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  seven  be  ap- 
pointed to  inquire  and  report  what  method  will 
be  most  expedient  in  bringing  before  the  Con- 
vention alterations  or  amendments  of  the  Con- 
stitution which  may  be  preferred. 

Mr.  G.  DAVIS."  Mr.  President,  before  the 
substitute  is  considered  I  will  offer  an  amend- 
ment in  the  form  of  an  additional  resolution 
to  those  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson- 
(Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe.)  ' 

The  Secretary  read  the  Resolution  as  follows: 
Resolved,  That  a  select  committee  of  five  be 
appointed  by  the  President,  with  instructions  to 
report,  in  substance,  as  the  first  provision  of  a 
new, "or  amended  Constitution,  that  no  member 
of  this  Convention  shall  be  eligible  to  any  office, 
or  place  of  trust  or  profit,  established  directly  ' 
by  it,  or  that  may  be  established  under  the  au- 
thority of  any  constitutional  provision  which  it 
may  adopt;  or  the  mode  of  appointment,  or  elec- 
tion, to  which  mav  be  prescribed  by  any  such 
constitutional  provision,  or  by  any  such  law,  un- 
til after  the  expiration  of  ten  years  from  the  rat- 
ification and  approval  of  this  Constitution  by 
the  qualified  voters  of  this  Commonwealth. 

Mr.  IRWIX.  At  this  distance  I  could  not  dis- 
tinctly hear  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon  (Mr.  Davis,)  but  so  far  as  I  could 
understand,  it  seems  to  me  to  cut  off  every  gen- 
tleman in  this  House  from  any  office  to  be  crea- 
ted by  the  Constitution.    (Laughter.)    If  I  afti 


20 


correct  in  my  understanding,  before  this  resolu- 
tion shall  have  been  adopted  I  feel  some  disposi- 
tion to  resign.     (Renewed  laughter.) 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  did  not  in  the  pro- 
iet  I  drew  in  my  resolutions,  borrow  from  any 
system  adopted  as  I  am  aware  by  any  Conven- 
tion of  a  sister  State,  as  I  had  not  access  to  the 
journals  of  any  other  State.  I  am  therefore  en- 
tirely responsible  for  the  propriety  of  these  res- 
olutions, and  I  desire  that  they  may  not  be  en- 
cumbered, when  they  are  only  intended  to  ena- 
ble the  presiding  officer  of  this  body,  if  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  views  of  the  delegates,  to  go  to 
work  and  select  committees,  to  whom  certain 
duties  devolving  on  us  under  the  law  calling  the 
Convention,  may  be  assigned.  Of  course  there 
is  nothing  in  these  resolutions,  which  expresses 
directly  or  indirectly,  or  desires  to  extract  the 
opinions  of  any  member  of  this  House  upon  any 
principle  either  of  the  Constitution  to  be  framed, 
or  any  change  of  the  present  Constitution  or  a- 
mendment  thereof.  I  should  carefully  abstain 
from  thus  early  introducing  such  a  resolution 
myself;  but  to  enable  us  to  do  this  work,  I  think 
we  should  have  something  of  system  or  order, 
and  certain  duties  and  labors  assigned  and  ap- 

Eortioned  out  among  the  members  thereof. — 
'ence  it  was  that  I  proposed  the  appointment  of 
different  committees.  There  should  devolve  on 
one  committee,  the  duty  of  examiningthe  present 
Constitution  with  reference  to  the  Executive  de- 
partment of  the  government;  another  with  refer- 
ence to  the  Legislative  department;  another,  Avith 
reference  to  the  Judicial  department;  and  tlien 
the  miscellaneous  provisions  of  the  Constitution. 
These  committees,  composed  of  the  delegates  of 
this  House,  selected  by  the  judgment  of  the  pre- 
siding officer,  would  immediately  go  to  work. — 
They  would  make  a  report  to-day,  or  to-morrow, 
or  the  next  day,  of  so  much  of  their  labor  as  they 
had  prepared, — say  connected  with  the  Execu- 
tive department, — calling  it  if  you  please,  num- 
ber one.  That  will  then  be  placed  upon  your 
calendar  as  an  order  of  the  day.  Another  will 
be  prepared  to  report  in  part,  the  duties  allotted 
to  them.  They  have  examined,  deliberated  up- 
on, and  digested  the  work;  have  consulted,  and 
carefully  put  together  the  result  of  their  labors  in 
a  manner  and  in  language  that  cannot  possibly 
be  misunderstood.  We  can  then  take  up  those 
reports  from  day  to  day,  and  if  it  is  tlie  desire  of 
the  House,  we  can  discuss  them  here,  and  if  ne- 
cessary the  committee  may  explain,  and  any 
member  of  the  House  will  be  at  liberty  to  offer 
amendments  and  have  a  vote  taken  upon  them. 
And  when  it  is  perfected,  we  can  take  the  vote 
on  its  en^ossment  and  lay  it  aside  as  so  much 
labor  finished,  to  be  put  together  in  the  mode 
hereafter  to  be  agreed  upon  by  the  House.    The 

E reposition  of  the  Delegate  from  the  county  of 
ourbon,  might  be  very  appropriate  as  a  matter 
of  instruction  to  the  committees,  or  a  separate 
committee  might  be  raised,  and  instructed  to  put 
such  a  proposition  in  the  Constitution  a.s  would 
have  that  effect.  But  it  seems  tome  not  appro- 
priate to  the  resolution  which  I  had  the  honor 
to  submit  to  this  House.  If  the  object  of  the  res- 
olutions I  submitted  is  understood:,  I  desire  not- 
to  consume  the  time  of  the  House;  and  if  they  de- 
sire further  time  to  reflect  and  examine  a  better 
plan  ^an  I  have  submitted,   I  will  cheerfully 


postpone  their  consideration .  Certainly  I  cannot 
vote  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon,  because  it  involves  a  great  principle. 
I  do  not  know  that  I  have  so  great  an  objection 
to  it  as  my  young  friend  from  Logan  (Mr.  Irwin,) 
for  I  certainly  have  no  idea  of  holding  office  un- 
der the  new  Constitution. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  wish  to  superadd  to  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  the 
following:  "provided  however,  that  this  amend- 
ment shall  only  apply  to  such  members  of  this 
Convention  as  shall  vote  for  the  same." 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  It  seems  to  me  that 
this  is  a  very  important  step  which  we  are  about 
to  take,  and  it  is  one  which  I  am  not  disposed  to 
vote  upon  at  present.  This  resolution  is  to  gov- 
ern the  future  action  of  the  Convention,  as  I  un- 
derstand it,  and  should  be  fully  examined.  I 
therefore  move  tliat  it  be  laid  on  the  table  and 
printed. 

Mr.  DAYIS.  Mr.  President,  I  believe  that 
motion  is  subject  to  debate.  I  made  my  propo- 
sition in  all  good  faith,  and  should  be  greatly 
gratified  myself  to  see  this  Convention,  if  they 
think  it  proper,  adopt  it.  It  is  not  the  presen- 
tation of  a  new  principle  to  me,  but  a  new  ap- 
plication of  one  found  both  in  the  Federal  and 
our  own  State  Constitution,  and  as  I  think  not 
an  unimportant  and  useless  one  as  proposed  in 
the  amendment  I  have  offered.  I  will  call  the 
attention  of  the  gentleman  from  Henrv,  (Mr. 
Nuttall,)  and  of  the  Convention  to  the  clause  in 
each  Constitution.  I  do  not  know  that  the 
amendment  suggested  by  my  very  respected 
friend  from  Henry  would  have  any  personal  ap- 
plication to  himself,  because  I  am  not  satisfied 
that  the  effect  and  tendency  of  my  amendment 
would  in  any  way  be  to  exclude  him  from 
any  place  under  any  Constitution.  [Laughter.] 
If  it  had  the  effect  to  exclude  myself,  why  I 
should  have  no  sort  of  objection  to  it — none. 
What  I  have  said  is  in  pure  good  humor  to  my 
respected  friend,  for  whose  talents  and  abilities 
I  have  the  highest  respect,  and  to  whom  I  am 
ready  to  tender  mv  personal  regard  and  friend- 
ship; and  I  should  feel  some  distress  to-be-sure 
if  he  should  be  cut  off  from  any  office  or  the 
country  lose  the  great  advantage  of  his  talents 
and  experience.  Any  proposition  I  have  made 
here,  I  trust,  will  be  frauglit  with  no  such  catas- 
trophe, either  to  himself  or  the  country. 

In  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  Sec. 
6,  of  the  1st  Article,  the  second  clause  readsthus: 

"No  member  of  the  Senate  or  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  shall,  during  the  time  for  which 
he  shall  have  been  elected,  be  appointed  to  any 
civil  office  under  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,  which  shall  have  been  created  or  the 
emoluments  whereof  increased  during  suoli  tmie; 
and  no  person  holding  any  office  under  the  Uni- 
ted States  shall  be  a  member  of  either  house  du- 
riiig  his  continuance  in  office." 

The  provision  of  our  own  Constitution  I  pre- 
sume was  borrowed  by  the  wise  men  who  framed 
it  from  the  words  just  read  from  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution.   It  is  as  follows: 

"No  Senator  or  Representative  shall,  during 
the  term  for  whicli  he  was  elected,  or  for  one  year 
thereafter,  be  appointed  or  elected  to  any  civil 
office  of  profit  under  this  Commonwealth,  whicli 
shall  have  been  created,  or  the  emohiments  of 


21 


which  shall  hare  been  increased,  during  the  time 
such  Senator  or  Representative  was  in  office, 
except  such  offices  or  appointments  as  may  be 
made  or  filled  by  the  elections  of  the  people." 

!Xow  I  propose  an  extension  and  application  of 
this  principle  of  exclusion  from  office  to  those 
"who  are  to  make  offices,  the  members  of  this 
body,  and  that  this  exclusion  shall  have  effect 
and  operation  for  a  term  of  ten  years.  It  is  not 
a  total  exclusion,  but  its  extent  will  depend  on 
the  innovation  and  change  which  this  body  may 
make  upon  the  existing  Constitution,  and  accord- 
ing to  my  best  care  and  deliberation  I  drew  it  up 
to  have  that  restricted  operation.  If  this  Conven- 
tion by  any  constitutional  provision  should  es- 
tablish a  new  office,  every  member  of  it,  if  my 
proposition  should  prevail, — including  myself, 
who  will  vote  for  it,  and  including  my  respect- 
ed friend  from  Henry  who  I  presume'will  vote 
against  it — would  be  necessarily  excluded  from 
office.  And  so  it  is  meant  for  myself.  ]/  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  should  authorize 
the  Legislature  to  create  and  establish  other  offi- 
ces, and  the  Legislature  under  the  authority  of 
such  a  provision  or  provisions  should  pass  laws 
for  the  establishment  of  other  offices,  whv,  in 
like  manner,  he  and  myself  would  be  excluded 
from  appointment  or  election  to  those  offices'? 
There  is  another  branch  of  the  resolution  that 
provides  that  where  the  modeof  appointment  or 
of  election  shall  have  been  changed  by  this 
amended  or  new  Constitution,  or  by  any  law 
passed  under  its  authority,  this  exclusion 
shall  have  application  to  such  cases  also.  If 
the  office  of  Governor  or  Lieut.  Governor  re- 
mains intact  by  this  body,  no  gentleman  aspi- 
ring to  those  high  positions,  under  the  effect  and 
operation  of  my  amendment,  would  be  excluded 
from  them.  If  the  term  of  these  offices  is  deem- 
ed too  long,  it  might  be  limited  to  three  or 
two  years,  and  still  the  prohibition  not  extend 
to  any  member  of  this  Convention.  If  there 
should  be  a  change  made  in  the  organization  of 
the  Legislative  department  of  the  Government — 
for  example,  that  its  election  should  be  biennial, 
and  that  unless  convened  on  extraordinary  oc- 
casions by  the  Governor,  its  sessions  shouM  be, 
by  the  Constitution,  restricted  to  once  in  two 
years — whieh  I  hope  will  be  a  provision  and 
feature  in  the  new  Constitution — every  gentle- 
man who  should  vote  for  that  provision  would 
be  eligible  to  seats  in  either  branch  of  the  Le- 
gislature. If  the  mode  of  appointing  Judges 
should  remain  the  same  as  it  is  under  the  exist- 
ing Constitution,  and  to  my  mind,  there  will  be 
great  if  not  insuperable  difficulty  in  improving 
that  mode,  although  it  is  objectionable  to  my- 
self— still,  if  that  mode  should  be  preserved  un- 
der a  new  Constitution,  and  the  Judges  be  re- 
quired to  hold  their  offices  for  a  limited  time — 
which  principle  I  should  like  to  see  adopted  in 
the  Constitution — every  gentleman  on  this  floor 
will  be  eligible  to  the  judicial  offices  of  the 
State.  So  that  I  beg  leave  to  inform  mv  young 
friend  from  Logan,  or  at  least  so  recently  from 
Logan,  that  he  will  pardon  me  for  forgetting  his 
locality — and  to  my  friend  from  Henry,  that  the 
provision  which  I  have  submitted  to  the  consid- 
eration of  the  Convention,  is  not  as  sweeping  as 
a  superficial  view  would  authorize  gentlemen  to 
infer. 


Xow  I  do  not  know,  and  indeed  have  no  hope, 
unfortunately,  that  the  proposition  will  prevail; 
nevertheless  it  has  as  much  of  my  confidence, 
and  will  have  from  me  as  steady  and  as  earnest 
a  support,  though  I  stand  solitary  and  alone  in 
uttering  my  voice  in  its  favor,  as  if  it  was  to  re- 
ceive the  unanimous  sanction  of  this  body  and 
the  people  of  this  State.  I  believe  it  to  be  right, 
and  that  it  would  work  good  to  our  constitu- 
ency and  the  country*.  I  will  add  one  or  two 
arguments  why  I  believe  it  will  not  prevail. 
Under  the  existing  system,  and  the  principles  of 
our  present  Constitution,  a  great,  powerful,  and 
talented  party,  consisting  of  nearly  one  half  of 
the  voters  of  Kentucky,  are  excluded  from  execu- 
tive appointments.  I  admit  it  to  be  a  wrong. 
I  maintain  that  in  all  our  governments.  General 
and  State,  the  mass  of  the  important  politi- 
cal offices,  those  that  mould  the  administration 
and  give  character  to  it — the  executive  adminis- 
tration and  the  active  politics  of  the  govern- 
ment— ought  to  be  filled  with  the  friends  of  that 
government.  But  when  you  come  to  judicial 
and  minor  ministerial  offices,  I  utterly  condemn 
and  abhor  that  piratical  principle  that  would 
eject  men  from  such  places  because  they  dared  to 
think  for  themselves,  and  to  entertain  principles, 
and  to  cherish  systems  ofpolicy  not  acceptable  to 
the  incumbents  having  the  appointing  power. 
Such  a  principle  is  oppression  and  tyranny, 
and  I  would  like  to  see  the  free  people' of  this 
country  trample  it  in  the  dust  and  annihilate  it. 
I  admit  that  it  is  wrong  and  unjust  to  exclude 
the  great  Democratic  party  in  this  State  from  all 
executive  appointments.  "We  see  them  rallied 
against  the  present  mode  as  one  man,  and  why? 
Because  the  present  system  entirely  excludes 
them  from  these  places,  these  judicial  offices, 
and  authorizes  their  filling  by  executive  appoint- 
ment. I  am  not  prepared  to  say  that  any  sys- 
tem we  may  introduce  in  its  stead  would  be  Set- 
ter. We  are  all  frail  and  erring.  Iso  human  insti- 
tution is  perfect.  Xo  system  that  the  experience 
and  wisdom  and  virtue  of  man  can  devise  will 
ever  work  infallibly.  Xone!  On  this  subject  I 
have  no  fixed  principles  or  predilections.  I  want 
light — to  interchange  views  and  feelings  and  sen- 
timents with  my  associates  in  this  body.  I  want 
the  best  system  that  can  be  devised  by' the  reflec- 
tion, experience,  wisdom,  and  patriotism  of  this 
body,  to  be  thrown  before  it  for  its  fair  and  un- 
restricted consideration;  and  if  1  know  myself, 
when  that  system  is  addressed  to  me,'  and 
conforms  to  tlie  dictates  of  my  conscience  and 
judgment,  I  am  prepared  to  adopt  it,  come  from 
what  source  it  may.  But  I  am  utterly  and  irre- 
versibly opposed  to  the  election  of  the  judiciary 
by  the  popular  vote.  I  am  equally  inflexible  in 
my  opposition  to  the  election  of  the  judiciary 
by  the  vote  of  the  two  Houses  of  the  Legislature. 
On  the  other  hand,  I  see  how  impracticable  and 
vain  would  be  any  proposition  that  did  not  con- 
cede something  to  this  party  that  has  been  en- 
tirely excluded  from  these  offices.  The  organi- 
zation which  at  present  seems  to  me  most  prop- 
er, but  which  I  will  cheerfully  yield  to  any 
proposition  that  on  reflection  app'eafsto  me  better, 
IS  this:  That  when  the  Legislature  convenes,  and 
there  is  a  vacancy  in  a  judicial  office,  the  mem- 
bers of  the  House  of  Representatives  from  the 
district  in  which  such  vacancy  exists,  shall  get 


22 


toEjether  and  form  themselves  into  an  electoral 
college,  and  shall  name  for  the  office  two  candi- 
dates— two  gentlemen  resident  within  the  dis- 
trict— and  shall  nominate  them  to  the  Senate, 
whish  body  shall  nominate  one  of  them  to  the 
Governor,  and  he  shall  receive  the  commission 
of  the  Commonwealth  as  Judge  of  the  district. 
I  would  like  some  such  system  as  that — some- 
thing that  would  do  justice  to  both  of  the  great 
parties  in  this  State. 

While  our  friends  constitute  numbers  nearly 
as  great  as  ourselves,  embodying  talents,  virtue, 
and  patriotism  nearly  or  quite  as  great  as  we  do, 
I  regard  it  as  unjust  and  oppressive  that  they 
should  be  excluded  from  ail  these  offices.  If 
any  one  of  the  number  of  the  able  men  of  that 
party  on  this  floor,  whose  reflection  and  experi- 
ence will  enable  him  to  devise  a  system  that  will 
secure  something  like  equal  justice  to  both  par- 
ties— that  will  at  the  same  time  avoid  the  vio- 
lence, the  corruption,  the  bribery,  and  the  great 
train  of  ills  that  will  follow  the  popular  election 
of  the  judicial  officers  of  this  Commonwealth, 
and  will  prevent  the  offices  being  thrown  into 
the  Legislature  of  the  State  for  scramble  and  in- 
trigue— I  say,  if  any  gentleman  will  devise  a 
better  system  than  the  one  I  have  introduced,  I 
will  thank  him  for  myself,  and  will  most  cor- 
dially adopt  it.-  I  did  not  intend  to  debate  this 
proposition,  but  to  throw  it  out,  not  for  present 
action  or  discussion,  but  that  members  might 
think  and  ponder  upon  it,  and  if  they  came  to 
the  conclusion  that  it  was  worthless — reject  it. 
If  it  deserved  a  better  citnsideration,  they  could 
give  it  to  it — ^but  I  think  now  is  the  proper  time 
— at  the  very  threshhold  of  our  deliberations — 
to  offer  it.  If  it  was  possible  by  my  vote  to  cut 
off  the  members  who  are  to  frame  a.Constitution, 
from  all  political  office  and  hope,  and  even  from 
every  party  tie,  I  would  cast  such  a  vote.  I 
would  say  that  they  should  stand  aloof,  as  im- 
partial, unsullied,  pure,  unsuspected  arbiters 
among  contending  partizan  factions.  They 
should  form  a  government  for  the  present  and 
for  posterity.  They  should  have  no  political 
object  or  hope  beyond  that  work.  If  that  work 
was  badly  done,  it  would  be  sufficient  evidence 
that  they  ought  not  to  be  trusted  with  any  other. 
If  it  was  well  done,  it  would,  in  my  opinion,  af- 
ford a  just  and  sufficient  fame  to  satisfy  the  am- 
bition of  any  properly  organized  mind.'  I  would 
not  only  exclude  them  from  office  under  the  State, 
but  under  the  general  government.  I  would  cut 
them  off  as  far  as  practicable  from  being  parti- 
zans.  They  should  know  none  of  the  motives, 
personal  or  private,  that  operate  upon  the  hu- 
man mind  and  conscience,  to  debauch  it  and  to 
pervert  it  to  wrong  conclusions.  None!  But  I 
■will  add  nothing  more  on  this  subject  at  present, 
but  to  express  the  hope  that  gentlemen  will  give 
this  subject,  as  I  have  .sought  to  give  it  myself, 
a  careful  examination,  and  if  they  are  not  satis- 
fied with  it  and  think  it  ought  to  be  rejected,  I 
shall  feel  no  disappointment  at  the  result. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  "When  the  gentleman  offered 
his  resolution,  it  appeared  to  me  that  perhaps  his 
intention  was  to  <lereat  any  Constitution  whicli 
this  Convention  might  make.  I  do  not  know  that 
I  clearly  apprehended  the  gentleman's  object,  but 
I  think  I  am  not  mistaken  when  I  say  that  the 
citizens  of  his  county  voted,  by  a  considerable 


majority,  in  favor  of  calling  the  Convention. 
If  then  the  citizens  of  his  county  voted  for  cal- 
ling the  Convention  and  elected  him  a  member 
of  it,  how  is  it  that  he  offers  a  resolution  which 
I  cannot  but  think  was  offered  with  the  inten- 
tion of  defeating  any  Constitution  which  this  '• 
Convention  may  make.  He  seems  to  mourn  for" 
the  fate  of  the  democratic  party  of  Kentucky. 
I  did  not  expect  to  hear  much,  in  this  place,  in  re- 
gard to  the  democratic  party,  or  in  regard  to  the 
party  of  which  the  gentleman  is  a  member.  We 
were  not  elected  for  party  purposes.  If  the  gen- 
tleman comes  here  with  the  intention  of  defeat- 
ing the  very  object  of  the  Convention — with  the 
intention  of  securing  the  rejection  of  any  Con- 
stitution which  this  Convention  may  make — I 
imagine  that  when  he  goes  back  to  his  constitu- 
ents, they  will  tell  him  that  he  has  not  truly 
represented  their  will  and  wishes.  The  people 
have  expressed  their  will,  and  have  sent  us  here 
not  to. act  upon  principles  of  party  policy.  No, 
Sir,  but  to  change  tlie  organic  law  of  the  State, 
and  to  make  it  conform  to  their  will  and  wishes. 
What  is  the  great  object  which  is  to  be  ac- 
complished by  us?  Is  it  not  to  change  the  mode 
of  appointment  of  the  various  important  officers 
of  the  State?  The  Judiciary  is  one  class  of  those 
officers.  The  duration  of  their  offices,  as  those 
offices  are  at  present  constituted,  is  highly  ob- 
jectionable to  the  people.  No  mode  of  appoint- 
ment, the  gentleman  says,  can  be  perfect — no 
.system  of  government  can  be  perfect.  That  is 
true;  but  if  there  be  any  mode  on  earth  by  which 
appointments  can  be  made  that  is  as  pure  and  as 
free  from  corruption  as  when  made  oy  the  sov- 
ereign people,  I  acknowledge  that  I  am  mista- 
ken. The  people  are  the  sovereignty  of  the 
State,  and  the  power  belonging  to  the  people  is 
that  power  which  regulates  the  interests  and 
welfare  of  this  great  Commonwealtli.  When 
the  government  is  in  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple, it  is  near  and  dear  to  them.  Then  why 
should  we  trust  to  ariy  other  power  than  that 
of  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth  to  do  this 
important  work?  I  mean,  to  appoint  the  high 
officers  of  government — those  officers  who  de- 
rive the  pay  for  the  services  they  render  direct- 
ly from  the  people.  Who,  I  say,  can  be  better 
qualified  to  appoint  those  officers  than  the  peo- 
ple themselves?  It  would  be  a  shame  to  deprive 
them  of  it;  and  I  should  be  very  reluctant  to  see 
my  name  enrolled  with  those  who  would  deny 
to  the  people  the  privilege  of  making  such  ap- 

f)ointments.  I  should  be  equally  reluctant  to 
avor  the  proposition  that  no  member  of  this 
Convention  should  hold  office  for  the  next  ten 
years.  I  should  be  ashamed  that  it  should  go 
forth  to  the  world,  that  this  Convention  passed 
a  resolution  tiiat  no  one  of  its  members  should 
hold  office  under  the  Constitution  that  we  may 
make,  within  a  period  of  ten  years.  I  would 
ask  the  gentleman  where  he  ever  found  a  prece- 
dent for  such  a  resolution?  If  sucli  should  be 
adopted,  I  apprehend  both  he  and  myself  would 
be  quite  too  old  afterwards  to  participate  in  the 
affairs  of  the  government.  It  strikes  me,  that 
we  are  pretty  well  advanced  in  years  already.  I 
do  not  Know  that  he  entertains  any  wish  to  re- 
ceive an  appointment,  but  I  have  no  doubt  there 
are  friends  of  the  gentleman  wlio  would  not  be 
so  reluctant  to  render  tlieir  services  to  the  State. 


23 


But  at  all  events  I  have  more  confidence  in  the  I  to  the  gentleman's  resolution.    I  shall  now  ask 


members  of  this  Convention,  than  to  be  willing 
to  declare  that  the^  shall  not  hold  office  under 
the  new  Constitution  for  a  period  of  ten  years. 
I  -want  to  show  that  we  are  not  ashamed  or 
afraid  to  submit  the  work  of  our  hands  to  our 
constituents,  and  if  it  be  found  that  we  have 
been  good  and  faithful  servants,  perhaps  the 
people  may  desire  that  we  should  continue  in 
their  service. 

The  gentleman  says, let  the  Districts  nominate 
two  persons  to  the  Senate  for  the  office  of  Cir- 
cuit Judge  and  let  the  Senate  determine  between 
them.  But  would  not  that  defeat  the  verv  in- 
tention which  the  ffentleman  professes  to  nave 
in  view?  If  you  should  have  a  Wliig  Senate 
would  the}'  not  be  very  apt  to  appoint  a  Whig 
Judge?  Or  if  the  Senate  should  be  Democratic 
would  not  the  appointee  be  a  man  of  their  own 
politics?  Why  not  then,  to  avoid  this  dilemma, 
refer  the  matter  to  the  people  themselves?  If, 
sir,  the  people  are  the  sovereign  power  of  the 
State,  which  they  are, — if  they  support  and 
uphold  the  State,  which  they  do', — for  they  pay 
for  the  services  of  their  officers — ou^ht  they  not 
to  have  the  right  to  appoint  those  o&cers?  And 
ought  they  not  to  have  the  right  to  sav  )iow 
long  thev  shall  ser^-e,  and  to  have  the  right  also 
to  say  wliether  those  who  have  served  them  al- 
ready in  one  capacity  shall  continue  to  serve 
them  in  a  different  capacity?  But  do  not  under- 
stand me  as  saying  that  I  would  place  a  man  be- 
fore the  people"  for  a  high  office  unless  he  were  a 
man  of  high  standing.  For  instance,  in  the  case 
of  the  appointment  of  a  Judge,  I  would  require 
that  the  candidate  should  be  a  man  of  long  ex- 

Serience  at  the  bar.  Although  I  belong  to  the 
•emocratie  party,  a  fact  which  I  believe  is  very 
well  known,  so  far  from  placing  before  the  peo- 
ple for  appointment  a  man  not  duly  qualified,  I 
would  require  full  and  complete  qualification 
and  fitness  in  all  candidates  for  office.  I  would 
not  only  have  them  qualified  to  discharge  the 
duties  of  the  office,  but  I  would  have  them  to  be 
residents  of  the  Districts  in  which  their  duties 
are  to  be  performed.  I  would  not  only  have  the 
appointments  of  the  Judges  made  by  the  people, 
but  I  would  leave  to  the  people  the  election  of  aU 
officers  whom  they  are  to  pay  for  their  services. 
As  regards  the  Secretary  of  State,  Auditors,  and 
such  otherofficers,  I  would  not  insist  upon  their 
appointments  being  made  by  the  people ;  but  as 
regards  those  officers  who  reside  in  the  various 
Districts,  and  whose  services  are  to  be  there  dis- 
charged, the  people  are  better  qualified  to  elect 
them  than  any  other  tribunal.  There  is  a  great 
deal  that  I  might  add  upon  this  subject,  but  I  do 
not  desire  to  consume  the  time  of  the  Convention. 
I  merely  wish  to  throw  out  these  suggestions, 
and  I  would  be  glad  to  hear  the  opinions  of  gen- 
tlemen on  both  sides  upon  a  matter  as  important 
as  this  is.  Indeed  I  do  not  know  that  any  re- 
marks upon  this  subject  are  in  order  at  this  time. 
The  subject  seems  to  have  been  brought  forward 
prematurely. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  do  not  myself  believe 
that  this  is  the  proper  time  for  the  discussion  of 
this  question.  Nor  do  I  think  it  is  a  time  for 
the  indulgence  of  pleasantry;  and,  perhaps,  had 
I  sufficiently  considered  what  was  due  to  self- 
respect,  I  should  not  have  offered  the  amendment 


leave  to  withdraw  it,  and  at  the  same  time  ten- 
der mv  respects  to  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon, 
(  Mr.  Davis,)  for  whom  I  have  always  enter- 
tained a  high  regard.  I  shall  not  however  vote 
in  favor  of  the  gentleman's  proposition;  because 
I  prefer  to  save  to  the  country  tne  benefit  of  his 
ability  and  talents,  (laughter,)  for  I  am  well  as- 
sured, that  the  country  would  never  be  able  to 
progress  without  the  aid  of  his  distinguished 
talents.     (Renewed  laughter.) 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  do  not  intend  to  present  to 
the  consideration  of  the  Convention,  any  ;wo;e< 
or  plan  of  change  necessary  to  be  made  in  the 
Constitution  of  the  State;  nor  will  I  detain  the 
Convention  more  than  a  few  minutes.  I  have 
read  with  some  care  and  particularity,  the  prop- 
osition of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  and  I 
have  only  to  remark,  tliat  the  principle  that  is 
therein  attempted  to  be  applied  to  the  members 
of  this  Convention,  has  neVer  been  applied  to 
the  members  of  any  Convention  in  this  Union 
which  has  assembled  for  the  purpose  of  forming 
a  Constitution.  1  am  aware  that  in  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  and  I  believe  that  in 
the  Constitution  of  every  State  in  the  Union, 
there  is  a  provision  that  no  member  of  a  Legisla- 
tive body,  who  shall  be  engaged  in  the  creation 
of  any  office,  shall  be  appointed  or  promoted  to 
that  office,  during  his  term  of  service  in  the 
body  by  which  the  office  was  created.  If  I  un- 
derstand the  position  of  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon,  it  is  this— it  seems  at  least  to  resolve 
itself  into  the  enquiry^what  is  the  creation  of 
an  office?  If  a  change  be  made  in  the  manner 
and  mode  of  appointment,  does  the  gentleman 
mean  that  such  change  shall  be  considered  as  the 
creation  of  a  new  office?  I  certainly  so  under- 
stand the  gentleman.  If  I  misunderstood  him, 
I  would  be  glad  to  be  corrected. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  gentleman  does  misunder- 
stand me.  That  is  a  distinct  class  of  cases. 
The  gentleman  will  find  that  there  are  Wo  class- 
es provided  for  in  the  resolution;  first,  those  ca- 
ses where  offices  are  newly  created;  secondly, 
those  in  which  there  is  only  a  change  or  modin- 
cation  in  the  manner  of  appointment. 

Mr.  CLAREIE.  And  am  I  to  understand  that 
the  gentleman  intends  that  in  this  latter  case  it 
shall  be  considered  as  the  creation  of  a  new  of- 
fice? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  do  not  pretend  to  determine; 
but  my  proposition  is  to  this  effect:  that  where 
any  action  is  had  by  the  Convention  itself,  or  by 
legislation  occurring  under  the  provisions  which 
we  may  adopt,  which  may  operate  merely  to 
change  the  mode  of  appointment  of  public  of- 
ficers, it  will  form  a  distinct  class  of  cases 
to  which  the  restriction  shall  or  shall  not  apply 
according  to  the  nature  of  the  change  produced. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Yes,  I  understand.  Now;I 
have  no  idea  that  this  Convention  will  create  in 
that  sense  any  new  office  whatever;  but  I  do  ex- 

gect  and  I  trust  that  expectation  will  be  verified 
y  the  ultimate  action  of  this  Convention,  that 
there  will  be  a  change  in  the  mode  of  electing 
almost  every  officer  in  the  State.  For  my  own 
part,  I  desire  that  there  should  be  a  change  in  the 
mode  of  electing  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Ap- 
peals, and  indeed  I  may  say  I  desire  to  see  d- 
most  every  officer  elected  by  the  people  of  the 


24 


State  over  -wliora  they  exercise  jurisdiction  or 
power.  At  present  I  will  not  argue  this  ques- 
tion, but  I  must  say  that  I  cannot  come  to  the 
conclusion  that,  by  a  mere  change  in  the  mode  of 
■the  appointment  of  a  Judge,  by  the  action  of 
this  Convention,  you  create  a  new  office.  If  you 
have  a  Circuit  Judge  now  appointed  by  the 
Governor  whose  appointment  is  confirmed  by 
the  Senate,  liis  functions  are  the  same  as  they 
would  be  if  he  were  nominated  by  the  people 
of  the  State  and  confirmed  by  the  Senate.  The 
resolution  seems  to  me  ambiguous.  It  leaves 
open  a  controversy  which  in  aftertimes  will  grow 
up,  if  a  gentleman  of  this  Convention  should  as- 
pire to  an  office,  whether  it  was  an  office  created 
by  the  Convention,  or  an  office  where  merely 
the  mode  of  appointment  had  been  changed. 
Instead  of  shutting  out  difficulties  hereafter,  it 
will  only  produce  doubt  and  controversy  that 
can  never  oe  settled  without  calling  a  new  Con- 
vention. As  I  remarked,  I  did  not  rise  to  make 
a  speech.  I  merely  wished  to  understand  the  true 
construction  to  be  given  to  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  1  am  not  pre- 
pared to  vote  for  his  resolution,  but  shall  vote 
for  the  motion  to  lav  it,  together  with  the  amend- 
ment and  the  substitute,  on  the  table. 

Mr.  DIXON".  I  do  not  rise  with  the  intention 
of  taking  any  part  in  this  discussion,  for  I  am 
very  well  satisfied  myself  that  it  is  wholly  ir- 
relevant to  our  present  business.  This  is  not 
the  proper  time  for  the  discussion  of  this  ques- 
tion; the  principle  which  is  involved  in  it  will 
come  properly  before  us  for  discussion  after  the 
various  propositions  which  ought  to  be  submit- 
ted to  us  shall  have  been  reported  upon  by  their 
appropriate  committees.  I  am  anxious  to  get 
forward  with  the  business  for  which  we  have 
been  sent  liere,  and  I  am  averse  therefore  to  en- 
tering upon  a  discussion  of  this  nature  at  this 
time.  I  understand  there  is  a  motion  now  pend- 
ing to  lay  the  original  resolution  and  the  amend- 
ment and  substitute  on  the  table.  I  do  notknow 
any  good  reason  why  they  should  not  be  laid 
upim  the  table  and  printed.  I  hope  that  we 
shall  now  proceed  to  adopt  some  rule  by  which 
our  business  will  be  facilitated  that  we  may  sat- 
isfy the  country  that  we  are  in  earnest  in  going 
about  the  duties  that  have  been  entrusted  to  us. 
I  would  further  remark  that  I  do  not  think  that 
the  subject  is  now  properly  debateable.  Al- 
though we  have  not  yet  adopted  specific  rules 
for  our  guidance,  yet  we  ought  to  be  governed  by 
a  due  regard  to  an  economy  of  time  Vith  a  view 
to  the  di.spatcli  of  business. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  A  motion  to  lay  on  the  table 
and  print  is  debateable. 

Mr.  DIXON.  The  debate  then  should  be  con- 
fined strictly  to  the  question  of  printing.  When 
the  question  does  come  up,  I  shall  be  glad  to 
hear  the  opinions  of  gentlemen  on  all  sides,  but 
really  it  appears  to  me  that  this  is  not  the  proper 
time. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  rise  only  to  make  one  or 
two  suggestions  to  the  mover  of  these  resolu- 
tions. There  is  a  great  deal  in  them  which  de- 
Bcrvas  mature  deliberation,  and  it  would  be  well 
to  have  them  before  us  in  a  printed  form,  and 
that  they  should  be  referred  to  the  committee  of 
the  whole,  and  made  the  order  of  the  day  frojn 
day  to  day.    T  want  at  the  proper  time  to  sub- 


mit my  views  upon  the  subjects  embraced  in 
them.  I  do  not  intend  to  do  it  now.  I  wish  it 
to  be  remembered,  however,  that  every  office  in 
this  government,  from  the  Governor  down,  has 
to  be  re-filled  under  the  new  Constitution.  The 
terms  of  the  resolutions  appear  to  me  to  be 
too  broad;  indeed  I  do  not  think  that  my  hon- 
orable friend,  himself,  intended  that  they  should 
go  to  the  extent  which  their  language  would  im- 
ply. I  differ  from  him,  too,  as  to  the  election 
of  a  Judiciary,  but  I  will  give  my  reasons  on  a 
future  day. 

At  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE, 
the  resolutions  were  laid  on  the  table  until  to- 
morrow, and  were  ordered  to  be  printed. 

ELECTION   OF    PRINTERS. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  offered  the  following 
resolution  which  was  adopted,  viz: 

Resolved,  That  William  Tanner  and  John  W. 
Finnell  be,  and  they  are  hereby,  appointed 
Printers  to  this  Convention. 

PUOPOSITIOXS   TO   AMEND. 

Mr.  TURNER  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tions, viz: 

1.  Resolved,  That  all  the  officers  of  Govern- 
ment should  be  elected  at  stated  times,  either 
directly  or  indirectly  by  tlie  qualified  voters  of 
the  county  or  district  in  which  the  officer  is  to 
serve. 

2.  Resolved,  That  elections  should  continue 
but  one  dav,  and  votes  should  be  cast  rtca  voce; 
and  to  enable  the  electors  to  cast  their  votes  in 
one  day,  the  counties  should  be  divided  into 
townships  of  not  exceeding  two  hundred  elec- 
tors, ancl  an  election  held  in  each  township. 

3.  Resolved,  Tliat  members  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  of  the  State  Legislature  .should 
be  elected  for  two  years,  and  of  the  Senate  for 
four  years — one  half  of  the  latter  to  go  out  every 
two  years.  The  Legislature  to  sit  biennially, 
subject  to  be  called  together  by  the  Governor. 
No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  either  House  who 
has  not  resided  in  Kentucky  years, 
and  who  is  not  a  citizen  of  the  United  States. 
No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  Senate  who 
has  not  attained  the  age  of  thirty-five  years,  or  to 
the  House  of  Representatives  wlio  has  not  attain- 
ed the  age  of  twenty-Jive  years. 

4.  Resolved,  That  the  Legislature  shall  have 
no  power  to  grant  divorces,  but  shall,  by  law, 
authorise  the  courts  to  do  so.  Tlie  Legislature 
shall  have  no  power  to  pass  any  local  or  special 
law,  unless  three-fifths  of  all  the  members  elected 
to  each  House,  by  yeas  and  nays,  concur  in  its 
passage. 

5.  Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly  shall 
have  no  power  to  pass  laws  for  tlie  emancipation 
of  slaves,  without  the  consent  of  their  owners. 
They  shall  pass  laws  to  permit  the  owners  to 
emancipate  tliem,  saving  tlie  rights  of  creditors: 
Provided,  The  persons  emancipated  shall  be  sent 
out  of  the  United  States  at  the  expense  of  the 

Ecreon  who  emancipat<!s  them,  and  oe  sold  into 
ondage  for  the  benefit  of  tho  public  Treasury, 
in  case  of  their  return  to  Kentucky. 

6.  Resolved,  Tliat  no  per.sons  shall  henceforth 
be  slaves  within  this  CoinmonweaUh,  except 
such  as  are  now  so  and  the  descendants  of  thp 
females  of  them,  and  such  as  may  be  brought  to 
this  State  by  bona  fide  emigrants  and  tho  descend- 


9& 


ants  of  the  females  of  them,  and  such  as  citizens 
of  Kentucky  shall  derive  title  to  out  of  the  State 
by  marriage,  devise,  or  descent,  and  the  descend- 
ants of  the  females  of  them. 

7.  Resolved,  ThattheSuprerae  Appellate  Court 
of  the  State  should  consist  oi  four  Judges,  who 
should  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eiffht 
years,  subject  to  removal  by  impeachment  or  ad- 
dress— no  person  to  be  eligible  to  the  office  ex- 
cept a  licensed  Attorney  who  has  attained  to  the 
age  of  thirty  years,  and'who  has  actually  resided 
ij)  Kentucky  for  years,  and  is  a  citizen 
of  the  United  States — one  Judge  to  go  out  every 
two  years,  but  to  be  re-eligible. 

8.  Resolved,  That  no  person  should  be  eligible 
to  the  office  of  Judge  of  any  inferior  court,  who 
has  not  attained  the  age-of  thirty  years,  and  who 
is  not  a  licensed  Attorney  and  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  and  who  has  not  resided  in  Ken- 
tucky years.  They  should  hold  their 
offices  for  the  term  of  eight  years,  subject  to  re- 
moval by  impeachment  or  address — one-fourth  to 
go  out  every  tico  years,  and  to  be  re-eligible. 

9.  Resolved,  That  no  religious  test  or  property 
qualification  shall  be  required  to  entitle  a  citizen 
to  vote  or  hold  office. 

10.  Resolved,  That  instead  of  the  mode  point- 
ed out  in  the  present  Constitution  for  calling  a 
Convention  to  re-adopt,  amend,  or  change  the 
same,  the  persons  legally  authorised  to  vote 
shall,  every  year  after  the  adoption 
of  the  new  Constitution,  at  the  stated  elections 
for  members  of  the  Legislature,  cast  their  votes 
on  the  propriety  of  calling  a  Convention,  and  if 
a  majority  of  all  the  legal  voters  of  the  State 
shall  vote' for  the  call  of  a  Convention,  two  years 
in  succession,  then  the  next  Legislature  shall 
pass  a  law  for  holding  a  Convention;  but  if  such 
majority  do  not  so  vote  either  year,  then  at  the 
end  of  years  from  that  time,  a  similar 
vote  shall  be  taken,  and  .so  on  every 

years,  until  the  requisite  majority  shall  vote  two 
successive  years  for  the  call  of  a  Convention. 

11.  Resolved,  That  writs  of  error,  from  the  in- 
ferior courts  to  the  Court  of  Appeals,  should  be 
allowed  to  the  accused  in  criminal  prosecutions. 

12.  Resolved,  That  anv  amendments  to  the 
present  Constitution,  wnich  this  Convention 
may  adopt,  shall  be  submitted  to  the  qualified 
voters  of  this  Commonwealth  for  approval,  and 
if  not  approved  by  a  majority  of  those  who  cast 
their  votes,  such  amendments  shall  not  take  ef- 
fect, but  tJie  present  Constitution  shall  still  re- 
raain  in  full  force  until  changed  according  to  its 
own  provisions. 

The  resolutions  having  been  read, 

Mr.  TURNER  said,  in  offering  these  resolu- 
tions, I  am  not  vain  enough  to  expect  that  they 
will  all  meet  the  views  of  a  m^ority  of  the 
Convention.  They  are  thrown  out  merely  as 
suggestions  for  the  consideration  of  the  Con- 
vention among  other  propositions  that  may  be 
submitted.  Indeed  there  are  some  of  them  that 
I  have  considerable  doubt  about  myself.  I  in- 
tend to  act  here  upon  deliberation  and  not  upon 
preconceived  opinions.  I  have  di-awn  them  up 
with  some  attention,  however,  and  I  hope  they 
may  be  received  and  such  consideration  given 
to  them  as  may  be  deemed  proper.  It  may  be 
doubtful  whether  we  ought  to  debate  proposi- 
tions of  this  sort  until  after  the  committees  nave 


been  appointed  and  have  examined  and  reported 
upon  them.  But  it  appeared  to  me  tnat  it 
would  be  appropriate  at  this  time  to  present  tha 
resolutions  in  order  that  the  attention  of  members 
might  be  drawn  to  them,  and  that  they  might,  at 
the  proper  time,  be  referred  to  the  committee  of 
the  whole.  The  opinion  has  been  expressed  that 
it  would  be  better  to  let  the  committees  mature 
the  different  subjects  which  will  be  brought  up 
for  our  deliberation  before  any  opinions  are  ex- 

Eressed  upon  them  in  this  body.  On  the  other 
and,  it  is  said  that  it  would  be  perfectly 
right  and  proper  to  discuss  the  great  principles 
involved  in  tnese  various  propositions;  but  I 
have  drawn  up  the  resolutions  and  presented 
them  at  this  time  with  the  view  that  the  at- 
tention of  the  Convention  may  be  drawn  to 
them.  I  hope  they  will  be  printed,  and  that 
they  will  come  up  at  the  proper  time,  and  that 
they  will  be  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole  Convention  in  connection  with  the  re- 
ports of  the  various  committees. 

The  resolutions  were  laid  upon  the  table,  and 
were  ordered  to  be  printed. 

nAILT   JOURXAL. 

Mr.  "WALLER  submitted  the  following  reso- 
lution: 

Resolved,  That  the  Printers  to  the  Convention 
be,  and  they  are  hereby,  directed  to  print  six 
hundred  copies  of  the  Journal  of  the  Conven- 
tion. 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  amend  by  striking 
out  out  "600"  and  leaving  the  blank  to  be  filled 
hereafter. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  resolutioii^ 
was  then  laid  on  the  table. 

SEATS   OF   MEilBZBS. 

Mr.  McHENRY  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  laid  over,  and  made  the  special 
order  after  reading  the  Journal  in  the  morning: 

Resolved,  That  this  Convention  will  now  as- 
sign seats,  by  lot,  in  the  following  manner:  The 
Secretary  stall  put  the  names  of  the  members 
on  separate  papers,  as  near  alike  as  may  be,  in  a 
box,  and  proceed  to  draw  them  out,  one  at  a 
time,  shaking  the  box  before  every  drawing,  and 
each  member  shall,  as  his  name  is  drawn,  select 
his  seat,  and  have  a  right  to  occupy  the  same 
during  the  session  of  the  Convention. 

DISCUSSION   OF    PEOPOSITIOXS. 

Mr.  DIXON  offered  the  following  resolution, 
and  on  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  Meriwether  it  was 
referred  to  the  Committee  on  Rules: 

Resolved,  That  no  original  resolution,  offered 
to  the  Convention,  proposing  auT  amendments 
to  the  Constitution,  shall  be  discussed  on  its 
merits,  till  it  shall  have  been  referred  to  the  ap- 
propriate committee. 

COSOQTTXXS. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, viz: 

Resolved,  That  the  people  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  Kentucky,  in  ordering  and  calling  this 
Convention,  desired  not  to  abolish,  but  to  alter 
and  amend  their  existing  State  Constitution;  and 
that,  to  enable  the  Convention  to  determine 
what  amendments  are  required,  it  is  expedient 
to  appoint  six  committees,  to  consist  of  ^ — ■ 


26 


members  each,  to  whom  tlie  appropriate  divis- 
ions of  the  Constitution,  with  the  amendments 
that  may  be  offered  to  the  same  may  be  refered; 
and  that  the  first  of  said  committees  be  styled 
The  committee  on  ike  Legislative  Department;  tho 
second.  The  committee  on  the  Executive  Depart 
ment;  the  third.  The  committee  on  the  Judicial 
Department;  the  fourth.  The  committee  on  Slave- 
ry; the  fifth,  The  committee  on  General  Provis- 
ions; the  sixth,  The  committee  on  the  mode  of  re- 
vising the  Constitution. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  submitted  the  following 
as  a  substitute: 

1.  Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  ten  be  raised 
to  ascertain  the  number  of  standing  committees 
necessary  to  facilitate  the  deliberations  and  busi- 
ness of  the  Convention;  and  that  said  commit- 
tee report  the  same,  together  with  a  proper  de- 
signation of  each  of  said  committees. 

2.  That,  in  order  to  form  said  committees,  the 
delegates,  collectively,  from  the  counties  of  each 
congressional  district  of  the  State,  shall  select 
one  of  their  own  number  as  a  member  of  said 
committee,  and  report  such  selection  to-mor- 
row morning. 

On  motion  both  propositions  were  laid  upon 
the  table  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

Mr.  THOMPSON  submitted  the  following,  of 
which  the  same  disposition  was  made: 

Resolved,  That  the  preamble,  and  first  article 
of  the  Constitution  of  this  Commonwealth  be 
referred  to  a  committee  of  five  members;  that 
the  second  article  thereof  be  referred  to  a  like 
committee  of  five  members;  that  the  third  arti- 
cle be  referred  to  a  like  committee  of  five  mem- 
bers; that  the  fourth  article  be  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee of  nine  members;  that  the  fifth  article  be 
referred  to  a  committee  of  five  mernbers;  that 
the  sixth  article  be  referred  to  a  committee  of 
five  members;  that  the  seventh  article  be  referred 
to  a  committee  of  five  members;  that  the  eighth 
article  be  referred  to  a  committee  of  five  mem- 
bers; that  the  ninth  article  be  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee of  five  members;  that  the  tenth  article  be 
I'eferred  to  a  committee  of  five  members;  and  that 
the  schedule  in  said  Constitution  be  referred  to  a 
like  committee  of  five  members;  the  members  oi 
said  several  committees  to  be  appointed  by  the 
President:  and  that  said  several  committees  re- 
port to  this  Convention,  for  its  action,  such 
amendments  as  to  them  shall  seem  proper,  to  the 
several  articles  of  the  Constitution  to  them  re- 
ferred. 

ANOTHER   MEMBER. 

Mr.  MICHAEL  L.  STONER,  from  the  coun- 
ties of  Cumberland  and  Clinton,  appeared  and 
took  his  seat. 

ADMISSION   OF   A   REPORTER. 

Mr.  PRESTON  offered  the  following  resolu- 
ion: 

Resolved,  That  H.  M.  McCarty,  reporter  for  the 
Louisville  Courier,  be  admitted  to  the  floor  of 
this  Convention,  and  have  the  privilege  of  a  re- 
porter's desk. 

He  presumed  there  would  be  no  inconveni- 
ence attending  it,  and  he  hoped  the  privilege 
would  be  extended  to  this  gentleman. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  subject  of  reporting 
the  debates  of  thiabody,  isone  which  has  notyet 
attracted  the  attention  of  its  members.    It  seems 


however  to  have  engaged  the  attention  of  the 
Legislature,  by  whiclitheact  for  assembling  this 
Convention  was  passed.    How    far  this   oody 
will  adopt  what  has  been  done  by  the  Legisla- 
ture, it  is  not  for  me  to  indicate.     If  the  resolution 
be  passed  to  admit  this  gentleman,  every  repor- 
ter from  every  paper  in  the  State,  who  may  pre- 
sent himself,  will  be  entitled  to  the  same  privi- 
lege, and  it  is  a  subject  which  I  think  is  worthy 
of  a  little  consideration,  how  far  this  privilege 
ought  to  be  extended,   and  how  far  this  body 
will  acquiesce  in  the  course  which  the  Legisla- 
ture has  pursued.  I  do  not  desire  now  to  ex- 
press any  opinion  as  to  the  propriety  of  that  le- 
gislative action.     I  supposed  that  the  question 
would  have  been   called    for,   and    that  there 
would   ere  now  have  been  an   expression  of  the 
body  in  regard  to  it.    For  one  I  may  be  permit- 
ted to  say  that  I  have  no  objection  to  that  course. 
The  object  which  I  had  in  rising  was  to  ask  the 
gentleman  to  postpone  this  matter  for  a  little, 
that  members  may  see  how  far  they  will  be  in- 
convenienced by  reporters'  desks  in  this  Hall. 
We  may  have  conflicting  reports  in  the  diff'erent 
papers,  and  I  think  at  least  that  we  might  take  a 
few  hours  to  reflect,  because,  if  the  privilege  be 
conferred  upon  the  individual  whose  application 
is  before  us,  we  must  extend  it  to  all  others. 
Certainly  we  cannot  make  a  distinction.     There- 
fore I  think  it  is  a  question  which  is  worthy  of 
a  little  reflection.     I  hope  the  gentleman   will 
consent  to  let  the  resolution  lie  upon  the  table. 
Mr.  PRESTON.     I  would  willingly  consent 
to  the  proposition  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,   (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe.)  but  I  believe  it 
will  be  useless  and  only  take  up  the  time  of 
this  House  about  a  matter  that  is  not  of  much 
importance  at  any  time.    I  did  not  intend  to 
present  this  resolution  to-day  to  the  interruption 
of  any  material  business,  and  should  have  post- 
poned it,  but  that  I  was  afraid  that  to-mon"ow 
important  matters  would  be  brought  up  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  and  that  it  might  then  be 
more  inconvenient  to  present  it.     I  know  that  in 
Congress  a  great  many  Reporters  are  admitted, 
there  being  thirty  States  of  the  Union  interested 
in  their  proceedings,  but  so  far  from  that  being 
the  case  here,  it  would  have  been  almost  impos- 
sible to  have  obtained  a  Reporter,  had   it  not 
been  for  the  action  of  the  Legislature.     This 
proposition,  however,  is  not  to   appoint  a  Re- 
porter, or  that  he  shall  be  paid  by  tlie  State,  but 
only  that  a  Reporter,  who  proposes  to  report  gra- 
tuitously, be  admitted  upon  the  floor.     It  cannot 
produce    an    inconvenience   as   the    gentleman 
seems  to  apprehend.    I  certainly  would  be  the 
last  to  desire  to  encumber  or  embarrass  the  Con- 
vention.   Another  thing  has  been  alluded  to  by 
the  gentleman,  and  it  is  the  probability  of  hav- 
ing contradictory  reports.    We  have  an  official 
report  prepared  by  a  very  skilful  Reporter  ap- 
pointed for  us  by  the  State.    It  is  probable  that 
no  other  may  desire  the  privilege  except  two  or 
three  from  our  own  Stat<i — perhaps  from  Mays- 
ville  and  one  or  two  others — and  no  disadvan- 
tage can  possibly  arise  from  this  arrangement; 
perhaps  our  debates  may  be  more  correctly  pre- 
sented, for  no  Reporter  can  keep  his  att<2ntion  so 
constantly  fixed  that  he  may  Aot  be  sometimes 
in  error.    I  believe  the  House  will   sustain  no 
inconvenience  by  giving  the  privilege  to  this 


27 


Reporter,  nor  do  I  believe  that  vre  shall  be  en- 
cumbered by  numerous  applicants  for  the  same 
privilege,  and  I  can  see  no  reason  why  he  should 
not  be  admitted;  nor  can  I  see  any  good  reason 
for  postponement  of  the  question.  It  "wiU  take 
more  time  perhaps  to-morrow  than  it  would  now. 
It  is  certainly  more  convenient  to  settle  it  now,  I 
think,  and  therefore  I  must  respectfidly  dissent 
from  the  proposition  of  my  friend  for  its  post- 
ponement. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  declared  to  be  rejected. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Will  it  be  pennissible  un- 
der the  rules  of  the  House  to  call  for  the  yeas 
and  navs. 

The  1*RESIDENT  remarked  that  it  was  now 
too  late. 

Mr.  ^^JTTALL  and  Mr.  CLARKE  both  rose, 
and  as  an  act  of  courtesy  to  the  gentleman  from 
the  city  of  Louisville,  to  afford  him  an  opportu- 
nity to  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays,  moved  a  re- 
consideration. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  suggestion  which 
I  am  about  to  make  will  probably  settle  the  mat- 
ter. There  can  be  no  necessity  for  the  admis- 
sion of  this  Reporter,  because  W  subscribing  to 
the  Daily  Commonwealth,  the  Louisville  Cour- 
ier can  obtain  all  the  Reports  as  correctly  as  bv 
having  a  Reporter  here,  and  at  as  early  a  period. 


Mr.  WILLIAilS  submitted  an  amendment, 
and  moved  that  the  report  and  amendment  be 
laid  upon  the  table  and  printed. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  suggested  that  as  there 
were  but  few  changes  from  tie  rules  of  the  Sen- 
ate, it  would  be  desirable  to  consider  them  now. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKXIFFE  said  he  should  vote 
for  the  printing.  There  were  some  of  the  rules 
which  did  not  meet  his  approbation,  and  hence 
he  wished  to  have  an  opportunity  to  examine 
them.  He  Eluded  particularly  to  a  nile  which 
provided  for  the  reception  of  petitions  and  me- 
morials. He  did  not,  certainly,  intend  to  invite 
the  presentation  of  memorials  and  petitions,  of 
a  certain  class,  and  for  other  reasons  he  preferred 
that  the  report  and  the  amendment  should  be 
printed,  and  laid  upon  the  tables  of  the  members 
of  the  Convention. 

The  motion  to  postpone  and  print  agreed  to. 

TKIBCXE    FOE   DEBATEBS. 

Mr.  ROOT  ofifered  the  following  resolution: 
Resolved,  That  the  President  of  this  Conven- 
tion be  requested  to  direct  the  Sergeant-at-Arms 
to  place  a  table  in  front  of  the  Clerk's  table,  for 
the  use  of  the  Delegates  when  they  may  address 
the  Convention  at  length. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  he  would  like  to  hear  an 
explanation  as  to  whereabouts  the  table  was  to 


havinganeporternercanaataaeariydperiou,   ^^^  and  how  it  was  to  be  used— whether  a 

for  the  published  official  reports  will  reach  Lou-    j^^^^^  ^^  to  get  upon  the  table.     (Laughter.) 
;.^,1U  W  t^P  *;am*,  mail  hv  which  the  communi-   ^^  ^^^  himself,  he  could  never  get  upon  the  ta 


isville  by  the  same  mail  by  which  the  communi 
cation  of  any  Reporter  can  be  forwarded.  The 
gentleman,  1  think,  is  also  mistaken  as  to  the 
number  of  applications  that  we  shall  have  for 
the  same  privilege,  for  I  have  already  had  three 
such  applications  made  to  mvself. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  I  was  one  of  those  who  op- 
posed the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Louisville.  It  seems  to  me  that  there  is  no  ne- 
cessity for  granting  the  privilege  in  this  case; 
and,  besides,  before  voting  to  admit  any  one,  we 
should  consider,  that  if  we  extend  it  in  one  case, 
we  must  grant  the  same  privilege  to  all  appli- 
cants. I  would  grant  the  privilege  to  those  of 
my  own  neighborhood  sooner  than  any  other, 
but  I  oppose  the  proposition  on  the  ground  that 
we  cannot  make  a  distinction. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  believe  I  shall  vote  for  this 
man's  having  this  privilege  though  rather  against 
my  judgment,  for  I  believe  that  the  paper  for 
which  the  privilege  is  asked  is  an  emancipation 
paper,  and  I  wish  to  let  him  tell  all  he  can. 

Mr.  HARGIS  briefly  spoke  in  opposition. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  moved  to  lay  the  motion  for 
reconsideration  on  the  table. 

Mr.  PRESTON  desired  to  have  the  yeas  and 
nays  on  that  motion. 

ilr.  CLARKE  said  he  had  made  the  motion 
for  reconsideration  to  aflFord  the  gentleman  from 
Louisville  an  opportunity  to  call  for  the  yeas  and 
navs. 

fending  this  motion  the  Convention  adjourn- 
ed. 


THURSDAY,  OCTOBER  4,  1849. 

ECUS   OK   OEDEE. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER,  by  consent,  from  the 
committee  on  rules,  reported  a  series  of  rules  for 
the  government  of  the  Convention,  which  were 
read. 


ble.     (Renewed  laughter.) 

Mr.  ROOT  said  if  it  wen;  necessary  to  explain, 
that  the  honorable  gentleman  might  comprehend 
the  design  of  the  resolution,  he  would  state  that 
it  was  mainly  to  accommodate  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  liimself,  that  he  might  have  a  stand 
placed  in  front  when  he  wished  to  address  the 
Convention,  so  that  he  might  be  distinctly  heard, 
and  that  no  word  of  his  might  fall  witliout  its 
effect  upon  the  Convention.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  HARDIN  replied  that  he  did  not  intend 
to  call  forth  any  remarks;  all  he  desired  to  know 
was,  where  the  table  was  to  be  put,  and  how 
high  it  was  to  be. 

Mr.  ROOT  replied  that  it  was  intended  to  be 
placed  there — (pointing  to  the  centre  of  the 
aisle.)     - 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  as  to  accommodating  him, 
he  was  obliged  to  the  gentleman  from  Campbell, 
but  he  did  not  want  any  such  accommodation. — 
He  presumed  that  it  was  intended  to  be  in  imi- 
tation of  the  plan  of  the  French  Convention — 
the  bloody  one  under  Robespierre,  where  they 
had  to  get  upon  a  tribune.  Anything  in  imita- 
tion of  that,  he  did  not  wish  to  approach  at  all, 
or  approximate  to.  He  thought  it  better  to  lay 
it  upon  the  table  fbr  the  present,  that  the  Con- 
vention might  consider  it. 

The  PRESIDENT  ruled  the  resolution  out  of 
order  without  unanimous  consent,  and  as  objec- 
tion was  made  it  was  not  received. 

JOUEXAL   AXD    DEBATES. 

Mr.  LINDSET  asked  unanimous  consent  to 
take  up  the  resolution  oflTered  yesterday,  in  re- 
lation to  the  printing  of  the  Journal  of  tne  Con- 
vention, as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  Printers  to  the  Convention 

be,  and  they  are  hereby,  directed  to  print 

copies  of  the  Journal  of  the  Convention. 


^ 


He  suggested  as  a  reason  for  immediate  action, 
that  he  was  advised  by  the  Printers  that  they 
had  now  a  large  amount  of  type  set  up  which  it 
would  be  desirable  to  dispose  of. 

Consent  was  given,  and  the  resolution  was  ta- 
ken up  for  consideration. 

Mr.  LINDSEY  then  moved  to  amend  the  reso- 
lution by  adding  the  words,  "  and copies 

of  the  Debates  of  the  Convention." 
The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 
Mr.  MAYES  moved  to  fill  the  blank  in  the 
resolution  in  relation  to  the  Journal  with  "100," 
which  he  thought  would  be  a  sufficient  number. 
Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  he  thought  there 
should  be  a  copy  placed  in  each  County  Clerk's 
office  in  the  Commonwealth,  and  that  would 
amount  to  one  hundred.  Then  each  member 
should  have  a  copy,  which  would  amount  to 
two  hundred.  There  would  then  be  a  bound 
volume  to  provide  for  each  member  to  take  home, 
which  would  dispose  of  three  hundred,  and  fifty 
would  be  necessary  to  exchange  with  other 
States  that  were  accustomed  to  exchange  similar 
documents  with  us.  He  thought  three  hundred 
and  fifty  would  not  be  more  than  sufficient.  It 
might  be  perhaps  proper  that  he  should  explain 
that  he  intended  to  follow  this  up  with  another 
proposition  to  supply  each  member  of  the  Con- 
vention with  a  certain  number  of  copies  of  the 
weekly  papers  published  here,  in  order  that  they 
might  send  to  their  constituents  papers  coiatain- 
ing  information  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Con- 
vention. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  a  larger 
number  for  the  additional  reason  that  the  differ- 
ence in  cost  between  three  hundred  and  fifty  and 
five  hundred  copies,  was  a  matter  of  small 
consequence  in  the  item  of  expense.  But  fifty 
copies  for  exchanges  would  leave  none  for  Li- 
braries, Literary  Institutions,  and  the  different 
courts  of  higher  jurisdiction;  and  again,  there 
might  be  some  new  counties  made  in  the  State, 
increasing  the  number  of  County  Clerks'  offices, 
though  he  thought  there  should  be  some  restric- 
tion on  that  branch  of  legislation.  He  therefore 
proposed  that  the  blank  should  be  filled  with 
five  hundred. 

That  motion  was  agreed  to. 
Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  that  the  blank  in 
the  resolution  in  relation  to  the  Debates,  be  fill- 
ed with  the  same  number. 

Mr.  WALLER  moved  that  the  blank  be  filled 
with  two  thousand  five  hundred.  The  extra 
cost  would  be  small,  and  this  was  a  work  that 
should  be  sent  broad-cast  throughout  the  land. 
They  were  all  anxious  that  their  proceedings 
should  be  known,  and  they  ought  to  be  in  every 
public  Library  and  circulated  as  generally  as 
possible. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  thought  it  was  a  matter  that 
ghould  be  first  enquired  aoout  before  they  order- 
ed 80  large  a  number  as  2500  copies.  He  knew 
not  what  they  should  do  with  them. 

Mr.  MAYES  was  opposed  to  the  amendment. 
If  he  could  see  any  public  good  that  would  re- 
sult from  printing  2500  copies  of  the  Debates  of 
the  Convention  he  would  cheerfully  vote  for  it. 
It  was  a  matter  worthy  of  consideration  and  re- 
flection, and  he  woulcl  therefore  move  to  post- 
pone the  further  consideration  of  the  subject  un- 
til to-mbrrow. 


The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  GARRARD  enquired  if  it  was  intended 
to  give  each  member  the  control  of  twenty  five 
copies. 

Mr.  WALLER  supposed  the  matter  of  disposing 
of  the  Debates  could  be  attended  to  hereafter.  He 
supposed  that  two  copies  would  be  sufficient  for 
each  member,  ten  to  each  county,  some  to  the  li- 
braries in  the  State,  and  the  remainder  might  re- 
main in  the  library  here  to  be  exchanged  with 
other  States.  It  was  the  custom  in  the  State  of 
New  York,  each  year,  to  give  a  copy  of  the  De- 
bates of  their  Convention  to  every  new  member 
of  the  Legislature;  there,  they  were  all  anxious 
that  the  people  should  understand  the  law  and 
the  constitution.  The  safety  of  this  country 
rested  on  the  intelligence  of  the  people,  and 
nothing  Avas  so  important  as  an  understanding 
of  our  laws. 

Mr.  HARDIN  would  like  to  hear  what  each 
copy  would  cost.  He  supposed  it  would  not  be 
less  than  two  dollars,  and  that  would  be  $5000. 
It  was  a  matter  of  very  little  importance  except 
as  an  item  of  expense.  He  supposed  they  should 
argue  enough  here  to  fill  a  book  of  a  thousand 
pages,  and,  if  they  continued  in  the  way  they 
had  started,  perhaps  two  thousand,  which  would 
make  two  volumes,  and  these  at  $2  a  piece  would 
cost  $10,000.  Some  antiquarian,  perhaps,  in 
years  to   come  might  look   into   them;  though 

Erobably  not.  He  would  make  no  motion,  but 
e  would  vote  for  500  copies  and  not  for  2500. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment, which  was  rejected. 

The  motion  to  fill  the  blank  with  500  copies 
was  then  agreed  to. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  then  moved  to  amend 
the  resolution  so  as  to  authorize  the  Secretary  of 

the  Convention  to  subscribe  for copies  of 

the  Weekly  Commonwealth  and  Yeoman  for  the 
purpose  of  distribution. 

Mr.  GREY  said  he  had  a  resolution  on  the 
same  subject.    It  was  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  be  directed  to  fur- 
nish each  member  of  the  Convention  with  five 
copies  of  the  Daily  Commonwealth,  containing 
the  Debates  and  proceedings  of  the  Convention, 
and  five  copies  of  the  Weekly  Commonwealth, 
and  five  copies  of  the  Yeoman. 

He  said  it  was  very  desirable  that  they  should 
have  information  of  their  proceedings  commu- 
nicated to  the  people,  and  this  was  the  cheapest 
way  in  which  it  could  be  done.  He  presumed 
that  all  their  constituents  desired  to  see  and 
know  what  was  going  on  here,  and  what  they 
were  doing.  He  had  fixed  the  number  at  five 
copies,  but  if  gentlemen  desired  it,  he  had  no 
objection  to  increase  or  diminish  it,  as  would 
best  suit  their  views.  It  was  desirable  that  they 
should  have  some  copies  of  the  Daily  Common- 
wealth, as  it  was  Uie  only  paper  tliat  furnished 
full  Debates  and  a  full  account  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Convention.  The  other  papers  would 
contain  a  synopsis  of  the  proceedings  and  in- 
formation that  would  be  very  acceptable  to  the 
people. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  offered  a  substitute  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  be  appoint- 
ed whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  ascertain  on  what 
terms  the  editors  of  the  Commonwealth  and 
Yeoman  will  furnish,  each,  to  the  members  of 


29 


this  Convention  copies  of  each  of  their  papers 
containing  the  proceedings  of  this  body,  for  dis- 
tribution among  the  good  people  of  this  Com- 
mon^realth. 

He  would  remark  that  many  of  their  constitu- 
ents lived  at  a  distance  from  the  capitol  and 
■would  not  be  benefited  by  a  dailv  paper,  as  most 
of  them  had  but  weekly  mails,  ^The  weekly  pa- 
per would  contain  a  condensed  report,  and  per- 
naps  all  that  was  very  material  to  be  known,  for 
a  proper  appreciation  of  what  would  be  done 
here.  It  would  cost  much  less,  and  he  appre- 
hended they  would  have  a  large  item  in  the  way 
of  expenditure  before  they  got  through  the  bu- 
siness of  the  Convention. 

ilr.  MERIWETHER  accepted  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Christian. 

A  conversation  ensued  in  which  several  mem- 
bers took  part,  which  was  tenninated  by  the 
withdrawal  of  the  several  propositions  to  amend. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  resolution, 
as  amended,  ordering  500  copies  of  the  Journal 
and  Debates,  which  was  agreed  to. 

SEATS    OF   MEMBEBS. 

Mr.  McHEXRY  called  for  the  consideration  of 
the  special  order,  being  the  resolution  which  he 
offered  yesterday,  as  follows : 

Resolved,  That  this  Convention  will  now  as- 
sign seats,  by  lot,  in  the  following  manner :  The 
Secretary  shall  put  the  names  of  the  members  on 
separate  papers,  as  near  alike  as  may  be,  in  a 
box,  and  proceed  to  draw  them  out,  one  at  a  time, 
shaking  the  box  before  every  drawing,  and  each 
member  shall,  as  his  name  is  drawn,  select  his 
seat,  and  have  a  right  to  occupy  the  same  during 
the  session  of  the  Convention. 

Mr.  WOODSON  offered  the  following  as  a 
substitute. 

Resolved,  That  each  Delegate  be  allowed  to 
retain  the  seat  he  at  present  occupies  during  the 
residue  of  the  session, 

Mr.  McHEXRY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
thereon. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  to  lay  the  whole  sub- 
ject on  the  table. 

Mr.  McHEXRY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  that  motion ;  and  being  taken,  tliey  were,  yeas 
54,  nays  43.  So  the  whole  subject  was  laid  up- 
on the"  table. 

ADMISSION   OF    A   REPOETEE. 

Mr.  PRESTOX  called  up  the  question  pend- 
ing at  the  adjournment  yesterday,  viz  :  the  mo- 
tion to  lay  upon  the  table  the  motion  to  reconsid- 
er the  vote  taken  on  his  resolution  to  admit  to 
the  floor  of  the  Convention  a  Reporter  for  the 
Louisville  Courier,  on  which  he  had  called  for 
theyeas  and  nays. 

Tlie  yeas  and  nays  were  taken  and  resulted 
thus — ^yeas  70,  nays  27. 

PEOPOSITIOXS    TO    AMEND. 

Mr.  DAVIS  submitted  the  following  resolu- 
tion which  he  asked  to  have  referred  to  the 
Committee  of  the  whole  and  printed. 

Resolved,  That  foreigners  of  the  following 
descriptions  and  classes,  only,  shall  be  entitled 
to  vote  for  any  civil  officer,  or  shall  be  eligible 
to  any  civil  office,  or  place  of  tru.st  or  profit"  un- 
der the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky:  1.  Those 
who,  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  this  amended 


Constitution,  shall  be  naturalized  citizens  of  the 
United  States.  2.  Those  who,  at  the  time  of  the 
adoption  of  this  amended  Constitution,  shall 
have  declared  their  purpose  to  become  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  in  conformity  to  the  laws 
thereof,  and  who  shall  have  become  citizens.  3. 
Those  who,  twenty-one  vears  previously  thereto, 
shall  have  declared  their  purpose,  according  to 
the  existing  provisions  of  the  laws  of  the  United 
States,  to  become  citizens  thereof;  and  who  then 
shall  be  citizens  of  the  United  States.  4.  Minors, 
who  shall  have  migrated  with  their  parents,  or 
parent,  to  the  United  States,  twenty-one  years 
after  their  names,  ages,  and  a  particular  descrip- 
tion of  their  persons,  shall  have  been  entered  on 
the  records  of  some  court  of  record  of  the  State  of 
Kentucky,  or  some  other  of  the  United  States : 
such  foreigners,  having  also,  in  every  case,  the 
like  qualifications  of  residence,  and  on  all  other 
points,  that  are  required  of  native  born  citizens  ; 
and  a  properly  authenticated  copy  of  the  record 
being  in  all  cases  required  for  the  verification  of 
the  facts. 

The  question  was  taken  and  as  the  result  ap- 
peared to  be  doubtful, 

Mr.  DAVIS  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Several  gentlemen  expressed  the  opinion  that 
courtesy  required  that  the  proposition  should  be 
printed  for  the  convenience  of  members  in  its 
consideration,  although  some  of  them  were  not 
favorable  to  the  principles  which  it  involved.^— 
After  a  brief  conversation  the  motion  was  agreed 
to  without  a  division. 

Mr.  KELLY  offered  the  following,  and  moved 
that  it  be  postponed  and  printed: 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  Legislature  shall  sit  every 
four  years,  and  shedl  be  confined  in  their  session 
to  sixty  days:  that  the  qualifications  of  mem- 
bers and  electors  be  as  at  present. 

2.  That  the  offices  of  this  Commonwealth  be 
made  elective;  and  that  those  who  have  the  col- 
lection or  disbursement  of  money  be  elected  for 
two  years;  and  those  who  have  not,  for  four 
years. 

3.  That  the  Circuit  Judges  be  reduced  to 
twelve  in  number. 

4.  That  the  members  of  the  County  Courts  be 
reduced  in  number  in  each  county,  and  that  the 
Justices  thereof  be  districted,  and  elected  by 
their  districts. 

5.  That  the  Legislature  shall  not  borrow  mo- 
ney on  the  faith  of  the  State  without  a  direct 
vot«  of  the  people. 

6.  That  officers  guilty  of  misfeasance  or  mal- 
feasance, shall  be  removed  on  indictment  and 
trial  by  apetit  jur>',  and  a  verdict  of  guilty. 

7.  That  the  Common  School  Fund  shall  be 
made  inviolate. 

8.  That  the  House  of  Representatives  con- 
consist  of  fifty,  and  the  Senate  of  twenty-five 
members. 

9.  That  taxation  for  county  purposes  shall  be 
on  the  ad  valorem,  principle. 

10.  That  elections  be  neld  in  March  or  April, 
and  continue  one  day. 

11.  That  officers,  aft«r  their  election,  shall  be 
required  to  make  oath  to  support  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  and  of  Kentucky,  and 
to  faithfully  discharge  their  official  duty;  and, 
also,  that  they,  in  the  obtention  of  office,  have 
not  directly  or  indirectly,  by  themselves  or  oth- 


30 


ere,  with  moiK^y,  property,  or  any  other  com- 
modity, attempted  to  corrupt  or  influence  any 
elector  in  their  district. 

12.  Thatpersonsconvictedof  any  offence,  crim- 
inal or  penal,  shall  have  the  right  of  appeal  to 
the  Superior  Courts. 

13.  That  the  power  to  divorce  shall  reside 
alone  in  the  Courts  of  Justice. 

14.  That  the  Constitution  formed  by  this 
Convention,  be  voted  on  directly  by  the  people, 
and  if  a  majority  vote  against  the  same,  that  the 
present  Constitution  be  in  force. 

15.  That  all  voting  shall  bo  viva  voce,  and  no 
property  qualification  orreligious  test  prescribed. 

16.  That  a  con.stitutional  limitation  be  pre- 
scribed to  suits  for  land. 

17.  That  no  slave  shall  be  emancipated  by 
deed,  or  last  will,  without  removal  from  the 
Union. 

18.  That  every  citizen  of  this  Commonwealth 
may  bring  from  other  States,  and  introduce 
slaves  at  his  own  Avill. 

19.  That  the  Constitution  made  by  this  body, 
be  amended  as  required  in  the  present  Constitu- 
tion. 

Mr.  ROOT  offered  the  following  as  an  amend- 
ment: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  be  appointed,  con- 
sisting of  five,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  report  to 
this  Convention  the  best  mode  of  securing  the 
present  Coumion  School  Fund,  as  well  as  its 
views  in  reference  to  enlarging  the  same. 

Mr.  KELLY  accepted  the  amendment,  and 
they  were  postponed  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

CHAPLAINS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TURNER,  it  was 

Resolved,  That  the  proceedings,  of  this  Con- 
vention be  opened  every  morning,  at  the  stated 
hour  of  meeting,  by  prayer  to  the  Throne  of 
Grace,  and  that  tlie  "Ministers  alternately,  of  the 
various  denominations  of  christians,  resident  in 
Frankfort,  be  invited  by  the  Secretary  of  this 
Convention,  to  perfonn  the  service. 
newspapkhs. 

Mr.  GREY  renewed  his  resolution,  heretofore 
offered  as  an  amendment,  and  then  withdrawn, 
in  these  words: 

Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  be  directed  to 
furnish  each  member  of  the  Convention  with  five 
copies  of  the  Daily  Commonwealth,  containing 
the  debates  and  proceedings  of  the  Convention, 
five  copies  of  the  Weekly  Commonwealth,  and 
five  copies  of  the  Yeoman. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  proposed  as  a  substitute,  the 
following; 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  be  appoint- 
ed, wliose  duty  it  shall  be  to  ascertain  on  what 
terms  the  editors  of  the  Coininoiiwealth  and 
Yeoinan  will  furnish  to  the  members  of  the  Con- 
vention   copies,  each,  of  their  papers,  con- 
taining tlie  proceedings  of  this  body,  for  distri- 
bution among  the  good  people  of  this  Common- 
■wealtli. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  proposed  to  refer  tlie 
whole  subject  to  a  select  committee. 

The  question  was  taken  on  that  motion,  and 
it  was  agreed  to. 

The  PRESIDENT  named  the  following  gen- 
tlemen as  the  select  committee:  Messrs.  Meri- 
wether, Grey,  and  Gholson. 


BUSINESS  OK   THE   DAV. 

The  propositions  submitted  yesterday,  by  Mr. 
C.  A.  Wickliffe,  then  came  up  in  their  order,  for 
consideration,  but  on  his  motion  they  were  pass- 
ed over  informally. 

The  propositions  submitted  by  Messrs.  Tur- 
ner, Chambers,  Thompson  and  others,  then  came 
up,  in  their  order,  and  were  disposed  of  in  the 
same  manner. 

The  Convention  then  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  OCTOBER  5,  1849. 

The  proceedings  of  the  Convention  were  this 
day  opened  with  prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuart 
Robinson,  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 

THE   PURCHASE    OF   NEWSPAPERS. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Mr.  President:  The 
committee  to  whom  was  referred  the  resolutions 
in  respect  to  the  purchase  of  certain  newspapers, 
are  prepared  to  report,  and  as  this  is  the  day  for 
the  printing  of  one  of  the  papers,  if  it  be  the 
pleasure  of  the  Convention  I  will  now  make  it. 
The  committee  report  a  substitute  for  the  two 
resolutions,  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  Public  Printers,  appointed 
to  do  the  printing  of  this  Convention,  be  direct- 
ed to  supply  each  member,  for  distribution,  with 
as  many  copies  of  either  the  weekly  or  daily 
papers  published  in  Frankfort,  as  he  may  direct; 
Provided,  That  the  amount  furnished  to  each 
member  shall  not  exceed  the  cost  of  twenty 
copies  of  a  daily,  or  sixty  copies  of  a  weekly 
paper. 

It  is  possible  some  explanation  as  to  the  cost 
may  be  necessary.  Upon  a  conference  with  the 
Editors,  we  were  informed  that  the  daily  paper 
can  be  furnished  for  $1  50  during  the  session, 
and  the  weekly  paper  for  fifty  cents.  That  reso- 
lution will  permit  each  member  to  send  sixty 
weekly,  or  twenty  daily  papers,  or  as  many  of 
each  as  he  may  prefer,  and  he  will  select  his 
own  paper,  at  a  cost  of  thirty  dollars. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  enquire  of  the  honor- 
able gentleman  what  he  supposes  will  be  the 
cost. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  If  necessary,  I  would 
remark,  that  the  cost  for  each  member  will  be 
thirty  dollars.  Each  member  will  be  requested 
to  hand  to  the  Editors,  the  names  of  those  per- 
sons to  whom  he  would  have  the  paper  sent,  and 
the  papers  will  be  envelope<;l  and  sent  at  a  cost 
of  fifty  cents  for  the  weekly,  and  one  dollar  and 
fifty  cents  forthe  daily  paper  during  the  session. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  That,  then,  will  be  $.3,000  for 
newspapers,  and  perhaps  the  members  will  not 
send  of!  one  in  twenty.  I  do  not  think  we  should 
give  that  amount  of  money,  and  I  would  move 
that  the  amount  be  limited  to  a  sura  not  exceed- 
ing ten  dollars  for  each  member. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  would  say  to  my 
friend  from  Nelson,  that  in  order  to  make  it 
equal  to  all,  the  proportion  of  the  weekly  or 
daily  papers  should  be  specified.  Twenty  one 
weeklv  i)apcr8  will  l)c  equal  to  seven  daily.  I 
woulif  remark,  that  I  am  not  directly  interested 
in  this  resolution,  for  1  live  in  a  county  where 
there  are  six  or  eight  papers  published,  so  that. 


31 


my  constituents  are  provided  for.  It  was  for  the 
advantage  of  tliose  living  in  remote  portions  of 
the  Stat«  who  are  not  so  fortunately  situated  as 
I  happen  to  be,  that  T  advocated  this  resolution. 
I  thinlc  mvself,  that  the  public  mind  should  be 
informed  of  whatwe  do  here  as  we  proceed. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  We  know  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
that  the  pro»;eedings  of  this  body  will  be  pub- 
lished in  every  paper  in  Kentucky.  A  practice 
has  been  growing  up  here,  and  in  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  I  will  not  say  it  is  at 
the  suggestion  of  the  gentlemen  who  print,  and 
are  interested,  but  our  expenses  in  public  print- 
ing are  increasing  every  year.  They  are  al- 
ready excessive  in  this  Commonwealth,  and  we 
are  nere  proposing  to  add  $3,000  for  dissemina- 
ting information  which  the  people  will  all  get 
long  before  they  get  our  papers.  Besides,  each 
gentleman  who  sends  a  paper,  will  have  to  pay 
three  cents  postage,  for  we  have  not  the  privilege 
of  franking. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  "Will  the  gentleman 
pardon  me.  The  individuals  who  receive  the  pa- 
pers will  pay  the  postage,  for  they  will  be  sent 
from  the  publishing  office. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  understand  that.  But  they 
will  get  information  of  the  proceedings  of  this 
Convention  in  other  papers  before  they  get  those 
that  we  may  send,  and  therefore  they  will  not 
want  them  when  they  come.  I  care  nothing 
about  the  expense.  It  is  a  small  amount,  but 
our  expenditures  are  runningup  very  much,  and 
in  truth  and  in  fact  our  expenses  have  run 
up  verv  fast  during  the  last  20  years.  Until  the 
year  l534,  the  whole  revenue  of  the  country,  col- 
lected by  the  sheriff,  was  no  more  than  $74,000; 
but  it  has  now  increased  to  the  amount  of  .$562,- 
000.  I  intend  at  some  future  day  to  exhibit  a 
table  of  the  expenditures,  and  the  amount  of 
revenue  from  taxes,  each  year  since  the  operation 
of  the  government,  that  the  people  may  see  the 
profligate  and  prodigal  manner  in  which  theirrao- 
ney  has  been  disbursed.  Now  we  are  asked  to  ex- 
pend$3,000  for  daily  papers.  The  very  resolution 
we  voted  yesterday,  will  cost  the  State  $3,000 
or  $4,000,* and  before  we  quit,  I  shall  not  be 
astonished  if  the  printing  for  the  Convention 
should  run  up  to  ten,  fifteen,  or  twenty  thou- 
sand dollars.  If  it  were  necessary  for  the  infor- 
mation of  the  people,  I  would  not  hesitate  a  mo- 
ment, but  we  all  know  that  in  truth  and  fact,  our 
proceedings  will  be  read  by  the  people  long  be- 
fore we  can  furnish  them  with  these  papers.  I  will 
vote  for  the  sum  of  ten  dollars,  and  beg  leave 
to  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on  the  motion. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  With  all  imaginable  defer- 
ence for  the  opinions  of  my  respected  friend,  I 
beg  leave  to  correct  him  somewhat.  The  idea  of 
this  thing  did  not  originate  with  the  printers. — 
If  any  honor  attaches  to  the  measure  so  far  as 
it  relates  to  the  members  of  this  body,  I  claim 
that  honor.  I  first  mentioned  it  to  the  printers. 
We  had  talked  this  thing  over  before  I  left  home, 
and  I  promised  my  constituents  that  I  would 
make  some  such  motion  as  this  for  their  particu- 
lar benefit  in  common  with  the  residue  of  the 
Stat«.  This  is  a  question  in  which  the  people 
feel  an  interest  paramount  to  any  other  proposi- 
tion that  has  excited  the  public  attention  for 
many  years.  We  are  not  in  my  county  as  much 
of  a  newspaper  reading  people  as  the  conrtitu- 


ency  of  many  gentlemen.  Many  of  us  are  situa- 
ted at  a  distance  from  post-offices,  but  we  ha.l 
made  arrangements  in  advance  for  the  dissemi- 
nation of  this  information.  I  am  in  favor  of  a 
larger  number  than  that  recommended  by  the 
Committee,  for  we  owe  it  to  our  constituents  that 
they  should  be  fully  advised  of,  and  have  be- 
fore them  the  reasons  why  we  do  one  particular 
thing  and  refuse  to  do  another.  It  is  contempla- 
ted that  the  result  of  our  labors  shall  be  referred 
to  the  people  for  their  acceptance  or  rejection, 
early  in  the  season.  Is  it  not  important,  then, 
that  they  should  be  fully  advised,  and  entirely 
comprehend  the  subject  on  which  they  are  to 
vote'i  This  thing,  I  repeat,  is  urged  not  for  the 
Printers'  benefit,  but  for  that  of  the  people,  and 
were  I  to  suggest  any  alteration,  it  would  be  to 
increase  the  number  to  a  hundred  copies  instead 
of  sixtv. 

Mr.  SARDIX.  I  am  willing  the  gentleman 
should  have  the  honor  of  the  paternity  of  this 
resolution,  and  I  will  not  give  it  to  the  printers. 
I  conceive  it  to  be  an  unnecessary  expense,  for 
very  few  will  read  the  papers  we  send.  Con- 
gress, never  allowed,  since  I  had  an  acquaintance 
with  that  body,  more  than  thirty  dollars  for  pa- 
pers, sometimes  duriugasession  of  eight  months; 
but  we  are  here  proposing  to  incur  an  expense  of 
$3000,  for  what  I  consider  a  ver^'  useless  thing. 
I  will  only  remark  again,  that  my  object  is  not  to 
prevent  information,  but  that  we  mav  act  with 
a  prudent  and  saving  hand.  It  is  indispensably 
necessary  for  this  government  that  we  snould  to 
a  certain  extent,  retrench  our  expenditures. — 
There  is  not  an  instance  known  in  the  history  of 
the  world,  where  ago venimeut,  without  resort- 
iug  to  first  principles,  ever  retraced  its  steps  in 
point  of  expenditure.  In  monarchical,  imperial, 
and  aristocratical  governments,  heavy  expendi- 
tures have  repeatedly  aided  in  producing  revolu- 
tions. In  republics  we  can  only  retrace  our 
steps  by  recurring  to  first  principles.  We  incur- 
red yesterday  an  expense,  I  presume,  of  at  least 
$2000  or  $2500,  and  this  morning  it  is  proposed 
to  add  $3000.  I  hope  we  shall  withhold  no  in- 
formation, none  at  all,  but  I  do  think  that  ten 
dollars  is  enough  to  be  appropriated  to  each  mem- 
ber for  daily  papers. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  On  this  subject  I  agree  with 
my  colleague,  (Mr.  Meriwether.)  We,  in  our 
neighborhood,  have  an  abundance  of  newspa- 
pers, but  many  are  very  differently  circum- 
stanced— many  of  the  other  counties  have  no 
paper  at  all.  It  is  generally  conceded,  I  ima- 
gine, that  the  Constitution  we  may  frame,  will 
be  laid  before  the  people  for  approval  or  rejec- 
tion, and  it  becomes  therefore  a  matter  of  great 
importance  that  they  should  be  well  informed  of 
the  daily  progress  which  we  make;  and  certain- 
ly this  is  the  only  mode  by  which  this  informa- 
tion can  be  extended  to  many  counties  in  the 
State.  In  this  government  an  intelligent  public 
opinion,  is  the  foundation  on  which  it  rests,  and 
tlierefore  the  expense  of  a  few  dollars  is  scarcely 
worthy  of  consideration.  A  matter  of  $3,000  is 
not  for  a  moment  to  be  taken  into  consideration 
when  we  view  the  great  importance  of  the  peo- 
ple being  enlightened  on  this  subject,  before  thev 
act  in  reference  to  it.  Where  then  is  the  man 
who  will  consider  the  paltry  sum  of  $3,000  to 
the  State  of  Kentucky  compared   with  the  ob- 


32 


ject  in  view?  As  I  before  remarked,  the  con- 
stituents I  represent  have  but  little  or  no  inter- 
est in  this  resolution.  We  have  five  or  six  daily- 
papers  at  our  doors,  but  I  consider  it  my  duty 
to  sustain  this  motion,  for  the  benefit  of  the 
State  at  large. 

Mr.  GREY.  I  was  very  sorry  to  hear  my 
friend  from  Nelson  offer  the  objections  he  has 
made  to  this  resolution,  and  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  only  objection,  which  the  gentleman  seems 
to  interpose,  of  any  importance  whatever,  has 
no  foundation  in  fact.  He  says,  if  you  pass  this 
resolution,  and  send  out  the  papers  to  the  differ- 
ent counties  in  the  State,  you  do  not  afford  the 
citizens  an  opportunity  of  receiving  the  infor- 
mation until  long  after  they  have  acquired  it 
from  other  sources.  That  is  the  only  avowed 
objection  of  the  gentleman  to  the  passage  of  the 
resolution,  and  I  ask  you  if  it  is  true?  How  are 
they  to  get  information,  unless  telegraphic  wires 
be  extended  to  each  citizen  of  the  Commonwealth. 
He  certainly  cannot  get  it  sooner  than  through 
the  daily  paper  published  here,  transmitted  by 
mail  to  each  individual.  That  is  the  most  ex- 
peditious manner  of  disseminating  information 
that  I  can  conceive  of.  The  gentleman  seems 
anxious  that  this  information  shall  be  extended 
throughout  the  community,  but  he  thinks  that 
his  constituents  will  read  through  the  daily  pa- 
pers, all  the  information.  His  constituents  may 
be  more  favorably  situated  than  the  constituency 
of  others,  but  I  ask  you  if  the  great  body  of  the 
constituency  of  this  assembly  will  not  fail  to  re- 
ceive this  information,  unless  some  plan  of  this 
sort  be  adopted.  I  would  send  them  to  different 
neighborhoods,  and  to  persons  not  in  the  habit 
of  taking  papers,  so  as  to  disseminate  informa- 
tion of  what  IS  doing  here  among-  the  people  as 
much  as  possible.  I  think  a  less  number  than 
that  proposed  would  be  perfectly  useless.  What 
good  would  it  do?  Each  member  here  repre- 
senting from  1,000  to  1,500  voters — to  circulate 
less  than  sixty  daily  papers  among  that  num- 
ber— what  good  will  it  do?  It  seems  to  me  a 
less  number  will  be  of  no  value;  and  I  think  if 
the  gentleman  wants  to  go  in  for  retrenchment 
and  saving  of  expense,  he  ought  to  commence  at 
some  other  point.  I  believe  the  dissemination 
of  information  among  the  people  is  a  matter  of 
which  they  would  never  complain.  What  is  the 
sum  of  $3,000  in  comparison  with  tlie  intelli- 
gence the  people  will  receive  from  the  circulation 
of  these  papers  throughout  the  State.  I  hope 
the  amendment  will  be  voted  down,  and  the  res- 
olution, as  proposed,  be  adopted. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  Coming  from  a  county  dis- 
tant,frora  tlie  Seat  of  Government  as  well  as  from 
Louisville,  where  information  is  disseminated 
directly  amongst  the  people,  I  perhaps  feel  more 
interest  than  my  friend  from  Nelson  in  the  pas- 
sage of  the  resolution.  I  know  that  he  is  mista- 
ken, so  far  as  my  constituents  are  concerned,  in 
regard  to  the  facility  Avith  which  they  will  re- 
ceive information  of  what  we  are  here  doing. — 
I  feel  that  it  is  a  duty  which  will  be  acceptable 
to  them  that  I  shall  render  here  in  voting  for  the 
adoption  of  the  largest  number,  even  though  it 
exceed  that  whicli  the  committee  have  presented 
for  our  consideration.  There  are  not  more  than 
5  or  6  copies  of  the  Commonwealth  that  go  to 
my  town,  and  perhaps  not  a  single  copy  of  the 


Yeoman.  How  then  are  my  constituents  to  re- 
ceive weekly  intelligence  of  what  we  are  here 
transacting  in  any  other  vay  than  that  proposed? 
I  am  for  economy  andretreiichment  of  the  public 
funds  as  much  as  possible,  but  I  do  not  consider 
it  any  economy  to  witlihold  from  our  constitu- 
ents information  of  what  we  are  doing  here, 
intended  for  their  good.  I  hope  the  resolution 
will  be  adopted  with  the  largest  number. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  have  but  two  or  three  words 
to  say.  I  represent  about  2000  constituents,  and 
if  the  question  were  put  to  them,  Avhether  they 
would  vote  that  60  men  of  my  county  should 
have  sixty  papers  sent  to  them,  paid  for  out  of 
the  Treasury  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky, 
I  am  satisfied  that  not  ten  votes  would  be  given 
for  it.  Suppose  we  take  them,  it  would  be  ne- 
cessary to  send  the  whole  series  to  the  same  per- 
sons or  they  would  be  disconnected,  and  hence, 
but  about  60  men  of  the  county  would  receive  a 
paper  for  nothing  during  the  whole  session,  and 
the  balance  of  the  2000  that  I  represent  will  bear 
the  expense.  I  do  not  believe  it  would  meet 
with  their  approbation.  I  have  no  objection, 
none  in  the  world,  that  the  people  should  have 
information,  and  I  believe  that  when  they  want 
it  they  are  able  to  pay  for  it  and  will  d.o  so. — 
There  are  some  .300  papers  taken  in  my  county, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  in  the  world  that  every  sin- 
gle man  there  who  desires  to  know  what  we  are 
doing,  from  the  newspapers  published  in  this 
town,  will  send  his  money  here  and  pay  for  them. 
I  do  not  think  they  want  to  have  a  gratuity  and 
shall  vote  against  the  whole  affair. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  presume  the  question 
would  have  but  one  side  if  put  in  such  a  form 
that  we  should  be  called  upon  to  say  whether  we 
are  willing  that  the  people  should  or  should  not 
have  information.  Then  there  would  be  only 
one  question  and  one  vote  upon  it;  but  the  only 
question  here  is,  is  this  the  best  form  of  attain- 
ing that  end?  I  respect  all  tliat  comes  from  my 
friend  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  from  his  great 
talent  and  experience.  I  shall  vote  for  the 
smallest  number.  In  voting  for  the  diffusion 
of  information,  I  should  prefer  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Woodford  (Mr.  Wal- 
ler.) I  would  rather  have  the  deliberations  of 
this  body  in  a  more  compact  and  tangible  form. 
I  would  rather  increase  the  publication  of  the 
Debates  and  Journals,  and  when  this  conven- 
tion adjourns  and  the  people  are  to  decide  upon 
the  new  Constitution,  let  them  have  the  Debates 
to  read.  It  seems  to  me  that  very  many  of  the 
daily  and  the  weekly  papers  distributed  in  the 
way  proposed  would  never  reach  the  people.  I  am 
willing  at  all  times  and  under  all  circumstances  to 
vote  for  the  largest  possible  amount  when  the  ob- 
ject is  to  educate  and  enlighten  the  people,  but  it 
seems  to  me  that  this  is  not  tlie  best  way  to  dis- 
seminate the  information.  I  shall  therefore  vote 
for  the  proposition  of  my  friend  from  Nelson. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  On  the  question  about  to  be 
taken, I  call  for  theyeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  It  may  be  desirable 
that  each  member  shall  knoAV  what  the  cost  will 
be,  and  upon  an  accurate  calculation  I  think  the 
amount  may  be  stated  at  4^^  cents  of  tax  upon 
each  legal  voter  of  this  Commonwealth. 

Mr.  BROWN.  Before  I  vote  on  the  amend- 
ment I  desire  to  say  a  word  or  two,  and  it  is  with 


38 


some  reluctance  that  I  say  anything.  I  do  not 
expect  to  participate  much  in  the  debates  or  dis- 
cussions of  this  convention,  but  I  desire  to  rep- 
resent my  action  by  my  votes  to  my  constituents. 
I  shall  vote  for  the"  am'endment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  and  then  a£:ainst  the  adoption  of 
the  entire  resolution.  This  resolution  -will  not 
accomplish  the  purpose  ■which  it  professes  to 
have  in  view — the  dissemination  of  intelligence 
among  the  people.  In  my  county  there  are 
some  2500  voters,  and  if  you  give  to  each  mem- 
ber 10  or  20  copies,  to  wliom  are  they  to  be  sent? 
Each  delegate  -will  select  perhaps  that  number 
among  the  people  of  his  county;  these  papers 
will  be  sent  to  them,  and  their  reading  will  be 
confined  pretty  much  to  them;  and  it  would  not 
be  sending  intelligence  therefore  to  the  people 
generally,  so  that  the  resolution  would  not  ac- 
complish the  object  designed.  If  it  were  to  dis- 
seminate intelligence  to  the  people  generally,  I 
should  be  in  favor  of  it;  but  if  delegates  desire 
to  send  papers  to  their  constituents  or  favorites, 
let  them  subscribe  for  them.  I  am  opposed  to 
their  doing  it  at  the  erpense  of  the  State. 

Mr.  MARTIN  P.  MARSHALL.  I  wish  to  of- 
fer an  additional  suggestion,  with  all  respect  for 
my  friend  from  Nelson.  If  ever  there  was  a  time 
in  the  history  of  Kentucky,  that  required  the  ex- 
istence amongst  us  of  a  healthy,  sound,  sober, 
public  sentiment,  that  crisis  is  now  approaching, 
when  the  Constitution  which  we  shall  make 
shall  be  presented  to  the  people.  We  know  that 
bv  the  terms  of  our  Constitution,  it  is  necessary 
tfiat  we  should  go  through  a  probation  in  re- 
gard to  the  collection  of  public  sentiment, 
whether  the  Constitution  shall  be  submitted  to 
them,  or  amendments  thereof.  But  the  time  has 
come  when  the  whole  Constitution  must  be  sub- 
mitted to  them — not  whether  any  amendment 
sxiggested  shall  be  put  in  it,  but  whether  the 
whole  Constitution,  after  it  has  undergone  the 
revision  of  this  body,  sheill  be  adopted  or  reject- 
ed by  the  people  at  large.  I  consider  that  a 
most  important  question,  and  requiring  the  ac- 
tion of  a  sound ,  intelligent  publ  ic  sentiment.  In 
view  of  that,  I  am  prepared  to  vote  for  every 
proposition  to  extend  light  and  information 
among  the  people  at  large.  This  is  one  mode  of 
doing  it.  The  people  will  not  have  more  than 
six  months  from  this  time,  before  they  are  called 
upon  to  decide  whether  they  will  reject  or  adopt 
vour  Constitution.  This  is  a  short  period,  and 
1  consider  it  highly  important  that  thev  should 
be  informed  as  to  the  progress  of  the  labors  of 
this  Convention,  for  the  purpose  of  creating 
among  them  a  sound  public  sentiment.  I  there- 
fore feel  disposed  to  vote  for  every  thing  that 
tends  to  disseminate  information.  This  Consti- 
tution is  going  to  produce  a  great  change  in  our 
manner  of  government.  It  is  to  run  in  opposi- 
tion to  many  cherished  opinions,  and  must  be 
considered  by  the  people  at  their  fire-sides,  in 
order  that  tfiere  may  arise  therefrom  a  whole- 
some public  sentiment.  The  cost  of  $.3,000 
or  $30,000  is  as  nothing  when  yon  look  to 
the  good  resulting  from  giving  public  senti- 
ment a  riffht  direction. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  think  it  always  best 
for  a  man  when  he  ascertains  that  he  has  com- 
mitted an  error,  at  once  to  correct  it.  I  rise  to 
correct  a  great  error  that  I  have  made.     The  ac- 


tual cost  of  these  papers,  to  each  voter,  will  be 
two  and  one  seventh  cents  instead  of  four  and 
three  quarters,  as  I  before  stated.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  T.J.HOOD.  I  concur  in  the  suggestion 
that  there  would  be  but  one  voice  in  tfiis  body 
as  to  the  propriety  of  furnishing  the  people  with 
correct  information  of  our  proceedings,  so  far  as 
it  can  be  done  without  incurring  too  extravagant 
an  expenditure.  The  objection  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Boyle  (Mr.  Talbott)  is,  that  he  does 
not  regard  this  as  the  best  method,  and  I  request 
the  gentleman  to  embody  his  proposition  in  the 
shape  of  a  substitute  or  amendment,  and  I  will 
most  cheerfully  adopt  it.  In  the  absence  of  any 
such  amendment,  I  snail  vote  for  the  proposition 
for  the  largest  number. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  I  shall  vote  for  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson.  It  is  but  a 
few  years  since  that  thp  taxation  of  the  State 
was  Dut  six  cents  on  one  hundred  dollars;  it  is 
now  in  my  county  twenty  two  cents.  The  ob- 
ject of  the  mover  of  the  resolution  and  of  the 
mover  of  the  amendment  is  to  disseminate  infor- 
mation among  the  people.  This  is  very  well. 
Suppose  that  the  original  resolution  passes,  and 
I  take  twenty  copies  of  the  Daily  Common- 
wealth, and  these  twenty  I  send  to  twenty  men 
of  my  county.  In  all  probability  there  will  not 
be  forty  men  in  the  county  who  will  ever  see 
those  papers.  I  think  it  is  much  more  impor- 
tant that  the  people  should  be  informed  of  what 
we  have  done  after  we  have  finished  our  labors 
than  of  what  we  have  said  while  we  were  per- 
forming it.  My  object  will  be  to  have  a  copy 
of  the  amended  Constitution  printed  for  eacn 
voter  in  the  State.  Let  provision  be  made  by 
the  Convention  to  disseminate  these  copies  of 
the  amended  Constitution,  so  that  each  voter  be- 
fore he  comes  to  the  poll  to  vote,  shall  have  had 
a  copy,  and  this  will  give  him  all  the  necessary 
information  as  to  what  we  have  done.  By  these 
means  he  will  know  what  we  have  done  and  not 
what  we  have  said  in  doing  it. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  Upon  this  resolution  to  fur- 
nish $3,000  worth  of  papers,  I  shall  vote  with 
the  respected  gentleman  from  Nelson.  The  num- 
ber is  so  small,  and  inadequate  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  information  to  the  citizens  of  this  Com- 
monwealth, that  I  shall  not  vote  for  the  appro- 
priation for  any  at  all.  I  represent  a  very  large 
county,  of  near  3,000  voters;  of  them  I  do  not 
know'one  half,  and  were  you  to  furnish  me  gra- 
tuitously at  the  expense  of  the  State  with  papers 
for  all  of  them,  I  should  have  to  send  home  and 
get  the  poll  book  in  order  to  know  to  whom  to 
send  them.  As  remarked  by  my  friend  from 
Nelson  our  revenue  has  increased  yery  rapidly, 
and  I  promised  my  people  during  the  canvass, 
that  my  voice  should  be  raised  and  my  ac- 
tion directed  at  all  times  to  endeavor  to  frame 
a  Constitution  to  render  our  Government  of  a 
form  that  will  be  cheaply  administered,  and  we 
not  be  trampled  upon  by  taxation.  The  only 
way  to  do  that  is,  to  cut  all  off.  If  we  begin  to 
say  this  is  a  small  item  of  only  $3,000  to-day,  it 
will  be  $3,000  to-morrow,  and  perhaps  $6,000 
the  next  day,  until  there  is  no  end  to  the  matter. 
Look  at  us  now,  and  it  will  be  seen  that,  in 
some  ten  or  twelve  years  our  revenue  has  in- 
creased to  some  $500,000,  and  it  is  still  increfeing. 
I  shall  vote  for  the  amendment  first,  and  then  I 


34 


shall  vote  against  the  whole  proposition.  If  we 
want  to  send  papers  to  the  people,  we  can  pay 
for  them  ourselves.  We  receive  pay  here,  and 
after  paying  our  board,  we  cannot  do  "better  than 
to  send  the  balance  to  our  constituents. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  will  say  one  word.  It  seems 
to  me  that  we  are  in  a  great  measure  forgetting 
one  of  the  important  reasons  operating  upon 
the  people  by  which  they  were  induced  to  call 
this  Convention.  One  of  the  great  complaints 
of  the  county  that  I  represent  was  the  extrava- 
gance of  the  Legislature  in  its  appropriations. 
X  fear  if  we  go  on  passing  resolutions  for  the 
expenditure  of  money  as  we  have  commenced, 
we  shall  exceed  the  extravagance  of  any  Legis- 
lature that  has  gone  before  us.  I  agree  with  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  that  the  passage  of  this 
resolution  will  not  advance  or  promote  the  ob- 
ject it  seems  to  have  in  view — that  is  the  dissem- 
ination among  the  people  of  information  of  the 
action  of  the  Convention  in  reference  to  the  for- 
mation of  a  new  Constitution.  It  is  said  that 
we  should  subscribe  for  papers  to  be  scattered 
among  the  people  that  their  minds  may  be  in- 
formed and  enlightened  as  to  the  Constitution 
after  it  has  been  framed  by  the  Convention.  If 
a  gentleman  will  not  subscribe  for  a  paper  him- 
self, I  hold  it  as  true,  that  if  you  subscribe  for 
it  and  send  it  to  him,  he  will  not  read  it  even 
when  he  has  it.  My  friend  from  Ballard  and 
McCracken  says  that  this  thing  was  talked  over 
in  his  county;  mine  is  adjoining,  and  yet  noth- 
ing was  said  there  concerning  it.  I  do  not  want 
$3,000  nor  any  other  sura  voted  for  papers.  Such 
as  desire  to  read  will  subscribe  for  them,  and  they 
will  read  them  if  they  are  willing  to  pay  their 
money  for  the  privilege  of  reading  them.  They 
do  not  expect  the  Convention  to  vote  $3,000  or 
any  other  sum  to  scatter  papers  through  the 
country  to  inform  them  what  was  done  here  to 
day  or  yesterday.  Take  up  the  proceedings  of  this 
Convention  yesterday,  and  I  ask  you  if  there  is 
any  thing  reported  that  will  enlighten  the  pub- 
lic mind  as  to  anv  principle  being  acted  upon 
here  bearing  on  the  formation  of  a  new  Consti- 
tution. And  there  will  be  nothing  in  any  pa- 
per that  will  enlighten  any  mind  as  to  going  for 
or  against  any  thing  in  the  Constitution.  I  shall 
vote  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  and  then  against  the  whole  resolution. 

Mr.  TURNER.  As  a  great  many  gentlemen 
have  said  they  will  vote  against  this  proposition, 
with  a  view  of  testing  its  strength,  and  to  save 
time,  I  move  to  lay  the  amendment  and  the  reso- 
lution on  the  table,  and  I  call  for  the  yeas  and 
nays  thereon. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  Before  the  vote  is  taken,  I 
ask  the  indulgence  of  the  House  merely  to  reply 
to  the  remarks  which  fell  from  a  gentleman  who 

J  receded  me.  I  am  for  economy,  but  we  are 
ere  spending  the  money  for  the  people,  and  I 
ask  if  we  have  as  yet  spent  a  dollar  that  is  to  go  for 
their  benefit.  Members  may  differ  with  me  in  opin- 
ion on  the  subject,  but  in  my  view  all  our  print- 
ing heretofore  has  not  resulted  and  will  not  result 
to  the  good  of  the  people.  Here  is  the  first  prop- 
osition introduced,  to  disseminate  throughout  the 
country  the  proceedings  of  this  Convention,  and 
the  debates,  discussions,  and  conclusions  at  which 
we  arrive  here.  Now  iu  it  not  a  matter  of  great 
importance  that  the  arguments,  views,  and  feel- 


ings which  have  actuated  the  members  of  this 
Convention  should  be  spread  abroad  throughout 
the  laud,  that  the  people  may  weigh  the  argu- 
ments here  advanced,  and  perhaps  in  due  time 
arrive  at  the  same  conclusions  to  which  this 
body  has  arrived?  My  people,  I  am  satisfied, 
without  the  expression  of  any  opinion  from  them, 
will  justify  me  in  attempting  to  give  them  this 
information.  I  stand  here  without  instruction 
from  them,  but  I  believe  that  I  shall  maintain 
their  will  and  act  in  accordance  with  their  plea- 
sure in  thus  extending  this  infonnation  to  them. 
As  I  said  before,  this  is  the  first  proposition  as 
yet  introduced  to  spread  intelligence  before 
them.  I  admit  that  when  they  look  over  the 
paper  containing  the  report  of  our  proceedings 
yesterday  our  constituents  will  feel  but  little  in- 
terest in  what  we  are  doing ;  but  at  the  same 
time  I  am  willing  that  they  shall  knoAV  how  we 
are  employed.  I  trust  the  time  will  soon  come 
wlien  our  debates  and  proceedings  will  have  a 
deeper  interest  with  the  people,  and  then  I  want 
them  to  have  the  privilege  of  reading  them.-  I 
feel  justified,  therefore,  in  voting  for  this  appro- 
priation that  they  may  liave  this  intelligence, 
and  I  trust  this  House  will  not  entertain  the  mo- 
tion just  made. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion 
to  lay  on  the  table,  and  it  was  negatived;  ayes, 
43;  nays,  53. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  amendment 
of  Mr.  HARDIN,  and  it  was  adopted;  ayes,  57; 
nays  38. 

Mr.  T  ■  J.  HOOD.  The  number  of  papers  that 
will  be  furnished  under  the  amendment  will  be 
so  small,  that  it  will  afford  those  who  represent 
large  counties,  but  a  very  limited  means  of  dis- 
seminating information  among  their  constitu- 
ents. As  the  matter  of  expense  seemed  to  be 
the  main  objection,  in  the  hope  that  some  gentle- 
man may  devise  a  cheaper,  and  at  the  same 
time,  a  better  mode  to  attain  the  desired  end,  I 
will  move  that  the  further  consideration  of  the 
subject  be  postponed  until  to-morrow. 

This  motion,  the  question  being  then  taken, 
was  negatived. 

The  question  was  then  taken  by  ayes  and  nays 
on  the  resolution,  as  amended,  and  it  was  re- 
jected, yeas,  40;  nays,  56. 

A   CONTESTED  SEAT. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  received  a  communi- 
cation from  the  county  of  Casey,  signed  by  sev- 
eral gentlemen,  and  though  I  do  not  desire  to 
have  any  thing  to  do  with  the  subject,  I  suppose 
somebody  must  have.  They  have  requested  me 
to  present  the  communication  to  the  Convention, 
and  to  have  an  enquiry  made  into  the  election 
of  the  delegate  from  the  county  of  Casey.  I  have 
heard  the  suggestions  of  my  colleague  and  my 
friend  from  Mad  i  son,  and  I  agree  with  both  of  them 
that  if  their  statements  are  true,  and  I  have  no 
doubtofit,  the  gentleman  present  from  that  coun- 
ty is  entitled  to  his  seat.  Yet  it  is  due  to  those 
who  sent  this  communication  to  me,  that  a  com- 
mittee should  make  an  enquiry  into  the  matter. 
The  journals  read  that  the  Convention  received 
the  last  certificate  of  the  sheriff,  and  I  agree 
with  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner,) 
that  the  officer  had  no  right  to  make  it;  and  I 
agree  also  with  that  gentleman  that  no  man  after 


35 


he  had  voted  on  the  first  or  second  day  of  the 
election,  had  a  right  to  come  back  on  the  third 
day  and  fill  out  his  vote.  A  voter  has  a  right 
to  abandon  the  right  of  suffrage  altogether,  or 
to  vote  for  a  portion  of  the  offices,  but  he  has 
no  right  to  come  back  and  fill  up  a  deficient 
vote.  That  was  the  decision  in  the  case  of  the 
contested  election  of  Williams  and  Mason.  If 
it  would  be  satisfactory  to  the  gentlemen,  I  will 
move  to  refer  the  subject  to  a  select  committee. 
I  have  no  doubt  my  friend  from  Casev,  (Mr. 
Coffey,)  is  entitled  to  his  seat,  but  his  right 
should  be  clear  and  undoubted.  We  cannot  act 
on  a  sheriff's  cerificate  given  two  months  af- 
terwards. 

The  communication  was  then  read. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  This  is  a  matter  about  which 
I  know  but  little,  but  I  imagine  that  the  Con- 
vention does  not  fully  understand  all  the  circum- 
stances in  relation  to  the  election  in  Casey  coun- 
ty. It  is  questionable  whether  there  is  any 
law  by  which  a  contested  seat,  or  the  right  to  a 
seat  in  this  body,  can  be  investigated.  I  cer- 
tainly have  doubts  on  the  subject,  and  in  the  ab- 
sence of  any  certainty  in  regard  to  it,  from  the 
best  information  we  have  in  relation  to  this  elec- 
tion, it  is  to  be  presumed  that  the  gentleman 
has  come  here  by  the  consent  and  will  of  the 
majority  of  the  voters  of  the  county  of  Casey. 
When  the  gentleman  presented  his'  certificate, 
and  claimed  his  seat,  no  one  disputed  his  right 
to  it,  provided  the  sheriflF  had  done  his  duty. 
There  was  no  objection,  then,  that  I  have  heard, 
to  his  having  received  really  a  majority  of  the 
votes  of  the  qualified  voters  of  Casey.  That 
seemed  to  be  conceded,  and  the  only  objection 
made  by  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  was,  that 
the  sheriff,  perhaps,  had  not  performed  his  duty. 
The  voters  of  Casey,  itwas  fair  to  presume,  con- 
sidered the  gentleman  entitled  to  his  seat,  or 
they  would,  I  imagine,  have  taken  some  legal 
course  in  reference  thereto,  under  the  laws  in  re- 
lation to  contested  seats  in  the  Legislature. — 
Nothing  of  the  kind  has  been  done,  and  the  gen- 
tlem£in's  claim  to  the  seat  appears  to  have  been 
fully  acquiesced  in  by  the  people  of  Casey. — 
When  the  vote  was  taken  on  the  question 
whether  the  Delegate  from  Casey  should  come 
forward  and  take  his  seat,  there  was  hardly 
an    objection  raised,  and  the   Convention   ap- 

S eared  to  be  almost  unanimous  in  conceding  that 
e  was  legally,  and  fairly,  and  honorably  enti- 
tled to  a  seat  in  this  bodv.  The  gentleman  ac- 
cordingly came  to  the  boot,  was  sworn,  and  took 
his  seat  among  us.  Would  it  be  right  now,  and 
in  accordance  with  parliamentary  usage,  and  the 
habits,  customs,  and  dignity  of  bodies  of  this 
character,  after  doing  what  this  Convention  has 
done — after  we  have,  as  we  supposed,  taken  into 
consideration  all  the  circumstances  we  could  get 
possession  of  in  relation  to  this  election — would 
It  seem  right  and  reasonable  that  we  should  take 
barely  the  suggestions  of  a  few  gentlemen  from 
some  place — we  do  not  know  whether  from  Ca- 
sey, or  in  fact  anywhere  else,  for  we  can  know 
nothing  about  the  names  attached  to  that  paper 
— and  go  on  and  interrupt  the  business  of  the 
Convention  by  the  appointment  of  a  select  com- 
mittee, to  enquire  into  the  legal  right  of  the  gen- 
tleman to  his  seat?  Such  a  proceeding,  it  ap- 
pears to  me,  would  be  rather  useless.  I  ackoowl- 


edge  my  inexperience  in  parliamentary  usage, 
but  it  does  seem  to  me  that  common  sense,  and 
everything  else  that  ought  to  govern  such  a  body 
as  this  Convention,  requires  that  the  gentlemaii 
should  retain  his  seat  without  interruption. 

Mr.  HARDIX.    My  honorable  friend  last  up 
did  not  understand  me,  I  presume.     These  are 
not  fictitious  names,  I  presume,  and  the  gentle- 
man from  Casey  can  answer  whether  there  are 
any  such  gentlemen.    I   have  never  heard  of 
them,  before  I  received  their   communication 
through    the  post  office  to-day.     They   claim 
an  investigation  into  the  subject,  and  if  they  are 
voters  in  Casey  county,  it  is  due  to  them  that 
they  should  have  that  investigation,  and  the  mat- 
ter not  be  laid  on  the  table.     We  owe  it  to  our- 
selves to  judge  of  the  qualification  and  election 
of  Delegates  nere.    As  I  said  before,  I  concur 
with  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  in  under- 
standing the  law  to  provide  that  a  man  who  voted 
on  Monday  or  Tuesday,  and  did  not  fill  out  his 
vote  for  Delegate,  has  no  right  to  come  back  on 
Wednesday  and  fill  it  out.     In  this  case,  I  un- 
derstand tliat  four  gentlemen  who  abandoned 
the  right  to  vote  on  tlie  first  day,  came  back  on 
the  last  day  and  voted;  and  that  made  the  result 
a  tie.     If  that  was  the  case — and  I  have  no  doubt 
6f  the  fact — the  gentleman  is  entitled  to  his  seat; 
but  it  was  due  to  all  concerned  that  the  matter 
should  be  reported  upon  by  acommittee.    Anoth- 
er reason  is,  that  I  protest  against  the  power  of 
the  sheriff,  after  he  has  made  one  return,  some 
months  after  to  give  another.    His  official  du- 
ties ceased  in  the  first  instance,  and  he  had  no 
right  to  give  another.    I  desire  the  committee  to 
examine  and  report  on  these  facts;  and,  for  one, 
I  will  vote  that  no  man  who  did  not  give  a  full 
vote  on  Monday,  has  a  right  to  come   back  and 
fill  it  out  on  Wednesday.    I  had  the  good,  or  bad 
fortune — in  the    case   of  the  contested  seat  of 
Williams  and  Mason — to  hold  a  seat  in  the  Sen- 
ate, and  I  voted  for  the  report  of  the  committee; 
and,  in  fact,  drew  up  every  word  of  it,  which 
distinctly  laid  down  this  principle.     I  think  the 
gentleman  entitled  to  his  seat,  but  we  owe  it  to 
the  people  to  enquire  about   it,  and  I  think  the 
gentleman  himself  should  consent  to  it,  and  let 
the  fact  appear  on  the    Journals.    I  am  a  thou- 
sand times  obliged  to  my  friend  over  the  way 
(Mr.  Hargis,)  for  the  information  he  has  given; 
but  perhaps  he  has  not  as  much  experience  in 
parliamentary  usage  as  some  of  us.    I  have  been 
about  half  of  my  life  in  parliamentary  bodies, 
but  never  having  expected  any  elevation  to  the 
chair  of  speaker,  or  even  that  of  chairman  of 
committee  of  the  whole,  I  know  as  little  about 
parliamentary  rules  as  almost  any  other  man. — 
I  hope  the  committee  will  be  raised,  and  the 
facts  reported  upon,  although  not  for  a  moment 
doubting  that  the  gentleman  will  retain  his  seat. 
Mr.  COFFEY.    I  not  only  concur  with  my 
friend  from   Nelson,  but  I  ask  myself  the  ap- 
pointment of  a  committee  to  examine  into  this 
case.    Let  them  take  the  whole  of  the  papers 
and  certificates  before  them,  and  report  the  truth 
in  regard  to  the  matter.     I  discover  that  many 
members  of  the  House  are  only  in  possession  of 
a  part  of  the  facts.    Frequent  reference  has  been 
made  to  the  case  as  if  these  four  votes  improper- 
ly cast,    alone  authorized  me    to  come  here. 
But  there  were   other  votes  in  my  fayor.    I 


36 


wish  the  papers  and  evidence,  and  the  writ- 
ten contract  between  rayself  and  my  worthy 
competitor  also  to  be  fully  examined  and  re- 

Eorted  upon.  I  am  not  ambitious  to  stand 
ere  improperly.  When  I  occupy  a  seat  in 
any  body  I  wish  to  do  it  lawfully  and  honora- 
bly. I  desire  to  be  here  independently,  and 
without  leaning  on  any  man,  and  therefore  I 
desire  that  this  committee  shall  be  raised. 

The  subject  was  then  referred  to  a  select  com- 
mittee, as  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son. 

The  PRESIDENT  named  the  following  gen- 
tlemen as  the  committee,  Messrs.  Hardin,  Tur- 
ner, and  Clarke. 

PROPOSITIONS   TO   AMEND. 

Mr.  DIXON  offered  the  following,  which  on 
his  motion  was  postponed  and  ordered  to  be 
printed. 

Resolved,  That  the  judicial  officers  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky  should  be  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple; but,  to  avoid  the  exercise  of  any  improper 
influence  'over  the  Judges,  in  the  discharge  of 
their  official  duties,  by  those  who  may  have  ta- 
ken part  in  their  elections,  it  is  expedient  to  in- 
corporate into  the  Constitution  a  provision,  re- 
quiring the  judges,  living  in  two  adjoining  dis- 
tricts, to  preside  alternately  in  each  of  the 
Courts  of  such  districts. 

Mr.  ROOT  submitted  the  [following  proposi- 
tion, which  on  his  motion  was  postponed,  re- 
ferred to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  order- 
ed to  be  printed. 

1 .  Resolved,  That  any  inhabitant  of  this  State 
who  shall  hereafter  be  engaged  in  a  duel,  either 
ae  principal  or  accessary,  shall  forever  be  dis- 

Sualified  as  an  elector,  and  from  holding  any  of- 
ce  under  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  this 
State;  and  may  be  punished  in  such  other  man- 
ner as  shall  be  prescribed  by  law. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly  shall 
not,  in  any  manner,  create  any  debt  or  debts, 
liability  or  liabilities,  which  shall  singly  or  in 
the  aggregate,  with  any  previous  debts  or  liabil- 
ities, exceed  the  sum  of  dollars,  except 
in  case  of  war,  to  repel  invasion,  or  suppress 
insurrection,  unless  the  same  shall  be  author- 
ized by  some  law  for  some  single  object  or  work, 
to  be  distinctly  specified  therein;  which  law 
shall  provide  ways  and  means,  exclusive  of 
loans,  for  the  payment  of  the  interest  of  such 
debt  or  liability  as  it  falls  due ;  and  also  to  pay 
and  discharge  the  principal  of  such  debt  or  lia- 
bility within  years  from  the  time  of  the  con- 
tracting thereof;  and  shall  be  irrepealable  until 
the  principal  .ind  interest  thereon  shall  be  paid 
and  discharged;  but  no  such  law  shall  take  ef- 
fect until,  at  a  general  election,  it  shall  have 
been  submitted  to  the  people,  and  have  received 
a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  for  and  against  it 
at  such  election;  and  all  money  raised  by  au- 
thority of  such  law  shall  be  applied  only  to  the 
specific  object  therein  stated,  or  to  the  payment 
of  the  debt  thereby  created ;  and  such  law  shall 
be  published  in  at  least  one  newspaper  in  each 
judicial  district,  if  one  is  published  therein, 
throughout  the  State  for  months  preceding 
the  election  at  which  it  is  submitted  to  the  peo- 
ple. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  submitted  the  follow- 
ing, which  waa  ordered  to  be  printed. 


Resolved,  That  it  is  the  deliberate  and  fixed 
opinion  of  this  Convention,  that  no  provision  or 
amendment,  which  shall  have  the  effect  to  re- 
strict the  right  of  free  and  equal  suffrage,  as  it 
now  exists,  or  to  change  the  conditions  by  which 
it  may  be  now  acquired,  according  to  the  Consti- 
tution of  Kentucky,  ought  to  be  inserted  in  any 
Constitution  whicn  may  be  proclaimed  by  this 
Convention. 

Mr.  DIXON  offered  the  following  as  a  substi- 
stute  for  the  proposition  of  Mr.  Davis,  in  rela- 
tion to  naturalization. 

Whereas,  The  people  of  the  United  States,  in 
the  1st  article  and  8th  section  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, have  given  to  Congress  the  exclusive 
power  to  establish  a  uniform  rule  of  naturaliza- 
tion ;  and  whereas,  it  was  contemplated  by  the 
framers  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
that  the  citizen  natura^zed  should,  in  all  re- 
spects, touching  the  right  of  suffrage,  be  placed 
on  an  equal  footing  with  the  native  born  citizen. 
Therefore, 

Resolved,  That  it  would  be  inexpedient  to  in- 
corporate into  the  Constitution  of  Kentucky,  any 
principle  whereby  any  invidious  distinction 
should  be  made  in  favor  of  the  native  born  over 
the  naturalized  citizen,  in  the  exercise  of  the 
right  of  suffrage. 

Mr.  DAVIS.    I  will  merely  say  to  the  gentle- 
man in  regard  to  these  propositions,  that  when 
the  time  comes  for  tlieir  consideration,  let  them 
be  taken  up  in  their  order,  and  then 
"Lay  on  Macduff." 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  will  only  say  to  the  gentle- 
man that  when  the  time  comes  Macduff  will  be 
in  his  place. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  only  to  say 
that  wherever  Macduff  or  Macbeth  may  be,  a 
Kentucky  citizen  will  be  in  his  place. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tions, which  were  postponed  and  ordered  to  be 
printed,  viz: 

Resolved,  That  special  pleading,  in  all  Courts 
of  Justice  in  this  Commonwealth,  should  be 
abolished;  that  a  speedy  and  impartial  trial  by 
a  jury  of  the  vicinage,  upon  the  merits  of  his 
case,  should  be  secured  to  every  citizen. 

Resolved,  That,  to  this  end,  Chancery  Courts 
should  be  abolished. 

Resolved,  That  a  constitutional  provision, 
which  shall  (within  a  reasonable  time)  quiet  the 
titles  of  the  occupants  of  lands,  as  to  the  ad- 
verse claims  of  all  persons  not  laboring  under 
some  legal  disability,  is  indispensably  necessary 
to  the  well-being  and  prosperity  of  the  good 
citizens  of  this  Commonwealth. 

Resolved,  That  the  jurisdiction  of  Justices  of 
the  Peace  should  be  increased  to  dollars. 

Resolved,  That  it  is  expedient  to  lay  off  the 
State  of  Kentucky  into  four  districts,  in  each  of 
which  the  Appellate  Court  shall  hold  two  terms 
annually. 

Resolved,  That  the  concurrence  of  a  majority 
of  the  Appellate  Judgjes  should  be  necessary  to 
a  reversal  of  the  opinion  of  an  inferior  tribunal. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  offered  the  following  which 
were  ordered  to  be  printed  and  made  the  order 
of  the  day  for  to-morrow: 

1.  Resolved,  That  no  part  of  the  present  Consti- 
tution of  Kentucky,  nor  of  any  proposed  amend- 
meut  thereto,  shall  be  referred  to  any  committee, 


37 


other  than  the  committee  of  the  whole,  until 
the  same  has  been  considered  and  approved  by 
the  Convention  as  proper  to  be  inserted  in,  and 
made  a  part  of,  the  new  or  amended  Constitution. 
2.  Resolved,  That  from  and  afterthe  7th  instant, 
the  Convention  will  hold  a  momin?  and  an 
evening  session  each  day,  ineeting  for  the  former 

at o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  for  the  latter  at 

■  o'clock,  P.  M. 


3.  Resolved,  That,  until  otherwise  ordered,  the 
morning  sessions  of  the  Convention  shall  be  de- 
voted to  hearing,  receiving,  and  referring  such 
portions  of  the  existing  Constitution  as  may  be 
deemed  worthy  of  re-adoption,  and  of  amend- 
ments to  the  same,  the  reports  of  committees, 
Ac,  and  that  immediately  on  assembling  in  the 
afternoon,  the  Convention  will  go  into  commit- 
tee of  the  whole  upon  such  matters  as  may  have 
been  referred  to  it,  and  so  continue  until  ad- 
journment. 

RULES  OF   ORDER. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER,  the 
Convention  proceeded  to  the  considei-ation  of 
the  report  of  the  select  committee  of  a  series  of 
rules  for  the  government  of  the  Convention. 

The  1st  2d  .3d  and  4th  rules  were  read  and 
passed  without  amendment. 

The  5th  was  amended  verbally  by  the  substi- 
tution of  the  word  may  for  shall,  so  as  to  provide 
that  "the  President  may  examine  and  correct  the 
journal  before  it  is  read." 

The  6th  rule  being  under  consideration  in 
these  words: 

"6.  He  shall  have  the  right  to  name  any  mem- 
"  ber  to  perform  the  duties  of  the  Chair  but  such 
"substitution  shall  not  extend  beyond  a  day,  or 
"over  one  adjournment;  and  when  not  occupy- 
"  ing  the  Chair,  he  may  submit  propositions  and 
"participate  in  debate." 

Mr.  TURXER  moved  to  strike  out  the  words, 
"and  when  not  occupying  the  chair,  he  may  sub- 
mit propositions  and  participate  in  debette." — 
He  said,  I  make  this  motion  because  it  is  giving 
a  power  to  the  President,  and  a  right  that  is 
without  precedent,  as  far  as  I  know  and  believe, 
in  any  deliberative  body  in  the  United  States, 
either  of  Church  or  State.  It  is  very  improper, 
according  to  my  notion  of  the  duties  of  a  presi- 
ding officer.  A  presiding  officer  ought  to  un- 
derstand thoroughly,  the  rules  x)f  the  body  over 
which  he  presides,  and  he  ought  to  understand 
parliamentary  law.  It  is  his  duty  to  be  well 
versed  in  these,  and  to  pay  more  attention  to  the 
duties  of  the  chair  than  to  any  other.  Our  pre- 
siding officer,  for  whose  appointmenti  myself  vo- 
ted, I  have  no  doubt,  is  well  versed  in  the  du- 
ties belonging  to  his  station,  but  like  many  in- 
dividuals in  his  position,  he  is,  I  apprehend,  a 
little  rusty  in  a  good  many  things.  I  make  this 
remark,  not  as  being  applicable  to  that  gentle- 
man in  particular,  for  no  one  in  this  Conven- 
tion has  a  greater  share  of  my  regard  than  he 
lias,  but  it  appears  to  me,  that  our  presiding  offi- 
cer ought  to  have  his  attention  devoted  exclu- 
sively to  the  di.'charge  of  the  duties  of  the  chair, 
in  the  preservation  of  order,  and  not  to  come 
down  to  the  floor  of  the  House,  in  order  to  bring 
forward  propositions  and  argue  them,  throwing 
his  weight  and  influence  in  theirfavor,  and  then 
to  go  back  and  take  the  chair,  and  decide,  upon 


his  own  propositions.  There  may  not  be  any 
harm  done  in  the  case  of  our  President,  but  then; 
is  a  good  book  which  says,  we  ought  not  to  lead 
a  man  into  temptation.  And  I  think  this  warn- 
ing is  particularly  applicable  in  politics.  I  do 
not  wish  to  lead  our  honorable  President  into  too 
much  temptation. 

There  is  an  additional  reason,  according  to 
my  view  of  the  subject,  why  this  portion  of 
the  rules  ought  not  to  be  adopted.  We  all  know 
— although  there  is  no  memtjer  who  will  admit 
that  he  is  under  such  influence — that  when  a 
man  is  made  President  of  the  United  States,  orthe 
Governor  of  a  State,  or  President  of  a  Convention, 
the  official  station  gives  him  a  certain  degree  of 
influence,  and  in  the  case  of  a  presiding  officer 
his  opinions  ought  never  to  be  known;  he  ought 
to  be  an  impartial  umpire;  at  all  events  his  opin- 
ions ought  not  to  be  known  till  the  debate 
is  over  and  the  vote  taken.  I  have  alwaj-s 
thought  that  the  rule  which  gives  to  the  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  Kentucky  the 
right  to  vote  is  improper.  You  find  nothing  of 
the  kind  in  the  British  Parliament  nor  in  Con- 
gress. You  find  nothing  of  the  kind  in  ancient 
legislative  bodies.  It  is  a  rule  that  has  been 
adopted  in  modern  times,  and  one  which,  as  I 
have  myself  seen,  exerts  an  improper  influence. 
The  presiding  officer  is  looked  up  to  by  the 
members  of  the  body  over  which  ne  presides, 
and  when  you  permit  him  to  come  upon  the  floor 
and  debate  a  proposition,  and  then  go  back  to 
the  chair  and  decide  upon  it,  you  destroy  his 
usefulness  and  his  impartiality  as  a  presiding 
officer.  "With  these  suggestions,  I  will  renew 
my  motion  to  strike  out  the  latter  clause  of  the 
sixth  rule.  I  should  be  gratified,  when  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  upon  the  proposed  amend- 
ments of  the  Constitution,  to  hear  the  views  of 
our  President  expressed.  I  believe  that  his 
views  very  nearly,  if  not  entirely,  correspond 
with  my  own.  I  do  not  make  this  motion  with 
any  hostility  to  our  presiding  officer,  or  from  a 
belief  that  he  has  any  disposition  to  do  wrong, 
but  I  do  it  because  I  think  that  the  principle,  if 
carried  out,  will  have  a  pernicious  and  corrupting 
influence.  And  in  this,  the  highest  deliberative 
body  that  can  be  assembled  in  the  State,  there 
ought  to  be  no  exemption  from  an  adherence  to 
the  practice  which  has  invariably  been  followed 
in  the  most  enlightened  legislative  bodies  in  the 
world. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  With  due  deference  to 
the  opinions  of  my  friend  from  Madison,  I  would 
suggest  that  he  is  under  a  misapprehension,  if 
he  supposes  that  whenever  the  President  has 
left  the  chair,  we  are  in  committee  of  the  whole. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  mean  that  it  is  so  in  sub- 
stance. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  In  substance  then  I  dif- 
fer with  the  gentleman,  as  much  as  in  shadow. 
In  substance,  we  shall  not  be  in  committee  of 
the  whole;  for  although  the  President  may  leave 
his  seat,  yet  the  previous  question  is  applicable, 
so  that  in  substance  the  convention  will  not  be 
in  committee  of  the  whole.  The  gentleman  will 
remember  that  we  are  depriving  the  City  of 
Louisville  of  the  service  of  one  of  its  delegates 
by  depriving  him  of  the  right  to  participate  in 
debate  upon  propositions  that  are  offered  here. 
This  is  different  from  a  Legislative  body.    There 


38 


the  Constitution  makes  it  incumbent  upon  the 
body  to  select  one  of  their  number  to  preside. — 
Not  so  here.  No  man  supposed  that  the  Presi- 
dent of  this  convention  was  to  be  deprived  of 
any  of  his  rights  by  his  elevation  to  the  Chair. 
Will  you  deprive  him  of  the  right  which  every 
other'member  enjoys  of  discussing  propositions 
and  swbmitting  propositions  merely  oecause  you 
have  elevated  him  to  that  seat?  Will  you  re- 
quire the  President  to  vote  upon  propositions 
without  giving  reasons  for  or  against  them? — 
That  is  the  question.  Many  important  proposi- 
tions will  be  made  in  Convention  which  will 
not  be  made  in  committee  of  the  whole,  and  the 
President  of  the  Convention  will  be  required  to 
record  his  vote  for  or  against  them;  ancl  yet  you 
will  not  permit  him  to  assign  his  reasons.  I  ask 
is  it  right  to  place  your  presiding  officer  in  that 
position? 

As  to  the  idea  suggested  by  the  gentleman 
that  his  influence  is  so  much  greater  on  account 
of  his  position,  I  cannot  concur  with  him.  In- 
deed the  allusion  made  by  the  gentleman  to  the 
usage  in  the  Legislature  and  in  this  Convention, 
of  calling  upon  the  President  to  vote,  shows  the 
fallacy  of  that  idea.  The  vote  given  by  the  Pres- 
ident apprises  every  member  of  his  opinion  re- 
garding the  proposition  upon  which  ne  votes, 
and  his  participation  in  the  debate  could  not 
carry  that  influence  further  than  his  vote  will  go. 

Again,  as  to  another  suggestion  that  he  would 
descend  from  the  Chair,  submit  a  proposition, 
discuss  it  and  then  return  to  the  Chair  and  de- 
cide upon  it.  I  do  not  understand  it  as  being 
the  privilege  of  the  presiding  officer  to  decide  any 
question  here.  He  only  announces  the  decision 
of  the  House.  Points  of  order  he  does  decide, 
but  he  decides  no  question  that  is  submitted  to 
the  Convention  for  its  deliberation.  Having 
thus  briefly  stated  my  views  in  regard  to  this 
matter,  I  shall  vote  against  the  motion  of  the 
gentlemen  from  Madison. 

Mr.  LINDSEY  moved  to  amend  by  adding  the 
words,  "  but  when  in  committee  of  tne  whole  he 
ehall  have  the  right  to  submit  propositions  and 
participate  in  debate." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  suggested  to  the  mover 
of  this  amendment  that  it  was  wholly  unnecessa- 
ry as  the  President  had  already  that  right  under 
parliamentary  law. 

Mr.  TURNER  accepted  the  amendment  as  a 
substitute  for  his  own,  and  then  said:  I  do  not 
wish  to  be  importunate  upon  this  subject,  but 
the  gentleman  seems  to  think  that  the  people  of 
Louisville  will  not  have  a  fair  representation 
here,  unless  wc  allow  the  President  to  take  the 
floor  and  debate  every  proposition  as  well,  when 
not  in  committee  of  tlie  whole,  as  when  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole.  This  same  argument  would 
apply  to  every  Speaker,  who  has  ever  acted  in 
Kentucky  as"  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, and  it  would  apply  in  Congress, 
where  sometimes  they  elect  a  Speaker  who  is  a 
member  from  a  Stat*  which  sends  but  one  or 
two  representatives,  as  is  the  case  with  Dela- 
ware. But  it  was  never  thought  that  in  such 
case,  he  should  have  this  extraordinary  privi- 
lege. Here  the  county  of  Jefferson  is  amply 
represented;  it  is  represented  by  able  and  elo- 
quent gentlemen,  and  notwitlistanding  this,  it 
is  feared  that  Louisville  will  bo  deprived  of  her. 


E roper  share  of  weight  in  this  Convention — by 
aving  one  of  her  representatives  elected  to  pre- 
side over  the  body.  Unless  Louisville  claims  to 
do  the  whole  business  of  the  Convention,  I 
think  she  has  no  cause  to  complain  of  being  de- 
prived of  the  services  of  one  of  her  representa- 
tives out  of  so  many  able  and  enlightened  gen- 
tlemen as  are  here  from  that  city  and  county. 
It  is  not  only  the  privilege  of  coming  down  from 
the  chair  and  originating  and  debating  proposi- 
tions that  I  object  to,  but  there  is  a  great  deal  in 
the  discretion  that  may  be  exercised  in  calling 
to  the  chair  a  delegate  of  similar  sentiments 
with  himself.  I  do  not  say  that  the  President 
would  act  improperly,  but  I  want  to  be  govern- 
ed by  that  invaluable  rule  lead  not  a  man  into 
temptation.  I  want,  not  only  purity,  but  to  be 
above  suspicion.  It  is  said  by  the  gentleman 
from  Jefferson,  I  believe,  that  although  the  Pre- 
sident participated  in  the  debate  he  would  not 
go  back  and  decide  upon  the  question  that  had 
been  debated.  But  it  appears  to  me  that  under 
the  rule  which  we  are  about  to  adopt,  when  a 
vote  is  taken  which  is  a  doubtful  one,  when  it  is 
claimed  by  both  parties,  the  President  will  be 
very  apt  to  decide  in  favor  of  the  proposition  for 
which  he  has  been  contending;  as  a  matter  of 
course  he  Avill  think  the  majority  always  on  his 
side.  Human  nature  is  a  little  frail,  and  those 
who  have  gone  before  us  have  always  acted  upon 
the  principle  that  it  isbetter  to  guard  against  the 
influence  that  may  be  exercised  by  a  presiding 
officer  by  being  permitted  to  participate  in  de- 
bate. Take  your  presiding  officer  from  his  sta- 
tion, and  he  will  not  have  time  to  study  Jeffer- 
son's Manual,  which  it  is  so  difficult  to  under- 
stand. I  doubt  very  much  whether  it  has  been 
read  this  week,  by  any  one  in  this  Convention. 
I  want  our  President  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
the  chair  instead  of  being  employed  in  drawing 
up  propositions  and  debating  them.  I  do  not 
think  the  President  desires  any  such  privilege. 
It  would  be  placing  him  in  a  position  in  which 
his  usefulness  would  be  destroyed. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  If  the  occupant  of 
the  Chair  should  not  desire  the  privilege  ne  need 
not  exercise  it.  The  rule  does  not  make  it  obli- 
gatory upon  him  to  do  so,  and  by  omitting  to 
claim  the  privilege  he  will  avoid  all  the  difficul- 
ty which  the  gentleman  suggests.  Tlie  same  ar- 
gument was  made  by  the  gentleman  in  committee. 
I  had  no  particular  preference  on  the  subject,  but 
a  large  majority  of  the  committee  instructed  me 
to  report  that  provision  in  the  rules. 

If  the  President,  as  the  gentleman  supposes, 
after  discussing  a  proposition,  will  return  to  the 
Chair  and  decide  the  question  incorrectly,  may 
he  not  so  decide  withoutthe  privilege  of  discuss- 
ing it?  He  will  doubtless  be  enlisted  on  one  side 
or  the  other  of  every  proposition  that  is  submitted 
here,  and  if  he  could  be  prompted  to  an  incorrect 
course  of  action  in  the  one  case,  could  he  not  as 
well  pursue  that  course  without  having  partici- 

Eated  in  the  discussion  as  after  having  done  so? 
Iocs  not  the  gentleman  Avish  to  obtain  light  upon 
any  subject  which  is  brought  forward  for  discus- 
sion? Then  why  not  receive  from  the  presid  ingoffi- 
cer  the  benefit  ofhisjudgmcnt  as  well  as  from  ev- 
ery other  member  of  this  body?  I  have  no  doubt 
that  it  would  be  acceptable  to  at  least  a  majority 
of  us. 


39 


■  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.    I  shall  vote  for  this  I  members  in  the  Convention,  and  it  is  proijosed 
amendment  in  accordance  with  what  I  think  has   tliat  there  be  eleven  committees,  consistiucr  of 


been  the  proper  and  uniform  course  in  all  deliber- 
ative bodies.  Almost  the  entire  business  m  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  is  matter  of  debate,  and  in  that 
we  should  have  the  benefit  of  the  assistance  of  the 
presiding  officer.  But  I  think  that  in  formine 
rules  for  this  House  we  should  follow  established 
usages,  and  that  the  presiding  officer  should  not 
be  permitted  to  originate  business.  Surelv  it 
could  never  be  desired  to  bring  the  presicling 
officer  into  personal  collision  with  the  members 
of  the  body.  I  think  we  had  better  pursue  the 
beaten  track;  it  is  always  the  safe  course. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  will  only  remark  that  I  con- 
sider this  to  be  an  innovation,  and  I  consider 
with  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  that  there  are 
strong  reasons  why  the  innovation  should  not  be 
adopted. 

Mr.  MoHENRY  called  for  a  division  of  the 
question  and  the  yeas  and  nays  on  the  first  branch. 
He  said,  I  do  not  desire  to  debate  this  question. 
I  will  only  make  the  suggestion,  that  I  do  not 
believe  the  gentleman  need  apprehend  any  such 
impropriety  of  conduct  on  the  part  of  our  presi- 
ding officer  as  has  been  suggested. 

There  has  been  no  exhibition  of  party  feeling 
in  this  body  hitherto,  except  in  the  election  of  a 
President,  but  I  caution  the  majority,  that  this 
grant  of  additional  power  to  the  President  may 
give  rise  to  a  suspicion  that  they  are  willing  to 
promote  party  purposes. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Barelv  one  suggestion 
and  it  is,  that  the  majority  here  have  not  yet  cho- 
son  guardians  over  them. 

Mr.  PRESIDENT.  Before  proceeding  to  put 
the  question,  I  will  remark  that  J  did  not  know 
that  this  proposition  was  to  be  made  until  it  was 
announced  to  the  House  this  morning.  I  fur- 
ther ask  leave  of  the  Convention  to  be  excused 
from  voting  upon  it. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  I  will  only  remark  that,  I  did 
not  suppose  that  you  had  any  such  knowledge. 
I  did  not  mean  to  insinuate  any  such  thing. 
The  yeas  and  nays  were  then  taken,  and  were 
yeas,  52,  nays,  43.  So  that  the  amendment  was 
adopted. 

The  7th  rule  was  amended  on  the  motion  of 
Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe,  by  substituting  the  word 
"plurality,"  for  the  word  "majority."  So  that 
a  plurality  of  votes  in  the  Convention  may  ap- 
point committees. 

The  8th  rule  was  passed  without  amendment. 
The  9tli  rule  was  amended  on  the  suggestion 
of  Mr.  Meriwether,  by  the  substitution  of  the 
words  "presiding  officer,"  for  the  word  "Presi 
dent,"  so  that  a  gentleman  appointed  to  preside 
in  the  absence  of  the  President  might  have  pow- 
er to  clear  the  galleries  in  case  of  disturbance 
or  disorderly  conduct. 

The  lOth  rule  was  passed  without  amendment. 
The  11th  rule  whicli  provides  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  standing  committees  on  the  various  ar- 
ticles of  the  Coikstitution,  was  then  read  for  con- 
sideration. 

Mr.C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  This  rule  must  be 
regarded,  I  suppose,  as  a  division  of  the  labor  of 
this  bodv  among  the  committees  enumerated 
here.  Therefore  it  becomes  a  matter  of  some  im- 
portance, before  we  adopt  it,  to  consider  what  its 
efifect  and  operation  will  be.    Wehavea  hundred 


nine  members  each.  Kine  times  eleven  areuine- 
tv-nine,  which  will  comprehend  every  member 
of  the  Convention,  exclusive  of  our  President. — 
If  every  article  of  the  old  Constitution  is  to  be 
the  subject  matter  of  alterations,  it  appears  to  me 
that  the  division  of  labor  here  proposed,  will  be 
very  unequal.  There  have  been  several  sugges- 
tions regarding  the  proper  division  of  tlie  labor 
which  is  to  be  performed  by  us,  and  it  is  possi- 
ble that  the  one  which  the  committee  have  re- 
commended is  the  best.  I  do  not  think  so,  how- 
ever, and  I  will  endeavor  to  point  out  a  faw  rea- 
sons why  I  do  not  think  so.  I  do  not  suppose  it 
is  a  matter  of  very  great  consequence  to  members 
of  this  body,  to  l>e  upon  a  committee  for  remod- 
elling or  amending  that  which  requires  no  amend- 
ment, where  there  is  nothing  for  the  committee 
to  do,  except  to  transcribe  and  report  the  provi- 
sion assigned  to  them  precisely  as  it  stands  al- 
ready. Such,  I  apprehend,  will  be  the  case  in 
regard  to  the  bill  of  rights.  I  doubt  whether 
there  is  any  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  Con- 
vention, to  make  any  alteration  in  that  so  far  as 
the  crossing  of  a  T,  or  the  dotting  of  an  I.  The 
committee  then,  to  which  that  portion  of  the 
Constitution  will  be  referred,  will  have  nothing 
to  do;  whilst  others  will  have  important  altera- 
tions to  make  in  the  parts  assigned  them. 

The  partition  of  labor  then,  by  this  method, 
will  be  very  unequal.  It  was  not  without  at- 
tention to  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution, 
that  I  attempted  to  partition  the  labor  according 
to  the  partition  of  the  various  powers  of  the 
government,  regarding  which  our  judgments 
have  been  and  will  continue  to  be  divided.  But 
without  detaining  the  Convention  further  with 
these  illustrations,  let  gentlemen  turn  their  at- 
tention to  the  eighth  article  of  the  Constitution. 
It  is  as  follows : 

"The  seat  of  government  shall  continue  in  the 
town  of  Frankfort  until  it  shall  be  removed  by 
law;  provided,  however,  that  two  thirds  of  all 
of  the  members  elected  to  each  House  of  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  shall  concur  in  the  passage  of 
such  law." 

The  time  has  been,  sir,  when  a  much  younger 
man  than  I  am  now,  that  a  position  upon  such 
committee,  and,  above  all,  the  privilege  of  form- 
ing such  committee,  would  have  been  very  agree- 
able to  me.  It  is  one  of  those  committees  that 
I  would  like  to  have  a  hand'in  making,  and  I 
have  no  doubt  that  my  colleague  would  like  to 
have  such  a  privilege,  although  I  believe  that  he 
is  in  favor  of  a  different  place  from  that  which  I 
should  choose,  to  which  the  seat  of  government, 
if  removed  at  all,  should  be  carried.  If  the  priv- 
ilege were  given  to  me  to  form  a  committee  to 
whom  this  subject  should  be  confided,  I  could 
bring  together  a  very  formidable  corps  of  advo- 
cates for  any  particulai  location  that  I  might 
choose  to  designate.  Therefore  it  appeared  to  me, 
sir,  in  reference  to  even  this  subject,  important 
or  unimportant  as  it  may  be  regarded,  as  well 
as  in  reference  to  one  or  two  of  the  general  pro- 
visions of  the  Constitution,  that  it  would  be 
proper  to  make  a  different  distribution  of  the 
labors  of  the  committees  from  that  which  has 
been  proposed  by  the  committee  on  rules.  We 
necessarily  call  into  the  committee  rooms  from 


40 


different  sections  of  the  State  men  -who  will 
bring  to  bear  their  intellect  and  their  industry, 
jind  not  hixve  more  than  their  due  proportion  of 
labor.  Very  many  of  the  miscellaneous  provis- 
ions of  the  Constitution  will  not  have  to  be 
touched  in  the  way  of  alteration,  but  merely 
transcribed.  For  these  reasons  I  thought  it  ne- 
cessary to  make  these  suggestions  in  reference  to 
a  different  division  of  duties.  It  may,  perhaps, 
be  deemed  egotistical  in  me  to  set  up  my  opin- 
ions in  opposition  to  those  of  the  committee  and 
to  suggest  a  different  division  of  labor,  but  I 
think  it  will  be  apparent,  when  gentlemen  ex- 
amine the  subject,  that  a  different  distribution 
would  be  attended  with  much  advantage.  In 
regard  to  the  preamble  of  the  Constitution,  for 
instance,  what  is  there  for  a  committee  of  nine 
men  to  do  but  to  direct  their  clerk  to  transcribe 
it.  With  a  view  then  of  obtaining  the  sense  of 
the  Convention  regarding  a  different  distribu- 
tion, I  move  to  strike  out  so  much  as  relates  to 
the  appointment  of  committees,  and  to  insert  so 
much  of  the  resolution  which  I  offered  the  other 
day,  as  relates  to  this  subject. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  suppose  now  is  as  proper 
a  time  as  any  other,  for  the  consideration  of  the 
question,  whether  this  Convention  Avill  go  about 
its  work  through  committees, — selected  by  the 
Chair  or  in  any  other  form, — or  whether  it  will 
go  about  it  in  committee  of  the  whole.  It  seems 
to  me,  that  if  we  are  determined  to  do  our  work 
Avith  dispatch,  and  with  a  proper  understanding 
of  what  we  have  to  do,  and  come  to  a  fair  and 
proper  conclusion  upon  every  question  that  is  to 
be  presented  by  every  member  of  this  Conven- 
tion, the  right  way  to  do  it,  is  to  do  it  first  in 
committee  of  the  Avhole.     I   know   of  no   other 

Flan.  My  mind  can  suggest  no  other;  although 
know  that  there  is  an  opinion  prevalent  in  this 
Convention,  in  favor  of  submitting  every  thing 
to  committees.  Some  gentlemen  would  have 
committees  to  do  that  work  which  the  Conven- 
tion should  do  itself.  I  know  of  no  plan  by 
which  the  work  could  be  so  Avell  and  so  expedi- 
tiously done,  as  it  could  be  in  committee  of  the 
whole.  In  addition  to  this  fact,  there  are  other 
reasons  why  this  Convention  should  not  resolve 
itself  into  committees,  to  do  the  work  of  the  Con- 
vention. I  find  the  reasons,  indicated  by  the 
gentleman  from  Kelson,  as  to  the  impropriety  of 
raising  a  committee  in  reference  to  the  removal 
of  the  seat  of  government,  amply  sufficient  to 
satisfy  my  mind,  that  this  work  should  be  done 
in  Convention,  and  not  through  committees. — 
The  reasons  wliich  present  themselves  to  the  gen- 
tleman's mind,  in  reference  to  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment, will  apply  with  equal  force,  to  every  pro- 
position which  any  gentleman  in  this  Conven- 
tion may  have  to  make.  When  sub-committees 
do  the  work,  the  Convention  loses  its  power  of 
control  over  the  work  of  those  committees. — 
Thev  will  be  organised  in  such  manner,  as  that 
the  force  and  influence  and  power  and  talent,  to 
be  found  in  this  Convention,  will  be  brought  to 
bear  upon  particular  propositions.  Not  that  the 
Chair  will  intentionaUy  make  such  an  organiza- 
tion, but  that  will  bo  the  necessary  result  of  hav- 
ing the  work  done  througli  committees.  All  the 
talent  and  influence  will  be  brouglit  to  bear  in 
those  committees,  in  order  that  they  may  carry 
out  particular  objects;  and  individual  members 


of  the  Convention,  will  have  no  more  power 
against  the  weight  and  influence  of  the  commit- 
tee, in  any  attempt  to  overrule  or  controvert  any 
proposition  submitted  by  the  standing  commit- 
tee, than  he  would  have  to  do  any  thing  that  is 
perfectly  impracticable.  Sir,  itiswrongto  work 
by  committees  in  forming  a  Constitution.  It  is 
right  that  we  should  work  by  Convention,  all  of 
us  together,  that  every  man  in  the  Convention 
may  hear  what  every  man  has  to  say,  and  every 
man  be  free  to  present  his  own  proposition  and 
stand  by  it  to  the  last. 

Besides  all  this,  Ave  will,  by  taking  this  course, 
save  a  great  deal  of  time.  We  can  go  to  work  to- 
morrow. We  can  take  up  the  old  Constitution, 
and  examine  it  article  by  article,  section  by  sec- 
tion, line  by  line.  We  can  re-adopt  that  which 
we  consider  ought  to  be  re-adoptecl,  and  we  can 
modify  that  Avliich  we  think  ought  to  be  modi- 
fied. How  many  amendments  will  be  required 
to  be  made  to  the  old  Constitution?  I  apprehend 
that  it  is  not  to  be  entirely  changed.  Where  then 
is  the  necessity  for  having  a  committee  to  exam- 
ine every  article  of  that  Constitution,  and  to  de- 
vise something  which  the  people  have  never  con- 
ceived of,  and  which  will  be  perhaps  utterly  re- 
pugnant to  them,  Avhen  devised  by  the  commit- 
tees of  this  Convention. 

What  have  Ave  to  do?  The  people  desire  but 
few  alterations;  they  ask  for  but  few;  Ave  have 
come  here  with  the  view  only  of  making  those 
feAV,  and  I  kiioAV  of  no  platform  upon  Avhich  I 
would  rather  work,  than  the  old  Constitution. — 
Although  I  have  ever  been  in  favor  of  Constitu- 
tional reform,  and  amso  now,  I  know  of  no  plat- 
form upon  Avhich  I  would  rather  work,  than  the 
old  Constitution.  There  are  many  of  its  provi- 
sions Avhich  I  desire  to  preserve,  and  I  am  not 
willing  that  iicav  propositions  shall  be  urged  up- 
on this  Convention,  with  all  the  poAver  and  in- 
fluence of  a  committee,  which  may  be  unaccept- 
able to  a  majority  of  tliis  Convention,  and  yet 
that  majority  be  unable  to  control  the  work  of 
the  committee. 

I  think  we  can  do  the  work  in  a  shorter  time 
by  doing  it  in  Convention,  and  that  we  can  do 
it  in  a  manner  more  satisfactory  to  ourselves,  by 
resolving  ourseh'es  into  a  committee  of  the 
Avhole,  and  taking  up  the  old  Constitution  as  I 
have  already  intimated.  Therefore,  I  have  sub- 
mitted this  proposition.  Whether  it  will  meet 
Avitli  a  favorable  reception  on  the  part  of  the 
Convention,  of  course  I  cannot  tell;  but  it  does 
appear  to  me  to  be  the  more  reasonable  and 
proper  course  to  be  pursued. 

If  We  go  to  Avork  by  committees,  what  is  the 
Convention  to  be  engaged  Avith  in  the  meantime? 
When  are  the  committees  to  report?  This  Con- 
vention, to  be  divided  off  into  eleven  commit- 
tees, composed  of  nine  members  each,  and  the 
Convention,  I  suppose,  to  be  dissolved  until 
those  committees  report.  We  will  meet,  I  sup- 
pose, each  day  as  a  matter  of  mere  formality, 
and  wait  too,  three,  or  four  Aveeks  until  the  com- 
mittees are  prepared  to  report.  And  when  those 
reports  shall  haA^e  been  laid  before  us,  will  they 
not  liave  to  be  considered  in  Convention?  They 
will  stillhave  to  be  gone  over.  Then,  Avhy  not 
begin  at  once  in  Convention?  It  seems  to  me 
that  it  would  be  far  better. 

The  Convention  then  adjourned. 


41 


SATURDAY,  OCTOBER  6,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuabt  Robixsox. 

PROPOSITIOXS  TO  AStEXD. 

Mr.  DAVIS  offered  the  following,  vrhich  on 
his  motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  Circuit  Court  system  of 
the  State  of  Kentucky,  be  so  constituted  that 
there  shall  not  be  less  than  circuits,  each  cir- 
cuit to  have  a  single  Judge,  whose  term  of  of- 
fice shall  be  years,  and  who  shall  be  ap- 
pointed to  office  in  the  following  manner:  When- 
ever there  shall  be  a  vacancy  in  any  circuit,  the 
members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  living 
within  such  circuit,  shall,  at  the  ensuing  session 
of  the  Legislature,  form  an  electoral  college, 
and  shall  choose  two  fit  persons  for  the  office  of 
Judge  therein,  and  report  their  names  forthwith 
to  the  Senate,  one  of  whom  it  shall  nominate  to 
the  (Governor,  and  he  shall  be  commissioned  the 
Judge  of  such  circuit. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  Court  of  Appeals  con- 
sist of  Judges,  who  shall  hold  their  offi- 
ces for  and  during  the  term  of  years,  and 
that  they  be  appointed  in  the  following  man- 
ner: The  Governor  shall  select  from  amon^  the 
Circuit  Judges,  or  such  persons  as  shall  nave 
filled  the  office  of  Cirouit  Judge  under  this 
amended  Constitution,  tlie  fittest  person  to  fill 
such  vacancies  in  said  Court,  who  upon  being 
nominated  by  him  to  the  Senate,  and  being  ap- 

S roved  of  by  it,  shall  be  commissioned  accor- 
inglv. 

3.  kesolred.  That  the  Governor  have  power  to 
fill  such  vacancies  in  the  offices  of  Circuit  and 
Appellate  Judges  as  may  occur  in  the  period  be- 
tween the  sessions  of  the  Legislature;  such  ap- 
pointments to  continue  until  the  office  shall  be 
tilled  by  regular  appointment  under  the  provis- 
ions of  this  Constitution. 

4.  Resolved,  That  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals  and  the  Circuit  Courts  shall  receive 
from  the  public  treasury  a  fixed  annual  salary, 
which  shall  not  be  diminished  during  their  con- 
tinuance in  office;  and  that  the  Legislature  shall 
not  have  the  power  to  pass  any  law  whatever  to 
remove  them  from  office,  or  the  object  and  ten- 
dency of  which  is  to  constrain  them  to  resign. 

Mr.  McHEXRT  submitted  the  following,  which 
on  his  motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  of 
the  whole,  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  present  mode  of  calling  a 
Convention  to  revise  the  Constitution  ought  to 
be  retained  in  the  Constitution  about  to  be 
framed. 

2.  Resolved,  That  some  mode  of  making  spe- 
cific amendments,  without  calling  a  Convention, 
should  be  adopted,  to  apply  only  to  those  arti- 
cles and  sections  of  the  Constitution,  about  to 
be  framed,  which  shall  be  materially  different 
from,  and  make  radical  changes  in,  the  present 
Constitution. 

3.  Resolved,  That  the  provisions  of  the  pre- 
sent Constitution,  upon  the  subject  of  slavery, 
be  retained,  and  ins^ted,  without  alteration,  in 
the  Constitution  about  to  be  framed. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  offered  the  following  as  an 
amendment,  which  took  the  same  direction: 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  specific  mode  of  amend- 
ing the  Constitution,  by  submitting  to  the  voters 


of  the  State  one  clause  at  a  time,  is  the  correct 
and  best  mode,  and  the  same  can  and  should  be 
adopted,  with  such  restrictions  as  to  secure  the 
rights  of  propertv,  and  prevent  the  future  agita- 
tion of  the  question  of  slavery. 

2.  Resolved,  That,  in  addition  to  the  specific 
mode  of  amendment,  constitutional  provision 
should  be  made  for  taking  the  vote  every  twenty 
years,  as  to  the  propriety  of  calling  a  Conven- 
tion. 

3.  Resolved,  That  the  increase  of  free  persons 
of  color  in  the  State  of  Kentucky  should  be  pre- 
vented in  future;  and,  for  that  purpose,  power 
should  be  given  to  the  Legislature  to  appropri- 
ate the  necessary  means  to  transport  to  the  colo- 
ny of  Liberia,  all  such  as  mav  consent  to  go, 
and  all  that  mav  be  emancipate<l  for  that  purpose. 

Mr.  HARGIS  offered  the  following: 
Resolved,  That  the  following  preamble,  and 
first  and  second  articles  (in  substance,  as  the 
same  is  herewith  presented)  be  adopted  by  this 
Convention  as  the  first  and  second  articles  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  State  of  Kentucky : 

THE  COXSTITLTIOX  OR  FORat  OF  GOVEKXMEXT  FOE  THE 
STATE  OF  KEXTLCKY. 

Preamble. 
"We,  the  Representatives  of  the  people  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky,  in  Convention  assembled, 
grateful  to  the  supreme  Being  for  the  blessings 
hitherto  enjoyed,  and  feeling  our  dependence  on 
him  for  a  continuation  of  those  blessings,  in 
order  to  secure  to  all  the  citizens  thereof  the  en- 
joyment of  life,  liberty,  and  property,  and  of 
pursuing  happiness,  do  make,  ordain,  and  estab- 
lish this  Constitution  for  its  future  govern- 
ment. 

THE  POWEKS  OF  THE  GOVERJIiiEXT. 

Article  1. 

1.  The  powers  of  the  go%-ernment  of  the  State 
of  KentucKy  shall  be  divided  into  three  distinct 
departments,  and  each  of  them  be  confided  to  a 
separate  body  of  magistracy,  to-wit:  Those  which 
are  legislative  to  one,  those  which  are  executive 
to  another,  and  those  which  are  judiciary  to  an- 
other. 

2.  No  person  or  collection  of  persons,  being 
one  of  those  departments,  shall  exercise  any 
power  properly  belonging  to  either  of  the  others, 
except  in  cases  hereinafterwards  directed  or  per- 
mitted. 

THE  LEGISLATFVE  DEPAETMEXT. 

Article  2. 

1.  The  legislative  power  of  this  Common- 
wealth shall  be  vested  in  two  distinct  branches, 
the  one  to  be  styled  the  House  of  Representatives, 
the  other  the  Senate,  and  both  together  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky. 

2.  'The  members  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives shall  continue  in  office  for  the  term  of  two 
years  from  the  commencement  of  the  general 
election,  and  no  longer.  The  members  of  the 
Senate  shall  continue  in  office  for  the  term  of 
four  years  from  the  commencement  of  the  gen- 
eral election,  and  no  longer. 

3.  Representatives  shall  be  chosen  on  the  first 
Monday  in  August  every  second  year,  and  shall 
meet  at  the  capitol  of  the  State  on  the day 


42 


of every  second  year.    The  Senate  shall 

also  meet  at  the  same  time  and  place  every  se- 
cond year,  and  shall  be  chosen  on  the  first  Mon- 
day in  August  every  four  years,  but  shall  only 
assemble  at  the  same  time  and  place  of  the  meet- 
ing of  the  members  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives. 

4.  The  General  Assembly,  as  aforesaid,  shall 
not  continue  in  session  more  than  forty  days, 
unless  upon  extraordinary  occasions,  the  Gov- 
ernor, by  proclartiation,  should  think  proper  to 
continue  tnem  in  session  longer,  but,  in  no  in- 
stance, shall  the  session  be  prolonged  over  six- 
ty davs. 

5.  I'he  General  Assembly  shall  have  no  pow- 
er to  grant  divorces,  or  pass  any  law  dissolving 
the  marriage  contract;  nor  shall  they  have  power 
to  pass  any  act  or  law  for  individual  or  private 
benefit,  unless  four  fifths  of  all  the  memoers  of 
both  houses  concur  in  the  passage  thereof. 

6.  They  shall  pass  laws  establishing  in  each 
and  every  county  in  this  State  at  least  five  elec- 
tion precincts;  and  in  every  city  or  town,  entitled 
to  one  or  more  members,  they  shall  establish  at 
least  three  election  precincts,  and  more  if  the 
Legislature  should  think  proper.  All  elections 
shall  be  held  at  the  time  and  places  established 
by  law. 

7.  No  person  shall  be  a  Representative  who, 
at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  and  hath  not  attained  to  the  age 
of  twenty  four  years,  and  resided  in  this  State 
two  years  next  preceding  his  election,  and  the 
last  year  thereof  in  the  county,  city,  or  town,  for 
which  he  may  be  chosen. 

8.  No  person  shall  be  a  Senator  who,  at  the 
time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  and  who  hath  not  attained  to  the  age 
of  thirty  five  years,  and  resided  six  years  in  this 
State  next  preceding  his  election,  and  the  last 
year  thereof  in  the  district  for  which  he  may  be 
chosen. 

9.  In  all  elections  for  all  and  pvery  officer  in 
this  Commonwealth,  who  are  by  this  Constitu- 
tion to  be  elected  by  the  people,  and  also  for 
members  of  Congress,  or  President  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  or  Vice  President,  every  free  white 
male  citizen  who,  at  the  time  being,  hath  at- 
tained to  the  age  of  twenty  one  years,  and  resi- 
ded in  this  State  one  year,  or  more,  and  in  the 
county,  city,  or  town,  where  he  offers  to  vote  at 
least  four  months,  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  for 
all  and  either  of  said  ofiicers,  except  foreigners 
not  naturalized,  and  persons  convicted  of  felony 
and  not  pardoned. 

10.  At  the  first  session  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly after  this  Constitution  takes  eflFect,  the  Sen- 
ators shall  be  divided  by  lot,  as  equally  as  may 
be,  into  two  classes;  the  seats  of  the  Senators  of 
the  first  class  shall  be  vacated  at  the  end  of  the 
second  year,  so  that  half  of  the  Senators  shall 
be  elect«d  every  second  year. 

11.  The  first  election  for  Senators,  after  this  Con- 
stitution takes  effect,  shall  be  general  through- 
out the  State  and  at  the  same  time  that  Repre- 
sentatives are  elected;  and  tliereafter  there  shall 
be  a  biennial  election  for  half  the  number  of 
Senators  to  which  the  State  is  entitled. 

12.  Representation  shall  be  equal  throughout 
the  State  as  near  as  may  be,  agreeably  to  the  ra- 
tio an  laid,  from  time  to  time,  by  the  General 


Assembly,  according  to  the  number  of  qualified 
voters  in  the  State.  The  General  Assembly  sliall 
never  consist  of  more  than  one  hundred  mem- 
bers in  the  House  Representatives,  nor  more 
tlian  thirty  eight  Senators.  At  the  first  session 
of  the  General  Assembly,  after  the  taking  effect 
of  this  Constitution,  they  shall  lay  off  the  State 
into  as  many  senatorial  districts  as  there  may 
then  be  Senators,  and  apportion  the  representa- 
tion in  the  House  of  Representatives  and  Senate 
amongst  the  several  counties,  towns,  cities,  and 
districts,  to  which  the  State  is  entitled. 

13.  The  General  Assembly  shall  have  no  pow- 
er to  pass  any  law  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves 
while  they  remain  in  this  State.  They  may  pass 
laws  to  emancipate  slaves,  saving  the  rights  of 
creditors,  with  the  consent  of  their  owners,  upon 
condition  that  they  are  not  to  be  free  until  they 
leave  the  borders  of  this  State;  and,  upon  con- 
dition, that  if  such  emancipated  slave,  or  slaves, 
should  ever  return  into  Kentucky,  that  he,,  she,  or 
they,  are  to  be  taken  up  and  sold  for  the  benefit 
of  the  State  Treasury. 

14.  The  General  Assembly  may  pass  laws 
prohibiting  the  importation  of  slaves  into  this 
State  for  the  purposes  of  sale,  but  shall  pass  no 
law  prohibiting  their  importation,  if  acquired 
by  gift,  grant,  or  devise  by  will,  or  otherwise  : 
Provided,  the  same  is  solely  and  bona  fide  for  the 
use  of  the  importer.  Laws  may  be  passed  to 
compel  owners  of  slaves  to  treat  them  humanely, 

15.  In  apportioning  the  representation  for  Rep- 
resentatives to  both  houses  of  the  General  As- 
sembly, where  one  county  does  not  contain  the 
number  of  qualified  voters  required  by  law  to 
elect  a  Representative  or  Senator,  in  that  case, 
two  or  more  counties  may  be  joined  together 
(which  counties  must  lie  joining  each  other)  for 
the  purposes  of  electing  a  Senator  or  Represen- 
tative. The  number  of  Representatives  at  the 
first  session  of  the  General  Assembly,  after  this 
Constitution  takes  effect,  shall  consist  of  one 

hundred  members,  and  the  Senate  of , 

to  be  apportioned  as  directed  in  the  twelfth  sec- 
tion of  tne  second  article  of  this  Constitution  : 
Provided,  that  when  two  or  more  counties  ad- 
joining, have  residuums  over  and  above  the  ra- 
tio, when  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when 
added  together,  will  amount  to  the  ratio  fixed, 
in  that  case,  one  Representative  shall  be  added 
to  that  county  having  the  largest  residuum. 

16.  The  House  of  Representatives  shall  choose 
its  Speaker  and  other  officers. 

17.  The  apportionment  of  representation  for 
members  to  tne  General  Assembly,  and  the  lay- 
ing the  State  off  into  corresponaing  or  suitable 
districts,  shall  be  done  every  four  years. 

18.  The  Congressional  Districts  should  be  laid 
off  and  the  apportionment  made  every  ten  years, 
containing  the  ratio,  or  number  of  qualified  vo- 
ters, agreeably  to  the  laws  of  the  United  States, 
for  the  purpose  of  electing  members  to  Con- 
gress. 

19.  Not  less  than  a  majority  of  the  members 
of  each  house  of  the  General  Assembly  shall 
constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business,  but  a  small- 
er number  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day,  and 
shall  be  authorised  by  law,  to  compel  the  at- 
tendance of  absent  members,  under  such  rules 
and  penalties  as  they  may  prescribe. 

20.  Each  house  of'^  the  General  Assembly  shall 


43 


judge  of  the  qualiliaMiaa*  «iHi  retarns  of  its 
members ;  and  a  contoleSHSi^sKoD  dull  be  detef' 
mined  by  law. 

21.  Each  hoose  of  the  General  Assembir  may 
determine  the  mle«  of  it?  proceedings,  pdnish  a 
member  for  disorderly  benavior,  and  with  the 
concurrence  <rf  two-thirds,  exp)el  a  member. 

22.  Each  hoose  of  the  General  Assembly  shall 
keep  and  pablish,  weekly,  a  journal  of  its  pro- 
eeeoiiigs;  and  the  reas'and  nays  of  the  mem- 
bos,  tm  anr  qaestion.  shall,  at  the  desire  of 
any  two  of  tliem,  be  entered  on  the  journal. 

23.  Ifather  hoose  of  the  General  Assembly 
shall  adioam  for  more  than  two  days  at  a  time, 
during  the  session,  nor  to  anr  other  place,  with- 
ont  the  c<Micnrrenee  of  the  other. 

24.  The  members  of  the  Oenenl  AssemUj 
diall  receive  from  the  public  treasniy,  for  their 
seirices,  such  compensation  as  may  be  anthor- 
tsed  by  law,  bat  no  increase  or  alteration  in  the 
eompensation  of  membos  of  either  hoose  shall 
take  eifeet  doring  the  se^on  at  which  the  same 
is  altered  or  increased. 

25.  The  membos  <rf  tiie  General  Aasemblj 
shall,  in  all  cases,  (eseept  felony,  treason,  breach, 
or  surety  of  the  peace)  be  privileged  from  ar- 
rest, or  imprisonment,  during  thenr  attendanee 
(»  their  respeetiTe  houses,  ami  in  goii^  to,  and 
letnming  from,  the  same;  nor  for  any  speech  or 
debate  in  die  hoose,  shall  they  be  questioned  in 
any  other  place. 

26.  No  Senator  or  RepresentatiTe  ^ball,  du- 
ring the  term  for  which  he  was  elected,  nor  for 
one  year  thaneafter,  be  eligible  to  any-  ciril  office 
under  tlus  Commoawea^,  whidi  shall  hare 
been  created,  or  the  anolaments  of  vhieh  shall 
hare  been  increased,  during  the  time  such  Sena- 
tor or  Representative  was  in  office,  except  soeh 
offices  as  may  be  made,  or  filled  by  the  election 
of  the  people. 

27.  >  o  person,  while  be  continues  to  exercise 
the  fanctions  of  a  dergjman,  priest,  or  teacher 
of  any  religious  pnsuaaion,  soeietT.  or  sect,  nor 
whilst  he  holds  or  exercises  any  offiee  of  nrofit 
under  this  ComnKmwealth,  shall  be  eUgible  to 
the  General  Assembly,  except  attorneys  at  law. 
Justice  of  the  Peace,  and  militia  officers:  Fn- 
widedf  Thai  attorneys  for  the  C(»nnionvealth 
who  leeerre  a  fixed  annual  salary  bom  tiw  pub- 
lic treasury,  shall  be  indi^iUe. 

S8.  No  officer  of  any  kind  whatever,  shall  be 
eligible  to  aseat  in  tlie General  AaseaaUy,  until 
he  has  obtained  a  qnietos  or  receipt  ibr  all  the 
moneys  doe,  or  owing  firom  him,  to  the  Common- 
wealth, or  to  the  coonly  in  which  he  resides. 

29.  Xo  bUl  shall  have  the  force  of  a  law,  un- 
til on  three  seroal  days,  it  be  read  otct  in 
house  of  the  General  Aiffionbly,  and  free  discus- 
sion allowe.1  thereon,  unless  four-fifths  of  the 
hoa«e  where  the  bUl  «thall  be  depoiding,  may 
deem  it  expe<lient  to  dispense  with  this  rule. 

30.  All  bills  for  raising  revenue,  shall  origi- 
nate in  the  House  of  Representatires,  but  ue 
Senate  may  propose  amendments  relative  to  the 
revenue,  the  same  as  in  other  eases. 

31.  The  General  Assembly  shidl  have  power  to 
pass  all  laws  not  contrary  to  this  Const  itotion, 
&r  the  laws  and  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
which  they  may  think  proper  and  expedient; 
they  shall  also  fegolate  by  law,  in  what  manner 
vacancies  in  either  house  may  be  filled. 


32.  In  all  elections  by  the  people,  the  Totes 
shall  be  publidr  given,  **tum  taee"  and  be  pro- 
claimed DT  the  WiSenSoi  tlie  deetion;  wx  anB 
any  election  in  this  Oommcanreahh  continae 
more  than  one  day;  but  nothii^  in  tins  Consti- 
tution shall  be  construed  to  pnmibtt  the  Ootob- 
or  £rt>m  proclaiming  and  issuing  writs  of  dee- 
tions,  upon  occasions  cxtracxdinarf ,  or  as  auj 
be  required  by  law. 

The  Secretaiy  proceeded  to  read  tiie  proposi- 
tion, but  before  he  had  read  it  throng, 

Mr.  IBWIX.  The  proposition  is  to  i«mt,  I 
believe.  If  the  Hoose  has  determined  to  print  a 
new  Constitution  of  which  we  know  nothing,  it 
of  course  will  do  so,  but  I  will  more  the  old 
Constitotiim  as  a  substitdte  thoi^M'.  I  think  it 
thebest1lra7<rf^gdtingatthe]Hintii^<rf'  the  old 
Constitution,  and  I  moT«  fliat  we  dispense  with 
the  further  reading  of  the  jNroposiuon  of  the  gen- 
tieman. 

The  question  was  thai  taken  on  the  motion  to 
dii^ioDse  with  the  further  reading  of  the  propo- 
sition and  it  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.LRWUf.  I  do  not  desire  to  run  the  State 
into  anj  expense,  as  I  do  not  bdiere  we  have  a 
great  deal  o€  money  to  exp«id;  but  as  I  under- 
stand that  fifty  or  sixty  thousand  copies  of  the 
present  Constitntion  Were  winted  last  year,  by 
mder  of  the  Lq^slatoTe,  I  snould  like  to  modii^r 
my  proposition  so  as  to  provide  that  membos 
shoTudoe  fimnushed  tritik  cofisA.  Thqr  eould 
perh^K  be  readily  obtidned  at  the  printing  of- 
fice, or  in  some  of  the  offices  about  the  Capitol. 
I  certainly  move  to  dispense  with  the  printing 
of  the  proposition  just  offined. 

The  qoffition  wats  then  taken  on  printing  the 
proposition  of  Mr.  Haigis,  and  referring  it  to  the 
e<Hnmittee  of  the  wbde;  and  the  Ctmrention  re- 
fiosed  so  to  dispose  ct.  it. 

Mr.  PRESTON  (rf^ed  the  following: 

Reaobaed,  That  it  is  expedient,  in  any  CoBBta- 
tuticm  which  may  be  formed  by  this  Convoitimi, 
to  dasafy  the  offices  which  in»-  be  declared  to 
be  deetire  therein,  into  those  ofagenoil  and  lo- 
cal charai^ter,  so  that  the  de^kuis  of  persoos  to 
fill  the  same  may  oeeor  at  different  times. 

The  attention  ot  eoitienien  will  undoobtedly 
bemgaged  in  r^aid  to  the  mode  of  deeting  <rt- 
ficeis,  and  the  (^ees  would  be  naturally  claasi- 
fied  into  those  of  a  local  and  those  of  a  general 
character.  I  hope  to  be  able  to  show,  when  the 
time  eomes,  that  this  will  be  the  only  pnetieafals 
mode  hf  which  we  can  cmiduet  those  dectioas 
which  1  have  no  doubt  the  Convention  will  a- 
gree  to  have  hdd,  under  the  Constitution  we 
'J^^  iHopose  to  fonn.  I  move  that  the  resolntimi 
^*^'  'be  printed  and  refored  to  a  committee  of  the 
whole. 

The  motion  was  i^^reed  to. 

Kirus  or  OKuu. 

The  Convention  resumed  the  consdention  of 
the  report  (^  the  sdect  committee  on  rules. 

The  11th  proposed  rule  being  under  conside- 
ration when  the  subject  was  last  before  the  Con- 
vention, it  was  again  read. 

The  question  was  on  the  substitute  propoged 
by  the  gentieman  finmi  Bourbon,  as  pnbmh«l  in 
the  report  of  yesterday's  proceedings. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  Thoe  is  no  gaitleman  be- 
longiiig  to  tbis  l)ody  vith  more  ajuaety  than  mj- 


44 


myself,  that  the  labors  of  this  bodv  should  be 
bought  to  a  speedy  and  successful  close.    Nor  is 
there  anyone  more  aware  than  I  am  that  the  inter- 
position of  any  obstacle  to  a  free  and  fair  discus- 
sion, would  be  the  means  of  frustrating,  to  a  very 
f:reat  extent  that  desirable  object.  I  am  for  estab- 
ishing  some  correct  basis  of  procedure,  and  not 
having  had  the  honor  to  present  any  project  for  the 
consideration  of  the  Convention,  I  am  wedded  to 
no  plan,  and  I  am  prepared  with  an  unbiased 
judgment  to  decide  upon  the  various  proposi- 
tions which  have  been  submitted.    If  I  belonged 
to  the  division  of  this  body,  if  there  be  such  a  di- 
vision, who  believe  that  no  alteration  should  be 
made  in  the  existing  Constitution,  I  should  be 
prepared  to  support  the  substitute  offered  by  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon.     In  my  apprehension 
the  substitute  assumes  that  the  existing  Consti- 
tution is  not  susceptible  of  improvement.  At  least 
it  presents  the  question  in  a  very  doubtful  as- 
pect.   It  pr&^supposes  that  it  has  to  a  very  great 
extent  the  approbation  of  this  body,  and  resolves 
the  question  into  a  mere  enquiry  as  to  whether 
it  can  or  cannot  be  improved.      The  people  of 
Kentucky  by  a  large  and  decided  majority,  say 
they  will  have  constitutional   amendment  and 
reform.    We  come  up  here  representing  a  con- 
stituency in  favor  of  such  a  measure.     Shall  we 
then  at  the  very  threshold   present  ourselves  in 
such  an  attitude  as  to  appear  before  our  constitu- 
ency as  doubting  whether  such  amendment  and 
reform  can  be  made?     In  a.ssuming  the  existing 
Constitution  as  a  basis  of  our  operations  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  we  give  to  it  prima  facie  our 
f  reference.     So  it  would  seem  to  me,  and  hence 
am  opposed  to  the  planproposed  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Bourbon.     Tiie  sanction  of  all  par- 
liamentary usage  as  I  understand  it,   is  against 
such  a  proposition.     It  is  necess?iry  that  some 
nucleus  should  be  formed  around  which  the  opin- 
ions of  this  body  can  be  concentrated.      The  ef- 
fect of  presenting  the  present  Constitution,  and 
taking  up  article  by  article  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  would  be  to  resolve  every  member  of  this 
Convention  who  may  have  a  plan  of  his  own  in- 
to a  committee.    He  presents  his  own  project, 
and  there  would  be  a  want  of  concentration 
and  unity  of  action,  which  it  seems  to  me  would 
be  the  means  of  protracting  debate  here,  and  of 
lengthening  much  beyond  the  time   which   has 
been  anticipated,  the  session  of   the  Conven- 
tion.    It  has  been  objected  that  in  the  meantime, 
while  these  committees  were  digesting  various 
plans  and  were  preparing  their  reports,  this  Con- 
vention would  be  without  business.     The  rules 
propose  to  embody  this  entire   Convention  into 
eleven  committees  of  nine  members  each — consti- 
tuting aggregately   ninety-nine   members,   and 
these  would  be  engaged  in  carrying  forward  the 
business  of  this  Convention.     It  is  true  the  Con- 
vention, as  a  body,  might  not  be  prepared  to  act 
immediately  after  the  appointment  of  the  com- 
mittees, but  still  the  business  which  has  assem- 
bled us  here,  would  nevertheless  be  in  progress. 
I  was  at  the  first  blush,  prepared  to  vote  for  such 
an  organization  of  committees  as  is  contempla- 
ted by  the  resolutions  of  the   gentleman  from 
Nelson,  but  upon  reflection,  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  labors  of  this  body  would  be  better  distri- 
buted by  the  plan  proposed  in  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  rules.    The  labors  of  the  com- 


mittees being  thus  indicated,  it  seems  to  me 
we  might  at  an  earlier  period  be  prepared  to 
commence  the  operations  which  have  brought 
us  here  together.  Under  that  state  of  the  case, 
and  with  a  view  to  facilitate  as  far  as  may  be, 
the  object  which  has  a.ssembled  it,  and  to  des- 
patch as  speedily  as  may  be  the  business  of  the 
Convention,  I  shall  for  one  vote  for  the  rules  as 
they  have  been  reported  by  the  committee. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  question  imme- 
diately before  the  Convention  is  the  motion  of 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  to  substitute  for 
the  proposition  I  have  offered,  the  one  that 
we  will  at  11  o'clock  each  day  go  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  and  take  up  the  Constitution  as  we 
find  it  on  the  statute  book,  and  then  alter  and 
amend  it  as  each  member  may  choose  to  propose. 
All  who  favor  the  appointment  of  committees  in 
preference,  will  of  course  vote  against  the  prop- 
osition of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  whether 
they  prefer  the  number  of  committees  and  the 
division  of  their  labors  and  duties  introduced  in 
the  report  of  the  committee,  or  in  the  amendment 
proposed  by  myself.  I  listened  with  a  great  deal 
of  pleasure  to  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  and 
to  his  illustrations  of  the  effect  of  his  mode  of 

f»roeeeding,  but  some  little  experience  in  the 
egislative  branches  of  our  government,  has 
taught  me  to  believe,  I  may  be  wrong,  that  we 
must  work  under  the  guidance  of  rules,  and  that 
seldom,  unless  on  extraordinary  occasions,  is  the 
public  business  advanced  or  promoted  by  dis- 
pensing Avith  the  rules  which  govern  us.  Un- 
der these  rules,  to  work  prudently  and  intelligent- 
ly, we  must  have  system  and  order.  Suppose  that 
we  go  into  committee  of  the  whole  at  once  on 
the  Constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  each  member 
has  liis  project  of  amendment.  We  have  had  al- 
ready several  indications  of  the  opinions  of 
members  through  resolutions,  and  there  was  one 
this  morning  embracing  almost  the  entire  Con- 
stitution. We  should  have  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  perhaps,  to  discuss  and  debate  the  propo- 
sition to  amend  in  some  shape  and  form,  of  every 
gentleman  here,  whereas,  if  the  amendment  or 
the  principle  upon  which  it  is  predicated  was 
drawn  out  in  form  with  care  by  some  committee, 
you  would  see  the  whole  framework  before  you. 
I  will  assume  what  I  believe  to  be  the  fact,  and  I 
do  not  think  I  can  be  mistaken,  that  a  large  ma- 
jority of  this  body  have  been  elected  here  upon 
the  principle  tliat  the  tenure  of  all  officers, 
whether  Executive,  Legislative,  or  Judicial, 
should  be  changed.  They  have  been,  too,  a  large 
majority  upon  another  principle,  that  the  mode 
of  appointment  sliould  be  changed  from  that  of 
the  Executive  exercise  of  power  to  an  election 
by  the  voters  of  the  State.  Now  I  assume  upon 
that  principle  that  the  Judiciary  is  to  be  organ- 
ized on  the  basis  of  the  elective  franchise,  and  I 
ask  you  in  organizing  the  whole  judicial  system 
of  tnis  Commonwealth — the  Appellate  Courts, 
Circuit  Courts,  Chancery  Courts,  and  County 
Courts, — how  long  it  would  takethis  Convention, 
by  resolution  and  amendment  to  perfomi  that 
labor,  and  produce  its  result  in  any  thing  like  an 
intelligent  shape?  It  would  be  a  most  admirable 
theatre,  I  admit,  for  the  di.sjilay  of  those  powers 
possessed  by  many  in  this  House,  to  illustrate  the 
necessity  of  a  reform  in  the  organic  law,  and  to 
point  out  abuses  which  have  crept  intoour  system 


15 


of  government  and  the  necessity  for  their  refor- 
mation; but  we  want  nothing  to  convince  us  of 
that.  Our  constituents  sent  us  here  to  execute 
their  will  in  that  particular,  and  the  object  now 
is  to  lay  out  the  work,  and  carry  out  the  reforms 
in  accordance  with  their  wishes.  Delay  and  in- 
convenience must  be  the  result  of  discussing 
the  Constitution  in  the  mode  indicated  by  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon.  I  think  what  has 
taken  place  this  morning  mustsatisfy  every  mem- 
ber of  the  House  that  under  such  a  system, 
we  must  have  amendment  after  amendment,  and 
substitute  upon  substitute,  to  an  extent  that  the 
House,  by  the  hour  of  1  o'clock,  would  be  brought 
into  such  a  state  of  confusion  that  it  would  not 
be  able,  in  the  course  of  a  week's  session,  to  tell 
precisely  the  question  upon  which  they  were 
called  upon  to  vote.  I  will  therefore  briefly  call 
the  attention  of  tlie  Convention  to  the  division 
of  labor,  if  we  appoint  the  committees  as  indica- 
ted in  the  rule  under  consideration.  I  am  sure 
that  if  the  committee  will  review  their  own 
works,  they  will  see  that  it  is  not  the  best  di- 
vision that  could  be  made.  The  preamble  and 
first  article  of  the  Constitution  were  to  be  re- 
ferred to  one  committee  of  nine  Delegates.  The 
first  article  is  merely  the  division  of  the  powers 
of  government  into  three  several  classes  of  magis- 
trates; the  next,  that  no  person  exercising  the 
duties  of  one  oflSce  shall  interfere  with  another — 
and  there  ends  the  wliole  duties  of  nine  Delegates. 
You  refer  this  preamble  and  article  to  nine  men 
to  make  report,  when  it  is  not  designed  to  change 
either  of  them.  As  I  remarked  vest*  rday  as  to 
the  schedule,  when  you  take  up  tlie  Constitution 
as  we  have  it  put  together,  vou  will  find  that  if 
you  confine  the  duties  of  the  committees  to  the 
several  articles  and  not  to  the  operations  of  pow- 
er, you  will  have  under  the  head  of  Judicial  or 
Legislative  branch,  the  business  of  appointing 
coroners  or  sheriffs,  and  of  appointing  and  com- 
missioning militia  officers.  There  can  be  then 
I  think  not  much  harmonv  in  the  work  of  these 
constituted  committees  wlien  they  shall  be  en- 
gaged in  their  labor. 

In  reference  to  the  question  of  delay,  I  have 
already  said  I  believe  that  we  would  save 
time,  and  expedite  the  work  of  this  body,  by  the 
adoption  of  a  plan  of  committees.  The  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon  seems  to  think  that  we  shall 
all  be  idle,  and  there  will  be  nothing  to  do  in 
thisHouse,  while  the  committees  areatwork;  and 
he  consoled  himself  with  the  idea  that  he  could 

fo  home  and  attend  to  his  business  at  the  courts; 
ut  if  he  happened  to  be  assigned  on  a  very  im- 
portant committee  he  would  Ije  unwilling  to  go 
nome.  Sir,  this  House  will  have  enough  to  em- 
ploy itself  from  the  hour  of  10  o'clock  until  2 
o'clock,  in  considering  and  discussing  the  vari- 
ous propositions  that  have  and  may  be  thrown 
upon  the  table,  by  way  of  settling  general  ques- 
tions. For  instance,  if  it  is  necessary  to  try  the 
judgment  of  the  House  on  an  elective  judiciary, 
we  can  have  a  resolution  on  the  subject,  that  may 
as  well  be  discussed  in  the  House  as  elsewhere. 
Meanwhile,  the  judiciary  committee  would  be 
at  work,  predicating  their  labor  on  what,  in  the 
opinion  of  thisHouse  was  the  public  sentiment, 
that  the  judiciary  should  be  elected.  Thev 
could  soon  give  us  the  result  of  their  labor  in 
Buch  a  form  that  the  country  and  the  House  could 


see  it,  and  take  it  up,  and  judge  how  the  princi- 
ple of  an  elective  judiciary  could  be  carried  out 
with  safety  to  the  country  and  the  people.  On 
their  report  coming  in,  we  could  take  it  up  as 
the  Legislature  do  a  bill,  and  move  to  amend  it, 
add  to  it,  and  discuss  it.  It  is  no  objection  to 
me  if  we  have  a  committee,  to  siiy  that  its  influ- 
ence will  be  felt  in  the  House.  You  will  have 
individuals — members  of  this  body — whose  duty 
it  will  be  made  particularly  to  attend  to  the 
work  of  their  own  hands — to  see  that  it  is  per- 
fect, and  to  prevent,  as  far  as  they  can,  by  argu- 
ment and  discussion,  any  innovation  that  is  cal- 
culated to  render  it  worse,  or  change  it  entirely 
in  feature  or  principle.  With  this  explanation  I 
shall  leave  it,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  to  the 
judgment  of  the  House,  to  pursue  what  I  have 
no  doubt  it  will  do,  on  all  occasions,  its  own 
course  in  reference  to  the  action  through  which 
it  will  get  at  its  labors.  As  to  the  question  of 
time — if  this  was  a  meeting  got  up  to  nominate 
a  man  for  Governor,  we  have  been  here  long 
enough  to  do  it.  If  we  had  come  here  to  take  up 
local  legislation,  and  to  redress  personal  griev- 
ances, we  have  been  liere  lon^f  enough  to  pass  at 
least  fifty  or  sixty  divorce  bills.  But  the  amend- 
ing of  a  constitution  that  has  lasted  for  some  fifty 
years,  and  the  making  of  one  that  shall  last,  I 
hope,  fifty  years  longer,  is  a  work  not  to  be  done 
in  haste.  It  requires  deliberation,  examination, 
order  and  system,  that  we  may  be  satisfied  with 
the  results  of  our  labor  when  it  goes  from  our 
hands. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  feel  that  it  is  very  important 
that  the  Convention  arrive  at  a  proper  decision 
as  to  the  three  propositions  which  are  now  before 
it;  because  on  that  will  depend  very  much,  our 
success  in  the  progress  of  the  business  of  the 
Convention.  1  here  are  three  propositions  which 
are  submitted,  and  I  apprehend  that  every  gen- 
tleman of  the  Convention  is  anxious  to  adopt  that 
which  will  be  best  in  bringing  about  a  proper 
svstem  of  doing  the  business  of  the.  Convention, 
f  he  first  proposition  is  that  which  has  been  sub- 
mitted by  the  committee  appointed  to  report 
rules  for  the  business  of  the  Convention.  The 
second  is  that  which  has  been  offered,  I  believe, 
by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  as  a  substitute; 
and  the  third,  is  that  which  has  been  offered  by 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  as  a  substitute  for 
the  whole.  These  are  the  various  propositions 
that  have  been  submitted.  I  do  not  see  a  very 
great  difference  between  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  and  that  presented  by 
the  committee.  They  are  in  substance  very 
much  the  same.  But  there  is  a  very  great  differ- 
ence between  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon  and  that  of  the  committee,  or  that 
of  the  gentleman  from  Xelson.  I  am  clearly  of 
opinion,  that  either  the  propo.sition  reported  by 
the  committee,  or  that  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  should  be  adopted.  When  I  first  came 
here,  I  was  of  the  opinion  myself,  that  the  plan 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  would 
be  tne  best;  but  in  examining  the  course  pursued 
by  other  Conventions,  I  satisfied  myself  that  this 
plan  would  be  wliolly  impracticable.  I  discov- 
ered that  the  Virginia  Convention,  in  tlie  first 
place,  appointed  a  committee  whose  business  it 
was  to  report  the  proper  mode  of  proceeding.  I 
discovered  in  the  same   Convention,   a  propo- 


46 


sition  made  by  a  distinguished  member  of  that 
body,  similar  to  the  one  proposed  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon.  It  was  voted  down,  I  think, 
by  a  large  majority  of  the  Convention.  A  simi- 
lar proposition  was  made  in  the  New  York  Con- 
vention and  voted  down.  I  understand  from  a 
gentleman  who  has  looked  into  the  matter,  that 
a  similar  proposition  was  made  to  the  Tennessee 
Convention  and  adopted  by  it,  and  that  after 
some  time  progressing  under  it,  they  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  it  Avas  a  bad  mode  and  aban- 
doned it,  and  at  last  adopted  the  mode  suggest- 
ed by  the  committee  or  tlie  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son— that  is,  in  spirit  and  siibstance. 

I  think  that  either  the  proposition  reported  by 
the  committee,  or  that  offered  as  a  substitute  by 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  should  be  adopted, 
because  I  am  confident  we  shall  never  progress 
with  the  business  of  the  convention  unless  Ave 
refer  the  important  matters  to  committees.  I  care 
not  what  the  committees  may  be,  so  they  are 
formed  on  proper  principles  and  organized  with 
a  view  of  preparing  the  Dusiness  of  the  conven- 
tion. I  understand  that  my  friend  from  Bourbon, 
whose  speech  I  listened  to  with  great  pleasure, 
finds  one  great  objection  to  the  appointment  of 
committees  in  the  extraordinary  influence  which 
he  apprehends  they  may  exercise  over  the  mem- 
bers of  this  convention.  I  understand  the  prop- 
osition he  has  laid  down  to  be,  that  w'henever  a 
committee  lias  reported,  an  individual  will  be 
scarcely  heard  on  this  floor,  or  if  heard  at  all, 
his  voice  will  be  lost  in  the  mighty  influence 
exercised  bv  tlie  committee  over  the  other  mem- 
bers. On  this  point,  I  think  the  gentleman  is 
entirely  mistaken.  What  are  the  privileges  of 
members  of  this  house?  When  these  committees 
have  reported,  are  there  not  various  modes  by 
■which  we  may  at  once  avoid  any  decision  on 
their  report.  I  do  not  like  the  decision  of  the 
committee,  and  I  may  make  a  proposition  to  re- 
commit their  report,  or  I  may  propose  to  lay  it 
on  the  table,  or  to  refer  it  to  another  committee. 
Do  I  not  take  the  sense  of  the  whole  house  as  to 
the  propriety  of  laying  it  on  the  table,  of  refer- 
ring it  back,  or  of  making  any  other  disposition 
it  may  be  thought  proper  to  "inake  of  itV  Do  I 
not  address  the  good  sense  of  the  house  as  to  the 
propriety  of  the  step?  And  is  it  to  be  said  that 
It  is  to  b<j  overridden  by  the  mere  expression  of 
the  committee,  that  it  is  right  and  proper  their 
report  should  be  adopted?  Surely  not.  I  see 
no  possible  objection,  so  far  as  regards  any  in- 
fluence which  the  committee  may  exercise.  We 
select  these  committees  because  we  have  confi- 
dence in  them,  and  with  a  view  not  only  that 
they  may  suggest  the  best  mode  of  preparing  the 
subject  before  them,  but  that  they  may  bring  it 
before  the  convention  in  such  a  form  as  will  satis- 
fy the  country.  That  is  the  object.  What  is  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon? 
"The  submission  of  all  tliese  matters  at  once  to 
the  committee  of  the  whole,  says  he,  will  ena- 
ble us  to  progress  at  once.  We  avoid  the  influ- 
ence of  committees  in  the  first  place,  and  then 
proceed  at  once  to  the  investigation  of  all  the 
great  questions  involved  in  an  amendment  of  the 
constitution.  And,  says  he,  if  we  appoint  com- 
mittees and  refer  tlie  business  to  them,  what  is 
this  convention  to  do  in  their  absence?"  Does 
not  the  gentleman   know   that  every   possible 


proposition  that  any  gentleman  may  think  prop- 
er to  bring  forward  can  be  submitted  to  the  com- 
mittee, and  when  or  before  it  is  submitted  that  you 
can  discuss  the  proposition  itself.  I  may  offer 
a  proposition  to  this  effect,  as  I  did  yesterday, 
that  the  judicial  officers  of  this  government  ought 
to  be  elected  by  the  people,  but  that  they  should 
be  placed  on  an  eminence  which  should  secure 
them  against  popular  influences;  against  the  pre- 
judices that  might  be  engenderedfrom  the  vari- 
ous causes  that  might  ari.se  in  the  election  of  a 
judge  and  induce  him  to  give  a  decision  at  war 
with  the  real  principles  involved  in  the  case.  I 
offer  a  proposition  like  that,  and  in  what  form  do 
I  present  it?  Resolved,  That  the  committee  on 
such  an  article  of  the  constitution  be  instructed 
to  report  the  substance  of  that  proposition  as  an 
amendment  to  the  constitution.  I  present  this  by 
way  of  illustration;  and  does  not  every  gen- 
tleman see  that  when  that  proposition  Avas  re- 
ported, he  Avould  have  the  right  to  arise,  and 
take  issue  Avith  the  principle,  and  to  discuss  it  to 
any  extent  he  may  desire.  Every  proposition 
that  any  gentleman  may  desire,  he  will  have  full 
liberty  to  make,  presenting  it  in  the  form  of  in- 
structions to  any  one  committee,  and  requiring 
them  to  report  an  amendment  engrafting  in  the' 
constitution  the  principle  contained  in  the  reso- 
lution offered.  Does  not  every  gentleman  see  at 
once  thati  there  is  no  difficulty  on  this  point? 
Why  then  the  necessity  of  referring  everything 
to  a  committee  of  the  Avhole,  and  dispensing 
entirely  Avith  the  committees  Avhich  are  usual  in 
all  parliamentary  bodies,  and  Avhich  are  neces- 
sary to  the  proper  presentation  of  bu.siness.  It 
does  seem  to  me  that  we  have  only  to  look  at  the 
ordinary  routine  of  doing  business  in  bodies  like 
this  to  satisfy  ourselves  at  once  that  this  plan  of 
committees  is  the  one  which  Avill  best  conduce 
to  the  proper  and  speedy  discharge  of  our  busi- 
ness. After  going  into  committee  of  the  whole 
on  the  constitution,  does  any  man  suppose  that 
he  is  to  amend  it  as  he  desires.  He  may  make 
speeches,  and  offer  propositions  to  his  *  heart's 
content,  but  what  Avill  he  do  in  the  Avay  of 
amendment  after  all.  He  Avould  have  to  provide 
some  committee  to  lick  the  bantling  into  form. 
You  cannot  get  along  Avithout  committees,  and  it 
is  useless  to  attempt  it,  as  gentlemen  Avould 
find  if  they  adopt  the  resolution  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon.  I  thought  it  to  be  the  right 
plan  when  I  first  came  here,  and  intended  to  offer 
a  similar  proposition  myself,  but  on  reflection,  I 
am  satisfied  that  it  Avill  not  result  in  forwarding 
the  business  of  the  convention  but  r.ather  in  re- 
tarding it. 

Mr.  LINDSEY  preferred  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon,  and  was  opposed  to  the 
appointmentof  committees.  He  said  by  turning 
to  the  present  Constitution  it  Avouldbe  found  th.at 
there  Avere  several  articles  Avhich  needed  no  altera- 
tion. Take  ashas  been  suggested  the  first  article, 
Avhere  it  is  proposed  that  nine  members  of  this  body 
shall  be  designated  to  do  a  Avork  which  no  one 
believes  is  desired.  The  gentleman  from  Breath- 
itt (Mr.  Hargis)  has  himself  this  morning  pre- 
sented as  much  labor  as  a  commttee  of  nine  could 
have  performed  during  the  Avhole  session.  No 
one  thinks  of  changing  the  plan  by  Avhich  the 
powers  of  the  government  are  distributed,  or  the 
declaration  that  one  branch  of  the  government 


47 


shall  not  interfere  with  another,  and  therefore  so 
far  as  a  committee  is  organized  on  that  subject, 
the  whole  work  is  already  done  and  well  done. 
There  are  several  articles  of  the  Constitution  in 
the  same  position.  Take  the  article  in  reference 
to  impeacnnients — upon  which  also  it  is  propos- 
ed to  constitute  a  committee  of  nine ;  no  one 
thinks  of  changing  the  present  mode  of  impeach- 
ing officers  or  the  present  declarations  of  the 
Constitution  in  relation  thereto,  unless  it  should 
be  previously  determined  to  change  the  mode  of 
electing  the  legislature  and  the  judiciary,  and 
then  it  would  become  important  to  change  the 
whole  Constitution  on  the  subject  of  impeach- 
ment. "WTiat  is  to  become  of  this  committee  during 
the  time  that  another  and  an  important  commit- 
tee is  acting  on  a  matter  confided  to  them.  Are 
they  to  sit  in  silence  or  to  find  other  pursuits 
to  engage  them  until  tliis  question  is  determin- 
ed? So  on  the  article  in  relation  to  the  seat  of 
government — and  just  here  I  beg  leave  to  re- 
mark, that  if  there  is  to  be  a  committe  on  that 
subject,  I  hope  it  will  be  of  one,  and  I  that 
member — because  I  am  not  disposed  like  Ban- 
quo's  ghost  to  wander  in  these  halls  alone,  while 
iny  friends  Macbeth  and  Macduff  are  settling  their 
controversy.  Take  the  article  in  relation  to 
slavery — it  has  been  indicated  here,  and  I  think 
sufficiently  strong,  that  no  one  contemplates  the 
introduction  of  new  propositions  in  relation  to 
slaveiy.  There  arc  but  two  sections  to  the  arti- 
cle. One  is,  that  slavery  shall  exist  in  this 
Commonwealth,  and  the  mode  by  which  eman- 
cipation shall  take  place;  and  there  is  the  man- 
ner in  which  public  prosecutions  shall  be  had 
against  slaves.  What  is  to  become  of  that  while 
discussion  is  going  on  in  relation  to  the  execu- 
tive and  legislative  departments'?  "VTe  are  here 
for  some  purpose,  and  what  is  it?  The  present 
Constitution  points  it  out.  We  first,  are  to  re- 
vise or  re-adopt  the  Constitution  as  it  now  ex- 
ists. If  we  refuse  to  adopt  it,  what  next?  Then 
we  are  to  amend,  alter,  or  change  the  present 
Constitution.  Suppose  we  adopt  this  last  course, 
let  us  see  then  whether  we  are  not  now  under  the 
resolution  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  pre- 
cisely where  we  would  be  after  the  reports  of  all 
the  committees  proposed  were  before  the  house. 
"We  are,  and  if  expedition  is  the  intention  and 
object  of  this  body,  it  ought  at  once  to  adopt 
that  resolution  as  a  substitute  for  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  rules,  and  proceed  to  take  the 
vote  whether  we  will  re-adopt  the  present  Con- 
stitution. If  we  fail  to  do  that,  then  we  could 
proceed  to  amend,  section  by  section,  article  by 
article,  the  present  Constitution.  If  we  take  it 
up  on  that  plan,  see  what  will  be  the  operation. 
Tne  second  article  relates  to  the  legislative  de- 
partment— the  first  section  to  the  qualifications 
of  electors.  Delegates  here  have  already  pre- 
sented propositions  in  relation  to  qualifications 
and  restrictions  upon  the  right  of  suffrage. — 
This  is  one  of  the  most  important  questions  to 
"be  settled,  and  at  the  very  outset  of  amending 
this  Constitution.  It  is  to  come  before  this  bodv 
in  connection  with  the  principle  of  electing  atl 
the  officers  of  the  State — not  only  the  represent- 
ative but  the  executive  and  judicial  officers.  If 
we  decide  to  adopt  the  principle  of  electing  all 
officers,  there  at  once  the  incipient  step  is  the 
detetminatioQ  by  whom  they  shall  be  elected. 


And  Tfhen  you  settle  the  qualification  of  the 
elector  who  is  to  elect  your  representative;  you 
have  settled  it  in  regard  to  all  other  officers. — 
Adopt  the  plan  proposed  by  the  committee  on 
rules,  and  you  refer  this  subject  to  three  distinct 
committees,  and  they  will  perhaps  each  report  a 
distinct  and  different  proposition.  Each  propo- 
sition will  be  subject  to  amendment,  or  tlie  whole 
may  be  rejected  and  some  substitute  offered  by 
any  member  adopted.  It  will  be  found  by  look- 
ing into  the  three  leading  articles  of  the  present 
Constitution,  that  the  whole  work  is  to  be  done 
there. 

So  far  as  regards  the  executive,  there  is  but 
little  to  do,  and  I  imagine  that  if  gentlemen  will 
turn  their  attention  to  the  present  constitution, 
thev  will  find  there  is  to  be  but  slight  change 
under  any  state  of  the  case  in  that  article.  The 
only  changes  will  as  directly  come  up  under  dis- 
cussion on  an  amendment  to  the  second  arti'.-le 
in  relation  to  the  legislative  branch  of  the  gov- 
ernment, as  they  will  under  that  referring  to  the 
executive  branch.  All  the  sections  in  the  pres- 
ent constitution  in  relation  to  the  executive  de- 
partment, are  embraced  under  the  heads  of  the 
ages  and  qualifications  of  those  elected  to  the 
offices  of  Governor  and  Lieut.  Governor — when 
these  terms  shall  commence  and  when  end,  and 
their  several  powers  and  duties.  And  here  I 
would  remark,  that  under  the  arrangement  as  in- 
troduced by  the  committee  there  will  be  found 
matters  in  the  present  constitution  that  really  do 
not  belong  to  the  heads  under  which  they  are 
placed.  Take  for  instance,  the  executive  branch 
of  the  government  under  our  present  constitu- 
tion— many  of  the  powers  and  duties  appertain- 
ing to  which  were  distributed  under  the  head  of 
general  powers.  So  it  will  be  seen  at  once  that 
it  will  be  utterly  impossible,  under  the  arrange- 
ment the  committee  have  made  for  us,  that  the 
powers  and  duties  of  the  several  officers  can  be 
arranged  in  a  manner  in  which  they  can  be  sat- 
isfactory. After  the  committees  shall  have  re- 
ported we  shall  be  precisely  at  the  point  where 
we  are  now.  You  take  up  the  present  constitu- 
tion, and  you  proceed  to  amend,  alter,  or  change 
it.  The  committees  come  in  with  their  reports, 
and  you  proceed  to  act  upon  them,  having  their 
projet  of  a  constitution  in  connection  with  the 
original  one  before  you.  You  will  have  the  same 
difficulties  to  meet  as  it  is  contended  exist  now. 
I  think  therefore  that  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  is  the  true  and  correct 
one. 

We  are  not  a  legislative  bodv — we  are  to  orig- 
inate nothing  new  here — and  tlie  preparation  of 
the  duties  devolved  upon  us  cannot  be  assimila- 
ted to  that  of  a  legislative  body.  There  prop- 
ositions are  originated  by  members,  and  it  be- 
comes a  matter  of  importance  that  they  should 
be  referred  to  the  standing  committees  of  the 
House,  composed  of  persons  of  experience  and 
skill  in  the  formation  of  tlie  course  of  legisla- 
tion, that  thev  may  be  compared  with  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  land,  in  order  that  it  may  be 
seen  whether  they  are  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  that  instniraent.  That  is  not  tho 
case  here.  We  take  up  section  by  section,  and 
any  gentleman  may  propose  to  amend.  Suppose 
there  should  be  a  dozen  amendments  offered, 
these  are  all  acted  upon,  and  when   you  have 


48 


passed  through  your  existing  Constitution,  and 
have  before  you  all  the  iiineudmeuts  that  gentle- 
men clioose  to  offer,  then  you  have  the  opportu- 
nity of  making  a  selection  and  of  arranging  them 
in  a  form  perfectly  to  be  understood  by  every 
member  of  the  House.  I  regard  the  plan  sug- 
gested by  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  as  the 
correct  one,  but  if  that  is  rejected  I  much  prefer 
the  plan  introduced  by  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son to  that  introducedby  the  committee;  and  for 
the  reason  just  given,  that  the  present  Constitxi- 
tion  embodies  under  different  heads  matters  which 
should  not  be  there.  The  resolution  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  indicates  the  particular  du- 
ties of  the  committees  and  their  arrangement  in 
a  better  form  than  they  exist  under  the  present 
Constitution,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  even  there 
we  shall  be  met  with  the  difficulties  I  have  sug- 
gested. The  various  committees  will  have  their 
various  projects,  whereas,  if  the  Convention  first 
settled  the  principle — to  elect  all  officers  for  ex- 
ample— they  would  have  at  once  the  settlement 
of  the  question;  the  delay  too  would  be  far  less. 
Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  committee  have 
reported  rules,  among  which  is  one,  that  re- 
quires each  gentleman  to  confine  himself  to  the 
question  before  the  house;  and  I  would  be  very 

flad  to  see  such  a  rule  adopted,  if  no  other. — 
'he  question  now  pending  before  the  Conven- 
tion, is  whether  we  shall  have  committees  at 
all  or  not.  The  question  pending,  is  between 
the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon, 
which  excludes  committees,  and  the  other  prop- 
ositions which  recommend  their  formation.  Now 
I  have  been  taught  to  believe  that  the  province 
of  the  committee  of  the  whole,  was  to  settle  gen- 
eral principles,  the  province  of  sub-committees, 
to  arrange  the  details.  Then  when  we  are  in 
committee  of  the  whole,  we  will  debate  general 
principles,  and  when  we  meet  in  sub-committee 
we  will  arrange  details.  For  instance,  sir,  after 
the  members  of  the  sub-committees  collectively 
here  as  a  body  in  convention  shall  have  heard 
the  discussion  of  general  principles,  and  when 
those  principles  shall  have  been  settled,  then 
the  appropriate  committees  may  arrange  the 
details  to  carry  out  those  general  principles. 

I  trust  the  Convention  will  vote  down  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  and 
then  the  question  will  come  up  between  the  prop- 
osition suomitted  bv  the  committee,  and  the  sub- 
stitute offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  would  not  have  said  a  word 
upon  the  subject,  if  I  had  not  been  a  member  of 
the  committee  for  drafting  rules,  and  had  not 
submitted  to  the  committee  a  proposition  simi- 
lar to  the  one  now  under  consideration.  I  pre- 
sented to  the  committee  a  proposition,  similar  to 
the  one  offered  by  my  colleague  for  wliich  I  was 
indebted  to  liis  kindness.  I  will  state  my  ob- 
jection to  the  report  of  the  committee  in  a  few 
words.  I  agree  with  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, that  the  bu.siness  of  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  is  to  settle  the  great  and  leading  princi- 
ples which  are  to  guide  the  action  of  this  body, 
and  that  the  office  or  function  of  sub-commit- 
tees is  to  throw  those  great  principles  into  form 
or  shape,  and  to  report  to  us  practical  measures 
for  adoption  by  the  Convention;  and  so  of  all 
legislative  bodies.  Well  now,  what  is  proposed 
here?    Not,  as  my  friend  says,  a  question  simply 


whether  any  committees  are  to  be  raised  or  not. 
That  is  not  the  only  question.  In  addition  to 
that,  there  is  the  much  more  important  question, 
shall  the  whole  Constitution  as  it  now  exists, 
undergo  unlimited  discussion  in  relation  to  the 
principles  contained  in  it,  and  those  which  gen- 
tlemen think  should  be  embodied  in  the  new 
Constitution,  or  be  referred  to  sub-committees 
and  be  discussed  by  them  in  the  committee  rooms; 
or  shall  those  leading  and  general  principles  be 
settled  in  the  first  instance  in  committee  of  the 
whole?  That  is  the  question.  Now,  sir,  the 
most  perfect  consummation  of  legislative  meas- 
ures that  I  know  of  in  the  world,  is  to  be  found 
in  the  British  Parliament;  that  is,  their  meas- 
ures are  better  matured  than  those  of  any  other 
legislative  body  to  be  found  on  the  face  of  the 
earth.  What  is  the  uniform  course  that  is  pur- 
sued there?  A  subject  is  debated  in  the  House 
of  Commons  in  committee  of  the  whole,  and 
the  great  leading  principles  are  there  discussed, 
deliberated  upon,  decided,  and  established;  af- 
ter that  has  been  done,  the  subject  is  referred  to 
a  sub-committee  invariably,  to  give  shape  and 
fashion  to  the  measures  growing  out  of  those 
principles  thus  debated.  Now  that  is  the  prop- 
osition of  ray  honorable  friend,  and  it  involves 
this  question,  whether  this  Convention  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  will  proceed  to  do  its  prop- 
er and  important  office  of  deciding  for  itself  the 
great  leading  principles  that  shall  be  embodied 
in  the  Constitution  beforehand,  and  afterwards 
refer  the  different  subjects  thus  discussed  and 
decided  upon  to  the  appropriate  committees  for 
the  purpose  of  being  drawn  up  in  the  form  of  a 
Constitution,  or  whether  we  shall  permit  the  im- 
portant work  of  forming  a  decision  upon  the 
freat  leading  principles  of  the  Constitution  to 
e  done  in  the  sub-committee  rooms.  I  think 
the  first  mode  the  best.  What  is  the  proposition 
and  its  effect?  Whv,  as  I  said  before,  every  prin- 
ciple to  be  embodied  in  the  new  Constitution, 
every  principle  which  any  member  of  this  Con- 
vention shall  have  thrown  before  the  body  for  its 
consideration,  everyone  which  may  merely  be  as 
yet  nestling  in  the  mind  of  any  man  is  to  be 
thrown  by  sections  before  the  committees,  and 
the  reports  of  those  committees  taken  together, 
will  form  the  whole  of  anv  Constitution  that  we 
may  make.  Well  now  tlie  question  is,  shall 
these  committees  go  into  secret  conclave,  pledg- 
ed, perhaps  themselves,  against  every  important 
principle  that  you  may  propose — come  before  this 
Convention  with  their  minds  irrevocably  fixed 
for  or  against  those  principles,  or  shall  they  first 
be  discussed  by  the  body — shall  we  have  the 
advantage  of  a  free  and  unrestricted  interchange 
of  opinion  in  regard  to  them?  I  pref«rthe  latter 
course.  What  will  be  the  effect  of  this  proposi- 
tion? Why,  when  the  various  subjects  are  re- 
ferred to  these  committees,  they  will  go  into 
their  committee  rooms  and  there  decide  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  various  subjects  entrusted  to  them; 
they  will  establish  fixed  and  immutable  rules 
for  or  against  the  principle  contained  in  each 
particiilar  proposition.  They  will  then  come  in 
and  make  their  report.  When  that  is  done?  The 
reports  of  the  committees  are  taken  seriatim,  re- 
ferred to  a  committee  of  the  wliole^and  there 
debated,  and  precisely  the  same  work  which  we 
now  propose  to  go  about  in  committee  of  the 


49 


whole  will  then  remain  to  Ibe  performed.  The 
question  then  is,  whether  it  is  better  to  go  through 
the  use-less  process  of  obtaining  these  reports,  or 
shall  we  in  the  first  instance  consider  the  vari- 
ous subjects  in  committee  of  the  whole? 

But  this  is  not  all.  After  the  committee  of 
the  Avhole  has  acted  upon  the  reports  of  the  sub- 
committees, and  has  agreed  upon  the  great  prin- 
ciples to  be  embodied  in  the  Constitution,  there 
must  then  be  a  general  committee  of  compila- 
tion, or  something  like  it,  and  to  this  must  be  re- 
ferred the  work  of  throwing  together  the  result  of 
the  labor  of  the  various  committees,  and  report- 
ing back  to  the  convention  a  draft  of  a  constitu- 
tion, composed  of  the  various  reports  of  the  sub- 
committees. This  report  must  be  again  referred 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  the  same  de- 
liberation and  discussion  must  be  gone  over 
again,  with  every  opportunity  for  gentlemen  to 
submit  all  the  propositions  which  they  might  be 
inclined  to  submit  if  the  old  constitution  were  now 
taken  up  for  consideration  in  accordance  with 
the  proposition  of  my  honorable  friend.  Well 
now  I  think,  as  a  matter  of  economy  of  time, 
certainly  as  a  matter  of  deliberate,  well  consid- 
ered action,  as  affording  an  opportunity  for  elic- 
iting information  by  interchange  of  views,  it 
may  be  more  readily  effected  by  his  proposition 
than  by  that  of  the  committee.  There  will  be,  by 
pui-suing  this  method  an  opportunity  afforded  to 
every  member  of  the  convention  to  explain  his 
views  to  the  utmost  extent  that  he  can  desire. 
But  it  is  not  the  speeches  of  gentlemen  that  we 
want.  I  want  to  near  propositions  from  every 
member  of  this  house  upon  every  important  prin- 
ciple that  is  to  be  embodied  in  the  constitution. 
I  want  the  benefit  of  the  reason  and  experience 
and  the  deliberate  judgment  of  every  member,  in 
the  form  of  a  proposition,  and  I  will  give  to  it 
such  weight  as  in  my  judgment  it  may  be  enti- 
tled to;  and  I  want  this  aid,  I  want  such  lights 
as  I  can  obtain  from  the  weakest  and  most  igno- 
ble as  well  as  from  the  brightest  and  strong- 
est intellect;  for  there  is  no  man  so  weak  but 
he  may  sometimes  suggest  wise  and  valuable 
propositions.  I  want  all  these  aids  in  forming  a 
new  constitution  to  be  substituted  for  that  which 
has  controlled  the  destinies  of  this  Common- 
wealth so  gloriously  for  half  a  century.  I  think 
that  we  can  place  ourselves  upon  no  better  plat- 
form than  that  which  comes  to  lis,  sanctioned  by 
the  names  of  Breckinridge,  of  Innis,  of  Grundy. 

Now  a  word  to  ray  honorable  and  honored 
friend  from  Henderson.  I  will  tell  him  why  in 
my  judgment  we  should  not  be  governed  by  the 
mode  adopted  in  the  Conventions  of  Tennessee, 
Virginia,  and  New  York.  Those  Conventions 
contemplated  an  amendment  of  the  existing  Con- 
stitutions— not  a  fundamental  change;  not  cer- 
tainly those  radical  and  important  changes  which 
have  been  already  proposed  to  us.  They  did 
not  contemplate  such  changes,  they  set  them- 
selves to  improve  and  modify  their  respective 
Constitutions,  not  to  cut  them  up  by  the  roots; 
but  it  seems  that  this  Convention  has  assembled 
with  far  different  motives,  at  least  on  the  part  of 
some.  The  great  principles  then  that  are  invol- 
ved in  such  a  radical  change  ought  to  be  discus- 
sed in  committee  of  the  whole,  and  not  by  sub- 
committees. The  Convention  itself  ought  to  do 
the  work. 


I  have  thus  stated  in  few  words  the  reasons 
which  induced  me  to  differ  from  the  committee. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  was  prepared  yes- 
terday to  favor  the  resolutions  of  my  friend  from 
Bourbon.  They  were  such  as  commended  them- 
selves to  my  mmd  for  adoption  ;  and  one  great 
point  which  recommended  them,  was  that  the 
method  of  proceeding  indicated  by  them  would 
discipline  our  minds  and  make  us  more  au  Jait 
at  the  business  we  have  to  do.  But  after  reflection 
upon  the  subject,  I  am  of  opinion  that  it  would 
be  objectionable, inasmuch  as  it  will  throw  into 
this  house,  the  whole  constitution  in  all  its  va- 
rious parts  and  propositions,  and  instead  of  facil- 
itating our  dclioerations,  it  will  operate  as  an  el- 
ement of  division  and  scatter  to  the  four  winds 
every  thing  like  concentrated  action  upon  any 
given  subject;  and  the  argument  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  drawn  from  the  history  of 
the  British  Parliament  is  in  my  opinion  falla- 
cious to  this  extent,  that  although  in  the  Parlia- 
ment of  England,  as  I  understand,  they  consider 
important  questions  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
and  leave  the  details  to  be  settled  by  select  com- 
mittees, it  will  be  remembered  that  the  subjects 
which  engage  their  attention  differ  from  those 
which  it  will  be  our  province  to  consider. — 
There  an  isolated  question  is  presented  and  it  is 
proper  that  it  should  be  considered  in  committee 
of  the  whole;  but  here  the  whole  Constitution 
of  Kentucky  en  masse  is  submitted  to  our  con- 
sideration. Here  it  is  not  an  isolated  question. 
In  the  Parliament  of  England  a  single  subject  is 
submitted,  and  it  is  discussed  in  committee  of 
the  whole  and  sent  to  a  select  committee  to  be 
matured  in  its  details.  No  such  single  proposi- 
tion is  before  us,  therefore  the  point  of  tne  gen- 
tleman's argument,  I  think  fails  to  be  analagous 
to  the  truth  of  this  case. 

The  great  objection  I  have  to  the  business  of 
this  House  being  done  by  committees  is  one 
which  I  have  no  doubt  has  suggested  itself  to 
the  mind  of  every  man  in  the  House.  It  is  this, 
that  we  all  liave  our  cherished  theories,  that  the 
people  who  have  sent  us  here  have  their  cherish- 
ed theories,  and  the  committees  who  will  have 
these  various  subjects  in  charge,  it  is  reasonable 
to  believe,  will  be  imbued  with  their  predilec- 
tions and  preferences.  They  will  deliberate 
carefully,  consult  authorities,  and  by  every  pos- 
sible means  endeavor  to  establish  their  own 
cherished  doctrines.  And  they  will  be  prepared 
to  defend  them  against  all  attacks;  they  will  be 
armed  with  authorities,  and  will  be  in  a  com- 
plete state  of  preparation  to  engage  in  debate. — 
The  House  in  the  meantime  are  not  engaged  in 
deliberation  upon  those  subjects,  they  have  not 
consulted  authorities,  they  have  not  had  the  dis- 
cipline which  the  members  of  the  committee  Will 
have  the  advantage  of.  But  on  the  contrary 
they  are  taken  unawares  by  the  return  of  the 
committee  to  the  House  with  their  proposition. 
The  Committee  will  stand  forth  strong  and  vig- 
orous, compact  and  well  disciplined,  against 
whom  individuals  in  the  house,  whose  minds, 
not  less  vigorous,  but  more  crude  and  unprepared, 
cannot  expect  to  prevail.  This  is  the  great  ad- 
vantage that  will  be  possessed  by  the  commit- 
tees. It  may,  however,  be  obviated  under  the 
rules  which  have  been  reported.  Suppose  a 
committee  to  have  an  important  subject  under 


50 


consideration.  While  they  are  so  engaged,  I 
may  move  to  instruct  that  committee  to  pursue 
a  course  that  is  consistent  with  my  own  ideas. — 
This  will  become  the  subject  of  discussion  hero, 
and  our  minds  will  be  brought  to  deliberate  on 
the  self  same  subject  which  occupies  the  atten- 
tion of  the  committee.  By  proceeding  in  this 
way  we  will  prepare  ourselves  to  meet  the  objec- 
tions of  the  committee  and  to  combat  the  position 
taken  by  them.  This  objection  then  being  over- 
come, the  argument  of  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon (Mr.  Williams)  Would  fall  to  the  ground, 
and  in  its  stead  would  arise  this  argument,  that 
by  adopting  either  the  rules  that  have  been  re- 
ported Iby  the  committee  or  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe)  we 
shall  facilitate  the  progress  of  business  whilst 
we  acquire  all  the  advantage  which  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  presents  to 
our  consideration.  We  were  sent  here  by  the 
people,  not  to  demolish  the  present  Constitu- 
tion; there  is  no  danger  that  we  shall  do  that,  I 
will  inform  my  honorable  friend.  We  have  been 
sent  here  to  reform  various  material  portions  of 
our  Constitution,  but  not  to  destroy  it  altogeth- 
er. I  can  assure  the  gentleman  there  is  no  such 
radical  spirit  as  that.  Depend  upon  it,  howev- 
er much  a  man's  mind  may  be  carried  away  by 
ideas  of  radicalism  here,  the  moderate  reformer, 
the  man  who  confines  himselfwithin  the  bounds 
of  strict  conservatism  is  the  man  who  will  best 
recommend  himself  to  the  consideration  of  those 
who  sent  us  here.  I  believe  there  are  very  few, 
if  any,  in  this  Convention,  who  contemplate 
an  entire  change  of  the  Constitution.  I  believe 
that  to  go  into  such  a  radical  change  as  tlie  gen- 
tleman seems  to  apprehend  would  be  to  transcend 
the  limits  of  our  duty.  I  should  regard  it  as  one 
of  the  greatest  evils  that  could  befall  us,  if  this 
Convention  were  to  determine  upon  so  entire 
and  complete  a  change  in  all  the  great  princi- 
ples which  our  Constitution  embraces,  because 
the  consequence  would  inevitably  be  the  rejec- 
tion of  our  labors  on  the  part  of  our  constitu- 
ency and  the  very  moment  that  it  is  rejected,  it 
will  give  rise  to  agitations  which  will  oe  atten- 
ded with  the  most  disastrous  consequences. — 
But  I  rose  merely  to  make  the  suggestion  which 
I  have  made  in  reference  to  one  point  in  the  re- 
marks of  my  friend  from  Bourbon. 

Mr.  BROWN.  If  we  were  about  to  engage  in 
the  details  of  legislation,  the  establishment  of 
standing  committees,  it  seems  to  me,  would  be 
highly  proper  and  necessary.  But  we  are  not 
here  tor  sucn  a  purpose.  We  have  been  delega- 
ted by  the  people  to  revise  the  present  system  of 
government  in  Kentucky,  and  to  embody  gen- 
eral principles  which  are  to  guide  and  govern 
this  great  Commonwealth.  Now,  the  question 
presented  in  the  three  propositions  is  simply 
this:  It  is  in  what  mode  shall  we  approach  the 
work  which  lies  before  us.  I  am  sure,  sir, 
that  I  am  anxious  to  get  at  it  by  the  best 
mode.  Now,  sir,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  is  misap- 
prehended by  some  of  the  delegates.  They 
seem  to  comprehend  it  as  dispensing  entirely 
■with  the  service  of  committees.  I  do  not  so  un- 
derstand it.  It  does  not  take  it  out  of  the  pow- 
er of  the  Convention  to  appoint  a  committee 
whenever  the  services  of  a  committee  may  be 


deemed  necessary.  I  cannot  see  how  the  appoint- 
ment of  these  stahding  committees  is  to  facili- 
tate the  business  of  the  Convention.  Sir,  wlien 
a  gentleman  presents  a  proposition  here,  parlia- 
mentary courtesy  requires  that  it  should  be  en- 
tertained. Would  it  not  be  better  that  it  should 
come  up  in  committee  of  the  whole  and  be  discus- 
sed upon  its  general  principles,  and  then  a  com- 
mittee may  properly  have  it  in  charge  and  pro- 
vide the  necessary  details  for  carrying  it  out. 
Well,  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon,  as  I  said,  does  not  take  it  out  of  the 
power  of  the  Convention  to  appoint  committees 
when  the  necessity  arises.  The  gentleman  from 
Jefferson,  though  in  favor  of  tne  amendment 
submitted  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  fur- 
nished, in  my  judgment,  the  very  best  argument 
that  I  have  heard  against  his  own  proposition. 
He  says  the  purpose  of  a  committee  is  to  deter- 
mine upon  general  principles.  I  agree  with  the 
gentleman  that  such  is  its  business  and  purpose. 
After  it  has  done  that,  then  let  a  committee  be 
appointed  to  report  a  constitutional  provision 
enibracing  those  general  principles.  Permit 
me  to  give  you  an  instance.  A  proposition 
is  introduced  here :  "Resolved,  That  we  are  in 
favor  of  an  elective  Judiciary."  As  I  said  be- 
fore, parliamentary  courtesy  requires  .that  it 
should  be  received  by  the  house.  Is  it  to  be 
sent  to  one  of  the  standing  committees  before  the 
sense  of  the  house  is  obtained  in  reference  to  it? 
If  you  send  it  to  a  committee  it  comes  back  to 
you  in  a  report  from  that  committee,  and  the 
sense  of  the  Convention  is  yet  to  be  expressed 
upon  it.  Then,  I  ask,  what  have  you  gained  by 
sending  it  to  a  committee?  You  are  precisely 
where  you  began.  The  proposition  comes  up  as 
at  first,  and  all  the  various  amendments  that 
gentlemen  may  be  inclined  to  offer  are  yet  to  be 
considered  in  committee  of  the  whole,  so  that 
nothing  whatever  can  be  accomplished  by  that 
mode  of  proceeding. 

The  delegate  from  Oldham,  remarked,  that  he 
was  opposed  to  the  amendment  of  the  delegate 
from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Williams,)  because  it  assum- 
ed that  we  were  satisfied  with  the  present  consti- 
tution, and  desired  no  change.  I  cannot  so  un- 
derstand it.  It  is  true,  the  amendment  might 
with  much  propriety  have  assumed  that  the  del- 
egates and  the  country  were  satisfied  with  many 
of  the  principles  and  provisions  of  the  constitu- 
tion. 

I  am  opposed  to  the  amendment  of  the  dele- 
gate from  Nelson — not  however  for  the  reasons 
assigned  by  the  delegate  from  Bourbon — because 
it  is  calculated  to  favor  that  radical  and  revolu- 
tionary spirit  he  thinks  he  has  seen  manifested 
here.  I  may  belong  to  that  class  of  delegates 
considered  radical  and  revolutionary,  but  the 
principle  I  avowed  before  the  people  who  sent 
me  here,  shall  receive  my  public  support  as  a 
delegate  to  this  Convention,  even  at  tne  hazard 
of  incurring  the  reputation  of  being  termed  rad- 
ical and  revolutionary. 

It  does  seem  tome  that  the  amendment  propos- 
ed by  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  indicates 
the  Dest  mode  of  approaching  the  important 
work  that  lies  before  us.  The  other  mode,  in 
my  Jiumble  judgment,  will  accomplish  nothing. 
Tne  liouse  will  gain  nothing  by  it. 

Mr.  McHENRY.    It  seems  to  me  that  to  adopt 


51 


the  course  indicated  by  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  would  not  facilitate 
our  proceedings  as  the  gentleman  who  has  pre- 
ceded me  seems  to  suppose.  He  has  assumed 
that  the  resolution  or  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon  does  not  do  away  with  the 
necessity  for  committees.  In  order  to  show  that 
this  is  an  entire  misconception,  I  will  ask  the 
Clerk  to  read  that  amendment. 

The  Secretary  read  the  amendment  according- 
ly- 

Mr.  McHEXRT.  If  ow  what  is  the  object  of  it? 
Not  as  the  gentleman  seems  to  have  understood 
it — not  that  we  shall,  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
take  up  the  constitution  and  settle  the  great 
principles  which  we  desire  to  retain  in  the  new 
constitution.  By  no  means.  But  that  we  are 
to  take  it  up,  article  by  article,  and  section  by 
section,  and  amend  it,  and  then  refer  it  to  com- 
mittee of  the  whole — not  to  be  moulded  into 
form,  but  that  it  may  be  accepted  or  rejected. 
The  question  then  before  the  convention  is, 
whether  we  shall  have  standing  or  select  com- 
mittees, or  whether  we  shall  take  up  the  whole 
subject  in  committee  of  the  whole,  and  then 
commence  the  work.  And  when  we  get  to  a 
troublesome  place,  we  shall  find  ourselves  just 
where  we  were  before.  After  consuming  a  great 
deal  of  time,  as  we  have  done  to  day  in  talking, 
we  shall  probably  forget  what  we  have  alreadv 
done,  and  shall  be  obliged  to  go  back  and  ask 
our  Secretary  to  read  what  has  been  done  from 
his  minutes,  as  I  was  a  few  moments  ago.  We 
shall  be  liable  to  get  into  this  condition  every 
day  and  every  hour. 

ITow,  the  proposition  is,  which  mode  of  pro- 
ceeeding  will  you  adopt?  The  que.stion  is  be- 
tween standing  committees  and  the  committee 
of  the  whole.  If  we  adopt  the  latter  course, 
gentlemen  may  go  on  and  offer  propositions  un- 
til we  have  a  bushel  basket  full,  and  then  we 
shall  be  obliged  to  stop  and  print  them,  and  we 
shall  find  ourselves  involved  iu  embarrassment, 
from  which  we  shall  not  easily  escape.  But  on 
the  other  hand,  if  we  appoint  the  different  com- 
mittees, we  may  send  to  them  those  resolutions 
which  appropriately  belong  to  them.  Why,  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  himself  has  given  us 
enough  to  talk  about  for  the  next  three  weeks, 
and  I  myself  have  several  propositions  to  offer. 
But  this  committee  of  the  whole  will  take  up 
and  discuss  the  principles  involved  in  these 
propositions,whicn  are  to  be  distributed  among 
the  various  committees,  and  the  sense  of  the 
convention  may  thus  be  obtained,  and  the  com- 
mittees will  afterwards  embody  those  great 
principles  which  have  thus  been  settled  by  the 
convention  in  committee  of  the  whole.  I  am  de- 
cidedly of  the  opinion  that  to  have  standing  or 
select  committees  is  a  mode  of  proceeding  that  is 
preferable  to  that  suggested  by  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon,  of  bringing  up  the  whole  consti- 
tution at  one  time  before  the  committee  of  the 
•whole,  and  considering  it  article  by  article,  and 
section  by  section. 

Mr.  RUDD.  The  question  is  a  very  simple  one, 
and  can  be  easily  comprehended.  It  is  merely 
whether  we  shall  do  the  business  of  the  Conven- 
tion by  committees  who  shall  report  to  us  in 
proper  form  and  shape  the  various  portions  of  a 
Constitution,  or  whether  we  shall  have  it  done 


by  the  committee  of  the   whole.    I   think   that 

fentlemen  who  have  given  us  their  views  here 
ave  overlooked  what  will  be  the  result  of  hav- 
ing the  business  thrown  upon  the  committee  of 
the  whole.    We  shall  see  forty  or  fifty  Delegates 

Serhaps,  claiming  the  privilege  of  giving  their 
ifferent  views  upon  every  subject  that  may  be 
brought  up.  Now  let  us  make  a  comparison. — 
Here  are  one  hundred  men,  each  one  anxious 
and  prepared  to  bring  forward  his  own  proposi- 
tion. Suppose  nine  nundred  were  added,  mak- 
ing a  thousand  Delegates,  how  would  this  house 
get  on  with  its  business,  if  we  pursue  the  course 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon?  Why 
every  one  who  reflects  a  moment  must  see  that 
we  could  make  no  progress  in  that  manner.  We 
must  have  our  committees,  and  the  arguments 
which  have  been  brought  forward  here  against 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  rules,  I  think  is 
of  no  weight  or  consequence.  I  trust  that  every 
man  in  this  house  has  come  with  the  determina- 
tion to  do  the  business  of  his  constituents.  If 
more  labor  be  placed  upon  one  man  than  upon 
another,  let  him  bear  it.  There  is  no  difference 
whatever  between  the  proposition  of  the  com- 
mittee that  was  raised  to  report  the  rules  and 
the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Xelson, 
except  that  the  committee  on  rules  have  report- 
ed a  smaller  number  for  the  committees  to  con-  '. 
sist  of  than  that  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from' , 
Nelson.  We  can  work  under  either  of  those 
propositions.  Nine  men  can  do  the  work  of  a 
committee  instead  of  fifteen.  It  is  absurd  to 
suppose  that  these  committees  will  control  the 
opinions  of  this  house.  The  members  having 
each  his  own  views,  will  differ  among  them- 
selves, and  on  the  reports  which  they  wUl  make 
we  shall  have  the  opinions  of  the  majority. 

Let  the  naked  question  be  taken  whether  we 
shall  work  with  standing  committees  or  by  the 
committee  of  the  whole.  For  my  own  part,  I 
cannot  see  how  we  are  to  get  along  without 
standing  committees.  I  believe  that  the  labors 
of  those  committees  will  expedite  our  business. 
I  hope  that  either  the  rules  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee or  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  will  be  adopted.  I  am  for  beginning  at 
the  beginning  of  our  work,  and  not  at  the  end. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  have  but  one  or  two  remarks 
to  make,  sir.  After  an  experience  and  practice 
under  the  present  constitution  of  the  State,  for 
some  forty  or  fifty  years,  the  people  of  Kentucky 
have  determined,  bv  majorities  unprecedented, 
at  two  distinct  elections,  that  there  were  certain 
changes  and  alterations  to  be  made  in  that  con- 
stitution. Under  the  present  constitution,  the 
hundred  Delegates  who  are  assembled  have  met 
for  making  those  changes  and  alterations.  The 
nature  of  those  changes  and  alterations,  as  I  un- 
derstand, was  discussed  in  every  county  of  the 
State.  The  mode  and  manner  of  electing  the 
judicial  officers  was  one  of  the  proposed  chang- 
es; and  there  were  other  alterations  proposed  by 
the  different  candidates  who  offered  their  servi- 
ces to  the  people,  as  Delegates  to  this  conven- 
tion; and  I  apprehend  that  there  are  on  this 
floor  some  seventy  or  eighty,  perhaps  ninety, 
who  agree  that  the  present  constitution  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky  is  not  .so  good  a  constitution 
as  the  Delegates  here  assembled  can  furnish  to 
the  people  of  the  State.    There  are  those  on  this 


52 


floor  ■who  maintain  that  the  present  constitution 
of  the  State  is  the  best  platform  that  we  can 
stand  upon,  and  that  there  are  no  changes  ne- 
cessary to  be  made  in  that  instniment.  The 
question  then  comes  up,  as  we  have  assembled 
here  under  the  authority  of  the  people,  whose 
voice  has  pronounced  from  one  end  of  the  Com- 
monwealth to  the  other,  that  great,  important, 
and  radical  changes  ought  to  be  made  in  the 
constitution  of  the  State.  The  question  comes 
up  as  to  whether,  having  here  assembled  for  the 
purpose  of  acceding  to  their  will,  we  shall  take 
up  the  present  constitution — disorganized,  scat- 
tered, undisciplined,  and  engraft  upon  the  new 
one  those  principles  that  have  been  ratified  by 
Delegates  on  this  floor,  or  whether  we  shall  or- 
ganize by  the  appointment  of  committees,  and 
perfect  the  work  by  committees.  Now,  I  am 
not  surprised  that  the  original  anti-convention 
men — those  who  have  believed  that  the  present 
constitution  was  an  instrument  as  perfect  as  it 
could  be  made — should  stand  here  and  insist 
upon  a  fair  and  open  fight.  I  am  not  surprised 
that  gentlemen  who  are  in  favor  of  the  present 
constitution  of  the  State  of  Kentucky,  should 
be  opposed  to  the  organization  of  those  commit- 
tees, to  be  composed  of  members  who  are  in  fa- 
vor of  particular  changes  which  tliey  think 
ought  to  be  made.  But  I  should  be  astonished, 
if  those  who  have,  before  their  constituents, 
when  they  asked  for  their  suffrages,  proposed 
changes  m  the  constitution,  and  who  believe 
that  those  changes  will  be  of  advantage  in  all 
time  to  come,  should  object  to  the  formation  of 
committees.  Those  who  believe  the  constitution 
to  be  defective,  and  who  believe  that  radical  and 
wholesome  changes  can  be  made,  will  certainly 
be  in  favor  of  organizing  committees. 

I  trust — and  I  have  very  little  choice  between 
the  two  propositions — that  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  or  the  proposition 
of  the  honored  chainnan  of  the  committee  ap- 
pointed to  draft  rules  for  this  body,  will  be 
adopted.  I  have  little  preference.  If  I  were  to 
declare  a  preference  at  all,  it  would  be  in  behalf 
of  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son. I  had  thought  that  five  or  six  committees 
would  be  sufficient;  it  is  a  matter  of  no  conse- 
quence, however,  as  to  the  number.  The  only 
question  is,  as  to  whether  the  party  who  have  as- 
sembled here  in  favor  of  changes  and  alterations 
in  the  present  constitution,  shall  be  organized, 
or  whether  they  shall  not.  And  whether  we 
organize  under  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  or  the  series  of  rules  offered  by  the 
gentleman  who  is  the  honored  chairman  of  the 
committee  to  prepare  rules  for  this  House,  is  a 
matter  of  entire  indiflference  to  me.  All  I  ask, 
all  I  hope  is,  that  those  on  this  floor,  who  are  in 
favor  of^  constitutional  reform,  and  who  believe 
the  old  constitution  not  as  perfect  as  we  can 
make  it — all  I  pray  is,  that  that  party  on  this 
floor,  will  permit  tneniselves  to  be  organized.  I 
care  not,  sir,  what  the  influence  of  the  reports 
of  the  committees  may  be,  if  the  committee's  re- 
port comes  strengthened  by  the  fact,  that  they 
have  well  conned  and  well  digested  all  questions 
involved  in  the  enquiry  they  have  been  ma- 
king. I  care  not,  "n-hen  they  come  upon  the 
floor  with  their  report,  whether  it  be  a  com- 
mittee appointed  by  the  chair,  or  otherwise. 


so  long  as  the  report  is  strengthened  by  that 
fact. 

I  apprehend,  sir,  that  there  is  an  overwhelm- 
ing majority  on  this  floor  in  favor  of  constitu- 
tional reform,  and  if  the  reports  of  the  commit- 
tees present  the  principles  which  have  been 
sanctioned  by  the  people  at  the  polls,  I  care  not 
how  the  committees  nave  been  constituted.  I 
hope  we  shall  have  an  organization  of  commit- 
tees. I  trust  there  is  not  a  gentleman  on  the 
floor,  who  believes  that  reform  is  necessary,  who 
will  permit  himself  to  be  seduced  from  the 
faith,  and  aid  in  preventing  that  organization. 
With  these  remarks  I  am  perfectly  Avilling  to 
await  the  action  of  the  House. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  When  I  came  to  ths  conven- 
tion, sir,  I  was  perfectly  in  favor  of  the  ap- 
pointment of  standing  committees.  That  was 
my  intention  and  my  proposition.  After  hear- 
ing the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon 
last  evening,  when  he  seemed  to  suggest  a  better 
idea,  that  we  could  proceed  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  and  that  no  standing  committees  were 
necessary,  I  thought  it  would  be  proper,  per- 
haps, to  draw  up  what  I  conceived  ought  to  be 
the  two  first  articles  of  the  constitution,  in  such 
form  as,  in  my  opinion,  would  please  about  nine 
tenths  of  the  people  of  Kentucky.  I  had  an  ob- 
ject in  doing  tliis,  I  will  inform  the  gentleman 
over  the  way.  I  intended  to  present  this  draft 
to  the  convention  in  the  morning,  injorder  to  see 
with  what  sort  of  respect  it  would  be  treated  by 
those  gentlemen  who  want  no  standing  commit- 
tees. I  accordingly  offered  it,  and  what  was  the 
consequence?  Why,  after  the  reading  of  about 
eight  lines,  the  gentleman  jumped  up,  exclaim- 
ing, 0,  you  must  not  read  that.  Well,  I  thought 
I  must  submit  to  it  all.  It  was  not  read;  it  was 
laid  on  the  table,  and  I  do  not  know  what  will 
become  of  it;  I  am  utterly  uninformed  what  the 
issue  will  be;  but  I  do  know  that  the  resolutions 
which  I  presented,  contain  the  two  first  articles 
of  the  very  kind  of  a  constitution  that  about 
nine  tenths  of  the  people  of  Kentucky  want.  I 
think  so.  Well,  I  thought  the  gentleman's  re- 
marks, last  evening,  entitled  to  some  considera- 
tion, and  I  was  willing  to  test  his  sincerity  about 
the  matter.  Not  that  I  say  those  gentlemen  want 
no  reforms  at  all.  They  may  want  some  reforms 
for  aught  I  know.  But  I  am  of  the  opinion  that 
they  are  such  reforms  <as  the  people  of  Kentucky 
do  not  desire.  Almost  every  body  understands 
what  those  reforms  ought  to  be.  But,  says  the 
gentleman,  take  up  the  old  constitution,  exam- 
ine it  article  by  article,  and  section  by  section, 
and  whenever  gentlemen  think  proper  to  pro- 
pose a  change,  let  it  be  discussed.  But  how  are 
these  proposed  changes  to  be  presented  to  the 
consideration  of  the  convention,  if  you  will  not 
even  permit  propoitions  to  be  read? 

I  came  here  for  the  purpose,  and  with  the  in- 
tention of  accomplishing  the  work  of  amending 
the  constitution  as  soon  as  it  could  be  done.  My 
object  is  to  accomplish  the  work  as  speedily  as  1 
can,  and,  in  order  to  facilitate  the  Dusiness,  it 
certainly  appears  to  me  that  standing  commit- 
tees are  the  most  appropriate.  The  learned  gen- 
tleman from  Bourbon,  I  am  sure,  has  not  forgot- 
ten what  took  place  in  the  convention  which 
formed  the  present  constitution  of  the  United 
States.    That  convention  assembled  early    in 


53 


May,  with  Washington  at  the  head  of  it;  they 
sat  until  the  last  of  June,  and  whathad  they  done? 
Nothing  at  all.  Thev  had  not  the  committees. 
At  last  the  venerable  "benjamin  Franklin  got  up 
and  told  them,  that  instead  of  going  forward, 
they  were  going  back,  that  they  had  been  two 
months  in  session  and  done  nothing.  Having 
invoked  the  blessing  of  Heaven  upon  the  con- 
vention, he  moved  that  there  should  be  standing 
committees  appointed.  They  were  appointed, 
and  every  thing  went  on  prosperously,  every 
thing  worked  well,  a  constitution  was  made, 
and  that  instrument  which  has  been  the  security 
of  our  liberty  has  existed  from  that  time.  We 
are  now  living  under  it,  and  have  under  it, 
grown  to  be  one  of  the  greatest  nations  in  the 
world.  If  there  is  any  precedent  worthy  to  be 
followed,  I  think  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  pro- 
ceedings of  that  convention.  I  imagine  that  we 
have  as  much  right  to  take  example  from  those 
proceedings,  as  from  the  proceedings  of  any  con- 
vention that  ever  assembled.  We  should  go  on 
and  appoint  the  standing  committees  as  they 
did,  and  let  those  committees  present  to  us  the 
form  of  a  new  constitution,  or  so  much  of  the 
old  one  as  ought  to  be  retained,  with  alterations 
of  those  parts  where  reform  is  necessary.  When 
those  reports  are  laid  before  the  committee  of  the 
■whole,  gentlemen  can  state  their  objections,  if 
they  have  anv,  and  then  propose  amendments 
preciselv  as  they  can  now. 

In  order  then,  to  hasten  the  business  of  the 
Convention,  and  to  give  evidence  to  the  country 
that  we  are  willing  to  commence  the  work 
which  we  were  sent  here  to  do,  in  the  shortest 
possible  time,  had  we  not  better  have  commit- 
tees? With  all  deference  to  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  however,  I  think  it  is  not  necessary  to 
have  so  many  committees  as  he  proposes;  but  at 
all  events,  if  we  intend  to  go  on,  and  amend  the 
Constitution  of  Kentucky  with  the  least  possible 
delav,  the  most  appropriate  mode  it  appears  to 
me,  }s  to  have  standing  committees  appointed 
and  let  them  go  to  their  work. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  The  remarks  made 
by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  render  it  ne- 
cessary for  me  to  explain  the  vote  which  I  shall 
give  on  this  occasion.  He  has  arraigned  all  who 
are  opposed  to  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  as  being  originally  opposed  to  all 
constitutional  reform,  or  else  of  being  seduced 
away  from  their  faith.  For  myself,  I  profess  to 
be  as  decidedly  in  favor  of  constitutional  reform, 
and  as  warm' an  advocate  for  it  as  any  man  in 
this  house  can  be.  I  have  been  said  to  be  radi- 
cal. I  am  not  ashamed  to  acknowlege  that  I 
am  so.  Indeed  I  have  boasted  of  being  radical 
in  this  matter.  I  shall  howevervote  for  the  prop- 
osition of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  and 
I  do  so,  not  because  I  am  opposed  to  organiza- 
tion— not  because  I  do  not  believe  that  there  is 
a  necessity  on  the  part  of  the  house  to  create  com- 
mittees— but  because  committees  created  by  the 
rules  which  are  proposed  to  be  adopted  will 
have  conferred  upon  them  powers  which  ought 
not,  I  think,  be  confided  to  any  committee.  If 
they  were  intended  only  to  do  what  the  chair- 
man of  the  committee  says  they  are  intended  to 
do,  that  is  simply  to  take  up  and  put  into  prop- 
er shape  and  form  the  principles  tnat  have  been 
agreed  upon  and  established  by  the  Convention, 


I  should  not  object.  But  if  this  is  indeed  the  in- 
tention of  the  appointment  of  committees  cither 
under  the  rules  or  underthe  resolution  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  the  language  in  which  they 
have  couched  the  resolutions  seems  to  me  essen- 
tially contradictory.  These  committees  are  di- 
rected to  take  the  initiative  in  the  amendments 
which  are  to  be  proposed. 

I  shall  vote  for  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  and  if  that  fails  I  shall  move 
to  strike  out  so  much  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee as  relates  to  the  powers  of  these  standing 
committees,  and  move  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  as  a  substitute  for  that 
clause. 

Mr.  DIXON.  What  is  to  be  the  disposition 
of  the  thousand  propositions  that  will  be  thrown 
into  this  great  maelstroom,  for  thev  will  all  go 
there,  when  we  have  resolved  ourselves  into  the 
committee  of  the  whole.  What  proposition  shall 
be  taken  up  first?  Shall  all  be  taken  up  at  once, 
or  each  in  the  order  in  which  it  was  offered? — 
Or  shall  we  commence  at  the  beginning  of  the 
constitution  and  take  up  each  proposition  as  it 
applies,  and  so  on  until  the  whole  are  di,spo- 
sed  of.  My  friend  from  Bourbon,  for  whose  opin- 
ion I  entertain  the  highest  respect,  and  who 
makes  the  suggestion  that  the  committee  of 
the  whole  is  the  only  possible  mode  in  which 
this  labor  can  be  done  through  any  principle 
of  order,  illustrates  his  proposition  by  a  refer- 
ence to  the  mode  of  proceeding  in  the  Parlia- 
ment of  Great  Britain.  What  is  the  mode  of 
proceeding  there?  The  proposition  is  first  re- 
ferred to  a  committee  of  tne  whole;  it  is  discuss- 
ed there,  and  afterwards  it  is  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee. Now  I  suppose  all  these  propositions 
will  be  referred  to  a  committee  of  the  whole, 
and  at  a  proper  tin^  I  propose  to  take  them  out 
of  that  great  maelstroom,  and  refer  them  to  a 
committee  after  every  body  has  had  a  chance  to 
be  heard  on  them. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  plan  proposed  is  that  the 
pre-sent  constitution  should  be  taken  up,  and 
each  clause  read,  and  as  it  is  read  that  every 
member  who  thought  he  had  an  amendment  per- 
tinent to  it,  and  which  would  improve  it  if 
adopted  by  the  convention,  should  have  the  priv- 
ilege of  offering  it,  precisely  as  he  would  to  a 
bill  in  the  Legislature. 

Mr.  DIXO> .  I  have  not  misunderstood  the 
gentleman;  the  principle  is  the  same.  The  gen- 
tleman, in  committee  of  the  whole,  offers  his 
amendment,  and  it  is  adopted  or  rejected,  and  I 
apprehend  that  a  thousand  amendments  offered 
there  will  be  rejected.  When  the  whole  matter 
is  reported  to  the  House,  what  will  be  done  with 
this  proposition?  When  the  amended  constitu- 
tion is  reported  to  the  House,  what  will  be  done 
with  it,  or  when  all  the  amendments  adopted  in 
committee  of  the  whole  are  reported,  what  will 
be  done  with  them?  Are  we  to  take  a  vote  on 
each  separate  provision  as  reported?  Suppose  I 
propose  to  refer  the  whole  matter  to  a  committee 
of  the  House — and  that  seems  to  be  considered 
as  the  parliamentary  mode  of  proceeding  in 
Great  Britain,  and  which  the  gentleman  alludes 
to  as  illustrative  of  the  correctness  of  the  prin- 
ciple he  advocates — when  it  is  referred  to  them, 
what  will  the  committee  do  with  it?  The  con- 
stitution has  gone  to  a  single  committee,  and  ev- 


54 


cry  proposition  intended  to  amend  it  goes  to 
that  committee  also!  Does  not  every  gentleman 
see  the  impracticability  of  the  scheme?  A  thou- 
sand propositions  referred  to  that  committee! — 
Does  not  every  gentleman  see  that  if  he  intends 
his  propositions  to  be  discussed  and  considered 
by  tlie  committee,  he  must  refer  it  to  them,  and 
they  Tvill  decide  upon  all  the  questions  ■which 
will  arise  before  this  House,  upon  the  great  ques- 
tion, as  to  how  the  constitution  shall  be  framed. 
Is  it  not  clear — cannot  all  see,  that  we  had  bet- 
ter have  appropriate  committees,  that  will  take 
up  each  subject,  with  all  the  various  proposi- 
tions that  would  come  directly  before  them,  in 
reference  to  the  particular  subject  matter  under 
their  advisement?  Let  them  report  back  to  the 
House  the  propositions  they  think  proper  to 
adopt,  and  also  to  be  discharged  from  the  consid- 
eration of  those  that  they  do  not  think  proper  to 
adopt.  I  tMnk  if  the  gentleman  will  reflect,  he 
will  see  that  there  is  no  probability  of  coming 
to  a  conclusion  in  reference  to  the  important 
question  of  doing  the  business  of  this  conven- 
tion, unless  some  such  system  is  adopted.  The 
Parliament  of  Great  Britain  never  thought  of 
forming  a  bill  in  committee  of  the  whole — they 
establish  a  great  principle  there,  and  the  whole 
matter  is  referred  to  a  committee  to  report  back 
the  principle,  with  a  well  defined  law  for  the 
country.  My  judgment  is — and  I  have  no  other 
motive  except  to  get  the  best  mode — clearly  in 
favor  of  adopting  committees,  who  would  settle 
on  correct  principles,  and  then  put  the  constitu- 
tion in  correct  form.  Every  proposition  could 
be  sent  to  a  committee  of  the  whole,  if  gentle- 
men desired  it,  and  be  discussed  there.  If  com- 
mittees are  appointed  and  the  gentleman  desired 
to  have  his  proposition  discussed  in  committee 
of  the  whole,  it  would  go  there  from  the  courtesy 
the  convention  would  extend  to  it,  even  Avere 
it  not  for  the  admirable  power  that  the  gentleman 
has  of  charmingthe  convention  by  his  eloquence, 
wliich  would  always  be  an  inducement  to  refer 
his  proposition  there.  I  trust  the  proposition  ei- 
ther of  the  committee  or  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  will  be  adopted. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  substitute 
offered  Tby  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  and  it 
was  rejected. 

Tlie  question  then  recurred  on  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wick- 
liflfe.) 

Mr.  GRAY  offered  the  following  as  an  addi- 
tional resolution,  and  as  an  amendment  to  the 
proposition  of  Mr.  C.  A  Wickliffe. 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  —  be  appointed 
to  report  what  amendments  or  changes  are  ne- 
cessary to  be  made  in  the  Constitution  of  Ken- 
tucky in  relation  to  the  mode  of  revising  and 
amending  tlie  Constitution  of  Kentucky  in  rela- 
tion to  staves. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WIGKLIFFE  accepted  the  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  oflfered  as  a  substitute  for 
Iwth  the  original  proposition  and  tlie  amend- 
ment, a  proposition  t<)  appoint  six  committees  to 
whom  the  various  articles  of  the  Constitution, 
and  the  arn<!ndment8  proposed  thereto  should  be 
referred.     The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD  ofTertid  as  an  a<lditional  reso- 
lution, an  amendment  providing  that  a  commit- 


tee of delegates  be  appointed  to  be  styled  the 

committee  on  the  Educational  Fund,  whose  duty 
it  shall  be  to  ascertain  the  amount  of  the  present 
school  fund,  the  character  and  condition  of  its 
investment,  and  to  report  the  same  to  the  Con- 
vention with  such  propositions  as  in  their  opin- 
ion should  be  incorporated  in  the  Constitution 
rendering  said  fund  inviolable,  for  the  establish- 
ment of  a  permanent  system  of  Common  School 
Education.     The  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  APPERSON  offered  an  amendment  obvi- 
ating a  conflict  of  jurisdiction  on  the  part  of  the 
committees  in  regard  to  county  offices,  which 
was  agreed  to. 

The  number  of  members  of  which  the  com- 
mittees should  be  composed  was  fixed  at  nine, 
and  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son, (Mr.  C.  A  Wickliffe,)  as  amended,  was  then 
agreed  to. 

The  12th,  13th,  14th,  15th,  16th,  17th,  18th, 
and  19th  rules  were  passed  without  amendment. 
The  20th  and  21st  were  verbally  amended. 

The  22d  was  so  amended  as  to  provide  that 
"every  member  who  shall  be  in  the  Convention 
when  his  name  is  called,  shall  give  his  vote. 

The  rules  from  23  to  32  inclusive,  were  pass- 
ed without  amendment. 

The  33d  rule  providing  for  a  limitation  of  the 
time  in  which  a  motion  to  reconsider  shall  be 
made,  was  so  modified  as  to  provide  that  a  Del- 
egate voting  in  the  majority,  might  move  a  re- 
consideration on  the  day  on  which  a  question 
was  decided,  and  that  if  it  were  not  made  on 
that  day,  one  day's  notice  of  the  intention  to 
move  a  reconsideration,  should  be  required  to  be 
given. 

The  rules  froai  34  to  47  inclusive,  were  passed 
without  amendment. 

The  48th  rule  providing  that  "no  original 
proposition,  proposing  any  amendment  to  the 
present  Constitution,  shall  be  discussed  on  its 
merits,  in  the  Convention,  until  it  .shall  have 
been  referred  to  some  appropriate  committee," 
was  stricken  out. 

The  49th  rule,  which  provides  that  "no  per- 
son, except  the  members,  officers  of  the  Conven- 
tion and  ladies,  shall  be  admitted  within  the 
doors  of  the  Hall;  nor  shall  any  person  except 
the  members  and  officers,  be  admitted  upon  the 
floor,  without  the  permission  or  invitation  of 
tlie  presiding  officer,"  was  amended  on  the  mo- 
tion of  Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe,  so  as  to  give  the 
right  of  admission  to  the  floor,  to  the  Governor 
of  the  Commonwealth,  the  Leiut.  Governor, 
Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  and  such  per- 
sons as  may  have  filled  either  of  those  offices. 

The  rules  from  50  to  59,  Avere  passed  without 
amendment. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BROWN,  an  amendment 
was  inserted,  providing  for  the  taking  of  the  yeas 
and  nays,  on  the  call  of  any  two  Delegates. 

Mr.  IRWIN  moved  an  amendment,  to  provide 
that  the  previous  question  shall  bring  the  Con- 
vention to  a  direct  vote  upon  not  only  "amend- 
ments reported  by  a  committee,  if  any;  then  up- 
on pending  amendments" — but  upon  "amend- 
ments proposed,"  before  voting  upon  the  main 
question. 

The  anicndincnt  was  not  agreed  to. 

Tlie  series  of  rules  reported  by  the  special  com- 
mittee, was  then  adopted  as  amended;  and  on 


55 


the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER,  a  hundred 
and  tventy-five  copies  -were  ordered  to  be  print- 
ed. 

AXOTHER  COXTESTED  SEAT. 

Mr.  GAITHER,  by  unanimous  consent,  pre- 
sented a  memorial  of  ilr.  Joseph  Lecompte, 
setting  forth  that  he  was  entitled  to  the  seat  of 
the  Delegate  from  Henry  countv,  noxr  held  by 
Mr.  Xuttall.  The  memorial  at  liis  request  was 
laid  on  the  table  for  the  present. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HARDIN,  the  projet  of  a 
Constitution  submitted  this  morning  by  Mr.  Har- 
gis,  \ras  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole, 
and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

The  Convention  then  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  OCTOBER  8,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Xoetox. 

CHANGE   OF   THE   COmtlTTEES. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  that  on  examina- 
tion it  would  be  found  that  the  committees  as  at  j 
present  organized  by  the  rules,  under  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C.  A. 
WickliflFe,)  did  not  provide  for  nine  members  of  j 
the  convention.  That  is,  there  would  be  nine 
delegates  not  embraced  on  any  committee.  He 
would  therefore  move  that  one  member  be  added 
to  each  of  the  standing  committees  except  the 
first,  which  would  provide  for  every  member  of 
the  convention. 

This  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HARDlN  then  proposed  the  following: 

Resolved,  That  a  select  committee  of  nine  del- 
gates  be  appointed,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  en- 
quire into  the  public  debt  of  "the  State,  the  best 
practicable  mode,  not  only  to  prevent  its  future 
increase,  but  to  liquidate  the  same  by  the  time 
it  shall  fall  due. 

This  resolution  was  agreed  to. 

STAXDIXQ     COJCMITTEES. 

The  PRESIDENT  then  announced  the  fol- 
lowing standing  committees: 

No.  1.  The  committee  on  the  Executive,  for 
the  State  at  large. — Messrs  Archibald  Dixon, 
Garrett  Davis,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Hugh  Newell, 
Thomas  Rockhokl,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  and 
Nathan  McClure. 

No.  2.  The  contmittee  on  the  Executive  and  Min- 
isterial Offices,  for  Counties  and  Districts. — 
Messrs.  Squire  Turner,  George  W.  Williams, 
Robert  N.  WicklifFe,  John  J.  Thurman,  Nathan 
Gaither,  John  Wheeler,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
James  Rudd,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  and  Henry 
Washington. 

No.  3.  The  committee  on  the  Militia. — Messrs. 
Lucius  Desha,  William  Johnson,  James  Dudley, 
Milford  Elliott,  John.son  Price,  Green  Forrest, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  William  Hendrix,  Wesley  J. 
Wright,  and  Andrew  S.  White. 

No.  4.  The  committee  on  the  Legislative  Depart- 
ment.— Messrs.  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  John  D.  Mor- 
ris, Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Wm. 
R.  Thompson,  William  Preston,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  and 
Howard  Todd. 


No.  5.  The  committee  onthe  Court  of  Appeals. — 
Messrs.  Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Richard  Apperson, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  George  W.  Johnston,  Alfred 
Bovd,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, Henry  B.  Pollard,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
and  Robert  D.  Maupin. 

No.  6.  The  committee  on  the  Circuit  Courts. — 
Messrs.  Ben.  Hardin,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Thom- 
as W.  Lisle,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Ira  Root,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  William  Bradley,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  and  John  Hargis. 

No.  7.  The  committee  on  the  County  Courts. — 
Messrs.  Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, James  W.  Stone,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Thomas 
James,  Vincent  S. Hay,  Luther  Brawner,  Charles 
Chambers,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Eind  Thomas  J. 

GrOUgh. 

No.  8.  The  committee  on  Miscellaneous  Provis- 
ions.— Messrs.  John  W.  Stevenson,  John  H.  Mc- 
Henry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Ninian  E.  Grey, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Jon- 
athan Newcum,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas 
D.  Brown,  and  John.  Rogers. 

No.  9.  The  conanittee  on  the  Revision  of  the 
Constitution,  and  Slavery. — Messrs.  David  Meri- 
wether, John  L.  Ballinger,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Edward  Curd,  John  S.  Barlow,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  James  W.  Irwin,  Andrew  Hood, 
James  M.  Lackey,  and  Jesse  Coffey. 

No.  10.  The  committee  on  Education. — Messrs. 
John  D.  Taylor,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Philip  Trip- 
lett,  Williain  K.  Bowling,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Silas  Woodson,  John  L.  Waller,  William  Che- 
nault,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  and  Larkin  J.  Proctor. 

AMEXDMEXT    OF  THE  RULES. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  asked  the  unanimous 
consent  to  amend  the  tenth  rule  so  as  to  supply 
an  omission  as  to  the  number  of  delegates  that 
should  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business.  Con- 
sent was  given,  and  he  moved  that  a  quorum 
shall  consist  of  at  least  two  thirds  of  the  dele- 
gates elected.  This  was  agreed  to,  and  the  rule 
was  so  amended. 

THE  COXTESTED  SEAT. 

Mr.  GAITHER  enquired  if  there  had  been  any 
standing  committee  on  elections  appointed,  and 
if  not,  whv  it  had  been  omitted. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  that  when  the  com- 
mittee on  rules  were  appointed,  they  had  receiv- 
ed no  intimation  that  there  was  to  be  any  con- 
tested elections,  and  therefore  did  not  provide 
for  such  a  committee.  He  would  further  inform 
the  gentleman  that  the  usual  practice  had  been 
to  constitute  a  select  committee  for  the  purpose 
to  which  the  gentleman  had  alluded. 

Mr.  GAITHER  said  that  his  impressions  were 
different,  and  that  it  was  usual  in  all  delibera- 
tive bodies  to  have  a  standing  committee  on  the 
subject.  It  was  not  constituted  expressly  for  the 
consideration  of  contested  seats,  but  as  a  chan- 
nel through  which  all  matters  in  reference  to 
elections  should  be  brought  distinctly  before  the 
convention.  If  there  was  not  a  committee  pro- 
vided of  that  character,  and  if  it  was  in  order, 
he  would  move  that  such  a  committee  be  now 
provided. 

The  PRESIDENT  said  that  it  would  be  in 
order. 


'56 


*  Mr.  GAITHER'  fl^en  moved  to  aSd  a  standing 
committee,  to  consist  of  five  delegates,  on  the 
subject  of  elections. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 
Mr.  GAITHER  then  moved  that  the  memorial 
of  Mr.  Joseph  Leconipte,   claiming  the  seat  of 
Mr.  Nuttall,  presented  by  him  on  Saturday,  be  re- 
ferred to  the  committee  just  provided  for. 

The  memorial  wasso  referred,  after  being  read 
as  follows : 

To  the  honorable,  the  constitutional  convention  of 
Kentucky,  now  assembled  in  the  city  of  Frank- 
fort. 

Your  memorialist,  Joseph  Lecomfte,  a  citizen 
of  Henry  county,  Kentucky,  claims  that  he  is  en- 
titled to  membership  in  your  honorable  body, 
in  exclusion  of  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Esq.,  who  now 
occupies  aseatupon  the  floor  of  said  body,  claim - 
in»  to  represent  the  county  of  Henry;  and  your 
memorialist  shows  the  following  causes  upon 
which  he  predicates  his  claims. 

1st.  Your  memorialist  avers,  that  he  was  a 
candidate  for  membership  in  your  body  at  the 
last  August  election  in  Henry  county,  and  that 
your  memorialist  having  all  the  legal  qualifica- 
tion for  membership,  as  aforesaid,  and  being  op- 
posed by  the  said  IS  uttall,  was  elected  over  the 
saidNu'ttall,  by  having  a  majority  of  all  the  le- 
gally qualified  voters,  who  voted  at  said  elec- 
tion, to  vote  for  your  memorialist,  over  said 
Nuttall. 

2d.  Your  memorialist  avers,  that  the  poll- 
books  of  all  the  places  of  voting  in  Henry 
county,  do,  in  fact,  show  upon  their  face,  that 
your  memorialist  did  receive  a  majority  of  the 
total  number  of  votes  cast  at  said  election;  and 
he  claims  in  virtue  tliereof,  that  he  is  entitled 
to  the  seat  as  the  delegate  for  Henry  county. 

3d.  Yet,  nevertheless,  your  memorialist  avers, 
that  the  returning  officer,  who  was  entitled  to 
certify  the  election  of  the  delegate  who  might 
be  elected,  certified  to  the  Secretary  of  State 
that  the  said  Nuttall  was  elected;  and,  in  virtue 
thereof,  the  said  Nuttall  hath  taken  his  seat  in 
your  honorable  body;  when,  in  fact,  your  me- 
morialist avers,  that  the  said  poll-books  show 
your  memorialist  to  have  been  entitled  to  said 
certificate  by  ten  votes:  but  your  memorialist 
avers  that  he  is  entitled  to  said  seat  for  other 
reasons:  he  charges, 

4th,  That  voters  voted  for  said  Nuttall 

who  were  not  citizens  of  the  county  of  Henry 
at  the  time  of  voting. 

5th.  That  voters  duplicated  their  votes 

for  said  Nuttall. 

6th.  That  persons,  who  were  under  the 
age  of  21  years,  voted  for  said  Nuttall. 

7th.  That  citizens  of  Shelby  county  voted 
for  said  Nuttall. 

8lh.  That,  in  these  and  other  respects,  there 
■were  two  hundred  illegal  votes  for  said  Nuttall. 
Wherefore,  your  memorialist  prays  that  the 
proper  steps  may  be  set  on  foot  to  ascertain  the 
truth  of  the  case,  and  that  your  honorable  body 
•will  declare  your  memorialist  entitled  to  a  seat 
in  this  convention,  as  a  member  thereof,  provided 
it  shall  turn  out  that  your  memorialist  is,  in 
law,  entitled  thereto.     And  your  memorialist 

■will  ever  pray,  Ac,  <bc.,  

^   ^  JOSEPH  LECOMPTE. 


APPOINTMENT  OF  A  MESSENGER. 


Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  that  the  sergeant- 
at-arms  be  authorized  to  employ  some  lad  as  a 
messenger  to  assist  him  in  the  discharge  of  his 
duties.  It  was  usual  to  allow  that  ofiicer  this 
assistance  in  the  legislature. 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  HARDIN  in  favor 
of  the  motion,  it  was  agreed  to. 

PEOPOSITIONS  TO  AMEND. 

Mr.  IRWIN  offered  the  following,  which,  on 
his  motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department,  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

1.  Resolved,  That  some  constitutional  reform 
and  restriction  should  be  made  upon  the  suWect 
of  the  future  formation  of  new  counties  in  Ken- 
tucky. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  house  of  representatives 
in  Kentucky  ought  not  to  consist  of  a  greater 
number  of  representatives  than  sixty  five,  nor 
should  the  senate  consist  of  a  greater  number  of 
senators  than  thirty. 

Mr.  MAYES  offered  the  following,  which,  on 
his  motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  hav- 
ing charge  of  the  subject  of  county  courts,  and 
was  ordered  to  be  printed. 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  Legislature  of  Kentucky 
ought  not  to  meet  oftener  than  once  in  three 
years;  and  that  the  Governor,  upon  extraordina- 
ry occasions,  should  have  power  to  convene  that 
body  in  extra  session. 

2.  Resolved,  That  whenever  the  legislature 
shall  continue  in  session  longer  than  fifty  days, 
the  pay  of  its  members  should  be  reduced  to  one 
dollar  per  day,  for  every  day  the  session  shall  be 
extended  beyond  fifty. 

3.  Resolved,  That  in  lieu  of  the  present  system 
of  appointing  jutsices  of  the  peace,  in  Kentucky, 
each  county  iii  the  State  should  be  laid  off  into 
convenient  magistrate's  districts;  that  the  quali- 
fied voters  of  each  district  should,  at  stated 
times,  by  vote,  elect  some  qualified  person,  re- 
siding in  the  district,  to  the  oifiee  of  justice  of 
the  peace  for  such  district,  who  should  be  com- 
missioned by  the  Governor,  and  hold  said  ofiice 
years;  and  he  should  be  eligible  to  re-elec- 
tion. 

4.  Resolved,  That  should  any  justice  remove 
from  his  district,  his  oflice  should  thereby  be  va- 
cated, and  another  elected  in  his  place. 

5.  Resolved,  That  said  justices  should  have 
and  exercise  all  the  jurisdiction  now  legally  ex- 
ercised by  justices  of"^  the  peace. 

6.  Resolved,  That  in  place  of  the  now  existing 
county  courts  in  Kentucky,  a  court  should  be 
erected  and  established  in  each  county  to  be 
called  court,  to  consist  of  a  judge,  or 
judges,  (the  number  should  not  exceed  three,)  to 
be  elected  at  stated  times  by  the  votes  of  the 
qualified  voters  of  each  county,  and  to  be  com- 
missioned by  the  Governor,  and  to  hold  his  or 

their  oflice years.    This  court  should  have 

and  exercise  jurisdiction  in  all  matters  now  prop- 
erly belonging  to  the  county  courts;  and  appeals 
should  be  allowed  to  it  from  the  decisions  of  the 
justices  in  the  country. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  offered  the  following,  the 
first  of  which,  on  his  motion,  was  referred  to  the 
committee  on  the  mode  of  amending  the  consti- 
tution, and  the  second  to  the  committee  on  the 


57 


miscellaneous  provisions  of  the  constitution,  and 
both  were  ordered  to  be  printed. 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  mode  of  amending  the  con- 
stitution, by  convention,  is  the  correct  and  prop- 
er one,  which  has  been  sanctioned  b^  experience 
under  the  old  and  the  present  constitution. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  miscel- 
laneous provisions  of  the  constitution  be  instruc- 
ted to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of  adding  the 
following  section  to  that  part  of  the  constitution 
to  them  referred,  viz:  Any  person  who  shall,  af- 
ter the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  fight  a  duel, 
or  knowingly  be  the  bearer  of  a  challenge  to 
fight  a  duel,  or  send  or  accept  a  challenge  for 
that  purpose,  or  be  an  aider  or  abettor  in  fight- 
ing a  duel,  shall  be  deprived  of  the  right  to  hold 
any  office  of  honor  or  profit  in  this  Common- 
wealth, and  shall  be  deprived  of  the  right  of 
suflFrage,  and  shall  be  punished  otherwise,  in 
such  manner  as  the  legislature  may  prescribe. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  offered  the  following, 
which,  on  his  motion,  was  referred  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

1.  Resolved,  That  it  is  expedient  to  provide 
for  the  election  of  members  of  the  state  senate 
for  the  term  of  four  years,  and  members  of  the 
house  of  representatives  for  the  term  of  two 
years.  That  the  legislature  shall  convene  but 
once  in  two  years,  unless  for  special  reasons, 
convened  by  proclamation  of  the  governor.  That 
the  members  shall  receive  a  daily  compensation 
to  be  fixed  by  law,  but  that  no  member  shall  re- 
ceive compensation  for  more  than  sixty  davs  of 
any  one  session,  which  compensation  shall  not 
be  increased  so  as  to  take  effect  during  their  con- 
tinuance in  office, 

2.  That  it  is  expedient  to  provide  that  the 
governor  and  lieutenant  governor,  members  of 
both  branches  of  the  legislature,  and  congress, 
be  elected  on  one  and  the  same  day;  and  all  oth- 
er officers,  whether  executive,  judicial,  or  minis- 
terial, elected  by  the  people,  be  elected  on  the 
coresponding  day  of  the  next  succeeding  year, 
so  as  to  effectually  separate  the  elections  of  gov- 
ernor, lieutenant  governor,  members  of  both 
branches  of  the  legislature  and  congress,  from 
that  of  the  other  executive  judicial  and  ministe- 
rial officers:  Provided,  That  the  governor,  lieu- 
tenant governor,  senators,  judges  of  the  superior 
and  inferior  courts,  and  such  other  officers  whose 
terms  of  office  may  exceed  two  years,  shall  be  so 
arranged  as  to  cause  their  election  to  be  held  on 
the  day  and  in  the  year  as  provided  for  in  this 
resolution. 

3.  That  it  is  expedient  to  prohibit  the  manu- 
mission of  slaves  within  this  commonwealth, 
unless  ample  security  be  provided  for  their  re- 
moval ana  remaining  without  the  limits  of  this 
state.  And  that  provision  be  made  for  the  re- 
moval of  all  free  persons  of  color  from  the  state, 
and  to  prevent  the  future  immigration  of  any 
such  persons  to  the  state. 

THE  KLECTIVE  FRANCHISE. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  that  if  there  was 
no  other  gentleman  who  desired  to  present  any 
proposition,  he  would  call  up  his  resolutions,  sub- 
mitted the  other  day,  on  the  subject  of  the  elec- 
tive franchise. 

The  PRESIDENT  said  that  unless  some  ob- 
jection should  be  made,  he  would  consider  it  to 
be  the  sense  of  the  convention  that  the  resolu- 
8 


tions,  referred  to  by  the  gentleman,  should  be 
now  considered. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  that  it  had  been 
suggested  to  him  that  the  delegate  from  Bourbon 
(Mr.  Davis)  was  not  in  his  seat,  and  that,  per- 
haps, it  was  not  proper  to  consider  the  subject 
in  nis  absence.  He  nad  offered  this  resolution 
from  no  desire  to  create  discussion  upon  it,  al- 
though it  was  one  of  those  questions,  when  in- 
dicated in  the  shape  of  the  resolutions  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon,  calculated  to  excite 
some  degree  of  distrust  in  the  public  mind  in 
advance  of  the  labors  of  the  convention.  He 
supposed  that  the  public  sentiment  of  Kentucky, 
in  reference  to  the  right  of  suffrage,  had  been  so 
long  and  so  decidedly  fixed,  that  they  would  not 
be  called  upon  here  to  review  the  work  of  their 
predecessors.  He  knew  of  no  question  on  which 
public  feeling  was  more  likely  to  be  excited 
than  upon  these  resolutions.  If  it  was  the  pleas- 
ure of  the  convention,  he  was  willing  to  post- 
pone the  consideration  of  the  matter  until  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  should  return. 

Mr.  HARDIX  concurred  very  much  with  his 
colleague  in  his  opposition  to  the  resolution  of 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  yet,  as  a  matter 
of  courtesy  to  that  gentleman,  he  hoped  it  would 
not  now  be  taken  up. 

Mr.  DIXOX  was  very  anxious  for  the  discus- 
sion of  the  resolution,  for  it  embodied  very  near- 
ly the  principle  of  the  one  he  had  himself  the 
honor  to  submit,  but  he  was  desirous  that  the 
discussion  should  be  postponed  until  the  return 
of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  That  gentle- 
man, he  was  satisfied,  desired  a  discussion  of 
this  question.  The  gentleman  had  thrown  down 
the  gauntlet  to  his  friend  on  the  <left,  Mr.  C.  A. 
Wickliffe  and  himself,  and  they  had  taken  it  up 
very  promptly  he  believed.  He  was,  therefore, 
not  disposed  to  have  any  fight  whilst  his  friend 
from  Bourbon  was  absent. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  had  no  objection  to  the 
postponement  of  the  subject. 

Its  consideration  was  then  further  postponed 
accordingly. 

PRESIDENT    PRO   TEMPORE. 

The  PRESIDENT  here  requested  Mr.  DIX- 
ON to  take  the  Chair,  and  preside  for  the  resi- 
due of  the  day. 

ORDERS   OF   THE   DAY. 

The  consideration  of  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Boone,  (Mr.  Chambers),  offered 
on  the  5th  inst.,  in  reference  to  the  order  of 
business — ^being  next  in  order, 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  moved  that  they  lie  on  the 
table — remarking  that  the  action  of  the  conven- 
tion directing  the  formation  of  committees  had 
dispensed  with  any  necessity  that  existed  for 
their  adoption. 

They  were  so  disposed  of. 

Mr.  IRWIN  said  that  there  had  been  a  good 
many  propositions  presented  to  the  house,  of 
which  no  disposition  had  as  yet  been  made. 
He  would  move  therefore  that  they  be  now  ta- 
ken up  and  referred  either  to  the  standing  com- 
mittees or  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  as 
might  be  the  pleasure  of  the  convention. 

This  suggestion  was  agreed  to,  and  under  this 
arrangement  the  resolutions  of  Mr.  Gholson, 
offered  on  the  5th  inst.,  in  reference  to  the  ab- 


58 


olition  of  special  pleading  of  tlie  chancery 
courts,  trial  oy  jury,  etc.,  were  referred  on  liis 
motion.,  to  a  select  committee  of  five. 

The  PRESIDENT  designated  the  following 
gentlemen  as  the  select  committee  : 

Messrs.  Gholson,  Clarke,  Triplett,C.  A.Wick- 
liife  and  Bristow. 

The  resolution  of  Mr.  Dixon,  proposed  on  the 
■5th  inst.,  in  reference  to  the  election  of  judicial 
officers,  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  circuit 
courts. 

AN-    EXPL.\NATI0\. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Mr.  President :  Upon  referring 
to  the  Louisville  Courier  of  Oct.  6,  I  think  it  pos- 
sible that  I  may  not  be  correctly  reported,  or 
that  my  vote  does  not  stand  correct  on  the  jour- 
nals, and  I  rise  to  ask  the  attention  of  the  con- 
vention to  a  brief  explanation.  In  a  letter  writ- 
ten from  this  city  to  the  Louisville  Courier,  I 
find  the  following  passage: 
.  Frankfort,  October  5. 

W.  N.  Haldeman  : — 

"As  I  informed  you  by  telegraph  yesterday,  the 
sages  from  a  hundred  counties  now  assembled  in 
•the  present  capital  of  Kentucky,  very  summarily 
i^isposed  of  the  Courier  case,  oy  refusing  to  re- 
consider the  vote,  and  thus  preventing  a  direct 
vote  by  the  calling  of  the  ayes  and  noes  upon 
Col.  Preston's  resolution.  I  regret  this — as  I 
desired  for  many  reasons,  to  know  explicitly 
the  position  of  every  member  upon  the  issue 
presented.  However,  the  vote  upon  reconsider- 
ing is  almost  a  test  vote,  every  member  voting 
against  the  reconsideration,  being  opposed  to 
granting  your  reporter  a  seat,  and  every  member, 
except  Messrs.  Nuttall,  Clarke,  and  probably 
/one  other,  who  voted  for  the  reconsideration, 
was  in  favor  of  granting  the   application." 

I  have  merely. risen  for  the  purpose  of  stand- 
ing right  on  the  subject.  Through  courtesy  to 
my  friend  from  Louisville,  Mr.  Preston,  who 
was  desirous  to  take  the  sense  of  the  house  by  a 
call  of  the  ayes  and  noes  on  his  proposition  to 
admit  the  correspondent  of  the  Louisville  Courier 
to  a  seat  on  this  floor,  I  made  the  motion  to 
reconsider,  but  I  afterwards  voted  against  it.  I 
do  not  know  whether  the  journals  so  represent 
me  or  not,  but  this  letter  places  me  in  the  atti- 
tude of  having  voted  for  the  reconsideration.  I 
did  not  so  vote,  and  I  desire  to  make  the  state- 
ment here,  that  the  repudiation  may  be  as  pub- 
lic as  the  charge. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  My  recollection  accords  pre- 
cisely with  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson. 
I  regarded  the  motion  as  merely  an  act  of  cour- 
tesy extended  to  me  so  as  to  afford  me  an  op- 
Eortunity  to  call  for  the  ayes  and  noes,  which  I 
ad  neglected  to  do.  At  the  same  time,  if  I  un- 
derstood anything  of  the  gentleman's  views,  they 
were  adverse  to  the  admission  of  the  reporter. 

With  these  statements,  the  matter  was  drop- 
ped, 

DEBiaNATION    OF   THK   COMMITTEES. 

^r.  APPERSON,  offered  the  following  reso- 
lution with  a  view  of  more  specifically  designa- 
ting the  committees,  and  it  was  adopted. 

Resolved,  That  tlie  standing  committees  shall 
be  called  and  known  by  the  following  names : 
No.  1,  the  committee  on    the  executive  of  the 
state  at  large.    No.  2,  the  committee  on    the 


executive  and  ministerial  offices  of  counties 
and  districts.  No.  3,  the  committee  on  the  mili- 
tia. No.  4,  the  committee  on  the  legislative  de- 
partment. No.  5,  the  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals.  No.  6,  the  committee  on  the  circuit 
courts.  No.  7,  the  conmiittee  on  the  county 
courts.  No.  8,  the  committee  on  miscellaneous 
provisions.  No.  9,  the  committee  on  the  revi- 
sion of  the  constitution  and  slaveiy.  No.  10, 
the  committee  on  education.  No.  11,  the  com- 
mittee on  elections. 

SLAVERY A    SPECIAL    ORDER. 

Mr.  TURNER  believed  that  the  resolutions  he 
offered  the  other  day  were  referred  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  without  a  time  being  fixed 
for  their  consideration.  He  did  not  propose  to 
take  up  the  whole  series,  at  any  one  time,  but 
desired  to  have  the  one  relating  to  slavery  taken 
up  on  "Wednesday  next.  His  reasons  were — that 
there  had  been  a  committee  appointed  on  that 
subject,  and  various  resolutions  submitted  here 
in  regard  to  it.  Some  proposed  to  allow  the 
unrestricted  importation  of  slaves,  others  to  pro- 
vide a  constitutional  restriction  on  the  subject, 
while  a  third  class  Avere  for  giving  to  the  legisla- 
ture all  power  in  regard  to  the  importation  of 
slaves.  On  these  questions  there  was  likely  to 
be  considerable  diversity  of  opinion,  and  he 
deemed  it  proper  before  any  standing  committee 
was  to  act,  that  there  should  be  an  expression  of 
opinion  on  the  part  of  the  house,  as  a  guide  to 
the  committee,  so  that  when  it  did  report,  its  re- 
commendations Avouldbe  in  accordance  with  the 
sense  of  the  house.  With  that  view,  and  as 
there  was  nothing  set  apart  for  consideration  on 
Wednesday  he  moved  that  the  resolution  refer- 
red to,  be  made  the  order  of  the  day  for  Wed- 
nesday. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  9,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Nortox. 

PROPOSITIONS   TO   AMEND. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  submitted  the  following,  and 
moved  that  it  be  referred  to  the  committee  on 
slavery,  and  printed. 

1.  Resolved,  That  it  will  be  expedients  incor- 
porate into  the  constitution  this  convention  is 
about  to  form,  a  clause  that  it  may  be  amended 
specifically  on  all  subjects  not  involving  the 
right  of  property. 

2.  Resolved,  l"*hat  the  question  of  slavery,  and 
all  other  questions  involving  the  right  of  prop- 
erty, shall  not  be  reached,  except  through  the 
call  of  a  convention. 

3.  Resolved,  That  no  specific  amendment  shall 
be  adopted,  or  convention  called,  under  the  con- 
stitution this  convention  may  adopt,  except  upon 
the  recommendation  of  at  least  two  thirds  of 
both  branches  of  the  legislature  for  two  succes- 
sive sessions,  and  afterwards  sanctioned  and 
ratified  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people,  a  majori- 
ty of  all  the  qualified  electors  in  tlie  State  vo- 
ting for  the  same. 

Mr.  NEWELL  suggested  to  the  gentleman 
from  Boyle,  that  an  enormous  sum  would  be  ex- 
pended Dy  so  much  printing,  and  he  enquired 


if  it  would  not  be  sufficient  to  have  the  resolu- 
tions referred  to  the  committee,  before  whom  tlie 
gentleman  could  appear,  if  he  desired  it,  to  give 
further  explanations. 

Mr.  TALBOT T  replied,  that  it  had  been  the 
custom  to  print  propositions,  and  he  asked  for 
no  deviation  from  the  usual  course. 

The  motion  to  refer  and  print  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  RUDD  offered  the  following: 

Resolved,  That  no  city,  town,  or  county  shall 
hereafter,  in  any  manner,  give,  loan,  or  sell  its 
credit  in  aid  of  any  individual  association  or 
corporation;  neither  shall  it  contract  any  debt 
but  in  anticipation  of  it^  regular  revenue  for  any 
fiscal  year,  and  to  be  paid  within  six  months 
after  expiration  of  such  fiscal  year;  nor  shall 
the  legislature  authorize  any  city,  town,  or  coun- 
ty, to  contract  any  such  other  or  furtlier  debt 
unless  it  be  payable  in  fifteen  years  at  farthest ; 
Bor  unless  there  be  levied  at  the  same  time  an 
annual  tax  upon  the  real  and  personal  property 
situate  within  the  corporate  limits,  adequate  to 
the  annual  payment  of  the  interest  and  the  ex- 
tinguishment of  tlie  debt  within  the  time  stipu- 
lated for  the  payment ;  nor  shall  anv  such  law 
take  effect  until  three  months  after  tlie  passage, 
nor  until  the  same  shall  receive  the  sanction  of  a 
majority  of  all  those  who  at  the  time  are  assessed, 
or  owners  of  such  real  or  personal  estate  by  a 
Tote  to  be  taken  after  ten  days  notice,  on  a  day 
to  be  named,  and  in  a  manner  to  be  prescribed 
by  those  having  control  of  the  principal  affairs 
oi  such  city,  town,  orcounty ;  nor  shall  the  taxes 
on  the  real  or  personal  estate  of  any  citv,  town, 
or  county  be  increased,  but  by  a  law  which  shall 
in  like  manner  receive  the  sanction  of  a  majority 
of  all  those  whose  property  is  assessed  as  afore- 
said. The  legislature  may,  at  any  time  after  the 
approval  of  such  law  by  the  tax  payers,  forbid 
the  contracting  of  any  further  debt  or  liability, 
under  such  law ;  but  tax  imposed  by  such  law, 
in  proportion  to  the  debt  or  liability  which 
mav  have  been  contracted  in  pursuance  thereto, 
shall  not  be  repealable,but  be  annu.illy  collected 
until  the  principal  and  interest  of  the  debt  con- 
tracted shall  be  discharged. 

He  asked  that  it  be  printed,  for  it  was  a  prop- 
osition of  some  considerable  importance,  and 
that  it  be  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  exec- 
utive and  ministerial  officers  for  counties  and 
districts. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  McHEXRY  submitted  the  following: 

1.  Resolved,  That  if  representation  can  be 
made  equal  and  uniform,  and  each  county  in 
the  State  have  separate  representation,  by  in- 
creasing the  number  of  representatives  to  one 
hundred  and  fifty,  it  should  be  done;  but,  if  by 
so  increasing  the  number  of  representatives,  eack 
county  cannot  be  entitled  to  a  separate  represen- 
tation, and  at  the  same  time  representation  be 
more  equal  than  at  present,  then  the  number  of 
representatives  should  be  reduced  to  and  fixed 
at  seventy-five,  and  the  number  of  Senators  to 
twenty-five. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  regular  session  of  the 
legislature  should  be  limited  to  sixty  days,  un- 
less extended  bv  a  vot«  of  two-thirds  of  all  the 
members  elected  to  both  branches  thereof. 

He  moved  that  it  be  referred  to  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department,  and  printed. 


Mr.  NEWELL  enquired  if  so  much  printing 
could  not  be  avoided.  He  called  for  a  dirision 
of  the  question,  so  that  the  vote  could  be  taken 
separately  upon  the  motion  to  print,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  testing  the  question  whether  the  conven- 
tion was  willing  to  print  all  resolutions  ihai, 
might  be  offered  to  it. 

The  question  was  taken,  and  the  motion  to  re^ 
fer  and  print  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  KELLY  offered  the  following,  and  they 
were  referred  to  the  committee  on  me  court  of 
appeals: 

Resolved,  That  commissioners  shall  be  ap- 
pointed to  codify  and  condense  the  laws  of  this 
Commonwealth'  and  that  the  rules  of  practice 
in  the  various  courts  of  justice  be  made  uniform. 

Resolved,  That  the  court  of  appeals,  as  at  pres- 
ent constituted,  be  abolished,  and  that  the  cir- 
cuit judges  constitute  said  court. 

PRIXTIXG  OF  EESOLUTIOXS. 

Mr.  MATES  submitted  the  following  resolu- 
tion : 

Resolved,  That  all  resolutions,  hereafter  offer- 
ed in  this  convention,  shall  be  referred  without 
printing,  unless  otherwise  specially  ordered. 

Mr.  fRIPLETT  expressed  the  hope  that  that 
resohition  would  not  be  adopted,  for  the  object 
of  printing  was,  that  members  of  the  conven- 
tion might  have  an  opportunity  to  learn  thor- 
oughly what  the  propositions  submitted  were. 
Some  of  them  were  so  situated  in  the  house  that 
they  could  not  hear  distinctly  when  the  resolu- 
tions were  read,  and  it  was  due  to  them  that 
they  should  be  afforded  an  opportunity  to  read 
if  they  could  not  hear  them. 

Mr."MAYES,  in  defence  of  his  resolution,  said 
that  if  all  resolutions  submitted  to  the  house 
were  to  be  printed,  as  a  matter  of  course,  a  very 
large  amount  of  expenditure,  for  printing  alone, 
would  accrue.  But  the  gentleman  from  Daviess 
did  not  appear  to  have  heard  his  resolution,  or 
he  would  have  perceived,  that  if  it  should  be 
adopted,  the  convention  could  order  any  resolu- 
tion to  be  printed  whenever  the  printing  was 
deemed  necessary  for  the  information  of  the  del- 
egates, and  if  they  were  not  of  sufficient  impor- 
tance, of  course,  the  printing  would  not  be  or- 
dered. 

Mr.  BULLITT  said  it  seemed  to  him  to  be  a 
courtesy  due  to  any  member,  that  his  proposi- 
tion should  be  printed,  that  it  might  be  maturely 
considered  by  all  the  other  members  of  the  conven- 
tion. Some  of  them  could  not  hear  all  the  reso- 
lutions that  were  read,  nor  could  they  hear  all 
the  speakers  that  addressed  the  convention,  and 
without  some  such  means  of  forming  a  correct 
judgment,  they  could  not  rightly  disoharge  their 
duties  to  the  people  who  had  seni  them  there. 
The  cost  of  printing  such  documents  was  a 
small  consideration,  when  compared  with  the 
importance  of  the  work  in  view.  Unless  he 
could  have  printed  documents  to  consult,  he 
shouM  very  often  be  at  a  Toss  how  to  vote,  and 
he  hoped,  therefore,  that  the  convention  would 
consent  to  print  any  such  document  that  any 
gentleman,  as  the  representative  of  a  constituen- 
cy, might  think  proper  to  offer. 
'  Mr.  MERIWETHER  thought  that  nothing 
would  be  gained  by  the  adoption  of  this  resolu- 
tion, for  it  proposed  that  a  vote  should  be  taken 


60 


on  the  printing  of  every  proposition,  which  was 
now  the  rule  and  the  practice  of  the  convention. 
The  resolution  was  rejected. 

THE   COURT   OF   APPEALS. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  that  the  stand- 
ing committee,  on  that  branch  of  the  constitu- 
tion which  related  to  the  court  of  appeals,  had 
directed  him  to  make  a  report,  which  he  styled 
No.  1,  as  follows: 

Article  — . 
Concerning  the  Judicial  Department. 

Sec.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  Common- 
wealth, both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equity, 
shall  be  vested  in  one  supreme  court,  which 
shall  be  styled  the  court  of  appeals,  and  in 
such  inferior  courts  as  the  general  assembly  may, 
from  time  to  time,  erect  and  establish. 

Sec.  2.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  only,  which  shall  be  co-ex- 
tensive with  the  State,  under  such  restrictions 
and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  constitu- 
tion, as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

Sec.  3.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly 
qualified,  subject  to  the  conditions  hereinafter 
prescribed;  but  for  any  reasonable  cause,  Avhich 
shall  not  be  sufficient  ground  of  impeachment, 
the  Governor  shall  remove  any  of  them  on  the 
address  of  two-thirds  of  each  house  of  the  gen- 
eral assembly:  Provided  however,  That  the  cause 
or  causes  for  which  such  removal  may  be  requir- 
ed, shall  be  stated  at  length  in  such  address,  and 
on  the  journal  of  each  house.  They  shall,  at 
stated  times,  receive  for  their  services  an  ade- 
quate compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  law. 

Sec.  4.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  consist  of 
four  judges,  any  three  of  whom  may  constitute 
a  court  for  the  transaction  of  business.  The 
judges  shall,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  be  con- 
servators of  the  peace  throughout  the  State.  The 
style  of  all  process  shall  be,  "  The  Common- 
wealth of  Kentucky."  All  prosecutions  shall 
be  carried  on  in  the  name,  and  by  the  authority 
of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and  con- 
clude "against  the  peace  and  dignity  of  the 
same." 

Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly,  at  its  first  ses- 
sion after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  shall 
divide  the  State  into  four  appellate  court  dis- 
tricts— in  each  of  which  districts  the  qualified 
voters  therein  shall  elect  one  judge  of  the  court 
of  appeals. 

Sec.  6.  The  judges  first  elected  shall  serve  as 
follows,  to-wit:  one  shall  serve  two  years;  one 
shall  serve  four  years;  one  shall  serve  six  years, 
and  the  otheir  shall  serve  eight  years.  The 
judges  at  the  first  term  of  the  court  succeeding 
their  election,  shall  determine,  by  lot,  the  length 
of  time  which  each  one  shall  serve;  and  at  the 
expiration  of  the  service  of  each,  an  election  in 
the  proper  district  shall  take  place  to  fill  the  va- 
cancy. The  judge  having  the  shortest  time  to 
serve  shall  be  styled  the  Chief  Justice  of  Ken- 
tucky. 

Sec.  7.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  said  court, 
by  death,  resignation,  removal,  or  otherwise,  the 
Governor  shall  issue  a  writ  of  election  to  the 
district  in  which  such  judge  was  elected,  and 


another  judge  shall  be  elected  by  that  district, 
to  serve  until  the  expiration  of  the  time  for 
which  the  judge  was  elected,  whose  death,  re- 
signation, removal,  or  other  cause,  produced 
such  vacancy. 

Sec.  8.  Any  citizen  of  the  United  States,  who 
has  attained  the  age  of  thirty  years,  and  who  is 
a  resident  of  the  appellate  (iistrict  for  which  he 
may  be  chosen,  and  who  has  been  a  practising 
lawyer  in  the  courts  of  this  state  for  at  least 
eight  years,  or  whose  practice  at  the  bar,  and  ser- 
vice upon  the  bench  of  any  court  in  this  state 
shall,  together,  be  equal  to  eight  years,  shall  be 
eligible  to  the  office  of  judge  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals. 

Sec.  9.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  hold  its  ses- 
sions in  each  appellate  district  at  such  times  and 
f)laces  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  provided  by 
aw. 

Sec.  10.  The  first  election  of  the  judges  of  the 

court  of  appeals  thall   take   place  on  the 

day  of ,  and  every  two  years  thereafter,  in 

the  district  in  which  a  vacancy  may  occur,  by 
expiration  of  the  terra  of  office;  and  the  judges  of 
the  said  court  shall  be  commissioned  by  the  gov- 
ernor. 

Sec.  11.  There  shall  be  elected,  in  each  appel- 
late district,  by  the  qualified  voters  thereof,  a 
clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  for  such  district, 
who  shall  hold  his  office  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  and  Avho  may  be  removed  by  the  court  of 
appeals  for  good  cause,  upon  information  by  the 
attorney  general. 

Sec.  12.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  as  clerk, 
unless  he  is  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  a  res- 
ident of  the  district  in  which  he  may  be  elected, 
of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  and  have,  at  the 
time  of  such  election,  a  certificate  of  his  qualifi- 
cations from  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals. 

Sec.  1.3.  In  case  of  the  vacancy  in  the  office  of 
clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  in  any  district,  for 
any  cause,  the  governor  shall  issue  a  writ  of  elec- 
tion to  that  district,  and  the  qualified  voters 
thereof,  shall  elect  a  clerk  for  that  district,  to 
serve  until  the  end  of  the  term  for  which  the 
clerk  was  elected  whose  vacancy  is  to  be  filled. 

Sec.  14.  The  legislature  shall  provide,  by  law, 
for  the  mode  and  manner  of  conducting  and  ma- 
king due  returns,  to  the  seretary  of  state  of  all 
elections  of  the  judges  and  clerks  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  and  of  determining  contested  elections 
of  any  of  those  officers. 

There  is  (said  Mr.  W.)  one  other  provision 
connected  with  this  subject  that  attracted  the 
attention  of  the  committee,  but  we  prefer  before 
expressing  any  opinion  upon  it  to  wait  the  ac- 
tion of  the  other  committees  connected  with  the 
judiciary.  I  allude  to  the  mode  of  electing 
these  officers — whether  it  shall  be  by  ballot  or 
viva  voce.  The  vicAV  of  the  committee  was,  to 
adopt,  in  reference  to  the  election  of  all  these  of- 
ficers, especially  those  connected  with  the  judici- 
ary, the  ballot  system ;  but  we  have  not  gone  into 
that  subject,  preferring  first  to  wait  the  action  of 
the  other  committees.  In  obedience  to  the  direc- 
tion of  the  committee,  I  ask  that  the  convention 
will  order  the  printing  of  five  hundred  copies 
of  the  report.  They  desire  this  more  than  ordi- 
nary number,  that  they  may  be  enabled  to  send 
out  to  sections  of  the  State,  where  newspapers 


61 


perhaps  will  not  reach,  the  views  they  propose 
shall  oe  adopted  in  the  constitution. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  in 
order  to  offer  the  resolution  introduced  by  me 
a  few  moments  since,  as  an  amendment  to  the 
report  of  the  committee;  but  if  it  be  in  order  I 
wUl  so  ofiFer  it.  I  think  I  see  also  in  the  report 
of  the  committee,  in  regard  to  the  clerk  ot  the 
court,  another  defect.  In  the  case  of  the  death 
or  the  resignation  of  that  officer,  they  require 
the  writ  of  an  election  to  fill  the  vacancy  thus 
caused,  to  be  issued  by  the  governor.  Suppose 
however,  the  officer  should  die  or  resign  on  the 
first  day  of  the  term,  who  would  discharge  the 
duties  of  the  office?  I  think  the  report  ought  to 
provide  for  a  pro  tempore  appointment,  by  the 
court  itself,  until  the  vacancy  should  be  regu- 
larlv  filled, 

Tlie  PRESIDENT  said  that  the  gentleman's 
resolution  had  been  referred  to  the  committee, 
and  was  not  now  in  possession  of  the  house. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  My  friend  from 
Washington  can  attain  his  object  in  committee 
of  the  whole,  when  it  will  be  in  order  to  take 
up,  discuss,  consider,  and  amend  the  report  of 
the  committee.  I  do  not  think  this  is  the  ap- 
propriatetime  to  oflFer  an  amendment;  certainly  it 
was  not  the  design  of  the  committee  to  ask  the 
consideration  of  this  report  now,  before  it  is 
printed.  The  difficulty  in  reference  to  the 
clerk,  to  which  allusion  has  been  made  by  the 
gentleman,  did  not  escape  the  attention  of  the 
committee.  It  is  to  be  presumed  that  there  will 
be  left  some  power  of  legislation  after  we  have  ter- 
minated our  labors  here,  to  provide  for  the  tempo- 
rary dischargeof  the  duties  of  the  office,  in  case  of 
the  resignation  ordeath  of  the  clerk.  However, 
that  can  properly  be  considered,  when  it  is  prop- 
er to  take  up  the'subject  for  amendment — that  is, 
when  it  is  considered  in  committeeof  the  whole. 
I  was  instructed  to  ask  the  reference  of  the  re- 
port to  that  committee,  and  not  its  consideration 
now. 

Mr.  KELLY.  To  obviate  all  difficulty  I  will 
withdraw  my  motion,  being  satisfied  that  the 
subject  will  come  up  more  properly  in  commit- 
tee of  the  whole. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  This  is  a  matter  of  great  im- 
portance, and  I  am  certain  that  every  gentleman 
here  would  like  to  enter  upon  its  discussion  pre- 
pared with  his  views  on  the  subject.  I  would 
suggest  that  a  day  be  fixed  upon  for  the  consid- 
eration of  the  report. 

Mr.  C.  A.  "WICKLIFFE  had  no  objection  to 
fix  upon  a  day  as  suggested,  andmoved  to  make 
the  consideration  of  the  report  a  special  order 
for  Monday  next. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
print  500  copies  of  the  report,  to  refer  it  to  the 
committee  of  the  whole,  and  to  make  it  the 
special  order  for  Monday  next,  and  it  was 
screed  to. 

THE   DISTRIBUnOS   OF   NEWSPAPERS. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  There  was  a  subject  disposed 
of  some  two  or  three  davs  since,  in  regard  to 
which  I  am  inclined  to  t&ink  the  sense  of  the 
convention  has,  perhaps,  undergone  a  change. 
It  was  the  proposition  to  disseminate  through 
the  medium  of  the  Commonwealth  and  Yeoman, 
throughout  the  country,  information  as  to  the 
proceedings  of  this  convention.    I  desire  that 


the  vote  disposing  of  this  subject,  may  be  re- 
considered, and  as  I  understand  that,  under  the 
rules,  it  is  necessary  to  give  one  day's  notice  of 
a  motion  for  reconsideration,  I  will  give  that 
notice  now. 

Mr.  GREY.    If  the  matter  is  to  be  acted  upon 
at  all  it  might  as  well  be  done  at  once.     I  move 
therefore,  to  suspend  the  rule  so  that  the  vote  on 
the  reconsideration  may  be  taken  now. 
The  motion  was  agreed  to. 
Mr.  MACHEN.    I  now  make  a  motion  to  re- 
consider the  vote  laying  the  subject  on  the  table. 
The  house  will  recollect  that  the  original  pro- 
position was  to  provide    that    each    delegate 
should  be  furnished  for  circulation  through  the 
country  with  60  copies  of  the  weekly  Common 
wealth  or  Yeoman,  or  a  certain  number  of  copies 
of  the  daily  Commonwealth,  not  exceeding  the 
cost  of  $30",  as  each  might  prefer.     There  was 
an   amendment   introduced   oy  the    gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin),  limiting  the  amount 
to  $10  to   each  delegate,  and"  then  by  a  vote  of 
the   convention  the  whole  subject  was  laid  on 
the  table.     I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  con- 
vention has  had   perhaps,   a  favorable  leaven 
operating  upon  it  with  reference  to  the  subject, 
and  that  many  members  who  then  voted  adverse 
to  my  opinion  are  now  disposed  to  extend  this 
information  to  the  country.     It  was  objected  to 
when  this  question  was  before  under  discussion 
that  the  means  proposed  were  entirely  inadequate 
to  the  purpose  proposed  to  be  accomplished. 
Now  we  can  adopt  no  measure  to   disseminate 
our  proceedings  so  as  to  reach  every  individual 
who  may  be  scattered  over  the   country,  but  we 
may  adopt  such  a  mode  as  will  result  in  their 
pretty  thorough  dissemination.    I    come  from 
the  county  of  Caldwell,  and  am  pretty  well  ac- 
quainted with  its  territory  and  the  location  of 
tne  people — as  I  presume  every  gentleman  here 
is  with  that  of  the  county  he  represents — and  I 
can  send  to  the  different  neighborhoods,  copies 
of  the  Commonwealth  or  Yeoman,  and  I   doubt 
not  the  citizens  in  the  respective  portions  of  the 
county  to    whom  they  are  sent,  will   feel    a 
sufficient  interest  in  the  proceedings  of  this  body, 
to  secure  for  the.se  papers  a  wide-spread  and  very 
general  circulation  in  their  vicinity.     I  appre- 
hend that  none   of  our  citizens  will  complain 
of  us  for  having  in  this  way  attempted  to  advise 
them   of   what  we    are   doing.      I  understand 
further  that  the  appropriation  made  at  the  last 
session  of  the  legislature  to  defray  the  expenses 
of  the  convention,  will  amount  to  the  sum  of 
near  $60,000.    If  so,  and  my  information  may  be 
incorrect,  it  does  seem  to  me  that  $3000  can  in 
no  better  way  be  appropriated,  than  in  the  dis- 
semination of  this  intelligence,  and  I  trust  that 
the  gentlemen  who  have  been  adverse  to  this 
method   of   doing  it,  will  change  their  views 
on   the  subject  and  allow  the  delegates  to  be 
furnished  for  the  purpose  with  these  newspapers. 
The  motion  to  reconsider  the  vote,  laying  the 
subject  on  the  table,  was  then  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  As  to  what  the  gentleman 
said  in  regard  to  $60,000  being  set  apart  for  the 
expenses  of  this  convention,  I  have  not  seen  any 
law  which  set  apart  such  a  sum  for  the  purpose. 
There  was  a  taxation  of  four  cents  additional 
levied — two  cents  of  which  were  for  the  school 
fund,  and  which  would  amount  to  $56,000,  al- 


6!^ 


lowing  for  a  fair  increase  in  the  value  of  proper- 
ty, but  allowing  for  no  such  increase,  and  just 
standing  as  we  were,  it  would  amount  to  $54,000. 
Then  there  was  two  cents  more  assessed  upon 
the  people,  which  Avould  make  about  $56,000 
more.  But  the  gentleman  will  bear  in  mind 
that  the  dividends  upon  slack  water,  which 
went  into  the  sinking  fund,  have  been  taken  and 
appropriated  to  the  school  fund,  and  the  loss  of 
that  amount  to  the  sinking  fund  will  liave  to  be 
made  up  by  these  extra  two  cents.  I  have  ex- 
amined the  slack  water,  and  take  the  whole  of 
it,  I  do  not  know  liow^  much  it  will  amount  to 
this  year,  but  I  guess  to  not  more  than  $25,000. 
The  receipts  are,  or  at  least  are  likely  to  be,  much 
less  than  they  were  hist  year,  while  the  expen- 
ses are  much  greater  than  last  year,  ow'ing  to  the 
timbers  that  make  the  dams  becoming  rotten. 
And  they  will  become  more  and  more  so  every 
year,  until  they  finally  sweep  away  the  wliole 
system  in  less  than  ten  years,  unless  I  am  a  false 
prophet.  The  geiftleman  is  mistaken — there  is 
very  little  money,  hardly  enough  to  live  on, 
coming  from  these  two  cents.  After  supplying 
what  the  sinking  fund  requires,  there  will  be  far 
short  of  $60,000  left  for  us.  Then  an  account 
has  to  be  opened  for  the  convention,  and  unless 
we  are  saving  wc  shall  have  no  money  at  all.  It 
will  take  $18,000  to  pay  the  members  if  we 
should  sit  sixty  days;  and  then  there  is  $3  a  day 
extra  for  the  dignity  of  the  chair:  $10  a  day  for 
the  clerk;  and  there  is  the  assistant,  the  door- 
keeper, and  the  sergeant-at-arms  $3  or  $4  each; 
and  there  is  also  an  assistant  messenger  to  be 
had.  Besides  all  this,  there  is  a  good  deal  of 
paper  to  be  used;  and  there  is  to  be  an  account 
for  wood,  and  evidently  a  large  printing  account 
which  will  not  be  a  dollar  less  than  $10,000. 
The  gentleman  from  Nelson,  my  colleague, 
moved  the  printing  of  j&ve  hundred  copies  of 
his  report.  I  did  not  see  the  necessity  for  any 
]nore  than  one  hundred  and  twenty  five,  but  I 
did  not  want  to  be  troublesome.  K'ow  the  gen- 
tleman from  Caldwell  proposes  to  expend  $3,000 
more  for  newspapers,  and  he  puts  it  on  the  wrong 
basis — tlie  rock  that  a  great  many  men  have 
broke  themselves  upon — that  is,  tlie  idea  that 
their  avails  are  equal  to  their  expenses.  I  had 
the  misfortune,  and  I  rather  consider  it  so  than 
otherwise,  from  time  to  time  to  have  had  a  seat 
in  congress,  and  I  found  I  could  not  stand  the 
sacrifice  of  the  loss  longer  than  for  two  or  four 
years  at  a  time.  Then  I  had  to  quit  and  resort 
again  to  the  practice  of  the  law  to  repair  the 
loss.  I  have  at  every  session  expended  not  less 
than  $200  or  $300  in  the  purchasing  of  docu- 
ments to  send  among  my  constituents.  I  took 
care  to  buy  something  of  value,  important  doc- 
uments, good  speechi'S,  not  too  much  or  too  lit- 
tle, and  well  made.  I  found  this  to  be  the  only 
way.  This  paper  business  in  congress  is  a  most 
idle  waste  of  $30  to  each  member. 

I  took  witl)  mc  copies  of  the  poll  book  for  ev- 
ery county  in  my  district,  and  directed  the  little 
boys  in  the  house  to  fold  up  my  documents  and 
gave  them  instructions  to  direct  them  from  the 
poll  book — giving  A.  one  to-day,  and  B.  one  to- 
morrow, and  80  on.  And  perhaps  A.  would  not 
get  more  than  one  copy  during  the  session,  for 
the  poll  book  would  hardly  be  got  through  with 
before  the  session  was  terminated.     Now  what 


can  we  do  here?  I  represent,  I  presume,  some 
2,000  constituents.  If  I  send  only  the  papers  to 
A.,  the  balance  of  the  alphabet  -will  be  vexed, 
and  so  mad  that  they  will  not  read  them  at  all. — 
Su  ppose  I  send  the  balance,  through  the  alphabet, 
to  my  whole  constituency.  WhUe  perhaps  each 
one  would  get  a  paper,  they  would  not  get  more 
than  one  through  the  whole  session.  Will  they 
get  information  through  this  source,  of  what  we 
are  doing  here?  They  would  each  just  get  an 
account  of  what  we  do  here  on  one  day.  There 
is  scarcely  a  town  in  Kentucky  where  they  do 
not  have  a  printing  press — doing  a  little  job 
work,  and  publishing  a  little  paper,  perhaps  not 
larger  than  my  two  hands.  They  will  all  pub- 
lish our  proceedings,  and  so  will  all  the  leading 
papersin  thestate — the  Louisville  Journal,  Dem- 
ocrat, Courier,  Chronicle,  the  Commonwealth, 
Yeoman,  and  God  knows  how  many  papers — all 
will  publish  them,  and  they  will  be  read.  I  have 
never  been  a  Gen.  South  in  this  house — I  men- 
tion him  with  all  reverence,  for  he  is  dead — who 
was  always  considered  sitting  on  the  strongbox 
— ^but  we  are  proposing  to  lay  out  I  know  not 
hoAV  many  thousands.  If  the  motion  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Woodford  should  prevail,  to  print 
2500  copies  of  the  debates,  that  would  amount 
to  $7,500,  and  tlie  present  motion  would  make 
another  $3,000 — making  $10,500  in  all.  And 
thenifwegoon  and  print  all  the  reports  and 
propositions  made  here,  it  would  amount  by  the 
endof  the  session  to  $15,000  or  $20,000.  If  I 
thought  that  any  useful  information  could  bo 
diffused  thereby,  I  would  not  care,  but  I  declare 
most  solemnly,  that  I  cannot  see  tliat  there  is. — 
I  suppose  tliat  in  the  course  of  the  debates  many 
valuable  speeches  will  be  made  here — I  do  not 
expect  to  make  any  myself,  but  I  see  some  of  the 
ablest  men  in  the  house  preparing  to  make  them 
— and  they  will  be  the  best  things  to  be  distri- 
buted, for  the  benefit  of  the  people,  as  they  will 
give  a  full  view  of  each  side  of  a  question.  As 
for  the  Daily  Commonwealth,  I  do  not  consider 
it  worth  a  cent  or  half  a  cent — I  would  not  give 
a  cent  for  ten  millions  of  them. 

Mr.  MA  CHEN.  I  beg  to  state  to  the  gentle- 
man last  up,  that  my  little  experience  in  Frank- 
fort, in  attempting  to  serve  my  constituents,  jus- 
tifies me  in  the  supposition,  that  I  shall  have 
need  of  all  the  remuneration  they  give  me,  with- 
out appropriating  any  part  of  it  for  extending  to 
them  infurniation.  It  may  suit  gentlemen,  who 
have  political   aspirations  for  the  future,    to  ex- 

fiend  their  intiividual  means,  in  order  to  extend 
ight  to  their  constituents.  I  happen  not  to  have 
those  aspirations,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  my 
constituents  will  require  any  indivi<lual  sacrifi- 
ces on  my  part,  in  giving  to  them  information 
which  tliey  liave  a  right  to  demand  at  the  hands 
of  this  body.  If  I  am  correct  in  my  estimate  of 
the  proceeds  of  tlie  two  cent  tax,  there  will  be 
ample  for  llie  purposes  of  this  convention,  and 
more  than  sufficient.  There  will  be  a  surplus  to 
go  into  the  sinking  fund,  in  order  to  relieve  tlie 
embarrassments  which  our  internal  improve- 
ment system  lias  drawn  us  into.  The  difference 
between  the  gentleman's  estimate  of  the  two  cent 
appropriation  and  my  own,  is  not  very  material. 
I  have  supposed  that  at  least  sixty  thousand  dol- 
lars would  be  raised  under  that  appropriation, 
and  the  gentleman  estimates  it  at  fifty-six  thou- 


63 


sand.  There  -will  be,  at  all  events,  enough  from 
this  source  to  dispense  this  information,  and  I 
think  that  we  can  make  no  better  application  of 
three  thousand  dollars,  than  by  devoting  it  to 
this  purpose. 

Mr.  HARDIX .  The  gentleman  is  entirely  mis- 
taken, if  he  supposes  that  I  have  any  aspira- 
tions. My  friend  from  Caldwell,  I  have  no 
doubt,  is  actuated  by  very  laudable  motives  in 
advocating  this  proposition,  but  I  do  not  think 
he  will  make  many  friends  by  the  distribution  of 
papers.  Indeed  I  think  he  will  make  ten  ene- 
mies for  one  friend.  I  have  had  occasion  to  ex- 
amine the  subject  of  our  revenue  several  times, 
and  no  longer  ago  than  yesterday,  being  in  the 
second  Auditor's  office,  I  made  an  investigation, 
the  result  of  which  proves  to  me,  that  if  there  is 
no  increase  in  the  value  of  property,  fifty-four 
thousand  dollars  will  be  all  that  can  be  raised 
under  the  two  cent  tax.  If  property  should  in- 
crease a  little  in  value,  there  mav  be  fifty-six 
thousand  dollars  raised.  There  will  be  a  great 
deficiency  in  the  sinking  fund,  and  that  deficien- 
cy must  be  made  up  in  some  way  or  other.  It 
will  take  at  least  thirty-five  thousand,  to  pay  the 
expenses  of  this  convention,  if  we  observe  as 
much  economy  as  we  can.  I  suppose  that  we 
shall  sit  about  seventy  days,  and  probably  when 
we  submit  our  work  to  the  people,  we  shall  not 
adjourn  finally;  but  meet  again  after  the  people 
shall  have  determined  to  ratify  or  reject  our  work. 
If  they  ratify  it,  there  will  be  a  necessity  for 
some  action  to  be  taken,  in  order  to  put  the  gov- 
ernment in  motion.  If  on  the  other  hand,  the 
people  reject  the  new  constitution,  on  account  of 
some  defect,  it  will  be  necessary  to  meet,  in  or- 
der to  remedy  that  defect.  "W'e  had  better  not  be 
too  profuse  with  this  little  remnant  of  appro- 
priation. 

The  gentleman  is  entirely  mistaken  if  he  sup- 

[)oses  that  I  can  spare  two  or  three  hundred  dol- 
ars  for  the  purchase  ot  newspapers  to  distribute 
among  my  constituents. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  Since  this  matter  was  laid 
upon  the  table,  I  have  almost  come  to  the  con- 
clusion myself,  that  I  would  vote  for  some  ap- 
propriation, perhaps  to  the  extent  of  one  thou- 
sand dollars  for  the  purchase  of  newspapers,  to 
be  distributed.  But  I  had  a  conversation  with 
one  of  the  public  printers,  (Mr.  Hodges,)  this 
morning,  who  said  to  me  that  he  was  very  glad 
we  did  not  order  the  thousand  dollars  worth,  as 
it  would  be  of  no  advant<ige  to  them.  Having 
thought  the  matter  all  over,  inasmuch  as  one 
thousand  dollars  worth  would  go  but  a  little 
way,  when  distributed  among  the  people,  I  came 
to  the  conclusion  that  I  would  not  vote  for  tlie 
proposition  if  it  should  come  up  again.  I  ac- 
cord ingly  purchased  about  forty  papers,  wliich 
I  am  now  sending  off.  I  think  that  for  all  the 
good  we  can  do  by  making  an  appropriation  of 
this  kind,  we  had  better  not  incur  the  expendi- 
ture. Xot  that  I  would  oppose  the  dissemina- 
tion of  knowledge  or  information,  but  I  think 
that  information  will  be  more  readily  extended 
to  the  people,  by  taking  a  different  method.  I 
shall  certainly  vote  against  any  such  appropri- 
tion. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  am  pleased  that  the  gen- 
tleman from  Caldwell,  upon  reflection,  has  con- 
cluded to  move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  in 


this  case,  and  am  particularly  gratified  in  having 
this  proposition  brought  before  this  body  in 
such  close  proximity  with  another  measure  just 
disposed  of.  A  few  moments  ago,  a  resolution 
was  offered  by  my  friend  in  front  of  me,  (Mr. 
Mares,)  dispt-nsing  with  the  printing  of  that 
multitude  of  resolutions,  daily  accumulating  on 
the  secretary's  table,  for  the  benefitof  this  body, 
except  such  as  it  may  otherwise  direct.  Now, 
many  of  these  resolutions  present  questions  of 
great  importance,  and  well  worthy  the  serious 
consideration  of  every  gentleman.  Yet  from 
the  character  and  length  of  some  of  them,  the 
suspicion  may  reasonably  be  indulged  that  the 
good  people  of  Buncombe  were  not  wholly  lost 
sight  of  in  drafting  them.  The  object  of  that 
resolution  was  to  curtail  expenses,  as  the  daily 
papers,  laid  upon  our  tables  would  furnish  the 
same  information.  Still  it  was  voted  down. 
Now  I  am  inclined  to  favor  every  proposition 
tending  to  retrenchment  and  reform,  but  they 
must  not  be  partial  in  their  bearing.  We  should 
not  print  alone  for  our  own  information  or  ben- 
efit, and  withhold  all  intelligence  of  our  pro- 
ceedings from  those  who  sent  us  here.  For  what 
f)urpose,  sir,  have  we  here  a.ssembled?  Nothing 
ess  than  to  alter,  amend,  or  remodel  the  organie 
law  of  the  State — the  constitution  which  will 
give  tone  and  character  to  the  very  government 
under  which  they  live — and  they,  as  being  so 
deeply  interested  in  our  deliberations,  have  a 
right  to  be  informed  of  our  reasonings  and  con-' 
elusions,  and  to  see  with  what  fidelity  we  re- 
deem the  pledges  made,  when  candidates  before 
them.  When  this  proposition  was  up  a  few 
days  since,  gentlemen  became  alarmed  at  the 
expense  to  be  incurred.  We  shall  now  see 
whether  their  ideas  of  retrenchment  shall  ope- 
rate alone  to  withhold  intelligence  from  the  peo- 
ple as  to  our  proceedings,  whilst  they  them- 
selves are  unaffected  by  them.  In  order  to  as- 
certain this,  I  call  for  tlie  ayes  and  nays. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  I  wish  to  make  a  single  re- 
mark in  reference  to  the  observation  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Morgan  and  Breathitt.  The  gentle- 
man says,  that  his  mind  has  undergone  a  change 
upon  this  subject.  It  seems  to  me,  when  I  look 
at  the  documents  that  are  before  us,  that  I  can 
readily  see  why  it  is  that  his  mind  has  undergone 
a  change;  and  his  constituents,  I  imagine,  will 
come  to  the  same  conclusion.  They  will  think 
that  there  has  been  enough  of  printing  at  his 
suggestion  for  one  ses.sion  at  least.  I  refer  to  the 
document  presented  by  that  gentleman. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  The  gentleman  from  Caldwell 
will  excuse  me,  when  I  say  that  I  think  he  is 
mistaken  in  saying  that  the  document,  presented 
by  me,  was  printed  upon  my  motion. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  then  taken  upon  the 
motion  to  reconsider,  with  the  following  result: 
yeas  53,  nays  40. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  said,  if  in  order,  I  will  now 
move  to  strike  out  ten  and  insert  thirty.  I  re- 
gard ten  dollars  as  altogether  insuflicient  for  the 
object  proposed.  Unless  the  sura  be  enlarged  so 
as  to  furnish  a  sufficient  number  of  papers  for 
distribution  to  those  distant  parts  where  news- 
papers do  not  commonly  reacn,  it  will  be  alto- 
gether a  useless  expenditure.  But  it  does  seem 
to  me,  that  if  the  appropriation  be  made  large 
enough  to  accomplish  that  object,  much  good 


64 


may  be  done.  It  is  the  case,  I  believe,  in  many 
counties  that  there  are  neighborhoods  where 
newspapers  do  not  reach.  Those  neighborhoods 
are  withi]\  the  knowledge  of  gentlemen  on  this 
floor,  and  by  using  that  knowledge,  and  send- 
ing the  newspapers  into  those  neighborhoods, 
we  shall  have  the  means  of  extending  infonna- 
tien  upon  the  important  subjects  which  are  agi- 
tated here,  and  enable  the  people  to  form  their 
judgments  respecting  them. 

The  PRESIDENT.  That  motion  is  not  in 
order.  It  is  not  in  order  to  renew  a  motion  that 
has  already  been  made  and  determined. 

Mr.  WJVt.  JOHNSON.  I  will  move  then  to 
strikeout  ten,  and  insert  thirty  one. 

The  PRESIDENT,  It  is  perfectly  in  order  to 
move  to  amend,  by  striking  out  and  inserting  a 
new  number. 

Mr.  MAGHEN.  I  will  ask  the  chair  if  the 
first  step  will  not  be  a  reconsideration  of  the 
vote  by  which  ten  dollars  was  substituted  for 
thirty. 

The  PRESIDENT.  That  would  be  the  regu- 
lar order  of  proceeding.  Some  gentleman,  who 
voted  with  the  majority,  should  move  a  recon- 
sideration of  that,  vote. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  I  voted  Avith  the  majority, 
and  in  order  to  test  the  question,  I  will  move  a 
reconsideration  of  the  vote  by  which  that  amend- 
ment was  adopted. 

Mr.  HARDIN  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
upon  that  motion,  and  being  taken,  they  were, 
yeas  40,  nays  52. 

The  question  then  recurred  upon  the  adoption 
of  the  resolution  as  heretofore  amended. 

Mr.  MAYES.  The  original  resolution  propo- 
ses, or  its  object  seems  to  be,  to  give  to  the  peo- 
ple of  the  state  correct  information  in  reference 
to  the  action  of  the  delegates  to  this  convention 
during  its  session.  The  resolution,  if  adopted 
in  its  amended  form,  will  give  to  each  one  of  us 
some  five  copies  of  a  daily  paper,  or  in  lieu  of  a 
daily,  some  twenty  or  twenty  five  copies  of  a 
weekly  paper.  Now  my  friend  from  Nelson 
represents  some  two  thousand  constituents,  and 
the  purpose  of  making  the  appropriation,  is  to 
keep  our  constituents  apprised  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  convention.  That,  as  I  understand 
it,  is  the  object;  that  they  shall  be  informed  of 
every  thing  which  transpires  here;  that  they 
shall  be  put  in  possession  of  the  reasons  why  we 
are  in  favor  of  a  given  proposition,  or  why  we 
oppose  it.  "Well,  say  that  I  take  for  the  benefit 
of  my  constituents  five  copies  of  the  daily  Com- 
monwealth, and  send  those  five  copies  to  the 
county  of  Graves.  How  am  I,  with  only  these 
five  copies  of  the  paper,  to  supply  information 
to  the  seventeen  hundred  voters  of  that  county? 
That  the  purpose  may  be  accomplished,  I  must 
send  to  each  person  every  day;  for  if  I  send  to 
this  man  to-day,  and  to  that  to-morrow,  there  is 
in  reality  no  information  conveyed;  because 
each  man  would  have  but  a  disjointed  portion  of 
our  proceedings. 

If  any  feasible  plan  can  be  adopted  by  which 
this  information  can  be  spread  throughout  the 
country,  I  shall  be  in  favor  of  it;  for  I  am  the 
last  man  to  withhold  useful  information.  But 
I  think,  that  tlie  expenditure,  as  proposed,  would 
be  worse  than  useless.  I  believe  it  would  utter- 
ly fail  to  accomplish  the  purpose  intended. — 


These  are  some  of  the  reasons  why  I  vote  against 
it;  not  because  I  am  opposed  to  giving  infonna- 
tion  to  the  people.  I  should  be  glad  to  put  them 
in  possession  of  full  information.  But  as  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson  very  justly  observes,  if 
you  attempt  to  impart  information  at  all,  you 
should  make  it  extend  impartially  to  all.  If 
I  send  a  paper  to  one  man  and  send  none  to  his 
neighbor,  the  latter  will  be  ofi'ended,  for  he  will 
conceive  that  he  has  as  much  right  to  receive 
information  as  the  other. 

I  can  see  no  reason  why  delegates  should 
change  the  opinion  they  expressed  the  other  day 
in  regard  to  passing  this  resolution.  No  reason 
has  been  advanced,  and  the  more  I  have  heard 
gentlemen  talk  on  the  subject,  the  more  I  am 
satisfied  that  the  appropriation  of  a  [thousand 
dollars  would  be  worse  than  useless. 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  would  simply  say  to  all  those 
gentlemen  who  are  in  favor  of  a  reformation  of 
the  constitution,  that  I  hope  they  will  vote  for 
this  resolution,  however  limited  it  may  be  in  its 
character.  Sir,  the  elections  were  scarcely  over 
before  the  secret  enemies  of  all  reform  were  en- 
deavoring to  impose  upon  the  more  ignorant 
portion  of  our  fellow  citizens,  by  leading  them 
to  believe  that  no  reform  could  be-  efi'ected  by 
the  convention,  and  they  are  now  preparing  the 
public  mind  to  condemn  in  advance  whatever 
may  be  done  by  the  convention.  It  is  worse 
than  useless  for  us  to  deliberate  here,  for  one, 
two,  or  three  months,  bringing  whatever  wisdom 
there  may  be  in  the  convention  to  bear  upon 
the  question  of  reform,  while  the  enemies  of  re- 
form are  deceiving  the  great  body  of  the  people, 
and  preparing  them  to  condemn  unheard  what- 
ever we  may  do.  I  am  therefore,  in  favor  of  cir- 
culating this  information.  It  is  true,  it  is  but 
little  information  that  this  resolution  will  dis- 
seminate, but  it  may  be  like  leaven  thrown  into 
the  public  mind,  which  will  produce  its  proper 
effect.  Suppose  I  send  twenty  copies  of  a  week- 
ly newspaper  into  my  neighborhood.  The  peo- 
ple at  their  usual  gatherings  will  obtain  the  in- 
formation which  it  is  intended  to  convey ;  and 
they  will  be  enabled  thereby,  to  some  extent,  to 
meet  the  arguments  of  the  enemy.  They  will 
be  put  in  possession  of  the  reasons  by  which  we 
are  governed,  and  when  we  place  before  them,  at 
our  return  home,  that  which  we  shall  have  pre- 
pared for  their  adoption,  the  work  will  be  well 
nigh  accomplished;  and  it  will  be  ratified  by  a 
triumphant  vote.  But  if  instead  of  doing  this, 
you  permit  the  evil  disposed  to  pour  into  the 
ears  of  the  people  their  vile  fabrications,  they 
will  be  filled  with  apprehension  and  they  will 
not  be  prepared  to  sanction  your  work. 

Sir,  let  us  provide  that  the  antidote  go  with 
the  poison.  The  thing  most  feared  by  tlie  ene- 
mies of  reform,  is  that  light  shall  be  thrown  out 
— shall  be  communicated  to  the  people.  Hence 
you  find  that  every  one  who  has  been  heretofore 
opposed  to  constitutional  reform,  is  now  for  put- 
ting out  the  light,  whilst  all  the  friends  of  reform 
and  of  the  people,  are  for  circulating  light.  It 
is  the  light  that  has  been  circulated,  wliich  has 
brought  this  august  assemblage  of  tlie  people  to- 
gether. It  is  light  that  strengthens  their  liearts 
and  their  understandings,  and  which  will  ena- 
ble them  to  receive  the  labors  of  the  convention 
as  they  should  be  received. 


I  repeat,  sir,  I  hope  that  erery  friend  of  con- 
stitutional reform  will  give  his  vote  to  dissemi- 
nate this  little  pittance  of  light  among  his  neigh- 
bors. 

Mr.  HARDIi^.  I  am  not  going  to  make  a 
speech  Mr.  Pres  ident,  but  simply  to  protest  aga  inst 
the  opinion  advanced  by  the  gentleman  from 
Campbell,  that  it  is  those  who  ■were  opposed  to 
the  call  of  the  convention,  Tvho  are  now  endeavor- 
ing to  prevent  the  dissemination  of  light,  and  to 
prevent  the  accomplishment  of  any  good.  I  do  not 
know  at  what  time  my  friend  over  the  way  became 
a  convert  to  that  doctrine;  but  I  will  say  to  him 
as  was  said  once  in  the  United  States  Senate 
by  a  distinguished  southern  senator :  "  Before 
you  say  a  thing  is  so,  you  should  know  that  it  is 
so."  I  opposed  this  appropriation  on  the  ground 
that  I  do  not  believe  it  will  do  any  good  at  all. 

Mr.  MATES.  I  do  not  know  tliat  any  por- 
tion of  the  delegates  of  this  convention,  are  in 
favor  of  withholding  light  from  the  people,  nor 
did  I  suppose  that  it  ever  entered  the  mind  of 
any  delegate,  that  those  who  oppose  the  passage 
of  the  resolution,  appropriating  a  thousand  dol- 
lars for  the  purpose  of  sending  these  newspapers 
through  the  country,  were  opposed  to  constitu- 
tional reform.  For  myself,  I  can  sav  in  regard 
to  this  subject,  that  I  was  an  original  convention 
man.  I  have  been  for  it  from  the  beginning,  and 
am  for  it  still;  and  as  I  remarked  before,  if  I 
could  see  any  good  that  would  result  from  ap- 
propriating this  money,  in  the  way  that  is  pro- 
posed, I  would  vote  for  it.  But  as  I  can  see  no 
good  that  is  likely  to  result  from  it,  I  shall  vote 
against  it. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  only  rise  to  say,  that  I  have 
opposed  no  appropriation  at  all,  that  was  intend- 
ea  to  convey  information  throughout  the  coun- 
try. And  in  reference  to  being  a  convention  man, 
I  will  inform  gentlemen,  that  I  have  been  a  con- 
vention man  from  the  very  beginning;  and  one 
of  the  reforms  which  I  have  been  most  in  favor 
of,  is  economy.  On  the  score  of  economy,  then, 
believing  that  this  appropriation  can  do  no  good, 
I  shall  vote  against  it. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  uniformly  voted 
a^nst  incurring  a  large  expense  for  printing  and 
distributing  papers;  and  my  reason  for  doing  so 
is,  that  the  printing  that  is  to  be  done  hereafter 
is,  I  thiuK,  of  much  more  importance.  When  we 
finish  the  constitution  which  we  are  about  to 
make,  I  want  to  print  a  great  many  copies  of  it, 
together  with  the  old  constitution,  and  send  them 
out  to  the  people,  that  they  may  compare  the  one 
with  the  other,  and  make  choice  between  them. 
My  impression  is,  that  we  have  a  tolerably  good 
constitution  already,  though  I  am  for  making  a 
great  many  changes  in  it.  Still  we  have  done 
yery  well  under  the  old  one,  and  I  wish  the  peo- 
ple to  make  a  comparison,  and  say  which  they 
will  prefer.  Every  principle  emoodied  in  the 
new  constitution,  ought  to  be  compared  with 
those  of  the  old  one,  that  the  people  may  vote 
understandingly. 

It  is  important  that  we  should  avoid  incur- 
ring expense  for  printing,  that  may  be  dispensed 
with,  in  view  of  having  this  necessary  item  of 
expense,  which  will  not  be  inconsiderable,  to  be 
incurred  hereafter.  Our  printing  bills  will  oth- 
erwise run  up  to  an  enormous  amount.  Will  it 
not  be  more  important  that  we  should  lay  before 
9 


the  people  the  final  result  of  our  labors,  than 
that  we  should  give  them  ten  dollars  worth 
of  the  Commonwealth  and  the  Yeoman?  And, 
after  all,  how  many  individuals  can  you  supply 
with  that  ten  dollars  worth?  I  tell  gentlemen 
I  have  had  some  little  experience  in  this  busi- 
ness. On  one  occasion,  previous  to  an  election, 
I  wrote  letters  to  about  twenty  individuals,  in 
different  parts  of  the  county,  urging  them  to  ex- 
ert themselves  a  little  for  me,  as  my  business 
would  not  admit  of  my  personal  attendance. — 
But  I  found,  that  by  selecting  individuals  in 
this  manner,  I  gave  offence  to  others,  and,  in 
short,  I  made  three  enemies  where  I  gained  one 
friend.  And  if  we  send  out  papers  in  this  way, 
Ave  shall  give  offence  to  every  man  in  the  neigh- 
borhood, except  the  one  to  whom  the  paper  is 
sent.  And,  when  the  appropriation  is  narrowed 
down  to  the  sum  of  ten  dollars,  it  will  be  found 
to  be  too  limited  to  do  any  good.  And  there  is  an- 
other item  which  we  shall  nave  to  pay:  that  is,  a 
postage  of  three  cents  upon  each  paper,  while  tie 
paper  itself  costs  but  two.  So  that  in  any  point 
of  view  in  which  I  can  look  at  the  matter,  it 
seems  to  me  to  be  highly  objectionable.  In  the 
first  place,  it  will  do  little  or  no  good,  if  not 

Eositive  harm;  and  in  the  next  place,  it  will  ex- 
aust  our  means  and  prevent  us  from  doing  an. 
important  service  hereafter,  to  enable  them  to 
vote  understandingly  upon  the  issue  of  our  la- 
bors. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  The  expense  to  be  incurred 
for  postage  is  certaiulv  erroneously  stated  by 
the  gentleman  from  iMadison.  Put  it  at  the 
highest  price,  and  it  is  only  one  cent  upon  each 
newspaper,  when  sent  by  individuals.  This 
I  understand  to  be  the  post  oflSce  law.  But  the 
intention  was  that  the  names  of  those  to  whom 
papers  were  to  be  sent,  should  be  left  with  the 
publishers,  and  that  the  papers  should  go  from 
the  publishing  office  without  this  additional  tax 
upon  the  sender. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX.  I  certainly  do  not  rise  for 
the  purpose  of  animadverting  particularly  upon 
the  remarks  of  any  one  gentleman,  or  upon  any 
thing  in  particular,  that  has  been  said.  "WTiile 
all  manifest  a  willingness  that  the  people  should 
be  supplied  with  information,  none  suggest  a 
better  mode  than  that  which  they  object  to. 
Are  we  to  be  told  that  because  this  mode  is  not 
so  good  as  might  by  possibility  be  devised,  we 
are  therefore  to  have  none  at  all?  Why  do  not 
its  opposers  present  to  us  another?  Do  the 
members  of  this  convention  desire  to  keep  their 
light  hidden  under  a  bushel?  Are  they  un- 
willing that  their  constituents  should  know 
what  they  are  doing  here?  Certainly  not.  No 
one  will  place  himself  in  that  dilemma.  Then  I 
call  upon  gentlemen  to  furnish  us  a  plan  for 
disseminating  light  among  the  people.  I  be- 
lieve there  is  no  one  in  the  state  who  does  not 
desire  to  be  particularly  informed  of  what  is 
said  and  done  here.  It  is  due  to  the  people  that 
they  should  be  informed.  We  are  consuming 
daily  and  hourly  their  money,  and  shall  we  be 
told  that  we  are<  not  to  give  an  account  of  our 
stewardship.  Much  has  been  said  about  being 
opposed  to  reform.  I  call  upon  those  gentle- 
men, who  assert  that  they  are  in  favor  of  a  re- 
form-, to  place  before  the  people,  the  means  of 
refuting  this  calumny.    And  what  other  means 


66 


so  effective  for  doing  this  as  disseminating  the 
debates  of  this  convention. 

I  admit  that  the  sum  of  a  thousand  dollars  is 
insignificant,  and  1  shall  vote  against  it.  When 
nothing  better  than  that  can  be  done,  I  should 
prefer  to  pay  the  ten  dollars  myself.  I  ■was  in 
favor  of  voting  a  hundred  papers  instead  of  sixty; 
but  if  you  reduce  it  to  ten  dollars,  I  shall  advise 
every  one  to  vote  against  it,  and  pay  the  amount 
out  of  his  own  funds.  It  is  altogether  too  in- 
significant a  sura  to  do  any  good.  If  a  reasona- 
ble number  of  papers  -were  distributed,  the  peo- 
ple might  be  pvit  in  possession  of  the  necessary 
information,  but  the  present  number  is  totally 
inadequate,  and  I  shall  feel  constrained  to  vote 
against  it  altogether. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  I  trust  the  gentleman  from 
Ballard  •will  not  vote  against  this  appropriation, 
because  if  the  distribution  of  a  large  number 
will  do  any  good,  the  distribution  of  a  few  will 
do  some  good.  It  has  been  intimated  that  those 
opposed  to  the  original  resolution  wished  to 
•withhold  light  from  the  people.  I  have  no  such 
motive  as  that.  When  the  constitution  shall  be 
formed,  I  am  in  favor  of  sending  a  copy  to  each 
voter  in  the  State,  so  that  he  may  be  enabled  to 
form  an  opinion  regarding  it.  We  have  heard  in 
•this  hall,  that  a  large  portion  of  the  delegates  in 
this  convention  are  in  favor  of  civil  revolution. 
What  do  we  propose  to  do?  What  do  a  ma- 
jority of  the  people  of  Kentucky  ask  at  our 
hands?  It  is  to  place  in  their  hands  the  elec- 
tion of  the  remainder  of  the  officers  of  gov- 
ernment, beyond  those  -which  they  now  have. 

I  for  one  hope  that  those  in  favor  of  the  origi- 
nal resolution  for  taking  thirty  dollars  worth  of 
the  newspapers,  will  not  vote  against  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  because  if 
thirty  dollars  will  do  good,  ten  dollars  worth  ap- 
propriated in  the  same  way  will  do  some  good. 
But  the  best  plan,  I  think,  for  giving  the  people 
information  is,  when  we  have  finished  our  work, 
to  have  a  copy  transmitted  to  each  voter  :  and 
I  fear  not  for  the  result  of  our  labors  when  the 
people  come  to  vote. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  I  would  not  trouble  the  con- 
vention with  a  single  remark,  were  it  not  that  in 
consequence  of  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman 
from  Campbell,  I  would  appear  to  stand  in  an 
attitude  opposed  to  reform.  As  has  been  well 
remarked,  gentlemen  ought,  before  they  make 
an  assertion,  to  be  well  assured  of  its 
truth.  I  have  opposed  this  appropriation  from 
the  beginning.      I  was  opposed  to  so  small  and 

Jitiful  a  provision  for  the  dissemination  of 
nowledge;because,in  fact,and  in  truth,  I  believ- 
ed it  -would  be  of  no  avail,  while  it  would  cost 
the  state  a  considerable  sum,  and  that  it  would 
create  more  dissatisfaction  among  the  people 
than  if  we  had  not  sent  a  paper  among  them  at 
all.  Suppose  we  distribute  three  thousand  dol- 
lars -worth.  Who  would  get  them?  Why,  the 
reading  men,  and  great  numbers  would  not  be 
taken  from  the  post  office  at  all.  And  it  is  rea- 
sonable to  suppose  that  those  who  are  reading 
and  enquiring  men,  will  get  the  information  at 
all  events, -without  entailing  this  expense  upon 
the  state. 

The  gentleman  is  mistaken  if  he  supposes  I 
am  not  for  reform.  I  want  to  send  out  a  new 
constitution, from  the  beginning  to  the  very  last 


letter  of  it ;  and  I  want  to  embody  in  that  con- 
stitution the  reforms  which  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky require.  And  I  Jnot  only  want  a  ne-w 
constitution,  but  i  want  that  constitution  sub- 
mitted to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  while 
their  vote  is  being  taken  let  this  convention  ad- 
journ, and  if  our  labor  does  not  please  them,  let 
the  convention  again  meet  and  revise  their  work. 

The  gentleman  from  Ballard  says,  that  none 
of  us  have  proposed  a  better  plan  of  giving  in- 
formation to  the  people.  If  the  gentleman 
wishes  his  speeches  published  and  sent  forth 
throughout  the  state,  or  throughout  the  U.  S.,  he 
can  do  it  without  burthening  the  stale  with  the 
expense.  The  proceedings  of  this  body  will 
hereafter  be  of  more  interest  to  the  people  than 
they  are  at  present.  I  have  no  doubt  there  will 
be  speeches  made,  that  will  be  of  the  very  deep- 
est interest.  There  will  be  speeches  made  in  re- 
lation to  slavery,  in  relation  to  the  right  of  suf- 
frage, in  relation  to  the  election  of  the  judiciary 
and  other  subjects  of  equal  importance,  which 
will  be  well  worthy  of  being  published  and  dis- 
seminated, and  well  worthy  of  the  public  atten- 
tion. I  would  frather  see  these  published  an<J 
distributed  at  the  public  expence  than  that  a 
few  copies  of  a  daily  paper  should  be  irregular- 
ly distributed ;  which  will  convey  no  other  in- 
formation than  the  ordinary  routine  of  business 
here,  with  the  disjointed  remarks  of  delegates 
upon  various  subjects. 

The  question  being  taken  upon  the  adoption  of 
the  resolution,  it  was,  upon  a  division,  decided 
in  the  affirmative.    Ayes  47.    Noes  33. 

COMMITTEE   ON  ELECTIONS. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  will  take  this  occasion 
to  appoint  the  committee  on  elections. 

They  are,  Messrs.  Root,  Huston,  Ballinger,  A. 
K.  Marshall,  and  Garrard. 

CONTESTED    SE.\T. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  If  I  am  in  order,  I  would 
like  to  make  a  few  remarks  to  the  convention, 
concerning  the  application  of  the  claimant  for 
my  seat.  I  would  like  to  know  whether  his  pe- 
tition has  been  presented  to  the  committee. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  has  been  referred,  and 
the  subject  is  now  before  the  committee. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  do  not  know  whether  this 
is  the  proper  occasion  to  say  any  thing  in  regard 
to  this  subject,  but  as  it  appears  that  there  is  not 
much  business  now  before  the  convention,  I 
would  be  glad,  if  it  would  meet  with  the  appro  ■ 
bation  of  the  body,  to  make  a  few  statements. 

SEVERAL  DELEGATES.    "Leave,  Leave." 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  can  be 
heard,  unanimous  leave  being  granted,  although 
it  is  totally  out  of  order,  there  oeing  no  motion 
before  the  convention. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  gentleman  is  certainly 
entitled  to  be  heard. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  gentleman 
desires  to  be  within  the  rules  of  order,  he  can 
move  to  instruct  the  committee,  and  then  he  "vrill 
be  entitled  to  address  the  convention. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  would  like  to  know  wheth-  , 
er  the  committee  possesses  the  power  to  send  fot ; 
persons  and  papers.  ' 

The  PRESIDENT.  That  powerresults  necesi : 
sarily  from  the  appointment  of  the  committee. 


w 


Mr.  NITTTALL.  I  should  like  to  have  the 
committee  instructed  upon  one  branch  of  the 
question,  and  in  order  to  elucidate  my  meaning, 
with  permission,  I  will  make  a  few  remarks  to 
the  convention. 

The  first  Monday  succeeding  the  August  elec- 
tion, my  competitor  notified  me  that  he  would 
contest  my  right  to  a  seat  here,  upon  the  ground 
of  illegal  votes  having  been  polled  for  me  in  that 
election.  I  sent  him  word  back  by  the  gentle- 
man who  served  the  notice,  that  if  his  friends 
would  pay  up  their  bets,  I  would  run  the  elec- 
tion over  again,  and  desired  to  know  whetherhe 
intended  to  prosecute  the  contest  in  good  faith. 
From  that  day  until  the  opening  of  the  conven- 
tion, I  heard  nothing  of  the  contest.  No  notice 
was  given  me  that  any  depositions,  or  that  any 
preliminary  steps  would  be  taken  to  contest  my 
right  to  a  seat  here. 

^ow,  surely  sir,  the  committee  ought  to  be 
instructed,  not  that  I  am  afraid  to  meet  my  com- 
petitor on  that  ground,  but  not  to  go  into  that 
branch  of  the  controversy,  because  I  know  that 
this  convention  cannot  well  spare  me,  and  if 
they  go  into  that  investigation,  I  shall  have  to 
be  absent  about  three-fourths  of  my  time. 

As  to  the  other  branch  of  the  controversy,  I 
pledge  myself  to  the  convention  that  I  will  oc- 
cupy no  seat  here  that  the  majority  of  my  con- 
stituents refuse  to  give  me.  And  further,  that 
there  is  an  apparent  majority  for  my  competitor 
upon  the  poll  books,  there  can  be  no  rational 
doubt;  and  that  one  of  two  things  is  as  certain 
as  that  the  sun  shines  in  the  firmament  of  Heav- 
en, and  that  is,  either  that  the  officers  of  elec- 
tion for  the  county  of  Henrv  have  been  guilty 
of  wilful  corruption  in  giving  my  certificate  of 
election  to  me,  or  that  there  has  be'en  most  damn- 
able forgery  perpetrated  upon  the  poll  books. 
I  will  prove  beyond  a  doubt  to  the  convention 
by  all  the  judges  of  election,  that  from  twenty 
four  to  twenty  five  votes  have  been  forged  upon 
the  poll  book.  I  will  prove  by  the  clerk  of  elec- 
tion thatthose  votes  were  never  recorded.  I  will 
prove  by  the  voters  themselves,  that  they  never 
cast  their  votes.  If  I  do  not  prove  thfs,  I  am 
willing  to  be  set  down  by  every  gentleman  on 
this  floor,  as  a  dishonorable  man. 

The  PRESIDENT.  There  is  no  question  be- 
fore the  convention. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.    I  am  now  through,  sir. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  do  not  know  any  thing  of 
the  nature  of  the  contest  as  between  my  honora- 
ble friend  and  his  competitor,  but  from  the  ex- 
perience I  have  had  in  contested  elections,  I  am 
convinced  that  the  gentleman  who  h^i  the  seat 
has  a  right  to  be  heard  upon  that  or  upon  any 
other  point.  The  gentleman  contesting  the  .seat 
has  no  right  to  speak  without  special  permis- 
sion. I  wiU,  therefore,  move  that  Mr.  Lecompte 
be  permitted  to  be  heard  also. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  think  that  very 
proper,  and  shall  vote  for  it  whenever  the  com- 
mittee shall  have  made  an  issue  by  their  report. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  There  may  be  some  inciden- 
tal point  upon  which  it  will  be  necessary  for  Mr. 
Lecompte  to  make  some  explanation. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  will  simply  suggest  that  the 
motion  should  be  amended  so  that  he  may  be 
heard,  either  by  himself  or  counsel. 

Mr.  HARDIN.    I  would  remark  that  I  n«v«r 


saw  a  lavfjet  introduced  in  the  case  of  a  con- 
tested election. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  question  is  upon  al- 
lowing the  contestant  the  right  to  be  heard  upon 
any  point  in  connection  with  the  contest. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  10,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Me.  Nortox. 

PKOPOSITIOXS   TO   AiTEXD. 

Mr.  JAMES  submitted  the  following,  which 
on  his  motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department,  and  ordered  to  be 
printed: 

1 .  Resolved,  That  it  is  expedient  to  direct  the . 
general  assembly  to  provide,  by  law,  for  the  mode 
and  manner  in  which  the  survivor  of  a  duel,  and 
his  estate,  shall  be  rendered  respon.«ible  to,  and 
be  charged  with,  a  compensation  for  the  wife 
and  children  of  the  deeeeised  whom  he  has  slain. 

2.  Resolved,  That  no  lottery  should  be  author- 
ized by  this  state,  and  the  selling  or  buving  of 
lottery  tickets  within  this  state  should  be  pro- 
hibited. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  offered  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
the  executive  department  for  the  state  at  large, 
and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

Resolved,  That  whenever  the  governor  shall 
remit  a  fine  or  forfeiture,  or  grant  a  reprieve  or 
pardon,  he  shall  enter  his  reasons  for  doing  so  on 
the  records  of  the  secretary  of  state,  in  a  sepa- 
rate book;  and  on  the  requisition  of  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly,  the  same  shall 
be  laid  before  them,  and  published  if  they  deem 
proper. 

Sir.  GRAY  submitted  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
the  revision  of  the  constitution  and  slavery,  and 
ordered  to  be  printed: 

Resolved,  That  the  mode  of  revising  and  amend- 
ing the  constitution  ought  to  be  as  follows : 

Any  specific  amendment,  or  iimendmenta,  to 
the  constitution  may  be  proposed  in  the  senate 
or  house  of  representatives,  and,  if  the  same  shall 
be  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of  the  members  elec- 
ted to  each  of  the  two  houses,- such  proposed 
amendment,  or  amendments,  shall  be  entered  on 
the  journals,  with  the  yeas  and  nays  taken  there- 
on, and  published  for  three  months  previous  to 
the  next  succeeding  election  for  representatives 
to  the  legislature,  in  at  least  one  newspaper  of 
each  county,  if  any  be  published  therein,  and 
shall  be  submitted  to  the  people,  atsaid  election, 
in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  may  prescribe; 
and,  if  the  people  shall  approve  such  amend- 
ment, or  amencunents,  or  any  of  them,  by  a  ma- 
jority of  all  the  electors  of  the  state  qualified  to 
vote  for  members  of  the  legislature,  such  amend- 
ment, or  amendments,  so  approved,  shall  be  re- 
ferred to  the  legislature  chosen  at  said  election; 
and  if,  in  said  legislature,  such  proposed  amend- 
ment, or  amendments,  or  any  of  them,  shall  be 
agreed  to  by  a  majority  of  all  the  members  elect- 
ed to  eaJch  house,  then  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 


legislature  to  again  submit  such  proposed  amend- 
ment, or  amendments,  or  such  of  them  as  may 
have  been  agreed  to,  as  aforesaid,  by  the  two  leg- 
islatures, to  the  people  at  the  next  election  for 
judicial  officers,  or  members  of  the  legislature  ; 
and  if  the  people,  at  said  second  election,  shall 
approve  and  ratify  such  amendment,  or  amend- 
ments, or  any  of  them,  by  a  majority  of  all  the 
electors  of  the  state  qualified  to  vote  for  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature,  sucli  amendment,  or 
amendments,  so  approved  and  ratified,  shall  be- 
come part  of  the  constitution  :  Provided,  That  if 
more  than  one  amendment  be  submitted,  they 
shall  be  submitted  in  such  manner  and  form  that 
the  people  may  vote  for  or  against  each  amend- 
ment separately  and  distinctly;  but  no  amend- 
ment, or  amendments,  shall  be  submitted  to  the 

people  oftener  than  once  in years:  And, 

provided  further,  That  the  article  of  the  consti- 
tution concerning  slaves,  this  article,  and  the 
portion  which  provides  that  no  man's  property 
shall  be  taken  or  applied  to  public  use  without 
the  consent  of  his  representatives,  and  without 
just  compensationbeing  previously  made  to  him, 
shall  never  be  amended  or  changed  without  the 
concurrence  of  two  thirds  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  each  house  of  the  general  assembly, 
at  two  successive  sessions,  and  a  majority  of  all 
the  electors  of  the  state,  qualified  to  vote  for 
members  of  the  legislature,  at  two  successive 
elections. 

Mr.  PRESTON  offered  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
miscellaneous  provisions,  and  ordered  to  be 
printed: 

Resolved,  That  it  be  referred  to  the  committee 
on  the  miscellaneous  provisions  of  the  constitu- 
tution,  to  inquire  into  the||expediency  of  amend- 
ing the  1 6th  section  of  the  6th  article  of  the  pre- 
sent constitution  of  Kentucky,  so  that: 

1st.  All  judicial  officers  and  all  ministerial  or 
executive  officers,  whose  duties  and  powers  are 
confined  to  counties,  who  may  be  elected  under 
the  new  constitution,  shall  be  chosen  by  ballot. 

2d.  In  all  elections  by  the  people  of  gov- 
ernor, lieutenant  governor,  members  of  the 
general  assembly,  and  officers  whose  duties  re- 
late to  the  state  at  large,  and  in  all  elections  by 
the  legislature,  the  votes  shall  be  personally  and 
publicly  given  viva  voce. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  offered  the  following,  and 
on  his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee 
on  the  county  courts,  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

1.  Resolved,  That  provision  should  be  made 
in  the  constitution  for  a  court  of  probate  in  each 
county  of  the  State,  to  consist  of  a  sole  judge, 
■with  a  jurisdiction  defined  in  the  constitution 
and  laws:  Provided,  however,  That  such  jurisdic- 
tion shall,  in  no  case,  in  the  trial  of  civil  causes, 
exceed  the  sum  of  dollars. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  number  of  justices  of 
the  peace  for  each  county  of  the  State  should  be 
in  proportion  to  the  number  of  q^ualified  voters 
in  sucn  county,  which  proportion  should  be 
prescribed  in  the  constitution;  and  that  the  ju- 
risdiction of  justices  of  tlie  peace  ought  not  to 
exceed  that  now  given  by  the  laws  of  the  State: 
Provided,  however.  That  each  county  seat  of  the 
State  ought  to  liave  at  lea.st  two  justices. 

3.  Resolved,  That  the  county  courts,  as  now 
established,  should  b«  abolished,  and  that  the 


justices  collectively  of  each  county,  constitute  a 
Doard  of  county  commissioners;  and,  as  such,  to 
have  no  other  power  nor  jurisdiction  than  such 
as  relates  to  the  county  revenue  and  its  applica- 
tion, roads,  passways,  ware-houses,  ferries,  and 
mills,  and  to  be  regulated  and  governed  in  such  . 
jurisdiction  in  such  manner  as  may  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

Mr.  DUNAVAN  offered  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred,  and  ordered  to  be 
printed: 

Resolved,  That  the  appropriate  committee  en- 
quire into  the  expediency  of  adopting  in  the 
constitution  a  provision  requiringthe  fiscal  agent 
of  the  state,  after  the  return  to  his  office  of  the 
commissioners'  books  of  the  revenue  tax,  to 
make  an  estimate  of  the  probable  expenditure 
of  the  government  for  that  year,  and  then  to  as- 
sess an  ad  valorem  tax  on  the  amount  of  proper- 
ty listed  for  taxation  sufficient  to  meet  that  ex- 
penditure. 

Mr.  BOWLING  offered  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department,  and  ordered  to  be 
printed: 

1.  Resolved,  That  it  is  right  and  just  tliat  all 
property  should  be  taxed  according  to  its  value; 
that  value  to  be  ascertained  in  such  manner  as 
the  legislature  shall  direct,  so  that  the  same  shall 
be  equal  and  uniform  tliroughout  tlie  common- 
wealth. No  one  species  of  property  from  which 
a  tax  may  be  collected  ought  to  be  taxed  higher 
than  any  other  species  of  property  of  equal  val- 
ue— but  that  the  legislature  ought  to  have  power 
to  tax  merchants,  pedlers  and  privileges,  in  such 
manner  as  they  may,   from  time  to  time,  direct. 

2.  Resolved,  That  no  article  manufactured  of 
the  produce  of  this  commonwealth  ought  to  be 
taxed,  otherwise  than  to  pay  inspection  fees. 

Mr.  HAMILTON  offered  the  following,  and 
moved  that  it  be  referred  to  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department: 

1.  Resolved,  That  within  five  years  after  the 
adoption  of  this  constitution,  the  legislature 
shall  appoint  not  less  than  three,  nor  more  than 
five  persons,  learned  in  the  law,  who  shall  re- 
vise, digest,  arrange  and  publish  the  laws, 
civil  and  criminal,  so  as  to  have  but  one  law  on 
any  one  subject,  and  to  be  in  plain  english,  in 
such  manner  as  the  legislature  m.ay  direct;  and 
a  like  revision  every  ten  years  thereafter. 

2.  Resolved,  That  every  law  enacted  by  the  le- 
gislature shall  embrace  but  one  object,  and  that 
sliall  be  expressed  in  the  title. 

3.  Resolved,  Tliat  no  law  shall  be  revised  or 
amended  by  reference  to  its  title;  but,  in  such 
ca-se,  the  act  revised,  or  section  amended,  shall 
be  re-enacted  and  publislied  at  length;  and  all 
other  laws  on  the  same  subject  shall  be  repealed. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  offered  the  following,  as  an  ad- 
ditional resolution,  and  suggested  that  they 
should  be  referred  to  a  special  committee,  having 
charge  of  the  subject: 

Resolved,  That  the  legislature,  at  its  first 
session  after  the  adoption  of  the  new  constitu- 
tion, shall  provide  for  the  appointment  of  three 
commissioners,  wliose  duty  it  shall  be  to  revise, 
reform,  simplify,  and  abridge,  the  rules  and  prac- 
tice, pleadings,  forms  and  proceedings,  of  the 
courts  of  record  of  this  st«te,  and  report  thereon 


69 


to  the  legislature,  subject  to  their  adoption  and 
modification,  from  time  to  time. 

Mr.  HAMILTO^r  accepted  the  amendment, 
and  the  suggestion  to  refer. 

The  propositions  were  accordingly  referred  to 
a  special  eninraittee,  and  ordered  to'be  printed. 

Mr.  McCLURE  oflFered  the  following,  and,  on 
his  motion,  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
the  executive  for  the  state  at  large,  and  ordered 
to  be  printed: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  executive  of- 
fices shall  enquire  into  the  propriety  of  chang- 
ing, or  so  amending  the  existing  constitution, 
that  when  the  governor  of  this  commonwealth 
shall  die,  refuse  to  qualify,  move,  or  resign,  in 
that  event  a  new  election  shall  be  had  for  gov- 
ernor, instead  of  the  mode  pointed  out  in  the 
existing  constitution  of  filling  his  vacancy. 

Mr.  LINDSEY  offered  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department: 

Resolced,  That  the  committee  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  be  instructed  to  enquire  and  re- 
port on  the  propriety  of  inserting  the  following, 
as  sections  in  the  new  constitution: — 

"The  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury,  in  all 
criminal  or  penal  prosecutions  on  behalf  of  the 
commonwealth,  snail  be  held  sacred,  and  the 
rights  thereof  remain  inviolate;  except  the  legis- 
lature may  define  the  causes  for  which  the  com 
monweallh  may  challenge  jurors,  and  allow 
challenges  in  her  behalf  without  cause  shown, 
not  exceeding  five  in  number — and  may  also  al- 
low three-fourths  of  the  jury  to  render  a  verdict. 
And  in  civil  causes,  the  legislature  may  lessen 
the  number  of  jurors  to  seven,  and  allow  five  to 
render  a  verdict. 

"The  rights  of  bearing  arms  in  self  defence 
shall  not  be  prohibited  by  the  legislature;  but 
the  legislature  may  prohibit,  bj'  law,  the  wear- 
ing of  concealed  weapons  in  time  of  peace,  and 
when  not  worn  in  self  defence." 

Mr.  GARRARD  offered  the  following,  and  it 
was  agreed  to: 

Resolved,  That  the  second  Auditor  be  request- 
ed to  transmit  to  this  convention  a  tabular  state- 
ment, showing  the  number  of  white  males  over 
twenty  one  years  of  age  in  each  county  in  this 
State  for  the'  year  1849. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  offered  the  following,  and  it 
was  agreed  to: 

Resolced,  That  the  power  of  the  legislature  to 
contract  debts  ought  to  be  restricted,  and  the 
committee  on  the  public  debt  of  the  State  be  in- 
structed to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of  so 
amending  the  constitution  as  to  place  the  above 
restriction  upon  the  legislative  authority. 

CORRECTIONS. 

Mr.  TALBOTT,  by  consent,  substituted  the 
following  for  his  third  resolution  submitted  yes- 
terday, in  which  some  errors  were  found: 

Resolved,  That  no  specific  amendment  shall 
be  adopted  or  convention  called,  under  the  con- 
stitution this  convention  may  adopt,  xcept  upon 
the  recommendation  of  at  least  two-thirds  of 
both  branches  of  the  legislature  for  two  success- 
ive sessions — and  afterwards  sanctioned  and 
ratified  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people,  a  raajority 
of  all  the  qualified  electors  in  the  State  voting 
for  the  same. 


Mr.  C.  A.  TVICKLIFFE.  I  desire  this  oppor- 
tunity to  correct  what  I  conceive  to  be  probably 
a  natural  misconception  of  the  remark  I  made 
on  the  proposition  of  my  colleague  (Mr.  Hardin) 
yesterday,  on  the  motion  to  permit  Mr.  Lecompte 
to  take  a  seat  in  this  body,  and  be  heard  at  any 
time  he  may  think  proper  on  any  motion  that 
may  be  made  from  time  to  time  by  tlie  commit- 
tee on  the  subject  of  his  election.  In  the  lan- 
guage employed  in  the  short,  note  made  of  the 
subject,  I  am  made  to  acquiesce  in  that  course. 

My  objection  was,  that  I  was  unwilling  to  per- 
mit an  individual  to  take  his  seat  in  the  legisla- 
ture, or  in  any  body  organized  as  this  is,  until 
after  the  committee  who  had  the  subject  under 
consideration  had  examined  and  reported  upon 
the  facts.  I  interposed  an  objection  to  the  order 
giving  him  the  privilege  of  being  heard  in  this 
body  on  any  incidental  question  tKat  might  arise 
on  the  motion  of  the  committee  or  of  any  mem- 
ber of  the  convention.  The  house  however 
thought  proper  to  give  him  that  privilege,  by  a 
vote,  but  not  with  my  vote  or  consent.  I  did 
not  think  it  right  then  in  regard  to  the  body 
itself,  nor  do  I  think  it  right  in  reference  to  the 
sitting  member.  I  barely  wish  to  correct  any 
misapprehension  that  I  acquiesced  in  voting  for 
that  resolution. 

SLAVERY. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER,  from  the  committee  on 
the  revision  of  the  constitution  and  slavery,  made 
the  following  report: 

ARTICLE  SEVEXTH. 

Sec.  1 .  The  general  assembly  shall  have  no 
power  to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of 
slaves  without  the  consent  of  their  owners  or 
without  paying  their  owners  previous  to  such 
emancipation  a  full  equivalent  in  money  for  the 
slaves  so  emancipated,  nor  shall  they  exercise 
any  other  or  greater  power  over  the  after  born 
children  of  slave  mothers  than  over  the  slaves 
then  in  being. 

Sec.  2.  Thev  shall  have  no  power  to  prevent 
emigrants  to  tbis  state  from  bringingwith  them, 
nor  citizens  thereof  who  may  derive  title  bv 
marriage,  descent  or  devise,  from  bringing  to  this 
state  such  persons  as  are  deemed  slaves  by  the 
laws  of  any  one  of  the  United  States,  or  any  ter- 
ritory thereof,  so  long  as  any  person  of  the  same 
age  or  description  shall  be  continued  in  slavery 
by  the  laws  of  this  state. 

Sec.  3.  They  shall  pass  laws  to  permit  the 
owners  of  slaves  to  emancipate  them  saving  the 
rights  of  creditors  and  preventing  them  from  be- 
coming a  charge  to  any  county  in  this  common- 
monwealth.  But  thev  shall  have  no  power  to 
pass  any  law  authorising  the  emancipation  of 
any  slave  or  slaves,  without  a  provision  for 
their  removal  from,  and  against  their  return  to, 
this  state. 

Sec.  4.  They  shall  have  full  power  to  prevent 
slaves  being  brought  into  this  state  as  merchan- 
dize. 

Sec.  5.  They  shall  have  full  power  to  prevent 
any  slaves  being  brought  into  this  state  from  a 
foreign  country,  and  to  prevent  those  from  being 
brought  into  this  state,  who  have  been,  since  the 
first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred and  eighty  iiliu',  or  n.av  Lercafter  bu  im- 
ported into  any  of  the  United  States  from  a  for- 
eign country 


70 


Sec.  6.  They  shall  have  full  power  to  pass 
such  laws  as  may  be  necessary  to  oblige  the  own- 
ers of  slaves  to  abstain  from  all  injuries  to  them, 
extending  to  life  or  limb  and  in  case  of  their  neg- 
lect or  refusal  to  comply  with  the  directions  of 
such  laws,  to  have  such  slave  or  slaves  sold  for 
tlie  benefit  of  their  owner  or  owners. 

Sec.  7.  They  shall  pass  laws  providing  that 
whenever  a  slave  or  slaves  are  executed,  a  full 
equivalent  in  money  shall  be  paid  the  owner  out 
of  a  fund  to  be  raised  by  a  special  tax  on  slaves 
levied  for  that  purpose,  and  providing  that 
when  any  slave  or  slaves  shall  be  executed  for 
the  destruction  of  property,  a  pro  rata  distribu- 
tion of  the  value  paidT  for  said  slave  or  slaves 
shall  be  made  between  the  owner  of  such  slave 
or  slaves  and  the  owner  of  the  property  destroyed. 

Sec.  8.  They  shall  have  power  to  provide  by 
law,  for  the  removal  of  all  free  negroes  aiad  mu- 
lattos now  in  this  state. 

Sec.  9.  Tliey  shall  pass  laws  providing  that 
any  free  negro  or  mulatto  hereafter  emigrating 
to,  or  being  emancipated  in,  and  refusing  to  leave 
this  state,  or  having  left,  shall  return  and  settle 
within  this  state,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of 
felony  and  punished  by  confinement  in  the  pen- 
itentiary thereof. 

Sec.  10.  In  the  prosecution  of  slaves  for  felo- 
ny, no  inquest  by  a  grand  jury  shall  be  necessa- 
ry, but  the  proceedings  in  such  prosecutions 
shall  be  regulated  by  law :  except,  that  the  gen- 
eral assembly  shall  have  no  power  to  deprive 
them  of  the  privilege  of  an  impartial  trial  oy  a 
petit  jury. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  that  the  report 
be  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole  and 
printed,  and  made  the  special  order  for  Monday 
week,  the  22d  instant. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  special  or- 
der, being  the  resolutions  of  Mr.  Turner  in 
relation  to  the  importation  of  slaves,  set  down 
by  order  of  the  convention  for  consideration  to- 
day. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  did  not  anticipate  so  early 
a  report  from  the  standing  committee  on  the 
slavery  question ,  when  I  moved  a  few  days  ago, 
to  refer  the  resolutions  I  had  the  honor  of 
introducing  here,  to  a  committee  of  the  whole, 
to  be  the  subject  of  consideration  to-day.  I 
suggested  at  the  time,  tliat probably  there  would 
be  considerable  diversity  of  opinion,  as  to  the 
propriety  of  inhibiting  the  further  importation 
of  slave.s — whether  there  should  be  a  constitu- 
tional or  a  statutory  provision  on  the  subject — 
and  tliat  probably  a  considerable  number  of 
members  were  opposed  to  any  provision  at  all  in 
regard  to  it.  I  liad  desired  that  these  proposi- 
tions should  be  somewhat  discussed  before  the 
committee  reported,  but  as  they  have  made  their 
report,  I  consider  it  premature  perhaps  to  take 
up  my  resolutions  and  enter  upon  their  discus- 
sion, before  tliat  report  is  taken  up  for  consider- 
ation. I  do  not  therefore,  think  it  proper  to  in- 
terfere with  tlie  motion  of  the  chairman  of  tlie 
committee — and  I  suppose  he  made  it  under  the 
instructions  of  his  coiiiinittee — to  postpone  the 
consideration  of  tlie  matter  until  Monday  week. 
I  cannot  concur  in  the  report  of  that  committee, 
and  at  the  proper  time  I  hope  to  be  enabled  with 
the  assistance  of  other  gentlemen  who  agree  with 


me  in  opinion,  to  show  that  there  are  proposi- 
tions in  that  report  that  we  ought  not  to  adopt. 
I  understand,  that  according  to  the  report  tbe 
gentleman  has  made,  there  is  never  to  be  in  this 
commonwealth  the  power  of  arresting  the  bring- 
ing in  of  slaves  into  the  state  for  the  use  of  the 
individual  who  mav  bring  them. 

Mr.  MERIWETflER.  If  the  gentleman  will 
pardon  me,  there  is  no  such  provision  in  the 
present  constitution 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  do  not  understand  it  as  a 
direct  prohibition,  but  in  substance  it  does  so 
prohibit.  I  want  no  equivocation  on  the  sub- 
ject. I  want  the  constitution  expressly  to  pro- 
hibit it,  or  to  recognize  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
tive part  of  the  government  to  do  so;  for  I  think 
I  shall  be  able  to  show,  that  it  is  against  the  in- 
terests of  this  commonwealth,  that  slaves  should 
be  brought  here — that  it  is  against  our  pecuniary 
interests,  the  light  of  the  age  in  which  we  live, 
and  the  rights  of  humanity.  I  move  that  the 
resolutions  I  had  the  honor  to  present  be  made 
the  order  of  the  day,  in  connection  with  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  on  slavery,  for  Monday 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  By  a  little  modification 
of  his  motion,  the  gentlemen  will  get  at  the  ob- 
ject he  desires.  If  he  will  move  to  postpone  the 
consideration  of  his  resolutions,  and  to  make 
them  the  special  order  for  Monday  week,  thej^ 
will  come  up  at  the  same  time  with  the  report 
of  the  committee.  In  regard  to  the  point  dwelt 
on  by  the  gentleman,  we  have  copied  exactly  the 
provisions  of  the  old  constitution  on  the  subject. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  noticed  that  the  provisions 
of  the  old  constitution  have  been  copied  by  the 
committee,  and  for  mvself,  I  never  experienced 
any  difiiculty  in  declaring  that  the  legislature 
had  power  to  prohibit  the  importation  of  slaves. 
But  if  you  go  to  one-third  of  the  members  in  tlie 
legislature  last  winter,  they  will  tell  you  that 
they  voted  to  modify  the  law  of  1833,  because 
it  was  unconstitutional,  and  that  idea  weakened 
the  force  and  effect  of  the  law  very  much.  Al- 
though the  supreme  court  has  decided  that  it  is 
constitutional,  yet  a  large  portion  of  the  intel- 
ligence of  the  country  doubts  it,  and  for  that 
reason  I  prefer  that  if  we  do  not  prohibit  the  im- 
portation of  slaves  by  the  constitution  itself,  we 
shall  have  a  provision,  clear  and  unequivocal, 
that  the  legislature  shall  have  the  power  to  do 
so.  All  I  desire  in  regard  to  the  order  of  busi- 
ness is,  that  my  resolution  shall  come  up  for 
consideration  at  the  same  time  as  the  report  of 
the  committtee. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  As  one  of  tlie  committee  on  the 
subject  of  slavery,  I  wish  merely  to  remark  that 
I  do  not  agree  with  this  report.  I  like  the  amend- 
ment proposed,  and  am  willing  to  incorporate 
the  law  of  1833  into  the  constitution  of  the 
state.  I  have  always  been  opposed  to  the  re- 
peal of  that  law,  because  I  saw  that  it  worked 
very  well,  and  I  am  satisfied  that  its  incorpora- 
tion iuto  the  constitution,  would  satisfy  a  large 
and  respectable  portion  of  the  people  of  the 
country.  I  think  it  is  unnecessary  uiat  slaves 
should  be  brou^lit  into  the  commonwealtli  for 
the  use  of  our  citizens,  and  for  the  purpose  of 
preventing  anv  cavil  as  to  the  power  of  tne  leg- 
islature over  tte  question,  I  desire  to  seethe  pro- 
hibition incorporated  into  the  constitution.    I 


71 


am  perhaps  far  leas  inclined  to  do  imy  thing  on 
this  subject  than  any  gentleman  here,  from  the 
great  interest  my  county  has  in  this  question. 
There  is  about  $1,600,000  in  property  of  this 
description  in  Logan,  and  yet  in  that  county 
there  are  many  gentlemen,  lai^e  slave  owners, 
who  desire  to  see  this  principle  incorporated  in 
the  constitution. 

The  PRESIDENT  stated  that  the  proper  form 
of  the  motion,  was  first  that  the  committee  of 
the  whole  be  discharged  from  the  further  consid- 
eration of  the  resolution. 

Mr.  TCTRNER  would  submit  it  to  the  pleasure 
of  the  convention,  whether  his  resolution  should 
be  considered  at  this  time  or  not.  As  for  him- 
self, he  would  as  soon  say  what  little  he  had  to 
sav  now  as  at  any  other  time. 

'The  convention  then — the  question  being  ta- 
ken— resolved  to  go  into  committee  of  the  whole, 
on  the  6th  resolution  offered  by  Mr.  Turner. 

Mr.  BARLOW  was  called  to  the  chair,  and 
the  resolution  was  read  as  follows: 

6.  Resolved,  That  no  persons  shall  henceforth 
be  slaves  within  this  commonwealth,  except  such 
as  are  now  so,  and  the  descendants  of  the  fe- 
males of  them,  and  such  as  may  be  brought  to 
this  State  by  bonajide  emigrants  and  the  descend- 
ants of  the  females  of  them,  and  such  as  citizens 
of  Kentucky  shall  derive  title  to  out  of  the  State 
by  marriage,  devise,  or  descent,  and  the  descend- 
ants of  the  females  of  them. 

Mr.  TURNER.  Mr.  President:  when  I  made 
the  motion  some  days  ago,  to  go  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  I  had  not  the  resolutions  that  I  had 
the  honor  to  introduce,  before  me,  and  I  supposed 
that  the  whole  subject  of  slavery  was  emoraced 
in  the  one  resolution.  I  find,  however,  that  there 
is  a  preceding  resolution  rather  conducive  to  the 
one  just  read,  or  at  least  connected  with  the  same 
subject  matter;  and  as  I  believe  that  there  is  con- 
siderable liberty  of  debate  allowed  under  the 
rules  of  the  convention,  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  I  will  take  the  libertv  of  reading  it  in 
connection  with  the  one  read  by  the  secretary: 

5.  Resolved,  That  the  general  assembly  shall 
have  no  power  to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation 
of  slaves,  without  the  consent  of  their  owners. 
They  shall  pass  laws  to  permit  the  owners  to 
emancipate  them,  saving  the  rights  of  creditors: 
Protided,  The  persons  emancipated  shall  be  sent 
out  of  the  United  States  at  the  expense  of  the 
person  who  emancipates  them,  and  be  sold  into 
bondage  for  the  benefit  of  the  public  treasurj',  in 
case  of  their  return  to  Kentucky.  '         | 

It  will  be  perceived  that  in  this  resolution,  a  | 
portion  of  the  old  constitution — the  clause  which  I 
gives  the  power  to  emancipate  by  making  just  i 
and  previous  provision  to  the  owners — is  omit- 
ted. I  am  opposed  to  taking  the  property  of  an 
individual,  which  he  has  acquired  under  the 
sanction  of  the  law  and  the  constitution,  at  all, 
unless  with  his  free  will  and  consent.  I  do  not 
believe  that  it  is  consistent  with  the  principles  of 
our  government  to  do  so.  The  very  first  princi- 
ple of  the  government  of  the  L^nitetl  States,  and 
of  the  State  of  KentucKy,  and  indeed  one  of  the 
grounds  assigned  in  the  declaration  of  indepen- 
dence, as  a  cause  of  seperation  from  the  mother 
country,  was  that  private  property  should  be 
secured  against  the  exactions  of  government.  It 
has  been  the  practice  for  ages  past,   in  the  gov- 


ernment of  England,  in  tinies  of  great  exigency, 
to  scire  upon  the  property  of  individuals — to 
take  it  without  compensation  being  made  to 
them,  or  to  leave  them  dependent  wholly  upon 
the  will  of  the  government,  whether  it  should  be 
done  or  not.  Soldiers  have  been  quartered  on 
private  individuals  without  compensation  being 
made,  and  private  property  taken  in  various 
ways,  under  the  ancient  institutions  of  thecoun- 
try'from  which  we  derive  all,  or  at  least  the  great- 
er portion,  of  our  institutions.  I  therefore  have 
regarded  this  principle  of  the  right  of  property, 
as  asserted  in  the  declaration  of  independence, 
in  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  in 
that  of  Kentucky;  and  I  look  to  it  as  lying  at 
the  very  foundation  of  our  government,  and  as  a 
moral  principle  which  ought  not  to  be  violated 
under  any  circumstances,  or  in  any  way  or  shape. 
But  still,' if  you  are  to  make  compensation  it 
might  be  said,  why  not  leave  that  clause  in  the 
constitution?  If  you  take  the  property  to  use  in 
ime  of  war,  or  of  great  necessity,  when  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  country  could  not  progress,  and 
sustain  our  rights  and  liberties,  then  the  princi- 
ple of  taking  private  property  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  owner,  or  making  him  previous  com- 
pensation therefor,  would  properly  apply.  But 
that  is  not  the  case  in  relation  to  slave  property. 
I  will  not  go  into  this  question  very  extensively, 
as  I  think  the  opinion  of  the  country  is  settled 
in  regard  to  it.  According  to  the  Auditor's  re- 
port of  the  last  year,  there  wa-s  within  a  fraction 
of  $61,000,000  of  this  property  in  Kentucky,  and 
according  to  an  estimate  by  the  most  distin- 
guished emancipationist  in  Kentucky,  it  would 
take  $50  per  head  to  remove  the  slaves  to  Africa. 
This  upon  200,000  slaves,  the  number  I  under- 
stand m  Kentucky,  would  cost  $10,000,000. — 
And  further,  upon  these  sums  the  interest  would 
be  about  $4,200,000  per  annum,  a  sum  that  it  is 
not  probable,  and  indeed  it  is  almost  impossi- 
ble, that  any  legislature  which  shall  ever  sit  in 
Kentucky,  will  levy  upon  the  people  in  the  way 
of  tax.  to  pay  interest  upon  a  debt,  with  a  pros- 
pect that  the  debt  itself  was  to  be  perpetual. — 
That  would  be  setting  at  liberty  the  slaves  of  the 
country,  and  enslaving  the  white  race.  I  am  for 
doing  justice  to  both; — it  is  as  necessary  for  the 
one  as  the  other.  1  believe  that  the  ^aves  in 
Kentucky  are  in  a  better  condition  now,  than  any 
in  which"  you  could  place  them — that  they  are 
in  abetter  condition  than  the  laboring  popula- 
tion of  any  part  of  the  globe — and  I  do  not  be- 
lieve it  will  benefit  them  to  send  them  to  a  for- 
eign country,  or  to  sell  them  to  the  south  or  any 
where  else.  But  if  it  would  benefit  them,  the 
question  is,  whether  you  would  enslave  the 
white  men  for  the  purpose — for  you  might  as 
well  do  so  as  to  impose  upon  thei'n  a  tax  of  $4,- 
200,000  a  year,  in  addition  to  the  taxation  now 
necessary  to  carry  on  the  government  and  pav 
the  interest  on  the  public  debt.  Besides  I  think 
that  almost  every  plan  of  emancipation  that  has 
been  proposed  to  the  country,  has  been  one  of  a 
compulsive  character,  and  tfiis  I  think  entirely 
impracticable.  Among  the  many  distinguished 
and  talented  men  of  the  countr\',  "who  have  writ- 
ten and  spoken  on  this  subject,  "there  are  scarcely 
two  who  agree  as  to  the  plan  of  emancipation. — 
There  is  no  better  test  as  to  whether  a  proposi- 
tion is  right  and  practicable,  than  to  ascertain 


1ft 


whether  its  advocates  agree.  But  as  the  opinion 
of  the  country  has  settled  down  against  any  of 
these  plans  of  emancipation,  I  will  not  trouble 
the  committee  with  any  further  remarks  on  this 
branch  of  the  subject. 

I  suppose  that  some  will  call  me  an  emancipa- 
tionist, because  I  am  going  to  occupy  some  of 
the  grounds  taken  by  the  convention  which  met 
here  on  the  25th  of  April.  I  am  not  to  be  scared 
by  names,  for  I  have  oeen  against  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves  for  years.  I  believe  tliat  when 
you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  myself  were  associated 
together  in  the  legislature  in  1841,  we  voted  to- 
gether in  relation  to  this  subject,  and  advocated 
the  doctrine  I  am  now  advocating — that  it  is 
not  for  the  interest  of  Kentucky  to  import  more 
slaves.  I  know  that  the  statute  of  1833  has  not 
been  enforced  to  the  extent  it  ought  to  have 
been,  and  that  many  slaves  have  been  brought 
into  the  state  notwithstanding  its  provisions, 
and  for  that  reason,  I  am  for  incorporating  it 
into  tlie  constituiion.  When  in  the  legislature, 
I  introduced  a  proposition  similar  to  the  one 
now  under  consideration,  and  it  passed  through 
the  representative  branch — that  no  persons 
should  be  slaves  in  Kentucky  except  such  as 
were  then  slaves,  and  the  descendants  of  such 
as  were  brought  in  by  their  masters,  or  by  mar- 
riage, descent,  or  devise.  This  leaves  the  pro- 
hibition one  against  bringing  in  slaves 
here  for  merchandize,  or  for  the  use  of  indi- 
viduals, and  what  is  the  effect  of  it?  It  is  a 
proposition  which  will  work  of  itself,  and  ren 
der  it  unnecessary  to  go  to  the  commonwealth's 
attorney,  or  any  other  officer  of  the  government 
in  order  to  have  it  executed.  And  while  I  am 
as  much  against  the  increase  of  free  negroes 
amongst  us  as  any  man  in  Kentucky,  and  be- 
lieve it  to  be  a  curse  to  both  races,  yet  I  under- 
stand, that  under  the  proposition  which  I  advo- 
cate, any  negro  brought  here  in  opposition  to 
the  laws,  will  be  no  slave.  What  will  be  the  ef- 
fect? No  man  in  his  senses  will  ever  run  the 
risk  of  bringing  a  slave  here.  If  he  does  the  ne 
gro  can  sue  for  his  freedom.  There  would  never 
be  a  slave  imported  into  the  state  under  tliat  pro- 
vision. 

It  may  be  said  that  this  is  occupying  emanci- 
pation ground.  If  I  do  occupy  such  ground,  it 
IS  the  same  as  that  occupied  by  the  venerable  com- 
monwealth of  Virginia,  from  which  many  in 
this  house  are  descended,  and  who  is  looked  up 
to  as  one  of  the  strongest  in  the  number  of  pro- 
slavery  states.  As  early  as  1777,  she  adopted  in 
her  statutory  provisions  a  similar  inhibition 
against  the  importation  of  slaves.  Tlie  state  of 
South  Carolina,  with  Mr.  Calhoun,  the  great  ul- 
tra pro-slavery  leader  at  the  head,  has  a  similar 
provision  in  her  laws.  The  constitution  of  the 
slave  state  of  Mississippi  prohibits  tlie  bringing 
in  of  slaves  there  as  merchandize,  and  gives  to 
the  legislature  the  power  of  patting  tlie  same 
inhibition  on  all  importations  into  the  state,  ex- 
ijcptin  the  cases  of  slaves  brought  by  immigrants, 
after  the  year  1845.  I  think  when  a  Keutuckian 
only  occupies  the  ground  taken  by  the  venerable 
state  of  Virginia,  and  the  states  of  South  Caroli- 
na and  Mi.'isiiisippi,  he  can  hardly  be  charged  with 
uot  being  a  pro-slavery  man. 

The  resolutions  will  show  to  you  that  I  am 
willing  that  a  man  shall  bring  slaves  with  him  if 


he  comes  here  to  reside;  or  if  his  relatives  out 
of  the  state  devise  them  to  him,  that  he  may  go 
and  get  them.  Or,  if  one  of  our  young  men 
marries  in  another  state,  and  his  wife  has  her  do- 
mestic slaves  — those  with  whom  she  is  acquaint- 
ed, and  desires  on  coming  into  a  foreign  coun- 
try to  have  around  her  some  person  to  look  upon, 
whose  face  she  has  seen  before — I  am  willing  that 
she  shall  bring  them.  But  I  am  against  the  traf- 
fic in  human  blood  in  every  shape  and  manner  in 
which  it  can  be  brought  here. 

I  tJiink,  rather  than  have  the  constitution  open 
on  this  subject,  we  should  incorporate  this  prop- 
osition in  regard  to  emancipation  into  it.  What 
will  be  the  effect  of  leaving  the  matter  open? — 
We  see  it  in  what  has  been  the  effect  of  the  dis- 
cussions during  the  last  year  \ipon  the  people. — 
Every  time  that  you  agitate  the  slave  question, 
either  in  the  legislature  or  during  an  electioneer- 
ing canvass  on  the  stump,  you  weaken  the  bonds 
of  slavery,  render  the  slave  restless  and  insolent, 
and  eventually,  by  deceiving  him  in  his  igno- 
rance, cause  him  to  suffer  the  loss  of  life,  or  be 
subjected  to  great  cruelty.  Would  it  not  be  bet- 
tor then,  to  put  the  prohibition  in  the  constitu- 
tion, than  to  suffer  the  question  again  to  be 
agitated  at  the  polls?  In  my  part  of  the 
state,  you  can  scarcely  travel  through  the  coun- 
try that  you  will  not  see  slaves  who,  although 
fonnerly,  before  the  great  discussions  of  last 
year,  were  peaceable  and  quiet,  have  now  for- 
feited all  their  claims  to  good  character,  and 
have  gone  to  jail  or  been  sent  abroad  for  insolence ; 
thinking  they  were  entitled  to  their  liberty, 
they  have  rebelled,  and  have  been  sent  to  jail 
and.  probably  punished  with  stripes,  and  render- 
ed liable  to  be  hung.  Look  at  the  scenes  wit- 
nessed up  the  country  hereon  divers  occasions, 
and  I  think  that  a  few  months  ago  a  similar 
scene  occurred  in  the  counties  towards  the  Green 
River  country.  I  believe  that  these  scenes  oc- 
curred through  the  agitation  of  this  question, 
the  consequent  delusion  of  the  slaves,  and  their 
mistaken  belief  that  they  were  to  be  free.  There- 
fore, I  think  the  question  ought  to  be  tied  up  in 
the  constitution,  so  that  we  may  hear  nothing  of 
slavery  or  no  slavery  in  future.  Let  it  be  a  set- 
tled question  as  to  the  opinion  of  the  country, 
whether  slaves  shall  be  brought  here  or  not,  or 
whether  they  shall  have  their  freedom  on  any 
condition,  in  future,  other  than  the  will  of  the 
owner. 

I  differ  from  the  proposition  reported  by  the 
committee.  I  know  it  is  not  properly  before  us, 
but  I  believe  that  in  committee  of  the  whole,  we 
are  in  committee  of  the  whole  world,  and  at  lib- 
erty to  discuss  almost  everything.  One  of  the 
propositions  of  the  committee  is,  that  the  slavery 
question  is  to  be  thrown  altogether  into  the 
legislature — and  another  is  in  regard  to  free  ne- 
groes. Now  I  do  not  understand  that  under  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States  wo  have  any 
power  over  those  negroes  already  free.  They 
are  quasi  citizens  of  this  commonwealth,  of  this 
country,  enjoying  privileges  recognized  by  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  aud  we  have 
no  power  to  compel  them,  after  they  have  ob- 
tained their  freedom,  to  leave  the  commonwealth. 
That  question  has  already  been  passed  upon  in- 
directly under  a  law  in  Delaware,  providing  for 
getting  rid  of  their  free  negroes,  and  their  trans- 


73 


portation  to  Liberia.  The  proposition  of  the 
committee  relative  to  those  liberated  hereafter 
by  the  free  will  of  the  owner  of  them,  is  that 
laws  shall  be  passed  compelling  them  to  leave 
the  commonwealth.  I  think  the  provision 
should  be  that  they  ought  not  to  be  free  until 
they  do  leave  the  state.  I  would  go  further  and 
say  that  if  they  came  back  here,  or  even  their 
descendants  came  back  here — though  I  should 
regret  it  very  much — that  we  should  impose  the 
penalty  on  them  of  being  sold  into  bondage,  and 
that  the  proceeds  should  go  into  the  public  trea- 
sury. I  wish  to  make  the  prohibition  against 
free  negroes  as  stringent  and  extended  in  its 
operation  a.s  is  possible.  I  wish  in  this  matter 
to  go  to  the  verge  of  our  power  under  the 
federal  constitution.  I  believe  that  if  there  is  a 
curse  alike  to  the  white  and  the  black  race,  it  is 
in  having  free  negroes  where  there  are  vicious 
white  men.  They  have  none  of  the  motives  to 
raise  themselves  lip  and  attain  a  higher  state  of 
morals  and  education  that  a  white  man  has — and 
shut  out  from  office  and  all  the  privileges  of  pol- 
itical life,  they  necessarily  become  a  degraded 
race.  They  are  made  use  of  by  vicious,  wicked 
white  men,  for  purposes,  where  the  negro  cannot 
be  a  witness  against  them.     The  white  man  can 

fo  and  Avhisper  in  the  free  negro's  ears,  corrupt 
is  morals,  and  induce  him  to  steal,  and  yet  he 
cannot  be  a  witness  against  him,  although  he  re- 
ceives what  he  gets  from  the  negro,  and  profits 
by  it.  You  cannot  show  me  one  free  negro  out 
of  fifty  that  is  in  equal  condition,  morally  or 
physically,  with  him  who  has  a  master  that 
treats  him  well.  I  shall  therefore,  at  the  proper 
time  move  to  amend  the  proposition  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  subject,  for  I  do  not  think  it  gives 
us  the  proper  security  against  an  increase  of  the 
free  negro  population 

There  is  about  sixty-one  million  of  dollars 
worth  of  slave  property  in  Kentucky,  which  pro- 
duce less  than  three  per  cent,  profit  on  the  capi- 
tal invested,  or  about  half  as  much  as  the  mon- 
eyed capital  would  yiel^.  But  suppose  the  nett 
Srofit  to  be  three  per  cent.,  it  is  a  proposition 
lat  is  susceptible  of  demonstration,  tnat  it  is 
not  our  interest  to  increase  this  property.  I  have 
made  a  little  calculation  whicn  I  will  submit 
to  the  committee,  and  I  believe,  if  there  be  any 
error  in  it,  it  will  be  found  to  be  on  the  side  of 
making  slave  labor  more  valuable  than  it  really 
is,  and  by  that  calculation  I  cannot  make  the 
profit  to  be  more  than  three  per  cent.  There  are 
about  two  hundred  thousand  slaves  in  Kentucky. 
Of  these,  about  three  fourths  are  superanuated, 
sick,  women  in  a  condition  not  profitable  for  la- 
bor, and  infants  unable  to  work,  who  yield  no  net 
profit.  Show  me  the  man  that  has  forty  or  fifty 
slaves  upon  his  estate,  and  if  there  are  t«n  out  of 
that  number,  who  are  valuable  and  available,  it 
is  as  much  as  you  can  expect.  But  my  calcula- 
tion allows  you  to  have  tnree  fourths,  that  are 
barely  able  to  maintain  themselves,  to  pay  for 
their  own  clothing,  fuel,  house  room,  and  doctor's 
bills.  Is  there  any  gentleman  here,  who  has 
a  large  number  of  slaves,  who  will  say  that 
they  are  more  profitable  than  that?  I  do  not  be- 
lieve there  is  one.  Well  then,  we  have.the  one 
fourth  left.  This  leaves  fifty  thousand  laborers, 
and  I  put  the  value  of  their  labor  at  sixty  dol- 
lers  each,  per  annum.  This  will  produce  three 
10 


millions  of  dollars  annually.  But  from  this  you 
must  deduct  at  least  twenty  dollars  per  head  for 
raiment,  food,  house  room,  and  doctor's  bills, 
and  that  amounts  to  a  million  of  dollars.  Is 
this  deduction  too  little?  Is  there  any  individ- 
ual here  who  wiU  say  that  a  grown,  working  ne- 
gro does  not  cost  his  master,  leaving  out  of  the 
question  what  he  steals  from  him  and  sells  at  the 
nearest  town — is  there  any  one  that  will  say  that 
an  average  expense  of  twenty  dollars  for  this 
class  of  slaves,  is  too  small  an  estimate.  This 
then  will  make  a  million  of  dollars,  and  there 
will  be  only  a  profit  of  two  millions  left.  You 
must  also  deduct  about  five  per  cent,  from  the 
value  of  all  the  slaves,  for  deaths  :  which  leaves 
the  net  profit  on  the  capital  of  sixty-one  mil 
lions  of  (loUars  about  one  million,  six  hundred> 
ninety-five  thousand,  which  is  less  than  three 
per  cent.,  or  about  half  as  much  as  the  moneyed 
capital  would  yield ;  and  this  valuation  is  a  very 
liberal  one  for  the  slavery  importation  side  of 
the  question — as  every  one  must  acknowledge, 
who  has  had  any  experience  in  the  matter. — 
This  estimate,  is  at  least  a  fair  one,  applied  to 
the  part  of  the  country  where  I  live,and  I  believe 
that  slave  property  is  as  well  managed  there,  as  it 
is  any  where.  It  is  true  the  man  may  have  upoa 
his  farm  only  such  slaves  as  are  able  to  work. — 
He  may  have  no  women  or  children  among  them, 
and  he  will,  in  such  case,  make  a  little  more  pro- 
fit. But  if  you  take  the  whole  slave  property 
together,  the  average  will  be  as  I  have  stated. 

Well  then,  in  a  pecuniary  point  of  view,  as  a 
mere  calculation  of  dollars  and  cents,  if  I  am 
right  in  my  estimate,  it  is  not  our  interest  to  in- 
vest more  capital  in  slave  property.  It  is  against 
the  interest  of  the  commonwealth  to  do  it;  man- 
ifestly so,  if  I  am  right,  or  any  where  near  right. 
Well,  that  is  a  considerable  point  gained ;  out 
there  are  considerations  in  connexion  with  this 
part  of  the  subject,  that  have  an  important  bear- 
ing upon  it,  according  to  my  view  of  the  matter. 
That  white  labor  is  the  cheapest  I  have  no  doubt. 
I  have  never  entertained  a  doubt  on  that  point. 
I  have  never  entertained  a  doubt  that  it  is  the 
interest  of  the  great  slave  holding  community  of 
this  state,  to  sell  their  slaves.  If  they  were  not 
attached  to  them,  and  if  they  did  notaislike  see- 
ing those  who  have  grown  up  with  them  and 
their  children,  driven  into  a  bondage  more  gall- 
ing, more  oppressive,  where  their  raiment  and 
food  would  not  be  equal  to  what  they  now  enjoy, 
and  where,  owing  to  the  great  amount  of  slave 
population,  their  restrictions  would  be  greater, 
it  would  be  of  decided  advantage  to  the  owners 
of  slaves  here  to  dispose  of  those  slaves  and  in- 
vest their  capital  in  some  other  way. 

It  is  the  working  portion  of  this  Common- 
wealth, those  who  have  to  work  their  way  up 
from  small  beginnings  in  order  to  gain  a  posi- 
tion for  themselves  and  their  families,  it  is  this 
class  of  the  community,  who  are  interested  in 
retaining  the  institution  of  slavery  in  this  state; 
because  the  slaves  keep  out  a  pauper  population; 
the  emptying  of  the  jails  and  the  poor  nouses  of 
Europe,  the  renegades  from  all  parts  of  the 
earth,  who  come  here  and  compete  with  the 
whole  population  in  point  of  labor.  Do  not 
understand  me  as  saying  one  word  against  that 
class  of  foreigners  who  ordinarily  come  here, 
because  yery  few  oi  tJios«  whom  I  hare  men- 


74 


tioned,  the  renegades  of  other  countries,  ever 
come  to  Kentucky  under  the  purifying  process 
of  keeping  negroes.  In  that  respect  they  have 
a  happy  influence.  The  better  class  of  foreign- 
ers come  here,  while  the  dregs  of  the  emigrant 
population  will  be  found  in  the  cities.  You  will 
see  them  there  in  thousands,  such  men  as  make 
it  hardly  safe  to  walk  the  streets,  unless  you 
have  your  pocket-book  secured.  But  nine  out 
ten  of  those  who  come  here,  I  am  willing  to 
take  by  the  hand  whenever  they  declare  tlieir 
intention  of  renouncing  their  allegiance  to  a 
foreign  government,  and  avow  their  attachment 
to  our  institutions  and  declare  that  they  intend 
to  live  under  them.  What  is  the  evidence  of  its 
being  the  interest  of  the  owners  of  slaves  to  dis- 

f)ose  of  that  sort  of  property?  Because  slave 
abor  is  the  dearest.  Why  is  it  that  your  shoe  and 
boot  makers  go  all  the  way  to  Lynn  and  pur- 
chase the  fabrics  of  free  labor?  Because  they 
can  be  procured  for  one  third  the  price,  and  after 
paying  the  expense  of  transportation  they  can 
undersell  your  citizens.  Why  is  it  that  you  ob- 
tain your  cotton  and  woollen  fabrics  more  cheap- 
ly abroad  than  you  do  at  home?  Why  is  it  that 
even  in  the  interior  of  the  state,  where  I  live,  at 
a  distance  of  a  hundred  miles  from  Cincinnati, 
you  can  send  to  that  city  and  buy  furniture  and 
cabinet  work  and  carry  it  round  by  the  Kentucky 
river,  a  distance  of  a  hundred  and  fifty  miles, 
and  all  this  at  one  third  less  cost  than  you  can 
get  it  for  at  home?  It  is  because  our  vocation 
IS  different;  it  is  agricultural. 

These  with  a  thousand  other  considerations, 
convince  me  that  free  labor  is  cheaper  than 
slave  labor,  and  that  it  is  the  working  portion  of 
the  community  alone  that  is  interested  in  keep- 
ing up  this  institution.  We  all  know  that  the 
institution  of  slavery  is  the  best  in  the  world  for 
keeping  society  from  becoming  fixed  and  settled. 
Look  at  those  who  wore  originally  overseers  in 
Virginia  and  Kentucky,  at  their  first  settlement. 
They  have  many  of  them  become  the  proprietors 
of  the  very  estates  upon  which  they  were  at  first 
employed  as  overseers.  And  their  descendants 
now  fill  the  halls  of  legislation  and  the  courts 
of  judicature  of  the  country,  whilst  the  descen- 
dants of  the  original  proprietors  have  descended 
to  a  different  level  in  the  scale  of  society. 
Such  revolutions  in  the  condition  of  individu- 
als do  not  take  place  half  so  often,  where  the 
institution  of  slavery  does  not  exist  where  it  is 
not  recognized.  Go  to  New  York  and  to  Massa- 
chusetts, and  you  will  find  manjr  estates  that 
have  descended  in  the  same  families  while  the 
poor  laborer  is  the  poor  laborer  still.  It  is  true, 
there  are  exceptions,  but  not  the  same  number  of 
exceptions  as  under  our  institutions.  So  you 
will  see,  though  I  am  again.st  extending  this  in- 
stitution or  increasing  it,  it  has  a  wholesome 
effect  in  some  respects,  while  it  has  in  other  re- 
gpecte  a  highly  injurious  effect.  I  believe  that 
they,  who  are  raised  up  where  the  institution 
of  slavery  exists,  with  some  exceptions,  have 
been  uniformly  distinguished.  Who  has  ever 
Been  such  a  constellation  of  great  men  as  the 
Southern  states  liavo  produced,  since  we  have 
achieved  our  liV)erties?  Look  at  the  great  men 
of  Virginia,  South  Carolina,  and  of  Kentucky, 
and  where  are  the  men  who  are  worthy  to  be 
compared  with  them,  in  the  free  states  of  the 


north.  We  have  had  it  is  true,  an  Adams  or  two, 
a  Webster,  and  a  Wright,  but  they  are  few  and 
far  between.  But  you  will  find  them  in  the 
great  south.  And  sir,  there  is  a  nobleness  of 
spirit,  a  feeling  above  littleness,  a  greatness  of 
soul  that  grows  up  where  the  institution  of 
slavery  exists,  that  is  scarcely  to  be  found 
in  any  other  country.  One  says  it  would  be 
better  that  we  should  have  more  slaves,  because 
there  are  not  enough  to  perform  the  labors  of 
the  country,  when  the  institution  ceases.  If 
you  drive  them  out  we  shall  be  overwhelmed 
with  a  white  population.  For  my  own  part  I 
want  a  great  deal  of  room.  Look  at  some  por- 
tions of  the  north  where  the  population  is  hud- 
dled together  in  such  a  manner,  that  although 
perhaps,  in  their  habits  and  customs  they  may 
be  equal  with  us,  the  pestilence  Avherever  it  pre- 
vails is  more  fatal  amongst  them  than  with  us. 
They  are  swept  off  in  greater  numbers  than  in 
those  portions  of  the  country  where  the  poula- 
tion  is  sparse.  And  sir,  if  you  bring  in  a  dense 
population  here,  why  as  a  matter  of  course,  you 
decrease  the  prospect  of  the  free  laboring  man  to 
obtain  high  Avages,  the  competition  will  be  so 

f^reat.  I  do  not  think  it  is  the  interest  of  slave- 
lolders  here,  that  they  should  emancipate  rather 
than  keep  their  slaves,  because  three  per  cent,  is 
better  than  nothing.  If  you  take  them  away  al- 
together you  sink  sixty  one  millions  of  dollars 
worth  of  property,  you  sink  one  million  eight 
hundred  thousancl  dollars  of  net  profits  annual- 
ly, that  are  derived  from  it,  and  I  take  it  that  we 
have  the  same  right  to  the  offspring  that  we 
have  to  the  original  property.  It  is  all  secured 
by  the  same  law  and  by  the  same  constitution, 
according  to  every  principle  that  is  right,  proper, 
and  just.  I  am,  therefore,  not  for  emancipation 
in  any  shape  or  in  any  manner,  except  permis- 
sive emancipation. 

But  there  is  another  reason  why  slave  proper- 
ty is  not  going  to  remain  as  valuable  as  it  is. — 
Every  man  who  lives  on  the  border  of  the  com- 
monwealth next  to  Virginia,  where  slave  proper- 
ty is  secured  by  want  of  facility  to  travel,  knows 
that  slaves  in  the  interior,  even  when  forty,  fif- 
ty, or  a  hundred  miles  distant  from  the  otlier 
frontier,  are  less  valuable  on  account  of  the  fa- 
cilities which  they  possess  for  escape,  and  on  ac- 
count of  the  interposition  of  the  meddlesome 
abolitionists.  Shall  we  then,  as  a  matter  of  pe- 
cuniary interest,  go  on  investing  our  capital  in 
the  purchase  of  this  description  of  property, 
whicn  is  constantly  becoming  less  secure  and 
less  profitable?  Now,  I  make  use  of  one  obser- 
vation Avhich  probably  some  gentleman  may 
take  exception  to.  I  say  there  is  no  man  living, 
that  sees  in  the  hand  of  Providence  what  I  see, 
that  docs  not  perceive  that  there  is  a  power  at 
work  above  us,  that  is  above  all  human  institu- 
tions, and  one  that  will  yet  prevail,  even  in  Vir- 
ginia, Maryland,  and  Kentucky.  Yes,  there  is 
a  power  at  work,  which  is  above  all  human  pow- 
er, and  one  which  we  cannot  resist. 

I  do  not  say  that  I  desire  this;  but  that  it  is 
coming — that  it  is  as  steadily  marching  upon  us 
as  we  are  marching  forward  to  the  grave,  and 
that  we  do  not  know  when  it  will  come,  is  per- 
fectly certain  from  the  evidences  around  us;  and 
should  we  go  on  investing  our  capital  in  this 
property  we  shall  find  this  to  be  the  case.    Why 


75 


sir,  in  the  state  of  Maryland,  there  is  already  a 
great  diminution  in  the  value  of  that  kind  of 
property.  I  do  not  say  that  there  is  a  positive 
diminution  in  the  state  of  Virginia,  but  it  ceases 
to  increase  to  the  extent  that  it  did  formerly. — 
The  shadow  upon  the  sun  dial  is  advancing  suf- 
ficiently to  show  that  this  is  not  growing  or  in- 
creasing in  that  state;  at  all  events,  that  the  in- 
crease is  not  so  great  as  in  time  past.  And  the 
same  thing  has  already  commenced  in  Kentucky; 
and  this  proceeds  from  the  power  which  we  can- 
rot  resist.  We  may  tie  it  up — I  desire  that  it 
should  be  restricted  by  whatever  legislation  we 
may  adopt  upon  that  subject — but  ■w-lien  the  De- 
ity has  sent  forth  his  fiat  that  this  institution  is 
to  cease,  it  will  cease,  and  no  human  effort  can 
arrest  it.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  institution  of 
slavery  is  going  to  exist  for  all  time.  I  am  con- 
vinced, from  the  evidences  around  me,  that  it 
■will  not,  and  I  cannot  see  how  we  can  benefit 
the  slaves,  or  better  their  condition  by  any  thing 
we  can  do.  I  have  been  imable  to  come  to  any 
other  conclusion,  and  I  have  given  the  subject  a 
careful  examination.  But  that  it  is  an  institu- 
tion that  is  not  destined  to  endure,  I  think  is 
most  certain.  We  need  not  be  afraid  that  this 
slave  population  will  not  increase,  so  as  to  keep 
tip  their  numbers;  though  they  do  not  increase 
in  the  same  proportion  as  formerlv.  In  1831, 
there  were  one  hundred  and  forty  thousand  and 
t«n  slaves  in  Kentucky.  In  1848,  there  were 
one  hundred  and  ninety-two  thousand,  four  hun- 
dred and  seventy,  and  I  suppose  there  are  about 
two  hundred  thousand  now.  There  was  an  in- 
crease of  the  number  of  slaves  during  the  seven- 
teen years  between  1831  and  1848,  of  fifty-two 
thousand,  four  hundred  and  sixty;  consequently, 
an  increase  of  the  amount  of  capital  of  one  hun- 
dred and  forty  thousand  dollars.  The  increase 
has  kept  up  in  a  reasonable  ratio  with  the  in- 
crease of  the  white  population.  And  I  think 
that  those  who  believe  that  slavery  will  exist  al- 
ways, and  do  desire  to  have  it  exist  here,  ought 
to  be  content  with  this  increase. 

It  is  said,  why  prevent  the  poor  man  from 
owning  this  description  of  property,  why  pre- 
vent him  from  buying  slaves  where  he  can  pro- 
cure them  cheapest?  I  do  not  think  that  the 
price  of  slaves  will  be  increased  by  prohibiting 
bringing  them  into  the  state.  The  price  is  reg- 
ulated very  much  by  the  price  of  our  commod- 
ities in  the  south. 

Well  sir,  as  to  the  wealth  of  the  country;  un- 
der the  statute  of  1833,  though  it  has  not  been 
very  much  enforced,  let  us  see  how  the  wealth  of 
the  country  has  run  up.  The  taxable  property 
in  the  state  in  1831  was  one  hundred  and  twelve 
millions  two  hundred  and  eighty  five  thousand 
seven  hundred  and  eighty  dollars.  In  1848,  it 
amounted  to  two  hundred  and  seventy  two  mill- 
ions eight  hundred  and  forty  seven  thousand 
six  hundred  and  ninety  six,  an  increase  in  seven- 
teen years  of  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  per 
cent.  It  is  true,  there  have  been  some  few  .sub- 
jects added  to  the  taxable  property  in  that  peri- 
od. The  money  capital  has  been  made  taxable 
property,  and  they  have  made  some  portions  of 
the  stock  of  the  country  taxable.  But  in  1831, 
the  cash  capital  was  exceedingly  scarce,  ex- 
changes were  against  us;  the  me'rehants  who 
went  to  the  north  had  to  pay  something  like  five 


percent,  for  funds  that  they  could  use  in  Phila- 
delphia and  New  York.  That  was  a  heavy  tax 
upon  the  country.  Well  what  has  been  the  in- 
fluence of  this  wholesome  law?  Instead  of 
bringing  in  slaves  from  Virginia  and  elsewhere, 
money  has  been  brought  into  the  country,  and 
the  effect  is,  that  Kentucky,  though  a  very  young 
state,  has  become  one  of  the  moneyed  states. — 
Exchanges  are  now  in  our  favor,  instead  of  be- 
ing against  us.  We  are  not  obliged  every  time 
we  go  out  of  the  state  for  the  purpose  of  pur- 
chasing an  article  that  may  be  needed  in  our 
families,  to  purchase  exchanges  at  a  premium  of 
five  per  cent.  And  this  is  so  much  added  to  the 
property  of  the  state.  And  it  is  in  this  way 
that  we  have  made  this  property  more  valuable 
than  slave  property,  which  brings  but  three  per 
cent.,  and  it  is  by  getting  clear  of  this  difference 
in  exchanges  that  Kentucky  has  become  wealthy 
and  powerful. 

Now  put  this  provision  in  the  constitution,  let 
it  appear  that  this  traffic  is  to  cease  so  far  as  the 
investment  of  capital  and  the  bringing  in  of 
slaves  is  concerned,  and  Kentucky  will  rise  up 
and  be  still  more  powerful.  But  increase  the 
number  of  your  slaves  and  the  product  of  your 
property  wUl  be  less  and  les.s.  A  man  who  has 
three  or  four  able  bodied  slaves  may  make  them 
profitable,  but  when  a  man  has  forty  or  fifty,  if 
he  makes  any  thing,  it  is  but  a  small  pittance 
upon  the  capital  invested.  Increase  them,  and 
the  product  of  their  labor  will  be  less  and  less. 

Well,  what  kind  of  slaves  do  we  get?  You 
see  almost  every  slave  state,  except  probably 
Texas  and  Arkansas,  are  making  negro  raising 
a  business  to  obtain  a  living  by.  It  may  be  said 
that  wheat  is  the  staple  production  of  Virginia; 
but  I  say  that  negroes  are  the  staple  production 
in  reality.  As  to  Tennessee,  I  am  told  that 
there  was  not  a  man  elected  to  the  legislature 
who  was  not  pledged  to  support  a  measure 
against  bringing  in  any  more  slaves  into  the 
state.  Now  what  kind  of  slaves  shall  we  get 
here?  Shall  we  get  those  fine,  honest  servants, 
that  we  want  to  entrust  with  our  property,  or 
shall  we  get  these  scape-gallowses,  rogues,  and 
rascals  forced  upon  us,  not  only  ready  to  steal 
and  bum  our  property,  but  to  contaminate  those 
we  have  already.  It  seems  to  me  sir,  that  this 
will  be  the  inevitable  effect  of  opening  the  door 
for  the  admission  of  negroes,  to  be  brought  here 
in  droves,  and  in  chains.  Gentlemen  may  say 
they  do  not  think  so,  but  when  the  fact  stares 
them  in  the  face  they  cannot  resist  it. 

For  myself,  what  few  slaves  I  have,  and  those 
that  are  owned  among  my  friends  and  relatives, 
why  sir,  they  are  endeared  to  me,  and  it  ought  to  be 
so  with  every  man.  I  feel  thattheyarehuman  be- 
ings, and  that  their  morals  should  be  attended 
to,  and  that  they  should  not  be  made  to  associate 
with  rogues  and  rascals.  It  appears  to  me  to  be 
in  the  nature  of  a  punishment  to  the  slaves  to 
sell  them.  I  do  not  want  my  slaves  who  have 
grown  up  with  my  children,  and  that  have  be- 
come attached  to  my  family  to  be  associated  with 
these  scape-gallowses  and  to  be  corrupted  by 
them  any  more  than  I  want  the  laboring  white 
population  to  be  mingled  with  the  offscourings 
of  Europe  that  are  brought  in  here.  Suppose  we 
bring  into  this  commonwealth  twenty  thousand 
of  this  kind  of  slaves,  with  their  morals  de- 


76 


stroyed,  and  distribute  them  among  our  slaves, 
the  whole  amount  you  have,  and  those  you 
bring  in.  "would  not  sell  to  any  man  who  appre- 
ciates morals  as  he  ought,  for  the  amount 
which  those  would  bringwhich  we  have  already. 
The  whole  civilized  world  has  turned  its  back 
upon  the  African  slave  trade;  even  Portugal  is 
now  coming  into  civilization  and  Christianity 
upon  this  subject,  if  I  may  be  allowed  the  ex- 
pression; she  is  placing  herself  by  the  side  of 
England,  and  of  France,  and  of  all  the  enlight- 
ened nations  of  the  earth.  And  what  is  there  in 
the  African  slave  trade,  that  is  worse  than  to  go 
into  another  state  and  to  bring  slaves  from 
thence,  tearing  mothers  from  tlieir  children,  sep- 
arating husbands  from  their  wives,  without  any 
offence  charged  against  them ;  driving  them  along 
in  chains  as  if  they  were  beasts  of  prey?  Is  it 
not  a  scene  that  liuman  nature  revolts  at  the 
sight  of  ?  Is  it  not  a  scene  that  no  man,  unless 
he  is  determined  to  engage  in  this  traffic,  can 
look  upon  without  feelings,  deep  and  powerful? 
But  what  is  there  in  the  African  slave  trade, 
which  makes  it  more  excusable?  There,  by  the 
laws  of  war,  as  practiced  among  those  barbarians, 
prisoners  are  brought  in  and  sold  as  slaves. — 
Well,  the  captor  has  a  right  to  the  life  of  his 

Srisoner,  according  to  their  laws  of  warfare. — 
[e  may  kill  him  if  he  pleases.  I  am  no  apolo- 
gist for  this;  but  it  is  inflicting  upon  him  a 
weaker  punishment.  There  is  suffering,  to  be 
sure,  upon  the  passage;  and  there  is  suffering 
experienced  by  those  whom  we  send  out  to  Afri- 
ca, but  when  they  arrive  here  they  get  the  bene- 
fit of  civilization;  they  are  placed  in  a  more  el- 
evated scale  than  they  occupied  before.  But 
nearly  all  of  Christendom — and  the  residue  is 
coming  in — have  denounced  this  traffic,  and  put 
those  who  are  engaged  in  it  upon  a  footing  with 
those  who  are  guilty  of  the  worst  crimes  that  can 
be  committed  against  humanity.  They  refuse 
thera  an  honorable  death,  but  hang  them  as  rob- 
bers and  pirates,  and  the  committers  of  high 
treason.  The  slaves  that  are  already  civilized 
and  christianized,  do  not  derive  these  advanta- 
ges. It  is  true,  I  believe,  they  are  treated  as  well 
in  Kentucky  as  in  any  state,  which  is  the  only 
point  of  view  you  can  put  it  in,  that  will  in  any 
way  or  in  any  manner  excuse  us.  And  I  suppose 
that  in  Virginia,  where  negroes  are  grown  up 
for  the  purpose  of  sale,  there  is  very  little  differ- 
ence in  the  manner  of  treating  them. 

As  this  subject  has  been  taken  up  a  little  out 
of  its  order,  in  consequence  of  the  report  of  the 
committee  coming  in  when  I  did  not  expect  it,  I 
have  probably  detained  the  committee  longer 
than  I  ought  to  have  done.  But  I  will  ask  the 
committee  one  question  before  I  stop.  How 
would  any  gentleman  here  feel,  if  we  were  in  the 
minority,  and  another  race  of  people  was  to 
come,  and  without  any  offence  or  injury  being 
committed  against  them  by  us — without  any 
complaint,  take  the  wife  of  one  of  these  honor- 
able delegates,  and  tie  her  in  liis  presence,  or  his 
daughter,  or  his  son,  and  chain  them  to  a  hun- 
dred other  individuals  who  had  committed  no 
offence  against  God  or  man,  and  take  them  away 
where  they  could  never  be  recovered?  If  there 
is  any  man  who  could  look  upon  a  scene  of  this 
kind — because  they  are  human  beings  and  liave 
souls  as  we  have — without  feelings  of  tlie  deep- 


est remorse,  I  can  only  say  that  he  is  differently 
organized  from  me.  I  say  that  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky ought  to  be  magnanimous,  chivalrous, 
just,  and  humane;  that  our  great  constitutional 
charter  should  have  affixed  upon  its  face,  upon 
its  very  front,  an  expression  for  posterity  and  for 
other  states  and  nations  to  read  that  we  do  not 
believe  in  such  a  traffic,  and  that  we  set  our  fa- 
ces against  it  in  every  way,  and  in  every  shape. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  It  will  be  recollected 
by  the  convention,  that  I  suggested  the  proprie- 
ty of  postponing  this  matter,  and  making  it  the 
special  order  of  the  day  for  the  day  fixed  upon 
for  the  consideration  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee. This  suggestion,  however,  did  not  seem 
to  meet  the  approbation  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison.  He  has  thought  proper  to  proceed  to- 
day, and  feeling  it  incumbent  upon  me  to  show 
that  the  gentleman  did  misappreJiend  the  report 
of  the  committee,  and  feeling  a  deep  regret  that 
he  did  not  wait  until  he  had  examined  that  re- 
port, I  will  proceed  to  make  a  few  remarks  in  an- 
swer to  the  gentleman. 

I  had  the  honor  of  a  seat  in  this  hall,  as  repre- 
sentative from  the  county  of  Jefferson,  when  the 
act  of  1833  Avas  passed,  and  voted  for  it.  Had  I 
been  here  at  the  last  session  of  the  legislature,  I 
should  have  voted  against  its  repeal.  But  I  do 
object  to  placing  the  provisions  of  that  act  in  the 
constitution;  because  it  is  evident  to  every  mem- 
ber here,  that  if  we  do  so  we  shall  cause  a  heavy 
vote  to  be  ca-st  against  that  constitution,  when  it 
shall  be  submitted  to  the  people. 

We  know  that  a  large  number  of  the  dele- 
gates in  this  hall  were  members  of  the  last  legis- 
lature, and  voted  for  the  repeal  of  that  law. — 
The  repeal  was  carried,  and  it  is  but  fair  to  pre- 
sume that  they  reflected  the  will  of  their  con- 
stituents. And  will  you  incorporate  in  the  con- 
stitution a  provision  that  must  inevitably 
cause  a  large  and  heavy  vote  to  be  cast  against 
it? 

I  listened  with  a  great  deal  of  pleasure  to  ma- 
ny of  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son. I  listened,  however,  to  other  portions  of  his 
argument  with  rather  different  feelings.  I  im- 
agined at  one  time  that  I  was  hearing  the  eman- 
cipation candidate  wlio  chased  me  through  the 
county  of  Jefferson  last  summer.  Indeed  one 
friend  suggested,  why,  is  that  Thomasson;  an- 
other, no,  it  is  Brecjcinridge  from  Fayette.  If 
this  convention  will  tolerate  an  anecdote,  I  will 
give  them  one  in  illustration  of  my  feelings  in 
reference  to  a  portion  of  the  gentleman's  argu- 
ment. There  was  a  young  man,  who  was  for  the 
first  time  erapannelled  upon  a  jury,  and  the  case 
to  be  tried  was  for  stealing  a  calf.  When  the 
plaintiff  had  got  through  his  side  of  the  case  the 
young  man  hunched  the  juror  next  him,  and  re- 
marked, "what  a  scoundrel  the  defendant  must 
have  been  to  steal  his  neighbor's  calf."  The 
defendant's  counsel  introduced  his  testimony, 
and  then  the  young  man  said,  "why  I  was  en- 
tirely wrong,  it  is  the  plaintiff  that  has  been  trj-- 
ing  to  steal  the  defendant's  calf."  His  friend 
said  to  him,  "  wait  until  you  hear  the  speeches 
of  the  lawyers."  The  plaintiff's  counsel  ad- 
dressed the  jury.  "  I  am  wrong  again,"  said  the 
youth;  "the  defendant  is  the  thief."  The  coun- 
sel for  the  defence  then  addressed  the  jury.  "I 
am  still  wrong,"  said  the  young  man.    "  Wait," 


77 


said  the  experienced  juror,  "till  you  hear  the 
charge  of  tne  judge."  After  thejurv  had  re- 
tired, the  old  juror  remarked,  "  well,  Tom,  what 

do  you  thiuk   of  the  case  now?"     "By ,  I 

don't  believe  the  calf  belonged  to  either  of  them." 
That  was  precisely  my  case.  First,  I  thought  I 
was  listening  to  a  pro-slavery  man;  afterwards 
I  thought  I  was  listening  to  an  emancipationist, 
And  finally  I  came  to  the  conclusion  tuat  I  was 
listening  to  neither  one  nor  the  other. 

The  gentleman  objects  to  the  report  of  the 
committee,  because  he  says  that  he  is  unwilling 
that  emancipation  should  take  place  in  Ken- 
tucky, even  if  the  owners  should  be  paid  for 
their  negroes.  I  beg  leava  to  differ  with  the  gen- 
tleman there.  If  it  should  ever  become  so  pal- 
pably necessary  for  us  to  get  clear  of  this  descrip- 
tion of  property  as  to  make  the  owners  willing 
that  emancipation  should  take  place,  and  the  peo- 
ple willing  to  pav  for  them,  I  am  in  favor  of  em- 
Eowering  the  legislature  to  do  so.  It  never  will 
e  done  till  the  necessity  becomes  so  palpable 
that  there  is  no  alternative  left  to  them. 

But,  sir,  if  you  should  strikeout  the  provision 
of  the  constitution  which  now  exists,  and  which 
the  committee  have  retained,  do  you  not  add  to 
the  strength  and  force  of  the  arguments  of  the 
emancipationifis?  They  will  say,  you  have  de- 
prived us  of  the  power  of  accomplishing  the  ob- 
ject, even  at  the  expense  of  paying  for  the  slaves. 
They  will  say  to  you,  you  have  left  us  no  alter- 
native. But  when  the  necessity  shall  arrive  and 
shall  have  become  so  palpable  that  we  must  ex- 
tricate slavery  at  some  price,  not  having  it  in 
our  power  to  get  clear  of  the  evil  by  paying  for 
them,  we  must  actually  extricate  them  by  death 
itself.  Will  not  this,  1  ask,  l)e  a  powerful  argu- 
ment in  the  mouth  of  the  abolitionist?  Will  he 
not  rouse  the  feelings  of  the  community,  and 
induce  them  not  only  to  vote  against  the  consti- 
tution, but  rouse  them  so  as  to  prevent  such  a 
provision  from  being  contained  in  any  other  con- 
stitution that  might  be  made? 

But  the  gentleman  wishes  a  provision  to  be 
inserted,  which  will  make  every  slai'e  that  is 
brought  into  the  state,  free  upon  his  arrival,  ex- 
cept he  be  brought  by  an  immigrant,  or  unless  the 
title  to  such  slave  be  derived  by  marriage,  de- 
scent, or  devise.  What  effect  would  this  have? 
Why  every  man  who  lived  in  a  neighboring  state, 
who  wished  to  manumit,  and  thus  get  clear  of 
an  old  and  unprofitable  slave,  would  only  have 
to  bring  him  over  into  Kentucky,  and  tlien  the 
slave  would  be  free,  and  would  remain  here  as  a 
eui^e  upon  us.  You  will  put  it  in  the  power  of 
residents  of  other  states  to  flood  our  country 
with  a  black  population,  to  be  made  free,  by 
sending  them  here  without  requiring  bond  and 
security  for  their  maintenance  and  good  beha- 
vior from  the  state  whence  they  are  brought. — 
Again,  you  enable  every  free  negro  who  may 
choose  to  do  so,  to  come  into  this  state.  A  free 
negro  resident  in  Ohio,  or  any  other  free  state, 
has  only  to  get  some  abolitionist  to  pass  for  his 
master,  and  then  he  may  come  into  this  state  and 
reside  here.  I  would  fain  hope  at  least  thut  the 
gentleman  wished  to  produce  no  such  result  as 
this. 

The  gentleman  has  gone  into  some  statistical 
details,  estimates  I  think  he  termed  them,  to 
show  you  that  slave  labor  was  not  profitable.    I 


will  give  the  gentleman  a  few  officiiU  returns, 
which  I  think  will  convince  him  that  his  esti- 
mates are  wrong.  We  will  take  the  last  year. 
The  increased  value  of  taxable  property  was 
eighteen  millions  of  dollars,  speaking  in  round 
numbers.  That  may  be  taken  as  the  increased 
wealth  of  the  state.  Now  the  Stat*  of  Ohio, 
with  a  population  nearly  three  times  as  great 
has  had  no  such  increase  of  wealth.  The  actual 
increase  in  the  value  of  taxable  property  in  the 
State  of  Ohio,  which,  as  I  before  remarked,  has 
three  times  the  population  and  labor  that  pro- 
duces wealth  that  we  have,  was  but  about  eleven 
millions.  The  increased  wealth  of  Indiana 
about  four  millions.  Take  Indiana  and  Ohio 
added  together  and  they  have  about  four  times 
the  labor,  and  yet  the  increased  wealth  of  Ken- 
tucky hjis  been  greater  than  that  of  both  those 
states,  with  Illinois  thrown  into  the  bargain. 
These  facts  are  taken  from  the  ofiicial  returns. 

But  the  gentleman  says  that  white  labor  is 
cheaper  than  black.  That  mav  be  true.  Why 
is  it  so?  It  is  because  white  labor  in  the  free 
States  is  cheaper  than  black  labor  is  here.  The 
gentleman,  I  trust,  will  not  maintain  tliat  white 
here  is  cheaper  than  black  labor;  and  I  ask  if  he 
wishes  to  reduce  the  value  of  white  labor  here, 
and  put  it  upon  a  par  with  the  labor  of  those  free 
States?  If  he  wishes  to  keep  its  value  up,  and 
slavery  has  that  effect,  why  prevent  the  increase 
of  slaves? 

But  the  gentleman  spoke  of  the  horrors  of  the 
slave  trade.  He  did  it  eloquently,  and  I  agree 
with  him  in  everj'  sentence  that  he  uttered  upon 
the  subject.  But  when  he  assumes  the  position 
that  there  is  no  difference  between  the  African, 
slave  trade  and  the  trade  between  the  States,  then 
I  take  issue  with  him.  Is  there  no  difference  be- 
tween subjecting  a  free  man  to  slavery,  and  the 
removal  of  a  slave,  or  a  change  of  masters,  -when 
he  has  been  accustomed  to  slavery  all  his  life? — 
Can  the  gentleman  see  no  difference?  If  he  can- 
not, I  imagine  that  I  can  distinctly  see  a  differ- 
ence. I  will  go  as  far  as  any  individual  to  sup- 
press the  .slave  trade  with  Africa,  and  the  slave 
trade  between  the  States  too.  But  the  gentle- 
man is  mistaken,  when  he  supposes  that  the 
report  of  the  committee  does  not  provide  for  this. 
It  provides  expressly  that  the  legislature  shall 
have  power  to  pa.ss  laws  to  prohibit  their  being 
brought  here  as  merchandise.  They  are  not  to 
be  brought  here  in  droves,  chained"  together,  as 
the  gentleman  remarked .  They  are  to  be  brought 
here  only  by  immigrants,  who  come  to  reside  in 
the  State,  or  when  the  title  to  such  slaves  is  ac- 
quired by  marriage,  descent,  or  devise;  or  an 
individual  may  go  out  of  the  State  and  bring 
them  in  for  his  own  use,  if  the  legislature  should 
see  fit  to  permit  this  to  be  done.  With  these 
brief  remarks,  I  will  move  that  the  committee 
rise,  that  the  further  discussion  of  this  subject 
may  be  deferred  until  the  day  which  has  been 
fixed  for  the  consideration  of  the  report  of  the 
committee. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  moved  to  amend  the  sixth 
resolution  by  inserting  the  following : 

"  Or  that  shall  be  brought  into  tlie  state  by 
bona  fide  purchasers  for  their  own  use." 

Mr.  NUT  TALL.  I  shall  make  but  few  re- 
marks on  this  proposition.  If  we  wish  to  get 
clear  of  the   much  vexed  questions  that  will 


is 


arise  from  giving  the  leg^laltlW'fiStver  to  pass 
laws  enabling  the  owners  of  slaves  to  emancipate 
them  in  this  countiy,  my  proposition  will  save 
all  the  trouble  and  all  the  danger  that  will  arise 
from  adjudication  in  cases  upon  reserved  rights, 
"Which  will  necessarily  spring  up  when  a  free 
ne»ro  who  has  gone  out  of  the  state  returns 
and  asserts  his  rights  here  as  a  free  man.  I  am 
not  for  giving  any  man  the  power  to  manumit 
his  slaves  in  Kentucky.  If  he  becomes  so  pious 
and  as  my  friend  would  have  it,  so  Godly  given 
that  he  cannot  consistently  with  his  conscience 
live  in  the  state  in  which  he  was  born  or  which  he 
has  made  the  home  of  his  adoption,  and  cannot 
hold  slaves,  let  him  leave  the  state  ;  let  him  and 
his  slaves  together  leave  the  commonwealth.  Now 
■what  will  be  the  result  ?  A  man  frees  his  slaves, 
and  he  gives  bonds  that  he  will  provide  for  their 
leaving  the  state  of  Kentucky,  and  actually  does 
furnish  the  means  to  transport  them  into  a  for- 
eigr  state,  to  Africa,  or  to  Liberia.  Well  sir, 
the  veay  moment  the  manumitted  slave  gets  to 
Africa,  or  to  Liberia,  and  is  not  satisfied  with 
his  lot,  and  chooses  to  come  back,  if  he  is  a 
free  man  ipso  facto,  no  qualification  that  we  can 
attach  to  our  enactment,  will  prohibit  him  from 
coming  back  into  this  state  as  a  free  man.  But 
■when  he  goes  out  of  the  state,  and  is  not  freed 
until  he  gets  beyond  the  territorial  jurisdiction 
of  the  commonwealth,  then  we  may  impose  re- 
strictions, so  as  to  prevent  him  from  coming 
back.  Sir,  I  do  not  myself,  look  forward,  I  will 
say  in  reply  to  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  to 
the  time  when  this  commonwealth  of  old  Ken- 
tucky ever  will  be  a  non-slaveholding  state.  I 
hope  it  never  may  be.  And  if  the  gentleman 
can  see  the  finger  of  God,  working  out.  some 
great  moral,  religious,  or  sublime  problem  with 
regard  to  the  slave  question,  "why,  sir,  it  is  more 
than  I  can,  and  if  I  had  such  a  vision  as  the 
gentleman  has  to  perceive  all  these  glorious 
things  to  be  attainable,  I  would  not  attempt  to 
thrust  mvself  between  God  Almighty  and  the 
subject ;  "because,  sir,  if  He  has  determined  that 
slavery  shall  cease  to  exist,  all  the  restrictions  on 
earth  can  never  prevent  or  stay  His  purpose. 
The  state  of  Kentucky  has  for  all  time  to  come 
to  be  either  a  frontier  slavery,  or  a  frontier  non 
slavery  state,  and  the  great  question  which  her 
citizens  have  to  determine  is,  whether  she  will 
separate  from  her  old  connections,  her  associates, 
those  who  are  bone  of  her  bone  and  flesh  of  her 
flesh,  those  ■who  have  been  brought  up  with  the 
same  institutions,  the  same  customs — whether 
she  will  forsake  all  these  and  unite  herself  with 
men  who  are  foreign  to  us  in  interest,  in  pur- 
poses, and  in  all  the  associations  of  life.  Ken- 
tucky, sir,  will  be  ready  for  emancipation  when 
she  is  ready  to  cut  loose  all  her  feelings  for  the 
South  when  she  is  willing  to  see  the  cotton 
fields  of  the  south,  sink  back  into  their  original 
quagmires  and  cane  breaks — whenshe  is  willing 
to  see  the  sugar  plantations  of  the  south  return 
to  the  original  forest.  Then  will  Kentucky  be 
ready  for  emancipation;  then  will  she  be  ready 
to  unite  with  our  northern  friends,  and  not  till 
then. 

I  am,  upon  principle,  opposed  to  establishing 
a  slavocracy  in  tins  country;  and  agn Inst  the 
incorporation  of  the  law  of  1B33  into  1hi<  con- 
stitution, 1  most  solemnly  protest.    The  gentle- 


man is'very  willing,  if  a  man  is  so  fortunate  as 
to  be  a  distinguished  gentleman,  like  himself, 
to  raise  up  a  distinguished  son,  who  goes  into 
a  foreign  state,  and  by  a  matrimonial  alliance, 
acquires  the  ownership  of  five  hundred  slaves — 
the  gentleman  is  very  willing,  I  say,  that  all 
these  should  be  brought  into  Kentucky.  But  if 
a  poor  devil  like  me,  "who  had  nothing  to  recom- 
mend him  but  his  person,  were  to  go  into  Vir- 
ginia to  marry,  what  sort  of  a  chance  would  he 
have  to  acquire  property  in  slaves?  If  you  com- 
pel us  to  bow  down  to  the  slavocracy,  we  shall 
never  have  money  enough  on  God  Almighty's 
earth  to  buy  a  slave,  for  I  am  not  over  fond  of 
work,  and  none  of  my  kin  is  so  fortunate,  I  be- 
lieve, as  to  possess  slaves;  so  that  I  have  no 
chance  of  acquiring  them  by  inheritance,  and  if 
I  cannot  acquire  them  by  marriage,  how  can  I 
get  them?  The  Lord  Almighty  knows,  for  it 
seems  there  is  no  chance  for  the  poor.  Now,  my 
mle  would  be  about  this:  the  rich  have  enough 
of  the  good  things  of  this  world — do  let  the 
poor  have  a  chance.  And  I  tell  the  gentliaman 
from  Madison,  in  language  which  he  will  undvjr- 
stand,  after  the  submission  of  the  constitution 
to  the  people,  that  even  the  old  county  of  Heji- 
ry — though  1  do  not  know,  as  yet,  that  I  hai'e 
the  honor  to  represent  the  people  of  that  county 
— had  it  not  been  for  the  law  of  1833,  never  . 
would  have  been  a  convention  county.  JSl 
you  send  out  the  constitution  with  this  provis- 
ion, it  will  be  rejected  by  forty  thousand  votes. 
Tlie  laboring  men  of  Kentucky,  the  poor  men, 
the  men  who  never  can  expect  to  acquire  slaves 
by  marriage,  or  by  descent,  Avill  see  that  it 
is  a  slavocracy,  a  tariff  upon  their  labor,  that 
they  will  not  stand.  It  is  a  protection  that  no 
state  can  give  in  its  fundamental  law.  I  my- 
self will  vote  against  the  constitution,  if  it 
should  contain  such  a  provision.  I  want  to  own 
slaves,  and  I  want  the  privilege  of  buying  them 
where  I  can  get  them  cheapest,  though  I  do  not 
want  to  see  them  introduced  in  droves.  I  think 
I  have  as  much  of  the  milk  of  human  kindness 
as  any  man,  and  I  abhor  the  mere  slave  dealer, 
the  trafficker  in  human  blood,  as  much  as  any 
man  in  tlie  world.  Sir,  we  have  not  enough,  or 
we  have  too  many.  Let  us  get  clear  of  the 
whole  concern,  and  have  a  free  state  out  and  out, 
or  let  every  one  have  the  chance  to  get  slaves 
where  he  can  for  the  best  price,  and  of  whom  he 
pleases. 

We  must  be  either  for  emancipation  or  against 
it.  There  is  no  middle  grouncl  on  the  subject 
— and  I  was  very  much  like  my  friend  from  Jef- 
ferson in  regard  to  the  member  from  Madison — I 
thought  him  here  in  disguise  ;  but  I  know  him 
too  well  to  liave  any  opinion  of  him  of  that  sort. 
I  give  it  as  my  opinion,  that  the  best  way  to  get 
rid  of  any  future  difficulty  on  the  subject  is  to 
allow  no  man  to  emancipate  his  slaves  in  Ken- 
tucky. If  he  wants  to  get  rid  of  his  slaves,  let 
him  act  upon  the  proposition  I  made  the  eman- 
cipationists. If  you  Dcat  us,  we  will  leave  the 
good  old  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  but  if  we 
beat  you,  tlien  you  shall  leave  it.  I  think  now, 
that  one  of  those  two  things  ought  to  take 
place.  We  have  beaten  them,  and  a  large  ma- 
jority of  the  people  are  with  us,  and  now  Kt 
them  leave  us.  " 

Mr.  TURNER  said  he  would  detain  the  com-* 


79 


mittee  but  for  a  moment.  So  far  as  concerns 
the  gentleman  from  Henry,  and  his  fear  of  the 
finger  of  his  maker,  I  will  not  put  any  more 
weight  on  him.  The  finger  of  a  gentleman 
from  his  county  is  upon  him,  so  strong  now, 
that  I  think  it  would  be  cruel  to  put  any  more 
on  him,  until  that  is  removed.  The  gentleman 
from  Jefferson  appears  to  think  that  I  or  some- 
body else — I  do  not  know  whether  it  was  any 
one  who  was  going  to  murder  or  assassinate  the 
gentleman  or  not — had  something   against  his 

Eerson.     I  am  very  sorry  that  any  gentleman 
ere  should  think  I  had  anything  against  his 
person. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  gentleman  will 
pardon  me  but  he  seems  not  to  have  understood 
the  purport  of  my  remarks.  I  said  that  some 
gentleman  asked  me  whether  it  was  Mr.  Thom- 
asson,  my  opponent,  who  was  speaking,  or  ano- 
ther gentleman  who  canvassed  Fayette  in  favor 
of  emancipation,  and  was  then  rejected. 

Mr.  TURNER.     Very  well,  I  do  not  wish  to 
permit  the  power  of  em.ancipation,  even  by  pay- 
ing for  the  slaves,  and  if  the  gentleman  advo- 
cates the  proposition  that  it  shall  be  left  open,  I 
ask  him  upon  whom  he  would  impose  tne  tax 
for  the  purpose.     Would  he  tax  those  poor  men 
who  do  not  own  slaves  to  pay  for  their  emanci- 
pation?   We  have  no  right  to  tax  those  poor  men 
who  own  no  slaves  to  pay  for  ours.     Would  he 
then  have  those  who  owned  and  brought  slaves 
here,  pay  for  their  emancipation?     What  would 
that  amount  to?    Why,  to  a  man's  putting  his 
hand  in  his  right  pocket  to  replenish  his  left. — 
They  would  only  pay  themselves.     Every  man, 
particularly  in  this  convention,  will  at  once  say 
that  it  would  be  cruel  and  unjust  to  tax  the  great 
body  of  the  people  who  own  no  slaves,  to  pur- 
chase emancipation.     I  consider  myself  a  strong- 
er pro-slavery  man  than  the   gentleman    from 
Jefferson,  for  I  have  never  advocated  emancipa- 
tion in  any  form.      The  gentleman  says  he  voted 
for  the  law  to  exclude  the  importation  of  slaves. 
"Where  then,  is   the  difference  between   myself 
and  any  pro-slavery  man  here?      There  is  none. 
No  gentleman  in  this  convention  is   more  deci- 
ded than  I  am,   against  the  taking  of  a  man's 
property,   or  useing  its  proceeds  by  the   gov- 
ernment, without  compensating  him  for  it.      I 
am  also  against  bringing  any  more  slaves  here. 
I  do  not  believe  it  is  for  the  interest  of  Kentucky, 
or  that  humanity  or  Christianity   tolerates    it, 
or  that  there  is   any  view  of  the  subject,  which 
will  justify  it,  that  any  human  being  may  take; 
according  to  my  perception.     I  do  not  wish 
those  who  differ  with  me  in   opinion   to  think 
tliat  I  imagine  they  are  inhuman.      They  have 
different  light  from  me.      Every  man  must  act 
under  his  own  light,  and  I  intend  to  act  on  tliat 
which  has  been  given  to  me.     But  my  teachings 
of  the  rights  and  duties  of  humanity  lead   me 
to  think  that  the  trafic  ought  to  be  restricted. 

The  gentleman  from  Jefferson  says  that  under 
ray  proposition,  they  would  send  here  superan- 
nuated slaves  to  be  freed.  My  proposition  is 
only  in  outline,  to  elicit  debate,  and  I  supposed 
that  a  gentleman  so  distinguished  as  the  gentle- 
.man  from  Jefferson,  at  the  nead  of  a  committee, 
could  draft  a  provision  that  would  effectually 
prohibit  this  traffic,  and  this  apprehended  send- 
ing here  of  superanuated  slaves.    I  was  aston- 


ished too,  at  the  gentleman's  idea,  that  a  free 
negro  in  Ohio  would  be  brought  into  slavery 
and  become  a  free  negro  in  Kentucky!  I  sup- 
posed the  gentleman  to  be  a  little  fartlier 
along,  a  little  smarter — I  wishnotto  be  personal, 
but  the  idea  of  a  man  in  the  state  of  Ohio,  ac- 
knowledging himself  to  be  a  slave,  and  the  ab- 
olitionists bringing  him  here  and  selling  him, 
and  then  he  getting  his  freedom,  is  one  so  ab- 
surd, that  it  never  for  one  moment  entered  my 
mind.  I  am  in  favor  of  a  constitutional  provis- 
ion declaring  that  no  more  slaves  shall  be  im- 
ported into  this  state,  or  if  a  majority  is  not  in 
favor  of  that,  I  desire  that  the  question  .shall  be 
divested  of  all  the  doubts  wliich  involve  the 
clause  on  the  subject  in  the  old  constitution. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  gentleman  did 
not,  I  apprehend,  comprehend  the  argument 
which  I  made,  in  supposing  a  case.  I  did  not 
suppose  that  a  free  negro,  wisliing  to  emigrate 
to  Kentuckv,  would  come  with  an  abolitionist, 
and  permit  liimself  to  be  sold.  The  gentleman's 
resolution  does  not  provide  for  such  a  case.  It 
is  not  necessary  to  sell  the  negro,  but  an  aboli- 
tionist may  come  with  him  to  Kentucky,  or  a 
resident  in  Kentucky  goes  to  Indiana,  and  bring- 
ing the  negro  here,  treats  and  claims  him  as  his 
slave,  and  by  the  operation  of  the  gentleman's 

Eroposition,  the  negro  would  be  made  free,  and 
ence  would  have  a  right  to  remain  here.  I  go 
as  far  as  the  gentleman,  against  taxing  either 
the  slaveholder  or  the  non-slaveholder,  for  the 
purpose  of  manumitting  the  slaves  of  the  state. 
The  committee,  I  believe  not  a  member  of  it, 
advocate  no  such  provision,  but  thought  it 
expedient  to  retain  the  provision  of  the  old  con- 
stitution without  alteration,  so  that  if  any  ne- 
cessity should  arise,  which  should  become  so  im- 
perious as  to  force  us  to  get  rid  of  our  slaves,  we 
might  do  so  by  devising  some  means  of  pay- 
ment therefor.  I  again  renew  the  motion  that 
the  committee  rise  and  report  the  resolutions  to 
the  house,  with  a  view  of  then  moving  that  they 
be  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and 
made  a  special  order  for  Monday  week. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  am  anxious  at  the  proper  time, 
to  make  some  remarks  upon  the  proposition 
contained  in  the  resolutions  submitted  by  the 
gentleman  from  Madison.  I  differ  from  that 
gentleman  entirely  in  regard  to  the  pro- 
priety of  inserting  in  the  constitution,  the  prop- 
osition he  has  submitted  to  the  convention,  and 
I  desire  at  a  proper  time  to  give  my  reasons  to 
the  convention.  I  do  not  know  that  they  will 
have  any  influence  here,  still  I  hold  it  is  a  duty 
to  myself,  and  my  constituents,  that  I  should 
give  my  views  on  the  important  questions  in- 
volved in  the  resolutions.  I  think  the  motion  oi 
the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  to  rise  and  report, 
is  one  altogether  proper  and  right,  and  I  nope 
it  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  that  the 
discussion  had  better  continue  at  once,  until  the 
day  when  gentlemen  come  to  vote  upon  it,  when 
their  minds  would  be  fully  made  up  on  the  sub- 
ject. He  moved  therefore,  that  the  committee 
rise  and  report  progress,  and  ask  leave  to  sit 
again.  The  subject  then  could  be  taken  up  to- 
morrow, or  if  not,  on  the  next  day. 

The  motion    prevailed,  and  the  committee. 


80 


through  their  cliairman,  reported  progress,  and 
obtained  leave  to  sit  asain. 

Mr.  McHENRY  said  that  he  noticed  from  the 
remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  that 
another  resolution  of  that  gentleman,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  same  subject  of  slavery,  had  not  been 
referred  to  the  committee  of  tlie  whole.  He 
moved  to  refer  the  whole  series  to  the  committee 
of  the  whole. 

This  motion  was  agreed  to. 

QUALIFIED    VOTERS — AUDITOR'S  REPORT. 

The  PRESIDENT  said  that  he  had  beeq  pre- 
sented by  the  Auditor,  with  a  list  of  the  qual- 
ified voters  in  each  county  of  the  state,  in  pursu- 
enee  of  a  resolution  passed  this  morning. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  the  printing  of  125 
copies  of  the  report,  for  the  use  of  the  members. 

This  motion  was  agreed  to. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY,  OCTOBER  11,  1849. 

PROPOSITIONS   TO   AMEND. 

Mr.  BARLOW  offered  the  following  resolution, 
which  was  agreed  to: 

Resolved,  1  hat  the  committee  on  the  miscella- 
neous provisions  of  the  constitution,  be  instruct- 
ed to  enquire  into  the  propriety  and  expediency 
of  making  a  provision  in  the  new  constitution 
about  to  be  made,  which  will  enable  citizens  of 
any  of  the  United  States,  emigrating  to  this 
state,  to  exercise  the  elective  franchise  at  an  ear- 
lier period  after  such  emigration  than  is  now 
provided  in  the  present  constitution. 

Mr.  CHRISM  AN  offered  the  following,  which 
was  referred  to  the  committee  on  miscellaneous 
provisions,  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  miscellane- 
ous provisions  be  instructed  to  enquire  into  the 
expediency  of  adopting  in  the  constitution  a 
provision  declaring  any  collector  of  the  revenue 
tax,  or  other  disbursing  officer  of  the  govern- 
ment, or  any  officer  thereof,  who  may  have  the 
charge  or  custody  of  the  government  funds,  or 
any  attorney  or  lawyer,  or  other  collector,  who 
may  fail  or  refuse  to  pay  over  any  money  col- 
lected by  him  in  his  official  capacity,  ineligible 
to  any  office  under  said  constitution,  until  they 
shall  first  have  obtained  a  full  acquittance  and 
discharge. 

Mr.  HAY  offered  the  following,  and  it  was  re- 
ferred to  the  committee  on  tlie  revision  of  the 
constitution  and  slavery,  and  ordered  to  be  print- 
ed: 

1.  Resolved,  Thatthespecificmodeof amending 
the  constitution,  by  submitting  to  the  voters  of 
the  state  one  clause  at  a  time,  is  the  correct  and 
best  mode. 

2d.  That,  in  lieu  of  the  mode  pointed  out  in 
the  old  constitution  for  callinc;  a  convention, 
the  following  should  be  adopted:  The  legisla- 
ture, whenever  two  thirds  of  both  houses  concur, 
may  propose  amendments  to  the  new  constitu- 
tion, which  proposed  amendment  shall  be  enter- 
ed at  large  on  the  journals  ;  and  such  proposed 
amendment  shall  be  submitted  to  the  people  at  the 
next  general  election,  and  if  it  shall  appear  that  a 


majority  of  all  the  qualified  voters  of  this  com- 
monwealth have  voted  in  favor  of  the  proposed 
amendment,  fhe  same  shall  be  adopted  at  the 
next  session  of  the  legislature  as  part  of  the  con- 
stitution. 

3.  That  if  more  than  one  amendment  is  propo- 
sed at  one  time,  each  amendment  shall  be  dis- 
tinctly stated,  so  that  the  votes  may  be  taken 
on  each  proposed  amendment  separately. 

LECTURES   IN    THE   HALL. 

Mr.  HARDIN  offered  the  following,  which 
was  agreed  to: 

Resolved,  That  James  D.  Nourse,  of  Bards- 
town,  have  the  use  of  the  hall  of  this  conven- 
tion, at  any  time  of  an  evening  that  he  maj 
choose,  to  deliver  a  series  of  lectures  on  the  phi- 
losophy of  history  and  society,  especially  with 
reference  to  the  sources  and  progress  of  modern 
democracy:  Provided,  the  convention  or  the  com-  : 
mittees  are  not  then  using  the  hall. 

SLAVERY. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BARLOW  the  conven- 
tion resolved  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole, 
Mr.  BARLOW  in  the  chair,  and  resumed  the  con- 
sideration of  Mr.  TURNER'S  resolutions,  which 
were  undisposed  of  when  the  committee  rose 
yesterday.  '. 

The  CHAIRMAN  stated  the  question  pendin^f 
before  the  committee,  and  said  that  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe)  was  en- 
titled to  the  floor. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  had  not  intended  by 
the  motion  he  made  yesterday  to  entitle  him- , 
self  to  the  floor,  nor  had  he  given  any  intima- 
tion that  he  intended  to  participate  in  this  dis- 
cussion at  all.  He  supposed  that  the  gentleman  , 
from  Henderson  was  entitled  to  the  floor. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  did  not  intend  to  address  the 
committee  on  the  resolutions  submitted  by  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  at  the  present  time. — 
I  remarked  yesterday,  that  I  did  not  think  this 
was  the  proper  time  to  discuss  that  Question, 
and  I  am  still  of  that  opinion,  and  have  de- 
termined to  postpone  the  making  of  any  remarks 
which  I  may  have  to  submit,  until  the  time 
when  the  amendment  to  the  constitution  report- 
ed by  the  committee,  shall  come  up  for  consid- 
eration. At  that  time  I  may  submit  some  re- 
marks on  the  principle  contained  in  the  amend- 
ments proposed,  and  also  in  reply  to  the  re- 
marks made  yesterday  by  the  gentleman  from 
Madison.  I  do  not  design  to  address  the  com- 
mittee to-day. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  As  no  gentleman 
seems  disposed  to  address  the  committee,  I 
desire  that  we  shall  proceed  to  vote  on  the 
amendment.  If  no  one  is  ready  to  speak,  all 
must  be  ready  to  vote,  for  I  believe  our  minds 
are  pretty  well  made  up  in  regard  to  the  ques- 
tion. 

Mr.  TURNER.  As  the  gentleman  from  Hen- 
derson has  indicated  a  desire  to  be  heard  here- 
after, on  these  resolutions,  and  as  no  one  seems 
ready  now  to  speak  on  them,  I  move  that  the 
committee  rise  and  report  them  to  the  house, 
that  they  may  be  referred  to  the  same  eommittee 
of  the  whole,  to  which  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee was  referred. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  It  strikes  me  that 
the  course  proper  for  us  to  pursue   in  regard 


01 


to  this  subject,  -would  be  to  proceed  with  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  abstract  question  of  slavery  now. 
It  is  a  topic  whicli  seems  to  be  involved  in  the 
resolutions,  as  well  as  in  the  gentleman's  speech 
of  yesterday,  and  when  we  have  terminated  the 
discussion,  we  can  take  up  and  vote  on  the 
amendment  proposed.  I  thought  that  was  the 
course  understood  and  indicated  yesterdaj^  by 
the  vote  of  the  house.  The  present  proposition, 
I  understand  to  be,  that  the  committee  shall 
rise  and  report  the  resolutions  to  the  house ; 
but  there  is  an  araendmeiat  to  the  resolutions 
pending,  and  I  do  not  know  whether  such  a 
motion  is  strictly  in  order  until  the  committee 
have  disposed  of  the  motion  to  amend.  If  no 
other  gentleman  designs  to  offer  an  amendment 
to  the  resolutions,  it  was  my  purpose,  after  the 
committee  had  disposed  of  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Henry,  (Mr.  Nuttall)  to 
move  to  strike  out  these  resolutions  from  the  se- 
ries introduced  by  the  gentleman,  with  a  view 
of  taking  a  vote  of  the  committee  and  reporting 
the  result  to  the  house,  and  if  it  was  its  pleasure 
then  to  postpone  further  discussion  upon  them, 
it  could  do  so,  for  it  would  then  be  in  order.  I 
think  the  members  of  this  house,  considering 
the  discussions  which  took  place  throughout 
every  county  and  town  in  the  state  during  the 
last  summer,  on  this  question  of  slavery — wheth- 
er it  be  more  useful  or  profitable  than  any  other 
description  of  labor  or  property — the  policy  of  in- 
terfering with  it  by  the  action  of  this  convention, 
and  disturbing  the  relation  between  master  and 
slave — should  regard  these  as  questions  which  our 
constituents  have  settled  for  us.  And  if  the  pa- 
pers told  truly,  they  informed  us  that  there  was 
returned  to  this  body,  no  one  favorable  to  the 
emancipation  of  slave  property.  I  think  there- 
fore.'that  a  discussion  upon  the  abstract  question; 
the  right  or  wrong,  the  good  or  evil  of  slavery — 
the  comparrison  of  profits  between  servile  and 
free  labor — is  one  that  belongs  to  the  region 
north  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line,  and  not  to  the 
meridian  of  Kentucky,  now,  and  within  this  hall. 
These  were  my  opinions  before  the  resolutions 
were  discussed  yesterday,  and  they  have  been 
strengthened  by  that  discussion,  however  able  up- 
on the  points  touched.  However,  as  the  subject 
has  been  mooted,  I  desire  that  these  resolutions 
shall  be  retained  by  the  committee — that  the 
committee  shall  express  its  sense  upon  them-— 
Jand  then,  if  any  more  discussion  is  necessary,  it 
will  properly  come  up  when  the  report  of  the 
committee  shall  be  under  consideration. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  do  not  wish  to  be  trouble- 
some on  this  subject,  but  some  of  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  make  it  necessary  that  I  should 
notice  them.  Now,  I  came  here  avowing  the 
same  sentiments  that  1  did  at  home.  I  am  as 
much  opposed  to  emancipation  as  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  and  I  claim  to  be  as  sincere  in  my 
views  as  he  can  possibly  be.  I  am  utterly  op- 
posed to  emancipation  in  every  mode  and  aspect 
m  which  it  has  ever  been  proposed  in  Kentucky, 
and  one  of  my  resolutions  is  more  ultra  upon 
the  subject,  than  any  proposed  by  the  commit- 
tee, or  any  gentleman  here,  for  it  inhibits  the 
emancipation  of  slaves  corapulsorily,  even  af- 
ter compensation  has  been  made.  But  in  the  re- 
gion of  country  in  which  I  live,  and  indeed, 
throughout  Kentucky,  it  has  been  a  question  a 
11 


great  many  years,  whether  the  further  importa- 
tion of  slaves  was  beneficial  or  not,  and  whether 
there  was  not  as  many  here  now  as  was  profita- 
ble; and  I  suppose  it  to  be  as  legitimate  a  topic 
of  consideration  here  as  before  the  people. 
There  is  not  a  single  sentiment  in  my  resolu- 
tions, or  any  sentiment  avowed  by  me  yesterday, 
which  I  have  not  avowed  before  my  constituents, 
and  which  they  do  not  fully  understand.  I  am 
considered  the  most  ultra  pro-slavery  man  iu 
my  county,  and  the  whole  power  of  the  emanci- 
pation interest  there  was  wielded  against  me.  to 
a  greater  extent  probably  than  against  any  other 
candidate  before  the  people.  I  come  here  to  sus- 
tain the  sentiments  which  I  avowed  at  home. 
I  maintain  the  inviolability  of  the  slave  proper- 
ty of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  at  the  same 
time  my  light  leads  me  to  believe  that  there  is 
no  necessity  for  its  increase.  And  this  also,  is 
what  I  understand  the  people  of  the  county 
from  which  I  came,  to  believe. 

It  is  a  matter  of  indifference  to  me  personally, 
whether  this  resolution  shall  be  acted  upon  to- 
day or  not.  I  have  said  most  of  what  I  expect- 
ed to  say,  except  that  I  may  desire  to  reply  brief- 
ly to  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  which  I  had 
not  time  to  do  yesterday.  I  had  intended  to 
wait,  before  I  should  do  this,  until  I  heard  the 
remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Hendei-son,  as 
he  has  declared  his  opposition  to  the  resolutions 
which  I  have  introduced.  There  is  one  remark 
of  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  to  which,  I  per- 
ceive from  reading  the  report  of  the  proceedings 
of  yesterday,  I  did  not  reply.  This  is,  that  the 
importation  of  more  slaves  would  be  beneficial 
to  those  persons  who  now  owned  none.  Now,  I 
have  always  believed  that  the  more  people, 
whether  white  or  black,  brought  into  a  state  to 
labor,  would,  by  increasing  the  competition, 
lessen  the  value  thereof.  But  I  am  not  going  to 
discuss  that  question  now,  my  only  desire  is, 
that  I  may  be  put  right  before  the  convention 
and  the  people.  I  repeat,  there  is  not  a  member 
of  this  house,  who  will  go  farther  than  niyself  in 
sustaining  the  institution  of  slavery.  I  do  not 
believe  that  we  would  be  justified  under  any 
consideration  in  interfering  with  the  rights  of 
the  slaveholders  of  Kentucky.  Thev  have  vest- 
ed their  capital  in  slave  property  under  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  constitution  and  the  laws  of  Kentucky, 
and  I  am  opposed  to  taking  it  from  them,  even  if 
it  is  proposed  to  compensate  them  for  the  loss. 
They  purchased  or  invested  their  property,  and 
they  only  have  the  right  to  dispose  of  it. 

I  believed  before  this  debate  came  on  that 
there  was  not  a  majority  here  in  favor  of  the  6th 
resolution,  and  I  so  informed  the  people  of  my 
county  last  summer,  while  avowing  myself  in 
favor  of  incorporating  the  provision  in  the  con- 
stitution. I  have  brought  forward  this  resolu- 
tion to  ascertain  what  the  majority  were  in  favor 
of — whether  of  incorporating  the  provision  into 
the  constitution,  or  of  giving  the  legislature  the 
power  over  the  subject.  And  really  I  thought 
it  but  right  to  ascertain  upon  which  of  these 
propositions  the  majority  did  agree,  before  the 
standing  committee  reported.  As  I  said  to  my 
constituents  before  I  left  home,  I  suppose  the 
majority  here  will  go  for  leaving  the  power  in 
the  hands  of  the  legislature,  but  for  myself,  I 
am  pledged  to  go  for  inserting  a  prohibition 


^3 


against  the  further  importation  of  slaves  into 
this  Commonwealth,  in  the  constitution  itself. 
I  have  said  all  I  desired. 

The  CHAIR.  Does  the  gentleman  move  to 
rise  and  report? 

Mr.  TURNER.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  would 
be  more  respectful  to  those  who  wish  to  speak  on 
this  question,  as  well  as  to  myself,  that  further 
opportunity  should  be  given  to  discuss  the  ques- 
tion. I  have  no  objection  to  its  being  laid  on 
the  table,  to  be  called  up  when  any  gentleman 
desires  to  speak  upon  it. 

Mr.  DIXON.  It  is  a  matter  of  very  little  con- 
sequence to  me,  whether  I  debate  tnese  resolu- 
tions or  not — in  fact,  were  I  to  consult  my  own 
feelings  and  inclinations,  I  believe  I  should  not 
debate  them.  I  listened  with  a  good  deal  of  at- 
tention to  the  speech  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison  yesterday,  and  the  views  taken  by  him 
upon  some  abstract  propositions  connected  With 
the  subject  of  slavery,  I  thought  demanded  an 
answer  and  reply.  I  do  not  know  what  impres- 
sions the  opinions  advanced  by  him,  as  respects 
the  institution  of  slavery  itself,  are  designed  to 
make  on  the  public  mind.  I  understand  him 
to  have  laid  down  as  a  proposition,  that  slavery 
is  a  great  evil,  and  that  to  permit  the  people  of 
Kentucky  to  purchase  for  their  own  use,  slaves 
out  of  the  state,  would  be  not  only  a  great  evil, 
but  an  outrage  upon  all  the  great  principles  of 
humanity.  The  resolutions  of  the  gentleman 
I  understand,  propose  that  no  citizen  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky  shall  purchase  slaves  out  of  the 
state  for  his  own  use.  The  legitimate  course  of 
the  debate  would  be  on  that  point  alone,  yet 
gentlemen  in  the  discussion  here,  have  taken  a 
wide  range,  and  discussed  all  the  great  princi- 
ples connected  with  slavery — all  the  benefits 
which  result  to  our  civil  institutions  from  the 
existence  of  slavery — and  all  the  evils  which 
are  consequent  upon  it.  I  could  not  tell  from 
hearing  the  speech  of  the  gentleman,  whether 
in  his  opinion — though  he  emphatically  de- 
clared it  to  be  an  evil — slavery  was  really  an  evil 
or  a  blessing.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  in  my 
judgment  slavery  is  a  blessing,  or  that,  in  my 
opinion,  slavery  as  it  exists  in  Kentucky  is  an 
evil.  This  is  a  question  which  I  mean  to  dis- 
cuss at  a  proper  time — not  abstractedly,  but  in 
reference  to  the  condition  of  society  as  it  now 
exists  in  the  commonwealth  of  Iventucky.  I 
would,  if  I  had  the  power,  make  all  mankind 
free.  I  would  have  no  such  thing  as  slavery  or 
inequality.  I  would  have  equal  rights  measur- 
ed out  to  all;  but  in  the  formation  of  civil  insti- 
tutions for  the  government  of  man,  we  are  to 
look  at  the  condition  of  things  as  they  are — we 
are  to  adapt  the  laws  to  the  condition  of  those  to 
be  governed.  It  is  a  question  of  grave  impor- 
tance, whether  or  not  slavery  as  it  exists  in  Ken- 
tucky, is  not  better  for  the  slave  and  the  master 
—and  this  is  the  great  question,  the  only  ques- 
jtlon,  which  can  have  any  particular  interest  in 
this  debate.  I  shall  attempt  to  show  that 
slavery  is  not  a  curse  as  it  exists  now  in  Ken- 
tucky, but  that  it  is  a  blessing.  I  do  not  mean 
to  say,  as  I  remarked  before,  that  it  would  not 
\je  better,  if  there  wa?,  no  such  thing  as  slavery 
on  the  face  of  the  earth.  I  do  mean  to  say  tliat 
as  slavery  exists  in  Kentucky — in  view  of  all 
the  circumstances  around   it — in  view  of  the 


wretched  cotiditioh  of  the  slave,  his  relation  to 
his  master,  the  peculiar  organization  of  the  two 
races,  the  utter  impossibility  that  the  one  can 
rise  to  an  equality  in  the  scale  of  morality  and 
dignity  witn  the  other,  the  fact  that  the  slave, 
whether  you  call  him  a  freeman  or  not,  is  still 
but  a  slave,  the  wretched  offcast  slave — I  sav  it 
becomes  a  question  of  grave  importance  to  Iven- 
tucky, whether  it  is  not  a  blessing  alike  to  the 
slave  and  the  white  man,  that  he  is  a  slave. — 
These  are  the  questions  which  arise  and  present 
themselves,  from  a  view  of  the  condition  of  this 
commonwealth,  and  it  was  my  intention  at  the 
proper  time,  to  enter  upon  their  discussion.  I 
do  not  think  it  the  proper  time  now.  As  I  re- 
marked before,  I  have  no  particular  anxiety  to 
discuss  the  question  at  all,  nor  do  I  know  that 
I  shall,  yet  I  have  thought  it  due  to  the  country, 
and  respectful  to  the  gentleman  from  Madison, 
that  his  remarks  should  be  replied  to,  and  for 
that  reason  I  was  anxious  that  the  resolutions 
introduced  by  that  gentleman  should  take  the 
course  indicated  by  him. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  do  not  wish  to  be  trouble- 
some, but  this  is  a  sensitive  matter  to  the  coun- 
try, and  1  desire  that  my  position  shall  be  fully 
understood  in  regard  to  it.  Those  who  will 
read  my  speech  of  yesterday  will  find  there  is 
not  a  word  in  it,  against  the  condition  of  the 
slave  in  Kentucky,  or  even  a  suggestion  tliat 
his  condition  could  be  improved  in  any  way.  I 
occupy  the  same  position  as  the  gentleman  him- 
self— tliat  you  cannot  improve  the  condition  of 
the  slave  in  Kentucky  in  any  way,  and  that  the 
institution  of  slavery  as  it  here  exists  is  better 
for  the  white  and  the  black  man  than  any  thing 
this  convention  or  the  legislature  can  devise.  I  do 
not  go  as  far  as  the  gentleman,  and  he  is  mista- 
ken in  supposing  that  I  said  that  slavery  as  an 
original  institution  is  an  evil — though  I  will  now 
say  that  I  agree  with  him,  that  if  we  were  form- 
ing a  new  commonwealth  where  no  slavery  ex- 
isted, it  would  be  better  to  get  along  without  it. 
I  agree  with  liim  in  that,  though  I  did  not  make 
the  avowal  yesterday.  As  an  original  question, 
if  there  never  was  a  slave  in  the  world,  I 
would  not  introduce  slavery  into  societv,  but  I 
also  believe  that  as  it  exists  in  Kentucky  with  m 
the  peculiar  circumstances  surrounding  it,  it  is  fl 
a  benefit  to  both  races.  That  is  my  position.  I  ™ 
am  opposed  to  bringing  any  more  slaves  here, 
because  I  do  not  believe  that  it  is  profitable  or 
desirable  in  airy  way;  and  that  is  the  only  point 
on  which  I  differ  from  the  gentleman  from  Hen- 
derson. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  barely  intend  to  indicate  to 
the  committee,  my  intention  at  the  proper  time 
to  offer  a  proposition  on  the  subject  of  the  im- 

Eortation  of  slaves,  variant  from  that  reported 
y  the  standing  committee,  and  that  offered  by 
the  gentleman  from  Madison.  It  has  been 
claimed,  and  during  the  recent  contest  between 
the  different  candidates  for  delegates  to  this  con- 
vention, in  many  sections  of  the  state,  it  has 
been  urged  that  the  net  of  1833  was  a  concession 
to  abolitionism  in  this  Htate.  I  myself  have 
heard  gentlemen  who  are  emancipationists  in 
principle,  and  who  had  the  candor  to  avow 
their  principles  before  the  people,  declare  that 
the  act  of  1833  was  a  concession  to  the  .'spirit  of 
emancipation  in  this  state.     During  the  last 


99 


session  of  the  state  legislature,  as  I  see  by  an 
examination  of  their  acts,  there  was  a  modifica- 
tion of  the  law  of  1833  adopted,  and  in  the  pas- 
sage of  that  modification,  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  sense  of  the  people  was  clearly  and  fairly 
indicated.  And  if  we  are  to  give  any  respect 
whatever  to  the  opinion  of  the  people,  as  ex- 
pressed by  their  representatives  last  winter,  and 
as  expressed  in  the  elections  of  last  August, 
when  the  candidates  for  delegates  were  before 
them,  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  it  is  the  sense  of 
the  people  of  this  state,  that  there  should  be  no 
restriction  upon  the  citizen  who  may  desire  to 
import  another  slave  into  the  state  for  his  own 
use.  I  would  go  farther  than  the  amendment  to 
the  act  of  1833,  passed  at  the  last  session  of  the 
legislature,  for  it  is  not  broad  enough  for  me. 
It  requires  the  party  importing  a  slave,  to  take 
a  certain  oath,  that  he  was  brought  into  the 
state  for  his  own  use,  and  that  he  will  not  dis- 
pose of  him  for  five  years.  I  would  not  go  so 
far  as  to  say  that  I  am  in  favor  of  importing 
slaves  into  the  state  for  the  purpose  of  merchan- 
dize, but  I  would  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  the  cit- 
izens of  this  state  should  not  be  restricted  in 
the  exercise  of  the  right  to  bring  slaves  here. 
And  I  would  propose  to  limit  the  time  they 
should  hold  the  slave,  before  they  had  a  right  to 
sell  him,  to  twelve  months  rather  than  five  years. 
Indeed  if  I  know  my  own  feelings,  and  what  I 
believe  is  the  sense  of  those  I  represent  here,  I 
prefer  that  there  should  be  no  restriction  around 
the  subject  at  all.  The  fifteen  slave  states  of  the 
Union  compose  one  great  family,  dependent  one 
upon  the  other,  so  far  as  the  perpetuity  of  the 
institution  of  slavery  is  concerned,  and  I  would 
prefer  that  there  should  be  no  restriction  thrown 
around  the  citizen  at  all,  but  that  he  should  be 
left  free  to  exercise  his  own  dictates  in  this  mat- 
ter. You  cannot  generate  by  legislative  ac- 
tion, a  moral  principle  in  the  bosom  of  man,  by 
wliich  he  will  be  governed,  and  if  there  ai'e 
those  among  us  disposed  to  traffic  in  human 
blood,  they  will  find  means  to  do  it,  I  care  not 
what  constitutional  or  legislative  restrictions 
there  may  be. 

At  a  proper  time,  I  shall  propose  as  a  substi- 
sute  for  the  5th  section  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee, that  every  citizen  of  this  state  shall  be 
allowed  to  bring  slaves  into  the  state  for  his  own 
use.  And  when  I  make  this  proposition,  I  trust 
that  I  shall  be  prepared  to  sustain  it,  at  least  so 
far  as  those  I  have  the  honor  to  represent  on  this 
floor,  are  concerned. 

Now  one  more  remark  and  I  am  through. 
it  was  suggested  by  the  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son yesterday,  that  the  states  of  South  Carolina 
and  Virginia  had  both  passed  laws  prohibiting 
the  importation  of  slaves  within  their  territories. 
I  have  not  examined  the  statutes  of  South  Caro- 
lina, but  I  tliink  it  possible  that  my  friend  is 
mistaken  on  that  subject.  I  am  aware  that  du- 
ring the  canvass  in  the  State  of  Tennessee  the 
past  summer,  the  question  was  put,  and  discuss- 
ed liberally  by  all  the  candidates  for  both  branch- 
es of  the  Legislature,  and  perhaps  by  the  candi- 
dates for  Confess,  as  to  the  propriety  of  pass- 
ing a  law  which  would  prohibit  the  importation 
of  slaves  from  other  States  into  Tennessee.  I 
beg  leave  to  state  to  the  committee  that  I  am 
perfectly  fjamiliar  with  all  the  facts  and  circum- 


stances connected  with  that  move  in  Tennessee. 
During  the  last  winter,  the  few  emancipationists 
in  this  State  had  produced  an  excitement  that 
alarmed  the  whole  south.  Kentucky  now  occu- 
pies a  frontier  position — the  same  position  now 
on  the  subject  of  slavery  that  she  occupied  in 
times  past  and  gone  by,  in  reference  to  the  dan- 
gers that  might  be  apprehended  from  the  incur- 
sions of  the  savages.  She  was  then  a  frontier 
state,  and  still  is,  so  far  as  the  institution  of 
slavery  is  concerned.  The  broad  Ohio,  rolling 
its  waves  from  almost  the  southern  extremity  of 
the  State  to  its  eastern  border,  separates  Kentucky 
from  the  free  states,  and  her  members  of  congress 
and  the  members  of  congress  from  every  slave 
state  in  the  union,  felt  that  when  that  great  nat- 
ural barrier,  the  line  of  separation,  between  the 
slave  and  the  free  states  was  struck  down,  there 
was  danger.  They  felt  that  there  was  scarcely  a 
slave  state  in  the  union  that  Would  not  go  by 
the  board  in  less  than  twenty  years,  if  Kentucky 
abandoned  her  old  friends  who  had  stood  by  her 
in  every  emergency,  and  allied  herself  to  those 
who  had  warred  on  her  institutions  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  abolition  agitation  to  the  present 
day.  Hence,  a  meeting  of  the  members  of  con- 
gress from  the  slave  states,  was  suggested  by  the 
members  of  congress  from  this  state ;  and  it 
was  there  suggested  that  the  distinguished  and 
leading  men  in  each  slave  state  in  the  union 
should  be  written  to,  and  be  urged  to  get  up  an 
excitement,  if  you  please,  upon  the  subject  of 
prohibiting  the  importation  of  slaves  from  one 
state  into  another.  And  for  what  purpose?  For 
no  otlier  than  to  prevent  the  emancipation  of 
slaves  in  Kentucky,  as  every  gentleman  here  can 
see.  Hence,  tlie  move  that  was  made  in  the 
state  of  Teimessee,  upon  the  subject  of  a  law 
to  proliibit  the  importation  of  slaves  into  that 
state.  We  were  aware  that  there  was  not  mon- 
ey enough  in  Kentucky  to  purchase  the  libera- 
tion of  the  slaves  of  Kentucky,  and  that  our 
people  well  enough  knew  the  fact;  and  we  were 
aware  also,  that  when  the  balance  of  the  slave 
states  of  this  union  had  declared  by  their  legis- 
lative action,  that  our  slaves  should  not  be  pur- 
chased by  their  citizens,  that  it  would  operate 
as  a  terror  upon  those  in  favor  of  emancipa- 
tion in  Kentucky  and  put  down  the  emancipa 
tion  party.     That  was  the  motive. 

I  am  not  unwilling  to  declare  here,  before  the 
state  and  the  world,  that  I  believe  that  slavery, 
as  it  exists  in  the  slave  states  of  this  union,  ele- 
vates the  character  of  tlie  white  race,'its  dignity, 
and  its  morals,  and  I  trust  that  we  shall  frame  a 
constitution  that  will  perpetuate  slavery  in  this 
state  for  all  time  to  come.  "When  the  proper 
time  shall  arrive,  I  desire  to  oflfer  as  a  substitute 
for  the  5th  section  of  the  report  of  the  committee, 
a  section  that  shall  embody  the  principle  that 
every  citizen  in  this  state  shall  have  a  right 
to  import  slaves  into  this  state  for  his  own  use, 
and  upon  that  proposition  I  desire  to  be  heard. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  have  no  desire  to  take 
part  in  the  debate  at  this  time,  and  I  think  that 
courtesy  to  the  gentlemen  who  intend  to  do  so 
as  well  as  the  nature  of  the  subject  itself,  dictates 
that  this  matter  should  be  postponed,  and  that  it 
should  come  up  with  the  resolutions  reported  by 
the  committee  on  the  revision  of  the  constitution 
and  slavery.    I  had  designed  to  offer  an  amend- 


84 


ment  to  the  report  of  the  committee,  but  I  sliall 
be  saved  that  trouble,  because  my  resolution 
■would  have  comprehended  what  my  distinguish- 
ed friend  from  Simpson  has  intimated  to  the 
house  he  shall  do  himself.  I  have  no  disposi- 
tion at  this  time  to  enter  into  the  abstract  ques- 
tion of  slavery.  That  I  may  do  so  hereafter, 
"Will  depend  very  much  upon  the  character 
■which  this  debate  may  take.  I  have  discussed 
already  before  my  constituents,  this  law  of  1833, 
and  the  question  as  to  ■whether  it  should  go  into 
the  constitution.  It  "was  a  question  that  ■was 
made  before  the  people,  between  the  gentleman 
■who  opposed  me  in  the  canvass  and  myself;  and 
the  ditference  between  us  was  upon  that  question 
alone.  1  am  opposed  to  the  law  of  1833  going 
into  the  constitution;  but  while  I  avow  this 
sentiment,  I  am  not  in  favor  of  the  slave  traffic. 
I  am  not  in  favor  of  traffic  in  human  blood. 

I  am  opposed  to  the  fifth  resolution  of  the  series 
of  the  gentleman  from  Mad  ison ,  and  I  desire  at  the 

f  roper  time  to  give  my  views  upon  the  subject, 
desire,  with  the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  that 
the  citizens  of  this  commonwealth  should  enjoy 
equal  rights.  I  desire  that  every  one  should 
have  the  right  to  import  slaves  for  his  own  use. 
And  as  I  have  declared  heretofore  when  I  had 
the  honor  of  a  seat  in  the  legislature,  I  am  not 
in  favor  of  allowing  the  capricious  will  of  the 
legislature  to  determine  whether  A.  B.  shall  be 
permitted  to  bring  in  slaves,  and  a  similar  per- 
mission be  refused  to  C.  D.  This  is  one  of  those 
inequalities  of  rights  to  the  existence  of  which 
I  am  utterly  opposed,  and  it  is  a  point  which  I 
desire  to  aiscuss  when  mv  honorable  friend 
from  Simpson  offers  his  resolution  as  an  amend- 
ment to  the  report  of  the  committee.  When 
we  give  to  the  legislature  the  right  to  say 
■wheuier  a  man  shall  bring  slaves  here  for  his 
own  use  or  not,  we  give  to  them  the  right  to 
judge  of  the  expediency  of  importing  slaves, 
and  it  will  be  owing  altogether,  not  to  the  jus- 
tice of  the  application,  but  to  the  particular 
phase  and  color  which  the  legislature  may  wear 
at  the  time  when  the  application  is  made. 

I  desire,  in  framing  a  constitution,  to  provide 
for  equality  of  rights,  as  far  as  it  can  be  done. 
I  am  led  away,  Yiowever,  from  the  purpose  for 
which  I  rose,  which  was  to  ask  that  the  question 
be  postponed,  not  only  out  of  respect  to  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison,  but  also  through  defer- 
ence to  the  committee  who  have  made  a  report 
upon  the  subject.  I  hope,  then,  that  the  com- 
mittee will  rise,  and  that  the  further  discussion 
of  the  subject  will  be  postponed  until  the  day 
iSxed  for  tlie  consideration  of  the  report  of  the 
committee. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  Much  has  been  said  here, 
and  elsewhere,  on  this  very  exciting  and  import- 
ant question.  I  concur  with  the  gentleman  that 
perhaps  this  is  not  the  most  proper  time  to  enter 
into  the  discussion  of  it.  What  is  said  and 
done  here  is  not  only  to  affect  us,  but  our  poster- 
ity. Not  only  to  affect  us  as  a  state,  but 
to  affect  our  sister  states — not  only  to  interest 
us  at  this  time,  but  will  interest  us  in  all  time  to 
come. 

I  came  liere  not  for  the  purpose  of  inflicting 
upon  this  liouse  frequent  and  long  speoclieB.  I 
came  here,  inexperienced  as  I  am  in  the  delibera- 
tions of  a  body  like  this,  with  a  view,  ■with  the 


expectation,  and  with  the  desire  to  listen  and 
learn.  But  sir,  when  I  see  a  delegate  like 
the  gentleman  from  Madison,  rise  in  his  place, 
and  under  all  the  peculiar  circumstances  that  are 
thrown  around  this  particular  question,  declare 
to  this  body,  and  through  this  body  to  the  world, 
such  sentiments  as  he  has  expressed,  I  should 
feel  that  I  was  criminal,  1  should  feel  that 
I  ought  to  be  held  responsible  at  the  bar  of 
my  own  conscience,  that  I  ought  to  be  held 
responsible  by  my  constituents,  that  I  ought 
to  be  held  responsible  at  the  bar  of  my  God, 
on  the  great  day  of  accounts,  if  I  ■were  to 
stand  here  with  the  feelings  wliich  I  have,  and 
the  principles  Avhicli  I  have  advocated,  and  allow 
to  pass  unnoticed  and  uncontradicted,  senti- 
ments such  as  I  heard  expressed  by  that  gentle- 
man yesterday.  We  all  know  that  it  is  impossi- 
sible  for  this  or  any  other  assembly,  to  attempt  to 
any  time,  or  in  any  place,  or  under  any  circum- 
stances to  discuss  these  questions,  either  as  orig- 
inal questions,  or  questions  of  expediency, 
without  producing  the  most  thrilling  and  the 
deepest  excitement.  I  agree  with  the  gentleman 
from  Kenton,  that  this  question  had  better  be 
deferred,  and  I  am  willing  for  one  to  vote  that  it 
shall  be  deferred.  But  1  rose  to  say  a  word  in 
reference  to  the  remarks  made  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  yesterday,  in  which  he  says  that 
he  considers  slavery  wrong  in  the  abstract;  that 
it  is  right  for  us  to  hold  slaves,  but  that  the 
principle  is  wrong — that  the  finger  of  God  is 
not  only  upon  it,  but  the  will  and  law  of  God 
are  positively  and  unequivocally  against  it. 
Now  sir,  if  this  be  true,  there  is  not  a  man 
here,  not  a  christian  man  in  the  ■world  who  can 
enjoy  his  religion  and  hold  slaves  for  one  single 
moment.  Sir,  tliis  is  laying  the  axe  at  the  root 
of  the  tree. 

You  may  talk  to  me  as  much  as  you  please 
about  the  expediency  of  slavery,  about  the  profits 
and  losses  of  slavery,  about  tne  convenience,  or 
the  luxuries  of  slavery,  and  every  good  that 
might  possibly  grow  out  of  it;  but  if  it  is  contra- 
ry to  the  will  of  my  God,  a  sin,  a  great  moral 
evil,  and  detrimental  to  the  best  interests  of  my 
country,  I  for  one  am  willing  to  consecrate  my- 
self with  all  I  possess  to  the  principle;  and  to  do 
or  die,  so  long  as  I  live,  will  be  my  ■watch-word, 
so  help  me  God.  Sir,  I  never  will  so  long  as  my 
heart  Ibeats,  preach  one  principle  and  practice 
another.  If  slavery  is  wrong  in  the  abstract,  rad- 
ically wrong,  where  is  the  man,  the  christian 
man,  the  man  who  loves  truth  and  justice  in  the 
world,  who  would  for  a  moment  be  its  advocate? 
I  am  ready  to  enter  upon  the  discussion  of  the 
subject,  and  indeed  1  came  here  for  the  purpose 
of  making  a  speech  upon  it  to-day;  but  I  am 
willing  to  wait  until  the  day  that  is  fixed  for  tlie 
consideration  of  the  report  of  the  committee,  and 
then  I  hope  that  the  liouse  ■will  do  me  the  favor 
to  hear  me.  Allow  me  to  say  to  the  gentleman 
rom  Madison,  however,  who  speaks  of  the  finger 
of  God  controlling  this  matt«r,  that  perhaps  lie  is 
mistaken,  he  may  however  have  received  some  new 
revelation  on  the  subject.  I  merely  wisli  to  state  to 
the  gentleman,  that  I  hold  slavery  to  be  neither  a 
sin  nor  a  moral  evil,  nor  detrimental  to  the  best 
interests  of  the  State,  and  that  I  hold  myself  re- 
sponsible to  prove  it,  and  when  the  opportunity 
occurs,  I  will  prove  it,  not  from  any  new  revela- 


83 


tion,  but  from  the  old  fasliioned  Bible.  I  there- 
fore ■waive  all  farther  remarks  for  the  present. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  disposition  of 
the  subject  which  I  indicated,  was  predicated  on 
the  idea  that  it  was  not  desirable  to  discuss  the 
abstract  question  of  slavery  at  the  present  time. 
But  it  seems  that,  in  homely  phrase,  my  friend 
from  Madison  has  waked  up  a  snake  in  this  as- 
sembly; especially  since  we  are  told  from  the 
other  side  of  the  house  that  we  are  to  have  a  ser- 
mon on  the  subject.  I  am  willing  to  listen  to 
gentlemen  on  this  question,  butl  do  not  contem- 
plate participating  myself  in  any  debate  upon  it. 
The  gentleman  can  give  such  direction  to  his 
own  resolutions  as  he  may  think  proper,  and  if 
he  desires  that  they  shall  come  up  in  committee 
of  the  whole,  together  with  the  report  of  the  se- 
lect committee,  it  will  only  be  necessary  to  al- 
low the  subject  to  pass  by  until  the  time  fixed 
upon  for  the  consideration  of  that  report. 

Mr.  T  ALBOTT.  I  think  it  is  due  to  the  hon- 
orable gentleman  from  Madison  that  this  matter 
be  laid  over.  But  I  thought  it  proper  to  state 
what  were  my  intentions,  that  nobocfy  might  be 
deceived,  and  that  it  might  not,  when  it  comes 
up  unexpectedly.  But  I  think  it  is  due  to 
every  gentleman,  when  important  principles 
are  about  to  be  controverted,  to  give  time  that 
he  may  be  prepared  for  the  discussion.  I 
am,  therefore,  in  favor  of  postponing  the  further 
consideration  of  this  subject  until  next  Monday 
Week. 

Mr.  TURXER.  I  am  afraid  that  I  may  be 
considered  troublesome,  but  I  am  so  little  expe- 
rienced in  matters  of  this  kind  that  it  appears  I 
have  got  myself  into  a  hornet's  nest  sure  enough. 
I  have  failed  to  make  myself  understood;  but  I 
can  tell  the  gentleman  that  I  am  in  no  wise  ter- 
rified by  any  thing  that  has  occurred.  If  gen- 
tlemen would  understand  me  and  understand 
themselves  they  would  do  a  great  deal  better. 
There  is  not  a  gentleman  who  has  made  a  re- 
mark upon  any  thing  that  I  have  said,  except 
the  two  gentlemen  on  my  left,  who  understand 
what  I  said  yesterday — not  one.  I  would  recom- 
mend gentlemen,  before  they  conae  here  to  an- 
swer a  speech  that  has  been  made,  to  understand 
what  was  spoken.  I  never  said  that  the  finger 
of  the  Deity  was  against  the  institution  of  slave- 
ry. Never.  I  said  that  the  hand  of  Deity  was 
causing  slavery  to  recede  in  Maryland,  in  Vir- 
ginia, and  in  Missouri;  that  it  was,  at  all  events, 
not  increasing  with  the  increase  of  the  white 
population,  and  that  every  thing  we  could  do 
would  not  be  able  to  prevent  this.  But  that  the 
Deity  was  against  the  whole  institution,  I  never 
intimated  or  intended  to  intimate.  But  there 
is  one  thing  I  intended  to  intimate.  I  am 
not  as  well  read  in  the  gospel  as  I  ought  to 
be,  and  not  so  well,  doubtless,  as  some  gentle- 
men here;  butl  do  not  understand  the  teachings 
of  the  gospel  as  justifying  this  institution  as  it 
stands,  and  I  never  will  advocate  what  I  do  not 
believe.  I  believe  that  the  gospel  applies  to  a 
state  of  things  that  does  not  exist  at  present.  I 
believe  in  leaving  to  Cjesar  the  things  that  be- 
long to  CiEsar.  The  mission  of  the  Apostles 
and  Patriarchs  of  old  was  of  a  spiritual  charac- 
ter. It  related  to  things  of  another  world. — 
They  did  not  come  here  to  interfere  with  the 
things  of  Tiberius  or  of  Cjesar.     They  came  not 


to  interfere  with  temporal  prosperity,  and  it  does 
not  appear  to  me  that  any  argument,  in  justifi- 
cation of  the  institution  of  slavery,  as  it  now 
exists,  is  to  be  found  in  the  sacred  writings. — 
Still,  I  believe  slavery,  as  it  exists  in  the  state  of 
Kentucky,  is  a  good  institution.  I  do  not  intend 
to  attack  it.  Let  gentlemen  read  the  speech  that 
I  delivered  yesterday,  and  they  will  not  find  in 
it  any  such  sentiments  as  the  gentleman  over 
the  way  has  attributed  to  me.  And  I  must  cor- 
rect the  gentleman  from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon,) 
as  well  as  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C. 
A.  Wickliffe.)  I  did  not  mean  to  assert  that  the 
institution  of  slavery  was  an  evil. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  certainly  so  understood  the 
gentleman. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  said  nothing  of  that  kind. 
On  the  contrary,  I  attempted  to  maintain  that  it 
was  a  benefit  to  both  races  as  it  exists  here,  but 
I  do  not  think  it  is  profitable  or  desirable  in  any 

Eoint  of  view  to  increase  the  number  of  slaves 
y  importing  them  from  other  states.  They 
have  a  prohibition  against  the  importation  of 
slaves  into  other  states,  and  we  shall  only  get 
the  demoralized  and  debased  portion,  and  this 
is  not  the  description  of  slaves  that  I  should 
wish  to  see  mixed  with  our  black  population. 
I  do  not  think  it  would  be  profitable  because  the 
more  you  introduce,  the  more  competition  there 
would  be  against  free  wh  ite  labor,  and  the  great- 
er difliculty  for  white  men  to  get  employment. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  Having  been  a  member  of 
the  committee,  which  has  made  the  report  on 
the  subject  of  slavery,  and  having  concurred  with 
that  report,  I  shall  stand  prepared  to  defend  it 
whenever  it  is  called  up  for  discussion ;  and  I 
shall  be  opposed  to  the  incorporation  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  act  of  1833  into  the  new  constitu- 
tion. I  differ  from  my  honorable  friend  from 
Henderson.  I  am  prepared  to  maintain  that 
slavery  is  neither  a  moral  nor  a  social  evil,  but 
a  positive  advantage  to  the  white  population 
and  no  injury  to  the  black.  Slavery  must  be 
viewed  in  two  aspects.  Treated  as  property,  no 
discrimination  should  be  made  between  that 
and  other  kinds  of  property.  I  shall  not  trouble 
the  house  at  present  with  any  further  remarks; 
but  whenever  the  report  comes  up  I  shall  be  pre- 
pared fully  to  explain  my  views. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  One  more  remark.  The 
gentleman  from  Madison  this  morning  denied 
that  he  made  the  assertion  that  the  finger  of  God 
was  against  the  institution  of  slavery.  I  cer- 
tainly understood  the  gentleman  yesterday  as 
making  that  declaration,  but  he  has  the  right 
to  make  his  own  explanation,  and  if  he  re- 
pudiates such  a  sentiment,  I  am  willing  ro 
receive  the  gentleman's  explanation.  But  I 
think  that  the  gentleman  has  substantially  re- 
affirmed the  same  sentiment,  for  he  now  says 
that  the  bible  does  not  recognize  slavery;  con- 
sequently, as  the  bible  is  the  revealed  will  of 
God,  that  will  is  opposed  to  slavery.  Now  I 
stand  pledged  before  this  house  to  prove  that 
slavery  has  existed  in  every  age  of  the  world 
since  the  flood,  and  that  it  is  justified  and  appro- 
ved by  the  scriptures  themselves. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  It  is  written  that  the  apostle 
Peter,  in  the  language  of  admonition  to  the  church, 
said:  "Be  ready  always  to  give  an  answer  to  eve- 
ry man  that  asketh  you,  a  reason  of  the  hope  tliat  is 


86 


inyou,  with  meekness  an<i  fear."  And  yesterday, 
just  about  the  time  tliat  I  had  screwed  my  cour- 
age up  to  give  this  answer,  my  friend  from  Nel- 
son made  a  remark  which  somewhat  let  me  down. 
And  that  was,  that  this  act  of  1833  had  not  been 
much  discussed  in  the  election  of  delegates  to 
this  convention. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  can  only  say  that 
if  the  gentleman  had  been  better  acquainted  with 
me  he  would  have  understood  the  remark  as 
being  entirely  ironical. 

Mr.  TAYllOR.  I  mean  nothing  offensive  to 
the  honorable  gentleman.  A  man  cannot  al- 
ways help  his  thoughts,  but  he  may  forbear  ex- 
pressing them.  But  when  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  remarked  yesterday,  tliat  this  act  of  1833 
had  not  been  discussed  much  for  tlio  last  six 
months,  I  thought  that  if  my  friend  Thomas  S. 
Page,  the  second  auditor,  (and  he  is  great  in 
figures)  should  be  directed  to  inform  the  house 
how  much  the  discussion  of  that  act  lias  cost 
this  commonwealth,  it  would  be  found  to  be,  if 
estimated  by  its  cost,  the  most  valuable  act  that 
has  ever  slept  upon  the  statute  book  of  Ken- 
tucky, for  16  long  continuous  years.  Have  gen- 
tlemen forgotten  the  history  of  the  convention 
movement  in  this  proud  and  glorious  old  com- 
monwealth of  ours?  Have  they  forgotten  that 
the  representatives  of  the  people — and  I  sav  it 
with  mortification  and  shame — when  tliey 
passed  the  act  authorizing  the  sense  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky  to  be  taken  on  the  propriety 
of  calling  a  convention  to  amend  the  existing 
constitution,  made  a  pledge  and  threw  it  out  to 
the  journeying  winds,  that  this  question  of  slave- 
ry was  not  to  be  agitated,  and  that  in  asking  for 
reform  they  did  not  intend  to  interfere  with  the 
relations  which  existed  between  master  and 
slave. 

Among  the  most  ardent  advocates  of  reform  in 
that  portion  of  Kentucky  which  I  have  the  hon- 
or to  represent,  was  the  humble  and  unobtru- 
sive individual  who  is  now  addressing  you.  I 
have  fought  the  good  fight;  I  have  kept  the  faith. 
What  I  mean  is,  that  I  lived  up  to  tlie  pledge 
given  by  those  who  sent  forth  the  manifesto 
which  I  mentioned  a  moment  since,  and  never 
during  the  discussion  of  that  question,  but  on 
one  occasion,  did  I  allude  to  this  question  of 
slavery,  and  then  I  struck  it  gently  as  a  lover 
strikes  his  mistress  with  a  blossom.  The  good 
figlit,  as  I  said,  Avas  fought;  the  faith  was  kept; 
and  out  of  136,000  voters,  102,000  votes  were  cast 
in  favor  of  a  convention.  Even  the  friends  of 
constitutional  reform  looked  at  each  other  with 
perfect  surprise,  at  the  idea  of  the  immense  ma- 
jority that  they  liad  obtained,  and  just  like  two 
conjurors  they  could  not  look  at  each  other  with- 
out a  smile  at  the  result.  It  was  a  glorious  tri- 
umph which  we  were  called  upon  to  carry  out 
ana  to  secure.  Our  emancipation  friends,  wliere 
were  theyV  I  mean  prior  to  tlie  vote  of  which  I 
have  just  spoken.  Sir,  not  the  tap  of  an  eman- 
cipation drum,  not  the  rallying  sound  of  an 
emancipation  bugle,  not  the  challenge  of  a  sin- 

f;le  emancipation  sentinel  was  heard,  as  tlie 
riends  of  constitutional  reform  in  solid  phalanx 
were  marching  on  without  faltering.  The  bat- 
tle, as  I  have  said,  was  fought,  a  triumph  was 
achieved,  and  victory  perched  upon  ourbanners; 
aud  83  Shakxpeare  hays  in  Richard  III,   "Our 


bruised  arms," — and  not  much  bruised  either, — 
"were  hung  up  for  monuments;  and  our  stern 
alarums," — if  there  were  any  in  the  contest, — 
"were  changed  to  merry  meetings."  Thus  far  I 
have  travelled  in  the  record  of  this  history,  and 
now  I  am  coming  to  another  point  to  w"liich  I 
wish  to  call  attention.  Did  you  ever  sir,  in  mid- 
summer, about  night-fall,  look  upon  a  clover- 
field  and  see  the  fire-flies  rising  out  of  it?  Just 
so  when  the  people  had  determined  to  have  con- 
stitutional reform,  were  our  emancipation  friends 
seen  springing  up  and  giving  light  aud  hope  to 
each  other.  If  I  may  use  a  strong  expression, 
they  had  been  until  this  triumph  lying  low  and 
keeping  dark.  But  when  they  found  that  the 
people  were  determined  upon  constitutional  re- 
form, then  for  the  first  time,  to  use  a  French  ex- 
pression, they  began  to  fraternise.  Or  to  use  a 
school-master's  word,  they  began  to  coalesce. 

Sir,  the  pledge  which  had  been  given  by  the 
friends  of  the  convention,  as  I  said,  has  been 
faithfully  kept.  They  did  not  in  anywise  agi- 
tate this  question  of  slavery.  They  have  made 
no  allusion  to  the  tenure  or  the  right  by  which 
the  master  held  his  slave.  Sir,  there  was  a  sort 
of  implied  pledge  on  the  part  of  our  emancipa- 
tion friends,  that  they  did  not  mean  to  agitate 
this  question,  and  for  two  whole  years  while 
these  battles  were  being  fought,  never  was  the 
click  of  their  rifles  or  the  tap  of  their  drum 
heard;  but  when  the  friends  of  constitutional 
reform  were  triumphant,  they  began  to  frater- 
nize, to  coalesce.  Then,  for  the  first  time,  the 
emancipation  party,  as  such,  was  fonned.  Do 
gentlemen  recollect — let  memory  run  back 
— what  they  first  demanded — such  a  demand  as 
could  only  proceed  from  the  arrogance  and  inso- 
lence of  power— that  there  should  be  incorporated 
in  the  constitution  some  sort  of  system  of  pros- 
pective emancipation?  And  I  could  not  but 
fancy  under  the  zeal  and  ardor  with  which  it 
was  pursued,  that  the  time  was  not  far  distant 
when  the  slave  population  of  this  state,  amount- 
ing to  sixty  millions  of  dollars  in  value,  with 
their  masters  were  to  make  a  grand  exodus  from 
this  commonwealth.  They  fired  and  fell  back. 
I  will  show  you  exactly  the  position  to  which 
they  fell  back.  They  fell  back,  sir,  under  the 
protection  and  cover  of  this  act  of  1833.  They 
fell  back  under  the  protection  of  another  batte- 
ry which  is  to  be  unmasked  in  this  house  ere 
long.  I  mean  that  of  specific  amendments  to 
the  constitution — the  open  clause.  How  do  you 
know  they  fell  back  on  the  law  of  1833?  There 
is  a  paper  in  Kentucky,  or  at  least  there  was — I 
do  not  know  whether  it  is  now  in  existence — ^I 
do  not  know  but  the  council  fires  of  our  emanci- 
pation friends  liave  been  put  out,  and  that  they 
are  disbanded — but  they  had  adopted  a  paper 
called  the  Louisville  Examiner,  as  the  organ  of 
their  views,  motives,  and  sentiments;  and  some 
times  the  curtain  was  lifted  a  little  too  high,  and 
we  liad  a  view  of  the  modus  operandi  and 
of  the^uo  modo  by  which  they  were  to  direct 
public  sentiment  and  achieve  the  glorious  tri- 
umph for  their  party,  whicli  their  fancy  had 
painted.  Well  sir,  this  is  the  first  legislative 
body  in  which  I  ever  had  a  seat.  It  is  the  most 
novel  situation  in  wliich  I  was  ever  placed, 
and  if  I  had  tlie  moral  courage  I  would  resign 
this  evening  and  go  home.     Permit  me  to  rea^ 


87 


one  extract,  that  xre  may  see  -whether  or  not  I 
have  been  indeed  telling  the  truth.  Let  us  see  if 
the  emancipation  party  nave  not  fired  and  fallen 
back  for  protection  upon  the  act  of  1833.  Here 
is  a  letter  dat<^d  at  the  residence  of  my  friend 
from  Bovle— "Danville,  Ky.,  March  19,  1849.' 
Letter  writers  are  leaky  vessels.  They  some 
times  let  out  secrets  of  the  cabinet.    But  I  tell 

?'ou  there  is  more  light  in  this  letter  than  the 
riends  of  emancipation  Avot  of  or  desire.  Let 
us  see  how  the  letter  reads: 

"  The  meeting  above  described  was  adjourned 
in  j)erfect  order — no  undue  excitement  was  pro- 
duced. Opponents  treated  the  meeting  with  re- 
spect, and  there  was  less  excitement  than  is  of- 
ten produced  by  the  most  ordinary  political  and 
transient  topics.  "We  trust  the  friends  of  eman- 
cipation will  every  where  be  encouraged  to  hold 
similar  meetings.  It  wants  but  moral  courage 
and  prudence  to  do  so  with  perfect  success  and 
public  approbation.  All  has  already  been  gain- 
ed in  this  country  that  is  desirable — a  pledge  on 
the  part  of  each  candidate  for  delegate  to  the 
convention,  (three  in  number,)  that  he  is  in  fa- 
vor of  the  incorporation  of  the  law  of  1833  in 
the  new  constitution,  and  of  a  provision  allow- 
ing specific  additions  or  amendments  to  be  made 
to  the  constitution  by  the  legislature  and  the 
people,  not  excluding  emancipation. 

"  These  two  articles  in  the  new  constitution 
being  obtained,  we  have  gained  all  for  the  pre- 
sent that  we  need  desire — the  rest  will  follow  in 
due  time.  That  it  is  perfectly  in  the  power  of 
the  emancipationists  to  effect  these  two  all-im- 
portant provisions  in  the  new  constitution,  there 
18  not  the  shadow  of  a  doubt,  if  they  will  use 
their  influence  aright.  They  ought  not,  unless 
where  succes  is  quite  certain,  to  run  candidates 
of  their  own,  but  to  hold  the  bilaxceof  pov^ek 

BETWEEN  C0N~rEXDIXG   CANDIDATES,  and  tO  VOtC  for 

that  man  who  will  go  farther  for  their  cause,  un- 
less his  good  faith  may  be  suspected,  or  there  ex- 
ist other  strong  objections  to  him. 

"If  "we  are  wise  as  serpents  and  harmless  as 
doves,"  we  can  hold  the  balance  of  power  in  the  con- 
vention. Our  opponents  can  be  brought  to  terms: 
if  not,  a  pro-slavery  constitution  can  be  rejected 
by  a  popular  vote. 

"  The  present  aspect  of  public  opinion  and 
feeling  gives  us  every  rea.son  to  hope.  All  that 
is  wanted,  is  moral  courage  and  efficient  action. 
Let  every  friend  of  emancipation  in  the  state 
who  can,  attend  the  convention  at  Frankfort. 

"I  should  have  stated  that  the  meeting  here 
was  composed  of  all  parties  both  in  reli^n  and 
politics.  "i  ours,  «fec.,  X.  V. 

"P.  S.  Since  the  above  was  written  a  candid- 
ate for  delegate  from  this  county  for  the  conven- 
tion, in  favor  of  emancipation,  has  been  an- 
nounced. This  movement,  in  my  humble  judg- 
ment, is  injudicious  and  will  not  meet  the  appro- 
bation of  the  emancipationists  of  the  county. 
The  course  above  recommended,  is  the  true 
course  and  the  only  one  that  holds  out  a  reason- 
able prospect  of  success.  If  there  be  any  coun- 
ty where  a  friend  of  emancipation  has  a  good  or 
reasonable  prospect  of  being  elected,  a  candid- 
ate ought  undoubtedly  to  be  presented.  But 
surely  it  is  worse  than  folly,  to  run  one  where 
we  are  certain  of  defeat,  and  where  our  influ- 
ence and  votes,  if  wisely  used  and  cast,  will  se- 


cure us  all  we  ought  at  present  to  want — an  ett' 
tering  wedge  to  rive  "  the  crooked  and  gnarled 
oak,"  which  now  overshadows  our  fair  state 
with  the  pestiferous  shade  and  blight  of  a  curse, 
the  greatest  that  a  nation  can  produce." 

"An  entering  wedge."  Sir,  as  I  said  a  while 
ago,  a  man  cannot  help  his  thoughts,  but  he  may 
forbear  their  expression.  I  thought  of  the  old 
hymn,  which  with  a  little  alteration  might  read 
thus: 

Ye  slavery  men  come  view  the  ground. 
Where  you  must  shortly  lie.— (Laughter.) 

If  I  had  no  other  motive,  and  there  were  no 
other  strong  super- inducing  reason  why  I  should 
vote  against  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  I  should  want  no  other  than 
that  couched  so  strongly  in  this  letter.  They 
want  it  as  an  entering  wedge.  They  want  the 
act  of  1833  incorporated  into  the  constitution, 
only  because  it  is  the  best  they  can  procure^  on- 
ly because  it  is  a  sort  of  constitutional  spring- 
l)oard,  by  which  they  may  hereafter  vault  into  a 
position  by  which  they  will  carry  the  question  of 
emancipation  altogetlier  Sir,  I  am  a  pro-slave- 
ry man.  I  am  not  willing  to  yield  a  single  inch, 
to  the  emancipation  party  in  any  form  whatever, 
and  I  never  intend  to  vote  for  the  incorporation 
of  the  spirit  or  principle  of  the  act  of  1833  into 
the  new  constitution,  lor  the  reason  that  the  par- 
ty call  it  an  entering  wedge,  to  rid  this  country 
of  what  they  call  a  great  moral  and  political 
evil.  Well,  I  take  issue  with  them  upon  that. 
But  I  am  not  going  to  discuss  that  question 
now,  nor  do  I  intend  to  discuss  the  act  of  1833, 
as  to  its  constitutionality  or  otherwise.  This  I 
will  leave  for  a  more  fitting  opportunity,  if  an 
opportunity  should  occur,  and  I  can  summon  up 
courage  to  address  the  convention. 

Sir,  this  act  of  1833,  as  it  is  called,  the  spirit 
of  which  is  sought  to  be  incorporated  in  the 
constitution,  slept,  asl  have  said,  upon  the  stat- 
ute- book,  from  1833  to  1848.  It  was  then  re- 
pealed. Why  do  I  use  the  term  slept?  Mem- 
bers of  the  legislature  can  answer  that  question. 
I  will  tell  you  the  reason  why  I  use  the  term . 
There  was  a  continuous  legislative  dispensation 
from  the  operation  of  that  act,  and  this  certain- 
ly ought  to  be  taken  into  consideration,  when 
mv  friend  Mr.  Page  comes  to  count  the  cost. 
Ttiere  was  a  most  catholic  feeling  on  the  part  of 
the  legislature,  for  granting  a  dispensation  to 
every  man  who  came  before  them  in  a  lachry- 
mose manner  and  asked  for  it.  And  year  after 
year  slaves  were  brought  into  Kentucky.  I 
consider  the  act  of  1833  to  have  been  altogether 
inoperative,  so  far  as  any  good  effects  were  to  flow 
from  it,  but  if  the  people,  through  their  repre- 
sentatives, could  keep  the  act  in  existence  from 
1833  up  to  1848,  I  can  see  no  good  in  incorpo- 
rating it  into  the  constitution,  except  to  gratify 
our  emancipation  friends,  and  to  drive  in  a  little 
the  entering  wedge  to  the  accomplishment  of 
their  purposes. 

There  was  one  remark  made  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  that  struck  me  with  a  great 
deal  of  force,  and  it  was  this,  that  slave  prop- 
perty  in  Kentucky  was  decreasing  in  value — 
sir,  'I  suppose,  like  a  lady's  waist,  growing 
"small  by  degrees  and  beautifully  less."  If 
it  be  so,  a'nd  if  the  gentleman's  statistics  prove 
it  to  be  a  fixed  fact,  then  I  maintain  that  there 


88 


is  no  necessity  for  the  existence  of  the  act 
of  1833  at  all,  and  certainly  no  necessity  for  its 
incorporation  in  the  new  constitution.  If  the 
institution  ia  in  fact  under  the  finger  of  provi- 
idence,  receding  in  Maryland,  Viginia,  and  Mis- 
souri, and  tlie  other  slave  states  of  tliis  Union,  I 
am  willing  to  leave  it  to  the  direction  of  provi- 
dence. I  am  willing  to  trust  that  being  who  is 
said  to  be  all-wise,  and  all-just  from  necessity 
rather  tlian  election. 

The  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison 
reminded  me  forcibly  of  an  old  woman  who  had 
the  misfortune  to  have  her  horse  run  off  with 
the  buggy  in  Avhich  she  was  riding.  Fortunate- 
ly, she  escaped  unhurt.  When  her  friends  were 
collected  around  the  tea  table  and  congratula- 
ting her  upon  her  escape,  one  asked  if  she  had 
not  been  greatly  alarmed.  "Why,"  said  she,  "I 
trusted  in  Providence  'till  the  breeching  broke  ; 
and  after  that,  I  did  not  know  what  to  do."  I 
am  beginning  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison  when  he  says  that  ho  re- 
lies upon  Providence.  I  begin  to  think  he  trusts 
more  to  legislative  and  constitutional  breeching 
than  he  does  to  any  thing  else. 

I  said  a  while  ago,  that  when  the  time  should 
come  and  I  could  have  courage  enough  to  ad- 
dress the  convention,  I  would  like  to  be  heard 
upon  this  point,  that  slavery,  as  it  is  asserted  by 
our  emancipation  friends,  is  a  great  social  and 
political  evil.  There  has  been  a  continual  cry 
111  this  commonwealth  about  free  labor  being 
cheap,  and  that  numbers  constitute  political 
wealth.  I  do  not  believe  it.  Continual  fault 
has  been  found  by  our  emancipation  friends 
throughout  this  broad  commonAveath,  with  the 
social  condition  of  the  people  of  Kentucky. — 
Sir,  there  are  around  us  and  among  us  evidences 
of  the  elements  of  greatness  and  content.  For 
my  own  part,  I  am  content  witli  Kentucky  as 
she  is.  I  would  not  swap  her  olT  for  ten  of  the 
brightest  and  most  glorious  commonwealths, 
throwing  in  our  emancipation  exemplar  Ohio, 
into  the  bargain.  Do  you  recollect  what  the 
preacher  said,  after  he  had  exhausted  his  fancy 
in  accumulating  figures  of  speech  descriptive  of 
Heaven,  after  speaking  of  it  as  the  residence  of 
just  men  made  perfect,  after  speaking  of  it  as  the 
place  where  it  is  said  that  the 

"  Smile  of  the  Lord  is  the  feast  of  the  soul,"' 
taking  a  still  more  upward  flight,  as  a  finale  to 
all   his  figures,  he  said,   it  is  a  Kentucky  of  a 
place.      Sir,  there  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  that 
figure. 

I  do  hope  and  trust,  therefore,  that  this  act  of 
1833,  thespirit  of  it  at  least,  will  not  be  incorpo- 
rated in  the  constitution.  The  people  have  re- 
buked its  incorporation  in  any  way,  and  if  I 
want  any  reflex  of  public  opinion  on  the  subject, 
if  gentlemen  are  still  like  Bunyan,  in  doubting 
castle,  there  was  one  vote  given  at  the  heel  of 
the  last  session,  which  ought  to  satisfy  their 
doubts.  That  vote  was  for  the  repeal  of  the  act 
of  1833.  It  was  a  declaration  of  Uie  people  that 
the  relation  between  master  and  slave  should 
not  in  anywise  be  disturbed.  I  would  say  to 
the  gentleman  from  Madison,  and  I  say  it  in  no 
BDirit  of  tlisrespectoftg/a  principiis,  resist  things  at 
the  beginning.  When  I  see  gentlemen  endeav- 
oring to  incorporate  the  act  of  1833  in  the  con- 
stitution—I  say  to  the  pro-blavery  party  that 


the  wolf  is  on  their  walk  and  it  is  the  province 
of  wise  men  at  least  to  beware. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  should  not  have  said 
a  word  but  for  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison.  He  thinks,  sir,  that  the  commit- 
tee should  have  waited  and  heard  discussions  on 
his  resolutions  before  they  made  their  report. 
With  due  deference,  I  beg  leave  to  differwith  the 
gentleman.  Why  should  we  wait?  His  resolu- 
tions assert  abstract  principles,  and  the  report  of 
the  committee  goes  into  matters  of  detail.  Are 
we  to  wait  and  hear  discussions  here,  and  then 
report  the  opinions  of  the  convention?  No,  sir, 
we  are  to  report  the  individual  and  collective 
opinions  of  the  committee.  Why  wait  for  dis- 
cussion? This  question  of  slavery  has  been  dis- 
cussed in  all  its  bearings  throughout  the  State  of 
Kentucky.  We  could  expect  to  elicit  no  new 
light  on  the  subject  by  waiting  for  discussion. 
Therefore,  it  was  thought  expedient  to  make  the 
report  when  the  committee  had  come  to  a  con- 
clusion, and  not  to  wait  for  an  expression  of 
opinion  on  the  part  of  the  house. 

One  other  word  to  my  friends  from  Madison 
and  Simpson  as  to  the  fifth  section.  My  friend 
from  Madison  wishes  the  report  of  the  committee 
changed  so  as  to  incorporate  the  law  of  1833. 
My  friend  from  Simpson  wishes  it  so  changed  as 
to  prohibit  the  passage  of  any  such  law.  They 
both  profess  to  be  friends  of  constitutional  re- 
form. Are  they  not  aware  that  this  new  consti- 
tution must  lose  strength  by  the  incorporation 
of  the  law  of  1833,  or  by  the  denial  of  power  to 
the  legislature.  If  you  incorporate  the  princi- 
ple of  the  law  of  1833  in  the  constitution,  you  at 
once  throw  the  vote  of  those  opposed  to  the  law 
against  the  constitution.  If  you  deny  tlie  legis- 
lature the  power  of  passing  such  a  law,  you 
throw  the  votes  of  all  tlie  friends  of  that  law 
against  the  constitution.  And  is  it  desirable  to 
do  this?  Why  not  leave  it  as  it  stands  at  pres- 
ent? Why  not  leave  it  to  the  decisions  of  the 
courts,  and  not  throw  this  great  weight  against 
the  adoption  of  the  constitution  which  will  in- 
evitably be  the  case  if  either  of  the  suggestions 
of  the  gentlemen  be  adopted. 

I  wiu  conclude  by  remarking  that  I  cannot  see 
how  you  can  bring  up  the  discussion  of  the  gen- 
tleman's resolutions  with  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee. Although  both  should  be  made  the  spe- 
cial order  of  the  day  for  the  same  day,  one  must 
have  precedence  over  the  other.  If  you  now 
make  the  gentleman's  resolutions  the  special  or- 
der of  the  day  for  Monday  week  next,  you  give 
the  report  of  the  committee  precedence,  and  that  • 
report  must  come  up  to  the  exclusion  of  the  reso- 
lutions. They  may  be  under  discussion,  it  is 
true,' but  they  cannot  give  rise  to  any  action  un- 
til the  report  shall  have  been  acted  upon. — 
Then,  why  not  go  on  with  the  discussion  of  the 
resolutions  until  the  day  fixed  for  the  considera- 
tion of  the  report  of  the  committee. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  My  honorable  friend  from  Jef- 
ferson I  think  begs  the  question.  He  set^ms  to 
suppose  that  if  the  amendment,  proposed  by 
the  gentleman  from  Madison,  be  adoi)ted,  it  will 
array  the  pro-slavery  men  in  the  state  against 
the  constitution.  Well,  that  is  true,  sir.  He 
then  argues  that  if  the  proposition  tiiat,  1  intend 
to  submit  be  adopted,  it  will  array  the  emanci- 
pationists against  the  constitution. 


89 


Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  gentleman  misap- 
prehends me.  I  said  the  friends  of  the  law  and 
the  emancipationists. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Yes  sir,  it  will  array  the 
friends  of  the  law  of  1833  and  the  emancipation- 
ists against  the  constitution.  That  will  be  the 
result  as  the  gentleman  supposes.  I  am  perfect- 
ly satisfied,  though  a  vote  upon  my  proposition 
will  test  that  question,  that  there  is  no  gentle- 
man on  this  floor,  who  does  not  desire  fairly, 
honestly,  and  faithfully  to  represent  the  will  and 
feelings  of  those  who  sent  him  here.  When 
the  vote  shall  be  taken  on  my  proposition, 
if  there  should  be  a  majority  in  favor  of  with- 
holding from  the  Legislature  the  power  to  pro- 
hibit citizens  of  this  State  from  bringing  slaves 
into  the  State,  I  shall  believe  that  there  is  in 
the  State  a  will,  reflected  by  delegates  here, 
in  favor  of  the  principle  that  I  propose.  I  am 
not  willing  to  confer  upon  the  Legislature  the 
power  to  legislate  upon  the  subject  of  slavery  at 
all.  I  believe  there  is  nothing  more  dangerous 
to  the  future  peace  and  tranquility  of  this  proud 
old  commonwealth,  than  to  confer  upon  the  leg- 
islative department  of  the  government  for  all 
time  to  come,  the  power  to  legislate  upon  the 
subject  of  slavery.  What  has  been  the  effect,  sir, 
as  I  suggested  in  the  few  remarks  that  I  had  the 
honor  to  submit  for  the  consideration  of  the  com- 
mittee afew  mornings  ago,  of  the  act  of  1833? 
That  act  was  regarded  as  a  concession  to  aboli- 
tionism ;  and  there  has  not,  according  to  my  re- 
collection, since  the  passage  of  that  act  in  1833 
down  to  its  repeal  in  1848,  been  one  solitary  ses- 
sion of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  in  which  the 
subject  of  slavery  has  not  been  either  directly  or 
indirectly  discussed.  We  have  had  from  1833 
to  1848  an  experience  of  years  as  to  the  proprie- 
ty of  the  principle  incorporated  in  that  act.  We 
have  had  practical  experience  upon  the  subject 
of  that  act,  its  consequences  on  the  prosperity, 
the  well-being,  the  tranquility  of  the  State,  and 
I  think  sir  that  from  the  bare  fact  that  the  people 
last  winter  in  the  exercise  of  their  sovereign  will 
and  power,  returned  to  both  branches  of  the 
Legislature  of  the  State  an  overwhelming  major- 
ity for  the  repeal  of  the  law  of  1833,  we  may  ar- 
rive at  the  conclusion  that  a  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  State  are  in  favor  of  allowing  her  citi- 
zens to  import  slaves  for  their  own  use.  What 
better  wedge,  I  ask  in  the  language  of  the  gen- 
tleman over  the  way,  do  the  emancipationists 
want  than  that  the  constitution  should  confer  up- 
on the  legislative  department  of  this  government 
the  power  perpetually  to  agitate  the  subject  of 
slavery. 

And  upon  principle.sir,  there  will  be  but  a  shade 
of  difference  between  leaving  the  question  open 
for  legislative  discussion  and  legislative  action, 
and  the  incorporation  of  the  open  clause  princi- 

{)le  in  the  new  Constitution.  As  I  remarked  be- 
ore,  I  do  not  now  propose  to  discuss  this  ques- 
tion, but  there  are  innumerable  reasons  why  this 
convention  should  withhold  from  the  legisla- 
ture the  power  to  take  any  future  action  upon 
the  subject  of  slavery.  When  the  proper  time 
shall  have  arrived,  and  I  shall  be  permitted  to 
have  the  honor  to  offer  the  amendment  that  I 
propose  to  offer,  then  I  desire  a  patient  and  calm 
consideration  on  the  part  of  this  convention,  of 
such  arguments  as  I  shall  submit  in  favor  of  a 
12 


clause  that  shall  prohibit  tlie  legislature  from 
acting  upon  the  sucyect  of  slavery. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  ask  leave  to  say  a  word  or 
two  before  the  subject  is  postponed.  So  far  as 
it  respects  the  article  which  has  been  read  here 
by  tlie  gentleman  from  Mason,  it  is  one  that  I 
used  all  last  summer  myself,  at  least  I  used  it 
as  long  as  I  was  engaged  in  my  canvass,  and  I 
used  it  for  the  purpose  of  warning  pro-slavery 
men  that  they  should  be  upon  their  guard 
against  electing  any  man  who  was  in  favor  of 
the  open  clause.  I  read  that  and  other  similar 
publications  to  the  voters,  to  show  that  there 
was  a  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  emancipation- 
ists to  divide  up  the  two  parties,  in  order  to 
make  an  opening,  and  see  if  they  could  not  get 
some  individual  who  was  a  little  soft,  wno 
would  go  a  little  secretly  in  favor  of  the  open 
clause.  I  was  considered  the  ultra  pro-slavery 
man  of  the  county  which  I  represent.  The 
emancipationists  met  here  on  the  25th  of  April 
last,  and  said  that  they  were  in  favor  of  putting 
the  principle  of  the  act  of  1833  in  the  constitu- 
tion, but  the  county  of  Madison  did  not  think 
she  was  bound  to  abandon  her  principles  which 
she  had  advocated  since  1833,  merely  because 
the  emancipationists  had  taken  them  up.  Out 
of  fifty  votes  given  in  both  branches  of  the  leg- 
islature by  members  from  the  county  of  Madi- 
son, only  three  have  ever  been  cast  in  opposition 
to  this  law  of  1833.  And  before  this  question 
of  emancipation  was  opened,  the  county  of  Mad- 
ison always  seemed  to  indicate  that  she  was  in 
favor  of  putting  the  provisions  of  that  law  in 
the  constitution,  and  I  was  in  favor  of  doing  so 
myself.  But  I  agree  with  my  friend  on  my  left, 
that  this  matter  of  slavery  should  be  shut  up  in 
the  Constitution,  that  it  should  not  be  agitated 
in  the  legislature,  for  that  I  consider  near  akin  to 
the  open  clause  itself.  It  should  not  be  agita- 
ted, because,  to  disturb  this  species  of  property, 
injures  its  usefulness  and  value. 

Now,  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  gentleman 
from  Mason  intended  to  intimate  that  I  had, 
in  the  views  which  I  supported,  any  connection 
with  the  emancipationists.  There  are  pro-slave- 
ry men  here  who  are  in  favor  of  the  open  clause, 
which  is  greatly  worse  than  incorporating  the 
act  of  1833;  fori  do  not  think  that  statute  would 
produce  any  injury  at  all ;  on  the  contrary,  I 
think  it  would  oe  a  benefit;  but  there  are  gen- 
tlemen whose  opinions  are  entitled  to  as  much 
attention  as  my  own,  who  think  it  would  be 
right  to  leave  it  open.  It  was  urged  upon  me 
that  inasmuch  as  the  convention  would  not 
touch  the  subject  of  slavery,  but  would  adopt 
the  principle  in  favor  of  the  open  clause,  I  ought 
not  to  go  against  it  in  the  canvass,  and  ought  not 
here.  But  I  told  them  that  I  was  in  favor  of 
shutting  it  up  for  a  period,  longer  than  any  man 
in  my  county  was  in  favor  of,  and  should  en- 
deavor to  put  it  beyond  the  reach  of  any  legis- 
lation for  twenty  or  twenty -five  years;  that  it 
should  not  even  be  brought  up  again  for  discus- 
sion before  the  people  for  that  time.  And  now 
with  my  ultra  views  on  this  subject,  because  I 
think  we  had  better  not  import  anymore  slaves 

fentlemen  seem  to  think  that  I  have  some  kin- 
red  feelings  with  the  emancipationists.  Real- 
ly, the  condition  I  have  gotten  into  here  reminds 
me  of  a  little  passage  between  myself  and  Squire 


# 


Wffe<M^ W  ^M'^^'U^t  other 
by  the  title  of  Squire,  and  he  thought  we  were 
both  squires  by  trade.  I  asked  him  how  Jack- 
sou's  adruinistration  was  getting  along.  _  "Real- 
ly,"he  said,  "we have  not  got  into  apredicament 
to  show  our  circumstance/'  But  really  I  think 
I  have  got  into  a  predicament  to  show  my  cir- 
cumstance, but  if  they  will  give  me  fair  play  I 
do  not  care.  The  gentleman  from  Mason  has  ta- 
ken hold  of  me,  and  the  gentleman  from  Jeffer- 
son was  about  to  do  so.  The  gentleman  from 
Boyle  has  not  read  my  speech,  and  did  not  hear 
it  well,  and  I  was  obliged  to  listen  to  a  long 
speech  in  consequence  of  his  misapprehending 
my  position.  Now  sir,  when  I  am  properly  un- 
derstood, the  gentlemen  have  not  got  the  vantage 
ground  of  me.  I  am  a  pro-slavery  man,  but  I 
think  we  have  got  enough  of  It.  It  is  said  we 
Iriay  have  too  much  of  a  good  thing.  I  admit 
that  the  slaves  we  have  now  are  beneficial  to  us, 
and  it  is  desirable  to  improve  them,  not  to  con- 
taminate them  by  mixing  them  up  with  rogues 
and  rascals.  My  county,  I  believe,  is  not  for 
tringing  in  any  more,  and  she  is  not  willing  to 
yield  her  principles,  merely  because  the  emanci- 
pationists have  adopted  the  law  of  1833. 

Now  I  do  not  wish  to  use  any  language  that 
would  seem  to  be  indecorous,  but  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  emancipationists  re&iind  me  of 
a  circumstance  that  occurred  some  years  ago. — 
One  Barby  Diggs  came  to  me  to  get  me  to  bring 
a  suit  upon  a  contract  for  land.  I  took  his  bond 
and  told  him  to  come  again  in  two  weeks.  At 
the  end  of  that  time  he  returned,  and  having  ex- 
amined the  papers  in  the  mean  time,  I  told  him 
that  he  had  no  chance  to  get  clear  of  the  con- 
tract. He  was  very  much  disappointed.  Said 
he,  "  can't  jou  bedevil  them?"  "  0  yes,  if  that 
is  what  you  want,  but  I  shall  charge  you  a 
pretty  large  fee."  He  very  readily  agreed  to  pay 
it,  but  wanted  me  to  wait  until  the  business  was 
over.  I  told  him  no,  he  might  play  the  bedevil- 
ing game  on  me.  Now  as  for  this  matter  of  the 
open  clause,  I  understand  the  emancipationists 
to  say,  if  you  will  give  us  that  we  will  ere  long 
bedevil  you  till  you  agree  to  give  up  your  slaves. 
Now  sir,  T  throw  myself  into  the  breach  at  that 
point.  I  am  against  allowing  them  to  play  Bar- 
by  Diggs  on  us  in  any  way  or  shape,  and  I  will 
vote  Side  by  side  with  the  gentleman  from  Ma- 
son, and  other  pro-slaverj-  men.  There  are  some 
individuals  who  have  got  up  to  the  highest 
notch,  and  are  about  to  turn  us  out  of  the  church 
here.  I  am  here  by  the  direction  of  the  people  of 
Madison,  by  the  authority  of  twenty-six  or  seven 
hundred  people  of  the  commonwealth,  and  am 
not  to  be  ousted  by  any  man  who  may  consti- 
tute himself  priest  or  preceptor.  I  am  here  in 
obedience  to  the  voice  of  the  free-citizens  of 
Madison,  and  I  intend  to  advocate  their  princi- 
ples fearlessly,  let  what  will  come.  I  came  here 
through  fire  and  brimstone,  more  perhaps  than 
anyone  who  ha.<?  a  seat  upon  this  floor,  and  I 
•will  not  bow  to  the  emancipationists  in  any 
shape  or  manner. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  hefe  Called  attention  to  his 
amendment  to  the  6th  resolution  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison,  and  insisted  that  a  vote 
should  be  taken  iipon  it. 

Mr.  OARFIELDE.  I  rise  to  express  the  opin- 
ion ^st  the  resolution,  of  the  gentleman  from 


Madison  should  not  be  laid  on  the  table  as  sug- 
gested by  some  here.  There  are  a  couple  of  lite 
rary  gems  in  embryo  here,  twin  brothers,  that  I 
would  like  to  see  developed  to  this  house. — 
The  first  is  the  political,  philosophical  axiom 
that  slavery  is  amoral  blessing  to  both  the  slave 
and  his  master,  and  a  political  blessing  to  the 
commonwealth.  The  second  is,  the  divine  ax- 
iom that  the  Being  who  descended  from  heaven 
to  free  mankind  from  the  shackles  of  sin  came 
also  to  assist  in  riveting  the  shackles  of  human 
despotism.  I  hope  a  full  and  fair  opportunity 
will  be  granted  for  the  development  of  both  these 
principles,  so  entirely  new  and  strange  as  they 
are.  And  although  we  all  may  have  come  here 
to  carry  out  the  wishes  and  principles  of  out 
constituents,  yet  if  members  of  this  convention 
will  be  benefitted  by  the  discussion  of  princi- 
ples of  this  character,  I  hope  that  the  committee 
will  grant  them  an  opportunity. 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  would  not  rise  to  speak  but  I 
should  feel  I  had  not  discharged  my  duty,  if  jj 
upon  the  further  discussion  of  this  question,  I  ; 
should  not  endeavor  to  make  the  voice  of  a  re- 
spectable portion  of  the  state  heard  in  relation  to 
it.  My  constituency  feel  a  deep  solicitude  and 
interest  in  the  principles  of  the  law  of  1833. 
There  was  nothing  said  about  emancipation  or 
abolitionism  when  that  law  was  placed  on  the  : 
statute  book,  and  while  it  remained  there  quiets 
ly,  there  was  no  agitation  in  my  part  of  the  state. 
It  strikes  me  that  this  question  ought  to  be  set- 
tled on  wise  and  proper  principles  It  ought  to 
be  settled  by  a  concession  on  the  part,  of  the 
ultra  pro  slavery  men  on  the  one  hand,  and  aa 
the  gentleman  says  that  the  emancipationists  re-  , 
quire  the  principle  of  the  law  of  1833  to  be  in-  ; 
corporated  into  the  constitution,  there  ought  to 
be  some  concessions  on  both  sides.  The  eman- 
cipation party  in  Kentucky  is  not  only  respec- 
table, numerous,  and  intellectual,  but  its  voice 
must  and  will  be  heard.  It  is  impossible  to 
stifle  the  principles  embraced,  and  laid  down 
by  the  emancipation  party  in  this  state,  and  it 
would  be  unwise  to  endeavor  to  stifle  discussion, 
and  to  put  a  padlock  upon  the  lips  of  the  intel- 
lectual gentlemen  who  are  in  favor  of  some  sys- 
tem looking  to  ultimate  emancipation  in  tliis 
state.  In  my  section  of  the  country,  no  man  be- 
lieves in  incorporating  the  gradual  emancipa- 
tion system  in  the  constitution;  but  there  are 
divers  men,  some  of  our  most  distinguished 
men,  and  slaveholders  too,  who  look  forward  to 
the  period  when  Kentucky  shall  be  indeed  re- 
deemed and  disenthralled  by  the  irresistible 
genius  of  universal  emancipation.  It  matters 
not  whether  it  comes  in  ten,  fifteen,  twenty  or  a 
thousand  years,  they  desire  that  our  policy  shall 
look  forward  to  the  period  when  Kentucky  shall 
be  redeemed — when  she  shall  possess  within  her 
borders  a  numerous  body  of  free  laborers — and 
when  we  shall  be  in  fact  a  free  stat«.  I  desire 
to  be  heard  upon  some  branch  at  least  of  the 
principles  of  the  law  of  1833.  I  come  here  as 
the  representative  of  about  two  thousand  voters 
— I  know  the  feelings  and  opinions  of  those 
whom  I  represent — and  is  this  too  much  to  ask? 
Are  we  who  have  stood  by  the  law  of  1833, 
we  who  have  battled  for  it  for  ten,  fifteen,  or 
twenty  years,  to  recede  from  this  positron  and 
in  short  is  the  policy  and  principle3  contain- 


91 


ed  in  that  law,  now  to  be  abandoned  because 
a  little  junto  of  immediate  emancipationists 
or  abolitionists  choose  to  occupy  ground  that 
nearly  the  entire  state  has  occupied  for  six- 
teen years?  Are  we  to  be  driven  from  any  posi- 
tion because  our  enemies  get  upon  our  platform? 
Are  we  desirous  to  make  Kentucky  the  great 
slave  mart  of  the  United  States,  because  the  im- 
mediate emancipationists  choose  to  get  on  the 
platform  on  which  we  stood  fairly,  fully,  and 
quietly,  until  the  last  legislature  chose  to  lay 
Yiolent  hands  on  that  sacred  law.  The  policy 
of  changing  the  law  was  equivocal.  The  con- 
test that  was  fought  on  this  floor  showed  it  to  be 
of  doubtful  import,  and  the  vote  by  which  it 
was  repealed  exhibited  the  fact  that  there  was 
a  strong  and  powerful  minority  in  favor  of  that 
law.  This  powerful  minority  will  come  up 
in  judgment  against  the  men  who,  uninstruct€d, 
disturbed  the  policy  of  the  great  commonwealth 
of  Kentucky.  upon  this  point,  therefore,  I 
think  that  there  is  no  friend  of  the  law  of  1833, 
who  has  anything  to  fear.  I  can  bring  up  an  ar- 
ray of  great  names,  the  very  foremost  in  this 
country,  who  have  stood  up  and  advocated  the 
law  of  1833,  and  who  were  not  backward  in  as- 
serting these  principles.  Let  then  every  friend 
of  the  ancient  and  settled  policy  of  the  state 
come  up,  and  I  believe  not  even  the  most  ultra 
of  the  pro  slavery  men,  will  attempt  to  over- 
throw tne  new  constitution,  because  it  has  the 
Erinciples  of  the  law  of  1833  engrafted  upon  it. 
>oes  the  law  disturb  any  settled  policy  under 
the  constitution  and  laws  of  the  state?  Does  it 
unhinge  any  man's  claims  to  slave  property,  or 
render  it  less  secure?  I  maintain  that  it  will 
render  slave  property  more  valuable,  and 
that  the  repeal  of  the  law  will  bring  an  in- 
flux of  slaves  here,  and  make  the  state  the  great 
slave  mart  of  the  Union — to  the  disgrace  of  the 
proud  and  chivalrous  sons  of  old  Kentucky, 
whose  blood  has  been  spilled  upon  a  hundred 
battle  fields  in  defence  of  the  rights  of  man.  I 
desire  that  this  question  may  be  postponed,  so 
that  the  voice  of  the  country  may  come  up  here 
and  not  be  stifled  on  a  question  of  sucn  mo- 
mentous importance.  I  move  that  the  commit- 
tee rise  and  report  progress. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  committee 
rose  and  reported  progress,  and  leave  was  grant- 
ed for  it  to  sit  again. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  OCTOBER  12, 1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Thos.  N.  Raiston,  of  the 
Methodist  church. 

PEOPOSITION8  TO  AMEXD. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  oflfered  tiie  following  resolu- 
tions: 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  miscella- 
neous provisions  be  instructed  to  report  an  amend- 
ment to  the  present  constitution,  which  shall 
provide,  that  while  tiie  ancient  mode  of  trial  by 
jury  be  kept  inviolate,  the  commonwealth  shall 
in  all  criminal  prosecutions,  have  the  right  of 
pereraptorj  challenge  to  the  same  extent  that 
shall  be  given  to  the  accused. 

2.  Resolved,  That  said  committee  also  report 
an  amendment,  which  shall  give  to  the  citizen 


the  right  to  carry  arras  for  self  defence,  reserving 
to  the  legislature  the  power  to  pass  laws  for  the 
punishment  of  those  who  carry  concealed  wea- 
pons. 

Mr.  "WILLIAMS.  I  have  offered  these  resolu- 
tions, with  a  view  to  instruct  the  committee  to 
make  a  report  in  favor  of  the  instructions  contain- 
ed in  the  resolutions.  To  my  mind  these  proposi- 
tions are  of  such  weight  tnat  it  seems  to  me  it 
would  be  useless  to  address  arguments  to  the  con- 
vention in  their  favor.  It  strikes  me  sir,  that  there 
is  a  very  great  defect  in  our  system  of  criminal 
prosecutions,  in  regard  to  the  manner  in  which 
jurors  are  selected,  and  that  under  the  present 
mode  of  selecting  jurors,  in  a  trial  of  criminals, 
especially  those  charged  with  murder,  and  who 
are  men  of  much  property,  there  is  a  very  ^reat 
difficulty  in  convicting  them.  And  in  my  judg- 
ment, the  difficulty  lies  in  the  mode  in  which 
jurors  are  selected,  and  in  the  fact  that  the  ac- 
cused has  the  right  to  challenge  peremptorily 
the  number  of  22  jurors,  while  the  common- 
wealth is  denied  the  right  even  to  challenge  a 
single  juror. 

With  reference  to  the  second  resolution  which 
relates  to  the  article  in  our  present  constitution, 
which  provides  that  citizens  shall  carry  arms 
for  self-defence,  permit  me  to  say  that  in  my 
opinion,  that  article  has  prevented  the  legisla- 
ture from  passing  any  law  to  punish  individu- 
als for  carrying  concealed  weapons.  Now  while 
I  am  willing  that  every  citizen  should  carry 
arms  for  self-defence,  it  seems  utterly  wrong  that 
every  individual,  who  chooses,  should  carry  a 
pistol  or  a  bowie  knife  concealed,  and  go  unpun- 
ished, and  the  resolution  proposes  to  instruct 
the  committee  to  insert  some  provision  in  the 
constitution,  which,  while  it  shall  allow  the  cit- 
izen to  carry  arms  for  self-defence,  shall  give  to 
the  legislature  the  power  to  punish  those  who 
carry  concealed  weapons. 

m.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  believe  this  is  the 
first  resolution  that  has  been  presented  to  re- 
quire this  house  to  vote  positive  instructions  to 
a  committee  in  the  exercise  of  its  duties.  If  it 
is  the  purpose  of  the  mover  of  the  proposition 
to  have  the  subject  investigated,  scrutinized,  and 
examined  in  all  its  bearings  upon  our  personal 
rights,  and  the  rights  of  the  citizen,  I  have  no 
objection  that  it  shall  take  that  course.  I  am 
not  prepared  myself,  at  this  time,  to  give  my 
vote,  positively  instructing  the  committee  thus 
to  change  the  rights  which  pertain  to  the  citi- 
zens of  this  commonwealth — I  allude  to  the 
rights  pertaining  to  the  accused,  and  the  rights 
of  the  commonwealth  in  a  contest  between  the 
commonwealth  and  a  citizen  charged  with  a 
criminal  offence.  I  am  not  prepared  at  once  to 
give  my  vote  that  there  shall  be  such  a  radical 
change  on  this  question,  and  I  therefore  hope 
that  the  gentleman  will  let  the  subject  go  before 
the  committee  for  their  examination,  without 
positive  instruction.  However,  if  the  question 
is  pressed  in  the  shape  of  an  instruction  design- 
ed to  elicit  the  judgment  of  the  house,  I  for  one 
desire  to  interpose  the  expression  of  my  opinion 
against  the  adoption  of  any  such  principle  in 
tne  constitution. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  would  suggest  that  the 
form  of  the  resolutions  is  too  peremptory,  and 
requires  a  vote  at  once  on  as  important  a  princi- 


92 


pie  as  can  be  brought  before  us.  To  enquire  is 
one  thing,  but  to  instruct  is  to  give  a  vote  to 
change  the  most  important  part  of  the  criminal 
jurisprudence  of  the  country.  I  hope  my  friend 
will  alter  his  resolutions  so  as  simply  to  direct 
the  committee  to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of 
reporting  the  provision.  The  committee  on  the 
circuit  courts  nave  that  matter  before  them,  and 
will  consider  it  again  this  evening.  It  is  wor- 
thy of  consideration,  for  a  great  evil  does  result 
where  the  accused  has  a  right  to  challenge  twen- 
ty, and  the  commonwealth  has  no  peremptory 
cnallenge.  Our  committee  are  enquiring  into 
it,  and  I  hope  some  of  the  other  standing  com- 
mittees will  also  do  so.  This  resolution  is 
compulsory  now,  and  if  we  are  to  give  a  vote  on 
it,  I  hope  it  will  not  be  done  to-day. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  do  not  insist  on  its  going 
to  the  committee  in  the  form  of  a  positive  in- 
struction. I  had  not  supposed  there  would  be 
any  objection  to  that  form,  but  I  will  so  modify 
the  resolution  as  that  the  committee  be  instruct- 
ed to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of  reporting 
an  amendment. 
The  resolution  was  so  modified. 
Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  have  an  amendment  which 
I  desire  to  have  made  to  the  resolutions.  I  want 
that  committee  to  enquire  into  the  fact  whether 
the  commonwealth  shall  not  have  the  right  to 
change  the  venue.  The  accused  has  frequently 
that  right;  and  whenever  it  occurs  that  the  com- 
monwealth cannot  have  a  trial,  from  the  fact  that 
every  man  in  the  county  has  formed  his  opinion 
for  or  against  the  accused,  and  that  no  jury  can 
be  found  to  try  him,  I  desire  that  the  common- 
wealth shall  have  the  right  to  remove  the  case  to 
some  distant  county,  where  a  man  shall  finally 
be  tried,  and  from  the  fact  that  he  has  committed 
so  aggravated  an  oflfence  that  every  man  has 
formed  an  opinion,  he  shall  not  go  unwhipt  of 
justice.  I  throw  out  the  suggestion  that  the  com- 
mittee may  take  it  under  consideration,  and  if 
they  do  not,  I  will  bring  it  in  some  tangible  form 
before  the  convention. 

The  resolutions  were  then  agreed  to. 
Mr.  IRWIN  offered  the  following  resolutions, 
viz: 

Resolved,  That  in  the  reorganization  of  the 
government  of  this  commonwealth,  it  will  be 
expedient  to  divide  each  county  into  a  conve- 
nient number  of  civil  districts,  to  be  designated 
first,  second,  third,  <fec.,  and  that  each  district 
shall  be  entitled  to  two  magistrates  and  one  con- 
stable, to  be  elected  by  its  qualified  voters. 

Resolved,  That  the  revenue  of  the  common- 
wealth ought  not  to  be  collected  by  the  sheriff, 
but  that  a  new  officer  for  that  purpose  ought  to 
be  created,  to  be  styled  the  revenue  collector, 
and  that  this  officer  should  be  elected  by  the  ma- 
gistrates of  the  county. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  understand  that  the  commit- 
tee on  the  county  courts  has  adopted  much 
the  same  principle  as  that  contained  in  the  first 
resolution,  and  1  simply  wish  to  refer  that  re- 
solution without  being  printed  to  the  committee 
on  the  county  courts.  I  notice  that  in  Tennes- 
see, the  collection  of  the  revenue  is  given  to  a 
collector  and  not  to  r»  sheriff.  It  seems  that  the 
sheriff,  being  elected  bv  the  people,  seldom  pays 
any  money  over  into  the  treasury,  and  it  seems 
necessary  that  it  should  be  collected  by  an  officer 


elected  for  the  purpose.  I  therefore  propose  to 
refer  these  resolutions  to  the  committee  on  the 
county  courts. 

They  were  so  referred  accordingly. 

Mr.  HOOD  offered  the  following,  which  was 
referred  to  the  committee  on  the  executive  for 
the  state  at  large. 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  execu- 
tive for  the  state  at  large,  be  instructed  to  in- 
quire into  the  expediency  of  so  qualifying  and 
restricting  the  executive  power  to  grant  pardons 
and  reprieves,  <fec.,  as  to  prevent  its  improvident 
exercise,  under  false  or  partial  representations  to 
the  governor,  by  the  friends  of  the  convict  or 
otherwise. 

Mr.  NESBITT  offered  the  following,  which 
was  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  county 
courts. 

Resolved,  That  in  lieu  of  the  county  courts, 
there  shall  be  elected  in  each  county  a  probate 
judge,  who  shall  discharge  the  duties  of  the 
county  court,  and  tlie  county  court  clerk,  and  for 
compensation  shall  have  the  fees  of  the  clerk  of 
the  county  court,  and  no  other. 

Resolved,  That  the  latter  office  be  abolished. 

SLAX^ERY. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  BARLOW  in  the  Chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  Mr.  Turner's; 
resolutions  which  Avere  undisposed  of  when  the 
committee  rose  yesterday. 

The  CHAIR  awarded  the  floor  to  Mr.  Root, 
but  that  gentleman  waived  the   right,  saying  . 
that  he  would  take  some   other  occasion  to  ad- 
dress the   committee,  as  the  discussion   should . 
progress. 

The  question  was  on  the  amendment  of  Mr. 
Nuttall  to  the  sixth  resolution,  proposing  to  al- 
low any  citizen  of  Kentucky,  to  import  from 
another  state  a  slave  for  his  own  use. 

The  question  was  then  taken,  and  the  amend- 
ment was  adopted. 

The  PRESIDENT.  Mr.  chairman:  I  under- 
stand that  the  6th  resolution  is  intended  to  test 
the  sense  of  the  convention  upon  the  propriety 
of  incorporating  into  the  constitution  the  prin- 
ciples there  indicated;  and  in  order  that  it  may 
be  done  at  once, I  will  now  move  to  strike  out  of 
the  resolution  all  after  the  word  "Resolved."  I 
am  satisfied  in  my  own  mind  that  we  shall  not 
be  able  to  put  in  this  constitution,  with  any  hope 
of  its  adoption,  any  such  provision.  1  am 
equally  satisfied  in  my  own  mind,  tliat  we  shall 
not  be  able  to  put  in  the  constitution  any  such 

f)rovision  as  that  indicated  by  the  gentleman 
rom  Simpson,  (Mr.  Clarke,)  yesterday,  and  that 
all  we  can  do  is  to  agree  upon  some  general  prin- 
ciple, and  allow  the  legislature  to  exercise  a 
sound  discretion  upon  the  subject.  When  our 
constitution  was  framed  in  1798,  wo  had  the  fol- 
lowing provision  in  relation  to  slavery: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves, 
without  the  conftent  of  their  owners,  or  without 
paying  their  owners,  previous  to  such  emancipa- 
tion, a  full  equivalent  in  money  for  the  slaves  so 
emancipated.  And  in  connection  with  that  sub- 
ject, in  the  12th  section  of  the  cenoral  provisions 
of  the  constitution,  we  have  this  further  provis- 
ion, "nor  shall  any  man's  property  be  taken  or 


93 


applied  to  public  use,  without  the  consent  of  his 
representatives,  and  without  just  compensation 
being  previously  made  to  him." 

The  convention  then  based,  by  these  two  pro- 
visions, the  foundations  of  the  government  on 
substantial  justice,  and  put  it  beyond  the  popular 
will  to  take  a  man's  property  under  the  pretence 
of  use  without  giving  him  a  full  and  fair  com- 
pensation. The  first  proposition,  to  clear  it 
from  all  doubt  and  equivocation,  they  applied 
directly  to  slaves,  in  which  they  recognized 
property.  In  the  further  proposition  they  ap- 
plied the  principle  to  all  property,  leaving  it  to 
the  legislature  to  control  the  laws  of  this  gov- 
ernment, but  forbidding  them  to  invade  the 
rights  of  property.  I  tnist  when  we  come  to 
form  this  constitution,  that  we  shall  follow  that 
example — that  we  will  reiterate  those  provisions 
— ^that  we  will  take  it  from  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  invade  private  rights,  and  that  we 
will  re-affirm  the  principles  adopted  by  those 
who  have  gone  before  us,  that  private  property 
is  not  to  be  invaded,  under  any  pretence,  with- 
out a  fair  and  just  compensatron.  We  have  in 
the  present  constitution,  a  further  provision  as 
follows: 

"They  shall  have  no  power  to  prevent  emi- 
grants to  this  state  from  bringing  with  them 
such  persons  as  are  deemed  slaves  by  the  laws  of 
any  one  of  the  United  States,  so  long  as  any  per- 
son of  the  same  age  or  description  shall  be  con- 
tinued in  slavery  by  the  laws  of  this  state. 
They  shall  pass  laws  to  permit  the  owners  of 
slaves  to  emancipate  thom,  saving  the  rights  of 
creditors,  and  preventing  thera  from  becoming  a 
charge  to  any  county  in  this  commonwealth. 
They  shall  have  full  power  to  prevent  slaves  be- 
ing brought  into  this  state  as  merchandize." 

Under  the  latter  clause  of  that  provision  the 
act  of  1833  was  passed,  prohibiting  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves,  and  the  constitutionality  of  that 
act  was  sustained  by  our  appellate  triounals. — 
But  in  truth  it  fell  almost  a  dead  letter  on  tlie 
statute  book.  Kentucky  was  not  the  best  mark- 
et for  slaves.  There  were  more  profitable  mark- 
ets— they  have  not  been  brought  here  except  un- 
der peculiar  circumstances;  and  Kentucky  never 
has  been  a  market  for  slaves,  where  they  have 
been  made  a  subject  matter  of  merchandize. — 
And  while  we  have  the  more  profitable  business 
of  cotton  planting,  and  sugar  making  in  the 
southern  states,  Kentucky  never  will  be  a  mark- 
et for  slaves.  It  is  said  that  the  act  of  1833  was 
a  concession  to  the  emancipationists,  and  to 
some  extent  it  was,  for  those  who  then  desired 
emancipation  in  Kentucky  desired  to  go  further. 
They  were  content  however  with  the  act  of  1833, 
and  the  subject  was  dropped  in  the  legislature 
for  several  years.  Our  citizens  upon  the  Ten- 
nes.see  line,  however,  became  dissatisfied  Avith  it. 
Living  upon  almost  an  imaginary  line,  and  de- 
siring to  make  exchanges  between  one  another 
— the  citizens  of  Kentucky  and  Tennessee — 
they  found  inconveniences  arising.  The  slaves 
on  one  side  married  the  slaves  on  the  other,  and 
it  became  desirable,  for  the  convenience  of  fam- 
ilies, that  there  should  be  exchanges,  and  they 
from  time  to  time  petitioned  the  legislature  to 
repeal  this  law,  and  to  grant  special  laws,  until 
leave  was  granted  to  alfwho  asked,  and  though 
the  law  of  1833  existed  upon  the  statute  book  it 


was  no  prevention,  or  if  it  was  a  prevention  it 
was  evaded  by  permission  of  the  legislature,  or 
by  the  act  ot  the  citizen. 

I  voted  for  the  act  of  1833,  and  T  voted,  too, 
against  its  repeal.  I  should  have  been  content 
to  have  had  it  remain  on  the  statute  book,  as  the 
indication  of  the  sense  of  the  legislature  that 
they  discountenanced  the  bringing  in  of  slaves 
here  as  merchandize;  but  it  was  the  fate  of  this 
law,  like  all  other  laws  tliat  are  against  the  sense 
of  a  large  minority  of  the  people,  that  it  did 
not  give  peace  upon  the  subject.  That  was  the 
case,  for  the  agitation  continued  and  was  repeat- 
ed, session  after  session,  and  the  representatives 
of  the  people  continued,  from  time  to  time,  to 
violate  what  I  consider  a  great  principle  in  le- 
gislation— that  is,  that  the  law  should  bear 
equally  and  uniformly  on  all  the  citizens,  and 
that  it  should  not  be  a  prevention  to  one,  while 
the  legislature  gave  an  exception  and  license  to 
another.  And  it  is  better  for  a  majority  to  yield 
the  law  that  gives  to  a  large  portion  of  the  citi- 
zens dissatisfaction,  and  is  a  cause  of  continued 
agitation,  than  to  hold  it  at  that  expense,  when, 
too,  they  are  unable  to  enforce  it,  and  when  the 
representatives  of  the  people  yield  to  particular 
exceptions,  year  after  year.  It  was  modified  or 
repealed  at  the  last  session  of  the  legislature.-— 
The  minority  that  for  years  had  been  dissatisfi- 
ed with  it  and  agitated  its  repeal  and  procured 
licenses  to  violate  it,  had  made  themselves  the 
mfijority. 

The  repeal  of  that  law  has  been  seized  upon 
by  those  who  favor  emancipation  in  the  state  of 
Kentucky,  as  one  step  in  advance  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  emancipation,  and  they  now  seek  to  place 
it  in  the  constitution.  I  do  not  charge  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison  with  being  an  emancipa- 
tionist, although  in  this  work  he  is  doing  their 
business,  and  has  taken  their  steps  in  advance. 
Suppose  that  it  should  be  the  sense  of  this  con- 
vention that  slaves  should  not  be  brought  into 
Kentucky  as  merchandize,  would  they,  in  view 
of  that  powerful,  active,  and  decided  minority 
that  is  agitated  upon  this  subject,  who  have  pro- 
cured license  from  year  to  year  to  violate  this 
law,  and  finally  made  themselves  a  majority,  and 
repealed  it,  be  acting  wisely  and  discreetly  to 
place  such  a  provision  in  the  constitution  they 
are  about  to  adopt,  and  thus  add  to  the  office- 
holders, and  the  spirit  of  emancipation  which 
now  threatens  it,  that  additional  force  to  pro- 
cure? its  rejection  by  the  people?  for  I  take  it  for 
granted  that  whatever  constitution  we  shall 
agree  upon  we  shall  present  to  the  people  for 
their  affirmance,  before  we  put  it  into  opera- 
tion. 

Mr.  Chairman,  in  forming  a  constitution  as  in 
passing  laws,  it  is  the  part  of  wisdom  to  apply 
them  to  the  sentiments,  the  feelings,  and  the  dis- 
position of  the  people,  whose  organic  law  is  to 
be  formed,  or  to  the  principles  upon  whicli  the 
state  expects  her  people  to  be  governed.  And 
though  the  philosopher  in  his  closet  may  say 
this  principle  or  that  principle,  this  law 
or  that  law,  would  be  better,  we,  in  ap- 
plying a  constitution  to  the  wants,  and  necessi- 
ties, and  feelings  of  the  people,  are  bound  to 
consult  them.  Therefore,  in  forming  a  consti- 
tution, upon  this  very  identical  subject,  it  is  im- 
portant that  we  should  look  at  the  sentiments 


94 


long  entertained,  and  firmly  fixed,  of  the  citi- 
zens of  Kentucky;  and  what  is  against  those 
feelings  and  sentiments  is  impracticable.  And 
I  say  to  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  it  is  im- 
practicable to  put  his  proposition  into  the  con- 
stitution, with  the  sentiments  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky  in  relation  to  this  matter  staring  him 
in  the  face.  It  is  a  consideration  for  us  all, 
not  only  in  regard  to  this  subject,  but  upon 
others,  that  are  to  come  before  us. 

Ifow  I  do  not  intend  to  go  into  the  question, 
the  abstract  question,  -whether  slavery  is  an  un- 
mitigated curse,  or  evil,  or  whether  itis  an  abso- 
lute blessing  to  society.  We  are  not  in  a  con- 
dition to  judge  that  question,  for  we  are  not 
clear  from  the  influences  which  it  casts  around 
us.  If  there  was  no  slavery  in  Kentucky,  and 
we  were  debating  whether  we  would  have  slave- 
ry, this  question  would  be  proper,  and  the 
lights  of  history,  the -experience  of  other  na- 
tions, and  if  you  will,  the  sanctions  of  religion, 
inight  fairly  be  invoked  and  brought  into  play, 
in  the  consideration  of  the  subject.  Slavery 
exists — it  has  been  sanctioned  by  law,  and  by 
our  organic  constitution — it  is  in  our  midst — and 
we  are  to  make  a  constitution  in  view  of  those 
facts.  We  are  not  at  liberty  then,  to  entertain 
this  question.  Though  not  a  religious  man,  I 
have  examined  this  subject  so  far  forth  as  to  sat- 
isfy my  own  conscience,  that  there  is  no  sin  in 
holdingslaves  under  the  constitution  of  Kentucky . 
And  my  readingof  the  gospel,  and  understanding 
of  the  mission  of  the  Savior  of  the  world  is,  that 
it  was  not  against  governments  and  the  existing 
order  of  things,  as  found  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth  when  the  tidings  were  proclaimed, 
but  against  the  sin  of  fallen  man  and  for  his  re- 
formation. Servitude,  in  one  form  or  another, 
has  existed  in  society  from  the  earliest  light  that 
history  gives  us;  and  from  the  condition  of  so- 
ciety, and  the  light  the  history  of  the  past  is 
calculated  to  shed  on  the  future,  it  will  exist  in 
all  time  to  come.  We  are  served  in  certain  ca- 
pacities and  conditions  by  our  slaves.  The 
good  people  of  Massachusetts  are  served  by 
white  people  in  the  same  menial  offices,  that  we 
are  served  by  our  slaves.  Massachusetts  has 
about  the  same  population  as  Kentucky,  yet 
look  at  the  difference  in  the  number  of  poor  sus- 
tained bv  public  charity  in  each  state.  Taking 
the  number  in  tlie  county  of  Jefferson,  as  an  av- 
erage for  each  county  in  the  state,  we  have  some 
three  thousand.  Look  at  the  statistics  as  return- 
ed by  the  state  of  Massachusetts,  and  it  would 
be  found  that  they  had  twenty-eight  thousand! 
A  wide  difference.  Here  the  master  takes  care 
of  the  aged  and  infirm,  and  we  have  a  provision 
in  the  present  constitution,  that  the  legislature 
shall  have  the  power  of  enforcing  the  discharge 
of  the  duties  of  humanity  upon  the  master.  I 
think  it  would  be  easy  to  calculate,  when  we 
look  at  the  history  of  the  crowded  population 
of  the  old  world,  and  compare  it  with  the  histo- 
ry of  population  in  the  slave  states,  that  the 
mass  of  numan  misery,  of  crime,  and  degrada- 
tion, is  far  greater,  in  those  states  with  crowded 
white  population,  than  it  ever  was  or  ever  will 
be  in  the  slave  states.  I  believe  that  white  labor, 
as  it  increases,  becomes  cheaper  than  slave  la- 


the cold  hand  of  public  charity,  and  that  Mjissa- 
chusetts,  with  her  28,000  poor,  as  compared  with 
Kentucky,  so  far  as  regards  those  who  serve  and 
those  wno  do  not  serve,  has  a  greater  mass  of 
human  misery,  degradation,  and  crime  than  we 
have  in  Kentucky,  or  ever  can  have  under  the 
existing  order  of  things.  So  that  looking  at 
things  as  they  are,  and  as  in  all  human  proba- 
bility, they  will  be,  we  shall  have  no  cause  to 
reproach  ourselves  on  the  ground  of  humani- 
ty, or  as  having  failed  to  advance  the  interests 
of  society  if  we  suffer  this  institution  to  re- 
main as  it  has  existed. 

Mr.  Chairman:  There  is  an  obligation  resting 
upon  every  owner  of  a  slave,  that  all  sensible, 
correct  feeling  men,  well  understand.  The  slaves 
are  born  under  our  roof,  reared  with  our  chil- 
dren, and  work  in  the  same  field  and  at  the  same 
labor  that  we  do.  They  are  parts  of  the  same 
household,  and  if  they  are  manumitted  where 
are  they  to  go?  Some  gentlemen  would  send  them 
to  the  coast  of  Africa.  I  have  looked  into  the 
matter,  and  I  have  satisfied  my  own  mind  and 
judgment  that  it  is  impossible  to  send  them  there. 
There  is  no  country  then  to  receive  them — they 
have  not  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  and  capa- 
city to  govern  themselves — and  further,  we  have 
not  the  means  to  send  them  there.  I  do  not  in- 
tend to  detain  the  convention  with  the  history 
and  the  facts  that  have  brought  my  mind  to  this 
conclusion,  for  no  doubt  every  gentleman  here, 
has  examined  the  subject  for  h'^imself  Are  they 
then  to  be  free  among  us?  I  have  satisfied  my 
mind  that  these  two  races  of  people  never  can 
mingle  and  become  one.  Free  them,  and  they 
become  the  Lazzaroni  of  the  state.  They  will 
crowd  to  the  cities — they  will  visit  the  country 
only  on  marauding  parties — and  they  will  be- 
come idle,  vicious,  and  ungovernable.  Look  at 
those  portions  of  Philadelphia  and  New  York 
and  other  eastern  cities  where  the  free  negroes 
congregate.  Look  at  the  records  of  their  courts 
of  criminal  justice  and  you  will  find  that  they 
are  embraced  as  idle,  vicious,  ungovernable,  and 
in  the  annals  of  crime,  a  per  cent,  over  that  of 
the  white  race,  of  more  than  a  hundred  in  crime. 
You  may  once  in  a  while  find  an  exception  of 
one  who  is  industrious,  who  accumulates  proper- 
ty, but  he  never  becomes  an  American.  Re  is 
not  one  of  the  people,  and  can  never  aspire  to 
an  equality  in  our  social  relations.  He  never 
can,  and  if  we  free  the  two  hundred  thousand 
slaves  that  exist  in  Kentucky,  it  will  be  more 
difficult  to  govern  them,  than  it  is  now.  Instead 
of  being  productive  of  wealth,  as  they  are  now, 
they  will  be  destructive  of  wealth.  They  will 
not  be  advanced  in  morality,  but  they  will  be 
advanced  in  crime.  They  will  not  be  advanced 
in  happiness,  but  they  will  be  advanced  in  mis- 
ery and  in  degradation.  This  is  Avhat  has  taken 
place  in  other  states,  and  as  sure  as  you  with- 
draw the  hand  of  the  master  from  the  slave  here, 
as  surely  will  the  same  thing  take  place  among 
us. 

We  are  to  make  a  constitution  for  that  people 
as  well  as  for  ourselves.  They  are  now  our 
slaves.  The  right  of  the  owner  is  shielded  by 
the  constitution  under  which  we  live,  and  guard- 
ed by  the  same  spirit  of  right,  that  guarded  pri- 


bor,  and  I  believe  the  capitalist  employs  but  the   vate  property  from  the  inroads  of  the  public  in 
beat,  and  leaves  the  most  deficient  to  charity,  1  terest  with  the  consent  of  the  legislature  and  full 


06 


'cbtnpehsjction.  You  can  enter  into  the  feelings 
and  the  spirit  of  the  man  who,  if  we  were  clear 
of  slavery,  would  vote  against  its  introduction, 
but  I  think  that  those  who  entertain  that  feeling 
and  that  spirit  and  would  overturn  the  institu- 
tion as  it  now  exists,  have  not  looked  along  the 
whole  line  of  circumstances  that  surround  it. 
Do  vou  thereby  advance  the  happiness  of  your 
slave?  I  think  not.  You  secure  his  degrada- 
tion, and  you  make  it  more  difficult  to  govern 
and  to  rule  him.  Though  you  place  hira  on  the 
footing  of  a  free  man,  you  cannot  elevate  hira  to 
the  condition  of  the  whiite  man.  It  is  an  impos- 
sibility of  nature,  and  we  must  have  the  dis- 
tinction of  races,  the  animosity,  and  the  ha- 
tred, until  the  day  comes,  that  one  race  shall  ex- 
pel the  other.  And  when  that  day  comes,  it 
will  not  be  a  peaceable  expulsion. 

In  forming  a  constitution  we  are  to  form  it 
with  reference  to  the  existing  state  of  tilings, 
and  for  the  government  of  tne  people  as  they 
are,  and  I  have  satisfied  my  own  mind  that  it  is 
better  for  the  slave  and  better  for  the  white  man, 
that  while  they  remain  in  Kentucky  thev  should 
remain  in  the  condition  of  master  and  slave. 

Those  who  hurl  their  anathemas  against  slave- 
ry from  other  states,  do  not  understand  our  con- 
dition, the  difficulties  we  have  to  encounter,  and 
the  obligations  we  are  under  in  relation  to  this 
species  of  property,  and  are  not  capable  of  judg- 
ing it.  They  have,  therefore,  no  effect  on  my 
firm  conviction  on  the  subject,  that  it  is  better 
for  both  races  that  the  relation  between  them  in 
this  state  should  remain  as  it  is  now. 

I  think,  sir,  we  are  not  prepared  to  take  what 
I  have  referred  to  as  the  step  in  advance.  And 
though  I  do  not  charge  the  gentleman  from  Mad- 
ison with  being  with  these  emancipationists, 
yet  he  is  aiding  and  assisting  them  in  this  move. 
I  think  that  many  persons  have  acceded  to  the 
insertion  of  the  act  of  1833  in  the  constitution 
without  due  and  proper  reflection.  Nothing  is 
to  be  gained  by  it,  and  positive  injury  is  to  be 
the  result  in  the  work  we  have  now  undertaken. 
If  we  were  to  put  its  provisions  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  Kentucky,  we  would  be  aiding  and  as- 
sisting in  the  emancipation  movement.  It  would 
be  holding  out  to  them  encouragement  without 
doing  any  thing,  and  with  almost  a  certainty,  in 
my  judgment,  that  we  should  thereby  secure 
the  rejection  of  our  labors.  There  was  an  im- 
plied pledge  on  the  part  of  those  who  passed 
the  law  to  call  a  convention,  in  the  address 
they  made  to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  that  we 
would  not  interfere  witli  this  subject,  that  it  was 
not  the  design  and  intention  of  those  who  advo- 
cated constitutional  reform  in  Kentucky  to  in- 
terfere with  the  relations  of  master  ana  slave. 
And  as  the  gentleman  from  Mason  said  yester- 
day, the  voice  of  the  emancipationist  was  not 
heard  in  the  land  until  we  had  passed  the  Rubi- 
con, until  the  convention  was  called.  I  am 
not  sure  that  it  was  not  raised,  or  assisted  and 
carried  forward  by  those  who  desired  a  rejection 
of  the  constitution,  and  hoped  to  fall  back  upon 
that  instrument  as  it  now  exists.  There  is  out 
one  change  that  I  would  make  in  this  constitu- 
tion in  relation  to  slavery.  I  would  fulfill  faith- 
fully the  pledge  held  out,  and  under  Avhich  I 
believe  the  convention  was  called,  that  we  would 
not  interfere  between  the  rights  of  the  master 


and  slave;  and  I  would,  in  addition,  prevent 
the  emancipation  of  slaves  to  remain  here.  I 
would  vote  for  that,  because  I  think  it  is  within 
the  spirit  of  that  pledge  and  the  spirit  of  our 
system.  I  believe,  from  my  knowledge  and  ex- 
perience, that  the  emancipation  of  the  slave  is 
no  advantage  to  the  slave  himself,  while  it  is 
an  absolute  injury  to  the  slave  property,  its  own- 
ers, and  to  society  at  large.  And  the  present 
constitution  intenas,  in  the  emancipation  of  the 
slave,  to  guard  the  public  from  the  support  of 
him.  It  has  the  very  principle  that  I  would 
carry  out,  and  it  is  the  feeling  I  entertain  upon 
the  subject.  In  Kentucky,  by  the  present  con- 
stitution, we  give  every  man  the  right  to  eman- 
cipate his  slaves;  and,  by  another  provision, 
guarded  the  public  and  individuals  against 
wrong  and  injury  from  the  exercise  of  that 
right.  I  would  throw  a  further  guard  over  the 
public  in  relation  to  their  emancipation,  and 
prevent  their  remaining  in  the  commonwealth 
of  Kentucky  to  the  injury  of  the  slave  property 
and  of  the  citizens  at  large.  And  with  that 
change,  I  think  I  should  be  willing  that  the 
present  constitution  should  stand  as  it  is,  and 
that  our  pledge  would  be  redeemed.  I  am  sat- 
isfied that  we  cannot  emancipate  tlie  slaves  and 
send  them  to  Liberia — and  that  we  ought  not, 
under  the  obligations  which  we  owe  to  the  slave 
himself,  to  drive  him  out  against  his  will — be- 
cause we  would  thereby  make  his  condition 
worse. 

I  believe  the  principle  that  private  property 
should  not  be  taken  without  the  consent  of  the 
representatives  of  the  people,  and  without  full 
compensation  being  first  made,  is  a  great  funda- 
mental one  that  should  never  be  violated. — 
"When  you  teach  the  citizen  to  violate  that  great 
principle,  you  have  undermined  the  principle 
that  sustains  all  good  governments. 

If  you  set  the  example  of  violating  this  prin- 
ciple you  but  lead  to  the  formation  of  bands  of 
robbers,  and  set  them  an  example  of  taking  by 
force  without  a  just  right,  that  property  which 
has  been  acquired  under  the  sanction  of  the  con- 
stitution and  the  laws — that  is,  the  fruits  of  a 
man's  labor — as  well  his  lands  as  his  household 
goods.  It  is  under  that  principle  asserted  in 
our  government  more  than  any  other,  that  the 
enterprize  and  the  activity  of  her  people  have 
carried  us  forward  in  the  progress  of  wealth, 
faster  than  any  other  government  in  the  world. 
We  have  asserted  in  our  constitution  that  it  is 
beyond  the  power  of  the  government  itself  to 
take  from  us  the  fruits  of  our  labor — and  every 
man  feels  that  he  is  thus  protected.  The  eman- 
cipationists would  violate  that  principle.  When 
we  shall  violate  it  in  one  instance,  it  will  be  but 
the  first  step  towards  other  and  greater  viola- 
tions. The  day  may  come  without  the  sacrifice 
of  that  principle  when  there  will  be  a  call  for  a 
division  of  estates,  and  when  that  call  comes, 
we  will  come  Avith  a  stronger  voice  and  appeal 
to  the  selfishness  of  our  nature,  than  does  the 
subject  of  emancipation.  Now  it  is  only  to  take 
away  the  rights  of  a  portion  of  our  fellow  citi- 
zens, in  which  alone  they  are  interested,  but 
when  the  demand  comes  for  a  division  of  estates 
in  a  popular  government,  where  the  voice  of  the 
majority  is  to  rule,  the  example  you  have  set  of 
riolating  and  breaking  down  this  great  princi- 


96 


pie,  will  add  to  the  force  and  power  of  selfisli- 
iiess  in  guiding  on  those  who  are  to  participate 
in  and  to  divide  the  profits  of  such  a  division. 
And  then,  what  becomes  of  the  fruits  of  a  long 
and  industrious  life  in  the  accumulation  of  com- 
forts for  a  man's  use  in  his  old  age  or  for  the  set- 
ting out  of  his  children?  You  will  have  taken 
away  the  stimulus  that  induce  the  industrious 
to  accumulation,  because  when  you  have  once 
broken  down  this  great  principle,  no  one  can 
tell  when  these  interested  bands  may  rise  and 
call  for  plunder.  It  is  said  that  the  first  step  in 
crime  is  the  one  that  weakens  the  conscience  and 
is  followed  with  pain  and  remorse,  but  that  a 
few  steps  more,  and  all  pain  and  remorse  is 
gone,  and  the  adventurer  is  fairly  started  on  a 
career  of  crime.  It  is  the  first  step  in  breaking 
down  the  great  foundations  of  justice  in  a  com- 
munity— the  invasion  of  private  right,  that  dis- 
tracts the  people  and  undermines  the  founda- 
tions upon  which  we  must  stand  in  the  forma- 
tion of  a  government. 

I  think  no  good  can  come  from  this  discus- 
sion, as  to  the  abstract  right  or  the  positive  evils 
or  the  positive  blessings  of  this  institution.  It 
is  our  duty  in  framing  a  constitution  to  see  that 
it  conforms  to  the  existing  state  of  things,  and 
therefore  I  am  against  incorporating  the  act  of 
1833  in  the  constitution — or  as  I  have  before  said, 
of  taking  the  step  in  advance.  I  wish  to  retain 
in  any  new  constitution  the  same  great  principle 
in  relation  to  slavery  and  private  property,  that 
was  adopted  in  the  present  constitution. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison  says  we  are  not 
able  to  pay  for  emancipation — that  we  are  not 
able  to  pay  even  the  interest  on  the  debt  that 
would  thus  be  created.  That  many  may  be  all 
very  true,  but  this  government,  this  state,  I  trust 
is  to  exist  for  centuries,  and  how  this  thing  may 
be  hereafter  no  man  can  tell.  There  is  a  time 
when  slavery  will  cease.  The  Indian  has  rece- 
ded before  the  Saxon,  and  still  recedes.  He  is 
of  an  inferior  race  and  lives  by  hunting,  and  as 
civilization  marches  on  he  gives  place,  and  this 
I  understand  is  according  to  the  great  laws  of 
the  ruler  of  the  universe.  In  the  march  of  pop- 
ulation when  white  labor  becomes  cheaper  and 
crowded,  slave  labor  will  yield  to  it.  And  the 
day  will  come  when  thus  depreciated  in  value, 
and  some  country  to  which  they  may  be  sent  is 
found,  it  may  be  the  desire  of  those  who  shall 
come  after  us,  to  free  their  slaves,  and  to  do  it 
without  a  resort  to  revolution.  And  when  that 
day  shall  come,  I  wish  them  to  act  as  in  their 
judgment  is  right,  but  I  also  desire  to  indicate 
to  them  in  this  constitution  that  the  foundation 
of  this  government  is  laid  in  justice,  and  that 
property  acquired  under  its  sanction  is  not  to  be 
invaded,  without  compensation  to  the  owner.  I 
am  not  one  of  those  who  propose  to  provide  in 
this  constitution  for  the  perpetuity  of  slavery. 
I  recognize  the  principle  tnat  every  people  have 
a  right  to  form  their  own  government,  and  to 
change,  alter,  or  modify  it,  as  tliey  may  deem  the 
interests  of  society  to  require;  and  Avhenever 
those  wlio  may  come  after  us  shall  desire  so  to 
do,  I  shall  rest  content  that  they,  in  their  judg- 
ment, shall  do  Avhat  thev  deem  right  upon  this 
and  upon  all  other  subjects.  Tiitireforo,  I  do 
not  expect  in  this  constitution  to  make  slavery 


perpetual,  and  beyond  the  reach  of  those  who 
shall  come  after  us. 

I  desire  to  secure  in  it  the  rights  of  prop- 
erty, and  to  secure  the  people  against  injury 
from  an  accumulation  of  free  negroes  among  us. 
And  I  desire,  also,  to  let  every  man  in  the  com- 
munity who  has  slaves,  whenever  touched,  eith- 
er by  religion  or  philanthrophy,  to  manumit 
them  at  his  ptea5ti?e,-saving  the  commonwealth 
and  the  good  people  thereof  from  all  injury  or 
danger  from  setting  them  free;  and  I  believe 
that  can  be  efficaciously  done  only  by  their  re- 
moval from  the  commonwealth.  Now  we  have 
a  maxim  in  law,  the  English  of  which  is,  see 
that  you  use  your  own  rights  so  as  not  to  inter- 
fere with  the  rights  and  property  of  others. — 
This  is  a  very  good  rule,  and  a  very  good  max- 
im. N'ow,  if  I  have  a  right  in  property,  in  using 
that  right,  I  am  under  obligations  so  to  use  it 
as  not  to  interfere  with  my  neighbors.  If  I  own 
one  hundred  or  one  thousand  slaves,  I  have  the 
right  of  manumitting  them.  I  do  not  wish  to 
interfere  with  that  right,  but  to  prevent  the  ex- 
ercise of  it  in  a  way  that  would  injure  the  prop- 
erty of  ray  neighbor  or  of  the  country  at  large; 
and  I  think  we  have  the  right  to  so  limit  find  re- 
strain it.  And,  hence,  I  would  prohibit  the 
emancipation  of  slaves,  and  the  permitting  them 
to  remain  in  the  state.  There  is  no  difficulty 
about  it  in  my  mind.  "We  take  private  property 
for  various  uses  after  paying  for  it.  We  take 
slaves  where  they  have  been  guilty  of  crime, 
and  execute  them  for  the  same  crimes  for  which 
we  execute  the  white  man.  It  is  a  public  use  of 
the  property,  and  we  remunerate  the  owner  of 
him  and  take  him.  I  do  not  wish  the  private 
interest  of  the  owner  to  be  stimulated  to  evade 
the  public  justice  of  the  country  by  withhold- 
ing him  compensation  when  his  property  is 
used. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  indulge  in  a  few  re- 
marks in  connection  with  one  branch  of  the  sub- 
ject of  the  slave  trade,  without  intending  to  go 
into  the  slave  trade  as  carried  on  upon  the  seas. 
I  have  stated  that  the  bringing  in  of  slaves  to 
Kentucky  as  merchandise  has  never  been  prac- 
tised to  any  extent,  and  never  will  be  while 
there  is  a  better  market  for  them ;  but  it  strikes 
me  that  gentlemen  who  are  so  horror  stricken 
with  the  trade  as  it  exists  in  the  United  States, 
have  stopped  short  of  the  mark,  if  they  intend 
to  prohibit  it  at  all.  They  do  but  half  their 
work  unless  they  prohibit  the  sale  of  slaves 
and  the  carrying  of  them  out  of  Kentucky.  It 
is  as  much  a  separation  of  the  husband  from  the 
wife,  the  parent  from  the  child,  and  the  slave 
from  his  country,  where  you  sell  a  Kentucky  slave 
u>  a  Virginia  planter,  as  where  you  purchase  him 
in  another  state  and  bring  him  here.  As  the  gentle- 
man from  Mason  said,  there  can  be  no  great  crime 
in  bringing  him  to  Kentucky  from  another  place, 
but  it  may  be  a  much  worse  crime  to  take  him 
from  this  state  to  another.  In  relation  to  this 
slave  trade  about  which  so  much  noise  is  made, 
as  it  exists  in  the  slave  states  of  the  country,  its 
horrors  liave  been  greatly  exaggerated.  Go  into 
the  interior  of  Kentucky;  there  are  but  few 
slaves  sold  out  of  the  state,  and  they  are  most- 
ly those  whose  bad  and  ungoveriuible  disposi- 
tion is  such,  that  the  master  can  no  longer  con- 
trol them.     Tlic  proportion  of  the  white  popu- 


97 


lation  that  for  bad  conduct  is  sold  into  slavery 
elsewhere.  I  refer  gentlemen  to  the  counties  in 
which  they  live  and  their  experience  upon  this 
subject,  the  trade  so  far  as  sending  abroad  is 
concerned  rarely  reaches  any  other  than  the  dis- 
solute, the  idle,  and  the  unruly;  and  then,  not 
in  a  greater  proportion  than  our  white  popula- 
tion flee  their  country  when  they  have  lost  their 
characters. 

I  think  that  we  who  have  come  here  under  the 
pledges  held  out  to  the  people,  who  voted  to 
call  this  convention,  and  who  have  chosen  its 
delegates  should  regard  it  as  our  bounden  duty 
to  leave  this  thing  where  we  found  it.  We  can- 
not put  in  the  constitution  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  nor  do  I  think  we  can 
put  in  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson. — 
The  great  constitutional  reforms  that  we  desire 
and  which  the  people  of  Kentucky  have  called 
for,  if  we  intend  them  to  be  sanctioned  by  the 

fieople,  will  prevent  either  of  those  propositions 
rom  being  incorporated  in  the  constitution. — 
We  have  got  to  make  up  our  minds  as  to  what 
the  people  want  and  desire,  and  as  to  what  will 
be  the  effect  of  each  proposition.  If  I  had 
pledged  myself  upon  this  act  of  1833  and  the 
open  clause,  I  would  have  had  a  high  road  to 
this  convention;  but  knowing  the  condition  of 
the  country,  and  the  obligation  the  delegate 
would  be  under  to  consult  the  interests  and  feel- 
ings and  wishes  of  the  whole  state,  I  was  un- 
willing, and  refused  to  make  a  pledge  on  the 
subject,  and  I  had  difficulties  in  the  way.  And 
though  we  may  have  difficulties  in  the  way  in 
relation  to  the  constitution  that  we  may  make, 
if  we  come  together  in  the  right  spirit  of  con- 
cession, to  carry  out  what  the  people  of  Kentuc- 
ky designed  in  calling  this  convention,  I  doubt 
not  we  shall  unite  ana  frame  an  instrument  that 
will  be  acceptable  to  them. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  Avill  add  no  more,  for  I  have 
no  doubt  that  every  delegate  has  made  up  his 
mind,  and  I  do  not  expect  that  any  one  will  for- 
bear giving  his  full  and  free  views  upon  the 
subject.  And  it  is  right  and  proper  that  he 
should  do  so.  I  call  upon  those  who  favor  constitu- 
tional reform,  to  look  steadily  at  the  difficulties  to 
be  encountered  if  we  incorporate  the  proposition 
of  either  one  gentleman  or  the  other  in  the  con- 
stitution. Something  is  to  be  left  to  the  legisla- 
ture of  the  country,  the  representatives  of  the 
people.  I  only  desire  to  lay  the  foundation  of 
this  government  injustice  and  wisdom,  leaving 
the  representatives  of  the  people  to  carry  it  out. 

Mr.  DIXON.  When  the  gentleman  from  Mad- 
ison, yesterday,  rose  in  his  place,  and  an- 
nounced to  this  convention  that  he  was  an  ultra 
pro-slavery  man,  I  thought  it  altogether  just  to 
nim,  that  whatever  misunderstanding  I  might 
have  come  to  from  listening  to  his  remarks,  de- 
livered on  Wednesday,  should  be  corrected.  I 
very  promptly  stated  to  the  gentleman  that  I  re- 
tracted any  remarks  which  had  been  made  by 
me  calculated  to  do  him  injustice  on  that  point. 
The  gentleman,  I  have  no  doubt  at  all,  is  in  feel- 
ing a  pro  slavery  man,  but  that  is  not  the  ques- 
tion he  lias  offered  to  us  to  settle  or  discuss  in 
this  convention.  His  motives  and  feelings,  he 
says,  are  with  us ;  and  for  ray  own  part,  I  have 
charity  enough  to  allow  that  such  is  the  fact. 
But  the  great  question  is,  what  is  the  tendency 
13 


of  the  proposition  he  has  submitted,  and  what 
are  its  effects  upon  the  slaveholding  interests  of 
Kentucky;  and  upon  that  question  I  design  sub- 
mitting a  few  remarks  before  I  have  taken  my 
seat. 

The  gentleman's  proposition  in  substance  is, 
that  a  citizen  of  Kentucky  shall  not  purchase 
slaves  out  of  the  State  for  his  own  use. 

Mr.  Chairman,  there  are  three  classes  of  per- 
sons in  the  State  of  Kentucky,  and  in  the  United 
states,  who  are  the  advocates  of  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Madison.  There  is  a 
powerful  party  outside  of  Kentucky  who  are  the 
advocates  of  his  proposition.  There  are  a  great 
many  persons  in  Kentucky  who  are  pro-slavery 
men,  and  the  advocates  of  his  proposition. 
There  are  in  the  State  of  Kentucky  a  great  many 
gentlemen  who  are  of  the  emancipation  party, 
and  the  advocates  of  his  proposition.  The  gen- 
tleman from  Madison  belongs  to  that  class  of 
the  people  of  Kentucky,  who,  although  pro- 
slavery  men,  believe  it  to  be  right  and  proper 
that  the  measure  he  presents  to  the  house  should 
be  incorporated  in  the  constitution  of  the  State. 
The  gentleman  is  influenced  by  one  motive,  such 
as  he  describes  to  this  convention;  the  other  gen- 
tlemen are  influenced  by  different  motives,  such 
as  will  finally  result  in  the  emancipation  of  the 
slave.  There  is  a  powerful  party,  not  in  Ken- 
tucky, looking  most  anxiously  to  the  delibera- 
tions of  this  body,  and  who  are  most  anxious 
that  there  should  be  some  lodgment  in  the  con- 
stitution on  which  they  may  build  their  hopes 
of  ultimately  bringing  the  state  to  emancipa- 
tion. There  is  a  powerful  party  in  the  state 
looking  anxiously  to  the  deliberations  of  this 
body,  and  trusting  to  see  some  provision  in  the 
constitution  Avhich  will  be,  to  use  the  language 
of  my  friend  from  Mason,  the  entering  wedge 
for  a  great  system  of  emancipation.  This  is  the 
classification  of  parties. 

Under  the  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
those  who  live  outside  of  Kentucky  and  who 
inhabit  what  we  call  the  free  states,  are  under 
the  most  solemn  obligations,  whenever  slaves 
belonging  to  Kentucky,  or  any  other  state,  shall 
take  refuge  within  their  limits,  to  return  them 
safely  to  their  owners,  or  to  aid  and  assist  at 
least,  in  surrendering  them  up  to  those  entitled 
to  their  services.  There  is  a  party  in  the  Uni- 
ted States  who  regard  that  great  principle  in  the 
constitution  as  null  and  void,  and  who  consider 
they  have  a  right  to  set  themselves  up  in  viola- 
tion of  it,  and  nullify  it.  That  party  is  denom- 
inated the  abolition  party,  and  they  are  uniting 
with  all  parties  who  seek  tlie  emancipation  of 
the  slaves  within  the  limits  of  the  slave  states. — 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  the  emancipationists 
of  Kentucky  are  in  any  respect  abolitionists, 
because  I  can  clearly  perceive  that  a  difference 
exists  in  principle;  but  I  do  mean  to  say  that 
the  results  of  the  action  of  those  who  term 
themselves  emancipationists,  and  those  who  pro- 
claim themselves  aoolitionists,  are  in  effect  the 
same;  I  do  mean  to  charge  on  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  that  this  proposition  of  his,  is 
one  of  a  great  series,  which  if  carried  into  full 
effect  will  finally  result  in  the  emancipation  of 
all  the  slaves  in  this  state.  ,  All  are  acting 
together,  and  all  their  measures  are  tending  to 
the  same  result. 


m 


"Let  u^  fof  a  indW^ttt  examine  this  great  ques- 
tion, and  see  whether  such  is  not  the  fact.  An 
effort  is  making  to  abolish  slavery  in  theDistrict 
of  Columbia.  Why  is  it?  It  is  that  there  may 
be  a  place  of  refuge  for  the  slaves  to  flee  to,  from 
the  service  of  their  masters;  that  there  may  be 
a  place  where  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States  imposes  no  obligations  upon  the  citizens 
to  surrender  any  slave  who  has  escaped  from  his 
owners.  There  is  an  effort  in  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States  to  abolish  slavery,  so  far  as  it 
may  exist  within  such  places  Avithin  the  limits 
of  the  slave  states,  over  which  Congress  may 
exercise  exclusive  jurisdiction — within  the  lim- 
its of  all  docks,  and  arsenals,  and  places  of  that 
description.  What  is  the  object  of  it?  It  is  to 
proviae  a  place  of  refuge  for  the  slave  when  he 
shall  flee  from  his  owner.  There  is  a  party  to 
be  found  within  the  limits  of  every  free  state 
utterly  opposed  to  passing  any  laws,  or  to  the 
enforcement  of  any  laws,  by  which  the  slave 
shall  be  restored  to  the  possession  of  his  owner. 
Did  we  not  see  but  a  short  time  since,  the 
state  of  Ohio  repealing  all  laws,  the  object  of 
which  was,  to  assist  the  master  in  reclaiming  his 
runaway  slaves?  Do  we  not  in  addition  to  all 
this,  see  that  the  very  courts  have  set  themselves 
up  within  the  limits  of  these  free  states  to  as- 
sist in  the  escape  of  the  slave  from  his  master. 
But  a  short  time  since,  one  of  the  courts  in  the 
state  of  New  York  decided,  that  if  the  owner  of 
a  slave  used  any  force  whatever  in  his  attempt 
to  recover  him,  it  should  be  regarded  as  a  for- 
feiture of  the  slave.  And  if  the  owner  of  a 
slave,  exercising  his  sound  discretion,  should 
place  him  within  the  precincts  of  a  jail  for 
greater  safety,  it  should  oe  regarded  as  the  for- 
feiture of  his  right  to  the  slave.  All  this  was  done 
to  break  down  the  institution  of  slavery  within 
the  limits  of  the  slave  states.  That  is  the  object 
and  design.  Now  what  does  all  this  tend  to? 
In  the  first  place,  the  runaway  slave  from  Ken- 
tucky, finds  a  refuge  in  those  places,  in  which 
it  is  declared  by  act  of  Congress,  that  slavery 
shall  no  longer  exist;  and  secondly,  in  the  pro- 
tection of  those  who  are  determined,  in  viola- 
tion of  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  to 
aid  the  slaves  in  escaping  from  their  masters. 

And  you  find,  sir,  that  even  the  people  them- 
selves, under  the  sanction  of  law,  formed  them- 
selves into  bands  for  the  purpose  of  enabling 
slaves  to  escape.  Now,  all  these  things  are  cal- 
culated to  weaken  the  tenure  by  which  slave 
property  is  held,  and  to  render  that  kind  of  prop- 
erty less  secure.  This  is  the  course  pursued 
by  those  outside  of  the  limits  of  Kentucky. — 
Now  let  us  come  to  the  state  itself  and  see  what 
is  the  course  that  gentlemen,  anxious  for  the 
•«raancipation  of  the  slaves,  are  pursuing.  First, 
there  are  those  who  are  for  emancipating  the 
slaves  without  making  any  compensation  to  their 
owners.  This  is  rather  a  startling  proposition, 
and  I  say  it  with  all  due  deference  to  the  great 
mind  who  conceived  it.  That  emancipation 
should  take  place  upon  the  slave's  attaining  a 
certain  age,  and  that  he  should  then  be  hired  out 
Ibr  three  years,  and  that  the  proceeds  of  his  labor 
lihould  be  applied  to  his  transportation  to  such 
•Aace  as  might  be  chosen  as  his  future  home.  It 
M  a  very  great  question — I  mean  the  question 
which  the  distinguished  gentleman  from  Louis- 


ville has  argued  with  great  ability  as  to  the 
power  of  the  State  of  Kentucky  to  take  from  her 
citizens — for  I  take  it  for  granted,  the  right  of 
property  in  slaves  is  the  same  as  the  right  to  any 
other  sort  of  property — to  take  from  her  citizens 
the  property  that  is' secured  to  them  under  the 
sanction  of  the  constitution  of  the  state.  The 
first  great  question  is,  as  to  the  power  of  the 
government  of  the  state  to  do  this.  Does  that 
power  exist?  Is  it  within  the  power  of  the  state 
to  take  the  property  of  her  citizens  and  appropri- 
ate it  to  the  public  use  without  making  any  com- 
pensation for  it?  This  is  the  great  and  important 
question.  Sir,  what  is  the  relation  which  exists 
in  Kentucky  between  the  master  and  the  slave? 
How  does  it  exist?  Was  it  not  an  agreement . 
among  those  who  formed  the  old  constitution 
under  which  we  are  now  living,  that  the  master 
should  enjoy  the  labor  of  his  slave?  And  if  ihere 
be  this  solemn  agreement  existing  between  the 
sovereign  power  of  Kentucky  and  the  citizens  of 
Kentucky,  can  that  agreement  be  violated?  The 
gentleman  from  Louisville  read  from  the  constitu- 
tion in  reference  to  this  great  question;  I  will  bare- 
ly call  the  attention  of  this  convention  againto  it: 
"  No  person  shall,  for  the  same  offence,  be 
twice  put  in  jeopardy  of  his  life  or  limb;  nor 
shall  any  man's  property  be  taken  or  applied  to 
public  use,  Avithout  the  consent  of  his  represen- 
tatives and  without  just  compensation  being  pre- 
viously made  to  him." 

That  is  the  great  point;  nor  shall  any  man's 
property  be  taken  for  public  use  without  his 
consent,  or  w^ithout  compensation  being  made 
to  him.  What  is  the  manifest  interpretation  of 
this?  Is  it  not  an  agreement  between  the  sover- 
eign power  of  Kentucky  and  the  people  of  the 
State?  What  is  that  agreement?  That  the  peo- 
ple shall  not  be  deprived  of  their  property, 
without  compensation  being  made  to  them. — 
Now,  if  this  be  so,  what  is  the  tendency  of  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman,  or  at  least  the  ar- 
gument of  the  gentleman?  It  is,  that  this  sol- 
emn agreement  shall  be  disregarded.  Eut  ad- 
mitting that  you  have  the  power  to  violate  this 
agreement,  ought  such  a  power  to  be  exercised? 
I  deny  that  we  have  the  power  to  pass  any  law, 
whether  in  convention  or  in  the  legislature,  by 
which  the  solemn  contract  contained  in  the  con- 
stitution, securing  the  riglits  of  property  to  the 
citizen  shall  be  violated.  What  is  tne  lan- 
guage of  the  constitution  of  the  United  States? 
"No  state  shall  pass  any  law  impairing  the 
obligation  of  a  contract." 

This  is  the  emphatic  language  of  the  consti- 
tution of  the  United  States;  not  that  no  legisla- 
ture shall  do  so,  but  no  state  shall.  What  do 
we  propose  now  to  do?  To  pass  a  law  violating 
the  solemn  contract  between  a  sovereign  State 
and  its  citizens.  I  beg  to  refer  gentlemen  to  a 
judicial  decision  given  by  that  illustrious  man, 
chief  justice  Marsnall,  and  I  apprehend  that  af- 
ter referring  to  it,  there  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt 
remaining  on  the  mind  of  any  gentlemen  here, 
that  the  state  of  Kentucky  has  not  the  power  to 
take  from  the  citizen  the  property  that  is  vested 
in  him  under  the  constitution;  and  it  is  upon 
this  point  that  I  differ  from  my  honorable  friend 
from  Louisville.  The  case  to  which  I  refer  is 
that  of  Fletcher  vs.  Peck. 
Sir,  we  are  citizens  of  two  great  sovereignties. 


99 


We  are  not  only  citicens  of  Kentucky  but  we 
are  citizens  of  the  United  States.  Kentucky  is 
a  sovereignty,  but  she  is  not  an  absolute  sov- 
ereignty. She  is  laboring  under  disabilities,  and 
one  of  those  disabilities  is,  that  she  cannot  pass 
a  law  impairing  any  contract.  And  that  is  the 
ground  upon  which  the  former  chief  justice  of  the 
United  States — I  mean  chief  justice  Marshall — 
places  this  great  question.  In  a  case  growing 
out  of  a  suit  for  lands  in  the  state  of  Georgia,  in 
which  land  had  been  granted  by  the  state  to  a 
citizen  of  that  state,  when  the  party  held  under 
a  grant  from  the  governor  of  the  statd  which 
was  issued  in  pursuance  of  an  act  of  the  As- 
sembly, but  which  was  abrogated  by  a  subse- 
quent act  of  the  Assembly,  chief  justice  Mar- 
shall, in  pronouncing  the  decision  of  the  court., 
used  this  language.  "  The  sovereign  power  of 
a  state  is  not  precluded  from  making  a  contract 
with  a  citizen  of  the  state;  and  having  made 
such  contract,  is  not  the  sovereign  power  of  the 
state  under  the  same  disability  to  violate  that 
contract  that  the  citizen  is  placed  under?"  The 
conclusion  at  which  he  arrived  was,  that  the  dis- 
ability in  both  cases  was  the  same  and  that  it  was 
out  of  the  power  of  the  state  of  Georgia,  after 
she  had  granted  lands  to  a  citizen  of  the  state  to 
divest  the  citizen  of  his  title.  Now  this  is  the 
great  question  presented  here.  Has  the  state 
the  power  to  divest  the  citizen  of  his  right  to 
property  which  is  guarantied  to  him  by  the  con- 
stitution of  the  state?  I  maintain  boldly  that 
she  has  not  the  power.  In  the  first  place  I  do 
not  believe  that  tne  power  exists,  ana  in  the  se- 
cond place,  I  believe  that  it  would  be  a  fraud 
upon  the  citizen  if  attempted  to  be  exercised. 
The  citizen  rests  upon  the  guarantee  of  the  right 
of  property  that  is  contained  in  the  constitution, 
and  if  the  state  seizes  upon  his  property  and 
converts  it  to  the  public  use,  it  at  once  sinks 
the  character  of  the  government  to  the  level  of 
dishonesty.  But  there  is  another  great  question. 
If  the  power  does  exist,  would  it  be  right  and 
proper  that  it  be  exercised?  What  do  you  pro- 
pose to  do?  To  strike  out  a  great  principle 
which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  free  government, 
that  principle  which  has  agitated  the  whole  of 
Europe,  which  agitated  England  to  its  founda- 
tion and  elicited  the  great  charter  of  the  people's 
rights,  called  ma^a  charta.  that  great  principle 
which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  liberties  of 
this  country.  It  was  the  determination  of  Eng- 
land on  the  one  hand  to  seize  the  property  of 
her  subjects  unlawfully,  and  the  resistance  of 
the  colonists  on  the  other,  that  led  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  our  free  institutions.  It  is  a  prin- 
ciple that  has  been  consecrated  bv  blood,  and 
wnich  never  will  be  forfeited  by  t&ose  who  de- 
sire to  preserve  their  freedom.  It  is  a  principle 
that  is  incorporated  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  and  one  which  enters  into  the  or- 
ganization of  all  the  state  governments  of  this 
Union.  Wliat  will  be  the  consequence  of  ab- 
rogating this  principle?  What  will  be  the  con- 
sequence of  permitting  it  to  be  understood,  that 
Kentucky  in  her  sovereign  capacity  can  take 
away  the  property  of  her  citizens?  Let  this 
once  be  proclaimed  abroad  throughout  the  free 
states — let  it  be  understood  that  the  refuse  of  the 
population  of  every  country  on  the  face  of  the 
earth,  may  come  here,  and  help  to  swell  the 


majority  whose  vote  may  take  away  the  prop- 
erty of  the  citizen — let  it  go  to  the  pauper 
population  of  Ireland  and  of  Germany,  and  all 
other  countries  where  misery  walks  abroad  un- 
protected, and  here  they  will  come,  form  them- 
selves into  voters  and  employ  their  votes  to  de- 
Erive  the  honest  citizen  of  the  property  that 
e  has  gathered  by  a  long  life  of  toil.  This 
will  be  the  result  of  striking  out  of  the  con- 
stitution this  sacred  guarantee  that  a  man's 
property  shall  not  be  taken  away  from  him, 
witnout  compensation  first  being  made  to  him. 
Let  us  examine  a  little  further  this  project  of 
emancipation.  I  maintain  that  it  cannot  be 
done.  Yet  there  are  others  who  hold  that  it  can. 
Let  us  trace  it  a  little  further.  All  the  slaves  are 
to  be  made  free,  and  after  having  served  for 
three  years,  are  to  be  sent  to  Liberia,  and  the  ex- 
pense of  their  removal  to  be  defrayed  from  the 
products  of  those  three  year's  labor.  What  in 
the  name  of  heaven  will  become  of  them  then? 
From  eight  to  ten  thousand  negroes  sent  from 
the  state  of  Kentucky  to  a  distant  shore,  with- 
out the  means  of  providing  for  themselves  when 
they  arrive  there!  And  ail  this  in  the  name  of 
humanity,  of  justice,  of  liberty!  They  are  to 
be  torn  from  their  families,  the  husbands  separa- 
ted from  their  wives,  the  parent  from  the  chil- 
dren, all  the  associations  of  life  broken  up, 
thrown  upon  a  distant  shore  without  any  means 
of  support  except  six  months  provisions.  What 
will  become  of  them  when  those  six  months 
have  expired?  Ten  thousand  people  sent  to  a 
foreign  country,  the  wild  ana  the  vicious,  the 
weak  and  impotent,  the  old  and  dying,  the  lazy 
and  the  idle,  the  vagabond  ana  the  pauper, 
mingled  together  in  one  common  mass,  what 
will  be  their  condition  when  you  have  got  them 
there?  Will  they  have  houses  to  shelter  them? 
None.  Lands  to  cultivate?  None.  Imple- 
ments of  husbandry?  None,  nothing  but  six 
month's  provision,  and  after  that,  starvation, 
ruin,  desolation  staring  them  in  the  face,  meeting 
them  at  the  very  threshhold  of  their  new  home. 
This  is  the  plan  of  those  who  are  the  advocates 
of  this  system  of  emancipation.  Sir,  it  cannot 
be  done.     It  will  not,  ought  not  to  be  done. 

But  again,  let  us  examine  another  plan.  It  is 
that  of  a  distinguished  gentleman  of  Kentucky, 
who  proclaimed  it  as  the  firm  conviction  of  his 
judgment  that  t-his  system  of  keeping  the  negro 
race  in  bondage  ought  not  to  be  continued.  That 
humanity  and  religion  call  aloud  for  its  sup- 
pression. What  is  his  plan?  "WTiy,  that  all, 
after  arriving  at  a  particular  age,  shall  be  free, 
and  unless  taken  from  the  State  before  that  time 
they  shall  be  transported  to  Liberia. 

Do  the  teachings  of  humanity  instruct  you  that 
it  would  be  right  to  sever  the  relation  which  ex- 
ists between  me  and  my  servants,  and  between 
them  and  all  that  is  dear  to  them?  Yet  all  this, 
the  gentleman  says,  is  consistent  with  his  ideas 
of  religion  and  humanity.  Sir,  it  is  utterly  im- 
practicable. It  would  be  aviolation  of  all  the  great 
principles  of  humanity,  and  the  country  itself, 
unless  it  sink  far  below  the  standard  of  religion 
and  humanity,  which  I  have  attributed  to  it,  will 
never  sanction  such   a  proceeding.     All  these 

Elans  may  be  regarded  as  impracticable,  and 
ave  been  abandoned.    And  what  have  we  next? 
A  convention  assembled  in  Frankfort  iot  the 


100 


purpose  of  devising  some  new  mode  of  emanci- 
pation. And  what  is  the  plan  that  was  propos- 
ed there?  Why  give  us  some  principle  in  the 
constitution  by  which  all  further  importation  of 
slaves  into  the  state  shall  be  prevented.  And 
let  not  gentlemen,  who  are  in  favor  of  that  prop- 
osition m  this  convention,  suppose  that  I  attrib- 
ute to  them  any  participation  in  the  designs  of 
the  emancipationists.  But  concede  to  them  the 
open  clause  and  the  gentleman's  proposition,  and 
the  question  will  be  agitated  at  all  times  here- 
after; you  will  weaken  the  tenure  by  which 
slaves  are  held,  and  induce  the  master  to  fly 
with  his  slaves  to  a  place  where  he  will  be  more 
secure  in  the  enjoyment  of  his  property.  And 
a  further  result  will  be,  that  we  shall  have  no 
slaves  brought  into  Kentucky.  The  effect  will 
be,  as  every  body  must  at  once  perceive,  that 
no  one  would  think  of  removing  to  Ken- 
tucky, except  from  those  states  where  it  has  been 
determined  that  slavery  shall  no  longer  exist. 
Virginians  and  Carolinians  will  not  come  here. 
The  only  person  that  will  come,  will  be  those 
who  are  in  the  habit  of  agitating  the  question 
of  emancipation,  and  they  will  continue  to  agi- 
tate until  the  people  become  alarmed,  and  some 
will  leave  the  state,  while  the  rest  will  be  anxious 
to  get  rid  of  a  species  of  property  that  is  held 
by  an  uncertain  tenure. 

In  regard  to  the  plan  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison,  do  we  not  see  that  it  is  one  of  a  series, 
the  tendency  of  which  is,  toward  the  final  eman- 
cipation of  all  the  slaves?  He  says,  let  no  man 
be  permitted  to  go  abroad  and  purchase  slaves, 
and  bring  them  into  this  State,  for  his  own 
use.  I  am  a.s  much  opposed  to  dealing  in  hu- 
man flesh  as  any  man  can  be,  but  there  is  a 
solemn  obligation  resting  upon  me,  as  well  as 
upon  every  man,  to  aid  in  carrying  out  the  laws 
of  the  country.  The  gentleman's  proposition  is, 
that  Ave  shall  not  bring  slaves  into  Kentucky 
from  any  foreign  state,  efor  our  own  use. — 
Now  you  will  see  at  once  the  effect  of  this,  if  it 
has  any  effect. 

According  to  the  position  assumed  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison,  another  effect  of  engraft- 
ing into  the  constitution  his  proposition,  would 
be  to  enhance  the  value  of  the  slaves  already  in 
the  State,  and  of  securing  to  a  few  the  monopo- 
ly of  slave  labor.  Admitting  this  to  be  coiTect, 
it  is  clear  that  the  tendency  of  the  gentleman's 
measure  would  be  to  excite  in  the  mind  of  the 
non-slaveholder,  a  prejudice  against  those  for 
whose  benefit  alone  the  institution  of  slavery 
would  seem  to  have  been  established,  and  to  ar- 
ray him  with  those  who  are  interested  in  bring- 
ing about  a  system  of  emancipation.  But  the 
eflfect  of  the  principle  would  not  stop  here.  It 
would  be  disregarded  by  a  large  portion  of  the 
people  of  the  State.  Those  who  chose  to  go  to 
Virginia  and  Maryland  and  purchase  slaves  for 
their  own  use  would  not  be  held  responsible,  for 
no  law  can  or  will  be  enforced  to  which  the  pub- 
lic sentiment  of  the  country  is  opposed.  It  is 
true  that  the  conscientious  portion  of  the  com- 
munity would  not  violate  it,  but  the  unscrupu- 
lous would  not  liesitate  to  do  so.  Many  good 
and  honest  citizens  who  wish  to  purchase  slaves 
for  their  own  use,  would  not  act  in  contraven- 
tion of  the  constitution,  and  would  prefer  pur- 
chasing from  those  who  have  them   m    market, 


where  they  would  be  left  by' the  negro  traders, 
men  who  purchase  for  speculation  and  without 
regard  to  the  character  of  the  slaves.  The  vilest 
description  of  slaves,  those  who  had  been  guilty 
of  crimes  probably,  would  be  brought  into  Ken- 
tucky, because  they  could  be  purchased  at  a  low 
rate  by  the  speculator  with  tne  prospect  of  ob- 
taining a  high  price  here.  Allow  the  honest 
farmer,  who  wishes  to  go  abroad  and  purchase 
slaves  for  his  own  use,  to  do  so,  and  the  case  will 
be  far  different.  He  will  be  cautious  in  the  se- 
lection he  makes,  and  will  bring  in  only  such  as 
have  good  characters  for  honesty  and  industry. 

Those  who  call  themselves  emancipationists 
ought  to  understand  what  that  efifect  is.  They 
wish  to  incorporate  into  the  constitution  of 
Kentucky  what  is  called  the  open  clause.  I 
am  not  for  giving  them  any  such  advantage. 
Give  us,  say  they,  an  entering  wedge,  and  when 
you  do  that  we  will  split  the  timoer  in  such  a 
way  as  will  suit  our  own  views.  I  am  not  for 
giving  them  that  advantage.  The  gentleman's 
proposition  then,  taken  in  connection  with 
open  clause,  if  it  amounts  to  any  thing,  will 
have  a  tendency  to  lead  to  emancipation. — 
I  feel  bound  then,  to  oppose  it  at  the  very 
threshhold.  I  shall  oppose  it  here  and  every 
where.  If  the  gentleman  wishes  to  place  it  up- 
on the  statute  book,  let  him  place  it  there.  I  do 
not  want  it  here — it  is  one  of  that  series  of  plans 
which  are  expected  to  result  in  emancipation. 

Sir,  I  do  not  mean  to  say  here  or  elsewhere, 
that  I  am  the  advocate  of  perpetual  slavery.  As 
I  remarked  yesterday,  I  would  to  God  that  it 
were  possible  for  all  mankind  to  be  free.  If  in 
my  power,  I  would  break  the  shackles  that  bind 
the  most  low  and  contemptible  being  that  crawls 
on  the  face  of  the  earth.  But  we  must  look  at 
the  condition  of  society  in  Kentucky,  as  it 
is.  Sir,  you  cannot  dignify  the  African  race 
by  emancipating  them,  you  cannot  raise  them 
to  your  own  level,  you  cannot  give  them 
the  civil  rights  of  freemen,  you  cannot  elect 
them  to  fill  the  civil  offices  of  the  govern- 
ment. You  cannot  bring  your  manumitted  slave 
to  your  fire-side  and  to  your  table,  you  can- 
not introduce  him  to  the  social  circle  Avith  your 
family,  you  cannot  allow  him  to  enjoy  with  you 
those  privileges  which  fall  alike  to  the  humblest 
and  the  most  exalted  of  your  own  race,  andAvhen 
you  proclaim  that  the  shackles  of  the  slave  are 
broken,  Avhen  you  have  said  to  him,  "you  are 
free,"  Avhat  is  the  advantage  that  you  confer  up- 
on him?  Is  it  to  breathe  the  pure  air  of  heaven, 
is  it  to  drink  from  the  limpid  stream  which  is 
free  to  all,  is  it  to  walk  abroad  and  proclaim  his 
new-born  liberty?  Sir,  when  you  fail  to  give  him 
the  civil  rights  of  freemen,  degradation  follows 
him  wherever  he  goes.  He  sinTks  in  the  scale  of 
humanity  far  beloAv  the  .slave  who  iioav  excites 
tlie  sympathies  of  gentlemen.  Cut  him  off  from 
all  the  privileges  of  a  participation  in  tlie  affairs 
of  government,  and  you  take  away  from  him  the 
inducement  to  be  honest,  you  drive  him  to  a  vi- 
olation of  the  law ;  he  becomes  a  robber  and  a 
vagabond;  he  becomes  a  man  of  crime.  This 
will  be  his  condition;  it  cannot  be  avoided. — 
What  then  are  we  to  do  Avith  him?  If  we  con- 
vey him  from  the  State,  will  his  condition  then 
be  improved?  Here  lie  has  house  and  raiment; 
here  he  has  no  wants  that  are  not  supplied.    Sir, 


101 


he  is  a  happy  man,  infinitely  better  off  than  the 
miserable,  -n'retched  vagabonds,  tJie  pauper  pop- 
ulation of  other  States  and  countries,  whom  you 
call  free.  Will  the  gentleman  tell  me  that  the 
system  of  laws  which  is  to  sink  him  below  the 
brute  and  deprive  him  of  all  the  privileges  that 
belong  to  freemen,  which  will  shuthim  out  from 
human  society  and  render  him  a  robber  and  a 
man  of  blood,  is  the  proper  system?  Will  he 
not  rather  tell  me  that  the  system  of  laws  which 
bind  the  master  to  the  slave  and  the  slave  to  the 
master,  is  much  better  than  any  theory  of  gov- 
ernment that  the  visionary  minds  of  the  emanci- 
pationists have  or  can  devise?  Sir,  there  is  no 
doubt  in  my  mind  as  to  what  would  be  the  effect 
of  such  a  theory.  It  would  be  ruin  to  the  slave, 
and  ruin  to  the  master.  That  sir  would  be  the 
ultimate  and  certain  result.  My  own  opinion  is, 
that  in  view  of  the  relation  which  exists  in  Ken- 
tucky between  master  and  slave,  considering  the 
abhorrence  on  the  part  of  the  white  population  at 
establishing  an  equality  between  themselves  and 
the  blacks,  it  is  better  that  the  institution  should 
be  continued.  Contrast  the  condition  of  our 
slaves  with  that  of  the  pauper  population  in  other 
countries.  Here,  the  master  protects  his  slaves ; 
there,  the  man  exists  in  a  state  of  destitution,  and 
is  unprotected,  his  wants  unrelieved  except  by 
the  cold  charities  which  the  law  metes  out  to  him 
in  stinted  and  parsimonious  portions.  Go 
to  the  populous  cities,  and  there  in  the  midst  of 
profusion,  wretchedness  and  misery  stare  you 
in  the  face.  Magnificent  palaces  present  them- 
selves to  the  eye,  while  the  needy  mendicant 
goes  unrelieved  by  the  lordly  occupant.  What 
is  it  to  him  who  revels  in  those  palaces,  and  en- 
joys the  wealth  of  a  John  Jacob  Astor,  that 
thousands  of  his  fellow  creatures  perish  with 
hunger?  It  is  by  oppression,  Jhat  a  great  sys- 
tem of  aristocracy  is  created.  It  is  reared  upon 
the  ruin  of  the  miserable  population  who  are 
falling  prostrate  at  the  feetof  power.  Cast  your 
eyes  upon  the  wretched  and  starving  population 
of  Ireland,  and  do  you  not  hear  the  wretched 
and  suffering  child  crying  to  the  mother,  "  give 
:  me  but  three  grains  of  corn."  Are  such  scenes 
-witnessed  in  Kentucky?  Where  is  the  pauper 
who  does  not  meet  with  the  sympathies  of  those 
around  him?  Where  is  the  man,  Avho  is  suffer- 
ing with  want,  who  is  not  relieved?  Rarely 
does  an  instance  of  real  want  present  itself  un- 
der the  benevolent  system  of  our  government. — 
Such  cases  do  not  exist.  We  are  the  happiest 
people  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  we  are  the 
proudest  people  on  the  face  of  the  earth.  I  will 
not  say  that  we  are  the  most  chivalrous  people, 
,  but  I  will  say,  that  in  this  respect  we  are  not 
I     sarpassed. 

i  There  is  no  reason,  in  my  iudgment,  why  the 
'  relation  between  master  ana  slave  should  be 
'  severed.  I  do  not  think  it  ever  will  be.  It 
ought  not  to  be  until  a  plan  can  be  devised,  by 
which  the  condition  of  the  slave  can  be  improv- 
ed, and  no  injustice  done  to  the  master.  I  would 
five  up  my  slaves  willingly,  if  such  apian  could 
e  devisea,  but  I  shall  not  yield  them  up  under 
the  false  systems  of  philanthropy  and  humanity 
which  the  wild  fanaticism  of  those  who  call 
themselves  emancipationists  propose.  I  liave  no 
right  to  murder  my  slave.  I  have  no  right  to 
do  him  wrong.    The  principles  of  philanthropy. 


of  religion,  and  of  law,  forbid  it.  And  I  utter- 
ly abhor  and  dcte'Jt  th  j  wgtem  nf  j>hi?anthropy 
which  propos-is  'he  sacriipce  of  th2  Slave  for  tne 
benefit  of  the  white  'nian'  And  ydt  these  gen- 
tlemen tor  rao,  that  hur.ianity  nnd  rel-girn  re- 
quire tFe  s£j;rifi(.e.  I  sho^l^  !:ot  '.ik3  'o  i^e  the 
priest  oT-feticii  an  oracle,  rbr'  wohic^.  I  bfe'the 
priest  to  preside  at  the  altar  of  such  a  sacrifice. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  shall  detain  the  committee  but 
a  very  few  moments,  for  I  am  sure  that  there  is 
no  gentleman  who  attempts  to  address  the  com- 
mittee, who  requires  more  of  the  indulgence  of 
the  house.  As  I  am  not  much  in  the  liabit  of 
public  speaking,  my  rising  to  do  so  is  sittended 
with  some  degree  of  nervousness. 

I  should  not  on  to-day  have  said  a  single  word 
if  it  had  not  been  for  the  remarks,  which  fell  from 
our  honorable  President,  and  if  I  am  to  fall  in 
this  contest,  I  would  prefer  to  fall  by  his  hand 
rather  than  by  that  of  a  more  ignoble  foe.  He 
insinuated  that  those  who  arc  in  favor  of  the 
law  of  1833,  to  some  extent  were  attaching  them- 
selves to  the  emancipation  party  in  the  state, 
and  that  the  object  of  that  attachment,  was  to 
bring  about  the  defeat  of  the  constitution  which 
we  are  about  to  make.  Now  I  have  ever  oppos- 
ed this  convention,  and  upon  no  other  ground 
in  the  world  than  that  I  believed  that  this  ques- 
tion of  emancipation  would  be  brought  up. 
But  this  is  not  only  a  great  question  in  Ken- 
tucky, but  it  is  becoming  a  paramount  question 
every  where,  and  it  seems  to  me,  that  the  move- 
ment, not  only  here  but  throughout  the  whole 
Union  is  calculated  to  build  up  a  great  party 
which  is  to  operate  upon  the  future  elections  in 
this  country.  Have  we  not  seen  lately  one  of 
the  most  distinguished  personages  in  the  United 
States,  permitting  himself  to  be  a  candidate  for 
the  Presidency  of  this  Union,  surely  with  no 
hope  of  success,  but  that  he  might  form  a 
nucleus  around  which  the  free  soil  partv  or  abo- 
litionists of  the  north  might  gather.  Have  you 
not  seen  veiy  lately  a  distinguished  Senator  in 
Missouri  taking  the  same  ground,  not  now 
"solitary  and  alone."  And  again,  we  have  seen 
a  distinguished  Senator  from  Kentucky,  whom  I 
have  ever  admired  and  for  whom  I  have  voted, 
and  for  whose  success  I  have  felt  a  deeper  in- 
terest than  for  that  of  any  other  politician,  com- 
ing forward  and  attaching  his  name  to  the  eman- 
cipation movement  in  our  own  state.  And  I 
fear  that  I  may  live  to  see  the  day  when  these 
distinguished  Senators  will  be  found  fighting 
under  the  same  banner.  I  believe  that  the 
emancipation  movement  in  Kentucky  has  been 
mainly  brought  about  by  a  union  of  the  eman- 
cipationists and  the  democracy  with  the  oflSce 
seekers.  It  is  true,  the  emancipationists  of  this 
country  never  opened  their  mouths  upon  the 
subject  until  it  was  decided  that  this  convention 
should  be  called;  but  the  very  moment  the  call 
of  the  convention  was  decided  upon,  they  did 
open  their  mouths,  and  had  unfortunately  the 
sanction  of  the  name  of  the  distinguished  indi- 
vidual I  have  alluded  to.  But  even  with  his 
potent  name  and  influence  they  have  failed  to 
elect  one  single  delegate   to   this    convention. 

What,  you  may  ask  me,  was  the  object  of  the 
democratic  party  in  attaching  themselves  to  the 
emancipation  party?  I  do  not  say  they  did  so 
for  the  purpose  of  advancing  the  interest  of  the 


102 


emancipation  party,  but  mainly  for  the  purpose 

of  advaiJoiiig. their 'owiv^  rnterest;  They  knew 
very  ■\vell,-thdt  fuiless  tiny  ooirid "create  new  is- 
sues, they  iie*56r  ccul<i  ^t-a  majc/rity,  but  from 
the  time  of  calling-  tlx,e.  <>onvention  up  to  its 
meetJng^  -th^j  'deniolTac/  -  have  'determined  to 
siesd'Mpoii4iil  the 'popular  poiuti^  af'd.principles 
to  be  inserted"  in  the  new  constitution,  to  give 
themselves  tlie  ascendency.  The  son  of  a  very 
distinguished  gentleman  has  said  that  whiggery 
and  democracy  were  demolished,  that  those  par- 
ties never  could  again  exist  in  these  United 
States.  I  firmly  believe  the  remark  to  be  true. 
Will  not  the  democracy  and  emancipationists 
unite,  and  if  they  do  so  unite,  may  they  not  en- 
graft principles  in  the  new  constitution  which 
may  cause  it  to  be  rejected.  This  discussion  has 
arisen  upon  a  single  proposition.  What  is  that 
proposition?  That  the  principle  of  the  law  of 
1833  shall  be  engrafted  upon  the  new  constitu- 
tion, and  the  gentleman  from  Louisville,  our 
distinguished  President,  has  voted  for  the  pas- 
sage of  that  law  in  1833,  that  he  regarded  it  as 
correct  in  principle.  And  now  forsooth,  he  is 
willing  to  abandon  it.  Why?  Not  because  it 
is  bad  in  principle,  but  because  the  popular  will 
has  been  indicated  by  the  last  legislature,  and  he 
yields  to  popular  will  rather  than  to  his  own 
convictions  of  right  and  wrong.  Does  he  aban- 
don it  then  to  become  the  leader  of  the  pro- 
slavery  party  in  Kentucky?  Perliaps  it  does  not 
become  me  to  say  that  he  desires  to  become  the 
leader  of  the  pro-slavery  party,  but  new  issues 
are  to  be  seized  upon,  which  will  advance  the 
interests  of  the  party  of  which  the  gentleman  is 
a  distinguishedmember. 

I  think  gentlemen  have  lashed  themselves  into 
a  great  fury  upon  a  proposition  simply  to  en- 
graft the  principle  of  the  law  of  1833.  But  with 
due  deference  to  the  gentlemen,  their  arguments 
have  had  but  little  to  do  with  it.  It  seems 
to  me  that  the  question  is  simply,  will  the 
engrafting  of  the  principle  of  the  law  of  1833 
upon  the  new  constitution,  advance  the  inter- 
est of  the  emancipationits.  If  I  believed 
it  would,  I  would  be  the  last  man  to  sanc- 
tion it.  But  I  do  not  believe  it.  That  law 
has  been  upon  tlie  statute  book  for  sixteen 
years,  and  has  the  emancipation  party  accom- 
plished any  thing?  Have  they  succeeded  in  elect- 
ing a  single  delegate  to  this  convention?  They 
have  not.  Then  why  not  incorporate  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  law  of  1833,  since  it  has  not  aavan- 
ced  their  interest?  There  have  been  immense 
changes  in  reference  to  this  matter.  The  people 
of  the  part  of  tlie  country  which  I  in  part  repre- 
sent, have  been  uniformly  in  favor  of  the  re- 
peal of  that  law,  and  the  people  in  the  north  part 
of  the  Ht&Ui  have  been  opposed  to  such  repeal. 
The  gentleman  says  he  voted  against  its  repeal, 
but  he  objects  to  the  incorporation  of  its  princi- 
ple into  the  new  constitution,  not  because  the 
principle  is  bad,  but  Ijecausc  public  sentiment 
has  changed.  I  tliink  tlie  gentleman  is  mistaken 
if  he  supposes  tliat  public  sentiment  has  chang- 
ed. How  will  tlie  incorporation  of  that  prin- 
ciple be  an  entering  wedge  by  whicli  the  inter- 
est of  the  emancipation  party  will  be  subserv- 
ed? 

The  present  slave  jxtpulation  in  Kentucky 
amounts  to  about  two  hundred  thousand — the 


annual  increase  of  which  alone  amounts  to 
about  six  thousand.  I  venture  to  predict  that 
this  natural  increa-se  will,  in  twenty  years,  in- 
crease the  slave  population  in  Kentucky  to  three 
hundred  and  fifty  thousand.  And  I  ask,  will 
not  that  be  an  increase  of  the  slave  population 
quite  as  large  as  the  gentleman  desires?  Do 
gentlemen  wish  to  bring  in  more  slaves?  Why? 
Is  it  that  every  gentleman  shall  have  an  oppor- 
tunity to  have  a  slave  for  his  own  use?  The 
gentleman  from  Henry  remarked  that  unless  they 
were  the  sons  of  nabobs,  there  was  no  use  in 
going  to  Virginia  to  get  them.  I  would  say  to 
gentlemen,  that  in  many  instances,  it  would  be 
better  if  none  of  us  had  one.  I  regard  them  as 
no  blessing.  From  the  speeches  of  gentlemen, 
you  would  suppose  their  was  some  proposition 
to  bring  about  gradual  emancipation.  There 
surely  is  nothing  of  that  sort  proposed.  When 
this  constitution  goes  before  the  people,  if  the 
law  of  1833  shall  be  incorporated  in  it,  it  will  be 
seized  upon  by  the  demagogues  of  the  country, 
and  it  will  be  represented  by  them  that  we 
have  formed  a  constitution  which  will  deprive 
the  people  of  the  privilege  of  purchasing  ne- 
groes out  of  the  State  for  their  own  use,  when 
in  truth  and  in  fact  there  are  slaves  enough  in 
Kentucky  for  all  practical  purposes.  I  honestly 
believe  that  if  this  principle  be  incorporated  in 
the  constitution,  the  emancipation  party,  seeing 
their  position,  that  Kentucky  is  bound  to  adhere 
to  the  south  and  to  southern  institutions,  you 
will  never  hear  one  word  of  complaint  in  refer- 
ence to  this  proposition  again.  So  far  from  pro- 
ducing disturbance  or  disquietude,  I  firmly  and 
honestly  believe  it  will  give  peace  and  happi- 
ness and  quiet  to  the  whole  country. 

There  have  been  some  singular  positions  taken 
by  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  and  I  will 
make  a  single  remark  in  reference  to  one  or  two 
of  them.  He  very  benevolently  desires  that 
foreigners  shall  have  equal  privileges  with  na- 
tives in  the  exercise  of  the  elective  franchise. 
This  may  be  right.  He  would  make  no  invidi- 
ous distinctions,  as  proposed  by  the  resolution  of 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  (Mr.  Davis,)  but  I 
infer  from  his  argument  that  if  the  negroes  may 
be  permitted  to  be  brought  in,  the  consequence 
of  which  is  the  foreigners  will  be  kept  out.  This 
is  a  very  strange  position.  By  what  logic  can  he 
reconcile  it?  Again,  he  says  you  cannot  elevate 
the  negroe — ^you  cannot  bring  him  to  your  fire 
sides — you  can't  make  him  Governor — he  lias  no 
incentives  to  be  an  honest  man,  and  he  han  no 
incentive  to  work.  Yet  his  argument  is  in  favor 
of  bringing  in  more  of  tliis  unfortunate  race,  a 
consequence  of  which  will  be  that  foreigners 
will  be  kept  out,  against  whom  no  such  disabili- 
ties obtain.  This  is  not  the  time  to  discuss 
which  would  be  the  best  policy,  to  bring  in  more 
negroes  or  foreigners.  That  will  be  a  contest 
more  appropriate  to  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon and  Macduff  himself.  But  it  seems  to  me 
that  if  the  gentleman  from  Henderson  sliall  be 
able  to  reconcile  the  principles  which  he  has  as- 
serted to  day,  he  will  be  compelled  to  vote  for 
(he  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon. 
For  myself,  wlien  tlie  proper  time  arrives,  I  shall 
vote  for  the  incorporation  of  the  principle  of 
the  law  of  1833.  I  did  so  in  committee,  and 
did  not  agree  with  the  report  of  the  committee 


103 


on  slavery,  in  some  of  its  most  important  pro- 
visions. I  was  for  incorporating  the  7th  sec- 
tion of  the  present  constitution,  exactly  as  it  is 
with  the  exception  that  free  neeroes  shall  be 
sent  out  of  the  commonwealth,  oelieving  that 
that  principle  and  the  law  of  1S33  would  give 
universal  satisfaction. 

In  conclusion,  it  is  my  determination  to  adhere 
to  the  south  and  to  southern  institutions,  whatever 
change  may  be  produced  by  party  changes  in 
Kentucky  or  elsewhere.  I  regard  the  preserva- 
tion of  tne  Union  itself  as  being  dependent  upon 
the  maintainance  of  southern  interests  and 
southern  institutions. 

Mr.  DIXON.  The  gentleman  says  he  does  not 
see  how  I  can  reconcile  the  two  propositions — 
the  one  contained  in  the  resolution  which  I  had 
the  honor  to  offer  on  the  subject  of  naturalized 
citizens,  and  the  proposition  which  I  make  here, 
that  it  would  be  wrong  for  a  bare  majority  to 
take  away  a  man's  property.  I  do  not  intend  to 
assert  that  a  bare  majority  ought  to  have  the 
right  to  take  away  a  man's  propertv.  I  do  not 
mean  to  admit  that  principle;  nor  3o  I  mean  to 
admit  the  principle,  that  the  citizens  of  Ken- 
tucky, togetner  with  naturalized  foreigners  have 
the  right  by  their  votes,  to  take  away  the  prop- 
erty of  citizens.  I  would  give  to  naturalized 
citizens  the  same  rights  that  are  enjoyed  by  the 
natural  bom  citizens;  but  I  would  deny,  in  both 
cases,  the  right  of  a  mere  majority  to  deprive  the 
citizen  of  his  property. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  moVed  that  the  committee  rise 
and  report  progress. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to  and  leave  was 
granted  to  sit  a^ain. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  OCTOBER  13,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Geobqe  W.  Brush. 

PROPOSITIOXS  TO  A3IE5D. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  offere<l  the  following: 
Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  miscella- 
neous provisions  of  the  constitution  be  instruc- 
ted to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  authoriz- 
ing and  requiring  the  legislature  to  change  the 
punishment,  now  prescribed  by  law,  for  felonies, 
other  than  murder  or  rape,  committed  by  persons 
of  color,  to  that  of  expatriation,  or  to  the  forfeit- 
ure of  libertyand  sale  into  bondage. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  desire  to  submit  a 
resolution  of  inquiry  in  relation  to  free  negroes 
to  one  of  the  committees.  I  think,  from  what 
we  liave  heard  expressed  here,  that  all  sides 
would  be  very  glad  to  get  clear  of  them  from 
Kentucky.  I  have  devoted  some  reflection  to 
the  subject  and  to  the  various  expedients  sugges- 
ted to  attain  that  object,  as  well  as  its  connection 
with  our  relations  as  a  state  arising  under  the 
federal  constitution.  I  propose,  as  a  subject  of 
inquiry,  for  the  committee  on  miscellaneous  pro- 
visions, the  propriety  of  substituting,  in  lieu  of 
the  punishment  now  imposed  on  that  class  of 
people  for  crimes  other  than  murder,  the  penalty 
of  exportation,  or  of  being  sold  again  into  bon 
da^e.  I  think  it  is  wortnv  of  inquiry;  and  it 
strikes  me,  if  it  has  no  otner  effect,  it  will  at 


least  have  the  tendency  of  keeping  this  class  of 
persons  out  of  the  state;  and  it  may  be  the  means 
of  inducing  others  to  leave  it  voluntarily.  It  is 
a  subject  worthy  of  inquiry,  and  I  offer  it  in  that 
shape. 

The  resolution  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  BROWN  offered  the  following,  which  was 
agreed  to: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  education  be 
requested  to  prepare  and  report  a  clause  or  pro- 
vision for  the  new,  or  amended,  constitution,  se- 
curing the  present  school  fund,  togetlier  with 
the  proceeds  under  an  act  of  the  lat«  legislature, 
entitled  "  an  act  for  the  benefit  of  common 
schools,"  as  a  permanent  and  perpetual  school 
fund,  applying  the  interest  of  said  fund,  invio- 
lably, to  the  establishment  and  encouragement 
of  common  schools   throughout  the  state,  and 

f>rohibitingthe  passage  of  any  law  by  the  legis- 
ature,  authorizing  the  use  of  said  fund  for  any 
other  purpose  than  tlie  use  and  encouragement 
of  common  schools. 


The  convention  resolved  itself  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  Mr.  BARLOW  in  the  chair,  and 
resumed  tie  consideration  of  Mr.  Turner's  reso- 
lutions which  were  undisposed  of  when  the  com- 
mittee rose  yesterday. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  was  entiUed  to  tJie  floor  and 
he  spoke  as  follows: 

Tne  opinions  of  this  convention,  as  indicated 
by  this  discussion,  seem  to  be  divided  into  three 
classes.  The  gentleman  from  Madison,  who  I 
have  no  doubt  will  have  some  followers  here, 
desires  to  incorporate  into  the  constitution  the 
law  of  1833.  The  proposition  which  I  had  the 
honor  to  introduce  is  directly  anta^onistieal  to 
his.  It  proposes  to  allow  the  citizen  of  Ken- 
tuckv,  who  in  good  faith  goes  to  a  foreign  state 
and  fcuys  a  slave  for  his  own  use,  to  bring  him 
here.  There  is  another  class  of  pro-slavery  men 
on  this  floor  who  entertain  a  different  opinion 
from  both  of  us;  and  that  is,  that  we  should 
leave  the  clause  in  the  present  constitution  as  it 
now  stands,  with  a  small  emendation  to  the 
effect  that  persons  in  this  state  shall  have  the 
power  to  emancipate  their  slaves,  providing  at 
the  same  time  fur  sending  them  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  commonwealth. 

The  motion  of  the  honorable  President  of  this 
body,  if  it  prevails,  effectually  destroys  the  pro- 
position of  the  gentleman  from  Madison  as  well 
as  my  own,  and  leaves  open  for  discussion,  the 
proposition  to  which  he  referred  so  ably  in  his 
remarks.  I  am  not  tenacious  of  any  opinion 
that  I  entertain  on  this  subject.  I  am  not  .satis- 
fied myself,  that  I  am  right.  But  I  believe  for 
all  wise  purposes,  that  in  all  probability,  the 
proposition  which  I  had  the  honor  to  introduce, 
is  tne  best  for  the  country  ;  though  as  I  before 
remarked,  I  am  not  certain  of  the  fact.  The 
great  object  of  this  convention  in  my  opinion 
should  be  to  build  up  a  constitution,  that  will 
be  most  acceptable  to  the  people  of  Kentucky, 
and  that  will  tend  to  quiet  agitation  upon  every 
subject  embraced  in  it.  There  is  danger,  I  con- 
fess, great  danger,  that  tlie  friends  of  constitu- 
tional reform,  in  elaborating  and  framing  an  or- 
ganic law  for  the  people  of  the  commonwealth, 
will  do  too  much,  will  rxin  too  far  into  detail. 


104 


With  regard  to  tlio  orf^auic  law  of  Kentucky, 
and  the  reformations  tliat  we  should  make,  there 
are  almost  as  many  opinions  in  the  country  as 
there  are  faces.  I'here  is  no  earthly  doubt  of 
this,  and  there  is  great  danger  that  the  friends  of 
reform  will  burthen  the  result  of  their  labors 
with  too  much  matter,  and  that  when  we  submit 
it  to  the  people  for  their  judgment  and  verdict 
upon  it,  we  shall  have  multiplied  so  many  ob- 
jectors to  it,  that  if  they  coalesce  the  constitution 
is  sure  to  be  rejected. 

I  am  entirely  satisfied  that  if  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  succeeds  in  engrafting  upon  any 
constitution  we  may  frame,  the  law  of  1833,  it 
will  fall.  That,  such  will  certainly  be  its  fate, 
I  have  no  doubt.  I  never  did,  I  never  can  bring 
myself  to  question  the  motive  of  any  gentleman 
on  this  floor.  I  think  they  came  here  as  pure 
minded  and  as  clear  of  guile  as  I  came  myself, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  that  his  conduct  on  this  oc- 
casion IS  superinduced  by  an  ardent  patriot- 
ism and  devotion  to  the  best  interests  of  his 
country.  But  the  question  is  not,  what  good  pur- 
pose the  incorporation  of  that  clause  will  subserve, 
but  whether  it  will  secure  certainly  for  the  con- 
stitution, when  framed  with  that  clause  in  it,  the 
approval  of  the  judgment  and  the  sober  under- 
.standing  of  the  people  of  this  commonwealth. 
That  is  the  question — whether  it  will  have  that 
effect,  or  whether  it  will  have  a  contrary  one.  I 
oppose  the  principle  ii^yolved  in  the  provision, 
and  even  if  it  was  abstractly  right,  it  is  one 
to  which  I  would  never  subscribe.  What  is  it  ? 
It  is,  that  slavery,  as  it  now  exists  in  Kentucky, 
and  to  the  extent  to  which  it  exists,  is  well 
enough,  is  right,  and  he  is  not  disposed  to  inter- 
fere with  it ;  that  it  is  the  source  of  great 
wealth  ;  that  it  aids  in  the  agriculture  of  the 
country,  and  adds  to  the  revenue  of  the  govern- 
ment ;  but  that  all  those  who  are  blessed  with 
this  description  of  property  now,  are  to  retain  pos- 
session of  it,  and  it  is  not  to  be  increasd  by  arti- 
ficial means  hereafter.  Now,  upon  two  grounds, 
I  am  in  favor  of  a  different  plan.  1  oppose,  and 
shall  ever  oppose  while  I  entertain  the  views  I 
do,  the  principle  of  conferring  especial  immuni- 
ties upon  one  class  of  citizens.  And  you  might 
as  well  do  it  at  once,  by  legislative  enactment, 
as  to  say  that  what  the  citizen  now  'possesses  he 
shall  retain,  and  throw  around  it  the  additional 
safeguard,  that  no  man  shall  hereafter  liold  that 
description  of  property  unless  he  becomes  able 
to  purchase  it  from  those  who  now  enjoy  it, 
and  who  indeed  may  be  unwilling  to  sell  it. 
Such  is  the  effect  if  you  prohibit  the  citizen  from 
going  elsewhere  to  get  this  description  of  prop- 
erty, at  the  best  possible  price — of  Avhora  he 
chooses.  I  oppose  it  upon  another  ground.  It 
will  be  recollected  that  five  black  men  in  Ken- 
tucky are  equal  to  three  white  men  in  anotlior 
state.  They  may  say  as  much  as  they  please 
outside  of  tne  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and 
in  the  non-slaveholdingstates,  upon  this  subject, 
but  if  five  of  our  black  men  amount  to  as  much 
as  three  of  their  white  men,  I  am  perfectly  satis- 
fied. And  with  regard  to  our  future  strength 
and  weight  in  the  councils  of  the  nation,  if  you 
consult  the  future  growth,  and  strength,  and 
greatness  of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky, 
every  avenue  that  can  bo  opened  for  the  intro- 
duction of  this  property,  save  for  the  purpose  of 


merchandise,  ought  to  be  opened  for  this  ob- 
ject. Are  gentlemen  willing,  when  they  have 
seen  this  great  struggle  arising  all  aroimd  us 
in  the  non-slaveholding  states,  to  consult  mere- 
ly their  own  wishes,  their  feelings,  and  views, 
when  thereby  we  Aveaken  our  future  growth 
and  strength?  I  think  that  this  is  a  strong 
reason  why  the  law  of  1833  should  never  be  in- 
corporated in  the  organic  law  of  this  state. 

Now  if  it  was  there  incorporated,  does  the 
gentleman  suppose,  for  a  single  moment,  that  it 
will  quiet  agitation  upon  the  slave  question  and 
upon  the  question  of  emancipationV  It  will  not 
do  it.  My  reading  has  taught  me  it  is  always 
best  to  defend  the  outposts,  and  never  be  driven 
to  the  defence  of  the  citadel  while  we  have  a 
chance  to  meet  the  enemy  at  the  threshhold. 
And  if  our  political  adversaries  haVe  come  and 
placed  themselves  on  what  is  said  to  be  the  plat- 
form adopted  by  the  original  convention  men, 
I  can  only  say  that,  for  one,  whenever  I  see  my 
enemy  ranging  himself  under  my  standard,  I 
begin  to  doubt  whether  I  am  sailing  under  the 
riglit  kind  of  colors. 

Now  my  proposition,  which  will,  in  effect,  be 
destroyed,  if  that  of  the  honorable  President  of 
the  convention  succeeds,  I  think  will  not  only 
secure  to  these  men  the  rights  they  now  enjoy 
under  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  but  will 
quiet  agitation.  What  will  the  emancipationists 
have  to  gain  by  further  agitation?  What  can 
they  do  on  this  subject?  They  can  do  nothing 
unless  they  are  willing  to  take  the  high  and  re- 
sponsible ground,  when  the  majority  of  their 
countrymen)  in  one  of  the  most  triumphant 
votes  that  has  ever  been  given  on  any  suoject, 
have  voted  them  down,  of  continuing  to  agitate 
the  same  question.  Are  they  still  going  on  to 
agitate  the  subject?  Are  they  about  to  assume 
tlie  character  of  those  incendiaries  who  are  wil- 
ling, at  all  times  and  under  all  circumstances,  to 
light  the  torch  of  civil  war  here,  which  will  re- 
sult in  the  burning  of  our  houses,  and  in  the  bc- 
dcAving  of  our  hearth-stones  with  the  blood  of 
our  wives  and  children?  It  is  right  and  proper 
that  every  man  in  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky— no  matter  what  his  creed,  faith,or  notions 
in  religion  or  politics  on  this  subject  may  be — 
when  the  majority  have  voted  him  down,  should, 
as  a  good  citizen,  submit  to  their  decision. 

Now  for  myself,  I  have  set  out  with  the  de- 
termination neter  to  yield  one  single  inch  to 
any  spirit  of  fanaticism;  because  whenever  you 
concede  them  any  ground,  they  will  be  sure  to 
desire  to  go  one  step  further  and  occupy  a  more 
prominent  position.  My  proposition  is  intrin- 
sically ri^ht  in  itself.  It  secures  to  all  grades, 
and  conditions  in  life,  if  they  have  the  means  of 
purchasing  this  kind  of  property,  the  right  to  do 
so  whenever  they  choose.  In  a  mood  of  mer- 
riment which  often  comes  over  me,  and  perhaps 
too  often  for  my  own  good,  I  happened  the  other 
day  to  refer  to  the  fact  that  some  gentlemen  were 
exceedingly  lucky,  but  tliat  the  class  in  which 
I  was  born  and  raised,  and  in  which  I  hope  to 
die,  have  never  been  so  fortunate.  We  make  no 
calculation,  as  I  remarked  on  that  occasion,  to 
liave  any  of  this  kind  of  property  come  down  to 
us  by  descent,  by  gift,  and  least  of  all,  by  mar- 
riage. If  some  gentlemen  are  so  fortunate,  or 
rather  unfortunate  as  to  have  the  opportunity  of 


105 


marrying  some  four  or  five  times,  and  every  time 
marrying  negroes  by  the  acre,  ithas  not  yet,  and 
I  trust  in  God  It  never  will  fall  to  my  lot.  Of 
all  things  on  the  earth,  a  mercenary  marriage  is 
the  most  detestable  in  the  sight  of  God  and  the 
holy  angels  that  cluster  around  the  throne  of 
Heaven.  I  certainly  do  not  expect  to  acquire 
property  in  this  way. 

Inow  if  a  man  who  pursues  agriculture,  a 
working  man — after  he  has  made  money  enough 
and  when  he  and  his  helpmate  have  clambered 
up  the  hill  of  life  and  are  ready  to  descend  on 
the  other  side — should  desire  to  buy  some  '  one 
to  wait  upon  him  in  his  old  age,  is  it  not  right 
that  he  should  have  the  privilege  of  doing  it  at 
the  cheapest  possible  rate?  I  know  a  great  many 
hard  working  men  in  this  state,  my  neighbors 
— and  I  have  as  good  neighbors  as  any  gentle- 
man on  this  floor — who  have  expressed  such  a 
desire,  and  it  is  but  right  they  should  have  the 
privilege  of  its  gratification. 

Now  let  me  ask  the  slaveholders  of  this  body, 
why  it  is  that  you  see  the  non -slaveholder 
clinging  around  the  institution  of  slavery  in 
this  country  ?  There  are  various  reasons  why. 
They  know  from  experience  that  somehow  or 
other — but  from  what  cause,  perhaps  I  carinot 
tell — the  character  of  a  non-slaveholding  man 
in  a  slave  holding  country,  is  elevated  to  the 
highest  pitch  and  that  he  stands  on  the  plat- 
form of  universal  equality  with  his  neighbors, 
whether  he  owns  slaves  or  not. 

I  recollect,  during  last  summer  to  have  seen 
a  manifesto  from  the  city  of  Louisville,  the  head 
quarters  of  abolitionism  and  emancipation — 
which  was  thrown  out  like  a  gilded  bait  to 
catch  the  non-slaveholding  interest  of  the  coun- 
try— laying  it  down  as  an  undeniable  proposi- 
tion that  slavery  was  a  curse  to  any  country, 
and  at  the  same  lime  classifying  the  counties  m 
the  state,  showing  that  the  whole  of  it  existed 
in  but  some  eighteen  or  twenty  counties,  and 
that  those  on  the  frontiers  had  scarcely  any 
slaves  in  them.  They  had  two  objects.  Now 
it  occurred  to  me  that  if  slavery  was  this  blight- 
ing mildew,  if  it  was  this  mill  stone  which 
hung  round  our  necks,  they  should  have  refer- 
red to  the  further  fact,  more  undeniable  even 
than  any  thing  they  have  laid  down,  that  right 
in  the  centre  of  Kentucky,  we  have  the  richest, 
the  most  intelligent,  and  the  most  patriotic  peo- 
ple— not  excluding  our  frontier  brethren — on  the 
face  of  the  globe.  And  here  where  we  have 
more  slaves  than  in  any  other  part  of  Kentucky, 
by  ten  to  one,  if  it  is  such  a  curse,  how  does  it 
happen,  that  under  that  curse,  under  that  blight- 
ing curse,  which  blasts  and  pollutes  every  tiling 
that  it  touches,  we  have  the  most  enlightened, 
the  richest,  and  the  most  cultivated  people  upon 
the  face  of  God  Almighty's  earth.  Yes,  here, 
surrounded  with  this  curse,  this  vast  curse,  this 
mountain,  that  would  crush  any  other  people 
and  bear  them  down  on  the  face  of  the  earth, 
how  does  all  this  happen? 

I  can  throw  my  recollection  back  to  the  peri- 
od when  from  the  town  of  New  Castle  to  Shel- 
byville,  there  was  scarcely  a  log  cabin  for  the 
wayfarer  to  stop  and  slake  his  thirst.  Now, 
there  runs  a  continuous  lane  from  my  town  to 
Shelby  ville,  and  if  a  lady  were  riding  by  herself, 
she  could  not  break  herself  a  switch.  On  the 
14 


one  side  the  traveler  sees  the  wheat-fields  in 
harvest  time  groaning  under  the  weight  of  their 
heavy  yield,  and  on  the  other,  the  green  pas- 
tures with  their  thousands  of  cattle.  And  all 
this  right  in  the  midst  of  this  curse  of  slavery! 
It  is  iill  a  mistake— slavery  does  not,  will  not, 
and  cannot  produce  such  a  moral  or  physical 
de^adation  as  gentlemen  seem  to  imagine. 

Well,  as  I  said,  1  believe  that  my  proposition 
is  correct,  but  I  am  not  fastidious  upon  the  sub- 
ject. I  have  asserted  that  slavery  is  not  an  evil, 
and  I  want  rather  more  of  it.  If  it  is  the  thing 
I  think  it  is,  and  if  it  works  out  such  won- 
ders in  this  country,  as  I  perceive  it  does,  I 
am  willing  to  have  rather  more  of  it.  And 
gentleman  may  pass  laws  either  inviting  this 
agitation  or  putting  an  end  to  it;  but  if  every 
man  here  was  an  emancipationist,  they  could 
not,  if  they  were  so  disposed,  incorporate  a 
clause  in  the  constitution  taking  from  me  my 
right  of  ownership  in  the  slaves.  Let  us  try  this 
question.  I  do  conceive  that  the  present  consti- 
tution of  Kentucky  conferred  upon  the  citizen 
unlimited  and  unrestricted  rights,  either  as  to 
time  or  any  thing  else,  in  his  slave  property.  If 
that  is  the  fact,  uien  how  could  this  convention, 
without  impairing  the  obligations  of  contract, 
incorporate  any  clause  in  the  constitution  that 
would  authorize  the  legislature  to  take  the  prop- 
erty of  the  slave  owner  without  paying  him  a 
just  compensation,  oreventhen  withouthis  con- 
sent? Are  there  not  many  banks  chartered  in 
the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky  whose  charters 
extend  beyond  the  sitting  of  this  convention  or 
the  period  previous  to  the  adoption  of  any  con- 
stitution which  we  may  frame,  and  is  there  any 
gentleman  here  who  will  attempt  to  assert  that 
this  convention  has  a  right  to  say  to  those  banks 
that  their  charters  shall  now  expire,  and  that  it 
shall  depend  upon  the  legislature,  whether  they 
shall  be  renewed?  A  gentleman  gives  me  his 
note  payable  three  years  after  date,  and  it  falls 
due  two  years  after  this  convention  has  adopted  a 
constitution.  Can  this  convention  say  that  the 
bond  shall  be  null  and  void?  Would  it  not  con- 
flict with  the  provision  of  the  federal  constitu- 
tion declaring  that  the  state  has  no  power  to 
impair  the  obligation  of  contracts?  I  buy  a  ne- 
gro from  one  of  my  neighbors.  He  conveys  him 
to  me  by  a  bill  of  sale,  and  vests  in  me  all  the 
rights  of  property  that  incorporations  can  have 
vested  in  them  by  charter,  or  that  you  can  vest 
in  the  obligee  of  a  note  by  writing  your  obliga- 
tion to  him.  And  can  your  constitution  set  my 
negro  free  without  my  consent,  whether  it  pays 
me  or  not?  Would  it  not  impair  an  obligation 
and  seek  to  vitiate  and  render  null  by  constitu- 
tional enactment,  a  vested  right  in  me?  Is  not 
all  this  true? 

Now  I  liave  given  ray  views  upon  this  ques- 
tion, and  I  shall  not  seek  to  elaborate  them  any 
further.  I  would  like  to  know  one  thing  before 
I  sit  down — perhaps  I  ought  to  leave  the  enqui- 
ry to  other  gentlemen  on  this  floor — but  I  should 
like  to  know  from  my  friend  from  Logan,  when 
and  how  it  was  Mr.  Clay  became  the  great  leader 
of  the  democratic  party?  Now,  I  never  have 
said,  in  all  my  life,  one  word  against  the  per- 
sonal character  of  Mr.  Clay,  or  made  any  vile  or 
false  accusation  against  him.  I  have  looked  up- 
on him  as  one  of  the  most  stupendous  intellects 


106 


the  world  ever  produced — as  an  orator,  never 
equalled,  and  as  a  great  man  who  has  scarcely 
ever  been  surpassed.  I  have  never  admired  but 
one  kind  of  aristocracy,  and  that  is  of  mind,  and 
I  have  always  been  ready  to  render  at  all  times 
homage  where  homage  is  due.  The  gentleman 
from  Logan,  who  tried  his  liand  in  one  county 
and  could  not  quite  come  it,  and  went  to  anoth- 
er county  and  now  has  come  into  this  conven- 
tion, I  think  has  attempted  to  reach  over  or 
around  the  shoulders  of  an  old  friend  to  stab  his 
old  political  enemies.  If  such  is  his  intention, 
I  yield  to  him  all  the  honor  and  pleasure  of 
such  a  triumph.  I  myself  have  never  in  my  life 
thrust  around  the  side  of  my  friend  to  stab  or 
wound  an  enemy.  It  may  be,  and  I  think  it  is, 
true,  that  "Old  Bullion,"  in  his  old  age  and  do- 
tage, is  seeking  himself  to  become  the  great 
free-soil  leader,  and  competes  for  that  honor 
with  both  Mr.  Clay  and  Mr.  Van  Buren.  Mr. 
Clay,  defeated,  Avrites  his  bulletin  on  the  field  of 
battle,  and  seeks  the  north  for  the  restoration  of 
his  health.  Mr.  Van  Buren  artfully  pretends  to 
be  seeking  to  heal  the  breach  in  the  democratic 
party  in  New  York,  and  yet,  as  I  think,  is  all 
the  wliile  artfully  tearing  it  asunder.  Old  Bul- 
lion, soldier  as  he  is,  and  has  been,  standing 
alone  among  southern  men,  comes  out  and 
proclaims  free-soil  ism,  returns  to  Missouri,  rolls 
up  his  sleeve  and  enters  the  thickest  of  the  fight. 
I  think  it  will  be  found  that  Old  Bullion  will 
head  the  great  free-soil  arid  whig  party,  with  mv 
friend  from  Logan  right  at  their  heels,  in  1852. 
I  know  that  the  emancipationists  of  Ken- 
tucky say,  and  I  suppose  they  will  doit,  that 
when  this  constitution  is  submitted  to  the  peo- 
ple, they  will  unite  with  my  friend  from  Logan, 
and  others,  to  break  it  down.  It  is  a  great  pity, 
I  think,  that  this  should  be  the  case  with  so  pop- 
\;lar  a  gentleman,  wlio,  after  trying  it  in  one 
county  and  failing,  can  go  to  another  county  and 
come  it  after  all.  It  was  with  great  difficulty 
that  I  could  come  it  at  all.  [Laughter.]  Well, 
though  he  did  do  this  thing,  I  think  it  a  great 
misfortune  to  this  convention  that  any  anti- 
convention  men  were  elected  to  this  body  at 
all — and  I  am  afraid  there  are  too  many  of  them. 

But  let  us  unite  and  make  the  very  best  con- 
stitution that  we  possibly  can.  For  myself,  I 
am  going  to  take  the  views  of  the  elders  of  this 
church— of  those  men  who  understand  this  sub- 
ject better  than  I  do.  I  have  my  projects,  and  I 
nave  presented  them  for  the  consideration  of  this 
convention.  If  they  vote  them  down  it  will  be 
a  matter  of  no  regret  to  me.  I  want  them  but 
to  do  right,  and  when  they  satisfy  me  that  they 
are  doing  right,  I  am  going  right  along  witn 
them,  hand  in  hand  and  shoulder  to  shoulder. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  On  a  former  occasion  I  pro- 
mised at  some  proper  time  to  give  my  views  upon 
a^  particular  brancn  of  tlie  great  subject  of  slave- 
ly,  and  I  rise  this  morning,  in  obedience  to  that 
promise,  for  the  purpose  of  redeeming  that 
pledge.  I  do  not  indulge  the  hope  that  I  shall 
deliver  myself  in  a  very  happy  and  felicitous 
manner,  nor  do  I  expect  to  charm  the  members 
of  tJiis  body  by  my  eloquence,  by  my  oratory,  or 
by  my  rhetoric.  But  I  intend  to  ueliver  my  views 
in,  as  brief  and  comprehensible  manner  as  is  pos- 
sible. I  do  not  expect,  upon  this  or  upon  any 
occasion,  to  slied  any  light  upon  this  or  any  oth- 


er subject,  and  I  rise  not  so  much  for  tlie  pur- 
pose of  enlightening  this  assembly,  upon  this 
grave  and  important  subject,  as  for  the  purpose 
of  assigning  a  reason  for  occupying  the  position 
I  do  upon  this  subject. 

I  will  now  proceed  to  the  investigation  of  this 
subject  in  a  moral  and  religious  point  of  view  — 
I  mean  the  question  of  slavery.  And  the  first 
thing  that  will  be  necessary,  will  be  to  define, 
clearly  and  distinctly,  the  question  to  be  proved, 
and  tlie  point  at  issue.  And  here  permit  me  to 
remark  that  I  will  not  attempt  to  prove,  or  to 
investigate  the  question,  whether  slavery  as  it 
exists  in  this  state,  or  in  any  other  state,  is  right 
or  wrong,  but  whether  slaveiy  is  right  or  wrong, 
consistent  or  inconsistent  with  the  law  of  God, 
in  this  or  any  other  country,  or  in  this  or 
any  other  age? — whether  it  is  right  for  any 
individual,  at  this  or  any  other  time,  under 
existing  or  any  other  circumstances,  to  hold 
property  in  man?  That,  sir,  is  the  question. — 
And  here  I  ask,  what  is  the  ground  assumed 
by  the  opposition?  I  do  this  in  order  that 
we  may  have  the  true  issue  before  us,  in  a  man- 
ner so  clear  that  no  gentleman  can  misunder- 
stand it.  And  as  the  delegate  from  Madison  re- 
pudiates the  sentiments  which  I  understood  him 
to  have  expressed,  and  which  was  the  founda- 
tion of  what  I  then  said,  and  what  I  am  now 
about  to  say — that  slavery  was  wrong,  and  that 
the  finger  of  God  was  upon  and  against  it — I  beg 
leave,   to    read   a  paragraph    from  what  pur- 

Eorts  to  be  an  address  to  the  Presbyterians  of 
'entucky,  for  the  instruction  and  emancipation 
of  their  slaves — by  a  committee  of  the  Synod  of 
Kentucky — and  published  in  the  Examiner,  a 
paper  which  I  believe  is  endorsed  and  patron- 
ized by  the  emancipation  party,  throughout  the 
state.    It  reads  as  follows : 

"We  all  admit  that  the  system  of  slavery, 
which  exists  among  us,  is  not  right.  Why  then 
do  we  assist  in  perpetuating  it?  Why  do  we 
make  no  serious  efforts  to  terminate  it?  Is  it 
not  because  our  perception  of  its  sinfulness  is 
very  feeble  and  indistinct,  while  our  perception 
of  the  difficulties  of  instructing  and  emancipa- 
ting our  slaves  is  strong  and  clear?  As  long  as 
we  believe  that  slavery,  as  it  exists  among  us, 
is  a  light  evil  in  the  sight  of  God,  so  long  will 
we  feel  inclined  to  pronounce  every  plan  that 
can  be  devised  for  its  tennination,  inexpedient 
or  impracticable.  Before,  then,  we  unfold  our 
plan,  we  wish  to  examine  the  system,  and  try 
it  by  the  principles  which  religion  teaches.  If 
it  snail  not  be  thus  proved  to  be  an  abomina- 
tion in  the  sight  of  a  just  and  holy  God,  we 
shall  not  solicit  your  concurrence  in  any  plan 
for  its  abolition.  But  if,  when  fairly  examined, 
it  shall  be  seen  to  be  a  thing  which  God  abhors, 
we  may  surely  expect  that  no  trifling  amount  of 
trouble  or  loss,  will  deter  you  from  lending 
your  efforts  to  its  extermination. 

"  Slavery  is  not  the  same  all  the  world  over, 
and  to  ascertain  its  character  in  any  particular 
state  or  country,  we  must  exfimine  tnc  constitu- 
ents and  eff'ects  of  the  kind  of  slavery  which 
there  exists.  The  system  as  it  exists  among  us, 
and  is  constituted  by  our  laws,  consists  of  Uireo 
distinct  parts — a  deprivation  of  the  right  of 
property,  a  deprivation  of  personal  liberty,  and 
a  deprivation  of  peraonal  security.    In  all  its 


107 


•  parts  it  is,  manifestly,  a  violation  of  the  laws  of 
'  God,  as  revealed  by  the  light  of  nature,  as  weU 

•  as  the  light  of  revelation. " 

It  will  be  seen  at  once  sir,  that  the  ground  as- 
sumed here  is,  that  slaverv  is  wrong  in  its  insti- 
tution and  evil  in  its  tendencies — a  thing  which 
God  abhors — a  sin  in  his  sight,  and  in  all  its  parts 
a  violation  of  his  law,  a  great  moral  evil,  and 
as  a  matter  of  course,  in  all  its  tendencies  and 
consequences,  ruinous  to  the  best  interests  of  a 
state.  If  this  be  true  sir,  no  man  has  a  right  to  hold 
property  in  another,  and  no  christian  man  should 
do  It.  I  am  a  pro-slavery  man  sir,  but  convince 
me  of  the  truth  of  this  assumption,  and  I  would 
at  once  renounce  it  all,  and  I  would  not  let  the 
sun  go  down  upon  my  sin.  I  would  give  up 
my  slavesj  join  the  emancipationists,  and  help 
to  pay  for  the  balance.  I  would  throw  myself 
into  the  fight,  and  do  battle  for  God  and  liberty. 
And  what  I  am  most  surprised  at  is,  that  men 
who  profess  to  oelieve  all  this,  do  not  practice 
what  they  preach.  If  they  -would  sir,  they  could 
then  say  to  us  with  an  uplifted  front,  "go  and 
do  likewise,"  or  come  and  "go  along  with  us 
and  we  will  do  thee  good."  But  let  us  see  if 
these  things  be  so.  Let  us  see  if  under  the  laws 
of  God,  as  revealed  in  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, and  as  recorded  in  our  old-fashioned 
family  Bibles,  a  man  may  not  own  property  in 
man — whether  he  mav  not,  with  money  pur- 
chase slaves  as  we  do  liere,  and  hold  them  for- 
ever, or  for  life,  and  stiU  live  in  favor  with 
God,  or  without  committing  a  sin  in  his  sight. 

Just  here  sir,  before  I  proceed  farther  in  this 
investigation,  I  will  remark,  that  as  to  the  sin- 
fulness of  slavery,  if  any  gentleman  here  or 
elsewhere,  now  or  at  any  other  time,  will  show 
me,  in  our  old-fashioned' family  Bible,  a  solitary 
chapter,  paragraph,  or  verse,  which  says  that 
one  man  shall  not  purchase  and  own  property 
in  man,  or  that  slaverv  in  this  form  is  a  sin  and 
abhorrent  in  the  sigtt  of  God,  I  will  give  up 
the  question.  But  if  there  is  no  law  to  be 
shown,  there  is  none  to  violate;  then  there  is  no 
transgression,  and  consequently  no  sin — for 
there  must  be  transgression  before  sin.  This 
sir,  I  think  settles  the  question  as  to  the  sin  of 
slavery. 

But  let  us  look  farther  into  a  different  branch  of 
the  subject.  Let  us  see,  if  we  can,  -when  and 
how,  and  by  what  authority,  slavery  was  first 
instituted.  'Turn  sir,  to  the  9th  chapter  of  GJen- 
esis,  24th  verse,  -which  reads  as  follows: 

"24.  And  Xoah  awoke  from  his  wine,  and 
'  knew-what  his  younger  son  had  done  with  him. 

"25.  And  he  said,  cursed  be  Canaan;  a  ser- 
'vant  of  servants  shall  he  be  unto  his  brethren. 

"  26.  And  he  said,  blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of 
*  Shem,  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant. 

"  27.  God  shall  enlarge  Japhet,  and  he  shall 
'dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem;  and  Canaan  shall 
'  be  his  ser\'ant." 

This  sir,  is  the  prophetic  denunciation  of 
Noah,  on  one  branch  of  his  family,  spoken  by 
the  immediate  inspiration  of  God,  and  nas  been 
fulfilled,  and  is  now  being  fulfilled,  as  I  think 
will  be  proven  in  the  sequel,  as  clearly  as  histo- 
ry, reason,  and  revelation  can  go  to  prove  any 
thing.  Before  I  inquire  into  what  the  denuncia- 
tion is,  the  first  question  arises,  was  Noah  au- 


thorized to  pronounce  it.    And  here  sir,  I  beg  to 
read  from   Matthew    Henry's  notes    on  these 

verses: 

"The  spirit  of  prophecy  comes  upon  him, 
'and  like  the  dving  Jacoo,  he  tells  his  sons 
'  what  should  befall  them."  ch.  49,  v.  25. 

And  again  sir,  I  beg  leave  to  read  from  Bishop 
Newton,  another  standard  work  in  all  the 
churches: 

"  In  consequence  of  this  different  behavior  of 
'his  three  sons,  Noah  as  a  patriarch  was  en- 
'  lightened,  and  as  the  father  of  a  family,  who  is 
'  to  reward  or  punish  his  children,  was  empow- 
'  ered  to  foretell  the  different  fortunes  of  their 
'  families;  for  this  prophecy  relates  not  so  much 
'  to  themselves,  as  to  their 'posterity,  the  people 
'  and  the  nations  descended  from  them.  He  was 
'not  prompted  by  wine  or  resentment,  for  neither 
'  the  one  nor  the  other  could  infuse  the  knowl- 
'  edge  of  futurity,  or  inspire  him  with  the  pre- 
'  science  of  evente,  which  happened  hundreds, 
'  nay  thousands  of  years  afterwards.  But  God, 
'willing  to  manifest  his  superintendence  and 
'  government  of  the  world,  endued  Noah  with 
'the  spirit  of  prophecy,  and  enabled  him  in  some 
'  measure,  to  disclose  the  purposes  of  his  provi- 
'  dence  toward  the  future  race  of  mankind." 

From  both  of  these  authorities  it  appears, 
that  Noah  spoke,  not  as  some  have  supposed, 
from  the  vindictive  feelings  of  a  drunken  old 
man,  but  by  the  immediate  inspiration  of  God. 
If  this  is  true,  then ;  what  he  said  was  right  and 
proper,  not  contrarv  to,  but  in  strict  conformity 
with,  the  will  of  God.  None,  I  presume  will 
deny  that  the  curse  here  pronounced  was  per- 
sonal servitude,  or  slavery.  Then  sir,  we  have 
the  curse  of  slavery  pronounced  on  some  one  by 
the  authority  of  (5oa,  and  the  question  now  is 
upon  whom' was  it  pronounced?  And  here  sir, 
I  beg  leave  to  read  from  Newton  on  the  prophe- 
cies, page  15: 

"  The  curse  of  servitude  pronounced  upon  Ca- 
'  naan,  and  so  likewise  the  promise  of  blessing 
'  and  enlargement  made  to  Shem  and  Japheth,  are 
'  by  no  means  to  be  confined  to  their  own  per- 
' sons,  but  extend  to  their  whole  race;  as  after- 
'  wards  the  prophecies  concerning  Ishmael,  and 
'  those  concerning  Esau  and  Jacob,  and  those 
'  relating  to  the  twelve  patriarchs,  were  not  so 
'  properly  verified  in  themselves  as  in  their  pos- 
'  terity,  and  thither  we  must  look  for  their  full 
'  and  perfect  completion." 

"Hitherto  we  have  explained  the  prophecy 
'according  to  the  present  copies  of  our  bible; 
'  but  if  we  were  to  correct  the  text,  as  we  should 
'  any  ancient  classic  author  in  a  like  case,  the 
'  whole  perhaps  might  be  made  easier  and  plain- 
'er.  Ham  the  Jath£r  of  Canaan  is  mentioned  in 
'the  preceding  part  of  the  story;  and  how  then 
'  came  the  person  of  a  sudden  to  be  changed  into 
'Canaan?  The  Arabic  version  in  these  three 
'verses  hath  the  father  of  Canaan  instead  of  Ca- 
'naan.  Some  copies  of  the  Septuagint  likewise 
'  have  Ham  instead  of  Canaan,  as  if  Canaan  was 
'  a  corruption  of  the  text.  Vatablus  and  others 
'by  Canaan  understand  the  father  of  Canaan, 
'which  was  expressed  twice  before.  And  if  we 
'  regard  the  metre,  this  line  "  Cursed  be  Canaan," 
'  is  much  shorter  than  the  rest,  as  if  something 


id¥ 


'was  deficient.  May  we  not  suppose  therefore, 
'  (without  taking  such  liberties  as  Father  Houbi- 
'gant  hath  with  the  Hebrew  text,)  that  the  copy- 
'ist  by  mistake  wrote  only  Canaan  instead  of 
'Ham  the  father  of  Canaan,  and  that  the  whole 
'passage  was  originally  thus?  And  Ham  the 
'father  of  Canaan  saw  the  nakedness  of  his  father, 
'  and  told  his  two  brethren  without.  And  Noah 
'awoke  from  his  wine,  and  kneio  what  his  younger 
'son  had  done  unto  him.  And  he  said,  Cursed  be 
'Ham  the  father  of  Canaan;  a  servant  of  servants 
'shall he  be  unto  his  brethren.  Andhe  said,Blcs- 
'sed  be  the  Lord  God  of  S hem;  and  Ham  the  father 
'  of  Canaan  sliall  be  servant  to  them.  God  shall 
'enlarge  Japheth;  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of 
'Shem;  andliam  the  father  of  Canaan  shall  be 
'  servant  to  them." 

From  this  it  appears  that  the  curse  was  not 
only  upon  Ham,  out  upon  his  posterity  to  the 
latest  generations.  The  next  question  then  is, 
who  was  Ham  and  his  posterity  to  the  latest 
generations  to  serve?  It  appears  from  the  very 
face  of  the  decree  itself,  that  they  were  to  be 
servants  of  servants  to  their  brethren  Shem  arid 
Japheth.  But  Newton,  page  15,  goes  to  show 
that  they  were  not  only  to  serve  Shem  and  Ja- 
pheth, but  their  children  to  the  latest  genera- 
tion. And  now,  sir,  let  us  see  the  fulfillment  of 
this  prophecy.  And  here  I  read  from  Newton, 
page  19,  20: 

"Ham  at  first  subdued  some  of  the  posterity 
'of  Shem,  as  Canaan  sometimes  conquered  Ja- 
•pheth;  the  Carthaginians,  who  were  originally 
'  Canaanites,  did  particularly  inSpain  and  Italy; 
'but  in  time  they  were  to  be  subdued,  and  be- 
*come  servants  to  Shem  and  Japheth;  and  the 
'change  of  their  fortune  from  good  to  bad  would 
'render  the  curse  still  more  visible.  Egypt  Avas 
'  the  land  of  Ham,  as  is  often  called  in  Scripture; 
'  and  for  many  years  it  was  a  great  and  flourish- 
'ing  kingdom;  but  it  was  subdued  by  the  Per- 
'sians,  who  descended  from  Shem,  and  after- 
'  wards  by  the  Grecians,  who  descended  from 
'  Japheth;  and  from  that  time  to  this  it  hath  con- 
'stantlybeen  in  subjection  to  some  or  other  of  the 
'  posterity  of  Shem  or  Japheth.  The  whole  con- 
'  tinent  of  Africa  was  peopled  principally  by 
'the  children  of  Ham:  and  for  how  many  ages 
'have  the  better  parts  of  that  country  lain  under 
'the  dominion  of  the  Romans,  and  then  of  the 
'Saracens,  and  now  of  the  Turks?  in  whatwick- 
'edness,  ignorance,  barbarity,  slavery,  misery, 
'live  most  of  the  inhabitants?  and  of  the  poor 
'  negroes  how  many  hundreds  every  year  are  sold 
'  and  bought  like  beasts  in  the  market,  and  are 
'  conveyed  from  one  quarter  of  the  world  to  do 
'  the  work  of  beasts  in  another? 

"  Nothing  can  bo  more  complete  than  tlie  exe- 

*  cution   of  the  sentenco  upon   Ham  as  well  as 

*  upon  Canaan." 

•        *««««*« 

I  quote  the  following  ftom  page  20: 
"  God  prefers  Shem  to  liis  elder  brother  Ja- 
pheth, as  Jacob  was  afterwards  preferred  to 
'Esau,  and  David  to  his  elder  brothers,  to  show 
'  that  the  order  of  grace  is  not  always  the  same 
'88  the  order  of  nature.  The  Lord  being  called 
'ihe  God  of  Shem  particularly,  it  is  plainly  inti- 
' mated  that  the  Lord  would  be  his  God  in  a  par- 
'  ticular  manner.    And  accordingly  the  church 


'of  God  was  among  the  posterity  of  Shym  for 
'several  generations;  and  of  "them  (Rom.  ix. 
'  5,)  as  concerning  the  flesh  Christ  came." 

'But  still  Japheth  was  not  dismissed  witliout 
'  a  promise.  (Gen.  ix.  47,)  "  God  sliall  enlarge 
'Japheth,  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of 
'Shem;  and  Canaan  shall  be  servant  to  them," 
'  or  their  servant." 

"So  it  is  said  here  "God  shall  enlarge  Ja- 
'pheth,"  and  the  name  oi  Japheth  signifies  cn- 
'largcment.  Was  Japheth  then  more  enlarged 
'than  the  rest?  Yes  he  was  botli  in  territory 
'  and  in  children.  The  territories  of  Japheth's 
'  posterity  were  indeed  very  large,  for  besides  all 
'  Europe,  groat  and  extensive  as  it  is,  they  pos- 
'sessed  the  lesser  Asia,  Media,  part  of  Armenia, 
'  Iberia,  Albania,  and  those  vast  regions  towards 
'the  nortli,  which  anciently  the  Scythians  inha- 
'bited,  and  now  the  Tartars  inliabit;  and  it  is 
'not  improbable  thattlie  new  Avorld  was  peopled 
'by  some  of  his  northern  descendants  passing 
'thither  by  the  straits  of  Anian." 

I  will  now  read  from  Keith  on  the  Evidence  of 
the  truth  of  the    Christian  Religion,  as  follows: 

"Not  only  do  the  different  countries  and  cities 
'which  form  the  subjects  of  prophecy  exhibit  to 
'this  day  their  predicted  fate,  but  tliere  is  also  a 
'prophecy recorded  as  delivered  in  an  age  coeval 
'  with  the  deluge,  when  the  members  of  a  single 
'family  included  the  whole  of  the  human  race — 
'  the  fulfillment  of  which  is  conspicuous  even  at 
'the  present  time  " 

******** 

"But  whatever  was  the  occasion  on  which  it 
'Avas  delivered,  the  truth  of  the  prophecy  must 
'  be  tried  by  its  completion: — "Cursed  be  Canaan; 
'  a  servant  of  servants  shall  he  be  unto  his  breth- 
'  ren.  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem,  and  Ca- 
'  naan  shall  be  his  servant.  God  sliall  enlarge 
'Japheth,  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of 
'  Sliem,  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant." 

"  The  historical  part  of  scripture,  by  its  de- 
'  scribing  so  particularly  the  respective  settle- 
'meiits  of  the  descendants  of  Noah,  "after  their 
'generations  in  their  nations,"  affords  to  this  day 
'the  means  of  trying  the  truth  of  tlie  prediction, 
'  and  of  ascertaining  Avhethor  the  prophetic  char- 
'  acter,  as  given  by  the  patriarch  of  the  jjost-dilu- 
'vian  AVorld,  be  still  applicable  to  the  inhabitants 
'  of  the  different  regions  of  the  earth  Avhich  Avere 
'peopled  by  the  posterity  of  Shem,  of  Ham,  and 
'  of  Japheth.  The  Isles  of  the  Gentiles,  or  the 
'countries  beyond  the  Mediterranean,  to  which 
'they  passed  by  sea,  viz:  those  of  Europe,  Avere 
'divided  by  the  sons  of  Japheth.  The  descen- 
'dants  of  Ham  inhabited  Africa  and  the  south- 
'Avestern  parts  of  Asia.  TJic  families  of  the  Ca- 
'naanUes  were  spread  abroad.  The  border  of  the 
'  Canaanites  was  from  Sidon.  Tlie  city  of  Tyre 
'Avas  called  the  daughter  of  Sidon;  and  Car- 
'  thage,  tlie  most  celebrated  city  of  Africa,  Avas 
'  peopled  from  Tyre.  And  the  dAvcllings  of  tJie 
'sons  of  Shem  were  unto  the  east,  or  Asia.  Tlio 
'  particular  allotment,  or  portion  of  each,  "after 
'their  families,  after  their  tongues,  in  their  coun- 
'  tries,  and  in  their  nations,"  is  distinctly  speci- 
'fied.  And  although  the  different  nations  de- 
'scended  from  any  one  of  the  sous  of  Noah  liave 
'intermingled  Avith  each  other,  and  undergone 
'  many  revolutions,  yet  the  three  great  divisions 


109 


'  of  the  world  have  remained  distinct,  as  sepa- 
'  rately  peopled  and  possessed  by  the  posterity 
'of  each  of  the  sons  of  Noah.  On  this  subject 
'the  earliest  commentators  are  agreed  before  the 
'existence  of  those  facts  -which  give  to  the 
'prophecy  its  fullest  illustration.  The  facts 
'uiemselves  by  which  the  prediction  is  verified 
'  are  so  notorious  and  so  applicable,  that  the  most 
'brief  and  simple  statement  will  suffice.  Before 
'  the  propagation  of  Christianity,  which  first  spoke 
'peace  to  eartli,  taught  a  law  of  universal  love, 
'  and  called  all  men  brethren,  slavery  evenrwhere 
'  prevailed,  and  the  greater  part  of  the  numan 
'  race,  throughout  all  the  world,  were  born  to 
'  slavery,  and  unredeemed  for  life.  Man  can  now 
'boast  of  nobler  birthright.  But,  though  lon^ 
'  banished  from  almost  all  Europe,  slavery  still 
'  lingers  in  Africa.  That  country  is  distinguish- 
'ed  above  every  other  as  the  land  of  slavery. 
'Slaves  at  home,  and  transported  for  slavery, 
'  the  poor  Africans,  the  descendants  of  Ham,  are 
'  the  servants  of  servants,  or  slaves  to  others. 
'  Yet  so  unlikely  was  this  fact  to  have  been  fore- 
'  seen  by  man,  that  for  centuries  after  the  close  of 
'  the  Old  Testament  histor^-^,  the  inhabitants  of 
'  Africa  disputed  with  the  Komans  the  empire  of 
*  the  world.  But  Hannibal,  who  was  once  almost 
'  master  of  Rome  and  of  Europe,  was  forced  to 
'yield  to,  and  to  own  the  fate  of  Carthage." 

I  have  here  read  from  Bishop  Tfewton,  Mat- 
thew Henry,  and  Keith,  men  of  high  standing, 
much  piety,  and  great  learning,  and  who  had  no 
interest  in  telling  a  lie,  or  publishing  that  which 
they  did  not  believe.  They  have  all  testified, 
positively  and  unequivocally,  that  the  prophecy 
was  by  inspiration  of  God  that  the  denuncia- 
tion upon  Ham  was  personal  servitude  or  slave- 
ry, and  that  it  has  been,  and  is  now  being  ful- 
filled, literally  and  certainly,  not  only  upon 
Ham  but  his  posterity,  and  that  the  promise  of 
blessing  to  Shem  anS  the  promise  of  enlarge- 
ment made  to  Japheth  have  also  been,  and  now 
are  being  fulfilled,  just  as  certainly  and  as  lite- 
rally as  the  curse  upon  Ham.  Sir,  they  all  tes- 
tify clearly,  explicitly,  and  positively,  the  place 
where,  the  time  when,  and  the  manner  in  which, 
the  curse  was  inflicted,  the  blessing  enjoyed,  and 
the  prophecy  fulfiledupon  them  and  their  whole 
posterity  up  to  the  present  time.  This,  sir, 
should  give,  to  this  part  of  God's  word,  a  just 
claim  on  every  man  for  his  faith.  This  prophe- 
cy and  its  literal  fulfillment  should  command 
tlie  confidence  and  credence  of  every  man  who 
loves  the  truth  and  who  takes  no  pleasure  in  un- 
righteousness. Now  sir,  what  next?  Some  are 
ready  perhaps  to  say  that  "this  may  do  pretty 
well;  out  can  you  show  that  Ham  was  black  or 
that  the  present  African  race  are  the  descendants 
of  Ham?"  I  think  if  you  will  hear  me  a  mo- 
ment this  will  at  least  seem  to  be  the  reasonable 
inference.  Now  read  the  9th  chapter  of  Gene- 
sis, 18th,  I9th,  and  20th  verses,  and  you  will  find 
what  has  been  already  stated,  that  Noah  had 
three  sons,  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth,  and  by 
them  was  all  the  earth  over  spread;  and  from  the 
context  and  all  histoir  it  appears  they  divided 
the  then  known  world  as  follows:  Shem  went 
into  Asia,  Japheth  into  Europe,  and  Ham  into 
Africa.  Africa  is  frequently  called  the  land  of 
Ham  in  the  sacred  scriptures.  Now  sir,  we  have 
the  foantains  let  us  see  if  we  can  follow  the 


streams.  You  know  then  the  blessing  was  to 
Shem— of  him  and  through  him  concerning  the 
flesh  was  salvation   or  the   Saviour  to  come. 

I  here  call  again  the  attention  of  tKe  house  to 
the  extracts  which  I  read  from  Newton,  page  20, 
ill  which  he  states,  that  nothing  can  be  more 
complete  than  the  execution  of  the  sentence  upon 
Ham  as  well  as  upon  Canaan — ^alluding  to  tlie 
curse  pronounced  by  Noah).  And  now  let  us  see 
the  promise  made  to  Shem  and  Japheth,  from 
which  it  appears,  that  God  preferred  Shem  to 
his  elder  brother  Japheth — as  he  did  Jacob  to 
Esau — and  from  Shem,  as  concerning  the  flesh, 
Christ  came,  (Rom.  9,  5.)  Now,  sir,  the  ques- 
tion is,  do  you  believe  this?  Do  you  believe,  as 
concerning  the  flesh,  Christ  came  through  Shem? 
This,  sir,  is  an  important  question,  and  has 
much  to  do  in  helping  us  to  form  a  correct  con- 
clusion in  the  investigation  of  this  great  subject. 
Do  yo.u  then  believe  it,  sir?  If  you  do,  why,  let 
me  ask  do  you  believe  it?  Surely  it  is  not  be- 
cause Christ  said  it  himself — for,  said  he.  If  I 
bear  witness  of  myself,  my  witness  will  be  of  no 
avail;  there  is  another  that  beareth  witness  of 
me.  Search  the  scriptures,  said  he,  to  the  unbe- 
lieving Jews,  for  in  them  you  think  you  have 
eternal  life,  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of 
me.  I  need  not  tneii  ask  you,  sir,  if  you  be- 
lieve Jesus  Christ,  the  son  of  God,  concerning 
the  flesh,  is  the  son  of  Shem.  This,  sir,  we  all 
acknowledge.  This  we  all  believe.  But  why 
dowe  believe  it,  is  the  great  que.stion  in  this  in- 
vestigation. 

Is  it  not,  sir,  from  reason,  revelation,  and  his- 
tory? Is  it  not  from  the  numerous  prophecies? 
made  in  ages  past  concerning  him,  and  their 
wonderful  and  literal  fulfilment?  Is  it  not  from 
reason,  revelation,  and  history,  that  you  have 
been  forced  to  this  conclusion?  I  ask  you,  sir, 
if  it  is  not  from  reason,  the  revelation  and  word 
of  God,  as  recorded  by  Moses,  declared  by  the 
prophets,  and  preached  by  the  apostles,  that 
you  have  been  driven,  irresistably,  to  this  con- 
clusion? If  so,  sir,  I  would  ask  you  if  it  was 
not  the  same  spirit  of  prophecy  that  proclaimed 
the  one,  that  declared  the  other?  If  it  v.as  not  the 
same  historian  that  recorded  the  one,  who  wrote 
the  other?  And  if,  sir,  it  is  not  the  same  reason 
that  understands  the  one  that  comprehends  the 
other?  AVliere  then,  sir,  is  the  diflerence?  It 
seems  to  me  there  is  none.  The  conclusion  is 
inevitable.     If  you  believe  that  Adam  existed, 

f'ou  must  believe  tliat  Noah  existed.  If  you  be- 
ieve  that  Noah  existed,  you  must  believe  that 
Moses,  and  John,  and  Jesus  existed.  And  if 
you  believe  that  Jesus  existed,  you  must  believe 
that  he  was  the  son  of  Shem.  And  if  you  be- 
lieve that  Jesus  was  the  son  of  Shem,  you  must 
believe  that  we  are  the  sons  of  Japheth,  and  if 
you  believe  we  are  the  sons  of  Japhetli,  you 
must  believe  that  the  Africans  are  the  sons  of 
Ham,  for  we  have  the  same  witness,  the  same 
testimony,  the  same  revelation  to  show,  the  same 
record  to  read,  tlie  same  reason  to  understand 
the  one  that  we  have  to  show,  to  read,  and  to 
understand  the  other. 

The  conclusion  therefore,  is  clear,  and  the 
question  established,  that  God  did,  for  purposes 
unrevealed,  and  unknown  to  man,  doom  Ham 
and  his  posterity  to  the  latest  generation,  to  per- 
sonal servitude  or  slavery,  and  that  too,  to  his 


IIQ 


brethren,  Shem  and  Japheth,  whose  children  \V'e 
are,  and  their  posterity.  If  this  be  true,  what 
follows?  Why,  in  vain  may  we  talk  about 
slavery,  or  the  abolition  of  slavery?  In  vain 
may  we  talk  about  slavery  in  this  state  or 
in  that  state.  In  vain  may  we  talk  about 
slavery  in  this  form  or  that  form.  It  will  all  be 
idle.  If  God  has  decreed,  it  will  be  so.  "What 
is  man,  that  he  can  resist  the  decrees  of  Jeho- 
vah? We  may  change  its  place,  but  we  cannot 
break  down  the  institution.  It  has  existed  in 
every  age  of  the  world  since  the  flood,  as  I  have 
shown.  And  it  has  been  incorporated  with  every 
dispensation  of  religion.  Patriarchal,  Jewish, 
and  Christian,  as  I  will  now  proceed  to  show. 
First  then  sir,  I  -will  refer  you  to  the  14th  Gen. 
14th  verse,  and  you  will  find  that  Abraham  the 
father  of  the  faithful  and  the  friend  of  God, 
had  318  servants  born  in  his  own  house,  reared 
by  his  OAvn  hand,  and  subject  to  his  absolute 
control,  in  war  as  well  as  in  peace.  This  sir; 
does  not  look  as  if  slavery  was  a  sin.  Go  a  lit- 
tle further,  and  what  do  we  find?  We  find 
Sarah  his  wife,  the  brightest,  the  purest,  and  best 
of  women,  fit  emblem  of  the  blessed  virgin,  as- 
sociated with  Abraham  in  this  matter.  This 
still  does  not  look  as  if  slaveiy  was  a  sin.  Go 
still  further,  and  we  find  the  angel  of  the  living 
God,  talking  to  Hagar,  who  had  run  away  from 
her  mistress  Sarah,  Abram's  wife.  And  what 
does  the  angel  of  the  Lord  say  to  Hagar?  Does 
he  tell  her  to  run  away  from  her  mistress?  Does 
he  tell  her  thatslavery  is  a  sin,  a  thing  abhorrent 
to  God,  a  great  moral  evil,  and  that  she  should 
not  be  held  in  bondage?  No  sir,  no  such  advice 
was  given,  no  such  principles  were  inculcated. 
He  told  her  to  go  back  to  her  mistress,  and  sub- 
mit to  her  will.  Just  here,  sir,  I  Avould  like  to 
indulge  the  idea  for  one  moment,  as  to  what 
would  have  been  tlie  advice  and  the  conduct  of  a 
northern  abolitionist  on  such  an  occasion — but  I 
will  forbear.  But  this,  Mr.  Chairman,  does  not 
still  look  as  if  slavery  was  such  a  great  outrage 
against  God  and  religion. 

[Here  Mr.  T.  remarked,  that  feeling  very  much 
indisposed,  having  been  so  for  several  days,  he 
would  be  obliged  to  waive  the  further  discus- 
sion of  the  subject  for  the  present.  He  had 
made  all  his  points,  and  the  elaboration  of  them 
he  should  perhaps  ask  the  indulgence  of  the 
committee  for  another  opportunity  to  present.] 

Mr.  CLARKE  moved  that  the  committee  rise 
and  report  progress,  and  ask  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  motion  prevailed,  and  the  committee  ac- 
cordingly rose  and  reported  progress. 

The  question  being  on  granting  leave  to  sit 
again. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  proposed  to  give  the 
committee  leave  to  sit  again  on  Monday  week. 
On  Monday  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
court  of  appeals,  would,  under  an  order  of  the 
committee,  come  up  for  consideration,  and  he 
was  exceedingly  anxious  it  should  be  then  ta- 
ken up,  progressed  in,  and  as  he  hoped,  fin- 
ished during  the  coming  week.  It  was  possible 
he  might  be  called  away  from  the  house  for  two 
or  three  days  the  week  after,  and  he  could  not 
very  well  leave  until  he  knew  what  disposition 
haabeen  made  of  the  report  of  the  committee  of 
which  he  was  chairman. 

Mr.  CLARKE.    I  submit  to  the  consideration 


of  the  house  whether  it  is  not  better,  as  we  have 
taken  up  this  subject  of  slavery,  that  we  should 

Erogress  with  its  discussion  until  it  shall  have 
een  gone  through  with.  If  we  waited  iintil 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  slavery  was  ta- 
ken up  we  should  have  to  go  over  the  very  same 
ground,  that  has  been  traveled  over  for  the  last 
three  or  four  days,  before  we  could  take  any 
ultimate  action  on  the  report.  Let  the  discussion 
now  proceed,  and  terminate,  and  when  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  does  come  up,  we  shall 
be  ready  for  decisive  action. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  desire  to 
discuss  it  myself,  but  it  is  not  yet  12  o'clock, 
and  I  perceive  indications  on  the  part  of  several 
gentlemen  around  me  of  a  desire  to  do  so.  I  do 
not  feel  disposed  to  withdraw  the  proposition  I 
have  made,  that  the  committee  have  leave  to  sit 
again  on  Monday  week.  In  the  meantime  we 
can  make  some  progress  in  another  branch  of 
the  subject,  and  one  which  is  not  less  important. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  committee  on  the  circuit 
courts  and  the  committee  on  the  county  courts  al- 
so, have  been  in  session  for  some  time,  and  there 
is  a  prospect  I  believe  of  harmonious  action  in 
regard  to  the  organization  of  those  courts.  I 
give  notice,  therefore,  that  on  Wednesday  next,  if 
the  subject  be  not  sooner  disposed  of,  I  shall 
move  that  the  convention  refuse  leave  to  the 
committee  to  sit  again,  and  that  the  resolutions 
be  laid  upon  the  table.  I  am  getting  very  tired 
of  this  discussion. 

Mr.  TURNER.  1  am  not  anxious  that  my 
resolutions  should  be  debated  to  the  exclusion  of 
other  business. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  My  desire  is  not  to  prevent 
the  discussion  of  the  gentleman's  resolutions, 
but  simply  to  make  an  order  of  business  for 
Wednesday. 

Mr.  TURNER.  A  great  deal  of  matter  has 
been  introduced  for  the  purpose  perhaps  of  get- 
ting up  a  little  ephemeral  popularity — which 
has  no  connection  with  the  subject.  All  that  I 
desire  is  to  have  an  opportunity  to  reply  to  the 
arguments  which  have  been  advanced  against 
my  proposition. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  However  much  I  may  be  op- 
posed to  the  principles  contained  in  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  neverthe- 
less as  far  as  I  understand  parliamentary  rules, 
and  the  rules  of  deconini,  it  is  due  to  the  gentle- 
man that  he  should  be  heard  in  defence  of  his 
Eropositioii,  tand  in  reply  to  the  arguments  that 
ave  been  adduced  against  it. 

If  the  proposition  indicated  by  the  gentleman 
from  Shelby  should  prevail,  I  do  not  know  what 
the  condition  of  other  gentlemen  in  this  conven 
tion  would  be,  but  as  far  as  I  am  concerned  it 
would  be  rather  an  awkward  one.  When  I  in- 
dicated the  other  day  that  I  intended  to  offer  a 
substitute  for  the  fifth  resolution,  I  accompanied 
the  intimation  with  some  declarations  of  senti- 
ments, which  have  since  been  animadverted  up- 
on; and  it  is  due  to  myself,  and  to  those  whom  I 
represent  on  this  floor  that  I  should  be  heard  in 
defence  of  those  sentiments.  Therefore  I  tnist 
the  house  will  entertain  the  motion  that  I  first 
made,  that  the  committee  have  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  subject  of  slavery  is  one  which  deeply 
interests  tlie  whole  of  tne  people  of  tliis  state; 
and  not  the  people  of  this  state  only,  but  the 


Ill 


whole  of  the  peopleof  this  union  have  been  exci- 
ted more  or  less  upon  the  subject.  It  is  a  subject, 
sir,  that  ought  to  oe  discussed;  and  so  far  as  the 

f  reposition  which  I  have  indicated  is  concerned, 
desire  to  discuss  it;  and  I  hope,  therefore,  that 
the  committee  will  have  leave  to  sit  again  on 
Monday  next. 

The  question  being  taken  first  on  the  motion 
of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  that  the  commit- 
tee have  leave  to  sit  again  on  Monday  week,  it 
was,  upon  a  division, negatived;  ayes  21, nays  49. 

The  question  then  being  upon  the  motion  of 
the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  that  the  committee 
have  leave  to  sit  again,  it  was  agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  OCTOBER  15,  1349.| 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Laxcastee,  of  the  Cath- 
olic church. 

EEPOET    FROM    A   COlOaTTEE. 

Mr.  TURNER,  from  the  committee  on  the  ex- 
ecutive and  ministerial  offices,  for  counties  and 
districts,  made  the  following  report: 

ARTICLE  — . 
Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  elected  a  common- 
wealth's attorney  for  each  circuit,  and  a  circuit 
court  clerk  for  each  county,  whose  term  of  office 
shall  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  circuit  judges;  a 
county  court  attorney,  clerk,  sur%-eyor,  coroner, 
and  jailer,  for  each  county,  whose  terra  of  office 
shall  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  presiding  judge 
of  the  county  court. 

Sec.  2.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  offi- 
ces mentioned  in  tliis  article  who  is  not,  at  the 
time,  twenty  four  years  old,  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  and  who  has  not  resided  two  years 
next  preceding  the  election,  in  the  state,  and 
one  year  in  the  county  or  district  in  which  he 
offers  his  services.  No  person  shall  be  eli- 
gible to  the  office  of  commonwealth  or  county 
attorney,  unless  he  shall  have  been  a  licensed 
practicing  attorney  for  two  years.  No  person 
shall  be  elected  clerk  unless  he  shall  have  pro- 
cured from  the  court  of  appeals  a  certificate  that 
he  has  been  examined  by  their  clerk,  under  their 
supervision,  and  that  he  is  qualified  for  the  of- 
fice for  which  he  is  a  candidate.  But  the  office 
of  sheriff  or  constable  may  be  filled  by  persons 
who  have  attained  the  age  of  twenty  one  years. 
Sec.  3.  The  commonwealth's  attorney  and 
circuit  court  clerk  shall  be  elected  at  the  same 
time,  and  in  the  same  manner  as  the  circuit 
judge.  The  county  attorney,  clerk,  surveyor, 
coroner,  and  jailer,  shall  be  elected  at  the  same 
time,  and  in  the  same  manner,  as  the  presiding 
judge  of  the  county  court. 

Sec.  4.  Sheriffs  shall  be  elected  in  each  county, 
at  the  same  time  and  manner  that  associate  judges 
of  the  county  court  are  elected,  whose  term  of 
office  shall  be  two  years,  and  they  shall  be  re- 
eligible  for  a  second  term;  but  no  sheriff,  or  dep- 
uty, who  qualified  under  him,  shall,  after  the 
expiration  of  the  second  terra,  be  re-eligible  for 
the  succeeding  term. 

Sec  5.  A  constable  shall  be  elected  in  every 
justice's  district,  who  shall  be  chosen  at  the 


same  time,  in  the  same  manner,  and  for  the  same 
term,  that  justices  of  the  peace  are  elected.  He 
may  execute  the  duties  of  his  office  in  any  part 
of  the  county  in  which  he  resides. 

Sec.  6.  Officers  for  towns  and  cities  shall  be 
elected  for  such  terms,  and  in  such  manner,  and 
with  such  qualifications,  as  may  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

Sec.  7.  Vacancies  in  offices  under  this  article, 
shall  be  filled,  until  the  next  ensuing  election, 
in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  may  provide. 

Sec.  8.  All  officers  provided  for  in  this  arti- 
cle, shall  reside  in  their  respective  counties  or 
districts,  during  their  continuance  in  office. 

Sec.  9.  Clerks  shall  be  removable  by  the  appel- 
late court,  only  for  breach  of  good  behavior; 
which  court  shall  be  judges  of  law  and  fact. 
Other  officers,  whose  removal  from  office  is  not 
provided  for  in  this  constitution,  shall  be  remov- 
ed in  such  manner  as  shall  be  prescribed  by 
law. 

Sec.  10.  When  a  new  county  shall  be  erected, 
officers  for  the  same,  to  serve  until  the  next  sta- 
t<jd  election,  shall  be  elected  or  "appointed  in 
such  way,  and  at  such  times,  as  the  legislature 
may  prescribe. 

Sec.  11.  Clerks,  sheriffs,  surveyors,  coroners, 
and  jailers,  shall,  before  they  enter  upon  the  du- 
ties of  their  respective  offices,  and  as  often  there- 
after as  may  be  deemed  proper,  give  such  bond 
and  security  as  shall  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Sec.  12.  The  legislature  may  provide  for  the 
appointment  of  such  other  county  or  district 
ministerial  and  executive  officers  as  shall,  from 
time  to  time,  be  necessary  and  proper. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  report  is  the  result  of 
the  deliberations  of  a  majority  of  the  commit- 
tee of  which  I  have  the  honor  to  be  chairman.  I 
did  not  myself  nor  did  other  members  of  the 
committee  concur  in  all  these  provisions.  I 
think  that  there  are  several  little  officers  that 
might  as  well  be  appointed  without  the  trouble 
of  going  through  an  election;  but  in.  this,  one 
member,  and  there  were  probably  others,  did 
not  concur,  because  they  believed  that  the  peo- 
ple ought  to  have  unlimited  power,  without  any 
restriction  as  to  age  or  anything  else,  to  select 
their  officers.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  report  is 
rather  incidental,  and  runs  into  both  circuit 
and  county  courts,  and  it  will  not  therefore,  be 
expedient  for  us  to  act  upon  it,  until  the  reports 
of  those  two  other  committees  should  come  in. 
I  move  therefore,  that  it  be  printed  and  sent  to 
the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  I  will  at  some 
future  day,  fix  upon  a  time  for  taking  it  up. 

It  was  referred  and  ordered  to  be  printed  ac- 
cordingly. 

RESOLITIOXS    OF   INQriBT. 

Mr.  JAMES  offered  the  following,  and  it  was 
agreed  to: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  miscellane- 
ous provisions  be  instructed  to  inouire  into  the 
expediency  and  propriety  of  amenaing  the  con- 
stitution, so  as  to  prohibit  the  legislature  from 
passing  any  law  which  shall  suspend  or  alter 
anv  of  the  legal  or  equitable  remedies  for  the 
collection  of  debts  and  the  enforcement  of  con- 
tracts, so  as  to  operate  retrospectively. 

Mr.  W.  N.  MARSHALL  offered  the  following, 
and  it  was  agreed  to: 


112 


Resolved,  That  tlie  committee  on  miscellane- 
ous provisions  be  instructed  to  inquire  into  the 
propriety  of  incorporating  into  the  new  consti- 
tution, a  clause  exempting  from  execution,  to 
each  hona  fide  occupant  of  land,  a  homestead 
of  from  fifty  to  one  hundred  acres,  not  to  exceed 
in  value,  the  sum  of  $500,  and  not  to  affect  any 
debt  created  before  the  new  constitution  goes  in- 
to operation. 

CHANGE   OF  KEFEEENCE. 

Mr.  RITDD  called  the  attention  of  the  conven- 
tion to  the  fact,  that  some  days  ago  he  offered  a 
resolution  concerning  cities,  towns,  and  counties, 
which  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  le- 
gislative department.  He  had  since  ascertained 
that  that  committee  thought  it  did  not  come 
Avithin  their  province;  and  hence  he  now  moved 
that  the  committee  on  the  legislative  department 
be  discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of 
the  subject,  and  that  it  be  referred  to  the  select 
committee  on  the  public  debt,  of  wliich  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin,)  was  chair- 
man. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

SLAVERY. 

Mr.  DIXON"  offered  the  following: 

Whereas,  The  right  of  the  citizen  to  be  se- 
cure in  his  person  and  property  is  not  only  guar- 
antied by  all  free  governments,  but  lies  at  the 
very  foundation  of  them:  and  whereas,  the  pow- 
ers derived  to  this  convention  immediately  and 
collectively  are  directly  from  the  people,  and  al- 
though not  expressed  are  implied,  and  that 
among  these  is  the  power  so  to  change  the  exist- 
ing constitution  of  the  state  as  to  afford  a  more 
ample  protection  to  the  civil  and  religious  rights 
of  the  citizen,  but  not  to  destroy  them:  and 
whereas,  the  slaves  of  the  citizens  of  this  com- 
monwealth are  property,  both  those  that  are  now 
in  esse  and  those  hereafter  born  of  mothers  who 
may  be  slaves  at  the  time  of  such  birth.  There- 
fore, 

Resolved,  That  this  convention  has  not  the 
power  or  right,  by  any  principle  it  may  incor- 
porate into  the  constitution  of  the  state,  to  de- 
prive the  citizen  of  his  property  without  his 
consent,  unless  it  be  for  the  public  good,  and  on- 
ly then  by  making  to  him  a  just  compensation 
therefor. 

Mr.  DIXON".  My  object  in  offering  this  reso- 
lution, is  to  call  directly  the  attention  of  the 
convention  to  the  great  and  important  principle 
that  is  embodied  in  it;  I  mean  the  right  of  a  bare 
majority  of  tliis  convention,  either  as  it  is  now 
constituted,  or  in  any  otlier  form  in  which  that 
majority  can  possibly  constitute  itself,  to  take 
from  the  citizen  the  property  which  belongs 
to  him,  without  making  any  compensation 
therefor.  That  is  the  great  question  which  I 
■want  to  present  for  the  consideration  of  the 
convention,  and  of  the  people  of  Kentucky;  and 
it  is  a  question  upon  which  doubts  are  entertain- 
ed by  many  persons,  which  doubts  ought  to  be 
set  at  rest  oy  the  actimi  of  the  convention.  I 
hold  it  to  be  a  principle  that  cannot  be  contro- 
verted, that  every  citizen  has  rights  in  every 
well  organized  community,  under  a  free  govern- 
ment, which  he  cannot  be  deprived  of  unless  by 
revolution  or  by  actual  force.  I  maintain  that 
the  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  government. 


and  on  the  part  of  the  governed  is  mutual ;  that 
whilst  the  governed  have  a  right  to  demand  pro- 
tection, the  government  lias  a  right  to  demand 
obedience.  It  is  a  mutual  agreement  that  can- 
not be  violated  by  either  party.  The  citizen 
cannot  violate  it,  nor  can  the  government  vi- 
olate it.  The  principle  embraced  in  the  res- 
olution, lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  soci- 
ety, that  the  right  of  the  citizen — the  right 
which  is  secured  to  him,  which  is  admitted  to 
belong  to  him,  the  right  of  property  and  of  lib- 
erty— cannot  be  taken  away  from  him  by  the  gov- 
ernment. That  riglit  I  say.  lies  at  the  foundation 
of  society,  and  is  independent  of  the  organic 
law  of  the  country,  is  independent  of  municipal 
regulations,  of  statute  law,  or  of  any  thing 
which  may  have  been  agreed  upon  by  the  state 
for  the  governance  of  her  citizens.  It  is  an  ori- 
ginal element,  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  all 
society. 

I  desire  more  particularly  to  explain  my 
views  on  the  subject,  by  reading  from  the  first 
volume  of  Blackstone's  commentaries,  a  passage 
which  clearly  points  out  and  sustains  the  prin- 
ciple, which  is  essential  in  this  resolution. 

•' Though  society  had  not  its  formal  begin- 
'  nin^  from  any  convention  of  individuals,  aetu- 
'  ated  by  their  wants  and  their  fears;  yet  it  is  the 
'  sense  of  their  weakness  and  imperfection  that 
'  keeps  mankind  together,  that  demonstrates 
'the  necessity  of  this  union,  and  that  there- 
'  fore  is  the  solid  and  natural  foundation,  as  well 
'as  the  cement  of  civil  society.  And  this  is 
'  what  we  mean  by  the  original  contract  of  socie- 
'  ty,  which,  though  perhaps  in  no  instance  it  has 
'  ever  been  formally  expressed  at  the'  first  insti- 
'  tution  of  a  state,  yet  in  nature  and  reason  must 
'always  be  understood  and  implied  in  the  very 
'  act  of  associating  together:  namely,  that  the 
'whole  should  protect  all  its  parts,  and  that 
'  every  part  should  pay  obedience  to  the  will  of 
'  the  whole;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  commu- 
'  nity  should  guard  the  rights  of  each  individual 
*  member,  and  that  (in  return  for  this  protection) 
'  each  individual  should  submit  to  the  laws  of 
'the  community;  without  which  submission  of 
'  all  it  was  impossible  that  protection  could  be 
'  certainly  extended  to  any." 

There  is  the  sum  and  substance  of  the  whole 
thing.  This  is  the  commencement  of  society, 
that  the  whole  should  protect  all  its  parts,  and 
that  the  parts  should  pay  obedience  to  the  whole. 

JEere  was  a  mutual  compact  existing  before 
this  convention  was  formed.  "Wlien  it  was  de- 
termined to  send  delegates  to  this  convention  to 
form  an  organic  law  for  the  state,  this  principle 
lay  at  the  very  bottom  of  llie  action  of  the  peo- 
ple; that  the  government  should  protect  the 
rights  of  individuals,  whilst  individuals  are 
bound  to  render  obedience  to  the  government. 
The  great  principle  embraced  in  the  resolution 
which  I  have  offered  is,  that  it  is  the  right  of 
the  citizens  of  every  free  government,  to  be  se- 
cure in  their  persons  and  property,  and  that  this 
right  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  society  it- 
self, and  constitutes  the  very  elements  of  it;  that 
this  convention  has  been  assembled  witli  pow- 
ers delegated  from  the  people  themselves,  and 
that  those  powers,  though  not  expressed,  are 
nevertheless  limited  in  their  character,  and  that 
the  coDvcution  is  expected  to  protect  those  great 


113 


Tights,  which  lie  at  the  fonndation  of  society 
and  uot  destroy  them. 

Then  I  assert  another  proposition,  that  slaves 
are  property,  as  vrcll  those  now  in  existence,  as 
those  vrho  may  be  bom  hereafter  of  mothers, 
who  at  the  time  of  birth  are  slaves;  and  I  main- 
tain that  a  bare  majority  of  the  convention,  nay 
that  the  whole  of  the  convention  has  not  power 
to  take  from  the  citizen  his  property,  without 
his  consent,  or  without  making  him  compensa- 
tion for  it.  2fot  that  the  legislature  shall  not 
have  power,  but  this  convention,  this  assem- 
blage of  the  sovereign  of  the  state,  is  limited  in 
its  power,  is  controlled  by  the  great  principle 
which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  society — ^by  that 
great  principle,  which  when  it  is  lost  sight  of, 
sinkd  the  people  into  the  condition  of  slaves. 

I  have  presented  this  resolution,  because  I  de- 
sire to  call  the  attention  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky to  it.  I  have  proposed  it,  because  I  am 
myself  utterly  opposed  to  surrendering  into  the 
hands  of  this  convention,  or  any  other  conven- 
tion hereafter  to  be  assembled,  the  right  to  seize 
upon  private  property  and  appropriate  it  as  the 
convention  may  thin^  proper,  without  regard  to 
the  public  good.  And  finally,  when  the  public 
good  demands  it,  I  insist  upon  it  that  it  cannot 
be  taken  unless  compensation  be  made  for  it- 

I  do  not  mean  to  discuss  the  question  now, 
nor  do  I  know  that  I  shall  discuss  it  at  all.  I 
will  move,  however,  that  the  resolution  be  print- 
ed and  that  it  be  referred  to  the  committee  of 
the  whole,  because  it  contains  an  important 
principle,  with  the  view  of  giving  to  my  hon- 
orable friends  who  may  wish  to  discuss  the  ques- 
tion, an  opportunity  of  turning  their  attention 
particularly  to  it. 

Mr.  TURXER.    I  do  not  know  that  the  reso- 
lution should  be   printed  and  referred  to  the 
committee  of  the  whole.    I  suppose  every  mem-  j 
ber  of  the  convention  is  in  favor  of  the  proposi-  j 
tion  contained  in  the  resolution.    I  do  not  think  i 
there  can  be  a  doubt  on  the  part  of  any  deleo^ate 
as  regards  the  correctness  of  the  sentiments  laid 
down  in  it.    It  is  a  proposition,  I  thinK,  about 
which  there  can  be  no  doubt,  either  on  the  part 
of  members  of  the  convention  or  of  those  wJio 
sent  us  here. 

[  Mr.TALBOTT.    I  hope  the  gentleman  from 

Madison  will  withdraw  his  opposition  to  the 
printing  of  the  resolution.  I  do  not  believe  there 
18  a  subject  in  the  world  the  discussion  of  which 
is  so  well  calculated  to  enlighten  the  convention 
and  the  country  as  that  contained  in  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Henderson.  I  want 
to  obtain  information  in  regard  to  it.  I  know 
there  are  thousands,  and  tens  of  thousands  of 
people  in  this  state,  who  dispute  the  proposi- 
tion, and  I  want  light  upon  the  subject.  I  do 
hope  the  resolution  will  be  referred  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  I  understand  the  resolution 
to  be  nothing  more  nor  less  than  this,  that  the 
convention  has  not  the  power,  under  any  state  of 
things,  to  emancipate  the  slaves.  For  one,  I 
maintain  that  they  have  this  power. 

Mr.  DIXOX".     The  gentleman  will  see  that  he 

is  mistaken,  if  he  will  examine  the  resolution. 

It  asserts  this  principle,  that  it  is  in  the  power 

of  tJiiis  convention,  to  take  the  property  of  the 

15 


citizen,  when  tlie  public  good  requires  it,  bat 
that  it  must  compensate  the  owner  therefor. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  real  meaning  is,  that  we 
have  not  the  power  to  emancipate  the  slaves  that 
we  have  now  in  existence,  nor  to  emancipate 
them  in  prospective.  We  have  that  power  if 
we  pay  the  owner  for  his  property.  I  agree 
with  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  that  it 
should  not  be  done.  I  will  not  consent  to  do  it; 
but  we  have  the  power  to  do  it.    We  have  the 

Eower  to  do  any  thing  that  a  nation  can  do,  un- 
jss  forbid  by  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States  and  the  laws  of  Congress  made  in  pursu- 
ance of  it,  and  treaties  made  by  the  United  States 
in  pursuance  of  the  treaty-making  power. — 
There  is  no  restraint  upon  us  except  so  far  as  re- 
gards these,  and  if  it  were  not  for  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  we  might  declare  any 
gentleman  of  this  convention  King  or  Emperor 
to-morrow,  and  he  would  be  King  or  Emperor 
until  the  people  saw  fit  to  dethrone  him,  which 
I  suppose  they  would  do  very  quickly.  Well, 
can  we  not  set  the  negroes  free  if  we  choose?  I 
shoidd  think  so,  compensation  or  no  compensa- 
tion, those  now  in  existence,  or  those  hereafter 
to  be  bom.  But  I  deny  the  policy  of  doing  so. 
I  agree  with  the  gentleman.  I  am  against  set- 
ting them  free,  but  I  do  not  want  to  pass  a  reso- 
lution declaring  that  we  have  not  the  power  to 
do  it.  I  hope  the  resolution  will  be  deferred, 
and  when  we  come  to  the  time  for  action  on  the 
subject  I  would  give  all  such  resolutions  a  hand- 
some go-bye,  by  laying  them  upon  the  table  and 
refusing  to  act  upon  them.  That  is  what  I 
should  call  a  handsome  berth  for  them,  and  I 
hope  it  will  be  given  to  them.  It  is  well  to  cor- 
rect the  views  of  all  the  gentlemen  of  this  con- 
vention in  regard  to  this  subject;  but  I  do  not 
think  it  would  be  expedient  to  take  any  action 
upon  it. 

While  I  am  up  I  wiU  only  further  remark, 
that  we  came  here  with  a  view  of  making  three 
or  four  essential  changes  in  our  organic  law. — 
One  is,  to  take  the  appointing  power  from  the 
executive  and  give  it  to  the  people;  and  another 
is,  to  destroy  the  life  tenure  of  office,  because 
the  holders  of  office  for  life,  or  during  good  be- 
havior, are  virtually  under  no  responsibility 
whatever,  the  tenure  of  their  office  being  in  the 
nature  of  a  life  estate;  for,  as  Jefferson  well  said, 
"they  never  resign,  and  scarcely  ever  die." — 
Another  object  is,  to  make  the  holders  of  office 
more  immediately  responsible  to  the  people; 
and  another  object — one  which  I  had  particular- 
ly in  view,  though  I  don't  know  how  it  is  with 
other  gentlemen — was  to  prevent  the  state  from 
contracting  any  more  of  those  enormous  debts 
which  we  have  been  in  the  habit  of  doing. — 
And  when  we  have  done  this,  we  shall  have  at- 
tained the  great  object  for  which  we  have  assem- 
bled. I  hope  we  shall  do  it  in  the  best  possible 
way.  I  recollect  hearing  an  anecdote,  thirty 
years  ago,  of  a  poor  man  going  to  buy  a  hun- 
dred acres  of  land  from  a  land  speculator,  who 
declared  that  he  had  an  excellent  title,  and 
produced,  as  the  evidence  of  his  title,  a  record 
against  the  unknown  heirs  of  A.,  and  a  record 
against  the  unknown  heirs  of  B.,  and  was  pro- 
ceeding to  produce  other  evidences  of  titl^  of 
the  same  character,  when  the  buyer  said,  "no 
doubt  yotir  title  is  a  good  one,  but  there  is  so 


114 


muchjrf-rtT-i-sltall  never  be  able  to  read  it,"  and 
he  declined  making  the  purchase.  Now,  I  can- 
not agree  with  the  gentleman  that  we  ought  to 
declare  that  we  have  not  the  power  to  make  such 
disposition  of  this  subject  as  we  please.  There 
is  a  wide  difference  between  having  the  power, 
and  considering  it  expedient  to  exercise  it.  We 
may  incorporate,  if  we  choose,  the  law  of  1833 
into  the  new  constitution,  but  it  shall  not  be 
done  with  my  consent,  and  I  presume  tliere  are 
not  twenty  delegates  in  this  house  who  desire 
that  it  shall  be  done.  We  have  ample  power, 
but  we  are  not  going  to  exercise  it.  I  hope  that 
tlie  convention  will  give  to  this  resolution  the 
destination  which  my  honorable  friend  proposes, 
and  that  we  shall  hear  the  sentiments  of  dele- 
gates upon  the  subjects  embraced  in  it.  But  I 
want  to  adopt  no  negative  declaration  as  to  our 
power. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  If  I  rightly  understood  the 
resolution,  it  does  not  bear  the  interpretation 
which  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  puts  upon  it. 
I  was  very  glad  to  see  the  resolution  introduced 
by  the  gentleman  from  Henderson.  It  embodies, 
in  effect,  the  same  idea  which  is  contained  in  a 
part  of  the  report  of  the  committee,  and  which 
will  naturally  come  up  for  consideration  in  the 
report  itself.  I  understand  the  resolution  as  as- 
serting two  principles.  One  is,  the  declaration 
that  we  came  here  under  an  implied  understana- 
ing,  that  we  would  not  violate  the  rights  of  per- 
sons or  of  property,  and  with  the  implied  undei-- 
standing  between  the  people  who  elected  the  del- 
egates to  this  convention  and  those  delegates, 
that  the  rights  of  property  should  remain  un- 
disturbed. 

There  is  another  principle  asserted  in  the  reso- 
lution, and  it  is,  that  this  convention  has  no 
power  whatever  to  pass  a  post  nati  law,  or  any 
constitutional  provision  for  freeing  the  children 
to  be  bom  hereafter,  descendants  of  the  slaves. 
I  do  not  believe  that  this  house  is  willing  to  ac- 
cord to  the  proposition  that  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky has  the  right  to  exercise  such  a  power. 
I  do  not  believe  myself  that  we  are  in  a  state  of 
revolution.  I  do  not  believe  myself  that  full 
and  plenary  power  is  possessed  by  this  house. 
I  do  not  believe  that  we  came  here  with  all  the 
powers  of  sovereignty.  I  do  not  believe,  but  if 
this  house  consisted  of  one  hundred  and  fifty 
delegates  instead  of  one  hundred,  we  could  come 
here  as  a  legally  constituted  convention.  I  be- 
lieve we  were  called  here  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  constitution,  which  provides 
for  its  amendment,  which  stipulates  that  it  should 
be  done  in  a  certain  manner,  and  that  when  we 
do  come  together  for  that  purpose,  we  are  not  in 
a  state  of  revolution,  not  at  liberty  to  carry  pow- 
er to  the  extreme  limit  which  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  seems  to  think;  but  that  wo  do 
come  here  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the 
views  of  the  people,  under  the  implied  obliga- 
tion which  is  set  forth  in  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson. 

There  was  no  principle  more  strongly  argued 
than  the  one  which  asserted  that  there  should  be 
a  provision  inserted  in  the  constitution  which 
we  are  about  to  form,  which  would  provide  for 
the  future  emancipation  of  slaves.  Tliey  de- 
clared that  we  should  insert  in  the  constitution, 
either  a  provision  that  would  permit  the  eman- 


cipation of  the  slaves  now,  or  a  provision  for 
their  gradual  emancipation.  I  do  not  know 
whether  any  gentleman  in  this  convention  en- 
tertains such  an  opinion.  I  understand  there 
are  one  or  two  who  do;  but  I  know  that  twelve 
or  fifteen  thousand  votes  Avtie  cast  in  the  state, 
asserting  that  they  believed  in  the  existence  of 
the  right  to  do  so.  There  are  as  many  as  fifteen 
thousand  persons  in  the  state  then,  who  do  not 
think  that  such  a  provision  will  be  altogether 
useless,  and  who  would  consequently  be  opposed 
to  inserting  in  the  constitution  a  provision  de- 
claring that  the  slaves  should  not  be  manumit- 
ted, without  a  compensation  being  paid  to  their 
owners.  I  recollect  reading  with  a  great  deal  of 
interest  the  speech  of  a  distinguished  gentleman 
of  this  state  (Judge  Underwood,)  regarding  the 
emancipation  of  the  slaves,  in  which  he  ad- 
vanced the  opinion  that  we  should  insert  such  a 
feature.  But  he  afterwards  receded  somewliat 
from  that  position.  We  know,  however,  this 
fact,  that  some  twelve  or  fifteen  thousand  of  the 
people  of  this  state  believe  that  such  a  feature 
should  be  inserted.  I  do  not  believe  that  it  can 
be  justly  done.  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  and  I  believe  there  is  no  man  within  the 
sound  of  my  voice  who  will  maintain  that 
private  property,  other  than  slaves,  can  be  taken 
without  compensation;  but  we  all  know  that 
there  has  been  one  constant  clamor  from  the  north 
asserting  that  slaves  are  not  property.  I  have 
heard  it  asserted  in  Louisville  that  man  could 
have  no  property  in  man.  I  have  found  an  opin- 
ion prevailing  throughout  the  countiy  to  a  great 
extent  to  the  same  effect.  The  whole  mind  of 
the  country  in  fact  is  directed  to  this  question. 
It  may  not  be  the  ease  in  this  house,  but  a  differ- 
ence of  opinion  does  prevail  in  the  country,  and 
the  question  should  therefore  be  met;  it  should  be 
considered  and  determined.  What  do  they  sav? 
That  slaves  are  not  like  other  property,  but  that 
they  are  property  sui  generis.  The  State  of  New 
York  passed  anti-slavery  laws,  and  I  have  yet 
to  learn,  that  she  had  no  right  to  pass  such 
laws,  though  she  did  it  under  no  constitution- 
al sanction.  Her  example  was  followed  by 
other  states,  and  if  we  let  this  constitution  go 
out  without  some  such  provision,  may  it  not 
be  subject  to  judicial  enquiiy  whether  subse- 
quent action  of  the  legislature  can  control  this 
property. 

In  February  last,  in  conversations  with  pro- 
slavery  men,  they  declared  that  the  present  con- 
stitution contained  a  guarantee  for  the  continu- 
ance of  slavery  in  reference  to  existing  slaVes; 
but  they  seemed  to  yield  the  point  that  it  would 
be  just  and  proper,  and  no  invasion  of  right  if 
a  provision  were  inserted  for  the  emancipation 
of  those  who  are  not  now  in  esse.  As  the  mat- 
ter was  discussed,  the  question  began  to  assume 
a  different  aspect,  the  people  began  to  regard  the 
increase  of  slave  property  in  the  same  light  as 
the  increase  of  real  estate;  and  they  began  to  be 
of  opinion  that  the  convention  had  no  more 
right  to  declare  that  the  offspring  of  slaves 
should  be  free,  than  tliey  had  to  declare  that  the 

firofits  of  real  estate,  or  of  stocks  should  not  be- 
ong  to  the  owners  of  such  property.  I  know 
there  are  individuals  who  are  averse  to  the  dis- 
cussion which  the  emancipationists  have  raised 
in  Kentucky.    I  know  it  is  a  prevalent  opinion 


115 


that  you  can  no  more  take  away  the  future 
bom  children  of  slaves  from  their  owners,  than 
you  can  the  existing  slaves.  But  we  are  a  tran- 
sient body,  we  shdl  pass  away,  and  if  we  ad- 
journ without  the  expression  of  our  opinion,  all 
traces  of  the  opinions  we  entertain  will  pass  away 
with  us.  They  will  endure  onlv  so  long  as  the 
minds  which  entertain  them.  I  agree  therefore 
with  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  that  we 
should  leave  an  imperishable  record  of  the  great 
truth,  that  the  great  barriere  which  are  thrown 
around  other  property  apply  equally  to  our 
slaves;  and  the  expression  should  go  forth  to  the 
country,  that  it  not  only  applies  to  slaves  now 
in  existence,  but  that  it  equally  applies  to  those 
who  shall  be  bom  of  slaves  hereafter.  I  see  no 
inutility  about  it.  On  the  contrary,  I  see  great 
utility.  I  have  heard  other  matters  that  are  cer- 
tainly not  so  pertinent,  discussed  with  much 
ability  in  this  house.  I  do  not  regard  it  as  use- 
less; I  regard  it  as  a  cardinal  hinge  on  which 
the  decision  of  this  question  is  to  turn  hereafter. 
There  is  no  gentleman  within  the  sound  of  my 
voice,  but  will  recollect  that  when  this  point  was 
pressed  by  the  emancipationists  it  was  the  great- 
est difldculty  presented. 

I  certainly  have  shown  no  disposition  to 
trespass  on  the  patience  of  the  house.  Among 
the  youngest  members  in  it,  I  shall  never  speak 
unless  when  I  consider  there  is  a  great  and  im- 
portant principle  at  issue.  I  have  great  respect 
for  the  opinions  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
but  I  have  perceived  within  the  last  week, 
that  there  have  been  questions  discussed,  that 
are  of  less  importance  than  this.  It  will  natu- 
rally come  up  in  the  report  of  the  committee  on 
Slavery,  a  report  to  which  I  have  many  objec- 
tions. '  That  report  provides  that  the  free  ne- 
groes, who  are  at  present  within  the  state,  are  to 
be  torn  from  their  homes,  and  sent  away,  as  I  be- 
lieve against  law  and  right.  By  adopting  this, 
we  adopt  a  provision  that  involves  in  it  inhu- 
manity; one  which  involves  a  proposition  that 
every  one  who  advocated  the  pro-slavery  cause 
found  the  strongest  he  could  use,  for  I  main- 
tain that  there  is  no  argument  that  the  people 
listen  to  with  more  sympathy  than  the  declara- 
tion that  by  the  contemplate<i  scheme  of  eman- 
cipation, if  they  could  carry  it  out,  a  hundred 
thousand  human  beings  would  be  torn  from 
their  homes  and  landed  upon  a  distant  and  in- 
hospitable shore.  If  there  was  one  argument 
which  pressed  harder  than  another,  against  the 
emancipation  party,  it  was  this.  I  myself  feel  a 
deep  and  vivid  interest  in  it.  I  believe  the 
principle  is  acardinal  one,  and  I  believe  it  should 
be  distinctly  understood  and  declared  by  this 
house,  that  private  property  shall  not  be  taken, 
without  full  compensation  being  made  to  the 
owner.  I  think  we  ought  to  assert  the  princi- 
ple distinctly,  and  that  we  should  declare  that 
it  extends  to  slaves,  and  not  only  to  the  slaves 
who  are  now  in  esse,  but  to  the  descendants  of 
those  slaves.  That  is  the  principle,  as  I  under- 
stand it,  for  which  the  gentleman  from  Henderson 
contends.  So  far  as  power  to  act  upon  the  subject  is 
concerned,  I  do  not  understand  the  resolution  of 
the  gentleman  as  doing  more  than  conveying  the 
idea,  that  there  is  an  implied  understanding  that 
the  right  to  private  property  shall  not  be  violated, 
and  that   understAuding  becomes  a  motiva  to 


strong  as  to  govern  the  exercise  of  power  by  this 
convention,  that  they  will  not  violate  that  class 
of  property,  but  that  they  will  provide  for  its 
future  protection.  If  I  understand  the  gen- 
tleman aright  I  will  support  him  in  it. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  The  gentleman  certainly  un- 
derstands mv  position,  at  least  in  part.  I  assert 
two  propositions;  first,  that  according  to  the 
original  contract  between  the  members  of  socie- 
ty, the  whole  have  a  right  to  govern  the  individ- 
ual members  of  the  society;  but  they  have  a 
right  to  do  it  on  this  condition,  that  they  do  not 
violate  the  rights  of  individual  members  of  the 
society.  That  is  one  proposition  which  I  assert. 
The  next  proposition  is  this;  that  the  powers  of 
this  convention,  a  body  which  is  the  represen- 
tative of  that  society,  and  whose  powers  are 
derived  from  that  society,  are  limited  by  the  im- 
plied understanding  existing  betwixt  the  mem- 
bers of  that  society,  which  constituted  this 
body,  to  the  extent  that  this  body  would  not  vi- 
olate the  original  understanding  betwixt  the 
members  of  the  society  and  the  community 
composed  thereof.  It  was,  that  the  whole 
might  govern  the  individual  members,  but  with 
the  express  understanding  that  they  should  not 
deprive  the  individual  members  of  those  rights 
to  which  they  were  entitled.  Therefore  the  res- 
olution goes  to  the  extent  that  the  power  does 
not  exist  in  this  convention,  because  whatever 
powers  it  possesses,  the  resolution  insists  upon 
it,  are  derivative,  and  that  we  ought  not  to 
transcend  those  powers.  The  powers  possessed 
by  this  convention  therefore,  do  not  go  to  the 
extent  of  violating  that  principle. and  if  weassert 
it  here  by  any  act  of  ours,  it  will  be  in  violation  of 
what  I  believe  to  be  the  original  contract  between 
the  people  and  their  representatives.  That  is  the 
proposition,  that  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  the  con- 
vention to  take  .iway  private  property  without 
compensation  being  made  therefor;  that  slaves 
are  private  property,  and  that  the  rule  applies 
as  well  to  them  as  to  any  other  property,  and 
applies  as  well  to  future  bom  slaves,  as  to  slaves 
at  present  in  existence. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  understand  the  main  part 
of  the  gentleman's  resolution.  Its  practical 
bearing  as  I  conceive  is,  to  have  an  expression  of 
this  convention  that  they  will  not,  in  the  consti- 
tution which  we  are  about  to  form  violate  either 
the  right  of  property  in  slaves,  as  it  now  exists, 
or  the  right  of  property  in  those  hereafter  to  be 
bom. 

The  reason  why  I  rose  to  make  any  remark, 
is  that  I  hope  the  resolution  will  come  up  for 
consideration  at  the  time  the  gentleman  has  in- 
dicated. If  the  whole  house,  as  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  says,  is  willing  to  accord  to  this 
proposition,  let  them  do  it  now,  and  the  object 
will  have  been  achieved.  And  if  any  gentlemen 
entertain  different  sentiments,  I  would  like  to 
give  them  an  opportunity  to  be  heard,  the  last 
perhaps,  that  they  will  have  for  many  years  to 
come.  I  hope  therefore,  the  resolution  will  be 
allowed  to  take  the  direction  indicated  by  the 
gentleman. 

Mr.  TURNER.    I  withdraw  my  objection. 

Mr.  0.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  this  were  a  prop- 
osition to  insert  in  the  constitution  a  clause,  de- 
claring that  the  legislature  shall  not  exercise  the 
power  of  «mancipatin|;  tbs  issu*  of  future  bora 


116 


slaves,  I  should  have  no  hesitation  in  yielding  it 
my  unqualified  and  ready  support,  but  if  1  un- 
derstand the  resolution  in  connection  with 
this  preamble,  it  asserts  a  principle  to  wliich  I 
cannot  yield  my  a.ssent  so  readily  as  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison  has  done.  It  is  intended  to  as- 
sert the  principle,  not  only  that  this  convention  has 
not  the  power,  but  consequently  no  other  con- 
vention which  can  be  assembled  by  the  people 
of  Kentucky  will  ever  have  the  right  to  exercise 
the  power  to  provide  any  means  or  mode  of 
emancipation  of  the  slaves  in  this  common- 
wealth, either  those  now  in  existence  or  those 
hereafter  to  be  bom. 

I  am  perfectly  willing,  as  I  remarked  before, 
if  it  be  thought  desirable  to  insert  in  the  con- 
stitution a  declarative  clause  denying  the 
power  of  the  legislature  to  act  upon  the  subject, 
that  it  shall  be  done.  I  am  willing  to  place  that 
which  is  already  to  my  mind,  sufficiently  plain 
in  the  existing  constitution,  beyond  cavil  or 
doubt,  in  the  one  which  we  may  substitute  for 
it.  But  sir,  I  cannot  yield,  understanding  the 
resolution  with  its  preamble,  to  the  proposition 
that  there  exists  no  power  in  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky, to  declare  now,  or  hereafter,  that  slavery 
shall  be  discontinued,  because  if  the  position  of 
the  gentleman  be  true,  there  cannot  be  exercised 
any  power  of  the  sovereign  people  of  Kentucky 
in  any  shape  except  by  civil  and  violent  revolu- 
tion, to  secure  the  means  of  adopting  that  which 
our  fathers  thought  they  did  possess  when  they 
formed  the  existing  constitution,  that  is  a  sys- 
tem of  emancipation,  to  take  place  at  some  con- 
venient time  without  injury  to  the  rights  of  pri- 
vate individuals. 

Yielding  my  full  asent  to  the  position  that 
slaves  are  property,  and  entitled  to  the  same 
protection  Avhicli  is  guarantied  to  other  proper- 
ty under  the  organic  law,  the  enquiry  necessari- 
ly arises,  how  came  slaves  to  be  considered 
property?  Was  it  by  constitutional  provision 
and  organic  law,  speaking  it  into  existence  by 
the  authority  of  the  people,  exercised  in  their 
convention,  and  carried  out  by  legislation. — 
The  property  in  slaves  is  guarantied  by  consti- 
tutional law,  no  matter  how  originally  acquir- 
ed; and  the  same  power  (the  people,)  which 
gave  the  constitutional  guaranty,  if  they  elect 
to  do  80,  may  withdraw  that  guaranty  in  any 
re-construction  of  the  government  which  they 
may  choose  to  make.  I  do  not  say  it  would  be 
just  to  do  so;  but  they  have  the  power  to  do  so; 
and  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  does 
not  inhibit  the  people  of  a  state  from  the  exer- 
cise of  such  a  power.  Is  it  contended  that  the 
same  people  have  not  the  power  now,  or  they 
shall  not  hereafter  exercise  it  in  the  same  manner? 
They  have  the  same  sovereigntv,  and  the  same 
power  to  declare  what  shall  ana  what  shall  not 
be  property  within  this  commonwealth.  The 
rights  of  property  depend  upon  law,  and  its  se- 
curity is  the  protection  which  the  constitution 
and  laws  give  to  il;.  If  you  acquire  property 
in  slaves  by  your  organic  law,  I  cannot  yield 
myself  to  the  principle  that  the  same  power 
which  spoke  the  law  into  existence  cannot  re- 
trace its  steps  at  the  proper  time. 

Now  these  are  the  reasons  why  I  cannot  yield 
tny  a.ssent  to  the  proposition.  I  am  prepared  to 
goMfkr  tm  any  man  to  say  that  the  Legislature 


shall  not  have  the  power  to  emancipate  existing 
slaves  or  their  future  increase.  But  I  am  not  pre- 
pared to  say  that  if  the  people  of  Kentucky 
choose,  assembled  in  this  hall,  or  in  any  future 
convention  which  they  may  organize,  in  their 
sovereign  capacity,  to  adopt  some  system  of 
emancipation,  they  have  not  an  unquestionable 
right  to  do  so.  I  am  indifferent  what  course  the 
resolution  takes. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  This  is  a  mere  abstract 
resolution,  and  while  there  are  probably  nine 
tenths — one  gentleman  says  four  fifths — but  I 
think  I  may  safely  assert  there  are  nine  tenths  of 
the  delegates  in  this  convention  who  will  agree 
to  the  proposition  that  both  slaves  that  are  now 
in  existence,  and  those  post  nati  must  continue 
to  be  slaves  so  long  as  it  is  the  will  and  pleasure 
of  the  people  of  Kentucky  that  they  shall  be  so. 
I  deny  the  capacity  of  this  house  to  put  a  limi- 
tation upon  its  own  power.  Why?  Simply  be- 
cause by  admitting  that,  you  admit  that  you  can 
put  a  limitation  upon  the  powers  of  the  people 
from  whom  the  members  of  this  house  derive 
their  power.  Pass  this  resolution,  and  put  into 
the  constitution  a  declaration  that  this  conven- 
tion has  not  the  power  to  do  this  or  that,  and 
you  thereby  declare  that  the  people  themselves 
have  not  the  power.  Now  where  do  you  land? 
It  is  the  unanimous  intention  of  the  convention, 
I  believe,  that  the  new  constitution,  when 
formed,  shall  be  placed  before  the  people  for 
their  ratification,  and  they  will  ratify  it,  and  it 
then  becomes  the  act  of  the  people.  I  ask  you 
then,  this  plain  question:  have  not  succeeding 
generations  the  same  power  that  this  generation 
lias?  and  if  they  should  change  their  opinion, 
how  are  tliey  ever  to  express  that  change,  provi- 
ded you  put  this  declaration  in  the  constitution? 
You  come  to  this  plain  proposition  at  last,  that 
if  there  is  no  method  of  amending  the  constitu- 
tion, to  arrive  at  their  object,  you  throw  them 
upon  something  ulterior  and  beyond  it — you 
throw  them  upon  revolution.  I  am  a  pro-slave- 
ry man — meaning  just  what  I  say.  I  am  for 
slavery  for  the  sake  of  slavery,  and  I  will  here 
avow,  that  if  there  were  now  no  slaves  in  Ken- 
tucky, and  they  were  in  other  states  as  slaves,  I 
for  one  would  say  bring  them  here.  If  they  are 
a  blessing,  I  want  our  portion  of  that  blessing; 
and  I  believe  that  they  are  a  blessing,  a  moral 
blessing — whether  a  religious  blessing  or  not  I 
do  not  exactly  know,  and  therefore  do  not  in- 
tend to  give  an  opinion  on  the  subject.  I  be- 
lieve religion  has  little  to  do  with  tlje  question. 
I  am  a  pro-slavery  man  for  the  sake  of  slavery, 
but  how  do  I  know  that  ray  children  will  be  of 
the  same  opinion?  And  while  I  lay  down  the 
proposition  and  maintain  it  side  by  side  with 
the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  I  cannot  go  so 
far  as  to  say  that  my  descendants  shall  not  be 
free  to  follow  their  own  inclinations.  I  cannot 
deny  to  them  the  same  right  to  determine  for 
themselves  this  question,  that  I  claim  for  myself 
noAv. 

You  put  into  the  constitution  a  declaration 
such  as  tliis,  if  they  want  to  remedy  it  you  throw 
them  upon  revolution.  That  is  one  reason  why  I 
am  opposed  to  its  insertion.  But  there  is  another. 
I  ask  if  it  is  good  policy  when  it  seems  to  be 
the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  house,  and  when 
as  I  believe,  ther«  are  but  three  or  four,  in  fact. 


117 


m  the  convention  in  favor  of  emancipation — but 
fifteen  or  twenty  in  the  convention  who  regard 
slavery  as  wrong  in  the  abstract,  including  all 
the  t6rms  you  choose  to  apply  to  it.  One  thinks 
it  wrong  morally,  another  religiously,  and  an- 
other politically.  Why  combine  all' these  ele- 
ments together  and  show  its  strength  abroad? 
■fhere  is  no  necessity  for  this.  Divide  and  con- 
qner!  Why  amalgamate  all  this  mass?  Why 
combine  those  who  diflft-r  with  us  upon  the  ab- 
stract proposition?  To  say  the  least,  it  is  bad 
"policy;  because  the  expression  of  opinion,  wheth- 
er given  by  your  reporters  and  going  out  into 
the  State,  or  put  into  the  constitution,  let  it  be 
as  it  may,  will  have  a  powerful  influence  in  Ken- 
tucky. And  I  do  not  want  an  opinion,  when 
formed  and  expressed  here,  to  be  so  formed  that 
the  people  of  Kentucky  or  the  people  out  of  Ken- 
tucky may  see  that  upon  this  great  question  of 
slavery  there  is  a  great  difference  of  opinion  in 
this  house. 

Upon  the  single  question  of  slavery,  there  is 
very  little,  if  any,  difference  in  this  house,  but 
upon  the  abstract  proposition,  whether  we  have 
the  right  to  prevent  emancipation  by  future  gen- 
erations, I  am  inclined  to  think  "there  wifl  be 
great  divei-sity  of  opinion.  The  emancipation- 
ists in  Kentucky,  and  out  of  it,  will  claim  eve- 
ry one  of  those  who  differ  with  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson,  who  is  seldom  wrong:  thev 
will  class  every  one  in  this  house  who  differe 
with  him  on  this  question,  as  being,  to  some  ex- 
tent, an  emancipationist.  I  am  not  very  certain 
that  I  can  agree  with  the  whole  of  the  proposi- 
tion myself. 

Our  constituents,  throughout  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky, have  'sworn  the  peace'  against  the  emanci- 
pationists, and  they  have  required  us  to  take  from 
them  bonds  that  they  will  never  hereafter,  disturb 
the  peace  and  harmony  of  the  state,  by  their  tam- 
pering with  this  property  or  agitating  this  ques- 
tion. And  we  are  here  now  to  say  what  those 
bonds  shall  be.  Tou  may  put  the  penalty  as  high 
as  you  choose,  but  do  not  put  in,  as  a  condition  to 
the  bond,  a  mere  matter  of  opinion.  Nine-tenths 
of  the  people  are  now  with  us,  and  they  may 
turn  round  and  say,  "that  is  not  the  penalty  we 
required  you  to  take;"  and  it  mav  prevent  the 
people  of  Kentucky  from  sanctioning  that  bond. 

I  rose  hastily  and  more  for  the  puipose  of 
begging  that  the  resolution  might  be  allowed  to 
take  such  direction  as  was  indicated  by  the 
mover,  that  we  may  see  whether  he  will  abide 
by  all  the  propositions  contained  in  it.  I  know 
that  he  is  supported  by  the  celebrated  case  from 
Georgia,  in  four  fifths'of  the  ground  he  intends 
to  occupy;  but  as  to  whether  he  will  be  support- 
ed in  tne  whole  ground,  there  will  probably  be 
a  great  diversity  of  opinion.  Wherefore  then 
press  the  subject,  for  every  man  who  does  not 
agree  with  the  legal  proposition,  will  be  com- 
pelled to  vote  against  it.  1  do  not  sav  I  shall 
be  of  the  number,  because  I  have  not  tad  time 
to  examine  the  subject  calmly  and  deliberately. 
I  desire,  however,  with  the  gentleman  from  Hen- 
derson, to  seal  up  the  months  of  the  abolition- 
ists. I  will  go  as  far  as  he  will  to  do  this,  but  I 
do  not  want  to  vote  for  an  abstract  legal  propo- 
sition, with  all  of  which  I  cannot  agree. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  I  wish  to  correct  the  gentle- 
man's misapprehension  of  the  report  of  the  com- 


mittee on  slavery  as  regards  free  negroes.  There 
is  nothing  compulsory  in  that  report.  It  is  a 
1  simple  proposition  to  authorize  the  legislature  to 
remove  them  at  a  future  time,  if  they  should  see 
fit.  I  conceive  it  is  important  that  they  should 
have  that  power,  because  the  time  may  arrive — 
and  it  is  hoped  and  believed  that  we  are  going 
to  make  a  constitution  that  will  stand  the  test 
of  time — when  the  subject  will  present  a  differ- 
ent aspect  from  that  which  it  now  presents.  It 
may  be  for  the  good  of  both  races,  it  may  be  con- 
sistent with  humanity  and  good  policy  to  trans- 
port thein  to  Africa.  I  wish  the  convention  not 
to  be  led  into  error  by  the  remarks  which  the 
gentleman  has  made,  but  to  recollect  that  they 
are  not  compelled  by  this  report,  but  that  simply 
power  is  given  to  do  it,  if  it  is  considered  best. 
And  I,  for  one,  have  full  confidence  in  the  legis- 
lature of  the  state  of  Kentucky,  that  they  will  nev- 
er exercise  the  power  in  a  spirit  of  cruelty  and 
oppression.  I  am  as  much  opposed  to  this  for- 
cible emancipation,  to  driving  them  out  to  die 
on  the  sands  of  Africa,  as  the, gentleman  can  be; 
and  when  the  report  comes  up,  I  shall  stand 
ready  to  defend  it.  I  merely  rose  to  take  issue 
with  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  upon  what  I 
conceive  to  be  a  great  and  radical  mistake  on  his 
part,  in  saying  that  slaves  became  property  un- 
der our  organic  law.  Upon  this  point  I  take  is- 
sue confidently.  What  was  the  first  organic  law 
which  established  tliis  institution?  The  decree 
of  the  Almighty  himself,  as  recorded  in  the  sa- 
cred book.  I  will  refer  the  gentleman  to  the 
passage  where  the  Almighty  declares  that  the 
Hebrew  slaves  should  be  emancipated  at  the  end 
of  every  seven  years,  and  that  all  prisoners  of 
war  should  be  held  in  perpetual  bondage.  Has 
the  gentleman  overlooked  his  bible,  that  he  goes 
to  organic  law.  Well,  then,  I  ask,  is  there  any 
organic  law  in  the  United  States  to  establish 
slavery?  I  deny  the  assertion,  and  call  for  the 
proof.  Slaves  were  brought  into  this  country 
1  like  all  other  property.  But  if  the  gentleman 
i  can  lay  his  hand  upon  anv  organic  law  that  es- 
tablishes slavery,  I  should  be  glad  to  be  inform- 
ed where  it  is.  "I'hey  were  brought  here  like  all 
other  property,  like  every  thing  that  has  been 
made  the  subject  of  projjerty,  and  he  will  find, 
laws  without  number,  recognizing  that  species 
of  property,  but  none  establishing  it?  It  did 
not  require  the  recognition  of  any  organic  law. 
It  is  preciselylike  all  other  property,  and  was  so 
regarded  in  all  countries  to  which  it  went.  If  it 
had  not  been  property,  when  the  first  ship  load 
came  to  Virginia,  were  there  not  lawyers  there 
who  would  have  taken  out  writs  of  habeas  corpus 
and  manumitted  the  slaves?  Yes,  sir;  but  that 
was  never  thought  of.  It  is  a  new  idea  altogeth- 
er, one  that  has  sprung  up  in  this  modem  age  to 
make  a  distinction  between  slaves  and  other 
property.  They  were  property  like  every  thing 
else;  and  if  there  was  any  property  on  the  face 
of  the  earth,  more  particularly  recognized  than 
any  other,  it  was  that  property.  Let  the  gentle- 
tleraan  examine  the  bible,  and  show  me  where 
there  is  a  greater  sanction  given  to  any  property. 
But  it  seems  to  have  become  the  fashion  of 
the  day,  without  examination,  to  point  this  out 
as  a  moral,  social,  and  political  evil.  I  did 
not  intend  to  trouble  the  house  on  this  subject, 
but  when  I  heard  so  extraordinary  a  position  ad- 


118 


vanced  by  one  of  the  ablest  men  of  the  state,  a 
iTiau  of  great  legal  ability.  I  thought  it  time  at 
least  to  enter  my  protest.  And  as  I  am  upon 
the  subject,  I  take  the  position  that  it  is  neither 
a  moral  nor  a  social  evil.  I  might  be  inclined  to 
favor  emancipation,  however,  if  I  could  see  a 
mode  pointed  out  by  -which  the  African  could 
be  rendered  more  happy.  I  am  firmly  persua- 
ded that  the  negro  slave  of  Kentucky  is  in  a 
more  happy  condition  than  he  ever  has  been,  or 
can  be  placed  in,  in  any  part  of  the  world.  We 
all  know  that  he  is  far  better  off  than  he  was 
when  serving  as  a  slave,  in  the  country  whence 
he  came.  He  is  in  a  much  better  condition  than 
the  free  negro  now  in  this  country;  in  a  far  bet- 
ter condition  than  the  emancipated  negro  in  Ja- 
maica and  St.  Domingo.  Then,  being  satisfied 
it  is  doing  no  injustice  to  the  slave,  I  say  it  is 
neither  a  moral  nor  a  social  evil,  but  a  decided 
political  blesssing.  How  do  you  make  it  a 
moral  evil?  In  tne  northern  states,  the  time  is 
rapidly  approaching,  when  the  white  man  and 
the  white  woman  must  work  for  their  mere  sub- 
sistence and  clothing.  There,  the  employer 
pays  in  money,  or  perhaps  in  trade.  If  he  mis- 
benaves  he  is  turned  off  without  a  recommenda- 
tion, and  is  left  to  shift  for  himself  in  the  best 
manner  he  can.  Now  let  us  draw  a  comparison. 
Here,  the  slave  receives  his  food  and  clothing, 
and  is  well  taken  care  of.  If  he  misbehaves,  he 
is  corrected  in  a  humane  manner,  and  is  coerced 
to  do  his  duty.  Where  then  is  the  difference 
but  in  name?  If  one  of  those  hirelings  at  the 
north  gets  sick,  he  is  sent  to  the  hospital,  he  is 
left  to  the  cold  charities  of  a  public  institution. 
Here,  if  the  master  have  not  sufficient  humanity, 
the  law  compels  him  to  give  his  slave  medical 
aid.  Where  then  I  ask,  is  the  difference?  The 
slave  occupies  here  precisely  the  same  attitude 
as  the  hireling  there.  Being  then,  as  I  conceive, 
neither  a  moral  nor  a  social  evil,  I  say  it  is  a 
political  blessing.  I  am  speaking  of  it  now,  as 
applicable  to  Kentucky.  The  free  states  do 
not,  and  will  not  raise  hemp  and  tobacco.  Ken- 
tucky and  Missouri  have  the  monopoly  of  this 
great  article,  hemp.  This,  as  long  as  slavery 
remains,  must  be  the  case.  The  southern  mar- 
ket will  always  keep  our  slaves  down  to  a 
healthy  point.  The  emancipation  which  has 
taken  place  in  the  West  Indies  is  destroying  tlie 
tropical  products.  They  will  necessarily  be 
increased  in  this  countiy.  With  the  growth  of 
our  navy,  and  our  mercantile  marine,  will  in- 
crease the  demand  for  hemp.  Take  away 
slaves,  and  you  destroy  the  production  of  that 
valuable  article,  which  is  bound  to  make  the 
rich  lands  of  Kentucky  and  Missouri  still  more 
valuable.  But  examine  the  subject  in  another 
point  of  view.  What  is  the  great  evil  whii^h  is 
bearing  down  all  Europe  at  this  time?  An  ex- 
cessive population. 

Do  we  not  know  that  slaves  keep  out  an  ex- 
cessive population.  They  keepitoutin  this  way. 
In  a  slave  country,  the  low  and  worthless  cannot 
find  employment.  Those  foreigners  or  abolition- 
ists from  the  north,  who  are  so  worthless  and  de- 
graded that  they  would  be  willing  to  black  my 
shoes,  or  to  wait  on  me,  cannot  find  employment 
here.  They  are  compelled  to  go  to  the  free  states, 
while  oidy  those  whom  wc  desire  to  have  among 
u8  find  any  inducement  to  corn*.    The  mechan- 


ic, the  man  of  intelligence  and  of  character, 
whether  native  born  or  foreigner,  finds  it  better 
for  him  to  come  here  than  to  go  to  the  free  states. 
I  would  refer  you  to  Louisville  where  there  are 
foreigners  of  the  better  and  more  industrious 
class.  There  you  may  find  foreigners  who  are 
among  the  best  horticulturists  in  the  country, 
and  the  land  is  raised  in  value  in  consequence  of 
their  labors,  from  fifty  to  a  hundred  dollars  per 
acre.  Our  slavery  .system  invites  this  descrip- 
tion of  emigrants,  while  it  keeps  out  the  worth- 
less and  the  abandoned.  If  foreign  nations  are 
disposed  to  send  their  paupers  to  us,  slaverv  ne- 
cessarily keeps  them  out  of  our  state.  "While, 
at  the  same  time,  if  the  south  is  true  to  itself,  we 
shall  never  be  burthened  with  a  redundant  slave 
population.  Perhaps  the  greatest  evil  to  be 
feared  from  an  excessive  population  is,  that  in 
time  it  must  destroy  republican  institutions  them- 
selves. When  we  become  two  hundred  millions 
of  people,  when  the  northern  states  become 
crowded  to  starvation,  is  it  not  as  certain  as  that 
the  sun  rises  and  sets,  that  when  this  vast  body, 
this  living  mass,  thrown  off  from  Europe,  arrives 
here  they  will  not  only  destroy  republican  gov- 
ernments, but  destroy  itself.  Hence  must  arise 
an  armed  despotism,  in  order  to  protect  proper- 
ty. Look  at  France,  whose  people  at  this  time, 
after  having  waded  through  seas  of  blood  for  the 
last  fifty  years,  have  at  last  established  a  repub- 
lic, where  every  man,  black,  white,  or  yellow, 
of  twenty  one  years  of  age,  is  entitled  to  vote. 
They  elected  a  convention,  and  in  less  than 
thirty  days  after  their  meeting  their  lives  were 
in  danger  and  they  had  to  call  in  the  aid  of  from 
sixty  to  a  hundred  thousand  troops ! 

That  is  one  of  the  results  of  an  excessive  pop- 
ulation, yet  forsooth  the  institution  of  slavery — 
an  institution  which  has  the  effect  of  preventing 
an  excessive  population,  is  pronounced  to  be  a 
great  moral  and  social  evil.  Every  man  who  is 
opposed  to  slavery,  promises  great  good  to  the 
country  by  destroying  this  institution — the  only 
one  that  can  secure,  for  a  long  period  of  years,  the 
safety  of  our  government.  I  believe  the'^timewill 
arrive,  in  how  long,  no  human  foresight  can  tell, 
when  the  northern  republics  will  be  destroyed 
by  a  redundant  population,  and  despotisms  will 
prevail.  But  that  time,  if  it  does  arrive,  will 
be  more  distant  in  this  country.  Kentucky,  and 
some  few  other  middle  states,"^ have  peculiar  ad- 
vantages by  openingthe  markets  of  the  south,  to 
keep  out  a  redundant  and  useless  population. 
And  such  population  being  kept  out,  she  will 
remain  to  tjie  end  of  time  in  a  happy  condition. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  regret  extremely  to  sav  a 
word  upon  this  subject,  but  I  feel  compelled 
to  do  so.  The  only  proposition  that  I  inten- 
ded to  assert  was  this,  th.it  it  was  in  the  pow- 
er of  the  convention  to  do  anything  and  every- 
thing that  the  people  could  do  in  the  forma- 
tion of  their  government,  unless  restricted  by 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  by  acts  of 
the  congress  of  the  United  States,  or  by  treaties 
of  the  United  States  made  in  pursuance  of  the 
treaty  making  power.  Except  so  far  as  restrict- 
ed, wc  have  every  power  that  the  people  have  in 
the  organization  of  the  government.  We  cannot 
make  a  monarchy,  because  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States  guaranties  a  republican  gov- 
emmeut,  and  roquiros  that  a  republican  form  of 


no 


government  shall  prevail  in  every  state.    We  I 
are  obliged,  of  course,  to  conform  to  this  requi- 1 
sition  in  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  i 
There  are  a  great  manv  things  that  are  entirely  i 
restricted  to  the  states.'  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  and  there  are  a  great  many  pow- 
ers that  are   concurrent,  to  be   exercised   by  the 
congress  of  the  United  States,  and  by  the  legis- 
lative power  of  the  several  states,     liut  whenev- 
er congress  acts  upon  those  powers,  that  are  con- 
current, then  the  states  cannot  act  in  contraven- 
tion of  that  action  of  congress. 

If  I  understand  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson,  it  is  this,  that  the  con- 
vention cannot  adopt  any  rule  or  regulation,  or 
organic  principle  of  government,  to  set  negroes 
free  that  are  now  in  slavery,  or  those  that  may 
be  bom  hereafter  of  motliers  who  are  in  slavery. 
That  is,  he  disclaims  the  power  of  this  conven- 
tion, or  of  any  other,  that  may  be  hereafter  as- 
sembled for  hundreds  of  years  to  come,  if  we 
should  so  long  exist  as   a  government,  to  pass  i 
any  rule  or  regulation  for  the  emancipation  of  j 
slaves  without  making  compensation  to  the  own-  j 
ers  of  such  slaves.     What   is  the  power  of  the  i 
legislature "?     The  legislature  can  do  any  thing  | 
and  every  thing  that  a  sovereign  people  can  do, ' 
unless  forbid  by  the  constitution  of  the  United  | 
States  or  by  the  constitution  of  Kentucky. 

Why  was  it  then,  that  the  framers  of  the  con- 1 
stitution  of  1799  put  in  this  provision:  "That  \ 
the  general   assembly  shall  have  no  power  to  | 
pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves,  without  \ 
the  consent  of  their  owners,  or  without  paying  < 
their  owners  previous  to  such  emancipation,  a  : 
full  equivalent  in  money  for  the  slaves  so  eman-  j 
cipated."     Do  you  not  see,  sir,  that  the  very  I 
powers  are  prohibited  to  the  legislature,  which  ' 
the  gentleman  now  asserts  this  convention  can- ; 
not  exercise?  Whvdid  the  convention  of  1799  put 
such  a  provision  in  that  constitution?    Because 
without  it  the  legislature  would  have  had  the 
power  from  the  very  nature  of  government. 

While  I   am  up  I  will   make  one  or  two  re- 
marks further,  though  a  little  out  of  the  issue. 
Indeed  nine-tenths  of  the  debate  upon  any  ques- 
tion is  out  of  the  issue.     I  agree  with  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson.    I  would  not  exercise 
the  power,  and  I  disagree  with  the  gentleman 
from  Campbell,  I  would  not  put  the  law  of  1833  j 
in  by  any  means.     I   alwavs  opposed  that  law  j 
as  senator  in  the  state  legislature.     I  opposed  it . 
upon  several  grounds.     One  was,  that  I  thought 
it  a  violation  of  the  constitution  of  the  United  ' 
States;  because  the  constitution  of  the  United  [ 
States  contains  a  provision  for  the  regulation  of ' 
commerce  with  foreign   nations,  and  among  the 
several   states  and  with  the  Indian  tribes.     I  i 
have  taken  it  for  granted  that  if  a  horse  was  an  : 
article  of  commerce  in  Virginia  and  Kentucky, 
Virginia  could  not  prevent  the  introduction  of , 
horses  there;  and  if  a  hog  was  an  article  of  com- ' 
merce,  Virginia  could  not  prevent  us  from  dri-  j 
ving  hogs  across  the  Big  Sandy  river;  and  if  ne-  j 
groes  are  articles   of  commerce,  I  know  of  no  , 
prohibition   against    their   introduction    where ' 
they  are  so  regarded.     That  was  the  reason  why  ; 
I  opposed  the  law  of  1833,  for  several  sessions, ' 
and  it  passed  at  last  by  a  compromise.  1 

The  gentleman  last  up,  from  Jefferson,  and 
the  gentleman- up  the  other  day,  from  Boyle,  in- 1 


quire  by  what  right  we  hold  our  slaves.  The 
gentleman  from  Boyle  then  goes  back  to  the  bi- 
ble, and  referred  to  the  punishm-^nt  inflicted  up- 
on Cain  for  killing  his  brother  Abel,  as  the  ori- 
gin of  slaverv. 

Mr.  TALBbTT.  The  gentleman  is  mistaken. 
I  never  alluded  to  Cain  and  Abel. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  Well,  I  understood  it  to  come 
from  either  him  or  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson. 
I  know  the  gentleman  from  Boyle  broke  down 
this  side  of  the  flood,  and  I  do  not  hear  very 
well.  [Laughter.]  However,  the  Bible  or  the 
Testament  does  not  authorize  slavery;  it  only  re- 
cognizes it  as  in  existence — that  is  so  far  as  I 
know.  I  am  not  ver}-  well  acquainted  with  the 
Bible,  though  I  do  read  it  occasionallv,  and  par- 
ticularly the  books  of  Job  and  Isaiah,  which  I 
consider  the  most  eloquent  I  ever  read,  except 
the  23d  chapter  of  Matthew,  where  it  takes  hold 
of  those  it  calls  pharisees,  hypocrites  and 
scribes,  and  says:  "Wo  unto  ye  scribes  and 
pharisees,"  «tc. 

The  gentleman  from  JeflFerson,  (Mr.  Bullitt,) 
last  up.  I  think  does  not  imderstaud  the  manner 
in  which  slavery  was  originally  brought  into 
this  country,  or  else  I  do  not.  Slavery  exists 
in  Africa  now,  as  it  did  in  Europe  two  thousand 
years  ago.  The  conquerer  claims  and  exercises 
the  right  of  making  subjects  of  the  conquered, 
of  making  slaves  of  them,  or  of  putting  them  to 
death.  And  the  slaves  that  were  bought,  and 
are  now  bought  on  the  coast  of  Africa,  are  not 
bought  by  the  men  who  brought  them  here,  so 
that  freemen  are  made  slaves — they  are  in  fact 
bought  from  slave  owners.  And  that  trade  in 
slavery  keeps  up  a  continual  and  perpetual  war 
between  the  countries  there,  and  even  between 
towns  in  sight  of  each  other.  That  was  the  ar- 
gument Wilberforee  urged  in  the  British  parlia- 
ment, why  the  slave  trade  should  be  put  down. 
And  Africa  was  in  a  state  of  war,  a  little  pre- 
datory kind  of  war,  beginning  south  of  the 
Orange  river,  in  about  35  degrees,  and  running 
clear  to  the  southern  part  of  the  great  desert  of 
Sahara,  and  clear  across  the  African  continent. 
They  did  attempt  to  put  it  down,  and  Great  Bri- 
tain now  has  vessels  on  the  African  coast  to  catch 
slaves,  and  America  has,  and  France  also  has, 
but  it  does  not  answer  the  purpose.  There  is  a 
large  slave  market  through  the  desert,  in  Africa 
itself,  inMorocco,  Tripoli,  and  Tunis,  andEgypt, 
as  well  as  a  slave  trade  through  Madagascar  and. 
along  there  to  the  north.  And  there  is  no  way  to 
put  it  down,  other  than  to  make  war  upon  it'  to 
go  to  the  Emperor  of  Morrocqo,  the  Bevs  of  Tri- 
poli and  Tunis  and  to  the  Governor,  whoever  he 
may  be  of  Egypt,  and  to  Brazil,  and  tell  them 
that  the  trade  must  stop.  I  wisb  to  God  that  it 
was  stopped.  Was  it  asked  by  what  right  they 
held  negroes  in  Virginia?  They  were  bought  as 
slaves,  and  from  the  owners  of  slaves  on  the 
coast  of  Africa,  beginning  at  about  the  Bight  of 
Berrin  and  going  south  to  the  Orange  river. 
They  were  bought  as  slaves  from  those  who 
owned  them,  and  had  a  right  to  own  them.  The 
same  right  existed  at  that  dav  as  it  exists  in  this. 
That  is  the  ground  upon  which  we  hold  them, 
and  our  constitution  and  laws  recognize  it  on 
that  ground.  In  the  name  of  God,  have  I  the 
right  to  hold  you  in  slavery  without  some  great 
natural  principle,  just  as  if  it  grew  up  by  acci- 


120 


(lent?  It  Was  not  established  or  authorized  by 
the  laws  of  either  Kentucky  or  Virginia,  but  by 
the  slave  mercluirit  who  bought  them  from  the 
slave  merchant  in  Africa  and  brought  them  here. 

The  gentleman  from  Jefferson  who  spoke  some 
time  ago  does  not  seem  to  understand  our  pow- 
ers. What  powers  have  we?  Have  we  not  as 
much  in  this  convention  as  if  Ave  heretofore  had 
been  a  territory,  and  were  now,  for  the  first  time, 
making  a  government.  Why  certainly — just  as 
much.  In  our  new  territory  in  California,  they 
are  now  attempting,  by  convention,  to  make  a 
new  government,  and  have  we  not  as  much  pow- 
er here  as  they  possess;  they  made  a  constitution 
here  in  '92,  and  have  we  not  as  much  power 
as  our  predecessors  had  then?  We  have.  Have 
we  not  as  much  power  as  the  people  of  Ohio, 
Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri,  or  any  other  state? 
Just  as  much.  But,  says  the  gentleman,  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  full  plenitude  of  power  here  would 
be  a  state  of  revolution.  1  am  not  to  be  alarm- 
ed at  that  raw  head  and  bloody  bones  cry  of 
revolution.  I  have  heard  it  often,  and  have 
never  attached  any  importance  to  it.  We  come 
here  to  make  our  governmentjust  as  we  please 
— and  how  shall  we  do  it.  We  can  adopt  the 
present  constitntion  as  it  now  stands;  we  can 
alter  and  change  it  as  we  please,  or  make  a  new 
one  out  and  out.  I  do  not  care  if  we  are  in  a 
state  of  revolution,  still  we  retain  that  power, 
and  I  shall  not  be  driven  under  the  bed  like  a 
cross  child  by  this  raw  head  and  bloody  bones 
outcry.  I,  for  one,  would  not  exercise  the  pow- 
er, and  I  have  no  idea  of  setting  ray  negroes 
free  at  all.  I  pity  their  condition  as  much  as 
any  man  in  the  country,  and  I  shall  do  all  that 
I  can,  as  a  master,  to  make  their  situation  a 
happy  one,  and  I  hope  that  every  other  man 
will  do  the  same.  They  fare  better  than  I  do, 
and  every  man's  negroes  should  fare  as  well  as 
is  consistent  with  the  policy  of  keeping  them  in 
slavery.  But  here  they  are,  200,000  of  them  in 
Kentucky.  Turn  them  loose,  and  I  would  not 
live  a  month  in  the  country.  We  cannot  inter- 
marry with,  or  give  them  any  right,  civil,  politi- 
cal, or  social,  that  wo  enjoy.  We  can  give  them 
every  religious  right  we  have,  and  that  is  all  wo 
can  do.  Turn  loose  the  200,000  negroes  free 
among  us,  and  what  will  become  of  them?  Will 
you  hunt  them  away  to  another  state?  No;  they 
would  not  move  ten  miles  from  home;  and  in 
that  they  would  act  sensibly,  for  if  they  did  they 
would  be  caught  up  and  sold.  They  would  have 
no  encouragement  to  work,  none  at  all,  and 
would  at  most  work  out  one  day  as  a  matter  of 
appearance,  and  then  steal  during  the  other  six. 

1  would  not  give  up  the  slaveholding  people 
of  Kentucky  for  any  people  on  earth.  I  recollect 
when  a  boy  of  readmg  Mr.  Burke's  and  Lord 
North's  arguments  in  the  British  Parliament,  in 
reference  to  the  course  to  be  pursued  towards  the 
American  colonies — and  when  Lord  North  in 
recapitulating  the  me.ins  and  powers  of  the  gov- 
ernment, finally  went  into  a  comparison  between 
the  British  soldier  and  the  American,  and  said 
that  one  of  tlie  former  could  whip  ten  of  the  lat- 
ter, ten  a  hundred,  a  hundred  a  tnousand,  and  a 
thousand  a  liundred  thousand,  and  denounced  us 
as  slaveholders.  I  never  can  forget  the  answer: 
"Where  no  slavery  is  tolerated,  there  the  peo- 
ple look  upon  liberty  as  apolitical  right,  but 


where  slavery  is  tolerated,  there  they  look  upon 
it  as  a  high  personal  privilege,  and  will  die  before 
they  give  it  up."  And  I  believe  in  that  doc- 
trine, and  if  the  whole  of  Europe  was  to  invade 
us,  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  last  gun  for  liberty 
would  be  fired  in  a  slaveholding  state.  It  is  a 
generous,  a  manly  population,  and  any  law  that 
goes  to  alarm  or  dnve  out  the  slave  owners, 
brings  in  a  people  in  their  stead  not  very  agree- 
able to  my  taste.  We  should  have,  as  they  do  at 
the  north,  the  outpouring  of  Europe,  and  all 
the  v.agabonds,  rapscallions,  and  miserable  be- 
ings of  the  world  let  loose  upon  us.  And  are 
we  to  exchange  the  generous  slaveholder  for  this 
class  of  people?  I  would  not  exchange  one  for 
a  hundred  of  them.  I  believe  we  have  now  in 
Kentucky  the  best  population  to  be  found  any 
where,  from  the  rising  to  the  setting  of  the  sun, 
and  from  pole  to  pole.  This  is  the  language  of  a 
Kentuckian,  and  of  a  Native  American.  I  do 
protest  against  any  restriction  upon  our  powers. 
We  have  the  power,  but  I  do  not  want  to  exer- 
exercise  it — God  knows  I  do  not.  Tlie  gentle- 
man's proposition  does  assort  that  we  have  no 
power,  and  I  say  that  we  have. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  feel  obliged  to  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson  for  introducing  his 
resolution.  There  are  two  considerations  which 
operate  upon  my  mind,  and  make  it  an  impor- 
tant matter  that  this  resolution,  in  its  real  mean- 
ing and  intent,  should  be  discussed  in  this 
house.  We  have  been  in  session  two  weeks, 
and  we  have  indulged  in  a  course  of  erratic  de- 
bate, and  upon  any  question  that  had  any  affin- 
ity whatever  to  the  absorbing  topic  of  slavery. 
We  have  had  it  brought  upon  lis  in  all  its  va- 
rious guises, 'until  the  house  has  become  so  dis- 
tempered, irritable,  and  sensitive,  in  regard  to 
the  subject,  that  it  seems  to  me  it  is  almost  inca- 
pable of  looking  at  any  thing  that  can,  by  a 
forced  construction,  be  made  to  affiliate  with 
slavery.  I  apprehend  this  is  a  state  of  feeling 
exceedingly  unfortunate  for  the  Avise  results  that 
are  expected  by  the  people  at  our  hands.  Most 
exceedingly  unfortunate  will  it  be  to  the  great 
abstract  principles,  which  in  their  consequences 
are  important  to  us  and  to  our  generation  forev- 
er, should  it  be  decided  by  being  viewed  from  a 
promontory  which  does  not  give  the  mind  the 
ability  to  arrive  at  just  conclusions.  And  among 
the  subjects  of  the  greatest  importance  for  the 
discussion  of  this  house  and  the  information  of 
the  people  at  large,  I  class  the  resolution  Avhich 
the  gentlema7i  from  Henderson  has  offered,  and 
for  which  I  tender  him  my  most  sincere  thanks. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  arrival  of 
the  hour  of  twelve,  when  by  the  direction  of  the 
house,  the  orders  of  the  day  were  to  be  consid- 
ered. 

Upon  motion  the  order  was  dispensed  with, 
that  the  gentlenian  might  continue  nis  remarks. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  am  sincerely 
obliged  to  the  house  for  the  compliment  they 
have  thought  proper  to  pay  me,  and  I  shall  not 
trespass  long  upon  their  patience,  because  my 
remarks  will  be  confined  to  the  legitimate  sub- 
ject under  consideration.  I  will  read  the  reso 
lution  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Henderson 
without  the  preamble. 

"  Resolved,  Tliat  this  convention  has  not 
'the  power  or  right,  by  any  principle  it  may  in- 


121 


'  corporate  into  the  constitution  of  the  state,  to 
'  deprive  the  citizen  of  his  property  "without  his 
'  consent." 

I  have  read  the  resolution  thus  far,  and  I  ask 
is  there  a  principle  contained  in  it,  that  is  not 
absolutely  essential  to  society  itself,  and  with- 
out which  can  society  exist  at  all?  The  necessi- 
ty for  society  has  originated  society.  The  ne- 
cessity vrhich  mankind  labored  under  to  have 
such  established  institutions  a.s  would  secure 
their  property  and  liberty  has  originated  society. 
It  was  not  the  wild  and  licentious  idea  of  liber- 
ty that  originated  society — it  was  that  the  liber- 
ty which  is  in  a  manner  enjoyed  by  mankind 
without  society,  should  be  so  framed  and  regu- 
lated as  to  be  consistent  with  ord*r  and  with 
property.  It  was  tliat  order  and  freedom  should 
be  made  to  exist  in  some  system  of  laws  denom- 
inated a  social  compact,  ^fecessity,  the  mother 
of  wisdom,  urged  mankind  into  this  association, 
and  the  standard  principle  of  that  association  is 
declared  to  be  property  and  order.  Property  is 
but  an  element  of  personal  liberty.  In  a  social 
compact  tliere  can  be  no  such  thing  as  liberty 
without  property  being  sacred  and  inviolate.  It 
then  becomes  a  standard  principle  of  a  social 
compact,  that  the  right  of  property  shall  be  sa- 
cred; and  in  order  to  that  end,  it  is  necessary 
that  we  should  give  up  some  of  our  libeity 
when  it  comes  in  conflict  with  this  society. 
That  position,  I  am  very  well  convinced,  will 
not  be  impugned  bv  either  of  my  friends  from 
!Nelsou,  to  whom  I  listened  with  great  pleasure. 

The  principle  then  being  conceded,  it  shows 
that  there  are  such  standard  principles  neces- 
sary for  the  maintenance  of  social  order,  and 
that  each  disregard  of  those  principles  dissi- 
pates social  order  and  destroys  the  very  object 
man  had  in  view,  when,  urged  by  necessity  to 
adopt  a  social  compact.  Then  one  of  these 
standard  principles  must  be  taken  into  consid- 
eration here,  in  view  of  the  powers  of  this  con- 
vention. Has  this  convention  a  sovereign  right 
to  overturn  the  social  compact  which  binds 
mankind  together?  They  have  no  right  to  any- 
thing that  will  infringe  on  the  standard  prin- 
ciple upon  which  this  social  compact  is  based; 
and  whenever  they  do  usurp  that  power,  just 
then  do  they  do  what  seems  to  have  excited  the 
risibility  of  my  friend  from  Nelson — just  then 
do  they  enter  upon  the  confines  of  a  revolution- 
ary proceeding.  And  although  to  the  gentle- 
man this  term  revolution  seems  a  bug-bear  and 
a  scare-crow — ^yetwith  all  the  respect  I  entertain 
for  him  and  his  abilities,  a  respect  which  I  en- 
tertain second  to  no  man  in  the  house,  I  must 
differ  with  him  in  that  position.  What  does 
this  resolution  declare  but  a  standard  principle 
of  society,  one  without  which  society  cannot 
exist,  and  which,  if  this  body  undertakes  to 
trample  under  foot,  they  undertake  to  do  that 
whicn  never  entered  into  the  minds  of  the  peo- 
ple who  sent  them  here.  What  is  it — "Resolved, 
'  That  this  convention  has  not  the  power  or  right, 
*  by  any  principle  it  may  incorporate  intothecon- 
'  stitution  of  the  state,  to  deprive  the  citizen  of 
'  his  property  without  his  consent."  A  standard 
principle,  without  which  society  cannot  exists — 
and  the  invasion  of  which  will  create  a  sensa- 
tion throughout  this  laud,  I  think  highly  hon- 
orable to  the  people  whom  we  represent.  Let 
16 


us  see  for  a  moment  the  consequences  of  a  po- 
sition antagonistic  to  this.  Does  the  gentleman, 
or  either  of  them,  from  Nelson,  regard  it  as  the 
right  of  this  house  to  take  away  private  proper- 
ty without  the  consent  of,  or  compensation  to, 
tlie  owner?  When  you  establish  that  principle, 
do  you  not  perceive  you  have  established  and 
declared  the  right  to  divide  our  lands,  and  to  do 
every  thing  not  inconsistent  with  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  in  regard  to  the  ob- 
ligations of  contract.  If  you  have  the  right 
to  emancipate  a  slave  without  consent  and  with- 
out pay,  then  you  have  the  same  right  over 
every  other  species  of  property  that  it  has  been 
the  pleasure  of  God  to  give  us.  I  can  perceive 
no  difference.  And  if  you  reject  this  resolution 
and  adopt  the  opinion  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  do  you  not  incorporate  in  the  constitu- 
tion the  idea  that  the  sovereignty  of  the  people 
is  to  unite  to  take  from  the  weak  and  give  to  the 
strong.  Tou  take  from  the  rich  and  give  to  the 
poor,  and  you  break  down  those  standard  prin- 
ciples upon  which  the  temple  of  society  is  based. 
Vote  against  this  resolution,  and  adopt  that  of 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  and  that  is  the  po- 
sition the  members  of  this  convention  will  be 
bound  to  occupy.  This  is  a  position  I  am  not 
prepared  for.  You  have  no  power  to  do  so. 
You  have  only  power  to  perfect  into  detail  the 
great  object  of  a  social  compact,  and  to  carry  out 
the  object  of  association. 

This  social  compact  is  exhibited  in  different 
part-s  of  the  world  under  different  phases.  The 
manner  of  carrying  out  the  object  of  society 
varies  in  a  monarchy,  a  despotism,  and  in  a  demo- 
cratic government.  These  are  mere  illustrations 
of  power  which  are  to  be  exercised  in  harmoni- 
ous consistency  with  the  great  standard  prin- 
ciple of  a  social  compact.  We  happily  have 
succeeded  in  achieving  for  ourselves  the  proud 
institutions  of  self  government.  "What  we 
have  to  do  now  is  to  carry  out  into  detail  the 
great  design  upon  which  the  social  compact  is 
based,  and  we  have  not  the  least  right  to  break 
down  the  barriers  of  the  standard  principle  in 
the  social  compact.  If  we  take  the  Autocrat  of 
Russia  as  representing  the  extensive  empire 
over  which  he  presides,  and  he  should  strike  at 
the  rights  of  property,  society  would  cease  to 
exist,  the  end  of  all  social  order  would  be  de- 
termined, and  the  result  would  be  that  the  na- 
tion would  not  be  so  prosperous  as  it  is.  The 
manner  of  carrying  out  this  idea  of  a  social  com- 
pact in  the  various  countries  of  tlie  world  was 
always  governed  by  the  circumstances  around 
those'  countries.  The  circumstances  under 
which  the  august  power  of  Great  Britain  is  ex- 
ercised, makes  her  adopt  a  certain  mode  of  car- 
rying out  the  social  compact.  And  so  with  re- 
gard to  all  nations  of  the  earth,  including  our- 
selves. We  are  here  to  adopt  a  mode  and  sys- 
tem, and  while  in  that  condition  we  are  asked 
to  reject  a  resolution  embodying  the  basis  of 
society.     Am  I  understood? 

Well  sir,  "this  convention  has  not  the  power 
'or  right,  by  any  principle  it  may  incorporate 
'  into  the  constitution  of  the  state,  to  deprive  the 
'  citizen  of  his  property  without  his  consent,  un- 
'  less  it  be  for  the  public  good,  and  only  then  by 
'making  to  him  a  just  compensation  therefor." 
The  first,  position  I  assume  to  be  adapted  to  the 


122 


second,  and  only  makes  it  practicable  or  rather 
only  illustrates  it  by  a  detail  of  its  practical 
operation.  Yourobject  is  not  to  take  away  pri- 
vate property  except  for  the  public  good,  and  it 
is  not  reasonable  that  you  should  have  a  contra- 
ry imputation  cast  upon  you.  Then  you  may  be 
answered  on  the  subject  of  emancipation,  that  it 
is  only  suggested  by  the  idea  of  public  good. 
On  this  subject  I  wisn  to  say  but  very  little.  I 
stand  here  fully  convinced  of  the  untenability 
of  any  such  scheme  as  an  emancipation  of  the 
slaves  of  Kentucky  at  this  time.  I  stand  here 
determined  to  give  expression  to  any  opinion 
which  I  may  here  entertain.  I  stand  here  elec- 
ted by  an  intelligent  constituency,  who  entertain 
the  views  in  regard  to  tlie  practical  untenability 
of  emancipation  that  I  do,  and  who  entertain 
the  view  in  regard  to  the  abstract  (juestion  of  slave- 
ry that  I  do,  and  who  also  entertain  the  views  that 
Idoin  regard  to  justice.  I  believe  that  if  it  was  an 
original  question  whether  slavery  should  now 
be  introduced  among  us — the  subject  being  dis- 
embarrassed of  the  jealousy  which  has  naturally 
arisen  from  it  by  the  course  the  agitation  has  ta- 
ken, and  various  other  reasons — then,  on  this 
floor  I  say,  I  would  never  introduce  slavery  into 
Kentucky.  But  viewing  Kentucky  as  being  al- 
ready a  slave  state,  as  having  within  her  borders 
that  species  of  property,  which  citizens  were  in- 
duced to  obtain  at  the  expense  of  their  money 
by  the  encouragement  of  the  whole  people  of 
the  state,  the  question  presents  a  different  as- 
pect entirely  to  the  consideration  of  my  mind. 
The  people  of  this  state  induced  the  slave  hold- 
er to  purchase  and  bring  into  the  state,  his  slaves. 
It  has  been  guarantied  under  the  constitution  of 
1792,  and  the  convention  of  1798,  that  slave  prop- 
erty should  be  as  sacred  as  any  property  which 
a  man  could  hold  in  this  state.  They  have 
been  induced  to  purchase  it  by  the  non-slave- 
holders, for  by  a  reference  to  slavery  statis- 
tics it  will  be  seen  that  though  slavery  has  in- 
crea.sed,  still  the  non-slaveholding  population 
has  increased  in  the  ratio  of  110  to  some  25  or  30 
of  the  slaveholding.  And  nothing  protects  the 
resolution,  according  to  the  position  assumed  by 
my  friend  from  Nelson,  but  the  mere  vote  of 
these  110,  and  their  attachment  to  it.  Nothing 
prevents  it  but  a  wholesome  public  sentiment, 
and  the  traditional  recollection  in  the  hearts  of 
the  people,  that  if  there  is  any  wrong  in  the  hold- 
ing of  tne  slaves,  it  is  not  on  the  side  of  the 
slaveholder,  but  rather  the  fault  of  the  institu- 
tions of  the  country  which  perhaps  encouraged 
him  to  obtain  them.  And  justice,  when  sub- 
mitted to  the  proper  tribunal,  is  never  silent. 
And  hence  the  dread  and  jealousy  the  people  en- 
tertained that  this  principle  of  justice  might  be 
disturbed,  has  secured  the  return  of  not  a  single 
emancipationist  here.  Nothing  el.se  but  a  sound 
public  sentiment  on  the  subject  of  slavery  has 
made  this  house  what  it  is.  Yet  if  you  do  not 
adopt  this  resolution,  you  will  jar  tnat  public 
sentiment,  and  you  will  make  people  think  that 
there  is  something  in  view  of  this  convention, 
to  do  the  majority  the  wrong  of  disturbing  this 
element  of  justice. 

Apart  from  the  proper  title  to  the  slave,  we 
hold  our  title  to  our  slaves  under  the  constitution 
of  1792,  and  under  none  other.  That  constitu- 
tion was  made  while  we  were  in  a  state  of  so- 


ciety, when  we  owned  slaves,  the  result  of  the 
relations  of  law  which  existed  at  the  time  that 
constitution  was  made.  I  would  ask  any  gen- 
tleman whether  it  comports  with  his  idea  of  law 
and  right,  that  the  convention  of  1792  in  form- 
ing this  constitution  had  a  right  to  free  all  the 
slaves  in  Kentucky  without  compensation  or 
without  consent?  'it  is  a  proposition  perfectly 
inconsistent  with  any  idea  of  justice,  or  with 
any  state  of  society.  Did  the  convention  of 
1792  have  the  right  to  proclaim  all  the  slaves  of 
Kentucky  free?  If  they  had  not,  why?  Because 
it  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  principles  on 
which  society  is  based — those  principles  which 
are  always  harmonious  with  justice. 

The  resolution  declares  that  the  property  of 
the  citizen  shall  not  be  taken  without  his  consent 
unless  for  the  public  good,  "  and  only  then  by 
making  to  him  a  just  compensation  therefor." 
Now,  if  as  time  rolls  on,  slavery  becomes  so 
mischievous  in  the  bosom  of  Kentucky  that  the 
people  are  perfectly  convinced  that  it  ought  not 
to  exist,  and  having  found  the  means  of  abolish- 
ing it  without  allowing  the  slaves  to  remain 
among  us — who  can  doubt  their  right  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  sovereignty  of  the  countiy,  to  rid 
themselves  of  what  they  may  then  consider  to 
be  a  great  evil?  Say  that  experience  has  changed 
the  mind  of  gentlemen  here,  or  that  a  resort  to 
her  bibles  or  to  other  sources,  has  convinced 
them  of  the  evil  tendency  the  institution  has  ex- 
erted, and  that  public  sentiment  has  arrived  at  a 
full  conviction  that  it  ought  to  be  got  rid  of, 
would  they  not  have  a  right  to  do  so?  Is  it  not 
an  element  of  sovereignty  to  be  able  to  protect 
yourselves?  It  is  one  of  the  most  necessary  for 
self-preservation,  and  any  attempt  to  interdict 
it  by  constitutional  provision  would  be  a  dead 
letter,  whenever  circumstances  arose  requiring 
its  exercise.  And  that  time  would  arrive  when 
public  sentiment  became  generally  and  heartily 
satisfied  that  slavery  was  mischievous,  and  a 
political  and  moral  evil  to  the  body  politic  of 
Kentucky.  Then  what  will  they  do?  But  two 
things  present  themselves  to  my  mind.  One  is 
very  doubtful  indeed — the  other  is  in  no  doubt. 
I  have  no  doubt  if  such  is  the  sentiment  of  the 
country,  that  slavery  is  an  evil  too  great  to  be 
borne — admitting  it  to  be  true,  even  those  who 
do  not  believe  it — still  if  time  convinces  them 
of  their  error — they  will  agree  to  be  taxed  and 
give  a  just  compensation.  They  will  inquire 
into  the  humanity  of  the  matter,  and  a  system  of 
emancipation  will  be  adopted  where  the  two  ele- 
ments, justice  to  the  master,  and  humanity  to 
the  slave,  will  be  reconciled  and  combined.  That 
state  of  things  cannot  exist  unless  brought  forth 
by  the  operation  of  moral  and  physical  causes. 
T^he  physical  cause  must  be  acteci  upon  by  the 
moral  cause,  and  the  moral  cause  must  be  gov- 
erned by  justice  and  the  nature  of  things,  and 
when  that  time  comes,  slavery  ceases  to  exist  in 
Kentucky.  That  state  of  things  does  not  exist 
now.  Tnere  are  times  in  society,  when  subjects 
are  agitated  of  great  importance  to  the  people — 
that  then  prejudices  become  so  excited,  that  the 
question  does  not  receive  from  them  an  impar- 
tial consideration — yet  there  was  a  still  calm 
voice  in  the  bosom  of  every  man,  which,  when 
those  prejudices  and  extraneous  considerations 
ceased  to  operate,  would  be  heard.    And  when- 


128 


ever  that  still  small  voice  does  decide  in  favor  of 

the  emancipation  of  the  slaves,  then  the  most 
perturbed  mind  will  acquiesce  in  it,  and  slavery 
nere  ceases  forever. 

I  have  never  entertained  an  opinion  \rhioh 
would  go  to  interfere  with  the  rights,  or  of  the 
claims  of  the  slave  to  humane  consideration.  I 
am  here  to  vote,  and  will  vote  against  any  prop- 
osition that  Avill  even  indicate  a  tendency  to 
emancipate  the  slaves.  I  am  here  and  will  vote 
for  every  proposition  that  will  go  to  lessen  the 
number  of  free  negroes  in  the  state.  I  am  here, 
and  will  vote  to  tax  slave  property,  and  I  am  a 
slaveholder  myself,  that  will  have  a  tendency  to 
make  the  slaves  less  mischievous  and  trouble- 
some to  the  country  than  they  are  now,  and  to 
prevent  them  from  fleeing  away  from  us.  All 
these  positions  I  entertain  in  this  body.  I  am 
here  to  go  as  far  as  any  one  to  protect  that  prop- 
erty, and  to  make  tlie  institution  of  a  character 
that  it  will  be  sustained  by  the  public  sentiment. 
I  am  here,  declaring  that  it  is  the  offspring  of 
law,  and  that  it  exists  and  is  based  upon  public 
sentiment,  and  the  only  way  to  perpetuate  it,  is 
by  adapting  it  to  that  sentiment.  The  result  of 
the  laxity  of  discipline  on  the  part  of  the  mas- 
ter, is,  that  the  slave  population  is  becoming 
mischievous  to  a  very  great  extent,  and  thereby 
an  imposition  on  tjie  non-slaveholding  portion 
of  the  community.  This  should  cease.  The  time 
will  come  when  these  people  who  own  no  slaves 
will  feel  sensative  under  this  burthen,  and  en- 
quire why  it  is  they  are  compelled  to  bear  all 
their  evils.  I  am  willing  to  go  all  lengths  to 
obviate  this  condition  of  things,  so  that  even  in 
such  a  matter  public  sentiment  shall  be  fully 
satisfied.  I  have  said  all  that  is  necessary  and  all 
that  I  expected. 

The  convention  then  went  into  committee  of 
the  whole,  Mr.  BARLOW  in  the  chair,  on  the  res- 
olutions of  Mr.  TURNER  in  relation  to  slavery. 

The  CHAIR  awarded  the  floor  to  Mr. 
CLARKE,  who  waived  it  to  Mr.  TALBOTT, 
that  gentleman  expressing  a  desire  now  to  finish 
the  remarks  he  was  compelled  by  an  attack  of 
illness  to  forego  on  Saturday. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  rose  and  spoke  as  follows:  I 
arise  this  morning  to  conclude  the  remarks 
which,  from  indisposition,  I  was  compelled  to 
discontinue  on  Saturday.  At  that  time  I  had 
just  concluded  the  proof,  as  to  how,  and  when, 
and  by  what  authority,  the  institution  of  slavery 
was  first  established;  showing  clearly,  as  I  think, 
from  the  context  and  the  proof  then  adduced, 
that  God  did,  by  the  prophetic  denunciation  of 
Noah,  doom  Ham  and  his  posterity  to  the  latest 
generations,  to  personal  servitude  or  slavery  to 
liis  brethren,  Shem  and  Japheth,  and  to  their  pos- 
terity, as  appears  in  the  9th  chapter  of  Grenesis, 
from  24th  to  28th  verses.  The  question  then 
was,  as  to  the  institution,  and  the  question  now 
is,  as  to  the  privilege  and  practice  of  slavery. 
And  my  object,  on  the  present  occasion,  will  be 
to  show,  if  I  can,  whether  there  is  any  law,  eith- 
er in  the  old  or  new  testament  scriptures,  al- 
lowing or  forbidding  the  privilege  or  practice  of 
slavery  to  the  Patriarch,  the  Jew,  or  the  Christian; 
to  show  whether  slavery  is  compatible  or  incom- 
patible, consistent  or  inconsistent,  contrary  to,  or 
in  conformity  with,  the  will  or  law  of  God,  as  re- 
vealed in  either  or  both  testamcaits;  whether  a  man 


has  a  right  to  purchase,  own,  and  hold  property 

in  slaves,  at  any  time,  or  under  any  circumstan- 
ces, without  committing  a  sin  in  the  sight  of 
God,  and  incurring  his  righteous  displeasure. 
We  will  then,  sir,  see  what  was  the  practice  of 
the  wisest  and  best  men  in  the  patriarchal  age. 
And  I  refer  you,  first  then,  to  the  14th  chapter 
of  Genesis,  14th  verse,  which  reads: 

"  And  when  Abram  heard  that  his  brother  was 
'taken  captive,  he  armed  his  trained  servants, 
'born  in  nis  own  house,  three  hundred,  and 
'eighteen,  and  pursued  them  unto  Dan." 

From  which  you  see  that  Abraham,  the  father 
of  the  faithful,  and  the  friend  of  God,  had  three 
hundred  and  eighteen  servants,  raised  in  his 
own  house,  reared  by  his  own  hand,  and  sub- 
ject to  his  own  absolute  control,  in  war  as  well  as 
in  peace — a  privilege  much  greater  than  any  in 
our  country  either  exercise  or  enjoy.  And,  so  far 
from  being  considered  a  curse  in  those  days, 
one  of  the  strongest  arguments  by  Eleazer,  when 
urging  Rebekah  to  marry  Isaac,  the  son  of  Abra- 
ham, was,  that  the  Lord  had  greatly  blessed  his 
master  with  houses  and  lands,  and  silver  and 
gold,  and  men  servants,  and  maid  servants;  and 
all,  said  Eleazer,  that  my  master  hath,  he  has 
given  to  his  son  Isaac.  Rebekah  could  not  have 
been  an  abolitionist,  or  have  believed  slavery  to  be 
a  sin,  for  she  very  readily  agreed  to  take  Isaac 
with  all  his  slaves. 

If  you  will  turn  now  to  the  20th  chapter  of 
Exodus,  17th  verse,  you  will  find  slavery  is  put, 
by  Grod  himself,  in  the  same  category  with  all 
other  propertj*:  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy 
neighbor's  house,  thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neigh- 
boi-'s  wife,  nor  his  man  semant,  nor  his  maid  ser- 
vant, nor  his  ox,  nor  his  ass,  nor  any  thing  that 
is  thy  neighbors."  Here,  sir,  you  see  the  right 
clearly  acknowledged  by  the  law  itself,  t^at 
your  neighbor  has  to  his  servant,  and  yon  are 
positively  forbid  to  covet  them,  just  as  you  are, 
to  covet  his  ox,  his  ass,  or  any  other  property 
that  is  your  neighbors. 

Turn  now,  sir,  to  the  2lst  Exodus,  20th  and 
21st  verses,  and  you  will  find  slavery  positively 
affirmed  to  be  money :  "  If  a  man  smite  his  ser- 
'  vant  or  his  maid  with  a  rod,  and  he  die  under 
'  his  hand,  he  shall  be  surely  punished.  Not- 
'  withstanding,  if  he  continue  a  day  or  two,  he 
'  shaU  not  be  punished,  because  he  is  his  money.' 
This,  sir,  does  not  seem  as  if  the  people,  in  those 
days  believed  slavery  a  great  sin,  or  that  a  man 
has  no  right,  under  the  laws,  at  least  of  that  dis- 
pensation, to  purchase  and  hold  slaves. 

Turn  now,  sir,  and  read  the  17th  chapter  of 
Genesis,  12th,  13th,  and  14th  verses,  and  you  will 
find  slavery  incorporated  with  the  institution  of 
circumcision: 

"And  he  that  is  eight  days  old,  shall  be  cir- 
'  cumcised  among  you,  every  man  child  in  your 
'  generations;  he  that  is  bom  in  the  house  or 
'  bought  with  money  from  any  stranger,  which 
'  is  not  of  thy  seed. 

"He  that  is  born  in  thy  house,  and  he  that  is 
'  bought  with  thy  money,  must  needs  be  circum- 
'  cised:  and  ray  covenant  shall  be  in  your  flesh 
'  for  an  everlasting  covenant." 

Turn  now,  sir,  to  the  12th  chapter  of  Exodus, 
43d,  44th,  and  45th  verses,  and  you  will  see 
slavery  incorporated  with  the  institution  of  the 
passover : 


"  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses  and  Aaron,  this 

*  is  the  ordinance  of  the  passorer:  there  shall  no 
'  stranger  eat  thereof: 

"  But  every  man's  servant  that  is  bought  for 
'  money,  when  thou  hast  circumcised  him,  then 
'  shall  he  eat  thereof. 

"  A  foreigner  and  a  hired  servant  shall  not 
'  eat  thereof." 

Now,  sir,  here  are  two  instances,  where,  under 
the  express  direction  of  God,  slavery  has  been 
recognized  and  incorporated  with  two  distinct 
institutions — and,  in  one,  the  bondman,  to  the 
express  and  positive  exclusion  of  the  hired  ser- 
vant. 

We  have  now  seen  the  practice  of  slavery,  and 
let  us  see  if  we  can  find  the  privilege. 

Turn  then  sir,  to  the  21st  chapter  of  Exodus, 
from  the  1st  to  the  7th  verse,  and  you  Avill  find, 
the  children  of  maid  servants  went  with  their 
mothers. 

"2.  If  thou  buy  a  Hebrew  servant,  six  years 
'he  shall  serve:  and  in  the  seventh  he  shall  go 

*  out  free  for  nothing. 

"  3.  If  he  came  in  by  himself,  he  shall  go  out 
'  by  himself:  if  he  were  married,  then  his  wife 
'  shall  go  out  with  him. 

"  4.  If  his  master  have  given  him  a  wife,  and 
'  she  have  borne  him  sons  or  daughters,  the  wife 
'  and  her  children  shall  be  her  master's,  and  he 
'  shall  go  out  by  himself. 

"  5.  And  if  the  servant  shall  plainly  say,  I 
'love  my  master,  my  wife,  and  my  children;  I 
'  will  not  go  out  free: 

"  6.  Then  his  master  shall  bring  him  unto  the 
'judges:  he  shall  also  bring  him  to  the  door, 
'  or  unto  the  door-post:  and  his  master  shall 
'  bore  his  ear  through  with  an  awl:  and  he  shall 
'  serve  him  for  ever." 

Turn  then,  sir,  to  the  25th  chapter  of  Leviti- 
cus and  read  from  39th  to  47th  verses. 

"39.  And  if  thy  brother  that  dwelleth  hj  thee 
'  be  waxen  poor,  and  be  sold  unto  thee;  thou 
'  shalt  not  compel  him  to  serve  as  a  bond- 
'  servant: 

"  40.  But  as  a  hired  servant,  and  as  a  sojourn- 
'  er  he  shall  be  with  thee,  and  shall  serve  thee 
'  unto  the  year  of  jubilee: 

"41.  And  then  shall  he  depart  from  thee,  both 
'  he  and  his  children  with  him,  and  shall  return 
'  unto  his  own  family,  and  unto  the  possession 
'  of  his  fathers  shall  he  return. 

"  42.  For   they    are    my    servants    which    I 

*  brought  forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt;  tliey 
'  shall  not  be  sold  as  bond-men. 

"  43.  Thou  shalt  not  rule  over  him  with  rigour, 
'  but  shalt  fear  thy  God. 

"  44.  Both  thy  bond-men,  and  thy  bond-maids, 
'  irhich  thou  shalt  have,  shall  be  of  the  heathen 
'that  are  round  about  you;  of  them  shall  ye  buy 
'  bond-men  and  bond-maids. 

"45.  Moreover,  of  the  children  of  the  strangers 
'  that  do  sojourn  among  you,  of  them  shall  ye 
'  buy,  and  of  their  families  that  are  with  you, 
'  which  they  begat  in  your  land:  and  they  shall 
'  be  your  possession. 

"  46.  And  ye  shall  take  them  as  an  inheritance 
'for  your  children  after  vou,  to  inherit  Merw /or 
'«  possession,  they  shall  be  your  bond-men  for 
'  ever;  but  over  your  brethren  the  children  of 
'  Israel,  ye  shall  not  rule  one  over  another  with 
'  rigour. ' 


I  presume  now,  sir,  after  reading  these  verses, 
that  no  one  under  the  iniiuenee  of  right  reason, 
will  pretend  to  say  that  the  Jews,  under  this 
law,  had  no  right  to  purchase,  and  own,  and 
hold  slaves — the  Hebrew,  till  the  year  of  jubilee, 
and  the  heathen  and  stranger  forever,  or  for  life, 
and  to  entail  them  upon  their  families  as  an 
inheritance.  All  admit,  that  under  this  law, 
the  Jews  had  a  right  to  own  slaves,  bondmen 
and  bond-maids.  Some  say  the  Jews  had  a 
right  to  hold  them  for  life,  and  transmit  them 
to  their  children,  but  that  we  have  no  such  right, 
the  law  having  been  long  since  cancelled  or  re- 
pealed. If  it  has,  I  do  not  know  when  or  where, 
or  how,  or  by  what  authority;  but  if  it  ever  has, 
it  devolves  upon  the  opposition  to  show  it. 
Here  is  a  perfect  right  until  a  better  one  can  be 
shown.  I  believe  it  is  a  principle  universally 
acknowledged,  and  one  established  in  all  our 
courts,  that  in  every  suit  of  ejectment,  the  com- 
plainant has  to  prove  his  title  good  before  he 
can  recover,  whether  the  occupant  has  any  right 
or  not.  And  it  does  seem  to  me  sir,  unless  the 
emancipationists  can  show  some  law  equal  in 
dignity  and  authority,  some  express  statute  of 
Jehovah,  or  some  act  of  the  creature  by  which 
this  express  privilege  granted,  has  been,  either 
by  operation  of  law,  abrogated,  or  by  statute 
repealed,  they  shonld  forever  after  hold  their 
peace.  But  more  of  this  sir,  after  a  little. 
Others  say,  the  privilege  here  granted  to  pur- 
chase slaves  or  bond-men,  and  hold  them  for- 
ever, means,  and  never  meant  anything  more 
than  that  they  might  buy  them  and  hold  them, 
till  the  year  of  jubilee.  That  forever  and  jubi- 
lee mean  one  and  the  same  thing,  or  that  they 
are  synonymous  terms.  This  idea  sir,  I  tliink 
will  prove  to  be  very  absurd  if  you  will  look  for 
a  moment  to  the  29th  verse  of  this  same  chapter. 
Let  us  read : 

"29.  And  if  a  man  sell  a  dwelling  house  in  a 
'  walled  city,  then  he  may  redeem  it  within  a 
'  whole  year  after  it  is  sold ;  within  a  full  year 
'  may  he  redeem  it. 

"  30.  And  if  it  be  not  redeemed  within  the 
'  space  of  a  full  year,  then  the  house  that  is  in 
'  the  walled  city  shall  be  established  forever  to 
'  him  that  bought  it,  throughout  his  generation : 
'  it  shall  not  go  out  in  the  jubilee." 

And  what  do  we  find  here  sir.  Not  that  ju- 
bilee and  forever  are  synonymous,  or  mean 
one  and  the  same  thing,  but  the  contrary.  It 
expressly  declares  that  if  a  house  in  a  wallwl 
city  be  sold,  it  may  be  redeemed  within  a  whole 
year,  but  if  not  redeemed  within  a  year,  it  shall 
positively  be  the  property  of  the  purchaser  for- 
ever— it  shall  not  go  out  in  the  jubilee,  so  that 
I  think  the  question,  that  jubilee  and  forever, 
in  this  connection,  are  not  synonymous,  and  do 
not  mean  one  and  the  same  thing,  sliould  now  be 
considered  as  settled.  But,  to  prove  still  more 
clearly,  and  if  possible,  that  the  bondmen  liere 
named,  purchased  of  tlie  heathen  and  the  stranger, 
did  not  go  out  in  the  jubilee,  but  were  to  con- 
tinue the  property  of  the  masters  forever,  I  beg 
leave  to  read  from  Matthew  Henry's  note  on  these 
verses,  which  reads  as  follow: 

"  That  they  might  purchase  bondmen  from 
'  the  heathen  nations  round-about  them  or  of 
'  those  strangers  who  sojourned  amongst  them, 
'  (except  of  those  seven  nations  who  were  to  be 


13S 


destroyed)— and  might  claim  a  dominion  over 

them,  and  en/oi/  them  to  their  families  as  an 

inheritance.     For  the  year  nf  jubilee  should  gme 

'  no  discharge  to  them." 


Again,  vou  discover  one  thing  very  plainly 
here  from"  this  39th  verse  of  Leviticus  that  no 
Israelite  or  Jew  -was  to  be  made  bondman  or 
slave  for  life,   and  why?    Because  it/w^^  of 
Shem,  through  the  Jews,  concerning  the  flesh, 
Christ  or  the  Saviour  was  to  come,   as  he  did, 
and  as  was  shown  in  the  remarks  concluded  on 
Saturday.     And  hence  the  importance  that  no 
Jew  should  be  sold  as  a  boncl  servant  forever, 
or  for  life,  as  in  this  way  the  nation  would  have 
lost  its  identity,  as  they  would  have  been  sent, 
in  this  condition  all  over  the  world,  as  the  Afri- 
cans, the  descendants  of  Ham  have  been;  and 
mixing  as  slaves  witb  the   descendants  of  Ham, 
in  every  age  of  the  world,  they  would  have  so 
amalgalnated  as  to  destroy  the  identity  of  both 
nations,  which  would  have  defeated  the  inten- 
tion of  the  God  of  heaven,  to-wit:  to  keep  the 
line  of  three  distinct  races  of  beings— to  show 
in  all  time  to  come  the  exact  fulfillment  of  the 
prophetic  denunciation  of  Xoah,  in  9th  Genesis, 
not  only  of  the  curse  of  Ham,  but  the  bless- 
ing   of   Shem    and    enlargement    of    Japheth, 
which  never  could  have  been  done  if  God  had 
made   common  slaves,  or  slaves   in  common  of 
the   children  of  more  than   one  of  them;    and 
hence  the  prophecy  concerning  each  was  ^^Ser- 
ent,  and  has  been  executed,   and  can  and  will 
continue  to  be,  just  as  it  has  been  under  this  ar- 
rangement in  all  time  to  come,  or  the  setting  up 
of  a  new  dispensation.     This  is  God's  purpose, 
and  this  is  his  plan,  as  appears  from  the  evi- 
dence adduced,  for  reasons  unrevealed  and  un- 
known to  us.    Read  again  the  46th  verse.    >  ow 
vou  see  here  is  a  positive  law,  granting  the  priv- 
ilege in  so  many  words,  to  buy  and  hold  slaves 
for  life,  or  forever.    But  notice  sir,  it  tells  who 
you  are  to  make  slaves  for  life.     Now,  sir,  there 
IS  a  very  important  question  just  here,  one  which 
I  think'may  shed  some  light  on  this  subject,  and 
it  is  this,  sir.     Do  you  believe  the  provision  m 
the  39th  verse  of  this  chapter,  that  no  Israelite 
or  Jew  was  to  be  made  alwndman  for  life,  that 
they  were  to  serve  six  years,  and  go  out  in  the 
seventh?    I  ask,  sir,  do  vou  believe  this?    If  you 
do  sir,  vou  are  bound  to  believe  the  provision 
contained  in  the  other,  to-wit:  that  they  might 
buy  bondmen  of  the  heathen  and  strangers,  who 
were  to  be  slaves  forever,  and  be  transmitted 
from  generation  to  generation,  or  until  at  least 
the  setting  up  of  a  new  dispensation,  for  the  law 
that  establishes  the  one  grants  the   other.     Sir, 
this  view   is  clear  to  my  mind,  and  the  conclu- 
sion inevitable,  to-wit:   that  the  prophecy  of 
Noah  was  of  God,  and  its  fulfillment  of  God — 
and  that  the  curse  of  Ham  was  slavery  to  the  la- 
test generations. 

Now  this  certainly  settles  the  question,  and  I 
will  so  consider  it,  unless  some  more  authorita- 
tive law  is  found  to  inhibit  it ;  for  here  is  the 
privilege  to  purchase,  to  hold,  and  transmit  to 
your  families  after  you. 

But  'tis  said  that  the   New    Testament    is 
against  it.    Let  us  see  if  this  be  true. 
'Paul.  in  his  letter  to  1  Corinthians,  7tb  chap- 
ter, 20th,  21st.  22d,  23d  and  24th  verses,  says : 


"20.  Let  every  man  abide  in  the  same  calling 

'  wherein  he  was  called. 

'•■  21.  Art  thou  called  being  a  servant?  care  not 
'  for  it;  but  if  thou  may  est  be  made  free,  use  it 
'rather.  ,   .  . 

"22.  For  he  that  is  called  in  the  Lord,  bemg  a 

'servant,  is  the  Lord's  freeman:  likewise  also 

'  he  that  is  called,  being  free,  is  Christ's  servant, 

"23.  Ye  are  bought  with  a  price;  be  not  ye 

'  the  servants  of  men.  . 

"24.  Brethren,  let  every  man,  wherein  he  is 
'  called,  therein  abide  with  God." 

Again  :  Paul,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Eohesians, 
6th  chapter,  5th,  6th,  7  th,  8th,  and  9th  verses, 
says : 

"5.  Servants,  be  obedient  to  them  that  are 
'  your  masters  according  to  the  flesh,  with  fear 
•  and  trembling,  in  singleness  of  your  heart,  as 
'  unto  Christ; 

"  6.  Not  with  eye-service,  as  men-pleasers;  but 
'  as  the  servants  o'f  Christ,  doing  the  will  of  God 
'  from  the  heart; 

"  7.  With  good  wUl  doing  service,  as  to  the 
'  Lord,  and  not  to  men; 

"  8.  Knowing  that  whatsoever  good  thing  anr 
'  man  doeth,the  same  shall  he  receive  of  the  Lord, 
'  whether  he  be  bond  or  free. 

"  9.  And,  ve  masters,  do  the  same  things  unto 
'them,  forbearing  threatening:  knowing  that 
'  your  Master  also  is  in  heaven;  neither  is  there 
'  respect  of  persons  with  him." 

Ao'ain :  Paul,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
3rd  chapter,  22nd,  23rd,  24th,  and  25th  verses; 
says: 

"22.  Servants,  obey  in  all  things  your  masters 
'  according  to  the  flesli;  not  with  eye-service,  as 
'men-pleasers;  but  in  singleness  of  heart,  fear- 
'ingGod. 

"  23.  And  whatsoever  ye  do,  do  it  heartily,  as 
'to  the  Lord,  and  not  unto  men; 

"  24.  Knowing  that  of  the  Lord  ye  shall  re- 
'ceive  the  reward  of  the  inheritance:  for  ye 
'  serve  the  Lord  Christ. 

"  25.  But  he  that  doeth  wrong,  shall  receive 
'  for  the  wrong  which  he  hath  done:  and  there  is 
'  no  respect  of  persons." 

Again :  Paul,  in  his  first  epistle  to  Timothy, 
6th  chapter,  1st  and  2nd  verses,  says : 

"1.  Let  as  many  servants  as  are  under  the  yoke 
'  count  their  own' masters  worthy  of  all  honour, 
'  that  the  name  of  God  and  his  doctrine  be  not 
'  blasphemed. 

"  2.  And  they  that  have  believing  masters,  let 
'  them  not  despise  them,  because  they  are  breth- 
'  ren;  but  rather  do  them  service,  because  they 
'  are  faithful  and  beloved,  partakers  of  the  bene- 
'  fit.     These  things  teach  and  exhort." 

Again :  Paul,  in  his  epistle  to  Titus,  2nd 
chapter,  9th  and  lOth  verses,  says : 

"  9.  Exhort  servants  to  be  obedient  unto  their 
'  own  masters,  and  to  please  them  well  in  all 
'  things;  not  answering  again; 

"  10.  Not  purloining"  but  shewing  all  good  fi- 
'  delitv;  that  they  may  adorn  the  doctrine  of  God 
'  our  Saviour  in  all  things." 

Again :  Paul,  in  his  first  epistle  to  Peter,  2nd 
chapter,  18th,  1 9th,  and  20th  verses,  says  : 

"  18.  Servants,  be  subject  to  your  masters  with 
•all  fear;  not  only  to  the  good  and  gentle,  but 
'  also  to  the  froward. 
I     "  19.  For  this  is  thank-worthy,  if  a  man  for 


126 


'conscience  toward  God  endure  grief,  suffering 
'  wrongfully. 

"20.  For  what  glory  is  it,  if,  when  ye  be  buf- 
'  feted  for  your  faults,  ye  shall  take  it  patiently? 
'  but  if,  when  ye  do  well,  and  suffer/or  it,  ye  take 
'  it  patiently,  this  is  acceptable  witH  God." 

Why   did   Paul  send   Onesimus  home  to   his 
master,   stating  that    he    hoped   he    who    had 
hitherto    been   an   unprofitable  servant,  would 
now  be   profitable?      Wliy  did  he   not  say   to 
Pliilemon  that  slavery  was  wrong,  that  it   was 
a  sin,  that  it  Avas   a  thing  which  God  abhor- 
red, a  corroding  cancer  on    the   body  politic, 
and  would  certainly  destroy  it   if  it  was   not 
healed?      Why,   I   ask,   if  slavery  be  the  evil 
complained  of   in    the    article    read  from   the 
Examiner,  did  Paul  not  tell  Philemon  that  he 
had  best  set  Onesimus  free,  and  turn  abolition- 
ist.    Why,  I  ask  again,  sir,  if  slavery  be,  in  "all 
its  parts"  evil,  and  in  all  its  tendencies,  conse- 
quencies,    and    effects    ruinous,   and    in    itself 
contrary  alike  to  the  laws  of  nature,    reason, 
and    revelation,    is    it   that   our    Saviour  did 
not  condemn  and  abolish  it.     His  mission  was 
love,  his  object  to  condemn  sin,  and  redeem  men 
from  its  bondage.      He   did  it   in  every  other, 
why  not  in  this?      Was  it  because  the   sin  of 
slaveiy  was  too  small  a  matter?   Oh  no.  Why,  if 
■what    the    emancipationists  say  be  true,  it  is 
the  greatest  sin  in  the  world.      What  sir,  take 
your  equal,  and  vi  et  armis,  drive  him  off  into  the 
lanes,  and  ditches,  and  gutters,  and  dens,  and 
hog  wallows,  and  chains,  and  drag,  and  drive, 
and  whip,  and  cut,  and  beat,  and  rob  him  of  his 
liberty  and  his  property;  why  'tis  the  worst  sin 
in  the  world.     Why  then  sir,  did  not  the  blessed 
Redeemer  condemn  it;  and   do  it  in  a  manner 
not  to  be  mistaken?  Was  it  because  his  sympathy 
was  not  as  great  as  that  of  the  abolitionists,  or 
his  love  of  truth  and  justice  weaker?   Sir,  his  mis- 
sion was  love,  love  to  each,  and  love  to  all.    If 
he  loved  all  alike,  why  then  Avould  he  leave  any 
in  bondage  who  were  entitled  to  their  freedom, 
when  his  great,  governing  principle  was,  "  ren- 
der unto   CiEsar  the    things   that  are   Cajsar's; 
and  unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's."     Sir,  if 
slavery  be  the  thing  assumed,  the  course  pursued 
bjr  our  Savior  is  wholly  irreconcilable,   to   my 
mind,   with  his  mission,  his  life,  his  death,  his 
resurrection,  his  religion,  or  his  attributes.      He 
came  to  do  the  will  of  his  father,  and  if  slavery- 
be  a  thing  that  God  abhors,  it  seems  to  me,  sir, 
he  would  certainly  have  abolished  it,  especially 
as  it  would  have  been  an   end  so  easily  accom- 
plished by  one  who  said  "let  there  be  light,  and 
there  was  light."     But  it  is  said  by  some,  but  I 
think  falsely  said,  that  he  could  not  have  estab- 
lished his  kingdom  if  he  had   interfered  with 
the  domestic  in.stitutions  of  that  day ;  and  that 
from  motives  of  policy,  or  fear,  he  did  not  do  it 
though   his  head,  his  heart,  his  father,  his  re- 
ligion, and   all   was  against  it.    Sir,  did  you 
ever  hear  such  an  infamous  and  blasphemous 
sentiment!     The  king  of  glory,  actuated  by  a 
principle  of  fear,  or  governed  by  motives  of  pol- 
icy I    He  who  spake  as  never  man  spake  1     He 
wno  in  the  beginning  was  with  God,  and  was 
God  I    He  by  whom,  and  for  whom,  all  things 
were  made,  and  without  whom  was  not  any 
thing  made  that  was  made,  governed  in  a  great 
question  like  this  by  a  principle  of   policy,  to 


the  neglect  and  total  abandonment  of  all  justice, 
mercy,  and  truth  !  It  is  too  bad.  Sir,  to  impute 
such  a  motive  to  such  a  being,  on  such  a  subject, 
is  infamous ;  it  is  blasphemous  in  the  extreme.  I 
know  men,  sir — I  speak  nothing  invidiously — 
who  have  said — and  I  have  heard  of  their  ex- 
pressing the  sentiment — teach  them  to  be- 
lieve that  God  and  religion  tolerated  and  estab- 
lished slavery,  and  they  would  renounce  it,  and 
forever  after  go  against  it,  and  the  principles  it 
inculcates.  Sir,  this  shows  that  the  object  such 
an  one  would  have  in  ascertaining  the  will  of  God, 
would  not  be  to  execute  and  carry  it  out,  but  to 
see  how  far  he  can  make  it  sutserve  his  own 
peculiar  views.  But,  sir,  convince  me  that  God 
the  Father,  God  the  Son,  and  God  the  Spirit,  all 
in  one,  would  for  thousands  and  thousands  of 
years,  in  every  age,  and  under  every  dispensa- 
tion of  religion,  and  amongst  all  nations,  permit 
an  institution  so  outrageous  as  the  one  of  slave- 
ry is  represented  to  be  by  our  opponents.  I 
confess  it  would  shake  my  faith.  Sir,  I  do 
not,  I  cannot  believe  it. 

Now,  sir,  I  have  gone  through,  in  my  crude 
way,  with  this  whole  subject,  and  I  have  shown, 
I  think,  that  God  did  ordain  and  establish  slave- 
ry by  the  prophetic  denunciations  of  Noah  and 
his  son  Ham,  and  his  posterity,  in  the  very  dawn 
of  time.     I  have  shown  that  he  permitted  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob,  all  to  have  hosts  of  slaves, 
while  in  full  fellowship  with  Him  and  with  one 
another.     I  have  shown  that  God  authorized  the 
Jews,  through  Moses,  to  purchase   with  money, 
and   hold   slaves  forever.     I  have  shown,  also, 
that  he  incorporated  it  with  the  institutions  of 
the  passover  and  circumcision,  thus  identifying 
it  with,  and  incorporating  it  in,  both  Patriarch- 
al and  Jewish  dispensations;  showing,  clearly 
and  conclusively,  that  slaverj-  is  not,  as  is  con- 
tended by  the  opposition,  contrary  to,  but  com- 
patible with,  the  law  of  God,  and  consequently 
cannot  be  a  sin  in  his  sight.     Sin  being  an  in- 
stitution or  act  contrary  to,  and  in  violation  of, 
God's  holy  law,   and  God  having  ordained  and 
established  slavery,  it  cannot  be  immoral,  either 
in  its  institution  or  tendency.     A  bad  tree  can- 
not bring  forth  good  fruit,  nor  can  a  good  tree 
bring  forth  bad  fruit.     I  have  farther  shown  that 
it  is  not  the  use,   but  the   abuse  of  slavery  that 
brings  wretchedness  and  ruin;  that  where  slave- 
ry abounded  and  was  properly  regulated,  pros- 
perity did  much  more  abound  and  continue, — 
thus  clearly  showing  and  establishing  what  was 
to  be  proven — that  slavery  is   neither  a  sin  in 
the  sight  of  God,  a  great  moral   evil,  or  detri- 
mental to  the  best  interests  of  a  state;  that  it  has 
existed  in  every  age  of  the  world  since  the  flood, 
and  has  been  incorporated  with  every  dispensa- 
tion of  religion — Patriarchal,  Jewish,  and  Chris- 
tian. 

And  then,  on  motion  of  Mr.  CLARKE,  the 
committee  rose  and  reported   progress.    Leave 
was  granted  for  it  to  sit  again,  and 
The  convention  adjourned. 


127 


TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  16, 1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

EEPORTS   FROM    COMillTTEES. 

Mr.  "WICKLIFFE,  from  Uje  committee  an  the 
court  of  appeals,  made  a  report  as  an  amend- 
ment of  the  report  heretofore  made  from  that 
committee,  Tvhich,  on  his  motion,  was  referred 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole  and  ordered  to  be 
printed,  as  follows: 

Sec.  5.  Line  2,  after  "  state,"  add  "  by  coun- 
ties." Sec.  5.  Line  2,  after  "  districts,"  add  "  as 
nearly  equal  in  voting  population,  and  with  as 
convenient  limits  as  may  be." 

Sec.  13.  Add  the  following:  "provided,  that 
when  a  vacancy  may  occur  from  any  cause,  or 
the  clerk  shall  \>e  under  charges  upon  informa- 
tion, the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  shall  have 
Sower  to  appoint  a  clerk,  pro  tern,  to  perform  the 
uties  of  clerk  until  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled, 
or  the  clerk  acquitted." 

Add  the  following:  Sec.  15  "  All  elections  of 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  the  clerks 
thereof,  shall  be  by  ballot." 

Mr.  BRISTOW,  from  the  committee  on  the 
county  courts,  made  a  report  which  was  referred 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  ordered  to 
be  printed,  as  follows: 

article  — . 

Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
■within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to 
consist  of  a  presiding  judge  and  two  associate 
judges. 

Sec.  2.  The  judges  of  the  county  court  shall 
be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  in  each  county, 
for  the  term  of  four  years,  and  until  their  suc- 
cessors shall  be  duly  qualified,  and  shall  receive 
such  compensation  for  their  services  as  may  be 
fixed  by  law,  to  be  paid  out  of  tlie  county  rev- 
enue. 

Sec.  3.  At  the  first  election  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  the  three  judges  shall  be 
elected  at  the  same  time,  but  the  associate  judges, 
first  elected,  shall  hold  their  offices  for  only  two 
years,  so  that,  thereafter,  the  election  of  the  pre- 
siding judge,  and  that  of  the  associate  judges, 
will  not  occur  at  the  same  time. 

Sec.  4.  Xo  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  office 
of  presiding  or  associate  judge  of  the  county 
court,  unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  Slates, 
over  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  of 
the  county  in  which  he  sh^l  be  chosen  one  year 
next  preceding  the  election. 

Sec.  5.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  county  court 
shall  be  regulated  by  law,  and,  until  changed, 
shall  be  the  same  now  vested  in  the  county 
courts  of  this  commonwealth. 

Sec.  6.  The  several  counties  in  this  state  shall 
be  laid  oflf  into  districts  of  convenient  size,  as 
the  general  assembly  may,  from  time  to  time,  di- 
rect. Two  justices  of  the  peace  and  one  consta- 
ble shall  be  elected  in  each  district  by  the  quali- 
fied voters  therein.  The  jurisdiction  of  said  of- 
ficers shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  county. — 
Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected  for  the 
term  of  four  years,  and  constables  for  the  term 
of  two  years;  they  shall  be  citizens  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  twenty-one  years  of  ago,  and  shall 
have  resided  six  months  in  the  district  in  which 


they  may  be  elected,  next  prece<ling  the  election. 

Sec.  7.  Judges  of  the  county  court,  and  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  shall  be  conservators  of  the 
peace.  They  shall  be  commissioned  by  the  gov- 
ernor. County  and  district  officers  shall  vacate 
their  offices  by" removal  from  the  district  or  coun- 
ty in  which  they  shall  be  appointed.  The  legis- 
lature shall  provide,  by  law,  for  the  mode  and 
inanner  of  conducting  and  making  due  returns 
of  all  elections  of  judges  of  the  county  court, 
justices  of  the  peace,  and  constables,  ana  for  de- 
termining contested  elections;  and  also  provide 
the  mode  of  filling  vacancies  in  these  offices. 

Sec.  8.  Judges  of  the  county  courts,  justices 
of  the  peace,  and  constables,  shall  be  subject  to 
indictment  for  malfeasance  or  misfeasance  in  of- 
fice, in  such  mode  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law, 
subject  to  appeal  to  the  court  of  appeals;  and, 
upon  conviction,  their  offices  shall  become  va- 
cant. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX,  from  a  select  committee,  as 
its  chairman,  made  the  following  report,  which 
was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole  and 
ordered  to  be  printed: 


Sec.  1.  "Within  five  years  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  the  legislature  shall 
appoint  not  less  than  three  nor  more  than  five 
persons  learned  in  the  law,  who  shall  revise,  di- 
gest, and  arrange  the  statute  laws,  civil  and 
criminal,  so  as  to  have  but  one  law  on  any  one 
subject,  to  be  in  plain  English,  in  such  manner 
as  the  legislature  may  direct;  and  a  like  provis- 
ion shall  be  had  as  often  as  shall  be  found  neces- 
sary. 

Sec.  2.  Eachlawpassedbythe  legislature  shall 
embrace  but  one  subject  matter,  which  shall  be 
expressed  in  the  title. 

Sec.  3.  Every  amendment  of  a  statute  shall 
include  that  part  of  the  old  statute  intended  to 
be  retained,  as  well  as  the  amendment  or  addi- 
tion thereto. 

Sec.  4.  The  legislature,  at  its  first  session  af- 
ter the  adoption  of  the  new  constitution,  shall 
provide  for  the  appointment  of  at  least  three 
persons  learned  in  tne  law,  whose  duty  it  shall 
be  to  prepare  a  code  of  practice  for  the  courts  in 
this  commonwealth,  by  revising,  abridging,  and 
simplifying  the  laws  in  relatiou  thereto,  and  re- 
port the  same  to  the  legislature  for  their  adop- 
tion and  modification  from  time  to  time. 

Sec.  5.  The  mode  of  taking  evidence  in  this 
commonwealth  shall,  in  all  civil  suits,  be  uni- 
form and  the  same,  and  each  party  shall  have 
the  right  to  make  a  witness  of  the  opposing 
party. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX,  from  a  minority  of  the  same 
committee,  asked  and  obtained  leave  to  make  a 
report  differing  in  some  of  its  details  from  the 
report  of  the  majority,  with  which  he  said  he  was 
unable  to  agree.  On  his  motion  it  was  referred  to 
the  commiuee  of  the  whole  and  ordered  to  be 
printed,  as  follows: 

ARTICLE  — . 

Sec.  1.  At  its  first  session  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  the  legislature  shall  appoint 
not  less  than  three  nor  more  than  five  persons 
learned  in  the  law,  whose  duty  it  shall  he  to  re- 
vise and  arrange  the  statute  laws  of  this  com- 


128 


mouwealth,  both  civil  and  criminal,  so  as  to  have 
but  one  law  on  any  one  subject. 

Sec.  2.  And,  also,  three  other  persons  learn- 
ed in  the  law,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  pre- 
pare a  code  of  practice  for  the  courts  in  this 
commonwealth,  by  revising,  abridging,  and  sim- 
plifying the  rules  of  practice,  and  laws  re- 
lating tliereto — all  of  whom  shall,  at  as  early  a 
day  as  practicable,  report  their  labors  to  the 
legislature  for  their  approval,  amendment,  and 
adoption.  A  like  revision  of  the  statutes  and 
rules  of  practice  shall  be  provided  by  the  legis- 
lature every  years. 

Sec.  3.  When  the  legislature  shall  amend  a 
statute,  the  whole  of  such  statute,  as  amended, 
shall  be  published. 

Sec.  4.  No  law  passed  by  the  legislature  shall 
embrace  more  than  one  distinct  object,  or  sub- 
ject matter,  which  shall  be  expressed  in  the 
title. 

Sec.  5.  No  petition  or  declaration  shall  ever 
be  made  necessary  to  the  issuance  of  process, 
on  accounts  or  notes  for  the  payment  of  money 
or  property. 

Sec.  6.  No  civil  suit  shall  be  dismissed  for 
lack  of  technical  form  or  specifications;  but  ev- 
ery citizen  shall  have  justice  freely  without  sale, 
promptly,  without  denial  or  delay,  and  a  trial 
\ipon  the  merits  of  liis  case.  To  this  end,  the 
l(!gislature,  at  its  first  session  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  shall  provide  one  general 
form  of  action  in  which  all  civil  suits  shall  be 
brought. 

Sec.  7.  In  all  civil  suits  the  witnesses  shall 
be  examined  orally,  and  in  open  court,  except  in 
such  cases  as,  from  necessity,  the  legislature 
shall  othei-wise  order  and  direct;  and  either  par- 
ty shall  always  have  the  right  to  make  a  witness 
of  the  opposing  party. 

Sec.  8.  Seven  years  peaceable  possession  un- 
der a  title,  either  legal  or  equitable,  shall  quiet 
the  titles  of  the  occupants  of  lands  in  this  com- 
monwealth, as  to  the  adverse  claim  or  claims  of 
all  and  every  person  or  persons — infants,  idiots, 
and  persons  of  unsound  mind  excepted. 

LEAVE    OF    ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  JAMES,  leave  of  ab- 
sence was  granted  to  Mr.  Talbott  until  to-mor- 
row morning. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  that  he  had  re- 
ceived a  note  from  the  delegate  from  Franklin 
county  (Mr.  Lindsey)  stating  that  he  was  de- 
tainea  from  his  seat,  without  leave,  by  the  ill- 
ness of  his  father. 


The  resolutions  offered  yesterday  by  Mr.  Dix- 
on, affirming  the  inviolability  of  slave  property, 
came  up  as  the  unfinished  business. 

Mr.  TURNER  resumed  the  discussion,  and 
spoke  as  follows: 

Mr.  President:  When  the  gentleman's  res- 
olution was  read  yesterday  morning  there  was 
such  confusion  here  that  I  did  not  at  once 
draw  the  distinction  between  the  propriety  of 
doing  what  he  desires,  and  the  power  of  doing 
it,  and  I  therefore  said  that  I  noped  the  vote 
■would  be  taken  immediatjly,  for  I  am  sure  that 
not  a  member  wishes  to  interfere  with  the  riglit 
of  property.    After  it  was  read  a  second  time, 


the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,) 
got  the  floor,  and  I  had  not  the  opportunity  of 
making  the  remarks  I  desired.  I  concur  in  what 
was  said  by  that  gentleman  with  one  exception, 
and  I  do  not  at  present  intend  to  discuss  the 
merits  of  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson,  except  in  part,  as  I  understand  it  is 
to  be  amended.  I  am  extremely  anxious  that 
we  shall  all  come  to  an  agreement  on  this  subject, 
and  to  such  a  one  as  will  not  go  out  to  alarm 
the  people  of  the  commonwealth.  It  is  true 
there  can  be  no  dissent  from  the  proposition 
that  we  ought  not  to  interfere  Avith  the  vest- 
ed rights  of  the  citizens  of  Kentucky.  Yet,  how- 
ever alarming  it  may  appear  at  first  blush,  I  have 
not  the  most  remote  doubt  that  we  have  the 
power  to  interfere  with  those  vested  rights,  so  far 
as  respects  the  slave  property  of  the  common- 
wealth. I  hope  the  day  will  never  come — it  cer- 
tainly has  not  now  come — when  there  will  be  a 
disposition  to  exercise  this  power,  either  by  us 
or  by  those  who  may  come  after  us. 

There  have  been  two  propositions  assumed  in 
this  debate,  in  relation  to  the  influence  of  the 
Federal  Constitution  on  this  subject  of  slavery, 
upon  which  I  wish  to  express  an  opinion,  and 
to  read  some  authorities.  There  has  been  an 
opinion  expressed  here,  that  the  constitution  of 
1792  and  1798,  was  a  contract  between  the  citi- 
zens of,  and  the  government  of  the  state,  that 
they  should  hold  slave  property,  and  tliat  there- 
fore it  was  guarantied  by  that  provision  of  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  which  se- 
cures the  inviolability  of  contracts.  I  do  not 
think  that  is  a  correct  doctrine.  I  do  not 
believe  that  the  tenure  of  our  slave  property  is 
held  in  any  way  under  prohibitions  or  grants  of 
power  in  the  United  States  constitution,  except 
so  far  as  the  provisions  of  the  constitution  in 
regard  to  runaAvay  slaves,  and  one  otlier  similar 
matter,  may  be  connected  with  it.  I  do  not  eou- 
sider'a  constitution,  any  more  than  a  law,  to  be  a 
contract.  Is  every  law  we  pass  a  contract  be- 
tween the  government  and  the  citizen?  And 
the  constitution  is  nothing  more  than  law.  It  is 
supreme,  and  other  law  yields  to  it  as  inferior 
law,  but  still  it  is  a  mere  law,  and  rule  of  ac- 
tion prescribed  by  the  sovereign  power.  It  is  a 
sovereign  law  in  its  sphere  of  action,  and  where 
it  is  not  restrained  by  constitutional  power  supe- 
ortoit;  butwhetheritbecoiistitutionorlaw, there 
are  no  riglits  of  contract  arising  from  it.  If  that 
was  the  case,  then  the  repeal  of  the  law  would 
leave  all  the  rights  under  it  just  as  if  the  law 
was  not  repealed.  And  if  we  concede  that  slave 
property  in  this  country  is  regulated  by,  or  held 
in  any  manner  under  the  federal  government, 
what  does  that  concession  amount  to?  It  is  the 
very  concession  that  tlie  wildest  advocate  of  ab- 
olitionism desires  us  to  make  for  them.  Instead 
of  the  institution  being  entirely  under  the  pro- 
tection of  our  own  laws  and  regulations,  it 
would  be  entirely  under  the  control  of  tlic  feder- 
al government.  It  may  be  said  that  there  are 
guaranties  with  regard  to  it  under  the  federal 
constitution,  but  are  we  not  increasing  tlie  free 
states  ta  sucli  an  extent  that  soon  two  thirds 
of  the  Union  will  be  free  states,  who  could  at 
any  moment  attack  those  guanvnties  by  way  of 
amending  the  constitution,  and  take  our  proper- 
ty away  from  us.    That  would  be  the  goal  to 


139 


which  we  are  driving,  and  I  protest  against  the 
assumption  of  the  existence  of  any  such  power 
in  the  federal  government. 

It  ha-?  been  said  also,  that  the  slave  property 
is  further  protected  because  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States  declares  that  private  property 
shall  not  be  taken  without  compensation — a 
similar  provision  to  the  one  existing  in  our 
state  constitution.  It  is  not  addressed  to  the 
state  power  or  authority  at  all,  but  it  is  address- 
ed entirely  to  the  exercise  of  the  power  in  the 
federal  constitution  by  congress  sitting  under 
it.  It  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  state  institu- 
tions or  the  exercise  of  state  power  at  all.  I  will 
read  the  decision  on  this  point  in  the  case  of 
Barrow  vs.  the  Mayor  of  Baltimore — 7th  Peters, 
page  243. 

"The  provision  declaring:  that  private  proper- 
'  ty  shall  not  be  taken  for  public  use  without 
'just  compensation,  is  intended  solely  as  a  limi- 
'  tation  on  the  exercise  of  the  power  bv  the 
'government  of  the  United  States,  and  is  not 
'  applicable  to  the  legislation  of  States.  Limi- 
*  tations  of  power,  if  expressed  in  general  terms, 
'  are  necessarily  applicable  to  the  government 
'  created  by  the  instrument,  and  not  to  distinct 
'  governments  formed  by  different  persons  and 
'  for  different  purposes." 

As  to  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  I  concur  in  all  he  said  in  relation 
to  the  origin  of  our  title  to  slave  property,  and 
indeed  in  every  thing  he  said  to  which  he  gave 
the  sanction  of  his  opinion.  But  does  he  wish 
to  have  the  idea  inferred  from  his  argument,  that 
the  delegation  of  the  commercial  power  in  the 
federal  constitution — the  power  to  regulate  com- 
merce between  the  several  states,  Indian  tribes, 
<tc. — -places  a  restriction  upon  our  power  over 
our  slave  property?  I  did  not  understand  him 
as  giving  his  opinion  that  such  was  the  fact, 
but  onlv  as  referring  to  it  as  an  argument,  which 
he  useS  in  1833,  when  we  were  both  much 
younger  than  now,  to  keep  the  non-importation 
slave  law  from  being  passed.  The  gentleman  is 
too  good  a  lawyer,  and  too  enlightened  and 
candid  a  man,  to  say  to  this  house,  that  he  be- 
lieves that  the  clause  of  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States  applies  to  this  subject,  and  reach- 
es the  matter  of  commerce  in  slaves.  He  would 
never  throw  the  weight  of  his  character  and 
judgment  into  that  scSe.  The  federal  constitu- 
tion, when  speaking  of  the  regulation  of  com- 
merce between  the  states,  refers  to  the  ordinary 
subjects  of  commerce.  It  does  not  apply  to 
"persons,"  as  negroes  are  designated  in  that  in- 
strument, and  they  are  not  within  the  scope  of 
the  federal  power.  Whv,  if  Congress  can  pass 
an  act  permitting  us  to  l)ring  slaves  into  Ken- 
tucky, can  they  not  also  pass  a  law  prohibiting 
ns  from  doing  so?  Suppose  this  was  a  new 
state — ^that  there  were  not  an  hundred  slaves  in 
its  whole  population,  and  that  we  desired  to 
have  slavery,  can  the  congress  of  the  United 
States,  legally  under  its  constitution,  say  that 
we  shall  not  bring  them  here,  notwithstanding 
every  body  desired  that  we  should?  I  deny 
that  congress  has  any  power  over  the  subject, 
derived  either  from  the  commercial  clause  in 
the  constitution,  or  from  any  other  source.  The 
negroes  of  the  southern  country  are  going  into 

Texas  in  great  numbers,  and  is  there  any  one 
17 


who  will  say,  that  notwithstanding  she  is  recog- 
nized as  a  state  of  the  Union,  the  federal  govern- 
ment has  a  right  to  prohibit  those  slaves  from 
being  brought  into  that  state?  Is  it  not  an  in- 
stitution clearly  under  her  own  control,  over 
which  the  federal  government  has  no  power?  If 
not,  if  we  admit  tliat  congress  has  that  power, 
under  the  commercial  clause,  it  is  putting  the 
slave  institution  in  the  states,  entirely  under  the 
control  of  the  federal  government. 

If  this  power  extends  to  one  state,  under  this 
commercial  clause,  it  must  extend  to  all.  That 
Congress  should  have  the  power  to  say  what 
shall  or  shall  not  be  brought  into  Kentucky,  but 
shall  not  have  the  same  power  with  regard  to  In- 
diana or  Ohio,  is  a  proposition  that  will  not  bear 
even  a  moment's  scrutiny.  Wherever  they  have 
anv  power  under  the  constitution  it  is  unlimi- 
ted in  its  exercise  within  the  sphere  of  the 
limits  of  the  United  States,  and  can  be  applied 
to  every  state,  territory,  and  nook,  and  comer  in 
this  nation.  The  power  is  not  subordinate  to 
that  of  the  state;  the  state  power  always,  when 
it  comes  in  conflict  with  that  of  the  federal 
government,  is  subordinate  and  succumbs  to  it. 
In  the  great  case  of  Graves  vs.  Slaughter,  which 
went  up  to  the  United  States  supreme  court  from 
Louisiana,  this  part  of  the  constitution  was 
touched  upon  ana  ai^ued  in  a  manner  so  able  as 
to  draw  forth  the  highest  encomiums  of  the  court. 
Judge  McLean  on  this  subject  said: 

"  Can  the  transfer  and  sale  of  slaves,  from 
one  state  to  another,  be  regulated  by  Congress, 
under  the  commercial  power? 
"If  a  state  may  admit  or  prohibit  slaves  at 
its  discretion,  this  power  must  be  in  the  state, 
and  not  in  Congress.     The  constitution  seems 
to  recognize  the  power  to  be  in  the  states.     The 
importation  of  certain  persons,  meaning  slaves, 
which  was  not  to  be  prohibited  before  eighteen 
hundred  and  eight,  was  limited  to  such  states, 
then  existing,  as  shall  think  proper  to  admit 
them.    Some  of  the  states  at  that  time  prohibi- 
ted the  admission  of  slaves,  and  their  right  to 
do  so  was  as  strongly  implied  by  this  provision 
as  the  right  of   other    states  that    admitted 
them." 
"  The  constitution  treats  slaves  as  persons. 
'    *    *    *    "  The  character  of  property  is  giv- 
'  en  them  by  local  law.     This  law  is  respected, 
'  and  all  rights  under  it  are  protected  by  the  fed- 
'  eral  authorities;  but  the  constitution  acts  upon 
'  slaves  as  persons,  and  not  as  property.    *    * 

"  The  power  over  slavery  belongs  to  the  states 
'  respectively.  It  is  local  in  its  character,  and  in 
'its  effects;  and  the  transfer  or  sale  of  slaves 
'  cannot  be  separated  from  this  power.  It  is,  in- 
'  deed,  an  essential  part  of  it. 

"  Each  state  has  the  right  to  protect  itself 
'  against  the  avarice  and  intrusion  of  the  slave 
'  dealer;  to  guard  its  citizens  against  the  incon- 
'  veniences  and  dangers  of  a  slave  population. — 
'  The  right  to  exercise  this  power,  by  a  state,  is 
'  higher  and  deeper  than  the  constitution.  The 
'  evil  involves  the  prosperity,  and  may  endanger 
'  the  existence  of  a  state.  Its  power  to  guard 
'  against,  or  to  remedy  the  evil,  rests  upon  the 
'  law  of  self-preservation;  a  law  vital  to  every 
'  community,  and  especially  to  a  sovereign 
'  state." 


130 


I  will  now  read  a  short  extract  from  Chief 
Justice  Taney  : 

"  I  had  not  intended  to  express  an  opinion 
'  upon  the  question  raised  in  the  argument  in  re- 
'  lation  to  the  power  of  congress  to  regulate  the 
'  traffic  in  slaves  between  the  diflFerent  states,  be- 
'  cause  the  court  have  come  to  the  conclusion,  in 
'  which  I  concur,  that  the  point  is  not  involved  in 
'  the  ease  before  us.  But,  as  my  brother  McLean 
'  has  stated  his  opinion  upon  it,  I  am  not  willing, 
'  by  remaining  silent,  to  leave  any  doubt  as  to 
'  mine. 

"  In  my  judgment,  the  power  over  this  subject 
'  is  exclusively  with  the  several  states;  and  each 

*  of  them  has  a  right  to  decide  for  itself,  whetlier 

*  it  will  or  will  not  allow  persons  of  this  descrip- 

*  tion  to  be  brought  witliin  their  limits,  from  an- 
'  other  state,  either  for  sale  or  for  any  other  pur- 
'pose;  and,   also,  to  prescribe  the  manner  and 

*  mode  in  which  they  may  be  introduced,  and  to 
'  determine  their  condition  and  treatment  within 
'  their  respective  territories;  and  the  action  of  the 
'  several  states  upon  this  subject,  cannot  be  con- 

*  trolled  by  congress,  either  by  virtue  of  its  power 
'  to  regulate  commerce,  or  by  virtue  of  any  other 
'  power  conferred  by  the  constitution  of  the  Uni 

*  ted  States.  I  do  not,  however,  mean  to  argue 
'this  question;  and  I  state  my  opinion  upon  it, 
'  on  account  of  the  interest  which  a  large  portion 

*  of  the  union  naturally  feel  in  this  matter,  and 

*  from  an  apprehension  that  my  silence,  when  an- 
'  other  member  of  the  court  has  delivered  his 
'  opinion,  might  be  misconstrued." 

One  of  these  judges,  Mr.  McLean,  was  from  a 
free  state,  although  I  believe  he  is  a  native  of 
Kentucky,  and  I  have  always  understood  that  he 
grew  up  to  manhood  in  Lmcoln  county,  where 
my  father  knew  him  as  a  boy.  He  was,  there- 
fore, reared  in  a  slave  state.  The  other,  chief 
justice  Taney,  is  a  citizen  of  Maryland,  where 
slavery  exists.  Thus  we  have  the  weight  of  au- 
thority of  two  judges,  each  residing  in  different 
sections  of  the  union,  the  non-slaveholding  and 
the  slaveholding  state  both  concurring.  There 
was  no  dissent  expressed  in  the  court,  I  believe, 
except  by  judge  Baldwin,  who  seems  to  think 
the  power  is  vested  under  the  commercial  clause. 

Mr.  DIXON"  amended  his  resolution  by  strik- 
ing out  the  words  "power  or"  before  the  worc^ 
"right."    So  that  it  will  read  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  this  convention  has  not  the 
right,  by  any  principle  it  may  incorporate  into 
the  constitution  of  the  state,  to  deprive  the  citi- 
zen of  his  property  without  his  consent,  unless 
it  be  for  the  public  good,  and  only  then  by  mak- 
ing to  him  a  just  compensation  therefor. 

He  then  spoke  as  follows: 

Mr.  President:  I  have  listened,  and  I  will  reply 
very  briefly,  to  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  and  the  positions  which  he  has 
assumed.  The  proposition  which  was  thrown 
out  by  me  in  the  remarks  which  I  had  the  honor 
to  address  to  this  convention  in  committee  of  the 
■whole  on  another  question,  is,  that  there  is  such 
a  thing  as  a  contract  being  entered  into  between 
the  state  in  its  sovereign  capacity,  and  the  peo- 
ple in  their  individual  capacities.  That  was  the 
proposition  I  then  assumed,  and  which  I  am 
prepared  now  to  maintain,  not  only  by  argu- 
ments which  I  think  ought  to  be  conclusive,  but 
by  authorities  as  high  as  those  the  gentleman 


read  to  this  convention,  and  the  decisions  of  the 
same  courts.  Now  let  me  understand  the  prop- 
osition contained  in  the  decision,  which  the  gen- 
tleman has  read  to  this  convention,  and  upon 
which  he  seems  so  triumphantly  to  rely  as  es- 
tablishing this  great  fact,  that  the  state  has  the 
sole  power  of  controlling  its  slave  population, 
and  that  it  in  no  respect  belongs  to  congress  and 
the  government  of  the  United  States.  No  body 
doubts  that  proposition.  The  State  of  Kentucky 
has  the  exclusive  right  to  control  the  slave  prop- 
erty of  the  state — and  the  gentleman  might  have 
gone  a  little  further,  and  said  that  the  state  has 
the  sole  and  exclusive  right  of  controlling  the 
landed  property  of  Kentucky.  It  is  perfectly 
clear  that  congress  has  no  poM'er  over  the  landed 
property  of  the  commonwealth,  nor  has  it  any 
more  power  and  control  over  the  slaves  of  the 
state,  or  over  any  right  which  the  state  has  to 
control  that  population.  No  body  ever  contend- 
ed that  they  had — nor  was  it  ever  so  contended 
in  the  proposition  which  formed  the  basis  of  the 
decisions  to  which  the  gentleman  has  referred. 

But  here  is  the  true  and  the  great  question: 
Although  congress  has  no  power  to  control 
slavery,  yet  the  constitution  of  the  United  States 
lays  the  state  under  an  inhibition,  so  far  as  re- 
spects the  violation  of  contracts  which  it  may 
make  with  individuals.  In  regard  to  abolishing 
slavery,  or  of  preventing  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky from  abolishing  slavery,  congress  has  no 
f)ower,  but  the  constitution  of  the  United  States 
ays  the  state  under  an  inhibition  in  respect  to 
the  right  to  violate  the  obligations  of  contracts. 
I  agree  with  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  that 
the  clause  of  the  United '  States  constitution  in 
regard  to  the  taking  of  private  property,  refers 
alone  to  the  exercise  of  that  power  under  that 
instrument,  and  not  to  any  action  of  the  state. — 
But  this  is  not  the  question  here.  The  question 
which  I  desire  to  present,  comes  up  under  the 
resolution  I  have  offered.  Can  the  state  enter 
into  a  contract  with  regard  to  the  right  of  prop- 
erty? The  gentleman,  if  I  understand  him, 
says  it  cannot.  Do  I  understand  him  to  say  so 
or  not? 

Mr.  TURNER.  No  sir;  my  position  is,  that 
neither  the  constitution  nor  the  law  is  a  contract, 
unless  it  is  in  the  nature  of  a  charter  of  a  bank, 
or  something  of  that  kind. 

Mr.  DIXON.  Well  then,  the  gentleman's 
proposition  is,  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a 
contract  in  law,  or  resulting  from  a  contract, 
unless  it  is  a  bank  charter  or  something  of  that 
kind.  I  take  issue  directly  with  the  gentleman, 
and  maintain  it  as  a  proposition  clear  and  con- 
clusive, that  there  is  a  power  in  the  legislative 
department  of  the  government — nay,  in  this  con- 
vention itself- — to  make  a  contract  with  the 
citizens  in  regard  to  every  right  of  property. — 
Suppose  the  legislature  grants  land  to  the  people 
of  the  state — there  are  various  modes  by  which 
grants  are  made — either  by  the  direct  act  of  the 
legislature,  or  by  the  governor  authorized  so  to 
do  in  the  name  of  the  commonwealth.  There 
was  such  a  grant  as  that  mentioned  by  the 
legislature  of  Virginia,  to  Richard  Henderson 
&  Co.,  granting  200,000  acres  of  land,  not  by 
any  patent,  but  directly,  commencing,  I  believe, 
at  the  mouth  of  Green  river.  It  was  a  direct 
grant  through  a  legislative  act.    I  mean  to  tell 


131 


tho  gentleman,  and  maintain  it  too,  that  grant 
was  an  obligation  or  contract,  between  the  state 
of  Virginia,  who  granted  it,  and  the  grantees  un- 
der the  act.  I  mean  to  tell  him  it  was  a  contract 
which  the  legislature  of  Virginia  had  not  the 
power  to  rescind  or  impair.  What  is  that  con- 
tract? It  is  the  contract  on  the  part  of  the  state, 
that  it  will  not  re-take  from  tne  grantee  that 
which  it  has  granted  to  him.  That  is  the  con- 
tract. I  bring  up  the  question  here,  whether  it 
is  in  the  power  of  this  convention  to  impair  that 
contract,  and  to  declare  its  obligations  void? — 
That  is  the  question  I  present  to  the  gentleman. 
This  state  can  also  make  a  contract  with  its  cit- 
izens, that  it  will  not  take  the  property  which  it 
has  recognized  as  theirs,  without  making  them 
compensation  therefor.  And  I  maintain  that 
the  state  did  make  a  contract,  a  most  solemn  one, 
that  it  would  not  take  the  property  from  the  cit- 
izen, under  the  constitution  of  the  years  1792  and 
1798.  It  guarantied  this  property,  and  that  guar- 
antee is  a  contract.  What  is  it?  The  state 
invited  the  citizens  of  Virginia  to  settle  in  Ken- 
tucky, then  a  territory,  and  the  people  then  liv- 
ing here  she  invited  to  remain  here,  as  their  fu- 
ture home;  and  held  out  to  them  all  the  beauti- 
ful prospect  which  spread  around  them,  as  a 
reason  why  they  should  emigrate  here,  and  why 
those  living  here  should  remain.  And  it  held 
out  another  inducement.  It  was  that  their  prop- 
erty should  be  protected.  Yes,  this  was  another 
great  inducement  held  out,  that  their  property 
should  be  protected  and  not  violated,  and  the 
state  entered  with  the  citizens,  into  this  con- 
tract, this  agreement: 

"No  person  shall,  for  the  same  oflFence,  be 
'  twice  put  in  jeopardy  of  his  life  or  limb;  nor 
'  shall  any  man's  property  be  taken  or  applied  to 
'  public  use,  without  the  consent  of  his  represen- 
•  tative,  and  without  just  compensation  being 
'  previously  made  to  him." 

Now  what  is  the  contract?  "Nor  shall  any 
man's  property  be  taken,  for  the  public  use, 
without  his  consent,  and  without  compensa- 
tion being  made  to  him."  In  this  the  state 
agrees  witli  the  citizen,  that  it  will  not  take  his 
property  without  his  consent,  or  without  com- 
pensation to  him.  What  does  the  citizen  agree 
with  the  state?  Why,  that  if  the  public  good  re- 
quires it,  you  may  take  my  property  by  making 
compensation  for  it.  Here  is  the  agreement,  clear 
and  specific.  It  is  a  solemn  contract  between 
the  state  and  the  citizen;  the  state  guaranteeing 
and  binding  itself,  that  she  will  not  take  his 
property  without  paying  him  for  it,  and  the  cit- 
izen binding  himself,  that  if  the  public  good  re- 
quires it,  the  state  may  take  it  from  him  on  pay- 
ment therefor.  And  will  you  tell  me  that  this  is 
not  a  contract?  What  is  it,  if  it  is  not  a  con- 
tract, an  agreement,  a  promise;  a  solemn  pledge 
to  the  people,  which  can  never  be  violated  with- 
out sinking  the  character  of  the  state  into  that  of 
dishonor  and  degradation?  Judge  Underwood, 
a  man  of  talents  and  an  honor  to  Kentucky, 
although  an  emancipationist,  has  said,  that  this 
obligation  cannot  be  violated  without  dishonor 
or  fraud. 

Could  the  people,  or  will  they  ever  in  Ken- 
tucky, violate  it,  unless  mobocracv  shall  be  su- 
preme, unless  reason  itself  shall  be  dislodged, 
unless  th«  spirit  of  tho  Institutions  of  tb«  ooun- 


try  fail  in  their  chairacter,  unless  that  wild  spirit 
of  fanaticism  which,  imder  the  reign  of  terror, 
drove  the  French  people  to  desperation,  and  in- 
duced them  to  parade  through  the  streets  of  Paris 
that  singular  goddess  of  reason  and  worship  her 
in  preference  to  the  holy  religion,  that  great 
spirit  which  lies  at  the  foxmdation  of  law,  and 
which  gives  strength  and  value  to  all  that  we 
hold  dear  on  earth,  and  the  results  of  the  disre- 
gard of  which  were  exhibited  in  the  bloody  rule 
of  a  Robespierre,  a  Danton,  a  Murat — never,  un- 
less influenced  by  these  impulses,  could  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky  arrive  at  such  a  conclusion. 
And  it  was  to  guard  against  this,  against  the 
outbreaks  of  fanaticism,  and^-tbe  terrorof  a  wild 
mobocracy,  who  miglit,  in  a  moment  of  despera- . 
tion,  seek  to  impair  the  obligation  of  contracts, 
that  these  great  principles  were  thrown  around 
the  constitution  to  protect  them.  This  was  the 
object  of  inserting  this  provision  in  the  constitu- 
tion, and  I  will  demonstrate  it  by  the  opinion  of 
those  who  will  have  weight  with  all  within  the 
sound  of  my  voice.  I  refer  to  the  great  case  of 
Fletcher  against  Peck,  which  went  up  from  the 
state  of  Georgia  to  the  United  States  supreme 
court,  and  I  intend  to  show  by  the  arguments 
and  decisions  on  that  occasion,  that  the  section 
of  the  con-stitution  of  Kentucky  alluded  to,  is  a 
solemn  contract  between  the  state  and  the  citi- 
zen, which  is  not  to  be  disregarded  or  violated. 
I  believe  the  gentleman  from  Madison  holds  that 
the  state  can  make  no  contract  as  a  law,  unless 
with  regard  to  a  corporation,  or  something  of 
that  sort. 

Mr.  TURNER.  What  I  said  was,  that  ordi- 
nary laws  were  not  contracts.  They  were  such 
when  release  of  lands  and  powers  were  made  by 
the  state  to  individuals,  but  the  commonwealth 
never  owned  the  negroes,  or  the  personal  proper- 
ty of  the  country. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  make  no  point  of  it  then.  I 
never  dispute  with  a  gentleman  if  he  agrees 
with  me.  If  the  gentleman  does  I  am  glad  of  it 
as  it  takes  from  me  the  duty  of  meeting  his  re- 
marks. I  hope  the  convention  will  attend  to 
me  in  the  reading  of  this  decision,  as  it  is  very 
important  and  bears  directly  on  the  whole  ques- 
tion. It  is  due  to  themselves  and  to  the  whole 
country,  that  this  question  should  be  under- 
stood.    I  will  read: 

"  The  legislature  of  Georgia  was  a  party  to 
'  this  transaction;  and  for  a  party  to  pronounce 
'  its  oAvn  deed  invalid,  whatever  cause  may  be 
'  assigned  for  its  invaliditv,  must  be  considered 
'  as  a  mere  act  of  power,  w&ichmust  find  its  vin- 
'  dication  in  a  train  of  reasoning  not  often  heard 
'in  courts  of  justice. 

"  If  the  legislature  be  its  own  judge  in  its  own 
'case — [that  is  the  very  power  which  I  deny 
'here]  it  would  seem  equitable  that  its  decision 
'  should  be  regulated  by  those  rules  which 
'  would  have  regulated  the  decision  of  a  judicial 
'  tribunal.  The  question  was,  in  its  nature,  a 
'  question  of  title,  and  the  tribunal  which  decided 
'  it  was  either  acting  in  the  character  of  a  court  of 
'justice,  and  performing  a  duty  usually  assigned 
*  to  a  court,  or  it  was  exerting  a  mere  act  of  power 
'  in  which  it  was  controlled  only  by  its  own  will. 

"If  the  legislature  felt  itself  absolved  from 
'  those  rules  of  property  which  are  common  to  all 
'  th«  citiz«ns  of  the  United  States,  and  from  tfaos* 


ia» 


'principles  of  equity  which  are  acknowledged 
'  in  all  our  courts,  its  act  is  to  be  supported  by 
'  its  power  alone  ;  and  the  same  power  may  di- 

*  vest  any  other  individual  of  his  lands,  if  it 
'  shall  be  the  will  of  the  legislature  so  to  ex- 
'  ert  it. 

"  It  is  not  intended  to  speak  with  disrespect 
'  of  the  legislature  of  Georgia,  or  of  its  acts. 
'  Far  from  it.     The  question  is   a  general  ques- 

*  tion,  and  is  treated  as  one.  For  though  such 
'  powerful  objections  to  a  legislative  grant,  as  are 
'  alleged  against  this,  may  not  again  exist,  yet 
'the  principle,  on  which  alone  this  rescinding 
'  act  it  is  to  be  supposed,  may  be  applied  to  eve- 
'  ry  case   to  which  it  shall  be  the  will  of  any 

.' legislature  to  apply  it.  The  principle  is  this, 
'that  a  legislature  may,  by  its  own  act,  divest 
'  the  vested  estate  of  any  man  whatever,  for  rea- 
'  sons  which  shall,  by  itself,  be  deemed  suffi- 
'  cient." 

Now  you  have  the  whole  case  spread  before 
you.  The  legislature  may,  by  its  own  act,  di- 
vest any  right  in  this  commonwealth  of  which 
they  may  think  proper  to  divest  the  citizen.  I 
deny  that,  and  maintain  here  that  it  cannot  be 
done  under  that  clause  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States  declaring  that  the  states  shall  pass 
no  law   impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts. 

"In  this  case  the  legislature  may  have  had 

*  ample  proof  that  the  original  grant  was  obtained 

*  by  practices  which  can  never  be  too  much  repro- 

*  bated,  and  which  would  have  justified  its  abro- 

*  gation  so  far  as  respected  those  to  whom  crime 
'  was  imputable.  But  the  grant,  when  issued, 
'  conveyed  an  estate  in  fee  simple  to  the  grantee, 
'  clothed  with  all  the  solemnities  which  law  can 
'bestow.  This  estate  was  transferable;  and  those 
'  who  purchased  parts  of  it  were  not  stained  by 
'  that  guilt  which  infected  the  original  transac- 

*  tion.  Their  case  is  not  distinguishable  from  the 
'  ordinary  case  of  purchasers  of  a  legal  estate 
'  without  knowlege  of  any  secret  fraud  which 
'  might  have  led  to  the  emanation  of  the  original 
'  grant.  According  to  the  well  known  course 
'  of  equity,  their  rights  could  not  be  affected  by 
'such  fraud.  Their  situation  was  the  same, their 
'  title  was  the  same,  with  that  of  every  other 
'  member  of  the  community  who  holds  land  by 
'regular  conveyances  from  the  original  patentee." 

But  according  to  the  power  asserted  here  by 
gentlemen  in  this  convention,  they  occupy  no 
such  attitude.  The  innocent  purchaser  under 
the  grant  of  the  state  of  Virginia,  before  the 
convention  of  Kentucky  in  its  sovereign  capaci- 
ty organized  a  constitution,  occupied  the  very 
identical  ground,  so  far  as  taking  from  him  his 
vested  rights  is  concerned,  as  the  individual 
who  purchased  of  him,  who  was  guilty  of  the 
fraud  imputed  to  the  grantees  under  the  patents 
issued  by  the  state  of  Georgia.  There  is  no  dif- 
ference between  them.  And  that  is  the  argument 
that  gentlemen  proclaim  in  asserting  the  right  of 
the  sovereignty  of  Kentucky  to  seize  upon  private 
rights  and  use  and  apply  them  in  whatever  man- 
ner they  think  proper,  and  which  they  ask 
the  convention  to  assert  and  proclaim  through- 
out the  country.  The  ^reat  point  is  this — has 
the  state  of  Kentucky,  in  its  sovereign  capacity, 
the  power  to  take  from  me  those  vested  rights 
which  it  has  been  instrumental  in  bestowing 
upon  me,  or  of  violating  any  other  agreement 


which  it  may  enter  into  with  me  in  the  form  of 
a  constitutional  or  statute  law?  That  is  a  power 
which  I  utterly  repudiate  and  deny.  Here  the 
discussion  comes  right  to  the  point. 

"  Is  the  power  of  the  legislature  competent  to 
'  the  annihilation  of  such  title,  and  to  the  re- 
'  sumption  of  the  property  thus  held  1 " 

The  state  granted  to  the  citizens  all  the  great 
landed  estates,  and  has  no  power  to  divest  them 
of  it,  and  to  resume  them.  Has  it  the  power  to 
do  it?  The  gentleman  maintains  that  it  has  the 
power — that  this  convention  stands  as  the  rep- 
resentative of  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  of 
the  state,  and  that  its  powers  are  unlimited  in 
regard  to  any  extent  it  may  think  proper  to  ex- 
ercise it: 

"  The  principle  asserted  is,  that  one  legisla- 
'  ture  is  competent  to  repeal  any  act  which  afor- 
'  mer  legislature  was  competent  to  pass;  and 
'  that  one  legislature  cannot  abridge  the  powers 
'  of  a  succeeding  legislature." 

What  has  been  done  under  the  constitution  of 
Kentucky,  the  great  organic  law  of  the  state? 
Negroes  were  brought  into  the  state  under  it,  and 
it  Avas  an  act  done  under  the  sanction  of  law. 
Negroes  have  been  purchased  under  it,  and  that 
was  an  act  done  under  the  law.  If  I  purchase 
one  from  you,  the  title  to  the  negro  is  to  be  bro- 
ken up — the  obligation  between  you  and  me, 
you  being  the  grantor  to  me,  is  to  be  violated, 
by  this  all-sweeping  power  of  the  convention  of 
Kentucky.  Because  you  must  violate  the  obli- 
gation of  the  man  who  makes  the  sale,  if  you  de- 
clare that  the  title  derived  from  you  is  not  bind- 
ing. The  obligation  can  be  severed,  or  our  ac- 
tion amounts  to  nothing  at  all.  For  the  state  of 
Georgia,  in  conveying  tiie  lands  to  her  citizens, 
acted  on  the  implied  obligation  that  she  would 
not  take  back  that  property.  It  was  so  regarded 
by  the  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  and  to  which  the  inhibition  in  the 
section  which  declares  that  no  state  shall  pass 
laws  impairing  the  obligations  of  contract,  was 
intended  to  apply.  If  that  implied  obligation 
came  within  that  inhibition,  is  it  not  clear  that 
it  applies  as  well  to  your  interference  with  obli- 
gations between  the  citizens,  as  to  obligations 
between  the  citizen  and  the  state?  The  gentle- 
man strikes  at  that,  and  in  any  attempt  to  break 
doAvn  the  titles  to  slave  property,  he  must  de- 
stroy the  contract  between  individuals;  because, 
in  the  act  of  manumission,  you  destroy  the  title 
to  the  property  you  set  free,  as  derived  from  the 
laws  of  the  state,  and  being  derived  also  from 
another  individual,  it  becomes  a  great  question 
as  to  the  power  of  the  state  of  Kentucky  to  im- 
pair the  obligations  between  another  individual 
and  me.  But  I  will  not  ai'gue  that  point  now, 
but  confine  myself  to  the  question  between  the 
state  and  its  citizens: 

"The  correctness  of  this  principle,  so  far  as  re- 
'  spects  general  legislation,  can  never  be  contro- 
'  verted.  But,  if  an  act  be  done  under  a  law,  a 
'  succeeding  legislature  cannot  undo  it.  The  past 
'  cannot  be  recalled  by  the  most  absolute  power.  Cou- 
'veyances  have  been  made;  those  conveyances 
'  have  vested  legal  estates;  and  if  those  estates 
'  may  be  seized  by  the  sovereign  authority,  still, 
'  that  they  originally  vested  is  a  fact,  and  cannot 
'  cea.se  to  be  a  fact." 
Now  you  will  understaad  that  the  propoaitioo 


133 


before  the  supreme  court  was  to  take  away  from 
the  person  who  purchased  the  property,  the  title 
which  the  state  had  granted,  and  to  taie  away 
subsequently  tlie  same  property  to  which  indi- 
viduals had  acquired  a  title  under  the  recipients 
of  the  state  grants.  Two  propositions  arise — 
first,  the  power  to  abrogate  the  contract  between 
the  state  and  the  citizen,  and  next  the  power  to 
abrogate  the  contract  between  the  citizens  them- 
selves— the  one  purchasing  lands  through  a  con- 
tract with  the  other.  And  you  will  find  that 
the  decision  of  the  court  is,  that  the  sovereign 
power  of  the  State  of  Georgia  cannot  deprive 
either  one  nor  the  other  of  his  property.  1  will 
read  it: 

"When,  then,  a  law  is  in  the  nature  of  a  con- 
'  tract;  when  absolute  rights  have  vested  under 
'that  contract;  a  repeal  of  that  law  cannot  di- 
'vest  those  rights;  and  the  act  of  annulling 
'them,  if  legitimate,  is  rendered  so  by  a  power 
'  applicable  to  the  case  of  every  individual  in 
'the  community." 

Does  the  gentleman  mean  to  maintain  that 
absolute  rights  are  not  vested  under  the  con- 
tract in  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  solemnly 
entered  into  with  the  citizens  of  the  state?  I 
will  not  say  that  you  may  not  repeal  the  consti- 
tution of  the  state,  but  I  do  maintain  that  when 
you  have  done  that,  you  have  not  destroyed  my 
rights  of  property,  and  upon  this  proposition  I 
will  make  a  few  remarks  presently. 

"It  may  well  be  doubted  whether  the  nature 
'  of  society  and  of  government  does  not  prescribe 
'some  limits  to  the  legislative  power;  and  if 
'any  be  prescribed,  where  are  they  to  be  found, 
'  if  the  propertv  [the  word  property  is  used  here] 
'of  an  individual,  fairly  and  honestly  acquired, 
',may  be  seized  without  compensation. 

"  'To  the  legislature  all  legislative  power  is 
'granted;  but  the  question,  whether  the  act  of 
•  transferring  the  property  of  an  individual  to 
'the  public,  be  in  the  nature  of  the  legislative 
'  power,  is  well  worthy  of  serious  reflection. 

"  The  validity  of  this  rescinding  act,  then, 
'  might  well  be  doubted,  were  Georgia  a  single 
'  sovereign  power.  But  Georgia  cannot  be  view- 
'jed  as  a  single,  unconnected,  sovereign  power, 
'  on  whose  legislature  no  other  restrictions  are 
'  imposed  than  may  be  found  in  its  own  constitu- 
'  tion;  she  is  a  part  of  a  large  empire;  she  is  a 
'  member  of  the  American  union;  and  that  union 
'  has  a  constitution,  the  supremacy  of  which  all 
'  acknowledge,  and  which  imposes  limits  to  the 
'legislatures  of  the  several  states,  which  none 
'  claim  a  right  to  pass.  The  constitution  of  the 
'  United  States  declares  that  no  state  shall  pass 
'  any  bill  of  attainder,  ex  post  facto  law,  or  law 
'  impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts. 

"Does  the  case  now  under  consideration  come 
'within  this  prohibitory  section  of  the  constitu- 
'tion? 

"In  considering  this  very  interesting  question, 
'  we  immediately  ask  ourselves,  what  is  a  con- 
'  tract?  Is  a  grant  a  contract?  A  contract  is  a 
'  compact  between  two  or  more  parties,  and  it  is 
'either  executory  or  executed.  An  executorj- 
'  contract  is  one  in  which  a  party  binds  himself 
'  to  do,  or  not  to  do,  a  particular  thing;  such  was 
'  the  law  under  which  the  conveyance  was  made 
'  by  the  governor.  A  contract  executed  is  one 
'  in  which  th«  object  of  the  contract  is  performed ; 


'and  this,  says  Blackstoue,  difi'ers  in  nothing 
'from  a  grant.  The  contract  between  Georgia 
'and  the  purchasers  was  executed  by  the  grant. 
'A  contract  executed,  as  well  as  one  which  is  ex- 
'ecutory,  contains  obligations  binding  on  the 
'  parties.  A  grant,  in  its  own  nature,  amounts 
'to  an  extinguishment  of  the  right  of  the  grant- 
'  or,  and  implies  a  contract  not  to  reassert  that 
'  right.  A  party  is,  therefore,  always  estopped 
'by  his  own  grant." 

Since  then,  in  fact,  a  grant  is  a  contract  exe- 
cuted, the  obligation  of  which  still  continues; 
and  since  the  constitution  uses  the  general  term 
contracts,  without  distinguishing  between  those 
which  are  executory  and  those  which  are  execu- 
ted, it  must  be  construed  to  comprehend  the  lat- 
ter as  well  as  the  former.  A  law  annulling  con- 
veyances between  the  individuals,  and  declar- 
ing that  the  grantors  should  stand  seized  of  their 
former  estates,  notwithstanding  those  grants, 
would  be  as  repugnant  to  tie  constitution  as  a 
law  discharging  the  vendors  of  property  from 
the  obligation  of  executing  their  contracts  by 
conveyances.  It  would  be  strange  if  a  contract 
to  convey  was  secured  by  the  constitution,  while 
an  absolute  conveyance  remained  unprotected. 
If,  under  a  fair  construction  of  the  constitu- 
tion, grants  are  comprehended  under  the  term 
contracts,  is  a  grant  from  the  state  excluded 
from  the  operation  of  the  provision?  Does  not 
this  settle  the  fact  conclusively,  that  if  the  state 
of  Kentucky,  in  her  sovereign  capacity  attempts 
to  annul  a  contract  entered  into  between  the 
president  of  this  convention  and  myself  for  a 
sale  of  lands,  she  is  debarred  from  so  doing  by 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States?  If  she 
cannot  destroy  the  title  to  lands,  she  cannot  de- 
stroy the  title  if  the  president  had  granted  to 
me  slaves  or  any  other  description  of  property, 
which,  under  the  laws  he  might  be  entitled  to  do. 
And  the  act  of  manumission  that  some  are  at- 
tempting to  impose  upon  the  state,  what  is  it 
but  striking  at  the  contract  entered  into  between 
two  citizens,  the  one  selling  to  the  other.  It 
would  be  striking  at  every  title  in  Kentucky.  I 
will  read  further  on  this  point: 

"Is  the  clause  to  be  considered  as  inhibiting 
the  state  from  impairing  the  obligation  of  con- 
tracts between  two  individuals,  but  as  exclu- 
ding from  that  inhibition  contracts  made  with 
itself?  The  words  themselves  contain  no  such 
distinction.  They  are  general,  and  are  applica- 
ble to  contracts  of  every  description," 
"If  contracts  made  with  the  state  are  to  be 
exempted  from  their  operation,  the  exception 
must  arise  from  the  character  of  the  contracting 
party,  not  from  the  words  which  are  employed. 
"Whatever  respect  might  have  been  felt  for 
state  sovereignties,  it  is  not  to  be  disguised  that 
the  framers  of  the  constitution  viewed,  with 
some  apprehension,  the  violent  acts  which  grow 
out  of  the  feelings  of  the  moment;  and  that  the 
people  of  the  United  States,  in  adopting  that 
instrument,  have  manifested  a  determination  to 
shield  themselves  and  their  property,  from  the 
effects  of  those  sudden  and  strong  passions  to 
which  men  are  exposed.  The  restrictions  on 
the  legislative  power  of  the  states  are  obvious- 
ly founded  in  tinis  sentiment;  and  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  contains  what  may  be 


134 


deemed  a  bill  of  rights  for  the  people  oi  each 
state. 

"No  state  shall  pass  any  bill  of  attainder,  or 
ex  post  facto  law^,  or  law  impairing  the  obliga- 
tion of  contracts. 

"A  bill  of  attainder  may  affect  the  life  of  an 
individual,  or  may  confiscate  his  property,  or 
nifiy  do  both. 

"In  this  form  the  power  of  the  legislature 
over  the  lives  and  fortunes  of  individuals  is  ex- 
pressly restraineii.  What  motive,  then,  for  im- 
plying, in  words  which  import  a  general  pro- 
hibition to  impair  the  obligation  of  contracts, 
an  exception  in  favor  of  the  right  to  impair  the 
obligation  of  those  contracts  into  which  the 
state  may  enter. 

"The  state  legislature  can  pass  no.  ex  post  facto 
law.  An  ex  post  facto  law,  is  one  which  renders 
an  act  punishable  in  a  manner  in  which  it 
was  not  punishable  when  it  was  committed. 
Such  a  law  may  inflict  penalties  on  the  per- 
son, or  may  inflict  pecuniary  penalties  which 
swell  the  public  treasury.  The  legisature  is 
then  prohibited  from  passing  a  law  by  which 
a  man's  estate,  or  any  part  of  it,  shall  be 
seized  for  a  crime  which  was  not  declared,  by 
some  previous  law,  to  render  him  liable  to  that 

Sunishraent.  Why,  then,  should  violence  be 
one  to  the  natural  meaning  of  words,  for  the 
purpose  of  leaving  to  the  legislature  the  power 
of  seizing,  for  public  use,  the  estate  of  an  indi- 
vidual in  the  form  of  a  law  annulling  the  title 
by  which  he  holds  that  estate?     The  court  can 

Jerceive  no  suflScient  grounds  for  making  this 
istinction.  This  rescinding  act  would  have 
the  effect  of  an  ex  post  facto  law.  It  forfeits 
the  estate  of  Fletcher  for  a  crime  not  committed 
by  himself,  but  by  those  from  whom  he  pur- 
chased. This  cannot  be  effected  in  the  form  of 
.an  ex  post  facto  law,  or  bill  of  attainder;  why, 
then,  is  it  allowable  in  the  form  of  a  law  an- 
nulling the  original  grant? 

"  The  argument  in  favor  of  presuming  an  in- 
tention to  except  a  case,  not  excepted  by  the 
words  of  the  constitution,  is  susceptible  of 
some  illustration  from  a  principle  originally 
engrafted  in  that  instrument,  though  no  longer 
a  part  of  it.  The  constitution,  as  passed,  gave 
the  courts  of  the  United  States  jurisdiction  in 
suits  brouglit  against  individual  states.  A 
state  then,  which  violated  its  own  contract,  was 
suable  in  the  courts  of  the  United  States  for 
that  violation.  Would  it  have  been  a  defence 
in  such  a  suit  to  say  that  the  state  had  passed  a 
law  absolving  itself  from  the  contract?  It  is 
scarcely  to  be  conceived  that  such  a  defence 
could  be  set  up.  And  yet,  if  a  state  is  neither 
restrained  by  general  principles  of  our  politi- 
cal institutions,  nor  by  the  words  of  the  con- 
stitution, from  impairing  the  obligations  of  its 
own  contracts,  sucn  a  defence  would  be  a  valid 
one.  This  feature  is  no  longer  found  in  the 
constitution;  but  it  aids  in  the  construction  of 
those  clauses  with  which  it  was  originally  as- 
sociated. 

"It  is  then  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  court, 
that,  in  this  case,  the  estate  naving  pa-ssed  into 
the  hands  of  a  purchaser  for  a  valuable  consid- 
eration, without  notice,  the  state  of  Georgia  was 
restrained,  either  by  general  principles  which 
are  common  to  our  free  iustitutionti,  or  by  the 


'  particular  provisions  of  the  constitution  of  the 
'  United  States,  from  passing  a  law  whereby  the 
'  estate  of  the  plaintiff  in  the  premises  so  pur- 
'  chased  could  he  constitutionally  and  legally  im- 
'  paired  and  rendered  null  and  void.  In  overrul- 
'  mg  the  demurrer  to  the  third  plea,  therefore, 
'  there  is  no  error." 

Now  I  have  presented  the  case  here,  precisely 
as  it  was  presented  in  the  supreme  court  of  the 
United  States,  by  that  illustrious  man  whose  de- 
cision upon  every  question  has  shed  a  lustre  up- 
on the  judicial  learning  of  this  country  that 
will  live  in  the  most  distant  ages.  Then  the 
question  is  a  settled  one,  that  there  is  a  contract 
between  the  state  and  the  people  of  Kentucky; 
and  when  I  turn  to  the  clause  of  the  constitution 
which  I  have  read,  it  is  clearly  to  the  effect  that 
the  property  of  our  citizens  snail  not  be  taken 
for  public  use  without  paying  them  a  compensa- 
tion therefor.  I  have  shown  that  if  the  state 
grants  land  to  the  citizen  it  cannot  take  it  back; 
and  that  if  it  grants  slaves  it  cannot  take  them 
back,  for  there  is  no  difference  between  the  title 
to  a  slave  and  to  land.  And  I  maintain  here 
that  under  this  section  of  the  constitution,  the 
state  of  Kentucky  declares  that  it  shall  not  be 
taken  for  public  nse  without  compensation — 
that  it  is  a  contract  between  the  citizen  and  the 
state — and  that  each  is  bound  by  it. 

But  my  friend  from  Nelson  maintains  another 
proposition,  and  I  intend  to  call  attention  to  it 
now.  Yes  it  is  a  strange  proposition,  and  that 
is,  that  all  the  right  we  have  to  our  slave  popu- 
lation is  derived  from  the  constitution  and  laws 
of  the  state.  If  the  gentleman  would  but  look 
back  to  the  history  of  the  acquisition  of  titles  to 
slave  property ,ihe  would  find  there  a  refutation  of 
his  whole  position.  How  did  we  originally  ac- 
quire any  title  to  slave  property  in  this  country? 
If  he  will  look  back  as  far  as  1620,  he  will  find 
that  the  very  first  slaves  were  brought  to  Virgin- 
ia, in  that  year  in  a  Dutch  vessel.  If  he  will  look 
back  not  quite  so  far,  he  will  find  that  charters 
were  granted  by  Queen  Elizabeth  to  certain  com- 
panies empowering  them  to  go  to  Africa  and 
possess  themselves  of  slaves,  and  bring  them  to 
the  then  colonies  of  North  America.  He  will 
find  that  they  were  permittnd  to  go,  and  that 
many  went  without  permission  at  all.  Well, 
when  they  went  there,  what  did  they  do?  They 
acquired  the  property.  They  captured  or  pur- 
chased the  negroes.  They  exercised  their  man- 
ual strength  and  labor  in  acquiring  the  posses- 
sion of  that  property — they  oecame  owners  by 
occupation  or  by  purcha.se,  a  way  of  acquiring 

Froperty  that  gentlemen  will  readily  understand, 
say  they  became  owners  by  occupation,  as 
those  gentlemen  who  have  gone  to  California 
to  dig  gold.  There  being  no  law  to  protect  it, 
they  oecome  entitled  to  the  gold  from  the  very 
fact  that  they  exercise  manual  labor  to  separate 
it  from  that  earth  in  which  it  has  been  long  im- 
bedded. Law  does  not  provide  the  right  to  the 
gold  and  it  does  not  provide  tlie  right  to  capture 
and  appropriate  the  slave.  They  nad  the  gold 
without  any  law,  and  they  have  now  called  a 
convention  of  gold  diggers  and  miners,  and  for 
what  purpose?  To  give  them  title  to  the  gold? 
Not  at  all,  they  have  that  right  now — but  it  is 
to  give  protection  to  those  riglits  which  they 
hav«  acquirtd  by  occupancy.      That  is  the  oli^- 


135 


ject  and  design.  To  give  them  rights  ?  Not  at 
all — ^but  the  protection  of  the  rights  ■which  now 
exist.  Let  us  take  this  matter  a  little  further. 
I  believe  that  Avhen  Kentucky  separated  from 
Virginia— or  to  go  further — that  before  any 
constitution  was  formed  in  the  United  States, 
the  people  of  Virginia  had  then  slaves,  and 
that  people  had  a  right  to  them.  And  when 
the  act  of  separation  was  passed  on  the  part  of 
Virginia  allowing  Kentucky  to  become  a  sepa- 
rate state — when  she  separated  herself  and  threw 
herself  back  on  first  principles  and  declared  her 
.sovereignty  in  the  act  of  establishing  organic 
law,  her  citizens  then  had  this  right  of  proper- 
ty in  slaves.  Those  rights  of  property  there- 
fore, were  not  derived  from  the  laws  of  Virgin- 
ia, or  from  the  constitution  of  1792  and  1795 — 
they  existed  prior  to,  and  independent  of  those 
Jaws.  They  existed  because  they  were  rights 
clearly  acquired  from  those  who  first  acquired  the 
slaves  and  which  had  come  down  to  their  des- 
cendants bv  descent,  or  which  had  been  transfer- 
ed  by  purchase.  Thus  were  these  rights  exist- 
ing prior  to  the  adoption  of  any  organic  law. 
But  at  this  particular  period  of  time,  when  all 
things  are  thrown  back  to  their  original  ele- 
ments, and  all  permitted  to  express  their  opin- 
ions and  views  on  all  and  every  question,  a 
strange  proposition  is  springing  up  in  the  midst 
of  our  excited  countrymen.  What  is  it?  One 
says  to  another,  you  have  no  right  to  all  that 
land  of  yours — another,  you  have  no  right  to 
your  negroes — and  another,  you  have  no  right  to 
your  strong  box.  It  is  a  strange  proposition 
springing  up  right  here  inj  this  community. 
"\Vhat  will  be  the  result  of  it? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Does  the  gentleman 
mean  to  say  that  I  advocated  such  a  doctrine  on 
this  floor?    If  so  he  is  mistaken. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  mean  that  such  is  the  effect  of 
the  gentleman's  proposition.  I  say  that  it  is  the 
true  consequence  of  the  doctrine  advanced,  that 
all  power  belongs  to  this  convention,  and  that 
no  right  exists  independent  of  the  organic  law  it 
may  make,  or  the  statute  laws  which  may  be 
passed  under  it.  I  say  then,  let  us  go  back  to  the 
state  of  society  I  have  mentioned  to  the  gentle- 
man. Let  the  proposition  he  made  and  pro- 
claimed to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  that  prior  to 
the  adoption  of  their  constitution  the  right  to 
property  does  not  exist,  and  what  would  be  the 
condition  of  every  member  of  society?  The 
very  assumption  of  the  principle  would  be  look- 
ed upon  as  a  violation  of  every  principle  of 
right,  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  every  free 
government. 

Well  our  title  to  our  slaves  is  not  derived  from 
Virginia  or  from  the  constitution  or  statute  laws 
of  Kentucky,  but  it  is  derived  in  the  manner 
which  I  have  represented.  We  come  then  to  the 
formation  of  our  present  constitution.  What 
shall  we  do  here?  We  intend  to  unite  in  framing 
a  constitution  that  will  protect,  not  destroy,  to 
build  up  and  not  to  pull  down — to  throw  the 
aegis  of  our  protection  around  the  rightsof  thecit- 
izen,  and  not  to  put  in  the  hands  of  the  incendi- 
ary a  torch  to  con.sume  or  a  sword  to  destroy  and 
murder.  This  convention  has  no  such  power. 
And  if  such  a  power  can  exist,  if  it  is  to  oe  pro- 
claimed here  that  fifty  one  men  in  this  conven- 
tion have  the  right  to  seize  on  the  property. 


should  they  see  proper  to  do  it,  then  away  with 
the  rights  of  the  people.  If  this  is  not  radical- 
ism, the  rank  old  agrarianism  starting  up  here, 
as  from  the  floors  of  the  old  Roman  senate,  sha- 
king its  gory  locks  at  us,  it  is  very  like  it.  I 
will  say  to  it,  "ihou  cans't  not  say  I  did  it," 
but  I  will  say  also,  it  is  you  and  you  who  pro- 
claim such  doctrines  who  did  it.  And  where  is 
this  thing  to  stop?  Who  can  tell  what  a  people 
may  do  hereafter,  and  what  a  majoritv  may  fa- 
vor hereafter — where  is  it  to  stop?  1  said' the 
other  day,  when  it  is  once  admitted  that  a  mere 
majority  has  the  right  and  the  power  to  seize 
upon  the  property  of  the  people  and  to  appro- 
priate it  to  such  use  as  they  think  proper,  there 
IS  no  longerany  safety  in  society.  Vou  have  but 
to  proclaim  to  all  the  vagabond  population  of 
the  world,  that  they  have  only  to  become  citi- 
zens of  Kentucky,  and  a  majority,  in  order  to 
seize  upon  the  property  of  our  citizens  and  ap- 
propriate it  as  they  think  proper — vou  have  but 
to  call  upon  the  wild  spirits  that  infiabit  the  free 
states  and  the  great  cities,  the  skulking  vaga- 
bond population  who  only  seek  an  opportunity 
for  plunder  and  murder— you  have  but  to  call 
upon  those  people  of  other  countries  who  have 
been  expatriated  from  their  own  lands,  by  the 
laws,  and  who  are  driven  from  necessity  to  vio- 
lence and  outrage  on  those  who  are  better  ofi" — 
you  have  but  to  call  upon  these  classes  to  come  to 
Kentucky,  and  to  assert  the  rights  of  a  citizen 
and  obtain  the  privilege  of  voting,  and  what 
would  be  the  result?  They  would  pour  in  upon 
us  as  did  the  Goth  and  Vandal  barbarians  upon 
the  Roman  territory — they  would  come  as  did 
the  Huns  under  the  lead  of  Attila,  sweeping  be- 
fore them,  as  with  a  whirlwind  of  desolation,  all 
the  great  institutions  of  the  country,  and  mo- 
nopolizing all  its  property.  They  would  rally 
around  some  great  leader,  like  that  "scourge  of 
nations,"  and  destroyer  of  civil  institutions,  who 
looked  back  on  the  desolation  he  had  left,  and 
forward  on  the  beauty  that  was  spread  before 
him,  and  like  that  conqueror  exclaim,  "I  look 
ahead  and  all  is  beautiful,  and  all  is  cheering  to 
my  eyes  and  hopes.  I  look  behind  me,  and  my 
track  is  marked  in  ashes  and  in  blood.  Desola- 
tion spreads  itself  in  my  rear,  and  the  beauties 
of  civilization  wither  and  fade  at  my  approach." 

And  your  beautiful  land  of  Kentuckv — this 
fair  garden  of  the  United  States — this  spot 
where  the  poet  delights  to  dwell,  and  the  states- 
man and  hero  delights  to  linger — this  great 
Kentucky  of  ours,  so  glorious  in  the  memory  of 
the  past,  and  so  bright  in  the  vista  of  the  future 
— it  is  to  become  like  the  plains  of  Italv,  it  is  to 
be  scourged  by  those  who  come  like  tie  Goths 
and  Vandals  and  Huns  under  Attila,  scattering 
ruin  and  waste  through  our  land. 

I  never  will  subscribe  to  such  a  doctrine,  or 
agree  that  fifty-one  men  shall  be  armed  with  the 
sovereign  power  of  seizing  upon  my  life,  liberty, 
or  property,  and  appropriating  it  to  their  own 
use,  in  violation  of  the  great  principle  which 
lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  free  governments. 
I  never  will  subscribe  to  that,  and  what  does  it 
amount  to?  We  have  embarked  all  our  fortunes 
in  the  great  vessel  of  state,  and  on  this  great 
and  cheerless  deep  of  political  experiment  we 
are  now  moving  onward,  having  been  permitted, 
each    man,  to  take  into   this  ark  of  political 


tm 


safety  his  property;  some  one  description,  and 
some  another;  and  before  the  vessel  is  launched, 
before  she  spreads  her  sails  to  the  favoring 
"Winds,  and  before  she  has  entered  on  the  great 
voyage,  th.^y  have  pledged  themselves  solemnly 
to  each  other  that  they  will  not  encroach  upon 
each  others  rights  or  property.  Well  they  ad- 
vance on  the  great  deep,  floating  on  prosper- 
ously, when  a  portion  of  the  creAV  rise  up  and 
declare,  you  sir  have  property  here  that  you 
sliall  no  longer  carry,  or  to  another,  you  have 
property  that  we  are  opposed  to  taking  along — 
and  then  they  appeal  to  the  majority,  and  pro- 
claim the  right  of  this  majority  to  compel  him 
either  to  quit  the  vessel  in  which  he  has  embark- 
ed with  his  property,  the  fruits  of  his  labor  or 
to  see  that  property  thrown  into  the  deep. 
Here  is  the  principle  carried  out  of  taking  my 
property  without  compensation,  of  taking  my 
slaves  without  my  consent,  and  in  violation  of 
the  original  pledge  in  the  constitution.  I  never 
■will  yield  to  that  principle,  I  never  will  submit 
to  it — never.  It  was  a  solemn  agreement  which 
we  entered  into  when  we  entered  the  great  vessel 
of  state,  that  neither  one  nor  the  other  should  in- 
terfere with  the  rights  of  the  other,  and  if  it  be- 
came necessary  for  the  public  good — to  carry 
out  the  simile  a  little  further — that  a  portion  of 
the  property  should  be  thrown  overboard,  that 
compensation  should  be  made  therefor.  But 
that  the  majority  shall  rise  up  and  say,  away 
with  this,  we  do  not  recognize  it  as  property 
and  we  will  throw  it  overboard,  or  you  must 
It^ave  the  vessel  with  it,  is  a  proposition  which  I 
utterly  repudiate  and  denounce  and  against 
which  I  enter  my  solemn  protest. 

Then  what  does  the  resolution  I  have  offered 
assert?  "Why  this  principle — that  the  citizen  has 
a  right  to  be  secure  in  his  person  any  property — a 
right  which  is  not  only  guarantied  by  all  free 
governments,  but  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of 
free  government,  and  is  illustrated  by  the  prin- 
ciple I  read  here  from  that  celebrated  man, 
Blackstone,  in  his  commentaries.  There  the 
principle  is  illustrated.  It  is  that  the  aggregate 
of  society  have  the  right  to  control  its  individu- 
al members;  but  the  individual  members  have 
the  right  to  the  protection  of  all  their  private 
rights,  and  this  before  any  convention  is  entered 
into  or  organic  law  is  framed.  It  is  a  solemn 
a^eement  that  you  will  not  take  from  me  my 
rights,  and  in  doing  that,  I  submit  to  you  the 
power  of  regulating  it.    I  wish  to  put  it  to  the 

f;entleman — I  wish  to  know  whether  the  reso- 
ution  I  have  offered  asserts  more  than  the  fun- 
damental principle  in  all  the  constitutions  and 
laws  of  the  country,  that  you  shall  not  take  pri- 
vate property  except  for  the  public  good,  and 
only  then  by  granting  compensation^  I  wish 
to  ask  whetner  it  is  not  the  principle  which 
ought  to  be  maintained  here  and  everywhere. 

Now  we  are  making  a  great  organic  law  for 
Kentucky,  and  asserting  great  fundamental 
principles,  and  why  not  assert  that  it  is  not  the 
right  of  a  mere  mob,  although  in  a  miijority,  to 
Beize  upon  the  property  of  individuals?  Why 
not  assert  that  principle?  Admit  tliat  we  have 
the  power,  and  the  power  may  exist  in  this  con- 
vention, but  that  does  not  carry  with  it  an  ad- 
mission of  the  right  of  its  exercise.  I  used  the 
word  power  yesterday,  but  I  meant  the  word 


riglit.  The  power  may  exist,  and  I  admit  that 
the  physical  power  does  exist.  I,  in  contraven- 
tion of  the  laws  of  Kentucky,  might  commit  an 
act  which  Would  stain  my  hands  with  the  blood 
of  a  fellow  man.  I  may  have  the  pliysical  pow- 
er, but  not  the  right  to  do  it.  I  may  rob,  mur- 
der, and  commit  eveiy  other  crime  known  to  the 
law,  but  I  have  not  the  right  to  do  all  these 
things,  and  I  deny  the  right  to  do  the  act  referred 
to  in  the  resolutions.  We  may  usurp  power, 
but  assumption  is  not  right.  We  may  take  it 
upon  us  to  do  as  we  please — we  may  proclaim 
to  the  world  powers,  which  our  constituents 
never  delegatea  to  us,  and  never  intended  to  do. 
Still  those  acts  and  declarations  Avould  not  car- 
ry with  them  the  right  to  do  those  acts,  which 
we  would  proclaim  ourselves  as  having  the  ca- 
pacity to  perform.  No  such  right  can  exist. 
Our  rightfnl  powers  then,  in  my  humble  opin- 
ion, are  limited  to  the  protection  of  the  people 
and  their  rights,  and  not  to  destroying  their 
property — not  to  pulling  down,  but  to  building 
up  that  great  temple  of  liberty,  to  which  all  fly, 
and  to  erect  that  altar  around  which  all  may 
cluster,  and  offer  up  the  libations  due  to  free- 
dom and  human  rights. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  rise  to  en- 
ter into  the  discussion  of  the  question  at  present, 
nor  do  I  think  that  I  shall  discuss  it  at  any  other 
time.  If  I  should  undertake  to  do  so,  I  shall 
desire  thoroughly  to  understand  the  point  that 
is  to  be  discussed.  Certainly  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon)  has  not  been  an- 
swering speeches  that  were  made  in  this  house, 
at  least  in  my  hearing;  and  if  no  otlier  record  of 
the  debate  went  out  save  the  speech  of  that  hon- 
orable gentleman,  our  honest  and  confiding  con- 
stituents would  be  lead  into  tlie  belief  that 
there  was  an  agrarian  spirit  prevailing  here,  and 
that  it  had  obtained  an  influence  that  was 
threatening  to  result  in  robbing  them  of  their 
property.  The  remarks  of  the  gentleman  would 
authorize  the  assumption  that  such  a  spirit  ex- 
ists in  this  house.  Does  the  gentleman  intend 
to  ascribe  such  a  feeling  to  the  delegates  in  this 
body? 

Mr.  DIXON.  Will  the  gentleman  state  the 
proposition  I  made. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  say  that 
the  gentleman  charged  any  individual  member 
although  from  his  manner  I  was  led  to  suppose 
for  a  moment,  that  ho  was  charging  me — (but 
that,  I  believe  is  disclaimed  by  the  gentleman) 
with  entertaining  the  sentiment  that  this  conven- 
tion has  the  power  to  divest  the  citizen  of  the 
titl^  to  his  property — to  go  into  the  strongholds 
of  the  miser,  and  say  to  him,  surrender  your 
gold — to  go  to  the  land  holder  and  say  give  up 
your  land.      I  utterly  disclaim  such  sentiments. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not  inopute  it  to  the  gen- 
tleman if  he  disclaims  it.  But  if  the  gentleman 
asserts  it,  I  take  issue  with  him. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  trust  the  gentle- 
man will  never  have  the  mortification  of  listen- 
ing to  the  a.ssertion  of  such  an  abominable  prin- 
ciple from  the  humble  individual  now  on  the 
floor.  I  uttered  the  sentiment  yesterday  in  an- 
swer to  the  remarks  which  accompanied  the  in- 
troduction of  this  resolution,  that  we  held  slave 
property  in  this  commonwealth  under  the  guar- 
antees of  the  constitution.    I  do  not  deem  it  ne- 


137 


cessar^  to  go  back  to  the  introduction  of  African 
slaves  into  this  country,  but  I  expressed  the  senti- 
ment that  it  was  the'constitution  of  Kentucky, 
and  the  constitution  of  Kentucky  alone  that  gave 
the  guarantee  to  the  holders  of  this  description 
of  property.  I  believe  that  to  be  the  principle 
of  your  constitution  upon  the  subject.  Abro- 
gate that,  and  I  will  ask  my  "worthy  friend 
from  Jefferson  ■whether  his  plea  of  the  Mosaic 
dispensation,  in  a  court  of  justice,  "would  author- 
ize him  to  hold  his  negroes  in  bondage.  That 
■was  the  position  that  I  advanced,  and  I  advance 
this  further  proposition,  that  the  power  "was  giv- 
en to  the  conventions  that  assembled  for  the 
purpose  of  fonning  the  constitutions  of  1792 
and  1798,  to  "withhold,  if  they  chose  to  do  so,  the 
constitutional  guarantee,  under  "which  this  prop- 
erty was  held.  This  is  what  I  advanced;  not 
that  this  convention  desired  or  contemplated 
to  infuse  into  the  constitution  a  principle  or 
spirit  or  power  in  any  department  of  the  gov- 
ernment, destructive  of  private  property;  al- 
though the  gentleman's  speech  would  seem  to 
indicate  that  such  was  the  purpose  of  this  house. 
I  disclaim  it  for  myself,  sir,  entirely. 

But  the  object  that  I  had  in  rising  was  mere- 
ly to  ascertain  from  the  gentleman  whether  he 
maintains  the  principle  that  the  constitution  of 
the  state,  where  there  is  no  specific  grant  to  A 
or  B  of  property  or  privilege,  exclusive  in  its 
character  of  the  rights  of  the  great  mass  of 
the  people,  is  a  contract  "within  the  meaning  of 
the  federal  constitution. 

Mr.  DIXOif .    I  will  answer  the  gentleman. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  (continuing.)  A  sin- 
gle moment,  sir.  ^o  one  has  contended  here, 
in  my  hearing,  that  if  the  legislature  chooses, 
by  ordinance,  to  grant  an  estate  in  land  to  B,  or 
individual  and  separate  and  corporate  rights  to 
C,  or  to  transfer  property  by  legislative  enact- 
ment, that  such  legislative  action  did  not  con- 
stitute a  contract  within  the  meaning  of  the  fed- 
eral constitution,  which  inhibits  the  passing  of 
laws  impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts.  And, 
hence,  the  rule  applicable  to  the  case  which  is 
familiar  to  every  student  who  has  ever  crossed 
the  threshhold  of  a  lawyer's  office,  is  wholly  in- 
applicable, with  due  deference  to  the  gentleman, 
to  the  question  now  under  consideration.  But 
the  question  which  I  propounded  to  the  gentle- 
man is  this:  Is  the  constitution — is  the  organic 
law  of  the  state — which  protects  the  members  of 
the  community  in  the  enjov^ment  of  their  political, 
social,  and  religious  privileges  and  rights  of  prop- 
erty, a  contract  between  the  members  of  the  con- 
vention who  made  it  and  the  people — the  indi- 
viduals who  may  have  exercised  rights  and  ac- 
quired property  during  its  existence?  If  such 
be  the  interpretation  of  a  state  constitution,  we 
had  better  at  once  draw  the  little  pay  to  which 
we  are  entitled  and  go  home,  for  every  innova- 
tion we  make  in  our  constitution  will  \)e  a  vio- 
lation of  the  contract.  Sir,  if  I  am  not  greatly 
deceived  in  my  memory — and  I  regret  very 
much  that  other  matters  have  almost  taught 
me  to  forget  what  law  I  learned  in  early  life 
— the  question  has  undergone  repeated  investi- 
gations of  the  supreme  court.   The  supreme  court 


TV  act,  of  any  conflict  between  a  state  law  and 
the  constitution  of  the  same  state. 

It  is  no  contract.  It  might  as  well  be  said 
that  the  provision  of  the  constitution  which  de- 
clares that  no  man  shall  be  put  in  jeopardy  twice 
for  the  same  offence,  is  a  contract.  If  "we  de- 
clare in  the  new  constitution  that  a  man  may  be 
tried  three  times  for  the  same  offence,  we  have  a 
right  to  do  so,  and  in  doing  so  we  violate  no  con- 
tract. 

I  have  grown  up  under  this  constitution, 
says  a  citizen,  I  have  reared  a  family  under 
the  guarantee,  among  others,  that  a  man  shall 
not  be  tried  twice  for  the  same  offence,  and  you 
have  now  taken  away  that  guarantee  for  my 
safety.  What  remedy  have  I?  Suppose  I  sue 
the  convention  in  the  supreme  court  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  will  you  maintain  the  position,  and 
let  it  go  abroad,  that  the  constitution  of  a  sov- 
ereign state  is  a  contract  between  a  state  and 
individuals,  where  there  was  no  property  vested 
and  no  personal  rights  conveyed  to  the  individ- 
ual? 

Mr.  DIXOJf .    I  am  not  certain  whether  I  un- 
derstood the  gentleman  or  not.    I  think  howev- 
er, I  understood  him  yesterday  to  affirm,  that  it 
was  in  the  power  of  this  convention  to  declare 
what  shall   be  property  in  Kentucky,  and  what 
shall  not.     And  I  think  I  understood  the  gen- 
tleman in  addition  to  this,  to  make  no  excep- 
tion whatever  in  favor  of  any  kind  of  property. 
I  understood  the  gentleman  to  say,  and  to  main- 
tain here,  that  it  was  a  power  belonging  to  this 
convention  to  say,  what  should  be  property,  and 
what  should  not  "be  property.     Did  I  not  so  un- 
derstand the  gentleman?     The  gentleman  asked 
me  a  question — it  was  this — whether  I  mean  to 
affirm  here,  that  the   constitution  of  Kentucky 
is  a  contract  between  the  citizens  of  Kentucky 
and  the  sovereign  power  in  regard  to  the  exercise 
of  their  civil  rights.     Sir,  I  mean  to  say,  and  I 
mean  to  maintain  it,  that  it  is  a  contract,  a  solemn 
contract,  one  sir,  which  the  government  cannot 
violate — one  which  ought  never  to  be  violated — 
which  no  mortal  man   here  can  violate  without 
arousing   the   indignation  of  the  whole  world. 
It  is   a  contract  which    guarantees  to  me  the 
right  to  liberty,  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  and 
the  privilege  of  worshiping  Almighty  God  in 
whatever  form  I  choose.     It  is  a  great  contract 
between  the  people  of  Kentucky  collectively,  in 
their    sovereign  capacity,  and    the   individual 
members  of  society.    It  is  a  solemn  contract 
which  ought  never  to  be  disregarded.     I  do  not 
mean  to   maintain  here  or  elsewhere,  that  the 
same  rules  will  be  applicable  as  are  applicable 
to  the  rights  of  property;  but  I  do  mean  to  say 
that  it  is  undoubtedly' a  contract  between   the 
governing  and  the  governed — between  the  ma- 
kers of  the  law,  and  those  upon  whom  they  op- 
erate. 

The  gentleman  says  I  have  no  right  to  make 
any  such  assertion.  I  ask  the  gentleman  if  he — 
The  PRESIDENT.  The  hour  for  calling  the 
order  of  the  day  has  arrived;  and  I  would  re- 
mark that  this  mode  of  interrogatfng  gentlemen 
directly  in  the  manner  and  spirit  in  "which  it  is 
done,  will  lead  to  unpleasant  consequences  and 
should  be  avoided.    It  is   surely  not  necessary 


cannot  take  cognizance  between  citizens  of  the   to  the  free  discussion  of  any  question  that  may 
same  state  under  the  25th  section  of  the  judicia- 1  arise. 
18 


138 


VMr.  DIXON.  I  stand  corrected.  Ididnotcom^ 
mence  the  system  of  interrogation,  but  I  con- 
fess that  I  was  speaking  with  some  little  anima- 
tion. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  will  per- 
mit me  to  say  that  the  whole  tenor  of  his  ad- 
dress was  of  such  a  character  as  to  induce  the 
belief  that  he  was  making  charges  against  in- 
dividuals. I  forbore  to  call  liim  to  order  for 
some  time,  for  I  knew  his  manner  of  speaking; 
but  gentlemen  must  perceive  that  it  will  lead  to 
unpleasant  consequences  unless  they  correct 
themselves. 

Mr.  DIXON.    I  stand  corrected  sir. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will 
have  leave  to  finish  his  speech. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  know  that  ray  manner  is  very 
earnest;  but  what  I  said  was  intended  only  in  a 
good  natured  way.  I  certainly  did  not  mean  to 
reflect  upon  any  gentleman,  but  I  understood 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe) 
to  have  asked  me  this  question — if  I  meant  to 
assert  that  there  was  power  in  this  convention  to 
take  away  the  property  of  the  people  of  the 
state.  I  understood  him  to  indicate  tlaat  I  had 
asserted  such  a  proposition.  The  gentleman* 
may  have  been  reported  wrong  in  the  speech 
which  he  delivered  upon  this  resolution  yester- 
day to  which  I  beg  leave  to  call  attention.  The 
gentleman  is  reported  to  have  said, 

"  Yielding  my  full  assent  to  the  position  that 
'slaves  are  property,  and  entitled  to  the  same 
'  protection  which  is  guarantied  to  other  proper- 
'  ty  under  the  organic  law,  the  enquiry  necessa- 
'rily  arises,  how  came  slaves  to  be  considered 
'property?  Was  it  by  constitutional  provision 
'  and  organic  law,  speaking  it  into  existence  by 
'  the  authority  of  the  people,  exercised  in  their 
'convention,  and  carried  out  by  legislation? 
'  The  property  in  slaves  is  guarantied  by  consti- 
'  tutional  law,  no  matter  how  originally  acquir- 
'  ed;  and  the  same  power  (the  people,)  which 
'  gave  the  constitutional  guaranty,  if  tliey  elect 
'  to  do  so,  may  withdraw  that  guaranty  in  any 
're-construction  of  the  government  which  they 
'  may  choose  to  make.  I  do  not  say  it  would  be 
'just  to  do  so;  but  they  have  the  power  to  do  so; 
'and  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  does 
'  not  inhibit  the  people  of  a  state  from  the  exer- 
'  cise  of  such  a  power.  Is  it  contended  that  the 
'  same  people  have  not  the  power  now,  or  they 
'shall  not  hereafter  exercise  it  in  the  same  man- 
'  ner;  they  Lave  the  same  sovereignty,  the  same 
'power  to  declare  what  shall  and  what  shall  not 
'  be  property  within  this  commonwealth." 

If  I  understood  t1»e  gentleman  correctly,  of 
which  I  am  not  entirely  certain,  I  understood 
him  to  say  that  this  convention  possessed  the 
power  of  the  people.  If  I  am  wi-ong  in  this,  I 
hope  the  gentleman  will  correct  me,  for  I  do  not 
wish  to  misrepresent  him.  The  gentleman  then 
yields  his  assent. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  rose  to  address  the 
chair. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  still  must  insist  that 
this  mode  of  appealing  to  gentlemen  is  totally 
out  of  order,  and  it  leads  directly  and  at  once 
to  difficulties  between  members  of  this  conven- 
tion, which  it  is  desirable  should  be  avoided. 

Mr.  DIXON.  If  the  gentleman  means  merely 
to  assert  the  power  of  the  people — that  they  may 


in  their  strength  arise  and  break  down  all  the 
guaranties  of  the  constitution — that  they  may 
declare  who  shall  and  who  shall  not  have  prop- 
erty— if  he  means  that  when  they  assume  the 
terrible  power  tiiat  was  exercised  during  the 
French  Ilevohition,  when  they  overrode  and  de- 
stroyed all  the  guarantees  thrown  ai-ound  the 
property  of  the  country,  which  was  in  itself  rev- 
olution, I  will  not  take  issue  with  him.  But  if 
he  means  to  assert  here  that  the  power  of  de- 
claring what  shall  be  property  and  what  shall 
not  be  property,  who  shall  have  it  and  who 
shall  not  have  it,  that  the  right  exists  here  to 
take  the  property  of  everj'-  citizen,  to  seize  it 
and  apply  it  in  any  way  that  the  governing 
power  may  think  proper — then  I  differ  with  my 
honorable  friend  from  Nelson,  and  therefore  I 
join  issue  with  those  who  claim  this  right.  I 
do  not  mean  to  assert  that  any  gentleman  does 
claim  it.  I  assert  in  the  resolution  that  the  right 
does  not  exist.  I  assert  that  we  have  the  right 
to  protect  and  guard,  but  not  to  pull  down  and 
destroy  the  rights  of  individuals— ^that  our  pow- 
ers are  derived  from  tlie  people,  and  that  we 
came  here  to  build  up  the  great  civil  institutions 
by  which  the  people  are  to  be  protected  and  not 
to  destroy  them. 

This  is  what  I  intended  to  coiivey,  without 
intending  to  cast  any  reflection  upon  gentlemen, 
for  I  have  a  deep  respect  for  the  opinion  of  eve- 
ry gentleman,  however  much  he  may  be  opposed 
to  me  in  the  views  he  entertains;  but  1  must 
speak  out  boldly  upon  the  point  that  is  contain- 
ed in  my  resolution,  and  I  have  done  so. 

TJie  PRESIDENT  stated  the  question  to  be 
on  referring  the  resolution  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  and  ordering  it  to  be  printed ;  which  was 
agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  wliole,  Mr.  BARLOW  in  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  Mr.  Turner's 
resolution  in  relation  to  slavery. 

Mr.  CHENAULT.  I  rise  on  the  present  oc- 
casion, not  with  the  vain  hope,  sir,  of  shedding 
any  new  light  upon  the  proposition  ofiered  by 
my  honorable  colleague,  and  to  which  a  propo- 
sition to  amend  was  offered  by  the  honorable 
president  of  this  body,  by  striking  out  all  after 
the  word  "resolved."  But  sir,  I  rise  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  to  my  constituents  and  to  the 
section  of  country  from  which  I  come,  that  I 
have  been  faithful  to  the  pledges  which  I  made 
to  them.  My  honorable  colleague  and  myself 
took  issue  upon  this  question  when  we  were 
canvassing  for  a  seat  upon  this  floor.  I  am  well 
aware  sir,  that  every  speech  made  on  this  floor 
»;osts  the  state  of  Kentucky,  perhaps,  $100;  but, 
sir,  in  obedience  to  what  I  owe  to  my  constitu- 
ents, I  desire  to  make  a  few  remarks  before  re- 
cording my  vote  upon  the  resolution. 

The  people  of  Kentucky,  sir,  have  convened 
us  here  for  some  purpose,  and  as  far  as  my 
knowledge  extends,  that  purpose  is  to  endeavor 
to  amend  the  organic  law  of  tiie  state,  or  in  oth- 
er words,  the  constitution  of  Kentucky.  And, 
sir,  I  think  if  there  is  any  one  fact  clearly  es- 
tablished, or  more  clearly  than  all  otliers  as  re- 
spects theamendment  of  the  present  constitution 
of  Kentucky,  it  is  this — that  many  of  the  most 
prominent  convention  men  of  Kentucky,  in  1847, 
convened  in  tliis  very  place,  issued  a  manifesto 


13d 


to  the  people  that  they  would  not  interfere  •with 
slave  property  as  it  existed  in  Kentucky;  and  I 
"wish  to  show  that  that  manifesto  issued  from 
the  seat  of  government,  and  having  the  authori- 
ty of  distinguished  names  was  the  great  cause, 
and  I  believe  the  sole  cause  of  this  convention 
being  called  by  the  people.  What,  sir,  let 
me  a-k,  was  the  vote  of  the  convention  party 
in  1838?  That  vote  was  but  about  28,000.— 
What,  sir,  let  me  ask  this  house,  and  the  hon- 
orable chairman  of  this  committee,  has  produced 
the  powerfully  increased  vote  in  the  space  of 
ten  vears,  if  it  was  not  the  declaration  that  was 
made  tp  the  world  that  we  would  not  interfere 
with  private  rights,  with  private  property,  or 
property  in  slaves?  I  consider  that  a  settled 
question. 

If  we  attempt,  sir,  to  engraft  the  law  of  1833 
upon  your  constitution,  what  does  it  intimate? 
It  is,  sir,  that  we  are  resolved  to  change  the  or- 
ganic law,  by  engrafting  upon  it  a  feature  which, 
if  carried  out,  will  strike  at  the  very  root  of 
slavery  in  this  confederacy.  Yes,  sir,  and  this 
understanding  produces  alarm.  Even  while  we 
are  consuming  time  here  in  debate,  there  is  not 
a  Kentucky  slaveholder — there  is  not  an  infant  in 
Kentucky,  of  ten  years  of  age,  who  does  not  feel 
that  his  rights  andhis  property  are  somewhat  en- 
dangered by  the  action  of  this  convention.  Sir, 
I  wish  to  see  no  such  principle  engrafted  on  the 
constitution  of  Kentucky. 

To  engraft  this  principle  does  more  than  this. 
It  builds  up,  as  my  honorable  friend  from  Hen- 
ry (Mr.  Ifuttall,)  says,  a  slaveocracy  in  Ken- 
tucky; or  in  other  words,  a  slave  monopoly, 
which  I  do  not  desire  to  see  created,  and  de- 
fends that  monopoly  by  guarantees  greater  than 
those  which  apply  to  other  property. 

I  will  do  mv  honorable  colleague  the  justice 
to  sav,  that  I  do  not  think  he  intended,  in  ofiFer- 
ing  the  resolution,  to  avow  himself  an  advocate 
for  the  incorporation  of  that  law  in  tlie  con- 
stitution, for  he  said  he  was  not  sure  that  he 
should  support  it  himself.  I  think  it  was  his 
great  zeal  to  get  into  this  body,  which  induced 
him  to  commit  himself  to  such  a  resolution, 
deeming  that  it  might  be  serviceable  and  give 
him  some  degree  of  strength.  I  think  howev- 
er, my  honorable  colleague,  from  his  connection 
with  some  of  the  leading  men  of  the  state,  from 
his  old  associations,  and  from  its  having  been  a 
projet  offered  to  the  people  of  Kentuckv,  and 
from  its  having  been  carried  through  the  legisla- 
ture by  his  aid,  has  been  perhaps  wedded  to  the 
darling  project. 

I  am  opposed  to  this  resolution  from  another 
consideration.  I  recollect  a  remark  that  was  made 
by  a  distinguished  gentleman  of  Kentucky,  a 
member  of  the  legislature,  in  a  speech  in  which  he 
labored  strenuously  to  convince  the  people  of 
Kentucky  that  they  ought  to  engraft  the  principle 
of  the  law  of  1833  in  the  constitution.  He  told 
them  that  from  1833  up  to  1840,  during  the  contin- 
uance of  that  law,  there  had  been  a  decrease  in 
the  number  of  slaves  ;  and  he  took  the  ground 
that  when  three  fifths  of  the  members  of  the 
Legislature  should  think  proper  to  emancipate 
the  slaves,  they  could  do  it.  Upon  that  point  I 
take  issue  with" him.  I  think,  sir,  that  the  portrait 
of  Washington,  which  is  hanging  over  your  head, 
should  admonish  not  only  Kentucky,  bat  every 


slaveholding  state  in  the  Union  to  stand  up  and 
firmly  maintain  its  rights  over  this  property, 
as  well  as  over  all  other  property  that  is  secur- 
ed to  them  by  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States  or  the  constitution  of  Kentucky. 

I  am  a  native  bom  Kentuckiap.  and  it  was 
with  mortification  and  regret  that  I  read  the  let- 
ter of  a  distinguished  citizen  of  Kentucky,  in 
which  he  said  that  the  time  was  approaching 
when  the  slaveholder  would  have  an  opportuni- 
ty to  get  rid  of  his  slaves.  But  I  think  that  his 
plan  was  unjust  and  demoralizing  in  its  tenden- 
cy, taking  away  from  one  portion  of  the  citizens 
of  the  state  what  they  had  earned  by  their  indus- 
try, and  leaving  others  in  the  full  enjoyment  of 
their  different  species  of  property.  1  think  the 
engrafting  of  snch  a  proposition  into  the  consti- 
tution would  be  to  declare  to  the  emancipation- 
ists, throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  the 
United  States,  "open  your  ears,  be  %'igilant,  be 
attentive,  Kentucky  sets  the  example  that  no 
more  slaves  shall  be  introduced;  and  she  is  the 
battle  ground  where  this  great  contest  between 
slavery  and  abolitionism  is  to  be  fought."  And 
I  will  say  to  my  co-delegates  here  assembled,' 
let  us  fight  this  great  battle  like  men — let  us 
contend  for  our  rightvS — and  if  an  overruling 
providence,  as  my  colleague  would  say,  has  de- 
creed that  the  slaves  shall  be  free  at  some  future 
day,  I  would  say,  with  due  deference  to  my  col- 
league, let  providence  do  its  own  work  and  let 
us  not  attempt  to  hasten  that  work. 

We  see  the  abolitionists  at  the  north  already 
in  the  congress  of  the  United  States  endeavor- 
ing to  deprive  slavery  men  of  their  rights — en- 
deavoring to  drive  them  from  the  country  for 
which  they  have  shed  their  blood — and  even 
now  in  this  convention,  it  is  proposed  to  deprive 
the  men  who  went  shoulder  to  shoulder,  and 
breast  to  breast  in  the  defence  of  the  country 
and  the  country's  rights — of  the  property  to 
which  they  are  entitled  under  the  guarantee  of 
the  constitution  and  laws.  Kentucky  then  is 
setting  an  example  which,  in  my  humble  judge- 
ment, will  number  the  days  of  this  republican 
government.  If  there  ever  was  a  principle  more 
forcibly  expressed  than  another,  it  was  that 
which  was  expressed  by  the  father  of  his  coun- 
try when  about  to  retire  from  public  life,  which 
was,  that  these  states  should  bind  themselves  to- 
gether by  one  common  interest,  and  that  no 
small  differences  of  opinion  should  separate 
them.  Our  motto  should  beV'united  we  stand, 
divided  we  fall;"  and,  sir,  as  we  are  a  frontier 
state — as  Kentuckv  is  to  be  the  battle  ground  in 
this  contest — ^let  Kentuckians  show  that  they 
intend  to  maintain  their  rights  at  all  hazards,  be 
the  consequences  what  they  may. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  In  the  progress  of  this  de- 
bate, as  has  been  remarked  by  some  gentleman 
who  heretofore  participated  in  it,  three  classes  of 
i  opinions  have  been  developed,  the  first  restric- 
1  tive  of  slavery;  the  second  approving  the  ex- 
i  isting  state  of  things — approving  the  constitution 
I  as  it  now  stands,  and  as  it  has  been  explained  by 
i  the  court  of  appeals;  the  third  taking  higher 
j  ground,  and  professing  so  to  modify  the  constitu- 
'  tion  as  to  make  it  conform  to  what  is  conceived 
to  have  been  the  spirit  and  true  meiming  of  the 
framers  of  the  present  constitution  in  making 
the  provision  upon  this  subject.    If  I  were  dia- 


140 


posed  to  generalize,  I  would  say  that  the  first 
class  embraces  those  who  regard  slavery  as  an 
evil,  and  who  indulge  the  hope  that  it  will  pass 
away,  and  are  animated  by  the  desire  to  aid  in 
accomplishing  its  extinction.  As  to  the  second 
class,  it  embraces  those  who  have  expressed  and 
perhaps  entertained  no  decided  opinion  upon 
the  abstract  question.  They  are  content  to  re- 
pose on  the  existing  state  of  things,  leaving  the 
past  with  posterity  and  the  future  to  God.  The 
third  category  embraces  those  who  have  adopt- 
ed the  proposition  that  slavery,  as  it  exists  in 
this  country,  was  not  per  se  an  evil  in  its  incep- 
tion, has  been  productive  of  more  good  than  evil 
in  its  progress,  and  does  not  promise  to  present 
a  future  more  inauspicious  than  the  past.  I  am 
aware,  sir,  that  surrounding  circumstances,  hab- 
its, associations,  temperament,  with  many  other 
extraneous  causes,  may  have  produced  sucn  mod- 
ifications of  opinion  as  to  be  incompatible  with 
this  classification,  but  I  look  upon  its  general 
accuracy  as  susceptible  of  demonstration. 

Let  me  invite  the  attention  of  the  convention 
to  the  language  in  which  the  original  resolu- 
tion, which  is  the  foundation  of  this  debate,  is 
couched: 

"Resolved,  (I  do  not  know  whether  I  can  give 
it  accurately  from  recollection,)  that  henceforth, 
no  persons  shall  be  slaves  within  the  common- 
wealth of  Kentucky." 

This  is  the  general  rule,  the  sweeping  decla- 
ration—"resolved  that  henceforth  no  persons  shall 
be'  slaves  within  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky." The  general  rule  is  prohibitory  of  slave- 
ry, the  general  rule  is  emancipative  in  its  char- 
acter, the  general  rule  is  to  abolish  the  whole 
system.  It  is  true  sir,  there  is  an  exception, 
and  the  rights  of  slaveholders  in  Kentucky  are 
compressed  within  the  limits  of  that  exception. 
Slavery,  as  it  now  exists,  and  the  descendants 
of  those  who  are  now  slaves,  and  such  as  are 
permitted  to  be  brought  here  under  certain  re- 
strictions, are  embraced  within  the  limits  of 
that  exception.  But  the  broad  declaration  is 
made,  that  hereafter  no  persons  shall  be  slaves 
■within  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky.  The 
language  of  the  resolution  seems  to  me  to  indi- 
cate its  spirit.  The  general  rule  is  laid  down 
from  principle,  the  exception  is  adopted  from 
necessity.  The  principle  is  that  slavery  shall 
cease  to  exist  in  Kentucky.  The  necessity  is, 
that  it  shall  exist  s«6  Tnoao.  Upon  what  does 
this  broad  declaration  rest?  If  it  be  predicated 
of  any  principle  it  is,  that  slavery  is  an  evil. 
If  it  point  to  any  end  it  is,  sir,  that  the  evil 
should  be  lessened  if  not  extinguished.  The 
effort  at  restriction  necessarily  associates  the 
idea,  raises  the  inference  that  the  will,  but  not 
the  ability  to  abolish  slavery  exists.  It  con- 
cedes emancipation  as  right  in  the  abstract,  but 
the   exception  contests  it  in  the  concrete.     It 

J'ields  up  the  whole  argument,  except  one  iso- 
ated  pomt,  by  narrowing  down  the  controversy 
to  the  sole  question  of  practicability. 

If  then,  sir,  the  principle  that  slavery  is  an 
evil  can  be  eviscerated  from  this  resolution,  does 
it  not  follow  that  the  only  excuse  for  not  cor- 
recting the  evil,  is  the  impracticability  of  any 
plan  of  emancipation  heretofore  proposed.  This 
view  of  the  subject,  this  position  seems  to  me 
to  be  strengthened  by  the  statistical  argument  of 


the  honorable  mover  of  the  resolution.  I  shall 
not  enter  upon  its  details  nor  is  it  necessary  for 
me  to  do  so.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  his  ar- 
gument concludes  with  the  declaration  that  to 
free  the  slaves  would  be  to  enslave  the  white 
man.  It  will  not  be  pretended  that  the  prohi- 
bition is  designed  to  operate  as  a  protection  to 
the  state  against  superabundant  slave  labor. 
This  superabundance  does  not  exist,  nor  is  it 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  it  ever  will  exist;  and 
in  this  position  1  am  fortified  by  the  argument 
of  the  gentleman  who  first  addressed  the  com- 
mittee on  this  subject.  He  declares  that  slavery 
has  not  increased  in  Kentucky  as  in  former 
years,  and  intimated  that  a  period  was  approach- 
ing when  it  would  cease  to  exist;  and  that  this 
would  be  brought  about  by  a  higher  power  than 
any  human  institution — ^by  heaven  itself.  If 
then,  sir,  there  is  no  danger  of  an  excess  of 
slave  labor  why  make  the  prohibition?  The 
proposition  is  either  nugatory,  or  it  is  intended 
to  act  as  a  restriction  upon  the  system  as  it  now 
exists.  There  is  no  danger,  sir,  of  slaves  being 
brought  to  Kentucky  beyond  the  demand  for 
slave  labor.  Such  a  position  as  that,  it  seems 
to  me,  would  be  preposterous.  Men  do  not  carry 
coals  to  Newcastle.  Slaves,  like  every  other 
kind  of  property,  seek  the  best  market,  where 
a  demand  exists,  depend  on  the  same  principles 
that  regulate  trade  in  every  other  department, 
the  difi'erence  between  the  demand  and  supply 
fixing  the  price. 

But  sir,  on  the  other  hand,  by  restricting  the 
introduction  of  such  slaves  as  may  be  necessary 
to  meet  the  exigencies  of  the  country,  you  make 
a  direct  attack  upon  the  institution  of  slavery  it- 
self. If  you  carry  out  what  I  conceive  to  be  the 
principle  which  is  embodied  in  the  resolution, 
what  will  be  the  consequence?  That  anomalous 
thing,  a  slave  state,  without  the  benefits  of  slave- 
ry, and  yet  unable  to  avail  herself  of  free  labof; 
By  adopting  a  provision  such  as  this,  and  bring- 
ing about  such  a  state  of  things,  you  place  an 
incubus  on  the  bosom  of  the  body  politic,  that 
must  weigh  down  the  enterprise  and  destroy  the 
prosperity  of  the  state. 

This  view  of  the  subject  is  not  controverted 
by  the  fact  that  for  fifteen  years  the  law  of  1833 
continued  upon  our  statute  book.  It  will  be  re- 
collected, that  by  a  system  of  partial  legislation, 
and  by  continued  evasions,  that  law  was  render- 
ed inefficient,  inoperative,  and  did  not  accom- 
?lish  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  enacted. — 
'he  door,  though  it  seemed  to  be  closed,  was 
held  continually  open.  What  is  to  be  the  effect 
of  adopting  such  a  provision,  upon  the  future 
prosperity  of  Kentuc4:y?  Is  the  immense  area 
of  fertile  lands  within  the  limits  of  Kentucky 
to  remain  as  it  is,  a  primeval  forest?  Is  the 
vast  mineral  wealth,  with  which  her  mountains 
abound,  to  sleep  forever  in  the  dark  bosom  of 
the  earth?  Who  among  us  can  foresee  the  exi- 
gencies of  coming  years?  Who  can  set  bounds 
to  the  enterprise  whicli  the  great  mineral  and  ag- 
ricultural resources  of  our  state  are  calculated  to 
awaken?  Who  can  measure  the  wealth  with 
which  that  enterprise  would  be  crowned,  if  it 
should  be  left  to  the  exercise  of  its  unshackled 
energies?  Are  the  men  of  southern  Kentucky 
content  to  lie  under  the  shades  of  their  unsub- 
dued forests,  and  dream  of  smiling  fields  waving 


141 


in  the  yellow  maturity  of  promised  abundance? 
I  ask  you  by  "what  process  of  alchemy,  if  you 
please,  the  mountaineer  can  change  his  coal  and 
iron  into  gold"?  This  proposition  will  be  to  Ken- 
tucky a  Chinese  shoe.  Crippled  in  her  pro- 
gress, marred  in  her  fair  proportions,  she  will 
stumble  forward  to  premature  decay,  with  the 
sin  of  undeveloped  greatness  stamped  upon  her 
■withered  lineaments.  Can  it  be  argued  that  the 
deficiency  in  slave  labor  could  be  supplied  by 
free  labor?  The  experience,  not  only  of  Ken- 
tucky, bnt  of  all  the  states  of  the  union,  shows 
the  incompatibility  between  these  two  descrip- 
tions of  laoor;  they  cannot  co-exist;  the  presence 
of  one  banishes  the  other.  "Where  slavery  ex- 
ists, the  white  operative,  as  a  class,  is  unknown. 
Such  sir,  I  venture  to  affinu,  is  the  elevating  in- 
fluence of  slavery,  that  it  lifts  the  white  man 
above  that  description  of  labor;  it  converts  him 
from  a  mere  machine  into  a  man.  And  hence  it 
is  in  consequence  of  this  incompatibility,  no  re- 
liance can  be  placed  upon  free  labor,  when  slave 
labor  is  inadequate  to  the  purpose.  And  what 
will  be  the  consequence?  We  sliall  be  neither  a 
free  nor  a  slave  state;  "neither  fish,  flesh,  fowl, 
nor  yet  good  red  herring."  And  it  is  easv  to  be 
foreseen,  that  when  such  a  state  of  things  is 
brought  about,  the  institution  must  wear  itself 
out.  Does  it  not  then  follow,  if  I  am  correct  in 
the  position  which  I  have  taken,  and  in  the  il- 
lustrations which  I  have  attempted  to  give,  that 
this  resolution  is  a  direct  attack  upon  the  insti- 
tution of  slavery  in  Kentucky? 

Let  me  pass  on  to  the  consideration,  for  a  very 
brief  period  of  time,  of  the  second  class  in  the 
division  I  have  attempted  to  make.  They  are 
those,  as  I  have  said,  who  are  content  with  the 
provisions  in  the  existing  constitution.  They 
are,  I  apprehend,  pro-slavery  men,  who  are  not 
looking  forward  to  a  change  in  our  system,  and 
yet  for  some  reason  or  other,  they  are  not  dis- 
posed to  protect  the  institution  from  the  perils 
of  possible  innovation.  I  would  not  be  under 
stood  as  entertaining  distrust  in  popular  dis- 
cretion, when  I  propose  to  close  the  door  against 
any  legislation  on  this  subject,  except  so  far  as 
merchandise  in  slaves  is  concerned.  My  object 
would  be  to  guard  against  the  dangerous  effects 
of  agitation.  Xot  that  agitation  would  direct- 
ly accomplish  any  thing.  Xot  that  it  would 
immediately  lead'  to  the  overthrow  of  our  insti- 
tutions. But  it  is  the  collateral  effects  which 
I  drea^l,  the  influence  it  would  have  upon  the 
slave  and  the  owner  of  slaves,  rendering  the 
slave  worthless,  disobedient,  and  intractable, 
bringing  that  description  af  property  into  disre- 

Eute,  throwing  uncertainty  around  it,  no  man 
nowing  how  long  the  institution  of  slavery 
"would  continue  among  us,  inducing  men,  and 
the  very  best  men  the  country  boasts,  rather 
than  remain  in  this  state  of  embarrassment  and 
uncertainty,  to  disrupt  all  the  dearest  associa- 
tions that  cluster  about  the  heart,  to  sever  the 
ties  that  bind  them  to  home  and  country,  to  fore- 

So  all  these  considerations,  and  deserting  the 
irth-place  of  their  young  hopes,  and  the 
graves  of  their  fathers,  carry  themselves  into 
voluntary  exile,  that  they  may  live  under  the 
shade  of  their  own  vine  and  fig  tree,  with  no 
man  to  make  them  afraid.  Are  not  these  con- 
siderations that  should  induce  pro-slavery  men 


to  pause  before  leaving  this  subject  in  a  state  of 
uncertainty?  "Why  stop  here?  Are  they  not 
looking  forward  to  a  continuance  of  the  institu- 
tion? II  this  be  not  the  case,  then  are  they 
dilatory  in  their  eff'orts.  They  stop  short.  They 
should  attach  themselves  to  the  first  class  of 
which  I  spoke.  They  should  make  an  imme- 
diate demonstration,  and  erect  upon  it  a  plat- 
form for  their  future  operations. 

Why  pause,  sir?  Has  not  public  opinion  pro- 
claimed throughout  the  length  and  oreadth  of 
Kentucky,  the  sentiments  of  the  good  people  of 
this  commonwealth?  Is  it  not  supposed  that 
emancipation  has  been  buried,  as  it  were,  under 
the  avjilanche  of  public  opinion?  "VThv  permit 
its  inanimate  corpse  to  be  aug  up?  "Wfiy  suff'er 
it  to  be  reinvieorated  and  have  the  breath  of  a 
new  life  breathed  into  it?  "Why  let  a  new  song 
be  put  in  its  mouth?  "Why  permit  emancipation 
to  plant  its  foot  on  the  platform  of  the  constitu- 
tion? Why  suffer  the  institution  of  slavery 
again  to  be  folded  in  the  stifling  embraces  of  the 
law  of  1833?  "Why  not  dispose  of  this  exciting 
subject  at  once  and  bestow  upon  Kentucky  the 
advantages  of  an  unequivocal  position?  1  am 
one  of  those  who  believe  that  it  was  the  interest 
of  our  fathers,  who  framed  this  instrument,  to 
give  to  it  just  such  an  interpretation  as  the  opin- 
ions which  I  have  advanced  would  indicate,  to 
place  the  subject  where  I  have  attempted  to  place 
it.  I  believe  that  the  legislature  has  no  power 
to  prohibit  the  importation  of  slaves  except  for 
merchandise.  I  believe  this  is  the  true  inter- 
pretation of  the  intent  of  the  framers  of  the  ex- 
isting constitution;  and  it  is  to  restore  to  the 
constitution  its  original  spirit  and  guard  the  in- 
stitution of  slavery  against  the  insidious  attacks 
of  emancipation,  that  I  take  higher  ground  than 
do  those  gentlemen  who  are  for  retaining  the 
provisions  of  the  present  constitution  on  this 
subject. 

I  will  refer  for  a  few  minutes  to  the  third  class 
of  opinions  which  seem  to  be  indicated  here, 
and  I  will  remark,  that  my  own  opinions  are  of 
this  class.  In  order  to  give  my  views  on  this 
subject,  it  will  be  necessary  to  refer  to  the 
relation  that  exists  between  master  and  slave; 
that  I  should  attempt  to  show  the  influence 
which  that  relation  exerts,  not  only  upon  the 
condition  of  the  parties  to  that  relation,  but 
upon  general  society.  If  I  am  able  to  prove 
that  slavery  is  not  an  evil,  as  regards  the  Afri- 
can, as  regards  the  white  men,  as  regards  the 
general  structure  of  society,  I  shall  estAlish  the 
position  which  I  assumed  to  belong  to  this  third 
class.  I  shall  have  proved  that  slaverr  is  not 
an  evil,  and  when  I  do  that,  I  shall  have 
proved  that  it  is  a  blessing.  That  political 
equality  is  a  great  principle  in  our  government, 
is  as  true  as  that  social  equality  never  did,  and 
from  the  very  constitution  of  man,  never  can 
exist.  Men  are  bom  intellectually,  morally, 
and  physically  unequal ;  and  these  irregularities 
seem  to  produce  gradations  in  society.  In  this 
country,  sir,  where  political  distinction  does 
not  exist — where  political  rank  does  not  obtain, 
wealth  seems  to  oe  the  chief  agent  in  accom- 
plishing social  inequality.  Hence,  wealth  seems 
to  occupy  one  extreme,  and  poverty  the  other, 
of  the  social  gradation.  Upon  those  who  are 
poor,  (I  speak  of  communities  where  slavery 


142 


does  not  exist,)  devolves  the  perfoi'ibance  of  all 
the  menial  offices  of  life..  It  is  their  destiny. 
Poverty  forces  it  upon  them.  The  degradation 
to  ■winch  they  are  subjected  does  not  spring 
60  much  from  the  performance  of  menial  service, 
as  from  the  relation  which  is  generated  by  that 
service.  The  poor  man  looks  up  with  awe  and 
"wonder  to  his  master,  as  a  type  of  the  power  of 
"wealth;  and  when  he  reflects  uponhis  own  condi- 
tion his  soul  shrinks  within  him,  and  he  feels 
and  acknowledges  his  own  nothingness.  He  looks 
at  the  impassaJBlc  barrier — the  abyss  that  lies 
between  him  and  his  master — and  feels  that  al- 
though he  has  the  same  political  rights,  he  has 
not  the  same  social  position.  Is  this  calculated 
to.  elevate  the  character  and  make  the  proud,  fear- 
less freemen  that  we  boast  of?  That  this  is  true, 
there  can  bono  doubt.  That  this  state  of  things 
does  exist,  and  that  it  must  from  the  nature  of 
things  continue  to  exist,  is  equally  certain.  Now 
look  at  the  state  of  things  in  the  slave  state. 
There  the  menial  offices — those  services  that  at- 
tach to  themselves  degradation,  are  all  performed 
by  slaves.  No  matter  how  humble  his  condir 
tion,  the  freeman  of  tlie  south  feels  with  Coop- 
er's scout  that  he  is  a  white  man,  without  a 
cross — that  liberty  is  not  only  a  political  right 
but  a  personal  distinction. 

There  are  in  the  slave  states  but  two  great  di- 
Tisions — white  and  black.  Tlie  black  is  the  de- 
graded class;  the  white  the  honored.  And  when 
it  is  said  that  slavery  is  calculated  to  produce 
aristocracy,  there  is  more  truth  in  the  remark 
than  persons  generally  allow.  But  it  is  general 
aristocracy — aristocracy  of  the  whole  white  race. 
What  is  the  reason  of  the  marked  distinction  ex- 
isting between  the  men  of  the  south  and  those  of 
the  north,  their  circumstances  being  equal'?  Is 
it  climate'?  That  cannot  be,  because  the  dis- 
tinction stands  out  as  prominently  upon  the  bor- 
ders, where  a  river  forms  the  geographical  divis- 
ion, as  in  the  interior.  They  have  all  sprung 
from  one  common  origin,  speak  tlie  same  lan- 
guage, live  under  the  same  political  institutions, 
yet  when  you  institute  a  comparison  between  the 
men  of  the  north  and  the  south,  does  it  not  re- 
sult in  favor  of  those  of  the  south'?  Has  not  the 
fiouth  acquired  for  itself  a  character  for  frank- 
ness, generositj'',  high-toned  honor,  and  chivalry 
■which  is  unknown  to  the  north?  Look  a  little 
further.  Review  the  history  of  our  government 
from  its  first  foundation  down  to  the  present 
time.  It  exhibits  a  series  of  brilliant  triumphs 
achieved  by  the  south,  illustrating  superiority 
of  moral  force  over  mere  numerical  strength. — 
The  voice  of  its  eloquence  has  predominated  in 
the  council  chamber.  She  has  displayed  her 
courage  and  patriotic  devotion  on  every  battle- 
field, and  throughout  the  broad  expanse  of  our 
country.  Her  energy  and  her  wisdom  have  been 
mainly  instrumental  in  achieving  the  success- 
ful progress  of  those  institutions  which  were 
originaily  moulded  by  her  geuius  and  her  patri- 
otism. 

But  there  is  another  view  in  which  I  wish  this 
subject  to  be  considered.  I  wish  to  contempljite 
slavery  in  regard  to  its  general  eflfect  upon  soci- 
ety as  a  whole.  I  wish  to  contrast  the  results  of 
the  combination  of  capital  and  labor  in  the 
t^wo  sections  of  this  union.  Capital  and  labor 
are  the  two  great  elements  of  every  countrv-'s 


property.  By  capital  I  mean  money  or  proper- 
ty of  any  description.  By  labor  I  mean  merely 
physical  exertion,  and  the  united  operation  of 
these  two  constitutes  the  prosperity  of  any  coun- 
try. In  order  to  achieve  this  prosperity  they  are 
reciprocally  necessary  to  each  other,  and  yet 
they  are  antagonistical.  Capital  without  labor 
is  valueless,  and  labor  without  capital  is  useless. 
What  is  the  function  of  capital?  It  is  to  accu- 
mulate. The  function  of  labor  in  those  states 
which  are  usually  called  free,  is  to  toil  out  a  lifo 
of  wretchedness,  with  no  ability  to  escape  from 
the  wretchedness  of  its  condition.  The  fiercest 
struggles  that  governments  have  ever  known, 
struggles  that  resulted  in  the  overthrow  of  their 
institutions,  have  arisen  from  this  fierce  antag- 
onism of  capital  and  labor.  They  are  the  great 
elements  of  strife  in  every  country  where  free 
labor  is  employed.  Talk  about  ambition  stalk- 
ing to  a  throne!  Infinitely  greater  are  the  evils 
which  spring  from  the  strife  between  capital  and 
labor.  Labor  complains  that  she  has  expended 
her  energies  and  worn  out  her  life  in  obtaining 
a  pittance  that  is  scarcely  sufficient  to  support 
nature,  scarcely  sufficient  to  reinvigorato  the 
system  and  fit  it  for  commencing  the  same  round 
of  labor  on  the  morrow.  Capital  looks  on  with 
unconcern,  impassive  in  its  nature  and  governed 
by  the  laws  of  its  being,  like  the  car  of  Jugger- 
naut it  rolls  on  to  the  accomplishment  of  its 
ends,  crushing  beneath  its  wheels  those  who 
have  ministered  to  its  greatness.  In  these  fierce 
strifes  capital  is  always  the  victor.  Whenlabot 
complains,  what  does  capital  do?  It  can  afford 
to  wait  till  the  sharp  pinchings  of  hunger  force 
labor  into  submission.  Then  it  is  that  capital 
dictates  terms,  and  puts  its  foot  upon  the  neck  of 
labor. 

Look  at  Massachusetts,  that  great  State  which 
boa-sts  of  her  dense  population,  and  of  her  enor- 
mous wealth.  Her  laborers  are  absolutely  ex- 
cluded from  the  social  circle.  I  have. attempted 
to  describe  the  influence  of  capital,  looking  at 
and  accomplishing  its  own  ends  by  immutable 
laws — laws  springing  from  its  very  character. 
Hence  the  misery,  the  poverty,  the  degradation 
of  the  operatives  as  a  class  where  free  labor  ob- 
tains— ^lience  the  dift'erence  between  the  manners 
of  the  men  of  the   north  and  those  of  the  south. 

Now  let  us  for  a  moment,  it  you  please,  turn 
our  attention  to  the  south,  and  see  how  this  prin- 
ciple works.  There  is  there  no  antagonism  be- 
tween labor  and  capital.  Th6y  are  both  united 
in  the  same  hands.  This  antagonism  cannot 
possibly  exist  in  a  slave  state.  The  union  of 
these  two  great  conflicting  elements  gives  to  the 
state  a  conservatism  which  can  nowhere  be  found 
where  slavery  does  not  exist. 

The  whole  population  of  course  are  not  the 
owners  of  slaves.  Among  those  who  are  not 
slave-holders,  capital  in  "land,  for  instance,  is 
united  with  their  own  labors,  thus  producing 
no  antagonism,  and  the  residue  of  the  popula- 
tion who  are  without  capital,  for  the  most  part 
mechanics,  are  so  necessary  to  the  capitalists, 
that  instead  of  having  the  wages  of  labor  fixed 
for  thera  by  their  employers,  they  dictate  their 
own  terms.  Hence  the  difference  between  the 
mechanics  of  the  south  and  those  of  the  north, 
and  the  independence  growing  out  of  their  posi- 
tion and  out  of  the  operation  of  this  institution 


143 


of  slavery.  It  is  this  which  has  elevated  them. 
It  is  not  that  there  is  any  intrinsic  diflFerence  be- 
tween the  men  of  the'south  and  those  of  the 
north.  Human  nature  has  been  the  same  in  all 
ages.  The  difference  in  their  condition  must  be 
referred  to  the  circumstances  by  which  they  are 
surrounded. 

I  have  thus  attempted  to  show  that  this  insti- 
tution, so  far  as  the  white  population  is  concern- 
ed, works  no  evil.  I  have  attempted  to  show 
that  it  is  elevating  and  conservative  in  its  influ- 
ence. I  have  attempted  to  show  that  order  and 
tranquility  are  the  result  of  the  absence  of  this 
antagonism,  which  has  produced  such  fearful 
convulsions  in  tho.se  countries  where  the  insti- 
tution of  slaverv  does  not  exist.  The  time  mav 
come,  though  God  forbid  that  it  ever  should, 
when  this  union  will  be  severed;  when  the  north 
and  the  south  will  become  distinct  empires,  and 
if  such  a  calamity  is  to  visit  us,thetime  will  in  all 
probability  also  come  when  these  fierce  conflicts 
to  which  I  have  alluded  will  result  in  the  pro- 
duction of  anarchy,  and  in  laying  the  founda- 
tion for  a  form  of  government  altogether  differ- 
ent from  that  which  now  exists.  If  such  a  ca- 
lamity does  arise,  then  we  shall  have  a  practical 
example  of  the  conservative  influence  of  this 
institution  of  slavery.  Then  it  will  be  seen 
that  slavery  is  a  social  blessing. 

Why  sir,  is  it  that  we  hear  so  much  of  the 
outrages  of  lawless  mobs  in  the  north?  Such 
disgraceful  seines  are  never  witnessed  in  the 
southern  states.  I  am  aware  that  the  cities  of 
the  north  are  larger,  that  a  greater  concourse  of 
persons  are  brought  together  within  a  small 
compass,  and  tliat  there  is,  under  such  circum- 
stances more  probability  of  their  passions  being 
inflamed.  But  why  is  it  that  mobs  prevail  at 
the  north,  where  there  is  no  great  difference  in 
point  of  population,  while  they  are  unknown  in 
the  south?  To  what  cause  can  we  refer  this, 
unless  it  be  to  this  very  conservatism  of  which 
I  have  spoken.  I  therefore  look  upon  slavery 
as  a  blessing  in  all  of  its  relation  to  the  white 
man.  Xow,  if  it  appear  that  it  is  no  injury  to 
the  slave  himself,  I   shall  have  established  the 

Froposition  which  I  proposed  to  establish  when 
set  out  with  my  remarks. 

Look  for  a  moment  at  the  condition  of  the 
black  man  as  he  exists  in  our  country,  and  as 
he  exists  in  Africa.  The  black  man  here,  though 
he  wears  the  ba»ige  of  slavery,  is  infinitely  su- 

Eerior  to  the  black  man  as  he  exists  in  his  native 
ind.  What  does  this  go  to  show?  That  the 
connection  "n'hich  exists  between  the  African  and 
the  white  man  has  resulted  in  the  elevation  of 
the  former.  Look  at  Africa  now,  and  look  at 
her  condition  a  thousand  years  ago.  Go  back 
to  her  earliest  history,  nay,  examine  the  anti- 
quarian researches  of  Champolion,  who  dug  up 
from  the  ruins  of  an  unknown  empire  the  evi- 
dences of  the  degradation  of  the  negro  race  graven 
in  the  mystic  hieroglyphic  of  a  literature  that 
had  been  lost  to  the  world.  "While  other  coun- 
tries have  strided  forward  in  the  march  of  im- 
provement, while  the  lights  of  science  have 
beamed  upon  them,  and  uie  arts  of  civilization 
taken  the  place  of  savage  rudeness,  Africa  is  now 
where  she  wa.5  then:  the  same  fierce  savage  lurks 
amid  the  dark  jimgles  of  his  pestilent  clime. 
This  inability  to  advance  proves  him  to  be  of 


an  inferior  race.  Why,  when  all  the  other  na- 
tions of  the  earth,  have  advanced  in  the  arts  and 
sciences  and  have  manifested  ability'  to  accom- 
plish the  high  destinv  of  man,  whv,  I  say,  is 
the  negro  stationary?  It  is  because  lie  belongs 
to  a  race  inferior  to  the  Cauca-sian.  Incapable 
of  improvement  bv  his  own  efforts,  it  is  neces- 
sary that  he  should^  be  under  tlie  auspices  of  the 
white  man,  to  be  dragged  from  his  original  deg- 
radation. A  comparison  of  the  African,  in  his 
native  condition  with  the  negro  reared  under 
white  auspices,  exhibits  the  benefit  which  has 
accrued  to  him  from  this  relation.  The  negro, 
sustained  in  the  grasp  of  the  white  man.  when 
that  grasp  is  relaxed  by  emancipation,  will  fall 
back  into  his  original  condition.  As  proof  of 
this,  look  at  the  difference  between  the  free  ne- 
gro and  the  slave.  Comparison  shows  the  supe- 
riority of  the  latter. 

Although  removed  from  under  the  immediate 
influence  of  a  master,  he  still  enjoys  the  benefits 
of  civilization,  and  is  still  under  the  control  of 
wholesome  laws.  How  much  greater  would  be 
his  degeneracy  if  he  should  be  restored  to  the 
original  condition  of  his  race,  and  removed  en- 
tirely beyond  the  influence  which  had  been  the 
means  of  his  elevation.  Would  he  not  if  left  to 
his  own  resources  relapse  into  barbarism? — 
Would  liberty  under  such  circumstances  be  a 
boon?  Is  slavery  which  thus  elevates  him  a 
degradation?  He  would  lose  the  feeble  light 
which  had  dawned  on  his  original  darkness.  If, 
as  I  before  said,  libertv  be  no  boon,  then  is  slave; 
ry  no  degradation,  ff  occupying  the  position 
he  does  among  us,  his  condition  be  degradation 
as  compared  with  that  of  the  white  man,  it  is 
nevertheless  elevated  as  compared  with  that  of 
the  native  African.  If  then  slavery  be  not  an 
evil,  but  a  blessing  to  the  race  enslaved,  I  shall 
have  proved  the  whole  proposition,  having  be- 
fore established  that  it  is  no  evil  to  the  white 
man,  and  therefore  a  blessing  to  both. 

If  this  proposition  be  admitted  to  be  true,  or 
to  approximate  to  truth,  shall  we  attempt  to 
cripple  an  institution  which  in  its  operation 
dispenses  a  double  blessing?  Why  should  we 
throw  any  obstacle  to  its  successful  operation? 
Why  do  we  not  pennit  it  to  remain  in  its  full 
vigor,  and  allow  it  to  accomplish  all  that  it  has 
done  for  our  fathers,  and  that  it  promises  to  do 
for  posterity. 

I  am  aware  that  I  have  already  too  long  tres- 
passed on  the  patience  of  the  committee,  and  I 
would  at  this  point  pause,  but  the  peeuliaritv 
of  my  position  in  reference  to  another  proposi- 
tion which  has  been  presented  for  the  considera- 
tion of  the  convention,  and  the  duty  which  I 
owe,  as  well  to  mvself  as  to  my  constituents,, 
make  it  necessary  tliat  I  should  very  briefly  de- 
fine my  position  in  relation  to  the  proposition 
above  referred  to.  I  avail  myself  of  this  mo- 
ment, because  the  subject  is  connected  with  the 
one  under  discussion. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  gentleman  will 

give  way,  I  will  make  a  suggestion  which  I  think 

will  meet  with  the  approbation  of  the  convention. 

j  Owing  to  my  peculiar  position,  I  am  desirous  that 

!  the  report  of  the  committee,  in  reference  to  the 

j  court  of  appeals,    shall  be  considered.    I  will 

therefore  ask  that  the    committee  rise,  report 

I  progress,  and  ask  leave  to  sit  again  on  Monday 


144 


next,  in  oivlerthat  we  may  take  up  the  report  to 
which  I  have  referred,  to-morrow.  When  the 
committee  of  the  whole  shall  have  this  subject 
again  under  consideration,  the  gentleman  can 
finish  his  discourse.  I  will  make  the  motion 
which  I  have  indicated. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  committee 
rose  and  reported  progress,  and  obtained  leave 
to  sit  again  on  Monday  week. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  17,  1849. 

Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

Mr.  MERIWITHER,  who  has  been  detained 
from  the  convention  for  several  days  by  severe 
indisposition,  this  morning  resumed  his  seat. 

EXPLANATION. 

Mr.  TURNER  rose  to  correct  a  misapprehen- 
sion of  the  remarks  he  made  a  few  days  since, 
on  presenting  the  report  of  the  committee  of 
Avhich  he  was  chairman,  with  which  the  commit- 
tee were  dissatisfied. 

What  he  intended  to  say  on  that  occasion  was, 
that  there  were  several  members  of  the  commit- 
tee who  did  not  concur  in  the  report  so  far  as  it 
affected  the  election  of  several  of  the  minor  of- 
ficers, such  as  surveyors,  coroners,  and  jailers, 
but  that  a  majority  was  in  favor  of  electing  those 
officers — and  also,  that  one  member  of  the  com- 
mittee did  not  concur  in  the  proposed  restriction 
as  to  age  to  be  required  of  the  candidates  for  of 
fice,  as  the  people  ought  to  be  the  sole  judges, 
and  had  a  right  to  elect  a  man  of  any  age  tney 
thought  proper. 

Mr.  GAITHER  was  glad  the  chairman  of  the 
committee  had  made  this  explanation,  but  did 
not  think  it  went  far  enough  to  meet  the  impu- 
tation which  his  reported  remarks  had  cast  upon 
at  least  one  member  of  the  committee.  The  gen- 
tleman had  said  that  one  member  of  the  com- 
mittee was  not  disposed  to  have  any  restriction 
as  to  the  age,  qualification,  or  any  thing  else  of 
candidates  for  office.  That  was  an  awkward 
position  to  be  placed  in,  and  one  which  he  did 
not  wish  to  be  charged  with  having  assumed. 
It  was  his  lot  to  differ  with  the  gentleman  and 
others  of  the  committee,  in  relation  to  what  is 
called  the  conservative  principle;  but  he  want- 
ed mature  age  to  be  required,  although  he  was 
opposed  to  some  other  restrictions. 

Mr.  TURNER  liad  understood  the  gentle- 
man's position  to  be  as  he  (Mr.  T.)  had  before 
stated,  but  if  he  was  mistaken  he  would  be  hap- 
py to  be  corrected. 

Mr.  GAITHER.     You  are  mistaken. 

Mr.  TURNER  was  very  glad  then  that  the 
gentleman  had  corrected  hira. 

After  some  other  observations  the  conversa- 
tion dropped, 

EEPOET  FROM   A   COMMITTEE. 

Mr.  DESHA,  from  the  committee  on  militia, 
made  the  following  report,  which,  on  his  mo- 
tion, was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole 
and  ordered  to  be  printed : 


ARTICLE   . 

Sec.  1.  The  militia  of  this  commonwealth 
shall  consist  of  all  the  free,  able-bodied  male 
persons  (negroes,  mulattoes,  andlndians  except- 
ed,) resident  in  the  same,  between  the  ages  of 
eighteen  and  forty  five  years,  except  such  per- 
sons as  now  are,  or  hereafter  may  be,  exempt- 
ed by  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  or  of  this 
State;  but  those  who  belong  to  religions  socie- 
ties whose  tenets  forbid  them  to  carry  arms 
shall  not  be  compelled  to  do  so,  but  shall  pay  an 
equivalent  for  personal  services. 

Sec.  2.  The  governor  shall  appoint  the  adju- 
tant general,  and  his  other  staff  officers;  the  nia- 
jors  general,  brigadiers  general,  and  command- 
ants of  regiments  shall  respectively  appoint  their 
staff  officers;  and  commandants  of  companies 
shall  appoint  their  non-commissioned  officers. 

Sec.  3.  All  other  militia  officers  shall  be  elect- 
ed by  persons  subject  to  military  duty,  within 
the  bounds  of  their  respective  companies,  battal- 
ions, regiments,  brigacies,  and  divisions,  under 
such  rules  and  regulations  as  the  legislature 
may,  from  time  to  time,  direct  and  establish. 

POPULAR   elections. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  thereon: 

Resolved,  That  the  good  people  of  this  com- 
monwealth are  fully  competent  to  judge  of,  and 
decide  upon,  the  qualifications  of  all  candidates 
for  any  office  whether  the  same  be  legislative, 
executive,  judicial,  or  ministerial;  wherefore,  a 
certificate  of  election,  according  to  law,  is  the 
only  certificate  of  qualifications  that  shall  ever 
be  required  to  enable  any  citizen  to  enter  upon 
the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  office  to  which 
he  may  be  elected. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Are  we  to  vote  upon  that 
resolution  without  discussion  or  forethought, 
and  adopt  as  a  constitutional  provision  now, 
instantly,  unhesitatingly,  a  matter  of  as  much 
importance  as  probably  any  other  provis- 
ion that  is  likely  to  be  submitted  to  this  House? 
Do  any  of  our  rules  authorize  the  calling  of  the 
yeas  and  nays  before  we  have  had  any  time 
to  ascertain  the  full  length,  and  breadtli,  and 
depth  of  a  proposition  like  this?  For  one, 
1  am  not  prepared  to  vote  for  it  throughout,  or 
against  it  throughout.  I  want  time  for  reflec- 
tion; and  let  me  say  to  the  honorable  mover  of 
the  proposition,  that  I  am  rather  inclined  to  think 
he  himself  wants  time  to  reflect  upon  the  sub- 
ject. Is  he  prepared  now  to  say  that  the  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals  shall  have  no  qualifica- 
tions whatever;  and  whether  they  are  twenty-one 
years  of  age  or  not,  or  learned  in  the  laws  of  the 
land  or  not,  is  immaterial,  because  the  people 
are  competent  to  judge  of  all  these  qualifica- 
tions? That  may  be  so,  or  it  may  not  oe  so. — 
The  gentleman  from  Ballard  must  bear  in  mind 
it  is  a  physical  impossibility,  that  in  the  very 
nature  of  things,  all  the  voters  who  are  to  vote 
foror  against  the  election  of  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals  can  be  acquainted  witli  their  qualifi- 
cations. The  present  proposition  is  to  elect  four 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  one  in  each 
district;  but  STippose  it  is  not  adopted  by  the 
convention,  but  that  the  four  judges  shall  be 
elected  by  all  the  voters  of  the  state— does  the 
gentleman  intend  to  lay  down  the  proposition 


145 


that  the  voters  of  the  countv  of  Daviess  are  not 
to  be  entitled  to  all  the  ligbt  that  can  be  given 
to  them  when  they  come  to  vote  for  a  candidate 
that  may  reside  in  the  county  of  Bracken,  or 
Knox,  or  Harlan,  or  in  any  of  the  most  remote 
counties  of  the  stateV  And  the  same  may  be 
suid  upon  the  subject  of  electing  the  clerks  of 
the  court  of  appeals — ^for  I  understand  that  we 
are  to  elect  four  clerks  of  that  court,  and  have 
four  different  sets  of  records.  It  is  a  fair  pre- 
sumption, when  the  people  of  Kentucky  have 
sent  one  Imndred  gentlemen  here,  that  they 
are  at  least  a  fair  sample  of  the  intelligence  of 
the  state.  Why  send  them  at  all,  unless  at  least 
they  are  an  average,  if  not  above  an  average,  of 
the  general  intelligence  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky. But  I  acknowledge  that  I  am  not  very 
well  qualified  to  judge  what  are  the  proper  quali- 
fications of  a  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals.  Here- 
tofore, when  the  judges  of  the  court  had  the 
power  to  give  the  office  to  whom  they  pleased, 
there  was  an  examination  of  the  candidate  duly 
made  before  them,  and  it  was  only  upon  a  certi- 
ficate that  he  was  competent  to  make  a  good 
clerk  that  he  received  the  appointment!  Are  not 
the  people  entitled  to  have  this  information  con- 
veyed to  them"?  Of  the  whole  of  the  one  hun- 
dred members  in  this  body,  except  half  a  dozen, 
perhaps,  and  the  political  lion  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  Irom  kelson,  and  his  colleague,  and 
some  other  old  lawyers,  there  are  none  who 
are  competent  to  judge  of  the  qualifications  of 
a  clerk.  As  for  myself  and  others  around 
me,  I  think  we  are  not  qualified;  and  it  is  but 
right  that  we  should  liave  all  the  information  on 
the  subject  we  can  possibly  obtain.  At  all  events, 
1  hope  the  resolution  may  be  laid  over  for  a  time 
and  that  we  shall  not  be  compelled  to  vote  on  it 
just  now. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  concur  in  all  that  was  said 
by  my  friend  just  up,  except  in  his  compliment 
to  myself,  and  to  that  I  dissent.  I  do  not  want 
to  vote  on  this  resolution  at  this  time,  nor  is  it 
necessary,  for  we  are  showing  in  our  reports 
every  day,  that  we  are  willing  to  return  the 
election  of  officers  to  the  people.  And  when 
the  committee  on  circuit  courts,  of  which  I  have 
the  honor  to  be  a  member,  and  of  which  my 
worthy  friend  from  Ballard  is  a  most  worthy 
member,  shall  report,  and  I  hope  it  will  be  in  a 
day  or  two,  we  shall  show  that  Ave  too  are  deter- 
mined to  trust  them.  We  came  here  with  that 
view,  and  it  is  not  worth  while  to  make  a  general 
declaration  of  it.  The  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  court  of  appeals,  as  well  as  tiose  that 
have  been  made  from  other  committees  show, 
that  we  are  in  favor  of  restoring  to  the  people 
their  rights.  As  to  this  sweeping  resolution 
proposed  by  the  gentleman.  1  suppose  if  it 
means  anything,  it  intends  to  strike  at  some 
of  the  details  of  the  report  in  reference  to 
circuit  and  county  courts,  it  may  be,  the  pro- 
vision that  no  man  shall  be  run  as  a  candi- 
date for  the  office  of  clerk  unless  he  is  qualifi- 
ed and  that  he  must  be  examined  and  get  a  cer- 
tificate of  his  ability.  I  think  it  is  a  very  valu- 
able requisition  to  say  to  a  man  who  comes  for- 
ward as  a  candidate,  you  shall  have  the  testi- 
monial of  your  qualifications,  and  you  shall 
not  be  elected  because  you  are  a  succesful  dema- 
gogue on  the  stump.  I  am  greatly  in  favor  of 
19 


throwing  back  all  the  power  to  where  it  origi- 
nally belonged,  (the  people),  but  let  us  not  run 
the  thing  too  far.  Let  us  not  go  too  far.  We 
are  pressing  it  too  far  if  we  say  that  men  shall 
be  elected  clerks,  who  perhaps  were  scarcely 
ever  in  a  clerk's  office  in  their  lives.  We  have 
prejudices  to  encounter  in  establishing  this  new 
system;  and  indeed  one  of  the  very  objections 
I  have  heard  urged  against  the  elective  system, 
was  in  regard  to  this  very  subject  of  the  election 
of  clerks.  So  far  as  I  was  concerned,  I  always 
gave  it  the  go-by,  by  saying  it  was  time  enough; 
but  I  always  intended  to  guard  against  it,  when 
the  opportunity  offered.     I  was  striking  at  the 

freat  offices  of  this  commonwealth — and  when 
go  out  to  hunt  such  game  as  the  grisly  bear 
of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  I  do  not  stop  to 
trouble  myse'lf  about  the  little  bears  that  arise 
around  me,  but  leave  them  to  be  attended  to  at 
my  leisure.  And  that  is  the  way  I  got  rid  of 
the  election  of  clerks  in  the  election;  but  I 
never  did  intend,  so  far  as  I  could  prevent  it, 
that  a  man  should  be  elected  clerk  without  the 
proper  qualifications.  I  hope  we  may  give  the 
subject  the  go-by  at  present,  and  that  the  resolu- 
tion may  be  printed. 

I  know  that  my  friend  from  Ballard  labors  to 
the  same  end  that  I  do — to  give  the  great  elec- 
tive franchise  to  the  people,  where  it  naturally 
and  of  right  belongs.  But  let  us  labor  to  make 
a  good  svstem,  without  running  into  too  much 
detail.  When  I  have  done  that,  I  shall  feel  as 
Barney  Edwards'  negro  did,  when  he  saw  his 
master  after  a  long  absence.  Said  he,  "I  have 
seen  the  face  of  my  master,  my  God  let  me  die." 
When  I  have  seen  such  a  system  secured,  I  shall 
be  willing  to  go. 

Mr.  IRWIX.  I  rise,  sir,  simply  to  make  a 
motion.  I  am  unprepared  to  vote  for  the  reso- 
lution of  the  gentleman  from  Ballard,  (Mr. 
Gholson,)  not  that  I  am  unwilling  to  trust  the 
people — ^not  that  I  do  not  feel  that  they  are 
competent  to  select  proper  officers — but  that  I 
conceive  it  necessary  that  the  resolution  should 
be  considered.  I  am  willing  to  trust  the  people 
when  they  desire  to  be  trusted,  but  surely  every 
officer  should  have  some  qualifications.  I  move 
that  the  resolution  lie  on  the  table  for  the  pres- 
ent and  be  printed. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  barely  desire  to  remark  that 
upon  general  principles,  I  am  inclined  to  concur 
with  my  friend  from  Ballard,  and  think  that 
ultimately  I  shall  support  his  resolution.  It  in- 
volves a  great  principle,  and  one  that  perhaps 
ought  more  deliberately  and  more  maturely  to  en- 
gage the  consideration  of  the  convention.  I  am 
willing  to  concede  that  the  clerks  ought  to  be 
qualified  to  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  their 
respective  offices,  because  the  clerk  of  the  cir- 
cuit court,  the  county  court,  and  the  court  of  ap- 
peals have  ven^  important  and  responsible  duties 
to  perform.  But  there  is  nothing  connected  with 
the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  a  clerk  in  which 
the  people,  among  whom  he  lives,  are  not  direct- 
ly and  immediately  interested.  I  hold  it  to  be 
equally  important  that  a  legislator  should  be 
qualified  to  make  laws,  when  he  is  called  upon 
to  take  a  seat  in  either  branch  of  the  legislature, 
and  have  gone  through  a  thorough  examination. 
Is  there  any  gentleman  on  this  floor  who  proposes 
that  when  a  candidate  presents  himself  lor  elec- 


14d 


tion,  there  shall  be  a  tribunal  created  by  the  con- 
stitution through  which  he  shall  pass  and  be  fa- 
vorably adjudged  before  he  is  considered  compe- 
tent to  take  a  seat  in  either  branch'/  But  -n-hen 
he  is  elected  by  the  people,  and  takes  his  seat, 
he  has  then  one-third  of  the  sovereignty  of  the 
state  in  his  own  hands.  He  becomes  a  part  of 
the  law-making  power  of  the  state.  It  is  not 
insisted  upon  that  he  shall  undergo  an  examiiia- 
tion  before  he  takes  that  position,  but  it  is  insist- 
ed that  a  clerk  shall  be  so  much  more  qualified 
to  discharge  the  duties  of  his  office,  than  a  leg- 
islator, that  a  tribunal  must  be  established  to 
judge  of  his  qualifications.  If  the  principle  be 
true,  that  all  political  power  is  inherent  in  the 
people — that  the  people  are  competent  for  self- 
government — ana  that  they  are  the  safest  depos- 
itories of  political  power,  why  not  leave  with 
the  people,  who  are  directly  interested  in  the 
subject,  the  power  to  judge  of  the  qualifications 
of  a  clerk?  You  strike  at  the  great  principle 
that  the  people  are  competent  for  self-go verraent; 
and  you  strike  also  at  the  principle  that  the  peo- 
ple are  the  safest  depositories  of  all  political  pow- 
er, when  you  attempt  to  withhold  from  them  the 
exercise  of  that  power,  unless  you   can  show  a 

food  and  sufficient  reason  for  withholding  it. 
can  myself  perceive  no  reason,  either  potent  or 
powerful,  or  more  satisfactory  to  my  mind,  why 
the  power  should  be  given  to  the  people  to  judge 
of  the  qualifications  of  a  candidate  for  the  sen- 
ate, or  the  lower  branch  of  the  legislature  of 
Kentucky,  or  of  a  judge,  if  you  please,  and 
at  the  same  time,  the  power  should  be  withheld 
from  the  people,  to  judge  of  the  competency  of  a 
candidate  for  a  clerkship.  Now,  1  doubt  not 
there  Ls  a  majority  on  this  floor  who  will  ulti- 
mately maintain  that  the  judges,  as  well  of  the 
circuit  and  county  courts,  as  of  the  supreme 
court  of  the  state,  shall  be  elected  directly  bv  the 
people.  I  understand  that  question  to  nave 
been  decided  in  the  recent  contest  for  the  elec- 
tion of  delegates  to  this  convention,  and  I  ap- 
prehend there  are  from  seventy  to  ninety  mem- 
oers  here  who  are  prepared  to  concur  in  giving 
back  to  the  people  the  power  surrendered  in  the 
old  constitution,  of  electing  all  those  officers. 

When  it  is  decided  that  the  people  are  compe- 
tent to  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  or  of  a  district  judge,  or  of 
three  judges  of  the  county  courts,  of  judicial 
officers,  in  whose  hands  are  placed  the  lives,  lib- 
erties, property  and  reputation,  of  the  people  of 
this  state — upon  what  principle  is  it  that  this 
same  people  are  not  competent  to  judge  of  the 

aualifications  of  the  otlier  and  minor  officers? 
pon  what  principle  is  it  that  the  same  people 
wno  are  competent  to  decide  upon  the  qualifica- 
tions for  office,  of  those  at  whose  hands  and  will 
and  fiat,  all  the  dearest  rights  of  the  citizen  can 
be  either  crushed  or  elevated,  are  declared  in- 
competent and  unable  to  decide  on  the  qualifica- 
tions of  a  clerk?  The  people  are  just  as  com- 
petent to  judge  of  the  qualifications,  the  com- 
petency, the  moral  character,  and  the  honesty  of 
a  clerk,  as  of  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals. 
I  maintain  that  we  ought  to  make  no  exception 
to  the  rule,  unless  the  exception  is  predicated  on 
8ome  reason  more  powerful  than  any  I  have  yet 
heard. 
But  I  would  suggest  that,  instead  of  demand- 


ing the  yeas  and  nays  on  the  resolution  submit- 
ted, it  would  be  more  consistent  with  the  pres- 
ent disposition  of  this  body  to  refer  it  to  the 
committee  of  the  whole,  and  select  some  early 
day  for  its  discussion;  for,  if  I  am  not  mistaken, 
it  18  one  of  the  gravest  questions  that  has  been 
submitted  to  this  convention. 

Mr.  HARDIN.    I  am  always  gratified  when  I 
hear  from  the  honorable  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son, for  he  is  certainly  a  very  eloquent  man,  and 
it  is  to  guard  against  that  very   kind  of  thing 
that  we  require    some    qualification,  now  and 
then,   on  the  part  of  a  candidate  for  office. — 
Take  up  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
court  of  appeals,  and  is  there  not  some  qualifi- 
cation required  for  a  judge  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals?   He  is  to  be  thirty  years  of  age,  and  that 
is  one  of  his  qualifications,  and  it  is  one  of  those 
restraints  upon  the  rights  of  the  people  so  high- 
ly commented  upon.     Is  it  not  furthermore  pro- 
vided that  he  shall  live  in  the  district  where  he 
is  chosen?    Yes.    Is  it  not  furthermore  provided 
that  he  shall  have  been  eight  years  a  practicing 
lawyer?     Yes;  because  the  committee  very  prop- 
erly took  up  the  idea  that  it  was   not  the  best 
speaker   who   would  make  the  best  judge.     Is 
there  not  a  qualification  necessary  for  a  govern- 
or?    To  be  sure.     Is  there  not  a  qualification  as 
to  his  age?    Yes.     And  we  must  now  and  then 
impose  those  kinds  of  restraints,  to  guard  against 
that   very    volume  of  eloquence  that  we  have 
heard  to-day,  or  our  government  runs  into  what 
is  called  a  mobocracy,   instead  of  a  free  repre- 
sentative republic.    It  is  to  guard   against  that 
state  of  things  that  these  qualifications  are  ne- 
cessarily required.     Do  we  not  know   that  it  is 
of  vast  importance  that  none  but  a  man  learned 
in  the  law  should  be  a  judge?    And  should  not 
the  candidate  be  learned   in  his  profession  be- 
fore you  make  him  a  clerk?    Is  not  one  just  as 
requisite  as  the  other?    And  shall  we  elect  the 
best  stump  speaker,  if  you  choose,  or  the  man 
who  can  organize  and  "dicker"  the  most  voters  at 
the  polls?    Is  it  possible  that  we  are  going  to  do 
any  thing  of  this  kind?    I  have  run  this  thing 
as  far  as  I  can,  but  the  gentleman   out  Herods 
me.    Let  us  impose  some  wholesome  restraints 
as  to  qualifications  upon  all  the  officers  put  be- 
fore the  people.     Let  our  governor  be  qualified 
as  to  age  and   residence;  let  the  judges   of  the 
courts  of  appeals  be  qualified   as  to  age,  resi- 
dence, and  legal  attainments;  and  let  our  judges 
of  the  circuit  courts  be  qualified  in  the  same  re- 
spects.   Yes  sir,  and  there  is  another  class  of 
men,  who  are  called  the  Queen's  solicitors,  and 
it  would  be  more  tasteful  to  the  country  if  we 
should  require  some  qualifications  before  they 
throw  themselves  before  the  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple.   I  have  seen  many  a  young  man  of  two  or 
three  and  twenty  years  of  age,  who  could  ad- 
dress himself  very  kindly  to  the  sympathies  of 
the  people,  and  yet  possess  no  qualification  be- 
yond tliat.    I  hope,  therefore,  we  shall  not  vot« 
now  on  this  resolution,  as  the  subject  will  soon 
come  up  in  its  appropriate  aspect. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  am  aware  that  it  is  owing 
to  the  over-flowing  kindness  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  rather  than  to  any  merit  of  mv 
own,  tliati  have  received  the  coinplinunt  whicli 
he  has  just  paid  me.  I  am  not  opposed  to  qual- 
fications,  nor  did  I  assert  such  a  principle.    I 


147 


did  not  sarthat  a  clerk  or  a  judge  should  not  be 
qualified,  but  I  maintained  this  ground,  that  the 
people  were  competent  to  judge  of  his  qualifi- 
cations, and  it  was  predicated  upon  the  idea, 
that  in  the  exercise  of  their  sound  judgment  and 
well  matured   discretion,  they  would  make  a 

E roper  selection.  That  is  the  ground  I  take.  I 
ave  never  argued  that  a  judge  or  a  clerk  should 
not  be  qualified  to  discharge  the  duties  of  his 
office;  but  I  assumed  the  ground  which  is  as- 
sumed in  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from 
Ballard,  that  the  people  alone  are  qualified  to 
judge  of  his  qualifications.  If  they  are  quali- 
fied to  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  a  President 
of  the  United  States,  in  whose  hands  are  thrown 
all  the  diplomatic  relations  existing  between 
this  country  and  foreign  nations,  and  who 
wields  more  patronage  and  power  than  any 
other  officer,  or  ten  officers  in  the  United  States, 
I  maintain  they  are  competent  to  judge  of  the 
qualifications  of  a  clerk,  whether  of  the  circuit 
court  or  of  the  court  of  appeals.  Ihare  assumed, 
and  that  is  the  reason  I  made  the  suggestion  to 
my  friend  from  Ballard,  that  there  may  be  rea- 
sons interposing  to  exclude  the  election  of  a 
clerk  by  the  people,  unless  he  has  imdergone 
some  examination.  As  yet,  however,  they  have 
not  occurred  to  my  mina,  and  it  is  to  hear  such 
reasons,  if  there  are  any,  that  I  suggested  to 
my  friend  from  Ballard"  the  propriety  of  refer- 
ring his  resolution  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  with  the  assignment  of  some  day  for  its 
discussion. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.    I  certainly  most  cordially 
reciprocate  the  kind  sentiments  expressed  with 
regard  to  myself.     I  certainly  have  no  disposi- 
tion to  introduce  anything  here  tliat  shall   pro- 
duce unnecessary  debate,  or  lead  to  an  unprofi- 
table  consumption   of   time.     But  maintaining 
as  I  do — ^having  maintained  it  before  those  who 
sent  me  here,  and  that  sentiment  being,  as  I  be- 
lieve almost  unanimously  entertained  by  them — 
that  the  people  are  capable  of  self-government, 
and   seeing,   as  I  think,  a  disposition  here  to 
deny  this  great  fundamental  principle   that  all 
power  is  inherent  in  the  people,  and  that  they 
alone  have  the  legitimate  right  to  exercise  that 
power,  I  desire  to   test    the  question   at  once. 
What  light  does  any  learned  gentleman  need  on 
this  subject?    Is  any  gentleman  prepared  to  say 
that  the  people  are  not  capable  of  self-govern- 
ment? or  that  they  are  not  competent  to  choose 
a  clerk?    Is  any  gentleman  here  prepared  to  say 
to  his  constituents,  I  fearyon  will  take  up  some 
ignorant  man  who  is  unfit  for  the  office?     That 
you  are  so  vicious  and  so  ignorant  that  you  will 
palm  upon  the  country  an  unqualified   officer? 
w  hy,  I  hold  it  to  be  a  self-evident  truth  that  in 
the  absence  of  interested  motive  to  do  wrong  all 
mankind  would  do  right.     And  where  is  the 
motive  that  shall  prompt    the    people  of  any 
county  in  this  state  to  do  wrong  m  a  matter  of 
this  kind?     There  can  be  no  motive;  hence  they 
will  do  right,  and  in  doing  right  they  will  make 
the  best  selection.    If  they  make  a  bad  selection 
tiiey  alone  are  the  suflFerers;  it  wiU   be  their 
fault,  and  perhaps  one  bad  choice  may  be  neces- 
sary to  put  them  on  their  guard,  and  to  make 
them  more  careful  in  future.     You  might  as 
well  undertake  to  stand  between  a  man  and  the 
wife  of  his  choice,  and  say  to  him  let  me  decide 


on  the  qualifications  of   that  lady  before  you 
marry  her. 

It  is  the  right  of  every  man,  of  every  free  man, 
to  exercise  the  privilege  of  selecting  the  public 
servants.  And  it  is  for  this  right  that  I  contend. 
Now,  with  regard  to  the  proper  mode  of  mana- 
ging this  thing,  and  as  to  what  will  soonest  test 
the  "question,  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  ;  but  I 
want  the  ayes  and  noes  upon  it.  I  want  every 
gentleman  here  to  say  to  the  people  of  Kentuc- 
ky whether  or  not  inhis  estimation  they  are  ca- 
pable of  self-government.  If  it  is  thought  most 
expedient  to  set  apart  a  day  for  the  discussion 
of  this  subject,  I  am  agreed,  provided  the  time 
is  not  too  far  distant.  I  want  that  thing  tested, 
and  the  sooner  the  better. 

I  wiU  not  consume  the  time  of  the  convention 
at  present,  as  gentlemen  say  they  are  unprepar- 
ed to  enter  upon  a  debate,  and  I  wish  to  give 
them  ample  time  for  preparation;  but  the  whole 
argument  on  this  subject  in  my  judgment,  iS  in 
a  nutshell  and  does  not  require  a  lengthy  discus- 
sion. Unprepared  as  gentlemen  may  be,  I  am 
myself,  ready  at  all  times  to  vote  on  a  question 
lite  this.  I* am  willing  that  the  consideration 
of  this  subject  shall  be  postponed  and  made  the 
special  order  for  Mondav  or  Tuesday  next,  or 
any  other  day  that  the  liouse  may  think  proper 
to  name.  If  my  friend  from  Logan  will  with- 
liraw  his  motion,  I  will  move  that  the  resolution 
be  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and 
made  the  order  of  the  day  for  Tuesday  next. 

Mr.  IRWIX.     I  have  no  objection. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  With  the  gentleman  from 
Ballard,  I  am  always  ready  to  vote  on  a  ques- 
tion involving  the'rights  of  the  people,  and  I 
am  prepared  now  to  vote  on  this  proposition.  It 
seems  to  me  that  there  are  two  questions  involv- 
ed in  the  resolution,  and  it  has  been  my  purpose 
to  ask  for  a  division  of  them,  when  the  question 
shall  be  taken.  One  is  the  attract  proposition — 
are  the  people  capable  of  self-government?— on 
which  1  shall  vote  in  the  affirmative,  believing 
that  there  is  not  a  question  upon  the  subject. 
But  the  other  proposition,  whether  any  qualifi- 
cations for  office  should  exist,  is  a  question 
which  should  be  considered.  Let  me  suggest, 
as  an  additional  reason,  that  in  regard  to  clerks, 
there  is  nothing  in  the  requisition  of  certificates 
of  qualifications  from  thera,  that  presupposes  a 
disqualification  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  judge 
upon  the  subject.  The  very  requisition  seems  to 
indicate  the  necessity  of  examination  on  the 
part  of  the  people.  It  requires  that  some  com- 
petent tribunal  shall  be  provided  for  the  exami- 
nation of  this  officer,  authorized  not  for  any  in- 
competency on  the  part  of  the  people  to  judg«, 
but  from  the  inability  of  the  whole  people  to 
make  the  examination  and  with  a  view  of  reliev- 
ing them  from  that  trouble.  It  was  merely  to 
present  this  view  of  the  subject  that  I  rose. 

The  resolution  was  then  made  a  special  order 
for  Tuesday  next  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

COUET  OF  CHAXCEaT  AT  LOUISVILLE. 

Mr.  RUDD  oflfered  the  following  resolation, 
which  was  adopted: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  circuit  courts 
be  instructed  to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of 
permitting  the  Louisville  chancery  court  to  ex- 
ist under  the  new  constitution,  and  giving  au- 


148 


thority  to  tJie  legislature  to  establish  other  chan- 
cery courts  in  the  commonwealth. 

THE    COURT   OF  APPEALS. 

The  convention  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  G.  W.  JOHNSTON 
in  the  chair,  on  tlie  article  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee on  the  court  of  appeals. 

The  verbal  amendments  proposed  by  the  stand- 
ing committee  in  their  supplemental  report  were 
adopted,  with  a  view  of  perfecting  the  re- 
port of  the  committee. 

The  question  then  came  up  on  the  proposed 
additional  section  to  the  article,  as  follows: 

Sec.  15.  "All  elections  of  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  and  the  clerks  thereof,  shall  be  by 
ballot." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered, when  the  committee  made  the  report  now 
under  consideration,  that  under  their  sanction  I 
announced  to  the  house  that  the  mode  in  which  the 
elective  franchise  should  be  exercised  by  the  peo- 
ple in  the  choice  of  judicial  officers  had  not  es- 
caped their  attention.  They  did  not,  however, 
feel  it  incumbent  on  them  to  express  what  was 
understood  to  be  their  opinion,  by  any  specific 
proposition  as  to  the  mode  in  which  it  should  be 
exercised  in  the  choice  of  judicial  officers,  wait- 
ing, out  of  respect,  the  action  of  other  commit- 
tees, who  had  kindred  subjects  under  advise- 
ment. The  committee,  however,  upon  a  further 
consultation  and  reflection  upon  the  subject, 
and  looking  forward  possibly  to  a  divisioii  of 
sentiment  in  this  body  in  reference  to  a  radical 
change  in  the  niode  of  voting  prescribed  by  our 
present  constitution,  and  as  long  practiced  by 
our  people  in  the  choice  of  political  representa- 
tives and  officers,  have  thought  that  between  the 
advocates  of  the  prieiple  of  viva  voce  voting,  and 
those  who  are  in  favor  of  the  ballot  system,  and 
of  introducing  this  new  and  important  principle 
in  our  government  of  electing  all  our  officers, 
political  as  well  as  judicial,  we  might  attain 
something  at  least,  in  the  freedom  of  the  exer- 
cise of  the  privilege  where  it  is  brought  to  bear 
in  the  choice  of  a  judicial  officer;  at  all  events, 
that  it  might  operate  to  relieve  the  elective  prin- 
ciple of  one  objection  which  I  have  heard — I  will 
not  say  in  this  house,  because  it  has  not  been  as 
yet  avowed  here,  but  outside  of  this  house — the 
danger  of  placing  a  judicial  officer  under  the  in- 
fluence of  personal  feelings  in  his  course  toward 
individual  suitors  and  litigants  who  might  either 
have  voted  for  him  or  against  him.  I  do  not  re- 
gard however  that  as  at  all  assaulting  the  principle 
which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  elective  sys- 
tem. The  independence  of  the  judge  has  never 
been  regarded  in  any  age  or  country  as  being  se- 
cured by  or  dependent  upon  the  mode  of  his  ap- 
pointment. It  is  supposed  to  rest  on  the  princi- 
ple which  was  one  of  the  results  of  the  revolu- 
tion in  England,  one  of  the  fruits  of  which  was 
tlie  change  in  the  tenure  of  this  description  of 
office — prior  to  which  revolution  the  judge  held 
his  office  at  the  will  of  the  crown  or  the  pleasure 
of  the  prince,  not  by  the  tenure  of  good  behavior. 
That  was  the  principle,  and  it  is  the  one  from 
■which  wc  have  derived,  as  heretofore  entertained, 
all  our  notions  of  an  independent  judiciary. 
Not  that  the  officer  derived  his  appointment  ei- 
ther by  election,  from  the  representatives  of  the 


people  in  our  state  legislature,  or  that  lie  Avas  ap- 
pointed by  the  executive  under  the  confirmation 
of  the  senate — but  that  when  he  is  appointed  the 
constitution  of '99  secured,  atJeast  on  paper,  and 
I  hope  in  reality,  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary, because  ho  was  macle  by  the  tenure  of  his 
office  only  responsible  under  the  forms  and  prin- 
ciples prescribed  in  the  constitution.  I  do  not 
now  understand  that  there  exists  in  this  body  or 
out  of  it,  whether  among  the  advocates  of  a 
convention  for  constitutional  reform  or  against 
it,  any  one  who  is  an  advocate  for  life  tenure  in 
office.  All  of  all  parties  are  in  favor  of  surren- 
dering the  principle  of  tenure  during  good  be- 
havior, or  in  common  parlance,  life  estates  in  of- 
fice. Upon  all  .sides  the  question  has  been  given 
up.  All  yield  to  tlie  principle  that  the  officer 
should  at  some  time  short  of  his  life,  be  returned 
back   to  the  appointing  power,  wherever  that 

Eower  may  be  deposited.     We  propose  by  the 
ill  to  deposit  the  power  in  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple, to  whom  we  believe  it  belongs. 

The  independence  of  the  judge  does  not  de- 
pend upon  the  source  of  appointment.  Whether 
a  judge  be  appointed  by  the  governor,  the  legis- 
lature, or  the  people,  if  he  be  a  bad  man  he  will 
make  a  bad  judge,  and  if  he  be  a  good  man  he 
will  make  you  a  good  judge  or  good  officer,  and 
tlie  people  must  take  the  chances  of  selecting  be- 
tween the  good  and  the  bad.  And  they  are  just 
as  competent,  if  not  indeed  more  so,  to  make  the 
selection  themselves,  than  any  intermediate  del- 
egated agents  according  to  the  present  mode. 

I  do  not  propose  at  this  time,  to  enter  into  the 
discussion  of  the  importance  of  this  change,  and 
the  benefits  whicli  will  result  from  it,  further 
than  is  necessary  to  explain  the  object  of  tho 
committee  in  the  amendment  they  propose. — 
They  were  unanimous  and  unhesitating  in  their 
opinion  of  its  importance,  and  in  their  desire 
that  it  should  be  engrafted  upon  the  article  now 
under  consideration,  and  if  you  will  allow  me  to 
say  it,  upon  all  other  articles  which  have  refer- 
ence to  the  election  of  judicial  ofticers.  I  be- 
lieve that  a  majority  of  the  States  of  this  Union — 
I  speak  but  from  a  general  recollection  and  not 
from  minute  recollection — have  adopted  and  are 
now  in  the  practice,  in  all  elections  of  every  kind 
and  description,  of  the  ballot  system.  There  is 
much  to  say  in  favor  of  the  ballot  system,  and 
especially  in  communities  differently  organized 
and  constituted  in  some  respects  from  our  own 
State.  I  have  not  understood  that  a  change  in 
the  mode  of  casting  the  votes  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky,  for  officers  heretofore  elected  by  them, 
has  been  a  cause  of  constitutional  reform,  or  that 
it  was  a  cause  of  complaint  or  grievance.  I  do 
not  believe  that  the  time  now  exists,  or  is  likely 
to  exist  in  this  country,  so  long  as  we  shall  cher- 
ish our  domestic  institutions — if  I  am  understood 
by  that  phrase — that  there  will  be  the  same  ne- 
cessity for  the  mode  of  exercising  the  electivo 
franchise  that  other  States  and  communities  have 
believed,  or  found  to  exist  among  them.  But 
in  the  choice  of  a  judicial  officer  by  the  people-— 
to  moot  the  argument  or  the  objection  to  the  sys- 
tem tliat  I  have  lieard  alledgea — tliat  is,  that  the 
judge  who  is  elected,  finding  A,  who  has  cast 
nis  vote  against  him,  a  suitor  in  his  court,  may 
feel  disposed  to  visit  upon  him,  in  some  of  his 
judicial  acts,  vengeance  for  this  exercise  of  priv  - 


149 


ilege.  A  judge  under  the  influence  of  bad  pas- 
sions, in  the  exercise  of  the  high  duties  which 
the  constitution  and  the  country  have  confided 
to  him,  may  visit  the  perversion  of  law,  tyranny, 
and  injustice,  upon  some  humble  but  independ- 
ent man  in  the  country,  brought  before  him  bv 
some  of  the  various  processes,  as  witness,  liti- 
gant, criminal,  or  suitor.  I  think  if  I  have  a  cor- 
rect knowledge  of  Kentucky  character,  that  there 
is  more  danger  from  an  individual  in  the  exer- 
cise of  his  judicial  functions,  when  elected  by  the 
voice  of  the  people,  in  an  action  between  A  his 
supporter  and  B  his  opponent,  lest  he  might  be 
suspected  of  leaning  towards  his  friend,  he  would 
rather  lean  against  him  to  avoid  even  the  ap- 
pearance of  favoritism.  The  committee  wish  to 
give  every  man  in  the  State  who  may  choose  to 
vot«  for  a  judicial  ofiicer,  the  privilege,  if  he 
choose  so  to  do,  by  a  ballot,  deposited  in  a  box 
unknown  to  any  but  himself.  It  will  not  de- 
prive any  man  who  may  feel  disposed  to  let  a 
candidate  know  how  he  voted,  of  the  privilege 
of  voting  an  open  ticket  if  he  chooses  so  to  do. 
But  if  I  am  so  constituted  as  to  feel  that  I  might 
place  myself  in  all  probabilitv,  being  a  suitor, 
in  an  attitude  that  would  excite  a  lurking  and 
partial  and  improper  feeling  in  the  breast  of  the 
judge  towards  me  in  the  exercise  of  his  judicial 

Eowers,  if  I  chose  to  keep  it  concealed  from  him 
ow  I  voted,  give  me  the  privilege  of  doing  so. 
I  leave  to  you  who  have  no  such  apprehensions, 
the  privilege  of  voting  your  open  ticket,  in  com- 
mon phrase,  or  of  letting  the  individual  know 
you  voted  for  or  against  him  as  you  may  prefer. 
These  were  the  reasons  which  influenced  the 
committee  in  asking  the  amendment  to  the  orig- 
inal report  which  has  just  been  read,  and  with 
this  brief  explanation  I  submit  the  question. 

Mr.  HARDIK.  I  hope  the  genueman  will 
not  press  the  section  at  this  time,  but  permit  the 
bill  to  be  gone  through  with  section  by  section, 
commencing  at  the  first  one;  then  the  amend- 
ment would  be  reached  in  its  order,  and  we 
should  have  time  to  reflect  upon  it.  For  my  own 
part  I  cannot  say  yet  how  I  will  vote,  but'l  am 
very  much  in  favor  of  the  viva  voce  mode  of  vo- 
ting, and  the  committee  of  which  I  am  a  mem- 
ber are  also  rather  disposed  that  way.  I  like 
harmony  very  much  and  I  believe  that  the  mode 
of  voting  for  all  ofiicers  should  be  the  same.  I 
am  not  afraid  to  tell  these  high  dignitaries  how 
I  vote. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  hoped  the  report 
would  be  taken  up  section  by  section.  He  said, 
at  first  blush  I  am  opposed  to  this  innovation 
upon  our  custom  of  voting,  and  I  want  time  to 
reflect  upon  it.  As  at  present  advised  I  shall  feel 
constrained  to  go  against  it. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  certainly  do  not  de- 
sire to  press  the  question  if  any  member  is  not 
frepared  to  vote  upon  it  or  desires  to  discuss  it. 
will  agree  to  the  course  suggested  the  more 
readily,  as  I  believe  that  the  more  these  two  gen 
tlemen  reflect  on  the  subject,  the  nearer  they  will 
arrive  at  the  conclusions  to  which  the  committee 
have  come.  I  suppose  I  was  distinctly  under- 
stood. I  am  not  advocating  a  change  in' the  viva 
voce  mode  of  electing  political  ofticers.  The  rea- 
son is  that  if  you  elect  a  political  oflicer,  a  mem- 
ber of  congress,  of  the  legislature,  or  a  governor, 
he  cannot  visit  his  official  action  on  me  to  my 


injury  for  voting  against  him  without  it-s  falling 
with  an  ^Qual  hand  on  the  balance  of  the  com- 
munity. That  is  the  difference  between  a  politi- 
cal and  a  judicial  oflacer.  Of  course  I  acquiesce 
with  pleasure  in  the  course  suggested. 

The  1st  sec.  was  then  read  as  follows: 

Sec.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  common- 
wealth, both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equity, 
shall  be  vested  in  one  supreme  court,  which 
shall  be  stvled  the  court  of  appeals,  [the  courts 
establishecl  by  this  constitution]  and  in  such 
inferior  courts  as  the  general  assembly  may  from 
time  to  time  erect  and  establish. 

After  a  brief  conversation  in  which  Messrs. 
Wickliffe,  Dixon,  Guthrie,  W.  C.  Marshall  and 
others  took  part,  the  section  was  amended  by 
the  insertion  of  the  words  placed  between 
brackets.  The  section  as  amended  was  then 
adopted. 

Tne  2d  section  was  read  and  adopted  without 
amendment,  as  follows: 

Sec  2.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  only,  which  shall  be  coex- 
tensive  with  the  state,  under  such  restrictions 
and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  constitu- 
tion, as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed  by 
law. 

The  third  section  was  then  read  as  follows: 

Sec.  3.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly 
qualified,  subject  to  the  conditions  hereinafter 
prescribed;  but  for  any  reasonable  cause,  which 
shall  not  be  sufficient  ground  of  impeachment, 
the  governor  shall  remove  any  of  them  on  the 
address  of  two-thirds  of  each  house  of  the  general 
assembly:  Provided,  however.  That  the  cause  or 
causes  for  which  such  removal  may  be  required, 
shall  be  stated  at  length  in  such  address,  and  on 
the  journal  of  each  house.  They  shall,  at  stated 
times,  receive  for  their  services  an  adequate 
compensation  to  be  fixed  by  law. 

Mr.  HARDIX  proposed  to  strike  out  the 
words;  "  which  shall  not  be  sufficient  grounds 
of  impeachment."  He  said,  I  desire  that  the 
legislature  shall  have  power  to  address  a  judge 
out  of  office  without  the  formality  of  impeach- 
ment, and  I  do  not  want  his  removal  by  address 
to  be  confined  to  such  subordinate  cases  as  will 
not  be  full  cause  for  impeachment.  That  is  one 
of  the  practical  modes  of  making  a  judge  re- 
sponsible. And  while  I  am  up  I  will  state  that 
I  shall  move  to  strike  out  "  two  thirds,"  and  in- 
sert "  a  majority,"  because  when  we  come  to 
the  two  thirds  principle,  the  whole  responsibili- 
ty is  as  perfect  a  mockery  as  can  be  imagined. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  committee 
thought  that  by  preserving  the  responsibility 
which  the  present  constitution  has  thrown  upon 
the  judicial  officers  of  the  government,  making 
them  removable  for  good  and  sufficient  cause, 
upon  an  address,  two-thirds  of  each  house  of 
the  general  assembly  concurring,  and  by  retain- 
ing the  power  of  impeachment,  judgment  upon 
which  extends  only  and  rightfully  to  removal 
and  disqualification  from  office;  and  the  respon- 
sibility which  arises  from  the  return  of  those 
officers  to  the  appointing  power,  the  people,  by 
the  limitation  of  the  term  of  office,  they  have 
secured  to  the  people  a  sufficient  power  over  the 
judges  during  their  term  of  eight  years.     They 


150 


desired  that  whilst  we  were  securing  to  the  peo- 1 
pie,  or  claiming  for  them,  tlie  power  of  electing 
tlieir  own  officers  and  limiting  the  duration  of 
the  term  for  which  they  shall  be  elected,  to  in- 
fuse into  the  exercise  of  their  power  some  con- 
servative feature,  to  secure  at  least  those  officers, 
when  thus  constitutionally  appointed,  against 
the  possible  influence  of  public  excitement,  the 
offspring  of  political  divisions  in  all  free  gov- 
ernments. 

A  party  or  political  majority  of  the  popular 
branch  of  the  government,  maddened  with  pow- 
er, unrestrained  by  any  power  but  the  power  to 
do  wrong,  is,  by  the  amendment  of  my  col- 
league, to  be  let  loose  upon  the  weakest  depart- 
ment of  the  government — a  department  filled  by 
tJie  people  tlieraselves.  Does  my  honorable  col- 
league remember — I  know  he  has  not  forgotten 
the  conflict  between  the  legislative  department 
and  the  judiciary  of  this  state,  in  1824.  He  and 
myself  were  side  by  side,  in  my  humble  way-- 
for  I  bore  but  an  humble  part  in  that  memorable 
contest;  he  played  a  distinguished  part  in  that 
struggle  between  master  spirits,  which  is  krown 
in  the  history  of  this  state  as  the  contest  bet  ween 
the  old  court  and  new  court  party.  I  refer  to 
this  portion  of  the  history  of  my  country  in  no 
spirit  of  unkindness  towards  those  with  whom 
I  then  differed.  There  wei-e  statesmen  and 
patriots  in  that  party,  honest  I  know  iu  the  ad- 
vocacy of  those  principles.  We  triumphed  by  the 
power  of  the  ballot  box.  Had  his  principle  of 
removing  the  judges  upon  the  address  of  a  ma- 
jority of  the  two  houses  of  the  general  assembly 
Deen  engrafted  in  the  existing  constitution,  as 
he  now  proposes  it  shall  be  in  the  new  one,  what 
would  have  Decome  of  the  great  principle,the  inde- 
pendence ofthejudiciary,  involved  in  that  contest? 
Your  constitutional  court  and  the  principle  in- 
volved would  have  gone  as  by  a  whirlwind.  A 
good  cause  for  the  removal  of  the  judges  was 
then,  by  a  legislative  majority,  found  in  the  fact 
that  they  had  decided  au  act  of  the  legislature  un- 
constitutional. 

Sir,  I  yield  to  no  man  in  this  body  in  devotion 
to  the  great  democratic  principle,  which  lies  at 
the  foundation  of  free  governments,  that  the  ma- 
jority shall  rule.  But  sir,  to  secure  that  princi- 
fde  in  its  free  and  beneficial  exercise,'!  claim,  at 
east,  that  in  framing  an  organic  law,  we  should 
take  care  to  insert  a  rule  for  the  guidance  of  that 
majority.  Popular  majorities  need  a  rule  of  ac- 
tion by  which  to  be  governed.  Our  constitution 
is  made  not  so  much  for  the  benefit  of  the  ma- 
jority in  the  community,  as  it  is  to  protect  the 
rights  of  minorities.  The  great  principle  in 
free  governments,  that  a  majority  shall  rule  and 

f;overn,  belongs  to  political  questions,  and  is 
oved  and  cherished  by  all  who  love  political 
freedom  and  civil  liberty.  I  tell  gentlemen  who 
think  with  me,  that  a  government  of  a  majority 
is  the  best  form  of  government  which  the  wis- 
dom of  man  has  ever  devised;  that  in  order  to 
f (reserve  that  government,  to  secure  the  liberty, 
ife,and  property  of  the  citizen,  it  is  necessary  to 
establish  cnecks  and  balances,  and  to  throw 
around  the  weaker  departments  these  safeguards 
necessary  to  insure  the  freedom  of  opinion  and 
independence  of  action  in  the  exercise  of  their 
functions.  But,  sir,  in  the  support  and  in  the 
advocacy  of  the  priociple  that  a  majority  shall 


rule,  I  invoke  gentlemen  not  to  be  misled.  I  say 
it  is  necessary  and  proper,  in  the  formation  of  a 
free  constitution,  that  a  majority  should  impose 
wholesome  restrictions  upon  itself.  We  may  be 
in  a  majority  to-day,  and  by  a  turn  of  the  polit- 
ical wheel  we  may  be  iu  a  minority  to-morrow, 
in  the  legislative  body. 

In  party  times  when  passion  guides  the  popu- 
lar leaders,  when  reason  is  silenced,  and  argu- 
ment is  hushed  by  the  conflict  of  selfish  motives, 
the  prostration  of  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary department  of  your  government  is  no  diffi- 
cult task.  The  legislature  assume  to  be  the 
people,  forget  their  true  position,  and  rush  with 
accumulated  rage  upon  their  work  of  destruc- 
tion. This  will  be  accomplished  by  local,  if 
not  political  combination.  Help  me  to  remove 
this  judge,  says  one  faction,  he  is  a  whig,  and 
we  don't  like  him;  we  have  a  democratic  major- 
ity, we  can  hurl  him  out.  You  have  a  whig 
judge  in  your  district,  we  will  join  in  removing 
him,  if  you  assist  us.  Under  the  influence  of 
popular  excitement,  political  feelings,  perhaps 
personal  animosity,  the  judge  is  hurled  from  of- 
fice. "Well  sir,  the  turn  of  the  political  wheel 
brings  the  whigs  into  a  majority,  and  under  the 
same  influences,  the  political  Juggernaut  is 
rolled  over  some  poor  democrat  who  may  be 
found  in  office. 

To  avoid  all  these  possible  evils  the  commit- 
tee desired  to  retain  the  power  of  removing  by 
address,  giving  the  incumbent  the  security  not 
so  much  for  his  sake  as  for  the  sake  of  public 
justice,  which  we  have  had  in  our  constitution 
for  the  last  fifty  years.  They  desired  to  give  him 
the  security  that  he  shall  not  be  removed  unless 
the  crime,  the  offence,  the  cause  of  removal 
shall  be  so  apparent  to  the  body  that  both 
branches  of  the  legislature  shall  feel  it  incum- 
bent upon  them  to  make  the  removal.  When  that 
is  the  case  I  have  no  fears  that  two-thirds  will  not 
agree.  If  you  leave  the  removal  of  a  judge  to 
the  will  of  a  majority  of  the  popular  branch  of 
the  government,  what  judge  will  dare  to  stand 
between  the  encroachments  of  the  legislative 
department  and  the  citizen?  You  make  him 
the  miserable,  suppliant  tool  of  legislative 
power  and  wrong,  if  you  trust  him  in  the  pow- 
er of  a  bare  majority,  whose  acts  he  will  nev- 
er have  the  boldness  and  the  independence  to 
declare  unconstitutional.  What  security  will 
there  be  for  the  life,  liberty,  or  property  of  the 
citizen.  I  therefore  implore  the  convention  to 
pause  before  they  consent  to  incorporate  the 
amendment  in  the  constitution  we  are  about  to 
form.  The  judiciary  is  the  political  ark  of  the 
poor  man,  to  which  he  must  flee  iu  times  of  #,, 
danger;  the  shield  by  which  he  is  to  resist  the  ' 
attempts  of  power  to  deprive  him  of  his  rights. 
If  you  place  the  judge  in  the  powder  of  a  bare 
majority,  you  take  from  the  weak  the  only  se- 
curity against  Wrong  and  injustice.  Let  us  not 
deceive  ourselves  by  names.  The  majority  of 
the  legislature  is  not  a  majority  of  the  people. 
If  you  adopt  the  amendment  you  virtually  sur- 
render all  power  into  the  liands  of  a  legis- 
lative majority.  The  legislative  depart-  ^ 
ment  will  overwhelm  all  other  departments, 
and  we  shall,  instead  of  having  secured  to  the 
people  a  government  with  partitions  of  power, 
to  operate  as  checks  and  oalances  upon  each 


151 


other,  hare  established  a  legislative  despotism 
for  oar  state,  in  my  mind  the  worst  of  all  despo- 
tisms. 

Mr.  HARDIjS".  I  have  been  looking  forward 
to  the  contest  ■which  is  now  approaching.  I  have 
been  expecting  it  for  months.  This  is  the  very 
jwint  upon  ■which  ■we  are  to  sho'w  our  hands  in 
some  way,  shape,  or  manner.  Sir,  what  is  re- 
quired to  insure  a  good  government — a  real  good, 
popular,  democratic  government?  It  is  that  the 
people  shall  govern  themselves,  imposing  on 
them  a  few  wholesome  salutary  restraints.  Well, 
h  ow  are  they  to  govern  themselves?  They  can- 
not meet  as  the  people  were  accustomed  to  do  in 
the  republic  of  Athens  and  vote  upon  ever^  law. 
They  are  spread  over  a  surface  of  country  in  this 
Union  which  embraces  now  about  three  million 
three  hundred  thousand  square  miles.  They  can 
only  meet  bv  their  representatives.  The  people  of 
the  United  States  can  only  assemble  by  their  rep- 

^resentatives.  The  people  of  Kentucky,  spread  as 
they  are  over  an  extent  of  forty  thousand  square 
miles,  comprising  a  population  of  eight  hundred 
thousand,  can  only  meet  by  their  representatives. 
As  we  cannot  have  democracy  then  m  its  original 
character,  we  must  approach  as  near  as  we  can  to 
it.  How  is  this  to  be  attained?  Whv,  the  people 
are  to  send  men  here  to  represent  tnem.  These 
men  are  to  speak  the  will  of  the  people.  In  what 
way,  sir,  are  we  to  conduct  this  government? 
By  taking  the  election  of  all  the  officers  of  the 
government  into  our  own  hands;  to  proclaim  to 
the  world  and  have  it  well  understood,  that  we 
deem  ourselves  in  this  enlightened  age  conipe- 
tent  to  all  purposes  of  self-government.  The 
world  has  advanced  in  sciences  of  every  kind, 
and  it  has  greatly  improved  in  the  science  of 
government.  I  for  one  am  ready  to  proclaim 
to  the  world  that  I  believe  the  people  of  the 
United  States  are  competent  to  govern  themselves, 
and  no  state  stands  more  prominent  in  its  char- 
acter, in  its  republican  character,  than  the  state 
of  Kentucky.  There  are  those,  who  under  the 
principle  of  conservatism,  would  provide  the 
means  by  which  people  may  have  some  way  to 
take  care  of  themselves.  Is  it  the  elective  prin- 
ciple that  insures  it?  No  sir.  What  is  it  then? 
It  is  the  elective  principle  coupled  with  practi- 
cal responsibility.  That  is  what  does  it.  Let 
us  vote  for  every  officer  of  this  government  from 
a  governor  down  to  a  constable.  Let  us  take  the 
elective  franchise  into  our  own  hands,  and  let 
the  same  power,  the  majority  that  elects  a  man 
to  office,  have  a  right  to  say  to  him  whenever 
they  believe  that  he  misbehaves,  you  shall  leave 
the  office.  Did  not  the  people  of  Rome  elect  the 
worst  menuponthefaceof  theearth  as  Emperors? 
They  electea  a  Nero,  aDomician  and  a  Tioerias, 
the  very  worst  scourges  by  which  mankind  was 
ever  aAicted;  and  why  did  they  act  as  they  did? 
Because  there  was  no  power  to  call  them  to  an 
account.  Did  not  the  people  of  France  elect 
Bonaparte  Emperor?  Yes,  every  man  of  twenty 
one  years  of  age,  gave  his  vote  to  elect  an  Empe- 
ror who  put  his  foot  upon  their  necks.  Why 
was  it  that  he  had  such  power  over  France  that  he 
could  make  thousands  bleed  at  his  pleasure? 
Because  tlie  people  of  France  had  no  way  by 
which  they  coula  make  him  accountable.  It  is 
the  elective  franchise,  exercised  by  a  majority, 
that  makes  a  country  to  that  extent  a  republic. 


It  is  the  controlling  power  of  the  majority  that 
carries  out  the  republican  principle,  which  with- 
out that  power  would  not  oe  carried  out. 

Sir,  says  the  gentleman,  what  would  have  be- 
come of  the  old  court,  if  this  principle  had  not 
been  adopted?  Yes,  and  if  the  two  thirds  princi- 
ple had  not  been  in,  what  would  have  become  of 
that  miserable  old  magistrate  out  in  Greenup, 
who  was  brought  before  the  court,  a  few  years 
ago,  for  the  worst  kind  of  offence?  If  it  is  es- 
tablished that  a  majority  can  appoint,  a  majori- 
ty should  also  have  power  to  remove;  not  the 
majority  of  a  quorum,  but  a  majority  of  all 
those  efected,  a  majoritv  of  the  whole  state.  Sir, 
we  set  out  in  this  business  alH)ut  four  or  five 
years  ago — I  mean  this  convention  business.  It 
was  proclaimed  from  one  end  of  the  state  to  the 
other  that  there  must  be  more  practical  respon- 
sibility, or  we  should  cease  to  be  a  repuolic. 
Well,  sir,  a  meeting  was  held  in  the  senate 
chamber,  a  chairman  was  chosen  and  a  certain 
gentleman  was  appointed  to  draw  an  address  to 
the  people  of  Kentucky.  He  drew  it  up,  and 
we  met  again,  a  small  band  of  us;  we  did  not 
like  the  address  exactly  in  all  its  parts,  it  was 
sent  back  to  be  remodeled ,  and  was  again  brought 
up  and  read.  Several  gentlemen  stood  off  and 
would  not  put  their  names  to  it.  There  was 
something  of  conservatism  about  them  and  they 
would  not  put  their  names  to  it.  At  last  the 
people  began  to  take  the  matter  up  and  names 
began  to  be  attached  to  it;  first  one  man  and 
then  another  put  his  name  to  it;  we  saw  then 
how  the  wind  was  blowing  and  we  all  pitched 
in.  The  men  who  had  before  stood  off  then 
signed  their  names.  Those  who  stood  aloof 
when  I  wrote  my  name,  and  would  not  sign,  af- 
terwards did  so.  WeU,  upon  the  first  vote  for  a 
convention  the  question  was  carried  by  a  ma- 
jority of  forty  eight  tliousand.  The  second  year 
there  was  a  majority  of  eighty  thousand.  Well 
now  what  was  the  principal  change  that  was  to 
be  made  by  the  convention?  It  was,  that  all  the 
officers  of  government  should  be  elected  by  the 
people,  and  that  th^y  shoidd  all  be  held  respon- 
sible to  the  people,  that  every  officer  should  be 
responsible  to  the  same  power  that  elected  him; 
that  is,  a  majority  of  the  people.  Without  this, 
I  say  it  is  not  a  republic  at  all.  Ah,  says  the 
gentleman,  the  people  will  act  incautiously,  thev 
will  act  under  excitement;  it  is  not  to  be  suffered  ' 
that  a  majority  shall  have  power  to  displace  an 
officer  of  the  government.  That  is  the  language 
of  monarchists,  the  language  of  courtiers.  The 
people,  he  says,  must  be  saved  from  themselves, 
they  must  not  be  entrusted  with  this  power,  they 
must  be  guarded  by  this  principle  of  strong  con- 
servatism. If  tlie  people  are  not  to  be  entrusted 
with  the  management  of  their  own  affairs,  let  us 
^o  back  to  monarchy,  let  us  go  back  to  Great 
Britain  at  once  and  send  for  Victoria  to  rule 
over  us. 

I  set  out  in  favor  of  this  identical  principle, 
and  I  would  not  give  a  ninepence  for  the  con- 
stitution unless  this  was  in  it.  We  are  to  be 
saved  from  ourselves,  because  we  may  do  -wrong. 
I  am  a  bad  manager  of  my  own  affairs,  as  every 
body  knows,  particularly  of  my  money  matters; 
but  managed  right  or  wrong,  I  would  rather  have 
the  management  myself  than  to  have  any  one 
else  manage  for  me.    There  is  something  plea^- 


152 


ant  in  the  thought,  that  I  may  manage  jny  af- 
fairs as  I  choose,  and  if  this  be  really  a  repub- 
lican government,  let  a  majority  of  the  people 
manage  the  affairs  of  govenmient.  Suppose  the 
majority  do  wrong,  who  is  to  suffer?  That  very 
majority,  and  they  will  soon  right  themselves. 
I  recollect  I  once  went  out  when  I  was  about 
thirteen  or  fourteen  years  old,  upon  a  mill  pond 
in  a  eanoe,  with  three  other  boys.  We  com- 
menced rocking  the  boat.  We  shall  be  drowned 
if  we  upset,  said  the  three  boys,  for  we  cannot 
swim  a  stroke.  We  upset  sure  enough.  I  could 
swim  pretty  well,  so  1  was  not  alarmed.  I  call- 
ed out  to  them  to  hold  on  to  the  side  of  the  boat 
and  keep  their  chins  above  water,  while  I  swam 
ashore  with  the  rope  so  as  to  drag  the  boat 
ashore.  They  caught  hold  of  the  boat.  Lord, 
how  they  did  spread  themselves  to  keep  afloat! 
The  instinct  of  self-preservation  macle  them 
exert  themselves,  and  self-preservation  will 
make  us  careful  to  do  right.  If  we  had  to  cross 
the  Mississippi  in  a  skiif,  would  we  be  such  fools 
as  to  turnover  when  we  knew  that  we  must  all  be 
drowned?  Not  at  all.  Let  us  trust  ourselves. 
r  came  here  for  the  purpose  of  endeavoring  to 
establish  this  principle  in  the  new  constitution, 
and  if  we  do  not  do  that,  we  shall  have  accom- 
plished nothing.  Save  us  from  ourselves!  That 
may  be  the  doctrine  of  some  gentlemen,  but  it 
is  not  my  doctrine.  God  save  the  people,  and 
let  them  govern  themselves — that  is  what  1  say. 
I  never  court  any  man-power,  though  I  court 
now  and  then  the  people.  I  look  to  the  sove- 
reignty of  the  people — to  that  I  have  looked  all 
ray  life — I  am  willing  to  trust  them.  I  have  no 
idea  that  a  man  shall  be  made  a  judge  unless  du- 
ly qualified,  and  I  shall  vote  for  the  guard  of 
eight  years  practice  at  the  bar,  as  a  qualifica- 
tion. I  will  vote  for  the  further  guard  tliat  the 
a^e  of  thirty  years  shall  be  required  of  the  can- 
didate for  a  ju'dgreship.  N&j,  I  would  go  further, 
and  make  it  thirty-five  years.  But  as  to  respon- 
sibility, I  want  to  hold  him  responsible  to  a  ma- 
jority of  all  tlie  people  of  Kentucky.  That  is 
the  responsibility  I  ask. 

I  have  no  doubt  I  shall  meet  a  good  deal  of 
opposition  upon  this  point,  because  it  is  a  lead- 
ing feature  among  the  purposes  for  which  we  are 
assembled.  I  hope  it  will  be  well  weighed  by 
this  house  before  they  adopt  the  two-thirds  prin- 
ciple. If  we  adopt  it  in  reference  to  the  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  we  must  adopt  it  with 
reference  to  every  other  officer  of  the  govern- 
ment; and  I  now  call  upon  those  who  are  in  fa- 
vor of  reform,  those  who  are  of  the  old  conven- 
tion party,  to  bear  in  mind  that  this  was  one  of 
the  principal  objects  for  which  the  convention 
was  called. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  know  very  well  the  age 
and  experience  of  my  honorable  friend  from  Nel- 
son, and  I  am  aware  of  the  deference  that  is  due 
to  him  on  a  subject  of  such  magnitude  as  that 
which  he  has  this  moment  discussed.  It  was 
with  some  amazement  that  I  heard  the  proposi- 
tion, as  I  had  not  anticipated  that  any  one  in 
this  house  would  advance  the  principle,  or  con- 
tend for  it,  or  seek  to  engraft  it  in  the  constitu- 
tion which  we  are  about  to  frame.  I  am  at  pres- 
ent too,  on  account  of  the  novelty  of  the  posi- 
tion, unprepared  to  meet  it  except  by  those  ap- 
pftrent  arguments,  which  I  believe,  address  them- 


selves to  the  mind  of  every  member  of  this  house 
upon  the  great  innovation  which  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  proposes  to  make.  I  believe,  how- 
ever, that  there  is  fallacy  at  the  bottom  of  his 
position,  so  clear  and  so  palpable,  one  so  de- 
structive of  every  true  principle  of  government 
that  a  mere  tyro  in  the  science,  destitute  of  the 
knowledge  or  experience  that  he  possesses  can 
clearly  discover  it.  It  is  not  requisite  that  one 
should  be  deeply  instructed,  in  order  to  find  out 
the  monstrous  consequences  to  which  it  would 
lead.  I  take  issue  with  the  gentleman  boldly  and 

Sointedly.  If  we  stand  here  for  the  purpose  of 
ragging  all  the  powers  of  government,  bound 
and  manacled  to  the  feet  of  the  legislative  power, 
delusively  called,  by  the  member  from  iSclson, 
the  people,  I,  for  one,  am  not  prepared  to  go  such 
lengths.  The  peoi^le,  the  people,  the  people,  is 
the  constant  cry, and  when  the  gentleman  defines 
what  is  meant  bv  the  people  in  this  case,  it  ap- 
pears that  it  is  the  address  of  a  bare  majority  of 
the  legislature  of  the  state.  This  is  what  he 
styles  the  people.  I  deny  the  proposition;  the 
legislature  are  not  the  people.  It  may  be  deemed 
presumptuous  in  me  to  set  my  opinions  in  oppo- 
sition to  those  of  a  gentleman  from  whom  1  re- 
ceived much  instruction  in  youth,  and  from 
whom  I  imbibed  many  of  the  principles  which 
I  entertain  in  manhood.  But  in  regard  to  this 
subject  I  feel  that  I  stand  upon  the  true  ground, 
and  that  ground  I  am  ready  to  maintain,  assisted 
or  unassisted  in  this  convention. 

What  is  tlie  provision  iii  the  report,  in  refe- 
rence to  the  removal  of  the  judges  of  the  appel- 
late court?    It  is  this: 

"But  for  any  reasonable  cause,  which  shall  not 
'  be  sufficient  ground  of  impeachment,  the  gov- 
'  eraor  shall  remove  any  of  them,  on  the  address 
'of  two  thirds  of  each  house  of  the  general  as- 
'  sembly  " 

Now  sir,  the  question  is,  shall  we  permit  a 
mere  Ttto/oriiy  to  exercise  this  right.  A  majority 
of  the  legislature  are  to  expel  ignominiously 
from  office,  session  after  session,  the  very  judges 
chosen  by  the  people,  and  yet  it  is  to  be  done 
under  a  false  and  pernicious  political  pretext, 
and  in  the  name  of  the  people.  The  French 
convention,  when  they  appointed  the  committee 
of  public  safety,  announced  the  principle,  that 
the  people  possessed  the  supreme  power.  The 
convention  of  France,  when  constituted  howev- 
er, assumed  to  hold  all  the  power  in  their  own 
hands,  and  declared  itself  Avas  the  people.  My 
belief  is,  that  the  tendency  would  be  the  sanie 
with  regard  to  the  legislature  of  Kentucky.  If 
I  understJind  any  thing  of  the  feeling  whicli 
])revail8  in  this  house,  in  regard  to  the  powers  of 
the  legislature,  that  feeling  is  in  favor  of  cur- 
tailing those  powers.  •  Look  upon  our  tables, 
see  the  multitude  of  propositions  with  whicli 
they  are  loaded,  until  they  seem  like  the  moon, 
described  in  the  poem  of  Ariosto,  a  place  in 
which  the  lost  wits  and  crude  ideas  of  all  the 
world  were  collected.  It  is  already  proposed 
in  tliis  convention,  that  the  legislature  shall  not 
be  permitted  to  grant  any  banking  privileges, 
that  they  sliall  not  be  permitted  to  meet  oftener 
than  once  in  two  years,  that  they  shall  not  be  per- 
mitted to  run  the  state  into  debt,  and  a  multitude 
of  provisions  such  as  these  are  advocated  by 
distinguislied  gentlemen.     And  yet  it  is  now 


153 


proposed  that  they  shall  have  the  right  to  biud 
and  manacle  the  judges  and  compel  thera  to  re- 
tire from  office  •whenever  the  legislature  may 
see  proper  so  to  direct. 

Is  it  possible  that  gentlemen  can  suppose  that 
the  people  of  Kentucky  will  be  satisfied  with 
the  provision,  which  directs  that  the  judges  shall 
hold  their  offices  at  the  will  of  the  legislature. 
If  this  principle  be  applied  to  the  judges,  it 
must  be  applied  also  to  all  the  other  officers  of 
the  government;  and  the  address  of  a  bare  ma- 
jority of  the  legislature  is  not  only  to  expel  tlie 
judges  from  their  office,  but  to  expel  the  governor 
of  the  state  from  his  office,  and  place  the  execu- 
tive and  judicial  departments  under  the  absolute 
dominion  of  the  legislature.  Would  this  be  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  wishes  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky? Are  gentlemen  of  this  house  reduced  to 
the  miserable  and  farcical  pretext — and  I  say  it 
with  all  respect  to  my  honorable  friend  from  l5^el- 
son — of  asserting  that,  when  they  are  imposing 
limitations  upon  the  powers  of  tie  legislature, 
crippling  their  authority,  saying  that  they  shall 
have  no  pay  after  sixty  days,  or  that  it  shall  be 
reduced  one  half,  and  taking  away  from  them 
the  power  to  act  upon  certain  specified  subjects, 
that  it  is  necessary  to  place,  at  the  same  time, 
the  judiciary  within  the  grasp  of  a  merciless  le- 
gislative majority.  Sir,  the  historical  examples 
that  were  cited  by  the  gentleman  were,  if  my 
recollection  be  correct,  entirely  different  in  their 
tenor  from  that  which  he  supposes.  The  people 
of  Rome,  the  gentleman  says,  placed  upon  the 
throne  Caligula  and  Nero,  and  he  says  that  the 
tyranny  endured  by  Rome  under  those  Emperors 
was  on  account  of  the  people  not  having  a  proper 
control  over  them.  If  he  will  tax  his  memory  a 
little  further  he  will  find  that  it  was  the  corrupt 
legislature  that  elected  from  time  to  time  the  Em- 
perors, and  combined  with  the  Pretorian  guard, 
elevated  men  into  power  and  made  sale  of  the 
empire  to  replenish  their  purses,  that  caused  the 
destruction  of  Roman  liberty.  If  he  will  turn 
to  a  more  recent  instance — to  the  French  assem- 
bly to  which  he  has  alluded — he  will  find,  that 
when  that -sssembly  had  been  called  together  by 
the  people,  they  abrogated  the  executive  power, 
and  made  their  own  sitting  almost  permanent. 
They  first  declared  a  constitution,  and  gave  the 
monarch  the  right  to  veto.  When,  in  the  time  of 
Louis  the  16th,  confiscation  of  the  church  prop- 
erty was  determined  on,  it  was  then  the  assem- 
bly cried  out  against  the  executive  veto.  The 
legislature  deprived  the  executive  of  that  protec- 
tion, and  the  king's  head  fell.  The  indepen- 
dence of  the  judiciary  soon  sunk  under  the  in- 
vasions of  the  same  body.  A  revolutionary  tri- 
bunal, with  Fouquier-Tmville  at  its  head,  arose 
based  upon  its  ruins;  bill  after  bill  of  attainder 
was  passed  and  a  committee  of  public  safety 
was  appointed.  When  that  committee  was  es- 
tablished, of  which  Carnot  was  a  member,  Fou- 
quier-Tinville  directed,  day  after  day,  long  lists 
of  accusations  and  proscriptions  to  be  prepared, 
and  mfide  the  streets  flow  with  blood,  long  pro- 
cessions ef  carts  filled  with  unfortunate  noble- 
men, were  driven  along,  and  when  lesser  victims 
failed  the  lower  orders  of  the  people  were  sacri- 
ficed. 

Danton  remarked  that  the  revolution  was  en- 
dured as  long  as  it  operated  only  upon  the  aristo- 
20 


cratic  classes,  but  after  a  time  the  guillotine  be- 
gan to  work  upon  the  people  themselves,  and  it 
was  found  then  that  the  evil  was  intolerable. — 
The  revolution,  he  said,  like  Saturn,  ended  by 
devouring  its  own  children:  so  it  will  be  with 
any  single  department  of  government  in  which 
you  place  the  supreme  power.  I  believe  firmly 
and  conscientiously  that  if  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson  be  adopted,  it  will 
have  that  effect.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  it 
will  plunge  the  people  immediately  into  bloody 
revolutions  as  in  France,  because  the  same  op- 
pression does  not  exist  here,  and  the  rebound 
would  not  be  so  terrible.  I  do  not  mean  to  say 
that  it  will  lead  to  any  such  sanguinary  results 
at  this  moment,  but  I  do  assert  that  if  we  adopt 
this  principle,  the  independence  of  the  judicia- 
ry of  Kentucky  will  be  destroyed.  If  I  were 
compelled  to  trust  my  life,  liberty,  and  fortunes, 
and  those  of  my  cliildren,  to  the  caprice  of  an 
unchecked  legislative  body,  I  would  not  hesi- 
tate one  instant  to  seek  refuge  under  the  safer 
protection  of  a  limited  monarchy.  Divide  the 
responsibility  of  such  powers  among  a  hundred 
legislators,  and  you  limit  it  in  such  a  manner 
that  it  is  exercised  without  restraint  or  con- 
science. Rather  than  go  back  to  such  a  state  of 
things,  it  would  be  better  to  trust  our  lives  and 
property  to  popular  assemblies,  like  the  Atheni- 
an democracy,  collected  in  the  grove  of  the 
academy,  or  to  the  hundred  thousand  men  who  as- 
semblea,  sword  in  hand,  upon  the  plain  of  Volo 
to  decide  upon  the  destinies  of  Poland.  Never 
let  us  trust  ourselves  to  the  tender  mercies  of  an 
unscrupulous  legislative  majority. 

I  do  not  believe  that  this  convention  is  prepar- 
ed to  go  to  the  extremity  that  the  gentleman  de- 
sires. If  it  be,  the  stump  will  be  assumed  and 
God  only  knows  what  fortune  may  await  Ken- 
tucky. Her  people,  who  have  lived  for  fifty 
years  under  a  happy  constitution,  may  possibly 
in  a  phrensy  adopt  his  propositions.  But  I 
know  that  there  are  good  and  patriotic  men  in 
this  assembly,  and  throughout  the  land  who  will 
at  least  lift  their  warning  voices  .igainst  the  mea- 
sure— a  measure  wliich  will  tend  to  destroy  the 
whole  foundation  upon  which  the  independence 
of  the  judiciary  rests.  I  am  convinced,  myself, 
that  if  we  do  so,  in  a  few  years  the  evil  will  be- 
come so  intolerable  that  it  will  correct  itself.  I 
feel  confident  that  it  will  be  repudiated  and  de- 
nounced by  the  whole  people  of  the  state.  But 
I  cannot  think,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the  conven- 
tion will  adopt  it.  I  know  full  well  how  infe- 
rior is  my  experience  in  public  life;  but  if  I  were 
the  only  man  in  this  house  to  stand  up  in  oppo- 
sition to  this  measure,  I  would  feel  that  I  occu- 
pied invulnerable  and  impregnable  ground,  and 
never  should  such  a  proposition  be  made  and 
carried  in  this  convention,  without  my  protest 
being  entered  against  it. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  I  agree  fully  with  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  in  the  proposition,  that  in 
this  government  and  indeed  all  governments,  a 
majority  should  rule  in  every  case  where  it  is 
practicable.  And  while  I  have  a  particular  de- 
ference for  the  great  talents  of  the  gentleman,  I 
must  enter  my  protest  against  his  application  of 
this  rule.  I  will  endeavor  to  show  the  gentle- 
man, that  when  you  come  to  apply  the  rule,  it 
will  be  found  to  do  away  with  the  very  princi- 


154 


pie  for  which  he  contends.  Before  I  enter  on 
the  main  proposition,  however,  I  will  endeavor 
to  answer  that  portion  of  his  argument  in  which 
he  refers  to  the  election  of  the  Roman  emperors, 
Ceesar,  Tiberias,  and  Caligula.  He  says  they 
were  elected  by  the  people,  in  order  to  secure 
good  government,  and  the  enormities  which  they 
committed,  the  people  were  unable  to  restrain 
for  the  want  of  proper  checks  and  balances,  for 
the  want  of  a  proper  means  of  controlling  them. 
I  set  out  with  this  proposition  which  I  think  is 
unanswerable,  that  the  reason  why  our  gov- 
ernment is  superior  to  all  others  that  have  exist- 
ed before  us  is  this.  It  is  a  cardinal  principle 
that  has  been  established  first  in  America,  that 
the  powers  of  government  should  be  divided  in- 
to three  separate  and  distinct  departments,  the 
legislative,  the  executive,  and  the  judicial;  and 
that  no  one  of  these  department  should  exercise 
any  power  belonging  to  another.  Grant  all  the 
powers  of  government  to  one  department,  and 
you  make  it  a  despotism. 

While  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  in  the  prin- 
ciple that  a  majority  should  rule,  I  hold  that  he 
is  wrong  in  its  application.  What  does  it  lead 
to?  He  says  the  legislature  possesses  the  pow- 
ers of  the  people.  But  the  legislature  is  only 
one  department  of  the  government,  whereas  the 
people  in  a  republic  have  the  supreme  power. 
It  is  the  business  of  this  convention  to  make  an 
organic  law,  separating  this  government  into 
distinct  and  separate  departments.  I  have  never 
heard  it  suggested,  that  we  should  dispense  with 
any  of  the  departments  I  have  named,  and  it  is 
a  well  settled  principle  in  our  government,  that 
one  department  should  not  infringe  upon  the 
powers  of  another. 

The  gentleman  is  in  faver  of  allowing  a  ma- 
jority to  rule.  So  am  I.  But  I  am  not  for  giv- 
ing the  legislature  that  power  in  the  name  of 
the  people.  Sir,  the  legislature  is  not  the  peo- 
ple. It  is  a  department  of  the  government,  and 
it  is  that  department  which  has  a  tendency  to 
swallow  up  all  the  others.  Now  see  in  what  a 
delicate  position  you  place  your  judiciary.  Here 
are  representatives  of  the  "people  from  every 
county,  assembled  in  their  legislative  capacity. 
They,  through  party  organizatioa,  or  from  par- 
ticular motives,  influencing  them,  pass  a  law  vio- 
lating the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  or 
the  constitution  of  Kentucky.  That  law  is 
brought  before  a  judge,  and  tne  judge  is  com- 
pelled to  decide  that  it  is  unconstitutional.  When 
he  80  decides,  will  not  the  majority  who  passed 
the  law  almost  instantly  remove  that  judge?  Is 
such  an  act  for  the  gooct  of  the  people? 

But,  sir,  when  you  establish  the  principle  that 
a  bare  majority  of  the  legislature  may  remove 
the  judge,  you  at  once  take  away  the  great  and 
card.inal  principle  of  our  government,  that  the 
various  departments  of  the  government  shall  be 
independent  of  each  other.  Any  act  of  the  gov- 
ernment has  first  to  go  through  the  ordeal  of  the 
legislature,  then  it  is  subjected  to  the  veto  power 
of  the  governor,  and  afterward,  as  far  as  consti- 
tutionality is  concerned,  it  must  be  subjected  to 
the  veto  of  the  judiciary.  But,  sir,  establish 
this  principle,  and  you  take  this  very  qualified 
veto  from  the  judicial  department. 

Now,  sir,  it  seems  to  be  a  clear  proposition, 
that  if  you  adopt  the  principle  which  the  gen- 


tleman proposes  you  will  effectually  destroy  the 
power  of  the  judiciary.     Apply  the  same  princi- 

f)le  to  the  governor,  take  away  the  veto  power 
rom  him,  and  vou  put  all  the  powers  of  the 
government  in  tlie  hands  of  one  body.  When 
you  do  that,  your  government  becomes  a  despo- 
tism, inevitably,  call  it  by  whatsoever  name  you 
will. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  This  proposition  has  been 
sprung  upon  the  house  somewhat  suddenly,  but 
I  am  satisfied  from  the  little  examination  I  have 
given  the  subject,  that  not  less  than  tAvo  thirds  of 
the  legislative  department  should  possess  the 
power  to  remove  a  judge  from  office.  So  far  as 
my  reading  of  history  has  enabled  me  to  discov- 
er, I  know  of  no  instance  where  tyranny  has  pre- 
vailed in  any  country  save  by  the  operation  of 
law.  Tyranny  and  oppression  never  have  ex- 
isted any  where  except  by  the  operation  of  law. 
No  tyrant  has  ever  unsheathed  his  SAVord,  and 
from"  the  humble  walks  of  life  marched  to  a 
throne  except  by  the  operation  of  law.  No  peo- 
ple have  ever  been  cast  down  from  the  elevated 
position  of  enlightened  freemen,  to  the  degrad- 
ing position  of  slaves,  except  by  the  operation  of 
law. 

It  has  been  well  remarked  by  the  gentleman 
from  Louisville,  that  it  is  not  proposed  by  any 
person  on  this  floor  to  arrange  a  government  on 
any  other  principle  save  that  which  divides  it 
into  three  independent  and  distinct  branches, 
and  these  to  be  independent  each  of  the  other. 
What  is  the  principle  contained  in  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson?  It  is  de- 
structive of  the  independence  that  belongs  to  the 
judiciary   department   of  the   government,    and 

f daces  it  at  the  will,  pleasure,  and  disposal  of  the 
egislative  department.  TJiey,  are  to  be  sure,  sep- 
arate, or  independent,  the  one  of  the  other,  but 
in  what  does  that  independence  consist?  If  you 
place  the  judiciary  department  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  legislative,  why  not  place  the  execu- 
tive and  the  executive  department  under  the 
same  control?  And  when  you  do  that  you  have 
merged  all  the  different  departments  of  govern- 
ment in  the  legislative  department — the  very  de- 
partment in  every  government  from  which  op- 
pression and  tyranny  has  sprung.  Why  is  it 
that  in  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  we 
see  a  provision  that  no  law  shall  take  effect  after 
it  has  met  the  disapprobation  of  the  executive 
until  two  thirds  of  both  houses  of  congress  shall 
give  it  their  sanction?  Because  it  is  necessary  that 
the  executive  should  be  clothed  with  the  power 
to  shield  and  protect  himself  from  insults  and 
encroachments  on  the  part  of  the  legislative  de- 
partment of  the  federal  government:  and  for  the 
purpose  of  keeping  up  that  independence  which 
IS  necessary  for  the  wholesome  and  the  healtliy 
operation  of  the  government  itself.  I  am  one  of 
those  who  entertain  the  opinions  expressed  by 
my  honorable  friend  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dix- 
on,) that  there  are  things  in  government  bearing 
on  the  social  relations  that  exist  between  the  cit- 
izens and  the  relations  that  exist  between  the 
citizens  and  the  government  that  cannot  and 
ought  not  to  be  done  by  majorities.  And  the 
very  moment  you  lay  down  the  principle  that  a 
majority  of  the  legislature  may,  at  its  will  and 

{)leasure,  remove  a  judge,  that  very  moment  you 
ay  down  the  principle  that  the  same  majortty 


155 


may  remove  the  executive  officer  of  the  state, 
and  you  have  thus  centered  all  the  powers  of  the 

fovernraent  in  the  hands  of  one  department, 
'herefore  the  idea  of  three  distinct  departments 
of  government  is  repudiated  in  the  practical  op- 
eration of  the  principle  proposed  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  and  I  desire  to  enter  my  pro- 
test against  it.  When  I  am  aware  from  the  iiis- 
tory  of  the  past,  tliat  no  country  has  ever  lost 
its  liberties  except  by  the  operation  of  law — and 
the  legislative  department  is  the  law  making 
power  of  government — I  am  unwilling  to  vest  in 
that  department  of  government  whose  instincts 
incline  it  to  encroach  on  the  rights  of  the  other 
departments — a  power  that  will  place  them  at  its 
mercy. 

As  I  before  remarked,  this  question  has  been 
sprung  upon  us  suddenly,  and  perhaps  but  few 
on  this  floor  are  prepared  to  give  a  vote  upon  it 
understand ingly  and  iipon  mature  deliberation. 
I  have  only  risen  to  enter  my  protest  against  a 
proposition  that  a  bare  majority  of  the  legisla- 
ture of  Kentucky  may  remove  a'judge  from  that 
position  to  which  he  has  been  elevated  by  the 
people.  If  the  power  is  conferred  at  all,  as  per- 
haps it  correctly  ought  to  be,  I  would  withhold 
the  exercise  of  it  until  it  has  the  concurrence  of 
two  thirds  of  the  representatives  of  the  people 
The  PRESIDEXT.  I  believe  in  the  power  of 
the  people  to  govern  themselves  wisely  and  dis- 
creetly. I  believe  in  their  power  to  frame  organ- 
ic laws  to  guide  and  direct  the  legislature,  and 
to  define  the  judicial  and  executive  departments 
and  to  prescribe  their  duties.  I  come  here  as  one 
of  the  people  and  from  the  people,  to  give  my 
aid  and  support  in  establishing,  or  rather  of 
re-modeling  such  a  government.  I  expect  to 
vote  to  place  in  this  constitution  the  provision 
that  is  in  the  present  constitution,  declaring  that 
"  the  powers  of  the  government  of  the  state  of 
Kentucky  shall  be  divided  into  three  distinct 
departments,  and  each  of  them  be  confided  to  a 
separate  body  of  magistracy,  to  wit:  those  which 
are  legislative,  to  one;  those  which  are  executive 
to  another  ;  and  those  which  are  judiciary,  to 
another."  And  I  expect  to  vote  to  restore  the 
appointing  power  to  the  people,  in  all  respects, 
that  was  confided  to  their  agents  by  those  who 
framed  our  present  constitution,  and  that  the  ju- 
diciary, as  well  as  the  executive,  shall  receive 
their  appointment  and  authority  to  judge  this 
people  from  the  people  themselves,  and  from  no 
intervening  agent.  I  came  to  do  it,  and  I  shall 
do  it  unshrinkingly,  without  the  shadow  of  a 
doubt  or  question  of  the  intelligence,  the  capa- 
city, and  the  right  of  the  people  to  choose  these 
officers.  And  it  is  a  trust  better  confided  to 
them,  than  to  any  other  power  that  it  is  possible 
for  us  to  select.  We  have  confided  the  appoint- 
ment of  our  judges  to  tlie  executive,  and  of  our 
clerks  to  the  courts,  and  the  various  inferior  offi- 
cers to  other  agencies  without  the  immediate  and 
direct  action  of  the  people.  I  expect  the  people 
of  Kentucky  to  take  one  step  further  in  aavance 
in  the  principles  of  free  government,  and  to  give 
my  vote  to  restore  all  these  appointments  to  the 
people.  And  when  they  shall  have  appointed 
all  these  officers,  I  expect  to  provide  in  this  new 
constitution,  by  my  vote,  a  responsibility  to  the 
people  immediate  and  direct,  by  bringing  them 
again  before  the  appointing  power  in  a  limited 


period  of  years,  so  that  the  people  shall  have  a 
right  to  say,  "well  done,  good  and  faithful  ser- 
vant"— or  to  dismiss  those  that  have  proved  un- 
worthy, and  to  select  other  and  better  qualified 
individuals.  And  that  is  the  responsibility  to 
the  people  that  I  believe  in — the  majority  of  the 
people — and  the  majority  of  no  other  depart- 
ment in  this  government  that  we  shall  create. 
It  is  a  direct  responsibility,  and  that  is  the  ad- 
vantage and  benefit  that  will  grow  out  of  a  lim- 
ited term  of  office.  If  gentlemen  want  other 
responsibilities — if  a  judge  or  other  officer  has 
been  guilty  of  acts  worthy  of  impeachment, 
provide  for  that  impeachment.  Let  the  judg- 
ment of  the  impeaching  tribunal  have  the  effect 
as  it  now  has,  of  removing  them  from  office. 
That  tribunal  we  have  provided  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  state,  and  in  that  same  instrument 
we  have  also  provided,  in  obedience  to  the  prin- 
ciple that  requires  the  conviction  of  an  individ- 
ual in  the  civil  tribunals  to  be  by  the  voice  of 
the  whole,  a  change  in  relation  to  impeach- 
ments, and  require  the  conviction  to  be  by  two- 
thirds  of  the  judging  body.  If  that  is  not  suffi- 
cient to  remove  these  officers,  then  I  will  go  fur- 
ther, and  allow  the  address  to  be  spread  upon 
the  records  of  the  general  assembly;  but  I  will 
not  vote  that  less  than  two-thirds  shall  remove 
an  appointee  of  the  people.  The  office  comes 
from  the  people,  and  let  them  provide  the  respon- 
sibility of  a  limited  term  of  years.  If  the  in- 
cumbent becomes  worthy  of  impeachment,  I  am 
willing  to  provide  a  tribunal,  and  to  follow  in 
the  footsteps  of  those  who  have  gone  before  us, 
and  to  let  that  tribunal  be  the  house  of  represen- 
tatives impeaching  for  the  people,  and  the  senate 
judging  for  the  people.  I  am  willing  to  go  fur- 
ther. I  am  willing  to  allow  an  address  of  both 
branches  of  the  legislature  to  enable  the  govern- 
or to  remove,  but  I  am  not  willing  that  a  bare 
majority  shall  do  it. 

The  President  here  waived  any  further  re- 
marks, and  on  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE 
the  committee  rose  and  reported  progress,  and 
asked  leave  to  sit  again. 

Leave  was  granted,  and 

The  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY,  OCTOBER  18, 1849. 

Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuaet  Robixsox. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  offered  the  following  reso- 
lution, which  was  adopted: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  be  instructed  to  enquire  into  the 
propriety  and  expediency  of  holding  the  annual 
elections  on  some  day  other  than  Monday,  and 
in  some  month  other  than  August;  and,  also, 
that  said  committee  enquire  into  the  propriety 
and  expediency  of  permitting  each  free  white 
male  citizen,  who  at  the  time  being  shall  have 
attained  to  the  age  of  twenty  one  years,  and 
shall  have  resided  in  the  state  one  year,  and  in 
the  county  three  months,  next  preceding  the 
election,  to  exercise  the  right  of  suffrage  in  aU 
state,  county,  and  district  elections — and  that  said 
committee  report,  <fec. 


156 


Mr.  THOMPSON  offered  the  following,  whicli 
was  agreed  to: 

Weleeeas,  great  public  inconvenience  has  aris- 
en from  the  suspension  of  the  enactments  of  gen- 
eral laws.     Therefore, 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  miscella- 
neous provisions  of  the  constitution  be  instruct- 
ed to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of  making  the 
following  amendment  to  tliat  part  of  the  constitu- 
tion to  them  referred:  The  legislature  shall  have 
no  power  to  suspend  any  general  law  for  the  ben- 
efit of  any  particular  individual,  nor  to  pass  any 
law  for  the  benefit  of  individuals  inconsistent 
with  the  general  laws  of  the  land;  nor  to  pass  any 
law  granting  to  any  individual  or  individuals 
rights,  privileges,  immunities,  or  exemptions, 
other  than  such  as  may  be,  by  the  same  law,  ex- 
tended to  any  member  of  the  community  who 
may  be  able  to  bring  himself  within  the  provis- 
ions of  such  law:  Provided  always,  the  legislature 
shall  have  power  to  grant  such  charter  of  corpo- 
rations as  tney  may  deem  expedient  for  the  public 
good. 

COVET    OF   APPEALS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BARLOW  the  conven- 
tion resolved  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole, 
Mr.  HUSTON  in  the  chair,  on  the  article  reported 
bv  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals. 

"The  PRESIDENT.  Mr.  Chairman,  at  the 
concluding  part  of  the  remarks  which  I  submit- 
ted to  the  convention  yesterday,  I  said,  that  I 
was  opposed  to  the  proposed  amendments.  I 
hold  that  in  all  tliat  is  essential  to  the  peace  of 
society,  to  the  public  justice  of  the  country,  the 
security  of  the  persons,  the  lives,  and  the  for- 
tunes of  the  citizens,  the  judicial  department  is 
the  most  important  branch  of  this  government; 
and  one,  that  in  laying  the  foundations  of  this 
government,  we  should  be  the  most  careful,  the 
most  prudent,  to  lay  in  wisdom.  It  is  the  proud 
privilege  of  tjiiis  people  to  live  under  a  govern- 
ment of  lawsT^laws  enacted  in  tlie  form  of  con- 
stitutional piiovisions,  which  are  a  barrier  to  the 
legislature,  a  barrier  to  the  judiciary,  that  se- 
cures to  every  man  the  blessings  of  liberty,  the 
pursuit  of  happiness,  the  enjoyment  of  the  fruits 
of  his  industry,  and  to  the  high  and  the  low 
with  equal  hope  of  justice.  And,  in  select- 
ing the  officers  who  are  to  apply  that  law  to  the 
people,  more  regard,  more  care  should  be  taken 
that  it  be  confided  to  able,  correct,  independent, 
honest  men,  than  in  the  selection  of  those  put  in 
charge  of  ahj  other  branch  of  this  government. 
It  is  tlie  confidence  of  the  people  in  that  branch 
of  government  that  gives  happiness  and  repose 
to  society;  and  there  can  be  no  confidence 
where  there  is  not  integrity,  where  there  is  not 
independence,  where  there  is  not  ample  intelli- 
gence to  apply  those  powers  wisely,  discreetly, 
justly,  efficiently,  without  favor  and  without  af- 
fection to  the  lowest  man,  and  to  bring  the  high- 
est to  that  equal  tribunal  of  right,  which  it  is 
the  privilege  of  a  free  people  to  secure  to  all  the 
citizens.  In  reatonng  the  appointment  of  these 
officers  to  tlie  people,  I  do  not  desire  to  lessen 
the  chances  in  tue  remotest  or  smallest  degree,  of 
the  selection  of  the  description  of  men  to  fill 
those  offices  that  I  have  alluded  to.  I  want 
them  to  possess  that  independence  that  flows 
from  intelligence  and  integrity;  that  indepen- 
dence that  is  characteristic  of  our  people,  and  to 


know  no  man  in  the  tribunals  of  justice;  but  to 
regard  those  considerations  alone  in  the  deci- 
sions they  shall  make.  But  in  making  them 
thus  independent  in  the  sight  of  the  people,  and 
in  their  own  consciences,  I  desire  thai  they  shall 
be  responsible,  llespousible  to  whom?  Tliey, 
as  all  the  other  officers  that  we  shall  clioose, 
to  carry  out  the  government  of  this  people,  are 
only  the  agents  of  this  people.  As  agents,  they 
should  be  faithful  and  intelligent  in  the  fulfil- 
ment of  their  duties.  As  agents,  I  would  have 
them  responsible  to  the  people,  who  created 
them  for  purposes  of  public  justice;  and  I  would 
make  them  responsible  in  no  other  way.  We 
propose  to  restore  the  appointment  of  these  offi- 
cers to  the  people.  Heretofore,  we  have  selected 
the  governor,  as  a  trustee,  to  nominate  most  of 
these  officers,  confiding  to  him  a  trust,  which 
now,  in  the  name  and  by  the  authority  of  the 
people  of  Kentucky,  we  have  come  here  to  re- 
sume and  give  back  to  those  who  gave  the 
trust.  We  propose  to  make  them  responsible  by 
bringing  them  periodically  before  the  people, 
when  they  will  be  required  to  render  an  account 
before  that  people,  who  are  to  pass  upon  them. 
Heretofore,  we  appointed  these  officers  through 
the  agency  of  the  governor,  during  good  behav- 
ior. We  subjected  them  to  impeachment  for 
crimes  and  great  misdemeanors,  because  it  was 
unseemly  and  improper,  that  those  who  presi- 
ded in  the  tribunals  of  the  public  justice  of  the 
countiy,  should  be  stained  or  suspected  of  the 
crime  of  violating  the  laws  of  the  land.  And 
in  order  that  public  justice  might  flow  pure,  un- 
tainted, and  unsuspected,  we  subjected  them, 
when  charged  with  crimes  and  great  misde- 
meanors, to  impeachment,  to  removal  from  of- 
fice, and  left  them  subject  to  the  laws  of  the 
country  by  indictment,  as  all  other  citizens  are 
left.  We  did  more,  sir.  We  provided  that 
upon  an  address  of  two-thirds  of  both  branches 
of  the  legislature,  the  governor  might  remove 
for  other  causes  less  than  impeachment.  And 
the  cause  of  removal  is  required  to  be  spread 
upon  the  journal. 

The  wisdom  of  that  provision  I  acknowledge. 
If  a  judge  became  insane,  it  was  no  crime,  no 
misdemeanor.  He  was  not  liable  to  impeach- 
ment— it  was  a  visitation  of  divine  Providence 
to  which  the  whole  human  family  are  liable. 
If  he  became  imbecile,  he  was  not  liable  to  be 
impeached.  Even  if  he  failed  to  do  the  duties 
of  his  office  and  continued  the  docket,  it  was 
hardly  to  be  considered  a  great  misdemeanor,  or 
subject  matter  for  impeachment.  For  these,  and 
perhaps  other  causes,  he  being  incapable  of  ful- 
filling the  duties  for  which  he  was  selected,  or 
failing  to  discharge  the  trust,  there  must  be  some 
power  somewhere  to  remove  the  officer,  and  sup^ 
ply  his  place.  And  hence  the  provision,  that 
for  causes  less  than  impeachment,  the  officer 
might  be  removed  upon  the  address  of  two- 
thirds.  The  constitution  of  the  United  States 
provides  for  impeachment,  and  that  by  two- 
thirds;  and  the  senate  shall  be  the  bodv  to  try, 
and  two-thirds  of  the  representatives  shall  pre- 
fer the  charges  against  tliese  officers.  And  of 
the  thirty  states  which  constitute  this  union, 
twenty  seven  of  them  have  adopted  that  princi- 
ple. Some  twenty  of  them  have  the  provision 
requiring  two-thirds  to  remove  on  address. — 


157 


Massachusetts,  New  Hampshire,  and  one  other 
state  do  not  fix  what  number  shall  consti- 
tute that  concurring  vercliot  in  case  of  impoaeh- 
ment;  and  some  of  them  have  failed  to  put  in 
their  constitutions  the  provisions  for  removal. 
Now,  these  provisions,  oy  all  these  states,  re- 
quiring, with  so  great  unanimity,  as  they  do,  a 
concurrence  of  two-thirds  for  impeachment,  and 
two-thirds  for  address,  are  causes  for  reflection 
and  consideration — -just  for  what  they  are  worth 
before  this  body.  There  are  but  few  states  of 
this  union  that  have  restored  to  the  people  the 
right  to  select  their  judges;  and  if  we  were  to 
take  the  example  of  the  majority,  and  make  it 
conclusive  on  us,  why,  we  would  decide  against 
this  restoration.  And,  perhaps,  if  you  were  to 
take  the  whole  of  the  nations  of  the  earth,  you 
would  decide  against  the  capacity  of  the  people 
for  self-government.  Take  the  whole  acts  of  all 
the  people  upon  the  earth,  and  you  would  de- 
cide against  their  competency  to  govern  them- 
selves. Still,  the  concurring  acts  of  so  many  of 
the  state  governments,  requiring  the  verdict  of 
two-thirds  in  impeachment  in  a  criminal  offence, 
and  two-thirds  in  an  address  to  remove,  is  evi- 
dence furnished  by  the  acts  of  a  free  people,  of 
the  extreme  caution  with  which  they  have  given 
the  power  to  one  department  of  the  government 
to  invade  that  of  another.  And  we  may  look 
into  human  nature  and  draw  our  own  conclu- 
sions in  relation  to  the  cause. 

Now,  I  am  opposed  to  the  first  amendment 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  to 
strike  out  the  words  "for  cause  less  than  im- 
peachment," which  would  have  the  efiect  of  al- 
lowing them  to  remove  for  all  and  any  cause. — 
And  I  am  also  opposed  to  striking  out  the  words 
"two-thirds,"  which  would  give  the  power  to  a 
majority  of  a  quorum,  or  a  majority  of  all  elect- 
ed. These  ofiicers  are  to  be  selected  by  the  peo- 
ple, and  we  are  to  calculate  that  for  these  high, 
sacred  trusts,  that  entwine  themselves  with  the 
interests  of  all  society,  men  of  character,  men 
of  intelligence,  men  of  capacity  and  learning 
for  the  particular  description  of  business  they 
are  selected  to  perform,  will  be  chosen. 

My  reading  of  the  history  of  democracy  in 
America,  ana  the  lessons  which  it  gives  us,  per- 
suade me  that  the  intelligence  of  the  people  will 
induce  them  to  select  for  all  their  offices,  men 
capable  from  their  age,  their  experience,  and 
their  talents,  their  knowledge,  their  information, 
and  their  integrity,  for  the  particular  ofiice  in 
question.  Take  the  galaxy  of  distinguished  in- 
dividuals who  have  filled  the  presidency  of  the 
United  States,  elected  by  the  people  themselves, 
and  a  better  example  of  the  intelligence  and  ca- 

Sacity  of  the  people  to  select  for  that  hi^h  and 
istinguished  office,  cannot  be  produced  in  the 
annals  of  the  world.  And  it  is  one  to  which  we 
may  appeal  in  relation  to  these  officers,  that  in 
proportion  to  the  importance  of  the  office,  and  it^ 
application  to  the  great  interests  of  society,  will 
the  people  be  interested  in  filling  it  with  talen- 
ted and  competent  men;  and  thej  will  bring 
their  intelligence  to  operate  here,  in  proportion 
to  the  interests  at  stake.  In  all  the  State  consti- 
tutions, the  principle  is  recognised  that  the  wisest 
provision  in  relation  to  the  organization  of  gov- 
ernment, is  that  its  powers  be  confided  to  three 
descriptions  of  officers;  those  which  are  execu- 


tive, those  which  are  judicial,  and  those  which 
are  legislative.  That  principle  is  recognised  in 
them  all.  The  principle  is  also  recognised,  that 
they  should  be  separate  and  distinct,  and  that 
no  one  of  these  departments  of  government  should 
be  placed  under  the  control  of  another.  They 
all  flow  from  the  people.  They  are  all  the  agents 
of  the  people  to  whom  the  different  trusts  are 
confided;  and  no  one  of  these  departments  should 
have  the  power  of  reducing,  controlling,  direct- 
ing, or  influencing  another.  Their  duties  are 
clear,  separate,  and  distinct.  Their  responsibil- 
ity should  be  to  the  authority  which  created 
tliem.  What  does  the  gentleman  propose  to  do 
by  this  amendment?  To  strike  outi  And  the  ef- 
fect of  it  is,  to  strike  out  impeachment  for  crime 
against  these  officers;  and  in  the  conviction  of 
them  for  these  crimes,  which  is  to  remove  them 
from  office,  the  tribunal  that  is  to  try  them  is  not 
to  Ije  sworn.  In  all  impeaching  tribunals,  an 
oath  is  taken  of  the  sacred  character  that  is  ad- 
ministered to  a  jury  when  it  tries  a  man  for  his 
life  or  his  liberty;  or  even  in  a  case  between  in- 
dividuals, that  relates  to  the  property  of  the  one 
or  the  other.  But  in  this  instance,  the  sanctity 
of  that  oath  is  proposed  to  be  dispensed  with. 

Mr.HARDIN.  The  gentleman  does  not  un- 
derstand me,  or  I  do  not  understand  myself.  If 
the  gentleman  will  permit  me,  I  will  explain.  It 
is  not  to  s1:rike  out  the  article  for  impeachment, 
but  to  provide  for  removal  by  address. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  understood  the  gentle- 
man exactly.  If  they  are  not  to  proceed  by  im- 
peachment, if  they  may  choose  between  the  two 
modes  of  proceeding,  if  they  may  drop  the  im- 
peachment and  take  address,  mj'  argument  is  ap- 
plicable. If  I  desire  to  attain  a  particular  ob- 
ject, and  if  there  are  difficulties  in  one  mode  of 
accomplishing  it,  I  will  take  that  course  which 
will  bring  me  more  directly  and  more  surely  to 
the  accomplishment  of  my  end.  And  if  I  de- 
sired to  remove  a  judge,  and  the  sanction  of  an 
oath  stands  in  the  way  of  such  removal  in  one 
method,  I  should  certainly  avail  myself  of  the 
privilege  and  remove  the  case  to  a  tribunal  where 
no  oath  is  necessary,  where  I  should  not  have 
to  ride  over  the  consciences  of  men  to  accomplish 
the  end.  I  understood  the  gentleman  right,  for 
the  effect  of  his  proposition  IS  to  do  away  with 
the  impeachment  and  place  it  within  the  power 
of  the  two  branches  of  the  legislature  to  remove, 
and  stain  by  that  act,  the  character  of  these  high 
functionaries  that  the  people  have  called  to  their 
tribunals  to  administer  the  justice  of  the  coun- 
try.    Therefore,  I  am  opposed  to  it. 

The  legislature  are  to  spread  upon  the  records, 
the  causes  of  the  removal.  They  are  to  judge 
of  the  evidence  which  is  to  satisfy  their  minds. 
Indeed,  it  is  not  apparent  that  there  is  to  be  any 
evidence.  They  make  the  indictment  for  them- 
selves; they  spread  it  on  their  records,  and  they 
are  to  judge  of  the  evidence.  They  may  judge 
of  the  evidence  from  public  rumor,  or  thev  may 
not.  They  mav  give  notice,  they  may  call  evi- 
dence; but  in  tlie  address  there  is  no  obligation 
to  do  so,  and  then  these  high  functionaries, 
created  "by  the  people,  indicted  by  one  branch  of 
the  legislature,  tried  by  that  branch,  with  or 
without  evidence,  are  at  their  will  and  pleasure, 
removed  from  office,  and  sent  back  to  the  people 
that  elected  them.    That  is  the  effect  of  it. 


158 


The  people  may  return  tiiem  again,  and  the 
power  of  tills  legislature  is  to  be  like  that  of 
the  British  Parliament,  which  repeatedly  sent 
back  Mr.  Wilkes  to  his  constituents,  declaring 
that  he  was  not  fit  to  be  the  representative  of 
the  people  that  had  chosen  him.  And  this  is  to 
be  accomplished  when  you  strike  out  the  two 
thirds,  by  a  bare  majority! 

Why,  iu  Athens,  we  read  that  they  banished 
Aristides  from  the  commonwealth  for  no  other 
reason,  and  for  no  other  cau.se,  than  that  they 
were  weaiy  of  hearing  him  called  "the  just." 
Take  deliberative  assemblies  from  the  earliest 
period  from  which  you  can  trace  their  history, 
and  you'will  find  there  are  times  when  passion, 
when  prejudice,  when  party  rule  is  triumphant, 
and  justice  is  lost  and  never  heard  of  in  their 
courts.  I  will  not  refer  to  the  bloody  scenes  of 
the  French  revolution.  It  were  enough  to  look 
at  the  blood  of  patriots  sacrificed  by  a  British 
parliament,  at  the  frown,  or  at  the  instigation  of 
the  king.  They  were  the  representatives  of  a 
free  people — they  boast  the  freest  in  the  world. 
And  yet  these  representatives  of  the  people,  by 
their  proceedings  exhibited  their  readiness  to 
shed  the  blood  of  patriots. 

We  bring  the  actions  of  men  to  the  tribunal  of 
public  opinion,  and  whilst thattribunalissound, 
there  is  no  fear.  But  will  it  always  be  sound? 
Is  there  no  suspicion  in  the  breast  of  the  patriot, 
that  even  here,  in  this  enlightened  age,  in  this 
land  where  we  boast  of  our  independence,  and 
our  liberty,  that  passion,  prejudice,  and  party 
feeling,  will  trample  on  the  rights  of  individuals 
and  upon  the  public  justice  of  the  country?  And 
are  we  sure  that  the  time  may  not  come  when 
this  very  intelligence,  this  very  freedom,  mav 
grow  into  licentiousness,  and  that  the  intelli- 
gence of  the  country  may  be  united  to  lead  the 
fiassions  and  feelings  of  those  who  are  not  so  en- 
ightened,  astray  on  many  subjects?  Now  there 
is  a  great  example  to  which  I  will  refer,  for  no 
further  purpose  than  for  illustration.  It  is  suffi- 
cient cause  in  the  minds  of  intelligent  statesmen, 
to  turn  a  man  out  of  office  because  he  is  not  one 
of  the  same  party.  It  is  not  confined  to  one  par- 
ty, or  to  another,  and  in  the  progress  of  this  gov- 
ernmentit  will  not  be  confined  to  one  or  the  oth- 
er; for  so  sure  as  one  party  prevails  over  anoth- 
er, and  that  has  acted  on  that  principle  and  been 
sanctioned  by  the  intelligence  of  the  people,  or 
by  their  passions  or  prejudices,  and  upheld  on 
party  grounds  and  party  distinctions,  so  surely 
and  so  certainly,  wnen  they  come  into  power, 
they  will  turn  out  and  replace  those  they  find  in 
office  with  their  own  partizans. 

I  hope  that  in  framing  this  constitution  of 
Kentucky,  in  giving  these  offices  to  the  people, 
that  we  will  con.stitute  no  tribunal,  who  acting 
on  that  principle,  on  vague  rumors,  or  false  re- 
ports, will  let  the  vengeance  of  the  majority  in 
this  state  fall  on  the  innocent,  and  turn  out  for 
alledged  incapacity  the  officers  whom  the  people 
have  selected.  I  tell  you  we  should  never  give 
the  power  to  permit  it  to  be  done.  I  hold  we 
have  all  the  power  in  our  hands  for  the  purpose 
of  making  this  constitution.  We  are  the  people; 
•we  represent  them.  They  have  given  us  all 
the  power.  For  what?  To  lay  the  foundations 
of  this  government  in  wisdom  and  in  justice, 
to  restrain  the  legislative  department,  so  that  by 


passion  or  by  prejudice,  or  unawares,  and  with- 
out due  reflection,  they  shall  not  pass  those 
boundaries  that  we  in  the  name  of  the  people, 
may  prescribe  for  them.  And  tell  these  judges, 
whom  we  select  to  decide  upon  all  the  great  in- 
terests that  a  free  people  can  have  in  a  govern- 
ment like  this,  and  who  are  the  coercive  powers 
that  give  life,  action,  and  being  to  the  govern- 
ment itself.  That  they  shall  only  be  responsi- 
ble to  the  people,  that  they  are  subject  to  nothing 
else,  so  that  no  passion,  or  prejudice,  shall  turn 
the  judiciary  aside  from  the  great  ends  for 
which  we  established  it.  Is  there  a  gentleman 
on  this  floor  who,  were  it  proposed  that  a  man 
should  be  indicted  for  a  crime,  would  contend 
that  the  tribunal  should  not  be  sworn,  should 
hear  no  evidence,  should  decide  without  the  ob- 
ligation of  an  oath,  consign  to  infamy,  or  con- 
sign to  banishment  any  citizen  of  this  land, 
would  not  start  back  from  it?  I  would  fain  per- 
suade mvself  that  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
has  not  ftilly  regarded  the  consequences  of  this 
thing.  I  know  that  he  is  an  able  lawyer;  I 
knoAV  that  he  is  far  more  familiar  with  states- 
manship than  I  am.  I  have  great  confidence 
that  his  heart  is  in  this  movement,  and  that  he 
desires  to  restore  these  offices  to  the  people. 
And  verily,  I  believe  in  my  conscience  that  to 
him  more  than  any  other  man  is  attributed  the 
great  unanimity  with  which  we  now  meet  in  fa- 
vor  of  the  restoration  of  these  offices  to  the  peo- 
ple— for  he  early  and  boldly  and  decidedly 
placed  himself  on  that  ground  and  has  not  wa- 
vered. 

I  should  be  sorry,  as  he  intimates,  to  part 
with  him  here.  A  great  principle  is  involved  in 
this  question — a  great  principle  of  responsibili- 
ty. Responsibility  to  whom?  To  the  people? 
The  term  of  office  is  the  great  responsibility  to 
which  I  look.  The  reward  the  people  are  to' be- 
stow after  he  has  served  his  term,  when  he  and 
his  friends  may  be  greeted  with  the  proud  certifi- 
cate that  a  re-election  will  give  him,  for  the  able 
and  efficient  manner  in  which  he  has  discharged 
the  duties  of  his  trust,  will  give  to  the  officer  a 
stimulus  to  increase  his  intelligence,  to  guard 
his  integrity  and  his  impartialitv  in  the  distri- 
bution of  the  public  justice  of  tlie  country.  It  f 
is  to  that  reward  he  should  look. 

It  is  to  the  approbation  of  a  free,  intelligent, 
and  patriotic  people  that  the  patriot  looks  as 
tlie  brightest  reward  for  the  services  and  dan-  ; 

gers  he  has  encountered  in  the  service  of  the  peo- 
ple, sure  that  that  approbation,  following  an  up- 
right, virtuous,  correct,  and  impartial  conduct  is 
better  calculated  than  any  other,  to  make  him 
live  in  the  pages  of  history.  I  want  to  hold  out 
to  these  judges  that  approbation,  that  encour- 
agement, that  security,  and  bind  them  by  the 
hopes  of  that  reward  to  a  faithful  and  true  dis- 
charge of  their  duties.  I  do  not  wish  these 
judges  to  be  looking  before  their  offices  have  ex- 
pired, as  a  celebrated  statesman  looked,  when  he 
asked  where  he  was  to  go  when  his  term  was 
out.  For  these  reasons  I  am  opposed  to  striking 
out  these  provisions.  I  am  disposed  to  leave  in 
this  constitution  the  power  of  impeachment,  to 
get  clear  of  those  who  have  been  guilty  of  crimes 
and  high  misdemeanors,  and  remove  them  from  i 

the  judiciary.  And,  I  expect  that  in  this  consti- 
tution a  provision  will  be  inserted,  that  when 


159 


the  great  inquest  of  the  state  of  Kentucky,  con- 
stituted of  the  representatives  of  the  people, 
shall  find  an  impeachment,  that  provision  will 
be  made  for  the  appointment  of  an  officer  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  during  and  after  the  trial.  I 
expect  vre  shall  put  a  provision  of  that  kind  in 
the  constitution,  so  that  the  tribunals  of  justice, 
after  such  inquest,  shall  not  be  filled  vr'nh  men 
suspected  of  crime  and  of  great  misdemeanors 
against  the  laws  of  the  Ian  J.  I  expect  when  ac- 
cidents happen  which  render  a  judge  incapable 
to,  or  improper  that  he  should,  discharge  his  du- 
ty, that  oy  address  he  may  be  removed  and  an- 
other put  in  his  place.  I  am  willing  to  trust  this 
qualified  power  to  the  legislature.  It  is  not  the 
power  of  appointment,  nor  the  power  of  remov- 
al, except  in  a  qualified  mode.  And,  whenever 
a  man  is  guilty  of  crime,  and  is  convicted,  he 
ought  to  be  removed ;  and  we  direct  the  legisla- 
ture in  the  place  of  a  grand  jury,  as  a  giand  in- 
quest of  the  state,  to  find  the  grounds  of  im- 
peachment. We  trust  to  our  senators,  men 
whom  we  elect  for  their  age,  and  whom  the  peo- 
ple choose  for  their  intelligence,  their  probitv, 
talents,  and  character,  to  be  the  triers.  And,  m 
these  cases  of  removal,  I  expect  that  the  repre- 
sentatives, and  the  senate,  and  the  executive, 
combined,  will  remove. 

No  man  on  this  floor  feels  more  fimdy  decided, 
or  desires  more  anxiously  than  I  do,  to  give  the 
appointment  of  all  these  ofllcers  to  the  people. 
There  is  no  man  sees  more  strongly  the  neces- 
sity, the  importance,  the  propriety  of  the  inde- 
pendence of  these  judges  from  the  power  of  the 
executive,  and  from  the  power  of  the  legislative 
department  than  I  do;  yet,  if  these  oflicers  should 
be  guilty  of  crime  or  misdemeanor,  elected  as 
thevmaybe — for  no  man  can  tell  when  crime  shall 
be  brought  to  his  own  door — by  the  frailty  and 
temptations  of  life — they  shall'  have  a  tribunal 
fair,  honorable,  and  such  as  is  worthy  of  a  free 
people  to  try  them.  They  shall  not  be  removed 
unless  it  is  manifest  and  clear  to  two  thirds  of 
both  branches  of  the  legislature  and  the  execu- 
tive that  thev  ought  to  be  removed.  And  I  think 
there  is  no  danger  in  making  this  requisition, 
and  that  we  should  be  traveling  in  the  path  that 
has  been  traveled  by  other  states  of  this  union. 
I  think  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  will 
have  the  efiect,  in  high  party  times,  when  great 
clamor  is  raised  against  an  individual,  to  sacri- 
fice the  ofiice  to  party,  prejudice,  and  clamor,  in- 
stead of  his  falling  under  the  justice  of  his  coun- 
try; and  for  this  reason  I  am  opposed  to  striking 
out  both  provisions. 

The  gentleman  says,  there  is  a  place  where  two 
parties  in  this  convention  are  to  separate,  and 
intimates  very  strongly  that  if  this  proposition 
is  not  sustained,  many  of  us  will  part.  I  came 
here  to  make  a  constitution.  I  never  expected 
to  get  it  exactly  my  way.  I  calculated  to  yield 
to  the  better  judgment'  to  the  sounder  experi- 
^  ence  of  others;  and  if,  upon  the  whole,  when 
the  constitution  is  made,  I  believe  we  have  made 
a  step  in  advance  for  the  benefit  and  prosperity, 
and  happiness,  and  for  the  advancement  of  the 

fublic  justice  of  the  country  in  all  time  to  come, 
intend  to  give  it  my  signature  and  my  sup- 
port. And  1  trust  that  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son, if  he  should  chance  to  be  in  a  minority, 
will  consider  that  this  is  not  the  place  where  tfie 


friends  of  constitutional  reform  in  Kentucky 
should  part.  1  trust  that  he  who  struck  th'e 
hardest  and  strongest  blow  against  the  central 
power,  and  in  favor  of  distributing  and  giving  it 
to  the  people,  will  reconsider  and  go  with  us. 

I  go  with  every  gentleman  who  can  obtain  the 
sanction  of  my  judgment  in  relation  to  his 
measures.  I  go  for  compromise,  when  compro- 
mise is  essential  to  gain  a  portion;  but  the  man 
who  secures  my  vote  for  nis  proposition  must 
first  obtain  the  sanction  of  my  judgment.  This 
the  gentleman's  proposition  has  failed  to  do. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  There  is  not  a  member 
upon  this  floor  who  would  be  less  pleased  to  hear 
the  sound  of  his  own  voice  reverberating  in  these 
halls  than  myself,  but  I  consider  that  no  more 
important  question  will  be  presented  to  the  con- 
sideration of  this  convention  than  the  prinfciple 
involved  in  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson.  Equally  important  ones  may  be 
presented  and  are  perhaps  in  embryo  for  the  con- 
sideration of  this  house,  but  none  more  impor- 
tant, none  more  vital  for  the  preservation,  in  my 
humble  judgment,  of  civil  liberty  itself.  I  there- 
fore throw  myself  upon  the  indulgence  of  this 
house,  to  express  the  grounds  upon  which  my 
vote  will  stand  recorded  upon  the  journals  of 
this  convention.  I  yield  to  no  man  in  the  advo- 
cacv  of  the  calling  of  a  convention  in  this  state, 
ancf  while  I  cheerfully  acquiesce  in  the  distin- 
guished ability  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  and 
yield  to  him  with  pleasure  the  position  of  leader 
in  that  contest — I  yield  to  no  man  here  in  the  ad- 
vocacy of  what  I  Relieve  to  be  the  true  democra- 
cy of  the  country — that  democracy  which  recog- 
nizes equality  of  rights,  equality  of  liberty,  and 
security  of  property.  And  while  I  say  this,  I 
have,  at  least,  brought  my  own  mind  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  adoption  of  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  would  be  striking  at,  if  not  the 
comer  stone,  one  of  the  great  principles  upon 
which  democratic  government  rests.  No  man 
entertains  a  more  exalted  respect  or  a  greater 
friendship  for  the  mover  of  this  proposition  than 
myself;  and  though  I  am  compelled  to  dissent 
from  him,  and  to  enter  my  protest  against  his 

E reposition,   I   know  and  I  believe  that  he  has 
een  lead  in  an  error  by  a  too  zealous  and  exag- 
gerated love  for  the  rights  of  the  people. 

The  history  of  all  governments,  from  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world  to  the  present  time,  has 
shown  that  the  people  themselves,  to  secure  a 
good  government,  have  deemed  it  necessary  to 

?ut  certain  limitations  upon  their  own  power, 
he  history  of  Athens  has  been  quoted  in  this 
discussion;  and  why  was  it  that  the  people  of 
Athens  did  not  meet  in  ma.ss  to  enact  their  own 
laws  and  take  into  their  own  hands  the  govern- 
ment? Why  has  the  axiom  been  handed  down  to 
us,  that  if  every  Athenian  was  a  Socrates,  yet  then 
every  Athenian  assemblage  would  be  a  mob?  It 
was  because  they  could  not  trust  themselves  to 
the  excitements  which  weak  humanity  is  heir 
to ;  and  they  were  afraid  to  trust  themselves  to 
the  charmed  tongue  of  some  wild  demagogue — 
some  ambitious  marplot,  who,  commencing  a 
demagogue,  never  fails  to  end  a  tyrant. 

The  very  foundation  of  government  rests  upon 
the  restriction  upon  popular  rights,  and  the  peo- 
ple wisely  have  determined  to  take  the  authority 
of  the  masses  and  to  confer  it  upon  certain  agents. 


160 


under  certain  written  restiictions  and  bounda- 
ries by  •which  it  is  to  be  marked,  and  beyond 
■which  tliesc  agents  have  no  right  to  go.  '  One 
great  error  of  the  gentleman  consists  in  suppos- 
ing that  the  legishiture  constitutes  the  people. 
During  the  canvass  last  summer,  and  upon  every 
stump  in  my  county,  when  the  subject  of  tlie 
open  clause  was  discussed,  I  undertook  to  battle 
this  ground  with  my  opponent,  and  one  of  the 
grounds,  the  impregnable  ground  upon  Avhich  I 
stood,  was  that  the  legislature  was  not  the  peo- 
ple. Is  it  necessary  for  me  to  take  up  the  time  of 
this  convention  to  undertake  to  prove  a  maxim 
which  seems  to  me  almost  axiomatic?  Why 
when  I  was  a  boy,  the  first  great  leading  state 
paper  which  I  saw  in  my  own  native  state,  was 
a  celebrated  report  issued  in  1812,  setting  forth 
that  the  doctrine  of  instruction  was  the  cardinal 
doctrine  of  the  democratic  party.  The  object  of 
that  paper  was  to  elucidate  and  to  explain  the 
responsibility  of  those  agents  of  the  people  to 
the  source  from  whence  their  power  was  derived. 
But  now  it  seems  that  great  cardinal  doctrine 
is  to  be  overthrown  and  to  be  subverted,  and  we 
are  told  that  the  legislature  can  do  no  wrong — 
that  a  bare  majority  of  a  legislature  shall  have 
the  right  to  violate  a  still  more  fundamental 
principle    of  the    government — that    the   three 

freat  departments  of  this  government  shall  be 
ept,  as  far  as  can  be,  into  distinct  and  separate 
departments.  Give  the  gentleman  his  proposi- 
tion, and  allow  a  majority  of  the  legislature — 
whether  actuated  by  political  excitement,  whetli- 
er  carried  away  by  some  momentary  phrenzy,  or 
whether,  like  myself,  charmed  by  the  eloquent 
tones  and  able  arguments  of  the  gentleman  who 
stood  there  yesterday,  advocating  this  very  doc- 
trine, and  throwing  around  it  a  soft  silvery  tinsel, 
to  be  carried  away  by  such  arts  as  these — and 
do  you  not  bring  suppliant  at  their  feet,  the  ju- 
diciary of  this  land?  The  gentleman  cited,  in 
support  of  his  position,  the  case  of  a  magistrate 
from  the  county  of  Carter,  I  believe.  I  had  the 
honor  of  occupying  at  that  time  this  seat  in  the 
legislature,  and  the  house  of  representatives 
with  a  unanimity,  perhapsscarcelyever  witness- 
ed on  any  other  question,  considered  him  un- 
worthy to  hold  puolic  office  in  Kentucky  ;  but 
the  case  went  to  the  other  branch ,  and  there  per- 
sonal prejudice  or  political  feeling  so  blinded  a 
number  of  the  senators  as  to  render  our  action 
nugatory.  Does  the  gentleman  know  how  often 
he  has  quoted  the  axiom,  "that  it  was  better  that 
99  guilty  men  should  escape  than  one  innocent 
man  suffer" — and  has  he  considered  that  the 
same  motives  which  kept  them  from  doing  jus- 
tice then,  might  on  another  occasion  urge  them 
to  destroy  the  very  pillars  upon  which  our  gov- 
ernment rests? 

I  am  guilty  of  no  affected  diffidence  when  I 
say  that  I  have  never  before  felt  the  responsibili- 
ty I  feel  now.  One  of  the  voungest  members 
upon  this  floor,  I  find  myself  engaged — not  in 
the  passage  of  laws,  not  in  that  action  which  we 
can  do  to-day  and  undo  to-morrow — but  in  that 
important  and  sacred  work  under  which  we  at 
least,  and  our  children  after  us  are  to  live.  It 
has  been  said,  and  said  truly,  that  "  the  ill  that 
men  do,  lives  after  them,  butthe  good  is  too  often 
interred  with  their  bones."  Andwhen  I  come  to 
consider  that  one  false  step  in  the  building  up  of 


this  great  work  may  bring  upon  those  who  sent 
us  here  misfortune,  ruin,  and  destruction,  I  say 
that  I  do  feel,  feel  sensibly,  the  sense  of  the  res- 
ponsibility under  which  I  act. 

Is  it  not  true  that,  if  a  majority  of  the  legisla- 
ture have  a  right  to  remove  a  judge,  we  les- 
sen the  independence  of  one  department  to  the 
other?  And  do  we  not,  if  we  adopt  the  gentle- 
man's proposition,  bring  down  the  judiciary  to 
the  very  feet  of  the  legislative  department?  The 
legislature,  coming  from  different  counties  fresh 
from  the  people,  to  the  discharge  of  their  duties 
here,  have  an  influence  over  the  people  that 
neither  of  the  other  two  departments  from  their 

f)ositiou  and  their  duties  can  ever  attain.  They 
ive  among  them,  tliey  are  with  them,  and  they 
come  here  only  for  a  short  period  to  discharge 
their  duty.  The  governor  is  at  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment, where  he  is  naturally  withdrawn  from 
the  people.  The  judges,  from  their  close  appli- 
cation to  business,  and  their  residence  here,  are 
also  witlidrawn  from  the  people,  and  they  have 
none  of  that  affection  of  the  people  brought 
about  by  the  daily  and  common  intercourse  of 
man  with  man. 

In  the  legislature  there  invariably  springs  up 
an  \innatural  jealousy  towards  both  the  execu- 
tive and  the  judiciary,  and  prepossessed  with 
those  feelings,  some  new  question  arises;  the 
democrats  are  in  a  majority  and  they  want  to  get 
rid  of  a  judge  in  the  north  or  the  soutli  of  the 
state.  They  commence  by  throwing  out  all  sorts 
of  insinuations  against  his  capacity,  his  person- 
al integrity,  or  against,  if  you  please,  his  politi- 
cal opinions.  A  flame  of  discord  is  excited 
here,  and  soon  is  found  some  eloquent,  daring 
defender  of  the  people's  rights,  who  intoxi- 
cates the  house  by  his  eloquence  and  his  log- 
ic, into  a  belief  that  really  the  safety  of  this 
government,  the  safety  of  the  party,  the  integri- 
ty of  our  judicial  system  itself  requires  that  the 
head  of  that  judge  should  be  off.  We  can  justi- 
fy ourselves  before  the  people — we  can  go  to 
them  and  influence  them;  they  know  us  as  vigi- 
lant defenders  of  their  rights — they  do  not  know 
these  judges,  these  aristocrats  at  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment who  have  never  met  with  the  people, 
and  who  never  know  them  if  they  do.  Tiiey 
will  say  this,  and  they  say  further:  this  is  the 
judge  who  decided  the  case  by  which  you  lost 
your  land — or,  this  is  the  man  who  met  you  in 
Frankfort  and  did  not  know  3'ou.  This  popu- 
lar appeal  is  made  to  the  people,  and  they  might 
or  might  not  sanction  it.  And  what  have  you 
done  even  if  they  do  not  sanction  it?  You  have 
placed  on  tlie  records  of  your  land,  that  will  live 
forever,  this  man  as  disgraced  and  dishonored — a 
plague  spot  on  his  fair  fame  as  a  heritage  to  his 
children,  through  generations  to  come.  And 
ten  thousand  reprobations  of  the  people  would 
not  alter  or  diminish  the  dishonor  01  that  act. 
And  suppose  the  people  did  sustain  him,  tlie 
transaction  would  be  very  far  from  being  right. 
I  think,  talking  about  democracy — and  my 
friend  made  many  zealous  appeals  to  democra- 
cy— that  a  few  years  ago  I  neard  somewhere 
that  there  was  a  sober  second  thought  of  the 
people.  What  was  meant  by  that  sober  second 
thought,  but  that  the  people  themselves,  when- 
ever they  would  act  wisely,  would  reflect  and 
act  coolly.    Not  under  impassioned  appeals  or 


161 


excitement,  but  coolly  thev  should  hear,  and  still 
more  coolly  they  should  (determine. 

But  there  is  another  great  objection  to  this 
doctrine.  I  have  heard  another  maxim — that 
all  governments  should  be  permanent — that 
we  should  not  change  for  light  and  transient 
causes  that  government  under  •which  vre  live. 
But  supposing,  as  the  honorable  gentleman  says, 
the  legislature  should  carry  out  the  ■will  of  the 
people  and  should  appeal  to  them — Tvhat  sort  of 
equilibrium  could  exist  in  any  government  when 
the  legislature  can  appeal  to  the  people  on  a 
constitutional  question.  What  sort  of  equili- 
brium and  permanency  in  any  government  can 
there  be,  vrhen  on  the  very  fundamental  princi- 
ples of  the  constitution  you  can  give  to  one  de- 
partment of  government  the  right  to  appeal  to 
the  people,  and  allow  them,  from  day  to  day,  or 
year  to  year,  to  change,  undermine,  or  destroy  it? 
It  is  at  war  with  the  permanency  of  any  govern- 
ment and  tends  directly  and  immediately  to  de- 
stroy it. 

Why  has  it  been  in  all  governments,  that  cer- 
tain guards  were  thrown  around  each  of  its  va- 
rious departments'?  Was  it  not  to  protect  it 
from  the  assaults  that  might  be  made  upon  it? 
Was  it  not  to  give  it  that  independence  and  that 
security  against  the  assaults  which  the  other 
departments,  either  by  a  combination  or  singly, 
should  make  upon  it?  I  have  always  so  under- 
stood and  always  so  regarded  it.  And  when  a 
gentleman  tells  me  that  the  people  themselves 
are  not  subject  to  these  passions — that  the  legis- 
lature can  ao  no  wrong — I  point  him  to  all  past 
history  as  a  perfect  and  complete  refutation  and 
condemnation  of  this  doctrine.  Look  at  France 
and  you  see  her  daily  expiring  from  the  very 
excess  of  liberty.  Look  at  our  own  govern- 
ment, and  you  will  see,  not  only  in  our  own  con- 
stitution, but  in  the  constitution  of  every  state 
in  the  Union,  certain  restrictions,  placed  around 
each  and  every  of  its  departments.  And  the 
surrender  of  power  by  the  people  themselves, 
in  the  constitution  or  organization  of  a  govern- 
ment is  itself  a  restriction  upon  them  to  a  cer- 
tain extent.  I  cannot  for  myself  see  upon  what 
ground  or  in  what  way  the  gentleman  can  hope 
to  carry  through  his  proposition.  It  strikes  me 
as  perfectly  destroying  the  very  independence  of 
the  judiciary.  It  strikes  me  as  bringing  down  the 
ermine  of  judicial  integrity  into  the  conflicts  of 
the  hustings — destroying  first  its  independence, 
and  then  covering  its  purity  with  the  dirt  of 
personal  detraction  or  political  malice.  It  can- 
not be  supposed  if  the  gentleman's  proposi- 
tion prevails,  and  any  succeeding  legislature 
that  may  convene  here,  undertakes  to  remove 
two  or  tnree  of  these  judges,  that  they  will  not 
seek  to  defend  themselves  against  these  attacks, 
and  that  they  will  not  go  before  the  people  to 
justify  their  conduct?  In  the  destruction  of  the 
reputation  and  character  of  a  judge,  we  will  sup- 
pose the  case  that  the  people  themselves  do  not 
sustain  their  representatives,  and  that  the  judge 
thus  assailed  is  re-elected  some  years  afterwards 
to  make  some  slight  atonement  for  this  indig- 
nity. Or  if,  as  I  understand  the  proposition  is 
likely  to  be  amended,  the  matter  is  to  be  submit- 
ted at  once  to  the  people,  and  the  act  of  ostra- 
cism by  the  legislature  is  not  to  go  into  effect 
until  approved  by  the  people,  still  I  must  make 
21 


objection  to  it,  because  then  the  judge  appeals 
to  the  people,  and  we  have  on  the  hustings  of 
every  county,  the  accuser  on  the  one  side,  and 
the  judges  on  the  other.  The  people  perhaps 
sustain  the  judge,  and  do  you  think  that  judge 
would  be  competent  to  sit  in  those  counties, 
and  decide  between  these  accusers  and  their 
rights.  Admit  that  it  is  gratifying  to  see  high 
judicial  integrity,  the  spotless  ermine  of  our 
country  drabbled,  soiled,  and  trodden  under 
foot,  in  the  country,  and  then  the  popular  voice 
raising  it  up  again,  what  Kentuckian  is  there  in 
the  land  who  would  not  feel  dishonored  and  hum- 
bled in  the  dust  thereby?  What  man,  after  hav- 
ing passed  through  a  conflict  of  bitter  passion, 
in  which  his  honor,  and  reputation,  and  the  inter- 
est of  his  family  had  been  insulted,  and  had  suf- 
fered under  the  slanderous  tongue  of  some  am- 
bitious demagogiie.  could  trust  himself  to  as- 
cend the  judicial  tribunal  and  decide  between 
the  rights  of  these  men?  I  felt  almost  charmed 
to  the  spot  by  the  eloquent  remarks  of  my  dis- 
tinguished friend  yesterday,  but  that  very  elo- 
quence shows  me  the  danger  of  the  doctrine  it 
supports,  and  was  to  me  a  convincing  argument 
against  subjecting  judicial  reputation  and  integ- 
rity to  the  assaults  of  those  artful  demagogues 
who,  with  eloquence  to  support  them,  might 
choose  to  assail  it. 

Nay,  sir,  charmed  as  I  was,  I  heard  the  speech 
more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger — with  a  sort  of 
pleasant  melancholy  mourning  to  think  that 
the  gentleman  should  be  willing  so  far  to  go  on 
in  the  course  which,  without  the  slightest  dis- 
respect to  the  gentleman,  I  regard  as  the  very 
{)erfection  of  radicalism.  The  sentiments  de- 
ivered  by  him,  it  must  be  remembered,  will  have 
their  effect.  I  have  seen  how  far  partv  has  car- 
ried this  excitement  in  Kentucky,  during  the 
past  summer,  and  a  still  more  striking  example 
of  how  high  excitement  upon  local  questions 
can  rise.  You  know,  sir,  and  every  member 
within  the  sound  of  my  voice  will  recollect  how 
Kentucky  heaved  and.  tossed  like  an  agitated 
ocean  whilst  the  slavery  discussion  was  going 
on.  In  the  height  of  that  excitemnet,  in  several 
of  the  counties,  the  great  doctrine  seemed  to 
have  been  forgotten  that  "error  ceases  to  be  dan- 
gerous when  reason  is  left  free  to  combat  it." 
When  you  touch  a  man's  property — when  you 
touch  the  doctrine  which  invades,  as  he  suppo- 
ses, either  his  liberty  or  the  sanctity  of  his  fire- 
side you  almost  dethrone  his  reason.  The  people 
themselves  can  be  led  on,  where  questions,  ex- 
citable in  themselves,  are  agitated  by  the  wily 
tongue  of  the  ambitious,  though  they  lead  us  to 
extremes  on  every  subject.  Suppose,  if  you 
please,  that  you  have  a  pro-slavery  legislature, 
and  I  trust  in  God  no  other  will  ever  sit  within 
these  walls,  and  some  gentleman  holding  the  po- 
sition of  a  judge,  in  the  exercise  of  his  reason 
and  under  the  sanction  of  his  oath,  chooses  to 
give  an  honest  expression  of  his  opinion,  and 
we  will  suppose  that  expression  of  opinion  is 
wholly  and  entirely  opposed  to  the  legislature. 
Sir,  you  can  imagine  from  even  the  glimmerings 
of  the  scenes  of  last  winter  what  a  fire-brand 
such  an  expression  of  opinion  must  throw  into 
the  legislature.  What  security  then  will  there 
be  for  the  independent  exercise  of  the  functions 
of  the  judiciary?     How  perfectly  fragile  and 


162 


crumbling  must  be  the  organization  of  any  of 
the  departments  of  this  government  when  it  is 
to  depend  on  the  mere  temporary  comprehension 
of  the  legislature  itself.  Why,  sir,  you  have  no 
right  to  suppose  that  this  legislature  will  bring 
from  their  constituents  an  expression  of  opinion 
in  regard  to  their  action  in  the  investigation  into 
the  conduct  of  an  officer  against  whom  charges 
may  be  preferred.  Cases  must  spring  up,  which 
will  require  legislative  interposition,  long  after 
the  time  when  the  members  of  the  Legislature 
shall  have  been  elected.  Yet  you  will  under- 
take to  give  to  these  men,  uninformed  as  they 
must  be  as  to  the  wishes  and  opinions  of  their 
constituents  on  this  subject,  the  right  to  remove 
any  judge  and  to  destroy  his  reputation — to  strip 
him  of  his  office,  and  when  the  people  themselves 
ask  the  reason,  you  can  only  say  to  them,  "we 
did  what  we  supposed  to  be  right."  Yet  they 
may  have  been  deceived.  I  mention  these  ex- 
amples merely  to  show,  in  the  first  place,  that  I 
do  not  look  to  the  legislature  for  correct  action 
in  such  cases.  All  history  attests  that  the  legis- 
latures of  all  tlie  states,  have  at  times  run  counter 
to  popular  sentiment.  Why,  sir,  how  many 
times  have  you  witnessed  on  this  floor  less  than 
one  third  of  the  members  who  are  returned  here, 
and  I  believe  one  instance  is  on  record  in  Virginia, 
where,  perhaps,  two  thirds  were,  after  having 
given  a  particular  vote,  defeated  before  the  peo- 
ple. It  seems  to  me  that  the  principle  embraced 
in  the  proposition  strikes  at  the  very  root  of  this 
government — it  strikes  at  its  stability — it  dis- 
turbs its  equilibrium — it  is  really  bringing  both 
the  judiciary  and  the  executive  at  the  footstool 
of  the  legislature.  It  is  constituting  them  the 
great  sovereign  power  of  the  land,  and  I  under- 
stand the  gentleman  to  say,  that  he  not  only 
does  not  confine  the  principle  to  the  judges,  but 
that  he  carried  it  from  the  governor  down  to  a 
constable. 

I  have  given,  very  imperfectly,  the  reasons  in 
addition  to  those  delivered  with  so  much  ability, 
both  by  the  distinguished  President  of  this  con- 
vention, and  by  my  honorable  friend  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklitfe,)  why  I  am  opposed  to  this 
proposition.  I  shall  never,  sir,  were  I  to  live  to 
the  age  of  Methuselah,  place  my  hand  upon 
my  heart  and  give  a  vote,  upon  the  correctness 
of  which  I  could  not  stand  at  all  times.  I  came 
here  sir,  to  form  what  I  hope  will  be  a  con- 
servative constitution.  I  came  here  to  stand 
up  for  those  principles  of  government  which 
have  been  instilled  into  my  mind  from  the  ear- 
liest moment  of  my  recollection  ;  and  if  I  fall,  I 
ask  no  prouder  epitaph,  than  that  I  fell  at  the 
foot  of  what  is  believed  the  fundamental  princi- 
ple of  a  civil  and  religious  government.  I  shall 
never  seek  to  gain  office  by  pandering  to  the 
prejudices  of  the  populace — call  them  people — 
or  call  them  what  you  please.  I  am  a  believer 
in  popular  government,  and  I  believe  in  the  good 
aense  of  those  who  sent  me  here,  to  give  me  at 
least  an  opportunity  to  defend  myself  upon  ev- 
ery vote  I  give  here;  and  when  I  go  before  them, 
should  I  be  called  on  to  give  an  account  of  my 
stewardship,  I  shall  very  readily  be  able  tosatisfy 
them  thati  pursued  the  dictates  of  my  conscience 
and  ray  honest  judgement.  I  know  them  too 
well  to  believe  that  they  will  ask  me  to  sacrifice 
my  honest  convictions,  and  I  hope  that  they 


know  me  too  well  to  expect  it  of  me.  No  sir,  I 
believe  that  one  of  the  greatest  errors  of  this  en- 
lightened age  is,  a  disposition  on  the  part  of 
gentlemen  not  to  trust  enough  to  the  good  sense 
of  the  people — not  to  profit  by  their  own  wis- 
dom and  experience  and  to  do  what  that  wisdom 
and  experience  shall  dictate.  It  is  better  that 
gentlemen  should  rely  upon  their  own  ability  to 
justify  their  conduct,  instead  of  pandering  to 
popular  opinion.  I  mean  this  for  no  gentleman 
on  this  floor.  I  recognize  the  ability  of  tlie  dis- 
tinguished gentleman  who  offered  this  amend- 
ment. I  concede  to  him  entire  lionesty  of  pur- 
pose, though  I  frankly  say  that  I  do  think  him 
wholly  and  entirely  wrong.  I  have  detained  the 
committee  longer  than  I  intended,  and  I  can  only 
return  my  thanks  for  their  attention. 

Mr.NUTTALL.  It  is  not  sir  thatI  expect  on 
the  present  occasion  to  throw  such  light  on  the 
subject  as  will  influence  the  committee  to  render 
their  verdict  in  favor  of  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr. Hardin.)  To  judge 
from  present  appearances,  at  least,  the  supporters 
of  the  amendment  which  he  has  proposed  will 
in  all  probability  be  "few  and  far  between."  I 
am  never  myself  startled  by  such  considerations. 
I  have  but  one  rule  of  action — one  principle  for 
the  government  of  my  conduct,  and  that  is  to 
form  my  opinions  myself  in  all  cases  and  in 
all  times,  and  to  advocate  them  on  all  occas- 
ions to  the  best  of  my  ability.  I  was  ex- 
tremely gratified  to  hear  the  honorable  Pres- 
ident of  the  convention,  for  whose  talents  I 
have  a  high  regard,  after  having  last  evening 
exhibited  a  degree  of  temper  which  almost  in- 
duced me  to  think  that  he  had  fallen  out  with 
all  mankind — I  was  gratified  I  say,  when  he 
resumed  the  stand  this  morning,  to  find  that  he 
was  restored  to  his  customary  good  humor,  and 
that  he  was  disposed  to  discuss  this  question 
with  that  clearness  and  ability  for  which  he  is 
so  distinguished.  Now,  sir,  gentlemen  have  de- 
fended their  positions  with  regard  to  this  ques- 
tion of  constitutional  reform — they  have  indica- 
ted the  attitude  which  they  assume  towards  this 
great  question.  Although  there  are  older  men 
on  this  floor  than  myself,  I  can  date  back  my 
advocacy  of  the  measure  to  the  year  1823.  Save 
the  gentleman  from  Madison  and  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  I  suppose  I  am  the  oldest  advocate 
of  a  convention  upon  this  floor — not  that  I  think 
the  gentleman  from  Madison  would  ever  have 
taken  the  sense  of  the  people  whether  they  would 
amend  the  constitution  or  not.  And  1  would 
like  to  know,  sir,  what  new  lights  have  dawned 
upon  his  mind,  and  how  long  it  is  since  lie  be- 
came the  advocate  of  constitutional  reform.  And 
I  think  there  are  many  others  on  this  floor  who 
have  become  new  converts.  I  can  trace  their  in- 
crease from  that  day  to  this,  in  every  election  in 
which  I  with  feeble  powers  advocated  the  pro- 

f»riety  of  calling  a  convention  ;  nay,  sir,  I  go 
urther;  I  can  say  what  no  other  man  in  this 
house  can  say,  that  when  the  question  was  sub- 
mitted to  the  people  a  year  ago  wliether  they 
would  revise  the  constitution  or  not,  and  my  own 
father  was  a  candidate  in  opposition,  I  went  to 
the  polls  like  a  freeman  and  voted  against  him. 
I  think,  sir,  whatever  may  be  the  judgment  of 
this  house  in  regard  to  myself  and  the  position 
which  I  occupy,  I  can  show  to  my  countrymen 


163 


that  I  liave  at  least  been  consistent  through  life 
upon  this  question. 

I  think  that  gentlemen  have  misunderstood  or 
misinterpreted,  at  least,  the  effect  of  the  amend 
ment  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Xelson. 
I  understand  sir,  that  the  partition  of  the  poTv- 
ers  of  the  government  provided  by  the  article 
reported  by  the  cliairman  of  the  committee,  is 
pretty  much  in  the  language  inwhichthe  oldcon- 
stitution  of  Kentuckv  is  couched     Am  I  wrong? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  gentleman 
will  allow  me,  I  will  answer  tlie  question.  The 
committee  have  made  in  their  report  no  parti- 
tion of  the  powers  of  government.  They  have 
looked  forward  with  hope  and  confidence  that 
the  partition  of  those  powers  already  to  be 
found  in  the  existing  constitution,  ancl  which 
lies  at  the  foundation  of  every  free  government 
would  be  retained  or  re-adopted  in  the  constitu- 
tion which  we  may  form.  If  the  gentleman 
means  the  three  departments  of  the  government, 
the  legislative,  the  executive,  and  the  judicial, 
with  the  duties  belonging  to  each  committed  to 
a  separate  body  of  magistrates,  acting  inde- 
pendentlv  in  their  own  spheres,  we  considered 
that  no  alteration  would  be  made  in  that  respect, 
and  have  made  no  such  partition  because  we 
thought  it  unnecessary, 

Mr.  XUTTALL.  Well  then,  I  take  it,  if  that 
is  to  stand  as  it  ought  to  stand,  that  this  govern- 
ment is  divided  into  three  separate,  distinct  de- 
partments, the  legislative,  the  judicial,  and  the 
executive,  and  that  neither  of  these  departments 
is  to  exercise  the  powers  properly  belonging  to 
the  others.  That  is  the  true  ground.  That  is 
the  doctrine  for  which  I  mean  to  contend,  and 
now  sir  I  would  like  to  know  how  it  is,  and  up- 
on what  principle,  if  you  make  the  judges  re- 
movable by  the  address  of  a  bare  majority, 
that  it  conflicts  with  any  provision  in  the  order 
of  government.  Does  it  interfere  with  the  ju- 
dicial department  of  this  government  merely  to 
give  the  power  to  the  legislature,  by  a  fair  ad- 
dress, to  remove  a  judge  from  office  in  conse- 
quence either  of  misfeasance,  malfeasance,  or 
nonfeasance  in  ofiice.  I  say  sir,  it  will  not  and 
cannot  be  construed  by  a  reasonable  interpreta- 
tion into  a  conflict  with  any  provision  of  the 
constitution  which  regulates  the  powers  of  gov- 
ernment. I  have  listened  with  great  pleasure 
and  have  been  perfectly  enraptured  by  the  elo- 
quence of  the  gentleman  from  Kenton.  He  re- 
minded me  very  much  of  the  poet  whose  tongue 
was  strung  with  golden  sinews,  whose  honied 
accents  could  tame  down  tigers,  and  cause  the 
huge  leviathan  to  leave  the  unfathomed  deep  to 
dance  upon  the  sands.  But  my  judgment  has 
not  been  convinced. 

What  is  it  that  has  done  this  thing?  What 
portion  of  this  convention?  I  do  not  mean  to 
particularize.  Who,  sir,  are  endangering  the  pil- 
lars of  this  temple  of  civil  liberty,  the  right  arm, 
the  stay,  the  prop,  the  anchor  of  our  safety?  I 
will  not  say  that  it  is  those  who  have  gone  be- 
fore the  people  and  attempted  to  destroy  the  in- 
dependence of  the  judiciary,  and  drag  them 
down  by  popular  clamor,  by  contending  for  the 
election  of  the  judges  by  the  people. 

Now,  sir,  I  may  live  to  see  the  day,  though  I 
trust  in  God  I  never  shall,  when  the  issue  which 
gentlemen  talk  about  will  be  made;  when  you  will 


try  a  judge  and  turn  him  out  by  a  bare  majority, 
and  then  have  an  issue  between  the  judge  on 
one  side  and  his  accusers  on  the  other.  But  do 
not  gentlemen  see  that  they  will  place  the  gov- 
ernment in  more  danger — that  they  will  throw 
the  vessel  of  state  upon  a  more  dark  and  tem- 
pestuous ocean  of  confusion,  by  allowing  the 
people  to  elect  the  judges  than  by  allowing  them 
to  be  removed  by  a  bare  majority?  I  hope  I  may 
never  see  the  day,  when  a  judge,  being  removed 
from  office,  will  mount  the  stump;  when,  a  great 
constitutional  question  having  been  decided  by 
him,  or  a  great  and  important  question  in- 
volving hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars,  he 
will  be  compelled  to  canvass  before  the  people 
the  question  involved  in  his  decision.  But  who 
will  be  to  blame  in  this?  Sir,  I  am  for  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  judiciary.  My  position  was 
before  my  constituents,  until  the  popular  clamor, 
which  gentlemen  so  much  dreaded,  had  swept 
over  this  commonwealth,  and  had  swept  off  eve- 
ry man  who  was  disposed  to  stand  up  for  the  in- 
dependence of  the  judiciary  of  his  country. — 
We  all  had  to  give  way;  we  all  had  to  recede 
from  our  position.  I  intend  to  vote  for  an  elec- 
tive judiciary.  But  sir,  while  I  do  that  it  is  in 
obedience  to  the  commands  of  those  who  sent 
me  here.  I  have  always  had  my  misgivings 
with  regard  to  an  elective  judiciary,  and  I  am 
willing  that  it  should  be  entered  upon  the  re- 
cords of  this  house,  upon  the  journal  of  our  pro- 
ceedings, and  that  it  shall  staad  for  all  time  to 
come,  to  show  whether  I  rightfully  prejudged 
the  case  or  not. 

There  never  is  any  danger,  there  never  can  be 
any  danger  where  the  judges  have  a  revisory 
tribunal  to  correct  their  errors  and  rectify  their 
erroneous  judgments.  We  have  no  diflSculty  on 
this  point.  But  to  some  extent,  and  to  a  very 
great  extent,  the  judges  must  be  vested  with  en- 
larged discretionary  powers,  and  then,  sir,  when 
those  poor  men  of  whom  the  gentleman  from 
Kenton  spoke,  on  one  side,  and  the  rich  and 
powerful  on  the  other,  come  up  before  the  local 
judge  who  has  the  right  to  exercise  this  discre- 
tionary power,  to  which  side  will  the  decision 
incline. 

Well  then,  sir,  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  is  the  only  proposition  that 
can  meet  a  contingency  of  this  sort.  The  judge 
is  to  be  in  office  eight  years,  according  to  the 
present  plan  of  government,  and  if  whilst  in  of- 
fice he  abuses  this  discretionary  power;  if  he  is 
guilty  of  misfeasance,  malfeasance,  or  nonfea- 
sance in  ofiice,  then,  sir,  a  bare  majority  of  the 
legislature  has  the  right  to  address  him  out, 
spreading  upon  the  journal  the  cause  for  which 
tliey  do  so.  And  I  know  it  was  never  contem- 
plated by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  that  these 
judges  should  be  tried  without  witnesses.  I 
think  that  delegates  in  this  convention  have  con- 
jured up  a  great  bugbear  here  as  a  make-weight. 
I  do  not  think  that  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
ever  did  or  could  conceive  of  such  a  preposter- 
ous proposition,  as  that  they  should  be  tried 
without  witnesses.  Now  I  intend  to  show  my 
constituents  that  their  wishes  shall  be  carried 
out.  I  intend  to  vote  for  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  even  if  it  gets  no  other 
vote  than  mine;  and  in  doing  this  I  preserve  the 
great  landmarks  of  republican  liberty.    I  shall 


164 


stand  by  those  landmarks,  for  I  do  not  want  in 
after  years  to  have  some  surveyor  go  hunting  up 
landmarks  for  me. 

The  doctrine  I  set  out  with  is  that  which  I 
mean  to  maintain,  that  the  people  have  a  right 
to  govern,  and  ought  to  govern  in  this  free  coun- 
try. That  is  where  I  stood,  sir,  twenty  three 
years  ago;  and  if  the  people  of  the  state  will  be 
consistent,  and  upon  sober  reflection  just  alter 
the  tenure  of  office  of  the  judges,  and  uphold  in 
their  elections  the  removal  by  a  bare  majority, 
they  will  have  a  system  which  I  doubt  not  will 
work  better  than  the  present. 

I  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  being  oppo- 
sed to  an  elective  judiciary.  I  only  throw  this 
out  for  tlie  benefit  of  gentlemen  who  may  not 
have  known  my  position  heretofore;  and  I  in- 
tend to  occupy  that  position  so  long  as  I  have 
any  thing  to  do  with  public  life. 

It  all  goes  back  to  this;  every  argviment  that 
I  have  heard  from  able,  learned,  and  talented 
gentlemen  here,  runs  right  back  to  the  old  doc- 
trine of  monarchists,  that  the  people  are  not  ca- 
pable of  self-government.  You  may  govern  your- 
selves say  they,  but  we  will  throw  restrictions 
around  you,  for  you  may  be  led  away  by  dema- 
gogues, and  not  form  a  correct  judgment.  And 
my,friend  from  Kenton  gave  as  an  instance,  that 
at  some  future  day  the  democratic  party  might 
have  a  majority!  Great  God!  that  I  should  throw 
out  such  an  insinuation  in  regard  to  the  party 
to  which  I  belong;  that  the  great  democratic 
party  is  so  steeped  in  iniquity  and  immorality 
that  they  would  be  guilty  of  such  scoundrelism; 
that  a  period  could  arrive  in  this  country,  when, 
for  mere  party  purposes,  a  democratic  majority 
of  the  legislature  would  turn  out  a  judge.  Great 
God  Almighty !  if  I  belonged  to  a  party  who 
would  act  thus,  I  would  turn  my  back  upon  them 
in  five  minutes,  and  never  unite  with  them  again 
on  the  face  of  the  earth. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  did  not  speak  of  the 
democratic  party.  I  said  that  gentlemen  who 
came  here  professing  to  be  democrats,  might 
disregard  the  popular  voice  when  they  get  here. 
There  have  been  gentlemen  who  professed  one 
thing  on  the  stump,  and  pursued  a  different 
course  when  they  came  here. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  Well  I  think  that  may  be 
applicable  to  the  gentleman  from  Kenton,  but  I 
know  it  is  not  to  me.  I  go  upon  the  principle, 
that  our  constituents  throughout  the  length  and 
breadth  of  this  great  and  patriotic  state  are  en- 
lightened men.  I  dare  any  gentleman  to  go 
home  and  take  the  stump  and  say  there  are  men 
living  at  the  seat  of  government  who  under- 
stand these  matters  better  than  you  do;  men  who 
can  form  a  correct  judgment  in  relation  to  the 
affairs  of  government,  whilst  you  who  live  in 
seclusion,  who  know  nothing  of  the  refinements 
of  city  life,  who  have  never  neard  the  tones  of  a 
piano,  or  seen  tables  groaning  under  loads  of 
sweet-meats,  are  not  capable  of  forming  an 
opinion.  I  do  not  pretend  to  much  refinement 
myself;  I  am  one  of  tlie  people,  a  demagogue,  if 
you  please,  but  sometimes,  when  I  meet  before 
the  people  men  who  have  considerable  preten- 
sion on  the  score  of  attainments,  I  do  assure 
iou  I  make  their  hair  stand  on  end.  But  sir, 
have  read  an  old  adage  which  I  will  give  you 
presently.    When  a  set  of  gentlemen  want  to  put 


down  any  great  measure,  they  always  refer  us 
to  the  manner  in  which  the  governments  of 
antiquity  have  all  run  the  road  to  ruin.  The 
free  governments  of  Rome  and  Athens  are  point- 
ed out,  as  an  index,  as  a  beacon  light  to  sliow 
us  where  the  rocks  and  quicksands  are  situated. 
Well,  I  have  read  some  little  myself  in  Dil- 
worth's  spelling  book,  but  I  do  not  think  that  I 
ever  saw  in  all  my  reading,  any  description  of  a 
government  that  comes  up  to  my  idea  of  a  free 
government,  except  our  own.  And  when  a 
gentleman  comes  here,  like  the  gentleman  from 
Kenton,  who  is  on  his  first  legs,  or  like  my  hon- 
orable friend  from  Louisville,  when  the  lobbies 
are  crowded  with  ladies,  they  like  to  talk  about 
Greece  and  Rome,  and  make  a  display  of  their 
learning.  I  don't  wish  to  make  any  display.  I 
think  even  if  my  wife  were  to   die   and  there 

was  ever  so  miich  attraction  in  the  lobbies 

I  take  that  back, — Mr.  Chairman;  but  a  great 
many  men  certainly  do  come  here  to  extinguish 
themselves.  [Irrepressible  laughter  throughout 
the  house,  as  well  as  much  merriment  in  the 
galleries,  was  elicited  by  the  quaintness  of  the 
honorable  delegate.]  But  I  never  saw  anything 
in  this  Greece  and  Rome  business  to  alarm  me. 
I  have  no  doubt  there  are  some  gentlemen  who 
know  more  about  those  countries  than  I  do;  I 
never  was  there,  and  never  expect  to  go  there; 
and  never  having  read  more  than  Dilworth's 
spelling  book,  I  never  expect  to  know  more  of 
them  than  I  shall  hear  in  oratorical  displays  in 
this  house.  I  had  thought,  however,  or  per- 
haps dreamed  that  free  governments  always 
fell  from  the  fact  that  a  few  men  get  into  power, 
whether  by  demagoguery  or  not,  and  by  degrees 
destroyed  the  foundations  of  the  government,  and 
stole  away  the  liberties  of  the  people.  I  may  be 
Avrong.  But,  sir,  it  is  a  very  favorite  topic.  If 
gentlemen  want  to  break  down  measures  which 
a  few  men  like  myself  advocate,  in  order  to 
give  strength  to  the  other  side  of  the  question, 
they  cry  out  demagougery — demagougism. 
Well,  I  have  no  idea  that  any  gentleman  who 
has  used  this  expression  has  tried  to  give  it  point 
towards  any  member  of  this  body. 

I  am  determined,  as  far  as  my  action  is  con- 
cerned to  preserve  the  great  land  mark,  that  a 
majority  shall  rule,  and  I  do  not  fear  that  the 
constituents  of  any  man  in  this  country,  in  this 
enlightened  age,  ever  can  or  will  be  influenced 
by  demagogues,  first  to  elect  an  improper  per- 
son as  judge,  and  then  to  elect  a  man  to  the 
legislature  who  is  incompetent  to  determine 
whether  the  judge  has  committed  an  offence  for 
which  he  ought  to  be  removed.  I  do  say  sir, 
that  it  is  underrating  the  intelligence  of  the 
people;  it  is  not  a  proper  appreciation  of  their 
general  intelligence  to  say  that  any  state  of 
things,  in  this  our  day,  can  arise,  in  which  the 
people  can  be  misled;  because  if  they  suffer 
themselves  to  be  deceived  it  is  they  Avho  must 
suffer  the  ill  consequences  resulting  therefrom. 
But  I  do  humbly  conceive  from  the  fact  that  all 
the  important  officers  of  the  government  are  to 
be  elected  by  the  people,  that  they  will  be  cau- 
tious, that  tney  will  act  with  judgment,  and 
certainly  not  pennit  themselves  to  elect  to  im- 
portant offices,  such  persons  as  are  incapable  of 
administering  the  government.  I  think  they 
will  at  all  times  rise  superior  to  the  charge 


165 


which  gentlemen  have  seen  fit   to  throw  out 
against  them.     That  is  my  doctrine. 

I  do  not  know  how  much  I  am  influenced  by 
what  may  be  laid  up  at  home  against  a  man,  for 
his  acts  in  this  convention;  but  in  very  few 
words,  in  conclusion,  I  will  give  you  my  opinion 
as  to  what  we  ought  to  do.  And  first,  I  will  say 
that  if  this  amendment  does  not  succeed,  I  am 
still  with  the  convention  party.  I  am  going  for 
the  amendment  in  good  faith,  and  whether  suc- 
cessful or  not  in  this,  I  am  still  going  for  other 
amendments  in  the  constitution;  and  if  we  can 
fix  up  a  constitution  that  will  suit  a  majority  of 
this  house,  my  signature  shall  be  attached  to  it, 
whether  I  coincide  in  the  amendments  that  are 
made  or  not.  I  intend  to  be  consistent.  Al- 
though my  own  notions  may  not  meet  the  views 
of  a  majority  here,  yet  if  you  secure  the  great 
object  for  which  we  nave  asembled  by  forming 
a  constitution  that  will  be  acceptable  to  a  majori- 
ty, I  am  with  you.  When  you  secure  an  elec- 
tive judiciary,  and  secure  to  the  people  the  elec- 
tion of  all  the  other  officers  of  the  government, 
you  will  have  effected  one  of  the  great  objects 
which  the  people  had  in  view  in  ordering  this 
convention.  If  only  this  shall  be  accomplish- 
ed, I  shall  vote  for  the  new  constitution.  I  do 
not  know  how  long  my  friend  from  Nelson  and 
myself  will  continue  to  vote  together.     I   sup- 

Eose  that  if  his  amendment  should  be  rejected, 
e  will  part  from  most  of  his  old  friends,  by 
putting  himself  in  opposition  to  any  constitu- 
tion that  may  be  made. 

I  believe  I  have  said  all  that  I  designed  to  say, 
and  perhaps  more  than  I  ought  to  have  said.  As 
the  preacher  says  in  winding  up  his  sermon,  if 
anything  has  Heen  said  that  is  out  of  the  way, 
I  liope  the  house  [I  will  not  call  upon  the  Lorcl, 
for  I  am  not  good  enough  for  that,]  will  have 
mercy  upon  me. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  I  do  not  rise,  sir,  with  a  view 
of  detaining  this  house,  or  of  attempting  to  en- 
lighten it,  by  presenting  this  subject  in  any 
new  light.  I  feel  it  due  to  myself,  however,  and 
to  those  whom  I  represent,  to  give  a  reason  for 
the  action  which  I  snail  take,  when  we  have  the 
privilege  of  attempting  to  dispose  of  the  ques- 
tion which  has  been  under  discussion.  I  have 
seen  sir,  heretofore  in  this  house,  the  shafts  of 
ridicule  attempted  to  be  hurled,  where  there  was 
no  argument  to  sustain  the  position  which  the  par- 
ty was  endeavoring  to  advocate.  But  sir,  the 
shafts  of  ridicule,  I  trust,  will  always  fall  harm- 
less upon  the  ear  of  every  speaker  in  this  con- 
vention. We  are  here  for  high  and  important 
purposes;  and  I  conceive  thafthe  action  of  this 
convention  upon  the  question  which  is  now  be- 
fore it,  has  a  great  deal  to  do  in  carrying  out 
those  purposes  for  which  we  are  here  assembled. 
I,  sir,  claim  to  be  as  fully  initiated  in  the  spi- 
rit of  democracy  as  any  man  upon  this  floor.  I 
claim  to  have  gone  as  far  in  all  my  past  history, 
in  endeavoring  to  sustain  those  great  principles, 
which  I  believe  lie  at  the  foundation  of  all  re- 

Sublican  governments  as  any  man  on  this  floor, 
ut  sir,  for  the  first  time  in  my  short  existence 
have  I  learned  that  the  representatives  of  the 
people  assembled  here,  constitute  the  people 
themselves.  It  is  a  new  doctrine  to  me;  and  sir, 
I  conceive  it  to  be  fraught  with  error  which  is  so 
fundamental,  that  if  sustained  by  the  action  of 


this  convention,  all  our  institutions  will  be  over- 
turned, and  the  legislative  department  of  our 
government  will,  as  has  been  frequently  stated 
by  gentlemen  on  this  floor,  be  the  great  fish 
which  is  to  swallow  up  all  the  other  depart- 
ments. I  know  that  the  argument  made  by  the 
venerable  gentleman  from  ^lelson  was  well  cal- 
culated to  lead  us  astray ;  it  was  well  calculated 
to  deceive  the  unwary  ;  and  at  the  first  blush 
might  be  supposed  to  carry  with  it  a  power, 
which  in  reality  it  did  not  posses.  Ah !  sir,  it 
was  like  a  bed  of  beautiful  roses,  inviting  to  the 
eye,  but  it  contained  within  it  an  asp,  and  if  we 
lay  our  hand  upon  it  the  poison  of  the  asp  will 
be  felt. 

It  is  attempted  to  be  maintained  that  the  leg- 
islature are  the  people  themselves.  I  ask  you  to 
look  back  for  a  few  years  at  the  action  of  our 
legislature,  and  then  say  if  the  people,  regarding 
the  legislature  as  the  people,  are  capable  of  self- 
government.  I  say  the  position  cannot  be  main- 
tained, if  we  take  the  action  of  the  legislature 
for  the  action  of  the  people  themselves.  What 
is  the  fact  ?  One  year  the  legislature  is  here  as- 
sembled, engaged  in  enacting  laws  b\'  which  the 
commonwealth  is  to  be  governed.  They  return 
to  their  constituents;  and,  as  remarked  by  tlie 
gentleman  from  Kenton,  it  frequently  happens, 
that  not  one-third  of  those  who  were  engaged  in 
enacting  those  laws,  are  returned  to  the  next 
legislature.  Their  constituents  say  to  them,  you 
have  not  been  good  and  faithful  servants;  we 
must  elect  those  who  will  carry  out  our  views. 

One  of  the  great  disadvantages  of  a  republican 
government  is,  that  we  have  to  delegate  our  au- 
thority. We  are  here  representing  the  people  of 
Kentucky,  but  are  we  the  people?  Xo  sir,  we 
are  acting  with  delegated  authority.  If  we  do 
their  will,  we  shall  receive  their  approbation, 
and  our  work  will  be  sustained  by  an  overwhelm- 
ing power  in  the  commonwealth.  But  is  it  not 
a  fact,  that  the  people  from  one  end  of  this  great 
commonwealth  to  the  other,  have  looked  and  are 
still  looking  upon  our  action  here  with  great 
jealousy?  That  is  from  the  fact  that  our  power 
is  delegated  to  us;  that  they  have  entrusted  to  the 
action  of  a  few  men,  the  interests  of  this  great 
commonwealth. 

The  gentleman  who  was  last  up  presented  this 
to  my  mind  in  rather  a  startling  point  of  view. 
He  says  that  his  voice  is  for  maintaining  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  people;  that  he  has  full  confi- 
dence in  their  capacity  for  self-government. — 
And  how  does  he  demonstrate  this?  He  says 
he  believes  that  the  power  to  elect  the  judiciar}' 
ought  not  to  be  entrusted  to  their  hands.  What 
was  it  that  led  him  to  this  conclusion?  He  says 
that  the  people  will  demonstrate  their  imbecility; 
that  when  the  election  of  the  officers  of  govern- 
ment is  thrown  upon  the  people,  their  imbecility 
will  be  demonstrated  in  their  action.  I  believe 
that  the  people  have  the  capacity  to  elect  any  of 
the  officers  of  the  government. 

Mr.  XUTTALL.  I  wish  to  be  distinctly  un- 
derstood in  regard  to  this  matter,  because  it  is  to 
be  a  matter  of  record.  The  ground  which  I  took 
before  my  constituents,  and  which  I  take  now 
is,  that  the  people  are  qualified  to  elect  every 
officer  of  the  government,  from  the  president 
down  to  a  constable;  but  that  in  the  case  of  a 
judge,  though  the  people  are  not  disqualified  to 


166 


elect  him,  yet  from  the  fact  of  his  receiving  his 
appointment  in  that  way,  it  operates  as  a  dis- 
qualification \ipon  him.  That  is  the  ground  I 
take. 

Mr.  MACEEX.  I  understand  then,  tliat  the 
epirit  of  the  proposition  which  I  made  has  not 
been  controverted.  If,  sir,  the  exercise  of  the 
power  that  is  here  intended,  as  I  trust,  to  be 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  people,  is  to  operate 
as  a  disqualification  of  those  who  are  to  carry 
on  the  operations  of  the  government,  I  affirm 
that  according  to  any  system  of  reasoning  with 
which  I  am  acquaint«a,  it  must  result  in  a  dis- 
qualification of  the  people  themselves  to  control 
the  government.  Now,  what  is  to  be  the  effect 
of  the  adoption  of  this  principle?  The  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  has  clearly  indicated  that  he 
intends  that  the  principle  shall  extend  to  all  the 
officers  of  the  government,  from  the  governor 
down  to  a  constable.  What  will  be  the  condi- 
tion of  the  governor  under  such  a  system?  The 
legislature  meets  and  pas.ses  a  law,  which  on 
account  of  a  constitutional  objection,  the  gov- 
ernor is  compelled  to  return  to  them  without  his 
sanction.  What  will  be  the  action  of  that  body? 
They  will  say,  "sir,  you  have  stepped  in  between 
the  rights  of  the  people  and  the  interests  of  those 
for  whose  benefit  the  law  was  passed;  you  shall 
no  longer  be  governor."  And  what  is  to  be  the 
remedy?  Ah,  gentlemen  say,  go  back  to  your 
constituents  and  defend  your  conduct.  Will 
that  restore  the  governor  to  his  position?  Will 
that  secure  vou  against  the  evils  which  are  inci- 
dent to  sucli  a  power  in  the  legislative  depart- 
ment?    No,  sir,  it  will  not  do  it. 

I  did  not  intend  when  I  rose,  to  detain  the 
house  as  long  as  I  have.  I  have  not  attempted 
to  arrange  what  few  ideas  I  entertain  on  the  sub- 
ject, in  any  thing  like  a  correct  form.  I  know 
that  upon  my  tongue  there  is  no  syren  sound, 
that  is  calculated  to  attract  those  who  listen 
long.  I  have  lived  long  enough,  however,  to 
feel  that  this  is  one  of  those  important  princi- 
ples upon  which  will  depend  the  good  order,  or 
the  confusion,  attendant  upon  the  operations  of 
the  government.  It  is  important,  if  you  would 
secure  harmony  and  good  order,  that  each  de- 
partment of  the  government  should  be  kept  sep- 
arate, and  made  to  feel  its  independence.  There 
are  many  ways  in  which,  if  this  principle  be  car- 
ried out,  it  will  operate  injuriously  to  the  inter- 
ests of  the  people.  It  is  not  necessary  to  speci- 
fy them;  the  intellectual  vision  of  gentlemen 
will  readily  suggest  them.  I  shall  vote  against 
the  motion  to  strike  out,  for  it  is  my  firm  con- 
viction that  the  power  here  contemplated  to  be 
given  to  a  maionty  should  never  be  exercised, 
unless  two-thirds  at  least  of  the  assembled  wis- 
dom of  the  state  pronounce  in  favor  of  it,  and 
this  is  what  the  people  will  sanction. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  The  proposition  before 
the  committee  is  this:  whether,  when  a  judge  is 
brought  before  the  legislature,  it  shall  require 
a  vote  of  two  thirds  to  remove  him,  or  tlio  vote 
of  a  bare  majority.  Now  who  is  it  that  pro- 
proses  this  tribunal  to  remove  a  judge?  From 
the  arguments  that  I  liave  heard  here,  I  appre- 
hend it  is  supposed  that  the  legislature  is  sub- 
ject to  all  the  improper  influences  that  can  be 
brought  to  bear  upon  man.  Who  is  it  that  pro- 
poses that  this  power  shall  be  placed   in  the  I 


hands  of  tlie  legislature?  Why,  the  proposition 
came  from  the  committee  on  the  judiciary.  If 
that  department  is  not  the  proper  tribunal  to  ex- 
ercise this  power,  why  did  you  propose  it?  why 
did  you  not  propose  some  other,  if  the  legisla- 
ture is  not  to  be  trusted?  This  power  has  exist- 
ed in  the  legislative  department  of  the  govern- 
ment from  the  year  1792  under  the  old  constitu- 
tion and  under  the  present  constitution  up  to 
this  hour;  and  I  call  upon  gentlemen  to  point 
out  an  instance  when  this  two  third  power  has 
ever  been  carried  into  effect.  Sir,  it  has  remain- 
ed a  dead  letter  in  both  the  old  and  the  present 
constitution.  What  is  the  effect  of  it?  Suppose 
the  legislature  is  liable  to  all  the  improper  in- 
fluences suggested  by  gentlemen.  There  are 
one  hundred  and  thirty  eight  men  in  the  two 
houses.  A  judge  is  brought  before  them  for 
malfeasance  in  office.  Ninety  one  say  that  he 
is  guilty,  and  forty  seven  say  he  is  not.  How 
does  the  rule  operate?  Why,  according  to  the 
proposition  of  those  who  advocate  the  two  thirds 
system  the  fortyseven  are  to  rule  the  ninety  one. 
Is  this  republicanism?  I  say  it  is  not.  Are  not 
the  forty  seven  more  liable  to  improper  influen- 
ces than  the  ninety  one?  Most  imdoubtedly. 
Sir,  the  same  argument  that  I  have  heard  urged 
in  favor  of  this  two  thirds  rule  I  have  heard 
urged  against  the  election  of  the  judges  by  the 
people.  I  have  no  doubt  if  you  take  the  vote 
of  the  judges  on  the  subject  the  two  thirds  rule 
will  be  adopted;  but  if  you  carry  it  to  the  peo- 
ple they  will  decide  that  a  majority  shall  rule. 
That  is  the  principle  that  should  be  carried 
through  every  department  of  the  government. 
If  the  legislature  is  not  the  proper  department 
to  be  entrusted  with  this  power,  then  select  some 
other;  but  if  it  is  the  department  that  is  to  ex- 
ercise the  power,  then  let  the  republican  princi- 
ple apply,  that  a  majority  shall  rule. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE,  the 
committee  rose,  reported  progress,  and  obtained 
leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


miDAY,  OCTOBER  19,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  R041NSON. 

EVENING    SESSIONS. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  submitted  a  resolution,  as  fol- 
lows : 

Resolved,  That  after  Monday  next  this  conven- 
tion will  hold  a  morning  and  an  evening  session, 
the  evening  session  to  commence  each  day  at  3 
o'clock. 

He  said  he  did  not  deem  it  necessary  to  say 
any  tiling  in  favor  of  this  resolution.  It  was 
well  known  to  the  whole  country  that  one  of  the 
objects  in  calling  this  convention  was,  that  there 
should  be  economy  secured  in  the  expendi- 
tures of  the  state.  This  convention  had  already 
spent  much  time  in  tlie  discussion  of  abstract 
principles  which  had  been  well  settled  in  the  pri- 
mary a.ssemblie.s  of  the  people.  He  hoped  the 
convention  would  adopt  the  resolution,  that 
they  might  be  enabled  to  do  the  business  for  the 
state  of  Kentucky,  to  do  which  the  people  had 


167 


sent  them  here.  On  the  resolution  he  called  for 
the  veas  and  nays. 

ifr.  BOYD  suggested  an  amendment,  so  as  to 
provide  that  the  morning  session  should  com- 
mence at  9  o'clock. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  accepted  the  amendment,  and 
the  resolution,  as  amended,  "was  as  foUo^vs : 

Resolved,  That  after  Monday  next  the  conven- 
tion will  hold  a  morning  and  evening  session — 
the  morning  session  to  commence  each  day  at  9 
o'clock  and  the  evening  session  at  3  o'clock. 

Mr.  IRWIX  was  as  desirous  to  secure  econo- 
my as  any  gentleman  on  this  floor,  and  he  was 
as  anxious  that  they  should  get  through  the  la- 
bors which  devolved  upon  them  here.  He  was 
anxious  to  return  to  his  own  business,  which  re- 
quired his  attention,  but  the  people  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky  had  entrusted  to  them  the  import- 
ant duty  of  making  a  constitution  under  which 
they  were  hereafter  to  be  governed,  and  so  im- 
portant a  work  should  not  be  done  in  a  hurry. 
It  was  not  only  necessary  to  do  their  work,  but 
to  do  it  well,  and  thus  to  guard  against  some  of 
the  consequences  of  unnecessary  haste.  And 
what  was  the  state  of  things  here?  Why,  from 
several  committees,  the  convention  had,  as  yet, 
received  no  report.  These  committees  were  in 
session  daily,  and  their  hour  of  meeting  was 
three  o'clock.  How  then  could  they  meet  here 
at  three  o'clock,  without  interfering  with  their 
business,  in  the  committee  room,  on  which  the 
progress  of  business  in  the  convention  so  much 
depended?  The  committee  on  contested  elec- 
tions would  meet  to-day  at  three  o'clock,  whieh 
many  members  of  the  convention  were  desirous 
to  attend.  This  was  a  fact  which  would  show 
the  convention  that  all  its  business  was  not  con- 
fined to  this  hall;  and  he  was  well  satisfied  that 
it  was  too  early  a  period  to  adopt  the  resolution 
which  had  been  just  offered. 

With  respect  to  the  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
which  he  presumed  was  to  affect  individuals  at 
home,  by  showing  that  certain  delegates  were 
more  anxious  than  others  to  secure  economy  in  the 
expenditures  of  the  State,  he  would  merely  ob- 
serve that  he  was  not  thereby  to  be  driven  from 
giving  such  a  vote  as  in  his  judgment  he  be- 
lieved to  be  right.  Xo  effect  to  be  produced  by 
it  hereafter  would  change  his  course  of  action, 
when  he  conscientiously  believed  that  evening 
sessions  at  this  time  would  rather  retard  than  fa- 
cilitate the  business  of  the  convention.  He  real- 
ly thought  that  the  resolution  ought  not  to  be 
id  opted. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  thought  he  should  be 
prepared  to  vote  for  this  resolution  a  week  hence, 
out  at  present  there  were  some  twoor  three  stand- 
ing committees  which  had  made  no  reports. — 
These  committees  met  at  three  o'clock  in  the  af- 
ternoon, but  in  the  course  of  a  week  he  thought 
they  would  be  prepared  to  devote  more  time  to 
business  in  convention.  If  he  had  any  particu- 
lar reputation  it  was  that  of  being  a  laborious 
and  industrious  man;  and  he  was  as  anxious  as 
any  gentleman  to  make  rapid  progress  with  the 
business  which  they  had  come  to  accomplish; 
but  at  present  they  were  not  prepared  for  the 
adoption  of  this  resolution.  He  would  therefore 
move  that  this  resolution  be  postponed  until 
Monday  week,  when  he  would  call  it  up  again 
if  nobody  else  did. 


Mr.  HARDlX  remarked  that  it  had  been  sug- 
gested to  him  that  the  three  committees  on  the 
various  branches  of  the  judiciary — the  court  of 
appeals,  the  circuit  courts,  and  the  county  courts 
—should,  aft<ir  they  had  finishe<l  their  several 
labors,  have  ajoiut  meeting  for  the  purpose  of 
attempting  to  unite  upon  some  harmonious  sys- 
tem as  a  whole.  The  reports  as  they  now  stood, 
did  not  harmonize.  He  thought  it  a  very  sensi- 
ble suggestion  and  hoped  it  would  be  acted  up- 
on, and  that  the  discussion  on  the  judiciary 
should  cease  until  the  result  of  that  action  was 
known.  All  he  desired  was  to  secure  that  har- 
monious action  which  would  produce  the  best 
possible  system.  All  came  here  for  that  object, 
and  all  seemed  to  concur  on  several  of  the  prom- 
inent principles  that  were  to  be  acted  upon  by 
this  convention.  He  hoped  they  would  harmo- 
nize, and  the  result  be,  that  they  would  give  to 
the  people  such  a  constitution  as  that  genera- 
tions for  time  to  come  would  say,  "  God  bless 
the  convention  of  1849." 

Mr.  PROCTOR  was  as  anxious  as  any  one 
that  full  time  and  deliberation  should  be  allow- 
ed in  the  performance  of  the  labors  of  the  con- 
vention, but  from  his  observation  of  the  pro- 
ceedings, he  thought  his  proposition  would  af- 
ford ample  time  to  the  committees  for  any 
such  purpose.  If  every  subject*  was  to  be  dis- 
cussed to  the  extent  which  those  under  consider- 
ation had  been,  he  did  not  believe  they  would 
get  through  their  labors  until  after  Christmas, 
unless  the  convention  sat  more  hours  daily.  In 
calling  for  the  ayes  and  noes  his  object  was  not 
to  influence  any  gentleman  in  his  vote,  and  he 
presumed  the  call  would  exert  no  such  influence. 
As  gentlemen  of  more  experience  than  him- 
self seemed  to  regard  it  as  the  best  plan,  he  had 
no  objection  to  the  suggestion  of  the  gentleman 
from  jN  elson  (Mr.  Wickliffie.) 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  that  the  sugges- 
tion to  which  his  colleague  had  referred  was 
based  upon  the  idea  that  the  great  principles  up- 
on which  this  new  svstem  of  a  judiciary  was  to 
be  organized,  shoul<l  be  first  determined  by  a 
vote  of  the  house.  The  committees  could  tlien 
harmonize  so  far  as  its  details  were  concerned. 
He  did  not  wish  to  beunderstood  as  desiring  that 
the  committees  in  joint  meeting  should  settle 
upon  the  principles,  because  it  would  be  no  final 
determination  if  they  did,  as  the  matter  would 
still  have  to  be  decided  in  the  house.  He  hoped 
the  resolution  would  be  postponed.  While  he 
was  willing  to  second  all  efforts  to  further  the 
business  of  the  house,  he  did  not  want  to  act 
hastily  on  a  work  of  so  important  a  character  as 
this.  It  was  not  like  the  ordinary  legislation  of 
this  country  which  could  undo  on  one  day  what 
had  been  done  the  day  preceding. 

The  resolution  was  by  consent  postponed  un- 
til Monday  week. 

LEAVE   OF   ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BARLOW,  leave  of  ab- 
sence until  Monday  week  was  granted  to  Mr. 
Hamilton. 

PROPOSAL  TO  TEHIUXATZ  DEBATE. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  that  all  debate  in  commit- 
tee of  the  whole  on  the  amendment  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  to  the  re- 


16$ 


port  made  from  the  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals,  be  terminated  at  1  o'clock  this  day,  and 
that  the  committee  shall  then  proceed  to  vote 
thereon.  He  said  he  made  this  motion  with  a 
view  to  expedite  the  business  of  the  convention. 
In  the  course  of  a  few  days  it  might  be  necessa- 
ry that  he  should  be  absent  for  a  brief  period, 
and  as  it  had  been  suggested  that  the  question 
involved  a  greater  responsibility  than  any  other 
that  had  arisen  during  their  deliberations,  he 
desired  the  opportunity  of  voting  against  the 
amendment.  He  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  his  motion. 

The  PRESIDENT  had  some  doubt  whether 
the  motion  was  in  order,  for  the  report  referred 
to  was  in  the  possession  of  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  and  was  not  now  before  the  convention. 
He  did  not  see  how  they  could  reach  it  while  it 
was  in  committee  of  the  whole. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  that  the  mo- 
tion would  be  in  order,  if  made  so  as  to  instruct 
the  committee  to  rise  and  report  upon  the  amend- 
ment at  a  certain  hour.  The  committee  certain- 
ly were  bound  to  obey  the  instructions  of  the 
house.  But  he  should  vote  against  any  motion 
to  arrest  debate,  believing  that,  although  it  had 
consumed  something  like  two  days,  it  had  not 
been  unprofitable  to  the  house  and  the  country. 
It  was  too  important  a  question  to  decide 
without  full  debate,  and  as  the  mover  of  the 
amendment,  and  others  desired  to  be  heard  up- 
on it,  he  believed  they  should  have  that  op- 
portunity. Like  the  gentleman  he  was  anxious, 
and  indeed  he  Avas  compelled  to  be  absent  for  a 
few  days,  but  if  public  duty  required  him  to 
stay,  his  individual  interests  must  take  their 
chance. 

Mr.  HARDIN  would  do  any  thing  in  the 
world  to  accommodate  the  gentleman  from 
Washington,  but  it  was  impossible  that  he  could 
get  a  vote  on  the  amendment  at  one  o'clock  to- 
day. The  whole  article  had  to  be  gone  through 
with  in  committee  before  it  was  reported,  and 
the  ayes  and  noes  could  only  be  called  after  it 
had  come  back  to  the  house.    By  that  time  both 

fentlemen  would  have  returned  to  the  house, 
'here  were  a  great  many  propositions  connected 
with  this  article  that  would  elicit  discussion. 
There  was  the  question  in  relation  to  the  four 
judges — another  in  relation  to  the  eight  years 
term — and  then  there  was  the  question  of  eligi- 
bility on  which  undoubtedly  there  was  a  formi- 
dable battle  to  be  fought.  That  was  the  place 
where  he  meant  to  make  a  stand  if  he  had  to 
die  in  the  ditch.  This  was  the  leading  bill  of 
the  house,  and  opportunity  ought  to  be  afforded 
for  a  full  discussion  upon  it.  He  did  not  know 
whether  he  should  speak  again  on  the  subject  or 
not,  such  was  the  feeble  condition  of  his  health, 
but  he  was  willing  to  forego  any  remarks  on 
that  point.  But  on  the  great  question  of  eligibility 
or  re-eligibility,  he  did  desire  to  be  heard  at 
some  length.  He  desired  also  to  be  heard  on 
the  question  as  to  the  manner  of  voting.  He  was 
in  favor  of  the  viva  voce  system  and  wished  it 
applied  to  all  oflRsers  that  were  to  be  elected.  He 
had  no  idea  that  the  manner  of  voting  for  a  judge 
should  be  different.  They  were  not  the  sun, 
that  we  were  obliged  to  look  at  them  through  a 
smoked  glasn,  and  he  was  willing  to  look  them 
in  the  face  and  vote  ayv  or  no,  as  Tic  chose. 


Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  said  that  his  colleague 
had  taken  the  occasion  in  his  own  peculiarway, 
to  give  notice  of  his  future  opposition  to  the 
bill.  For  this  he  was  very  much  obliged,  and 
had  the  gentleman  given  the  same  notice  on  the 
question  under  consideration,  he  (Mr.  W.)  Avould 
perhaps  have  been  better  prepared  to  meet  the 
subject  than  he  was  when  it  was  sprung  upon 
him  the  other  day. 

Here  the  conversation  dropped  without  any 
action  on  the  motion,  the  President  having  de- 
cided that  it  was  out  of  order. 

REPORT   OF   A   COMMITTEE. 

Mr.  McHENRY,  from  the  committee  on  mis- 
cellaneous provisions  made  a  report  as  follows, 
which  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole 
and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

PREAMBLE. 

We,  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  the 
state  of  Kentucky,  in  convention  assembled,  to 
secure  to  all  the  citizens  thereof  the  enjoyment 
of  the  rights  of  life,  liberty,  and  property,  and 
of  pursuing  happiness,  do  ordain  and  establish 
this  constitution  for  its  government. 

ARTICLE  1. 

Concerning  the  distribution  of  the  powers  of  the 
government. 

Sec.  1.  The  powers  of  the  Government  of  the 
state  of  Kentucky  shall  be  divided  into  three  dis- 
tinct departments,  and  each  of  them  be  confided 
to  a  separate  body  of  magistracy,  to-wit:  those 
which  are  legislative  to  one;  those  which  are  ex- 
ecutive to  another,  and  those  which  are  judiciary 
to  another. 

Sec.  2.  No  person,  or  collection  of  persons, 
being  of  one  of  those  departments,  shall  exer- 
cise any  power  properly  belonging  to  either  of 
the  others,  except  in  the  instances  hereinafter 
expressly  directed  or  permitted. 

COURT   OF    appeals. 

The  convention  then  again  resolved  itself  into 
committee  of  the  whole,  on  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  Mr.  HUSTON 
in  the  chair. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  been  a  listen- 
er during  the  whole  sitting  of  this  convention, 
and  I  have  derived  much  more  gratification 
thereby,  than  I  expect  to  impart  by  speaking  any 
crude  notions  of  my  own.  The  committee  on 
the  court  of  appeals  have  submitted  their  report 
proposing  some  very  serious  innovations  upon 
our  present  judiciary  system.  They  propose  to 
elect  the  judges,  to  fix  their  term  of  office  at  eight 
years,  and  to  make  them  responsible  to  at  least 
two-tliirds  of  the  legislature.  The  gentleman 
from  Nelson  in  his  amendment  now  under  con- 
sideration, proposes  to  make  them  responsi- 
ble not  to  two-tnirds  of  both  branches  of  tlie  le- 
gislature, but  to  a  majority  of  both  branches.  I 
shall  vote  for  that  amendment,  and  I  shall  vote 
also  for  the  proposition  of  the  committee  to  elect 
the  judges.  As  a  part  of  the  means  to  secure  that 
responsibility  of  the  judge,  heretofore  needed, 
tlie  committee  propose  to  elect  him  for  the  limit- 
ed term  of  eight  years.  For  the  purpose  of  se- 
curing a  more  immediate  and  practicable  re- 
sponsibility than  that  limited  term  of  office  of  it- 


169 


self  provides,  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  has 
proposed  his  amen<lment.     I  shall  vote  "with  the 
committee  to  elect  the  judge,  and  with  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  to  secure  a  more  efficient 
and  practical  responsibility.      In  giving  either 
or  both  of  these  votes  it  is  possible  that  I  shall 
differ  from  those  who  give  me  authority  to  vote 
at  all  in  this  convention.      I  "was   elected  here, 
like  some  other  gentlemen  perhaps,  upon  another 
issue;  a  question  which  at  the  time  was  thought 
to  involve  danger,  fearful  and  threatening  enough 
to  obliterate  all  the  ancient  landmarks  bj  which 
parties  have  been  characterized.     The  subject  to 
Avhich  I  refer,  has  eugaged  the  attention  of  the 
convention  for  the  last  ten  days,  and  it  is  a  ques 
tion  which  I  had  thought  was  settled,  eternally 
settled  by  the  popular  voice  in  a  manner  so  de- 
cided as  to  leave  no  room  for  cavil.      When   it 
comes  up  again,  I  may  desire  to  say  something 
upon  it — and  I  allude  to   it   now,   oidy  for  the 
purpose  of  showing  how  it  was  I  came  here  at 
all,  and  why  it  is  that  on  these  questions  of  an 
elective  judiciary,  and  judicial  responsibility,  I 
may  differ  from  my  fellow-citizens   whose  good 
opinion  I  so  deeply  regard.     But  whatever  may 
be  the  effect  of  tne  vote  I  may  give,  I  have  this 
to  console  me — that  I  never  practised  any  con- 
cealment to  secure  their  suffrages.      I  was  guilty 
of  no  hypocritical  pretences  to  secure  a  seat  on 
this  floor.     So  far  from  that,  day  after  day,  du- 
ring the  canvass,  it  was  imputed  to  me  that  my 
views  on  particular  subjects,  were  of  too  radical 
and  revolutionary  a  character,  as  I  believe  my 
friend  from  Bourbon  has  designated  them.      If, 
therefore,  I   differ  from  the  people   of  Fayette 
county,  it  will  be  a  fair  difference  of  opinion  be- 
tween them  and  me,  and  presenting  on  ray  part 
no  violation  of  pledged  faith,  no  broken  promis- 
es, or  disregard  of  understood  obligation.     I  say 
it  is  possible  I   may  differ  from  them,  but  the 
question  is  one  which  has  never  been  much  dis- 
cussed in  that  county.      A  few  years  ago,  a  man 
would  have  been  laughed  at,  if  he  talked  about 
electing   a  judge,  or  of  securing  that  responsi- 
bility for  the   faithful  discharge   of  his  duties 
that  is  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson. 
And  at  first  blush  we  all  shrink  from  the  idea. 
There  is  no  principle  more  universal  in  the  hu- 
man breast,  than  that  which  induces  us  to  shrink 
from  any  change  that  trenches  on  those  syst«ms 
of  labor  and   habits  of  thought,  to   which   we 
have  been  accustomed  for  years,  and  which  are 
hallowed  perhaps  by  the  memories  of  past  days. 
But  this  is  not  the  age,  nor  is  this  the  people  to 
be  content  with   the  argument  that  because  a 
thing  has  been,  therefore  it  must  be. 

It  is  a  misfortune,  or  a  fact  whether  it  be  a  mis- 
fortune or  not,  that  the  profession  of  which  I 
have  the  honor  to  be  a  member,  learned  as  it  is, 
honorable  as  it  is,  and  ancient  as  it  is,  is  always 
the  very  last  to  give  up  any  antiquated  theory 
or  practice,  connected  with  the  judicial  depart- 
ment of  the  government.  Whenever  it  under- 
goes any  reform,  the  duty  has  to  be  done  by 
those  outside  the  court  house,  and  without  the 
co-operation  of  those  who  minister  at  the  altar 
of  justice.  Instead  of  our  leading,  as  we  are  apt 
to  do,  in  regard  to  all  other  great  and  saluta- 
ry reforms,  w^e  here  have  to  follow  in  the  wake 
of  those  who  originated  this  great  principle, 

22 


and  to  whom  will  belong  all  the  honor,  if  it  is 

successful. 

Now  it  is  useless  to  allude  to  the  causes  which 
produce  this  state  of  things.  There  are  many 
of  them,  but  perhaps  the  most  obvious  one  is 
this:  the  very  first  book  we  read  reveals  to  us 
some  political  notions  that  may  do  very  well  for 
the  country  we  came  from,  but  which  is  found  to 
be  utterly  false  when  we  come  to  apply  them  to 
the  organization  of  government  as  it  exists 
among  us.  We  read  in  Blackstone  about  an 
independent  judiciary,  and  we  have  heard  of  it 
in  this  hall  from  all  the  distinguished  gentlemen 
who  have  addressed  the  committee.  We  read 
about  an  independent  judiciary,  and  when- 
ever any  attempt  is  made  to  infuse  an  ele- 
ment of  responsibility  into  that  department 
of  the  government,  liie  that  proposed  by  the 
committee,  or  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  it 
is  always  met  with  the  cry,  you  are  violating 
that  sacred  principle  so  essential  to  the  safety  of 
the  government,  and  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary. The  words  "independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary" have  a  meaning,  a  full  meaning  in  Eng- 
land. There  is  not  a  page  of  British  history — 
full  as  it  is  of  deeds  of  renown ,  both  civil  and 
military,  that  give  character  and  dignity  to  the 
race  from  which  we  sprang — ^brighter  than 
that  wliich  records  the  struggles  of  the 
English  judiciary  in  behalf  of  English  lib- 
erty. The  kiug  formerly  appointed  ms  judges, 
for  they  were  called  his'  judges — ^to  hold  their 
ofiices  during  his  will  and  pleasure,  and  they 
were  paid  by  him,  and  were  responsible  to  no 
body  else.  And  now  refer  to  the  statute  books 
of  ]£ngland  and  see  the  number  of  crimes  which 
the  subject  is  capable  of  committing  against  his 
royal  majesty,  and  you  will  not  be  surprized 
that  the  king  was  in  constant  struggle  with  his 
people.  And  who  could  doubt  the  result  of 
such  struggles  where  the  king  had  only  to  point 
to  the  suQect  and  nod  to  the  judge?  What 
was  the  first  great  struggle  for  English  liberty? 
It  was  to  change  the  tenure  by  which  the  judge 
held  office  during  the  will  of  the  king  to  the 
right  of  holding  it  during  good  behavior.  That 
was  the  great  struggle  for  English  liberty. 

And  it  was  not  fully  achieved  until  as  late 
as  the  reign  of  William  and  Mary,  after  the 
revolution.  But  mark  you  now,  the  very  men, 
and  they  were  wise  and  great  men,  who  made 
this  change — ^that  he  should  hold  during  good 
behavior — also  fixed  the  responsibility  of  the 
judge  not  to  the  king  but  to  the  parlfament — 
where  men  speak  their  minds  according  to  the 
definition  of  the  word  and  not  to  two  thirds  but 
to  a  majority,  both  houses  concurring.  That  is 
what  they  did.  What  did  they  do  next?  When 
the  king  died,  the  judges'  commission  became 
vacant,  and  thus  the  officer  was  still  made  de- 
pendant on  the  crown.  And  when  the  new 
monarch  ascended  the  throne,  this  power  to  re- 
appoint the  judges  gave  him  a  vast  patronage, 
and  enabled  him  to  create  on  the  part  of  the 
judge  some  feeling  of  obligation  to  the  crown. 
It  became  then  another  struggle  of  English  lib- 
erty to  rectify  that  error,  and  that  was  not 
aefiieved  I  think  until  the  time  of  George  the 
Third.  Then  the  act  was  passed  continuing  the 
judge  in  office,  notwithstanding  the  king  should 
die,  and  the  independence  of  Uie  English  Jndi- 


170 


ciary  was  fully  established.  It  was  in  this  way 
that  it  became  entitled  to  all  the  endearing  re- 
collections, with  which  we  regard  it  at  this  day. 
No  page  of  British  history — no  period  in  all  the 
English  struggles  for  lioerty — not  even  that 
when  the  barons  farced  king  John  at  Runny- 
mede  to  sign  magna  charta — not  even  all  the 
wars  against  all  the  kingly  prerogative  which 
ended  in  the  revolution,  and  the  decapitation  of 
the  king — none  present  an  instance  where  the 
ancient  spirit  of  old  English  liberty  was  more 
indomitably  and  triumphantly  developed  than 
in  stripping  the  king  of  the  power  lie  had  over 
the  judiciary.  No  longer  could  he  prosecute  and 
punish  in  a  court  of  his  own  contriving,  and  be- 
fore a  judge  of  his  own  appointment,  either  for 
cause  or  upon  pretext,  the  subject  whom  he 
might  think  dangerous  to  the  throne. 

Here  ended  tlie  struggle  of  English  liberty. 
It  ended  too  soon,  as  we  think  in  this  country, 
and  as  I  believe  it  has  always  ended  in  England. 
"When  they  forced  king  James  to  resign  the 
crown,  they  simply  submitted  to  the  house  of 
Hanover.  "When  we  rejected  the  authority  of 
George  the  Third,  we  did  not  import  a  Dutch 
Stadtholder  to  reign  over  us,  but  "we  went  to 
work  and  formed  a  republican  government  in 
which  we  infused  these  elements  of  English 
liberty.     But  mark  you,  we  commenced  at  the 

f)oint  where  the  struggle  for  English  liberty  had 
eft  this  thing.  They  left  the  power  of  appoint- 
ing the  judge  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  the  ex- 
ecutive branch  of  the  government,  to  hold  for 
good  behavior,  with  responsibility  to  the  parlia- 
ment. We  copied  in  this  particular  from  Eng- 
land, leaving  the  power  of  appointment  in  the 
hands  of  the  executive,  the  judge  to  hold  his 
office  during  good  behavior  with  responsibility 
to  the  legislature.  "We,  however,  w^ent  even 
beyond  the  British  parliament,  and  vested  the 
responsibility  in  two  thirds  of  both  branches  of 
the  legislature  instead  of  a  majority.  The 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  as  I 
understand  it,  seeks  to  restore  the  responsibility 
to  the  majority  as  it  exists  in  the  British  parlia- 
ment. Now  it  is  proposed  to  take  the  power  of 
appointment  from  the  executive  and  to  give  it  to 
the  people — the  judge  to  hold,  not  during  good 
behavior,  but  for  a  limited  tenn,  and  then  to  be 
responsible  to  the  people  in  their  representative 
capacity.  And  I  see  every  thing  to  justify  the 
principle  of  making  them  responsible  to  a  ma- 
jority, and  there  is  nothing  whatever  in  what  I 
nave  heard,  that  is  not  as  fully  applicable  to  the 
very  principle  of  electing  the  judges. 

"We  have  had  a  great  deal  of  new  light  upon 
this  matter  of  progress  in  constitutional  reform. 
It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  wise  men  who  fram- 
ed the  federal  constitution — pure  as  they  were — 
coming  as  they  did  just  from  the  very  fires  of 
the  revolution — did  not  think  that  the  people 
were  competent  to  elect  a  president.  They  look- 
ed to  the  past,  to  the  turbulent,  violent  democra- 
cies of  ancient  times,  and  that  brought  them  to 
the  melancholy  conclusion  that  the  people  were 
unsafe  depositories  of  power.  Hence  it  was  that 
they  interposed  the  body  of  electors  between  the 
people  and  the  candidate.  "What  are  they  for? 
It  was  intended  to  be  a  deliberative  body,  with 
power  to  choose  a  president  for  the  people,  but 
in  fiact  the  practice  is  otherwise.    They  have  be- 


come a  mere  ministerial  body,  to  do  simply  what 
the  people  have  called  them  to  do.  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  so  amending  the  federal  constitution  as  to 
dispense  with  all  that  machinery,  for  it  is  per- 
fectly useless.  And  there  is  some  danger  that 
after  a  while  it  may  be  perverted  to  harm, 
through  the  faithlessness  of  some  man  to  the 
trust  which  the  people  have  reposed  in  him.  I 
have  merely  referred  to  this  as  showing  you  the 
apprehension  entertained  at  one  time  as  to  the 
capacity  of  the  people  to  elect  their  officers. — 
Now,  I  believe  there  will  not  be  much  controver- 
sy as  to  the  propriety  of  the  people  electing 
even  their  judicial  officers.  And  why  is  it  pro- 
posed that  the  people  shall  elect  them?  Was  it 
not  for  the  purpose  of  securing  some  responsi- 
bility on  the  part  of  the  judiciary  to  the  people, 
whose  representatives  they  are?  And  if  tney 
are  to  have  so  long  a  term  as  eight  years,  would 
it  not  be  a  more  efficient  and  practical  responsi- 
bility if  they  were  held  accountable  to  the  le- 
gislature? Gentlemen  here  have  denounced  the 
legislative  department  of  government,  and  why 
that  particularity?  Has  the  judicial  department  of 
government  always  been  so  pure  and  immacu- 
late that  it  ought  not  to  be  held  to  accountabili- 
ty to  any  body?  How  were  they  in  the  times  of 
the  children  of  Israel  of  old?  vYe  are  told  that 
they  became  corrupt  and  were  deposed !  We  are 
told,  too,  that  in  the  Koman  empire,  in  the  days 
of  Cicero,  the  judges  became  so  corrupt  and 
bribery  so  common,  that  they  actually  boasted 
of  the  amounts  they  had  received  to  decide  cau- 
ses in  a  particular  Avay !  How  was  it  in  Eng- 
land before  the  revolution?  Were  they  not  hang- 
ing and  banishing  them  for  a  long  time?  But 
since  the  tenure  was  changed  to  good  behavior, 
with  responsibility  to  the  representatives  of  the 
people  in  parliament  assembled,  they  have  had, 
with  but  tew  exceptions,  the  best  judges  in  the 
world.  And  in  opposition  to  all  these  facts, 
gentlemen  were  constantly  referring  to  the  ex- 
cesses of  a  single  popular  assembly  in  revolu- 
tionary France,  as  showing  the  dangers  to  be  ap- 
prehended from  the  legislative  department.  And 
they  propose  too,  to  give  these  judges  an  eight 
years'  terra  of  office,  with  no  other  responsibili- 
ty than  that  they  shall  come  back  at  the  end  of 
tnat  time  to  the  people,  or  to  require  two-thirds 
of  both  branches  of  thelegislature  to  bring  them 
back  there  before  that  time.  This  Mr.  Jefferson 
long  since  pronounced  a  mere  scare  crow,  and 
the  history  of  the  country  shows  that  it  is  so. 

We  are  told  that  to  make  them  responsible  to 
a  majority  of  the  legislature,  would  be  to  de- 
stroy the  independence  of  a  department  of  the 
government.  1  do  not  understand  that  each  de- 
partment in  your  government  is  independent. — 
When  you  say  in  your  constitution  that  the  gov- 
ernment shall  be  divided  into  three  departments, 
you  mean  that  no  body  of  men  in  one  shall  ex- 
ercise the  powers  properly  belonging  to  the  oth- 
er; but  not  that  they  shall  all  of  them  be  irre- 
sponsible. How  is  it  now?  A  judge  has  the 
power  to  strike  your  legislative  act  dead.  Was 
that  not  an  interference  with  the  legislative  de- 
partment? The  president  of  the  United  States 
nas  a  qualified  veto  on  the  acts  of  congress,  and 
a  large  and  intelligent  body  of  gentlemen  think 
that  to  be  wrong,  although  he  is  elected  by,  and 
is  the  representative  of,  the  people !    Congress 


171 


may,  hovever,  pass  an  act  notwithstanding  the 
objections  of  the  president,  but  the  judge  in  the 
judicial  department  of  the  goremment,  not  re- 
sponsible to  the  people,  has  an  absolute  and  un- 
qualified veto  upon  every  act  of  congress.  In 
tne  name  of  Goa,  is  not  ttat  enough?  They  are 
said  to  be  be  co-equal  and  co-ordinate,  but  I  do 
not  think  so.  I  think  with  this  vast  power  in 
its  hands,  of  striking  every  act  of  the  legisla- 
ture dead,  the  supremacy  is  clearly  on  the  side 
of  the  judiciary.  And  if  we  are  to  give  them  a 
term  of  office  of  eight  years  duration,  we  must 

Erovide  some  other  checks  upon  them.  You  can 
ave  none  other  than  the  legislature.  All  say 
that  thev  are  willing  they  should  be  made  re- 
sponsibfe  to  the  people — but  that  would  clearly 
be  no  responsibility  at  all.  because  you  cannot 
assemble  the  immense  body  of  the  people  to  act 
upon  it.  The  only  place,  then,  where  you  can 
delegate  this  responsibility,  is  clearly  with  the 
legislative  department  of  the  government. — 
They  are  the  representatives  of  the  people,  and 
elected  every  year  by  the  people,  as  I  trust  in 
God  they  will  continue  to  be,  for  I  am  not  in  fa- 
vor of  biennial  sessions.  Frequency  of  politi- 
cal elections  is  a  cardinal  doctrine  with  me  in 
political  faith;  and  I  am  not  to  be  led  off  from  it 
by  the  mere  consideration  of  the  cost  of  assembling 
the  legislature  every  vear.  N^or  can  I  consent 
that  these  judges  sfiall  be  elected  by  ballot,  and 
nobody  else.  I  am  for  the  ballot,  and  I  would 
apply  the  principle  to  the  election  of  every  offi- 
cer in  the  government.  I  would  make  no  dis- 
tinction— and  permit  me  to  say  that  the  remark 
of  my  distinguished  friend  was  a  sad  one  on 
that  subject.  He  thought  that  it  was  necessary 
to  restrict  the  ballot  for  the  purpose  of  preserv- 
ing a  peculiar  institution  in  Kentucky!  I  have 
never  heard  such  an  argument  before. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  'J'he  gentleman  will 
pardon  me,  but  he  neither  could  have  heard  me 
or  read  my  printed  speech.  The  remark  I  made 
was,  that  I  was  attached,  from  long  habit,  to  the 
vica  voce  system  of  voting;  and  that  the  reasons 
which  perhaps  had  induced  other  states  to  adopt 
and  practice  the  system  of  voting  by  ballot,  did 
not,  and  would  not  exist  here,  as  they  were  sup- 
posed to  exist  there,  so  long  as  we  cherished  and 
maintained  our  present  domestic  institutions. — 
If  ot  that  the  viva  voce  system  was  necessary  to 
maintain  these  institutions,  but  that  the  main- 
tenance of  them  would  obviate  the  necessity  for 
the  existence  of  those  causes  which  have  driven 
other  states  to  the  adoption  of  the  ballot  sys- 
tem. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  very  happy  to 
hear  the  explanation  of  the  gentleman,  for  I  cer- 
tainly would  not  like  to  have  such  an  idea  go 
forth  with  the  sanction  of  the  distinguished  gen- 
tleman from  Xelson.  "We  have  had  enough  of 
appeals  to  the  non-slaveholder  against  the  slave- 
holder in  Kentucky.  There  was  not  a  county  in 
the  state  in  which  such  an  appeal  had  been  suc- 
cessful, and  what  was  it  that  had  composed  this 
body  as  it  is,  with  the  sentiments  they  entertain 
on  this  subject?  What  was  it  but  a  sense  of  jus- 
tice in  the  public  mind?  I  go  with  the  gentle- 
man from  Henderson,  (Mr  Dixon)  and  I  expect 
to  vote  in  favor  of  his  resolution,  declaring  that 
you  have  no  right  to  take  the  property  of  tie  cit- 
izen without  paying  him  for  it.    "You  have  no 


more  right  to  take  it  withont  due  compensation, 
than  the  non-stockholders  in  a  bank  have  a  right 
to  seize  on  the  bank's  money — and  there  is  not 
one  man  in  five  hundred  who  is  a  stockholder  in 
a  bank. 

Gentlemen  have  frequently  made  allusions  to 
the  ancient  democracies,  and  drawn  largely  from 
those  sources  for  illustration.  But  there  is  a 
principle,  it  should  be  recollected,  the  discovery 
of  modem  times,  of  which  those  democracies 
knew  nothing.  That  is  the  representative  prin- 
ciple. The  people  here  do  not  meet  together 
now,  as  they  did  in  olden  times,  even  when  it  is 
possible  for  them  to  do  so.  There  is  not  a  vil- 
lage in  the  state,  in  which  the  people  might  not 
meet  and  adopt  their  municipal  regulations. — 
Yet  do  they  not  elect  trustees  to  whom  they  con- 
fide their  business?  The  principle  has  become 
so  interwoven  with  the  hearts  and  customs  of 
the  people,  that  they  exercise  it  even  in  those  ca- 
ses where  they  could  easilv  meet  en  masse,  and 
transact  their  business.  "But  along  with  that 
principle  has  come  another,  and  without  it  the 
system  would  all  end  in  despotism.  That  is  the 
principle  of  periodical  responsibility  on  the  part 
of  any  man  delegated  to  office,  to  those  who  del- 
egated him.  It  is  responsibility  on  the  part  of 
the  public  agent,  not  only  to  tlie  people  them- 
selves, but  to  those  who  come  directly  to  the 
people,  and  who  alone  are  competent  to  bring 
him  to  the  public  scrutiny.  That  is  the  princi- 
ple, and  hence  I  shall  vote  for  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Xelson.  Then  we  shall 
have  responsibilities  directly  to  the  people  at  the 
end  of  eight  years,  as  provided  by  the  commit- 
tee, but  another,  and  a  better,  and  more  efficient 
responsibility  to  the  people's  representatives. — 
I  do  not  contend  that  the  legislature  is  the  peo- 
ple. But  they  are  the  representatives  of  the 
people,  elected  every  year,  and  coming  fresh 
from  the  people,  and  they  are  the  proper  deposi- 
tories of  the  duty  of  holding  to  accountability 
all  other  officers. 

I  had  not  designed  to  occupy  much  of  the 
time  of  the  committee,  and  I  rose  merely  for  the 
purpose  of  indicating  my  views  in  regard  to  an 
independent  judiciary.  I  have  done  so  frankly, 
though  perhaps  the  people  of  my  county  may 
not  entertain  the  same  views  that  I  do.  '  They 
may  be,  for  aught  I  know,  governed  bv  the 
views  of  a  distinguished  gentleman  in  Clarke, 
who  is  writing  and  circulating,  through  the 
public  press,  a  series  of  essays  in  which  he  takes 
the  very  grounds  in  arguing  against  an  elective 
judiciary — the  same  melancholy  strains  that 
gentlemen  do  here,  against  the  principle  of  pro- 
viding a  responsibility  on  the  part  of  the  judi- 
ciary to  the  legislative  department  of  govern- 
ment. 

I  shall  add  no  more,  though  perhaps  I  may 
avail  myself  of  a  parliamentary  privilege,  if  I 
think  proper,  and  write  out  my  views  a  little 
fuller  on  this  subject  than  I  have  here  delivered 
them. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  desire  to  occupy  for  a  few  mo- 
ments the  attention  of  the  committee,  while  I 
give  the  reasons  that  will  induce  me  to  dissent 
from  the  proposition  of  my  respected  friend 
from  If  elson.  I  have  been  taught,  from  my  earli- 
est infancy,  to  receive  whatever  should  come  from 
his  lips  as  being  dictated  by  the  purest  principles 


172 


of  patriotism,  and  as  having  been  suggested  by 
great  and  superior  wisdom  and  experience. 
And  I  am  very  sorry  that  on  this  occasion,  I 
cannot  give  ray  assent  to  the  proposition  which 
the  gentleman  has  suggested.  What  is  that 
proposition?  Why,  if  I  understand  it,  it  is  to 
strike  out  of  the  third  section  of  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  the  words, 
"that  shall  not  be  sufBcient  grounds  of  impeach- 
ment," with  a  view  if  I  understand  correctly, 
that  we  may  so  alter  and  so  frame  this  constitu- 
tion which  we  are  called  upon  to  make,  that 
there  shall  be  no  distinction  in  right  of  the  leg- 
islature to  remove  the  judges  from  office,  whether 
by  address  or  by  impeachment;  and  that  for  any 
matter  for  which  a  judge  shall  be  subject  to  im- 
peachment and  trial  by  a  court  that  is  to  consist 
of  the  Senate  upon  oath,  he  may  also  be  removed 
by  a  bare  majority  of  the  legislature.  Not  only 
judicial  but  executive  officers,  as  I  understand 
it,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  are  to  be  sub- 
ject to  this  same  tribunal.  That  is  the  question 
that  we  are  now  called  upon  to  consider.  And 
I  ask  you,  in  considering  this  question,  if  it  is  not 
necessary  to  understand  why  we  have  three  great 
departments  in  this  government?  Why  is  it 
that  the  wisdom  of  our  fathers,  wlio  framed  our 
general  government,  and  the  wisdom  of  those 
Avho  framed  all  our  state  governments,  have 
thought  proper  to  divide  and  distribute  the 
powers  of  government  into  three  distinct  depart- 
ments, and  to  give  to  each  depailment  a  separate 
body  of  magistracy?  If  I  understand  the  great 
principle  that  has  made  this  experiment  of  a 
free  government  successful,  it  is  that  there  has 
entered  into  it  the  provision  which  never  be- 
fore entered  into  any  government:  that  these 
three  departments  should  be  separate  and  inde- 
pendent. And  this  too  notwithstanding  the 
Sosition  of  the  gentleman  from  Fayette,  (Mr.  R. 
'.  Wickliffe,)  that  they  cannot  be  independent 
of  each  other.  It  has  been  my  learning  that 
these  departments  of  government  operate  as 
checks  and  balances  on  each  other,  and  thus  the 
one  would  prevent  the  other  from  exercising  any 
power  whicOi  did  not  properly  belong  to  it.  If 
these  are  true  principles,  if  they  lie  at  the  foun- 
dation of  our  government,  and  are  worth  main- 
ing  and  preserving  in  the  constitution  that  we  are 
called  upon  to  frame,  I  ask  you  if  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  is  not  calcu- 
lated to  subvert  and  destroy  them.  It  seems  to 
me  they  would  crumble  into  dust.  Now,  what 
are  the  arguments  that  gentlemen  offer  in 
support  of  that  proposition,  and  what  reasons 
do  they  give  here,  why  this  principle  should 
be  changed — a  principle  which  has  been  sanc- 
tioned by  the  authority  of  every  state  in  the 
union,  and  by  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States  itself.  I  ask,  sir,  what  reasons  do  gentle- 
men give  for  going  thus  against  the  experience 
and  the  history  of  the  country  from  its  founda- 
tion to  the  present  time.  Why,  the  gentleman 
says  this  is  a  republican  government,  and  here 
tlie  great  republican  principle  is  that  the  ma- 
jority must  rule,  and  that  they  can  do  no  wrong. 
That  is  the  only  position,  the  only  principle  that 
my  honorable  mend  has  urged  as  a  reason  for 
making  this  radical  change,  as  I  conceive  it  to 
be  in  the  principles  of  our  constitution.  I  will 
go  as  far  as  any  man,  in  saying  tliat  a  majority 


of  the  people  liave  the  right  to  rule,  and  to  frame 
and  fashion  their  government  as  they  tliink  will 
best  secure  their  rights,  but  how  and  when  are  they 
to  do  it?  Here  is  th(!  place,  and  we  are  delega- 
ted to  do  it.  Here  the  majority  of  the  people 
are  heard,  and  they  have  a  right  to  frame,  and  I 
trust  we  shall  frame  such  a  government  as  a  ma- 
jority on  this  floor  will  approve,  and  when  we 
submit  it  to  the  people  that  a  majority  will  rati- 
fy it. 

Then  can  that  objection  prevail  if  the  people, 
acting  here  in  their  sovereign  capacity  through 
their  representatives,  think  tliat  the  great  ends 
of  government,  the  security  of  the  life,  liberty, 
and  property  of  the  citizens  of  the  state,  will  be 
better  attained  by  having  the  provision  in  the 
constitution,  that  one  department  of  the  govern- 
ment shall  not  be  interfered  with  or  removed  by 
another  department — although  it  naay  be  as  the 
gentleman  has  said  the  representatives  of  the 
people,  unless  they  can  get  two  tliirds  of  their 
number  to  concur  therein.  We  have  the  same 
right  to  engraft  that  principle  on  the  constitu- 
tion, and  it  will  be  as  republican,  as  if  they 
thought  projjer  to  place  it  in  the  power  of  a  bare 
majority  of  the  legislature  to  override  and  con- 
trol the  other  departments  of  the  government. 

It  seems  to  me  that  all  the  rea.sons  that  gen- 
tlemen have  offered  for  this  change,  amount  to 
nothing  more  than  that.  The  honorable  gentle- 
man from  Fayette  has  gone  into  a  history  of  the 
judiciary  of  England,  to  state  and  show  us  that 
the  judiciary  there,  is  independent.  Why,  from 
the  gentleman's  speech,  I  presume  that  he  thinks 
that  it  is  far  better  and  more  independent  than  any 
judiciary  we  have  here  now,  or  that  we  will  have, 
after  we  have  organized  it  on  the  plan  proposed 
in  the  report  now  under  consideration.  He  tells 
us  that  the  judges  there  are  subject  and  respon- 
sible to  a  majority  of  the  parliament,  and  not 
to  two  thirds.  He  told  us  at  the  same  time,  that 
these  judges  derive  their  power  and  authority  by 
appointment  from  the  king.  Is  there  no  dfffer- 
euce  here?  Is  there  no  difference  in  the  propo- 
sition that  is  now  before  the  committee?  Do  we 
propose  that  anjr  king  shall  bestow  this  appoint- 
ment upon  the  judges,  or  that  any  other  one  in- 
dividual shall  do  it?  No,  sir,  the  proposition 
here  is  that  the  people  in  their  sovereign  capaci- 
ty shall  elect  these  judges.  And  I  ask  if  it  would 
not  be  the  height  of  folly  and  absurdity  whea 
they  give  them  the  rigJit  to  elect  their  judges,  to 
say  we  will  give  to  a  bare  majority,  an  accident- 
al one  perhaps,  of  the  legislature,  who  are  elect- 
ed by  the  same  power,  not  for  tlie  purpose  of 
making  judges,  but  to  attend  to  the  legislation 
of  the  country,  the  right  to  turn  out  all  the 
judges  in  the  commonwealth,  for  some  difference 
in  opinion  that  they  may  conceive  to  exist  be- 
tween them.  It  would  seem  to  me,  that  instead 
of  this  responsibility  that  the  gentleman  speaks 
of,  he  is  building  up  a  power  to  tear  down  and 
destroy  what  the  people  themselves  have  set  up. 
If  they  are  qualifica  to  elect  men  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  tlie  office  of  judge,  ought  there  to 
be  a  power  above  the  people,  a  bare  majority  of 
another  department  of  this  government  to  undo, 
to  tear  down  and  demolish  that  which  the  people 
have  built  up.  It  seems  to  me  a  strange  fallacy 
that  has  got  into  the  heads  of  some  of  ray  friends. 
But  the  gentleman  says  there  will  not  be  a  suffi- 


173 


cient  responsibility  to  the  people,  or  to  any  oth- 
er appointing  power.  Now,  would  it  not  be 
quite  as  proper  that  the  people  should  appoint 
some  power  to  regulate  tne  legislature?  They 
are  both  selected  as  the  agents  of  the  people.  And 
•would  it  not  be  quite  as  plausible  to  say  that 
there  should  be  some  tribunal  to  overrule  and  in- 
vestigate the  acts  of  the  legislature  before  they 
should  operate  on  the  people.  This  very  pro- 
vision requires  that  all  these  judges  shall  go  out 
at  the  end  of  eight  years;  and  if  you  adopt  the 
report,  one  of  them  is  to  go  out  at  the  expiration 
of  every  two  years.  Is  not  that  a  responsibility 
<lirectly  to  the  people,  and  one  that  will  affect 
them  as  soon  as  the  responsibility  of  the  repre- 
sentatives in  the  legislature  will  be  thrown  back 
upon  them?  I  presume  my  friend  from  Fayette 
is  the  only  gentleman  here  who  is  in  favor  of 
annual  sessions  of  the  legislature.  If  there  was 
any  thing  that  did  most  to  bring  about  this  con- 
vention in  my  section  of  the  country,  it  was  the 
fact  that  the  people  complained  of  the  legisla- 
tion of  the  country — that  there  was  too  much 
of  it — that  the  legislature  met  here  annually, 
and  were  engaged  in  passing  all  manner  of  laws 
which  before  they  could  be  fairly  understood,  or 
their  effects  tested,  were  half  of  them  modified, 
changed,  or  repealed,  until  the  gentleman  himself, 
with  all  his  legal  knowledge,  would  find  it  diffi- 
cult to  trace  out  the  law  on  some  particular  sub- 
ject. It  seems  to  me  that  this  was  one  of  the 
reasons  why  this  convention  was  called  togeth 
er.  And  it  will  certainly  be  engrafted  on  the 
constitution  that  the  legislature  shall  not  meet 
oftener  than  once  in  two  years. 

And  then  the  same  responsibility  would  exist 
in  regard  to  one  of  these  judges  as  there  would 
in  regard  to  the  legislature  itself.  Ther  would 
be  directly  responsible  to  the  people,  (both  the 
judge  and  the  legislature,)  and  within  the  same 
period  of  time.  But  what  are  the  bad  effects  that 
would  result  from  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man? Why,  whenever  a  legislature  should  come 
here,  instead  ofgoing  about  the  business  the  people 
entrusted  to  them,  the  legislation  of  the  country, 
we  should  have  agitation  all  over  the  state  in  re- 
gard to  the  removal  of  the  judges.  Here  would  be 
a  judge  in  one  section  of  the  state,  who  was  not 
acting  in  a  manner  suited  to  the  notions  of  some 

5 articular  representative,  he  having,  perhaps, 
ecided  some  case  under  a  particular  law  against 
him  or  his  friend,  and  on  that  principle  you 
might  combine  members  from  all  parts  of  the 
state,  and  consume  more  of  the  time  of  the  leg- 
islature in  trying  these  judges  than  might  be  re- 
quired in  passing  all  the  laws  that  were  necessa- 
ry and  proper.  And  if  there  should  be  any  law 
passed  involving  any  great  constitutional  ques- 
tion bearing  upon  the  people  at  large — anv  thing 
which  would  excite  and  divide  the  people  into 
parties,  no  matter  what  sort  of  parties,  I  ask 
gentlemen  if  these  party  feelings  would  not 
come  into  conflict  here  and  operate  on  the.se 
judges?  These  judges  are  appointed  to  restrain 
the  action  of  the  legislature — to  confine  them  to 
the  principles  and  powers  as  defined  in  the  con- 
stution  we  may  adopt.  Do  you  not  immediate- 
ly excite  a  jealousy  between  the  legislative  pow- 
er and  the  judicial  power,  when  the  judiciary, 
in  the  solemn  discharge  of  the  duties  imposed 
on  them,  decide  on  the  constitutionality  of  the 


law  adopted  by  the  legislature?  I  ask  you  if  a 
bare  majority  of  the  legislature,  that  passed  the 
law,  should  liave  the  power  to  remove  the  court? 
I  ask  if  the  court  would  not  be  swept  off,  not- 
withstanding its  decision  might  be  right,  and  the 
people  themselves  might  approve  of  it?  The 
people,  at  one  time,  might  be  wrong,  and  we 
know  the  majority  of  the  people  change,  and 
that  the  majority  is  not  always  right;  and  would 
it  be  right  tnen,  to  subject  the  courts  of  the  coun- 
try, the  tribunals  tliat  are  to  decide  upon  the 
rights  of  every  citizen,  to  any  popular  whim, 
any  mere  freak  that  might  come  over  the  people? 
We  have  had  some  experience  in  this  country  on 
this  subject  at  the  time  the  new  and  old  court 
parties  divided  the  people.    We  know  that  the 

f)eople  were  in  favor  of  sustaining  some  of  the 
aws  that  the  court  declared  to  he  unconstitu- 
tional, and  if  a  majority  of  the  representatives 
of  the  people  then  could  have  reached  the  court, 
we  should  have  had  the  sacred  principle  in  our 
constitution,  that  the  obligation  of  no  contract 
should  be  impaired,  obliterated,  and  in  effect 
destroyed. 

Now,  when  we  see  the  bad  effects  that  may 
result  from  this  principle,  ought  we  not  to  hesi- 
tate? Is  it  not  better,  as  the  gentleman  sajs, 
that  we  should  stand  by  the  old  landmarks 
which  have  been  regarded  in  all  the  states,  and 
which  have  proved  successful  for  tlie  purposes  for 
which  they  were  intended?  I  believe,  that  in 
the  state  of  Illinois,  which  is  certainly  demo- 
cratic enough  for  any  man  on  God's  earth,  and 
where  I  am  told  tliat  the  candidates  for  the  senate 
of  the  United  States  canvass  the  whole  state  as 
the  candidates  for  governor  do  here — they  mod- 
ified their  constitution  only  two  years  ago,  and 
we  find  that  this  same  principle  of  requiring 
two  thirds  of  the  legislature  to  remove  a  judge,  is 
preserved  in  it.  I  ask  then,  if  we  shall  obliterate 
it  here,  unless  gentlemen  can  give  us  some  good 
reason,  or  show  some  great  danger  that  is  to  re- 
sult from  its  retention.  I  think  it  is  a  principle 
that  has  been  tested  bv  time,  and  that  no  incon- 
venience can  result  trom  it,  while  great  incon- 
venience may  result  from  its  being  changed  as 
the  gentleman  desires. 

Mr.  ROOT.  It  is  with  the  greatest  diffidence 
that  I  rise  at  any  time,  to  address  this  convention, 
and  my  only  apology  for  doing  so  at  present  is, 
that  I  look  upon  the  subject  which  is  now  before 
the  convention  as  one  of  very  great  importance, 
and  I  am  desirous  therefore,  that  my  views  in  re- 
lation to  it,  however  humble  they  may  be,  shall 
be  known  to  my  immediate  constituents. 

Since  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  has  been  presented  to  this  house,  gentle- 
men upon  this  floor,  both  on  my  right  hand  and 
on  my  left,  gentlemen  of  acknowledged  ability, 
and  gentlemen  who  are  abundantly  able  to  ar- 
gue the  question,  and  to  show  clearly  all  the 
pros  and  cons,  have  seemed  to  magnify  the  sub- 
ject as  though  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  was  to  incorporate  a  new  principle 
into  the  report  of  the  committee.  I  will  notice 
what  principle  is  proposed  to  be  incoiporated, 
and  in  the  mean  time,  sir,  as  gentleman  have  de- 
fined their  positions  on  the  subject  of  their  early 
advocacy  of  the  convention  principle.  I  too  will 
venture  to  announce  my  course  on  this  subject. 

I  am  an  original  convention  man.     I  contend- 


174 


pd  for  it  in  my  county  and  in  the  adjacent  coun- 
ties, when  the  principle  was  unpopular.  In  1844 
I  stood  upon  this  floor,  and  introduced  the  bill 
for  a  convention,  and  I  stood  solitary  and  alone. 
I  "was  unsupported,  save  by  one  individual  who 
had  the  temerity  to  stand  up  and  denounce  the 
iniquity  that  existed  under  the  old  constitution, 
and  to  apprise  the  people  of  Kentucky  of  the  op- 
pressions they  had  been  laboring  under  for  fifty 
years,  and  of  the  amount  of  money  that  might  be 
saved  to  tliem,  if  the  administration  of  the  gov- 
ernment of  this  commonwealth  were  carried  on 
under  a  different  system.  I  have  therefore,  a 
right  to  have  some  idea  of  what  the  people  of 
my  section  of  the  country  desire  shall  be  incor- 
porated in  the  constitution. 

The  committee,  in  their  report,  have  proposed 
to  give  to  the  people  the  right  to  elect  their 
judges.  That  is  the  principle  that  is  contended 
for  by  nearly  every  gentleman  on  this  floor;  but 
the  report  of  the  committee  goes  on,  and  propo- 
ses to  incorporate  in  the  new  constitution  the 
two  thirds  principle.  Sir,  the  two  thirds  prin- 
ciple is  the  identical  principle,  about  which  the 
public  mind  in  Kentucky  was  awakened  to  a 
sense  of  the  iniquitous  system  that  was  resting 
upon  us.  It  was  upon  this  ground  that  I  stood 
impregnably  before  the  people — the  responsibili- 
ty of  the  judges  and  other  officers  of  the  gov- 
ernment to  the  people.  You  elect  your  judges 
for  eight  years.  The  judge  whom  you  elect 
may  be  a  man  of  fifty  or  sixty  years  of  age;  he 
does  not  anticipate  a  re-election  for  a  second 
term,  and  during  that  long  period  of  eightyears, 
he  will  be  as  irresponsible  to  the  people,  as  he 
would  under  the  old  system.  Ana,  sir,  we 
have  the  lights  of  past  history  before  us  to  show 
that  in  all  times,  and  particularly  in  Kentucky, 
for  the  last  fifty  years,  the  time  has  not  been 
when  a  solitary  judge,  or  magistrate,  or  any  other 
individual  holding  office,  could  be  brought  be- 
fore the  legislature  with  any  probability  of  his 
being  removed  from  office  for  any  cause  whatever. 
There  is  a  sort  of  hallowed  dignity  surround- 
ing the  ermine  of  the  judge,  that  our  legislature 
dare  not  tamper  with.  Sir,  a  iudgeought  not  only 
to  be  pure,  but  he  ought  to  be  like  Caesar's  wife, 
clear  of  all  suspicion.  Can  the  committee  sup- 
pose for  a  moment,  that  a  judge,  with  all  the  in- 
fluence which  he  possesses,  and  with  the  eleva- 
ted character  which  the  people  have  given  him, 
by  electing  him,  will  have  injustice  done  to  him 
by  one  hundred  and  forty  of  the  representatives 
of  the  people  of  the  State?  Is  it  possible  that  a 
majority  of  the  house  of  representatives,  and 
of  the  senate,  responsible  immediately  to  the 
people  as  they  are,  will  turn  a  man  out  of  office, 
unless  there  be  some  just  cause  for  which  he 
should  be  removed?  If  it  becomes  a  doubtful 
contest,  whether  a  judge  may  be  legally  turned 
out  of  office  for  malfeasance  or  misfeasance,  or 
for  any  capital  crime  that  he  may  have  commit- 
ed,  he  ought  to  be  turned  out  by  the  people 
themselves,  for  in  no  case  should  a  judge  be  re- 
tained in  office,  oven  if  a  breath  of  suspicion 
rests  upon  him.  The  judiciary  of  a  country 
ought  to  be  kept  pure;  and  in  order  that  it  may 
be,  you  ought  to  elect  a  tribunal  for  the  express 

furpose  of   taking  cognizance    of  such  cases, 
ncorporate  the  two  third  principle,  and  go  back 
to  your  constituents,  and  declare  to  them  what 


you  have  done,  and  they  will  tell  you  that  you 
nave  adopted  the  old  system  of  no  responsibil- 
ity, for  it  amounts  to  none.  Have  we  never  had 
a  judge  or  a  magistrate  in  the  commonwealth, 
that  ought  to  havebeen  turned  out  of  office?  Yet 
where  is  the  power  that  has  ever  arrested  their 
course,  in  cases  Avhere  they  have  done  wrong? 
There  has  not  been  a  solitary  instance. 

Look  at  the  case  that  has  been  referi-ed  to  in 
the  county  of  Greenup — a  case  in  which  the 
magistrate  ought  not  only  to  have  been  turned 
out  of  office,  but  damnetl  to  eternal  infamy. — 
But  when  brought  before  the  legislature,  there 
was  not  virtue  enough  in  the  two  third  principle 
to  relieve  the  public  from  this  incubus  that  was 
resting  upon  them.  The  majority  principle  is 
the  principle  of  republican  liberty — the  princi- 
ple tnat  runs  through  every  avenue  throughout 
this  broad  land.  And  it  is  a  safe  basis  on  which 
the  people  may  rest.  If  you  go  into  the  court  of 
appeals,  there  a  majority  of  the  judges  assem- 
bled, will  decide  your  case,  though  millions  are 
depending  upon  it.  If  you  go  to  congress, 
where  the  great  interests  of  the  nation  are  dis- 
cussed, and  where  the  solemn  arbitrament  is 
made  upon  the  destinies  of  a  free  people,  there  a 
majority  of  the  representatives  assembled  to  de- 
cide upon  the  great  interests  of  the  nation.  And 
is  there  anything  peculiarly  sacred  or  holy  that 
surrounds  the  c-haracter  of  a  JTidge,  rendering  it 
proper  that  he  should  not  be  held  responsible  to 
the  people?  To  the  people  I  say,  he  ought  to 
be  held  responsible;  and  in  order  to  make  him 
so,  it  is  necessary  to  strike  from  your  constitu- 
tion the  two-third  principle. 

Sir,  there  is  no  danger  of  the  people,  through 
their  representatives,  doing  any  injustice  to  the 
people's  judges.  Would  any  ,man  having  the 
character  of  a  representative  of  the  people,  blast 
his  own  reputation  and  put  a  blot  upon  his  own 
escutcheon  in  order  to  reach  the  judge  of    his 

f (articular  district  and  to  turn  him  out  upon  po- 
itical  grounds  or  from  malevolent  motives? 

Sir,  admitting  that  all  the  representatives 
from  the  tenth  judicial  district  shall  conspire  to- 
gether in  order  to  place  A  in  the  office  to  which 
B  has  been  elected  by  the  people;  or  admit  that 
B  had  rendered  himself  obnoxious  to  a  gentle- 
man who  possesses  great  influence  and  power 
throughout  the  judicial  district,  are  there  not  one 
hundred  and  thirty  five  representatives  of  the 
people  from  other  parts  of  the  state  who  will 
constitute  a  check  upon  the  designs  of  the  rep- 
resentatives and  others  of  that  particular  district? 
In  short  are  there  not  checks  enough  in  order  to 
liold  the  scales  of  public  justice  even?  I  appre- 
hend that  the  two  thirds  principle,  instead  of 
making  votes  for  your  new  constitution,  will  be 
the  paramount  cause  why  it  will  fall  before  the 
people. 

Sir,  the  gentleman  who  last  addressed  you  rest- 
ed tlie  whole  case  upon  this — that  the  judges 
may  decide  a  law  of  a  certain  legislature  uncon- 
stitutional, and  hence  he  supposes  that  all  the 
representatives  of  the  state  will  be  lashed  into  a 
fury,  and  that  they  will  come  up  here  and  in 
the  face  of  the  constitution  will  be  for  hurling 
the  judge  out  of  his  seat.  Sir,  let  us  look  at  the 
history  of  Kentucky  for  the  last  fifty  years.  If 
you  turn  over  the  journals  you  will  find  that  but 
few  of  the  men  who  were  assembled  here  any  one 


175 


year  in  the  legislature,  are  returned  the  next 
year. 

Sir,  the  responsibility  to  a  majority  of  the 
sovereign  people,  or  the  representatives  of  the 
people,  is  the  only  true  criterion  of  responsibil- 
ity that  I  know  of.  The  same  principle,  as  no- 
ticed yesterdav,  and  \rhich  my  honorable  friend 
from  Fayette  Thas  elaborated,  is  the  law  of  Eng- 
land, when  a  majority  of  parliament  can  depose 
a  judge.  Yet  gentlemen,  who  have  reliea  so 
much  in  this  discussion  upon  English  precedent 
and  authoritv,  array  themselves  against  the  re- 
publican principle  of  the  right  of  the  major- 
ity to  rule.  Sir,  why  adopt  a  two  thirds  prin- 
ciple in  relation  to  judges  and  not  to  other 
officers?  Why  not  say  that  the  President  of  the 
United  Stat«s  shall  be  elected  by  a  two  thirds 
vote?  The  President  of  the  United  States  unites 
in  his  hands  more  power  over  the  destinies  of 
this  country,  than  any  other  officer  in  the  land, 
and  yet  he  is  elected  by  a  majority  vote.  Sir, 
the  principle  is  not  tenable;  and  in  my  concep- 
tion it  is  not  consonant  with  republicanism.  It 
is  not  such  as  I  desire  to  see  incorporated  in  the 
constitution. 

Mr.  KAYAXAUGH.  It  is  with  great  diffi- 
culty that  I  have  brought  my  mind  to  the  point 
of  addressing  this  committee,  and  giving  the 
reasons  that  will  influence  my  vote,  both  to 
the  committee  and  to  the  country.  But  sir,  the 
attitude  which  I  occupy  here,  and  the  relation 
which  I  sustain  to  the  constituency  which  sent 
me  to  this  body,  make  it  necessary  that  I  define 
the  reasons  that  shall  induce  me  to  give  the  vote 
which  I  shall  give  upon  the  question,  which  is 
now  under  consideration.  That  there  have 
been  great  and  general  complaints  throughout 
thestateof  Kentucky,  as  to  the  non-responsibility 
of  the  judiciary  of  the  country,  cannot  be  con- 
tradicted. There  is  scarcely  a  dissenting  voice 
among  all  those  with  whom  I  have  conversed 
on  the  subject,  that  there  is  no  practical  respon- 
sibility, so  far  as  the  judges  of  the  courts  are 
concerned,  and  I  myself  have  ever  been  in  fa- 
vor of  an  efficient  mode,  if  it  can  be  devised,  of 
reaching  the  judiciary  of  the  country,  for  any 
malfeasance  in  office.  I  took  that  position  be- 
fore my  constituents,  and  came  here  with  the  un- 
derstanding, that  so  far  at  least  as  the  county  of- 
ficers were  concerned,  my  views  and  those  of 
my  constituents  were  with  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  that  subject.  But  with  regard  to 
other  classes  of  officers  than  the  county  officers 
— and  we  have  the  question  now  to  meet  in  re- 
gard to  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  and 
the  circuit  court.  Where  is  the  tribunal  to 
try  them?  I  have  heard  many  suggestions 
as  to  the  proper  tribunal.  However,  the  on- 
ly question  now  before  the  committee  is,  wheth- 
er they  shall  be  tried  by  a  simple  majority 
of  the  legislature,  or  by  a  majority  of  two- 
thirds.  That  is  the  question.  And  sir,  one 
word  upon  the  responsibility  principle,  which 
has  been  spoken  of  by  almost  every  gentleman 
who  has  addressed  the  committee  upon  this  sub- 
ject. I  yield  to  none,  sir,  so  far  as  devotion  to 
the  call  of  the  convention  is  concerned,  from  the 
very  beginning.  I  yield  to  none  sir,  so  far  as 
regards  a  desire  and  intention  of  restoring  back 
to  the  people  those  rights,  which  they  have 
conveyea  to  a  corps  of  agents  in  the  common- 


wealth, and  restoring  back  to  the  people  the 
election  of  their  ovra  offic'ers.  I  was  orignally 
a  convention  man.  I  went  for  it  throughout.  The 
question  as  to  the  right  of  the  people  to  rule  by 
a  majority,  is  not  the  question  we  have  now  to 
consider.  As  far  as  I  understand,  the  people 
have  a  right  to  say  what  agents  shall  decide 
this  question  or  the  other  question.  Xow  when 
the  legislature  of  Kentucky  is  convened  for  the 
purpose  of  passing  upon  the  judicial  officers  of 
the  commonwealth,  they  are  sitting  as  a  quasi 
judicial  tribunal,  they  are  made  the  judges  of 
the  law  and  Ihe  facts  of  the  case. 

Suppose  vou  incorporate  into  the  constitution 
the  principfe  that  a  bare  majority  of  the  legisla- 
ture shall  turn  a  man  out  of  office?  What  do  you  do 
sir?  You  go  in  the  very  teeth  of  the  practice  that 
youTiave  pursued  from  the  commencement  of  the 
government  of  this  commonwealth;  you  say  in  ef- 
fect ,  that  although  the  question  is  doubtful,  wheth- 
er the  officer  is  competent  to  discharge  the  duties 
of  his  office  or  not,  or  whether  he  has  been  guil- 
ty of  malfeasance  in  office  or  not,  a  bare  major- 
ity shall  remove  him  from  office.  I  ask  you  if 
that  is  not  contrary  to  the  principles  of  every 
free  government? 

Is^ow,  what  has  been  the  practice  of  the  com- 
monwealth of  Kentucky?  A  jury  decides  the 
facts  of  the  case,  and  your  judges  the  law  of  the 
case.  Questions  of  fact  are  much  more  difficult 
to  be  decided  than  questions  of  law.  You 
require  the  unanimous  verdict  of  a  jury  to  de- 
termine the  title  to  property,  or  to  pass  upon  the 
life  of  an  individual.  That  is  right  sir.  I 
know  that  in  some  quarters  of  this  house,  there 
is  an  intimation  given  out  in  favor  of  a  majority 
verdict  of  a  jury.     I  am  for  the  old  method. 

But  to  return,  you  come  to  this  question  as  a 
judicial  tribunal.  When  a  judge  has  been  elect- 
ed by  the  people  of  his  district,  if  he  discharges 
the  duty  as  he  ought,  he  holds  the  office  till  the 
time  for  which  he  has  been  elected  has  expired. 
Yet  here  you  propose  to  remove  him,  and  not 
only  to  remove  him,  but  to  fix  a  blot,  a  stain 
upon  his  character,  which  cannot  be  wiped 
away.  That  is  the  course  that  is  proposed  to  be 
pursued.  I  came  here  ready  to  go  for  any  propo- 
sition which  would  meet  the  two  questions  into 
which  this  whole  matter  is  resolvable,  and  that 
is  convenience  andjustice.  A  convenient  mode 
of  reaching  your  officers,  and  a  mode  which  will, 
at  the  same  time  that  it  is  convenient,  square 
with  the  ends  of  justice.  But  sir,  what  has  oeen 
the  practice  of  this  commonwealth, so  far  as  this 
power  of  impeachment  and  address  is  concerned? 
We  are  tola  that  at  no  time  have  judges  been 
addressed  out  of  office,  or  impeached  out.  That 
is  all  true. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  gentleman 
will  allow  me,  I  will  correct  him  in  regard  to 
this.  If  he  means  to  apply  his  remark  to  the 
old  jury  court,  he  is  mistaken.  The  records  of 
the  court  show  that  judges  have  been  removed 
by  impeachment,  and  disqualified  from  holding 
office.  I  allude  to  the  magistrate  from  the  coun- 
ty of  Logan. 

Mr.  KAVAXAUGH.  As  far  as  that  is  con- 
cerned, I  have  not  examined  carefully  the  whole 
proceedings  of  the  legislature  on  the  subject. 
And  as  far  as  the  recollection  of  the  gentleman 
extends  I  stand  corrected.    I  make  no  doubt  he 


176 


i's  eotfife^,  bitt  I  ara'fommg  to  ttii  poinl    A 

feiitlemau  tells  us  that  when  a  judge  is  elected 
y  a  majority  of  the  people,  the  same  majority 
which  returned  him  to  office  shall  have  power  to 
say  whether  or  not  he  shall  continue  in  office. 

That  is  the  question .  That  it  is  anti-republican 
to  say  tliat  a  judge  shall  hold  his  office  when  a 
majority  of  the  people  are  against  him.  I  say  that 
that  question  is  not  involved  in  the  question 
now  before  us.  A  judge  from  one  of  your  cir- 
cuit courts  is  brought  before  the  legislature. 
When  he  comes  before  them,  if  it  is  not  a  polit- 
ical question  upon  which  he  is  brought,  your 
legislators  act  in  the  capacity  of  judges  and  ju- 
rors to  determine  the  facts  and  the  law  in  the 
case.  And  it  is  no  longer  an  expression  of  the 
people's  will,  but  simply  a  decision  of  the  legis- 
latui"e  sitting  as  judges  upon  the  ease.  Suppose 
you  bring  a  judge  before  the  legislature  for  mal- 
feasance in  office  from  the  county  of  Hickman, 
your  representatives  from  other  counties,  know- 
ing nothing  of  the  merits  of  the  case,  sit  as  im- 
partial triers  for  the  purpose  of  determining 
whether  or  not  according  to  the  facts  of  the  case 
he  ought  to  be  removed. 

But  suppose  on  the  other  hand  that  the  judge 
is  arraigned  for  political  offences,  or  upon  such 
pretences  as  any  one  may  choose  to  invent,  or 
upon  a  charge  of  incompetency  if  you  please. 
What  then  is  the  result?  It  is  not  often  that  a 
political  question,  in  which  the  judiciary  may 
take  part  produces  such  great  excitement,  such 
deep  interest  in  the  country  as  to  cause  him  to 
be  arraigned.  But  if  you  bring  him  here  for  a 
political  offence,  the  legislature  being  of  one 
political  complexion,  and  the  judge  of  an  oppo- 
site, and  the  greatest  excitement  prevails,  as 
at  the  time  of  the  contest  between  the  old  and 
the  new  court,  though  the  judge  give  a  fair  ex- 
pose, of  the  constitution,  yet  if  tlie  majority  prin- 
ciple had  then  prevailed,  the  judge  woulci  have 
been  removed,  and  a  stain  cast  upon  his  charac- 
ter, unless  the  people  had  risen  in  their  might 
and  reinstate  him.  When  it  comes  to  apolitical 
question  there  is  danger  in  allowing  the  legisla- 
ture to  remove  a  judge  even  upon  the  two  thirds 
principle;  yet  I  go  for  that  principle. 

I  am  in  favor  of  the  report  of  the  committee 
as  it  now  stands.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  election 
of  the  judiciary  by  the  people.  It  is  unnecessary 
to  add  a  single  remark  on  that  subject.  It  was 
the  intention  of  the  convention  party  in  the  state 
to  bring  every  office  in  the  state,  judicial  or 
otherwise,  within  the  reach  of  every  man  who  is 
competent  to  fill  such  office,  and  who  has  prov- 
ed himself  worthy  of  office  in  the  estimation 
and  opinion  of  those  by  whom  he  was  surround- 
ed; and  that  no  office  should  depend  on  execu- 
tive patronage. 

I  shall  therefore  go  for  an  elective  judiciary, 
but  sir,  I  shall  go  for  these  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals  holding  their  offices  for  the  term  of 
six  years  only.  If  that  is  incorporated  in  the 
constitution  it  is  probable  that  the  wheels  of 
government  might  roll  on  for  the  next  fifty 
years,  and  not  a  single  complaint  be  urged 
against  the  judge;  for  the  simple  reason  that  any 
man  who  comes  before  the  people  of  this  coun- 
try for  office,  no  matter  who  he  is,  is  desirous  of 
securing  the  approbation  of  the  people;  and  if 
he  understands  any  thing  of  the  people  of  Ken- 


tucky he  will  endeavor  to  discharge  the  duties 
of  his  office  properly  in  order  to  secure  his  elec- 
tion a  second  time. 

But  throwing  that  out  of  the  question  entirely, 
any  man  who  may  be  elected  by  the  people  to 
the  office  of  judge  will  probably  be  competent 
to  discharge  the  duties  of  his  office  correctly.  I 
have  no  doubt  the  people  will  make  proper  selec- 
tions? But  there  is  one  other  view  of  the  sub- 
ject which  has  occurred  to  my  mind,  to  which  I 
will  simply  call  the  attention  of  the  committee, 
and  I  have  done. 

There  have,  perhaps,  been  fewer  attempts 
made  in  Kentucky  to  remove  judges  from  office 
than  there  would  have  been,  from  the  fact  that 
this  mode  of  removing  them  by  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  legislature,  was  regarded  as  rather 
a  difficult  mode  than  otherwise,  by  which  to  ac- 
complish anything.  The  people  at  this  time  are 
looking  to  the  re-eligibility  of  the  judges,  and 
of  all  other  officers  in  the  commonwealth,  as 
their  mode  of  redress  in  consequence  of  the 
faithlessness  of  the  officer  to  the  trust  which  has 
been  reposed  in  him.  Heretofore  sir,  even  though 
a  judge  may  have  abused  the  discretionary  power 
vested  in  him,  even  though  he  maynot  have  come 
up  to  the  line  in  which  a  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple would  like  the  judge  to  walk,  and  which 
nevertheless,  would  not  be  sufficient  ground  of 
removal,  either  by  impeachment  or  address,  they 
have  remained  quiet,  and  why?  For  the  simple 
fact  that  they  had  no  other  remedy  than  going  J 
before  the  legislature.  1 

There  are  a  thousand  things  that  would  not 
influence  the  legislature  in  the  case  of  address- 
ing, or  in  the  case  of  impeachment,  which,  nev- 
ertheless, would  have  great  influence  with  the 
people  when  they  march  up  to  the  polls  to  cast 
their  votes.  I  think  therefore,  that  the  very  best 
responsibility  is  in  limiting  the  term  of  office 
to  about  six  years,  making  them  re-eligible. 
Why  sir,  a  judge,  whether  of  the  circuit  or  ap- 

Eellate  court,  when  elevated  to  the  bench,  looses 
is  practice.  He,  no  doubt,  will  desire  to  be 
re-elected.  If  he  does,  it  will  be  the  very  best 
guaranty  the  people  can  have  that  the  judge  will 
discharge  the  duties  of  his  office  properly. 

For  the  reasons  I  have  given,  I  shall  vote  for 
the  report  of  the  committee  as  it  now  stands  and 
against  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson.  And  I  thought  it  due  to  the  constitu- 
ents whom  I  represent  here  to  give  the  reasons 
which  induced  me  to  give  this  vote.  I  hold  my- 
self ready,  however,  at  all  times  when  a  more 
convenient  mode  shall  be  proposed  by  any  mem- 
ber of  this  committee,  of  holding  your  appel- 
late judges  responsible,  so  as  at  the  same  time  to 
secure  the  proper  administration  of  justice,  to 
go  with  those  who  are  in  favor  of  such  a  meas- 
ure, if  I  do  not  see  radical  objections  to  it.  I 
admit,  sir,  that  the  mode  which  is  provided  in 
the  present  constitution,  and  in  almost  every 
constitution  of  the  different  states  of  this  union, 
is  a  difficult  mode.  I  admit  all  this,  and  if  a 
better  mode  could  be  devised  I  am  for  it.  But 
from  what  reflection  I  have  been  able  to  give  to 
the  subject,  I  have  been  unable  to  devise  any. 
Your  appellate  judges  are  officers  of  the  whole 
state ;  officers  in  whom  the  whole  state  are  inter- 
ested; officers,  wlio  are  not  to  be  removed,  how- 
ever, by  the  popular  will.  They  are  officers  who 


177 


are  to  be  removed  from,  or  retained  in  office  by  a 
set  of  judges,  consisting  of  the  members  of  the 
legislature,  sitting  to  oetermine  whether  they 
have  been  guilty  of  malfeasance  in  office.  Sir, 
■when  I  am  elected  to  an  office,  I  have  the  right  to 
hold  that  office  until  I  have  been  convicted  of  be- 
ing guiltv  of  some  malfeasance,  and  it  has  been 
proved  tliat  I  am  no  longer  worthy  to  hold  it. 
There  is  a  point  at  which  your  democratic  majori- 
ties must  stop.  It  comes  up  under  the  principles 
couched  in  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from 
.  Henderson.  It  comes  up  in  the  principle  of  the 
trial  by  jury.  It  is  where  no  majority  has  a  right 
to  take  from  a  man  a  vested  right,  unless  the  facts 
and  circumstances  be  clearly  proven  as  in  the 
case  of  a  judge  that  he  has  forfeited  his  office. 

"With  these  remarks,  having  defined  my  posi- 
tion. I  shall  no  longer  detain  the  committee. 

Mr.  ^'ESBITT.  As  it  seems  to  be  the  order  of 
the  day  for  delegates  to  give  the  reasons  which 
will  influence  their  votes  upon  the  subjects  which 
are  under  the  consideration  of  the  convention,  I 
have  thought  it  would  be  proper  for  me  to  ask 
the  attention  of  the  committee  whilst  I  also  as- 
sign a  few  of  the  reasons  by  which  I  shall  be 
governed  in  reference  to  the  question  which  is 
now  before  us. 

I  have  heard  it  stated  by  several  delegates  that 
they  have  always  been  convention  men.  1  too 
claim  the  honor  of  having  been  a  convention  man, 
and  something  beyond  that — a  convention  boy. 
I  advocated  the  principle  of  reform,  sir,  as  best 
I  might  long  before  I  had  a  right  to  vote. 

I  listened  with  pleasure,  sir,  to  the  gentleman 
from  Fayette  this  morning,  and  I  cannot  help  re- 
gretting that,  after  having  taken  so  many  pleas- 
■  ant  tours  together  advocating  a  convention  and 
constitutional  reform,  in  the  upper  counties,  we 
shall  now  at  this  late  day  be  compelled  to  part 
company.  I  will  not  say  that  I  led  him  through 
the  mountains;  and  he  shall  not  say  that  he  led 
me  in  this  convention. 

I  have  been  somewhat  astonished  too  at  some 
of  the  declarations  that  have  been  made  by  del- 
egates here.  Some  take  the  ground  that  this  con- 
vention is  the  people.  Some  take  the  ground  that 
the  legislature  is  the  people.  The  good  old  doc 
trine  used  to  be  that  the  legislature  was  nothing 
more  than  the  ser^'ants  of  the  people.  And 
looking  back  into  history  how  do  we  and  that 
nations  have  risen  and  fallen?  Just  as  long  as 
legislatures  recognized  the  doctrine  and  acted 
upon  the  principle  that  they  were  the  servants  of 
the  people,  all  things  went  on  well.  But  they 
at  last  began  to  preach  the  doctrine  that  is 
preached  here,  that  they  were  equal  with  the 
people,  and  that  they  were  the  people  them- 
selves. And  soon  another  step  was  taken  which 
taught  that  they  were  superior  to  the  people,  and 
then  the  state  began  to  totter  to  its  fall. 

What  is  the  question,  sir — ^what  are  the  ob- 
jects of  it?  What  are  the  ends  proposed  to  be 
accomplished?  Gentlemen  seem  to  be  anxious 
to  proclaim  to  the  world  how  much  they  are  wil- 
ling and  how  anxiously  they  desire  that  a  ma- 
jority shall  rule.  I  too,  sir,  am  in  favor  of 
a  majority  ruling,  but  I  want  a  majority  of 
the  people  to  do  so;  and  it  does  seem  to  me 
that  in  advocating  the  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  gentlemen  desire  to  fix  upon, 
an  easy  mode  of  curbing  the  will  of  the  major- 
23 


ity,  and  to  hurl  from  power  the  officers  of  the  gov- 
ernment, whom  a  majority  of  the  people  have 
placed  in  power.  I  know  that  I  am  to  be  held 
responsible,   not  to  this  convention  but  to  the 

Eeople  themselves,  for  every  act  I  may  perform 
ere  and  every  word  I  may  utter;  and  I  desire 
to  be  able  to"  furnish  some  authority  for  the 
manner  in  which  I  may  act.  If  the  committee 
will  indulge  me  for  a  few  moments  I  will  make 
a  few  extracts  fro  n  the  farewell  address  of  the 
Father  of  his  Country : 

"  Towards  the  preservation  of  your  govern- 
'ment,  and  the  permanency  of  your  present  hap- 
'  py  state,  it  is  requisite,  not  only  that  you  stead- 
'  ily  discountenance  irregular  oppositions  to  its 
'  acknowledged  authority,  but  also  that  you  resist 
'with  care,  the  spirit  of  innovation  upon  its 
'principles,  however  specious  the  pretext.  One 
'  method  of  assault  mav  be  to  effect,  in  the  forms 
'of  the  constitution,  alterations  which  will  im- 
'pair  the  energy  of  the  system,  and  thus  to  un- 
'dermine  what  cannot  be  directly  overthrown. 
'In  all  the  changes  to  which  you  may  be  invited, 
'remember  that  time  and  habit  are  at  least  as  ne- 
'  cessary  to  fix  the  true  character  of  government,  as 
'of  other  human  institutions;  that  experience  is 
'the  surest  standard,  by  which  to  test  the  real 
'tendency  of  the  existing  constitution  of  a  coun- 
'try:  that  facility  in  changes,  upon  the  credit  of 
'mere  hypothesis  and  opinion,  exposes  to  perpet- 
'  ual  change,  from  the  endless  variety  of  hypotb- 
'esis  and  opinion;  and  remember,  especially, 
'  that  for  the  efficient  management  of  your  com- 
'mon  interests  in  a  country  so  extensive  as  ours, 
'a  government  of  as  much  vigor,  as  is  consistent 
'with  the  perfect  security  of  liberty,  is  indispen- 
'  sable.  Liberty  itself  will  find  in  such  a  gov- 
'emment,  with  powers  properly  distributed  and 
'adjusted,  its  surest  guardian.  It  is,  indeed,  lit- 
'  tie  else  than  a  name,  where  the  government  is 
'too  feeble  to  withstand  the  enterprises  of  fac- 
'tion,  to  confine  each  member  of  the  society 
'within  the  limits  prescribed  by  the  laws,  and 
'to  maintain  all  in  the  secure  and  tranquil  en- 
'  joyment  of  the  rights  of  person  and  of  property. 
"I  have  already  intimated  to  you,  the  aanger 
'of  parties  in  the  state,  with  particular  reference 
'to  the  founding  of  them  on  geographical  dis- 
' criminations.  Let  me  now  take  a  more  compre- 
'hensive  view,  and  warn  you  in  the  most  solemn 
'manner  against  the  baneful  effects  of  the  spirit 
'  of  party,  generally. 

"  This  spirit,  unfortunately,  is  inseparable  from 
'our  nature,  having  its  root  in  the  strongest  pas- 
'sions  of  the  human  minJ.  It  exists  under  dif- 
'  ferent  shapes,  in  all  governments;  more  or  less 
'  stifled,  controlled,  or  repressed ;  but  in  those  of 
'the  popular  form,  it  is  seen  in  its  greatest  rank- 
'  ness,  and  is  truly  their  worst  enemy. 

"  The  alternate  domination  of  one  faction  over 
'  another,  sharpened  by  the  spirit  of  revenge  nat- 
'  ural  to  party  dissension,  which  in  different  ages 
'  and  countries  has  perpetrated  the  most  horrid 
'  enormities,  is  itself  a  frightful  despotism :  but 
'  this  leads  at  length  to  a  more  formal  and  perma- 
'nent  despotism.  The  disorders  and  miseries 
'which  result,  gradually  incline  the  minds  of 
'  men  to  seek  security  and  repose  in  the  absolute 
'power  of  an  individual;  and  sooner  or  later,  the 
'chief  of  some  prevailing  faction,  more  able  or 
'  more  fortunate  than  his  competitors,  toma  this 


178 


'  disposition  to  the  purposes  of  his  own  eleva- 
'tion,  on  the  ruins  of  public  liberty." 

"  It  is  important  likewise,  that  the  habits  of 
'thinking,  in  a  free  countrjr,  should  inspire  eau- 
'tion  in  those  intrusted  with  its  administration, 
'to  confine  themselves  "within  their  respective 
'  constitutional  spheres,  avoiding  in  the  exercise 
'  of  the  powers  of  one  department  to  encroach  up- 
'on  another.  The  spirit  of  encroachment  tends 
*to  consolidate  the  powers  of  all  the  departments 
'in  one,  and  thus  to  create,  whatever  the  form  of 
'government,  a  real  despotism." 

Now,  sir,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  amendment 
"which  has  been  proposed  here,  tends  at  once  to 
consolidate  all  the  departments  of  the  govern- 
ment into  that  one  called  the  legislative  depart- 
ment. Gentlemen  have  gone  to  England  and 
have  raked  up  authorities  there  to  prove  that  the 
judiciary  ought  to  be  independent.  I  grant  it 
ought. 

If  we  change  the  principle,  I  want  responsi- 
bility to  the  people  of  this  great  commonwealth. 
And  I  want  the  judiciary  to  be  independent  of 
the  two  other  departments  of  the  government.  I 
do  not  want  the  judiciaiy  to  be  bound  hand  and 
foot,  and  to  be  made  responsible  to  the  executive 
or  to  the  legislative  department.  I  do  not  de- 
sire the  legislative  department  to  be  responsible 
to  either  of  the  other  two  departments.  I  want 
the  executive,  legislative,  and  the  judiciary  de- 
partments, to  be  independent  of  each  other — to 
be  the  representatives  of  the  will  of  the  people 
of  Kentucky,  and  to  be  responsible  alone  to  them; 
and  to  bring  about  this  end,  sir,  I  shall  so  cast 
my  vote. 

There  are  other  reasons  sir,  Avliy  I  do  not  desire 
to  see  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son prevail.  The  people  of  the  commonwealth 
of  Kentucky  are  already  jealous  of  this  conven- 
tion. They  know  their  rights  and  they  know 
"well  how  to  maintain  them;  though  I  see  sir, 
here  manifested  a  spirit  of  radicalism  that  is  like- 
ly, if  tarried  to  its  utmost  extreme,  to  bring  us 
back  to  our  original  chaos,  to  leave  us  without 
a  constitution,  and  without  any  form  of  civil 
government.  We  "were  elected,  sir,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  radical  changes  and  alterations 
an  the  constitution,  I  will  admit.  We  were  elect- 
ed for  the  purpose  of  carrying  into  effect  the 
public  will — for  the  purpose  of  doing  that  which 
the  people  desire  to  have  done,  and  of  doing  noth- 
ing more. 

And  I  would  like  to  know  sir,  whether  there 
is  a  gentleman  in  this  convention  who  was  in- 
structed at  the  polls  by  his  constituents  to  say 
that  a  bare  majority  of  the  legislature  shall  have 
the  power  to  undo  the  work  which  they  shall  do 
at  the  polls?  If  there  be  one,  I  hope  he  will  dis- 
charge his  duty.  For  mys(?lf,  I  know  what  I 
■was  told  to  do,  and  I  know  I  was  not  told  to 
carry  into  effect  any  such  principle  as  that  con- 
tained in  the  amendment.  I  have  learned  my 
lesson  well;  and  a  part  of  it  is  to  let  alone  every 
thing  inthe  old  constitution  that  ray  constituents 
have  not  told  mo  to  vote  to  amend. 

This  question  may  not  again  arise — I  do  not 
suppose  it  will  on  tne  report  of  any  other  com- 
mittee, and  I  thought  it  proper,  sir,  to  give  the 
reasons  why  I  shall  vote  to  sustain  the  report  of 
the  committee. 


There  is  another  reason  sir,  why  I  shall  do  so. 
I  took  the  trouble  to  disseminate  among  the  peo- 
ple of  my  county,  as  far  as  I  could,  the  report  of 
the  committee,  and  I  asked  it  as  a  favor  of  them, 
that  they  would  send  me  information  "whether  it 
suited  them  or  not;  and  as  far  as  I  received  in- 
formation, it  is  unqualified  that  it  suits  them. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  perceive  that  the  discussion 
of  this  deeply  important  and  interesting  question 
will  not  be  terminated  for  several  days. 

I  will  move  that  the  committee  rise,  report 
progress  and  ask  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  leave  was  grant- 
ed to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  OCTOBER  20, 1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Norton. 

LEAVE    OF   ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  ROOT,  leave  of  ab- 
sence Was  granted  to  Mr.  WHEELER  until  Mon- 
day next. 

COUET   or   APPEALS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BARLOW  the  conven- 
tion resolved  into  committee  of  the  whole,  Mr. 
HUSTON  in  the  chair,  on  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  Yesterday,  while  my  friend 
from  Fayette  (Mr.  R.  N.  Wickliffe)  ^vas  address- 
ing tlie  committee,  I  could  not  help  remarking 
upon  the  vicissitudes  of  human  life.  I  shared 
with  him  the  innocent  amusements  of  boyhood, 
and  now,  after  twenty-five  years  have  elapsed, 
we  find  ourselves  participating  in  the  more  so- 
ber, serious,  and  as  I  hope,  to  the  country  at  least, 
more  profitable  pursuits  of  manhood.  Although 
I  differ  entirely  from  him,  1  could  not  but  ad- 
mire the  beauty  and  power  of  diction,  and  that 
impressiveness  of  manner  which  twenty-five 
years  ago,  as  well  as  now,  enabled  him  to  make 
the  worse  appear  the  better  reason.  There  are 
in  this  country  three  descriptions  of  aristocracy 
— the  aristocracy  of  wealth,  the  aristocracy  of 
intellect,  and  the  aristocracy  of  ofKce — to  none 
of  which  I  belong,  and  yet  to  all  of  which  I  de- 
sire to  be  most  intimately  attached  and  connect- 
ed. I  cannot  destroy  the  aristocracy  of  w^ealth, 
and  I  do  not  know  that  I  ought  even  if  I  could. 
I  could  not  if  I  would,  and  I  would  not  if  I 
could,  destroy  the  aristocracy  of  intellect.  This 
aristocracy  of  intellect,  or  rather  this  mental 
quality  called  talent,  is  the  first  divinity  which 
my  budding  spirit  was  taught  to  worship,  and  it 
is  the  last  idol  which  the  startling  proximity  to 
the  grave,  will  in  my  bosom  totter  to  its  fall. — 
But  there  is  another  description  of  aristocracy 
— that  of  office — to  which  I  am  hostile,  and  in 
the  destruction  of  which  I  am,  in  common  with 
many  around  me,  about  to  participate.  I  was, 
as  I  said  a  few  days  ago,  an  early  and  an  ardent 
friend  of  constitutional  reform.  I  was  not  so 
because  I  desired  this  or  that  particular  reform, 
or  this  or  that  particular  measure;  but  I  was  the 
ardent  and  early  friend  of  constitutional  reform 
on  principle.  That  principle  "was  neither  more 
nor  less  taan  an  anxiety  to  secure  such  a  consti- 


179 


tution  as  would  level  men  up,  instead  of  level- 
ling them  down.  I  was  for  a  constitution  that 
would  throw  open  to  the  aspirations  of  the  poor 
as  well  as  the  rich,  to  the  humble  as  well  as  the 
exalted,  the  offices  of  the  countrv.  I  had  seen 
the  offices  of  Kentucky — so  ha^l  the  people — 
bought  and  sold  for  money.  I  have  seen  these 
offices  bought  and  sold,  and  the  price  paid  for 
them  was  partizan  and  political  services.  I  was 
anxious  to  correct  this  manifest  and  inexcusable 
abuse,  and  hence  I  was  in  favor  of  constitution- 
al reform,  so  that  the  only  price  which  should 
be  paid  for  the  offices  of  Kentucky  should  be 
qualification  and  integrity. 

Have  you  ever  read,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  most 
graphic  description  of  a  country  church  and  of 
a  country  preacher,  given  by  that  justly  cele- 
brated and  distinguished  lawyer,  William  "Wirt, 
in  the  British  Spy?  The  meeting  house  compos- 
ed of  logs,  filled  with  the  simple-hearted,  hon- 
est and  confiding  people,  plainly  but  neatly  at- 
tired, their  quiet,  sturdy  horses  hitched  to  the 
swinging  limbs  of  the  surrounding  trees,  per- 
mit the  eye  of  your  imagination  to  rest  for  a  mo- 
ment on  such  a  picture  as  described  so  inimita- 
bly by  Wirt,  such  doubtless  as  you  have  seen 
along  the  pathway  of  your  life;  then  throw 
yourself  into  a  city,  such  as  the  beautiful  one  in 
whicli  we  are  now  convened,  and  enter  a  church 
covered  all  over  with  tapestry  and  splendor, 
with  the  pews  most  beautifully  cushioned,  with 
the  red  morocco  bound  bible  with  a  piece  of 
green  ribbon  to  mark  the  chapter  and  place  of 
the  text,  and  just  at  the  end  of  the  pew  a  gilt 
sign  with  the  owner's  name  upon  it;  in  the  first 
described  old  fashioned  country  church,  with 
the  horses  tied  thick  around,  the  worshippers  are 
the  plain,  modest,  and  unsuspecting  people;  in 
the  latter  the  ostentatious  office-holders  of  the 
country,  with  the  pharasaical  air  about  them  of, 
"stand' back,  fori  am  holier  than  thou." 

This  is  a  just  description  of  the  difiference  be- 
tween the  office-holders  and  the  people,  under 
the  present  constitution.  And  it  is  for  that  rea- 
son, and  because  of  that  difiference,  so  plain  and 
manifest,  to  which  no  man  can  or  ought  if  he 
could,  shut  his  eyes,  that  I  was  an  early  advo- 
cate for  a  convention.  I  wanted  to  level  men  up 
— I  wanted  the  church  doors  thrown  open,  so 
that  every  man  could  go  in  and  worship  there. 
I  wanted  those  aspirations  for  office  in  which  the 
poor  may  indulge  as  well  as  the  rich,  and  if  need 
be,  gratified;  and  I  wanted  the  price  to  be  paid 
for  that  gratification  in  Kentucky,  integrity  and 
qualifications.  And  it  was  because  of  that  prin- 
ciple that  I  am  now  here,  and  it  is  for  the  forma- 
tion of  a  constitution  such  as  I  have  just  indi- 
cated, and  possessing  the  spirit  to  which  1  have 
just  alluded,  that  I  mean  to  vote,  not  only  here, 
but  at  the  polls,  in  ease  it  should  be  submitted 
to  the  people.  The  character  of  a  government 
depends  very  much  upon  the  character,  and  gen- 
ius, and  spirit  of  the  people,  and  the  reverse  of 
the  proposition  is  jnst  as  true;  and  I  want  a  con- 
stitution that,  in  the  beautiful  language  of  my 
friend,  Captain  Cutter, 

"Shall  create  a  charm  within  the  very  air. 

Which  shall  teach  each  haughty  thing. 
The  poorest  man  he  meets  with  here 

Is  every  inch  a  King." 

I  want  all  the  officers  in  the  coantry,  as  some 


gentlemen  have  said,  from  the  highest  to  the 
lowest,  to  be  elected.  I  had,  at  first,  I  very 
frankly  acknowledge,  some  misgivings  in  regard, 
to  an  elective  judiciary.  I  had  been  early 
taught  that  for  such  a  purpose  the  people  was  a 
dangerous  depository  of  power,  but  I  am  satisfi- 
ed now,  and  experience  has  proved  that  it  is  the 
safest  and  the  best  mode  of  selection.  Every 
coterminous  state,  save  Virginia,  have,  in  some 
form  or  other,  an  elective  judiciary.  Tennessee, 
Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Missouri,  all  have 
an  elective  judiciary  in  some  form  or  other.  And 
fortunately  they  have  made  the  experiment  for 
us,  for  I  am  not  prepared  to  cut  down  the  lamp 
post  which  experience  has  placed  along  the 
pathway  of  human  life,  and  to  plod  on  in  dark- 
ness rather  than  in  light.  The  experiment  has 
been  made  in  other  states,  and  in  New  York 
most  satisfactorily  and  successfully.  Originally 
the  judges  in  New  York  were  selected  as  they 
now  are  under  the  present  constitution  of  Ken- 
tucky. From  1818  to  1835,  some  of  the  most  ar- 
dent contests  for  governor  have  taken  place  in 
Xew  York  than  have  ever  occurred  in  any  state 
of  the  union;  and  simplv  from  the  fact  that  next 
to  the  president  of  the  tnited  States,  the  office 
of  governor  of  New  York  was  considered  the 
most  important.  And  it  has  been  used  with 
some  success,  as  a  sort  of  spring-board,  from 
which  political  aspirants  have  leaped  into  the 
presidency  of  the  United  States.  What  were 
the  consequences  growing  out  of  these  ardent 
contests'?  The  consequences  were,  that  vacan- 
cies in  the  supreme,  and  other  courts,  were  filled 
without  reference  to  the  fact  whether  the  incum- 
bent was  an  honest  man  or  a  good  lawyer.  Ex- 
ecutives are  but  men  at  last,  and  are  subject  to 
the  common  frailties  and  imperfections  of  our 
nature,  and  they  therefore,  in  New  York,  were 
prone  to  fill  the  office  of  judge,  whenever  vacant, 
with  one  of  these  ardent  and  faithful  partizans 
who  had  carried,  perhaps,  a  particular  county 
and  district  for  them.  What  was  the  conse- 
quence? The  people  became  indignant  and  dis- 
satisfied, and  justly  so,  with  this  mode  of  ap- 
pointment. What  was  the  next  step?  It  was  to 
make  the  office  of  judge  elective  by  joint  ballot 
of  the  legislature.  I  have  lived  in  one  of  the 
states  in  this  union  where  the  judges  were  so 
elected,  and  I  say  with  all  candor  and  truth,  that 
I  saw  just  as  good  judges  there  as  we  have  had 
in  Kentucky — possessing  as  large  an  amount  of 
legal  attainments,  integrity,  and  all  those  qual- 
ifications which  a  judge  ought  to  possess.  I 
have  lived  also  in  a  state  where  they  were  elect- 
ed directly  by  the  people,  and  in  that  state  I  saw 
just  as  good  judges  as  I  have  seen  under  the 
system  which  we  have  adopted  and  used  for  the 
last  half  century.  Hence  I  say  my  own  expe- 
rience and  observation,  connected  with  the  ex- 
perience and  observation  of  those  in  other  states 
of  this  union,  goes  to  prove  that  an  elective  ju- 
diciary is  not  fraught  with  such  fearful  and 
dreadful  consequences  as  some  gentlemen  have 
fancied  and  imagined.  Hence  it  is  that  I  am  in 
favor  of  an  elective  judiciary. 

What  is  this  thing  called  public  opinion? — 
Sir,  it  is  the  school  master  of  public  men.  It  is 
the  originator,  frequently,  of  some  wise  and  sal- 
utary public  measures.  It  is,  indeed,  as  Burns 
has  said,  "a  sort  of  hangsman  whip,  to  hauld 


180 


the  wretch  in  order."    Do  you  want  an  example, 
full,  complete,  and  conclusive,  of  its  power?    It 
is  to  be  found  reported  in  the  book  of  life,  and 
is  presented   in  the  person   of  the  boldest  and 
most  talented  of  the  apostles.     The  apostle  Pe- 
ter, who  upon  the  sea  of  Galilee,  amid  the  awe 
of  darkness  and  the  storm,  had  seen   his  divine 
master  say  to  the  winds   "peace,"   and  to  the 
waves    "be    still" — ^and  all    was   quiet  as    an 
August    noon — the    same  Peter  who  had  stood 
by  the  grave   of  Lazarus,   and  witnessed  that 
mysterious  re-union  between  the  dead  body  and 
the  immortal  spirit  of  him  who  was  sleeping  in 
the  grave — that  very  man,  quailing  before  the  ef 
feet  of  a  false  public  opinion,  in  one  and  the 
same  hour  thrice  denied  his  faith  and  his  mas- 
ter.    I  am  in  favor  of  an  elective  judiciary,  the 
officers  of  which  shall  be,  every  eight  years,  sub- 
mitted to  the  salutary  operation  of  public  opin- 
ion.    I  am  asked  to  go  a  step  further  than  this, 
and  to  make  the  judge  removable  by  a  bare  major- 
ity of  the  legislature.     I  do  not  mean  to  go  that 
far,  and  the  man  who  would  a.sk  me  to  do  it,  af- 
ter the  surrender  of  the  prejudices  which  I  have 
already  made  on  the  subject  of  an  elective  judi- 
ciary, would  have  cried  fire   during  the  deluge. 
This  thing  called  an  independent  judiciary  is 
a  matter  about  which  a  great  deal  has  been  said, 
and  a  great  deal  more  thought.    Most  significant 
allusion  was  made  yesterday,  to  an  independent 
judiciary  in  what  was  formerly  called  the  mother 
country.     The  judges  in  England,  as   was   said 
by  ray  friend  from  Fayette,  were   originally  ap- 
pointed by  the  crown.     They  were,  to  use  a  com- 
mon expression  which  every  man  in  this  house 
whether  a  lawyer   or  not,  understands,  tenants 
at    will  of  the   crown.     What  was  the  conse- 
quence?   History  shows  that  wherever  tlie  pre- 
rogative of   the    crown  came  in  conflict  with 
the  interests    and  liberties  of  the  subject,   the 
judges  were  invariably  found  on  the  side  of  the 
king.     It  was  just  as  the  old  maxim   contained 
in  the  book  of  life  declares,  "  The   ox  knoweth 
itsowner,  and  the  ass  its  master's  crib."     It  is  a 
long  time  since  I  read  the  history  of  England — 
a  good  deal  longer  than,  since  my  friend  from 
Henry  (Mr.  Nuttall)  read  the  history  of  Greece 
and  Rome — and  I  believe  he  said  he  never  read 
it  except  in  Dilworth — but  the  contest  which  fi- 
nally resulted  in  securing  the  in  dependence  of  the 
judges,   commenced,  according  to   my  reading, 
about  the  year  1688.      It  is  immaterial  when  it 
commenced,  but  it  finally  resulted  in    changing 
•  the  tenure  by  which  the  judges  held   their  office 
from  that  of  a  tenancy  at  will  of  the  crown,  to 
that  of  good  behavior,  and  that  amounts  gener- 
£dly  to  a  tenancy  for  life.    What  were  the  conse- 
quences of  that  change  of  tenure?     The  judges 
from  being  the  supple  and  pliant  tools  of  the 
king  were  converted  into  a  city  of  refuge  for  the 
Bubject.     The  judiciary  of  England  then,  for  the 
first  time  in  the  history  of  the  country,  Avas  in- 
deed converted,  if  I  may  use  the   thought,   into 
the  shadow  of  a  mighty  rock  in  a  weary  land,  to 
Bhelter  and  to  protect.    Before  that  period,  the 
security  of  the  crown  rather  than  the  safety  of 
the  subject  was  consulted.     Such  were  the  pro- 
per, natural,  and  legitimate  consequences  of  judi- 
cial independence. 

Although  we  are  about  to  destroy  in  some  res- 
pects the  old  constitution  of  Kentucky,  there 


are  still  some  good  things  in  it  which  have  my 
admiration  and  confidence,  and  which  are  con- 
nected not  only  witli  the  glorious  past,  but  with 
security  for  the  present,  and  proud  and  still 
more  glorious  hopes  of  the  future.  I  desire  to 
read  from  the  very  first  article  in  that  constitu- 
tion, and  to  commend  its  consideration  in  all  its 
length  and  breadth  to  the  house,  ere  the  hour  of 
trial,  the  hour  of  voting  shall  arrive. 

"article  1.      SECTION  I. 

'  The  powers  of  the  government  of  the  state  of 
'  Kentucky,  shall  be  divided  into  three  distinct 
'  departments,  and  each  of  them  be  confided  to  a 
'separate  body  of  magistracy,  to  wit:  Those 
'  which  are  legislative,  to  one ;  those  which  are 
'  executive,  to  another  ;  and  those  which  are  ju- 
'  diciar}',  to  another." 

There  is  safety  and  security  in  that,  and  there 
is  protection  in  it.  And  why?  For  the  reason 
that  it  is  a  division  of  the  powers  of  government, 
and  it  is  the  separation  and  division  of  those 
powers  which  constitute  republicanism,  as  con- 
tradistinguished and  opposed  to  despotism.  I 
will  read  the  second  clause  of  this  section  of  the 
constitution,  to  shoAV  you  how  the  division  and 
continued  separation  of  those  powers  were 
guarded  by  the  framers  of  the  constitution  : 

"article   I.      SECTION   II. 

''No  person,  or  collection  of  persons,  being  of 
'  one  of  those  departments,  shall  exercise  any 
'  power  properly  belonging  to  either  of  the  oth- 
'  ers  ;  except  in  the  instances  hereinafter  express- 
'  ly  directed  or  permitted." 

What  is  despotism?  I  ask  every  gentleman  to 
propound  the  question  to  himself,  and  to  answer 
for  himself.  What  but  the  union  of  all  the  pow- 
ers of  government  in  the  same  hand?  And  I 
vastly  prefer  living  under  a  despotism  where 
the  union  of  all  these  powers  is  in  one  hand, 
than  where  it  is  in  a  hundred.  There  can  be 
legislative  despotism  as  well  as  any  other.  And 
when  the  legislature,  by  constitutional  provision 
or  by  usurpation,  get  into  their  hands  all  the 
powers  of  government — executive,  legislative, 
and  judicial — as  my  friend  from  Jefl"erson  Avell 
said  the  other  day,  it  is  a  despotism.  And  it  is 
the  worst  form  of  despotism,  for  obvious  reasons. 
It  generates  public  opinion,  and  after  it  is  gen- 
erated, it  directs  and  controls  it.  The  history  of 
the  French  revolution,  so  eloquently  referred  to 
by  my  friend  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston)  is 
full  of  meaning  and  instruction  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  the  danger  to  be  apprehended  from  legis- 
lative despotism.  What  were  the  consequences 
there?  The  monstrous  visage  of  public  robbery 
and  murder,  covered  with  the  mask  of  public 
necessity,  stalked  over  the  land  ;  the  government 
carried  in  one  hand  the  torch  of  a  profane  phi- 
losophy, and  in  the  other  the  cup  of  massacre; 
public  purification  for  its  object,  and  plunder, 
rapine,  and  murder  its  means.  The  history  of 
the  past  is  pregnant  with  the  dangers  of  legisla- 
tive despotism,  and  the  want  of  some  power  in 
which  the  people  can  confide,  to  stay  the  hand 
of  popular  madness  and  faction.  It  is  tliat  very 
separation  of  the  powers  of  government,  con- 
tained in  this  first  article — and  the  strong  in- 
junction contained  in  the  second  clause  of  it, 
that  no  one  department  shall  exercise  the  powers 
properly  belonging  to  anotlier,  whicli  constitutes 


181 


the  safety  of  the  citizen,  and  gives  perpetuity  it- 
self to  the  government.  And  without  this  clause, 
I  would  not  give  a  farthing  for  any  constitution 
which  the  wisdom  of  the  people  as  represented 
in  this  convention  may  frame.     And  unless  that 

frinciple  is  incorporated  in  the  new  constitution, 
shall  go  home  and  take  the  stump  against  it, 
or  at  least  clear  my  own  conscience  by  voting 
against  it. 

Gentlemen  seem  to  think  that  the  legislature 
is  the  people,  and  that  its  opinions  and  action  is 
always  the  just  reflex  of  public  sentiment.     My 
own  experience  and  that  of  every  man  on  this 
floor  shows  most  conclusively  that  this   is  not 
true.     Is  there  a  man  here  who  has   forgotten 
the  scenes  of  1822,   "23,  and  '24.     Jso  sir,   and 
what  is  more,  I  hope  and  trust  they  never  may 
be  forgotten;  and  all  I  ask  of  gentlemen  is  that, 
before  the  vote  is  taken  on  the  proposition  of  my 
friend  from  Xelson,  they  will  just  allow  thei'r 
recollections  to  wander   back   to   the  scenes  to 
which  I  allude.     They  are  part  of  history  now. 
The  statute  of  limitations  has  been  well  called 
a  statute  of  repose,  and  I  advert  to  this  history 
of  the  past  only  for  the  purpose  of  illustration. 
What  was  that  history?     The  legislature  passed 
a  law  which  had  the  approbation  doubtless   of 
their  hearts  rather  than  their  heads,  and  which  re- 
sulted from  their  sympathy  with  the  unfortu- 
nate and  destracted  state  of  the  country.     The 
courts  of  Kentucky  decided  that  law  to  be  un- 
constitutional.    The  legislature   could    not  re- 
move the  judges  by  address,  and  what  was  the 
result?    Finding  they  could  not  remove  them  as 
the   constitution  provided,  the    legislature  at- 
tempted to  do  it  in  an  unconstitutional  manner. 
There  is  an  example  which  is  to  be  avoided  of 
the  danger  of  legislative   power,  and  it  is   one 
too,  which  I  desire  gentlemen  before  they  vote 
on  the  amendment  of  my  friend  from  Xelson,  to 
look  at  and  to  reflect  upon.    Make  a  judge  sub- 
ordinate to  the  legislative  power  and  you  make 
him  a  mere  creature  of  legislative  will.     Is  that 
the  mode  by  which  we  expect  to  guard   his  in- 
tegrity and  secure  his  honor  in  the  administra- 
tion of  justice?    Not  at  all.     Look  at  the  judi- 
ciary now.     Under  the  present  system  the  execu- 
tive and  the  legislature  are  elected  by  the  people, 
while  the  judiciary,  whose  duty  it  is  to  protect 
the  rights  and  interests  of  the   citizen,  to  give 
efficacy  to  the  laws,  and  stability  to  the  govern- 
ment itself,  and  even  to  control  the  other  two 
departments  of  the  government,  is  created  by 
the  executive  and  one  branch  of  the  legislature. 
Hence  it  is  that  among  other  reasons,  one  of  the 
strongest  which  has  induced  me   to  sustain  an 
elective  judiciary,  is  that  it  will  withdraw  the 
judges  entirely  from  legislative  influence.    If  a 
judge  is  conscious  that  he  may  be  removed  by  a 
mere  legislative  majority,  will  he  not  be  "to  their 
faults  a  little  blind,  and  to  their  virtues  very 
kind." 

We  will  suppose  the  case,  and  I  acknowledge 
it  is  a  violent  supposition,  of  a  legislature  in 
the  midst  of  high  party  feeling  and  excitement, 
j  suspending  in  a  time  of  profound  peace  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  or  putting  some  man  in 
jeopardy  of  life  and  limb  twice  for  the  same 
offence,  or  even  taking  private  property  for  pub- 
lic use  without  the  consent  of  or  compensation 
to  the  owner.     The  judge  standing  upon  the 


constitution,  acting  as  a  co-ordinate  branch  of 
the  government,  says  to  them  like  t]ie  prophet  of 
old,  with  his  censer  in  his  hand,  '•  thus  far  shalt 
thou  come  and  no  farther,"  and  declares  those 
actsunconstitutional,  and  therefore  null  and  void. 
They  having  the  power  so  to  do  by  a  bare  ma- 
jority, could  and  would  remove  him.  And  they 
would  place  in  his  stead  some  pliant  and  sub- 
servient tool,  some  gentleman  who  would  be 
obedient  to  the  legislative  will,  some  man  who 
would  be  ready  to  say  to  them,  whatever  you 
order  I  do,  and  whatever  are  your  injunctions 
I  am  obedient.  That  is  the  description  of  the 
judges  which  we  would  have  upon  the  bench, 
should  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  prevaQ,  and  it  could  not  be  otherwise. 
The  honest  judge  would  be  subject  to  removal 
for  the  honest  indication  of  his  opinion,  and 
for  his  just  and  unpurchased  expositions  of  the 
law,  or  else  you  would  have  in  the  judicial  tribu- 
nals of  the  country  the  mere  tools  of  the  legisla- 
ture ready  to  record  tlieir  will,  and  to  do  their 
bidding. 

I  am  therefore,  utterly  opposed  to  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Jfelson,  because  I 
believe  that  upon  an  honest  and  unpurchasable 
judiciary,  the  safety  of  the  rights  and  interests 
of  the  citizen  depend.  I  believe  that  times  may 
come  and  have  come  when  the  legislature  will 
be  induced  to  overstep  the  bounds  of  the  consti- 
tution, and  to  punish  the  judge  for  resisting 
them.  I  believe,  also,  that  the  time  has  once 
come,  and  may  come  again,  when  they  will  be 
disposed  to  try  a  fall  with  justice  only  for  the 
express  purpose  of  showing  its  weakness,  and 
I  am  opposed  therefore,  utterly  opposed,  to  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Is  elson.  And 
I  am  anxious  that  the  new  constitution  should 
contain  a  clause  requiring  two  thirds  of  the 
legislature  as  necessary  to  remove  the  judge. 
We  have  done  enough  in  all  conscience  when 
we  have  made  the  judiciary  elective,  and  sub- 
jected thera  to  the  salutary  operation  of  public 
opinion  at  the  end  of  each  eight  years  of  service. 
I  have  made  these  remarks  because  I  con- 
sidered it  my  duty  so  to  do,  and  I  shall,  when- 
ever the  question  is  submitted  to  the  decision  of 
the  house,  vote  against  the  adoption  of  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  A^ elson,  for 
the  reasons  which  I  have  just  given. 

Mr.  GHOLSOIf .  I  have  not  risen  with  any 
particular  expectation  that  I  shall  be  able  to  en- 
lighten this  body.  I  cannot  expect  that  ray  re- 
marks will  have  much  weight.  I  feel  disposed, 
however,  to  exercise  this  privilege  in  behalf  of 
those  who  sent  me  here,  knowing  as  I  do  that 
they  will  be  greatly  dissatisfied  if  some  of  these 
measures  are  adopted.  Xow,  sir.  what  is  the 
question  before  us?  What  is  it  we  are  called 
upon  to  decide?  It  is  to  make  a  decision  be- 
tween something  on  the  one  hand  and  nothing 
on  the  other;  for  all  experience  will  bear  me  out, 
when  I  say  that  impeachment  by  a  majority,  or 
even  by  a  two  thirds  vote,  is  but  a  mere  scare- 
crow. It  has  no  terrors  for  the  judicial  tyrant 
on  his  throne.  And  why?  Because  in  fifty  Vears 
it  has  never  succeeded  in  removing  one.  '  ^"hat 
does  all  this  argue?  Why  one  of  two  things — 
that  we  have  had  the  most  honest,  correct, 
independent  judiciary  that  the  sun  ever  shone 
upon  on  the  one  hancf,  or  on  the  other,  that  thig 


182 


system  has  proved  the  most  inoperative  arnl  in- 
effectual for  the  purpose  for  Avhich  it  was  inten- 
ded. And  now,  while  I  repeat  that  I  believe  we 
liave  had  as  enlightened,  ;is  honest,  as  worthy  a 
judiciary  as  has  fallen  to  the  lot  of  any  otlier 
people,  I  will  also  say  we  have  had  those  on  the 
judicial  bench  who  did  deserve  punishment;  and 
I  affirm  that  they  ought  to  have  been  punished 
on  account  of  disqualification  and  misdemean- 
ors in  office;  but  they  could  not  be  reached.  I, 
myself,  have  felt  the  iron  heel  of  judicial  omnip- 
otence, and  yet  because  I  was  poor  I  had  to  suc- 
comb  before  the  tyrant.  I  have  felt,  and  I  hope 
I  shall  always  feel  that  respect  which  is  due  to 
the  judiciary  of  the  country.  I  am  conscious  of 
never  having  offered  an  insult  to  a  judge  upon 
the  bench.  I  beg  pardon,  if  what  I  have  said 
in  relation  to  the  judiciary  is  offensive;  but  I 
am  a  stranger  to  that  sycophancy  which  I  see 
abroad  in  the  land  towards  those  upon  the  judi- 
cial bench.  Who  is  the  judge?  Is  he  not  one 
of  us?  By  what  right  does  he  occupy  his  sta- 
tion,? Is  it  not  the  gift  of  the  people?  Is  he 
not  their  serv'ant?  To  what  is  it  you  bow  when 
you  enter  the  court  house?  It  is  not  to  the  bi- 
ped who  sits  there,  but  it  is  to  the  law  itself.  It 
18  to  the  majesty  of  the  law — it  is  to  that  which, 
if  properly  administered,  should  command  our 
respect,  and  which,  like  the  dews  of  heaven, 
should  shed  its  benign  influence  alike  upon  all. 
It  is  to  that  which  I  bow;  and  this  proposition 
that  the  judge  shall  only  be  reached  by  a  two 
thirds  vote,  is  to  grant  him  a  dispensation  to  do 
what  he  may  please,  in  his  omnipotence,  to  the 
end  of  his  term.  It  is  to  say,  you  shall  not  be 
punished;  the  like  never  has  been  done,  and 
therefore  we  have  a  good  reason  to  believe  it  will 
never  be  done,  and  you  may  do  as  you  please.  It 
is  possible,  and  only  among  possibilities,  that  if 
the  majority  principle,  as  proposed  by  the  honora- 
ble gentleman  from  Nelson  is  adopted,  an  innocent 
ana  upright  judge  might  be  removed.  One  sin- 
gle, solitary  instance  in  fifty  years  is  given;  and 
I  have  listened  with  pleasure  to  the  declaration 
that  there  has  been  but  one  instance  of  this  kind 
in  which  any  disposition  has  been  shown  by  a 
majority  of  the  legislature  to  remove  a  judge  for 
any  cause  whatever.  We  have  had  a  great  deal 
of  light  on  the  subject  of  English  jurisprudence. 
Now,  I  do  not  pretend  to  know  all  about  English 
history.  Much  has  been  said  on  the  troubles 
that  have  visited  other  lands.  It  may  be  tru- 
ly said  that  I  have  not  gone  further  than  cruci- 
fix in  that  kind  of  history,  for  poverty  was  my 
only  inheritance  and  freedom  my  birthright,  and 
it  is  for  that  freedom  here  I  will  contend.  I  do 
not  pretend  to  say  whether  gentlemen  are  right 
or  wrong,  in  their  account  of  British  or  other 
foreign  history,  but  I  do  say  that  their  remarks 
are  wholly  inapplicable.  I  maintain  that  we 
are  the  only  free  people  under  the  wide  canopy 
of  heaven — that  we  are  the  only  people  who  are 
capable  of  self-government,  in  the  proper  sense 
of  that  word.  These  things  have  no  application; 
these  hobgoblins,  raw  heads  and  bloody  bones, 
have  no  terrors  for  me.  I  have  an  abiding  con- 
fidence in  the  patriotism  and  intelligence  of  the 
people;  and  I  say  to  my  brother  delegates  here 
and  the  whole  world  tnat  if  I  believed  my  fel- 
low-citizens of  Kentucky  were  so  corrupt  and  so 
degraded  as  to  abuse,  disgrace,  and  pollute  this 


legislative  hall,  as  some  seem  to  think  they 
would  do  if  this  majority  principle  should  pre- 
vail, I  would  turn  my  back  on  this  state  forever, 
I  would  not  live  among  such  people,  who,  for 
opinion's  sake,  or  party's  sake,  would  commit 
such  an  act.  That  I  have  political  opinions  of 
my  own  I  confess.  I  am  a  ciemocrat,  but  I  never 
intend  to  say  it  in  the  convention  again.  I  am 
sorry  to  hear  some  gentlemen  bringing  up  these 
party  terms,  and  foreboding  what  party  may  do. 
I  am  a  republican,  and  intend  to  assist  in  framing 
a  republican  government.  I  am  for  doing  the 
greatest  amount  of  good  to  the  greatest  number. 
I  am  for  putting  it  in  the  power  of  the  poor  to 
obtain  equal  and  exact  justice  as  well  as  the 
rich.  And  I  want  to  put  it  in  the  power  of  the 
poor  man  to  reach  the  high  in  a  manner  that  will 
make  the  tyrant  on  his  throne  tremble,  and  com- 
pel him  to  pursue  the  path  of  rectitude.  This 
whole  matter  seems  to  be  'WTong.  When  you 
say  to  a  man  in  the  lower  or  upper  end  of  Ken- 
tucky, if  you  have  been  imposed  upon  by  a  judge 
— if  he  fines  you  improperly — if  he  is  guilty  of 
malfeasance,  or  any  other  feasance,  for  there  are 
so  many  feasances  Avhich  gentlemen  have  refer- 
red to,  I  cannot  remember  them  all — you  must  fol- 
low that  judge  to  Frankfort  to  get  redress,  does 
not  any  man  knowthatit  will  amount  to  nothing. 
The  poor  man,  we  all  know,  in  such  a  case 
would  obtain  no  redress;  and  I  beseech  you  to 
look  at  the  matter  as  it  is,  and  do  not,  because  a 
man  lives  at  a  distance  from  the  capital,  take 
from  him  the  power  of  redress.  I  know  that  I  am 
considered  radical,  and  1  may  be,  perhaps,  a  lit- 
tle too  radical;  if  so,  I  owe  it  to  the  oppressions 
I  have  endured  and  to  the  abominations  in  the 
administration  of  the  government  that  I  have 
experienced.  I  have  come  here  to  lay  the  axe 
at  the  root  of  the  tree.  I  hold  every  man  here 
to  be  a  servant  of  the  people,  and  I  want  all  offi- 
cers of  the  government  so  to  consider  themselves, 
instead  of  considering  themselves  their  masters. 
I  am  not  to  be  told  and  made  to  believe  that  the 
thing  is  notpracticable.  I  appeal  to  gentlemen  to 
erect  some  tribunal  which  shall  be  within  the 
reach  of  every  man  within  the  broad  common- 
wealth,where  every  man  shall  heheld  to  account- 
ability. Were  I  to  cnoose  between  the  two  proposi- 
tions, I  would  vote  for  the  majority  principle.  That 
issomething.whilethetwo  thirds  vote  is  nothing; 
it  is  less  than  nothing;  it  never  has,  it  never  can, 
and  it  never  will  embrace  the  object.  It  is  an- 
ti-republican; it  makes  the  minority  rule;  it  is 
all  wrong  in  principle. 

I  have  been  astonished — and  I  say  it  with 
all  imaginable  deference  to  the  grey  heads  and 
the  Avise  heads  that  have  discussed  this  subject — 
at  this  discussion  and  the  importance  which 
gentlemen  attach  to  the  difference  between  a  ma- 
jority and  two  thirds.  Why,  it  will  never  affect 
anjr  one  for  ill;  it  will  never  remove  a  man  from 
office  in  Kentucky.  The  responsibility  may  reach 
a  judge  who  lives  at  Frankfort,  but  it  will  never 
reach  tliose  in  distant  parts  of  the  State.  The 
only  remedy  for  the  evil  complained  of  is  to  re- 
turn to  the  source  whence  the  power  is  derived 
by  frequent  elections.  Wlicn  the  proper  time 
comes,  I  want  to  propose  the  term  of  four  years 
instead  of  eight.  I  want  to  have  some  tribunal 
erected  where  the  judge  will  be  tried  by  a  jury  of 
the  vicinage,  or  other  competent  tribunal,  instead 


183 


of  sending  the  case  to  be  tried  away  from  the  wit- 
nesses ana  the  injured  party.  1  have  heard  it 
said  that  there  is  something  too  dignified  and 
too  noble  about  a  judge  that  he  should  be  tried 
by  an  ignorant  jury.  Xow,  I  hold  there  is  no 
man  living  in  tlie  broad  expanse  of  Kentucky 
■who  has  more  rights  than  you  or  I,  or  more  in- 
terests to  be  disposed  of  by  a  jury  of  twelve  men. 
Gentlemen  talk  about  bringing  a  judge  in  chains 
to  the  feet  of  one  department,  that  of  our  own 
legislature.  I  agree,  in  one  particular,  that  it  is 
wrong  that  a  judge  should  be  brought  before  the 
legislature.  It  is  a  violation  of  the  first  article 
of  the  constitutioB,  which  declares  that  the  gov- 
ernment shaiti)e  divided  into  three  separate  de- 
partments. I  want  to  keep  them  separate.  I 
want  to  carry  out  the  articles  in  their  spirit  and 
truth.  I  do  not  want  the  judge  brought  to  the 
feet  of  the  executive.  1  want  the  judge  to  do 
his  duty,  and  to  rely  alone  on  those  who  elected 
him  to  office.  It  is  certainlv  subverting  one  of 
the  principles  of  the  constitution;  it  is  unde- 
niable that  you  cannot  sustain  the  position, 
and  maintain  these  two  powers  distinct.  The 
legislature,  if  eS'ectual  as  a  tribunal  for  the  trial 
of  judges,  destroys  their  independence.  It  mer- 
ges all  power  in  the  legislature,  in  that  respect, 
whether  the  required  number  be  two  thirds  or  a 
majority.  It  is  immaterial;  it  brings  the  other 
departments  to  the  footstool  of  the  legislative 
department;  and  then  its  impracticability  is  de- 
monstrated by  experience,  the  best  teacher  on 
the  face  of  the  eartli.  When  we  have  seen  what 
has  occurred  in  Kentucky  in  relation  to  the  old 
and  new  court  system,  I  think  gentlemen  should 
be  convinced  that  if  the  majority  should  not 
rule,  a  judge  cau  never  be  removed.  And  I  do 
not  think,  if  the  majority  had  been  sustained,  in 
the  case  to  which  I  nave  referred,  that  the  coun- 
try would  have  suffered  any  great  harm.  True, 
I  was  then  in  favor  of  sustaining  the  judges, 
because  I  believed  they  acted  honestly,  and  that 
they  intended  to  sustain  the  constitution — still 
the  object  of  the  legislature  in  passing  the  law, 
decided  to  be  unconstitutional,  was  a  good  one. 
For  these  reasons,  and  these  alone  it  was  that 
I  was  disposed  to  sustain  the  law. 

"Well,  that  single,  solitary  instance,  from  the 
foundation  of  the  government  to  the  present 
time,  is  the  only  one  that  has  occurred,  if  I 
rightly  recollect  our  history.  It  is  the  only  in- 
stance in  which  any  attempt  to  remove  any  officer, 
except  perhaps  that  of  a  justice  of  the  peace,  for 
malfeasance,  or  misdemeanor,  had  even  the  ap- 
pearance of  being  successful.  And  are  we  sent 
here  by  the  people,  with  high  hopes  and  expec- 
tations, which  are  wide  spread  over  the  land, 
that  something  radical,  something  republican, 
should  be  done,  to  go  back  and  say  to  them,  that 
the  united  wisdom  of  Kentucky  is  not  sufficient 
to  devise  a  plan  that  shall  give  justice  to  the 
•whole  land?  Are  we  disposed  to  say  when  we 
return  to  our  constituents,  you  must  follow  a 
judge,  if  he  impose  upon  you,  to  Frankfort,  or 
go  without  redress.  If  you  have  not  thousands 
you  must  endure  your  grievance  as  best  you 
may.  Is  this  republican?  Is  it  for  this  that  we 
came  here?  Are  delegates  prepared  to  go  home 
and  say  there  is  something  so  high  and  sancti- 
monious in  the  name  of  a  judge,  that  we  cannot 
permit  you  plebians  to  lay  hands  on  him,  unless 


you  follow  him  to  Frankfort.  You  confess  the 
citizens  of  this  country  are  not  competent;  they 
are  too  ignorant,  too  vicious.  We  cannot  trust 
you.  There  isuot  in  the  whole  country  materials 
for  a  competent  tribunal  to  try  a  judge  for  mis- 
demeanors in  office.  And  then  will  you  turn 
round  and  tell  them,  that  although  this  is  the 
case,  thev  shall  not  have  the  privilege  of  going 
aWay?  Vou  will  try  the  poor  man  where  the 
offence  is  committed,  unless  he  gets  a  change  of 
venue.  But,  although  the  act  of  a  judge  is  as 
atrocious  as  it  can  be,  still  he  is  sent  off  here  for 
trial.  And  this  is  republicanism!  This  is 
equality!  And  this  is  the  glorious  feast,  that 
gentlernen,  in  their  devotion  and  their  patriotic 
strains,  in  wliieh  they  dilate  so  eloquently  on 
the  fruits  of  the  judiciary,  have  invited  us  to! 
This  is  the  feast  of  the  poor!  This  is  the  grand 
banquet  which  is  to  result  from  our  convention- 
al labors  here. 

Now,  I  would  respectfully  ask  why  it  is  you 
will  put  in  the  constitution  a  provision  that, 
you  all  must  agree,  has  heretofore  proved  inef- 
fectual, and  one  which  we  may,  therefore,  rea- 
sonably expect  will  be  so  hereafter.  Why,  I 
ask,  will  you  put  such  a  provision  in  the  consti- 
tution, when  it  has  never  removed  a  circuit  judge 
in  the  whole  extent  of  Kentucky?  Is  it  not  tri- 
fling with  the  rights  of  the  people?  Is  it  not 
trampling  the  rights  of  the  poor  man  in  the 
dust?  I  affirm  that  it  is.  But  I  have  heard  it 
objected  out  of  this  house,  although  I  do  not 
recollect  that  any  gentleman  has  adverted  to  it 
in  his  remarks,  that  a  judge  would  be  harrassed 
— would  be  subject  to  perpetual  indictment,  if 
a  jury  was  permitted  to  act  on  the  case. 

I  submit  it  to  gentlemen  if  that  is  not  saying 
a  great  deal  for  their  several  constituencies,  that 
a  judge  could  not  be  permitted  to  go  on  in  an 
even-handed  and  straight  forward  administra- 
tion of  justice,  because  their  constituents  are  so 
malicious  and  so  black-hearted  that  they  would 
continually  harrass  them  with  wicked  and  un- 
founded indictments.  For  my  part,  in  the  name 
and  behalf  of  my  constituents  1  deny  the  impu- 
tation. I  represent  no  such  people  here.  No, 
far  from  it.  All  we  ask  for  is  even-handed  jus- 
tice. All  that  we  want  is,  to  do  away  with  that 
distinction  which,  because  one  man  is  poor,  pla- 
(ies  him  directly  within  the  reach  of  the  law, 
and  because  another  is  an  official  dignitary 
takes  him  away  to  another  and  a  higher  tribunal. 
The  whole  system  is  wrong,  and  anti-republican,, 
and  I  protest  against  it.  1  never  will  submit  to 
that  principle.  I  maintain  that  we  all  stand 
here  on  one  broad  platform  of  equality,  and  I 
claim  that  the  poorest  in  my  county  shall  enjoy 
the  same  rights  and  have  the  same  protection  as 
the  richest  and  proudest  in  this  broad  common- 
wealth. 

We  claim  no  exclusive  privilege — we  claim  to 
be  freemen,  to  be  honest,  and  we  claim  a  just 
share  in  all  the  rights  of  the  government.  This 
is  what  I  J^k  at  the  hands  of  the  convention ; 
and  I  call  upon  delegates  to  do  away  with  this 
horizontal  distinction.  It  cannot  be  denied 
that  this  creates  one.  It  is  an  invidious  distinc- 
tion between  the  rich  and  the  poor.  Am  I  to  be 
frightened  by  this  talk  about  taking  away  the 
character  of  a  judge,  when  you  take  away  his 
office?    All  experience  shows  that  if  you  want 


iU 


to  make  a  man  a  martyr,  your  surest  way  to  do 
it  is  by  persecution.  1  hold,  then,  that  this  re- 
sult never  -would  take  place;  that  the  honest  man 
Jiever  would  be  put  down  and  eternally  disgraced 
by  such  an  act.  if  wrongfully  removed  he  would 
be  sustained  by  the  people.  There  is  too  much 
patriotism  and  too  much  intelligence  in  this 
commonwealth  to  allow  the  innocent  man  to 
suffer.  They  never  have  done  it,  and  never  will 
do  it.  We  ask  for  equality  in  the  administra- 
tion of  justice;  and  this  is  to  be  insisted  upon 
to  the  last.  No  man  can  successfully  maintain 
that  the  character  of  a  judge  is  more  sacred  than 
the  life  of  an  individual,  yet  you  will  compel 
the  individual  to  be  tried  on  the  spot  by  a  jury, 
and  if  found  guilty,  you  will  hang  him  as  high 
as  Haman's  gallows.  Yet  a  man,  because  he  is 
a  judge,  when  he  has  violated  the  rights  of  a  citi- 
zen, must  go  to  Frankfort  for  trial.  I  call  on 
gentlemen  to  blot  out  this  horizotal  distinction; 
our  people  call  for  this;  and  they  call  with  one 
stentorian  voice  for  a  return  of  all  the  powers  of 
government  to  their  hands.  It  is  for  that  I  ask — 
for  that  equality  that  should  belong  to  a  republi- 
can people. 

I  do  not  know  that  it  becomes  me  on  the  pres- 
ent occasion  to  say  any  thing  more.  There  was 
another  point  to  which  I  desired  to  call  the  at- 
tention of  the  committee,  but  as  that  may  come 
up  at  at  another  time  more  appropriately,  I  will 
say  no  more  at  present. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not  rise  to  remark  upon 
the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
but  merely  to  refer  to  some  of  the  positions  just 
taken  by  my  friend  from  Ballard  and  McCracken. 
I  will  take  this  occasion  to  remark  that  I  look 
upon  the  independence  of  the  judiciary  as  the 
sheet  anchor  of  the  ship  of  state,  and  without 
which  there  would  be  no  security,  either  of  per- 
son or  property.  I  amforthe  independence  of  the 
judiciary,  ana  I  regard  it  as  the  great  palladium 
of  the  rights,  and  the  liberties  of  the  people  of 
this  commonwealth,  and  I  trust  in  God  that  the 
people  will  never  become  so  insane  as  to  bring 
the  jndicial  power  of  the  country  down  at  the 
feet  of  faction,  or  subject  to  the  mere  excitement 
of  popular  feeling.  The  gentleman  from  Bal- 
lard and  McCracken,  has  implored  this  conven- 
tion not  to  sacrifice  the  rights  of  the  poor,  and 
lie  seems  to  think  that  those  rights  are  to  be  pro- 
tected by  the  persecution  of  the  judicial  intelli- 
gence of  the  country.  Did  the  gentleman  ever 
enquire  how  it  was  that  men  are  influenced,  or 
what  it  is  that  can  influence  the  judge  on  the 
bench,  or  stain  the  judicial  ermine  with  corrup- 
tion? Did  he  ever  learn  that  it  was  not  the  poor 
who  could  influence  the  judge? 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  utterly  disavow  any  de- 
sign to  persecute  the  judiciary,  or  that  such  were 
my  remarks. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  did  not  say  that  the  gentle- 
man had  used  that  language,  but  his  argument 
comes  to  that  point,  and  I  am  remarking  upon 
the  effects  of  trie  gentleman's  argument.  Does 
the  gentleman  desire  to  humiliate  the  judiciary 
at  the  feet  of  popular  power,  which  in  its  wild 
excesses,  knows  no  right,  and  is  limited  by  no 
restraint?  What  is  it  that  corrupts  the  judge, 
prostitutes  the  judicial  character,  and  sinks  it  to 
the  low  and  degraded  position  of  pandering  to 
the  appetites  of  men  in  power?     Is  it  the  poor 


man  who  can  do  this?  Does  he  find  that  when 
the  rich  suitor  and  the  poor  suitor  appear  before 
the  judgment  seat,  that  the  former  is  more  likely 
to  influence  the  judge  than  the  latter?  Is  the 
judge  likely  to  be  more  sensible  to  the  approach- 
es of  the  poor  man,  than  to  the  power  and  wealth 
of  the  rich  and  powerful?  What  then  is  it  that 
ever  protects  the  rights  of  the  lowest  and  the 
meanest  in  the  commonAvealth  from  violation 
and  outrage,  but  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary and  the  integrity  of  the  judge?  When  par- 
ty spirit  is  exerted,  when  passions  sway,  and 
judgment  is  subordinate,  then  you  behold  an 
independent  judiciary  elevated  on  an  eminence 
far  above  the  .storm,  looking  down  and  calming 
the  stormy  wave,  and  throwing  the  ajgis  of  judi- 
cial protection  around  the  weak,  whom  public 
fury  would  have  sacrificed.  The  gentleman 
would  bring  down  the  judge  from  that  high  ele- 
vation; but  the  people,  the  poor  man  who  finds 
in  an  independent  judiciary  the  best  protection 
of  his  rights,  will  never  consent  to  it. 

The  gentleman  seems  to  think  that  majorities 
should  rule  and  control  in  all  things.  There  are 
some  things  in  which  majorities  ought  not  and 
cannot  rule.  What  is  the  object  of  law  at  all? 
What  is  the  object  of  constitutional  law?  What 
is  the  object  of  those  great  principles  which  are 
declared  in  our  bill  of  rights?  Does  the  gentle- 
man mean  to  say  that  the  restraints  which  are 
there  imposed  on  the  rights  of  majorities  are 
wrong?  Does  he  mean  to  strike  out  of  the  con- 
stitution of  the  state,  a  great  principle  which 
has  prevailed  throughout  the  land — that  a  bare 
majority  shall  not  take  from  me  those  great  rights 
there  secured?  It  was  to  sustain  them,  that  is 
the  very  object  of  framing  a  constitution  at  all. 
It  was  to  restrain  the  majority,  to  abridge  their 
power,  and  to  say  to  them,  "thus  far  shalt  thou 
go,  and  no  farther."  This  is  the  very  object  of 
all  law  and  constitutions. 

With  all  due  respect  to  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  I  must  enter  my  protest  against  one 
principle  contained  in  his  amendment.  It  pro- 
poses, as  I  conceive,  that  one  department  of  the 
government  shall  have  the  poAver  of  swallowing 
up  another.  Its  effect  will  be  to  make  the  judi- 
cial department  but  the  slave  of  the  legislature. 
Does  not  every  gentleman  here  see,  that  if  the 
judges  are  to  be  elected  throughout  the  country, 
that  if  it  becomes  the  organic  law.  that  the 
legislature  may  remove  the  judge  for  any  cause 
they  may  think  proper — that  they  have  but  to 
suggest  as  a  reason  why  they  should  remove  him, 
that  he  has  decided  the  act  of  assembly  to  have 
been  unconstitutionally  passed?  "iou  have 
made  a  constitution,  the  ooject  of  which  is  the 
protection  of  the  rights  of  t"lie  people — and  you 
nave  thrown  arourui  them  the  safeguards  which 
are  designated  in  the  bill  of  rights.  The  legis- 
lature, led  on  by  some  turbulent  spirit  or  other, 
violates  those  safeguards,  the  judicial  depart-" 
ment  of  the  government  steps  in  to  rescue  tnem, 
and  declares  the  law  to  be  unconstitutional — 
and  the  legislature  having  the  power  so  to  do  by 
a  bare  majority,  sweep  them  down  from  that 
high  elevation  upon  which  the  people  have 
placed  them.  Do  you  not  see  that  the  legisla- 
tive department  will  tliereby  sweep  down,  by  a 
bare  majority,  this  department  wliich  was  in- 
tended to  restrain   those  fierce  popular  excite- 


185 


ments  \fhieh  tend  to  sweep  away  all  that  is 
dear  and  valuable  to  societr.  I  shall  go  against 
the  amendment  because  of  its  tendency  to  per- 
mit one  department  to  swallow  up  another,  and 
to  drag  down  and  bring  as  a  victim  to  the  feet  of 
the  legislature,  that  great  safeguard  of  the  rights 
of  the  people — the  judiciary. 

I  rose  not  to  make  a  speech,  but  merely  to  say 
to  the  gentleman  from  Ballard  and  McCncken — 
let  him  beware  of  his  proposition. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  have  been  exceed- 
ingly edified  by  the  course  which  this  question 
has  taken  since  its  introduction  into  this  house. 
It  will  be  admitted  that  the  discursive  character 
of  the  debate  which  has  been  tolerated,  has 
evolved  all  the  elements,  out  of  which  a  pure  and 
independent  judiciary  is  to  be  constructed.  It 
was  not  mr  intention,  if  this  question  had  been 
kept  within  its  legitimate  limits,  to  have  been 
heard  in  regard  to  it.  But  I  stand  here  sir,  more 
deeply  interested  in  regard  to  making  a  pure,  in- 
dependent judiciary,  than  upon  any  other  sub- 
ject which  may  be  presented  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  convention.  When  all  the  elements 
"which  enter  into  the  structure  of  this  judiciary 
department  seem  to  be  free  for  discussion  here, 
I  feel  it  to  be  my  duty  to  those  whom  I  repre- 
sent, as  well  as  wliat  I  consider  to  be  in  obe- 
dience to  the  dictates  of  my  own  conscience,  to 
sav  a  few  words. 

"We  are  sent  here  to  reform  our  constitution  on- 
ly in  those  parts  which  public  sentiment  has  in- 
dicated should  be  reformed.  "VTe  are  not  to  de- 
molish the  constitution  under  which  we  have 
lived  for  fifty  years  in  safety  and  prosperity;  but 
to  reform  the  government  only  in  such  parte  as 
have  created  dissatisfaction  in  the  minds  of  the 
people.  The  people  of  this  State  have  found  no 
fault  with  the  constitution  except  in  some  of  its 

f>arts,  which  we  may  reform  without  going  deep- 
V  into  the  vital  principles  which  were  estab- 
lished in  1799. 

Amongst  other  things  that  either  ideally  or  re- 
ally oppress  them,  is  the  irresponsibility  of  their 
inferior  and  higher  courts.  That  irresponsibili- 
ty they  wish  to  be  changed  by  the  constitution 
which  we  are  sent  here  to  make,  and  some  prac- 
tical principle  placed  in  the  constitution  which 
Would  make  the  judiciary,  whether  high  or  low, 
more  responsible.  Experience  diflfused  through 
the  State  in  regard  to  the  action  of  the  lower 
branches  of  the  judiciary — the  experience  of  the 
oppressions  of  this  branch  of  magistracy— I 
mean  the  justice  of  peace  system,— -has  created 
a  dissatisfaction  in  regard  to  that  department  of 
the  government. 

What  is  the  great  evil  which  we  are  here  as  a 
convention  called  upon  to  correct?  I  ask  everv 
gentleman  in  this  house,  whether  or  not  the  leai 
ing  grievance  of  which  tlie  community,  that  we 
here  represent,  most  loudly  complain,  was  not 
the  grievance  arising  from  these  lower  branches 
of  the  judiciary?  I  ask  them  whether  it  in  fact 
WBS  not,  in  its  inception,  the  great  reason  why 
this  convention  should  be  called?  That  was  the 
first  real  grievance  which  led  the  people  to  agi- 
tate the  call  of  a  convention. 

Xow  sir,  as  has  been  well  and  truly  said,  we 

should  have  a  government  adapted  to'the  public 

sentiment.    The  public  sentiment,  which  is  our 

lex  non  ter^ita,  ought  to  be  obeyed,  or  it  is  not  a 

24 


government  of  the  people  at  all.  An  enactment 
that  is  not  in  accordance  with  public  sentiment, 
lies  as  a  dead  letter  on  the  statute  book.  Public 
sentiment  should  be  implicitly  obeyed,  and  its 
behests  should  be  embodied  in  the  oi^anic  law 
which  we  are  here  to  frame. 

Xow,  the  public  sentiment,  as  indicated,  in 
regard  to  the  inferior  branch  of  our  judiciary  is, 
that  the  constitqtion  should  be  altered,  in  so  far 
as  relates  to  the  manner  in  which  men  should 
hold  office,  as  Well  as  to  the  punishment  that 
should  be  inflicted  upon  them  for  malfeasance  in 
office.  Public  sentiment,  I  repeat,  has  shown 
that  clearly.  The  present  constitution  has  also 
shown  thai  their  magistracy  is  not  sufficiently 
responsible  to  the  people.  And  one  reason  why 
this  is  so,  is  because  tne  people  do  not  put  them 
in  power.  They  are  self<reated,  and  perpetuate 
themselves  by  their  own  action,  and  tnat  among 
others  has  been  given  as  a  reason  why  the  peo- 
ple voted  for  a  convention.  Let  us  elect  this 
magistracy,  and  let  us  elect  them  in  the  differ- 
ent precincts  in  which  they  reside,  giving  them 
a  proper  iurisdiction,  and  the  people  will  select 
officers  who  will  perform  the  service  properly. 
The  election  by  the  people  is  an  indication  of 
public  sentiment  which  is  unmistakeable,  and 
should  be  obeyed.  Go  higher  up,  and  what  have 
the  counties  in  the  State  indicated  in  regard  to 
the  circuit  court  judges?  Do  you  find  as  much 
unanimity  as  rou  do  in  respect  to  the  inferior 
magistracy?  In  some  count  les  there  is  some  una- 
nimity, and  in  others  they  leave,  it  to  the  dis- 
cretion of  those  whom  they  send  here.  But,  in 
regard  to  the  lower  branches,  there  is  a  unani- 
mous opinion  that  they  should  be  elected. 

In  regard  to  the  next  branch,  you  find  a  divis- 
ion on  the  broad  surface  of  Kentucky;  that  while 
some  counties  are  for  electing,  some  are  for  elect- 
ing in  one  way,  and  some  in  another.  We  find 
there  is  not  unanimity  in  this  respect.  Let  what 
I  say  be  understood  as  believed  by  me;  there  is  a 
unanimity  in  Kentnckv  to  limit  this  life  tenure, 
and  to  break  up  the  principle  of  a  tenure  during 
good  behavioi",  which  amounts  to  a  life  tenure, 
and  insert  in  lieu  thereof,  a  limited  tenure.  This 
is  a  principle  upon  which  the  people  have  fixed 
their  s<9al,  and  they  have  equally, announced  the 
limitation  principle.  Public  sentiment  must  be 
embodied  in  the  constitution,  and  it  has  fixed 
its  condemnation  upon  life  services. 

The  time  of  service  shall  be  limited,  but  with 
regard  to  the  number  of  years,  there  is  not  the 
same  agreanent  in  opinion.  We  all  agree  that 
the  services  of  a  jud^  shall  be  limited  by  a 
term  of  years;  and  whether  appointed  by  the 
governor  or  elected  by  the  legislature,  or  by  the 
people;  that  is  to  be  an  element  in  the  structure 
of  his  office.  We  all  agree  on  that — there  is  no 
difficuitT  in  the  committee  in  regard  to  this 
point.  'We  all  agree  to  limit  the  judicial  office 
to  a  term  of  years,  bat  there  arise  the  questions, 
what  further  shall  be  done  in  the  structure  of 
this  judicial  system?  How  shall  we  get  the 
jud^e  into  office?  How  long  shall  he  be  retain- 
ed in  office?  How  shall  he  be  dismissed  &om  . 
that  office?  These  questions  involve  these  propo- 
sitions. You  are  called  upon  to  make  an  office, 
and  the  first  inquiry  which  is  natural  to  a 
reasonable  mind  is,  what  is  the  object  of  the 
office?  What  do  the  people  wish  to  eflrect  through 


186 


the  medium  of  this  ministerial  agent  "were  a 
called  upon  to  constitute?  They  wish  a  judge 
who  will  decide  between  the  weak  and  the  pow- 
erful impartially.  They  wish  to  protect  one 
citizen  against  the  villanies  of  another.  They 
wish  a  judge  to  stand  as  a  barrier  against  the 
tyrannous  influences  that  may  arise  in  the  pri- 
vate walks  of  life.  What  more  do  the  people 
ask  at  your  hands  in  the  structure  of  this  office? 
He  is  not  only  to  protect  the  weak  against  the 
strong,  the  poor  against  the  wealthy  and  power- 
ful, but  lie  has  still  other  duties  to  perform. — 
Duties  higher  cannot  be  under  lieaven,  except 
the  duty  to  God.  His  duties,  then,  are  higher 
than  any  which  rest  upon  him  as  a  mere  mem- 
ber of  society.  What  are  they?  That  he  shall 
protect  the  balances  of  our  government  from 
those  usurping  tendencies  and  influences  which 
we  have  seen  in  all  times  in  the  legislative 
department  of  the  government.  And  without 
which  protection,  each  department  would  rush 
madly  and  wildly  upon  the  other,  and  in  the 
collision  sweep  down  and  destroy  all  those 
great  constitutional  barriers  which  the  wisdom 
of  ages  has  thrown  around  the  rights  and  liber- 
ties of  mankind.  Much  has  been  said  of  the 
safety  of  human  liberty  wlien  in  the  power  of 
the  legislative  department,  and  some  gentlemen 
have  been  so  inaccurate  as  to  refer  to  Roman 
history  to  sustain  their  position.  It  is  not  my 
wish  to  revert  to  that;  and  it  is  not  necessary  to 
maintain  my  position  that  I  should  do  so.  But 
liberty  has,  in  as  many  instances  suffered  through 
the  despotic  influence  of  combined  numbers  as 
through  any  other  influence  whatever,  and  the 
testimony  of  history  is  that  liberty  has  always 
expired  under  the  influence  of  factions  genera- 
ted in  such  bodies  as  tliis.  Such  may  be  the 
case  here;  but  our  judges  are  called  upon  to  stand 
between  the  citizen  and  the  usurped  authority 
on  the  part  of  the  executive  or  the  legislative 
departments.  They  are  called  upon  to  be  a 
barrier  to  protect  your  constitution  against  in- 
vasion from  either  the  executive  or  the  legisla- 
tive, and  you  must,  in  making  this  structure  of 
a  judge,  confine  yourself  to  the  view  of  its  ob- 
ject. No  mechanic  makes  a  machine  unless  he 
takes  into  view  the  object  for  which  it  is  design- 
ed. No  man  lays  down  a  proposition  except  he 
has  his  end  in  view,  and  no  politician  can  advo- 
cate a  measure  except  he  knows  what  it  is  cal- 
culated to  produce.  Hence,  we  are,  in  framing 
a  constitution  to  take  into  consideratron  all  its 
provisions  to  make  it  so  that  all  its  provisions 
can  have  a  fair  and  proper  operation.  One  gen- 
tleman has  observed  that,  in  the  course  of  duty, 
the  judiciary  is  called  on  to  stand  against  the 
action  of  the  legislature.  Your  legislature,  per- 
haps, pass  a  law  against  human  liberty  in  a 
time  ot  excitement,  such  a  time  as  may  arise  in 
this  country  on  the  slave  question,  such  a  time 
aa  might  arise  on  the  question  of  emancipation, 
or  no  emancipation,  when  men,  in  carrying  out 
the  feelings  of  their  hearts,  and  which  they  be- 
lieve to  be  riglit,  raa^  place  themselves  in  a  false 
position  before  society.  The  people  may  ap- 
peal to  the  constitution  which  gives  them  equal 
rights  aiid  privileges,  and  which  declares  that 
the  right  of  trial  by  jury  shall  be  sacred  and  in- 
violate to  them.  And  this  appeal  is  submitted 
to  the  judiciary,  whilst  a  great  majority  of  the 


legislature  have  enacted  laws  having  a  restrain- 
ing effect  on  tlie  rights  of  the  citizens.  Here  is 
a  decision  upon  an  enactment  of  the  legislature, 
which,  for  the  time  being,  receives  the  popular 
applause,  and  is  considered  correct,  but  which 
involves  some  rights,  which  were  not  agreed  upon 
when  the  charter  of  liberty  was  framed.  Here 
is  a  law  then,  which  the  legislature  has  passed, 
which  comes  in  conflict  with  the  freedom  of  the 
person  of  the  individual  under  tlie  constitution; 
and  here  is  a  judge  called  upon  to  protect  him 
from  the  xinconstitutional  eff'ect  .of  this  law  oil 
his  rights.  The  judge  then,  if  he  fulfils  the 
functions  for  which  he  is  appointed  is  bound  to 
decide  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  con- 
science, and  protect  this  citizen  if  he  is  right, 
against  legislative  and  popular  influence.  Now, 
that  is  a  proposition  which  is  far  higher  than 
any  which  relates  to  contests  between  indi- 
viduals. 

In  making  this  judge,  you  are  to  take  into 
consideration  that  tliese  exigencies  may  arise 
in  the  process  of  time,  and  that  you  are  to  con- 
fer upon  him  the  power  of  preventing  this  evil 
from  legislative  usurpation.  And  after  securing 
his  independence  the  whole  structure  of  the  of- 
fice should  conform  to  the  design  you  had  in 
view  when  you  created  it.  Well,  you  have  made 
it  in  conformity  with  the  design  which  you  had 
in  view  when  you  created  the  office,  and  the  du- 
ties which  the  judge  may  be  called  upon  to  dis- 
charge. Then  you  must  guard  him  against  the 
attacks  of  faction  in  his  course,  which  will  de- 
stroy his  power.  You  must  not  ask  a  man  to 
do  that  which  no  man  can  do,  and  which  is  im- 

Eosed  upon  no  man  in  view  of  the  frailties  of 
uman  nature,  that  which  no  man  can  do  with- 
out being  exposed  to  the  insinuations  of  tempta- 
tion, or  the  bold  assaults  of  power. 

Then,  in  making  this  department  in  conformi- 
ty to  the  duties  which  you  require,  is  there  a 
man  who  means  to  make  this  structure  anything 
but  that  which  will  produce  a  pure,  independent 
action?  Not  one.  We  all  agree  that  the  judge 
shall  be  pure,  intelligent,  independent,  yet 
when  you  aim  to  accomplish  this  object,  will 
you  surround  him  with  a  class  of  circumstances 
that  conflict  with  the  idea  of  purity  and  inde- 
pendence? If  you  do,  you  are  guilty  of  that 
which,  I  presume,  you  do  not  intend.  You 
place  him  in  circumstances  which  are  sure  to 
produce  the  reverse. 

Your  judge,  then,  must  be  independent  in  order 
that  he  may  be  pure;  he  must  have  salary  enough 
to  induce  talented  men  to  accept  the  office,  in- 
telligence enougli  to  induce  intelligent  men  to 
elect  him,  and  integrity  enough  to  resist  the 
usurping  tendencies  of'^the  otlier  departments 
of  this  government.  Then  what  is  the  proposi- 
tion that  is  laid  down  by  tlie  gentleman  from 
Nelson?  Let  us  look  at  it.  It  is  that  a  majority 
of  the  legislature  shall  remove  tliis  judge  from 
office  for  any  cause  wliich,  in  their  wise  discre- 
tion, they  may  think  proper,  by  spreading  their 
reasons  on  the  journals,  iou  desire  this  judge  to 
be  independent,  yet  you  require  him  to  do  inde- 
pendent at  the  risk  of  his  own  honor,  at  tlie  risk 
of  his  own  bread.  Ho  is  elected  by  tlie  people, 
and  removable  by  what?  A  great  mistake  seems 
to  pervade  this  house,  and  let  me  remark  upon 
that  mistake.    There  is  a  great  mistake,  as  indi- 


187 


cated  by  the  language  of  delegates  -when  they 
speak  of  the  lejislatxire  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
confound  the  idea  of  that  body  with  the  idea 
that  they  are,  in  reality,  the  people,  when  in  fact 
they  are  only  a  mjuoritv  of  a  party  of  the  peo- 
ple. The  great  object  In  making  the  judge  in- 
dependent is  to  render  him  pure  and  above  the 
influence  of  partizanoperations.  But,  in  making 
him  above  parlv  it  is  to  place  him  above  the 
sphere  of  those  influences  which  mere  partisan 
operations  have  upon  the  people.  The  difference 
between  a  party  of  the  people  and  the  people 
themselves  is  a  most  important  one.  Suppose, 
for  instance,  a  judge  is  arraigned  before  the  legis- 
lature for  the  declaration  that  the  course  which 
some  violent  emancipationist  has  taken,  is  not 
wrong,  and  that  the  fundamental  principles  of 
the  constitution,  which  secures  to  him  equal 
privileges,  have  been  violated  by  the  passage  of 
an  act  of  the  legislature  which  was  founde<l  up- 
on public  sentiment  at  the  time  of  its  enactment. 
His  punishment  is  called  for  by  public  senti- 
ment, but  like  the  weak  who  fly  to  a  fortress  of 
strength,  he  goes  to  the  charter  which  the  con- 
stitution has  erected,  and  that  charter  points  him 
to  the  judge  that  is  to  protect  him.  This  tribu- 
nal, therefore,  is  by  the  terms  of  the  resolution 
of  the  gentleman  from  Xelson,  to  be  disgraced 
by  the  legislature  if  he  dares  to  declare  that  it  has 
interfered  with  the  rights  of  this  humble  citizen; 
that  legislature  elected  bv  the  people  over  this 
broad  state,  divided  and  distracted  as  they  may 
be,  yet  still  having  a  majority  sufficient  to  carry 
out  all  the  wishes  of  the  people,  stand  here  ready 
to  represent  them  in  saying  that  this  doctrine  of 
emancipation  must  be  put  down,  even  if  it  must 
be  at  the  expense  of  the  destruction  of  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  this  government.  Xow, 
if  I  understand  the  object  of  government,  it  is  to 
protect  the  weak  against  the  .strong;  it  is  not 
made  to  protect  majorities,  but  minorities. 
Hence  there  are  certain  fundamental  principles 
and  maxims  that  are  never  to  be  disturbed. 

When  you  trace  out  the  origin  of  the  improve- 
ments that  have  taken  place  m  our  judicial  sys- 
tem, you  will  find  that  our  ancestors  have  been 
struggling  for  the  maintenance  of  that  princi- 
ple from  the  time  of  King  John,  when  they  se- 
cured to  themselves  the  principles  of  Magna 
Charta,  the  foundation  of  all  those  parliamenta- 
TV  provisions,  that  were  enacted  from  time  to 
time,  giving  personal  liberty,  and  which  they 

filaced  upon  their  statute  books.  "We  read  in  Eng- 
ish  historv,  that  in  the  time  of  the  Plantage- 
nets  and  the  Tudors,  the  liberties  of  the  subject 
were  repeatedly  violated,  either  by  the  king,  or 
bv  whatever  power  had  the  ascendency.  And 
although  the  English  people  had  the  name  of  be- 
ing free,  they  never  had  an  inch  of  freedom,  nor 
ever  did  enjoy  it  in  fact,  for  the  want  of  one 
great  desideratum  in  their  system  of  civil  polity. 
And  what  was  the  reason  that  this  system  of  poli- 
tv  was  so  corrupt,  that  with  all  theirpaper  rights, 
tiey  still  were  not  free?  Their  property  was 
not  secure,  and  their  lives  and  their  liberties  out- 
raged by  the  laws  of  the  land.  Let  me  refer 
gentlemen  to  that  state  of  things,  and  let  me  en- 
treat them  to  pause  and  reflect  on  the  reason  that 
this  people  aid  not  enjoy  their  liberties.  At 
that  perioil,  although  their  system  of  civil  polity 
vas  considered  complete,  yet  they  did  not  enjoy 


that  polity  in  security.    It  was  on  account  of  the 
administration  of  the  law  by  a  dependent  judi- 
ciary, and  because  it  was  a  mere  idle  farce  to 
proclaim  aman  free whilethe  kingandthe parlia- 
ment might  tram  pie  his  dearest  rights  underfoot, 
j  and    he    have  no  protection.    These    freemen, 
from  whose  loins  we  are  descended,  and  who 
!  are  the  pride  of  human  nature — these  freemen 
j  and  law-abiding  people,  a  people  governed  by 
a  common  sense  principle  m  ail  their  actions, 
both    national   and  individual — a  people  who 
look  upon  human  government,  as  the  most  difli- 
cult  on  earth,  as  a  science  that  should  be  made 
I  more  and  more  perfect,  as  necessity  points  out — 
'_  this  people,  I  say,  endured  these  gnevanees  pa- 
jtientlyand  impatiently,  according  to  the  circum- 
stances that  surrounded  them,  till   having  wan- 
dered through   a  labyrinth  of  difficulties,  and 
after  having  listened  to  the  voice  of  the  wise 
Bacon,  (that  judge  so  famous  for  receiving  the  in- 
I  fluence  of  private  solicitation,)  these  people  who 
i  had  lived  for  ages,  and  laid  up  the  maxims  out 
i  of  which  human  wisdom  is  made — these  people , 
j  at  last  found  out  that  the  great  cause  why  their 
liberty  was  only  in  name,  and  their  property  se- 
cure only  in   name,  was  for  the  want  of  some 
ministerial    agency,   some  power  engrafted  on 
their  civil  jiolity,  to  hold  up  the  w^k  against 
the  strong. 

Why  is  it  that  from  that  day  to  this  no  power 
has  been  found  that  will   secure  that  solitary 
principle,  the  protection  of  the  weak  against  the 
strong?    Why  is  it  that  the  great  desideratum  of 
government  has  never  yet  been  discovere<l,  that 
the  weak  might  be  protected  in  his  propertv  and 
his  liberty  against  the  strong?    Why  was  it  that 
j  beings  lifee  us,  enlightened  as  they  were  in  an- 
icient   times,    failed  to    make    this    discovery? 
I  Why  was  it  that  the  democracy  of  Athens,  w&o 
1  conceived  themselves  so  wise  in  all  the  princi- 
j  pies  of  government,  failed?    Whv  was  it  that 
the  numerous  attempts  to  establish  a  republic  in 
{  Rome  was  unsuccessful?    Why  was  it  that  the 
j  praetor,  when  he  went  into  power,  was  onlv 
j  asked  to  be  consistent  with  himself?    When  we 
refer  to  the  times  to  which  I  have  alluded,  we 
j  discover  that  it  was  the  ignorance  of  the  prin- 
■  ciple,  which  would  secure  the  weak  against  the 
strong,  which  caused  those  failures  to  establish 
self-government.     That  principle  never  was  dis- 
covered till  our  ancestry  in  England,  havings 
passed  through  the  process  of  adventurous  ex- 
periments, were  forced,  by  the  necessity  of  the 
occasion,  to  adopt  the  plan  of  an  independent 
judiciary. 

Surround  such  a  man  as  Bacon,  an  ornament 
to  the  human  intellect,  a  most  astounding  phe- 
nomenon of  human  intellect,  surround  him  with 
favorable  circumstances,  let  him  not  look  to 
power  to  hold  him  in  office,  give  him  a  salary 
sufficient  to  place  him  above  temptation,  in 
other  respects,  and  a  more  pure  and  noble  in- 
stance of  the  mind  of  man  has  never  been 
known  since  the  days  of  the  earliest  memory  of 
man.  The  circumstances  which  surrounded 
this  great  man  were  the  cause  of  his  lack  of  pu- 
rity and  independence.  Circumstances  formed 
the  man.  Where  you  meet  with  one  man  in  this 
high  position,  who  walks  like  a  giant  above 
all  circumstances  around  him,  you  meet  with  s 
million  who  are  themere  creatures  of  cireamstan- 


1^ 


era.  That  man  is  the  true  genius,  who  can  make 
circumstances  bow  to  the  high  behests  of  his  own 
intellect.  That  man,  to  whom  I  have  referred. 
Lord  Bacon,  was  not  that  elevated  genius.  He 
was  an  instance  of  a  giant  intellect,  thrown 
down  by  circumstances  and  temptation,  into  ab^ 
ject  contempt.  Go  on  from  tliat  period  and 
trace  the  rise  of  the  judicial  structure,  and  you 
will  find  that  it  lasted  till  the  days  of  William, 
and  Mary,  till  after  public  sentiment  had  been 
whipped  into  maturity  of  wisdom;  and  this 
great  desideratum,  the  independence  and  purity 
of  a  judge,  was  discovered. 

Wlien  you  get  to  that  epoch  of  time,  shortly 
after  the  expulsion  of  James  II.  for  crimes  which 
never  can  be  atoned  for,  among  other  principles 
asserted,  is  the  principle  that  the  judge  shall 
hold  ofiice  during  good  oehavior;  that  he  shall  be 
subject  to  no  power  but  the  power  of  God,  in 
inscribing  a  deep  sense  of  right  on  his  conscience 
in  all  his  relations  to  the  great  King,  or  the  mi- 
nor King. 

That  independence  which  is  secured  by  put- 
ting the  judge  in  office  during  good  behavior, 
is  the  most  important  principle  that  can  affect 
the  human  character.  This  independence  is  ab- 
solutely essential  to  the  character  of  a  judge,  as 
essential  as  in  any  department  of  this  govern- 
ment. A  paper  constitution  is  nothing  without 
efficacy  and  sanction.  A  principle  is  nothing 
unless  it  can  be  carried  out  practically-  An 
abstract  principle  may  be  correct,  yet  when  it  is 
reduced  to  practice,  it  may  prove  its  inadequacy 
for  the  end;  but,  the  very  beauty  of  the  science 
of  government  is,  that  although  it  is  fit  on  prin- 
ciple, yet  in  practice  it  produces  effects  perfectly 
answering  the  purposes  of  its  institution.  Your 
abstract  proposition  is,  that  vou  will  have  a  bal- 
anced government  and  an  independent  judiciary, 
and  you  will  reduce  these  two  principles  to  prac- 
tice. And  how  are  you  to  do  it?  Are  you  to 
guess  at  the  manner  in  which  it  is  to  be  accom- 
plished? Are  you  to  destroy  the  government 
which  your  ancestry  framed,  and  adopt  a  mere 
guess-work  form  of  government,  or  are  you  to 
look  to  the  light  of  experience,  which  you  have 
as  a  guide,  and  which  penetrates  beyond  the 
bounds  of  speculation  into  the  regions  of  real- 

Your  design  is  to  make  an  independent  judge, 
and  in  the  word  independence,  we  will  include 
ideas  which  must  go  with  it — purity  and  intelli- 
gence; for,  no  judge  can  perform  his  duty  if  he 
IB  dependent  upon  those  around  him.  But  you 
can  make  him  pure  and  intelligent  as  the  neces- 
sary consequence  of  independence. 

I  have  shown  why  Lord  Bacon  and  other  emi- 
nent jurists  failed  to  reach  the  character,  which  we 
have  seen  in  modem  times.  It  was  because  they 
held  their  power  during  the  pleasure  of  those 
that  placed  them  in  office.  But  we  are  called  on 
to  limit  this  life  service,  and  the  public  senti- 
ment must  be  gratified.  We  are  not  bound  to 
demolish  that  principle  in  our  constitution ;  we 
are,  however,  bound  to  limit  the  term  of  office, 
for  this  is  absolutely  necessary  to  obey  the  will 
of  those  who  sent  us  here.  Now,  can  we  obey 
that  will  and  still  retain  in  this  Judicial  system 
this  important  principle  of  judicial  indepen- 
dence? I  say  we  can,  that  this  object  can  be 
achieved,  and  that  we  can  now  make  another  ad- 


vance iri  the  science  of  government  beyond  that 
which  was  made  by  the  wisdom  of  those  who 
have  gone  before  us.  They  attained  the  greatest 
independence  by  allowing  the  judges  to  retain 
their  office  during  good  behavior;  we  can  attain 
the  desideratum  by  permitting  them  to  retain 
their  office  for  a  term. of  years.  It  is  not  so  im- 
portant how  a  judge  gets  into  office,  as  that  he 
shall  have  no  temptation  when  he  shall  have 
taken  his  seat.  The  manner  of  his  appointment 
is  not  so  important,  as  that,  after  he  secures  that 
appointment,  he  shall  properly  discharge  the  du- 
ties which  belong  to  his  station.  The  elective 
principle,  therefore,  may  be  considered  as  the 
manner  of  putting  him  in  office,  and  the  tenure 
of  office  for  a  term  of  years,  may  be  adopted  and 
still  he  will  be  pure.  The  independence  of  a 
judge  in  England,  did  not  arise  from  the  cir- 
cumstance that  he  was  appointed  for  life,  but 
from  the  fact  that  if  he  behaved  well  he  could 
not  be  removed,  and  that  he  had  no  occasion 
whatever,  to  look  to  any  source  for  his  continu- 
ance in  office  except  his  own  merits.  Now,  I 
wish  this  idea  to  be  well  weighed  by  gentlemen. 
The  judge  was  not  put  in  for  a  term  of  years  by 
the  King,  to  be  again  appointed  at  the  end  of 
that  term  by  the  same  King,  because  if  so,  he 
would  have  been  under  the  influence  of  tenrpta- 
tion  to  propitiate  the  kind  feelings  of  that  King 
that  he  might  secure  a  second  appointment.  He 
was  not  re-eligible  to  office  because  if  he  was 
turned  out  of  it  he  suffered  the  fines  and  penal- 
ties incident  to  that  disgraceful  position.  He 
was  placed  in  an  office,  the  term  of  which  was 
limited  by  life  if  he  behaved  himself  well. 

Now,  what  is  it?  You  put  a  man  into  office, 
and  say  to  him  if  you  behave  yourself,  you  shall 
remain.  In  order  to  remove  from  him  any  temp- 
tation, (such  as  existed  in  the  heart  of  the  English 
judiciary  to  succumb  to  the  appointing  power,) 
I  say  the  principle  ought  to  be  incoqjorated  in 
the  constitution  that  he  shall  iiotbe  re-elligible — 
that  he  shall  hold  his  office  during  this  term  of 
years,  provided  he  behaves  himself;  and  when 
that  term  shall  have  elapsed,  he  shall  go  out  of 
power  for  at  least  one  term..  Let  us  consider  this 
matter  and  inquire  what  we  shall  have  gained 
by  inserting  this  principle  in  the  constitution. 
Like  causes  will  produce  similar  effects  in  the 
moral  as.  well  as  in  the  physical  world.  The 
great  cause  of  the  independence  of  the  English 
judiciary  was,  they  were  not  under  the  influence 
of  power.  The  same  cause  taust  be  produced 
here. 

Look  at  the  man  who  is  chosen  for  eight  years, 
and  then  is  a  candidate  for  re-election.'  See 
what  a  spectacle  will  be  presented  to  the  people 
of  Kentucky.  Your  judge  is  to  be  elected  oy 
the  people  at  large,  that  is  a  concession  I  admit. 
Your  people  are,  therefore,  to  elect  your  judges. 
A  man  is  a  man  in  whatever  guise  he  may  be, 
and  when  a  candidate  comes  before  you  he  will 
mingle  with  the  people.  Now,  I  am  no  servile 
adulator  of  man  as  man,  or  of  man  as  many; 
and  although  I  have  heard  an  adulation  in  re- 
gard to  the  people  that  would  make  me  think  I 
was  any  where  else  but  in  this  body,  though  I 
have  a  respect  for  the  people  which  those  should 
have  who  resort  to  this  adulation,  still  I  know 
the  people.  I  know  the  people  of  Kentucky  are 
influenced  by  common  sense  and  justice,  and 


they  suspect  that  man,  who  is  alwayssayinglhe  l^hich  should  make  a  ^  proud  and^  honest  man 
people  cannot  err;  and  that  man  who  expects  to  blush.  But  nothing  but  necessity  has  caused  it. 
rise  into  favor  with  the  people  bv  appealing  to  1  It  is  the  plea  of  necessity  that  always  gives  the 
.,        •  ,   i r  1  jfli-Ji %.  T*ko^„  ^r^r^c.  l+T-ront  Vi  «  PTPnsp     Tt.  wM  the  olea  of  my  neces- 


them  in  such  terms  of  adulation  as  I  have  some- 
times heard — I  do  not  mean  to  allude  to  any  one 
in  this  convention — will  fail  in  his  attempt  to  se- 
cure their  favor;  but  a  manly  independent  course 
before  the  people  of  this  state,  telling  them  what 
is  true,  though  it  operates  against  you>  is  a  course 
that  will  be  sustained  by  the  people,  and  will 
more  surely  attain  the  public  favor  than  any 
other  course  whatever.  Now,  if  the  judge  comes 
before  the  people,  he  comes  before  a  people  of 
this  kind,  although  you  may  look  at  it  as  para 


tvrant  his  excuse.  It  was  the  plea  of  my  neces- 
sity which  caused  me  to  sacrifice  the  principle 
which  I  ought  to  cherish  more  than  any  other— 
my  own  self-respect. 

He  is  in  power  though,  and  he  holds  that  pow- 
er subject  to  the  will  of  the  people  for  re-elec- 
tion. In  England  the  king  or  parliament  put 
the  judge  in  power.  This  person,  was  he  put 
there  by  the  people— by  the  whig  or  the  demo- 
cratic party?  Every  man  will  say  it  was  the  lit- 
tle floating  party  t&at  elected  him.    What  have 


doxical!  The  people  will  be  generally  divided  ^g  seen  in  the  great  state  of  Ohio?  After  great 
into  two  classes,  and  these  parties — whigs  and  trouble  and  confusion  the  legislature  of  that 
democrats — perhaps  are  nearly  equally  divided,    g^ate  was  organized.     It  became  the  duty  of  that 

v.. 4-    ♦■l^rt^..-.     ;.:!     Q -n /-it V. nT>    rilacs   ■minorlincr    With    tlie  1  \^-^^l-.-      ii*^/4.i».    tTi^  r» 


but  there   is   another  class  mingling  with  the 
people.    What  class  is  that?    It  is  a  class  found 
m  every  republic,  which  floats  between  the  two 
great  parties,  gi^'ing  first  to  one  party  the  as- 
cendency, and  then  to  the  other.     The  effect  of 
this  floa'ting  vote  has  been  shown  in  many  cases 
within  the  knowledge  of  gentlemen  during  the 
last  thirty  years.     What  caused  the  election  of 
General  flafrison,  except  the  inclination  of  this 
floating  interest  to  his  side?    And  what  but  this, 
produced  the  election  of  Gen.  Taylor?    If  this 
proposition  has  proved  true  on  a  large  scale,  are 
you  to  expect  it  will  be  otherwise  upon  a  limited 
one  in  this  commonwealth?    When  your  candi- 
dates for  re-election  present  themselves  before 
the  people,  what  is  likely  to  be  the  practice  of 
the  two  parties?     The  two   great  parties  stand 
out  prominently,  but  here  is  another  party,  which 
ought  not  to  be  classed  among  the  people.     This 
judge  is  to  be  elected.     His  mind  is  anxious  and 
he  tegins  to  weigh  his  chances  of  success,  and 
he  thinks  he  must  propitiate  this  floating  party. 
Here  are  a  thousana  voters  on  one  side,  and  nine 
hundred  upon  the  other,  aud  one  hundred  and 
fifty  floating  voters  who  must  be  propitiated. 
Wfiat  is  to  be  done?    I  ought  not  to  ask  that 


body,  under  the  constitution  and  laws  of  that 
stat«,  to  elect  a  senator  in  congress  and  judges. 
There  it  was  that  a  little,  insignificant  band  of 
fanatics,  called  free  soilers,  insignificant  in  num- 
ber, more   insignificant  in  intellect,  showed  it- 
self in  the  legislature.     Neither  of  the  great  par- 
ties holding  the  balance  of  power,  the  potency 
of  this  little  party  was  sorely  ifelt.     They  held 
the  balance  of  power  and  dictated  to  the  demo- 
cratic party  the  course  to  be  pursued  in  the  elec- 
tion of  these  high  ofiicers.     Thev  told  the  dem- 
cratic  party  if  they  would  come  into  their  terms, 
they  should  have  success  in  the  fond  wish  of 
their  hearts.     They  gave  them  the  United  States 
senator,  and  then  this  little  party,  composed  of 
three  men,  demanded  the  judiciary  of  the  state! 
Now  what  happens  in  a  body  constituted  of 
one  hundred  and  fifty,  may  happen  in  one  of  an 
hundred  thousand.  '  The  same  cause  may  pro- 
duce the  same  results  when  acting  in  the  broad 
space  of  unlimited  numbers,  and  just  so  certain- 
ly will  this  small  irresponsible  party,  dictate  in 
the   counties   of  this  state,  who   shall  be  the 
judge.     The  judge  looks  then  to  that  party  as 
the  source  and  origin  of  his  power,   and  wilh 
great  propriety  he  looks  to  them  for  his  re-elee- 


question;  human  nature  is  human  nature,  and  UJoq,    Is  that  a  proposition  that  is  understood 

proud  as  hnman  intellect  may  be,  or  elevated  as   jjgr^  by  this  house?     The  very  power  of  his  ap 

your  principles  of  morality  may  be,  when  your  |  pointment  he  has  to  look  to  for  his  re-appoint 

mind  is  inflamed,  you  are"  sure  to  call  to  your   ^„„+ 

aid  this  balance  o'f  power  which   may  decide 

your  fate.     Ton  are  sure  to  propitiate  it  with  all 

the  will  that  your  nature  can  invent.     Is  this  a 

true   or  a  false   picture   of  the  practical   effect 

which  will  be  produced  by  the  election  of  the 

judiciary  by  the  people?  'is  it  a  true  or  a  false 

Eicture  of  the  practices  to  which  our  iudges  will 
ave  to  resort  to  obtain  this  high  elevation  of 
the  judgeship.  If  it  is  true,  there  is  nothing 
but  a  power,  which  must  be  abiding  in  this 
house,  which  will  make  me  yield  to  the  election 
of  the  judiciary  by  the  people.    In  deference. 


ment. 

In  England  the  judge  was  put  in  for  life,  and 
of  course  he  was  ineligible.  Then  incorporate 
this  same  principle  during  good  behaviour.  But 
how?  Say  he  shall  not  be  re-elected — give  him 
a  good  salary — incorporate  that  salary  in  the 
constitution — ^then  make  that  judge  ineligible, 
and  although  you  have  demolished  that  judicial, 
structure  which  we  have  borrowed  from  Eng- 
land, vou  have  constructed  one  which  will  se- 
cure t£e  same  end  that  was  designed  to  be  secur- 
ed by  the  old  structure.     But  gentlemen  say 


of  the  judiciary  by  the  people.    In  deferent-e,    ^here  is  no  stimulant  for  the  judge  to  behave  well 
however,_  to  that   power  which  I  inow  to  be    ^^^^^e  in  office,  unless  he  is  to  be  placed  before 


present  in  this  house,  I  have  conceded  this 
question.  The  judge  has  assumed  his  seat  for  a 
term  of  years,  limited,  some  say  to  four  and 
some  to  eight  years;  he  has  received  his  salary, 
his  honors,  and  the  only  dark  spot  in  hisremin- 
isence  is  the  corrupt  scene  through  which  hi;  was 
forced  to  pass,  to  obtain  his  office.  But  oh  what 
a  sad  condition.  It  has  caused  me  to  lose  my 
self-respect.  I  have  had  to  pass  through  the 
ordeal.  I  have  obtained  office,  but  I  have  lost 
my  self-respect.    I  have  condescended  to.do  that 


while  in  office,  unless  he  is  to  be  placed  before 
his  constituents  again.  Let  us  look  at  it.  I  know 
that  I  am  detaining  the  house  longer  than  they 
want  to  be  detained,  but  the  subject  under  con- 
sideration rises  above  every  other  subject. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  here  rose  and  asked 
the  gentleman  from  Fleming  to  give  way  for  the 
purpose  of  enabling  him  to  make  a  motion  that 
the  committee  rise. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHLL  assented. 
I     Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  then  moved  that  the 


190 


committee  rise,  report  progress,  and  ask  leave  to 
sit  again. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  leave  was  granted, 
and  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  OCTOBER  21,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Noetok. 

CONTESTED    ELECTION. 

Mr.  ROOT,  from  the  committee  on  Elections, 
made  the  following  report: 

Your  committee,  to  whom  was  referred  the 
memorial  of  Joseph  Leeompte,  contesting  the 
right  of  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  the  delegate  returned 
to  serve  in  this  convention  from  the  county  of 
Henry,  which  memorial  is  as  follows: 
"To  the  honorable,  the  constitutional  convention  oj 

Kentucky,  now  assembled  in  the  city  of  Frank- 
fort. 

"Your  memorialist,  Joseph Lecomfte,  a  citizen 
of  Henry  county,  Kentucky,  claims  that  he  is  en- 
titled to  membership  in  your  honorable  body, 
inexclusion  of  Elijah  F.  ISuttall,  Esq.,  who  now 
occupies  aseat  upon  the  floor  of  said  body,  claim- 
ing to  represent  the  county  of  Henry:  and  your 
memorialist  shows  the  following  causes  upon 
which  he  predicates  his  claims. 

"1st.  Your  memorialist  avers,  that  he  was  a 
candidate  for  membership  in  your  body  at  the 
last  August  election  in  Henry  county,  and  that 
your  memorialist  having  all  the  legal  qualifica- 
tion for  membership,  as  aforesaid,  and  being  op- 
posed by  the  said  Nuttall,  was  elected  over  the 
said  Nuttall,  by  having  a  majority  of  all  the  le- 
gally qualified  voters,  who  voted  at  said  elec- 
tion, to  vote  for  your  memorialist,  over  said 
Nuttall. 

"2d.  Your  memorialist  avers  that  tlie  poll- 
books  of  all  the  places  of  voting  in  Henry 
county,  do,  in  fact,  show  upon  their  face,  that 
your  memorialist  did  receive  a  majority  of  the 
total  number  of  votes  cast  at  said  election;  and 
he  claims  in  virtue  thereof,  that  he  is  entitled 
to  the  seat  as  the  delegate  for  Henry  county. 

"3d.  Yet,  nevertheless,  your  memorialist  avers, 
that  the  returning  officer,  who  was  entitled  to 
certify  the  election  of  the  delegate  who  might 
be  elected,  certified  to  the  Secretary  of  State 
that  the  said  Nuttall  was  elected;  and,  in  virtue 
thereof,  the  said  Nuttall  hath  taken  his  seat  in 
your  honorable  body;  when,  in  fact  your  me- 
morialist avers,  that  the  said  poll-books  show 
your  memorialist  to  have  been  entitled  to  said 
certificate  by  ten  votes:  but  your  memorialist 
avers  that  he  is  entitled  to  said  seat  for  other 
reasons:  he  charges, 

"4th.  That  voters  voted  for  said  Nuttall 
who  were  not  citizens  of  the  county  of  Henry 
at  the  time  of  voting. 

"5th.  That  voters  duplicat«d  their  votes 
for  said  Nuttall. 

"6th.  That  persons,  who  were  under  the 
age  of  21  years,  voted  for  said  Nuttall. 

"7th.  Tnat  citizens  of  Shelby  county  voted 
for  said  Nuttall. 

"8th.  That,  in  these  and  other  respects, 
there  were  two  hundred  illegal  votes  for  said 
Nattall. 


"Wherefore,  your  memorialist  prays  that  the 
proper  steps  may  be  set  on  foot  to  ascertain  the 
truth  of  the  case,  and  that  your  honorable  body 
will  declare  your  memorialist  entitled  to  a  seat 
in  this  convention,  as  a  member  thereof,  provided 
it  shall  turn  out  that  your  memorialist  is,  in 
law,  entitled  thereto.  And  your  memorialist 
will  ever  pray,  <fec.,  <fec., 

"JOSEPH  LECOMPTE." 
have  had  the  same  under  consideration,  and  re- 
port thereon:  That  it  Avas  agreed  by  the  memo- 
rialist, on  his  part,  to  withdraw  all  the  allega- 
tions in  his  memorial,  except  the  second,  and  to 
rely  on  that  alone — 

"2d.  Your  memorialist  avers,  that  the  poll- 
books  of  all  the  places  of  voting  in  Henry 
county,  do,  in  fact,  show  upon  their  face,  that 
your  memorialist  did  receive  a  majority  of  the 
total  number  of  votes  cast  at  said  election;  and 
he  claims  in  virtue  thereof,  that  he  is  entitled 
to  the  seat  as  the  delegate  for  Henry  county." 
And  on  the  part  of  the  sitting  member,  Elijah 
F.  Nuttall,  that  he  would  rely  alone,  upon  show- 
ing the  fact,  that  after  the  said  election,  and  after 
the  poll-books  were  returned  to  the  clerk's  office 
of  the  said  county  of  Henry,  that  the  poll-books 
for  the  precinct  of  New  Castle,  in  said  county, 
were  changed,  altered,  and  forged,  and  that 
twenty-six  marks  (or  votes)  were  placed  in  Le- 
compte's  columns  opposite  to  the  names  of  divers 
persons,  who  voted  for  neither  of  the  parties  in 
this  contest,  at  the  August  election.  The  issue 
being  thus  formed,  and  the  onus  probandiihxo^n. 
upon  Nuttall,  the  said  Nuttall  proceeded  to  call 
his  witnesses,  when  Leeompte,  by  his  counsel, 
moved  your  committee  to  exclude  all  parol  tes- 
timony, tending  to  show  any  alteration  or  forge- 
ry of  the  poll-books  of  the  said  county  of  Hen- 
ry; which  motion,  being  fully  heard,  on  the  part 
of  Leeompte,  was  overruled.  Whereupon,  Le- 
eompte, by  his  counsel,  demanded  a  specifica- 
tion, in  writing,  of  the  votes,  that  the  sitting 
member  alledges  to  have  been  forged  upon  the 

E oil-books  of  New  Castle,  and  it  was  furnished 
im: 

15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 


John  Roberts, 
F.  Roberts, 
S.  T.  Drane, 
Edward  Ransdale, 
J.  C.  Sheperd. 

20.  John  Ransdale, 

21.  James  Whitehead, 

22.  John  Radford, 

23.  Tho.J.  Bruce, 

24.  Josiah  Bridgeman, 

25.  R.  Shockensey, 

26.  Richard  Neale, 


1.  Samuel  Eddy, 

2.  Charles  Allen, 

3.  Uriah  Edwards, 

4.  A.  W.  Pritchett, 

5.  W.  L.  Batts, 

6.  James  Johnson, 

7.  M.  Luckett, 

8.  Wm.  Harris, 

9.  John  Shryock, 

10.  Jain^s  Hawkins, 

11.  Gideon  King, 

12.  B.  F.  Owen, 

13.  T.  H.  Meriwether,  27.  A.  Force. 

14.  Tho.  L.  Jklartin, 

Wereupon,  the  memorialist,  (Leeompte,)  declin- 
ed all  further  contest,  and  withdrew  any  further 
claim  to  aseat  in  this  convention. 

Your  committee  would  further  report:  That, 
from  an  examination  of  the  poll-books,  from  the 
said  precinct  of  New  Castle,  that  they  are  of 
the  opinion,  tliat  votes  had  been  added  to  Le- 
compte's  columns,  opposite  to  divers  names  of 
voters,  since  the  "footing up"  of  said  poll-books 
by  the  clerk  of  the  election;  and  tliis  was  more 
apparent  to  your  committee  from  the  fact,  that 


191 


no  such  errors  appeared  in  the  addition  of  the 
votes  of  either  of  the  other  candidates.  Your 
committee  enumerated  the  number  of  votes 
upon  the  Xew  Castle  poH-book  iu  Lecomtpo's 
columns,  and  found  that  the  number  of  marks 
standing  for  votes,  exceeded  upon  each  pa^e, 
except  one,  of  said  poll-book,  the  clerk's  addi- 
tion, from  two  to  four  votes. 

Your  committee  also  report  the  following  reso- 
lution: 

Resolved,  That  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  who  has 
been  returned  by  the  sheriff  of  Henry  county,  to 
have  been  duly  elected,  at  the  last  August  elec- 
tion, a  delegate  to  this  convention  from  the  coun- 
ty aforesaid,  was  duly  elected  by  the  qualified 
voters  of  said  county;  and  is  entitled  to  his  seat 
upon  this  floor. 

The  PRESIDENT  stated  the  question  to  be 
on  the  adoption  of  the  resolution. 

Mr.  BOl  D  called  for  the  veas  and  navs. 
Mr.  XUTTALL  said  he' would  like"  to  have 
them  taken.  He  had  been  extremely  anxious 
that  the  committee  should  have  received  some 
of  the  testimony  on  the  question  of  forgery,  but 
they  thought  that  the  withdrawal  of  the  contest 
was  perhaps  an  admission  of  the  fact.  He  was 
better  acquainted  with  the  tactics  of  his  com- 
petitor at  home  than  perhaps  any  gentleman  on 
this  floor,  and  he  should  like  to  have  the  yeas  and 
nays  taken.  In  fact  it  was  at  his  suggestion 
that  the  gentleman  from  Trigg  made  the  call. 

Mr.  C.  A  WICKLIFFE  suggested  that  the 
vote  should  be  taken,  and  if  there  were  any  noes 
then  the  veas  and  nays  could  be  called  for.J 

The  PRESIDEXT  put  the  question  on  the 
adoption  of  the  resolution,  and  it  was  agreed  to 
unanimously. 

Mr.  HARiDI2f  brought  before  the  convention 
the  question  of  paying  the  expense  of  this  eon- 
test.  He  said  there  had  been  many  witnesses 
brought  to  this  city  at  an  expense  of  several 
hundred  dollars. 

The  PRESIDEXT  intimated  that  no  claim 
was  made  bv  the  witnesses. 

Mr.  HARblX  replied  that  he  understood  their 
attorney  had  paid  the  money  for  them. 

Mr.  NUT  TALL  said  he  had  already  paid  a 
portion  of  the  witnesses,  but  he  did  not  con- 
ceive that  these  expenses  should  fall  upon  him 
under  the  circumstances. 

Mr.  HARDIX  said  before  this  contest  was 
commenced,  Mr.  Lecompte  enquired  from  him 
who  would  be  adjudged  to  pay  the  costs;  and  he 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  replied  that  he  supposed  the  state 
would  pay  if  there  was  probable  ground  for  the 
contest,  and  if  not,  that  Mr.  Lecompte  would 
have  to  pay  them.  Mr.  Lecompte  added  that  he 
was  exceedingly  poor,  and  did  not  wish  to  be 
obliged  to  pay.  It  did  not  now  appear  that  Mr. 
Lecompte  had  probable  ground  whereon  to  con- 
test the  seat  of  the  sitting  member,  and  it  would 
be  better  if  the  state  should  pay.  He  (Mr.  H.) 
had  felt  bound  to  make  this  statement. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  thought  that  from  $70  to  .$100 
would  pay  the  whole  expense  of  the  prosecu- 
tion, including  the  witnesses. 

The  PRESIDENT  interposed  and  said  there 
was  no  question  before  the  convention. 
The  conversation  then  dropped. 

COCBT  OF   APPEALS. 

The  convention  again  resolved  itself  into  com- 


mittee of  the  whole  on  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  court  of  appeals,  Mr.  Huston  in 
the  chair. 

ilr.  il.  P.  MARSHALL.  The  discussion  of 
the  subjects  involved  in  the  question,  so  exceed- 
ingly important  in  their  character  and  bearing, 
on  Saturday  last  exhausted  me  physically;  and 
this  morning  I  feel  the  propriety  of  putting  off 
the  discussion  of  this  point  till  a  more  propitious 
period.  The  independence  of  the  judiciary  is  a 
standard  principle  iu  its  character,  which  'must 
be  engrafted  into  the  constitution,  which  we 
make  in  this  house.  And  in  view  of  having  it 
thus  engrafted  I  will  read  a  proposition  which 
in  its  proper  place  and  at  the  proper  time  I  will 
offer  for  the  action  of  the  convention. 

"The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  shall  re- 
'  ceive  each  a   fixed  annual  salarv  of  not  less 

'  than  dollars,  and   be   inelligible  for  the 

'  succeeding  term  after  the  expiration  of  the  time 
'for  which  they  shall  have  been  elected." 

This  distinct  proposition,  carrying  with  it  a 
principle  which  it  is  nece-ssary  should  be  en- 
grafted on  a  judicial  structure,  wiU  be  submitted 
at  the  proper  time,  and  I  hope  it  will  then  re- 
ceive the  aid  of  all  those  who  view  the  matter 
as  I  do.  I  believe  the  proper  time  has  not  now 
arrived,  and  therefore  I  shall  not  trouble  the 
house  with  any  more  remarks. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  designed  making  one  or 
two  remarks  further  in  this  case,  but  I  have  con- 
versed with  the  honorable  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, and  he  says  that  he  is  desirous  of  closing 
the  debate.  If  any  gentleman  is  desirous  of 
speaking,  I  will  not  speak  at  the  present  time. 
If  not,  I  will  submit  a  few  remarks. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  do  not  design  to  make  a 
speech  on  this  question,  but  it  has  excited  con- 
siderable interest  in  the  house,  and  perhaps  in 
the  country.  I  only  design  to  give  my  reasons 
why  I  will  not  vote  for  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson.  Members  have  assign- 
ed various  reasons,  and  unless  I  assign  mine,  my 
constituents  might  place  me  among  those  who 
have  given  reasons  of  which  I  do  not  approve. 
Most  of  the  members  have  set  out  with  the  prop- 
osition that  they  were  original  convention  men. 
I,  too,  claim  to  have  been  an  original  conven- 
tion man.  I  claim  to  be  one  of  those  who  go  as 
far  in  favor  of  reform  as  any  gentleman  in  this 
house.  •  I  think,  with  other  'members  who  have 
addressed  the  committee,  that  all  power  belongs 
to  the  people,  and  that  power  should  be  exer- 
cised for  their  good.  I  claim  for  them  the 
sovereignty  in  this  land,  but  it  seems  they  have 
.sent  me  here  to  yield  up  a  portion  of  it  and  to 
frame  a  government  that  shall  be  enduring.  "We 
have  divided  our  government  into  three  several 
parts.  The  executive  power  we  confine  to  one, 
the  law-making  power  to  another,  and  the  judi- 
ciarv  to  a  third.  Our  government,  without  go- 
ing "back  to  England,  and  to  the  history  of  the 
past,  is  framed  on  the  principle  of  checks  and 
balances.  This  principle  should  be  kept  up  and 
not  destroyed. 

The  law-making  power  is  one  part  of  this  gov- 
ernment; it  is  that  department  to  which  the  peo- 
ple of  this  state  look  with  more  jealousy  than 
any  other.  But  they  have  thrown  a  protection 
upon,  and  have  made  the  judiciary  supreme. 
They  are  the  check,  and  when  we  make  a  law  by 


193 


•the  legislature,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  judiciary  to 
declare  whether  it  is  or  is«ot  constitutional.  But 
if  we  make  the  jiidiciary  subservient  to  the  law- 
making power,  then  the' judiciary  will  be  the 
tools,  tne  tenants  at  will  of  that  department,  as 
the  jildges  were  in  England  previous. to  the  revo- 
lution. This  will  be  the  case  here,  and  it  be- 
hooves Us  to  fix  this  thing  up  permanently,  that 
it  may  stand.  How  can  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  go  for  making  the  jufliciary  subservient 
to  the  law-making  power,  when  he  does  not  go 
for  specific  amendments?  He  wants  to  throw 
around  the  constitution  the  present  clause  in  re- 
lation to  amendments.  He  wants  the  people  to 
come  to  their  sober  second  thoughts  before  we 
destroy  the  present  constitution.  He  would  not 
go  for  a  bare  majority  to  amend  our  constitution, 
much  less  ought  he  to  go  to  destroy  that  powei 
in  our  government,  which  holds  them  in  cheek 
and  awe.  There  is  not  a  consistency  in  these 
two  principles.  I  have  before  remarked,  it  seems 
to  me,  that  the  power  is  in  the  hands  of  the  peor 
pie,  and  I  wish  to  make  the  judiciary  subservient 
to  them.  I  want  the  judiciary  made  elective  by 
the  people,  and  elected  for  a  term  pf  years..  If 
good  and  faithful  servants,  they  can  be  returned 
again,  and  that  will  be  the  strongest  stimulant 
that  can  be  thrown  around  an  honest  man.  .  I 
also  wish  to  have  a  separate  department  to  try 
men  for  malfeasances.  .1  would  be  as  radical  as 
the  gentleman  from  Ballard  and  McCracken.  I 
would  have  a  tribunal  to  try  a  judge  in  the  vicin- 
age. There  is  a  precedent  for  this  :  and  then  it 
would  be  necessary  that  they  should  have  the. 
consent  of  the  whole  jury,  and  not  a  majority 
merely.  A  verdict  of  the  whole  twelve  sworn 
jurors  would  be  required.  Some  gentlemen 
are .  in  favor  of  a  verdict  by  a  majority  of  ju- 
rors; but  that  was  not  the  ground  of  the  original 
convention  men.  It  seems  to  me  that  no  man 
who  is  a  lover  of  that  which  is  consistent,  and 
a  lover  of  justice  can  be  in  favor  of  such  a  sys- 
•  t«m.  Some  gentleman,  I  believe  it  was  the  gen- 
tleman from  Campbell,  said  there  is  not  virtue 
enough  in  two-tlurds  to  try  a  judge.  This  to  me 
appears  to  be  a  .strange  position  ;  if  there  is  not 
virtue  enough  in  twd-thirds,  for  God's  sake  don't 
take  a  majority.  In  times  of  excitement,  poli- 
ticians will  transcend  their  duties.  They  have 
done  so.  The  passage  of  the  law  of  1833  was 
uncalled  for,  and  the  repeal  of  it  was  uncalled 
for.  They  havepassed  inany  uncalled  for  laws, 
and  I  want  to  throw  around  the  lawmaking 
department  many  checks.  With  the  expression 
of  these  few  rea.sons,  I  do  not  think  it  necessa- 
ry that  I  should  say  anything  more. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  The  faculty  or  power  of 
condensing  is  a  most  v?duable  one,  and  its  exercise 
is  indispensably  necessary  in  the  formation  of  a 
constitution.  This  power  might  also  have  been 
advantageously  and  happily  infused  into  many 
of  the  speeches  which  gentlemen  have  addressed 
to  us  upon  the  subject  before  thecompiittee.  Sir, 
seeing  the  difficulty  of  obtainingthefloor,  and.wit- 
nessing  the  distressing  embarrassment  that  young 
and  modest  members  must  experience  in  attempt- 
ing to  address  the  convention,  I  had  determined 
to  condense  and  to  compress  all  that  I  might  have 
to  say  into  the  simple  yet  comprehensive  aye  or 
no;  and  sir,  I  shall  not  very  greatly  depart  from 
that  determination  o^  this  occasion. 


Sir,  the  subject  matter  under  consideration  is 
the  motion  made  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
to  amend  that  portion  of  the  report  from  the 
committee  on  the  court  of  appeals  Avhich  relates 
to  impeachments  and  address,  and  he  proposes 
to  strike  out  the  words  "two  thirds"  and  insert 
"majority." 

Now  sir,  the  effect  of  this  amendment,  should 
it  prevail,  will  be  to  place  not  only  the  judges, 
but  all  of  the  higher  officers  of  this  common: 
wealth  at  the  mercy  of  a  bare  majority  in  the 
legislature;  and  why  sir,  should  we  d.o  this? 
Has  any  gentleman's  constituents  required  such, 
a  provision  at  his  hands?  Will  such  a  provision  ' 
conduce  to  the  securing  of  abler  and  better  meii 
for  these  offices?  Is  it  requisite  to  insure  a  faith- 
ful discharge  of  their  duties,  that  these  officers 
should  constantly  have  the  tensors  of  address  or 
impeachment  before  their  eyes?  I  think  not  sir. 
What  sir,  is  the  prominent  and  distinguishiiig 
feature,  the  characteristic  movement  on  the  part 
of  the  people  in  calling  this  convention?  Was 
it  to  enlarge  the  powers  of  either  of  the  great  de- 
partments of  this  government?  Was  it  to  make 
any  one  of  tho.se  departments  more  dependant 
upon  another  than  it  is  imder  the  existing  con- 
stitution? No  sir,  no.  I  have  not  so  understood 
them.  But  on  the  contrary  the  object  and  design 
most  apparent  in  the  great  movement  which  has 
resulted  in  our  assembling  here,  was  a  determina- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  people  to  reclaim  and  to 
have  restored  to  them  many  of  the  powers  now 
delegated  to  the  several  departments.  It  was  not 
to  increase  the  strength  of  one  of  the.se  depart- 
ments at  the  expense  of  another's  weakness  that 
we  were  called  here.  No  sir.  It  was  to  take  from 
each  of  these  departments  some  of  the  powers 
now  delegated  to  it,  and  to  restore  the  exercise 
thereof  to  the  people  themselves.  What  sir, 
are  our  instructions  with  regard  to  the  executive 
branch  of  this  government?  Are  they  not  that 
we  shall  strip  him  of  all  appointing  power  and 
patronage?  that  we  leave  with  him  the  qualified 
veto  he  now  has^the  command  of  the  militia, 
and  the  exercise  of  the  attributes  of  mercy  and 
clemency — the  pardoning  power. 

What  sir,  are  our  instructions  with  respect  to 
the  judiciary?  Are  they  not,  that  we  take  the 
little  patronage  it  now  has,  the  appointment  of 
clerks,  from  it?  Thfit  we  make  the  judges  as 
well  as  clerks  elective?  That  we  shorten  the 
terms  of  their  offices?  That  we  make  the  incum- 
bents dependent  upon,  and.  responsible  to,  the 
people? 

And,  what  sir,  are  our  instructions  in  reference 
to  the  legislative  department;  are  they  that  we 
shall  enlarge  its  powers,  or  make  either  of  the 
others  more  dependant  upon  it?  I  think  not  sir. 
If  I  understand  the  requiremeuts  of  the  people 
they  are  that  the  legislature  shall  meet  less  fre- 
quently— that  it  shall  coiifine  its  action  to  sub- 
jects of  a  general  character  and  interest — that  it 
shall  be  limited  in  its  power  to  incur  debts  and 
to  inerea.'^e  the  taxes. 

These  sir,  are  the  great  measures  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  Avhich  this  convention  was 
called,  and  sir,  let  us  not  disappoint  the  people 
by  doing  cither  more  or  less  taau  they  have  re- 
quired. 

Here  sir,  I  might  stop,  for  I  have  said  about  all 
that  I  intended  to  say,  and  more,  perhaps,  than 


193 


some  may  consider  germain  to  the  subject.  But 
we  are  in  committee  of  the  whole,  and  great  lat- 
itude in  discussion  is  allowed;  and  as  I  do  not 
know  that  a  time  more  opportune  to  say  some- 
thing about  impeachmeuts  will  occur,  I  will 
say  it  now.  Sir,  whence  did  we  derive  this  fea- 
ture in  our  constitution?  Other  gentlemen, 
fresh  from  the  perusal  of  English  history,  antic- 
ipating the  proper  time  for  such  discussion, 
have  descanted  most  eloquently  upon  the  rise  of 
Britishjurisprudence,  the  progress  of  judicial  in- 
dependence, and  so  forth;  but  sir,  I  was  surprised 
that  whilst  gentlemen  went  minutely  into  these 
details,  thev  entirely  overlooked  and  lost  sight 
of  that  highest  and  most  august  of  all  judicial 
tribunals,  from  which  our  court  of  impeachment 
is  derived, — I  mean,  sir,  the  British  house  of 
lords,  sitting  as  a  high  court  of  impeachment, 
and  a  court  of  final  and  last  resort  for  causes  as 
well  civil  as  criminal.  This  too,  when  that 
identical  provision  in  our  proposed  amendment 
is  the  subject  under  consideration.  But  sir,  it  is 
easy  to  account  for  this  oversight.  The  engross- 
ing'subject  with  us  is  the  mode  of  appointment, 
tenure  of  office,  <fec.,  of  the  judges  of  our  ordi- 
nary tribunals  of  justice.  The  court  of  im- 
peachment is  an  extraordinary  one,  and  one,  to 
my  mind,  wholly  useless  and  unsuited  to  the 
genius  and  character  of  our  people  and  that  of 
our  institutions.  Sir,  it  may  suit  a  proud  old 
monarchy,  such  as  that  of  Great  Britain,  to  tol- 
erate such  an  institution,  and  surely  a  sight  more 
imposing,  in  the  civil  pursuits  of  life,  is  no 
where  to  be  seen  than  that  exhibited  by  the  Brit- 
ish house  of  lords  sitting  as  a  high  court  of  im- 
f)eachment.  There,  sir,  you  may  behold  the 
ords  spiritual  and  temporal,  with  all  the  high 
dignitaries  of  the  crown  and  parliament,  array- 
ed in  all  their  decorations  and  insignia  of  office 
— there  you  may  see  the  house  of  commons,  with 
its  speaker  at  its  head  preferring  charges— there 
you  may  see  an  ex-governor  of  India,  arraigned 
as  acriininal,  and  there  you  may  hear  the  over- 
powering and  enrapturing  eloquence  of  a  Burke, 
a  Sheridan,  a  Windham,  a  Fox,  and  a  Pitt.  Sir, 
such  an  institution  may  be  a  proper  appendage 
to  a  regal  government,  but  it  is  wholly  out  of 
place  in  a  plain  democratic  republic,  where  in- 
stitutions are  wanted  for  practical  and  useful 
purposes,  and  not  for  expense  and  show.  But 
gentlemen  look  at  me  enquiringly,  and  seem  to 
demand,  how  will  you  reach  the  high  officers  of 
government  for  official  delinquencies?  Reach 
them,  sir,  just  as  I  would  the  lower  officer  I — 
And  how  is  that,  sir?  By  indictment  and  trial 
by  jury  in  our  superior  courts  of  law.  But  there 
are  impeachable  offences  which  are  not  indicta- 
ble at  common  law.  But  I  presume  these  can  be 
made  so  by  statute.  Under  an  impeachment  the 
charges  and  specifications  must  be  set  out  with 
clearness  and  certainty,  and  could  not  the  same 
be  done  with  equal  clearness  and  certainty  in  an 
indictment?  Sir,  I  prefer  the  indictment,  be- 
cause it  offers  some  practicable  way  to  reach 
these  offenders,  and  insures  a  fair,  cheap,  and 
speedy  trial.  Sir,  for  political  offences  there  is 
no  accountability  nor  responsibility,  save  that  to 
public  opinion;  "but  for  crimes  and  misdemean- 
ors, every  officer  in  this  government  stands  upon 
an  equal  footing  with  the  private  citizen,  and  all 
are  amenable  at  the  bar  of  the  same  tribunal, 

25 


the  ordinary  conrts  of  law.  And  sir,  we  are 
about  to  render  our  inferior  officers  so  amenable 
for  their  official  delinquencies;  why  then  shall 
we  make  an  exception,  and  provide  a  different 
tribunal  for  the  tnal  of  official  delinquencies  in 
superior  officers?  Sir,  I  see  no  good  reason  for 
such  a  distinction.  Sir,  what  is  the  penalty  at- 
tached to  a  conviction  by  impeachment?  It  is, 
I  believe,  removal  from  office  and  disqualifica- 
tion forever  after.  Could  not  this  follow  convic- 
tion by  indictment  as  well?  I  think  it  could 
sir,  and  in  addition,  it  might,  in  aggravated  ca- 
ses, be  right  to  inflict  upon  the  person  convict- 
ed, death,  confinement  in  the  penitentiary,  or 
other  punishment.  Sir,  I  see  nothing  in  the 
prosecution  by  impeachment  which  is  not  at- 
tainable by  indictment.  I  am,  therefore,  in  fa- 
vor of  our  omitting  this  article  of  impeachment 
and  substituting  indictment  and  trial  by  jury. 
Let  conviction  vacate  the  office,  and  let  it  be 
the  duty  of  the  acting  executive,  upon  proper 
information  of  such  a  state  of  case,  to  issue  a 
writ  of  election  t«  fill  the  vacancy  thus  oeca- 
sioned. 

Still  sir,  in  a  certain  class  of  cases,  removal 
by  address  will  be  necessary  ;  and  I  am  in  favor 
of  it  by  a  two-thirds  vote,  but  not  by  that  of  a 
bare  majority.  When  an  incumbent  has  become 
unfit  for  the  office  by  age,  infirmity,  or  other 
cause  not  amounting  to  an  indictable  offence, 
removal  by  address  would  seem  to  be  proper, 
and  some  provision  for  such  contingencies  should 
be  made. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  am  not  unaware  of  the  fact 
that  the  patience  of  the  committee  is  well  nigh 
exhausted  in  the  examination  and  investiga- 
tion of  the  important  and  interesting  question 
S resented  by  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from 
elson.  This  fact  together  with  another,  the 
feeble  state  of  my  health,  admonishes  me  that  it 
is  altogether  proper  even  if  I  was  otherwise  in- 
clined, that  in  any  remarks  I  may  submit,  I  should 
be  as  brief  as  the  nature  of  the  case  and  the  cir- 
cumstance, will  permit. 

I  had  thought  indeed  when  I  left  my  home 
that  the  conveation  would  have  but  little  diffi- 
culty in  arrangiag  and  framing  such  a  constitu- 
tion as  would  accord  with  the  notions  and  opin- 
ions of  the  people  as  expressed  in  the  late  Au- 
gust election.  I  thought  indeed,  and  still  enter- 
tain the  same  opinion,  that  all  the  important 
amendments  desired  by  the  people  to  the  organic 
law  had  been  so  deliberately  discussed  by  the 
people,  and  so  clearly  understood  by  their  rep- 
resentatives, that  we  would  have  but  little  to  do 
here  other  than  to  meet  together  and  to  throw 
into  proper  form  the  amendments  desired  to  be 
made  in  the  constitution  by  those  over  whom  it 
is  to  have  a  mighty  influence  either  for  weal  or 
for  woe.  I  know  of  but  two  great  and  important 
questions  discussed  during  the  last  summer,  in 
reference  to  such  amendments  as  should  be  made 
in  the  constitution.  Those  questions  I  know 
were  discussed  at  length  in  the  part  of  the  coun- 
try in  which  I  lire,  and  from  my  reading  and  the 
indications  as  exhibited  by  the  newspapers  of 
the  country,  they  were  the  two  great  and  impor- 
tant questions  operating  on  the  people  at  the 
time  they  called  the  convention.  What  were 
they?  One  was  that  the  legislature  met  too  fre- 
quently, and  that  out  of  that  arose  unnecessary 


194 


»nd  extravagant  expenditures,  which  it  was  the 
great  object  of  the  people  to  curtail.  Another 
great  object  as  I  then  understood,  and  still  un- 
stand,  of  the  people  in  calling  a  convention  was 
that  there  should  be  returned  to  them  the  power 
heretofore  delegated  to  the  executive — that  of 
appointing  the  officers  of  the  comraonAvealth. 
The  people  claimed  the  right  to  appoint  these 
officers  themselves  directly  at  the  ballot  box. 
This  question  of  slavery  which  has  been  so 
ably  and  eloquently  discussed  here  never  enter- 
ed into  the  minds  of  the  people  as  an  important 
question  until  after  it  was  determined  to  hold 
the  convention.  After  that  happened  the  ques- 
tion became  an  important  one,  and  we  have  all 
come  here,  I  doubt  not,  to  express  the  voice  of 
the  people  in  the  way  of  altering  the  constitu- 
tion on  this  subject.  Hence  I  remark  I  consid- 
ered the  discussion  here  on  the  subject  of  slavery 
as  uncalled  for,  and  under  the  circumstances  as 
wholly  and  entirely  improper.  I  will  remark 
here  again,  that  many  have  professed  to  come 
here  in  opposition  to  the  open  clause  or  specific 
amendment,  and  why?  Because  they  say  if  the 
constitution  is  left  in  a  position  to  be  specifically 
amended,  this  question  of  slavery  will  agitate 
and  distract  the  country  from  year  to  year.  Yet 
we  have  here  from  day  to  day,  in  speaking  up- 
on and  agitating  that  very  question,  done  the 
very  thing  which  we  would  arrest  by  a  clause 
in  the  constitution.  Hence  I  regard  that  we 
have  in  our  action  on  that  subject  been  some- 
what contradictory  to  ourselves. 

Now  I  think  I  am  right  when  I  say  that  the 
people  of  Kentucky  require  no  such  change  in 
the  constitution  of  the  state,  as  the  one  proposed 
by  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son. I  am  not  prepared  to  say  that  a  bare  ma- 
jority of  the  legislature  in  all  time  to  come  shall 
have  the  right  at  its  will  and  pleasure  to  remove 
from  office  the  judges  placed  in  office,  not  by  the 
legislature,  but  by  the  vote  of  the  people,  given 
at  the  polls.  Gentlemen  have  told  us  to  beware, 
to  look  to  our  constituents,  and  I  believe  if  I 
was  to  give  a  vote  of  that  character  it  would  be 
directly  in  opposition  to  the  will  of  those  who 
sent  me  here.  The  people  desire  no  such  change 
80  far  as  I  am  imformed,  in  the  fundamental  law, 
as  the  one  contemplated  in  the  amendment  of 
the  able,  learned,  and  experienced  gentleman 
from  Nelson.  I  am  not  to  be  driven  from  any 
opinion  on  this  subject,  deliberately  formed,  by 
the  repeated  declaration  that  the  people  are  ca- 
pable of  self  government.  It  seems  that  when- 
ever gentlemen  desire  to  press  a  question  and  to 
carry  it  through  they  get  up  and  admonish  us 
that  the  people,  the  sovereign  people  of  this 
country,  are  capable  of  self  government.  Sir, 
this  is  the  lesson,  I  suppose  to  have  been  taught 
ns  all  from  infancy  up  to  the  present  time — tliat 
the  people  of  this  free,  this  happy,  and  this  glo- 
rious confederacy,  are  and  ever  have  been  capa- 
ble of  self  government.  Why,  I  have  uncler- 
gtood  this  to  be  one  of  the  great  and  mighty 
principles  for  which  our  fathers  in  the  days  of 
the  revolution,  the  times  which  tried  the  souls 
of  men,  and  for  which  Wa.shington,  Jefferson, 
and  Madison,  and  all  the  patriots  of  that  day, 
contended.    All  power  of  ri^ht  belongs  to  tne 

Sople,  and  should  be  vested  in  and  confided  to 
em,  yet  the  people  themselves,  in  their  funda- 


mental law,  desire  such  checks  and  guards  as 
shall  protect  them  against  wrong  and  fraud,  come 
from  what  source  it  may.  This  I  understand  to 
be  the  wish  and  desire  of  the  people.  Yet  you 
tell  me  that  you  give  to  the  people  the  right  to 
elect  a  judge,  and  at  the  same  time  you  say  that 
a  bare  majority  of  the  legislature,  without  cause, 
unless  it  "be  some  political  cause,  shall  have  a 
right  to  remove  the  very  judge  from  office 
elected  by  the  people.  I  understand  that  it  is 
contemplated,  and  I  believe  it  will  be  done,  that 
the  State  of  Kentucky  shall  be  laid  out  into  four 
districts,  in  each  of  Avhich  the  people  there  re- 
siding shall  select  one  judge.  I  understand,  al- 
so, that  it  is  more  than  likely  that  the  conven- 
tion will  determine  that  the  state  shall  be  laid  out 
into  twelve,  or  more  or  less,  circuits,  and  that 
the  people  of  each  circuit  shall  have  the  power 
restored  to  them  to  determine  who  shall  bo  judge 
in  a  particular  circuit  in  which  they  live.  Now, 
assuming  that  this  change  shall  be  made  in  the 
constitution,  in  the  district  in  which  I  live,  the 
people  knowing  the  integrity,  the  fitness,  and 
virtue  of  the  individual  living  in  that  district, 
select  him  and  say  he  shall  take  the  scales  of 
justice,  and  administer  the  justice  of  the  land  in 
that  district. 

Well,  the  legislature  coming  from  every  coun- 
ty in  the  state  meets,  and  charges  are  preferred 
against  that  judge,  or  no  charge  is  preferred;  if 
you  please  he  has  been  a  partizan.  The  legisla- 
ture, by  a  bare  majority,  tell  the  people  of  my 
district,  "youhave  elected  your  judge;  you  know 
him;  you  have  lived  with  him;  you  know  he  is 
a  man  of  integrity,  virtue,  and  honesty,  and  le- 
gal learning,  yet  the  constitution  leaves  a  ma- 
jority of  us  to  say  that  you  shall  not  liave  the 
man  you  select."  This  would  be  the  effect  of  it. 
"You  have  the  right  to  elect  the  judge,  and  a  lai'ge 
majority  of  the  district  may  desire  to  continue 
him  in  office,  but  a  majority  of  the  representa- 
tives in  the  legislature  say,  you  shall  not  retain 
him.'"  Why,  is  it  desired  that  the  power  of  im- 
peachment and  the  requirement  that  two  thirds 
of  the  legislature  shall  be  necessary  to  remove  a 
judge  from  office  shall  be  stricken  from  the  con- 
stitution, because  it  is  said  the  judges,  where 
two  thirds  are  required  to  remove  them,  are  irre- 
sponsible to  the  people?  Can  it  be  seriously 
contended  that  a  judge,  elected  and  holding  his 
station  under  the  change  in  the  constitution  pro- 
posed by  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals, 
will  not  be  responsible  to  the  people?  Is  not 
the  responsibility  seen  at  once,  and  will  not  this 
responsibility  direct  the  people  to  remove  any 
difficulty  that  might  exist  so  far  as  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  would  be 
calculated  to  remove  it?  Would  it  not?  But  if 
the  motion  of  the  gentleman  shall  be  rejected', 
and  the  constitution  shall  require  two  thirds  of 
the  legislature  to  remove  a  judge  from  office,  the 
gentleman  tells  us  he  would  not  give  a  cent  for 
the  constitution.  Nay,  if  you  do  what  the  peo- 
ple desired  you  to  do  when  you  were  elected — if 
you  say  that  the  power  to  elect  these  officers  shall 
be  returned  to  them,  the  power  to  select  the  judge 
who  is  to  administer  the  justice  of  the  land  in  a 
district — if  you  say  this,  I  would  not  give  a 
cent  for  the  constitution,  says  the  gentleman. 
If  you  say  that  the  legislature  hereafter  shall 
not  convene  oftener  than  once  in  two,  three,  or 


195 


four  years,  still,  says  the  gentleman,  I  would  not 
give  a  cent  for  the  constitution.  If,  J^ain,  you 
leave  the  proposition  in  the  constitution  in  rela- 
tion to  slavery  as  it  is,  and  say  you  consider  the 
people  desire  it,  still  the  gentleman  savs,  I  -vrould 
not  give  a  cent  for  the  constitution.  Why,  these 
are  "the  great  changes,  the  important  changes 
that  it  is  desired  by  the  people  should  be  made 
in  the  organic  law  of  Kentucky. 

But  the  legislature,  in  the  language  of  the  gen- 
tleman, is  defeated.  The  legislature  of  Ken- 
tucky constitutes  the  people  of  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky. Now,  I  do  confess  that  to  me — although 
I  do  not  profess  to  have  much  learning — this  is 
a  new  idea.  But  I  would  ask  before  I  remark 
upon  it,  whether  there  be  in  any  civilized  gov- 
ernment upon  earth  such  a  feature  as  the  gentle- 
man desires  to  incorporate  in  the  constitution  of 
Kentucky?  I  ask  if  there  be  in  any  one  of  the 
constitutions  of  the  thirty  states,  forming  this 
great  confederacy,  such  a  feature  as  tlie  gentle- 
man wishes  to  have  inserted  in  the  constitution 
of  Kentucky?  When,  and  where  did  he  learn 
that  the  legislature  constituted  the  people?  If 
any  department  of  the  government  has  been 
more  completely  condemned  and  repudiated  (to 
use  a  strong  term)  by  the  people  than  any  other, 
it  is  this  self  same  legislative  department. — 
"\Miy  is  it  that  the  people  desire  that  it  should 
not  be  called  together  more  than  once  in  four 
years,  or,  at  least,  once  in  two  years?  Why,  from 
the  very  fact  that  the  people  themselves  have  but 
little  confidence  in  the  discretion  and  wisdom  of 
that  branch  of  the  government.  It  arises  out  of 
that.  Why  is  it  that  the  people  desire  that  the 
legislature  shall  not  have  the  right  to  run  the 
state  in  debt,  without  first  consulting  the  people 
in  relation  to  the  appropriations  they  may  de- 
sire to  make?  Because,  from  experience,  the 
best  of  all  teaehcR,  they  have  learned  that  the 
legislature,  on  the  subject,  is  not  to  be  relied 
upon.  That  is  the  reason.  Why  is  it  that  the 
people  desire  that  this  constitution,  for  the  fram- 
ing of  which  we  have  been  called  together,  shall 
provide  for  the  protection  and  security  of  the 
common  school  fund  of  Kentucky?  It  is  for  the 
reason,  and  that  alone,  that  they  apprehend  the 
legislative  department  of  the  government  will 
squander  and  waste  that  fund  which  has  been  set 
apart,  most  sacredly,  for  the  education  of  the 
poor  as  well  as  the  rich.  Sir,  I  know  it  to  be 
the  case,  so  far  as  the  people  I  have  the  honor  to 
represent  are  concerned.  Last  year,  in  mv  coun- 
tv,  a  large  majority  was  given  in  opposition  to 
tlie  tax  of  two  cents  for  common  school  purpo- 
ses. Whv  was  it?  Simply  because  they  nad  no 
faith  in  tiie  legislative  department  of  the  gov- 
ernment, and  believed  they  would  divert  the  tax 
to  another  purpose.  They  approved  of  the  com- 
mon school  system,  and  saw  the  necessity  of  ed- 
ucation. They  know  that  the  very  existence 
and  perpetuity  of  the  free  instutions  of  this 
country  depend  upon  the  virtue  and  intelligence 
of  the  people;  but  say  they,  "we  have  no  confi- 
dence in  the  representatives  of  the  people."  Not 
that  they  have  no  confidence  in  the  people;  they 
t«ll  you' they  have  all  confidence  in  the  people. 
But  they  say  those  men  we  sometimes  elect,  are  not 
the  people'  and  do  that  whicTi  the  people  repudi- 
ate and  condemn.  The  experience  of  every  man 
shows  this  to  be  true.    We  all  know  it  to  be 


true.  Now,  the  gentleman  from  Kenton  was 
right;  experience  teaches  us  that  he  was,  al- 
though my  friend  from  Henry  repudiated  it  in 
reference  to  the  democracy,  in  relation  to  the 
principles  of  party  action.  The  principle  of  ac- 
tion sjjoken  of  by  the  gentlemen  applies  to  one 
party  as  well  as  another  when  in  power.  We 
may  try  to  bear  it  off.  We  may  felicitate  our- 
selves that  one  party  in  power  will  not  remove 
from  office  those  opposed  to  that  party,  but  ev- 
ery dav's  experience  proves  to  us  that  when  one 
party  is  in  power,  those  in  office,  holding  differ- 
ent politics,  must  give  way.  Give  the  legisla- 
ture the  power  to  remove  the  judges,  and  I  care 
not  whether  the  whig  or  democratic  party  is  la 
power,  human  nature  is  the  same  in  both.  A 
ludge,  in  a  time  of  high  party  excitement,  must 
bow  and  cringe  at  the  feet  of  the  legislative  de- 
partment, if  they  would  keep  their  places.  I 
believe  that  no  gentleman,  legally  qualified, 
and  having  that  virtue  and  integrity  so  essential 
to  the  bench,  and  possessing  one  particle  of  self- 
respect,  if  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  succeeds  and  becomes  part  and  parcel  of 
the  constitution,  would  ever  go  upon  the  bench. 
No,  sir.  No  man  who  respected  his  own  stand- 
ing, who  regarded  the  peace  and  happiness  of 
the  community  in  which  he  lived,  or  the  repu- 
tation of  his  family  and  his  friends,  would  place 
himself  in  a  position  so  unenviable.  I  take  of- 
fice from  the  hands  of  the  people;  the  district 
elects  me  a  judge,  and  am  I  to  be  removed  from 
office  by  the  vote  of  a  bare  majority  of  their  rep- 
resentatives? Whether  it  be  for  good  causes  or 
not,  let  him  be  removed,  and  there  is  a  plague 
spot,  a  stain,  a  disgrace,  fixed  upon  his  reputa- 
tion for  all  time  to  come.  And  no  man  having 
self-respect  would,  as  I  conceive,  receive  office 
so  trammelled. 

I  was  very  much  pleased  with  the  gentleman 
from  Henry,  and  with  a  good  part  of  his  speech, 
but  I  do  think  he  rather  contradicted  himself. 
But  he  is  not  like  an  individual  who  tells  you, 
if  he  does  not  succeed  in  a  motion,  he  will  go 
against  the  constitution.  He  is  an  advocate  of 
constitutional  reform  for  the  sake  of  constitu- 
tional reform,  and  if  he  can  better  the  constitu- 
tion in  any  one  particular,  he  will  go  for  the 
new  constitution  heart  and  hand,  although  all 
the  little  notions  he  may  entertain  were  not 
adopted  in  it.  This,  I  conceive  to  be  the  right 
spirit,  which  the  people  intended  should  operate 
upon  all  of  us  when  they  sent  us  here  to  frame 
a  new  constitution.  Why  do  the  people  in  one 
county  believe  that  they  are  going  to  get  a  con- 
stitution made  exactly  as  they  would  have  it? 
Do  thev  not  know  it  must  be  built  up,  and  framed 
upon  that  principle  of  mutual  concession  so  es- 
sential to  framing  a  basis  for  any  government. 
I  shall  be  with  the  gentleman,  if  any  essential 
change,  which  is  desired  by  the  people  in  their 
organic  law,  be  made,  whether  the  one  particular- 
ly favored  by  the  people  I  represent  or  not.  I 
go  for  the  new  constitution,  on  the  ground  that 
the  condition  of  the  people  will  be  bettered,  and 
that  one  improvement,  at  least,  on  the  subject  of 
government,  the  most  important  subject  that  re- 
lates to  mankind,  has  been  made.  I  am  for  hav- 
ing the  power  returned  to  the  people  to  elect 
:  their  officers.  I  will  sign  and  vote  for  the  con- 
I  stitation,  if  that  power  m  refused,  and  the  legis- 


106 


lative  departm«ntshall  be  regulated  as  the  peo- 
ple desire ;  and  I  will  use  what  little  influence  I 
may  have  to  induce  others  to  go  with  me.  I 
think  with  the  gentleman  from  Henrj',  and  his 
very  countenance  is  an  index  of  his  honesty  on 
another  subject,  and  that  is,  that  it  was  made 
manifest  during  the  discussion  of  this  subject. 
that  the  votes  in  favor  of  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  as  indicated  in  this 
house,  will  be  few  and  far  between.  I  think 
they  should  be  few  and  far  between,  for  if  we 
desire  to  sap,  and  blast,  and  ruin  the  very  foun- 
dations of  the  government  under  which  wa  live, 
it  does  seem  to  me  tliat  we  could  not  more  eflfect- 
ually  do  it  than  by  incorporating  in  the  consti- 
tution the  feature  proposed  by  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson. 

One  word  in  reference  to  a  remark  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Mason.  It  seems  the  gentleman  has 
lived  in  different  states.  He  tells  us  he  has  lived 
in  a  state  where  the  legislature  by  joint  vote  are 
permitted  to  determine  who  shall  administer  the 
law ;  and  I  was  surprised  to  hear  the  gentleman 
say  it  was  a  happy  mode.  Of  all  the  modes  pre- 
sented to  my  mind,  that  by  joint  vote  of  the  two 
houses  of  the  legislatur<3  is  the  most  objeetioila- 
ble.  It  is,  in  my  opinion,  obnoxious  to  the  most 
serious  and  powerful  objections.  I  believe  that 
the  people  are  capable  of  electing  persons  who 
will  discharge  the  duties  of  judge  with  ability 
and  fidelity.  Where  they  have  an  opportunity 
to  know  the  individual,  the  appointment  will  be 
a  good  one ;  they  will  select  such  persons  as  are 
worthy  to  be  entrusted  with  the  important  inter- 
ests which  must  necessarily  be  confided  to  a 
judge. 

Now  I  merely  desire  to  state  why  I  object  to 
the  principle  which  is  recommended  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Mason. 

The  people  of  the  county  where  I  live,  de- 
sire by  their  free  suffrages  to  call  in  some  man 
to  act  as  judge;  but  you  provide  by  your  consti 
tution  that  he  shall  "be  elected  by  joint  ballot  of 
the  legislature.  What  follows?  I  desire-  to 
have  a  certain  man  elected.  A  member  of  the 
legislature  from  another  county,  desires  to  se- 
cure the  election  of  a  particular  individual  to  a 
similar  office  in  his  county.  He  says  to  me  you 
go  for  my  man  and  I  will  go  for  yours.  If  there 
18  no  judge  tx)  be  appointed  in  his  county  there 
may  be  some  object  for  which  he  desires  an  ap- 
propriation of  money.  The  result  is  the  same. 
We  enter  into  an  alliance  for  mutual  support  and 
assistance.  No  sir,  it  is  one  of  the  most  cor- 
rupt modes  by  which  appointments  can  be  made; 
one  of  the  very  worst  systems  in  my  opinion, 
that  could  be  adopted  in  any  country.  The 
stream  of  justice  should  be  kept  pure  and  un- 
adulterated. The  people  themselves  whose  in- 
terests are  so  deeply  concerned  should  be  the 
appointing  power.  They  are  interested  in  hav- 
ing the  best  men  that  can  be  selected  forjudges, 
and  they  will  take  care  to  select  such. 

Well,  sir,  there  is  another  point  connected 
■with  the  subject  under  consideration,  to  which  I 
will  for  a  moment  advert.  I  think  we  were  ad- 
monished the  other  day  that  at  the  proper  time 
a  motion  would  be  made  to  strike  out  ot  this  re- 
port the  feature  which  requires  that  some  test  of 
qualification  shall  be  required  of  those  who 
present  themselves  for  election  to  the  office  of 


iudge.  The  propriety  of  such  a  provision  has 
been  already  adverted  to  by  some  gentlemen 
who  have  taken  part  in  this  discussion;  and  for 
myself,  sir,  I  give  notice  now,  that  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  it.  I  design  to  go  for  protecting  the 
people  against  imposition  and  fraud.  No  man 
should  receive  the  appointment  of  judge  who  is 
not  learned  in  the  law,  and  who  is  not  in  all 
respects  properly  qualified  to  discharge  the  du- 
ties appertaining  to  the  ofiice.  Being  learned 
in  the  law  is,  I  apprehend,  a  very  essential 
qualification,  and  there  ought  to  be  some  mode 
of  determining  this  point,  beyond  the  mere 
prima  facie  evidence  that  you  have  seen  him 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  the  law.  It  must  be 
evident  to  gentlemen  that  it  is  desirable  that  the 
candidate  for  judgeship  should  be  able  to  certify 
the  electors  of  his  qualifications.  This  must 
strike  gentlemen  as  being  necessary  and  proper 
for  the  safety  of  the  community,  that  the  people 
may  know  into  whose  hands  their  interests  are 
to  be  intrusted. 

Gentlemen  agree  that  there  ought  to  be  a  cer- 
tain age  fixed  at  which  aman  may  be  elevated  to 
the  bench;  and  another  requirement  should  be  a 
certain  number  of  years'  j^ractice  at  the  bar  be- 
fore he  is  made  eligible.  But,  gentlemen  say 
the  people  are  capable  of  self-government,  and 
inconsequence  of^the  people  being  capable  of 
self-government,  no  qualification  is  necessary  to 
be  fixed  for  those  who  are  to  hold  office  under 
appointment  by  the  people.  Without  the  in- 
sertion of  these  provisions,  I  think  gentlemen 
will  find  that  their  constituents  will  not  be  sat- 
isfied. I  told  the  people  in  the  county  where  I 
live  that  if  I  should  be  elected  to  the  conven- 
tion I  should  be  in  favor  of  these  tests  of  quali- 
fication, in  reference  to  the  judges,  and  also  in 
reference  to  the  clerks  of  courts.  But  when  a 
man  presents  himself  before  the  people  for  the 
station  of  judge,  the  mere  presentation  of  a  cer- 
tificate will  not  be  sufficient  evidence  of  his 
qualification.  It  is  a  fact  that  is  well  known 
tnat  there  was  a  time  when  in  Tennessee  there 
was  no  test,  I  believe,  required  on  the  part 
of  a  candidate  for  a  clerkship.  Well,  sir, 
a  fact  came  under  my  own  observation  iu 
relation  to  the  conduct  of  a  clerk — it  jnay  be 
an  extreme  case,  but  still  many  such  cases  have 
no  doubt  transpired — which  shows  most  conclu- 
sively how  far  we  may  be  from  shielding  and 
protecting  the  rights  of  those  whom  the  gen- 
tleman so  fondly  calls  the  people,  if  we  adopt 
this  constitution,  and  permit  A.  B.  or  C.  1). 
whether  ten  years  of  age  or  older,  whether  in- 
structed in  the  duties  of  the  ofllice  or  not,  to  be 
elected  clerk.  Under  such  a  system  the  man 
who  can  best  flatter  the  people  is  the  man  who 
will  be  most  successful.  He  will  be  certain  to 
be  elected  without  any  test  or  qualification. 
This  will  be  but  opening  the  door  for  the  dema- 
gogue— the  man  Avho  loves  himself  better  than 
he  loves  the  dear  people. 

I  had  occasion  to  call  for  the  record  of  one  of 
the  counties  of  Tennessee;  I  sent  to  the  clerk  of 
that  county  for  a  copy.  What  think  you  the  clerk 
did?  Instead  of  sending  a  copy  of  the  record, 
he  was  so  well  qualified  for  tlie  nigh  station  ho 
occupied,  he  was  so  well  informed  of  his  duties, 
that  instead  of  the  record  he  sent  an  entirely 
different  document.     That  clerk  was  elected  un- 


197 


der  this  system,  of  w  hich  I  have  spoken,  with- 
out test  of  qualiticatioii,  or  fitness  for  office. 
And  I  will  tell  you  how  it  happened  that  he 
was  elected.  I  am  but  a  poor  historian,  but  I 
will  give  you  an  outline  of  the  case.  There 
was  a  war  commencing  in  Florida;  this  man 
started  for  the  war,  but  he  did  not  get  there. 
The  circumstance  of  his  having  .started,  how- 
ever, gave  him  so  much  popularity  that  they 
made  hira  clerk.  Why,  the  very  rights  of  the 
people  themselves  depend  upon  the  qualifica- 
tions of  the  public  officers.  The  people  are  ca- 
pable of  judging  of  the  qualification  and  fit- 
ness of  candidates  for  office,  when  they  have 
the  means  within  their  power;  but  if  you  with 
hold  from  the  people  the  means  of  judging,  it 
cannot  be  expected  that  they  will  be  able  to 
make  suitable  selections.  How,  in  the  name  of 
common  sense,  can  the  people  elect  a  proper 
officer,  unless  they  have  the  means  of  judging 
of  his  qualifications?  Will  they  vote  for  a 
man  because  he  happens  to  belong  to  one  party 
or  another?  Very  likely  they  might  in  such  a 
case  as  that  of  the  clerk  of  the  court  in  Tennes- 
see, to  whom  I  have  referred,  who  had  started 
for  the  Florida  war,  and  thus  had  acquired  a 
degree  of  popularity. 

But  it  is  the  duty  of  this  convention  to  pro- 
vide the  means  of  judging  of  the  qualification 
and  fitness  of  candidates  for  office.  The  peo- 
ple art*  not  to  be  deceived  by  flattery,  by  being 
told  thev  are  capable  of  self-government.  That 
is  an  axiom,  of  the  truth  of  which  they  are  well 
Satisfied.  The  feature  which  the  committee  de- 
sire to  have,  retained  in  the  constitution,  is  the 
very  guard  wliich  the  people  want.  Strike  that 
feature  from  the  constitution,  and  they  will 
have  no  guard,  no  security,  for  the  proper  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  the  judicial  officer.  It 
is  that  feature  which  they  desire  should  be  re- 
tained, so  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with  the  wish- 
es of  the  people. 

If  the  legislature  are  the  people,  why  may  we 
not  with  equal  propriety,  say  that  the  judges 
are  the  people?  The  members  of  the  legisla- 
ture, according  to  my  apprehension,  are  agents 
of  the  people,  and  they  are  agents  who  frequent- 
ly abuse  their  trast.  The  judges,  over  whom 
tlie  legislature  is  to  sit  as  a  kind  of  inquisition, 
the  judges  themselves,  are  the  agent^s  of  the 
people  also.  Let  the  people  elect  them.  Let 
the  people  elect  every  officer,  from  the  judge  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  or  from  the  executive 
down  to  a  constable.  Every  officer  of  the 
government  is  an  agent  of  the  people.  Does  it 
follow  that  he  is  the  people?  But  gentlemen  tell 
me  that  a  majority  of  the  legislature  ought  to 
have  the  right  to  determine  for  every  district  in 
the  state,  who  shall  be  judge,  ana  who  shall 
not.     To  this  proposition  I  can  never  agree. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  do  not  rise  to  make  a 
speech,  but  I  want  the  ear,  for  a  moment  or  two, 
of  the  honorable  delegate  from  the  county  of 
Nelson,  and  I  also,  for  a  very  few  moments,  de- 
sire the  attention  of  the  members  of  this  con- 
vention, and  your  own.  There  are  two  propo- 
sitions that  were  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  and  provided  such  explanations  are 
given  by  him,  as  I  have  no  doubt  he  is  fully  ca- 
pable of  giving,  and  such  promises  are  made  by 
him,  as  he  is  fully  capable  of  complying  with; 


if  these  explanations  and  promises  are  given  to 
myself  and  the  committee,  I  shall  vote  for  the 
first  proposition;  without  them  I  shall  not  vote 
for  it,  and  I  believe  the  committee  will  not. — 
For  the  second  proposition  I  shall  not  vote,  on 
any  account  whatever,  for  the  reasons  which 
have  been  given  by  gentlemen  who  have  parti- 
cipated in  this  discussion,  which  reasons  I  will 
not  repeat,  because  it  is  not  worth  while  to  re- 
peat what  has  been  better  said  by  others.  But 
as  no  gentleman  has  turned  his  attention  to  the 
first  proposition,  I  desire  to  advert  to  it  for  a 
moment,  for  I  consider  it  of  the  utmost  impor- 
tance. It  establishes  a  principle  which  I  am  in 
favor  of,  if  we  can  carry  through  the  whole  con- 
stitution. But  I  am  not  willing,  and  I  do  not 
believe  that  a  solitary  member  of  this  commit- 
tee is  willing,  to  adopt  that  principle  in  this  par- 
ticular place,  unless  it  can  be  carried  through 
the  whole  constitution.  We  are  all  aware  that 
it  is  necessary  that  we  should  be  extremely  care- 
ful that  all  the  parts  of  the  constitution  shall 
harmonize — ^that  they  shall  not  only  fit  well  to- 
gether, but  work  well  together,  and  that  no  one 
part  of  the  machinery  shall  conflict  witli  anoth- 
er. The  proposition  to  which  I  now  refer,  is 
that  for  striking  out  the  words,  "which  shall  not 
be  sufficient  ground  for  impeachment."  If  it  be 
intended  to  retain  in  the  new  constitution  the 
whole  of  the  fifth  article  of  the  old  constitution, 
these  words  ought  to  be  stricken  out.  I  see 
around  me  several  gentlemen  who  were  members 
of  the  old  legislature.  The  gentleman  from 
Henry  is  one  of  them,  and  the  gentleman  from 
Xelson,  Mr.  Hardin,  is  another.  The  first  gen- 
tleman has  declared  that  he  has  travelled  in  his 
literary  researches  as  far  as  Dilworth,  and  the 
other  gentleman  has  advanced  as  far  as  words  of 
three  syllables;  but  these  gentlemen,  if  they  have 
not  read  their  political  spelling  book,  liave  at 
least  read  the  book  of  mankind,  and  they  know 
what  it  is  that  the  people  expect.  They  know, 
or  ou^ht  to  know,  that  every  species  of  special 
pleading  should  be  avoiddl  in  a  document  of 
this  kind — that  it  is  necessary  that  we  should 
make  our  meaning  clear.  I  want  to  leave  as  lit- 
tle as  possible  for  legislative  or  judicial  con- 
struction. What  we  do  I  want  to  do  so  plainly 
that  the  different  departments  of  the  government 
may  not  only  read  it  as  they  run, but  understand 
it  well  and  easily.  Now,  leave  this  clause  as  it 
stands,  without  striking  out  the  words  referred 
to,  and  this  question  will  occur  frequently. — 
There  is  a  certain  class  of  acts  which  amount  to 
malfeasance,  others  to  misfeasance,  and  others  to 
nonfeasance  in  office.  A  man  has  done  a  partic- 
ular thing  that  he  ought  not  to  do,  or  he  has 
omitted  to  do  a  thing  he  ought  to  do,  about 
which  acts  there  may  be  cavilling  as  to  whether 
they  fall  under  the  class  of  cases  to  which  im- 
peachment applies,  or  whether  they  come  under 
that  of  address.  I  knojv  on  one  occasion 
such  a  question  saved  a  man  from  being  turned 
out  of  office.  It  opens  a  door  by  which  men  of 
tender  consciences  evade  the  responsibility  of 
voting  directly  upon  the  question  of  a  man's 
culpability.  It  raises  a  doubt  by  which  men  of 
strong  consciences  or  no  consciences  at  all,  can 
escape  the  consequences  of  their  misdeeds.  To 
put  It  in  legal  phrase,  which  will  be  intelligible 
to  every  body,  they  demur  to  the  case  set  out  on 


198 


the  motion  for  (he  address,  on  this  ground — that 
it  is  not  cause  for  address,  but  cause  for  impeach- 
ment, and  that  you  must  not  put  it  in  the  form 
of  an  address.  Why?  Because  it  is  a  higher,  a 
vorse,  a  blacker  crime  than  that  which,  by  the 
constitution  of  the  state,  is  authorized  to  be 
made  cause  of  removal  by  address. 

I  acknowledge  sir,  that  thi.s  is  a  very  strange 
reason,  and  it  would  be   a  strange  reason  to  an 
undisciplined  mind;  but  tlie  greater  should  al- 
ways include  the  less,  and  if  the  judge  had  com- 
mitted treason,  larceny,  or  arson,  or  any  capital 
oifence,  and  the  moral  sense  of  the  community 
was  satisfied  of  his  guilt,  yet  one  of  your  men  of 
tender  conscience  may  say'^it  is  not  good  cause  for 
removal  by  address.     I  want  to  get  rid  of  this 
objection.     Gentlemen  can   imagine  a  thousand 
dilferent  cases  in  which  this  objection  might  be 
raised.     If  you  think  proper  to  give   the  power 
of  impeachment,  put  in  the  necessary  words  for 
that  purpose  and  you  Avill  have  all  that  I  aim  at, 
and  that  is,  when  a  civil  officer  of  tlie  govern- 
ment has  been  guilty  of  such  high   crimes   and 
misdemeanors  as  to  require    impeachment,   im- 
peach him  if  you  think  proper,  but  the  impeach- 
ment of  a  civil  officer  has  in  this  country  become 
almost  unnecessary,  and  indeed  almost  imprac- 
ticable.    If  a  judge  fail  to  attendeourtforsuch  a 
length  of  time  as  to  make  it  evident  to  the  legis- 
lature that  his  conduct  amounts  to  nonfeasance 
in  office,  it  might   be   cause   for  impeachment, 
provided  sickness  or  other  legitimate  reasons  for 
such  absence   be  not  proven;  but  you   may  re- 
move him  by  address,  although  his  absence  had 
been  occasioned  by  sickness  or  physical  disabil- 
ity.    Retain  then  the  5th  article  of  the  old  con- 
stitution, and  add  to  it,  and  every  evil  or  incon- 
venience that  has  been  predicted  will  be  avoided. 
I  cannot  agree  to  go  so  far,  as   to  strike  out  the 
two-thirds  principle;  but  without  going  into  that 
question  at  present,  I  will  only  ask  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  when  he  comes  to  reply  to  the 
arguments  that  have  been  advanced  against  his 
proposition,  to    answer  this   solitary  question: 
was  not  the  two  thirds  principle  originally   in- 
serted in  the  constitution  of  this  State,  and  in  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  as  a  matter  of 
compromise  between  requiring  the  verdict  of  the 
whole  Jury  to  decide  the  facts  on  one  side,   and 
the  majority  of  the  court  to  decide  the  law  on 
the  other,  and  whether  when  the  legislature  meets 
and  has  to  remove  a  man  by  address,  they  are 
not  occupying  the  position  of  both  a  jury  to  de- 
cide the  facts,  and  the  court  to  decide  the  law, — 
whether  this  principle   was  not  put  in  as  a  com- 
promise in   consequence  of  the  mixture  of  the 
character  of  the  court,  Jiaving  to  decide  touch- 
ing the  law  and  the  facts — between  the  two  ex- 
tremes, of  requiring  only  a  bare  majority  of  the 
court  on  one  side  and  the  whole  of  the   jury   on 
the  other?    Hiis  it  npt  worked  well?     Tell  me  a 
solitary  instance  wiiere  it  has  failed  upon  address, 
althou^'h  gentlemen  can  find  a  hundred  instances 
where  It  has  failed  by  impeachment.     There   is 
the  point.     I  am   in  favor  of  striking  out  the 
words  proposed  to  be  stricken  out. 

I  am  averse  to  detaining  the  committee  longer, 
for  there  are  many  gentlemen  who  are  desirous 
of  giving  their  views,  and  who  seem  to  think  our 
sittings  are  too  brief.    My  own  opinion  is  that 


we  would  get  along  faster,  if  we  were  to  allow 
the  committees  to  do  more  work. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  will  state  briefly 
what  the  views  of  the  committee  were.  They, 
in  the  first  place,  believed  differently  from  the 
gentleman  from  Daviess,  that  no  officer  should 
be  removed  by  address  or  impeachment  upon 
mere  rumor.  "l  understand  the  gentleman  to 
state  that  cases  might  arise,  cases  of  high  crimes 
and  misdemeanors,  and  altliough  the  legislature 
may  be  satisfied  that  the  crimes  were  committed, 
yH  in  the  absence  of  direct  proof  of  the  fact 
the  party  cannot  be  removed. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  As  this  is  a  matter  of  some 
importance,  I  wish  it  to  be  clearly  understood. 
What  I  wish  to  know  is,  whether  it  is  intended 
by  the  committee  that  an  officer  shall  be  removed 
for  something  which  is  not  a  fact  to  be  proved 
by  testimony.  If  this  be  the  intention,  let  it 
be  done;  but  if  you  intend  to  remove  the  judge 
upon  facts  that  require  the  testimony  of  wit- 
nesses, in  the  name  of  Heaven  go  through  with 
the  address  in  the  same  manner  as  you  would 
with  an  impeachment.  Give  the  accused  notice 
in  writing  of  all  the  facts  you  intend  to  prove 
against  him.  Let  him  be  heard  at  the  bar  by 
himself  or  counsel  and  let  him  produce  witness- 
es for  his  defence.  Give  him  the  benefit  of 
all  the  means  of  defence  when  you  propose  to 
remove  him  by  address,  the  same  as  you  would  if 
the  form  of  proceeding  was  by  impeachment.  I 
desire  to  ask  both  the  gentlemen  from  Nelson, 
one  as  the  mover  of  the  amendment,  and  the 
other  as  chairman  of  the  committee,  whether  if 
you  retain  the  fifth  article,  you  int^^nd  to  grant 
to  the  judge  under  the  address  all  the  means  of 
defence  that  he  would  be  entitled  to  under  im- 
peachment. If  you  do  this,  you  will  have  made 
a  most  salutary  reform. 

Mr.  C.  A.   WICKLIFFE.    I  think  that  I  did 
not  misunderstand  my  honorable   friend.     The 
object  of  impeachment  is  not  only  to  get  clear 
of  the   officer,  but  also  to  disqualify  him  for  the 
future   from  holding  office  in   the  community. 
The  committee   did  not  design,   in  giving  the 
right  to  the  legislature  to  remove  by  address,  re- 
quiring the  usual  number — two  thirds — to  lessen 
the  rights  of  the  accused  or  to  enlarge  the  privi- 
leges of  the  accuser — the  commonwealth.     That 
no  man  should  be  removed   unless  there  be  suf- 
ficient proof  of  the  facts  alleged  against  him, 
nor  shall  he  be  removed  upon  a  charge  which  is 
but  partly  proved.     If  I  understand  my  honora- 
ble friend,  his  objection  was,  that  for  any  offence 
which  was   punishable    by   impeachment,  the 
triers  of  that  impeachment,  when  called  to  exer- 
cise their  functions  under  the  solemnity  of  an 
oath  recently  administered,  would,  like  a  jury, 
require  proof  before  they  would  convict  the  in- 
dividual.    But  he  may  be  guilty,  says  the  gen- 
tleman, and  there  may  not  be  sufficient  proof  to 
satisfy  a  court,  or  the  constituted  tribunal,  yet 
enough  to  satisfy  the   minds  of  the  people,  and 
that  you  will  convict  him  upon  mere  rumor  prop- 
agated by  his  enemies.     That  is  the  gentleman's 
position  if  I  understand  it.     The  gentleman  di- 
vides the  offences  for  which  officers  may  be  re- 
moved into  two  classes — into  sucJi  as  are  mala 
in  se,  and  such  as  do  not  amount  to  crimes.     It 
is  upon  this  latter  class  that  tlie  removing  power 
by  address   is  intended  to  operate,  and   in  cases 


199 


I 


of  trials  or  misdemeanors,  the  mode  of  proceed- 
ing is  by  impeachment,  therefore  I  was  in  favor 
of  retaining  the  impeaching  power. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Sir,  although  I  know  there 
is  an  impropriety  in  this  couvei-sational  mode  of 
debate,  vet  I  must  be  excused  for  a  single  mo- 
ment, ^o  man  supposes  that  it  was  intended 
that  an  officer  should  be  tried  without  an  oath 
on  the  part  of  those  who  try  him,  and  notice  of 
the  accusation  that  is  made  against  him.  I  can- 
not believe  that  my  honorable  friend  from  Nel- 
son is  unable  to  comprehend  the  distinction  that 
I  take.  Suppose  a  judge  gives  a  decision  which 
is  so  perfectly  absurd,  that  you  see  he  is  incom- 
petent to  discharge  the  duties  of  his  station, 
there  you  want  no  testimony  to  prove  the  fact. 
It  is  matter  of  record.  But  when  you  accuse  him 
of  felony,  when  you  accuse  him  of  any  crime, 
then  it  is  necessary  not  only  that  you  give  him 
notice  of  the  accusation,  but  that  the  senate 
shall  be  swoni  as  well  as  the  lower  house.  All 
these  things  might  confuse  the  minds  of  a  juiy, 
.but  they  cannot  confuse  this  house.  There  is  a 
distinctness  of  undej-standing  on  the  part  of  gen- 
tlemen around  me,  which  convinces  me  that 
they  cannot  be  confused.  Why  then  go  another 
step  and  say  they  shall  be  newly  swoni?  Swear 
them  every  morning  if  you  wish.  That  does  not 
touch  the  point  of  mv  argument.  This  thing  of 
removing  men  by  address  is  a  serious  matter,  but 
it  is  one  which  becomes  necessary  sometimes, 
and  shall  we  not  take  the  trouble  to  lay  down 
the  necessary  preliminaries  so  that  it  may  be 
done  correctiyV  It  is  only  writing  a  few  lines 
further,  and  saying  at  the  bottom  of  a  paragraph, 
that  each  house  when  sitting  and  adjudicating 
upon  an  address  shall  be  sworn,  ana  prescribe 
the  form  of  oath.  I  think  the  propositon  made 
by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin,) 
ought  to  succeed,  provided  it  is  particularly 
guarded,  and  I  leave  in  his  able  hands  the  duty 
of  properly  guarding  it. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  Were  it  not  that  an  expecta- 
tion is  entertained  in  this  house  that  I  should 
make  some  reply  to  what  has  been  said  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  proposition  which  I  made,  I  would 
not  address  the  house  now  or  at  any  other  time 
on  this  question,  because  I  discover,  sir,  that  I 
am  in  what  may  be  called  a  very  small  minori- 
ty, and  it  is  somewhat  unpleasant  to  travel  in 
such  company.  I  rise,  however,  rather  for  the 
purpose  of  disabusing  myself  from  some  re- 
marks, though  not  of  a  personal  character,  and 
not  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  set  speech. 
Before  I  do  that,  I  will  make  this  preliminary  re- 
mark, that  for  five  years  back  I  have  been  ex- 
ceedingly* anxious  for  the  call  of  a  convention. 
I  discovered  that  great  abuses  had  crept  into  our 
government — verj*  great  abuses— -especially  in 
the  appointing  power,  and  that  in  the  language 
of  Jetterson,  "power  is  always  stealing  away 
from  the  many  to  the  few,"  and  that  it  has  been 
emphatically  stealing  away  from  the  people  of 
Kentucky;  and  like  bovs  playing  "cat  or  corner 
ball,"  when  the  ball  is  lost  they  stop  and  cry  out 
"lost  ball."  I|was  ready,  for  one  to  stop  legisla 
ting  and  cry  out  "lost  ball."  One  great  object 
that  I  had  in  view,  in  advocating  the  call  of  a 
convention,  I  felicitate  myself  will  be  fully  at- 
tained, and  that  is  that  the  appointing  power 
will  be  restored  to  the  people  where  it  originally 


and  of  right  belongs.  When  I  attain  that,  I 
wUl  vote  for  almost  any  thing  that  this  house 
may  be  disposed  to  insert  in  the  constitution.  \ 
did  not  like  from  the  start  the  proposition  that 
is  now  before  this  commtttee,  and  I  hope  I  may 
be  indulged  while  I  recapitulate  the  new  and 
substantial  provisions  contained  therein,  and  as 
I  go  along  I  will  point  out  some  of  the  objec- 
tions that  I  have  to  them.  The  first  principle 
is  that  the  judges  shall  be  elected  by  the  people; 
I  heartily  go  for  that.  The  next  proposition  is 
substantiallv,  that  the  judges  shall  not  be  re- 
moved by  address  in  any  case  that  is  the  subject 
of  impeachment.  I  am  rather  opposed  to  that, 
but  not  particularly  wedded  to  my  opinion.  The 
next  great  principle  is,  that  it  shall  require  a 
vote  of  two  thirds  to  remove  a  judge.  Wei, 
sir,  I  am  against  that,  as  I  intimated  to  this 
house  a  week  or  two  ago;  yet  that  would  not  be 
a  sine  qua  non  with  me.  if  I  could  get  some  other 
alterations  made.  I  want — ^whether  it  be  a  ma- 
jority or  two  thirds  of  the  legislature,  that  shall 
have  power  to  remove  a  judge — that  the  passage 
of  the  resolution  shall  be  ipso  facto,  the  removal 
of  the  judge,  and  that  the  governor  shall  have 
no  hand  in  it  afterwards;  because  if  we  were  to 
pass  a  resolution,  unless  there  was  some  provis- 
ion of  that  kind  inserted,  he  would  veto  it,  and 
there  is  no  provision  by  which  we  can  pass  the 
resolution,  his  veto  notwithstanding.  It  will 
be  remembered  by  delegates  in  this  house  that 
the  legislature  of  Pennsylvania  attempted  to 
address  a  judge  out,  and  the  words  employed  in 
their  constitution  were,  "the  governor  may  re- 
move." The  legislature  passed  the  resolution 
by  a  large  majority  of  both  houses  and  laid  it 
before  the  governor.  He  refused  to  remove  the 
individual,  and  the  legislature  entered  upon  the 
labor  of  expostulation.  They  contended  that 
the  word  "may''  was  synonymous  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  was  used  in  that  place  with  "shall." 
The  governor  returned  this  insolent  answer: 
"You  say  the  word  "may"  means  "shall;"  I  say 
it  means  "I  will  not."  He  then  went  on  anU 
said,  "You  do  those  things  which  you  ought  not 
to  do,  and  you  leave  undone  those  things  which 
you  ought  to  do,  and  there  is  no  health  in  you." 
That  was  the  language  of  the  governor  of  Penn- 
sylvania. 

I  am  in  favor,  whether  you  require  a  vote  of 
two  thirds  or  three  fifths  or  a  bare  majority,  of 
removing  the  individual  without  the  interven- 
tion of  the  governor  at  all.  The  governor  has 
no  hand  in  the  election  of  a  judge,  except  by 
his  vote  an  a  private  individual,  and  I  am  not 
for  applying  to  him,  as  governor,  to  sanction 
what  tne  legislature  has  done. 

Well  sir,  I  am  willing  that  the  eight  years 
principle  shall  be  retained  in  the  bill,  provided 
you  introduce  in  it  the  principle  of  ineligibility 
after  that  time.  If  they  are  to  be  re-eligible,  let 
their  terms  be  as  in  Mississippi,  for  but  four 
years;  and  let  the  re-eligibility  only  continue 
for  two  terms.  But  I  would  prefer  a  term  of 
eight  years,  with  ineligibility  for  at  least  four, 
five,  six,  or  eight  years  more. 

I  do  not  know  that  the  court  of  appeals  would 
be  placed  in  a  position  in  which  they  may  exer- 
cise any  undue  influence  upon  the  voters.  But 
take  the  circuit  courts — and  I  imagine  that  we 
are  to  have  twelve  judicial  districts,  embracing. 


200 


perhaps  eight  or  ten  counties  each,  in  which 
may  be  included  some  fourteen  or  fifteen  thou- 
sand voters — and  imagine  to  yourself  a  judge 
on  the  bench,  who  is  looking,  if  you  please,  for 
a  re-election.  Imagine  to  yourself  that  he  has 
the  life  of  some  member  of  a  powerful  and  influ- 
ential family  in  his  hands,  or  the  liberties  of  an- 
other member  of  a  family  of  that  description — 
and  he  may  have  a  thousand  eases  of  that  kind 
before  him — and  I  ask  you  if  that  is  not  a  lever 
of  power  that  cannot  be  resisted  for  one  moment? 
What  lawver  in  the  state  can  come  in  competi- 
tion with  him?  None,  none  sir!  I  am  in  favor 
of  a  man,  when  he  comes  before  the  people,  com- 
ing without  the  black  cloak  of  a  juclge  upon 
him.  I  am  opposed  to  re-eligibility,  and  I  want 
to  say  to  this  house,  that  if  I  could  see  the  inel- 
igibility principle  carried  out  in  this  bill,  with 
some  other  alterations,  I  would  forego  the  propo- 
sition that  I  now  make.  I  am  making  these 
Fropositions,  because,  take  this  bill  as  a  whole, 
do  not  like  its  provisions.  I  do  not  like  the 
proposition  for  four  judges.  I  have  no  recollec- 
tion that  we  ever  had  four  judges,  except  in  that 
celebrated  court  called  the  new  court;  and  I  re- 
collect very  well  that  when  I  took  the  stump 
against  that  famous  court,  of  all  the  weapons 
that  I  used  that  was  the  most  powerful,  except 
that  of  John  Trimble's  woman's  saddle  which 
he  put  in  the  mortgage.  I  have  a  deep-rooted 
prejudice  against  four  judges,  and  I  will  state  a 
ca.se.  The  circuit  judge,  if  you  please,  decides 
a  certain  principle  of  law.  It  comes  up  to  the 
court  of  appeals.  The  four  judges  stand  two 
to  two  in  tlieir  opinions,  and  the  decision  below 
is  sustained,  because  they  are  equally  divided. 
"Well,  a  case  comes  up  in  which  the  circuit  judge 
has  taken  an  opposite  opinion;  the  court  is  di- 
vided and  so  it  stands.  That  is  what  we  call  a 
beautiful  uniformity  of  decision.  Give  us  then 
a  number  that  can  agree;  take  three,  five,  seven, 
nine,  or  eleven,  if  you  want  to  give  us  a  number 
that  can  never  be  equally  divided;  but  three 
judges  have  done  our  business  very  well  for  the 
last  twenty  or  thirty  years,  I  believe.  I  have 
but  little  fault  to  find  with  the  court  of  appeals, 
and  it  was  a  fault  that  we  all  find,  namely,  that 
the  governor  was  the  appointing  power.  I  want 
to  give  it  to  the  people.  Next,  I  always  thought 
there  was  something  of  indecent  huny  and 
hast«  in  the  manner  in  which  these  judges  dis- 
charge their  business.  The  higher  court  of  the 
state  should  do  its  business  with  something  like 
a  measured  gravity  and  dignity;  yet  their  whole 
business  has  been  accomplished  in  one  hundred 
days  of  one  year.  And  the  moment  they  accom- 
plish it  they  hurry  off  to  accomplish  other  busi- 
ness— some  to  lecture  on  law,  some  to  do  one 
thing  and  some  another.  I  do  not  know  that  I 
fihair  offer  an  amendment,  or  that  it  is  practica- 
ble to  make  any  alteration  on  that  point.  I  am 
against  four  judges,  because  it  will  add  to  the 
expenses  of  the  court  some  $1500,  at  least — 
$2000  if  we  fix  the  salary  at  that  sum. 

I  am  against  branching  the  court.  Branching 
the  court  will  make  it  necessary  to  have  four 
clerks,  four  clerk's  offices,  four  clerk's  records, 
four  different  sets  of  all  the  machinery  attending 
the  court.  That  will  swell  the  expenses,  per- 
haps, taking  all  together,  some  $5000.  But  I 
have  an  objection  still  stronger.    Where  are  you 


to  locate  these  four  branches?  If  you  leave  it 
to  the  legislature,  it  will  be  a  bone  of  contention 
eternal!}'.  And  when  they  are  located,  it  will 
perhaps  be  in  places  where  there  are  not  to  be 
found  five  law  books.  At  all  events  they  may 
be  located  at  places  where  full  and  competent 
libraries  for  the  court  of  appeals  cannot  be  ob- 
tained. Well  how  many  days  will  these  branch- 
es have  to  sit?  And  how  many  terms  are  they  to 
hold?  Will  they  have  four  terms?  If  so,  how 
many  weeks  and  days  will  they  sit  at  each?  Say 
eight  weeks,  and  I  will  soon  show  you  that  that 
will  not  do.  There  will  be  four  clerks,  four  sets 
of  records,  four  clerk's  offices,  at  the  expense  of 
the  state  ;  there  will  also  be  four  men  to  wait  on 
the  court,  four  men  to  make  the  fires,  and  God 
knows  how  much  additional  machinery  will  be 
required  in  these  courts.  But  the  great  objec- 
tion is  this — will  they  in  any  term  in  the  year  be 
able  to  do  the  business?  Some  gentlemen  tell 
you  that  if  you  divide  the  business  of  the  court 
of  appeals  into  foUr  parts  the  judges  can  do  the 
business.  But  do  you  not  know,  and  I  appeal, 
to  every  lawyer  in  this  house,  that  if  you  branch 
it  the  business  will  be  doubled  and  trebled.  Did 
you  ever  see  a  neighborhood  where  there  was 
no  court  house  within  twenty  miles?  How 
peaceable,  and  quiet,  and  civilly  disposed  to- 
wards each  other  thev  were.  Make  anew  coun- 
ty and  bring  a  court  house  to  their  doors,  and 
every  man  begins  to  pull  his  neighbors  hair  the 
wrong  way,  directly  in  the  shape  of  a  law  suit. 
Bring  up  a  branch  to  any  place,  and  I  can  safely 
say  that  I  can  point  out  some  five  lawyers  that 
can  take  more  business  to  the  court  than  it  can 
do  in  that  part  of  the  year  allotted  to  it.  In 
Mississippi — I  went  there  in  1837  and  1838  Avith 
a  view  of  practicing  there — it  was  known  that 
that  was  the  case,  and  they  presented  me  with  a 
set  of  rules  to  sign  ;  and  it  was  a  regulation  of 
fees,  such  as  a  per  centage  for  collecting,  and  a 
half  per  cent,  for  getting  continuances.  Now  a 
great  deal  of  the  business  will  be  exactly  of  this 
kind.  You  double  and  treble  the  business,  and 
throw  into  the  court,  where  it  only  sits  once  a 
year,  so  much  that  the  court  will  soon  get  behind 
hand.  It  will  soon  be  found  that  the  great  bus- 
iness of  the  lawyers  will  be  to  get  tlie  fees  by 
continuances. 

I  recollect  that  when  I  practised  in  Green,  a 
veiy  worthy  lawyer,  Sam  Brents,  the  half  of 
whose  business  was  getting  continuances,  of 
which  he  obtained  the  fees;  and  I  have  known 
him,  for  the  purpose  of  getting  a  continuance, 
to  speak  four  nours  on  the  point,  whether  at  the 
court  was  equal  to  in  the  court.  I  am  against 
this  proposition ;  and  I  am  against  the  proposi- 
tion that  we  shall  vote  for  these  judges  by  bal- 
lot. I  am  in  favor  of  the  viva  voce  vote  for  eve- 
ry officer  in  this  commonwealth;  and  I  do  not 
subscribe  to  the  reasons  suggeste<l  by  my  col- 
league, that  the  judges  ought  not  to  know  who 
voted  for  them,  lest  they  may  wreak  their  ven- 
geance upon  the  men  who  voted  against  tliem. 
If  that  be  the  case,  the  public  feeling  in  this  coun- 
try is  in  a  most  deplorable  condition,  to  say  the 
least.  But  if  a  judge  wants  to  play  that  game, 
cannot  he  very  easily  find  out  who  voted  against 
him?  The  gentleman  and  myself  can  go  into  a 
crowd,  and  without  asking  a  man,  but  by  merely 
shaking  hands  with  him,   we  can   tell  whether 


201 


he  -n-ill  vote  for  or  against  us.  A  candidate  has 
a  hundred  ways  by  which  he  can  find  itout.  I 
recollect  when  I  run  for  congress  in  1835.  I  met 
a  very  worthy  man  on  the  Sunday  evening  be- 
fore the  election;  he  shook  hands  with  me,  and 
said  wliere  are  you  going?  I  am  going  to  Tay- 
lorsville,  said  I.  Are  you  going  to  be  there  to- 
morrow, while  the  election  is  goino^  on?  I  an- 
swered yes.  I  vote  at  Bloorafield,  he  added. 
Yes,  sai'd  I;  and  I  hope  you  will  take  all  your 
friends  Avith  you,  and  get  them  to  vote  for  me. 
A  Aveek  or  two  afterwards,  I  again  met  him, 
and  he  said  to  me,  how  did  you  know  that  I  was 
going  to  vote  for  you?  Just  from  the  manner 
in  which  you  enquired  wliere  I  was  going.  I 
knew  vou  felt  interested  in  my  locality  the  first 
day  of  the  election,  and  that  was  enough  for  me. 
But  if  I  cannot  ascertain  it  inthatway,  it  would 
be  very  easy  for  me  to  ask  one  man  to  enquire 
from  another,  how  he  voted,  and  thus  I  can 
soon  find  out.  But  I  will  not  indulge  the  opin- 
ion that  in  this  country  men  will  be  afraid  to 
vote,  and  to  avow  their  sentiments,  for  fear  of 
the  wrath  and  indignation  of  the  judge;  and  I 
am  unwilling  to  believe  that  the  judge  would 
exercise  it.  When  I  come  up  to  vote,  I  am  not 
to  look  at  the  judge  through  a  smoked  glass,  as 
they  do  at  the  sun,  when  it  is  about  to  be 
eclipsed.  "We  are  not  to  have  any  man  here  that 
we  are  afraid  to  look  upon.  My  worthy  col- 
league well  knows  that  the  people  are  not 
afraid  to  vote.  We  have  been  candidates  too 
often  not  to  know  that  our  best  friends,  who  do 
not  agree  with  us,  will  come  and  vote  against 
us,  and  look  us  fairly  in  the  face,  and  be  friends 
with  us  afterwards.  In  counties  where  there  are 
large  landholders — men  holding  perhaps  half 
a  county — there  may  be  tenants  that  it  may  be 
necessary  to  screen  from  the  wrath  and  indigna- 
tion of  tlieir  landlord,  when  he  knows  how  they 
vote.  In  counties  too,  where  there  are  large 
manufacturing  establishments,  and  where  a  man 
can  control  the  votes  of  a  thousand  operatives,  it 
may  be  necessary  to  protect  them;  but  in  this 
country,  above  all  others  in  the  world,  we  ought 
to  be  the  last  people  afraid  to  vote.  The  first 
objection  which  I  made,  was,  as  pointed  out  by 
my  worthy  friend  from  Daviess,  (Mr.  Triplett.) 
"if  the  gentleman  will  turn  to  our  constitution, 
he  will  see  that  it  is  only  a  misdemeanor  in 
office,  that  is  a  ground  of  impeachment  under 
our  state  constitution.  But  in  the  constitution 
of  the  United  States,  the  power  of  impeachment 
extends  bevond  that: 

"Art.  2,  Sec.  4.  The  President,  Vice 
'  President,  and  all  civil  officers  of  the  United 
'  States,  sljall  be  removed  from  office,  on  im- 
'peachment  for,  and  conviction  of,  treason, 
'bribery,  or  other  high  crimes  and  misdemean- 
'or.s." 

A  man  in  the  government  of  the  United  States 
may  be  impeached  for  treason,  and  felony,  and 
other  high  crimes,  and  misdemeanors,  that 
remove  him  from  office.  When  you  come  to  the 
State  of  Kentucky,  it  is  only  upon  misdemean- 
or in  office,  as  to  the  court  of  appeals.  And 
when  it  comes  to  a  justice  of  the  peace,  they  can 
be  removed  by  impeachment  for  any  offence,  or 
they  can  be  addressed  out: 

"Art.  5,  Sec.  3.     The  governor  and  all  civil 
'  officers  shall  be  liable  to  impeachment  for  any 
26 


'misdemeanor  in  office;  but  judgment  in  such 
'  cases  shall  not  extend  further  than  to  removal 
'from  office,  and  disqualification  from  any  office 
'  of  honor,  trust,  or  profit,  under  this  common- 
'  wealth;  W  the  party  convicted  shall  never- 
'  theless  be  liable  and  subjectto  indictment,  trial, 
'  and  punishment  according  to  law." 

Any  thing  he  can  be  impeached  for  he  can  be 
removed  foi-";  but  a  justice  of  the  court  of  appeals 
cannot  be  removed  unless  for  misbehaviour  in 
office.  A  judge  of  the  supreme  court  can  be  re- 
moved by  impeachment,  for  bribery  and  other 
high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  which  do  not  re- 
late to  the  office.  A  judge  of  our  supreme  court 
can  only  be  removed  for  misbehaviour  in  office 
by  impeachment — a  justice  of  the  peace  for  all 
the  catalogue  of  offences  that  can  be  committed 
by  man  for  which  he  would  be  worthv  of  renaov- 
al.  I  see  no  reason  in  the  world  why  there  should 
be  that  difference.  If  a  man  is  guilty  of  misbe- 
haviour in  office,  why  not  give  the  opportunity 
to  address  him  out?  Say  he  is  guilty  of  gross 
oppression  or  tyranny  in  office,  are  we  to  get  at 
him  in  no  way  except  by  impeachment?  How 
many  ten  thousands  of  oppressions  and  misbe- 
haviours are  there  of  which  a  judge  may  be 
guilty;  and  I  ask  if  there  is  no  way  to  reach  him 
but  by  impeachment?  What  is  an  impeachment? 
Who  starts  an  impeachment?  Why  some  man 
in  the  country;  or  an  address  may  be  prepared 
and  carried  on  by  some  member  of  the  legisla- 
ture. We  know," as  a  matter  of  experience,  that 
the  resort  to  impeachment  is  impracticable.  The 
people  are  cowed  and  afraid  to  undertake  it.  I 
recollect  once  that  some  of  the  officers  of  the 
banks  in  the  District  of  Columbia  pointed  out 
to  me  how  Mr.  Dallas,  then  Secretary  of  the 
Treasurj',  had  swindled  the  government,  on  a 
loan,  in  favor  of  his  son-in-law,  Bache,  out  of 
$1,250,000.  They  showed  me  the  book  where 
his  son-in-law  ha'd  subscribed  for  or  bought  up 
$13,000  at  eighty  seven  and  a  half  cents  on  the 
hundred  for  stock — for  that  was  the  price  during 
the  war.  And  he  had  been  permitted  to  pay  in 
the  whole  ten  millions  in  that  way;  although  at 
the  time  he  paid  it  in  the  war  had  closed,  and 
the  stock  had  risen  to  par,  enabling  him  to  real- 
ize twelve  and  a  half  per  cent,  on  the  ten  million 
loan.  This  I  say  they  pointed  out  to  me,  and  it 
is  in  a  book  which  I  will  never  part  with  in  the 
world.  I  pointed  it  out  to  Mr.  Randolph  and  he 
attacked  Mr.  Dallas.  Some  gentleman  from  the 
other  side  of  the  house  cried  impeach  him,  and 
Randolph  replied,  I  once  tried  that  against  that 
corrupt  Judge  Chase  and  it  would  not  do,  and  I 
will  try  it  no  more.  And  then  he  said  this — 
When  1  was  a  boy  I  read  some  book  where  the 
rats  held  a  great  convention  to  devise  the  ways 
and  means  to  get  clear  of  the  cat,  of  whom  they 
stood  in  fear.  At  last  they  agreed  to  put  a  bell 
round  the  cat's  neck,  but  when  they  came  to  the 
last  question — which  rat  would  put  the  bell  on 
the  cat — ^there  was  none  found  willing  to  do  it, 
and  the  whole  business  fell  through.  No  rat 
could  be  found  to  bell  the  cat.  And  so  it  would 
be  with  impeachments.  Burke,  Fox,  aad  Sher- 
idan, tried  to  bell  the  cat,  Warren  Hastings,  for 
a  series  of  oppressions  unparalelled  in  theliisto- 
ry  of  the  world,  but  they  failed  after  a,  trial  of 
fourteen  years.  The  ministry  protected  him — 
the   Queen  took  his  wife  by  the  haaad  to  her 


<r 


'202 


crowded  levees  and  parties— and  the  King  pro- 
tected him  and  the  prosecution  failed.  Since 
then  an  impeachment  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
has  been  considered  a  perfect  mockery.  I  look 
■upon  the  whole  doctrine  of  impeachments  as  a 
perfect  mockery  and  insult  upon  the  people. 
Where  is  the  man  that  "VN^as  ever  impeached  out? 
You  (pointing  to  Mr.  0.  A.  Wickliffe)  tried  it 
•with  Judge  Peck — you,  and  others  of  as  great 
talent,  tried  it  and  failed  by  one  vote.  You 
know,  as  far  as  you  are  concerned,  that  it  is  a 
mockery.  You  labored  in  such  a  way  as  to  en- 
title you  to  great  credit,  and  so  did  your  col- 
legues  in  the  house  of  representatives,  but  they 
all  failed.  Chase  was  one  of  the  judges  of  the 
supreme  court  of  the  United  States  at  the  time 
that  John  Adams  was  in  office,  and  congress 
with  his  aid  and  assent  passed  the  Alien  and 
Sedition  laws,  which  roused  the  indignation  of 
the  people  of  the  United  States  in  all  its  length 
and  breadth.  Chase  Avas  the  man  who  played 
the  same  part  to  John  Adams  the  elder,  that  the 
infamous  Judge  Jeffries  did  to  James  II  precise- 
ly. They  were  a  pair  that  were  worthy  of  each 
other,  and  they  were  as  tyranical  a  pair  as  were 
ever  on  the  bench  in  the  Avorld.  The  people  of 
the  United  States,  however,  with  one  united 
voice  nearly,  hurled  John  Adams  from  the  pres- 
idential chair  and  put  Jefferson  into  it.  But 
the  whole  federal  senators  remained,  and  when 
Chase  was  impeached  for  his  misbehaviour  in 
office,  and  for  ail  his  tyrannies  and  course  of  op- 
pression, in  office,  the  federalists  attended  to  a 
man.  If  you  were  ever  in  congress  at  the  time 
you  know  how  they  sat.  I  had  the  misfortune 
or  good  fortune  to  be  there  during  a  little  of  the 
time.  There  they  sat  on  one  side  of  the  house, 
the  federalists  dressed  as  the  Duke  of  "Welling- 
ton or  the  Marquis  of  Whitewash,  or  any  other 
distinguished  nobleman,  with  their  heads  all 
powdered.  On  the  other  side  were  the  republi- 
cans in  their  plain  clothes  and  no  powder.  On 
the  trial  of  Chase  the  fine  dressed  federal  sena- 
tors, to  the  number  of  fifteen,  against  nineteen 
of  the  finest  republicans  the  world  ever  saw, 
saved  that  old  tyrant  ;  and  that  as  Randolph 
said,  was  enough  for  him.  While  nineteen  re- 
publicans voted  against  Chase,  fifteen  old  feder- 
alists, in  their  fine  clothes  and  powdered  heads, 
voted  for  him  because  he  had  been  serving  their 
cause  during  the  administration  of  Adams,  and 
they  kept  him  on  the  bench.  That  is  what  they 
called  ooedience  to  public  sentiment  I  suppose. 
They  knew  that  four  fifths  of  the  whole  nation 
were  republicans  at  the  time;  but  those  federal- 
ists, who  were  elected  during  the  reign  of  Ad- 
ams, held  their  seats,  with  some  additions  from 
the  New  England  states;  and  those  fifteen  saved 
him.  I  consider  impeachments  of  no  use  at  all. 
There  is  only  a  procrastination  and  expense  in 
it.  Nobody  will  undertake  it,  and  the  only  rem- 
edy is  an  aadress  to  both  houses. 

Well  how  is  an  impeacliment  tried?  There 
are  sixty  senators;  and  of  tliese,  thirty  one  is  a 
quorum.  Two  thirds  of  that  number  is  all  that 
is  necessary  to  convict  a  man — that  is  twenty 
one.  But  how  is  an  impeachment  tried  in  the 
Senate  here?  There  are  tnirty  eight  senators,  of 
whom  twenty  is  a  quorum,  and  two  thirds  of 
that  number  is  fourteen  and  that  fourteen  may 


convict.  Now  fourteen  is  six  less  than  mr 
amendment  presents  to  this  house. 

If  an  address  of  the  majority  prevails,  it  will 
be,  if  the  number  should  remain  as  it  now  is, 
twenty  senators  and  fifty  one  representatives.  By 
impeachment  fourteen  senators  have  the  power 
to  remove  a  man.  The  constitution  is  based  on 
that  theory.  I  know  that  in  common,  and  in 
perhaps  ninety  nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred  the 
whole  senate  will  be  full;  but  the  goveniment 
is  predicated  on  the  theory  that  fourteen  sena- 
tors out  of  thirty  eight  can  break  a  governor  if 
they  choose. 

,  Now  what  is  this  dangerous  proposition  that 
has  excited  so  much  opposition?  From  every 
quarter  of  this  house  has  opposition  sprung  and 
all  seem  to  be  astonished  that  I  have  the  temeri- 
ty— I  had  almost  said  the  audacity — to  bring  it 
forward. 

What  is  the  proposition?  If  we  are  to  have 
one  hundred  members  in  one  house,  fifty  one 
which  is  a  clear  majority  of  all  elected,  with  all 
absentees  counted  against  them,  will  be  all  that 
is  necessary.  If  the  senate  consists  of  thirty 
eight  as  at  present,  then  twenty  will  be  all  that 
is  necessary  in  that  body.  But  there  must  be 
twentv,  because  the  proposition  is  that  a  majority 
of  each  house,  which  means  a  majority  of  all 
the  members  to  which  it  is  entitled,  shall  be  re- 
quired. Then  where  is  the  difference  between 
us?  You  say  two  thirds,  that  is  twenty  six^sen- 
ators  and  sixty  seven  representatives.  We  on 
our  part,  the  small  band  that  went  to  Ther- 
mopylcB,  and  will  I  hope,  again,  if  we  can 
bring  it  before  the  people,  say  twenty  in  one 
house  and  fifty  one  in  another.  You  say  twenty 
six  in  one  house  and  sixty  seven  in  the  other. 
And  after  that,  you  meet  the  argument  precisely 
in  the  same  way,  by  crying  out  revolution,  revo- 
lution, as  CrotQwell  did,  when  he  cried  out  Sir 
Harry  Vane,  save  me  from  Sir  Harry  Vane.  Is 
there  any  thing  more  revolutionary  in  our  prop- 
osition than  in  yours?  The  only  difference  in 
the  two  propositions  is  in  regard  to  these  num- 
bers, differing  to  the  number  of  six  in  one  house 
and  sixteen  in  the  other. 

Gentlemen  ask,  shall  the  judiciary  be  at  the 
mercy  of  the  legislative  department.  Well  who 
is  to  try  the  case,  if  it  takes  two-thirds?  The 
same  body?  The  same  body  precisely.  If  the 
proposition  was  to  have  a  different  department 
of  government  to  try,  then  the  gentleman's  ar- 
gument would  be  sound;  but  when  it  is  the  same 
department,  the  legislative  department,  we  see 
that  the  difference  is  in  the  number  only,  which 
is  necessary  to  convict.  I  ask  now  is  it  more 
revolutionary  with  us  than  Avith  you?  How  is 
it  to  oppress  the  judiciaiy  by  the  legislature  in 
one  case  more  than  in  the  other?  Gentlemen 
say  that  the  Polish  manner  will  be  taken,  deci- 
ding that  one  vote  is  a  sufficient  negative,  till 
one  man  can  cut  off  a  member's  head.  There  is 
then,  nothing  in  the  proposition  to  alarm  any 
body.  It  is  only  a  question  (not  that  another 
department,  but  the  same  department  shall  try) 
whether  it  shall  be  twenty  in  one  house  and 
fifty  one  in  the  other,  or  twenty  six  in  one  house 
and  sixty  seven  in  the  other.  If  our  doctrine  is 
revolutionary  so  is  yours,  gentlemen.  If  our 
doctrine  is  that  the  legislative  department  shall 
be  called  on  to  decide  on  the  judiciary,  so  ia 


203 


vours.  It  is  only  in  reference  to  number  that  we 
differ.  I  want  uie  legislature,  the  senate,  and 
the  house  of  representatives,  to  take  the  attitude 
of  a  high  court  of  judicature,  and  henco  I  do  not 
want  the  governor  to  have  any  connection  with 
it  or  any  veto  upon  their  action.  I  want  to  have 
it  possess  the  dignity  and  the  solemnity  so  far 
as  practicable,  of  a  high  court  of  judicature,  by 

giving  to  the  accused  the  right  of  being  heard  by 
imself  and  couusel,  that  it  shall  not  be  a  mere 
hastv  thing,  as  was  cauglit  up  against  Judge 
Clarlceundertheexcitement  of  the  moment.  But 
there  shall  be  two  branches  acting  separately, 
and  they  shall  assume  the  high  character  of  a 
court  of  adjudication,  and  the  governor  shall 
have  no  hand  in  it,  but  the  accused  may  be  heard 
by  himself  and  counsel.  I  ask  gentlemen,  are 
not  our  judges  to  be  responsible  to  the  people 
in  some  way?  Do  you  mean  to  make  them  en- 
tirely irresponsible?  If  responsible,  how  are 
they  to  be?  Can  the  people  come  here,  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  five  thousand  voters,  according 
to  the  census,  in  this  or  any  other  place  to  try 
and  remove  a  judge  by  impeachment?  You 
must  make  the  judges  responsible  through  some 
agents  that  they  may  designate.  Whom  will  the 
people  designate?  Is  it  to  be  the  governor? 
God  forbid!  Who  then?  To  the  people  through 
the  senate  by  impeachment;  the  whole  people 
of  Kentucky  through  their  representatives,  ta- 
king both  houses  together.  Who  represents  the 
people  more  immediately  than  any  other?  You 
say  the  governor  does.  Yes  he  does.  Who 
ought  to  do  it?  The  senate  and  house  of  repre- 
sentatives., who  come  immediately  from  the  peo- 
ple, from  one  end  of  the  state  to  the  other,  from 
the  mouth  of  Big  Sanday  to  Mills'  Point,  and 
from  Louisville  to  Cumberland  Gap.  I  say 
there  cannot  be  a  tribunal  better  selected,  more 
proper,  and  more  amenable  to  the  people  than 
the  nonse  of  representatives  and  the  senate. 

We  must  adopt  that  system.  We  are  obliged 
to  make  them  responsible  to  the  people  in  some 
shape.  They  cannot  be  responsible  to  the  peo- 
ple individually,  and  therefore  they  must  be  re- 
sponsible to  their  agents,  and  who  so  proper  as 
the  senate  and  house  of  representatives  ?  Away 
then  with  the  argument  that  you  put  them  at  the 
mercy  of  the  legislative  department.  A  few 
days  since  a  gentleman  gave  us  an  instance  of 
the  new  court,  and  perhaps  he  will  give  us  an- 
other of  Judge  Clarke.  That  occurrence  has 
happened  once  since  the  formation  of  the  govern- 
ment in  1792,  but  I  hope  and  trust  in  God  it  will 
never  happen  again.  A  bad  course  of  legisla- 
tion in  ldl9,  by  chartering  a  set  of  independent 
banks,  and  thus  flooding  this  country  with  pa- 
per, produced  an  inordinate  spirit  of  specula- 
tion, and  got  the  whole  state  into  debt.  You 
had  no  laws  to  protect  a  poor  man's  land  from 
being  sacrificed  as  you  have  now  by  the  two 
thirds  principle,  and  of  exempting  a  poor  man's 
bed  or  cow,  or  only  working  beast  from  seizure 
and  sale.  Constables  and  sheriffs  were  going 
from  place  to  place  through  the  land,  and  there 
was  no  safe-guard  that  the  land  should  be  sold 
at  the  court  house  door.  None.  Sheriffs  and 
constables  were  going  through  the  land,  and 
selling  as  I  know,  valuable  lands  for  one-fiftieth 
of  their  value.  I  know  of  ten  thousand  acres 
that  were  sold  for  one  hundred  and  twenty  dol- 


lars, and  the  gale  was  confirmed  in  the  conrt  of 
appeals.  I  know  a  thousand  acres,  worth  four 
or  five  thousand  dollars,  sold  for  four  dollars, 
and  the  sale  was  good.  I  know  another  case  of 
fifteen  thousand  acres,  that  belonged  to  an  uncle 
of  mine,  and  which  had  descended  to  his  heirs, 
sold  for  ten  dollars.  Sir,  there  was  a  parcel  of 
merciless  speculators  following  the  sheriffs  and 
constables  of  the  country,  like  carrion  crows, 
buzzards,  and  vultures,  following  a  marching  and 
fighting  army  to  prey  upon  the  bodies  slain  in  bat- 
tle, or  those  who  might  die  by  disease,  and  the 
people  were  goaded  on  to  madness.  But  I  hope 
never  to  see  such  a  state  of  things  again.  It  is 
better  that  the  people  should  succeed  than  that 
such  a  principle  should  be  retained  in  the  con- 
stitution. I  did  vote  for  the  old  court.  I  am 
one  who,  rather  than  be  sustained  by  the  tricke- 
ries of  bond  and  mortgage,  would  live  in  a  work- 
ed-out  saltpetre  cave.  I  fought  for  the  old  court, 
and  I  saw  the  sufferings  of  the  whole  country. 
The  legislature  in  its  wisdom  has  surrounded 
the  poor  man  with  the  protection  of  a  two-thirds 
principle,  and  exemption  and  sale  at  the  court 
house.  We  are  not  to  reason  from  extreme  ca- 
ses, as  that  of  Judge  Peck,  or  the  extreme  case 
of  Judge  Chase,  or  of  Judge  Clarke,  in  the  old 
court,  but  we  are  to  settle  on  the  general  rule, 
on  the  safe  principle  based  on  the  common  oc- 
currences of  all  good  governments.  That  is 
what  we  ought  to  settle  down  upon  now.  I  ask 
what  is  the  theory  of  our  government,  and  what 
is  the  theory  of  all  republican  governments? 
There  are  but  two  kinds  of  government.  None 
but  two.  Some  are  called  the  government  of 
the  Grand  Turk,  some  the  government  of  the 
great  Emperor  of  all  the  Russias,  or  the  Empe- 
ror of  Austria,  the  King  of  Prussia,  the  misera- 
ble little  Bonaparte  here  now  in  Paris,  and  Queen 
Victoria  with  her  royal  spouse,  whose  father 
owned  a  little  country  that  had  sixteen  hundred 
people  in  it,  and  we  may  go  and  look  back  to  the 
aristocracies  that  existei  in  Venice,  and  in  all 
there  are  but  two.  One  is  that  of  a  minority 
controlling  a  majority,  and  the  other,  that  of  a 
majority  controlling  its  own  action  ;  call  it  im- 
perial, monarchical,  or  what  you  will,  there  are 
but  two. 

What  is  the  theory  of  our  government?  Is  it 
not  that  of  a  majority?  Are  you  afraid  of  the 
majority?  Are  you  to  say  the  majority  cannot 
be  trusted — God  save  the  majority  from  them- 
selves, their  foolish  selves?  Cannot  a  majority 
of  the  supreme  court  of  nine  judges  be  trusted 
to  decide  upon  ten  millions  of -property?  Yes. 
Cannot  a  majority  of  a  court  martial  decide  on 
the  high-toned  honors  of  General  Scott,  or  of 
General  Taylor,  if  he  were  still  a  general?  Yes. 
Cannot  a  majority  in  congress  make  a  law? — 
They  could  if  it  was  not  for  the  president's  veto. 
Cannot  a  majority  of  the  legislature  of  Ken- 
tuckv  make  a  law,  the  governor's  veto  notwith- 
standing? Yes.  Does  not  a  majority  in  the 
court  of  appeals  govern?  Does  not  a  majority 
in  the  county  court  govern?  And  if  there  were 
other  courts  would  not  a  majority  govern  in 
them?  Yes.  But  when  a  majority  of  the  legis- 
lature come  to  try  and  fine  for  misdemeanors 
they  cannot  be  trusted !     This  is  the  whole  case. 

I  go  for  having  the  elections  by  the  people, 
and  then  I  go  for  practical  responsibility.     We 


204 


all  do.  But  then  they  say  that  practical  respon- 
sibility is  two-thirds,  and  I  say  that  it  is  respon- 
sibility to  a  majority  of  the  representative  de- 
partment. This  is  the  only  difference  between 
us.  We  agree  in  the  elective  principle,  and  we 
agree  in  responsibility,  but  we  differ  in  saying 
in  whom  that  responsibility  shall  consist. 

But  when  you  come  to  the  trial  of.au  ofiieer 
for  misbehavior,  a  majority  is  not  to  be  trusted. 
That  is  the  whole  case.  I  "go  for  the  election  be- 
ing with  the  people.  All  of  us  go  for  that.  I 
so  then  for  periodical  responsibility.  We  all  go 
for  that.  But  then  they  say  that  periodical  re- 
sponsibility is  two-thirds,  but  I  say  that  it  is  no 
responsibility  at  all.  That  is  the  only  differ- 
ence between  us.  We  concur  in  the  elective 
principle,  but  when  we  come  to  responsibility, 
they  insist  upon  the  two-third  principle,  which 
I  say  is  no  responsibility  at  all.  I  have  looked 
a  little  into  tliis  matter,  as  regards  the  practice 
in  other  states.  The  constitution  of  Massachu- 
setts— and  there  are  other  constitutions  which 
have  the  same  provision — is  in  tlicse  words : 

"Chap.  3,  Art.  1.  The  tenure  that  all  cora- 
'  missioned  oflicers,  shall,  by  lawhave  in  their  of- 
'  fices  shall  be  expressed  in  their  respective  com- 
'  missions:  all  judicial  officers  duly  appointed, 
'  commissioned  and  SAvorn,  shall  hold  their  offi- 
*  ces  during  good  behavior;  excepting  such  con- 
'  cerning  whom  there  is  a  different  provision 
'  made  in  this  constitution :  Provided,  nevertke- 
'  less,  the  Governor,  with  the  consent  of  the 
'  council,  may  remove  them  upon  the  address  of 
'  both  houses  of  the  Legislature." 


"Aet.  3.  In  order  that  the  people  may  not 
'  suffer  from  the  long  continuance  in  any  place 
'  of  any  justice  of  the  ])eace,  who  shall  fail  of 
'  discharging  the  important  duties  of  his  office 
'  with  ability  or  fiaelity,  all  commissions  of 
'justices  of  the  peace  sliall  expire  and  become 
'  void  in  the  term  of  seven  years  from  their  re- 
'  spective  dates;  and  upon  the  expiration  of  any 
'  commission,  the  same  may,  if  necessary,  be  re- 
*  newed,  or  another  person  appointed,  as  shall 
'  most  conduce  to  the  well  being  of  the  Com- 
'  monwealth." 

There  the  majority  principle  with  the  govern- 
or's concurrence,  removes  a  jud^e.  In  the  con- 
stitutions of  New  Hampshire  and  Rhode  Island 
there  is  the  same  provision.  In  New  York  the 
judges  are  removed  by  impeachment,  and  the 
majority  of  the  senate  and  a  majority  of  the  su- 
preme court  constitute  the  tribunal,  and  then 
it  takes  two  thirds  of  this  majority  to  author- 
ize the  act  of  removal.  Indiana  has  about  the 
same  provision.  We  know  one  thing,  that  in 
Massachusetts  they  have  a  first  rate  judiciary, 
equal  to  any  in  America,  and  their  constitution 
has  been  in  existence  ever  since  the  year  1780, 
and  we  know  that  in  New  Hampshire  and  Rhode 
Island  they  have  a  good  judiciary.  In  Rhode 
Island  they  are  not  only  elected  oy  tlie  people, 
but  they  are  elected  every  six  months,  and  yet 
they  have  a  good  judiciary.  So  that  the  major- 
ity principle  is  not  a  new  one.  It  is  not  new  in 
Massachusetts,  for  it  has  been  in  existence  there 
since  1780;  it  is  not  new  in  New  Hampshire  and 
Rhode  Island,  and  as  my  friend  from  Fayette 
gaid,  it  is  not  new  in  Great  Britain.  Here  is  the 
British  statute  on  the  subject: 


"All  judges  must  derive  their  authority  from 
'the  crown,  by  some  commission  warranted  by 
'law.  Tlie  judges  of  Westminster  are  (all  cx- 
'cept  the  chief  justice  of  the  King's  bench,  who 
'is  created  by  writ)  appointed  by  patent,  and 
'formerly  held  their  places  only  during  the 
'King's  pleasure;  but  now  for  the  greater  secu- 
'rity  of  the  liberty  of  the  subject,  by  the  12  and 
13  W.,  3  0.  2,  their  commissions  are  to  be  quain- 
'  diu  se  bene  gesserint ;  but  upon  the  address  of 
'  both  houses  of  Parliament,  it  may  be  lawful  to 
'remove  them." 

A  majority  controls  in  the  house  of  Lords  and 
in  the  house  of  Commons.  The  judges  are  to  be 
commissioned  by  the  King  and  the  appointing 
power  is  vested  in  him  still;  but  the  removing 
power,  the  responsible  power  to  the  people,  is  ia 
the  Lords  and  Commons.  Not  in  two  thirds, 
but  in  a  majority  of  those  bodies,  and  as  the 
same  gentleman  obser  ed,  to  secure  further  the 
power  of  the  judiciary,  as  to  its  responsibility 
to  the  people,  when  a  King  dies,  the  judge "s 
commission  does  not  die  with  him.  Under  the 
statute  of  Greorge  III.  he  continues  in  office  as 
long  as  he  lives,  unless  he  is  removed  for  misbe- 
havior. Are  not  impeachments  in  the  house  of 
Lords  decided  by  a  majority?  Are  not  all  laws 
passed  by  the  Parliament  of  Great  Britain  pass- 
ed by  a  majority?  Does  not  congress  pass  all 
laws  by  a  majority?  Is  there  the  two  thirds  prin- 
ciple in  any  part  of  the  government  of  the  Uni- 
ted States?  To  be  sure,  it  takes  two  thirds  of 
the  senators  present  to  decide  upon  an  impeach- 
ment, and  therefore,  twenty  one  out  of  sixty  can 
remove  a  judge  or  any  other  functionary  under 
trial.  How  that  principle  got  into  our  constitu- 
tion God  in  his  mercy  only  Knows.  If  my  friend 
from  Daviess  comes  to  enquire  of  me,  as  he  says 
he  will,  I  must  tell  him  to  go  furtherahead.  I  can 
give  him  no  information.  I  have  looked  at  the 
theory  of  the  British  government.  The  two 
thirds  principle  is  not  there,  nor  does  it  prevail 
in  the  courts  in  Great  Britain.  If  twelve  judges 
are  on  the  bench  seven  may  decide.  If  an  im- 
peachment is  tried  in  the  house  of  Lords,  a  ma- 
jority decides.  The  principle  of  a  majority  con- 
trols throughout  in  tne  British  government.  It 
controls  throughout  that  of  the  United  States, 
except  in  the  removal  of  a  judge  by  address,  and 
I  propose,  or  shall  propose,  that  the  judge  be 
heard  by  himself  or  counsel,  and  that  the  gov- 
ernor shall  have  no  hand  in  it,  and  that  the  legis- 
lature shall  be  considered  as  a  high  and  digni- 
fied court  of  judicature. 

Sir,  this  is  an  age  of  improvement.  What 
was  the  condition  of  the  world  fifty  years  ago, 
and  what  is  it  now?  What  was  known  of  the 
power  of  steam  fifty  years  ago?  It  is  not  twenty- 
years  since  a  man  "in  Kentucky  drove  his  horses 
to  the  market  in  Soutli  Carolina,  and  driving- 
along  the  turnpike  where  a  railroad  passed  over 
it,  and  looking  above,  four  or  five  cars  passed 
over  his  head — his  horses  scattering  in  every 
direction,  "ray  God,"  he  exclairaea,  "behold 
hell  in  harne.s8."  Forty  years  ago,  the  moving 
of  a  steamboat  by  night  down  the  Ohio  river, 
would  liave  alarmed  the  whole  western  world. 
Ten  vears  ago,  would  any  man  have  believed 
that  'he  could  have  talked  to  the  people  iji 
Washington  city  and  get  an  answer  tl»e  same 
minute?    W<;  thought  Franklin,  the  beuefuctor 


205 


of  the  world,  -nhen  he  armed  the  world  with  the 
lightning  rod  against  the  thunder  bolts  of  heaven. 
And  now  we  call  doAvu  the  same  thunder  bolts, 
and  send  them  as  messengers  to  every  part  of 
the  world.  I  recollect  liearing  a  dispute  between 
two  ignorant  men  when  erecting  the  posts  for 
the  telegraph  which  passes  through  Bardstown: 
one  man  said  tliey  could  talk,  on  that  line,  to 
the  people  at  Washington  city  in  a  minute.  "It 
is  not  so,"  said  the  otlier,  "God  Almighty  keeps 
his  lightning  to  punish  sinners,  and  He  will 
never  part  with  it  in  the  world."  Look  at  the 
liistory  of  the  world.  Behold  the  wonderful 
growth  of  the  energy  of  Greece.  See  what  power 
was  developed  in  the  Roman  republic,  and  see 
)iow  they  were  degraded  the  moment,  the  tyrant 
slipped  in.  What  is  Greece  now?  What  was 
she  an  hundred  years  after  liberty  was  driven 
from  her  border?  Xothing.  What  was  she  du- 
ring the  palmy  days  of  her  republicanism? — the 
admiration  of  the  world,  and  the  world  was 
hardly  a  match  for  her  in  battle,  though  she  cov- 
ered not  ten  thousand  square  miles  at  most. 
What  was  Rome  after  she  lost  her  liberty?    A 

freat  corrupt  mass  of  the  human  family.  And 
ow  the  mind  and  the  energies  of  man  sunk, 
and  how  they  became  disordered  and  degraded. 
Constantine  established  the  christian  religion — 
it  threw  itself  into  the  hands  of  the  corrupted 
civil  authorities  and  sunk  mankind  almost  to 
the  level  of  the  brute  creation.  So  much  so,  that 
a  handful  of  naked  Arabs,  like  to  have  overrun 
and  conquered  all  the  christian  world.  They 
conquered  in  Asia,  in  Africa,  and  in  Europe, 
until  the  great  battle  was  fought  on  the  plains 
of  France,  and  there  nothing  saved  the  christian 
world,  if  God  had  not  said  to  the  Huns  be 
christians  and  march  against  the  infidels,  and 
they  did  march,  and  after  three  days  hard  fight- 
ing conquered.  There  was  no  energv  or  power 
at  all,  and  the  whole  christian  world  was  in  a 
state  of  absolute  slavery.  How  was  it  after- 
wards? The  Saracen  power  went  down,  and 
the  Turkish  power  stood  up.  They  conquered 
the  christian  world  again  in  Assia  and  Africa. 
They  conquered  the  seat  of  Christianity — Con- 
stantinople. They  conquered  Greece,  Thessaly, 
Macedonia,  Thrace,  the  country  on  both  sides  of 
the  Danube,  and  were  on  the  verj'  point  of  con- 
quering Vienna  and  the  whole  christian  world 
in  Europe,  wlien  the  Poles,  by  the  word  of  God 
became  christians,  and  through  their  king,  John 
Sobieski,  saved  it  again. 

How  was  it  again  when  Martin  Luther  sprang 
up.  Religious  liberty  walked  abroad  and  the 
nations  of  the  world  improved  in  all  the  arts  and 
sciences  of  war  and  civil  liberty.  And  after 
the  American  revolution  started  and  proclaimed 
liberty  to  mankind,  the  flame  of  revolution  was 
caught  in  France  by  the  boys  who  fought  here 
in  our  ranks — Lafayette,  Pichegru,  Jourdan, 
Bernadotte  and  others.  Liberty  was  then  pro- 
claimed, and  how  now  does  it  stand  over  the 
world?  We  have  to  a  great  extent  civil  liberty 
and  religious  and  political  liberty,  and  what 
now  is  the  condition  of  mankind?  Can  the 
heathen  world  ever  overrun  them  again?  Never.' 
We  have  nothing  to  fear  from  the  arms  of  the 
heathen  world  again !  Ifor  will  it  ever  be  ne- 
cessary to  convert  a  heathen  nation  to  save  us 
again.     The  christian  world  through  the  influ- 


ence of  religions  and  civil  liberty  can  conquer 
ten  thousand  heathen  worlds,  let  them  be  no 
strongerthan  it  is  now.  Gentlemen  have  spoken 
of  the  French  convention.  Well  God  bless  the 
French  nation,  the  French  convention  was  a 
great  tiling.  It  was  composed  of  a  powerful 
set  of  men,  and  it  struggled  and  was  convulsed 
in  its  effort  for  liberty.  Their  king  turned 
against  them,  and  their  queen  and  their  nobility 
did  the  same.  All  Europe  declared  war  against 
them,  and  what  did  the  French  convention  do? 
They  accepted  battle  with  the  whole  united 
crowned  heads  of  Europe,  and  in  the  language 
of  Danton — "the  gauge  of  battle  was  the  head  of 
a  king  thrown  down."  What  a  noble  expression. 
And  would  to  Almighty  God,  the  Hungarians 
had  thrown  down  as  their  gauge  of  battle  the 
heads  of  the  tyrants  of  Austria  and  Russia,  and 
they  would  have  roused  mankind  from  one  end 
of  the  world  to  the  other.  But  they  have  suc- 
cumbed and  I  would  rather  be  at  this  day, 
the  son  of  Kossuth,  or  of  any  of  those  who  were 
beheaded,  or  who  now  are  in  jail,  than  the  son  of 
that  vile  traitor  Georgy,  who  now  is  basking  in 
the  sunshine  of  his  master's  favor.  Sir,  mankind 
is  equal  to  any  emergency.  When  our  revolu- 
tion broke  outhow  was  it?  Great  Britain  said — 
you  have  not  a  man  in  America  who  can  com- 
mand a  company  of  regulars — ^you  have  no 
talents — but  the  moment  we  struck  for  inde- 
pendence, a  thousand,  aye  ten  thousand  showed 
themselves  on  the  theatre  of  action,  both  in  the 
cabinet  and  in  the  field.  Do  you  think  the 
Almighty  creates  men  for  particular  purposes? 
No,  but  it  is  the  natural  genius  of  men  to  resist 
slavery  and  bondage — and  man  walked  abroad 
in  his  own  grandeur  and  majesty.  It  was  the 
occasion  that  made  Washington  and  all  the 
generals,  and  all  the  statesmen  of  that  day.  It 
was  the  occasion  that  made  Massena,  who 
fought  fourteen  years  in  the  royal  ranks  of  Louis 
XVI,  and  never  knew  what  energy  he  had.  So  it 
was  with  Bernadotte  who  fought  in  our  ranks. 
It  was  the  occasion  that  made  Massena  and 
Bernadotte,  Mirabeau  and  others.  Say  to  the 
people  that  they  are  capable  of  self-government, 
and  I  will  warrant  you  they  are  able. 

It  may  be  said,  Hardin  you  are  a  demagogue. 
I  am  not,  and  every  body  that  knows  me  knows 
that  I  am  not.  I  have  looked  to  the  people  for 
every  thing,  in  a  political  way,  that  I  ever  re- 
ceived, with  scarcely  a  single  exception,  and  so 
have  you,  and  you,  and  you,  and  you,  (point- 
ing to  several  delegates.)  We  have  all  looked 
to  the  people.  Thank  God,  I  do  not  know  a 
man  in  this  house,  that  has  been  a  solicitor  of 
power,  except  at  the  hands  of  the  people;  and  I 
despise  the  man,  that  like  a  little  dog,  goes 
scratching  at  the  door  of  power  at  about  the 
hour  of  nine  o'clock  at  night,  and  by  his 
scratching  gains  admission.  I  never  did  that, 
and  thank  God,  I  do  not  believe  there  is  one 
man  in  the  house  who  has  ever  done  it.  We 
alllook  to  the  people,  and  we  all  desire  to  give 
to  them  the  best  government  that  is  possible. 
Let  us  at  the  same  time  that  we  give  a  govern- 
ment to  the  people,  give  them  one  that  will  be 
acceptable  to  them.  There  is  as  much  necessity 
to  give  them  such  a  government,  as  to  consult 
the  wisest  maxims  that  Plato  could  devise.  I 
know  it  is  difiioult  to  frame  a  government  for 


206 


posterity,  but  let  us  give  them  the  best  one  we 
can.  I  want  the  best  constitution.  I  come  to 
yield  a  groat  deal  to  the  views  of  those  who  may 
not  agree  with  me.  If  1  get  the  elective  fran- 
chise restored  to  the  people,  I  shall  have  gained 
a  great  point.  If  I  get  the  appointment  of  the 
juaffes  for  a  limited  number  of  years,  and  their 
ineligibility,  I  shall  have  gained  another  great 
point,  and  will  take  almost  any  thing  after  that; 
but  I  am  not  willing  to  take  this  bill  as  it  now 
stands,  in  all  its  provisions.  1  introduce  this 
amendment,  intending  to  get  something  better, 
and  I  hope  for  that  still.  I  have  nothing  to 
hope  for  in  the  political  world,  and  where  a  man 
hopes  for  nothing,  he  has  nothing  to  fear.  I 
have  spoken  my  honest  convictions,  the  same 
that  I  held  two  years  ago  last  winter,  in  this 
hall — the  same  that  I  held  in  every  political 
speech  I  made.  I  do  not  know  that  I  said  the 
majority  principle,  but  a  more  practical  re- 
sponsibilitythan  the  two  thirds  principle.  I  do 
not  say  that  my  colleague  agreed  to  it;  in  fact, 
I  have  no  recollection  what  he  said;  I  had  as 
much  to  do  as  I  wanted  to  take  care  of  myself. 
But  I  held  this  doctrine  in  the  counties  of  Har- 
din, Spencer,  Marion,  Bullit,  and  Nelson,  and 
in  this  hall,  therefore,  I  play  no  demagogue. 

I  am  sorry  that  I  should  in  any  way,  bring 
down  upon  myself  the  rebuke  of  the  gentleman 
from  Graves.  He  is  a  worthy  man,  and  I  am 
told,  is  the  brother  of  one  of  the  fastest  friends  I 
ever  had,  and  one  of  the  finest  men  I  everknew, 
and  I  should  be  sorry  that  he  should  lock  horns 
with  me;  and  if  he  thought  that  I  said  I  would 
not  give  a  cent  for  the  constitution,  it  was  rath- 
er a  slip  of  the  tongue  than  otherwise,  and  if  he 
please,  I  will  moclify  what  I  said;  I  will  do  it 
at  all  events  to  avoid  his  opposition. 

I  have  not  been  in  good  health  as  every  body 
knows  for  a  month,  and  if  I  could  have  avoided 
making  a  speech  I  should  have  done  it,  but  I 
felt  bound  to  do  it.  I  know  that  I  am  to  be  in 
a  minority,  but  if  I  knew  there  was  not  one 
man  in  this  house,  who  would  vote  for  it,  I 
■would  vote  as  I  shall  now;  and  I  beg  those  gen- 
tlemen who  think  as  I  do  on  this  subject,  to 
stand  up  like  men,  and  maintain  their  views  by 
their  vote.  Three  hundred  men  fought  more 
than  a  million  at  Thermopylae,  and  let  us,  like 
the  Spartan  charging,  sing  the  liymn  of  battle, 
and  fight  on  bravely.  I  have  but  a  few  davs  to 
live  in  this  world,  and  it  is  more  my  business 
to  get  ready  to  die,  than  anv  thing  else.  I  will 
only  mention  that  I  have  the  authority  of  Mr. 
Jefferson,  which  is  considered  high  authority, 
for  this  principle  of  a  majority.     He  says: 

"It  has  been  said  that  the  people  are  not  com- 
'  petent  electors  of  judges   learned  in  the  law. 

*  But  I  do  not  know  that  this  is  true,  and  if 
'doubtful  we  should  follow  the  principle  in  this 
'  as  in  many  other  elections,  they  would  be 
•guided  by  reputation,  which  would  not  err  of- 

*  tener,  perhaps,  than  the  present  mode  of  ap- 
'  pointment.  In  one  state  of  the  union,  at  least, 
'  It  has  been  long  tried,  and  with  the  most  satis- 
'  factory  success.  The  judges  of  Connecticut 
♦have  "been  chosen    by   the  people  every  six 

*  months,  for  nearly  two  centuries,  and  I  believe 

*  there  has  hardly  ever  been  an  instance  of  change; 

*  BO  successful  is  the  curb  of  incessant  responsi- 
'bility.    If  prejudice  however,  derived  from  a 


'monarchial  institution,  is  still  to  prevail  against 
'  the  vital  elective  principle  of  our  own,  and  if 
'  the  existing  example  among  ourselves  of  peri- 
'  odical  elections,  by  the  people,  be  still  mistrust- 
'  ed,  let  us  not  at  least  adopt  the  evil  and  reject 
'  the  good  of  the  English  precedent;  let  us  retain 
'  a  movability,  on  the  concurrence  of  the  exeeu- 
'  tive  and  legislative  branches,  and  nomination 
'  by  the  executive  alone." 

This  two  thirds  principle  has  insinuated  itself 
into  our  constitution,  but  I  cannot  tell  how  it 
got  there.  We  know  that  in  jury  trials  it  re- 
quires a  unanimous  vote.  This  principle  was 
wrested  from  the  king  by  the  people,  so  far  as 
it  regards  the  rights  of  persons.  It  is  entirely 
sui  generis  and  does  not  belong  to  this  govern- 
ment. The  theory  of  this  government  is,  that 
a  majority  should  govern. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  After  the  able  vin- 
dication we  have  just  heard,  and  in  ccnsidera- 
tion  of  the  length  of  time  we  have  been  in  ses- 
sion, it  would  scarcely  be  courteous  to  this  house, 
nor  would  it  be  doing  justice  to  myself  were  I 
to  proceed  in  my  remarks  at  present.  I  may  de- 
sire to  do  so  to-morrow,  and  for  that  purpose  I 
will  move  that  the  committee  now  rise. 

The  committee  accordingly  rose,  reported  pro- 
gress, and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  23, 1849. 

Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Norton. 

Mr.  HARGIS,  who  has  been  detained  frona 
the  convention  for  some  days  by  severe  indispo- 
sition, resumed  his  seat  this  morning. 

EXEMPTIOX   FROM   EXECUTION. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  submitted  the  following  reso- 
lution, which  was  adopted: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  be  requested  to  enquire  into  the 
expediency  and  propriety  of  providing  in  the 
new  constitution,  a  clause  specifying  the  amount 
of  property  which  shall  hereafter  be  exempt 
from  execution. 

COURTS   OF    CONCILIATION. 

Mr.  IRWIN  offered  the  following  resolution: 
Resolved,  That  tribunals  of  conciliation  shall 
be  established  in  every  county  by  law;  such  law 
shall  be  general,  and  shall  be  of  uniform  opera- 
tion throughout  the  state. 

Mr.  IRWIN  said  ho  wished  that  proposition  to 
be  referred  to  the  committee  on  county  courts. 
He  was  not  satisfied  how  such  a  court  as  was  in- 
dicated by  that  resolution  would  operate;  but 
on  an  examination  of  the  proceedings  of  tlie  con- 
ventions in  the  states  of  New  York  and  New 
Jersey,  he  saw  that  such  a  proposition  was  sub- 
mitted to  each  of  those  bodies.  The  object  of 
the  proposition  wasto  prevent  litigation,  and  he 
had  no  doubt  that  every  gentleman  would  have 
it  much  at  heart  to  accomplish  tliis.  He  had 
read  that  in  Denmark  there  were  25,000  law  suits 
in  one  year,  which  after  the  adoption  of  these 
courts  were  reduced  to  10,000.    They  have  also 


201 


been  established  in  Pmssia  and  France,  and,  it 
was  said,  with  good  effect.  He  was  not  quite 
sure  that  these  courts  would  suit  this  country, 
even  if  they  could  be  carried  into  eflfect.  It  was 
said,  he  believed,  that  tlie  people  of  the  country 
could  establish  arbitrators  for  themselves,  but 
he  thought  it  better  to  establish  such  courts  in 
each  county  for  the  settlement  of  small  disputes 
that  might  arise.  He  wished  to  have  this  prop- 
osition referred  to  the  committee  on  county  courts 
that  the  convention  might  get  the  information 
which  that  committee  would  be  able  to  furnish. 
He  would  read  to  the  convention  an  extract  from 
a  report  made  some  few  years  since  to  the  2f  ew 
Jersey  convention  on  this  subject: 

"In  each  town  or  precinct,  two  persons  are 
'  chosen  by  the  people,  who  sit  one  day  in  each 
'  week,  for  the  receiving  of  complaints,  issuing 
'  summonses  for  the  appearance  of  parties  at  the 
'  next  regular  day  of  meeting,  and  for  hearing  the 
'  parties  already  summoned.  The  courts  sit  with 
'  clo.sed  doors,  and  none  but  the  parties  them- 
'  selves,  or  their  special  attorneys,  are  permitted 
'  to  be  present.  The  duty  of  the  court  is  to  hear 
'  the  complaints  and  reply  to  the  parties,  and  to 
'  endeavor  to  induce  them  to  adjust  their  difficul- 
'  ties  amicably.  As  an  absolute  rule,  nothing 
'  that  passes  in  the  court  is  divulgedbythemem- 
'  bers  of  it,  and  is  forbidden  as  evidence  in  the 
'  courts  of  law.  Should  the  attempt  for  recon- 
'  ciliation  fail,  the  court  grants  to  each  of  thepar- 
'  ties  a  certificate  stating  that  they  had  appeared, 
'  but  did  not  reconcile  their  differences.  Those 
'  certificates  are  required  by  the  courts  of  law,  in 
'order  to  oblige  parties  to  seek  reconciliation. 

"The  fee  of  this  proceeding  is  very  trifling, 
'  and  is  paid  by  one  or  botli  of  the  parties,  as 
'  may  be  decided  by  the  reconciliating  judges. 

"Your  committee  suppose,  that  it  is  unneces- 
'  sary  for  them  to  say  any  thing  in  recomnienda- 
'  tion  of  a  tribunal  so  simple  in  its  fonnation  and 
'  so  evidently  useful,  but  they  cannot  refrain  from 
'  calling  the  attention  of  the  convention  to  the 
'  fact  of  the  numberless  cases  which  are  subjects 
'  of  lengthy,  expensive  and  vexatious  law  suits, 
'which  have  their  origin  in  trifling  differences 
'between  neighbors  and  friends,  and  which  the 
'  amicable  agency  of  a  third  party  could  recon- 
'  cile  and  put  forever  at  rest." 

He  then  continued  to  say,  that  he  knew  but 
little  of  the  effect  the  adoption  of  such  a  provis- 
ion would  have;  he  had  merely  desired  to  call  to 
it  the  attention  of  the  convention,  for  if  the  ob- 
ject was  to  prevent  litigation,  it  was  certainly  an 
object  worthy  of  attention. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  said,  however  highly  he  ap- 
preciated the  object  of  the  gentleman  from  Lo- 
gan, as  manifested  in  the  resolution,  and  howev- 
er desirous  he  was  to  carry  out  that  object,  he 
must  protest  against  the  reference  proposed.  He 
could  suggest  another  reference  which  he  thought 
would  be  more  appropriate  than  the  committee 
of  which  he  was  the  chairman,  which  was  prin- 
cipally composed  of  lawyers,  and  of  whom  it 
might' be  .said,  although  they  might  profess  a 
great  desire  to  produce  peace  and  harmony 
throughout  the  borders  of  this  great  coramon- 
wealtR,  that 

"When  self  the  wavering  balance  shake, 
Its  rarely  right  adjusted." 


How  much  more  proper  would  itbe  to  referthe 
proposition  to  a  committee  composed  of  farmers, 
whose  labor  will  not  be  distrusted  in  their  laud- 
able attempt  to  prevent  litigation. 

Mr.  IR^  IX  briefly  replied.  He  was  not  quite 
sure  that  a  committee  of  farmers  could  so  well 
understand  this  subject  as  one  on  which  there 
were  lawyers  as  distinguished  as  the  gentleman 
from  Todd.  He  however  was  not  particularly 
anxious  as  to  the  direction  which  the  propositi  on 
should  take;  the  only  object  he  had  in  view  be- 
ing to  bring  it  to  the'  attention  of  the  house,  be- 
lieving as  he  did  that  it  was  worthy  of  their  at- 
tention. 

The  motion  to  refer  to  the  committee  on  coun- 
ty courts  was  negatived,  and  the  proposition  was 
referred  to  a   select  committee,  consisting  of 

]Sjfessrs.  Irwin,  Boyd,  Gholson,  Dudley,  and 
"White. 

COURT  OF  APPEALS. 

The  convention  then  again  resolved  itself  into 
committee  of  the  whole,  on  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  Mr.  HUSTON 
in  the  chair. 

Mr.  WICKLIFFE.  This  debate  was  com- 
menced on  the  amendment  of  my  colleague,  pre- 
senting to  the  consideration  of  the  committee  a 
single  question,  but  one  which,  in  my  humble 
judgment,  is  of  vast  importance  and  magnitude 
as  connected  with  our  deliberations  and  the  du- 
ties before  us. 

The  question,  sir,  is  a  proposition  that  the 
judges  of  the  appellate  court,  andot  consequence 
all  other  oQicers  from  the  governor  down  to  a 
constable,  to  use  the  language  of  my  colleague, 
shall  be  subject  to  be  removed  from  office  by  an 
address  of  a  majority  of  each  house  of  the  legis- 
lature. 

The  proposition,  sir,  is  at  war  with  the  opin- 
ions that  I  have  entertained  ever  since  I  had  a 
knowledge  of  the  theory  and  practice  of  my 
government.  Coming  from  the  quarter  whence 
it  did,  I  confess  it  struck  me  with  more  than  or- 
dinary surprise.  It  is  a  proposition,  sir,  which 
has  for  its  purpose  the  inevitable  effect  of  plac- 
ing the  two  departments,  the  executive  and  ju- 
diciary, of  this  government  at  the  will  and  mer- 
cy of  a  legislative  majoritv,  congregated  in  this 
ball  for  the  purposes  of  legislation  under  the 
provisions  of  the  constitution — a  proposition 
which,  if  adopted,  makes  the  legislature  what 
the  British  Parliament  is  to  that  govern- 
ment—omnipotent— and  produces  necessarily  a 
concentration  of  all  power  directly  and  indi- 
rectly in  one  department  of  government — the 
popular  branch.  This  proposition,  announced 
with  such  confidence  in  its  propriety,  accompa- 
nied by  such  an  appeal  from  the  source  whence 
it  came,  was  not  in  itself  calculated  to  quiet  the 
apprehensions  I  had. 

We  were  told  that  he  had  been  anticipating  the 
question  which  was  then  before  the  house;  that 
he  had  looked  for  it,  and  turning  with  emphatic 
expression  and  authoritative  tone,  he  appealed 
to  the  delegates  of  this  convention  who  were 
the  real  advocates  of  constitutional  reform,  to 
rally  under  his  banner  on  this  principle,  as  the  one 

freat  principle  upon  which  he  intended  to  make 
attle  in  this  house,  declaring — and  he  is  so  re- 
ported— that  if  it  were  not  incorporated  in  the 
1  constitution  which  we  are  about  to  make,  he 


208 


WouM  not  give  aninepence  for  the  constitution. 
My  friend  from  Graves,  who  addressed  the  house 
yesterday,  misquoted  him  when  he  said  one 
cent;  that  is  less  than  he  said  he  would  give  for 
it. 

I  attempted,  sir,  upon  the  introduction  of  that 
amendment,  to  present  in  brief  the  views  which 
influenced  the  committee  in  so  organizing  the 
article  as  you  have  it  from  the  report.  I  have, 
perhaps,  in  part  to  vindicate  that  committee 
again  to-day;  but  what  I  shall  say  will  be  rather 
in  vindication  of  my  own  opinions.  It  is  at  all 
times  unpleasant  to  me  to  differ  with  my  honor- 
able colleague  upon  questions  of  constitutional 
law,  but  more  especially,  related  as  we  are,  be- 
ing the  representiitives  of  one  of  the  counties  in 
this  commonwealth.  He  undertakes  to  speak 
for  the  county  of  Nelson,  and  presumes,  and  I 
have  no  doubt  believes,  that  he  speaks  truly 
their  opinions  on  this  subject.  Differing  with 
him,  not  only  in  the  soundness  of  the  principle, 
but  in  fact  in  reference  to  the  opinions  of  the 
people  of  Nelson,  I  should  be  recreant  to  them 
and  unjust  to  myself  if  I  did  not  take  issue  with 
him,  both  in  reference  to  the  principle  itself  and 
the  fact  on  which  he  acts. 

Sir,  tlie  question  of  the  mode  and  manner  in 
which  a  judge  shall  be  removed  from  office,  after 
he  shall  have  been  elected  by  the  people,  was 
not  a  subject  of  discussion  in  that  canvass. 
However  much  I  desired  the  honor  of  represent- 
ing that  county  on  this  floor,  and  however  much 
I  feel  honored  by  the  confidence  of  the  people  of 
that  county,  a  majority  of  them  being  politically 
opposed  to  me  on  other  questions,  had  the  ques- 
tion been  presented  in  discussion,  whether  we 
should  incorporate  a  provision  into  the  new  con- 
stitution, by  which  to  place  the  judiciary  de- 
partment within  the  power  of  both  branches  of 
the  legislature;  from  whatever  source  such  a 
proposition  might  have  come;  I  would  have 
staked  my  political  existence  on  the  issue  before 
the  people,  and  would  have  risked  that  question 
with  the  most  entire  confidence  as  to  the  result. 

I  regret  that  under  tlie   circumstances,   the 

Juestion  was  not  made,  for  if  I  know  myself  I 
esire  to  make  a  constitution,  not  for  the  present 
generation  alone,  but  for  those  who  come  after 
us.  1  would  not  consent  to  be  the  representa- 
tive of  a  people,  and  engraft  into  their  organic 
law  a  principle  of  self-destruction  of  the  very 
liberty  and  independence  of  a  co-ordinate  branch 
of  this  government.  Other  agents  should  have 
been  employed. 

My  worthy  and  respected  colleague  is  adroit 
in  debate,  powerful  in  purpose,  and  always  has 
one  when  he  acts.  I  have  Known  him  long  and 
tried  him  often  in  forensic  debate  in  professional 
life,  and  it  has  sometimes  fallen  to  my  good  for- 
tune to  be  on  tlie  right  side  against  him.  When 
beaten  upon  one  point  he  retreated  with  great. 
skill  and  assailed  me  upon  another.  Conscious 
that  the  principle  he  has  advanced  cannot  be 
sustained  by  the  enlightened  judgment  of  this 
house,  yielclini;  the  question  that  he  stands  in  a 
most  woful  minority,  ho  consoles  himself  that 
his  proposition  was  to  feci  the  pulse  of  the 
house,  and  having  done  so,  he  has  drawn  around 
him  a  Spartan  band,  as  he  calls  it,  to  rally  un- 
der his  banner  in  the  future  operations  in  fram- 
infr  tbi'»  f  n»>B*'*ution.    I  would  say  to  this  band, 


if  such  a  band  have  enrolled  themselves  under 
his  banner,  take  heed,  be  cautious  that  vou  are 
not  led  to  make  war,  before  you  are  cfoue,  on 
your  own  principles,  and  your  own  best  interests, 
and  the  best  interests  of  the  state.  We  came 
here  to  make  a  constitution  such  as  the  people 
of  Kentucky  can  live  prosperously  and  hap- 
py under,  and  such  as  they  will  be  satisfied 
with  when  it  passes  from  our  hands;  and,  sir, 
lean  say  to  the  gentleman,  that  his  warning 
voice  to  the  advocates  of  reform  in  this  house, 
for  whatever  purpose  intended,  did  not  strike 
on  my  ear  as  necessary.  We  Avere  told  that  there 
were  enemies  of  reform  at  work,  and  those  of  us 
who  desired  constitutional  reform,  should  take 
care  whom  they  trusted  and  Avith  whom  they 
acted,  and  he  gave  us  the  biographical  illustra- 
tion of  the  life  and  profession  of  Burke,  the  man 
who  made  his  living  by  killing  his  friends  with 
kindness.  Did  he  mean  that  there  were  politi- 
cal Burkers  in  this  house,  professing  to  be  in  fa- 
vor of  reform,  but  in  reality  designing  to  defeat 
the  very  purpose  for  which  this  convention  was 
called?  And  I  suppose  by  inference  that  we  are 
to  understand  that  the  article  on  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  court  of  appeals  emanated  from  a 
college  of  Burkers,  and  tliat  it  was  designed  by 
that  committee  so  to  operate  in  its  provisions, 
as  to  defeat  the  object  which  the  people  had  in 
reference  to  the  judiciary  department  of  the 
government,  to-wit,  election  by  the  popular 
voice,  and  limitation  of  the  term  of  oihce,  and 
return  to  the  elective  power,  and  what  I  think 
is  a  necessary  corollary,  a  constitutional  guaran- 
tee and  safe  guard,  and  wall  of  defence  thrown 
aroun<l  them  while  in  the  exercise  of  that  office, 
that  v/ill  enable  them  fairly,  boldly,  and  inde- 
pendently to  discharge  their  duties,  without  the 
constant  apprehension  of  being  dragged  to  tlie 
house  of  parliament  in  this  state,  and  their  in- 
dependence sacriiiced  at  the  will  of  a  bare  ma- 
jority. These  were  the  purposes,  so  far  as  I  un- 
derstand, tlie  people  desired  in  reference  to  the 
judiciary  department.  But  it  seems  that,  weary 
of  -this  principle,  made  perhaps  a  little  sick  of  it 
by  the  manifestation  of  the  judgment  of  this 
house  again.st  it,  if  not  by  his  own  recollections 
of  his  past  history  and  opinions  on  this  ques- 
tion, he  has  surrendered  the  question,  suffered  a 
non-suit  and  made  an  onslaught  on  the  whole  bill 
on  this  motion.  I  must  be  pardoned  while  I  de- 
A-ote  a  portion  of  the  time  which  I  had  assigned 
to  this  discussion  to  vindicate  the  bill,  upon  the 
points  indicated  yesterday,  from  the  assaults 
Avhich  have  been  made  and  are  threatened  to  be 
made,  before  1  progress  further  in  the  discussion 
of  the  immediate  question  before  the  committee. 
Sir,  my  colleague  has  notified  us  that  he  ob- 
jects to  four  judges  for  the  appellate  court,  and 
declares  that  it  is  unparalleled,  save  in  a  new- 
court,  organized  in  1824.  If  his  recollection  is 
asmucliat  fault  in  some  of  the  facts  and  his- 
torical incidents  he  so  eloquently  presented  to 
us  yesterday,  as  in  that,  I  am  rather  iuclim-d  to 
thiiik  it  Avould  be  difficult  for  any  nienib<T  to 
beat  him,  in  the  language  of  a  countryman  of 
mine,  in  arguing  historj'.  In  1801  the  appellate 
court  was  constituted  of  four  judges.  It  so  re- 
mained till  1813,  when,  upon  the  demise  of  one 
of  the  Judges,  the  legislature  passed  a  law  de- 
claring that  thereafter  it  should  consist  of  three 


\ 


209 


judges.  I  need  not  name  the  eminent  men  who 
tilled  that  court  during  that  time.  And  during 
all  that  period  of  twelve  years,  the  case  which 
he  put  yesterday  as  an  objection  to  four  judges, 
to  wit,  tlie  two  cases  decided  differently  by  two 
circuit  judges,  and  both  affirmed  by  a  divided 
court  of  appeals,  did  not  occur,  and  perhaps 
never  will.  To  answer  that  objection,  for  a 
single  moment  asl  pass — does  my  honorable  col- 
league know  that  where  a  case  should  be  con- 
firmed by  a  divided  court,  that  it  stands  as  the 
decision  and  precedent  of  the  appellate  court 
and  governs  not  onlv  the  court  below,  but  all 
the  other  courts  until  it  shall  be  otherwise  de- 
cided. And  should  the  case  come  up,  that  he 
alludes  to,  of  a  different  decision  to  the  circuit 
judge,  the  appellate  court  is  bound  by  the  pre- 
cedent of  the  first  decision.  It  is  putting  a  case 
that  has  not  happened  in  the  history  of  twelve 
years  of  our  appellate  jurisprudence.  It  is  put- 
ting a  case  that  has  not  happened  in  the  history 
of  the  jurisprudence  of  any  of  the  other  states 
whose  appellate  courts  are  constituted  of  an 
even  number  of  judges,  and  most  of  the  appel- 
late courts  of  our  sister  .states  are  composed  of 
the  number  four.  It  is  putting  a  case  calculated 
to  scare  a  skeptical  mind  more  than  to  enlighten 
a  reasoning  mind.  WTiy  did  the  committee  pro- 
pose to  organize  this  tribunal  of  four  judges,  to 
stand  as  long  as  this  constitution  shall  stand,  if 
we  make  one?  I  appeal  to  the  lawyers,  who 
are  in  the  habit  of  practising  in  that  court,  on 
my  left  and  on  my  right — I  appeal  to  every  man 
who  has  attendee!  that  tribunal  for  the  last  eight 
or  ten  years — if  the  judges  have  not  been  so 
overburdened  and  overwhelmed  with  labor  as 
to  be  almost  forced  to  retire  from  the  bench. 
The  answer  is  uniform  and  without  a  dissenting 
voice,  that  there  is  more  than  three  men  can  do 
with  dispatch  and  accuracy;  the  labors  are 
greater  than  it  is  possible  for  them  to  perform  to 
the  satisfaction  of  themselves  and  the  communi- 
ty. Looking  forward  to  an  increase  of  popula- 
tion and  business  in  this  commonwealth,  con- 
jecturing and  hoping  that  our  constitution  shall 
be  such,  at  least,  that  it  shall  endure  for  the 
period  that  our  present  constitution  has  endured 
— fifty  years — what  will  be  the  increase  of  popu- 
lation and  business  in  the  commonwealth  of 
Kentucky*  And  is  it  too  much  to  ask,  in  the 
formation  of  the  court  that  the  tribunal  shall  be 
composed  of  the  number  of  four  judges"?  In- 
deed, some  of  the  members  of  the  committee — 
although  it  is  not  altogether  parliamentary  to 
speak  of  the  individual  opinions  of  the  mem- 
bers of  a  committee — ^were  anxious  to  engraft  in 
the  constitution  the  provision  that  the  legisla- 
ture shall  have  the  power  of  increasing  that 
number  if  the  public  exigency  should  require  it. 
More,  however,  upon  this  subject,  when  the 
gentleman's  proposition  comes  up  to  reduce  the 
number  of  these  judges;  and  then  it  will  be 
proper  for  me  to  call  upon  some  of  my  able  as- 
sociates in  the  committee  to  vindicate  theirs  as 
well  as  my  own  judgment  upon  it. 

But  the  gentleman  admonishes  us  he  is  also 
against  the  principle  of  re-eligibility  in  office  of 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  as  well  as  all 
the  other  judges,  and  he  invites  his  spartan  band 
to  come  up  to  his  rescue,  and  stand  by  him  upon 
that  question.  I  fancv  that  he  will  find  the 
27 


principal   portion   of  tliat  force  disinclined   to 
follow  him  in  this  movement  at  least. 

I  listened  with  great  pleasure,  as  I  always  do, 
to  the  able  and  ingenious  argument  that  my 
friend  from  Fleming  incidentally  introduced  on 
this  subject,  and  I  could  not  see,  sir,  with  every 
desire  to  be  convinced,  if  I  was  wrong  upon  this 
question,  and  I  know  there  is  no  gentleman 
more  able  to  convince  me  than  he — I  listened  to 
him  and  I  did  not  hear  an  argument  from  him 
upon  the  subject  of  a  judicial  officer,  with  all 
due  deference  and  respect,  that  did  not  strike  at 
the  very  principle  of  electing  the  judges  by  the 
people.  His  argument  was,  that  there  were  two 
great  parties  in  this  state,  and  there  necessarily 
always  would  be,  which  were  nearly  equally 
balanced.  He  chose  to  give  them  their  appro- 
priate names,  whig  and  democrat,  or  some  other 
name  that  may  hereafter  spring  up.  In  either 
party  there  AVere  sound  portions  of  the  commu- 
nity competent  and  capable  of  exercising  the 
elective  franchise  with  freedom  and  judgment. 
But  that  there  existed  in  this  community  also- 
another  power  which  he  represented  as  floating 
to  one  side  or  the  other,  as  appliances,  corrup- 
tions, blandishments,  or  allurements,  might  be 
able  to  turn  it.  That  it  had  always  and  would 
always  control  our  popular  elections,  and  that 
the  judge  necessarily  would  court  tliat  portion 
of  the  population  which  he  described  as  not 
properly  entitled,  and  who  ought  not  to  be  al- 
lowed, to  exercise  the  elective  franchise  in  the 
choice  of  the  judicial,  or  any  other  officers. 

"We  again  hear  on  the  other  side,  from  another 
quarter,  that  instead  of  courting  that  portion  of 
the  people  the  judge  would  be  influenced  by  the 
powerful  and  wealthy  within  his  district.'  It 
was  emphatically  asked,  if  a  powerful  and 
wealthy  family  is  involved  in  a  contest  in  his 
district,  either  by  crime,  or  in  litigation,  wheth- 
er you  could  find  a  man  to  stand  up  and  admin- 
ister justice  in  the  face  of  such  a  power"?  It  is 
utterly  impossible,  says  the  gentleman.  Yet  the 
same  gentleman  tells  us  when  he  declares  his  op- 
position to  the  mode  of  balloting,  reported  by 
the  committee,  that  he  cannot  believe  that  any 
judge  could  be  found  weak  and  wicked  enough 
to  be  influenced  in  the  exercise  of  his  official  du- 
ties, and  controlled  and  diverted  from  the  line  of 
justice  and  probitv,  because  one  or  the  other  of 
the  litigants  may  liave  voted  for  or  against  him. 
The  inconsistencies  in  that  line  of  argument  I 
will  not  stop  to  point  out. 

What  is  this  principle  of  re-eligibility  ?  Yon 
have  seen  the  action  of  other  state  governments 
and  their  constitutions,  in  which  they  have  de- 
clared that  after  a  given  age  no  incumbent  shall 
be  re-eligible,  or  continued  on  the  bench.  In 
Xew  York,  I  believe,  the  age  of  60  or  65  drove 
from  her  bench  a  chancellor  Kent  and  a  Spencer, 
men  whose  mental  capacity  and  great  legal  learn- 
ing made  them  shining  Tights  in  the  history  of 
American  jurisprudence,  not  only  while  in  com- 
mission, but  for  some  twenty  years  after  they 
were  supposed  to  be  incompetent  to  administer 
justice  and  decide  the  questions  of  law  submit- 
ted to  them  by  their  fellow-citizens.  Tlwt  state 
became  satisfied  that  this  system  of  ostracism 
was  wrong ;  that  to  provide  by  legislative  enact- 
ment, when  human  intellect  should  fail,  was 
unwise,  and  they  abandoned  it.      In  all  the  ef- 


210 


forts  of  the  states  to  return  the  power  of  appoint- 
ing the  judges,  either  directly  to  the  people,  or  in 
a  less  popular  form  to  the  legislative  branch  of 
the  government,  there  is  not  a  single  instance, 
nor  do  the  records  of  any  of  their  journals  or  de- 
bates, so  far  as  they  have  fallen  under  my  exam- 
ination, show  that  a  single  man  had  indicated  a 
desire  to  render  a  judge  ineligible  after  the  expi- 
ration of  his  term.  Kentucky  statesmen  are  the 
first  to  maintain  that  such  a  principle  is  necessa- 
ry to  preserve  the  purity  of  the  judge.  Convince 
me  that  it  is  dangerous  to  the  purity  of  our  ju- 
risprudence that  the  judge  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple should,  because  of  the  confidence  Avhich  he 
may  have  created  by  his  good  conduct  and  pre- 
eminent qualifications,  and  because  the  purity  of 
his  conduct  on  the  bench  has  commanded »the 
respect  and  confidence  of  all  who  have  been 
called  to  his  court — convince  me  that  such  con- 
fidence shall  operate  to  disqualify  a  man  and  to 
deprive  the  state  or  district  of  his  sei'vices,  and 
I  fall  back  to  the  old  principle  of  appoinment,  or 
some  other  mode.  Sir,  it  is  to  charge  upon  the 
people,  not  in  so  many  words,  but  by  implica- 
tion, a  want  of  capacity  to  discriminate  in  the 
choice  of  their  officers  between  the  good  and  the 
bad.  It  is  telling  them,  you  are  incapable  of  de- 
tennining  on  the  character  of  your  judicial  offi- 
cers, whose  official  conduct  is  day  in  and  day 
out  exposed  to  the  scrutiny,  the  vigilance,  aye 
sir,  the  keen  eye  of  the  acivocate  in  his  court. 
You  are  not  capable  of  determining  or  deciding 
■when  a  man  is  influenced  by  improper  or  cor- 
rupt motives,  and  you  shall  not  be  permitted  to 
re-elect  him,  though  he  may  have  commended 
himself  for  all  the  decorum,  all  the  probity,  all 
the  integrity,  all  the  justice,  and  all  the  firmness 
that  can  endear  a  judge  to  a  state,  or  to  a  district. 
We  will  incorporate  into  your  organic  law  a 
provision  taking  from  you  the  privilege  of  call- 
ing upon  him  again  as  your  public  servant  up- 
on the  bench  of  the  appellate  or  district  court. 
It  is  telling  the  people  tbey  are  without  discre- 
tion, and  without  capacity  thus  to  select  for 
themselves,  and  to  determine,  when  they  witness 
the  conduct  of  a  man  upon  the  bench,  whether 
he  be  corrupt  or  pure.  The  great  argument  with 
me  in  surrendering  the  opinions  formed  in  the 
law  school,  or  the  library,  those  principles  which 
all  students  imbibe  from  the  eulogy  which 
Blackstone  has  pronounced  on  the  judicial  de- 
partment of  England,  and  his  opinions  as  to  the 
tenure  of  the  judicial  office,  the  necessity  of  the 
independence  of  the  judges,  and  the  policy  of 
removing  their  appointment  as  far  as  possible 
from  the  excitements  and  turmoil  of  political  con- 
flicts, was  my  confidence  in  the  capacity  and  in- 
tegritj  of  the  people  to  select  their  own  officers. 
I  desire  to  give  to  the  people  the  powerof  select- 
ing judicial  officers,  believing  they  had  the  ca- 
pacity, the  discretion,  and  from  the  deep  and 
abiding  interest  they  had  involved,  that  they 
would  make  a  selection  better  than  any  other  in- 
termediate iigency  which  I  can  devise  myseli,  or 
which  otliers  can  devise.  I  liave  seen  a  reason 
for  this,  that  all  will  acknowlege,  in  the  exercise 
of  the  executive  power  of  appointment  of  all 
the  officers.  I  will  not  stop  to  quarrel  wiUi 
them  or  point  them  out.  They  are  remembered. 
And,  as  my  worthy  colleague  was,  at  one  time, 
■part  and  parcel  of  the  executive,  I  take  his 


testimony  as  conclusive  evidence  on  the  sub- 
ject. 

I  am  in  favor  of  the  election  of  the  judge 
because,  feeling  his  responsibility  to  the  people, 
he  has  a  conscious  pride  about  him — he  feels  a 
spirit  of  independence,  and  he  knows  that  the 
justice  of  this  community  is  such,  that  if  he 
turns  to  the  right  or  to  Ihe  left,  if  he  should 
kick  the  beam  of  justice  in  favor  of  the  rich  or 
the  poor,  there  is  discrimination  enough  in  the 
commumity  to  know  it.  There  is  no  officer  in 
this  commonwealth — I  care  not  what  he  may  be 
called — who  is  watched  with  more  vigilance, 
more  scrutiny  by  the  public  at  large,  than  the 
judges  in  the  courts  of  original  jurisdiction. 
Sir,  when  a  judge  enters  upon  the  discharge  of 
the  duties  confided  to  him  by  the  people  of  the 
state,  he  knows  his  responsibility,  he  knows 
that,  to  secure  the  good  opinion  the  people  en- 
tertained of  him,  when  they  placed  him  there, 
he  must  strike  for  justice,  to  use  a  common 
phrase;  and  when  the  people  see  that  he  does 
so,  they  will  sustain  him.  But  when  they  see 
the  miserable  tool  of  power,  the  instrument  of 
fear,  they  abandon  him.  There  is  no  necessity 
therefore,  for  inserting  in  the  constitution  the 
provision  that  he  shall  not  be  re-eligible.  I  put 
it  to  my  colleague  whether  we  shall  go  further  in 
this  business  than  our  sister  states  have  gone? 
Shall  we  manifest  an  apprehension  lest  some 
one  elected  by  the  people  should  become  cor- 
rupt, and  acting  from  improper  motives,  should 
discharge  the  duties  confided  to  him  improper- 
ly? I  trust  not.  Wliy,  I  ask  you  sir,  when 
the  judge  has  been  elected  by  the  people,  and 
he  has  ser^'od  his  six  years,  or  if  you  please,  his 
four  years,  or  eight  years,  whichever  may  be 
fixed,  and  the  people  are  satisfied  with  him,  and 
are  anxious  to  retain  him,  when  there  is  no  bet- 
ter man  in  the  district,  to  whom  they  can  con- 
fide these  high,  and  honorable,  and  important 
trusts — why,  I  ask  you,  will  you  deprive  tiie 
people  of  the  opportunity  of  calling  to  their 
aid,  the  man  who  has  given  such  universal  sat- 
isfaction? Why  disqualify  a  man  in  the  prime 
of  life?  And  sir,  this  is  not  all.  If  my  honor- 
able colleague  should  carry  out  the  intimation 
he  has  given,  that  the  term  of  eight  years  is  too 
long  in  the  appellate  court — that  six  vears  is  too 
long  a  term  for  the  circuit  court. — and  four  years 
too  long  for  the  county  court,  and  should  come 
down  as  low  as  some  are  disposed  to  come,  (but 
I  will  tiike  it  at  the  period  at  which  I  under- 
stand his  committee  has  fixed  upon  as  the  term 
of  service  for  the  circuit  judge — six  years)  I  ask 
you  sir,  with  his  principle  of  ineligibility  en- 
grafted upon  the  constitution — I  ask  him  sir,  of 
what  m.iterials  will  his  court  be  composed? 
Will  he  tell  me  that  he  will  secure  tlie  services 
of  capable  lawyers?  I  appeal  to  every  member 
in  this  house — I  appeal  to  my  honorable  col- 
league himself.  Go  home  and  look  abroad  in 
your  own  district — tell  me  of  a  lawyer  whose 
practice  is  worth  following — tell  me  of  n  lawyer 
who  is  willing,  for  the  sake  of  the  elevation  to 
the  bench,  to  abandon  his  practice,  with  a  con- 
stitutional restriction  upon  him  that  when  ho 
has  served  six  years — when  his  practice  and  cli- 
ents are  gone,  nis  habits  of  life  changed,  he  is 
to  go  baclc  to  the  practice  of  law.  Tell  me  of  a 
lawyer  who  is  fit  to  go  on  the  bench — I  speak  in 


•MVk 


reference  to  his  capacity — who  \ronld  accept  the 

f)romotion?  It  is  true  of  the  profession  that  the 
arger  portion  of  them  work  hard,  live  well,  and 
die  poor.  No  man  sir,  who  has  attained  the  ne- 
cessarr  standing  in  his  profession,  and  is  of  the 
age  proposed  in  this  provision,  would  be  willing 
to  surrender  his  practice  and  the  means  of  sup- 
port for  his  family,  for  the  tenure  of  six  years, 
with  the  glorious  privilege  of  being  disqualified 
for  the  judgeship  thereafter,  and  of  being  cora- 
pell«d  to  turn  to  the  practice  of  law  for  the  sup- 
port of  the  family  tliat  is  dependent  on  his  exer- 
tions. Xo,  sir.no.  Tour  judiciary,  under  such 
a  system,  would  be  composed  of  old,  broken 
down  lawyers,  who  nev^  did  much  good  for 
themselves,  or  young  ones  who  have  been  fol- 
lowing the  profession  all  their  lives  and  have 
not  overtaken  it.  Besides,  I  would  as  soon 
think,  myself,  of  leasing  a  farm  to  a  tenant  for 
six  years,  telling  him  that  he  should  no  longer 
occupy  it:  and  telling  him,  also,  that  he  should 
not  be  accountable  for  waste  during  the  time. — 
What  would  be  the  practice  of  a  judge  under 
such  a  tenure  of  office?  Tell  him  that  he  must 
go  back  at  the  end  of  the  term,  for  a  living,  to 
the  practice  of  the  profession,  and  for  the  last  two 
or  three  yeara  of  his  judicial  life  he  would  be 
like  the  tenant  who  is  not  responsible  for  waste. 
The  one  would  leave  the  briars  growing  in  the 
corners  of  the  fences,  and  the  other  would  leave 
the  docket  overflowing  with  causes.  That 
would  be  the  effect  of  your  system  of  disqualili- 
cation. 

Something  was  said  sir,  by  my  honorable  col- 
league yesterday  about  districting  the  court  of 
appeals — and  I  regret  exceedingly  that  he  had 
not  reserved  himself  till  we  had  got  clear  of  this 
motion.     To  usehisown  language, he  was  might- 

■  ily  opposed  to  this  system  of  branching  the 
court  of  appeals.  I  care  not  by  what  name  you 
term  it,  the  proposition  is,  that  the  court  of  ap- 
peals shall  hold  its  sessions  in  four  districts,  at 
such  times  and  places  as  shall  be  provided  by 
the  legislature.  Is  this  a  new  question  in  this 
state?  No,  sir.  Long  and  often  has  a  large  por- 
tion of  this  commonwealth  demanded  that  the 

■  court  of  appeals — to  use  a  common  phrase — 
shall  rusticate;  shall  hold  their  sessions  at  dif- 
ferent points  in  this  commonwealth,  thereby  to 
destrov  the  tendency  to  centralization — to  bring 
the  administration  of  justice  nearer  to  the  resi- 
dences of  the  suitors. 

My  colleague  says  it  will  have  a  tendency  to 
increa.se  litigation.  I  am  not  prepared  sir,  to 
say  that  it  will  or  will  not.  I  am  much  inclined 
to  believe  that  it  will  not  have  that  tendency,  be- 
cause if  we  are  successful  in  giving  to  the  peo- 
ple of  this  commonwealth  a  good,  intelligent, 
independent  tribunal  of  original  jurisdiction,  it 
will  tend  greatly  to  lessen  the  necessitj'  for  an 
appellate  court.     Give  us  a  court  that  the  bar 

.  and  the  country  will  have  confidence  in — that  is, 
a  court  which  tries  the  case  originally,   and  the 

•suitor  be  content  to  abide  the  result.'  It  is,  sir, 
because  our  tribunals  of  original  jurisdiction 
are  so  constituted  that  neither  the  bar  nor  the 
community,  in  many  parts  of  the  state,  have 
confidence  in  their  decisions,  that  the  business 

.  in  the  appellate  court  has  been  increasing  for 

-  the  last  fifteen  years.     But  admitting  that  it  has 

-  a.  tendency  to  increase  the  business,  shall  we  de- 


j  ny  to  a  suitor  of  the  county  of  Hickman  the 
;  privilege  of  having  his  cause  revised  by  holding 
[  the  court  at  so  great  a  distance  that  his  counsel 
I  may  not  be  able  to  follow  the  cause?  Is  public 
{ justice  served  by  denying  to  .suitors  who  reside 
I  at  a  distance  the  privilege  of  having  their  cases 
I  revised  in  the  appellate  court,  when  in  the  opin- 
;  ion  of  the  couns^  justice  has  not  been  done? 
I  I  said,  sir,  that  this  business  of  dividing  the 
j  labor  of  this  court  is  not  one  that  is  new  in  this 
I  commonwealth.  I  have  not  the  time,  sir,  nor  is 
j  it  necessary  that  I  should  look  up  the  various 
i  bULs  that  fiave  been,  from  time  to  time,  before 
j  the  legislature  in  reference  to  this  subject,  and 
I  defeated  in  their  passage  by  being  pronounced 

I  unconstitutional.  I  find  that  in  1816  the  subject 
!  was  before  the  legislature,  and  it  was  proposed, 

I I  think,  to  hold  the  court  at  three  or  four  points 
1  in  the  state;  and  that  I  may  do  justice  to  gentle- 
;  men  who  thought  then  as  I  think  now,  I  will 
I  read  the  names  of  those  who  vote<l  for  the  bill. 
I  They  are  "  Messrs.  Buckner,  Breathitt,  Beau- 
I  •  champ,  Craig,  Cotton,  Coffee,  Cosby,  Doller- 
! '  hide,  Emerson,  Floumoy,  Fergus,  Forrest, 
j '  Goode,  Hughes,  Hombeck,  Hart,  Hubbard, 
I '  Harrison,  Letcher,  Mills,  Moorman,  McMahan, 
; '  Metcalfe,  McClanahan,  Patton,  Rennick,  Rob- 
! '  inson.  Reeves,  Rowan,  P.  Thompson,  Ward, 
I '  Wirt.  Wall.  Yantis,  and  Yates."  Among  them 
I  are  names  of  great  weight,  men  of  great  politi- 
I  cal  influence,  lawyers  eminent  for  their  talents. 
!  I  could  go  to  the  journals  and  show  you,  vear 

after  year,  mv>n  who  were  voting  for  tKis  propo- 
sition, and  demanding  it  as  an  act  of  justice  to 
the  extremes  of  this  eommonwealtli. 

Looking,  sir,  to  the  questions  that  belong  to 
the  bill  further  on,  especially  the  mode  of  elect- 
ing these  judges  by  ballot,  or  by  vica  voce,  indi- 
vidually I  care  not  one  farthing  what  may  be  the 
decision  of  this  house  in  regard  to  the  mode  in 
which  the  votes  shall  be  oast.  I  do  not  doubt 
the  gentleman  himself  possesses  the  indepen- 
dence to  look  boldly  at  the  judge  whilst  voting 
against  him.  He  is  not  prohibited  from  doing 
so;  but  sir,  there  are  others  who  may  not  have 
been  blest  with  that  spirit.  The  ohiject  of  the 
committee  was  to  give  the  voter  the  privilege  of 
voting  with  perfect  freedom.  As  I  remarked 
the  other  day,  a  majority  of  the  states  in  this 
union  have  adopted  tie  ballot  system  in  all  their 
elections.  I  said  that  the  reason  why  they  adopt- 
ed it  in  many  of  the  states  in  reference  to  the 
election  of  manv  of  their  officers,  did  not,  and  I 
hope  never  will,  exist  in  our  commonwealth. — 
I  allude  to  the  crowded  and  dependent  popula- 
tion, such  as  they  have  in  many  of  their  towns 
I  and  cities. 

I  But  to  return  to  the  question  immediately  be- 
I  fore  the  committee,  I  will  endeavor  to  meet  the 
I  ailment  which  I  understand  to  be  the  only  one 
i  that  has  been  presented,  that  the  impeaching 
!  power,  and  the  power  to  drive  these  officers  out 
,  of  commission  by  the  voice  of  two  thirds  of 
i  each  branch  of  the  legislature,  is  inoperative,  is 
j  not  efficient,  and  cannot  be  usetl  either  to  keep 
I  the  officer  in  order,  or  to  punish  him  wlien  he 
!  has  violated  his  duty  as  a  public  officer.  And 
I  sir,  I  regret  exceedingly  that  my  worthy  and 
j  honorable  colleague  in  drawing  upon  his  memo- 
1  ry  for  instances  to  illustrate  this  position,  had 
i  not  called  to  his  mind  the  admonition  which  I 


212 


think  is  necessary  t«  be  observed  in  all  our  in- 
tercourse: "de  mortuis  nil  decit  sic  nisi  bonum." 

He,  sir,  introduced  as  an  illustration,  the 
memorable -assaidt  made  on  the  secretary  of  the 
treasury,  Alexander  J.  Dallas,  by  the  foderalibts 
and  anti-war  party  of  1812,  growing  out  of  his 
operations  as  secretary  of  the  treasury,  in  regard 
to  a  loan  authorized  by  act  of  congress.  Sir, 
who  was  Alexander  J.  Dallas?  No  man  of  his 
age  or  day  was  more  revered  or  more  highlj''  re- 
spected and  esteemed  by  his  associates,  by  those 
who  knew  him  and  had  familiar  intercourse 
with  him,  in  his  social  and  political  relations. 
His  memory,  his  name,  his  virtues,  his  social 
qualities,  are  held  in  veneration  by  those  who 
knew  him.  Sir,  those  of  his  descendants  and 
representatives  who  now  live,  ajid  the  represen- 
tatives of  his  gallant  son,  who  sacrificed  his  life 
in  the  cause  of  his  country,  are  to  have  the  morti  ■ 
ficatiom  of  reading  in  the  debates  of  this  con- 
vention, recorded  and  perpetuated  for  all  time, 
that  their  father  was  guilty  of  swindling  the 
government,  when  acting  as  secretary  of  the 
treasury  amid  the  struggles  and  differences  be- 
tween the  federal  and  the  war  party  in  1812. 
I  stop  not  to  investigate  that  transaction;  but 
when  investigated,  it  will  be  found  that  Mr. 
Dallas  was  free  from  all  blame.  He  could  not 
afterwards  have  lived  and  died,  beloved  and  re- 
spected as  he  was  throughout  the  commonwealth 
of  Pennsylvania  and  the  United  States,  had  he 
been  guilty  of  swindling  tlie  government.  I 
had  not  the  pleasure  of  a  personal  acquaintance 
with  him,  but  I  ha%'e  long  had  an  intimate  ac- 
quaintance with  his  distinguished  son,  the  late 
Vice-President  of  the  United  States.  It  is  the 
regard  I  have  for  the  high  reputation  of  the  de- 
ceased, that  I  feel  called  upon  to  say,  that  there 
is  at  least  one  man  in  the  convention,  who  is  not 
prepared  to  take  the  assaults  of  the  federalists 
against  that  distinguished  gentleman  as  true, 
without  proof  from  the  record.  I  have  no  doubt 
iny  colleague  believed  what  the  clerk  told  him, 
but  the  allegation  that  Mr.  Dallas  swindled  the 
government  out  of  this  money  cannot  be  true.  It 
is  impossible  that  it  can  be  true. 

As  another  illustration  of  the  inefficiency  of 
this  power,  ray  colleague  gave  us  a  graphic  de- 
scription of  the  personal  appearance  of  those 
federalists,  who  sustained  Judge  Chase  on  the 
occasion  of  his  trial,  and  my  colleague  was  so 
emphatic  that  he  not  only  denounced  the  judge 
but  he  denounced  his  triers  also.  I  had  thought 
that  the  public  judgment  upon  the  exciting  ques- 
tions which  arose  out  of  the  memorable  contests 
of  1801  had  become  settled,  and  that  those  ex- 
citements had  passed  away  when  the  actors  in 
those  scenes  had  paid  the  last  debt  of  nature, 
and  the  public  mind  had  been  brought  to  bear 
impartially  upon  the  subject.  I  had  thought 
that  there  was  at  this  day  but  one  opinion  in 
reference  to  the  decision  in  the  case  of  Judge 
Chase,  and  I  will  venture  to  say  that  the  gentle- 
man, with  all  his  ability,  if  he  take  his  jury 
•  from  this  house,  and  produce  all  the  evidence  he 
<i«  capable  of  producing,  would  not  be  able  to 
'  obtain  a  reversal  of  the  decision  in  that  case. 
Sir,  if  hi«  triers,  the  senators  of  the  United 
•States,  deserve  the  condemnation  which  my  hon- 
orable colleague  gave  them  yesterday,  I  think 
the  statement  at  least  ought  to  be  accompanied 


by  the  names  of  the  men  whose  votes  I  find  re- 
corded as  declaring  Judge  Chase  not  guilty  of 
the  charges  preferred  against  him,  I  have  heard 
him  loud  and  eloquent  in  his  encomiums  upon 
the  individual,  his  patriotism,  intelligence,  pub- 
lic virtue,  his  fitness  for  the  high  station  of  Pres- 
ident of  the  United  States,  whose  name  stands 
recorded  first  among  those  who  voted  not  guilty 
upon  every  charge  against  Judge  Chase.  That 
individual  was  John  Quincy  Adams.  Yet  sir,  my 
worthy  colleague  would  have  elevated  this  gen- 
tleman to  the  highest  office  in  this  government, 
considering  him  worthy  of  the  confidence  of 
this  nation.  I  could  give  you  other  distinguish- 
ed names  sir,  names  of  individuals  in  whom  my 
honorable  colleague  professed  to  have  unlimited 
confidence,  who  nevertheless  voted  not  guilty 
upon  the  charges  preferred  against  Judge  Chase. 
I  could  give  you  the  name  of  one  of  the  distin- 
guished senators  of  Kentucky,  formerly  a  resi- 
dent and  revered  citizen  of  this  town,  who, 
though  acting  with  the  republican  party  of  that 
day,  was  compelled  to  record  his  vote  against  a 
majority  of  the  charges  contained  in  the  indict- 
ment. 

And  what  was  this  charge?  Without  going 
into  particulars.  Judge  Chase  had  decided  that 
it  was  treason  against  the  government  to  resist, 
by  an  armed  force,  the  execution  of  a  statute  of 
the  United  States.  Iredell,  his  predecessor. 
Judge  Peters,  and  Judge  Patterson,  decided  the 
same  question.  When  the  gentleman  comes  to 
examine  with  care  and  attention  the  whole  case, 
together  with  the  judgment  of  the  court,  I  think 
he  will  arrive  at  the  same  conclusion  to  which 
my  mind  has  been  brought,  that  the  senate  of 
the  United  States  could  not  have  decided  other- 
wise. 

He  has  been  pleased  to  allude  to  the  case  of 
Judge  Peck,  with  which  my  name  is  associated 
a-s  one  of  the  managers.  It  is  true  the  house  of 
representatives  voted  an  impeachment  in  that 
case.  The  charge  was,  that  he  had  punished  a 
lawyer  for  contempt,  because  the  lawyer  had 
criticised  his  opinion  in  the  newspapers.  The 
house  thought  that  it  was  an  improper  exercise 
of  power,  the  oS'ence  not  having  been  commit- 
ted in  court;  that  it  did  not  properly  belong  to  a 
judge  to  punish  for  contempt  where  the  contempt 
consisted  in  something  written  or  said  out  of 
court.  The  senate  thought  otherwise;  that  is, 
they  thought  there  was  nothing  of  corruption  in 
the  exercise  of  the  power.  The  judge  was  ac- 
quitted, but  I  believe  it  improved  his  manners 
as  a  judge.  This  case  led  to  the  passage  of  an 
act  of  Congress  defining  what  should  consti- 
tute a  contempt  of  court. 

The  gentleman  has  referred  to  the  case  in  the 
county  of  Carter  as  evidence  that  this  power  of 
impeachment,  or  address,  has  fallen  as  a  dead 
letter  upon  the  statute  book.  Are  we  to  be  told 
that  because  I  can  point  you  to  a  case  where  a 
notorious  criminal  has  escaj^ed  public  justice, 
by  the  improper  conduct  of  a  judge,  or  by  a 
misconception  on  the  part  of  the  jury,  or  a  per- 
version of  the  facts,  tliat  we  are  then-fore  to 
abandon  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury? 
Because  all  criminals  have  not  been  convicted 
shall  we  go  back  and  take  up  this  invention, 
which  I  see  emanating  from  a  law  shop  in  Louis- 
ville, that  upon  the  trial  of  a  criminal,  the  com- 


213 


monwealth  shall  have  the  right  to  challenge  as 
many  jurors  as  the  criminal,  and  that  the  jury 
shall  consist  of  seven?  Are  we  to  abandon  our 
time-honored  system  because  Judge  Chase,  or  the 
Carter  magistrate,  has  escaped?    I  trust  not. 

Let  us  come  sir,  to  our  own  state  and  see  how 
this  thing  has  operated.  Has  this  power  never 
been  invoked  etliciently  on  our  judicial  bench? 
I  entered  public  life  as  a  member  of  the  legisla- 
ture, (I  am  almost  ashamed  to  acknowledge  it 
as  long  ago  as  lt>l2,)  and  one  of  the  first  acts 
that  attracted  my  attention  was  a  charge  brought 
against  an  a-ssociate  judge  of  the  county  of 
Nicholas.  The  charge  was  that  he  was  an  alien, 
and  the  proof  was  that  he  had  been  some  twen- 
ty years  in  the  United  States,  but  had  not  taken 
the  oath  of  allegiance;  and  further,  that  he  had 
declared  himself  delighted  with  the  result  of  a 
conflict  that  had  taken  place,  in  which  the  Brit- 
ish were  victorious  in  1812.  The  result  was, 
the  legislature  broke  him  by  the  unanimous  vote, 
I  believe,  of  both  houses.  I  could  give  you  nu- 
merous instances  where  officers  of  the  govern- 
ment have  been  removed  by  the  legislature.  It 
is  true,  attempts  have  been  made  to  remove  judges 
by  address,  and  have  failed,  but  I  call  upon  my 
colleague,  and  upon  the  gentleman  from  Fayette, 
his  lieutenant,  1  suppose,  in  his  Spartan  band, 
to  point  out  to  me  a  case  where  a  judge  has 
been  brought  before  the  legislature  for  a  mor- 
al delinquency  or  niisdemeauor  in  oflice  where 
there  was  a  failure  to  remove  the  judge  when 
he  ought  to  be  removed.  I  will  pause  if  my 
colleague  will  name  a  case;  my  own  memory 
does  not  furnish  me  with  one.  I  remember  very 
well  the  case  of  judge  Clarke.  He  was  attempt- 
ed to  be  removed  under  the  two-thirds  rule, 
and  the  attempt  failed.  Yet  sir,  there  was  a  ma- 
jority in  both  houses  in  favor  of  his  removal, 
and,  but  for  this  principle  of  requiring  two- 
thirds,  that  worthy  man,  that  able  jurist  and 
statesman,  would  have  shared  the  fate,  which 
many  a  judge  will  meet,  if  my  friend  should 
succeed  in  his  proposition,  to  engraft  the  majori- 
ty principle  in  the  constitution.  I  must  be  al- 
lowed by  the  committee  to  disinter  the  facts  con- 
nected with  this  case  from  the  buried  rubbish 
of  your  library,  and  place  them  once  more  in 
bold  relief  before  the  people  of  Kentucky,  that 
they  may  understand  what  would  be  the  effect 
of  my  colleague's  proposition  if  he  should  be 
able  to  engraft,  it  in  the  constitution. 

In  1822  we  had  in  Kentucky  a  set  of  politi- 
cians, most  of  whom  have  passed  from  the  stage 
of  life,  whose  residences  were  around  the  Athens 
of  Kentucky.  They  were  called  and  familiarly 
known  throughout  the  commonwealth  in  those 
days  as  the  Lexington  junto.  They  assumed 
to  control  the  will  of  the  legislature.  Judge 
Clarke,  in  the  Bourbon  circuit  court,  was  called 
upon  to  quash  a  replevin  bond.  He  quashed 
the  bond  on  the  ground  that  the  law  was  un- 
constitutional and  void.  I  think  the  opinion 
was  given  on  Tuesday  or  Wednesday  evening, 
and  on  Friday  night  there  came  an  avalanche 
from  Lexington,  with  a  copy  of  the  judge's  opin- 
ion taken  from  the  newspapers.  The  next  morn- 
ing, being  Saturday,  as  soon  as  we  met,  a  gen- 
tleman, who  is  now  no  more,  who  was  not  be- 
hind my  honorable  colleague  in  his  power  of 
appealing  to  the  passions  and  prejudices  and  ex- 


citements of  the  people,  thought  it  necessan* 
to  call  forth  public  indignation  against  an  unof- 
fending ofiicer,  came  into  the  house  and  moved 
the  appointment  of  a  committee  not  to  inquire  in- 
to the  guilt  of  the  individual,  not  to  inquire  into 
the  merits  of  the  case,  but  to  report  an  address 
to  the  governor  requiring  his  dismissal  from  of- 
fice, for  no  other  offence  than  that  of  decidiiig  a 
law  to  be  unconstitutional.  I  happened  to  be  a 
member  of  the  committee.  Such  was  the  inde- 
cent haste,  not  having  time  to  sit  on  Saturday 
night,  for  the  session  of  the  house  lasted  until 
nearly  the  hour  of  midnight,  I  was  summoned 
on  the  Sabbath  day,  sir,  to  meet  in  a  member's 
room  to  take  the  subject  into  consideration.  I 
well  remember  the  room  and  its  furniture,  and 
its  inmates.  There  was  a  bed  two  chairs  and  a 
jug  of  whisky.  I  tried  then  to  procure  a  sum- 
mons to  be  sent  to  Judge  Clarke,  or  a  letter  in- 
viting him  to  appear  before  the  committee.  A 
few  others  with  myself  attempted  with  all  our 
persuasive  powers,  or  rather  with  imploring  so- 
licitude, to  preserve  at  least  the  appearance  of 
justice  in  our  proceedings,  and  to  have  the  judge 
before  the  committee.  It  was  denied.  The  re- 
port was  made  to  the  house  requiring  the  gov- 
ernor to  remove  him.  We  again,  for  some  six 
hours,  continued  to  solicit  the  tribunal  for  a  sum- 
mons, requiring  the  attendance  of  Judge  Clarke 
before  the  bar  of  the  house  to  answer  to  the 
charge,  and  as  a  mere  act  of  grace  and  mercy, 
at  the  close  of  the  day,  an  order  was  made  for 
process  against  him.  The  ofiicer  found  him  en- 
gaged in  the  trial  of  two  persons  indicted  for 
nmrder.  The  jury  had  just  found  the  men  guil- 
ty, and  the  judge  was  dragged  from  his  court, 
leaving  the  verdict  unconfirmed,  and  before  the 
ensuing  term  the  convicts  broke  jail  and  escaped 
justice.  Jfow  here  are  the  proceedings  in  the 
case  of  Judge  Clarke,  and  here  is  an  exemplifi- 
cation of  the  glorious  provision  of  my  friend. 
Here  is  a  large  majority,  sir,  lacking  but  two 
votes  of  being  two  thiras,  prepared  to  dismiss  a 
judicial  officer,  for  no  other  off'ence  than  deciding 
an  act  of  the  legislature  unconstitutional.  Ana 
sir,  I  beg  you  to  bring  your  mind  down  and  fol- 
low the  history  of  the  man  to  his  grave,  and  tell 
me  what  was  the  judgment  of  the  country  upon 
that  man  so  long  as  he  lived.  He  afterwards 
filled  a  seat  in  congress  as  long  as  he  chose.  He 
was  once  a  judge  of  your  appellate  bench;  he 
was  elected  by  the  people  of  this  commonwealth 
its  chief  magistrate;  1  believe,  in  purity  and 
virtue,  he  may  have  had  equals,  but  no  supe- 
rior in  Kentucky.  And  it  is  to  avoid  scenes  of 
this  kind  that  I  wish  to  guard  the  judiciary  de- 
partment. My  colleague,  in  his  impassioned 
and  glowing  eloquence,  gave  us  the  causes 
which  led  the  legislature  into  the  adoption  of 
the  relief  system,  and  the  violation  of  the  con- 
stitution, and  the  temporary  prostration  of  the 
ajjpellate  court.  He  is  of  opinion  the  like  causes 
will  never  exist;  that  the  execution  laws  of  the 
state  now  protect  the  debtors'  property  against 
sacrifice.  Sir,  these  laws  are  nnitable;  may  be 
swept  from  your  statute  book,  and  I  do  not  "wish 
to  leave  the  judiciary  to  the  discretion  of  a  bare 
majority  of  tne  legislature.  I  want  the  judiciary 
to  act  as  a  check  and  balance  upon  the  other  two 
departments  of  the  government.  I  wish  not  to 
let  the  judge  depend  for  his  continuance  in  office. 


214 


tipoii  the  mere  will  and  pleasure  of  a  majority 
of  either  branch  of  the  legislature,  or  of  both 
together. 

Sir,  I  will  not  take  the  trouble,  nor  detain  the 
committee,  by  reading  the  proceedings  and  votes 
of  the  house  in  the  case  of  judge  Clarke.  But  I 
shall  request  the  reporter  to  append  them  to  the 
remarks  I  make,  not  for  any  purpose  of  my  own, 
but  as  a  p.art  of  the  history  of  the  case.  1  want 
my  constituents  to  see  and  know  what  will  be 
the  elfeet  of  placing  the  judiciary  at  the  will  and 
pleasure  of  the  popular  branch  of  the  govern- 
ment. I  want  them  to  draw  a  lesson  from  the 
experience  of  the  past. 

Sir,  my  colleague  referred  to  the  reforms  in  the 
judicial  department  in  our  mother  country.  I 
admit  that  the  revolution  brought  about  a  great 
reformation  in  favor  of  English  liberty  when  they 
changed  thetejiureof  judicial  office.  Wlienthey 
did  that  sir,  however,  claiming  to  be  omnipotent, 
the  parliament  retained  in  their  hands  the  power 
of  removing  the  judges  by  address.  Is  that  all 
sir?  No.  The  concun-ence  of  his  majesty,  the 
king,  is  necessary,  besides  the  concurrence  of  a 
majority  of  parliament.  Our  ancestors,  how- 
ever, benefitted  by  experience,  improved  upon 
the  English  system.  In  order  to  better  it  and  to 
secure  American  liberty,  and  the  independence  of 
the  American  government,  they  carried  it  yet 
further,  and  provided,  as  I  think,  inalmost  eve- 
ry American  constitution,  certain  safe  guards 
wliich  were  thrown  around  the  judicial  depart- 
ment of  the  government,  which  we  claim  shall 
be  thrown  around  our  judicial  department  in 
Kentucky.  They  did  not  leave  to  the  will  of  a 
bare  majority  of  the  legislative  department,  the 
power  of  destroying  the  independence  of  the  ju- 
diciarv  department.  They  accordingly  incorpo- 
rated into  the  American  system,  these  further  im- 
provements upon  the  British  system.  They  pro- 
vided that  the  judiciary  should  not  be  controlled 
by  the  will  of  a  majority;  but  for  misdemeanors 
in  office,  they  require  higher  evidence  than  the 
dictum  of  a  popular  majority  before  they  shall 
be  removed. 

My  worthy  colleague  brought  himself  to  the 
conclusion  yesterday,  that  there  is  very  little 
difference  between  us,  and  by  figures  he  at- 
tempted to  prove  that  there  is  very  little  differ- 
ence between  a  majority  of  the  house  and  a  vote 
of  two  thirds.  I  will  not  stop  to  work  out  that 
problem.  I  think  there  is,  however,  some  dif 
ference.  What  has  been  the  effect  of  this  attempt 
to  get  clear  of  the  judges  by  a  popular  vote  of  the 
house  of  representatives  and  the  senate?  Imight 
call  your  attention  to  the  attempt  to  get  rid  of 
judge  Robbins,  and  I  believe  tne  main  charge 
against  him  wa.s,  that  he  refused  to  appoint  the 
son  of  a  man,  who  had  resigned  his  office,  to  a 
clerkship.  But  let  us  examine  a  little  into  our 
own  history  in  reference  to  this  attempt  to  put 
down  the  judiciary.  I  will  not  go  abroad  for 
precedents  or  opinions.  I  will  refer  to  many  in- 
stances in  our  own  history  and  our  own  times,  to 
support  the  position  that  I  maintain  on  this  floor. 
I  stated  the  other  day,  that  in  all  popular  gov- 
ernments, based  upon  the  will  of  a  majority,  that 
majority  needed  checks  and  balances  and  re- 
straints upon  itself;  that  it  was  necessary  in  the 
formation  of  an  organic  law  in  a  popular  gov- 
ernment, if  they  -wished  to  preserve  public  lib- 


erty and  secure  private  rights,  to  throw  restraints 
Jind  safe  guards  around  themselves.  For  utter- 
ing this  sentiment,  my  colleague  chose  to  say  that 
it  was  the  sentiment  of  a  monarchist  and  a'cour- 
tier.  If  it  be  so  sir,  it  is  one  that  I  have  imbibed 
by  long  reflection  and  from  high  authority. 

Allow  me  to  read  an  extract  from  the  opinion 
of  one  well  schooled  in  the  science  of  govern- 
ment, (Mr.  Rutledge,  of  South  Carolina): 

"  Yes,  sir,  in  popular  governments  coiistitu- 
'  tional  checks  are  necessary  for  their  preserva- 

•  tion;  the  people  want  to  Be  protected  against 
'  themselves;  no  man  is  so  absurd  as  to  suppose 
'  the  people  collectedly  will  consent  to  the  pros- 
'tration  of  their  liberties;  but  if  they  be  not 
'  shielded  by  some  constitutional  checks  they 
'  will  suffer  them  to  be  destroyed;  to  be  destroy- 
'  by  demagogues,  who  filch  the  confidence  of  the 
'  people  by  pretending  to  be  their  friends;  dema- 

*  gogues  who,  at  the  time  they  are  soothing  and 
'  ca,joling  the  people,  with  bland  and  captivating 
'speeches,  are  forging  chains  for  them;  dema- 
'  gogues  who  caiTy  daggers  in  their  hearts,  and 
'  seductive  smiles  in  their  hypocritical  faces;  who 
'  are  dooming  the  people  to  despotism,  when  they 
'  profess  to  be  exclusively  the  friends  of  the  peo- 
'  pie.  Against  such  designs  and  such  artifices 
'  were  our  constitutional  checks  made  to  preserve 
'  the  people  of  this  country." 

I  will  not  stop  to  give  you  historical  illustra- 
tions from  other  nations  or  times  than  our  own. 
Sir,  I  will  not  content  myself  with  quoting  the 
opinions  of  this  distinguished  American  states- 
man and  jurist.  I  have  authority  nearer  home, 
and  authority  that  is  entitled  to  more  weight 
perhaps  upon  this  question  than  the  one  I  hare 
just  read.  I  will  proceed  to  read  from  this  last 
authority: 

"The  government  of  the  people  is  divided 
'into  three  distinct  co-ordinate  departments; 
'one  to  make  the  laws,  another  to  expound  the 
'laws,  and  a  third  to  execute  them.  Tne  depart- 
'raents  emanate  from  the  same  great  fountain  of 
'power,  the  people;  they  are  equal  and  independ- 
'ent  of  each  other,  with  a  few  exceptions,  which 
'  shall  be  noticed  hereafter.  And  it  is  necessary, 
'in  the  nature  of  things,  that  it  should  be  so; 
'for  the  people  intended,  in  making  their  gov- 
'  ernment,  that  they  should  be  checks  and  balan- 
'  ces  to  each  other. 

"This  great  principle  of  three  departments  of 
'governments,  co-equal,  co-ordinate  and  inde- 
'  pendent  of  each  other,  to  a  great  extent,  has 
'been  considered  one  of  the  pillars  upon  which 
'  this  republic,  that  of  the  L  nited  States,  and 
'our  sister  states,  are  erected.  It  is  an  indis- 
'pensable  ingredient  to  the  very  existence  of  all 
'republics." 

Have  you  three  co-ordinate  "equal  departments 
of  the  government  if  you  bring  the  judiciary  to 
the  footlstool  of  the  legislature?  But  to  proceed, 
for  these  authorities  are  rich  and  abundant. 
Why,  sir,  Bonaparte,  and  Greece,  and  Rome, 
are  good  authority.  So  acknowledged,  I  believe, 
on  all  sides.     But  I  read  again: 

"Gentlemen  ought  to  be  cautious  whenever 
'they  depart  from  the  fair,  obvious,  and  manifest 
'import  of  the  constitution,  as  the  same  was 
'wrote  by  the  convention,  in  pursuit  of  what 
'they  suppose  or  call  the  public  good;  thevare 
'travelling  on  dangerous  ground;  it  is  notliing 


215 


'  more  or  less  than  the  plea  of  all  tyrants  and 
'despots;  for  in  their  most  wanton  acts  of  op- 
'pression  and  cruelty,  they  plead  the  public 
'good  and  the  public  necessity.  Bonaparte 
'pleaded  necessity,  public  good,  and  the  glory 
'  of  France,  for  his  conscriptions  and  wars.  Eng- 
'land  relies  on  the  same  plea  for  her  system  of 
'oppressive  taxation,  and  her  prostration  of  ev- 
'ery  thing  like  civil  liberty.  John  Adams  had 
'the  same  defence  to  make,  for  his  alien  and  se- 
'dition  laws,  and  all  his  acts  of  official  miscon- 
'duet  and  mal-administration.  The  truth  is,  no 
'republic  can  exist  long  without  a  constitution, 
'the  charter  of  their  liberties;  and  that  charter 
'amounts  to  nothing  unless  it  is  reverenced  hj 
'  all  and  obeyed  by  all,  and  never  broken  or  eva- 
'  ded,  either  in  letter  or  spirit,  by  any  depart- 
'  ment  of  government,  under  any  pretence  what- 
'ever,  even  if  it  should  assume  the  imposing 
'  name  of  public  good  or  necessity.  It  is  by  im- 
'  posing  names  and  appearances  we  are  always 
'  deceived.  The  syrens  beguiled  by  their  music. 
'  Christ  was  betrayed  by  a  kiss. 

"We  are  told,  in  the  next  place,  that  the  judges 
'ought  to  be  removed  by  way  of  asserting  the 
'supremacy  of  the  legislature.  That  doctrine 
'goes  to  an  entire  annihilation  of  the  constitu- 
'tion  and  is  subversive  of  all  government.  The 
'constitution  contains  a  delegation  of  power  to 
'the  three  departments  of  government;  and  also, 
'  it  contains  prohibitions  and  restrictions  upon 
'  the  three  departments  of  government.  Certain 
'  great  fundamental  rights  are  reserved  to  the 
'  people.  The  three  departments  are  to  check 
'  each  other,  if  either  exceed  its  constitutional 
'  power  and  encroach  upon  the  other  departments, 
'or  the  great  rights  reserved  to  the  people." 

By  this  authority  we  are  taught  that  if  we 
leave  the  legislative  power  uncontrolled,  it  will 
be  invoked  to  crush  the  independence  of  the  ju- 
diciary department. 

Again,  sir,  to  continue  the  quotation: 

"  The  people  intended  that  the  judicial  de- 
'  partraent  should  be  a  check  to  the  legislative, 
•  should  that  department  attempt  any  unconstitu- 
'  ional  act,  any  encroachment  upon  the  great  in- 
'  alienable  rights  of  the  people.  I  Avould  ask, 
'how  can  that  department  be  a  check,  if  the 
'  other,  by  an  ordinary  act  of  legislation,  can 
'  destroy  it  at  will  and  pleasure?" 

To  do  this  is  what  the  committee  intended  by 
the  article  under  consideration,  that  it  should 
constitute  a  constitutional  check  upon  the  other 
departments;  that  they  should  be  responsible  to 
the  people  who  gave  them  their  appointments, 
and  that  the  legislature  should  act  as  a  court  to 
try  them  for  crimes  and  misdemeanors. 

"Will  you  not  allow  the  judges  to  decide  upon 
'  a  constitutional  question?  Is  it  not  their  duty, 
'when  the  question  is  brought  before  them?  And 
'will  you  turn  them  out  of  office  for  doing  their 
'duty,  because  you  may  suppose  the  opinion  is 
'wrong?  Are  our  judges  to  be  removed  when- 
'  ever  the  legislature  may  differ  with  them  in 
'opinion?  If  that  be  the  tenure  by  which  they 
'hold  their  offices,  then,  I  say,  it  is  a  brittle  ten- 
'ure,  and  our  judiciary,  instead  of  being  a  safe- 
'  guard,  a  shield  and  buckler,  to  defend  the  prop- 
'  erty,  liberty,  and  life  of  the  citizen,  is  a  mere 
'  mocker?." 


How  can  my  colleague  hope  to  see  an  inde- 
pendent judiciary  under  this  constitution,  if  by 
the  exercise  of  a  mere  act  of  legislation  they  can 
be  removed  from  office? 

Sir,  the  concluding  remarks  of  a  very  able 
speech  of  my  colleague,  from  which  I  have  been 
reading,  are  emphatic. 

"  All  republics  have  gone  the  same  way;  men 
'  of  daring  courage  and  unbounded  ambition 
'  have  played  the  demagogue,  by  abusing  the 
'honest  officers  of  government,  sounding  alarms 
'and  erj'iug  out  to  the  people,  we  are  oppressed" 
'  by  those  who  administer  the  government,  pre- 
'  tending  a  glowing  love  and  an  ardent  devotion 
'to  the  people.  This  course  of  conduct  breaks 
'the  harmony  of  the  government,  produces  dis- 
'  cord,  confusion,  riots  and  tumults;  still  ad- 
'  vancing,  step  by  step,  the  climax  is  capped,  by 
'  pushing  the  people  into  blind  anarchy  and 
'  wild  uproar.  In  this  state  of  things,  the  gov- 
'  eminent  is  a  prize  to  the  first  bold  and  daring 
'  adventurer.  The  history  of  all  republics  proves 
'this  assertion.  Athens  had  her  Pisistratus; 
'Rome  her  Csesar;  England  her  Cromwell,  and 
'France  her  Bonaparte." 

This,  sir,  is  the  warning  voice  of  my  honora- 
ble colleague,  an  able  and  sound  statesman  of 
his  day.  delivered  at  a  time,  and  upon  an  occa- 
sion, when  the  whole  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky was  agitated  from  one  extreme  to  the  other; 
when  mighty  spirits  on  both  sides  were  agitated, 
when,  as  it  was  thought,  a  destructive  movement 
was  made  against  the  judiciary.  He  and  others 
were  standing  on  the  ramparts  of  the  constitu- 
tion calling  on  the  people  to  rally  in  support 
and  defence  of  the  time  honored  instrument 
which  we  are  now  called  on  to  revise. 

I  rallied  under  his  standard,  as  I  remarked  the 
other  day,  side  by  side,  and  shoulder  to  should- 
er, in  my  humble  way,  aiding  and  assisting  my 
colleague  in  implanting  in  the  public  mind  those 
sentiments  of  justice  and  sound  policy,  which 
resulted,  after  a  struggle  unparralleled  in  excite- 
ment, in  a  settlement  of  this  vexed  question.  I 
was  conversing  this  morning  with  an  old  friend, 
yfho  played  a  distinguished  part  in  that  conflict, 
being  at  that  time  a  member  of  one  branch  of 
the  legislature,  and  an  important  actor  in  the 
whole  scene.  Time  has  passed  over  him ;  the 
frost  of  many  winters  have  caused  him  to  reflect. 
He  said,  in  his  emphatic  manner,  if  we  had  had 
then  the  lever  of  my  colleague,  we  could  have 
prized  from  office  everv  judge  in  the  state  and  tri- 
umphed in  the  struggle. 

I  invoke  my  colleague  not  to  put  this  provis- 
ion in  the  constitution  ;  for  when  the  crisis 
comes,  if  come  it  may,  and  God  forbid  it  should 
ever  come  in  my  day,  we  may  not  have  his  voice 
to  sustain  the  independence  of  the  three  co-ordi- 
nate branches  of  the  government;  and  I  ask  him 
now  to  review  his  opinion  upon  this  question  be- 
fore he  votes  upon  it.  I  ask  him  to  compare  his 
opinion  now,  with  the  opinion  tliathe  formerly 
held,  and  tell  me  which  he  is  willing  to  stand  or 
fall  by. 

I  have  detained  the  committee  longer  than  I 
should  have  done,  had  I  been  left  to  the  exercise 
of  my  own  judgment.  I  know  I  have  been  un- 
able to  do  justice  to  the  subject,  but  I  have  en- 
deavored to  present  my  views  without  recapitu- 
lating the  positioHS  that  have  been  more  ably 


216 


taken  by  others  on  this  question.  My  object 
has  been  to  present  specific  authorities  'to  show 
that  the  existence  of  tliis  power,  as  we  propose 
to  continue  it,  has  not  proved  detrimeutal  to  the 
interests  of  the  commonwealth,  or  of  her  citi- 
zens ;  and  that  it  is  our  duty,  coming  as  we  do, 
not  to  innovate  upon  great  principles,  which 
are  intended  to  secure  thelibertiesof  the  people, 
and  the  independence  of  the  different  depart- 
laents  of  the  government,  but  to  improve  them — 
it  is  our  duty,  I  say,  to  adhere  to  those  great 
principles.  Having  said  thus  much,  I  yield  the 
question  to  the  dicision  of  the  committee. 

The  question  was  then  taken  upon  the  motion 
to  strike  out  the  words  "  which  are  not  the  sub- 
jects of  impeachment,"  and  it  was  decided  in  the 
negative. 

The  question  then  being  upon  the  motion  to 
strike  out  "two-thirds,"  and  insert  "a  majori- 
ty," it  also  was  decided  in  the  negative. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  My  object  in  rising,  is  to  en- 
quire of  my  worthy  colleague,  what  he  means 
by  the  words  in  his  report  "the  governor  shall 
remove  any  one  of  them,  upon  an  address  of  two 
thirds  of  both  houses  of  the  legislature."  Does 
he  mean  that  the  governor  is  to  sign  these  ver- 
dicts, as  a  part  of  the  law-making  power,  or  Avhat 
does  he  mean?  If  he  is  to  sign  it  as  a  resolu- 
tion passed  by  both  houses,  as  a  component  part 
of  the  law-making  power,  then  he  can  veto  it, 
notwithstanding  it  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  two 
thirds.  I  have  conversed  with  some  gentlemen 
here,  and  there  appears  to  be  a  diversity  of  senti- 
ment in  regard  to  the  meaning  of  this  clause. 
It  was  necessary,  perhaps,  that  the  meaning 
should  be  distinctly  understood.  I  am  aware 
that  it  is  not  proper  to  refer  to  his  action  in  com- 
mittee, but  one  may  guess— and  I  guess  there- 
fore, that  the  committee  on  the  circuit  courts — 
whether  they  decide  that  a  majority  or  two  thirds, 
shall  be  requisite  to  the  passage  of  the  resolu- 
tion— intend  that  its  passage  shall  of  itself  ipso 
facto,  remove  the  juage,  and  that  the  governor 
shall  have  no  negative  power  on  the  subject.  If 
tlie  governor  is  not  to  have  a  negative  power, 
why  not  say  so?  If  he  is  to  have  such  a  nega- 
tive power,  when  and  in  what  way  is  it  to  be  ex- 
ercised? Is  the  legislature  to  be  brought  to  a 
stand  still,  like  the  legislature  of  Pennsylvania, 
in  the  days  of  old  John  McKay?  I  expect  not. 
I  do  not  design  to  make  a  speech  but  when  we 
come  into  the  house,  when  I  shall  have  the  op- 
portunity of  calling  for  the  ayes  and  nays,  I  will 
there  bring  the  question  to  a  test.  I  move  to 
strike  out  the  words  to  which  I  have  referred. 

•Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  had  forgotten  in 
my  somewhat  discursive  remarks  to  refer  to  the 
objection  indicated  by  my  colleague  against 
the  governor  having  any  agency  in  this  mat- 
ter of  impeachment.  The  committee  have  adopt- 
ed the  same  language  as  in  tlie  present  con- 
stitution. I  do  not  understand,  nor  does  my 
colleague  I  suppose,  that  the  governor  or  any 
one  else,  when  the  legislature  is  deciding  up- 
on questions  of  tliis  kind,  has  any  power 
over  the  subject.  The  language  of  the  constitu- 
tion as  preserved  in  the  report  of  tlie  committee, 
is  imperative  that  the  governor  shall  remove. 
It  leaves  no  discretion  with  the  executive  as  is 
left  with  the  British  crown,  or  as  left  to  the  ex- 
ecutive in  the  Massachusetts  cuastitution — where 


it  says  that  a  majority  may  remove  when  the 
governor  and  his  council  shall  concur.  It  is 
altogether  imperative;  and  after  the  passage  of 
such  a  resolution,  the  question  naturally  arises, 
who  is  the  most  appropriate  power  to  execute 
this  judgment  of  the  legislature?  If  the  legis- 
lature merely  passes  the  resolution  of  removal, 
and  then  adjourns  and  goes  home,  perhaps  the 
judge  might,  if  he  choose,  hold  on  to  his  com- 
mission and  attempt  to  fxercise  the  power. 
As  the  governor  is  the  chief  executive  officer  of 
this  commonwealth,  though  my  colleague  de- 
sires, and  I  think  I  shall  go  with  him,  to  strip 
him  of  all  power  save  that  of  appointing  a  sec- 
retary perhaps,  or  of  giving  entertaining  parties 
to  the  legislature  when  they  meet  here,  I  thought 
at  least  we  might  entrust  to  him  the  execution  of 
the  judgment  of  this  high  court  of  impeachment, 
or  high  inquisition  of  the  State.  And  looking 
a  little  further,  the  governor  is  to  issue  writs  of 
election  in  cases  Avhen  vacancies  occur.  And 
who  is  there  more  appropriate  than  the  executive, 
at  the  order  of  the  judgment  of  the  legislature, 
to  notify  the  people  by  a  writ  of  election  that  a 
vacancy  has  occurred.  Howev^^r,  if  I  can  con- 
ciliate my  colleague,  and  get  him  to  go  with  me 
for  a  single  provision  of  the  bill,  I  will  consent 
that  he  may  strike  the  governor's  name  out  of  it. 
Mr.  HARDIN.  I  would  cheerfully  yield  any 
thing  in  the  world,  and  be  cap  in  hand  to  my 
worthy  cousin  and  colleague;  and  his  turning 
around  to  me  and  saying  that  we  would  perhaps 
leave  the  governor  the  power  of  appointing  a 
secretary,  could  not  but  remind  me  of  what 
Eneas  said  to  Dido  when  she  required  him  to  re- 
late the  taking  of  Troy — 

"Great  Queen  what  you  command  me  to  relate, 
But  renews  the  sad  remembrance  of  my  fate." 

Now  I  enquired  more  out  of  curiosity  than  any 
thing  else,  of  the  worthy  President  of  this  body, 
who  I  consider  one  of  the  most  learned  men  in 
law  and  in  constitutional  law  in  Kentucky, 
what  was  meant  by  the  clause  to  which  I  have 
referred?  He  saicf  he  thought  it  gave  to  the 
governor  a  veto  power.  It  was  in  the  most  in- 
nocent manner  that  I  called  his  attention  to  it, 
and  his  opinion  ascertained,  my  suspicions  were 
aroused. 

The  gentleman  says  the  king  of  Great  Britain 
has  a  veto  upon  the  address  of  parliament  to  re- 
move a  judge.     I  know  that  is  so,  but  I  have 
examined  with  a  great  deal  of  care  and  attention 
the  exercise  of  the  veto  power  by  the  kings  of 
Great  Britain,  and  if  there  is  a  single  instance  of 
such  exercise  since  the  abdication  of  James  II, 
it  has  escaped  my  attention.     There  never  was 
a  nation  in  the  world,  that  except  in  name,  and 
a  great  many  forms  perhaps,  was  more  republi- 
can than  Great  Britain.     '1  he  crown  does  not  in- 
terfere with  the  acts  of  parliament  at  all.     It  is 
not  responsible  for  any  tiling  that  is  done  at  all — 
for  the  king,  in  the  language  of  their  govern- 
ment, can  do  no  wrong.     The  reason  is  that  he 
does  nothing  at  all.     His  ministry  is  responsi- 
ble for  all  that  is  done  wrong,  and  thoy  get  tho 
credit  for  all  that  is  done  right.     And  whenever 
the  nation  does  not  approve  of  wliat  the  minis- 
try has  done  or  is  doing  at  the  time,  they  turn 
them  out — and  the  signal  is,  bringing  them  to  a 
small  majority  in  the  liouse  of  commons.     The 
curiosity  of  this  liouse  has  perhaps  often  been 


217 


excited,  why  it  was  that  the  ministry  of  Great 
Britain  always  resigns  when  they  are  brought  to 
a  lean  majority,  say  of  twenty,  thirty,  or  forty 
votes  in  the  house  of  commons.  I  never  could 
get  exactly  at  the  reason  until  I  read  a  book 
prepared  by  a  gentleman  whose  name  I  regret  to 
have  forgotten,  who  had  been  a  member  of  par- 
liament for  about  thirty  years.  The  members  of 
parliament  get  no  pay — not  even  the  pitiful 
sura  of  three  dollars  per  diem.  Nor  are  they 
obliged  to  submit  to  the  humiliations  of  having 
an  attorney  general  or  first  auditor  enquiring 
whether  the  sum  could  not  be  reduced  to  two 
dollars,  if  they  sat  too  long.  Sixty  days  is  the 
time  these  two  great  functionaries  seem  to  have 
fixed  upon  as  the  period  during  which  we  are 
to  sit  in  this  house.  The  members  of  the  British 
Parliament  I  say  get  no  paj'.  The  profits  of  the  , 
collections  of  the  internal  revenue  in  Great ; 
Britain  are  worth  about  three  millions  a  year. 
Whenever  a  member  of  Parliament  votes  with  j 
the  Ministrv  they  give  to  him  the  appointing  j 
power  of  all  the  collecting  ofiicers  of  the  in- 
ternal revenue  in  his  county.  If  there  are  two  i 
members  who  both  vote  with  the  Ministry,  then  ' 
the  power  is  divided  among  them,  or  if  t"nere  is  ; 
one  member  from  a  county  for,  and  another ' 
against  them,  the  former  gets  all  the  power  of . 
appointment.  And  these  appointments,  it  was  ! 
notorious  they  sold,  and  sometimes  they  derived  ■ 
therefrom  from  50,000  to  100,000  pounds  ster- : 
ling.  Xow,  it  will  be  seen  why  it  is  that  the 
Ministry  resigns  the  moment  they  find  them-  \ 
selves  in  but  a  small  majority  in  the  House  of  | 
Commons;  they  know  the  treasury  rats  are  leav- 
ing them,  and  they  do  not  wish  to  be  left  alone,  ! 
because  tihese  rats  have  an  iiistinctive  premoni- 1 
tion  of  a  falling  liouse.  They  are  like  the  rats  ■ 
who  come  home  in  a  ship  from  a  voyage  around  I 
the  world,  and  who  have  an  instinctive  knowl- 1 
edge  as  to  whether  she  is  seaworthy  or  not,  and  | 
if  she  is  not  they  immediately  leave  her  and 
go  to  another  vessel;  that  is  the  reason. 

Now,  the  king's  veto,  as  I  have  before  said, 
h.as  never  been  exercised  within  my  knowledge 
since  the  abdication  of  James  II.  It  is  as  formal 
as  John  Doe,  in  the  trial  of  an  action  of  eject- 
ment. It  is  merely  necessary  to  the  form  of  the 
British  government.  And  whenever  the  British 
parliament,  by  the  action  of  both  houses,  should 
remove  a  judge,  the  king  would  never  dare  ex- 
ercise his  veto  power.  And  why?  '  Because  it 
would  produce  a  ferment  in  the  parliament,  and 
throughout  the  land,  that  woula  end,  God  only 
knows  where.  What  was  the  reason  that  Louis 
XVI  was  dethroned  and  imprisoned?  It  was 
but  for  the  exercise  of  merely  the  slightest 
veto  power.  And  they  called  him  Monsieur 
Veto,  and  his  wife  the  Austrian,  and  Madame 
Veto.  They  dethroned  Louis  and  brought  his 
head  to  the  block  in  France,  for  thwarting  and 
crossing  the  papular  will. 

Xow,  the  governor  has  no  hand  in  the  election 
of  these  ju<lges.  They  are  to  be  elected  by,  and 
to  be  responsible  to,  the  people.  Therefore,  he 
has  no  right  to  interfere  in  their  removal.  I 
have  the  utmost  confidence  in  the  present  gov- 
ernor, and  I  shall  have  the  utmost  confidence,  I 
suppose,  in  whoever  shall  be  his  successor. — 
And,  in  relation  to  the  present  governor,  we 
should  remember,  in  the  language  of  Queen 
28 


Elizabetli,  in  reference  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  "  we  frocked  him  and  will  unfrock 
him." 

There  are  a  great  many  motions  I  mean  to 
make  in  regard  to  this  bill,  and  my  colleague 
cannot  buy  me  off.  Not  at  all.  I  am  not  to  be 
bought  oft  with  a  crust  of  bread  or  a  sop  in  the 
pan.  I  strike  at  and  shall  vote  against  the  four 
ludges.  I  strike  at  and  shall  vote  against  the 
oranching  of  the  court  of  appeals.  I  have  been 
looking  over  the  two  first  volumes  of  Judge 
Cranch.  The  first,  I  think,  has  about  twenty- 
three  cases,  fifteen  of  which  came  from  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia.  The  second  has  about  twen- 
tv  cases,  and  all  but  five  of  them  came  from  the 
district  of  Columbia.  And  why?  Just  because 
justice  was  at  their  very  door,  and  whenever  yoQ 
bring  the  court  of  appeals  into  four  districts, 
they  will  exhibit,  not  a  District  of  Columbia  in 
miniature,  but  in  bold  relief.  I  believe  that  it 
would  so  overburden  the  courts  with  business, 
that  they  would  not  be  able  to  get  through  with 
it.  And  although,  perhaps,  it  would  be  a  per- 
sonal benefit  to  me,  l)y  bringing  the  court  nearer 
to  my  door,  I  shall  oppose  the  proposition  to 
branch  it. 

Mr.  GUTHRIE.  I  hope  these  words  will  not 
be  stricken  out.  The  belligerents,  from  my  old 
native  county  of  Nelson,  cannot  compromise 
this  constitution.  I  hope  and  trust  the  conven- 
tion will  act  discreetly  on  this  subject.  The 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  who  has  last  spoken, 
asked  me  what  was  meant  by  the  clause  to  which 
reference  has  been  made.  I  supposed  he  was 
acquainted  with  the  constitution  of  Kentucky, 
and  I  said  to  him  that  the  governor,  as  I  under- 
stood it,  would  have  a  right  to  exercise  the  veto 
power  in  this  case — that  is,  on  the  supposition 
that  we  retained  the  present  provision  of  the 
constitution,  and  which  is  as  follows: 

"  Every  order,  resolution,  or  vote,  to  which 
'  the  concurrence  of  both  houses  may  be  necessa- 
'  ry,  except  on  a  question  of  adjournment,  shall 
'  be  presented  to  the  governor,  and  before  it  shall 
'  take  effect,  be  approved  by  him;  or,  being  dis- 
'  approved,  shall  be  re-passed,  by  a  majority  of 
'  all  the  members  elected  to  both  houses,  accor- 
'  ding  to  the  rules  and  limitations  prescribed  in 
'  case  of  a  bill." 

Then,  if  we  remove  by  address  of  both  houses, 
it  is  an  order — a  resolution ;  it  goes  to  the  execu- 
tive, and  if  he  approves,  he  signs  and  executes 
it.  If  he  disproves  he  sends  it  back.  His  dis- 
approval amounts  to  a  call  for  a  re-consideratioa 
before  the  tribunal .  And  upon  that  re-consid- 
eration, if  a  majority  of  both  houses  insist,  the 
order  is  executed. 

I  have  made  up  my  mind  in  relation  to  my 
vote  on  this  subject  of  appointments  to  ofl5ce. 
And  that  is,  we  shall  take  these  appointments 
from  the  governor  and  give  them  to  the  people 
of  the  state  at  large,  or  of  the  districts,  counties, 
<fec.  To  that  extent  we  wiU  strip  the  executive 
of  all  power;  but  I  am  not  prepared  to  destroy 
the  office.  I  do  not  mean  to  attempt  to  make 
the  stool  stand  on  less  than  three  legs.  I  wish 
to  retain  such  powers  in  the  executive  as  is  due 
to  an  officer  elected  by  the  whole  people  of  Ken- 
tucky to  see  her  laws  faithfully  executed.  I  be- 
lieve it  is  just  and  proper  in  addition  to  this 
two  thirds  requisition  to  give  the  executive  the 


•218 


power  of  throwing  back  for  re-consideration 
any  hasty  act  the  legislature  may  have  perform- 
ed in  the  exercise  of  their  power.  The  judiciary 
is  the  weakest  branch  in  this  government.  They 
will  always  be  the  weakest,  constituting  now  in 
the  court  of  appeals,  and  in  the  circiut  court, 
and  in  the  chancery  court,  I  believe  some  twenty 
three  individuals — a  number  which  I  have  no 
doubt,  instead  of  increasing,  we  shall  diminish. 
We  have  confided  to  them  the  power  of  deciding 
upon  the  rights  of  individuals,  of  bringing  the 
public  justice  of  the  commonwealth  to  bear  up- 
on Jthose  who  offend  against  her  laws,  of  de- 
ciding the  rights  of  individuals  as  they  arise 
under  the  laws  and  contracts  permitted  in  soci- 
ety, peaceably,  quietly,  without  making  any  of 
those  appeals  to  the  great  interests  of  the  com- 
munity, or  the  passions  of  men  that  attract  to 
them  popularity,  and  with  that  popularity,  pow- 
er. And  in  the  discharge  of  those  duties,  the 
losing  party  attributing  too  often  his  defeat  to 
the  judge,  and  thus  exciting  murmurs  among 
the  people,  the  dissatisfaction  of  learned  and 
distinguished  counsel,  all  having  its  influence 
on  the  public  mind  against  them,  and  they  not 
mingling  with  or  taking  any  interest  in  the 
great  scenes  tliat  lead  to  popularity  and  power 
m  this  country — they  are  the  "weakest  power. 
They  will  be  the  weakest  power.  This  constant 
attrition  on  the  public  mind,  that  is  lower- 
ing them  in  the  estimation  of  the  people,  is 
constantly  going  on,  and  I  do  not  wish  to  throw 
down  any  one  of  the  barriers  that  is  to  sustain 
and  shield  them  from  wrong  and  oppression.  If 
they  deserve  to  be  removed,  let  it  be  by  two 
tiiirds  of  the  tribunal  we  have  organized.  And 
let  the  governor,  chosen  by  the  whole  people,  and 
the  representative  in  addition  of  that  minority 
who  have  voted  against  the  removal,  have  the 
power  to  recall  this  great  tribunal  for  a  re-con- 
sideration of  their  action.  Let  us  show  that, 
in  restoring  these  appointments  to  the  people, 
we  do  not  intend  to  strip  the  executive  of  all 

Sower  and  consideration — that  we  ex}ject  the  in- 
ividual  who  attains  the  proud  elevation  of  gov- 
ernor of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky  to  oea 
man  of  character,  intellect,  and  integrity,  such 
a  one  as  will  never  throw  back  upon  the  legis- 
lature their  action  for  re-consideration,  unless  in 
his  conscience  he  believes  there  is  ample  cause. 
In  such  a  case  a  re-consideration  is  necessary 
and  proper.  The  question  comes  up  legitimate- 
ly and  properly  when  we  come  to  the  powers  of 
the  executive,  and  not  just  in  this  place;  but  I 
am  prepared  to  meet  it  with  my  vote  now  as 
then. 

Mr.  TURNER  said,  with  a  view  to  expedite 
business  and  to  confine  the  discussion  to  the 
topics  under  consideration,  he  desired  to  propose  a 

{>lan  which  had  met  the  sanction  of  those  of  the 
eading  members  of  the  convention  with  whona 
lie  haa  consulted.  It  was  a  series  of  amend- 
ments, to  the  report  as  a  whole,  on  which 
■when  discussion  was  terminated,  the  question 
could  at  once  be  taken  separately.  The 
amendment,  which  had  just  been  discussed  was 
not  included,  for  he  concurred  with  the  presi- 
dent in  his  views  in  regard  to  the  veto  power. 
And  if  that  power  was  retained,  another  amend- 
ment to  the  report  would  be  needed  so  as  to  re- 
qaire  two  thirds  to  cuocur,  in  reiterating  Uie 


decision  of  the  legislature  upon  which  the  veto 
had  been  brought  to  bear.  The  constitution  as  it 
now  stands  only  requires  a  majority  to  reverse  a 
veto,  and  this  was  one  reason  why  he  supposed  the 
veto  power  did  not  apply  in  cases  of  these  re- 
movals from  office.  He  was  very  willing  that 
the  new  constitution  should  be  made  so  to  ap- 
ply, because  he  did  believe  that  judges  elected 
for  a  limited  term  would  have  any  too  much  in- 
dependence of  the  popular  feeling  and  preju- 
dices. He  then  expressed  a  desire  to  be  heard 
to-morrow  on  this  question,  and  read  a  series 
of  amendments  to  the  report,  which  he  intend- 
ed that  he  should  offer. 

Mr.  NUT  TALL.  I  thought  I  discovered  a 
very  few  days  after  we  assembled  here  that 
some  three  or  four  gentlemen  of  this  body  in- 
tended to  take  upon  themselves  the  privilege  of 
making  this  constitution,  and  that  the  balance 
of  us  might  exclaim,  "we  had  no  part,  or  lot  in 
the  house  of  David,"  and  "  to  your  tents  oh 
Israel."  If  that  be  the  case,  I  am  willing  now 
to  have  issued  a  writ  of  de  idiota  inquirendo  over 
the  balance  of  the  members,  and  to  set  these 
gentlemen  apart  to  revise  the  organic  law  of 
Kentucky. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  rise  to  a  point  of  or- 
der— I  may  as  well  make  it  here  as  at  any  other 
point.  Mr.  M.  then  called  attention  to  the  rule 
requiring  amendments  to  be  made  to  the  sec- 
tion at  the  time  uuder  (ionsideration,  as  being 
the  point  which  he  desired  to  raise. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  am  veiy  sorry  that  the 
gentleman  thought  proper  to  bring  this  motion 
down  on  me  just  as  I  was  about  to  do  something. 
If  the  independence  of  the  judiciary  is  to  be 
lost,  it  will,  if  this  committee  will  adopt  an 
amendment  to  the  eighth  section  that  I  now 
propose,  at  least  save  its  character. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  hope  we  will  pro- 
ceed to  take  the  question  on  the  amendments  as 
they  are  proposed,  and  when  we  come  to  tlie  Bth 
section,  the  amendment  indicated  by  the  gentle-  . 
man  will  be  in  order.  I  barely  wish  to  excuse 
myself  from  any  imputation  of  desiring  to  re- 
strain the  gentleman  from  Henrj'  or  any  other 
from  participating  in  this  work  of  framing  the 
constitution.  I  am  very  willinar  that  he  shall  do 
it,  and  I  know  he  will  whether  I  am  willing  or 
not.  I  know  him  very  well,  and  I  Avill  venture 
to  say  that  he  will  have  his  full  share  in  making 
this  constitution  in  some  way. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  Just  as  certain  as  the  Lord 
lives  I  will.     [Laughter.] 

Mr.  HARDIN.  1  want  to  meet  again  this  af- 
ternoon, so  as  to  give  my  friend  from  Henry  a 
chance.  I  would  rather  he  would  take  the  after 
part  of  the  day,  for  he  will  be  in  better  order 
then,  than  at  any  other  time.    [Laughter.] 

Before  Mr.  NUTTALL'S  amendment  was 
read,  or  any  queston  taken  on  Mr.  Turner's 
proposition,  the  committee  rose  and  reported 
progress .    Leave  was  granted  to  s  i  t  a  u^a  i  n . 

The  convention  then  adjourneJ. 


WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  24,  1849. 

APPROPRIATIONS   BY   THE   LEOISLATl  Hi:. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  JAMES,  the  following 
resolution  was  agreed  to : 


219 


Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  be  instructed  to  enquire  into  the 
expediency  and  propriety  of  soaraendingthe  con- 
stitution as  to  prohibit  the  legislature  from  passing 
any  bill,  or  resolution,  for  the  appropriation  of 
money,  or  creating  any  debt  against  the  state,  or 
for  the  payment  of  money  in  any  wav  whatever, 
imless  such  bill,  or  resolution,  shall  fee  voted  for 
by  a  majority  of  all  the  members  then  elected  to 
oaeh  branch  of  the  legislature,  and  said  vote  to  be 
spread  upon  the  journals  of  each  house. 

THE   ELECTIOJf  FOR   CASET   COITXTT. 

Mr.  BALLINGER  presented  a  memorial  ac- 
companied by  a  statement  of  facts  signed  by 
some  one  hundred  and  twenty  five  persons,  in 
relation  to  the  election  of  the  sitting  delegate 
for  the  county  of  Casey,  which  he  moved  to  re- 
fer to  the  select  committee,  having  that  subject 
in  charge. 

Mr.  HARDIN  made  a  brief  statement  of  the 
reasons  why  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
subject  had  been  delayed  so  long.     On  examin- 
ing the  case  he  found  that  it  involved   many 
difficult  questions.     He  was  satisfied  that  the 
i       gentlemen  who  did   not  fill  up  their  votes  on 
t       Monday  had  no  right  to  do  so  on  Wednesday, 
but  it  was  alleged  that  the  judges  of  elections 
informed  them  that  they  would  have  the  right 
to   do   so.     Important   questions   consequently 
arose    that    would    require    a    report  of   some 
length.     He  would  however  endeavor  to  present 
it  in  a  few  days. 
The  motion  to  refer  was  then  agreed  to. 

PEOPOSmOXS   TO   AJTEXD. 

Mr.  TURNER  offered  the  following  amend- 
ments to  which  he  yesterday  called  the  attention 
of  the  committee  of  the  whole,  that  they  might 
be  printed,  and  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole  having  in  charge  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  court  of  appeals. 

1 .  Strike  out  of  the  third  section  these  words 
— "  they  shall,  at  stated  times,  receive  for  their 
services  an  adequate  compensation,  to  be  fixed 
by  law,"  and  insert  these  words — "each  judge 
sliall  receive  for  his  services  not  less  than  $ — 
per  annum." 

2.  Strike  out  the  fifth  section. 

3.  Amend  the  seventh  section  by  striking  out 
these  words — "to  the  district  in  which  such 
judge  was  elected,"  in  the  second  and  third 
lines;  and  strike  out  of  the  fourth  line  the  words 
"by  that  district." 

4.  Amend  the  eighth  section  and  second  aud 
third  lines  bv  striking  out  these  words — "and 
who  is  a  resident  of  the  appellate  district  for 
which  he  may  be  chosen." 

5.  Strike  out  the  ninth  section  and  insert  in 
its  stead  this — "the  court  of  appeals  shall  hold 
its  sessions  at  the  capital  of  the  state." 

6.  Amend  the  tentn  section  by  striking  out  of 
the  third  line  these  words — "in  each  district  in 
which  a  vacancy  may  occur." 

7.  Amend  the  eleventh  section  by  striking  out 
in  the  first  line  these  words — "in  each  appellate 
district;"  and  in  the  second  line  strike  out 
the  word  "thereof,"  and  insert  these  words  in 
its  place — "of  the  state;"  and  strike  out  of 
the  same  line  the  words  "for  such  district." 

8.  Amend  the  twelfth  section  by  striking  out 


of  the  second  line  these  words — "the  district  in 
which  he  may  be  elected,"  and  inserting  in 
their  place  the  word  "state." 

9.  Amend  the  thirteenth  section  by  striking 
out  of  the  second  line  these  words — "in  any  dis- 
trict;" and  out  of  the  third  line  these  words — 
"  to  that  district"  and  the  word  "thereof;"  and 
out  of  the  fourth  line  these  words — "for  that 
district." 

10.  Strike  out  the  fifteenth  section,  which  is 
in  the  amended  report,  and  all  the  amendments 
proposed  to  the  fifth  section. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  called  for  a  division,  so  that 
the  question  could  first  be  taken  on  the  motion 
to  refer.    He  saw  no  necessity  for  the  printing. 

Mr.  GRAY  asked  if  it  was  in  order  to  present 
these  amendments  at  this  time. 

The  PRESIDENT  replied  that  he  thought  it 
was  entirely  in  order ;  indeed  he  had  no  ques- 
tion about  it. 

Mr.  GRAY  said  it  was  yesterday  decided  to 
be  out  of  order  for  a  member  to  present  diverse 
and  sundry  amendments  which  embrace  the  en- 
tire bill.  It  seemed  to  him  that  each  of  the  amend- 
ments should  be  offered  separately  to  each  dis- 
tinct section  to  which  they  apply,  and  that  they 
could  not  be  presented  in  mass  in  this  way. 

Mr.  DIXON  did  not  understand  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  to  offer  his  amendments  in  mass  ; 
he  simply  offered  them  in  the  house  that  they 
might  be  printed,  and  referred  to  the  committee 
of  the  whole,  with  the  view  of  offering  them 
separately  at  the  proper  time.  He  thought  it 
was  perfectly  in  order. 

Mr.  TURjfER  desired  to  explain:  one  of  the 
amendments  which  he  had  proposed  was  to  do 
away  with  the  district  system  in  the  election  of 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals.  The  neces- 
sity for  the  other  amendments  was  that  the  same 
idea  ran  through  many  sections,  and  when  they 
were  printed,  it  would  be  perfectly  obvious  to 
gentlemen,  whether  they  were  in  favor  of  elect- 
ing by  the  state  at  large  or  by  districts.  If  the 
convention  would  order  them  to  be  printed,  their 
bearing  on  the  report  of  the  committtee  on  the 
court  of  appeals  would  be  readily  seen.  It  was 
for  the  convenience  of  gentlemen  that  he  made 
this  motion,  and  not  with  the  view  of  submit- 
ting them  for  the  action  of  the  convention  in 
mass.  They  would  be  offered  separately  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  to  the  sections  to  which  they 
apply. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  enquired  whether  the 
adoption  of  this  motion  would  have  the  effect  of 
giving  precedence  to  these  amendments  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole. 

The  PRESIDENT  replied  that  the  committee 
having  reported  their  plan  for  a  court  of  appeals 
and  having  themselves  reported  distinct  amend- 
ments, he  conceived  it  was  in  order  for  any  gen- 
tleman to  make  distinct  amendments  or  propo- 
sitions to  that  report.  It  was  in  the  province  of 
the  convention  to  order  such  propositions  to  be 
printed  and  referred  to  some  committee;  but 
when  in  committee  of  the  whole,  the  rules  that 
govern  it  would  be  applied  and  these  proposi- 
tions would  not  have  any  precedence.  They 
might  be  offered  and  there  was  a  propriety, 
when  a  change  was  contemplated  in  the  whole 
a.spect  of  the  report,  that  the  member  should  in- 
dicate it,  and  that  it  should  be  printed,  so  that 


220 


its  bearing  might  be  seen.  Henoa  the  chair 
'  deemed  this  motion  to  print  and  refer  to  be  in 
order. 

The  motion  -was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  said  he  also  had  an  amend- 
ment of  which  he  wished  to  make  the  same  dis- 
position. It  was  designed  to  be  inserted  at  the 
foot  of  the  eighth  section. 

The  Secretary  read  it  as  follows: 

Provided,  however.  That  if  any  candidate  for 
the  office  of  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or  any 
of  the  circuit  courts  to  be  established  in  this 
commonwealth,  shall  engage  in  public  speaking 
or  treating,  during  his  candidacy  for  such  offi- 
ces, or  either  of  them,  upon  information,  in  wri- 
ting, supported  by  the  oaths  of  two  or  more  re- 
spectable witnesses,  to  the  attorney  general  of 
the  state,  he  shall,  in  the  event  of  the  election  of 
such  candidate,  thereupon  cause  to  be  issued 
from  the  clerk's  office  of  the  circuit  court,  at  the 
seat  of  goverament,  a  caveat  against  such  judge, 
which  shall  be  returnable  to  the  succeeding  gen- 
eral assembly  of  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky, who  shall  try  him  according  to  the  rules 
and  regulations  by  this  constitution  provided 
for  the  trial  of  judges  for  other  offences,  and  up- 
on conviction  thereof,  he  shall  be  adjudged  dis- 
qualified from  holding  said  office,  and  the  gov- 
ernor shall  not,  before  the  trial  nor  after  the  con- 
viction in  such  case,  commission  such  judge. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  said  it  was  very  evident  that 
the  judges  were  to  be  elected,  and,  although  his 
amendment  was  not  couched  in  the  language  he 
could  wish,  if  it  were  printed  the  convention 
would  be  enabled  to  see  the  idea  wliich  he 
wished  to  embody,  and  some  gentleman  might 
be  induced  to  take  some  steps  to  secure  a  provis- 
ion which  shall  prevent  the  judges  from  enter- 
ing into  the  election  contests  which  would  take 
place  under  the  new  constitution. 

The  motion  to  print  and  refer  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  the  convention  is  now 
engaged  in  the  most  important  business  upon 
which  it  will  be  called  to  act  during  the  session. 
I  think  the  judiciary  department  is  a  matter  of 
infinitely  more  interest  than  that  of  any  other 
department  or  all  other  departments  of  the  gov- 
ernment besides.  Now  I  conceive  that  an  inno- 
vation on  that  department  is  about  to  be  made 
by  this  convention  which  will  be  in  my  judg- 
ment fraught  with  consequences  of  the  greatest 
mischief  to  the  country.  No  government — no 
constitution,  that  does  not  secure  an  able, 
learned,  and  impartial  judiciary,  is  worth  pos- 
sessing. And  when  any  principle  is  about 
to  be  introduced  into  the  constitution  which 
would  be  subversive  of  those  great  ends  of  gov- 
ernment and  of  the  judicial  department  itself,  it 
seems  to  me  it  is  the  duty  of  every  person  thus 
convinced  to  offer  every  opposition  to  the  intro- 
duction of  such  a  monstrous  principle. 

I  had  hoped  that  the  minds  of  men  who-se 
ability  and  experience  in  connection  with  the 
courts  of  the  country,  and  with  the  framing  of 
constitutions,  and  the  introduction  of  great  con- 
stitutional principles  into  such  an  instrument, 
would  have  taken  a  part  in  resisting  that  great 
and  mischievous  innovation,  which  in  the  ab- 
sence of  a  better  champion  I  feel  somewhat  dis- 
posed to  offer  myself. 


I  understand  that  it  is  the  order  of  proceeding 
in  convention  that  propositions  in  relation  to 
the  judiciary  shall  be  submitted  to  the  liouse 
and  liave  a  reference  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  and  be  printed,  that  they  may  have  a 
proper  consideration.  I  did  suppose  rnysolf 
that  a  different  mode  would  have  been  adoptccl, 
but  I  shall  not  object  to  any  mode,  provided  it 
will  enable  each  member  to  present  his  views 
and  have  a  just  consideration  of  any  proposi- 
tion which  he  may  deem  it  important  to  present 
to  the  convention. 

This  affords  a  more  deliberate  consideration  to 
the  convention,  and  gives  the  advantage  of  hav- 
ing it  in  print,  so  that  the  members  of  the  con- 
vention may  examine  it  more  carefully  and  de- 
liberately. In  conformity  to  that  course,  and  to 
what  has  been  adopted  by  several  members  this 
morning,  especially  by  my  friend  from  Henry 
(Mr.  Nuttall)  I  will  submit  aproposition  which  I 
intend  to  offer  as  a  substitute  for  the  report  of 
the  committee,  in  relation  to  tlie  appellate  court; 
and  in  doing  so  I  do  not  propose  to  make  any  re- 
marks at  large;  but  I  will  say  to  the  gentleman 
from  Henry,  that  he  is  striking  but  at  some,  at  a 
small  portion  of  the  inherent  evils  which  will 
attend  the  new  system  of  submitting  the  election 
of  the  judges  to  the  popular  vote. 

I  think  myself,  sir,  as  we  value  an  able, 
a  learned,  and  an  impartial  judiciary — as  we  es- 
timate the  value  of  the  rights  of  persons,  of  prop- 
erty, of  liberty,  and  of  reputation — and  as  we 
expect  to  secure  to  the  citizens  their  enjoyment 
of  these  rights  through  the  intervention  of  laws, 
just  laws,  properly  administered  by  wise  and  in- 
dependent tribunals,  that  that  innovation  upon 
the  present  system  ought  to  be  resisted.  I  may 
stand  alone  in  this  body,  or  in  this  state,  in  vin- 
dication of  that  position;  but  whether  alone  or 
whether  I  have  allies  enough  to  enable  me  to 
maintain  it,  of  which  I  have  no  hope,  still  I  in- 
tend to  maintain  it,  because  I  believe  that  every 
duty  which  I  owe  to  my  state  and  to  the  govern- 
ment of  my  state,  requires  that  I  should  attempt, 
as  far  as  in  me  lies,  to  prevent  the  establishment 
of  any  such  principle  in  the  constitution  of  the 
state  of  Kentucky. 

I  will  submit  and  ask  that  it  be  printed,  a  sub- 
stitute in  support  of  which  at  a  proper  time  I 
may  say  something  in  cominitte  of  the  whole. 
I  regret  exceedingly  that  I  am  called  upon  to 
say  anything  in  its  support.  I  regret  exceeding- 
ly that  the  mind  that  conceived  such  a  proposi- 
tion as  has  been  offered  to  this  convention,  and 
which  pointed  out  so  justly  and  so  forcibly  its 
weakness,  and  the  attacks  to  which  it  was  per- 
petually accessible — that  that  mind  did  not  con- 
ceive it  to  be  its  duty  to  have  entered  upon  the 
vindication  of  the  present  principle  in  the  con- 
stitution which  stands  sanctioned  bv  time  and 
experience.  And  I  had  hoped  that  it  that  mind 
had  not  felt  bound  to  perform  sucli  a  work  that 
some  other  and  more  experienced  mind  would 
have  come  up  to  tlie  work.  I  regret  beyond  any 
language  I  can  use  to  liave  to  perform  a  task  so 
arduous  and  so  difficult.  But  still  unequal  as  I 
feel  to  the  task,  I  feel  bound  to  undertake  the 
work  myself  in  the  absence  of  a  better  champion. 

The  secretary  read  the  amendment  as  follows: 


221 


ARTICLE  — . 

Concerning  the  Judicial  Department. 

Sec.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  common- 
wealth, both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  eq\iity, 
shall  be  vested  in  one  supreme  court,  which  shall 
be  styled  the  court  of  appeals,  and  in  such  in- 
ferior courts  as  the  general  assembly  may,  from 
time  to  time,  erect  and  establish. 

Sec.  2.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  only,  wliich  shall  be  co-ex- 
tensive with  the  state,  under  such  restrictions 
and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  constitu- 
tion, as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

Sec.  3.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly 
qualified,  subject  to  the  conditions  hereinafter 
prescribed;  but  for  any  reasonable  cause,  wliich 
shall  not  be  sufficient  ground  ot  impeachment, 
the  governor  shall  remove  any  of  them  on  the 
address  of  two-tliirds  of  each  house  of  the  gen- 
eral assembly:  Provided,  however,  That  the  cause 
or  causes  for  which  such  removal  may  be  requir- 
ed, shall  be  stated  at  length  in  such  address,  and 
on  the  journal  of  each  house.  They  shall,  at 
stated  times,  receive  for  their  services  an  ade- 
quate compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  law. 

Sec.  4.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  consist  of 
four  judges,  any  three  of  whom  may  constitute 
a  court  for  the  transaction  of  business.  The 
judges  shall,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  be  conserv- 
ators of  the  peace  throughout  the  state.  The 
style  of  all  process  shall  be,  "The  Common- 
wealth of  Kentucky."  All  prosecutions  shall 
be  carried  on  in  the  name  and  by  the  authority 
of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and  con- 
clude, "against  the  peace  and  dignity  of  the 
same." 

Sec.  5.  That  the  governor  of  the  common- 
wealth shall,  from  among  the  judges  of  the  in- 
ferior courts,  and  such  persons  as  shall  have 
been  judges  thereof,  nominate,  and  by  and  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  appoint 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals. 

Sec.  G.  That  the  court  of  appeals  shall  ap- 
point its  clerk,  who  shall  be  a  citizen  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky,  and  who  shall  hold  his  appoint- 
ment for  and  during  the  term  of  years,  sub- 
ject to  be  removed  by  said  court,  upon  specific 
charges,  filed  by  the  attorney  general.  And 
whenever  there  may  be  charges  pending  against 
the  clerk,  the  said  court  shall  appoint  a  clerk 
to  perform  the  duties  of  the  ofliee  for  the  time. 

Sec.  7.  That  all  fees  accruing  for  services  ren- 
dered by  the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals,  sliall 
be  collected  from  the  proper  parties  under  the 
direction  of  the  auditor  of  public  accounts,  and 
be  paid  into  tlie  treasury  of  the  State,  and  said 
clerk  shall  receive  for  his  compensation  an  an- 
nual salary  of  $  The  number,  ap- 
pointment, and  compensation,  of  his  deputies, 
and  the  other  necessary  expenditures  of  his  office, 
shall  be  regulated  by  law. 

The  motion  to  refer  and  print  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said,  in  consequence 
of  some  remarks  thrown  out  a  few  days  ago  re- 
specting the  increase  of  counties,  he  felt  bound 
to  ask  for  the  appointment  of  a  select  committee. 


for  which  purpose  he  would  ofier  the  following 
resolution: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  members  be 
appointed,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  prescribe 
the  mode  and  manner  in  which  new  counties 
shall  be  established,  so  as  to  prevent  the  unne- 
cessary increase  of  counties 

The  resolution  was  agreed  to,  and  the  chair 
appointed  as  the  committee,  Messrs.  C.  A.  Wick- 
lifle,  Mayes,  G.  W.  Johnston,  Boyd,  and  Apper- 
son. 

HOUR  OF  MEETING  AND  ADJOURNMENT. 

Mr.  RUDD  offered  the  following  resolution: 

Resolved,  That  this  convention  ^^41l  meet  from 
and  after  this  day  at  9  o'clock,  and  continue  in 
session  until  two  o'clock. 

He  said  in  support  of  this  resolution  that  there 
had  been  three  amendments  offered  this  morning 
to  the  report  which  had  been  for  some  days  un- 
der consideration  in  committee  of  the  whole,  in 
relation  to  the  court  of  appeals,  and  as  much 
more  time  would  be  required  to  discuss  these 
amendments  he  thought  tlie  sittings  of  the  con- 
vention should  be  extended  so  as  to  afford  more 
time  to  gentlemen  to  discuss  them  than  they  liad 
had  heretofore.  Another  reason  was  that  he 
saw  manifested  in  this  house  a  disposition  to 
hold  evening  sessions.  If,  however,  this  reso- 
lution were  adopted  the  convention  would  be  five 
hours  a  day  in  session,  which  would  aflbrd  the 
convention  sufficient  time  to  do  its  business. 
For  these  reasons  he  submitted  this  resolution, 
and  if  there  were  to  be  any  difficulty  about  it  he 
would  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  PRESIDEI^T  suggested  that  it  would  be 
necessary  that  the  resolution  should  lie  over  for 
one  day  under  the  rules. 

Mr.  DIXON  said  the  resolution  was  entirely 
out  of  order.  The  gentleman  could  not  propose 
to  deprive  this  house  of  its  right  to  adjourn  at 
any  time. 

Mr.  RUDD  was  perfectly  aware  of  that.  He 
knew  the  house  had  the  right  to  adjourn  at  any 
time,  and  even  for  three  days  at  a  time,  but  if 
this  resolution  were  passed  it  would  hold  the 
house  to  a  responsibility  which  they  would  not 
disregard  by  adjourning  at  one  o'clock  or  even 
sooner. 

The  PRESIDENT  explained  that  by  the  rules 
of  the  house  10  o'clock,  A.  M.,  was  fixed  as  the 
hour  of  meeting,  which  could  not  be  changed 
without  a  two  third  vote.  That  portion  of  the 
resolution  in  relation  to  the  adjournment  he  held 
to  be  out  of  order. 

Mr.  RUDD  had  no  desire  to  be  out  of  order, 
and  therefore  he  would  amend  his  resolution,  so 
as  to  embrace  that  part  that  was  in  order,  on 
which  he  desired  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  BOYD  suggested  that  as  a  similar  resolu- 
tion had  been  heretofore  offered,  the  considera- 
tion of  which  was  postponed  to  Monday  next,  it 
would  be  desirable  to  postpone  this  resolution  to 
the  same  time.  He  would  therefore  make  that 
motion. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to;  ayes  42,  nays  34. 

LEAVE    OF   ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER,  leave 
of  absence  was  granted  to  Mr.  Wright,  for  an  in- 
definite  period,    that  gentleman    having  been 


2^2 


called  home  in  consequence  of  sickness  in  his 
family. 

COURT    OF    APPEALS. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  apjjeals. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  understand  that  although 
"we  are  restricted  in  our  action  to  one  proposi- 
tion at  a  time,  yet  we  are  permitted  to  embrace 
in  the  discussion  the  entire  merits  of  the  sub- 
ject. I  have  listened  to  this  debate,  the  ablest  1 
nave  heard  in  any  deliberative  body,  with  a 
great  deal  of  interest,  but  still  I  think  there  are 
views  of  the  subject  which  as  yet  have  not  been 
fully  presented,  and  it  is  under  this  belief  that  I 
now  trespass  on  the  patience  of  the  committee 
to  express  my  vicAvs  on  the  various  propositions 
touching  the  judiciary.  And  I  hope  the  fact, 
that  as  the  profession  in  the  pursuit  of  which  I 
have  expended  the  best  part  of  my  days,  is  inti- 
mately connected  with  this  subject,  will  be  my 
excuse  for  so  doing. 

I  cajiie  here  determined  to  remove  the  power 
of  appointing  the  judges  from  the  governor,  and 
to  go  for  their  election  by  the  people — although 
it  was  with  great  hesitancy  that  my  mind  was 
brought  to  that  point.  Butl  believe  the  country 
has  settled  down  in  favor  of  the  elective  princi- 
ple, and  that  the  majority  of  the  people  of  my  own 
county,  although  there  is  considerable  division 
of  opinion  there,  are  decidedly  in  favor  of  it; 
and  there  is  such  a  prejudice  now  existing 
against  executive   appointments,  as  would,  in  a 

freat  measure,  do  away  witli  their  usefulness, 
'here  is  an  opinion  prevailing  throughout  the 
country,  whetlier  right  or  wrong,  that  almost 
every  executive  that  has  been  elected  in  this 
commonwealth  of  either  party,  has  collected 
around  him  from  one  circumstance  or  another  a 
great  many  individuals  who  keep  the  great  bodv 
of  the  people  from  having  any  influence  with 
the  executive  department  of  the  government.  I 
do  not  believe  this  myself,  but  there  is  an  im- 
pression abroad  that  the  executives  have  been 
influenced  by  favoritism  and  by  cliques,  and 
not  by  considerations  of  qualification  and  ca- 
pacity in  their  appointments  to  office.  And 
there  have  been  many  appointment  made  with- 
in the  last  twenty  years  which  would  at  least 
give  a  color  to  such  an  impression.  I  have  there- 
fore determined  to  go  for  an  elective  judiciary, 
but  in  doing  that,  1  must  have  those  guarantees 
and  safe-guards  thrown  around  it  that  I  think 
are  necessary  and  essential  to  secure  its  indepen- 
dence. It  is  the  judiciary  of  every  country 
which  gives  character  to  its  government — and  it 
is  in  their  lionesty  and  purity,  their  intelligence 
and  independence,  that  the  safety  of  the  life, 
liberty,  and  property  of  the  citizen  depends.  The 
executive  or  legislative  department  to-day  may 
hold  one  language,  and  the  change  in  the  current 
of  public  opinion  may  cause  them  to  speak  an- 
other to-morrow.  In  the  congress  of  the  United 
States,  there  will  be  at  one  election  one  party, 
an(J  at  the  very  next  election  another  party  in 
power.  It  is  the  same  in  the  govcnimcnts  of  the 
various  states  of  this  union.  But  tlie  judiciary 
should  speak  the  same  language  in  all  times  and 
countries,  and  to  do  that  it  must  be  independent 
not  only  of  the  other  departmcuts  of  the  gov- 


ernment, but  in  some  measure  of  the  appointing 
power  itself  after  the  appointment  has  been  be- 
stowed. Is  any  man's  life  and  liberty  secure, 
where  he  has  a  judge  to  try  him,  who  is  the 
mere  index  of  popular  excitement  and  prejudice, 
and  whose  decisions  vary  as  it  varies?  Would  our 
rights  and  property  be  safe  under  judges  of  that 
description — tlie  mere  index  of  the  way  the  popu- 
lar breezes  are  blowing — and  what  would  be  the 
consequence  to  all  investments  of  property  and 
capital,  under  a  judiciary  system  which  every 
six  or  twelve  months  shoufd  hold  a  different 
doctrine  in  regard  to  the  rules  and  contracts  in 
relation  thereto'?  What  but  utter  ruin  and  de- 
struction? There  can  be  no  security  or  confi- 
dence in  any  thing  that  relat-es  to  such  a  judici- 
ary. 

I  have  had  great  doubts  about  the  propriety  of 
appointing  a  judiciary  for  a  term  of  years,  but 
the  public  opinion  of  the  country  is  so  entirely 
unanimous  in  favor  of  it,  that,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  my  own  feeble  voice  hardly  ought  to  be 
heard  as  expressing  doubts  in  relation  to  the 
subject  at  all.  Yet,  I  have  greater  doubts  about 
it  than  I  have  as  to  the  propriety  of  their  elec- 
tion by  the  people — much  greater.  I  believe 
that  an  elective  judiciary,  with  proper  guards, 
such  as  to  hold  their  offices  during  good  behavior, 
to  be  rendered  independent  by  the  constitution 
by  fixing  their  salaries,  and  to  be  removed  by 
two  thirds,  and  not  a  bare  majority,  may  be  bet- 
ter than  any  system  we  liave  ever  had.  "But,  un  • 
less  We  can  have  all  these  points  secured,  the 
government  cannot  get  along.  Look  at  the  gov- 
ernment we  are  about  to  pull  down.  I  supposed 
— to  use  a  farmer's  simile — that  when  we  came 
here  to  perform  that  work,  we  were  going  to 
leave  to  the  old  government,  at  least,  three  rails, 
but  I  think  now  the  chances  are  that  we  shall 
scarcely  leave  it  one  rail.  And  really  a  consti- 
tution IS  a  fence,  a  wall  thrown  around  to  guard 
the  liberties  and  rights  of  property  of  the  peo- 
ple. If  the  people  desired  all  power  in  tlieir 
hands,  they  could  have  it  without  a  constitution 
and  without  a  legislature.  The  very  object  of 
making  a  constitution,  and  for  whicli  they  sent '' 
us  here,  is  to  guard  the  people  against  the  re- 
sults of  an  unchecked  exercise  of  their  own 
power,  and  to  protect  the  rights  of  every  citizen 
in  the  commonwealth.  And,  the  constitution, 
instead  of  being  solely  for  the  benefit  of  the  ar- 
istocracy and  wealthy,  is  for  the  great  security 
of  the  poor  man,  of  the  weak  against  the  pow- 
erful and  the  mighty. 

The  poor  and  the  weak  have  no  security  in 
any  govenunent,  where  the  constitution  does  not 
restrain  within  their  proper  spheres  and  proper 
limits,  the  great  and  powerful  men  of  the  coun- 
try. It  is  the  poorer  portion  of  the  country 
who  are. the  most  interested  in  having  a  stable 
and  independent  judiciary  who  is  to  carry  the  gov- 
ernment into  effect?  Who,  when  the  legislature 
or  the  executive  are  disposed  to  trample  down 
the  rights  of  the  great  body  of  the  community  is 
to  protect  them?  Tliey  appeal  to  the  judiciary 
to  come  to  their  aid  and  to  say  to  these  otlier  de- 
partments— thus  far  your  power  goes  and  no 
further.  Gentlemen  talk  to  me  about  the  people,  . 
and  of  their  possessing  all  power  in  themselves.  I 
am  aware  of  that,  and  the  people  Iiave  sent  us 
hero  to  take  away  a  portion  of  that  power,  to 


223 


confide  it  to  their  agents,  and  to  put  restraints 
on  those  agents.  And  one  of  the  great  prin- 
ciples which  they  desire  shall  not  be  invaded,  is 
that  each  department  is  to  be  confined  in  its 
action,  to  its  own  particular  duties. 

Well,  I  have  indicated  that  I  am  going  for  an 
elective  judiciary.  In  going  for  it,  I  regret  sep- 
arating from  my  friend  from  Bourbon,  because  I 
believe  him  to  be  one  of  the  ablest  and  purest 
men  in  this  body.  I  have  had  my  doubts 
whether  in  separating  from  him  I  was  right, 
but  yet  I  have  determined  at  this  point  to  do  so. 
I  will  do  it  on  certain  conditions.  What  have 
Ave  come  here  for?  And  why  have  any  of  us  de- 
sired a  seat  in  this  convention?  Was  it  to  secure 
a  momentary  popularity  among  the  people,  to  be 
swept  away  by  the  first  adverse  breeze  that 
comes  along?  "Dr  was  it  not  to  do  that  which 
will  endear  ns  to  posterity  for  the  benefits  we 
have  confen-ed  upon  them,  and  give  to  our 
names  fame  and  veneration  among  those  who 
come  after  us,  and  at  the  same  time  furnish  an 
example  in  the  modeling  of  a  government 
which  other  states  would  be  proud  to  follow. 

If  the  first  set  of  officers  that  are  appointed 
under  this  new  constitution  we  are  about  to 
create,  are  not  men  of  the  highest  standard  of 
intellect,  integrity,  and  purity,  then  will  that 
new  constitution  become  obnoxious  to  the  peo- 
ple. It  will  be  said  by  every  body,  you  have 
made  a  government  that  cannot  be  administered, 
and  which  is  neither  practical  nor  right.  You  have 
done  away  with  the  old  constitution  made  by 
our  fathers,  and  you  have  given  us  one  in  its 
stead,  that  does  not  work  well,  and  that  does 
ziot  realize  that  amount  of  benefit  to  us  that  we 
expected  when  we  sent  you  here  to  make  it. 
We  may  get  thereby  an  ephemeral  popularity  of  a 
few  months  or  year's  duration,  but  its  beneficial 
and  practical  operation  for  years  to  come  is 
what  we  are  sent  to  secure.  And  how  shall  we 
secure  that?  We  must  do  it  by  making  the  ju- 
diciary the  great  pillar  of  the  government — 
that  branch  of  the  government  Avhichi  is  the 
guardian  of  liberty  and  of  every  right  that  is 
dear  to  man.  Its  action  should  always  be  uni- 
form, and  based  on  principles  the  same  in  all 
ages  and  at  all  times.  We  must  make  the  judi- 
ciary stable  and  independent,  and  then  only 
shall  we  make  it  a  benefit  to  the  community. 
Now,  twenty  five  years  ago,  when  men  were 
struggling  with  the  old  and  new  court  ques- 
tion, was  it  not  then  manifest  that  the  judici- 
ary was  the  weakest  department  of  the  govern- 
ment? As  then  organized  it  was  weaker  than 
the  legislature  or  the  executive?  And  in  fact 
the  legislature  was  then  more  powerful  than  both 
of  the  other  departments  together.  And  in 
what  we  are  now  doing  we  must,  in  some  way, 
supply  those  props  that  support  the  weakness  of 
the  judiciary,  which  we  are  now  about  to  take 
away.  We  are  stripping  away  all  power  from 
the  executive,  and  giving  it  to  the  people,  so 
that  that  department  of  the  government  when 
we  get  through  will  not  amount  to  anything. 
The  man  who  would  then  take  the  office"  would 
merely  have  a  right  to  be  called  governor,  and 
have  every  old  lady  and  tippler  in  the  country 
petitioning  him  to  remit  fines,  and,  perhaps  in 
addition,  the  power  to  pardon.  But  he  would 
have  no  patronage  in  his  hands,  and  if  all  that 


was  proposed  here  was  to  bo  carried  out  the 
office  would  be  a  mere  shadow. 

Well,  instead  of  adding  strength  to  the  judi- 
ciary, we  are  going  to  provide  for  its  election, 
and  to  change   the  tenure  of  their  offices  from 
good  behaviour  to  a  term  of  years,  and  then  as  a 
matter  of  course  bring  them  nearer  to  the  political 
power,  and  more  under  the  influence  of  the  legis- 
lature.    The  legislature   is   composed  of  indi- 
viduals mixing  with  the  people,  constantly  go- 
ing back  to  them,  and  having  perpetual  connec- 
tion with  them.     The  judiciary,  from  the  neces- 
sities of  their  avocations,  are  aloof  from  the  peo- 
ple, and  do  not  associate  with  them.     Indeed  it 
would  be  considered  unbecoming  and  undigni- 
fied for  them  to  go  into  those    circles    which 
the  political  portions  of  the  government  go  into. 
Moreover,  every  decision  of  a  judge  makes  him 
one  enemy  for  every  friend ;  and  it  must  also  be 
recollected  that  the  recollection  of  an  enemy  is 
an  hundred  per  cent,  more  retentive  than  that  of 
a  friend.     Then  you  have  all  the  power  of  the 
bar    in   opposition  to    the  judge.      I  wish  to 
speak  of  my  profession  with  respect,  but  it  is  in 
accordance  with  human  nature.     But  the  whole 
corps  of  lawyers  will  be  candidates  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  judge,  and  being  therefore  interested 
in  rendering  him  unpopular,  will  be  continual- 
ly striking  at  him — those  of  them  at  least  who 
desire  his  situation.     The  result  may  be  that  the 
country  may  be  influenced  to  believ'e  him  an  in- 
competent judge,  and  as  wanting  in  all  the  re- 
quisites that  enter  into  the  composition  of  an  in- 
telligent judicial    officer.      You    weaken    him 
therefore  in  his  position,  and  in  the  very  points 
where  he  is  now  most  strongly  sustainecl.     The 
judge  now  holds  his  office  during  good  behav- 
iour, and  what  is  the  effect?   Every  lawyer  is  de- 
sirous of  bein^  friendly  with  him — for  a  great 
many  people  think,  that  the  best  way  to  gain  a 
cause,  though  not  the  best  way  to  act'  is  to  have 
your  judge  like  you — and   "the    bar    ar  gene- 
erally   disposed  to  sustain  the  judge.     Again, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  there  will  be  an  ev- 
erchanging  current  of  popular  opinion  and  par- 
ties in  the  country.     Elect,  at  the  first  election, 
a  judge  of  one  pa'rticular  party,  and  by  the  time 
he  is  ready  to  go  out,  the   popular  current  will 
have  changed,  and  another  party  Avill  be  in  pow- 
er.    Then  political  prejudices  will  begin  to  be 
excited  in  the  choice  of  a  judge,  and  tlie  influ- 
ences  of  party  will  be  brought  to  sustain  and 
oppose  him.     With  all  those  influences  to  which 
I  have  referred  against  him,  it  seems  to  me  that 
we  should  sustain  him   in  every  way  that  we 
can.     When  we  look  at  the  great  power  that  will 
be  brought  to  bear  against  adjudge,  the  influence 
that  the  bar  will  be  inclined  to  use  against  him, 
and  the  fact  that  his  duties  claim  his  whole  and 
undivided  attention,   prevent  him  from  shaking 
hands  with  and  making  friends,  giving  parties, 
etc.,  we  are  undoubtedly  called   upon  to  give 
him  some  power  to  sustain   himself  against  all 
these  influences.     If  we  do  not,  the  government 
will  go  down  the  first  year  of  its  operation,  or 
to  use  a  more  homely  phrase,  it  will  stick  in  the 
mud. 

I  voted  yesterday  for  the  two  thirds  requisi- 
tion to  remove  the  judge,  and  I  am  now  in  favor 
of  still  further  sustaining  him,  by  allowing  the 
governor  to  have  a  discretionary  power  after  two 


224 


tliirds  of  tlie  legislature  shall  say  that  he  shall 
give  up  his  office,  of  returning,  for  good  cause, 
the  question  back  again  to  the  legislature  for  re- 
consideration. And  when  we  come  to  that  clause 
of  the  constitution  read  by  the  President  yester- 
day, I  want  instead  of  a  majority  to  reverse  tlie 
veto,  to  have  a  two  third  vote  required  also  for 
that  purpose.  This  was  one  reason  that  induced 
me  to  suppose  this  veto  power,  under  the  present 
constitution,  did  not  apply  to  cases  of  impeach- 
ment. It  would  be  a  most  extraordinary  feature 
in  a  government  to  say  that  in  the  first  instance 
it  should  take  two  thirds  to  remove  a  judge,  and 
the  governor  from  good  and  sufficient  reasons 
gives  his  veto  tliereupon,  that  then  a  bare  niajori- 
ty  should  be  sufficient  to  affirm  the  decision  not- 
withstanding that  veto.  I  wish  at  the  proper 
time,  to  move  to  amend  this,  so  as  to  require  a 
two  thirds  vote  after  tlie  veto — and  this  as  a  fur- 
ther protection  to  the  judiciary. 

And  now  as  to  the  question  of  salary.  I  think 
it  ought  to  be  fixed  in  the  constitution  at  a  suf- 
ficient minimum — to  do  what?  To  induce  the 
great  and  distinguished  lawyers  of  the  country, 
Avho  are  qualified,  and  have  reputation  and  tal- 
ents, and  character  for  honesty  and  firmness, 
and  all  other  requisites  for  a  competent  judge 
to  offer  their  services,  and  go  into  the  judiciary. 
For  I  have  no  wish  to  fill  our  benches  with  a  set 
of  little  ninepenny  judges,  under  an  elective  sys- 
tem, with  all  those  poAvers  to  which  I  have  refer- 
red arrayed  against  them.  They  would  never  be 
able  to  get  along — the  governmentwould  go  down 
— and  the  people  would  call  another  convention 
to  reverse  what  we  have  done.  It  is  essential  to 
the  firmness  and  independence  of  the  judiciary, 
that  it  should  possess  powerful  talents  to  sustain 
itself.  I  want  no  third  rate  judges  in  the  court 
of  appeals  and  in  the  circuit  courts  to  battle 
against  the  mighty  power  that  will  surround 
them  at  all  times.  It  will  never  do,  and  we 
must  offer  and  pay  a  salary  that  will  induce  the 
first  legal  minds  of  the  state  to  quit  the  practice  of 
their  profession  and  take  the  office.  As  a  mem- 
ber of  the  legislature,  I  have  never  been  a  high 
salary  man,  but  to  secure  the  first  class  men  we 
must'  pay  what  their  services  require  before  you 
can  organize  a  judiciary  here  that  will  not  cost 
raore  than  the  present.  I  believe  that  with  a 
dozen  or  fifteen  circuit  judges,  for  instance,  com- 
prising the  ablest,  most  talented,  and  hardest 
working  men,  that  they  will  do  the  business 
better,  and  in  a  shorter  time  than  the  nine- 
teen we  now  have.  I  mean  no  disrespect,  but 
80  far  as  I  am  acquainted,  there  are  very  few 
able  rnen  among  them.  I  believe  we  can,  by 
getting  better  men,  have  the  judicial  business 
perforined  at  as  cheap  a  rate  as  it  now  costs  the 
government.  We  would  liave  fewer  men  to  do 
it,  and  better  work  done  than  by  tlie  many.  I 
would  therefore  fix  in  the  constitution  such  a 
salary  as  would  secure  the  ablest  men  in  the  ju- 
diciary;  and  I  believe  if  we  do  not,  we  shall  not 
get  along  with  an  elective  judiciary.  I  am  sat- 
isfied it  will  not  do  to  give  the  legislature  the 
power  of  fixing  the  salary.  If  it  was  left  to  the 
next  legislature — I  have  looked  over  the  list  and 
they  are  very  clever  men — I  do  not  believe  on  a 
call  of  the  ayes  and  noes  they  would  fix  the  sal- 
ary of  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals  at  more 
than  $50(1.    1  hope,  as  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 


bon says,  that  none  of  us  intend  to  seek  for  of- 
fice, and  that  we  all  mean  to  do  right.  I  believe 
he  has  some  proposition  that  no  member  of  this 
convention  shall  be  a  candidate  for  office  within 
en  years.  If  that  is  adopted,  gentlemen  of  my 
years  may  as  well  give  up  all  hope.  But  I  am 
ready  to  vote  for  it,  if  it  would  not  cut  off  a 
great  many  worthy  young  men,  I  see  around  me, 
from  serving  the  people. 

There  has  been  something  said  about  district- 
ing and  branching  the  court  of  appeals.  Well 
you  have  discovered  pretty  early  in  the  session 
that  I  dare  to  speak  my  mind  on  any  subject, 
and  I  am  goingto  do  it  on  this.  Although  I  have 
moved  to  strike  out  the  provision,  I  am  not  very 
anxious  on  this  subject  of  districting  the  court. 
If  I  believed  that  we  were  to  have  a  judiciary 
to  be  composed  of  the  members  of  one  party 
alone  I  would  not  go  for  it.  I  believe  the  court 
ought  to  be  composed  of  members  of  both  par- 
ties, and  it  has  been  my  experience  in  attending 
court,  that  it  would  be  better,  and  I  have  seen 
courts  organized  in  that  way,  at  all  times,  and 
that  there  would  be  less  prejudice  against  it. 
And  if  I  believed  there  would  oe  a  disposition 
to  make  this  a  political  court,  and  that  the  two 
parties  would  meet  and  nominate  judges  of  their 
own  party  exclusively,  though  I  belong  to  a  party 
now  in  a  political  majority  in  this  state,  I  would 
not  make  this  motion .  I  make  it  because  it  seems 
to  be  connected  with  this  branching  of  tlie  court 
of  appeals,  because  as  it  is  left  to  the  legislature 
to  make  the  districts  they  might  throw  into  the 
court  men  not  so  well  qualified  as  we  would  get 
having  the  whole  state  to  elect  from.  There  may 
be  districts  in  the  state,  that  have  no  individual 
sufficiently  qualified  for  the  office.  In  my  ex- 
perience it  has  been  a  great  while  since  I  thought 
the  court  of  appeals  was  an  able  body.  I  will 
not  dispute  that  there  are  clever  men  in  it,  but 
if  there  has  been  any  man  of  transcendent  talents 
there,  for  a  long  time,  then  I  have  been  mistaken. 
I  think  there  ought  to  be  one  man  of  towering 
abilities  there — one  who  could  take  the  great 
questions  of  boundary  between  the  state  and  fed- 
eral power  when  it  comes  up  there,  and  grapple 
with  them  like  a  giant.  I  believe  that  we  ought 
to  frame  such  a  constitution,  and  offer  such  a  sal- 
ary as  would  command  such  a  man  at  the  head 
of  the  judiciary  of  a  greatand  independent  state. 

As  to  branching  the  court  I  am  against  it  in 
every  way  and  shape  in  which  it  could  be  nam- 
ed, because  then  I  believe  you  never  will  get  a 
set  of  men  to  accept  the  offices,  for  any  salary 
this  government  will  give.  Sucli  a  set  of  men  I 
mean,  as  ought  to  fill  them.  A  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals  is  not  like  the  circuit  judge. 
For  the  latter,  all  that  is  necessary  is  that  he 
should  bo  a  sensible  man,  and  a  good  lawyer, 
and  be  able  to  come  to  correct  conclusions.  He 
is  not  required  to  write  them  out  for  publica- 
tion. But  when  you  come  to  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, you  must  liave  men  of  learning,  education 
— rnen  of  transcendent  abilities  if  you  can  get 
them,  because  the  state  that  pays  only  for  ordi- 
nary talents,  in  these  times,  throws  away  its 
money.  You  liad  better  give  a  large,  a  higli  sal- 
ary, and  let  your  judiciary  be  stable  and  uniform 
in  its  decisions,  instead  of  vacillating  and  vary- 
ing with  every  flare  up  that  public  excite- 
ment may  array  against  them.     Let  them  have 


225 


character,  talents,  and  learning,  so  as  to  be 
able  to  carry  public  opinion  witli  them.  Let 
them  move  on  like  a  torrent,  and  public  opinion 
will  move  with  them.  They  have  to  write  out 
their  opinions,  to  give  their  reasons,  and  to  print 
them,  and  they  should  have  the  talents  and  the 
learning  requisite  for  this.  To  secure  all  these 
qualifications,  we  should  pay  them  not  only  a 
good  salary,  but  give  them  the  power  of  sustain- 
ing their  reputation.  A  distinguished  man  at 
the  bar  is  not  going  onto  the  bench,  if  he  did 
not  believe  it  would  increase  his  reputation.  As 
for  salary,  you  never  will  give  one  which  of  it- 
self, would  make  it  worthy  in  a  pecuniary  point 
of  view,  to  induce  the  master  spirits  of  the  state 
to  take  the  position.  There  must  be  some  other 
thing,  and  what  is  that'?  The  honor  of  the  sta- 
tion, the  prospect  of  handing  their  names 
down  as  the  great  expounders  of  the  law  and 
constitution,  and  who  will  be  remembered  for 
ages  to  come  for  their  intelligence  and  ability. 
You  must  give  them  an  opportunity  to  do  all 
this.  And  do  you  suppose  that  four  men — for  I 
do  not  believe  you  can  get  along  with  three — of 
the  first  order  of  talents,  who  are  making  from 
$6,000  to  $10,000  a  year  by  their  profession,  will 
take  a  seat  on  the  bench  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
and  be  made  a  set  of  mere  tinkers  to  ride  around 
the  state  from  point  to  point,  and  place  to  place. 
When  you  and  I  wereboys,  there  was,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, before  Kentucky  became  rich,  and  we  got  out 
China  ware  and  plate,  and  all  that — there  was  a 
set  of  men  called  tinkers,  who  went  around  pick- 
ing up  all  the  old  pewter  spoons,  and  running 
them  over  again — thus  making  old  spoons  new. 
Xow  sir,  this  proposition  to  branch  the  court  of 
appeals  puts  me  in  mind  of  these  tinkers — and  you 
will  have  tinkers  for  your  judges,  if  you  adopt 
this  proposition. 

How  many  causes  are  there  now  pending  in  the 
court  of  appeals?  We  have  seen  it  .stated  in  the 
newspapers,  and  I  know  it  is  so  from  examina- 
tion, that  out  of  seven  hundred  causes  in  that 
court,  there  are  about  three  hundred  of  them  at 
least,  every  year,  where  written  opinions  are 
considered' necessary  to  settle  and  define  the 
rights  of  property  and  all  other  rights,  for  the 
courts  of  this  commonwealth.  Well,  before 
thev  come  to  the  facts,  there  are  the  principles 
of  law  involved  in  the  case  to  be  determined, 
and  the  judges  have  to  go  to  the  law  library  and 
read,  and  examine,  and  decide  which  of  these 
principles  are  applicable  to  the  case.  And  after 
all  this  is  done,  then  they  have  the  labor  of  wri- 
ting out  the  opinion.  In  delivering  such  opin- 
ions, involving  as  they  often  do,  the  rights  of 
property  to  an  enormous  amount,  not  only  to 
the  suitors  concerned,  but  to  the  people  general- 
ly, how  essential  it  is  that  every  word  should  be 
weighed,  and  every  principle  thoroughly  examin- 
ed. It  should  not  DC  put  forth  as  the  result  of 
hasty  labor,  but  of  the  most  matured  delibera- 
tion. They  are  put  in  the  book,  and  become  in 
fact  a  part  of  the  law  of  Kentucky.  If  there  is 
a  mistake  in  the  opinion  thus  laid  down,  it  may 
be  the  cause  of  dive,sting  the  citizen  of  his  prop- 
erty, or  of  inducing  men  to  invest  their  property 
and  engage  in  contracts,  only  to  be  rumea  and 
destroyed.  And  these  opinions  thus  published 
too  are  the  guides  to  the  judges  of  the  inferior 
courts  in  their  administration  of  the  law,  and 
29 


to  the  people  in  their  understanding  of  it.  And 
suppose  now  that  each  judge  has  about  one  hun- 
dred of  these  opinions  a  year  to  write  out,  if  he 
is  put  on  the  bench  of  the  brasnch  court,  how  is 
he  going  to  do  it?  Will  it  not  occupy  him  one 
whole  year  if  he  stays  at  home,  without  riding 
about  from  point  to  point? 

I  should  have  no  objection  to  the  branching  of 
the  court,  if  only  the  great  lawyers  of  the  state 
would  come  before  it  and  argue,  in  order  that 
the  court  might  thus  be  sure  of  all  the  aid  whicli 
such  distinguished  and  learned  minds  could 
bring  to  their  assistance,  in  deciding  upon  great 
and  important  cases,  involving,  as  I  said  before, 
immense  interests.  I  have  no  doubt  there  are 
able  men  and  lawyers  in  every  part  of  the  state, 
but  you  will  have  a  crop  of  lawyers  come  in 
and  nil  your  court  house,  if  it  is  not  pretty  large, 
under  the  branching  system,  that  will  not  be  so 
able.  And  they  have  as  much  right  to  be  heard 
as  others;  nor  do  I  object  to  it.  And  there  will 
be  other  things  taking  place.  I  have  argued  in 
the  present  court  of  appeals,  and  I  know  an  in- 
stance of  a  lawyer  from  the  southern  part  of  the 
state,  arguing  a  ease  in  that  court  involving  a 
question  of  property,  when  he  and  his  client  re- 
ally wanted  to  lose  it.  Of  course,  in  deciding 
against  him  the  court  would  be  doing  just  what 
the  lawyer  and  his  client  desired.  But  for  aught 
I  know,  this  is  a  case  which  might  happen  un- 
der any  organization  of  the  court  we  might 
adopt.  Can  you  have  at  each  location  the  court 
may  decide  upon  the  law  library  that  we  have 
here?  Those  who  do  not  know  much  about  the 
legal  profession  may  think  a  library  a  very  un- 
important matter,  and  that  the  judges  ought  to 
know  all  about  the  law.  I  am  asked  myself, 
often,  'what,  are  you  reading  vet?  why,  I  thought 
you  knew  all  the  law?'  1" bat  is  a  great  mis- 
take. No  man  ever  lived  to  learn  all  the  law, 
and  even  if  he  did,  he  might  become  a  little 
cloudy  on  the  subject,  especially  when  he  is  call- 
ed upon  to  argue  or  decide  a  cause,  he  may  find 
it  very  necessary  to  read  and  refresh  his  memory. 
Chief  Justice  Marshall  himself  never  decided  a 
difiicult  case,  I  dare  say,  without  refreshing  his 
memory  by  a  reference  to  the  decisions  of  the 
American  and  English  courts.  And  it  is  prop- 
er that  every  judge  should  do  the  same,  if  he 
wishes  his  decisions  to  square  with  the  estab^ 
lished  principles  of  law.  What,  then,  will  be 
the  cost  of  three  law  libraries?  As  stated  in 
the  newspapers,  $3000  will  not  furnish  such  9 
library  as  the  court  of  appeals  should  have.  I 
believe  the  library  of  the  law  school  at  Lexing- 
ton did  not  cost  less  than  $10,000,  and  the  court 
of  appeals  ought  to  have  one  in  nowise  its  infe- 
rior. You  must  have  some  man  and  a  waggon 
to  carry  the  books  around,  or  else  you  must  pur- 
chase a  library  for  each  district.  You  must 
build  a  court  house  for  each  district,  or  else  be  a 
tenant  of  the  county,  and  pay  rent  for  the  use  of 
their  court  house.  Then  you  must  have  for  each 
court  a  sergeant,  a  tipstaflf,  a  man  to  make  fires, 
etc.,  and  all  the  other  attendants  to  a  court.  The 
increased  expense  is  therefore  a  great  objec- 
tion to  the  system.  It  would  be  much  more  ex- 
pensive than  the  present  system,  of  which  the 
people  complain,  and  that  is  one  evil  among 
others  in  regard  to  it,  which  they  desire  to  have 
obviated. 


226 


There  is  another  point  of  vieAV — I  hope  I  shall 
not  be  misunderstood.  I  have  the  highest  re- 
spect for  the  profession  of  which  I  am  a  mem- 
ber, and  I  believe  it  to  be  an  honorable  and  a 
useful  one,  that  it  has  stood  up  for  the  rights 
of  the  people  whenever  they  have  been  attack- 
ed. But  like  all  other  avocations,  self-interest 
has  some  little  influence  over  them.  The  elder 
gentleman  from  Nelson  and  myself  had  some 
conversation  in  relation  to  the  federal  court. — 
We  counted  the  number  of  causes  in  the  United 
States  supreme  court,  and  we  found  that  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia,  small  in  population  and  ter- 
ritorial extent  as  it  is,  has  about  one-fifth  of  the 
whole  number.  Such  would  be  the  eff'ect  in  the 
districts  if  you  branch  the  court.  Do  we  not 
now  see  when  a  court  house  is  located  in  a  little 
neighborhood,  however  peaceable  it  has  been 
before,  very  soon  every  body  gets  to  law,  and 
litigation  increases  rapidly  and  to  a  great  ex- 
tent. Carry  a  branch  of  the  court  of  appeals  to 
every  neighborhood,  and  what  will  be  the  effect? 
Instead  of  bringing  up  such  causes  as  engage 
the  attention  of  that  court  here,  cases  involving 
the  interests  and  rights,  very  often,  of  the  whole 
people,  a  lawyer,  when  his  client's  case  is  lost, 
would  perhaps  tell  him  that  the  merits  of  the 
case  were  in  doubt,  but  there  was  a  technical 
error,  by  Avhich,  if  carried  xip,  the  other  party 
could  be  put  to  an  expense  of  from  $50  to  $100, 
as  he  would  have  to  pay  all  the  clerk's  and  law- 
yer's fees  on  both  sides.  The  man  who  was  de- 
feated, feeling  hurt  and  excited,  would  agree 
at  once  to  carry  up  the  cause,  as  a  matter  of 
spite.  And  the  result  will  be,  that  a  host  of 
causes  will  be  carried  up,  to  result  in  the  benefit 
of  no  person,  except  the  clerk  and  others  who 
attend  at  the  court  house.  Now  all  will  agree 
'  that  this  is  a  condition  of  things  which  ought 
not  to  be  encouraged. 

There  are  other  bearings  of  this  question 
which  might  be  referred  to,  but  as  others  intend 
to  speak,  I  will  not  occupy  time  by  touching 
upon  them. 

Now  as  to  the  number  of  judges.  For  many 
years — I  dislike  to  tell  how  many,  because  I  am 
told  that  I  look  like  a  younger  man  than  I  am 
really — I  have  practiced  in  the  court  of  appeals, 
and  my  experience  has  been  that  these  judges  at 
present  have  not  the  time  to  write  out  their  opin- 
ions as  they  should  do.  As  the  court  is  now  or- 
ganized without  branching,  they  have  not  time 
fully  to  examine  the  subject,  and  mature  and 
■write  out  their  opinions  thereon.  And  one  cause 
of  the  confusion  in  practice,  and  the  frequency 
of  appeals,  is  that  too  often  these  opinions 
do  not  settle  any  point  of  law.  I  once  heard 
Judge  Ewing  say,  and  he  was  a  sensible  man, 
"that  the  court  had  not  time  to  write  out  short 
opinions."  It  looks  a  little  paradoxical,  but  it 
is  as  much  a  truism  as  any  thing  that  was  ever 
said.  In  such  an  opinion  generally  the  law 
points  are  all  thoroughly  sifted,  and  fully  exam- 
ined, and  stated  clearly  and  distinctly.  Read 
the  opinions  in  the  court  of  appeals  where  they 
have  Deen  hurried  out  by  a  press  of  business,  al- 
though they  may  have  been  written  by  able  men, 
of  reasonable  capacity,  who  understood  tlieir 
business,  and  you  will  find  that  one  quarter  of 
their  opinions  are  ratlier  of  the  character  of  a 
jeview  of  arguments  than  of  a  decision  with 


the  reasons  therefor  fully  and  distinctly  set 
forth.  All  this  results  from  a  want  of  time.  I 
shall  bo  in  favor  of  the  four  judges,  and  for  an- 
other reason — for  the  very  reason  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  gave  as  influencing  him  to  oppose 
it.  He  says  if  a  cause  comes  up  and  the  court  is 
equally  divided  and  it  is  therefore  affirmed,  and 
if  the  same  question  comes  up  in  a  reverse  view, 
that  the  court  being  again  divided  it  is  also  af- 
firmed, and  thus  a  contrary  decision  on  the  same 
principle  is  established.  I  have  always  sup- 
posed that  when  the  first  cause  was  decided  it 
would  be  considered  as  establishing  the  prece- 
dent, and  be  the  law,  unless  there  should  be 
cause  for  the  whole  court  unanimously  to  reverse 
it.  And  if  the  court  of  appeals  did  stand  two 
and  two,  there  Avould  be  the  circuit  judge  on 
one  side,  and  thus  the  case  would  be  decided  by 
three  against  two.  On  the  other  hand  with 
three  judges,  unless  the  court  was  unanimous, 
every  decision  would,  counting  in  the  circuit 
judge,  stand  two  and  two. 

There  has  been  something  said  in  reference  to 
an  election  by  ballot.  I  do  not  consider  it  an 
important  matter.  Most  of  our  people  have  in- 
herited from  Virginia  the  custom  of  voting  open- 
ly and  manly  by  viva  voce.  And  the  idea  that 
a  citizen  would  be  afraid  to  vote  against  the 
judge  because  he  might  be  influenced  thereby 
against  him,  seems  to  me  rather  a  degrading  idea. 
I  do  not  believe  that  our  population  is  composed 
of  any  such  material.  I  believe  there  is  a  fear- 
less independence  in  the  disposition  of  the  elec- 
tive franchise  among  our  people,  and  that  no 
man  cares  who  knows  hoAV  he  votes.  But  there 
are  a  set  of  slanderers  who  go  about  attacking 
candidates  although  they  maybe  as  pure  as  the 
angels;  but  I  will  not  refer  to  that.  As  to  giv- 
ing the  vote  by  ballot,  a  great  portion  of  our 
people  unfortunately  are  not  capable  of  filling 
out  their  ballots,  and  we  should  under  that  sys- 
tem have  at  every  election  fifty  or  one  hundred 
political  managers,  who  would  be  inducing  men 
to  come  to  them,  and  get  their  votes  filled  out. 
Such  a  system  I  do  not  desire  to  see  introduced 
in  this  state. 

Something  has  been  said  about  the  competency 
of  the  people  to  elect  their  officers.  It  is,  I  be- 
lieve, pretty  generally  admitted  that  they  are  ful- 
ly competent  to  elect  their  judges  and  clerks  of 
the  courts.  But,  as  regards  the  fitness  of  clerks 
for  office,  I  would  not  only  require  a  certificate 
of  competency,  but  I  would  require  the  further 
guarantee  that  the  candidate  for  a  clerkship  had 
served  two  years  apprenticeship  before  present 
iiig  himself  as  a  candidate  for  office.  It  is  an 
office  that  should  be  filled  only  by  competent 
persons,  those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  du- 
ties of  the  office  by  experience. 

A  great  deal  depends  ujjon  the  accuracy  of  a 
clerk,  a  large  amount  of  property  may  depend 
on  his  correctness  in  drawing  up  the  records  of 
the  court  in  which  important  papers  are  embraced. 
A  slip  of  the  pen  may  bring  entire  ruin  upon  a 
man  who  has  business  before  the  court. 

In  drawing  up  the  record.s  of  the  court  the  ut- 
most precision  is  requisite,  for,  although  they 
are  read  over  in  the  morning,  it  is  seldom  that 
the  judge  pays  attention  to  their  correctness,  ow- 
ing to  the  interruptions  that  constantly  occur.  If 
you  have  a  clerk,  who  is  not  acquainted  with 


227 


his  duties,  you  are  in  danger  of  doing  irrepara- 
ble injury  to  persons  having  business  before  the 
court.  A.  mere  slip  of  the  pen,  in  drawing  up 
an  order  of  court,  may  ruin  a  man.  It  is  very 
important,  therefore,  that  there  should  be  a  form 
of  proceedings  which  should  be  perfectly  un- 
derstood by  every  candidate  for  a  clerkship. 
I  am  in  favor  of  having  some  guarantee  when  a 
man  comes  before  the  community  as  a  candidate 
for  clerkship,  that  he  has  the  requisite  qualifica- 
tions. You  might  as  well  permit  a  man  to  un- 
dertake the  business  of  a  silversmith  or  watch- 
maker, without  having  any  knowledge  of  the 
business,  as  to  permit  him  to  undertake  the  du- 
ties of  a  clerk  without  the  proper  qualifications. 
It  is  a  trade  by  itself,  which  ought  to  be  under- 
stood in  all  its  parts.  I  suggest,  therefore,  for 
the  consideration  of  the  committee,  that  the  can- 
didate for  a  clerkship  ought  not  only  to  be  re- 
quired to  procure  a  certificate  of  qualification, 
but  he  should  be  required  to  serve  for  two  years, 
at  least,  before  presenting  himself  for  election. 
I  liave,  myself,  assisted  many  young  men  in  ob- 
taining a  clerkship  by  putting  them  in  posses- 
sion of  the  proper  formula  of  business.  But,  in  a 
few  weeks  after  their  aiapointmeut  they  had  for- 

fotten  the  routine,  and  they  were  no  more  capa- 
le  of  performing  the  duties  of  clerk  than  a  man 
who  had  never  had  anything  to  do  with  otfice. 
I  would  provide,  if  I  had  my  way,  that  the  can- 
didate for  a  clerkship  should  previously  serve  a 
two  years  apprenticeship. 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON".  I  do  not  desire  my  posi- 
tion to  be  misunderstood,  and  therefore  I  will  oc- 
cupy the  time  of  the  committee  for  a  very  few 
minutes  to  state  the  views  I  entertain.     I  am  op- 

Fosed  to  the  election  of  judges  altogether,  though 
will  not  dwell  on  that  point  now.  There  is  an- 
other question  to  which  I  shall  address  myself, 
and  if  that  can  be  secured  my  objection  to  the 
elective  principle  will  be  somewhat  diminished. 
The  independence  of  the  judiciary  has  ever  been 
preserved  by  a  life  tenure.  It  has  been  so  pre- 
served in  England  as  well  as  in  this  country; 
and  the  destruction  of  the  life  tenure  will  be  the 
destruction  of  the  independence  of  the  judiciary, 
imless  you  make  the  judges  ineligible  for  a  re- 
election. A  long  term  of  service  and  ineligibil- 
ity alone  can  preserve  that  independence  which 
is  so  essential  to  the  proper  administration  of 
justice,  if  the  life  tenure  be  destroyed.  Gentle- 
men must  decide  between  a  dependent  and  an 
independent  judiciary.  I  know  it  has  been  said 
that  the  judges  in  England,  being  dependent  on 
the  crown  for  their  appointment,  were  the  obse- 
quious tools  of  the  reigning  monarch.  And 
what  will  be  the  condition  of  things  here  if  you 
make  your  judges  dependent  on  the  people  in  a 
popular  election?  What,  sir,  were  the  views  of 
the  convention  party  on  this  subject,  which  they 
published  to  the  people  of  Kentucky  upwards  of 
a  year  ago,  to  induce  them  to  call  a  convention  for 
the  purpose  of  framing  a  new  constitution'?  Were 
they  not  unequivocally  in  favor  of  an  independent 
judiciary?  They  were.  And  were  it  not  that 
such  sentiments  were  put  forth  in  the  published 
manifesto  of  that  party,  this  convention  would 
not  have  been  called  by  the  people.  I  have  be- 
fore me  the  language  which  the  convention  party 
used  in  addressing  the  people  on  this  subject; 
and  hence,  sir,  there  can  be  no  mistake  about  it. 


for  it  is  susceptible  of  but  one  interpretation. 
From  that  manifesto  I  make  the  following  quo- 
tation : 

"W^hilst  we  are  in  favor  of  such  modes  of  ap- 
'pointment  of  judges  as  will  strictly  preserve 
'the  independence  of  the  judiciary,  and  opposed 
'to  any  mode  which  would  be  calculated  to 
'weaken  or  destroy  the  independence  of  that 
'department,  we  hold  that  the  members  of  the 
'courts  should  be  amenable  to  practicable  re- 
'  sponsibility — we  are  decidedly  in  favor  of  lim- 
'itinjj  the  terra  a  judge  shall  hold  his  ofiice — 
'good  behavior  for  a  limited  term  of  years 
'should  be  the  tenure  of  judicial  station." 

Such  was  their  language  sir;  and  it  was  the 
the  language  of  some  fifteen  or  twenty  delegates 
on  this  floor,  for  they  signed  that  document,  and 
I  cannot  be  brought  to  believe  that  they  will 
disregard  and  do  violence  to  so  solemn  a  pledge. 
I  am  aware  that  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
(Mr.  Hardin.)  has  here  reiterated  his  intention 
to  maintain  the  principle  of  the  ineligibility  of 
the  judges  after  one  term  of  service;  and  on  no 
other  principle  can  their  independence  be  main- 
tained. Frequent  elections  of  a  judge  would  be 
pernicious  in  their  consequences,  for  they  would 
thus  be  made  more  solicitous  to  meet  popular 
favor  than  to  administer  righteous  judgments. 
Sir,  ought  our  judicial  bench  to  seek  instruction 
from  the  people?  Ought  they  not  rather  to  ad- 
minister the  laws  of  the  land  uninfluenced  by  an 
approaching  election?  If  it  were  otherwise,  they 
ought  to  leave  the  judicial  bench  and  mingle 
among  the  people  to  ascertain  how  they  are  re- 
required  to  decide  a  particular  case?  And  are 
there  any  gentlemen  in  this  convention  who  are 
Avilling  to  reduce  our  judicial  ofiicers  to  such  a 
degrading  and  disgraceful  condition?  I  fear 
there  are  extreme  opinions  held  here  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  I  say  it  with  regret.  One  honorable 
gentleman  frankly  told  me  that  he  saw  no  distinc- 
tion between  the  ofiice  of  a  representative  of  the 
people  in  the  halls  of  legislation,  and  the  judge 
on  the  bench,  and  that  if  the  representative  was 
dependent  on  the  will  of  the  people,  the  judge 
should  be  put  in  the  same  position.  But  sir,  is 
there  not  a  marked  difference  between  the  two. 
The  representatives  of  the  people  are  to  make 
laws  in  accordance  with  the  sentiment  of  the 
community,  which  those  laws  are  to  protect;  but 
when  made,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  judge  to  admin- 
ister the  laws  with  impartiality  until  they  shall 
be  changed  bv  the  same  popular  will  that  gave 
them  being.  In  the  making  of  laws,  therefore, 
the  popular  voice  must  be  heard,  but  no  influ- 
ence should  swerve  a  judge  from  the  upright 
administration  of  those  laws  which  have  thu,s 
been  made. 

The  rights,  the  persons,  and  the  property  of 
the  citizens  of  this  commonwealth,  are  dependent 
on  the  proper  administration  of  justice,  and 
hence  there  is  a  deep  necessity  that  the  judges 
should  be  removed  from  all  improper  influences, 
and  from  the  tendency  to  court  popular  applause, 
to  which  a  re-election  would  subject  them.  The 
judiciary,  I  repeat,  must  be  independent,  if  our 
rights  and  liberties  are  to  be  secured;  and  the 
life  tenure  is  well  calculated  to  preserve  that  in- 
dependence. But  make  the  judiciary  removable 
by  a  majority  of  the  legislature,  and  on  the  legis- 
lature they    become  dependent.      Their  inde- 


228 


pendence  will  also  be  gone  if  they  shall  be  com- 
pelled to  court  popular  favor  after  a  short  time 
of  servioe.  What  is  it  sir,  that  protects  the 
■weak  against  the  strong?  What  is  it  that  pro- 
tects theponr  against  tlie  rich  and  the  powerful? 
Certainly  sir,  not  a  dependent  judiciary.  I  am 
in  favor  of  an  independent  judiciary,  and  I  am 
willing  to  agree  to  a  long  term  of  service  and  in- 
eligibility for  a  re-election,  by  which  I  hope  it 
may  be  maintained.  Aod  why  sir,  should  judges 
be  re-elected?  We  are  to  have  twelve  circuit 
judges  and  three  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
■which  will  be  one  man  to  a  population  of  about 
10,000.  Now  suppose  we  say-  to  this  one  man 
in  10,000,  having  held  the  office  for  eight  years, 
having  been  sucking  at  the  treasury  pap  during 
that  time,  you  must  now  stand  aside  and  give  place 
to  one  of  the  9,999.  What  hardship  will  be  ■  in- 
flicted? Is  rotation  in  ofRceso  very  objectionable? 
In  my  judgment  it  will  be  a  means  whereby  -we 
may  secure  our  safety. 

It  is  a  ■well  settled  prim;iple,  that  a  judge 
should  not  decide  nor  a  witness  testify  in  a  case 
in  -which eitherhasapersonal  interest;  nor  should 
a  judge  be  placed  in  a  position  in  which  he  may 
be  tempted  to  pervert  tlie  administration  of  jus- 
tice to  secure  a  re-election  to  the  bench,  which 
may  be  worth  to  him  some  $10,000.  He  should 
not  be  tempt'Cd,  in  times  of  popular  excitement, 
to  meet  by  his  decisions  popular  favor,  and  to 
guard  against  this,  I  implore  the  committee  to 
preserve  the  independence  of  the  judiciary. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  have  a  small  proposition 
to  make,  by  -way  of  amendment  to  this  bill.  I 
do  not  claim  to  belong  to  that  class  of  the  pro- 
fession who  occupy,  or  are  supposed  to  occupy, 
such  a  distinguished  position  in  the  country  as 
some  gentlemen  in  tins  convention.  I  have  had 
all  my  life  a  limited  practice  in  one  of  the  circuit 
courts  on  the  border  of  the  State;  and  I  suppose 
that  niy  friend  from  Oldham  kno-ws  that  some 
times  I  get  a  fifteen  shill  ings  fee.  I  have  never 
yet  had  the  honor  to  appear  in  this  court  of  ap- 
peals. The  idea  of  coming  before  so  enlightened 
a  tribunal  has  always  had  a  marked  effect  upon 
me.  I  know  nothing  else,  save  my  modesty, 
that  has  produced  it.  I  came  into  the  legisla- 
ture in  1623,  and  I  met  on  that  occasion  more 
distinguished  men — this  body  excepted — than  I 
have  on  any  other  occasion;  such  men  as  the 
lamented  Rowan,  a  man  -whose  fame  will  live  in 
the  recollection  of  his  countrymen  as  long  as 
any  other  shall  live.  I  met  here  a  Green,  a  Har- 
din, a  Robertson,  a  WicklifFe,  with  many  other 
distinguished  gentlemen,  as  I  conceive,  forming 
the  brightest  galaxy  of  statesmen  that  have,  in 
any  age,  or  in  the  history  of  this  country,  assem- 
bled together.  And  last,  not  least,  I  met  a  man 
''irhose  thrilling  eloquence  in  the  other  end  of 
the  capitol,  had  an  influence  throughout  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  that  will  scarcely 
die  so  long  as  it  shall  last.  But,  from  that  time 
to  this,  since  those  men  have  passed  off  the  stage 
of  action,  I  have  been  hunting  about  for  a  great 
man  to  whom  the  gentleman  allu«led  in  his 
gpeech.  But,  where  to  find  him,  if  we  under- 
took it  with  a  search  warrant,  Ood  only  knows, 
unless  you  go  up  into  the  caves  of  Madison 
county. 

No^w,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think,  when  ■we  dis- 
trict this  State,  as   I  hppo  will  be  douc,  that 


there  is  sufficient  material — if  not  in  this  house, 
there  is,  at  least,  certainly  out  of  it,  and  of  the 
right  sort  too — gentlemen  of  the  bar,  -who  are 
Well  qualified  to  fill  the  office  of  judge  in  the 
court  of  appeals.  1  disagree  with  one  of  my 
friends  from  Nelson  on  the  subject  of  districting 
the  State  and  making  the  court  of  appeals  branch- 
able,  and  the  very  rea.son  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  and  the  gentleman  from  Madison  urged 
against  it,  is  the  most  cogent  reason  with  me 
that  it  is  the  most  practicable  and  best.  And 
■\vhat  is  that  objection?  It  is,  that  out  of  the 
cases  that  have  been  decided  in  the  supreme 
court  of  the  United  States,  the  greatest  amount 
of  business  has  been  brought  up  from  the  district 
of  Columbia.  And  why  is  this?  Because  justice 
is  brought  nearer  to  the  door  of  the  suitors. — 
No-w,  that  is  the  very  reason  why  I  will  go  for 
branching  the  court  of  appeals,  that  the  people 
of  the  State  may  have  an  appellate  tribunal  nearer 
their  doors,  where  justice  may  be  administered. 

With  regard  to  the  cost  for  libraries,  court 
houses,  and  many  other  things  that  -will  arise 
from  branching  the  court  of  appeals,  that  is  a 
matter  of  very  little  consideration  with  me;  for 
the  people  who  desire  that  the  court  of  appeals 
should  be  thus  branched  are  the  very  people  who 
will  pay  the  expenses.  The  whole  people  of 
the  state  of  Kentucky  are  now  taxed,  in  com- 
mon, for  these  expenses.  The  civil  list  is  swell- 
ed for  the  purpose  of  keeping  up  and  separating 
the  court  of  appeals,  as  it  now  stands,  while 
some  of  those  wdio  contribute  to  its  support,  live 
hundreds  of  miles  off.  And  the  poor  man  who 
has  a  case  which  he  desires  should  be  tried  be- 
fore the  appellate  court,  is  alarmed  when  he  is 
told  that  he  will  have  to  go  some  two  hundred 
miles  with  his  witnesses  to  attend  court.  I  am 
for  branching  the  court,  and  I  shall  vote  for  it. 
There  is  no  constitutional  question  now  in  the 
way,  and  I  desire  the  distribution  of  justice 
equally  throughout  the  commonwealth. 

I  shall  therefore  vote  for  branching  the  court 
of  appeals,  and  I  shall  go  for  the  four  judges. 
The  gentleman  from  Nelson  assumed  that  if  a 
case  came  up  before  four  judges,  and  thev  disagree, 
the  decision  of  the  circuit  judge  is  held  to  be 
the  law  of  the  land,  and  other  cases  will  be 
governed  by  the  principle  thus  settled.  Well 
sir,  thus  far  I  am  understood.  No-w  as  to  the 
section  about  clerks.  The  gentleman  from 
Nelson  understands  thoroughly  the  duties 
of  the  clerk's  office,  I  have  no  doubt;  at  all 
events,  he  knows  something  on  the  subject;  but 
there  is  a  difficulty  which  seems  to  Kaunt  his 
mind  in  regard  to  the  judges'  decisions.  The 
gentleman  from  Madison  says,  that  he  knows  a 
judge  who  could  not  -write  a  short  decision,  be- 
cause he  had  not  time.  Well,  if  our  judges  in- 
stead of  tryingto  show  so  much  learning,  instead 
of  running  into  every  book  on  the  face  of  the 
earth,  that  has  the  name  of  a  law  book,  if,  in- 
stead of  doing  this,  they  would  take  a  little 
time  to  write  their  opinions,  there  would  be  no 
difficulty  about  it.  If  they  would  prepare  their 
opinions  as  Lord  Mansfield  was  accustomed  to 
do,  or  Lord  Hardwicke,  from  whose  decisions 
not  more  than  three  appeals  were  ever  taken, 
and  these  were  affirmed — if  he  would  write  them 
out  on  one  page,  there  would  be  no  objection  on 
tliat    ground.    If  they  would — as  judge  Scott 


229 


used  to  do  in  the  court  of  admiralty — if  they 
^vould  write  out  their  opinions  in  a  few  lines, 
no  difficulty  would  arise  on  that  subject. 
Whether  they  wish  to  build  up  a  reputation  bv 
giving  long  decisions,  I  do  not  know,  but  it 
seems  that  our  judges  have  got  into  the  habit  of 
giving  decisions  that  will  fill  entire  books. 
Yes  sir,  books.  They  must  enlarge,  di- 
late, run  into  every  sort  of  legal  ramification, 
do  every  thing  to  show  to  the  bar  and  the  coun- 
try, that  they  are  men  of  profound  learning.  I 
do  not  pretend  to  be  a  judge  of  their  decisions — 
I  never  wade  through  them.  As  far  as  the 
points  at  issue  in  law  cases  are  concerned,  the 
examination  of  these  long  decisions  is  too  often 
an  unnecessary  work. 

With  regard  to  the  term  for  which  they  are  ap- 
pointed, the  gentleman  has  discussed  that  with 
his  usual  ability.  I  have  already  said  as  much 
on  the  subject  as  I  wish  to  say,  although  I  hare 
said  nothing  yet  on  the  subject  of  balloting  for 
these  judges.  It  seems  to  me,  though  I  do  not 
know  myself  which  way  to  vote  upon  that,  I  am 
very  much  like  a  justiceof  the  peace  in  our  county 
by  the  name  of  Searcy.  There  was  a  trial  con- 
cerning the  right  of  property,  and  the  constable 
got  him  to  come  and  act  as  one  of  the  ap- 
praisers and  sit  as  judge.  While  there,  a 
question  came  up,  whether  such  and  such  evi- 
dence should  be  permitted  to  go  to  the  jury. 
Henderson,  a  distinguished  lawyer,  argued  that 
the  evidence  ought  not  to  be  admitted.  "To  be 
sure,"  said  the  magistrate  to  Mr.  Henderson, 
'you  seem  to  take  very  correct  ground  on  this 
subject.  I  think  as  you  do  that  this  evidence 
ought  not  to  be  admitted."  Chas.  Allen,  the 
lawyer  on  the  other  side  then  interposed. 
'Don't  decide  the  point  until  vou  have  heard 
me,"  said  he.  "Certainly  I  will  hear  you,"  re- 
plied he.  Allen  went  on  for  fifteen  or  twenty 
minutes,  and  the  magistrate  observed,  "Allen 
seems  to  be  right."  Henderson  says,  "don't  de- 
cide yet,  you  were  right  at  first,"  and  he  argued 
the  point  over  again,  and  the  magistrate  again 
came  to  the  conclusion  that  he  was  right.  Allen 
then  insisted  upon  arguing  it  over  again,  and 
the  magistrate  became  at  last  so  confused,  that 
he  said  to  the  law  vers,  "come  up  and  decide  it 
for  yourselves."  feome  gentlemen  have  argued 
so  ably  on  the  ballot  side  of  the  question,  and 
others  so  ably  on  the  vita  voce  side,  that  I  can- 
not tell  which  way  I  ought  to  go,  and  perhaps  I 
had  better  reserve  my  opinion  until  the  yeas  and 
nays  are  called,  for  I  have  great  difficulties  on 
both  sides  I  did  think  that  a  man  of  my  bold- 
ness, or  the  gentleman's  boldness,  would" hate  to 
go  up  and  vote  against  a  judge  right  full  in  his 
face,  and  perhaps  too,  when  he  had  an  impor- 
tant case  of  ours  pending  before  him;  while  on 
the  other  side,  it  does  seem  to  me,  that  the  in- 
dependent character  of  our  people  would  be  les- 
sened very  much,  by  saying  that  if  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner,)  has  not  him- 
self moral  courage  sufficient  to  go  up  and  vote 
against  the  judge,  the  great  balance  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  state  would  not  have. 

On  the  subject  of  the  clerks,  I  do  not  know 
whether  I  am  radical  or  not.  I  believe  I  am 
about  like  the  balance — not  of  the  members  on 
this  floor — but  of  the  people  generally.  I  be- 
lieve I  am  OA  often  wrong  as  right.      I  do  not 


claim  to  be  perfection  in  matters  connected  with 
my  legislative  duties  ;  but  it  rather  seems  to  me, 
that  if  we  are  detennined,  and  if  it  is  right  that 
we  should  do  so,  and  if  we  have  the  capacity  to 
elect  our  judges  we  have  the  capacity  to  elect 
the  clerks  ;  and  I  go  for  electing  them — with- 
out taking  lessons  from  any  man — ^for  I  take 
lessons  from  no  man  on  earth.  The  gentleman 
says,  license  is  required  before  you  can  practice 
law.  That  is  true,  but  did  that  ever  make  a  man 
qualified  on  the  face  of  the  earth?  How  many 
men  will  appear  with  the  certificate  or  license  of 
the  judges,  recommending  him  to  the  communi- 
tv,  who  can  not  bring  or  try  a  suit  to  save  his 
life?  It  takes,  as  Coke  said — no  I  won't  quote 
authority — it  takes,  according  to  my  experience, 
a  man  at  least  twenty  years,  steady,  continuous 
training  to  become  anything  like  qualified  to 
hold  the  situation  of  circuit  judge,  or  judge  of 
th«  court  of  appeals.  And  sir,  let  the  people 
judge  of  the  qualifications  of  candidates  for  of- 
fice— whether  for  a  clerkship  or  a  judgeship.  I 
have  come  out  for  the  people.  I  am  a  people's 
man,  and  I  say  if  we  elect  one  officer  let  us  elect 
all ;  and  let  us  not  sav  to  the  people  in  one  breath 
that  they  are  qualified  to  elect  everv  officer  provi- 
ded for  by  this  constitution,  and  in  t^e  same  breath 
tell  them  there  are  some  officers  whom  they  are  not 
to  be  permitted  to  elect,  unless  thev  have  a  cer- 
tificate of  qualification.  Do  not  the  people  vote 
for  President  of  the  -United  States?  Does  the 
President  have  to  undergo  an  examination? 
Has  he  to  pass  the  ordeal  of  some  political  jun- 
to, to  ascertain  whether  he  is  qualified  or  not? 
I  know  many  Presidents  who  have  been  elected 
within  the  last  twenty  five  years,  who,  as  old 
Ben.  Craig  said,  "  If  thev  had  had  to  get  a  De- 
phrium,  they  never  would  have  been  Presidents 
of  the  United  States."  I  think  the  "toiling  mil- 
lion" that  we  hear  so  much  of  before  the  election 
and  so  little  after,  are  as  capable  of  electing  a 
clerk  without  his  having  a  certificate  of  qualifi- 
cation from  a  judge,  or  from  any  body  else,  as 
they  would  be  if  he  had  ever  so  many  certificates. 
Has  not  the  gentleman  from  Madison  (Mr.  Tur- 
ner) told  you,  that  he  has  procured  clerkships 
for  persons  who  were  not  qualified?  He  helped 
them  through  by  his  ingenuitv,  although  they 
were  not  qualified  for  the  office  before  they  got  it, 
and  were  not  qualified  afterwards.  I  suppose 
from  what  he  said,  that  for  a  good  fee  he  could 
put  in  a  stock  or  a  stone.  Whether  he  took  his 
fee  from  these  men,  I  don't  know  :  I  suppose  he 
did  not,  for  I  am  told  he  does'nt  love  money. 
Sir,  there  is  a  more  important  consideration  than 
that.  If  you  will  convince  me  that  the  judges 
who  are  to  be  elected  to  the  court  of  appeals 
bench  will  be  infallible — that  they  will  have 
none  of  the  imperfections  of  our  nature — none 
of  our  affections  or  partialities,  then  sir,  I  have 
no  difficulty  with  regard  to  giving  them  the 
power  of  licensing  clerks  or  of  throwing  around 
them  these  restrictions.  But  suppose  that  two  or 
three  gentlemen  of  the  court  of  appeals  should 
have  some  son,  or  brother,  or  other  connexion 
whom  they  wanted  to  make  clerk.  Why  thev 
would  refuse  to  grant  a  certificate  to  every  other 
man  who  applied  to  them,  or  else  they  would 
certify  that  they  were  not  qualified,  fiow  long 
is  it  since  the  office  of  reporter  to  the  court  of 
appeals  became  vacant,  when  one  judge  insisted  . 


230 


upon  having  his  nephew  appointed,  and  another 
had  a  friend  he  wislied  to  give  the  office  to,  and 
it  was  a  longtime  before  we  knew  whether  we 
would  have  a  reporter  at  all  or  not.  If  a  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals  be  guilty  of  a  proceed- 
ing like  this  in  the  face  of  the  country,  might  he 
not  be  influenced  in  the  same  way  in  relation  to 
the  clerkship?  How  would  it  be  with  the  cir- 
cuit court  judge?  You  would  have  perhaps 
twenty  men  who  could  get  certificates,  and  not 
one  of  them  qualified  for  the  office.  Do  gentle- 
men desire  to  put  the  judges  in  a  position  that 
would  subject  them  to  suspicion?  If  we  throw 
the  whole  responsibility  of  electing  public  offi- 
cers upon  the  people,  let  them  judge  of  the  quali- 
fication of  the  candidates,  and  I  have  no  doubt 
it  will  have  a  happy  influence  in  making  the 
people  themselves  investigate  the  pretensions 
and  claims  of  the  various  gentlemen  offering 
their  services  to  fill  the  offices  that  we  intend  to 
provide  for  in  this  constitution.  The  great  ob- 
ject that  we  all  have  in  view,  is  to  secure  for  the 
country  an  enlightened,  learned  judicial  tribu- 
nal— a  tribunal  that  is  intended  to  protect  the 
weak  against  the  strong — to  protect  the  rights 
of  the  poor  man  against  the  powerful.  If  this 
can  be  done,  and  1  have  no  doubt  it  can,  the 
amendment  I  have  offered,  proposes  that  any 
gentleman  who  has  offered  for  judgeship,  shall 
be  found  treating  or  speaking  in  public  during 
the  canvass,  he  shall  be  wholly  disqualified  for 
holding  office. 

I  am  not  afraid  to  trust  the  people — not  at  all. 
It  has  not  onlv  been  so  here,  but  it  has  been  so 
from  the  foundation  of  the  government  down  to 
the  present  day,  that  when  a  person  undertakes 
to  defend  the  rights  of  the  people  against  any 
sort  of  oppression,  he  is  denounced  as  a  dema- 
gogue. I  have  heard  the  cry  of  demagoguism 
from  one  end  of  this  body  to  the  other?  w  ell, 
gentlemen  and  myself  differ  with  regard  to  the 
origin  of  the  word  "demagogue."  I  am  going 
with  the  convention  men,  particularly  with 
those  who  are  not  for  stealing  any  of  the  rights 
of  the  people  awav  from  them.  I  am  for  taking 
the  right  to  elect  the  officers  of  this  government 
boldly  and  fearlessly  from  the  department  to 
which  it  has  been  entrusted,  and  for  restoring  it 
back  into  the  hands  of  the  people,  where  it  of 
right  belongs.  Every  great  man  in  the  world 
that  has  raisedhis  voice  in  behalf  of  the  people 
against  the  oppressions  of  the  few,  has  been  de- 
nounced as  a  demagogue.  Those  Avho  have  been 
the  friends  of  the  poor  man  have  been  proclaim- 
ed as  demagogues.  Now  sir,  I  do  not  wish 
to  see  anything  of  this  kind  in  this  country 
if  it  could  be  avoided.  The  greatest  evil  that 
can  arise  from  electing  our  judiciary  would 
be,  that  we  should  have  the  judges  of  the 
circuit  court  defending  themselves  against  the 
decisions  of  the  supreme  court  and  vice  versa. 
My  amendment  contemplates  that  the  man  who 
will  enter  upon  a  system  of  public  speaking  or 
canvassing  a  district  or  the  state,  shall  be  dis- 
qualified from  holding  office,  and  that  the  gov- 
ernor shall  not  commission  him.  I  do  not  wisli 
to  see  the  time  arrive  in  the  history  of  this 
country,  when  this  state  of  things  will  exist.  I 
have  no  idea  that  the  people  will  be  misled.  It 
is  not  that  I  have  an  objection  to  allowing  the  , 
people  to  elect  their  judges,  but  I  liave  an  objec- 1 


tion  to  see  a  man  canvassing  for  an  office  of  tins 
sort,  where  he  is  to  have  in  his  keeping,  the 
rights,  the  liberties,  and  even  the  life,  property, 
and  happiness  of  the  people. 

I  sir,  shall  have  nothing  to  regret  if  my  amend- 
ment gets  no  vote  at  all;  but  if  I  find  out  that  I 
cannot  get  a  pretty  hearty  support  for  it,  I  be- 
lieve I  will  withdraw  it;  and  I  intend  when- 
ever I  have  a  proposition  that  I  do  not  like,  to 
back  out  myself;  and  I  intend  to  do  it  boldly, 
so  that  every  man  may  know  what  I  am  at.  Not 
like  the  gentleman  who  last  addressed  the  house. 
He  is  climbing  down  faster  than  any  man  I  ev- 
er saw. 

Now,  I  hope  I  am  going  to  speak  some  sober 
sense !  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  have  credit 
for  it,  however,  for  I  rarely  get  credit  for  any 
thing.  I  am  not  going  to  draw  any  invidious 
distinctions,  and  I  consult  no  gentleman  as  to 
what  I  shall  say.  lam  neither  to  be  led  nor 
unled.  I  did  not  consult  the  leading  men  of  this 
convention  whether  I  ought  to  introduce  my 
proposition,  and  I  am  not  goin^  to  consult  them 
whether  I  shall  withdraw  it.  There  is  one  lead- 
ing gentleman  who,  I  know,  was  not  consulted, 
and  that  is,  I  myself.  Now,  if  we  are  going  to 
make  a  constitution,  I.  think  it  is  time  we  set 
about  it;  and  I  want  my  two  friends  from  Nel- 
son, and  the.  distinguished  President  of  the  con- 
vention, and  all  the  balance  of  the  distinguished 
members  of  the  convention — for  we  are  all  dis- 
tinguished alike — and  when  I  say  distinguished, 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  one  is  distinguished 
above  another — I  desire  that  we  shall  harmon- 
ize, consult  together,  and  determine  upon  a  con- 
stitution that  will  be  acceptable  to  the  people. 
For  myself,  sir,  I  am  not  ambitious  of  fame.  I 
do  not  care  that  in  twenty  five  years  from  now, 
or  fifty,  when  I  shall  be  Iving  under  the  cold  sod 
of  the  valley,  in  all  profcability,  and  when  no 
mortal  can  find  out  the  spot  where  I  lie,  my 
name  shall  be  remembered.  I  have  no  ambition 
of  extending  my  fame  beyond  the  lids  of  the 
coffin,  or  my  Avinding  sheet.  Nothing  of  the 
sort.  But  I  want  to  unite  in  making  a  constitu- 
tion that  will  be  acceptable  to  the  people  because 
other  men's  fame  is  involved  in  it.  I  would 
make  it  live  in  eternal  freshness  in  the  memory 
of  our  countrymen.  I  care  nothing  for  such 
considerations  as  those  of  personal  celebrity. 
They  do  not  influence  me.  The  great  breakers 
that  are  before  us,  are,  that  we  have  too  many 
great  men  among  us.  I  am  willing,  for  the  bal- 
ance of  the  session,  to  lay  down  all  my  preten- 
sions. I  think  I  have  had  my  full  share  now; 
and  I  do  not  wish  to  act  the  part  of  a  glutton, 
who  does  not  know  when  to  quit.  I  am  going 
to  deliver  up  into  the  hands  of  the  balance  of 
this  convention  the  further  conduct  of  the  busi- 
ness. I  only  hope  thev  will  not  crowd  the  con- 
stitution too  much  witu  details.  The  great  ob- 
ject is  to  have  it  made,  and  have  it  made  in  short 
order,  and  not  to  have  too  much  put  in  it.  I 
know  that  I  have  wearied  the  convention,  but 
this  is  tlie  last  time,  perliaps,  that  I  sliall  tres- 
pass upon  their  patience;  if  I  do  not  get  into  so 
tjad  a  humor  as  I  did  last  evening,  and  for  act- 
ing so  bad  on  that  occasion,  I  ask  the  pardon  of 
this  house. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  do  not  know  that  I  should 
liave  risen  on  this  occasion,  but  for  the  heavy 


231 


blovr  that  was  aimed  by  the  gentleman  from 
Ma<lison  against  one  of  the  provisions  embraced 
in  the  report.  I  supposed  that  we  had  assem- 
bled here  for  a  special  purpose;  that  there  were 
a  few  things  that  we  had  to  do;  and  in  saying 
this  much,  I  hope  it  will  not  be  considered  tliat 
I  am  reading  a  lecture  to  this  committee.  I  sup- 
posed that  the  people  had  demanded  that  our 
organic  law  should  be  remodled.  And,  as  far 
as  1  can  learn,  the  great  principle  which  the 
people  have  insisted  is  erroneous  and  requires 
change  is,  the  life  tenure  of  office  of  the  judges. 
There  are  some  gentlemen  who  seem  disposed 
to  concede  that  the  people  shall  have  the  right  to 
elect  tlieir  judicial  officers,  but  at  the  same  time 
they  seem  to  think  that  it  is  granting  too  much 
to  permit  the  tenure  of  office  to  be  limited.  I 
supposed,  sir,  that  this  was  a  fact,  a  fixed  fact, 
on  which  the  people  had  determined  all  over  the 
land,  that  there  should  be  a  limitation  upon  the 
term  of  office.  With  regard  to  other  matters,  as 
that  the  judiciaiy  should  be  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple, there  was  a  general  concurrence,  and  I 
thought  there  was  also  a  concurrence  that  the 
tenure  of  office  should  be  limited.  I  understood 
that  this  was  the  great  object  for  which  this  con- 
vention was  called,  and  as  the  people  had  gen- 
erally declared  in  favor  of  electing  the  judges, 
we  had  nothing  to  do  in  reference  to  that  matter, 
but  to  carry  out  the  will  of  the  people.  Having 
done  that,  and  having  said  that  the  election 
should  take  place  in  one  day,  there  was  but  lit- 
tle else  for  this  convention  to  do,  and  it  was 
wholly  unnecessary  that  we  should  be  here  three 
weeks,  discussing  abstract  principles.  I  think 
my  friend  from  Henry  alluded  to  me  when  he 
said  that  three  or  four  gentlemen  seemed  deter- 
mined to  have  the  business  of  making  the  con- 
stitution in  their  own  hands.  If  he  had  said 
nine  or  ten  I  should  certainly  have  concluded 
that  he  meant  to  embrace  me  among  the  number. 
We  have  had  nothing  tangible  before  the  con- 
vention till  the  committee  on  the  court  of  ap- 
peals made  their  report.  Suice  we  have  had 
something  tangible  as  the  result  of  that  report, 
and  as  I  was  one  of  the  committee  who  made 
that  report,  I  take  his  remark  as  applping  to. 
myself. 

I  did  not  design  to  discuss  the  whole  argu- 
ment presented  to  the  committee,  but  there  were 
some  heavy  blows  administered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  iladison,  and  by  the  elder  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  and  especially  on 
the  subject  of  branching  this  court.  But  this  is 
nothing  new  certainly.  So  lon^  ago  as  1816 
this  principle  was  introduced,  and  there  we  find 
in  favor  of  it  some  of  the  first  names  of  that 
period.  Subsequently,  it  has  been  introduced 
nere  and  favorably  received.  But  how  frequent- 
ly have  we  heard  the  objection  that  we  have  no 
right  to  do  this,  because  it  is  not  recognized  by 
the  constitution.  There  is  the  .stumbling  block. 
There  has  been  an  expression  all  over  the  coun- 
try that  the  court  of  appeals  should  be  branched, 
and  hence  the  legislature  itself  has  frequently 
undertaken  to  branch  this  court.  Now,  I  am  not 
at  all  surprised  that  the  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son is  opposed  to  it,  not  that  I  would  impute  to 
him  any  improper  motive,  and  I  would  hope 
that  I  fiave  a  proper  estimate  of  his  talents,  tor 
he  was  my  teacher,  and  I  confess  that  that  esti- 


mation for  him  is  very  high.  But  he  does  not 
undergo  any  of  those  inconveniencies  wliieh 
those  meet  who  live  at  a  great  distance  from 
Frankfort.  He  lives  near  the  centre  of  the  state, 
within  a  few  hours  ride  of  the  capital,  and  I 
will  show  that  it  is  those  who  live  immediately 
around  the  capital  that  are  in  the  habit  of  doing 
the  business  of  the  court  of  appeals.  We  were 
told  more  than  once  that  the  docket  of  the  su- 
preme court  in  the  district  of  Columbia  was 
crowded.  But  there  are  more  reasons  than  one 
for  that.  It  was  said  that  it  was  because  the  sit- 
ting of  the  court  being  there,  made  it  so  conveni- 
ent, and  that  is  one  of  the  strongest  reasons  that 
could  possibly  be  given  why  the  court  should  sit 
in  more  places  than  one.  But  there  is  another 
reason  that  has  not  been  alluded  to.  In  all  the 
circuit  courts  of  the  United  States  we  have  a 

judge  who  is  a  judge  of  the  supreme  court  also, 
but  in  the  district  of  Columbia  they  have  their 
own  judges  who  have  no  voice  and  no  seat  upon 
the  bench  of  the  supreme  court.  And  the  pre- 
sumption is,  that  where  a  judge  of  the  supreme 
court  presides,  more  satisfaction  is  given,  and 
there  are  fewer  appeals.  But  the  other  reason  is 
the  main  one,  because  the  court  is  held  at  the 
very  doors  of  the  suitors,  and  they  are  put  to  no 
incovenience  in  having  justice  administered  to 
them. 

But  it  is  said,  here  is  to  be  an  increase  of  cost. 
Cost  of  what?  Of  court  houses  to  be  built? 
Many  counties  will  say  send  it  to  us,  and  it  will 
not  cost  the  state  a  cent.  It  is  said  there  must 
be  a  library.  I  know  that  the  gentleman  from 
Madison  has  a  library  little  inferior  to  the  pub- 
lic library  here.  Will  not  the  library-  of  every 
lawyer  where  the  court  may  be  estaSlished  he 
opened  to  the  service  of  the  court,  and  will  they 
not  thus  have  every  possible  facility  for  con- 
sulting authorities?  Tnis  looks  like  a  kind  of 
scare  crow,  to  deter  us  from  branching  the  court, 
because  it  is  to  cost  something.  It  is  said  you 
will  have  to  carry  books  about,  or  have  a  library 
in  every  place.  But  it  is  not  so.  I  want  to 
show  to  the  counties  in  the  vicinity  of  Frank- 
fort that  if  you  will  examine  the  docket  of  the 
court  of  appeals  you  will  see  a  great  dispropor- 
tion between  the  number  of  cases  brought  from 
the  counties  in  the  vicinity  and  those  more  re- 
mote. If  it  be  said  that  if  you  branch  the  court 
there  will  be  more  courts  held,  and  more  litiga- 
tion, I  reply,  that  if  that  is  a  good  reason 
against  branching  the  court,  it  is  equallv  good 
for  abolishing  it  altogether.  If  it  be  objected 
that  the  court  of  appeals  should  not  be  branched 
on  account  of  the  cost;  the  same  reason  applies 
for  not  having  any  court  of  appeals.  I  want  to 
show  another  thing,  it  is,  that  as  you  go  away 
from  the  capital  the  disproportion  of'suits  brought 
to  the  court  of  appeals  is  most  manifest.  I  have 
a  little  table  of  statistics  on  this  point,  and  if 
any  gentleman  will  just  take  the  docket  of  the 
court  of  appeals  and  look  at  it,  and  compare  it 
impartially,  it  will  be  impossible  for  him  to 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  not  proper  to 
sit  in  more  than   one  locality.     I  have  taken 

\  first  five  counties  where  there  are  four  judges. 

j  Now  it  cannot  be  possible  that  they  are  all  the 
worst  judges  in  the  state.    In  these  five  coun- 

j  ties  of  Woodford,  Fayette,  Bourbon,  Nicholas 

I  and  Fleming,  there  were  fifty  cases  sent  to  the 


232 


last  court  of  appeals,  which  is  equivalent  to  one 
luindred  cases  in  a  year.  But  there  were  thir- 
teen hundred  and  twelve  new  suits  in  the  cir- 
cuit courts  in  those  counties  during  the  year 
1848.  Now  look  at  the  same  number  of  coun- 
ties on  the  borders  of  Tennessee,  and  remote 
from  Frankfort,  and  see  what  is  the  number  of 
cases  brought  to  this  court.  From  the  counties 
of  Pulaski,  Green,  Barren,  Warren,  and  Logan, 
where  there  w^ere  nine  hundred  and  seventy  one 
cases  brought  in  the  circuit  courts  in  1848,  there 
were  ten  whole  cases  sent  to  the  court  of  appeals 
at  the  last  terra,  and  ten  only.  If  we  compare 
the  number  of  voters  in  these  counties,  we  find 
that  in  the  five  first  named  counties,  from  which 
fifty  cases  were  sent  to  the  court  of  appeals  at 
the  last  term,  there  are  nine  thousand  six  hun- 
dred and  thirty  six,  and  in  the  last  named  five 
counties,  there  are  eleven  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred and  fifty  six  voters,  making  a  balance  of 
some  twenty  one  hundred  more  voters  in  those 
counties  from  which  only  ten  cases  were  sent  to 
the  last  court  of  appeals. 

Again,  take  the  counties  of  Estill,  Madison, 
Garrard,  and  Mercer,  which  are  comparatively 
near  to  Frankfort,  and  you  find  that  they  sent 
fifty  one  cases  at  the  last  term,  to  the  court  of 
appeals,  while  they  had  during  the  year  1848 
seven  hundred  and  fifty  two  new  suits  brought 
in  the  circuit  courts.  Now,  in  opposition  to 
these  four  counties,  take  the  four  counties  of 
Caldwell,  Hopkins,  Henderson,  and  Daviess, 
and  you  find  that  while  they  had  during  the 
year  1848  seven  hundred  and  seventy  six  new 
cases  in  the  circuit  courts,  they  had  only  three 
cases  come  up  to  the  court  of  appeals  at  tne  last 
term.  Here  Avere  three  judges,  and  only  three 
appearances  in  the  last  court. 

I  will  now  take  a  number  of  counties  in  the 
neighborhood  of  my  friend  from  Nelson;  taking 
Washington,  Marion,  Nelson,  Jefferson,  and 
Meade,  counties  that  are  not  distant  from  Frank- 
fort, and  I  find  that  there  were  seventy  nine 
cases  sent  up  at  the  last  term,  and  to  the  court  of 
appeals,  while  ten  counties,  at  the  extreme 
boutliern  border  of  the  state,  viz  :  Fulton,  Hick- 
man, Graves,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Ballard,  Mc- 
Cracken,  Trigg,  Critttendeii,  and  Livingston, 
sent  only  ten  cases  to  the  court  of  appeals;  ten 
counties,  and  only  ten  cases.  Now,  sir,  I  can 
take  fourteen  counties  in  the  state  that  have 
brought  more  cases  to  the  court  of  appeals  than 
all  the  other  counties  in  the  state.  To  what 
pther  conclusion  then,  can  we  come,  than  that 
Jiere  in  the  centre  of  the  state  is  the  centre  of  the 
talent,  and  hence  arises  the  amount  of  business 
of  the  appellate  court.  Is  it  possible  to  con- 
clude otherwise,  when  we  see  that  in  the  remote 
parts  of  the  state,  the  rights  of  the  citizens  are  as 
frequently  contested  in  the  circuit  courts  as  in 
the  centre,  while  in  the  appellate  couits,  the 
rights  of  litigants  from  those  counties  are  scarce- 
ly ever  heard. 

I  know  that  the  gentleman  from  Madison  has 
a  most  extensive  practice,  because  we  have  a 
very  accommodating  law  allowing  suits  to  l)e 
brought  from  all  the  circuit  courts.  How  does 
it  happen,  when  this  may  be  done,  and  when  we 
are  tobl  that  it  may  be  cfoue  by  brief,  and  that  a 
brief  is  all  that  is  neee«.sary,  that  so  few  cases 
come  from  remote  counties  to  this  courtV 


It  mav  be  said,  that  in  the  comparison  which 
I  have  Instituted,  I  have  selected  the  pauper 
counties,  and  that  the  counties  nearer  the  capi- 
tal have  the  wealth.  But  on  a  comparison  of 
Mercer  with  Daviess,  or  of  Garrard  with  Hen- 
derson, and  it  will  be  found  that  there  is  a  pre- 
ponderance of  wealth  in  the  two  latter  counties, 
and  yet  from  Garrard  there  were  nineteen  cases 
in  the  last  court  of  appeals,  and  from  Mercer 
ten,  while  from  each  of  the  counties  of  Daviess 
and  Henderson  there  was  only  one.  Does  not 
this  prove  something?  If  you  look  at  the  voting 
population,  if  you  look  at  the  wealth,  you  find 
that  in  those  counties  where  the  least  business 
has  come  to  the  court  of  appeals,  there  is  the 
greatest  number  of  the  voting  population,  the 
greatest  amount  of  wealth,  and  the  most  busi- 
ness done  in  the  circuit  courts.  But  when  you 
go  from  Frankfort,  then  the  business,  except  that 
in  the  circuit  court,  ceases.  How  is  this,  if  the 
business  may  be  done  in  the  court  of  appeals  by 
a  brief  as  well  as  by  actual  attendance?  Gen- 
tlemen know  that  it  is  necessary  to  make  oral 
motions,  and  that  a  lawyer  must  l>e  present  for 
this  purpose. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  becoming  hoarse,  and  I 
find  it  inconvenient  to  proceed  with  my  re- 
marks. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  move,  as  a  favor 
to  my  colleague  on  the  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals,  that  the  committee  now  rise. 

The  committee  then  rose,  reported  progress, 
and  had  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


THURSDAY,  OCTOBER  25,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  G.  W  Brush. 

CIRCUIT   COURTS. 

Mr.  HARDIN,  from  the  committee  on  circuit 
courts,  made  the  following  report: 

ARTICLE   

Sec.  1.  Tliere  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  whicli  may  hereafter  be  erected 
within  this  commonwealth,  circuit  courts. 

Sec.  2.  The  jurisdiction  of  said  courts  shall 
be  and  remain  as  it  now  exists,  hereby  giving  to 
the  legislature  the  power  to  change  or  alter  it. 

Sec.  3.  The  right  to  take  an  appeal,  or  sue 
out  a  writ  of  error  to  the  court  of  appeals,  is 
hereby  given  in  the  same  manner  and  to  the 
same  extent  as  it  now  exists,  giving  to  the  legis- 
lature the  power  to  change,  alter,  or  modify,  said 
riglit. 

Sec.  4.  At  the  first  session  of  the  legislature 
after  this  constitution  shall  go  into  effect,  the 
legislature  shall  lay  off  the  commonwealtli  into 
twelve  judicial  districts,  having  due  reganl  to 
business  and  population  :  Provided,  Tliat  no 
county  shall  be  divided. 

Skc.  5.  The  legislature  shall,  at  the  same  time 
that  the  judicial  districts  are  laid  off,  direct  elec- 
tions to  be  held  in  each  district  to  elect  a  judge 
for  said  district,  and  shall  prescribe  how  and  in 
what  manner  the  elections  shall  be  held  and 
conducted,  and  how  the  governor  shall  bo  noti- 


238 


fied  of  the  result  of  the  election,  and  who  has 
been  chosen:  Provided,  That  such  election  shall 
be  held  at  a  different  time  from  that  at  which 
elections  are  holden  for  governor,  lieutenant 
gorernor  and  members  of  the  legislature. 

Sec.  6.  All  persons  qualified  to  vote  for  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature,  in  each  district,  shall 
have  the  right  to  vote  forjudges. 

Sec.  7.  !No  person  shall  be  elected  judge  who 
has  not  attained  the  age  of  thirty  five  years  at 
the  time  of  his  election,  and  been  a  practicing 
lawyer  eight  years,  and  resided  in  the  district 
five  years  immediately  preceding  his  election. 

Sec.  8.  The  person  elected  as  judge  shall  con- 
tinue in  ofiice  for  —  years,  unless  he  shall  move 
out  of  the  district  for  which  he  is  elected,  or  be 
removed  from  ofiice  as  hereinafter  prescribed. 

Sec.  9.  The  governor,  so  soou  as  he  is  notified 
of  the  election  of  a  judge,  shall  issue  a  commis- 
sion to  the  person,  so  elected,  for  the  terra  of 
—  vears  from  the  date  of  the  commission. 

§EC.  10.  If  the  judicial  business  of  this  state 
shall  so  increase,  from  time  to  time,  as  to  make 
it  necessary  for  other  judicial  districts  to  be  cre- 
ated, thy  legislature  is  hereby  authorized  to  cre- 
.nte  oue  district  every  —  years,  but  in  uo  event 
shall  there  ever  be  more  than  —  judicial  dis- 
tricts. 

Sec.  11.  The  legislature  shall  provide  by  law 
a  competent  and  adequate  compensation '  to  be 
paid  to  the  judges  out  of  the  public  treasury, 
but  in  no  event  shall  the  compensation  of  each 
judge  be  less  than  sixteen  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  12.  The  judges  of  the  circuit  court  shall 
be  removed  from   office  by  a  resolution  of  the 

general  assembly,  passed  by of  all  the  mem- 
ers  of  each  house.  The  reasons  for  the  resolu- 
tion shall  be  entered  at  large  on  the  journal  of 
each  house. 

Sec.  13.  The  judges  shall  likewise  be  subject 
to  impeachment,  to  be  instituted,  carried  on,  and 
tried  in  the  same  manner  that  impeachments  are 
directed  under  our  present  constitution,  and  for 
the  same  oflFences  as  therein  pointed  out,  and  a 
conviction  shall  have  the  same  effect. 

Sec.  14.  There  shall  be  an  attomev  for  each 
judicial  district,  elected  by  the  qualified  voters 
of  each  district  at  the  time  the  election  is  held 
for  judge,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  attend  to  the 
business  of  the  commonwealth  as  now  prescrib- 
ed by  law,  and  such  other  business  as  the  legis- 
lature may,  from  time  to  time,  direct  and  pre- 
scribe. 

Sec.  15.  No  person  shall  be  elected  attorney 
for  the  commonwealth  unless  he  shall  have  at- 
tained, at  the  time  of  his  election,  the  age  of 
twenty -five  years,  and  been  years  a  resi- 

dent of  the  district  for  which  he  is  elected,  and 
years  a  practicing  lawyer. 

Sec.  16.  The  election  for  commonwealth's  at- 
torney, after  the  result  shall  be  ascertained  in 
the  manner  the  legislature  may  direct,  shall  be 
certified  to  the  governor,  who  snail  issue  a  com- 
mission to  the  person  elected,  to  serve  for 
years  from  the  date  of  the  commission. 

Sec.  17.  The  legislature  shall,  from  time  to 
time,  fix  and  regulate  the  aunual  compensation 
of  the  attorneys,  but  in  no  event  shall  it  be  less 
than  three  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  18.  Upon  every  conviction  on  a  present- 
ment or  indictment  for  a  misdemeanor,  thew 
30 


shall  be  allowed  to  the  commonwealth's  attor- 
ney, to  be  fixed  and  regulated  by  law,  not  less 
than  two  dollars  and  one  half. 

Sec.  19.  The  governor  shall  have  no  power  to 
remit  the  fees  of  the  clerk,  sheriff',  or  common- 
wealth's attorney,  in  penal  and  criminal  cases. 

Sec.  20.  The  commonwealth's  attorney  shall, 
after  his  election,  continue  to  reside  in  the  dis- 
trict for  which  he  is  elected,  during  his  continu- 
ance in  office,  and  if  he  shall  move  out  of  the 
district  he  shall  forfeit  his  ofiice,  and  the  vacan- 
cy shall  be  filled  in  the  same  manner  as  if  he 
had  resigned. 

Sec.  21.  At  the  same  time  that  judges  and 
attorneys  for  the  commonwealth  are  elected  for 
each  district,  each  county  of  the  district  shall, 
by  the  qualified  voters  thereof,,  elect  a  clerk  for 
the  circuit  court  of  said  county,  whose  duties, 
fees,  and  responsibilities  shall  be  the  same  as 
now  fixed  and  regulated  by  law;  but  the  legisla- 
ture may,  from  time  to  time,  change,  modify, 
and  alter  the  same,  and  regulate  how,  and  in 
what  manner,  the  governor  shall  be  notified  of 
the  result  of  the  elections. 

Sec.  22.  Xo  person  shall  be  elected  clerk  of 
the  circuit  court,  unless  he  has  attained  the  age 
of  twenty-oue  years,  been  a  resident  of  the 
county  for  which  he  may  be  elected 
years,  and  have  a  certificate  from  the  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  that  he  is  qualified  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  clerk. 

Sec.  2.3.  When  the  governor  is  notified,  in  the 
manner  prescribed  by  law,  he  shall  issue  a  com- 
mission to  the  person  elected  clerk,  to  serve  as 
clerk  for  said  circuit  court  for  years,  from 

the  date  of  his  commission. 

Sec.  24.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  the  office 
of  judge  of  the  circuit  court,  or  in  the  office  of 
attorney  for  the  district,  or  in  the  office  of  clerk 
of  a  circuit  court,  the  governor  shall  issue  a  writ 
of  election  to  fill  such  vacancy,  and  the  person 
elected  shall  continue  in  office  during  the  unex- 
pired portion  of  the  time  which  he  may  be  elect- 
ed to  fall,  and  until  his  successor  shall  be  duly 
qualified. 

Sec.  25.  The  judges,  attorneys,  and  clerks, 
provided  for  in  this  article,  shall  not  only  con- 
tinue in  office  the  times  herein  prescribed,  but 
until  their  successors  are  duly  qualified  to  enter 
upon  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  their  respec- 
tive offices. 

Sec  26.  The  judges  of  the  circuit  courts,  at- 
torneys, and  clerks,  who  are  now  in  office,  or 
who  may  be  put  into  office  under  the  present 
constitution,  shall  continue  in  office  until  their 
successors,  as  are  prescribed  in  this  article,  shall 
not  only  be  elected,  but  qualified  to  enter  upon 
the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  their  respective 
offices. 

Sec.  27.  The  legislature  shall  not  have  pow- 
er to  change  the  venue  in  any  prosecution  for 
treason,  felony,  or  a  misdemeanor;  but  upon  the 
accused  presenting  a  petition  to  the  judge  of  the 
court  where  the  prosecution  may  be  depending, 
out  of  term  time  or  to  the  court  when  in  session, 
which  petition  shall  be  verified  upon  oath,  sta- 
ting in  said  petition  that  he  does  not  believe  he 
can  have  a  fair  and  impartial  trial  by  a  jury  of 
the  county,  to  direct  a  venire  facias  to  any  ad- 
joining county  the  judge  may  select,  ana  the 
sheriff  of  the  county  to  whicn  the  venire  fada* 


234 


may  be  directed  shall  summon  twelve  good  and 
lawful  men  as  jurors  to  try  the  accused,  who 
shall,  at  the  time  appointed  in  said  writ,  repair 
to  the  court  as  therein  directed,  and  who  shall 
be  a  jury  to  try  the  accused  unless  challenged 
by  him,  and  if  challenged,  the  place  of  the  per- 
son challenged  shall  be  supplied  with  bystand- 
ers: Provided,  They  live  out  of  the  county  Avhere 
the  trial  is  about  to  be  hadj  and  if  bystanders, 
as  herein  prescribed,  cannot  be  had,  the  court 
shall  have  the  power  to  send  the  sheriff  into  the 
adjoining  counties  to  summon  bystanders. 

Sec:  28.  The  legislature  shall  have  power, 
and  is  hereby  directed,  to  provide,  by  law,  for 
the  pay  of  the  jurors  and  sheriffs  for  the  servi- 
ces herein  required. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Before  I  sit  down  I  shall 
move  to  have  the  report  printed,  and  referred  to 
the  committee  of  the  whole  and  made  the  special 
order  for  Monday  next.  It  is  proper,  perhaps, 
that  I  should  give  some  explanation  in  regard  to 
some  of  the  provisions  of  the  report.  The  com- 
mittee have  convened  on  a  great  many  occasions, 
and  as  was  to  be  expected,  on  some  propositions 
they  agreed  almost  unanimously,  while  on  oth- 
ers they  were  divided.  There  was  no  question 
on  which  the  division  was  so  exactly  equal,  as 
in  regard  to  eligibility.  It  was  agreed  last  night 
that  we  should  not  report  on  that  point,  but 
leave  it  open  until  we  might  collect  the  judg- 
ment of  the  house,  and  then  to  report  in  accord- 
ance with  that  judgment. 

There  are  at  present  nineteen  circuit  judges  in 
the  State;  and  this  report  proposes  that  there 
shall  be  only  twelve.  The  circuit  judges  now 
get  $1200  each  per  annum;  this  plan  proposes  to 
give  them  $1600.  This  plan  proposes  to  add 
largely  to  the  duties  of  the  judge,  and  to  in- 
crease his  pay  $400  per  annum.  We  believe  that 
take  the  average  of  the  judges  under  the  present 
system,  and  their  duties  do  not  engage  them  over 
80  days  in  the  year.  And  they  have  not  consid- 
ered $1200  so  adequate  a  compensation  as  to 
exempt  them  from  the  necessity  of  following 
other  pursuits.  We  desire  to  relieve  them 
from  that  necessity,  and  the  report  propo- 
ses that  they  shall  sit  150  days  in  the  year,  and 
receive  $1600  a  year,  to  be  increased,  if  it  is  not 
enough,  by  the  legislature. 

We  have  not  raised  the  salaries  of  the  common- 
wealth's attorneys,  but  by  way  of  inducing  the 
best  lawyers  in  the  State  to  take  the  office,  we 
have  restored  the  old  law  in  relation  to  the  col- 
lection of  fees  on  indictments,  and  presentments 
for  misdemeanor.  I  had  between  the  years  1807 
and  1815,  the  duties  of  commonwealth's  attor- 
ney to  perform,  and  during  that  time  the  court 
appointed  me  for  four  counties  and  after  that, 
the  law  being  altered,  the  governor  appointed  me 
for  five  counties.  My  receipts  from  the  taxing  of 
fees  amounted  to  something  like  $1500  to  $2000 
per  annum.  The  fees  do  not  come  from  tlie  peo- 
ple, but  from  those  who  violate  the  law,  and  fliey 
will  not  amount  in  most  instances  to  more  than 
j8fteen  shillings  each.  Wewwre  very  much  em- 
barrassed in  our  action  on  the  subject  of  attorneys 
and  clerks,  as  we  found  the  matter  had  been 
referred  to  another  committee,  yet  connected  as 
it  was  with  the  duties  devolving  on  our  comrait- 
te&t  we  must  be  excused  for  reporting  on  the 


subject.  The  committee  of  course  could  decide 
between  the  two  reports. 

The  circuit  court  system  as  it  now  exists,  in- 
cluding commonwealth's  attorneys'  salary,  costs 
tlie  State  $28,600.  Under  the  system  we  propose, 
including  also  the  pay  of  the  commonwealth's 
attorneys,  it  will  cost  the  State  but  $22,800. 
Thus  if  it  goes  into  operation,  it  will  save  the 
State  $5,70O  per  annum.  One  ground  of  com- 
plaint on  the  part  of  tlie  people,  Avas  that  tho 
government  was  too  expensive,  and  the  desire 
was  that  if  practicable  we  should  retrace  our 
steps  in  this  particular.  These  complaints  the 
committee  have  endeavored  to  remedy,  and  at 
the  same  time  to  secure  a  more  efficient  system  of 
circuit  courts.  I  have  no  fault  to  find  with  the 
present  judges  that  I  am  aware  of — either  of  the 
court  of  appeals  or  of  the  circuit  judges. — 
They  are  about  as  able  men  as  we  can  get;  but 
I  want  to  give  them  such  a  compensation  as  will 
obviate  any  necessity  of  their  resorting  to  other 
business  to  secure  a  living.  I  am  acquainted 
with  all  the  circuit  judges  in  the  country,  and 
with  all  the  appellate  judges,  except  the  last  gen- 
tleman appointed,  whom  I  hear  very  favorably 
spoken  of.  I  do  not  desire  a  change  in  the  sys- 
tem because  I  have  any  objection  to  the  judges, 
for  I  have  no  idea  that  we  shall  get  better  men 
than  chief  justice  Marshall  and  his  associate 
judge  Simpson,  or  the  gentleman  last  appointed, 
but  I  desire  that  it  shall  be  improved.  This  re- 
port relates  to  what  I  consider  the  most  impor- 
tant branch  of  the  judiciary,  who  have  our  lives 
and  liberties  in  their  care,  and  the  committee 
have  bestowed  the  utmost  careand  labor  on  their 
report.  I  therefore  move  that  the  report  be 
referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  made  the 
special  order  of  the  day  for  Monday  next,  and 
that  500  copies  of  it  be  printed. 

This  motion  prevailed. 

COURT  OF  APPEALS. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of 
the  committe  on  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  APPERSON  having  the  floor,  said:  I  feel 
myself  under  obligations  to  the  committee  for 
the  courtesy  it  displayed  towards  me  yesterday 
in  rising  and  adjourning  until  to-day,  so  as  to 
afford  me  an  opportunity  further  to  address  them 
on  the  subject  which  occupied  my  attention  at 
the  time  of  the  adjournment. 

I  had  dwelt  more  particularly  on  the  subject 
of  branching  the  court,  and  although  it  was  not 
then  wholly  disposed  of,  yet  I  was  so  nearly 
through  with  it,  that  I  will  not  undertake  to 
travel  over  the  ground  again.  It  may  be  said, 
and  perhaps  since  I  closed  yesterday  it  has  been 
said,  that  in  making  out  the  table  I  then  sub- 
mitted, I  had  selected  a  particular  portion  of  the 
state  most  suitable  to  my  purpose,  and  that  per- 
haps other  counties  lying  nearer  Frankfort  would 
not  have  presented  the  same  inequality.  That  I 
deny.  I  laid  down  yesterday  as  one  of  my  prop- 
ositions, this  inequality;  and  that  one  of  the  rea- 
sons I  referred  to  the  particular  counties  I  did, 
was  to  have  as  many  different  judges  in  the  coun- 
ties as  possible,  so  as  to  obviate  the  objection 
that  it  was  a  bad  judge  whose  district  was 
selected.    Hence  it  was  that  I  selected  as  many 


285 


judges  as  I  could.  But  to  satisfy  the  com- 
mittee on  this  point — there  "was  the  county  of 
2f  icholas  vrhich  had  but  four  causes  in  the  court 
of  appeals.  Had  I  chosen,  I  could  have  selected 
counties  immediately  adjacent  to  Nicholas — one 
witli  eight,  another Vith  ten,  and  another  with 
the  same  number — eight  and  twenty  cases  in  all. 
Why  did  I  not  do  it?  Because  they  were  not  in 
the  way  of  the  line  I  was  drawing.  I  did  not 
undertake  to  present  a  one-sided  view.  There 
■were  the  counties  of  Harrison,  Mason,  and  Bath, 
not  one  of  which  brought  up  to  the  court  less 
than  eight  cases,  and  unit€dly  twenty  eight 
causes.  Yet  I  omitted  them  and  put  in  the  coun- 
ty of  Nicholas,  sending  but  four  causes.  That 
appeared  to  me,  at  any  rate,  to  be  fair.  But  I 
can  extend  my  tables  a  little  further.  If  every 
gentleman  could  look  at  that  map  (of  the  Stat* 
of  Kentucky)  I  would  desire  him  to  trace  a  line 
with  me.  t  will  take  a  section  of  the  state,  of 
which  I  have  made  a  table,  commencing  with 
the  county  of  Whitley,  and  embracing  Pulaski, 
Casey,  Green  and  Taylor,  Hardin  and  Breckin- 
ridge, and  down  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  rivers 
and  around  the  Tennessee  line  to  the  beginning, 
and  embracing  forty  two  counties  of  the  south- 
em  portion  of  the  state.  And  how  many  cases 
were  brought  up  to  the  court  at  its  last  term  from 
that  whole  region  of  country"?  The  whole  num- 
ber at  the  June  term  of  the  court  was  three  hun- 
dred and  sixty  five  for  tlie  whole  state,  and  out 
of  that  number,  this  region,  embracing  almost 
half  the  population  of  the  state,  had  only  sixty 
four  causes — ^leaving  to  the  other  portion  of  the 
state  three  hundred  and  one  causes.  Take  more 
than  half  the  territory,  and  nearly  one  half  of 
the  voting  population  of  the  state,  and  they 
had  brought  up  just  sixty  four  causes,  whereas 
the  remaining  portion  of  the  state  brought 
up  three  hundred  and  one!  But  if  I  were  dis- 
posed to  make  it  appear  still  worse  than  that,  I 
might  have  gone  to  the  head  of  the  Big  Sandy 
river,  the  great  Chatteroi  of  the  Indians,  anH 
beginning  at  Harlan,  have  included  also  the 
counties  of  Harlan,  Knox,  Letcher,  Perry,  Clay 
and  Laurel.  You  will  see  at  once  what  an  im- 
mense territory  it  comprises,  and  yet  those  conn 
ties,  so  distant  are  they  from  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment, have  sent  up  but  one  cause  here.  Sixty 
five  causes  only  have  come  from  two  thirds  of 
the  state  so  far  as  territory  is  concerned,  and  em- 
bracing upwards  of  sixty  thousand  voters,  out 
of  one  hundred  and  forty  one  thousand,  the 
whole  number  in  the  state  as  reported  by  the 
auditor  last  year.  This  is  almost  half  of  the 
voting  population  of  the  state,  and  while  they 
have  sent  up  but  sixty  five  causes,  the  remain- 
ing portion  of  the  state  has  sent  up  exact- 
ly three  hundred.  Now  am  I  to  be  told  that 
ttis  table  is  a  partial  one,  and  does  not  tru- 
ly represent  the  facts?  My  object  was  to 
select  the  counties  so  that  they  would  run  regu- 
larly and  have  as  many  judges  as  possible, 
that  it  could  be  seen  whether  the  fault  was  on 
the  part  of  the  judges,  or  whether  there  were 
not  some  other  reasons  for  this  disparity.  Sup- 
pose on  the  other  hand  that  I  had  selected  a  class 
of  counties  with  the  least  possible  business,  I 
should  make  a  different  sort  of  table  from  what 
I  did.  The  counties  of  Adair,  Allen,  Ballard, 
Butler,  Caldwell,  Casey,  Calloway,  Edmonson, 


Grayson,  Hart,  Hickman,  Marshall,  Monroe  and 
Whitley,  did  not  have  a  single  cause  in  the  court 
of  appeals.  Now  if  I  had  been  disposed  to 
make  as  bad  a  comparison  as  possible,  1  could 
have  made  the  selection  from  these  particular 
counties.  And  I  might  have  named  counties 
adjacent  to  these  and  have  one  continuous  line 
too,  with  even  still  fewer  causes  at  the  court  of 
appeals.  I  mean  by  this,  counties  lying  on  the 
south  of  those  I  have  named. 

Now  some  gentleman  may  say  that  this  proves 
too  much — that  there  is  too  much  litigation,  and 
that  these  counties  are  better  off  if  they  do  not 
enjoy  the  facilities  within  the  reach  of  tliose  im- 
mediately around  the  capital.  If  their  lot  is  so 
blessed  m  being  distant  from  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, let  us  at  once  say  to  the  people  here,  this 
IS  a  great  curse  to  central  Kentucky — ^you  have  to 
pay  all  this  expense — ^the  costs  come  out  of 
you,  and  this  court  is  a  great  curse.  Why  if 
there  be  all  these  objections  to  it — if  it  is  not  a 
blessing,  why  are  we  making  provision  that 
there  shall  be  a  court  of  appeals?  I  insist  it  is 
a  blessing,  and  those  "who  live  at  remote  parts  of 
the  state,  should,  as  near  as  may  be,  have  the 
same  facilities  to  have  their  rights  adjudicated 
upon,  as  those  immediately  around  the  capital. 
My  attention  was  called  to.  the  question  as  to 
how  the  court  would  stand  in  regard  to  the  af- 
firmance or  reversal  of  cases  brought  there  from 
the  different  circuits.  Without  undertaking  to 
refer  to  any  particular  causes,  I  will  state  that 
the  court  of  appeals  commenced  its  session  on 
the  5th  day  of  June,  and  up  to  the  2d  July, 
on  looking  at  the  record,  I  find  that  there  were 
sixty  reversals  and  seventy  afiirmances.  Well, 
we  must  suppose  that  in  these  sixty  cases  thus  re- 
versed, there  was  something  to  reverse,  and  some 
error  in  the  court  below;  and  if  these  counties 
in  the  neighborhood  are  thus  to  enjoy  the  privi- 
lege of  having  their  rights  maintained,  do,  if 
you  please,  extend  the  same  privilege  to  the  dis- 
tant portions  of  the  state.  Give  us  the  same  fa- 
cilities as  near  as  may  be,  for,  of  course,  I  do 
not  expect  they  will  travel  into  every  county. 

An  objection  has  been  urged  in  regard  to  the 
furnishing  of  law  libraries;  and  we  were  told 
that  the  public  library  has  cost  the  state  about 
$.3,000.  I  presume  there  are  very  few  county 
towns  in  the  state,  where  the  libraries  of  the  law- 
yers residing  there  did  not  cost  much  more  than 
that  amount.  There  was  a  time  when  such  men  as 
Trimble,  Boyle,  Bibb,  Mills,  and  divers  oth- 
ers who  have  never  been  surpassed  in  Kentucky, 
so  far  as  I  have  any  knowleage,  sat  on  the  bench 
of  that  court,  ana  where  was  the  state  library 
then?  And  tliere  were  as  2eamed  and  as  eminent 
law>'ers  in  those  days  as  now,  but  where  was  the 
public  library  then?  And  yet  the  absence  of 
one  is  now  one  of  the  greatest  objections  urged 
against  branching  the  court  of  appeals,  if  we 
shall  decide  to  have  one.  Another  objection 
was  the  cost,  and  yet  has  any  gentleman,  who 
has  advanced  it,  told  the  committee  how  it  was 
to  cost  a  single  dollar  more.  Are  the  people  to 
be  taxed?  No,  the  expenses  are  to  be  paid  by  the 
litigants  just  as  at  present.  Not  a  dollar  is  to  be 
drawn  from  the  treasury.  What  else  is  there? 
There  is  the  tipstaff.  How  will  he  be  an  ad- 
ditional expense.  He  is  hired  by  the  day,  and 
will   not  there  be  just  the  same  expense  to  be 


236 


incurred,  wliefeher  tkey  sit  ia  one  or  four  places? 
What  other  expenses  are  there?  I  have  heard 
it  said  this  system  is  to  be  more  expensive,  and 
yet  wherein  it  is  to  be  so,  has  not  as  yet  been 
pointed  out.  I  have  heard  it  said,  also,  that  to 
branch  the  court,  would  be  to  crowd  the  court 
houses  with  lawyers — but  is  that  so?  The  gen- 
tleman comes  liere  to  the  court  of  appeals — he 
goes  into  a  fine  room,  finely  cai-peted,  and  fur- 
nished witli  every  convenience,  and  sometimes 
he  may  find  two  lawyers  there — one  on  each 
side  of  the  case — and  the  three  judges,  a  clerk, 
and  tipstaff.  Sometimes  that  is  all  the  compa- 
ny in  tne  court  room.  When  was  there  ever  seen 
as  many  as  twenty  lawyers  in  the  court  at  one 
time?  I  have  been  in  the  habit  of  attending  every 
term  for  the  last  few  years,  and  I  am  certain  that 
I  have  never  seen  twenty  assembled  there  at  a 
■time.  Branch  the  court,  and  if  every  lawyer  in 
the  district  attended  they  would  not  fi:ll  the 
court  house.  We  have  no  need  of  the  attend- 
ance of  any  other  than  lawyers,  though  of  course 
all  who  desire  it,  have  the  privilege  of  coming. 
One  gentleman  has  said,  you  may  be  permitted 
to  practice  by  brief,  and  that  the  legislature  has 
so  determined.  But  those  in  the  habit  of  prac- 
ticing in,  or  of  frequenting  this  court,  are  aware 
that  motions  are  to  be  made,  which  even  if  a 
lawyer  at  a  distance  is  practicing  by  brief,  he 
must  employ  a  lawyer  residing  here  to  make. 
So  much  for  the  question  of  cost.  And  when  a 
gentleman  again  asserts  that  this  branching  sys- 
tem is  to  cost  more,  I  am  fond  of  figures  and  I 
want  to  see  it  proved  to  me.  It  is  a  mathemati- 
cal proposition,  and  therefore  can  be  easily  put 
down  in  figures;  but  a  mere  declaration  that  it 
is  to  be  so,  amounts  to  nothing.  There  was  one 
remark  made  by  the  gentleman  from  Madison, 
(Mr.  Turner,)  which  I  very  much  regretted  to 
hear.  It  was,  that  the  court  of  appeals  was  not 
as  it  ought  to  be.  I  do  not  know  how  that  is  so. 
They  are  eminent  judges,  and  have  given  as 
much  satisfaction  to  the  people,  perhaps,  as  any 
other  three  men  who   could  have  been  selected. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  gentleman  has  misun- 
^derstood  me.  I  said  that  the  salary  ought  to  be 
such  as  always  to  secure  the  very  best  men  on 
the  bench  of  that  court.  I  said  that  the  present 
judges  were  men  of  capacity  and  industry,  and 
filled  the  office  very  well. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  am  exceedingly  gratified 
that  the  gentleman  has  made  this  explanation, 
for  I  am  sure  he  did  not  design  to  do  injustice 
*  to  the  judges.  And  as  I  certainly  misunder- 
stood the  gentleman,  I  will  let  the  matter  pass. 
But  the  gentleman  did  say  that  they  coula  not 
do  all  the  business,  and  there  we  agree  exactly. 
I  think  three  judges  cannot  do  the  business, 
and  those  who  have  been  in  the  habit  of  at- 
tending here,  may  be  aware  that  they  are  com- 
pelled to  sit  up  almost  every  night  during  the 
winter  until  twelve  o'clock.  That  is  imposing 
too  much  labor  upon  them. 

It  was  objected  to  having  four  judges,  that  it 
was  an  equal  number,  and  that  the  decisions, 
when  the  court  sliould  divide,  would  not  be  uni- 
form. No  proposition  I  suppose  can  be  stated, 
which  will  De  entirely  perfect.  Let  us  suppose  a 
case  where  there  are  three  judges.  A  farmer  is 
sued  in  ejectment  for  his  land.  The  circuit 
judge  instructs  the  jury   so  that  they  find  in 


favor  of  the  tenant  in  possession,  but  the  claim- 
ant to  the  land,  brings  the  case  to  the  court  of 
appeals,  and  two  of  the  judges  going  in  favor 
of  the  claimant,  the  decision  is  reversed,  and 
the  occupant  is  turned  off  the  land.  Yet  he  had 
two  judges  and  the  plaintiff  had  but  two. 
The  circuit  judge  who  ought  to  be  qualified — 
and  I  know  some  who  are  admirably  so — and 
one  of  the  appellate  judges  are  on  one  side,  and 
their  opinions  are  overruled  by  the  two  other 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals.  I  think  a  man 
would  have  a  right  to  feel  in  tolerably  bad  hu- 
mor at  loosing  his  land  in  such  a  case.  This 
same  objection  will  apply  to  any  even  number, 
and  yet  I  believe  a  majority  of  the  states  have 
an  even  number.  The  rule  is  that  if  the  court 
is  equally  divided  the  judgment  of  the  court  be- 
low shall  stand. 

We  hear  very  much  about  the  expense  of  put- 
ting a  fourth  judge  on  the  bench.  Why  when 
we  had  not  near  the  business,  perhaps  not  half 
that  is  now  before  the  court  of  appeals,  we  had 
four  judges.  We  were  told  the  other  day  by  the 
chairman  of  the  committee,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklffe; 
that  for  something  like  twelve  years,  we  had 
four  judges  on  the  appellate  bench.  And  there 
were  very  many  states  in  this  Union  who  had 
exactly  that  number,  and  many  had  six  and  New 
York  had  eight.  The  expense  would  be  just 
that  of  adding  one  judge  more  to  the  bench, 
which  I  believe  to  be  entirely  necessary,  and  in 
that  particular  also  I  agree  with  the  gentleman 
from  Madison.  We  shall  probably  have  a  great 
deal  said  on  this  matter  of  expense.  The  elder 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  is  very 
fond  of  talking  about  the  enormous  expendi- 
tures of  our  government.  We  have  heard  him 
declare  that  our  government  once  has  been  car- 
ried on  on  a  tax  of  six  cents  on  the  $100 
when  the  valuation  was  much  less  tlian  at 
present,  and  when  many  articles  that  are  now 
taxed  were  not  then — and  that  now  our  taxation 
is  nineteen  cents  on  the  $100.  It  is  easy  to 
account  for  much  of  it.  Tavo  cents  of  it  goes 
to  pay  us,  the  expenses  of  this  convention — 
two  more  for  educational  purposes — and  five 
more  for  the  sinking  fund,  to  extinguish  the  in- 
terest on  the  public  debt.  If  we  look  at  the 
growth  and  prosperity  of  the  state,  if  we  regard 
the  increase  in  its  population,  we  shall  see  the 
necessity  for  this  additional  judge. 

With  regard  to  the  subject  of  re-elegibility,  I 
know  that  I  shall  be  separating  from  some  of  my 
best  friends,  for  whose  opinions  I  have  the  high- 
est respect.  But  let  me  call  the  attention  of 
gentlemen  on  this  floor  to  a  few  facts.  Where  is 
the  state  out  of  the  thirty  in  this  Union,  whose 
judges  are  ineligible  for  a  second  term?  Where 
is  it  adopted,  with  all  the  experience  we  haveac- 
q^uired  since  the  foundation  of  tliis  government, 
since  state  constitutions  have  been  made,  a  pe- 
riod now  between  sixty  and  seventy  years?  If 
it  be  true  that  it  is  so  radical  a  principle,  that  a 
good  officer  should  be  re-elegible,  how  is  it  we 
never  found  the  contrary  principle  to  have  been 
adopted?  It  may  have  been  discussed  on  divers 
occasions,  but  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  discov- 
er, there  is  not  a  state  constitution  where  the  of- 
ficers are  not  re-elcgible.  Why  should  it  not  be 
80?  From  whom  do  they  get  tneir  appointment? 
From  the  people.     I  know  that  when  you  begin 


237 


to  talk  about  the  people,  you  -will  hear  some  one 
springing  up  and  saying  that  is  demagoguism. 
Those  who  made  our  constitution  did  not 
think  so.  Had  I  made  the  remark  that  I  am 
about  to  read  from  that  instrument,  it  \rould 
have  been  said  directly  that  I  -was  resorting  to 
demagoguism : 

"All  power  is  inherent  in  the  people,  and  all 
'free  governments  are  founded  on  their  authori- 
'  ty,  and  instituted  for  their  peace,  safety,  and 
'  happiness." 

This  is  a  correct  principle,  and  we  feel  and 
know  that  it  is.  And  now  we  are  endeavoring 
to  return  in  some  degree  to  that  principle  thus 
declared  in  1799.  And  as  all  power  is  inherent 
in  the  people,  let  us  undertake  to  trust  the  peo- 
ple. They  have  elected  us  here,  and  I  know 
that  there  are  very  many  of  us,  myself  among  the 


Hampshire,  the  supreme  court  sits  in  every 
county;  in  Vermont,  the  same;  in  Massachu- 
setts, in  eight  different  places;  in  Connecticut, 
in  every  county;  in  New  York,  in  every  other 
year,  in  each  judicial  district,  there  being  four 
ofthem;  in  Pennsylvania,  in  four  districts,  at  such 

e laces  as  are  pointed  out  by  the  constitution:  in 
'elaware,  there  are  but  three  counties,  and  the 
supreme  court  sits  in  every  one  of  them;  in  Vir- 
ginia, it  sits  in  two  places;  in  South  Carolina, 
the  same;  in  Georgia,  in  every  county;  in  Ala- 
bama and  Mississippi,  it  is  n ot" bran c he'd;  in  Lou- 
isiana, uncertain;  in  Texas  there  are  three  branch- 
es, and  in  Tennessee  there  are  branches.  In 
Kentuckv,  we  know  there  are  none  yet,  but  we 
hope  to  have  them  very  soon.  In  Ohio,  they 
sit  in  each  county,  but  they  have  a  right  to  ad- 
journ questions  in  bank  where  they  all  sit.     In 


number,  who  once  had  prejudices  against  the  '  I^^'"ois,  there  are  three  branches;  in  Missouri, 
election  of  judges  by  the  people.  We  have  I  ^^ur;  in  Wisconsin,  five,  and  in  Indiana,  they 
never  been  accustome'd  to  it,  and  perhaps  have    seem  not  to  have  any.     Thus  it  will  be  seen 


always  thought  that  the  judiciary  should  be 
placed  as  far  as  possible  from  the  people  and  not 
as  in  England,  as  far  as  possible  from  the  crown. 
Kow  ina.smuch  as  all  power  is  inherent  in  the 
people,  thev  certainly  should  be  trusted  to  select 
all  their  ofiicers,  whether  judicial  or  executive. 
"VVe  say  that  they  shall  elect  the  governor — his 
duties  are  to  see  that  the  laws  are  executed. 
They  elect  also  the  legislature,  the  law-making 
power,  and  are  they  not  competent  to  indicate 
the  particular  individual  who  shall  administer 
those  laws?    It  is  but  another  form  of  the   exer- 


that  there  are  a  great  majority  of  the  states,  in 
which  the  supreme  court  is  branched.  There  is 
the  old  state  of  Pennsylvania,  for  many  a  long 
year,  the  court  has  sat  at  Philadelphia,  at  Har- 
risburg,  at  Sunbury,  and  at  Pittsburg.  Have 
they  a  stat«  library  travelling  about  in  a  cart?  In 
old  times  here,  a  wheelbarrow  or  two  would  have 
carried  all  the  law  books  the  judges  had  to  con- 
sult. But  they  had  to  reflect  more  and  read 
less  in  forming  their  decisions.  And  one  objec- 
tion that  I  have  to  the  court  of  appeals  is,  that 
they  write   rather  too  much.     The  old   opinions 


cise  of  the  same  power.     And  inasmuch  as  it  is    °^  years  ago,  were  very  short,  and  came  directly 


conceded  that  all  power  is  inherent  in  the  people, 
why  not  go  to  the  source  at  once,  when  you  are 
about  to  provide  for  the  appointment  of  officers? 
I  confess  that  my  prejudices  were  early  enlisted 
against  the  svstera,  but  when  I  come  to  reflect 
upon  it,  and  Team  its  effects  in  other  states,  my 
mind  becomes  more  reconciled  to  it.  I  learned 
from  a  particular  friend  of  mine  who  has  remov- 
ed from  Montgomery  county  to  Illinois,  that  in 
that  state,  under  the'  new  co'nstitution,  the  people 
elect  their  judges,  and  he  believes  it  to  be  the 
wisest  plan  in  the  world,  and  tliat  it  secures  the 
ablest  judiciary.  I  lately  met  a  gentleman  from 
Louisiana  who  studied  law  with  me,  and  he 
states  that  there  is  a  great  desire  prevailing  there 
to  have  their  judges  elected  by  the  people.  He 
resides  near  the  Mississippi  line,  and  the  testimo- 
ny of  all  the  lawyers  who  go  into  that  state  to 
practice,  is  that  tliey  have  much  better  judges, 
and  that  the  business  is  far  better  done  than  in 
Louisiana.  How  is  it  in  Tennessee?  They  have 
been  appointed  there  by  the  Legislature,  and 
they  have  recently  decided  that  the  people  shall 
elect  them.  And  if  this  principle  is  so  danger- 
ous a  one — it  has  been  in  operation  for  a  consid- 
rable  time — how  is  it  that  its  dangers  have 
never  been  discovered?  And  there  seems  to  be 
a  tendency  all  over  the  Union  to  adopt  it.  As 
the  people  are  the  source  of  all  power,  let  us 
therefore  require  those  who  desire  office,  to  seek 
it  from  that  source. 

I  have  omitted  one  thing  on  the  subject  of 
branching  the  court,  and  I  must  now  beg  the  in- 
dulgence of  the  house,  to  return  to  that  subject. 
If  this  idea  of  branching  the  court  is  so  very 
objectionable,  how   is  it  that  so  many  of  our  sis 


to  the   point,  and  when  they  disposed  of  that 
they  wrote  no  more.     "With  regard  to  the  man- 
ner of  selecting  judges   in  other  states,  in  Ver- 
mont, they  are  elected  by  the  legislature  every 
year,  or  oftener  if  the  legislature  choose.     Well, 
did  you  ever  hear  that  they  were  not  re-eligible 
there?    In  reading  the  biography  of  the  present 
Post  Master  General,  (CoUamer,)  I  found  that  he 
had  filled  the  office  of  Judge,  and  as  his  biogra- 
phy said,  he  was  re-elected  every  six  months' for 
years   until  he  went  to  congress.     From   those 
who  know  the  Post  Master  General,  I  learn  that 
he   is  admirably   qualified  for  the  station,  and 
that  he  was  always  re-elected  without  opposition. 
In  Rhode  Island,  the  judges  are  elected  by  the 
legislature,  and  are  to  hold  their  seats  until  the 
legislature  declares  them  vacant,  which  mav  be 
done  at  once.     In  Connecticut,  they  are  ele'cted 
by  the  legislature,  and  hold  during 'good  behav- 
ior.    In   Jfew  Jersey,  they  are  appointed  by  the 
governor  and  senate,   and  hold  their  offices  for 
seven  years,  and  are  then  re-eligible.     In  Penn- 
sylvania, the  governor  and  senate  appoint;  they 
hold  their  offices  for  fifteen  years,  and  are  then 
reeligible.    In  Michigan,  by 'the  governor  and 
.senate,  for  seven  years,  and  re-eligible.     In  Ar- 
kansas— by  the   legislature,   to    hold  for  eight 
years,  and're-eligible.     In  Texas,  the  judges  are 
appointed  by  the  governor  and  senate,  to  hold 
for   six    years,  and  re-eligible.     In   Louisiana, 
they  are  appointed  by  the  governor  and  senate 
for  eight  years,  and  re-eligible.     In  Mississippi, 
the  people  elect  for  six  years,  and  they  are  re-el- 
igible.    In  Ohio,  they  are  elected  by  the  legisla- 
ture for  seven    yeare,  and   are  re-eligible.     In 
Tennessee,  they  are    appointed  by  the  legisla- 


ter  states  have  adopted  that  very  plan?    In  New   ture,  and  hold  for  three  years,  and  they  are  re- 


238 


eligiciie.  In  Georgia,  by  the  legislature,  for 
three  years,  and  re-eligible.  In  New  York,  they 
have  eight  judges,  four  of  whom  have  been 
elected  in  one  particular  "vvay,  and  four  in 
another  way.  Theirs  is  a  travelling  court. 
Pennsylvania  is  the  same;  and  Avhat  objection 
is  there  to  our  adopting  the  same  plan?  We 
only  ask  that  the  same  judicial  facilities  may  be 
extended  to  the  people  of  the  exterior  portions 
of  the  state,  as  are  enjoyed  by  those  of  the  in- 
terior. They  are  not  compelled  to  be  dissatis- 
fied with  the  decision  of  the  circuit  judge,  but 
let  them  have  the  same  facilities  forreaching  the 
appellate  court,  if  they  desire  to  do  so. 

Now,  these  judges  m  New  York  have  a  dis 
tinguished  reputation.  Go  into  your  state  libra- 
ry, and  you  will  find  there  about  one  hundred 
volumes  of  the  New  York  reports.  And  are 
these  celebrated  judges  a  set  of  travelling  tin- 
kers? Are  they  going  about,  as  the  tinkers  of 
old,  for  the  purpose  of  running  up  old  spoons 
and  basons?  Are  not  their  decisions  among  the 
highest  legal  authorities  in  the  land?  The  old 
constitution  of  New  York,  it  is  true,  provided 
that  after  a  judge  had  arrived  at  the  age  of  six- 
ty, he  should  vacate  his  ofliice,  but  what  regrets 
had  the  people  that  such  a  provision  drove  chan- 
cellor Kent  from  the  bench.  What  a  great  loss 
was  it  to  the  jurisprudence  of  the  state,  nay,  to 
the  union,  that  he  was  not  permitted  to  contin- 
ue in  the  discharge  of  his  high  duties?  What, 
■under  such  a  provision,  would  have  become  of 
Chief  Justice  Marshall,  the  brighest  ornament 
of  the  American  bench?  He  lived  to  be  a  very 
old  man,  and  up  to  the  last  retained  full  pos- 
session of  the  finest  intellect  in  the  land.  And 
to  declare  that  a  judge  should  not  be  eligible, 
was  it  not  to  say  to  the  people,  we  are  better 
qualified  to  judge  of  his  capacity  than  you? — 
We  are  not  going  to  permit  you  to  select  these 
old  men,  or  to  re-elect  those  men  who  have  serv- 
ed you  for  eight  years,  and  whom  you  are  satis- 
fied have  served  you  well.  That  is  the  amount 
of  the  declaration  of  ineligibility. 

There  has  been  a  wide  range  taken  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  this  report  of  the  committee,  and  par- 
ticularly on  the  proposition  that  the  legislature 
shall  have  the  power  to  remove  the  judge  by  a 
majority.  And  it  does  strike  me  as  remarkable, 
that  my  old  friend,  the  old  patriarch,  whom  I 
have  delighted  to  follow,  should  desire  to  have 
the  legislature  supreme,  and  that  a  majority 
should  have  the  power  to  do — what?  To  turn 
out — not  an  officer  selected  by  another  power 
than  the  one  from  whom  they  derive  their  own 
authority — ^but  that  a  majority  of  the  people's 
representatives  should  turn  out  of  office  a  man 
wnom  the  people  themselves  have  elected.  Let 
U8  see  how  it  would  work.  A  district  selects 
their  judge  and  he  comes  up  here,  and  in  the 
legislature  charges  are  preferred  against  him. — 
Every  representative  from  his  district  is  aware 
that  the  people  there  know  liim  to  be  honest  and 
qualifFea,  and  they  accordingly  vote  against 
turning  him  out.  But  the  majority,  who  know 
nothing  of  him,  vote  him  out.  Th(!re  is  a  di- 
rect disregard  of  the  voice  of  the  people.  The 
time  once  was,  when  that  same  old  friend  of 
mine — he  is  now  a  patriarch — stood  up  most 
manfully  and  battled  most  resolutely  against 
this  principle.    lie  once  contended  that  officers 


appointed  not  by  the  people,  but  far  removea 
from  the  people  and  appointed  by  the  executive, 
should  require  two-thirds  of  the  people's  repre- 
sentatives to  turn  them  out.  What  is  his  posi- 
tion now,  when  connected  with  that  which  he 
held  then?  Why  that  when  the  officers  were  re- 
moved as  far  as  possible  from  the  people,  it  ought 
to  require  two-thirds  of  the  people's  representa- 
tives to  remove  them,  but  if  you  bring  their  ap- 
pointment directly  to  the  people  themselves,  then 
a  majority  of  the  people's  representatives  ought 
to  be  sufficient  to  remove  them  !  That  is  the 
position.  But  as  was  enquired  by  the  chairman 
of  the  committee,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe)  where 
is  the  instance  that  has  occurred  under  the  two- 
thirds  principle,  of  a  judge  not  being  broken 
when  he  deserved  it?  I  have  heard  it  said  that 
there  were  never  removals  at  all  under  the  two- 
thirds  principle,  yet  my  friend  gave  an  instance 
where  a  judge  was  removed  by  a  nearly  unani- 
mous vote.  My  old  friend,  the  patriarch  to 
whom  I  have  referred,  has  a  happy  tact  of  bring- 
ing every  man  to  his  support.  His  arguments 
on  the  subject  of  removal  by  the  legislature, 
brings  to  his  support  a  gentleman  who  was,  at 
first,  opposed  to  the  election  of  judges,  yet  he 
now  advocates  their  election,  ana  wants  a  ma- 
jority of  the  legislature  to  turn  them  out !  My 
friend  from  Fleming  (Mr.  M.  P.  Marshall,)  was 
just  as  much  opposed  to  the  majority  turning  out 
as  possible,  yet  he  goes  against  branching  the 
court,  and  therefore  he  is  also  a  supporter  of  my 
old  friend.  It  seems  to  be  wholly  immaterial  to 
him  how  he  does  it,  but  he  is  sure  to  gather 
around  him  a  host  of  supporters.  The  old  patri- 
arch has  been  a  leader  all  his  life,  and  I  have  no 
doubt  always  will  be.  I,  myself,  have  hereto- 
fore been  happy  to  follow  his  lead,  but  we  shall 
have  to  separate  now. 

Let  us  examine  the  objections  to  the  re-eligi- 
bility of  the  officer.  Nearly  everybody  who  has 
spoken  has  been  a  lawyer,  and  all  have  praised 
the  judiciary.  I  think  it  is  the  strong  arm  of 
government.  It  is  the  weak  department,  but 
the  strong  arm.  If  a  judge  is  not  to  be  re-eligi- 
ble, where  is  the  lawyer  willing  to  leave  his  lu- 
crative practice,  and  break  up  all  his  business 
connections  to  accept  the  office?  A  man,  pretty 
M'ell  advanced  in  years,  and  rich,  might,  perhaps, 
be  willing  to  take  it;  but  where  is  the  man  of 
from  thirty  five  to  forty  years  of  age,  with  a  good 
practice,  who  would  be  willing  to  surrender 
that  practice  to  go  on  the  bench,  and  there  to 
serve  for  eight  years  and  not  to  be  re-eligible? 
The  judge,  under  such  a  system,  would  be  at 
the  end  of  eight  years,  after  having  lost  all  his 
customers,  and  got  out  of  his  traces,  as  it  were, 
in  the  practice  of  law,  and  having  become  more 
familiar  with  the  drawing  up  of  decisions  and 
opinions  than  of  declarations  and  bills  in  chan- 
cery, in  a  most  unenviable  position.  Here  is  at 
once  a  powerful  reason  why  the  judge  should  be 
re-eligiule.  There  is  another  reason.  He  is  to 
return,  again,  to  the  appointing  power — ^the  peo- 
ple, who  are  the  sources  of  allpower,  and  if  hehas 
not  acted  properly,  if  he  has  been  corrupt  in  any 
way,  or  discharged  his  duties  in  a  partial  man- 
ner, I  ask  you  if  he  will  be  re-elected?  I  have 
heard  it  said  that  this  proposition  for  re-eligibil- 
ity is  a  radical  one.  It  seems  to  mc  a  most  con- 
servative one,  and  further,  it  is  leaving  the  office 


239 


open  to  the  greatest  number.  The  gentleman 
from  Scott  (Mr.  "W.  Johnson,)  says  he  is  for  rota- 
tion in  office,  and  for  that  reason,  it  seems,  he  is 
not  willing  that  the  people  shall  sav  ■whom  they 
prefer  for  office.  It  is  not  proposed  to  say  to  the 
people  that  these  men  shall  Be  elected,  or  that 
they  must  re-elect  them.  It  is  only  casting  their 
lot  among  the  claims  of  other  citizens  whom  the 
people  are  to  pass  upon.  If  they  think  the  for- 
mer judge  to  D€  the  best  man,  give  them  a  chance 
to  re-elect  him. 

It  has  been  inquired  of  me  whether  or  not,  in 
the  division  of  the  state  into  districts,  I  did  not 
expect  a  branch  of  the  court  would  be  brought 
near  to  me.  I  have  not  looked  forward  to  this, 
but  the  county  in  which  I  live  is  the  Piedmont 
of  Kentucky — it  is  right  at  the  foot  of  the  hills — 
and  if  it  should  so  turn  out  that  it  will  come 
there,  it  will  be  received  with  open  hearts  and 
open  doors.  It  will  never  be  necessary  to  call 
upon  the  state  to  build  a  court  house,  and  so  far 
as  expense  of  living  is  concerned,  I  do  not  see 
that  It  will  cost  the  judges  any  more  than  to 
come  and  sit  at  Frankfort.  Some  there  was  who 
call  such  a  court  migratory,  but  I  do  not  think 
the  term  applicable  to  a  court  that  is  to  sit  in  four 
different  places  in  the  state.  It  would  not  be  a 
roving  or  wandering  court,  but  would  have  sta- 
ed  points  of  meeting. 

Objection  has  been  made  to  the  vote  by  ballot. 
I  have  notmuch  to  say  about  this, but  as  we  have 
got  to  vote  very  shortly  on  the  question — let  me 
make  one  inquirj'.  Has  there  ever  been  a  state 
in  the  Union  that  ever  adopted  the  ballot  sys- 
tem, and  abandoned  it,  for  the  viva  voce  system? 
Are  there  not  many  states  who  once  praticed 
the  viva,  voce  system,  who  have  abandoned  it  for 
the  ballot,  ana  never  again  returned  to  it?  The 
ballot  system  therefore,  would  appear  to  be  the 
better  one.  In  regard  to  political  offices,  I  do 
not  care  any  thing  about  it.  It  is,  perhaps,  not 
so  manly  a  plan  to  go  and  deposit  a  vote  in  a 
ballot  box,  so  that  the  candidate  cannot  know 
whether  you  voted  for,  oragainsthim.as  to  come 
out  and  declare  your  preference.  I  believe  that 
our  constituents  are  entirely  satisfied — so  far  as 
the  electionof  the  judicial  officers  is  concerned — 
that  they  shall  be  elected  by  ballot.  Indeed, 
there  are,  throughout  the  state,  very  many,  we 
know,  who  are  in  favor  of  balloting  for  all  the 
officers.  But  whatever  complaints  are  made  up- 
on other  subjects,  there  are  no  complaints,  so  far 
as  I  am  aware,  as  to  viva  voce  voting;  therefore, 
I  would  be  disposed  to  leave  it  as  it  stands  at 
present.  I  would  leave  that  point  untouched  al- 
together. 

The  amendment  which  I  desire  should  be  made 
to  the  report  of  the  committee,  and  which  I  in- 
tend to  offer  when  the  proper  time  arrives — and  I 
suppose  it  will  be  more  appropriate  to  do  so  in 
the  house  than  in  committee — is  this:  I  want  a 
general  election  of  the  judges.  And  here  it  is  I 
shall  have  to  separate  I  suppose  from  some  of 
my  friends.  I  insist  that  tnese  judges  as  they 
are  to  pass  upon  the  rights  of  the  people  of  the 
whole  state,  ought  to  be  elected  by  the  people  of 
the  whole  state;  that  you  shoulcf  not  elect  one 
in  the  north  and  have  him  pass  upon  the  rights 
of  the  people  of  the  south,  who  had  no  hand  in 
electing  him.  He  is  under  no  responsibility  to 
tliem.    I  w^ould  have  each  candidate  brought  be- 


fore all  the  people,  and  let  them  vote  for  the  men 
of  their  choice.  When  you  bring  them  before 
all  the  people  of  the  state  you  will  not  find  so 
great  a  tendency  to  centralize;  but  they  will  be 
diffused  through  the  state.  I  say  that,  inasmuch 
as  the  judge  has  to  pass  upon  the  rights  of  all 
the  people  of  the  state,  let  us  give  all  the  peo- 
ple the  same  privilege  in  electing  him.  1  insist 
that  it  is  but  right  to  give  all  parts  of  the  state, 
as  nearly  as  can  be,  equal  facilities  and  an  equal 
opportunity  of  voting  for  all  the  judges.  And, 
in  re»ard  to  the  matter  of  expense,  it  is  not  a 
tax  that  is  to  be  levied  upon  the  community;  it 
is  a  voluntary  contribution  on  the  part  of  those 
who  have  cases  to  be  tried  before  the  judges  of 
the  appellate  court.  Let  an  opportunity  then 
be  offered  to  the  people  in  every  part  of  the  state, 
south  as  well  as  north,  to  carry  their  cases  into 
that  court.  There  is  no  mathematical  proposi- 
tion that  can  be  more  easily  proved  than  that 
professional  men,  residing  at  the  capital,  do  the 
greater  part  of  the  business  in  that  court.  I  be- 
lieve that  I  have  said  about  all  that  I  intended 
to  say.  I  feel  grateful  that  I  have  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  address  this  committee:  and  as  I  have 
been  a  very  silent  member  heretofore,  I  may  be 
permitted  perhaps  to  add  a  few  remarks'.  It 
seems  to  me  that  we  have  not  got  a  great  deal  to 
do.  "We  may  talk  a  great  deal  about  abstract 
propositions  upon  slavery,  but  will  not  the  sub- 
ject remain  exactly  as  it  is  now?  So  far  as  I  can 
leam  from  conversations  with  delegates  around 
me,  we  are  not  going  to  disturb  it.  There  are 
certain  purposes,  however,  for  which  the  people 
have  sent  us  hero.  There  are  certain  reforms 
which  they  desire  shall  be  made.  Prominent 
among  those  is  a  change  in  the  tenure  of  the 
offices  of  the  judges;  that  is  one  of  the  great  ob- 
jects for  which  we  are  assembled:  their  tenure 
of  office  being  now  for  life,  and  it  being  desira- 
ble to  change  that  tenure  to  a  term  of  years. 
Another  great  object  is  that  the  judges  shall  be 
elected  by  the  people.  And  another  change  that 
is  required  to  be  made  is  a  change  in  the  county 
court  system.  Another  is,  that  we  shall  provide 
for  biennial  sessions  of  the  legislature,  and  that 
there  shall  be  no  special  legislation,  such  as  the 
granting  of  divorces.  If  there  be  anything  else 
of  great  importance  that  the  people  have  re- 
quired to  be  done,  I  am  not  prepared  at  this  time 
to  say  what  it  is.  In  regard  to  the  branching  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  if  we  effect  those  other 
great  objects  that  I  have  referred  to,  which  ever 
way  we  may  determine  that  question,  I  think 
we  shall  have  made  a  pretty  good  constitution 
after  all.  This  self-constituted  county  court  will 
not  be  in  existence.  There  will  be  a  general 
election  of  all  the  officers  by  the  people,  and  if 
nothing  more  be  done,  though  there  may  be  a  few 
other  changes  which  I  would  be  pleased  to  see 
made,  yet,  upon  the  whole,  I  shall  be  content, 
and  even  if  I  shall  be  overruled  in  this  matter  of 
the  general  election  I  shall  still  be  satisfied. 


The  following  tables,  alluded  to  in  Mr.  Ap- 
person's  remarks,  are  appended,  for  the  better 
understanding  of  the  subject  discussed  by  him. 
The  tables  are  made  up  from  the  conrt  of  ap- 
peals docket  at  the  last  spring  term. 


COUNTIES  NEAR  TO  FRANKFORT. 


FIRST   CLASS. 

j^^>. 

Causes  at 

Causes  in 

No.  of  vo 

^^li,,;. 

spr.  term 

cir.  court 

ters  in 

:;,  •.  ." 

1849. 

1848. 

1848. 

"Woodford, 

9 

248 

1255 

Fayette, 

10 

415 

2584 

Bourbon, 

11 

241 

1773 

Nicholas, 

4 

219 

1713 

Fleming, 

16 
50 

189 
1312 

2311 

9636 

SECOXD  CLASS. 

Estill, 

8 

102 

1011 

Madison, 

14 

152 

2566 

Garrard, 

,       19 

215 

1563 

Mercer, 

10 
51 

283 
752 

2125 

7265 

THIRD  CLASS. 

Washington, 

9 

269 

1770 

Marion, 

8 

168 

1768 

Nelson, 

7 

179 

2007 

Jefferson, 

45 

1225 

6774 

Meade, 

10 

79 

180 

100 
1841 
3905 

1022 

13341 

Grand  total. 

30242 

COUNTIES  DISTANT  FROM  FRANKFORT. 


FIRST   CLASS. 

Causes  at 

(Causes  in 

No.  of  vo- 

spr. term 

clr.  court 

ters  in 

1849. 

1848. 

1848. 

Pulaski, 

2 

132 

2305 

Green, 

1 

190 

2365 

Barren, 

3 

256 

2939 

Warren, 

2 

201 

2131 

Logan, 

2 

192 

2016 

10 

971 

11756 

SECOND    CLASS. 

Caldwell, 

0 

229 

1860 

Hopkins, 

1 

194 

1813 

Henderson, 

1 

177 

1467 

Daviess, 

1 

176 

1933 

3 

776 

7073 

THIRD   CLASS. 

Fulton, 

2 

163 

631 

Hickman, 

0 

81 

656 

Graves 

1 

120 

1576 

Calloway, 
Marshall, 

0 

79 

1206 

0 

32 

824 

Ballard, 

0 

146 

728 

McCracken, 

3 

160 

742 

Trigg, 

1 

176 

1381 

Crittenden, 

1 

159 

947 

Livingston, 

2 

10 

•    .  J3 

120 
1236 
2983 

808 

9499 

Grand  total 

28328 

Mr.  DIXON.    I  am  anxious  sir  to  make  a  few 
remarks    upon   two    other    propositions   which 
have  grown  up  in  the  course  of  this  debate,  al- 
though I  am  not  disposed  to  discuss  any  other 
questions  than  those  which  came  fairly  and  le- 
gitimately before  this  committee,  and  I  shall  not 
therefore,  say  anything  upon  the  abstract  ques- 
tion of  slavery,  to  which  my  friend  who  has  just 
preceded  me  has   alluded.     I  am  no  flatterer  of 
the  people.     I  am  the  people's  friend,  however, 
and  I  trust  in  God  I  ever  shall  be  their  friend; 
and  if  I  could  be  their  protector,  I  would  employ 
such  feeble  abilities  as  I  possess  to  that  end.    I 
am  among  those  who  think  it  right  that  in  some 
respects,  the  people  should  be  protected  against 
themselves.    Not  sir,  that  I  have  not  the  utmost 
confidence  in  the  capability  of  the  people  for  self 
government.     I  have  every  confidence  in  their 
ability  to  govern  themselves,  and  I  take  occasion 
here  to  remark,  that  I  am  very  decidedly  in  favor 
of  the  people  electing  most,  if  not  all,  the  offi- 
cers of  government.     I  am  for  electing  the  judges: 
but  although  I  am  for  electing  the  judges,  I  am 
not  for  weakening  the  judiciary  department.     I 
am   not  for  making   it  dependent.     I   am   for 
placing  it  in  an  elevated  positition,  such  as  may- 
enable  it  to  administer  justice  in  the  veiy  spirit 
of  the  constitution  without  sale,  denial,  or  delay. 
These  are  the  principles  to  which  I  hold.     I  am 
for  electing  the  judges  because  I  believe  it  is  bet- 
ter to  elect  the  judges  than  to  have  them  appoint- 
ed in  the  manner  in  which  they  have  been  here- 
tofore appointed  under  the  present  constitution 
of  Kentucky.     I  believe  that  the  appointing  pow- 
er has  been   abused,  and  it  was  from  the  idea, 
whether  correct  or  not,  that  the  appointing  pow- 
er had  been  abused,  that  I  became  a  convert  to 
the  doctrine  of  electing  the  judges  by  the  people. 
I  confess   that  the  time  was  when  I  entertained 
a  different  opinion,  and  I  confess  that  I  aproach- 
ed  this  great  subject  with  fear  and  trembling, 
because  I  had  been  taught  from  my  infancy  to 
believe  that  upon  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary depended  the  safety  of  the  people  of  this 
commonwealth.     I  have  cast  my  mind  back  to 
the  history  of  that  people  from  wliom  Ave  are  de- 
scended, and  there  I  have  discovered,  that  the 
judiciary  has  been  prostrated  at  the  feet  of  pow- 
er, and  made  the  mere  registers  of  the  edicts  and 
decrees  of  the  ruling  monarch.     I  have  beheld 
the  judicial  power  of  England  prostrated  at  the 
foot  of  the  king,  and  made  the  more  organ  of 
the  dictations  of  the  despot,  instead  of  being  as 
they  ought  to  have  been,  the  protectors   of  the 
freedom   of  the  people.     I  beheld  the  struggle 

foing  on  between  the  oppressed  people  and  tneir 
ingly  oppressor,  and  I  saw  that  the  purpose  of 
the  struggle  was  to  relieve  the  judiciary  from 
their  continued  servility  to  those  in  poAver.  I 
traced  the  struggle  on,  until  at  length  tJie  intelli- 
gence and  love  of  liberty  of  the  people  of  Eng- 
land, triumphed  over  the  despotism  Avhich  had 
so  long  kept  them  in  slavery,  and  made  the  ju- 
dicial officers  of  the  government  independent  of 
the  appointing  power.  When  its  independence 
was  established,  it  arose  to  a  liigh  elevation  and 
dignity,  which  it  had  never  before  attained.  It 
arose  in  all  its  great  and  lofty  attributes  until  it 
acquired  the  character  of  being  the  protector  of 
the  freedom  of  the  people.  It  was  no  longer  the 
servile  tool  of  power,  moving  at  the  will  of  a 


24  i 


despot,  to  the  shedding  of  blood,  and  under  the 
constructive  doctrines  of  treason,  making  victims 
of  the  innocent,  in  obedience  to  the  behests  of 
poorer.  It  saved  the  people  from  the  scourge  of 
despotism.  Such  sir,  was  the  influence  that  it 
exerted  over  the  liberties  of  England.  I  vras 
taught  to  reverence  this  great  department  of  the 
government — great  in  its  results — having  for  its 
object  the  enforcement  and  illustration  of  the 
laws  and  the  vindication  of  the  constitution  of 
the  country.  And  as  I  remarked  before  when 
this  question  came  up  jas  to  the  election  of  the 
judges  by  the  people,  it  was  a  question  which  I 
approached  with  fear  and  trembling.  If  the  ef- 
fect of  electing  the  judiciary  by  the  people  will 
be  to  prostrate  it  at  the  feet  of  any  other  depart- 
ment— I  care  not  what  department — if  prostrated 
and  enslaved,  the  people  will  be  the  victims.  I 
asked  myself  the  question,  whether  or  not  the 
election  of  the  judges  by  the  people,  was  to  en- 
slave the  judges  and  render  them  dependent. 
And  sir,  if  it  was  to  render  them  dependent,  I  for 
one,  declared  that  I  would  not  subscribe  to  a 
constitution  which  contained  that  feature.  I 
would  not  aid  in  the  adoption  of  a  constitution 
which  would  render  them  the  slaves  of  any  pow- 
er within  this  commonwealth.  I  satisfied  my- 
self however  that  the  judges  could  be  elected  by 
the  people,  and  their  independence  still  be  main- 
tained, and  having  satisfied  myself  on  that 
point,  I  yielded  at  once  to  the  propriety  of 
changing  the  mode  of  appointment.  I  thought 
the  present  mode  bad  because  it  might  be  abused, 
and  I  was  apprehensive  that  the  election  of  the 
judges  by  the  legislature  would  be  worse;  but  I 
came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  true  source  to 
which  this  matter  should  be  referred  was  to  the 
people  themselves.  But  whilst  I  am  in  favor  of 
throwing  it  back  upon  the  people  and  giving 
them  the  right  to  elect  the  judges,  let  no  man 
say  that  because  I  differ  with  him  upon  abstract 

f  repositions  of  preserving  their  purity  in  ofiice, 
am  therefore  opposed  to  a  change  in  the  organ- 
ic law  of  the  state.  I  am  for  everything  which 
isjto  protect  the  people  of  thestat* — -for  everything 
which  is  caleulatea  to  build  up  the  defences  of 
human  freedom. 

We  are  assembled  here  because  it  is  believed 
there  are  important  improvements  that  may  be 
made  in  our  con.stitution.  We  have  solemn  du- 
ties to  perform,  and  instead  of  con.stituting  a  ju- 
diciary that  shall  be  dependent  upon  another 
department  of  the  government,  letusmaKe  them 
the  guardians  of  the  people's  liberties.  I  would 
rather  sink  into  utter  oblivion,  than  be  instru- 
mental in  bringing  about  any  other  result.  I  say 
sir,  that  I  came  here  to  provide  for  the  election 
of  the  officers  bv  the  people,  but  I  came  here  to 
render  the  judicial  power  independent  of  the 

eeople.  I  do  not  mean  sir,  that  thev  shall  not 
e  properly  responsible  somewhere,  \>ut  I  mean 
to  assert  that  I  am  opposed  to  making  them  re- 
sponsible merely  to  tne  power  that  creates  them. 
I  am,  like  the  gentleman  from  If  elson,  and  like 
the  honorable  president  of  the  convention,  and 
like  many  distinguished  gentlemen  who  have 
addressed  this  committee,  I  am  for  making  them 
responsible  to  the  legislative  department  in  the 
manner  indicated  by  the  report  of  the  committee, 
and  I  shall  not  pause  here  to  discuss  the  plan 
proposed  by  them.  It  is  proposed  to  make  the 
31 


judges  responsible  to  the  legislature.  Is  that  the 
proper  department  to  which  they  should  be  held 
responsible?  If  you  mean  to  make  them  responsi- 
ble to  that  department,  let  it  be  so;  but  if  you  do 
not  mean  to  make  them  responsible,  where  is  the 
necessitv  of  spreading  out  in  the  report  the  re- 
sponsibility of  the  judges  to  the  legislature? — 
There  was  some  design  in  it.  Thosewho  framed 
the  report  must  have  understood  it  themselves. 
They  must  have  intended  that  there  the  responsi- 
bility shouldrest,  and  I  for  one  sir,  am  decidedly 
of  tfieir  opinion,  that  to  that  tribunal  the  respon- 
sibility of  the  judges  should  belong.  Then  sir, 
if  we  make  them  responsible  to  that  tribunal, 
are  we  also  to  make  them  responsible  to  another? 
If  that  is  the  tribunal  before  which  they  are  to* 
be  arraigned,  and  by  which  sentence  is  to  be 
pronounced  upon  them  for  malfeasance  in  office, 
or  for  misfeasance,  or  any  other  act  that  amounts 
to  disqualification,  why,  I  ask  again,  the  necessi- 
ty that  any  other  responsibility  should  be  indi- 
cated? We  have  directed  that  the  judges  shall 
be  elected  by  the  people.  So  far  it  is  right.  We 
have  declared  that  there  shall  be  responsibility, 
and  we  have  indicated  where  it  shall  be.  Sir,  if 
this  is  not  a  proper  tribunal  before  which  the 
judges  shall  be  tried,  strike  it  out,  and  proclaim 
that  the  true  tribunal,  and  the  only  one  before 
which  the  judges  shall  be  tried,  is  the  people  at 
large.  I  say  strike  it  out,  let  it  fall,  because  it 
has  no  business  there  at  all.  But  I  am  for  that 
tribunal,  it  is  the  right  one,  and  I  am  not  for 
any  other.  I  am  not  for  making  them  responsi- 
ble directly  to  the  people,  and  although  the  peo- 
ple might  desire  that  they  should  be  made  respon- 
sible directly  to  them,  it  ought  not  to  be  so;  for 
it  would'be  ruinous  to  the  people  and  destruc- 
tive of  every  thing  that  is  most  dear  to  them. 

I  am  then  for  an  independent  judiciary.  In- 
dependent of  whom?  Independent  of  the  power 
which  appoints  them.  In  England  the  judges 
are  not  responsible  to  the  appointing  power.  In 
Kentucky,  the  governor  nominates  and  the  sen- 
ate confirms  the  nomination — not  the  people. 
They  are  responsible  to  the  legislature  collectively, 
a  power  different  from  that  which  appoints.  In 
all  the  states,  they  are  made  responsible  to  a 
power  difierent  from  the  appointing  power. 

Having  decided  how  thev  shall  be  appointed, 
and  how  thev  shall  be  tried,  let  us  see  what  sort 
of  safe-guard  we  can  throw  around  our  judicia- 
ry, because  that  is  a  matter  which  touches  us  all. 
It  is  a  matter  that  concerns  not  only  us,  but  our 
posterity — ^those  in  high  places  and  those  in  low 
places— ^1  have  a  deep  interest  in  protecting  the 
judiciary.  What  are  the  various  plans  that  have 
been  suggested,  by  which  the  independence  of 
the  judiciary  shafl  be  maintained?  I  have  not 
heard  any  man  contend  that  the  independence  of 
the  judiciary  ought  to  be  destroyed.  I  like  the 
remarks  that  were  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
Scott,  (Mr.  W.  Johnson)  on  this  subject.  There 
was  wisdom  in  every  word  he  uttered.  He 
spoke  like  an  honest  man  and  a  patriot.  There 
was  that  in  his  manner  and  his  remarks,  which 
indicated  that  he  would  not 

"Flatter  Neptune  for  his  trident, 
Kor  Jove  for  his  power  to  thunder.*' 

I  love  the  man,  because  he  rose  here  in  the 
midst  of  the  confusion  and  strife,  and  proclaim- 
ed those  noble  sentiments  in  defence  of  the  inde- 


24t2 


pendence  of  the  judiciary.  I  think  there  is  no 
one  here  who  is  opposed  to  their  independence; 
but  what  is  to  bring  about  that  independence? 
Is  it  to  be  done  by  making  the  judicial  depart- 
ment directly  responsible  to  the  people?  Do 
gentlemen  mean  to  maintain  that  that  will  make 
them  independent?  Will  it  not  prostrate  the 
judicial  power  at  the  very  feet  of  the  people, 
and  if  the  judicial  power  of  the  state  is  to  be 
prostrated  at  the  feet  of  the  people,  who  are  to 
be  the  sufferers?  Not  the  rich  and  the  powerful. 
They  will  escape — there  can  be  no  doubt  about 
that.  Who,  then,  are  to  suffer?  The  poor  and 
the  defenceless.  Well  has  it  been  said,  by  that 
greatest  of  English  poets  ; 

Through  tatter'd  clothes  small  vices  do  appear— 
nohes  and  fur'd  gowns  hide  all.    Plate  sin  with  gold, 
And  the  strong  lance  of  justice  hurtless  breaks  : 
Arm  it  in  rags,  a  pigmy's  straw  doth  pierce  it. 

I  advocate  the  independence  of  the  judiciary, 
and  I  do  so  upon  this  ground  among  others;  and 
I  know  that  in  this  respect  I  am  in  a  hopeless 
minority.  It  matters  not  to  me,  however.  I  utter 
what  I  think  is  right,  and  whether  it  meets  with 
favor  or  not,  I  shall  not  refrain  from  uttering  the 
honest  sentiments  of  my  heart.  I  believe  that 
the  judges,  if  elected  by  the  people,  ought  not 
to  be  re-eligible,  because  I  believe  their  power 
might  be  used  for  the  very  worst  purposes.  Let 
not  gentlemen  tell  me,  when  I  contend  against 
the  re-eligibility  of  thejudges,  that  I  amcontend- 
ing  against  their  election  by  the  people.  The 
influences  which  operate  upon  a  judge  before 
his  election  will  operate  after  it,  and  at  a  time 
when  his  conduct  will  affect  the  rights  of  every 
citizen  in  the  commonwealth.  It  is  only  when 
he  is  called  to  administer  justice,  that  his  power, 
if  he  be  corrupt,  is  felt;  and  it  tells  with  wither- 
ing influence  upon  the  people  of  the  stat«,  crush- 
ing the  la.st  hope  of  the  poor  man,  who  seeks 
protection  from  oppression,  at  the  hands  of  the 
judiciary.  Will  gentlemen  tell  me  that  judges 
are  incorruptible?  Will  they  tell  me  that  a 
judge  has  not  the  frailties  to  which  all  human 
nature  is  subject?  Will  they  proclaim  such  a 
sentiment  as  this?  If  they  do,  they  must  have 
read  the  book  of  human  nature  to  little  advant- 
age. Let  them  cast  their  eyes  to  the  judicial 
records  of  England,  and  there  behold  the  judi- 
ciary prostrate  at  the  feet  of  the  monarch,  and 
let  gentlemen  not  tell  me  that  because  the  peo- 
ple are  competent  to  self-government,  they  may 
not  select  unworthy  agents,  that  they  may  not 
be  deceived,  that  they  may  not  select  such  per- 
sons to  administer  justice  as  will  be  subject  to 
the  influence  of  bribery  and  corruption.  Let  it 
not  be  proclaimed  that  such  will  not  be  the  fact. 
Such  will  be  the  fact,  unless  human  nature 
greatly  changes  from  what  it  has  been. 

The  day  of  re-election  approaches,  and  with 
it,  comes  the  temptation  to  mingle  with  the 
crowd,  and  discuss  those  questions  in  which 
the  people  are  interested,  men  of  power  and  in- 
fluence arr^ed  on  one  side,  and  men  of  neither 
power  nor  influence  on  the  other;  the  man  of 
n>rtune  and  influence  comes  to  the  candidate  for 
the  judgeship,  and  demands  of  him  that  he 
shatl  avow  his  opinions  upon  a  question;  he 
then  infuses  the  poison  into  his  soul,  and 
drops  the  consolation  that  he  will  be  instrumen- 
tal in  bringing  about  his  election.     A  man  on 


the  other  side  makes  the  same  insinuation:  the 
iudge  weighs  the  comparative  influence  opposed 
by  the  two,  and  he  inclines  in  favor  of  the  most 
powerful.  Does  any  gentleman  mean  to  say  that 
this  will  not  be  the  current  of  events,  upon  which 
will  glide  away  the  independence  of  the  judici- 
ary of  the  state?  Will  any  gentleman  contend 
that  such  will  not  be  the  effect?  Figure  to  your- 
self a  judge  going  down  from  the  judgment  seat, 
mingling  with  the  populace,  mounting  the  hus- 
tings, and  proclaiming  his  opinions  upon  the 
subjects  that  are  agitated.  Will  any  gentleman 
say  that  he  is  willing  to  have  such  influences 
operate  upon  the  candidates  for  this  office?  He 
must  be  more  than  man  if  he  can  rise  above 
them.  Why  then  will  you  make  the  judges  re- 
eligible?    What  is  the  object  of  it? 

I  ask  where  is  the  necessity  for  making  them  re- 
eligible?  I  am  told  that  unless  they  are  re-eli- 
gible you  cannot  get  another  one  to  supply  the 
place,  and  I  am  told  again,  that  you  deprive  the 
people  of  the  right  to  select  their  omcers  ac- 
cording to  their  wishes.  Why  do  you  declare 
in  the  constitution,  that  the  governor  of  your 
state  shall  not  be  re-eligible  for  a  certain  period 
of  years?  What  is  the  reason  of  that?  Because 
they  believed  that  he  might  prostitute  the  power 
of  his  office,  in  order  that  he  might  secure  his 
return  to  office.  They  intended  that  he  should 
not  be  permitted  to  pander  to  the  popular  pas- 
sions and  prejudices,  with  a  view  to  again  being 
placed  in  power.  That  was  the  great  principle. 
That  is  why  it  was  declared  in  that  instrument, 
which  we  are  about  to  change  and  alter,  that 
the  governor  .shall  not  be  re-eligible.  It  was  in- 
tended to  guard  against  the  corrupt  influences 
that  might  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  weak- 
ness of  iiuman  nature;  and  though  the  principle 
was  not  incorporated  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  yet  throughout  the  land,  from  the 
centre  to  its  extremity,  has  been  proclaimed  the 
propriety  of  incorporating  such  a  principle,  in 
reference  to  the  office  of  President  of  the  United 
States.  It  was  feared  that  the  power  confided  to 
him,  by  the  people,  mi^ht  be  used  in  such  a 
manner,  as  would  be  destrtuctive  of  the  very 
ends  of  justice,  in  order  to  secure  a  re-election, 
and  it  was  proclaimed  to  the  whole  democratic 
party  of  the  nation,  that  it  was  wrong  in  princi- 
ple that  the  president  should  be  re-eligible  to 
office.  I  ask  every  man,  is  it  to  be  believed 
that  when  Jackson  proclaimed  this  sentiment, 
he  meant  to  deny  that  the  people  were  capable 
of  self-government?  Such  was  not  the  inten- 
tion. Such  is  not  the  legitimate  construction  of 
the  language  he  used.  The  principle  has  been 
asserted  time  and  again.  It  is  a  principle  which 
is  dear  to  the  democratic  party  of  tlie  nation, 
and  it  should  be  dear  to  the  hearts  of  the  whole 
nation.  Let  it  not  be  disregarded  liere.  What 
have  you  gained  by  making  the  judges  re-eligi- 
ble? Is  it  true  we  have  no  otlier  men  capable  of 
filling  those  offices?  Give  your  judges  salaries 
commensurate  to  the  important  services  to  be 
performed;  place  tJiem  above  improper  influ- 
ences, and  then  you  will  have  what  is  so  desira- 
ble in  every  community,  justice  administered 
without  denial  or  delav.  Why  do  you  want 
this  principle  of  re-eligrbility?  Surely  not  be- 
cause you  are  afraid  of  depriving  the  people  of 
the  right  to  select  the  officers  they  may  desire. 


243 


No  such  thing.  You  have  created  an  officer  to 
discharge  certain  duties,  and  you  wish  him  to 
discharge  them  fairly  and  honestly.  Is  it  wrong 
toward  the  people  to  protect  them  from  those 
corrupting  influences  which  would  drag  him 
down  from  the  high  position  in  which  they 
have  placed  him?  They  will  thank  you  in  their 
hearts,  should  you  have"  saved  them  from  those 
corrupting  influences. 

1  have  thrown  out  these  remarks,  desultory  as 
thev  may  be,  for  the  consideration  of  the  com- 
mittee. They  contain  truths  that  come  gushing 
from  my  heart  and  that  are  sanctioned  by  my 
judgment.  I  have  thrown  them  out  because  I 
thought  it  due  to  mvself,  and  to  the  question. 
1  know  not  whether  they  will  find  a  response  in 
the  judgment  of  others.'  It  is  enough  for  me  to 
say,  in  the  language  of  that  distinguished  man, 
the  elder  Adams,  amidst  the  storms  of  the  revo- 
lution, on  the  very  day  when  the  declaration  of 
independence  was  signed,  and  when  he  had 
placed  his  signature  to  that  instrument,  "while 
conscience  claps  let  the  world  hiss." 

There  are  some  two  or  three  propositions  to 
which  1  desire  brieflv  to  refer — not  for  the  pur- 
pose of  discussing  tliem,  but  merely  to  call  the 
attention  of  the  committee  to  them.  I  like  the 
principle  that  is  contained  in  the  bill  that  was 
reported  by  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
the  court  of  appeals.  I  believe  it  a  great  con- 
servative principle,  the  judges  beiu]^  elected  as 
it  is  conceded  on  all  hands  thev  will  be,  by  the 
people;  and  I,  myself,  am  decidedly  in  favor  of 
electing  them.  That  being  conceded,  the  great 
conservative  principle  starts  up  and  strikes  my 
mind  with  powerful  force.  What  is  that  principle? 
You  elect  one  judge  from  each  separate  district. 
If  you  have  but  one  court  of  appeals,  or  rather  of 
the  court  sit  but  at  one  single  point,  as  for  in- 
stance at  the  seat  of  government,  and  you  have 
but  four  judges,  and  you  and  I,  sir,  come  up 
from  a  single  district  with  our  causes  to  this  tri- 
bunal, but  one  of  those  four  judges  will  have 
been  voted  for  by  us,  the  other  three  will  be 
wholly  elected  by  others.  And  whether  favora- 
ble tons  or  opposed  to  us,  they  will  be  whoUv 
irresponsible  to  us,  and  the  main  reason  which 
gentlemen  assign  for  being  opposed  to  the  elec- 
tive principle  will  be  entirely  swept  away.  I 
am  therefore  for  the  election  of  all  the  judges  by 
the  whole  people  of  the  state;  and  I  believe 
there  will  be  no  difficulty  in  finding  suitable 
men.  I  believe  there  is  talent  enough  to  be 
found  in  every  district,  and  that  men  may  be  se- 
lected who  are  abundantly  competent  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  the  o"ffice  properly.  I  do 
not  entertain  a  doubt  on  the  subject.  I  am  there- 
fore in  favor  of  this  particular  principle  because 
I  believe  it  is  right  in  itself  and  conservative  in 
its  influence. 

There  is  another  principle  engrafted  in  the  re- 
port to  which  I  give  my  assent,  and  do  so  from 
the  necessity  of  the  case.  I  believe  it  will  be 
found  to  be  the  public  sentiment.  I  believe  that 
the  people  desire  that  that  principle  shall  be  es- 
tablished— I  mean  that  the  courts  shall  sit  at 
different  points.  This  is  no  new  thing,  sir,  with 
me.  While  a  member  of  the  legislature  I  advo- 
cated the  proposition,  and  the  only  obstacle  in  the 
way  of  carrying  it  out  was  a  want  of  constitution- 
al power  on  the  part  of  the  legislature.  But  I  will 


tell  gentlemen  with  whom  I  agree  as  to  the  pro- 
priety of  incorporating  that  principle,  I  am  not 
sure  but  that  it  would  be  better  to  leave  the  con- 
stitution open,  so  that  the  legislature  may  here- 
after act  as  it  may  be  deemed  advsiable.  When 
you  have  laid  off' twenty  five  counties  together, 
you  have  got  either  by  'yourself  or  by  the  legis- 
lature to  designate  some  point  where  the  court 
is  to  be  held;  the  question  then  comes  up  wheth- 
er some  of  the  parties  would  not  rather  come 
here  than  to  go  to  some  place  in  the  interior.  I 
will  suppose  the  counties  lying  on  the  Ohio  riv- 
er. Take  the  lowest  county  and  trace  up  to 
Louisville,  and  the  question  is  whether  they  will 
not  find  it  more  convenient  to  come  to  the  seat  of 
government  than  go  to  the  interior,  with  all  the 
attending  inconveniences  of  bad  roads.  I  mere- 
ly throw  out  to  gentlemen  this  suggestion  for 
tteir  consideration. 

There  is  another  reason  why  it  would  be  pref- 
erable to  leave  it  open,  rather  than  to  incorpo- 
rate the  principle  in  the  constitution,  and  it  is 
this.  Suppose  that  hereafter,  you  may  wish  to 
change  the  system,  and  bring  back  the  sittings 
of  the  court' to  the  .seat  of  Government,  gentle- 
men will  perceive  that  it  will  be  too  late  to  make 
that  change.  They  will  have  made  a  constitu- 
tional provision  from  which  they  cannot  escape. 
There  is  another  difficulty.  I  have  said  to  vou  i  n 
all  honesty,  for  I  feel  it,' that  I  am  for  making  a 
constitution  that  will  be  acceptable  to  the  people 
of  Kentucky.  I  feel  that  not  only  my  character 
as  a  delegate  to  this  convention,  but  that  the 
character  of  the  whole  state  is  involved  in  it. 
It  will  not  only  be  disgraceful  to  us  if  we  make 
a  constitution  that  will  be  rejected  by  the  people, 
but  it  will  be  a  disgrace  to  the  state 'itself.  We 
shall  be  a  laughing  stock  to  the  people  of  all 
other  states.  The  people  of  Kentucky  nave  said 
we  will  change  the  organic  law  of  the  state,  but 
after  having  assembled  for  that  purpose,  it  was 
found  that  there  was  not  wisdom  enough  in  the 
state  to  frame  a  constitution.  I  want  no  such 
imputation  as  this  to  be  cast  upon  us.  And  I 
want  no  such  imputation  to  be  thrown  upon  the 
state  at  large.  Well  then,  I  put  the  question  in 
this  form,  do  you  not  see  that  by  incorporating 
this  provision"  in  the  constitution,  you  may  array 
a  powerful  party  against  that  constitution?  Does 
not  every  man  see  that  you  run  the  risk  of  de- 
stroying the  very  instrument  that  it  is  so  very  de- 
sirable we  should  protect  and  defend.  But  if 
you  leave  it  to  the  legislature,  can  you  not  ac- 
complish all  that  vou  desire  in  regard  to  this  im- 
portant matter?  fey  leaving  it  open  what  do  you 
do?  You  merely  leave  it  to  a  majority  of  the 
people  of  the  state  to  determine  whether  they 
will  have  the  court  of  appeals  brought  near  to 
their  respective  homes,  or  whether  they  will  have 
it  remain  at  the  seat  of  government.  Why  not 
leave  it  to  them  to  determine?  Are  you  afraid  to 
trust  a  majority  of  the  people?  Why,  is  not  the 
very  court  intended  as  a  safe-guard  for  the  rights 
and  liberties  of  the  people?  Why  not  let  them 
decide  whether  the  court  of  appeals  shall  be 
branched  or  not?  That  is  the  question  which  I 
submit  for  the  consideration  of  this  committee 
You  will  lose  nothing  by  it,  because  if  the  peo- 
ple want  the  court,  they  will  have  it  carried  to 
the  districts;  and  if  you  incorporate  it  in  the 
I  constitution,  you  cannot  afterwards  get  clear  of 


244 


it.  It  cannot  weaken  the  constitution,  if  you 
leave  it  open  ;  and  you  will,  by  doing  so,  avoid 
arraying  a  formidable  party  against  you.  This 
is  a  matter  that  ought  to  be  looked  to. 

If  it  is  not  best  to  refer  the  whole  matter  to  the 
decision  of  the  people  through  the  legislature, 
at  least  let  such  a  provision  as  this  be  inserted, 
that  the  legislature  may,  when  any  district  de- 
sires it,  have  power  to  direct  that  the  court  of  ap- 
peals shall  no  longer  be  holden  in  such  district. 
Vou  may  do  this,  and  it  will  relieve  you  of  the 

treat  difficulty  which  stands  in  the  way  of  ma- 
ing  this  principle  a  permanent  provision  in  tlie 
constitution. 

_  Mr.  PRESTON.  I  was  glad  that  the  discus- 
sion of  the  subject  of  the  appellate  court  came 
up,  and  though  it  will  seem  that  a  great  deal  of 
time  has  been  consumed,  yet  the  great  princi- 
ples in  the  report  itself  will  probably  regulate 
the  other  articles  in  regard  to  the  judiciary  that 
will  be  subsequently  brought  before  the  conven- 
tion. Various  principles  are  embraced  in  it,  but 
they  have  been  so  irregularly  discussed  that  I 
am  in  some  doubt  what  part  of  the  bill  is  prop- 
erly under  consideration.  I  know  that  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  that 
the  majority  of  the  legislature  should  dismiss 
the  judges,  has  been  voted  down,  and  if  I  im- 
derstand  the  proposition  of  the  gen  tleraan  from 
Madison,  I  conceive  these  questions  to  be  within 
the  scope  of  his  proposed  amendments — rirst  as 
to  the  number  of  the  courts,  second  as  to  whether 
the  judges  shall  be  elected  by  general  ticket  or 
by  (districts,  third  whether  the  court  shall  hold 
sessions  at  one  or  more  places,  fourth  whether 
the  judges  shall  be  re-eligible,  and  fifth,  whether 
they  shall  be  chosen  by  ballot  or  the  ancient 
viva  voce  system. 

These  I  regard  as  the  questions  involved  in 
the  bill  before  us;  but  as  they  are  too  numerous 
to  discuss  here  unless  in  a  speech  longer  than  I 
propose  to  make,  I  will  allude  to  that  portion  of 
the  bill  only  which  contemplates  the  re-eligibil- 
ity of  the  judges.  On  this  subject  I  differ  with 
the  gentleman  from  Henderson  as  well  as  with 
others  on  this  floor.  I  have  been  accustomed  to 
attend  with  too  much  reverence  probably  to  the 
lessons  of  experience  which  the  past  has  given 
us,  and  am  too  much  disinclined  to  differ  from 
the  settled  course  of  things,  to  adopt  with  facil- 
ity new  suggestions  as  regards  the  mode  of  ap- 
pointing the  judiciary  or  to  apprehend  the  full 
forceof  the  objections  levelled  against  the  plan  in- 
dicated in  the  report  even  when  urged  with  all 
the  eloquence  which  has  distinguished  the  effort 
made  by  the  gentleman  from  Henderson. 

That  the  mode  is  novel  is  true,  for  throughout 
this  confederacy,  now  numbering  thirty  states, 
there  is  not,  so  far  as  I  am  informed,  a  single 
member  of  it  that  has  required  such  a  feature  in 
its  constitution.  In  framing  their  organic  law 
all  have  been  moved  by  asimilar  desire  to  secure 
an  independent  judiciary;  but  none  have  deemed 
it  necessary  to  insert  such  a  safe-guard  in  their 
constitutions;  and  shall  Kentucky  then  first  un- 
dertake to  do  this,  and  to  do  it  rather  impelled 
by  the  eloquence  of  its  advocates  than  by  the 
solidity  of  the  reasons  urged?  Or  »hall  we  adopt 
blindly  and  insert  this  feature  without  knowing 
whither  it  tends  or  what  is  its  use. 
I  heard  a  part  of  the  remarks  of  my  fnend 


from  Fleming  (Mr.  M.  P.  Marshall)  in  wliose 
simple,  truthful,  yet  strong  and  argumentative 
mind  I  have  the  utmost  confidence,  and  in  whom 
I  can  see  a  mental  resemblance  to  his  great  kins- 
man, who  so  long  distinguished  the  bench  of  the 
supreme  court  of  the  United  States.  But  I  see 
no  valid  reason  advanced  by  the  gentleman  to 
whom  I  allude,  to  sustain  this  assault  upon  the 
report  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals. 
But  it  is  asked,  on  the  other  side,  what  is  the 
use  of  re-eligibility,  and  whether  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  judiciary  will  not  be  better  secured 
by  ineligibility  than  re-eligibility.  Sir,  there  is 
no  good  ground  why  any  faithful  servant  who 
has  discharged  his  duties  to  the  country  and 
earned  its  gratitude,  should  be  excluded  from 
the  subsequent  confidence  of  his  fellow  citizens. 
This  is  the  general  principle,  and  if  there  is  any 
exception  to  it  it  must  be  shown  that  it  is  neces- 
sary to  secure  the  independence  of  the  judiciary. 
This  cannot  be  done. 

PVom  the  first  establishment  of  the  govern- 
ment of  this  country,  no  such  principle  has  been 
adopted  in  our  state  or  Federal  constitution,  ex- 
cept as  relates  to  the  office  of  governor  of  Ken- 
tucky. The  president  of  the  United  States, 
congressmen,  judges  and  all  other  officers  are 
re-eligible.  The  provision  in  our  constitution 
in  relation  to  the  governor  is  the  only  precedent 
that  I  know  to  the  contrary.  Sir,  the  principle 
of  ineligibility  is  founded  on  fear,  and  should 
only  apply  to  those  officers  who  are  clothed 
with  great  powers — the  president  of  the  United 
States  should  possibly  be  declared  ineligible. 
Why?  The  president  of  the  United  States  holds 
the  army  of  the  country  in  one  hand,  and  the 
navy  in  the  other.  Ho  has  thirty  millions  of 
revenue  to  be  distributed  among  the  officers  of 
the  government.  He  holds  a  veto  on  all  the 
laws  of  Congress,  and  at  this  time  he  exercises 
as  great  power  as  any  limited  monarch  in 
Europe.  Is  there  then  no  difference  between  him 
and  the  defenceless  judge  of  the  appellate  court? 
One  possesses  the  patronage  of  thirty  thousand 
offices,  of  salaries  for  these  offices — has  the  third 
navy  in  the  world  under  his  control — and  has 
an  executive  veto  upon  the  representatives  of 
twenty  millions  of  people.  The  other  wields 
no  such  patronage,  controls  no  such  power,  the 
check  of  ineligibilitv,  even  if  necessary  to  con- 
trol an  office  of  sucfi  vast  powei-s,  as  the  presi- 
dent is  wholly  unnecessary  in  regard  to  a  judge. 
The  gentleman  from  Henderson  says,  that  the 
judge  will  be  seen  descending  from  hip  place 
mixing  with  the  populace,  seducing  theij>  af- 
fections, disturbing  their  judgments,  and^^ally 
by  a  sort  of  reciprocal  corruption,  dest»q.yirtg*not 
only  his  own  independence,  but  the  honesty  of 
the  people.  ;  •■-    ,.,,  v'*'* 

Mr.  DIXON.  The  gentleman  'is  mistaken. 
I  did  not  say  that  he  would  destroy  the  honesty 
of  the  people,  but  that  corrupt  men  would  des- 
troy his  honesty,  if  he  had  any.  * 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Kit  does  not dfestroy  their 
honesty  then  there  is  nothing  to  fear.  If  it 
does  not  destroy  the  lionesty  of  the  people  they 
will  liave  intelligence  enough  to  rebuke  any 
such  attempts  on  the  part  of  an  electioneering 
judge. 

But  I  will  pursue  the  parallel  which  I  would 
draw  between  the  President  of  the  United  States 


•J45 


aiid  a  judge.  Will  the  gentiemau  say  that  a 
judge  can  lu  fact  ascertain  who  is  to  have  an  in- 
fluence upon  his  election,  or  if  he  could,  that  it 
would  be  of  much  importance?  Let  us  examine 
•what  this  bill  actually  proposes  to  do.  It  pro- 
poses to  divide  this  state  into  four  great  parts, 
and  in  each  part  to  establish  a  judicial  district. 
It  is  not  a  court  of  original  but  only  of  appellate 
jurisdiction.  We  find,  as  was  stated  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Montgomery,  more  than  two  hun- 
dred to  one  of  the  cases  which  arise  in  circuit 
courts  never  reach  the  court  of  appeals.  A  judge 
is  appointed  by  the  electors  of  a  judicial  district 
containingtwo  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  souls, 
and  has  only  one  vote  out  of  four  on  the 
appellate  bench,  when  the  court  is  organized. 
He  has  no  clerks  to  appoint,  no  patronage  to  be- 
stow, no  army  within  his  grasp,  no  fleet  under 
his  control,  but  he  is  simply  an  unarmed  and 
powerless  officer  of  the  law — a  man  shorn  of 
influence,  but  chosen  by  the  people  to  sit  and 
determine  on  their  rigfits  and  their  property. 
The  statistics  in  relation  to  this  matter,  show 
that  there  are  about  six  hundred  cases  in  the 
appell.f.,e  courts  in  one  term,  and  that  this 
number  of  appeals  is  taken  from  about  thir- 
teen thousand  appearances  in  the  circuit  courts; 
which  makes  about  one  appeal  in  two  hun- 
dred appearances.  If  so  the  chance  that  any 
particular  individual's  case  will  come  before 
the  court  of  appeals,  is  remote  indeed.  If  it 
does,  the  judge  will  only  have  one  vote  in  four, 
and  that  after  the  decision  of  the  tribunal  below. 
The  assertion,  therefore,  that  the  judge  would 
sacrifice  his  independence  to  secure  personal  sup- 
port, based  upon  such  remote  contingencies,  is 
contrary  to  every  fair  presumption.  Is  not  the 
apprehension  so  remote  that  it  may  be  called 
fanciful?  But,  sir,  engraft  this  principle  in  your 
constitution  and  you  destroy  the  whole  theory  of 
an  elective  judiciary — you  blow  hot  and  cold 
with  the  same  breath.  You  say  at  one  moment 
that  the  people  are  sufficiently  honest,  intelligent, 
and  incorruptible,  to  elect  their  judges;  in  the 
next,  that  they  are  too  corruptible  to  re-elect 
them.  Put  it  on  the  ground  that  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson  does — that  is,  that  the  judge 
might  be  corrupted  by  the  people — then  he  should 
never  be  elected  by  the  people.  Admit  the  ar- 
gument, and  you  admit  that  the  judge,  when  he 
is  thirty  years  old  and  first  a  candidate,  is  in- 
capable of  corrupting  the  people,  and  as.sert  the 
next  moment  that  he  becomes  capable  after  he  has 
been  eight  years  in  office.  I  do  not  think  that 
any  investigation  will  .show  that  there  is  any 
solid  objection  to  the  report  on  this  account. 
No,  sir,  there  are  more  real  evils  that  will  spring 
up  from  the  ineligibility  of  the  judiciary  than 
from  their  re-eligibility.  It  is  claimed  tiat  an 
ineligible  judiciary  will  be  honest,  but  let  me 
ask  the  gentleman  one  thing — whether  it  depends 
so  much  on  the  mode  of  appointment  as  upon 
tbe  character  of  the  man  himself.  I  believe  that 
if  a  man  is  a  good  man  he  will  be  a  good  judge. 
If  he  is  a  bad  man  he  will  be  a  bad  judge.  If 
he  is  an  independent  man  he  will  be  an  inde- 
pendent judge.  If  he  is  a  servile  man  he  will 
ue  a  servile  judge.  The  mode  of  the  appoint- 
ment will  not  alter  the  character  of  the  man. 

Well  sir,  if  the  gentleman's  proposition  was 
to  go  into  effect  and  the  election  should  fall  on  a 


man  so  servile  that  he  would  sacrifice  his  inde- 
pendence, what  would  bethe  result?  Would  in- 
eligibility make  his  character  pure?  No  sir.  A 
man  of  such  a  character  would  leave  his  docket 
encumbered  with  the  most  important  cases,  so 
that  he  might  be  employed  in  the  same  cases 
when  he  should  come  to  the  Ifar;  so  that  he 
might  obtain  practice  so  soon  as  he  should  be 
excluded  from  the  bench.  And  the  fact  would 
be  that  you  would  have  an  encumbered  docket, 
and  you  would  inflict  an  evil  without  obtaining 
a  corresponding  benefit.  The  eligibility  of  the 
judges  has  been  permitted  in  every  state  in  the 
union,  and  if  we  prohibit  it  now,  it  will  be  the 
first  time  that  it  has  been  done  in  this  country. 
I  have  seen  no  reason  why  we  should  thus  devi- 
ate from  the  practice  of  our  sister  states.  We 
will  not  secure  more  fully  by  such  a  course  that 
independence  in  the  judges  which  is  both  neces- 
sary and  desirable.  The  court  of  appeals  is  not 
so  constituted  that  it  can  affiect  directly  the  peo- 
ple themselves.  Even  if  we  preserve  the  feature 
which  is  now  engrafted  in  it,  we  shall  sufficient- 
ly secure  the  independence  of  the  judiciary,  and 
meet  the  approbation  of  the  people  themselves. 
And  if  we  place  their  salaries  beyond  the  reach 
of  the  legislature  we  shall  be  enabled  to  carry 
out  the  great  principles  which  are  contended  for 
by  the  friends  of  progress  in  every  part  of  this 
union,  and  establish  an  independent  elective 
judiciary. 

The  gentleman  has  given  us  a  quotation  from 
Shakspeare.  He  tells  us  in  the  language  of  Lear 
that 

"Through  tattered  clothes  small  vices  do  appear." 
And  that  the  rags  of  the  beggar  are  but  a  poor 
shield  against  injustice.  But  sir,  if  you  let  the 
poor  man  have  the  power  of  telling  "by  his  vote 
at  the  polls  whether  he  believes  his  judge  just 
or  unjust,  you  will  never  hear  of  the  rags  of  the 
beggar  being  a  poor  shield  against  the  injustice 
of  tlie  judge.  For  myself  I  want  to  halt  at  no 
half  way  house  in  the  election  of  the  judiciary. 
Let  us  either  have  the  judges  appointed  by  the 
governor,  or  elected  by,  and  responsible  to,  the 

{)eople.  Let  us  have  no  legislative  election,  but 
et  us  come  up  fully  and  fairly  to  the  question. 
In  Ohio  they  Cave  haltecT  at  the  half  way 
house.  A  distinguished  gentleman  yesterday 
gave  me  an  account  of  the  condition  of  the  judi- 
ciary in  that  state.  The  judges  have  heretofore 
been  appointed  by  the  legislature.  But  the  peo- 
ple are  now  seeking  to  substitute  popular  elec- 
tions, and  it  will  be  done.  We  cannot,  in  my 
opinion,  by  any  mode  of  reasoning,  arrive  at 
the  conclusion  that  if  the  judges  should  be 
elected  by  the  people  they  should  not  be  re-eli- 
gible. I'here  are  no  reasons  for  entertaining 
fears  that  the  judges  will  be  servile  to  the  peo- 
ple, which  would  not  apply  with  equal  force  if  we 
were  to  render  them  ineligible.  We  should  not. 
I  think,  Mr.  Chairman,  deviate  from  the  estab- 
lished rule  which  exists  in  thirty  states  of  this 
confederacy,  without  more  cogent  arguments 
than  have  yet  been  advanced. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MITCHELL  the  com- 
mittee rose  and  reported  progress,  and  obtained 
leave  to  sit  again. 

LEAVE  OF  ABSZXCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.   DESHA  leave  of  ab- 


246 


seiice  was  granted  to  Mr.  Talbott,  till  Monday 
next. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  OCTOBER  26,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  George  W.  Brush. 

LEAVE  OF  AUSEXCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  GAITHER  leave  of  ab- 
sence was  granted  to  Mr.  W.  K.  Marshall  to 
Monday  next. 

RESOLUTIOXS. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  offered  the  following  resolution, 
and  it  was  adopted: 

Resolved,  That  the  Second  Auditor  be  request- 
ed to  furnish  to  the  convention  a  statement  show- 
ing the  whole  number  of  parents  and  guardi- 
ans, in  the  State  of  Kentucky,  by  counties,  who 
have  children  between  five  and  sixteen  years  of 
age,  as  follows:  1st.  Those  that  have  no  proper- 
ty entered  for  taxation,  and  number  of  children. 
2d.  Those  who  are  worth  less  than  $100  in  prop- 
erty, and  number  of  children.  3d.  Those  who 
are  worth  from  $100  to  $400  in  property,  and 
number  of  children.  4th.  Those  who  are  worth 
from  $400  to  $600  in  property,  and  number  of 
children.  5th.  Those  who  are  worth  over  $600 
in  property,  and  number  of  children,  for  the  year 
1849. 

Mr.  HARGTS  offered  the  following,  and  it  was 
adopted: 

Resolved,  That  the  Second  Auditor  be  request- 
ed to  furnish  this  convention  with  a  tabular 
statement  of  the  receipts  and  expenditures,  an- 
nually, of  the  government  of  the  State  of  Ken- 
tucky, from  the  year  1823  until  the  end  of  the 
fiscal  year  1849:  showing  the  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures from  each  source. 

PETITIONS COMMON  SCHOOLS. 

Mr.  "WALLER  presented  a  petition  from  sun- 
dry citizens  of  Fayette  and  Clarke  counties,  on 
the  subject  of  common  schools,  which  on  his  mo- 
tion was  referred  to  the  committee  on  education, 
and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

THE   COimT   OF    APPEALS. 

The  convention  again  resolved  itself  into 
committee  of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the 
chair,  on  the  article  in   relation  to  the  court  of 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  The  few  remarks  which  I 
propose  to  submit  for  the  consideration  of  the 
committee,  will  be  addressed  to  the  subject  of 
judicial  re-eligibility.  This,  although  not  tlie 
immediate  question  upon  which  a  vote  is  about 
to  be  taken,  is  embraced  in  the  series  of  amend- 
ments offered  to  the  report  under  discussion,  and 
because  it  involves  principles  of  higher  and 
greater  moment  than  any  other  amendment  pro- 
posed, is,  I  apprehend,  the  most  important  mat- 
ter to  be  discussed. 

I  listened  with  the  greatest  pleasure  to  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson  on  yesterday,  while 
addressing  the  committee  on  this  subject.  His 
stormy  eloquence,  to  employ  the  beautiful  and 
appropriate  figure  whish  ho  himself  used,  was 
to  in«  like  light  bursting  from  a  dark  cloud.    It 


led  my  imagination  captive,  but  it  failed  to  con- 
vince my  judgment.  The  positions  which  he  as- 
sumed, if  tenable,  and  the  arguments  deduced 
from  them,  apply  with  equal  force  to  the  elec- 
tion and  re-election  of  judges.  I  regard  the 
principle  of  re-eligibility  as  inseparable  from, 
and  identical  with,  that  of  the  election  of  the 
judiciary.  If  re-eligibility  be  wrong  in  princi- 
ple, it  would,  I  conceive,  be  wrong  to  elect 
by  the  people  judicial  officers.  In  the  exam- 
ination of  this  subject,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
go  back  and  see  upon  what  principles  the  pro- 
posed reform  extending  the  elective  franchise,  so 
as  to  embrace  the  judiciary,  is  predicated.  I 
will  endeavor  to  show,  that  if  it  be  right  to  make 
this  proposed  reform,  it  will  not  be  right  to  stop 
short  at  the  point  which  the  gentleman  from  Hen- 
derson indicat.es  as  aproperterrainustoit.  I  will 
endeavor  to  show  that  we  shall  be  compromising 
agreat  principle  in  pausing  at  that  point;  and  in- 
stead of  obeying  the  popular  impulse — instead 
of  obeying  the  will  of  the  people  as  expressed 
throughout  Kentucky  on  this  subject,  we,  by 
adopting  the  views  of  tlie  honorable  gentleman 
from  Henderson,  should  be  but  making  a  con- 
cession to  popular  prejudice,  which  would  con- 
tain in  itself  a  compromise  of  the  principles  up- 
on which  we  profess  to  act.  That  that  form  of 
government  is  best  which  secures  the  exercise  of 
the  greatest  amount  of  power  to  the  people,  com- 
patible with  successful  progress,  is  a  postulate 
which  I  apprehend  few  in  this  country  are  dis- 
posed to  controvert.  Tliere  is  no  doubt  a  differ- 
ence of  opinion,  and  an  honest  difference  of  opin- 
ion as  to  the  exact  point  at  which  the  exercise  of 
poAver  on  the  part  of  the  people,  should  termi- 
nate, and  the  exercise  of  delegated  power  should 
commence,  or,  in  other  words,  when  the  people 
should  cease  to  act  by  themselves  and  begin  to 
act  by  their  representatives. 

In  a  government  like  ours,  with  a  population 
such  as  we  have,  want  of  intelligence  in  tlie 
masses  can  in  no  event  be  alleged  as  a  reason  for 
withholding  from  them  the  exercise  of  power. 
To  make  such  an  assertion  would  be  to  deny  the 
truth  of  that  political  maxim  upon  which  our 
whole  system  reposes — the  capacity  of  man  for 
self-government.  This,  sir,  is  the  atlas  upon 
whose  broad  shoulders  our  political  globe  is  sus- 
tained. To  say  that  the  people  are  the  fountaiu 
of  all  power — that  their  wisdom,  intelligence, 
and  virtue  are  equal  to  any  political  emergency 
which  may  arise,  and  yet  to  deny  to  them  the 
exercise  of  that  power  on  the  score  of  incapaci- 
ty, would,  in  my  humble  judgment,  be  to  perpe- 
trate an  absurdity. 

Our  political  theory  presupposes  popular  ca- 
pacity adequate  to  the  conduct  and  management 
of  all  the  operations  of  government.  But  at  the 
same  time  it  concedes  the  necessity  of  represen- 
tation— a  necessity  arising  not  from  the  want  of 
intelligence  on  the  part  of  the  people,  but  from 
the  impracticability,  in  many  instances,  of  di- 
rect popular  action.  It  is  impossible,  sir,  with 
a  population  as  great  as  ours,  extending  over  so 
large  an  area,  for  the  people,  as  in  democratic 
Athens,  to  legislate  primarily,  and  hence  the 
representative  feature  from  necessity  is  engraft- 
ed on  our  system.  This  great  cardinal  princi- 
ple should  ever  be  kept  in  view,  that  represen- 
tation in  popular  governments  is  a  concession' 


247 


to  necessity.  And  hence,  therefore,  whenever 
representation  is  carried  beyond  the  point  of 
necessity  in  a  government  which  assumes  to  be 
popular  in  its  structure,  its  practice  pro  tanto 
departs  from  its  theorj%  and  to  that  extent  is  a 
direct  attack  upon  the  capacity  of  the  people  for 
self-government.  That  the  tendency  of  power 
is  ever  from  the  many  to  the  few  is  a  political 

Eroverb  which  has  come  down  to  us  sanctioned 
y  the  sad  experience  of  the  world.  The  chains 
which  bind  enslaved  nations  are  but  so  many 
links  of  power,  stolen  one  by  one  from  the  pop- 
ular grasp.  Popular  concession  is  the  material 
out  of  which  have  been  constructed  the  loftiest 
thrones  tliat  despotism  ever  reared.  The  only 
sure  guaranty  for  the  preservation  of  popular 
rights  is  the  vigilant  and  continued  exercise  of 
popular  power.  As  in  the  physical,  so  in  the 
moral  world,  inaction  is  the  parent  of  weakness. 
As  our  physical  nature  requires  activity  to  pre- 
serve its  vigor,  so  does  our  moral  being,  our  po- 
litical existence.  The  arm  whose  muscles  swell 
with  strength,  if  kept  in  a  state  of  inaction  shriv- 
els away  and  becomes  a  thing  of  weakness. 
Even  the  tongue  itself  by  disuse  forgets  its  cun- 
ning, and  tlie  power  of  speech  which  indicates 
our  kindred  to  divinity,  is  lost. 

Out  of  the  curse  pronounced  on  man's  first 
disobedience,  by  the  beneficence  of  divine  prov- 
idence, grow  the  issues  of  human  prosperity. 
"When  the  lesson  of  activity  is  so  impressively 
taught  in  every  department  of  life — when  we  be- 
hold healtli  and  strength,  yielding  to  the  para- 
lizing  iniluence  of  indolence — when  we  see  in- 
tellect moulded  in  the  god-like  proportions  of 
genius  sinking  into  driveling  inanity,  are  Ave 
not  admonished  that  from  the  same  cause  our 
liberty  may  lose  somewhat  of  its  sw-elling  pro- 
portions— may  shrink  into  a  shadowy  phantom 
that  shall  moek  the  patriot's  hopes.  It  is  not, 
sir,  on  the  disastrous  battle  field  that  a  peo- 
ple's liberties  are  cloven  down.  Greece,  it  is 
true,  had  her  Cheronea  and  Rome  her  Pharsalia; 
and  although  the  proud  note  of  the  war  trumpet 
which  proclaimed  ambition's  triumph  may  have 
told  tliat  Grecian  liberty  and  Roman  libertv 
were  no  more,  yet  long  before  had  it  perished, 
expiring  in  the  fatal  embraces  of  popular  inac- 
tivity. The  liberties  of  a  free  people  fall  not  by 
the  sword.  A  nation's  gratitude  may  mingle 
civic  wreaths  with  the  laurel  that  clusters  around 
the  successful  warrior's  steel-clad  brow — the  glit- 
tering cohorts  of  hereditary  power  may  seek  to 
trample  the  rights  of  man  under  the  iron  heel  of 
military  force — the  sword  of  faction  mav  leap 
from  its  scabbard — civil  dissension  under  the 
guidance  of  unhallowed  ambition  may  imbrue 
Its  hand  in  kindred  blood — but  unavailing  are 
all  the  dazzling  attributes  of  military  glory, 
the  fierce  ukase  of  imperial  despotism,  the  in- 
ternal strifes  that  blood-stained  faction  may  gen- 
erate to  overturn  the  liberties  of  a  free  people,  so 
long  as  they  are  found  vigilently  exercising  the 
power  which  of  right  belongs  to  them.  So  long 
as  this  is  the  case  we  need  not  despair  of  free- 
dom. Our  institutions  are  now  in  their  youth- 
ful vigor.  Sliall  we  pause,  sir,  till  we  sink  into 
political  decrepitude — until  the  vital  energies  of 
our  government  shall  have  been  exhausted — un- 
til its  recuperative  powers  shall  have  been  lost? 
Is  not  this  the  propitious  period  to  infuse  the 


great  principle  of  popular  activity  into  the  in- 
stitutions of  the  country,  and  thus  build  up  its 
intelligence  and  its  patriotism.  The  more  di- 
rect control  the  people  take  in  the  management 
of  their  government  the  greater  will  be  there  in- 
terest in  it.  The  exercise  of  political  rights  cul- 
tivates political  knowledge,  cultivates  popular 
patriotism.  The  love  of  country,  sir,  exists  no 
doubt  to  some  extent  every  where.  It  is  found 
amid  the  snows  of  Lapland— it  exists  on  the 
arid  plains  of  India — it  dwells  in  the  tent  of  the 
Bedouin — it  is  the  only  gleam  of  sunshine  that 
cheers  the  dark  fate  of  the  Russian  serf.  But 
this  love  of  place  and  of  the  associations  con- 
nected with  place  is  rather  a  social  than  a  polit- 
ical feeling.  Who  that  does  not  bow  at  the  do- 
mestic altar  around  which  the  holiest  and  purest 
feelings  of  our  nature  cling — who  that  does  not 
worship  his  own  household  gods— who  that  does 
not  carry  with  him  through  all  his  wanderings 
a  fond  rememberance  of  the  spot  marked  by  the 
footprints  of  his  infancy?  This  is  mere  love  of 
place — alone  engendered  by  early  and  intimate 
association.  But  patriotism,  that  high  souled 
patriotism  which  soars  above  domestic  affections, 
nestles  no  where  save  in  the  heart  which  throbs 
with  the  strong  pulsations  of  freedom. 

Now,  sir,  is  the  time,  relying  on  the  firm 
basis  of  popular  intelligence,  to  rear  tlie  judicial 
superstructure  with  a  boldness  of  architecture 
commensurate  with  the  strength  of  its  foundation. 
Now  is  the  time  for  the  people  to  resume  the  full 
power  to  which  their  intelligence  entitles  them. 
They  have  striden  forward  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  this  object  with  a  giant  step,  trampling 
as  they  went  the  dogmas  which  conservatism 
had  thrown  in  their  path.  I  am  not  unmindful 
sir,  that  the  subject  of  judicial  reform  has  pre- 
sented difficulties  to  those  who  from  their  pa- 
triotism and  their  wisdom  are  entitled  to  our 
highest  respect.  But  sir,  I  am  not  to  be  deterred 
from  carrying  out  what  I  conceive  to  be  a  great 
principle  hj  the  timid  warnings  even  of  those 
who  claim  to  be  guided  by  the  light  of  experi- 
ence. 

According  to  the  theory  of  popular  govern- 
ment, which  I  have  endeavored  to  state  to  the 
committee,  the  first  inquiry  which  presents  it- 
self is  as  to  the  necessity  of  delegating  power 
in  the  election  of  judges,  for  it  will  be  remem- 
bered that  representation  is  the  result  of  ne- 
cessity. This  inquiry  involves  another  ques- 
tion— -the  practicability  of  their  direct  appoint- 
ment by  the  people.  And  if  sir,  direct  appoint- 
ment be  practicable,  of  which  I  presume  there 
cannot  be  a  doubt,  then  any  other  mode  of  ap- 
pointment is  a  departure,  a  practical  departure, 
from  the  theory  of  popular  government,  and 
therefore  a  direct  attack,  if  I  am  correct  in  the 
position  which  I  have  assumed,  upon  popular 
ri  gilts. 

I  am  aware,  sir,  that  those  who  object  to  re-el- 
igibility as  well  as  those  who  object  to  the  elec- 
tion of  the  judge,  hang  that  objection  not  upon 
the  want  of  popular  intelligence,  not  upon  the 
incapacity  of  the  people  for  making  wise  and 
judicious  selections,  but  upon  the  baneful  influ- 
ences that  are  to  be  exercised  upon  the  judge  him- 
self. They  concede  popular  intelligence.  They 
concede  ability  upon  the  part  of  the  people  to 
meet  this  emergency.     They  contest  the  propriety 


248 


of  such  a  course  upon  the  ground  that  the  officer 
himself  wiU  become  corrupt.  Now  I  take  it 
that  these  two  propositions  are  the  converse  of 
each  other.  The  objection  overcomes  the  con- 
cession. The  objection  which  eoes  to  the  con- 
duct of  the  judge  is  in  fact  an  objection  to  the 
ability  of  the  people.  Let  us  for  a  moment  ex- 
amine the  question.  If  the  people  are  capable 
of  electing  their  judges,  then  must  they  be  equal- 
ly capable  of  deciding  upon  the  manner  in 
which  the  judicial  functions  have  been  discharg- 
ed. The  capacity  to  elect  officers  pre-supposes 
the  ability  to  judge  of  the  qualifications  for  office 
before  appointment,  and  the  manner  in  which 
its  duties  are  performed  during  incumbency. 
The  two  things  are  inseparable.  To  say  that 
the  judge  by  courting  the  rich,  by  discrimina- 
ting among  suitors,  by  prostituting  his  office, 
can  secure  his  re-election,  is  in  effect  saving  that 
the  people  are  so  corrupt  as  to  be  conciliated  by 
dishonesty;  or  else  so  foolish  as  to  be  gulled  by 
it.  If  dishonest  courses  can  secure  the  re-elec- 
tion of  the  judge,  the  same  dishonest  courses 
would  secure  his  election  in  the  first  instance. 
The  objection  applies  as  well  to  election  as  to  re- 
election— to  one  set  of  influences  as  to  the  other. 
If  it  prove  that  the  judge  should  not  be  re-elec- 
ted, it  equally  proves  that  the  judge  should  not 
be  elected.  If  it  prove  that  the  people  are  in- 
capable of  re-electing,  it  equally  proves  that 
they  are  incapable  of  electing  in  the  first  in- 
stance; and  as  I  before  remarked,  it  is  but  sta- 
ing  the  same  proposition  in  two  forms.  Besides 
the  reasoning  by  which  this  objection  is  attempt- 
ed to  be  sustained,  if  it  can  be  established, 
makes  a  direct  attack  upon  the  whole  elective 
franchise.  It  goes  to  show  that  popular  elec- 
tions are  corrupting  in  their  influence.  It  goes 
to  show  that  popiilar  responsibility  is  degrading 
and  therefore  no  officer  should  be  elected  by  the 
people.  If  the  same  judge  be  honest  when  he 
does  not  look  to  the  people  for  a  continuance  of 
his  official  existence,  and  dishonest  from  neces- 
sity, in  order  to  continue  it,  then  the  degradation 
of  the  officer  is  the  result  of  the  low  standard  of 
popular  morals — a  standard  so  low  as  to  unfit 
the  people  for  the  exercise  of  political  power. 

Something  has  been  said  in  relation  to  the  in- 
dependence of  the  judiciary,  and  we  have  been 
referred  to  England.  Now  sir,  as  I  understand 
it,  the  independence  of  the  English  judiciary 
depends  on  no  principle  which  is  controverted 
in  the  report  of  the  committee.  Originally,  the 
crown  had  not  only  the  bestowal  of  judicial 
office,  but  that  office  was  held  at  its  will  and 
pleasure.  The  king  was  a  part  of  the  govern- 
ment. He  constituted  the  executive  branch. 
He  placed  his  creatures  in  judicial  stations. 
They  were  dependent  on  his  smile  for  the  con- 
tinuance of  their  official  existence.  The  judici- 
ary then  became  a  part  of  the  executive,  and  all 
its  energies  and  powers  were  exerted  to  build  up 
the  royal  prerogative.  When  afterwards,  the 
judges  neld  their  office  bv  a  certain  tenure,  and 
were  placed  beyond  the  influence  of  the  execu- 
tive, it  was  declared  that  they  were  independent; 
and  that  is  the  independent  judiciary  of  which 
Englishmen  boast. 

Now,  it  is  proposed  that  our  judges  shall  hold 
their  offices  oy  a  certain  tenure — for  a  certain 
term  of  years — that  thoy  shall   be  during  that 


time,  independent  of  the  power  that  created 
them,  and  of  every  department  of  the  govern- 
ment, so  long  as  they  are  faithful  in  the  dis- 
charge of  their  duties.  But,  says  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson,  the  only  way  to  secure  the  in- 
dependence of  the  judge  is,  to  make  hiin  entire- 
ly independent  of  the  power  from  whom  he  re- 
ceived his  office.  The  crown,  he  said,  in  Eng- 
land, made  the  judge,  and  he  was  therefore 
placed  above  the  influence  of  the  crown.  The 
people  make  the  judge  here,  and  he  should  be 
placed  above  the  influence  of  the  people.  The 
honorable  gentleman,  in  defining  judicial  inde- 
pendence, and  reasoning  as  to  what  should  exist 
here,  from  what  exists  in  England,  has  certainly 
lost  sight  of  the  fact,  that  the  English  judge, 
although  independent  of  the  crown,  which  is 
but  one  department  of  the  British  government, 
stills  holds  his  office  at  the  will  and  pleasure  of 
the  parliament,  in  which  the  sovereign  power 
resides.  It  is  apparent  then  that  the  judge,  un- 
der our  system,  will  be  more  independent  than 
the  English  judge,  for  instead  of  a  bare  majori- 
ty, two  thirds  of  the  legislature  are  required  to 
evict  him  from  office,  and  they  are  required  to 
exhibit  on  their  journal  the  causes  of  his  remo- 
val. While  the  gentleman  approves  of  this  re- 
sponsibility, he  does  not  seem  to  take  the  dis- 
tinction that  here  the  legislature  are  but  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  people,  and  should  reflect 
their  will,  so  that  their  action  is  presumed  to  be 
the  people's,  the  power  which  is  interposed  be- 
tween the  judge  and  the  people  being  a  delega- 
ted power. 

I  therefore  regard  it  as  a  new  principle  as  ap- 
plied to  our  political  system,  to  say  that  the 
judge  shall  be  entirely  independent  of  the  pow- 
er that  created  him.  All  our  officers  are  crea- 
ted directly  or  indirectly  by  the  people;  and 
they  are  held  directly  or  indirectly  responsible 
to  the  people.  The  question,  so  far  as  judicial 
responsibility  is  concerned,  is  to  whom  the  dele- 
gated power  shall  be  entrusted,  because  in  this 
instance  it  is  impossible  for  it  to  be  held  by  the 
people  and  exercised  by  them.  But,  says  the 
gentleman,  the  effect  of  re-eligibility  Avil'l  be  to 
drag  down  the  judere  at  the  feet  of  the  people. 
Why  that  was  one  of  the  great  objects  for  which 
this  convention  was  called.  For  my  part  I 
should  say  that  the  haughtiest  nature  that  was 
ever  stamped  on  the  human  soul  could  ask  for 
office  without  humiliation  or  degradation  at  the 
hand  of  a  free  and  enlightened  people. 

The  gentleman  indulges  the  fear  that  if  re- 
eligibility  becomes  a  feature  in  our  judicial  sys- 
tem, the  judge  will  mount  the  hustings  and  that 
the  discussions  of  private  rights  will  become  the 
medium  through  which  public  office  is  sought. 
Well,  I  do  not  perceive  that  that  would  not  as 
well  be  the  case  if  we  permit  the  judges  to  be 
elected  by  the  people  as  it  will  should  they  be 
made  re-eligible.  Enlightened  public  opinion 
must  control  this  subject,  and  that  is  the  only 
control,  that  is  tlie  only  safe-guard  we  have  for 
our  whole  political  system. 

Our  institutions  rest  upon  the  intelligence  of 
the  people,  which  is  the  only  guaranty  for  the 
perpetuity  of  free  governments.  He  says,  and  ' 
says  perhaps  correctly,  that  it  may  occa.sionally 
occur  that  a  bad  man  will  be  placed  in  hi^h  ju- 
dicial  station.     Grant  that  it  is  so;  it  will  not 


249 


be  contended  that,  let  the  appointment  come  from 
xrhat  quarter  it  may,  bad  men  will  not  sometimes 
be  placed  in  hieh  stations.  This  may  occur  in 
any  state  of  things.  A  bad  man  placed  on  the 
bench  to  serve  his  own  base  purposes,  whether 
he  be  re-eligible  or  not,  will  be  tempted  to  em- 
ploy sinister  means  to  accomplish  nis  sinister 
ends.  I  cannot  perceive  that  re-eligibility  will 
produce  this  effect.  Besides, this  very  argument 
wars  against  the  very  principle  on  which,  as  I 
conceive,  our  whole  system  rests.  If  the  employ- 
ment of  such  means  as  these  is  to  operateon  the 
public  mind,  then  the  public  mind  has  not  the 
capacity  to  elect  or  to  re-elect.  Talk  about  the 
judge  lending  himself  officially  to  influential 
men  for  the  purpose  of  securing  their  aid.  I 
ask  you  what  is  the  number  of  the  litigants 
compared  with  the  whole  voting  population? 
Scarcelv  a  tenth.  And  of  this  number  how  many 
would  become  the  subjects  of  judicial  bounty, 
and  the  creatures  of  the  judge?  Not  a  tithe  of 
that  tithe.  And  for  every  friend  that  is  created 
there  will  be  an  enemy  made.  Favors  cannot  be 
bestowed  on  some  without  making  enemies  of 
those  at  whose  expense  they  are  obtained.  Grant- 
ing that  the  rich  and  influential  will  be  favored 
by  this  corrupt  judge,  we  all  know,  who  know 
the  character  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  that 
the  complaints  of  the  humble  and  obscure  will 
always  nnd  a  listening  ear,  and  a  ready  sympa- 
thv,  and  a  spirit  of  indignation  in  the  public 
mind  that  would  trample  under  foot  such  base- 
ness. 

But  sir,  you  prove  nothing  by  showing  that  a 
bad  man  would  go  on  to  perpetrate  his  evil 
deeds.  You  must  show  that  the  good  man  be  • 
comes  a  bad  one.  It  is  necessary  that  this  violent 
presumption  be  indulged  before  it  can  be  presum- 
ed that  evil  wUl  result  from  re-eligibility.  Men 
that  are  good  before  their  appointment  will  not 
be  led  to  commit  evil  deeds  without  some  strong 
and  powerful  motive.  What  then  would  be  the 
motive?  To  gain  popular  favor  and  influence, 
and  their  conduct  would  be  predicated  on  a  pre- 
sumption of  popular  weakness;  and  the  belief 
that  oy  corruption,  and  by  converting  office  into 
an  engine  which  should  be  made  to  effect  evil  to 
some  and  good  to  others,  with  a  view  to  secure 
re-election,  they  could  accomplish  success.  I 
say  the  whole  argument  is  predicated  on  popu- 
lar ignorance.  If  the  people  have  the  intelli- 
gence that  is  attributed  to  them  they  could  see 
the  influences  which  were  brought  to  bear,  and 
would  visit,  as  they  ought,  upon  the  judges  the 
indignation  which  they  would  merit.  On  the 
other  hand,  supposing  the  people  to  possess  that 
intelligence  ana  virtue  which  are  requisite  to 
make  judicious  selections,  the  judge  looks  for- 
ward, as  the  means  of  securing  his  re-election — to 
what?  To  the  faithful  discharge  of  his  official 
duties.  He  regards  the  public  as  an  enlightened 
tribunal,  before  which  he  is  again  to  come;  and 
he  knows  that  unless  he  brings  evidence  to  show 
that  he  has  been  a  good  oflScer  he  will  be  reject- 
ed. But  shall  we  say  that  it  would  be  impolitic 
to  re-elect,  but  that  it  would  be  judicious  to  elect 
our  jiidges?  In  the  first  instance  they  present 
themselves  b«fore  the  people  who  have  to  take 
them  on  their  reputation.  They  are  then  tin- 
tried;  but  the  next  time  they  present  themselves 
their  whole  official  course  is  known,  and  the 
32 


people  are  better  prepared  to  judge.  They  have 
more  material  out  of  which  to  form  a  "correct 
judgment,  supposing  they  are  capable  of  judg- 
ing. But  on  the  other  hand,  the  officer  who  is 
placed  in  a  judicial  station,  and  looks  to  the  end 
of  his  terra  as  the  termination  of  bis  official  ex- 
istence— 'who  knows  that  let  his  cmrrse  of  con^ 
duct  be  what  it  may,  there  is  for  him  no  longer 
the  hope  of  official  life — who  knows  that  he  is 
to  sink  again  to  the  popular  level,  from  which 
he  cannot,  according  to  the  iron  rule  of  the  con- 
stitution, arise,  let  his  merits  be  what  thev  may. 
I  say  what  stimulus,  what  incentive  is  tbere  to 
industrv,  to  tire  building  up  of  a  high  judicial 
reputation,  to  the  acquisition  of  large  judicial 
attainments-— what  stimulus  is  there?  He  may 
sink  into  indolence,  he  may  neglect  his  official 
duties,  and  the  result  is  tHe  same.  Sir,  it  was 
regarded  by  the  inspiration  of  heaven  as  a  curse 
upon  man  that  he  should  labor.  It  is,  there 
fore,  a  part  of  the  constitution  of  man  to  be  in- 
dolent. You  have  to  stimulate  him.  You  have 
to  hold  out  to  him  inducements.  Exertion  is 
not  voluntary.  It  is  dragged  forth  by  some  pow- 
erful extraneous  cause.  Our  holy  system  of  re- 
ligion is  a  system  of  rewards  anS  punishments, 
constituted  according  to  the  nature  of  man. — ' 
Man  by  that  system  is  held  in  check.  He  is  con- 
strained to  pursue  the  paSh  of  rectitude.  He  is 
taught  to  walk  in  the  ways  in  which  he  should 
go  by  rewards  held  out  for  good  conduct,  and 
punishment  denounced  for  evil  deeds.  Yet  we 
are  told  that  re-el igibility^  although  it  holds  out 
rewards  for  faithful  service,  would  destroy  the 
independence  of  the  judge,  and  therefore  render 
him  corrupt,  and  that  by  prostrating  the  judicia- 
ry at  the  feet  of  the  people  the  ermine  would 
be  soiled,  the  station  degraded.  In  the  language 
of  Shakspeare,  my  friend  from  Henderson  ex- 
claims : 

"Plate  sin  in  goM,  and  the  strong  lance  of  justice 
hurtless  breaks — 

Clothe  it  in  beggar's  rags,  a  pigmy's  straw  will  pierce 
it." 

This  language  might  have  suited  the  English 
court  in  the  days  of  Henry  the  VIII,  and  his 
daughters  the  bloody  Mary,  the  imperious  Eliza- 
beth. It  may  have  suited  the  days  when  the 
English  judiciary  was  the  creature  of  the  Eng- 
lish crown,  but  it  can  scarcely  apply  with  any 
force  in  this  enlightened  age,  either  to  the  tri- 
bunals of  that  country  or  Uiis,  nor  can  I  think 
that  it  portrays  the  course  of  popular  action  in 
our  country.  Sir,  if  I  wanted  to  excite  the  pub- 
lic mind — -if  I  wanted  to  concentrate  indignation 
on  any  object,  I  would  charge  that  object  with 
having  perpetrated  injustice,  not  on  the  rich, 
and  the  proud,  and  the  influential,  but  on  the 
man  who  wears  the  rags.  Such  is  my  experience 
of  Kentucky  character. 

I  have  perhaps  said  £is  much  on  this  subject  as 
I  ought  to  say.  I  have  given  my  views  in  a  ve- 
ry imperfect  manner  in  reference  to  these  ques- 
tions. I  conceive  that  the  two  are  inseparably 
connected,  and  that  they  cannot  be  severed.  If 
you  say  the  judge  should  not  be  re-elrgible,  you 
say  in  fact  that  the  judge  should  not  be  elected. 
It  seems  to  be  on  all  hands  agreed  that  an  elective 
judiciary  will  be  established  by  this  conveation. 
I  have  endeavored  to  show  that  it  will  be  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  true  principle  of  a  popular 


250 


government — that  the  people  are  to  exercise 
the  power  because  there  is  do  necessity  to  dele- 
gate it.  I  have  endeavored  to  show  that  re-eli- 
fibility  rests  on  the  same  principle,  and  having 
one  so,  I  shall  close  my  remarks. 
Mr.  DAVIS.  I  am  in  very  feeble  health,  and 
I  have  thought  that  I  should  take  no  part  in  the 
debate  on  this  question.  I  will,  however,  en- 
deavor if  my  strength  will  enable  me  to  main- 
tain the  floor,  in  some  measure  to  redeem  the 
pledge  which  I  have  given.  In  coming  to  this 
discussion  I  regret  that  I  do  not  possess  my  usu- 
al amount  of  physical  heiilth,  but  much  more 
deeply  do  I  regret  the  absence  of  that  intellectu- 
al strength,  which  will  enable  me  to  vindicate 
my  position,  not  only  to  the  house,  but  to  the 
country.  I  am  happy  to  know  from  the  publish- 
ed debate,  so  far  as  I  have  attended  to  it,  that 
we  all  agree  in  one  position;  that  is,  that  the  ju- 
diciary department  of  the  government  should  be 
able,  learned,  honest,  and  independent.  Now, 
any  system  of  appointment  of  the  courts  that 
will  secure  these  great  and  essential  ends  of  the 
judiciary,  would  be  satisfactory  to  me;  and  if 
my  reason  could  be  convinced  that  the  mode  of 
popular  election  would  secure  to  the  country 
these  most  important  and  essential  ends  of  gov- 
ernment, I  would  withdraw  the  feeble  opposi- 
tion which  I  shall  endeavor  to  present.  But  I 
go  in  this  matter  of  an  able,  honest,  and  inde- 
pendent judiciary,  for  an  essence,  for  a  thing 
that  will  exist  in  practice  and  in  effect,  not  for 
an  abstraction  or  a  theoretical  ideality.  I  am 
not  satisfied  with  the  declaration  of  gentlemen, 
that  they  are  pledged  and  devoted  to  such  a  ju- 
diciary as  I  have  indicated.  I  want  them  to  con- 
vince me  that  they  propose  to  give  to  the  coun- 
try that  judiciary,  and  that  mode  of  constitu- 
ting it,  which  AVill  secure  these  ends.  And  it  is 
becau.se  I  am  wholly  incredulous  as  to  the  re- 
sults of  the  system  which  the  committee  has 
proposed,  and  which  I  have  no  doubt  the  con- 
vention will  give  to  the  countrv.  It  is  because 
of  my  utter  scepticism  in  regard  to  the  practica- 
bility and  the  aptitude  of  the  system  to  its  great 
ends,  that  I  am  induced  to  oppose  it  here,  as  I 
will  elsewhere.  The  great  improvement  of  mod- 
em political  science  and  statesmanship  over  that 
of  ancient  times  and  the  middle  ages,  is  the  di- 
vision of  the  government  into  departments,  and 
its  distribution  among  various  ofticers  and  class- 
es of  officers,  who  shall  be  co-ordinate,  and  who 
shall  be  a  check  against  the  encroachment  of 
each  other.  These  form  a  protection  to  the  peo- 
ple, and  to  tlie  rights  which  are  reserved  by  the 
constitution  for  the  people,  and  which  are  not 
at  all  intended  to  be  given  into  the  political 
scheme. 

Now,  the  chief  advantage  of  our  American 
system  of  governments  over  all  that  exist  else- 
where, and  over  all  that  preceded  them,  througli 
the  long  lapse  of  political  history,  in  my  judg- 
ment, resolves  itself  into  these  two  general  prin- 
ciples. We,  the  representatives  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky  assembled,  ought  to  preserve  and 
guard,  with  the  most  sedulous  vigilance  and 
watchfulness,  these  important  principles,  and  if 
it  be  a  matter  of  doubt  whether  any  provision 
which  we  are  about  to  adopt  and  incorporate 
into  the  constitution,  or  any  mode  of  appointing 
the  in»gistracy,  which  we  are  about  to  establish, 


will  jeopardise  these  principles,  it  seems  to  me 
that  every  member  of  tliis  convention  should  feel 
it  incumbent  upon  him  to  repudiate  all  such 
propositions.  We  have  three  co-ordinate  depart- 
ments of  the  government,  according  to  the  un- 
derstanding of  the  country,  and  according  to 
the  constitution  itself;  a  legislative,  executive, 
and  judicial  department.  We  have  been  taught 
by  the  sages  of  the  law,  not  only  in  our  own 
country,  but  in  that  from  which  we  sprung,  and 
by  all  the  experience  of  mankind,  that  that  man 
or  body  of  men,  who  engross  all  these  functions 
and  exorcise  them  all  in  their  oAvn  persons,  is  the 
government,  and  it  is  essentially  and  practically 
a  despotism. 

Now  take  the  projects  and  schemes,  not  of  re- 
form, not  of  amendment,  which  seem  to  be  en- 
grossing the  attention  of  this  body,  but  of  de- 
struction and  revolution,  especially  in  regard  to 
the  judiciary,  and  adopt  them  in  the  new  consti- 
tution, and  you  swallow  up  and  engross  all  the 
departments  of  the  government  in  the  legisla- 
tive department;  you  subvert  and  overthrow  the 
judiciary,  and  practically  take  awav  that  protec- 
tion to  the  citizens  of  the  state,  which  the  con- 
stitution and  the  laws  have  provided  for  them, 
and  I  would  go  home  to  my  people,  and  I  would 
proclaim  from  the  stump,  and  every  wliere,  that 
such  a  constitution  was  not  worth  thier  confi- 
dence nor  their  acceptance,  and  I  would  invoke 
them  to  reject  it.  We  are  asked,  and  particular- 
ly by  my  friend  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,) 
who  made  us  a  most  eloquent  and  forcible  ad- 
dress yesterday,  "are  you  afraid  to  trust  the 
people?  are  not  the  people  competent  to  do  their 
own  business?" 

I  answer  in  the  most  precise  and  unequivocal 
language,  I  am  afraid  to  trust  the  people  in  all 
things,  1  am  afraid  to  trust  myself.  The  peo- 
ple themselves,  our  fathers,  who  had  as  much 
wisdom  and  patriotism  as  we  have,  acted  on 
that  principle  in  fonning  the  instrument  now 
under  consideration,  and  which  we  are  to  say 
whether  we  will  amend,  or  whether  we  will  sub- 
vert. They  adopted  a  constitution  that  was  to 
be  paramount  not  only  to  the  legislature,  but  to 
the  entire  government,  the  fundamental  law  of 
government,  the  law  of  laws.  They  prescribed 
and  defined  the  powers  of  the  three  branches. 
They  erected  limits  and  barriers,  beyond  which 
they  were  not  to  pass.  They  withheld  expressly 
from  the  political  scheme  of  government,  great 
fundamental  rights  which  they  were  resolved  the 
government  should  never  have  cognizance  of, 
and  without  which  reservation  our  social  fabric 
never  could  have  been  reared  in  that  beautiful 
proportion  in  which  it  now  exists. 

I  have  said  that  the  people  distrusted  them- 
selves, that  they  were  not  willing  to  confide  to 
themselves,  much  less  to  either  the  legislature, 
the  executive,  or  the  judicial  departments,  cer- 
tain great  and  fundainental  rights  wliich  thev 
have  declared  in  the  most  explicit  language,  shall 
not  be  the  subject  of  governmental  cognizance. 
Take  the  definition  of  treason,  take  your  bill  of 
rights,  and  read  them  carefully,  and  ponder  upon 
them.  Treason  is  to  consist  in  levying  war  by 
overt  act,  to  establish  which,  tliere  must  be  two 
positive  witnesses  to  the  same  fact.  This  was  a 
great  subject  which  those  wlio  framed  the  con- 
stitution were  resolved  to  regulate,  and  they 


251 


have  said  that  the  legislature  shall  not  infringe 
on  that  definition  of  treason,  nor  change  the 
la\r  of  evidence  upon  which  tlie  charge  shall  be 
established.  They  have  laid  down  great  and 
broad  principles  of  natural  right  in  our  bill  of 
rights;  they  nave  assured  to  us  the  freedom  of 
speech,  the  right  to  meet  together  to  deliberate 
upon,  and  condemn  the  action  of  our  popular 
authorities;  the  freedom  of  the  press,  the  right 
to  worship  Grod  according  to  reason  and  con- 
science, and  the  security  of  property  and  per- 
son; exception  from  ex  post  facto  laws,  and  laws 
violating  the  obligation  of  contracts,  and  other 
rights  fundamental  and  proper.  They  have  laid 
down  the  mode,  and  a  difficult  and  tardy  mode 
it  is,  in  which  thejr  themselves,  the  only  source 
of  power  that  exists  upon  God's  globe,  will 
amend  the  fundamental  law,  the  constitution  of 
the  land.  And  what  does  the  concluding  arti- 
cle in  the  bill  of  rights  say,  in  regard  to  these 
and  other  rights  quite  as  important? 

"  To  guard  against  transgressions  of  the  high 
'  powers  which  we  have  delegated,  we  declare,  that 
'every  thing  in  this  article  is  excepted  out  of  the 
'  general  powers  of  the  government,  and  shall 
'forever  remain  inviolate;  and  that  all  laws  con- 
'  trarv  thereto,  or  contrary  to  this  constitution, 
'shall  be  void." 

Xow  I  ask  my  friend,  and  I  ask  the  house,  if 
the  people  were  not  afraid  to  trust  themselves, 
if  they  were  not  afraid  to  trust  that  majority, 
whicli  might  get  possession  of  the  government, 
and  control  its  action?  The  people  have  said 
that  these  rights  are  inalienable,  and  that  they 
shall  forever  remain  inviolate;  that  all  laws  con- 
trary thereto  shall  be  void. 

JN'ow,  I  will  illustrate  this  important  position, 
this  great  and  fundamental  truth,  by  one  or  two 
examples.  Private  property  shall  not  be  taken 
for  public  use  without  the  consent  of  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  owner,  nor  without  just  com- 
pensation being  made  to  him  for  it.  That,  in 
the  last  twelve  months  in  one  of  its  modes  and 
forms,  has  been  a  most  exciting  question  in  this 
commonwealth.  Suppose  that  every  adult 
male  in  Kentucky  should  meet  and  resolve  that 
emancipation  should  take  place  without  com- 
pensation, and  this  in  opposition  to  the  consti- 
tution of  the  state.  I  ask  my  friend,  and  I  ask 
this  convention,  what  woul&  be  the  legal  and 
practical  effect  of  such  a  resolution,  adopted 
unanimously  by  the  freemen  of  the  whole  state? 
It  would  be  unconstitutional,  and  it  would  be 
void:  and  a  judiciary,  able,  imderstanding  the 
principles  of  the  constitution,  impartial,  inde- 
pendent, would  rise  above  the  raging  storm, 
and  would  not  allow  this  great  principle  in  the 
constitution  to  be  violated,  that  the  people  of 
the  state  of  Kentucky  cannot  wrest  from  anv 
man  his  property,  without  just  compensation 
being  made  to  him. 

I  ask  again  then,  if  in  this  most  important 
juncture,  the  people  have  not  shown  a  distnist 
of  themselves,  and  have  not  refused  to  confide 
the  exercise  of  sovereign  power,  even  to  a  sov- 
ereign majority  itself?  I  will  put  another  in- 
stance, and  but  one  more.  What  was  it  but  the 
principle  of  freedom  of  conscience,  and  the  right 
to  worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  rea- 
son, that  inalienable  and  invaluable  right  which 
produced  the  settlement  of  this  North  American 


continent?  Suppose  now,  that  the  hordesof  immi- 
gration from  Catholic  Europe  shall  come  on  in 
such  increasing  waves  as  to  constitute  the  balance 
of  power  in  this  Union.  They  are  now  coming  at 
the  rate  of  half  a  million  yearly,  and  in  a  sfiort 
time  these  tides  may  rise  and  "swell,  till,  they 
reach  a  million  annually.  How  many  such  an- 
nual influxes  will  it  talie  to  enable  a  catholic 
league  in  times  of  excitement,  to  seize  upon  the 
balance  of  political  power,  not  only  in  the  United. 
States,  but  of  most  of  the  states?  Suppose  that 
state  of  things  should  come  upon  us,  and  then  in 
obedience  to,  and  in  conformity  with  the  princi- 
ples of  a  united  faith,  and  despotic  religion,  they 
should  resolve  to  put  down  protestantism,  and 
j  that  the  infallible  catholic  religion  should  be 
I  the  only  faith,  and  that  all  should  bow  to  it  in 
sending  up  orisons  to  their  Omniscient  Creator? 
I  ask  if  a  majority  thus  derived  and  constituted, 
should  meet  m  defiance  of  the  constitution,  and 
that  great  principle  which  secures  freedom  of 
conscience  to  the  citizen,  and  should  resolve  that 
this  should  be  the  all-pervading  religion  of  the 
land,  what  legal  effect  and  validity  would  ifci 
have?    None  sir,  none  whatever.  ! 

Now  sir,  the  wise  men  who  framed  this  con- 
stitution, and  the  people  who  have  lived  under 
it  so  long,  knew  that  we  were  all  frail  and  in- 
firm beings,  liable  to  error  and  passion,  to  op- 
pression and  wrong;  they  knew  that  when  such 
was  the  character  of  the  individual  action  of 
mankind,  that  its  aggregate  action  by  states  and 
nations  must  be  of  the  same  character.  Whjj 
there  is  not  a  man  in  this  hall,  however  en»f 
lightened  in  mind,  however  pure  in  intention, 
however  sublimated  in  morals,  that  does  not  err 
from  day  to  day,  and  grievously  err;  how,  when 
we  all  individually  so  err,  can  our  collective  ac- 
tion be  invariably  free  from  error,  free  from  the  in- 
firmities  that  beset,  and  always  will  beset  our 
frail  and  fallen  nature.  The  people  knew  that 
they  were  liable  to  be  misled  and  to  commit 
error,  to  be  led  by  faction  to  perpetrate  wrong, 
and  in  times  of  high  excitement  to  use  their 
power  oppressively  on  the  minority.  And  it 
was  because  of  this  deep  and  pKUosophical 
knowledge  of  our  infirmity  and  liability  to  err 
in  all  things  in  government,  in  the  formation  of 
a  constitution,  and  especially  in  the  enactment 
of  laws,  that  they  established  this  constitution, 
that  they  laid  broad  and  deep  the  fundamental 
rights  in  the  article  of  the  constitution  from 
which  I  have  just  read;  and  they  proclaimed 
that  all  laws  which  violate  these  great  and  in- 
appreciable rights  should  be  held  void  and  of 
no  effect.  Then  I  am  not  to  be  deterred  from 
this  position,  by  being  asked  if  I  am  afraid  to 
trust  the  people.  I  am  afraid  to  trust  the  peo- 
ple, I  am  afraid  to  trust  myself.  But  when  you 
enlighten  the  people,  when  you  give  them  facts, 
and  time  to  deliberate,  to  act  advisedlv  and  with 
mature  reflection,  I  bow  to  their  will  with  aai  , 
much  submission  as  any  man  in  this  hall.  "But 
I  am  not  for  bringing  about  a  sute  of  things 
which  shall  deprive  the  people  of  those  lights 
and  that  deliberation. 

I  think  my  position  argues  more  confidence  in 
the  people  than  that  of  anv  gentleman  who  has 
spoken  his  sentiments  in  tlie  course  of  this  de- 
bate. The  people  know  that  they  are  the  only 
legitimate  source  of   power.    Why  when  they 


252^ 


adapted  the  principle  in  the  constitution,  by 
"which  they  bound  themselves  that  two  succes- 
sive votes  should  be  taken  at  a  general  election, 
upon  the  question  of  calling  a  convention,  and  a 
majority  should  be  had  each  time  before  they 
could  .call  a  cenvoution,  did  they  incorporate 
that  principle?  They  knew  they  had  the  right 
xipon  the  instant  and  at  all  times  to  change, 
amend  or  wholly  subvert  our  constitution  and 
our  form  of  government.  But  they  reasoned, 
they  reflected  like  moral  and  accountable  beings, 
they  considered  that  such  would  not  be  the 
bsst  mode  of  changing  that  constitution,  and 
that  time  and  reflection  Avould  be  necessary 
to  inform  them,  even  upon  this  great  ques 
tion.  From  such  considerations  they  chose  to 
prescribe  for  themselves  the  time  which  the  ex- 
isting constitution  requires  for  its  amendment. 
Why  sir,  the  people  want  a  government,  not 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  exercising  their  power, 
not  merely  to  display  to  the  world  that  they  are 
the  authors  of  the  govenunent,  that  it  exists  by 
their  will,  and  that  tliey  hav-e  a  right  to  change 
it  as  they  please;  they  do  not  Avant  a  govern- 
ment with  officers  and  with  all  consequent  ex- 
penditures, simply  for  the  ostentatious  display 
of  this  power.  Thfiy  want  it  for  their  conveni- 
ence, their  security,  and  their  protection.  I 
have  this  confidence  in  the  intelligence  and  vir- 
tue of  the  people  in  relation  to  this  question 
and  all  other  questions  of  government,  if  you 
can  satisfy  them  that  there  is  a  mode  of  filling 
the  judicial  offices,  different  from  that  of  popu- 
lar election,  by  which  a  greater  amount  of  abili- 
ty, honesty,  and  independence  can  be  secured, 
they  will  have  the  reason  and  good  sense  to  cast 
the  exercise  of  power  from  themselves,  and  to 
delegate  it  where  it  may  more  certainly  secure 
those  great  ends. 

"We  all  agree  as  I  before  said,  in  one  gen- 
eral principle,  and  that  is,  that  we  must  have  an 
able,  honest,  impartial,  and  independent  judicia- 
ry. The  question  on  which  we  differ  is,  as  to  the 
best  manner  of  securing  such  tribunals.  I 
propose  to  compare  opinions  with  gentlemen 
m  relation  to  two  modes.  I  deny  that  it  has 
been  any  where  established  by  time  and  experi- 
ence, that  the  principle  of  popular  election  of 
judges  is  the  best  or  will  secure  the  great 
purposes  for  which  a  judiciary  is  to  be  constitu- 
ted. We  have  no  such  experience  in  our  country, 
or  elsewhere,  to  establish  that  political  truth.  I 
have  met  with  men,  democrats  too,  who  have 
lived  in  Mississippi  and  have  practiced  law  un- 
der an  elective  judiciary  system,  and  of  all  men 
whom  I  have  met  they  were  the  most  thorough 
and  uncompromising  in  their  opposition  to  the 
system.  Such  a  system  in  that  state  has  result- 
ed in  the  courts  being  deterred  from  holding 
their  terms  by  the  clamor  of  debtors,  and  in 
bringing  upon  it  the  foul  and  indelible  dishonor 
of  state  repudiation.  It  has  been  adopted  but  re- 
cently in  the  state  of  New  York.  Certainly  it 
has  not  been  there  long  enough  in  operation  to 
afford  any  thing  like  a  practical  test  tnat  is  to  be 
relied  upon  in  carrying  out  our  deliberations  in 
the  business  of  forming  a  constitution.  Why 
sir,  a  system  like  that  would  require  an  age  to 
prove  it;  we  should  have  to  run  through  two  or 
three  judicial  cycles  before  we  could  say  we  had 
the  lights  of  experience  in  relation  to  that  prob- 


lem. How  had  it  worked,  and  how  is  it  working 
in  that  state  for  the  sliort  period  of  its  existencel 
In  any  other  way  than  I  could  desire  it  to  work 
in  ray  state,  if  the  principle  is  to  be  introduced 
here. 

You  propose  to  elect  tlie  judge  by  the  people. 
What  will  be  not  only  the  manifest,  but  the 
inevitable  consequence  of  the  adoption  in  prac- 
tice of  such  a  principle?  You  will  make  your 
courts  and  your  judges  partizan  and  political,  as 
certain  as  tiiat  tJtie  sun  shines,  or  as  the  night 
succeeds  the  day,  and  you  will  draw  these  offi- 
ces into  the  absorbing  maelstroom  of  political 
partizan  politics.  Gentlemen  hug  to  themselves 
a  contrary  delusion.  But  we  all  know  the  peo- 
ple are  wholly  divided,  into  two  great  political 
parties.  The  candidates  for  these  offices  will 
not  have  the  virtue  and  self-denying  capacity 
to  hold  themselves  aloof  from  the  scramble  of 
party  politics.  In  my  judgment,  men  never  de- 
luded themselves  with  a  greater  fallacy.  Your 
system,  in  a  short  time  after  the  judges  are  to  be 
elected  by  the  popular  vote,  Avill  inevitably  force 
the  selection  of  every  candidate  for  a  judgeship 
from  political  partizans;  indeed  there  will  be 
none  others  from  whom  to  select  these  candi- 
dates, and  the  very  same  means  which  fill  other 
political  partizan  offices  will  be  resorted  to,  and 
will  fill  the  office  of  judge.  We  recollect  that 
about  two  years  ago  the  first  election  was  held  for 
supreme  judges  in  the  state  of  New  York.  When 
the  two  parties  made  their  nominations  for  su- 
preme court  judges,  Mr.  Gardiner  received  the 
nomination  of  the  democratic  party,  and  he  be- 
ing an  anti-renter  in  principle,  that  party  took 
him  up  and  voted  for  him,  and  he  was  elected, 
running  ahead  of  his  ticket  some  twenty  thou- 
sand votes.  What  power  and  influence  gave 
him  such  a  great  majority  over  his  associates  on 
the  ticket?  It  was  believed  beforehand  that  if 
elected  to  the  supreme  bench,  in  that  high  judg- 
ment seat  he  would  be  anti-renter,  and  would 
decide  against  the  rights  of  the  landlords.  We 
recolleet  a  few  years  ago,  that  we  sent  a  commis- 
sion to  the  state  of  Ohio,  coiLsisting  of  two  of  the 
most  talented  and  prominent  men  in  Kentucky,  to 
endeavor  to  have  re-modeled  the  laws  of  Ohio  for 
the  reclamation  of  fugitive  slaves.  This  mission 
produced  the  passage  by  the  Ohio  legislature  of 
what  was  called  the  "black  law."  The  subject 
excited  the  people  of  that  state,  and  divided 
them  into  parties.  An  abolitionist  became  a 
candidate  for  the  oflSce  of  judge  before  the 
legislature  of  the  state,  and  he  declared  before- 
hand that  he  regarded  those  laws  unconstitu- 
tional, and  if  elected  would  declare  them  nuU 
and  void — and  it  was  upon  this  previous  decla- 
ration of  principle,  that  he  was  supported  and 
elected  to  the  office.  But  what  is  going  on  in 
the  state  of  New  York  at  this  time?  New  York 
— the  empire  state  as  slie  is  called — great  in  her 
population,  in  her  resources,  in  elements  of 
Avealth,  and  national  power,  and  great  but  most 
mischievious  in  the  example  she  sets  to  her  sis- 
ter states,  and  in  no  example  more  mischievious 
than  in  the  constitution  that  she  has  lately  adopt- 
ed— what  is  going  on  in  that  great  state?  I  read 
from  the  New  York  Evening  Post  an  account  of 
what  is  doing  in  the  second  judicial  district: 

"  The  judicial  convention  in  this  district  met 
'at  Newburgh  on  the  11th  inst.,  and  nominated 


ti53 


'  John  W.  Brown,  Esq.,  vice  S.  B.  Strong,  whose 
'  terra  expires." 

I  have  served  in  congress  with  one  of  these  gen- 
tlemen, and  I  suppose  my  venerable  friend  (Mr. 
Hardin)  has  served  with  the  other,  and  we  both 
know  that  Strong  is  a  man  of  greatly  more  abil- 
ity and  legal  attainment  than  Brown.  And  on 
what  consid(;rations  is  Mr.  Strong  now  super- 
ceded, and  another  democrat  brought  out  to  fill 
his  placeV     The  Post  says: 

"A  more  acceptable  nomination  could  not  have 
'  been  made,  either  to  his  district  or  to  the  state. 
'  Mr.  Brown  is  one  of  the  first  lawyers  at  the  New 
'  York  bar,  and  enjoys  the  entire  confidence  of 
'  his  professional  brethren.  He  is,  besides,  a 
'  man  of  unwearied  industry;  has  been  the  ar- 
'chitect  of  his  own  fortunes;  was  honored  with 
'  a  seat  in  congress  for  two  successive  terras,  and 
'  was  one  of  the  most  efficient  members  of  the 
'constitutional  convention  of  1846. 

"His  antagonist.  Mr.  Hasbrouck,  also  of  New- 
'  burgh,  is  better  known  as  a  politician  than  a 
'  lawyer,  and  will  not  pi'obably  receive  the  entire 
'  support  of  his  party  against  a  candidate  so  de- 
'sirable,  in  every  point  of  view,  as  a  judge  to 
'  the  people  of  his  district." 

I  make  this  declaration  without  regard  to  pol- 
itics— be  he  whig  or  be  he  democrat — keep  your 
political  partizans  out  of  your  courts,  as  you 
would  keep  a  pestilence  from  this  hall.  But  the 
cause  for  the  overslaugh  of  judge  Strong  will 
appear  in  the  continuation  of  the  extract: 

"  The  following  very  appropriate  tribute  was 
'  paid  by  the  convention  to  the  Hon.  S.  B.  Strong, 
'whose  term  of  office  expires  this  winter. 

"  Resolved  unanimously.  That  Hon.  Selah  B. 
'  Strong,  whose  term  as  justice  of  the  supreme 
'  court  will  expire  on  the  first  of  January  next, 
'has  discharged  the  duties  of  his  station  with 
'pre-eminent  ability,  and  to  the  entire  satisfac- 
'  tion  of  the  members  of  the  bar,  and  the  people 
'  of  the  district.  That  nothing  but  the  peculiar 
'  situation  of  the  district,  and  the  location  of 
'  three  judges  in  a  single  part  of  it,  has  induced 
'  us  to  nominate  another  person  to  fill  his  place." 

What  was  the  controlling  consideration  tlien? 
Not  talents,  not  legal  attaiimients,  not  imparti- 
ality, not  integrity,  not  every  talent  and  virtue 
that  can  adorn  the  judicial  bench,  but  a  favor- 
able local  position  gave  the  inferior  man  more 
strength,  and  therefore  he  was  selected  by  the 
convention,  to  displace  a  vastly  superior  man. 
Availability!  But  this  is  only  one  of  the  dis- 
tricts.    I  read  from  the  same  paper: 

"  JrmciAL  Nominations. — The  democratic  can- 
'didates  for  the  supreme  court  in  the  eighth  ju- 
'dicial  district  of  the  state  are  as  follows." 

The  democratic  candidates  for  the  supreme 
court!  A  court  that  supervises  the  legislation 
and  the  action  of  the  executive  of  the  Empire 
State — that  declares  what  is  law,  and  what  is 
not  law — that  secures  to  the  citizen  his  life,  his 
liberty,  his  reputation,  and  his  property — this 
august  and  all  powerful  tribunal,  that  ought  to 
be  a  type  of  divinity  itself,  as  much  as  frail  and 
erring  man  can  be — ^how  is  it  to  be  selected?  By 
the  meeting  of  deraocratic  and  whig  cabals  and 
juntos,  and  the  bringing  forward  of  men,  not  for 
their  virtue,  intelligence  or  legal  attainments, 
but  because  of  their  political  popularity  and 
availibility.  And  what  do  these  cabals  do?  They 


nominate  upon  strict  party  and  partizan  groimds, 
eight  candidates  under  the  name  of  the  demo- 
cratic candidates  for  the  offices  of  supreme  judge 
in  the  Empire  State  of  New  York.  "What  a 
spectacle! 

"The  democratic  candidates  for  the  supreme 
court  in  the  eight  judicial  districts  of  the  state 
'are  as  follows: — District  No.  1,  Samuel  Jones, 
'of  New  York;  district  No.  2,  John  W.  Brown, 
'of  Orange." 

Mr.  Jones  is  an  able  man.  I  am  informed 
that  Mr.  Brown  has  received  the  nomination  of 
the  two  segments  of  the  democratic  party,  the 
Barnburners  and  the  Old  Hunkers.  They  have 
settled  their  family  quarrels,  and  the  two  par- 
ties after  living  separate  a  while,  have  done 
away  with  their  partial  divorce,  and  have  got 
together  again,  and  are  living  in  tolerable  har- 
mony, I  suppose.  But  before  that  was  effected, 
Mr.  Brown  received  the  nomination  of  one  sec- 
tion, and  now  he  receives  it  from  the  other.  That 
is  not  all — the  Anti-renters — powerful  and  de- 
termined in  purpose,  casting  their  votes  and  ex- 
erting themselves  in  all  the  elections  as  a  unit, 
probably  hold  the  balance  of  power  in  some  of 
these  judicial  districts,  and  it  Decomes  a  matter 
of  great  party  interest,  with  both  parties,  to  en- 
list the  Anti-renters  in  the  support  of  their  cause 
and  candidates.  The  Anti-renters  made  efforts, 
and  I  believe  they  succeeded  in  getting  such 
pledges  and  assurances  from  Mr.  Brown,  as  Mr. 
Young,  the  whig  candidate  for  governor,  and  as 
Mr.  Gardiner,  the  democratic  candidate  for  lieut. 
governor,  gave  them  at  a  former  election.  The 
consequence  is,  that  the  three  parties  unite  in  the 
nomination  and  the  election  of  Mr.  Brown  is 
placed  almost  beyond  the  power  of  fate  itself. 
The  third  district  has  nominated  Henry  Hoge- 
boom,  of  Columbia;  the  fourth,  John  Fine,  of 
St.  Laurence — whom  I  have  the  pleasure  to 
know,  and  who  is  a  very  worthy  and  intelligent 
gentleman — the  fifth,  Joshua  A.  Moore  and  Rob- 
ert Lansing,  of  Jeff'erson;  the  sixth,  William  H. 
Shankland,  of  Cortland;  the  seventh,  Theron  R. 
Srong,  of  Wayne;  and  the  Eighth,  Nathan  Day- 
ton, of  Niagara.  The  nomination  in  the  fifth 
district  was  made  before  the  re-union  of  the 
Barnburners  and  the  Old  Hunkers — and  of  these 
two  sections  of  locofocoisra  I  do  not  know  which 
bears  the  best  name.     The  editor  says: 

"  The  nominations  in  the  fifth  district  were 
'  made  before  the  union  of  the  democracy  in  the 
•  State  was  completed. 

"  We  presume  the  necessary  steps  will  be  ta- 
'  ken  to  present  but  one  cand^idate  there.  The 
'  district  is  strongly  democratic,  having  given  a 
'  majority  of  over  ten  thousand  against  Taylor; 
'  and  it  ought  not  to  be  lost  by  divisions." 

Now  I  ask  any  man  here  if  he  is  so  credulous 
as  to  believe  that  these  offices  of  judge,  under 
our  proposed  system,  will  not  become  politically 
partizan?  And  if  they  are  to  become  so,  what 
are  to  be  the  inevitable  consequences  but  inef- 
ficiency, degradation  and  corruption?  What  of- 
fice is  there  in  all  Araerica — in  any  state  or  terri- 
tory within  the  United  States,  that  is  filled  by 
the  popular  vote  or  by  an  electoral  college  of  any 
number,  but  what  has  been  thus  degraded  and 
become  politically  partizan  in  its  character?  How 
is  it  with  your  President — with  your  members  of 
congress — with  your  governors  of  the  states  and 


254 


state  legislators?  How  is  it  with  your  county 
courts — your  coroners  and  petty  constables?  All 
have  become  political  partizan,  all  have  been  de- 
graded into  this  sink  of  corruption  and  iniqui- 
ty, and  all  are  soiled  more  or  less  by  its  filth. 

How  can  you  expect  ta  preserve  the  ermine  of  a 
judge  pure  and  uncontaniinatedwhen  it  is  dragg- 
ed into  such  an  association?  Never,  never !  "i  ou 
might  as  soon  expect  to  find  chastity  in  a  brothel. 
How  is  it  that  your  political  and  partizan  offi- 
ces are  filled — and  how  is  it  that  these  judicial 
offices  will  be  filled  when  they  are  degraded  to 
that  character?  Go  to  some  of  the  districts  now 
in  my  mind,  and  you  will  see  partizan  leaders, 
months  before  the  election  organizing,  so  as  to 
make  perjury,  and  subornation  of  perjury,  inev- 
itable. You  will  see  sums  of  money  scattered 
broad  cast  for  purposes  of  bribery  and  corrup- 
tion, and  of  buying  the  elective  franchise  it- 
self— the  highest  perogative  of  political  sove- 
reignty that  can  appertain  to  man.  Go  to  the 
stables  and  the  barns — contiguous  to  the  places 
of  voting  a  few  days  before  the  election — and  you 
will  see  debased  men  herding  together  like  cattle, 
drinking  and  carousing,  fiddling  and  dancing, 
and  in  their  revolting  orgies,  violating  the  Sab- 
bath itself.  You  will  see  $50  and  $100  as  pub- 
lically  paid  for  votes  as  for  ahorse  in  open  market, 
and  all  for  political  partizan  victory.  You  will 
see  your  partizan  leaders — your  high  priests  of 
democracy  and  whigism — passing  their  slogan 
and  their  war  cry,  their  henchmen  and  followers, 
calling  out  their  forces  and  preparing  for  the  con- 
flict, and  making  every  appliance  that  can  be 
devised,  for  the  purpose  of  accomplishing  their 
ends.  Think  you  not  that  the  sacred  ermine  of 
the  judge  will  thus  be  brought  down  to  degra- 
dation and  infamy?  It  is  so  in  New  York,  and 
it  will  be  so  in  Kentucky,  whenever  you  make 
these  officers  elective  by  the  people.  One  thing 
is  certain,  tlie  people  are  about  as  often  mistaken 
and  abused,  cheated  and  defrauded  out  of  prop- 
er men  in  electing  to  political  offices,  as  other- 
wise. I  imagine  that  the  actual  statistics  upon 
this  subject  will  present  at  least  one  half  unfit 
from  ignorance  or  want  of  capacity  and  princi- 
ple, or  some  other  cause. 

The  same  causes  that  bring  such  a  proportion 
of  unfit,  inefficient  and  improper  men  into  your 
purely  political  offices,  will  also  operate  upon 
your  judiciary.  Their  fixed  salary  and  their 
longer  tenure  of  office  will  aggravate  this  state  of 
things,  as  to  them.  But  we  are  answered  again 
by  the  cry  of  the  demagogues,  "  are  you  afraid 
to  trust  the  people  with  the  people's  business?" 
I  say  if  the  people's  business  can  be  better  done 
by  agents  selected  by  them  and  directly  respon- 
sible to  them,  the  people  themselves  will  not 
only  sanction,  but  will  require  you  to  trust  their 
business — not  to  themselves,  but  to  those  agen- 
cies. And  here  I  will  say  to  my  respected  friend 
from  Henderson,  that  upon  this  point  I  have  not 
the  remotest  intention  to  apply  my  remarks  to 
him,  but  to  one  not  present— a  native  red-repub- 
lican, a  natural  born,  constitutional,  iulierent 
red-republican,  of  which  party  I  am  not.  That 
there  are  some  functions  of  government  which 
can  be  better  performed  by  agents  appointed 
by  the  people,  than  by  the  people  themselves, 
and  which  ought  to  be  entrusted  to  such  agents. 
You  cannot  get  the  people  together  to  make  laws, 


acting  in  general  assembly.  It  is  physically  im- 
possible. But  if  there  were  small  communities, 
such  as  Athens,  or  the  republic  of  ancient  Greece, 
or  the  republics  of  Italy  of  the  middle  ages,  and 
if  it  were  possible  to  assemble  the  body  of  the 
people  for  that  purpose,  a  few  able,  experienced, 
and  discreet  men,  properly  selected  by  the  peo- 
ple, would  be  better  fitted  and  more  competent 
to  devise  laws  than  the  people  themselves.  If 
it  were  possible  to  get  the  people  together  to 
sit  in  judgment,  and  to  apply  legal  and  con- 
stitutional principles  to  the  multitude  of  cases 
that  come  before  the  judges,  it  could  be  better 
done  through  the  medium  of  judges,  enlighten- 
ed and  virtuous  men,  than  it  could  by  the  body 
of  the  people  themselves  But  it  is  said  the 
people  elect  their  president  and  governor,  and 
why  should  they  not  elect  their  judges?  The 
people  do  not  elect  a  foreign  embassador,  a  sec- 
retary of  state,  or  a  commander  of  their  armies, 
and  if  they  had  had  the  power  to  elect  the  com- 
mander of  the  army  to  take  charge  of  the  late 
Mexican  war,  the  results  of  which  shed  so  much 
glory  and  lustre  upon  the  American  arms — not 
upon  the  American  government — but  upon  the 
American  soldiery — who  would  have  been  proba- 
bly called  upon  to  lead  our  armies  in  the  conduct 
of  that  war?  Where  would  have  been  the  hero 
of  Buena  Vista?  The  man  whose  valor,  and 
whose  military  genius  created  his  own  fortune, 
a  most  brilliant  one,  in  one  campaign.  Where 
would  have  been  the  hero  of  Chippewa  and 
Lundy's  Lane,  whose  military  genius  conceived 
and  executed  in  this  Mexican  war,  one  of  the 
most  brilliant  campaigns  on  record?  Even  the 
immortal  Scott  would  have  been  saved  the  work, 
and  liis  conntry  would  have  lost  one  of  the 
brightest  pages  of  her  history,  the  record  of  the 
greatest  of  modern  campaigns,  from  the  castle 
of  St.  Juan  de  UUoa  to  the  city  of  Mexico  by  the 
selection  of  another  and  less  able  military  leader. 
It  is  in  the  nature  of  things,  that  there  should  be 
an  inherent  irremediable  unfitness  and  impropri- 
ety in  the  people  electing  such  officers  as  these. 
Tiiat  unfitness  is  much  more  palpable,  and  ap- 
plies with  much  more  force  to  tiie  office  of  judge. 
Gentlemen  say  we  live  in  a  progressive  age.  I 
am  not  a  very  old  man — not  so  old  probably  as 
I  seem  to  be — I  am  not  a  sexigenarian  at  any  rate, 
but  still  these  modern  wiseacres  would  persuade 
me  that  I  am  behind  the  times;  that  I  do  not 
keep  up  with  the  intellectual  improvements  of 
the  day,  and  particularly  in  the  science  of  gov- 
ernment; that  although  I  studied  in  the  schools 
of  Washington,  of  Hamilton,  and  of  Jefferson, 
and  of  the  sages  who  formed  our  institutions, 
that  still  I  am  a  vast  distance  behind  the  ad- 
vancing political  sciences  of  the  day. 

Now  there  are  some  things  that  cannot  be  im- 
proved, among  them  are  the  process  of  procrea- 
tion, the  Lord's  prayer,  and  some  of  the  funda- 
mental and  immutable  principles  of  our  consti- 
tution, and  I  say  that  the  man  is  a  novice  him- 
self who  attempts  to  prove  and  establisli  that  I 
am  a  dotard  and  behind  the  wisdom  of  the  present 
generation,  because  I  will  not  repudiate  great 
principles  like  these.  When  you  put  your  sys- 
tem in  operation,  how  willyou  elect  your  judges 
and  who  will  elect  them.  I  have  seen  it  stated 
as  a  political  axiom  that  the  independence  of 
the  judiciary  is  the  assurance  whicli  the  sover- 


255 


eign  of  the  state  gives  to  its  justice  against  its 
power.  This  is  a  great  principle  in  our  system, 
and  I  will  examine  the  proposition  a  single  mo- 
ment. The  constitution  and  wise  and  just  laws 
under  it,  are  the  essence  of  free  institutions  and 
of  true  popular  liberty.  What  is  it  that  consti- 
tutes liberty?  It  is  not  the  power  of  doing  what 
ire  please;  hut  it  is  the  security  which  good  in- 
•  stitutions  and  just  laws  give.  I'he  rights  of  life, 
of  liberty,  of  reputation, and  property,  are  assured 
to  us,  by  our  constitution  and  our  laws,  and  this 
is  American  liberty.  This  constitution  and  these 
laws  are  not  self-acting  and  self-executing  ma- 
chineiy.  The  shield  of  the  law  is  said  to  protect 
the  citizen,  but  how  is  its  protection  secured  to 
him?  How  is  it  then  with  the  humble  man,  and 
how  does  it  become  a  panoply  and  security  to  him? 
It  is  by  the  intervention  of  judges  who  are  learn- 
ed, who  are  independent,  and  who  are  honest.  If 
you  have  not  a  judiciary  so  constituted,  you 
might  as  well  have  no  laws,  for  the  security 
and  protection  of  our  essential  rights  is  only  to 
be  had  through  the  medium  of  courts,  and  with- 
out judges  who  have  the  ability  and  the  virtue 
to  apply  those  laws,  the  laws  inight  as  well  not 
exist — indeed  they  do  not  practically  exist. 
We  all  concede  this  truth;  how  shall  we  make  it 
practically  good  to  the  country?    How  will  you 

E;ive  assurance  to  the  people  that  they  have  such 
aws,  and  sucli  tribunals  thus  to  administer 
them,  because  it  is  not  enough  that  we  provide 
and  pass  laws,  it  is  requisite  and  necessary  that 
the  people  should  have  full  confidence,  full  be- 
lief and  faith  that  tliey  have  such  laws  and  such 
tribunals  to  administer  them,  but  you  never  will 
attain  this  in  my  judgment  by  means  of  your 
courts  elected  by  popular  vote.  We  all  concede 
that  our  judges  must  be  honest  and  independent. 
How  are  you  to  make  them  independent?  They 
must  be  able  and  learned  in  the  law;  if  they  are 
not,  they  cannot  be  independent,  because  they 
will  have  to  lean  upon  the  intellect  of  some 
trusted  lawyer,  who  will  be  called  upon  to  guide 
them  in  their  dark  and  bewildered  path.  Abili- 
ty and  learning  in  a  judge  is  just  as  necessary  as 
virtue,  integrity  and  impartiality.  The  history 
of  political  officers,  and  you  propose  to  make 
the  judici<iry  a  political  office,  proves,  that  in  a 
majority  of  cases  at  least,  this  requisite,  ability 
and  learning,  will  not  be  secured  for  the  bench 
as  it  is  not  for  other  descriptions   of  offices. 

In  the  great  state  of  New  York  have  we  not 
seen  that  these  requisites  are  not  the  touchstone; 
that  they  do  not  guide  those  who  make  the  nomi- 
nations, and  who  mediately,  at  least,  confer 
the  appointment  itself;  that  they  are  not  the 
motives  which  control  the  action  of  those  cabals 
and  conventions  that  nominate  the  candidate 
forjudge?  They  look  to  availability,  to  a  man's 
popularity,  to  the  number  and  activity  and  pow- 
er of  his  connections,  to  his  wealth;  to  his  golden 
coffers,  and  to  his  disposition  to  spend  and  scat- 
ter their  contents  for  the  purposes  of  corruption. 
They  will  pass  around  the  party  watch-words, 
and  in  bringing  their  candidates  into  the  field, 
they  will  invariably  have  whig  and  democratic 
candidates  for  judge.  Who  will  fill  the.se  offic&s? 
The  men  that  can  get  the  nomination  of  the  con- 
vention, of  the  intriguing  and  corrupt  cabal  that 
bring  out  the  candidates  and  present  them  to 
the  voters  of  the  district.     They  will  succeed. 


and  they  alone.  Is  it  not  so  in  offices  purely  po- 
litical? And  if  it  is  so,  is  not  the  conclusion 
inevitable  that  it  will  be  so  in  relation  to  the 
judges,  when  you  make  them  partizan  political 
officers?  Now  my  democratic  friends  may  an- 
swer nie  on  this  branch  of  the  subject,  by  saying 
that  the  whole  of  your  judges  now  are  partizan 
judges;  they  are  whig  judges.  I  am  sorry  that 
all  of  them  are.  It  is  this  total  interdiction  and 
exclusion  of  the  democratic  party  from  these  of- 
fices, that  has  given  this  question  of  electing 
the  judges  by  the  popular  vote  its  strength. 

If  the  democratic  party  always  had  had  an  equal 
or  just  share  of  these  offices,  and  if  election  to  them 
by  popular  vote  had  not  been  recommended  to  us 
by  the  example  of  New  York,  this  question  nev- 
er would  have  exi.sted  here  in  its  present  impo- 
sing strength.  You  have  seen  the  powerful  ar- 
gument that  this  exclusion  of  their  men  of  tal- 
ents addresses  to  their  party.  Here  is  our  party, 
constituting  nearly  a  majority  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky,  possessing  an  equal  amount  of  intel- 
ligence, virtue,  and  fitness  for  these  offices,  and 
are  we  not  inexorably  excluded  from  them  under 
the  present  system.  That  system  is  unjust  and 
oppressive  to  us,  and  therefore  let  us  overthrow 
it.  And  the  rank  and  file  have  marched  with 
their  leaders  and  are  ready  to  overthrow  such  a 
system  and  substitute  any  other  that  promises 
them  a  fair  proportion  of  the  honors  and  emol- 
uments in  this  department  of  the  government. 
I  deny  that  the  people  of  Kentucky  ever  deman- 
ded an  elective  judiciary.  I  deny  that  they  now 
do  it.  I  say  if  this  question  is  fairly  made  and 
ably  discussed  in  every  county  and  district  in 
the  state  of  Kentucky,  the  people  themselves 
will  sustain  a  contrary  principle,  if  you  will 
hold  out  to  the  democratic  party  a  system  that 
will  give  them  a  just  and  equal  share  of  these 
offices.  How  then  did  the  question  acquire 
this  strength?  Because  the  country  was  divided 
into  two  parties,  each  party  zealous  and  anxious 
for  the  patronage  and  power  of  the  government 
rather  than  for  the  success  of  its  principles 
and  the  great  practical  benefits  which  they  be- 
lieve are  to  flow  from  those  principles,  and  con- 
sequently determined  to  take  no  position  to 
jeopardize  their  party  strength.  The  democrats 
go  for  change,  because  change  is  favorable  to 
them.  The  wliigs,  because  they  think  that  their 
malcontents,  with  the  democrats,  will  become  a 
majority,  and  they  are  determined  not  to  be  left 
on  this  question  in  a  party  minority,  and  for 
that  reason  they  fall  in  and  swell  the  multitude 
that  is  ringing  this  cry  for  change  in  the  judici- 
ary over  the  state. 

Now,  what  do  I  propose?  I  propose  to  avoid 
the  evils,  the  great,  inevitable,  unapprecia-  • 
ble  evils,  that  cannot  be  too  much  deprecated, 
which  must  result  from  this  system  of  electing 
by  the  popular  vote.  And  what  is  my  plan?  I 
have  to  speak  of  it  in  its  application  to  the  cir- 
cuit courts  also,  as  in  that  connection  it  attaches 
itself  necessarily  to  the  court  of  appeals.  I  sup- 
pose our  friends,  the  democrats,  as  a  general 
rule,  will  only  expect  to  get  the  judges  in 
districts  in  which  they  have  the  majority ; 
and  it  is  fit  and  just  that  they  should  there 
have  them.  I  imagine  they  do  not  expect, 
and  probably  all  of  them  do  not  desire  more; 
but  whether  they  do  or  not,  I  presume  they 


256 


will  hardly  get  more  as  a  general  rule.  Well, 
how  do  I  propose  to  organize  the  courts  and 
to  appoint  the  judgesV  You  may  call  them  cir- 
cuit or  district  courts,  or  whatever  you  please, 
but  you  divide  the  state  into  districts.  I  pro- 
pose to  constitute  the  members  of  the  house  of 
representatives  of  the  legislature,  from  each  dis- 
trict, into  an  electoral  college,  and  as  soon  as  the 
legislature  convenes,  the  seven,  eight  or  ten  men 
constituting  the  representatives  from  a  district, 
shall  get  together  and  form  an  electoral  college, 
whenever  their  is  a  vacancy  in  the  office  of  judge 
in  the  district,  and  shall  name  two  men  to  the 
senate.  The  senate  shall  nominate  one  of  them 
to  the  governor,  and  he  shall  commission  him  as 
judge  of  the  circuit  or  inferior  court  of  that  dis- 
trict. In  this  way,  ten,  fifteen,  or  twenty  judges, 
as  may  be  decided  upon,  will  be  selected.  When 
the  court  of  appeals  is  to  be  filled,  the  governor 
shall  select  from  among  the  circuit  judges,  or 
such  persons  as  have  filled  that  office,  a  suffi- 
cient number,  and  shall  nominate  them  to  the 
senate,  and  by  and  with  their  advice  and  con- 
sent, he  shall  appoint  them  to  that  high  station. 
But  he  shall  be  limited  and  restricted  to  only 
such  persons  as  are  or  haVe  been  judges  of  the 
circuit  or  inferior  courts.  These  inferior  courts 
shall  be  filled,  in  the  mode  and  on  the  principle 
■which  I  have  described.  How  is  that  going  to 
work?  The  executive  branch  of  our  government 
is  rather  in  low  repute  now.  It  has  been  cried 
down,  till  it  has  lost  the  popular  affection,  and 
not  only  that,  but  the  system  of  the  government 
itself— the  constitution — has  been  cried  down. 
And  gentlemen  who  thus  assail  the  executive, 
say  there  have  been  great  abuses  in  the  exercise 
of  its  discretion  and  power. 

I  will  concede  that  there  has  been  at  least 
some  abuses,  but  not  so  much  as  there  has  been 
on  the  part  of  the  legislative  branch  of  govern- 
ment, though  more  I  admit  than  there  has  been 
on  the  part  of  the  judicial  department.  You  cut 
off  all  agency  and  possible  abuse  of  the  execu- 
tive power  in  filling  the  inferior  courts,  and  up- 
on whom  will  it  be  devolved?  Upon  the  mem- 
bers of  the  house,  men  chosen  by  the  people  for 
whom  the  judge  is  to  act,  and  who  are  most  in- 
terested in  having  proper  men  to  be  their  judges 
— representatives  who  for  their  intelligence  and 
knowledge  of  public  men,  and  business,  will  be 
chosen  by  their  constituency  for  this  in  connection 
with  other  high  duties.  Would  not  they  select 
proper  judges?  They  would  know  to  a  reasona- 
ble extent  all  the  men  in  their  several  districts  fit 
for  the  ofiice  of  judge,  while  eiglit  tenths  of  the 
people  of  the  district  do  not  and  cannot  have 
such  knowledge  of  men.  The  quiet  of  the  pro- 
fes.sion  and  uie  seclusion  of  the  law  library 
leads  the  very  men  who  are  best  qualified  to  fill 
the  office  away  from  the  vortex  of  politics.  The 
best  men  especially  for  judicial  offices,  are  not 
mixing  in  political  aflfairs,  they  are  away  from 
them,  calmly  pursuing  their  legal  studies,  im- 
proving their  minds  and  cultivating  a  system  of 
moral  principles  and  moderation  of  character, 
that  eminently  qualifies  them  for  the  discharge  of 
the  duties  of  the  bench.  The  people,  out  of  their 
particular  counties,  are  generally  strangers  to 
such  men.  The  men  wliom  they  send  to  the  legis- 
lature as  their  representatives  would  probably 
know  all  such  men  in  their  districts.    Tliose  rep- 


resentatives will  in  most  cases  name  two  men  of 
the  party  in  a  majority  in  their  districts  to  the 
senate,  and  the  senate  will  nominate  one  of  them 
to  the  governor,  who  will  commission  him  as  a 
judge.  In  this  way  the  popular  voice  of  the  dis- 
trict would  be  represented,  and  a  man  of  the  same 
political  sentiment  with  the  majority  would  be 
their  judge,  and  he  would  in  all  probability  be 
the  ablest  man  of  their  party  in  the  district.  By 
this  mode  what  an  incentive  would  you  offer  to 
the  electors,  for  choosing  their  best  men— a  pros- 
pect of  ultimate  promotion  to  the  bench  of  the 
appellate  court.  They  would  look  forward  t« 
the  time  when  a  limited  term  of  office  in  that 
court  would  bring  about  a  probable  promotion, 
and  they  would  select  men  of  the  first  legal  at- 
tainments, fitness  and  capabilities,  with  a  view 
to  promotion  to  that  high  station.  When  the 
judges  came  to  fill  their  stations  in  the  circuit 
courts,  they  would  know  that  within  tlie  course 
of  seven,  eight,  ten  or  twelve  years  there  would 
be  a  periodical  series  of  nominations  to  the  ap- 
jjellate  bench,  and  these  nominations  would  be 
restricted  entirely  to  themselves,  and  the  few  who 
had  filled  their  offices.  The  most  industrious 
judges,  the  men  of  the  most  ability  and  fitness  for 
the  office,  would  in  all  probability  be  called  to  fill 
the  higher  places.  What  powerful  incentive  do 
you  offer  to  these  judges  to  withdraw  entirely 
from  the  turmoil  of  politics,  to  appropriate  their 
talents,  their  time,  and  their  energies  to  the  ex- 
clusive study  of  the  law  as  a  science,  and  the  im- 
provement of  all  the  necessary  qualities  that 
enter  into  the  character  of  a  great  judge.  I  ask 
you  if  this  system  Avould  not  inevitably  Avork  to 
the  improvement  of  our  judiciary,  and  to  the 
encouragement  of  application  and  industry 
.among  the  circuit  court  judges,  by  holding  out 
to  their  ambition  a  reasonable  prospect  of  re- 
ward and  promotion?  Look  at  the  principle 
where  it  is  operative  in  the  general  government. 
I  propose  a  line  of  regular  promotion  in  the 
courts.  We  have  that  principle  acting  from  the 
foundation  of  our  government  in  its  military  and 
naval  services.  But  for  the  existence  of  that 
principle,  and  the  emulation  to  which  it  gave 
rise  among  our  naval  and  military  officers,  Scott 
himself  never  would  have  been  fitted  to  have 
planned  and  executed  the  brilliant  campaign 
wliich  throws  a  halo  of  glory  around  liis  name. 
You  bring  the  principle  into  our  courts,  and  you 
secure  thereby  in  the  legal  profession,  the  same 
results  whicli  vindicate  it  in  the  military  and 
naval  professions. 

But  I  have  a  few  other  cursory  remarks  as  to 
the  defects  of  this  system  of  electing  judges. 
As  I  said;  the  people  would  not  select  their 
judges,  but  a  few  active  and  intriguing  politi*  j 
cians,  who  manage  the  conventions  and  politi*  j 
cal  caucuses,  and  get  control  of  the  political  par-  1 
ties  of  the  district.  Would  direct  the  whole  affair. 
Yes.  in  a  judicial  district,  a  half  dozen  men 
would  control  the  nominations,  and  thus  decide 
who  should  be  judge  and  who  should  not.  I 
know  it  is  intended  to  limit  the  tenure  of  the  ju- 
dicial officer.  I  am  in  favor  of  that  princijilo, 
and  every  evil  of  the  existing  judiciary  .system, 
which  requires  correction,  in  my  judgment 
would  be  corrected  by  its  introduction.  And 
9o  far  as  we  innovate  beyond  that,  it  is  wholly 
for  mischief.     You  bring  down  the  terms — say 


257 


of  the  appellate  judges  to  eight  years,  and  the 
circuit  judges  to  four  or  six  years.  Now  the 
■men  wlio  are  nominated  to  oflice  ■will  be  elected 
and  placed  there  by  those  -who  make  the  nomi- 
nation, because  the  candidates  so  nominated 
■null  certainly  and  inevitably  receive  the  support 
and  entire  vote  of  their  party.  "Whoever  does 
this  ■work  of  nomination  therefore  ■will  essential- 
ly and  practically  make  the  judge.  And  ■who 
will  do  iVt  Not  the  people,  not  the  mass  of  the 
voters,  but  the  political  wire-'workers,  the  jug- 
glers, the  active  electioueerers,  the  enterprising, 
the  bold  and  the  iinscrupulous  political  mana- 
gers. Thev  ■will  usurp  this  power  of  nomina- 
ting the  judge,  and  in  that  way  they  will  dictate 
to  the  people  whom  they  shall  elect.  Think  you 
not  the  man  thus  nominated  and  elected  will  not 
know  who  put  him  in  office — that  he  will  not 
"remember  his  creator  in  the  days  of  his  youth':"' 
And  if  you  give  him  a  short  term,  think  you 
not  that' he  will  look  to  the  power,  to  the  men, 
ah  to  the  man  who  placed  him  in  office  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  a  renewal  of  his  term?  Why 
just  as  certain  as  destiny. 

Under  the  existing  system  a  judge  is  appoint- 
ed by  the  governor  and  senate.  He  feels  the 
sanctity  of  his  office,  the  purity  of  the  ermine 
which  he  figuratively  wears,  and  he  with 
dfaws  from  politics,  stands  aloof  from  active 
partisanship,  and  becomes  a  non-combatant  in 
this  war  for  political  power.  His  indepen- 
dence is  assured  to  him  by  a  life  tenure.  But 
when  candidates  are  brought  out  as  tlie  whig 
and  democratic  candidates  are,  nominated  by 
whig  and  democratic  conventions  and  cabals, 
and  a  nomination  is  equivalent  to  an  election, 
and  that  nomination  is  made  and  decided  by  a 
few,  and  the  judges  then  go  into  the  cauva.ss, 
and  in  defiance  of  the  resolution  and  purpose  of 
my  friend  from  Henry,  (Mr.  Nuttall,)  make 
speeches  from  the  stump,  mingle  with  the  people, 
visit  from  house  to  house,  draw  themselves  into 
controversies,  declare  themselves  opposed  to 
black  laws  or  similar  questions,  when  they  go 
into  pot  houses  and  groggeries,  and  come  reek- 
ing from  the  brandy  bar  to  the  bar  of  justice — 
what  sort  of  administration  of  justice  will  you 
have?  Will  not  its  pure  streams  become  con- 
taminated and  corrupt,  defiled  and  polluted? 
Who  is  there  that  wants  such  streams  of  justice 
to  flow  through  the  land  to  desolate  the  sacred 
rights  of  life  and  liberty,  reputation  and  pro- 
perty? Do  you  want  your  courts  to  be  thus  con- 
stituted, and  made  the  supervisors  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  country,  to  set  limits  to  the  exer- 
cise of  executive  and  legislative  power — ^yes,  to 
stand  as  a  barrier  against  the  sovereign  people 
themselves,  whenever  they  seek  to  invade  great 
and  fundamental  principles,  as  those  contained 
in  our  bill  of  rights?  What  do  the  sovereign 
people  say  in  relation  to  the  judges?  We  elect 
them  as  a  defence  and  a  bulwark  of  our  justice, 
against  our  po'wer.  What  sort  of  security 
would  they  be  when  a  half  dozen  intriguing  and 
corrupt  political  managers  in  a  district  give 
his  office  to  the  judge,  when  he  has  a  short  term, 
and  when  he  is  looking  for  a  renewal  of  that 
term,  to  the  men  and  power  that  placed  him 
there?  He  would  become  a  suppliant  tool,  and 
submit  his  own  mind  and  his  own  intellect — if 
raind  and  intelligence  he  had — and  his  own  will, 

33 


impartiality  and  virtue  to  the  interests,  the 
caprices,  or  the  passions  of  the  men  who  placed 
him  in  power.  The  system  is  corrupt  in  its  es- 
sence and  nature,  and  in  its  inevitable  results, 
and  you  might  put  pure  men  in  it,  but  you 
would  necessarily  in  most  cases  debase  and  cor- 
rupt thein. 

I  will  give  you  another  instance  if  you  please. 
I  have  heard  of  a  gentleman  who  has  instituted 
in  this  state,  a  thousand  actions  of  ejectment  for 
land,  and  I  know  otlier  gentlemen  who  claim 
thousands  of  acres,  worth  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands. The  election  of  a  judge  is  coming 
on.  We  all  know,  who  are  acquainted  with 
courts  of  law,  the  weakness  of  the  courts  for 
the  purposes  of  self-defence.  We  know  also 
the  capacity  even  (rf  circuit  or  inferior  judges, 
for  mischief,  aggression  and  wrong  on  private 
rights,  and  whenever  there  is  a  partial  or  cor- 
rupt judge,  he  may,  in  many  cases,  suppress 
and  pervert  justice.  There  is  a  vast  deal  confi- 
ded to  his  discretion,  especially  in  making  up 
bills  of  exception,  through  the  medium  of 
which  his  decisions  are  submitted  to  the  superi- 
or court.  We  all  know  that  when  circuit  judges 
become  so  corrupt,  and  debased  as  to  pervert 
and  prostitute  their  power,  they  may  m  this 
way  subvert  justice.  'An  election  is  about  to 
take  place  in  a  judicial  district — these  one 
thousand  ejectments  are  filed,  or  suits  are  com- 
menced, each  involving  some  two  or  three  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars — and  there  is  a  demo- 
cratic and  a  whig  candidate — something  like  an 
equal  division  of  parties  in  the  district — and 
there  is  to  be  a  severe  and  doubtful  contest.  I 
tell  you  there  are  many  of  the  districts,  where 
ten  thousand  dollars  of  gold  would  carry  the 
election,  and  enable  the  man  who  had  a  large 
interest  at  stake  to  place  his  creature  in  the  of- 
fice of  judge.  Give  the  candidate  a  short  term, 
and  submit,  not  to  the  people,  but  to  the  cabals 
and  managers,  the  question  of  bis  re-election, 
and  you  expose  him  to  this  influence.  From 
the  mode  of  his  constitution,  the  tenure  of  his 
office,  the  uncertainty  and  insufficiency  of  his 
salary,  he  is  weak,  and  is  known  to  be  weak. 
He  that  is  suspected  is  liable  to  assault,  or  she 
either;  and  he  or  she  either,  who  pause*  when 
assaulted,  is  lost,  and  I  tell  you  that  these  men 
who  have  such  immense  interests  depending  on 
the  dicision  of  these  courts,  will  make  the  ap- 
proach, and  many  judges  will  pause  and  sell 
themselves  too.  And  they  will  know  beforehand, 
from  which  of  the  candidates  they  can  expect 
most.  There  are  men  in  this  state,  having  suits 
in  the  courts,  and  interests  large  enough  involved 
in  them  to  authorize  that  expenditure,  and  who 
would  make  it  judiciously  and  effectually  too,  to 
carry  the  election  of  a  judge,  and  place  his  man 
and  creature  in  the  seat,  to  exercise  not  only  the 
justice  of  the  sovereign  people,  but  the  mockery  of 
that  justice  which  should  be  an  emanation  of 
the  divinity  itself.  And  are  you  going  to  drag 
down  the  judiciary  system  to  that  depth  of  deg- 
radation? I  give  you  another  example-  My 
friend  who  sits  before  me,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  who 
now  has  the  frosts  of  sixty-five  winters  on  his 
brow,  has  an  intellect  as  vigorous,  comprehen- 
sive, active,  and  daring  as  any  of  which  I  have 
I  ever  had  knowledge.  Through  his  life,  be  has 
I  always  exercised,  and  always  would  exercise  a 


258 


vast  influence,  the  influence  of  mind,  of  great 
and  towering  intellect  over  inferior  minds,  the 
influence  of  an  iron  will  and  purpose  that  never 
sleeps,  over  a  will  and  purpose  more  feeble  and 
enervated.  In  a  canvass  for  judge,  the  support 
of  ray  friend  would  control  the  election,  as  cer- 
tain as  that  he  would  give  his  favorite  candi- 
date that  active,  energetic,  and  all-powerful  sup- 
port he  gives  to  every  cause  he  advocates. 
When  he  places  his  friend  in  office,  and  practi- 
ces in  every  court  in  his  distrtct,  I  ask  you,  if 
my  friend  would  not  have  a  more  favoraole  ear 
in  court  than  the  man  who  opposed  the  judge? 
By  the  present  mode  of  appointment,  a  govern- 
or who  has  made  a  judge,  having  a  suit  in  court, 
would  before  him,  in  a  majority  of  cases,  have 
decidedly  the  vantage  ground  against  any  ad- 
versary whatever.  And  the  general  safety  of 
suitors  in  court,  is  in  the  fact  that  the  governor 
is  not  the  opposing  party;  but  under  the  elec- 
tive system,  tnose  who  make  the  judges,  would 
at  all  times,  and  in  all  courts,  be  parties  litigant 
or  their  advocates  and  lawyers.  And  it  would 
not  be  in  human  nature  for  the  judge  to  escape 
from  their  thraldom. 

When  political  parties  nominate  party  candi- 
dates, and  on  party  views  and  party  considera- 
tions sustain  and  vote  for  them,  and  when  there 
has  to  be  borne  the  heat  and  burthen  of  many 
a  long  and  fatiguing  day  in  the  canvass  of  one 
of  them  by  his  political  friends,  would  not  his 
party,  when  he  came  upon  the  bench,  exact  a  re- 
turn from  him,  and  require  him  to   submit  him- 
self to  their  interests  and  purposes  and  passions 
so  far  as  he  could,  without  the  prospect  of  pun- 
ishment— and  he  might  so  administer  the  laws 
within  that  pale  to  a  most  fearful  extent.      It  is 
so  with  all  other  oflicers,  and  it  would  be  equal- 
ly so  with  the  office  of  judge.     Suppose  an  elec- 
tion in  a  judicial  district,  if  you  please.     We 
have  just  passed  through  an  excited  and  violent 
gubernatorial,  presidential,  or  general  canvass, 
such  as  has  often  characterized  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky, in  which  men  array  themselves  as  it  were, 
in  hostile  strife;  and  every  angry  passion  in  our 
nature  is  aroused,  and  every  power  of  the  intel- 
lectual and  physical  man  is  brought  into  requisi- 
tion.    The  parties  meet,  discuss,  and  bring  up 
voters  to  the  polls,  and  every  appliance  of  bribe- 
ry, corruption,  or  intimidation  is  used.      In  the 
course  of^such  a  contest  a-sthis,  a  private  brawl 
arises,  and  a  whig  and  a  democrat  meet  in  mor- 
tal combat,  and  one  of  them  falls.     Does  not  his 
case  in  the  criminal  court  immediately  become 
the  cause  of   his    party?  and  think  you    not 
they  will  require  theirjudge  to  become  the  in- 
strument in  shielding  and  saving  the  man  who 
crimsoned  his  hands  in  blood  to  advance  the  in- 
terests and  secure  the  success  of  the  party  ?    But 
I  have  named  as  yet,  a  small  portion  of  the  dis- 
orders and  deplorable  consequences  which  this 
mon-strous  power  of  electing  judges  by  the  peo- 
ple would  necessarily  bring  with  it.     To  have 
an  able  judge,  you  must  necessarily  have  an  able 
man  for  a  candidate.    If  you  adopt  the  system, 
in  ray  humble  judgment,  they  ouglit  not  to  be 
re-eligible.     The  judge,  if  not  able,  ought  at 
least  to  have  the  sustaining  principle  of  official 
independence  and  the  purpose  to  discharge  liis 
duties  solely  with  regard  to  his  oath,  and  the 
•onstitution  and  lawB,  and  not  with  reference  to 


the  chances  of  re-election.  If  you  render  hira 
ineligible,  you  ought  to  give  him  a  longer  term 
— ten  or  twelve  years  at  least — because  you  will 
not  get  a  man  of  second  rate  talents  and  legal 
learning  to  accept  the  office  for  a  term  of  four, 
six  or  eight  years.  We  all  know,  those  of  us 
who  are  lawyers,  that  when  a  man  abandons  his 
practice  to  take  a  seat  on  the  bench,  he  loses  it, 
and  when  he  returns  to  the  practice  again  it  takes 
him  years  and  years  of  painful  toil  and  labor 
to  regain  it.  Men  in  full  and  lucrative  practice, 
and  such  a  practice  have  they  who  are  competent 
in  ability  and  learning  to  be  judges,  will  never 
consent  to  give  up  that  practice  for  a  short  term 
on  the  bench.  They  would  knowfuUwell  the  de- 
grading means  to  which  they  would  have  to 
submit  to  secure  election  and  re-election,  and  of- 
ten as  ruinously  expensive  as  degrading.  And 
men  in  any  degree  qualified  could  not  be  indu- 
ced to  take  the  places  for  short  terms.  Such  as 
would  act  otherwise,  would  want  the  talents 
and  attainments  to  get  business  as  lawyers,  and 
they  would  not  possess  one  of  the  higli  quali- 
ties of  a  great  and  virtuous  judge.  To  secure 
the  services  of  men  even  remotely  approximating 
to  the  requisite  amount  of  mind,  of  law. 
learning,  of  independence  and  rectitude,  you 
would  have  to  give  them,  both  in  superior  and 
inferior  courts,  long  terms — ten  years  at  least. 
But  whatever  be  the  length  of  the  term,  men  of 
the  best  ability,  and  of  the  highest  qualifica- 
tions and  qualities  for  the  bench,  wul  never 
submit  themselves  to  arduous,  doubtful,  and  de- 
basing partizan  political  canvasses,  with  all  their 
debasing  and  revolting  concomitants,  to  become 
judges;  and  yet  this  will  be  the  one  impossible 
condition  upon  which  the  place  is  to  be  won. 

And  when  your  courts  are  filled,  as  they  will 
be,  with  party  hacks,  without  talents  or  legal  at- 
tainments, poor  and  needy,  looking  to  their  sal- 
aries for  bread  and  to  party  or  a  few  party  lead- 
ers or  powerful  and  influential  men  for  a  contin- 
uance of  this  bread — low  and  grovelling  in 
mind,  depraved  in  moral  sense,  broken  down  in 
spirit  and  independence,  and  destitute  of  self- 
respect,  what  then  becomes  of  the  protection  M 
which  the  constitution  and  laws  promise  the  fl 
citizen?  What  security  has  life,  liberty,  reputa- 
tion  and  property  against  the  violence  of  the 
strong  and  lawless?  What  defences  have  the 
weak  and  the  lowly  against  the  wealthy  and  the 
powerful?  Such  I  believe  will  be  the  fruits, 
and  but  a  portion  of  the  bitter  fruits,  which  this 
mischievious  innovation  will  bring  us,  and  there 
will  be  no  escape  from  them.  It  is  in  sorrow 
and  despondency  that  I  make  this  dark  predic- 
tion, and  I  know  it'will  be  treated  with  the 
same  incredulity  and  contempt  as  the  predic- 
tions of  Cassandra  of  old.  I  would  hope,  if  I 
could,  that  my  prognostics  of  this  great  evil  de- 
served to  bo  so  treated.  This  change  in  the 
mode  of  filling  tlie  office  of  judge,  being  I  ap- 
prehend inevitable,  my  earnest  and  sincere  wish 
IS  that  it  may  produce  the  best  results,  better  in- 
deed than  its  most  sanguine  friends  promise  for 
it.  Yet  I  have  no  faitli — none.  But  whatever 
be  the  constitution  and  forms  of  our  public  offi- 
ces, and  the  modes  of  filling  them,  1  have  the 
sincerest  desire,  that  they  shall  result  in  the 
greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number.  But  if  it 
were  possible  to  place  fit  men  on  the  bench  in 


359 


the  first  iustanee — tliesystem  is  so  inherent  in  its 
vitiating  elfects,  so  essentially  eorrupting  in  its 
nature,  that  it  will  necessarily  drag  down  these 
pure  and  better  men  to  its  own  level.  What  is 
It  that  secures  the  independence  of  a  judge? 
My  friend  from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon)  has  de- 
bated this  point;  and  though  his  entire  speech, 
which  evinced  great  powers  of  mind,  was  nom- 
inally on  the  otier  side  of  this  question,  yet  I  felt 
myself  that  the  chief  force  ancT  power  of  his  ar- 
gument was  on  our  side,  and  it  was  so  of  neces- 
sity, because  no  man  can  make  a  just,  a  logical 
anil  appropriate  argument  in  favor  of  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  judges  without  striking  at  this 
principle  of  popular  election.  The  thing  is  ut- 
terly impossible.  You  cannot  have  an  inde- 
pendent judiciary  elected  by  popular  vote.  What 
said  my  friend  in  reference  to  and  in  illustra- 
tion of  this  part  of  the  subject.  He  spoke  of  the 
judges  of  England,  and  the  change  made  in  their 
tenure  of  office,  and  of  the  separate  powers  which 
would  appoint  the  judges  here,  and  that  which 
would  adjudge  them — being  in  the  one  case  the 
legislature  and  in  the  other  the  people;  and  he 
argued  the  independence  of  the  judges  from  the 
separate  and  independent  existence  of  those  two 
powers. 

What  was  the  great  judicial  reform  in  Eng- 
land that  gave  to  the  courts  of  that  country  an 
elevation  and  independence  to  which  before  they 
were  entirely  strangers?  It  was  making  the 
judge  independent  of  the  appointing  pow- 
er. The  crown  appointed  the  judge,  who 
held  the  place  during  the  pleasure  of  the 
crown.  Whenever  the  king  spoke  his  fiat, 
the  judge,  whose  independent  spirit  had  made 
him  obnoxious,  went  out  of  office,  and  some 
more  flexible  royal  minion  took  the  vacant  seat. 
The  necessar}'  consequence  was,  that  but  few 
judges  opposed  the  royal  will,  or  refused  to  be- 
come the  tools  of  its  oppressive  tyranny.  Hence 
the  history  of  the  previous  crown  trials  are 
marked  by  the  most  revolting  judicial  prostitu- 
tion, and  the  shedding  of  the  blood  of  martyrs 
in  the  cause  of  their  country's  liberties.  But  at 
length  the  tenure  of  the  judge's  office  in  Eng- 
land was  declared  by  law  to  be  during  good  be- 
havior, subject  to  removal  by  the  king  upon  the 
address  of  two  thirds  of  the  two  houses  of  par- 
liament. Then  it  was  that  the  spirit  of  inde- 
pendence enthroned  itself  on  the  benches  of  the 
English  courts,  and  in  the  serene  strength  and 
power  of  law  and  justice  looked  down  upon  roy- 
alty itself.  Then  it  was  that  her  courts  for  the 
first  time  threw  the  shield  of  liberty  and  law 
over  the  prostrate  subject,  and  sheltered  him 
from  the  heavy  blows  of  a  tyrant  king.  But  how 
will  it  be  here  under  the  proposed  change?  The 
judge  every  four  years  is  to  go  crawling  back  in 
the  slime  of  his  own  and  his  party's  filth,  not  to 
the  people,  not  to  the  hard  handed,  strong-sensed, 
honest  hearted,  well  employed  masses,  but  to 
the  brawling  demagogue,  the  politicians  by 
trade,  the  party  hacks,  the  ever  active  and  in- 
triguing wire-workers,  and  the  men  who  have 
thousands  to  give  to  the  work  of  bribery  and 
corruption,  for  a  renewal  of  his  term.  He  is 
subject  all  the  time  to  be  removed  by  legislative 
impeachment  and  legislative  address.  And  who 
but  the  people,  or  ratherparties  and  politicians, 
make  the  legislature?    WTiose  mind,  whose  will 


and  purpose  but  those  who  make  the  judge* 
does  the  legislature  reflect  and  execute?  What 
power  regulates  the  quantity  of  bread  this  judge 
shall  eat,  by  declaring  what  shall  be  his  salary 
but  this  same  legislature,  this  general  committee 
of  arrangement,  not  of  the  countrj',  not  of  the 
body  of  a  great  party,  but  of  a  junto  of  political 
partizans?  I  ask  my  friend  if  the  cases  are  par- 
allel? If  the  assurance  of  judicial  indepen- 
dence in  England  is  not  more  satisfactory  than 
it  would  be  under  his  system  in  Kentucky. 
^o  where  on  the  globe  is  there  at  present  more 
just,  enlightened,  independent  and  inflexible 
administration  of  the  civil  and  criminal  law 
than  by  the  courts  of  England.  There  are  ten 
instances  at  least  of  the  escape  of  felons  and  of 
the  failure  of  a  redress  of  private  wrongs  in  our 
courts  to  one  in  those  of  England.  It  is  the  se- 
curity which  this  state  of  things  gives  to  her 
subjects,  the  certainty  of  judicial  justice  which 
gives  to  her  government  its  tranquility  and  its 
chief  stability.  More  than  is  secured  by  her 
large  standing  army  and  unequaled  navy. 

How,  I  ask,  in  the  name  of  common  sense 
and  reason,  could  a  judge,  thus  constituted  and 
thus  holding  the  office,  selected  necessarily  from 
a  class  of  inferior  men,  because  from  the  tenure 
of  the  office  and  the  mode  of  election,  you  will 
get  none  but  inferior  men  to  accept  it — his  salary 
depending  on  the  legislature,  and  having  given 
up  what  little  practice  h^  had,  if  he  had  any, 
and  looking  for  support,  for  food  and  raiment 
for  himself  and  his  children,  solely  to  his  sal- 
ary— how  could  he,  by  the  laws  of  human  na- 
ture, be  independent?  Why,  he  would  be  the 
merest  and  vilest  dependent  minion  that  ever 
disgraced  the  ermine  or  the  name  of  a  judge. 
The  suitors  in  court  make  the  judge — or  rather 
in  part  make  him,  a  part  being  opposed  to  his 
election.  The  lawyers  who  practice  in  his  court 
in  part  elect  the  judge,  and  in  part  oppose  his 
election.  And  would  not  those  suitors  and  law- 
yers who  had  made  the  judge  have  a  power  and 
claim  over  his  good  will  and  favor,  that  those 
who  opposed  him  would  not  have?  It  is  the 
immutable  law  of  our  frail  and  fallen  nature, 
and  no  shifts  we  can  devise  will  enable  us  to 
escape  from  it.    None. 

How  then  I  ask  my  friends  again  are  you  to 
secure  a  pure  and  independent  judiciary  under 
such  a  system?  The  thing  is  impossible,  and  if 
it  is  impossible,  we  ought  to  fly  from  it,  and  at 
once  to  repudiate  it.  Tou  have  a  good  syst€m 
now,  as  clear  as  the  noonday  sun,  and  it  has 
existed  in  the  wise  and  just  administration  of 
free  and  equal  laws  in  this  country  for  half  a 
century.  If  you  have  a  doubt  in  regard  to  the 
other  project  then,  let  your  doubt  cause  you  to 
reject  it.  This  is  not  a  subject  for  experiment, 
or  a  matter  upon  which  we  are  to  doubt  or  put 
forth  beautiful  theories  that  we  know  from  the 
experience  of  every  day,  and  of  ages  will  work 
wrong.  Let  us  throw  ourselves  back  on  experi- 
ence, and  be  guided  and  controlled  by  its  safe 
lessons. 

I  have  said  that  I  do  not  believe  the  people 
demand  this  change — and  I  am  candid  in  that 
opinion.  I  have  never  seen  a  man  in  my  social 
intercourse  and  conversation  on  the  subject, 
that  is  for  the  change  unless  he  was  a  democrat. 
And  I  never  have  conversed  freely  in  confidence 


•i60 


and  friendship  with  a  democrat,  that  he  did  not 
avow  his  reason  for  being  against  the  present 
system — and  I  admit  it  is  a  sufficient  one — was 
tinat  it  deprived  his  party  of  all  judicial  office, 
both  in  the  inferior  and  superior  courts.  I  feel 
the  force  and  justice  of  that  argument.  Now  the 
only  abuses  which  I  have  ever  heard  urged  by 
the  people  against  the  judiciarj^  department,  as 
it  exists,  were  ofa  very  limitedand  trivial  nature. 
They  brought  up  instances  of  judges  appointing 
their  relatives  to  clerkships,  and  of  the  clerks 
making  sales  of  offices,  and  of  these  judges  rati- 
fying tliose  sales  by  appointing  the  purchasers 
to  the  office.  And  that  is  the  extent,  all  told, 
of  the  complaint  of  abuses  against  the  judiciary 
as  it  exists,  ajid  is  constituted  under  the  present 
constitution,  so  far  as  I  know.  Now  just  look 
at  the  clamors  and  indignation  of  the  people 
against  the  legislative  department  of  the  govern- 
liaent  for  its  frequent  and  numerous  abuses  of 
power — look  at  the  like  condemnation  by  the 
people  of  the  executive  department — and   com- 

Sare  the  volume,  the  matter  of  these  complaints, 
leir  truth  and  justice,  with  the  few  and  trivial 
complaints  made  against  the  judiciary,  aftd  tell 
me  which  of  the  departments  of  government  has 
most  sinned  against  propriety,  against  justice, 
and  against  the  people?  And  yet  the  fury  of 
this  convention  is  to  be  directed  mainly  against 
that  department  of  government  which  has  of- 
fended least,  in  the  proper  constitution  and  se- 
curity of  which  the  people  are  most  interested, 
and  the  organization  and  proper  adjustment  of 
which  is  the  most  difficult  task  that  the  conven- 
tion is  called  upon  to  perform. 

I  do  not  believe  the  popular  feeling  required 
the  call  of  this  convention.  I  do  not  believe  it, 
strange  as  it  may  appear  to  some  of  my  friends 
here.  There  were  a  few  things  complained  of, 
■which  ought  to  be  corrected,  and  I  would  like  to 
see  them  reformed.  But  I  do  not  want  to  see  any 
revolution  or  subversion  of  the  existing  system 
— any  overthrow  of  the  great,  time-honored,  and 
well  tested  principles  of  our  constitution.  Let 
it,  and  its  great  outlines  remain,  a  monument  of 
the  wisdom  and  patriotism  of  our  ancestors, 
to  guide  and  enlighten  posterity  to  the  latest 
generati«n.  If  there  are  a  few  defects  in  it,  let 
tnem  be  obviated  and  improved.  In  relation  to 
the  judiciary,  the  only  essential  defect  ever 
brought  under  my  knowledge  has  been  this: 
there  have  been  incompetent  judges,  who  could 
'  hot  be  got  out  either  by  address  or  impeachment. 
And  whose  fault  was  it?  Not  that  of  the  judi- 
ciary, or  its  organization,  but  of  their  triers — of 
the  tribunal  which  is  required  to  supervise  that 
department,  to  keep  it  pure  and  incorrupt,  able 
and  competent — tne  legislative  department. 
"Why  do  they  not  impeach  the  judge,  if  he  is 
corrupt?  Why  have  they  not  removed  by  ad- 
dress, the  incompetent?  It  is  not  true  that 
it  is  the  sin  of  tne  judiciary,  but  a  derelic- 
tion of  duty  on  the  part  of  the  legislature.  I 
have  seen  the  salary  of  the  judges  increased, 
for  the  purpose  of  constraining  certain  incom- 
petent judges  to  Tesign.  I  have  seen  the  better 
portion  oi  the  judges,  men  of  mind,  virtue,  in- 
tellect and  unsullied  character,  respond  to  such 
an  insulting  call  upon  them,  and  at  once  surren- 
der their  places  to  the  executive.  I  have  seen 
ihe  incompetent,  and  those  who  ought  to  bo  out, 


cling  tenaciously  to  the  office,  and  I  have  seea 
the  legislature  march  forward,  and  bring  up  the 
salaries  of  these  inefficient  and  incompetent 
judges,  to  the  high  mark  to  which  the  legislature 
had  raised  those  salaries.  Whose  sin  was 
that?  If  there  was  a  tithe  of  the  cause  of 
complaint,  and  of  just  complaint,  against  the 
judicial  department,  that  are  brought  against 
the  legislature  and  the  executive,  I  would  sliau'e  in 
that  spirit  of  indignant  hostility  which  urges  on 
some  in  this  convention,  in  the  cnisade,  the  re- 
morseless crusade  they  are  making  against  it. 
But  it  has  had  no  such  short  comings,  it  has  not 
perpetrated  a  tithe  of  the  wrong  against  the  coun- 
try which  the  legislature  has.  But  still  there  are 
things  in  the  constitution  of  the  judiciary,  I  would 
like  to  see  changed.  I  admit  that  from  the  un- 
changeable principles  of  our  nature,  our  sympa- 
thy with  infirmity,  which  prevents  us  from  re- 
moving incompetent  judges,  and  induces  us  to 
raise  their  salaries  to  the  same  point  as  those 
who  are  competent — will  forever  prevent  uh 
from  removing  by  impeachment  or  address.  I 
do  not  want  an  incompetent  judge  fastened  on 
the  people  for  life ;  and  the  only  remedy  that 
I  believe  would  possibly  work  any  good,  would 
be  limitation  in  office.  This  is  secured  in  the 
system  I  have  proposed.  You  are  to  get  the 
best  materials  for  a  judge,  and  when  you  have 
filled  the  office  in  that  way,  you  might  permit 
the  incumbent  to  be  re-eligible — as  when  the 
department  is  properly  organized  he  ought  to  be. 
But  if  you  follow  out  the  mode  by  which  it  ia 
proposed  to  fill  it,  I  tell  you  that  like  the  strong 
man,  you  will  get  deeper  and  deeper  into  the 
mire,  and  finally  be  engulphed  in  its  depths, 
as  certain  as  time  and  man  exists. 

I  propose  to  withdraw  from  this  corrupting 
political  scramble  a  portion  of  the  talents,  the 
virtue  and  the  ambition  of  the  country,  and 
turn  it  to  the  pursuit  of  legal  science  and  judicial 
promotion.  Everything  is  now  swept  along  by 
that  all  engrossing  political  current.  Every 
man  of  mind  and  ambition,  who  hopes  for  an 
elevated  or  an  honorable  position  among  his 
countrymen,  through  the  superiority  of  his  tal- 
ents, and  by  the  exercise  of  his  virtues  and  pa- 
triotism is  called  by  the  only  course  of  preferment 
and  honor  to  enter  the  political  arena.  You  will 
give  to  the  members  of  the  house  of  representa- 
tive, representing  a  judicial  district,  the  right  to 
name  the  two  men  from  whom  the  judge  shall 
be  chosen  forthat  district — they  of  course  would 
select  men  of  their  party  politics,  unless  more 
powerful  considerations  should  control,  and  if 
they  existed  they  ought  to  control.  Let  the 
senate  take  one  of  them  and  nominate  him  to 
the  governor,  and  the  governor  commission  him 
as  judge;  and  then  from  this  class  of  judges, 
let  the  governor  select  the  appellate  court.  Tell 
the  young  men  of  mind  and  promise  in  these 
judicial  districts — withdraw  yourselves  from 
politics,  there  is  no  man  that  contributes  any- 
thing to  his  own  personal  virtue  and  happiness, 
or  to  his  moral  sense,  his  general  intolligcnce, 
or  to  his  dignity  as  a  man,  by  going  into  the 
arena  of  politics.  None.  No  man  can  venture 
into  that  vortox  without  being  more  or  less  in- 
jured. Tell  the  man  of  pure  well  regulated 
mind  which  desires  distinction,  that  it  is  not  to 
be  driven  to  the  necessity  of  leaping  into  that 


^M 


tumultuous  arena,  for  the  purpose  of  realizing 
their  cherished  hopes.  Tell  tnem  to  aimhigher  in 
qualifying  theinsolves  by  study  in  the  noiseless 
recesses  of  the  library,  and  in  the  cultivation  of 
that  moral  sense  and  elevation  of  character  which 
prepares  them  to  become  the  repositories  of  the 
high  powers  which  the  constitution  reposes  in  the 
judiciary  of  the  country.  Tell  them  that  by 
taking  this  course,  they  are  to  minister  to  a 
purer  and  a  nobler  ambition,  than  if  thev 
were  to  rush  into  this  turmoil  of  politics.  Tefl 
the  men  who  are  to  make  the  selection  for  of- 
tice,  choose  your  best  and  most  promising  men — 
choose  themVith  a  view  to  their  powers  of  mind, 
their  moral  Avorth,  their  habits  of  diligence  and 
application,  and  their  cajiability  for  improve- 
ment in  legal  science. 

Select  your  men  with  a  view  to  these  high 
qualities,  for  those  inferior  judgeships,  and  in  a 
few  short  years,  in  the  course  of  judicial  promo- 
tion, they  will  be  translated  to  a  higher  and  no- 
bler and  more  responsible  station — one  in  which 
they  are  to  figure  before  and  actforthe  whole,  and 
become  members  of  your  highest  judicial  tribu- 
nal. What  a  powerful  stimulus  Ao  you  offer  to 
the  man  of  genius  and  of  virtue  ana  noble  am- 
bition to  withdraw  from  the  corruption  of  poli- 
tics, and  dedicate  himself  to  more  elevated  du- 
ties and  objects,  and  by  which  he  may  render 
higher  and  more  difficult  service  to  his  country. 

I  had  proposed  to  urge  some  other  points  and 
arguments,  but  I  find  my  strength  a  good  deal 
exhausted.  Indeed  I  have  now^  spoken  longer 
than  I  thought  I  should  possibly  be  able  to  do 
when  I  commenced.  For  the  patience  of  this  com- 
mittee in  bearing  with  me  so  long,  I  return  it 
my  sincere  thanks.  I  came  here  to  act  for  my 
state  without  regard  to  party  politics.  I  would 
have  been  extremely  gratified  if  a  stouter  and 
an  abler  champion  had  appeared  here  to  support 
the  cause  which  I  have  attempted  to  uphold, 
but  in  the  absence  of  allies,  of  a  single  coadjutor, 
and  indeed  of  even  one  h.aving  with  me  in  this 
matter  a  heartfelt  sympathy,  still  I  felt  that  un- 
aided, with  my  single  arm,  it  Avas  due  from  me 
to  strike  one  blow  at  least  against  this  great  and 
monstrous  innovation.  I  came  here  to  reform 
the  constitution.  I  w^ould  be  willing  to  elect 
the  inferior  executive  and  ministerial  officers,  as 
clerks,  sheriffs,  constables,  coroners,  etc.  I 
would  be  willing  also  to  do  away  with  the  coun- 
ty courts.  I  Avant  to  prohibit  local  and  private 
legislation,  such  as  divorces,  etc.,  and  to  secure 
some  other  slight  reforms,  but  I  want  to  do  noth- 
ing else.  As  long  as  there  is  a  ray  of  reason  in 
myhead,ora  pulsation  in  this  feeble  heart,  I 
shall  feel  it  tne  most  sacred  duty  I  OAve  my 
country  to  oppose  this  principle  of  electing 
judges  by  the  popular  A'ote.  I  will  oppose  this 
attempt  to  desecrate  and  drag  doAvn  this  greatest 
and  most  important  and  yet  most  defenceless  de- 
partment of  the  government.  In  addition  to 
that,  I  am  for  maintaining  inviolate  the  rights  of 
property.  I  am  also  against  an  open  clause  in 
the  constitution.  I  am  against  the  perpetual 
agitation  and  constitutional  tinkering  Avhich 
such  a  principle  would  introduce.  And  I  am  in 
favor  of  requiring  the  foreign  voter  to  reside  as 
long  within  the  state,  as  our  own  native  bom  chil- 
dren before  they  exercise  the  right  of  suffrage. 
Upon  this  latter  question,  I  shall  ask  the  indul- 


gence of  the  convention  at  a  future  time,  and  I 

Sromise  to  trouble  it  no  further  in  set  speeches, 
ut  to  ensure  success  to  either  of  the  cardinal 
positions  Avhich  I  have  here  declared,  there  is  no 
amount  of  popular  applause,  no  place  or  honor 
in  the  prospective,  no  vision  of  my  ambition, 
that  I  Avould  not  bring  into  this  hall,  and  lay 
doAvn  cheerfully  as  a  sacrifice — not  only  to  car- 
ry either  of  these  principles,  but  to  give  them 
any  strength.  And  not  only  to  gain  them  a 
modicum  of  strength,  but  to  do  my  duty,  by 
declaring  my  deep,  abiding  and  undismayed  de- 
votion to  each  and  all  of  them. 
The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  OCTOBER  27,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Geo.  W.  Brush. 

DEATH  OF  THE  HOX.  BRYAN  Y.  OWSLEY. 

Mr.  M'CLURE  ofifered  the  following  preamble 
and  resolution:. 

Whereas,  It  is  represented  to  this  convention, 
that  the  Hon.  Bryan  Y.  Owsley  departed  this 
life  about  12  o'clock  on  the  night  of  the  26th  inst., 
in  the  town  of  Frankfort,  and  that  his  friends 
will  proceed  with  his  remains  to  Boyle  county, 
the  place  of  interment,  at  10  o'clock,  a.  m.,  to- 
day: tJterefore,  as  a  token-  of  respect  to  the  mem- 
ory of  the  dead, 

Resolved,  That  this  convention  will  accompany 
the  procession  Avhieh  takes  charge  of  his  remains, 
across  the  bridge  over  the  Kentucky  river,  on  the 
route  to  his  interment;  and  that  the  convention, 
for  the  purpose  aforesaid,  will  take  a  recess  of 
half  an  hour. 

The  resolution  was  adopted,  and  the  conven- 
tion proceeded  to  join  the  funeral  cortege. 

At  half  past  10  o'clock,  the  convention  re- 
assembled. 

parents  and  property. 
The  PRESIDENT  presented  to  the  convention 
the  following  statement  from  the  second  auditor, 
in  answer  to  a  resolution   offered  yesterday  by 
Mr.  Taylor: 

A  statement  showing  the  total  number  of  parents 
and  guardians,  Avith  the  amount  of  their  prop- 
erty, and  the  number  of  children  between  5 
ancl  16  years  of  age,  taken  from  the  commis- 
sioners'books  returned  to  the  Second  Audi- 
tor for  the  year  1849: 

Parents.  ChiWn. 
1st.  Those  that  have  no  property  enter- 
ed  for  taxation  and   number  of  chil- 
dren .....     8,028      19,467 
2d.  Those  who  are  worth  less  than  $100 

in  property  and  number  of  children    -    13,755      36.764 
3d.  Tho.se  who  are  worth  from  $100  to 
$100  in  property  and  number  of  chil- 
dren   12,757      35,035 

4th.  Those  who  are  worth  from  $400  to 
$600  in  property  and  number  of  chil- 
dren   5,904      16,409 

5th.  Those  who  are  worth  over  $600  in 
property  and  number  of  children       -    30.263      85,315 

Total  ....     70,707     192,990 

On  motion,  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on 
education. 


2m 


KEVKXUES    i-HD    IXPENDITLEES. 

The  PRESIDEIvfT  also  presented  the  follow- 
ing letter,  in  relation  to  a  resolution  passed  yes- 
terday on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Hargis: 

Hon.  James  Guthrie,  President  State  Convention: 
Sir:  I  enclose  a  statement  of  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures from  18:29  to  1849.  Upon  receiving 
the  resolution  of  the  convention  on  yesterday, 
requiring  me  to  furnish  "the  receipts  and  expen- 
ditures from  1823  to  1849  from  each  source,"  I 
found  it  would  be  impossible  to  furnish  that 
statement  in  time  for  the  use  of  the  convention. 
I  then  saw  Mr.  Hargis,  the  mover  of  said  resolu- 
tion, and  he  is  willing  to  accept  the  statement 
now  enclosed. 

I  am  sir,  very  respectfully, 

THOS.  S.  PAGE, 
Second  Auditor. 
Auditor's  Office,  Frankfort,  Oct.  27,  1849. 

Mr.  HARGIS  said  it  was  important  that  the 
convention  should  have  the  information  which 
his  resolution  had  called  for,  and  he  hoped  the 
document  now  presented  would  be  printed  and 
referred. 

The  motion  to  print  was  withdrawn,  after  a 
few  words  from  Mr.  Triplett,  and  the  communi- 
cation was  referred  to  tne  select  committee  on 
the  State  debt. 

NEW   COUNTIES. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  from  the  select  com- 
mittee on  that  subject,  made  the  foUlowing  re- 
port, which,  on  his  motion,  was  referred  to  the 
committee  of  the  whole  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

ARTICLE    — . 

Sec.  1.  No  new  county  shall  be  formed  with 
an  area  of  less  than  three  hundred  and  fifty  square 
miles;  nor  shall  such  new  county  be  formed,  if 
by  doing  so  it  reduces  any  county  out  of  which 
it  shall  be  formed,  in  whole  or  in  part,  below  an 
area  of  fourhundred  square  miles;  andin  running 
the  lines  or  boundary  of  such  new  county,  no 
such  line  shall  run  nearer  than  ten  miles  of  the 
county  seat  of  any  county. 

INSTRUCTION   TO   CLOSC    DEBATE. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  oflfered  the  following  res- 
olution: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  of  the  whole  be 
instructed  to  close  the  debate  upon  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals  on  Mon- 
day the  29th  inst.,  at  12  o'clock,  m.,  and  thatsaid 
committee  of  the  whole  proceed  to  vote  at  that 
time  upon  the  pending  amendments,  and  such  as 
may  be  proposed. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  he  apprehended  the 
resolution  wanted  no  explanation,  for  it  ex- 
plained itself.  He  thought  sufficient  latitude 
would  have  been  allowed  for  debate  by  12  o'clock 
on  Monday. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  to  the  gen- 
tleman from  Jefferson,  that  his  resolution  should 
be  somewhat  modified.  Amendments  might  be 
sprung  upon  them  after  the  time  had  arrived  at 
which  the  resolution  would  stop  debate,  and  he 
enquired  whether  it  would  be  proper  that  they 
should  be  called  upon  to  vote  on  such  amenu- 
ments  without  due  reflection  or  explanation.  He 
would  suggest,  though  he  would  not  make  any 


motion  for  that  purpose,  that  ten  minutes  should 
be  allowed  for  aebate  on  any  amendment  that 
may  be  offered. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  was  aware  of  the  objec- 
tion to  which  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  allu- 
ded, but  if  it  was  intended  to  give  ten  minutes 
to  each  gentleman  for  an  explanation,  he  appre- 
hended they  had  better  not  pass  the  resolution. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  did  not  suppose  that 
many  members  would  desire  to  speak  or  to  ex- 
plain. It  might  be  proper  at  least  to  allow  a 
gentleman  to  give  his  views  on  the  amendment 
that  might  be  offered,  and  also  to  allow  some 
member  of  the  committee  from  which  the  report 
came,  to  give  reasons  why  it  ought  not  to  be 
adopted.  Now  suppose  twenty  members  should 
consume  ten  minutes,  not  in  discussion,  but  in 
explanation;  would  that  be  too  much  time  to  give 
to  it?  In  the  house  of  representatives  of  the  con- 
gress of  the  United  States  he  believed  time  was 
allowed  to  explain  amendments,  and  he  thought 
such  a  privilege  should  be  retained  here. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said,  in  reference  to  the 
rule  in  Congress,  it  was  confined  he  believed  to 
the  mover  of  the  amendment.  He  had  no  ob- 
jection to  give  the  mover  of  an  amendment  ten 
minutes  for  explanation,  and  the  chairman  or  a 
member  of  the  committee  that  reported  the  arti- 
cle, ten  minutes  for  reply. 

"The  following  words  were  therefore  added  to 
his  resolution:  "allowing  the  mover  of  any 
amendment  ten  minutes  to  explain  the  same,  and 
to  a  member  of  the  committee  making  the  report, 
ten  minutes  to  reply. 

Mr.  HARDIN  enquired  from  the  gentleman 
from  Jefferson,  if  he  meant  to  preclude  any  re- 
marks when  the  report  should  come  from  the 
committee  of  the  whole  to  the  house? 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.     Certainly  not. 

Mr.  HARDIN  continued.  He  made  the  en- 
quiry because  he  designed  to  say  something  him- 
self, but  he  should  take  up  as  little  time  as  pos- 
sible. 

The  PRESIDENT  put  the  question,  and  a 
division  was  called  for. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  as  there  seemed  to 
be  some  doubt  about  it,  he  would  ask  for  the  yeas 
and  nays. 

Mr.  GRAY  thought  this  resolution  was  rather 
making  a  discrimination  between  the  members  of 
the  convention.  It  appeared  to  him  that  every 
member  of  the  house  ought  to  have  the  same  priv- 
ilege; and  he  saw  no  reason  why  it  should  be 
confined  to  a  member  of  the  committee  from 
which  the  report  came.  He  moved  to  amend  the 
resolution,  so  as  to  give  ten  minutes  for  expla- 
nation to  every  member  who  desired  to  explain. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  IRWIN  said,  he  did  not  like  the  resolu- 
tion as  it  was  amended.  A  good  many  had  ad- 
dressed the  convention  and  it  might  be  that 
others  desired  to  do  so  too.  He  desired  to  do 
so  himself.  He  had  been  trying  for  several 
days  to  have  sufficient  confidence  in  himself  to 
do  it.  It  seemed  to  him  that  after  fifteen  or 
twenty  gentlemen  had  occupied  the  whole  time 
of  the  convention  from  its  commencement  to  the 
present  time,  other  gentlemen  should  have  an 
opportunity  to  speak.  He  did  not  think  the 
time  had  been  spent  unprofitably  that  had  been 
spent    in    discussion.      He  thought  important 


263 


views  had  been  presented  to  the  house  and  he 
thought  this  discussion  would  do  a  great  deal  of 
good  to  the  country.  They  learned  from  each 
other  the  views  that  gentlemen  entertained,  and 
he  could  not  see  vrhy  it  was  necessary  that  they 
should  say  that  at  this  particular  day  tlie  de- 
bat«  should  be  closed.  He  thought  they  had 
been  getting  along  very  well,  and  that  in  two  or 
three  weeks  they  should  be  ready  to  vote,  as  by 
that  time  many  of  the  most  prominent  subjects 
would  have  been  discussed.  He  thought  it  bet- 
ter to  lay  the  resolution  on  the  table  at  present. 
He  made  that  motion. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  withdrew  his  call  for  the 
yeas  and  nays,  and  the  resolution  was  adopted. 

COURT   OF      APPEALS. 

The  convention  then  again  resolved  itself  into 
committee  of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the 
chair,  and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the 
report  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  WOODSOX.  Mr.  Chairman,  when  I  in- 
dicated my  intention  last  evening  to  address  the 
committee  this  morning,  it  was  more  from  the 
impulse  of  the  moment  than  any  pre-conceived 
or  settled  determination  on  my  part  to  give  my 
views  upon  the  interesting  topics  presented  in 
the  course  of  this  discussion.  At  the  time,  sir, 
I  was  laboring  under  the  influence  of  that  gen- 
eral excitement  which  pervaded  the  whole  com- 
mittee at  the  conclusion  of  the  thrillingly  elo- 
quent and  interesting  speech  of  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Garrett  Davis.)  I  felt,  sir, 
whilst  that  distinguished  delegate  was  speaking, 
with  a  zeal  so  characteristic  and  with  a  power 
so  peculiar  to  himself,  that  it  was  a  singular  mis- 
fortune to  the  country  and  to  the  party  to  which 
he  belongs,  that  he  did  not  utter  sentiments 
which  were  more  in  accordance  with  the  wishes 
and  feelings  of  that  party — as  well  as  with  the 
age  in  which  we  live — as  well  as  the  circumstan- 
ces by  which  we  are  surrounded.  I  felt  the  force 
of  the  remark  that  the  gentleman  said  had  been 
applied  to  him  viz:  that  he  was  behind  the 
times — that  he  was  living  and  acting  with  the 
past  rather  than  the  present — that  he  was  express- 
ing the  sentiments  of  the  eighteenth  rather  than 
the  nineteenth  century.  I  regret  that  the  gentle- 
man has  not  resumed  his  seat  this  morning  as  I 
shall  take  occasion  to  notice  some  of  the  posi- 
tions he  assumed,  and  make  such  replies  to  them 
as  they  merit,  in  ray  judgment.  Allow  me  to 
say  though,  sir,  that  nothing  is  further  from  my 
intention  than  to  say  any  thing  which,  in  the 
slightest  degree,  is  calculated  to  reflect  upon  the 
motives  or  intentions  which  superinduced  any 
remark  that  fell  from  him — far  from  it.  On  the 
contrary,  I  entertain  the  very  hightest  possible 
regard  for  his  personal  as  well  as  political  integ- 
rity. 

We  were  all  forcibly  struck,  and  I  am  .sure, 
sir,  that  the  whole  country  will  be  when  the  gen- 
tleman's speech,  delivered  on  yesterday,  is  pub- 
lished, with  the  graphic  description  which  he 
gave  of  the  great  abuses  and  corruptions  of  the 
elective  franchise  in  Kentucky — men  lying  in 
our  stables  and  bams — drinking,  violating  the 
sabbath,  selling  their  votes — a  picture  that  I  will 
repeat  no  further,  but  refer  you,  this  committee, 
and  the  country,  to  the  gentleman's  speech  for. 


Scenes,  sir,  which,  if  they  have  ever  been  wit- 
nessed in  Kentncky,  1  tlTank  God  have  never 
come  within  my  observation — they  may  have 
been  witnessed  in  Bourbon.  But  1  am  ciarita' 
ble  enough  to  hope  that  the  gentleman's  unap- 
proachable purity  has  revolted  at  small  matters, 
and  has  so  wrought  upon  his  gifted  imagination 
as  to  cause  him  to  manufacture  mole  hills  into 
mountains,  in  the  excitement  of  debate.  He 
says  that  money  and  other  corrupting  influences 
will  control  the  elections  of  our  judges;  that  no 
one,  however  pure,  ever  passed  through  the  or- 
deal of  an  e.xciting  political  contest,  and  came 
out  of  it,  as  pure  as  when  he  entered  it.  Sir,  I 
need  no  more  powerful  refutation  of  this  as.ser- 
tioh  than  to  point  to  the  gentleman;  he,  sir,  ha.s 
passed  through  many  such  ordeals,  and  he  still 
IS  but  another  name  for  purity. 

But  allow  me,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  ask  what  was 
the  whole  of  the  gentleman's  speech  an  effort  to 
prove?  Nothing  more  nor  less,  sir,  than  man's 
corruption  and  incompetency  for  self-govern- 
ment. Strip  that  speecn  of  the  bright,  glowing 
and  burning  words  with  which  it  is  clothed — 
let  it  stand  in  its  naked  simplicity  before  the 
couiitry,  and  nine-tenths  of  all  who  read  it  will 
se€  but  that  one  idea  in  it.  I  am  happy  to  say 
that  it  is  the  first  speech  I  ever  heard  on  "that  side 
of  the  question.  1  have  read  many.  I  could  but 
think  of  the  days  of  1776  Avhen  such  speeches 
were  common.  At  that  time  the  enquiry,  can 
man  govern  himself?  was  an  interesting  one 
indeed — the  purest  patriots — the  most  sagacious 
statesmen  doubted — the  experiment  had  never 
been  successfully  made — the  fallen  splendors  of 
the  republics  of  antiquity  were  poor  arguments 
in  its  favor — the  pomp,  power  and  circumstance 
of  monarchical  Europe — the  literature  of  the 
age,  and,  I  may  Avith  propriety  say,  except  in 
the  colonies,  the  patriotism  of  the  age  all  stood 
in  hostile  array  again.st  it.  Still  our  ancestors 
acted — they  determined  to  tr)'  the  great  experi- 
ment in  defiance  of  the  experience  of  the  past — 
they  proclaimed  the  long  obsolete  idea,  man  has 
purity,  intelligence  and  prudence  sufficient  to 
govern  himself — of  the  glorious,  the  happy  re- 
sults of  that  determination  I  need  not  speak — 
they  are  subjects  with  which  the  world  is  fa- 
rail'iar.  And  I  had  thought  that  even  the 
crowned  heads  of  Europe  had  at  last  acknowl- 
edged the  truth  of  the  maxim  "  man  can  govern 
liimself."  But,  sir,  what  do  I  find  here  in  Ken- 
tucky— ^yes,  sir,  in  Kentucky,  where  I  had  sup- 
posed every  heart  would  bleed  and  every  head 
would  fall  in  the  maintenance  of  this  great  truth? 
I  am  told  by  one  of  Kentucky's  most  distinguish- 
ed and  gifted  sons  that  he  is  afraid  to  trust  the 
people — that  he  is  afraid  to  trust  himself.  And 
we  are  now  called  upon  to  demonstrate  the  fact 
that  the  people  are  capable  of  electing  their  own 
servants.  We  are  now  triumphantly  asked  if  we 
wish  to  destroy  the  symmetry  of  our  govern- 
ment— to  set  at  defiance  the  experience  of  the 
East — ^to  overturn  a  government  which  has  so 
appily  and  so  signally  blessed  us — and  under 
which  so  few  abuses  have  occurred  in  the  execu- 
tive or  judicial  departments  of  the  govern- 
ment? 

1  answer  for  myself,  sir,  that  if  to  take  from 
the  governor  of  Kentucky — the  judiciary  of  the 
country,  and  the  legislature^  th«  power  to  ap- 


264 


point  to,  and  fill  the  offices  of  the  country,  is  to 
be  regarded  as  a  destruction  of  the  government, 
1  am  prepared  to  see  it  fall — and  instead  of  shed- 
ding tears  over  its  untimely  grave,  I  shall  only 
regret  that  it  has  not  fallen  long  ago.  So  far, 
however,  from  wishing  to  destroy,  1  only  wish 
to  build  up  and  perfect  the  government. 

Allow  me  though,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  ask  if 
there  have  been  no  abuses  under  the  present  con- 
stitution of  the  powers  exercised  by  tne  different 
departments  of  the  government?  And  can  I  an- 
swer that  question  more  conclusively  in  the  af- 
firmative, in  any  other  manner  than  by  calling 
to  your  recollection  the  admission  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon  (Mr.  Davis)  that  the  present 
convention  Avould  never  have  been  called  had 
the  democratic  party  been  treated  justly  in  the 
bestowment  of  the  offices  of  the  country  within 
the  gift  of  the  governor?  I  think  not.  He  says 
that  partizan  considerations  have  been  too  gen- 
erally regarded  in  the  bestowment  of  office.  I 
would  ask  if  any  other  than  a  blind  adhesion 
to  party,  in  the  great  majority  of  cases,  has  ever 
been  regarded  at  all?  To  be  sure  there  are  some 
honorable  exceptions,  but  they  are  few.  Do  not 
understand  me,  however,  sir,  as  wishing  to  cen- 
sure the  whig  party  particularly  upon  this  score; 
they,  if  possible,  are  less  guilty,  in  the  state  and 
nation  tlian  there  great  rivals  the  democrats. 
But  we  all  know,  sir,  that  a  whig  governor  or  a 
whig  president  will  fill  the  offices  of  the  govern- 
ment with  whigs,  and  that  a  democratic  govern- 
or or  president  will  fill  them  with  democrats. 
Exceptions  I  know  may  be  found,  but  isolated 
exceptions  to  a  rule  only  prove  its  general  truth. 
If  this  is  so,  and  no  man  can  doubt  it — and  the 
preservation  of  the  judiciary  of  the  country 
from  party  politics  is  essential,  and  I  am  told 
and  believe  it  i.s — I  ask  you  how  we  are  to  be 
worsted  by  changing  the  mode  of  appointment? 
It,  per  possibility,  may  be  so  under  an  elective 
system.  We  know  that  it  is  contaminated  in  its 
very  creation  under  the  present  system. 

The  question,  sir,  the  practical  question  I 
mean,  has  the  governor  of  Kentucky  more  dis- 
cernment, more  purity,  more  intelligence  than 
one  half  of  the  voting  population  of  Kentucky? 
For  myself  I  will  venture  to  say  he  has  not. 
The  appointing  power  to  office  ought  to  be  pure, 
intelligent,  above  improper  influences,  able  to 
set  at  defiance  the  combinations  and  conspira- 
cies of  the  designing,  to  resist  the  unjust  en- 
croachments of  the  bold  and  designing,  to 
appreciate  as  well  as  to  ascertain  the  merits 
and  qualifications  of  the  retiring  and  inde- 
pendent, in  contrast  with  the  unbridled  pre- 
tensions of  the  arrogant  and  sycophantic — 
who  generally  beset  governors  and  presidents 
for  office — not  the  retiring  student  or  the  man 
of  business  generally,  but  on  the  contrary, 
the  lazy,  idle,  noisy  partizans,  who  infest  the 
country.  The  people  on  the  other  hand,  and  I 
Bay  it  to  their  credit,  will  reward  nifrit  when 
tliey  find  it;  and  they  can  but  find  it,  if  it  is  in 
the  country.  Tlie  peo[)le  combine  to  a  greater 
extent,  in  my  liumule  judgment,  all  of  the  re- 
quirements of  an  efficient  and  desirable  appoint- 
ing power  than  can  be  found  any  wliere  else  in 
thu  or  any  other  goveniment;  and,  hence,  I  de- 
sire to  see  the  people  retain  in  their  own  hands 
the  appointment  of  every  officer  in  tlie  state. 


Various  reasons,  Mr.  Chairman,  have  brought 
me  to  this  conclusion,  and  thorougly  satisfied 
my  mind  that  I  am  correct.  I  will  give  a  fcAV  of 
them.  First  contrast  the  talents,  virtues,  in  a 
word,  the  qualifications  of  men  .in  high  office, 
placed  there  by  the  people,  with  those  in  corres 
pondingly  high  and  responsible  positions  by  ex- 
ecutive favor,  and  I  feel  confident  that  the  dis- 
cemnu'iit  and  the  judgment  of  the  people  will 
stand  fully  justified  before  the  world.  Congress 
has  been  filled  by  the  people,  our  judges  ap- 
pointed by  the  governor.  I  do  not  know  how  it 
IS  in  other  states,  but  this  I  do  verily  believe, 
that  in  point  of  talents,  morals  and  fitness  for 
office,  the  members  of  congress  from  Kentucky 
have  invariably  surpassed  our  circuit  judges. 

Yes,  but  gentlemen  say  there  is  a  difference  in 
political  and  judicial  offices;  the  people  are  very 
well  qualified,  say  they,  to  elect  their  president, 
members  of  congress,  <fec.,  but  then  to  think  of 
allowing  the  people  to  elect  a  judge,  the  idea  is 
ridiculous.  What  do  the  people  know  of  the 
qualifications  of  a  judge?  I  will  tell  you  what 
they  know;  they  know  who  is  honest;  they  know 
to  whom  they  would  entrust  their  business  in  a 
court  of  justice;  in  a  word  they  know  that  hon- 
esty, intelligence  and  business  habits,  to  the  ex- 
clusion of  their  opposites,  are  essential  to  the 
proper  discharge  of  important  private  or  public 
trusts.  I  tfU  you  though,  sir,  that  the  judg- 
ment and  discriniination  of  the  people,  as  Avell 
as  their  incorruptibility,  are  greatly  underrated. 
Go  to  any  common  farmer  and  ask  him  who  is 
the  best  lawyer,  the  most  successful,  the  most 
honest,  that  practices  at  the  bar  in  his  county, 
and  I  will  venture  that  in  nine  cases  out  of  every 
ten,  where  the  enquiry  is  made,  not  only  a  satis- 
factory, but  the  correct  answer  is  given.  How 
could  this  be  otln-nvise,  as  society  is  organized 
and  business  carried  on  in  Kentucky.  The  great 
body  of  the  people  attend  the  courts  of  the 
county  occasionally,  especially  when  important 
and  exciting  causes  are  to  be  tried.  They  see 
the  lawyers  arrayed  on  either  side,  witness  their 
mental  "conflicts,  li.sten  to  their  discussion  of 
propositions  of  law  before  the  court,  their  ad- 
dres.ses  to  the  jury,  hear  judges  and  lawj^era 
talking  of  eacli  others  standing  and  attainments 
in  the  profession;  these  things  being  so,  sir, 
how  can  the  people  be  at  a  loss  to  know  who  of 
the  lawyers  at  the  bar  is  qualified  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  judge?  Has  common  .sense  left  the 
world  and  taken  up  its  abode  with  office  holders 
alone?  Are  the  people  so  steeped  in  ignorance, 
barbarism  and  mental  niglit,  that  they  are  whol- 
ly unable  to  discriminate  between  the  jiroten- 
sions  of  the  pettifogger,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  real  merits,  sound  legal  learning  and  abili- 
ties of  the  lawyer  on  the  other?  So  far  from  it  I 
venture  that  the  people,  a  majority  of  them,  in 
any  one  of  the  districts  proposed  by  the  report 
on  your  table  would  be  able  to  designate,  with 
invariable  certainty,  the  very  best  man  in  it  for 
the  bench.  At  least  they  would  know  more 
about  tlie  lawyers  of  the  district  than  any  gov- 
ernor could  po.ssibly  know.  Let  me  ask  you, 
sir,  wiiat  till!  governor  of  Kentucky  knows  alniut 
the  qualifications  of  men  for  office  in  the  remote 
parts  of  the  state?  Nothing,  literally  notliing. 
Why,  sir,  when  an  office  is  to  be  filled,  we  see 
those  who  desire  it,  riding  over  the  country  pro- 


265 


'curing  ktters  aad  recoramendations  of  them  to 
the  executive,  and,  generally,  without  them,  he 
■would  not  knowany  thing  more  about  the  claims 
or  fitness  of  the  aspirants  for  office  than  I  know 
of  the  relative  spnghtliness  of  any  two  of  the 
numerous  offspring  of  the  queen  of  England. 
At  last,  sir,  under  the  present  constitution,  his 
excellency  has  to  be,  from  the  very  necessity  of 
the  case,  governed  in  his  appointments  to  office 
by  the  information  of  the  neighbors  of  the  aspi- 
rant, leading  whigs  or  democrats  as  the  case 
may  demand. 

Well,  but  there  is  another  serious,  irremediable 
objection,  to  an  elective  judiciary  urged  by  gen- 
tlemen. What  is  it?  Why  sir,  it  is,  that  they 
can  be  corrupted;  that  money — the  charmed 
tongue  of  the  artful  demagogue  will  mislead 
them — involve  them  in  error.  And  here  sir,  is 
the  Thermopylae  of  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon— ^here  it  was  that  his  eloquent  voice  swelled 
to  its  full  height  and  his  indignant  eye  flashed 
its  keenest  iires, — yes  sir,  in  the  effort  to  demon- 
strate the  ease  with  which  the  people  could  be 
seduced  and  led  away.  If  there  was  any  one 
point  in  his  great  effort  where  he  exhibited"  more 
fully  than  any  where  else,  the  full  grown  dimen- 
sions of  Kentucky's  orator,  it  was  there.  But  sir, 
I  will  ask,  did  he  convince  any  one  that  he  was 
right  in  the  views  which  he  presented — in  the 
assertion  he  made,  that  he  was  afraid  to  trust  the 
people?  If  so,  I  can  only  say  to  vou,  whoever 
you  are,  then  sir  you  are  convinced  that  the  very 
foundations  upon  which  our  government  rests 
are  but  sands  to  be  swept  away  by  the  breath  of 
the  first  demagogue  who  breathes  upon  them. 
Our  government  rests  upon  the  intelligence — ^the 
purity  of  the  people;  and  I  need  not  say  that  if 
they  can  be  rendered  vicious  and  corrupt  in  the 
election  of  the  judiciary,  that  they  can  in  the 
election  of  the  legislature,  state  and  national. 
And  if  so,  what  is  our  government  worth?  Kot 
the  paper  sir  upon  which  the  charter  of  our  lib- 
erties is  written.  And  if  I  were  fully  satisfied 
that  the  people  were  corrupt — the  'majority  I 
mean, — that  those  who  have  all  power,  according 
to  the  theor}'' of  our  government,  could  be  bought 
and  sold — and  the  government  of  the  country 
thus  made  the  emblem  of  corruption  and  iniqui- 
ty— I  would  invoke  the  shades  of  our  departed 
ancestry  to  return  to  earth,  form  a  procession, 
with  Jefferson  and  Madison  at  their  head,  take 
the  declaration  of  independence  which  declares 
the  equality  of  man,  the  constitution  of  thelJni- 
ted  States  which  provides  for  a  popular  govern- 
ment, and  together  with  all  the  State  constitu- 
tions which  secure  the  same  great  and  heretofore 
thought  inappreciable  boon  to  man.  march  to  the 
foot  of  the  British  throne,  confess  the  divine 
right  of  kings,  make  a  bon  fire  of  those  un- 
meaning, false,  delusive  charters  of  our  boasted 
liberty,  and  pray  her  majesty  to  give  us  a  sprig 
of  royalty  to  reign  over  us  and  our  children  for 
ever.'  But,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  thank  my  God  that 
I  yet  have  confidence  in  the  purity  and  the  incor- 
ruptibility of  the  people,  and  consequently  in 
man's  ability  to  govern  himself.  And  deprive 
me  of  that  confidence,  and  sir  when  you  have 
done  so,  allow  me  to  say  that  you  have  deprived 
the  world,  as  well  as  myself,  of  the  brightest  hope 
that  gilds  the  patriot's  dreams. 

At  Itet,  however,  I  am  told  sir,  th»t«Teh  ad- 
34 


mitting  the  people  vouid  dect  good  judges,  that 
they  cannot  De  corrupted,  smd  all  that,  yet  that 
unless  the  judges  are  independent  that  the  coun- 
try is  destined  to  decay  and  ruin, — and  we  have 
had  lona:,  eloquent  and  able  speeches  in  vindi- 
cation of  an  independent  judiciary.  The  mother 
country,  old  England,  (I  wonder  if  we  will  never 
get  done  going  to  her  for  precedents  to  prove  how 
a  Republic  ought  to  be  governed?)  has  been  re- 
ferred to — her  independent  judiciaiy  has  been 
pointed  at — the  high  wrought  praises  of  a  Black- 
stone,  of  an  independent  judge,  have  been  cited. 
There  I  admit  its  necessity — the  liberty,  the  prop- 
erty, the  reputation  of  the  subject,  are  all  depend- 
ent upon  the  independence  of  the 'judge;  that  is, 
Erovided  dependence  makes  a  man  a  slave,  and  I 
now  that  it  does   to  a  greater   or  less   extent. 

There  sir,  the  king  appoints  the  judge — ^there 
the  reigning  monarch  is  considered  the  source  of 
power  and  honor;  here  the  people — here  in  short, 
the  government  was  made  for  the  people — offices 
erected  for  the  benefit  of  the  people,  and  the  du- 
ties thereof  are  to  be  discharged  for  the  benefit 
of  the  people ;  there  the  government  was  made  for 
the  king — ofiices  created  by  him  and  for  his  fa- 
vorites to  fill,  and  the  laws  of  the  realm  admin- 
istered to  suit  his  royal  pleasure,  and  often  to  the 
oppression  and  ruin  of  the  British  subject.  Hence 
it  was  that  the  people  demanded,  and  at  length 
succeeded  in  effecting,  the  independence  of  the 
judge,  who  was  to  decide  upon  their  most  sacred 
rights.  Prior  to  this  time,  the  commission  of  the 
judge  in  England  was  duringthe  pleasure  of  the 
crown;  this  being  the  case,  we  all  can  but  see  at 
once  that  there  was  no  independence  in  the  judi- 
ciary, and  we  can  all  see  the  necessity  for  it. 
There  the  effort  was  to  make  the  judge  inde- 
pendent of  the  king;  here,  strange  absurdity,  the 
effort  is  to  make  him  independent  of  the  people; 
there  the  king  fought  against  the  independence 
of  the  judiciary — the  people  for  it. 

Mr.  Chairman,  here  allow  me  to  advert  to 
first  principles  for  a  moment  or  too.  All  human 
governments  have  had  an  origin,  different  theo- 
ries characterize  them.  And  it  is  our  good  for- 
tune in  America  to  differ  from  all  of  the  govern- 
ments of  the  world  which  are  older  than  ours. 
In  what  does  this  great  distinguishing  difference 
consist?  Most  conspicuously  in  two  respects — 
first  in  other  govtrnraents  the  executive  origi- 
nates the  theory  and  appoints  the  oflScers  who 
are  to  administer  it.  Here  the  people  originated 
the  government  and  prescribed  the  duty  of  those 
who  are  to  administer  it.  Secondly,  here  we 
have  a  written  theorj' — dividing  the  government 
into  different  departments  and  assigning  to  each 
department  particular  functions — such  was  not 
the  case  in  any  other  government  upon  earth 
when  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  was 
formed.  Why  I  may  be  asked,  do  I  advert  to 
these  first  principles?  I  do  it  to  show  the  want 
of  analogy  between  our  government  and  all 
others — and  to  assert  that  this  convention  has 
all  power  in  its  hands,  which  has  been  lying 
dormant  in  the  present  constitution  of  Kentucky, 
or  which  has  been  exercised  under  it  by  the  dif- 
ferent departments  of  the  government.  That  it 
is  legitimate  and  right  in  us,  either  to  increase 
or  diminish  the  powers  of  the  legislative,  execu- 
tive or  judiciary  branches  of  the  government  as 
we  may  think  rfght  or  the  people  deraatid,  whose 


nm 


majesty  we  represent.  The  question  then  pre- 
sents itself,  what  ought  we  to  do?  Ought  we  to 
allow  each  department  to  retain  its  present  pow- 
ers or  ought  we  to  increase  the  powers  of  one 
and  lessen  that  of  another?  One  fact  is  obvious 
to  all  who  have  reflected  upon  this  subject  as  we 
increase  the  powers  of  government  we  lessen  our 
own,  as  we  take  from  the  different  departments 
we  increase  our  own — I  mean  the  people.  If 
for  instance  we  make  no  provision  for  a  legisla- 
ture to  meet  under  the  amended  constitution, 
none  can  ever  meet — if  we  take  from  the  execu- 
tive all  of  his  powers  and  from  the  judiciary  all  of 
its  powers,  wliat  then  is  the  government?  Why 
the  people  most  assuredly.  Why  then  to  the  ex- 
tent that  we  diminish  the  powersof  the  different 
departments  of  the  government,  without  vesting 
the  powers  Ave  take  away  in  some  other  depart- 
ment, we  increase  the  powers  of  the  people. 
This  being  so,  my  impression  is,  that  we  ought 
not  to  increase  the  powers  of  government  in 
any  of  its  departments — but  that  we  ought  to 
decrease  it  in  all  and  restore  the  strength  we  take 
from  these  different  powers  to  the  people.  For 
instance,  let  us  deprive  the  legislature  of  the 
power  to  meet  as  often  as  heretofore.  Let  us  de- 
prive the  governor  of  the  power  to  appoint  any 
officer  of  the  government — and  let  us  take  from 
the  judiciary  the  right  to  continue  in  office  save 
for  a  limited  period.  It  will  be  seen  that  I 
have  stripped  each  department  of  the  govern- 
ment of  great  powers — but  if  I  have  it  has  only 
been  to  give  them  to  the  people  to  be  exercised 
by  them.  Now  there  is  only  one  sort  of  inde- 
pendence that  I  recognise  under  our  theory  of 
government,  as  properly  belonging  to  the  judi- 
ciary or  either  of  the  other  departments  of  the 
government — and  that  is  let  each  be  perfectly 
independent  of  the  other — that  is  never  allow 
the  legislature  to  infringe  upon  the  executive, 
or  the  executive  upon  the  judiciary — keep  them 
all  separate — exercising  their  delegated  functions 
each  in  its  own  sphere  perfectly  independent  of 
all  the  rest — and  all  dependent  upon  the  people 
within  constitutional  limits.  Thus  far,  sir,  and 
no  farther  am  I  willing  to  subscribe  to  the  doc- 
trine of  an  independent  judiciary. 

There  is  another  idea  which  I  wish  to  present. 
I  understand  that  this  is  a  free  people,  that  we 
live  in  a  republican  government,    and  that  the 

Eeople  have  a  right  to  govern  them.selves.  We 
ave  a  senate"  and  house  of  representatives  in 
Kentucky  as  well  as  in  the  United  States  gov- 
ernment. Why  is  it  that  the  members  of  the 
lower  house  are  elected  for  a  short  period,  and 
the  senate  for  a  longer  one?  It  is  to  prevent  the 
effect  of  hasty  legislation  under  the  influence  of 
popular  excitement.  Look  now  at  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  and  we 
see  there  is  a  provision  that  the  judges  shall  be 
elected  for  eight  years,  the  first  being  elected  for 
two  years,  another  for  four,  another  for  six,  and 
the  fourth  for  eight  years,  so  that  after  the  first 
election  only  one  judge  is  elected  in  two  years. 
We  have  the  same  conservative  principle  here 
then,  which  is  found  in  the  manner  in  which  our 
senators  are  chosen.  Suppose  now  any  undue 
excitement  should  originate  in  the  country.  On- 
ly one  member  of  the  court  will  be  chosen  at 
»ny  one  election.  Four  years  will  have  to  pass 
»vjiy  bftfoffl  any  improper  influence  from  popu- 


lar excitement  can  b«  brought  to  bear  on  tKe  do- 
cisions  of  that  court.  Well,  if  a  people  shall 
persist  for  four  long  years  in  one  course  of  poli- 
cy, my  impression  is  it  will  be  right.  I  do  not 
believe  that  any  people  will  continue  for  four 
years  in  any  undue  excitement.  We  have  a  safe 
guard  then  in  the  bill  itself,  which  will  secure 
us  against  any  excitement  to  which  the  people 
are  liable.  Sly  impression  is  that  this  is  a  mere 
contest  between  the  friends  of  a  popular  govern- 
ment, and  the  friends  of  the  old  order  of  things. 

But,  said  my  friend,  (Mr.  G.  Davis)  the  peo- 
ple are  unwilling  to  trust  themselves;  and  he  is 
unwilling  to  trust  himself,  and  he  is  unAvilling 
to  trust  the  people.  How  did  he  attempt  to  show 
that?  Why  he  read  from  the  constitution  of  1799 
where  it  is  said  that  private  property  shall  not 
be  taken  for  public  use  without  just  compensa- 
tion. He  read  the  section  relating  to  the  ina- 
lienability of  the  rights  which  are  resers'ed  in 
this  constitution,  and  then  declared  that  the  peo- 
ple were  afraid  to  trust  themselves.  Whom  did 
they  trust?  Did  they  confide  any  of  these  pow- 
ers of  which  the  gentleman  read,  to  the  legisla- 
ture, or  to  the  executive?  They  trusted  nobody 
but  themselves  with  these  powers.  To  show 
this  point,  I  will  read  from  the  28th  section  of 
the  lOth  article. 

"To  guard  against  transgressions  of  the  high 
'  poAvers  which  we  have  delegated,  we  declare, 
'that  every  thing  in  this  article  is  exeej)ted  out 
'  of  the  general  powers  of  government,  and  shall 
'forever  remain  inviolate." 

Now  these  sacred  rights  were  excepted  out  of 
the  general  powers  of  government,  and  where 
were  they  reserved?  In  the  hands  of  the  people; 
and  this  convention  is  nothing  more  nor  less 
than  the  body  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  called 
here  for  the  purpose  of  amending  the  organic 
law,  and  to  make  such  improvements  as  time 
has  pointed  out  to  be  necessary.  How  are  we 
created?  By  the  people.  Can  the  power  that 
creates  create  any  thing,  having  greater  purity 
than  the  creating  power?  Suppose  this  conven- 
tion appoints  all  the  judges  in  the  state,  would 
any  gentleman  be  afraid  to  trust  this  convention? 
And  yet  I  do  not  think  that  this  convention 
would!  appoint  better  judges  than  the  great  body 
of  the  people  would  appoint.  This  convention 
is  the  reflex  of  the  intelligence  of  the  people, 
and  if  they  were  capable  of  electing  us  they  are 
capable  of  electing  their  officers,  and  they  will 
exercise  it.  The  gentleman  regrets  that  New 
York  has  set  us  so  baneful  an  example,  but  I 
can  tell  you  the  time  has  come  when  the  people 
of  Kentucky  too  intend  to  take  the  power  into 
their  own  hands.  I  am  glad  that  New  York 
has  set  the  example,  and  I  am  only  sorry  that 
the  honor  of  this  great  movement,  this  first  step 
in  modern  times  in  a  great  state,  does  not  belong 
to  Kentucky.  New  York  has  set  the  example, 
Pennsylvania  is  about  to  follow.  Tennessee  in- 
tends to  do  it,  Kentucky  intends  to  do  it,  and  I 
tell  you  that  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  in 
all  the  thirty  states  of  this  Union  the  people 
will  elect  every  officer.  And  we  Avill  go  higher, 
we  will  not  stop  there;  we  will  take  it  upon 
ourselves  to  elect  every  officer  in  the  state  and 
nation.  We  can  do  it  with  as  much  propriety, 
and  as  much  benefit  to  the  people  as  it  has  been 
dona,  or  is  likely  to  be  don*',  under  th««  old  order 


ol"  things.  I  Lave  mucL  respect  for  past  history,  I  I  do  uot  profess  to  be  a  leader  of  the  people, 
but  am  not  so  wedded  to  it  as  not  to  be  willing  j  but  one  of  them,  and  with  them  we  have  our 
to  open  my  eyes  to  the  light  which  is  everywhere  j  eye  fixed  on  victory;  and  we   intend  to  march 

forward.    We  intend  to  seize  that  prize,  popular 
liberty,  and  enjoy  it  sir,  when  we  have  it. 

Allow  me  to  return  my  thanks  for  the  very 
kind  attention  with  which  I  have  been  listeneJi 
to. 

Mr.  GUTHRIE.  I  desire  to  avail  myself  of 
the  rule  which  prevails  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  to  express  my  opinions  upon  some  of  the 
amendments  proposed,  and  which  I  shall  be  pre- 
cluded from  doing  when  the  report  comes  before 
the  convention. 

It  might  be  profitable  to  mark  the  position 
which  we  now  occupy.  The  popular  and  free 
governments  has  existed  from  the  time  of  the 
first  settlement  on  these  shores  by  those  noble 
spirits  who  were  driven  hither  to  seek  refuge 
from  tyranny  and  oppression,  now  more  than 
three  hundred  years.  The  government  of  all 
the  colonies  was  more  or  less  popular  and  free  in 
their  construction  up  to  the  date  of  our  glorious 
revolution,  and  since  our  independence.  The 
form  of  the  government  of  all  colonies  as  sepa- 


bearaing  around  me. 

I  was  sorry  sir,  to  hear  the  gentleman  say  that 
he  would  go  home  and  oppose  this  principle  be- 
fore the  people,  the  principle  that  the  people 
have  the  right  to  govern  themselves.  I  trust  lie 
will  take  that  back.  I  trust  he  will  take  the 
example  of  those  who  framed  the  constitution  of 
the  L  nited  States.  There  was  a  Hamilton  in 
that  body,  who  fought  the  great  battle  for  the 
aristocrats  and  monarchists;  he  opposed  the 
constitution  through  every  step  of  its  progress; 
and  when  he  had  struggled  and  struggled  in 
vain,  that  magnanimous,  that  great  and  illus- 
trious man  surrendered  his  own  opinion  and  he 
went  to  his  state  and  with  all  the  powers  of  that 
mind  which  had  not  been  surpassed  in  that  or 
any  other  age,  he  labored  for  the  adoption  of 
that  constitution  and  it  was  adopted.  I  trust 
Mr.  Davis  will  go  home  and  retract  what  he  has 
said  here,  and  come  into  the  support  of  this 
principle.  But  if  he  should  not,  I  will  still 
nope  that  he  will    not  be   able  to   defeat  what 


the  people  have  done  here.     I  know  his  powers,  |  rate  states,  have  become  more  popular  and  free 
his  genius,  and   ability,  but  I  trust  that  here-  j  with  constitutions  securing  personal  liberty  and 


after  he  will  be  disposed  to  act  with  the  friends 
of  constitutional  reform  in  carrying  out  what 
they  have  determined  to  carry  out. 

My  friend  from  Mason,  tie  other  day  said, 
there  were  three  sorts  of  aristocracies;  the  aris- 
tocracy of  intellect,  of  wealth,  and  of  olBce. 
Let  me  suggest  to  him  that  there  is  another  sort 
of  aristocracy,  and  one  that  will  swallow  up  all 
other  aristocracies  that  are  not  compatible  with  it, 
andthat  is  the  aristocracy  of  numbers.  Thepeo- 
ple,  sir,  form  the  aristocracy  of  numbers,  and  they 
are  coming  to  take  the  place  of  these  other  aris- 
tocracies, that  have  enjoyed  all  the  benefits  of 
the  government,  to  their  own  exclusive  advan- 
tage, and  to  the  entire  expulsion  of  the  great 
body  of  the  people, 


private  right,  and  the  choice  of  the  agents  of 
the  government  with  greater  or  less  restrictions 
in  the  hands  of  the  people. 

Wlien  Kentucky  separated  from  Virginia  and 
formed  her  first  constitution  in  1792,  the  right  of 
suffrage  was  extended  to  all  the  free  white  male 
citizens  over  the  age  of  twenty  one  years.  A 
decided  step  as  to  the  right  of  suffrage  in  ad- 
vance of  the  other  states  of  the  union,  but  influ- 
enced by  the  same  distrust  of  the  people  which 
was  expressed  by  the  gentleman  (Mr.  Davis) 
from  Bourbon,  on  yesterday,  she  provided  elec- 
tors to  choose  a  governor  ana  select  a  senate,  and 
to  the  governor,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  senate,  confided  the  appointment  of  the 
judges  of  the  superior  and  inferior  courts,  and 


I  know  that  I  have  spoken  discursively,  but  j  most  of  the  other  important  officers,  and  to  other 
be  pleased  to  remember,  this  is  my  first  effort  in  i  agencies  the  appointment  of  most  of  the  county 
this  body,  and  I  felt  a  little  like  a  gentleman  \  and  district  officers,  and  only  gave  to  the  people 
who  has  never  courted,  but  who  is  desperately  j  entitled  to  the  right  of  suffrage  the  choice  of  rep- 
in  love.  He  has  good  and  pure  intentions,  but  j  resentatives  to  the  lower  branch  of  the  general 
when  the  time  comes,  he  is  greatly  embarrassed  i  assembly,  and  the  electors  of  governor  and  sen- 


to  communicate  them.  I  am  only  sorry,  to  use 
the  language  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon, 
that  the  people  whose  advocate  I  am,  should  not 
have  had  an  abler  champion;  whilst  I  have  been 
speaking,  but  I  can  use  a  different  expression 
from  that  which  the  gentleman  used.  He  said 
he  had  no  aid,  he  takes  it  on  himself,  that  he  is 
the  only  champion  of  the  rights  of  the  few,  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  rights  of  the  many.  But 
sir,  I  have  many  compeers,  and  I  thank   God, 


ators,  and  the  sheriffs  and  coroners. 

After  the  lapse  of  eight  years  another  conven- 
tion was  called,  and  another  step  in  advance 
was  made,  and  the  right  of  the  people  to  choose 
theirown  governor  and  senators,  as  well  as  their 
representatives,  was  secured,  but  the  appoint- 
ment of  judges,  tfee.  was  given  to  the  governor, 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  and 
to  the  courts  the  appointment  of  their  own  clerks 
and  to  the  county  courts   the   nomination   of 


much  abler  ones  than  myself,  who  are  willing  to  |  justices  of  the  peace  with  the  rotation   amon? 
do  all  they  can  to  bring'back  the  government  to  j  the  members  of  that  court  of  the  sheriffalty,  and 
the  hands  of  the  people.     I  rejoice  that  it  should    the  appointment  of  all  the  county  officers.' 
be  so,  for  I  know  that  every  step  we  take  in  that  |     How  did  the  system  work?    Was  the  country 
direction  will  meet  with  lavor  from  the  people,    satisfied  with  its'  operations?    Did  the  governor 


I  know  that  the  people  are  capable  of  the  high 
destiny  that  awaits  them.  We  have  taken  our 
position,  nothing  shall  deter  us  from  it,  and  in 
the  language  of  one  of  Scott's  heroes, 

"Conie  one,  come  all, 

"  This  house  shall  fly 

"  From  its  firm  base, 

"  .\8  90on  as  I." 


in  making  nominations  seek  the  senators,  con- 
verse with  them,  and  obtain  their  advice  as  to 
the  best  man  to  be  appointed?  Xo  sir,  his  nom- 
inations were  determined  on  in  secret  cabinet,  and 
the  senate  only  asked  to  register  and  confirm  them. 
How  has  it  been  with  regard  to  such  nomina- 
tions?   Have  the  favorites  of  the  governor  been 


-2(0 


such  as  were  the  fevoriles  of  the  peopl«i?  Have 
they  been  selected  for  their  intelligence,  integri- 
ty and  capacity  for  the  station,  or  have  they  been 
selected  from  family  and  party  considerations, 
without  regard  to  their  qualifications  for  the  of- 
fice? We  know  that  family  and  party  (!onsider- 
ations  have  but  too  often  prevailed  without  re- 
gard to  qualifications,  and  that  great  dissatisfac- 
tion has  long  prevailed  in  the  country,  and  that 
the  people  are  no  longer  satisfied  to  have  the  ap- 
pointment of  their  oflicers  in  the  hands  of  the 
executive. 

How  has  it  operated  with  the  courts?  The 
judges  nominated  by  the  governor.  Have  such 
men  been  selected  as  were  best  qualified  for 
clerks  for  the  discharge  of  the  great  trusts  and 
important  duties  confided  to  that  class  of  offi- 
cers, or  have  they  been  the  mere  favorites  of  the 
judges  and  their  influeiitial  friends — perhaps  a 
relation — and  but  too  often  without  qualifica- 
tion for  the  office? 

I  leave  it  to  the  knowledge  of  those  acquainted 
with  how  the  appointments  have  been  made,  and 
the  manner  the  business  has  been  transacted,  to 
answer  the  question. 

How  have  the  county  courts  fulfilled  the 
trust  of  selecting  the  officers  confided  to  their 
appointment?  The  offices  have  not  been  bestow- 
ed on  those  best  qualified  to  discharge  the  du- 
ties. The  offices  have  been  conferred  upon  fam- 
ily connexions,  the  favorites  of  cliques  and 
mere  partizans.  The  interest  of  the  public  has 
not  been  consulted,  and  the  people  have  suff«r- 
ed  from  neglect  and  want  of  capacity  on  the 
part  of  those  officers.  It  is  to  provide  a  reme- 
dy for  these  evils,  to  make  a  reform  in  this  selec- 
tion of  all  their  officers,  more  than  for  any  other 
purpose,  that  this  cnovention  has  been  called; 
and  let  me  tell  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  it 
is  because  these  trusts  have  been  violated  by  the 
agents  to  cwhom  the  people  honfided  them  in  or- 
der to  have  the  offices  bestowed  on  those  best  qual- 
ified to  discharge  the  duties  more  than  any  other 
cause,  that  this  convention  is  now  assembled. 
It  is  not,  so  far  as  the  democracy  is  concerned, 
because  they  have  been  excluded  from  offices  of 
trust  and  profit  in  the  commonwealth  by  whig 
executives.  It  is  because  the  evils  have  been 
long  continued  and  festeruig  in  the  public 
mind,  until  the  people  have  resolved  that  a  rem- 
edy shall  be  found  and  a  remedy  applied. 

The  first  time  I  had  the  honor  of  a  seat  in  the 
house  of  representatives,  the  question  of  a  con- 
vention was  before  the  legislature,  and  the  ques- 
tion of  limiting  the  tenure  of  the  judicial  offices 
of  the  state  was  raised  by  me  as  a  reason  for 
calling  a  convention,  and  in  consequence  of  my 
advocating  the  limitation  I  was  denounced  as  a 
radical  and  looked  upon  with  dread  by  those 
■who  deemed  our  constitution  perfect.  I  have 
lived  to  see  the  day  when  a  limitation  to  the  ju- 
dicial terra  has  the  sanction  of  all. 

Having  called  the  attention  of  the  convention 
to  the  position  in  which  we  now  stand,  I  will 
submit  some  remarks  upon  the  subject  of  the  tri- 
bunal which  we  propose  to  select  the  judicial  of- 
ficers. It  is  well  to  be  acquainted  with  histo- 
^l^f  but  it  is  far  better  to  understand  the  lessons 
•  'vhich  history  teaches.  The  necessity  for  an  in- 
dependent judiciary  is  a  lesson  which  we  derive 
from  Bnglifth  bistOiry.    The  judiciary  of  Eng- 


land was  not  dewned  iudepeadent,  while  the  ap- 
pointment of  the  judges  and  their  continuance  iiL 
office  rested  with  the  monarch,  whilst  tlieir  of- 
fices and  salaries  depended  on  his  pleasure. 
They  were  not  and  could  net  be  indepsndent. 
It  is  deemed  essential  to  the  liberties  and  rights, 
of  the  people  to  take  from  the  grown  the  control 
of  the  judiciary.  His  prerogatives  and  his  in- 
terests sustained  and  enlarged  by  ajudieiary  sub- 
ject to  his  Avill,  acted  oppressively  upon  tike  peo- 
ple and  constituted  a  judicial  despotisoa,  and 
English  freeman  learnt  that  power  was  steal- 
ing from  the  many  to  the  few  by  means  of  the 
judicial  tribunals'  All  kings  that  ever  have  or 
will  exist,  have  or  will  seek  to  have,,  their  pow- 
ers enlarged  and  strengthened  by  o-pen  or  se- 
cret means,  and  one  of  the  greatest  sources  of 
poweris  judicial  construction,  and  ke  who  has  a 
suppliant  judiciary  at  his  control,  is  master  of 
the  liberties  and  rights  of  the  people.  The 
king  as  to  the  tenure  of  their  offict^,  and  subject 
to  English  made  the  judges  independent  of  the- 
reraoval  by  parliament.  This  T»as  done  that  the 
judges  should  stand  indifferent  between  th& 
king  and  the  people.  From  that  time  ve  find 
the  prerogatives  of  the  king  restrained  by  the- 
judicial  tribunals,  and  the  people  better  secured 
from  the  oppressions  of  the  crown,  and  justice 
and  right  more  sure  to  prevail.  In  this  country 
the  powers  of  government,  according  to.  our  re- 
publican theory,  reside  with  the  people.  From 
the  people  proceeds  all  the  powers  that  are  ex- ' 
ercised  in  the  various  departments  of  govern- 
ment. There  is  no  antagonist  interest  between 
the  government  and  the  people.  We  want  no- 
judiciary  independent  of  the  people.  We  want 
the  constitution  upheld,  and  the  liberty  and. 
rights  of  the  people  secured,  and  what  is  the  in- 
terest of  one  is  the  interest  of  all.  Whatever 
change  we  may  make  in  our  constitution — how- 
ever we  may  direct  the  judiciary  shall  be  ap- 
pointed and  how  removed,  I  hope  that  the  prin- 
ciples that  secure  the  rights  of  personal  liberty,, 
of  private  property,  and  the  pursuit  of  happi- 
ness, will  find  a  place  in  our  constitutionals 
law,  and  that  the  judges  shall  never  l>e  indpen- 
dent,  but  always  responsible  to  the  people.  A 
judiciary  responsible  to  people  in  this  country  ia 
essentially  different  froma  judiciary  in  England, 
and  other  monarchical  governraeuts,  where  the 
interest  of -the  king  and  the  people  is  separate 
and  distinct.  I  Avant  to  have  no  judiciary  in 
this  country  that  shall  be  independent  of  the 
people. 

The  arguments  in  favor  of  the  ability  or  capa- 
city of  the  people  to  select  their  own  executive 
autl  representatives  in  both  branches  of  the  legis- 
lature, apply  as  well  to  the  selection  of  judges. 
It  is  conceded  the  people  have  capacity  to  select 
their  governor  and  representatives — wliy  are 
they  not  equallv  capable  of  selecting  their  judg- 
es? The  president  of  the  IJhited  States,  not- 
withstanding the  machinery  of  the  electoral  col- 
leges, is  elected  substantially  by  the  people,  and 
the  candidates  for  electors,  in  practice,  are  only 
the  advocates  of  particular  candidates,  and  the 
organ  of  the  people  to  cast  their  votes  as  indi- 
cated at  tlic  polls.  In  our  state  our  chief  execu- 
tive magistrate  is  chosen  by  the  people  them- 
selves. Those  who  enact  our  laws — our  senators 
and  our  repre.sentatives,  are  alsochosenby  the  peo- 


«t 


pie.      ILcy  ;.r<r  :hc  ^.  r  people,  the 

first  execute  the  laws  ana  au  ci-Ui-i  lliose  laws. 
We  coafide  to  them  powers  as  importaist  aiid  as 
essential  as  those  we  cou£de  to  the  judges.  Why 
have  the  people  capacity  to  choose  one  set  of 
their  agents  and  not  the' other?  The  interests, 
powers,  and  duties  confided  to  the  president  of 
the  United  States  is  far  more  important  than  that 
confided  to  any  of  our  judicial  officers,  and  the 
many  able  and  distinguished  statesmen  who 
have  held  that  office  by  the  votes  of  the  people, 
aiford  satisfactory  evidence  that  there  can  be  no 
want  of  capacity  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  se- 
lect that  high  o&cer.  The  same  may  be  said  in 
relation  to  the  many  distinguished  men  who 
have  filled  the  oflBce'  of  governor  of  Kentucky, 
and  the  other  states,  by  the  votes  of  the  people. 
And  with  pride  we  may  refer  to  the  many  ais- 
tinguished  men  we  have  had  in  our  national  and 
state  legislatures;  and  the  prosperity  that  we 
have  enjoyed  as  a  people,  in  our  national  and 
stale  governments,  and  the  wisdom  and  justice 
of  our  laws.  Those  that  make  our  laws  and 
those  that  execute  them  are  chosen  by  the  peo- 
ple, and  why  should  not  those  who  administer 
the  laws  also  be  chosen  by  the  people?  They 
are  the  people's,  and  not  the  governor's  nor  the 
legislature's  judges.  If  it  is  contended  that  the 
people  are  not  competent  to  choose  their  judges, 
neimer  are  thev  competent  to  choose  the  execu- 
tive and  legisfative  agents  of  the  state  and  na- 
tion. 

Gentlemen  contend  that  the  present  mode, 
namely,  nomination  by  the  governor  and  confir- 
mation by  the  senate,  is  best  calculated  to  se- 
cure the  appointment  of  competent  and  able 
men.  The  governor  of  the  state  never  has,  and 
never  will  be,  more  than  a  man,  possessing  pas- 
sions and  frailties,  liable  to  be  influenced  by 
proper  and  improper  impulses.  He  may  be  de- 
ceived, or  have  unjust  prejudices  and  partiali- 
ties; and  how  much  more  liaWe  is  an  individual 
to  be  mistaken,  or  led  astray  by  improper  influ- 
ences, than  the  whole  body  of  the  people?  How 
much  more  likely  is  he  to  be  influenced  by  pri- 
vate interest,  partiality,  and  prejudice,  than  tnat 
the  whole  people  should  be  so  swayed?  Honesty 
of  purpose  and  integrity  of  action  are  always 
greater  with  the  masses  than  individuals,  and 

Particularly  with  individuals  armed  with  power, 
here  will  always  be  greater  security  in  having 
good  judges  when  the  selection  is  made  by  the 
whole  body  of  the  community,  than  when  it  is 
made  by  an  individual.  Do  gentlemen  mistrust 
the  people?  Do  they  believe  their  feelings  may 
be  wrought  upon  and  their  judgments  misled, 
and  that  they  will  be  influenced  to  do  what  they 
ought  not,  and  place  improper  and  incompetent 
persons  in  office?  Who  are  the  parties  to  suffer, 
should  such  be  the  case?  Will  it  not  be  the  peo- 
ple themselves?  Who  are  most  interested  in 
iia\'ing  good  judges?  Tlie  life,  the  liberty,  the 
property,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  of  each 
ana  of  all,  is  at  stake.  Xo  individual  can  have 
a  separate  interest  from  the  whole  mass.  The 
liberty  and  rights  of  one  cannot  be  trampled  up- 
on without  hazarding  the  liberty  and  the  rights 
of  all. 

It  is  true  that  the  education  of  the  masses  is 
not  so  far  advanced  as  we  might  desire.  Still, 
the  public  mind  is  sufficiently  enlightened  to  be 


I  a,ble  to  understand  and  comprehend  all  the  great 
interests  of  society  and  government.     There  i& 

I  no  people  on  earth  more  thoroughly  enlightened 
Oil  the  principles  and  sciences  of  free  govern- 
ment, nor  on  the  personal  and  private  rights  of 
the  citizens.  All,  or  nearly  all,  read  the  bible 
and  the  newspapers.  They  hear,  in  the  several 
courts,  coustiiutiousd,  criminal,  and  civil  law, 
discussed  by  able  and  ingenious  counsel,  and 
they  hear  the  impartial  decisions  of  the  courts. 
The  actions  of  men  and  their  rights  are  openly 
discussed  in  our  courts  and  before  our  jurors, 
and  all  brought  to  that  legal  and  correct  stand- 
ard of  right  and  wronw  which  constitutes  one 
of  the  distinguished  blessings  of  a  free  people. 
Our  tribunals  of  justice  and  trials  bv  jury  are 
high  schools  for  tne  dissemination  ot*^  legal  in- 
formation, and  the  true  principles  of  right  and 
wrong  among  the  people.  The  law  and  the  jus- 
tice of  every  case  of  great  importance  is  fully 
discussed  and  known  in  the  several  counties 
when  they  arise,  and  thousands  upon  thousands 
of  cases  are  ruled  amongst  an  enlightened  and 
just    people,    form  the   lessons  learned  in  our 

i  courts  and  thus  disseminated  amongst  the  peo- 
ple. 

Our  annual  elections  and  our  habit  of  public- 
ly discussing  all  great  and  important  questions  of 
government  and  public  policy,  and  the  conduct 
and  principles  of  our  public  men,  are  also  high 
sclaools  for  the  dissemination  of  political  infor- 
mation amongst  the  people,  and  for  a  critical 
and  searching  examination  of  the  principles  of 
government,  the  action  of  the  government,  the 
conduct  and  actions  of  public  men.  Our  ses- 
sions of  the  legislature  are  also  high  schools  for 
the  discu&sion  of  the  great  principles  and  poli- 
cy of  free  government,  and  are  calculated  to 
Eerfect  that  knowledge  that  is  acquired  from 
istory,  and  render  permanent  and  ip.sting  the 
principles  of  equal  laws  and  rights.  The  pur- 
suits of  agriculture,  commerce,  manufactures, 
and  mechanical  arts,  are  high  schools  for  acquir- 
ing information,  and  the  habit  of  judging  men 
and  things.  The  freedom  of  our  religion,  the 
instruction  of  the  ministers  of  the  gospel,  the 
Sunday  school,  the  cheering  consolation  brought 
to  the  domestic  circle  by  these  messengers  of 
peace,  the  sublime  lesson  of  morals  that  flows 
almost  daily  from  the  pulpit,  these,  with  the  in- 
fluence of  woman's  gentler  nature  in  the  domes- 
tic circle,  and  her  breathings  of  love,  and  right, 
and  justice  to  her  offepnng,  constitute  high 
schools  for  the  morals  of  tne  people. 

It  is  to  a  people  thus  enlightened  and  thus  in- 
structed, that  we  propose  to  entrust  the  selection 
of  judges  to  enforce  the  laws.  There  is  no  peo- 
ple on  earth  better  informed  as  to  the  rights,  the 
principles  of  their  government,  its  policy  and 
Its  action,  the  conduct  and  principles  of  itsJpub- 
lic  men.  They  are  both  thinkers  and  actors  in 
the  great  drama  of  life,  and  look  to  their  ener- 
gies and  exertions  for  comfort,  for  wealth,  and 
station  in  life,  with  a  full  knowledge  that  all  of- 
fices are  open  to  their  attainment,  their  ambi- 
tion, and  their  virtues.  Gentlemen  mistrust  this 
tribunal  of  the  people — they  mistrust  them- 
selves— they  have  no  confidence.  Now,  confi- 
dence may  "be  a  plant  of  slow  growth  in  old  men 
and  old  politicians,  and  with  the  party  to  which 
the  gentleman  belongs.    The  results  of  free  gov- 


1f^ 


ermtnt — a  puvenmienl  of  aiiJ  by  th«  people,  iu  I 
the  choice  of  their  agents  to  conduct  it,  has 
given  to  me  confidence  that  they  are  to  be  trust- 
ed, implicitly;  and  I  am  unwilling  longer  to 
pay  brokerage  to  the  executive  and  the  other 
trustees  of  the  present  constitution,  for  bestow- 
ing offices  in  the  shape  of  appointments  and 
places  for  relations,  of  tne  agents  and  their  influ- 
ential and  family  friends.  The  offices  are  cre- 
ated for  the  benefit  of  the  people,  and  if  any  fa- 
vors are  to  be  bestowed  in  the  grant  of  these  of- 
fices, it  is  the  people's  right  to  bestow  them,  and 
to  whom  they  please.  The  shades  of  suspi- 
cion that  gentlemen  cast  upon  the  action  of  the 
people,  in  the  selection  of  officers,  by  the  high- 
drawn  pictures  of  our  elections,  are  but  fancy 
sketches.  The  great  mass  are  intelligent,  hon- 
est, upright,  thinking  and  acting  men,  in  the  va- 
rious pursuits  of  life;  and  they  constitute  an 
overwhelming  majority  in  the  electoral  college. 
And  we  may  proudly  point  to  the  selections 
made  by  the  people,  through  a  long  series  of 
years,  in  disproof  of  the  conclusions  that  gen- 
tlemen draw  from  the  spots  they  see  on  the  sun. 
Thepeopleof  Kentucky  havedecreed  this  change 
and  I  have  confidence  in  the  decree,  and  I  wish 
to  carry  it  out  fully  and  fairly,  to  the  best  of  my 
judgment. 

I  desire  to  strengthen  the  judiciary  by  taking 
from  them  the  suspicion  that  they  owe  their 
stations  to  executive  favor,  or  to  the  influence  of 
great  men,  or  to  party  considerations.  I  desire 
to  give  them  the  authority  of  the  people  to  pre- 
side in  the  halls  of  justice,  and  administer  the 
laws  of  a  free  people.  With  the  warrant  of  the 
people,  and  sustained  by  their  suffrages,  they 
will  have  a  strength  and  popularity  that  they 
have  not  hitherto  possessed,  and  can  with  more 
confidence  and  animated  with  brighter  hopes 
preside  in  the  halls  of  justice. 

Gentlemen  fear  the  influence  of  great  lawyers 
and  subtle  litigants  will  secure  the  election  of 
judges  who  will  be  swayed  by  the  influence  that 
promoted  them.  The  bar  of  Kentucky  is  crowd- 
ed with  bold  and  fearless  lawyers,  and  no  judge 
who  is  dependent  on  the  public  will,  can  dare  to 
be  unjust  or  partial  in  his  conduct  on  the  bench, 
or  in  his  decisions.  His  conduct  and^  his  de- 
cisions are  public  property,  and  scrutinized 
with  boldness.  Injustice  or  partiality  will  be 
sure  to  bring  his  condemnation  before  the  tri- 
bunal of  public  opinion,  and  if  unjustly  or  il- 
liberally treated  by  the  bar  or  the  litigants,  that 
same  tribunal  of  public  opinion  will  be  sure  to 
be  his  guard  and  his  shield. 

There  is  a  charm  in  the  life  and  conduct  of  an 
intelligent,  learned,  and  upright  judge,  that  wins 
the  confidence  and  esteem  of  the  people,  and  is 
a  sure  guaranty  to  public  favor.  Such  a  judge 
will  live  down  the  excitements  of  the  moment, 
and  give  sanctity  to  the  laws,  and  confidence  in 
the  public  justice  of  the  country. 

It  is  proposed  to  amend  the  report  so  as  to 
make  tnese  judges  ineligible.  All  I  have  urged 
in  favor  of  the  election  of  the  judges  by  the  peo- 
ple, is  applicable  to  their  re-election  with  in- 
creased force.  The  judge  has  been  tried ;  he  has 
been  found  capable  ;  he  knows  the  laws  ;  he  is 
impartial  ;  his  integrity  is  without  impeach- 
ment ;  he  is  kind  and  urbane  in  his  deportment 
to  the  bar,  to  the  litigants,  jurors,  witnesses, 


and  peopl«  ;  he  admiuietera  the  laws  with  firm- 
ness, yet  with  mercy.  The  people  see  and  know 
all  this.  They  desire  to  retain  so  good  a  judge. 
Why  will  you  deprive  them  of  the  right?  You 
fear  they  have  not  capacity  to  know  a  good 
judge  ;  that  improper  influences  will  be  bi"ought 
to  bear  on  the  minds  and  judgments  of  the  peo- 
ple. You  cannot  conceive  that  the  people  can 
appreciate  the  high  qualities  which  constitute  a 
good  judge,  and  that  their  favor  is  only  to  be 
won  by  bad  men  and  sinister  practices.  With 
all  that  so  judge  the  people,  I  have  no  power  to 
reason,  I  can  offer  nothing  to  persuade — nothing 
to  convince.  I  believe  the  people  will  also 
know  a  bad  judge,  and  will  mark  all  the  quali- 
ities  to  constitute  one,  and  they  will  have  the 
intelligence  and  virtue  to  reject  such,  should 
they  come  before  them  for  re-election.  Bad  men 
are  not  the  recipients  of  the  favors  of  the  people. 
The  sample  of  our  public  men  prove  it.  The  re- 
jection of  all  such  by  the  people  prove  it  ;  and 
bad  judges  will  have  less  favor  with  the  people 
thanany  otherclassof  public  officers.  Should  the 
people  in  the  first  instance  select  a  bad  judg"-, 
or  in  the  second  trial  should  he  prove  such,  we 
shall  provide  for  removal  by  impeachment  or  ad- 
dress, so  that  any  mistake  in  this  matter  shall 
be  promptly  redressed. 

The  report  of  the  committee  provides  for  four 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  that  they 
shall  be  elected  in  four  separate  districts,  and 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  eight  years,  and  one 
is  to  be  elected  every  two  years.  It  is  proposed 
to  reduce  the  number  to  three,  and  that  the 
election  shall  be  by  general  ticket.  I  shall  vote 
to  retain  the  four  judges.  I  have  practiced  for 
many  years  in  the  court  appeals,  and  believe  the 
laborsare  too  great  for  three  judges.  There  has 
been  for  the  last  ten  years  an  average  of  more 
than  six  hundred  causes  in  the  court  of  appeals 
every  year,  and  some  of  them  immensely  com- 
plicated, involving  intricate  questions  of  law, 
and  involved  in  doubtful  facts.  To  understand 
and  decide  these  causes  as  they  should  be,  re- 
quires great  time,  great  labor,  and  an  extensive 
examination  of  authorities.  There  should  be 
ample  time  and  ability  to  decide  the  causes 
which  go  to  that  court,  and  1  am  satisfied  the 
labor  of  a  fourth  judge  is  required,  and  that  it  is 
due  to  the  litigants  of  the  state  that  we  should 
provide  a  supreme  court  all  sufficient  to  de- 
cide well  and  understandingly  all  causes  that 
shall  be  brought  to  that  tribunal. 

I  shall  also  vote  for  the  election  of  the  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals  by  districts  in  preference 
to  electing  them  by  the  state  at  large.  In  elect- 
ing these  judges  by  districts  we  shall  always 
have  three  judges  on  the  bench  who  have  not 
been  voted  for  by  the  litigants  whose  cases  are 
before  the  tribunal,  and  to  whom  the  objection 
which  is  made  to  the  election  of  judges,  that 
they  will  be  swayed  in  their  decisions  by  those 
who  voted  against  or  for  them,  will  not  apply. 
In  electing  them  by  districts  we  shall  have  the 
best  lawyer  of  the  district  selected  for  the  judge, 
and  one  who,  by  his  character  and  legal  attain- 
ments will  be  known  to  the  whole  district,  and 
which  would  not,  except  in  rare  instances,  be 
the  case  were  the  elections  by  general  ticket. 
We  should  also  have  each  section  of  the  state 
repr«»ent«>d  on  the  bench  of  that  court,  which 


271 


has  not  b«en  the  case  heretofore,  and  get  clear  of 
that  charge  of  partiality  in  the  aelection  of  the 
court  that  has  prevailed. 

Gentlemen  say  we  will  have  a  party  court,  and 
that  the  two  great  parties  will  array  themselves 
and  choose  their  candidates  from  their  respec- 
tive ranks.  Grant  it;  but  it  will  be  the  same  if 
we  elect  by  general  ticket.  If  we  elect  by  dis- 
tricts each  partv  will  present  their  ablest  and  best 
man,  and  whicliever  party  prevails  we  shall  have 
an  able  judge.  If  we  elect  by  general  ticket  it 
is  not  probable  the  whole  four  of  either  ticket 
will  be  equal  to  the  whole  four  selected  for  the 
district  tickets,  and  in  all  probability  we  shall 
not  have  as  many  able  men  on  the  bench,  nor 
have  them  so  well  distributed,  and  many  of  the 
citizens  will  have  to  vote  for  men  who  they  do 
not  personally  kjiow. 

We  have  a  party  court  now,  and  the  court  will 
not  be  more  a  partv  court  if  we  elect  by  districts 
than  it  is  selected  by  the  governor  and  senate,  or 
that  it  would  be  if  selected  by  general  ticket.  It 
might  be  less  so.  The  governor  always  puts  in 
his  party  in  office.  He  cannot  and  does  not  rise 
above  party  influences;  but  the  people  are  more 
liberal  and  rise  above  party  prejudices,  and  select 
men  for  public  office  in  gratitude  for  past  public 
services,  and  on  account  of  high  character  and  ca- 
pacity for  the  station.  In  the  office  of  judge  the 
people  do  not  want  apartizan.  They  want  a  man 
of  character  and  high  legal  attainments,  and  a 
just,  true  and  impartial  man.  Such  a  man  thev 
will  elect  and  break  down  all  party  rules.  Such 
men  they  have  elected  to  political  stations  in  de- 
fiance of  party  trammels,  and  they  are  far  more 
likely  to  elect  such  to  the  office  of  judge. 

To  the  people  we  desire  to  restore  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  judges,  and  to  the  people  in  districts 
who  will  personally  know  the  men  they  are  call- 
ed on  to  vote  for.  We  have  looked  too  miich  to 
Farty  and  too  little  to  qualification.  The  people, 
verily  believe,  will  look  more  to  qualifications, 
and  less  to  party  in  the  selection  of  judges. 

We  propose  to  make  the  sessions  of  our  legisla- 
ture biennial,  and  have  our  representatives  elect- 
ed once  in  every  two  years,  and  to  elect  our  judg- 
es in  those  years  that  we  do  not  elect  our  repre- 
sentatives, and  to  have  the  election  in  one  aay, 
and  in  convenient  election  precincts.  The  minds 
of  the  people  will  be  called  to  the  qualifications 
of  the  judge,  to  the  requisites  proper  for  that  of- 
fice and  to  nothing  else;  and  if  the  candidate 
mingles  with  and  addresses  the  people,  he  must 
sustain  the  character  suitable  to  the  dignity  of 
the  judge.  He  must  manifest  intelligence  and 
capacity  suitable  for  the  station.  His  reputation 
and  character  must  be  pure  and  without  stain. 
As  to  a  party  court  we  cannot  be  worsted,  and 
we  may  be  bettered. 

I  do  not  consider  the  plan  of  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon  calculated  to  give  us  as  able  men 
on  the  bench.  I  dislike  his  electors  to  come  be- 
tween the  people  in  the  choice  of  the  judge. 
The  presidential  electors  are  only  advocates  of 
the  candidate  of  the  party,  and  bound  in  honor 
to  give  force  to  the  party  nomination.  His 
electors  for  judges  will  in  some  measure  lose 
their  character  of  representatives,  and  become 
the  advocates  of  particular  men  for  office,  or 
they  would  come  in  upon  mixed  considera- 
tions. 


I  do  not  think  the  judge*  of  the  circuit  «ourt 
best  calculated  to  make  appellate  judges.  They 
are  prompt  men  in  general  with  their  legal 
knowledge;  but  they  are  in  the  habit  of  deci- 
ding on  the  spur  of  the  occasion,  without  the 
examination  of  authorities,  and  without  proper 
reflection  upon  the  bearings  of  the  facts,  and  of 
the  opinions  they  give.  This  off-hand  and  has- 
ty mode  of  decision  thev  carry  on  the  appellate 
bench,  and  habits  of  tliis  nature  it  is  difficult 
to  get  rid  of. 

I  unJerstand  it  is  proposed  to  amend  the  re- 
port so  as  to  fix  a  minimum  for  the  salaries  of 
judges;  to  that  course  I  stronglv  incline.  I  be- 
lieve the  people  are  more  liberal  in  fixing  sala- 
ries than  their  representatives,  and  I  believe  if 
we  give  good  salaries  the  people  will  take  this 
constitution  because  thev  are  to  fill  the  offices, 
and  that  they  will  fill  tlie  offices  with  men  ac- 
cording to  the  salaries.  If  you  give  salaries  ad- 
equate  to  command  the  best  talents  and  legal 
attainments,  that  the  people  will  not  put  infe- 
rior men  in  the  office:  but  if  the  salaries  are  not 
sufficient  to  command  the  services  of  her  best 
men,  that  the  best  men  will  not  be  .selected;  and 
I  believe  the  success  of  our  constitution  depends 
upon  the  character  and  ability  of  the  men  selec- 
ted to  carry  out  its  principles. 

It  is  also  proposed  to  amend  the  report  so  that 
the  judges  shall  be  elected  by  ballot,  and  I  am 
decidedly  in  favor  of  the  ballot  in  the  selection 
of  judges.  In  our  first  constitution  we  adopted 
the  ballot,  and  in  our  second  we  adopted  the 
viva  voce  svstem.  Most  of  the  states  vote  by 
ballot,  and  if  examples  in  our  sister  states  is  en- 
titled to  consideration  we  have  it  in  favor  of 
the  ballot. 

The  objection  made  to  the  election  of  judges 
is,  that  the  knowledge  of  the  judge  of  those  who 
voted  for  or  against  him,  would  influence  his 
action  on  the  bench.  I  have  no  fear  of  that. 
The  character,  learning,  and  intelligence  of  the 
men  qualified  for  a  judge  with  the  eyes  of  the 
people  upon  him,  would  place  him  above  such 
influences;  but  the  suspicion  might  rest  on  the 
minds  of  the  litigants,  and  that  I  would  provide 
against  by  the  ballot.  Gentlemen  declare  that 
voting  openly  and  in  the  face  of  the  world, 
makes  our  people  more  manly  and  more  inde- 
pendent. I  do  not  think  so.  It  may  give  the 
habit  of  violating  the  opinions  and  sentiments 
for  favors  expected  or  for  fear  of  consequences 
from  those  in  whose  employ  or  power  they  mav 
chance  to  be.  I  have  heard  men  say  that  they 
felt  they  had  a  right  to  control  the  voltes  of  those 
that  were  indebted  to  them  and  of  those  in  their 
employ,  and  again  of  those  w-ith  whom  they 
dealt,  and  have  known  men  sued  forthwith  for 
not  giving  such  votes,  and  dismissed  from  em- 
ployment for  the  same  cause,  and  politics  made 
the  open  cause  for  ceasing  to  be  a  customer. 

We  have  a  lesson  to  learn  in  our  march  to 
perfect  freedom,  and  in  the  exercise  of  the  rights 
of  freemen.  We  must  learn  to  tolerate  each  oth- 
er in  our  political  sentiments,  and  what  we  claim 
for  ourselves,  in  judging  of  men  and  principles, 
we  must  learn  to  grant,  without  interference,  to 
all  others,  or  we  are  not  good  whigs  or  good 
democrats.  We  still  have  a  remnant  of  the  ty- 
rant in  our  naturej  which  it  is  our  dutv,  as  the 
free  men  of  a  free  government,  to  eradfcate  and 


^m 


<le3troy.  I  would  give  the  ballot  an  one  great 
step  towards  this  toleration.  I  desire  every  man 
to  understand  the  principles  of  his  government, 
and  to  take  an  interest  in  its  action  and  in  its 
public  men,  and  when  election  dav  comes  to  feel 
every  inch  a  sovereign,  and  be  able  to  cast  his 
vote  without  fear  of  consequences.  I  call  for 
the  election  of  judges,  and  I  call  for  the  ballot. 

I  thank  the  committee  for  their  patient  and  at- 
tentive hearing. 


KVENINO   SKSSIOX. 

The  Convention  re-assembled  at  3  o'clock,  P. 
M.,  and  again  resolved  itself  into  committee  of 
the  whole.  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the  chair,  on  the 
article  in  relation  to  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  I  should  be  very  willing  if  I 
could  to  add  to  the  correctness  of  the  conclu- 
sions of  the  convention  or  hasten  the  progress  of 
the  business  thereby,  to  be  merely  content  with 
recording  my  vote.  But  as  I  shall  not  interfere 
with  either  of  these  objects  by  making  a  few  re- 
marks, to  add  my  mite  to  the  correctness  of  the 
conclusions  to  which  the  standing  committee 
have  arrived,  and  to  express  my  indebtedness 
and  gratitude  to  them  that  they  did  report  such 
a  bill  as  they  have.  Not  agreeing  perhaps  in  all 
its  details,  yet  the  great  principles  asserted  in 
that  report,  I  do  freely  endorse.  So  far  as  the 
business  of  this  convention  is  eoncenied,  I  have 
adopted  for  myself  the  rule  that  I  will  struggle 
for  unity  on  all  matters  of  principle,  essential- 
ly ,important,  to  ask  for  liberality  on  all  sub- 
jects not  important  and  not  essential;  and  I  am 
sure  of  the  ready  response  of  every  delegate 
when  I  ask  for  charity  in  all  things.  Politicians 
have  a  habit  when  they  commence  their  career, 
or  are  about  to  act  in  reference  to  a  great  princi- 
ple, of  defining  their  position ;  and  in  a  very 
tew  words,  sir,  I  wish  to  define  mine  before 
this  committee. 

I  do  not  mean  to  sav  much  in  regard  to  abuses 
in  our  government.  That  there  have  been  abuses 
seen  by  all,  there  can  be  no  question.  There 
have  been  many  abuses  which  serve  as  a  finger 
board  to  point  out  their  origin,  and  the  danger 
which  exists  that  may  grow  into  graver  and 
more  serious  ones  ;  and  it  is  a  matter  of  sur- 
prise to  me  that  in  the  history  of  our  government, 
under  our  present  organization,  they  have  not 
been  greater.  Had  our  otlicial  functionaries  act- 
ed up  to  the  limits  of  their  power  under  that  or- 
Sanization,  and  without  regard  to  the  spirit  of 
le  aM  or  of  the  people,  then  our  evils  would 
have  been  great  indeea,  and  long  since  by  revo- 
lution or  otherwise  would  have  been  obviated. 
But  we  are  indebted  to  the  oiScers  of  the  com- 
monwealth, from  the  foundation  of  our  govern- 
ment tothepresenttime,forhavingdone  as  well  as 
they  have;  and  there  is  not  a  solitary  officer  in 
the  state,  against  whom  I  have  had,  so  far  as  I 
have  engaged  in  the  political  reforms  of  the  day, 
a  private  pique  or  malignant  feeling — having 
met  at  the  hands  of  all  the  best  treatment  in  the 
social  and  official  relations,  and  in  the  discharge 
of  my  duty  before  them.  I  have  received  from 
their  liands  no  particular  favor,  neither  have  I 
sought  for  any,  therefore  I  am  not  disappointed. 
Hence,  no  such  influences  operate  on  my  mind. 
But  some   abuses  have  sprung  up — and  those 


abuses  directed  my  mind  to  the  source  from 
which  they  sprung — the  tenure  by  which  they 
held  their  offices,  and  I  then  thought  we  had 
better  provide  against  them,  lest  in  an  unfavora- 
ble hour  these  abuses  might  grow  up  to  the  ex- 
tent to  which  we  have  conferred  authority  on 
our  officers  to  increase  them.  It  sometimes  hap- 
pens that  the  people  in  a  small  district  will  de- 
sire some  functionary,  who  has  charge  of  some 
especial  duties,  to  discharge  them  in  a  particular 
way.  Most  generally  tliey  do  it,  but  sometimes 
they  fail,  and  this  directs  me  to  the  authority 
and  source  of  such  an  abuse.  In  a  district  near 
where  I  live,  there  was  a  vacancy  in  the  office  of 
justice  of  the  peace,  and  the  people  in  that  dis- 
trict got  together  and  elected  one.  They  did  it 
with  as  much  form  and  ceremony  and  as  well, 
as  if  they  had  been  authorized  to  do  so  under  the 
laws.  But  the  tribunal  to  which  an  appeal  was 
made  (the  county  court.)  felt  it  to  be  an  insult  to 
their  dignity  that  the  jseople  should  have  dared 
to  do  it,  and  would  not  appoint  the  man  of  the 
people's  choice.  This  induced  me  to  look  at 
the  authority  under  which  the  court  acted,  and 
whence  they  derived  it.  The  people  in  the  au- 
thority, and  the  organic  law  as  it  now  exists,  au- 
thorized them  to  act  as  they  thus  saw  proper  to 
act.  Another  view  led  me  to  conclude  that  some 
reform  ought  to  be  made  in  the  organic  law. 
The  greater  number  of  offices  seemed,  to  a  great 
extent  at  least,  from  accident  of  course,  to  fall 
into  the  hands  of  particular  individuals,  who 
did  not,  as  my  friend  from  Mason  most  eloquent- 
ly described,  depend  on  their  personal  merit  for 
the  positions  to  which  they  were  elevated.  They 
were  not  offices  attainable  by  those  in  the  hum- 
bler and  less  wealthy  walks  of  life.  The  level- 
ing up  principle,  referred  to  by  my  friend,  there- 
fore struck  my  mind  with  great  force.  That 
great  moral  prim.'iple  in  reform  for  which  I  con- 
tend, struck  more  forcibly  than  any  of  the  small 
or  great  charges  made  against  the  officei's  them- 
selves. I  may  subject  myself  to  the  charge  of 
being  a  demagogue,  but  I  express  my  own  senti- 
ments. The  great  moral  principle  which  makes 
the  people  feel  that  this  is  their  government, 
that  they  bear  it  on  their  shoulders,  elevates  them 
in  the  scale  of  being,  and  makes  them  each 
feel  that  they  may  each  attain  the  highest  des- 
tiny. 

This  great  moral  principle  was  one  of  the 
grounds  upon  which  I  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  reform  in  our  organic  law  was  necessary. 
It  was  to  secure  equal  rights  and  equal  privileges, 
to  hold  out  an  inducement  to  the  children  of  the 
poor  and  humble  as  Avell  as  the  rich  and  power- 
ful, that  if  they  qualify  themselves  they  may 
stand  a  chance  to  fill  the'best  offices  in  the  coun- 
try. We  have  the  power  to  do  this  now,  and  I 
am  greatly  gratified  that  since  I  formd  this  opin- 
ion,! have  had  no  occasion  to  doubt  its  cor- 
rectness, except  for  a  short  time  last  suminer 
when  an  excitement  sprung  up  on  one  question. 
I  was  a  little  alarmed,  and"!  was  afraid  tliis  con- 
vention would  not  come  here  prepared  to  work 
out  all  those  reforms  which  I  honestly  thought 
they  should.  All  that  fear  has  been  wiped 
away.  I  find  the  people  comnetetit  to  tlie  task, 
even  when  excited  from  one  Dorder  of  the  state 
to  the  other,  and  I  bear  testimony  to  the  fact, 
they  have  sent  individuals  here  well  qualified 


«1« 


to  the  discharge  of  these  duties.  Theu  t]ie  ereat ;  the  question  I  aak.  Tiieu  if  there  is  any  depen- 
consideratioii  is,  what  are  these  duties?  They  '  dence  at  all,  I  want  it  to  be  on  the  people.  I  see 
have  sent  us  here  with  authority  to  yield  some  !  a  difference  between  dependence  on  the  people 
of  their  sovereign  power.  It  is'a  very  high  re-  and  dependence  upon  a  party,  ortliose  in  power, 
spbnsibility  which  rests  upon  us,  and  for  my-  ;  I  am  not  for  that.  Who  is  the  judge  to  aepend 
self,  I  will  yield  up  no  power  into  the  hands  of  upon?  He  is  to  look  somewhere  for  his  bread, 
any  department  of  the  government,  except  so  and  that  is  to  come  from  the  people.  He  is  to 
far  as  is  consistent  with  the  necessary  restraint  look  somewhere  for  approbation,  and  that  is  to 
and  protection  of  the  people  and  their  rights,    come  from  the  people. 

The  great  question  then  comes  up,  what  shall  we  There  are  always  two  sides  to  a  picture — a 
yield?  Some  sav  that  we  must  yield  the  election  :  bright  and  a  dark  side.  The  constitution  of 
of  officers,  and  some  regard  the  people  as  not  some  minds  leads  them  always  to  look  to  the 
qualified  to  discharge  that  duty.  It  is  true  that  dark  side  of  things,  whilst  others  regard  the 
all  power  is  inherent  in  the  people — there  is  no  ;  bright  side.  Xow  I  believe  that  the  yeomanry- 
controversy  about  that.  But  the  question  is,  ',  of  Kentucky,  the  great  body  of  them,  are  prac- 
how  much'  of  that  power  shall  we  yield  and  give  '  tical  and  sensible  men,  and  that  when  they  go 
up  to  the  different  departments  of  government?    into   an  election  it  is  with  a  sense  of  the  great 


It  is  regarded  that  the  science  of  government 
has  not  progressed  further  than  the  organization 
of  three  distinct  departments.  But  how  much 
power  will  you  yield  up?  Just  that  which  is 
inconvenient  to  tlie  people  to  exercise  themselves 


responsibility  that  rests  upon  them,  and  that 
they  would  vote  with  an  eye  single  to  the  pros- 
perity and  the  happiness  of  the  country. 

I  know  that  there  is  a  dark  side  of  the  picture, 
and  that  there  are  those  of  the  people  who  are 


-just  that  and  no  more  will  I  consent  to  yield  j  ignorant  and  liable  to  be  misled.  Let  them  feel 
up;  nor  are  we  authorized  to  yield  up  any  more.  I  the  responsibility  which  rests  upon  them,  and 
Just  so  far  as  the  people  can  conveniently  attend  I  that  the  government  is  not  safe  unless  they  turn 
to  the  great  duties  of  the  government,  let  them  i  their  attention  to  it.  It  has  been  said  that  im- 
so  attend,  and  thereby  feel  the  elevating  influence  ]  proper  influences  will  be  brought  to  bear  upon 
of  thus  discharging  that  duty.  But  it  is  said  '  the  people  in  the  election  of  a  judge,  and  the 
that  the  election  of  judges  is  a  thing  the  people  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  in  his  glowing 
have  not  talked  over  or  thought  of.  Elect  a  description  of  the  evils  to  result  therefrom, 
judge — the  man  whom  we  are  in  the  habit  of  among  others  suggested  that  some  powerful  and 
looking  upon  as  superior,  and  as  hardly  forming  i  influential  lawyer  would  induce  the  people  to 
a  part  of  human  nature.  Elect  a  judge?  Yes  \  elect  a  judge  who  ought  not  to  be  elected.  I 
sir.  But  there  are  various  collateral  questions  i  am  aware  that  these  high  wrought  figures  of  my 
growing  out  of  this  main  question.  It  seems  to  '  friend  from  Bourbon  have  been  well  studied,  but 
strike  the  minds  of  some  of  the  delegates,  and  |  still  I  desire  to  explain  in  my  own  way  the  in- 
some  others  with  great  alarm  that  this  power  j  fluence  of  a  lawyer.  I  know  the  lawyers  have 
will  be  exercised  by  the  mob.  And  some  gen- 1  not  a  higher  reputation  for  honesty  than  they 
tlemen  say  we  want  a  court  independent  of  the  ought  to  have,  and  yet  I  believe  they  are  an  hon- 
people,  and  some  that  they  are  not  willing  to  est  and  honorable  profession  generally.  But 
trust  the  people.  Jfay  says  the  gentleman  from  I  even  put  it  upon  the  principle  that  in  the  elec- 
Bourbon,  "lam  not' willing  to  trust  myself !"  i  tions  the  lawyers  will  be  governed  in  their  ac- 
If  he  has  that  distrust  of  himself,  which  should  '  tion  by  sordid,    self-interested  motives,   what 

Eertain  to  men  who  are  called  upon  to  discharge  j  then  will  be  the  result?  If  I  understand  the 
igh  duties,  in  view  of  the  responsibilities  which  t  workings  of  the  human  heart,  it  wiU  be  the  de- 
press upon  them,  it  is  right  and  proper;  but  |  sire  of  every  lawyer  to  get  out  of  practice  the 
if  he  means,  in  the  abstract,  that  the  court  would  i  ablest  members  of  the  bar,  as  it  would  leave 
not  be  independent  because  it  was  elected  by  [  more  business  for  the  balance.  Then,  even  if 
the  people,  or  that  the  court  must  in  the  abstract  |  they  are  influenced  solely  by  selfish  motives,  it 
be  independent  of  the  people,  and  the  people  |  will  be  their  object  to  get  upon  the  bench  the 
ought  not  to  be  trusted  with  the  discharge  of :  ablest  of  their  number.  So  there  is  no  danger 
that  duty — then  I  must  differ  with  the  gentle-  j  of  any  improper  influence  upon  the  people  from 
man.     The  question  of  the  independence  of  the  |  that  source. 

judiciary  and  its  origin  has  been  fully  argued  Again:  it  is  said  that  the  judge  would  be  in- 
and  settled  in  this  committee.  It  was  indepen- 1  fluenced  to  give  improper  and  illegal  decisions 
dence  of  the  king.  What  is  the  meaning  of  de- 1  in  favor  of  the  lawyer  who  aided  him  in  his 
pendenee  upon  the  king?  If  it  means  anything  |  election.  Is  that  the  character  of  Kentuckians? 
It  is  that  the  judges  in  the  discharge  of  the  high  j  Would  such  individuals  be  made  judges?  If 
duties  of  their  oflSce  regarded  the  will  and  wish-  an  individual  has  aided  us  in  an  election  to  of- 
es  of  the  king  more  than  the  protection  and  safe- !  fice.  and  then  seeks  to  induce  us  to  prostitute 
ty  of  the  liberties  and  lives  of  the  people  whose  ;  that  office  to  his  advantage,  and  to  the  violation 
rights  they  adjudicated  upon ;  that  they  were  I  of  our  oaths,  it  annuls  at  once  all  obligation  to 
looking  to,  and  were  guided  by  the  wishes  of,  him,  under  which  we  might  be  placed.  And  so 
the  king.  far  from  exerting  any  influence  over  the  func- 

How  does  the  principle  apply  in  the  election  i  tionary,  the  man  would  not  be  further  trusted 
of  judges  by  the  people?  Is  it  really  a  subject  j  himself.  We  are  sent  here  as  delegates  to  this 
of  alarm,  that  the  judges  should  regard  the  peo- 1  convention,  and  we  strike  for  high  principles, 
pie  to  such  an  extent,  as  in  the  discharge  of ;  and  we  say  that  we  would  sink  into  oblivion 
their  duties  to  be  willing  to  protect  their  liber- 1  rather  than  abandon  a  principle,  and  that  if  un- 
ties, and  to  guard  against  innovations  upon  their  |  aided,  and  in  a  minonty  of  one,  we  shall  still 
rights,  except  in  accordance  with  law?  That  is  '  battle  for  that  principle.  Is  it  not  then  assuming 
35 


^4 


too  much  to  say  that  the  people  will  not  elect 
equally  as  honest  and  independent  men  to  other 
high  stations,  equally  as  important  as  the  office 
ve  fill?  The  living  examples  given  by  all  tlie 
members  of  this  convention  is  a  proof  to  my 
mind  that  the  people  Avill  not  fill  these  offices 
under  such  influences  as  have  been  indicated  by 
gentlemen  on  the  other  side. 

We  have  heard  a  great  deal  said  about  renters 
and  anti-renters,  in  New  York,  and  about  party 
nominations;  and  to  my  judgment,  gentlemen 
are  using  arguments  derived  from  that  source 
■which  operates  against  any  and  every  mode  of  ap- 
pointment ever  suggested  to  ray  mind.  We  are 
all  aware  that  these  things  will  have  their  effect, 
but  the  question  is  how  shall  we  remove  the  of- 
ficer farthest  from  such  influences?  By  keeping 
the  appointing  power  where  it  is?  All  will 
answer  in  the  negative — that  will  not  do. 
Then  it  is  the  people  who  will  best  discharge 
that  duty,  and  yet  I  am  aware  that  generally 
speaking,  the  people  are  more  or  less  governed 
by  considerations  of  that  sort.  Be  it  so.  We 
have  not  arrived  at  that  point  when  we  can  ex- 

Eect  always  to  have  done  that  which  belongs  to  a 
Tighter  and  purer  clime  above  us.  The  spirit 
may  occasionally  make  itself  visible  in  our  dark 
ana  benighted  land,  but  only  so  rarely  as  to  in- 
duce us  to  hope  for  its  more  frequent  return.  It 
is  never  sufficiently  evident  to  arrive  at  perfec- 
tion in  any  of  these  tribunals.  Then  the  ques- 
tion is  not  which  is  the  perfect  mode,  but  com- 
paratively speaking,  Avhich  is  the  best  mode?  I 
contend  that  from  my  observation,  the  best 
mode  is  the  election  by  the  people.  The  change 
would  not  be  so  radical  as  some  think;  although 
it  is  in  language  and  words,  yet  in  practice  it  is 
not  so  radical,  and  just  so  far  as  the  change  goes 
in  practice,  just  so  far  is  it  useful  and  beneficial 
and  better  than  the  other  mode.  Say,  for  in- 
stance, that  a  certain  officer  is  desired  in  a  par- 
ticular portion  of  the  state,  and  by  a  particular 
district;  and  that  every  man  in  that  district  en- 
titled to  vote,  petitions  to  the  appointing  power, 
that  he  shall  be  appointed.  Generally  speaking 
he  would  be;  but  suppose  the  appointing  power 
in  this  instancoj  should  refuse  to  listen  to  the 
■wishes  of  the  people.  What  would  be  the  re- 
sult? A  conviction  is  produced  at  once  among 
the  people  that  the  appointing  power  has  done 
■wrong,  and  that  would  be  the  conclusion 
throughout  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 
We  are  in  an  imperfect  state,  and  there  is  no 
question  but  the  people  themselves  would  do 
wrong  sometimes,  but  a  wrong  is  supportable, 
when  we  bring  it  upon  ourselves;  and  when  we 
may  live  to  retrieve  ourselves  from  the  conse- 
quences of  our  own  action,  then  it  is  to  some 
extent  bearable.  Not  so  when  it  is  brought 
upon  us  by  others,  contrary  to  our  own  wi.shcs 
and  will. 

And  upon  the  election  of  the  judges  there 
is  a  difference  from  what  frequently  happens 
in  political  agitations.  It  is  sometimes  the 
case  that  politicians  bring  about  a  particular  re- 
sult, by  urging  and  pressing  certain  matters,  be- 
fore the  people  have  advanced  to  their  conside- 
ration; but  in  the  present  instance  the  people 
chose  tx)  think  in  the  first  place,  and  the  politi- 
cians have  been  obliged  to  follow,  and  as  some 
have  said  with  no  little  alarm  and  trepidation — 


especially  among  those  filling  the  offices — has 
been  created.  Bui  the  people  have  said  that 
they  desire  this  power  to  elect  their  own  officers, 
in  their  own  hands.  I  desire  just  here,  to  read 
some  little  authority  on  the  subject,  and  in  re- 
gard to  the  origin  of  the  difference  between  the 
two  great  parties  in  the  United  States.  I  read 
from  the  writings  of  an  individual  Avho  Avas  at 
least  forty  or  fifty  years  ahead  of  the  times  in 
which  he  lived,  and  a  more  direct  answer  to 
many  of  the  appeals  made  by  gentlemen  on  this 
floor  could  not  probably  be  framed.  In  speak- 
ing of  the  two  parties  Mr.  Jefferson  savs: 

"  One  fears  most  the  ignorance  of  tlie  people, 
'the  other  the  selfishness  of  rulers,  independent 
'of  them — one  side  has  been  fairly  tried,  the 
'  other  not." 

'•  I  drafted  a  constitution  annexed  to  the  notes 
on  Virginia,  the  infancy  of  the  subject  at  that 
moment,  and  our  inexperience  of  self-govern- 
ment, occasioned  gross  departures  from  genuine 
republican  canons.  In  truth  the  abuses  of 
monarchy  had  so  filled  all  the  space  of  politi- 
cal contemplation,  that  we  imagined  everything 
republican  Avhich  was  not  monarchy  ;  we  had 
not  yet  penetrated  to  the  mother  principle,  that 
governments  are  republican  only  m  proportion 
as  they  embody  the  will  of  their  people,  and 
execute  it." 

"In  England,  where  judges  were  named  and 
removable  at  the  will  of  an  hereditary  execu- 
tive, from  which  brandi  most  misrule  was 
feared  and  has  flowed,  it  was  a  great  point  gain- 
ed, by  fixing  them  for  life,  to  make  them  inde- 
pendent of  that  executive.  But  in  a  govern- 
ment founded  on  the  public  Avill,  this  principle 
operates  in  an  opposite  direction,  and  against 
that  will,  we  have  made  them  independent  of 
the  nation  itself. 

"  The  justices  of  the  inferior  courts,  are  self- 
chosen,  are  for  life,  and  perpetuate  their  own 
body  in  succession  forever.  They  tax  us  at 
will,  fill  the  office  of  sheriff,  the  most  important 
of  all  the  executive  offices  of  the  county." 

"Some  men  look  at  constitutions  ■with  sancti- 
'monious  reverence,  and  deem  them,  like  the  ark 
'of  the  covenant,toosaered  to  be  touched.  They 
'  ascribe  to  the  men  of  the  preceeding  age  a  wis- 
'  dom  more  than  human,  and  suppose  Avhat  they 
'  did,  to  be  beyond  amendment.  I  know  that 
'  age  well.  I  belonged  to  it,  and  labored  Avith  it. 
'  It  deserved  well  of  its  country.  It  was  very 
'  like  the  present,  but  without  the  experience  of 
'the  present;  .and  forty  years  experience  in  gov-  M 
'  eminent  is  worth  a  century  of  book  reading,  ^ 
'and  this  they  would  say  themseh'cs,  were  they 
'to  rise  from  the  dead.  Laws  and  institutions 
•must  go  hand  in  hand  with  the  progress  of  the 
'human  mind." 

"  Let  the  future  appointment  of  judges  be  for 
'  four  or  six  years.  This  will  bring  their  con- 
'duct,  at  regular  periods,  under  revision  and  pro- 
'bation.  We  have  erred  on  this  point,  by  copy- 
'  ing  England,  where  certainly  it  is  a  good  thing 
'tohave  judges  independent  of  the  kin^.  That 
'there should  he  public  functionaries  indepen- 
'dentof  the  nation,  is  a  solecism  in  a  republic, 
'  of  the  first  order  of  absurdity." 


273 


That  is  the  theory  of  Jefferson.  I  am  aware 
that  it  is  not  very  good  aiitliority  with  some,  but 
I  believe  him  to  have  been  one  of  the  purest  and 
ablest  politicians  that  ever  lived.  On  this  same 
subject  I  am  favored  Avith  a  beautiful  extract 
furnished  by  the  research  of  a  lady: 

"  There  is  only  one  cure  for  the  evils  which 
'newlv  acquired  freedom  produces — and  that 
'aureus freedom!  When  a  prisoner  leaves  his 
'cell,  he  cannot  bear  the  light  of  day ;  he  is  una- 
'ble  to  discriminate  colors,  or  recognize  faces. 
'  But  the  remedy  is  not  to  remand  him  into  his 
'  dungeon,  but  to  accustom  him  to  the  rays  of  the 
'  sun.  The  blaze  of  truth  and  liberty  may  at 
'  first  dazzle  and  bewilder  nations  which  have  be- 
'  come  half  blind  in  the  house  of  bondage.  But 
'  let  them  gaze  on.  and  tliey  will  soon  be  able  to 
■  bear  it.  In  a  few  years  men  learn  to  reason. 
'  The  extreme  violence  of  opinion  subsides.  Hos- 
'tile  theories  correct  each  other.  The  scattered 
'  elements  of  truth  cease  to  conflict  and  begin  to 
'  coalesce.  And  at  length  a  system  of  justice 
'  and  order  is  educed  out  of  the  chaos. 

"Many  politicians  of  our  time  are  in  the  habit 
'of  laying  it  down  as  a  self-evident  proposition, 
'that  the  people  ought  not  to  be  free  till  they  are  fit 
*  to  use  their  freedom.  The  maxim  is  worthy  of 
'the  fool  in  the  old  story,  who  resolved  not  to  go 
'  into  the  water  till  he  had  learnt  to  swim !  If 
'  men  are  to  wait  for  liberty  till  they  become  wise 
'  and  good  in  slavery,  they  may  indeed  wait  for- 
'  ever."  I 

Gentlemen  have  said  that  we  are  without  ex- 

Cerience  on  this  subject;  that  the  people  should  ' 
e  enlightened,  and  that  they  are  not  now  quali-  i 
fied  to  elect  their  judges.      And  how  are  tliey  to 
be?    Do  gentlemen  expect  that  upon   the  mere  j 
talkiu"^  of   a  convention  the  people   will   put  ■ 
themselves  at  great  pains  to  qualify   themselves  ^ 
to  do  that  in  which  they  have  had  no  interest. 
They  are  however  a  plain  sensible  people,  and  as 
politicians    they  are  equal  to  any  emergency. 
Then  throw  the  responsibility  upon   them,  and 
let  them  feel  that  that  responsibility  is   resting  | 
upon  them,  and  what  will  be  the  result?      If 

Eoliticians  are  correct  they  will  discharge  these  I 
igh  duties,  and  well  discharge  them.  Thus  I 
much  upon  the  general  subject  of  electing  the 
judges.  j 

I  have  said  that  I  am  in  the  habit  of  looking 
at  the  bright  side  of  things.  It  may  be  a  good 
or  it  may  be  a  bad  quality,  but  I  always  prefer 
to  look  at  that  side  of  the  picture,  and  I  believe 
that  the  spirit  and  genius  of  the  age  will  carry 
me  through  safely.  I  believe  that  if  this  power 
be  given  to  the  people  it  will  be  safely  exercised, 
and  that  the  result  in  regard  to  the  judiciary, 
will  be  all  that  can  be  desired.  But  the  mode 
and  manner  in  which  this  report  is  framed, 
meets  many  of  the  objections  against  the  elec- 
tive principle  itself,  as  contained  in  it.  Gentle- 
men say  that  it  will  not  do  to  have  the  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals  elected  by  the  people,  be- 
cause of  the  influence  that  may  be  exercised  over 
him  by  some  powerful  individual,  who  may 
have  favored  his  election,  when  he  comes  in 
contact  with  a  poor  man — and  that  thereby  the 
poor  man  will  be  deprived  of  justice.  I  will 
just  here  remark  l>efore  I  refer  to  the  report 
itself,  which  obviates  the  difficulty,  that  the  ar- 
gument excites  no  alarm   in  my  mind.    I  have 


I  understood  the  course  of  politicians  for  a  long 
[  time,  though  it  is  true  that  I  have  not  been  enga- 
j  ged  in  much  political  life  myself,  but  I  have 
i  heard  of  them,  and  that  is  not  theirway  of  acting. 
I  Politicians  generally  think  remarkably  well  of 
I  poor  people,  and  I  suppose  it  is  because  a  great 
j  majority  of  the  people  are  poor.  And  when  we 
I  are  told,  of  the  power  and  influence  of  money  in 
I  the  hands  of  men  who  will  bring  it  to  bear  upon 
j  the  people,  I  always  remember  that  in  our  coun- 
try, so  far  as  my  experience  has  gone,  there  is  al- 
I  ways  two  sides  to  a  question.  Therefore  while 
one  undertakes  to  make  his  money  tell,  another 
is  always  telling  on  him,  and  thus  these  things 
will  out,  and  correct  themselves.  And  while 
therefore  the  assumption  that  the  rich  will  im- 
pose upon  the  poor  through  the  influence  of  the 
judge  upon  the  bench,  excites  no  alarm  in  my 
mind,  it  is  also  guarded  against  by  the  mode 
and  manner  in  which  the  report  is  framed.  In- 
deed there  are  three  safeguards  on  the  subject. 
There  are  to  be  four  judges,  and  if  one  of  them 
from  the  first  district  should  be  subject<;d  to  any 
such  influence,  there  would  still  be  the  other 
three  uninfluenced.  If  there  were  to  be  three 
judges,  still  there  would  be  the  two  who  held  over; 
and  who  could  not  be  influenced  by  the  causes 
which  entered  into  the  election  of  the  third. 
So  I  conceive  that  difliculty  is  obviated  by  this 
provision  of  the  report. 

The  district  system  of  election,  I  believe,  will 
produce  a  wholesome  emulation  between  the 
several  districts,  as  to  which  shall  select  the 
best  men.  It  is  the  feeling  of  our  nature, 
and  with  that  pride  of  locality  that  always  ex- 
ists in  the  breasts  of  men,  to  a  greater  or  less  ex- 
tent, each  district  will  endeavor  to  send  their 
best  men,  and  superior  men,  if  they  can  find 
them,  to  those  that  any  other  district  may  send. 
I  am  doubly  in  favor  of  the  district  system 
therefore,  for  the  reasons,  to  which  I  have  just 
referred.  Here,  it  is  as  I  before  remarked,  that 
as  to  other  matters  of  expediency,  I  am  not  dis- 
posed to  quarrel  with  members,  as  to  whether 
they  shall  be  carried  out  or  not.  It  meets  my 
hearty  approbation,  that  one  of  the  judges  shall 
be  elected  in  each  of  the  four  districts.  In  as- 
suming there  are  to  be  four,  I  acknowledge  that  I 
am  governed  by  the  arguments  of  those  who 
ought  to  know  more  in  regard  to  the  subject 
than  myself.  I  have  conversed  with  some  of  the 
judges  themselves,  and  with  others  conversant 
with  the  business  done  in  that  court,  and  it 
seems  to  be  conceded,  that  the  business  is  more 
than  three  judges  can  do  with  deliberation,  and 
with  an  eve  that  justice  should  always  be  ad- 
ministered. I  am  also  satisfied  that  the  busi- 
ness will  be  increased,  and  I  want  to  provide  for 
that  contingency.  Let  there  then  be  four  judges 
elected,  one  in  each  of  the  four  districts.  But 
if  it  will  increase  business,  is  it  not  also  another 
objection?  Not  to  my  mind.  It  is  very  true 
that  I  may  be  considered  in  tlie  category  of 
those  who  are  governed  by  selfishness,  and  if 
nothing  is  to  be  considered  but  the  interests  of 
the  lawyers  of  the  country,  then  let  those  bene- 
fits be  equally  distributed  by  means  of  branch 
courts.  But  there  is  a  principle  involved  be- 
yond that  consideration.  It  is  of  course,  a  judicial 
tribunal  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole  state,  and  if 
the  people  any  where  are  dissatisfied  with  the 


276 


decision  of  a  circuit  judge,  let  them  have  the  ad- 
vantage of  this  tribunal  composed  of  the  ablest 
men  in  the  state.  If  it  is  of  no  use  abolish  the 
court,  but  if  it  is  beneficial  to  the  people,  then 
let  those  benefits  be  equally  distributed,  and 
not  confined  to  any  particular  locality.  But 
gentlemen  say,  if  those  at  a  distance  cannot  con- 
veniently come  to  court,  there  are  those  on  the 
ground  vrho  will  attend  to  their  business  for 
tnem.  But  they  cannnot  be  so  well  accommoda- 
ted. A  man  feels  of  course  a  deeper  interest  in 
his  own  matters  than  any  body  else,  and  my  ex- 
perience teaches  me,  that  if  you  want  your  coun- 
sel to  feel  like  yourself,  you  must  try  and  in- 
fuse into  him  the  same  spirit  and  feeling  with 
which  you  are  animated.  If  a  man  has  been 
oppressed  and  trampled  upon,  let  him  try  and 
infuse  such  a  spirit  into  the  lawyer,  that  he  will 
feel  that  it  is  he  himself  who  is  the  injured  par- 
ty. Can  that  be  done  by  men  who  live  three  or 
four  hundred  miles  off  and  have  never  seen  the 
lawyer?  Whenever  an  important  case  was 
brought  to  me,  I  have  always  advised  my  client 
that  it  was  best  for  him,  not  only  to  have  a  law- 
yer who  resided  here,  and  understood  the  prac- 
tice in  the  court  of  appeals,  but  that  he  himself 
should  go  in  person  and  see  his  lawyer,  and 
mesmerize  him,  if  you  can,  by  infusing  into  him 
the  spirit  which  actuates  your.self  in  the  pursuit 
of  justice.  At  a  casual  view,  it  may  be  sup- 
posed that  it  will  do  well  enough  to  write  to 
the  lawyer,  and  furnish  him  with  the  facts;  but 
it  is  not  so  well  as  to  infuse  into  him,  by  person- 
al application,  the  feelings  to  which  I  have  re- 
ferred. Besides,  it  is  more  to  the  satisfaction  of 
the  client  to  know  that  his  case  is  in  the  hands 
of  a  man  with  whom  he  is  acquainted — who  is 
no  imaginary  person,  but  one  with  whom  he  has 
conversed,  shaken  hands  with,  and  of  whose 
character  and  position  he  has  fully  enquired, 
and  is  thoroughly  satisfied. 

The  fact  that  appeals  are  not  taken  from  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  state  in  proportion  to  the 
amount  of  business  transacted  on  account  of  the 
increased  expense  thereby  imposed  on  those  re- 
siding in  distant  portions  of  the  state,  was  hap- 
pily shown  by  my  friend  from  Montgomery, 
(Mr.  Apperson.)  It  clearly  demonstrates  that 
if  there  are  any  advantages  to  be  derived  from 
the  court  of  appeals,  the  opportunities  of  having 
them  are  not  equally  distributed.  If  it  is  a 
good  tribunal,  let  us  place  it  within  the  reach  of 
all,  if  it  is  not  a  good  tribunal  let  us  abolish  it 
at  once.  Considering  as  I  do,  that  it  is  a  settled 
question  that  the  judges  will  be  elected  by  the 
people,  I  believe  therefore  that  it  is  best  for  each 
of  tne  four  districts  to  elect  one  judge.  They 
•will  be  better  acquainted  with  the  candidates, 
than  if  they  were  to  select  from  the  whole  state. 
But  gentlemen  say  that  we  must  throw  some 
guards  around  this  mode  of  election  if  it  is 
adopted  at  all.  And  one  of  the  great  guards 
they  propose  is  that  the  individual  should  not 
be  re-eligible  to  a  second  election.  They  give 
as  a  precedent  for  this,  the  fact  that  the  gover- 
nor is  not  re-eligible  to  a  second  term;  but  they 
are  very  far  from  convincing  me  that  he  ought 
not  to  ne  if  the  people  desire  it.  I  am  well 
aware  of  the  mignty  power  and  influence  ox- 
«rtcd  by  the  distribution  of  offices  in  the  hands 
of  the  governor,  but  that  objection  does  not  ap- 


ply to  the  judge  at  all,  as  he  has  no  such  power 
to  wield.  But  I  am  yet  to  be  convinced  that  it 
is  not  right  for  the  the  appointing  power  to  say 
in  every  case  that  it  may  desire,  "we  approve 
your  official  conduct."  1  cannot  see  the  force  of 
the  reasoning  that  when  an  individual  has  well 
discharged  his  duties,  he  shall  not  be  rewarded- 
It  is  said  that  the  officer  would  be  influenced  by 
improper  motives.  Why  say  that  the  people 
are  qualified  to  make  the  appointment,  and  in 
the  same  breath  say  the  people  cannot  dis- 
tinguish between  those  who  deserve  a  second  elec- 
tion and  those  who  do  not.  It  seems  to  me  a 
contradiction,  the  principle  is  absurd  and  I  am 
not  satisfied  that  it  shall  be  declared  in  the  or- 
ganic law  of  the  land,  that  any  officer  shall  not 
be  re-eligible,  if  he  fills  the  office  and  discharges 
the  high  duties  imposed  upon  him,  to  the  satis- 
faction and  advantage  of  the  people.  The  dark 
side  of  the  picture  is,  that  he  will  prostitute  his 
office  to  abuses  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  re- 
election. I  believe  no  such  thing.  I  fully  be- 
lieve that  there  is  virtue  and  intelligence  enough 
in  the  people  of  Kentucky  fairly  to  estimate  the 
manner  in  which  the  ofincers  have  discharged 
their  duties;  and  when  they  have  ably  and  faith- 
fully discharged  them,  I  want  the  people  to  have 
the  right  to  say  if  they  choose  to,  each  and  all, 
"well  done  good  and  faithfnl  servant,"  we  trust 
you  and  desire  you  to  go  on.  So  in  regard 
to  the  governor,  if  I  had  the  power  myself,  and 
it  was  an  original  question,  I  should  say  that  he 
should  be  re-eligible,  and  this  with  the  full  con- 
viction in  my  mind  that  the  present  officer  would 
be  re-elected,  although  I  should  do  every 
thing  to  defeat  his  re-election.  But  the  judges 
have  no  such  patronage  as  the  governor,  no  such 
offices,  and  an  objection  that  would  be  applica- 
ble to  the  governor  would  not  apply  to  the  judge. 
And  shall  we  establish  a  principle  in  our  or- 
ganic law  that  we  will  have  no  more  distin- 
guished men  in  the  tribunals  of  the  coun- 
try? Will  you  establish  the  principle  that 
six  or  eight  years  shall  be  the  full  limit  of  the 
time  that  any  individual  who  shall  fill  a  judicial 
station  in  Kentucky,  shall  be  allowed  to  distin- 
guish himself  and  benefit  his  countrymen?  Shall 
we  say  to  them  tliat  no  matter  how  much  you 
may  struggle  to  qualify  yourselves,  it  is  all  lost? 
It  seems  to  me  the  very  thing  itself  operates  di- 
rectly to  contradict  itself.  They  want  an  inde- 
pendent, a  virtuous  and  a  talented  judiciary 
and  how  do  they  propo-se  to  get  it?  By  saying 
to  the  judge,  when  you  have  had  some  experi- 
ence and  qualified  yourself  in  the  duties  you  are 
to  perform;  when  you  have  got  far  enough  to  be 
distinguished,  we  prohibit  you  from  serving  lon- 
ger. This  principle  of  human  nature  would  spring 
up  and  operate  on  the  individual.  He  would  at 
once  say,  I  will  not  undertake  to  be  a  shining 
light  in  the  tribunals  of  the  country;  I  have  but 
a  few  years  to  serve,  and  then  I  mu.st  .seek  for 
other  business,  and  after  I  have  lost  all  the  prac- 
tice I  had,  and  to  a  great  extent  unfitted  myself 
for  other  pursuits,  then  I  must  quit  this  to  which 
you  have  called  me  and  find  some  other  way  to 
earn  a  subsistence.  Is  it  not  in  fact  saying  that 
the  appointing  power  were  not  qualified  for  the 
exercise  of  that  high  duty  with  the  influence  of 
the  officer  operating  upon  them.  Or  rather  it 
would  be  saying  to  tnem,  you  have  all  the 


277 


knowledge  and  abiliiy  requisite  to  decide  as  to 
the  integrity  and  virtue  of  a  candidate  in  the 
first  instance,  but  in  the  second  you  have  not, 
because  of  tlie  influence  the  officer  would  exert 
over  you  by  the  prostitution  of  his  office? — 
Would  it  not  make  the  judges  more  industrious 
and  studious,  if  they  are  such  individuals  as  I 
hope  we  shall  obtain,  if  we  give  them  an  oppor- 
tunity of  showing  to  the  people  their  abilitv  and 
qualifications  to  discharge  the  duties  assigned 
tnem  under  the  stimilus  afforded  by  the  prospect 
of  a  re-election?  As  was  very  pertinently  re- 
marked, all  the  reasons  that  operate  on  the  pop- 
ular mind  favorable  to  first  election,  would  ope- 
rate favorable  to  the  re-election .  And  they  would 
operate  even  to  a  greater  degree.  When  we  first 
vote  for  a  man  we  have  had  no  opportunity  of 
seeing  how  he  will  discharge  the  duties  we  are 
about  to  impose  on  him;  but  in  the  case  of  a 
candidate  who  comes  up  for  re-election,  the  peo- 
ple have  seen  and  understood  his  abilities  and 
his  qualifications.  If  they  are  satisfied  then 
they  may  continue  the  worthy  officer  in  the  dis- 
charge of  his  duties,  and  afford  him  the  oppor- 
tunity still  further  to  inform  himself  in  legal 
knowledge.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  getting 
to  the  end  of  this  information — it  is  progressive. 
Then  let  him  progress  in  its  acquisition,  and  if 
he  becomes  an  honor  to  the  station,  let  the  people 
have  the  opportunity  of  continuing  him  in  their 
employment.  If  the  officer  has  been  incompe- 
tent or  failed  in  the  faithful  discharge  of  his  du- 
ties, the  people  will  at  once  condemn  him. 

We  are  not  to  expect  perfection  in  any  system, 
and  I  am  aware  that  the  elective  svstem  will 
not  be  an  entirely  perfect  one.  But  it  has  been 
tested  in  other  states  and  with  success,  and  while 
I  regret  that  to  Kentucky  does  not  belong  the 
honor  of  having  first  adopted  the  principle,  still 
I  am  willing  to  follow  in  the- footsteps,  and  thus 
not  be  obliged  to  travel  over  unexplored  ground. 
But  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  says  that  the 
system  has  not  been  tested  long  enough  to  satis- 
fy the  considerate  mind  of  its  success,  and  then 
he  gives  an  instance  of  what  particular  individ- 
uals say  on  the  subject.  What  they  say  should 
have  very  little  influence  as  an  argument,  but 
we  have  also  information  as  to  the  Avorking  of 
the  system  in  other  states.  We  have  information 
from  Mississippi,  and  it  demonstrates  that  an 
elective  judiciary  in  that  state,  has  been  entirelv 
successful,  in  securing  the  most  able,  talented, 
and  virtuous  judiciary  officers.  There  and  else- 
where the  system  has  been  fully  tested,  and 
we  see  none  who  have  tried  it  returning  to  that 
sy.?tem  which  they  abandoned. 

I  have  said  what  I  intended  to  say  on  this  sub- 
ject. I  have  tried  to  make  myself  plain,  and 
practical,  and  easy  to  be  understood.  I  have  not 
dealt  in  abstractions.  Let  logicians  do  that.  I 
know  that  the  people  of  this  country  desire  no 
such  reasoning;  at  least  in  my  section  of  the 
state  they  do  not,  and  to  them  I  desire  to  dis- 
charge my  duty.  In  closing  my  remarks  per- 
mit me  to  express  the  hope  that  the  labors  of  this 
convention  will  be  continued  and  closed  in  peace 
and  harmony.  Let  the  good  of  our  constituents 
and  our  state  be  our  polar  star,  and  may  we  each 
hear,  when  we  retire  from  our  labors,  the  grate- 
ful gratulation,  "well  done  good  and  faithful 
servant." 


Mr.  IRWIJf.  Differing  as  I  do  from  the  gen- 
tleman from  Todd  in  tlie  position  which  I  occu- 
py, I  feel  it  due  to  myself  and  due  to  those  I 
represent,  that  I  should  express  the  opinions  I 
entertain,  but  I  regret  that  I  cannot  speak  with 
that  clearness  and  deliberation  that  he  has  done. 
I  do  not  expect  that  I  shall  succeed  in  changing 
the  vote  of  any  gentleman  on  this  important 
subject.  I  am  one  of  the  few  gentlemen  elect- 
ed to  this  house  who  were  opposed  to  what  is 
now  termed  constitutional  reform,  and  in  my 
county  it  was  one  of  the  objections  urged  against 
me,  tfiat  I  would  be  opposed  to  all  refomis  that 
might  be  proposed  in  this  convention.  This 
however  was  an  error.  I  am  not  opposed  to  all 
the  propositions  which  have  been  presented,  for 
some  of  them  contain  principles  for  which  I  shall 
vote.  In  the  fii-st  place  I  am  opposed  to  the 
election  of  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
as  proposed  by  the  committee,  but  would  be 
willing  to  vote  for  a  judiciary  elected  by  the 
people  for  a  single  term.  I  want  them  to  be  in- 
eligible.   I  want  them  to  be  independent. 

In  the  organization  of  a  government  I  have 
been  taught  that  the  different  departments  should 
operate  as  checks  upon  each  other,  and  I  very 
greatly  fear,  that  the  mode  proposed  will  so  op- 
erate as  to  centralize  all  the  departments,  and 
produce  a  despotism  on  the  part  of  the  majority 
that  may  in  time  subvert  the  rights  of  the  mi- 
nority— one  of  the  great  objects  for  which  gov- 
ernments are  created. 

What  check  will  the  court  of  appeals  be  upon 
the  legislative  department,  when  both  are  placed 
in  power  by  the  same  electors.  Can  you  sup- 
pose that  a  majority  of  the  electors  wno  might 
place  representatives  in  power  favorable  to  the 
enactment  of  an  unconstitutional  law,  will  place 
judges  on  the  bench  who  will  reverse  the  enact- 
ment, or  declare  it  null  and  void.  No  sir.  Elect 
your  appellate  judges.  Elect  your  representa- 
tives. Let  both  emanate  from  the  same  source, 
and  they  act  in  concert;  they  will  be  a  unit,  and 
if  checks  and  balances  are  necessary  in  a  gov- 
ernment, you  will  destroy  them.  Does  any  gen- 
tleman believe  that  at  the  time  the  appellate 
judges  of  Kentucky  declared  the  relief  laws  un- 
constitutional, and  were  hurled  from  office  by 
the  representatives  of  the  people,  that  judges 
would  not  have  been  elected  who  would  have 
sustained  the  legislature? 

An  incorruptible  and  enlightened  administra- 
tion of  justice  is  indispensable  to  a  free  govern- 
ment, and  the  question  comes  up,  will  the  judges 
of  your  appellate  court,  elected  by  the  people, 
(and  that  by  districts,  a  very  objectionable  fea- 
ture,) be  as  independent,  a**  free  from  bias,  per- 
sonal as  well  as  political,  as  they  would  be  if 
they  were  placed  in  power  by  some  other  pro- 
cess? Judges  are  but  men.  If  they  get  into  a 
heated  controversy,  and  questions  of  great  mag- 
nitude are  presented  and  discussed,  their  person- 
al, partisan,  and  political  friends  mingling  in 
the  canvass,  and  by  their  powerful  exertions  se- 
curing their  election — do  you  suppose  they  will 
forget  their  obligations;  that  they  will  fail  to  re- 
ward their  friends  and  partizans?  It  will  be  too 
much  to  require  of  human  nature — that  they 
should  forget  their  friends  or  their  enemies. 

Gentlemen  seem  to  think  that  any  other  pro- 
cess than  by   a  direct  vote  of  the  people,   is  in 


27« 


oppoisilioii  to  tlie  principle  that  from  the  people 
must  emanate  all  authority.  Now,  we  all  know- 
that  a  pure  democracy  cannot  exist,  that  the 
powers  of  the  govenimout  must  be  delegated  to 
iigenti,  and  the  first  and  great  question  is,  will 
the  interest  of  society  be  better  promoted  by  the 
election  of  the  judges  directly  by  the  people,  or 
indirectly  by  the  people,  through  an  agent  select- 
ed by  them  and  responsible  to  them. 

I  incline  to  the  opinion  that  you  will  best  8\ih- 
serve  the  interest  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  by 
giving  to  the  governor  the  appointing  power  of 
the  appellate  court,  and  the  senate  the  power  of 
rejecting  or  confirming  the  appointment,  limiting 
the  tenure  of  office  to  eight  years. 

By  this  process  you  will  secure  constant  re- 
sponsibility, and  destroy  the  life  tenure  as  it  is 
called,  in  the  judicial  offices  of  the  country. 
I  feel  satisfied  that  the  objection  to  the  present 
organization  of  the  judicial  department  of  the 
government,  consists  more  in  the  tenure  than  in 
the  mode  of  appointment.  All  men  seem  to 
think,  that  of  all  the  safeguards  to  human  liber- 
ty, to  the  safety  of  our  rights,  personal  as  well 
as  political,  the  judicial  department  is  more  to 
be  relied  on  than  either  of  the  others.  If  this  is 
so,  we  should  so  organize  it  as  to  secure  efficient, 
independent  and  enlightened  administrators  of 
the  law,  and  the  question  comes  up,  will  an 
election,  directly  by  the  people,  best  subserve 
our  purposes?  Sir,  from  what  you  have  seen  and 
felt,  can  you,  or  you,  sir,  conscientiously  say 
from  your  own  knowledge  that  elections,  a.s  car- 
ried on  in  Kentucky,  and  indeed  elsewhere,  are 
not  so  conducted  a^-  to  place  the  recipients  of 
place  and  power  in  a  position  dangerous  to  his 
independence.  Is  it  not  in  the  nature  of  man  to 
reward  his  friends  and  punish  his  enemies — and 
does  not  all  history  prove  that  men  yield  to  the 
power  that  places  them  in  office?  As  long  as  the 
chancellors  of  England  held  office  at  the  will 
and  pleasure  of  the  crown,  were  they  the  admin- 
istrators of  justice  or  the  blood-thirsty  agents  of 
tyranny?  Let  any  gentleman  look  into  the 
history  of  England,  through  the  entire  reign  of 
James  II,  and  he  will  see  that  the  judges  were 
the  most  profligate  and  unscrupulous  scoundrels 
that  ever  disgraced  humanity. 

Elect  the  judges  now  of  the  court  of  appeals 
in  four  diflferent  sections  of  your  state,  one  dis- 
trict will  have  one  set  of  political  views — another 
the  reverse,  and  this  division  may  be  produced 
by  a  decision  of  the  judges  themselves — their 
election  is  coming  on — they  are  in  the  canvass, 
and  ardently  seeking  a  re-election — it  is  over, 
and  they  meet  on  the  bench  divided  in  feelings, 
in  interest — and  future  rewards  and  future  elec- 
tions are  tobesecuredljythetenacity  with  which 
they  subserve  the  party  puqjoses  of  those  who 
elected  them.  Do  you,  can  you  believe,  that 
these  judges  thus  elected  can  calmly  and  dispas- 
sionately decide  upon  the  constitutionality  of 
your  laws?  Why8ir,au  elective  judiciary  system, 
18  yet,  I  think  I  may  say,  an  experiment  that 
the  best  men  in  the  lancl  look  upon  with  fear. 
Yes  sir,  the  people  them.selves,  many,  very 
many  of  them,  distrust  and  fear  the  exer- 
cise of  power  which  may  prove  fatal  to  their 
interests,  fatal  to  their  hopes  of  peace  and 
quiet,  fatal  to  liberty  itself. 

In  the.sc    United    States,    how  many  have 


tried  the  experiment?  Four  or  five  I  be- 
lieve— New  \  ork,  Mississippi  and  some  oth- 
ers— and  the  experiment  is  of  such  recent  date 
that  I  think  gentlemen  will  not  rely  upon 
it  as  conclusive  evidence  that  the  system  is 
much  improved.  Another  feature  in  this  re- 
port is  most  objectionable,  that  is  the  election 
by  districts.  Sir,  if  you  must  elect  them,  surely 
you  will  let  the  people  share  in  that  election. 
I  can  have  no  objection  to  requiring  one  judge 
to  live  in  each  district  of  the  state,  but  surely  all 
sir,  as  all  the  people  of  this  state  are  to  partici- 
pate in  the  benefits  of  this  court,  you  will  let 
them  have  some  share  in  its  organization.  I 
think  I  see  in  this  division  of  the  state  into  dis- 
tricts, some  squinting  at  party  supremacy.  I 
hope  sincerely  that  party  will  have  nothing  to 
do  ill  this  judge  making  business;  it  will  be 
fatal  to  our  peace  and  fatal  to  our  happiness.  I, 
like  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis,) 
think  that  party  should  not  influence  the  organi- 
zation of  the  supreme  court,  and  that  the  minor- 
ity in  the  state,  should  not  be  deprived  of  all 
share  in  the  judicial  or  other  offices  of  the  coun- 
try. But  sir,  how  will  you  prevent  it?  Put  your 
state  into  districts,  and  my  word  for  it,  you  will 
elect  the  judges  of  the  supreme  court  from  the 
predilections  which  they  may  indicate — upon 
the  subject  of  national  politics. 

Elect  your  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  as 
proposea  by  the  committee  on  the  appellate 
court,  and  it  is  admitted  by  the  honorable  Presi- 
dent, it  will  be  a  partizan  court,  it  will  be  more 
sir,  it  will  be  so  organized  that  litigation  will 
increase  four  fold,  and  it  will  simply  be  a  court 
for  the  benefit  of  the  lawyers  of  tue  country,  at 
the  expense  of  immense  litigation  and  cost.  He 
says  the  strongest  men  of  each  party  will  be 
candidates,  and  this  argument  shows  that  it  is 
obliged  to  be  a  political  pai'tizan  court,  and  of 
all  the  organizations  for  the  distribution  of  jus- 
tice, a  partizan  court  is  the  last  one  in  the  world 
that  the  people  will  have  confidence  in,  and  it  is 
the  last  one  that  I  think  we  ought  to  organize. 

I  am  told  that  judges  for  the  supreme  court 
will  not  canvass.  That  the  dignity  of  the  office, 
the  amount  of  the  salary,  and  the  magnitude  of  the 
interests  involved  will  preclude  the  idea.  Why, 
my  dear  sir,  this  district  system  will,  in  my 
opinion  .secure  the  election  of  judges  who  have  a 
mere  local,  or  neighborhood  popularity — and 
that  men  will  be  elected  who,  if  the  whole  state 
had  the  right  to  vote,  would  never,  no  never  be 
thought  of — and  this  local  popularity  would  de- 
pend upon  his  political  predilections. 

I  am  also  opposed  to  that  principle  which 
makes  the  judges  re-eligible.  It  him  been  said 
that  an  elective  judiciary  would  protect  the 
rights  of  all  equally.  This  mav  be  doubted.  I 
know  that  the  rich  and  powerful  can  always  be 
secure;  if  a  man  has  wealth  he  always  has  pow- 
er. Bring  two  litigants  into  court  in  antagonism 
to  each  otlier;  one  a  poor  but  honest  man;  he 
has  his  home,  his  fire-side,  in  fact  his  all  are  at 
stake;  he  has  but  one  vote  to  give,  he  is  un- 
known to  fame,  and  his  whole  reliance  is  upon 
God  anil  his  country.  But  sir,  who  is  his  oppo- 
nent? He  is  rich,  he  is  powerful,  his  cause  is  ar- 
gued by  the  most  learned  counsel.  He  can  by 
means  of  his  wealth  and  connexions  have  t  lie  abil- 
ity to  carry  his  county  in  favorof  the  judge  who  is 


279 


to  dt'cide  upon  this  important  case.*  1  a^^k  you 
Mr.  Chairman,  if  \'-ou  wore  placed  in  the  position 
of  this  poor  man,  if  you  would  not  fear  for  your 
rights. 

But  sir,  suppose  he  does  decide  rightfully — 
and  he  decides  in  favor  of  his  rich  friend — do 
you  not  believe  that  this  poor  man  would  dis- 
trust the  correctness  of  the  decision?  So  you 
see  two  evils  may  arise  from  the  operation  of 
this  principle  of  re-eligibility :  one,  that  there 
is  great  danger  that  the  judge,  to  secure  his  re- 
election, will  lean  to  some  extent,  in  favor  of  the 
rich  litigant;  and  another,  that  if  he  decides 
rightfully  in  his  favor,  the  poor  man  will  dis- 
trust his  judgment.  Both  evils  arc  to  be  appre- 
hended; either  will  be  fatal  to  the  character  of 
the  judiciary,  which  like  Csezar's  wife,  sliould 
not  only  be  pure,  but  un.suspected.  Surely  if  we 
have  an  elective  judiciary,  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  officers  shall  be  re-eligible. 

Sir,  I  have  made  np  my  mind  to  vote 
against  the  election  of  the  judges  of  the  appel- 
late court.  I  fear  its  centralizing  effects,  and  I 
fear  for  the  independence  of  its  officers.  I  fear 
that  they  will  fraternize  with  the  legislative  de- 

f>artraent.  I  fear  that  a  dominant  party  in  the 
egislature,  backed  by  the  judiciary  department, 
may  forgot  that  tlie  people  created  them,  or  that 
they  are  responsible  to  them.  Sir,  I  have  been 
told  that  this  course  was  not  in  accordance  with 
the  progress  of  the  age  in  which  we  live,  and 
that  the  people  would  hold  me  to  fearful  respon- 
sibility. Sir,  I  intend  to  meet  that  responsibili- 
ty, ana  if  I  am  to  be  sacrificed,  I  shall  have  the 
proud  consciousness  of  knowing  that  my  ac- 
tions have  been  prompted  by  my  best  judgment 
of  what  are  the  interests  of  the  people. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  PROCTOR,  the  com- 
mittee rose,  reported  progress,  .and  obtaineil 
leave  to  sit  again. 

LE.iVi:    OF    ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  PROCTOR,  leave  of  ab- 
sence was  granted  to  Mr.  Jfewcum   indefinitely. 
The  Convention  then  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  OCTOBER  29,  1849. 

RESOLUTION'S. 

Mr.  MOORE  submitted  the  following  resolu- 
tion, which  was  agreed  to. 

Resolved,  That  the  select  committee  on  the 
public  debt  be  instructed  to  inquire  into  the  ex- 
pediency of  depriving  the  legislature  of  tlie 
power  to  borrow,  or  to  authorize  the  borrowing 
of  any  sum  or  sums  of  money  exceeding  in  all 
fifty  thousand  dollars,  without  the  consent  of  a 
majority  of  the  voters  in  this  commonwealth 
previously  obtained,  except  for  the  public  de- 
fence in  cases  of  insurrection  or  foreign  war. 

This  committee  consisted  of  Messrs.  Hardin, 
Meriwether,  Barlow,  M.  P.  Marshall,  McHenry, 
Gholson,  Coffey,  Lisle, and  A.  Hood. 

Mr.  MOORE  offered  the  following  resolutions, 
which  were  agreed  to. 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  be  instructed  to  inquire  into  the 


expediency  of  making  provision  for  tlio  real  and 
bona  Jide  reprosonlatioii  in  tlie  general  aiseniblj' 
of  the  people  of  each  and  every  county  in  the 
stat-e,  and  to  inquire  whether  this  end  is  attain- 
able without  giving  to  each  county  in  the  state 
at  least  one  member  in  the  house  of  representa- 
tives, increasing  the  number  in  the  larger  coun- 
ties by  a  fixed  ratio. 

Resolved,  That  all  "the  people  in  the  state 
ought  to  enjoy  as  nearly  as  may  be  an  eqiial 
reprentation  in  the  senate  of  this  state,  and  in 
the  congress  of  the  United  States  by  means  of 
districts  of  convenient  fonn  and  equal  popula- 
tion, and  that  the  power  of  the  legislature  ought 
to  be  restricted  in  districting  the  state  so  as  to 
aeoomplish  that  end. 

Mr.  BOYD  offered  the  following  resolution, 
and  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  re- 
vision of  the  constitution  and  s  lavery. 

Resolved,  That  the  legislature  should  have 
the  power  (a  majority  of  all  elected  to  both 
branches  concurring)  to  submit  amendments  to 
the  constitution,  to  the  people;  and  if  a  majority 
of  all  the  qualified  voters  of  the  state  sliould 
vote  in.  favor  of  such  amendments  at  two  suc- 
cessive general  elections,  it  should  be  a  part  of 
the  constitution.  Provided,  that  but  one  amend- 
ment should  be  proposed  at  the  same  session  of 
the  legislature.  And,  provided  further,  that  no 
amendment  should  ever  be  so  proposed,  or  sub- 
mitted, which  will  give  power  to  the  legislature 
to  emancipate  slaves,  without  the  consent  of  the 
owners. 

Mr.  BOYD  submitted  the  following,  and  it 
was  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  legislative 
department. 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  legislature  should  have  no 
power  to  incorporate  companies,  with  general 
banking  or  trading  powers,  without  providing 
that  the  private  property  of  each  individual 
stockholder  should  be  made  liable  for  all  the 
debts  and  obligations  of  such  incorporation, 
without  submitting  it  to  the  people  for  their  ap- 
proval. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  legislature  should  have  no 
power  to  borrow  money  (except  for  the  purpose 
of  repelling  invasion  or  suppressing  insurrec- 
tion), without  submitting  the  question,  together 
with  the  amount  to  be  borrowed  and  the  pur- 
poses for  which  it  may  be  wanted,  to  the  people 
for  their  approval  or  rejection. 

Mr.  MACHEN  offered  the  following  which 
was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole. 

Resolved,  That  the  legislature  at  its  first  ses- 
sion, after  the  adoption  of  the  new  constitution, 
be  required  to  provide  for  the  compilation  of  a 
book  of  forms  for  the  government  and  direction 
of  the  clerks  of  the  different  courts  of  record 
within  this  commonwealth,  in  the  manner 
of  keeping  tlieir  records. 

HOUR   OF   MEETING   CU.WGED. 

The  resolution  some  time  since  laid  upon  (he 
table  until  this  day,  proposing  to  change  the 
hour  of  meeting  to  9  o'clock  A.  M.,  and  to  hold 
an  evening  session,  commencing  at  3  o'clock  P. 
M.,  came  up  in  its  order. 

Mr.  PROCTOR,  who  moved  the  original  res- 
olution, now  urged  its  adoption.  In  reference 
to  the  objection  urged  when  he  first  submitted  the 
resolution,  that  it  was  necessary  to  give  the  com- 


280 


iiilttees  time  tu  dist-hiirge  the  duties  devolving 
upon  them  in  their  committee  rooms,  he  said  Jie 
believed  that  objection  no  longer  existed;  but  if 
it  was  not  entirely  removed,  lie  suggested  to  the 
committees  the  propriety  of  a  more  industrious 
devotion  to  their  duties. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  he  should  now 
cheerfully  vote  for  the  gentleman's  resolution;  but 
he  rose  principally  to  say,  iu  reference  to  the 
closing  remark  of  tne  gentleman,  that  the  com- 
mittee of  which  he  was  the  chairman — the  com- 
jiiittee  on  the  court  of  appeals — had  not  been  oth- 
erwise than  industrious  in  the  discharge  of  their 
duties,  frequentlj'  holding  two  sessions  a  day  of 
four  hours  duration,  besides  attending  the  session 
of  the  conv(.'ntioii. 

Mr.  WOODSON  was  of  opinion  that  the  busi- 
ness of  the  convention  was  not  sufficiently  ad- 
vanced to  justify  them  in  holding  evening  ses- 
sions; he  therefore  moved  to  strike  out  that 
branch  of  the  resolution  which  provided  for  an 
evening  session,  which  would  leave  it  to  the  con- 
vention to  meet  in  the  evening  whenever  it  might 
be  found  to  be  necessary. 

Mr.  CLARKE  defended  the  standing  commit- 
tees against  any  imputation  on  their  industry. 
He  said  they  had  been  more  industrious  than  the 
committees  of  any  legislative  body  of  which  he 
had  ever  been  a  member.  For  some  ten  days  lon- 
ger he  thought  they  should  not  commence  evening 
sessions,  for  they  had  still  many  consultations  to 
hold,  the  constitutions  of  many  of  the  States  to 
read  in  referenceto  particular  sections,  and  much 
labor  to  be  undertaken  in  making  the  articles  of 
the  new  constitution  as  perspicuous  as  possible. 
He  suggested  that  this  resolution  should  be  still 
further  postponed. 

Mr.  BRlSTOWalso  defended  the  committee  of 
which  he  was  the  chairman,  against  any  imputa- 
tion on  their  industry. 

Mr.  McHENRY,  in  the  absence  of  the  chair- 
man of  the  committee  of  which  he  was  a  mem- 
ber, also  iustified  that  committee  by  a  recapitu- 
lation of  tneir  labors. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  briefly  spoke  in  favor  of  eve- 
ning sessions. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  disclaimed  any  intention  of 
casting  imputations  on  the  members  of  the  com- 
mittees. But  he  reminded  the  convention  that 
they  had  been  a  month  in  session,  and  in  that 
time  the  committees  .should  have  managed  to 
get  through  their  business,  and  the  convention 
Itself  should  show  to  their  constituents  that 
they  were  in  earnest  in  the  business  which  had 
been  confided  to  them. 

Mr.  HARDIN  briefly  explained  the  progress 
and  present  condition  of  the  business  before  the 
committee  of  which  he  was  chairman,  and  ex- 
pressed the  opinion  that  now  they  should  be  en- 
abled to  proceed  rapidly  with  the  business  of 
the  convention,  and  meet  the  expectation  of  the 
people.  He  confessed  that  he  was  of  opinion, 
that  tliey  had  hitherto  done  very  well.  They 
had  interchanged  opinions  and  become  acquaint- 
ed with  each  other's  views,  and  in  the  course  of 
another  week,  they  should  be  enabled  to  vote 
upon  some  of  tlie  most  important  questions 
upon  which  they  should  be  called  to  act. 

The  motion  to  strike  out  that  branch  of  the 
resolution  in  relation  to  evening  sessions  was 
agreed  to,  and  the  resolution,  as  amended,  was 


adopted.     The  convention  will   therefore   meet 
for  the  future  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 

THE   CONTESTED    ELECTION    CASE. 

Mr.  ROOT  stated  that,  as  chairman  of  the 
committtee  on  elections,  he  had  received  a  com- 
munication from  Mr.  Lecompte,  the  contestant 
for  the  seat  occupied  by  Mr.  Nuttall,  but  as  that 
case  was  not  now  before  the  committee  he  had 
been  advised  to  present  it  to  the  convention. 

Mr.  GARRARD  objected  to  the  reception  of 
the  communication.  He  thought  it  should  not 
be  placed  upon  the  journal.  The  gentleman 
from  whom  that  communication  came,  was  the 
claimant  of  the  seat  of  the  gentleman  from 
Henry,  and  he  had  had  a  fair  opportunity 
to  sustain  his  case  by  any  proof  in  his  posses- 
sion; but  in  the  progress  of  the  case.  Major  Le- 
compte withdrew  his  claim  to  the  seat,  and  the 
sitting  member  was  declared  by  the  committee, 
to  be  rightfully  here.  That  gentleman  however, 
now  sent  here  a  document  of  some  eight  pages, 
which  he  (Mr.  Garrard)  did  not  suppose  Major  Le- 
compte had  written,  which  should  not  under  the 
circumstances  of  the  case,  be  received  by  the 
convention,  and  spread  out  on  their  journal. 

The  PRESIDENT  enquired  if  he  rightly  un- 
derstood the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  elec- 
tions to  say  that  it  was  not  a  communication  ad- 
dressed to  the  convention. 

Mr.  ROOT  replied  that  itwas  addressed  to  the 
committee  on  elections. 

The  PRESIDENT  then  decided  that  it  was 
not  properly  before  the  convention. 

Mr.  ROOT  withdrew  the  communication. 

COURT   OF   APPEAI^. 

The  convention  again  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  As  I  am  perhaps  the  young- 
est member  upon  the  floor  of  the  convention — 
and  as  I  am  conscious  of  the  age,  ability,  expe- 
rience, and  talents  of  those  with  whom  I  am  as- 
sociated in  the  great  task  of  making  for  the  peo- 
Sle  of  Kentucky  a  constitution,  it  is  Avith  no  or- 
inary  degree  of  diffidence  that  I  have  summon- 
ed to  my  aid,  the  courage  that  will  enable  me  to 
address  the  committee.  But  I  do  not  intend  to 
enter  into  an  elaborate  discussion  of  the  various 
propositions  before  the  committee,  nor  would  I 
have  been  found  intruding  myself  upon  the 
time  and  patience  of  the  convention,  had  it  not 
been  for  the  tenor  of  certain  remarks  which  have 
fallen  from  gentlemen  during  the  progress  of 
this  discussion,  which  I  hold  to  be  at  war  with 
the  genius  and  spirit  of  the  age  in  which  we 
live. 

And  you  will  permit  me,  Mr.  Chairman,  here 
to  remark,  that  while  I  have  ever  been  conserva- 
tive in  my  views  in  relation  to  constitutional  re- 
form, and  while  I  have  ever  been  opposed  to 
that  radical  doctrine  which  would  unsettle  and 
destroy  the  great  conservative  influences  of  the 
different  departments  of  the  government,  I  am 
at  the  same  time  not  one  of  those  who  are  so 
wedded  to  the  old  order  of  things  ns  not  to  see 
the  errors  and  defects  with  which  that  system  is 
sun'ounded.  While  1  venerate  that  which  is 
venerable,  and  while  I  admire  that  which  comes 


281 


down  to  us  sanctioned  by  our  fatliers  and  render- 
ed sacred  by  time-honored  custom — and  while 
I  appreciate  as  I  should  the  labor  of  those  ven- 
erable men  who  have  gone  before  us,  and  to 
■whose  devoted  patriotism  and  love  of  country 
we  are  indebted  for  so  many  of  the  privileges 
which  we  enjoy,  I  am  not  one  of  those  who  be- 
lieve that  no  improvement  can  be  made  in  the 
science  of  government. 

Mr.  Chairman,  seventy  three  years  ago  our  fa- 
thers proclaimed  to  the  world  the  important 
truth  that  man  was  capable  of  self-government; 
the  people  of  this  union  have  been  demonstra- 
ting that  great  principle  ever  since;  and  the  free 
voters  of  Kentucky  have  elected  us  to  this  con- 
vention for  the  purpose  of  giving  to  this  union 
and  to  the  world  a  practical  illustration  of  this 
great  principle.  In  making  a  government  for 
the  people  of  Kentucky  it  should  be  remember- 
ed that  we  are  not  now  just  emerging  from  the 
savage  state,  but  that  we  are  surrounded  by  all 
the  lights  and  experience  of  other  ages  and  oth- 
er countries  and  have  the  advantage  of  all  the 
benefit  which  is  to  be  acquired  in  the  great 
school  of  experience.  It  is  our  duty  in  forming 
a  government  for  the  free  and  intelligent  people 
of  Kentucky  to  make  that  government  harmo- 
nise as  near  as  may  be  with  the  spirit  and  ge- 
niuse  of  the  people.  And  what,  Mr.  Chairman, 
let  me  ask  is  noAv  the  condition  of  mankind;  and 
what  is  the  aspect  of  human  affairs?  It  is  that 
of  alternate  struggles  acd  triumphs.  And  yet  I 
venture  the  assertion  that  never  m  the  history  of 
man,  with  all  his  chronicled  glory  and  ancient 
renown,  has  there  been  witnessed  a  period  so 
interesting  in  the  history  of  man  as  the  present. 
I  know,  sir,  thatwe  may  .perhaps  discover  in  the 
history  of  certain  nations  specific  acts  and 
achievements  more  glorious  than  any  of  which 
we  boast;  but,  sir,  in  coming  to  a  correct  conclu- 
sion as  to  the  intelligence  and  capacity  of  a  peo- 
ple for  self-government,  we  must  withdraw  our- 
selves from  narrow  compasses  and  individual 
instances,  and  we  must  look  abroad  upon  the 
whole  human  family;  and  where  I  ask  was  there 
ever  a  period  so  interesting  in  the  history  of  man 
as  the  present?  But  a  few  short  years  ago  the 
lordly  prerogative  of  the  few  over  the  many  was 
the  settled  and  recognized  doctrine  of  all  Christ- 
endom. A  few  bold  and  gallant  spirits,  howev- 
er, tliere  were  who  repudiated  this  doctrine  and 
asserted  the  great  principle  that  to  the  people 
belongs  all  power  and  all  sovereignty. 

It  was  this  great  principle  that  enabled  the 
British  subject  to  wrest  from  the  hands  of  the 
British  crown  the  magna  charta  of  English  lib- 
erty. And,  sir,  it  was  but  the  working  of  this 
great  spirit  that  enabled  our  fathers  to  shake  off 
the  yoke  of  a  tyrant,  and  to  seek  an  asylum  here 
in  this  mighty  empire  of  a  new  world,  where, 
bearing  with  them  the  spirit  of  this  great  prin- 
ciple, proclaimed  to  the  world  the  important 
and  hitherto  disputed  truth  that  all  free  govern- 
ment was  founded  on  the  authority  of  the  peo- 
ple. Acting  upon  that  great  principle  ever  since, 
we  have  given  to  the  world  a  practical  illustration 
of  its  truth.  The  great  advancement  which  the 
American  people  have  been  making  in  all  the 
various  sciences  and  departments  of  government 
is  but  a  proof  and  confirmation  to  my  mind  that 
man  is  indeed  and  in  truth  capable  of  govern- 
36 


ing  himself.  Under  the  spirit  and  genius  of  our 
institutions  and  the  age  in  which  we  live  our 
people  liave  marched  onwards,  and  have  been 
demonstrating  the  beautv,  grandeur  and  power 
of  a  government  founded  on  the  virtue  and  in- 
telligence of  a  free  and  independent  people. 

Then  sir,  in  forming  the  constitution  which 
we  have  assembled  to  make,  we  should  make 
that  instrument  correspond,  as  nearly  as  possible, 
to  the  genius  of  the  people,  and  the  age  in  which 
we  live.  For  myself,  sir,  I  shall  vote  for  every 
proposition  which  will  tend  to  produce  such  a 
result. 

In  forming  a  constitution  for  the  government 
of  a  free  people,  it  is  well  for  that  government 
to  harmonize  with  the  feelings  of  the  people,  be- 
cause sir,  all  governments  and  all  free  institu- 
tions must  be  sustained  and  supported  by  the 
great  majority  of  the  people.  The  question  nat- 
urally arises  then,  what  are  the  sentiments  and 
feelings  of  the  people  of  Kentuckv,  in  relation 
to  the  election  of  the  judiciary,  by  the  people.  If 
sir,  I  am  any  judge  of  the  indication  of  public 
sentiment  upon  this  subject,  there  is  a  vast  and 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  people  of  Kentuc- 
ky in  favor  of  electing  their  judicial  officers. 
And  sir,  while  I  am  frank  to  aamit,  that  for  a 
long  time  I  doubted  the  propriety  and  expedien- 
cy of  electing  the  judges  by  the  popular  voice, 
yet  sir,  I  am  also  as  frank  to  confess  that  upon 
mature  reflection  and  consideration  of  this  great 
question,  my  mind  has  undergone  a  radical  and 
perfect  change.  I  confess  sir,  that  having  been 
early  taught  to  look  upon  the  independence  of 
the  judiciary  as  the  onlv  safe-guard  to  the  rights 
of  the  citizen,  I  had  imbibed  the  notion  that  this 
independence  was  inconsistent  with  popular  elec- 
tions by  the  people.  JSTot  sir,  that,  like  my  friend 
froip  Bourbon,  I  feared  to  trust  the  people;  but 
I  did  fear  that  the  influence  whicn  might  be 
brought  to  bear  upon  popular  elections  might 
warp  the  judgment  of  him  who  was  to  decide 
upon  the  various  rights  of  the  citizen.  But 
when  I  came  to  look  upon  this  question  in  all  its 
various  bearings,  my  better  judgment  has  con- 
vinced me,  that  there  is  no  power  to  which  the 
selection  of  the  judicial  officers  can  be  so  well 
trusted  as  to  that  of  the  sovereign  people  them- 
selves. The  gentleman  from  Logan  on  Saturday, 
remarked  that  he  was  opposed  to  the  election  of 
the  judges  by  the  people,  from  tlie  fact,  that  if 
the  judges  were  elected  bv  the  same  electors  by 
which  the  legislature  and  the  executive  were 
elected,  they  would  form  a  imit  in  the  several 
departments  of  the  government  that  would  be 
dangerous  to  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  citi- 
zen. May  I  not  ask,  Mr.  Chairman,  if  there 
would  not  be  a  unit  formed  in  the  different  de- 
partments of  the  government,  if  you  still  per- 
mit the  executive  to  appoint  the  judicial  officers 
of  the  government — a  unit  far  more  dangerous 
to  the  rights  of  the  people  than  if  you  retain 
in  the  hands  of  the  people,  the  power  to  make 
these  appointments  themselves.  I  think  so,  sir. 
I  believe  as  was  remarked  by  my  aged  and  ven- 
erable friend  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  upon 
another  occasion,  that  "all  men  love  power  from 
the  Autocrat  of  Russia  down  to  the  petty  con- 
stable who  struts  your  streets  with  his  saddle- 
bags upon  his  arm."  And  if  you  confide  too  much 
power  to  the  hands  of  one  man,  that  power  will 


282 


be  abused;  whereas,  if  you  retain  itiu  theliands 
of  the  people,  the  many,  to  whom,  and  from 
whom  all  power  emanates  and  belongs,  there 
cannot  be  that  danger  that  would  result  from 
concentrating  all  power  in  the  hands  of  one  man. 

I  know  that  it  is  a  difficult  task  to  form  a  gov- 
ernment that  will  be  perfect  in  all  its  parts.  Man 
is  a  frail  and  erring  oeing;  he  is  subject  to  all 
the  passions  and  prejudices  of  frail,  erring  na- 
ture ;  but  sir,  when  we  come  to  make  a  govern- 
ment, we  should  endeavor,  as  near  as  may  be,  to 
make  that  government  harmonize  with  the  condi- 
tion of  man  as  man,  and  to  harmonize  with  the 
great  principles  of  civil  liberty. 

How  then,  sir,  is  this  to  be  done,  if  you  want 
to  elevate  man  in  the  scale  of  human  existence? 
Can  you  do  it  by  telling  him  that  you  are  dis- 
trustful of  his  capacity  to  select  his  own  agents, 
and  the  officers  of  government?  Would  it  not 
rather  be  done  by  holding  out  to  him  the  idea 
that  he  Avas  an  iutelligent  being,  created  for 
high  and  noble  purposes,  and  endowed  with 
great  and  mighty  privileges?  What  sir,  was  it 
that  nerved  the  arm  of  Kentucky  soldiers  when 
bearing  aloft  the  flag  of  their  country  upon  the 
heights  of  Cerro  Gordo,  and  upon  the  plains  of 
Buena  Vista,  but  the  recollection  of  the  noble 
ancestry  from  which  they  sprang.  We,  sir,  then 
are  to  make  a  government  for  a  brave,  a  patriotic, 
and  an  intelligent  people,  and  in  making  that 
government,  Ave  should  not  indicate  to  that 
great  people,  that  Ave  distrusted  their  capacity 
for  any  emergency.  Again  sir,  if  you  elect  all 
the  officers  of  your  government,  you  say  to  the 
humble  and  obscure  (and  sir,  having  commenced 
my  career  in  life  without  friends  or  fortune,  1 
confess  I  have  a  very  great  respect  for  this  class 
of  the  community,)thatthe  door  is  open,  be  vir- 
tuous, be  honest,  be  industrious,  and  a  virtuous 
and  intelligent  people  Avill  rcAvard  your  exer- 
tions. 

Mr.  Chairman,  T  will  say  no  more  upon  this 
branch  of  the  subject.  But  I  will  just  here  re- 
mark, that  I  shall  support  the  proposition  as 
reported  by  the  committee,  with  but  few  excep- 
tions. I  shall  support  the  proposition  to  elect 
the  judges  by  districts,  because  sir,  I  believe  that 
by  that  plan,  we  shall  be  more  likely  to  get  a 
court  free  from  prejudice  than  by  any  other 
plan  that  has  been  proposed.  By  that  plan,  three 
of  the  judges  will  be  removed  from  the  consequen- 
ces which  nave  been  so  much  deprecated  upon  this 
floor  by  gentlemen,  who  fear  that  the  excite- 
ment of  an  election  by  the  people  might  be 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  decisions  of  the  judge. 
I  shall  vote  for  branching  the  court,  because  I 
believe  thatif  this  court  is  demanded  by  the  in- 
terest of  the  people,  and  is  necessary  to  carry 
out  the  great  ends  of  government,  it  should  be 
go  arranged  as  to  give  to  all  the  people,  as  near 
as  possible,  an  opportunity  to  avail  themselves 
of  the  advantage  of  that  court.  And  again  sir, 
as  was  well  remarked  by  my  friend  from  Todd, 
if  you  want  a  suit  Avell  managed  and  well  at- 
tended to,  you  must  liavo  an  attorney  that  par- 
takes of  the  spirit  of  the  client>— one  T'ho  will 
become  interested  in  the  issue  and  result  of  the 
cause;  and  no  attorney  is  so  apt  to  become  so 
as  one  who  lives  in  the  client's  own  county,  and 
•who  has  been  cngagad  in  the  cause  from  its 
commencement.    It  will  also  have  the  effect  of 


making  better  lawyers,  as  it  Avill  open  to  the 
laAvyers  of  each  county  a  Avider  fidd  for  the 
display  of  their  talents.  I  shall  also  vote  for 
the  re-eligibility  of  the  judges.  Without  giving 
my  reasons  at  length  upon  this  branch  of  tlie  sub- 
ject, I  will  only  remark  that  in  ray  humble  judg- 
ment, if  an  individual  Avho  has  been  elevated  to  a 
high  judicial  station  should  so  far  forget  his  po- 
sition and  calling,  as  gentlemen  have  indicated 
they  fear  he  Avould,  1  believe  there  is  virtue  and 
intelligence  enough  among  the  people  of  this 
commonAA^ealth  to  detect  and  condenm  such  a 
course,  and  to  elect  some  more  honorable  man  in 
his'  place.  Upon  the  subject  of  electing  the 
judges  by  ballot,  I  am  somcAvhat  like  my  friend 
from  Henry,  my  mind  is  in  doubting  castle. 
But  sir,  as  this  is  a  question  that  was  not  dis- 
cussed before  the  people,  and  as  I  doubt  very 
much  whelher  the  people  of  Kentucky  would 
favor  such  a  plan,  and  as  I  am  satisfied  that  the 
people  of  Kentucky  have  independence  enough 
to  vote  fearlessly  tor  any  officer  they  may  choose, 
and  as  I  am  satisfied  that  equally  as  many,  if 
not  more  frauds  could  and  Avould  be  practiced 
under  the  ballot  system,  than  under  the  viva  voce 
system,  I  shall  vote  against  that  proposition. 

Mr.  Chairman,  one  other  remark  and  I  have 
done.  NotAvithstanding  sir  we  have  been  a  lit- 
tle tardy  in  the  discussion  of  the  various  prop- 
ositions before  the  convention,  I  have  been 
pleased  to  see  the  two  great  political  divisions 
in  this  house  harmonize  so  Avell.  And  when  I 
see  around  me  men  of  both  political  parties — 
men  of  age,  and  experience,  and  virtue — men 
Avho  have  passed  the  meridian  of  life,  and  who 
areladened  with  the  fruits  of  experience,  I  can- 
not but  hope  for  the  most  auspicious  results  from 
our  labors.  But  sir,  whilst  I  am  thus  gratified, 
I  have  regretted,  deeply  regretted,  that  gentle- 
men belonging  to  the  great  political  church  that 
I  do,  should  have  thought  proper  in  the  discus- 
sions now  before  the  committee,  to  allude  to  the 
calling  of  a  convention,  as  a  matter  which  had 
originated  from  party  feelings.  And  sir,  when 
the  gentleman  from  Logan,  a  few  days  ago, 
made  the  startling  annunciation  to  this  conven- 
tion, that  the  democrats  and  emancipationists 
had  united  together  for  the  purpose  of 
calling  this  convention,  I  admit  sir,  that  I 
felt  a  good  deal  surprised;  but  sir,  Avhen  on 
Saturday,  he  announced  to  the  house,  that  he 
had  been  elected  because  of  his  opposition  to 
any  constitutional  reform  whatever,  then  sir, 
the  secret  of  my  astonishment  was  made  mani- 
fest. Sir,  I  have  just  this  to  say  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Logan.  He  may  speak  the  sentiments 
of  the  people  of  Logan,  but  sir,  if  his  be  Avhig 
doctrine — if  his  be  the  sentiments  which  agitate 
and  control  the  great  whig  heart — then  sir,  I  am 
ready,  like  my  friend  from  Knox,  to  tap  at  the 
door  of  the  democratic  church  for  admission. 
So  far  however,  Mr.  Chairman,  from  the  calling  of 
this  convention  having  been  a  party  measure,  it 
was  called  for  by  the  people — Avhigs  and  demo 
cracts  have  hitherto  battled,  shoulder  to  shoul- 
der, upon  this  great  question.  I  stand  here  as  a 
living  witness,  that  so  far  as  the  democrats  of 
my  county  are  concerned,  the  imputation  of  the 
gentleman  is  not  cliargeable  to  them;  and  I  do 
nope  that  we  sliall  be  actuated  by  a  common 
sentiment,  and  a  common  spirit,  and  ai  we  are 


283 


to  make  a  coustitution  for  a  free  aad  intelligent 
people,  that  we  shall  burj  our  party  feelings, 
and  party  prejudices,  and  that  we  shall  make  a 
constitution  that  will  remedy  the  evils  of  which 
the  people  have  complained. 

Mr.  KAVAXAUGH.  I  desire  to  submit  a  few 
suggestions  to  the  committee  before  the  vote  is 
taken,  upon  so  much  of  the  report  as  is  yet 
undisposed  of,  and  the  amendments  proposed 
thereto;  and  in  this  I  promise  to  be  brief.  The 
report  and  amendments  yet  undisposed  of,  pro- 
pose that  the  court  of  appeals  shall  consist  of 
four  judges,  and  that  this  court  shall  hold  its 
sessions  in  different  districts  in  the  state.  It  pro- 
poses further,  re-eligibility  and  minimum  salaries, 
riie  last  proposition,  I  believe,  was  made  by  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner.)  Before 
going  into  details  upon  any  provision  to  be  in- 
corporated into  the  constitution,  it  seems  to  me 
that  this  committee  and  the  convention,  should 
well  consider  the  results  and  consequences 
which  may  flow  from  such  details;  and  es- 
pecially should  they  well  consider  such  re- 
sults, if  the  question  has  not  been  discuss- 
ed before  the  people,  and  decided  by  them  in 
their  elections  at  the  polls.  There  were  some 
four  or  five  important  and  radical  changes  which 
the  people  seemed  desirous  to  have  made  when 
they  called  this  convention.  One  was  that  the 
legislature  should  meet  only  once  in  two  years; 
another  great  and  fundamental  change  insisted 
upon  was,  that  all  the  officers  in  the  common- 
wealth should  be  elected  directly  by  the  people 
themselves;  another  was,  that  when  the  legisla- 
ture was  assembled,  some  restriction  should  be 
placed  upon  the  power  of  that  body,  especially 
as  to  local  and  private  legislation  relative  to 
matters  and  things  which  could  be  more  cheaply 
and  conveniently  done  in  other  departments; 
and  further,  that  some  limit  should  be  fixed  as 
to  the  power  of  the  same  body  in  contracting 
debts.  These  were  some  of  the  reasons  and  ob- 
jects for  which  this  convention  was  called,  and 
permit  me  to  remark  that  at  no  time,  during  the 
two  years  canvass  before  the  people  on  tlie  ques- 
tion of  calling  a  convention,  did  I  hear  any  one 
say  that  it  was  to  be  called  for  the  purpose  of  in- 
creasing the  expenses  of  the  government  and  mul- 
tiplying offices.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  expect- 
ed that  if  any  change  were  made  in  this  respect 
it  would  be  to  cuitail  expenditures  and  diminish 
the  number  of  offices. 

2^ow,  in  this,  the  very  first  report  which  is 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  convention,  it  is 
proposed  to  increase  the  number  of  the  appellate 
judges  by  one,  and  that  the  court  shall  hold  its 
sessions  in  different  districts  in  the  state.  You, 
by  the  constitution  as  it  were,  issue  your  mandate 
to  the  legislature  to  district  the  state  into  four 
judicial  districts,  and  declare  that  these  courts 
shall  hold  their  sessions  where  the  legislature 
may  prescribe. 

The  gentleman  from  Montgomery,  (Mr.  Ap- 
person,)  made  an  able  speech  to  convince  the 
committee  that  this  court  should  be  branched, 
and  he  demanded  of  those  opposed  to  branching 
to  show  wherein  any  expense  would  accrue 
against  the  state  in  case  this  were  done.  Now,  I 
ask  for  nothing  better  than  the  arguments  of  the 
gentleman  himself,  to  show  that  the  expense  of 
this  court  will  be  increased,  and  that  if  his  posi- 


tions be  true,  the  annual  expense  will  even  be 
doubled.  That  gentleman  told  us,  that  no  ad- 
ditional court  houses  nor  additional  libraries 
would  be  needed  in  the  different  districts,  in 
which  the  court  of  appeals  would  be  required  to 
sit.  He  also  told  us  that  a  great  number  of  cau- 
ses were  carried  to  the  court  of  appeals,  and  that 
nearly  half  of  them  were  reversed,  and  insisted 
that  to  obtain  these  reversals  the  court  ought  to 
be  bronght  within  convenient  distance  to  every 
part  of  the  state;  and  that  the  border  counties 
now  carried  a  much  less  proportional  number 
of  causes  to  the  appellate  court  than  those  with- 
in the  vicinity  of  the  capital.  Now  to  obtain 
correct  decisions  resulting  in  these  reversals,  it 
is  necessary  to  have  learning,  ability  and  talents 
on  the  appellate  bench  of  the  highest  order — 
yet  it  is  proposed  to  send  the  appellate  judges 
out  into  the  state  to  correct  errors,  without  a 
court  house  and  without  a  library.  But  is  it  a 
fact  that  the  state  of  Kentucky  will  establish  in 
any  district  a  court  of  appeals  without  a  court 
house?  Is  it  a  fact  that  she  will  appoint  three 
or  four  judges,  and  require  them  to  perform  their 
duties  in  different  districts  without  a  library? 
But  the  gentleman  says  they  can  have  the  libra- 
ries of  the  lawyers.  This  may  be,  but  when  the 
thing  is  finally  tested  it  will  be  seen  that  the  state 
will  have  the  libraries  and  court  houses  to  furnish 
and  such  other  conveniences  as  the  wants  of  the 
court  may  require;  and  if  the  branches  ought, 
in  point  of  fact,  to  do  so  that  every  facility  may 
be  given  to  secure  correct  decisions.  It  would 
be  better  to  have  no  court  of  appeals  than  to 
have  a  weak  one.  One  great  object  in  a  court  of 
last  resort  is  to  attain  uniformity  of  decision, 
and  to  settle  general  legal  principles,  since  the 
decisions  of  such  a  court  are  not  only  to  affect 
the  rights  of  the  parties  in  a  given  instance,  but 
the  rights  of  hundreds  and  thousands  in  similar 
circumstances.  It  will  be  impossible  to  put  this 
system  into  operation  without  an  expense  to  the 
state  of  thirty  thousand  dollars,  made  up  of  the 
cost  of  three  or  four  court  houses  and  as  many 
libraries  besides  the  salary  of  the  additional 
judge.  But  why  is  it  another  judge  is  wanted? 
It  is  to  meet  the  facts  of  the  gentleman  from 
Montgomery,  (Mr.  Apperson,)  that  you  will 
double  the  amount  of  business  by  branching. 
But  when  you  get  four  judges  and  branch  the 
court  into  four  or  five  districts,  you  will  need 
eight  instead  of  four,  because  of  the  accumula- 
tion of  business  caused  thereby;  for  according 
to  the  argument  of  that  gentleman,  I  consider 
it  as  proved  conclusively,  that  whenever  you 
branch  the  court  and  hold  it  in  different  districts, 
you  will  have,  instead  of  six  hundred  causes, 
about  double  that  number  to  decide.  And  from 
the  intimations  already  given  in  this  convention, 
there  seems  to  be  a  strong  party  in  favor  of 
framing  a  constitution,  in  which  the  doctrine  of 
specific  amendments  is  not  to  be  allowed,  and 
that  the  door  is  to  be  shut,  bolted  and  barred 
against  that  principle.  Suppose  the  number  of 
the  appellate  judges  be  fixea  and  limited  to  four, 
and  in  the  course  of  coming  years,  it  becomes 
desirable  to  increase  or  to  diminish  that  number, 
but  on  consulting  the  constitution,  you  find  that 
the  door  to  any  amendment  is  shut,  and  bolted 
and  barred.  In  view  of  these  considerations,  I 
ask  if  gentlemen  are  willing  to  go  into  details 


284 


of  this  sort?  I,  for  one,  am  opposed  to  going 
into  this  branching  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
■when  the  people  have  not  instructed  us  to  do  so. 
It  was  not  one  of  the  questions  decided  by  the 
people  at  the  polls. 

Why  is  it  tnat  the  court  of  appeals  was  not 
branched  before?  It  is  said  that  the  legislature 
had  constitutional  scruples.  Sir  it  "was  easy  to 
have  constitutional  scruples  in  order  to  shrink 
behind  them  to  avoid  the  difficulties  which  pre- 
sented themselves.  But  that  was  not  the  reason 
that  liindered  the  legislature  from  branching 
this  court,  for  in  fact  there  was  no  con- 
stitutional barrier,  wliat  then  is  the  conclusion  to 
"which  we  must  come?  It  is  this,  that  it  was 
not  the  will  of  the  people  to  have  this  court 
branched.  We  must  certainly  come  to  this  and 
no  other  conclusion,  otherwise  the  legislature  at 
some  period  in  the  last  fifty  years,  would  have 
done  it.  The  legislature  had  the  power  during  all 
this  time,  and  the  only  reason  that  can  be  given 
"why  they  did  not  exercise  it  was,  that  they  were 
not  willing  to  shoulder  the  responsibility  when 
the  people  had  not  required  it. 

I  am  willing  that  this  question  of  branching 
should  go  before  the  people.  If  they  decide  in 
favor  of  it  by  their  representatives  in  the  legis- 
lature, I  have  no  sort  of  objection.  If  any 
barrier  exists  in  the  present  constitution  I  am 
Tvilling  to  remove  it;  but  protest  against  put- 
ting it  in  the  new  constitution.  We  do  not  know 
how  it  will  work.  According  to  the  argument 
of  the  gentleman  from  Montgomery  it  will  in- 
crease the  business  of  the  court  perhaps,  beyond 
the  power  of  that  tribunal  properly  to  decide 
and  dispose  of  the  causes  Avhich  may  come  be- 
fore it.  I  am  willing  this  question  of  branching 
should  have  a  fair  trial  before  the  country,  but  I 
shall  not  consent  here  to  this  unnecessary  in- 
crease of  offices  and  expenses.  The  fact  that 
the  committee  propose  an  additional  judge,  is 
evidence  that  they  considered  that  the  business 
of  the  court  would  be  increased  by  branching, 
above  what  might  be  expected  if  the  court  were 
held  at  one  point. 

Some  gentleman  has  proposed  that  a  mini- 
mum salary  should  be  fixed  in  the  constitution, 
I  believe  it  was  the  gentleman  from  Madison, 
and  who  contended  that  it  should  be  so,  because 
the  salary  should  be  beyond  the  power  of  those 
■who  elected  the  judge.  I  was  struck  -with  the 
remark  of  some  gentleman  the  other  day,  that 
the  people  of  Kentucky  were  generally  more 
liberal  in  making  compensation  to  those  wlio 
served  them — to  their  agents  in  an  official 
capacity,  than  the  legislature  itself.  I  am  will- 
ing to  leave  that  whole  matter  to  the  people, 
and  let  them  say  by  the  legislature,  who  are  their 
representatives  what  tlie  salary  shall  be.  It  is 
impossible  for  us  to  say  what  may  be  requisite 
in  the  long  future.  I  would  ask  are  you  ma- 
king a  constitution  to  last  but  a  few  years,  or 
one  to  last  half  a  century?  As  the  present  one 
has  done.  No  man  can  tell  what  will  be  a  fit 
Salary  to  be  paid  fifty  years  hence,  or  whether 
three  or  four  judges  will  be  required,  or  whether 
three,  four  or  more  districts  will  best  accomrao- 
<iate  the  people.  Yet  you  propose  to  go  into  all 
^ese  details,  and  then  bolt  and  bar  the  door, 
aad  say  that  these  judges  and  districts  shall 
never  bo  dimiaishedf  nor  increased  in  number. 


until  the  people  come  up  and  lay  down  their 
sovereign  power  at  the  feet  of  a  convention. 
We  have  already  seen  some  of  the  effects  of 
placinw  the  whole  sovereign  power  of  the  state 
in  the  hands  of  a  single  body  of  men,  yet  I  be- 
lieve this  convention  will  make  such  a  constitu- 
tion as  the  people  of  Kentucky  will  accept. 
They  may  go  counter  to  the  public  will  in  some 
respects,  but  in  the  main,  I  believe,  the  consti- 
tution will  be  such  as  will  meet  the  expectations 
of  the  country.  1  say  then  to  gentlemen,  let  us 
not,  in  making  this  instrument,  go  into  detail  if  we 
are  to  shut  it  up  against  specific  amendments. 
I  sliall  go  against  a  fixed  salary  for  the  reasons  I 
have  given. 

Much  has  been  said  respecting  an  independent 
judiciary.  I  am  in  favor  of  an  independent  ju- 
diciary, and  at  the  same  time  in  favor  of  respon- 
sibility to  the  people,  but  in  a  given  Avay  ;  and 
that  is,  that  when  the  judge  has  been  elected,  h  e 
shall  continue  in  office  till  the  time  for  which  he 
was  chosen  has  expired.  That  ray  vote  will 
show,  and  I  am  in  favor  of  this  other  indepen- 
dence of  the  judiciary,  that  when  a  judge  has 
been  elected,  the  tenure  of  office  shall  not  de- 
pend on  the  popular  will  ;  or  rather  on  popular 
preference  during  the  time  for  which  he  may 
have  been  elected — but  on  causes  presented  on 
fair  trial.  For  sucli  of  these  causes  as  would 
not  be  sufficient  ground  of  impeachment  you 
have  already  determined  on  a  mode  of  removal ; 
but  without  legal  cause,  even  though  every  man 
wlio  may  have  voted  for  a  judge  should  change 
his  opinion  and  prefer  another,  such  judge  can- 
not be  removed,  but  will  hold  the  office  "for  the 
time  he  was  chosen.  At  the  end  of  that  period 
I  wish  the  people  to  have  the  right  to  elect  or 
reject  him  at  their  pleasure.  That  is  indepen- 
dence enough  for  me,  and  the  kind  of  responsi- 
bility I  am  for. 

There  is  one  other  matter  to  which  I  "wish  to 
call  the  attention  of  the  committee  thougli  it  has 
been  discussed  much  more  ably  than  I  can 
hope  to  discuss  it.  I  "will  therefore,  in  a 
word  or  two  only,  present  the  views  which 
I  hold  on  the  subject.  There  have  been  some 
able  speeches  made  in  this  house  against  an 
elective  judiciary,  speeches  utterly  opposed  to  my 
opinions,  but  wnich  I  have  no  disposition  to  re- 
ply to,  because  they  have  been  well  answered  by 
others.  I  will  only  say,  that  the  people  liave  de- 
cided that  question,  and  tinlike  another  gentle- 
man who  has  spoken,  I  cannot  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  they  decided  lightly  and  hastily. — 
They  have  had  two  whole  years  before  them  to 
consider  the  matter,  and  tliey  have  determined 
that  they  have  not  only  the  right  to  elect  their 
officers,  but  that  it  is  expedient  to  elect  them, 
and  all  of  them.  The  question  now  is,  whether 
it  is  expedient  for  them  to  do  it  themselves  or  to 
delegate  the  power  to  others.  They  have  tried 
the  latter  mode  for  fifty  years,  they  liave  tried  it 
fully  and  thoroughly  and  they  have  now  delib- 
erately determined  that  they  can  exercise  tliat 
high  privilege  as  well  as  any  agent  can  do  it  for 
them.  They  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
they  will  have  as  learned,  as  pure,  and  as  intelli- 
gent a  judiciary  if  they  appoint  the  judges 
as  they  will  if  they  give  tliat  power  to  the 
executive ;  and  further,  that  they  will  not 
only  have  as  intelligent,  as  pure,  and  as  learned 


285 


a  judiciary  thus  appointed,  but  one  much  more 
in  harmony  with  public  feeling  and  the  popular 
voice.  They  have  determined  to  withdraw  this 
delegated  power,  which  is  recognized  under  the 
present  constitution,  and  that  tliey  will  exercise 
that  power  themselves,  and  they  are  now  deter- 
mining that  when  the  judge  is  elected,  whether 
for  eight  or  ten  years,  that  the  election  shall  be 
in  the  nature  of  a  contract  between  him  and  the 
people,  and  that  if  he  discharge  the  duties  of 
the  ofBce  properly,  he  shall  not  be  subject  to  be 
removed  simply  by  the  popular  voice,  but  only 
for  misdemeanors  in  office  for  which  he  may  be 
impeached,  or  for  any  other  reasonable  cause, 
for  which  a  majority  of  two  thirds  of  the  legis- 
lature may  remove. 

But  gentlemen  seem  to  think  that  if  the  judges 
are  re-eligible  they  will  be  responsible  to  the 
people,  and  therefore  not  independent,  under  the 
old  mode,  they  were  a.s  independent  of  the  ap- 
pointing power  as  they  will  be  under  the  new, 
and  not  more  so.  But  according  to  the  mode 
now  proposed  they  will  hold  their  offices  only  for 
a  limited  term.  If  the  people  are  capable  of  de- 
termining who  ought  to  be  their  judge  in  the 
first,  they  are  equally  capable  in  the  second  in- 
stance. All  agree  that  the  judge  should  hold  his 
office  only  for  a  limited  term.  N^ow,  if  you  do 
not  place  the  appointing  power  in  the  hands  of 
the  people,  will  you  place  in  the  hands  of  the 
executive,  and  if  so,  how  does  it  stand,  will  not 
the  judge  court  the  executive,  and  bow  to  him  or 
to  whatever  source  may  hold  the  re-appointing 
power,  for  the  purpose  of  securing'  a  re-appoint- 
ment, as  certainly  as  if  the  power  is  in  the  hands 
of  the  people?  But  the  idea  is  at  war  with  the 
fundamental  principles  of  our  government,  that 
if  the  people  have  a  sufficient  amount  of  public 
virtue  and  intelligence  to  govern  themselves,  and 
select  their  own  officers  .they  will  not  always  know 
by  what  motives,  in  a  general  point  of  view,  the 
judge  is  influenced  in  deciding  causes  which  are 
brought  Ijefore  him,  and  whetber  he  has  an  eye 
to  his  re-election  in  the  decisions  he  may  make. 
If  the  people  are  not  capable  of  resisting  the 
wily  attacks  by  a  judge  when  he  presents  him- 
self before  them,  either  in  the  first  or  the  second 
instance,  then  your  form  of  popular  government 
is  an  abortion,  and  you  may  as  well  at  once 
abandon  it. 

As  I  have  seen  no  good  rea.son  for  changing 
my  opinion  in  the  arguments  of  the  gentlemen, 
I  shall  vote  for  re-eligibility.  The  arguments 
presented  by  the  gentleman  from  Todd  (Mr.  Bris- 
tow,)  were  such  as  perfectly  satisfied  my  mind, 
that  one  of  the  most  powerful  inducements  to 
strict  justice  and  purity  in  a  judge,  befiore  an  en- 
lightened people,  is  re-eligibility.  Before  such 
a  people,  his  hope  of  re-election  hangs  not  on 
playing  the  demagogue  or  corrupt  judge,  but  on 
the  independent  and  upright  discharge  of  his 
duties  in  an  official  capacity — knowing  at  the 
time  that  his  official  conduct  and  motives  will 
be  duly  appreciated  by  the  people — and  that  if 
he  is  found  leaning  to  the  rich  and  influential,  or 
to  the  strong  lawyer  of  talent  and  weight  of 
character,  as  has  been  intimated,  or  to  any  oth- 
er power  whatever,  that  hisfellow  citizens  would 
rise  up  and  vote  him  down.  Gentlemen  insist 
that  this  principle  of  re-eligibility  will  bringthe 
judge  under  the  sway  of  the  rich  and  influential. 


Yet  the  poor  man's  vote  counts  as  many  as  that 
of  the  rich.  Besides,  there  is  a  sense  of  justice 
among  the  people  of  Kentucky,  before  which  the 
reputation  of  any  judge  wouli  be  bla.sted,  when- 
ever he  should  be  found  deciding  a  cause,  or  in 
any  official  capacity  acting  in  such  manner  as  to 
convince  the  people  that  he  thus  acted  for  elec- 
tioneering purposes.  It  would  secure  his  defeat 
in  any  coming  contest. 

I  hope  the  committee  will  be  content,  without 
putting  the  provision  for  bran<'hing  the  court  of 
appeals  in  the  constitution.  If  there  be  any  con- 
stitutional barrier  which  prevents  it,  let  that  be 
stricken  out,  and  let  the  whole  question  go  to 
the  people  to  be  decided  by  them.  I  am  willing 
that  the  border  counties  should  have  justice  done 
them — it  is  right  that  they  should;  but  I  imag- 
ine that  this  committee  are  not  ready  to  say  that 
the  people  have  decided  this  question.  If  they 
have  not  decided  it,  and  the  action  of  the  legis^ 
lature  shows  that  the  popular  will  is  against  it, 
let  the  whole  matter  remain  for  the  people  to  pass 
upon,  and  let  them  say  whether  the  court  of  ap- 

feals  shall  be  branched  or  not.  As  I  have  said, 
shall  vote  against  a  fourth  judge,  and  against 
branching  the  court  of  appeals,  but  for  leaving 
it  in  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  make  this 
provision  by  statute  hereafter,  if  they  choose  to 
do  so.  And  I  protest  against  going  into  these 
details,  while  it  is  uncertain  whether  the  public 
will  will  sanction  them.  The  gentleman  from 
Louisville  said,  this  branching  of  the  court  would 
be  of  great  convenience  to  the  members  of  the 
legal  profession,  and  probably  of  some  conve- 
nience to  the  people  at  large.  If  this  is  gotten 
up  for  the  sake  of  the  legal  profession,  and  with- 
out reference  to  the  people  at  large,  I  would  sav, 
let  the  gentlemen  of  that  profession  appeal  to  the 
people  at  large  for  this  convenience,  and  if  a 
majority  are  in  favor  of  it,  I  am  willing  that  ma- 
jority should  rule. 

But  I  do  hope  that  the  responsibility  of  this 
expense  of  branching  the  court  of  appeals  will 
not  be  incurred  by  the  convention,  and  that  the 
fact  that  it  may  be  made  a  make-weight  against 
the  final  adoption  of  the  constitution  by  the 
people,  will  also  be  considered.  Have  we  an 
overflowing  treasury  that  the  matter  of  cost  may 
be  passed  lightly?  It  was  said  last  winter  that 
the  public  debt  was  growing  less.  But  if  we 
examine  the  tables  we  shall  find  that  this  debt 
is  constantly  increasing.  It  is  true  that  the  pub- 
lic debt,  aside  from  the  school  fund,  has  been 
something  reduced — say  one  hundred  thousand 
dollars.  On  the  other  hand,  the  people  have 
determined  that  that  fund  should  remain  invi- 
olate. The  interest  on  which  was  funded  on 
the  first  January,  1843,  and  the  bond  of  the  state 
taken  therefor,  amounting  to  upwards  of  three 
hundred  thousand  dollars,  not  only  increasing 
the  debt  of  the  state  by  that  amount,  but  since 
the  date  of  this  bond  the  accruing  interest  on 
the  entire  school  fund,  including  the  bond,  has 
continued  to  run  up  and  accumulate  against  the 
state,  till  the  additional  outstanding  interest  on 
this  fund  to-day  is  not  less  than  one  hundred  thou- 
sanddoUars— ^5o  that  if  the  faith  of  the  state  to 
the  school  fund  is  preserved,  unless  we  diminish 
and  retrench  the  expenditures  of  the  state,  in- 
stead of  increasing  them,  an  increase  in  taxa- 
tion is  inevitable.     This  gradual  increase  of  the 


286 


public  debt  is  not  understood  by  the  great  body 
of  the  people,  but  the  reverse  is  generally  be- 
lieved by  tliem.  I  have  no  doubt  the  convention 
will  preserve  the  school  fund  inviolate.  True, 
our  attempt  at  common  schools  has  been  but  a 
faint,  a  feeble  imitation  of  a  school  system,  and 
has  in  truth  amounted  to  nothing  as  yet;  and  in 
point  of  fact  was  a  perfect  failure  till  the  people 
came  to  the  rescue  and  taxed  themselves  in  a  sum 
amounting  annually  to  near  sixty  thousand  dol- 
lars, whieli  is  in  addition  to  that  fund  which 
they  had  before  said  should  be  set  apart  and  se- 
cured to  the  schools  of  the  state. 

I  make  no  doubt  the  convention  will,  in  obe- 
dience to  the  will  of  the  people  thus  manifested, 
consecrate  the  whole  school  fund  under  the  new 
constitution  to  the  purposes  of  education,  and 
hope  that  in  future  we  will  have  an  efficient 
System  and  not  a  mere  imitation  or  attempt  at  a 
system  as  heretofore.  The  people  have  decided 
tnat  they  will  go  forward  on  the  subject  of  com- 
mon schools.  I  hope  they  will.  But  I  have 
called  the  attention  of  the  committee  to  the  state 
of  the  treasury  only  to  show  that  we  cannot  now 
meet  accruing  liabilities.  And  that  if  we  would 
avoid  further  taxation,  every  possible  item  of  ex- 
pense must  be  kept  down.  But,  sir,  without  ad- 
ding more,  I  would  only  again  say,  leave  details 
as  far  as  possible  out  of  the  constitution,  espe- 
cially if  it  is  the  intention  of  the  convention  to 
vote  down  specific  amendments.  If  it  is,  let 
the  constitution  consist  of  general  principles 
and  a  general  organization  of  the  government 
only,  as  it  was  in  this  respect  before,  and  leave 
to  the  legislature  the  power  to  fill  out  minute 
details.  Such  as  fixing  salaries,  as  well  as  the 
number  of  judges,  and  the  points  at  which  the 
courts  shall  be  held.  I  have  no  objection  to 
settling  things  of  this  kind  now  if  you  intend 
allowing  tlie  new  constitution  to  be  amended 
specifically.  If  you  do  not  so  intend,  but  still 
go  on  filling  up  tte  new  constitution  with  such 
provisions,  the  time  may  soon  co7ne  for  us  to  re- 
gret their  existence  without  a  mode  to  get  clear 
of  them,  short  of  calling  another  convention. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  It  is  the  first  time  in  two 
weeks  that  I  have  been  able  to  speak,  or  scarcely 
to  think,  on  account  of  the  state  of  my  health; 
and  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  be  able  to  do  so 
now.  As  much  as  I  prize  and  value  the  right  of 
the  people  to  govern  themselves,  and  to  elect 
their  own  ofiicers  to  preside  or  rule  over  them, 
and  who  receive  pay  for  the  services,  in  the  pre- 
sent form  of  the  report  of  the  comnuttee  on  the 
court  of  appeals,  I  shall  be  compelled  to  vote 
against  it,  because  I  believe  that  it  will  be  inju- 
rious to  the  interest  of  the  state,  and  the  best  in- 
terests of  the  people.  The  subject  of  branching 
the  court  of  appeals  is  not  new  to  us.  From  the 
best  examination  that  I  can  make,  this  subject 
has  been  before  the  legislature,  during  the  last 
fifty  years,  no  less  than  twenty-four  times.  In 
one  instance  only  eight  votes  were  wanting  to  its 
passage  in  that  body.  I  have  heard  no  argu- 
ment advanced  by  any  gentleman,  which  has 
satisfied  me  that  the  legal  power  does  not  exist 
in  the  legislature  to  brancli  the  court  of  appeals, 
if  they  wished  to  do  it.  1  Iiave  examined  the 
constitution,  and  from  the  best  lights  I  could 
obtain,  I  concede  it  as  a  fact  that  the  legislature 
has  bad    no   real    coustitutional   objection   to 


branching  the  court  of  appeals.  The  objection 
has  really  been  on  the  part  of  the  people;  they 
have  never  required  it.  I  know  gentlemen  in 
the  district  adjoining  mine  come  out  boldly,  aud 
say  that  this  branching  of  the  court  of  appeals 
would  not  increase  the  expenses  of  the  state; 
that  it  would  permit  judges  to  bring  justice 
nearer  the  doors  of  those  engaged  in  litigation. 
I  have  examined  the  different  constitutions — 
among  others  that  of  Texas,  and  what  was  the 
consequence?  No  state  in  the  union  has  branch- 
ed the  court  of  appeals,  where  they  have  paid 
less  than  two  thousand  dollars  as  a  salary  to  the 
judges.  In  Louisiana  they  pay  six  thousand 
dollars  to  the  judge,  and  to  the  associate  judge 
five  thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  In  Tennes- 
see the  judge  is  paid  three  thousand  five  hun- 
dred dollars,  and  the  associate  judge  two  thou- 
sand five  hundred  dollars.  Now,  gentlemen  tell 
me  that  branching  this  court  will  not  increase 
the  expense,  but  will  any  sensible  man  believe 
that  if  these  judges  are  appointed  and  compelled 
to  ride  throughout  the  state  and  hold  courts,  it 
will  not  cost  more  than  fifteen  hundred  dollars? 
Would  any  man,  who  is  capable  of  sitting  upon 
the  bench  of  the  appellate  court,  run  the  risk  of 
travelling  over  the  state  and  attending  to  the 
duties  of  his  station  for  such  a  compensation? 
And  would  Kentucky,  patriotic  Kentucky,  say 
that  her  judges  should  oe  behind  the  new  and 
little  state  of  Texas?  Would  she  send^her  men 
of  the  best  talents  throughout  the  state,  to  four 
different  points,  and  then  be  behind  the  little 
state  of  Texas,  and  say  that  they  must  perform 
these  important  services  for  the  pitiful  sum  of 
fifteen  hundred  dollars?  No  sir,  she  would  not 
do  it.  Now,  whatever  gentlemen  may  try  to 
palm  on  this  convention,  I  tell  you  that  when 
this  court  is  branched,  and  our  judges  have  to 
ride  over  the  whole  state,  you  will  find  that  we 
must  pay  them  as  much  as  is  paid  any  where 
else.  I  should  hate  to  live  in  Kentucky  and  have 
it  said  we  did  not  pay  our  judges  what  is  fair 
and  liberal.  And  where  is  the  man  that  would 
risk  his  cause  under  such  a  system,  where  the 
judge  rides  over  the  whole  state,  and  when  he 
gets  to  the  place  of  holding  the  court,  may  not 
find  a  library  worth  five  hundred  dollars.  And 
these  books'the  lawyers  will  own,  and  it  will  be 
very  natural  that  they  should  want  them  for  their 
own  use. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  hour  of  twelve  has 
arrived,  at  which  time  this  debate  must  close. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  Well  then,  I  shall  have  to 
vote  against  the  whole  of  the  proposition. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WIOKLIFFE.  As  the  hour  has 
arrived  which  is  assigned  for  the  purpose  of 
taking  the  vote,  I  ask  the  consent  of  my  col- 
leagues, before  we  vote  on  the  principal  amend- 
ment, to  submit  afew  verbal  amendments,  which 
do  not  change  the  principal  bill. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  then  offered  a  series 
of  verbal  amendments  to  the  article  as  follows  : 

Section  3,  line  2,  after  the  word  "years"  add 
the  words  "from  and  after  their  election." 

Section  4,  line  3,  add  to  the  word  "office"  the 
letter  "a." 

Section  5,  line  2,  strike  out  the  words  "appel- 
late court." 

Line  3,  strike  out  the  words  "  districts"  and 
"  therein." 


287 


Section  G,  line  2,  strike  out  the  1st,  2(J,  and 
3d  lines  to  the  word  -'years"  inclusive, and  insert 
"the  judges  first  elected  shall  serve  as  follows, 
viz:  one  shall  serve  two,  one  four,  one  six,  and 
one  eight  years." 

Section  7,  line  1,  strike  out  after  the  word 
"court"  the  words  "by  death,  resignation,  re- 
moval, or  otherwise." 

Section  7,  line  2,  and  3,  strike  out  the  words, 
"to  the  district  in  which  such  judge  was  elec- 
ted," and  insert  "to  fill  such  vacancy  for  the  re- 
sidue of  the  term." 

Section  8,  line  2,  strike  out  the  word  "appel- 
late." 

Section  9,  line  1,  strike  out  the  word  "appel- 
late." 

Line  2,  strike  out  the  words  "times  and 
places,"  and  insert  "place  and  times." 

Section  11,  line  1,  strike  out  the  word  "ap- 
pellate." 

Line  3,  after  the  word  "years,"  insert  "from 
and  after  his  election." 

Section  12,  line  1,  strike  out  the  words  "as 
clerk,"  and  insert  "to  the  office  of  clerk  of  the 
court  of  appeals." 

Line  2,  strike  out  the  word  "elected,"  and  in- 
sert "a  candidate." 

Line  3,  strike  out  "  have  at  the  time  of  such 
election,"  and  insert  "has." 

Section  13,  line  1,  strike  out  the  word  "the," 
ind  insert  "a." 

Line  2,  strike  out  the  words   "for  any  cause." 

Line  4,  strike  out  the  words  "for  that  district." 

Section  14,  line  1,  strike  out  the  word  "pro- 
vide," and  insert  "direct." 

Line  1,  strike  out  the  word  "for." 

Line  4,  strike  out  the  word  "those,"  and  in- 
sert "these." 

The  amendments  were  agreed  to. 

The  CHAIR  announced  the  question  to  be 
on  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Xelson 
(Mr.  Hardin)  to  strike  out  from  the  fourth  line 
of  the  third  section  after  the  word  "impe.ach- 
ment"  the  words  "the  governor  shall  remove;" 
and  in  the  fifth  line  after  "them"  insert  "shall 
be  removed." 

Mr.  HARDIN  remarked  that  he  had  never 
offered  those  amendments.  He  had  merely  made 
an  enquiry  to  ascertain  whether  it  was  the  in- 
tention to  vest  in  the  governor  the  veto  power 
in  this  case.  If  so,  then  there  would  be  exhibi- 
ted in  the  constitution  the  incongruity  of  first 
requiring  two  thirds  of  the  legislature  to  remove 
a  judge,  and  then  allowing  a  majority  to  over- 
rule the  governor's  veto  on  that  action.  He  had 
supposed  it  to  be  an  ovei-sighton  the  part  of  the 
committee,  and  had  risen  to  enquire  if  it  was 
not  so. 

The  fourth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  strike  out  the  word 
"four"  and  insert  "three."  So  that  there  should 
be  three  instead  of  four  judges  of  the  court  of 
appeals.  It  was  the  very  improper  haste  and 
hurry  to  get  through,  on  the  part  of  the  judges, 
that  kept  them  at  work  so  late  at  night,  to  which 
reference  had  been  made  and  not  the  press  of 
business.  If  there  were  to  be  four  judges  this 
evil  would  not  be  obviated.  He  had  obtained  a 
statement  which  exhibited  the  following  facts: 
In  1843,  the  number  of  juridical  days  the  court 
of  appeals  was  in  session,  was  106;  in   1844,  it 


was  9G;  in  1845,  it  was  107;  in  1846,  it  was  110; 
in  1847,  it  Avas  112;  in  1848,  it  was  107;  and  in 
1849,  it  was  50  days.  Now  if  thev  would  set 
about  as  long  as  they  ought,  say  loO  days,  they 
could  do  all  their  business  very  oonvenieully. 
And  to  increiise  the  number  would  not  tend  to 
secure  aiiv  reform. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  the  committee 
had  taken  counsel  from  other  states,  in  a  large 
majority  of  which,  the  appellate  court  consisted 
of  four'judges  and  upwards.  They  had  also 
looked  forward  to  an  increase  in  the  population 
and  business  of  the  country.  And  he  thought 
that  public  opinion  was  satisfied  that  four  judg- 
es were  not  too  many  to  transact  the  business 
even  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  HARDIN  conceded  that  there  had  been  . 
some  little  increase  of  business,  but  not  to  a 
considerable  extent.  The  number  of  cases  in 
1843  was  661,  of  which  468  cases  were  decided; 
in  1844,  627,  of  which  426  were  decided;  in 
1845, 753,  of  which  550  were  decided;  in  1846, 
758,  of  which  510  W'ere  decided;  in  1847,  818, 
of  which  628  were  decided;  in  1848,  763,  of 
which  598  were  decided;  in  1849,  369,  of  which 
288  were  decided;  but  there  has  been  only  one 
term  held  during  the  present  vear.  In  1802  or 
'3  or  '4,  we  had  four  judges,  tut  it  was  found 
to  be  more  than  was  necessary,  and  in  1813  the 
legislature  reduced  the  number  to  three,  and 
since  that  time  there  had  not  been  more  than 
that  number. 

Mr.  TURNER  desired  to  obviate  the  impres- 
sion which  might  be  created  by  the  gentleman's 
(Mr.  Hardin)  remarks  that  the  court  were  not 
engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office  during  the 
time  that  they  were  not  sitting  in  the  court 
room.  When  "the  court  was  not  in  session  the 
judges  were  engaged  at  home  in  the  examina- 
tion of  authorities,  and  in  the  preparation  of 
opinions  on  cases  which  had  been  submitted  to 
them.  The  easier  cases,  it  was  true,  were  deci- 
ded at  once,  but  those  embodying  difficult  ques- 
tions, the  judges  were  in  the  habit  of  taking 
home  for  examination.  He  believed,  however, 
that  if  the  court  was  branched,  there  would  be 
a  great  accession  to  the  business  before  them. 
And  as  the  court  could  not  hold  tlieir  sessions  at 
four  places,  and  sit  more  than  once  a  year  in 
each  place,  therefore,  instead  of  causes  being 
decided  directly,  in  difficult  eases,  two  or  three 
years  would  elapse  before  the  decision  was  ren- 
dered. He  was  for  increasing  the  number  of 
judges,  and  believed  that  the  reduction  of  ex- 
penses proposed  in  the  circuit  court  system 
would  more  than  balance  the  increased  expense 
that  would  be  incurred  by  the  addition  of  one 
judge.  From  1804  to  1812,  there  were  four  jtidg- 
es,  but  the  legislature  in  1813,  when  one  of  the 
judges  resigned,  that  they  might  be  justified  be- 
fore the  country  in  raising  salaries,  dropped 
one  judge  and  gave  his  salary  to  the  other  three. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  that  his  understanding  was 
that  the  judges  went  home  to  attend  to  their  own 
business,  and  not  to  examine  authorities  or  to 
write  out  opinions.  Some  of  the  most  impor- 
tant cases  have  been  argued  before  thJrn,  with 
great  ability,  and  in  less  than  four  days  a  new 
judge  had  an  opinion  ready  on  the  case.  And  as 
to  the  large  library  of  which  the  gentleman  had 
spoken,  and  the  want  of  which  he  had  urged  as 


288 


a  reason  against  branching  the  court,  wliere  did 
the  judges  find  that  at  home?  The  gentleman 
must  not  give  up  that  argument,  for  we  shall 
want  it  to  use  against  ^ranching  the  court. 
And  as  for  the  little  saving  in  regard  to  the 
circuit  courts,  we  want  that  to  apply  to  the  state 
debt. 

Mr.  TURIS"ER  said  that  as  far  as  he  knew, 
every  judge  had  an  excellent  library  at  home, 
nor  ciid  he  think  any  man  should  be  appointed 
to  that  station  who  did  not  have  such  a  library. 
And  he  would  not  branch  the  court  for  the  rea- 
son that  it  might  be  called  to  sit  at  places  where 
there  were  not  lawyers  who  had  such  libraries. 
The  judge  now,  if  he  had  not  a  sufficient  library 
at  home,  would  postpone  the  case  for  further  ex- 
amination when  he  came  where  there  was  a  com- 
petent library.  There  were  some  important  cases 
decided,  and  he  knew  of  one  in  which  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  was  concerned ,  where  great  and 
complex  constitutional  questions  were  involv- 
ed— where  it  was  a  matter  of  great  difficulty  to 
come  to  a  deeison,  and  where  numerous  author- 
ities had  to  be  examined.  In  settling  a  case  of 
that  importance  it  was  necessary  that  the  judge 
should  have  every  authority  which  could  shed 
any  light  upon  it,  even  if  he  had  to  send  abroad 
for  books; 

Mr.  HARGIS  said  he  was  opposed  to  the  in- 
crease of  the  number  of  judges  and  to  the  branch- 
ing of  the  court.  Three  judges  were  just  as 
competent  to  discharge  the  duties  as  four,  or 
five,  or  six.  The  court,  as  constituted,  had  been 
almost  the  only  tribunal  in  the  land  that  had 
given  satisfaction,  and  there  was  less  complaint 
against  it  on  the  part  of  the  people.  To  branch 
the  court,  he  believed,  would  be  to  lower  the 
higli  character  it  had  always  borne;  as  it  would 
overwhelm  them  with  business  to  such  an  extent 
as  to  prevent  their  giving  it  that  attention  wiiich 
was  requisite,  in  deciding  upon  questions  of  the 
importance  as  those  which  generally  came  before 
them.  He  should  go  for  the  district  system  and 
the  election  by  the  people,  and  believed  that  to 
be  all  that  was  necessary  in  the  way  of  amend- 
ment, so  far  as  the  appellate  court  is  concerned. 
The  propriety  of  branching. the  court  was  a  ques- 
tion for  the  legislature  to  decide,  and  not  the 
subject  of  organic  law.  Their  duty,  in  framing 
a  constitution,  was  to  lay  a  foundation  of  broad 
and  far  reacliing  principle  as  a  guidance  to  fu- 
ture legislation. 

Mr.  DAVIS  preferred  the  number  of  three 
judges  to  four.  Every  judge  ought  to  under- 
stand not  only  every  question  but  every  record, 
connected  with  it.  To  multiply  the  number  of 
judges  would  of  course  increase  the  difficulty. 
He  was  opposed  to  branching  the  court,  and  for 
the  same  reasons.  He  was  opposed  also  to  cre- 
ating another  officer,  unless  it  was  unavoidable. 
He  wanted  as  few  offices,  and  as  few  men  look- 
ing for  office,  as  possible.  To  continue  the  num- 
ber of  the  court  at  three,  to  increase  their  sala- 
ries to  about  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars, 
to  require  the  terms  of  the  court,  one  commenc- 
ing the  first  of  January,  and  the  other  the  first 
of  June,  and  to  continue  their  sessions  until  the 
general  business  was  got  through  with,  he 
thought  to  be  a  better  system  than  that  proposed 
by  the  committee. 

Mr.  MAYES  was  in  favor  of  retaining  the 


four  judges.  According  to  the  reasoning  of  the 
gentleman  who  had  just  spoken  one  judge  would 
do  the  business  better  than  three.  The  opinion 
(»f  four  judges  would  carry  more  weight  with 
them  than  that  of  a  less  number;  and  on  the 
principle  that  in  a  multitude  of  counsellors 
there  was  wisdom,  four  judges  would  be  of  more 
aid  to  each  other,  in  consultation  and  form- 
ing opinions,  than  three.  To  substitute  three  for 
four  judges,  would,  in  a  great  measure,  defeat 
the  purpose  the  committee  had  in  view  in  dis- 
tricting the  court  of  appeals.  He  was  for  the 
branching  of  the  court,  and  he  cared  not  if  it 
did  increase  the  expense  of  the  tribunal,  so  long 
as  it  had  a  tendency  more  generally  to  diffuse  its 
benefits.  The  reason  that  so  few  appeals  were 
brought  from  remote  parts  of  the  state  was  the 
expense  attendant  thereon,  which  would,  in  a 
great  measure,  be  obviated  by  bringing  the 
court  nearer  to  them,  and  this,  therefore,  was 
one  of  the  advantages  to  be  derived  from  branch- 
ing the  court.  As  to  the  library,  how  was  it  in 
the  days  of  Judge  Bibb?  There  was  no  public 
library  then,  and  he  got  along  without  one,  and 
judges  generally  in  that  day  resorted  to  their 
private  libraries.  No  gentleman,  it  was  fair 
to  suppose,  would  be  elected  a  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals  who  was  not  a  man  of  great 
legal  attainments,  nor  did  he  suppose  that  the 
court  would  be  required  to  sit  in  any  place  where 
there  was  not  a  library.  He  could,  see  no  forc5 
in  that  objection,  so  far  as  libraries  were  con- 
cerned. 

Mr.  CLARKE  agreed  that  if  the  people  were 
furnished  with  convenient  courts  in  each  of  the 
four  districts  that  there  would  be  an  increase  of 
litigation,  but  he  apprehended  it  would  not  be 
maintained  that  the  people  would  go .  to  law 
without  good  and  sufficient  reason.  If  it  was 
proper  to  have  but  one  court,  and  to  locate  it  in 
a  remote  part  of  the  state  so  as  to  prevent  liti- 
gation, and  to  prevent  an  impartial  administra- 
tion of  justice,  that  end  could  be  better  accom- 
plished by  at  once  allowing  the  court  to  sit  in 
but  one  place,  and  fixing  it  at  some  remote 
point  of  the  state.  The  whole  argument  re- 
solves itself  into  this — you  must  have  courts  so 
arranged  as  to  prevent  the  people  having  access 
thereto,  and  in  that  way  prevent  an  increase  of 
litigation.  If  it  was  desired  to  withhold  from 
the  people  the  right  to  come  into  the  sanctuary 
of  justice  and  there  demand  its  impartial  admin- 
istration, the  most  efficient  means  to  accomplish 
it  would  be  to  locate  the  court  as  he  had  in- 
stanced. How  often  did  it  happen  that  causes  in  - 
the  remote  parts  of  the  state  where  the  lawyer  W 
believed  the  decision  to  be  wrong  were  not  ' " 
brought  to  the  court  of  appeals,  on  account  of 
the  increased  expense?  He  had  in  1843  voted 
against  the  law  restricting  the  magistrates  of  the 
state  to  the  holding  of  but  four  courts  a  year, 
and  he  always  acted  on  the  principle  that  justice 
ought  to  be  carried  as  near  every  man's  door  as 
is  po.ssible,  and  consistent  with  the  public  in- 
terests. And  the  people  of  Kentucky  will  not 
withhold  a  small  expense  to  secure  that  end.  As 
it  was  now,  it  was  almost  an  impossibility  for  a 
poor  man  in  the  remote  part  of  the  state  to  bring 
his  cause  to  the  court  of  appeals  on  account  of 
the  heavy  expense.  If  the  citizens  want  to  go 
to  law  lettlieiu  have  the  means  of  redressing  the 


-289 


injuries  Uiey  have  received,  and  let  those  means  \  one  and  brought  up  ten;  Todd  sir  and  brought 
be  placed  within  their  reach.  As  to  the  library,  I  up  eight;  Shelby  fourteen  and  brought  up  seven; 
it  had  been  Tvell  remarked  that  no  judge  -would  Pike  two  and  brought  up  four;  Pulaski  two  and 
be  elected  in  a  district  who  had  not  a  good  one,  ,  brought  up  four. 

and  who  was  not  a  lawyer  of  experience  and  j  The  whole  table  goes  to  show  conclusively,  that 
learning.  But  if  a  library  should  be  needed  at  the  argument  on  the  other  si^e,  based  on  statistics, 
any  point  and  the  legislature  should  hesitate  1  is  utterly  without  force,  and  that  there  is  real- 
aboiit  making  an  appropriation  for  one,  the  '  ly  no  difficulty  of  access  to  the  court  of  appeals 
judge  elected  by  the  district  would  funiish  one  '  from  any  section  of  the  state.  He  was  opposed 
himself,  for  not  one  of  them  would  hazard  an  |  to  the  branching  of  the  court  of  appeals  and  for 
opinion  and  publish  it  to  the  world  without  due  i  these  reasons:  After  laying  out  the  state  into 
investigation  of  the  facts  and  authorities.  j  four  districts,  and  requiring  a  judge  to  be  eleet- 

The  PRESIDENT  said,  with  a  view  to  cor-  ^  ^^  «ach  district,  it  might  so  happen  that  in  a 
rect  anr  misapprehension  as  to  the  course  pur-  |  particular  district,  there  was  no  man  possessing 
sued  bv  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  with  j  ^^^  ^igh  qualifications  necessary  for  a  judge  of 
the  records,  after  the  cases  were  ai^ued  or  sub- !  the  court  of  appeals.  The  people  therefore,  m 
mitted  on  briefs,  the  practice  is  to  refer  a  record  ;  ^^.  selection  of  those  judges,  should  be  unre- 
to  a  single  judge  to  ascertain  and  report  the  j  stricted  except  by  the  limits  of  the  state. 
facts  and  law  questions  arising  on  the  record,  A^?ain,  it  would  be  impossible  for  the  court  to 
and  where  there  were  disputed  facts  and  great  ^^^^  '^  sessions  in  the  district  more  than  once 
contestation  about  them,  the  record  was  read  !  i"  ^^ch  year,  and  thus  they  could  not,  as  now, 
before  all  the  judges,  and  the  facts  and  law  set- 1  holding  two  terms  in  a  year,  call  over  the  dock- 
tied,  and  the  record  referred  to  one  of  the  judges  I  ^^  ^^^^'^  ^^  ^  7^^^'  and  the  result  would  be,  that 
to  draft  the  opinion;  and  when  the  opinion  was  i  ^^^  docket  would  not  be  cleared  at  all,  and 
drafted ,  it  is  read  and  approved  bv  aJl  the  jud?- '.  ^'^^^  would  be  great  delay.  And  causes  would 
es.  There  are  many  records  in  wtich  there  are  ■  ^^  delayed  through  that  cause  expressly  by  those 
no  disputed  facts,  therefore  there  would  be  no  j  ^^°  *»  desired.  But  what  was  the  object  of  the 
more  difficulty  with  four  than  with  three  judges.  I  '^^^^  of  appeals?  To  obtain  uniformity  of  de- 
Mr.  WILLIAMS  said  that  gentlemen  argued  '  cision-  This  being  the  great  object,  what  neces- 
this  question  of  branching  the  court,  as  if  there  sity  was  there  then  to  have  the  court  sitting  all 
had  been  a  bar  to  justice  in,  and  a  difficulty  of ;  °^^^  the  state,  and  deciding  differently,  m  dif- 
getting  access  to,  the  court  of  appeals  in  any  !  ^^^^^t  places?  A  circuit  court,  if  its  decisions 
part  of  the  state,  which  was  to  be  remedied  by  i  "^ere  final,  would  be  quite  as  good  a  court  of  final 
branching  the  court.  The  gentleman  from  i  ^e-sort  as  that.  What  was  then  to  be  gained  in  the 
Montgomery,  (Mr.  Apperson),  had  also  present- ;  branching  of  the  court  in  the  correction  of  fla- 
ed  some  statistics  calculated  to  confirm  this  im-  i  S^nt  errors  and  conduct  m  the  subordinate  tri- 
pression,yetthosestatisticsweremostfallacious.  ibunals,  another  part  of  its  duties?  Nothing. 
He  (Mr.  "VV.)  held  inhis  hand  some  statistics  pre-  '  There  was  clearly,  as  he  had  shown  from  the 
pared  from  the  auditor's  report  which  he  thought '  statistics  no  difficulty  in  getting  access  to  the 
presented  the  facts  in  a  more  favorable  light,  i  ^'^^^'  a°d  ''"^  the  great  purposes  for  which  a 
The  whole  number  of  causes  arising  in  the  in-  '  court  of  last  resort  was  established  could  be 
ferior  courts  as  exhibited  bv  that  report  for  the  1  better  obtained  by  requiring  the  court  to  hold 
year,  was  13,249,  of  which  there  came  up  to  the  !  ^ts  sesions  at  one  point.  Besides,  he  believed, 
court  ofappeals447,orone  out  of  every  thirty.  He  «^^i^  conceding  thatitwj^  desirable  to  branch 
had  made  an  estimate  of  the  number  of  causes  the  court,  it  would  be  far  preferable  to  leave  the 
which  each  county  would  have  been  entitled  to  matter  to  the  future  regulation  of  the  people, 
bring  up  to  the  co'urt  of  appeals,  and  then  com-  i  through  the  legislature,  than  to  tie  it  up  beyond 
pared  it  with  the  number  each  county  had  actu- :  control  in  the  constitution.  Nor  did  he  believe 
ally  brought  up  to  that  court,  and"the  result 'that  mcallingthis  convention,  the  people  had  ex- 
was  that  there  appeared  to  be  no  difficulty  of ,  P^css^d  any  desire  to  have  this  measure  adopted. 
access  on  the  part  of  the  remote  counties.  In-  \  Mr.  LINDSEY  said  that  having  been  absent 
deed  many  of  tliem  had  brought  up  more  than  ;  during  nearly  all  of  the  discussion  which  had 
their  proportion.  For  instance,  Allen  county,  ■  taken  place  on  the  formation  of  the  appellate 
according  to  the  estimate  should  have  brought '.  tribunal  of  the  state,  he  had  not  had  an  oppor- 
up  two  suits  and  canje  up  with  one,  just  half  as  i  tunity  to  express  his  views  on  the  several  sub- 
many  as  it  ought.  Henderson  was  entitled  to  ;jects  that  had  been  discussed.  And  having  but 
three,  and  brought  up  six;  Bullitt  three,  and  |  ten  minutes  time  allowed  him  now,  he  could 
brought  up  ten;  Caldwell  thirteen,  and  brought  |  only  express  one  or  two  reasons  that  would  in- 
up  eleven;  Carter  one,  and  brought  up  two;  Cum- :  duce  Mm  not  to  vote  for  striking  out  four  and 
berland  two  and  brought  up  three;  Hardito  '  inserting  three  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
three  and  brought  up  eight;  Fulton  three  and  I  In  this  section  of  the  state,  however  it  may  have 
brought  up  six;  Calloway  three  and  brought  up  '  been  elsewhere,  the  attention  of  the  people  was 
two;  Clay  one  and  brought  up  five;  Hickman,  j  directed  to  this  subject,  and  it  was  generally 
one  of  the  most  remote  counties  in  the  state,  |  thought  that  another  judge  added  to  that  court 
two  and    brought  up    ten;    Johnson  one   and    would  lighten  the  immense  labor  now  perform- 


brought  up  two;  Knox  two  and  brought  up  four; 
Laurel  one  and  brought  np  three;  Lawrence  one 
and    brought    np    six;     Livingston    five     and 


ed  by  the  three  judges.  That  an  additional 
judge  added  would  require  a  concurrence  of 
three  in  deciding  a  cause  where  there  was  not 


brought  up  six;   MeCracken  two  and  brought  unanimity,  and  in  such  cases,  would  give  more 
up  twelve;  Morgan  three  and  brought  upthree;   confidence  in  the  principles  settled  by  the  adju- 
Jnelson  eight  and  brought  up  twelve;  Whitley  I  dications. 
37 


290 


This  popular  iinlicatiou  had  great  weight 
with  him,  even  if  his  own  convictions  aid 
not  fully  concur;  as  he  did  earnestly  seek 
amendiuents  in  the  present  constitution,  and  be- 
ing thus  anxious  he  was  not  willing  to  insert 
any  matter  that  had  not  had  the  sanction  of  the 
people,  by  their  having  had  it  fully  discussed 
and  made  a  question  before  them  in  the  canvass. 

Nor  was  he  unwilling  to  leave  any  thing  in 
the  present  constitution  which  the  people  had 
desired  changed.  He  was  in  favor  of  the  four 
judges  therefore,  and  that  they  be  elected  by  the 
people  in  four  districts,  into  which  the  legisla- 
ture shall  divide  the  state.  The  reason  that  in- 
fluenced him  to  favor  the  district  mode  of  elect- 
ing the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  in  pre- 
ference to  electing  them  by  the  state  at  large,  in 
addition  to  many  other  reasons  he  had  heard 
stated  this  morning,  was  this  :  the  convention 
have  decided  tliat  the  people  shall  elect  them, 
and  to  keep  them  aloof  from  the  general  politics 
that  operate  in  selecting  all  officers  for  the  state 
at  large,  the  district  plan  to  his  mind  was  best. 
The  districts  will  be  of  size  sufficiently  small 
to  enable  all  the  citizens  therein  to  know,  or 
learn  pretty  well  for  whom  they  are  to  vote,  and 
not  be  compelled,  as  they  would  be,  if  the  elec- 
tion was  by  the  state  at  large,  to  trust  to  the  gui- 
dance of  others,  and  in  that  way  bring  to  ope- 
rate in  their  election  all  the  party  machinery 
and  tactics  used  in  the  election  of  other  officers, 
and  so  odious  in  its  influences. 

These  were  some  of  the  reasons  that  operated 
on  him  as  an  inducement  to  favor  four  instead  of 
three  judges,  and  the  plan  of  electing  them  by 
districts. 

In  relation  to  branching  the  court,  he  was  op- 
posed to  it,  and  might  perhaps,  if  the  opportu- 
nity occurred,  give  his  reasons  at  length  for  that 
opposition.  In  this  section  of  the  state,  the 
proposition  to  branch  was  not  agitated,  and  this 
with  him,  was  a  reason,  as  he  had  said,  for  not 
disturbing  the  present  constitution  in  relation  to 
the  place  of  holding  the  court.  It  had  been 
urged  by  the  delegate  from  Simpson,  that  per- 
sons at  a  distant  part  of  the  state,  were  often  de- 
terred by  the  necessary  expense  to  be  incurred, 
from  bringing  np  their  cases.  His  experience 
had  been,  that  men  who  want  to  go  to  law,  or 
continue  when  at  it,  are  not  deteired  by  expense. 
Suppose,  however,  a  court  established  two  or 
three  counties  off  from  the  gentleman,  in  what 
way  could  a  record  of  a  case  get  to  the  appellate 
tribunal  cheaper  than  it  comes  now.  At  all  dis- 
tances over  30  miles  the  postage  is  the  same, 
consequently  by  mail,  there  would  be  no  more 
expense  than  there  is  noAV.  This  is  the  cheap- 
est mode  of  conveying  a  record,  even  cheaper 
than  sending  a  messenger  with  it  to  an  adjoining 
county,  when  he  would  have  to  be  paid  for  his 
services.  It  would  be  seen  that  not  one  sixteenth 
of  the  cases  now  in  the  court  of  appeals  were  at- 
tended to  by  lawyers  residing  at  the  capital. 
Where  counsel  did  not  choose  to  attend  in  per- 
son, they  practice  by  brief  or  written  argument. 
The  largest  portion  of  causes  are  managed  in 
this  way.  Tlie  idea  of  some  gentlemen,  that 
motions  may  have  to  be  made  requiring  person- 
al attention,  had  but  little  weight,  for  no  coun- 
sel of  any  practice,  familiar  as  counsel  in  the 
circuit    courts  are  with  their  causes,  who  cannot 


readily  forsee  all  motions  that  can  arise  on  re- 
cords in  the  appellate  court  and  provide  as  well 
by  brief  therefor,  as  by  personal  attendance. 

Mr.  APPERSON  said  that  this  table  just  pre- 
sented by  the  gentleman,  ansAvered  his  purpose 
nearly  as  well  as  the  one  he  had  presented  him- 
self the  other  day.  Three  hundred  of  these  ca- 
ses were  those  which  had  remained  over  on  the 
docket,  from  previous  years,  and  this  of  itself 
was  an  argument  to  show  the  neces.sity  of  add- 
ing another  judge  to  the  court  to  secure  the  dis- 
patch of  business.  As  to  the  gentleman's  list, 
he  had  stated  only  extreme  cases,  and  had  not,  as 
he  (Mr.  A.)  did  the  other  day,  selected  a  region 
of  country,  without  reference  to  particular 
counties.  Let  us  see  how  the  matter  stands  ac- 
cording to  the  gentleman's  own  list.  Anderson 
county  was  entitled  to  send  up  three  causes,  and 
brought  up  six;  Bullitt  three,  and  brought  up 
ten;  Bourbon  thirteen,  aud  brought  up  fourteen; 
Bath  seven,  and  brought  up  tweh'c;  Clarke  five, 
and  brought  up  twelve;  Estill  three,  and  brought 
up  ten;  Pranklin  eleven,  and  brought  up  twenty 
one;  Fayette  fourteen,  and  brought  up  seven- 
teen; Fleming  six,  and  brought  up  twenty -two  ; 
Garrard  eight,  and  brought  up  twenty-seven  ; 
Harrison  six,  and  brought  up  sixteen;  Jefferson 
twenty-four,  and  brought  up  twenty-eight;  the 
Louisville  chancery  court  thirteen,  and  only 
brought  up  fifty;  Lincoln  four,  and  brought  up 
ten;  Marion  three,  and  brought  up  nine;  Wash- 
ington six,  and  brought  up  six.  Now  just  look 
a  little  further.  Trigg  Avas  entitled  to  eight,  and 
brought  up  one;  Simpson  three,  and  brought  up 
one;  Monroe  one,  and  brought  up  none;  Logan 
six,  and  brought  up  one  ;  Warren  five,  and 
brought  up  four.  But  he  might  go  clear  through 
the  table,  and  it  would  establish  every  fact  for 
which  he  had  contended  in  introducing  his  oAvn 
table  the  other  day.  Nor  had  the  authenticity 
and  correctnees  of  that  table  been  at  all  ques- 
tioned. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  said  the  whole  question  was 
one  of  convenience — shall  the  judges  go  to  our 
constituents,  or  shall  our  constituents  come  to 
the  court?  Shall  Mahomet  go  to  the  mountain, 
or  shall  the  mountain  come  to  Mahomet?  For 
fifty  years  our  constituents  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  coming  to  the  capital.  The  mountain 
has  come  to  Mahomet  for  fifty  years,  and  he 
thought  it  was  time  now  that  Mahomet  should 
go  to  the  mountain.  Suppose  the  branching  of 
the  court  would  cost  the  state  a  feAV  hundred 
dollars  more,  how  much  would  it  save  to  the 
people — ^by  bringing  the  court  of  appeals  nearer 
to  tnein,  instead  of  compelling  them  to  go  to  the 
capital — in  the  matter  of  travelling  expenses, 
lawyers'  fees,  «fec.  It  was  a  mere  question  of 
couA'enience,  and  as  it  had  been  tried  for  fifty 
^ears  one  way,  let  it  now  be  tried  for  a  time  the 
other  way.  But  the  convenience  of  the  people 
of  the  state  may  hereafter  require  that  the  num- 
ber of  districts  shall  be  increased,  and  he  had 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  better  to  leave 
the  subject  with  the  legislature,  rather  than  to 
place  it  beyond  control,  by  incorporating  it  in 
the  constitution.  He  Avould  require  the  legisla- 
ture, and  not  merely  authorize  tiiem  to  provide. 
The  question  being  then  taken,  the  motion  of 
Mr.  Hardin  to  strike  out  "four"  and  insert 
"three"  was  rejected. 


291 


Mr.  TRIPLETT  suggested  that  the  last  clause 
in  the  fourth  section,  as  follows — "all  prosecu- 
tions shall  be  carried  on  in  the  name  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky," 
and  conclude,  "against  the  peace  and  dignity  of 
the  same" — did  not  properlv  belong  to  this  arti- 
cle. It  related  to  crimiuaT  prosecutions,  with 
which,  of  all  the  departments  of  government, 
the  court  of  appeals  had  the  least  to  do.  The 
gentleman  from  Nelson  would  recollect  that  that 
particular  clause  in  the  present  constitution  lay 
dormant  for  forty-one  years,  and  until  about 
eight  or  nine  years  ago,  when  the  court  of  ap- 
peals decided  that  a  scire  facias  issued  on  a  bail 
bond  must  have  those  words  in  it.  It  was  pla- 
ced in  such  a  part  of  the  constitution,  that  for 
forty-one  years  neither  lawyers,  clerks,  or  sher- 
ilTs  had  found  it. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  that  it 
should  be  passed  over  for  the  present,  to  which 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  assented. 

Mr.  KAVAxf  AUGH  enquired  if  the  question 
had  been  taken  as  yet  on  the  adoption  of  the 
tliird  section? 

The  CHAIR  said  that  it  had  not. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE  moved  to  amend  the 
tliird  section,  by  striking  out  the  words  "two- 
thirds  of  each  house,"  and  insert  the  words,  "by 
the  joint  vote  of  both  houses,  two-thirds  con- 
curring." There  are  one  hundred  memljers  of 
the  lower  house,  every  member  of  which  might 
vote  for  the  removal  of  a  judge,  and  the  ques- 
tion goes  to  the  senate.  That  body  is  now  con- 
stituted of  thirty-eight  membei-s,  and  twenty- 
five  may  vote  to  remove  him  and  the  other  thir- 
teen to  retain  him.  There  would  be  one  hun- 
dred and  twentv-five  votes  to  remove  him,  and 
thirteen  to  retain  him,  and  he  would  be  retain- 
ed. So  far  from  that  being  a  two-third  princi- 
ple it  was  rather  a  nine-tenth  principle.  His 
proposition  was,  that  out  of  the  one  hundred 
and  thirty -eight  members,  ninety-three  should 
be  sufficient  to  remove  the  judge,  and  forty-six 
should  retain  him.  If  the  two-third  principle 
was  to  be  adopted,  let  it  be  fairly  carried  out. 

Mr.  PRESTON  said  this  was  but  a  phase  of 
the  majoritv  proposition  already  decided  by  the 
house.  T^e  two  third  principle  might  be 
adopted  in  regard  to  several  other  matters  which 
would  come  before  the  convention,  and  the 
preutleman  from  Fayette,  like  a  skilful  general 
■when  defeated  at  one  falls  back  on  another  bat- 
tery. The  proposition  was  without  a  precedent 
in  practice  within  the  thirtv  States  of  the  Union 
or  in  England.  The  principle  that  a  majority 
should  govern  was  proper  m  legislative  bodies, 
but  should  never  apply  to  trials.  It  was  a  prin- 
ciple that  did  not  prevail  in  juries,  and  should 
not  in  impeachments  or  address,  which  are  in 
the  nature  of  trials.  When  it  was  proposed 
that  the  legislature  should  not  except  by  a 
vote  of  two  thrids  of  each  house,  grant  the 
credit  of  the  state  to  corporations  or  undertake 
the  building  of  rail  roads  or  any  thing  of  that 
"  kind,  was  there  any  reason  for  prescribifig  a  rule 
that  would  bring  the  senate  and  the  house  into  one 
common  mob  in  order  to  act  on  a  subject  so  im- 
portant as  the  proprietv  of  trying  and  degrading 
a  judge.  It  struck  at  the  principle  of  that  delib- 
eration, which  the  division  of  the  general  as- 
sembly into  two  houses  proposed  to  secure,  and 


in  fact  was  but  a  phase  of  the  proposition  which 
was  once  nearly  unanimously  voted  down  in 
committee. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  that  there  would  al- 
ways first  have  to  be  an  investigation  into  the 
facts  of  the  case  before  it  was  decided  to  remove 
the  judge.  Did  the  gentleman  mean  that  one 
house  should  be  waiters  on  the  other,  or  that 
the  whole  matter  should  be  decided  in  joint  ses- 
sion. If  so,  it  was  without  a  precedent  in  any 
state  constitution. 

The  amendment  of  Mr.  R.  N.  WickliflFe  was 
rejected. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  amend  the  third  sec- 
tion— so  as  to  provide  that  the  salaries  of  the 
judges  should  be  fixed  by  the  legislature  at  a  sum 
not  less  than in  amount. 

Mr.  HARGIS  was  opposed  to  fixing  their  sal- 
aries in  the  Constitution.  It  was  better  to  leave 
it  to  the  legislature,  who  would  be  governed  by 
the  circumstances  in  the  discharge  of  that  du- 

t7- 

Mr.  BULLITT  moved  as  an  amendment  to  the 
amendment  that  the  blank  should  be  filled  with 
$2,500.  He  withtlrew  his  motion,  however,  at 
the  request  of  Mr.  TURNER,  who  suggested 
that  it  would  be  better  first  to  adopt  the  princi- 
ple before  the  sum  was  decided  upon. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  was  opposed  to  fixing 
salaries  in  the  constitution,  and  would  state  his 
reasons  therefor.  He  was  perfectly  satisfied  that 
there  was  out  of  this  convention  an  organized 
party  of  office  holders,  who,  in  connection  with 
those  opposed  at  the  start  to  any  change  in  the 
constitution,  will  seek  every  opportunity  to  pre- 
judice the  result  of  the  labors  of  the  convention 
before  the  people;  and  in  substitution  of  any  ar- 
gument of  his  own  on  this  subject,  he  would  just 
refer  to  a  conversation  he  had  with  a  gentleman 
the  other  day  on  this  very  topic  of  .salaries.  The 
gentleman  was  opposed  to  the  call  of  a  conven- 
tion and  not  a  member  of  this  body,  but  he  seemr 
ed  anxious  that  adequate  and  liberal  salaries 
should  be  fixed  for  the  officers,  but  was  unwil- 
ling to  vote  for  the  new  constitution  even  if  that 
was  done,  and  finally  when  asked  if  he  would 
use  it  as  an  argument  against  the  adoption  of  the 
instrument  before  the  people,  he  replied  that  he 
thought  it  would  be  a  fair  argument  to  use  to  de- 
feat what  he  considered  to  be  a  bad  measure. 
Therefor  he  (Mr.  W.)  would  rather  trust  the  mat- 
ter to  the  next  legislature,  believing  that  they 
would  be  imbued  with  the  spirit  of  the  new  con- 
stitution, and  be  prepared  to  fix  the  salaries  at 
fair  and  proper  amounts.  It  was  a  strong  argu- 
ment to  use  before  a  free  people,  to  tell  them 
that  the  salaries  of  the  officers  had  been  fixed 
beyond  their  control.  And  certainly  those  gen- 
tlemen who  have  manifested  so  much  confidence 
in  the  purity  of  the  legislature  in  regard  to  pla- 
cing the  power  of  removal  in  the  hands  of  a  ma- 
jority of  them,  should  be  willing  to  trust  them 
in  this  matter  of  salaries. 

Mr.  HARDIN  was  willing  that  the  gentle- 
man's remarks  should  apply  to  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, but  not  to  the  circuit  court.  The  commit- 
tee on  that  subject  had  adopted  the  minimum 
principle.  They  proposed  to  restrict  the  legisla- 
ture from  fixing  on  a  less  sum  than  $1600  per  an- 
num, and  less  than  that  would  fail  to  secure 
judges  to  discharge  the  amount  of  business  it  is 


292 


proposed  to  impose  on  them.  He  would  go  for 
$1500  to  the  court  t)f  appeals  judges,  but  not 
more.  They  had  shown  such  a  disposition  not 
to  hear  arguments  and  to  hurry  to  their  homes, 
that  he  would  not,  even  if  he  was  in  the  legisla- 
ture, go  for  giving  them  a  cent  more. 

Mr.  TURNER  was  in  favor  of  amending  the 
constitution,  and  of  making  such  a  one  as  would 
be  acceptable  to  the  people.  And  the  people 
have  sense  enough,  he  believed,  to  know  that 
unless  the  judges  are  paid  proper  salaries,  no 
system  that  we  can  adopt  will  succeed.  He  de- 
sired to  secure  the  slave  property  beyond  the 
reach  of  the  legislature,  and  even' to  restrict  the 
agitation  of  the  slavery  question  itself.  This  he 
believed  would  secure  the  vote  for  the  new  con- 
stitution of  a  great  many  who  opposed  the  call 
for  a  convention.  The  extension  of  popular  poAv- 
er  would  also  secure  the  votes  of  those  who  had 
desired  a  reform  in  that  particular.  These  mea- 
sures would  combine  all  the  great  interests  of  the 
State  in  the  support  of  the  new  constitution,  and 
thus  secure  its  adoption.  As  for  the  office  hold- 
ers, he  did  not  expect  to  please  them.  He  had 
nothing  to  say  against  them,  but  the  people  have 
willed  that  they  must  all  go  out — and  that  not 
one  shall  be  left  to  tell  the  tale  of  their  woes. 

Mr.  CLARKE  said  that  of  the  different  State 
constitutions,  there  were  about  eighteen  or  twen- 
ty-three in  which  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison  had  been  omitted,  and  indeed 
so  far  as  he  had  been  able  to  discover,  there  were 
but  four  or  five  in  which  any  amount  of  salary 
had  been  fixed.  He  could  perceive  no  very  good 
reason  why  this  convention  was  called  upon  to 
deviate  from  that  rule.  There  are  various  cir- 
cumstances which  govern  the  amount  that  a 
judge  should  receive.  In  1842  and  '43  .such  was 
the  scarcity  of  money,  and  the  general  reduc- 
tion of  the  value  of  property  and  labor  through- 
out the  State,  that  the  people  demanded  that  the 
salaries  of  their  officials  should  be  reduced. 
This  state  of  things  may  occur  again,  and  if  a 
minimum  be  fixed  in  the  constitution,  this  rem- 
edy could  not  again  be  applied.  Another  rea- 
son against  the  proposition  was,  that  he  did  not 
desire  further  to  encumber  the  original  conven- 
tion men.  They  would  have  enough  to  do,  with- 
out being  obliged  to  sustain  these  liigh  salaries, 
in  explaining  the  reduction  of  the  number  of  cir- 
cuit judges,  and  the  increase  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, and  other  changes  that  may  be  made  in 
the  constitution.  He  prefered  to  leave  the  ques- 
tion of  salaries  to  the  legislature,  and  leave  them 
to  fix  the  amount,  as  the  circumstances  of  the  case 
and  the  condition  of  the  country  may  require. 

The  committee  then  rose  and  reported  progress 
and  had  leave  to  sit  again. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned  to  nine 
o'clock  to-morrow  morning. 


TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  30,  1849. 

EEFORT   FROM   A    COMMITTEK. 

Mr.  McHENRY,  from  the  committee  on  mis- 
cellaneous provisions,  made  the  following  re- 
port, which,  on  his  motion,  was  ordered  to  be 
printed  and  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole; 


AE-ncLE  '■ — . 
Concerning  Impeachments. 

Sue.  1.  The  house  of  representatives  shall 
have  the  sole  power  of  impeachment. 

Sec.  2.  All  impeachments  shall  be  tried  by 
the  senate;  when  sitting  for  that  purpose,  the 
senators  shall  be  upon  oath  or  affirmation.  No 
person  shall  be  convicted  without  the  concur- 
rence of  two-thirds  of  the  members  present. 

Sec.  3.  The  goveraor,  and  all  civil  officers, 
shall  be  liable  to  impeachment  for  any  misde- 
meanor in  office;  but  judgment  in  such  ca.ses, 
shall  not  extend  further  than  to  removal  from 
office,  and  disqualification  to  hold  any  office  of 
honor,  trust,  or  profit, under  this  commonwealth; 
but  the  party  convicted  shall  nevertheless  be 
subject  and  liable  to  indictment,  trial,  and  pun- 
ishment by  law. 

rOWEES  TO    A   COMMITTEE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HARDIN,  it  was  or- 
dered that  the  select  committee  on  the  public 
debt  have  power  to  send  for  persons,  papers,  and 
records. 

EESOLUTIOXS.    COMMON    SCHOOLS. 

Mr.  JACKSON  offered  the  following  pream- 
ble and  resolutions,  which  were  referred  to  the 
committee  on  education: 

Whereas,  any  plan  or  system  of  common 
school  instruction,  which  can  be  adopted  in  this 
constitution,  will  necessarily  demand  frequent 
alterations,  conformable  to  the  progress  of  so- 
ciety, to  the  improvements  in  systems  of  educa- 
tion, and  to  the  means  which  the  state  may  be 
able,  from  time  to  time,  to  bestow — Therefore, 

Resolved,  That  it  is  inexpedient  to  establish 
in  this  constitution  a  system  of  common  school 
instruction,  but  that  the  legislature  be  required, 
by  a  provision  in  this  constitiition,  to  maintain 
inviolably  the  present  common  .school  fund; 
also  the  money  arising  from  the  special  tax  now 
levied  for  that  purpose,  and  such  other  means  as 
may  be  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  legislature 
for' the  promotion  of  that  object;  and  that  the 
same  shall  be  appropriated  to  the  promotion  of 
common  school  instruction,  in  such  manner,  and 
under  such  restrictions,  as  the  people,  through 
the  legislature,  may  determine. 

COURT  OF  APPEALS. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTONin  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals. 

The  amendment  ponding  when  the  committee 
rose  yesterday,  on  tiie  motion  of  Mr.  Turner,  in 
tliese   words,  in  relation   to  the   salary    of  the 
judges,  "which  shall   not  be  less  than 
dollars  per  annum,"  was  rejected. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  moved  to  amend  the  third  sec- 
tion by  adding  the  words,  "which  shall  not  bo 
diminished  during  their  continuance  in  office." 

He  said  he  was  unwilling  to  add'a  more  effectu- 
al mode -of  removing  from  office  than  either  im- 
peachment or  address — the  withholding  of  "aid 
and  comfort"  from  a  judge  by  diminishing  his 
salary. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.«;aid  so  far  ashewa 
individually  concerned  he  had  no  objection  to 
the  amendment;  but  the  reason  it  was  not  put  in 


293 


by  the  committee  was,  thev  thought  it  would 
come  ill  better  in  a  general  provision  in  refer- 
ence to  the  salaries  of  all  offieers.  It  certainly 
could  not  do  any  harm  to  insert  it,  and  lie  agreed 
that  it  was  not  proper  the  legislature  should 
have  power  to  take  away  tlie  salary  of  an  officer 
during  the  time  for  -n-hich  he  was  appointed, 
with  a  salary  fixed  by  the  people. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to,  and  the  third 
section  as  amended  was  adopted. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  fourth  section. 

Mr.  GHOLSOiS^  moved  to  amend  the  section 
so  a-s  to  provide  that  the  concurrence  of  three  of 
the  four  judges  should  be  necessary  to  overrule 
the  decisions  of  an  inferior  tribunal. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  such  a  provis- 
ion was  unnecessary.  Three  judges  were  neces- 
sary to  constitute  a  quorum,  and  he  presumed 
the  gentleman  hardly  required  that  they  should 
be  unanimous. 

Mr.  GHOLSON"  thought  the  circuit  judge  was 
the  most  competent  to  decide  questions  that 
came  before  him,  for  he  was  acquainted  with  all 
the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case,  and  he 
therefore  desired  to  have  a  provision  that  such 
a  decision  should  not  be  overturned,  unless  with 
the  concun-ence  of  three  judges  of  the  higher 
tribunal.  If  the  opinion  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  was  correct,  that  two  should  overrule  a 
judge  of  an  inferior  court,  he  saw  no  necessity 
for  increasing  the  number  of  judges  of  the  ap- 
pellate court.  He  desired,  by  the  amendment 
whicJi  he  had  proposed,  to  give  to  the  opinion 
of  the  judge  of  the  lower  court  the  weight  to 
which  It  was  entitled. 

The  amendment  was  rejected,  and  the  fourth 
section  was  then  adopted. 

The  fifth,  sixth,  ana  seventh  sections  were  also 
adopted. 

The  eighth  section  was  next  read.  In  the  ori- 
ginal report  it  stands  as  follows  : 

"  Sec.  8.  Any  citizen  of  the  United  States,  who 
has  attained  the  age  of  thirty  years,  and  who  is 
a  resident  of  the  appellate  district  for  which  he 
may  be  chosen,  *nd  who  has  been  a  practicing 
lawyer  in  the  courts  of  this  state  for  at  least 
eight  years,  or  whose  practice  at  the  bar,  and  ser- 
vice upon  the  bench  of  any  court  in  this  state 
shall,  togetlier,  be  equal  to  eight  years,  shall  be 
eligible  to  the  office  of  judge  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals." 

Mr.  HARDIN  enquired  what  was  meant  by 
the  words,  "service  upon  the  bench  of  any  court 
in  this  state?"  He  desired  to  know  if  it  was  in- 
tended to  include  county  as  well  as  circuit 
courts?  He  was  aware  that  sometimes  men  were 
appointed  to  the  bench  of  the  county  courts  who 
had  not  read  a  word  of  law,  and  he  desired  the 
chairman  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of  ap- 
peals to  say  whether  he  intended  to  include  such 
men. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  replied  that  the  ob- 
ject of  the  committee  was,  that  the  candidate  for 
the  office  of  a  judge  of  the  appellate  court 
should  furnish  some  evidence  to  the  people,  by 
his  practicing  as  a  lawyer,  or  on  the  bench,  of 
his  qualification  for  the  office;  and  he  did  not 
suppose  that  the  people  would  elect  such  a  man 
as  his  colleague  had  described.  Some  gentle- 
men, he  was  aware,  objected  to  the  words  "prac- 


ticing lawyer,"  and  wished  to  substitute  (he 
phrase  "licensed  lawyer."  The  committee  had 
used  the  term  practicing  lawyer  as  it  had  been 
used  in  other  constitutions.  He  knew  there 
were  great  facilities  afforded  to  obtain  licenses. 
He  had  lieard  of  one  who  offered  himself  as  an 
applicant  for  a  license,  to  whom  the  only  ques- 
tion proposed  was,  how  many  modes,  according 
to  law,  there  were  to  acquire  an  estate?  Three, 
was  the  reply.  When  asked  to  particularize,  he 
said  one  was  when  a  man's  daddy  died,  another 
was  when  he  bought  and  paid  for  it,  and  the 
third  was  hooking.  That  answer  was  consid- 
ered sufficient,  and  the  man  got  his  license,  and 
it  would  therefore  be  seen  that  the  committee 
had  reason  for  not  adopting  the  term  licensed. 
The  wish  of  all  the  committee  was  to  confine  it 
to  lawyers  who  had  practiced  in  the  courts  for 
some  years,  and  who  could  furnish  evidence  of 
their  capacity,  by  the  services  which  they  had 
rendered. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  the  committee  on  the  cir- 
cuit courts  had  directed  him  to  insert,  in  the  re- 
port from  that  committee  the  terra  of  eight  yeara, 
as  a  practicing  lawyer,  leaving  out  any  service 
on  the  bench.  He  had  himself  known  iif  his  re- 
gion of  country,  several  men,  such  as  had  been 
described,  who  obtained  licences  as  laAvyers.and 
they  were  the  greatest  pests  to  society.     It  ap- 

S?ared  to  him  too,  that  it  was  a  growing  evil, 
e  had  heard  of  one  of  these  men  being  examin- 
ed, to  by  the  question,  what  is  manslaughter, 
replied,  that  it  was  killing  a  man  in  a  hurrv. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  to  strike  out  the 
words  "and  who  has  been  a  practicing  lawyer  in 
the  courts  of  this  state  for  at  least  eight  years, 
or  whose  practice  at  the  bar  and  service  upon 
the  bench  of  any  court  in  this  state  shall  togeth- 
er be  equal  to  eight  years." 

According  to  the  gentlemen  who  had  addressed 
the  committee  it  appeared  that  one  man  might 
obtain  a  license  without  any  qualifications,  and 
he  would  become  a  practicing  lawyer  if  he  ob- 
tained a  case  with  a  fifteen  shilling  fee. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  approved  of  the  amendment  to 
strike  out.  He  had  no  doubt  there  were  such 
men  as  had  been  described,  but  he  wished  to 
throw  the  whole  responsibility  on  the  people, 
and  he  doubted  not  they  would  elect  suitable 
men. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  said  the  people  would  know 
who  were  competent,  and  therefore  he  was 
opposed  to  all  restrictions  upon  the  people. — 
Such  restrictions  could  not  be  found  in  the  con- 
stitutions of  other  states  where  the  juilgesare 
elected  by  the  people.  There  were  no  such  re- 
strictions placed  upon  the  governor  in  making 
such  appointments,  who  might  select  a  man 
who  had  not  been  either  a  judge  or  a  practicing 
lawyer,  and  why  then  should  these  restrictions 
be  placed  upon  the  people  when  the  appointing: 
power  will  be  in  their  hands.  They  would 
doubtless  elect  competent  men,  and  generally 
men  who  had  practiced  more  than  eight  years, 
either  for  the  bench  of  the  circuit  or  the  appel- 
late court. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  if  the  gentleman 
from  Bullitt  had  understood  his  motion  he  would 
have  seen  that  it  was  tostrike  outall restrictions. 

Mr.  ROOT  said  he  had  an  amendment  which 
he  thought  would  obviate  the  difficulties  which 


394 


'W'ith  some  gentlemen  existed.  It  was  to  insert  i 
the  words  "and  who  has  been  a  practicing  law- 
yer in  the  courts  of  record  of  original  jurisdic- 
tion." This  would  cut  off  the  small,  petty, 
practicing  lawyers. 

The  PRESIDENT  subscribed  fuUvtothe  doc- 
trine that  the  people  are  capable  of  selecting  their 
judges,  but  they  had  met  nere  in  convention  to 
lay  down  general  rules  to  govern  and  direct  the 
people.  He  presumed  that  this  convention  would 
provide  against  the  election  of  an  infant,  and 
that  was  restriction.  They  would  also  require 
of  the  person  who  is  to  be  elected  a  judge  of  the 
supreme  court  of  the  state  of  Kentucky,  that  he 
shall  be  at  least  twenty-one  years  of  age.  He 
saw  that  this  provision  required  that  he  shall  be 
thirty.  As  a  general  rule,  if  all  the  people  were 
together  consulting  on  the  subject,  they  would 
say  that  the  man  who  was  to  preside  in  a  court 
of'judicature  of  the  last  resort,  should  be  a  man 
of  matured  intellect  and  information,  and  that 
they  would  fix  a  period  so  far  as  would  promote 
that  maturity  of  intellect,  judgment,  and  infor- 
mation, requisite  to  that  office.  He  was  content 
with  thirty  years.  If  they  were  all  here  consult- 
ing in  relation  to  the  qualifications  of  this  judg«, 
they  would  all  agree  that  he  should  be  an  indi- 
vidual well  acquainted  with  the  laws  of  the 
land,  either  from  practicing  in  the  courts,  or 
presiding  in  the  courts  of  record  of  the  common- 
wealth a  sufficient  time  to  afford  evidence  of  his  j 
qualifications.  Now,  sir,  I  think  ei^ht  years  at  j 
the  bar,  or  three  years  at  the  bar,  and  five  as  a 
judge  in  a  court  of  record  would  be  a  good  rule 
to  oDserve  in  relation  to  this  matter.  We  would 
all  agree  that  each  of  these  restrictions  should  be 
observed  in  order  that  we  shall  have  the  advan- 
tage and  benefit  of  the  acquisitions  of  the  pro- 
fession, and  have  men  properly  qualified  for  this 
station.  We  do  know,  that  occasionally,  there 
are  peculiar  freaks  take  possession  of  the  public 
mind,  in  relation  to  individuals,  and  some  even 
have  a  remarkable  way  of  charming  the  people 
by  their  eloquence,  and  consequently  they  might 
have  men  imposed  upon  them  who  were  without 
mature  judgment  and  that  knowledge  of  the  law 
which  would  qualify  them  for  the  bench.  Now, 
in  prescribing  this  rule  for  the  people  themselves 
in  relation  to  all  the  judges,  that  we  will  all 
have  a  greater  cliance  of  obtaining  able,  compe- 
tent, experienced,  and  properly  qualified  men. 
And,  in  deciding,  in  the  first  instance,  and  mak- 
ing a  system  for  all  time  to  come,  we  had  better 
provide  the  men  that  we  want  in  that  tribunal.  But 
suppose  we  do  occasionally  cut  off  an  individual 
under  that  age,  who  is  well  qualified,  do  we  not 
also  cut  off  the  pretensions  of  those  who  have 
not  had  experience,  and  who  are  not  of  mature 
intellect,  and  of  legal  qualifications  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  the  office.  By  the  adoption  of  this 
rule  it  is  not  misjudging  the  competency  of  the 
people  to  select  capable  men  for  office  'I  It  is  no 
Kuspicion  in  relation  to  it;  it  is  only  a  safe  rule 
for  the  people  to  subscribe  to  with  a  view  to  reg- 
ulate themselves  in  reference  to  the  choice  of  an 
officer.    I  shall  vote  against  striking  out. 

Mr.  CLARKE  concurred  in  part  in  the  views 
of  the  honorable  President  of  this  convention. 
He  believed,  that  if  the  peoiile  of  this  state  were 
now  congregated,  they  would  concur  by  an  over- 
whelming majority  in  the  opinion  that  the  judge 


should  be  qualified  by  experience,  learning,  and 
practice.  He  believed  that  if  all  the  citizens  of 
one  district,  embracing  one  fourth  of  the  state 
were  met,  they  would  agree  bv  an  overwhelming 
majority  that  no  man  should  be  a  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals  in  this  state,  except  he  were 
qualified,  a  man  of  legal  learning,  experience, 
and  talent.  For  that  very  reason,  believing  that 
such  would  be  the  fact  in  every  section  of  the 
state,  he  was  perfectly  willing  to  leave  the  ques- 
tion to  the  voters  of  the  several  districts.  If 
they  Avould  give  such  a  decision  when  congrega- 
ted here,  they  would  do  the  same  thing  when 
exercising  their  sound  discretion  and  judgment 
at  the  polls.  He  saw  no  reason  why  the  people 
should  be  limited  in  the  exercise  of  their  judg- 
ment and  sound  discretion  in  making  a  selection 
of  a  judge  when  the  governor  has  never  been 
limited  in  the  exercise  of  his  discretion  and 
judgment  since  the  first  constitution  was  framed. 
There  never  was  a  provision  which  required 
that  the  governor  should  be  a  lawyer.  There 
had  been  those,  it  was  true,  who  had  claimed 
tliat  office  on  different  grounds,  and  some  on  the 
ground  that  they  were  not  lawyers,  but  from 
among  the  people,  as  they  were  pleased  to  term 
it.  If  then,  the  governor  appointed  the  judges 
without  reference  to  specific  qualfications,  would 
it  be  proper  to  limit  the  people  by  saying  that 
the  judge  .should  have  been  a  practicing  lawyer 
for  eight  years,  or  have  rendered  service  on  some 
judicial  bench  of  the  state?  If  it  were  true  that 
the  people  are  competent  to  elect  their  judges, 
and  there  were  a  correct  principle  in  the  breast  of 
the  people  of  this  state — if  it  were  true  that  the 
people  want  to  promote  their  own  welfare,  then 
would  they  make  no  such  selection  of  a  judge  as 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  had 
indicated.  This  fact  being  conceded,  he  saw  no 
reason  for  placing  any  restrictions  upon  the  elec- 
tions by  the  people.  His  opposition  was  based 
in  the  present  instance  upon  the  same  ground  as 
when  the  other  day  he  opposed  the  provision  re- 
lating to  the  qualifications  of  the  clerks  of  the 
circuit  court. 

Mr.  ROOT  re-stated  liis  amendment  thus — to 
strike  out  after  the  words  practicing  lawyer  the 
words  "in  the  courts,"  and  add  "in  the  circuit 
court  and  court  of  appeals."  It  was  evident  that 
the  judge  of  the  court  of  ajjpeals  must  be  a  lawyer, 
a  lawyer  in  practice,  for  no  man  would  be  suita- 
ble to  occupy  the  bench  of  the  court  of  appeals 
who  hadhad  no  practice.  It  would  bring  more 
ruin  to  the  country  than  any  thing  else,  for  ignor- 
ance in  high  places  often  produced  difficulties 
wliich  required  the  skill  ana  talent  of  many  wise 
men  to  remove.  It  was  therefore  a  settled  principle 
in  the  minds  of  the  people,  that  lawyers,  and 
those  of  the  best  talent  and  conversant  witli  the 
practice  in  the  higher  courts,  must  be  appointed 
to  these  offices. 

Mr.  HARDIN  felt  desirous  that  the  bill  rela- 
ting to  the  circuit  courts  and  the  court  of  appeals 
should  harmonize.  The  committee  on  thecircuit 
courts  had  introduced  a  provision  requiring  the 
candidate  to  be  a  practicing  lawyer  for  eight 
years,  and  a  residence  of  five  years  in  the  dis- 
trict. He  desired,  as  he  said  a  few  days  ago  to 
[the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  (Mr.  Clarke,)  to 
guard  against  the  effect  of  the  eloquence  of  young 
!  men  who  had  no  other  qualifications   for  the 


•i»5 


pffiee.  He  had  known  a  young  man,  who  by  his 
eloquence  could  carry  the  state  with  nini, 
who  was  less  powerful  as  he  advanced  in  life. 
And  so  it  was  with  many  young  men.  Aiken- 
side  wrote  his  best  work  at  twenty  one;  and 
Sheridan,  at  twenty  three,  wrote  his  "School  for 
Scandal,"  and  he  never  did  so  well  after.  He 
wanted  the  candidate  to  be  a  resident  in  the 
district — to  have  been  a  lawyer  for  eight  years — 
and  if  he  had  his  choice,  he  would  say  that  he 
should  be  thirty  five  years  of  age,  and  should 
not  continue  in  office  after  the  ^e  of  sixty  five. 
He  would  put  such  a  restriction  as  to  age,  be- 
cause he  would  guard  against  the  winning  elo- 
quence of  any  young  Absalom  who  might  start 
up.  He  thouglit  the  qualification  as  to  the  resi- 
dence not  long  enough. 

Mr.  DIXOJ^".  If  he  understood  the  object  of 
the  motion  to  strike  out,  it  was  to  destroy 
all  qualifications  for  this  oflice,  and  if  it  pre- 
vailed, it  would  read  in  this  way:  "anv  citizen 
of  the  United  States  who  has  attained  t"he  ao:e  of 
thirty  years,  and  is  a  resident  of  the  appellate 
district  for  which  he  may  be  chosen,  shall  be 
eligible  to  the  office  of  a  judge  of  the  court  of 
appeals." 

Could  it  be  possible  that  gentlemen  were  real- 
ly in  earnest  when  they  assert  such  a  proposition 
as  this'?    Did  gentlemen  really  believe  that  eve- 
ry citizen  of  the  district  was  eligible  to  this  of- 
fice?    Surely  gentlemen  "  would  not  and   could 
not  maintain  that  such  would  be  the  fact.    T\Tiat 
then  would  be  the  effect  of  the  motion  to  strike 
out?    It  would  be  that  every  citizen  might  at 
once  be  eligible  to  this  station,  whether  ignorant 
or  learned,   honest  or  corrupt,  qualified   or  dis- 
qualified.   He  could  not  believe  that  any  gen- 
tleman was  in  earnest  in  advocating  this  meas- 
ure.   It  was  asked  why  any  qualification  should 
be  put  in  the  new  constitution  when  it  was  not 
found  in  the  old  one?    Did  they  not  meet  here 
for  the  purpose  of  amending  the  old  constitu- 
tion, and  to  make  it  more  perfect?    If  nothing 
was  to  be  added  or  altered,  why  the  necessity 
of  meeting?     No  restriction  was"  laid  upon  the 
governor  oy  the  old  constitution,  but  it   was 
to  remedy  the  abuses   of  the   old   system  that 
they  were  now  deliberating.     In  all  probability 
the  storm  which  had  arisen  against  the  executive 
and  the  appointing  power  would  not  have  exist- 
ed had  it  not  been  for  the  abuses  which  existed 
under  the  old  system.     It  mattered  not  that  this 
was  not  in  the  old  constitution,  the  question  was 
whether  it  was  right  and  proper  to  incorporate 
it  in  the  new.     Was  it  right  that  men  not  quali- 
fied should  hold  this  office,  who  might  be  waft- 
ed into  this  high  position  by  the  circumstances 
around  them?    If  so,  whv  not  let  the  people  de- 
termine what  the  age  shall  be.    Why  not  let 
the  people  determine  on  all  the  qualifications? 
Wiat  was  the  object  of  laving  restraint  on  the 
people  in  one  particular  and  not  in  another?    He 
believed  there  should  be  a  restraint  upon  the 
people  which  would  keep  in  check  any  tenden- 
cy to  corruption  and  licentiousness;  not  that  he 
was  afraid  to  trust  the  people  to  elect  their  offi- 
cers, but  he  was  opposed  to  their  driving  off  in- 
to licentiousness,  and  elevating  men  to  high  sta- 
tions who  were  utterly  disqualified  to  discharge 
the  appropriate  duties.    If  there  were  to  be  any 
sort  of  discrimination  in  regard  to  these  offi'.-ers. 


he  desired  that  it  might  be  put  into  the  eoBSti- 
tutiou  in  that  form. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  did  not  suppose  that 
they  were  violating  any  great  principle,  or 
usage,  or  right,  when  they  endeavored  to  insert 
some  qualifications  for  the  office  of  judge.  The 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  would  strike  out 
all  qualifications.  An  individual  who  had  not 
been  a  resident  of  the  United  States  long  enougJi 
to  have  become  a  citizen  might  be  voted  for  and 
elected.  It  was  required  by  the  report  of  the 
committee  that  he  should  have  been  a  citizen 
eight  vears,  and  should  have  practiced  law,  or 
adjudicated  in  the  courts  of  justice  during  that 
time.  It  was  now  proposecl  to  strike  out  that, 
and  thus  render  every  one  not  only  eligible  to 
fill  offices,  but  competent  to  vote  for  others.  He 
found  in  running  over  the  constitution  of  the 
state  of  Louisiana,  that  a  person  must  be  a  citi- 
zen over  the  age  of  thirty  years,  a  resident  of  the 
district  eight  years,  and  have  practiced  law  five 
vears,  in  order  to  be  qualified  for  this  office, 
^he  same  principle  would  be  found  in  other 
constitutions.  He  believed  that  no  principle 
or  right  had  been  invaded  by  requiring 
that,  before  a  person  should  come  before  the 
people  asking  to  dischai^e  the  duties  of  this  of- 
fice, he  should  have  some  prima  facie  evidence  of 
his  fitness. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  said  he  had  made  up  his 
mind  to  say  not  a  word  on  this  subject.  He  did 
not  expect  to  say  any  thing  that  would  influ- 
ence the  vote  of  any  gentleman,  or  be  very  in- 
teresting to  the  house.  He  only  wished  to  say 
a  word  to  his  friends,  who  had  \  come  here 
pledged  to  constitutional  reform.  For  himself, 
he  had  come  determined  to  vote  for  any  and  ev- 
ery measure  which  he  conceived  necessary  to 
carry  out  the  great  object  which  the  people  nave 
in  view,  the  election  of  all  the  officers  by  the 
people.  But  while  he  was  in  favor  of  that 
measure,  he  would,  at  the  same  lime,  oppose 
any  and  every  measure,  having  for  its  object  to 
thwart  that  great  purpose.  A  proposition  had 
been  submitted  here  to  try  the  judges  elected  by 
the  people,  by  a  bare  majority  of  the  legislature, 
and  to  that  he  was  opposed.  A  proposition 
was  now  also  submitted,  to  let  any  and  every 
individual,  without  regard  to  his  qualifications, 
and  whether  a  citizen  or  an  alien,  be  eligible  to 
a  seat  in  the  highest  courts  in  this  state.  He 
was  likewise  opposed  to  that,  and  if  there  was 
no  other  reason  than  that  which  he  was  about 
to  assign,  it  would  be  sufficient.  They  had 
been  told  by  some  gentlemen  that  such  confu- 
sion as  the  world  had  neverseen  before,  would  en- 
sue if  theyjleft  the  election  of  the  judges  to  the  peo- 
ple. And  he  believed  this  would  oe  the  case  if  this 
proposition  to  strike  out  should  be  carried?  If  there 
were  no  qualifications  required,  every  man  would 
have  his  candidate  in  the  field.  Every  man  had  his 
influence;  every  man  had  his  party;  and  the  re- 
sult would  be,  that  the  district  would  be  filled 
with  as  many  candidates,  and  tlie  man  that 
could  bring  the  most  influence  to  bear,  by  cor- 
ruption, or  other  means,  would  be  the  suc- 
cessful candidate.  He  felt  constrained  to  vote 
for  retaining  the  qualification  in  the  report  of 
the  committee. 

Mr.  NESBITT  thought  the  people  desired  to 
guard  themselves  against  having  a  set  of  hungry 


^96 


office-seekers  ■vrithout  any  qualitioations  except 
as  to  age  and  residence,  more  gaunt  than  famished 
wolves,  turned  loose  upon  thcju.  It  miglit  happen 
inacauvass,  thatone  of  the  candidates  might  pos- 
sess all  suitable  qualifications,  while  the  other 
was  entirely  destitute  of  tliem.  The  better  man 
might  secure  a  large  majority  of  the  votes,  and 
the  other  might  receive  not  more  than  twenty 
five  votes  in  the  district;  yet  before  the  election 
closed  the  candidate  having  the  highest  num- 
ber might  be  stricken  down  and  die.  He  pre- 
sumed, in  this  civse,  that  the  certificate  of  elec- 
tion would  be  given  to  the  man  whom  the  peo- 
ple never  intended  to  elect. 

Mr.  ROOT  again  referred  to  the  effect  of  his 
proposed  amendment.  He  thought  that  every 
delegate  would  see  its  propriety.  It  would  be 
but  a  poor  compensation  to  their  constituents, 
for  their  long  effort  in  getting  tliis  convention,' if 
they  were  to  come  up  here  for  the  purpose  of 
bringing  about  constitutional  reform,  if  at  last, 
the  door  to  the  office  of  the  judge  of  the  court 
of  appeals  was  opened  so  wide,  that  every  nin- 
ny hammer,  through  the  influence  of  wealth  or 
king  alcohol,  might  ascend  the  judgment  seat, 
and  arbitrate  upon  the  great  questions  Avhich 
had  been  handed  down  from  all  antiquity,  al- 
though he  might  be  perfectly  ignorant  of  the 
laws,  and  the  decisions  that  bave  been  sanc- 
tioned for  the  last  thousand  years.  It  was  more 
important  to  have  a  person  of  judgment  and 
experience  in  the  station  of  a  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  than  in  that  of  tlie  presidency 
of  the  United  States,  or  the  chief  executive  of- 
fice of  this  commonwealth.  The  governor  of  a 
state  might  succeed  very  well  if  he  had  a  shrewd 
and  learned  secretary,  although  his  own  learning 
did  not  extend  beyond  Dilworth;  and  the  pres- 
ident of  the  United  States  might  retire  from  his 
station  with  honor,  although  he  possessed  little 
or  no  qualifications,  provided  he  is  surrounded 
by  a  wise  and  judicious  cabinet.  Butwhen  they 
come  to  the  judgment  seat  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, where  great  and  important  interests  were 
involved, learning,  ability,  talents,  and  integrity 
were  indispensable.  All  the  other  departments 
of  the  government  depended  upon  this,  and  they 
would  have  spent  their  time  in  vain,  if  they 
failed  to  secure  this.  They  would  adopt  a  sys- 
tem which,  instead  of  being  beneficial,  would 
result  in  the  most  pernicous  consequences  to  all 
the  people. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  observed  that  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson  had  inquired  whether  it 
was  to  be  supposed  that  every  gentleman  in  the 
district  would  be  qualified.  It  might  be  asked, 
on  the  other  hana,  if  every  lawyer  were  quali' 
fied.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A. 
Wickliffe)  hafl  told  them  with  what  facility  a 
license  might  be  obtained.  And  any  person  so 
licensed  became  a  practicing  lawyer  if  he  ob- 
tained a  fifteen  shillings  fee.  But  the  gentle- 
man from  Campbell  said  that  the  bill  would 
permit  an  alien  to  be  eligible.  The  bill  how- 
ever, said  he  must  be  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Har- 
din) said  that  even  a  residence  was  not  requir- 
ed. He  would  ask  if  the  bill  required  a  resi- 
dence? A  person  that  practiced  law  in  Indiana, 
or  Ohio,  might  be  eligible  ;  all  that  he  would 
have  to  do,  would  be  to  make  himself  a  resident 


and  if  he  liad  practiced  law  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  he  would  be  eligible  to  sit  on  the  bench 
of  the  supreme  court.  There  were  a  dozen  in-' 
dividuals  residing  in  Indiana,  and  yet  practi- 
cing lawyers  in  tlie  courts  of  Kentucky.  As  to  . 
the  section  read  bv  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklife)  from  the  constitution  of  the 
state  of  Louisiana,  he  believed  that  this  Avas 
the  only  one  out  of  some  half  dozen  that  he  had 
examined,  which  contained  a  provision  like  the 
one  which  was  read.  If  this  amendment  pre- 
vailed, he  intended  to  follow  it  up  with  another 
which  should  require  the  candidate  to  be  a  citi- 
zen of  the  district.  He  had  no  fear  that  the 
people  would  elect  a  man  without  qualifications. 
The  gentleman  from  Louisville  (Mr.  Guthrie) 
had  made  the  supposition  that  an  infant  might 
be  elected.  It  was  not  so.  The  amendment 
did  not  extend  to  age,  but  he  proposed  to  offer 
an  amendment  which  would  be  such  that  the 
people  would  be  sufficiently  prepared  to  judge 
of  the  attainments  of  the  candidate  without 
saying  whether  he  should  have  been  a  lawA"er  or 
not.  Would  gentlemen  say  that  all  who  had  been 
lawyers,  were  qualified?  If  any  standard  of  at- 
tainment could  be  fixed  upon,  which  would 
secure  talent   and  integrity,  he  would  go  for  it. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  explained  that  what  he  meant 
by  using  the  term  alien,  was,  a  gentleman  not 
living  in  the  district  in  which  the  election  was 
going  on,  but  who  had  come  there  from  some 
other  district,  merely  with  a  view  to  his  election. 
He  did  not  mean  by  alien,  a  native  of  Europe. 
He  had  no  idea  that  the  people  would  elect  a  man 
who  was  disqualified.  For  himself,  he  would 
say  that  he  had  entire  confidence  in  the  people, 
and  believed  it  was  to  their  interest  to  elect 
men  fully  qualified  for  the  office,  inasmuch  as 
their  lives,  their  liberties,  and  their  property 
were  at  stake.  He  believed  the  people  equal  to 
any  emergency.  But  here  was  the  difficulty  he 
wanted  to  avoid.  If  men  were  to  be  made  eli- 
gible to  the  high  office  of  a  judge  of  the  appel- 
late court,  who  were  not  lawyers,  who  had  no 
sort  of  legal  qualifications,  who  were  not  con- 
versant with  the  practice  and  doings  of  the 
courts,  men  who  had  every  thing  to  gain  and 
nothing  to  lose,  he  would  say  again,  that  the 
adoption  of  such  a  principle  might  produce  a 
state  of  confusion  which  every  man  in  the  coun- 
try would  regret  to  see.  We  all  knew  that  a  man 
to  be  a  judge,  should  be  a  lawyer,  and  a  lawyer 
of  high  attainments.  At  any  rate,  he  believed 
it  for  one.  As  he  had  already  said,  he  believed 
his  constituents  were  in  favor  of  electing  all  tlie 
officers  by  the  people,  but  they  did  not  want  to 
leave  the'm  without  restraint,  or  elect  them  with- 
out qualifications  of  any  and  every  sort..  And 
it  was  on  this  account,  not  because  he  distrust- 
ed the  integrity  or  intelligence  of  the  people,  or 
believed  they  would  elect  corrupt  or  incompe- 
tent men,  but  he  wished  to  prevent  confusion, 
and  elect  the  wisest  and  best  men  of  the  coun- 
try JUS  judges.  And  this  he  believed  the  people 
would  do,  if  the  qualifications  mentioned  in 
the  report  of  the  committee  should  be  retained. 
He  would  therefore  vote  against  the  amendment 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said,  the  gentleman  re- 
marked that  a  number  of  individuals,  not  quali- 
fied, might  be  candidates,  and  one  qualified  per- 


29t 


Bon  might  be  a  candidate.  That  circumstance  j  ticed  l&vr  was  supposed  to  possess  sufficient 
Would  result  in  the  advantage  of  the  best  man ,  knowledge  to  discharge  all  the  duties  devolving 
according  to  the  view  he  had  taken,  for  he  did  ,  on  the  highest  legal  tribunal  in  the  State.  He 
not  distrust  the  intelligence  of  the  people.     He   thought  tnat  if  ever  there  was  a  position  extreme- 


would  ask  whether  there  might  not  be  one  qual- 
ified lawver  and  half  a  dozen  not  qualified? 

Mr.  Dl'XON  understood  the  gentleman  to  in- 
quire whether  a  portion  of  the  lawyers  of  this 
state  might  not  be  wholly  disqualified  to  fill  the 
bench  of  the  court  of  appeals.  The  gentleman 
himself  had  not  denied  that  some  lawyers 
might  be  qualified  to  fill  that  office.  On  the  oth- 
er hand  he  would  inquire  if,  from  the  whole  com- 
munity not  embraced  in  the  class  of  lawyers,  one 
individual  could  be  found  qualified  for  that 
office? 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  replied  that  he  believed 
there  was,  and  always  had  been. 

Mr.  DIXOX  said  he  confessed  that  this  was 
beyond  his  comprehension.  He  had  spoken  of 
lawyers,  not  practicing  lawyers  alone,  out  those 
who  understood  the  laws  of  the  countrv,  and  ha4i 
devoted  their  lives  to  their  study.  Would  the 
gentleman  insert  in  the  constitution  a  declaration 
that  every  man  in  his  district  was  qualified  for 
this  office,  if  the  people  chose  to  appoint  him? 
If  so,  the  constitution  would  be  a  laughingstock 
for  all  sensible  men.  It  was  his  wish  to  make 
a  good  constitution,  one  that  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky would  be  proud  of,  one  that  would  pro- 
tect the  people  from  every  improper  influence, 
from  whatever  source  it  might  come.  He  was 
not  for  taking  away  these  qualifications.  He  be- 
lieved that  the  restrictions  as  to  age,  citizenship, 
and  residence  in  Kentucky,  should  be  retained, 
and  such  other  restrictions  as  would  guard  against 
improper  influences,  or  against  the  possibilitv 


ly  absurd,  his  honorable  friend  from  Jefi'erson, 
who  was  a  very  able  and  sagacious  man,  had 
now  laid  one  down.  Still  he  was  consistent,  and 
the  gentleman  who  had  not  given  his  concur- 
rence was  inconsistent.  Whenever  all  powers 
were  delegated  to  fill  all  offices,  and  it  is  de- 
clared that  the  agents  were  infallible,  and  would 
do  exactly  right,  then  this  broad  ground  should 
be  assumed  without  any  shackling  of  those 
agents.  But  gentlemen  involved  themselves  in 
a  dilemma,  when  they  threw  any  qualifications 
around  the  filling  of  offices.  That  was  the  test 
of  the  truth  of  the  general  principle  upon  which 
nine-tenths  of  the  delegates  in  tnis  convention 
seemed  to  act  in  relation  to  forming  a  constitu- 
tion. He  would  say  with  the  gentleman  from 
Jefferson,  that  if  it  were  necessary  to  prescribe 
any  restriction  upon  a  perfectly  free  action  infill- 
ing the  office  of  the  appellate  jud^e,  it  would  be 
equally  incumbent,  wise,  and  politic,  to  prescribe 
restrictions  in  other  respects.  But,  although  he 
was  opposed  to  the  motion  of  the  gentleman 
from  Jefferson,  and  the  principle  upon  which  it 
was  made,  yet  if  that  gentleman  would  act  in 
beautiful  and  harmonious  consistency  with  truth, 
it  would  not  only  lead  to  the  position  which  his 
honorable  friend  occujiied,  but  to  one  far  in  ad- 
vance of  it. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX  was  surprised  that  this  sarcas- 
tic mode  of  treating  the  right  of  the  people  to 
elect  their  judges  had  been  so  long  delayed.  He 
had  been  throughout  the  session  expecting  re- 
marks similar  to  those  he  had  just  neard  from 


of  placing  men  in  power  who  are  unqualified,  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  He  thought  the 
and  if  they  would  protect  the  judiciary  or  the  people  were  entitled  to  the  best  talents  for  any 
people,  they  shoula  all  unite  for  the  same  end.  i  office,  and  that  they  were  the  best  judges  of  those 
Mr.  DAVIS  thought  consistency  a  jewel,  and  talents.  He  did  not  think  the  best  talent  always 
was  glad  to  see  his  friend  from  Jefferson  (Mr.  I  came  within  the  limits  prescribed.  Some  men 
Meriwether)  approximating  to  it  in  some  de- 1  were  more  mature  at  twentv-five  than  others 
gree.  It  seemed  that  the  people  who  made  con- 1  were  at  thirty-five.  They  had  been  told  that  the 
stitutions  and  laws,  and  were  competent  to  fill  I  judicial  offices  must  be  confined  to  lawyers,  that 
all  the  offices  of  the  government,  were  unerring  j  the  clerks  of  the  offices  must  be  those  who  had 
and  infallible.     Throwing  any  restriction  around  |  been  trained  for  two  years  in  aclerk's  office.     He 


them,  was  acting  with  some  degree  of  inconsis 
teucy.  He  thought  his  friend  from  Jefferson  had 
not  gone  far  enough  to  reach  the  point  of  consis- 
tency. It  was  true,  he  wanted  to  throw  away 
some  of  the  shackles  that  were  around  the  peo 


did  not  consider  this  training  necessary.  There 
was  such  a  thing  as  hunkerism,  and  that  hunk- 
erism  had  occasioned  all  the  sentiment  against 
equal  rights  and  equal  freedom  that  they  had 
heard.     Gentlemen  had  been  so  long  accustomed 


pie.    He  would  ask,  why  not  take  away  evenr  j  to  the  loaves  and  fishes — they  had  so  long  had  a 
thing  that  hindered  a  perfectly  free  choice.    If  monopoly  of  every  lucrative  office  in  Kentucky, 


the  power  that  controls  and  elects  were  unerring, 
infallible,  and  would  always  select  proper  agents 
to  fill  office,  why  should  any  attempt  be  made 


that  tney  would  new  fight  to  the  last.  This  was 
the  last  dying  kick  of  aristocracy  which  they 
were  about  to  see  in  this  hall.    He  came  here  to 


to  shackle  these  agents  in  their  most  enlarged  [  aid  in  taking  care  of  the  interest  of  the  farmer, 
discretion.  Why  have  any  restrictions  as  to  cit- 1  on  which  the  whole  world  depended.  He  want- 
izenship,  residence,  or  age.  He  would  suggest  j  ed  no  restriction  laid  upon  that  class  who  sup- 
to  his  friend,  to  draw  up  an  amendment  some- 1  ported  the  balance  of  the  communitv.  He  was 
thing  like  this:  that  every  person,  without  re- j  disposed  to  leave  the  wholematter  of  elections  to 
gard  to  age,  residence,  sex,  or  color,  should  be  the  people  without  any  restrictions  of  this  sort, 
qualified  under  the  constitution.  His  honorable  |  Mr.  PRESTON  saia  he  occupied  rather  a  mid- 
friend  had  said,  that  a  man  who  has  never  prac-  j  die  ground  between  the  gentleman  from  Ballard, 
ticed  law,  was  yet  competent  to  fill  the  office  of '  (Mr.  Gholson,)  and  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
the  jud^e  in  the  court  of  appeals.  But  this  court  ■  bon,  (Mr.  Davis.)  The  perfect  infallibility  of 
reviewed  the  Federal  and  State  constitutions,  and  |  the  people  to  which  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
aU  laws  made  under  them,  and  all  common  law,  i  bon  alluded,  he  did  not  believe  was  contended 
and  all  civil  law  which  had  been  adopted  in  our  I  for  except  by  very  few  upqn  this  floor.  It  was 
constitution,  and  yet  a  man  who  had  never  prac-  not  contended  that  the  people  were  infallible, 
38 


298 


but  that  it  was  better  to  trust  the  power  of  ap- 
pointment to  them  than  to  the  fallible  governors 
Kentucky  has  had,  and  that  they  intended  to 
substitute  that  mode  of  appointment  for  the  one 
which  had  heretofore  existed,  without  seeking  to 
impose  any  restrictions  which  were  not  absolute- 
ly necessary  upon  the  election  of  a  judge.  The 
convention,  however,  did  intend  to  say  that  a 
free  negro  should  not  be  elected,  nor  an  alien. 
This  would  be  one  qualification.  They  did  not 
intend  that  a  minor  should  be  elected,  and  this 
Would  be  another  qualification.  They  intended 
to  impose  some  wise  qualifications  in  order  to 
secure  to  the  people  the  appropriate  and  tempe- 
rate exercise  of  tneir  own  power.  He  was  in  fa- 
vor of  the  exercise  of  that  power  by  the  people, 
but  he  did  not  believe  that  any  true  friend  of 
popular  rights  would  carry  it  so  far  as  to  make 
it  a  mere  farce  in  the  eyes  of  all  the  world. 
When  he  looked  to  the  extreme  left,  the  "ex- 
treme gauche,"  as  that  portion  of  the  French 
Chamber  was  called  where  sat  the  democratic 
members,  he  had  no  idea,  from  the  moderate  sen- 
timents expressed  by  many  of  them,  that  they 
intended  to  strike  down  those  restrictions  upon 
the  exercise  of  popular  power,  which  experience 
dictated,  and  the  destruction  of  which  had  been 
ridiculed  in  the  burlesque  proposition  made  by 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  He  knew  of  but 
one  instance  in  history  of  a  judge  who  was  not 
a  lawyer,  and  yet  who  gave  universal  satisfac- 
tion. He  well  remembered  that  the  illustrious 
Sancho  Panza,  when  ho  governed  the  Island  of 
Barrataria,  did  so  without  any  legal  preparation, 
having  received  from  his  master,  Don  Quixotte, 
full  authority  over  that  fair  and  romantic  do- 
mair;  yet  no  judge  who  had  ever  exercised  his 

f>owers  in  any  land,  ever  received  such  applause 
n  tlie  administration  of  justice  as  did  Don  San- 
cho in  his  district.  History  did  not  relate  wheth- 
er the  district  was  appellate  or  not,  over  which 
the  celebrated  Squire  held  sway;  but  at  least  he 
had  full  power  and  unlimited  authority  therein. 
He  maintained  that  his  friends  from  Jefferson 
and  Ballard  must  fall  upon  the  plan  of  that  em- 
inent judge,  if  they  wished  to  relieve  their  pro- 
posed judiciary,  who  were  not  to  be  lawyers, 
from  embarrassment  in  their  decisions.  Sancho 
had  one  fixed  and  inflexible  rule  with  which  he 
started  out,  and  which  aided  him  greatly  in  the 
decision  of  all  points  of  law;  he  determined 
when  he  ascended  the  bench  that  he  would  never 
listen  but  to  one  side  of  the  question,  that  then, 
as  he  honestly  asserted,  he  had  never  any  diffi- 
culty in  making  up  his  mind.  Let  us  pursue 
this  plan;  and  justice  will  come  back  to  that  true 
standard,  and  to  that  classical  uncertainty  in 
which  the  Greeks  painted  her  as  a  blind-fold 
Goddess,  holding  the  balances  evenly  suspended, 
80  that  luck  was  everything,  and  every  man  had 
a  perfectly  fair  chance.  Now,  he  believed  there 
was  such  a  respect  for  the  doctrine  of  chance  in 
the  public  raiud,  and  such  wisdom  in  worthy 
Sancho's  rule  of  practice,  tliat  if  the  amendf- 
ment  of  tlie  gentleman  from  Jefferson  were  en- 
grafted in  the  constitution,  the  courts  of  Ken- 
tucky may  soon,  perchance,  rival  in  learning, 
in  dignity,  and  in  wisdom,  the  decisions  of  the 
immortal  Governor  of  the  Island  of  Barrataria. 
The  PRESIDENT  remarked  that  it  had  been 
said  by  the  sages  of  tlie  law,  that  it  required  n 


study  of  more  than  twenty  years  to  make  a  com- 
petent judge;  and  he  could  himself  truly  say, 
that  after  its  practice  for  nearly  thirty  years  he 
found  that  he  had  a  great  deal  to  learn  in  rela- 
tion to  the  law,  and  that  there  were  continually 
new  questions  and  principles  arising  which  re- 
quired studious  application  and  examination  to 
understand.  Now  it  certainly  would  be  the  de- 
sire of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  that  the  greatest 
legal  attainments  the  country  afforded  should  be 
placed  on  the  appellate  bench.  And  shall  we  in 
their  name,  in  providing  a  constitution  for  their 
government,  require  that  some  preparation,  some 
evidence  of  devotion  to  a  subject,  Avhicli  requires 
so  long  a  study  to  understand,  should  be  evinced 
on  the  part  of  the  candidate,  before  he  should 
be  allowed  to  trouble  the  people  with  his  pre- 
tensions to  this  high  office?  That  is  the  ques- 
tion here,  and  the  gentleman  from  Ballard  mis- 
understands the  position  of  those  who  favor  the 
election  of  judges  by  the  people.  It  is  not  that 
the  people  are  deemed  infallible,  but  that  they 
are  deemed  a  wiser  and  a  better  authority  of  ap- 
pointment, than  those  to  whom  the  power  has 
heretofore  been  confided.  It  was  true  that  the 
present  constitution  in  giving  the  appointing 
power  to  the  governor  prescribed  no  qualifica- 
tion for  office,  but  they  also  required  tlie  nomi- 
nation to  come  before  the  senate,  and  it  was  not 
to  be  believed  that  thirty  eight  men  of  tlie  age 
of  thirty  five,  elected  in  the  various  districts  of 
the  country,  would  ever  have  permitted  a  man 
to  ascend  the  bench  of  the  chief  justice  of  the 
appellate  court  of  Kentucky,  Avho  had  no  actual 
experience  in,  or  had  devoted  no  time  to,  the  study 
or  practice  of  the  law.  That  was  the  guard 
which  was  thrown  around  the  executive  appoint- 
ments. And  in  giving  this  power  to  the  people 
it  is  proposed  that  they  shall  throw  a  guard 
around  themselves,  in  order  that  they  may  not 
be  troubled  with  candidates  who  have  not  devo- 
ted their  time  and  attention  to  the  attainment  of 
the  proper  qualifications.  It  was  not  intended 
to  proscribe  any  individual,  whether  farmer,  me- 
chanic, loafer,  or  any  thing  else,  but  he  must 
give  the  people  an  evidence  by  the  devotion  to 
the  profession  of  law  of  a  sufficient  length  of 
time,  to  show  that  he  has  some  pretensions  to 
the  office,  before  he  became  a  candidate.  Would 
it  not  be  prudent  to  allow  the  people  to  impose 
this  restriction  on  themselves?  He  had  as  much 
confidence  in  the  people  as  any  one,  but  lie  in- 
tended to  vote  for  the  insertion  in  this  constitu- 
tion of  a  clause  prohibiting  the  legislature  from 
taking  private  property  without  due  compensa- 
tion therefor.  Yet  would  not  his  confidence  in 
the  people  induce  him  not  to  put  it  in  the  con- 
stitution, but  to  leave  it  to  the  representatives  of 
the  people  interested.  And  he  believed  the  peo- 
ple to  have  that  restriction  imposed  upon  them. 
All  his  reflection  had  satisfied  him  that  the 
people  had  a  right  to  prescribe  to  those  who 
come  before  them  as  candidates  for  ofiice,  that 
they  shall  present  certain  evidences  of  qualifi 
cation  for  tlie  duties,  and  he  desired  that  those 
who  aspired  to  this  high  tribunal,  sliould  be 
brought  within  that  rule. 

Mr.  GRAY  said  that  the  requirements  of  age 
and  residence  were  qualifications  of  office. 
The  experience  of  every  man  also  went  to  show 
that  no   man  would  be  qualified  for  a  seat  on 


2di9^ 


the  appellate  bene'h  nntil  he  had  practiced 
law  at  least  eight  years,  and  was  it  any  more 
improper  to  require  that  he  should  possess  these 
qualifications  than  those  to  which  he  had 
first  referred.  They  were  all  prerequisites  and 
had  the  same  object  in  view — that  the  people 
shall  know  something  of  the  qualifications  of 
the  candidate  presented  to  them,  and  it  was  a 
knowledge  which  they  could  not  very  well  obtain 
in  anv  other  wav.  It  was  to  prevent  the  men 
■who  tad  no  qusiifieations  for  this  oflSce  from 
troubling  the  people  with  their  claims — and  the 
people  were  annoyed  enough  in  that  particular, 
as  the  number  ot  rqected  candidates  to  the  con- 
vention testified.  These  restrictions,  with  the 
addition  suggested  by  the  gentleman  from  Jef- 
ferson, of  a  residence  of  five  years  in  the  district 
or  state,  were,  it  seemed  to  him,  most  proper. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  said  that  a  judge  of  the  court 
of  appeals  was  to  be  a  judge  of  the  law,  and  the 
practice,  and  how  was  he  to  learn  law  without 
study,  or  know  what  the  practice  waCs  unless  he 
had  practiced  in  the  courts.  Everyman  knew 
that  the  practice  becomes  a  necessary  part  of  the 
law,  and  if  eight  vears  was  too  loug  a  time  to 
require  for  that,  tlien  diminish  it.  He  would 
say  to  the  gentleman  from  Ballard,  that  although 
perhaps,  his  (a  rich  alluvial)  county  might  pro- 
duce men  different  from  the  balance  of  the  state, 
yet  he  ought  to  have  some  degree  of  compassion 
on  those  in  other  parts.  Our  lawyers  did  not 
take  up  law  by  absorption  but  only  by  hard 
study,  and  they  must  have  eight,  t«n,  or  twelve 
years  before  they  could  become  possessed  of  such 
qualifications  as  would  fit  them  for  a  scat  on  the 
appellate  bench,  and  enable  them  to  decide  fa- 
vorably on  all  the  rights  of  the  citizen,  arising 
under  the  constitution  and  the  laws,  and  he  could 
not  believe  gentlemen  to  be  in  earnest  when  they 
desired  to  leave  the  possession  of  the  proper 
qualifications  on  the  part,  of  those  who  were  to 
sit  on  its  bench  to  mere  accident. 

Mr.  CLARKE  had  once  before  in  some  re- 
marks assumed  the  same  position  as  that  con- 
tained in  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Jefferson.  It  does  not  propose  to  destroy  all 
qualifications,  and  there  were  verj*  good  reasons 
why  a  candidate  should  be  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States.  An  elector  must  be.  But  even  if 
it  was  required,  he  did  not  believe  that  any  man 
who  did  not  possess  that  qualification  would 
ever  be  elected  by  the  people.  He  had  no  ob- 
jection to  the  candidate  being  required  to  be  a 
resident  of  the  district  in  which  he  run,  for  a 
certain  time,  but  he  did  object  to  the  requisition 
of  the  eight  years  practice  of  law,  the  thirty 
years  of  age,  and  the  having  been  a  judge  of 
some  court  for  eight  years.  No  one  believed,  he 
apprehended,  that  any  person  would  be  elected 
to  the  court  of  appeals  who  was  not  a  lawyer, 
and  familiar  with  both  the  law  and  the  practice. 
Would  any  one  undertake  to  say  that  the  people 
would  not  know  this  fact  and  whether  the  candi- 
date posse&sed  these  qualifications  as  well  as 
anv  one  here"? 

llr.  TRIPLETT.  Give  them  the  means  and 
they  will. 

Mr.  CLARKE  asked,  by  what  means  it  was 
that  any  one  in  that  committee  learned  what  it 
was  that  constituted  a  good  judge?  "Whatever 
they  were,  those  the  people  would  possess.   The 


president  of  llife  TThited  States  Was  elected  wlti'- 
out  any  requisition  of  qualification  whatever, 
and  yet  he  had  the  appointment  of  all  the 
officers  in  the  nation — the  judicial  ones  included. 
Might  h^  not  sometimes  be  mistaken  in  his  ap- 
pointments, and  if  so  would  not  the  conse- 
quences be  as  disastrous  to  the  country  as  if  the 
people  should  chance  to  be  mistaken  in  their 
selection  of  a  judge?  He  had  no  fears  that  the 
people  would  ever  select  any  other  than  a  com- 
petent lawyer  of  distinction  and  standing  in  his 
profession.  And  if  it  was  necessary  to  say  that 
a  man  should  not  serve  as  judge  before  he  had 
reached  the  age  of  thirty  years,  was  there  not  an 
equal  necessity  existing  to  prohibit  his  eligi- 
bilitv  after  a  certain  age.  There  was  just  as 
mucli  danger  to  be  apprehended  from  imbecility 
in  the  office  of  a  judge,  as  from  incapability. 
He  thought  there  -fras  just  as  much  reason  in  the 
one  ca«;e  as  in  the  other. 

Mr.  McHEJTRY  said  there  was  a  principle  in- 
volved? in  this  matter  which  gentlemen  seemed 
to  have  overlooked.  The  great  objection  urged 
against  the  election  of  judges,  by  those  op- 
posed to  that  reform,  was  that  it  would  lead  to 
the  selection  of  incapable  men,  and  under  im- 
proper influences.  To  this  it  was  replied  that 
the  people  were  capable  of  judging  in  these  par- 
ticulars, and  that  the  class  from  which  the.se 
high  functionaries  were  selected,  would  be 
those  who  were  qualified  by  their  study  of,  and 
experience  in,  the  practice  of  the  law.  Any  con- 
stitution made  here  must  therefore  clearly. be 
the  result  of  compromise.  He  called  on  gentle- 
men oti  the  one  side  therefore  to  yield  the  ques- 
tion, as  to  the  election  of  judges,  and  on  those 
on  the  other,  to  yield  to  those  restrictions  which 
seemed  to  be  desired  to  be  thrown  around  the 
people  in  the  exercise  of  that  power.  They 
could  do  it  more  especially  as  the  opposite  side 
required  but  those  qualifications,  on  the  part  of 
the  candidates,  which  all  of  them  agreed  the 
people  Would  themselves  require,  whether  it  was 
in  the  constitution  or  not.  He  hoped  gentlemen 
would  bear  in  mind,  that  there  must  be  some 
compromise  of  opinion  on  both  sides. 

Mr.  HARGIS  said  the  question  here  was  best 
presented  in  the  proposition,  were  the  people 
competent  to  the  election  of  the  judiciary,  or 
were  they  not.  Any  restriction  upon  the  people 
in  the  exercise  of  that  power  was  tantamount  to 
a  declaration  that  they  were  not  competent  to 
the  ta.sk.  He  was  opposed  to  restricting  the 
selection  of  candidates  to  lawyers,  as  he  did  not 
believe  it  would  secure  any  better  judges. 
There  would  be  perhaps  some  two  to  five  hun- 
dred lawvere  in  any  district  which  might  be 
made,  ani  yet  out  of  them,  not  more  than  one 
tenth  would  be  capable  of  drawing  a  declara- 
tion, and  force  the  case  to  an  issue.  Many  men 
too  had  been  in  the  courts  who  were  not  quali- 
fied to  pass  judgment  on  a  case  involving  twen- 
ty dollars.  These  restrictions  therefore  would  not 
secure  the  people  any  better  judges.  As  to  the 
fear  that  the  people  would  be  troubled  with  can- 
didates, he  did  not  regard  that  as  any  reason  at 
all  for  the  imposition  of  these  restrictions.  If 
the  people  were  qualified  to  elect  their  judges 
at  aD,  they  were  competent  also  to  decide  upon 
the  qualifications  of  the  candidates  before  them, 
and  ne  was  therefore  opposed  to  the  imposition  " 


300 


iu  the  constitution,  upon  their  free  exercise  of 
the  appointing  power.  If  they  were  not  com- 
petent for  the  task,  say  so  openly  and  directly, 
and  let  the  present  system  be  sustained;  but  ao 
not  seek  covertly  to  convey  the  impression  that 
they  Were  not,  by  these  various  restrictions  upon 
thenl.  They  are  competent,  or  they  are  not — 
there  is  no  middle  ground  on  the  question. 

Mr.  MAYES  "v^^ould  not  have  been  surprised 
if  this  amendment  had  emanated  from  some  gen- 
tleman who  was  opposed  to  the  election  of 
judges  by  the  people,  as  it  then  Avould  have  been 
plainly  seen  that  the  object  was  to  render  the 
constitution  as  ridiculous  to  the  people  as  pos- 
sible. Such  certainly  would  be  the  result,  if  it 
was  declared,  as  the  adoption  of  that  amend- 
ment would  declare,  that  every  man  in  the  state, 
without  the  evidence  of  any  qualifications  save 
that  he  resided  in  the  district  and  attained  the 
age  of  thirty  years,  should  be  considered  qual- 
fiedforthe  office  of  judge  of  the  highest  court 
in  the  state.  They  might  as  well  declare  that  a 
jury  on  the  trial  of  a  man  for  murder,  would  be 
fullv  as  able  to  decide  upon  his  innocence  or 
guilt,  by  the  mere  hearing  of  the  reading  of  the 
indictment,  as  if  they  had  heard  all  the  evi- 
dence on  both  sides  in  regard  to  the  transaction. 
The  restrictions  were  reported  by  the  committee, 
not  because  the  ability  of  the  people  was  at  all 
doubted,  but  because  it  was  deemed  proper  and 
necessary  that  the  people  should  be  guarantied 
that  the  candidates  presented  to  them  should 
possess  the  necessary  qualifications  for  the  of- 
fice. The  people  in  the  districts  could  not  per- 
sonally be  acquainted  with  the  qualifications  of 
all  the  candidates  who  might  come  before  them, 
and  the  candidates  therefore,  should  be  re- 
stricted from  presenting  themselves,  unless  they 
did  possess  those  qualifications  necessary  to  dis- 
charge the  high  duties  of  a  judge  of  the  appel- 
late court.  And  certainly  no  gentleman  would 
desire  that  any  other  than  such  a  man  should  be 
elected.  He  came  here  not  to  represent  lawyers, 
mechanics,  farmers,  or  any  one  class,  but  the 
whole  people;  to  do  that  which  in  his  weak 
judgment  was  best  calculated  to  promote  the  in- 
terest and  happiness  of  all;  and  these  were  the 
motives  whicn  governed  him  in  his  action  on  this 
subject. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  said  that  the  position  occupied 
by  gentlemen  here  could  not  better  be  illustrated 
than  by  an  anecdote,  which  the  committee  would 
pardon  him  for  relating :  "A  gentleman  went 
into  a  lawyer's  office,  ana  saw  around  it  but  two 
chairs,  a  pack  of  cards,  and  a  bottle  of  whis- 
key. Said  he,  how  do  you  get  along  without 
any  law  books,  I  don't  see  any  here?  Said  the 
lawyer,  looking  at  him  full  in  the  face,  and  with 
a  great  deal  of  emphasis — I  always  go  on  the 
broad  principle  of  human  ingenuity."  (Laugh- 
ter.) And  (said  Mr.  T.)  if  you  want  an  appel- 
late court  that  will  go  on  the  broad  principle  of 
human  ingenuity,  just  go  for  striking  out  all 
qualifications  reported  by  the  committee,  and 
you  will  be  gratined.  Some  gentlemen  seem  to 
think,  with  Dogberry  when  he  said  tliat  reading 
and  writing  came  by  nature,  that  the  great  and 
necessary  qualifications  for  the  court  of  appeals 
were  of  spontaneous  growth.  It  has  been  said 
tbat  whom  the  gods  would  destroy  they  first 
niake  mad,  and  it  appeared  to  him— he  said  it  in 


no  oflfensive  spirit — that  some  gentlemen  were 
approaching  that  spirit.  The  committee  had 
thrown  restrictions  aronud  the  legislature  iu  re- 
gard to  the  great  natural  and  inalineable  rights 
there  proclaimed,  and  what  purpose,  otherthan  to 
prevent  their  being  infringed  upon?  What  ob- 
jection, then,  could  there  be  to  carrying  out  this 
principle  further,  and  require  that  those  who 
were  to  decide  upon  and  to  guard  those  rights, 
those  who  were  to  sit  upon  the  appellate  bench, 
should  possess  the  requisite  qualifications  for  a 
discharge  of  their  duties?  And  besides,  was 
not  every  one  aware  that  attachment  to  and 
confidence  in  the  new  constitution,  by  the  peo- 
ple, was  to  depend  on  the  manner  in  which  the 
reforms  introduced  Avere  to  be  carried  out?  If  it 
was  desired  then  to  bring  the  instrument  down 
so  low  as  to  be  almost  beneath  contempt  itself, 
just  allow  a  man  without  qualifications  to  get 
on  the  appellate  bench,  merely  from  the  circum- 
stance that  this  body  failed  to  require  the  requi- 
site qualifications  for  a  candidate  for  that  sta- 
tion. Those  who  believe  that  the  people  have 
the  intelligence  and  capacity  to  select  proper 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  that  they 
would  select  none  except  such  as  were  experi- 
enced lawyers  and  fully  qualified  for  the  duties, 
should  not  object  to  these  restrictions.     If  the 

Eeople  were  thus  qualified  they  could  do  no 
arm,  and  it  may  do  good.  It  was  an  apt  re- 
mark, that  the  first  duty  of  the  legislature  was 
to  see  that  the  people  were  free,  and  their  next 
duty  to  see  that  they  so  remained.  Acting  upon 
that  principle,  he  should  vote  for  the  insertion  in 
the  constitution  of  the  restrictions  reported  by 
the  committee. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  here  withdrew  his  amend- 
ment, for  which  Mr.  Root  had  moved  a  substi- 
tute, and  then  moved  to  strike  out  the  first  word 
iu  the  8th  section,  any,  and  inset  no,  so  as  to 
make  the  section  read  no  person.  He  wished 
barely  to  remark,  that  the  section  as  it  now 
stands,  is  an  extension  of  the  right  to  become  a 
candidate,  instead  of  a  limitation.  Without  some 
alteration  such  as  he  had  indicated,  a  lawyer 
who  was  a  citizen  of  Indiana  or  Ohio,  (and  there 
were  several  within  his  knowledge,)  who  prac- 
ticed in  the  courts  of  Kentucky,  together  with 
every  justice  of  the  peace  who  had  been  on  the 
bench  of  the  county  court  for  eight  years,  would 
be  eligible  to  a  seat  on  the  bench  of  the  court  of 
appeals  in  Kentucky.  He  would  barely  call  the 
attention  of  the  human  ingenuity  lawyer  of  this 
house,  and  the  one  who  appeared  to  be  so  fami- 
liar with  the  practice  in  the  courts  of  that  re- 
nowtied  judge,  Sancho  Panza,  to  the  absurdity  of 
making  lawyers  who  were  citizens  of  other 
states,  and  even  justices  of  the  peace,  eligible  to 
our  supreme  bench,  to  the  exclusion  of  our  own 
citizens 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  thought  the  gentle- 
man had  made  his  retreat  upon  a  very  small  bat- 
tery. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  attack  came  from 
a  very  small  one. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  that  the  direct 
expression  of  one  thing,  in  law,  excludes  the 
expression  of  another.  The  expression  of  qual- 
ifications, therefore,  clearly  excluded  every  body 
who  did  not  possess  those  qualifications.  The 
amendment,  therefore,  was  wholly  unnecessary. 


301 


Mr.  HARDI2f  said  the  requisitJou  ol'  the  qual- 
ifications necessary  was  not  expressed  so  clearly 
as  it  ought  to  be,  or  as  it  ■\voula  be  if  the  nega- 
tive form  had  been  adopted.  It  was  the  natu- 
ral qualification  of  every  man  to  be  fit  for  the 
oflBce  unless  certain  restrictions  in  regard  there- 
to, were  imposed  upon  him.  The  negative  prin- 
ciple was  the  one  adopted  by  the  committee  on 
the  circuit  courts,  and  the  two  articles  ought 
to  harmonize  in  expression  as  far  as  possible. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  preferred  the  present 
form,  and  thought  it  to  be  clear  that  it  could 
not  be  misapprehended  by  any  who  understood 
the  force  and  meaning  of  language. 

Mr.  BROWN  offered  the  following  substitute 
for  the  eighth  section: 

"No  person  shall  be  elected  a  judge  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  who  is  not  a  citizen  of  the  United 
'      States;  and  who  has  not  attained  the  age  of  thir- 
ty years  at  the  time  of  his  election;  and  been  a 

practicing  lawyer  eight  years  ;  and  resided 

lu  the  district,  immediately  preceding  his  elec- 
tion." 

He  thought  it  necessary  that  the  candidate 
should  have  resided  in  the  district  for  a  certain 
time,  so  that  the  people  might  have  an  opportu- 
nity of  judging  of  his  qualifications  and  fitness 
for  the  ofiice. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  had  intended,  as  soon 
as  an  opportunity  was  afforded,  to  have  offered 
an  amendment  in  regard  to  this  qualification  of 
residence,  but  he  had  been  in  doubt  as  to  the 
number  of  vears  that  should  be  required.  The 
object  would  be  attained,  however,  without  the 
adoption  of  an  entire  substitute  for  the  section. 

Mr.  HARDIN  was  in  favor  of  some  amend- 
ment requiring  a  residence  of  some  length  of 
time  in  the  district.  Otherwise,  lawyers  from 
Ohio  and  Indiana  who  practiced  in  the  courts  of 
Kentucky,  might  remove  into  the  state  just  pre- 
vious to  the  election,  for  the  very  purpose  of  be- 
ing candidates  for  office.  He  again  urged  that  in 
these  matters  the  terms  of  expression  in  this  article 
and  in  that  reported  by  the  committee  on  circuit 
courts  should  be  harmonious,  and  instanced  the 
action  in  that  committee  as  having  been  governed 
bv  such  a  consideration  as  applicable. 

'Mr.  BROWN  then  filled  the  blank  in  his  sub- 
stitute, with  the  words  "two  years,"  so  as  to  re- 
quire a  re-sidence  of  that  period  of  time  in  the 
district,  to  qualify  a  candidate  for  the  office  of 
judge. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  of 
Mr.  MERIWETHER  to  strike  out  the  word 
"any"  and  it  was  negatived. 

Mr.  G.  A.  WICKLIFFE  then  moved  to  amend 
60  that  it  should  read  "any  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  who  has  attained  tlie  age  of  thirty  years, 
and  who  has  been  a  resident  of  the  district  for 
which  he  may  be  chosen,  for  at  least  two  years 
next  preceding  the  election,"  <feo. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  NESBITT  moved  to  add  the  word  "five" 
after  the  word  thirty,  so  as  to  require  the  can- 
didate to  have  attained  the  age  of  thirty -five 
years,  before  he  should  be  eligibleto  an  election. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  desired  to  explain  the 
opinion  of  the  committee  on  this  subject.  It  would 
perhaps  rarely  happen  that  a  candidate  would  be 
presented  or  chosen  younger  than  the  age  propos- 
ed by  the  amendment,  as  there  were  very  few  law- 


yers who  had  attained  sufficient  standing  and  ce- 
lebrity in  their  profession  before  that  age,  yet  the 
committee,  in  looking  back  to  the  distinguished 
men  who  had  filled  the  appellate  bench  not  only 
in  Kentucky  but  the  supreme  court  bench  of  the 
United  States,  found  tliat  some  of  its  brightest 
ornaments  had  been  called  there  at  an  age  not 
greater  than  the  period  the  committee  had  thought 
proper  to  adopt.  He  was  satisfied  from  what  he 
knew  of  the  life  of  judge  Story,  that  he  was  not 
thirty  when  he  was  appointed  judge,  and  was 
assured  also  that  the  late  governor  Clarke  was 
not  thirty  years  of  age  when  he  was  appointed 
judge,  and  he  could  give  other  instances.  Thirty 
years  was  the  meridian  of  a  man's  life,  and 
the  committee  thought  that  instances  might 
occur  where  indivividuals  of  that  age  might 
present  themselves  possessing  such  maturity  of 
mind  and  power  of  intellect  as  would  command 
the  confidence  of  the  people  among  whom  they 
lived,  and  they  concluded  to  fix  the  requisition 
of  age  therefore  at  that  period.  For  himself,  he 
had  no  choice  on  the  subject,  though  he  should 
regret  very  much  to  deprive  a  district  of  the  ser- 
vices of  a  competent  man,  merely  because  he 
did  not  happen  to  be  bom  six  or  eight  months 
earlier  than  he  happened  to   be. 

Mr.  HARDIN  was  not  weded  to  thirty  five 
or  thirty  years  as  a  requisition  of  age.  As  to 
judge  Story,  his  impression  was  that  he  was  at 
least  thirty  three  years  of  age  when  he  was  ap- 
pointed on  the  bench  of  the  United  States  su- 
f)reme  court.  He  was  the  youngest  judge  he  be- 
ieved  ever  placed  on  that  bench.  So  far  as  his 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  England  was  concern- 
ed, he  knew  of  no  man  who  had  ever  been  made 
a  judge  in  any  of  the  courts  there  under  the 
age  of  thirty  five,  and  very  rarely  until  they  had 
reached  the  age  of  forty  or  fifty  years.  The 
committee  on  the  circuit  courts,  by  a  vote  of  eight 
or  nine  to  one,  had  fixed  upon  the  age  of  thirty 
five.  As  for  himself,  it  would  not  apply  to  him, 
or  even  to  his  colleague,  and  he  was  not  particu- 
lar whether  the  age  of  thirty  or  thirty  five  should 
be  agreed  upon. 

Mr.  APPERSON  wished  to  state,  as  due  to  the 
chairman  of  the  committee,  that  the  gentleman 
had  proposed  to  limit  the  period  of  age  beyond 
whicHi  a  judge  should  be  ineligible,  but  was  vo- 
ted down  unanimously  by  the  committee.  In 
regard  to  judge  Story,  he  was  just  informed  by 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  that  judge  Story 
was  appointed  to  the  bench  in  I8l2,  when  he 
was  about  twenty  seven  or  twenty  eight  years  of 
age.  Such  an  instance  however,  would  rarely 
occur,  but  if  such  an  opportunity  should  again 
occur,  the  committee  did  not  wish  that  the  con- 
stitution should  be  a  bar  to  the  people  availing 
themselves  of  it. 

Mr.  NESBITT  remarked  that  the  present  con- 
stitution required  that  a  senator  should  be  thirty 
five  years  of  age,  and  as  he  supposed  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  men  of  matured  minds,  to 
operate  as  a  check  upon  the  lower  branch,  where, 
he  believed,  the  only  qualification  was  that  the 
members  should  be  twenty  four  years  of  age.  The 
court  of  appeals  was  a  check  upon  the  circuit 
courts,  and  revised  the  errors  that  the  circuit  judge 
might  be  lead  into  by  hisyouth  and  inexperience. 
As  a  member  of  the  committee  on  circuit  courts, 
he  had  been  in  favor  of  requiring  those  judges 


302 


to  be  thirty  j^ears  of  age;  but  he  believed  tliat 
the  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals  should  be  a 
man  of  more  mature  age.  And  if  there  should 
an  iu;5tance  occur,  as  that  of  judge  Story,  the 
people  would  not  be  entirely  deprived  of  his 
services,  they  would  merely  have  to  wait  five 
vears  before  they  could  avail  themselves  of  them. 
He  was  not  tenacious  however,  of  his  amend- 
ment. 

The  amendment  proposeJd  by  Mr.  NESBITT, 
was  then  rejected. 

Mr.  ROOT  called  for  the  question  on  his 
amendment,  to  insert  in  the  third  line  after  the 
words  "practicing  lawyer,"  the  words  "in  the 
circuit  courts  or  court  of  appeals,"'  in  lieu  of 
the  words,  "in  the  courts."  The  question  was 
then  taken,  and  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  PRESTON  moved  to  strike  out  in  the 
first  line  of  the  eighth  section,  the  Avords  "citi- 
zen of  the  United  States,"  and  to  insert  in  lieu 
thereof,  the  words  "qualified  elector  of  this 
commonwealth."  The  words  in  the  section 
would  seem  to  give  the  power  to  congress  under 
its  naturalization  law,  to  make  the  basis  of  the 
qualification  of  the  judge  of  the  appellate  court 
of  Kentucky.  The  words  "citizen  of  the  United 
States,"  were  not  used  in  the  present  constitu- 
tion in  regard  to  the  right  of  suffrage.  There 
the  phrase  is  used  "every  free  male  citizen." 
There  were  some  important  questions  which  had 
sprung  up  as  to  whether  a  naturalized  citizen  of 
the  Uunited  States,  was  necessarily  invested 
with  all  the  rights  of  a  citizen  of  Kentucky  by 
coming  here.  He  believed  such  not  to  be  the 
case.  In  Illinois,  a  residence  of  six  months  was 
all  that  was  required  to  become  a  citizen  of  the 
state,  even  from  an  alien  to  the  United  States. 
He  preferred  that  the  basis  of  the  suffrage  in 
Kentucky  should  be  taken. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  that  the  ob- 
ject of  the  gentleman  could  be  accomplished  by 
moving  to  strike  out  of  the  section  the  words 
"of  the  United  States,"  so  that  it  would  read, 
"any  citizen  Avho  shall,"  <tc.  This  would  leave 
this  vexed  question  of  double  allegiance  undis- 
turbed. 

Mr.  PRESTON  accepted  that  modification  of 
his  amendment. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  to  amend  the  amendment 
80  that  it  should  read  "any  citizen  of  the  com- 
monwealth of  Kentucky." 

Mr.  PRESTON  preferred  his  amendment  as 
he  had  modified  it. 

The  amendment  of  Mr.  BROWN  was  rejected, 
and  that  proposed  by  Mr.  PRESTON  was  adopt- 
ed. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  here  stated  thatafriend 
who  had  been  at  the  trouble  to  make  an  examina- 
tion in  regard  to  tlie  matter,  had  just  informed 
him  that  judge  Story  was  thirty-two  years  and 
two  months  old  when  first  appointed. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  moved  to  tstrike  out  the  words, 
commencing  in  tlic  fourth  line  and  ending  in  the 
sixth  line,  a.s  follows  ;  "or  whose  practice  at  the 
bar  and  services  upon  the  bench  of  any  court  in 
this  state,  shall  together  be  equaljto  eight  years." 

The  section  as  it  stood  would  allow  a  man 
•who  had  been  on  the  bench  of  a  county  court 
seven  years  and  six  months,  and  had  practiced 
law  for  six  months  to  be  eligible  to  the  bench  of 
the  court  of  appeals.    He  apprehended  this  was 


not  desired  by  any  and  that  it  was  perhaps  an 
oversight  by  the  committee. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  eighth 
section  as  amended,  and  it  was  adopted. 

The  nineth  section  was  then  read. 
Mr.DIXON  offered  as  a  substitute  for  the  section 
the  following:  "the  court  of  appeals  shall  hold 
its  sessions  in  each  appellate  district,  unless  the 
people  on  the  petition  of  a  majority  of  the  qual- 
ified voters  of  such  districts  shall' otherwise  di- 
rect, and  then  at  such  time  and  places  as  may  be 
otherwise  directed  by  law."  His  object  was  to  give 
the  people  of  a  district  who  might  desire  not  to 
have  a  branch  of  the  court  of  appeals  among 
them  an  opportunity  to  get  rid  of  it.  He  did 
not  doubt  however,  that  all  would  desire  to  have 
the  branch  in  their  district. 

Mr.  M ACHEN  had  objections  to  the  manner 
in  which  it  was  here  proposed  to  get  at  the  sense 
of  the  district.  He  proposed  therefore  that  the 
following  should  be  added  to  the  end  of  the  sec- 
tion. "Provided  that  any  one  or  all  of  said  dis- 
tricts may  by  a  majority  of  the  qualified  voters 
therein  aecline  having  a  branch  of  said  court, 
and  in  such  event  theappellate  business  for  such 
district  or  districts  shall  be  transacted  at  the 
seat  of  government." 

Mr.  DIXON  withdrew  his  proposition  and  ac- 
cepted that  of  Mr.  Machen  in  lieu  thereof. 
_  Mr.  TURNER  said  that  he  should  at  a  proper 
time  move  a  substitute  for  the  whole  section 
leaving  it  to  the  people  of  the  entire  state  to  say 
whether  they  would  have  the  court  branched  or 
not,and  to  the  legislature  to  provide  for  carrying 
out  their  will  in  case  they  should  decide  in  the 
aflirmative.  He  had  as  yet  heard  no  expression 
from  the  people  on  the  subject — nor  had  it,  so  far 
as  he  had  ever  discovered,  at  all  entered  into  the 
canvass  for  the  convention. 

Mr.  HARGIS  had  an  amendment  which  he 
believed  would  obviate  all  the  difficulty.  It 
was  as  follows:  Strike  out  all  the  first  line 
after  the  word  sessions,  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof 
the  words,  "at  the  capital  in  Frankfort,  at  such 
times  as  may  be  provided  by  law,  provided  that 
the  legislature  may  at  any  time  ijrovide  for  said 
court  to  be  held  at  such  other  place  or  places  not 
exceeding  three  as  they  may  think  proper." 
This  subject  was  a  proper  one  for  legislation, 
and   had  no  business  in  the  organic  law. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  had  no  idea  that  the 
people  of  any  district  would  ever  refuse  to  have 
a  branch  of  the  court  of  appeals  come  among 
them,  and  he  preferred  therefore,  the  section  as 
it  stood,  without  amendment. 

Mr.  MACHEN  was  himself  fully  satisfied  as 
to  the  propriety  of  branching  the  court,  and  had 
full  conficlence  that  the  district  of  country  from 
which  he  came  would  sustain  the  constitution  of 
the  convention  on  that  subject.  His  proposition 
was  intended  merely  to  obviate  the  difficulty, 
which  seemed  to  exist  in  the  minds  of  .some  gen- 
tlemen, as  to  the  probability  that  some  of  the 
districts  preferring  not  to  have  a  branch  of  the 
court  among  them.  The  amendment  could  do 
no  possible  injury  while  it  might  tend  to  satis- 
fy gentlemen  who  entertained  the  apprehen- 
sions to  which  he  had  referred.  However,  he 
felt  no  particular  interest  in  the  matter. 

Mr.  MAYES  opposed  the  amendmentas  being 


303 


calculated  to  destroy  the  proposition  to  branch 
the  court,  and  because  it  would  have  a  tendency 
to  keep  each  district  in  a  state  of  continual  ex- 
citement. 

Mr.  HARDIX  was  opposed  to  the  amendment. 
When  the  districts  were  arranged  and  the  pro- 
position came  up  before  the  people  as  to  what 
point  in  the  district  the  court  should  be  located, 
it  would  lead  to  continual  excitements  among 
the  people.  In  some  of  the  districts  the  loca- 
tion might  be  such  as  to  induce  a  majority  of 
the  people  to  reject  the  court,  rather  than  to  have 
it  continued  tliere.  It  was  emphatically  the 
proposition  with  too  much  machinery— 'if  it  was 
intended  to  branch  the  court  it  was  better  to  do 
it  at  once.  He  should  have  preferred  that  the 
whole  matter  should  have  been  left  to  the  legis- 
lature, for  th'em  to  branch  the  court  or  not  as  the 
people  might  desire.  To  insert  the  provision  in 
the  constitution  would,  he  was  confident,  in- 
sure forever  fifteen  to  twenty  thousand  votes 
against  the  constitution.  Who  believed  that 
the  vote  in  this,  and  the  adjoining  counties, 
would  not  be  very  heavy  against  any  con- 
stitution containinj;  such  a  provision.  He 
was  against  branching  because  it  would  in- 
crease the  expenses  of  the  state.  It  was  among 
the  great  reasons  which  induced  him  to  advo- 
cate a  convention,  that  some  provision  should  be 
made  in  the  constitution  to  guard  against  that 
■wasteful  extravagance  in  the  administration  of 
the  government,  which  had  so  largely  increased 
the  ratio  of  taxation  since  the  vear'  1834.  To 
branch  the  court,  to  add  an  additional  judge 
with  other  necessary  expenses  incident  to  such  a 
change  would  add  to  the  expenditures  of  the 
state  at  least  $4000  yearly.  Gentlemen  might 
say  what  was  $4000?  '  Nothing.  But  those  who 
were  farmers  knew  that  when  a  thousand  bushels 
of  com  was  put  in  a  crib  an  armful  or  a  ear  ta- 
ken from  it  was  nothing,  but  these  little  noth- 
ings would  leave  the  crib  bare  by  spring.  What 
was  one  of  the  little  springs  that  fed  the  Missis- 
sippi? Xolhing.  But  when  they  were  all 
united  th^  formed  the  broadest  and  most  ma- 
jestic river  the  world  ever  saw. 

The  CHAIR  announced  that  the  gentleman's 
time  had  expired. 

And  then  the  committee  rose  and  reported 
progress.  Leave  was  granted  it  to  sit  again, 
and  then 

The  convention  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  31,  1849. 

COURT   OF   APPEALS. 

The  convention  resolved  itself  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  Mr.  HUSTON  in  the  chair,  and 
resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  court  of  appeals. 

The  question  before  the  committee  was  the 
amendment  offered  yesterday  by  Mr.  Machen, 
to  tlie  9ih  section. 

Mr.  MACHEX  suggested  that  his  object  in 

5 resenting  that  amendment  was  to  prevent  some 
iffiulties  which  he  thought  had  arisen  in  the 
house.     He  was   a  thorough  friend  of  constitu 


tional  reform,  and  he  had  no  intention  to  make 
any  proposition  which  would  embarrass  the  ac- 
tion of  the  convention.  He  still  believed  the 
amendment  to  be  proper  and  right,  but  the  con- 
sultation which  he  had  had  with  those  for  Avhose 
opinions  he  had  a  great  regard,  had  induced  him 
to  ask  for  its  withdrawal. 

The  amendment  was  accordingly  withdrawn. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WIGKLIFFE  said,  lie  understood 
that  those  who  opposed  the  sitting  of  tlie  court 
in  different  districts,  yet  were  in  favor  of  elect- 
ing the  judges  by  districts  and  not  by  general 
ticket.  It  would  be  necessary  therefore  to  pre- 
serve the  equality  of  the  voting  population  as 
nearly  as  possible  in  each.  It  had  been  sugges- 
ted by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  (Mr.  Trip- 
lett,)  that  these  districts  should  be  so  formed  as 
to  preserve  the  balance  of  power,  that  the  place 
at  which  the  court  would  be  located,  might  be 
inconvenient  to  some  of  the  counties  in  the  dis- 
trict. He  would,  therefore,  with  a  view  to  ob- 
viate that  difficulty,  offer  an  amendment  as  ad- 
dition to  the  ninth  section,  as  follows: 

"  The  legislature  may  authorize  a  writ  of  er- 
ror or  appeal  to  be  tried  in  another  county  than 
that  to  which  such  district  may  be  attached." 

If  it  would  be  more  convenient  to  take  the 
business  of  one  county  or  district  to  another 
county,  this  would  give  permission  to  do  it, 
leaving  the  county  in  the  district,  so  as  to  pre- 
serve the  equality  of  the  voting  population. 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  he  had  an  amendment  which 
he  should  offer  in  the  convention,  in  lieu  of  the 
ninth  section,  which  bethought  would  meet  the 
objection  of  the  gentleman  from  Henderson.  He 
would  only  read  it  now: 

"Sec.  .  The  court  of  appeals  shall  hold  its 
sessions  at  the  seat  of  government,  unless  other- 
wise ordered  by  law,  and  the  power  is  hereby 
given  to  the  legislature,  from  time  to  time,  to  fix 
on  and  regulate  the  times  and  places  for  holding 
the  sessions  of  the  court  of  appeals." 

He  did  not  desire  any  present  action  upon  the 
amendment.  He  wished  not  to  encumtjer  the 
constitution  with  the  subject;  he  wished  the 
power  in  this  case  to  be  left  to  the  legislature. 
They  would  make  more  friends  by  leaving  it  to 
the  legislature  than  by  putting  it  in  the  con- 
stitution. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  was  fully  aware  that 
that  was  the  last  point  to  which  the  opponents 
of  the  district  system  were  to  retreat  and  fight  its 
battle.  He  was  not  to  be  alarmed  from  doing  what 
he  thought  right  by  the  idea  which  he  considered 
a  fallacious  one,  that  they  should  make  enemies 
to  the  constitution  by  tlie  insertion  of  such  a 
provision.  Gentlemen  were  in  the  practice  of 
getting  up  and  saying,  that  unless  their  favorite 
measures  were  carried,  there  would  be  such  a 
weight  of  opposition  to  the  constitution  that  the 
people  would  not  receive  it.  Other  gentlemen 
said  the  people  cared  nothing  about  districting, 
and  that  it  was  a  lawyer's  project.  He  had  heard 
and  read  similar  language  from  persons  out  of 
the  house,  coining  from  the  mountains  around  the 
seat  of  government.  Between  the  proposition 
of  his  colleague,  who  would  leave  the  subject  of 
branching  the  court  to  the  legislarure,  and  the 
one  of  his  friend  from  Madison,  that  the  court 
shall  be  held  at  the  seat  of  government,  he  had 


304 


no  heaitation  in  preferring  the  latter.  He  had  no 
vish  to  have  sucn  a  spring  board,  as  the  amend- 
ment of  his  colleague,  from  ■niiich  aspirants  to 
office  could  bound  into  congress  or  the  execu- 
tive chair.  He  had  often  witnessed  the  influ- 
ence which  had  been  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
action  of  the  legislature  from  around  and  with- 
in the  capital,  and  he  did  not  believe,  if  the 
matter  were  left  open,  that  the  court  would 
be  located  any  wliere  else  than  at  the  seat 
of  government.  The  influence  of  the  members 
of  the  bar  around  that  place  would  be  brought 
to  bear  upon  the  legislature,  and  would  con- 
stitute a  nucleus  to  rally  around  for  some  as- 
pirant for  congress,  or  the  governorship,  and 
it  would  be  very  convenient  to  say,  we  will 
postpone  this  bill  till  the  next  year,  till  the  third 
of  March.  If  it  was  right  and  proper  that  the 
court  of  appeals  should  hold  its  sessions  in  dif- 
ferent places,  and  at  different  times,  and  if  the 
public  interest  would  be  subserved  thereby,  he 
would  inquire  what  good  reason  there  was  for 
postponing  it.  As  to  the  argument  that  it  would 
be  a  make  weight  against  the  adoption  of  the 
constitution  by  the  people,  it  was  one  that 
could  be  used  on  both  sides.  This  measure 
had  been  before  the  legislature  heretofore  and 
he  might  perhaps  point  out  the  cause  why  it  had 
been  defeated.  There  had  been  in  times  past, 
some  sudden  changes,  and  new  lights  had  burst 
in  upon  the  legislative  body  between  the  going 
down  and  the  rising  of  the  sun;  even  at  the 
hour  of  midnight  those  lights  had  burst  in,  and 
had  furnished  an  apology  for  the  declaration, 
that  men  had  scruples  about  the  constitutionality 
of  the  thing.     The  gentleman  had  proposed  to 

five  tills  constitutional  power  to  the  legislature. 
hey  would  have  it  at  any  rate  unless  the  prop- 
osition of  the  gentleman  from  Madison  prevail- 
ed. 

Mr.  HARDIN"  repeated,  that  he  had  only  in- 
dicated his  design  to  bring  forward  the  amend- 
ment he  had  read,  at  a  proper  time,  when  he 
should  probably  give  his  reasons  fully  and  thor- 
oughly, that  his  constituents  might  see  why  and 
wherefore  he  differed  from  his  honorable  col- 
league. He  was  not  an  enemy  to  the  bill,  he  had 
ever  been  in  favor  of  electing  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  and  of  electing  them  by  dis- 
tricts, and  that  they  should  hold  their  offices  but 
for  one  term. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  did  not  intend  to  say 
that  he  was  an  enemy  to  the  principle  of  the  bill. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  he  had  staked  himself  on 
the  great  question  of  constitutional  reform.  He 
waA  one  of  the  first  men  that  voted  for  it  in  the 
state  senate.  He  was  exceedingly  anxious  to 
frame  a  constitution  which  the  people  would 
adopt,  upon  the  first  vote  that  they  should  take 
upon  it;  and  it  was  equally  important  that  the 
constitution  should  be  popular,  as  well  as  good. 
He  had  no  idea  of  practicing  law  much  longer, 
and  would  just  as  lieve  have  the  branch  of  the 
court  at  Pulaski  as  here.  He  did  not  take  many 
causes  to  that  court,  and  there  were  a  great  ma- 
ny eminent  lawyers  who  never  took  a  cause  to 
the  court  of  appeals.  They  might  as  well  stop 
at  the  court  below,  because  they  could  have  the 
opinion  of  but  one  man  when  they  got  here,  and 
the  ca.se  would  not  be  as  well  argued  as  at  home. 
He  admitted,  however,  that  it  was  well  to  have 


a  court  of  appeals,  for  the  purpose  of  preserving 
uniformity  in  decisions.  But  the  idea  that  jus- 
tice was  to  be  carried  to  every  man's  door,  was 
like  that  which  he  had  somewhere  read  fifty  years 
ago,  in  which  an  individual  declared  that  he  ha- 
ted the  very  idea  of  a  court  house  and  a  grave 
yard.  If  he  was  not  obliged  to  support  his  ne- 
groes he  would  never  go  near  a  court  house,  for 
he  regarded  the  court  house  and  the  grave  yard 
with  much  the  same  feelings. 

He  agreed  With  his  colleague,  that  the  legisla- 
ture always  had  the  power  to  branch  the  court, 
and  he  did  not  know  hoAV  a  contrary  opinion 
got  abroad;  he  had  been  told,  however,  that  it 
was  started  by  a  gentleman  who  lives  here,  Mr. 
Charles  S.  Morehead;  but  whoever  it  was,  he 
ought  to  have  a  patent  for  it.  He. had  been  in 
the  legislature  twice  when  the  subject  of  branch- 
ing the  court  had  come  up,  and  when  gentlemen 
suggested  places  where  the  court  should  be  held, 
Springfield  was  one  of  the  places  named.  This 
was  a  place  where  they  had  to  haul  water  five 
miles,  and  he  always  put  in  a  proviso,  that  if 
the  court  was  sent  there,  they  should  sit  in  wa- 
termelon time.  The  idea,  therefore,  that  the  le- 
gislature had  not  the  power  to  branch  the  court, 
was  anew  one — one  that,  during  his  practice  of 
the  law  for  forty-three  years,  he  had  never  heard 
in  his  county. 

The  CHAIRMAN  stated  that  as  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  had  not  offered  the  amend- 
ment which  he  read,  there  was  no  question  be- 
fore the  committee. 

Mr.  MORRIS  said  he  had  been  a  silent  but 
an  exceedingly  interested  listener  to  the  discus- 
sion on  this  question.  He  was  one  of  the  few 
gentlemen  in  this  house  who  was  extremely  te- 
nacious in  the  matter  of  the  independence  of 
the  judiciary.  He  believed  most  emphatically 
and  entirely  with  the  late  venerable  Chief  Jus- 
tice Marshall,  who  declared  in  the  convention  of 
Virginia,  that  the  greatest  curse  which  could 
befall  any  country,  was  a  dependent  and  cor- 
rupt judiciary.  He  came  here  prepa*od  to  vote 
for  the  insertion  of  a  clause  in  the  constitution 
giving  to  the  people  the  election  of  the  judges. 
He  believed  that  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary depended  not  so  much  on  the  mode  in 
which  the  judges  received  their  offices,  as  the 
tenure  by  which  they  were  held.  He  believed 
that  the  same  corrupt  influences,  so  beautifully 
described  the  other  day  by  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis)  would  equally  operate  on 
the  legislature,  or  on  any  other  of  the  depart- 
ments of  the  government,  as  on  the  people  them- 
selves. Nay,  he  believed  it  would,  to  even  a 
greater  extent.  He  considered  that  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  judiciary  was  to  be  effected  more 
by  making  the  term  of  office  long,  and  the  sala- 
ries of  the  officers  high,  and  also  by  making  the 
judges  ineligible  after  serving  out  their  respec- 
tive terms.  He  believed  that  in  this  way  they 
might  secure  an  independent  judiciary,  and 
these  were  the  propositions  lie  would  vote  for  as 
a  member  of  the  convention.  As  regarded  the 
question  now  before  the  committee,  he  looked 
upon  it  as  one  of  policy  and  e.xpediency,  and 
could  he  imagine  it  struck  at  the  independence 
of  the  judiciary  in  the  remotest  degree,  he 
would  stand  against  it  as  firmly  as  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  had  done;  but'he  looked  upon 


305 


it  as  not  affecting  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary. 

The  convention  had  been  told,  and  it  had 
been  proVed  by  the  gentlemen  from  Montgome- 
iT,  and  also  by  another  table  produced  here  by 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  W'illiam^,J 
that  if  they  branched  the  court  of  appeals,  the 
legal  business  of  that  court  would,  in  all  proba- 
bility, be  largely  increased.  Now,  he  saw  no  ob- 
jection to  the  adoption  of  that  proposition  on 
that  score.     Give  the  people  of  Kentucky  an  op- 

})oitunity  of  having  their  law  business  prompt- 
y  attended  to,  and  that  could  be  done  by  having 

branches  distributed  in  different  parts  of  the 
state.  If  the  court  of  appeals  was  a  benefit  and 
a  service  to  the  people,  by  affording  them  an 

opportunity  of  going  to  a  higher  and  abler 
court  than  the  circuit  court,  for  an  adjudication 
of  their  cases,  then  let  the  tribunal  be  placed  in 
such  a  position  as  to  suit  the  convenience  of  the 
people.  Was  it  right  that  the  people  from  re- 
mote parts  of  the  commonwealth,  should  be 
compelled  to  travel  all  the  way  to  Frankfort,  in 
order  to  attend  the  appellate  court,  whilst  the 
judges  should  have  the  privilege  of  travelling 
along  good  roads,  and  without  any  inconveni- 
ence whatever,  to  sit  aiid  hear  appeals  at  the 
seat  of  government?  The  court  of  appeals  then, 
under  existing  circumstances,  must,  he  thought, 
be  either  a  benefit  or  a  curse  to  the  people.  He 
should  judge  from  the  argument  of  the  venera- 
ble gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  that 
he  considered  this  court  a  curse.  If  it  was  a 
benefit,  it  should  be  spread  over  the  state  at 
large,  so  that  people  might  enjoy  it;  but  if,  on 
the  contrary,  it  Avas  a  curse,  why  let  the  people 
bear  it? 

It  had  been  said  that  the  introduction  of  this 
clause  would  affect  the  reception  of  the  new 
constitution  by  the  people  of  Kentucky.  He, 
however,  did  not  believe  it  would  produce  any 
effect  of  that  kind;  but  if  any,  it  would  affect 
the  constitution  for  good,  and  render  it  more  pal- 
atable to  the  people.  The  insertion  of  the  pro- 
vision in  question  was  regarded  by  many  gentle- 
men here  as  an  entering  wedge  toward  the  re- 
moving of  the  seat  of  government.  He  did  not 
looK  upon  it  in  that  light.  He  would  do  noth- 
ing to  remove  the  seat  of  government  from 
Frankfort,  for  it  was  a  pleasant  place,  and  the 

Seople  were  very  warm  hearted  and  hospitable. 
;e  would  warn  gentlemen,  who  felt  interested  in 
the  town  of  Frankfort,  that  tliere  are  large  and 
remote  sections  of  the  state  where  the  people 
were  extremely  anxious  for  the  branching  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  and  that  if  they  pertinaciously 
adhered  to  the  keeping  of  every  thing  within 
this  little  town,  it  might  operate  most  seriously 
against  it. 

The  9lh  section  as  amended  was  then  adopt- 
ed. 

The  secretary  then  read  the  tenth  section,  as 
follows  : 

"  The  first  election  of  the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals  shall  take  place  on  the  day  of 

,  and  every  two  years  thereafter,  in 
the  district  in  which  a  vacancy  may  occur,  by 
ex-piration  of  the  term  of  office;  ancf  the  judges 
of  the  said  court  shall  be  commissioned  by  the 
governor. " 

Mr.  0.  A.  WICKLIFFE  proposed  to  fill  the 
39 


blanks  in  that  section.  He  thought,  that  if  the 
constitution  was  not  to  be  formally  proclaimed 
as  the  constitution  of  the  state,  till  the  people 
liad  had  an  opportunity  to  consider  it,  and  the 
convention  were  to  meet  afterwards  to  proclaim 
ii,  they  could  not  meet  earlier  than  April  or 
ilay  next.  The  members  of  the  legislature 
would  be  elected  on  the  first  Monday  in  August, 
as  he  understood  by  the  contemplated  report  of 
the  committee  on  that  subject,  and  consequently, 
there  could  not  be  an  election  of  judicial  officers 
earlier  than  the  ensuing  spring  after  that  legisla- 
ture had  closed  its  session.  He  would,  there- 
fore, propose  that  the  first  election  of  these  offi- 
cers, throughout  the  state,  should  take  place  on 
the  first  Monday  in  May,  1851,  and  that  they 
should  be  elected  thereafter  on  that  day.  That 
would  avoid  an  election  of  these  judges  at  a  pe- 
riod when  the  political  officers  Avere  chosen,  and 
hethouglitit  a  more  convenient  season  than  the 
month  of  August. 

Mr.  MACHEN  suggested  that  members  of 
congress  would  be  elected  in  1851,  and  the  elec- 
tion of  judges  and  members  of  congress  Avould 
thus  occur  in  the  same  year. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIVFE  replied  that  it  was 
for  this  reason  that  the  month  of  May  was  se- 
lected, which  would  avoid  all  other  elections. 

Mr.  DESHA  said  the  second  or  third  Monday 
in  May  would  be  more  agreeable  to  the  people, 
in  reference  to  their  business  for  the  season. 

Mr.  xiPPERSOISr  would  prefer  the  middle  of 
a  week,  and  an  earlier  period.  The  first  Thurs- 
day in  April  would  throw  the  election  still  far- 
ther from  the  time  of  other  elections. 

Mr.  HARGIS  preferred  the  third  Thursday  in 
April,  as  the  circuit  courts  would  be  in  session 
in  his  county  on  the  first. 

The  PRE'SIDENT  thought  the  election  of 
these  officers  should  come  on  those  years  when 
the  members  of  the  legislature  were  not  to  be 
chosen.  He  would  prefer  the  first  Monday  in 
August,  on  those  years  wlien  the  members  of 
the  legislature  were  not  chosen.  He  was  not 
willing,  however,  that  any  time  should  be  fixed 
upon  now,  as  the  time  when  all  officers  were  to 
be  elected  was  to  be  fixed  upon  hereafter. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  stated  that  the  rea- 
son why  he  wished  to  have  the  blank  filled  now, 
was,  that  he  understood  that  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department  had  fixed  upon  the 
first  Monday  in  August,  1850,  as  the  time  when 
the  first  election  for  representatives  should  take 
place  under  the  new  constitution.  They  would 
then  be  obliged  to  take  a  different  month,  or  de- 
lay the  election  till  August,  1851,  which  would 
bring  the  election  to  the  time  of  the  election  of 
members  of  congress.  He  thought  it  would  be 
better  to  fix  on  a  different  period  of  the  year  for 
the  election  of  the  judges,  both  of  the  appellate 
and  circuit  courts,  from  that  on  which  either 
state  or  national  officers  were  to  be  chosen.  He 
was,  on  the  whole,  indifferent  Avhether  the  time 
were  fixed  now,  or  whether  tliey  waited  till  the 
legislative  committee  liad  reported  the  time  for 
the  choice  of  representatives.  He  would,  there- 
fore, Avithdraw  the  proposition  to  fill  the  blank 
at  present. 

The  tenth  section  was  then  adopted. 
The  eleventh  section  Avas   then  read,  as  fol- 
lows : 


306 


"  There  sliall  be  elocted,  iu  eacli  district,  by 
the  qualified  voters  thereof,  a  clerk  of  the  court 
of  appeals  for  such  district,  who  shall  hold  his 
office  for  the  term  of  eight  years,  from  and  after 
his  election,  and  who  may  be  removed  by  the 
court  of  appeals,  for  good  cause,  npon  informa- 
tion by  the  attorney  general." 

Mr.  TURNER  said  he  had  some  difficulty  in 
understanding  the  operation  of  this  section.  He 
would  like  to  know  how  many  attorneys  gener- 
al were  to  be  had?  He  thought  this  section  ought 
to  provide  for  having  four  attorneys  general,  one 
to  atteftd  each  sitting  court,  otherwise  he  must 
pass  araund  to  each  district.  In  this  case  the 
business  at  the  seat  of  government  would  be 
neglected,  for  the  officers  there  would  have  no 
one  to  advise  them  in  his  absence. 

Mr.  lilWIN  was  not  in  favor  of  the  proposed 
arrangement  of  the  court,  but  he  would  enquire 
if  it  were  not  somewhat  strange,  that  a  clerk 
who  was  elected  by  thirty  thousand  persons 
could  be  put  out  of  office  by  four  persons? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  Avas  sorry  that  he 
could  not  please  the  gentleman  from  Logan.  It 
was  difficult  to  please  a  gentleman  who  did  not 
wish  to  bepleased.  The  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son (Mr.  Turner,)  had  suggested  that  the  pres- 
ence of  an  attorney  at  the  capital  was  necessary. 
He  would  enquire  where  that  distinguished  gen- 
tleman now  resided?  Did  he  live  at  the  seat  of 
government?  There  had  been  many  who  did 
not,  and  the  present  able  and  competent  officer 
did  not  reside  here.  He  did  not  know  how  the 
government  got  along  in  his  absence.  He  thought 
there  would  be  no  difficulty  from  the  cause  indi- 
cated. "The  gentleman  from  Logan  (Mr.  Irwin,) 
had  objected  that  the  committee  proposed  that 
four  judges  should  displace  a  clerk  who  had 
been  elected  by  thirty  thousand  persons.  He 
would  answer  tnat  the  judges  were  to  be  elected 
by  a  still  larger  number,  but  they  were  to  be  re- 
movable by  a  small  number.  The  power  must 
be  placed  somewhere. 

Mr.  McHENRY  rose  to  a  point  of  order.  He 
thought  the  remarks  were  not  Jipplicable  to  the 
subject  before  the  committee.  The  section  was 
not  debateable  under  the  resolution  which  gave 
permission  to  discuss  amendments  only. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  begged  pardon  for 
having  unintentionally  wandered  from  the  point 
in  debate. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  wished  to  call  the  attention 
of  the  honorable  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
the  court  of  appeals  to  the  words  in  the  eleventh 
section,  "and  who  may  be  removed  by  the  court 
of  appeals,  for  good  cause,  upon  information  by 
the  attorney  general." 

There  was  a  possibility,  and  even  a  strong 
probability,  that  a  clerk  might  misbehave  in  one 
district  not  immediately  under  the  cognizance 
of  the  attorney  general,  and  he  would  not  have 
information  of  the  fact.  He  would  therefore 
suggest  the  propriety  of  inserting  the  words, 
"upon  the  indictment  of  a  grand  jury" — after 
thti  words  above  auoted.  Tiiere  ought  to  bo 
Home  measure  by  wnich  the  citizen  in  a  remote 
part  of  the  state,  who  liad  been  injured  by  the 
mal-conduct  of  a  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
might  be  able  to  roach  him  through  the  attorney 
general.  No  private  person  could  compel  him 
to  file  an  information,  but  when  a  grand  jury 


liad  found  a  true  bill  on  an  indictment,  it  was 
prima  fade  evidence  that  the  attorney  general 
ought  to  file  an  information  against  him.  He 
would  prefer  that  the  trial  should  take  place  in 
his  own  district,  because  the  subjects  for  which 
he  should  be  tried  would  relate  to  the  records  of 
that  particular  court,  and  it  would  be  necessary 
to  have  the  records  of  that  court  to  prove  the 
facts.  He  would  prefer  that  the  honorable  chair- 
man should  move  an  amendment  of  that  kind, 
because  it  was  not  easy  to  carry  an  amendment 
to  which  that  gentleman  Avas  opposed. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  the  committee 
thought  it  best  to  throw  around  these  officers 
some  safe-guard  from  unnecessaiy  annoyances 
by  persons  who  might  institute  proceedings 
against  them  which  were  groundless.  As  a 
member  of  that  committee  he  was  not  attached 
to  any  particular  court  as  the  court  to  try  such  a 
case.  He  would  suggest  to  his  friend  whether 
it  would  not  be  better  to  leave  it  to  the  legisla- 
ture to  fix  the  mode  of  procedure. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  assented  to  this  proposition. 

Mr.  HARDIN  suggested  that  it  would  be  bet- 
ter to  adopt  the  language  of  the  old  constitution, 
which  is  iu  the  following  words: 

"  They  shall  be  removable  for  breach  of  good 
'behavior  by  the  court  of  appeals  only,  who 
'  shall  be  judges  of  the  fact  as  well  as  of  the 
'  law." 

Now,  under  that  clause,  the  court  of  appeals 
has  said  it  is  only  to  be  filed  by  leave  of  the 
court.  If  this  language  were  adopted,  all  would 
understand  what  the  decisions  were.  He  would 
not,  however,  make  any  motion  on  the  subject. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  observed  to  the  gen- 
tleman from  Daviess  (Mr.  Triplett)  that  if  he 
would  consent  to  postpone  any  action  upon  his 
amendment  for  the  present,  he  would  consult 
tlie  committee  of  which  he  was  a  member,  and 
get  a  provision  which  he  thought  would  meet 
the  views  of  that  gentleman. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  assented. 

The  eleventh  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  twelfth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  that  in  conse- 
quence of  the  amendments  previously  adopted, 
it  would  be  necessary  to  strike  out  the  words 
"of  the  United  States."  and  insert  the  words  "a 
citizen  and  resident  of  the  district  at  least  two 
years  next  preceding  the  election."  And  he 
would  move  to  have  it  so  amended. 

The  amendment  was  adopted,  and  the  section 
therefore  was  in  these  words: 

"Skc.  12.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  of- 
fice of  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  unless  he  is 
a  citizen  and  resident  of  the  district  at  least  two 
years  next  preceding  the  election,  in  which  he 
may  be  a  candidate,  of  the  age  of  twenty  one 
years,  and  has  a  certificate  of  his  qualifications 
from  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals." 

Mr.  NUTTALL  moved  further  to  amend  by 
striking  out  the  words  "and  has  a  certificate  of 
his  qualifications  from  the  judges  of  tlie  court 
of  appeals." 

If  this  report  were  adopted,  and  if  the  election 
of  tlie  judges  and  the  clerks  were  to  take  place 
next  May,  out  of  the  twenty  five  or  tliirty  thous- 
and voters  composing  a  district,  not  more  than 
half  a  dozen,  except  the  old  clerks,  would  stand 
any  earthly  chance  of  being  elected  clerks  of  the 


307 


court  of  appeals,  for  their  several  districts.  Be 
that  as  it  might,  he  understood  that  if  this  sec- 
tion were  adopted,  it  would  have  the  direct  effect 
of  installing  all  the  old  officers  who  were  for- 
merly clerks  in  the  different  courts  of  Kentucky. 
There  was  no  earthly  doubt  of  it;  and,  he  would 
here  say,  that  if  there  was  one  thing  more  than 
another  that  had  a  most  powerful  influence  in 
revolutionizing  public  sentiment  on  the  subject 
of  calling  this  convention,  it  was  the  manner  in 
which  tlie  clerks  had  heretofore  been  appointed, 
and  the  course  pursued  in  continuing  men,  from 
father  to  sou,  in  office.  He  was  in  favor  of  giving 
every  man  a  fair  opportunity  of  filling  one  of  the 
public  offices,  if  he  chose  to  run  for  it.  If  ow  in 
regard  to  the  duties  of  the  clerks  of  the  court  of 
appeals  he  did  not  pretend  to  say  that  lie  under- 
stood them,  but  it  seemed  to  him  that  few  quali- 
fications only  were  required  to  make  a  man  a 
good  clerk.  He  had  been  in  the  court  of  appeals 
once  or  twice  in  his  life,  and  had  never  heard  a 
clerk  read  more  than  a  short  paper  that  the  court 
had  affirmed  or  reversed  the  decision  of  the  court 
below.  A  line  or  two  was  siifficient  to  enter  the 
order  of  the  court,  as  it  appeared  to  him.  He 
might  be  mistaken;  that  might  have  been  a  min- 
ute merely,  and  the  order  might  afterwards  have 
been  written  at  length,  but  he  did  not  hear  it 
read.  But,  it  seemed  to  him,  that  any  practical 
man  of  good  sense  might  discharge  the  duties  of 
clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or  of  the  circuit  court. 
He  was  willing  to  carry  out  the  doctrine,  which 
he  first  contended  for  here,  and  that  was,  that  if 
the  people  were  qualified  to  judge  of  the  capa- 
city and  ability  of  men  to  fill  other  offices,  they 
would  certainly  be  qualified  to  elect  a  man  clerk 
of  the  court  of  appeals.  He  was  in  favor  of 
striking  out  the  words  lie  had  indicated, because 
he  thought  it  would  be  forcingthe  clerks  already 
in  office  on  the  commonwealth. 

Mr.  HARDIN  observed  that  this  was  tlie  same 
question  that  had  occupied  the  attention  of  the 
committee  for  the  last  three  weeks.  All  it 
amounted  to  was,  whether  thev  should  fix  the 
qualifications  for  any  office.  Tliey  had  fixed  the 
age  at  twenty  one  years,  and  that  was  a  qualifi- 
cation. That  was  as  much  an  abridgment  of  a 
man's  liberty  as  to  make  him  subject  to  military 
duty.  He  had  no  idea  that  the  people  would 
elect  a  man  that  was  not  qualified,  but  it  was 
important  to  have  the  people  understand  what 
was  thought  about  the  principle  in  order  that 
they  might  know  that  a  knowledge  of  the  law 
was  essential  to  the  administration  of  justice  in 
our  courts.  The  people  ought  to  understand 
that  before  a  clerk  was  permitted  to  act  he  should 
have  some  paper  which  would  show  his  qualifi- 
cations. He  thought  that  no  man  should  be 
elected  a  clerk  unless  he  was  qualified.  It  had 
been  said  that  it  was  in  consequence  of  the 
abuses  of  the  appointing  power  this  convention 
had  been  brought  about.  It  was  true,  there  was 
ground  for  the.se  complaints.  WTien  the  clerk 
of  Owen  county  died,  the  judge  sent  down  to 
Green,  without  regard  to  the  wishes  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  district,  and  brought  his  brother  out 
of  an  apothecary  shop.  It  was  difficult  for  him 
to  get  a  certificate,  but  some  man  taught  him  to 
repeat  the  answers  which  he  would  be  required 
to  make,  and  he  thus  obtained  one.  When  the 
clerk  in  Garrard  died,  the  judge  thought  no  man 


was  so  well  qualified  to  fill  the  place  as  his  son 
William;  and  William  having  sold  itout.no  man 
was  so  well  qualified  as  William's  vendee.  And 
when  Boyle  county  was  made  no  man  was  so 
well  qualified  for  that  office  as  William,  in  the 
eyes  of  his  father.  He  hoped  gentlemen  would 
not  be  inclined  to  carry  their  views  so  far  as  to 
run  this  principle  into  the  ground.  We  have 
fixed  upon  the  qualifications  as  to  age  and  res- 
idence. It  would  do  no  harm.  The  gentleman 
from  Henry  was  entirely  mistaken  in  the  sup- 
position that  the  old  clerks  would  be  elected. 
Some  would,  and  some  would  not.  Many  young 
men  would  qualify  themselves  to  fill  the  office 
of  clerk,  and  he  ventured  to  say  that  there  would 
be  no  scarcity  of  competent  men  to  discharge 
the  duties. 

Mr.  CLARKE  said  that  gentlemen  had  at- 
tempted to  assign  reasons  why  a  candidate  for 
the  office  of  the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals 
should  be  in  possession  of  a  certificate  in  re- 
spect to  his  competency  and  ability  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  the  office.  This  was  based  upon 
the  fact  that  the  individual  wo\ild  not  be  as 
likely  to  be  as  generally  known  by  the  people, 
as  the  one  who  obtained  the  office  of  clerkship 
in  the  circuit  court.  Hence  therefore,  it  was 
contended,  the  necessity  of  a  certificate.  But, 
he  would  ask,  was  it  true  that  the  possession  of 
a  certificate  was  satisfactory  evidence  of  his 
qualification?  That  was  the  point.  It  was 
argued  that  no  one  should  be  a  clerk  unless  he 
was  qualified,  and  the  best  evidence  of  the  fact 
was  the  possession  of  a  certificate.  Now,  in 
respect  to  what  had  fallen  from  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  and  the  venerable  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  on  the  subject  of  a  certificate,  he 
would  ask  if  these  certificates,  obtained  with 
the  facility  which  had  been  stated  here,  furnisli- 
ed  satisfactory  proof  of  the  qualification  of  a 
clerk  to  discharge  the  duties  of  his  station?  If 
he  (Mr.  Clarke)  desired  to  be  a  candidate  for  the 
office  of  clerk,  he  would  set  about  learning  to 
answer  some  dozen  or  twenty  questions,  which 
it  was  understood  bv  the  ola  clerk  were  always 
put  by  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  to  an 
aspirant  for  the  office.  And,  after  he  should 
have  gone  before  them,  and  answered  those 
questions,  he  would  get  a  certificate.  They 
allowed  a  man,  because  he  had  a  certificate 
to  impose  upon  the  people — to  practice  a  fraud 
upon  their  credulity.  That  was  the  effect 
of  it.  If  they  let  him  go  before  the  people  upon 
his  reputation,  his  standing,  his  character,  and 
business  habits,  the  people  would  be  competent 
to  judge  of  his  fitness  and  capacity  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  a  clerk.  But,  if  they  let  him  go 
into  office,  because  of  his  possession  of  a  certi- 
ficate, which  he  had  obtained  by  fraud,  they  ex- 
cited the  suspicion  of  the  people  and  invited 
them  to  enter  into  a  scrutiny  of  his  qualifica- 
tion, which  they  doubtless  would  institute. 
He  had  no  objection,  nor  had  any  one,  to  the 
candidate  being  a  resident  of  the  district  in 
which  he  shoulcf  be  elected,  two  years,  and  that 
he  should  be  twenty  one  years  of  age;  but  he 
did  object  emphatically  to  his  being,  by  fraud 
and  trickery,  palmed  off  upon  the  community 
as  a  competent  clerk,  when  able  and  distinguisli- 
ed  lawyers  said  he  was  not  qualified. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  explained  the  bbject 


3P8 


of  the  committee  in  framing  this  section,  in  this 
manner.  They  designed  to  show  to  the  commu- 
nity and  to  the  -wond,  as  well  as  to  the  candi- 
dates for  this  office,  that  he  should  be  furnish- 
ed ^y'ltli  prima  facie  evidence,  cit  least,  of  fitJiess 
for  the  office.  That  individuals  had  obtained 
certificates  who  were  not  very  well  qualified  for 
the  duties  of  a  clerk,  might  be  true.  An  in- 
stance had  been  given  by  a  gentleman.  He 
could  give  an  instance  where  the  reverse  was 
true.  He  had  known  the  case  of  a  young  man, 
who  haS  enjoyed  every  advantage  to  make  him- 
self a  competent  clerk,  for  he  was  schooled  in 
the  clerk's  office,  and  made  himself  familiar 
■with  the  duties  of  tliat  office  by  study  and  ex- 
perience, and  he  (Mr.  "Wickliffe,)  knew  tliHt  he 
was  well  qualified,  yet  in  his  alarm  and  trepida- 
tion, before  the  tribunal,  he  could  not  answer  a 
single  question.  He  then  came  to  him,  (Mr. 
"Wickliffe)  and  told  him  what  had  occurred. 
Upon  a  consultation  with  the  judges,  are-exam- 
ination was  had  under  such  circumstnnces  as  to 
remove  the  cause  of  his  trepidation;  a  certifi- 
cate was  granted  and  he  made  a  most  excellent 
clerk.  When  gentlemen  came  to  reflect  upon 
it,  he  thought  they  would  seethe  necessity  of 
having  some  security  against  any  man  obtain- 
ing this  office  without  the  proper  qualifications. 
Some  popular  declaimer,  wholly  unqualified, 
might  obtain  the  suffrages  of  the  people,  and  se- 
cure the  election  and  commission  of  a  clerk,  aud 
having  done  so,  he  might  then  farm  it  out  to 
some  one  man  who  was  qualified,  just  as  the  old 
sheriffs  had  done.  He  Avished  to  preserve  a  pro- 
vision by  which  the  people  should  have  some 
evidence  of  fitness,  and  that  there  should  be 
some  inducement  to  young  men  to  qualify  them- 
selves. If  his  colleague  were  to  imagine  that 
he  might  be  a  suitable  clerk  in  his  judicial  dis- 
trict, it  would  be  difficult  to  prevent  his  elec- 
tion, yet  no  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals  would 
grant  him  a  certificate  that  he  was  qualified. 
Would  it  be  proper  to  appoint  such  a  man  as  he, 
and  then  have  some  friend  of  his  to  perform  the 
duties  of  the  office. 

Mr.  CLARKE  wished  to  remark  that  there 
was  a  man  now  occupying  the  station  of  clerk 
who  could  not  write. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  supposed  as  Dogber- 
ry said,  it  came  by  nature.  He  was  aware  there 
had  been  a  practice  throughout  the  state  of  ap- 

{)ointing  young  gentlemen  to  that  station  who 
lad  never  spent  a  day  in  a  clerk's  office,  and 
who  knew  nothing  about  the  business.  Clerks 
had  been  appointe(i  to  office  jsro  tem.,  wlio  went 
to  work  ana  qualified  themselves,  and  became 
excellent  clerks.  But  it  was  not  now  proposed 
to  elect  clerks  pro  tem. ;  and  prima  facie  evidence 
was  requisite,  at  least,  that  they  could  read  and 
write,  and  understood  something  of  the  iudicia- 
ry  of  the  country.  The  office  of  a  clerk  was  a 
very  important  one,  not  only  for  the  despatch  of 
business,  but  its  correctness.  He  had  known 
evils  to  arise,  owing  to  a  want  of  qualification 
in  a  clerk  under  the  present  system,  or  by  incom- 
petency of  his  deputies,  while  the  clerk  himself 
w»8  eroploved  in  other  business.  It  was  on  ac- 
count of  atuses  of  that  kind,  tliat  the  subject  of 
calling  aconvention  Wiis  fully  discussed  through- 
out the  region  where  he  lived.  The  people  did 
not  demand  any  evidence  of  the  honesty  or  integ- 


rity of  a  clerk,  but  tliey  said  they  would  require 
some  evidence  that  he  had  learned  his  trade,  that 
is,  that  he  knew  how  to  do  the  work. 

Mr.  BALLINGER  would  not  have  arisen  to 
speak  on  this  subject,  but  for  the  allusion  to  a 
clerk  in  one  of  the  counties  of  this  state,  by  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson.  It  was  true  that  for 
the  last  year,  that  clerk  had  been  disabled  by 
the  palsy.  There  was,  however,  no  clerk  in 
the  .state  better  qualified  to  discharge  the  duties 
of  the  office.  He  had  been  a  clerk  a  long  time, 
and  received  his  appointment  at  first  on  account 
of  his  superior  qualifications,  and  he  was  a 
living  evidejice  of  the  indispensable  necessity 
of  proper  qualifications.  He  had  given  uni- 
versal satisfaction  for  nearly  thirty  years.  The 
business  of  the  office  was  now  carried  on  by 
individuals  who  were  not  themselves  qualified, 
but  who  performed  their  labors  under  his  di- 
rection. That  was  an  evidence  of  the  necessity 
of  having  a  clerk  who  was  qualified  both  in 
theory  and  practice.  He  thought,  notwithstand- 
ing tne  statements  which  had  been  made  to  the 
contrary,  that  the  possession  of  a  certificate  was 
a  requisite  evidence  of  qualification.  Any  man 
who  would  give  his  time  and  attention  to  the 
subject  could  qualify  himself  for  this  office;  but 
the  people  were  not  capable  of  judging  whether 
an  individual  was  fully  competent.  K'one  but 
those  who  were  themselves  qualified  to  perform 
those  duties  were  competent  to  judge  of  the  rit- 
]iess  of  another  individual. 

Mr.  CLARKE  explained  that  he  did  not  make 
the  allusion  to  which  the  gentleman  had  replied, 
with  a  view  of  showing  that  the  incumbent  was 
not  qualified  to  discharge  tlie  duties  of  the  office, 
but  simply  to  reply  to  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son, (Mr.  "C.  A.  VVickliffe),  and  to  show.it  was 
not  indispensably  necessary  for  a  clerk  to  write 
a  very  elegant  hand. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  said  he  had  not  risen  with 
any  expectation  that  his  peculiiir  views  could  be 
enforced,  or  that  he  should  make  any  impression 
on  the  house  in  what  he  might  have  to  say  on 
this  question;  but  he  felt  it  his  bounden  duty 
to  oppose  the  course  Avhich  some  gentlemen 
were  taking'  in  making  these  invidious  distinc- 
tions at  every  stage  of  this  discussion.  Now 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin),  had 
conceded  the  whole  ground  in  controversy  at 
the  outset.  He  had  taken  down  his  words  vert . 
batim  as  they  fell  from  his  lips,  and  they  were 
that  he  had  no  idea  that  any  man  Avould  be 
elected  who  was  not  Avell  qualified.  He  had 
as  much  confidence  in  the  intelligence  of  the 
people  as  the  gentleman,  and  concurred  with 
him  in  the  opinion  which  he  had  expressed.  It 
had  been  fully  shown  that  a  certificate  was  not 
prima  facie  evidence  of  a  man's  fitness  for  office. 
In  this  opinion  he  also  concurred.  They  all 
knew  that  for  many  years  past,  the  public  offices 
had  been  confined  almost  exclusively  to  a  cer- 
tain class  of  the  comnmnity,  divided  among  cer- 
tain families  belonging  to  the  Patrician  order, 
as  he  considered  them.  The  father  first  enjoytid 
the  office  for  a  number  of  years,  and  then  it  was 
transferred  to  tlie  son.  Tliis  was  the  only  class 
of  persons,  if  this  provision  were  adopted,  that 
could  come  forwaru  and  obtain  a  certificate  of 
qualification.  He  agreed  with  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  that  the  people  would  make  a  pro- 


309 


per  choice.  Where  a  man  was  well  known  the 
people  must  be  the  best  judges,  and  yet  gentle- 
men proposed  to  prescribie  to  the  people  whom 
they  sliould  or  should  not  elect.  He  maintained 
that  the  character  of  a  man  before  the  people 
was  the  very  best  evidence  of  his  qualification. 
He  protested  against  prescribing  to  the  people, 
for  it  was  in  so  many  words  saying  to  them, 
"you  know  nothing  about  selecting  a  competent 
clerk,  and  we  must  give  you  our  advice  lest  you 
elect  an  incompetent  man,  having  no  confidence 
in  your  judgment,  integrity,  and  discretion." 
He  knew  this  measure  would  be  adopted,  but 
before  it  was  he  would  now  repeat  his  protest 
against  the  infliction  of  such  injustice  on  those 
who  sent  him  here. 

Mr.  DIXOX  believed  that  he  well  understood 
now,  Avhat  the  gentleman  from  Ballard  meant. 
The  last  remarks  of  that  gentleman  were  easily 
understood.  He  had  asked  the  gentleman  from 
Xelson,  if  his  object  was  to  prevent  the  ignora- 
muses from  being  elected  clerks,  to  prescribe 
rules  to  keep  them  out  of  the  oflice. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  declared  he  had  not  uttered 
that  seutiment,  but  did  say  that  other  gentlemen 
held  tlie  doctrine  that  the  people  would  elect  a 
set  of  ignoramuses,  and  therefore  they  prescrib- 
ed those  metes  and  bounds. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  That  was  it  then,  just  the 
thing,  they  prescribed  rules  by  which  ignora- 
muses might  be  prevented  from  being  clerks. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX.  If  the  gentleman  thought  to 
make  capital  by  a  wilful  perversion  of  his  re- 
marks he  was  welcome  to  do  so. 

Mr.  DIXOK  did  not  think  much  capital  would 
be  made  from  any  remarks  of  that  gentleman  :  for 
after  giving  him  full  credit  for  all  the  capital  he 
possessed,  it  would  be  of  little  value.  He  under- 
stood the  gentleman  to  say,  if  the  people  would 
make  bad  clerks,  they  had  a  right,  to  do  so;  if 
they  would  make  mean  and  dishonest  men  clerks, 
they  still  had  a  right  to  do  it;  and  if  they  put 
ignoramuses  in  office,  they  had  the  right  to  do 
it;  and  he  insists  that  the  people  of  Ballard  and 
McCracken  should  not  be  prevented  from  exer- 
cising this  right.  It  was  unfortunate  that  the 
gentleman  did  not  live  in  the  time  of  the  great 
contest  of  the  white  and  red  roses,  as  it  was 
termed,  or  between  the  houses  of  York  and  Lan- 
caster, which  was  waged  witih  such  partizan  fu- 
ry, that  England  was  drenched  in  blood. 
There  was  during  that  memorable  contest,  a  cel- 
ebrated man  who  entertained  the  same  opinions 
with  the  gentleman  from  Ballard  and  McCrack- 
en. He  and  those  who  agreed  with  him, 
thought  it  was  wrong  for  aman  to  write,  highly 
criminal  to  read,  and  especially  so,  if  he  spoke 
French.  It  was  the  celebrated  Jack  Cade.  He 
was  the  great  leader  of  all  the  ignorance  of  Eng- 
land ;  he  fought  several  battles,  and  was  victo- 
rious ;  he  took  many  captains,  and  made  it  a 
point,  like  the  gentleman  from  Ballard  and  Mc- 
Cracken, to  spare  no  one  who  was  so  unfortun- 
ate as  to  have  learned  to  read  and  write.  At  one 
time  he  constituted  himself  a  court  with  crimi- 
nal jurisdiction,  when  a  clerk — the  clerk  of  Chat- 
tam — ^was  brought  before  him,  on  the  grave  and 
horrible  charge  that  he  could  read  and  write,  and 
some  one  else  on  a  charge  that  he  spoke  French. 
Before  tJie  examination  of  the  unfortunate  vio- 
lators of  the  criminal  code  of  Cade  commenced. 


one  of  his  followers  said — the  first  thing  we  do, 
let  us  kill  all  tlie  lawyers;  to  which  Cade  im- 
mediately replied,  nay — ^ihat  I  mean"  to  do.  Is 
not  this  a  lamentable  thing,  said  he,  that  of  the 
skin  of  an  innocent  lamb  should  be  made  parch- 
ment, and  that  parchment  being  scribbled  over 
should  undo  a  man.  I  did,  said  he,  but  seal 
once  a  paper,  and  I  was  never  mine  own  man 
since.  It  was  after  arriving  at  this  most  wise 
and  sapient  conclusion  that  the  most  unfortu- 
nate clerk  of  Chatham  was  introduced  into  court 
and  put  upon  his  trial,  when  the  most  remarka- 
ble specimen,  perhaps  now  on  record,  of  all  the 
beauties  of  ignorance  was  displayed  in  the  di- 
alogue which  ensued  between  the  renowned 
judge  and  one  of  his  followers.  I  do  not  pre- 
tend to  quote  from  the  great  dramatist,  Shak- 
speare,  accurately;  but  it  was,  as  well  as  my 
memory  serves,  after  this  sort: 

"Who  have  you  there,  said  Cade. 

The  clerk  of  Chatham,  said  his  follower. 

What's  his  offence,  said  Cade. 

He  can  write  and  read,  and  cjist  accounts,  said 
his  follower. 

0 !  monstrous,  saiJ  Cade. 

We  took  him  setting  of  boys  copies,  said  his 
follower. 

O!  the  villain,  said  Cade. 

He  has  a  book  in  his  pocket  witli  red  letters 
in  it,  Said  his  follower. 

Kay,  then,  he  is  a  conjuror,  said  Cade. 

He  can  make  obligations  and  write  court  hand, 
said  his  follower. 

I  am  sorry  for  it,  said  Cade.  The  man  is  a 
proper  man  on  mine  honor.  Unless  I  find  him 
guilty  he  shall  not  die.  Come  hither  sirrah,  I 
must  examine  thee.  Dost  thou  use  to  write  thy 
name,  or  hast  thou  a  mart  to  thyself,  like  an 
honest  plain  dealing  man.' 

I  thank  God,  said  the  clerk,  I  have  been 
so  well  brought  up  that  I  can  write  my  name. 

He  hath  confessed !  He  hath  confessed, said  the 
follower  of  Cade.     He  is  a  villain  and  a  traitor. 

Away  with  him  then  said  Cade,  let  him  die 
with  his  pen  and  inkhorn  about  his  neck.  Off 
with  his  head. 

And  now,  said  he,  we'll  have  the  head  of  Lord 
Say,  for  selling  the  dukedom  of  Maine,  and  good 
reason  too  ;  for  thereby  is  England  maimed,  and 
fain  to  go  with  a  staff,  but  that  my  puisance 
holds  it  up.  Whv,  said  he,  is  not  this  Say  a  vil- 
lain, and  worse  than  all,  he  can  speak  French, 
and  therefore  he  is  a  traitor.  Answer,  if  you 
can.  The  Frenchmen  are  our  enemies,  go  to 
then.  I  ask  but  this,  can  he  that  speaks  with 
the  tongue  of  an  enemy  be  a  good  counsellor. 
I  answer,  he  cannot.  Then  I  say  let  him  die  the 
death  of  a  traitor.     Off  with  his  head." 

Had  my  friend  lived  at  that  period,  he  might 
have  been  a  distinguished  leader  like  Cade.  No 
qualifications  were  then  needed.  If  he  wrote, 
that  was  a  disqualification;  if  he  read,  it  was 
the  same ;  and  if  he  spoke  French  he  had  no 
chance  but  to  have  his  head  taken  off.  They 
were  not  now  living  at  such  a  period,  and  he 
thought  his  friend  from  Ballara  must  be  sat- 
isfied of  that.  Jack  Cade  thought  the  qualifi- 
cations of  writing,  reading,  and  speaking 
French,  were  sufficient  to  demand  decapitation. 
His  friend  fronj  Ballard  seemed  to  think  that  nil 
qualifications  for  the  office   of  clerk,  should  be. 


310 


disregarded.  He,  (Mr.  Dixon)  however,  looked 
on  the  qualifications  of  a  clerk,  as  among  the 
most  important  in  the  state,  important  to  every 
citizen  in  the  the  whole  country.  In  the 
clerk's  office  were  deposited  all  evidences  of  ti- 
tles, a  thousand  evidences  of  facts,  upon  which 
all  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  people  of  this 
commonwealth  depended.  It  was  highly  im- 
portant that  the  clerk  should  know  how  to  take 
care  of  these  papers.  Surely  it  was  important, 
and  he  believed  it  required  years  of  study  and 
close  application  to  qualify  any  man  for  tlie  bus- 
iness. He  was  most  decidedly  opposed  to  break- 
ing down,  or  throwing  wide  open  the  gate  to 
permit  every  man  to  go  in  and  take  charge  of 
these  evidences  of  title,  whether  qualified  or  not. 
They  had  better  look  to  this  matter  before  they 
acted  upon  it.  Titles  to  land,  and  titles  of  every 
description  were  placed  in  the  keeping  of  the 
clerk.  In  the  proper  records  of  the  decrees  and 
judgments  of  the  courts,  every  thing  was  in- 
volved, because  a  corrupt  or  ignorant  clerk  may 
pervert  the  record,  and  destroy  all  the  evidences 
which  it  was  intended  to  perpetuate,  and  then 
the  rights  of  the  people  of  course  are  sacrificed. 
Nothing  could  be  so  important  as  that  the 
clerks  should  be  competent  men.  He  hoped 
they  would  not,  by  striking  out  this  provision. 
Bay  to  the  people  of  the  whole  state  of  Kentucky, 
it  was  right  and  proper,  if  they  chose  to  do  it, 
to  put  an  ignorant  man  in  the  office  of  clerk. 
It  would  be  a  wrong,  and  an  outrage  on  their 
rights,  to  put  an  incompetent  man  in  that  office, 
and  thus  throw  down  all  the  barriers  which 
should  be  erected  by  this  convention,  against 
that  wild  spirit  of  revolution,  which  under  a 
leader  of  the  spirit  of  Jack  Cade,  might  result 
in  the  destruction  of  every  thingthat  was  worth 
preserving. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  said  it  would  be  recollected 
by  the  committee  that  he  had  commenced  his 
remarks  with  the  emphatic  declaration  that  he 
wanted  qualified  men,  and  that  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  said  he  had  no  idea 
that  the  people  would  elect  a  man  who  was  not 
qualified.  And,  in  order  to  get  them,  he  (Mr. 
G.)  proposed  to  give  the  election  to  those  who 
lived  around  them,  and  who  would  therefore,  be 
the  best  qualified  to  judge.  He  wished  to  be 
understood  on  that  particular  point.  When  gen- 
tlemen were  driven  to  the  wall,  when  tney 
ehowed  a  disposition  to  liold  up  the  aristocracy, 
let  them  refer  to  old  English  tales  of  Jack  Cade, 
and  Spanish  tales  of  Sancho  Panza.  He  need- 
ed no  such  aid.  His  affections  were  with  the 
people. 

The  PRESIDENT  supposed  there  was  no 
man  in  the  convention  who  did  not  desire  that 
the  candidates  for  the  office  of  clerk  should  be 
well  qualified.  Now  what  was  the  best  mode 
of  securing  that  description  of  officers?  In  the 
present  constitution  it  is  declared  "  that  each 
•court  shall  appoint  its  own  clerk,  who  shall 
'  hold  his  office  during  good  behavior  ;  but  no 
'  person  shall  be  appointed  clerk,  only  pro  tem- 
'  pore,  who  shall  not  produce  to  the  court  ap- 
'  j)oiuting  him,  a  certificate  from  a  majority  of 
'  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  that  he  had 
'been  examined  by  their  clerk  in  their  presence, 
'and  under  their  airection,  and  that  they  judge 
'hira  to  be  well  qualified   to  execute  the  office 


'of  clerk,  to  any  court  of  the  same  dignity, 
'  with  that  for  w^hich  he  offers  himself."  These 
are  the  qualifications  required  by  the  the  pres- 
ent constitution.  Granted  that  even  under 
these  qualifications  frauds  have  crept  into  the 
records,  should  they  now  throw  open  the  doors 
to  an  unlimited  extent  for  the  entering  of  such 
frauds,  for  that  reason  alone?  Because  certifi- 
cates were  sometimes  given  unworthily,  was 
that  a  reason  why  no  qualifications  at  all  should 
be  required  before  a  candidate  had  the  right  to 
present  himself  and  trouble  a  district  with  his 
pretensions  to  office?  Licenses  were  required 
from  lawyers  and  yet  sometimes  there  were  men 
who  received  them,  who  were  not  lawyers,  but 
this  fact  was  soon  found  out,  and  before  they 
could  do  much  harm.  In  regard  to  clerks,  the 
evils  arising  were  not  so  readily  to  be  obviated. 
And  should  not  the  people  require  at  least  the 
same  qualifications  of  those  who  present  them- 
selves for  that  office?  Shall  not  the  people 
place  over  themselves  the  same  guards  that  in 
the  present  constitution  they  placed  over  the 
courts  to  prevent  improper  individuals  from 
presenting  themselves  for  these  offices?  How- 
ever aristocratic  these  clerks  might  become  from 
their  official  position,  they  certainly  were  not 
so  in  their  origin.  They  were  generally  the 
sons  of  poor  men,  and  frequently  the  orphans  of 
widowed  mothers  who  were  educated  in  their 
duties  by  the  several  county  clerks.  And  he 
desired  also  to  fix  such  qualifications  as  should 
open  the  office  to  all,  and  at  the  same  time  pre- 
serve that  high  character  for  capability  which  the 
clerks  of  the  courts  of  Kentucky  had  ever  borne 
at  home  and  elsewhere.  It  would  at  least  in- 
crease the  chances  of  securing  better  officei-s, 
and  it  was  the  part  of  wisdom,  therefore,  to  put 
it  in  the  constitution.  Their  possession  of  this 
certificate  by  the  candidates,  would  be  prima 
facie  evidence,  at  least,  to  the  people,  that  they 
were  qualified  for  the  station. 

Mr.  TURNER  said  that  most  of  the  clerk- 
ships were  filled  by  the  sons  of  poor  and  hum- 
ble men.  And  if'it  should  be  required,  as  he 
proposed,  that  each   clerk  should   serve  an  ap- 

Srenticesiiip  of  two  years  before  he  was  a  can- 
idate,  it  would  to  a  still  greater  degree,  keep 
the  office  within  the  reach  of  the  sons  of  poor 
men,  inasmuch  as  the  sons  of  the  wealthy  and 
the  aristocratic  would  hardly  consent  to  learii 
the  business  as  apprentices.  The  best  clerks 
in  the  commonwealth  were  the  sons  of  poor 
men  who  had  been  obliged  to  serve  an  ap- 
prenticeship of  this  kind.  He  instanced  the 
clerks  in  this  city,  and  in  Madison,  Fayette, 
and  Lincoln,  as  being  most  excellent  officers, 
and  men  who  were  of  tne  class  to  which  he  had 
referred.  The  objection  to  the  present  mode  of 
judges  appointing  their  own  clerks  was,  that 
they  were  very  apt  to  appoint  their  own  sons 
and  relations  ;  and  this  was  not  surprising,  as 
they  received  so  little  compensation,  that  they 
must  be  compelled  to  resort  to  that  means  to 
sustain  thoir  families.  But  the  people  were  now 
to  make  these  appointments,  and  he  hoped  the 
convention  would  put  it  out  of  the  power  of  any 
man  to  receive  one  of  these  offices  unless  he 
had  qualified  himself  by  learning  its  duties  by 
a  regular  apprenticeship.  In  regard  to  the  refer- 
ence that  had  been  made  ti>  his  aiding  a  young 


311 


mxa  in  procuring  tlie  office  of  clerk — he  had 
only  to  say  that  he  did  it  in  one  instance,  receiv- 
ing'no  compensation  therefor,  and  merely  as  an 
act  of  good  will  to  the  person.  And  even  this  he 
desired  to  guard  against  in  the  future. 

Mr.  R.  ]N .  WICKLIFFE  said  he  should  vote 
to  retain  the  requirement  of  a  certificate.  The 
requisition  in  the  present  constitution  on  its  face 
■would  seem  to  be  the  best  that  could  be  devised. 
It  requires  the  judge  to  appoint  the  clerk,  and 
even  then,  that  he  should  not  do  it  except  upon 
a  certificate  of  qualification.  All  vrould  sup- 
pose that  the  judge  was  the  best  person  to  judge 
of  the  qualification  of  a  clerk,  and  the  framers 
of  that  constitution  were  wise  in  that  provision, 
if  the  courts  of  the  country  had  carried  it  out 
in  the  spirit  they  designed.  But  if  there  was 
any  thing  at  all  which  had  brought  about  this 
convention,  it  was  the  open  bargain  and 
sale  of  the  ofiices  of  the  commonwealth,  and 
the  shameful  prostitution  of  the  appointing  pow- 
er. There  was  hardly  an  office  in  the  state  that 
was  not  held  through  bargain  and  sale.  It  was 
the  fact  in  regard  to  his  county,  as  had  been 
brought  out  by  legislative  investigation.  He 
said  it  in  no  terms  of  derogation  to  the  incum- 
bents, for  they  were  his  personal  friends,  nor  did 
he  make  it  a  matter  of  reproach  to  them,  be- 
cause it  had  come  to  be  a  sort  of  common  law  in 
the  state,  that  all  offices  were  to  be  bought  and 
sold  as  merchantable  commodities.  He  was  for 
requiring  some  evidence  of  qualification  from 
the  candidates. 

Mr.  CLARKE  wished  to  have  the  officials  in 
his  district  excluded  from  this  charge.  The 
clerks  there  held  their  offices  by  no  bargain  or 
sale.  It  was  due  to  them,  estimable  gentlemen 
as  thev  were,  though  political  opponents  of  his, 
that  t£is  should  be  said. 

Mr.  R.  X.  WICKLIFFE  made  his  remark  in  a 
general  sense.  The  case  to  which  he  had  allud- 
ed in  his  own  county  had  been  a  matter  of  legis- 
ative  investigation,  and  here  it  was  proper  to 
say  both  gentlemen  swore  that  the  judge  had  no 
knowledge  of  the  sale  of  the  office. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  Mr.  NTTT- 
TALL'S  amendment,  and  it  was  rejected. 

:Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  amend  the  12th  sec- 
tion, bv  striking  out  the  words  "a  certificate  of 
his  qualifications  from  the  judges  of  the  court  of 
appeals,"  and  to  insert  in  lieu  thereof  the  words 
"a  certificate  of  his  having  served  two  years  in 
some  clerk's  office,  and  of  his  qualification  from 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals." 

Mr.  WOODSON  thought  the  adoption  of  this 
amendment  would  place  it  in  the  power  of  the 
present  incumbents  of  the  offices  to  say  who 
should  be  clerks  in  all  coming  time.  As  a  gener- 
al rule,  the  clerks  he  believed  were  opposed  to 
the  calling  of  a  convention,  because  under  the 
present  constitution  they  had  a  life  tenure  of 
their  offices.  To  require*  that  no  man  should  be 
eligible  to  the  office  unless  he  had  sensed  an  ap- 
prenticeship of  two  vears,  would  lead  to  these 
results.  The  men  wlio  had  been  taken  into  the 
clerks  offices  would,  from  delicacy,  be  prevented 
from  becoming  candidates  against  their  old 
friends;  and  the  clerks  also  would  be  likely  to 
get  no  one  into  their  offices  who  would  be  proba- 
ble, hereafter,  to  become  their  opponents  for  the 
station.    Further  as  to  the  amendment:    No  man 


who  had  not  written  in  a  clerk's  office  for 
two  vears  could  possibly  be  a  candidate  until  af- 
ter the  first  election.  ^Vhat  he  desired,  was  to 
see  every  man  who  could  get  a  certificate  of  his 
qualifications  eligible  to  the  office,  and  if  in  the 
granting  of  those  certificates  the  judge  should 
perpetrate  any  fraud  on  the  freemen  of  the  com- 
monwealth, let  them  be  deprived  of  their  of- 
fices. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  said  there  was  one 
honorable  exception  to  the  charge  that  the 
clerks  had  opposed  the  call  of  a  convention. 
There  was  one  who  had  not  only  been  an  earnest 
advocate  of  reform  throughout,  but  who  to  his 
honor,  be  it  spoken,  was  opposed  to  the  qualifi- 
cations recommended  by  the  committee.  He, 
(Mr.  M.,)  should  vote  against  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Madison,  and  also  against 
the  proposition  of  the  committee,  leaving  it,  as  he 
hoped  the  convention  would  determine  it,  to  the 
people  to  decide  what  qualifications  and  restric- 
tions should  be  required,  and  who  possessed  those 
qualifications.  He  had  been  commanded  by  the 
people  of  his  county  to  commit  into  their  hands 
not  only  the  election  of  their  officers,  but  to  trust 
to  their  intelligence  and  their  integrity  in  ma- 
king that  selection.  He  would  give  his  vote 
therefore  for  no  qualifications  that  were  depen- 
dent upon  the  action  or  judgment  of  any  other 
than  tne  people  themselves.  They  believed 
themselves  to  be,  and  he  believed  them  to  be, 
qualified  to  determine  who  was  fitted  for  the  of- 
fice of  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  for 
judge  of  the  circuit  courts.  He  did  not  agree 
with  the  gentleman  from  Henderson  that  the 
people  were  totally  indifierent  to  the  qualifica- 
tions for  the  offices  they  were  to  fill.  He  could 
not  believe  that  there  was  no  anxiety  existing 
outside  of  this  convention  to  fill  these  offices  with 
persons  who  were  amply  qualified  to  fill  them. 
Relying  as  he  did  most  implicitly  upon  the 
virtue  and  intelligence  of  the  people  of  this  state, 
and  believing  himself  to  be  commanded  by  the 
people  of  his  county,  as  well  as  by  the  people  of 
the  state  at  large,  to  commit  into  their  hands  this 
power,  he  desired  to  do  it  without  the  imposi- 
tion of  any  restrictions,  believing  they  would 
themselves  require  all  the  qualifications  that 
were  necessary.  He  should  therefore  vote  against 
eveiy  proposition  to  required  qualification. 

The  amendment  of  Mr.  TURNER  was  then 
rejected. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  moved  to  strike  out  the  words 
"and  has  a  certificate  of  his  qualifications  from 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals." 

He  did  not  want  the  clerks  to  have  all  the  ad- 
vantages, but  only  ju.st  an  equal  chance  with  ev- 
ery other  candidate  who  mightbe  able  togetacer- 
tificate  of  qualifications  from  the  appellate  judg- 
es. He  wanted  all  of  them  to  come  before  this 
new  court  of  appeals,  and  much  more  neces.cary 
was  this  since  gentlemen  had  here  confessed  that 
men  had  received  certificates  and  appointments 
who  were  not  qualified. 

Mr.  HARGIS  thought  if  the  amendment  was 
adopted  it  would  prevent  the  court  of  appeals  • 
from  organizing  for  the  want  of  a  clerk.  The 
judges  were  first  to  be  elected,  and  who  should 
sit  as  clerk  if  it  was  provided  that  no  one  should 
be  elected  until  he  had  received  a  certificate 
from  them?    As  to  the  qualifications  of  these 


'312 


clerks^  lie  was  desirous  of  requiring  that  tliey 
shouli  be  possessed  by  tlie  clerks  of  the  appel- 
late court;  but  of  the  clerks  of  the  circuit  courts 
who  were  to  be  elected  in  the  different  counties, 
he  yould  require  no  certificate  of  qualitioavions. 
He  was  acquainted  with  counties  where  there 
was  no  man  wlio  had  a  certificate  or  who  could 
get  one,  and  if  such  a  qualification  was  required 
the  court  would  either  have  to  do  witliout  a 
clerk,  or  appoint  a  pto  tern  to  act  until  some 
competent  man  should  move  into  the  county. 
This  would  not  be  the  casein  such  large  tracts 
of  country  as  would  constitute  an  appellate  dis- 
trict. 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  amend  by  adding  at  the 
end  of  tlie  section  the  words,  "or  any  two  cir- 
cuit judges  of  the  state."  The  certificate  of  any 
two  circuit  judges  should  be  sufficient,  as  it 
might  not  be  convenient  for  poor  young  men 
who  were  qualified,  to  go  to  the  expense  of  at- 
tending the  court  of  appeals  for  the  purpose  of 
procuring  their  certificates. 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 

The' thirteenth  section  was  then  read  as  fol- 
lows : 

"Sec.  13.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the  oflace 
of  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  in  any  district, 
the  governor  shall  issue  a  writ  of  election  to  that 
district,  and  the  qualified  voters  thereof  shall 
elect  a  clerk  to  serve  until  the  end  of  the  term 
for  which  the  clerk  was  elected  whose  vacancy 
is  to  be  filled.  Provided  that  when  a  vacancy 
may  occur  from  any  cause,  or  the  clerk  shall  be 
under  charges,  upon  information,  the  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals  shall  have  power  to  ap- 
point a  clerk  pro  <em,  to  perform  the  duties  of 
clerk  until  such  vacancies  shall  be  filled,  or  the 
clerk  acquitted." 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  said  it  appeared  to  him 
that  in  case  a  vacancy  occurred  a  short  time  pre- 
vious to  the  general  election,  there  ought  to  be 
some  mode  of  appointment,  by  which  the  office 
could  be  filled  pro  tern  for  the  remainder  of  the 
term.  He  understood,  however,  that  the  pro- 
vision required  tJiat  a  writ  of  election  should 
issue,  even  when  a  vacancjy  occurred,  within  a 
few  months  of  the  expiration  of  the  term. 

ilr.  JAMES  said  he  had  prepared  an  amend- 
ment which  he  thought  would  obviate  the  difli- 
culty. 

The  amendment  was  read  by  the  clerk  as 
follows  : 

Amend  section  13  line  2,  strike  out  all  afLer 
the  wonl  'district"  and  insert  "within  less  than 
one  year  next  before  the  time  for  which  he  shall 
liave  been  elected  or  appointed,  the  judges  of 
the  court  shall  fill  the  same,  but  in  all  other  cases 
the  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  an  election  in  such 
manner  as  the  general  assembly  shall  provide  by 
law,"  • 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  observed  that  it  ap- 
peared to  hirn,  that  there  was  really  no  necessity 
for  the  amendment.  In  ca.«e  a  clerk  should  die 
within  a  month  of  the  expiration,  if  the  gen- 
tleman would  examine  the  section,  hev/ould  find 
that  no  difficulty  could  arise.  There  would  neces- 
sarily be  an  appointment  pro  <CTn,  of  a  clerk  to 
do  the  busine««  until  an  election  took  place,  un- 
der the  writ  issued  by  the  governor,  or  until  the 
gABeral  election,  as  the  case  might  be. 


The  question  being  taken  on  tlie  amendment, 
it  was  rejected. 

The  fourteenth  section  was  then  read,  and  the 
question  bein?  taken,  it  was  adopted,  as  follows: 

"Skc.  14.  The  legislature  shall  direct  by  law 
the  mode  aud  manner  of  conducting  and  making 
due  returns  to  the  secretary  of  state,  of  all  elec- 
tions of  the  judges  and  clerks  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  ami  of  determining  contested  elections 
of  any  of  these  officers. 

The  lath  section  was  then  read,  as  follows  : 

Sec.  15,  All  elections  of  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  and  the  clerks  thereof,  shall  be  by 
ballot. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  reminded  the  com- 
mittee that  the  proposition  regarding  the  voting 
by  ballot,  was  the  next  subject  to  be  voted  up- 
on. He  would  leave  it  entirely  to  the  judgment 
of  the  committee  as  far  as  he  was  concerned, 
without  detaining  them  w'ith  any  argument  as 
to  the  propriety  of  its  adoption. 

Mr.  ROGERS  remarked,  that  in  his  opinion, 
the  proposition  involved  a  great  and  important 
principle.  It  was  a  matter  of  importance  to  the 
people  of  the  state,  to  consider  whether  or  not 
the  present  mode  of  election  should  be  abandon- 
ed, and  the  ballot  system  adopted.  He  desired 
gentlemen  to  look  back  for  a  moment,  and  con- 
sider from  whence  this  thing  came.  If  they 
would  revert  to  the  August  election,  it  would  be 
seen  that  since  the  secret,  and  masked  battery  of 
the  open  clause,  had  been  put  down  by  the  peo- 
ple of  the  State,  the  emancipation  party  had 
been  holding  up  to  the  people  the  ballot  system, 
as  one  which  ought  to  be  adopted,  and  the  object 
was  apparent.  Under  that  system  frauds  could 
not  be  detected,  whereas  when  votes  were  given 
openly,  if  an  error  was  committed,  it  might  be 
corrected.  There  was  no  necessity  for  oallot 
voting  in  Kentucky.  Was  it  to  be  supposed  that 
the  citizens  of  Kentucky  were  in  dread  of  any  in- 
fluence that  might  be  exerted  over  them  as  by 
land-lords  over  tenants.  Not  at  all.  What  were 
the  arguments  adduced  in  favor  of  adopting 
this  system?  It  was  held  out  by  the  emancipa- 
tionists, that  they  could  not  come  up  and  vote 
freely  and  openly  without  exposing  themselves 
to  the  enmitj':  o"f  those  whom  they  opposed. 
There  was  an  ulterior  object  he  ap'preheuded. 
He  believed  they  were  looking  forward  to  the 
time  wlien  they  would  be  able  to  bring  up  the 
question  of  emancipation  in  another  form,  and 
tliey  wanted  to  secure  the  provision  of  ballot 
voting  as  a  preliminary  step.  When  a  man  de- 
sired t6  commit  petty  'larceny,  or  highway  rob- 
bery, he  would  be  very  glad  to  provide  himseli 
beforehand  with  a  means  of  concealment  of  his 
act,  and  when  men  contemplate  committing  a 
wholesale  legal  robbery  of  your  property,  they 
want  the  cover  of  ballot  voting  to  do  it  under. 
To  use  their  own  language,  they  meant  to  be  "as 
wise  as  serpents  and  as  harmless  as  doves,"  and 
in  carrying  out  their  views,  they  were  no  doubt, 
prepared  to  come  forward  at  all  times,  under 
cover  of  patriotism  and  humanity,  but  other 
disguises  were  necessary.  It  was  Avrittcn  in  the 
book  of  inspiration,  that  there  should  be  Mse 
prophets  in  all  times  to  come,  as  there  had  been 
in  times  past,  and  that  they  should  deceive  even 
the  saints  themselves.  It  would  not  be  very  sur- 
prising  then,  that  they  should    deceive  even 


313 


these  good  convention  meu.  They  had  yielded 
to  the  anti-convention  men,  the  question  of  re- 
eligibility  of  officers;  they  have  yielded  to  them, 
the  question  of  qualification;  they  have  yielded 
various  points — this  point,  he  hoped  they  would 
not  yield.  He  hoped  they  would  retain  the  vita 
voce  system,  for  he  wanted  to  know  where  every 
man  stood  who  came  up  to  vote.  It  would  be 
important  as  a  matter  of  reference.  It  was  de- 
sirable frequently,  to  revert  to  the  former  acts  in 
a  man's  political'life.  How  would  it  be  in  re- 
gard to  the  action  of  the  convention  if  after  a 
period  of  years,  it  could  not  be  acsertained  what 
course  delegates  had  taken.  He  desired  that 
there  should  be  a  public  and  permanent  record 
of  all  votes,  and  he  trusted  that  the  amendment 
would  not  be  adopted. 

Mr.  BROWX  proposed  to  amend  the  amend- 
ment by  striking  out  the  word  'ballot"  and  in- 
serting the  words  "viva  voce." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  he  rose  merely 
to  disabuse  the  committee  on  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, from  the  imputation  of  entertaining  the 
sentiment  that  this  proposition  of  theirs  was  in 
furtherance  of  the  views  of  the  emancipationists. 
He  was  very  certain  however,  that  the  gentle- 
man could  not  himself  have  supposed  that  such 
was  the  purpose,  which  the  members  of  the  com- 
mittee had  in  view,  in  proposing  the  amendment 
that  was  now  under  consideration.  At  all  events, 
he  could  say  for  one,  that  no  such  purpose  en- 
tered his  mind,  and  he  did  not  think  that  he 
had  subjected  himself  to  such  a  charge,  either 
in  the  house  or  out  of  it,  wherever  he  was 
known.  While  up,  however,  he  would  say  to 
his  honorable  friend,  who  had  moved  the  amend- 
ment to  the  proposition  of  the  committee,  that 
the  best  way  to  accomplish  his  object,  would  be 
to  vote  against  the  proposition,  and  leave  it  to 
the  legislative  department,  hereafter  to  prescribe 
the  mode  in  which  electors  should  cast  their 
votes,  and  thus  avoid  encumbering  the  consti- 
tution with  any  provision  on  the  subject. 

Mr.  ROGERS  desired  to  say  one  word  in  ex- 
planation. He  did  not  intend  to  advance  the 
opinion,  that  any  member  of  the  committee,  or 
of  this  house,  favored  the  amendment  that  had 
been  recommended  by  the  committee,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  promoting  the  views  of  the  emancipa- 
tionists, but  that,  he  believed,  would  be  the  ef- 
fect of  the  amendment  if  adopted.  It  would  be 
yielding  to  them  a  principle,  and  to  this  he 
could  never  consent.  He  hoped  the  amendment 
would  not  prevail. 

Mr.  BULLITT  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  protest 
against  the  adoption  of  theballot  system,  in  any 
form  in  which  it  could  be  presented.  The  di- 
rect tendency  and  effect  of  it  would  be  to  aid 
emancipation,  as  well  as  agrarianism,  in  all  its 
forms.  He  had  as  much  confidence  in  the  honor, 
integrity,  and  virtue,  of  the  people  of  Kentucky, 
as  of  any  other  people  in  uie  world;  he  would 
not  yield  the  Kentucky  character  to  any  other, 
but  it  was  a  fact  well  known,  that  there  were 
bad  men  in  all  communities.  If  all  men  were 
perfect  and  invulnerable,  why  would  they  be 
sent  here,  to  make  a  constitution?  A  perfect 
man  requires  no  law  to  restrain  him,  but  they 
found  it  necessarv  in  all  governments,  to  impose 
restraints  upon  tte  wicked.  What  would  be  the 
effect  of  the  ballot  system?  It  would  be  this. 
40 


There  were  bad  men,  it  was  admitted — men  who 
would  deprive  their  neighbors  of  their  propertv, 
if  they  could  have  an  opportunity  of  doing  it  Sy 
sneaking  up  to  the  ballot-box,  like  a  sheep-stealing 
dog,  without  being  responsible  to  the  influences 
around  them.  Where  was  the  necessity  for  adopt- 
ing the  svstem  of  ballot  voting? 

He  had  come  to  the  convention  prepared  to  go 
for  the  election  of  judges,  by  the  people,  al- 
though it  was  not  his  original  opinion  that  they 
ought  to  be  so  elected.  Upon  this  point,  he  ha^ 
yielded  to  the  wishes  of  the  people  whom  he 
represented.  He  believed  further,  that  if  the 
convention  or  the  people  hereafter,  through  the 
legislature,  should  determine  to  give  good  sala- 
ries and  long  terms  of  service  to  the  judges,  their 
appointment  by  the  people  would  be,  he  thought, 
the  best  mode  that  could  be  adopted.  But  he 
would  not  begin  by  teaching  the  people  a  sys- 
tem of  fraud.  Any  man  who  was  not  indepen- 
dent enough  to  go  up  to  the  polls  and  vote  open- 
ly, ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  vote  at  all.  W'hat 
was  it  that  they  were  proclaiming  to  the  people 
by  such  a  mode  of  action  as  this?  It  was  tanta- 
mount to  telling  them,  we  are  establishing  a 
system  that  we  say  is  the  most  perfect  that  cau 
be  devised,  and  yet  so  imperfect  is  it,  we  say  in 
the  next  breath,  that  we  cannot  suffer  our  con- 
stituents to  vote  openly  like  men,  but  that  they 
must  sneak  up  to  tne  polls  and  vote  stealthily. 
Suppose,  after  having  voted  in  this  manner,  I 
should  be  enquired  of,  by  a  candidate,  how  did 
you  vote?  In  addition  to  the  concealment  of 
my  vote  in  the  first  instance,  I  should  have  to 
lie  a  little  about  it,  I  suppose,  in  order  to  hide 
from  him  the  fact  that  I  had  voted  against  him; 
so  that  I  might  avoid  having  my  neck  stretched, 
as  I  might  be  liable  to  do,  when  the  judge  came 
to  carry  out  that  vindictive  resentment  which 
gentlemen  attribute  to  them. 

He  protested  against  the  ballot  system,  on  the 
ground  that  among  honest  men  it  was  wholly 
unnecessary,  calculated  to  teach  people  to  dis- 
semble, and  to  hide  their  votes.  In  a  govern- 
ment of  the  people,  like  this,  every  man  should 
come  foi-ward,  boldly  and  independently,  and 
give  his  vote.  He  should  be  taught  and  instruc- 
ted to  do  this.  One  of  the  advantages  that  a 
slave  state  possessed  over  a  free  state  was,  that 
in  the  slave  states  property  was  more  equally 
divided  than  in  the  free  states.  In  the  slave 
states,  overgrown  estates  were  not  heard  of.  An 
Abbott  Lawrence  and  a  John  Jacob  Astor  were 
not  to  be  found  as  in  the  free  states.  There  was 
no  man  to  be  found  there  having  five  hundred 
voters  under  his  control,  men  who  were  more 
degraded  than  the  slaves.  If  the  slaves  were 
allowed  to  vote  he  would  be  inclined  to  adopt 
the  ballot  mode  of  voting,  but  the  case  was  very 
different. 

There  was  no  gentleman  in  this  house  who 
had  a  higher  respect  for  the  chairman  and  all 
the  members  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals,  but  the  course  pursued  by  the  commit- 
tee, he  must  be  permitttd  to  say,  did  not  entire- 
ly accord  with  his  ideas  of  what  constituted  that 
sort  of  action  which  the  honorable  chairman 
professed  to  have  in  view.  The  ballot  mode  of 
voting  was  not  applicable  in  this  country,  and 
they  were  let  into  a  bit  of  a  secret,  by  being  in- 
formed, from  a  very  high  emancipation  source. 


814 


that  the  eiuaueipationists  in  their  future  coudiict 
were  resolved  to  be  as  wily  as  serpents  and  as 
harmless  as  doves.  And  how  had  the  question 
now  been  brought  up?  Oh!  it  Avas  pretended 
that  a  man  could  not  vote,  free  from  eontrol, 
■without  going  up  to  the  ballot  box,  poking  in 
his  ballot  privately.  There  was  no  earthly  rea- 
son whv  the  present  elective  system  should  be 
changed. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  when  the  present  constitu- 
tion went  into  operation,  he,altnough  a  lad,  on- 
ly about  sixteen  years  of  age,  was  in  the  habit 
of  attending  the  elections,  feeling  a  deep  inter- 
est in  observing  how  they  were  conducted,  and 
he  knew  that  there  were  great  complaints  of  the 
frauds  that  were  practiced  upon  the  illiterate. 
The  friends  of  the  candidates  were  in  the  habit 
of  shifting  their  tickets.  Another  cause  of  com- 
plaint was,  that  some  of  the  voters  were  made 
to  vote  two  tickets,  and  such  was  the  alarm  of 
that  class  of  people,  lest  they  should  be  imposed 
on,  that  they  were  in  the  habit  of  going  to  their 
neighbors,  in  whom  they  had  confidence,  and 
getting  them  to  write  the  names  of  the  candi- 
dates for  them.  Under  the  original  constitution 
of  the  state,  free  negroes  were  permitted  to  vote; 
and  one  of  the  causes  of  calling  the  convention 
in  1799,  was  to  change  the  ballot  system  of  vo- 
ting. 

He  understood  from  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee that  he  did  not  intend  to  carry  out  the 
principle  through  all  the  elections.  He  was  for 
uniformity  of  voting.  The  principle  should  be 
the  same  in  the  election  of  all  the  officers  of  gov- 
ernment. As  the  gentleman  from  Jeffi^rson  had 
well  said,  in  countries  where  one  man  might 
have  a  thousaud  operatives  under  him,  it  might 
be  necessary  to  protect  those  men  in  the  exercise 
of  the  elective  franchise  against  the  dictation  of 
their  employers.  Where  a  man  owned  nearly  a 
whole  county,  it  might  there  be  necessary,  "but 
there  was  certainly  no  necessity  for  any  such 
thing  in  Kentucky. 

Mr.  BROWN  observed,  that  it  was  suggested 
to  him  by  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  that 
he  could  attain  his  object  as  well  by  voting 
against  the  amendment  proposed  by  the  commit- 
tee. That  might  be  true,  out  he  could  also  at- 
tain it  as  well,  by  the  amendment  he  had  offer- 
ed. He  was  utterly  opposed  to  the  adoption  of 
the  ballot  system,  in  Kentucky.  He  was  in  favor 
of  the  old  mode  of  voting.  He  had  never  had 
a  vote  to  give,  nor  did  he  ever  expect  to  have 
one,  which  he  desired  to  conceal.  He  believed 
that  it  was  more  republican,  more  democratic, 
more  independent,  for  a  man  to  go  up  to  the 
polls  and  vote  his  sentiments,  Avithout  any  con- 
cealment; and  he  believed  that  the  system  of 
voting,  now  proposed,  was  a  little  like  the  open 
clause,  appropriately  termed,  by  the  gentleman 
from  Mason,  a  masked  battery.  He  disclaimed 
any  such  imputation  against  the  committee,  or 
any  member  of  the  committee,  as  that  they  were 
desirous  of  favoring  the  views  of  the  emancipa- 
tionists; but  it  was  very  well  known  that  it  was 
a  mode  of  voting  that  nad  been  favored  by  the 
emancipationists.  The  old  mode  he  regarded  as 
valuable,  from  its  convenience  for  reference, 
whenever  it  became  desirable  to  ascertain  how  a 
man  had  previously  voted.  Unless  the  poll- 
book  could  be  referred  to,  to  show  how  a  man 


voted,  he  could  be  held  to  no  responsibility. 
There  was  within  this  state  a  class  of  men  who 
were  willing  to  destroy,  and  who  would  destroy, 
if  they  had  the  opportunity,  the  tenure  by  which 
a  certain  species  of  property  within  the  state 
was  held.  They  would  take  it  away  from  the 
owner,  Avithout  any  compensation.  They  were 
engaged  in  a  species  of  robbery,  and  this  ballot 
system  would  serve  them  as  a  protection  from 
the  odium  which  would  attach  to  those  who  de- 
sired to  obtain  a  man's  property  without  com- 
pensation. He  was  in  favor  of  retaining  the  old 
mode  of  voting,  because  it  was  more  republican, 
and  because  it  would  hold  men  to  a  just  sort  of 
accountability. 

Mr.  GARRARD  said  he  had  been  endeavor- 
ing, for  the  last  fifteen  or  twenty  minutes,  to  get 
his  own  consent  to  pass  over  tlie  remark  of  the 
gentleman  from  Morgan.  The  gentleman  said 
there  was  not,  in  some  regions  of  country,  al- 
though he  excepted  that  part  Avhich  he  himself 
represents,  a  man  to  be  found  who  was  qualified 
to  discharge  the  duties  of  clerk  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  nor  one  who  could  obtain  a  certificate 
of  qualification.  He  would  ask  if  the  gentle- 
man alluded  to  that  portion  of  the  people  of 
this  commonwealth  that  he  had  the  honor  to 
represent? 

Mr.  HARGTS  remarked,  that  he  had  not  spe- 
cified the  particular  county  where  this  state  of 
things  existed,  and  he  did.  not  know  that  the 
gentleman  had  a  right  to  require  him  to  state, 
specifically,  what  county  he  alluded  to. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  remarked  that  he  was 
perfectly  indifferent  as  to  the  decision  of  the 
committee  upon  the  proposition  now  before  them. 
He  belieA'ed  it  would  be  remembered  that  it  was 
stated  when  the  proposition  was  submitted  to 
the  convention,  that  it  was  not  designed  to 
change  the  mode  of  electing  political  officers, 
but  merely  to  change  the  mode  of  voting  in  the 
election  of  judicial  officers.  It  would  be  remem- 
bered by  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson  that  the 
idea  of  such  a  discrimination  had  certainly  not 
come  from  the  emancipationists.  Whenever  he 
believed  that  any  proposed  change  was  calcula- 
ted to  forward  the  vicAvs  of  the  emancipation  - 
ists,  he  would  be  found  battling  as  hard  against 
such  change  as  any  man  in  the  convention.  He 
was  opposed  to  changing  the  system  of  voting 
in  Kentucky  that  he  had  been  so  long  accus- 
tomed to  in  relation  to  other  than  judicial  offi- 
cers. Yet  while  he  would  vote  to  retain  the  sys- 
tem, there  were  objections  against  it,  but  he 
doubted  Avhetlier  those  objections  could  be  re- 
moved without  encountering  greater  difficulties 
than  the  ballot  system  presented.  His  friend 
from  Jefferson,  he  thought,  was  mistaken  when 
he  said  that  the  mode  of  voting  by  ballot  had 
only  been  adopted  in  free  states.  The  gentle 
man  would  find  that  it  had  been  adopted  in  sonn 
of  the  slave  states. 

Mr.  BULLITT  said  he  did  not  intend  that  his 
remarks  should  extend  to  all  the  slave  states. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Therefore  this  must 
be  regarded,  he  supposed,  as  an  attempt  to  in- 
troduce a  change  of  the  mode  of  voting  for  the 
purpose  of  letting  in  those  men  who  Avish  to  dis- 
turb the  tenure  of  property  in  the  state,  and  en- 
abling them  to  accomplish  their  designs.  He 
had  witnessed  the  progress  of  elections  in  states 


315 


where  the  ballot  system  \ras  the  constitutional 
mode,  and  he  had  seen  its  benefits.  He  had 
lived  under  the  system  of  viva  voce  voting,  and 
had  seen  its  benefits,  and  he  had  witnessed  evils 
under  it.  It  gave  to  the  capitalist,  to  the  man 
of  wealth  an  influence  and  a  power,  which  he 
should  wish  to  destroy,  if  by  human  ingenuity 
it  could  be  accomplished.  Xo  man  ought  to 
have  control  over  his  neighbor,  such  as  the  gen- 
tleman from  Jeflferson  so  warmly  repudiates. 
He  had  himself  sometimes  seen  the  influence 
that  has  been  exerted  over  voters  at  elections. 
He  had  known,  in  one  instance,  a  wealthy  and 
influential  man  to  wait  upon  a  mechanic  who 
had  declared  his  intention  to  vote  for  him  (Mr. 
^Vicklifie)  and  say  to  him,  if  you  cast  that  vote, 
1  will  take  your  work  awav  from  you.  He  had 
knoAvn  another  instance,  where  a  friend  and  sup- 
porter of  his  was  indebted  more  than  the  value  of 
his  whole  property.  This  man  was  appealed  to  by 
letter?,  and  when  they  failed  to  divert  him  from 
liis  purpose  of  voting  according  to  his  free  will, 
for  the  man  of  his  choice,  he  was  visited  person- 
ally by  those  who  Avere  interested  and  who  were 
his  creditors,  who  told  him,  if  you  cast  that  vote 
you  must  pay  up  your  debts,  you  must  surren- 
der up  your  property.  These' were  some  of  the 
evils  attending  the  present  system  of  voting.  He 
had  seen  instances,  also,  under  the  ballot  system, 
where  an  honest  voter  had  been  cheated  out  of 
his  vote,  and,  therefore  he  had  only  risen  for  the 
purpose  of  stating  to  the  gentleman  and  to  his 
colleague  that  he  had  not  been  an  advocate  for 
changing  the  system  of  viva  voce  voting,  to  the 
ballot  system  generally,  because  he  did  not  be- 
lieve it  was  requisite  in  political  elections,  but 
merely  to  erplain  the  motives  which  operated 
with  the  committee  in  inducing  them  to  recom- 
mend its  adoption  in  referauce  to  the  election  of 
judicial  officers.     He   had   no   doubt  that  the 

f;reat  mass  of  the  community  would  feel  no  re- 
uctance,  no  unwillingness,  l)ut  on  the  contrary, 
would  feel  both  pride  and  pleasure  in  declaring 
their  sentiments  viva  voce  at  the  polls;  yet  as  he 
deemed  it  possible  that  there  might  be  men  who 
"Would  wish  to  avoid  incurring  displeasure  with 
the  judge  by  concealing  his  vote,  he  desired  to 
.iftbrd  him  an  opportunity.  The  proposed 
amendment  did  not  prevent  any  man  who  desi- 
red to  do  so,  from  avowing  for  whom  he  voted. 
Having  said  thus  much,  he  would  leave  the 
question  with  the  committee. 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  there  was  one  difficulty 
resting  upon  his  mind,  in  regard  to  the  practi- 
cal working  of  this  system,  which  made  it  im- 
possible for  him  to  yield  his  assent  to  its  adop- 
tion. As  soon  as  the  ballots  were  counted,  they 
were  destroyed.  As  soon  as  tlxis  was  done,  he 
desired  to  know  how  they  were  to  ascertain  how 
each  man  voted,  and  how  it  would  be  possible 
to  carry  out  a  contested  election,  and  ascertain 
the  party  entitled  to  the  seat.  There  had  been 
instances,  he  had  no  doubt,  where  men  desired 
to  conceal  their  votes,  but  among  the  people 
generally,  ninety  nine  out  of  a  hundred  were  not 
afraid  to  look  any  man  in  the  face,  and  yot« 
their  sentiments.  They  claimed  that  it  was 
their  right  to  do  so,  and  no  one  shoald  deprive 
them  of  the  right. 

For  himself,  as  his  worthy  friend  from  Jeffer- 
son had  said,  he  believed  he  would  rather  aban- 


don the  whole  constitution  than  to  see  this  fea- 
ture introduced  into  it.  It  was  the  great  excel- 
lence of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  that  they  were 
not  afraid  to  come  up  and  vote  for  the  men  of 
their  choice.  He  thought  no  difference  ought  to 
be  made  between  the  mode  pursued  for  the  elec- 
tion of  governor,  and  of  a  judicial  officer.  The 
very  fact  of  making  a  distinction,  implies  that 
the  judge  was  considered  to  be  coiTupt,  or  that 
the  people  were  afraid  that  they  would  act  cor- 
ruptly. He  would  never  consent  to  any  such 
invidious  discrimination. 

Mr.  PRESTON  said  as  he  might,  in  some  de- 
gree, assume  the 'paternity  of  the  resolution, 
which  came  before  the  committee,  on  the  court 
of  appeals  report,  although  he  had  not  intended 
to  say  a  wora,  at  present,  on  the  subject,  yet  he 
felt  it  to  be  due  to  the  committee,  as  well  as  to 
himself,  that  he  should  make  a  few  remarks. 
Every  day  convinced  him  that  legislative  bodies 
were  like  individuals,  and  were  to  be  influenced 
in  the  same  manner,  by  the  whim  of  a  moment, 
or  by  the  eloquence  o?  the  advocate  of  a  partic- 
ular proposition,  and  that  they  would  run  full 
tilt,  one  way  or  the  other,  as  these  influences 
moved  them.  He  might  be  in  error  upon  this 
subject,  but  it  was  one  of  great  magnitude,  and 
should  not  be  met  with  a  sneer,  nor  subjected 
to  declamation,  such  as  they  had  witnessed  from 
the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  who  had  indulged 
in  an  assault  upon  it.  And  he  had  noticed  that 
that  gentleman  had  met  the  approving  smile  of 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson.  If  the  system 
would  give  rise  to  all  the  evils  which  the  gentle- 
man predicted,  then  let  it  not  be  adopted.  But 
such  has  not  been  its  operation  throughout  the 
country.  Most  of  the  states  of  the  confederacy 
vote  by  ballot,  and  if  such  evils  flowed  from  the 
system,  where  were  the  evidences  of  the  fact? 
Does  observation  confirm  the  assertion? 

They  ought  not  to  reject  the  proposition  with- 
out giving  it  mature  consideration.  Some  gen- 
tlemen seemed  to  be  of  the  opinion  that  the 
character  of  the  people  of  Kentucky  was  derived 
from  their  system  of  voting,  and  that  it  was  on- 
ly to  be  maintained  by  preserving  that  sy .stem. 
He  could  see  no  reason  why  this  should  be  so. 
Some  seemed  to  take  the  evidences  of  our  civili- 
zation and  progress  as  the  cause  rather  than  the 
result  of  that  civilization.  They  see  no  evil, 
rendered  venerable  by  time,  without  esteeming  it 
a  benefit,  no  blemish  that  is  not  a  beauty.  They 
reminded  him  of  an  Irishman  who  having  been 
thrown  upon  a  desolate  island,  and  beholdina: 
nothing  but  sterile  shores,  was  miserable  indeed, 
until  at  length  he  discovered  where  a  gallows 
had  been  erected,  and  transported  at  the  sight,  ex- 
claimed, "  thank  God,  I  now  know  I  am  in  a 
civilized  country." 

The  character  of  the  people  of  Kentucky  did 
not  depend  on  the  ballot  system  or  upon  any 
other  mode  of  election;  it  rested  upon  no  such 
frail  tenure;  it  was  based  rather  upon  the  char- 
acter, the  virtues,  the  worth,  the  intelligence  of 
our  hardy  ancestors,  those  pioneers  who  first 
established  here  civilization  and  free  institu- 
tions, than  upon  the  mere  existence  of  this  or 
that  system  of  voting. 

But  it  was  asked  why  not  make  the  system  of 
voting  uniform;  why  make  a  discrimination? 
One  thing  was  certain,  that  the  chances  of  fraud 


316 


under  the  viva  voce  system  were  multiplied  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  precincts  into  ■which 
the  district  was  divided.  In  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville there  were  this  year,  some  seventeen  candi- 
dates and  the  city  was  divided  into  eight  wards, 
otherwise  it  would  have  been  almost  impossible 
to  take  the  vote  in  a  single  day.  The  ballot 
would,  if  introduced,  obviate  this  aifficulty. 
The  number  of  offices  to  be  filled  in  a  county  at 
one  election  might  be  under  this  constitution  as 
high  as  fifteen  and  a  large  number  of  caudidates 
would  offer  for  each,  and  unless  the  expenses 
should  be  greatly  augmented  or  unless  the  pre- 
cincts were  multiplied  and  additional  opportu- 
nity thereby  afforded  for  the  practice  of  fraud 
by  double  voting,  the  ballot  system  would  be 
more  convenient,  and  it  was  this  very  conve- 
nience, which  was  the  main  argument  in  its 
favor.  The  gentleman  from  Bourbon  had  drawn 
a  graphic  picture  of  election  scenes  where  men 
were  huddled  together  in  barns  and  where  ten- 
ants were  compelled  to  vote  according  to  the 
dictation  of  their  landlords.  Would  gentlemen 
deny  to  the  poor  and  the  defenceless  the  oppor- 
tunity of  going  to  the  polls  and  voting  their  sen- 
timents (juietly,  without  opening  their  ticket  if 
they  desire  to  do  so? 

Election  by  ballot  seemed  to  have  been  stig- 
matized as  an  abolition  measure.  But  he  would 
ask  whence  did  it  emanate?  The  first  time  that 
he  saw  it  proposed  for  adoption  in  Kentucky 
was  in  the  pro-slavery  convention  that  assembled 
at  Frankfort  in  February  last,  which  declared 
it  to  be  one  of  their  chief  measures. 

He  did  not  believe  that  this  question  was  one 
that  would  alter  the  character  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky.  He  thanked  God  their  character 
was  based  upon  a  foundation  too  solid  to  be 
shaken  by  the  mode  of  voting  pursued  by  the 
citizens  of  this  commonwealth.  He  believed 
they  would  now  have  an  opportunity  of  trying 
the  system;  that  it  would  oe  more  convenient 
than  that  by  viva  wee  in  the  local  elections,  and 
that  it  should  not  be  heedlessly  cast  out  of  the 
house  as  if  it  were  one  that  possessed  such  mons- 
trous qualities  that  it  would  demolish  the  free 
institutions  under  which  we  live.  The  appre- 
hension could  only  arise  from  an  excited  fancy 
that  evils  such  as  these  could  be  produced  by 
one  or  the  other  system  of  voting.  He  hoped 
that  gentlemen  would  at  least  give  to  the  sub- 
ject a  little  calm  reflection,  and  although  he  had 
no  hope  of  carrying  the  measure,  and  attached 
less  importance  to  the  adoption  of  either  mode, 
than  many  did,  he  would  ask  the  convention  to 
consider  it  more  carefully,  before  they  acted 
finally  and  conclusively  in  regard  to  the  matter. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  said,  it  always  afford- 
ed him  great  pleasun;  to  listen  to  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  from  Louisville;  but  he  appre- 
hended that  on  this  occasion  the  gentleman's 
views  were  influenced  to  some  extent  by  the  pe- 
culiar position  which  he  occupied;  and  if  the  gen- 
tleman would  take  the  trouble  hereafter  to  read 
the  speech  that  he  had  just  delivered  he  believed 
be  would  find  in  it  argument  enough  to  satisfy 
himself  that  he  was  in  a  false  position.  What 
was  it?  He  alluded  to  the  description  given  by 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  of  barns  filled 
with  voters,  brought  in  from  the  neighborhood, 
for  the  purpose  oi  controlling  the  elections;  and 


gave  that  as  one  of  the  strong  arguments  against 
viva  voce  voting.  He  would  ask  the  gentleman 
if  drilled  forces  were  not  brought  into  service 
under  the  ballot  system?  He  would  ask  wheth- 
er the  vote  given  bv  ballot  was  not  known  from 
the  very  color  of  the  ticket,  and  whether  a  man 
at  the  head  of  his  column  of  parasites  was  not 
able  to  exert  as  much  influence  upon  the  election 
under  the  ballot  as  under  the  viva  voce  system? 

The  gentleman  had  spoken  of  the  working  of 
the  ballot  system  in  Louisville,  and  of  the  in- 
fluence which  a  landlord  might  exert  over  his 
tenantry.  He  would  tell  the  gentleman  that  the 
influence  of  the  landlord  was  a  healthy  and 
moral  influence,  and  in  his  judgment  it  was  far 
better  that  that  influence  should  be  carried  out 
at  the  polls. 

There  was  another  consideration.  He,  (Mr. 
Marshall,)  lived  in  apart  of  the  country  where 
religion  seemed  to  be  the  order  of  the  day,  and 
he  prayed  God  to  defend  him  from  a  system  by 
which  a  man  was  taught  to  go  smiling  in  the  face 
of  a  candidate  while  about  to  strike  him  under 
the  fifth  rib.  He  liked  to  see  a  man  come  up 
boldly  and  declare  his  vote,  and  not  practice  a 
fraud  upon  his  neighbor.  He  would  say  to  the 
gentleman  further,  if  this  system  should  be  car- 
ried out,  what  M^ould  become  of  the  character  of 
Kentucky?  The  gentleman  declared  that  it  was 
not  based  upon  the  system  of  voting.  Why 
then  did  the  gentleman  want  to  cover  it  up?  If 
the  character  ot  Kentucky  was  placed  upon 
such  a  firm  footing  why  cover  it  up? 

Mr.  PRESTON  interposed  to  explain.  He 
had  said  the  character  of  Kentuckians  was  not 
based  upon  the  mode  of  voting,  and  that  the 
main  question  was  one  of  convenience  in  taking 
the  votes. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  was  very  glad  to  hear 
the  gentleman's  explanation,  for  his  understand- 
ing of  the  gentleman's  remarks  had  been  some- 
what different.  Still  he  would  say,  if  it  were  a 
matter  of  convenience  only,  that  could  be  ac- 
complished by  .having  the  elections  take  place 
on  the  same  day,  he  would  ask  the  gentleman 
whether  the  same  objections  that  he  urged 
against  the  viva  voce  system  were  not  equally 
applicable  to  the  vote  by  ballot?  It  was  inno- 
vation which  the  people  did  not  require.  It 
was,  in  his  judgment,  a  reflection  upon  the  can- 
didate or  upon  the  people  themselves,  and  in 
either  case  the  people  must  suffer.  It  proved 
that  tlie  gentleman  was  himself  unwilling  to 
go  into  the  election  of  the  judges,  because  he 
believed  it  wrong.  He  had  nimself  made  three 
speeches  against  the  elective  principle,  but  failed 
to  convince  a  single  individual.  His  constitu- 
ents said,  Billy  go  for  the  elective  principle, 
and  he  folded  his  arms  quietly  in  obedience  to 
their  will. 

When  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  made  his 
speech,  every  sentiment  that  he  uttered  found  a 
response  in  nis  heart,  but  lie  said  to  himself  the 

Ceople  desire  a  different  system,  and  we  are 
ound  to  yield  to  their  wishes.  The  very  senti- 
ment that  had  been  uttered  by  the  gentleman,  in 
maintenance  of  his  views,  struck  at  the  tenure 
of  oflice;  and  he  could  but  remark  how  strange 
it  was  to  see  gentlemen  who  were  sent  here  to  do 
one  thing  doing  another.  If  gentlemen  would 
only  look  at  their  own  speeches  they  would  see 


317 


it  there  indicated  that  the  people  desired  the 
contrarj-  of  what  they  were  doing.  The  gentle- 
man spoke  of  leaders  urging  forward  their  de- 
Smdent  voters  with  whip  in  hand.  Great  God. 
e  would  ask  him  in  all  candor  and  frankness 
whether  if  a  man  designed  to  use  such  influence 
he  could  not  do  it  under  the  one  system  as  well 
as  the  other?  He  hoped  the  gentleman  from 
Louisville  would  reconsider  the  course  he  was 
taking.  And  if  he  would  but  do  that  he  would 
fin  1  that  he  was  going  counter  to  th?  popular 
will. 

Mr.  PRESTON  said  that  after  the  lecture  he 
had  received  from  his  friend,  the  laughing  phi- 
losopher from  Bracken,  he  almost  doubted  his 
own  judgment,  or  at  least  his  own  recollection, 
of  what  he  had  said  on  the  subject.  For  him- 
self, he  had  not  been  driven  by  those  popular 
storms  into  a  port  such  as  the  gentleman  de- 
scribed himself  as  having  been  compelled  to  put 
into  under  the  pressure  of  public  opinion,  and 
he  believed  that  such  was  the  obstinacy  of  his 
disposition,  that  he  should  have  tried  more  than 
three  or  four  speeches  on  the  subject  of  an  elec- 
tive iudiciary.  if  he  had  once  opposed  it,  and 
would  have  triumphed  or  fallen  on  the  question. 
The  gentleman  however  could  turn  his  sails 
with  a  dexterity  which  he  could  never  hope  to 
equal. 

He  liberates  every  sail  to  the  wind. 

utere  velis, 

Totos  pande  sious, 

and  upon  such  a  subject  as  an  elective  ju- 
diciary— upon  which  the  lives,  liberties,  for- 
tunes and  happiness  of  his  constituency  de- 
pended— he  wears  ship  and  steers  away  full 
tilt,  with  the  largest  majority  that  any  mem- 
ber has  received,  until  he  is  safely  harboured  in 
this  convention.  He  did  not  know  whether 
such  facility  of  temper  was,  after  all,  so  desira- 
ble; at  least  he  would  not  attempt  to  imitate  it. 
The  gentleman  from  Bracken  cheered  on  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  who  had  thrown  him- 
self, sword  in  hand,  before  the  venerable  insti- 
tutions of  the  past,  determined  to  sustain  or 
perish  with  them,  defending  the  pass  like  Hora- 
tius  at  the  bridge,  but  while  he  applauded  him 
did  not  imitate  his  example,  but  sought  shelter 
behind  him.  How  did  the  gentleman  manifest 
his  consistency?  He  came  forward  and  declared, 
in  the  first  place,  that  he  was  opposed  to  an 
elective  judiciary,  that  he  was  one  of  those  who 
were  in  favor,  originally,  of  the  time-honored 
institutions  under  which  our  people  have  lived. 
Yet  he  was  now  prepared  to  go  to  the  utmost 
extent  to  secure  the  adoption  of  the  elective 
principle.  That  was  the  basis  of  the  gentleman's 
consistency.  And  how  did  the  gentleman  fur- 
ther manifest  his  consistency?  He  declared  that 
a  system  of  tenantry  was  one  of  the  best  things 
on  earth;  and  he  considered  the  power  exercised 
by  the  landlord  over  his  tenatrv  to  compel  their 
votes  admirable  in  its  efifects.  lie  [Mr.  P.]  could 
not,  for  his  own  part,  see  the  beauty  of  the  svs- 
tem  where  a  tenant  was  ordered  to  vote  as  his 
landlord  directed.  More  than  half  the  people 
of  the  United  States  now  voted  by  ballot. — 
And  yet,  according  to  the  argument  of  the  gen- 
tleman, more  than  half  the  people  of  the  United 
States  were  cowardly,  trembling — and  to  use  the 
language  of  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  "sheep 


stealing  dogs"— and  unwoithy  to  be  trusted.  He 
appealed  to  the  history  of  their  common  country, 
and  asked  the  gentleman  in  all  fairness,  if  he 
could  conscientiously  calumniate  so  large  a  por- 
tion of  its  citizens  without  cause?  What  wiis 
this  system  of  landlord  and  tenant  that  the  gen- 
tleman spoke  of  so  approvingly?  He  recollected 
having  a  conversation  with  Mr.  Bingham,  of 
Philadelphia,  on  that  subject.  Mr.  Bingham 
had  been  in  England  at  the  time  when  the  sub- 
ject of  the  reform  bill  was  agitated  in  the  house 
of  commons  and  house  of  lords.  Mr.  Bingham 
said  he  met  in  society  a  nobleman  who  owned 
large  estates  that  were  occupied  by  a  numerous 
tenantry.  The  nobleman  enquired  of  him  how 
the  system  of  ballot  voting  was  conducted  in 
America;  Mr.  Bingham  described  to  him  the 
mode  of  proceeding.  The  Englishman  seemed 
lost  in  astonishment.  Said  he,  that  is  not  pos- 
sible. Not  possible?  Why  impossible?  Why, 
sir,  a  man's  own  tenantry  may  vote  against  him. 
Certainly,  said  Mr.  Bingham,  that  is  the  very 
object  of  the  thing.  Well,  remarked  the  noble- 
man, I  could  never  go  for  a  system  that  strikes 
at  the  relation  which  exists  Wtween  landlord 
and  tenant,  and  destroys  every  sentiment  of  loy- 
alty and  fidelity. 

The  gentleman  from  Bracken  savs  he  can  see 
no  benefit  that  can  arise  from  the  ballot  system. 
Had  the  gentleman  never  observed  in  our  state, 
the  eagerness  with  which  couriers  hasten  from 
one  precinct  to  another  when  an  election  is 
going  on,  conveying  news  of  the  state  of  the 

foils  up  to  a  certain  time.  There  sits  the  clerk, 
is  book  open,  the  votes  counted,  the  state  of 
the  contest  is  known  at  a  glance.  The  candi- 
date who  finds  himself  behind,  says,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  rush  up  a  few  more  voters:  he  spends  five 
hundred  dollars  more  in  the  corruption  of  vo- 
ters; and  that  is  the  practical  working  of  the 
system  in  excited  contests  in  our  state.  Now, 
under  the  ballot  system  this  would  not  occur. 

If  we  were  to  go  into  this  ballot  system  of 
voting,  it  would  only  be  adopting  that  which  a 
majority  of  the  nation  had  already  tried,  and  he 
could  assure  the  gentleman  of  one  thing,  tliat 
those  who  had  once  adopted  the  system,  had 
never  gone  back — had  never  abandoned  it. — 
He  would  detain  the  committee  no  further  than 
to  invoke  their  attention  to  two  or  three  things: 
first,  the  multitude  of  ofiicers  for  whose  election 
this  convention  was  providing;  secondly,  that 
there  would  be  but  one  day's  election;  tliirdly, 
that  it  would  be  well  to  separate  the  judicial 
elections  from  the  elections  for  other  oflScers:  and 
in  addition  to  that,  he  considered  it  a  matter 
that  was  entitled  to  some  consideration,  whether 
it  would  not  be  advisable  to  allow  those  who 
desired  to  avail  themselves  of  the  ballot  system 
of  voting,  to  do  so  at  the  local  elections  for  ju- 
dicial officers.  He  trusted  that  by  the  time  the 
question  came  up  in  the  house,  the  gentlemen 
composing  the  convention,  would  give  to  the 
subject  a  calm  and  impartial  consideration. 

The  PRESIDENT  disclaimed  any  idea  that 
the  rights  of  the  master  to  the  slave  were  depen- 
dent upoB  the  preservation  of  the  viva  toce  sys- 
tem of  voting,  or  that  they  would  be  jeopartled 
by  the  adoption  of  the  balfot  system.  That  rela- 
tion was  secured  by  that  regard  for  the  great 
principle  that  no  man's  property  should  be  t^kt  n 


318 


without  full  compensation,  •which  prevailed  so 
broad-cast  throughout  this  land,  and  did  not 
depend  upon  the  viva  voce  system  of  voting.  If 
it  did  so  depend  upon  that,  he  would  tell  gen- 
tlemen that  the  emancipationists  would  soon 
know  their  strength,  and  would  act  upon  it. — 
The  fact  that  he  had  been  five  times  elected  to 
office  by  the  votes  of  those  who  were  his  politi- 
cal opponents,  was  certainly  sufficient  to  induce 
him  to  believe  that  the  people  were  independent. 
No  man  had  a  greater  cause  to  respectt  and  be- 
lieve in  the  independence  of  the  people;  but  -he 
had  seen  the  men  who  had  thus  east  their  votes, 

{)ersecuted  by  their  party  and  discountenanced 
or  years.  And  there  was  a  want  of  toleration 
in  the  land,  in  regard  to  the  exercise  of  the  right 
of  suffrage.  He  was  one  of  those  who  voted  his 
sentiments  at  the  polls,  and  in  deliberative  bo- 
dies, and  he  desired  to  say  that  he  stood  here  in 
favor  of  the  ballot. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  here,  with  the  as- 
sent of  the  members  of  the  committee  on  the 
court  of  appeals,  withdrew  the  amendment,  re- 
marking tliat  the  ten  minute  rule  was,  perhaps, 
a  restriction  on  the  debate  of  the  question,  and 
it  could  agafn  come  up  in  the  house,  Avhere  no 
such  rule  prevailed. 

Mr.  DAVIS  said  he  supposed  it  would  take 
but  a  few  moments  for  the  fate  of  his  forlorn 
liope  to  be  decided,  and  he  asked,  therefore,  that 
the  question  should  now  be  taken  on  the  substi- 
tute for  the  whole  article  which  he  had  offered: 

ARTICLE  . 

Concerning  the  Judicial  Department. 

"Sf.c.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  common- 
wealth, both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equity, 
shall  be  vested  in  one  supreme  court,  Mhich  shall 
be  styled  the  court  of  appeals,  and  in  such  infe- 
rior courts  as  the  general  assembly  may,  from 
time  to  time,  erect  and  establish. 

"Sec.  2.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  only,  which  shall  be  co-ex- 
tensive with  the  state,  under  such  restrictions 
and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  constitu- 
tion, as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

"Sec.  3.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  and  until  tlieir  successors  shall  be  duly 
qualified,  subject  to  the  conditions  hereinafter 
prescribed;  but  for  any  reasonable  cause,  which 
shall  not  be  sufficient  ground  of  impeachment, 
the  governor  shall  remove  any  of  them  on  the 
address  of  two-thirds  of  each  house  of  the  gen- 
eral assembly:  Provided,  however.  That  the  cause 
or  causes  for  which  such  removal  may  be  requir- 
ed, shall  be  stated  at  length  in  such  address,  and 
on  the  journal  of  each  house.  They  shall,  at 
stated  times,  receive  for  their  services  an  ade- 
quate compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  law. 

"  Sec.  4.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  consist  of 
four  judges,  any  three  of  whom  may  constitute 
a  cooirt  for  the  transaction  of  business.  The 
judges  shall,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  be  con- 
servators of  the  peace  throughont  the  state. — 
The  style  of  all  process  shalfbe,  "the  common- 
wealth of  Kentucky."  AM  proseiiutions  shall 
be  carried  on  in  the  name  and  by  the  authority 
of  the  commonwealth   of  Kentucky,  and  con- 


clude, "  agaiirst  the  peace  and  dignity  of  the 
same. " 

"  Sec.  5.  That  the  governor  of  the  common- 
wealth shall,  from  among  the  judges  of  the  in- 
ferior courts,  and  such  persons  as  shall  have 
been  judges  thereof,  nominate,  and  by  and  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  appoint 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals. 

"  Sec.  6.  That  the  court  of  appeals  shall  ap- 
point its  clerk,  who  shall  be  a  citizen  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky,  and  who  shall  hold 'his  appoint- 
ment for  and  during  the  term  of  years,  sub- 
ject to  be  removed  by  said  court,  upon  specific 
charges,  filed  by  the  attorney  general.  And 
whenever  there  may  be  charges  pending  against 
the  clerk,  the  said  court  shall  appoint  a  clerk  to 
perform  the  duties  of  the  office  for  the  time. 

"  Sec.  7.  That  all  fees  accruingfor  services  ren- 
dered by  the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals,  shall 
be  collected  from  the  proper  parties  under  the 
direction  of  the  auditor  of  public  accounts,  and 
be  paid  into  the  treasury  of  the  state,  and  said 
clerk  shall  receive  for  his  compensation  an  annu- 
al salary  $  .  The  number,  appointment, 
and  compensation  of  his  deputies,  ancl  the  other 
necessary  expenditures  of  his  office,  shall  be  reg- 
ulated by  law." 

The  question  was  then  taken  and  the  substi- 
tute rejected. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  said,  some  time  ago  he  had 
offered  an  amendment  to  the  article,  which  had 
been  apparently  forgotten.  He  had  no  intention 
that  it  should  be  burked,  and  called  for  the  ques- 
tion upon  it  now. 

It  was  read  .as  follows: 

"Provided,  however.  That  if  any  candidate  for 
the  office  of  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or  any 
of  the  circuit  courts  to  be  established  in  this 
commonwealth,  shall  engage  in  public  speaking 
or  treating,  during  his  candidacy  for  such  offi- 
ces, or  either  of  them,  upon  information,  in  wri- 
ting, supported  by  the  oaths  of  two  or  more  re- 
spectable witnesses,  to  the  attorney  general  of 
the  state,  he  shall,  in  the  event  of  tlie  election  of 
such  candidate,  thereupon  cause  to  be  issued 
from  the  clerk's  office  of  the  circuit  court,  at  the 
.seat  of  government,  a  caveat  against  such  judge, 
which  shall  be  returnable  to  the  succeeding  gen- 
eral assembly  of  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky, Avho  shall  try  him  according  to  the  rules 
and  regulations  by  this  constitution  provided 
for  the  trial  of  judges  for  other  offences,  and  up- 
on conviction  thereof,  he  shall  be  adjudged  dis- 
qualified from  holding  said  office,  and  the  gov- 
ernor shall  not,  before  the  trial  nor  after  the  con- 
viction in  such  case,  commission  such  judge." 

The  PRESIDENT  enquired  if  the  gentleman 
meant  when  half  a  dozen  lawyers  in  a  district 
were  slandering  and  abusing  a  judge,  he  should 
not  have  the  right  to  defend  himself  before  the 
people? 

Mr.  MAYES  suggested  that  this  was  in  direct 
contradiction  to  the  gentleman's  position  of  not 
requiring  any  test  or  qualifications  for  office. 
The  amendment  was  in  effect  declaring  that  the 
people  had  no  right  to  elect  the  judge  if  he  makes 
a  speech  to  them. 

Mr.  NIITTALL  said  that  with  due  deference 
to  all  other  profes-sions,  he  had  always  thought, 
tliat  if  any  one  more  than  another  was  entitled 
to  the  appeUation  of  a  high  and  dignified  one, 


319 


it  was  the  legal  professiou.  And  so  far  from  a 
judge  being  called  upon  to  defend  himself  from 
the  accusations  of  the  lawyers,  he  believed  the 
functionary  would  find  in  them  his  strongest  pro- 
tectors. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  then  moved  that  the 
committee  rise  and  report  the  article  as  amended 
to  the  house. 

Mr.  HARDIJf  moved  to  take  up  the  article  in 
relation  to  the  circuit  courts. 

The  motion  was  decided  to  be  out  of  order, 
and  after  some  conversation  on  the  point  of  or- 
der involved,  Mr.  WICKLIFFES  motion  pre- 
vailed, and  the  committee  rose  and  reported  the 
article  as  amended  to  the  house. 

Pending  the  question  on  agreeing  with  the  re- 
port of  the  committee. 

The  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY,  NOVEMBER  1,  1 849. 

REPORT   FROM   A    COaOIITTEE. 

Mr.  CLARKE,  from  the  committee  on  the  j 
Legislative  Department  made  the  following  re-  i 
port ,  which  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  | 
whole,  and  ordered  to  be  printed:  i 

OF   Tire   LEGISLATIVE   DEPARTMENT. 
ARTICLE   . 

Sec.  1.  The  legislative  power  .shall  be  vested 
in  a  house  of  representatives  and  senate,  which 
together  shall  be  styled  the  general  assembly  of 
the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 

Sec.  2.  The  members  of  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives shall  continue  in  .service  for  the  term 
of  two  years  from  the  day  of  the  general  elec- 
tion, and  no  longer. 

Sec.  3.  Representatives  «hall  be  chosen  on  the 
first  Monday  in  August,  in  every  second  year; 
and  the  mode  of  holding  tlie  elections  shall  be 
regulated  by  law. 

Sec.  4.  ><o  person  shall  be  a  representative, 
who,  at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen 
of  the  United  States,  and  hath  not  attained  to 
the  age  of  twenty  four  years,  and  resided  in  this 
state  two  years  next  preceding  his  election,  and 
the  last  year  thereof  in  the  county,  town,  or  city, 
for  which  he  may  be  chosen. 

Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly  shall  divide  the 
several  counties  of  this  commonwealth  into 
equal  and  convenient  precincts,  or  may  delegate 
such  power  to  such  county  authorities  as  they 
mav  by  law  provide;  and  elections  for  represen- 
tatives for  the  several  counties  entitled  to  repre- 
sentation, shall  be  held  at  the  places  of  holding 
their  respective  courts,  and  in  the  several  elec- 
tion precincts  into  which  the  counties  may  be 
divided:  Provided,  That  when  it  shall  appear 
to  the  legislature  that  any  city  or  town  hath  a 
number  of  qualified  voters  equal  to  the  ratio 
then  fixed,  such  city  or  town,  shall  be  invested 
with  the  privilege  of  a  separate  representation, 
in  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly,  which 
shall  be  retained  so  long  as  such  city  or  town 


shall  contain  a  number  of  qualified  voters  t-qnal 
to  the  ratio,  which  may,  from  lime  to  time,  be 
fixed  by  law;  and  thereafter,  elections  for  the 
county,  in  which  such  city  or  town  is  situated, 
shall  not  be  held  therein;  but  such  city  or  town 
shall  not  be  entitled  to  a  separate  representa- 
tion, unless  such  county,  after  the  separation, 
shall  also  be  entitled  to  one  or  more  representa- 
tives. 

Sec.  6.  Representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be 
forever  regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  num- 
ber of  qualified  voters  therein.  At  the  first  ses- 
sion of  the  general  assembly  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitntion,  and  every  eight  years  there- 
after, provLsion  shall  be  made  by  law,  that  in  the 
year  and  every  eighth  year  thereafter,  an 

enumeration  of  all  the  qualified  voters  of  the 
state  shall  be  made.  The  number  of  represen- 
tatives shcdl,  in  the  several  years  of  making 
these  enumerations,  be  so  fixed^  as  not  to  be 
less  than  seventy  five,  nor  more  than  one  hun- 
dred; and  they  shall  be  apportioned  for  tlie 
eight  years  next  following  thus:  Counties, 
cities,  and  to^v^ls,  having  more  than  two  thirds, 
and  less  than  the  full  ratio,  shall  have  one  rep- 
resentative; those  having  the  full  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  less  than  two  thirds  over,  shall  have  but 
one  representative;  those  having  the  full  ratio, 
and  a  fraction  of  more  than  two  thirds  over, 
shall  have  two  representatives,  and  increase  their 
number  in  the  same  proportion;  counties  hav- 
ing less  than  two  thirds  of  the  ratio,  shall  be 
joined  to  similar  adjacent  counties  for  the  pur- 
pose of  sending  a  representative:  Provided, 
That  if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county,  then 
such  county  having  less  than  two  thirds  of  the 
ratio,  shall  be  united  to  that  contiguous  county 
having  the  smallest  number  of  qualified  voters; 
and  the  remaining  representatives,  if  any,  shall 
be  allotted  to  those  counties,  cities,  or  towns, 
having  the  largest  unrepresented  fractions. 

Sec.  7.  The  house  of  representatives  shall 
choose  its  speaker,  and  other  ofiicers. 

Sec.  8.  Every  free,  white  male  citizen  of  the 
age  af  twenty  one  years,  who  lias  resided  in  the 
state  two  years,  or  in  the  county,  town,  or  citv, 
in  which  he  ofi'ers  to  vote,  one  year  next  prece- 
ding the  election,  shall  be  a  voter,  but  such  vo- 
ter shall  have  been,  for  sixty  days  next  preceding 
the  election,  a  resident  of  the  precinct  in 
which  he  offers  to  vote,  and  he  shall  cast 
his  vote  in  said  precinct,  and  not  elsewhere. 
Voters,  in  all  cases  except  treason,  felony, breach 
or  surety  of  the  peace,  shall  be  privileged  from 
arrest  during  their  attendance  at,  going  to,  and 
returning  from,  elections. 

Sec.  9.  Senators  shall  be  ehosen  for  the  term 
of  four  years,  and  the  senate  shall  have  power  to 
choose  its  officers  biennially. 

Sec.  10.  At  the  fir^t  session  of  the  general  as- 
sembly, after  this  constitution  takes  effect,  the 
senators  shall  be  divided  by  lot,  as  equally  as 
may  be,  into  two  classes.  I'he  seats  of  the  ifii-st 
class  shall  be  vacated  at  the  end  of  two  years, 
from  the  day  of  the  election,  and  those  of  the 
second  class  at  the  end  of  four  years,  so  that  one 
half  shall  be  chosen  every  two  years;  and  when 
an  additional  member  sliall  be  added  to  the  sen- 
ate, he  shall  be  annexed  by  lot,  to  one  of  these 
classes. 


320 


Sec.  11.  The  senate  shall  consist  of  not  less 
than  thirty,  nor  more  than  thirty  eight  mem- 
bers. 

Sec.  12.  Tlie  same  number  of  senatorial  dis- 
tricts shall,  from  time  to  time,  be  established  by 
the  general  assembly  as  there  may  be  senators 
allotted  to  the  state.Vhich  shall  be  so  formed, as 
to  contain,  as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  number 
of  qualified  voters,  and  so  that  no  connty  shall 
bd  divided  in  the  formation  of  a  senatorial  dis- 
trict, except  such  county  shall  be  entitled,  under 
the  enumeration,  to  two  or  more  senators. 

Sec.  13.  One  senator  for  each  district  shall 
be  elected,  by  the  qualified  voters  therein,  who 
shall  vote  in'the  precincts  where  they  reside,  at 
the  places  where  elections  are  by  law  directed  to 
be  held. 

Sec.  14.  No  person  shall  be  a  senator,  who, 
at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States,  who  has  not  attained  the  age 
of  thirty  years,  and  who  has  not  resided  in  this 
state  six  years  next  preceding  his  election,  and 
the  last  year  thereof,  in  the  district  for  which  he 
may  be  chosen. 

&c.  15.  The  first  election  for  senators  shall 
be  general  throughout  the  state,  and  at  the  same 
time  tliat  the  election  for  representatives  is  held, 
and  thereafter,  there  shall  be  a  biennial  election 
for  senators  to  fill  the  places  of  those  whose 
term  of  service  may  have  expired. 

Sec  16.  The  general  assembly  shall  convene 
on  the  first  Monday  in  November,  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  and  on  the  same  day 
of  every  second  year,  unless  a  different  day  be 
appointed  by  law,  and  their  session  shall  be 
held  at  the  seat  of  government;  but  if  the  pub- 
lic welfare  require,  the  governor  may  call  a  spe- 
cial session. 

Sec  17.  Not  less  than  anmjority  of  the  mem- 
bers of  each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business,  but 
a  smaller  number  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day, 
and  shall  be  authorised  by  law,  to  compel  the 
attendance  of  absent  members,  in  such  manner 
and  under  such  penalties  as  may  be  prescribed 
thereby. 

Sec.  18.  Each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  judge  of  the  qualifications,  elections,  and 
returns  of  its  members;  but  a  contested  election 
shall  be  determined  in  such  manner  as  shall  be 
directed  by  law. 

Sec  19.  Each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
may  determine  the  rules  of  it  proceedings,  pun- 
ish a  member  for  disorderly  behavior,  and  with 
the  concurrence  of  two  thirds,  expel  a  member, 
but  not  a  second  time  for  the  same  cause. 

Sec  20.  Each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  keep  and  publish,  weekly,  a  journal  of  its 
proceedings,  and  the  yeas  and  nays  of  the  mem- 
oers  on  any  question,  shall,  at  the  desire  of  any 
two  of  them,  be  entered  on  their  journal. 

Sec  21.  Neither  house,  during  the  session  of 
the  general  assembly,  sliall,  without  the  consent 
of  the  other,  adjourn  for  more  than  three  days, 
nor  to  any  other  place  than  that  in  which  they 
may  be  sitting. 

Sec.  22.  The  members  of  the  general  assem- 
bly shall  severally  receive  from  the  public  treas- 
ury a  compensation  for  their  services,  which 
shall  be  three  dollars  a  day  during  their  attend- 
ance on,  going  to,  and  returning  from  the  ses- 


sions of  their  respective  houses:  Provided,  That 
the  same  may  be  increased  or  diminished  by  law ; 
but  no  alteration  shall  take  effect  during  the  ses- 
sion at  which  such  alteration  shall  be  made,  nor 
shall  a  se.ssion  of  the  general  assembly  continue 
beyond  sixty  days,  except  by  a  vote  of  two 
thirds  of  each  house;  but  this  shall  not  apply  to 
thefirst  session  held  under  this  constitution. 

Sec.  2'i.  The  members  of  the  general  assem- 
bly shall,  in  all  cases,  except  treason,  felony, 
breach  or  surety  of  tlie  peace,  be  privileged  from 
arrest,  during  their  attendance  at  the  sessions  of 
their  respective  houses,  and  in  going  to  and  re- 
turning from  tlie  same,  and  for  any  speech  or  de- 
bate in  either  house,  they  shall  not  be  questioned 
in  any  other  place. 

Sec  24.  No  senator  or  representative  shall, 
during  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected,  nor 
for  one  year  thereafter,  be  appointed  or  elected 
to  any  civil  office  of  profit  under  tliis  common- 
wealth, which  shall  have  been  created,  or  the 
emoluments  of  which  shall  have  been  increased 
during  the  time  such  senator  or  representative 
was  in  ofiice;  except  to  such  ofiices  or  appoint- 
ments as  may  be  filled  by  the  election  of  the 
people. 

Sec  25.  No  person  while  he  continues  to  ex- 
ercise the  functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest,  or 
teacher  of  any  religious  persuasion,  society,  or 
sect,  nor  while  he  holds  or  exercises  any  office  of 
profit  under  this  commonwealth,  or  under  the 
government  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  general  assembly,  except  attorneys  at 
law,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  militia  officers: 
Provided,  That  attorneys  for  the  commonwealth, 
who  receive  a  fixed  annual  salary,  shall  be  ineli- 
gible. 

Sec  26.  No  person  who  at  any  time  may  have 
been  a  collector  of  taxes,  or  public  moneys  for 
the  state,  or  the  assistant  or  deputy  of  such  col- 
lector, shall  be  eligible  to  the  general  assembly, 
unless  he  shall  have  obtained  a  quietus,  six 
months  before  the  election,  for  the  amount  of 
such  collection,  and  for  all  public  moneys  for 
which  he  may  have  been  responsible. 

Sec.  27.  No  bill  shall  have  the  force  of  a  law, 
until,  on  three  several  days,  it  be  read  over,  in 
each  house  of  the  general  assembly,  and  free  dis- 
cussion allowed  thereon,  unless  in  eases  of  ur- 
gency, four  fifths  of  the  house,  where  the  bill 
shall  be  depending,  may  deem  it  expedient  to 
dispense  with  this  rule. 

Sec  28.  All  bills  for  raising  revenue  shall 
originate  in  the  house  of  representutives,  but 
the  senate  may  propose  amendments  as  in  other 
bills,  provided  that  they  shall  not  introduce 
any  new  matter  under  the  color  of  an  amend- 
ment which  does  not  relate  to  raising  revenue. 

Sec  29.  The  general  assembly  shall  regulate, 
by  law,  by  whom,  and  in  what  manner  writs  of 
election  shall  be  issued,  to  fill  the  vacancies 
which  may  happen  in  either  branch  thereof. 

Sec  30.  Divorces  shall  not  be  granted,  save 
by  courts  of  justice,  in  conformity  to  law. 

Sec  31.  Tlie  credit  of  this  commonwealth 
shall  never  be  given  or  loaned  in  aid  of  any 
person,  association,  municipality,  or  corporation, 
without  the  concurrence  of  two  thirds  of  each 
house  of  the  general  assembly. 

Sec  32.  The  general  assembly  may  contract 
debts  to  meet  casual  deficits,  or  failures  in  the 


321 


revenue,  or  for  expenses  not  provided  for,  but 
such  debts,  director  contingent,  singly  or  in  the 
aggregate,  shall  not  at  any  time  exceed  five  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars,  and  the  moneys  arising 
from  loans,  creating  such  debts,  shall  be  applied 
to  the  purposes  for  which  they  are  obtained  or  to 
repay  such  debts:  Provided,  That  tlie  state  may 
contract  debts  to  repel  invasion,  suppress  in- 
surrection, or,  if  hostilities  are  threatened,  pro- 
vide for  the  public  defence. 

Sec.  33.  No  act  of  tlie  general  assembly  shall 
authorize  any  debt  to  be  contracted,  on  behalf  of 
the  commonxvealth,  except  for  the  purposes  men- 
tioned in  the  32d  section  of  this  article,  unle.ss 
provision  be  maiie  therein  to  lay  and  collect  an 
annual  tax  sutScient  to  pay  the  interest  stipula- 
ted, and  to  discharge  the  debt  within  years; 
nor  sliall  such  act  take  eflfect  until  it  shall  have 
been  submitted  to  tlie  people  at  a  general  elec- 
tion, and  shall  have  received  a  majority  of  all 
the  votes  cast  for  and  against  it. 

Sec.  34.  No  law  enacted  by  the  general  as- 
semblv  shall  embrace  more  than  one  object,  and 
that  shall  be  expressed  in  the  title. 

Sec.  35.  Jfo  law  shall  be  revised  or  amended, 
by  reference  to  its  title,  but  in  such  case,  the  act 
revised  or  section  amended  shall  be  re-enacted 
and  published  at  length. 

Sec.  36.  The  general  assemblv  shall  have  no 
power  to  pass  special  laws  for  individual  bene- 
fit, unless  a  majority  of  two  thirds  of  both  houses 
concur  therein. 

AX£XnK£NT   OF  THE  ELLIS. 

Mr.  GARRARD  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion which  lies  over  one  day,  under  the  rules : 

Resolved,  That  the  29th  rule  of  this  conven- 
tion be  amended  by  inserting  the  words  '-and 
such  amendments  as  may  be  offered"  immediate- 
ly after  the  word  "amendments"  in  the  last  line 
of  said  rule.    • 

COL-RT  OF  APPEALS. 

The  President  announced  the  next  business  in 
order  to  be  on  the  report  of  the  committee  of  the 
whole  on  the  article  in  relation  to  the  court  of 
appeals. 

After  a  brief  conversation  it  was  agreed  to 
take  the  question  first  on  all  the  amendments 
which  were  verbal  merely,  or  not  involving  any 
important  principle,  and  ihey  were  concurred  in. 

Mr.  C.  A.  ^YICKLIFFE  expressed  the  hop 
that  the  convention  would  not  agree  to  .strike 
out  the  words  "of  the  United  States"  from  the  8th 
section,  which  provides  that  "any  citizen  of  the 
United  States  Ac." shall  be  eligeble  to  the  office 
of  judge.  The  word  "citizen"  he  supposed  meant 
the  same  thing ;  but  Kentucky  had  not  prescrib- 
ed a  mode  to  make  citizens,  other  than  that  by 
the  government  of  the  United  States :  indeed,  he 
doxibted  if  they  had  the  power  to  do  so.  He 
hoped  therefore  the  convention  would  retain  the 
expression  in  the  article  which  but  followed  the 
precedents  of  other  constitutions. 

The  question  was  taken  and  the  convention 
.  refused  to  concur  in  the  amendment  by  which 
.those  words  had  been  stricken  out  in  committee 
•of  the  whole. 

•  In  the  12th  section,  a  like  amendment occurped 
•'to  which  the  convention  disagreed. 

•  Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  intimated  that  he  had 
prepared  a  substitute  for  the  entire  article  vhich 

41 


he  wishe.1  to  offer  when  the  proper  time  came. 
He  sent  it  to  the  secretarys  desk,  to  be  taken  up 
when  in  order. 

The  secretary  read  it  as  follows  : 

ARTICLE  — . 

Sec.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  common- 
wealth, both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equity, 
shall  be  vested  in  one  supreme  court,  which  shall 
be  styled  the  court  of  appeals,  and  in  such  in- 
ferior courts  as  may  be  established  by  this  con- 
stitution, or  such  as  the  general  assembly  may, 
from  time  to  time,  erect  andestablish. 

Sec.  2.  The  court  of  appeals,  except  in  cases 
otherwise  directed  by  this  constitution,  shall 
have  appellate  jurisdiction  only,  which  shall  be 
co-extensive  with  the  state,  under  such  restric 
tions  and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  con- 
stitution, as  may  from  time  to  time  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

Sec.  3.  Thejudgesofthe  court  of  appeals  shall 
hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  six  years,  and 
until  their  success6rs  are  dulv  qualified;  but  for 
any  reasonable  cause,  which  shall  not  be  suffi- 
cient ground  of  impeachment,  the  governor  shall 
remove  any  of  them  on  the  address  of  two-thirds 
of  each  house  of  the  general  assembly:  Provided 
however,  that  the  cause  or  causes  for  which  such 
removal  may  be  required,  shall bestatedatlength 
in  such  address,  and  on  the  journals  of  each  house. 
They  shall,  at  stated  times,  receive  for  their  ser- 
vices, an  adequate  compensation,  to  be  fixed  by 
law. 

Sec  4.  The  judges  shall,  by  virtue  of  their 
office,  be  conservators  of  the  peace  throughout 
the  state.  The  stvle  of  all  process  shall  be — the 
commonwealth  o{  Kentucky.  All  nrosecutions 
shall  be  carried  on  in  the  name,  and  oy  the  auth- 
erity  of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and 
conclude  "against  the  peace  and  dignity  of  the 
same." 

Sec.  5.  There  .shall  beelected, by  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  state,  one  judge  to  be  styled  the 
chief  justice  of  the  state  of  Kentucky,  and  such 
associatejudges  as  the  legislature  may  direct; 
Provided,  that  it  may  be  lawful  for  the'  legisla- 
ture to  lay  the  state  off  into  districts,  in  each  of 
which  a  judge  or  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
may  be  elected. 

Sec.  6.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  hold  at  least  two  sessions  of  the  court  in 
each  year,  and  each  session  shall  be  held  at  the 
seat  of  government,  until  otherwise  directed  by 
law. 

Sec  7.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  office 
of  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  who  is  under 
thirty,  or  over  sixty  five  years  of  age,  and  who 
has  not  been,  at  the  time  of  election,  at  least  five 
years  a  citizen  of  the  state  of  Kentucky. 

The  PRESIDENT  said  the  course  to  be  pursued 
would  be  to  take  up  the  article  by  sections,  and 
when  the  measure  was  perfected  by  its  friends 
it  would  be  in  order  to  act  upon  the  substitute 
of  the  gentleman  from  Jessamine. 

The  1st  and  2d  sections  were  accordingly  read, 
and  passed  without  amendment. 

The  third  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  strike  out  the  words 
"which  shall  not  be  sufficient  ground  of  impeach- 
ment." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  invite  gentlemen  to  exam- 
ine the  constitution  of  the  United  States.   There 


322 


ia  no  way  to  atldress  a  man  out  of  offioe  for  any 
offence  for  which  he  may  be  impeached.  In  our 
constitution  tliore  are  several  incongruities.  I 
will  read  the  section  on  this  subject: 

"A  competent  number  of  justices  of  the  peace 
'  shall  be  appointed  in  each  county;  they  shall  be 
'commissioned  during  good  behaviour,  but  may 
*be  removed  on  conviction  of  misbehaviour  in 
'  office,  or  of  any  infamous  crime,  or  on  the  ad- 
'  dress  of  two  thirds  of  each  house  of  the  gener- 
'  al  assembly." 

The  convention  will  perceive  that  the  power 
of  removal  extends  beyond  misbehaviour  in  of- 
fice, and  that  you  can  remove  by  address  for  any 
thing  for  wliich  you  could  by  impeachment. 
You  can  remove  a  justice  of  the  peace  for  folo- 
ny,  treason,  or  any  crime  of  that  description.  I 
see  no  reason  why  wlien  you  come  to  address  a 
man  out  of  office,  you  exclude  in  the  address 
what  is  the  subject  of  impeachment.  Any  one 
may  see  the  great  difficulty  which  might  grow 
out  of  it.  The  consequence  vill  be,  when  you 
remove  by  address,  it  will  be  said,  that  is  a  sub- 
ject of  impeachment.  I  wish  tlie  legislature  to 
nave  power  to  remove  by  address  if  the  judge 
behave  outrageously  bad.  Shall  there  be  no 
way  to  remove  him  by  address,  no  way  to  get  at 
him  but  by  impeachment?  "We  know  the  delays, 
formalities,  and  ceremonies  attending  an  im- 
peachment. I  wish  the  legislature  to  have  the 
right  to  address  out  a  man  for  any  tiling  for 
which  he  could  be  impeached  out.  I  can 
see  why  the  power  of  addressing  out  of  office 
should  be  more  extensive  than  the  power  to  im- 
peach. It  is  no  crime  to  be  superannuated,  yet 
the  legislature  should  have  power  to  remove  by 
address.  It  is  no  crime  to  be  so  deaf  as  not  to 
be  able  to  hear  a  word,  like  Judge  Duvall,  who 
held  his  office  as  judge  of  the  supreme  court  for 
ten  years  after,  and  was  superannuated  besides. 
It  was  no  offence  in  Judge  Heath  of  Baltimore 
to  become  insane,  and  yet  congress  could  not  re- 
move him.  It  is  important  that  the  power  to  re- 
move by  address,  should  be  more  extensive  than 
by  impeachment,  but  that  the  power  to  remove 
by  address  should  be  excluded  from  the  very  of- 
fence for  which  you  may  impeach,  I  cannot  un- 
derstand. There  are  a  thousand  ways  in  which 
their  conduct  may  be  very  wrong,  and  yet  you 
cannot  impeach  them. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WJCKLIFFE.  The  committee  tran- 
scribed this  article  from  the  present  constitution, 
and  if  there  is  any  thing  wrong  in  it,  our  ances- 
tors were  guilty  of  it.  If  it  needs  correction,  I 
am  willing  it  should  be  done.  I  am  inclined  to 
enlarge  the  subject  of  impeachment,  and  to  pre- 
scribe the  offences  for  which  an  officer  shall  be 
impeached.  I  am  extremely  anxious  to  retain 
the  power  of  impeachment,  because  it  disquali- 
fies a  man  from  any  office.  I  think  this  will 
meet  the  difficulty,  "but  for  reasonable  cause, 
the  governor  shall*  remove  any  of  them  on  an  ad- 
dress of  two  thirds  of  the  general  assembly." 
If  no  oU»er  gentleman  does  it,  1  shall,  hereafter, 
move  to  specify  the  grounds  for  which  a  judge 
may  be  impeached. 

The  motion  to  strike  out  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HARDIN.    I  will  now  renew  the  same 

amendment  that  I    made  in   committee  of  the 

whole,  to  strike  out  "two-thirds,"  and  insert  "a 

majority;"  and  on  that  question  I  shall  call  for 


the  yeas  and  nays.  I  .lesire  now  to  call  Uie  at- 
tention of  the  house  to  the  third,  fourth,  and 
eighth  articles  of  Judge  Chase's  impeachment. 
The  third  charge  is  thus : 

"article  III. 

"  That,  with  intent  to  oppress  and  procure  the 
'  conviction  of  the  prisoner,  the  evidence  of 
'  John  Taylor,  a  material  witness  on  behalf  of 
'  the  aforesaid  Callender,  was  not  permitted  by 
'  the  said  Samuel  Chase  to  be  given  in,  on  prc- 
'  tence  that  tlie  said  witness  could  not  prove  the 
'  truth  of  tlie  whole  of  one  of  tlie  charges  con- 
'  tained  in  the  indictment,  although  the  said 
'  charge  embraced  more  than  one  fact." 

On  this  charge  eighteen  were  against  Judge 
Chase  and  sixteen  for  him. 

The  fourth  charge  is  as  follows ; . 

"  ARTICLE   IV. 

"  That  the  conduct  of  the  said  Samuel  Chase 
'  was  marked,  during  the  wliole  course  of  the 
'  said  trial,  by  manifest  injustice,  partiality,  and 
'  intemperance,  viz : 

"1.  In  compelling  the  prisoner's  counsel  to 
'  reduce  to  writing,  and  submit  to  the  inspection 
'  of  the  court,  for  their  admission  or  rejection, 
'  all  questions  which  the  said  counsel  meant  to 
'  propound  to  the  above  named  John  Taylor,  the 
'  witness. 

"  2.  In  refusing  to  postpone  the  trial,  although 
'  an  affidavit  was  regularly  filed,  stating  the  al)- 
'  sence  of  material  witnesses  on  behalf  of  the 
'accused;  and  although  it  was  manifest,  that, 
'  witli  the  utmost  diligence,  the  attendance  of 
'  such  witnesses  could  not  have  been  procured, 
'  at  that  term. 

"  3.  In  the  use  of  unusual,  rude,  and  con- 
'  temptuous  expressions  towards  the  prisoner's 
'counsel;  and  in  falsely  insinuating  that  they 
'  wished  to  excite  the  public  fears  and  indigna- 
'  tion  and  to  produce  that  insubordination  to 
'  law,  to  which  the  conduct  of  the  judge  did,  at 
'  the  same  time,  manifestly  tend  : 

"  4.  In  repeated  and  vexatious  interruptions 
'  of  the  saia  counsel,  on  the  part  of  the  said 
'  judge,  which,  at  length,  induced  them  to  aban- 
'don  their  cause  and  their  client,  who  was  there- 
'  upon  convicted  and  condemned  to  fine  and  ini- 
'  prisonment : 

"  5.  In  an  indecent  solicitude,  manifested  by 
'  the  said  Samuel  Chase,  for  the  conviction  of 
'  the  accused,  unbecoming  even  a  public  prose- 
'  cutor,  but  highly  disgraceful  to  the  character  of 
'  a  judge,  as  it  was  subversive  of  justice." 

6n  that  charge,  also,  there  were  eighteen 
against  and  sixteen  for  liim. 

"  ARTICLE   VIII. 

"  And  whereas  a  mutual  respect  and  confi- 
'  deuce  betW(^en  the  government  of  the  United 
•  States  and  those  of  the  individual  states,  and 
'  between  the  people  and  those  go vernment»s,  re- 
'  spectively,  are  highly  conducive  to  that  public 
'  harmony,  without  which  there  can  be  no  public 
'  happiness,  yet  the  said  Samuel  Chase,  disre- 
'  garrting  the  duties  and  dignity  of  judicial  char- 
'  acter,  did  at  a  circuit  court,  for  the  district  of 
'  Maryland,  held  at  Baltimore  in  the  montli  of 
'  May,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  tliree, 
'  pervert  his  official  riglit  and  duty  to  address 
'  the  grand  jury,  then  and  there  .assembled,  on 
'  the  matters  coming  within  the  province  of  the 


'3!2?^ 


'  said  jury,  for  the  purpose  of  delivering  to  the 
'  said  grand  jury  an  interaperato  and  inflamato- 
'  ry  political  harrangue,  with  intent  to  excitethe 

*  fears  and  resentment  of  the  said  grand  jun.-, 
'  and  of  the  good  people  of  Maryland  against 
'  their  state,  goveminent,  and  constitution,  a  con- 
'  duct  highly  censurable  in  any,  but  peculiarly 
'  indecent  and  unbecoming  in  a  judge  of  the  su- 

*  preme  court  of  the  United  States,  and  more- 
'  over  that  the  said  Samuel  Chase,  then  and  there, 
'  under  pretence  of  exercising  his  judicial  right 
'  to  address  the  said  grand  jurk',  as  aforesaid, 
'  did,  in  a  manner  highly  unwarrantable,  en- 
'  deavor  to  excite  the  odium  of  the  said  grand 
'jury,  and  of  the  good  people  of  Maryland 
'  against  the  goveminent  of  the  United  States, 
'  bv  delivering  opinions,  which,  even  if  the  judi- 
'  cial  authority  were  competent  to  their  expres- 
'  sion,  on  a  suitable  occasion  in  a  proper  man- 
'  ner,  were  at  that  time  and  as  delivered  bv  him, 
'  highly  indecent,  extra-judicial  and  tending  to 
'  prostitute  the  high  judicial  character  with 
'  which  he  was  invested,  to  the  low  purpose  of 
'  an  electioneering  partizan. 

"  And  the  house  of  representatives,  by  protes- 
'  tation,  saving  to  themselves  the  liberty  of  ex- 
'  hibiting  at  any  time  hereafter,  any  further  ar- 
'  tides   or    other  accusation,    or    impeachment 

*  against  the  said  Samuel  Chase,  and  also  of  re- 
'  plying  to  his  answers  which  he  shall  make 
'  unto  the  said  articles,  or  any  of  them,  and  of 
'  offering  proof  to  all  and  every  of  the  aforesaid 
'  articles,  and  to  all  and  every  other  articles,  im 

'  peachment  or  accusation,  which  shall  be  exhi 
'  bited  bv  them,  as  the  case  shall  require,  do  de 
'  mand  tliat  the  said  Samuel  Chase  may  be  put 
'  to  answer  the  said  crimes  and  misdemeanors, 
'  and  tliat  such  proceedings,  examinations,  trials 
'  and  judgments  may  be  thereupon  had  and  giv- 
'en,  as  are  agreeable  to  law  and  justice." 

The  vote  stood,  on  the  eighth  charge,  nineteen 
against  him,  and  fifteen  for  him. 

I  invite  gentlemen  to  read  that  charge  as  a  lit- 
erary curiosity,  and  also  the  address  to  the 
grand  jury  of  Baltimore,  for  such  a  phillippic 
was  never  given  in  the  world.  They  are  as  fol- 
lows: 

"  Copy  of  the  conclusion  of  a  charge  delivered  and 
read  from  the  original  manuscript  at  a  circuit 
court  of  the  United  States,  holden  in  the  city  of 
Baltimore,  on  Monday  the  2d  day  of  May,  1803, 
by  Samuel  Chase,  one  of  the  judges  of  the  su- 
preme court  of  the  United  States. 
*' Before  you  retire,  gentlemen,  to  your  cham- 

*  ber  to  consider  such  matters  as  may  be  brought 
•before  you,  Twill  take  the  liberty  to  make  a 
'  few  observations;  which  I  hope  you  will  re- 
'  ceive  as  flowing  only  from  my  regard  to  the 
'  welfare  and  prosperity  of  our  common  coun- 
'try. 

"  It  is  essentially  necessary  at  all  times,  but 
'  more  particularly  at  the  present,  that  the  pub- 

*  lie  mind  should  be  truly  informed;  and  that 
'  our  citizens  should  entertain  correct  principles 
'  of  government,  and  fixed  ideas  of  their  social 

*  rights.  It  is  a  very  easy  task  to  deceive  or  mis- 
'  lead  the  great  body  of  the  jwople,  by  propaga- 
'  ting  plausible,  but  false  doctrines;  for  the  bulk 
'  of  mankind  are  gjovemed  by  their  passions,  and 

*  not  by  reason. 


"  Falsehood  can  be  Ttttdfs"TeaAi\y  disseminated 
'  than  truth,  and  the  latter  is  heard  with  reluc- 
'  tance  if  repugnant  to  popular  prejudice.     From 

•  the  year  1776, 1  have  been  a  decided  and  avow - 
'  ed  advocate  for  a  representative,  or  republican 
'  form  of  government,  as  since  established  by 
'  our  state  and  national  constitutions.  It  is  my 
'  sincere  wish  that  freemen  should  be  governed 

•  bv  their  representatives,  fairly  and  freely  elect- 
'  od  by  that  cIp^s  of  citizens,  described  in  our 
'  bill  of  rights,  "who  have  property  in,  a  com- 
'  mon  interest  with,  and  an  attachment  to,  the 
'  community." 

"  The  purposes   of  civil  society  are  best  an- 

•  swered  by  those  governments,  where  the  public 
'  safety,  happiness,  and  prosperity  are  best  se- 
'  curea,  whatever  may  be  the  constitution  or 
'form  of  government;  but  the  history  of  man- 
'  kind  (in  ancient  and  modern  times)  informs  us 
'  "that  a  monarchy  may  be  free,  and  that  a  re- 
'  public  may  be  a  tyranny."  The  true  test  of 
'  liberty,  is  in  the  practical  enjoyment  of  protec- 
'  tion  to  the  person  and  the_property  of  the  citi- 
'  zen,  from  all  enquiry.  Where  the  same  laws 
'  govern  the  whole  society  without  any  distinc- 
'  tion,  and  there  is  no  power  to  dispense  with 
'  the  execution  of  the  laws;  Avhere  justice  is  im- 
'  partially  and  speedily  administered,  and  the 
'  poorest  man  in  the  community  may  obtain  re- 
'  dress  against  the  most  wealthy  and  powerful, 
'  and  riches  aflbrd  no  protection  to  violence;  and 

•  where  the  person  and  property  of  every  man 
'  are  secure  from  insult  and  mjufy;  inthat'coun- 
'  try  the  people  are  free.  This  is'our  present  sit- 
'  nation,  ^here  law  is  uncertain,  partial,  or  ar- 
'  bitrary;  where  justice  is  not  impartially  ad- 
'  ministered  to  all;  where  property  is  insecure. 
'  and  the  person  is  liable  to  insult  and  violence, 
'  without  redress  by  law,  the  people  are  not  free, 
'  whatever  may  be  their  for  of  government.  To 
'  this  situation,  I  greatly  fear  we  are  fast  ap- 
'proaching! 

"  You  know,  gentlemen,  that  our  state  and  na- 
'  tional  institutions  were  framed  to  secure  to  ev- 
'  ery  member  of  the  society,  equal  liberty  and 
'  equal  rights;  but  the  late  alteration  of  the  fed- 
'  eral  judiciary  by  the  abolition  of  the  oflBces  of 
'  the  sixteen  circuit  judges,  and  the  recent  change 
'  in  our  state  constitution,  by  the  establishing  of 
'  universal  suffrage,  and  the  further  alteration 
'  that  is  contemplated  in  our  state  judiciary  (if 
'  adopted)  will,  in  my  judgment,  take  away  all 
'  security  for  property  and  personal  liberty. — 
'  The  independence  of  the  national  judieiary,  is 
'  already  shaken  to  its  foundation,  and  the  vir- 
'  tue  of  the  people  can  alone  restore  it.  The  in- 
'  dependence  of  the  judges  of  this  state  will  be 
'  entirely  destroyed,  if  the  bill  for  the  abolition 
'  of  the  two  supreme  courts  should  be  ratified 
'  by  the  next  general  assembly.     The  change  of 

•  the  state  constitution,  by  allowing  univereal 
'  suffrage,  will,  in  luy  opinion,  certainly  and  ra- 
'  pidly  destroy  all  protection  to  property,  and 
'  all  security  to  personal  liberty;  and  our  repub- 
'  lican  constitution  will  sink  into  a  mobocracy, 
'  the  worst  of  all  possible  governments. 

"  I  can  only  lament,  that  the  main  pillar  of 
'  our  state  constitution,  has  already  been  thrown 
'  down  by  the  establishment  of  universal  suf- 
'  frage.  'By  this  shock  alone,  the  whole  building 
'  totters  to  its  base,  and  will  crumble  into  ruins. 


324 


before  many  years  elapse,  unless  it  be  restored 
to  its  original  state.  If  the  independency  of 
your  state  judges,  which  your  bill  of  rights 
wisely  declares  "to  be  essential  to  the  impar- 
tial administration  of  justice,  and  the  great  se- 
curity to  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people," 
shall  be  taken  away  by  the  ratification  of  the 
bill  passed  for  that  purpose,  it  will  precipitate 
the  destruction  of  your  wliole  state  constitu- 
tion; and  there  will  be  nothing  left  in  it,  wor- 
thy the  care  or  support  of  freemen. 
"  I  cannot  but  remember  the  great  and  patriot- 
ic characters,  by  whom  your  state  constitution 
was  framed.  I  cannot  but  recollect  that  at- 
tempts were  then  made  in  favor  of  universal 
sufFrEige;  and  to  render  the  judges  dependant 
upon  the  legislature.  You  may  believe,  that 
the  gentlemen  who  framed  your  constitution, 

Eossessed  the  full  confidence  of  the  people  of 
laryland,  and  that  they  were  esteemed  for 
their  talents  and  patriotism,  and  for  their  pub- 
lic and  private  virtues.  You  must  have  lieard 
that  many  of  them  held  the  liighest  civil  and 
military  stations,  and  that  tliey,  at  every  risk 
and  danger,  assisted  to  obtain  and  establish 
your  independence.  Their  names  are  enrolled 
on  the  journals  of  the  first  Congress,  and  njay 
be  seen  in  the  proceedings  of  the  convention 
that  framed  our  form  of  government.  With 
great  concern  I  observe,  that  the  sons  of  some 
of  these  characters  have  united  to  pull  down 
the  beautiful  fabric  of  wisdom  and  republican- 
ism, that  their  fathers  erected! 

"  The  declarations,  respecting  the  natural 
rights  of  man,  which  originated  from  the  claim 
of  the  British  parliament  to  make  laws  to  bind 
America  in  all  cases  whatsoever;  the  publica- 
tions, since  that  period,  of  visionary  and  theo- 
retical writers,  asserting  that  men,  in  a  state  of 
society,  are  entitled  to  exercise  rights  which 
they  possessed  in  a  state  of  nature;  and  the 
modern  doctrines  of  our  late  reformers,  that  all 
men,  in  a  state  of  society,  are  entitled  to  enjoy 
equal  liberty  and  equal  rights,  have  brought 
this  mighty  mischief  upon  us;  and  I  fear  tliat 
it  will  rapidly  progress,  until  peace  and  order, 
freedom  and  property,  shall  be  destroyed.    Our 

fieople  are  taught  as  a  political  creed,  that  men, 
iving  under  an  established  government,  are 
nevertheless  entitled  to  exercise  certain  rights 
which  they  possessed  in  a  state  of  nature;  and 
also,  that  eevry  member  of  this  government  is 
entitled  to  enjoy  an  equality  of  liberty  and 
rights. 

"  I  have  long  since  subscribed  to  the  opinion, 
that  there  could  be  no  rights  of  man  in  a  state 
of  nature,  previous  to  the  institution  of  socie- 
ty; and  that  liberty,  properly  speaking,  could 
not  exist  in  a  state  of  nature.  1  do  not  believe 
that  any  number  of  men  ever  existed  together 
in  a  state  of  naturef  without  some  head,  leader 
or  chief,  whose  advice  they  followed,  or  whose 
precepts  they  obeyed.  I  really  consider  a  state 
of  nature  as  a  creature  of  the  imagination  only, 
although  ^reat  names  give  a  sanction  to  a  con- 
trary opinion.  The  great  object  for  whicli  men 
estaolish  any  form  of  government,  is  to  obtain 
security  to  their  persons  and  property,  from  vi- 
olence; destroy  tne  security  to  cither,  and  you 
tear  up  society  by  the  roots.  It  appears  to  me 
that  the  institution  of  governiaent  is  really  no 


'  sacrifice  made,  as  some  writere  contend,  to  nat- 
'  ural  liberty,  for  I  think  that  previous  to  the 
'  formation  of  some  species  of  government,  a 
'  state  of  liberty  could  not  exist.  It  seyms  to 
'  me  that  personal  liberty  and  riahts,  can  only  be 
'  acquirea  by  becoming  a  member  of  a  commu- 
'  nity,  Avhich  gives  the  protection  of  the  whole 
'  to  every  individual.  Without  this  protection 
'  it  would,  in  my  opinion,  be  impracticable  to 
'  enjoy  personal  liberty  or  rights.  From  hence 
'  I  conclude  that  liberty,  and  rights,  (and  also 
'  property}  must  spring  out  of  civil  society,  and 
'  must  be  forever  subjected  to  the  modification 
'  of  particular  governments.  I  hold  the  position 
'  clear  and  safe,  that  all  the  rights  of  man  can  be 
'  derived  only  from  the  conventions  of  society, 
'  and  may  with  propriety  be  called  social  rights. 
'  I  cheerfully  subscribe  to  the  doctrine  of  equal 
'  liberty  and  equal  rights,  if  properly  explained. 
'  I  understand  by  equality  of  liberty  and  rights, 
'  only  this,  that  every  citizen,  without  respect  to 
'  property  or  station,  should  enjoy  an  equal 
'  share  of  civil  liberty;  an  equal  protection  from 
'the  laws,  and  an  equal  security  for  his  person 
'  and  property.  Any  other  interpretation  of 
'  these  terms,  is  in  my  judgment,  destructive  of 
'  all  government  and  all  laws.  If  I  am  sub- 
'  stantially  correct  in  these  sentiments,  it  is  un- 
'  necessary  to  make  any  application  of  them,  and 
'  I  will  only  ask  two  questions.  Will  justice  be 
'  impartially  administered  by  judges  dependant 
'  on  the  legislature  for  their  continuance  iii  office, 
'  and  also  for  their  support'?  Will  liberty  or 
'  property  be  protected  or  secured,  by  laws  made 
'  by  representatives  chosen bv  electors,  whohave- 
'  no  property  in,  a  common  interest  with,  or  at- 
'  tachment  to,  the  community?  " 

He  was  found  guilty  on  two  of  the  charges 
preferred  against  him,  by  a  vote  of  eighteen  to 
sixteen,  and  on  the  eighth  there  were  nineteen 
for  conviction  and  fifteen  for  acquittal.  Any 
gentleman  who  will  read  these  charges,  will  see 
that  no  more  flagrant  conduct  has  been  manifest- 
ed on  the  bench  since  the  days  of  judgejJeffries. 
Tlie  effort  of  judge  Cliase  was  to  punish  any, 
the  slightest  expression,  of  disrespect  to  the 
President,  or  his  family,  or  his  caoinet.  The 
administration  of  Mr.  Adams  was  particularly 
marked.     It   was    intended   to  perpetuate    his 

f)owcr.  He  succeeded  General  Washington,  and 
10  commenced  a  system  to  perpetuate  his  power, 
and  finally  perhaps,  to  end  in  the  subversion  of 
the  government.  He  had  a  pretence  for  a  war 
against  France  and  a  large  standing  armv,  when 
there  was  no  prospect  of  war  at  all.  Then,  as 
part  and  parcel  of  the  same  measure,  he  had  an 
alien  law,  to  enable  him  to  send  out  of  the 
country  any  man  who  was  troublesome  to  liim. 
In  adcfition  to  that,  he  had  a  law  to  indict  and 
punish  a  man  at  pleasure,  for  any  word  spoken 
disrespectfully  of  the  Prfsident  of  the  United 
States,  his  family,  or  his  cabinet.  For  that, 
many  men  were  made  to  suffer,  and  among 
others  was  a  gentleman  from  Vermont,  (Matthew 
Lyon,)  who  afterwards  represented  the  state  of 
Kentucky  in  the  congress  of  the  United  States. 
Part  and  parcel  of  the  same  was  a  system  of  di- 
rect taxation,  and  also  of  indirect  taxation  in 
the  shape  of  excise.  His  standing  army,  hi.s 
alien  and  sedition  law,  and  liis  system  of  internal 
taxation,    together   with    such    men    as  judge 


925 


Chase,  coustituteil  a  machinery  by  which  he  cal-  | 
ciliated  to  perpetuate  his  power  and  subvert  the 
government  of  the  United  States. 

There  was  a  great  deal  of  virtue  in  public  sen-  i 
timent,  and  there  my  worthy  friend  from  Bour-  I 
bon  will  find  the  public  voice  expressed,  was  ■ 
most  noble  and  honorable  to  the  American  char-  i 
acter.     From  one  end  of  this  continent  to  the  ' 
other  there  was  a  voice  raised  against  him  and 
his  measures,  and  the  public  sentmient,  notwith- 
standing the  lever  of  his  power,  his  large  army, 
his  alien  and  sedition  law,  and  his  whole  system 
of  excise  and  taxation,  hurled  him  from  power. 
The  republican  party,  as  it  was  then  called,  did 
intend  to  make  an  example  of  judge  Chase,  be- 
cause he  deserved  it;  and  they  meant  to  make 
this  example  just  as  the  whig  party  in  England  i 
had  made  one  of  that  tyrant  JeflFries.     Articles  ' 
of  impeachment  were  preferred  against  him  by  i 
an  overwhelming  majority  fresh  from  the  repub-  ; 
lican  ranks,   and  each  article  of  impeachment 
was  voted  on  by  the  house  of  representatives,  ( 
and  carried  by  a  majority  of  two  to  one,  and  i 
this  was  thought  enough  to  authorize  his  convic-  I 
tion.     The  senate  held  their  terms  for  six  years, 
and  the  New  England  States  had  then  as  they 
have  now  agreat  disproportion  of  power  in  thesen- 
ate,  for  even  the  smallest  of  them  are  sovereign- 
ties,  and  have  an   equal  power  in   the  senate 
with  tlie  larger  states.     There  was,  as  I  said  the 
other  day,  a  small  federal  party  in  the  senate, 
and  if  I  said  any  thing  on  that  occasion  oflFen- 
sive  in  relation  to  the  powdered  heads  of  these 
gentlemen   and  their  affected   nobility,  I  will 
take  it  back;  but  it  was  literally  true.     Thev 
lacked  the  ribbons  and  the  star,  and  that  was  all; 
they  could  not  even  board  in  the  city,  but  must 
go  to  Georgetown  and  ride  in  their  splendid  car- 
riages, so  brilliant  that  when  the  sun  struck  up- 
on them  they  gleamed  as  when  the  sun  on  the 
surrounding  hills  of  Utica  fell  on  the  burnished 
arms  of  Ciesar's  soldiers. 

As  I  said,  on  the  third  charge,  eighteen  of 
these  senators  were  against  Judge  Chase,  and 
sixteen  for  him,  and  on  the  fourth  charge,  the 
same  number  eighteen  to  sixteen,  on  the  last 
there  was  a  falling  off  of  one  of  those  that  were 
for  him,  and  the  vote  stood  nineteen  against, 
and  fifteen  for  him.  He  lived  and  died  on  the 
bench,  an  example  to  the  world  of  judicial  ty- 
rianny,  and  a  proof  of  the  impracticability  of 
impeaching  a  judge.  Xow  my  colleague  thinks 
the  acquittal  of  judge  Chase  was  right.  On  that 
subject  as  well  as  some  others  Nelson  county 
is  divided.  I  will  not  say  who  is  right,  but  I 
will  declare  that  I  differ  from  him  in  opinion. 
The  honorable  gentleman  said  there  was  a  man 
by  the  name  of  John  Quincy  Adams  who  voted 
for  judge  Chase  to  the  end.  Do  you  know  the 
hi-story  of  John  Quincy  Adams?  He  was  the 
supporter  of  his  father  to  the  end,  and  of  judge 
Chase,  at  the  time  of  his  trial.  But  a  year  or 
two  afterward  he  got  the  benefit  of  a  spring 
plank  and  turned  a  summerset  to  the  republi- 
cans, but  this  was  not  before  judge  Chase  was 
tried.  The  gentleman  said  I  supported  John  Q. 
Adams.  I  did  it  with  tears  in  my  eyes,  and  I 
had  afterward  occasion  to  tell  him,  in  a  speech 
which  I  made  in  congress  in  1835, 1  had  suppor- 
ted him,  but  if  the  Lord  would  forgive  me  for  it, 
I  would  never  do  it  again.    That  speech  was 


published  and  copies  were  sent  to  my  friends 
over  this  state. 

Mr.  DAVIS,  I  trust  the  gentleman  will  not 
make  any  more  references  to  sommersets  on  this 
floor. 

Mr.  HARDIN,  very  well,  I  will  not,  but  I  am 
sure  it  would  not  hit  my  honorable  friend  from 
Bourbon  if  1  should.  I  do  not  know  to  what 
the  gentleman  alludes.     But  to  resume,  I  sup- 

Eorted  John  Quincy  Adams'  election,  because 
is  defeat  was  based  on  proving  bargain,  sale, 
and  corruption  against  six  or  seven  of  the  best 
men  in  Kentucky,  and  I  was  determined  to  stand 
up  for  Kentucky.  Another  reason  for  standing 
up  for  Kentucky,  was,  at  the  time  I  entered  upon 
political  life,  thirty  nine  years  ago,  we  had  no 
such  parties  as  whig  and  democrat,  and  every 
one  knows  that  I  could  not  join  the  federal  ranks 
on  account  of  the  cloves  and  powder.  On  the 
death  of  governor  Madison  I  was  against  the 
new  election,  and  also  in  favor  of  judge  Clark, 
because  I  thought  he  was  right.  "When  the  ques- 
tion came  up  in  relation  to  breaking  the  old 
judges  bv  address,  I  was  against  the  address  and 
also  against  the  new  court. 

Afterwards  I  fought  in  the  whig  ranks,  and  if 
any  man  in  my  party  has  fought  faithfully,  I 
have,  and  I  have  Ijeeii  making  battle  for  it  ever 
since.  I  believe  their  great  doctrines  are  sub- 
stantially right ;  I  believe  the  labor  of  America 
must  be  protected  against  the  pauper  labor  of 
Europe.  I  believe  in  rotation  in  office,  for  this 
gives  every  man  a  chance,  and  it  is  the  finest 
curb  ever  put  into  the  mouth  of  those  in  office. 
I  never  have  wavered,  and  if  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon  thinks  I  alluded  to  him,  I  did  not ;  he 
is  as  firm  as  the  rock  of  Gibralter  which  cannot 
be  battered  down  by  a  popgun  or  a  pocket 'pis- 
tol. 

It  will  be  no  labor  to  trace  my  position.  That 
has  been  so  traced  that  any  man  can  see,  and 
read  it.  But  sir,  I  do  not  attempt  to  trace  the 
position  of  my_^honorable  colleague.  He  has  thu 
advantage  of  me  in  that  particular.  If  I  were 
asked  in  what  part  of  the  Heavens  the  Aurora 
Borealis  dwelleth,  how  could  I  tell  ? 
As  the  poet  says: 

"Like  the  Borealis  race 

That  flits  'ere  ye  can  point  its  pl\cc." 

I  repeat  again  that  I  went  for  Adams  because 
they  endeavored  to  prove  bargain,  sale,  and  cor- 
ruption, on  six  or  seven  men  of  my  state.  If 
my  country  is  about  to  go  to  war,  I  will  prevent 
it  if  I  can,  but  if  she  gets  into  war,  I  will  help 
her.  This  is  the  manner  in  which  I  acted  during 
the  late  war  with  Mexico.  If  a  man,  living  in 
another  state,  should  sav  that  six  or  seven 
men  in  Kentucky  had  sol(I  themselves,  I  should 
hardly  stop  to  inquire  ;  I  should  go  for  Ken- 
tucky in  a  moment. 

I  extremely  regret  to  have  any  diflSculty 
with  any  gentleman.  I  regretted  the  speecn 
of  my  honorable  colleague  a  few  days  since. 
I  attack  no  gentleman,  and  I  do  not  in- 
tend to  do  so,  but  I  will  defend  myself.  I  have 
been  a  consi-stent  whig  and  intend  to  die  so;  but 
I  appeal  to  the  democrats,  if  I  have  not  fought 
them  honorably,  if  I  have  ever  treated  them 
with  disrespect.  One  reason,  among  others, 
why  I  struck  for  a  convention,  was  the  practice 


326 


of  the  governors  of  Kentucky,  in  filling  all  the 
offices  with  none  but  whigs."  1  believe  the  ofii- 
6es  should  be  distributed  without  reference  to 
politics.  I  believe  the  result  would  be  that 
when  the  elections  of  the  country  Avere  thrown 
into  the  hands  of  the  people,  those  elections 
■would  be  without  party  feeling.     I  saw  that  the 

{)ower    and   patronage"   were    getting  into   the 
lands  of  the  whig:,,  and  I   struck  for  a  conven- 
tion.    I  saw  that  three  or  four  governors  more 
would  root  out  all  the  democrats  as  clean  as  the 
diggers  of  ginseng  dug  it  up,  and  carried  it  off  to 
China.     I  cannot  see  the  principle  that  requires 
two  thirds.     We  are  a  government  of  the  peo- 
ple.    In  all   our  operations  the  government  is 
based  upon  the   liypothesis  that  the  people  are 
competent  to  govern;  and  if  competent  to  gov- 
ern, how  are  they  competent  to  govern?     \\  hy, 
by  majorities,  and  every  government  of  a  minor- 
ity is  a  tyrrany,  call  it  by  what  name  you  will. 
I  Icnow  that  the  honorable  delegate  from  Bour- 
bon said  that  he  could  not  trust  the  people.     I 
know  they  sometimes   run  off  \yith  a  great  deal 
of  feeling;  but  whom  shall  we  trust?     Are  we  to 
trust  the  appointing  power  in  the  hands  of  the  go- 
vernor? Surely  not.  Wehave  tried  that, and  ithas 
failed.  Are  we' to  trust  it  in  thehands  of  the  mem- 
bers  of  the  legislature?  God   forbid.     I  do  not 
know  that  I  very   well  understand   the   course 
which  my  friend  from  Bourbon  pointed  out;  but 
I  think  we  once  had  a  practice  m  this  state  sim- 
ilar to  that  which  he  recommended,  and  if  so,  I 
have  a  deep-rooted  objection  to   it.     We  know 
that  the  state  of  Kentucky  has  been  scandalized 
by  the  sale  of  the   sheriff's  and   clerk's  offices. 
In  two  thirds  of  the  cases,  the  clerks  of  the  cir- 
cuit courts  have   bouglit  their   offices.     General 
Allen    was  made  clerk  of  Green  county  in  1793, 
and  the  report   was  that  he  sold  the  office  to  a 
man  named  Jack   Barret.     The  judge  aupointed 
Jack  Barret,  his  vendee,  and  the  office  has  been 
held  by  one  orthe  other  for  the  period  of  fifty  seven 
years.     How   was  it  in   Hardin   county?     Ben. 
llelm  was  elected  clerk  in  1797,  and  Mr.  Hay- 
craft,  the  present  incumbent,  when  a  boy,  was 
brought  into  his  office   and  raised  there,  and  a 
very  pretty  boy  he  was.     Mr.  Helm  had  a  neice 
as  pretty  as  he.     They  wooed  and  courted,  and 
at  last  he  married  Sally  Helm.    Ben.  Helm,  the 
\mcle  of    Sally,  resigned,   and  seemed  to  give 
Haycraft  up  the  office.     John   Helm,  the  father 
of  Sally,  at  the  age  of  eighty,  died.     In  his  will 
he  distributed  his  property  among  his  children, 
but  he  said,  "I  charge  Sally  with  $3,000,   and 
my   brother  Bt^n  can   tell  what  became  of  the 
nionwy."     The  fair  and  literal  meaning  of  which 
is  that  he  bought  the  office   for  his  daughter, 
from  his   brother   Ben.     We  have  in   Nelson  as 
fair  a  clerk  as  any  in  the  world — Mr.  Slaughter 
— and  the  report  is  that  thirty  two  years  ago,  his 
father  gave  two  tliousand  dollars  for  the  office. 
Now,  that  embraces  the   tliree  clerkships  in  the 
counties  where  I   practice  law.     In  the  county 
of  Bullitt,    it    is  reported  that  Noah  Summers 
bought  George  Pope  out;  au<i  in   the  county  of 
Spencer,  it  i«  also  said  the  county  court  clerk's 
office  was  likewise  sold.     1  do  not  know  wheth- 
er the  clerk  of  Marion — 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  will  not  permit  any  such 
charges  to  be  made  in  my  presence  against  a 
deaa  brother. 


Mr.  HARDIN.  JTow"^  £Ee  genttei^en  Ka\'s  he 
will  not  permit  any  charge  to  be  maile  against 
hisdead  brother.  1  would  be  very  loath  to  mako 
any  charges  upon  his  father,  or  n  is  brother.  1 
was  speaking  in  reference  to  clerkships  being 
sold  like  horses  in  the  street. 

The  sheriff  of  Marion  county  advertised  his 
office,  and  it  was  bid  for  like  horses  in  the 
streets.  One  man  bid  eight  hundred  dollars  for  it, 
andalthoughwillingto  give  bond  for  himself,  was 
not  for  the  high  sheriff,  and  it  Avas  uut  up  again 
for  a  second  time,  and  sold  for  one  hundred  and 
ten  dollars  less.  The  high  sheriff  sued  the  first 
bidder,  and  the  defendant  engaged  myself  and 
colleague  for  the  purpose  of  defending  him,  but  I 
at  any  rate  wanted  to  use  it  for  a  political 
speech,  and  would  have  given  a  bonus  of  ten 
dollars,  rather  than  not  to  have  made  the 
speech,  but  the  suit  was  withdrawn. 

Where  then  are  you  to  vest  the  appointing 
power?  In  the  courts?  Do  we  not  know  that 
It  is  a  general  practice  for  them  to  select  the 
members  of  their  own  family  for  these  offices? 
I  ask  with  all  possible  respect  towards  the 
judges,  do  you  know  of  a  single  instance  in 
which  a  new  county  has  been  made,  and  a  clerk 
appointed,  that  the  judge  did  not  appoint  some 
member  of  his  own  family  to  the  office?  If 
there  has  been  such  an  instance,  it  has  escaped 
my  observation.     Where  then  is  the  appointing 

J)ower  to  be  vested?  Is  it  to  remain  wnere  it  is? 
Purely  not.  Is  it  to  remain  with  the  judges  as 
to  the  clerks?  Surely  not.  Is  it  to  remain  with 
the  governor,  Avhen  Ave  have  seen  hoAV  it  has 
been  exercised,  during  the  last  ten  or  fifteen 
years.  Certainly  not;  because  itAvill  be  the  source 
of  every  species  of  intrigue  and  favoritism. 
Shall  tiie  members  of  the  house  of  representa- 
tives appoint  state  officers?  Surely  not;  for  it 
will  be  a  source  of  outrageous  corruption. 
Shall  it  be  given  to  the  members  from  each 
county?  Surely  not;  for  they  Avould  soon  be 
selling  these  appointments,  as  the  members 
of  the  parliament  of  Great  Britain  do. 

NoAv  as  to  this  branching  business  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  I  wish  here  to  submit  a  few 
remarks.  I  am  against  it  altogether,  and  I  Avill 
declare  noAv,  as  1  have  frequently  done,  that  I 
have  been  before  the  people  in  one  Avay  or  an- 
other for  some  thirty  nine  years,  and  1  have  never 
lieard  it  once  demanded  by  the  public  sentiment. 
The  court  of  appeals  is  the  court  of  the  state, 
and  there  is  a  fitness  in  its  being  held  at  the 
capital  of  the  state.  The  governor  and  all  the 
state  officers  reside  here,  and  the  people  are  in 
the  habit  of  resorting  here  to  transact  tneir  busi- 
ness Avith  the  government.  It  Avas  necessary, 
therefore,  to  the  symmetrj-  of  the  operations  of 
our  government  th'at  the  court  being  for  the  state 
jit  large  should  hold  its  sessions  Avherever  Avas 
the  seat  of  government.  But  Ave  Avere  told  by 
gentlemen  from  the  southern  and  southAvest- 
ern  portions  of  the  state,  that  the  people  desire 
it  to  be  branched.  I  have  never  heard  the  peo- 
ple say  a  word  on  the  subject,  but  I  Avill  say  that 
the  lawyers  want  it.  And  in  thati  do  not  think 
I  am  mistaken,  nor  do  I  intend  any  disrespect 
whatever  to  the  lawyers  when  I  say  it.  It  is  an 
honorable  profession,  and  one  that  controls,  in  a 
great  degree,  public  sentiment,  and  one  also  that, 
i  from  time  to  time,  has  done  a  great  deal  towards 


327 


saving  this  state  from  auarbhv  aaJ  confusion. 
But  how  are  the  people  to  be  benefitted?  Why, 
says  one  gentleman,  it  is  a  matter  of  great  im- 
portance that  the  lawrj'er  vrho  argues  a  case  in 
the  court  below,  must  come  up  and  argue  it  in 
the  court  above.  Could  not  the  lawyer  write 
out  his  argument  and  send  it  here?  Is  it  not 
the  every  ^ay  practice  for  lawyers  who  live  as 
far  away  even  as  Hickman  county  to  write  out 
their  arguments  and  send  them  up  to  the  court 
here?  I  tell  you  a  well  written  argument  is  of 
more  weight  than  the  best  viva  voce  one  ever 
made  in  court.  There  is  the  only  place  where 
the  ballot  box  is  preferable.  It  is  no  inconveni- 
ence for  these  lawyers  to  send  their  arguments 
and  records  here — ^people  are  continually  coming 
here  from  every  county,  and  there  is  scarce  a 
week  in  the  vear  when  an  opportunity  will  not 
thereby  be  ofifered  of  sending  them.  But  sup- 
posing that  there  were  the  four  branches  of  the 
court  established,  I  ask  if  it  will  administer  to 
the  convenience  of  more  people,  than  would  be 
the  ease  if  all  the  sessions  of  tlie  court  were 
held  here?  Suppose  one  of  the  branches  to  be 
located  at  Mountsterling,  and  there  my  friend 
over  the  wav  declares  it  must  be,  and  there,  I 
think  from  its  central  location,  it  ought  to  be. 

Mr.  APPERSOX.  The  gentleman  is  mista- 
ken,! never  said  so. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  But  you  think  so,  and  we  all 
know  that  it  is  a  central  point,  and  that  in  all 
probability,  if  the  court  is  branched,  it  will  go 
there.  Now  is  it  not  more  convenient  for  a  ma- 
jority of  the  people  of  the  northern  district, 
down  to  the  mouth  of  the  Kentucky,  and  up  the 
Ohio  to  come  here,  tlian  to  ride  along  on  horse- 
back, through  the  mud,  to  Mountsterling — and 
tlie  court  will  be  either  there  or  at  Owingsville, 
if  there  is  to  be  four  districts — and  if  there  is 
three,  it  will  be  at  Paris.  Is  it  not  more  con- 
venient for  that  people  to  come  here,  especially 
when  most  of  them  will  have  other  business  to 
transact  here?  Well,  suppose  the  branch  in  the 
next  district  to  be  held  either  at  Harrodsburgh 
or  Danville,  I  ask  if  it  would  not  be  more  con- 
venient for  the  people  of  Shelbv,  Hardin,  Trim- 
ble, Oldham,  Jefferson,  Bullitt,  Spencer  and 
2^^elson  to  come  to  this  place  than  to  go  to  either 
of  the  others?  I  >houla  like  to  see  you  (Mr.  C. 
A.  Wickliffe)  riding  through  the  mud  just  to 
pay  you  for  your  advocacy  of  this  proposition 
of  branching.  Suppose  tliat  the  branch  in  the 
next  district  phoula  be  held  at  Greensburgh, 
Munfordsville,  or  Glasgow,  would  it  be  more 
convenient  for  the  people  of  Breckinridge,  Da- 
viess, Ohio,  and  Meade  to  go  to  either  of  those 
places  than  to  come  here?  Then,  I  ask  ray 
friend  from  Daviess,  will  Mahomet  go  to  the 
mountain,  or  the  mountain  go  to  Mahomet? 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.    We  will  divide  it. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Is  it  not  easier  to  come  here? 
Packets  are  running  every  day  from  where  the 
gentleman  lives  to  Louisville,  and  when  the 
railroad  is  completed,  from  thence  to  Frankfort, 
in  two  or  three  hours.  Or  if  not  by  railroad, 
there  is  a  good  turnpike  and  slack-water  naviga- 
tion, rendering  it  altogether  more  convenient  to 
come  here  than  to  go  to  either  of  those  otlier  places. 
In  the  next  district  the  branch  would  probably 
go  to  the  town  of  Princeton,  which  would  be  iis 
centre.      I  ask  the  gentleman  from  Henderson, 


(Mr.  Dixon)  if  lie  would  uot  a^  soon  come  here, 
as  he  could  very  conveniently  by  water,  as  to  go 
to  Princeton?  And  will  it  not  be  extrem«»ly  in- 
convenient to  the  judges,  men  of  advanced  years, 
generally  between  forty  and  sixty — for  even  now 
the  most  eligible  men  for  the  office  are  over  fifty 
years  of  age — ^to  hold  a  term  of  ten  weeks  at 
Mountsterling,  next  at  Danville,  and  next  at 
Greensburgh.  supposing  these  to  be  the  points 
of  location.  Would  it  not  be  extremely  oppress- 
ive upon  them,  to  be  obliged  to  ride  on  horse- 
back, through  the  mud,  if  it  was  muddy,  or 
through  the  inclemency  of  the  weather,  if  it  was 
inclement,  from  Mountsterling, to  Princeton,  a 
distance  of  near  three  hundred  miles. 

How  long  would  it  take  to  finish  the  business 
at  the  branches?  The  court  finished  its  business 
herein  about  110  days,  but  I  venture  to  say  that 
they  will  have  to  sit  eight,  nine,  or  ten  weeks  at 
each  of  these  branches — say  eight  weeks  ;  that 
would  take  eight  months  in  the  year  to  hold  the 
sessions  alone,  of  the  court.  There  could  be  no 
mistake  about  it,  and  for  the  reason  that  the  busi- 
ness before  them  would  be  doubled,  and  as  I 
think,  treble<l.  Gentlemen  have  saii  it  would 
bring  justice  to  the  door  of  every  man,  or  in  one 
gentleman's  language,  it  would  bring  Mahomet 
to  the  mountain.  I  do  not  know  about  its  bring- 
ing justice  to  every  man's  door,  but  I  do  know 
it  will  bring  more  cases  into  the  court.  I  have 
looked  over  the  docket  of  the  court,  and  I  find  that 
there  are  a  set  of  gentlemen  who  practice  here — 
some  come  here  of  course,  in  self-defence — ^whose 
every  effort  is  to  get  some  error  inserted  into  the 
record  so  that  they  may  bring  their  causes  up  to 
the  court  of  appeals,  instead  of  fighting  fair, 
face  to  face.  It  reminds  me  of  the  fashion  of  the 
governor's  appointments,  of  making  two  or  three 
appointments  out  of  one.  It  is  a  fashion  now, 
of  appointing  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals 
from  the  circuit  courts,  and  then  appointing  an- 
other circuit  judge  in  his  place,  thus  making 
two  appointments  out  of  one.  These  lawyers 
have  the  same  fashion  of  getting  an  error  or 
blunder  into  the  record,  that  they  may  have  a 
pretence  for  appealing,  and  thus  making  two 
causes  out  of  one.  In  examining  the  docket,  to 
see  who  these  lawyers  are,  who  thus  took  two 
mouthfuls  out  of  a  case,  I  find  that  two  of  them 
who  are  most  excellent  lawyers,  sharp,  keen, 
shrewd  men,  who  can  see  a  round  niriepence 
across  the  Mississippi  at  Plumb  point,  without 
the  benefit  of  a  telescope — out  of  fifty  lawyers, 
bring  np  more  than  half  of  the  causes  here.  And 
why  do  they  do  it?  Just  to  make  two  fees  out 
of  one.  They  also  delay  the  circuit  courts.  I 
have  argued  a  case  before  a  court  and  juiy,  and 
one  of  these  court  of  appeals  gentlemen  has 
worried  the  court  the  whole  day,  taking  down 
evidence,  and  yet  so  distorting  and  garbling  it, 
that  the  case  will  not  appear  in  the  court  of  ap- 
peals as  it  did  in  the  court  below,  and  by  that 
means  the  judgment  is  reversed.  I  hazard  noth- 
ing in  saying  that  the  branching  system  will 
double,  if  not  treble  the  business  of  the  appel- 
late court,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  they  will  be 
able  to  sit  in  each  district,  more  than  once  in 
each  year.  And  the  very  moment  the  docket  is 
large,  cases  will  be  brought  up  on  the  merest 
pretences  in  the  world,  just  for  the  sole  purpose 
of  delay.      Delays  will  then  be  secured  for  one 


328 


or  two  years,  while  under  the  present  system, 
the  delays  are  not  more  than  six  months.  Busi 
ness  will  then  get  so  clogged  up  that  it  will  be 
impossible  to  get  through  with  it,  and  the  result 
will  be  that  the  legislature  will  have  to  raise  the 
amount  for  which  writs  of  error  or  appeals  shall 
be  taken.  Now  any  case  over  which  the  circuit 
court  has  jurisdiction,  may  be  brought  up  to  the 
appellate  court,  by  an  appeal,  or  writ  of  error; 
but  such  will  be  the  increase  of  business,  under 
the  branching  system,  that  the  court  will  not  be 
able  to  get  through  with  it,  and  it  will  have  to 
be  restricted  by  increa'^ing  the  amount  in  contro- 
versy, on  the  suit  on  which  an  appeal  may  be 
taken.  Gentlemen  have  said,  if  justice  is  to  be 
had,  why  not  let  it  reach  alike,  the  door  of  each 
and  every  man.  I  answer,  that  branching  the 
court,  will  not  increase  the  means  for  attaining 
justice,  but  it  will  furnish  facilities  for  the  most 
manifest  and  flagrant  injustice.  It  will  retard 
justice,  by  increasing  the  opportunities  of  inge- 
nious lawyers  to  make  two  causes  out  of  one.  One 
gentleman  has  gone  so  far  as  to  say,  abolish  the 
court  of  appeals,  if  you  will  not  increase  the  fa- 
cilities of  getting  justice.  I  say  the  court  of  ap- 
peals is  only  important  in  one  point  of  view, 
and  that  is,  to  produce  uniformity  of  decisions. 
All  litigation  must  stop  at  some  point,  and 
whether  it  stops  in  the  appellate  court  or  the 
circuit  court,  in  respect  to  the  great  quantum  of 
justice,  or  injustice  done,  it  makes  no  difference. 
The  only  object  of  a  higher  court  was,  by  its  re- 
view, to  secure  uniformity  of  decision.  When 
our  lives  or  our  liberties  are  at  stake,  we  stop 
in  the  court  below,  and  why  do  we  come  to  the 
court  of  appeals,  only  when  our  property,  but 
vile  trash  at  best,  is  at  stake?  Just  that  we 
may  secure  uniformity  of  decision  in  the  courts 
below,  throughout  the  whole  length  and  breadth 
of  the  land.  The  idea  that  every  man  must 
bring  his  case  to  the  court  of  appeals,  is  entirely 
fallacious.  There  is  no  necessity  for  it,  and  it 
Avill  double  and  treble  the  expenses  of  justice. 

But  there  is  another  reason  why  I  oppose  this 
proposition  to  branch  the  court,  and  that  is  the 
increased  expense.  It  now  costs  about  $5107 
per  annum  to  pay  the  judges  and  all  the  ex- 
penses of  the  court.  It  is,  sometimes  a  little 
above  or  a  little  below  that  amount,  but  that  is 
the  fair  average.  Now  when  you  get  four  judges 
on  the  bench — and  you  will  never  get  a  man  of 
fifty  or  sixty  years  of  age  to  ride  from  Mt.  Sterl- 
ing to  Princeton,  and  hold  four  courts  a  year  in 
all  seasons  of  the  year,  for  less  than  $2000  or 
$2500  per  annum — say  $2000  a  year  each — 
that  will  cost  $8000.  Then  you  must  have  a 
room  fitted  up,  a  clerk's  office  to  build  in  each 
district,  costing  in  all  $1000  perhaps,  for  each 
branch.  Then  you  must  have  book  presses  and 
records  for  each,  and  incidental  expenses 
amounting  very  near  to  what  it  now  is.  I  haz- 
ard nothing  therefore,  in  saying  that  this  article 
in  our  constitution  will  double,  nay  treble  the 
expenses  of  this  one  branch  of  our  jurispru- 
dence. I  have  no  individual  interest,  none  in 
the  world  in  this  matter.  When  I  came  here,  I 
came  in  the  old  fashioned  way  ou  horse  back, 
and  wherever  the  branches  may  be  held  if  I 
travel  to  them  it  will  be  in  the  same  way.  In 
forming  these  districts  the  effect  would  often  be 
to  divide  the  business  of  the  counties — and  to 


throw  one  part  of  it  into  one  district  and  the 
other  into  another  district — and  thus  the  same 
lawyers  bo  forced  to  attend  the  court  in  both 
districts. 

I  am  in  favor  of  the  principle  of  ineligibility 
and  always  have  been.  Why  was  it,  I  appeal  to  the 
whigs  of  the  legislature,  that  we  should  go  for 
one  term  for  the  presidency?  Why  was  it  we 
would  not  permit  the  president  by  the  influence 
of  the  patronage  and  oppointing  power  his  of- 
ficial station  gave  him,  to  look  to  a  re-election 
for  office?  Because  we  were  aware  that  it  must 
influence  him  in  the  administration  of  the  gov- 
ernment, and  in  the  next  place  because  it  would 
give  him  so  much  the  vantage  ground  over 
any  who  chose  to  compete  with  him.  Does  not 
the  same  argument  apply  to  the  judge  of  the 
court?  You  put  him  in  office  for  eight  years — 
either  as  a  judge  of  the  circuit  or  of  the  appel- 
late courts — the  same  principle  applies  to  both. 
Suppose  a  judge  having  jurisdiction  over  ten 
counties,  looks  forward  to  a  re-election — what 
then?  Perhaps  the  lives  of  ten  men  may  be  in 
the  palm  of  his  hand  at  the  very  time,  and  they 
may  belong  to  powerful  and  wealthy  families, 
because  they  are  the  very  ones,  your  hotspurs, 
who  commit  these  crimes.  Perhaps  too  he  may 
have  the  liberties  of  some  twenty  or  thirty  others 
in  his  hands,  one  half  of  them  vagabonds  steal- 
ing about  the  country,  and  there  may  be  besides 
a  thousand  civil  causes  before  him.  Suppose 
him  to  be  as  upright  as  Aristides  himself  and  as 
honest,  would  not  this  power  in  his  hands  have 
an  effect  on  the  voters,  whether  the  ballot  or  the 
viva  voce  system  was  adopted.  It  is  a  lever  of 
power  that  cannot  be  trusted  in  the  hands  of  any 
man,  where  he  has  an  inducement  to  exercise  it. 
The  position  of  the  incumbent  member  of  Con- 
gress is  worth  fifteen  per  cent  in  votes  in  the 
canvass,  and  the  position  of  a  judge  who  is 
running  for  a  second  term  will  be  worth  full  fifty 
per  cent.  Go  to  Mississippi,  and  witness  its 
operations  there.  Judge  Ooalter,  a  whig,  has 
been  re-elected  repeatedly  to  the  circuit  court,  in 
a  district  strongly  democratic,  and  they  have 
never  been  able  to  defeat  him.  Judge  Sharky 
has  been  elected  from  the  middle  district  and  he 
is  the  chief  justice.  He  is  a  whig  and  his  dis- 
trict is  democratic  by  4000,  and  yet  no  man  has 
ever  been  able  to  come  nearer  than  2200  or  3000 
votes  of  him.  Why,  although  he  is  an  able  and 
upright  judge,  and  one  whom  Mississippi  should 
be  proud  of,  because  his  station  is  a  lever  that 
gives  him  tremendous  power.  The  honorable 
gentleman  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston),  who 
claims  the  paternity  of  the  ballot  proposition, 
says  that  tTie  position  of  the  president  and  a 
circuit  judge  is  not  analagous.  I  say  that  he 
has  more  power  in  his  theatre,  the  court,  than 
the  president  of  the  United  States  in  his  theatre. 
The  sheriffs,  jailors,  and  constables  are  all  cap  in 
hand  to  him,  Decause  their  accounts  are  to  be  al- 
lowed by  him.  And  there  is  also  a  class  of 
lawyers  who  are  cap  in  hand  to  him.  I  know, 
and  I  appeal  to  eveiy  gentleman  here,  if  it  is  not 
the  fact,  that  the  lawyer  who  is  seen  hand  in 
hand  witli  the  judge,  is  the  very  man  who  in- 
vites all  the  business.  And  why?  Because  the 
litigants  believe  him  to  be  in  favor  with  the 
judge,  and  the  judge  with  him,  and  though 
both  may  be  honest,  yet  it  invites  business  to 


320 


the  laxt'^er,  although  his  legal  taleuts  maj  not  I 
deserve  it.    And  I  appeal  to  tl»e  gentleman  from  [ 
txreen,  (Mr.  Lisle),  who  although  he  has  not  as  i 
yet  made  a  speech  here,  I  know  to  be  one  of  the  ' 
most  intellectual   gfutl'-meu  in    the  house,   as  j 
gentlemen  will  find  out  when  lie  does  speak — 
if  he  did  not  live  in  a  town  where  the  judge  of 
the  court  had  three  sons,  lawyers,  and  one  brother- 
iu-law — the   clerk   had  a  son  and  a  son-in-law, 
lawyers,  and  if  they  did  not  finally  exclude  all 
others  from  practice   in  that  court?    Litigants 
went  to  them   under  dread  of    the  judge  and 
clerk,  and  tJiat  drove  other  lawyers  from  that 
bar.     And  tliey  drove  also  from  tliat  bar,  a  gen- 
tleman who,  considering  his  opportunities,  is  one 
of  the  greatest  men  of  the  age.     It   cannot  bo 
otherwise.     Tlie  judge  will  have  this  influence, 
and  that  too  without  being  corrupt.     I  remem- 
ber what  judge  Bibb  told  me  when   I  received 
my  license.     Said  he.  it  is  not  enough  for  you  to 
get  a  license  from   the  jud^e,  vou  must  get  one 
also  from  tlie  people.     1  satd  f  would  try  to  do 
so.     Said  he,  you  must  bear  in  mind  never  to  I 
quarrel  with  the  judge,  and  always  if  po.ssible,  j 
appear  to  be  on  familiar  terms  with  him.     Why? 
Said  I.     Because,  he  replied,  it  invites  business 
to  you,  and  a  contrary  course  will  drive  it  away 
from  yon,  if  you  are  ever  so  competent.  I 

I  want  the  judge  to  have  no  power  beyond  | 
what  the  constitution  and  the  laws  give  him,  and 
I  want  to  give  him  no  temptation  to  swerve  from 
his  duty.  Why  says  the  gentleman,  he  should 
be  voted  for  by  ballot,  lest  he  might  exert  his  i 
power  upon  some  voter  who  had  exercised  inde- ' 
pendently  his  right  of  sufl^rage.  This  is  an  ad-  | 
ditional  reason,  and  a  confession  that  the  judge 
should  not  be  re-eligible.  But  I  have  another 
reason.  When  two  men  become  candidates  for 
office,  let  them  be  on  the  same  footing.  Do  not 
clothe  one  of  them  in  his  black  robes,  to  look 
wise  and  sapient,  in  all  his  power.  You  know 
how  wise  and  dignified  they  look.  Take  a  law- 
yer from  the  bar  and  put  him  on  the  bench,  and 
he  becomes  a  most  dignified  character,  and  gene- 
rally puts  on  two  or  three  pair  of  spectacles  to 
look  deeper  into  the  books  than  any  other  man. 
And  put  him  in  a  position  to  electioneer  before 
the  people,  and  they  will  wonder  almost  how 
such  a  man  come  to  get  into  the  world.  Let 
him  come  before  the  people  as  he  has  got  to  come 
on  the  day  of  judgment,  without  his  robes  of 
office,  and  like  the  man  who  competes  with  him 
for  the  office. 

Xothing  in  the  world  so  purifies  and  clarifies 
the  political  atmosphere  as  rotation  in  office; 
give  no  man  a  life  estate  in  office.  Wliat  is  the 
principle  that  fostered  the  growth  of  tlie  Roman 
republic  until  from  a  small  city  they  grew  to  a 
power  that  overran  the  world.  It  was  rotation 
in  office — that  no  man  who  filled  an  office  for 
the  first  year  should  be  re-eligible  the  second. 
That  principle  was  first  broken  in  upon  by 
Caius  Marius,  and  from  that  day  may  be  dated 
the  downfall  of  the  Roman  republic.  You  purge 
your  political  atmosphere  by  rotation  in  office. 
You  tell  your  aspiring  young  men,  pursue  your 
studies  and  come  on,  for  the  public  stations  are 
open  to  you,  and  you  are  not  to  be  placed  under 
the  disadvantage  of  competing  with  the  man 
who  has  a  thousand  litigants  depending  upon 
him.  It  is  said  that  we  should  not  make  nim 
42 


ineligible  unless  we  Increasehis  t€rm  of  office.  Is 
not  eight  years  long  enough?  We  know  that  it 
is  often  necessary  to  take  me  old  trees  out  of  the 
forest,  to  give  tlie  younger  ones  air  and  room 
to  grow.  But  I  have  no 'particular  desire  about 
the  term ;  I  do  not  want  a  man  to  be  an  um- 
pire on  the  bench,  and  at  the  same  time  a  can- 
didate for  office.  If  he  is  to  be  an  umpire  on 
the  bench,  do  not  let  him  at  the  same  time  be  a 
sycophant  in  the  political  arena  seeking  for 
votes.     Make  him  independent. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  trouble  the  con- 
vention with  any  more  remarks,  and  I  have 
thrown  out  these lieads  of  topics  that  I  may  be 
able,  if  I  choose,  hereafter,  to  write  out  my 
speech,  to  enlarge  upon  them  as  I  please. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  intend  at 
this  time,  Mr.  President,  to  notice  many  of  the 
remarks  of  my  colleague,  which  would,  under 
other  circumstances,  demand  and  receive  an  im- 
mediate response  from  me.  This  is  not  the 
theatre  for  the  exhibition  of  any  private  griefs 
which  he  may  feel  or  imagine;  neimer  is  it  fit  at 
this  time  that  I  should  repel,  with  appropriate 
rebuke,  the  personal  allusions  to  myself,  foreign 
from  the  question  under  consideration.  WTien 
the  gentleman  made  his  debut  in  this  house  on 
his  majority  principle,  in  reply  to  the  few  re- 
marks! made  in  opposition  to  his  motion,  he 
charged  me  with  uttering  the  language  of  a 
monarchist  and  courtier. 

My  colleague  has  known  me  well.  He  could 
not  expect  to  have  escaped  the  remarks  which 
his  reckless  charge  invited.  He  looked  for  a  vin- 
dication of  the  principles  and  opinions  uttered 
by  me.  He  perhaps  little  thought  that  I  should 
liave  drawn  for  that  yindicatiou  upon  the  pro- 
ductions of  his  own  mind,  given  to  the  public 
at  a  time  when  sound  principles  pervaded  it; 
when  its  vigor  had  not  been  made  to  totter  under 
the  influences  of  circumstances  which  have  sur- 
rounded him. 

We  have  spent  so  much  time  on  this  article 
concerning  the  appellate  court,  that  I  cannot 
now  throw  myself  upon  the  indulgence  of  this 
body  long  enough  to  notice  the  allusions  which. 
I  understand  to  be  personal ;  but  a  proper  time 
will  be  presented,  perhaps,  when  the  gentle- 
man's report  shall  come  up.  I  shall  then  ask 
the  indulgence  of  the  convention  to  do  myself 
justice,  and  also  to  bestow  some  attention  upon 
ray  colleague. 

The  question  before  the  conyentlon,  if  I  un- 
derstand it,  though  I  could  not  learn  it  from  the 
speech  of  the  gentleman,  is  to  insert  into  the 
con.stitution  the  principle  that  a  majority  of  the 
legislature  shall  have  the  power  of  removing  the 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  whom  the  peo- 
ple have  elected.  This  question  has  been  dis- 
cussed in  committee  of  the  whole,  the  vote  has 
been  taken  there,  and  I  am  anxious  that  it  should 
be  taken  in  the  house.  The  gentleman  has  call- 
ed for  the  ayes  and  noes,  and  I  am  prepared  to 
record  my  yote  in  opposition  to  him;  and  I  shsdl 
be  prepared  to  defend  that  vote  before  our  com- 
mon constituency  if  he  shall  select  that  theatre 
for  the  purpose.  So  far  as  respects  my  political 
opinions  in  reference  to  other  matters  which 
have  divided  this  country  in  times  past  and  now 
divide  it,  I  have  at  present  this  much  to  say: 
"Whatever  may  have  been  my  errors  in  theexercis^ 


330 


of  the  functions  ^Ith  which  a  confiding  country- 
have  from  time  to  time  invested  me,  I  haveyetthe 
first  man  to  charge  me  with  dishonesty  of  pur- 
pose or  intentional  eiTor.  I  have  been  able  to 
stand  before  an  opposing  constituency,  and  if  I 
have  been  unsuccessful  in  vindicating  the  cor- 
rectness of  the  opinions  I  entertained,  I  have  u5 
least  commanded  their  respect  and  personal  con- 
fidence. I  have  stood  my  ground  in  my  own 
county,  neither  have  I  elsewhere  been  found  to 
flee  before  my  fellow  citizens. 

I  will  say  no  more.  I  am  anxious  that  this 
convention' shall  proceed  with  its  business,  and  I 
am  now  prepared  to  vote  on  all  the  propositions 
that  have  been  so  fully,  ably,  and  elaborately  dis- 
cussed in  committee  of  the  whole,  and  when  the 
convention  has  more  patience  and  leisure,  I  may 
notice  some  of  the  remarks,  personal  to  myself, 
my  colleague  has  made. 

Mr.  RUDD.  I  voted  against  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  in 
committee  of  the  whole,  to  strikeout  "two  thirds" 
and  insert  "a  majority."  My  object  was  to  in- 
sert three  fifths,  instead  of  either  two  thirds  or  a 
majority. 

I  consider  it  almost  impossible  in  any  state  of 
things,  unless  for  the  grossest  conduct  on  the 
part  of  the  judge,  to  remove  a  judge  from  ofiice 
by  the  two  thirds  principle.  A  man  must  be 
base  indeed,  if  he  could  not,  in  a  body  of  one 
hundred  and  thirty-eight,  obtain  forty-six  votes. 
I  ask  the  house  in  all  sincerity,  if  a  man  ought 
to  be  permitted  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  the 
rights  of  his  fellow  citizens,  if  he  is  unable  to 
obtain  forty-six  votes  in  his  favor?  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  the  independence  of  the  judiciary,  still  I 
do  not  want  the  judge  to  be  wholly  irresponsi- 
ble. I  want  to  make  him  responsible  to  the  peo- 
ple from  whom  his  power  emanates.  If  it  were 
in  order  to  do  so,  I  would  ask  for  a  division  of 
the  question. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  shall  vote  for  the  motion 
to  strike  out,  with  the  view  that  when  the  ques- 
tion comes  to  be  put  upon  filling  the  blank,  it 
may  be  filled  by  tne  insertion  of  three-fifths,  so 
as  to  give  the  impeaching  power  to  tliree-fifths  of 
the  legislature,  as  I  prefer  that  to  two-thirds.  I 
am  opposed  to  giving  the  power  to  a  bare  major- 
ity, and  prefer  three-fifths  to  two-thirds. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  would  suggest  to 
the  gentleman  from  Louisville,  that  if  he  will  let 
the  question  be  taken  uj)on  the  proposition  of 
my  colleague,  he  will  not  be  precluded  from  of- 
fering his  own  proposition  subsequently. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  withdraw  my  motion, 
80  far  as  relates  to  filling  up,  and  move  only  to 
strike  out. 

The  yeas  and  nays  being  taken,  resulted  a.s 
follows : 

Yeas— John  S.  Barlow.  Alfred  Boyd,  Will- 
iam Bradley,  Benjamin  Oopelin,  Edward  Curd, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  "William  Hen- 
drix,  Thomas  James,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  John  Wheeler, 
Robert  N.  WickliflFe— 22. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

Ejrson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
uther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Brisfcow,  Thomas  D. 


Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Cof- 
fey, Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Jas. 
Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  James  H.  Garrard,  Nin- 
ian  E.  Gray,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Mark 
E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Maehen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Wm.  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Mer- 
iwether,William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Charles  A.  Wickliife,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 71. 

Mr.  BOYD  then  moved  to  strike  out  in  the 
second  line  the  word  "eight"  and  insert  the 
word  "six,"  so  as  to  reduce  the  term  for  which 
the  judges  should  serve.  He  said  he  thought  it 
would  at  least  be  more  satisfactory  to  his  con- 
stituents that  the  term  should  not  be  longer  than 
six  years. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  shall  vote  for  the  motion 
to  strike  out  "eight"  and  insert  "six,"  believing 
that  that  term  Avill  best  suit  those  whom  I  have 
the  honor  to  represent;  and  if  the  amendment 
shall  prevail,  of  which  I  have  not  much  hope, 
I  shall,  at  the  proper  time  and  place,  move  to 
strike  out  four  judges  and  insert  three.  I  will 
state  here,  that  1  am  for  the  branching  system,  I 
am  for  having  three  districts,  and  three  judges, 
with  a  term  of  office  of  six  years,  and  this  will 
enable  them  to  have  an  election  every  two  years. 
This  is  the  view  that  will  control  the  vote  that  I 
am  about  to  give. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  I  shall  vote  againstthe amend- 
ment, and  I  will  very  briefly  state  the  reasons 
why  I  shall  do  so.  I  came  here  with  predilec- 
tions in  favor  of  a  six  years  term  of  ofiice  for 
the  judges,  and  that  no  officer  should  be  in  oflSce 
for  a  longer  period  than  six  years.  I  came  how- 
ever with  the  expectation  that  perhaps  the  num- 
ber of  judges  would  be  continued  as  at  present. 
For  reasons  which  arc  satisfactory  to  my  mind, 
I  am  now  in  favor  of  the  appointment  of  four 
judges.  There  is  a  principle  connected  with 
the  election  of  the  judiciary,  which  1  conceive 
very  important  to  be  maintained;  it  is  that  one 
of  these  judges  shall  pass  out  of  office  every  two 
years,  and  that  the  people  of  the  district  in 
which  he  resides,  or  in  which  he  was  elected, 
shall  have  the  privile^je  of  choosing  anotlnr 
to  fill  his  place.  But  if  we  .strike  out  "eight" 
and  insert  "six,"  we  shall  necessarily  destroy 
that  principle  which,  it  seems  to  me,  so  impor- 
tant to  preserve. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  There  is  but  little  difi"erence 
between  the  views  of  the  gentleman  from  Cald- 
well and  myself.  The  propriety  of  having  an 
election  every  two  years,  I  fully  appreciate,  and 


331 


this  can  be  attained  by  the  tenure  of  six  years, 
having  three  judges  and  three  districts.  I  have 
come  to  the  couelusion  that  this  is  perfectly 
practicable,  and  I  am  entirely  iu  favor  of  it. 

Mr.  BARLOW  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  then  taken  upon  the 
motion  to  strike  out  "eight"  and  insert  "six," 
•with  the  foUovring  result: 

Yeas. — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R. 

D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha,  Milford  Elliott,  Nathan  Gaither, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin.  John  Hargis, 
William  Hendrix,  Thomas  James,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  Hugh 
Newell,  Elijali  F.  Nnttall,  Johnson  Price,  Thos. 
Rockhold.  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  T.ilbott,  John  J. 
Thurman,  John  Wheeler,  Silas  Woodson — 34. 

Nays. — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  William  Cheuault,  Beverley  L.  Clarke, 
William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Archibald  Dix 
on,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavau,  Benj. 
F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Mark 

E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston.  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H. 
McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John 
T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd.  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson.  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry 
Washington,  AndrewS.  White,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
liffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Geo.  W.  Williams^S6. 

The  fourth  section  was  then  read  by  the  secre- 
tary. 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  strike  out  "four"  and 
insert  "three,"  in  the  first  line,  which  is  in  these 
words,  "the  court  of  appeals  shall  consist  of  four 
judges,"  (fcc.  On  this  he  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  taken  upon  this  ques- 
tion, and  resulted  as  follows : 

Yeas. — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius 
Desha,  James  Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, James  W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  George  ^.  Mansfield, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  Hugh 
Newell,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ig- 
natius A.  Spaulding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman, 


Howard  Todd»  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washing- 
ton, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  Geo.  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson— 53. 

Nats. — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Beverlv  L.  Clarke, 
vfilliam  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Arc-hibald  Di.x- 
on,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Thomas  James,  George 
W.Johnston,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lind- 
sey, Willis  B.  Machen,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  JohnH. 
McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Elijah  F.  Nutall,  William  Preston,  Lar- 
kin J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Ro- 
gers, Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  C.  A.  Wickliffe— 38. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  As  the  vote  which  has  just 
been  taken,  appears  to  have  been  given  upon  de- 
liberation and  reflection,  and  as  there  is  little 
Erobability  that  the  decision  just  arrived  at  will 
e  changecl,  it  appears  to  me  it  will  be  better  to 
re-commit  the  bill  to  the  committee  from  which 
it  emanated,  in  order  that  they  may  remodel  it, 
so  as  to  make  it  suit  this  expression  of  the  views 
of  the  house.  I  think  it  will  be  a  saving  of  time, 
and  that  it  will  prevent  those  errors  which  will 
probably  creep  in,  if  we  attempt  to  re-construct 
the  bill  in  the  house. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  There  can  be  no  neces- 
sity for  its  re-commitment,  as  the  only  altera- 
tions to  be  made  are  mere  verbal  alterations,  that 
will  be  evident  to  every  gentleman. 

Mr.  TURNER.  1  do'not  believe — sir  I  am  not 
at  all  convinced  that  the  deliberate  opinion  of 
the  house  has  been  expressed  in  the  vote  just  ta- 
ken. Nor  do  I  think  it  necessary  to  change  the 
phraseology  of  the  bill  throughout  until  it  shall 
De  ascertained  whether  this  reduction  in  the 
number  of  Judges,  is  the  true  expression  of  the 
convention.  The  two  extremes  have  met,  for  the 
purposeof  breaking  down  the  branching  system— 
I  know  that  I  was  asked  to  vote  for  that  purpose. 
I  am  against  the  branching,  and  in  favor  of  hav- 
ing four  judges,  and  I  hope  we  shall  get  back  to 
four  judges.  I  do  not  wish  to  change  the  phrase- 
ology of  the  bill  until  we  shall  ascertain  wheth- 
er this  will  be  so. 

Mr.  DIXON.  A  difficulty  presents  itself  to  my 
mind  as  the  bill  now  stands.  It  provides  for 
four  districts,  and  only  three  judges  to  be  elected. 
There  will  consequently  be  one  district  that  will 
have  no  part  iu  electing  ajudge.  I  believe  we 
shall  have  to  come  back  to  the  number  of  four, 
or  give  up  the  bill. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  know 
whether  I  distinctly  understood  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  (Mr.  Turner.)  I  think  the  gentle- 
man is  certainly  mistaken,  in  supposing  the  Tote 
just  taken  was  not  an  expression  of  the  judg- 
ment of  the  house,  or  that  there  is  a  desire  to 
break  down  the  branching  of  the  courts,  or  the 
sitting  of  the  court  in  districts.  I  do  not  know 
what  may  have  induced  the  decision.  I  am  will- 
ing to  acquie.se  in  the  decision  of  the  majority, 
and  I  presume  the  vote  has  been  given  upon  so- 
ber and  sound  reflection.  I  understand  it  has 
been  decided  that  the  court  shall  consist  of  three 
judges,  instead  of  four,  and  that  they  are  to  be 
elected  for  eight  years,  and  to  serve  eight  years. 


3Ji'2 


if  they  coutiiiue  in  office  so  long,  by  a  very  de- 
cided vote  of  this  house.  I  presume  that  the 
election  is  designed  to  be  by  districts,  and  with 
the  delegate  from  Madison,  I  desire  that  thehouse 
shall  proceed  with  its  deliberations,  upon  this 
article,  until  we  shall  decide  in  some  mode 
whether  it  is  the  will  of  a  majority  of  this  house 
that  the  court  of  appeals  shall  hold  its  sessions 
in  three  districts,  Ti'hich  will  necessarily  have  to 
be  prescribed  in  the  following  section  of  this  bill. 
The  committee  can  very  easily  modify  the  bill, 
presupposing  that  three  is  to  be  the  number  of 
judges  to  constitute  the  court,  and  carry  out  the 
system,  as  seems  to  be  indicated.  I  arose  there- 
fore to  ask  the  house  to  proceed  .witli^the  con- 
sideration ofthe  bill. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  hour  has  arrived  for 
proceeding  with  the  special  order  of  the  day. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  This  is  1  believe  the 
order  of  the  dav. 

The  PRESID^ENT.  The  order  of  the  day  is 
to  go  into  committee  of  the  whole  at  twelve  o'- 
clock. 

Mr.  WICltLIFFE.  Then  I  propose  to  dispense 
with  the  rule. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  would  prefer  dropping  this 
matter  just  here,  because  I  think  that  we  shall 
all  get  together  again  in  regard  to  the  number  of 
judges,  a.s  it  originally  stood.  In  the  mean  time, 
I  would  prefer  going  into  committee  of  the 
whole  upon  stime  other  subject. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  withdraw  my  ob- 
jection, and  will  let  the  house  take  its  course. 

The  question  then  being  put,  shall  the  con- 
vention resolve  itself  into  committee  ofthe  whole 
generally,  it  was,  upon  a  division,  decided  in 
the  affirmative — ayes  42,  noes  40. 

COUNTr   COURTS. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  BOYD  in  the  chair. 

The  CHAIR  stated  that  the  first  subject  in 
order,  was  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  re- 
vision of  the  constitution,  and  slavery. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  If  in  order,  I  will  move  to 
take  up  the  resolution  I  hild  the  honor  to  submit 
some  (lays  since,  in  relation  to  the  qualification 
of  officers. 

The  question  being  put,  the  motion  was  nega- 
tived. 

Mr.  APPERSON  moved  to  take  up  the  report 
of  the  committee  upon  the  circuit  courts. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE.  I  think,  myself, 
that  while  we  are  on  one  subject,  we  ougiit  to 
get  through  with  that  subject,  or  else  take  up 
one  of  a  kindred  nature.  If  we  take  up  the 
subject  now,  of  the  revision  of  the  constitution, 
and  slavery,  it  will  throw  us  a  week  or  ten  days 
ahead.  I  therefore  think,  that  the  motion  to  take 
up  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  circuit 
courts,  is  the  proper  one. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  was  anxiotis  to  do  so  sir, 
but  one  or  two  of  the  members  of  the  committee 
requested  me  to  postpone  asking  that  that  report 
should  betaken  up  until  to-morrow,  with  a  view 
of  having  another  meeting  of  the  committee  to- 
night, to  see  if  they  could  not  come  to  some 
agreement,  so  as  to  mak  it  more  confonnable  to 
the  already  expressed  opinion  ofthe  house. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  1  thought  the  report  was  in 
possession  of  the  house. 


The  CHAIRMAN.  It  is  the  understandintr 
of  the  Chair,  that  the  report  is  in  the  possession 
of  the  house. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  proposed  to  take  up  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  on  county  courts. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  com- 
mittee are  disposed  to  take  up  any  report,  and 
therefore,  it  will  perhaps  be  as  well  that  the 
committee  rise,  and  that  the  convention  should 
adjourn. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  hope  the  gentle- 
man will  withdraw  that  motion  until  the  com- 
mittee have  taken  hold  of  something,  because  it 
would  be  an  awkward  report  for  our  chairman  to 
make,  that  the  conjmittee  had  clone  nothing. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  want  to  know  what  necessi- 
ty there  is  for  taking  up  this  report  at  present. 
1  he  committee  have  requested  to  have  another 
meeting  this  evening,  so  as  to  make  the  report 
meet  the  views  of  tlie  house.  If  the  object  of 
the  gentleman  is  to  take  it  up  for  the  purpose  of 
perfecting  it,  I  have  no  objection;  but  if  he  has 
any  particular  designs  against  me,  or  the  com- 
mittee, I  hope  he  will  give  me  until  to-morrow, 
when  perhaps  I  may  be  able  to  bring  forward 
something  that  will  be  acceptable. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  My  only  object  was  to  get 
to  work,  and  I  thought  that  the  subject  of  the 
circuit  courts,  was  one  that  had  the  nearest  rela- 
tion to  the  subject  that  we  had  just  been  engaged 
with.  My  motion  did  not  arise  from  any  thing 
that  I  had  against  the  gentleman. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  just  as  ready  now  as  at 
any  time,  to  take  up  thatsubject.  I  care  very  little 
what  becomes  of  the  bill,  I  am  not  wedded  either 
to  the  circuit  court,  or  to  the  court  of  appeals. 
My  proposition  Avas  merely  to  accommodate  the 
committee. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  If  it  be  the  desire  of  the 
committee  to  take  up  the  report  of  the  county 
courts,  I  will  withdraw  ray  motion. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  then  renewed  his  motion  to 
take  up  that  report. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to.  The  secretary 
read  it  as  follows: 

ARTICLE  — . 

Sec  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to 
consist  of  a  presiding  judge  and  two  associate 
judges. 

Sec.  2.  The  judges  of  the  county  court  shall 
be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  in  each  coun- 
ty, for  the  t*!rm  of  four  years,  and  until  their 
successors  shall  be  duly  qualified,  and  shall  re- 
ceive such  compensation  for  their  services  as 
may  be  fixed  by  law,  to  be  paid  out  of  the  coun- 
ty revenue. 

'  Sec.  '.i.  At  the  first  election  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  the  three  judges  sliall  be 
elected  at  the  same  time,  but  the  associate  judges, 
first  elected,  shall  hold  their  offices  for  only  two 
years,  so  that,  thereafter,  the  election  ofthe  pre- 
siding judge,  and  that  of  the  associate  judges, 
will  not  occurat  the  same  time. 

Sec  4.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  of- 
fice of  presiding  or  associate  judge  of  the  county 
court,  unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
over  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  of 
the  county  in  which  he  shall  be  chosen  one  year 
next  preceding  the  election. 


3S3 


Sec.  5.  Ihe  jurisdiction  of  the  oonnty  court 
shall  be  regulated  by  law,  and,  until  changed, 
shall  be  tlie  same  now  vested  in  the  county 
courts  of  this  uoiumon wealth. 

Sec.  6.  The  several  counties  in  this  state  shall 
be  laid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size,  as 
the  general  assembly  may,  from  time  to  time, 
direct.  'IVo  Justices  of  the  peace  and  one  con- 
stable shall  be  elected  in  eai'h  district  by  the 
qualified  voters  therein.  The  jurisdiction  of 
said  officers  shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  coun- 
tv.  Justices  of  the  peace  .shall  be  elected  for 
tlie  term  of  four  years,  and  cou-stables  for  the 
term  of  two  years;  they  shall  be  citizens  of 
the  United  States,  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and 
shall  have  resided  six  months  in  the  district  in 
which  they  may  be  elected,  next  preceding  the 
election. 

Sec.  7.  Judges  of  the  county  court,  and  jus- 
tices of  the  peace,  shall  be  c«mservators  of  the 
peace.  They  shall  be  commissioned  by  the  gov- 
ernor. County  and  district  officers  shall  vacate 
their  offices  by  removal  from  the  district  or 
county  in  which  they  shall  be  appointed.  The 
legislature  shall  provide,  by  law,  for  the  mode 
and  manner  of  conducting  and  making  due  re- 
turns of  all  elections  of  judges  of  the  county 
court,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  constables,  and 
for  determining  contested  elections;  and  also 
provide  the  mode  of  filling  vacancies  in  these 
offices. 

Sec.  8.  Judges  of  the  county  courts,  justices 
of  the  peace,  and  constables,  shall  be  subject  to 
indictment  for  malfeasance  or  misfeasance  in  of- 
fice, in  such  mode  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law, 
subject  to  appeal  to  the  court  of  appeals;  and, 
upon  conviction,  their  offices  shall  become  va- 
cant. 

The  first  .section  was  again  read. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  moved  to  amend  by  adding 
to  that  section  the  words,  "  any  two  of  whom 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of 
business." 

Mr.  TURXER.  With  the  view  of  testing  the 
sense  of  the  committtee,  I  move  you  to  strike 
out  the  two  associate  judges. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  There  is  an  amendment 
pending. 

Mr.  TURXER.  As  a  matter  of  course,  the 
motion  that  I  make  will  take  precedence  of  the 
motion  of  tlie  geutleman. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.      The  amendment  which  I 
propose  will  be  adopted  as  a  matter  of  course,  i 
There  can  be  no  objection  to  it. 

Mr.  TURNER.  But  that  motion  mav  be  super- 
ceded. My  opinion  is,  that  we  shall  liave  a  bet- 
ter court,  and  one  that  will  l)etter  accomplish  the 
public  busine.^,  if  we  have  but  one  juage,  with 
a  sufficient  salary,  to  secure  a  man  competent  to 
do  the  business,  than  to  have  three  judges  with 
small  salaries;  for  in  that  case,  we  should  be 
very  apt  to  have  men  who  are  incompetent.  I 
made  this  motion  with  the  view  of  making  an- 
other, in  case  it  prevails.  It  Is,  th.it  one  judse 
shall  hold  court  at  all  times,  except  when  the 
county  levy  is  to  be  laid  and  claims  against  the 
county,  to  be  assessed.  At  these  times  I  wish 
the  magistrates,  who  are  to  be  distinct  officers  at 
all  other  times,  to  come  in  and  a.«sist.  By  doing 
this,  you  will  make  it  a  county  bench;  otherwi.se 
vour  court  will  be  regarded   as   a  mere  town 


court,  as  having  very  little  sympathy  with  the 
people,  and  will  not  have  that  strength  to  sus- 
tain it,  it  ought  to  have  in  every  part  of  the 
county. 

There  is  another  reason.  In  assessing  th.; 
claims  against  the  county,  where  yon  have  the 
court  as  I  propose,  residing  in  iliffcrent  parts  of 
the  county,  they  will  be  qualified  to  judge  of 
the  claims,  that  may   be  presented;  thev  will 

Eossess  correct  information;  whereas,  if  you 
ave  a  court  oomp<ised  of  men  who  live  in  the 
town,  there  will  be  large  classes  of  claims 
brought  before  the  court,  speciously  presented, 
regarding  the  justness  of  wliich,  they  would  be 
unable  to  determine.  Numerous  cases  of  that 
kind  are  brought  forward,  and  at  first  view  they 
appear  to  be  iust  and  correct;  whereas,  if  yon 
have  information  on  the  other  side  of  the  ques- 
tion, they  might  prove  to  be  unjust.  Any  man 
who  has  had  much  to  do  with  courts,  kqows 
that  this  occurs  very  frequently. 

And  I  think  in  fact  if  we  are  to  have  a  court 
thus  organised,  it  is  much  better  to  have  one 
ignorant  man  than  to  have  three  to  preside  in  it. 
But  I  think  we  will  be  more  likely  to  get  a  good 
judge  if  we  have  but  one^  than  if  we  were  to 
have  three,  and  the  business  will  be  done  in- 
finitely better. 

Mr. 'BRISTOW.  I  hope  the  question  -will  be 
taken  upon  the  motion  I  made. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  would  make  this  sugges- 
tion to  the  gentleman,  that  if  there  is  a  majority 
of  the  committee  in  favor  of  ray  proposition,  of 
course  they  will  vote  his  proposition  down,  be- 
cause if  h's  should  be  adopted,  it  goes  in  a  great 
measure  to  defeat  mine,  and  if  mine  should  be 
adopted,  his  will  be  entirely  superceded. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  The  simple  question  is 
whether  two  of  these  judges  shall  hold  court. 

The  question  being  put  upon  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Todd,  it  was  adopteti. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  now  make  the  motion  to 
strike  out  tlie  words  "and  two  as.sociate  judges," 
and  in  another  part  of  the  bill,  I  will  move  an 
amendment  to  provide  that  tlie  county  magis- 
trates to  come  in  and  take  their  seats  in  the  court 
of  claims. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  This  is  an  important  court 
sir,  a  court  before  which  the  rights  of  property, 
to  a  very  considerable  amount,  are  to  be  investi- 
gated. There  will  be  important  questions  to  be 
determined  by  that  court  when  they  undertake 
t-o  settle  claims  against  the  county,  and  to  rai.se 
revenues.  You  are  aware  of  tbe  very  great 
prejudice  that  has  existed  throughout  the  com- 
monwealth against  the  county  courts.  We  could 
not  adopt  the  principle  contended  for  by  the 
gentleman,  without  incurring  all  that  unpopu- 
larity. If  you  gather  up  the  magistrates  from 
all  parts  of  the  county  to  hold  court  at  all  times 
of  tbe  year,  you  throw  upon  them  many  em- 
barrassments. The  gentleman  says  that  these 
three  judges  will  be  selected  from  town  resi- 
dents. I  suppose  not  sir.  We  have  not  pre- 
scribed the  limits  in  which  they  shall  live,  we 
have  left  it  entirely  to  the  county,  and  we  have 
supposed  that  they  would  be  well  content  with 
three  judges,  whom  they  might  select  within  the 
county.  We  thought  that  three  judges  selected 
by  the  people  to  preside  in  this  court,  would  be 
better  able  to  discharge  the  duties,  than  if  you 


334 


•were  to  e^atlier  up  all  the  ina<jistrates  tlirougliout 
tlie  county.  Tlie  geiitleiiiiiu  speaks  of  tVaiuls 
and  impositions  that  may  be  practiced  upon  the 
judges,  but  I  thiiik  it  is  a  great  mistake  to  sup- 
pose that  three  judges,  accustomed  to  hold  court, 
will  not  detect  frauds  as  readily  as  any  magis- 
trate can  do.  Much  might  be  said  on  the  sub- 
ject, but  I  am  not  for  consuming  the  time  of  this 
convention.  If  it  be  the  deliberate  opinion  of 
the  convention,  tliat  one  judge  should  do  the 
business,  and  Avhen  upon  county  business  collect 
all  the  magistrates  together,  let  them  so  decide. 
But  I  am  convinced  that  after  mature  delibera- 
tion, tliey  must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
best  way  would  be  to  have  one  presiding  judge 
and  two  assistants. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH.  This  report  relative  to 
the  county  courts  is,  in  my  view,  one  of  the 
most  important  that  can  come  before  the  conven- 
tion, and  as  it  is  suggested  by  delegates  around 
me,  that  the  convention  did  }iot  expect  to  take 
up  this  report  to-day,  and  as  there  is  not  much 
disposition  manifested  to  go  on  with  it  at  pres- 
ent, I  will  move  that  the  conmiittee  rise. 

The  committee  rose,  reported  progress,  and 
obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  NOVEMBER  2,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuaet  Robixson. 

THE  ELECTION  IN  CASEY  COUNTY. 

Mr.  HARDIN  presented  a  petition  signed  by 
some  two  hundred  and  fifty  six  persons  resident 
in  Casey  county,  in  relation  to  the  election  of  the 
delegate  to  this  convention  for  that  county.  It 
was  referred  to  the  committee  which  has  charge 
of  the  returns  of  that  election. 

AMENDMENT   OF   THE    RULES. 

Mr.  GARRARD  called  up  his  resolution  of- 
fered yesterday  to  amend  the  29th  rule. 

After  some  conversation  he  modified  his 
amendment  and  it  was  adopted  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  29th  rule  of  this  conven- 
tion be  amended  by  inserting  the  words,  "and 
such  amendments  as  may  have  been  offered  in 
committee  of  the  whole,  if  desired  by  the 
mover,"  immediately  after  the  word  "amend- 
mwnts,"  in  the  la-st  line  of  said  rule. 

COUNTY  OFFICERS. 

Mr.  TURNER  called  the  attention  of  the  con- 
vention to  the  fact  that  there  were  reports  from 
two  committees,  which  were  of  such  a  charac- 
ter as  to  require  that  they  should  be  considered 
together  in  the  committee  of  the  whole — the 
committee  on  the  executive  and  ministerial  offi- 
ces for  counties  and  districts,  and  the  committee 
on  county  courts.  lie  moved  that  the  committee 
of  the  whole  be  instructed  to  consider  those  two 
reports  together. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  thought  the  adoption  of  such 
a  motion  would  be  productive  of  confusion.  He 
preferred  that  each  report  should  be  considered 
separately,  and  after  they  had  been  disposed  of 


in  committee  of  the  whole,  a  special  conmi.ute 
could  revise  and  avoid  any  conflict  between 
them. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

LEAVE   OF    ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HAMILTON,  leave  of 
absence  was  granted  to  Mr.  Hcndrixtill  Tuesday 
next. 

COURT   OF    APPEALS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  of  the  whole  on 
the  article  in  relation  to  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  said  he  yesterday  gave 
notice  of  his  intention  to  offer  a  substitute  for 
the  whole  report  of  the  committee,  and  it  was 
then  suggested  by  the  President  that  such  a 
proposition  would  be  in  order,  when  the  meas- 
ure liad  been  perfected  by  its  friends.  He  now 
rose  to  modify  his  proposition  to  this  extent — he 
would  offer  it  as  an  amendment  instead  of  a  sub- 
stitute. If  in  order,  he  would  now  move  to 
strikeout  tlie  sections  from  one  to  ten  inclusive, 
and  insert  the  sections  which  he  presented  yes- 
terday. 

Mr.  C.A.  WICKLTFFE  called  forthe  yeas  and 
nays  on  that  motion. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  expected  when 
honored  with  a  seat  in  this  convention  to  have 
remained  entirely  silent,  except  to  give  njy  vote. 
I  had  no  ambition  to  offer  resolutions  or  make 
speeches  on  this  floor.  It  would  have  been  ex- 
ceedingly agreeable  to  me  to  have  been  permitted 
to  pursue  that  course,  and  I  should  have  done  so 
if  I  believed  the  course  which  the  convention 
was  about  to  take  was  one  which  would  meet 
the  wishes  of  the  people  of  tlie  state  of  Ken- 
tucky. I  had  not  a  doubt  when  I  came  here 
that  a  constitution  would  be  made  in  accord- 
ance with  the  wishes  of  the  people  without  the 
slightest  difficulty  or  delay.  It  did  seem 
to  me  that  the  desire  and  the  wish  for  a  change 
of  such  parts  of  the  constitution  as  were  ob- 
jected to  by  the  people,  was  so  clearly  under- 
stood, that  the  convention  could  not  err  in  ma- 
king the  changes  required  by  the  people.  So 
far  as  I  have  been  able  to  learn  from  my  associa- 
tion with  the  convention  party,  and  so  far  a^  I 
have  received  instructions  from  my  constituents, 
there  is  very  little  to  be  done  in  this  body.  The 
people  expect  some  slight  change  in  the  legisla- 
tive department,  to  have  the  sessions  every  two 
years,  instead  of  annually,  and  to  limit,  in  some 
degree,  the  power  of  the  legislature  with  regard 
to  special  legislation,  and  involving  the  state  in 
debt;  they  expect  us  to  limit  the  tenure  of  the 
judicial  officers  and  to  give  into  the  hands  of  the 
people  the  selection  of  all  the  officers  of  the 
state.  Now,  I  ask  every  gentleman  in  this 
house  if  we  do  this,  and  ao  nothing  more  than 
this,  if  we  shall  not  meet  the  expectations  and 
wishes  of  those  who  sent  us  here?  I  have  not 
understood  that  the  people  of  Kentucky  have 
believed  in  relation  to  the  present  constitution, 
that  "  the  whole  head  is  sick,  and  the  whole 
heart  faint,"  and  that  "from  the  crown  of  the 
head  to  the  sole  of  the  foot,  it  is  covered  with 
wounds  and  bruises  and  putrifying  sores."  I  do 
not  believe  they  expect  us  to  change  every  Hue 
and  letter  of  the  old  constitution;  but  on  the 
contrary,  they  desired  us  to  leave  as  much  of  it  as 


335 


possible  in  the  instrument  M-hich  we  submit  to 
them.  The  proposition  which  has  been  made 
by  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  I  have 
been  compelled  very  reluctantly  to  vote  asainst, 
because,  if  we  embody  in  it  details  not 
expected  by  the  people,  if  it  does  not  defeat, 
it  will  most  certainainly  bring  a  strong  op- 
position to  the  constitution.  There  wfll  oe 
in  many  counties  an  opposition  to  these  de- 
tails; they  did  not  expect  us  to  place  them  in  the 
constitution;  and  I  have  oflFerea  this  amendment 
that  we  might  commit  into  the  hands  of  the 
legislature — as  it  was  committed  to  them  by  men 
who  were  practically  as  wise  as  those  who  live  j 
in  this  day — the  power  of  carrying  out  the  prin- 
ciples which  we  establish  in  the  constitution, 
leaving  the  details  to  the  legislature,  and  not  as- 
suming to  ourselves  the  authority  to  do  that 
which,  in  every  other  constitution,  has,  I  believe, 
been  left  to  the  legislature. 

We  need  not  be  in  the  least  alarmed  that  what 
we  leave  out  of  the  constitution  will  be  danger- 
ous to  it.  There  is  no  danger  of  sins  of  omis- 
sion being  visited  on  our  heads  by  our  constitu- 
ents. There  will  be  no  vote  cast  against  the 
constitution  in  consequence  of  what  is  not  in  it, 
but  every  new  principle  that  we  introduce,  all 
extraordinary  and  new  matter  of  detail  may,  if 
it  does  not  certainly,  array  many  votes  against 
it;  and  I  desire  to  retain  every  line  and  letter  of 
the  present  constitution,  whicK  I  am  not  compel- 
led to  change,  with  a  view  of  engrafting  in  the 
new  instrument  those  principles  which  are 
clearly  and  unequivocally  required — and  very 
few  are  required.  I  venture  to  say  there  is  not 
a  gentleman  in  this  house,  who  cannot  take  up 
the  old  constitution  and  amend  it  so  as  to  meet 
the  wishes  of  the  people,  provided  he  has  no  par- 
ticular wish  of  his  own  to  gratify,  if  he  will  just 
exercise  the  knowledge  which  he  hasof  the  wish- 
es of  the  people  of  Kentucky.  There  is  not  a 
man  on  this  floor,  there  is  not  a  boy  ten  y»'ai"s 
old,  who  knows  the  views  of  the  people,  who 
cannot  make  a  constitution  which  they  would 
accept  without  the  slightest  hesitation.  If  we 
have  no  views  of  our  own,  no  personal  ambition 
to  gratify,  no  professional  ends  to  attain,  and  no 
sectional  objects  to  secure,  there  is  not  the  slight- 
est doubt  that  any  man  can  make  a  constitution 
which  will  meet  the  wishes  of  the  people  by  an 
overwhelming  majority,  and  he  would  have 
nothing  to  do  but  that  which  his  constituents 
have  bidden  him  to  do — change  those  features 
which  have  been  objected  to,  and  then  leave  ev- 
ery thing  else  just  as  he  finds  it.  I  hope  the 
proposition  I  have  made  will  receive  the  atten- 
tion of  the  house.  I  know  it  is  not  perfect;  and 
if  the  motion  prevails  to  strike  out  and  insert,  I 
shall  then  move  a  reference  to  some  committee 
with  a  view  of  having  it  put  in  a  more  perfect 
form. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  I  have  been  waitingforan  appro- 
priate opportunity  to  give  my  views  in  relation 
to  brancning  the  court  of  appeals,  and  the  elec- 
tion of  four  judges.  The  branching  of  the  court 
of  appeals  is  not  a  new  subject.  It  has  been  be- 
fore the  legislature  during  the  last  fifty  years, 
and  I  believe  this  fact  is  now  concedecl.'  The 
object  in  calling  this  convention,  in  part,  was  to 
reform  the  vast  expenses  of  the  stat«.  We  were 
in  debt  to  the  amount  of  nearly  five  millions  of 


dollars.  We  have  had  too  much  lcgi.slation, 
and  thus  our  expenses  have  been  increased.  I 
have  received  from  the  Auditor  an  account  of 
what  will  be  the  additional  expense  in  holding 
a  session  of  the  court  of  appeals.  The  judges 
now  receive  one  thousand  five  hundred  dollars, 
and  the  additional  expense  is  nine  hundred  and 
one  dollars.  This  expense  is  necessary  to  pay 
the  salary  of  the  sei^feant,  the  tipstaflf,  the  attor- 
ney general,  and  other  incidental  expenses.  We 
should  incur  in  electing  the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  seven  hundred  dollars  in  the  first 
election;  and  this  is  an  item  of  expen.ce  of  which 
I  have  heard  no  gentleman  speak.  If  the  slate 
is  to  be  laid  off  into  three  or  four  districts,  there 
must  be  some  place  for  the  sheriffs  to  meet  to 
compare  the  polls  and  ascertain  who  is  elected. 
The  sheriffs  would  have  to  be  paid  about  the 
same  amount  as  for  comparing  the  polls  in  the 
election  of  members  of  congress,  which  is  two 
dollars  a  day,  and  two  dollars  for  every  twenty 
five  miles  travel  in  going  and  returning,  which 
will  make  an  expense  in  each  county  of  from  six 
to  ten  dollars,  and  will  make  th'e  whole  amount 
for  the  state  at  least  seven  hundred  dollars. 
Then,  in  addition  to  that,  there  will  be  an  ex- 
pense for  record  books  which  will  amount  to 
five  hundred  dollars  in  each  of  the  branches.  Be- 
sides this,  if  there  is  an  attorney  general,  he 
must  be  paid  something  in  addition  to  his  sala- 
ry of  three  hundred  d«>llars  a  year,  for  we  can- 
not suppose  that  he  would  travel  through  the 
state  for  this  sum.  His  pay  must  be  increased 
then,  or  we  must  increase  tlie  number  of  attor- 
neys general.  The  judges  mu.st  be  paid  two  or 
three  thousan<l  dollars  for  riding  over  the  state 
and  holding  these  courts.  This  will  amount  to 
six  or  eight  thousand  dollars,  and  the  whole 
sum,  without  saying  a  word  about  libraries, 
will  make  an  addition  to  our  present  expenses 
of  six  or  eight  thousand  dollars  annually.  It 
will  ha  impossible  to  avoid  this;  and  I  tell  gen- 
tlemen that  whenever  they  branch  the  court  of 
appeals,  they  rivet  upon  the  state  an  additional 
expense  of  six  or  eight  thousand  dollars  a  year. 
The  legislature  for  the  last  fifty  years  could 
have  branched  this  court,  and  could  have  repeal- 
ed the  act  at  any  time  if  it  was  found  not  agree- 
able to  the  wishes  of  the  people.  They  nave 
never  ventured  to  do  it.  Why  have  they  not? 
Bixsause  the  people  of  Kentucky  have  never  re- 
quired it.  If  they  had  done  so,  sending  in  their 
members  to  the  legislature  every  year,  it  would 
have  been  passed,  and  the  experiment  would 
have  been  tried,  and  if  it  did  not  work  well, 
they  could  have  repealed  it.  We  have  come 
here  with  a  view  to  lessen  the  expenses  oi  the 
government,  and  carry  out  the  wishes  of  the  peo- 
ple in  this  respect;  and  the  first  thing  we  do, 
we  fasten  an  expense  of  six  or  eight  thousand 
dollars,  annually,  upon  the  .state,  when  the  legis- 
lature would  not  venture  to  do  it  even  for  a  sin- 
gle year.  Besides,  the  subject  of  branching  the 
court  of  appeals  was  not,  so  far  as  I  know,  dis- 
cussed last  summer  by  the  people.  If  the  peo- 
ple have  not  branched  tlie  court  when  they  had 
the  power  to  do  it,  shall  we  rivet  the  expense 
upon  the  state  wholly  unlocked  for  by  the  peo- 
ple? If  this  Ls  done,  I  have  no  doubt  the  people 
will  reject  the  constitution  bv  a  large  m^ority, 
I  have  seen  some  dozen  men  from  mv  section  of 


336 


the  country,  and  all  of  iheni  are  opposed  to  it. 
Now,  in  order  to  satisfy  the  people,  and  to  have 
their  will  expressed,  let  this  be  a  matter  of  legis- 
lation entirely;  to  that  extent  I  am  in  favor  of 
the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Jessa- 
mine. Thai  will  give  the  legislature  power  to 
branch  tlie  court,  if  they  please;  the  people  will 
be  satisfied;  and  tlie  objections  to  an  increase  of 
expense,  by  doing  that  which  the  legislature 
would  not  do  for  the  last  fifty  years,  will  be 
avoided. 

Much  has  been  said  to  show  that  the  branch- 
ing of  the  court  will  not  Increase  the  expense  of 
the  state.  Surely  this  expense  will  be  increased 
unless  the  judges  are  willing  to  ride  over  the 
state  for  the  salary  of  fifteen  hundred  dollars, 
which  they  now  receive,  wliile  other  states  are 
paying  their  judges  from  two  to  six  thousand 
dollars.  However  gentlemen  niav  claim  that  the 
people  want  justice  brought  to  tJieir  doors,  they 
can  now  reach  the  court  of  appeals  if  they  de- 
sire it;  many  do  go  to  that  court  who  ought  not. 
All  that  is  said  about  setting  up  this  monopoly 
in  Frankfort,  and  the  influence  this  has  on  the 
flection  of  senators,  amounts  to  but  little  in  my 
opinion.  The  legislature  will  sit  here,  and  how 
will  it  influence  the  action  of  the  legislature  for 
the  court  of  appeals  to  sit  here?  It  seems  to  me 
that  the  influence  of  the  court  of  appeals  and  of 
the  legislature  would  be  entirely  distinct;  I  can- 
not see  how  they  will  affect  each  other.  Then 
liow  is  it  that  it  will  tend  to  set  np  an  aristocra- 
cy which  has  been  spoken  of  around  Frankfort? 

I  should  have  been  glad  if  the  system  of  bal- 
lot voting  had  not  been  stricken  out.  I  Avas  for 
that  system,  and  I  still  believe  it  right.  Gentle- 
men have  said  that  Avas  a  favorite  measure  of  the 
emancipationists.  I  do  not  see  how  emancipa- 
tion is  connected  with  ballot  voting.  All  that 
lias  been  said  about  the  rich  man's  marching  up 
and  making  his  tenants  vote  according  to  his 
wish,  is  an  argument  in  favor  of  voting  by  bal- 
lot. I  want  my  tenant  to  go  and  drop  in  his 
ballot  without  my  knowledge  of  the  man  for 
Avhom  it  is  given.  If  they  vote  by  ballot  what 
landlord  will  know  any  thing  about  the  vote  of 
his  tenant.  Much  has  been  said  about  tlie  influ- 
ence that,  a  wealthy  man  may  have  in  procuring 
votes.  This  is  a  reason  why  I  am  in  favor  of 
the  ballot  .sy.stcm,  because  a  wealthy  man  would 
not  risk  liis  money  if  he  did  not  know  what  tick- 
et would  be  put  in  the  box.  Would  I  risk  pay- 
ing out  money  to  A,  B,  and  C,  when  they  could 
drop  a  ticket  in  the  box  against  me.  That  is 
one  reason  why  the  ballot  system  is  all  impor- 
tant, more  important  in  the  judiciary  than  any 
where  else.  One  gentleman  says  there  is  no 
possible  chance  to  contest  an  election  under  the 
nallot  system.  That  is  something  that  I  do  not 
understand.  If  I  understand  the  method  of  vo- 
ting by  ballot,  the  name  of  the  candidate  is 
written  on  one  ticket,  and  the  name  of  the  voter 
is  written  upon  the  back  of  the  same  ticket. 
When  this  ticket  is  deposited,  his  name  is  recor- 
ded by  the  clerk  upon  the  poll  book.  When  the 
election  is  over,  the  ballot-s  are  all  counted,  and 
the  clerk  arranges  in  lists  the  name  of  each  can- 
didate and  the  name  of  each  man  who  has  voted 
for  him.  The  tickets  are  carefully  preserved  un- 
til it  is  ascertained  whether  there  will  be  a  con- 
test of  the  election.     And   if  no  contest  arises 


within  ten  days,  the  tickets  are  destroyed.  An- 
other gentleman  says  that  fraudident  voting  can- 
not be  punished  under  the  ballot  system.  If  his 
name  is  upon  the  ticket  and  is  likewise  recorded 
upon  tlie  poll  book,  will  it  not  be  easy  to  com- 
pare the  tickets  with  the  record  upon  the  poll 
book,  and  ascertain  whether  there  has  been  ille- 
gal voting  either  by  those  Avho  are  under  age, 
or  who  are  non-residents?  If  there  is  a  contes- 
ted election,  then  these  fraudulent  votes  may  be 
struck  out.  The  grand  jury  can  indict  any  one 
who  votes  under  age,  and  every  proceeding  can 
be  carried  on  as  if  tlie  ballot  system  did  not  exist. 
Now,  in  order  to  carry  it  out  properly,  the  tickets 
will  be  destroyed,  and  neither  the  judge  nor  any 
other  man  will  have  a  right  to  know  for  whom  any 
person  may  have  voted.  That  is  a  system  that 
will  protect  the  voter,  and  if  any  thing  is  fair, 
and  will  at  the  same  time  tend  to  destroy  the 
corrupt  influences  under  the  present  system,  this 
will  do  it. 

To  those  gentlemen  who  say  this  is  connected 
with  emancipation,  I  answer  that  it  is  not  at  all 
connected  with  either  abolition  or  emancipation. 
It  is  a  movement  of  the  people,  which  they,  in 
their  honest  judgment,  consider  that  we  need. 
Some  two  or  three  weeks  since,  the  gentleman 
from  Logan  (Mr.  Irwin)  -stated  that  this  conven- 
tion was  brought  about  by  a  union  of  the  eman- 
cipationists and  democrats.  I  name  it  to  deny 
it,  and  I  will  try  to  prove  it.  lUit  1  do  not  blame 
the  gentleman  for  thinking  there  was  something 
like  a  combination  of  the  emancipationists  and 
democrats.  He  appeared  to  be  a  sort  of  way- 
faring man  during  the  canvass,  having  been  a 
candidate  in  Todd,  I  believe,  and  having  not  suc- 
ceeded veiy  well  there,  perhaps,  he  travelled  over 
into  Logan,  where  lie  started  under  headway. 
All  was  vacant  and  open.  He  soon  found  that 
there  was  an  emancipationist  there  as  a  candid- 
ate, who  was  after  him  with  a  sharp  stick,  close 
by.  There  was  another  gentleman,  wlio  is  now 
a  delegate  in  this  convention,  a  whig,  wlio  was 
away  ahead.  But  this  emancipationist  was 
right  after  the  gentleman  from  Logan,  and  when 
I  heard  of  it  I  thought  of  the  race  that  John 
Gilpin  run  with  the  post  bov.  Gilpin  put  on  liis 
red  cloak  and  his  belt,  to  which  he  had  suspend- 
ed two  bottles  filled  with  wine,  and  started  in 
the  race.  And,  as  he  went  he  thought  he  would 
go  clear,  and  the  first  thing  he  knew  the  post  boy 
was  scampering  at  his  heels  with  Avliip  and  spur, 
and  he  lost  his  wine.  Now,  I  thought  the  gen- 
tleman from  Logan  Avas  in  the  same  predicament. 
He  had  no  expectation  of  opposition,  but  here 
was  this  emancipationist,  running  him  close, 
and  he  came  within  fifty,  votes  of  defeating  him. 
He  got  more  votes  than  any  other  emancipation- 
ist in  Kentucky,  except  the  candidate  from  Lou- 
isville. The  gentleman  may  have  had  reasons 
for  his  belief,  but  I  do  not  believe  that  any  one, 
even  of  his  own  party,  believed  his  statement  to 
be  true.  There  were  in  this  state  twenty  whig 
emancipationists,  who  together,  got  about  nine 
thousand  four  hundred  votes,  while  the  nine 
democratic  emancipationists  received  about  four 
thousand  votes.  If  the  gentleman  alluded  to 
the  union  of  the  emancipationists  and  the  dem- 
ocrats with  the  intention  of  creating  a  dissen- 
tion  here,  it  was  clearly  wrong.  In  Lewis  coun- 
ty, there  were  two  craancipationiits  running,  but 


337 


a  whig  was  elected,  who  is  now  in  this  house.  | 
In  Lawrence  and  Carter  counties  there  was  a  ( 
majority  of  four  hundred  democrats,  and  there  a  j 
whig  was  elected  bv  a  strong  democratic  vote,  i 
but  if  the  emancipationists  had  joined  the  dem-  i 
ocrats  this  could  not  have  been  the  result.  I  ■ 
name  this  to  condemn  the  imputation  that  the  j 
democrats  were  united  with  the  emancipationists,  I 
or  any  other  party.  I  believe  that  the  conven- ! 
tion  Avas  brought  about  by  the  will  of  the  peo- ; 

Ele  of  Kentuckv.  and  no  party  should  have  the  | 
onor  of  it.  1  Wlieve  we  came  here  with  the  , 
intention  of  making  such  a  constitution  as  the  | 
people  require,  without  lugging  in  any  thing  i 
rew,  or  which  would  increase  the  expenses  and  j 
result  in  the  rejection  of  this  constitution  by  the  i 
people. 

If  all  tliis  be  true,  that  the  branching  of  the  ' 
court  of  appeals  would  increase  the  expenses  of 
government,  and  if  the  people  have  not  required 
this  at  our  hands,  as  certainly  as  we  live  it  will 
make  twenty  or  thirty  thousand  votes  against 
the  constitution.  I  honestly  believe  this,  and  I 
call  on  gentlemen  who  are  in  favor  of  the 
branching  system,  to  wait  only  a  year  or  two, 
and  to  let  us  have  the  right  to  add  another  judge, 
and  branch  the  court,  and  then,  when  the  sub 
ject  is  discussed,  the  people  will  pass  it  if  they 
want  it.  But  if  we  put  it  in  the  constitution 
now,  under  the  circumstances,  I  can  assure  the 
friends  of  constitutional  reform  that  our  labor 
will  be  rejected. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  would  ask  to  have 
the  word  "six"  struck  out  of  the  third  section, 
that  the  number  of  years  for  holding  the  office 
of  judge  mav  be  left  blank. 

The  PKESIDEXT.  The  gentleman  has  the 
right  to  modifv  his  own  ameniiment. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  presume  if  the 
house  think  proper  to  insert  that  amendment,  it 
will  be  proper  hereafter  to  fill  the  blank;  but 
the  house  could  not  take  any  thing  from  it  after 
its  adoption,  without  a  re-consideration.  We  | 
may  add  to  it,  but  we  cannot  strike  any  thing 
out  of  it.  With  that  understanding  I  shall  vote. 
The  proposition  of  the  committee  is  to  fix  the 
term  trf  the  judges  at  eight  years,  and  to  estab- 
lish the  principle  that  these  judges,  whether 
three  or  four,  shall  be  elected  by  districts.  The 
amendment  proposes,  if  I  understand  it,  that 
there  shall  be  one  chief  justice  and  two  associate 
judges. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  It  proposes  no  par- 
ticular number  of  judges. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLif  FE.  The  legislature  may 
then  give  the  chief  justice  the  support  of  one,  or 
as  many  more  as  they  please.  There  is  to  be  one 
president,  of  course,  and  the  legislature  mav  so 
constitute  the  appellate  court  that  he  shall  sit 
alone.  If  I  understand  it  correctly,  I  prefer  the 
original  report,  with  all  the  inroads  made  on  it 
by  the  vote  of  the  house  yesterday. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  would  ask  if  the 
whole  matter  might  not  be  referred  to  a  commit- 
tee. I  have  said  that  I  did  not  consider  myself 
competent  to  produce  any  thing  perfect.  I  have 
merely  thrown  out  the  will  of  my  people.  I  de- 
sire to  have  it  referred  to  a  committee,  even  if  it 
is  adopted  by  the  house.  I  have  no  personal  in- 
terest in  this  constitution  in  any  way.  I  have 
but  one  wish,  and  that  is,  to  form  a  constitution 
43 


which  the  people  of  the  state  of  Kentucky  want, 
and  which  they  will  accept.  I  have  but  One  fear 
in  reference  to  the  proposition  emanating  from 
the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  and  it  is 
a  fear  based  upon  what  I  believe  to  be  a  tho- 
rough knowledge  of  the  feelings  of  the  people 
of  Kentucky — for  I  am  no  stranger  to  their  feel- 
ings in  regard  to  the  present  constitution — and 
that  fear  in,  tliat  it  will  be  fatal,  entirely  fatal,  to 
the  constitution  itself.  The  proposition  of  the 
committee  will  be  presented  to  the  people  with 
a  suspicion  attached  to  it,  unjust  in  all  human 
probability,  but  which  the  honorable  chairman 
of  the  committee  knows  to  exist,  and  to  which 
he  has  himself  referred.  It  will  be  looked  upon, 
to  use  plain  language,  as  a  lawyer  project.  It 
has  been  called  so  in  this  house,  and  out  cf  it, 
and  whether  the  suspicion  is  groundless  or  not, 
is  not  for  us  to  determine.  But  let  the  people  of 
Kentucky  believe  that  the  lawyers  have  concoct- 
ed this  for  their  benefit,  or  that  the  main  moving 
object  of  it  is  to  benefit  the  lawyers,  and  they 
will  scout  it  as  certainly  as  the  Lord  lives. — 
They  like  lawyers  well  enough,  but  not  enough 
to  take  any  thing  which  they  suspect  is  for  their 
special  benefit.  There  are  enemies  enough  in 
this  house,  and  out  of  it,  to  use  this,  whether  it 
is  so  or  not — enough  to  justify  the  declaration 
which  has  been  made  here.  I  do  not  say  that  I 
entertain  these  feelings,  but  I  confess  that  I  shall 
have  some  difficulty  to  combat  this  objection. 
I  shall  have  much  to  do  to  satisfy  my  constitu- 
ents that  this  bill,  in  all  its  parts,  is  for  the 
whole  community,  and  that  this  class  of  profes- 
sional gentlemen  are  not  more  especially  benefit- 
te<l.  I  want  the  matter  left  with  the  legislature. 
Let  them  do  as  they  please.  I  hope  the  house 
will  understand  me  that  I  do  not  wish  to  press 
this  thing.  It  has  forced  itself  upon  me,  and  I 
felt  it  was  my  duty  to  ofier  it.  But  I  desire  that 
it  shall  be  referred  to  wiser  heads  than  mine  to 
render  it  more  in  accordance  with  the  wishes  ot 
the  community.  I  hope  the  house  will  accept 
the  proposition. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  have  known  since  I  have 
been  here,  scarcely  a  proposition  made  in  this 
house,  that  has  not  been  met  with  the  stereotype 
ai^ument,  that  if  it  should  be  incorporated  m 
the  constitution,  it  would  cause  the  constitution 
to  be  rejected  before  the  people.  I  believe  I  un- 
derstand something  of  the  feelings  of  the  peo^ 
pie  of  that  region  of  the  country  from  which  I 
came;  but  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know  how  it  hap- 
pens, that  gentlemen  know  so  well  what  are  the 
wishes  of  the  people  throughout  the  whole  state 
as  they  profess  to  do.  The  gentleman  from  Jes- 
samine assumes,  as  did  the  gentleman  who  pre- 
ceded him,  that  if  you  branch  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, you  will  lose  twenty  thousand  votes  which 
would  otherwise  be  given  for  the  new  constitu- 
tion. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  rose  to  explain. 

The  PRESIDENT.  Xo  gentleman  has  a  right 
to  interpose  when  another  delegate  is  address- 
ing the  chair,  unless  leave  be  granted  him  to  ex- 
plain. I  hope  that  gentlemen  will  obey  the 
rule  strictly. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  beg  leave  to  remark  to  the 
president,  that  if  I  have  misquoted  the  gentle- 
man, I  desire  that  he  shall  have  liberty  to  cor- 
rect me. 


338 


Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  Never  liaviug  be- 
longed" to  a  deliberative  body  before,  I  must  be 
pardoned  for  violating  a  rule  ■which  the  presi- 
dent seems  to  think  so  es.sential,  and  tlie  only 
apology  I  can  offer  is,  that  I  was  but  following 
the  example  that  has  been  set  me,  by  older  dele- 
gates on  this  floor,  with  the  permission  of  the 
president.  I  will  now  take  the  liberty,  as  per- 
mission has  been  granted  me,  to  explain  that 
my  observation  was,  that  I  believed  that  the  in- 
corporation of  this  proposition  in  regard  to 
branching  the  court  of  appeals,  would  array  a 
large  number  of  votes  against  the  constitution. 
I  did  not  pretend  to  designate  how  many. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  It  is  an  argument,  as  I  before 
remarked. 

The  PRESIDENT  (interposing.)  The  gentle- 
man has  chosen  to  impeach  the  chair  for  inter- 
ference. It  is  true,  I  nave  interfered.  I  have 
done  so  heretofore,  and  shall  continue  to  inter- 
fere, and  call  gentlemen  to  order  whenever  they 
violate  the  niles  of  this  body. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  may,  sir,  have  put  words 
in  the  mouth  of  my  friend  who  spoke  last;  I 
have  said  that  he  argued  that  twenty  thousand 
votes  would  be  arrayed  against  the  constitution, 
if  the  proposition  for  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals should  be  inserted  in  that  instrument.  In 
this  I  maybe  mistaken,  but  I  am  not  mistaken 
when  I  say  that  an  argument  that  is  in  the 
mouth  of  almost  every  gentleman  on  this  floor 
who  has  spoken  upon  any  subject,  is,  that  if  you 
incorporate  a  certain  principle  you  will  array  a 
party  in  this  state  against  the  constitution,  and 
that,  therefore,  you  ought  not  to  incorporate  such 
a  principle.  That  is  a  stereotyped  argument  in 
regard  to  almost  every  proposition,  against  which 
a  gentleman  may  entertain  an  objection. 

More  than  one  half  the  state,  in  point  of  pop- 
ulation, live  south  of  this  place.  It  has  been  ar- 
gued here,  and  among  others,  by  the  elder  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  that  if  you  branch  the  court 
of  appeals  the  result  will  be,  that  you  will  array 
— I  believe  his  remark  was — every  citizen — every 
voter  at  least  in  the  county  of  Franklin  save 
seven,  again.st  the  constitution.  WoU,  sir,  I 
confess  for  myself  that  I  have  not  been  at  the 
trouble  of  enquiring  how  all  the  people  of  Frank- 
lin county  will  vote,  in  the  event  that  the  court 
should  be  branched,  but  if  you  give  four  judges, 
and  establish  four  districts,  and  locate  a  branch 
of  the  court  of  appeals  in  each  district,  I  ask, 
sir,  if  the  same  rule,  will  not  obtain,  in  estab- 
lishing the  fact  that  you  get  at  four  points,  or 
three  at  lea.st,  leaving  a  branch  here,  the  votes 
of  a  ^eat  number  of  persons  in  favor  of  a  new 
constitution,  because  they  will  have  obtained 
their  wish,  though  you  may  lose  a  number  of 
votes  in  Franklin  county  because  the  court  has 
been  branched. 

I  can  tell  gentlemen,  for  I  profess  to  know 
something  about  the  feeling  of  the  people  in 
that  part  of  the  country  which  I  have  the  honor 
to  represent — ^that  they  have  regarded  the  loca- 
tion of  the  court  of  appeals  at  one  point  only,  in 
the  state,  as  a  hardship  upon  that  region  of 
country,  from  the  time  1  grew  up,  down  to  the 
present  day,  and  if  we  cannot  get  a  branch  of 
the  court  (town  there,  we  are  determined,  in  a 
body,  as  far  as  I  am  advised,  to  get  the  eourt  of 
appeals  a  little  closer  to  us. 


I  understood  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  to 
say,  yesterday,  that  it  would  be  a  great  hard- 
ship for  the  citizens  of  Henry  county  to  be  re- 
auired  to  go  to  Harrodsburg  to  attend  the  court, 
lat  they  would  have  to  travel  a  longer  distance 
than  from  Frankfort  to  Harrodsburg.  I  sup- 
pose the  gentleman  considers  it  no  hardship  at 
all,  that  the  people  of  Warrren,  Simpson  and 
McCracken,  and  all  the  southern  part  of  the 
state  should  have  to  come  here  to  attend  the 
court,  but  it  would  be  a  great  hardship  to  make 
four  judges  ride  down  there  through  the  mud. 
When  the  people  have  to  come  up,  the  roads  are 
all  dry,  but  when  the  judges  have  to  go  down, 
the  mud  will  be  very  deep,  according  to  the  ar- 
gument of  the  gentleman. 

Now  Mr.  President  there  is  not  a  voter  south- 
west of  Louisville,  who  would  not  be  willing  to 
be  taxed  a  half  cent  or  one  cent,  for  the  purpose 
of  furnishing  facilities  for  obtaining  justice. 
Gentlemen  need  not  be  alarmed  bv  the  idea  of 
additional  expenses  when  we  say  that  we  want 
four  judges  instead  of  three.  It  has  been  ar- 
gued on  this  floor,  and  I  believe  that  the  con- 
viction obtains  in  the  mind  of  every  gentleman, 
wath  perhaps  few  exceptions,  that  the  business 
of  the  court  of  appeals  cannot  be  transacted  by 
three  judges,  because  the  business  is  calculated 
to  increase,  and  it  must  increase,  according  to 
the  commercial  habits  of  the  people  of  the  state. 
It  has  already  increased  in  a  ratio  so  great,  that 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  numbering 
three  at  this  time,  cannot  bestow  that  attention 
in  the  investigation  of  the  cases  that  come  be- 
fore them,  that  the  well  being  of  the  country 
and  the  interests  of  the  community  demand  at 
their  hands.  It  must  be  the  case  that  we  must 
have  more  than  three  judges.  We  must  require 
them  to  have  that  uniformity  of  decision  of 
which  gentlemen  have  spoken;  we  must  require 
them  to  enable  litigants  to  reach  justice  without 
delay,  and  sir,  the  interests  of  the  country  de- 
mand four  judges.  I  ask  if  Kentucky  will 
stand  back,  merely  because  there  will  be  an  in- 
crease of  expense  of  twenty  five  hundred,  or 
even  four  thousand  dollars. 

Mr.  President,  I  for  one  disclaim  that  this  is 
a  lawyer  project.  I  am  aware  sir,  that  there 
are  those  in  the  country — and  I  have  felt  the  in- 
fluence of  these  objections  myself,  who  go  about 
and  attempt  to  excite  prejudice  against  the  pro- 
fession of  law.  I  am  aware  that  there  are  those 
who  go  forth  among  the  people,  and  whenever 
the  remotest  opportunity  occurs  for  exciting 
prejudice  against  a  lawyer  who  presents  him- 
self' for  office,  the  opportunity  is  not  alloAved  to 
escape.  But  I  apprehend  the  profession,  as  far 
as  branching  of  tne  court  of  appeals  is  concern- 
ed, will  be  able  to  satisfy  an  enlightened  con- 
stituency, that  what  they  have  done  in  this 
matter,  has  been  done  alone  for  the  purpose  of 
enabling  them  to  reach  justice,  without  travel- 
ing four  or  five  hundred  miles  to  do  it.  This 
may  be  a  lawyers'  project  on  one  side  or  the 
other,  and  I  doubt  very  much  if  there  are  not  a 
number  of  lawyers  perhaps  not  very  far  dis- 
tant from  the  present  place  of  sitting  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  who  are  opposed  to  the  branch- 
ing of  that  court.  Withhold  from  us  a  branch 
and  what  injury  sir,  do  you  inflict  upon  my  con- 
stituents, upon  those  of  that  part  of  the  coun- 


339 


try  from  -nrhich  I  came.  Then  if  I  am  employ- 1  us,  some  of  whom  live  two  hundred,  or  two  hun- 
ed  to  bring  an  action  of  ejectment,  or  any  other,  |  dred  and  fifty  miles  from  the  seat  of  government, 
I  make   no  arrangement  with  mv  client  that  if  |  because  of  the  additional  expense  of  some  twen- 


justice  is  not  done  in  the  court  below,  I  will  ap 
pear  in  the  court  of  appeals.  He  gives  me  a  fee. 
After  trial  if  I  apprehend  that  justice  has  not 
been  done,  I  advise  him  to  take  an  appeal.  He 
does  so.  And  what  then?  After  tlie  case  has 
been  prepared  there — argued  there — understood 
by  his  counsel  there — all  the  facts  and  circum- 
Btances  perfectly  familiar  to  him,  he  is  there  re- 
quired t^  leave  that  counsel  with  whom  he  has 
advised  during  the  progress  of  the  case,  he  is 
obliged  to  employ  additional  counsel  to  con- 
duct his  case  through  the  court  of  appeals; 
wherea-s  if  you  allow  him  the  opportunity  to 
reach  the  court  by  traveling  ten,  firteen  or  twen- 
ty miles,  the  probability  is  that  the  lawyer  he 
had  employed  there,  would  be  able  to  attend 
the  case,  in  the  court  of  appeals,  and  save  him 
the  payment  of  a  double  fee.  That  would  be 
the  effect  of  it.  It  would  grow  up  into  a  prac- 
tice that  when  counsel  are  employed  to  attend 
a  ca.se  in  the  court  below,  there  would  be  an 
agreement  at  the  same  time,  that  if  the  case 
should  be  taken  to  the  court  of  appeals,  the 
same  counsel  would  appear  and  conduct  the 
case  through  that  court,  and  it  must  result  in  a 
great  saving  to  the  people.  There  is  no  force 
in  the  argument  that  this  is  a  lawyers'  project. 
I  disclaim  it  as  a  lawyers'  project. 

If  the  wants  and  interests  of  the  country  re- 
quire that  justice  should  be  brought  nearer  to 
the  doors  of  the  citizens  of  the  state,  why  with- 
hold itV  We  are  in  this  state  as  a  band  of  broth- 
ers, and  I  call  upon  the  gentlemen  who  live  in 
the  counties  surrounding  the  capital,  I  call  upon 
gentlemen  who  live  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 


tv-fivo  hundred  dollars,  the  means  of  reaching 
tlie  sanctuary  of  justice.  I  have  said  more  than 
I  intended,  for  I  have  been  disappointed,  and 
regret  to  see  a  disposition  manifested,  to  make 
those  who  live  in  the  remote  portions  of  the 
state,  the  mere  suppliants  at  the  feet  of  power 
here. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  said  over  and  over 
again,  that  I  never  heard  this  question  made  be- 
fore the  people  where  I  live.  I  mean  the  ques- 
tion of  branching  the  court  of  appeals.  I  have 
taken  part  in  theelections, though  not  always  as  a 
candidate,  I  think  I  may  safely  say  for  the  last  for- 
ty two  or  forty  three  yeare,  and  I  never  heard  the 
question  made,  either  in  my  own  or  in  the  sur- 
rounding counties.  I  am  willing  to  give  the 
power  to  the  legislature  to  branch  the  court, 
whenever  the  people  of  the  state  desire  it  shall 
be  done,  and  1  have  indicated  to  the  house,  that 
before  I  had  done  with  this  subject,  I  would  of- 
fer a  proposition  for  this  purpose,  and  the  same 
thing  is  embodied  in  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tlamanfrom  Hendereon.  I  want  the  legislature 
which  comes  immediately  from  the  people — if  it 
be  desired  by  the  people  to  branch  the  court — 
to  have  the  power  to  do  it;  and  if  they  want 
more  than  three  judges,  let  the  people  say  so 
through  their  representatives.  That  is  all  I 
want. 

And  I  say  again,  and  I  say  it  in  a  spirit  of 
conciliation,  that  I  do  not  want  to  see  this  con- 
stitution encumbered  with  additional  machine- 
r)-.  But  as  to  the  gentleman's  idea  of  making 
me  use  the  expression  that  it  was  five  hundred 
miles  from  the  county  of  Henrj-^  to  Harrodsburg, 


place  where  the  court  of  appeals   is  at  present  j  and  in  coming  back  it  was  but  thirty.    I  recollect 
held,  and  ask  them  if  it  is  right   and  proper  to    a  law yer  call edWorden  Pope  who,  when  he  heard 


withhold  from  us  a  branch  of  that  court.  Ihave 
no  special  authority  to  do  it,  but  I  ask  in  the 
name  of  the  mountain  region  of  this  state,  if  it 
be  right  that  those  who  are  congregated  around 
the  place  of  the  present  sitting  of  the  court  of 
appeals  should  withhold  from  those  in  that  re- 
gion, the  right  and  the  convenience  of  having 
their  rights  preser\ed,  when  all  that  the  state 
has  had  to  bestow,  has  been  bestowed  upon  this 
place.  When  all  the  moneys  collected  throughout 
the  state,  in  the  way  of  taxes,  have  been  thrown 
into  the  lap  of  this  town  for  the  last  half  centu- 
ry, is  it  too  much  for  ns  to  ask,  to  be  allowed 
to  have  our  business  done  for  us  nearer  home, 
■when  we  are  taxed  as  much  as  they. 

I  am  satisfied  that  there  is  a  power  in  the 
south-western  part  of  the  state  that  will  have 
justice  brought  nearer  to  them,  and  if  we  cannot 
get  a  branch  of  the  court  of  appeals  down  there, 
we  will  have — and  we  will  struggle  for  it 
until  we  reach  the  power  to  have — the  court 
of  appeals  itself  nearer  to  us.  1  believe  there 
are  some  gentlemen  on  this  floor  who  have  per- 
haps mistaken  the  proposition  that  was  discus- 
sea  yesterday,  or  have  not  even  matured  it.  I 
believe  that  a  proposition  will  be  made  to  re- 
consider the  vote,  by  which  four  was  stricken 
out  in  reference  to  the  number  of  judges,  and 
when  that  vote  shall  be  reconsidered  and  the 
question  be  put  to  this  house,  we  shall  then  dis- 
cover whether  they  are  willing  to  withhold  from 


any  one  using  extravagant  language,  used  to 
sav,  "pooh!  I  never  believe  myself  when  I  am 
joting."  I  think  I  said  about  fifty  miles.  But 
lor  a  man  who  has  been  all  over  the  state,  in  its 
length  and  brea<lth,  and  made  speeches  in  al- 
most every  county,  and  yet  to  be  convicted  of 
such  a  gross  absurdity,  as  saying  it  was  five 
hundred  miles  from  the  county  of  Henry  to  Har- 
rodsburg, and  only  thirty  back  again,  is  more 
than  I  am  willing  to  suffer.  I  will  say  it  is  about 
two  hundred  and  eighty  five  miles  from  one  ex- 
treme point  to  the  other,  where  these  branches 
would  be  located.  And  I  would  repeat,  that  to 
require  an  old  man  from  forty  to  sixty  five  years 
old,  at  all  seasons  of  the  year,  to  pass  from 
point  to  point,  would  be,  to  say  the  least,  ex- 
tremely inconvenient.  The  gentleman  says, 
will  you  not  give  the  mountain  counties  jus- 
tice? This  does  not  apply  to  my  friend  (Mr. 
Clarke.)  He  lives  in  tne  richest  part  of  the 
country — there  are  no  mountains  there — not  one. 
I  consider  the  counties  of  Christian,  Warren, 
Logan,  Todd,  and  Simpson,  tlie  garden  spot  of 
Kentucky.  The  gentleman  says — if  you  do  not 
bring  the  court  of  appeals  to  us,  we  will  take 
away  the  seat  of  government  from  you.  Well, 
thatVill  go  for  abont  as  much  as  it  is  worth.  I 
suppose  the  whole  power  of  this  state  is  not  in 
Simpson  county.  Suppose  the  emperors  of  Rus- 
sia, and  of  Austria,  the  king  of  Great  Britain, 
and  Louis  XVIII,  when  they  had  assembled  in 


340 


their  great  congress,  and  were  proposing  some 
great  measure,  for  the  regulation  of  tlie  affairs 
of  the  wliole  of  Europe,  up  should  jump  a  little 
delegate  from  Hesse-Cassel,  and  say,  if  you  don't 
do  so  and  so,  all  Hesse-Cassel  will  be  in  arms, 
and  we  will  pluck  the  diadems  from  your  brows. 
Such  a  threat  would  not  be  more  ridiculous  than 
the  menace  of  the  gentleman  about  the  removal 
of  the  seat  of  go%'ernnient.  I  have  been  trying 
to  court  my  honorable  friend  all  the  session.  I 
think  he  is  a  very  promisiiig  young  gentleman, 
but  that  he  should  have  fallen  into  the  mistake 
of  attributing  to  me  such  a  palpable  absurdity 
is  very  extraordinary. 

I  have  no  intention  of  making  a  speech.  I 
only  rose  to  say,  that  I  approve  of  the  propoiition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  to  leave  it  to 
the  people,  through  their  legislature,  to  say 
whether  Hesse-Cassel  shall  be  accommodated  or 
not.  I  have  no  particular  interest  in  the  thing, 
but  I  know  verj"^  well  that  it  is  important  to  the 
character  of  the  state,  that  the  character  of  the 
court  of  appeals  should  not  be  brought  down. 
Duty  to  the  public  requires,  that  that  depart- 
ment should  be  kept  up;  and  to  have  three  or 
four  old  men  trudging  down  to  some  distant 
county,  to  hold  a  court,  perhaps  it  may  be  in  the 
■warm  season,  perhaps  in  the  winter  time,  will 
tend  very  much  to  degrade  the  court,  and  bring 
it  into  contempt.  1  have  no  interest  at  all,  none 
in  the  world,  in  having  a  court  to  sit  in  this 
place.  I  would  just  as  soon  have  it  sit  any 
■where  else  as  here.  I  don't  practice  much  here. 
I  have  perhaps  three  or  four  cases  a  year. 
It  is  not  a  practice  that  my  colleague  or 
myself  care  much  about,  or  look  much  to.  I 
believe  we  come  here  more  for  self-defence  than 
any  thing  else.  I  know  there  are  some  gentle- 
men, who  make  it  a  regular  business  to  come 
here  and  get  fees.  I  have  a  list  of  the  names  of 
several  gentlemen  who  do  so.  I  do  not  say  this 
invidiously,  because  it  shows  that  they  must  be 
men  who  have  rich  gifts  by  nature,  and  great  le- 

f^al  acquirements.     I  believe  I  will   reserve  the 
ist  hoAvever,  until  I  do  make  a  speech  on  this 
subject,  at  some  future  day. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  suppose  that  my  venerable 
friend  from  Nelson  assumes,  that  the  elder  dele- 
gate from  Nelson,  and  some  two  or  tliree  other 
gentlemen  here  represent  Russia,  Prussia,  and 
Austria,  and  that  the  balance  of  us  are  from 
Hesse  Cassel.  1  am  willing  sir,  that  the  gen- 
tleman should  have  all  the  credit  of  representing 
a  great  power  in  this  convention.  I  have  no  ob- 
jection in  the  world.  But  sir,  when  I  know  that 
those  who  have  lionored  me  with  a  seat  on  this 
floor,  demand  an  effort  on  my  part  to  enable 
them  to  enjoy  the  rights  that  are  enjoyed  by  those 
who  occupy  a  more  favorable  position  in  the 
state,  I  trust  I  shall  be  pardoned  by  the  Russian 
autocrat — I  do  not  apply  that  to  my  friend — but 
I  hope  to  be  pardoned  by  the  gentleman  from 
Russia,  for  insisting  that  tho.se  whom  I  represent 
shall  be  permitted  to  enjoy  an  equal  participa- 
tion in  the  rights  and  privileges  which  are  to  be 
confered  upon  the  people  of  this  state  by  the 
constitution.  That  is  all  I  ask.  I  sliould  be 
recreant  to  the  high  tnist  confided  to  me,  if  I 
did  not  insist  upon  having  a  brjinch  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  closer  to  tho.se  whom  1  have  the 
honor  to  represent.    1  trust  1  shall  be  pardoned 


by  the  gentleman,  if  1  try  to  discharge  the  du- 
ties that  have  been  entrusted  to  me,  by  the  peo- 
ple whom  I  represent.  I  do  not  intend  to  be  un- 
derstood however,  as  desiring  to  place  my  friend 
from  Nelson,  in  an  unenviable  attitude.  I  did 
remark  that  ho  had  stated  in  his  speech  of  yes- 
terday, that  great  inconvenience  would  he  felt 
by  the  judges,  if  they  were  compelled  to  go  to 
Harrodsburg.  I  said,  I  suppose  the  gentleman 
considered  it  five  hundred  miles  from  the  county 
of  Henry  to  Harrodsburg.  and  only  thirty  from 
Harrodsburg  here.  I  did  not  say  that  he  made 
this  statement,  but  I  deduced  it  as  a  conse- 
quence from  his  argument.  There  is  no  in- 
convenience it  appears,  in  requiring  the  people 
of  Carter,  Ballard,  and  McCrackeii  counties,  to 
come  to  Frankfort,  but  there  is  great  inconven- 
ience and  hardship  in  requiring  four  men  to  go 
down  to  those  counties.  JS  ow  sir,  what  is  the  fact? 
For  the  last  fifteen  years  there  have  been  three 
judges  from  two  counties  that  border  on  mine, 
sitting  in  the  court  of  appeals — I  allude  to  chief 
justice  Ewing,  honorable  J.  R.  Underwood,  and 
honorable  Asher  W.  Graham,  who  has  been  re- 
cently appointed.  These  gentlemen  are  obliged 
to  travel  to  this  place,  twice  a  year,  to  hold  court. 
And  is  it  too  much  to  ask,  that  tliey  should  go 
down  there  sometimes,  instead  of  compelling 
the  whole  people  of  that  region  to  come  up  here. 
Is  it  not  just  as  convenient,  I  ask  my  venerable 
friend — for  four  judges  to  ride  down  there  once 
in  tAvelve  months,  as  to  require  every  litigant  to 
come  to  this  place  to  attend  the  court.  Why  sir, 
up  to  1843,  upon  a  motion  to  admit  a  will  to  re- 
cord in  the  county  court,  if  the  motion  did  not 
prevail,  the  unsuccessful  party  Avas  compelled  to 
appeal  to  the  court  of  appeals  ;  and  in  the  ab- 
sence of  branches,  in  many  cases,  to  trudge  from 
one  to  tAvo  hundred  and  fifty  miles,  w^ith  from 
ten  to  one  hundred  witnesses,  to  Frankfort, to  ob- 
tain the  decision  of  the  court  as  to  Avhether  a 
Avill  should  be  admitted  to  record  or  not.  In 
more  than  one,  instance  I  have  known  large  num- 
bers of  Avitnesses,  Avho  Avere  in  humble  circum- 
stances, to  be  brought  in  carts,  the  distance  of 
an  hundred  and  sixty  miles,  to  reach  the  capital. 
I  again  ask,  would  it  not  be  proper  that  the 
judges  should  at  least  visit  the  people,  and  hold 
court  among  tliem  once  a  year,  rather  than  to  re- 
quire the  people  to  undergo  such  hardship  and  ex- 
pence  as  they  have  been  subjected  to,  under  the 
present  system. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  If  the  proposition  to  branch 
the  court  of  appeals  cannot  be  carried  by  legit- 
imate argument — if  the  opinions  of  the  delegate 
from,  Franklin  and  of  those  gentlemen  from 
neighboring  counties,  opposed  to  the  proposi- 
tion, cannot  be  changed  by  considerations  of 
propriety  and  fitness — the  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son Avill  hardly  succeed  by  denouncing  the  citi- 
zens of  Frankfort  and  I^ranklin  county.  His 
people  might  as  well  have  kept  hiin  at  home,  so 
tar  <as  the  proposition  under  discussion,  as  Avell 
as  all  other  matters,  is  concerned,  if  they  sup- 
posed his  attacks  upon  my  constituents  would 
frighten  them  or  their  humble  delegate  from  pro- 
priety. Wliat  has  the  toAvn  of  P'rankfort  done? 
What  has  slie  received  at  the  hands  of  tlie  com- 
nioiiAvealth,  so  much  more  than  otlier  nhices,  that 
she  .should  be  singled  out  ly  the  gentleman,  and 
charged  with  defeating  projects  which  the  honor- 


341 


able  gentleman  favore?  He  may  say  sir,  she  has 
the  capital  of  the  state,  and  the  rickety  concern 
called  the  governor's  palace.  Well,  look  back 
•  at  the  records,  and  see  at  whose  expense  these 
buildings  were  erected.  They  were  not  built  at 
the  expense  of  the  gentleman  and  his  constitu- 
ents. They  had  their  share  it  is  true ;  bnt  the 
citizens  of  this  town,  by  individual  subscriptions 
and  donations  of  lots,  which  were  sold  and  the 
•  proceeds  applied,  contributed  largely  to  the  ex- 
penditures, and  that  too,  under  contract  with  the 
commissioners  authorized  to  locate  a  permanent 
seat  of  government  for  the  state.  Look,  sir,  at 
the  few  improvements  that  surround  your  public 
square.  By  whom  were  they  made?  Were  they 
made  by  the  liberality  of  such  gentlemen  a?  un- 
dertake'to  influence  the  minds  of  delegates  near 
the  capital,  by  threats  of  its  removal?  They 
were  made,  sir,  by  the  authorities  of  the  town. 
The  gentleman's  threats  are  ill  advised  and 
T'.ade,  doubtless,  without  reflection  or  premedi- 
tation. 

If  the  people  of  this  proud  commonwealth  re- 
quire a  removal  of  their  seat  of  governnif'nt, 
let  them  remove  it  to  Louisville,  or  any  other 
place,  and  when  they  do  so,  I  will  say  to  the 
gentleman,  take  the  court  of  appeals  with  it. 
*i^here  is  propriety — there  is  fitness  that  the 
three  high  departmentsof  the  government  should 
be  at  the  same  place. 

I  have  vottd  sir,  throughout  for  four  districts 
and  four  judges.  The  votes  were  given  from  a 
conviction  that  four  districts  woukl  bring  candi- 
dates for  the  judgeship  within  the  knowledge  of 
those  who  are  to  elect  them,  and  from  the  fact 
that  a  fourth  judge  would  add  strength  to  the 
high  character  of  the  court,  and  give  weight  to 
their  decisions,  with  three  to  concur  in  opinion. 

These  votes  were  given  also,  to  gratify  gentle- 
men who  seemed  to  desire  the  district  mode  of 
election,  and  also  to  obviate  the  objections  raised 
by  those  opposed  to  the  election  by  the  people — 
that  they  could  not  knowforwhom  they  were  vot- 
ing, and  the  practice  would  soon  run  into  the  mode 
of  selecting  other  oflicers  by  central  influences, 
and  party  arrangements. 

I  did  it  sir,  to  le.ssen  in  some  degree  the  heavy 
labors  that  the  court  now  undergo. 

In  doing  this,  I  did  not  pledge  myself  to  go 
for  establishing  branches  of  the  court,  as  I  clear- 
ly indicated  in  a  few  remarks  heretofore  made. 
But  I  am  told  by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
that  I  mtist  advance  to  this,  under  the  penalty 
of  forfeiting  all  the  interests  of  my  constituents. 
I  say  to  gentlemen,  they  may  reason  me  into  the 
measure,  but  I  cannot  he  driven.  I  know  my 
people  too  well  to  believe  for  a  moment,  that 
any  considerations  growing  out  of  the  location 
of  the  capital,  or  any  threats  of  its  removal, 
would  be  regarded  by  them,  and  most  certainly 
they  will  not  be  by  t&eir  humble  delegate. 

I  am  not  disposed  to  impute  any  thing  im- 
proper to  delegates,  or  to  charge  them  as  being 
actuated  by  considerations  of  a  selfish  character, 
yet  I  coulS  but  remark  on  yesterday,  when  the 
fourth  judge  was  rejected,  that  some  of  those 
who  have  manifested  so  much  concern  about  the 
branching,  should  show  plainly  tliat  they  re- 
garded that  as  fatal  to  their  projects. 

Why  did  the  honorable  delegate  from  Mont- 
gomery show  such  feeling  at  that  vote?     It  was 


not  a  defeat  of  branching,ninless  he  rcgai-ded  the 
number  of  branches  as  necessary  to  be  regulated 
by  the  number  of  judges,  and  it  spoiled  his 
hopes  and  calculations  for  a  branch  at  his  town. 
The  flutterring,  sir,  .shoAvn,  did  awaken  a  suspi- 
cion in  my  mind,  that  I  had  been  lending  a  hand 
to  build  the  foundation  of  a  project,  which  I 
would  regard,  if  carried  out,  as  calculated  to 
weaken  not  only  the  independence  of  the  high- 
est judicial  tribunal,  but  the  confidence  that 
should  be  reposed  in  its  decisions. 

If  the  convenience  of  the  people  has  heen  the  ■ 
ruling  consideration  of  those  ?who  advocate 
branching,  why  should  they  have  treated  the  loss 
of  the  fourth  judge  as  fatal  to  their  project? 
Three  districts,  if  their  arguments  be  true,  would 
be  better  than  one  place  of  holding  the  court,  and 
why  did  they  not  rally  on  that?  My  apprehen- 
sions are.  as  intimated  by  the  elder  delegate 
from  Nelson,  it  broke  the  combination — spoiled 
the  plan,  overthrew  the  figures,  and  would  not 
work  to  suit. 

Gentlemen  who  consider  the  convenience  of 
the  people  the  paramount  consideration,  seem 
I  exceedingly  reluctant  to  accept  the  proposition 
made,  to  leave  the  subject  to  the  people,  to  be 
decided  through  their  representatives.  If  it  is 
the  will  of  a  majority  of  the  people,  as  contend- 
ed for  by  those  who  favor  the  measure,  why  not 
trust  it  to  tJieir  decision.  Will  any  one  in  Javor 
of  branching,  vote  against  the  constitution,  with 
the  power  conferred  on  the  legislature.  My  opin- 
ion is,  they  will  not.  2\^ordo  1  suppose  any  one 
opposed  to  branching,  will  vote  against  it  on 
that  account.  Yet,  if  it  is  made  imperative  to 
branch,  although  it  is  against  the  wishes  of  a 
I  majority,  it  will  have  to  be  done,  and  however 
inconvenient  it  may  be  when  put  to  practice,  it 
will  have  to  stand  until  the  constitution  is  alter- 
ed, and  will  necessarily  bring  against  the  consti- 
tution we  adopt  a  heavy  vote. 

Our  work  sir,  would  be  endangered,  and  great- 
ly endangered  by  introducing  as  fixed  niles,  mat- 
ters that  nave  not  been  desired  by  the  people. 

What  papers  in  the  state  proposed  or  oiscus- 
sed  the  plan  desired  by  the  committee  of  the 
court  of  appeals?  What  delegates  made  it  a 
question  in  their  canvass?  The  gentlemen  from 
Simpson  and  Montgomery,  both  say  they  spoke 
of  it  to  their  constituents.  This  may  be  all  true, 
but  does  it  prove  that  a  majority  of  the  people,  or 
of  even  their  own  constituents  favor  the  project  in 
the  absence  of  any  contest  upon  it,  or  direct  ex- 

Eressions  of  the  people's  will.  Let  me  ask  the 
onorable  gentleman  from  Simpson  how  many 
litigants  from  his  county  had  occasion  to  come 
to  the  appellate  tribunal  of  the  state  the  past 
year. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  If  the  gentleman  will  permit 
me,  I  believe  the  tables  show  only  one  case. 
There  would  perhaps  have  been  more,  if  the  in- 
convenience of  travel,  and  the  increased  expense 
of  atttendance  upon  the  court  of  appeals,  had 
not  been  so  great.  Hence,  justice  was  witliheld 
from  them. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  He  answers  one,  only  one. 
But  he  says  many  more  would  have  asked  re- 
versals of  erroneous  decisions  given  against  them, 
but  from  the  fact  that  the  distance  was  so  great 
to  Frankfort.  It  proves  one  of  two  propositions 
to  be  true;  that  the  cases  decided  must  be  small 


342 


indeed,  or  that  there  is  niore  need  of  lawyers  in 
his  county,  than  of  a  branch  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals. 

It  cannot  be  tliat  a  gentleman  of  his  abilities 
as  a  lawyer,  would  see  an  erroneous  opinion  of 
the  circuit  judge  given,  and  his  client's  rights 
disregarded — his  property  wrongfully  taken — 
"when  the  erroneous  judgment  could  have  been 
revised  at  an  expense  of  fifty  cents  or  a  dollar 
paid  for  postage,  in  transmitting  by  mail  to  the 
town  of  Frankfort,  the  record  of  the  case,  with  a 
short  written  brief,  pointing  out  the  errors  of  the 
circuit  court. 

Sir,  the  time  was  when  the  court  of  appeals  of 
Kentucky  was  what  every  tribunal  of  the  last  re- 
sort should  be,  a  court  having  the  confidence  of 
the  people — an  ornament  to  the  State — and  its 
decisions  commanded  respect  and  confidence 
wherever  read.  Those  were  the  days  when  the 
court  had  around  them  lawyers  of  the  highest 
eminence  in  their  profession.  Causes  were  then 
argued  and  re-argued,  and  opinions  were  revised 
and  re-revi.sed  until  they  contained  an  expression 
of  the  law  plain  and  e.asy  to  be  understood. 

Those  were  the  days  when  causes  were  requir- 
ed to  be  argued,  and  then  the  bar  enlightenecl  the 
court  and  tiie  court  the  bar.  It  was  this  discus- 
sion and  'abor  that  made  such  a  bar  and  such  a 
court.  Even  in  those  times,  sir,  when  there  was 
no  admission  to  practice  in  that  court  except  by 
regular  license  of  the  court^ — Avhcn  personal  ap- 
pearance was  demanded — wlien  litigants  or  coun- 
sel had  to  attend  the  court  and  await  their  turns 
upon  the  docket,  the  efforts  to  branch  the  court, 
repeatedly  made,  were  unsuccessful.  The  argu- 
ments then  were  as  now,  the  great  distance  to 
come — the  exceeding  hardship  that  a  litigant 
should  have  to  travel  all  the  way  to  Frankfort 
■with  his  record. 

These  objections,  sir,  were  obviated  by  rules  of 
practice  made  by  tlie  court  of  appeals  and  by  leg- 
islative enactments;  until  now  a  man  may  prac- 
tice in  that  court  wlio  cannot  practice  in  the  coun- 
ty courts  of  the  state.  He  has,  sir.  but  to  write  a 
brief  in  his  client's  name,  and  to  send  it  to  the 
court,  and  the  thing  is  done.  The  court  is  left 
to  find  out  and  apply  the  law  themselves  without 
the  aid  of  authorities.  In  half  the  cases  they 
decide,  and  those  who  practice  in  the  way  sug- 
gested, do  not  aid  the  court;  yet  in  every  case 
■when  they  do  not  get  a  cause  decided  as  they 
■want,  become  critics  on  the  decisions  of  the  court, 
and  thereby  aid  in  destroying  the  confidence  the 
people  should  have  in  such  a  tribunal. 

It  is  but  a  short  time  since,  perhaps  one  or  two 
■winters  past,  the  legislature  pa-ssed  an  act  requir- 
ing the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  to  docket 
the  causes  of  each  judicial  district  together. 
The  docket  is  published  under  this  arrangement 
])efore  court,  so  that  every  lawyer  who  desires  to 
attend  the  court  in  person  can  come  on  tlie  very- 
morning  of  the  day  if  he  pleases  when  liis  case  is 
to  be  heard.  Thus,  sir,  every  arrangement  that 
can  be  made  to  cheapen  and  make  convenient  the 
practice  in  that  court  has  been  adopted,  and  still 
some  of  the  profession  at  a  distance  seem  dissat- 
isfied, and  make  charges  that  Frankfort  lawyers 
are  monopolizing  tlie  business  of  that  court. 
Look  to  the  records  of  the  court  what  lawyers  of 
Frankfort  arc  doing — not  one  sixteenth  of  the 
causes  are  attended  U>  by  tkcm.    Fur  luy  humble 


self,  wrre  I  actuated  by  selfish  consideration?, 
and  looking  to  what  I  might  make  as  a  lawyer, 
I  would  say  unhesitatingly  branch.  But  no  s\ich 
cosiderations  are  influencing  me — none  such  in- 
fluenced the  people  of  Franklin  in  twice  casting 
a  handsome  majority  in  favor  of  this  convention. 
Have  they  regarded  such  m<itters  as  have  grave- 
ly on  this  floor  been  charged  upon  them?  Nay, 
had  they  dreaded  the  fierce  denunciations  that 
some  are  inclined  to  hurl  at  them,  it  would  have 
been  their  true  policy  to  have  voted  against  the 
convention  throughout. 

What  would  be  said  to  a  plan  like  that  of  Ohio, 
of  increasing  the  judges  and  having  a  court  of 
appeals  in  every  county.  This  would  be  bring- 
ing decisions  of  causes  nearer  still  to  every  man's 
door,  altiiough  it  might  not  bring  him  justice  or 
correct  law.  That  is  the  plan  in  one  sister 
state — one  exceedingly  disliked  by  the  people  of 
Ohio,  if  I  am  correctly  informed,  in  relation 
thereto.  They  have  been  compelled  to  require 
tlieir  supreme  judges  to  meet  in  bank  at  the 
capital  of  their  state  once  a  year  to  preserve  uni- 
formity of  decision  amongst  them  on  their  cir- 
cuits, and  to  have  the  opinion  of  a  full  court  on 
questions  new  or  difficult.  No  one  wants  such  a 
machinery  here,  I  am  sure,  yet  it  is  but  carrying 
out  the  principle  contended  for,  that  the  highest 
courts  should  be  brought  to  every  man's  door. 

The  next  thing  looked  for,  is  that  the  governor 
of  the  commonwealth  shall  branch  out.  He 
can't  be  branched.  Why  shall  he  not  travel 
through  each  county  of  the  state  dispensing  the 
duties  of  the  office  fairly  to  each  county,  and 
doing  the  business  of  the  people  at  their  own 
doors.  A  fair  division  of  his  time  in  that  way 
would  not  only  be  pleasant,  but  would  perhaps 
keep  hiin  in  fine  health  bv  traveling.  Is  there 
not,  sir,  in  the  executive  departments,  twice  the 
amount  of  business  to  be  transacted  by  the  peo- 
ple which  requires  them  to  come  in  pereon  or  by 
proxy,  to  what  there  is  in  the  court  of  appeals'? 
The  same  in  relation  to  the  legislature.  Why 
require  that  this  department  sliall  sit  at  one 
place?  Gould  they  uot  as  well  move  about  hold- 
ing sessions  one  year  at  one  place,  and  another 
year  at  another?  These  rambling  departments 
may  suit  some,  but  I  imagine  if  left  to  the  peo- 
ple they  will  not  approve  them,  even  on  the 
consideration  of  having  law  and  justice  at  their 
doors. 

But  some  gentlemen  say  the  expenses  to  be 
incurred  are  nothing.  Sir,  I  do  not  let  dollars 
and  cents  influence  me  much  in  gratifying  the 
wishes  of  my  friends  in  building  up  this  consti- 
tution, yet  I  know  sir,  the  taxes  of  this  state 
have  increased  fearfully  in  the  last  fifteen  yearsj 
and  are  in  a  fair  way,  from  the  failure  of  our 
public  works  to  meet  expenditures,  to  be  in- 
creased greatly  more.  It  is  time  sir-it  is  necessary 
that  we  cheapen  the  administration  of  justice, 
and  the  expenses  of  government  to  the  people,  in- 
stead of  increasing  them.  Every  one  concedes 
that  the  branching  must  necessarily  increase  tho, 
expenses,  and  the  gentleman  from  Simpson 
would  have  had  all  his  people  taxed  to  have 
brought  four  judges  to  his  neighborhood  to  de- 
cide the  one  case  from  his  county  rather  than  let 
the  litigant  pay  the  expense  of  getting  his  cause 
to  Fraiikfort. 

Ift  addition  to  the  items  of  cxjjense  already 


343 


-numerated  by  the  elder  del^ate  from  Nelson, 
tliere  are  a  few  more  sir  to  be  added,  if  branching 

prevails. 

The  attorney  general  must  necessarily  attend 
to  the  business  of  the  couimonwealth  in  each 
district  court.  Who  sir.  qualified  to  be  the 
legal  adviser  of  the  executive  of  the  state,  and 
all  the  higher  officers,  would  fill  that  office  and 
perforin  its  duties  then  for  foui  or  even  five  times 
the  salary  now  paid — abandoning  all  other  bu- 
siness and  every  other  pursuit,  to  ride  about 
with  the  judges  to  the  several  courts  as  he  would 
have  to  do.  He  cannot  practice  by  brief  in 
causes  of  the  coinnionwealth,  that  he  did  not  at- 
tend to  in  the  court  below,  nor  would  it  be  meet 
and  proper  that  he  should  do  so. 

Then  sir,  you  mu.st  have  a  traveling  reporter 
for  the  court,   or  four  reporters,  with  sufficient 
salaries  to  command  competent  persons  to  per- 
form the  service  of  reporting  the  opinions  of  tlie 
'jurt. 

And  you  must  also  increase  the  publication  of 
your  .statutes  and  reports  four  fold,  at  least,  over 
tlie  number  now  required,  for  exchanges  with 
other  states  and  the  United  States,  which  will 
be  found  no  small  item  of  increase.  Thirty 
copies  of  repoits  and  statutes  now  for  the  states, 
and  one  or  more  of  each  for  the  United  States, 
must  be  quadrupled,  saying  nothing  of  all 
other  books  requisite;  for  a  library. 

The  interest  of  the  state — the  convenience  of 
the  people — I  do  not  believe  require  the  branch- 
ing of  the  court  of  appeals.  Certainly  it  was 
not  a  matter  complained  of  sufficiently  to  justify 
us  in  making  it  a  fixed  rule  in  our  constitution 
to  be  made.  I  am,  for  one,  unwilling  to  hazard 
higher  things,  we  know  the  people  require,  by 
introducing  doubtful  oue.s,  to  say  the  least,  that 
have  not  been  required.  I  will  vote  to  leave  it 
to  the  people.  If  they  desire  it,  the  legislature 
will  be  commanded  so  to  arrange  the  ctmrt. 

Mr.  President,  I  did  not  intend  to  have  said  a 
word  on  this  subject  to  day,  nor  would  I  have 
spoken,  but  for  the  attack  made  upon  my  town 
and  county  by  the  honorable  delegate  from 
Simpson,  who  seems  to  think  that  Frankfort  in- 
fluence is  at  work  against  his  favorite  measure. 
Such  complaints  are  often  made  by  persons 
who  seem  to  me  to  find  out  a  great  deal  more  of 
the  actions  of  the  people  here  than  I  do.  I  aver 
sir,  I  have  seen  no  interference  by  any  citizen  of 
Frankfort,  in  any  way  upon  any  subject  before 
us.  They  are  a  free  people,  and  will  remain  so, 
unless  frightened  by  the  threats  of  my  friend 
from  Simpson. 

Once  for  all  sir,  I  have  to  say,  the  people  of 
Frankfort  have  asked  nothing  from  the  conven- 
tion. They  have  not,  in  any  way,  interposed 
their  feelings,  interest,  or  wishes  against  any  of 
the  matters  as  yet  discussed  before  the  conven- 
tion; and  I  do  protest  sir,  again.st  their  being 
held  up  unjustly  as  I  think  they  have  been  to- 
day, when  they  have  not,  in  any  way,  interfered, 
and  their  delegate  has  but  exercised  the  right 
belonging  to  every  member  of  voting  as  he  deems 
right  for  the  interest  of  the  state. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  We  have  heard  the  gentle- 
man from  Franklin  enquire  here  to-day,  what 
has  Frankfort  got?  I  am  delighted  with  Frank- 
fort, and  always  have  been  ever  since  my  first 
visit  to  the  place;  but  the  enquiry  has  been  made 


what  has  Frankfort  g(»t?  In  regard  to  the  pub- 
lic buildings,  although  ere<'ted  by  the  people  of 
Frankfort,  how  often  have  the  people  of  Irank- 
fort  applied  to  the  legislature  that  money  shall 
be  applied  from  the  common  public  treasury  to 
repay  them? 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  I  have  resided  here  for  thir- 
teen years,  and  during  that  time,  I  have  heard  of 
but  one  application  of  the  kind  made.  It  was 
to  obtain  tne  retum  of  seven  or  eight  hundred 
dollars  by  a  widow,  whose  husband  at  the  time 
the  sub.^cription  was  made,  was  in  affluent  cir- 
cumstances, and  surrounded  by  all  the  comforts 
of  life.  Misfortune  brought  her  to  the  very 
depths  of  poverty,  and  she  was  in  those  circum- 
stances, left  with  two  feeble  daughters  to  provide 
for.  That  is  the  only  application  ever  made  to 
the  legislature,  so  far  as  my  information  extends, 
to  pay  back  any  portion  of  the  sum  which  was 
contributed  by  the  citizens  of  Frankfort  to  the 
erection  of  the  public  buildings.  I  referred  to 
the  fact  which  will  be  found  recorded  in  a 
neighboring  county,  that  at  the  time  when  it 
was  proposed  to  locate  the  capital  here,  there 
was  pledged  by  the  owners  ot  the  property,  a 
block  of  lots,  now  solidly  covered  by  some  of 
the  best  houses  of  the  town,  the  whole  proceeds 
of  which  went  into  the  state  treasury  to  pay  for 
the  erection  of  the  public  buildings.  And  be  it 
said  to  the  discreait  of  the  representatives  of 
the  people,  with  a  full  knowledge  of  all  the 
suffering  that  surrrounded  tliat  lady,  and  with 
an  overflowing  treasury  at  the  time,  they  wast- 
ed and  expended  it  on  foolish  projects  of  inter- 
nal improvement  throughout  the  common- 
wealth, resulting  in  nothing  but  loss  to  the 
state,  and  did  not  return  the  money  or  any  part 
of  it. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  think  if  the  gentleman 
had  looked  a  little  further  back,  before  he  came 
here,  he  might  have  found  other  cases.  I  have 
heard  of  them  at  any  rate,  although  I  do  not 
know  whether  tlie  money  was  ever  returned  or 
not.  But  I  was  going  on  to  notice  the  enquiry, 
what  has  Frankfort  had?  The  present  governor 
is  a  resident  of  Frankfort.  1  was  delighted 
with  his  nomination  and  aided  in  securing  it. 
The  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  resides  in 
Frankfort,  and  it  is  the  best  ofiSee  in  the  state. 
The  register  and  the  second  auditor  also  belong 
to  Frankfort,  and  they  are  good  appointments, 
and  I  do  not  complain  of  them.  W  hat  else  has 
Frankfort  had?  She  has,  in  the  person  of  one 
of  her  citizens,  a  minister  to  ilexico — that  por- 
tion of  the  foreign  ministers  that  falls  to  the 
share  of  Kentucky.  She  has  also  the  consul  to 
Liverpool,  one  of  the  most  lucrative  offices  in 
the  gift  of  the  president,  and  she  has  also  a  com- 
missioner of  Indian  Afi'airs.  Now  what  has 
Frankfort  got,  or  rather  what  ha.s  she  not  got? 
I  do  not  complain.  She  has  distinguished  and 
intelligent  citizens,  and  I  believe  these  are  all 
first  rate  appointments,  but  I  wish  to  ask  how 
all  this  happens?  Is  there  more  intelligence 
and  virtue  in  Frankfort  than  there  is  in  Lou- 
isville, Lexington,  Bowlinggreen,  Bardstown, 
and  Harrodsburg  all  put  together?  It  is  be- 
cause there  has  been  a  gradual  and  continual 
concentration  of  the  representatives  of  the  peo- 
ple, at  Frankfort,  and  there  all  the  greatness 
seems  to  have  concentrated.     The  other  dav,  we 


344 


Were  toM  that  tliere  were  thirteen  lawyers  resi- 
ding in  the  town  of  Frankfort  who  practiced  in 
the  court  of  appeals.  Were  there  that  many  in 
Louisville?  Let  us  look  at  the  counties  not  in 
the  habit  of  sending  up  causes  to  the  court  of 
appeals.  Suppose  we  look  for  a  moment  at 
Daviess — it  is  about  as  wealthy  a  county  as 
Franklin,  and  has  about  as  many  voters,  and  I 
presume  she  ought  to  have  as  many  lawyers, 
and  as  able  ones  to  make  exceptions,  and  bring 
up  their  cases  here,  if  they  did  not  live  so  far 
otF.  Is  it  possible  that  Daviess  has  no  good 
lawyers?  She  has  one,  I  know,  on  this  floor,  a 
most  excellent  lawyer,  and  a  very  worthy  and 
intelligent  gentleman.  I  would  infer  from  the 
remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Franklin,  that 
the  lawyers  in  other  portions  of  the  state,  were 
from  some  reason  negligent  of  their  clients,  and 
never  prepared  their  causes  to  bring  before  the 
court  of  appeals.  Now  I  presume  that  the  law- 
yers all  over  Kentucky  are  doing  their  duty  to 
their  clients.  So  far  as  my  experience  is  con- 
cerned, I  have  found  that  the  lawyers  in  the 
most  remote  portions  of  the  state  have  paid 
quite  as  much  attention  to  the  interests  of  their 
clients,  as  have  those  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Frankfort.  But  in  all  parts  of  the  state  tliere 
are  not  the  same  facilities  and  opportunities 
of  obtaining  justice,  and  they  feel  the  want  of  it. 
Gentlemen  say  that  this  matter  has  not  been 
discussed  among  the  people,  and  that  they  have 
not  been  consulted  in  regard  to  it.  I  insist  that 
in  portions  of  the  state  at  least  tliis  is  not  the  fact. 
The  people  of  the  county  I  represent  have  been 
consulted,  and  there  was  no  difference  of  opin- 
ion on  the  subject  among  the  candidates.  It  is 
true  that  the  county  of  Montgomery  has  not  suf- 
fered as  much  inconvenience  as  some  other  coun- 
ties, for  she  has  had  her  fair  proportion  of  cau- 
ses in  the  court  of  appeals.  I  would  be  pleased 
to  have  the  court  come  to  Mt.  Sterling,  but  person- 
ally I  am  satisfied  it  would  be  better  for  me  if  it 
was  never  branched.  I  practice  in  many  of  the  ad- 

i'acent  counti^-s,  and  many  of  the  litigants  there 
lave  employed  me  in  the  court  of  appeals,  when 
I  was  not  engaged  in  the  court  below.  But  I  do 
not  expect  to  do  as  much  of  this  business  if  the 
court  is  brought  to  my  town.  Why  it  would  be 
an  invitation  to  other  lawA'ers  to  settle  at  Mt. 
Sterling,  and  there  would  soon  be  as  many  there 
as  at  Frankfort. 

But  that  is  not  the  question.  It  is,  does  any 
CTievance  exist,  and  now  has  it  happened?  Is 
Frankfort  80  much  more  of  a  commercial  place, 
and  has  there  been  so  much  more  litigation  ari- 
sing there  than  at  Owensboro',  where  manufac- 
tories are  growing  up?  Perhaps  it  is  notso  large 
a  town,  but  it  is  an  equally  rich  county,  rich 
people,  and  has  as  many  voters  as  Franklin. 
Ana  go  to  the  next  county,  Henderson,  andsoon 
down,  and  you  will  see  that  there  is  a  very  great 
disproportion.  I  was,  I  must  confess,  greatly  as- 
tonished to  hear  the  gentleman  from  Breathitt 
talking  about  the  attorney  general  as  he  did. 
The  gentleman  ought  to  have  known  that  the  at- 
torney geperal  does  not  live  here,  and  does  not 
compose  part  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  if  he 
will  examine  the  docket,  he  will  lin<l  that  there 
are  but  very  few  cases  in  which  that  functionary 
appears.  What  has  he  to  do  with  the  court  of 
appeals?    There  are  no  criminal  causes,  except 


little  petty  misdemeanor  cases  perhaps  brought 
up  here,  and  does  the  gentleman  think  the  attor- 
ney general  would  travel  all  over  the  state  to  at- 
tend to  such  causes?  But  the  gentleman  might 
have  known  tliat  this  was  a  rule  which  would 
work  both  Avavs.  If  it  was  so  convenient  for 
two  thirds  of  tlie  lawyers  in  this  commonwealth 
to  appear  by  brief  in  the  court,  would  it  be  any 
the  less  convenient  for  the  attorney  general  to  do 
the  same  with  the  few  causes  he  hail  charge  of? 
Now,  so  far  as  the  attorney  general  is  concerned, 
if  we  shall  sit  here  until  the  first  Monday  in  De- 
cember, we  shall  sit  until  the  court  of  appeals  is 
in  session,  and  if  the  gentleman  will  go  into  the 
court  room,  I  venture  to  say,  that  he  will  not  see 
the  attorney  general  more  than  once  in  that  court. 
And  yet  he  is  a  gentleman  well  qualified  for 
the  station,  and  always  attends  to  the  business. 
Another  objection  urged,  Avas  the  expense  of 
additional  officers,  tipstaffs,  constables,  etc.,  at- 
tendant on  branching  the  court  of  appeals.  Now, 
if  an  examination  was  made,  it  would  be  found 
that  these  officers  were  paid  by  the  day,  and 
would  be  required  whether  the  court  sat  here,  as 
now,  or  Avhether  it  was  branched.  Tlieexpen.se, 
therefore,  would  be  the  same  in  both  cases.  I 
was  a  little  amused  at  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son (Mr.  Hardin)  in  his  designation  of  the  dis- 
tricts. One  of  them,  the  eastern  district,  he  com- 
menced at  the  head  of  the  Big  Sandy,  and  run 
across  to  the  mouth  of  the  Kentucky  river.  He 
would  hardly  do  that,  I  apprehend,  if  he  was  in 
the  legislature.  The  district  would  Avith  more 
propriety  be  framed,  by  including  se\'eral  of  the 
counties  on  the  south  side  of  the  Kentuckv  river, 
and  Avould  not  embrace  Fayette  county.  I  admit 
that  Franklin  Avould  not  be  so  well  accommoda- 
ted thereby,  and  perhaps  Woodford,  Jessamine, 
Anderson.  Henry,  and  other  counties  nearer, 
might  not,  but  tiien  look  at  the  greater  number 
of  counties  Avhose  facilities  would  be  greatly  in- 
creased if  the  court  was  branched.  It  may  be 
that  Harrodsburg  would  be  the  centre  of  another 
district,  though  I  hardly  suppose  it  would,  and 
at  any  rate  it  Avould  be  a  duty  for  the  legisla- 
ture, and  not  this  convention,  to  perform. 

So  far  as  the  substitute  of  the  gentleman  from 
Jessamine  (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall)  Avas  concerned, 
there  was  one  feature  in  it  which  I  shall  support. 
I  am  glad  that  so  able  a  gentleman  has  come  for- 
Avard  to  aid  me,  for  I  stated  in  ray  remarks  on  a 
previous  occasion,  that  at  a  proper  time  I  should 
move  that  the  judges  should  be  elected  by  the 
state  at  large,  and  I  understand  that  his  amend- 
ment makes  just  such  a  provision.  Thus  far  the 
gentleman  from  Jessamine  and  myself  are  to- 
gether. 

But  is  there  not  a  grievance  in  this  matter?  I 
take  it  for  granted  that  the  lawyers  in  other  parts 
of  the  state  are  just  as  attentive  to  the  rights  of 
their  clients  as  are  those  residing  in  the  centre, 
and  that  they  Avould  be  just  as  apt  to  undertake 
to  save  the  rights  of  their  clients,  or  would  be, 
if  they  had  the  same  facility  to  have  their  rights 
adjudicated  upon.  But,  says  the  gentleman  from 
Franklin,  why  not  make  the  appellate  court  travel 
all  over  the  state,  into  every  county,  as  it  does  in 
Ohio?  I  ansAver,  because  it  is  inexpedient  to  do 
so,  and  because  the  same  end  can  be  attained  by 
branching.  But  this,  it  was  urged,  would  make 
the  court  less  dignified.     Did  the  branching 


345 


system  make  tlw  courts  of  Virginia,  Sooth  Car 
oliua,  Massachusetts,  Pennsylvania,  and  New 
York,  less  dignified?  "Was  it  such  a  reproach 
on  the  judgas  to  require  tliem  to  travel?  Take 
the  number  at  five  hundred  cases,  and  divide 
them  into  four  parts,  and  there  would  he  one 
hundred  and  twenty  five  each.  Was  it  so  very 
hard  to  require  four  men  to  travel,  say  two  hun- 
dred miles,  and  not  at  all  hard  to  require  one 
hundred  and  twenty  five  men  to  travel  the  same 
distance  to  come  here?  But  there  would  be  more 
than  one  hundred  and  twenty  five;  there  would 
be  the  parties  to  each  suit,  thus  making  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty.  And  what  is  tliere  undignified 
in  these  judges  thus  traveling  to  four  parts  of 
the  state  and  holding  their  courts  there?  Will 
it  tend  to  degrade  the  courts  whose  authority 
is  the  highest  of  any  we  have,  those  of  New 
York,  Massachusetts,  Virginia.  Pennsylvania, 
and  others?  If  so,  how  does  it  happen  that  the 
decisions  of  those  courts  stand  so  high  with  our 
own? 

The  PRESIDENT,  the  liour  of  twelve  hav- 
ing arrived,  announced  the  special  orders  of  the 
day. 

Mr.  DAVIS  moved  to  dispense  with  the  spe- 
cial order,  which  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  The  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son (Mr.  Hardin)  has  said  that  the  court  would 
be  required  to  sit  nine  or  ten  weeks  in  each  place. 
If  there  was  any  evidence  that  it  would  sit  so 
long,  it  is  conclusive  evidence  that  the  court 
should  be  branched.  He  tells  you  that  thev  sit 
now  but  fifty  days  at  each  term,  that  is  about 
eight  weeks.  Now  when  you  come  to  make  the 
calculation,  I  think  that  if  you  branch  the  court, 
and  require  them  to  sit  in  four  different  places, 
they  will  not  be  engaged  more  than  thirty  two 
weeks  out  of  the  fifty  two.  The  gentleman  has 
told  us  that  we  ought  not  to  be  too  specific  in 
what  we  do,  and  yet  what  do  we  find  in  his  bill? 
He  has  been  so  specific  as  to  set  down  even  what 
shall  be  the  amount  of  the  judges'  salary.  That 
is  specific  enough  in  all  conscience.  And  his 
circuit  bill  reminds  me  that  if  the  principle  is 
correct,  that  the  court  of  appeals  shall  sit  all 
the  time  in  one  place,  why  not  apply  the  same 
principle  to  the  circuit  judge,  and  say  he  shall 
sit  in  but  one  place?  If  it  is  so  undignified  for 
the  judges  of  one  court  to  travel  over  the  whole 
state,  why  is  it  not  as  equally  iindignified  for 
the  others  to  travel  over,  as  some  of  them  have 
to  do,  ten  counties?  It  is  because  of  the  ci  - 
position  to  bring  justice  as  near  to  every  man's 
door  as  mav  be.  But  I  have  supposed  that  four 
weeks  would  be  sufficient  to  do  the  business  of 
the  court  of  appeals  at  any  one  of  the  branches. 
Perhaps  the  one  in  which  Frankfort  would  be 
situat*;d,  if  Louisville  was  thrown  in  with  it, 
would  require  five  or  six  weeks.  "We  find  that, 
during  the  four  weeks  of  the  last  terra  the  court 
decided  one  hundred  and  thirty  cases,  and  that 
was  quite  as  many  as  any  district  would  ever 
have  before  it,  unless  it  was  the  one  in  which 
Frankfort  and  Louisville  were  situated.  Clearly, 
then,  tliey  would  not  be  required  to  sit  longer 
at  all  the  points  than  sixteen  weeks  at  one ; 
that  would  be  thirty  two  weeks  a  year,  and  if 
two  more  weeks  were  added  for  districts  where 
there  might  be  more  business,  still  that  would 
not  require  more  than  thirty  six  weeks.  And  if 
44 


we  are  going  to  pay-  these  qfficers  so  well,  cer- 
tainly they  can  afford  to  labor  these  thirty  six 
weeks. 

The  gentleman  from  Nelson  has  said  that  there 
were  a  few  lawyers,  who  brought  up  all  of  the 
cases  to  the  court  of  appeals.  I  have  heard  it 
said  also  that  some  gentlemen  had  such  influence 
over  courts  and  juries  that  they  could  gain  any 
cause  they  pleased.  The  gentleman  has  told  us 
that  he  was  advised  that  the  best  way  to  succeed 
in  the  practice  of  law,  was  to  be  on  good  terms 
with  the  judge,  and  I  suppose  the  gentleman  has 
acted  on  that  advice.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that 
any  judge  has  been  partial  to  that  gentleman, 
but  we  all  know  what  his  talents  are,  and  his 
great  ability  to  make  the  worse  appear  the  better 
cause,  and  m  this  way  he  is  able  to  have  the  de- 
cision in  his  own  way.  Hence  I  suppose  those 
on  the  opposite  side  find  themselves  obliged  to 
come  up  here  to  seek  redress  at  the  hands  of  the 
court  of  appeals. 

I  was  sorry  to  hear  the  gentleman  from  Jessa- 
mine intimate  that  this  was  a  lawyers'  project. 
Is  this  so?  If  we  were  to  look  around  the 
house  and  see  how  the  lawyers  stand,  they  would 
be  found  to  be  divided  into  two  parties,  those 
nearest  the  capital  forming  one,  and  those  distant 
from  it,  forming  another  party.  Those  that  live 
away  off  want  justice  extended  to  them,  and  those 
that  live  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  capital  want 
to  get  all  the  fees.  I  will  not  impu<^e  such  mo- 
tives, but  it  is  a  significant  matter  that  the  law- 
yers here  are  divided  as  I  have  intimated — the 
gentleman  from  Henry  excepted.  I  find  him  at  all 
times  liberal,  thougli  1  am  not  disposed  to  com- 
plain of  the  illiberally  of  any  gentleman,  be- 
cause I  believe  all  are  (iisposed  to  do  what  they 
believe  to  be  right. 

It  was  enquired  this  morning  if  this  court  was 
to  be  migratory — a  term  which  I  do  not  under 
stand  to  be  applicable  to  the  proposition  to 
branch  it ;  and  if  that  was  proper  in  reference  to 
the  court,  why  not  apply  the  same  principle  to 
the  legislature  ?  I  think  there  is  a  great  differ- 
ence between  the  two  cases.  They  were  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  people,  from  every  county  in 
the  state,  and  fully  understood  what  the  people 
wanted.  As  in  the  convention  the  people  were 
here  by  their  representatives.  Are  tliey  present  in 
the  court  by  their  representatives?  I  think  not.  It 
is  enquired  also  why  should  not  the  govemortrav- 
el  about  the  state  as  well  as  the  court  ?  "What  has 
he  to  do  with  the  administration  of  justice,  and 
the  decision  of  causes  !  Nothing,  as  it  appears 
to  me.  Gentlemen  have  also  referred  in  the  same 
connection  to  the  reporter.  The  present  reporter 
is  as  worthy  a  man,  and  as  well  qualified  for 
the  duties  of  his  office  as  any  man  in  the  state, 
but  is  it  his  duty  to  be  in  court  ?  Not  at  all.  He 
has  the  opinion  handed  over  to  him  as  it  is  writ- 
ten out,  and  he  gets  it  printed.  I  happened  to 
be  here  when  a  proposition  was  before  the  legis- 
lature offering  to  print  these  reports  for  two  dol- 
!  lers  and  twenty-five  cents  a  copy;  and  although 
I  the  gentleman  was  not  a  lawyer,  nor  indeed  was 
i  he  required  to  be;  he  agreed  to  have  them  done 
I  as  well  as  those  for  which  the  state  pays,  I  be- 
lieve five  dollars  for  every  five  hundred  pages, 
and  a  dollar  perhaps  for  every  additional  one 
hundred  pages,  or  five  or  six  dollars  a  volume. 
It  is  also  enquired  whether  it  is  not  a  fair  propo-  i 


34G 


Sltion  to  submit  tliis  question  to  the  people  V  It 
is  just  as  fair  as  to  submit  to  them  whether  they 
will  have  three,  or  four  judges,  or  even  whether 
there  shall  be  a  court  of  appeals  or  not.  I  sup- 
pose the  people  sent  us  here  for  some  purpose, 
and  having  come  here,  let  us  do  our  duty  as  the 
people  require.  And  it  does  seem  to  me,  when 
we  look  at  the  suits  in  the  circuit  courts,  and 
compare  the  number  of  them  that  are  brought  up 
to  the  court  of  appeals,  with  the  number  that 
come  up  from  around  Frankfort,  it  will  appear 
that  either  the  lawyers  are  greatly  superior  in 
this  part  of  the  country,  or  else  they  are  in  poses- 
sion  of  great  facilities  for  having  their  causes 
adjudicated.  These  facilities  I  am  desirious  to 
see  extended  to  every  part  of  the  commonweal tli, 
as  far  as  is  possible.  So  far  as  the  people  of 
Frankfort  are  concerned,  there  is  no  man  who 
has  a  higher  esteem  for  them  than  I  have,  and 
in  regard  to  the  capital  I  hope  they  will  always 
have  it  among  them,  and  that  it  will  never  be 
removed . 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  It  is  said  that  a  learned  cor- 
oner in  Indiana  on  one  occasion  in  charging  his 
jury,  laid  down  the  proposition  that  there  were 
three  modes  by  which  a  man  might  come  to  his 
death,  "by  accident,  by  encident,  and  by  the  acts 
of  an  encenduary."  Tlie  delegate  from  Mont- 
gomery has  not  taken  exactly  either  of  these 
modes  of  killing  off  Frankfort  and  her  citizens, 
although  his  course  may  come  under  the  head  of 
one  of  the  learned  coroner's  classification  in  the 
eyes  of  some.  But  I  do  not  charge  that  he  is 
doing  it  by  the  "acts  of  an  incendiary."  Yet 
for  one  who  manifests  such  high  regard  for  my 
town  and  people,  as  the  gentleman  has  expres- 
sed, who  has  not  suifered  any  inconvenience 
from  attending  the  appellate  court  here,  but 
found  it  pleasant,  agreeable,  and  profitable,  it 
might  seem  strange  that  he  has  been  arming 
himself  with  such  weapons  as  he  has  used  on 
this  occasion. 

What  delegate,  let  me  ask,  Mr.  President,  in- 
troduced Frankfort  and  her  influences  into  this 
discussion?  Certainly  no  one  will  charge  me? 
Nor  will  the  charge  lie  at  the  doors  of  any  of 
those  who  oppose  the  branching  of  the  court  of 
appeals.  I  leave  the  convention  to  determine. 
When  I  am  compelled  to  fall  down  in  argument 
for  objecting  to  any  constitutional  provision,  or 
in  its  advocacy  to  the  mere  wishes  or  interests  of 
a  single  county,  or  her  influences,  the  question 
will  not  be  considered  worth  the  opposition  or 
necessary  to  be  established.  I  hope,  sir,  my  vis- 
ion is  not  so  far  limited  that  I  cannot  see  great 
interests  to  be  promoted  in  the  state  at  large. 

The  gentleman  asks  what  has  the  governor  of 
Kentucky  to  do  with  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice? I  respond  much  to  do  with  it  in  the  vari- 
ous executive  branches.  Had  the  gentleman 
spent  a  small  portion  of  the  time  he  devoted  in 
making  out  tables,  that  prove  nothing,  that  ad- 
vances an  argument  for  his  branching  proposi- 
tion, in  a.scertaining  the  amount  of  business  the 
people  of  Kentucky  do  in  the  executive  branch- 
es of  their  government,  he  would  have  found 
that  the  arguments,  on  the  score  of  inconveni- 
ence to  the  people  in  visiting  the  .seat  of  govern- 
ment, woula  apply  with  much  more  force  to  the 
govenior's  being  stationary  at  one  place  than 
ta  th«  court  of  appeals. 


The  gentleman  asks  "what  lias  Frankfort  not 
got?"  aikl  answers,  "she  has  the  governor,  second 
auditor,  register,  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
minister  to  Mexico,  consul  to  Liverpool,  and 
commissioner  of  Indian  affairs."  All  true,  sir. 
The  citizens  hold  these  oflices.  But  the  gentle- 
man says  he  does  not  complain.  If  not,  why 
does  he  introduce  such  statements,  invidiously, 
or  seemiiiglv  so? 

Did  the  citizens  of  Frankfort  create  these  offi- 
ces, or  fill  them?  What  agency  had  her  people 
in  causing  the  distinguished  gentleman,  now  at 
the  head  of  the  executive  department,  to  fill 
that  office?  None,  sir,  whatever.  He  was  selec- 
ted by  a  convention  of  delegates  from  all  parts 
of  the  state. 

The  mode  of  crying  out  "Frankfort  influence" 
is  no  new  thing  to  me.  Frequently  have  I  seen 
members  of  the  legislature  elect  to  the  petty  offi- 
ces, necessary  to  the  organization  of  both  houses 
and  the  management  of  their  business,  citizens 
of  Frankfort,  and  then  heard  them  charging  that 
it  was  brought  about  by  Franfort  influence. 

Because  a  turnpike  road  runs  through  the 
town,  in  which  the  state  is  interested,  that  is 
named  as  a  great  matter  in  the  grave  charges 
against  the  citizens. 

I  regret  to  see  honorable  delegates  resorting  to 
such  means  to  promote  their  favorite  projects; 
and  again,  sir,  protest  that  they  find  argument 
and  sound  reason  to  sustain  them,  rather  than 
denunciation,  so  unmerited  as  it  has  been,  from 
any  act  of  my  constituents. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  It  is  true  that  in  the  remarks 
I  submitted  to  the  house  some  half  hour  ago,  I 
stated  that  there  Avere  lawyers  in  Frankfort  and 
the  counties  adjacent  who  perhaps  were  as  much 
interested  in  continuinj'  the  court  of  appeals 
here,  as  lawvers  in  the  districts  possibly  could 
be  in  branching  the  court  of  appeals;  but  I  did 
not  intend  by  that  remark  to  intimate  that  the 
feeling  was  stronger  in  the  one  class  than  in  the 
other.  I  make  the  remark  to  meet  the  sugges- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Jessamine,  who  stated 
it  to  be  a  lawyer  project,  or  rather  that  it  would 
so  be  considered  by  the  people,  for  he  did  not 
himself  declare  that  he  believed  it  to  be  so. 
Now,  I  have  been  considering  upon  the  vote  ta- 
ken yesterday,  and  could  not  discover  that  this 
proposition  of  branching  had  received  any 
strength  from  many  lawyers  either  of  Franklin 
or  the  surrounding  counties.  It  has  been  asked 
' — what  has  Frankfort  got?  In  proportion  to 
its  population,  Frankfort  lias  received  more  from 
the  public  treasury  than  any  other  town  in  the 
state.  If  I  am  not  mistaken  the  very  streets 
that  surround  this  capital  were  paved  at  the  pub- 
lic expense,  and  not  at  the  expense  of  the  citi- 
zens of  Frankfort.  The  gentleman  from  Frank- 
lin shakes  his  head,  but  I  have  been  informed 
that  the  whole  state  has  been  taxed  to  raise  mo- 
ney for  that  purpose.  There  are  various  otlier 
benefits  Frankfort  is  continually  receiving. — 
From  the  adoption  of  tlie  present  constitution 
down  to  the  present  moment,  one  hundred  and 
thirty  eight  delegates  have  yearly  assembled 
here,  and  it  is  a  fair  estimate  that  each  one  of 
tliem  has  left  a  dollar  a  day  in  Frankfort.  They 
have  assembled  here  yearly  and  have  thus  fur- 
nished a  market  for  the  county  of  Franklin 
and  the  surrounding  counties,  and  thousands 


347 


and  teas  of  thousands  of  dollars  hare  thus  been 
annually  spent  here.  Now,  I  have  served  in  the 
legislature  ftere  for  two  years,  and  I  have  not  a 
word  to  say  against  the  citizens  of  Frankfort, 
for  they  have  always  treated  me  politely  and 
hospitably.  1\ot  have  I  made  any  attack  on  the 
people  of  Frankfort;  but  I  have  said  this:  That 
the  people  of  a  region  of  the  state  which  I  in 
part  represent  on  this  floor,  want  a  branch  of  the 
court  of  appeals  there.  They  want  the  means 
of  justice  brought  nearer  their  doors,  and  I  sta- 
ted the  reason  whv,  and  attempted  briefly  to 
enumerate  the  hardships  under  which  they  have 
been  laboring  for  the  last  fiftv  years.  I  then  said 
that  if  the  representatives  of  the  people  in  this 
convention  withheld  from  that  portion  of  the  state 
a^branchof  the  court  of  appeals  by  which  justice 
could  be  obtained  more  ejisily  than  at  present 
and  at  less  expense,  that  we  could  try  and  take 
the  court  of  appeals  itself  nearer  to  us.  If  we 
were  to  receive  the  cold  shoulder,  and  to  have 
the  backs  of  the  hands  of  the  delegates  of  this 
convention  turned  upon  us  down  there,  when 
we  asked  for  no  more  than  simple  justice,  I  then 
appeal  to  the  whole  delegation  from  that  region 
of  the  state  to  stand  up,  and  if  we  cannot  do 
any  better,  we  will  try  to  have  the  court  of  ap- 
peals removed  nearer  to  us  than  it  is  at  the  pres- 
ent time. 

The  objection  to  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, as  I  understand  it,  is  based  upon  two 
grounds.  First,  the  increase  of  expenses,  and 
secondly,  that  it  will  lower  the  dignity  of  the 
court.  It  has  come  to  this,  then,  that  these  judg- 
es of  the  court  of  appeals  degrade  themselves  if 
they  go  to  the  different  part-s  of  the  state  and 
mingle  with  the  people !  One  of  the  strongest 
arguments  against  the  life  tenure  of  the  office  is, 
that  the  judge,  after  he  has  been,  on  the  bench 
a  number  of  years,  does  not  know  the  wants  of 
the  people,  has  not  the  least  idea  of  their  spirit, 
and  does  not  appreciate  their  intelligence  and 
virtue.  If  you  branch  the  court,  and  require 
them  to  visit  the  different  portions  of  the  state, 
you  enable  the  judges  to  know  something  of  the 
people.  And  would  it  in  the  least  interfere  witli 
the  force  and  weight  of  the  judicial  decision,  if 
it  was  rendered  at  Bowlinggreen  instead  of 
Frankfort?  Xot  at  all.  There  are  thirteen 
states,  I  find,  by  a  hasty  examination  of  a  Injok 
of  constitutions  here,  m  which  their  supreme 
court  has  been  branched.  In  .some  they  are  re- 
quired to  hold  courts  in  .seven  and  eigfit  differ- 
ent places,  and  in  others  in  two,  three,  and  four. 
What  states  are  these?  One  is  the  Empire  state. 
I  call  upon  gentlemen  who  practice  in  the  appel- 
late and  other  courts  of  this  state,  and  ask  of 
them  when  they  have  found  a  point  not  decided 
npon  by  our  own  court  of  appeals,  if  there  is 
any  higher  authority  in  the  country  than  tlie 
decisions  of  the  supreme,  or  appellate  court  of 
New  York?  There  is  Massachusetts,  too — her 
court  of  appeals  is  branched.  When  you  have 
not  found  tne  decisions  of  your  own  court  to 
apply,  I  ask  where  you  find  higher  authority 
than  the  decisions  of  Massachusetts?  Virginia, 
North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Tennessee,  in 
short,  I  believe  more  than  a  majority  of  the  old 
thirteen  .<;tates  that  assembled  in  convention  and 
framed  the  federal  constitution  of  this  proud 
union,   have    branched  their  court  of  appeals. 


and  the  weight  and  authority  of  the  opinions  of 
those  courts  are  not  inferior  to  those  of  any 
courts  in  the  union.  I  live  on  the  very-  borders 
of  the  state  of  Tennessee — the  county  in  which 
I  live  is  on  the  state  line — and  I  know  some- 
thing of  the  operations  of  the  system  in  that 
state.  The  court  is  there  called  tlie  supreme 
court,  and  sits  in  three  different  districts,  and  I 
have  never  heard  the  first  man  say  that  the  de- 
cisions of  that  court  rendered  at  Knoxville, 
were  not  iust  as  dignified  and  authoritative  as 
those  rendered  at  tlie  city  of  Nashville. 

I  trust  I  shall  not  be  understood  as  imputing 
motives  here,  but  it  is  a  notorious  f£ict,  that  the 
idea  prevails,  that  there  is  an  influence  about 
this  place,  which,  when  exerted  under  a  strong 
motive,  and  where  the  interests  at  stake  are  im- 
portant enough  to  arouse  it,  it  is  diflicult  to  re- 
sist. Why,  how  many  turnpikes  and  railroads 
are  there  running  to  other  towns  with  equal  pop- 
ulation to  this?  Where  is  the  other  town  with 
one  or  two  railroads  starting  out,  and  appropria- 
tions made  for  more,  and  turnpikes  running  in 
every  direction,  and  navigation  stopped  at  the 
town  it«!elf  ?  And  yet  nothing  has  been  done 
for  Frankfort!  I  then  only  ask  these  people 
who  have  so  long  enjoyed  all  these  advantages, 
to  submit  to  the  increase  of  a  tax  of  half  a  cent, 
for  the  purpose  of  extending  justice  to  us,  when 
we  have  been  paying  into  the  coffers  of  the  state 
for  vears,  thousands  and  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  aoUars,  to  be  expended  here,  and  fill  the 
pockets  and  purses  of  the  citizens  of  Frankfort. 
And  will  they  not  now  submit  to  a  little  increas- 
ed taxation,  to  enable  us  to  obtain  free  access  to 
the  court  of  appeals?     That  is  all  we  ask. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  regret  excee<Hngly  the 
character  that  this  debate  has  now  assumecl.  I 
think  it  portends  no  good.  I  dislike  to  see  on 
this  floor  crimination  and  recrimination.  I  am 
pained  to  witness  such  an  array  of  sectional 
feeling,  and  local  prejudice,  so  well  calculated 
to  call  up  the  worst  feelings  of  our  nature.  This 
hall  is  an  inappropriate  theatre  for  such  displays. 
It  is  unquestionably  not  a  proper  way  to  get  at 
correct  action.  It  certainly  can  lead  none  of  us 
to  expect  that  it  will  give  any  force  to  our  work 
when  we  shall  place  tne  new  constitution  before 
the  people  for  their  approbation.  And  for  what 
is  it  all  done?  It  seems  to  me  we  can  meet  here 
and  enter  into  an  interchange  of  opinions,  and 
convince  each  other  of  error,  if  error  exists, 
without  this  personal  feeling,  this  local,  section- 
al, jealousy,  which  is  unworthv  of  the  state,  un- 
worthy of  ourselves,  and  entirely  iinworthy  of 
the  great  cause  in  which  we  are  engaged!  For 
myself,  I  am  opposed  to  branching  the  court  of 
appeals.  I  shall  give  one  or  two  reasons,  with- 
out entering  into  a  lengthened  argument,  by 
which  I  have  been  led  to  this  conclusion.  In 
advance,  I  say  that  I  am  actuated  by  no  sel- 
fish feeling.  I  stand  not  here  to-day  as  a  rep- 
resentative from  northern  Kentucky  alone,  not 
as  a  gentleman  blind  to  the  interests  of  southern 
Kentucky,  because  I  happen  not  to  live  among 
them,  but  I  stand  here  as  aKentuckian,  prepared 
to  act  for  the  whole  state.  I  stand  as  a  repre- 
sentative on  this  floor  prepared  to  follow  gentle- 
men when  tliey  shall  convince  me  that  their 
proposition  is  right,  and  to  give  it  my  humble 
support.     But   when  threats  are   thrown  out — 


348 


when  denunciations  are  made — when  local  pre- 
judices are  appealed  to,  and  the  worst  passions 
of  our  nature  are  attempted  to  be  aroused  against 
this  town,  or  tliat  town,  it  creates  a  bitterness 
of  feeling  which,  if  persisted  in,  must  lead  to 
deleterious  results  and  wrong  conclusions.  I  do 
not  know,  myself,  that  I  have  any  particular 
feeling  of  attachment  to  Frankfort,  except  that 
it  is  tiie  capital  of  my  state.  If  there  are  un- 
derhanded influences  at  work  here — if  there  is 
certain  wire-pulling  behind  the  scenes  here  as 
certain  gentlemen  have  intimated — a  sort  of 
central  influence — in  the  name  of  God  do  not  let 
us  attempt  to  strike  at  great  principles  because 
we  dislike  Frankfort.  Let  us  remove  the  scat 
of  government,  but  do  not  let  us  do  that  which 
we  know  to  be  wrong  because  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment, in  the  opinion  of  certain  gentlemen,  is 
in  the  wrong  place.  If  it  is  wrong  to  branch 
the  court  of  appeals,  let  us  not  do  wrong  be- 
cause certain  delegates  on  this  floor  desire  to  re- 
move the  seat  of  government!  We  had  better 
remove  the  seat  of  government  and  get  rid  of 
this  trouble.  That  is  my  idea;  and  when  gen- 
tlemen tell  how  many  officers  Frankfort  has 
had,  what  amount  she  has  received  from  the  pub- 
lic treasury,  who  paved  the  streets,  and  who  built 
this  house  and  that  house,  I  pass  it  all  by  as 
irrelevant  to  this  discussion,  and  as  unworthy 
this  hall.  I  think  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
great  question  whether  the  appellate  tribunal  in 
this  state  should  or  should  not  be  branched.  If 
Frankfort  is  unhealthy — if  Frankfort  is  not  cen- 
tral enough — or  if  any  thing  else  is  wrong,  why 
let  us  select  another  place  for  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment; but  wherever  the  seat  of  government  is, 
there,  in  heaven's  name,  let  us  have  the  appel- 
late court  held!  It  is,  in  my  judgment,  the  proper 
place,  and  the  only  place  where  it  ought  to  be 
Wd! 

The  first  reason  why  I  am  opposed  to  branch- 
ing the  court  is,  that  it  tends  to  destroy  the  inde- 
pendence and  the  stability  of  the  judiciary. — 
what  leads  to  enlightened  opinions  from  any 
judicial  tribunal V  What  tends  to  judicial  stabil- 
ity? Why,  correctness  in  the  settlement  of  the 
principles  contained  in  legal  decisions.  How  is 
that  to  be  arrived  at?  By  laborious,  patient, 
unceasing  investigation  of  all  authorities  within 
their  reach,  and  by  a  calm  consultation  and  de- 
liberation over  them.  The  science  of  the  law, 
like  every  other  science,  is  progressive.  New 
books,  as  well  as  new  principles,  are  every  day 
being  developed  and  brought  forth.  Late  edi- 
tions of  English  works  and  American  editions, 
with  American  notes  and  authorities  of  these 
English  works,  are  every  day  being  published. 
The  judges,  in  order  to  arrive  at  correct  princi- 
ples on  any  subject  should  have  all  the  light, 
and  all  the  means  of  consulting  these  new  works. 
While  judges  must  exercise  the  labor  and  pa- 
tience of  investigation,  yet  they  must  also  have, 
in  fine  libraries,  the  materials  and  legal  {]|uarries 
upon  which  this  labor  and  this  patient  investi- 
gation is  to  be  exerted.  Can  you  furnish  these 
materials  more  readily  by  liaving  four  branches 
or  one  single  appellate  court?  Is  it  easier  to 
have  one  fine  library,  and  a  fund  set  apart  in 
this  constitution  for  it«  annual  increase,  by  the 

fmrchase  of  new  books,  or  is  it  easier  to  have 
bur  branches  and  four   diminutive    libraries, 


without  increase?  I  think  it  is  easier  to  hav«? 
one.  And  by  having  but  one,  we  are  more  likely 
to  have  a  good  one,  with  much  better  prospect 
of  having  it  annually  increased  by  valuable  ad^ 
ditions,  than  if  we  had  four. 

Look  at  the  supreme  court  of  the  United  States. 
Let  any  gentleman  go  into  that  court,  and  I  care 
not  hoAV  distinguished  or  how  humble  he  may 
be — I  care  not  how  much  prejudiced  against  the 
legal  profession  that  visitor  may  be — lethiinbea 
lawyer  or  not,  he  Avill,  on  entering  that  august 
tribunal,  feel  proud  of  it  as  one  of  the  institutions 
of  his  country.  If  he  is  ulawyer  he  will  feel  proud 
of  his  profession;  if  notaprofessionalraanhewill 
be  proud  of  the  intellect,  the  dignity  and  i  mposing 
aspect  of  the  tribunal  itself,  the  ability  with  which 
questions  are  there  discussed,  and  above  all  with 
the  solemn  and  impressive  manner  in  which  the 
learned,  able,  and  well  digested  opinions  of  that 
tribunal  are  delivered.  Would  gentlemen  branch 
that  court?  It  seems  to  me  that  if  there  is  any 
thing  in  this  argument  of  convenience  in  travel- 
ing to  and  from  courts,  as  we  have  heard  to-day, 
that  gentlemen  living  in  Texas  would  find  a 
great  many  more  reasons  to  urge  against  the  in- 
conveniences of  having  to  travel  to  Washington 
city,  than  can  be  urged  by  any  man  in  Kentucky? 
But  I  have  never  heard  any  such  complaints  from 
the  people  of  any  part  of  the  confederacy.  In 
the  supreme  court  they  have  lawyers  too  from 
every  part  of  the  Union — they  have  two  fine  li- 
braries, consultation  rooms,  printed  briefs,  print- 
ed records;  no  pains  and  no  expense  is  spared  in 
order  to  arrive  at  safe  and  correct,  legal  or  consti-' 
tutional  conclusions.  How  consistent  the  opin- 
ions of  that  court^ — how  stable — how  uniform — 
how  able — how  distinguished?  When  we  hear 
of  a  Mansfield  and  a  Hale,  and  a  host  of  other 
bright  luminaries  who  have  adorned  the  English 
bench  in  former  years,  what  American  heart  does 
not  thrill  with  pride  and  pleasure  when  he  heai's 
even  upon  tlie  other  side  of  the  Atlantic,  that  We 
have,  in  the  names  of  a  Marshall  and  a  Story,  ju- 
rists worthy  to  sit  side  by  side  Avith  them,  and 
associated  with  them  as  distinguished  compeers' 
I  believe  the  branching  of  the  court  of  appeals 
will  be  the  first  stroke  at  the  stability  of  tne  ji'i- 
diciary.  And  it  is  not,  Mr.  Chairman,  as  u 
northern  Kentuckian  or  as  a  sectional  man  that 
I  speak,  but  as  one  who  feels  deeply  the  impor- 
tance of  a  respectable  and  independent  judiciary. 
I  speak  as  one  who  desires  to  see  the  character  of 
our  jurisprudence  raised  and  elevated — a  juris- 
prudence which  by  its  learning  and  stability 
shall  rank  with  any  in  the  Union.  When  gentle- 
men tell  me  that  you  can  have  the  same  light,  the 
same  mature  deliberation  in  branching  the  court 
of  appeals,  I  point  them  to  those  states  where 
branching  has  existed,  and  I  ask,  has  it  given 
satisfaction?  Let  me  tell  my  friend  from  Simp- 
son, that  some  of  the  very  states  that  he  has 
quoted  are  now  praying  to  be  delivered  from  the 
system  of  brancning  their  appellats  court  wliich 
they  had  unfortunately  adopted  in  their  consti- 
tution. 

I  know  a  state  which  has  just  called  a  conven- 
tion, and  one  of  the  crvinp  evils  is  the  low  char- 
acter of  their  judicial  decisions — the  perfect  beg- 
ging of  justice — I  mean  the  state  of  Ohio. — 
There  Ihcy  have  these  migratory  courts  with  a 
vengeance.    Had   1   time  I   could,  by  the  de- 


349 


cisioijs  of  cases  there,  show  the  instability  of  such 
a  system.  I  could  show  that  in  one  prominent 
case  at  least,  (Zerc-her  vs.  Good,)  after  solemn 
determination  of  an  important  judicial  question 
— under  which  the  courts  acted  for  years — they 
have  recently  taken  it  all  back  and  unsettled  all 
the  judicial  decisions  of  like  principle. 

Mr.  Chairman:  Judges  are  like  other  men. — 
They  are  subject  to  the  same  physical  infirmi- 
ties. Were  I  called  in  bad  weather  and  over 
bad  roads  to  go  five  hundred  miles  to  argue  a 
case,  would  not  the  fatigue  of  the  journey  ren- 
der me,  in  some  degree,  unfit  to  perform  the  du- 
ty for  some  days.  Gentlemen  may  talk  about  it 
as  they  please.  There  is  uo  difference  between 
judges  and  other  inen!  Take  the  judges  for 
eight  or  ten  months  to  distant  parts  of  the  state 
— far  from  home — and  there  will  be  a  natural 
anxiety  to  get  home;  a  feverish  restlessness  in 
the  minds  of  the  judges  to  hurry  through  and 
get  home,  which,  if  it  is  not  calculated  to  render 
them  wholly  unfit,  will  at  least  tend  to  banish 
and  keep  away  that  mature,  calm,  and  patient 
deliberation  which  is  so  essential  to  the  consul- 
tation room  of  every  judicial  tribunal.  I  am 
disposed  as  an  humSle  member  of  the  conven- 
tion to  go  as  far  as  any  man  could  go  to  accom- 
modate the  whole  state.  But  at  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment, which  should  be  central  in  its  location, 
some  inconveniences  must  result  to  tho.se  living 
on  the  extreme  confines  of  the  state  in  their 
business  with  the  state.  It  is  not,  Mr.  Chairman, 
confined  to  the  judiciary,  but  it  applies  to  every 
other  department  of  the  government.  If,  to 
overcome  this,  it  is  necessarv  to  branch  the  judi- 
cial department,  why  not  branch  the  other  de- 
partments of  the  government?  Let  me  illus- 
trate. Suppose  the  neighbors  of  my  friend  from 
Simpson  (who  utters  such  bitter,  complaints,) 
desire  a  land  warrant — would  th«y  not  have  to 
apply  to  the  county  court  first,  then  to  come  to 
Frankfort  and  bring  a  survey  which  they  would 
deposit  in  the  register's  office,  to  get  a  receipt 
from  the  register,  and  at  the  end  of  six  months 
receive  their  patent.  Suppose  again,  money  has 
to  be  paid  bv  sheriffs  into  the  treasury  depart- 
ment. Do  they  not  all  have  to  come  here  and 
settle  with  the  second  auditor?  "Wherever  the 
seat  of  government  may  be  located,  those  who 
live  in  the  distant  parts  of  the  state  having  busi- 
ne,ss  with  the  state,  requiring  them  to  be  present, 
will  be  put  to  some  inconvenience,  ^ow,  it 
strikes  me  that  all  the  argument  of  my  friend 
from  Simpson,  in  order  to  get  over  the  injustice 
which  he  speaks  of,  would  require  us  to  have 
traveling  auditors,  treasurers,  and  registers,  and 
all  these  departments  ought  to  be  branched. 

Mr.  Chairman:  The  question  which  I  com- 
mend to  all  the  advocates  of  the  branching  sys- 
tem is.  whether  it  is  not  better  to  have  the  court  of 
appeals  here  and  get  justice,  than  have  a  court 
of  appeals  at  every  man's  own  door,  and  obtain 
a  sort  of  peddling  out  of  justice — a  species  of 
justice  which  will  be  only  half  administered, 
because  settled  on  wrong  principles.  Is  a  man 
more  oenefitted  by  having  wrong  decisions  at 
his  own  door,  than  if  he  were  to  come  here  to 
the  seat  of  government  and  have  his  suit  decided 
on  correct  ba.ses.  I  think  myself  that  the  peo- 
ple, if  they  believe  they  will  nave  abetter  court 
here,  a  more  enlightened  court,  more  stable  de- 


cisions, and  a  higher  character  given  fo  the  ju- 
risprudence of  our  state,  would  prefer  the  ap- 
pellate court,  here  than  to  have  a  migratory 
court  traveling  through  certain  districts. 

I  shall  not  go  into  the  large  increased  expen- 
diture which  would  necessanly  be  incurred  by 
a  branching  of  the  appellate  court.  That  ques- 
tion, and  tlie  details  of  increased  expenditure, 
has  been  gone  into  by  the  gentlemen  who  have 
preceded  me.  What  1  want  is,  that  when  I  get 
here  I  shall  find  a  learned,  stable,  safe,  and  in- 
dependent judiciary;  and  I  wish  to  have  the 
salaries  of  the  judges  fixed  in  the  constitution 
at  an  adequate  minimum.  Why?  Because  I 
think  that  also  tends  to  preserve  and  keep  the  ju- 
diciary independent.  When  I  was  in  the  legis- 
lature for  one  or  two  years,  I  frequently  heard 
propositions  made  to  reduce  the  salaries  of  the 
judges,  although  they  were  but  twelve  hundretl 
dollars.  There  were  gentlemen  in  that  body 
who  thought  they  were  too  high,  and  bills  were 
continually  introduced,  and  time  and  money 
was  continually  spent  in  discussing  the  proprie- 
ty of  reducing  the  salaries;  and  the  money  thus 
wa.sted  in  useless  discussions  and  fruitless  ef- 
forts at  reducing  salaries,  if  it  had  been  applied 
to  the  judges'  salaries,  would  have  given  us  the 
best  talent  in  the  state.  I  think  that  while  I  am 
not  for  paying  any  more  respect  to  our  judicial 
department  than  to  any  other,  I  am  for  keeping 
it  firm  and  independent.  I  am  for  putting  a 
limit,  beyond  which  the  legislature  shall  not 
come,  whatever  that  limit  may  be.  Let  this  con- 
vention agree  upon  what  would  be  the  true  min- 
imum compensation,  and  beyond  that  do  not"  let 
the  legislature  go.  Neither  make  it  too  high  or 
too  low,  but  make  it  adequate  and  sufficient! 
Make  it  ample  to  command  the  best  talent  in  the 
state. 

My  friend  from  Montgomery  remarked  that  it 
was  strange  that  gentlemen  supposed  that  the 
attorney  general  would  ever  be  required  to  at- 
tend a  court  of  appeals.  My  friend  seemed  to 
think  that  every  thing  could  be  done  by  brief. 
I  do  not  think  it  at  all  strange,  and  I  think  the 
gentleman  from  Montgomery  is  entirely  mista- 
ken. Whether  the  attorney  general  would  or 
not,  be  required  to  attend  the  appellate  court 
in  the  several  districts,  would  depend  on  circum- 
stances. There  are  ca.ses  where  he  could  not  ar- 
gue by  brief.  One  is  the  prosecution  for  mal- 
feasance of  all  public  officers.  But  a  few  years 
ago  the  clerk  in  one  of  the  largest  counties, 
Fayette,  was  tried ,  and  for  two  or  three  Aveeks 
was  prosecuted  before  this  court.  Now,  I  ask 
if  the  court  had  been  branched,  and  the  court 
had  been  sitting  at  the  time  of  said  pro.secution, 
if  in  Greene  county,  would  not  the  attorney  gen- 
eral have  been  obliged  to  attend?  Whether  he 
must  attend  or  not,  will  depend  on  the  business 
of  the  court.,  which  none  can  foresee.  The  ne-' 
cessity  of  his  personal  presence  will  depend  on 
the  character  of  cases  arising  in  the  court. — 
When,  however,  you  appoint  an  attorney  general 
he  will  look  to  all  these  probable  contingent 
services,  and  he  will  require  a  salary,  if  he  be  a 
man  of  fine  attainments,  that  shall  be  a  suitable 
compensation. 

But,  a-s  I  said.  I  do  not  intend  to  enter  into  the 
subject  of  expenses.  I  think  that  a  secondary 
topic.    I  go  on  the  broad  principle  that  the  char- 


350 


fl.i't<^r  of  our  jurisprudence  will  be  elevated^  and 
I  desire  to  see  it  stand  among  the  first  in  the 
uni)n.  I  desire  to  see  good  judges,  that  when 
our  commonwealth  comes  into  competition  with 
ot  lers,  for  the  service  of  lier  sons,  she  sliall  give 
P')od  prices  and  command  the  highest  talent. — 
Tnen  fix  some  adequate  minimum — give  them  the 
means  of  light  and  of  investigating  cases,  and 
require  them  to  sit  at  the  seat  of  government. 
I  do  not  speak  of  P'rankfort — I  speak  of  the  seat 
of  government,  wherever  it  may  be.  There  re- 
quire tliem  to  sit,  and  proceed  with  the  business 
until  the  whole  docket  is  disposed  of.  I  came 
here  not  absolutely  pledged  to  an  elective  judi- 
ciary. I  should  prefer,  and  I  expect  to  go  for, 
the  election  of  juclges  by  the  people,  becatise  I 
believe  the  people  Avill  disregard  these  minor, 
sectional,  pei"sonal,  and  improper  influences, 
which  have  hitherto  operated,  by  the  modes 
•whicli  have  existed  in  Kentucky. 

I  prefer  the  people  to  the  legisLature;  that  with 
nie  is  tlie  last  mode.  When  I  was  canvassing 
last  summer,  I  expresssed  my  preference  for  the 
people  as  against  tlie  governor  and  the  legisla- 
ture. I  reserved  to  myself  the  right,  as  1  still 
reserve  it,  to  go  for  any  otlier  mode,  if  any 
should  be  suggested,  in  preference  to  that.  But 
I  believe  that  the  people  are  fully  competent  ; 
that  they  will  not  only  disregard  political,  but 
all  improper  influences.  No  plan  is  thought  of 
but  that  oy  the  people.  When  I  hear  gentlemen 
say  that  one  or  two  individuals  will  lead  a 
whole  district  captive,  and  the  whole  will  bo  in 
the  hands  of  a  tew  intriguers,  I  think  they  do 
injustice  to  the  virtue  and  intelligence  of  the 
people.  It  is  because  I  have  the  utmost  confi- 
dence in  that  virtue  and  intelligence,  that  I  pre- 
fer that  mode  of  appointment  over  that  by  the 
governor,  and  the  legislature.  It  is  not  so  much 
in  the  mere  appointment,  as  it  is  in  their  proper 
independence,  after  you  have  appointed  the 
judges.  Keen  them  above  the  influence  of  a  bare 
majority  of  the  legislature;  hold  them  responsi- 
ble to  the  people;  let  their  living  not  depend 
upon  the  Avliinis  or  caprice  which  from  time  to 
time  may  show  itself  in  this  hall.  Fix  a  point 
beyond  which  that  legislature  cannot  go  ;  put 
them  in  for  six  or  eight  years;  give  them  faciliv 
ties  and  means  of  light,  and  1  have  no  fear  that 
•we  shall  not  have,  not  only  a  good  and  firm,  but 
an  able  judiciary. 

One  other  consideration,  and  I  am  done.  I 
have  very  unexpectedly,  and  in  a  very  desultory 
manner,  given  what  I  thought  was  the  leading 
objection  to  branching  the  court  of  appeals.  Oth- 
ers have  given  reasons  wliich  with  me,  are  mere 
secondary  considerations.  But  I  would  com- 
mend to  the  members  of  this  convention,  a  spirit 
of  harmony  and  conciliation  in  this  matter.  I 
appreciate  the  warm  zeal  of  my  friend  from 
Simpson,  i^nd  it  is  natural  that  my  friend  from 
Franklin  should  feel  excited  when  sneers  were 
cast  against  his  county  and  town;  but  I  appeal 
to  botn  these  gentlemen,  as  well  as  to  every  del- 
egate on  this  floor,  if  we  would  not  be  acting 
wisely,  to  let  this  matter  rest  where  it  can  be 
reached.  If  a  majority  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky desire  to  branch  this  court  of  appeals,  as 
an  humble  servant,  I  shall  yield  my  opinion, 
however  honest,  and  bow  with  the  most  perfect 
acquiescence  to  their  will.     Therefore,  let  us  put 


it  into  the  constitution,  that  it  may  be  branched 
if  it  shall  be  demanded  by  the  people — let  us 
leave  it  for  the  legislature  to  determine  when,  if 
ever,  this  shall  be  done.  This  is  a  sort  of  olive- 
branch  that  meets  with  my  most  hearty  appro- 
bation. It  is  not  denying  any  portion  of  the 
Eeople  justice;  it  is  not  forcing  them  to  come  up 
ere  against  their  will.  If  they  desire  to  have 
This  court  branched,  all  they  have  to  do,  is  to  in- 
struct their  representatives  to  do  it.  Their  fiat 
would  be  the  law  of  the  land;  then  every  gen- 
tleman would  be  satisfied;  whereas,  if  they  do 
not  desire  it,  if  it  is  unpopular,  and  not  demand- 
ed by  the  popular  will,  we  have  still  done  wise- 
ly; because  we  have  kept  it  out  of  the  constitu- 
tion. We  shall  go  before  the  people  with  this 
new  constitution,  having  both  parties  united  in 
its  favor.  Those  who  have  opposed  branching, 
as  proposed  in  the  bill,  will  achieve  what  they 
want,  unless  a  majority  of  the  people  of  Kentuc- 
ky should  hereaft«r  desire  this  court  branched 
throtigh  legislative  action — while  on  the  other 
hand,  those  who  are  in  favor  of  the  plan  of 
branching,  as  proposed  by  the  committee,  will 
have  a  mode  of  effecting  their  object. 
On  motion,  the  convention  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  NOVEMBER  3,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stl'art  Robinson. 

REPORT  FROM   A    COMMITTEE. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  from  the  committee  on 
Miscellaneous  Provisions,  made  the  following 
report,  which  was  referred  to  the  committee  of 
the  whole,  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

ARTICLE  — . 
GENERAL    PROVISIONS. 

Sec.  1.  Members  of  the  general  assembly,  and 
all  officers,  executive  and  judicial,  before  they 
enter  upon  the  execution  of  their  respective  offi- 
ces, shall  take  the  following  oath  or  affirmation: 
I  do  solemnly  swear  (or  affirm,  as  the  case  may 
be,)  that  I  will  be  faithful  and  true  to  the  coni- 
nionwealth  of  Kentucky,  so  long  as  I  continue  a 
citizen  thereof,  and  that  I  will  faithfully  exe- 
cute, to  the  best  of  my  abilities,  the  office  of 
,  according  to  law,  and  that  I  have  neither 


directly  nor  indirectly,  given,  accepted,  or  know- 
ingly carried  a  challenge,  to  any  person  or  per- 
sons, to  fight  in  single  combat  or  otherwise, 
with  any  deadly  weapon,  eitherin  or  out  of  the 
state,  since  the  adoption  of  the  present  consti- 
tution of  Kentucky,  and  that  I  will  neither  di- 
rectly nor  indirectly,  give,  accept,  or  knowingly 
carry  a  challenge  to  any  person  or  persons,  to 
fight  in  single  combat  or  otherwise,  with  any 
deadly  weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  state, 
during  my  continuance  in  office. 

Sec.  2.  Treason  against  the  commonwealth 
shall  consist  only  in  levying  war  against  it,  or 
in  adhering  to  its  enemies,  giving  them  aid  and 
comfort.  No  person  shall  be  convicted  of  trea- 
son, unless  on  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses 
to  the  same  overt  act,  or  bis  owa  confession  in 
open  court. 


351 


Sec.  3.  Every  person  sliall  be  ilisqualified 
from  holding  any  office  of  trust  and  profit  for 
the  t«rni  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elected, 
who  shall  be  convicted  of  having  given  or  of- 
fered any  bribe  or  treat  to  procure  his  election. 

Sec.  4.  Laws  shall  be  made  to  exclude  from 
office  and  from  suffrage,  those  who  shall  there- 
after be  convicted  of  bribery,  perjury,  forgery,  or 
other  high  crimes  or  misdemeanors.  The  pri- 
vilege of  free  suffrage  shall  be  supported  by 
laws  regulating  elections,  and  prohibiting,  un- 
der adequat<j  penalties,  all  undue  influence  there- 
on from  power,  bribery,  tumult,  or  other  im- 
proper practices. 

Sec.  5.  No  money  shall  be  drawn  fronj  the 
treasury,  but  in  pursuance  of  appropriations 
made  by  law,  nor  shall  any  appropriations  of 
money  for  the  support  of  an  army  be  made 
for  a  longer  time  than  two  years,  and  a  regular 
statement  and  account  of  the  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures of  all  public  money  shall  be  publish- 
ed anuually. 

Sec.  6.  I'he  general  assembly  may  direct,  by 
law,  in  what  manner,  and  in  what  courts,  suits 
may  be  brought  against  the  commonwealth. 

Sec.  7.  The  manner  of  administering  an  oath 
or  affirmation  shall  be  such  as  it  is  most  con- 
sistent with  the  conscience  of  the  deponent,  and 
shall  be  esteemed  by  the  general  assembly  the 
most  solemn  appeal  to  God. 

Sec.  8.  All  laws  which,  on  the  first  day  of 
June,  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  ninety 
two,  were  in  force  in  the  state  of  Virginia, 
and  which  are  of  a  general  nature,  and 
not  local  to  that  state,  and  not  repugnant  to  this 
constitution,  nor  to  the  laws  which  have  been 
enacted  by  the  legislature  of  this  common- 
wealth, shall  be  in  force  within  this  state,  until 
they  shall  be  altered  or  repealed  by  the  general 
assemblv.  • 

Sec.  3*.  The  compact  with  the  state  of  Vir- 
ginia, subject  to  such  alterations  as  may  be  made 
therein  agreeably  to  the  mode  prescribed  by  the 
said  compact,  shall  be  considered  as  part  of  this 
constitution. 

Sec.  10.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general 
assembly  to  pass  such  laws  as  shall  be  neces- 
sary and  proper  to  decide  differences  by  arbi- 
trators, to  be  appointed  by  the  parties  who  may 
choose  that  summary  mode  of  adjustment. 

Sec.  11.  All  civil  officers  for  the  common- 
wealth at  large,  shall  reside  within  the  state, 
and  all  district,  county,  or  town  officers,  within 
their  respective  districts,  counties,  or  towns, 
(trustees  of  towns  excepted,)  and  shall  keep 
their  respective  offices  at  such  places  therein 
as  may  be  required  by  law;  and  all  militia  offi- 
cers shall  reside  in  the  bounds  of  the  division, 
brigade,  regiment,  battalion,  or  company,  to 
which  they  may  severally  belong. 

Sec.  12.  Absence  on  the  business  of  this  state, 
or  the  United  States,  shall  not  forfeit  a  residence 
once  obtained,  so  as  to  deprive  any  one  of  the 
right  of  suffrage,  or  of  being  elected  or  appoint- 
eii  to  any  office  under  this  commonwealth,  un- 
der the  exceptions  contained  in  this  constitution. 

Sec.  13.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general 
assembly  to  regulate,  bv  law,  in  what  cases,  and 
what  deduction  from  tfie  salaries  of  public  offi- 
cers shall  be  made,  for  neglect  of  duty  in  their 
official  capacity. 


Sec.  14.  Eetunis  of  all  elections  by  the  peo- 
ple shall  be  made  to  the  secretary  of  state  for  the 
time  being,  except  in  those  cases  otherwise  pro- 
vided for  in  this  con.stitution. 

Sec.  15.  In  all  elections  by  the  people,  and 
also  by  the  senate  and  house  of  representatives, 
jointly  or  separately,  the  votes  shall  be  person- 
ally and  publicly  given,  viva  voce. 

Sec.  lo.  No  member  of  congress,  nor  person 
holding  or  exercising  any  office  of  trust  or 
profit  under  the  United  States,  or  either  of  them, 
or  under  any  foreign  power,  shall  be  eligible  as 
a  member  of  the  general  assembly  of  this  com- 
monwealth, or  hold  or  exercise  any  office  of 
tru.st  or  profit  under  the  same. 

Sec.  17.  The  general  assembly  shall  direct, 
by  law,  how  persons  who  now  are  or  who  may 
hereafter  become  securities  for  public  officers, 
may  be  relieved  or  discharged  on  account  of 
such  securityship. 

Sec.  18.  Any  person  who  shall,  after  the  a<lop- 
tion  of  this  constitution,  either  directly  or  indi- 
rectly, give,  accept,  or  knowingly  carry  a  chal- 
lenge to  any  person,  or  persons, to  fight  in  single 
combat,  or  otherwise,  with  any  deadlv  weapon, 
either  in  or  out  of  the  state,  shall  be  deprived  of 
the  right  to  hold  any  office  of  honor  or  profit  in 
this  commonwealth — and  shall  be  punished 
otherwise  in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  may 
prescribe  by  law. 

ARTICLE — . 

The  seat  of  government  shall  continue  in  the 
town  of  Frankfort,  until  it  shall  be  removed  bv 
law:  Provided,  Jiowever,  That  two  thirds  of  all 
the  members  elected  to  each  house  of  the  general 
assembly,  shall  concur  in  the  passage  of  such 
law. 

ARTICLE . 

That  the  general,  great,  and  essential  prin- 
ciples of  liberty  and  free  government  may  be 
recognized  and  established:     we  declare. 

Sec.  1.  That  all  freemen,  when  they  form  a 
social  compact,  are  equal,  and  that  no  man  or 
set  of  men  are  entitled  to  exclusive,  separate 
public  emoluments  or  privileges  from  the  com- 
munity, but  in  consideration  of  public  services. 

Sec.  2.  That  all  power  is  inherent  in  the  peo- 
ple and  all  free  governments  are  founded  on 
their  authority,  and  instituted  for  their  peace, 
safety,  happiness,  security,  and  protection  of 
their  property.  For  the  advancement  of  these 
ends  tney  have  at  all  times  an  inalienable  and 
indefeasable  right  to  alter,  reform  or  abolish 
their  government  in  such  manner  as  they  may 
think  proper. 

Sec.  3.  That  all  men  have  a  natural  and  inde- 
feasible right  to  worship  Almighty  God  accord- 
ing to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences;  that 
no  man  shall  be  compelled  to  attend,  erect,  or 
support  any  place  of  worship,  or  to  maintain  any 
ministrj' against  his  consent;  that  no  human  au- 
thority ought,  in  any  case  whatever,  to  control  or 
interfere  with  the  rights  of  conscience;  and  that 
no  preference  shall  ever  be  given  by  law  to  any 
religious  societies  or  modes  of  worship. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  civil  rights,  privileges,  or  ca- 
pacities of  any  citizen,  shall  in  no  wise  be  di- 
minished or  enlarged  on  account  of  his  religion. 

Sec.  5.  That  all  elections  shall  be  free  and 
equal. 


352 


Sec.  C.  That  Iho  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  Jury  f 
shall  bfc  held  sacred,  and  the  right  thjreol  re-  ' 
main  inviolate. 

Sec.  7.  That  printing  presses  shall  be  free  to 
every  person  who  undertakes  to  examine  the 
proceeaings  of  the  legislature,  or  any  branch  of 
government,  and  no  law  shall  ever  be  made  to 
restrain  the  right  thereof.  The  free  communi- 
cation of  thoughts  and  opinions  is  one  of  the  in- 
valuable riglits  of  man,  and  every  citizen  may 
freely  speak,  write,  and  print,  on  any  subject, 
being  responsible  for  the  abuse  of  that  liberty. 

Sec.  8.  In  prosecutions  for  the  publication  of 
papers  investigating  the  official  conduct  of  of- 
ficers, or  men  in  a  public  capacity,  or  where  the 
matter  published  isproper  forpublic  information, 
the  truth  thereof  may  be  given  in  evidence  ;  ami 
in  all  indictments  for  libels,  the  jury  shall  have 
a  right  to  determine  the  law  and  the  facts,  under 
the  direction  of  the  court,  as  in  other  cases. 

Sec.  9.  That  the  people  shall  be  secure  in 
their  persons,  houses,  papers,  and  possessions, 
from  unreasonable  seizures  and  searches,  and  that 
no  warrant  to  search  any  place  or  to  seize  any 
person  or  things,  shall  issue,  without  describing 
them  as  nearly  as  may  be,  nor  without  probable 
cause,  supported  by  oath  or  affirmation. 

Sec.  lO.  That  in  all  criminal  prosecutions, 
the  accused  hath  a  riglit  to  be  heard  by  himself 
and  counsel ;  to  demand  the  nature  and  cause 
of  the  accusation  against  him  ;  to  meet  the  wit- 
nesses face  to  face  ;  to  have  compulsory  process 
for  obtaining  witnesses  in  his  favor ;  and  in  pros- 
ecutions by  indictment  or  information,  a  speedy 
public  trial  by  an  impartial  jury  of  the  vicinage; 
that  he  cannot  be  compelled  to  give  evidence 
against  himself ;  nor  can  he  be  deprived  of  his 
life,  liberty,  or  property,  unless  by  the  judgment 
of  his  peers,  or  the  law  of  the  land. 

Sec.  11.  That  no  person  shall,  for  any  indict- 
able offence,  be  proceeded  against  criminally  by 
information,  except  in  cases  arising  in  the  land 
or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia  when  in  actual 
service,  in  time  of  war  orpublic  danger, by  leave 
of  the  court,  for  oppression  or  misdemeanor  in 
office. 

Sec.  12.  No  person  shall,  for  the  same  offence, 
be  twice  put  in  jeopardy  of  liis  life  or  limb;  nor 
shall  any  man's  property  he  taken  or  applied  to 
public  use,  without  the  consent  of  his  represen- 
tatives, and  without  just  compeBsation  being 
previously  made  to  him. 

Sec.  13.  That  all  courts- shall  be  open,  and 
every  person,  for  an  injury  done  him  in  Iris 
lancfs,  goods,  person,  or  reputation,  shall  have 
remedy  by  the  due  course  of  law,  and  right  and 
justice  administered,  without  sale,  denial,  or 
delay. 

Sec.  14.  That  no  power  of  suspending  laws 
shall  be  exercised,  unless  by  the  legislature  or  its 
authority. 

Sec.  15.  That  excessive  bail  shall  not  be  re- 
quired, nor  excessive  fines  imposed,  nor  cruel 
punishments  inflicted. 

Sec.  1G.  That  all  prisoners  shall  be  bailable  by 
sufficient  securities,  unless  for  capital  offences, 
•when  the  proof  is  evident  or  presumption  great; 
and  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
shall  not  be  suspended,  unless  when  in  cases  of 
rebellion  or  inTasion  the  public  safety  may  re- 
quire it. 


Sec.  17.  That  the  person  of  a  debtor,  where 
there  is  not  strong  presmnption  of  fraud,  shall 
not  be  conliimed  m  prison  after  delivering  up 
his  estate  for  the  benefit  of  his  creditors,  in 
such  manner  as  shall  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Sec.  18.  That  no  ex  post  facto  law,  nor  any 
law  impairing  contracts,  shall  be  made. 

Sec.  19.  Tliat  no  person  shall  be  attainted  of 
treason  or  felony  by  the  legislature. 

Sec.  20.  That  no  attainder  shall  work  corrup- 
tion of  blood,  nor,  except  during  the  life  of  the 
offender,  forfeiture  of  estate  to  the  common- 
wealth. 

Sec.  21.  That  the  estates  of  such  persons  as 
shall  destroy  their  own  lives,  shall  descend  or 
vest  as  in  case  of  natural  death;  and  if  any  per- 
son shall  be  killed  by  casualty,  there  shall  be  no 
forfeiture  by  reason  thereof. 

Sec.  22.  That  the  citizens  have  a  right,  in  a 
peaceable  manner,  to  assemble  together  for  their 
common  good,  and  to  apply  to  those  invested 
with  the  powers  of  government,  for  redress  of 
grievances,  or  other  proper  purposes,  by  petition, 
address  or  remonstrance. 

Sec.  23.  That  the  rights  of  the  citizens  to  bear 
arms  in  defence  of  themselves  and  the  state, 
shall  not  be  questioned. 

Sec.  24.  That  no  standing  army  shall,  in  time 
of  peace, be  kept  up,  without  the  consent  of  the 
legislature:  and  the  military  shall,  in  all  cases, 
and  at  all  times,  be  in  strict  subordination  to 
the  civil  power. 

Sec.  25.  That  no  soldier  shall,  in  time  of 
peace,  be  quartered  in  any  house  without  the 
consent  of  the  owner;  nor  in  time  of  war,  but  in 
a  manner  to  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Sec.  26.  That  the  legislature  shall  not  grant 
any  title  of  nobility,  or  hereditary  distinction, 
nor  create  any  office,  the  appointment  to  which 
shall  be  for  a  longer  term  than  during  good  be- 
havior. 

Sec.  27.  That  emigration  from  the  state  shall 
not  be  prohibited. 

Sec.  28.  To  guard  against  transgressions  of 
the  high  powers  which  we  have  delegated,  we 
DECLARE,  that  every  thing  in  this  article  is  ex- 
cepted out  of  the  general  powers  of  government, 
and  shall  forever  remain  inviolate;  and  that  all 
laws  contrary  tliereto,  or  contrary  to  this  consti- 
tution, shall  be  void. 

COURT   OF    APPEALS. 

Mr.  MANSFIELD  gave  notice  that  on  Mon- 
day next,  he  should  move  to  reconsider  the  vote 
by  which  the  convention,  wlien  acting  on  the 
report  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals, 
had  stricken  out  four  and  inserted  three,  as  the 
number  of  which  the  judges  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals shall  hereafter  consist. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  subsequently  rose  and 
said  he  understood  a  notice  had  been  given,  that 
a  motion  would  be  made  on  Monday  next,  to 
reconsider  the  vote  by  which  the  fourth  judge 
was  stricken  out  of  the  article  on  the  court 
of  appeals.  If  such  a  motion  were  to  be  made, 
he  suggested  that  it  should  be  made  at  once,  and 
that  for  that  purpose,  the  rule  which  requires 
notice  of  one  day  to  be  given,  of  a  motion  to 
reconsider,  should  be  suspended.  He  would 
not  however,  make  the  motion  now,  asthehouse 
was  not  full. 


353 


Tlip  convention  the'ii  resnuipil  the  coiisiJera- 
tion  of  the  report  of  tlie  committee  of  tlie  whole 
on  the  article  on  the  court  of  appeals,  the  pend- 
ing question  being  on  Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL'S 
substitute. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  amend  the  substitute 
by  striking  out  the  fifth  and  sixth  sections,  and 
inserting  the  following: 

Sec.  5.  Tlie  state  shall  be  divided  by  the 
general  assemblv  into  three  convenient  districts, 
and  in  each  of  said  districts,  a  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals  shall  be  elected  by  the  quali- 
fied voters  thereof,  and  that  judge  having  the 
highest  number  of  votes  sliall  be  chief  justice: 
Provided,  That  the  general  assembly  may  in- 
crease the  number  of  said  districts  and  judges, 
not  to  exceed  in  number  — . 

Sec.  6.  The  said  court  shall  hold  two  sessions 
each  year  at  the  capital:  Provided,  That  the  gen- 
eral assembly  may  order  said  sessions  to  be  held 
in  the  several  districts. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  am  now  soraewnat  glad 
that  I  did  not  get  the  floor  shortly  after  the  time 
the  vote  was  taken,  by  which  the  fourth  judge 
was  stricken  out.  Tlie  greater  part  of  two  long 
nights  spent  amongst  books  and  musty  records  is 
pretty  well  calculated  to  cool  the  blood. 

This  question  of  branching  the  court  of  appeals 
necessarily  and  naturally  divides  itself  into  two 
propositions,  one,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  mere  la- 
bor of  the  judiciary,  and  the  other  relating  to 
the  interests  of  the  people.  It  is  a  natural  di- 
vision. If  three  judges  cannot  do  the  business 
delegated  to  them,  then  we  should  have  four. 
The  object  is  not  only  to  have  the  business  done, 
but  to  have  it  done  well.  I  am  satisfied  that  three 
judges  can  do  the  business,  if  ordinarily  indus- 
trious. 1  do  not  believe  that  this  convention  de- 
sire to  throw  an  amount  of  labgr  upon  these 
judges,  when  at  the  age  of  from  forty-five  to 
sixty  years,  which  must  be  ruinous  to  their 
constitutions.  Will  gentlemen  look  back  to 
the  number  of  judges  on  the  court  of  appeals 
bench  who  have  been  absolutely  compelled  to 
resign  or  die.  Their  constitutions  could  not 
stand  the  labor  when  they  became  old.  Bear 
in  mind  that  as  the  wealth,  the  commerce,  and 
the  population  of  the  state  increases,  as  we 
want  them  to  increase,  as  a  matter  of  course  lit- 
igation and  law  questions  Avill  increase,  and  a 
complication  of  law  propositions,  and  with  them 
an  increased  amount  of  the  business  of  this  court. 
I  have  said,  and  I  say  it  with  some  forethought, 
that  ordinarily  three  judges  can  properly  discharge 
all  the  business  that  there  is  now,  or  has  been  for 
the  last  few  years,  in  the  court  of  appeals.  But 
I  believe  that  by  the  time  the  new  court  of  ap- 
peals can  be  organized,  the  business  will  be  more 
than  they  can  discharge,  even  if  that  court  is  at 
the  seat  of  government.  Then  it  will  be  neces- 
8ary,so  far  asthejudges  are  concerned, to  increase 
their  number,  in  order  to  meet  the  increasing 
amount  of  the  business  of  the  court.  Now,  with 
reference  to  the  interests  of  the  people.  The 
number  of  cases  that  are  reversed  by  this  court, 
is  a  matter  in  which  they  are  directly  concern- 
ed. I  have  examined  the  cases  brought  before 
this  court  during  the  last  four  or  five  years,  and 
find  that  from  sixty-one  to  sixty-five  cases  in 
every  hundred,  have  been  reversed,  seven  or 
eight  of  this  sixty-five  are  reversed  on  mere 
45 


technicalities  ;  the  people  are  not  interested  in 
such  cases,  property  does  not  thereby  change 
hands,  and  ultimately  the  decision  stands  as 
when  at  first  pronounced.  But  about  fifty  four 
of  fifty  five  of  these  cases  are  reversed  for  good 
cause,  and  then  the  property  changes  hands. 
The  amount  of  property  wliich  is  thus  changed 
cannot  be  accurately  ascertained,  because  it  is 
not  usually  stated  in  dollars  and  cents,  but 
from  the  best  estimate  I  can  make,  from  four  to 
six  hundred  thousand  dollars  worth  of  property 
is  thus  transferred  annually,  by  the  decisions  of 
the  appellate  court. 

I  have  based  my  estimate  upon  the  average 
value  of  the  land,  as  I  find  it  in  the  second  audi- 
tor's books. 

Now,  lay  tliat  proposition  down,  and  take  up 
the  next.  I  yield  the  question,  that  by  branch- 
ing the  court  of  appeals  the  business  will  be  in- 
creased, yes  I  may  say  it  will  be  doubled.  I  am 
an  advocate  for  branching  this  court,  yet  I  agree 
that  by  having  the  court  sit  in  four  places,  you 
will  double  tlie  business;  it  is  precisely  for  this 
reason  that  I  want  the  court  branched.  Bearing 
this  proposition  in  mind,  will  gentlemen  tell  me 
that  four  or  five  hundred  thousand  dollars  shall 
remain  in  wrong  hands,  for  the  Avant  of  courts  to 
review  the  decisions?  Now,  look  to  the  amount 
of  property  that  changes  hands,  stand  by  the 
proposition  that  some  have  laid  down  with  re- 
gard to  the  increased  amount  of  business  of  this 
court,  and  then  answer  to  your  consciences,  and 
to  your  constituents,  whether  this  amount  of 
property  shall  remain  in  wrong  hands,  merelv  to 
save  the  additional  expense  of  two  thousand[  or 
twenty-five  hundred  dollars  per  annum,  which 
this  branching  project  will  necessarily  cost. 

Perhaps  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Har- 
din; will  answer,  that  this  property  will  change 
hands  improperly,  if  the  court  is  branched;  and 
in  consequence  of  the  rapidity  with  which 
the  court  must  pass  from  place  to  place,  there 
will  be  wrong  decisions.  There  is  no  dan- 
ger that  the  great  principles  of  law  will  not  be 
carried  in  the  heads  of  the  judges,  libraries  or 
no  libraries.  The  necessity  of  books  for  refer- 
ence, is  not  so  much  to  settle  the  justice  of  a 
case,  as  to  settle  abstract  and  technical  princi- 
ples, and  pleadings.  It  is  strange,  j'et  true,  that 
nearly  one  third  of  the  books  comprising  our  law 
libraries,  relate  to  pleadings  and  evidence. 

It  is  not  often  the  case,  that  a  large  amount  of 
property  changes  hands  on  account  of  the  laws 
of  pleading.  These  laws  are  easily  understood, 
and  the  main  object  is  to  get  the  action  properly 
before  the  jury  or  the   chancellor.     The  great 

firinciples  of  law  and  equity  are  easily  compre- 
lended  and  tolerably  easily  applied,  and  the 
judges  would  carrv  from  place  to  place  these 
great  laws  which  have  become,  as  it  were,  a 
part  of  their  common  sense.  If  there  are  not 
large  libraries,  this  will  be  a  very  small  matter 
compared  with  the  benefits  which  the  people 
will  receive  from  branching  this  court. 

My  great  anxiety  is  to  get  through  with  the 
business.  First,  I  wish  to  make  a  good  consti- 
tution that  the  people  will  accept,  and  then  to 
accomplish  this  object  as  speedilv  as  possible. 
"What  is  necessary  for  this?  I  will  call  the  at- 
tention of  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  the 
judiciary,  and  also  the  chairman  of  the  commit- 


354 


tee  on  county  ooiirts  to  this  point.  If  we  fight 
over  every  solitary  proposition  that  is  subinilled 
to  this  body,  iu  relation  to  the  court  of  appeals 
and  the  circuit  court,  it  ■will  be  months  before 
we  get  through.  I  want  to  transier  the  arena  of 
the  contest  to  the  committee  room.  I  want  also 
to  add  the  committee  on  count}"-  courts,  with  its 
quiet  thoughtful  chairman.  Let  him  with  other 
gentlemen  of  that  committee  act  as  arbitrators; 
let  all  three  of  these  committees  meet  of  an  eve- 
ning, and  let  them  bring  their  reports  together, 
and  my  life  for  it  we  sliall  save  weeks,  if  not 
months.  I  hope  the  chairman  of  one  of  these 
committees  will  make  that  proposition.  I  de- 
sire, if  it  would  be  in  order,  that  the  gentl(;man 
from  Jessamine,  who  brought  forward  a  propo- 
sition in  which  there  is  a  great  deal  of  merit,  be 
added  to  one  of  the  committees. 

Mr.  KELLY  withdrew  his  amendments,  in  or- 
der, as  he  said,  to  enable  the  gentleman  from 
Jessamine  (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall)  to  offer  an 
amendment  with  a  view  of  perfecting  his  sub- 
stitute. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  then  moved  to  strike 
out  all  of  the  fifth  section  of  his  proposition 
down  to  the  word  "provided,"  and  to  insert  in 
lieu  tliereof,  the  words  -'the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  vo- 
ters of  the  state." 

'  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  intimated  a  few 
minutes  ago  that  when  the  house  should  be  full, 
I  would,  in  order  to  save  time,  adopt  tlie  course 
suggested  by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess.  I 
am  ready  to  agree  to  any  course  that  will  meet 
the  approbation  of  the  house,  and  enable  us  to 
progress  with  the  business,  and  I  move  now,  if 
It  is  the  pleasure  of  the  house,  to  suspend  the 
rule,  which  requires  a  motion  to  reconsider  to 
lay  on  the  table  for  one  day.  I  understand  that 
the  gentleman  from  Allen  has  made  a  motion  to 
reconsider  the  vote  given  on  the  proposition, 
and  that  other  gentlemen  of  the  house  who  vo- 
ted with  him,  desire  that  it  should  be  so  recon- 
sidered. If  it  should  be  the  pleasure  of  the 
house  to  adopt  that  course,  and  then  to  recom- 
mit the  bill  and  the  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Jessamine,  as  indicated  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Daviess,  I  am  ready  to  acquiesce,  and 
as  I  have  no  doubt,  are  the  other  members  of  the 
committee  on  the  court  of  appeals.  I  have  at 
least  satisfied  myself  that  if  we  desire  to  give  to 
the  country  an  increased  confidence  in  our  judi- 
ciary department,  the  number  of  judges  upon 
the  appellate  bench  ought  to  be  increased  to 
four,  though  not  beyond  that  number.  That 
number  was  not  agreed  to  by  myself  without 
reflection  or  examination.  Before  I  came  here 
to  discharge  the  duties  assigned  me,  I  had  con- 
versed with  gentlemen  who  had  not  only  prac- 
ticed in  that  court,  but  with  those  who  had 
served  as  judges  there,  and  their  opinion  is  in 
accordance  with  my  own,  that  there  ought  to  be 
on  that  bench,  an  additional  judge.  I  speak  not 
of  the  present  incumbents  ol  the  appellate 
bench,  for  I  did  not  feel  authorized  to  enquire  of 
them,  as  I  did  not  know  that  they  would  feel 
autliorized  to  give  me  tlieir  opinion.  I  appeal 
also  tx)  the  president,  if  he  has  not  heard  it  de- 
manded from  every  quarter  within  the  last  sev- 
en or  eight  years?  I  do  not  design  at  this  time 
to  enter  in  any  lengthened  discussion  as  to  the 


propriety  of  havingthis  additional  judge,  but  I, 
as  well  as  the  committee  with  whom  I  act,  pre- 
fer that  we  shall  not  meet  the  other  committees, 
with  the  vote  of  the  house  declaring  the  opin- 
ion that  the  bill  should  be  so  constituted  as  to 
compose  the  court  of  tliree  judges.  We  think 
the  committee  ought  to  be  left  as  free  to  act  as 
the  other  committees  would  be.  If  it  is  the 
pleasure  of  the  house  to  reconsider  the  vote,  I 
trust  it  will  be  done  to-day,  and  then  if  the 
course  indicated  by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess 
be  adopted,  if  no  good  results  from  it,  at  least 
there  will  be  no  harm,  beyond  perhaps  the  loss 
of  a  little  time  spent  in  tryingto  do  good.  The 
house  can  then  proceed  to  the  consideration  of 
the  reports  from  other  committees.  With  a  view 
of  testing  tlie  sense  of  the  house,  I  move  to  sus- 
pend the  rule. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  anxious  that  these  three 
committees  should  get  together,  and  in  a  spirit 
of  conciliation,  see  if  they  cannot  devise  some 
general,  harmonious  decision,  which  will  meet 
the  concurrence  of  the  house.  But  I  would  en- 
quire if  it  is  not  just  as  well  to  refer  this  matter 
back  without  reconsideration,  as  with  it?  It 
will  at  least  save  time.  I  have  looked  forward 
to  the  action  of  the  convention,  on  the  circuit 
court  bill,  with  a  good  deal  of  fear  and  trembling, 
in  view  of  the  labors  which  will  be  imposed  up- 
on them.  They  have  already  been  so  arduous  as 
nearly  to  break  down  some  of  the  members  of 
the  committee.  I  hope  the  motion  to  recommit, 
as  indicated  by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  will 
be  agreed  to,  and  that  the  result  will  be  the  most 
harmonious  action.  I  only  regret  that  the  gen- 
tleman from  Washington  (Mr.  Kelly)  has  with- 
drawn his  amendment,  for  it  met  my  views  ex- 
actly. 

Mr.  KELLY.    It  will  come  up  again. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  am  as  anxious  to  get  through 
as  any  gentleman  here,  but  I  am  disposed  to  see 
a  vote  taken  on  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Jessamine,  and  then  the  house  may  deter- 
mine which  of  the  plans  is  really  the  best. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  there  is  any  ob- 
jection to  dispensing  with  the  rule,  the  desired 
result  cannot  oe  attained.  If  the  gentleman  ob- 
jects, I  will  withdraw  the  motion. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  Avas  merely  going  to  move  the 
previous  question,  so  as  to  enable  the  convention 
to  come  to  a  direct  vote  on  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Jessamine. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  understand  the 
motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  to  be,  to 
dispense  with  the  rule  with  a  view  of  testing  the 
sense  of  the  convention  on  the  question  of  tlie 
four  judges,  as  decided  yesterday.  I  am  anxious 
that  this  course  should  be  adopted,  for  the  reason 
that  I  believe  it  will  tend  greatly  to  expedite  bu- 
siness. There  is  a  fitness  in  these  reports  from 
the  several  judiciary  committees,  and  in  my 
opinion,  there  should,  have  been  originally  but 
one  judiciary  committee,  who  should  have  had 
the  supervision  of  all  the  courts.  But  the  same 
thing  will  be  effected  by  the  adoption  of  the  pro- 
position to  require  the  three  committees  to  act 
together.  And  I  am  satisfied,  that  if  the  house 
has  any  confidence  in  those  committees,  tJie  re- 
8ult,sof  their  united  action  will  have  great  weight 
in  the  house,  and  business  be  greatly  progressed 
thereby.    Without  something  of  this    kind   is 


355 


done,  I  am  satisfied  we  shall  remain  here  until 
Juno.  I  hope,  therefore,  that  the  rxile  will  be 
suspended,  and  the  vote  taken  at  once  on  the  mo- 
tion to  reconsider.  If  the  house  reiterates  its 
preference  for  three  Judges  instead  of  four,  as  I 
nope  they  will,  it  will  act  as  a  guide  to  the  com- 
mittees in  the  framing  of  their  bill. 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  trust  the  house  will  dispense 
with  the  rule.  The  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals  have  bestowed  great  labor  on  their  bill, 
and  with  the  exception  perhaps  of  the  proposi- 
tion to  branch  the  court,  and  to  have  four 
judges,  it  is  as  perfect  as  it  can  be  made.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  if  the  bill  is  referred  as  indicated, 
the  result  will  be  such  as  to  meet  the  ap- 
probation of  the  house.  I  voted  to  strike  out 
the  four  judges,  not  that  I  had  any  particiilar 
objection  to  that  number,  but  because  I  was  op- 
posed to  the  adoption  of  the  branching  princi- 
ple in  the  constitution.  I  am  willing  to  leave  it 
to  the  discretion  of  the  legislature. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
dispense  with  the  rule,  and  it  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  TURXER.  I  should  like  to  define  my 
position.  1  am  utterly  opposed  to  branching 
the  court,  but  I  am  willing  to  go  for  the  four 
judges,  and  think  we  ought  to  have  four.  I  shall 
vote  for  the  reconsideration,  with  a  view  of  of- 
fering a  proposition  which  I  think  we  had  bet- 
ter compromise  upon.  It  is  to  fill  up  the  blanl^ 
with  four  judges,  one  to  be  elected  bv  the  state 
at  large,  to  be  styled  the  chief  justice  of  Ken- 
tucky— the  state  to  be  divided  into  three  dis- 
tricts, in  each  of  which  one  assistant  appellate 
judge  should  be  elected,  and  the  court  not  to  be 
oranched.  I  am  willing  to  go  for  a  proposition 
embracing  that  principle,  and  with  Jnat  view  I 
shall  vote  for  the  motion  to  reconsider. 

The  convention  having  dispensed  with  the 
rule  referred  to,  the  question  wa-s  takeu  on  the 
motion  to  reconsider  the  vote  striking  out  the 
four  judges,  by  ayes  and  nays  on  the  call  of  Mr. 
Hargis,  and  it  was  agreed  to — ayes  49,  nays  43, 
as  follows: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Ar- 
chibald Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfaelde, 
James  H.Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gliolson,  Ninian 
E.  Grey,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Alfred  M.Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  George  W.  Johnston,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John 
H.  McHenrv,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spaulding,  James  W. 
Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Tavlor,  Wil- 
liam R.  Thompson,  Phillip  Triplett, Squire  Tur- 
ner, Charles  A.  WickliflFe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe 
—49. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  William  C.  Bul- 
litt, Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudlev,  Mil- 
ford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Thomas  J.  6ough, 


Ben.  Haidin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Wm.  John- 
son, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Alexan- 
der K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  Hugh  Newell,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Mich'l  L.  Stoner, 
John  J.  Thumian,  Howard  Todd,  John  L.  Wal- 
ler, Henrv  Washington,  John  WTieeler,  Andrew 
S.  White"  Silas  Woodson— 43. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  In  accordance  with 
the  intimation  of  tlie  gentleman  from  Daviess,  I 
move  to  discharge  the  committee  of  the  whole 
from  the  consideration  of  the  two  bills  in  rela- 
tion to  the  circuit  and  county  courts,  and  to  re- 
fer them,  together  with  the  bill  now  under  con- 
sideration, to  the  three  committees  to  sit  in  joint 
session.  I  am  verj'  much  in  hopes,  that  by  tlie 
adoption  of  this  course,  we  may  facilitate  the 
harmonious  and  speedy  action  of  this  body  up- 
on these  important  branches  of  the  constitution. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  it  was 

Ordered,  That  the  committee  of  the  whole  be 
discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of  the 
report  of  the  committee  on  circuit  courts  and  the 
report  of  the  committee  on  county  courts,  and 
that  said  reports,  together  with  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  court  of  appeals,  be  referred  to 
the  standing  committees  on  the  court  of  appeals, 
circuit  courts,  and  county  courts  to  act  in  con 
junction. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  then  asked  and  obtain- 
ed consent  of  the  house  to  withdraw  his  substi- 
tute. 

Mr.  KELLY  desired  to  offer  his  amendment  as 
a  resolution  of  instruction  to  the  joint  committee, 
but  it  was  nded  out  of  order  at  this  time. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  If  I  knew  how  to  get  at  it, 
in  order,  I  should  like  to  test  the  sense  of  the 
convention  upon  branching  the  court  of  appeals 
and  upon  the  number  of  judges  for  that  tribunal. 
These  are  the  two  subjects  of  difiiculty;  and  to 
obviate  them,  we  have  just  a^eed  upon  a  joint 
or  consolidated  committee,  to  be  composed  of  the 
three  committees  upon  the  appellate,  circuit,  and 
county  courts. 

Now,  this  is  just  the  committee  that  should 
have  had  the  whole  subject  of  the  judiciary, 
from  the  first;  but  I  am  unwilling,  after  we 
have  spent  some  three  weeks  on  the  report 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  have  given  an  ex- 
pression of  the  sense  of  the  convention  upon 
one  of  these  subjects  which  does  not  argee  with 
the  report,  to  have  the  subject  referred  to  this 
joint  committee  without  instructions.  Every  mem- 
ber on  this  floor  has  the  same  right  to  be  heard 
that  any  one  of  this  joint  committee  has,  and  when 
once  we  know  how  many  judges  we  are  to  make, 
and  whether  this  court  is  to  be  made  ambulato- 
ry, all  difficulty  is  at  an  end.  I  shall,  therefore, 
in  the  proper  time,  move  to  instruct  the  com- 
mittee; for,  if  we  do  not,  we  shall  have  to  fight 
the  whole  bill  over  again  both  in  committee  and 
in  convention. 

It  does  not  seem  to  me  right,  that  when  a 
favorite  measure  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals  has  met  with  a  rebuflf  in  the  house,  its 
friends  .should  be  permitted  to  call  to  its  aid  the 
assistance  of  two  other  committees,  and  thus 
I  strengthened  impose  it  upon  us  for  a  second  con- 


356 


Bideration.  In  such  case  instructions  to  the  com- 
mittee are  proper. 

The  question  is,  shall  the  convention  instruct 
the  committees,  or  shall  it  be  instructed  by  them? 
I  had  supposed  that  we  were  the  people's  agents, 
and  instructed  by  them — and  that  these  commit- 
tees were  our  agents,  and  to  be  instructed  by  us. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  very  object  of  recom- 
mitting these  reports  to  committees  in  joint  ses- 
sion, was  to  get  clear  of  the  identical  thing  the 
gentleman  proposes.  Let  the  committee  get  to- 
getlier  and  then  report  to  the  house,  and  their 
decision  will  have  force  and  weight  with  the 
house. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  I  desire  that  the  commit- 
tee should  have  the  instructions  of  the  house, 
and  will  make  my  motion  with  that  view. 

The  PRESIDENT  ruled  the  motion  out  of 
order,  as  the  time  for  receiving  motions  and  res- 
olutions had  passed. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  had  a  proposition  which  he 
desired  to  have  referred  to  the  joint  committee, 
and  with  a  view  of  attaining  that  object  he  mov- 
ed to  suspend  the  rule. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  BOYD  in  the  chair. 

PREAMBLE,  AND  DEPARTMENTS  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  McHENRY  the  commit- 
tee proceeded  to  the  consideration  of  the  report 
of  the  committee  on  Miscellaneous  Provisions, 
on  the  preamble  to  the  constitution,  and  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  powere  of  the  govenmient. 

If  was  read  as  follows: 

PREAMBLE. 

We,  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky,  in  convention  assembled,  to 
secure  to  all  the  citizens  thereof  the  enjoyment 
of  the  rights  of  life,  liberty,  and  property,  and 
of  pursuing  happiness,  do  ordain  and  establish 
this  constitution  for  its  government. 

ARTICLE   1. 

Concerning  the   distribution  of  the  powers   of  the 

government. 

Sec.  1.  The  powers  of  the  government  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky  shall  be  (livided  into  three 
distinct  departments,  and  each  of  them  be  con- 
fided to  a  separate  body  of  magistracy,  to-wit: 
those  which  are  legislative  to  one;  those  which 
are  executive  to  another,  and  those  which  are 
judiciary  to  another. 

Sec.  2.  No  person,  or  collection  of  persons, 
being  of  one  of  those  departments,  shall  exer- 
cise any  power  properly  belonging  to  either  of 
the  others,  except  in  the  instances  hereinafter  ex- 
pressly directed  or  permitted. 

The  preamble  and  first  and  second  sections 
were  separately  read  and  adopted. 

It  was  then  lai<l  aside  to  be  reported  to  the 
house. 

COUNTY    AND   DISTRICT   OFFICEIW. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TURNER,  the  com- 
mittee next  took  up  the  report  on  the  executive 
and  ministerial  officers  for  counties  and  districts. 
The  first  section  was  read  as  follows: 
"Seo.  1.  Thereshallbeelectedacommonwealth 
attorney  for  each  circuit,  and  a  circuitcourt  clerk 
-for  each  county,  whose  term  of  office  shall  be 


the  same  as  that  of  tiie  circuit  judges;  a  county 
court  attorney,  clerk,  surveyor,  coroner,  and  jail- 
er for  each  county,  whose  term  of  office  shall  bo 
the  same  as  that  of  the  presiding  judge  of  the 
county  court." 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  move  to  amend  that  sec- 
tion, by  striking  out  the  words  "county  court 
attornev."  In  a  great  many  counties  in  the 
state,  tliere  is  no  county  attorney  at  all,  and  al- 
though it  may  be  thought  necesssary  for  the  des- 
patcli  of  business  that  there  should  be,  yet  in  ma- 
ny cases  the  material  is  not  to  be  found,  out  of 
which  to  make  them;  and  to  require  the  county 
courts  to  appoint  sucli  officers  would  be  neither 
more  nor  less  than  burthening  the  county,  with 
the  payment  of  salaries  to  persons  not  properly 
qualified  to  discharge  the  duties  devolving  upon 
them.  If  it  were  left  discretionary  witli  the 
county  courts  to  appoint  them  or  not,  I  should 
have  no  objection,  but  to  make  it  imperative 
would  be  improper.  The  courts  are  to  be  differ- 
ently organized  from  the  present  mode,  if  the 
proposition  now  before  us  snould  be  carried  into 
effect.  We  are  to  have  judges,  we  are  told,  who 
will  thoroughly  understand  the  law,  and  be  capa- 
ble of  discharging  the  duties  of  their  station, 
without  the  counsel  or  advice  of  an  attorney. 
I  think  there  is  no  necessity  for  these  officers. 
It  is  creating  an  office  hitherto  unknown,  and 
which  will  in  many  counties  of  the  state  be 
used  as  an  engine,  and  a  powerful  one,  in  the 
elections.  For  the.se  reasons  I  am  for  striking 
it  out. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  It  appears  to  me,  sir,  from 
the  reading  of  the  report,  that  the  subjects  em- 
braced in  it  come  properly  within  the  scope  of 
the  duties  of  the  committee  to  whom  the  re- 
ports on  the  court  of  appeals,  and  tlie  circuit, 
and  county  courts,  have  already  been  referred. 

The  same  matters,  it  will  be  perceived,  are  in- 
included  in  the  report  that  have  been  referred  to 
that  committee,  and  by  way  of  harmonizing  the 
decision,  it  seems  to  me  this  had  better  go  to 
that  committee  also. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  no  great  choice  in  this 
matter ;  but  the  subjects  referred  to  this  joint 
committee,  relating  to  the  various  courts,  are  not 
all  embraced  in  the  report  that  is  now  imder  con- 
sideration. At  the  commencement  of  the  session 
the  labors  of  the  convention  were  divided 
amongst  ten  committees,  and  the  subject  matter 
embraced  in  this  report  was  referred  to  one  oi 
these  committees  ;  and  uidess  we  set  aside  the 
order  of  business,  thus  agreed  upon,  we  must 
take  up  this  report  and  consider  it  separately.  I 
know  and  I  have  already  suggested  it  once  or 
twice,  that  much  of  tlie  matter  which  is  contain- 
ed in  tliis  report,  has  relation  to  those  matters 
that  were  considered  by  other  committees  ;  but 
unless  we  add  the  committee  that  made  this  re- 

1)ort,  to  the  combined  committees  to  which  we 
lavejust  referred  the  reports  relating  to  the  var- 
ious courts — and  that  would  be,  to  have  about 
half  the  convention  on  one  conmiittee — it  is  es- 
sential that  we  should  proceed  with  tlie  consider- 
ation of  this  report  in  committee  of  the  whole. 
I  think  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Knox 
should  not  prevail.  There  may  be  a  few  coun- 
ties in  the  state  where  they  do  not  employ  a 
county  attorney,  but  still  an  attorney  is  ne- 
cessary to  attend  to  the  duties  of  that  ofiice  in 


357 


the  county  court  particularly,  to  act  in  behalf  of 
the  commonwealth  i  f  any  thing  should  come  before 
that  court,  of  a  public  nature.  For  instance,  in 
the  matter  of  opening  roads.  That  is  a  thing 
which  strikes  vitally  at  the  interest  of  the  pub- 
lic. And  in  such  case,  where  a  whole  neighbor- 
hood is  interested  on  one  side,  it  becomes  impor- 
tant that  there  should  be  an  officer  whose  special 
duty  it  shall  be  to  attend  to  the  interests  of  the 
county.  There  is  a  class  of  cases  also  touching 
directly  the  public  morals,  which  are  brought 
lip  for  trial  in  the  county  court.  Such  cases  re- 
quire a  public  officer,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to 
see  that  the  law  against  offences  to  which  I  have 
alluded,  shall  be  carried  into  execution.  In 
criminal  cases  that  come  before  the  county  court, 
nine  tenths  of  them  do  not  originate  with  the 
grand  jury.  The  individual  committing  an  of- 
fence is  first  arrested  and  brought  before  a  mag- 
istrate. If  there  are  no  proceedings  instituted 
immediately,  the  individual  in  many  instances 
get«  beyond  the  law.  And  if  there  be  no  officer 
on  behalf  of  the  commonwealth,  and  there  should 
be  an  error  in  the  warrant  when  the  trial  comes 
up,  a  technical  objection  is  matle,  the  proceedings 
are  quashed,  and  the  individual  is  placed  be- 
yond the  reach  of  the  law.  It  is  essential  also 
to  have  a  prosecuting  attornev  to  examine  wit- 
nesses ;  it  is  as  important  to  liave  an  attorney 
for  such  purpose  in  commonwealth  cases,  as  in 
cases  between  individuals.  With  the  salaries 
which  we  give  both  to  county  and  circuit  attor- 
neys. We  are  seldom  able  to  command  the  same 
legal  attainments  and  talents,  as  will  be  found 
in  the  lawyer  upon  the  opposite  side.  But  with- 
out having  any  prosecuting  attorney  at  all — in 
many  instances  the  offender  against  the  laws  will 
be  turned  loose  to  prey  upon  society,  without 
any  person  taking  the  initiatory  steps  to  have 
him  Drought  to  justice. 

There  cannot  be  much  injury  arising  from  the 
appointment  of  this  officer,  as  suggested  by  the 
gentleman  from  Knox,  for  tliis  reason,  that  the 
salaries  of  the  county  attorneys  are  to  be  regula- 
ted by  the  electors  of  the  country,  and  if  there 
should  be  little  or  no  service  to  be  rendered,  of 
course  the  salaries  will  be  small,  they  will  be 

Proportioned  to  the  service.  I  think  that  an  of- 
cer  ought  to  be  appointed  in  everv  county  of 
the  state,  and  my  colleague  says  tliat  the  old 
constitution  either  directly  provided  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  such  officers,  or  recognized  that  as 
being  proper  and  necessary. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  I  concur  in  the  opinion  of 
the  gentleman  from  Ballard,  as  to  the  propriety 
of  referring  this  report  to  the  three  committees 
to  whom  were  referred  the  reports  in  relation  to 
the  various  courts.  I  think  it  is  a  subject  that 
is  immediately  connected  with  that  which  those 
committees  have  before  them.  I  therefore  move 
that  it  be  passed  by,  to  be  reported  to  the  house 
when  this  committee  rises,  with  the  view  of  hav- 
ing it  referred  to  the  committees  on  the  subject 
of  the  courts. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  hope  my  friend 
will  not  persist  in  the  motion  to  refer  this  motion 
also,  to  tne  three  committees.  It  is  said  that  it 
is  the  last  furrow  that  breaks  the  horse's  back. 
I  think  those  three  committees  liave  as  much  as 
they  can  do,  and  if  the  gentleman  will  refer  it 
to  some  otlier  committee,  it  will  be  as  well. 


Mr.  DIXON".  Do  I  understand  the  gentleman 
as  proposing  to  refer  the  whole  of  the  report  to 
the  three  committees,  or  only  so  much  as  relates 
to  the  commonwealth  attorney. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  I  mean  tliat  portion  of  the 
report  thas  is  connected  with  the  judiciary  de- 
partment. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  believe  it  is  all  connected 
withthat  department.  If  the  whole  report  is  to 
be  referred  to  that  committee,  perhaps  we  had 
better  abolish  the  committee  on  ministerial  and 
executive  offices  altogether.  It  takes  every 
thing  from  that  committee  that  appropriately  be- 
longs to  it.  I  do  not  think  that  the  committee 
ouglit  to  be  deprived  of  its  own  work.  I  do  not 
know  if  the  motion  is  strictly  in  order.  I  am 
not  at  all  satisfied  that  it  is  in  order,  to  lake  any 
portion  of  the  report,  and  to  refer  it  to  another 
committee,  leaving  the  balance  here.  I  have 
great  doubts  about  it.  I  think  we  had  better  let 
the  matter  remain  wliere  it  is. 

The  OH  AI  KM  AX.  It  would  be  unprecedent- 
ed, in  my  opinion,  to  refer  it  to  another  commit- 
tee. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  think  myself,  it  would  be 
wholly  unprecedented,  but  still  let  the  fault  rest 
where  it  belongs.  I  merely  make  the  sugges- 
tion. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  submit  if  it  would  not  be 
well  enough  for  the  house  to  indicate  by  vote,  or 
in  some  otlier  way,  the  change  that  they  desire 
should  be  made  in  the  report.  If  this  report 
should  be  referred  now,  to  tlie  three  committees, 
or  if  it  should  be  returned  to  the  committee 
which  reported  it,  they  would  have  no  means  of 
determining,  or  of  siscertainiug  the  sense  of  the 
house,  in  regard  to  any  action  to  be  taken  by  the 
committee.  They  would  not  be  advise<l  wheth- 
er it  was  tlie  sense  of  the  convention  that  there 
should  be  a  county  attorney  or  not.  1  appre- 
hend that  the  better  plan  would  be,  to  take  some 
question  in  committee  of  the  whole,  upon  the 
proposition  submitted  in  this  report  upon  a  mo- 
tion to  strike  out,  or  some  other  motion,  and 
that,  if  it  be  necessary  to  refer  it  back,  will  en- 
able the  committee  to  make  such  change  in  the 
form  of  the  report  as  will  be  conformable  to  the 
opinion  of  the  convention. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  I  am  by  no  means  particular 
about  the  form  of  proceeding.  I  heard  art  inti- 
mation from  gentlemen  in  different  parts  of  the 
house,  and  a  reason  given  why  it  was  necessary 
to  commit  this  report  to  the  same  committee  to 
whom  had  been  referred  the  reports  in  relation 
to  the  difierent  courts,  was  that  thesubject  might 
be  made  to  harmonize,  inasmuch  as  they  were 
intimately  connected. 

Mr.  BROWX.  I  consider  that  there  would  be 
no  propriety  at  all,  in  referring  this  report  to  the 
joint  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals, 
tlie  circuit  court,  and  the  county  court. 
There  would  however,  be  some  proprie- 
ty in  referring  it  to  the  committee  on  the  circuit 
courts.  For  I  find  in  those  two  reports,  that  pro- 
vision has  been  made  for  the  same  class  of  offi- 
cers, the  same  qualifications  are  required,  the 
same  duties,  and  the  same  mode  of  election  are 
prescribed.  I  think  it  would  be  proper  to  re- 
fer back  the  report  to  the  committee  who  made 
I  it,  including  the  committee  on  thecircuit  conrts. 


358 


I  therefore  move  that  the  ooniinittce  rise,  witli 
the  view  of  so  referring  this  report. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  think  we  had  better 
p.-vs-s  upon  some  principle  and  ascertain  the  sen- 
timent of  the  convention,  in  relation  to  the  elec- 
tion of  these  various  officers,  and  how  many  we 
are  to  have,  and  after  we  have  determined  those 
points,  we  may  refer  the  subject  to  a  committee 
that  tliey  may  put  the  whole  in  a  connected 
form.  But  as  to  referring  it  now,  without  first 
obtaining  the  sentiments  of  theeonventionupon 
the  subject,  and  determining  what  is  to  be  done 
with  it,  I  think  it  would  be  a  loss  of  time.  It 
seems  to  me,  it  would  be  throwing  upon  the 
committee  a  duty  which  we  ought  to  discharge 
ourselves.  I  am  against  the  committee  rising, 
and  reporting  to  the  house,  with  the  view  of  re- 
ferring the  subject  to  a  committee. 

Mr  ."turner.  It  appeared  to  me  when  the 
committee  that  made  tliis  report  was  formed, 
that  it  was  not  very  essential  except  for  the 
purpose  of  dividing  the  labors  of  the  conven- 
tion among  its  various  members.  I  therefore 
feel  no  particular  pride  in  having  advocated 
the  formation  of  this  committee,  or  of  assisting 
in  its  labors,  but  I  should  consider  it  an  injus- 
tice to  other  members  of  the  committee,  if  their 
labors  were  to  be  referred  to  another  committee, 
without  adding  the  committee  also.  Taking 
the  fruits  of  their  labor  and  placing  them  before 
these  three  committees,  without  adding  the 
committee  as  a  fourth,  would  be  like  treating 
them  as  ministerial  sure  enough,  and  the  others 
as  judges  to  try  them.  And  that  would  be 
the  effect  of  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from 
Hardin.  I  admit  that  the  committees  which 
made  the  various  reports  that  were  referred  back 
this  morning,  are  in  many  respects  more  impor- 
tant committees  than  this,  still  the  officers  here 
provided  for  are  essential  to  the  commonwealth, 
and  there  is  a  committee  to  which  this  particu- 
lar branch  of  duty  has  been  assigned;  and  they 
have  reported  the  result  of  their  labors.  I  thint 
as  a  matter  of  course,  we  ought  to  consider  this 
report.  It  is  true  the  committees  on  the  va- 
rious courts  have  assumed  to  report  upon  mat- 
ters which  did  not  properly  belong  to  them,  and 
upon  which  they  had  no  power  given  them  to 
report,  and  I  will  say  another  thing;  I  do  not 
believe  the  suggestions  they  have  made  as  re- 
gards the  same  officers  are  equal,  certainly  not 
superior  to  those  contained  in  this  report.  I  be- 
lieve in  point  of  principle,  and  in  every  other 
point  of  view,  that  the  report  under  considera- 
tion is  superior  to  the  reports  that  have  been 
made  on  the  same  subject  by  other  committees. 
I  am  therefore  opposed  to  the  motion  to  rise  and 
refer  this  subject  to  the  three  committees. 

Mr.  NUTT  ALL.  I  doubt  the  propriety  of  the 
committee  rising.  This  matter  is  before  us  in  a 
tangible  shape,  and  I  think  it  would  be  econo- 
my, of  time  at  least,  to  act  upon  the  report  as  it 
is,  without  any  further  reference  to  a  committee. 
The  county  attorney,  or  attorney  for  the  county 
c«urt,  seems  to  be  cutting  a  figure  in  this  report, 
and  notwithstandinjj  tlie  objections  of  some  of 
the  delegates  on  this  floor,  1  look  upon  him  as 
an  important  officer  in  this  country.  He  is  an 
officer  who  is  to  supervise,  to  a  very  considera- 
ble extent,  the  morals  of  tlie  county.  It  will 
be  incumbent  that  all  offenders  bhall  be  brought 


before  the  proper  officers  for  trial.  In  the  coun- 
ty where  I  live — though  I  do  not  know  how  it 
is  elsewhere — we  look  upon  the  office  of  county 
attorney  as  something  like  a  stepping-stone  for 
young  men  whq  are  entering  upon  the  profession 
of  law,  and  we  liberally  reward  him.  Our  coun- 
ty gives  two  hundred  dollars  annually  to  the 
county  attorney;  he  receives  it  whether  he  ren- 
ders twenty-five  dollars  worth  of  service  or  not. 
We  never  enquire  into  the  fact.  We  look  upon 
him  as  an  officer  who  is  necessary  to  the  well- 
being  of  the  county;  but  we  look  more  espe- 
cially upon  this  office,  as  a  stepping-stone  for 
young  men,  affording  them  a  means  of  learning 
special  pleading:.  Many  lawyers  are  made  out 
of  poor  men's  sons;  and  it  appears  to  me  to  be 
proper  to  hold  out  to  them  some  degree  of  en- 
couragement and  assistance;  I  care  not  whether 
it  be  by  voluntary  contribution  or  by  tax,  so  that 
they  get  it. 

I  am  opposed  to  striking  out  the  words, 
"county  court  attorney."  It  can  do  no  harm  to 
allow  it  to  stand.  This  report,  I  think,  is  about 
as  well  Avritten  as  any  that  has  been  presented  to 
this  house,  and  we  have  now  got  a  committee  of 
thirty  gentlemen,  to  consider  some  three  or  four 
of  the  most  complicated  questions,  and  the  Lord 
Almighty  knows  when  they  get  tangled  up  to- 
gether what  will  become  of  the  subjects  that 
have  been  referred  to  them.  I  was  averse  to  the 
proposition  for  making  that  reference,  but  I  am 
so  often  wrong  that  I  thought  I  would  vote  with 
the  majority  once,  and  I  am  now  going  one  step 
further,  and  am  willingto  add  another  ten  to  the 
committee,  and  let  this  subject  be  referred  to  the 
committee  of  forty;  then  we  will  select  one  oth- 
er subject,  and  acid  ten  more  to  the  committee, 
and  let  them  make  a  constitution,  and  when  it 
comes  in  I  pledge  my  honor  to  vote  for  any  thing 
they  propose. 

Mr.  RIIDD.  I  think  that  an  opinion  ought  to 
be  expressed  by  the  committee  of  the  whole,  upon 
the  different  propositions  contained  in  this  re- 
port, before  we  resolve  to  throw  it  upon  a  com- 
mittee that  already  consists  of  thirty  members. 
If  the  committee  that  made  this  report  be  added 
it  will  be  equally  objectionable;  there  will  be  a 
difference  of  three  to  one.  I  like  to  vote  upon 
equal  terms.  I  am  certain  that  the  joint  com- 
mittees do  not  wish  to  be  encumbered  with  any 
further  business  than  has  already  been  referred 
to  them.  They  are  charged  with  the  regulation 
of  the  three  courts,  and  they  have  as  much  as 
they  can  get  through  with,  without  having  this 
subject  added.  If  they  act  harmoniously  and 
report  back  a  bill  upon  the  subjects  already  re- 
ferred to  them,  that  will  be  acceptable  to  the 
convention,  they  will  have  done  all  that  we 
ought  to  expect  them  to  do;  and  they  will  be  en- 
titled to  the  tlianks  of  this  convention.  You 
might  as  well  refer  the  whole  business  of  the 
convention  to  these  thirty  men.  I  hope  the  com- 
mittee will  not  rise,  but  that  Ave  will  go  on  with 
the  eonsiderjition  of  the  report,  and  finish  the 
business  that  we  have  before  us. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  was  very  unfortunate  in 
my  suggestion.  It  was  made  to  cut  off  the  very 
thing  I  see  it  has  produced — that  is  debate.  "l 
suppose  that  when  the  constitution  is  formed  we 
do  not  intend  to  provide  for  one  thing  in  two 
places  in  that  instruinent. 


359 


My  object  is  to  get  along  wilJj  the  business 
for  Trhich  we  came  here,  and  I  have  urged  geu- 
llemen  to  vote  more,  aud  talk  less.  I  tliink  ve 
are  spending  muoli  time  uselessly,  and  if  gen- 
tlemen will  proceed  to  vote  upon  the  proposi- 
tions now  before  them,  I  will  agree  not  to  make 
a  speech  for  the  next  three  weeks. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  find  by  reading  the  twenty 
third  section  of  the  third  article  of  the  constitu- 
tion, these  words: 

"  An  attorney  general  and  such  other  att jrnies, 
for  the  commonwealtli  as  may  be  necessary,  shall 
be  appointed  whose  duty  shall  be  regulated  by 
law.  Attoniies  for  the  commonwealth  for  the 
several  counties  shall  be  appointed  by  the  re- 
spective courts,  having  jurisdiction  therein." 

I  think  it  is  possible  that  the  gentleman  from 
Knox  may  be  mistaken  in  supposing  that  there 
is  any  county  that  has  no  county  attorney.  The 
language  of  the  constitution  is  imperative  upon 
the  county  court,  and  they  have  carried  it  into 
effect. 

Mr.  WOODSOX.  I  would  ask  the  gentleman 
if  ••  attorney  for  the  commonwealth"  there,  in- 
cludes attorneys  for  counties? 

Mr.  XESBll'T.     I  presume  they  are  included. 

Mr.  WOODSOX.  It  is  not  so  in  the  region  of 
country  where  I  live.  That  section  of  the  con- 
stitution has  never  been  so  interpreted  or  under- 
stood, and  in  various  counties  they  have  no  at- 
torn ies. 

Mr.  XESBITT.  However  to  obviate  the  diffi- 
culty of  the  gentleman  from  Knox  I  would  pro- 
pose that  these  officers  shall  be  elected,  and  that 
j-  no  qualification  should  be  required,  and  I  am  of 
I  ■  opinion  that  we  would  save  time  by  taking  up  this 
report,  and  obtain  the  sense  of  the  committee 
upon  it.  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  from  Jef- 
ferson, that  by  the  time  these  three  committees, 
actinw  conjointly,  get  a  report  prepared  and  pre- 
sented to  the  convention,  they  will  have  done  as 
much  as  they  are  able  to  do.  If  every  thing  is 
to  be  referred  to  this  joint  committee,  it  would 
be  better  to  add  every  member  of  the  house  to  it, 
and  begin  over  again  and  take  up  the  old  con- 
stitution, section  by  section.  I  was  for  that  at 
the  start.  If  every  thing  is  to  be  referred  to 
this  committee  of  thirty,  it  ought,  I  think,  to  be 
increased  to  a  hundred. 

The  question  being  taken  on  the  motion  that 
the  committee  rise,  it  was  decided  in  the  negative. 
■  .  Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  do  not  understand,  as  the 
gentleman  who  was  last  up,  that  the  office  of 
county  attorney  as  it  now  exits  in  our  county 
courts,  is  a  constitutional  office.  I  apprehentl 
that  the  attorney  of  the  commonwealth  for  the 
county  referred  to  in  tlie  existing  constitution, 
discharged  his  duties  at  the  quarter-session 
courts;  but  as  the  county  courts  are  at  present 
organised,  being  deprived  of  original  common 
law  jurisdiction,  I  apprehend  that  the  county 
attorney  is  merely  a  lawyer  employed  by  the 
court,  and  is  not  a  constitutional  office. '  The 
creation  ot  such  an  officer,  to  act  upon  the  part  of 
the  commonwealth,  is  of  very  questionable  utili- 
ty, and  I  would  not  like  to  see  inserted  in  the 
constitution,  an  imperative  provision  for  his 
appointment.  The  duty  of  the  county  attorney 
is  merely  advisory.  It  is  very  rarely  that  any 
duty  devolves  on  him  as  a  practicing  attorney. 
I  look  upon  the  office  as  almost  a  sinecure.    Be- 


fore the  jury  law  was  passid — it  is  true — It  was 
appropriately  made  the  duty  of  the  county  at- 
torney to  attend  to  prosecutions  for  breaches  of 
the  peace  occun'ing  in  liis  county,  becaufc  the 
fines  went  to  lessen  the  county  levy;  but  since 
the  passage  of  that  law,  those  fines  are  a  part 
of  the  jury  fund,  aud  that  duty  should  be  di- 
verted Irom  liini,  as  a  matter  belonging  rather  to 
the  state  at  large  than  the  county.  This  would 
make  the  unties  of  the  office  merely  advisory. 
It  is  proposed  now  to  change  the  county  court 
system  entirely,  to  elect  a  county  judge,  and  the 
individual  chosen  to  fill  that  office,  it  is  reasonable 
to  suppose,  will  be  so  far  learned  in  the  law,  as 
not  to  need  the  advice  of  a  county  attorney. 
Under  all  the  circumstances,  I  think  it  will  be 
the  best  to  strike  out. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  am  not  very  much  wed- 
ded to  the  retention  of  the  provision  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  the  county  attorney  in  the  con- 
stitution, and  I  have  thought  that  I  would 
submit  a  compromise  to  the  gentleman  from 
Knox  and  Harlan.  There  may  be  some  counties 
in  which  county  attorneys  may  be  necessary; 
and  I  submit  whether  it  will  not  be  best  not  to 
make  it  imperative — as  this  bill  does — upon 
every  county  court  to  appoint  a  county  attor- 
ney; but  leave  it  discretionary  with  the  court, 
by  substituting  the  word  "may"  for  the  word 
"shall."  There  are  counties  where  such  an 
officer  may  not  be  necessary;  and  1  would 
leave  it  to  the  judges  to  dctennine  whether 
one  should  be  appointed  or  not.  They  would 
very  rarely,  I  think,  employ  a  county  attorney, 
and  thus  increase  the  taxation.  They  would 
employ  them  only  when  absolutely  necessary, 
and  the  appointment  would  be  approved  by  the 
people.  1  am  in  favor  of  allowing  the  court  a 
discretionary  power,  and  if  my  friend  fron  Ejiox 
and  Harlan  wul  so  modify  his  proposition,  I  will 
vote  for  it. 

Mr.  MAYES.  As  it  ii  not  a  matter  of  veiy 
great  moment — if  the  gentleman  from  Knox  will 
permit  me — in  order  to  meet  the  views  of  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson,  I  will  move,  bv  way 
of  amendment  to  his  proposition,  to  strike  out 
the  words  -'county  court  attorney,"  and  insert 
the  following:  "the  county  court  may  appoint  a 
county  attorney,  whose  duty  shall  be  regulated 
by  law." 

Mr.  WOODSON.    I  accept  the  amendment. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  do  not  think  it  should  be  im- 
perative on  the  county  court  to  appoint  a  county 
attorney;  it  should  be  left  di.scretionary  witK 
the  court  to  appoint  or  not,  as  they  shall  think 
the  business  and  interests  of  the  county  require. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  I  do  not  see  any  necessity 
for  the  appointment  of  a  count}'  attorney;  but  if 
we  are  to  have  that  description  of  officer — as  the 
principle  has  been  settled  I  believe  that  we  in- 
tend to  elect  all  other  officers — I  hope  that  this 
officer  will  also  be  elected  by  the  people,  and 
that  his  duties  will  be  specified  in  the  constitu- 
tion, because  in  some  counties  in  the  state  under 
the  existing  state  of  things,  there  are  doubts  as 
to  what  the  duties  are.  In  some  counties  where 
the  duties  are  not  defined,  the  county  attorney 
has  prostituted  his  office  for  sinister  motives.  1 
am  not  anxious  that  the  appointment  of  this 
class  of  officers  should  be  provided  for,  but  if 
it  be,  it  is  better  that  they  should  be  required  to 


860 


prosecute,  in  all  cases  in  wliidi  tlie  coniioon- 
wealth  is  intert-stod  within  tlie  cotiulies  in 
which  they  reside.  It  is  a  very  difficult  matter 
sometimes  for  the  conmionwealth  attorney  to 
carry  throii<jh  a  prosecution  successfully — not 
being  a  resident  of  the  county,  and  not  being 
cognizant  of  the  facts  attending  a  case  that  may 
arise;  hence,  if  a  county  attorney  be  appointed 
at  all,  he  should  he  required  to  prosecute  in  all 
cases  in  which  the  commonwealth  is  interested, 
whether  civil  or  criminal. 

And  as  we  are  about  to  adopt  the  principle  of 
making  all  other  officers  elective,  1  hold  that  the 
county  attorney  should  also  be  elected  by  the 
people. 

Air.  TURNER.  In  the  aspect  in  which  the 
question  is  now  presented,  1  have  no  great  so- 
licitude whether  it  prevail  or  not.  There  was 
nearly  an  equal  division  in  the  committee  iipon 
the  question  whether  this  officer  should  be  elec- 
ted, or  appointed  by  the  court.  I  voted  in  com- 
mittee in  favor  of  the  appointment  by  the  court. 
There  were  two  or  three  small  officers,  that  real- 
ly appeared  to  me,  too  unimportant  to  trouble 
the  people  about. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  If  it  be  in  order  now,  I  will 
move  to  amend  the  first  section,  in  the  third  line, 
by  striking  out  "county  court  attorney,"  and  at 
the  end  of  the  section  insert  the  following;  "that 
the  qualified  voters  of  the  different  counties  in 
the  state  may  elect  a  county  attorney,  who  shall 
hold  his  office  for  the  same  time  as  the  presiding 
judge  of  the  county  court,  whose  duties  shall  be 
prescribed  by  law." 

Mr.  WOODSON.  There  is  no  one  who  woula 
go  further  for  the  elective  principle  in  every  de- 
partment of  the  government,  than  myself.  My 
object  is  to  give  to  the  people  as  much  power  as 
possible — as  far  as  the  election  of  all  officers  is 
concerned — and  if  I  shall  ascertain  that  the  con- 
stituents whom  I  represent  here,  are  in  favor  of 
electing  county  attorneys,  I  shall  vote  to  give 
them  the  power  to  elect  them.  My  impression 
is,  that  neither  of  the  counties  I  represent  is  in 
favor  of  having  a  county  attorney  at  all. 

In  the  county  of  Knox  there  lias  not  been  a 
eounty  attorney  for  fifteen  years,  and  perhaps 
they  niay  not  choose  to  have  one  for  the  next 
twenty  years.  1  want  the  county  courts  to  liave 
it  left  to  their  discretion  whether  thoy  will  have 
an  attorney  or  not,  and  I  am  willing  to  accept 
the  amendment  of  my  friend  from  Simpson,  if 
he  will  insert,  "that  a  majority  of  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  county  may  elect  an  attorney  if 
they  think  proper." 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  will  put  the  amendment  in 
that  shape. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  believe  that  my  amendment 
was  accepted  by  the  gentleman.  I  regard 
this  as  an  important  question.  From  the  read- 
ing of  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Simpson,  I  do  not  know  how  the  people  are  to 
determine  that  they  will  elect  a  county  attorney. 
The  court  may  very  easily  determine;  but  if 
left  to  the  people,  they  will  first  be  obliged  to 
take  the  question  whetiier  they  will  have  an  at- 
torney. I  would  greatly  prefer  to  have  the 
amendment  which  I  proposed  acted  upon  and 
adopted  or  rejected.  If  rejected,  then  I  would 
propose  to  strike  out  the  words  "county  court 
attorney,"  and  leave  to  the  legislature,  accord- 


ing to  the   twelfth  section  of  the  report   of  the 
committee  on  executive  and  ministerial  officers, 
for  counties  and  districts,  to  provide  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  such  officers  as  may,  from  time  to        J 
time,  be  deoniod  necessary  and  proper.  1 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  would  like  to  test  the  ques-  ^ 
tion  whether  the  county  attorneys  shall  be  elec-  ^ 
ted  or  appointed  by  the  court. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  The  motion  which  I  made 
was  siini)ly  to  strike  out  the  words  "county  court 
attorney;"  and  mv  object  was  to.prevent  making 
it  the  imperative  duty  of  the  county  court  to  ap- 
point, in  each  county,  an  attorney.  If  those 
words  are  stricken  out,  1  am  willing  that  the 
committee  shall  substitute  any  provision  they 
may  think  proper,  provided  it  does  not  impose 
upon  the  court  the  duty  of  appointing  such  offi- 
cers. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  I  have  no  particular  objec- 
tion to  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Knox,  but  I  liold  that  the  county  court  attorney 
is  an  officer  that  should  be  elected  by  the  people. 
Hence  I  will  vote  against  any  proposition  that 
will  give  the  appointment  to  the  county  court. 
If  elected  by  the  people,  he  will  be  responsible 
to  them,  for  the  proper  discharge  of  the  duties  of 
his  office. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  rise  merely  to  suggest  a 
modification  of  the  amendment,  which  will  ob- 
viate all  difficulty  on  the  subject.  It  is,  "that 
the  general  assembly  shall  authorize  the  election 
of  county  attorneys,  in  such  counties  as  may  re- 
quest it." 
Mr.  CLARKE.  I  accept  it. 
Mr.  KAVANAUGH.  I  do  not  agree  with  the 
gentleman  from  Knox  (Mr.  Woodson)  as  to  his 
view  of  the  necessity  of  county  attorneys.  We 
have  commonwealth  attorneys  m  every  district, 
and  I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  this  commit- 
tee to  their  duties.  It  is  their  duty,  in  the  first 
instance,  to  take  up  and  prosecute  cases  in  the 
circuit  court,  where  an  offence  has  been  commit- 
ted against  the  peace  of  society  and  the  public 
safety.  When  any  felony  has  been  committed, 
the  commonwealth  attorney  of  the  district  has 
nothing  to  do  with  it,  until  it  comes  up  into  the 
circuit  court.  In  every  county  there  are  courts 
of  enquiry  establisliecf,  in  order,  after  a  felony 
lias  been  committed,  to  guard  against  the  escape 
of  the  offender  before  he  has  been  returned  to  the 
circuit  court.  Now,  unless  it  be  provided  by 
law  that  every  county  in  the  state  shall  have  a 
county  attorney,  the  most  outrageous  felonies 
may  be  committed,  and  as  the  county  has  no 
representative  in  the  court  of  enquiry,  the  indi- 
vidual would  escape.  Therefore,  thereare  .strong 
reasons  why  we  should  have  a  county  attorney. 
Again,  in  every  county  in  the  state,  there  are 
laws  operating  wliich  relate  to  the  state  revenue, 
in  regard  to  tavern  licences,  and  to  peddling 
clocks,  watches,  and  other  goods,  which  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  county  attorney  to  enforce.  In 
such  cases  the  whole  state  is  interested.  There 
are  cases  in  which  the  county  attorney  is  to  pro- 
tect the  rights  of  the  state,  and  it  is  important, 
therefore,  that  each  county  should  have  a  prac- 
ticing attorney.  As  to  leaving  it  to  the  counties 
to  decide  whether  they  will  have  these  officers  or 
not,  it  will  be  unwise,  inasmuch  as  the  people 
or  the  courts  could  never  decide  in  advance  when 
the  necessity  for  the  officer  would  arise. 


361 


Me.' MAYES.  The  difficulty  iu  my  miiia  in 
relation  to  the  election  of  the  attorney,  arises 
from  the  fact  that  the  people  could  not  determine 
•whether  they  •would  have  the  county  attorney  or 
not,  until  they  had  had  a  special  election  for  the 
purpose.  It  is  a  matter,  therefore,  •which  should 
be  left  to  the  county  court  to  determine.  It  is 
impossible  for  any  county  to  say  whether  the 
services  of  such  an  officer  would  or  would  not  be 
required  in  advance.  It  is  essential  that  in  every 
case  of  felony  the  state  should  have  a  represen- 
tative to  act  on  the  subject,  in  the  person  of  the 
county  attorney.  Besides,  in  regard  to  county 
matters,  it  is  His  duty  to  see  that  the  sheriff  pays 
over  the  revenue,  and  to  prosecute  motions  to 
recover  it;  and  it  is  impossible  for  any  county 
in  advance  to  say  whether  or  not  he  would  be 
required  to  exercise  these  duties.  Igo,  therefore, 
for  requiring  every  county  to  have  such  an  offi- 
cer, and  for  his  election  by  the  people.  We  are 
electing  all  the  other  officers  in  the  state,  and  we 
may  as  well  elect  him.  If  there  were  any  offi- 
cei-s,  in  regard  to  whom  there  are  stronger  rea- 
sons against  their  election  than  others,  it  seems 
to  me  they  are  the  practicing  attorneys,  whether 
of  the  districts  or  the  counties.  I  shall  vote  for 
their  election  by  the  people,  however,  as  I  do 
not  consider  the  reasons  against  it  to  be  suffi- 
ciently strong  to  induce  me  to  pursue  a  contrary 
course. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  As  I  am  determined  to  vote 
for  the  section  as  it  stands,  I  withdraw  my 
amendment. 

>Ir.  G.  W.  JOHNSTON.  I  regret  that  the 
motion  made  some  time  since  that  the  commit- 
tee  rise,  did  not  prevail,  as  I  desire  to  get  clear 
of  this  report  for  the  present.  I  think  we  are 
acting  hastily  in  providing  for  officers,  before 
we  have  created  the  offices  they  are  to  fill.  This 
report  provides  for  the  election  of  a  county  at- 
torney, and  countv  court  clerks,  and  if  we  go  on 
in  this  way,  we  shall  either  have  to  undo  what 
we  are  doing  now,  or  the  committee  upon  the 
courts  will  have  to  make  their  reports  conform 
to  our  action  to-day.  Suppose  we  vote  now  for 
the  election  of  county  court  clerks,  and  the  con- 
vention should  provide  for  a  probate  court  hav- 
ing testamentary  jurisdiction  in  each  county, 
and  a  commissioner's  court,  what  would  we  be 
obliged  to  do?  Wby,  to  reverse  our  previous  ac- 
tion, and  make  provision  for  the  appointment  of 
the  clerks  of  such  courts.  It  is  provided  in  this 
report  that  a  judge  and  sheriff  shall  be  elected, 
and  at  the  same  time  the  associate  justices  are 
elected.  I  believe,  on  the  motion  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison,  associate  justices  have  been 
stricken  out  of  the  report.  This  report  should 
either  go  back  to  the  committee  or  lie  on  the  ta- 
ble until  we  have  advanced  a  little  further,  and 
created  some  offices  to  be  filled,  before  we  pro- 
vide for  the  appointment  of  the  officers.  1  do 
not  desire  that  we  shall  be  obliged  hereafter  to 
go  back  and  undo  what  we  have  done  to-day. 
Therefore,  if  it  is  in  order,  I  move  that  the  com- 
mittee rise  and  report  the  bill  to  the  convention, 
there  to  be  either  referred  back  to  the  committee, 
or  to  lie  on  the  table.  We  can  then  take  up  some 
of  the  reports  from  other  committees — the  prop- 
osition for  instance  of  the  select  committee  in 
regard  to  the  establishment  of  new  counties— on 

46 


I  which  oar  action  will  not  require  to  be  undone, 

'  and  time  lost. 

I      Mr.  McHEXRY.    The  gentleman  can  obtain 

I  his  object  by  moving  to  pass  over  this  report. 

Mr.  G.W.JOHNSTON.  I  make  that  motion 
I  then,  and  also  to  take  up  the  report  on  the  sub- 
ject of  new  counties. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  am  satisfied  myself  from 
the  experience  we  have  had  during  the  session, 
of  the  results  of  the  practice  of  requiring  every 
thing  to  be  discussed  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
that  the  best  course  is  to  consider  the.se  matters 
at  once  in  the  convention.  I  suggest,  however, 
that  we  take  the  vote  first  on  the  proposition, 
whether  ■we  shall  have  a  county  court  or  not. 
And  then  we  may  rise  and  report,  and  have  the 
subject  in  the  convention,  where  these  protract- 
ed discussions  may  be  cut  off  by  the  previous 
question. 

Mr.  G.  W.  JOHNSTON.  I  am  disposed  to 
accommodate,  and  will  withdraw  the  motion. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  striking  oat 
the  words  "  county  attorney,"  and  the  motion 
was  rejected. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  It  seems  to  me  that  if  this  con- 
vention means  to  do  anything,  it  ought,  when  it 
takes  up  the  report  of  any  committee,  to  settle 
for  itself  its  leading  features  and  principles. 
For  instance,  as  regards  the  institution  of  the  of- 
fice of  county  attorney,  the  committee  ought  at 
once  to  make  known  whether  it  proposes  to  have 
such  an  office.  In  relation  to  the  matters  which 
were  referred  to  the  grand  confederated  commit- 
tee this  morning — one  question  being,  whether 
there  shall  be  four  or  three  judges,  and  another 
whether  the  court  shall  be  branched  or  not — all 
these  and  similar  questions  should  be  decided 
by  the  convention,  for  itself.  They  should  not 
be  referred  to  anv  individual  or  associated  com- 
mittees for  their  decision,  that  they  may  come  in 
and  instruct  the  convention.  Are  we  to  do  any 
thing,  or  get  away  from  here  at  all?  If  so,  some 
method  of  proceeding  must  be  adopted,  and  the 
best  in  my  judgment,  is  to  take  up  these  reports 
seriatim,  either  in  the  house,  or  in  the  committee 
of  the  whole,  and  at  once  decide  what  shall  be 
done,  without  waiting  the  opinion  of  any  com- 
mittee. When  a  report  is  tlius  acted  upon,  the 
convention  knows  at  once  its  settled  opinion 
and  decision  in  relation  to  all  its  principal  fea- 
tures. It  makes  no  difference  how,  but  it  ought 
to  be  done  in  some  mode.  This  report  under 
consideration,  should  be  taken  up  and  read  by 
sections,  either  in  committee  of  the  whole,  or  in 
the  house — and  probably  that  would  be  best,  as 
then  a  stop  could  be  put'to  this  eternal  talking, 
and  the  convention  brought  to  a  vote — and  then 
decide  upon  its  features.  The  objection  of  the 
gentleman  from  Shelby  (Mr.  G.  W.  Johnston) 
was  more  specious  than  solid.  He  says  if  we 
decide  now,  in  regard  to  these  officers,  it  will  be 
perhaps  before  this  confederated  committee  has 
decided  whether  the  offices  shall  be  established 
or  not.  But  the  decision  of  this  question  here, 
will  decide  this  point  for  them,  and  on  this  or 
any  other  proposition  it  would  be  the  proper 
course  to  pursue.  But  all  I  desire  is  that  we 
shall  get  to  work  in  some  form  or  other.  Let  us 
do  something.  Let  the  convention  decide  upon 
the  great  principles  and  features  of  the  constitu- 
tion for  itself,  and  then  let  it  be  referred   if  nc- 


mi 


cessary,  to  subcommittees  to  frama  and  put  in 
form. 

Mr.  MAYES  said  that  as  the  convention  had 
refused  to  strike  out,  he  would  withdraw  the 
balance  of  his  amendment,  proposiuij  to  insert. 
Mr.  CHRISM  AN  moved  to  strike  out  the 
words  "coroner  and  jailor."  This  would  leave 
it  to  the  legislature  to  provide  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  these  officers  as  tliey  might  deem  neces- 
sarv  and  expedient. 

'f"he  motion  was  rejected. 
Mr.  LINDSEY  moved  to  amend  the  first  sec- 
tion by  adding  the  following  words:  "  whenever 
the  county  court  of  any  county  deem  it  to  the 
interest  of  their  county  to  dispense  with  the  of- 
fice of  county  attorney,  they  shall,  at  their  court 
next  preceding  a  regular  election  for  the  county, 
make  an  order  discontinuing  the  office,  and  at  any 
time  thereafter,  at  a  court  next  before  a  regular 
election,  the  county  court  may,  by  an  order,  re- 
store theoffice;  and  the  duties  of  said  officer  shall 
be  regulated  by  law." 

Mr.  TURNER.  This  is  about  the  same  mo- 
tion the  gentleman  from  Knox  made.  Every 
county  is  xntested  in  having  those  persons  who 
violate  the  laws  punished,  and  if  they  do  not 
have  the  proper  prosecuting  attorney  to  prose- 
cute them,  they  will  escape  into  otlier  counties. 
If  you  intend  to  punish  crime  at  all,  you  should 
begin  at  its  very  incipient  stages,  otherwise, 
from  a  commencement  with  small  violations  of 
the  moral  law,  the  individual,  if  unchecked, 
soon  becomes  hardened  and  scruples  not  at  the 
commission  of  greater  and  more  heinous  oflfen- 
ces.  A  prosecuting  officer  is  therefore  necessary 
in  each  county,  to  see  that  these  leaser  crimes 
and  misdemeanors  are  at  once  punished.  And 
it  is  an  office,  which,  for  the  common  safety  of 
the  state,  every  county  should  be  required  to 
possess,  otherwise  the  duty  might  be  thi-own 
upon  only  a  few  counties  who  might  desire  his 
appointment.  The  absence  of  them  in  the  bor- 
der counties  would  also  be  an  inducement  for  of- 
fenders to  come  in  from  other  states  to  commit 
their  depredations.  The  old  constitution  re- 
quired that  there  should  be  a  county  attorney  in 
each  county,  and  yet  1  understand  there  are  some 
counties  which  have  no  such  officers.  Let  us 
however  do  our  duty,  and  provide  for  these  offi- 
cers, and  if  the  counties  do  not  carry  out  the 
provisions  of  the  constitution,  the  blame  is  with 
them,  and  not  with  us. 

Mr.HARGIS.  The  only  difficulty  lean  see 
in  this  matter  is,  that  in  some  counties  there  is 
no  man  whom  the  court  can  appoint.  If  this 
should  be  the  case,  and  it  is  marie  an  imperative 
duty  to  provide  for  such  an  officer,  what  will  be 
the  situation  of  the  court?  They  could  not  com- 
ply with  the  law.  I  prefer  to  leave  the  mat- 
ter optionable  witli  the  court.  As  to  its  elec- 
tion by  the  people,  it  is  a  little  trifling  office,  of 
no  account,  ana  the  people  care  but  little  about 
it.  Nor  do  they  care  about  electing  the  coroner, 
jailer,  and  other  little  petty  officers.  They  will 
fiave  enough  to  do  in  tne  election  of  tlie  judicia- 
ry, and  other  important  officers. 

Mr.  LINDSEY'S  amendment  was  rejected. 
Mr.   APPERSON    moved  to  strike  out  the 
■words  "  county  court"  b<jf]ore  the  word  "  atlor- 
OW."    Otherwise  the  3ecti,on  might  bo  under- 


stood as  referring  to  a  county  court  attorney, 
county  court  surveyor,  (fee. 

Mr.  TURNER  agreed  to  the  amendment  as 
right  and  proper,  and 

The  section  was  so  amended. 
Mr.  BRISTOVV  suggested  that  there  was 
nothing  in  the  report  which  provided  how 
these  officers  were  to  be  appointed.  The  term 
elected  was  used,  but  he  preferred  to  have  the 
words  added  "  by  the  qualified  voters." 

Mr.  TURNER  explained,  that  they  were  to  be 
elected  iis  the  bill  stated,  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  circuit  judges,  <fec.  The  object  was  to  keep 
the  constitution  as  free  from  verbiage  as  pos- 
sible. 

The  first  section  was  then  adopted. 
The  second  section  was  then  read : 
"  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  offices  men- 
tioned in  this  article  who  is  not  at  the  time  twen- 
ty four  years  old,  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
and  who  has  not  resided  two  years  next  preceding 
the  election  in  the  state,  and  one  year  in  the 
county  or  district  which  he  offers  his  services. 
No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  office  of  com- 
monwealth or  county  attorney,  unless  he  shall 
have  been  a  licensed  practicing  attorney  for  two 
years;  no  person  shall  be  elected  clerk  unless  he 
shall  have  procured  from  the  court  of  appeals  a 
certificate  that  he  has  been  examined  by  their 
clerk  under  their  supervision,  and  that  he  is 
qualified  for  the  office  for  which  he  is  a  candi- 
tlat>';  b>it  the  office  of  sheriff  or  constable  may 
be  filled  by  persons  who  have  attained  the  age  of 
twenty  one  years." 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  move  to  amend  the  second 
section,  bv  striking  out  the  words  "no  person 
shall  be  elected  clerk  unless  he  shall  have  pro- 
cured from  the  court  of  appeals  a  certificate  that 
he  has  been  examined  by  their  clerk  under  their 
supervision,  and  that  he  is  qualified  for  the  office 
for  which  he  is  a  candidate;"  but. 

When  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  court 
of  appeals  was  under  consideration,  I  took  oc- 
casion to  assign  some  reasons  why  I  thought  no 
certificate  should  be  required  from  a  candidate 
for  the  office  of  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals. 
I  heard  no  argument  which  satisfied  me  that  I 
was  not  right.  I  will  not  now  detain  the  com- 
mittee. I  am  willing  the  vote  should  now  be 
taken. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  had  the  honor  to  introduce 
a  resolution  covering  that  point  as  well  as  some 
others,  and  I  suppose  this  motion  will  test  the 
matter  which  I  had  in  view.  I  want  to  know 
how  many  honorable  gentlemen  are  in  favor  of 
laying  a  tariff  of  from  five  to  one  hundred  and 
tiftv  dollars,  to  operate  upon  all  applicants  for 
the'  office  of  clerk.  It  has  been  shown  that  a 
certificate  is  no  protection  to  the  people,  and  is 
not  even  prima  facie  evidence  of  fitness.  This 
provision  can  have  no  other  effect  than  to  ope- 
rate as  a  tariff  for  the  protection  of  those  who 
now  have  certificates,  and  it  is  imposing  unjust 
restrictions  upon  those  who  shall  be  candidates. 
It  is  making  invidious  distinctions  in  society.  It 
is  circumscribing  the  number  from  whom  tlie 

f»eoplc  may  choose,  and  is  thus  violating  their 
recdom.  At  a  proper  time  \  shall  call  for  the 
ayes  and  noes. 

Mr.  TURNER.  We  had  this  debated  the  other 
day,  and  I  would  ask  that  tlie  remarks  made  by 


iM 


the  gontlemen  from  Ohio,  from  Henderson,  and 
from  Louisville,  be  considered  as  answer?  to  the 
gentleman  from  Ballanl  and  MeCracken.  and  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson.  I  hope  that  we  shall 
not  hare  a  repetition  of  the  debate  on  the  princi- 
ple involved  in  this  question. 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  to  amen<l,  by  striking 
out  the  words  "by  their  clerk,"  and  inserting  the 
•words,  "any  two  of  the  judges  of  the  circuit 
courts." 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  believe  in  this  case,  the  ex- 
amination will  be  a  mere  farce.  No  length  of 
service  at  the  bar  will  make  a  competent  clerk. 
I  have  been  a  clerk  for  fifteen  years,  and  I  think 
I  can  judge  in  respect  to  this  matter.  1  have  no 
idea  that  the  certificate  will  be  of  any  use  to  the 
people;  they  are  as  competent  to  judge  of  the 
fitness  of  a  person  for  this  oflBce  as  the  judges  of 
the  appellate  and  circuit  courts,  and  therefore 
1  am  opposed  to  the  restriction.  I  do  not  think 
the  requisition  that  a  clerk  shall  be  twenty  four 
years  old  is  necessary.  I  knowyounggcTitlemen 
fifteen  yearsold,whoareaswellqualifieaas  many 
of  the  clerks  in  this  state,  or  the  clerk  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  though  there  is  none  better  than  he 
is.  I  know  too,  that  the  examination  is  not 
thorough.  The  duties  of  the  clerk  of  the  ap- 
pellate court  are  not  as  extensive  as  those  of  the 
circuit  court.  On  that  account  the  bare  certifi- 
cates will  be  of  little  consequence.  I  hope  the 
restriction  will  be  stricken  out. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  no  anxiety  whether 
the  circuit  judges  are  added  or  not.  I  said  noth- 
ing when  the  bill  was  before  the  house.  I  know 
that  in  many  instances  when  a  candidate  finds  a 
difficulty  in  getting  a  certificate  from  one  judge 
he  will  go  to  another  who  may  be  more  ready  to 
grant  it.  I  think  we  had  better  confine  this 
matter  where  it  was  in  the  old  constitution.  The 
appellate  judges  are  not  likely  to  be  influenced 
by  local  matters  in  different  parts  of  the  state, 
for  they  will  not  be  acquainted  with  the  coun- 
ties except  those  immediately  around  them.  I 
do  notsaythat  the  judges  would  give  certificates 
from  any  improper  motives,  but  I  know  there 
have  been  those  who  would  give  a  certificate  to 
any  one  who  desired  to  practice  law.  If  you 
want  tlie  certificate  to  amount  to  any  thing,  let 
us  confine  it  to  the  judges  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals. I  believe  there  is  nothing  more  essential 
to  preserve  the  great  interests  of  this  common- 
wealth than  to  have  a  competent  clerk,  and  we 
should  have  every  restriction  which  we  can  put 
upon  it.  Every  man's  life,  reputation  and  prop- 
erty, and  every  thing  else  is  occasionally  in  the 
power  of  these  officers.  And  if  there  is  any 
part  of  this  constitution  conservative,  I  want 
this  part  to  be  so  particularly.  I  have  said,  and 
I  repeat  again,  that  the  requisition  of  this  cer- 
tificate, instead  of  giving  the  prospect  of  wealth 
to  the  sons  of  those  who  are  already  wealthy,  it 
will  secure  it  to  those  who  are  in  lower  circum- 
stances as  to  wealth.  It  will  go  to  the  sons  of 
the  yeomanry  of  the  country.  At  an  early  day, 
in  ttis  government,  the  sons  of  the  wealtliy  per- 
formed this  service,  but  now  you  cannot  find 
half  a  dozen  individuals  in  these  oflSces  whose 
fathers  are  wealthy,  except  in  those  cases  where 
the  father  was  a  clerk.  I  say,  therefore,  it  se- 
cures a  better  prospect  to  the  great  bodv  of  the 
community.     I  have  frequently  hear^  young 


j  men,  who  wanted  a  certificate  as  a  lawyer,  jtay 
j  "I'll  not  go  to  this  jud^e,  for  he  will  as£  me  too 
;  many  questions.  He  will  take  me  through  Coke; 
:  I'll  go  to  another  judge  who  will  ask  me  but, 

■  few  questions,  and  sign  my  certificate  directly." 
'  I  want  a  judge  to  give  an  answer  of  the  charac- 

■  ter  that  was  given  to  me.     I  asked  the  judge, 
how  long  shall  I  have  to  read,  and  his  reply  wa-s 

j  until  you  understand  it.  Now,  I  want  a  clerk 
I  to  serve  till  he  can  answer  all  the  hard  questions 
{ that  may  be  put  to  him.  The  report  of  the  com- 
'  mittee  has  not  been  acted  on  in  the  convention, 
j  and  I  intend  that  the  circuit  judges  shall  be 
I  struck  out  of  that  report. 

!      The  committee  then  rose,  reported  progress, 
and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

LEAVE   OF    ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  COPTEY,  leave  of  ab- 
sence, till  Wednesday  next,  was  granted  to  Mr. 
Ballinger. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  NOVEMBER  5,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Noutox. 

LEAVE   OF   ABSENCE. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TAYLOR,  leave  of  ab- 
sence to  Wednesday  next,  was  granted  to  Mr. 
Proctor  and  Mr.  Lashbrooke. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  FORREST,  leave  of  ab- 
sence was  granted  to  Mr.  Pollard  to  this  day 
week. 

PREAMBLE,  AXD  DEPAETMXXTS  OF  GOVEEXMEXT. 

The  first  business  was  announced  to  be,  the 
question  of  concurrence  in  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  on  tlie  Preamble,  and  Arti- 
cle I,  concerning  the  distribution  of  the  powers 
of  the  government. 

The  convention  concurred  without  a  division. 


COLXTT   AXD   DISTRICT   OFFICERS. 

The  convention  resolved  itself  into  committ€e 
of  the  whole,  Mr.  BOYD  in  the  chair,  and  re- 
sumed the  consideration  of  the  reportof  the  com- 
mittee on  the  executive  and  ministerial  offices 
for  counties  and  districts. 

The  pending  question  was  on  the  motion  of 
the  gentleman  from  Ohio  (Mr.  McHenry)  to  in- 
sert in  the  second  section  after  the  words  "court 
of  appeals"  the  words  "or  any  circuit  court  judge 
of  this  commonwealth." 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  McHENRY  then  withdrew  another  amend- 
ment which  he  indicated  on  Saturday,  and 
which  was  connected  with  the  amendment  now 
rejected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  to  strike  out 
the  word  "four,"  and  insert  "one,"  so  that  the 
section  should  read — "no  person  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  offices  mentioned  in  this  article  who 
is  not  at  the  time  twenty-one  years  old,"  <tc. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  thfnk  it' should  be  shown 
that  a  man  has  fixed  habits, and  thatthosehabits 
are  known  to  the  people,  before  he  is  entrusted 


364 


with  the  records  of  the  county  which  are  pre- 
served in  these  offices.  At  tweuty-four,  a  man's 
habits  are  more  likely  to  be  fixed  and  known  to 
the  county  in  which  he  lives.  I  have  been  in- 
formed that  in  the  state  of  Missouri  important 
records  have  been  lost,  and  the  incumbent  clerks 
disclaim  all  knowledge  of  them,  for  when  there 
is  a  change  of  clerks  the  documents  are  not 
counted,  and  it  is  not  therefore  known  who  is 
responsible  for  the  loss.  I  look  upon  the  office 
of  clerk  as  of  more  importance  than  the  office  of 
a  member  of  the  house  of  representatives,  for  in 
the  latter  case  a  representative  has  but  a  one  hun- 
dredth part  of  the  power  of  one  branch  of  the 
legislature  to  do  either  good  or  evil,  whereas  the 
clerk  has  the  sole  care  of  the  records,  and  the 
opportunity  to  alter  them.  The  change  of  even 
a  word  in  some  of  the  records  in  the  care  of  these 
clerks,  might  lose  a  man  an  estate,  and  hence  no 
man  should  be  elected  to  such  an  office,  and 
thereby  have  such  poAvers  given  to  him,  unless 
he  is  a  man  of  discretion  that  will  properly  ex- 
ercise the  power  entrusted  to  him. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  age  of  a  clerk 
of  the  court  of  appeals  has  been  fixed  at  twenty 
one  years,  as  the  age  of  responsibility.  I  will 
go  as  far  as  the  gentleman  from  Madison — or  as 
far  as  it  is  prudent  to  go — to  fix  a  test  of  quali- 
fication, but  when  a  man  has  attained  the  age 
of  twenty  one,  which  is  the  age  of  responsibil- 
ity as  a  free  agent,  if  he  has  other  qualifications, 
I  think  the  people  ought  to  decide  on  his  fitness 
in  a  moral  point  of  view,  and  we  should  not  de- 
bar those  between  the  ages  of  twenty  one  and 
twenty  four  from  the  opportunity  to  compete 
with  others  for  this  office.  The  gentleman  must 
know  that  a  large  portion  of  the  business  is  of- 
ten done  in  these  offices  by  deputies  under  the 
age  of  twenty  four,  and  I  see  not  why  this  dis- 
tinction should  be  made. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  A  few  moments  since  the  house 
rejected  the  motion  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
Onio  and  Hancock,  which  required  the  certificate 
to  be  signed  by  two  of  the  judges  of  the  circuit 
court.  I  think  the  house  did  not  understand  that 
motion,  for  surely  we  do  not  intend  that  there 
should  be  a  restriction  Avhich  does  not  exist  in 
reference  to  the  court  of  appeals.  I  hope  some 
gentleman  will  move  a  reconsideration  of  that 
vote. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  There  has  been  some  litUe 
disagreement  between  the  reports  of  the  commit- 
tees of  these  two  courts.  In  the  committee  on 
circuit  courts  of  which  I  am  chairman,  we  re- 
quire th^  state's  attorney  to  be  twenty  five  years 
of  age;  but  we  provide  that  no  person  shall  be 
elected  clerk  of  the  circuit  court,  unless  he  has 
attained  the  age  of  twenty  one  years.  The  age 
of  twenty  one,  has  always  been  considered  the 
proper  age  in  this  state. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment, and  it  was  .adopted. 

Mr.  "WOODSON.  I  have  an  amendment  to 
oflfer  nearly  similar  to  one  which  has  been  rejec- 
ted. I  propose  to  amend  the  section  by  insert- 
ing the  words  "or  a  circuit  judge"  after  the 
words  "court  of  appeals,"  so  that  no  person  shall 
be  elected  clerk  unless  he  shall  have  procured 
from  the  court  of  appeals  or  a  circuit  judge  a 
certificate  of  qualification.  I  prefer  that  no  cer- 
ificate  should  be  required,  but  that  the  whole  be 


left  to  the  discretion  of  the  people  whose  officer 
he  is  to  be.  But  I  think  the  certificate  from  one 
judge  will  be  as  safe  a  guarantee  as  that  of  two. 
I  offer  it  now  only  that  I  may  have  the  opportu- 
nity to  call  the  ayes  and  noes  upon  it  in  tne  con- 
vention. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  Experience  is  the  best 
teacher.  Under  the  present  constitution  it  is  re- 
quired that  a  clerk  shall  have  a  certificate,  show- 
ing that  he  has  undergone  an  examination  by 
the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals?  And  have 
not  these  offices  been  filled  by  men  who  were 
well  qualified?  If  then  this  provision  lias  work- 
ed so  well,  why  should  we  depart  from  it?  The 
requisition  of  a  certificate  will  operate  as  astim- 
ulus  to  a  man  to  prepare  himself  as  I  know  from 
experience.  It  will  make  a  man  look  into  the 
duties  of  the  office  and  fit  himself  for  them.  I 
am  opposed  to  letting  down  our  offices,  and 
throwing  them  wide  open  for  all,  whether  qual- 
ified or  not. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  desire  to  retain  the 
same  qualifications  for  clerks  that  existed  under 
the  old  constitution,  which  requires  an  examina- 
tion by  the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  and  a 
certificate  of  a  majority  of  the  judges,  that  he 
has  been  examined  and  is  qualified.  This  was  a 
means  of  safety  in  reference  to  the  qualifica- 
tions. I  do  not  like  this  departure  from  the 
old  course.  I  am  not  satisfied  that  a  majority  of 
the  judges  of  the  circuit  or  county  court,  or  even 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  are  qualified  to  deter- 
mine the  proper  qualifications  of  a  clerk.  I 
know  that  although  I  have  been  a  practicing 
lawyer  a  long  time,  and  might  be  qualified  to 
be  a  judge  so  far  as  the  qualification  of  age  is 
concerned,  yet  I  know  that  I  should  not  be 
qualified  to  judge  of  the  fitness  of  a  person  for 
tne  office  of  clerk.  There  are  but  few  clerks 
who  would  not  make  a  better  examination.  I 
object  to  the  examination  of  the  judges  alone, 
because  they  may  not  know  the  duties  of  the 
clerk,  but  tne  examination  of  the  clerk  in  the 
presence  of  the  judges,  is  a  r/uasi  judicial  act 
which  can  be  trusted.  In  that  way  we  have 
had  good  clerks,  except  in  those  cases  where 
they  had  their  appointment ;7ro  tern. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  It  is  said  that  we  live  in  an 
age  of  improvement,  that  arts  and  sciences  have 
advanced,  and  that  some  progress  has  been 
made  in  the  science  of  government.  In  the  or- 
ganization of  our  government  the  principle 
was  recognized  that  man  is  capable  of  self- 
government,  and  that  the  people  are  qualified  to 
judge,  with  no  restriction  except  asto  age.  They 
can  elect  a  senator  of  the  United  States  at  thirty 
years  of  age,  and  a  member  of  congress  at 
twenty-five.  And  after  fifty  years  experience, 
during  which  time,  this  has  worked  well,  wc 
have  come  up  here  and  intend  to  carry  the 
science  of  government  a  little  further,  oy  re- 
storing to  the  hands  of  the  people  the  right  to 
elect  those  officers  which  have  been  heretofore 
appointed  by  the  governor.  But  are  we  ad- 
vancing? Not  at  all.  Take  the  report  of  the 
committee,  and  you  find  that  no  man  shall  be  a 
judge  unless  he  is  thirty  years  of  age  and  has 
Deeu  a  practicing  lawyer  for  a  certain  time.  I 
have  no  objection  to  that.  Wliat  next  do  you 
find?  You  do  not  permit  a  clerk  to  be  chosen 
unless  he  has  acertiacate  from  the  court  of  ap- 


365 


peals.  We  are  advancing  in  the  science  of  gov- 
ernment, by  fixing  in  the  hands  of  the  court  of 
appeals  the  right  to  control  the  whole  This 
court  of  appeals  in  fact  will  nominate,  and  the 
people  will  but  confinu  the  nomination,  as  the 
senate  confirm  the  appointments  of  the  governor. 
I  do  not  want  to  vot«  for  a  man  in  this  way,  nor 
do  the  people  that  I  represent  want  to  do  it. 
This  kind  of  nomination  by  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, I  object  to,  and  shall  vote  against  it. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  am  always  inclined  to  di.stmst 
ray  judgment,  when  it  comes  in  competition  with 
that  of  older  gentlemen  on  this  floor;  but  I  beg 
to  institute  a  comparison  between  the  amendment 
proposed  by  the  committee,  and  the  provision 
contained  in  the  old  constitution.  I  understand 
the  president  of  this  convention  to  say,  that  he 

F)refers  that  provision  to  the  one  proposed  in 
ieu  of  it.  But  the  latter  does  not  correspond 
with  the  former.  Persons  were  appointed  under 
the  old  constitution,  and  held  their  offices  for 
months  and  years  without  any  certificate  from 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals.  I  know  in- 
stances myself,  where  clerks  were  appointed 
pro  tempore  bv  those  judges,  and  held  tlieir  offi- 
ces without  first  being  qualified  by  them.  Here 
is  the  tenth  section  of  the  old  constitution  on 
that  subject: 

"Each  court  shall  appoint  its  own  clerk,  who 
shall  hold  his  office  during  good  behavior;  but 
no  person  shall  be  appointed  clerk,  only  pro  tem- 
pore, who  shall  not  produce  to  the  court  appoint- 
ing him,  a  certificate  from  the  majority  of  the 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  that  he  fiad  been 
examined  by  their  clerk,  in  their  presence,  and 
under  their  direction,  and  that  tliey  judge  him 
to  be  well  qualified  to  execute  the  office  of  clerk, 
to  any  court  of  the  same  dignity,  with  that  for 
whicli  he  offers  himself.  They  shall  be  remova- 
ble for  breach  of  good  behavior,  by  the  court  of 
appeals  only,  who  shall  be  judges  of  the  fact  as 
well  as  of  tlie  law.  Two  thirds  of  the  mem- 
bers present  must  concur  in  tlie  sentence." 

That  was  the  old  constitution.  What  was 
then  allowed?  You  allowed,  under  the  old  con- 
stitution, the  judges  the  power  to  appoint  a  man 
with  no  certificate  of  qualification  whatever, 
and  permitted  him  to  hold  the  office,  a.s  I  have 
already  said,  for  months  and  years.  And  by 
whom  was  he  appointed?  By  the  judges;  and 
these  appointments  were  frequently  made. 
Now,  when  we  propose  to  elect  a  clerk  by  the 
people,  it  is  argued  that  he  must  have  a  certifi- 
cate from  a  majority  of  the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  before  he  shall  have  the  office.  You 
say  that  the  judge  is  competent  to  select  one 
who  has  undergone  no  examination  at  all,  that 
he  can  take  care  of  the  public  records,  and  of  all 
the  public  papers,  and  miportant  documents  en- 
trusted to  his  charge,  without  even  having  a  cer- 
tificate, and  yet  you  now  say,  that  if  the  people 
elect  a  clerk,  he  must  have  a  certificate  from  the 
majority  of  the  court  of  appeals.  I  cannot  see 
any  consistency  in  this  argument.  I  understood 
my  friend,  the  president,  to  say  that  he  wished 
to  require  the  same  qualification  as  is  contained 
in  the  old  constitution.  If  you  place  it  on  the 
same  ground,  you  will  allow  the  people  to  elect 
a  clerk  before  ne  has  received  a  certificate  from 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  he  will 
remain  in  office  till  he  can  obtain  a  certificate, 


just  as  tlie  clerks  formerly  did  when  appointed 
pro  tern.  I  shall  favor  tlie  amendment  of  my 
friend  from  Knox  and  Harlan ;  but  when  we 
get  back  into  convention  again,  I  intend  to 
offer  the  same  amendment,  as  1  did  on  Satur- 
day, striking  out  all  in  relation  to  the  re- 
quirement of  a  certificate  from  tlie  judges  of 
tne  circuit  court,  and  to  get  the  yeas  and  nays 
upon  it.  But  if  I  cannot  do  better,  I  should 
much  prefer  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Knox  to  the  one  reported  by  the  committee 
on  executive  and  ministerial  offices.  I  am  satis- 
fied the  people  are  competent  to  judge  of  the 
qualifications  of  a  clerk.  I  am  convinced  that 
if  the  amendment  proposed  the  other  day  by  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  who,  I  believe,  is  the 
chairman  who  made  the  report,  were  adopted,  it 
would  perpetuate  the  clerkships  in  the  hands  of 
the  pre-sent  incumbeut.s.  That  proposition  re- 
quires that  the  clerks  shall  have  had  an  experi- 
ence of  two  years  in  some  clerk's  ofiice.  iS'ow, 
I  put  it  to  that  gentleman,  and  to  others,  if  that 
clause  were  put  in  the  constitution,  whether  the 
effect  of  it  would  not  be  to  perpetuate  these  offi- 
ces in  the  hands  of  the  present  incumbents?  Is 
it  likely  that  Mr.  Swigert,  or  any  other  gentle- 
man wlio  wanted  to  run  again  for  the  ofBce, 
would  take  a  young  man  into  his  office  and  in- 
struct him,  in  order  to  make  him  a  competitor? 
Would  any  clerk  in  this  state,  who  was  instruct- 
ing a  favorite  young  man,  or  perhaps  his  own 
sou,  be  likely  to  introduce  another,  who  it  was 
probable  would  become  an  antagonist  to  either 
of  tliem?  Not  at  all.  I  would  rather  that  the 
clerks  should  be  elected  by  the  people,  without 
any  certificate,  than  that  such  a  clause  should  be 
engrafted  in  the  constitution.  If  clerks  have 
held  their  offices  for  one  or  two  years  without  a 
certificate,  when  appointed  by  the  judges,  I 
maintain  they  ought  to  be  permitted  to  do  it  now, 
when,  as  I  hold,  the  people  are  qualified  to 
judge  of  their  ability.  But  even  if  the  clerks 
were  not  qualified  at  the  time  they  were  elected, 
1  have  heard  men  say  that  in  one  or  two  months, 
a  man  of  business  habits  might  prepare  himself 
to  discharge  the  duties  of  clerk. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  never  supposed,  nor 
designed,  that  there  should  be  any  pro  tempore 
appointments  of  clerks  by  the  people,  and  there- 
fore I  never  supposed  the'people  would  elect  jjro 
tempore  clerks  while  certificates  could  be  obtain- 
ed; and  I  hope  and  trust  my  remarks  will  not 
mislead  the  gentleman  as  to  what  I  designed. 
I  do  not  believe  that  the  judges  of  the  circuit 
courts,  when  elected  by  the  people,  will  \x:  en- 
dowed with  universal  knowledge — be  good 
book-keepers,  good  clerks,  and  every  thing  else, 
W  the  mere  certificate  of  election  by  the  people. 
The  representatives  of  the  people  are  not  always 
good  ones,  and  are  often  rejected  on  a  second 
trial.  That  fact  ought  to  satisfy  every  gentle- 
man that  the  people  are  not  infallible.  I  believe 
it  is  the  part  of  prudence  to  require  proper  qual- 
ifications for  these  important  officers,  to  whom 
we  are  to  confide  the  keeping  of  the  records  of 
courts,  the  titles  to  property,  and  the  contracts 
and  papers  of  individuals.  I  know  many  good 
lawyers  who  could  not  find  a  paper  in  a  clerk's 
office,  because  they  know  nothing  of  the  order 
with  which  the  papers  .should  be  arranged. 
There  is  some  skill  required  in  knowing  where 


366 


lo  pnt  thiiig.5,  an<l  if  all  llic  clerks  in  Ivontucky 
should  tell  nie,  even  under  oath,  that  a  man 
could  fit  himself  for  the  duties  of  a  clerk  in  thir- 
ty days,  I  would  not  believe  them.  There  are 
but  few  men  in  Kentucky  who  cannot  leani  book- 
keeping, but  there  are  very  few  good  book-keep- 
ers In  this  commonwealth,  because  few  have 
nia<le  it  their  vocation.  "VVe  lawyers  often  have 
to  deal  with  accounts;  and  how  do  we  do  itV 
We  send  for  a  skillful  book-keeper,  and  get  his 
infonnation  and  his  aid  in  examining  the  books. 
What  do  we  do  in  all  complicated  questions  that 
arise  in  relation  to  machineryV  We  study  the 
ca-ses  as  they  arise,  and  call  to  our  aid  skilful 
men  to  explain  what  we  do  not  comprehend,  in 
order  that  we  may  give  a  satisfactory  explana- 
tion of  the  case.  We  are  thus  constantly  ex- 
tending our  information.  I  prefer,  therefore, 
Ihat  the  examination  of  the  clerk  should  be  made 
by  a  clerk,  in  the  presence  of  the  judges,  if  this 
can  be  done  without  requiring  them  to  come  to 
Frankfort.     I  do  not  feel  willing  to  multiply  the 

aualifications  of  candidates  for  this  office,  but  I 
esire   that  a  man  be   properly   qualified  before 
he  asks  for  the  office. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  did  say  that  I  had  been  in- 
formed that  a  young  man  might  be  qualified  to 
fill  the  office  of  clerk,  in  the  course  of  twenty, 
thirty,  or  forty  days.  Whether  the  information 
was  correct  or  not,  I  certainly  had  it  from  those 
who  profess  to  be  acquainted  with  the  duties  of 
a  clerk.  I  did  not  suppose  that  a  clerk  would 
be  elected  pro  tern,  by  the  people,  as  the  gentle- 
man seems  to  think  I  understood  him  to  say. 
I  understand  that  under  the  old  constitution, 
the  clerks  were  appointed  pro  trm.  by  the  judges, 
and  I  repeat  the  statement  that  I  made  before, 
that  those  clerks  have  held  their  offices  from  one 
to  two  years,  without  being  in  possession  of  a 
certificate.  It  is  to  be  presumed  they  were  not 
qualified  at  the  time  they  received  their  appoint- 
ment, at  least  they  had  not  that  prima  facie 
qualification,  which  a  certificate  of  the  majority 
of  the  court  of  appeals  indicates.  Yet,  in 
whose  hands,  I  ask,  were  the  papers  that  settle 
the  rights  of  the  people  of  the  state?  In  whose 
liands  were  all  the  records  that  belong  to  the 
people  of  the  county,  if  not  within  the  hands 
of  tne  men  thus  appointed  pro  tan.  by  these 
judges,  without  any  certificate  of  qualification? 
I  have  known  of  no  instances  where  complaint 
has  been  brought  against  those  individuals  thus 
appointed  pro  tern. 

Now,  if  it  has  been  the  practice  of  this  state 
for  the  last  half  century  to  appoint  clerks,  ^o 
tern,  where  vacancies  occured,  who  had  not  the 
certificate  of  a  maji)rity  of  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  and  to  allow  them  to  remain 
in  office,  having  in  their  hands  important  pa- 
pers determining  and  settling  the  rights  of  the 
people  of  the  county,  and  no  injury  lias  resulted 
from  such  appointments,  I  ask  upon  what 
ground  it  is  claimed  that  the  people  cannot  se- 
lect a  man,  who  in  a  short  time,  can  be  prepared 
to  diacharge  the  duties  of  the  office  of  clerK?  I 
do  not  ar^ue  that  a  clerk  should  be  appointed /)ro 
tem.hy  the  people;  but  if  he  were,  he  would 
have  in  his  linnds  no  more  of  the  right.s  of  the 
people  than  the  clerk  appointed  by  the  judge 
pro  tern.  Ho  who  is  a  canJidat*  for  election  by 
the  people,  will  have  his  pride  stimulated  to 


qualify  himself  for  the  station,  and  I  believe  he 
will  be  qualified  in  less  than  two  months.  In- 
deed, I  do  not  believe  the  people  would  elect  a 
man  who  was  not  qualified  at  the  time  of  his 
election.  It  has  been  abundantly  proved  that 
certificates  have  been  frequently  obtained  with- 
out due  and  proper  qualifications.  And  when 
thus  obtained,  what  is  the  result?  It  is  this,  the 
court  of  appeals  have  sent  forth  among  the  peo- 
ple a  man  endorsed  as  qualified  against  one  not 
thus  endorsed,  and  who  is  perhaps  in  fact,  bet- 
ter qualified.  The  people  are  thus  imposed 
upon.  How  will  the  people  reason  when  a 
candidate  presents  himself  for  this  office?  They 
will  first  inquire  whether  he  is  honest,  and 
whether  thev  can  safely  entrust  these  papers  to 
his  care.  1  he  next  inquiry  will  be  whether  he 
is  capable,  and  they  will  detennine  that  question, 
because  they  are  deeply  interested  in  it,  and  in 
nine  cases  out  of  ten  the  man  will  be  stimula- 
ted to  qualify  himself.  I  trust  no  certificate  will 
be  required,  and  that  even  the  amendment  of  my 
friend  from  Knox  will  be  rejected,  antl  that  the 
people  mav  be  permitted  to  elect. 

Mr.  TRfPLETT.  I  have  an  amendment  Avhich 
I  propose  to  offer,  and  which  I  hope  will  be 
adopted  now.  Letustake  a  medium  course  and 
a  safe  one.  If  weturntooneportionof  this  house, 
they  tell  us  that  the  circuit  court  clerks  and  judges 
are  better  qualified  to  judge  of  the  fitness  of  the 
candidate  for  this  office  than  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals.  Anotherportion  think  the  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals  are  the  best  prepared  to  de- 
cide this  question.  I  ask  attention  to  this  fact, 
which  I  think  will  be  admitted,  that  a  man  best 
understands  the  business  to  which  he  has  been  ac- 
customed. Let  us  turn  our  attention  to  the  addi- 
tional factthatlong  disuse  prevents  the  discharge 
of  the  duties  of  any  station  with  freedom  and 
decision ;  and  we  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  are  not  the  best 
judges  of  the  qualifications  of  a  clerk.  But,  I 
cannot  agree  with  the  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
that  the  clerk  shall  have  no  certificate.  A  calm 
consideration  suggests  the  safest  couree;  there 
IS  no  necessity  of  running  from  one  extreme  to 
the  other.  W  hy  compel  candidates  to  come  a 
distance  of  two  hundred  or  three  hundred  miles 
to  Frankfort,  to  a  tribunal  not  better  qualified 
than  that  which  you  have  at  your  own  doors? 
If  your  circuit  court  judges  are  nearly  as  well 
qualified  to  judTO,wliy  not  let  them  judge.  In 
the  county  of  Ohio,  I  do  not  believe  there  is  a 
single  soul  who  has  a  certificate,  excejjt  the  clerk, 
nor  in  Daviess,  Breckenridge,  nor  Hancock. 
And  T  call  upon  the  delegate  from  Henry  to  en- 
quire how  nuuiy,  except  the  acting  clerk,  have 
certificates  in  his  county.  Now,  there  are  one 
hundred  counties  in  the  state,  and  you  do  not  in- 
tend to  limit  the  number  of  candidates  to  the 
present  incumbents,  and  I  would  inquire  how 
many  candidates   the   clerk  of  the  court  of  ap- 

?eals  can  examine  previous  to  the  election  ? 
here  must  be  from  one  to  two  hundred  examin- 
ations by  one  single  court,  with  all  tlie  expense 
and  trouble  of  travelling  one  or  two  hundred 
miles  to  the  town  of  Frankfort  for  the  purpose 
of  going  through  this  oxamination.  They  hold 
but  two  courts  in  a  year. 

At  your  own  doors  you  have  a  tribunal,  as  I  re- 
marked, equally  as  well  qualified  to  make  thi» 


307 


examination  as  th.^  court  of  appeals.  I  am  sat- 
isfied that  the  circuit  court  is  fully  as  well  qual- 
ified t«  make  the  examination,  as  to  the  qualifi- 
cation of  clerks,  as  the  court  of  appeals.  And, 
furthermore,  if  any  fraud  is  attempted  to  be 
practiced  in  the  granting  of  a  certificate  to  a 
man  who  is  not  qualified,  there  is  a  plain  and 
simple  plan  by  which  it  may  be  detected.  Let 
the  candidate  be  placed  at  the  table,  and  let  him 
keep  the  minute  book  for  one  day,  and  let  him 
make  up  the  record  at  night.  This  will  prove 
whether  he  is  qualified  or  not.  All  this  can  be 
done  in  the  circuit  court,  but  not  in  the  court  of 
appeals. 

riie  amendment  that  I  propose,  is  simply  to 
insert  after  the  words  "court  of  appeals"'  the 
words  "circuit  court,"  it  will  then  read  thus, 
•'no  person  shall  be  elected  to  the  office  of  clerk 
unless  he  shall  have  procured  from  the  court  of 
appeals,  or  from  the  circuit  court,  a  certificate 
that  he  has  been  examined  by  their  clerk  under 
their  supervision,  and  that  he"  is  qualified  for  the 
otfice." 

Mr.  WOODSOJf  accepted  that  amendment. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  dislike  very  much  to  detain 
the  committee  as  this  subject  has  been  debated  a 
good  deal  already,  but  there  have  been  some 
suggestions  thrown  out  which  it  will  be  necessa- 
ry to  notice.  Whenever  I  find  myself  compelled 
to  differ  with  the  gentleman  who  has  just  spo- 
ken, I  do  it  with  great  distrust  of  my  own  judg- 
ment, but  in  this  instance,  I  rely  upon  my  own 
more  than  upon  his,  because  I  have  had  an  ex- 
perience that  he  never  has  had,  in  regard  to  a 
clerk's  duties,  and  I  am  satisfied  that  it  is  one  of 
the  most  important  points  in  our  constitution, 
that  we  should  make  provision  for  the  qualifica- 
tion of  these  officers.  I  have  long  thought  so, 
ajid  so  declared  during  the  canvass.  My  objec- 
tion is,  to  your  leaving  this  matter  to  the  local 
judge  in  the  circuit  in  which  the  applicant  re- 
sides. He  should  not  be  under  any  local  influ- 
ences, though  he  may  be  as  well  qualified  or  bet- 
ter than  a  man  living  at  a  di.stance,  who  knows 
nothing  about  the  individuals  upon  whose  mer- 
it he  is  called  upon  to  decide.  There  is  a  great 
advantage  in  having  the  certificate  come  from 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  on  that  ac- 
count. I  admit,  as  was  said  by  one  of  the  gen- 
tlemen who  addressed  the  committee,  that  supe- 
rior qualifications  are  requisite  for  a  clerk,  to 
those  of  a  judge.  The  clerk  of  the  court  must 
be  a  lawyer, or  at  least  have  considerable  knowl- 
edge of  statutary  law.  When  1  went  into  the 
clerk's  office,  the  first  thing  I  had  to  do  was  to 
read  all  the  statutes  that  had  been  passed  in  re- 
lation to  the  business  that  properly  belonged  to 
the  court  in  relation  to  devises,  in  relation  to  the 
duties  of  executor  and  administrator,  and  a  hun- 
dred other  things  that  come  usually  before  the 
county  court  for  adjudication.  If  th'e  clerk  does 
not  understand  the  substance  of  what  the  law 
is,  he  never  can  make  the  record  to  meet  the 
merits  of  the  ca.se.  Will  gentlemen  tell  me  that 
aji  individual  can  understand  these  matters  in 
six  weeks,  two  months,  or  even  a  year?  Sir,  he 
ought  to  be  a  pretty  good  lawyer  before  he 
should  be  entitled  to  be  appointed  clerk  of  a 
circuit  court.  What  has  been  the  effect  of  hav- 
ing clerks  who  did  not  thoroughly  understand 
the  duties  of  the  office?    Many  a  man  has  been 


I  made  a  pauper  in  consequence  of  an  error  arls- 
;  ing  from  the  ignorance  of  the  clerk.  Many  men 
I  have  been  turned  out  of  their  hmuses  merely  be- 
I  cause  the  clerk  did  not  know  how  to  make  out  a 
i  certificate  conveying  the  rights  of  a  married  wo- 
i  man  in  real  estate,  where  the  parties  had  an  in- 
i  tention  to  convey,  and  where  the  conveyance 
I  was  afterwards  set  aside  in  consequence  of  the 
error  of  the  clerk.  Many  a  man  has  lost  hi.s 
I  property  after  having  made  improvements  to 
double  and  treble  the  value  of  the  property 
originally.  In  the  county  of  Madison  there  was 
a  case  in  which  the  rignlful  owner  of  eleven 
hundred  acres  of  land,  in  one  place,  was  depri- 
ved of  his  property  in  consequence  of  an  error 
of  this  kind.  1  allude  to  the  greatca.se  of  Shack- 
elford. Miller,  and  others.  The  duties  apper- 
taining to  the  office  of  clerk  are  of  transcenaant 
importance.  It  is  behind  no  other  office  in  the 
gift  of  the  people  in  importance.  I  could  refer 
you  to  another  case  in  tne  county  of  Madison, 
where  fourteen  hundred  acres  were  lost  after  a 
man  had  recovered  judgment  because  the  clerk 
did  not  draw  up  the  judgment  correetlv  in  the 
record,  and  the  error  was  not  discoverecT  until  it 
was  too  late. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Did  that  clerk  have  a  certifi- 
cate from  the  court  of  appeals? 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  principal  clerk  had  a  cer- 
tificate, but  thejudgment  was  drawn  up  I  suppose 
by  the  deputy.  Tlie  fonn  of  reading  the  record,  is 
gone  through  with  before  the  judge,  it  is  true, 
but  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  he  perhaps  is  smo- 
king a  cigar,  and  two  or  three  lawyers  are  talk- 
ing to  him,  and  he  pays  little  or  no  attention  to 
the  record.  Everj"^  thing,  therefore,  depends 
upon  the  clerk  having  a  knowledge  of  his  busi- 
ness. The  legislature  is  passing  acts  every  year 
giving  new  jurisdiction  to  the  courts,  and  it  be- 
comes necessary  therefore,  that  the  clerk  should 
be  able  to  make  his  forms  agree  with  the  sub- 
stance of  those  enactments.  One  gentleman 
objects  that  the  court  of  appeals  is  in  the  habit 
of  granting  certificates  whenever  they  are  ap- 
plied for,  and  that  another  court  never  grants 
them,  except  upon  the  clearest  evidence  of  qual- 
ification. It  may  be  that  in  one  case  out  of  fifty 
a  certificate  may  be  granted  to  a  man  who  is  not 
qualified,  but  never  did  I  hear  the  objection 
made,  that  they  refused  an  individual  who  was 
qualified.  It  is  merely  an  imaginary  objection. 
Many  men  get  into  the  legislature  who  are  not 
qualified.  There  are  sometimes  judges  ap- 
pointed, and  clerks  also,  who  are  not  qualified 
for  the  stations  they  fill,  but  those  cases  are  ex- 
ceptions, and  it  is  our  duty  to  provide  a  means 
of  ascertaining  the  qualification  of  those  who 
present  themselves  as  candidates  for  an  import- 
ant offic-e  like  this.  Are  we  not  to  have  sound 
evidence  of  qualification? 

In  relation  to  another  matter,  that  was  allud- 
ded  to  by  the  gentleman  from  Louisville,  I  have 
had  more  experience  than  he  hiis  in  that  branch 
of  business.  It  is  more  than  thirty  years  since 
I  went  into  the  clerk's  office  in  Madison  county, 
and  there  are  now  records  in  that  office,  which 
could  scarcely  be  found  by  any  person  but  mv- 
self.  The  record  is  not  always  entered  in  tie 
name  of  the  individual  whose  estate  is  in  con- 
troversy; it  is  indexed  in  the  name  of  his  son, 
or  some  distant  relative,  and  a  great  portion  of 


368 


the  persons  interested  in  the  case  may  be  wliolly 
unknown;  there  can  be,  therefore,  no  certain 
alphabetical  made  of  arrangement,  and  after 
the  lapse  of  forty  or  fifty  years,  it  becomes  al- 
most an  impossibility  to  find  the  records  of  the 
ease.  A  man  who  has  no  system,  and  no  know- 
ledge of  the  duties  of  the  otfice,  will  perhaps 
cause  the  ruin  of  many  individuals  in  the  com- 
munity. I  want  something  that  will  secure 
uniformity,  and  not  to  liave  every  thing  in  a 
state  of  confusion,  or  as  the  printers  say  in  "pi." 
You  will  be  tolerably  certain  of  having  plenty 
of  printers  "pi"  in  the  office  of  every  clerk  in 
the  commonwealth,  if  you  do  not  take  care  that 
they  understand  their  (iuty. 

1  lie  gentleman  from  Simpson  is  a  great  lover 
of  the  people,  and  I  admire  liis  zeal  and  enthu- 
siasm, but  he  seems  to  like  the  ignorant  portion 
of  the  people  better  than  the  intelligent.  I  am 
for  employing  the  intelligent  portion  for  thepur- 
pose  of  protecting  and  preserving  the  rights  of 
the  ignorant.  I  wish  to  make  men  desirous  of 
being  intelligent,  of  qualifying  themselves  for 
places  of  trust;  and  that  they  should  not  come  in  as 
applicants  for  office,  relying  upon  the  fact  of 
their  being  the  most  ignorant  men  that  are  to  be 
found  in  the  community,  and  consequently,  ac- 
cording to  the  tenor  of  the  gentleman,  less  lia- 
ble to  do  mischief.  I  do  not  pretend  to  say  that 
the  gentleman  from  Simpson  thinks  in  this  way; 
but  the  result  of  his  argument  is,  that  you  should 
give  a  free  fight,  and  let  every  body  come  in  and 
compete  for  the  offices.  Well  it  will  be  about  as 
it  was  with  the  English  officer  who,  happening 
to  be  in  Frankfort,  and  being  very  desirous  of 
witnessing  a  "free  fight"  at  a  time  when  there, 
was  a  ball  at  the  Mansion  House,  a  servant  came 
to  him  after  he  had  gone  to  bed,  and  told  him 
that  there  was  a  "free  fight"  going  on  in  the 
bar  room.  He  went  down  and  ensconsed  himself 
in  a  corner  to  look  on,  but  each  party  thought  he 
had  come  to  help  the  other,  and  so  they  both 
turned  to,  and  gave  him  a  severe  beating.  Well 
he  got  enough  of  that  "free  fight,"  and  told  the 
servant  never  to  awaken  him  again  to  see  a  "free 
fight,"  for  he  had  seen  and  felt  enough  of  it  to 
last  him  as  long  as  he  should  live. 

Well  if  we  have  a  "free  fight"  in  relation  to 
the  selection  of  clerks,  the  people  of  Kentucky 
will  never  want  another  "free  fight"  as  long  as 
they  live.  You  will  get  the  records  in  such  a 
condition  that  there  will  not  be  another  "free 
fight"  called  for. 

I  want  something  like  a  conservative  govern- 
ment. I  want  to  give  to  the  people  the  power  to 
manage  the  affairs  of  the  government ;  but  in 
doing  this  they  require  that  some  restrictions 
shall  be  placed  upon  this  power.  Why  do  we 
make  a  constitution  at  all,  unless  it  be  tnat  there 
Bhall  be  restrictions  imposed  upon  the  variousde- 
partments  of  government?  This  is  the  very  pur- 
pose for  which  the  people  have  sent  us  here.  It 
IS  essential  in  my  judgment,  that  there  should 
be  some  evidence  required  of  a  candidate  for  an 
office  of  this  description,  that  he  understands 
the  duties  appertaining  to  that  office. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  thought  that  this  matter 
•was  pretty  well  ended,  but  I  find  it  has  become 
re-juvenescent,  and  is  about  to  commence  again. 
I  vra&  struck  with  the  figurative  remark  that  was 
made  by  the  gentlemaa  from  Madison, that  if  the 


requisite  qualifications  are  not  provided  for,every ' 
thing  pertaining  to  the  clerks  office  will  be 
knocked  into  "pi."  I  suppose  the  people  will 
have  to  swallow  it  too 

Now  I  think  if  there  has  been  a  good,  a  first 
rate,  unanswerable  speech  made  for  our  side  of 
the  house,  the  gentleman  has  just  made  it.  He 
has  convinced  us  beyond  the  possibility  of  a 
doubt,  that  the  ground  we  occupy  is  the  correct 
one.  I  was  rather  inclined  that  way  before,  but 
now  I  am  satisfied,  perfectly  certain  that  I  am 
right.  Unless  we  can  provide  in  the  constitution 
that  all  the  old  incumbents,  who  have  held  these 
offices  for  the  last  ten,  fifteen,  twenty,  thirty, 
forty,  or  fifty  years,  should  remain  precisely 
where  they  are — unless  we  can  provide  in  our 
constitution  that  they  shall  live  to  the  age  of  Me- 
thuselah,— we  might  just  as  well  take  a  new  set 
of  clerks  as  not.  If  the  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son should  unfortunately  die — and  I  acknowl- 
edge— for  I  have  a  very  great  respect  for  him — 
that  the  county  would  sustain  a  very  great  loss  ; 
what  would  be  the  condition  of  things  in  Mad- 
ison county  ?  What  would  be  the  condition  of 
things  in  every  county  in  the  state,  if  these 
old  clerks  should  unfortunately  die  ?  There  would 
be  no  living  man  that  could  find  a  single  record. 
I  know  that  from  the  bungling  manner  in  which 
the  clerks  have  recorded  deeds  and  acknowledge- 
ments, vast  estates  have  been  lost ;  there  is  just 
such  a  case  in  my  county,  that  occurred  through 
an  act  which  I  suppose  the  lawyers  would  call 
felo  de  se. 

If  gentlemen  will  refer  to  the  decisions  on  this 
subject,  they  will  find  it  is  not  more  than  twen- 
ty years  since  the  question  was  first  made  con- 
cerning these  clerks  and  certificates;  there  are 
recent  discoveries  in  this  country  concerning 
the  errors  that  have  been  committed  by  clerks 
heretofore,  in  relation  to  the  relinquishment  of 
dower  in  conveying  real  estate.  These  mistakes 
are  not  confined  to  the  county  of  Madison,  or 
the  county  of  Henry;  you  will  find  them  in 
every  county  in  the  state;  they  have  occurred  in 
counties  where  clerks  have  obtained  their  cer- 
tificates of  qualification,  and  those  certificates 
were  obtained  when  the  most  distinguished 
men  occupied  the  bench  of  the  court  of  appeals; 
when  such  men  as  Boyle  and  Mills  and  Bibb 
were  judges  of  that  court. 

I  do  not  know  whether  I  am  conservative  ac- 
cording to  the  gentleman's  construction  or  not, 
or  whether  I  prefer  the  ignorant  portion  of  the 
people — that  tlie  gentleman  speaks  of — to  the 
learned.  I  have  not  got  learning  enough  my- 
self to  know  when  I  come  in  contact  with  a 
man  of  learning,  what  his  attainments  are;  but 
I  think  the  whole  of  the  gentleman's  argument 
just  leads  to  this;  that  you  must  make  clerks 
out  of  the  present  incumbents,  or  you  must 
select  good  lawyers  to  fill  these  offices.  Well  I 
am  in  favor  of  tne  bar,  that  is  certain.  I  am  an 
humble  member  of  the  profession,  and  if  clerks 
are  to  be  made  from  the  bar  exclusively,  I 
shall,  of  course,  be  satisfied;  I  think  it  is  a 
great  misfortune  that  we  are  not  all  clerks  in 
this  house,  because  according  to  the  infonuatiou 
we  have  received  the  last  few  days,  no  other 
than  good  lawyers  can  tell  anything  about  the 
manner  in  which  the  duties  ought  to  be  dis- 
charged.   I  am  sometimes  erratic  in  my  judg- 


369 


raent,  but  I  ara  desirous  of  doing  that  which  i 
shall  best  proniote  the  public  interest;  and  I  do 
not  see  any  necessity  for  tlirowing  so  many  re- 
strictions around  the  people,  if  you  give  them 
the  liberty  of  electing  the  clerks  of  the  courts 
at  all. 

I  had  hoped  that  as  one  clerk  led  ofiF  in  this 
debate;  and  as  tliere  are  several  clerks  in  this 
house,  we  would  have  heard  from  them  also, 
and  have  got  all  the  information  that  was  re- 
quisite; but  they  seem  to  hold  back;  they  do 
not  give  us  the  least  of  their  advice. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  I  am  not  a  clerk  at  this 
time. 

Mr.  K^UTTALL.  Like  myself  I  suppose  the 
gentleman  has  resigned.  There  are  however, 
many  gentlemen  upon  this  floor  who  are  clerks, 
and  I  think  that  all  who  are  so  now,  or  who 
have  been,  will  be  inclined  to  go  for  this  amend- 
ment. 

I  was  myself  of  opinion  that  no  certificate 
should  be  required,  but  when  I  heard  the  re- 
marks of  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  I  yielded 
— as  this  is  a  time  when  yielding  seems  to  pre- 
vail— to  the  opinions  of  the  gentleman,  upon 
this  subject.  Having  two  terms  of  the  court  of 
appeals  in  a  year,  you  require  all  applicants  for 
clerkships  to  come  up  here  to  obtain  their  cer- 
tificates of  qualification;  and  if  that  court  will 
devote  its  time  to  the  examination  of  all  those 
who  present  themselves  as  candidates;  they  will 
have  within  the  next  two  years  no  time  for  the 
decision  of  cases.  The  circuit  judges,  and  the 
clerks  of  the  circuit  court  together,  are  certain- 
ly competent  to  examine  into  the  qualifications 
of  a  man  for  the  clerkship,  without  putting  him  to 
the  trouble  of  traveliug  two  or  three  hundred 
miles  to  this  place,  and  waiting  here  day  after 
day  until  his  turn  comes  around  for  examina- 
tion. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  court  of  appeals  can 
examine  forty  candidates  at  the  same  time,  as 
easily  as  one. 

Mr.  NUT  TALL.  I  suppose  then,  they  would 
go  upon  the  plea  of  the  school  ma.ster  and  exam- 
ine them  in  classes,  as  they  do  boys  at  school, 
and  upon  putting  a  question  to  the  first — such 
as  this — if  a  feme  coeert  comes  in  with  her 
husband  to  convey  real  estate,  what  sort  of  cer- 
tificate would  you  require?  If  he  did  not  an- 
swer, the  question  would  be  put  to  the  next,  and 
the  old  fashion  of  tripping  would  prevail,  and 
the  fellow  that  got  turned  down  would  be  serv- 
ed as  the  little  boys  are  served  at  school. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  I  had  the  privilege— I  do 
not  know  whether  it  will  turn  out  to  be  an  honor 
or  not — a  few  days  since,  of  introducing  a  reso- 
lution which  I  had  hoped  would,  to  some  ex- 
tent, obviate  the  discussion  which  is  now  going 
on.  It  is  not  however  before  the  committee, 
and  I  do  not  know  exactly  how  to  get  it  there. 
It  will  be  recollected  that  it  was  a  requisition 
upon  the  legislature  at  its  first  session  under  the 
new  constitution,  to  provide  for  the  compilation 
of  a  book  of  forms,  to  be  used  in  the  clerk's 
ofiices.  That  proposition  I  suppose  is  not  cog- 
nizable by  the  committee  at  this  time,  and  the 
question  comes  up  simply  as  to  whether  the  cer- 
tificate of  qualification  shall  be  required  of  the 
different  persons  who  shall  see  proper  to  present 
themselves  for  the  office  of  clerk. 
47 


It  does  strike  me  that  the  argument  of  the 
gentleman  from  Madison  is  basea  upon  a  very 
strange  hypothesis.  Ve  have  laid  down  as  a 
fundamental  principle,  by  which  the  action  of 
this  convention  is  to  be  governed,  that  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky  are  capable  of  self-govern- 
ment. That  is  a  proposition  to  which,  I  under- 
stand, every  one  subscribes.  If  this  principle 
be  founded  in  trutli,  how  are  the  doctrines  which 
gentlemen  advance  here  to  be  reconciled  with  it? 
It  resolves  itself  into  this,  that  notwithstanding 
the  people  are  capable  of  self-government,  yet 
when  they  want  the  assistance  of  a  clerk  to  car- 
ry on  the  operations  of  government,  they  are  in- 
capable of  making  a  proper  selection.  The 
clerk  is  an  important  officer,  and  should  be  per- 
fectly qualified;  but  the  people  are  capable  of 
self-government,  therefore,  they  are  incapable  of 
selecting  a  clerk.  That  is  just  about  the  tenor 
and  effect  of  the  argument. 

I  was  very  much  pleased  a  few  days  since, 
with  the  argument  advanced  by  the  gentleman 
from  Todd,  upon  this  question  of  qualification; 
it  was  that  we  should  endeavor  as  far  as  possible 
to  elevate  the  people  by  giving  all  power  into 
their  hands,  in  order  that  when  called  upon  to 
act.  they  should  act  with  full  responsibility 
resting  upon  them,  and  then  like  prudent  men, 
they  would  set  about  seeking  those  qualifica- 
tions which  would  enable  them  efficiently  and 
prosperously  to  exercise  all  the  power  bestowed 
upon  them.  When  we  take  from  them  the  pow- 
er of  electing  a  circuit  court  clerk,  what  qo  we 
say  to  them?  We  say,  gentlemen  you  are  inca- 
pable of  determining  upon  the  qualifications  of 
those  in  vour  immediate  counties,  as  to  fitness 
to  fill  this  or  that  office.  For  one,  I  think  they 
will  exercise  this  power  in  a  wholesome  manner, 
not  only  as  regards  themselves,  but  the  interests 
of  the  counties  generally.  I  know  it  is  impor- 
tant that  we  should  have  clerks  who  are  quali- 
fied. The  gentleman  from  Madison  bases  his 
argument  upon  the  hypothesis  that  we  will  have 
incompetent  persons  to  fill  these  offices.  Wbere 
is  the  evidence  of  this?  And  he  tells  us  of  the 
immense  estates  that  have  been  lost  in  conse- 
quence of  having  them  filled  by  incompetent 
persons;  and  he  goes  on  and  tells  us,  that  those 
very  persons  had  certificates  of  qualification 
from  the  court  of  appeals.  And  he  would  have 
us  go  to  the  same  tribunal  for  certificates  of 
qualification  of  clerks  hereafter. 

Let  the  people  of  eveiy  county  in  the  state  de- 
termine for  tJiemselves,  and  I  will  guarantee 
that  they  will  not  put  in  such  persons  as  the 
gentleman  has  described.  He  said  we  must 
have  lawyers — 

'  Mr.  TURNER.  The  gentleman  is  mistaken. 
I  said  that  before  a  person  could  be  qualified  for  the 
office  he  must  have  studied  the  various  acts  which 
have  relation  to  the  business  to  be  transacted  by 
the  court — ^that  he  must  have  made  some  degree 
I  of  progress  towards  an  understanding  of  the 
statute  law. 

i  Mr.  MACHEN.  I  understand  then,  that  he 
must  be  pretty  nearly  a  lawyer.  I  admit  the 
fact;  but  I  ask  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  if  we  have 
1  not,  among  the  yeomanry  of  the  land,  men  who 
j  are  capable  of  taking  up  the  statutes  of  the 
j  state,  and  of  construing  them  with  as  much  cor- 
1  rectness  as  the  gentleman  himself?    The  gentle- 


370 


man  argues  as  if  the  people  would  put  ignora- 
musses  iu  office,  who  ought  not  to  be  trusted 
■with  any  part  of  the  business  of  the  govern- 
ment. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  I  am  decidedly  in  favor  of 
having  some  qualification  prescribed.  Under 
the  old  constitution,  the  candidate  is  examined 
and  obtains  a  certificate  from  a  majority  of  the 
court  of  appeals.  It  was  presumed  that  the 
judges  would  be  competent  to  decide  upon  their 
qualifications.  I  am,  however,  for  going  with 
the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  and  others,  in  favor 
of  an  examination  by  the  circuit  court.  Most  of 
our  judges  of  the  circuit  court,  at  least,  are  qual- 
ified to  make  examinations,  for  it  has  appeared 
on  all  hands  that  they  have  now  good  circuit 
court  clerks.  And  I  want  to  keep  up  the  num- 
ber of  those  clerks  in  the  state.  1  do  not  think 
that  the  people  desire  that  we  should  strike  out 
all  qualifications  for  clerks.  A  great  many  peo- 
ple in  the  state  are  interested  in  having  the  bu- 
siness of  that  office  performed  in  a  proper  man- 
ner; and  I  think,  although  we  give  the  election 
of  these  clerks  to  the  people,  yet  it  should  be 
with  the  assurance  that  they  will  not  elect  a  man 
who  has  not  the  proper  qualification. 

It  is  said  that  great  injury  has  been  done  by 
the  errors  of  the  very  men  who  had  certificates 
from  the  court  of  appeals.  I  grant  it.  No  man 
is  perfect,  no  system  is  perfect.  But  take  it  in 
this  way,  that  out  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  ca- 
ses, where  certificates  had  been  given  by  the 
judges,  the  people  have  been  imposed  on  by  about 
ten,  how  often  would  they  be  imposed,  on  by 
those  who  had  no  certificate  of  qualification? 
It  is  to  prevent  the  people  themselves  irom  Deing 
imposed  on,  that  I  desire  they  should  have  some 
evidence  of  qualification.  It  is  not  merely  a 
knowledge  of  forms  that  will  make  a  good  clerk; 
he  must,  as  the  gentleman  from  Madison  has  re- 
marked, have  some  knowledge  of  the  substance 
of  those  statutes,  under  which  the  proceedings 
of  the  court  are  taken.  Like  the  story  of  the 
good  old  justice  of  the  peace,  who  was  required 
to  issue  a  search  warrant:  the  article  to  be 
searched  for  was  a  drawing  knife.  Well,  when 
he  came  to  issue  the  warrant,  he  could  not  find 
any  form  for  a  search  warrant  for  a  drawing 
knife,  but  he  could  find  one  for  a  turkey;  so  he 
said  he  would  issue  the  warrant  for  the  turkey, 
and  if  the  constable  found  the  drawing  knife, 
he  could  take  it.  Now,  I  do  not  want  those  in 
the  office  to  be  as  much  at  a  loss  as  the  honest 
old  justice  of  the  peace.  I  want  them  to  under- 
stand something  of  the  substance  of  the  mat- 
ters which  they  have  to  transact.  The  people 
can  judge  of  a  candidate,  as  to  his  honesty,  and 
as  to  his  being  such  a  person  as  it  would  be 
agreeable  to  do  business  with,  but  as  to  his 
knowledge  of  the  manner  of  doing  business, 
they  would  rather  have  that  certified  by  some 
one  in  whom  they  have  confidence.  I  have  nev- 
er had  much  acquaintance  with  the  nature  of 
the  duties  of  a  clerk's  office,  never  having  acted 
in  the  capacity  of  clerk  myself,  although,  per- 
haps, I  might  form  as  just  an  estimate  of  the 
qualifications  of  a  person  to  fill  that  office,  as 
most  of  the  people  in  the  country;  yet,  I  would 
prefer  not  to  rely  exclusively  upon  my  own 
opinion  on  that  point,  but  would  prefer  that  the 
candidate  should  have  a  certificate  from  some 


tribunal,  indicated  by  the  constitution   itself,  of 
his  qualification. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  Mr.  Chairman  :  If  my  friend 
from  Caldwell  was  about  building  a  fine  house, 
and  found  it  necessary  to  procure  workmen  and 
was  not  a  mechanic  himself,  and  did  not  knoAV 
those  who  applied  for  the  work,  it  would  not 
follow  that  he  should  not  build  a  house,  nor 
have  the  right  to  choose  the  workmen.  But  it 
would  show  a  necessity  that  he  should  either 
commit  the  whole  thing  to  a  competent  person, 
or  that  he  should  require  the  applicants  to  pre- 
sent him  some  evidence  of  their  capacity  to  do 
the  work. 

Prudence  would  prompt  him  to  one  of  these 
modes,  rather  than  ri.sk  having  his  materials  de- 
stroyed and  his  building  spoiled. 

The  people  have  directed  us  to  provide  what 
is  necessary  for  a  good  government,  keeping  in 
their  hands  the  right  of  appointing  their  own 
agents,  of  .selecting  their  own  mechanics.  Pru- 
dence requires  that  we  furnish  them  the  means 
of  knowing  the  qualifications  of  those  who  are 
to  do  the  work.  It  is  no  reflection  upon  their 
intelligence  or  capacity  for  self-government,  nor 
their  right  to  elect  all  officers,  that  they  are  not 
all  clerks,  and  therefore  not  capable  of  judging 
who  are  qualified  to  do  the  clerk's  duties.  They 
keep  the  right  of  appointing  the  clerk,  but  want 
us  to  fix  a  mode  by  which  they  shall  not  be  de- 
ceived and  be  induced  to  select  incompetent  per- 
sons. It  is  a  fact,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  one  coun- 
ty in  thisstate  was  within  four  votes  of  electing 
an  individual  to  the  legislature,  who  had  gradu- 
ated in  the  penitentiary.  If  the  people  of  that 
county  had  known  this  fact,  think  you  they 
would  have  voted  for  him?  The  people  are 
misled  often — let  us  keep  them  from  being  mis- 
led. The  people  should  be  in  position,  as  far  as 
practicable,  at  all  times  to  know  candidates  for 
important  offices,  and  especially  those  which  re- 
quire skill  and  qualification  in  particular  duties, 
and  where  the  whole  service  or  duty  is  devolved 
upon  one  person,  as  in  the  case  of  clerk — an  of- 
ficer more  important  to  the  interests  of  a  county 
to  be  fully  qualified,  than  even  a  circuit  judge, 
whose  errors  can  all  be  revised  and  corrected. 

In  the  case  of  county  clerk,  errore  committed 
often  pass  unnoticed  until  there  is  no  chance  of 
correction,  as  in  the  cases  of  erroneous  certifi- 
cates to  deeds,  instanced  this  morning. 

I  am  in  favor  of  adding  the  test  of  qualifica- 
tion by  the  circuit  court,  or  court  of  appeals. 
This  will  obviate  the  objection  made,  that  can- 
didates will  have  to  go  a  great  distance  to  pro- 
cure certificates,  and  also  the  further  objection, 
that  examinations  before  the  circuit  judge  may, 
through  prejudice  or  local  influence,  be  too  much 
under  the  power  of  the  circuit  judge.     ' 

If  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Da- 
viess prevails,  the  candidates,  if  local  influence 
operates,  may  go  to  the  appellate  court — if  un- 
justly treatea  there,  they  may  go  to  the  circuit 
courts. 

If  provision  is  only  made  by  law  that  both 
courts  shall  fully  perform  their  duty  of  giving 
full  examination  before  certificate,  either  court 
will  suit  me.  If  the  circuit  judge  should  be 
required  to  follow  the  mode  indicated  by  the 
delegate  from  Daviess,  of  requiring  candidates 
for  clerkships  to  perform  a  day's  work  in  couft 


371 


I 


uniler  the  supervision  of  court,  clerk,  aiid  law- 
yers, that  would  be  better  examination  and  test 
of  qualification  than  a  week's  oral  examina- 
tion. 

I  am,  sir,  for  qualification  before  any  one  shall 
even  be  a  candidate  for  clerk,  and  for  rigid  ex- 
amination before  certificate  shall  be  given,  and 
in  advocating  this,  I  do  not  conceive  that  I  vio- 
late in  the  least  the  proposition  that  the  people 
are  capable  of  self-government,  but  rather  give 
them  the  means  of  exercising  the  principle  cor- 
rectly, and  prevent  the  evil  consequences  flow^- 
ing  from  the  selection  of  pei-sons  incompetent  to 
discharge  important  trusts  through  mistakes,  or 
in  any  other  way. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  adop- 
tion of  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Daviess,  in  preference  to  the  original  provision 
in  the  report  of  the  committee,  but  I  am  opposed 
to  the  requirement  of  certificates  altogether.  I 
think  the  whole  question  amounts  exactly  to  this. 
Are  the  people  capable  of  self-government  or 
not?  n  they  are,  I  hold  they  are  capable  of 
electing  every  officer  in  the  state.  If  they  are  not, 
why  then  we  had  better  choose  a  set  of  individ- 
uals to  be  guardians  over  them.  The  people 
are  acknowledged  to  be  competent  to  elect  the 
first  officer  in  the  state,  without  any  certificate  of 
qualification,  and  they  are  competent  to  elect 
every  officer,  down  to  the  clerk  of  the  court, 
in  the  same  manner.  Why  do  you  stop,  when 
you  come  down  to  the  clerk  and  say  that  he  shall 
come  before  the  people  with  his  capabilities  cer- 
tified to,  before  they  shall  elect  him.  I  want 
gentlemen  to  be  consistent.  As  well  might  you 
say  that  the  circuit  judge,  or  the  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  shall  be  required  to  obtain  a 
certificate  of  fitness  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
their  offices.  If  you  cany  out  the  principle, 
even  the  members  of  the  legislature  might  be 
required  to  obtain  evidence  of  qualification.  I 
will  go  for  the  amendment,  and  then  if  some 
gentleman  will  move  to  strike  out  the  provision 
in  relation  to  certificates,  I  will  go  for  striking 
it  out. 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  am  opposed  to  these  certifi- 
cates of  qualification.  1  think  if  the  people 
can  be  trusted  to  elect  a  public  officer,  they 
should  be  trusted  to  judge  of  his  qualifications. 
Every  argument  that  is  used  in  favor  of  requir- 
ing a  certificate  of  qualification  will  apply 
against  the  election  of  the  officer  by  the  people. 
I  know  that  the  legal  profession  in  this  countrj' 
is  highly  intelligent  and  a  highly  useful  profes- 
sion. No  one  appreciates  its  usefulness  more 
highly  than  I  do;  but  I  understand  the  govern- 
ment to  be  the  common  property  of  the  whole 
people,  and  I  do  not  think  that  any  class  of  men 
should  be  permitted  to  have  the  entire  control 
of  the  government.  I  do  not  think  that  the 
legal  profession  should  be  permitted  to  prescribe 
to  the  people  whom  they  shall  select.  I  know 
very  well,  that  to  be  a  commonwealth  attorney, 
or  a  circuit  judge,  it  is  necessary  that  the  ap- 
pointee should  be  taken  from  the  legal  profes- 
sion. That  is  all  right  and  proper,  but  at  the 
same  time  I  am  opposed  to  their  prescribing  the 
qualifications  that  shall  be  required  on  the  part 
of  other  officers.  It  is  neither  more  nor  less 
than  giving  them  the  power  of  nominating  the 


candidate,  and  the  people  have  only  the  right  to 
confirm  or  reject  the  nomination. 

And  if  a  candidate  obtain  a  certificate,  is  it 
any  guarantee  that  he  is  really  qualified?  The 
gentleman  from  Madison  has  proved  to  you  that 
a  man  may  obtain  a  certificate  without  having 
any  qualification.  If  he  cannot  obtain  a  certi- 
ficate in  any  other  way,  he  has  only  to  go  to  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  and  that  gentleman's 
ingenuity  and  skill  can  procure  it  for  him.  What 
security  then,  have  the  people?  None  at  all, 
according  to  the  showing  of  the  gentleman  him- 
self. 

This  provision  in  the  report,  if  carried  into 
effect,  will  be  perpetuating  the  system  of  which 
the  people  have  complained  so  much.  Certifi- 
cates will  be  granted  upon  principles  of  favorit- 
ism. I  believe  the  people  will  be  able  to  elect  as 
good  clerks  without  the  certificate  of  qualifica- 
tions as  with  it. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  am  aware  that  as  much 
time  has  been  occupied  already  on  this  subject 
as  should  be  bestowed  upon  it,  but  having  had 
some  little  experience  myself  in  relation  to  the 
duties  of  the  office  of  clerk,  I  desire  to  say  a 
word  or  two  in  reference  to  it.  It  seems  to  me 
that  a  great  deal  of  unnecessary  incense  has  been 
burnt  at  the  shrine  of  popular  intelligence.  The 
question  now  before  the  committee  does  not  in- 
volve the  popular  capacity,  does  not  call  in 
question  the  capacity  of  the  people  for  self-gov- 
ernment, does  not  trench  upon  the  elective  fran- 
chise, does  not  interfere  with  the  reforms  which 
have  been  demanded  by  the  people,  and  which 
this  convention  has  been  called  to  carry  out. 
In  the  existing  constitution  a  certificate  of  quali- 
fication is  required  when  a  circuit  judge  has  the 
appointing  power.  If  that  had  been  urged  as 
an  attack  upon  the  intelligence  of  the  people,  it 
would  have  been  the  subject  of  discussion 
throughout  the  state.  Every  body  knew  that 
this  was  the  provision  of  the  existing  constitu- 
tion. When  the  people  voted  for  this  conven- 
tion, in  order  that  the  present  constitution  might 
be  changed,  was  it  because  the  candidate  for 
clerkship  had  to  obtain  a  certificate  of  qualifica- 
tion before  he  could  present  himself  for  appoint- 
ment to  that  office?  No  sir,  that  objection  was 
never  urged. 

The  objection  was,  sir,  that  being  appointed' 
by  the  court,  it  gave  to  the  judge  an  influence 
that  he  ought  not  to  possess;  and  it  was  inter- 
fering with  the  right  of  the  people  to  select 
their  own  officers.  That  was  the  ground,  as  I 
understand,  upon  which  the  popular  voice  cried 
out  for  reform  in  this  particular.  I  have  never 
yet  heard  a  man  say  that  a  certificate  of  qualifi- ' 
cation  trenched  upon  the  rights  of  the  people. 
What  does  the  certificate  suppose?  It  supposes 
an  examination  necessary — it  supposes  that  the 
office  is  so  unobtrusive  in  its  character  that 
something  is  required,  to  show  that  the  applicant 
has  the  requisite  qualifications. 

An  individual  who  is  a  candidate  for  a  seat  in 
the  legislature,  goes  before  the  people  and  de- 
clares his  sentiments,  his  political  opinions  are 
known,  his  capacity  to  advocate  those  opinions 
is  known.  The  man  who  is  a  candidate  for  a 
judgeship  must  have  a  reputation  as  a  lawyer, 
as  well  as  a  reputation  for  integrity  and  honesty 
as  an  individual.    His  reputation  is  public.    It 


372 


is  not  so  in  the  clerical  department.  This  is  a 
quiet,  unobtrusive  office;  its  duties  are  perform- 
ed without  a  word  spoken;  and  its  requisitions 
presuppose  an  examination  necessary. 

It  is  not,  then,  a  question  involving  popular 
capacity  or  intelligence.  On  the  contrary  the 
requisition  supposes  that  no  one  is  competent  to 
judge  of  the  qualifications  of  the  clerk  unless  an 
examination  be  had  by  the  proper  tribunal. 

Well,  if  it  be  true,  that  the  people  cannot  ex- 
amine into  his  qualifications — and  it  is  impos- 
sible, in  the  nature  of  things,  for  them  to  do  so — 
the  mass  of  the  people  have  no  means  of  ascer- 
taining his  competency.  It  is  a  power  which 
they  cannot  exercise.  It  is  therefore  necessary 
that  they  should  delegate  that  power  in  some 
way.  They  want  a  tribunal,  a  board  of  exami- 
nation, because,  the  examination  being  necessa- 
ry, it  is  more  convenient  that  it  should  be  done 
by  a  board  which  is  thus  constituted. 

Then  sir,  what  i.s  all  this  declamation  about 
its  effects  upon  popular  influence  and  the  in- 
fringement of  the  elective  franchise?  Why  do 
you  not  throw  off  the  other  requisites  of  quali- 
fication? Why  not,  for  instance,  dispense  with 
the  requisition  that  the  candidate  shall  be  twen- 
ty-one years  of  age?  There  are  other  restraints 
besides  this  requisition  of  the  certificate  of  the 
judges.  There  is  no  reason  why  one  should  be 
retained  and  another  rejected.  The  people  are 
better  prepared  to  judge  as  to  the  merits  of  an 
individual,  than  as  to  his  qualifications  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  a  particular  office. 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  advantages  it 
will  give  to  the  existing  officers.  I  differ  with 
gentlemen  on  that  subject.  I  believe  the  ab- 
sence of  this  requisition  will  give  them  an  ad- 
vantage instead  of  the  requisition  itself.  Those 
who  already  possess  certificates  will  come  for- 
ward and  say,  fellow  citizens  I  am  here  with  the 
evidence  of  my  qualification.  My  competitor 
has  none.  I  ask  you  if  it  does  not  operate  in 
favor  of  those  who  have  heretofore  exercised  the 
office?  If  you  do  not  make  this  requisition,  all 
who  may  be  disposed  to  come  forward  as  can- 
didates will  not  stand  upon  an  equal  footing, 
because  there  will  be  no  qualified  tribunal  to 
give  the  certificate;  however  desirous  the  indi- 
vidual may  be,  he  cannot  get  it  in  an  authorita- 
tive form,  and  is  deprived  of  the  privilege  of 
S resenting  his  qualifications  to  the  country. — 
I  ow  look  at  the  operation  of  this  thing  in  other 
departments  of  life.  Why  does  a  medical  man 
obtain  a  diploma?  Why  is  it  that  public  opin- 
ion has  forced  on  him  the  necessity  of  doing  it? 
It  is  because  his  practice  will  not  prevail  with- 
out giving  more  evidence  that  will  convince  the 
people.  Why  not  say  this  is  in  derogation  of 
popular  rights?  Why  not  let  him  go  to  work 
and  practice  in  the  neighborhood  until  ho  is 
qualified? 

I  do  not  know  of  any  good  reason  wliy  the  re- 
quirement of  a  certificate  should  not  be  contin- 
ued. It  is  not  one  of  those  questions  of  capa- 
bility of  the  people  to  elect,  and  it  never  will 
be  ui^ed  as  a  test  of  the  rights  of  the  people. 
And  1  really  believe  that  by  requiring  the  cer- 
tificate you  will  do  more  to  test  the  capacity  of 
the  candidate  than  by  leaving  it  out.  1  believe 
the  present  incumbents  now  enjoy  a  decided  ad- 
vantage by  having  these  certificates,  and  being 


able  to  point  to  them,  to  say  we  alone  are  posses- 
sed of  the  requisite  qualifications.  And  will 
you  deny  to  those  who  desire  to  come  forward  as 
candidates  for  these  offices  the  opportunity  of 
doing  so,  although  they  may  be  very  well  qual- 
ified, by  refusing  them  the  privilege  of  obtaining 
a  certificate? 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  fully  appreciate  the  experi- 
ence and  intelligence  of  the  gentleman  from 
Oldham,  (Mr.  Mitchell,)  andthink  whathe  says  is 
entitled  to  much  consideration.  He  thinks  that 
the  absence  of  a  requisition  here  of  a  certificate 
of  qualification,  would  operate  against  those 
now  in  office.  Now  the  absence  of  the  require- 
ment for  it,  would  not  deprive  the  candidal*  of 
the  privilege  of  procuring  a  certificate  and  pre- 
senting it  to  the  people,  if  he  deemed  it  neces- 
sary. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  The  objection  was  that 
there  would  be  no  board  of  examination,  con- 
stituted by  the  laws  and  acting  under  the  sanc- 
tity of  an  oath,  who  would  be  bound  to  furnisli 
the  certificate  of  qualification.  Any  man  might 
obtain  private  certificates,  but  they  would  not 
have  so  great  a  weight  with  the  people,  as  those 
obtained  from  such  a  tribunal. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN.  Before  the  vote  is  taken,  I 
wish  to  define  my  position  on  this  subject.  I 
am  sent  here  by  the  people  to  secure  certain 
great  principles,  and  this  mission  I  mean  to 
fulfill,  so  far  as  iny  action  is  concerned.  I  am 
instructed  to  give  them  the  power  to  vote  for 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  of  the  other 
courts  of  the  commonwealth,  and  also  for  sher- 
iffs, magistrates,  and  constables.  But  the  people 
did  not  instruct  me  to  vote  for  giving  them  the 
right  of  selecting  county  attorneys,  jailers,  and 
coroners,  and  hence  the  motion  I  made  on  Sat- 
urday last  to  strike  out  this'^class  of  officers. 
This  is  playing  the  game  as  I  think  rather  too 
low  down,  and  I  am  not  disposed  to  take  the 
step.  The  gentleman  from  Henry,  (Mr.  Nut- 
talf,)  remarked  that  he  believed  it  would  be  un- 
fortunate for  the  people  of  Madison,  should  tlie 
gentleman  from  Madison  die.  Now  I  think  it 
would  be  unfortunate  for  this  body,  should  that 
gentleman  and  some  others  be  removed  from  it, 
for  if  they  were  we  should  be  all  sail  and  no 
ballast.  I  generally  find  him  to  be  right,  and 
in  this  particular  I  shall  go  with  him.  I  am 
prepared  to  require  certificates  of  qualification 
from  those  officers,  although  I  am  not  particular 
where  they  may  be  obtained,  whether  as  propos- 
ed by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  from  the 
circuit  court,  or  from  the  court  of  appeals.  All 
I  desire  is,  what  the  interests  of  the  people 
desire,  that  the  candidates  should  be  fully  qual- 
ified for  the  important  offices  they  are  to  fill. 
The  gentleman  from  Simpson  has  remarked  that 
almost  any  individual  could  qualify  liimself  for 
it  within  twenty  days,  and  he  afterwards  said 
that  this  thing  of  requiring  qualifications  wjis 
placing  forever  in  the  hands  and  at  the  disposi- 
tion of  the  present  incumbents  the  office  of  clerk. 
Now  if  a  man  can  qualify  himself  in  that  short 
time,  can  he  not  obtain  a  certificate  of  the  fact, 
and  how  then  would  it  be  placing  the  control  of 
these  offices  forever  in  the  nands  of  tlie  present 
incumbents?  I  was  raised  in  a  clerk's  office, 
and  it  is  true  also  that  I  belong  to  a  family  that 
has  always  held  that  office  in  tlie  county.    I  know 


373 


the  importance  therefore  of  having  a  good  clerk, 
not  that  I  mean  to  say  that  I  am  a  good  one, 
for  I  acknowledge  the  contrary,  yet  I  doubt 
whether,  if  the  office  be  placed  before  the  people 
■without  requiring  any  certificate  of  qualifications, 
any  candidate  coulci  keep  me  out  of  the  office. 
I  acknowledge  myself  unqualified  for  the  sta- 
tion, and  hence  I  feel  the  importance  of  requir- 
ing the  certificate.  As  the  gentleman  from  Old- 
ham remarked,  the  public  complaint  is  not 
against  this  qualification  as  required  in  the  old 
constitution,  out  against  the  manner  in  which 
the  power  of  appointment  has  been  exercised  by 
the  judges.  W  e  have  seen  clerks  removed  from 
one  county  to  another,  and  we  have  seeu  also 
the  office  sold  to  the  highest  bidder.  This  is 
what  thepeople  complain  of. 

Mr.  XIJTTALL.  I  did  not  expect  to  bring 
down  the  wrath  of  the  gentleman  from  Wayne 
upon  me;  I  have  never  insinuated  that  I  want- 
ed the  gentleman  from  Madison  to  die  or  leave 
the  house;  so  far  from  that,  from  the  year  1823, 
when  we  were  here  in  the  legislature  together, 
down  to  the  present  time,  I  have  always  had  the 
highest  regard  for  him,  and  have  ever  esteemed 
him  as  a  sound,  able,  and  intelligent  jurist;  and 
the  last  thing  on  earth  that  I  should  desire  would 
be  to  have  him  removed  from  this  bo^ly.  If  the 
gentleman  from  Wayne  wishes  to  sail  under  the 
colors  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  God 
knows  I  would  not  seek  to  prevent  him.  I  can 
respect  an  opponent,  or  even  the  enemv  of  my 
country,  so  long  as  he  does  not  sail  under  false 
colors.  For  myself,  I  am  for  the  bright  stars  and 
broad  stripes  of  my  country.  Xow  I  am  very 
much  attached  to  the  gentleman  from  Wayne, 
but  if  a  young  gentleman  of  his  acknowledged 
talents  and  ability,  who  belongs  as  he  confesses 
literally  to  the  family  of  clerks,  and  who  has 
been  for  such  a  length  of  time  in  a  clerk's  office, 
with  all  the  means  to  qualify  himself  for  the 
duties — if  he  has  not  been  able  by  this  time  to 
become  a  good  clerk,  why  it  rather  seems  to  me 
that  no  requirement  of  qualifications  we  might 
devise  could  secure  one.  He  says,  however,  that 
he  has  no  doubt  that  with  or  without  a  certificate 
he  could  beat  all  creation  in  Wayne.  I  have  no 
doubt  of  it — none  at  all,  for  I  understand  it  is  a 

Erettv  strong  whig  county,  and  the  very  fact  of 
is  election  in  the  face  of  that  majority,  evinces 
that  he  must  be  a  gentleman  of  extraordinary 
fine  abilities  and  amiable  manners.  Now,  as  to 
my  friend  from  Oldham,  (Mr.  Mitchell,)  if  there 
is  a  gentleman  on  earth  whom  I  esteem,  it  is 
him;  and  we  are  pretty  much  on  all  matters 
bone  of  the  same  bone,  and  flesh  of  the  same 
flesh.  Nor  do  I  wish  on  this  occasion  to  pro- 
voke his  wrath,  for  I  know  he  is  well  qualified 
as  a  clerk.  And  although  his  arguments  had 
considerable  weight  on  my  mind,  nevertheless  I 
am  not  disposed  to  change  the  position  I  occupy, 
or  further,  to  concede  any  more  than  is  contain- 
ed in  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Daviess. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.    Agreed,  I  wUl  go  for  that. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.     Agreed  it  is. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  Mr.  TRIP- 
LETT'S  amendment,  and  it  was  adopted. 

Mr.  BROWN  then  offered  the  following  sub- 
stitute for  the  section  as  amended. 

"No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  office  of 


commonwealth  attorney  who  has  not  attained 
the  age  of  twenty  four  years,  and  who  has  not 
resided  two  years  next  preceding  his  election  in 
the  state;  one  year  in  tlie  county  or  district  in 
which  he  offers  his  services;  and  shall  have  been 
two  years  a  practicing  lawyer.  No  person  shall 
be  elected  circuit  or  county  clerk,  sheriff,  or  con- 
stable, who  has  not  attained  the  age  of  twenty 
one  years,  and  resided  two  years  in  the  county 
or  district  next  preceding  the  election." 

It  was  rejected. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  strike  out  all  from 
the  word  '-but"  in  the  10th  line,  and  to  insert 
the  words  "sheriff  aud  constable"  after  the  word 
"clerk"  in  the  preceding  part  of  the  section,  so 
as  to  require  these  three  officers  to  be  twenty  one 
years  of  age,  and  the  others  to  be  twenty  four. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  include  the  county 
court  attorney  within  the  21  years  limitation. 
All  khew  that  the  office  was  commonly  given 
to  some  junior  member  of  the  bar,  generally  a 
poor  one,  and  it  was  too  small  a  matter  to  inter- 
fere with.  We  have  been  placing  too  many  re- 
strictions on  the  people  in  tbis  constitution,  and 
doing  what  they  did  not  send  us  to  do,  and  if 
we  continue  in  this  way,  he  did  not  doubt  it 
would  be  rejected  with  as  much  unanimity  as 
the  convention  itself  was  called. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to  and  the  second 
section  was  then  adopted. 

The  third  section  was  read,  and  it  was  adopt- 
ed without  amendment. 

The  fourth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  TURNER  offered  an  amendment  to  strike 
out  the  words  "associate  judges  of  the  coun- 
ty courts,"  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof,  the  words 
"members  of  the  general  assembly,"  with  a 
view  that  if  the  system  of  associate  judges 
should  not  be  adopted,  the  sheriff  should  then 
be  elected  at  the  same  time  as  were  the  members 
of  the  legislature. 

The  PRESIDENT  objected  to  this  on  the 
ground  that  it  would  interfere  with  the  plan  of 
separating  the  judicial  from  the  political  election. 

Mr.  TLTRNER  withdrew  the  amendment,  with 
the  remark,  that  if  the  neces.sity  for  it  should 
arise,  it  could  be  offered  hereafter. 

Mr.  WOODSON  moved  to  strike  out  all  after 
the  word  "vears"  in  the  fourth  line. 

Mr.  TUftNER.  The  effect  of  the  amendment 
will  be  to  permit  the  sheriff  to  be  elected  with- 
out limitation  as  to  time. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  The  office  of  sheriff  is  an 
important  one,  and  is  frequently  exercised  to 
the  oppression  of  the  people.  If  the  officer 
prove  to  be  a  good  one,  I  desire  that  the  people, 
whose  officer  he  is,  may  have  the  right  to  re-elect 
him.  The  fact  that  a  man  has  served  four  years, 
is  no  evidence  of  disqualification,  but  rather  of 
qualification,  and  if  he  has  so  discharged  the 
duties  as  in  the  opinion  of  the  people  to  deserve 
it,  they  should  have  the  right  to  re-elect  him  if 
thev  choose. 

Mr.  TURNER.  This  office  of  sheriff  is  a 
most  important  and  influential  one,  and  my  ex- 
perience has  been,  that  not  one  out  of  every  five 
sheriffs,  after  they  have  served  four  years,  make 
as  good  officers  as  they  did  during  tlie  first  four. 
They  attend  to  their  duties  very  well  during  the 
first  two  years,  but  after  that  they  fall  off,  and 


374 


confining  their  attention  to  the  most  profitable 
of  their  duties,  they  learn  how  to  avoid  the  dis- 
charge of  those  that  are  less  so.  The  committee 
were  divided  on  the  subject — some  being  for  a  term 
of  two  years  and  re-eligibility  after  one  term, 
and  others  forno  restriction  as  to  their  eligibility — 
and  they  finally  came  to  the  conclusion  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  bill.  The  object  of  extending  the 
provision  to  deputies,  I  will  explain.  I  liave 
heard  from  those  who  were  familiar  with  the 
■workings  of  the  constitution  of  1792,  and  its  sys- 
tem of  allowing  the  deputies  to  be  eligible,  tfiat 
it  was  customary  for  the  high  sheriff  to  select  a 
man  as  deputy,  Avho  would  succeed  as  sheriff. 
Then  the  new  sheriff  would  select  the  old  one  as 
his  deputy — and  thus  they  wentonrepeatingthe 
operation,  and  pursuing  a  system  of  "ride  and 
tie,"  which  would  have  kept  the  oflfiees  within 
their  control  forever,  had  tliat  constitution  lasted 
80  long.  And  in  Madison,  Bourbon,  Clarke,  and 
Fayette,  the  men  first  elected  and  their  deputies, 
diet  retain  the  offices  during  the  entire  existence 
of  that  constitution.  And  it  was  the  same  in  all 
1  he  great  counties  of  the  state.  Another  reason 
why  these  officers  should  not  be  re-eligihde  is, 
that  they  would  pervert  the  discharge  of  their 
duties  to  the  attainment  of  a  re-election.  It  was 
right  and  proper  they  should  go  out  of  office 
once  in  a  Avhile  and  take  the  air.  The  result 
w^ould  be  that,  if  this  provision  was  adopted,  tlie 
counties  would  be  blessed  with  far  better  sheriffs 
than  under  any  system  of  re-eiigibility. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  have  anainendment  which  I 
should  prefer  to  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Knox, 
althougn  I  am  opposed  to  the  provision  of  the 
report  of  the  committee.  It  is  the  26th  section 
of  the  report  on  tlie  legislative  department,  in 
the  following  words: 

"Sec.  26.  No  person  who  at  any  time  may  have- 
been  a  collector  of  taxes,  or  public  moneys  for 
the  state,  or  the  assistant  or  deputy  of  sucli  col- 
lector, shall  be  elligible  to  the  general  assembly, 
unless  he  shall  have  obtained  a  quietus,  six 
months  before  the  election,  for  the  amount  of 
such  collection,  and  for  all  public  moneys  for 
■which  he  may  have  been  responsible." 

I  am  unwilling  to  allow  the  .sheriff  to  collect 
the  public  moneys  and  to  electioneer  on  them  from 
time  to  time.  It  would  give  him  an  advantage 
before  the  people  over  any  competitor  who  was 
obliged  to  rely  upon  his  own  means.  But,  if  the 
gentleman  would  incorporate  this  principle  into 
his  amendment,  and  require  the  candidate  to 
have  a  quietus  of  all  claims  upon  him  on  tlie 
part  of  the  people,  vou  then  throw  him  on  his 
own  resources.  If  "he  thinks  proper  to  spend  his 
own  money  for  electioneering  purposes,  let  him 
do  it,  ana  the  other  candidate  has  the  privi- 
lege to  do  the  same.  Under  such  a  provision  I 
should  have  no  objection  to  his  coming  before 
the  people  three,  four,  or  any  number  of  times — 
none  wnatever.  When  he  did  come,  under  such 
circumstances,  then  the  enquiry  would  be  whether 
he  was  a  faithful  officer  or  not,  and  I  have  no 
objection,  if  the  people  choose,  that  they  shall  re- 
elect him  as  often  an  tliey  see  proper.  But  I  do 
object  to  his  being  allowed  to  use  the  public 
funds  for  his  electioneering  purposes. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  sheriffs  and  consta- 
bles arc  a  class,  and  I  believe  the  only  class  of 
officers  whom  I  do  not  wish  to  see  re-eligible. 


The  truth  is,  there  are  a  great  many  ways  in 
which  these  individuals  may  fail  to  discharge 
the  duties  that  devolve  upon  them,  for  the  sake 
of  benefitting  themselves.  They  are  the  agents 
to  execute  the  judgments  of  the  courts,  in  the 
collection  of  all  debts,  that  are  collected 
through  that  medium.  It  is  their  duty  to  col- 
lect tliem  fairly  and  according  to  the  law,  but 
there  are  a  great  many  ways  in  which  such  ofii- 
cers  have  the  power  to  favor  individuals  and 
thereby  to  enhance  their  popularity,  and  it 
was  in  their  power  also  greatly  to  oppress  indi- 
viduals. Now,  I  do  not  wish  them  to  exercise 
their  offices  either  to  the  favor  of  individuals,  or 
to  the  oppression  of  them,  through  any  desire  to 
advance  their  prospects  for  a  re-election.  It  is 
generally  the  case,  that  these  sheriffs  and  con- 
stables learn  in  some  way  or  other,  the  circum- 
stances of  individuals  in  the  community,  and 
how  to  take  advantage  of  them,  and  to  make  mo- 
ney out  of  them.  They  find  out  all  the  weak 
points  in  the  condition  of  individuals,  the 
amount  of  their  indebtedness,  and  their  necessi- 
ties for  money,  and  they  carry  on  a  system  of 
shaving  and  extortion  that  is  a  disgrace  to  the 
country.  I  do  not  say  that  all  do,  but  some  of 
them;  and  whenever  a  man's  appetite  is  whet- 
ted for  making  money  in  that  way,  it  always  in- 
creases. And  the  offices  of  sheriff  and  consta- 
ble are  sought  for  as  offering  greater  facilities  for 
acquiring  money  in  that  way,  than  any  other  in 
the  land.  I  would  therefore  turn  them  out  oc- 
casionally, and  bring  in  a  new  set,  who  are  not 
so  well  acquainted  Avith  the  necessities  of  indi- 
viduals, and  whose  knives  are  not  so  sharp. 
This  class  of  officers  should  have  but  one  term, 
and  I  commend  the  suggestion  to  those  gentle- 
men who  are  in  favor  of  rotation  in  office.  I 
submit  it  to  them  whether  it  is  not  better  to  let 
the  report  stand,  or  amend  it,  so  as  to  give  the 
sheriff's  one  term  of  four  years,  if  two  is  not 
enough,  and  then  make  them  and  their  deputies 
ineligible  for  some  period  of  time.  Let  them 
settle  up  their  accounts  with  the  public  and 
with  individuals,  and  give  place  to  others. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  We  have  been  told  here  by  al- 
most every  body  who  has  spoken,  that  the  peo- 
ple are  intelligent  and  virtuous,  and  if  this  is 
so,  why  are  there  apprehensions  suggested  that 
the  people  will  be  bought  up  and  controlled  by 
those  wnom  they  have  put  in  office?  But  they 
are  subject  to  be  influenced  by  no  such  conside- 
rations. It  is  not  the  Kentucky  character,  and 
it  is  contradicted  most  triumphantly,  by  tlie  his- 
tory of  the  last  four  years.  The  people  desired 
that  a  convention  sliould  be  called;  and  every 
judge  and  commonwealth's  attorney,  and  every 
body  who  expects  these  offices,  and  nearly  every 
clerk  in  the  state,  with  some  honorable  excep- 
tions, all  opposed  it,  and  yet  the  people,  by  a 
majority  unprecedented,  called  the  convention. 
Is  that  not  a  proof  that  the  people  are  incorrup- 
tible, and  that  a  man  with  money  enough  can- 
not buy  their  votes?  Have  you  not  had  an  ex- 
ample during  the  past  year,  that  tells  all  over 
the  union  what  the  Kentucky  character  is? 
Look  at  the  position  taken  in  regard  to  one  of 
her  statesmen,  whom  the  people  delight  to  hon- 
or and  love,  as  manifested  in  the  vote  taken  at 
the  last  election.  The  party  which  Mr.  Clay 
headed    in  that  election,  only  received  some 


375 


iwelve  thousand  out  of  one  hundred  and  fifty 
two  thousand  votes.  And  will  gentlemen  tell 
me  then,  that  Keutuckians  are  to  be  controlled 
by  money  or  by  such  little  offices  as  sheriffs  and 
constables?  I  am  one  of  the  people,  I  expect  no 
office,  and  I  went  for  the  calling  of  this  conven- 
tion on  principle.  I  desire  that  the  power  of 
appointment  shall  now  be  restored  to  the  peo- 
ple, unfettered  with  these  restrictions.  If  the 
people  are  capable  of  self-government,  they  are 
capable  of  deciding  upon  the  qualifications  of 
these  officers.  This  truth  is  axiomatic  to  my 
mind,  and  therefore  if  a  man  has  discharged  the 
duties  of  his  office  faithfully  and  well,  1  desire 
that  the  people  may  have  the  power  to  retain 
his  services  by  re-appointing  him,  if  they  desire 
it. 

Mr.  DIXOX.     I  have  been  listening  a  great 
deal  to  this  eternal  cry  about  the   sovereign  in- 
fallibility of  the  people,  and  really  if  the  con- 
tinual repetition  of  the  assertion  should  con- 
vince any  body,  I   ought  by  this  time  to  be 
convinced  of  its  truth.    My  friend  over  the  way, 
(Mr.  Bogers,)  asks   most    emphatically   if  this 
thing  of   capability  for    self-government,   and 
power  of  selecting  officers  is  not  the  same.     He 
says  he  can  see  no  difference.     But  I  think  it  is 
perfectly  clear  and  manifest  that  there  is  such  a 
thing  as  electing  officers   by  the  people,   and 
such  a  thing  too  as  the  officer  when  he  is  elect- 
ed, abusing  the  confidence  of  those  who  elected 
him.     Does  the  gentleman  mean  to  say  that  be- 
cause the  Kentucky  character  is  as  he  describes 
it,  that  the  people  are  never  deceived  in  regard 
to  men?     Does  he  or  any  other  gentleman  mean 
to  say  that  the  people  are  never  deceived  in  re- 
gard to  the  qualifications,  the  principle,  the  in- 
tegrity, and  the  hearts  of  men?    Does  he  mean 
to  assert  that  capable,  intelligent  and  discrimi- 
nating as  he  is,  he  can  look  into  the  hearts  of 
men,  and  see  the  secret  influences    operating 
there,  so  as  to  enable  hira  at  once  to  determine 
who  should  or  who  should  not  be  pliiced  in  power? 
Does  he  mean  to  assert  that  the  people  are  in- 
fallible and  cannot  be  deceived?    Does  the  gen- 
tleman not  know   that  Judas  Iscariot  deceived 
the  other  eleven  Apostles  before  he  betrayed  the 
Lord?    And  yet  are  the  people  so  infallible  that 
they  never  can  be   deceived?    2io  one   can  a^?- 
sert  such  a  doctrine.    While  then  I  would  trust 
the  people  to  the  utmost  I  would  guard  them. 
While!  fully  believe  in  their  capacity  for  self- 
government,  I   also  believe  it  to  be  right  and 
proper  that  they  should  be  protected  against  all 
improper  influences,  come  from  what  quarter  it 
may.     That  is  the  principle  I  mean  to  maintain. 
Would  the  gentleman,  because  he  believes  the 
people  are  capable  of  self-government,  not  de- 
sire that  the  sheriff  should  execute  a  bond  for 
the  faithful  discharge  of  his  duties.    Why  do 
we  require  a  bond  in  such  a  case?    If  the  peo- 
ple are  so  far  seeing  as  to  be  able  to  look  into  the 
very  hearts  of  men  and  penetrating  at  once  into 
their  most  secret  motives,  can  they  not  tell  in  a 
moment  whether  the   officer  would  discharge 
his  duties  faithfully,  honestly,  and  efficiently  or 
not?    If  they  have  this  power,  why  in  the  name 
of  heaven,  require  the  execution  of  a  bond  at  all? 
If  the  officer  is  faithful,  honest,  efficient  and 
capable,  and  collects  the  money  and  hands  it 
over,  that  is  all  that  is  wanted;  there  is  no  ne- 


cessity at  all  for  any  other  qualifii-ation.  And  I 
tell  the  gentleman  if  he  believes  this  that  he 
should  offer  an  amendment  declaring  that  the 
legislature  shall  require  no  bond  from  the  sheriff, 
and  let  the  reasons  therefor  be  put  in  a  pre- 
amble. For  instance,  that  the  people  are  ca- 
pable of  self-government,  that  they  are  endowed 
with  the  power  of  at  once  deciding  upon  the 
purity  and  integrity  of  men,  and  the  motives 
which  influence  them,  and  that  as  it  is  utterly 
impossible  they  should  elect  any  man  to  be 
sheriff  who  would  not  discharge  his  duties  most 
faithfully,  therefore  let  no  security  be  required 
of  him.  I  doubt  whether  the  gentleman  would 
go  as  far  as  that. 

I  agree  with  the  gentleman  from  Louisville 
(Mr.  Guthrie)  precisely,  that  it  is  better  that  the 
sheriff  should  not  be  re-eligible.  lean  very  well 
see  how  the  office  in  such  a  case  might  be  prosti- 
tuted to  the  very  worst  of  purposes.  I  can  very 
well  perceive  that  when  his  term  is  about  to  ex- 
pire, and  there  is  a  competitor  in  the  field  against 
him,  and  the  public  money  in  his  pocket  how 
the  officer's  views  of  justice  are  liable  to  be  per- 
verted. The  gentleman  seems  to  think  however 
that  money  does  nothiug  in  an  election.  It  is  a 
remark  in  which  but  few  in  this  house  will  con- 
cur, when  he  tells  us  that  the  character  of  Ken- 
tuekv  is  so  pure  that  money  will  do  nothing  in 
an  efection.  Money  in  an  election,  I  admit  will 
do  nothing  with  pure  men,  but  in  Kentucky,  as 
well  as  in  anv  otlier  country,  there  are  impure 
men,  and  baa  men.  It  is  true  and  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  there  are  bad,  artful  and  corrupt  men 
in  Kentucky,  who  can  be  seduced  and  will  be 
by  money  and  other  influences.  And  there  are 
men  who  can  and  will  be  corruptors  of  the  men 
controlled  by  a  sheriff,  with  a  view  to  influence 
his  election.  The  time  approches  when  the 
election  is  to  take  place,  the  sheriff  is  anxious 
for  a  re-election,  he  has  little  means  of  his  own, 
but  agreatdeal  of  thepublicmoney  in  his  hands, 
and  the  temptation  is  irresistible  for  him  to  use 
it.  Such  inducements  ought  not  to  be  held  out 
to  any  official  thus  to  pervert  the  duties  of  his 
office.  But  there  are  other  means  in  his  power. 
Does  not  every  one  know  the  power  of  the  sheriff 
to  oppress  some  and  to  favor  others?  He  comes 
armea  with  the  process  of  the  law,  he  has  the 
authority  to  seize  on  the  poor  man's  estate,  and 
to  sell  it  out.  Well,  he  has  authority,  it  may  be 
also,  to  seize  on  the  rich  man's  property  al.so,  but 
he  wants  votes,  and  although  it  is  his  duty  be- 
vond  all  question,  to  execute  the  process  at  once, 
lie  can  give  it  the  go  by  if  he  can  secure  those 
votes  by  so  doing.  And  he  may  have  processes 
against  forty  men  of  influence  in  a  community, 
and  delay  the  execution  of  them  all  for  the  sake 
of  securing  the  votes  he  wants.  Is  there  not  seen 
every  day,  vindictive  men  ready  to  go  to  law 
with  each  other,  and  for  no  other  purpose  than 
to  harrass  and  worry  each  other?  They  do  not 
care  for  the  petty  sum  involved,  the  object  is 
simply  to  harrass  the  man  contending  with  them. 
The  sheriff  is  armed  with  the  process  issued  by 
the  proper  authority,  and  it  is  an  immense  pow- 
er when  employed  by  a  vindictive  spirit,  and  if 
such  an  individual  was  favorable  to  the  sheriff 
would  not  the  very  purposes  of  the  law  be  liable 
to  be  defeated,  to  advance  the  interests  of  the 
officer,  and  to  pander  to  the  revengeful  feelings 


376 


of  his  supporters  ?  But  tlie  gentleman  says,  if 
tlie  officer  thus  acts,  the  people  will  not  reelect 
him.  Will  that  relieve  tlie  man  who  has  been  in- 
jured, oppressed,  and  down  trodden  by  the  sher- 
'  iff?  Would  that  restore  to  the  man  his  rights, 
abused  by  the  sheriff  in  failing  to  discharge  the 
duties  of  his  office,  in  a  desire  to  secure  the  votes 
of  his  adversary  ?  Not  at  all.  The  people  have 
turned  out  the  sheriff,  but  still  here  are  men  suf- 
fering under  the  exercise  of  a  power  intended 
for  the  good  of  the  country ,but  which  has  beenper- 
verted  to  corrupting  of  purposes.  This  is  a 
question  that  I  cfo  not  like  to  discuss,  but  it  is 
unavoidable,  in  view  of  the  importance  of  guard- 
ing these  officers  from  an  interference  with  the 
best  interests  of  the  people,  when  they  have  in 
their  hands  the  power  of  sacrificing  whom 
they  please.  Let  the  sheriff  be  elected,  I  care 
not  whether  for  two  or  four  years,  but  let  him  be 
in-eligible.  When  he  goes  out  let  him  wind  up 
his  business,  and  then  after  an  interval  of  two  or 
four  years  afterwards,  if  the  people  want  him 
again^letthera  elect  him.  Ana  I  think  with  the 
gentleman  from  Louisville  that  rotation  in  office, 
especially  in  regard  to  sheriffs,  is  the  most 
acivisable  policy  to  adopt. 

I  have  thought  proper  to  make  these  remarks, 
because  I  am  satisfied  that  if  we  turn  these  sher- 
iffs and  constables  loose,  armed  with  all  the  pro- 
cess of  the  law,  with  the  power  to  exercise  it  for 
the  advancement  of  their  own  interests,  it  will 
be  an  injury  to  the  country,  that  years  will  not 
remedy. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  The  scarcity  of  any  article 
is  said  to  enhance  its  value.  If  this  be  true,  and 
.1  til  ink  it  is,  consistency,  in  this  convention, 
cannot  be  too  highly  appreciated,  and  by  non.e 
more  than  my  friend  from  Simpson  (Mr.  Clarke.) 
I  do  not  pretend  to  say  that  I  have,  or  shall  be 
consistent  in  my  course,  in  this  convention,  but 
I  think  that  I  shall  try  at  any  rate  to  preserve  it 
as  far  as  possible.  But  I  have  been  particular- 
ly struck  with  the  course  of  gentlemen  here. 
When  a  clerk  is  to  be  elected,  we  are  told  no 
man  should  be  eligible  without  a  certificate  of 
qualification.  And  why?  Because  the  people 
are  not  capable  of  judging  of  his  qualifications. 
When  a  sherifl,  is  to  be  elected  by  the  people,  I 
am  told,  do  not  let  him  be  elected  again.  And 
why?  Do  not  the  people  of  his  county  know  all 
about  his  qualifications  by  thattirae,Avhetherhe 
has  been  oppressive  or  not,  or  discharged  his 
duties  properly  or  improperly?  Most  certainly. 
My  position  is,  that  we  ought  to  interpose  no 
more  restriction  than  is  possible  here,  and  I  am 
not  to  be  deterred  from  it  by  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon)  and  others  who  are  con- 
tinually taunting  people  here,  with  a  disposi- 
tion to  pander  to  the  prejudices  of  the  people, 
and  seeking  thereby,  to  aeter  us  from  jisserting 
that  the  people  are  capable  of  self-government. 
Nothing  of  the  sort  has  any  influence  on  me. 
Above  all,  do  not  say  in  one  breath  that  the  peo- 
ple are  capable  of  self-government,  and  in  the 
next  that  they  shall  not  select  their  own  officers, 
after  they  have  served  them  one  term,  for  fear 
they  may  be  improperly  influenced.  It  reminds 
me  of  the  election  of  Napoleon  to  the  first  con- 
sulship. It  was  declared  that  it  should  be  a 
perfectly  free  election,  but  accompanying  it  was 
the  proclamation,  that  he  who  voted  against  Na- 


poleon should  be  shot.  It  was  like  the  liberty 
of  the  press  proclaimed  during  the  reign  of  ter- 
ror in  France,  Avhere  every  article  was  subjected 
to  the  censorship  of  those  in  power.  Here  we 
are  told  the  people  are  free,  and  can  govern 
themselves,  irrespective  of  all  restrictions,  but 
they  are  told  also,  that  they  cannot  even  elect  a 
clerk  witliout  a  certificate  from  a  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  or  of  the  circuit  court;  and  for 
what  purpose?  In  order  that  the  people  may 
know  who  ought  to  be  permitted  to  serve  theni? 
And  when  a  sheriff  was  to  be  elected  a  second 
time,  we  were  told,  in  efi'ect,  that  the  people,  in- 
stead of  being  capable  of  self-government,  were 
incapable,  or  otherwise,  that  a  majority  of  the 
people  are  corrupt  and  accessible  to  bribery  and 
improper  influences.  Gentlemen  ought  not  thus 
to  sav  in  one  breath  that  the  people  are  capable 
of  self  government,  and  in  the  next  that  they  are 
not.  But,  says  the  president,  sheriffs  and  consta- 
bles are  to  be  found,  who  would  pervert  their  of- 
fices to  the  oppression  of  the  people  to  secure 
their  re-election.  I  am  reminded  by  that  remark, 
of  one  of  ^sop's  fables — that  of  the  fox  and  the 
flies.  The  fox  objected  to  the  flies,  wlien  they 
had  satiated  themselves,  being  driven  off  from 
him,  for  fear  that  another  hungry  set  would  come 
and  deprive  him  of  the  last  remaining  drop  of 
blood  ill  his  A'eins.  Thus,  if  a  man  discharges 
the  duties  Of  his  office  in  the  waV  described,  it 
is  to  be  hoped  by  that  time  he  will  be  sufficient- 
ly satiated  with  the  best  blood  of  the  people, 
and  that  they  would  suffer  less  under  him,  than 
those  who  had  not  as  yet  tasted  a  single  drop  of 
it.  My  impression  is  that  the  people,  in  the  se- 
lection of  these  officers  will  bie  governed  by  pro- 
per considerations.  If  a  sheriff  discharges  his 
duties  faithfully  and  properly,  they  will,  re-elect 
him;  if  not,  they  will  not  re-elect  him.  If  these 
two  positions  were  not  true,  I  would  vote  to 
deprive  them  of  the  power  of  exercising  this  priv- 
ilege, and  vest  it  in  another  tribunal.  Let  us  be 
consistent,  and  not  proclaim  to  the  world  in  the 
same  breath,  that  the  people  shall  elect  their  of- 
ficers, and  they  shall  not;  and  that  they  are  ca- 
pable of  discriminating  in  their  choice,  and  that 
they  are  not  thus  capable.  Do,  at  least,  let  us 
be  consistent.  To  use  a  homely  phrase,  "I  want 
to  go  the  whole  hog,  or  none."  Let  the  people 
have  the  whole  power  of  electing  whom  they 
wish. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  This  thing  of  drawing  gen- 
eral conclusions  from  particularities, is  all  wrong. 
It  is  true,  that  Judas  Iscariot  was  a  traitor,  and 
so  was  Benedict  Arnold,  but  these  isolated  cases 
do  not  prove  that  all  tlie  people  of  America  are 
traitors,  or  that  all  the  members  of  the  christian 
church  are  impostors;  not  at  all. 

Mr.  DIXON.  The  gentleman  did  not  under- 
stand me.  My  idea  was,  that  the  people  could 
not  discover  instinctively  who  were  and  who 
were  not  traitors. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  am  coming  to  that.  The 
gentleman  was  arguing  from  particular  instan- 
ces, and  applying  them  generally  to  the  people. 
I  would  have  the  sheriff  elected  for  two  years, 
for  I  go  for  a  short  term,  and  then  re-eligible,  and 
the  people  I  believe  have  too  much  intelligence 
to  re-elect  a  corrupt  man.  As  to  the  argument 
of  not  requiring  bonds  of  the  sheriff,  I  have 
heard  similar  things  during  the  whole  of  last 


311 


summer  from  those  who  were 
election   of  these  officers  by  the 

Thus,  in  my  countv,  it  was  said  "by  those  who 
sought  to  cast  ridicule  on  the  principle,  that  we 
desired  to  elect  standing  jurors  and  witnesses. 
As  to  a  sheriff  oppressing  the  people  in  view  of 
securing  his  re-election,  that  would  be  just  the 
opportunity  for  the  people  to  pay  him  back,  and 
I  desire  that  he  shall  pass  that  ordeal.  If  he  is 
a  good  officer  I  want  the  people  to  have  an  op- 
portunitv  of  rewarding  him  oy  re-electing  him 
to  the  office. 

Mr.  CLARKE  then  oflFered  the  following 
amendment  to  the  amendment: 

"That  judges  of  the  circuit  courts  are  elected, 
but  no  person  shall  he  eligible  to  the  office  of 
sheriff,  or  the  assistant  or  deputy  of  any  sheriff, 
unless  he  shall  have  obtained  a  quietus  six 
months  before  the  election  for  the  amount  of  all 
public  moneys  or  dues  for  which  he  may  be  re- 
sptmsible." 

On  motion,  the  committee  rose  and  reported 
progress. 

The  question  being  on  granting  the  committee 
leave  to  sit  again,  leave  was  refused — a  count 
being  had — ayes  25,  nays  29. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  NOVEMBER  6, 1849. 
Prayer  by  Rev.  Mr.  Laxcaster. 

LOUISVILLE    CHANCEKT    COURT. 

Mr.  HARDIX  from  the  committee  on  Circuit 
Courts,  offered  the  following,  which,  on  his 
motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  made  the  special  order  of  the  day  for 
to-morrow,  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

Sec.-.  TheLouisvillechaucery  court  shall  ex- 
ist under  this  constitution,  subject  to  repeal,  and 
its  jurisdiction  to  enlargement  and  modificatiou 
by  the  legislature.  The  chancellor  shall  have 
the  same  qualification  as  a  circuit  court  judge; 
and  the  clerk  of  said  court  as  a  clerk  of  a  circuit 
court,  and  the  marshal  of  said  court  as  a  sheriff; 
and  the  legislature  shall  provide  for  the  election 
of  the  chancellor,  clerk,  and  marshal,  of  said 
court,  at  the  same  time  that  the  judge  and  clerk 
of  the  circuit  court  are  elected  for  the  county 
of  Jefferson,  and  they  shall  hold  their  offices  for 
the  same  time. 

COMMOS  SCHOOLS. 

Mr.  TAYLOR,  from  the  committee  on  educa- 
tion, made  the  following  report,  which,  on  his 
motion,  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole,  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

ARTICLE  — . 

Sec.  1.  The  diffusion  of  knowledge  and  learn- 
ing among  men  being  essential  to  the  presei-va- 
tion  of  liberty  and  free  government,  ami  the  pro- 
motion of  human  virtue  and  happiness,  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  general  assembly  to  establish, 
within  years  next  after  the  adoption  of 

this  constitution,  and  Jorever  thereafter  keep  in 
existence,  an  efficient  system  of  common  schools 
throughout  this  commonwealth,  which  shall  be 
equally  open  to  all  the  white  children  thereof. 
48 


opposed  to  an  i  Sec.  2.  The  fund  called  and  known  as  the 
people  at  all.  school  fund,  consisting  of  $1,225,768  42,  secured 
by  bonds  given  by  the  state,  and  payable  to  the 
board  of  education,  and  $73,500  of  stock  in  the 
Bank  of  Kentucky,  also  the  sum  of  $51,223  29, 
being  the  balance  of  interest  on  the  school  fund 
for  the  year  1848,  over  and  above  the  charges 
against  that  interest  for  said  year;  all  of  which 
said  sums  of  money  and  stock,  and  the  interest 
and  dividends  accruing  thereon  and  therefrom, 
be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  set  apart,  dedicated, 
declared  to  be,  and  shall  remain,  a />erj)e<uaZ/wrjd,' 
the  principal  of  which  shall  never  be  diminished 
by  legislative  appropriation  or  enactment.  The 
interest  thereof,  together  with  any  other  fund  that 
may  arise  by  taxation,  heretofore  or  hereafter 
imposed  by  the  general  assembly  in  aid  of  com- 
mon schools,  shall  be  intJtoZa6/i/  applied  and  devo- 
ted to  the  creation,  support,  and  encouragement 
thereof  in  this  commonwealth,  for  the  equal  ben- 
efit of  all  the  children  therein,  whose  instruc- 
tion shall  be  provided  for  by  law;  and  no  law- 
shall  be  made  authorizing  said  fund,  or  any  part 
thereof,  to  be  diverted  to  any  other  use  or  pur- 

gose  whatsoever,  than  that  to  which  the  same  is 
ereinbefore  dedicated. 

Sec.  3.  The  interest  arising  from  the  fund  in 
the  second  section  of  this  article  mentioned,  as 
also  any  sum  which  may  have  arisen,  or  may 
hereafter  arise  from  taxation  imposed  for  the 
purposes  aforesaid  or  otherwise,  shall,  in  any 
system  of  common  schools  which  the  general  as- 
sembly may  establish,  be  distributed  among  the 
several  counties,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
children  therein. 

Sec.  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general  as- 
sembly to  provide  for  the  investment  of  the  sum 
of  $51,223  29,  in  the  second  section  of  this  ar- 
ticle mentioned,  in  some  safe  and  profitable  man- 
ner, the  interest  upon  which  shall  be  applied  as 
in  said  second  section  directed. 

Sec.  5.  Whenever,  for  the  period  of  one  year, 
there  shall  remain  unused  of  the  fund  set  apart 
and  made  applicable  by  the  second  section  of 
this  article  to  the  establishment  and  support  of 
common  schools,  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dol- 
lars, it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  governor  to  fund 
the  same,  which  shall  constitute  a  portion  of  the 
permanent  fund  for  the  support  of  common 
schools;  the  interest  arising  thereon  onlv  to  be 
applied  in  aid  thereof,  as  in  the  second  section 
of  this  article  mentioned:  Provided,  That  if  any 
county  have  failed  to  organize  common  schools 
therein  for  five  years,  it  may,  at  any  time  after 
an  organization,  draw  whatever  sum  may  then 
be  due  to  it,  provided  the  same  has  not  been 
funded  as  herein  directed. 

Sec.  6.  The  general  assembly  shall  provide 
the  ways  and  means  for  the  prompt  payment 
and  safe  custody  of  the  interest  now  due,  or 
which  may  hereafter  accrue  upon  the  bonds  giv- 
en by  the  state,  and  payable  to  the  board  of  ed- 
ucation. 

Sec.  7.  There  shall  be  elected,  by  the  quali- 
fied electors  in  this  commonwealth,'  a  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction,  who  shall  hold 
his  office  for  years,  and  whose  duties  and 

salary  shall  be  prescribed  and  fixed  by  law. 

BILL  OF  RIGHTS. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  desire  at  the  proper  time  to 
offer  an  amendment  as  a  substitute  for  the  second 


378 


section  of  the  bill  of  rights,  or  the  article  which 
is  placed  third  in  order  in  the  report  made  by 
the  chairman  (Mr.  Stevenson)  of  the  committee 
on  miscellaneous  provisions.  I  wish  now  to 
give  notice  of  my  intention,  and  if  in  order,  I 
will  present  my  substitute  that  it  may  be  prin- 
ted for  the  information  of  tlie  convention,  and 
referred  to  the  conmiittce  of  the  whole. 
,    The  secretary  read  it  a.s  follows : 

Sec.  — .  That  all  power  is  inherent  in  the  peo- 
ple, and  all  free  govornments  are  founded  on 
their  authority  and  consent,  and  instituted  for 
their  peace,  safety,  and  happiness,  and  the  secu- 
rity of  their  property.  For  tlie  advancement  of 
these  ends,  but  not  for  their  defeat,  tliey  liave  at 
all  times  an  unalienable  and  indefeasible  right  to 
alter,  reform,  or  abolisli  their  government  in 
such  manner  as  they  may  think  proper. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  If  I  understand  the  proposition 
of  mj  honorable  friend,  he  means  to  insert,  by 
his  substitute,  into  the  general  provisions  of  the 
constitution,  into  our  bdl  of  rights,  the  spirit  of 
a  preamble  and  resolution  wliicli  he  brought  in- 
to this  house  some  weeks  ago,  to  provide  solemn- 
ly and  explicitly,  that  whilst  the  sovereignty  of 
this  land  resides  in  the  people — whilst  the  people 
have  a  right  to  change,  alter,  and  to  abolish  t)ie 
fundamental  law  of  the  land,  and  to  do  every 
thing  for  the  security  of  their  lives,  liberty, 
and  property,  yet  that  they  have  no  right,  no 
legal  power  to  destroy  any  of  tiiese  great 
principles  which  were  the  inducements  to  all 
governments — the  pillars  upon  which  all  so- 
ciety rests — and  without  which  our  government 
would  loose  the  features  of  republicanism  and 
degenerate  into  despotism.  He  means  to  place 
the  constitution  in  such  a  light  as  that  there 
shall  be  no  mistake  with  regard  to  the  powers 
which  they  have  a  right  to  exercise,  and  those 
which  are  even  beyond  the  people  themselves, 
or  any  set  of  men  clothed  with  authority  from 
them.  He  means  to  place  it  beyond  all  cavil 
and  construction,  that  the  lives,  the  liberties, 
and  property  of  our  people  cannot,  even  by 
the  people  themselves,  be  taken  away.  He 
wishes  tiiat  hereafter  there  shall  be  no  misun- 
derstanding with  regard  to  this  point — that  tlie 
constitution  shall  plainly  set  forth  that  the 
power  to  destroy  property  without  compensation 
or  the  consent  of  the  owner  does  not  exist. 
This  is  clearly  established  to  my  mind,  by  the 
original  resolution  reported  to  this  house  by  the 
committee;  but  it  is  plain  to  my  mind  only  by 
implication,  and  it  lias  and  will  again  admit 
of  great  variety  of  construction  and  ditference 
of  opinion.  It  is  to  avoid  this  variety  of  con- 
struction, to  place  the  matter  clearly  and  dis- 
tinctly before  the  country,  that  this  substitute 
is  offered.  I  most  heartily  concur  in  the  pro- 
priety of  the  provision,  and  when  the  proper 
time  arrives  will,  if  it  be  necessary,  give  my 
reasons  fully  and  explicitly.  I  liope  it  will  be 
printed  and  duly  considered  by  every  mem- 
ber of  this  house.  It  is  a  proposition  involving 
a  great  principle. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  concur  in  the  propriety 
of  printing  the  substitute  now  offered  by  my 
friend  from  Henderson.  Tlie  object  of  the  com- 
mittee in  altering  this  section — it  will  bo  seen, 
■was  to  render  it  more  specific.  They  have 
changed  this  section  by  adding  after  the  words, 


"peace,  safety,  and  liappiness,"  the  words,  "  se- 
curity and  protection  of  their  property."  1 
concur  with  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  as 
well  as  with  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  (Mr. 
Morris,)  that  nothing  sliould  be  left  to  a  doubt- 
ful constructiim  in  the  bill  of  rights,  so  far  as 
security  goes,  and  I  shall  go  most  cheerfully  for 
the  proposed  amendment,  if  in  the  opinion  of 
the  convention  the  object  has  not  been  already 
clearly  secured  by  the  section  as  reported.  The 
only  change,  if  I  understand  it,  in  the  pro- 
posed amendment,  is  by  adding  the  words,  "and 
not  for  their  defeat."  I  had  supposed  when  this 
matter  was  discussed  in  the  connnittee,  that  af- 
ter setting  out  clearly,  openly,  and  distinctly 
with  the  proposition  that  the  object  for  which 
all  free  govcrjiment  was  framed,  was  the  peace, 
safety,  happiness,  security,  and  protection  of  the 
property  of  the  people,  that  any  government 
founded  in  contradistinction  to  these  principles, 
would  be  contrary  to  the  whole  spirit  and  geni- 
us of  the  government.  But  if  the  amendment  is 
not  sufficiently  strong,  no  gentleman  will  go 
further  than  myself  in  making  it  so.  I  hope 
this  amendment  will  be  referred  to  the  commit- 
tee, that  an  opportunity  may  be  given  for  a  mu- 
tual interchange  of  opinions,  and  if  the  present 
section  is  not  considered  sufficiently  strong,  I 
shall  go  with  my  friend  in  his  amendment,  to 
make  it  stronger. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  will  remark  that  in  present- 
ing this  amendment  my  object  was  to  make  the 
thing  clear,  which  I  thought  somewhat  doubtful. 
I  did  not  wish  any  mis-construction  to  be 
placed  on  the  language  in  the  second  section,  and 
1  thouglit  it  better  to  place  the  whole  matter  be- 
yond even  a  doubtful  construction.  J  think, 
gentlemen,  on  examination  of  the  second  section, 
will  perhaps  concur  with  mo,  tliat  the  words 
which  I  have  added,  "but  not  for  their  defeat" 
are  not  only  necessary,  but  all  important  to  pre- 
vent any  misconstruction  of  the  powers  of  this, 
or  any  Jtuture  convention,  overproperty. 

Tlie  motion  to  print  and  refer  was  agreed  to. 

INSTRUCTIONS   TO   A   COMMITTEE. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  "When  the  convention  was 
in  committee  of  the  whole  a  few  days  ago  on  the 
report  of  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals, 
the  word  "four"  was  stricken  out  and  the  word 
"three"  was  inserted  by  a  majority  of  the  con- 
vention, who  thus  expressed  the  opinion  that 
there  should  be  but  three  judges  of  that  court. 
The  whole  report  was  afterwards  referred  to  a 
joint  committee,  consisting  of  three  of  the  stand- 
ing committees  of  this  body,  to  whom  I  desire 
this  convention  to  give  instructions  on  this  sub- 
ject, to  govern  them  in  preparing  tlie  report 
which  they  may  hereafter  present.  I  believe 
the  subject  has  been  sufficiently  discussed,  and 
therefore  I  shall  say  no  more  than  to  ask  for 
the  yeas  and  nays  upon  the  resolution  wliicli  I 
now  offer. 

Resolved,  That  it  is  inexpedient  to  increase 
the  number  of  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or 
to  branch  that  court  by  constitutional  jirovinion, 
but  that  power  should  be  given  to  tiie  legisla- 
ture to  effect  tliese  objects,  when  tlic  same  shall 
be  demanded  by  the  people. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  move  to  lay  that  resolu- 
tion upon  the  table.    My  reason  "is  this.    The 


379 


grand  committee  has  bad  a  meeting,  and  tliey 
seem  to  be  going  along  very  well.  If  we  under- 
take to  instruct  tbera  on  the  subject,  there  will 
be  resolutions  of  instruction  offered  in  relation 
to  other*,  and  the  committee  may  be  embarras- 
sed. Xow,  as  they  yesterday  proceeded  so  very 
well,  I  hope  no  such  resolution  will  be  adopted, 
and  I  move  to  lay  it  upon  the  table. 

The  motion  was  put,  and  it  was  understood  to 
have  been  carried;  out  a  conversation  ensued  on 
the  propriety  of  calling  the  yeas  and  nays  upon 
it,  which  wsts  tenninated  by  the  withdrawal  of 
the  resolution  by  its  mover,  until  there  should 
b-e  a  better  attendance  in  the  house,  the  sense  of 
which  he  desired  to  obtain. 

COrXTY    JlXD    DISTRICT    OFFICES. 

The  convention  having  yesterday  refused  the 
committee  of  the  whole  leave  to  set  again  on 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  executive 
and  ministerial  offices  for  counties  and  districts, 
the  question  now  came  up  on  that  report  in  con- 
vention. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  move  that  the  convention  re- 
solve itself  into  committee  of  the  whole,  and  re- 
sume the  consideration  of  that  report. 

The  PRESIDENT.  That  report  is  not  now 
in  possession  of  the  committee  of  the  whole. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  presume  it  can  be  recommit- 
ted. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  may  be  again  referred 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  then  the 
gentleman  may  move  that  the  convention  resolve 
Itself  into  committee  of  the  whole  upon  it. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  make  that  motion  and  my 
reason  for  making  it  is  simply  this.  It  will  be 
better  to  consider  this  report  in  committee  of 
the  whole,  for  according  to  the  rules  which 
govern  the  committee  every  gentleman  can  more 
freely  express  his  views  and  sentiments  there.  I 
tliink  also  that  it  is  due  to  the  president  of  this 
body  that  he  should  have  an  opportunity  to 
give  expression  to  his  views  upon  the  amend- 
ments that  may  be  offered  or  to  oSer  amend- 
ments himself,  which  he  will  not  be  able  to  do 
in  convention.  At  an  early  period  of  the  ses- 
sion of  this  convention  there  was  an  understand- 
ing that  the  president  should  be  allowed  such  an 
opportunity,  and  I  think  that  when  the  conven- 
tion yesterday  refused  It-ave  to  sit  again,  this  un- 
derstanding was  not  properly  considered.  By 
refusing  to  go  into  committee  of  the  whole  again, 
I  think  we  shall  not  expedite  business,  for  I 
suppose  the  previous  question  will  not  be  moved 
until  all  have  said  what  they  desire  to  say.  Sir, 
I  move  that  the  report  be  again  referred  to  the 
committee  of  the  whole. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  beg  to  state  to  the  con- 
vention that  I  do  not  wish  it  to  change  any 
course  it  may  desire  to  pursue  for  the  conveni- 
ence of  its  presiding  officer.  I  have  already 
frequently,  perhaps  too  often,  addres.sed  the 
committee  of  the  whole,  on  the  subject  involved 
in  this  report,  and  I  do  not  wish  them  now  to 
change  their  course  on  mv  account. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WlCKLIFfE.  I  voted  yesterday 
against  granting  leave  to  sit  again,  deeming  it 
unnecessary.  I  supposed  that  we  were  nearly 
through,  and  that  any  further'  discussion  that 
might  be  thought  desirable  could  take  place 
in  convention. 


I     Mr.  GHOLSON.    If  the  president  has  no  de- 

i  sire  to  speak  on  these  questions  or  to  offer  any 

'  amendments  to  the  remaining  sections  of  this 

i  bill,  I   can  see  no  necessity  for  again  going  in- 

I  to  committee  of  the  whole  upon  it.     To  go  into 

I  committee  and  there  consider  it,  when  it  will 

I  have  afterwards  to  be  acted  upon  iu  convention, 

will  be  to  do  that  twice,  which  it  is  sufficient 

to  do  but  once.    I  am  opposed  therefore  to  the 

motion  which  is  now  pending. 

The  motion  to  recommit  was  then  rejected. 

The  report  was  then  taken  up,  and  the  first 
question  was  on  concurring  in  the  amendment  of 
the  committee  of  the  whole  to  the  first  section, 
striking  out  the  words,  "a  county  court"  and 
inserting  "  and." 

The  amendment  was  concurred  in. 

The  next  amendment  was  by  inserting  in  tho 
I  second  section  after  the  words,  "  no  person  shall 
be  eligible  to  the  offices  mentioned  in  this  ar- 
ticle wlio  is  not  at  the  time  twenty  four  years 
old" — tlie  words  "  except  clerks  of  county  and 
circuit  courts,  sheriffs,  constables,  and  county 
attorney,  who  shall  be  eligible  at  the  age  of 
twenty  one  years." 

The  amendment  was  concurred  in. 

The  next  amendment  was  by  adding  the 
words  "  or  a  circuit  court"  aft«rthe  words  "court 
of  appeals,"  in  the  same  section,  to  give  the 
judges  of  the  circuit  courts  power  to  grant  cer- 
tificates of  qualifications  to  candidates  for  the 
clerkship,  as  well  as  the  court  of  appeals. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  move  to  amend  the  section, 
under  consideration,  by  adding  the  words  "iu 
open  court"  after  the  words  "circuit  court."  I 
wish  this  examination  to  take  place  in  open 
court.  These  examinations  lieretofore  have  been 
made  at  night  after  the  adjournment  of  court, 
w^hen  the  clerk  has  been  fatigued  with  the  la- 
bors of  the  day,  or  before  its  sitting  in  the 
morning.  I  believe,  if  we  wish  to  have  thor- 
oughly qualified  certificated  clerks,  they  should 
be  examined  in  the  presence  of  the  multitude. 

Mr.  TURNER.  If  a  young  man  is  examined 
in  open  court,when  there  is  a  great  crowd,  the  ten- 
dency will  be  to  excite  and  alarm  him  so  much 
that  it  will  be  difficult  to  ascertain  whether  he 
is  qualified  or  not.  I  think  a  private  examina- 
tion would  be  much  better. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  think  there  would  bo  some 
inconvenience  attending  a  requisition  of  this 
kind.  If  a  man  wants  to  run  iu  August  and  the 
spring  session  of  the  court  has  passed  by,  he  will 
have  no  opportunity  for  an  examination  unless 
a  court  is  called  to  sit  for  the  purpose,  which  I 
presume  no  one  would  think  desirable. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  have  not  moved  this  amend- 
ment with  a  view  to  restrict  the  rights  of  any 
individual  in  this  commonwealth,  i  believe  the 
rights  to  office  should  be  as  free  as  air,  and  no 
restriction  should  be  cast  on  any  man  not  tain- 
ted with  crime.  I  have  some  knowledge  on 
this  subject,  and  I  know  how  the  best  evidences 
can  be  obtained ;  therefore  I  have  moved  that  the 
examination  be  made  by  the  circuit  court,  in 
I  open  court.  I  know  if  it  be  made  at  night, 
I  while  the  judge  and  the  clerk  are  tired,  it  will 
I  not  be  thorough,  and  there  will  not  be  that  in- 
!  spection  that  the  people  will  give.  I  am  oppo- 
{  sed  to  restrictions  altogether,  and  if  possible  I 
!  wish  to  kill  it. 


380 


Mr.  McHEN RY.  I  am  glad  the  gentleman 
has  avowed  his  object.  It  is  to  kill  this  provis- 
ion; and  I  hope  those  who  wish  for  restriction 
will  consider  this  object  in  the  vote  they  give 
upon  this  amendment.  It  seems  to  me  that 
there  is  sufficient  opportunity  to  examine  can- 
didates for  this  office,  without  being  in  open 
court.  There  is  another  thing  that  should  be 
considered,  whicli  is,  that  the  commonwealth  is 
spending  about  twenty  four  dollars  per  day, 
while  the  court  is  in  session;  an  examination  in 
open  court,  then  will  tend  to  increase  their  ex- 
pense in  this  proportion,  and  the  only  object  to 
be  attained  by  it  will  be  to  gratify  a  few  indi- 
viduals. We  shall  save  expense  and  trouble  by 
having  the  examination  made  by  the  jud^e  and 
the  clerk  in  private,  and  I  conceive  that  it  will 
be  decidedly  better. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  am  glad  the  gentleman 
from  Washington  has  called  attention  to  the 
phraseology  in  which  the  clause  of  that  report 
IS  couched.'  1  think  the  candidate  will  be  ex- 
amined in  open  court,  according  to  the  provis- 
ion of  the  section  under  consideration.  By  the 
expression  "court  of  appeals,"  I  do  not  under- 
stand the  judges,  but  the  open  court,  and  I  shall 
move  to  amend  so  that  a  judge  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  or  a  judge  of  the  circuit  court  may 
make  the  examination.  It  would  be  evceeding- 
ly  inconvenient  to  have  this  examination  niade 
in  open  court,  for  the  court  sits  but  twice  in  a 
year. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  While  a  number  of  proposi- 
tions were  pending  on  this  second  section 
in  reference  to  clerks,  I  proposed  in  commit- 
tee to  strike  out  all  after  the  word,  "years,"  in 
the  seventh  line  down  to  the  second  "the,"  in 
the  tenth  line,  which  would  destroy  the  neces- 
sity for  a  certificate  from  a  majority  of  the  judg- 
es "of  the  court  of  appeals.  I  would  prefer 
that  no  certificate  should  be  required  from 
any  judge.  There  are  those  in  this  con- 
vention who  believe  a  certificate  from  a  majori- 
ty of  the  judges  will  be  necessary,  and  tlriose 
•who  believe  that  the  people  are  capable  of 
judging,  and  that  a  certificate  will  be  only  pri- 
ma  facie  evidence  of  fitness,  and  might  be  pro- 
cured by  persons  not  qualified.  There  seems  to 
be  a  mi'ddle  ground,  which  is  that  the  candi- 
dates should  nave  the  certificate  of  one  judge  of 
the  circuit  court.  I,  therefore,  desire  to  have 
the  words  which  I  have  indicated  struck  out, 
letting  the  requisition  as  to  age  and  citizenship, 
as  it  is,  remain,  and  leaving  the  people  in  the 
exercise  of  their  sound  discretion  and  good 
judgment,  the  right  to  determine  whether  the 
candidate  is  qualified  or  not.  I  do  not  desire  to 
press  what  I  do  not  believe  to  be  right,  but  I  am 
convinced  that  no  certificate  that  would  be  ob- 
tained, would  furnish  satisfactorv  evidence  to 
the  people.  On  the  contrary,  I  tliink  it  would 
enable  tne  candidate  who  held  it  to  impose  on 
the  people,  and  perhaps  defeat  one  better  quali- 
fied than  himself.  I  nave  no  idea  of  requiring 
young  men  from  distant  parts  of  the  state  to 
come  to  Frankfort  for  a  certificate.  It  is  fair  to 
presume  that  there  will  be  two  candidates  in 
each  county,  and  if  they  liave  no  certificates, 
they  must  come  here  to  get  them,  and  when  ob- 
tained they  will  furnish  no  satisfactory  evi- 
dence of  qualification  in  ray  judgment.    I  then 


move  to  strike  out  the  words  I  have  indicated, 
and  on  that  question  I  call  for  the  ayes  and 
noes. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman's  motion 
is  not  in  order  at  this  time,  there  being  an 
amendment  pending. 

Mr.  KELLY  withdrew  his  amendment. 
Mr.  MITCHELL  moved  to  amend  the  passage 
under  consideration,  by  inserting  certain  words, 
so  that  it  would  read  as  follows,  the  words  pro- 
posed to  be  added  being  in  italic: 

"No  person  shall  be  elected  clerk  unless  he 
shall  have  procured  from  a  judge  of  the  court  of 
appeals  or  a  judge  of  the  circuit  court,  a  certificate 
that  he  has  been  examined  by  the  clerk  of  the 
court  giving  said  certijieate  under  his  supervision, 
and  that  he  is  qualified  for  the  office  for  which 
he  is  a  candidate." 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 
Mr.  CLARKE  then   renewed  his    motion    to 
strike  out  the  entire  passage,  as   amended,  and 
on  this  he  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  taken  and  resulted 
thus;  yeas,  33;  nays  52. 

Yeas. — Jnhn  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Bev- 
erly L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius 
De.sha,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither, Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
JohnHargis,  William  Hendrix,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Thomas  James,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Willis B.Machen,  William  N.  Marshall, 
David  Meriwether,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh 
Newell,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Silas  Woodson — 33. 

Nats. — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coff'ey,  Archibald 
Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.Edwards,  SeluciusGarfielde,  James 
H.  6arrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Yin- 
cent  S.  Hay,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred  M.  Jack- 
son, William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Mar- 
tin P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ardL.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHen- 
ry,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F. 
Nutall,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius 
A.  Spaukling,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W. 
Stone,  John  D.  Tay-lor,  John  J.  Thunnan,  How- 
ard Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  C.  A.  Wickliff'e,  Robert  N. 
WicklifFe,  Geo.  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.Wright 
—52. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  strike  out. 
The  convention  next  concurred  in  the  amend- 
ment of  the  committee  of  the  whole,  striking 
out  the  concluding  words  of  the  section,  a  pro- 
vision to  the  same  effect  having  been  made  in 
another  part  of  the  article. 

The  second  section  as  amended  was  then  adopt- 
ed. 

The  third   section  was  read  and  approved, 
without  amendment. 
The  fourth  section  was  next  read  as  follows: 


381 


"Sec.  4  Sheriffs  shall  be  elected  in  ea.h  coun- 
ty at  the  same  time  and  manner  that  [associate 
judges  of  the  county  court  are  elected,  whose 
term  of  office  shall  be  two  years,  and  they  shall 
be  re-eligible  for  a  second  term;  but  no  sheriff, 
or  deputy,  who  qualified  under  him,  shall  after 
the  expiration  of  the  second  term,  be  re-eligible 
for  the  succeeding  term."] 

Mr.  CLARKE  renewed  his  motion  which  he 
offered  in  committee  of  the  whole  yesterday,  to 
strike  out  all  the  words  of  this  section  which 
we  have  placed  between  brackets,  and  insert  the 
following:  "that  judges  of  the  circuit  court  are 
elected,  but  no  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  of- 
fice of  sheriff  or  an  assistant  or  deputy  of  any 
sheriff,  uidess  he  shall  have  obtained  a  quietus 
six  months  before  an  election,  for  the  amount  of 
all  public  moneys  or  dues  for  which  he  may  be 
responsible." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  If  I  understand  the  gentle- 
man's proposition,  it  is  that  the  sheriff  may  be 
re-eligible  so  long  as  the  people  will  elect  him, 
provided  he  has  obtained  a  quietus  six  months 
previous  to  the  election,  of  the  whole  amount  of 
revenue  and  county  levy,  for  which  he  is  respon- 
sible. If  that  be  the  case,  I  cannot  vote  for  the 
amendment.  I  listened  with  much  attention  to 
my  friend  from  Madison  yesterday,  and  from  my 
own  long  experience  I  am  led  to  believe  that  ev- 
ery word  he  said  was  literally  true.  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  rotation  in  office  and  practical  responsi- 
bility; and  to  insure  a  practical  responsibility 
as  to  some  officers,  I  know  of  no  way  but  ineli- 
gibility, because  there  is  no  way  to  get  at  him, 
except  by  suits  for  malfeasance,  misfeasance,  or 
nonfeasance,  unless  we  reach  him  by  putting  an 
expiration  to  the  time  for  which  he  may  be  elect- 
ed. I  liave  no  cause  of  complaint  again.st  any 
sheriff  in  any  court  where  I  practice,  nor  against 
any  clerk  or  judge.  1  did  not,  in  striking  for  a 
convention,  and  in  aiming  to  make  a  constitu- 
tion, do  it  with  a  view  to  provide  places  for  men 
out  of  office,  nor  to  turn  present  incumbents  out. 
The  sheriffs,  as  I  remarked,  do  their  business 
well,  and  the  clerks  also,  and  I  have  no  cause  of 
complaint  against  the  judges,  except  as  I  said 
in  relation  to  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
that  I  think  they  are  sometimes  in  too  much  of 
a  hurry.  But  if  a  sheriff  is  re-eligible  after  four 
years,  when  is  he  to  cease  to  be  so?  So  long  as 
the  people  will  elect  him  he  can  be  elected,  pro- 
vided he  has  complied  with  the  provision  of 
this  amendment. 

Now  in  practice,  whatwill  be  the  effect?  The 
sheriff  has  the  vantage  ground  in  all  sharping, 
foxing,  hooking,  and  every  thing  else,  and  in  all 
manner  of  ways.  There  is  no  conceivable  way 
in  which  the  people  can  be  ground  down  in 
which  he  will  not  be  able  to  do  it.  He  will 
have,  perhaps,  considerable  arrearages  of  money 
behina,  but  he  will  pay  up,  because  he  will  have 
funds  in  his  hands,  and  he  will  get  his  quietus, 
and  when  the  election  comes  on  he  will  have 
from  one  third  to  one  half  of  the  voters  under 
his  thumb,  so  that  they  cannot  resist  him.  I 
heard  a  speech  some  forty  vears  ago  in  Bullitt 
from  a  candidate  for  the  office  of  constable,  by 
the  name  of  Wilcoxon,  and  he  claimed  his  elec- 
tion, on  the  ground  that  he  had  been  a  constable, 
and  had  favored  the  people.  But  a  sheriff  can 
have  one  third  of  the  revenue  of  the  countv  out 


of  the  treasury,  and  yet  if  he  has  six  months  to 
make  his  quietus,  1  ask  if  he  will  fail  of  his 
election  while  he  has  claims  against  one  half  to 
one  third  of  the  voters  of  the  county.  Surely 
he  cannot  be  resisted.  He  may  have  execution.s 
against  a  man  who  controls  a  hundred  votes  and 
how  can  that  man  resist  him.  The  sheriff  may 
make  a  return  upon  an  execution,  "  not  sold  for 
want  of  time,"  or  "not  sold  for  want  of  bidders" 
and  no  damages  can  be  obtained  from  him.  He 
has  a  lever  of  power  which  I  do  not  want  a  sher- 
iff to  possess. 

I  will  venture  to  say,  if  you  have  no  other 
clause  except  that  of  a  quietus,  the  same  office 
can  be  in  the  same  family  for  twenty  or  thirty 
years.  Do  you  not  intend  to  leave  the  office 
open  to  all?  Do  you  not  wish  to  leave  a  com- 
petitor, a  rival  of  the  man  exercising  the  office 
of  sheriff,  a  chance  to  be  elected?  Give  him  a 
fair  competition.  You  give  the  sheriff  the  vant- 
age ground  more  than  fifty  per  cent.  It  is  a 
vantage  ground  that  cannot  be  resisted  at  all. 
Suppose  two  thousand  votes  have  to  be  given, 
and  one  thousand  have  an  arrearage  of  county  le^'y 
behind,  and  aremnantof  the  rest  have  an  execu- 
tion hanging  over  their  heads  ;  and  they  resist 
the  sheriff !  You  might  as  well  attempt  to  dam 
up  the  Mississippi  river  as  do  so.  I  strike  for 
rotation  and  responsibility  in  office,  and  I  say 
there  is  no  responsibi  Uty  if  you  allow  a  sheriff 
to  be  re-elected  after  such  a  term.  I  have  reflect- 
ed on  this  subject  a  good  deal  for  the  last  twelve 
months,  and  1  had  made  up  ray  mind  exactly  to 
such  a  report  as  has  been  made  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  that  a  sheriff  should  be  appoint- 
ed for  two  years;  and  re-eligible  for  one  term  and 
no  longer.  It  is  a  very  important  office.  It  is 
not  so  high  and  dignified  as  that  of  the  judge  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  or  of  the  circuit  court,  but 
it  is  a  most  important  office  to  the  great  body  of 
the  community,  as  much  so  as  any  in  the  state, 
for  this  officer  operates  on  the  high  and  the  low 
and  on  every  body;  and  through  nim,  the  whole 
administration  of  the  law  is  visited  on  the  heads 
of  every  one.  I  have  gone  as  far  as  I  can  possi- 
bly go  in  this  levelling  doctrine.  I  was  afraid 
when  Monsieur  Tonson  came  again,  this  morn- 
ing, that  he  would  take  us,  but  he  failed  by 
nineteen  votes.  And  I  hope  we  shall  put  into 
the  constitution  enough  of  the  conservative  prin- 
ciple to  make  it  at  least  healthy.  I  have  struck 
a  great  deal  for  reform,  but  I  cannot  go  to  this 
length.  I  want  a  sheriff  to  go  out  of  office  at 
the  end  of  four  years. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX.  I  suppo.se  gentlemen  will 
now  concede  the  fact  that  the  people  do  not  know 
enough  to  govern  themselves,  and  therefore,  we 
must  put  leading  strings  on  them,  or  they  wiU 
go  astray.  We  were  told  yesterday  an<l  thi.s 
inoniing,  that  you  shall  not  elect  a  clerk  whom 
I  the  people  please,  because  you  do  not  know 
whether  the  candidates  are  qualified  or  not. 
And  now,  when  we  come  t»  the  office  of  sheriff, 
you  shall  not  elect,  because  you  do  know.  You 
shall  not  elect  a  man,  although  he  has  served 
you  honestly  and  faithfully.  You  turn  round 
and  say.  we  must  put  the  bridle  in  the  mouths  of 
the  people,  because  otherwise,  the  candidates 
for  office  will  buy  votes  at  a  dollar  and  a  half. 
If  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  chooses  to  make 
such  a  declaration  in  relation   to  his  own  con- 


382 


stituents,  he  is  welcome  to  do  so.  I  disclaim  it 
as  applied  to  mine.  On  tlie  one  hand,  we  are 
told  what  we  shall  not  do,  and  on  the  other,  we 
are  emphatically  tcdd  that  the  object  for  whii.h 
the  people  have  called  with  stentorian  voice, 
shall  be  denied,  and  a  restriction  is  to  be  laid  on 
them,  in  the  choice  of  a  clerk,  and  now  in  the 
choice  of  a  sheriff,  because  the  sheriff  will  buy- 
up  the  votes.  It  was  remarked  by  my  talented 
friend  from  Henderson  yesterday,  that  consisten- 
cy is  a  jewel.  I  think  our  friends  are  about  to  act 
consistently  in  one  thing, at  least,  that  is  to  deny 
to  the  people  the  return  of  that  power  whicli 
they  have  called  for.  They  begin  to  denounce 
persons  as  demagogues,  and  turn  up  their  noses, 
and  say  they  are  sick  of  hearing  of  the  suprem- 
acy of  "the  people.  For  my  part,  I  am  not  tired 
of  it.  Gentlemen  have  shown  their  consistency 
in  tryingto  put  leading  strings  on  the  people, 
and  I  will  resist  it  at  every  step;  though  I  may 
be  overpowered  by  numbers,  I  will  contend  for 
what  I  believe  to  be  broad  republican  equality. 
I  can  point  to  one  on  this  floor,  who  has  held  the 
office  of  sheriff  for  thirty  years,  and  I  would  ask 
him  how  he  appreciates  the  compliment  which 
has  been  paid  to  the  sheriffs?  If  I  ever  heard 
the  doctrine  fall  from  the  lips  of  mortal  man, 
tliat  the  people  cannot  govern  tliemselves,  it  has 
been  uttered  by  my  friend  from  Xelson  (Mr. 
Hardin)  this  morning.  Away  with  freedom, 
away  with  self-governmont,  when  we,  in  this 
hall,  are  to  be  told  that  our  constituents  can  be 
bought  for  a  dollar  and  a  half  by  the  office  hold- 
er! Yet  this  is  the  argument  used  on  this  floor. 
"We  are  told  that  after  we  have  tried  an  officer, 
and  found  him  faithful,  we  shall  not  elect  him 
again,  while  at  the  same  time,  we  are  told  that 
all  power  is  to  return  to  the  people.  And  this 
is  the  way  it  is  to  be  done.  1  have  heard  of  such 
a  thing  as  riding  the  people  booted  and  spurred, 
and  I  used  to  think  that  some  office  holders  did 
it;  but  if  this,  which  it  is  now  proposed  to  do, 
is  not  the  thing,  then  I  do  not  understand  the 
use  of  language.  My  friend  from  Nelson  has 
tried  to  convince  us  that  the  circuit  court  judges 
will  be  scoundrels,  if  they  are  allowed  to  be 
electe<i  more  than  once.  Why  not  carry  out  the 
principle  in  relation  to  clerks?  When  it  suits 
the  gentleman's  proposition,  then  the  people  are 
any  thing  that  is  noble,  great,  good,  and  gene- 
rous; and  when  it  suits  his  proposition,  they 
are  knaves  and  scoundrels.  If  the  sheriffs  have 
been  honorable  in  his  neighborhood,  I  ask  why 
in  the  name  of  high  heaven  he  wants  to  turn 
them  out?  He  has  named  a  great  many  rascali- 
ties of  clerks,  and  I  wish  hinx  now  to  name  the 
sheriflfs  wlio  have  been  guilty  of  such  rascalities 
as  require  that  they  should  be  turned  out. 

I  believe  we  are  going  to  make  a  farce  of  this 
constitution,  and  I  offer  the  prediction,  that  so 
much  will  be  done,  that  the  people  will  vote 
again.st  it;  and  if  any  thing  will  induce  them  to 
do  it,  it  will  be  the.se  illiberal,  unjust,  and  anti- 
republican  discriminations;  this  bridling  of  the 
will  of  the  people,  and  this  denying  of  the  free 
choice  of  those  who  are  to  preside  over  them. 
If  it  fihould  happen  that  a  sheriff  should  suc- 
ceed in  one  election  by  bribery  and  corruption, 
"murder  will  out,"  and  the  rascality  will  soon 
be  exposed,  and  he  will  sink  into  the  lowest 
depths  of  infamy.      The  whole  thing  resolves 


itself  into  this,  that  we  must  protect  the  people 
from  themselves.  If  the  people  are  exposed  to 
Shylocks  and  shavers,  to  be  sold  like  sheep  in 
the  shambles,  will  they  not  be  conscious  of  these 
facts?  If  not,  they  are  no  better  than  slieep,  and 
they  are  the  last  people  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
to  be  trusted  with  the  rights  of  self-government. 
If  this  principle  is  adopted  in  the  present  case, 
I  hope  that  it  may  be  made  to  apply  to  other  ca- 
ses also.  I  protest  against  the  life  estate  granted  to 
others.  If  the  sherift"  is  to  be  cut  off,  cut  oft'  the 
clerks,  and  the  judges;  treat  all  alike,  and  do 
not  make  fish  of  one,  and  flesh  of  another. 

Mr.  KELLY.  Whether  the  facetious  allusion 
of  the  venerable  gentleman  from  jSTelson  to  Mons. 
Tonson  is  designed  for  me  or  not  I  do  not  care 
or  know.  He  says  he  has  gone  as  far  in  radical- 
ism as  he  is  willing  to  go,  and  I  confess  he  has 
gone  further  in  substantial  reform  than  I  ex- 
pected, and  I  am  glad  now  to  see  his  words  be- 
come the  echo  of  his  thoughts. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  do  not  intend  to  say  but  a 
very  few  words.  I  never  said  that  my  constitu- 
ents could  be  bought  for  a  dollar  and  a  half — and 
I  had  supposed  that  the  gentleman  (Mr.  Ghol- 
son)  had  suffered  enough  the  other  day  from  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon)  when  he 
attempted  to  put  words  in  that  gentleman's 
mouth  wiiich  he  did  not  use,  to  warn  him  against 
playing  that  kind  of  game  in  future.  I  have 
never  uttered  a  word  that  would  justify  him  in 
declaiming  for  a  quarter  of  an  hour  in  the  way  he 
has.  I  said  that  I  had  been  for  rotation  in  office 
from  the  governor  down,  and  I  appeal  to  him  if 
he  has  not  heard  me  argue  against  the  ineligi- 
bility of  officials  over  and  over  again,  as  tTie 
only  practical  means  of  securing  responsibility, 
of  which  heretofore  there  has  been  none  at  all. 
As  I  before  remarked,  the  sheriff  has  advantages 
in  entering  a  canvass,  greatly  superior  to  any 
other  man.  He  has  been  sheriff  for  four  years, 
and  has  three  or  four  deputies  in  the  large  coun- 
ties, and  at  least  two  in  any  county,  who  will 
know  every  man  in  the  county.  They  will  have 
the  remains,  though  you  require  a  quietus,  of 
levies  and  fee  bills  unexecuted  and  due.  They 
will  pay  up,  out  of  their  own  means,  to  the  gov- 
ernment, to  the  lawyers,  clerks,  and  others,  and 
get  a  quietus,  and  still  have  these  debts  scattered 
about  tlie  county,  no  doubt,  perhaps,  to  the  ex- 
tent of  a  thousand  cases.  What  will  be  the 
effect?  The  gentleman  says,  that  under  such 
circumstances,  he  can  come  up  and  vote  boldly; 
and  it  is  no  doubt  true,  though  I  cannot  tell. 
He  says,  also,  that  he  thinks  I  might  have  the 
same  boldness,  and  perhaps  I  might,  but  I  do 
not  want  to  be  placed  in  that  situation.  The 
word  of  God  says,  "  Lead  us  not  into  tempta- 
tion," or  some  such  expression  as  that;  at  any 
rate,  if  it  is  not  there  it  ought  to  be.  But  I  can 
say  for  myself,  that  if  the  sheriff  came  with  an 
execution  to  seize  upon  and  sell  all  I  possessed, 
even  to  my  last  bed,  and  was  to  promise  to  fa- 
vor me  a  little  until  after  election,  I  do  not  know 
how  I  should  act.  I  should  be  seized,  I  am 
afraid,  at  lea.st  with  fear  and  trembling.  And 
yet  my  friend  would  come  up  boldly  and  with- 
out fear.  Perhaps  he  would  it  he  had  the  money 
in  his  pocket,  and  who  then  would  be  afraid? 
I  have  gone  for  ineligibility  to  secure  responsi- 
bility in  every  office,  from   the  beginning,  and 


383 


Bhall  advocate  it  to  the  end.  I  do  not  know 
that  I  heard  distinct!  v  what  the  gentleman  from 
Washington  (Mr.  Kellv)  said,  and  perhaps  may 
not  have  understood  him.  He  at  least  is  under 
no  obligation  to  me  of  any  kind  or  character, 
nor  am  1  under  any  to  him,  except  so  far  as  en- 
tertaining a  good  opinion  of  him,  is  concerned; 
but  there  was  no  particular  necessity  for  his 
saying  what  he  did.  I  advocated  a  convention, 
and  have  advocated  it  for  years.  I  want  the 
people  to  elect  all  their  officers,  and  I  want  prac- 
tical responsibility,  and  ineligibility  to  secure 
it.  I  am  not  against  the  sovereign  people,  but 
whenever  I  hear  a  raau  talk  about  loving  the 
people  over  much,  I  let  it  go  for  about  what  it 
IS  worth.  I  love  the  people  too;  I  owe  every 
thing  to  them;  and  I  have  never  appealed  to 
them  in  vain;  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  ever  ap- 
peal to  them  again,  but  if  I  should,  I  will  stake 
my  life  upon  it,  it  will  not  be  in  vain.  They 
know  me,  I  mix  with  them,  and  am  one  of  them, 
and  BO  more  than  one  of  them.  And  in  refer- 
ence to  my  constituents,  I  will  say  that  they  are 
equal  to  the  gentleman's  constituents,  in  integ- 
rity, intelligence,  and  in  every  quality  that  en- 
nolales  men.  I  will  not  say  that  they  possess 
those  <Jualities  to  a  greater  extent  than  his,  by 
any  means,  for  I  presume  the  gentleman's  con- 
stituency are  just  as  respectable  as  any  other  in 
the  state. 

And  in  relation  to  the  sheriff,  I  do  not  know 
that  they  ever  voted  against  me,  and  in  my  prac- 
tice of  forty  three  years,  I  declare  most  solemnly 
tliat  I  never  sued  a  sheriff,  for  they  have  but  a 
hard  time  of  it  any  how.  We  are  on  the  best 
of  terms,  but  I  do  not  want  any  man  to  hold 
the  office  for  more  than  four  years  with  the 
power  tlie  sheriff  can  exert. 

I  did  say,  and  I  repeat  it,  when  it  was 
proposed  that  a  man  should  be  elected  clerk, 
possessing  no  qualifications,  that  it  wa.s  a  level- 
ing principle  to  wliich  I  was  opposed.  I  appeal 
to  my  friend,  for  I  still  must  call  him  so,  from 
Washington,  if  the  clerk  of  his  county  did  not 
die,  and  if  a  very  popular  lawyer  did  not  get 
elected  clerk  of  the  county  court.  He  is  a  verj' 
worthy  man,  a  good  clerk,  and  writes  a.s  good  a 
hand  as  myself,  and  perhaps  the  only  thing  in 
which  I  can  cxcell  him,  is  in  the  grammatical 
construction  of  sentences.  Well,  the  first  order 
he  made  was  to  notice  the  death  of  his  prede- 
cessor, and  it  was  entered  in  this  wav.  "At  a 
court  begun  in  hell  it  was  suggested  that  the 
county  court  clerk  had  died,  &c."  (laughter).  I 
saw  the  record  brought  into  court  four  years  af- 
terwards to  prove  that  the  gentleman  was  a  clerk, 
and  on  his  being  pointed  out  to  me,  I  turned  to 
him  and  said.  "In  the  name  of  God  why  did 
you  take  such  advantage  of  your  competitor,  as 
to  go  to  hell,  when  every  body  is  your  friend,  to 
hold  the  election '!"  (renewed  laughter.)  Since 
then  the  record  has  been  changed,  and  reads,  "at 
a  court  begun  and  held,  &c."  Tlie  requisition  of 
a  certificate  then  would  have  done  no  harm.  In 
relation  to  coroners  I  appeal  to  the  gentleman  from 
Hardin  if  the  facts  I  am  about  to  relate  are  not 
true  ?  During  one  of  the  terms  of  the  circuit 
court,  there  was  aterible  battle  fought  between 
two  bullies,  commencing  in  a  grocery  on  the 
west  side  of  the  street  and  extending  clear  across 
the  street,  resulting  in  one  of  them  oeing  caught 


and  thrown  down  so  as  to  cause  his  death.  A 
coroner's  jury  was  summoned,  and  the  verdict  of 
the  jui^y,  drawn  out  from  the  forms,  was  that 
one  man  had  killed  another,  with  six  thrusts  of 
a  small  sword  and  other  weapons,  and  a  variety 
of  places  in  the  body  were  designated  as  having 
thus  been  wounded.  Is  it  not  possible  then  that 
men  may  fill  offices  without  possessing  the  prop- 
er qualifications  ? 

.1  am  for  the  people  electing  their  governor, 
but  let  him  be  at  least  thirty  years  of  Rge.  I  am 
for  their  electing  a  representative,  but  let  him  be 
twenty  four  years  of  age.  I  am  for  their  electing 
a  senator,  but  let  him  be  at  least  thirty  years  of 
age,  and  I  am  for  electing  a  judge,  but  let  him  be 
at  least  thirty  years  of  age,  and  a  practising 
lawyer.  These  are  wholesome  restraints,  neces- 
sary for  the  safety  of  the  great  body  of  the  com- 
munitv. 

Mr.GHOLSON.  I  find  that  offices  are  made 
to  grow  in  importance  as  it  may  suit  the  con- 
venience of  gentlemen.  First  of  all  it  was  the 
judge,  then  the  clerk,  and  now  it  is  the  sheriff 
that  is  the  most  important  officer  under  the  cano- 

Sy  of  Heaven.  I  \\  onder  that  my  friend  from 
'elson,  does  not  desire  to  provide  that  a  certi- 
ficate of  qualification  shall  be  required  of  the 
sheriff'.  The  gentleman,  I  am  glad  to  hear,  now 
disclaims  that  the  people  can  be  bought  like 
sheep  at  the  shambles,  but  I  submit  to  the  gen- 
tleman if  he  did  not  distinctly,  openly,  unequiv- 
ically,  and  in  so  many  words,  declare  that  with 
the  revenue  means  in  liis  hands,  the  sheriff  would 
buy  votes,  which  revenue  would  amount  to  about 
a  dollar  and  a  half  a  head  ?  I  affirm  that  he  did 
do  it,  and  he  has  not  pretended  to  deny  it.  And 
it  was,  so  far  as  the  charge  applied  to  my  con- 
stitutency,  that  I  repelled  and  protested  against 
it.  And  he  has  also  failed,  and  forever  will  fail 
to  designate  a  sheriff'  who  has  acted  in  the  man- 
ner he  says  they  will  do.  And  the  stoiy  the 
gentleman  told  us  about  the  coroner  was  after  all 
merely  an  instance  where  an  honest  farmer  was 
led  into  error  by  copying  a  legal  fiction,  and 
which  form  never  had  common  sense  or  common 
honesty  in  it.  And  the  gentleman  and  others 
with  him,  when  the  question  comes  up  will  con- 
tend for  the  retention  of  all  these  senseless  legal 
forms  and  fictions.  Yes  sir,  when  the  motion  is 
made  to  reject  all  these  things  which  stand  like 
drift  wood  in  the  current  of  justice,  and  through 
whose  filtering  the  heavenly  attribute  is  only  to 
be  obtained,  if  at  all,  but  which  indeed  oftener 
turns  the  current  the  other  way,  and  causes  the 
withholding  of  all  justice,  you  will  find  him 
stoutly  contending  for  their  retention.  Just  look 
at  the  writ  of  ejectment  and  see  what  an  utter 
fiction  and  string  of  falsehoods  it  is  from  be- 
ginning to  end.  This  is  lawyers  sense,  and  it  is 
no  wonder  that  plain  honest  farmers  are  led 
astray  by  it. 

Mr.  HAMILTON.  I  have  been  listening  at- 
tentively to  the  protracted  discussion  of  this 
question,  but  gentlemen  have  failed  to  convince 
me  that  the  sheriff'  should  not  be  re-eligible. 
Some  liave  said  that  the  sheriff  would  take  the 
money  out  of  his  own  pocket  and  pay  it  over 
in  order  to  secure  a  quietus.  That  however,  is 
no  objection  to  me.  Others  have  contended  that 
he  would  oppre.ss  and  ruin  tlie  whole  conntrv-, 
but  this  I  think  is  a  mistaken  view.     So  far  as 


384 


I  am  acquainted  with  the  duties  of  the  sheriff, 
Ills  duties  are  prescribed  by  law.  and  a  penalty 
provided  for  eveiy  neglect  or  violation  of  them. 
Wliere  a  precept  is  delivered  to  him,  or  an  exe- 
•nition  comes  to  his  hands,  he  is  bound  to  return 
it  on  a  certain  day,  and  not  only  that,  but  to  en- 
<lorse  thereon  what  he  has  done  Avith  it.  And 
if  he  fails  to  endorse  an  execution,  he  is  liable 
not  only  for  the  amount  of  the  debt,  but  for 
ihirtjr  per  cent,  damages.  And  after  the  execu- 
tion is  returned  the  plaintiff  has  the  right  to 
go  and  see  what  has  been  done,  and  to  de- 
mand his  money  at  once — the  sheriff  being  li- 
able to  that  amount,  if  he  does  not  immediately 
account  for  it.  If  then,  great  evils  are  to  arise 
from  the  exercise  of  the  power  in  the  sheriff's 
liands,  which  gentlemen  seem  to  apprehend.  I 
Would  go  for  abolishing  the  office  at  once.  Ex-' 
perience  is  the  best  of  authorities,  and  I  can 
j)oint  to  instances  where  the  deputies  have  been 
jn  office  for  six,  eight,  or  more  years,  and  with 
no  complaint,  so  far  as  I  have  ever  heard, 
against  them.  In  Green,  the  deputy  has  served 
some  six  or  eight  years,  and  performed  his  duty 
well.  He  never  has  carried  out  this  desolation 
and  oppression  in  that  county  that  gentlemen 
have  here  pictured.  It  was  the  same  with  Bar- 
ren and  Hart  counties;  but  tliere  was  a  preju- 
<lice  among  the  democrats  in  Hart  in  favor  of  ro- 
tation in  office  for  the  sheriffalty,  and  in  that 
county  the  whigs  had  had  the  office  so  long  that 
the  incumbent,  although  a  clever  fellow,  was  run 
out,  and  a  democrat  substituted  in  his  place.  I 
was  called  upon  to  become  one  of  the  endorsers 
for  the  new  officer.  He  swore  in  a  couple  of  his 
sons  as  deputies,  and  about  twelve  njonths  af- 
terwards 1  heai'd  that  there  were  judgments  out 
against  him.  I  thought  it  best  to  go  and  see 
about  it,  and  had  hardly  got  into  town  when  a 
constable  handed  me  the  notices  of  his  failure  to 
return  executions.  I  went  a  litte  further,  when 
three  more  notices  Avere  served  on  me,  of  his  not 
paying  over  moneys' — and  when  I  got  to  the 
court  house  the  sheriff  gave  me  a  handful  of 
them,  for  his  misdemeanors  in  office.  The  sons 
had  destroyed  the  father,  and  thus  involved  his 
sureties,  borne  of  these  cases  I  have  been  ob- 
liged to  follow  up  to  the  court  of  appeals. 
This  is  one  of  the  results  of  the  application  of 
that  principle  for  which  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  is  so  strenuous  a  stickler—rotation  in 
office.  _  If  the  gentleman  and  others  would  ap- 
ply this  rule  to  their  speaking,  the  convention 
Would  get  along  nmch  faster  and  better.  And 
this  experience  proves  to  me,  that  if  a  man  in 
office  is  discharging  his  duties  Avell,  he  should 
be  re-eligible  again  to  it. 

But,  says  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  was 
there  not  a  Judas,  and  did  he  not  betray  his 
Lord  with  a  kiss?  Yes,  the  school  boys  in  ray 
county  know  that.  But  I  ask  the  gentleman  if 
this  did  not  occur  during  hisfirst  term,  and  if  he 
•was  re-electedV  (Lauglitcr.)  My  good  book  tells 
me  that  this  occurred  during  Judas'  first  term — 
and  that  he  was  not  re-elected,  though  he  sought 
to  be  with  tears  in  liis  eyes.  And  further,  says 
the  gentleman,  what  is  the  use  of  a  bond  from 
the  officer?  Cannot  his  experience  tell  him  that 
HO  long  as  the  officer  was  receiving  moneys,  it 
was  necessary  that  he  should  give  a  bond?  The 
first  endeavor  is  to  belcct  a  moral  man — if  you 


fail  in  that,  then  the  bond  secures  you.  I  had 
supposed  a  gentleman  of  his  experience  would 
not  nave  asked  such  a  question.  His  experience 
while  speaker  of  the  senate,  in  the  case  of  the 
state  treasurer,  by  which  the  people  lost  thou- 
sands of  dollars,  should  have  taught  him  better 
than  to  have  asked  such  a  question. 

Mr.  KELLY.  My  friend  from  Nelson  says 
that  by  the  record,  the  county  court  of  Washing- 
ton in  1835,  was  opened  in  nell.  Whether  that 
is  the  fact  or  not  I  do  not  know,  never  having 
been  there- — he  may  have  however.  But  I  do 
know  that  the  gentleman  who  was. the  incum- 
bent of  the  office,  discharged  his  duties  well, 
and  I  have  never  heard  a  complaint  against  him. 
I  am  sorry  to  sec  the  gentleman  take  occasion  so 
often  to  allude  to  the  county  of  Washington. 
He  denounced  a  distinguished  member  of  the 
bar  there  the  other  day — Dabney  Cosby- — 
while  speaking  on  the  subject  of  branching  the 
court  of  appeals.  He  was  born  and  raised  in 
Washington,  and  has  been  a  candidate  in  the 
district,  and  the  vote  of  the  county  has  always 
told  against  him,  and  I  think  that  to  be  the 
moving  cause  in  this  matter.  The  gentleman 
says  he  supposes  he  may  call  me  his  friend.  I 
tell  him  I  am  his  friend,  and  have  evft-  been, 
and  I  have  no  desire  to  engage  in  a  war  of  wit 
with  him.  He  is  an  overmatch  for  me  with  that 
weapon. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  As  I  shall  differ  with  some 
of  my  friends  with  whom  I  have  been  associated, 
in  regard  to  this  office  of  sheriff,  it  is  proper  that 
I  should  give  my  reason  therefor.  In  the  first 
place  however,  1  will  remark  that  I  have  not 
discovered  in  this  convention  any  desire  on  the 
part  of  any  one  to  introduce  what  the  gentle- 
man has  styled  the  levelling  doctrine.  I  sup- 
f)ose  that  every  gentleman  here  is  controlled  in 
lis  action  by  Avhat  he  considers  the  best  inter- 
ests of  his  constituents,  and  I  have  no  idea  that 
any  vote  they  may  give,  Avill  be  governed  by 
sinister  motives.  I  will  say  one  thing,  and  I 
appeal  to  the  judgment,  and  well  bought  expe- 
rience I  may  say,  of  every  gentleman  heie,  to 
vouch  for  its  correctness.  1  will  not  make  an 
invidious  distinction  as  to  counties,  for  I  believe 
the  people  are  alike  all  over  the  state,  but  if  you 
give  me  all  the  sheriffs  and  all  their  deputies, 
and  all  the  constables  on  my  side  of  the  ques- 
tion in  a  political  canvass,  I  think  I  stand  a 
very  good  chance  of  being  elected  in  any  county 
in  this  state. 

A  few  words  as  to  the  use  of  money  in  an  elec- 
tion. I  do  not  say  that  any  person  of  good  sound 
understanding  and  virtuoushabits  can  be  bought, 
but  I  can  tell  what  I  know  and  what  I  think  nas 
been  the  experience  of  every  man  who  has  been  a 
candidate  for   office.     It  is  that  money  used 

Eroperly  or  rather  improperly,  in  an  election 
as  great  power.  Why  do  the  whigs  and  demo- 
crats make  up  pony  purses  just  before  the  elec- 
tion if  nothing  is  to  be  gained  by  its  applicaton? 
Why  do  they  do  it  if  it  is  to  have  no  effect  and 
to  produce  no  result?  It  is  made  up  to  be  ex- 
pended in  certain  sections,  and  parts  of  districts, 
and  no  man  or  set  of  men  would  act  so  iiUy  and 
so  foolishly  as  to  make  up  these  purses  of  money 
just  before  an  election,  unless  they  were  aware 
that  something  was  to  be  accomplished  by  its 
expenditure. 


385 


Xow,  I  have  as  little  good  feeling  for  the  con- 
stables as  any  man  living,  but  as  for  the  sheriflFs, 
I  make  no  war  on  that  class  of  respectable  citi- 
zens. But  as  for  these  men  Avho  go  about  into 
every  poor  neighborhood,  and  poor  man's  house, 
in  the  country,  day  in  and  day  out,  just  before 
an  election,  tosav  that,  "with their  executions  and 
fee  bills  in  their  Lands,  they  have  no  controlling 
influence  in  an  election,  is  to  say  what  no  intel- 
ligent man  will  believe.  I  recollect  being  called 
into  a  neighboring  county  once,  to  makeaspeech 
to  a  large  cougregation  of  people.  On  such  oc- 
casions I  am  very  apt  to  look  at  the  topography 
of  the  country,  and  the  character  of  the  people 
to  whom  I  am  to  speak,  and  to  enquire  and  find 
out  who  are  the  drill  sergeants  of  parties, — and 
these  last  I  have  always  found  in  tlie  shape  and 
persons  of  constables — the  men  who  alwayshave 
their  saddle  bags  loaded  down  with  munitions  of 
war  for  the  occasion,  in  the  shape  of  fee  bills 
and  executions.  Well,  on  this  occasion  I  saw 
some  of  these  gentlemen,  with  their  saddle  bags, 
on  the  ground.  There  was  no  distinguished  man 
to  meet  me,  and  they  could  get  no  one  to  do  it 
but  a  constable.  Thinks  I,  old  fellow,  smart  as 
you  are,  I  shall  get  you;  for  I  am  some  in  a  scrape 
of  this  sort.  "Well,  I  saw  the  moving  of  the  wa- 
ters, and  it  was  my  business,  while  they  were 
concocting  their  schemes,  to  take  care  of  mvself. 
"Now,"  said  I, "fellow  citizens,  Ihavecomehere 
'  to  talk  politics  to  you,  but  I  see  that  this  ground 
'  is  infested  with  a  set  of  cattle  that  are  called 
'  constables.  Now,  I  will  stake  my  vote  upon 
'  the  fact,  that  what  I  am  going  to  tell  you  is 
'  true — if  it  is  not,  I  will  agree  to  vot«  for  your 
'man,  and  if  it  is,  you  shall  agree  to  vote'  for 
'  mine.  Here  is  an  election  to  come  off  in  about 
'  two  or  three  weeks.  It  is  an  important  one, — 
'the  whigs  have  got  their  secret  circular  out,  in 
'  which  they  t«ll  you  that  the  halt,  the  lame,  and 
'  the  blind,  must  all  be  brought  up  to  the  polls, 
'  and  the  democrats  have  also  got  out  their  circu- 
'  lar,  in  which  they  urge  the  same  thing  in  re- 
'  gard  to  the  same  kind  of  men  on  their  side. 
'  Now,"  said  I,  "these  gentry,  these  constables, 
'  will  have  you  all  out  to-day,  and  I  will  tell  you 
'what  they  will  say.  They 'will  tap  you  on'the 
'  shoulder  and  take  you  one  side,  and  sav,  'here 
'  isa  little  execution  against  you  of  $15  'or  §20; 
'  if  you  will  really  agree  to  par  me  it,  say  two 
'  weeks  after  the  election,  I  will  wait  for' you; 
'and  this  is  a  very  important  election  going  on 
'  now,  in  which  we  all  feel  interested,  as  it  is  a 
'  matter  of  great  consequence  to  the  people.' — 

*  Now,  fellow  citizens,  I  want  you  to  rise  up  here 

•  and  say  how  many  of  you  have  the  constables 
'  taken  out  in  this  way.  First  one  and  then  an- 
other, and  in  all  some  seven  or  eight,  got  up  im- 
mediately and  avowed  that  the  thing  had  oc- 
curred to  them.  Tell  me  not  then  that  a  sheriflF 
or  a  constable  can  exert  no  influence  with  his  of- 
fice. Let  one  of  these  oflficers  approach  a  poor 
man,  with  his  little  family  of  four  or  five  white 
headed  children,  all  depending  upon  him  for 
support,  with  an  execution  in  his  hands,  to  turn 
him  out  of  house  and  home  and  sacrifice  his  all, 
and  it  will  stagger  almost  any  man,  however  in- 
dependent lie  may  be.  I  know  many  sheriffs 
who  are  worthy  and  respectable  and  talented 
men,  but  if  I  had  my  way,  when  a  man  had 
once  consented  to  be  sheriff  or  constable,  he  nev- 

49 


er  should,  as  lone  as  time  lasts,  have  a  seat  in 
any  deliberative  body. 

5ly  friend  from  Ballard,  (Mr.  Gholson,)  whom 
I  believe  to  be  pursuing  his  notions  with  all  can- 
dor and  sincerity,  says  that  consistency  is  a  jew- 
el. I  am  afraid  then  that  there  are  very  few 
jewels  here.  And  in  my  course  on  this  ques- 
tion I  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  crossing 
my  tracks,  but  merely  as  yielding  a  little.  But 
that  money  is  not  used  for  electioneering  purpo- 
ses, and  sheriffs  and  constables  cannot  per\'ert 
their  stations  to  the  same  end,  is  not  my  experi- 
ence. I  have  run  some  heavy  political  races  in 
my  county,  and  there  never  was  an  occasion 
when  I  could  get  an  equal  division  of  these  ofli- 
cers — say  half  of  them  in  my  favor — that  I  could 
not  lick  my  competitor  all  hollow.  But  when, 
as  is  frequently  the  case,  they  all  go  against  me, 
if  I  get  elected  at  all,  it  is  rarely  by  more  than 
abaker's  dozen.  As  to  the  use  of  money,  I  think 
I  ought  to  know  something  about  it.  In  the 
most  celebrated  race  I  ever  ran,  my  opponent 
was  supplied  with  dollar  bills  by  the  hatfull, 
and  they  were  used  to  induce  men  not  to  vote  for 
Nuttall.  I  did  not  spend  much  money  to  get 
here,  because  I  had  it  not,  but  if  I  had,  &od  Al- 
mighty knows  it  would  have  went  like  water. 
"With  the  influences  that  were  exerted  against 
me,  I  would  not  have  been  defeated  for  as  much 
money  as  this  house  could  hold.  I  will  not  say 
that  other  men  did  not  spend  their  thousands 
for  me,  but  there  were  thousands  spent  against 
me.  "Well,  my  constituents  are  just  as  good  as 
those  of  any  other  gentleman  here;  quite  as  in- 
telligent, and  they  pay  about  $12,000  a  year  of 
revenue  to  the  state  government. 

I  am  for  a  compromise  of  this  matter;  I  start- 
ed in  this  convention  with  an  intention  to  com- 
promise on  non-essentials.  I  yielded  on  the 
matter  of  requiring  qualifications  from  clerks, 
and  if  gentlemen  will  all  act  in  the  same  spirit, 
we  shall  give  to  the  people  a  constitution  which 
will  be  adopted  bv  a  large  majority. 

Mr.  KELLY  otfered  the  following  amendment 
to  the  amendment,  to  be  added  at  the  end  there- 
of: "Who  is  not  a  defaulter,  but  willing  to  pay 
over,  when  legally  required  to  do  so,  money 
collected  upon  any  legal  process  to  him  direct- 
ed." 

Mr.  WOODSON  enquired  what  had  become  of 
his  amendment,  offered  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  vesterday? 

The  PRESIDENT  replied  that  it  was  cut  off 
by  the  refusal  of  leave  to  the  committee  to  sit 
again. 

3Ir.  KELLY'S  amendment  was  then  adopted. 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  strike  out  six  and  insert 
three  months,  as  the  time  before  the  election 
when  the  officer  should  be  required  to  have  a 
quietus. 

Mr.  CLARKE  accepted  the  amendment. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  -urged  that  the  six  months  re- 
quisition ought  to  be  retained. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  My  own  preferences  had  been 
for  six  months.  I  will  leave  it  to  the  house  to 
decide,  however. 

The  motion  of  Mr.  BOYD  was  rejected. 

Mr.  HARDIN  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  pending  amendment. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Having  offered  the  amend- 
ment, it  is  proper  that  I  should  submit  a  few  re- 


386^^ 


marks  on  the  subject.    I  offered  it  in  good  faith, 
and  I  am  sure  -with  no  purpose  to  detain  this 
convention.     We  have  a  question  that  involves 
a  principle  that  I  regard  as  of  some  importance, 
and  which  has  been  pending  in  this  house  for  the 
last  two  or  three  weeks.     It  is  as  to  the  re-eligi- 
bility of  the  judges.   I  myself  intend  to  vote  upon 
that  question  that  the  judges  may  be  re-elected 
by  the  people  just  as  often  as  they  come  before 
them.     I   intend  to  impose  no   restraints  upon 
the  people  in   regard  to  that  particular  subject. 
I  want  him  to  be  re-eligble  upon  the  great  prin- 
ciple that  the  people  themselves  are  competent 
to  determine  whether  they  ought  to  be  re-elected 
or  not.    You  propose  to  allow  the  circuit  court 
and  court  of  appeals'  clerk  to  be  re-elected,  but 
when  you  come  to  the  office  of  sheriff,  it  is  then 
said  he  shall  not  be  re-eligible,  and  why?    Be- 
cause he  is  the  collector  of  public  moneys,  and 
will  secure  his  re-election  by  their  use,  and  the 
use  of  the  means  he  has  to  collect  from  individ- 
ual litigants,  against  the  better  judgment  of  the 
people.     If  that  were  satisfactory  to  my  mind  I 
should  at  once  go   against  the  re-eligibility  of 
the  sheriff.    But  I  am  in  favor  of  allowing  every 
officer  in  the  state  to  be  re-eligible,  just  so  long 
as  the  people  shall  think  proper  to  place  them 
in  power.     It  is  enough  when  you  have  said  that 
they  shall  have  a  quietus  for  six  months.     And 
when  you  have  said  that,  in  the  name  of  com- 
mon sense  and  justice,  let  them  be  re-elected  if 
the  people  think  proper  to  do  it.    And  when 
you  take  into  consideration  the  amendment  of 
my  friend  from  Washington,  requiring  that  they 
shall  have  paid  up  all  the  moneys   collected 
from  private  litigants,  you  throw  him  then  upon 
his  own  resources.     He  has   no  means  to  elec- 
tioneer with  then,  save  las  own.     Why  not  say 
that  a  judge  shall  not  be  re-eligible  after  he  has 
served  four  or  five  years?    Is  there  not  just  as 
much  propriety  in  it?    I  refer  gentlemen  to  the 
able  speeches  made  by  my  friend,  the  elder  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  and  others  upon  this  floor, 
who  are  opposed  to  the   re-eligibility  of  the 
judges.    Tney  tell  you  that  he  has  more  power 
than  any  other  officer  in  the  country — that  the 
lives,  lioerty,  property  and  reputation  of  the 
citizens  are  in  their  hands,  and  that  he  stalks 
through  this   land  and  by  his  fiat,  strengthened 
by  the  power  thus  conferred  in  his  hands,  oblige 
tnose  to  support  him  who  otherwise  would  not. 
Yet  I  have  understood  it  to  be  the  sense  of  this 
convention,  expressed,  as  I  am  informed  by  the 
clerk,  by  its  vote,  that  these  judges  shall  be  re- 
eligible.     Talk  to  me  about  rotation   in  office. 
I  ask  my  friend  from  Nelson  what  is  his  expe- 
rience on  the  subject.    Go  to  Washington   and 
there  you  will  see  the  southern  and  northern 
delegations  in  congress.     Compare  the  delega- 
tions from   Maine,  New  Hampshire,    or   New 
York,  with  those  from  Virginia,  South  Carolina, 
and  tlie  other  southern  states,  and  you  will  Ipor- 
ceive  the  invariable  superiority  of"^the  southern 
delegation  in  every  congress.    Why  is  this  eo? 
Because  the  doctrine  of  rotation  in  office  obtains 
in  those  northern  states.     There  every  county 
composing  a  congressional  district  has  its  turn 
as  it  is  called,  and  when  a  candidate  is  taken 
from  one  county  at  one  congressional  election, 
his  turn  does  not  come  again  until  every  other 
county  in  the  district  ha.<«  presented   it*    man. 


Hence  you  rarely  see  in  congress  from  these 
states  more  than  one  or  two  men  who  have  had 
any  congressional  experience.  This  rule  obtains 
in  most  of  the  districts  in  New  York,  Maine  and 
various  other  northern  states,  and  it  is  the  rule 
of  rotation  in  office.  I  have  ever  been  in  favor 
of  rotation  in  office  where  it  is  conferred  by  ap- 
pointment, but  where  the  people  themselves' con- 
fer it,  being  the  judges  of  the  qualifications  and 
the  manner  in  which  the  officer  has  discharged 
his  duties,  I  say,  let  the  people,  if  he  deserves 
it,  have  the  power  to  re-elect  him.  Provided, 
however,  you  do  not  permit  such  election,  if 
such  things  can  occur  in  Nelson,  to  be  secured 
by  bribing  the  voters  with  the  public  moneys. 

I  repeat  I  have  offered  this  amendment  in 
good  faith,  and  I  want  to  test  the  question.  I 
do  not  perceive  myself  the  force  of  this  argu- 
ment, why  a  sheriff  should  not  be  re-eligible 
after  he  has  served  two  or  four  years,  and  while 
at  the  same  time,  a  judge  or  a  clerk  of  the  courts 
shall  be  re-eligible.  I  do  not  intend  to  be 
troublesome  if  I  can  avoid  it,  but  there  are  cer- 
tain great  principles  I  intend  to  carry  out  if  I 
have  the  opportunity  of  so  doing,  and  if  I  fail 
in  regard  to  this  great  principle  of  re-eligibility, 
so  far  as  the  office  of  sheriff  is  concerned,  I  then 
desire  to  test  the  sense  of  tlie  house  upon  the 
subject  of  the  re-eligibility  of  the  clerks,  and 
judges  of  the  courts.  I  intend  for  myself  to  be 
consistent  on  this  subject.  I  will  not  indulge 
in  such  remarks  as  have  characterized  the  speech- 
es of  some  gentlemen  here,  for  it  would  afford 
me  no  pleasure  to  bring  discredit  on  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  if  I  could  by  any  thing  I 
might  say  here.  If  I  could  tell  ten  thousand 
anecdotes  that  would  place  him  in  an  unfavora- 
ble position,  I  would  not  tell  one.  When  I 
came  to  the  legislature  the  first  time,  it  was  with 
a  determined  purpose,  never  to  be  personal  in 
any  remarks,  if  I  could  avoid  it,  and  to  always 
treat  the  opinions  of  gentlemen  with  respect, 
believing  them  to  be  expressed  in  candor  and 
sincerity.  And  until  this  convention  has  closed 
its  labors,  I  shall  be  found,  though  determined 
to  advance  such  principles  as  I  think  to  be  right 
and  proper,  at  ail  times  pursuing  the  course  I 
have  indicated.  It  lias  been  said  by  one  gentle- 
man, that  I  was  wonderfully  taken  with  the  peo- 
ple, and  that  I  had  a  great  affection,  particularly 
for  the  illiterate  over  the  learned.  Well,  I  re- 
gard it  as  a  compliment,  even  if  it  be  true.  I 
do  not  object  to  it,  and  I  am  willing  to  be  so 
considered.  It  is  an  old  saying  in  regard  to 
those  who  are  rich,  that  they  are  able  to  take 
care  of  themselves,  but  that  those  who  are  poor 
require  sometimes  the  assistance  of  others. 
Those  who  are  learned  in  this  community,  will 
bo  able  to  take  care  of  themselves,  but  the  mass- 
es, who  may  be  to  some  extent,  unenlightened, 
compared  with  the  gentleman,  do  require  some 
assistance  and  some  protection .  I  have  an  abi- 
dingr  faith  and  confidence  in  the  virtue  and  in- 
telligence of  the  people.  I  do  believe  that  the 
people  are  capable  of  self-government,  and  to 
the  election  of  their  officers.  I  do  believe  that 
they  are  able  to  discriminate  between  the  com- 
petency and  incompetency  of  men,  in  making 
this  selection.  I  do  believe  that  all  political 
power  is  inherent  in  the  people,  and  for  one, 
when  I  was  a  candidate  before  them  for  the 


m 


lienor  to  represenrtfi«n'  fn"  p«nou  this  floor,  I 
told  them  that  too  much  power  had  been  wrest- 
ed from  them  bv  the  old  constitution,  and  that 
if  I  came  here  1  would   be   disposed  to  restore 
that  Ions:  lost  power  to  the  people,  and  let  them 
exercise  it  according  to  their  will  and  pleasure. 
How  many  sheriffs  are  tliere  in   this    state, 
who  have  held  their  offices  for  the  last  ten  or 
fifteen  years?    And  I  call  on  the  gentleman  op- 
posed to  my  proposition    and  who  were  oppos- 
ed to  the  calling  of  this   convention,  believing 
that  the  old  constitution  was  good  enough,  to 
say  if  it  is  an  evidence  of  their  consistency, 
when  they  declare  there  is  danger  in  allowing 
the  officer  to  hold  more  than  four  years?    Why 
the  very  old  constitution  favored  by  those  gen- 
tlemen, the  platform  upon  which  they  stand,  al- 
lowed the  office  to  be  nawked  about  the  streets, 
and  sold  like  a  horse  in  the  public   market,  so 
that  he  who  had  the  most  money  might  get  the 
office,  and  perpetuate  it  in  his  hands,  just  so 
long  as  by  a  system  of  shaving,  he  could  raise 
money  to  buy  it.     That  is  the  system  under  the 
old  constitution,  and  then  we  are  told  that  un- 
der it,  the  sheriff  was  not  a  dangerous  man,  but 
now  when  he  is  to  be  elected  by  the  people,  and 
I  propose  that  he  shall  obtain  a  quietus  of  all  de- 
mands six  months  before  the  election,  it  is  urged 
here  that  a  most  tremendous  influence  is  concen- 
trated   in  his  hands,  by  which  he    will  buy 
up  all  the   votes   of  the   county,   in  which  he 
is  a  candidate.      If  I   were  satisfied  that  the 
people  of  this  state  were  so  corrupt,  as  that  a 
sheriff,  by  the  bare  exercise   of  the  ligitimate 
functions  of  his  office,  could  buy  up  the  voters 
in  the  different  counties  of  the  state,  I  should  be 
opposed  to  his  being  elected  by  the  people.     If 
I  believed  that  such  a  state  of  moral  depravity 
and  corruption  pervaded  a  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple, I  should  be  opposed  to  the  people  electing 
their  judges.     And   I  would   again  repeat,  that 
there  is  more  danger  to  be  apprehendea  from  al- 
lowing the  judges  to  be  re-eligible  to  office,  than 
the  sheriff.     The  sheriff  may  have   some   con- 
trol over  the  purse  of  the  citizen,  and  it  may  be 
in  his  power  to  oppress  him,   but  the  law  lays 
down  the  rules  which  are  to  govern  him,  and  if 
he  violates  those  rules,  he  becomes  responsible. 
But  has  he  the  life,  liberty  and   reputation  of 
the  citizen  in  his  hands?  I>ot  at  all;  out  merely 
his  purse  to  some  extent,  and  that  no  farther 
than  the  law  allows  him.     Then  if  we  shall  de- 
termine here  that  the  judge  shall  be  re-eligible, 
I  insist  upon  it,  that  the  sheriff  should  be,  with 
the  (Qualification  required  in   my  amendment. 
And  if  we  determine  that  the  sheriff  shall  not 
be  re-eligible,  then  I  shall  be  glad  to  hear  a  rea- 
son why  the  judge  should  be. 

Mr.  'rRlPLETT.  I  have  paid  some  attention 
to  the  amendment  that  was  last  adopted,  and  it 
appears  to  me  there  is  some  danger  if  we  con- 
tinue to  act  upon  this  subject,  that  we  shall  make 
confusion  worse  confounded. 

Take  the  amendment  as  it  now  is,  and  it  pro- 
vides that  no  person  shall  be  elected  sheriff  un- 
less he  has  a  quietus  from  the  auditor,  and  this 
amendment  goes  one  step  further,  and  says  that 
he  shall  have  a  quietus  from  all  private  indi- 
viduals, provided  a  legal  demand  shall  have 
been  made  upon  him. 
Jfow  I  will  call  the  attention  of  the  conven- 


tion to  this  single  point,  when  and  how  is  the 
fact  to  be  determined  that  he  has  obtained  a 
quietus  from  all  individuals?  If  you  try  him 
before  the  court  of  appeals  or  an  inferior  court, 
when  wUl  the  case  be  determined  and  the  facts 
ascertained?  Perhaps  not  for  six  months  after 
the  election.  He  has  in  the  mean  time  been 
elected  sheriff,  but  he  cannot  act  as  such,  if  there 
is  any  money  in  his  hands  belonging  to  individu- 
als, which  he  has  not  paid  over.  Why,  it  will 
take  months  before  the  fact  can  be  ascertained. 
Again,  what  is  to  be  the  consequence  provided 
it  can  be  ascertained  some  six  months  afterwards 
that  he  has  retained  money  belonging  to  indi- 
viduals, and  has  not  complied  with  the  requi- 
sitions of  the  law,  in  pavin"  it  over  when  le- 
gally demanded.  The  election  itself  will  ne- 
cessarily be  declared  void  underthe  constitution, 
according  to  the  provision  you  now  propose  to 
insert,  "  that  no  man  shall  be  elected  to  the  office 
of  sheriff  who  has  not  obtained  a  quietus." 
What  is  to  be  the  effect  of  a  judicial  declaration 
that  the  tests  which  you  have  required  at  the 
hands  of  the  sheriff,  shall  exist  before  the  elec- 
tion, did  not  in  fact  exist.  Are  all  of  the  acts 
done  by  him  in  the  mean  time  to  be  void? 
You  have  made  it  a  constitutional  requisition 
that  he  shall  not  be  elected  sheriff  without  hav- 
ing complied  with  this  provision,  therefore  the 
ordinaiy  decision  of  law,  that  where  an  officer 
is  in  office,  de  facto,  his  acts  are  not  void  but 
voidable,  will  not  apply.  Why?  Because  the 
courts  cannot  change  your  constitution;  they 
can  construe  the  law  sometimes  so  that  great 
and  material  inconvenience  shall  not  happen  to 
the  people — ^but  you  have  engrafted  in  your  con- 
stitution a  provision  that  no  manshall  be  sheriff 
until  he  has  obtained  a  quietus,  and  here  is  a  le- 

fal  decision  by  two  courts  of  record,  that  he 
as  not  done  so.  Take  this  thing  into  consid- 
eration then  and  see  whether  or  not  you  can 
adopt  the  amendment  as  it  now  stands. 

I  occupy  this  position ;  I  am  opposed  to  the 
re-eligibilitv  of  the  judges,  and  shall  give  my 
views  in  relation  to  that  matter  when  the  proper 
time  arrives.  I  am  also  opposed  to  the  re-elec- 
tion of  the  sheriff,  and  the  reason  is  so  plain 
"that  he  who  runs  may  read"  it.  Gentlemea 
may  talk  about  a  "free  fight;"  they  mistake  the; 
expression,  it  is  not  a  "  free  fight"  but  a  fair 
fignt,  that  is  required,  and  what  man  can  have 
a  fair  fight  with  the  sheriff  for  election  to  that 
office?  He  knows  every  man  in  the  county;  he 
knows  the  circumstances  of  every  man;  he  has 
executions  in  his  hands;  he  has  the  money  of 
other  individuals  in  his  hands;  he  has  the  means 
and  appliances  which  put  it  in  his  power — if 
you  maKe  him  re-eligible — to  secure  his  re-elec- 
tion. 

X^ow,  I  want  a  reasonable  time  to  elapse,  at 
least,  after  his  first  term  in  office,  before  you  per- 
mit him  to  become  a  candidate  for  the  same  of- 
fice. That  is  the  object  I  have  in  view.  I  do 
not  wish  that  he  should  come  forward  with  all 
the  advantages  which  the  possession  of  that  of- 
fice gives  him,  to  contend  against  men  who  have 
no  such  advantages.  The  candidates  for  office 
should  occupy  equal  ground,  and  have  a  fair 
fight.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  I  am  opposed  to 
the  re-eligibility  of  sheriffs.  I  think  that  upon 
further  reflection,  gentlemen  must  be  convinced 


388 


that  sucli  a  provision  as  this  will  not  work  well, 
and  ouglit  not  to  be  embodied  in  the  constitu- 
tion. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  understand  that 
the  object  of  the  gentleman,  in  altering  this 
clause,  applies  to  the  paying  over  of  money  on 
execution.  If  the  sheriit"  be  a  defaulter  in  fail- 
ing to  pay  over  money,  he  is  to  be  made  ineligi- 
ble. My  friend  from  Daviess  objects,  because 
the  fact  cannot  be  ascertained  until  long  after 
the  election  has  taken  place,  and  can  only  be  as- 
certained then  by  judgment  beiu^  rendered 
against  him.  But  if  there  be  no  judgment  ren- 
dered against  him,  then  there  is  no  disqualifica- 
tion; that  is  the  criterion  of  disqualification. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.     The  gentleman  does   not 

Jrecisely  state  the  ground  of  my  objection, 
udgment  entered  upon  the  record  is  evidence 
when  entered,  and  not  until  then.  The  sheriff 
is  a  defaulter,  but  he  has  in  his  hands  fifty  or  a 
hundred  executions,  and  he  is  a  candidate  for  re- 
election. The  money  has  not  been  legally  de- 
manded of  him;  but  it  is  demanded  between  the 
time  of  becoming  a  candidate  and  the  time  of 
the  election;  or  the  motion  may  not  have  been 
made  against  him  until  after  the  election,  and  it 
is  then  ascertained  that  he  was,  in  fact,  a  default- 
er at  the  time  of  the  election.  This  is  the  case 
that  I  put,  and  there  cannot  be  a  diversity  of 
opinion  in  regard  to  it,  that  the  sheriff  may  oe  a 
defaulter,  in  fact,  at  the  time  of  the  election, 
though  there  be  no  proof  of  that  fact  upon  re- 
cord. The  sheriff  becomes  a  candidate,  naving 
in  his  hands  money  which  he  has  collected  upon 
executions.  The  return  day  is  past,  but  no  legal 
demand  has  been  made.  After  the  election  he 
is  sued  for  the  money;  it  is  then  entered  upon 
the  record — then  it  is  that  the  very  thing  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson  speaks  of  has  happened. 
But  the  record  of  the  fact  is  not  furnished  until 
after  he  has  been  elected,  and  it  then  appears  in 
evidence,  that  at  the  time  of  tlie  election  he  was 
not  in  a  situation  to  be  elected,  and  therefore  he 
is  no  sheriff  at  all. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  understand  the  gentleman 
from  Daviess  to  be  in  favor  of  the  report  of  tlie 
committee.  If  all  these  evils  are  to  result  from 
the  use  of  the  public  money  by  a  candidate,  why 
allow  him  to  be  eligible  for  two  terms?  If  in 
the  case  of  a  sheriff  who  has  been  in  office  for 
two  terms,  or  four  years,  and  has  in  his  hands 
public  moneys,  it  is  dangerous  to  allow  liim  to 
go  out  among  the  people  as  a  candidate  for  re- 
election, lest  he  attempt  to  buy  up  votes,  does 
not  the  same  danger  exist  after  having  served 
two  years? 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  did  not  say  any  thing 
about  buying  votes. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  That  is  the  argument  that  has 
been  used  by  gentlemen  against  my  amendment. 
Every  solitary  argument  that  I  have  heard 
against  it,  is  based  upon  the  idea  that  the  sher- 
iff will  have  the  means  in  his  hands  of  securing 
his  re-election.  I  want  to  know,  and  I  ask  the 
chairman  of  the  committee  by  whom  this  report 
was  made,  how  it  is,  that  a  sheriff  having  serv- 
ed two  years,  cannot  use  the  same  means,  the 
same  influence,  to  secure  his  re-election,  as  he 
can  after  having  served  four  yeai-s?  If  you  want 
to  get  rid  of  an  evil  you  must  go  to  its  root;  you 
must  say  he  shall  not  hold  the  ofHce  for  a  second 


term,  until  he  has  been  out  of  office  for  a  certain 
number  of  years.  I  Avould  like  very  much  to 
know  by  what  course  of  reasoning  the  honorable 
chairman  of  the  committee,  and  the  members  of 
the  committee  who  ordered  the  report  to  be 
made,  were  influenced,  v,-hen  they  provided 
that  a  sheriff  shall  be  elected  for  a  second 
term,  if  there  is  such  a  manifest  danger  of  his 
exercising  an  \indue  influence  by  means  of  the 
moneys  he  may  have  in  his  possession? 

While  up,  I  will  refer  for  a  moment  to  the  re- 
marks that  were  made  this  morning  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  vote  that  was  taken  in  favor  of  the 
certificate  of  a  candidate  for  a  clerkship.  I 
consider  that  question,  sir,  as  settled.  I  did  all 
in  my  power  to  allow  the  privilege  to  them  who 
desired  to  do  so,  to  go  forth  to  the  country  and 
offer  their  services  without  this  mock  evidence  of 
qualification — as  I  regard  this  certificate  to  be — 
but  I  was  defeated.  It  has  been  alluded  to  in 
some  remarks  made  in  reference  to  a  motion 
which  I  submitted  since.  That  question  is  now 
renewed,  for  it  involves  the  same  great  principle 
that  is  involved  in  the  question  before  tne  house 
— at  least  to  some  extent — that  is,  the  capacity 
of  the  people  to  judge  for  themselves,  regarding 
the  qualification  of  candidates  for  ofiice.  And 
here  you  say  the  .sheriff  shall  be  elected  for  a 
seconS  term,  but  that  he  shall  not  be  elected 
after  the  second  term — however  well  qualified  he 
may  be.  Why  should  you  make  him  eligible 
for  a  second  term  and  then  stop  there? 

Mr.  TURNER.  1  am  very  reluctant  to  say 
any  thing  upon  this  subject,  as  the  debate  has 
been  prolonged  to  such  an  extent,  but  called  on 
as  I  am,  and  occupying  the  position  that  I  do,  I 
feel  it  ray  duty  to  make  a  few  remarks. 

This  matter  of  self-government  has  been 
brought  up  here  so  often,  that  I  think  it  is  ne- 
cessary to  examine  it  a  little,  and  see  upon  what 
it  is  based.  I  suppose  there  is  no  gentleman  in 
this  convention  who  denies  that  the  people  are 
capable  of  self-government.  But  although  the 
people   have  a  right  to   govern    themselves,  the 

fovernment  must  be  carried  out  upon  certain 
xed  principles.  Do  gentlemen  contend  that 
the  people  desire  to  £:overn  without  fixed  princi- 
ples; that  every  one  is  to  do  as  he  pleases?  That 
there  are  no  limits  or  boundaries  to  power?  That 
would  be  no  government  at  all.  This  matter  of 
liberty  and  equality  was  proclaimed  in  another 
hemisphere — if  I  may  be  permitted  to  allude  to 
it — and  even  Napoleon  himself,  when  at  the 
head  of  his  array  in  Italy,  when  seeking  the 
subjugation  of  other  nations  by  force  of  arms, 
in  every  letter  that  he  wrote  to  his  wife,  invari- 
ably commenced  with  the  words  "liberty  and 
equality."  When  he  was  endeavoring  to  erect 
one  of  the  worst  despotisms  that  ever  exi.sted 
under  the  sun,  he  had  constantly  on  his  lips  the 
words  "liberty  and  equality."  What  are  liberty 
and  equality,  in  their  true  meaning?  Why,  that 
a  man  may  be  secure  in  his  pereon  and  propertjyr. 
This  principle  ought  to  be  better  understood  in 
this  country  than  in  any  other  part  of  the  world. 
I  do  not  talk  a  great  deal  about  the  rights  of 
the  people;  because — and  I  do  not  intend  this 
as  any  disrespect  to  gentlemen  who  do — I  liave 
never  found  in  my  experience,  that  those  who 
were  eternally  talking  about  the  rights  of  the 
people,  felt  any  greater  attachment  to  the  people 


389 


than  those  who  said  but  little  about  them.  1 
have  never  found,  when  dan^^r  and  ditficulty 
arose,  that  thev  were  more  ready  to  expose  them- 
selves in  defence  of  the  people's  rights  than 
those  who  said  but  little  about  them. 

The  gentleman  from  Simpson  intimates  that  I 
am  in  favor  of  the  old  constitution  and  not  for 
making  a  new  one.  I  will  not  refer  to  my  ac- 
tion at  home.  If  I  did,  it  would  be  seen  that  I 
was  among  the  very  first  in  the  convention  move- 
ment. I  believe  we  can  make  many  useful 
amendments  to  the  constitution.  But  at  the 
same  time,  I  wish  to  pursue  a  conservative 
course.  It  is  our  duty  to  do  this,  and  not  run 
beyond  the  power  that  was  given  to  us  by  the 
people;  and  not  pull  down  and  destroy  every 
sound  principle  of  the  government  that  has  been 
provided  for  us  by  the  wisdom  of  our  fathers.  I 
wish  to  pursue  a  cautious  and  prudent  course. 

ilr.  CLARKE.  I  certainly  did  not  wish  to 
make  a  false  impression  in  reference  to  the  gen- 
tleman's position.  Really  I  am  not  advised 
whether  he  was  actually  opposed  to  the  conven- 
tion or  not;  and  if  my  manner  indicated  that  I 
entertained  such  an  opinion  as  that,  it  was  un- 
intentional. I  remarked  that  there  were  those 
who  were  opposed  originally  to  the  convention, 
and  I  doubt  very  much  whether  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  advocated  the  convention  as  far 
back  as  the  year  1838,  though  since  that  time 
he  may  have  discovered  some  new  reason  for 
doing  so. 

ilr.  TURNER.  I  was  not  a  convention  man 
in  1338,  but  I  voted  for  a  conventii)n  before  I 
was  aware  that  so  many  as  ten  men  in  my 
county  were  in  favor  of  it.  I  voted  for  it  in 
1847,  and  again  in  1848,  at  the  very  opening  of 
the  polls.  If  the  gentleman  from  Simpson  was 
for  tne  convention  in  1838,  he  ran  greatly  ahead 
of  public  sentiment  and  public  feeling.  There 
were  developments  between  1638  and  1847  that 
convinced  me  the  government  ought  to  be 
changed  in  some  particulars,  and  one  great  thing 
that  led  me  to  such  conclusion  was  the  annufil 
elections.  The  people  became  careless  as  to  the 
selections  thev  made,  in  consequence  of  the  term 
of  service  being  thus  limited.  The  mode  of 
holding  the  elections,  also  was  objectionable. 
I  wanted  to  have  the  elections  held  in  precincts, 
and  I  wanted  the  principal  powers  of  govern- 
ment in  regard  to  appointments  at  least,  placed 
in  the  hands  of  the  people,  and  not  entrased  to 
individuals,  to  make  appointments  through  fa- 
voritism, to  the  exclusion  of  merit. 

The  gentleman  has  asked  why  it  is  that  we 
permit  the  sheriff  to  be  elected  for  a  second  terra 
and  not  to  be  re-eligible  thereafter.  Mv  convic- 
tions were  against  the  re-eligibility  of  tliis  officer 
even  for  a  second  term,  though  l'  voted  for  the 
re-eligibility  of  some  other  officers.  I  voted  in 
committee  against  his  re-eligibility,  but  there 
was  a  majority  for  giving  him  a  second  term, 
while  some  were  for  leaving  his  re-eligibility 
entirely  unrestricted,  and  this  plan  was  a  com- 
promise made  between  the  extremes.  Those 
who  lived  under  the  old  constitution  from  '92  to 
'98  have  informed  me  that  a  sheriff  could  never  j 
be  removed  from  office  so  long  as  he  was  permit- 
ted to  be  re-eligible.  There  may,  however,  be  \ 
good  reasons  why  the  sheriff  should  be  re-eligi-  i 
ble  for  a  second   terra,  and  not  afterwards.     If  ^ 


you  allow  him  to  hold  his  office  only  until  the 
expiration  of  a  second  term,  he  4oes  not,  within 
that  time,  acquire  that  de^ee  of  influence  that 
he  would  have  after  holding  the  office  for  six, 
eight,  or  ten  years.  The  influence  of  a  sheriff 
goes  on  accumulating  like  a  rolling  ball  of  snow 
and  becomes  a  tremendous  machine  which  he 
can  wield  to  subserve  his  purposes.  If  you  per- 
mit this  principle  to  exist,  you  wiU  sap  the  very 
foundation  of  government. 

Can  any  man  make  me  believe  that  the  sheriff, 
when  he  feecomes  a  candidate  has  not  a  very  de- 
cided advantage  over  every  other  candidate  ?  In 
addition  to  his  other  sources  of  influence,  he  is 
acquainted  with  every  lady  in  the  county,  he 
goes  to  their  houses,  and  remains  all  night,  he  is 
polite  to  every  pretty  girl  he  meets  with,  and 
they  are  all  enlisted  in  his  favor.  He  thus  brings 
to  fiis  aid  an  increased  support,  and  unless  you 
intend  to  make  him  a  life  officer,  there  should 
be  a  limitation  upon  his  eligibility.  Why  is  it 
that  a  physician  who  has  practiced  for  a  long  time 
in  a  community,  can  get  more  votes  than  any 
body  else  ?  It  is  not  because  he  has  raore  influ- 
ence over  the  voters  directly,  but  it  is  because  he 
reaches  them  through  the  influence  of  the  ladies. 
This  is  an  influence  that  is  not  apparent  at  the 
polls,  but  it  is  one  which  nevertheless  has  a  very 
considerable  effect.  I  might  consume  hours  in 
showing  the  influence  that  sheriffs  may  acquire 
in  this  wav,  by  which  he  is  enabled  to  overcome 
any  one  who  opposes  him.  It  was  thought  by 
the  committee  that  it  would  be  better  that  he 
should  not  be  perraitted  to  be  elected  after  the 
second  term,  inasmuch  as  he  has  it  in  his  power, 
more  than  any  other  officer,  to  do  good  or  evil 
in  influencing  public  sentiment,  because  his 
business  is  with  every  body.  You  might  acci- 
dently  get  a  bad  man  in  that  office.  It  is  a  fair 
compromise,  I  think,  and  I  hope  itwill  be  adopt- 
ed. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  The  question  before  the  house 
I  believe  at  present  is  the  re-eligibility  of  sheriflfe. 
I  have  listened  to  a  great  deal  of  argument  on 
both  sides,  and  I  confess  I  am  somewhat  at  a  loss 
to  know  how  to  construe  them.  The  gentlemen 
who  appear  to  be  opposed  to  the  re-eligibility, 
say  that  the  sheriff,  after  having  served  one  term, 
will  gather  around  him,  such  an  influence  that 
he  can  control  the  election.  And  how  will  he 
do  it  ?  One  gentleman  says,  the  sheriff  will  gee 
acquainted  with  every  laHy  and  gentleman  in 
the  country,  and  secure  an  influence  in  that  way  I 
Another  says  he  will  use  the  public  money  which 
he  collects,  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  votes, 
and  that  he  will  do  every  thing  but  what  an 
honest  man  ought  to  do,  and  that  will  make 
him  so  popular  that  he  cannot  be  defeated.  Now 
in  my  county,  if  a  sheriff  was  to  act  as  gentle- 
men here  say  they  will,  he  would  be  the  most 
unpopular  man  in  the  county.  But  if  the  doc- 
trine be  true,  that  if  we  are  to  reward  a  public 
servant  according  to  his  just  deserts,  why  should 
we  say,  he  shall  not  be  eligible  for  a  second 
tenn  f  ''If  thou  hast  done  well,  shall  it  not  be 
well  with  thee  ?  But  if  thou  hast  not,  let 
sin  be  at  thy  door."  If  he  conducts  himself  well 
the  people  will  say  to  hira,  "Well  done,  good 
and  faithful  servant,"  "you  have  faithfully  dis- 
charged the  duty  that  was  entrusted  to  you,  we 
will  put  you  again  in  office."     But  to  say  that 


300 


the  people  ■will  re-ele«.^t  a  man  who  has  behaved 
improperly,  is  to  falsify  the  true  spirit  and  un- 
derstanding of  the  people.  It  is  an  imputation 
that  I  am  not  willing;  my  constitutents  shall  have 
thrown  upon  them.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  re-eli- 
gibility of  the  sheriffs. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  I  know  the  convention  is 
becoming  a  little  restless,  and  anxious  to  get  a 
vote  on  this  question;  but  1  trust  I  shall  be  in- 
dulged for  a  few  moments.  I  am  aware  tliere 
are  members  in  this  house,  who  hold  the  opin- 
ion that  there  are  lawyers  here  who  are  disposed 
to  consume  too  much  of  the  time.  To  such  gen- 
tlemen, I  will  say,  that  although  I  am  not  so 
much  of  a  lawyer  as  I  miglit  be,  those  whom  I 
represent,  sent  me  here,  not  to  vote  merely,  but 
to  assign  the  reasons  for  my  votes,  and  I  trust 
I  shall  have  an  opportunity  of  doing  so. 

I  am  here  as  an  advocate  for  the  re-eligibility 
of  these  officers,  and  I  tru.st  I  am  here  as  the 
advocate  also  of  conservative  principles.  I 
shall  have  to  receive  new  teaching,  before  I  have 
learned  tliat  I  am  departing  from  conservative 
principles,  when  I  vest  the  power  of  election  in 
the  hands  of  the  people.  I  have  an  illustration 
here  of  the  capacity  of  the  people  to  choose  the 
second,  third,  aye!  twentieth  time  an  officer  who 
has  served  them  well.  The  elder  gentleman 
from  Kelson,  who  has  so  ably  attempted  to  re- 
sist the  re-eligibility  of  the  officers  of  govern- 
ment, stands  here  to-day  as  a  sentinel  upon  the 
ramparts — what  ramparts,  I  need  not  say — he  is 
placing  himself  against  every  proposition  that 
seems  to  meet  with  favor  in  this  house;  but  per- 
haps he  is  exercisinga  conservative  influenceover 
our  deliberations,  that  will  be  wholesome  in  the 
end.  At  present,  my  judgment  does  not  lead  me 
to  that  conclusion.  I  believe  that  if  we  recog- 
nize the  capacity  of  the  people  to  elect  their 
officers,  and  judge  of  their  qualifications  in  one 
instance,  we  have  committed  ourselves  to  a  prin- 
ciple that  we  cannot  depart  from.  The  gentle- 
man from  Henry  says  he  will  not  be  found  cross- 
ing his  tracks.  I  will  not  accuse  him  of  it ;  he 
is  not  crossing  his  tracks,  but  he  is  rubbing 
them  out. 

The  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  says 
he  is  in  favor  of  rotation  in  office;  so  am  I.  It  is 
a  doctrine  that  has  greeted  my  ears,  for  "lo!  these 
many  years"  past.  But  I  never  understood  that 
rotation  in  office,  implied  ineligibility  after  hav- 
ing served.  The  people  have  a  right  to  rotate 
and  re-elect.  I  recollect  when  <^uite  a  youth, 
hearing  much  said  about  thisdoctrineof  rotation, 
but  I  never  adopted  the  doctrine  in  any  other  way 
than  that  the  people  should  exercise  the  power 
of  rotation.  And  certainly  no  constitutional 
provision  should  be  made  upon  the  question, 
but  leave  it  to  be  settled  by  the  people. 

It  does  seem  to  me,  that  if  we  yield  this  point, 
we  are  in  tlie  power  of  those  who  are  contend- 
ing for  the  opposite  doctrine.  If  we  yield  to 
those  who  are  contending  that  these  officers  shall 
not  be  re-eligible,  we  yield  one  step,  one  im- 
portant point,  in  regard  to  the  right  of  the  people 
lo  exercise  the  power  of  electing  their  officers 
according  to  their  own  reason  and  judgment. 
It  is  for  this  reason,  that  I  am  contending  against 
the  doctrine  tlkat  is  attempted  to  be  established 
here.  I  am  contending  for  the  doctrine  set  forth 
in  the  substitute  that  is  proposed  by  the  gentle- 


man from  Simpson.  But  I  regret  that  the  amend-  \ 
ment  was  made  to  that  substitute,  and  I  hope 
it  yet  will  be  stricken  from  it.  I  trust  the  house 
will  retrace  its  steps.  It  does  seem  to  me  that 
the  house  will  bring  itself  into  some  difficulty 
by  the  amendment  that  has  been  adopted. 

Gentlemen  in  this  convention  travel  with 
great  facility  across  the  broad  Atlantic  for  illus- 
trations in  support  of  their  arguments,  and  they 
apply  them  without  much  reference  to  their  ap- 
plicability. It  is  said  that  Bonaparte  began  by 
professing  the  utmost  sympathy  for  the  people, 
and  ended  by  seeking  to  establish  the  worst 
despotism  the  world  ever  beheld.  This  may  be 
the  opinion  of  some  gentlemen;  but  it  was  never 
mine.  I  think  that  he  was  a  burning  and  a 
shining  light,  and  although  the  spirit  of  despo- 
tism did  ultimately  pervade  his  heart,  yet  he 
was  instrumental  in  bringing  foi-wara,  and 
strengthening  the  love  of  republicanism,  not 
only  in  this,  but  in  all  other  portions  of  the  civ- 
ilized world.  What  was  his  system  of  laws? 
The  code-Napoleon  is  a  monument  of  purity, 
wisdom  and  greatness,  such  as  few,  if  any  of  the 
European  nations  have  given  to  the  world.  I 
consider  it  superior  to  any  thing  that  ever  ema- 
nated from  England.  We  adhere  too  pertina- 
ciously to  the  examples  that  are  furnished  us  by 
England.  Our  ancestors  when  they  separated 
themselves  from  Great  Britain,  severed  all  polit- 
ical connection  and  became  in  every  thing  ex- 
cept tlie  feeling  and  affections  of  the  heart,  a 
distinct  people,  having  a  government  based  up- 
on entirely  different  principles.  It  does  seem  tp 
me  that  we  should  not  seek  abroad  for  princi- 

f)les  of  republican  government.  Here  the  first 
essons  of  Avisdom  manifested  themselves  in  the 
formation  of  a  free  government.  We  can  gain 
nothing  for  our  republican  institutions  from 
abroad.  I  know  that  the  sheriffs  have  a  great 
deal  of  power,  but  to  tell  me  that  they  will  ex- 
ercise that  power  dishonestly  and  thereby  co- 
erce a  re-election,  is  to  tell  me  that  the  people  are 
incapable  of  electing  at  all,  and  that  the  power 
to  do  so  should  be  withheld  from  them. 

I  should,  perhaps,  not  feel  so  much  interest  in 
this  subject,  if  I  did  not  conceive  that  it  was 
striking  a  fatal  bloAv  at  other  propositions  that 
Avill  be  before  this  house.  I  know  that  gentle- 
men make  distinctions  that  are  satisfactory  to 
their  own  minds,  and  come  to  a  different  con- 
clusion. I  cannot  see  the  force  of  the  reasoning 
by  which  they  arrive  at  that  conclusion.  I  trust 
we  shall  leave  it  to  the  people  of  the  state,  to 
say  who  shall  serve  them,  and  how  long  con- 
tinue to  serve  them,  and  that  this  convention 
will  not  attempt  to  apply  the  system  of  rotation. 
If  this  be  done,  I  have  no  doubt  our  work  will 
be  favorably  received,  and  that  we  shall  be 
greeted  by  the  people  with  the  welcome  plau- 
dits, "well  done  good  and  faithful  servants." 

But  the  gentleman  from  Madison  tells  us,  that 
sheriffs  will  pass  around  from  house  to  house, 
and  secure  the  influence  of  all  the  female  por- 
tion of  every  family,  and  use  that  influence  for 
the  advancement  of  his  selii.sh  views.  Sir,  I  be- 
lieve the  influence  of  female  purity  is  a  salutary 
influence,  and  that  it  is  not  to  be  obtained  in  be- 
half of  the  unworthy.  I  trust  the  gentleman 
will  take  back  the  insinuation,  that  female  in- 
fluence can  be  enlisted  to  subvert  the  institutions 


591 


of  republicanism.     I  believe  that  if  we  allow  I 
ourselves  to  be  directed  by  that  influence,  and 
the  patriotism   which  is  to  be  found  iu  their 
breasts,  we  shall  scarcely  ever  err. 

Mr.  President,  I  will  no  longer  detain  the 
house.  I  shall  vote  to  strike  out,  as  proposed 
by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson>  and  insert  his 
amendment. 

Mr.  KELLY.  When  I  offered  the  amend- 
ment sir,  to  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Simpson,  I  offered  it  with  the  view  of  ob- 
viating some  of  the  difliculties  which  seemed 
to  rest  upon  the  minds  of  gentlemen,  who  op- 
posed the  re-eligibility  of  sheriffs.  I  did  not 
suppose  sir,  that  I  was  throwing  into  this  house 
an  apple  of  discord;  but  I  find  that  I  have 
done  so,  and  if  it  be  within  my  power,  I  will 
withdraw  that  amendment. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  amendment  has 
been  adopted  by  the  house,  and  cannot  now  be 
withdrawn,  without  a  re  consideration  of  the 
vote  by  which  it  was  adopted. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  will  move  then  a  reconsid' 
eration  of  that  vote. 

The  motion  to  reconsider  was,  upon  a  division, 
carried;  ayes,  40;  noes,  28. 

Mr.  KELLY  then  asked  and  obtained  leave 
to  withdraw  the  amendment. 

The  question  then  being  upon  the  adoption  of 
the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
a  division  was  called  for,  so  that  the  question 
should  be  first  taken  on  striking  out. 

On  this  question,  the  yeas  and  nays  were  or- 
dered, and  being  taken  were  yeas,  43;  nays  41. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Braw- 
ner, Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.Brown,  Bev- 
erly L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffev,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Iv'athaa  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Wm. 
N.  Marshall,  Xathan  McClure,  David  Meriweth- 
er, Jonathan  Neweum,  Hugh  Newell,  Johnson 
Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Silas  Woodson — 43. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  K. 
Bowling,William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hav,Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  jTackson,  Thomas  James, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Thomas 
N.  Lindsev,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Martin  P.  Mar- 
shall, William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
John  H.  McHeniT,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thos. 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,William  Preston,  James  Rudd, 
John  D.  Tavlor,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  Philip"  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L. 
Waller,  Henrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  Wliite, 
Robert  N.  Wfckliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wes- 
ley J.  Wright^-41. 
So  the  convention  agreed  to  etrike  out. 


The  question  then  recurred  on  the  motion  to 
insert,  pending  which, 
The  convention  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  NOVEMBER  7,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

COUXTY  COUHTS. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  offered  the  foUowinff  as 
a  substitute  for  the  article  heretofore  reported  in 
relation  to  county  courts,  which,  on  his  motion, 
was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole  hav- 
ing charge  of  that  subject,  and  was  ordered  to  be 
printed. 

ARTICLE  — . 

Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to 
consist  of  a  presiding  judge  and  the  several  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  of  the  county. 

Sec.  2.  The  presiding  judge  shall  be  elected 
by  the  qualified  voters  in  each  county  for  the 
terra  of  four  years,  and  until  his  successor  shall 
be  duly  elected  and  qualified,  and  shall,  from 
time  to  time,  receive  for  his  services  such  com- 
pensation as  may  be  fixed  by  law,  to  be  paid  by 
fees,  or  out  of  the  eountv  revenue. 

Sec.  3.  No  person  sliall  be  eligible  to  the 
office  of  presiding  judge  of  the  county  court, 
unless  he  be  a  ciliren  of  the  United  States,  over 
twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  in  the 
county  in  which  he  shall  be  elected  one  year 
next  preceding  his  election. 

Sec.  4.  The  presiding  judge  of  the  county 
courts  shall  be  sole  probate  judges  for  their  re- 
spective counties,  with  testamentary  and  such 
other  jurisdiction  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be 
given  by  law. 

Sec.  5.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  eountv  court 
shall  be  regulated  by  law;  and  until  changed, 
shall  be  the  same  now  vested  in  the  county 
courts  of  this  state,  except  as  herein  provided. 

Sec.  6.  The  several  counties  in  this  state  shall 
be  laid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size,  as 
the  general  assembly  mav,  from  time  to  time,  di- 
rect. Two  justices  of  the  peace,  and  one  con- 
stable, shall  be  elected  in  each  district  by  the 
qualified  voters  therein.  The  jurisdiction  of 
said  ofiioers  shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  coun- 
ty. Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected  for  the 
term  of  four  years,  and  constables  for  the  term 
of  two  years;  they  shall  be  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and 
shall  have  resided  six  months  in  the  district  in 
which  they  may  be  elected,  next  preceding  their 
election. 

Sec.  7.  Presiding  judges  of  the  county  court, 
and  justices  of  the  peace,  shall  be  conservators 
of  the  peace,  and  shall  be  commissioned  by  the 
governor.  County  and  district  officers  shall 
vacate  their  offices  by  removal  from  the  district 
or  county  in  which  they  shall  be  appointed. 
The  legislature  shall  provide,  by  law,  for  the 
mode  and  manner  of  conducting  and  making 
due  returns  of  all  elections  of  presiding  judges 
of  the  eountv  court,    justices   of  the  peace,  and 


392 


constables,  and  for  determining  contested  elec- 
tions; and  also  provide  the  mode  of  filling  va- 
cancies in  these  offices. 

Sec.  8.  Presiding  judges  of  the  county  courts, 
justices  of  the  peace,  and  constables,  shall  be 
.  subject  to  indictment  or  presentment  for  mal- 
feasance or  misfeasance  in  office,  in  such  mode 
as  may  be  prescribed  by  law,  subject  to  appeal 
to  the  court  of  appeals;  and  upon  conviction, 
their  offices  shall  become  vacant. 

SrBMtSSION  TO  THE  PEOPLE. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, which,  on  his  motion,  was  referred  to  the 
committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions,  and  or- 
dered to  be  printed. 

Kesoleed,  That  in  obedience  to  public  senti- 
ment clearly  manifested  throughout  the  state, 
and  from  a  sense  of  the  intrinsical  propriety  of 
such  a  course,  this  convention  will  submit  the 
result  of  its  labors  to  the  people  for  their  ratifi- 
cation; and  to  that  end,  that  it  is  expedient 
either  to  insert  in  the  constitution  which  is  now 
being  framed,  a  clause  making  its  establishment 
conditional  upon  such  popular  ratification,  or 
else  to  devise  some  other  plan  by  which  the 
approval  of  a  majority  of  the  voters  of  this  com- 
monwealth shall  be  a  necessary  preliminary  to 
its  adoption. 

COXSTRUCTION  OF  COUNTY  COURTS. 

Mr,  ROGERS.  I  have  a  resolution  which  I 
desire  to  offer,  in  these  words: 

Resolved,  That  the  con)mittee  on  county  courts 
be  instructed  to  inquire  into  the  propriety  of  con- 
stituting the  county  court  of  all  the  justices  in 
said  county. 

I  wish  to  offer  a  very  few  remarks,  giving  my 
views  explanatory  of  that  resolution,  and  I  shall 
do  so  by  referring  to  what  we  liave  done,  and 
•what  the  convention  seem  determined  to  do,  as 
I  judge,  from  their  action  on  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  county  courts.  We  first  organize 
a  county  court  from  the  bar,  and  that  is  all  right, 
I  suppose;  then  a  circuit  court  from  the  bar,  and 
that  IS  all  right;  and  then  we  select  attorneys 
from  the  bar,  and  that  is  all  right.  We  want  to 
make  them  re-eligible  too,  and  I  believe  that  is 
all  right.  We  proclaim  our  love  for  the  people, 
and  say  that  they  are  not  only  sovereign,  but  in- 
telligent and  wise.  But  it  strikes  me  that  when 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  county  courts 
was  before  us,  we  did  not  carry  out  the  princi- 
ple which  we  had  acted  upon  before,  and  that  al- 
though we  believe  the  people  intelligent,  we  do 
not  consider  them  sufficiently  so  to  form  a  coun- 
ty court.  I  think  the  justices  of  the  peace  in 
tne  several  counties  should  be  empowered  to  do 
the  business  of  the  county  court.  There  is  no 
necessity  of  creating  offices  with  fixed  salaries 
of  two  or  three  hundred  dollars  per  annum, 
when  the  labor  can  be  performed  by  the  magis- 
tracy of  the  county.  We  all  must  have  some  re- 
ppect  for  this  court  that  has  done  all  our  busi- 
ness in  relation  to  estates  and  elections.  With 
regard  to  pay,  it  is  the  cheapest  court  in  the 
country.  6ut  if  we  create  county  court  judges, 
they  must  have  a  salary,  and  I  sliould  not  be  as- 
tonished if  we  should  be  conipelled  to  select 
them  from  the  bar.  I  do  not  wish  to  increase 
the  expenses  of  the  government,  unless  it  is  ne- 
cessary.   I  voted  for  the  fourth  judge  because  I 


thought  it  necessary,  and  I  also  voted  for  branch-  ' 
ing  tlie  court,  for  the  same  reason ;  but  I  am  op- 
posed to  dispensing  with  the  county  court.  If 
there  is  not  intelligence  enough  to  select  a  proper  • 
court  from  the  people,  then  the  people  are  not 
capable  of  self-government.  It  seems  to  me  the 
tendency  of  the  doctrines  we  have  heard  here  is 
to  give  the  few  the  power  to  control  the  manv, 
instead  of  giving  the  many  the  power  to  mafee 
laws  for  the  good  of  the  whole.  I  am  in  favor  of 
county  court  judges  from  the  people,  because  if 
you  give  the  magistracy  the  power  of  jurisdic- 
tion in  riots  and  small  matters  only,  you  allow 
their  office  to  dwindle  in  importance,  and  strip 
from  the  position  that  which  will  induce  any 
man  of  worth  to  seek  it;  whereas  no  man  will 
refuse  to  sit  on  the  county  court  bench.  I  move 
to  refer  the  resolution  to  the  committee  on  coun- 
ty courts. 

Mr.  MAYES.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
the  committees  on  the  court  of  appeals,  and  the 
county  and  circuit  courts  are  now  united  in  one 
committee.  If  it  is  intended  to  refer  the  resolu- 
tion to  that  committee,  as  it  is  now  composed,  I 
have  no  objection. 

Mr.  ROGERS.     That  is  ray  motion. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  A  resolution  of  that  sort 
would  seem  to  imply  that  the  committee  on  coun- 
ty courts  have  not  thought  of  any  such  thing, 
although  it  is  a  matter  which  they  have  been 
discussing  for  several  weeks.  It  is  necessary 
now,  it  seems,  to  make  this  a  matter  of  solemn 
inquiry,  because  forsooth,  we  want  to  manifest 
our  great  love  for  the  people.  Our  love  may  be 
misdirected,  and  I  would  inquire  whether  my 
friend  who  offers  this  resolution  has  not  made  a 
mistake  in  this  case.  The  report  of  the  commit- 
tee on  county  courts, proposes  to  give  to  the  peo- 
ple an  unrestricted  choice,  but  the  gentleman 
wishes  to  restrict  this  office  to  the  magistacy,  in 
his  love  for  the  people.  The  whole  ground  sug- 
gested by  the  gentleman,  has  been  considered, 
and  I  think  well  considered,  by  the  committee, 
and  I  move  to  lay  the  resolution  on  the  table. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

COUNTY    AND    DISTRICT    OFFICERS. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  next  busi- 
ness to  be  the  consideration  of  the  report  of  tho 
committee  on  the  executive  and  ministerial  offi- 
cers for  counties  and  districts.  Before  the  adjourn- 
ment yesterday,  the  convention  agreed  to  strike 
out  a  part  of  the  4th  section,  and  the  question 
now  recurred  on  inserting  Mr.  CLARKE'S  sub- 
stitute for  the  matter  striken  out. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  I  desire  to  offer  a  substitute 
for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Do  I  understand  that  the 
motion  to  amend  my  amendment  is  entertained 
by  the  president? 

The  PRESIDENT.    It  is. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  history  of  this  amend- 
ment so  far  as  I  recollect  is  this:  I  offered  an 
amendment  to  the  fourth  section  of  the  report 
by  striking  out  and  inserting.  That  was  one 
proposition,  but  divisible.  Afterwards  a  mo- 
tion was  made  to  divide  the  question,  and  a 
vote  of  the  house  was  taken  on  the  proposition 
to  strike  out.  Mine  was  a  single  proposition 
but  it  WHS  subject  to  a  division .     Now  I  appre- 


393 


hend  that  if  before  the  vote  is  taken  on  the  se- 
cond branch  of  my  propa^sition,  another  amend- 
ment is  entertained,  a  parliamentary  fraud  may 
be  practiced  on  the  mover  and  the  house.  I  do 
not  know  wliat  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Clay  is.  It  may  be  a  proposition 
that  I  cannot  vote  for.  It  may  be  uesigned  to 
destroy  the  effect  of  the  amenament  that  I  offer- 
ed. What  is  the  result?  You  take  a  division  of 
the  question,  and  make  me  vote  first  to  strike 
out.  With  what  view?  With  a  view  of  taking 
a  vote  on  my  aniendment ;  and  when  this 
is  done,  the'cliair  entertains  a  proposition 
which  destrovs  my  amendment  and  makes  me 
vote  to  strike'  out  "what  I  would  prefer  to  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  himself.  You  thus 
make  me  assist  him  in  striking  out,  and  then  in- 
sert what  I  would  object  to  as  more  injurious 
than  the  matter  struck  out. 

I  submit  if  this  is  not  placing  every  gentle- 
man who  voted  for  striking  out,  in  a  very  pe- 
culiar attitude.  I  submit  that  the  vote  sliould 
be  taken  on  the  second  branch  of  my  proposi- 
tion. If  that  is  rejected  the  gentleman's  prop- 
osition may  then  be  brought  forward  to  fill  the 
blank  which  has  been  occasioned  by  striking 
out. 

There  is  another  point.  I  supposed  I  should 
have  the  right  to  perfect  my  amendment,  before 
a  vote  was  taken  upon  it.  This  is  a  parliamen- 
tary privilege;  but  it  is  not  in  order  for  another 
gentleman  to  offer  for  it  a  substitute:  my  mo- 
tion was  to  strike  out  and  insert,  and  why  did 
gentlemen  vote  to  strike  out?  Because  they 
wished  to  insert  my  amendment.  If  then,  this 
be  so,  it  seems  to  me  that  no  other  motion  can 
be  entertained  initil  ray  motion  is  disposed  of; 
and  then  if  that  which  I  propose  is  rejected, the 
question  can  be  taken  on  the  gentleman's  amend- 
ment.    I  appeal  from  the  decision  of  the  chair. 

Mr.  DIXOX .  I  am  satisfied  the  decision  of 
the  chair  is  correct.  I  understand  the  gertle- 
man  to  have  made  a  motion,  which  embraces 
two  distinct  propositions — the  first  is  to  strike 
out,  and  the  second  to  insert.  Now,  that  there 
were  two  distinct  propositions  is  certain,  from 
the  fact  that  there  was  a  division  called  for,  and 
it  was  decided  by  the  chair  to  be  in  order.  I  be- 
lieve the  gentleman  will  not  deny  that  it  was  so. 
A  rule  of  this  house  makes  a  motion  to  strike 
out  and  insert,  divisible.  It  was  not  so,  howev- 
er, under  the  old  ndes  of  the  senate.  The  first 
question  then  is  on  the  motion  to  strike  out,  and 
it  having  been  decided  in  the  affirmative,  the 
question  is  on  the  motion  to  insert.  I  under- 
stand the  gentleman  to  say,  that  all  who  vote 
for  tlie  motion  to  strike  out,  are  bound  to  vote 
for  the  motion  to  insert.  He  is  mistaken  in  that. 
Gentlemen  voting  to  strike  out,  may  be  actua- 
ted by  different  reasons;  some  may  do  so  for 
the  purpose  of  getting  rid  of  that  portion  of  the 
section,  with  a  view  of  getting  in  other  matter, 
which  would  be  more  acceptable  to  them  and  to 
the  people  of  Kentucky.  And  others  may  have 
a  different  object  in  contemplation.  Then  there 
is  a  blank  to  be  filled,  and  the  gentleman  says 
it  is  not  to  be  amended  by  any  other  person,  and 
he  tells  the  house,  he  alone  has  a  right  to  per- 
fect it.  But  is  that  so?  Has  he  a  right  to  per- 
fect it?  And  if  he  has,  has  nobody  else  the 
same  right?  Does  he  take  the  sole  control  of 
50 


the  proposition,  and  have  we  nothing  to  do  with 
it?  Why,  I  understand  we  have  a  right  to  vote 
for  that  proposition  as  well  as  the  gentleman. 
The  very  argument  he  uses  shows  at  once  that  he 
is  wrong.  If  one  has  a  right  to  perfect  it,  an- 
other has.  But,  as  it  now  stands,  it  is  merely 
a  propasition  to  fill  a  blank,  and  we  have  a 
right  to  perfect  it.  Each  member  of  the  conven- 
tion has  that  right  as  well  a.s  the  mover.  There 
can  be  no  difference  of  opinion  about  the  mat- 
ter. I  do  not  myself  care  any  thing  particular- 
ly about  it.  I  voted  to  strike  out,  because  I  did 
not  like  the  proposition  as  it  stood.  Others 
may  have  had  a  different  motive.  Perhaps  they 
intended  to  substitute  something  else  in  its 
place.  I  have  yet  to  leafn  that  because  a  mere 
motion  is  made  to  strike  out,  that  every  gentle- 
man intended  to  vote  for  the  proposition  which 
the  gentleman  was  about  to  offer  as  a  substitute. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  have  been  struck  with  the 
facility  with  which  gentlemen  put  words  into 
tlie  mouths  of  others,  and  then  make  speeches 
on  them.  Now,  I  tell  the  gentleman  from  Hen- 
derson I  did  not  say  that  those  who  voted  to 
strike  out  were  bound  to  vote  for  the  insertion  of 
my  amendment. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  certainly  understood  the  gen- 
tleman, in  effect,  to  say  so,  but  I  do  not  wish  to 
misrepresent  him. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  stated  that  I  had  made  a 
motion  to  strike  out  and  insert.  It  was  a  divi- 
sable  proposition.  The  vote  might  have  been 
taken  upon  it  as  a  single  question,  or  the  ques- 
tion might  have  been  divided,  as  it  was  divi- 
ded, and  the  question  taken   on  striking  out. 

Now,  here  is  a  section  reported  by  the  chair- 
man of  a  committee.  It  is  before  tlie  house  to 
be  acted  upon.  I  make  a  proposition  in  relation 
to  it,  that  is  entertained  by  the  chair.  But,  un- 
der the  rule,  a  delegate  has  a  right  to  call  for  a 
division  of  the  question.  "What  is  there  pend- 
ing? It  is  my  proposition,  and  nothing  else. 
But  a  division  of  the  question  is  called  for,  and 
the  first  vote  is  taken  on  striking  out.  Those 
who  vote  for  striking  out,  vote  with  what  under- 
standing and  for  what  reason?  Thev  vote  for  it 
because  a  proposition  has  been  submitted  which 
they  prefer  to  the  report  of  the  committee.  Thev 
are  not  bound  to  adhere  to  the  proposition  whict 
has  been  proposed,  but  they  vote  for  striking 
I  out, because  they  would  rather  have  the  amend- 
ment proposed,  than  the  original  section,  or  that 
part  of  it  proposed  to  be  striken  out.  That  is 
the  purpose  for  which  they  vote.  The  gentle- 
man from  Henderson  says  that  they  have  a  right 
to  amend.  I  admit  it,  at  the  proper  time,  and 
no  gentleman  in  this  convention  would  be  more 
unwilling  to  restrain  that  right  than  I  should  be. 
But  has  any  proposition  been  made  to  amend  by 
any  friend  to  striking  out?  No  sir.  There  are  two 
ways  to  defeat  a  measure.  One  is,  by  getting  a 
gentleman  who  voted  with  the  majority  to  move 
a  reconsideration  of  the  vote.  Another  is,  by 
clogging  the  amendment  proposed,  so  as  to  de- 
feat it  by  cutting  up  tliose  first  in  favor  of  it.  I 
deny  that  the  proposition  which  has  been  offered 
this  morning,  comes  from  any  friend,  or  any  one 
favorable  to  the  amendment  I  proposed,  but  it  is 
one  of  those  means  used  for  breaking  down  an 
amendment.  I  would  not  restrain  my  friend 
I  from  Henderson  or  any  other  gentleman  from 


394 


perfecting  the  amendment,  but  it  seems  to  me 
there  is  a  fitness  in  the  time  when  the  amend- 
ment should  be  made.  Now,  if  the  proposi- 
tion I  have  offered  be  accepted  by  the  house, 
take  a  vot«  on  it.  If  there  are  those  who  tliink 
they  can  propose  a  better  one,  they  will  not  vote 
for  mine.  But  when  forty-three  delegates  on 
this  floor  have  voted  for  striking  outwith  a  view 
to  the  insertion  of  this  amendment,  to  say  that 
it  shall  be  clogged  and  crippled,  before  the  vote 
is  taken,  and  that  too,  by  the  enemies  of  striking 
out,  it  appears  to  me,  with  all  due  deference  to 
the  opinion  of  the  chair,  will  be  placing  a  hard- 
ship upon  the  friends  of  striking  out,  which 
may  hereafter  resnlt  in  unpleasant  consequences; 
for  yon  may  insert  something  more  objectionable 
than  the  original  section  itself.  If  you  enter- 
tain the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Clay, 
you  make  us  assist  you  in  voting  for  a  proposi- 
tion more  objectionable  than  the  original  section 
was.  I  trust  every  gentleman  on  this  floor  who 
voted  for  striking  out  for  the  purpose  of  testing 
the  great  question,  whether  the  officers  of  this 
government  shall  be  re  eligible  or  not,  will  vote 
against  any  efforts  made  by  the  enemies  of  this 
proposition. 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  voted  with  the  gentleman  to 
strike  out,  but  I  think  he  is  wrong  if  he  suppo- 
ses that  those  who  voted  to  strike  out  are  bound 
to  vote  for  the  insertion  of  his  proposition.  We 
may  vote  to  strike  out,  but  may  not  like  what  is 
proposed  to  be  put  in.  If  that  is  not  the  case, 
there  is  no  propriety  in  dividing  the  question  at 
all. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Sir,  I  have  accomplished  ray 
purpose,  and  I  will  withdraw  my  appeal  from 
the  decision  of  the  chair. 

The  PRESIDENT.     I  rise  to  explain— 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  To  enable  the  chair 
to  make  his  explanation,  I  will  renew  the  appeal. 

The  PRESIDENT.  Although  I  have  been  a 
long  time  in  a  deliberative  body,  I  have  never 
presided  over  one  before,  and  never  studied  the 
rules  with  that  precision  which  induces  an  over- 
weaning  confidence  in  any  decision  that  I  may 
make.  All  the  decisions  that  I  have  made,  have 
been  made  to  the  best  of  my  judgment  at  the 
time,  and  in  all  ray  future  decisions,  I  shall  act 
on  the  same  principle.  A  motion  to  strike  out 
and  insert  being  divisible,  the  question  can  be 
taken  on  striking  out,  in  order  to  save  time;  for, 
if  words  are  struck  out,  there  is  no  necessity  to 
perfect  them.  Now,  it  is  true  the  gentleman 
who  oflfers  an  amendment  has  a  right  to  perfect 
it,  before  his  adversary's  proposition  is  submit- 
ted. That  I  understand  to  be  the  parliamentary 
rule.  When  a  proposition  is  made  to  divide  a 
question  with  a  view  to  save  time,  still  the  mo- 
tion to  insert  is  subject  to  amendment,  and,  as  I 
understand  it,  individuals  are  not  pledged  to 
vote  for  the  insertion  because  they  voted  to 
strike  out.  I  may  vote  to  strike  out  because  I 
do  not  like  the  original  provision,  and  then 
there  will  be  a  blank  left.  1  can  then  very  con- 
sistently refuse  to  insert — I  can  leave  a  blank — 
or  I  may  afterwards  move  to  insert  something 
else.  But  while  it  is  depending  as  a  question  of 
amendment,  it  is  subject  to  amendment  upon  the 
motion  of  any  individual  in  tlie  body.  If  I  am 
wrong,  I  should  like  to  be  put  right,  because  the 
question  will,  in  all  probability,  arise  again. 


Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  no  particu- 
lar solicitude  on  the  subject,  as  the  mover  has 
waived  his  apjieal;  but  1  agree  with  the  chair 
that  it  is  very  desirable  to  settle  the  principle 
involved  in  this  question  in  accordance  with  the 
laws  of  legislative  bodies.  Differing  in  some  re- 
spects from  the  presiding  officer,  as  well  as  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson,  I  will  state  my  views 
in  regard  to  it.  When  the  question  is  made  to 
strike  out  and  insert,  it  is  but  one  question.  The 
difference  between  us  is,  that  the  presiding  offi- 
cer and  the  gentleman  from  HencVerson,  regard 
it  as  two.  It  is  only  one  question;  but  to  decide 
it  the  presiding  officer  has  to  tell  the  house 
twice,  or  if  the  yeas  and  nays  be  called  the  clerk 
calls  twice,  to  enable  the  members  to  vote  on 
the  whole  proposition,  each  branch  separately. 
Bj  way  of  testing  tlie  correctness  of  this  princi- 
ple, the  gentleman  from  Simpson  has  proposed 
to  amend  by  striking  out  and  inserting.  He  in- 
duces me  and  others  to  vote  with  him  to  strike 
out  because  we  dislike  the  original  article;  he 
has  extracted  my  vote  to  strike  out,  and  has  ac- 
complished his  purpose,  but  can  lie  then,  with- 
out leave  of  the  house,  withdraw  his  amend- 
ment? I  say  he  cannot,  because  the  house  has 
commenced  voting  upon  it.  Here  is  the  rule 
laid  down  by  Jefferson:  "When  it  is  moved  to 
'  amend,  by  striking  out  certain  words  and  insert- 
'  ing  others,  the  manner  of  stating  the  question 
•  is,  first  to  read  the  whole  passage  to  be  amend- 
'  ed  as  it  stands  at  present;  then  the  words  pro- 
'  posed  to  be  struck  out;  next,  those  to  be  insert- 
'  ed;  and  lastly,  the  whole  passage  as  it  will  be 
'  when  amended.  And  the  question,  if  desired,  is 
'  then  to  be  divided,  and  put  first  on  striking 
'  out."  It  will  be  seen  by  the  language  used  here, 
"the  question,"  that  it  is  a  single  question. 
What  next?  "If  carried,  it  is  next  on  inserting 
'  the  words  proposed.  If  that  be  lost,  it  may  be 
'  moved  to  insert  others."  Now  if  they  vote  to 
reject  the  amendment,  it  will  be  in  order  to 
move  to  fill  the  blank  with  something  else;  but 
having  obtained  my  vote  to  strike  out,  they  can- 
not take  up  the  amendment,  and  make  it  such 
as  to  deny  me  the  privilege  of  voting  to  fill  tlie 
blank  with  what  is  first  proposed  to  be  insert- 
ed.    I  will  now  withdraw  the  appeal. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  question  has  not 
been  decided.  I  will  examine  the  rules  that  ap- 
ply to  this  question  with  reference  to  future  de- 
cisions. 

Mr.  DIXON.  The  rule  which  the  gentleman 
has  read  does  not  apply  to  this  house  at  all. 

The  secretary  then  read  Mr.  trarrard's  sub- 
.stitute  for  the  amendment  offered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Simpson. 

"The  presiding  judge,  or  associate  judges,  of 
the  county  courts  are  elected,  wliosc  term  of  of- 
fice shall  be  two  years,  but  no  sheriff,  or  deputy 
who  qualified  under  him,  shall  be  re-eligible  for 
the  succeding  term." 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  feel  a  desire  to  see  even 
handed  justice  done  here.  I  have  but  one  vote, 
and  that  shall  be  cast  with  an  eye  single  to  that 
purpose,  to  treat  all  officers  alike.  If  one  officer 
IS  to  be  ineligible,  I  shall  vote  to  make  all  so. 
When  I  am  convinced  that  it  is  b(;st  to  make  fish 
of  one  and  flesh  of  another,  and  that  the  people 
are  not  ca])able  of  selfrgovernment,  I  may  go  for 
invidious  distinctions. 


305 


Mr.  CLARKE.  This  aiuenJiiient  of  the  geu- 
tleman  1"™!)!  Clav  brings  up  the  question  of  re- 
eligibility,  broadly  and  flatly.  The  report  of 
the  coniraittte  makes  the  sheriflF  eligible  for  a 
second  term.  This,  in  my  judgment,  will  be  to 
turn  him  loose  on  the  community  without  re- 
sponsibility, with  his  sacrificial  knife  whetted 
to  cut  and  car\-e  in  any  direction  for  two  years, 
and  then  he  goes  out  of  ofiice.  If  it  be  true 
that  the  sherifif  is  in  the  habit  of  shaving  and  in- 
flicting oppressions  on  the  people,  you  place  a 
curb  on  him  by  making  him  re-eligible;  because 
conduct  of  that  sort  will  not  be  tolerated  by  the 
people  of  Kentucky,  and  if  he  indulges  in  con- 
duct of  that  kind,  the  result  will  be,  the  people 
will  turn  the  backs  of  their  hands  upon  him  and 
he  will  be  defeated. 

A  great  deal  has  been  said  about  conserva- 
tism, which  seems  to  mean  every  thing  and  no- 
thing. The  best  illustration  of  it,  as  some  re- 
gard it,  is  in  this  proposition  to  curb  the  sherifif 
for  one  term  by  the  hope  of  re-election  for  a  se- 
cond term,  and  for  one  term  only.  He  is  to  be 
reined  up  the  first  term,  and  the  second  he  is  to 
bo  turned  loose  to  oppress  and  shave  everybody 
he  pleases.  The  whole  question  of  re-ellgibili- 
ty  turns  on  the  decision  of  this,  and  the  gentle- 
man has  very  properly  brought  it  up.  It  is  said 
a  sheriff  shall  not  be  re-eligible,  but  it  is  insist- 
ed that  a  clerk  and  judge  shall  be.  Where  will 
my  friend  from  Nelson  be  found  on  this  question 
of  re-eligibility  in  his  lengthy,  able,  and  power- 
ful .speeches?  Why,  he  will  refer  to  the  vote 
upon  your  record,  and  sav  that  you  have  said  a 
sheriff  shall  not  be  re-eligible,  and  then  show 
the  comparative  importance  of  these  two  oflicers, 
and  their  relative  power.  He  asks  nothing  bet- 
ter than  a  vote  against  my  proposition.  He  will 
sliow  that  a  judgf  has  the  life,  property,  liberty, 
and  reputation  of  the  citizens  in  his  hands,  and 
even  the  sheriff  himself.  He  will  then  ask  you 
with  what  consistency  you  can  go  for  the  re-eli- 
gibility of  a  judge,  while  you  have  acknowl- 
edged the  danger  of  making  a  sheriff  re-eligible 
on  account  of  his  power  over  the  feelings  of  the 
people.  I  remarked  to  a  friend  this  morning, 
that  a  judge  had  the  lives  of  the  people  in  lus 
hands,  in  certain  cases.  He  replied,  that  he 
thought  the  jurors  had  a  greater  influence,  be- 
cause they  were,  in  criminal  cases,  judges  of  the 
law  and  the  fact.  I  rejoined  that  the  jurors  were 
inclined  to  defer  to  the  opinion  of  the  judge. 
There  is  nothing  more  natural  than  that  the 
opinion  of  a  learned  judge  should  have  weight 
with  a  jury,  and  it  does  always  have  more  or  less 
effect.  In  the  county  of  Barren,  a  negro  was 
apprehended  for  a  high  crime,  brought  before  a 
jury,  who  found  him  guilty,  and  the  Judge  was 
about  to  pass  sentence  of  death.  The  lawyer 
moved  in  arrest  of  judgment,  and  set  up  a  claim, 
under  an  old  statute,  for  benefit  of  clergy. 
Judge  Buckner  decided  he  was  entitled  to  ben- 
efit of  clergy,  and  although  the  ofience  of  which 
he  was  found  guilty  was  one  of  the  highest 
crimes  known  to  our  laws,  he  was  released.  ISot 
two  months  afterward,  a  slave  was  tried  for  ar- 
son in  the  county  of  Warren,  and  found  guilty, 
and  the  counsel  moved  for  the  benefit  of  clergy. 
The  judge,  however,  declared  he  was  not  enti- 
tled to  It.  Now,  one  or  the  other  judge  must 
have  been  wrong. 


If  you  tell  me  that  because  a  sheriff  collects 
tlie  county  revenue,  and  especially  because  he 
has  tlie  influence  of  the  ladies  on  his  side,  he 
will  exercise  a  power  dangerous  to  the  public  in- 
terests, I  will  tell  you  that  even  your  clerks  can 
wield  a  powerful  influence,  by  virtue  of  the  of- 
fice which  he  holds.  There  is  no  proposition  to 
make  a  clerk  ineligible  because  he  has  held  the 
office  two  or  four  yeai-s,  yet  he  has  a  thousand 
fee  bills  in  his  hands,  from  fifty  cents  to  one  and 
two  dollars  in  value.  These  fee  bills  have  the 
virtue  of  an  execution.  Make  him  a  candidate 
for  re-election,  and  he  will  put  them  in  the  hands 
of  the  constable.  When  the  constable  makes 
his  report,  and  tells  him  whom  he  is  oppressing, 
the  candidate  will  gel  on  his  horse,  and  ride 
around,  and  say  to  individuals  against  whom  he 
has  claims,  "I  am  in  a  sort  of  a  scrape — I  can 
borrow  money  at  ten  per  cent.,  however,  and  I 
must  do  it  if  1  indulge  you.  But  I  cannot  in- 
dulge you  if  I  am  defeated."  Suppose  a  young 
man  wishes  to  marrj%  and  comes  to  the  clerk  for 
a  license.  He  may  say  to  him,  "well,  young 
man,  I  am  about  to  be  a  candidate  for  clerk — 1 
will  make  you  a  present  of  a  license,  and  you 
must  help  me  in  my  election."  He  goes  home 
under  the  full  impression  that  the  clerk  is  the 
very  cleverest  officer  in  the  world,  and  uses  his 
influence  among  his  friends  for  his  re-election. 
I  do  not  say  that  this  will  be  the  case,  but  I  say 
there  is  as  much  probability  of  it,  as  that  the 
sheriff,  who  collects  the  revenue,  will  use  the 
influence  which  his  office  gives  him,  to  secure  a 
re-election. 

I  recollect  reading  in  Esop's  Fables,  or  some 
other  book,  of  a  goose  which  had  under  her 
charge  a  brood  of  go.slings.  A  fox  came  up  on 
a  very  cold  night,  and  begged  to  be  permitted 
to  enter  the  little  house  occupied  by  the  goose, 
but  was  refused.  The  fox  then  imploringly 
said,  "OhI  let  me  enter,  or  my  nose  will  freeze 
oft"."  He  obtained  permission  to  put  his  nose 
in.  Aft*r  a  little  time,  he  declared  that  his  head 
and  shoulders  were  freezing  off,  and  he  got  the 
consent  of  the  goose  to  enter  so  far.  Very  soon 
afterwards,  he  said  he  was  freezing  all  over,  and 
then  he  got  permission  to  enter  the  house.  He 
then  instantly  set  to  work,  and  ate  up  the  goose 
and  goslings.  This  is  an  entering  wedge  to  the 
destruction  of  re-eligibility.  Just  say  that  the 
sheriff  shall  not  be  re-eligible  and  you  have  let 
in  the  nose  of  the  fox;  after  awhile  the  princi- 
ple will  be  applied  to  the  clerk,  then  the  head 
and  shoulders  of  the  fox  are  in,  and  when  it  is 
applied  to  the  judge  the  whole  body  will  be  in, 
and  these  officers  will  all  be  devoured  together. 

I  repeat,  that  this  substitute  to  my  amendment 
brings  up  the  whole  question  of  re-eligibility. 
I  am  prepared  to  see  the  question  settled  now. 
I  shall  go  for  the  re-eligibility  of  the  judge 
though  you  defeat  me  in  respect  to  the  sheriff. 
There  are  many  gentlemen,  however,  who  will 
not  do  it.  I  shaft  violate  my  consistency,  believ- 
ing, as  I  do,  that  all  should  be  re-eligible,  if  I 
go  for  the  re-eligibility  of  a  judge,  and  permit 
the  sheriff  to  be  turned  away  without  the  privi- 
lege of  re-election.  I  shall  go  for  the  re-eligi- 
bility of  the  clerk,  and  if  I  get  part,  I  shall  be 
in  part  satisfied.  If  I  lose  :ul,  then  I  shall  be 
driven  to  the  conclusion  that  there  are  those  in 
this  oonvBntion,  who  consider  the  people  incom- 


396 


petent  to  determine  whether  a  man  is  worthy  to 
ne  elected  or  not. 

2^ow  I  have  been  taught  to  believe  that  tlie 
longer  an  officer  has  performed  his  duties,  the 
better  he  will  be  able  to  discharge  tliem.  But 
you  say  however  honest,  or  well  qualified,  or 
though  there  be  nine  out  of  ten  in  favor  of  him, 
the  people  shall  not  elect  him,  and  you  drive 
them  to  whiitV  To  take  up  a  new  man  of  whom 
the  people  know  nothing,  in  the  place  of  one  in 
"whom  they  liave  the  utmost  confidence. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  I  propose  to  modify  my 
amendment  by  striking  out  the  word  "two,"  so 
as  to  leave  it  with  the  convention  to  fill  the 
blank  as  they  shall  think  proper. 

While  up,  I  trust  the  house  will  pardon  me 
for  occupying  a  short  portion  of  its  time.  The 
gentleman  from  Simpson,  in  the  beginning  of 
his  remarks,  pronounced  mv  amendment — even 
before  it  was  read — a  fraud.  Upon  what  prin- 
ciple it  can  be  denominated  a  fraud,  I  am  at  a 
loss  to  understand.  I  am  conscious  of  one  thing, 
however,  and  that  is,  that  the  remark  cannot  ap- 
ply to  me.  I  have  been  constantly  in  favor  of 
electing  sheriffs  for  two  years,  and  no  longer. 
And  it  was  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  that 
object  that  I  moved  my  amendment;  and  not  for 
the  purpose  of  inflicting  a  fraud  upon  this 
house,  or  upon  any  member  of  it. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  apprehend  that  I  used  no 
such  term  in  reference  to  the  gentleman.  I  re- 
member when  I  was  discussing  the  question  as 
to  whether  the  amendment  Avas  in  order,  that  I 
assumed — not  that  his  amendment  was  a  fraud — 
but  that  the  entertainment  of  the  amendment  by 
the  house,  would  be  virtually  practising  a  fraud 
— though  perhaps  that  was  too  broad  an  expres- 
sion— but  the  house  will  understand  I  mean  a 
parliamentary  fraud — upon  those  who  had  voted 
m  favor  of  striking  out.  I  hope  my  friend  from 
the  county  of  Clay,  will  not  for  a  moment  sup- 
pose, that  I  intended  to  impute  to  him,  the  offer- 
ing of  a  proposition  for  the  purpose  of  practis- 
ing a  fraud.  There  is  no  gentleman  for  whom  I 
have  a  greater  respect. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  The  explanation  of  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson  is  entirely  satisfactory; 
and  as  he  and  myself  have  been  good  friends 
since  we  met,  I  will  give  to  you  and  this  con- 
vention an  idea  that  has  occurred  to  me,  and  if 
my  friend  from  Simpson,  should  think  proper  to 

Srofit  by  it,  I  shall  consider  that  I  have  at  least 
one  my  state  some  service.  The  book  that  we 
are  publishing,  of  the  proceedings  and  debates 
of  this  convention,  already  contains  some  three 
hundred  and  fifty  pagers.  The  stjitesmeu  and 
sages  who  come  after  us  will,  in  future  years, 
read  that  book  and  put  it  in  the  hands  of  their 
children  that  they  may  learn  how  to  make  con- 
stitutions. But  I  tell  my  friend,  that  I  think 
there  will  be  many  things  in  it  that  those  wise 
and  scrutinizing  men  will  dislike  to  set  before 
their  children  as  an  example  for  them  to  follow. 
You  will  recollect  that  some  years  since,  there 
was  a  great  noise  in  the  country,  growing  out  of 
a  proposition  introduced  into  the  United  States 
senate,  by  a  distinguished  senator  from  Mis- 
souri, in  regard  to  expunging  a  resolution  in  re- 
lation to  a  celebrated  individual.  "Expunging" 
was  a  new  word  at  that  day.  But  when  the 
sages  I  have  alluded  to,  come  to  read  this  book, 


expunging  will  certainly  be  the  order  of  the  day 
One  word  further.  The  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son has  alluded  to  a  celebrated  fox  and  goose, 
and  her  goslings:  and,  sir,  although  I  do  not 
understand  myself,  as  being  alluded  to  as  the 
cunning  fox,  yet  from  the  great  care  the  gentle- 
man has  kindly  manifested  in  regard  to  those 
who  voted  with  him  yesterday,  I  have  no  doubt 
he  must  have  intended  himself  as  the  goose. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  My  friend  from  Clay— al- 
though I  have  attempted  to  appease  him — seems 
still  inclined  to  indulge  in  his  witicisms.  It 
may  be  very  possible,  and  I  doubt  if  it  is  not 
true,  that  there  are  those  who  may  put  into  the 
book  which  records  our  debates,  some  things 
which  they  may  not  themselves  like  to  read 
hereafter.  I  do  not  say  that  my  friend  from 
Clay,  when  he  goes  home  to  his  constituents 
and  tells  them  that  he  has  recorded  in  the  book 
of  the  proceedings  of  this  house,  that  they 
should  not  have  a  right  to  vote  a  second  time 
for  the  same  candidate  for  sheriff,  may  not  wish 
to  withdraAv  tliat  part  of  the  record  from  pos- 
terity, and  those  even  who  now  exist.  It  is  true 
that  in  the  fable  that  I  related,  the  goose  was 
deceived  and  her  goslings  destroyed;  but  I  did 
not  intend  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  the 
gentleman  from  Clay  was  the  fox,  for  I  do  not 
think  he  has  cunning  enough  for  that.  The  gen- 
tleman did  notdisplay  cunning  enough  to  entrap 
us.  Though  he  introduced  liis  nose  within  the 
covert  of  the  goose,  I  do  not  intend  he  shall 
get  his  head  and  shoulders  in.  I  pi'efer  that  he 
should  stay  there  until  lie  freezes. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  The  amendment  proposes 
to  make  the  deputies  of  sheriffs  ineligible  as 
well  as  the  sheriff.  Now,  I  am  not  at  all  cer- 
tain that  the  sheriff  should  be  made  ineligible; 
but  feel  very  certain  that  his  deputies  should 
not.  I  cannot  consent  that  one  man's  holding 
an  office  should  make  another  man  ineligible. 
I  profess  to  be  a  liberal  conservative,  and  go  for 
electing  all  the  officers,  and  for  tests  of  qualifi- 
cation where  they  will  do  good;  but  I  cannot 
approve  of  making  such  evidences  of  qualifica- 
tion, however  obtained,  operate  to  make  the 
officer  ineligible,  much  less  another  man;  but 
for  some  other  reasons  I  shall  vote  to  make  the 
principal  sheriff  ineligible  after  a  second  term. 

Mr.  IRWIN".  I  am  opposed  to  the  re-eligi- 
bility of  sheriffs;  but  I  incline  to  the  opinion 
that  two  years  is  too  short  a  period,  as  the  busi- 
ness of  the  second  year  will,  (as  a  matter  of  ne- 
cessity) have  to  be  entrusted  to  his  successor, 
and  no  gentleman  will  take  the  slieriffalty,  un- 
der the  circumstances.  I  shall  move,  if  not 
done  by  some  other  member,  to  increase  the 
sheriff's  term  to  four  years,  and  to  be  ineligible 
thereafter  either  as  principal  or  deputy. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  I  was  one  of  those  who  voted 
to  strike  out;  and  I  did  so  because  I  did  not  like 
the  proposition  as  it  came  from  the  committee, 
nor  do  1  like  the  amendment.  I  am  in  favor  of 
a  sheriff  holding  his  office  for  two  years,  or  one 
term  only.  I  do  not  consider  the  office  of  .sheriff, 
like  all  the  others  that  have  been  alluded  to, 
and  the  reason  given  by  the  gentleman  from 
Simpson,  is  the  very  best  of  reasons  wliy  he 
should  not  be  re-elected.  He  says  he  will  go  on 
cutting  and  carving  for  the  first  two  years. 
There  is  a  good  deal  of  truth  in  tliat,  and  it  is  a 


397 


stroug  reason  whr  he  should  be  iillowe<^l  but  one 
term,  and  then  he  compelled  to  -wind  Tip  his 
business.  The  sheriff  under  the  present  con- 
stitution holds  his  office  only  for  two  years,  and 
I  have  never  heard  any  complaint  upon  that 
ground. 
Although  I  am  for  the  re-«ligibilitv  of  perhaps 


on  the  subject,  and  it  is  that  the  sheriff,  tvuhout 
regard  to  the  deputies,  shall  be  ineligible,  after 
having  served  two  terms,  until  after  one  term 
shall  have  elapsed — ^giving  him  the  right  to  be 
elected  two  terms  out  of  three.  I  propose  to 
insert  the  words,  "  that  associate  jnages  of  the 
county  courts  are  elected,  whose  term  of  office 


every  other  officer  of  government,  tfiis  is  an  of-  shall  be  two  years,  and  thev  shall  be  re-eligible 
ficer'that  I  am  opposed  to  making  re-eligible,  |  for  a  second  term,  but  no  slieriff  shall,  after  the 
for  the  reason  that  the  longer  he  is  in  office  the  '  expiration  of  the  second  term,  be  re-eligible  for 
more  will  he  have  it  in  his  power,  to  influence  ;  the  succee<ling  term." 

the  election.  I  have  seen  sherifife  turned  out  be-  j  Mr.  BROWK.  I  would  enquire  if  that  amend- 
fore  the  end  of  their  first  term,  and  have  known  i  ment  is  now  in  order.  The  same  thing,  in  sub- 
men  who  have  purchased  the  office;  but  I  have  \  stance,  has  been  once  stricken  out,  by  a  vote  of 
never  known  a  case  in  which  the  duties  have  1  the  convention.  The  parliamentary  rule  is,  I 
been  satisfactorily  discharged  after  the  first  term.  [  believe,  that  the  same  matter  that  has  once  been 
In  order  then  to  get  clear  of  a  sheriff  who  may  !  stricken  out  shall  not  be  again  re-inserted, 
be  found  remiss  in  his  duty,  and  to  give  the  peo- 1  Mr.  GRAY.  The  gentleman  misunderstands 
•pie  a  fair  chance,  I  will  'make  him  ineligible  i  mv  motion.  There  is  this  difference  between 
after  the  first  term.  I  do  not  think  that  this  i  wfcat  has  been  stricken  out  and  what  I  propose 
will  have  any  effect  as  an  entering  wedge,  in  [  to  insert,  and  it  is,  I  think,  a  very  material  dif- 
opposition  to'  the  re-eligibility  of  other  officers. '  ference.  My  motion  is  in  reference  to  the  sheriff. 
It  ought  not  to  have  such  effect,  for  I  do  not  be-  j  and  not  the  deputies. 

lieve  that  there  is  any  other  officer  that  ought  1      The  PRESIDENT.    I   am  inclined  to  think 

not  to  be  re-eligible.  j  the  proposition  is  in  order — ^the  matter  that  is 

Mr.  GHOLSON  asked  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on  !  proposed  to  be  inserted  not  being  the  same  as 

Mr.  GARRARD'S  substitute,  and  they  were  ta-  i  was  stricken  out. 


ken,  and  resulted  thus : 

Ye.\s.— Mr.  President.  (Guthrie,)  "Wm.  K.  Bow- 
ling, \Vm.  Chenault,  James  S.  Crisman,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Ben.  flardin,  John  Hargis 


Mr.  BRISTOW.  I  will  merely  remark  upon 
this  subject  of  re-eligibility,  that  my  mind  Is 
ma<ie  up,  to  the  effect  that'  all  our  o'fficers  had 
l)etter  be  made  re-eligible;  but  in  deference  to 
the  opinion   of  others — in  whom  I  have  great 


Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Invin,  Alfred 'M.  i  confidence— I  intend,  when  the  proper  time  ax- 
Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  rives,  to  move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  by 
Thomas  X.  Lindsev,  Martin  P.  Marshall.  Wil-  j  which  the  provision  regarding  the  re-eligibility 


JamesRudd,JohnD.Tavlor.  John  J.  Thnrman,!  vision  that  was  stricken  out  IS 

Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett.  Squire  Turner,  j  than  any  which  we  can  substitute  for  it.    1  wUl 

John  L.  Waller,  Henrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  i  therefore  move  to  reeonsider  that  vote. 

White,  Robert  X.  Wiekliffe,  Geo?ge  W.  Williams, !      The  PRESIDEJi  T    The  motion  to  reconsider 

We=lev  J.  Wrio-ht 37.  cannot  be  entertained,  according  to  the  rules, 

X.vy's.— Richlrd  Apperson.  John  S.   Barlow,  i  ""till  to-morrow  ^       ^   ,  „    , 

Alfred  Bovd ,  Williain  ^radlev,  Luther  Brawner,  Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  voted  myself  for 
Francis  if.  Bri.stow,  Thomas "D.  Brown.  Charles  ,  the  re-elig;bility  of  tne  shenff ;  but  I  can  see  no 
Chambers,  Beverlv  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffev,  i  objection  if  that  vote  is  to  be  reconsidered  to 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin.  Wil-  =  reconsidering  it  to-day.  I  tlierefore  move  to  dis- 
liam    Cowper,    Edward    Curd,    Lucius    Desha, !  pense  with  the  rule. 

Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,!  Mr.IRWI>.  I  see  no  good  reason  for  reconsid- 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  1  ering  that  vote.     I  could  suggest  a  reason  to  my 


Richard   D.   Gholson,  Xinian   E.   Gray,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Vincent  S.  Hay,   William   Hen- 
dri.x,  Thomas  James.  Charles  C.  Kelly.  Janies 
M.  Lackev,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.'Machen, 
George  ^.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
William  X.  Marshall,  Xathan  McClure,  David 
Meriwether,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spaulding.  James  | 
W.   Stone,   Michael   L.   Stoner,  John   Wheeler, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson — 47. 
So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 
The  question  then  recurred  upon  the  adoption 
•f  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Simp- 
>on. 

Mr.  GRAY.  It  seems  to  me  that  a  majority 
of  this  convention  are  in  favor  at  least  of  making 
these  officers  ineligible,  after  having  served  a 
certain  number  of  years.  1  have  a  proposition 
to  submit,  in  order  to  test  tlie  sense  of  the  house 


friend  from  Todd,  why  it  should  not  be  recon- 
sidered. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  If  the  gentleman  does 
not  desire  a  reconsideration,  I  wUl  witlidraw  my 
motion. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  There  are  several  delegates  ab- 
sent. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  It  is  for  that  very  reason  that 
I  wish  a  reconsideration.  I  will  renew  the  mo- 
tion to  dispense  with  the  rule. 

The  motion  being  put.  it  was,  upon  a  division 
negatived.  Ayes  51.  Noes  26.  Two-thirds  not 
voting  in  the  affirmative,  the  rule  was  not  dis- 
pensed with. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  I  now  give  notice  that  I  will 
renew  the  motion  for  reconsideration  to-morrow. 

Mr.  TURNER.  As  any  thing  that  we  may  do 
in  relation  to  this  matter^  wil!  probably  up<m  a 
reconsideration  of  the  vote  be  reversed,  I  propose 


398 


tliat  Ave  pass  over  tliis  section,  and  proceed  with 
the  residue  of  the  report. 

The  question  being  taken,  it  was  decided  in 
the  negative. 

Mr.  TURI^'ER.  I  can  see  no  objection  to  pass- 
ing over  this  clause  and  taking  up  the  residue 
of  tile  report.     It  will  save  time  eventually. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  hope  the  house  will  act  upon 
this  amendment.  I  would  like  to  see  some  in- 
dication of  the  opinion  of  the  convention  iipon 
it. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  is  certainly  in  the  pow- 
er of  the  house  to  pass  over  this  section  ;  but  the 
difficulty  is,  it  will  appear  very  awkardly  upon 
the  journals  ;  perhaps  the  convention  had  better 
proceed  with  the  section. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  no  objection. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  understand  the  ques- 
tion to  be  now  upon  the  substitute  for  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson.  I  voted 
in  favor  of  striking  out  the  clause  that  rendered 
the  slierifi  ineligible  ;  and  one  of  my  reasons 
for  doing  so,  was  because  it  extended  to  them. 
I  will  therefore  now  vote  forthe  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Christian,  in  favor  of  rendering 
the  high  .slieriff  ineligible  for  the  second  term, 
and  the  deputies  eligible. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  was  very  much  like  the 
gentleman  from  Jefferson,  1  thought  we  were  go- 
ing to  exclude  rather  too  many.  It  is  necessary 
that  there  should  be  a  great  many  deputies,  es- 
pecially as  the  elections  are  to  be  held  in  every 
district,  it  will  be  requsite  to  have  special  depu- 
ties in  everv  district.  I  am  disposed  to  support 
the  principle  contained  in  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Christian. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  am  willing  to  support  that 
proposition — with  one  exception — the  necessity 
for  which  I  think  will  be  obvious  to  all,  that 
he  shall  not  be  called  on  to  act  as  deputy  for  the 
succeeding  term. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  have  no  objection  to  that.  I 
^yill  accept  it  as  a  modification.  The  proposi- 
tion was  so  modified. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  shall  vote  for  the  proposition 
submitted  by  the  gentleman  from  Christian  ; 
not  because  I  prefer  it  to  the  one  that  was  sub- 
mitted by  the  gentleman  from  Clay  ;  but  because 
I  think  It  is  the  best  proposition  now  before  the 
convention.     I  hope  it  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  I  cannot  vote  for  the  substitute. 
It  is  in  fact  providing  for  what  we  have  been 
contending  against.  It  is  carrying  out  the  prin- 
ciple that  we  have  been  contemling  against — that 
these  officers  shall  be  ineligible. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  shall  certainly  give  this  pro- 
position my  hearty  support;  because  it  is  carry- 
ingout  the  very  principle  which  I  think  of  all 
others  should  be  carried  out,  and  that  is  that 
sheriffs  ought  not  to  bo  re-eligible,  after  the  first 
term.  lam  in  favorof  there-eligibility  of  judges, 
and  1  think  it  would  be  right  that  clerks  should 
be  made  re-eligible;  but  we  all  know  that  the 
duties  of  a  sheriff  differ  very  materially  from 
that  of  judges  and  clerks. 

Mr.  IRWIN  asked  for  tlie  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  substitute. 

Mr.  RRISTOW.  I  intend  to  vote  affirmative- 
ly on  this  propo.sition,  and  I  do  it,  not  because  I 
believe  exactly  in  the  correctness  of  the  reasons 
given;  but  the  great  principle  of  rotation  will 


come  up,  and  I  Ihink  that  four  years  is  a  suffi- 
cient length  of  time  for  a  man  to"  hold  the  office 
of  sheriff.  It  is  an  important  office,  and  I  am 
willing  that  the  deputies  shall  contest  the  office 
for  themselves. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  then  taken,  with  the 
following  result,  yeas  45,  nays  38: 

Yeas — Mr.  Pres'ident,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  William  K.Bowling,Francis  M.Bristow, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Se 
lucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard.  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hav,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thom- 
as James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston. Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thcunas  W^.  Lisle, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ard L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meri- 
wether, William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  William  Pres- 
ton, James  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor, John  J.  Thunnan,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry 
Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe,  Geo.  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 45. 

Nays— John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Beverley  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henrv  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Chastcen  T.  Dun- 
avan,  Benj.  F.  EdAvards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest.  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hcn- 
drix,  James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.Machen,  Geo. 
W.Mansfield,  Alexander K.  Marshall,  William 
N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  Jonathan  New- 
cum,  Hugh  Newell,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold.  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius 
A.  Spaulding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  Whee- 
ler. Charles  A  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 38. 
So  the  substitute  wasadopted. 
Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  have  a  small  amend- 
ment to  come  in  at  the  close  of  the  section.  It 
is  as  follows:  "Nor  shall  the  high  sheriff  be 
eligible  for  a  second  term,  unless  he  shall  have 
obtained  a  quietus  for  at  least  three  months  be- 
fore his  election." 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  believe  that  provision  is 
made  in  a  part,  of  the  report  of  the  legislative 
committee  for  this  veiy  suhject. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  1  will  then  withdraw 
my  amendment. 

Mr.  HAY.  I  move  to  fill  the  blank  with  the 
words  "two  years." 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 
The  question  then  being  taken  upon  the  orig- 
inal section  as  amended,  it  was  adopted. 

The  fifth  section  was  then  read  by  the  secreta- 
ry as  follows: 

"A  constable  shall  be  elected  in  every  justice's 
district,  who  shall  be  chosen  at  the  same  time, 
in  the  same  manner,  and  for  the  same  term  that 
justices  of  the  peace  are  elected.  He  may  execute 
the  duties  of  his  office  in  any  part  of  the  county 
in  which  he  resides." 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  will  move  to  strike  out 
the  words  "he  may  execute  the  duties  of  his  of- 
fice in  any  part  of  the  county  in  which  he  re- 
sides." I'he  effect  of  striking  out  these  words 
will  be  to  leave  the  juri.sdiction  of  constables  to 
be  settled   by  th«  legislMture  instead  of  pre- 


399 


tscribing  it  by  a  constittitional  provision.  In 
looking  over' the  old  constitution  I  find  that 
sheriffs,  constables,  coroners  and  surveyors  all 
made  constitutional  officers;  but  there  is  no  pro- 
vision in  that  constitution,  or  in  any  other  that 
I  have  seen,  prescribing  the  jurisdiction  of  these 
officers.  I  suggest  to  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, that  this  is  not  the  appropriate  place  for 
regulating  the  jurisdiction  of  constables.  It 
does  not  prevail  in  any  other  constitnrion,  nor 
does  it  in  our's.  I  am  perfectly  willing  that 
the  legislature  shall  have  full  power  to  regulate 
their  jurisdiction.  The  objection  I  raise  is,  that 
it  shall  not  be  done  by  constitutional  provision. 

Mr.  TURXER.  I  am  opposed  to  striking  out 
this  provision.  The  eighth  section  provides 
that  every  officer  shall  reside  Avithin  his  district 
during  his  continuance  in  office;  but  there  is  a 
])ropriety,  an  absolute  necessity,  in  fact,  that 
an  officer,  of  this  description,  shall  do  business 
in  any  part  of  the  county.  We  cannot  always 
obtain  the  services  of  a  sheriff  in  the  remote 
parts  of  the  county,  and  it  is  necessary  that  a 
constable  shall  be  permitted  to  execiite  process; 
])ut  if  he  has  to  stop  and  deliver  up  his  autliori- 
ty  to  another,  the  criminal  may  in  the  mean 
time  escape.  As  far  as  respects  the  duties  of  the 
office,  the  gentleman  from  Louisville  is  mistaken, 
if  he  supposes  there  is  any  attempt  to  prescribe 
those  duties  here.  That  is"  left  to  the  legislature 
idtogether;  but  it  is  right  and  proper,  according 
to  the  views  of  the  committee,  that  the  constitu- 
tion should  declare  that  he  is  a  county  officer 
and  can  do  business  in  any  part  of  the  county — 
that  his  jurisdiction  is  co-extensive  with  the 
county.  If  you  strike  out  this  provision,  the 
legislature  may,  if  they  think  proper,  confine 
him  to  a  single  district.  I  desire  tliat  he  shall 
be  a  county  officer.  And  if  it  is  a  proper  prin- 
ciple, it  is  right  to  insert  it  here. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Tliere  are  a  great  many 
things  that  are  right  and  proper  in  themselves, 
tliat  nevertheless  ought  not  to  be  inserted  in  the 
constitution.  We  are  to  presume  that  every 
thing  in  the  statute  book  is  right  and  proper; 
but  I  would  not  put  every  thing  that  is  in  the 
statute  book  in  the  constitution.  The  old  con- 
stitution simply  declares,  that  the  officers  shall 
be  constitutional  officers,  but  it  does  not  pretend 
to  prescribe  or  limit  their  jurisdiction.  It  pro- 
vides that  coroners,  justices  of  the  peace,  and 
surveyors  shall  be  created,  without  prescribing 
their  jurisdiction.  There  is  not  a  constitution 
in  any  state  in  the  union  that  prescribes  the  ju- 
risdiction of  a  constable,  and  I  do  not  believe 
that  it  should  be  done  here.  If  such  a  provision 
be  inserted,  it  will  be  beyond  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  control  the  jurisdiction  of  a  con- 
stable. I  can  see  no  propriety  in  encumbering 
the  constitution  with  a  provision  of  this  kind. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  The  gentleman  from 
Louisville  says  that  if  this  clause  should  be  re- 
tained, the  legislature  could  not  hereafter  con- 
fine the  jurisdiction  of  constables  within  nar- 
rower limits,  if  it  should  be  deemed  advisable 
to  do  so.  Is  it  right  that  the  legislature  should 
have  such  power?  They  are  to  be  elected  by 
districts.  Suppose  a  constable  has  an  attach- 
ment against  an  individual,  who  is  passing  into 
another  district;  or  suppose  the  case  of  process 
against  the  parties  to  a  note,  and  the  principal 


resides  in  one  district,  or  in  onewanl  of  a  tity, 
and  his  security  resides  in  anotlier.  Here  there 
would  be  a  necessity  for  having  more  than  one 
officer  to  serve  the  process. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  My  argument  was  not  based 
upon  the  assumption  that  the  legislature  would 
necessarily  restrict  the  jurisdiction  of  this  offi- 
cer. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  am  aware  of  that; 
but  I  think  it  would  be  improper  to  give  them 
the  power  to  do  it. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  My  opinion  is,  that  the  re- 
port, as  made  by  the  committee,  is  correct.  I 
think  that  the  power  to  make  legislative  restric- 
tion should  be  taken  away;  and  one  great  reason 
is  this :  If  you  have  a  constable  in  each  district, 
why,  he  will  necessarily  be  regarded  as  the  only 
officer  entitled  to  execute  the  duties  of  the  office 
within  that  district;  but  if  you  give  him  the 
privilege  of  exercising  the  duties  of  a  constable 
throughout  the  county,  you  afford  to  the  citi- 
zens of  the  county  the  opportunity  of  choosing 
among  those  officers,  the  one  most  prompt  and 
diligent  in  discharging  the  duties  of  that  office. 
It  will  have  the  effect  of  exciting  emulation 
among  them.  J'or  this  reason,  I  believe  they 
should  have  the  range  of  the  Avhole  county,  and 
that  legislative  restriction  should  be  taken 
away  in  regard  to  curtailing  their  jurisdiction. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  In  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  county  courts,  there  is  this  provision:  "The 
several  counties  in  this  state  shall  be  laid  off 
into  districts,  of  convenient  size,  as  the  general 
assembly  may,  from  time  to  time,  direct.  Two 
justices  of  the  peace  and  one  constable  shall  be 
elected  in  each  district,  by  the  qualified  voters 
therein.  The  jurisdiction  of  said  officers  shall 
be  co-extensive  with  the  county."  I  think,  sir, 
that  we  may  as  well  strike  out  the  whole  pro- 
vision on  this  subject  in  this  place,  and  leave 
the  section  I  have  just  read  to  be  adopted  when 
we  come  to  consider  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  county  courts. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  deny  that  the  subject  be- 
longs to  that  committee,  at  all.  They  had  no 
right  to  say  a  word  upon  the  subject.  This 
county  court  committee,  with  the  two  others  that 
are  associated  with  it,  making  a  committee  of 
thirty,  seem  to  think  that  there  can  be  nothing 
done  in  this  convention,  unless  they  do  it.  It 
appears  to  me,  that  the  remaining  seventy  dele- 
gates have  a  right  to  do  some  part  of  the  busi- 
ness. So  far  as  I  have  seen  of  the  business  done 
by  that  committee,  I  think  they  are  making  a 
constitution  that  will  be  set  aside  by  the  peo- 
ple. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  will  un- 
derstand that  it  is  not  in  order,  to  refer  to  the 
proceedings  of  any  committee. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  beg  pardon  sir,  I  was  but 
following  the  example  of  the  gentleman  from 
Logan,  who  was  arraigning  myself  and  iny  lit- 
tle committee  before  their  betters. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  am  not  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee of  thirty,  and  I  have  no  desire  to  deprive 
the  gentleman  of  any  honor,  that  he  may  obtain 
by  regulating  the  office  of  constable. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  take  no  pride— as  I  have 
said  repeatedly — in  having  to  do  this  business. 
In  all  probability  there  will  be  amotion  to  strike 
out  the  y)rovision  which  the  gentleman  has  read 


400 


from  the  report  of  tlie  county  court  coinmittee. 
It  is  not  satisfactory  to  all  of  us;  but  this  is  a  small 
mattor  sir,  ami  might  be  determined  witliout  any 
very  lengthy  debate. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  think  sir,  with  all  defer- 
ence to  the  opinions  of  other  gentlemen,  that  we 
should  be  pardoned  for  attaching  some  little  im- 
portance to  this  matter.  Now  if  a  constable  be 
restricted  to  his  particular  district,  the  people  are 
deprived,  to  a  great  extent,  of  his  services.  So 
far  Irom  being  restricted  to  the  district,  he 
should  not  even  be  confined  to  the  county  ;  but 
should  be  permitted  to  go  to  the  very  extremity 
of  the  state,  in  pursuit  of  a  fugitive  from  justice. 
If  a  constable  be  confined  to  his  district,  in  case 
ofsickness  or  other  disability,  his  place  cannot  be 
supplied  by  another.  There  can  be  no  harm  at 
all  events,  in  pi'oviding  for  contingencies  of  this 
sort.  I  will  furtlier  remark,  that  from  the  very 
beginning  of  this  report,  every  thing  seems  to 
have  gone  wrong  end  foremost.  Here  is  a  pro 
vision,  in  regard  to  the  continuance  of  tlie  office 
of  constable.  It  is  to  be  regulated  by  another 
office  wliich  is  not  yet  provided  for.  "A  consta- 
ble shall  be  elected  in  every  justice's  district, 
who  shall  be  chosen  at  the  same  time,  in  the 
same  manner,  and  for  the  same  term,  that  justi- 
ces of  the  peace  are  elected."  And  we  have  not 
yet  provided  for  justices  of  the  peace. 

Mr.  HAMILTON".  It  does  appear  to  me,  that 
the  regulation  of  this  whole  matter,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  jurisdiction  of  a  constable,  prop- 
erly belongs  to  the  legislature.  Under  tlie 
present  constitution,  those  who  fill  the  office  of 
constable,  discharge  the  duties  of  that  office  in 
any  part  of  the  county,  and  that  is  precisely  as 
it  should  be;  but  if  any  change  should  hereafter 
be  desired,  it  can  be  made  by  the  legislature.  It 
should  not  be  done  by  constitutional  provision. 
While  up,  I  may  be  permitted  to  say,  that  we 
are  consuming  much  time  with  unnecessa- 
ry speaking,  and  I  think  it  would  be  well  to 
have  a  committee  of  ten  members  appointed,  to 
be  termed  the  "speaking  committee,"  and  have 
the  senate  chamber,  or  some  other  apartment  fit- 
ted up  for  their  use,  so  that  those  gentlemen  who 
wish  to  indulge  in  much  .speaking,  may  have  an 
opportunity  of  doing  so,  without  interfering  with 
the  business  of  the  convention,  and  we  shall 
then  relieve  gentlemen  from  the  painful  necessi- 
ty of  seeking  to  expunge  a  great  deal  of  super- 
fluous matter  from  the  journal  of  our  debates, 
and  we  shall  be  able  to  make  much  greater  pro- 

fress  with  the  business  for  which  we  arc  assem- 
led. 

Mr.  RUDD.  I  hope  the  motion  to  strike  out 
will  not  prevail;  for  if  there  is  any  part  of  the 
state  that  will  suffer  more  than  another  it  is  the 
city  of  Louisville.  I  want  a  constable  when  he 
has  occasion  to  serve  a  process,  to  go  into  any 
part  of  the  city,  and  not  to  be  confined  to  a  par- 
ticular ward.  I  hope  the  gentleman  from  Louis- 
ville will  withdraw  the  proposition,  for  there 
would  be  great  disadvantage  arising  from  it,  if 
the  legislature  sliould  pass  a  law  confining  the 
jurisdiction  of  a  constaole  witliin  a  particular 
ward  or  di.strict.  I  do  not  myself  bidieve  that 
they  would  pass  such  a  law.  I  could  not  suppose 
for  a  moment,  that  a  body  of  men,  composed  of 
one  hundred,  would  be  so  inconsistent,  so  want- 


ing in  common  sense,  as  to  do  it.  But  I  liope 
the  proposition  will  be  withdrawn. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  would  call  the  attention 
of  the  mover  of  this  proposition  to  the  eftect  it 
would  have.  The  section  provides  that  one  con- 
stable shall  be  elected  in  each  justice's  district. 
If  these  words  be  stricken  out,  the  inference  will 
be  that  the  jurisdiction  of  each  of  these  con- 
stables is  to  be  confined  within  his  particu- 
lar district.  I  do  not  suppose  that  it  is  the 
intention  of  the  gentleman,  that  their  jurisdic- 
tion shall  be  thus  restricted. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon and  my  friend  from  Louisville,  have  both 
misapprehended  me  entirely.  1  think  that 
when  we  trust  the  legislature  with  the  power  of 
branching  the  court  of  appeals,  and  of  increas- 
ing the  tribunals  of  the  state,  and  of  increasing 
the  power  and  jurisdiction  of  the  higher  officers 
of  the  government,  that  it  is  carrying  the  mat- 
ter ratlier  too  far  now  to  fix  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
constable  in  the  constitution.  It  is  a  matter  that 
I  am  not  anxious  about;  but  I  do  insist  tliat  it 
is  not  proper  to  encumber  the  constitution  with 
provisions  of  this  description.  I  do  not  Avant 
to  usurp  every  power  that  the  legislature  should 
hereafter  exercise.  All  that  I  wish  is  tliat  tlie 
constitution  shall  remain  silent  upon  tliis  sub- 
ject. 

Mr.  TURNER.  If  you  do  not  retain  this 
provision  the  constructive  effect  will,  in  all 
probability,  be  that  the  constable  will  only  have 
jurisdiction  in  the  district  in  which  he  was 
elected.  You  make  him  a  constitutional  officer, 
and  the  legislature  will  have  no  power  to  en- 
large his  jurisdiction,  if  there  be  no  intimation 
contained  in  the  constitution,  as  to  its  intent  ami 
meaning  in  regard  to  the  jurisdiction  of  these 
officers. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  think  the  gentleman  from 
Louisville  is  right  in  the  motion  wiiich  he  has 
made  to  strike  out.  I  do  not  agree  with  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  that  because  this  sec- 
tion requires  the  officer  to  reside  within  the  dis- 
trict, it  is  an  inhibition  upon  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  authorize  him  to  do  business  out 
of  that  di.strict.  I  tliink  the  gentleman  from 
Louisville  is  right  for  this  reason.  The  part  of 
the  section  proposed  to  be  stricken  out,  confines 
the  duties  of  the  constable  within  the  limits  of 
the  county.  And  it  becomes  a  question  whether 
it  is  best,  by  constitutional  provision,  to  confine 
his  duties  within  the  limits  of  a  county.  It 
might  be  advisable, to  give  a  constable  the  right, 
under  certain  circumstances,  to  follow  a  criminal 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  county. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  think  that  the  motion  of 
the  gentleman  from  Louisville  ought  not  to  pre- 
vail, but  on  the  contrary  it  seems  to  me  that  the 
jurisdiction  of  a  constable  ought  to  be  extended — 
and  this  debate  has  suggested  to  me  a  matter — 
not  of  very  great  importance  certainly — but  one 
which  ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  And  I  give 
notice  now,  that  to- morrow,  or  at  the  proper 
time,  I  willoff"er  a  proposition  to  this  effect,  "Re- 
solved, that  the  general  assembly  be  instructed 
to  provide  by  law,  that  wiienever  a  criminal 
process  shall  come  into  the  hands  of  a  sheriff  or 
constable,  such  officer  sliall  have  power  and 
authority  to  follow  and  arrest  the  suspected 
criminal  in  any  county  within  the  state."    I  do 


40 ; 


not  know  any  thing  that  can  conduce  more  to 
tlie  proper  administration  of  justice  than  such  a 
provision, 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  will  ask  the  .secretary  to  in- 
sert these  words  in  the  section  propose<l  to  be 
amended,  "and  whose  jurisdiction  and  duties 
shall  be  prescribed  by  law." 

The  question  being  taken  upon  the  proposition 
of  the  grentlemau  from  Louisville,  it  was  rejec- 
ted. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  then  moved  to  amend  by  in- 
serting iu  lieu  of  the  5tii  section,  the  following  : 
"There  shall  Jje  elected  in  everv  county  in  this 
commonwealth,  one  constable  for  every  two  jus- 
tices of  the  peace;  he  shall  hold  his  office  two 
years,  with  such  jurisdiction,  duties,  and  respon- 
sibilities as  shall  be  prescribed  by  law. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  IRWIN  then  offered  the  following,  as  an 
amendment ;  being  a  part  of  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  county  courts. 

"The  several  counties  in  this  state  shall  be  laid 
off  into  districts  of  convienient  size,  as  thegeneral 
assembly  may  from  time  to  time  direct.  Two 
justices  of  the  peace,  and  one  constable  shall  be 
elected  in  each  district  by  the  qualified  voters 
therein.  Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected 
for  the  term  of  four  years,  and  constables  for  the 
term  of  two  years  ;  they  shall  be  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  twenty-one  years  of  age,  and  shall 
have  resided  six  mouths  in  the  district  in  which 
they  maj'  be  elected  next  preceeding  their  elec- 
tion." 

Mr.  TURNER.  This  is  a  proposition  for  the 
establishing  of  part  of  a  court,  and  is  therefore 
amatter  over  which  this  article  has  no  jurisdic- 
tion.    It  was  under  the  consideration  of  the  uni-  i 
ted  committee  on  the  judiciary,  to  whom,  at  a! 
proper  time,  I  intend  to  move  to  refer  this  matter  j 
also,  and  to  add   the   committee  on  ministerial 
offices  to  their  number.  , 

The  amendment  was  r<-jected.  i 

Mr.  GARFIELDE  moved  to  amend  the  sec- 
tion by  striking  out  the  words   in  the  second, 
line,  "and  for  the  same  time,"  and  to  insert  the  ! 
Words  "for  the  term  of  two  years."     He  thought ; 
two  years  Ions  enough  for  the  term  of  a  consta-  j 

e.  ; 

Mr.  TURNER.     As  the  committee  will   un-  j 
doubt edly  act  together  on  this  subject  and  make  | 
the  several   reports  so  as  to  blend  together,  I ' 
think  the  gentleman  had  better  withdraw  his 
proposition. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE.  My  only  objection  is, 
that  to  say  now  that  the  constables  shall  be 
elected  for'the  same  term  as  the  magistrates,  may 
restrict  the  action  of  the  committee,  who  have 
this  last  class  of  officers  in  charge. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  DESHA.  I  have  an  amendment  to  offer, 
and  I  beg  leave  to  state  to  the  house,  I  shall  vote  | 
against  myself.  My  desire  is  to  test  the  sincerity  i 
ot  members  as  to  this  question  of  re-eligibility. ' 
I  am  one  of  those  who  contend  that  the  people  \ 
are  capable  of  selecting  their  offieere,  not  only  ; 
for  the  first,  but  for  the  second  and  all  other 
terms,  and  in  the  votes  I  have  and  shall  give,  1 1 
go  in  favor  of  re-eligibility  in  its  fullest  extent,  j 
The  arguments  made  bv  gentlemen  here  who  | 
are  in  favor  of  the  ineligujility  of  a  sheriff,  it  j 
doeseeem  to  me  apply  at  least,  in  proportion  to  i 
51 


the  magnitude  of  the  office,  to  the  constable. 
There  is  not  to  be  one  constable,  but  fifteen  or 
twenty,  and  they  have  an  amount  of  money  in 
their  hands  greater  than  any  other  officer,  and 
combined,  they  would  wield  an  influence  fully 
equal  to  that  of  any  sheriff.  It  does  seem  to  me, 
therefore,  that  the  same  principles  will  apply  as 
strongly  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  I  do 
not  expect  to  make  any  extended  remarks  now, 
or  to  occupy  the  time  of  the  convention  at  any 
time  with  long  speeches,  for  I  came  here  to  act, 
and  shall  ever  be  found  in  my  place  to  carry  out 
tlie  views  of  those  Who  sent  me  here. 

Mv  amendment,  which  I  shall  vote  against,  is 
to  add  after  the  word  "election,"  in  the  third 
line,  the  words,  "  and  he  shall  be  re-eligible  for 
one  term  onlv." 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  am  in  favor,  as  a  general 
rule,  of  the  re-eligibility  of  all  officers,  but  I 
believe  that  the  cases  of  the  treasurer  of  the 
commonwealth,  and  the  sheriflfe  of  counties, 
ought  to  form  an  exception  to  the  general  rule. 
If  w«  do  make  them  thus  form  an  exception,  I 
believe  that  after  years  will  prove  its  wisdom.  I 
do  not  desire  that  those  who  have  the  custody 
of  the  public  money,  shall  become  candidates 
for  office  with  that  money  in  their  pockets. — 
TNTiether  this  objection  applies  to  the  constable 
or  not,  I  am  not  certain.  I  do  not  suppose  he 
becomes  a  collector  of  the  public  revenue,  and  I 
hope  he  never  will  be  allowed  to  become  so. 
But  if  I  thought  that  day  would  ever  come  un- 
der legislative  provision'  I  would  at  once  vote 
that  he  should  sen-e  for  two  years,  and  then  go 
out  and  make  a  settlement,  when,  if  they  chose, 
and  he  proved  worthy,  the  people  might  elect 
him  again  for  another  two  years.  I  would  let 
him  go  in  for  two  years  and  stay  out  for  two 
years,  before  he  should  be  re-eligible.  I  think 
all  those  officers  who  handle  the  money  of  the 
people,  should,  by  the  people  represented  in  this 
convention,  be  required  at  stated  times  to  make 
a  full  and  final  settlement.  I  am  not  afraid  of 
this  cry  of  inconsistency.  Some  gentlemen  have 
said,  that  if  we  vote  that  the  sheriff  shall  be 
ineligible  for  a  succeeding  term,  that  then  they 
will  violate  their  own  opinions  in  regard  to  the 
biilance  of  the  officers  of  the  country,  and  vote 
down  re-eligibility  in  every  other  officer  just  be- 
cause we  make  an  exception  in  the  case  of  a 
commonwealth  treasurer,  or  sheriff. 

Mr.  NEWELL  called  for  the  ayes  and  noes  on 
the  amendment. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  lay  the  amendment 
on  the  table. 

The  PRESIDENT  ruled  the  motion  out  of 
order. 

Mr.  WM.  JOHNSON.  I  believe  that  this 
whole  subject,  about  which  we  have  been  talking 
for  some  time,  is  an  improper  one  for  considera- 
tion here.  I  think  that  the  legislature  of  the 
country  can  dispose  of  this  matter  of  constable, 
and  define  how  many  each  county  shall  have, 
and  far  better  decide  upon  all  those  matters, 
from  time  to  time,  than  could  any  fixed  consti- 
tutional provision.  They  had  this  power  under 
the  old  constitution,  and  I  think  they  ought  to 
be  continued  in  it«  exercise.  I  should  prefer 
some  amendment  declaring  that  the  legislature 
may  provide  for  the  election  of  a-«iiitable  num- 
ber of  constables  in  each  county  in  the  state. 


402 


And  I  may  deem  it  proper  to  introduce  such  an  |  bunal  to  try  clerks.    Under  the  old   constitu- 


amendment  at  the  proper  time. 

Mr.  MAYES  moved  as,  a  substitute  for  the 
amendment,  the  Tvords  "and  he  shall  be  re-eli- 
gible for  a  second  term,  but  no  constable  shall, 
after  the  expiration  of  a  second  term  be  re-eli- 
gible for  a  succceeding  term." 


tion,  we  have  had  them  tried  before  the  appel- 
late court,  and  no  tribunal  could  be  more  com- 
petent. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  desire  that  the  clerk  of  the 
circuit  court  shall  be  removed  upon  indictment, 
the  judge  of  that  court   being  the  judge  of  the 


Mr.  DESHA  accepted  the  substitute  in  lieu  of  :  law  and  the  fact.     I  desire  the  clerks  of  the 
his  own  amendment.  i  county  court  to   be  removed   in  the  same  way. 


The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment, and  it  was  rejected;  ayes  21;  nays  58;  as 
follows: 

Teas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  "Wra.K.  Bow- 
ling, Archibald  Dixon,  James  H.  Garrard,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Ben.  Hardin,  Mark  E.  Huston, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Thomas  JST.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  John  L.  Waller— 21. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 
Chambers,  William  Chenault  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  "William  Cow- 
per,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dud- 
ley, Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.  Machen, 

George  W.  Mansfield,   Alexander  K.  Marshall,  {  had  better  leave  the  term  of  service  blank,  and 
William  N".   Marshall,  x^athan   McClure,  David    first  adopt  the  principle  contained  in  the  amend- 


the  judge  of  that  court  also  being  the  judge  of 
the  law  and  the  facts.  As  for  the  clerk  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  I  am  willing  that  he  shall  be 
removed  as  may  be  thought  proper. 

The  motion  to  .strike  out  the  section  was 
agreed  to. 

The  tenth  and  eleventh  sections  Avere  then 
read  and  agreed  to. 

The  twelfth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  insert  before  the 
word  "appointment,"  the  words   "election  or." 

The  amendment  was  adopted,  and  the  twelfth 
section  agreed  to. 

Mr.  TURNER  wished  to  offer  an  additional 
section,  as  an  individual,  and  not  in  behalf  of 
the  committee. 

The  proposed  new  section  was  then  read  as 
follows : 

"A  county  court  assessor  shall  be  elected  in 
every  county,  at  the  same  time,  and  in  the  same 
manner  that  the  presiding  judge  of  the  county 
court  is  elected,  who  .shall  have  power  to  ap- 
point such  assistant  assessors  as  may  be  neces- 
sary and  proper." 

Mr.  TURNER.     It  is  suggested  to  me  that  we 


Meriwether,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  New 
eum,  Hugh  Newell,  William  Preston,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 58. 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  strike  out  all  of  the  sec- 
tion after  the  word  "chosen"  in  the  second  line, 
and  substitute  in  lieu  thereof  the  words  follow- 
ing: "For  two  years,  at  such  time  and  place  as 
may  be  provided  for  by  law." 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  TURNER.  That  amendment  strikes  out 
the  provision  in  regard  to  the  extension  of  ju- 
risdiction. I  therefore  move  to  add  at  the  end 
of  the  section,  as  amended,  the  words  "whose 
jurisdiction  shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  coun- 
ty in  which  he  resides." 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 

The  section,  as  amended,  was  then   agreed  to. 

The  sixth  and  seventh  sections  were  then 
read,  and  agreed  to. 

The  eighth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  to  strike  it  out,  on  the 
ffround  that  tlio  matter  came  more  properly  un- 
der the  general  provisions  of  the  constitution, 
and  was  provided  for  by  another  report. 

Mr.  TURNER  had  no  objection,  and  the  sec- 
tion was  stricken  out. 

The  ninth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  NESBITT  moved  to  strike  it  out. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  hone  it  will  not  be  strick- 
«a  oat,  for  there  certainly  ought  to  be  «ome  tri- 


inent.  I  thiuk  there  is  no  gentleman  here  but 
will  see  the  propriety  of  having  an  officer  of 
this  kind.  This  duty  of  assessing  the  property 
of  individuals  and  preparing  a  list  of  voters,  is 
a  very  important  one,  and  it  has  been  very  bad- 
ly executed  heretofore,  as  all  must  know.  Some 
counties  in  the  state  pay  twenty  per  cent,  more 
revenue  on  the  value  ot  their  property  than  do 
other  counties,  and  some  counties  in  the  state 
have  a  full  return  made  of  the  number  of  their 
voters  while  others  do  not.  This  is  all  owing 
to  the  present  system  of  allowing  the  county 
courts  to  appoint  the  assessor,  whereby,  men 
lacking  in  the  proper  qualifications  for  the  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  get  the  office.  There 
should  be  a  regular  officer,  elected  by  the  people, 
for  the  purpose,  witli  a  term,  say  of  four  years, 
and  then  if  the  people  would  select  proper  men, 
we  would  have  this  business  done  better  than  it 
has  been  heretofore.  A  long  term  would  also 
induce  competent  individuals  to  accept  the  of- 
fice. Some  may  object  to  the  proposition  to  al- 
low the  assessor  to  appoint  his  deputies,  but  the 
proposition  was  thus  framed  for  this  reason. 
Tliere  are  a  great  many  of  the  smaller  counties 
in  the  state,  where  one  officer  would  be  suffi- 
cient, while  in  others,  such  as  Jefferson  and 
Madison,  three  or  four  would  be  required.  The 
assistants  would  be  responsible  to  tlie  assessor, 
and  should  be  appointed  by  him.  The  relations 
between  them  should  be  similar  to  those  be- 
tween the  sheriff  and  his  deputies. 

The  thirteenth  section  was  then  agreed  to. 

Mr.  NESBITT  moved  to  amend  the  section  so 
as  to  adopt  the  principle,  that  each  county  should 


403 


be  divided  into  assessor's  districts,  in  each  of 
which,  the  people  should  elect  aii  assessor. 

The  PRESIDENT  declared  the  araendraentto 
be  ineonsisteut  with  the  section  as  adopted,  and 
therefore  out  of  order. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  move  a  reconsideration  of 
the  vote  adopting  the  section.  It  might  happen 
that  a  man  elected  the  assessor  of  a  county 
would  appoint  two  or  three  of  his  sous  as  his 
deputies.  These  are  responsible  oflBcers,  and  the 
people  ought  to  choose  them. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  hope  the  motion  to  recon- 
sider will  not  prevail.  I  think  it  far  better  to 
have  one  individual  to  take  charge  of,  and  be  re- 
sponsible for.  the  whole  business. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  suppose  the  sheriff  will 
be  as  likely  to  appoint  his  sons  deputies,  as  the 
assessor,  and  yet  no  objection  has  been  urged 
against  that.  The  assessor  should  be  the  re- 
sponsible head  of  his  office. 

The  motion  to  reconsider  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  TURNER  proposed  to  submit  an  addi- 
tional section,  providing  for  the  manner  in  which 
the  commissions  of  the  officers,  provided  for  in 
this  report,  should  be  made  out;  but  it  being 
suggested  that  he,  as  chairman  ot  the  commit- 
tee, should  make  a  separate  report  on  the  sub- 
ject, he  withdrew  it. 

A  verbal  correction  was  then  made  in  the  11th 
section,  and  the  order  of  numbering  the  sec- 
tions directed  to  be  changed  so  as  to  conform  to 
the  amendment  of  the  report. 

The  question  was  then  announced  to  be  on 
the  adoption  of  the  report. 

Mr.  CLARKE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  WOODSON,  in  order  that  the  report 
might  be  fully  examined  before  final  action  was 
had,  moved  to  adjourn. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  refer  the  report  to  the 
committee  of  thirty  on  the  judiciary. 

The  PRESIDEI^T  declared  the  motion  not  to 
be  in  order,  while  a  motion  to  adjourn  was  pend- 
ing. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY.  NO\TEMBER  8,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Norton. 

JURISDICTION   OF   CONSTABLES. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  adopted. 

Resolved,  That  the  coramitte  on  miscellaneous 
provisions,  be  instructed  to  inquire  into  the  pro- 
prietv  of  authorizing  the  general  assembly  to 
provide  by  law,  that  when  a  sheriff,  coroner,  or 
constable,  has  a  criminal  process  against  any  per- 
son who  shall  escape  from  his  county,  after  the 
process  comes  to  the  hands  of  such  sheriff,  coro- 
ner, or  constable,  such  sheriff,  coroner,  or  con- 
stable may  follow  and  arrest  such  fugitive  from 
justice  in  any  other  county  in  this  common- 
wealth. 

CONSTITUTIONAL  AiraNDMENTS  BT  THE  LXGIELATUB£. 

Mr.  JACKSON  offered  the  following,  and  on 
his  motion  it  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  the 
revision  of  the  constitution  and  slavery: 


Whereas,  our  constitution  is  a  solemn  conven- 
tional agreement  among  freemen,  and  the  three 
great  departments  of  government  created  by  it 
are  bound  to  obey  its  provisions  ;  and  whereas, 
it  is  violative  of  the  principles  of  republican 
governments,  for  any  of  the  co-ordinate  branch- 
es of  such  government  to  have  any  control, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  over  the  organic 
law.  Therefore, 

Resolved,  That  it  is  inexpedient  to  give  such 
power  to  the  legislature  as  would  enable  it  to 
propose  amendments  to  the  constitution,  or  as 
would  invite  it  to  embark  in  constitutional  agita- 
tion. 

POWJERS  OF  THE  GENERAL  AND  STATE  GOVERNMENT. 

Mr.  GAITHER.  I  offer  the  following  resolu- 
tion : 

Resolved,  That  a  select  committee  be  appointed 
to  report  to  this  convention  what  powers  have 
been  delegated  to  the  United  States  ;  also  what 
powers  have  been  prohibited  by  the  constitution 
of  the  United  States,  to  the  states,  with  a  view  to 
enable  this  convention  to  act  understandingly, 
in  forming  a  constitution  for  the  government  of 
the  state  of  Kentucky. 

I  have  been  waiting  for  some  weeks  past,  with 
the  hope  that  some  gentleman  would  present,  in 
some  tangible  form,  a  proposition  of  this  kind 
to  the  convention.  We  were  notified  when  we  met 
here,  that  this  convention  was  clothed  with  all 
power,  save  that  delegated  to  the  federal  govern- 
ment, and  of  course  the  commonwealth  covers 
the  whole  ground,  with  the  exception  of  pro- 
hibited and  delegated  power.  We  are  about  to 
frame  a  constitution,  and  so  far  as  I  am  concern- 
ed, and  so  far  as  the  people  of  Kentucky  are 
concerned,  we  desire  to  have  the  whole  ground 
covered.  Without  having  laid  before  the  con- 
vention a  view  of  that  fact,  we  are  surely  thrown 
greatly  in  the  dark.  We  know  that  since  the 
foundation  of  our  government,  there  has  been  a 
dispute  as  to  the  powers  existing  in  the  federal 
government,  and  those  which  belong  to  the 
states.  These  disputes  have  led  to  convulsions, 
which  shook  the  integrity  of  the  Union,  and 
created  doubts  in  those  abroad,  whether  we 
should  sustain  the  principles  on  which  this  gov- 
ernment was  organized.  I  think  before  we  go 
further,  ^we  should  understand  the  ground  we 
occupy,  and  I  desire  to  occupy  the  whole  ground 
to  which  we  are  entitled,  and  not  a  solitary  inch 
beyond  it. 

I  have  presented  this  resolution  with  a  view 
of  bringing  this  subject  before  the  convention. 
I  have  witnessed  with  deep  interest  the  discus- 
sions that  have  incidently  touched  upon  this 
subject.  I  know  that  the  state  and  federal  gov- 
ernment have  been  divided  on  this  matter,  and 
we  have  had  statesmen  of  talent,  wisdom,  and 
experience  differing  in  their  views  in  regard  to 
it,  and  we  want  to  know  what  ground  we 
should  occupy  in  forming  a  constitution  for  the 
state  of  Kentucky.  We  are  apprised  that  under 
the  doctrine  as  held  by  one  school  of  statesmen, 
a  large  circle  of  the  powers  of  the  federal  gov- 
ernment are  regarded  as  held  by  implication  and 
construction.  Another  school  believe  that  the 
perpetuity  of  the  Union  depends  on  the  adher- 
ence to  a  strict  construction  of  the  doctrines  as 
laid  down  in  the  constitution.    It  is  important 


404 


that  the  issue  should  be  now  made  unuerstand- 
ingly.  It  is  true  that  we  have  now  hanging  over 
us  on  this  subject,  a  question  that  lias  unhinged 
the  hopes  of  tlie  perpetuity  of  this  government, 
the  enlarged  powers  of  the  federal  government, 
and  the  powers  granted  by  implication,  have 
laid  the  foundation  of  that  broad  platform  which 
has  been  laid.  But  the  government  that  has 
stood  thus  long  under  our  present  constitution 
seems  to  have  solved  the  problem  that  the  peo- 
ple are  capable  of  self  government.  I  have  no- 
ticed that  there  were  two  altars  in  this  conven- 
tion at  which  the  different  parties  seem  to  wor- 
ship, the  sovereignty  of  tlie  people,  and  the  in- 
dependence and  purity  of  the  judiciary.  Those 
gentlemen  who  had  chosen  to  worship  at  these 
different  altars,  perhaps  equally  pure  and  patri- 
otic, have  come  to  conclusions  at  war  with  each 
other,  yet  they  may  be  induced  by  compromise  to 
unite.  From  long  reflection  I  have  come  to  the 
conclusion  to  worship  at  the  altar  of  the  soverign- 
ty  of  the  people,  and  while  I  do  this  I  make  no 
imputation  on  gentlemen  who  entertain  different 
opinions.  My  conclusions  have  been  drawn  from 
long  observation  of  the  practical  working  of  a 
free  government.  We  have  gone  on  presperous- 
ly,  and  I  look  on  the  problem  of  self  govern- 
ment as  solved.  For  a  long  time  the  purest  and 
best  of  men  doubted  t^iis  fact.  There  was  ground 
for  these  doubts.  There  had  been  failures  in 
all  efforts  that  had  been  made,  and  it  Avas  for 
the  wisdom  of  the  American  people  to  solve 
his  problem  and  show  the  evils  that  had 
caused  all  former  efforts  to  prove  abortive. 

Three  forms  of  government  are  all  that  have 
existed;  monarchy,  in  which  the  sovereignty 
rests  in  one;  aristocracy,  in  which  it  rests  in  a 
few  wise  and  intelligent  individuals;  and  de- 
mocracy, in  which  it  rests  in  the  mass  of  the 
people.  These  three  primitive  forms  of  govern- 
ment constitute  the  basis  of  all  forms  that  have 
been  instituted.  In  the  United  States,  equal 
rights,  equal  privileges,  no  monopoly,  and  no 
exclusive  privileges,  constitute  the  elementary 
principles  of  our  government.  In  the  carrying 
out  of  this  machinery  in  the  commonwealth  of 
Kentucky,  through  the  constitution  we  may  de- 
vise, rests  the  practical  effects  which  may  be 
anticipated  in  the  government. 

I  have  witnessed,  long  and  feelingly,  the 
struggles  that  have  presented  themselves  in  the 
volcanic  convulsions  which  our  government 
has  passed  through,  during  the  la.st  thirty  years, 
and  even  longer  than  that,  and  I  have  traced, 
■without  any  intention  of  partizan  purposes,  the 
causes  and  the  results  of  those  convulsions,  and 
if  you  will  attend  to  them,  and  examine  them 
impartially,  you  will  find  they  all  originated  in 
the  position  maintained  by  one  of  the  great 
schools  to  which  I  have  referred,  by  exercising 
power  by  construction  and  implication  under 
the  federal  government,  and  having  never  been 
able  to  carry  out  their  doctrine  for  the  useful 
purposes  for  which  this  government  was  consti 
tuted.  We  know,  that  at  the  early  threshhold 
of  this  government,  Hamilton,  who  wa.s  the 
master  spirit  of  these  doctrines,  and  a  more  in- 
telligent man  never  lived,  nor  more  honest,  pure 
and  patriotic  in  motive,  but  from  his  early  edu- 
cation, bis  talents  and  patriotism  were  pervert- 


ed, and  his  views  and  notions  of  free  govern- 
ment were,  as  I  think,  erroneous. 

He,  it  is  true,  doubted  the  capacity  of  the  peo- 
ple for  free  government,  and  even  Washington, 
whose  motives  and  purity  of  motive  no  man 
dare  impugn,  doubted,  buthesaid  that  so  far  as 
he  was  concerned,  or  his  power  extended,  when 
he  was  called  to  the  executive  station,  they 
should  have  a  fair  trial.  A  period  of  seventy 
odd  years  has  demonstrated  the  fact,  and  it 
seems  to  me,  that  there  must  be  a  blind  devotion 
to  the  Hamilton  school,  to  assume  that  ground 
still.  I  do  not  believe  in  the  incorruptibility 
and  infallibility  of  men.  They  possess  many 
frailties,  and  are  subject  to  many  errors.  I  am 
well  aware  that  we  say  the  people  can  do  no 
wrong,  but  thus  far  Ave  are  in  error.  They  are 
subject  to  error,  and  for  this  reason.  Social  gov- 
ernments and  political  societies  have  agreed 
that  they  will  establish  fundamental  principles, 
which  may  be  their  guide,  so  far  as  written  con- 
stitutions are  concerned.  They  have  thus  ac- 
knowledged their  liability  to  error,  and  that 
though  government  is  an  evil,  it  is  a  necessary 
evil,  and  and  one  to  which  all  men  will  cheerful- 
ly submit. 

So  far  as  relates  to  the  purpose  of  my  resolu- 
tion, I  desire  to  present  it  to  the  consideration 
of  this  convention,  whose  duty  it  is  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  an  honest  yeomanry,  to  make 
knoAvn  to  tliem  what  rights  they  have  conceded 
to  the  federal  government,  and  what  we  grant  to 
them.  Can  we  attempt  to  frame  a  constitution 
without  having  brought  to  our  view  the  extent 
of  these  powers  that  we  have  retained  untramel- 
led  by  delegation? 

Enough  upon  the  subject  of  our  federal  re- 
lations. We  stand  as  one  member  of  a  confede- 
racy, as  one  independent  sovereign  state  claim- 
ing and  knoAving  that  Kentucky  Avill  maintain 
Avhat  properly  belongs  to  her,  against  any  pow- 
er that  may  make  inroads  upon  her  rights.  I 
Avant  this  so  established  in  our  constitution  that 
our  posterity  may  know  when  the  conflict  shall 
come — as  come  it  will,  what  position  Kentucky 
will  occupy  among  the  states  of  this  confede- 
racy. We  know  that  the  clouds  hang  heavily 
in  that  quarter  where  exists  a  jealousy  of  free- 
dom, and  Kentucky  knows  well  how  to  appre- 
ciate her  attitude,  in  the  great  struggle  Avhich 
threatens  us.  We  shall  show  our  sister  states  that 
we  know  what  position  belongs  to  us  on  the 
platform  that  covers  the  Avhole,  and  that  we 
have  the  courage  and  bravery  to  keep  the  sta- 
tion which  Ave  noAV  occupy.  We  occupy  the 
position  of  the  key -stone  of  the  federal  arch  on 
this  great  question  that  has  threatened  the  in- 
tegrity and  perpetuity  of  the  Union. 

I  hope  this  convention,  when  they  make  their 
report,  will  notify  the  different  portions  of  the 
confederacy  Avhat  position  we  take,  in  such 
a  Avay  that  they  may  be  easy  on  this  subject; 
that  the  north  may  know  we  are  not  to  be  moved 
from  the  position  that  we  occupy  in  relation  to 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  that 
we  may  admonish  our  southern  brethren  they 
need  be  no  longer  jealous  of  the  position  Ave  oc- 
cupy. We  know  the  importance  of  the  Union 
and  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from  it.  We  will 
have  them  understand  that  Ave  will  maintain  our 
position,  and  they  may  have  no  fear  that  Ken- 


405 


lucky  will  leave  any  room  for  jealousy  (>»  the 
subject  which  has  so  nuuh  excited  them  and 
upon  which  they  have  had  a  kind  of  mono- 
mania. 

Much  has  been  said  upon  the  causes  and  the 
reasons  which  operated  to  produce  this  conven- 
tion. My  own  reflections  have  been  long  and 
well  matured  on  this  subject.  I  shall  not,  how- 
ever cavil  with  my  colleagues  as  to  who  had  the 
honor  of  first  bringing  about  this  conv<:-ution.  I 
have  long  had  the  honor  to  represent  my  state  in 
a  legislative  capacity.  The  journals  of  1617  will 
show  that  on  examination  of  the  elementary 
principles  of  my  government  I  found,  as  I  con- 
ceive, that  we  had  outgrown  the  principles  be- 
fore adopted  and  then  existing.  1  was  then  in 
favor  of  a  convention,  not  on  account  of  mal-ad- 
ministratiou  of  officers,  but  in  consequence  of 
the  radical  defects  iu  the  organic  law,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  rights  of  the  people.  What  were  the 
rights  of  the  people  under  this  constitution? 
Once  in  four  years  you  had  the  privilege  of  vo- 
ting for  a  governor,  lieutenant  governor,  and 
senators,  and  once  a  year  for  representatives.  On 
all  the  globe  was  there  ever  a  government  so 
despotic  in  some  respects  as  ours?  It  is  true 
that  under  the  iuflueuce  of  public  opinion  the 
vessel  of  state  moved  on  harmoniously.  But  it 
was  not  long  before  the  statesmen  of  the  time 
found  the  latitude  of  the  ship  of  state.  The  life 
and  good  behaviour  tenure  of  office  had  its  ef- 
fect on  the  people,  and  they  determined  to  have 
a  different  constitution.  It  was  not  on  account 
of  mal-administration  of  office,  and  giving  of- 
fice to  sons  and  sons-in-law,  that  convrnced  the 
people.  Their  conviction  was  drawn  from  more 
essential  and  important  sources,  and  they  look 
to  us  now  for  the  exhibition  of  important  prin- 
ciples on  which  we  act,  and  if  we  shrink  from 
fear  of  the  cavils  of  individuals,  they  will  hold 
us  to  a  high  responsibilitv.  We  shall  deserve 
the  reproach  that  must  fall  on  us. 

I  have  lieard  here,  and  elsewhere,  that  all  free 

Governments  are  founded  on  three  pillars, 
'his  is  a  Blackstone  doctrine,  however.  Our 
government  is  based  ou  a  single  pillar,  and 
that  is  the  people.  Those  pillars  that  have 
been  represented  as  sustaining  the  governmental 
dome,  may  properly  belong  to  the  government 
of  Great  Britain;  but  to  apply  it  to  our  govern- 
ment, it  will  be  necessary  to  turn  it  upside  down, 
and  then  you  will  have  a  fair  representation  of 
it.  Our  government  is  based  on  one  pillar,  and 
that,  the  people.  The  executive,  legislative,  and 
judicial  departments,  are  but  different  portions 
of  the  superstructure.  We,  then,  as  those  ou 
whom  the  superstructure  is  based,  are  bound  to 
maintain  purity  and  integrity  iu  the  sphere 
"which  properly  belongs  to  us.  We  liave  heard 
with  pain,  for  the  past  thirty  years,  of  the  at- 
tacks made  upon  the  legislative  character  of  our 
state.  It  was  originally  made  by  those  who  do 
not  believe  in  popular  governments,  and  whose 
cowardice  made  tliem  afraid  to  attack  the  people 
themselves,  but  who  did  it  as  nearly  as  possible 
through  their  representatives.  Your  legislature 
has  been  held  up  as  an  unworthy,  corrupt,  log- 
rolling curse,  and  as  exhibiting  the  worst  pas- 
sions of  human  nature.  Now,  is  this  right? 
We  have  heard  it  here,  and  is  it  right  that  we 
should  quietly  hear  our  agents,  emanating  di- 


rectly from  us,  thus  vilified,  and  not  come  to  the 
rescue?  I  have  had  the  honor,  for  some  years, 
of  sitting  as  an  humble  representative  from  my 
county,  in  a  legislative  capacity,  and  as  I  camw 
out  of  doors  I  have  often  heard  some  insulting 
remark  like  this  :  '"You  have  done  no  harm  to- 
day, 1  hope."  I  passed  such  remarks  by,  and 
when  I  mingled  with  the  representatives  of  the 
country,  I  always  looked  ou  them  as  having  an 
atmosphere  about  them  reflecting  the  dignity  of 
the  people.  I  say,  then,  if  you  wish  to  preserve 
the  government  pure,  come  to  the  rescue  of  the 
three  great  departments  of  it.  Let  the  people 
know  that  they  are  the  medium  through  which 
the  government  must  be  carried  out,  practically. 
Come  to  the  rescue  of  the  legislature,  which 
may  feel  degraded  by  the  insults  thrown  upon 
it — repel  the  insinuation  that  they  are  not  to  be 
trusted — maintain  their  position,  and  if  the  peo- 
ple have  been  unfortunate  in  selecting  an  un- 
worthy man,  let  them  turn  him  aside,  but  do 
not  let  the  whole  department  suffer. 

The  executive  department,  too,  has  suffered. 
This  is  an  important  office,  and  although  I  have 
never  had  the  honor  to  be  an  incumbent  of  it,  I 
feel  a  pride  iu  maintaining  the  dignity  of  this 
office;  and  those  slurs  and  taunts  that  have  been 
cast  upon  this  branch,  are  calculated  to  bring 
into  disrepute  the  duties  of  that  office. 

The  next  department  is  that  of  the  judiciary, 
and  a  very  important  one  it  is,  but  I  must  con- 
fess that  I  have  never  been  able  to  consider  it 
more  important  than  the  other  departments,  all 
of  which  are  essential  in  carrying  out  the  prin- 
ciples of  tliis  government. 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  importance  of 
an  independent  judiciary.  I  like  an  indepen- 
dent representative,  and  an  independent  execu- 
tive, and  an  intelligence  and  moral  firmness  iu 
any  officer  that  will  lead  him  to  do  his  duty  re- 
gardless of  what  cabals  and  individuals  may 
say,  considering  that  the  mass  of  the  people  re- 
quire nothing  but  what  is  right,  and  when  it  is 
(tone,  they  will  give  their  sanction  to  the  act. 
Your  judiciary  is  essential  and  important,  but  I 
have  never  been  able  to  convince  my  mind  that 
it  was  the  most  essential  portion  of  the  super- 
structure which  the  people  have  erected  to  carry 
out  their  will.  Who  are  the  judiciary?  They 
are  composed  of  men.  What  are  their  duties? 
They  are  prescribed  by  the  statutary  provisions 
of  the  countr}'.  They  are,  perhaps,  as  good 
men,  but  not  better  than  the  mass  of  the  people 
that  surround  them.  An  independent  judiciary, 
in  the  generally  received  import  of  the  expres- 
sion, means  absolute.  An  independent  juclicia- 
rv,  that  is  to  be  ab.solute  and  above  the  mass  of 
the  people  on  whom  rests,  as  a  basis,  the  super- 
stucture,  seems  to  me  to  be  an  absurdity  too  in- 
tolerable to  be  sanctioned  for  a  moment.  Now 
the  subject  of  an  independent  judiciary  as  it  re- 
lates to  other  counties  has  been  frequently  pre- 
sented to  you.  What  was  the  proposition  of  an 
independent  judiciary  in  Great  Britain?  Was  it 
not  opposed  to  some  separate  and  antagonistic 
interests  on  the  part  of  others?  Have  we  in  this 
country  separate  and  antagonistic  interests  to 
those  of  the  people?  W^e  have  not,  and  there- 
fore the  term  independent  judiciary  is  an  ano- 
maly, and  does  not  belong  to  those  notions  we 
apply  to  government.     Have  we,  in  this  govern- 


406 


ment,  any  antagonistic  interest  to  tliose  of  the 
people?  If  we  liave,  let  its  advocates  conie  out 
Ooldly  and  produce  it.  Shall  it  be  fonud  in 
llie  private  corporations  and  privileged  orders 
that  you  create  in  tlie  sliape  oi  bank  barons  or 
kuiglits  of  the  spindle?  I  presume  none  are 
now  at  least  ready  to  come  forth  and  avow  that 
doctrine.  Then  1  know  no  ground  upon  -which 
to  claim  for  any  funtionary  of  government,  that 
kind  of  independence.  The  idea  is  absurd,  and 
does  not  belong  to  that  school  of  political  doc- 
trine, which  I  have  been  taught  to  believe  cor- 
rect. 

Upon  the  subject  of  the  independence  of  the 
judiciary  1  have  no  fears,  in  bringing  them  upon 
the  same  ground,  and  requiring  them  to  be  in- 
ducted into  office  by  the  same  propelling  power 
that  the  balance  of  the  functionaries  of  govern- 
ment are.  I  have  no  apprehension  that  their  in- 
tegrity, honesty,  or  independence,  will  be  weak- 
ened or  destroyed  thereby.  Can  you  make  any 
rational  man,  whose  prejudices  are  not  absurd, 
and  whose  mind  is  not  warped  by  the  Mansfield- 
ism  of  the  fixed  sources  of  Blackstonism,  be- 
lieve that  tlie  individual  who  receives  judicial 
power  from  the  golden  pen  of  the  executive, 
sanctioned  by  the  senate,  will  certainly  be  an 
independent,  honest  man,  when,  if  he  receives 
his  power  directly  from  the  ballot  box,  from  the 
sovereign  people  of  the  country,  he  will  be  con- 
verted into  a  rascal  at  once?  I  have  a  better 
opinion  of  the  lawyers  of  the  country,  the  class 
from  which  we  select  our  judges.  I  am  not  one 
of  those  advocates  of  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people,  who  believe  that  they  can  commit  no 
error,  or  are  infallible;  but  I  d;0  believe  the  mass 
of  them  are  capable  of  self-government,  and  that 
the  vessel  of  state  must  sail  upon  that  current. 
And  he  must  be  a  sceptic  indeed  who  does  not 
subscribe  to  that  doctrine.  Although  the  mari- 
ner in  the  management  of  the  rudder  of  the 
ship  of  state  may  have  run  ashore,  yet  once  in 
that  current,  the  vessel  of  state  is  irresistibly 
forced  on  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  great 
purposes  of  government.  We  have  had  convul- 
sions, and  trying  times  in  the  political  history 
of  this  country,  wliich,  if  they  have  not  de- 
monstrated to  ourselves,  they  nave  to  the  old 
world  at  least,  that  our  government  is  based  on 
a  solid  foundation,  and  that  the  people  are  in 
reality  capable  of  self-government.  I  have 
heard  various  projects  suggested  by  which  gen- 
tlemen desire  to  preserve  the  independence  of 
the  judiciary,  and  its  sovereignty,  from  the  con- 
taminating touch  of  the  mass  of  the  people.  It 
was  but  the  other  day  that  we  heard  it  avowed, 
and  declared,  that  they  could  not  trust  the  peo- 
ple, nor  even  themselves.  Now  I  take  it  for 
granted,  that  when  a  man  gets  into  a  position 
that  he  cannot  trust  himself,  that  his  neighbors 
themselves  ought  not  to  trust  him.  And  what 
was  this  project  tliat  was  to  preserve  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  judiciary?  It  was  that  the  state 
should  be  laid  off  into  districts,  and  that  the 
legislature — the  very  branch  of  government  that 
in  the  next  breath  was  declareu  to  be  the  most 
unworthy — should  select  the  lawyers,  and  re- 
commend them  to  the  senate,  and  that  body 
should  nominate  one  of  them  to  the  governor, 
-who  should  commission  him  as  an  officer. 
The  theory  of  our  government  is  the  separate 


and  distinct  divisions  of  its  powers  into  three 
departments.  The  judicial,  legislative  and  ex- 
ecutive officers  are  co-ordinate,  and  should  be 
kept  separate  and  distinct;  but  there  is,  and 
ought  to  be,  a  responsibility  some  where,  and 
where  can  it  be  more  safely  deposited  than  with 
the  body  of  the  people,  who  arc  solely  interest- 
ed in  the  correctness  and  faithfulness  of  their 
operations?  It  is  argued,  that  when  you  elect  a 
judge  upon  the  great  principle  of  the  sovereign- 
ty of  the  people,  that  of  course  you  must  subject 
him  to  the  influence  of  tliat  sovereignty  in  giv- 
ing his  judicial  decisions.  This  arises  from  a 
mistaken  view  and  wrong  conception  of  the 
purposes  for  which  our  government  is  instituted. 
We  the  people  profess  not  to  be  skilled  in  the 
technicalities  of  law  or  statutary  provisions, 
but  we  do  claim,  and  it  is  due  to  us  to  acknowl- 
edge that  our  motives  and  purposes  are,  that 
justice  and  equity  should  be  regarded  by  the 
functionaries  of  government.  And  we  have 
sufficient  of  common  sense  to  know  when  this  is, 
or  is  not  done,  and  when  it  is  not,  we  have  a 
right  to  arraign  those  functionaries  for  tlieir 
failure  in  the  performance  of  that  duty. 

It  has  been  argued  herewith  scarcely  a  dis- 
senting voice  that  the  judiciary  is  the  great  res- 
ervoir and  safeguard  of  the  liberties  and  rights 
of  the  people;  but  I  myself  have  not  come  to 
that  conclusion.  I  have  witnessed  the  opera- 
tions of  the  judicial  arm  of  the  government, 
and  paid  some  attention  to  the  judicial  history, 
not  only  of  our  country,  but  of  times  past  in 
other  governments.  And  1  find,  that  accord- 
ing to  their  number,  there  were  as  many  blood- 
thirsty despots  and  tyrants,  and  infinitely  more, 
among  the  judiciary,  than  ever  disgraced,  the  le- 
gislative halls  of  any  country.  Let  any  man 
read  the  history  of  the  state  trials  in  Great 
Britain,  and  he  will  learn  that  the  best  blood  the 
world  ever  saw,  has  been  sacrificed  at  the  shrine 
of  judicial  tyranny.  Mark  the  history  of  the 
United  States,  and  what  will  you  there  discov- 
er in  relation  to  the  judiciary?  Does  it  exhibit 
them  in  a  light  to  be  regarded  as  the  depot  and 
reservoir  of  our  liberties,  and  the  asylum  to 
which  we  must  carry  ourselves  for  safety?  In 
this  country  we  have  been  taught  a  different 
doctrine,  it  may  be  however,  of  a  school  which 
certain  jiortions  of  this  community  will  not  re- 
cognize or  adopt.  We  are  told,  and  every  man 
who  has  regarded  the  practical  operations  of 
our  judiciary,  must  concede  it,  that  they  are 
embarrassing  and  suppressing  the  liberties  of 
the  country,  gradually,  yet  certainly,  by  their 
decisions,  and  by  their  operations  on  the  politi- 
cal acts  of  government,  depriving  the  sovereign 
people  of  many  of  their  rights.  They  are  the 
great  high  priests  of  political  Jesuitism,  and 
passive  obedience  and  non-resistance  will  be  the 
inevitable  consequence,  if  the  people  listen  to 
the  doctrines  being  inculcated  by  many  of  the 
judiciary.  I  am  one  of  those  who  are  not  afraid 
of  establishing  the  judiciary  department  of  the 
government  upon  the  basis  of  the  sovereignty  of 
the  people,  and  of  holding  them  to  that  ac- 
countability to  them,  thatjthe  balance  of  the  func- 
tionaries of  the  government  are  held.  I  can  see 
DO  necessity  for  any  distinction.  I  have  never 
seen  a  family  where  the  parents  foster  and  set 
up  on<»  of  tneir  children,  a.s   the   favorite   and 


407 


champion  of  the  rest,  that  there  vas  not  dis- 
tnist  and  turmoil,  and  a  kind  of  family  feud 
arising  that  rendered  them  unhappy,  and  blast- 
ed their  prospects  hereafter.  All  human  insti- 
tutions partake  of  the  inherent  frailty  of  hu- 
manity, and  from  the  time  they  are  put  in  ope- 
ration there  is  a  constant  tenaency  to  dissolu- 
tion, and  the  only  way  they  are  to  be  preserved 
or  restored  is,  by'bringing  them  back  to  primi- 
tive principles.  And  the  only  way  to  do  this 
is  through  the  ballot  box.  Therefore,  if  we  are 
willing  to  do  what  our  constituents  expect  of 
us,  we  must  provide  them  with  a  constitution, 
iu  which  the  ballot  box  will  be  brought  to  bear  on 
all  officers,  from  the  constable  to  the  chief  justice. 
Let  them  not  be  apjwiuted  for  too  long  a  timo 
either,  for  frequent  accountability  secures  the 
faithfulness  of  all  agents.  Then  we  shall  have 
a  guarantee  that  the  pui-poses  of  this  govern- 
ment will  be  accomplished,  and  we  shall  demon- 
state  to  tlie  world,  that  we,  as  a  people  en  viasse, 
are  in  reality  capable  of  self-government.  Your 
constituency — my  constituency  at  least— expect 
that  we  shall  give  them  the  liberty  of  selecting 
their  own  agents,  and  that  in  the  selection  of 
those  agents,  they  shall  not  be  required  to  trust 
them  too  long.  Experience  and  the  practical 
operations  of  mankind  have  demonstrated  to 
us,  that  to  trust  men  too  long  is  sometimes  a  lit- 
tle unsafe.  \S'e  have  seen  men,  in  whose  politi- 
cal integrity  and  honesty  we  have  had  the 
greatest  confidence,  change  their  position,  and 
this  admonishes  us  that  we  ought  not  to  trust 
them  too  long.  The  notion  I  have  long  since 
adopted  is,  tliat  this  is  a  bad  world,  and  the 
fewer  we  trust  the  better.  Call  your  officials  to 
account  as  soon  and  as  often  as  possible,  before 
their  powers  corrupt  them,  and  if  they  have 
done  well,  reward  them  by  re-election  if  they 
desire  it.  Xow,  your  judiciary,  as  well  as  your 
representative  branches  of  the  government 
should  be  placed  precisely  in  that  condition.  I 
make  no  distinction,  for  they  are  all  functiona- 
ries of  the  government  of  the  sovereign  people, 
appointed  as  the  agents  to  carry  out  some  of  the 
attributes  of  that  sovereignty;  and  they  .should 
occasionally  be  brought  in  review  before  us  the 
people.  Vie  have  no  motive  to  do  wrong;  we 
may  and  do  commit  errors,  but  as  between  er- 
rors committed  by  ourselves  iu  mass,  and  those 
committed  by  inQividuals,  I  ha%'e  no  hesitation 
in  making  a  choice,  for  if  the  people  err  it  will 
not  be  wilfully. 

And  permit  me  to  say  there  are  doctrines  con- 
tended for  here  upon  this  subject  of  the  judicia- 
ry which  involve  imputations  upon  the  integrity, 
smcerity,  purpose,  and  motives  of  the  people, 
that  I  cannot  subscribe  to.  If  I  believed  that  iu 
the  selection  of  a  judge,  the  mass  of  tlie  people 
would  take  a  man  who  never  saw  a  law  book  or 
who  had  no  knowledge  of  the  science  of  law,  I 
would  not  vest  that  power  of  selection  in  them. 
But  it  is  an  imputation,  I  repeat,  upon  the  in- 
tegrity, capacity,  and  motives  of  the  people,  that 
I  am  not  willing  for  one  moment  to  subscribe  to. 
It  is  a  doctrine  which  belongs  to  the  past,  when 
men  doubted  the  capacity  of  the  people,  and  not 
to  the  present  or  the  future.  In  regard  to  sheriffs 
and  constables,  I  must  acknowledge,  that  if  my 
feelings  would  permit  me  to  sacrifice  principle  to 
policy  or  expediency,  id  would  be  to  make  thoso 


functionaries  who  handle  the  public  money  inel- 
igible. But  I  think  there  is  a  surer  and' better 
remedy  than  this.  If  I  understand  the  pmctical 
operation  of  the  theory  of  those  who  contend  for 
the  ineligibility  of  the  sheriff  and  constable,  it 
amounts  to  this:  Ton  elect  him  and  put  him  in 
office,  and  say  this  is  your  only  chance,  and  so 
go  on  and  be  a  great  scoundrel.  And  like  the 
small-pox,  which  must  have  its  various  stages, 
and  its  confluent  and  distinct  character,  so  must 
be  your  progress  in  rascality  in  office,  certain  that 
we  shall  cast  you  off  as  soon  as  you  are  pitted 
and  discovered.  Then  we  will  l)ring  forward 
others  to  take  the  infection.  I  want  a  better 
remedy  than  that.  If  there  are  perquisites  ap- 
pertaining to  their  offices  which  induce  such  cor- 
ruption, I  desire  that  the  legislature  should  cur- 
tail them,  and  enact  statutes  to  punish  that  kind 
of  land  piracy.  But  to  go  on  and  put  one  man 
in  office  and  tell  him  to  go  ahead  in  his  career  of 
rascality,  and  then  after  his  term  of  rascality  has 
expired  to  put  him  in  another,  would  be,  in  the 
course  of  time,  to  establish  a  class  of  graduated 
villains,  educated  to  swindle  and  rob^the  com- 
munity.    I  can  subscribe  to  no  such  doctrine. 

I  never  like  in  my  profession  to  apply  a  reme- 
dy when  I  am  satisfied  that  it  is  so  powerful  in 
its  character  that  it  may  engender  a  worse  disease 
than  the  one  it  seeks  to  remove.  I  prefer  to  bear 
it  patiently,  in  the  hope  that  nature  and  the  recu- 
perative powers  of  tie  body  will  combat  and 
overthrow  the  evil.  I  have  faith  in  the  efficacy 
of  the  practical  operation  of  the  ballot  box.  it 
was  presented  the  other  day  most  eloquently  by 
the  gentleman  from  Todd,  (Mr.  Bristow.)  It 
will  elevate  the  character  of  the  elector,  and  in- 
duce an  honest  pride  in  the  voters  by  making 
them  satisfied  that  in  reality  they  have  some  in- 
terest in  the  government.  It  will  be  practically 
demonstrating  to  them  that  they  do  possess  that 
interest.  Although  I  have  never  been  a  great 
electioueerer,  nor  ever  approached  a  man  to  seek 
his  vote  in  any  form  or  shape,  yet  I  have  been 
mortified  in  times  past,  when  in  a  canvass  the 
question  was  incidentally  brought  up  whether  a 
man  would  vote  for  me,  to  hear  him  reply,  I  do 
not  care  much  who  is  elected,  it  will  do  me  no 
good  as  I  have  no  interest  in  the  government. 
I  want  now  to  convince  the  voters  that  they  do 
have  an  interest  in  the  government,  and  thus  en- 
large their  views  and  elevate  their  pride.  This 
will  provide  a  corrective  for  the  evils  of  which  I 
have  just  spoken.  They  will  review  the  action 
of  the  public  officials  when  they  come  to  decide 
upon  their  re-election,  and  will  feel  like  freemen, 
and  that  their  rights  are  equal  and  on  a  par  with 
the  most  wealthy  and  influential  man  in  the 
country.  Our  doctrine,  if  I  understand  it  aright, 
and  I  say  without  intending  to  be  offensive,  the 
democratic  doctrine,  is  equal  rights  and  privi- 
leges against  monopolies  or  class  legislation  in 
any  shape  or  form.  Now  upon  that  doctrine,  it 
is  maintained  by  the  opposite  party,  that  we  are 
not  a  free  government  unless  we  have  universal 
intelligence.  If  that  is  correct,  then  it  is  like 
the  cure  for  the  toothache,  once  recommended 
here,  two  drops  of  yellow  jackets  honey.  We 
never  can  procure  it,  and  therefore  good!  bye  to 
free  government.  The  doctrine  of  equal  rights 
and  privileges  will  do  most  to  secure  it,  and  in 
this  way:  you  say  to  the  people,  as  intelligent 


408 


men,  you  have  your  rights,  and  you  will  know 
when  they  are  invaded  and  when  to  defend 
them;  and  while  you  do  that  you  will  be  de- 
fending the  rights  of  men  Avho  may  be  ignorant 
of  them,  but  who  stand  precisely  as  you  do. 
And  in  that  way  all  will  have  the  benefits  of 
equal  rights  and  privileges.  But  take  the  oppo- 
site doctrine,  and  let  us  get  a  scale  by  which  we 
will  judge  of  the  capacity  of  men  when  they 
come  to  the  ballot  box,  and  where  will  it  lead 
you?  There  is  no  stopping  place — none  short 
of  the  throne.  There  is  the  only  place  to  which 
any  man  who  advances  that  doctrine  can  resort. 
These  are  the  ideas  which  appear  to  actuate  the 
minds  of  men  who  ask  us  if  it  is  possible  that 
we  can  submit  the  selection  of  a  judicial  officer 
to  men  who  know  nothing  about  law.  There  is 
a  deep  seated  and  intelligent  appreciation  of 
right  and  justice  among  the  masses  that  will 
carry  along  with  it  all  except  this  floating  vote 
tliat  has  been  referred  to  as  existing  under  the 
present  system  where  the  people  are  allowed  lit- 
tle freedom,  which,  when  you  enlarge  that  free- 
dom, will  give  birth  to  an  honest  pride  that  will 
deprive  those  men  of  power  who  expect  by  their 
money  to  secure  the  destruction  of  an  election. 

I  must  acknowledge  that  I  have  been  some- 
what harrassed  by  the  views  and  declarations 
made  upon  this  floor.  Your  reporter  there  takes 
down  these  declarations,  and  they  are  to  be 
handed  down  to  posterity,  and  to  go  abroad, 
and  what  will  be  the  impression  created  by  read- 
ing them?  Why,  that  we,  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky, are  perhaps  the  most  corrupt,  the  most  brib- 
ed and  bribing  set  of  people  that  ever  extsted  on  the 
face  of  the  earth!  It  is  an  unfair  representation,  and 
I  regret  that  those  declarations  have  been  made 
and  spread  upon  our  journals  to  go  abroad.  I 
believe  the  people  of  Kentucky  have  formed  an 
opinion  of  the  Yankee  character,  from  the  hosts 
of  Yankee  pedlers  who  swarm  about  the  coun- 
try, cheating  and  defrauding  them;  but  it  is  a 
most  unfair  idea  of  the  Yankee  character.  Nor 
should  the  instances  of  those  who  seek  to  obtain 
power  and  position  upon  the  Jesuitical  principle, 
that  the  ends  justify  the  means,  be  taken  as  indi- 
cative of  the  character  of  our  politicians  or  our 
people.  He  who  obtains  a  seat  in  the  legisla- 
ture, in  congress,  or  upon  the  judicial  bench,  or  any 
where  else,  by  these  vile  and  corrupting  means, 
is  unworthy  of  the  trust,  and  a  disgrace  to  the 
atmosphere  he  occupies.  Do  not  then  proclaim 
it  to  the  world  and  to  subsequent  generations, 
that  we  are  a  set  of  bad  and  corrupt  men  in  our 
elections.  Sustain  tiie  representative  character 
of  the  state,  one  of  the  most  important  and  es- 
sential, as  it  is,  of  your  functions  of  govern- 
ment. Give  to  tlie  judiciary  department  the  re- 
spect and  dignity  that  is  due  it,  but  do  not  look 
upon  it  as  a  power  we  are  not  to  approach,  and 
which  is  not  to  be  touched,  without  the  hazard 
of  incurring  the  penalties  which,  in  olden  times, 
were  inflicted  on  the  sacrilegious  hands  that 
touched  the  sacred  ark.  They  are  our  agents 
and  functionaries;  and  here  is  a  great  error  men 
fall  into  in  relation  to  our  whole  political  ma- 
chinery of  government.  The  people  are  sove- 
reign; all  admit  that.  Some,  however,  believe 
that  when  you  invest  a  judicial  ofticer  with  pow- 
er, that  the  judicial  attribute  of  sovereignty  is 
conferred  on  him;   and  so  also  in  regard  to  your 


legislature  and  executive.  They  seem  to  be- 
lieve that  the  people  are  the  subjects  and  not  the 
sovereigns,  ihat  is  the  great  error,  for  the 
sovereignty  is  not  departed  from  the  people. 
These  officers  are  only  the  functionaries  clotted 
with  the  powers  to  carry  into  operation  the  will 
of  the  sovereign  people,  and  a  part  of  the  super- 
structure only  of  that  great  fabric,  the  base  of 
which  is  tlie  sovereign  people.  In  this  view 
there  can  be  no  difficulty  on  the  subject.  If  we 
entertain  the  other  view,  then  the  people  are  not 
the  sovereigns  but  the  subjects,  and  go  to  the 
ballot  box  only  to  designate  and  to  transfer  their 
rulers. 

I  must  ask  the  convention  to  excuse  me  for 
the  latitude  I  have  taken  in  the  discussion  of 
this  subject.  I  did,  however,  feel  it  due  to  my- 
self and  the  convention,  that  this  subject  should 
be  brought  before  us,  while  we  are  beginning  to 
lay  the  foundation  of  the  constitution.  I  de- 
sire not  to  trespass  or  to  encroach  upon  the  pow- 
ers delegated  to  the  federal  government.  I  de- 
sire not  to  assume  a  solitary  atom  of  that  pow- 
er which  the  state  prohibits  itself  from  assum- 
ing; but  all  powers  not  thus  delegated  are  re- 
tained by  the  state  and  the  people  of  Kentucky. 
And  hereafter,  when  the  subject  shall  again 
come  up,  I  may  indulge  in  an  analysis  of  what 
are  called  state  rights,  and  a  fair,  philological 
view  of  the  machinery  of  our  government,  so 
that  hereafter,  when  the  struggle  shall  come, 
Kentuekians  may  feel  what  is  the  ground  they 
have  to  defend.  I  Avill  promise  them  to  be  the 
first  to  go  to  the  rescue,  and  the  last  to  leave  the 
ground. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  called  for  the  reading  of  the 
resolution,  which  Avas   read  as  follows: 

"Resolved,  That  a  select  committee  be  appoint- 
ed to  report  to  this  convention  what  powers  have 
been  delegated  to  the  United  States;  also,  what 
powers  have  been  prohibited  by  the  constitution 
of  the  United  States  to  the  states,  with  a  view  to 
enable  this  convention  to  actunderstandingly  in 
forming  a  constitution  for  the  government  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky." 

I  have  never  heard  so  broad  a  speech  built  on 
so  narrow  a  foundation.  I  suppose,  sir,  that  the 
true  object  of  the  gentleman  from  Adair,  in  of- 
fering the  resolution,  was  to  prevent  the  powers 
of  the  general  government  and  the  poAvers  of 
the  several  state  governments,  from  becoming 
like  the  disease  he  spoke  of,  confluent — the  one 
running  into  the  other — such  is  its  length,  its 
breadth,  and  its  scope;  and  if  it  had  pleased  the 
gentleman  from  Adair  to  stop  at  that  point,  I 
would  have  joined  him  in  all  sincerity,  iji  the 
passage  of  the  resolution.  But  upon  this  nar- 
row foundation,  he  has  chosen  to  spread  a  broad 
speech,  in  which  he  has  avowed  sentiments  with 
which  I  cannot  agree.     Has  it  come  to  this,  that 


we  are  to  be  told,  that  Ave  cannot  have  an  inie-       ^ 


i)endent  judiciary,  at  the  same  time  that  Ave  ac- 


knowledge the  existence  of  the  great  principle, 
that  the  people  are  competent  to  self-govern- 
ment? Are  Ave  to  be  told  that  he  who  Morships 
at  one  shrine  must  turn  his  face  to  the  east,  while 
he  Avho  worships  at  the  other,  and  a  more  im- 
maculate shrine,  must  turn  his  face  to  the  west. 
Of  all  the  doctrines  that  we  have  heard  promul 
gated  in  this  house — and  God  knows  some  of 
them  are  bad  enough — ^this  is  the  most  objeotioH- 


409 


able,  that  the  people  are  capable  of  self-govern-  j 
ment,  and  he  who  believes  tnis  cannot  subscribe 
to  the  Huiversallv  admitted  truism,  that  they 
can  and  ouglit  to  have  an  independent  judiciary. 
So  far  from  these  two  great  principles  bein^an- 
taguuistical,  they  are  identically  the  same.  That 
is,  the  principle"^  of  the  capability  of  the  people 
for  self-government — and  it  is  a  principle  as 
firmly  fixed  as  a  rock  of  adamant — and  the  prin- 
ciple'that  the  judiciary  must  be  independent,  so 
far  from  being  antagonistic  to  each  other,  can- 
not exist  apart.  You  say  that  the  people  are 
not  capable  of  self-government,  when  you  de- 
clare that  that  department  cannot  be  independ- 
ent. I  do  not  think  that  the  people  will  applaud 
any  advocate  of  their  rights,  who  declares  that 
tliey  cannot  exercise  the  power  of  self-govern- 
ment and  at  the  same  time  have  an  independent 
judiciary.  So  far  from  this  being  true,  I  look 
upon  the  three  great  divisions  of  government, 
into  separate  and  independent  departments, 
the  executive,  the  legislative,  and  the  judicial, 
as  the  very  foundation  of  a  free  government; 
and  The  attack  it  has  pleased  the  gentleman 
from  Adair  to  make  upon  one  of  these  depart- 
ments, may,  if  not  answered,  not  only  shake  it 
so  as  to  make  it  totter,  but  to  topple  it  from  its 
broad  foundation,  and  lay  it  prostrate  in  the 
dust. 

Was  it  supposed  necessary  by  the  gentleman 
from  Adair,  that  in  order  to'protect  the  legisla- 
ture, of  which  he  has  been  a  useful  member,  and 
I  may  say  au  ornament,  that  he  should  turn 
around  and  lay  his  blighting  hand  upon  another 
and  weaker,  and  I  must  say  the  weakest  depart- 
ment of  our  government.  Sir,  potent  as  is  the 
arm  of  this  convertion,  I  hope  it  is  not  strong 
enough  to  destroy  the  influence  of,  or  bring  into 
contempt  the  judiciary  department;  even  though 
thev  put  upon  it  the  iaentical  maledictions 
•which  the  gentleman  bestowed  upon  it,  as  he 
rode  through  his  district  in  the  last  canvass.  It 
is  to  be  hoped  the  judiciary  will  be  able  to  de- 
fend itself  and  maintain  that  position  in  the  re- 
spect and  affections  of  the  people  so  necessary  to 
the  efficient  and  proper  discharge  of  its  neces- 
sarv  duties:  and  the  legislature  will  be  able  to 
defend  itself  and  maintain  and  occupy  its  prop- 
er sphere  of  action,  without  infringing  on,  or  in- 
terfering with  the  powers  properly  assigned  to 
either  the  judiciary  or  the  executive  departments. 
But  the  voluntary  defence  of  the  legislature  by 
the  gentleman  from  Adair,  shows  that  it  is  ne- 
cessary, in  his  opinion,  to  defend  in  advance 
that  department.  And  why  this  premature  and 
volunteered  defence,  unless  the  gentleman  anti- 
cipates encroachment  bv  this,  the  strongest,  on 
the  jucicianr  the  weakest  department  of  the 
government: 

The  volunteered  defence  of  the  gentleman 
from  Adair  of  the  Legislature,  when  no  man  has 
attacked  or  wished  to  attack  that  department  of 

foverument,  was  uncalled  for,  and  I  hope  and 
elieve  unnecessary — this  is  one  of  the  cases  in 
which  the  blood  of  Douglas  must  defend  itself. 
When  the  Legislature  confines  itself  within  its 
legitimate  sphere  of  action,  the  passage  of  such 
constitutional  and  wholesome  laws  as  the  wants 
of  the  people  have  dictated,  or  expediency  re- 
quires, they  need  no  defence  ;  and  when  they 
wander  beyond  that  constiiutional  boundary, 
52 


and  venture  into  prohibited  or  improper  ground, 
by  passing  laws  not  called  for,  or  against  the 
wishes  of  the  people,  even  the  talents  of  the 
gentleman  from  Adair  cannot  save  them  from 
condemnation. 

But  I  arose  principally  to  draw  the  attention 
of  the  house  to  the  previous  part  of  the  remarks 
of  the  gentleman  from  Adair.  I  hope  that  we 
will  not  establish  as  one  of  the  canons  of  this 
house  the  principle,  that  if  we  acknowledge  that 
the  people  are  capable  of  self  government — that 
the  judiciary  is  not  to  be  independent.  I  have 
heard  the  capability  of  the  people  for  self-gov- 
eniment  reiterated  until  I  am  heartily  tired  of 
hearing  of  it.  Every  one  who  rises  in  this  house 
proclaims  this  fact,  as  if  it  were  not  acknowl- 
edged on  all  hands.  Is  there  a  man  to  be  found 
in  this  state  who  denies  it?  And  yet  each  gen- 
tleman deems  it  necessary  to  pour  forth  a  long 
tirade  upon  the  capability  of  tbe  people  to  gov- 
ern themselves.  Why,  its  frequent  reiteration 
here  would  seem  to  imply  that  it  is  a  ques- 
tionable matter.  Why  keep  eternally  asserting 
that  which  nobodv  denies?  Is  it  for  thepurpose 
of  creatine  a  little  popularity  at  home;  is  it 
that  a  little  political  capital  may  be  obtained? 
Is  it  not  probable  tliat  we  may  do  great  injury  to 
the  high  standing  and  republican  character  of 
Kentucky,  by  iterating  and  reiterating  this  ac- 
knowledged and  common  place  maxim,  that  the 
people  are  capable  of  self-government,  by  caus- 
ing it  to  be  believed  abroad  that  there  are  dele- 
gates on  this  floor  who  deny  its  truth?  Is  it  ne- 
cessarv  to  reiterate  that  which  has  never  been 
denied  in  Kentucky,  much  less  in  this  chamber? 
It  seems  to  me  to  be  in  extremely  bad  taste,  to 
say  the  least  of  it.  With  the  balance  of  the  gen- 
tleman's speech  I  agree.  He  uttered  a  great  ma- 
ny sentiments  which  no  man  disagrees  with, 
and  which  I  will  assist  him  in  sustaining. 

But  let  us  turn  our  attention  for  a  moment,  to 
the  resolution  itself.  Great  and  herculean  will 
be  the  task  that  the  gentleman  imposes  upon  the 
committee,  in  drawing  the  line  of  distinction, 
that  exists  between  the  powers  of  the  general 
government  on  one  side,  and  the  powers  of  the 
state  governments  on  the  other.  They  lap  so 
frequently,  I  hardly  think  this  convention  will 
go  throngh  the  labour  of  drawing  the  line  of  de- 
marcation between  them;  nor  do  I  think  it  ne- 
cessary. There  are  particular  powers  which  re- 
main with  the  states  until  used  by  the  general 
government.  There  ai"e  numerous  powers  that 
remain  with  the  states  until  the  occasion  arises 
for  their  exercise  by  the  general  government. 
And  when  exercised  by  the  general  government, 
the  states  have  lost  their  power  over  them. 
There  is  a  large  class  of  powers  of  this  descrip- 
tion, without  touching  upon  the  principle  of  nul- 
lification, and  God  knows  I  would  rather  be  iu 
the  midst  of  a  hornet's  nest,  than  bringing  the 
nuUifiers  about  my  ears.  A  nuUifier  was  never 
known  to  be  convinced,  by  any  argument,  that 
he  was  wrong. 

The  resolution,  in  my  opinion,  cannot  do  much 
good.  But  if  the  gentleman  from  Adair  wi.shes 
that  the  committee  should  Im  formed,  and  is  wil- 
ling to  act  as  chairman — and  I  tell  him  before- 
hand, that  he  is  hardly  aware  of  the  difficulty 
of  the  task  he  has  undertaken — I  for  one,  will 
sustain  his  proposition. 


410 


Mr,  GAITHER.  I  regret  that  I  should  ]iave 
drawn  upon  myself  an  attack  from  my  friend 
from  Daviess.  I  did  not  anticipate  such  an  at- 
tack. I  have  been  hitherto  silent  in  this  con- 
vention, but  I  have  believed  that  the  country 
and  the  convention,  desired  that  this  subject 
sliould  be  understandingly  presented,  before  we 
proceed  to  act  upon  it.  I  can  assure  the  gentle- 
man, that  on  the  subject  of  nullification,  I  am 
as  averse  to  enter  as  he  is.  The  liornest's  nest 
■will  never  be  brought  about  his  head  by  me.  I 
acknowledge,  however,  tliat  I  have  as  nauch 
aversion  to  the  doctrine  of  passive  obedience, 
and  of  non-resistance,  as  I  have  to  nullification. 
If  I  had  to  die  a  political  death,  and  had  my 
choice,  as  to  the  manner,  I  would  prefer  to  die 
by  convulsion,  rather  than  collapse.  Sir,  this 
term  independence,  as  applied  to  tlip  jvidiciary,  is 
one  which  I  think  is  not  correctly  understood. 
What  does  it  mean?  Does  it  mean  absolute  and 
imqualified  independenceV  If  I  have  under- 
stood the  purpose  of  the  people  of  the  common- 
wealtli  of  Kentucky,  it  has  been,  that  in  the  or- 
ganization of  the  government,  the  judiciary 
should  not  be  placed  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
people;  that  tliey  should  not  be  made  entirely  in- 
dependent of  the  people.  If  the  gentleman  will 
substitute  the  terms  intelligence  and  firmness, 
for  independence,  we  could  comprehend  the 
meaning  of  those  terms,  as  applied  to  the  judi- 
ciary. I  am  glad  that  the  gentleman  has  coin- 
cided with  me  in  some  of  my  views  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  so  far  as  tlie  herculean  task  of  Avhich  he 
speaks  is  concerned,  I  have  no  great  desire  my- 
self, to  take  a  prominent  part  in  it;  but  I  desire 
that  the  subject  shall  be  investigated  by  those 
who  have  complained,  or  have  at  least  enter- 
tained a  belief,  that  the  states  hold  their  powers 
by  a  kind  of  courtesy.  I  will  not  shrink  from 
any  duty  that  shall  be  imposed  upon  me,  and 
yet  I  could  desire  that  it  should  be  committed  to 
other  hands  than  mine. 

Mr.  DIXOiSr.  I  have  no  intention  sir,  to  make 
a  speech  in  relation  to  the  resolution  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Adair.  I  believe  I  shall  vote  for  it, 
because  it  is  a  resolution  that  proposes  an  enqui- 
ry, and  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  report  upon  the 
subject  will  be  useful  to  the  house.  But  I  mere- 
ly arose  to  enter  my  protest  against  some  of  the  po- 
sitions of  the  gentleman  from  Adair,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  views  and  opinions  that  have  been 
expressed  by  some  of  the  members  of  this  con- 
vention, upon  certain  great  questions.  The 
gentleman  says  that  he  is  astonished,  and  he 
supposes  that  those  who  come  after  us  will  be 
astonished,  when  they  road  the  journal  of  our 
debates,  and  find  that  the  character  of  the  peo- 
ple has  been  falsified,  that  they  have  been  rep- 
resented as  being  corrupt,  as  being  the  basest 
people  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  less  capable 
of  self-government  than  any  other.     I  think  the 

fentleman  is  mistaken,  if  he  supposes  that  any 
elegate  upon  this  floor  lias  uttered  such  a  senti- 
ment. No  such  sentiment  has  V>een  uttered  ;  at 
least  in  my  liearing.  I  would  like  to  know  of 
the  gentleman,  from  what  (luarter  such  a  decla- 
ration a»  that  has  proceeded. 

Mr.  GAITHER.  I  do  not  intend  to  particu- 
larize; but  I  havo  heard  it  proclaimed  here,  that 
the  people  havo  been  purchased  at  the  ballot-box, 
^t  their  votes  have  oeea  bror  eht  into  the.  mar- 


ket, and  every  gentleman  was  appealed  to,  to 
say  whether  he  did  not  know  that  such  was  the 
fact. 

Mr.  DIXON.  That  is  a  very  different  thing 
for  the  sweeping  charge  upon  the  people  of 
Kentucky,  that  they  are  all  corrupt.  Gentlemen 
have  asserted  the  fact,  that  there  are  such  things 
in  Kentucky,  as  corruption  and  bribery  on  the 
part  of  politicians,  and  that  men  have  been 
purchased  to  vote  contrary  to  their  opinions. 
When  it  is  asserted  that  politicians  have  at- 
tempted to  bribe  persons  to  vote  for  them,  gen- 
tlemen assert  only  what  is  true,  and  what  I  pre- 
sume the  gentleman  from  Adair,  will  not  deny. 
But  the  gentleman  will  not  pretend  to  say,  that 
any  delegate  upon  this  floor  has  declared  that 
the  people  of  the  state  are,  as  a  whole,  corrupt, 
or  anything  other  than  that  some  men  mignt 
be  bribed. 

Mr.  GAITHER.  I  can  inform  the  gentleman 
that  I  have  no  personal  knowledge  on  the  sub- 
ject. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  like  the  gentleman's  speech 
in  some  respects.  It  was  broad  and  expansive, 
eloquent  and  beautiful.  He  certainly  took  a 
wide  range.  He  reminded  me  very  much  of  a 
philosopher,  who  once  got  upon  the  highest 
peak  of  the  Alps,  I  believe,  cast  his  eyes  to  the 
great  Heavens,  which  threw  in  unmeasurable 
space,  their  broad,  deep  canopy  around  him,  and 
then  to  earth,  taking  in  at  a  single  glance  land 
and  sea,  islands,  continents  and  worlds,  and  in 
the  sublimity  of  his  thoughts  and  the  pride  of 
his  imagined  power,  exclaimed,  "  attention,  the 
universe."  "  Islaudsl  continents!  and  worlds! 
wheel  into  lino!  to  the  riglit  aboutface — forward 
march."  The  universe  is  before  us,  and  eternity 
the  prize.  The  gentleman  seems  to  think  that 
to  control  every  thing  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
he  has  but  to  give  the  command  "  fall  into  line, 
forward  march."  Sir,  we  do  not  march  at  all, 
when  the  gentleman  attempts  to  drive  us,  by 
throwing  up  to  us  the  charge  that  has  been  ut- 
tered here,  that  we  are  anxious  to  maintain  the 
independence  of  the  judiciary,  because  the 
whole  people  of  Kentucky  are  corrupt.  We 
make  no  such  charge.  I  have  taken  the  ground 
that  the  judges  oujjht  not  to  be  re-eligible,  es- 
pecially the  circuit  court  judges.  But  do  I 
therefore  assert  that  the  people  must  be  corrupt? 
I  take  this  ground  from  the  conviction  that  it  is 
necessary  that  the  judges  should  be  preserved 
pure  and  immaculate  and  not  subjected  to  temp- 
tation, and  that  the  people  should  not  be  op- 
pressed by  corrupt  judges. 

I  am  not  certain  wliethcr  or  not  I  understood 
the  gentleman  as  insinuating  that  the  thunders 
of  nullification  have  been  heard  from  delegates 
in  this  convention.  I  do  not  think  there  are  any 
nuUifiers  upon  tliis  floor.  I  am  satisfied  there 
are  none. 

I  cannot  reply  to  the  gentleman's  remarks  on 
this  point,  because  I  do  not  know  precisely  to 
what  they  lead.  But  as  I  remarked,  I  listened 
to  his  speech  with  much  pleasure.  There  was  a 
great  deal  in  it  which  I  fully  concurred  in.  But 
I  cannot  consent  that  fhe  statement  shall  go 
forth  that  any  delegate  in  this  body,  has  made 
the  charge  that  the  people  of  the  whole  state 
are  corrupt. 

Mr.  gAiTHER.     J  would  inform  the  gentle- 


411 


man,  that  I  intended  no  allTislon  to  him  or  to 
any  otlier  delegate  in  particular.  I  apoligised 
at  the  outset  for  the  desultory  manner  in  which 
I  was  about  to  address  the  'convention  as  con- 
forming somewhat  to  the  indulgence  that  has  been 
granted  to  others.  I  have  not  hitherto  troubled 
the  convention  with  any  remarks  of  mine,  and  I 
desired  the  indulgence'  of  the  house,  in  order 
that  I  might  take  a  range,  similar  to  that  which 
has  been  indulged  in  by  other  delegates. 

The  question  was  then  taken  upon  the  reso- 
lution and  it  was  adopted,  and  the  president 
appointed  the  committee  as  follows — Messrs. 
Gaither,  Clarke,  Dixon,  Lisle  and  Mitchell. 

QUALIFICATIONS   OF   CAXDID.\TES. 

Mr.  GH0LS02f.  I  move  that  the  committee 
of  the  whole  be  discharged  from  the  further  con- 
sideration of  the  resolution  which  I  sonietime 
since  submitted  in  reference  to  the  qualification 
of  officers.    It  is  as  follows: 

"Resolved,  That  the  good  people  of  this  com- 
monwealth are  fully  competent  to  judge  of,  and 
decide  upon  the  qualifications  of  all  candidates 
for  any  ofiice,  whether  the  same  be  legislative, 
executive,  judicial,  or  ministerial;  wherefore, 
a  certificate  of  election,  according  to  law,  is  the 
only  certificate  of  qualifications  that  shall  ever 
be  required  to  enable  any  citizen  to  enter  upon 
the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  office  to  which 
he  may  be  elected." 

The' object  I  have  in  view  in  making  the  mo- 
tion is  this:  It  seems  to  be  roundly  asserted  here 
this  morning,  on  all  hands,  that  the  people  are 
capable  of  self-government  in  the  broadest  and 
fullest  sense  of  the  term.  This  idea  has  been 
reiterated  time  and  again  on  both  sides  of  the 
house.  Xow,  sir,  I  want  to  ascertain  how  many 
gentlemen  there  are  who  will  affirm,  that  the 
people  are  competent  to  judge  of  and  decide  upon 
the  election  and  qualification  of  all  officers,  and 
then  deny  to  the  people  the  right  to  make  such 
decision.  If  gentlemen  are  not  prepared  to  do 
this,  then  I  want  to  know  how  many  gentlemen 
there  are  who  are  not  willing  to  meet  this  ques- 
tion fairly,  and  who  will  perhaps  move  to  lay 
the  resolution  on  the  table,  to  amend  it,  or  in 
some  other  way  to  avoid  a  direct  vote  upon  this 
plain  and  unequivocal  proposition,  which  has 
so  often  been  asserted  here.  When  I  had  the 
honor  of  introducing  this  resolution,  the  objec- 
tion that  was  made  was,  that  gentlemen  did  not 
want  to  be  forced  into  a  vote  hastily.  They  have 
now  had  time  to  make  up  their  minds,  and  ought 
to  be  prepared  to  vote  upon  the  subject.  I  want 
this  thing  distinctly  understood.  My  object  in 
calling  up  this  proposition  now  is,  that  my  con- 
stituents may  know  that  I  have  done  all,  that  in 
my  humble  capacity,  I  was  able  to  do,  to  prevent 
the  infliction  of  so  great  a  wrong  upon  them. 
They  want  to  see  how  gentlemen  will  vote  in 
regard  to  a  proposition  that  has  been  so  broadly 
asserted. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE.  As  I  have  given 
some  votes  lately,  sir,  that  some  of  my  friends 
in  this  house  seem  to  think  indicate  a  want  of 
confidence  or  faith  in  the  popular  intelligence — 
in  the  capacity  of  the  people  to  decide  for  them- 
selves upon  these  matters — I  should  like  to  sub- 
mit a  few  remarks  in  regard  to  the  reasons  which 
have  influenced  me  in  giving  those  votes. 


With  regard  totlie  eligibility  and  re-eligibility 
of  officers,  gentlemen  seem  to  think  that  when 
you  vote  against  the  eligibility  of  officers  it  indi- 
cates a  want  of  confidence  in  popular  intelligence. 
The  delegate  from  Simpson,  who  seems  to  enter- 
tain this  view,  is  the  chairman  of  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department  of  the  government. 
That  committee  has  made  a  report,  and  in  their 
report  they  have  incorporated  a  provision  which 
exists  in  the  present  constitution:  it  is — "that 
'  no  minister  of  the  gospel  shall  be  eligible  to  a 
'  seat  in  the  general  assembly  of  the  common- 
'  wealth  of  Kentucky."  Now  he  is  not  simply 
prescribing  the  qualification  for  a  candidate,  but 
he  is  proscribing  a  large,  intellectual  and  moral 
class  of  the  community  from  any  participation 
in  the  concerns  of  government.  I  ask  the  gen- 
tleman, with  his  views  as  he  has  promulgated 
them  in  this  house,  how  he  can  defend  and  vin- 
dicate his  position  before  his  constituents?  You 
undertake  to  prescribe  the  qualifications  of  a 
candidate,  and  the  gentleman  says  that  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  idea  of  the  competency  of  the 
people  for  self-government;  and  yet,  at  the  very 
same  moment,  you  not  only  prescribe  qualifica- 
tions for  a  candidate  for  the  legislature,  but  you 
actually  proscribe  men  from  any  participation 
ill  legislation.  I  think  it  likely  that  I  ^hall 
agree  w-ith  the  gentleman  as  far  as  the  report  of 
the  committee  is  concerned,  and  I  shall  probably 
vote  for  it;  but  I  cannot  see  how,  with  the  pe- 
culiar doctrines  which  he  promulgates,  I  could 
go  before  my  constituents,  and  vindicate  the 
propriety  of  that  vote,  if  it  be  inconsisteut  with 
the  popular  intelligence,  to  prescribe  the  quali- 
fications of  candidates  for  office. 

A  gentleman  asserted  a  few  minutes  since,  that 
there  was  nobody  who  doubted  the  competency 
of  the  people  for  self  government.  Sir,  it  i.s 
doubted.  It  is  doubted  in  Europe;  there  it  is 
not  admitted.  I  am  a  firm  believer  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  competency  of  the  people  for  self 
government.  But  there  are  many  men  who 
doubt  it  in  this  country.  I  have  heard  many 
worthy  and  intelligent  men  express  their  doubts 
in  regard  to  it;  but  I  think  those  doubts  are 
predicated  upon  a  mistaken  notion  of  govern- 
ment. Where  did  the  doctrine  originate,  that 
the  people  are  not  competent  to  the  purpose  of 
self  government?  It  came  sir,  from  Rome;  the 
people  there  were  divided  into  two  classes,  the 
patricians  and  the  plebeians.  The  patricians  had 
all  the  political  power  in  their  own  hands,  al- 
though constituting  a  very  small  partof  the  body 
politic.  The  plebeians  were  a  majority  of  the 
people.  But  it  was  declared  by  the  patricians, 
that  the  plebeians  were  not  competent  to  self  gov- 
ernment. There  was  a  marked  distinction  be- 
tR'een  the  two  classes;  the  plebeians  had  not  on- 
ly no  political  rights  in  the  commonwealth,  but 
they  had  no  civil  rights.  The  two  classes  were 
not  permitted  to  intermarry  with  each  other. 
And  it  was  not  until  the  people  went  out  to  the 
sacred  mount,  and  determined  that  they  would 
not  return  until  some  rights  were  granted  them, 
that  they  got  even  the  privilege  of  assembling  at 
the  door  of  the  capitol  and  saying  "veto." 

How  is  it  in  this  country?  We  see  here  all  the 
people,  the  learned  and  the  unlearned,  the  rich 
and  the  poor,  have  always  constituted  the  body 
politic;  and  will  any  man  say  that  they  are  not 


412 


competent  to  the  purpose  of  self  goveniment? 
Any  man  who  so  df  clares,  stultifies  himself  as  a 
part  of  the  community.  The  federal  constitu- 
tion says  "we,  the  people."  All  constitute  the 
people,  and  instead  of  any  man  sneering  at  the 
capability  of  the  people  for  self  government,  he 
ought  to  endeavor  to  elevate  the  people,  and 
place  in  their  hands  that  power,  and  those  rights, 
to  which  they  are  entitled. 

Now,  this  is  my  idea  as  to  what  is  the  theory 
of  our  constitution,  and  I  desire  to  restoreto  the 

Eeople  the  power  of  selecting  their  own  officers, 
lavid  Hume,  if  my  recollection  is  right,  lays 
down  the  three  cardinal  principles  upon  which 
governments  are  based.  He  was  a  high  tory,  and 
a  Jacobite — not  a  jacobin — tlie  very  reverse  of  a 
jacobin.  In  cliaracterizing  the  various  forms  of 
government,  he  assigns  strength  to  a  monarchy, 
wisdom  to  an  aristocracy,  and  hoiiesty  to  a  re- 
public. Now,  whether  he  was  right  or  not,  in 
other  respects,  is  not  the  question,  but  he  was 
unquestionably  right,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  fact 
that  honesty  is  the  characteristic  of  a  republic. 
When,  therefore,  I  propose  to  restore  these  pow- 
ers of  government  to  the  people,  of  which  they 
have  been  to  some  extent  deprived,  I  do  so  be- 
cause I  would  place  tliera  where  there  is  a  dispo- 
sition to  do  right;  and  a  disposition  to  do  right 
is  half  the  battle. 

I  confess  it  would  be  difficult  to  convince  me 
that  a  learned  and  accomplished  judge,  and  an 
honest  judge,  could  not  determine  upon  the  qual- 
ifications of  a  clerk  better  than  the  collected 
mass  of  the  community;  and  it  is  no  imputation 
on  the  intelligence  of  the  people  to  say  so.  It  is 
no  imputation  on  your  intelligence  to  say  that 
you  cannot  determine  whether  a  physician  is 
well  skilled  in  his  profession.  Why  do  we  take 
it  out  of  the  hands  of  a  judge  and  give  it  to  the 

?eople?  Because  the  judge  may  not  do  right, 
'he  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  people  is  to  do 
right,  and  we  believe  in  their  capacity  and  in- 
telligence to  judge  of  these  matters.  Hence  it  is 
that  we  are  going  to  restore  this  power  into  the 
hands  of  the  people.  We  go  for  restoring  it  to  a 
place  where  there  is  at  least  a  disposition  to  do 
right,  and  some  times  that  disposition  does  i^ot 
exist  on  the  part  of  a  judge,  or  other  appointing 
power. 

But  I  rose  merely  for  the  purpose  of  showing 
that  in  the  votes  I  have  given,  I  have  not  been 
actuated  by  any  distrust  of  the  honesty  or  ca- 
pacity of  the  people,  and  that  it  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  that  idea  to  prescribe  the  qualifica- 
tions of  candidates  for  office.  The  federal  con- 
stitution does  it;  and  the  same  thing  is  done  in 
every  constitution.  Hence  it  is  that  I  have 
voted  as  I  have,  and  not  with  the  view  of  im- 
peaching the  general  intelligence  of  the  people. 
Mr.  CLARKE.  Without  any  intention  of 
making  a  speech  upon  the  resolution — for  I  in- 
tend my  course  shall  be  indicated  by  the  vote  I 
give — 1  am  unexpectedly  'constrained  to  ask  the 
indulgence  of  tlie  house  for  a  few  moments,  in 
consequence  of  the  reference  that  was  made  to 
roe  individually,  bv  the  gentleman  from  Fayette. 
I  had  not  supposea  that  I  would  be  drawn  into 
this  arena,  witliout  some  manifestation  of  wil- 
lingness on  my  part  to  become  an  humble  soldier 
at  least,  in  the  contest.  The  principle  by  which 
I  am  governed  in  regard  to  the  selection  of  offi- 


cers is  this.  I  have  always  believed  the  people 
competent  to  elect  their  own  officers,  and  at  the 
same  time,  to  judge  of  their  qualifications. — 
But  sir,  sometimes  officers  who  are  not  qualified 
may  be  chosen.  The  people  may  be  imposed 
on,  and  in  many  instances  doubtless  will  be; 
but  there  is  a  motive  operating  with  them  that 
will  correct  the  evil,  which  motive  does  not  ex- 
ist if  you  will  let  A,  B  and  C  make  the  appoint- 
ments— if  you  confer  the  power  of  appointment 
upon  one  man,  or  a  hundred.  If  you  let  the 
people  appoint  for  themselves,  what  is  the  re- 
sult? If  they  make  a  bad  appointment,  they 
are  themselves  injured,  and  they  will  be 
prompted  to  remove  the  individual,  and  thus  re- 
pair the  injury.  This  is  one  of  the  great  reasons 
why  I  want  the  people  to  have  the  power  of  ap- 
pointing and  of  removing,  at  limited  periods  of 
time  their  own  officers.  They  have  a  motive  for 
removing  if  the  appointment  has  been  a  bad  one, 
whereas,  if  you  entrust  the  power  of  appoint- 
ing to  a  few  men,  they  will  perhaps  have  no 
motive,  except  to  continue  the  oppression.  Now 
I  have  said  repeatedly,  that  I  am  Avilling  that  a 
candidate  for  the  clerkship  shall  be  a  citizen  of 
the  county,  and  of  the  state  for  a  certain  length 
of  time,  and  that  he  shall  be  of  a  certain  age. 
These,  to  some  extent,  are  qualifications,  but 
when  you  tell  me  that  he  shall  have  the  certifi- 
cate of  a  judge,  I  have  remonstrated  against  it. 
But  I  am  arraigned  by  the  gentleman  from 
Fayette,  because  I  have,  as  chairman  of  a  com- 
mittee, reported  that  no  one  who  is  a  minister  of 
the  gospel  shall  be  eligible  to  a  seat  in  the  legis- 
lature. Well,  sir,  there  are  interests  perhaps 
i  higher  than  governmental  interests.  My  own 
I  conviction  is,  that  when  a  citizen  of  the  state 
I  takes  on  himself  to  follow  our  meek  and  lowly 
Savior — when  he  takes  on  himself  the  care  of 
governing  and  protecting  his  little  flock — when 
he  takes  on  himself  to  go  forth  and  preach  the 
doctrines  of  Christianity,  I  do  not  care  to  what 
denomination  he  may  belong.  I  believe  that  the 


purity  and  influence  of  such  a  man  ought  not  to 
be  impaired  by  allowing  him  to  enter  into  the 
political  arena.     And  there  may  be  other  potent 


reasons  why  he  should  not.  There  have  been 
instances  in  which  whole  communities  have 
been  driven  to  the  perpetration  of  acts,  at  which 
every  feeling  of  humanity  shudders,  when  reli- 
gious fanatacism,  growing  out  of  sectarianism, 
has  been  allowed  to  mingle  with  politics.  I 
want  no  man  who  is  entrusted  with  the  spiritual 
care  of  the  people,  to  engage  in  political  discus- 
sion, or  to  have  any  thing  to  do  with  legisla- 
tion. I  want  no  such  man  to  have  a  seat  in  the 
legislative  halls  of  the  state.  I  Avant  to  proceed 
upon  the  same  principle  upon  which  our  fathers 

Froceeded,  in  forming  the  federal  government, 
want  to  keep  religion  and  politics  separate — 
I  want  every  one  in  the  country  to  worsnip  God 
according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience; 
but  if  he  has  torn  himself  from  the  world,  and 
dedicated  his  talents  and  labor  to  his  God,  in  the 
promulgation  of  the  eternal  principles  of  Chris- 
tianity, I  have  thought,  and  still  think  and  be- 
lieve, that  it  would  be  doing  religion  itself  in- 
justice— it  would  be  in  violation  of  the  great 
principle  on  which  we  set  out,  that  religion  and 
politics  should  be  kept  distinct,  that  he  should 
not  be  permitted  to  engage  in  political  strife;  and 


413 


I,  for  one,  will  not  subscribe  lo  the  doctrine,  that 
a  minister  of  the  gospel  shall  be  eligible  to  a 
seat  iu  the  legislative  halls  of  the  state. 

You  may  seanh  through  all  history,  from  the 
beginning  of  Christianity  down  to  the  present 
time,  and  you  will  scarcely  find  an  instance 
where  the  liberties  of  the  people  have  been  lost, 
where  revolution  and  blood-shed  have  been  the 
order  of  the  day,  unless  it  be  where  some  reli- 
gion has  been  established  by  law,  and  where  the 
Eeople,  to  enforce  it  or  to  get  rid  of  it,  have  re- 
elled. 

I  will  detain  tlie  convention  no  longer  upon 
this  subject.  I  have  said,  and  repeat  now,  tiiat 
I  believe  the  people  to  be  competent  to  self-gov- 
mcnt;  and  I  believe  that  this  exception  was 
placed  on  the  records  of  the  constitution  to  de- 
tract, to  some  extent,  from  the  competency  and 
ability  of  the  people  to  judge  for  themselves, 
and  I  believe  that  every  page  that  bears  the  im- 
press of  such  a  sentiment,  fixes  upon  the  common- 
wealth a  blighting,  withering  stain,  so  dark, 
deep,  and  damning,  that  neither  time  nor  cir- 
cumstances can  obliterate  it. 

If  I  have  the  misfortune  to  differ  with  gentle- 
men, it  must  be  my  misfortune.  I  repeat,  I  am 
thoroughly  satisfied  and  convinced,  that  no  cer- 
tificate of  a  judge  should  be  required  from  a 
candidate  for  the  oflSce  of  clerk.  I  repeat,  I  am 
thoroughly  satisfied  and  convinced,  that  if  a 
sheriff  has  discharged  the  duties  of  his  office 
with  ability  and  fidelity,  and  to  the  satisfaction 
of  those  among  whom  he  lives,  the  people  should 
have  the  right  to  place  him  again  in  office;  and 
I  intend,  as  far  as  my  vote  will  go,  to  carry  out 
this  principle.  If,  in  endeavoring  to  carry  it 
out,  1  shall  be  surrounded  bv  conflicting  ele- 
ments in  the  two  extremes,  and  overwhelmed  by 
the  force  of  the  torrent.  I  will  fall,  if  fall  I  must; 
but  if.  Phoenix-like,  I  can  rise  again,  and  defend 
the  principle  at  some  other  time,  I  will  again 
defend  it. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  no  objection 
to  take  the  vote  upon  discharging  the  commit- 
tee, if  it  be  the  pleasure  of  the  house  to  consid- 
er the  resolution  at  this  time.  I  rise,  however, 
for  the  purpose  of  saying,  that  if  this  discussion 
is  to  progress,  and  we  are  to  have  the  whole 
field  of  declamation  and  argument  opened  upon 
the  subject  of  government,  it  had  better  be  upon 
the  resolution  itself,  than  upon  the  motion  to 
discharge  the  committee.  In  order  to  get  rid  of 
that  discussion  which  is  out  of  place  upon  a  mo- 
tion of  this  kind,  I  shall  feel  compelled  to  move 
to  lay  it  on  the  table. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  shall  hereafter  hold  it 
out  of  order  to  discuss  the  merits  of  a  proposi- 
tion upon  the  motion  to  discharge  a  committee, 
or  to  go  into  committee  to  consider  it. 

Mr.  JACKSON  moved  to  lay  the  motion  to 
discharge  the  committee  of  the  whole  from  the 
further  consideration  of  the  subject  on  the  table. 

Mr.  BRAWXER  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  that  motion. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  asked  the  gentleman  from 
Muhlenburg  to  withdraw  his  motion,  so  that  the 
question  could  be  taken  directly  on  the  motion 
to  disclxarge  the  committee. 

Mr.  JACKSOX.  I  would  be  glad  to  accomo- 
date my  friend  from  Ballard,  but  so  deeply  im- 
pressed am  I  with  the  impolicy  of  the  introduc- 


tion here  of  these  mere  abstract  propositions ; 
and  so  well  convinced  am  I  that  suc-n  discus- 
sions cannot  be  promotive  of  a  good  end,  that  I 
cannot  consent  to  withdraw  my  motion. 

Tlie  yeas  and  nays  were  then  taken  and  they 
resulted  thu.s — yeas  56,  naj'S  25. 

Ye.\s — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

fierson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wil- 
iam  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  1).  Brown,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman.  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henrv  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  James  Dudley.  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Thos. 
J.  Gough,  NinianjE.  Grey,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Al- 
fred M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Wm.  Johnson, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh.  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Geo. 
W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
John  H.  McHenry,  Thos. P.  Moore,  John  D.Mor- 
ris, Jonathan  Newcum,  William  Preston,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  James  W. 
Stone,  John  D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thurman,  How- 
ard Todd,  Phillip "Trijdett,  Squire  Turner,  Jno. 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 56. 

Nays — Luther  Brawner,  William  Cowper,  Lu- 
cius De-sha,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Rich'd  D.  Ghol- 
.son,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William 
Hendrix,  Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Willis  B.  Machen.  Alex.  k.  Marshall.  William 
N.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Wm.  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Thos.  Rock- 
hold,  Ignatius  A.  Spaulding,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe— 25. 
So  the  motion  was  laid  on  the  table. 

COrXTY  AM)  DISTRICT  OFFICEBS. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  take  up  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  executive  and  ministerial 
ofiicers  for  counties  and  districts. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  submit  the  following  as  an 
additional  section: 

"All  officers  provided  for  in  this  article  shall 
be  commissioned  by  the  governor,  and  continue 
in  office  until  their  successors  are  commissioned 
and  qualified;  their  terra  of  service  shall  com- 
mence one  month  from  the  day  of  their  respec- 
tive elections." 

There  was  something  said  yesterday  about  al- 
lowingthese  officers  to  act  without  commissions, 
merely  having  the  election  and  return  recorded  iu 
the  ofiice  of  the  county  court.  The  committee, 
however,  thought  they  had  better  be  commission- 
ed by  the  governor.  According  to  the  present 
prospects  there  will  not  be  a  great  deal  else  for 
the  governor  to  do.  And  it  appeared  to  the  com- 
mittee advisable  that  there  should  be  one  uni- 
form period  at  which  they  should  enter  upon 
the  duties  of  their  respective  offices,  and  they 
have  fixed  that  period  at  one  month  after  the 
day  of  their  election. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  To  make  the  provision  in 
this  report  harmonize  with  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  circuit  courts,  I  will  suggest  the  pro- 
priety of  making  the  term  of  office  commence 
with  the  date  of  the  commission. 


414 


Mr.  TURNER.  We  had  that  matter  under 
t'ohsideration,  for  I  liad  noticed  tliat  the  commit- 
tee, of  which  the  lionorable  gtnitleinan  is  chair- 
man, had  made  suoli  a  report;  but  it  seems  tome 
that  this  is  preferable.  According  to  his  report, 
the  same  description  of  officers  living  here,  could 
be  commissioned  a  week  sooner  than  those  liv- 
ing in  the  distant  countit»s. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  think  it  would  be 
imposing  rather  too  great  a  task  upon  the  gov- 
ernor, to  compel  him  to  issue  commissions  for  all 
these  officers;  and  in  regard  to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  term  of  office,  it  had  better  be  from 
and  after  the  election,  and  continue  until  his 
successor  is  duly  qualified. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  difficulty  in  making  the 
term  commence  from  and  after  the  election  is, 
that  officers  will  act  before  they  are  commission- 
ed; before  tliey  have  given  bond,  for  a  great 
portion  of  them  are  required  to  give  bona,  for 
the  proper  discharge  of  their  duties. 

Mr.  APPERSOIN.  Although  constables  are 
to  be  constitutional  officers,  much  inconvenience 
may  arise  from  requiring  them  to  be  commis- 
sioned by  the  governor.  Cases  frequently  occur 
■where  it  is  necessary  to  set  forth  in  the  pleadings 
that  an  individual  is  a  constable,  and  it  would 
be  highly  inconvenient  sometimes  to  send  down 
to  Frankfort  for  a  copy  of  the  commission  that 
it  might  be  used  in  evidence.  A  motion  against 
a  constable  is  made  before  a  justice  of  the  peace 
in  a  remote  county,  and  the  party  would  have  to 
send  to  the  seat  of  government  for  a  copy  of  his 
commission.  At  present  you  have  only  to  send 
to  the  county  court  and  get  a  copy  of  the  order 
making  him  a  constable. 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  think  if  the  governor  is  to  be 
rec^uired  to  issue  commissions  for  all  these  petty- 
officers,  he  will  be  able  to  do  but  little  else.  We 
are  loading  the  constitutton  with  a  great  deal  of 
unnecessary  matter,  making  specific  provisions 
in  relation  to  many  things  that  had  better  be  left 
to  the  control  of  the  legislature. 

The  question  being  taken,  the  amendment  was 
rejected. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  to  add  at  the  end 
of  the  section,  tlie  words,  "  and  where  any  city 
shall  have  a  separate  representation,  in  one  or 
both  houses  of  the  general  assembly,  such  city, 
and  the  county  in  which  it  is  situated,  may 
have  separate  municipal  regulations  and  officers, 
such  as  mav  be  provided  for  separate  counties, 
all  of  which  may  be  regulated  by  law.  And  un- 
til such  legal  regulation  is  mat.e,  the  county  of 
Jefferson  sliall  elect  separately  from  the  city 
of  Louisville,  a  county  court,  sneriff  and  county 
clerk." 

Mr.  PRESTON,  I  understand  the  amend- 
ment of  my  friend  from  Jefferson  proposes  the 
separation  of  the  city  of  Louisville  from  the 
county  of  Jeflferson.  As  it  would  be  tanta- 
mount to  dividing  the  county  in  two,  and  as  I 
am  a  representative  of  that  constituency,  and 
not  believing  it  is  called  for  by  them,  I  object  to 
its  being  engrafted  on  the  a'rticle  now  under 
consideration.  I  believe  in  the  right  of  this 
convention,  or  of  the  legislature  under  it,  if 
80  authorized,  to  create  any  new  county,  or  to  in- 
vest the  city  of  Louisville  with  any  municipal 
privileges  they  may  think  proper,  but  tnat 
part  of  this  amendment  to  which  I  particularly 


j  object  is,  Avhere,  after  referring  to  what  fhelegis- 
laturemay  dointhepremises,itis  declared — "and 
until  such  legislative  regulation  shall  be  made, 
I  the  county  of  Jefferson  shall  elect,  separately  from 
the  city  of  Louisville,  a  county  court,  sheriff  and 
county  clerk."  This  then  is  a  proposition  to 
declare,  in  this  constitution,  that  the  city  of  Lou- 
isvilleshall  be  separated,  for  all  county  purposes, 
from  the  county  of  Jefferson,  and  that  a  virtual 
partition  of  the  county  shall  take  place.  Now, 
what  motive  my  friend  from  Jefferson  has,  in 
making  this  motion,  1  cannot  discover,  uidess, 
indeed,  it  be  this:  The  county  court  clerk's  and 
sheriff's  offices  are  valuable  ones  in  the  city  of 
Lonisville,  and  extend  in  their  jurisdiction  to 
both  city  and  county  ;  the  political  divisions 
are  sucii  that  there  is  a  majority  of  whigs 
in  Louisville  of  some  five  hundred,  in  a  poll  of 
five  thousand  votes:  but  in  the  county,  parties 
are  very  nearly  equally  balanced,  out  of  a  poll 
of  two  thousand  five  hundred  votes,  there  being 
scarcely  ever  a  majority  either  Avay  of  more  than 
fifty.  The  majority  in  the  city  of  Louisville 
therefore,  at  present,  controls  the  election  of 
those  officers. 

A  large  sum  of  money  has  been  expended  in 
the  erection  of  a  very  handsome  court  house 
and  jail,  to  be  used  by  the  city  and  county  in 
common.  The  sessions  of  the  courts,  and  the 
clerk's  offices  are  now  held  in  the  city.  What 
confusion  will  be  produced  by  such  an  act  of 
this  convention  as  the  gentleman  proposes — by 
commingling  the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts  and 
officers  of  the  county  and  city.  This  convention 
assembled  here  for  the  purpose  of  framing  an 
organic  law,  to  govern  the  state  at  large,  and 
not  to  produce  the  schism  which  will  prevail  in 
localities  in  regard  to  the  partition  of  existing 
and  the  erecti(»n  of  new  counties — not  for  the 
purpose  of  agitating  little  local  interests,  nor  for 
tlie  purpose  of  carrying  out  sectional  views. 
These  are  not  fitting  subjects  for  the  considera- 
tion of  this  convention.  No  such  movement  as 
the  gentleman  indicates  was  ever  agitated  in 
Jefferson  county,  as  1  understand,  during  the 
last  canvass.  Neither  was  it  agitated  in  the  city 
of  Louisville 

Now,  what  is  the  proposition  of  the  commit- 
tee on  the  legislative  department?  They  have 
provided  in  their  report,  that  cities  may,  for  the 
purpose  of  representation ,  be  separated  from  the 
counties  in  which  they  are  situated,  whenever 
the  public  necessities  may  require  it.  Thus  far 
I  am  willing  to  go.  But  I  do  object  to  bring- 
ing into  this  convention  a  propositicm  to  create 
separate  tribunals  in  Loui.sville,  from  Jefferson, 
and  to  provide  for  the  election  of  different  offi- 
cers. The  gentleman  from  Jefferson  submitted 
this  proposition  to  me,  I  say  it  in  justice  to  him, 
and  I  told  him  that  I  did  not  believe  that  our 
constituency  expected  this  move  to  be  madi' — 
that  so  far  as  engrafting  a  general  declara- 
tory provision  that  the  legislature  may,  from 
time  to  time,  act  in  regard  to  the  establishment 
of  municipal  courts  and  privileges,  and  the 
election  of  officers  in  cities  and  counties,  I  liad 
no  objection,  but  I  did  not  want  this  last  clause 
of  the  proposition  carried  before  this  conven- 
tion. 1  wanted  nothing  more  than  a  general  de- 
claratory clause,  applicable  not  ordy  to  the 
city  of  Louisville,  but  to  other  cities.     I  dislike 


415 


this  speeial  legislation,  even  in  the  legislature, 
but  much  less  should  it  enter  into  the  proceed- 
ings of  this  eotivention.  And  it  was  for  tliis 
reason,  I  asked  the  attention  of  this  convention 
to  the  subject.  If  they  go  on  in  this  way,  oth- 
er counties  may  desire  a  division,  or  the  crea- 
tion of  new  counties  in  the  state,  and  all  the 
perplexing  consequences  resulting  from  the  ad- 
mission of  such  a  principle,  would  flow  into 
the  convention,  to  disturb  and  embarrass  its  ac- 
tion. Why  is  the  separate  organization  of 
these  offices,  referred  to  in  the  last  clause  of  this 
gentleman's  amendment,  sought,  unless  it  be  to 
commence  in  advance,  this  movement  of  the  de- 
mocracy upon  the  whig  ascendancy  in  tlie  city 
and  county?  The  county  court  decides  the  coun- 
t}-  le>-y,  but  those  members  of  it  who  arc  appoint- 
from  the  city  do  not  exercise  that  right.  If  the 
gentleman  however,  apprehends  that  the  county 
court  system  proposed  by  the  committee  on  that 
subject,  is  to  be  carried  mto  eflFect,  and  believes 
that  the  city  of  Louisville  should  not  have  the 
right  to  vote  with  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
for  these  judges  who  are  to  decide  the  levy 
with  the  county,  why  I  am  willing  that  this 
matter  shall  be  referred  to  the  committee  of  thir- 
ty, for  part  of  the  subject  matter  falls  within,  as 
I  consider,  their  jurisdiction,  to  report  a  fair 
mode;  but  I  am  unwilling  to  tack  to  tlie  end 
of  this  report,  when  the  liouse  is  rather  tired, 
and  anxious  to  get  through  W' ith  it,  a  proposi- 
tion for  a  distinct  and  utter  separation  of  the 
city  and  county. 

ilr.  MERIWETHER.  I  am  aware  that  a 
portion  of  the  matters  embraced  in  this  amend- 
ment belongs  more  properly  to  the  other  com- 
mittee, but  a  portion  of  it  also  belongs  to  the  re- 
port now  under  consideration,  and  therefore,  it 
is  offered  as  an  amendment  here.  I  apprehend 
that  the  joint  committee  of  thirty,  have  about  as 
much  to  get  along  with,  without  any  addition  to 
their  labors,  and  therefore,  I  cannot  accede  to 
that  portion  of  the  gentleman's  proposition.  I 
regret  extremely  that  the  gentleman  has  thought 
it  necessary  to  introduce  the  terms  wliig  and 
democrat  here;  his  motive  is  with  himself.  As 
for  myself,  I  have  come  here  prepared  to  vote 
and  speak  without  reference  to  the  whigsor  dem- 
ocrats in  any  way  whatever.  But  I  will  proceed 
to  answer  the  objections  of  the  gentleman.  He 
seems  to  think  I  propose  a  separation  of  the  city 
and  countv.  You,  Mr.  President,  know  that  1 
have  stood  here  as  a  representative  in  the  legis- 
lature, from  Jefferson  county,  for  many  years  in 
opposition  to  that  separation,  and  the  creation 
of  a  new  county.  But  if  you  do  not  go  as  far  as 
my  amendment  proposes,  a  separation  will  be 
ejected,  unless  indeed,  you  adopt  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Wick- 
liffe)  which  provides  that  no  new  county  shall 
be  created,  unless  it  contains  a  certain  number 
of  square  miies,  and  which  proposition  un- 
der the  circumstances,  I  cannot  go  for.  And 
if  you  do  adopt  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  and  do  not  adopt  this,  then 
we  are  tied  up  forever,  as  a  portion  of  the  coun- 
ty of  Jefferson,  and  then  if  you  adopt  the  prop- 
osition that  has  been  reported,  with  reference  to 
county  courts,  we  never  can  obtain  justice.  What 
is  our  condition  there  now?  The  mayor  and 
council  of  Louisville  imposes  ibe  taxes  on  the 


citv,  and  disburses  them,  but  here  you  -will  give 
to  Louisville,  having  five  thousand  voters,  and 
Jefferson,  having  but  two  thousand  five  hun- 
dred, the  ria:ht  to  vote  in  the  election  of  the  men 
who  are  to  impose  taxes  on  Jefferson,  and  dis- 
burse their  revenues.  Is  that  right?  You  give 
us  no  power  in  voting  for  mavor  and  council, 
who  levy  your  taxes,  and  disburse  your  reve- 
nue— none;  and  we  want  none,  but  I  do  object 
to  a  population  of  five  thousaml  bein^  permit- 
ted to  vote  in  the  election  of  officers  who  are  to 
levy  our  taxes,  and  disburse  our  revenues.  ^VTiy, 
I  have  been  taught  to  believe,  that  taxation  and 
representation,  should  go  hand  in  hand,  in  this 
government. 

But  the  gentleman  does  not  object  to  giving 
the  power  to  the  legislature.  He  says  that  our 
constituencies  liavenot  been  consulted  onthesub- 
ject,  and  probably  hewishes  to  consult  his.  Of 
course  my  rule  of  action  should  not  govern  his, 
but  I  have  never  thought  it  necessary  to  ask  ray 
constituents  what  I  shall  do.  I  do  -what  I  be- 
lieve to  be  right,  and  trust  to  the  decision  of  that 
constituency  if  the  action  be  right  or  not.  I  in- 
troduced the  term  "any  city"  in  my  amendment, 
because  other  cities  may  occupy  the  same  rela- 
tion to  their  counties,  as  Louisville  does  to  Jef- 
ferson, but  I  do  not  make  it  obligatory  on  them 
thus  to  act.  As  to  the  gentleman's  objection  to 
the  county  of  Jefferson  being  allowed,  ov  consti- 
tutional provision,  to  elect  their  officers,  is  he  not 
aware  that  an  election  will  take  place  before  the 
legislature  meets?  A  county  court  then  will  be 
elected  for  four  years,  with  power  to  grind  down 
Jefferson,  and  a  majority  of  two  thirds  voting  for 
their  election,  who  have  no  interest  in  the  mat- 
ter. Besides,  I  wish  to  preserve  the  symmetnr 
of  the  thing,  if  nothing  else,  and  therefore,  if  it 
is  proper  that  we  shall  have  a  separate  county 
court,  it  is  just  as  proper  that  we  should  have  a 
clerk  for  it  also.  The  gentleman  says  if  this 
proposition  is  adopted,  we  may  be  flooded  with 
propositions  of  a  similar  character.  But  there  is 
nota  city  in  the  state,  which  is  similarly  situated, 
and  whose  population  entitles  it  to  a  separate 
representation,  and  therefore,  there  is  no  appre- 
hension to  be  entertained  on  that  score.  Believ- 
ing as  I  do,  that  the  good  sense  of  this  conven- 
tion will  at  once  see  the  propriety  of  this  meas- 
ure, I  submit  it  to  them. 

Mr.  BROWN.  As  this  question  involves  in 
some  degree,  the  interests  of  the  President,  I 
move  that  we  go  into  committee  of  the  whole, 
in  order  that  he  may  have  an  opportunity  of  par- 
ticipating in  the  discussion. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  is  not  necessary  for 
me.  I  am  not  in  favor  of  the  amendment  as  of- 
fered, though  I  am  willing  that  the  legislature 
should  give  the  cities  separate  representations 
when  they  are  entitled  to  it.  I  have  no  desire  to 
address  the  convention  on  the  subject. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  am  in  favor  of  any  propo- 
sition that  will  apply  equally  to  all  the  cities  of 
the  state.  The  cities  of  Covington,  <)f  Newport, 
and  Paducah,  and  probably  under  the  the  new 
railroad  improvement,  the  city  of  Henderson, 
may  desire  tliis  thing,  and  all  may  be  effected 
by  the  legislature.  As  I  before  stated,  I  desire 
no  speciiu  legislation  in  the  constitution  at  all. 
If  the  gentleman  will  draft  a  general  proposi- 
tion, giving  a  general  power  to  the  legislature  to 


establish  courts  wilh  separate  nninieipal  rights 
and  privileges,  and  with  the  puwer  of  electing 
separate  local  officers,  it  is  my  belief,  that  I  shall 
go  for  it.  But  to  attempt,  in  this  manner,  to  di- 
vide Louisville  from  Jetferson  county,  I  do  most 
strenuously  protest  against.  There  has  been  no 
petition,  no  movement  on  the  part  of  the  people, 
no  public  desire  manifested  for  such  a  separa- 
tion; and  the  result  would  be,  that  the  courts 
still  being  separate  for  all  municipal  purposes, 
would  yet  sit  in  the  same  place.  The  people 
of  Jeiferson  would  have  to  say  to  those  of  Lous- 
ville,  we  will  not  trust  you  with  the  election,  but 
still  we  claim  the  right  of  sitting  in  town.  In 
other  words,  there  would  be  two  counties  in  one 
— a  sort  of  political  monster,  unknown  in  the 
country.  And  it  would  produce  such  a  jumble, 
that  for  the  present,  at  least,  I  find  it  impossi- 
ble to  see  through  it. 

Now  I  admit,  in  some  degree,  the  justice  of 
my  friend's  remark,  and  confess  I  was  hurried  a 
little  too  far,  a  moment  since,  in  using  the  words 
whig  and  democrat.  I  should  be  glad  never  to 
hear  those  terms  used  in  this  house,  but  still  I 
only  spoke  the  plain  truth.  All  the  county  of- 
ficers of  Jetferson  Avould  be  obliged  to  come  to 
Louisville,  where  the  court  house  was  erected, 
to  reside  and  do  their  business,  and  what  a 
confusion  would  this  create?  I  hope  the  gentle- 
man will  suffer  his  proposition  to  go  to  the  com- 
mittee of  thirty,  or  that  he  will  amend  it  as  I 
have  suggested. 

Mr.  RUDD.  This  is  certainly  a  neAV  matter  to 
me,  and  one  which  1  have  never  heard  spoken  of 
until  I  came  to  this  convention.  1  can  hardlv  see 
the  object  to  be  attained  or  the  advantages  to  be 
derived  from  its  adoption.  I  do  not  see  that  it 
will  be  either  a  benefit  to  the  city  of  Louisville 
or  the  county  of  Jefferson.  They  have  hereto- 
fore mutually  acted  together,  so  much  so  that  it 
has  really  become  a  matter  of  difiiculty  to  toll 
whether  a  man  is  a  citizen  of  the  counV  or  of 
the  city.  And  yet  the  gentleman  generally  un- 
derstands pretty  well  what  he  is  after,  and  is 
pretty  keen  in  viewing  things  in  advance,  and 
there  may  be  advantages  to  be  derived  from  the 
Reparation  that  I  have  not  yet  discovered.  I 
have,  it  is  true,  given  no  reflection  to  the  subject, 
but  vet  it  seems  to  me  that  Jefferson  county  will 
certainly  be  the  loser  by  the  separation.  As  to 
the  magistracy  of  the  county,  the  nrnjority  was 
on  the  side  of  Jefferson,  and  I  have  never  yet 
heard  the  first  man  complain  of  the  action  of 
the  magistraev  of  Louisville  in  regard  to  them. 
They  generally  acted  cordially  together.  The 
public  property,  the  court  liouse,  etc.,  is  the 
common  property  of  the  city  and  the  county, 
and  it  is  located  in  the  city  of  Louisville.  My 
opinion  is,  that  if  you  once  provide  for  the  elec- 
tion of  a  separate  and  distinct  magistracy,  sher- 
iff and  clerk  for  eacli,  it  will  follow,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  tliat  there  will  be  a  separate  jail  and 
court,  and  thus  finally  two  separate  and  distinct 
cpunties.  And  what  benefit  would  result  to 
either?    It  reminds  nie  of  some  of  the  emanci- 

Satiouists  who  clamored  so  loudly  for  the  frce- 
om  of  the  blacks,  witliout  pointing  out  one 
8  ditary  mode  by  which  it  was  to  be  done,  or 
■where  the  black  or  the  white  race  was  to  be  ben- 
efi  ted,  and  yet  they  wanted  at  once  to  sacrifice 
$6),000,000  of  property.    The  expense  for  new 


public  buildings  would  be  heavy  on  th^  people 
of  Jetferson,  and  therein  at  least  I  think  the 
gentleman  would  be  doing  his  constituents  a 
positive  injur3^  As  for  the  matter  of  political 
ascendency  in  either  the  county  or  city,  I  think 
that  in  framing  this  constitution  such  conside- 
rations should  be  laid  aside  and  forgotten.  But 
Avho  knows  but  what  at  the  very  next  election 
that  comes  off  the  city  of  Louisville  may  not  be 
thrown  on  the  side  of  the  democracy,  or  that  the 
county  which  is  now  democratic  may  not  be- 
come whig?  This  new  constitution  we  are  about 
to  frame  will  certainly  introduce  a  new  order  of 
things.  Nor  does  any  man  know  upon  what 
side  he  may  be  thrown.  I  am  a  whig,  as  firm 
and  staunch  as  any  in  the  state,  and  yet  if  I  saw 
that  party  adopting  a  wrong  policy  I  would  vote 
against  them  to-morroAV.  I  am  governed  by 
principle  and  that  alone.  But  in  framing  an  or- 
ganic law  which  is  to  govern  not  only  the  pres- 
ent generation  but  posterity,  considerations  of 
this  kind  should  be  disregarded  and  the  general 
good  alone  kept  in  view. 

I  should  really  regret  very  much  to  see  any 
collision  grow  up  between  the  city  and  the 
county  on  this  subject,  and  as  for  the  gentleman 
himself,  he  has  often  stood  up  for  Louisville 
manfully,  and  we  of  the  city  would  dislike 
very  much  to  loose  his  aid  by  a  division.  I 
hope  therefore,  we  shall  remain  united,  unless 
some  palpable,  tangible  injury  would  be  inflict- 
ed on  Jefferson  county  thereby,  which  can  be 
pointed  out  so  plainly  that  no  man  can  mistake 
it.  For  myself,  I  want  neither  legislative  nor 
constitutional  separation.  Let  us  remain  Avhere 
we  are.  United,  we  form  a  large  population 
and  command  respect  throughout  the  state  from 
our  numbers;  and  I  desire  that  we  shall  retain 
that  position.  The  county  derives  great  advan- 
tages from  its  connection  with  the  city.  It  has 
increased  in  population  thereby,  and  in  the 
valuation  of  real  estate,  and  the  citizens  of  the 
county  derive  many  other  benefits  in  the  way 
of  the  city  magistracy  and  other  conveniences. 
The  city  certainly  has  never  thrown  any  obsta- 
cles in  the  way  of  the  county,  none  at  all;  and 
has  always  permitted  the  county  magistracy  to 
levy  their  tax  as  they  please.  And  as  for  taxes, 
we  are  taxed  almost  to  death  in  Louisville.  The 
taxes  amount  to  about  two-fifths  of  our  whole 
income,  and  even  the  legislature  of  the  state 
made  us  pav  one  half  per  cent,  for  improving 
the  public  lands  where  the  state  derived  three 
or  four  per  cent,  of  benefit.  This  is  one  of  the 
most  gross  acts  of  injustice  ever  inflicted  upon 
a  community;  and  I  hope  another  legislature 
will  remedy  it.  But  this  is  not  the  point  of 
discussion. 

I  hope  the  convention  will  not  interlVrc  with 
this  matter  or  attempt  to  partition  this  county 
as  proposed  in  the  gentleman's  amendment.  The 
people  of  the  city  and  county  are  one  and  the 
same  people  almost.  It  is  true  I  have  no  con- 
nection in  this  county,  but  my  wife  has,  aud  I 
want  that  wo  shall  liereafter,  as  heretofore,  all 
keep  together.  I  have  no  connection  scarcely 
of  my  own,  standing  as  I  do,  pretty  much  alone; 
and  therefore,  I  want  no  divorcing  in  this  mat- 
ter. I  hope  the  gentleman  will  therefore  with 
draw  his  proposition,  and  allow  us  to  go  on  to- 
gether as  wo  Have  heretofore,  hand  in  hand  and 


417 


heart  in  heart.  We  are  improving  in  the  city 
of  Louisville,  and  our  population  and  business 
i3  increasing.  The  dutch  population  too,  was 
spreading  over  the  county  and  doing  much  good, 
and  teaching  the  -would-be-fashionable  young 
roen  how  to  earn  an  honest  living,  by  the  culti- 
vation of  the  land.  We  are  a  mixed  people — 
we  have  Italians,  French,  Germans  and  Dutch, 
and  yet  -we  are  all  united.  They  are  spread- 
ing over  the  land  of  the  county,  turning  the 
wilderness  into  productive  gardens.  All  this 
was  for  the  benefit  of  Jefferson  county,  as  well  as 
for  the  city  of  Louisville,  and  the  county  would 
therefore  lose  rather  than  gain  bv  the  separation. 
If  the  gentleman  has  any  laud  he  wants  to  sell, 
I  can  insure  a  half  dozen  Germans  ready  to  pur- 
chase it  for  garden  purposes.  I  hope  the  gen- 
tleman will  conclude  to  withdraw  his  proposi- 
tion, and  let  this  matter  rest. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  depricate  a  separa- 
tion a.s  much  as  the  gentleman.  It  is  what  I 
have  been  against  for  years,  as  all  know.  Why 
do  they  wish  to  make  it  appear  that  I  am  for  a 
separation?  Is  it  a  separation  that  I  propose? 
To  some  extent  it  is,  but  the  gentleman  last  up 
has  given  the  strongest  reason  for  a  separation. 
Did  he  not  tell  us  that  the  city  of  Louisville 
was  taxing  her  citizens  to  death?  Will  you 
give  them  the  power  to  tax  the  whole  county  of 
Jefferson  to  death?  But  he  says  he  wants  all  to 
go  together.  Would  it  Tiot  be  as  well  for  the 
gentleman  to  withdraw  his  opposition,  and 
then  we  shall  all  be  together.  I  would  be  per- 
fectly content  to  leave  it  with  the  legislature 
except  for  the  reason  that  one  ele^;tion  must  take 
place  before  the  legislature  can  act.  You  take 
the  proposition  that  there  are  to  be  three  mem- 
bers of  the  county  court;  they  must  lay  the  tax 
and  disburse  the  revenue.  Will  the  county  of 
Jefferson  get  more  than  one  member  of  the  coun- 
ty court?  The  city  of  Louisville  has  a  relative 
population  greater  than  all  the  rest  of  JefiFerson 
county,  and  one  member  of  the  court  will  be  as 
many' as  the  county  can  e.xpect.  Then  comes 
the  process  of  taxing  to  death  and  the  disburse- 
ment of  that  tax.  Is  that  right?  I  am  willing 
to  leave  it  to  the  legislature,  but  I  am  not  dis- 
posed to  run  the  risk  of  being  left  in  this  posi- 
tion for  four  years.  My  colleague  is  absent  on 
account  of  sickness  in  his  family,  but  it  is  a 
point  on  which  he  and  I  have  conversed  and 
aboxit  which  we  are  agreed. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  rise  to  correct 
the  mistake  into  which  the  gentleman  from  Jef- 
ferson has  fallen.  He  says  there  will  be  no 
legislature  convened  before  an  election  will  take 

filace.  No  election  can  take  place  till  the  legis- 
ature  has  convened.  As  far  as  I  can  form  an 
opinion  it  is  the  intention  of  the  convention 
that  an  election  shall  take  place  in  August  1850. 
The  first  officers  elected  under  the  new  consti- 
tution will  be  the  legislative  and  executive 
officers  created  by  it.  They  will  have  to  carry 
out  the  provisions  of  the  constitution  in  refer- 
ence to  the  election  of  officers,  and  I  believe 
the  committee  has  fixed  in  their  own  mind  that 
the  first  election  of  the  judicial  and  county 
officers  shall  be  in  April  or  May  1851.  The 
legislature  will  be  elected  in  August  1850  and 
the  other  officers  cannot  be  elected  till  the  fol- 
lowing spring. 

53 


Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  cannot  for  the  life 
of  me  see  what  is  in  contemplation  in  the  minds 
of  the  committee  or  of  the  convention.  If  the 
constitution  as  now  reported  is  adopted,  it  will 
not  be  as  tlie  gentleman  has  stated.  I  would  be 
perfectly  content  to  have  it  arranged  in  that 
way,  if  the  election  were  not  to  take  place  as  I 
supposed,  but  according  to  the  report  of  the 
committee,  such  is  not  the  fact.  We  are  to 
vote  on  the  constitution  in  April  or  May  next. 
The  election  of  officers  under  the  constitution 
will  take  place  in  the  summer  or  fall  following. 
The  present  constitution  provides  for  an  election 
at  another  period  and  there  will  be  an  election 
unless  these  provisions  are  altered. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment, by  ayes  and  noes  on  the  call  of  Mr. 
PRESTOX,  and  it  resulted  thus— yeas  24,  noes 
61.  '    • 

Yeas — Alfred  Boyd,  Luther  Brawner,  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Mil- 
ford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John 
Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  James 
M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
John  Wheeler — 24. 

N.\YS — Mr.  President  (Mr.  Guthrie),  Richard 
Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  William  Bradlev,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jessey  Coffe,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  Dudley,  Chastecn  T.  Dunavan,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Grey, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Mark  E.  Huston, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelley, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  WiUis'B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Maves,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H. 
McHenry,  Wili'iam  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Wil- 
liam Preston,  Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Spaulding,  James  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Charles  A'.  Wickliflfe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe,  George  W.  Williams,  SUas  Woodson,  Wes- 
ley J.Wright— 61. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  then  moved  to  strike 
oxit  all  the  latter  portion  of  the  section  in  rela- 
tion to  the  election  of  officers. 

Mr.  PRESTON  suggested  that  it  would  be 
better  to  postpone  the  further  consideration  of 
this  subject  for  the  present. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  assented,  and  the  further 
consideration  of  the  whole  subject  was  post- 
poned accordingly. 

NEW   COUNTIES. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  the 
convention  resolved  itself  into  committee  of  the 
whole,  Mr.  JAMES  in  the  chair,  on  the  report  of 
the  select  committee  in  relation  to  the  formation 
of  new  counties.  The  secretary  read  the  article 
as  follows: 


418 


'.'      '       ■  AllTfCLK  — •; 

Skc.  1.  No  new  county  shall  be  formed  with 
an  area  of  less  than  three  hundred  and  fifty 
square  miles;  nor  shall  such  new  county  be 
formed,  if  by  doing  so  it  reduces  any  county  out 
of  which  it  shall  be  formed,  in  whole  or  in  part, 
below  an  area  of  four  hundred  square  miles;  and 
in  running  the  lines  or  boundary  of  such  new 
county,  no  such  line  shall  run  nearer  than  ten 
miles  of  the  county  seat  of  any  county. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  will  offer,  on  my 
own  responsibility,  an  amendment  which  I  think 
will  carry  out  the  views  of  the  select  committee, 
though  I  have  not  had  the  opportunity  to  sub- 
mit my  amendment  to  them. 

"Nor  shall  any  new  county  be  created,  if  the 
county  or  counties,  out  of  which  the  same  shall 
befonned,  in  whole  or  part,  shall  be  reduced  in 
the  number  of  qualified  voters  below  the  ratio 
of  representation  for  the  time  being." 

I  presume  there  is  not  a  member  present  in  this 
convention,  who  is  not  fully  sensible  of  the  evil 
of  the  multiplication  of  the  number  of  counties 
in  this  comjnonwealth,  and  I  think  it  is  our  duty 
to  prescribe  some  limitation  on  future  legisla- 
tion, which  will  give  stability  to  the  counties  as 
at  present  organized.  The  committee  could  base 
their  action  on  no  better  criterion  than  the  num- 
ber of  square  miles,  and  in  this  article  it  is  pro- 
vided that  no  new  county  shall  consist  of  less 
than  three  hundred  and  fifty  square  miles,  and 
no  old  county  shall  be  reduced  below  four  hun- 
dred square  miles.  The  amendment  that  I  pro- 
pose contemplates  another  condition,  and  that 
IS,  that  no  old  county  shall  be  reduced  below 
the  ratio  of  representation  as  established  by 
law.  With  these  guarantees  fixed,  I  think  we 
may  look  forward  to  something  like  peace  in 
forming  new  counties,  and  none  will  be  made, 
except  the  mass  of  the  people  require  a  separate 
county  organization. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  I  regret  that  this  question  is 
brought  up  to-day.  As  an  individual  member 
of  this  house,  I  regret  that  it  has  come  here  at 
all.  It  does  seem  to  me,  that  before  we  finish, 
we  shall  have  placed  sufiicient  clogs  upon  this 
constitution  to  weigh  it  down  to  death.  In  en- 
deavoring to  carry  out  the  principles  of  conserv- 
atism, which  seem  to  be  so  highly  appreciated 
on  this  floor,  I  think  this  will  oe  the  result.  I 
stand  here  the  representative  of  a  divided  peo- 
ple on  this  question.  It  may  be  their  misfor- 
tune to  be  divided,  and  mine  to  be  their  repre- 
sentative here,  but  when  that  principle  is  placed 
in  the  constitution,  I  think  I  cannot  oe  mistaken 
in  stating  to  this  house,  that  more  than  half  the 
county  is  against  you,  no  matter  how  wholesome 
the  balance  of  the  constitution  may  be.  I  know 
that  gentlemen  who  reside  in  old  counties  where 
every  thing  is  settled  to  their  satisfaction  may 
contend  that  no  further  change  shall  be  made  in 
municipal  regulations  for  the  convenience  of  the 
country.  But  I  hold  that  the  people  are  com- 
petent to  determine  whether  their  convenience 
requires  a  change,  and  when  you  tie  their  hands 
and  say  they  shall  no  longer  exercise  the  power 
of  free  volition  on  these  matters,  as  was  said  to 
Sampson  under  the  pillars,  tliat  his  hands  should 
no  longer  be  loosed,  they  will  rise  in  their  ma- 
jesty and  burst  th«  cords  by  which  they  are 


bound,  and  they  will  sliow  that  they  h.ive  right* 
although  they  are  minorities. 

I  am  no  disorganizcr.  I  advocate  no  disor- 
ganizing principles,  but  the  rights  of  minorities. 
What  is  tne  condition  of  this  state?  Look  at 
the  map.  Have  counties  been  arranged  with  re- 
ference to  territorial  beautv  or  symmetry  of  form, 
or  even  with  a  view,  i)i  all  cases,  to  convenience? 
I  assert  that  no  such  principle  has  been  carried 
out.  Population  has  been  concentrated  in  one 
portion,  by  certain  surrounding  circumstances, 
and  the  other  portion  of  the  county  asks  that 
they  may  have  a  separate  organization.  The 
weight  of  population  for  the  time  being  deter- 
mines where  the  county  seat  shall  be,  and  as  tlie 
more  remote  portions  are  settled,  that  county 
seat  becomes  inconvenient.  Now,  what  are  the 
people  to  do  under  these  circumstances?  Shall 
the  convenience  of  those  who  originally  organ- 
ized and  gave  shape  to  the  county  be  consulted, 
or  the  convenience  of  the  majority  within  the 
limits  of  the  county?  It  is  for  the  aggrieved  to 
comf  forward  and  show  their  grievances,  and  it 
is  the  duty  of  the  legislative  department  to  re- 
dress these  grievances.  I  am  told  that  it  is  a 
matter  of  economy.  What  is  the  purpose  oi 
government?  It  is  that  the  greatest  good  may 
be  secured  to  the  greatest  number  of  citizens. 
How  is  this  to  be  accomplished?  By  having  lo- 
cal accommodations,  to  bring  the  business  of 
every  man  near  to  him.  What  was  the  doctrine 
respecting  the  branching  the  court  of  appeals? 
It  Avas,  that  justice  might  be  brought  to  every 
man's  door.  I  take  it  that  the  same  principle 
runs  into  the  organization  of  counties.  They 
are  built  up  and  circumscribed,  for  the  purpose 
of  bringing  business  convenient  to  the  inhabi- 
tants, and  for  promoting  the  ends  of  justice. 
Who  shall  say  that  this  shall  be  withheld  from 
the  people? 

As  I  said  before,  those  who  are  well  situated 
may,  perhaps,  satisfy  themselves  that  it  is  prop- 
er and  right  to  tie  the  hands  of  others.  For  one, 
I  will  not  do  it.  My  health  is  not  good  to-day, 
and  I  trust  the  subject  will  not  now  be  acted 
upon,  as  I  desire  to  be  heard  in  reference  to  it. 
It  will  prove  a  dead  Aveight  on  the  constitution, 
and  shall  we,  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out 
our  sectional  views,  or  promoting  our  sectional 
convenience,  place  that  in  the  constitution 
which  will  be  the  death  of  it?  One  tells  us  that 
a  certain  thing  will  be  the  death  of  it,  and  an- 
other says  another  thing  will  do  it.  Every  man 
knows  that  this  thing  will  carry  a  tremendous 
vote  with  it.  Look  at  the  position  of  Fayette 
county,  and  the  other  central  counties.  What  is 
their  size,  compared  with  many  other  counties? 
They  are  not  lialf  the  dimensions  of  some  oth- 
ers, and  yet  they  are  satisfactorily  arranged. 
They  wish  for  no  division,  but  shall  they  with- 
hold the  power  of  dividing  from  those  wfcich  do 
wish  it? 

Let  the  voice  of  the  people  prevail  in  the 
legislative  hall,  and  I  know  that  although  the 
legislature  does  frequently  run  wild,  the  voice 
of  the  people  will  oe  heard;  and  we  have  no 
other  way  of  having  it  heard.  There  has  been 
a  disinclination,  for  years,  to  organizing  new 
counties,  and  on  thi.'^  subject  the  legislature  may 
be  trusted.  More  than  one-half  the  counties  are 
satisfied  with  their  present  organization.     They 


410 


■will  not  hastily,  and  without  due  reflection,  es- 
tablish a  new  county,  and  I  think  we  may  safe- 
ly leave  the  whole  matter  to  the  legislature, 
without  having  their  hands  tied. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  had  occasion  to  turn  my 
attention  to  this  subject  when  an  effort  was  made 
to  cut  up  the  county  in  which  I  live,  and  I  will 
venture  to  say  this  state  has  more  counties  than 
any  other  state  in  this  Union,  according  to  the 
Tuimber  of  square  miles,  unless  it  be  Ohio.  New 
York  lias  a  territory  of  about  48,000  square  miles 
and  58  counties;  Pennsvlvania  has  a  population 
of  about  2,000,000;  48,000  square  miles,  and  some 
60  odd  counties;  Maryland  has  a  population  of 
500.000,  with  more  than  half  the  territory  of 
Kentucky,  and  11  counties;  and  Virginia  has  100 
counties  and  63,000  square  miles.  Ohio  went  off 
in  the  same  kind  of  mistaken  policy  in  reference 
to  counties;  but  it  is  now  provided  in  the  consti- 
tution of  that  state  that  no  new  county  shall  be 
made  having  less  than  400  square  miles.  In 
Mississippi,  the  smallest  counties  contain  375 
square  miles.  I  was  very  glad  when  my  col- 
league presented  this  proposition.  I  inquired  of 
him  Avhy  he  did  not  make  400  the  lowest  number. 
He  replied  that  he  wanted  to  make  room  for  a 
few  new^  counties,  and  that  is  the  reason  ho  fixed 
upon  350  square  miles.  Now,  I  think  this  will 
accommodate  the  gentleman  from  Caldwell.  He 
has  provided  very  judiciously  that  no  county 
shall  be  encroached  upon,  and  also  that  no  coun- 
ty shall  be  reduced  below  400  square  miles.  If 
there  are  grievances  in  relation  to  the  size  of 
counties,  those  grievances  can  be  provided  for 
by  this  resolution.  But  as  I  have  before  said, 
there  is  a  place  Avhere  we  must  stop.  We  cannot 
always  grant  all  that  is  petitioned  for.  We  know 
how  this  thing  starts,  and  there  is  no  end  to  it 
when  it  is  started.  A  man  wants  to  be  a  county 
clerk,  and  he  will  press  it;  and  here  is  a  man  out 
of  office,  and  he  will  press  it;  and  then  there 
are  men  who  want  the  seat  of  justice  nearer 
their  town,  and  they  will  press  it;  .and  where 
there  is  a  little  miserable  town  at  the  cross 
roads,  the  people  there  will  press  it;  so  it  is  that 
a  thousand  little  petty  interests  are  brought  to 
bear  in  the  making  of  new  counties.  Now,  I  do 
not  think  that  a  man  gets  any  advantage  from 
living  in  one  of  these  little  chicken  stealing 
towns.  It  may  furnish  a  market  for  the  neighbor- 
ing country,  but  it  brings  in  a  squad  of  free  ne- 
groes who  steal.  I  hope  something  of  this  kind 
will  prevail.  I  have  never  heard  of  a  measure 
more  demanded  than  this  is  iu  the  part  of  the 
state  from  which  1  came. 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  regret  that  this  matter  has 
come  up  now.  I  think  this  provision  would  be 
imposing  too  much  of  a  restriction  upon  the 
power  of  the  legislature  in  forming  new  coun- 
ties. My  constituents  are  somewhat  interested 
in  this  matter,  and  I  would  like  myself  to  have 
the  consideration  of  this  subject  postponed  for 
the  present.  It  may  be  that  tlie  provision  of  the 
report  can  bo  so  shaped  that  it  will  not  affect  se- 
riously the  interests  of  my  constituent's.  I  hope 
it  will  be  postponed  till  we  are  prepared  to  meet 
it  as  we  desire. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  There  are  three  or  four  del- 
egates on  this  floor  in  rather  a  delicate  position 
in  casting  their  votes  on  this  subject.  I  am 
somewhat  in    the  condition  of  the  gentleman 


from  Caldwell.  I  have  no  inclination  to  sit 
quietly,  as  Sampson  did,  in  the  lap  of  Delilah, 
and  have  my  strength  shorn  away.  There  arc 
couties  where  individuals  are  compelled  to  trav- 
el from  twenty  to  twenty  five  miles  to  get  to  the 
county  seat.  There  have  been  several  proposi- 
tions, as  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Har- 
din) well  knows,  to  divide  ray  county.  My  po- 
sition in  relation  to  that  county  is  such  tiiat  it 
may  be  supposed  I  am  opposed  to  the  division 
of  the  county.  I  do  not  know  whether  there  is 
a  sufficient  number  of  square  miles  in  that  coun- 
ty to  allow  of  its  division  according  to  the  re- 
quired plan.  I  think  we  had  better  let  the  sub- 
ject lie  over  for  the  present.  I  am  in  favor  of 
the  general  principle  contained  in  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  chairman  of  the  committee. 

I  am  not  one  of  those  who  believe  that  when 
w^e  leave  this  hall,  all  the  virtue,  intelligence, 
and  integrity,  of  the  state  will  depart.  Other 
gentlemen  will  come  here  having  practical  com- 
mon sense  and  virtue  enough  to  carry  on  the 
government.  Unless  they  have,  there  will  be  no 
use  for  a  constitution  at  all.  I  do  not  wish  to 
leave  any  thing  to  the  legislature  that  ought  not 
to  be  left  to  them.  Draw  the  line  of  demarca- 
tion between  the  constitution  and  laws  accord 
ing  to  general  principles,  and  I  think  smaller 
matters  may  be  left  with  safety  to  the  legislature. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  will  take  this  occasion  now 
to  remark  that  there  is  nothing  so  extraordinari- 
ly new  in  the  proposition  of  the  select  commit- 
tee, as  that  gentlemen  need  be  alarmed  at  it. 
There  are  eleven  new  states  of  the  union,  having 
new  constitutions,  and  the  framers  of  which 
thought  proper  to  guard  against  disorganization 
in  making  new  counties,  by  inserting  a  provi- 
sion in  their  constitutions,  that  the  counties 
hereafter  to  be  made  should  not  be  larger,  or  re- 
duced to  a  smaller  size,  than  a  certain  number  or 
square  miles.  I  have  no  disposition  to  press 
the  proposition  upon  the  house,  if  gentlemen 
are  not  sufficiently  informed  on  the  subject  to 
be  able  to  discuss   it  at  this  time.     It  is  an  im- 

Eortant  subject,  and  one  in  which  the  people  or 
Kentucky  have  felt,  and  do  feel,  a  deep  interest. 
I  am  satisfied  the  people  of  this  state  look  to 
the  convention,  to  put  some  restriction  on  the 
legislature,  in  regard  to  forming  new  counties. 
I  entertain  no  doubt  about  it.  At  the  proper 
time,  I  have  some  statistics  on  the  subject,  which 
I  wish  to  present  to  the  consideration  of  the  con- 
vention; for  I  desire  that  they  shall  see  the 
making  of  new  counties  costs  the  state  a  great 
deal  of  money.  I  am  also  solicitous  to  prove  to 
them  that  one  great  source,  out  of  which  has 
grown  a  large  expenditure  of  money,  has  been 
the  erection  of  new  counties.  And  I  wish  to 
show  them  that  the  private  interests  of  private 
individuals  have  suffered  from  the  practice  of 
making  new  counties,  for  a  particular  purpose. 
All  these  facts  will  be  substantiated,  with  a 
view  to  be  reflected  upon,  and  then  we  should 
calmly  and  deliberately  determine  whether  this 
thinw  should  be  checked — not  stopped,  but 
checked,  and  a  wholesome  restriction  put  on  the 
legislature.  Kentucky  contains  forty  thousand 
five  hundred  square  miles,  and  one  hundred 
counties,  and  there  is  but  one  state  of  the  whole 
union,  composed  of  thirty  states,  which  has  a 
greater  numoer  of  counties,  and  that  is  Virginia, 


420 


which  has  a  population  of  one-third  more  than 
this  state.  Year  after  year,  when  the  legislature 
meets,  there  are  numerous  applications  made  for 
new  counties;  not  that  justice  maybe  brought 
to  the  door  of  the  people,  but  to  advance  the  in- 
terest of  some  one  who  wishes  to  be  made  a 
clerk,  or  something  of  that  sort.  I  could  show, 
if  it  were  necessary,  that  there  is  no  danger  of 
the  constitution  losing  strength  if  this  feature 
should  be  incorporated  iu  it.  It  will  add  to  the 
strength  of  it.  If  it  is  not  inserted,  as  I  believe 
it  ought  to  be,  it  being  called  for  by  the  people, 
there  will  be  much  dissatisfaction  manifested  by 
them.  I  have  discovered,  during  the  sittings  of 
this  convention,  that  it  is  a  very  ready  argument 
with  some  gentlemen,  when  they  are  opposed  to 
a  proposition,  to  say  that  it  will  greatly  clog  the 
constitution  when  it  comes  to  be  submitted  to 
the  people,  and  probably  cause  it  to  be  rejected. 
If  it  be  right  and  proper  to  incorporate  this  fea- 
ture in  the  constitution,  the  people  will  approve 
it,  and  I  have  no  idea  it  will  be  considered  a 
weight  on  it.  But  I  want  gentlemen  to  have 
time,  in  order  that  they  may  avail  themselves 
of  all  the  necessary  means  of  information,  to  en- 
able them  to  give  a  vote  in  accordance  with  their 
wishes,  and  therefore,  I  move  that  the  committee 
rise. 

The  committee  rose  accordingly,  reported  pro 
gress,  and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  NOVEMBER  9,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Norton. 

COMMITTEE   OF    ARRANGEMENT   AND     REVISION. 

Mr.  McHENRY  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, which  was  agreed  to: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  ten  delegates 
be  appointed,  to  be  styled  the  committee  of  ar- 
rangements, whose  duty  it  shall  be  take  into 
consideration  the  several  articles  tliat  have  been 
agreed  to  by  the  convention,  and  that  may  be 
agreed  to  hereafter,  and  arrange,  revise,  and 
classify  the  same. 

FEES  OF  CLERKS  AND  SHERIFFS. 

Mr.  HAMILTON  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  rejected: 

Resolved,  That  the  legislature,  at  the  first 
session  after  the  adoption  of  the  new  constitu- 
tion, shall  appoint  three  fit  persons  to  examine 
into  the  propriety  of  reducing  the  fees  of  clerks 
and  sheriffs,  and.  to  report  tlie  same,  with  a  list 
of  what  the  fees  ought  to  be. 

LEAVE   OF    ABSENCE. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  MAYES,  leave  of  absence 
wos  granted  to  Mr.  Chambers  for  a  few  days. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  WOODSON,  leave  of  ab- 
Bence  was  granted  to  Mr.  Taylor,  for  five  days. 

COMMISSIONERS   ON    ACCOUNTS. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  agreed  to: 

Re$olv€d,  That  tne  select  committee  on  the  pub- 


lic debt,  be  instructed  to  enquire  into  the  expe- 
diency of  establishing,  by  constitutional  provis- 
ion, a  board  of  commissioners,  to  be  appointed 
annually  by  the  governor,  or  by  the  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  one  from  each  appel- 
late district,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  make  an- 
nual examinations  and  settlements  of  the  ac- 
counts of  the  several  receiving  and  disbursing 
officers  of  the  state  at  large,  and  to  report  the 
same,  when  made,  to  the  legislature. 

COUNTY   AND    DISTRICT    OFFICES. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  executive  and 
ministerial  offices  for  counties  and  districts. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  withdrew  the  amend- 
ment Avliich  he  offered  yesterday,  before  tlie  ad- 
journment, and  for  that,  he  ofiered  the  following 
substitute: 

"When  any  city  or  town  shall  have  a  sepa- 
rate representation,  in  either  or  both  houses  of  the 
general  assembly,  the  county  in  which  such  city 
or  town  may  be  situated,  shall  be  invested  with 
the  privilege  of  having  such  separate  municipal 
governments,  courts,  and  offices,  in  the  same 
manner  as  may  be  provided  for  separate  coun- 
ties; but  such  county  may  hold  its  courts,  and 
have  its  public  buildings  and  offices  within,  and 
jointly  with,  such  city  or  toAvn;  and  all  public 
officers  may  reside  therein." 

Mr.  PRESTON  raised  the  question  of  order, 
that  this  amendment  was  not  admissible,  inas- 
much as  it  was  scarcely  a  modification  of  an 
amendment  which  tlie  convention  yesterday  re- 
jected. 

The  PRESIDENT  overruled  the  point  of  or- 
der. 

Mr.  PRESTON  then  moved  to  refer  the  whole 
subject  to  the  committee  on  county  courts. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  I  prefer  that  the  house  should 
decide  this  question.  It  strikes  me  that  we 
should  do  our  own  business,  without  the  inter- 
vention of  so  many  committees.  I  would  prefer 
taking  the  sense  of  the  convention  upon  it.  It 
is  a  matter  in  which  my  county  is  deeply  inter- 
ested, and  I  wish  to  be  able  to  record  my  vote 
upon  it.  If  in  order,  I  will  now  give  my  views 
upon  this  subject,  and  I  will  be  very  brief.  I 
desire  to  do  this  now,  because  I  have  left  a  sick 
wife  to  come  here,  and  may  not  be  able  to  con- 
tinue here. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  from  Jef- 
ferson has  the  floor  and  will  proceed. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  The  principle  in  this  and  all 
representative  governments  is,  that  representation 
and  taxation  shall  go  hand  in  hand.  It  was  that 
principle  which  caused  the  separation  of  the  U. 
States  from  Great  Britain.  It  has  been  carried  out 
in  the  U.  States  government,  and  in  all  our  state 
governments.  It  is  a  subject  so  trite  and  so  well 
understood,  that  I  shall  not  detain  the  commit- 
tee by  giving  my  views  upon  it.  The  proposi- 
tion of  my  colleague,  in  which  I  entirely  con- 
cur, is  intended  to  have  a  general  bearing  on  all 
the  counties  in  the  state,  which  may  have  a  city 
with  a  separate  representation;  but  it  applies 
particularly  to  the  county  of  Jefferson,  whicli  has 
a  large  city  in  it,  and  both  city  and  county  liave 
a  separate  representation  on  tins  floor.  Why  was 
there  a  separate  representation  to  botli  city  and 
county?    It  was  to  carry  out  the  jirinciple  that 


421 


taxation  and  representation  should  ^o  hand  in 
hand.  The  city  having  an  entirt'lv  different  set 
of  interests,  it  Tvas  necessary  that  she  sliould 
hare  a  separate  representation  in  the  legislature. 

We  know  that  the  interests  of  the  city  are  pe- 
culiar. She  has  peculiar  advantages  derived 
from  legislation,  with  her  banks  and  various  in- 
stitutions, and  she  is  bound  to  bear  her  peculiar 
burdens.  Let  her  have  her  peculiar  advantages 
and  burdens.  This  is  the  reason  why  she  has 
a  separate  representation,  and  why  each  people 
have  a  separate  voice  in  laying  the  taxes  which 
each  must  bear.  Why  has  the  city  of  Louisville 
a  dififerent  organization  from  ours?  We  have  our 
county  court  and  a  joint  circuit  court.  Louis- 
ville has  a  chancery  court,  and  a  municipal  court, 
which  has  a  vast  amount  of  business.  The  coun- 
ty organizations  would  not  be  sufficient  for  the 
city,  and  in  carrying  out  that  principle,  for  years 
back,  if  not  from  the  first,  the  county,  by  law  or 
by  agreement,  has  her  tax  levied  and  disbursed 
bj'  her  own  magistrates,  while  the  city  attends 
to  her  own  taxes.  We  have  got  along  in  perfect 
harmony  in  this  way,  and  if  the  present  consti- 
tution and  laws  continue,  I  have  no  idea  there 
■will  be  any  difficulty  in  the  future.  But  what  is 
now  proposed,  by  entering  into  these  details  in 
the  constitution,  changes  the  relation  between 
the  city  and  county.  The  city  having  so  large 
a  majority,  would  control  the  whole  in  reference 
to  number  of  judges  and  secure  two,  while  the 
county  would  have  but  one.  I  desire  to  have 
our  relations  remain  in  statu  quo,  and  the  only 
way  to  do  this,  is  to  let  the  city  have  control  and 
management  of  her  own  affairs,  with  which  we 
have  no  wish  to  interfere.  And  there  are  good 
reasons  why  we  should  not.  The  people  in  each 
portion  know  their  own  business  and  what  be- 
longs to  their  owni  interests,  and  we  ought  to 
permit  each  to  regulate  its  own  affairs. 

That  is  all  we  ask,  because  if  a  change  is 
made,  they  having  so  large  a  majority,  would 
place  our  interests  in  jeopardy.  I  have  no  idea 
It  is  the  wish  of  the   city  of  Louisville   to  op- 

{)ress  the  county  at  all,  but  we  have  heretofore 
ived  in  the  utmost  harmony,  and  I  desire  that 
we  mav  not  be  placed  in  the  power  of  the  city. 
Why  s&ould  Jefferson  county  oe  in  any  manner 
tinder  the  control  of  the  citv  which  has  a  city 
chancellor,  a  mayor,  and  judge,  and  entire  con- 
trol of  these  matters  with  which  we  do  not  wish 
to  interfere?  I  think  the  same  principle  applies 
in  regard  to  county  organization.  This  plan 
■which  we  propose  may  be  badly  dra'wu,  but  what 
we  desire  is,  that  we  may  be  placed  in  the  same 
condition  as  other  counties  in  the  state.  Why 
not  separate,  it  may  be  asked?  We  do  not  wish 
to  separate;  and  if  we  do,  there  is  a  difficulty  in 
the  way.  We  have  public  property  to  the  amount 
of  $100,000  in  the  city,  which  we  do  not  want 
to  give  lip.  We  simply  ask  that  the  present 
state  of  things  may  remain.  The  city  has  shown 
no  disposition  to  meddle  with  our  affairs,  nor 
has  the  county  any  disposition  to  meddle  with 
those  of  the  city,  but  we  want  to  stand  on  the 
footing  of  other  counties  as  regards  taxing,  and 
as  reganls  legislation  and  representation. 

I  know  no  other  mode.  We  do  not  want  to 
interfere  with  the  circuit  court.  We  do  not  want 
a* jail.  But  why  shall  we  not  elect  our  judge, 
and  our  magistracy?    And  why  not  i  sheriff  as 


well  as  to  take  Uie  deputy  of  the  high  sheriflf? 
It  is  a  county  as  large  as  many  otliers.  But  I 
wish  to  call  attention  to  the  remarks  of  the  gen- 
tlemen from  Louisville  (Mr.  Preston.)  He  says : 
"Xow  what  motive  my  friend  from  Jefferson, 
'  (Mr.  Meriwether.)  has  in  making  this  motion 

•  I  cannot  discover,  unless  indeeil  it  be  this  :  the 
'  county  court  clerks  and  sheriff's  offices  are  val- 
'  uable  ones  in  the  city  of  Louisville,  and  ex- 
'  tend  their  jurisdiction  both  to  city  and  county; 
'  the  political  divisions  are  such  that  there  is'a 
'  majority  of  whigs  in  the  city  of  Louisville  of 
'  some  five  hundred  in  a  poll  of  five  thousand 
'  votes,  but  in  the  county  parties  are  nearly 
'  equally  balanced  out  of  a  poll  of  two  thousand 
'  five  hundred  votes,  their  being  scarcely  ever  a 

•  majority  either  way  of  more  than  fifty.     The 

•  majorities  in  the  city  of  Louisville  therefore  at 
'  present  controls  the  elections  of  those  officers." 
Again  he  says  :  "Why  is  the  separate  organiza- 
'  tion  of  these  offices  referred  to  in  the  last  clause 
'  of  the  gentleman's  amendment  sought,  unless 

•  it  be  to  commence  in  advance  this  movement 
'  of  the  democracy  upon  the  whig  ascendancy 
'  in  tlie  citv  and  county."  I  regret  to  refer  to  this 
fact,  and  f  do  it  with  the  utmost  courtesy  to  the 
gentleman,  for  I  mean  nothing  offensive'to  Lou- 
isville or  its  representative;  he  must  pardon  me, 
however,  for  differing  from  him  on  this  subject. 
Supposing  the  facts  to  be  as  I  have  slated  them, 
how  do  we  stand?  I  stand  here,  commanded  by 
the  people  of  Jefferson,  to  know  no  distinction 
between  whig  and  democrat  on  this  floor,  and  at 
a  large  meeting  in  our  county  in  which  they 
solemnly  determined  to  elect  a  whig  and  a  dem- 
ocrat, they  required  the  pledge  that  their  dele- 
gates should  know  no  parties  here.  I  shall  be 
found  earryin":  out  the  spirit  of  this  pledge,  and 
I  call  on  my  democratic  friends  to  note  my  vote 
in  this  particular.  When  we  come  to  fix  the  ratio 
of  representation  I  shall  go  for  what  I  think 
right  for  the  whole  country.  Whatever  applica- 
tion this  may  have  to  my  colleague,  he  can  sav 
for  himself.  We  canvassed  the  county  together, 
and  a  mt>re  honorable  man  I  have  never  been 
with,  and  we  stand  pledged  to  know  neither 
whig  nor  democrat.  I  have  referred  to  this  mat- 
ter merely  because  I  thought  the  remarks  of  my 
friend  from  Louisville  bore  the  construction 
which  I  have  given  them. 

Will  any  man  here  make  a  different  constitu- 
tion because  it  may  have  a  whig  or  democratic 
bearing.  I  have  always  been  a  whig  and  ex- 
pect ever  to  remain  such.  1  voted  for  Gen.  Har- 
rison, Mr.  Clay  and  Gen.  Taylor  for  the  Presi- 
dency; I  never  voted  for  a  deracrat  except  last 
summer.  I  would  say  for  my  county,  that  if  she 
chooses  to  be  democratic,  she  has  as  much  right 
to  be  democratic  as  Louisville  has  to  be  whig. 
I  do  not  want  this  thing  held  up  in  terrorem.  I 
expect  to  be  a  whig,  I  want  to  stand  or  fall  on 
principles;  and  if  the  county  cannot  support  her 
whiggery,  I  do  not  wish  to'  call  on  the  city  of 
Louisville  for  help.  Shelby  county  has  a  whig 
majority  of  six  or  seven  hundred.  If  the  coun- 
ty of  Jefferson  is  to  be  under  whig  rule,  let  us 
go  to  the  county  of  Shelby.  That  being  an  ag- 
ricultural county,  the  people  know  better  what 
tax  te  lay  on  negroes,  horses,  and  other  stock. 
The  people  of  Louisville  have  peculiar  interests 
in  the  city  of  Louisville,  which  they  have  not 


422 


in  the  county.  But  I  must  protest  against  the 
idea  that  there  is  any  intention  to  effect  this 
thing  for  the  saiie  of  whiggery  or  democracy. 
Have  I  not  shown  the  strongest  possible  reason 
that  vre  should  stand  in  statu  quot  Is  there  a 
man  who  can  say  that  I  ask  any  thing  that  is 
unreasonable,  that  the  county  shall  have  the 
sole  right  to  elect  the  officers  Avho  shall  lay  and 
disburse  the  county  revenue?  It  seems  to  me 
that  if  the  matter  is  properly  considered,  gentle- 
men will  a^ree  with  me. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  think  the  committee  on  the 
county  court  is  not  the  proper  committee,  and 
I  move  to  refer  the  subject  to  the  conuuittee  on 
tlie  legislative  department. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  This  applies  to  all  the  coun- 
ties. The  city  of  Louisville  is  not  mentioned 
in  the  amendment. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  think  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department  is  tlie  proper  one,  as  thev 
can  make  a  genaral  provision  by  which  all 
grievances  of  this  kind  can  be  met.  This  may 
be  a  private  fight,  however,  and  I  will  not  inter- 
fere. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  This  proposition 
seemsto  be  one  which  I  cannot  well  comprehend. 
It  is  to  have  two  county  court  organizations  in  the 
same  county,  to  have  two  sheriffs,  and  two  clerks' 
offices  for  registering  deeds  and  Avills,  whose  ju- 
risdiction shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  bounds 
of  the  county.  I  admit  there  is  weight  in  the 
ideas  suggested  by  both  the  gentlemen  from  Jef- 
ferson upon  the  subject  of  the  revenue  and  the 
county  taxes.  I  do  not  know  that  the  mode  of 
organizing  the  county  courts,  as  contemplated 
by  the  committee,  will  contain  any  constitution- 
al inhibition  which  will  prevent  the  legislature 
from  meeting  the  difficultv  in  this  case.  The 
legislature  will  not  be  prohibited  from  giving  to 
any  county  a  tribunal  for  levying  the  revenue. 
They  may  make  the  magistracy  a  tribunal  for 
this  purpose,  for  the  county  levy  is  not  imposed 
on  the  citizens  of  the  city,  nor  can  the  levy  of 
the  city  be  imposed  on  the  citizens  of  the  coun- 
ty. The  county  court  as  now  organized,  sitting 
in  Louisville,  has  heretofore,  by  some  legislative 
enactment,  exercised  the  power  of  taxation  out- 
side of  the  city.  They  now  control  this  busi- 
ness by  a  kind  of  common  consent.  N'ow  if  the 
evil  be  as  the  gentleman  has  supposed,  why 
may  they  not  give  to  the  county  of  Jefferson  a 
board  for  taxing  the  citizens  separate  from  tlie 
city  of  Louisville?  There  is  no  inhibition,  and 
I  think  it  will  be  a  much  more  congruous  ar- 
rangement than  to  have  this  double  county  court 
in  the  same  county.  I  rose  with  a  desire  to  pre- 
serve harmony  in  the  provisions  of  the  constitu- 
tion, and  I  think  they  would  be  any  thing  but 
harmonious  with  double  county  courts  sitting  at 
the  same  time,  or  at  different  times,  with  two 
sheriffs,  one  running  into  the  city  of  Louisville 
and  the  other  in  tlie  county  of  Jefferson.  These 
are  evils  which  I  think  should  not  be  engrafted 
in  the  constitution,  and  it  would  be  much  better 
to  leave  the  legislature  to  act  on  the  subject. 
Let  the  magistracy  be  organized  into  a  board  to 
impose  taxes,  or  let  tliem  adopt  any  other  system 
which  may  be  deemed  appropriate. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  do  not  desire  to  fake  up 
the  time  of  the  house  on  this  matter.  The  rea- 
Kon  that  I  resisted  the  proposition  was  not  for 


the  purpose  of  placing  the  county  of  Jefferson 
under  the  dominion  of  the  city  of  Louisville,  or 
that  the  city  should  have  the  power  of  exercis- 
ing any  political  tyranny  over  the  county.  The 
gentleman  from  Jefferson  who  presentee!  the  res- 
olution, moved  in  the  first  part  of  it,  only  those 
things  which  the  legislature  already  have  the 
right  and  power  to  do;  but  in  the  latter  part,  he 
urged  a  proposition,  with  that  parliamentary 
dexterity  for  which  he  is  remarkable,  whicii 
would  permit  the  county  to  be  cut  in  two  by  a 
sort  of  proviso.  It  says,  in  effect,  that  the  coun- 
ty and  city  shall  be  divided  until  further  orders. 
Ihat  there  shall  be  distinct  sheriffs,  clerks,  and 
municipal  tribunals  and  officers.  The  resolu- 
tion containing  that  provision  was  voted  down 
yesterday  by  a  majority  of  about  fifty  eight  to 
twenty  four. 

So  far  as  I  yesterday  used  the  terms  whig  and 
democrat,  I  said,  I  could  conceive  no  other  rea- 
son, no  otlier  practical  object  in  this  measure  but 
to  produce  a  county  contest  for  local  ofiicers.  I, 
Mr.  Chairman,  have  been  indebted  to  my  demo- 
cratic friends  as  well  as  to  my  whig  friends  for 
ray  place  on  this  floor,  and  I  am  happy  to  have 
received  substantial  testimonials  of  "kindness 
from  both  parties  in  the  only  political  canvass 
I  ever  made.  For  the  remark  I  made  I  have  no 
apology  to  offer;  I  said  I  saw  no  reason  for  di- 
viding the  city  and  county,  but  to  have  a  coun- 
ty race  for  county  officers,  and  I  yet  see  none,  as 
I  have  no  knowledge  of  any  existing  grievances 
which  demand  such  redress. 

What  would  be  the  mode  of  levying  the  coun- 
ty revenue,  if  tlie  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
were  to  fail?  It  would  be  the  very  same  Avhich 
has  prevailed  for  the  last  eight  or  ten  years.  The 
only  difference  would  be,  that  instead  of  the  ap- 
pointment of  a  magistracy  by  the  governor,  on 
the  recommendation  of  the  county  court,  the 
people  under  the  new  constitution  Avill  elect 
them;  yet  the  gentleman  seems  to  think  such  a 
magistracy,  so  chosen,  would  impose  intolerable 
burthens,  by  taxation,  on  the  people  of  Jeffer-' 
son  before  the  legislature  could  convene. 

That  the  general  assembly  have  a  right  to  pror 
vide  for  the  appointment  of  a  separate  clerk  of 
the  court  and  sheriff'  in  the  city  of  Louisville, 
and  to  invest  it  with  the  separate  rights  of  a 
county,  there  can  be  little  doubt.  But  to  claim 
that  the  county  of  Jefferson  shall  have  separate 
elections,  officers  and  courts,  and  yet  come  to 
the  city  to  hold  those  courts,  would  be  like  de- 
manding that  new  counties  should  be  establish- 
ed, but  yet  should  have  the  right  to  hold  their 
courts  at  the  county  seat. 

If  the  gentleman  desires  a  general  declaratory 
provision.  I  have  no  objection  to  it;  but  it  is  on- 
ly acting  in  reference  to  that  whicli  the  legisla- 
ture will  have  a  right  to  do,  whether  we  act  on 
it  or  not.  I  am  willing  to  say  that  a  board  of 
county  magistracy  may  lay  the' levy  and  disburse 
it;  but  I  am  opposed  to  a  division  of  the  coun- 
ty and  city,  with  separate  sheriffs  and  county 
officers,  having  a  mixed  jurisdiction.  Accord- 
ing to  the  resolution  the  legislature  would  be 
compelled  to  divide  the  city  and  county,  forthat 
is  imperative.  It  declares  "that  the  county  and 
city  shall  be  divided.  It  says,  "the  city  or  town 
shall  be  invested,"  Ac.  I  believe  it  is  more  ad- 
visable for  this  convention  to  refer  this  matter 


4-23 


to  the  action  of  the  legislature  which  shall  eon- 
I  vene  under  the  new  constitution,  than  to  at- 
I     tempt  to  regulate  it  themselves. 

I  am   not  certain  that  the  city  of  Louisville 
would    not   be  willing  that  this  arrangement 
should  be  hereafter  made;  but  there  has  been,  as 
I     yet,  no  petition  from  any  quarter  on  this  sub- 
I     ject,  no  public  movement  on  the  part  of  the  cit- 
i     izens  before  the   election,  and  it  would  be  un- 
!      precedented  to  consummate  such  an  act  under 
such  circumstances.     It  seems  inappropriate  for 
this  convention  to  enter  upon  such  duties,  and 
for  these  reasons  I  am  opposed  to  it.     J,  there- 
fore, to   manifest  the  arrangement  to  which  1 
would  assent,  offer  this  as  a  substitute. 

"Cities  or  towns,  entitled  to  separate  represen- 
tation, may  be  invested  with  the  privilege  of  a 
separate  municipal  government,  and  of  having 
separate  courts  and  separate  officers,  in  the  same 
manner  provided  for  separate  counties,  and  on 
such  terms  and  conditions  as  the  general  assem- 
bly may  by  law  provide." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  From  indisposition,  I 
have  been  unable  to  enter  at  length  into  this  dis- 
cussion, but  I  beg  the  indulgence  of  the  house, 
while  I  give  some  reason  for  the  adoption  of  my 
amendment.  The  gentleman  from  Louisville 
says  it  is  now  a  separation  if  that  amendment  is 
adopted.  I  use  the  same  language  with  reference 
to  counties,  that  the  gentlemen  of  the  committee 
used  with  reference  to  cities.  What  is  the  lan- 
guage of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department? 

"  Provided,  That  when  it  shall  appear  to  the 
'legislature,  that  any  city  or  town  hath  a  num- 
'ber  of  qualified  voters  equal  to  the  ratio  then 
'fixed,  such  city  or  town  shall  be  invested  with 
'the  privilige  of  a  separate  representation,  in 
'  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly." 

I  use  that  language  to  meet  the  contingency, 
that  a  county  may  have  the  privilege  of  separate 
municipal  government;  and  I  ask  why,  when  a 
city  may  claim  a  .separate  municipal  government, 
you  turn  us  over  to  the  legislature?  Is  the  prop- 
osition right?  Then  why  not  act  on  it  here? 
Will  not  this  proposition  be  met  by  the  same  re- 
sistance in  the  legislature,  that  it  meets  here? 
"V^Tiy  provide  for  every  county,  whether  she  wish- 
es a  separate  representation  or  not,  and  turn  us 
over  to  be  taxed  with  the  city  of  Louisville? 
The  gentleman  from  Nelson  says,  this  can  all  be 
regulated  by  law.  Suppose  itcan.  Does  it  fol- 
low that  we  should  not  act  on  it  here?  Is  there 
any  provision  introduced  into  this  constitution, 
that  the  legislature  should  not  have  provided 
for?  Are  we  to  leave  all  to  the  legislature? 
Surely  not.  Then  why  not  let  the  constitution 
bear  on  this  point? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  did  not  say,  if  we 
passed  the  constitution  as  proposed,  the  legisla- 
ture would  have  power  to  do  what  the  gentle- 
man desires  to  do.  I  said,  the  legislature  had 
power  to  remove  the  only  evil  of  which  com- 
plaint was  made,  in  the  reason  given  for  the 
adoption  of  this  principle.  I  will  read  the  act 
that  relates  to  the  regulation  of  the  business  of 
the  county  court  of  Jefferson,  and  other  purposes. 
"  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act, 
'the  justices  of  the  peace  of  Jefferson  county, 
'  residing  without  the  limits  of  Louisville,  shall 
'constitute    the  court  for  laying  the  levy  of  the 


'county  of  Jefferson,  and  appropriating  and  dis- 
'bijreing  the  same;  and  the  justices  of  the  peace 
'of  said  county,  residing  in  Louisville,  shall  not 
'  preside  in  laying  the  levy  in  the  county  of  Jef- 
'ferson,  or  in  appropriating  or  disbursing  the 
'  same." 

Now,  if  you  pass  the  provision  in  reference  to 
county  courts,  as  proposed,  all  the  evils  in  rep- 
resentation and  taxation  can  be  avoided. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  It  must  be  recollecetd 
that  under  the  old  constitution,  the  taxing  pow- 
er in  the  county  was  not  elected  by  the  county 
at  large.  The  county  court  iippoiuted  resident 
magistrates,  such  as  might  be  thought  necessary 
throughout  the  county,  and  if  the  gentleman  had 
looked  a  little  further,  he  would  have  seen  that 
the  city  of  Louisville  would  not  have  more  than 
seven  magistrates.  But  it  is  now  proposed  that 
this  county  shall  have  three  judges,  to  be  elected 
by  the  voters  of  the  city  and  county  jointly;  and 
I  will  ask  you,  if  the  city  ha-s  hve  thousand 
votes,  and  the  county  two  thousand  five  hun- 
dred, which  will  control  in  the  election?  Does 
it  not  properly  belong  to  the  countj'  court  to  lay 
the  levy,  and  disburse  the  taxes?  Then,  if  the 
city  join  with  the  county,  in  the  election  of  a 
county  court  judge,  we  shall  never  have  a  resi- 
dent of  the  county  a  member  of  that  court. 

My  honorable  friend  from  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville, remarked  yesterday,  that  he  could  See  no 
motive  I  could  possibly  have  for  making  this 
proposition,  unless  it  was  to  get  up  a  party  race 
in  the  county,  that  the  democrats  might  stand  a 
chance.  The  gentleman  has  done  me  injustice, 
and  I  humbly  conceive  he  does  himself  injus- 
tice, when  lie  submits  a  proposition  of  that 
kind.  Had  I  as  little  charity  as  the  gentleman, 
might  I  not  charge  that  he  wanted  to  confine  the 
whig  majority  of  the  county  to  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville? But  I  will  not  do  this.  I  believe  the  gen- 
tleman is  actuated  by  no  such  motive.  Might  I 
not  also,  if  I  had  the  same  amount  of  charity  for 
the  frailties  of  others  as  he  appears  to  have, 
charge  that  the  gentleman  was  determined  to 
confine  the  county  of  Jefferson  to  the  city,  and 
oppress  her  by  taxation,  till  the  county  would 
be  forced  to  petition  for  a  new  county,  in  order 
to  get  clear  of  the  burden?  And  that  would  leave 
$100,000  in  possession  of  the  city,  which  the 
county  had  contributed  toward  the  public 
buildings.  But  I  am  confident  the  gentleman  is 
actuated  by  no  such  motive.  But,  says  the  gen- 
tleman, why  should  we  claim  to  hold  our  courts 
in  the  city  of  Louisville,  if  we,  in  the  county, 
have  a  separate  organization?  The  reason  is, 
because  we  have  paid  upwards  of  $80,000  to- 
ward the  erection  of  public  buildings,  $75,000 
of  which  was  for  the  court  house,  and  .$16,000 
toward  a  jail,  and  we  claim  the  right  of  holding 
our  courts  there,  because  we  have  expended  our 
money  in  the  erection  of  these  public  buildings. 
Is  it  any  inconvenience  to  the  city?  The  court 
house  is  capacious  enough  for  us  all.  It  is  no 
inconvenience.  We  now  hold  our  separate 
courts  there,  on  such  days  as  to  prevent  any  in- 
convenience. We  have  contributed  $1G,000  to- 
ward the  jail,  and  we  claim  the  right  to  confine 
in  that  building  those  who  may  violate  the 
laws.  On  account  of  indisposition,  I  shall  say 
no  more  at  present.  I  shall  leave  this  matter  to 
the  convention.      Let  them  dispose  of  it  as  they 


424 


may  think  proper,  and  I  will  bow  in  humble 
submission.  1  have  discharged  my  duty  to  those 
who  sent  mc  here.  * 

Mr.  TURNER.  There  is  a  great  principle  in- 
volved in  this  case  with  respect  to  which  it  may 
be  necessary  to  say  a  word.  I  think  no  people 
should  be  taxed  unless  by  the  vote  of  those  who 
pay  the  tax.  I  think  the  proposition  should 
come  up  in  connection  with  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  legislative  department.  1 
think  some  provision  should  be  made,  so  that 
the  cities  growing  up  on  the  Ohio  shall  not 
finally  control  the  agricultural  portion  of  the 
state.  I  want  the  agricultural  interest  to  govern 
the  legislation  of  the  country.  That  question  is 
involved  in  this  case  between  the  representa- 
tives of  the  city  and  the  county.  By  legislating 
for  the  agricultural  interest  we  may  avoid  being 
governed  by  the  influence  of  our  cities,  as  they 
are  in  the  state  of  New  York.  The  policy  of 
states  which  are  controlled  by  a  few  large  cities, 
is  as  shifting  as  the  wind.  "This  is  especially 
true  with  regard  to  the  state  of  New  York,  of 
which  it  is  said,  as  goes  the  city  so  goes  the 
Empire  state.  I  protest  against  basing  repre- 
sentation exclusively  on  population,  in  order  to 
avoid  being  influenced  by  large  cities.  I  am 
willing  to  go  with  the  gentleman  from  Jefi'erson 
as  far  as  respects  the  principle  of  taxation  out- 
side t)f  the  city,  that  it  should  be  exclusive- 
ly within  the  power  of  those  outside  to 
levy  and  disburse  the  revenue.  Otherwise  you 
may  select  people  in  the  city  to  tax  those  out  of 
it  with  whom  they  have  not  a  common  sympatliy. 
But,  I  am  in  hopes  that  this  county  court,  as  in- 
dicated, will  not  be  organized,  or  if  so,  organiz- 
ed on  different  principles,  and  that  we  shall 
have  one.  or  three  judges,  but  I  am  in  favor  of 
one,  and  that  the  magistracy  of  the  district  may 
levy  and  disburse  the  money.  This  will  be  act- 
ing on  the  same  principle  as  the  legislature  of 
the  state.  The  legislature  levies  a  tax  on  every 
part  of  the  commonwealth.  Suppose,  that  in- 
stead of  having  this  done  by  the  legislature,  you 
authorize  the  governor,  treasurer,  and  comptroller 
to  do  it,  would  the  people  be  satisfied?  It 
wouM  be  a  levy  made  by  a  few  individuals,  and 
not  by  the  representatives  of  the  people.  I 
would  suggest  to  the  gentleman  to  withdraw  his 
proposition  for  the  present,  for  I  think  this  can 
be  satisfactorily  arranged  when  we  come  to  that 
point.  I  do  not  think,  nor  do  I  suppose  any 
gentleman  believes  that  the  county  court  of  the 
city  of  Louisville  ought  to  lay  a  tax  for  the 
balance  of  the  county,  although  it  may  have  the 
power  to  do  so,  because  the  great  body  of  the 
voters  will  be  in  that  portion  of  the  county. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  gentleman  from  Mad- 
ison has  precisely  apprehended  what  I  think  we 
should  do.  We  do  not  desire  to  tax  the  county 
of  Jefferson  through  any  representative  selected 
by  us.  If  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson  will 
witlidraw  hi.s  resolution,  and  propose  that  a 
board  of  magistrates  shall  lay  the  county  levy, 
and  the  magistrates  of  the  city  of  Louisville 
have  notliing  to  do  with  it,  I  am  willing.  I  am 
opposed  to  having  separate  courts,  separate 
clerks,  and  separate  municipal  organizations. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.'  I  do  not  know  that  I 
was  understood  by  the  gentleman  from  Louisville. 
I  am  decidedly  opposed  to  separate  organ  izations. 


My  opposition  is  based  upon  principle  against 
giving  the  legislature  power  to  create  too  dis- 
tinct organizations  in  one  county. 

Mr.  RUDD.  Both  the  gentlemen  seem  to 
have  a  great  desire  to  be  heard  on  the  subject  of 
dividing  the  city  of  Louisville  from  the  county 
of  Jefferson,  for  the  whole  tenor  and  scope 
of  the  resolution,  offered  by  the  gentleman  (Mr. 
Meriwether),  and  which  is  before  the  house  is  to 
that  effect,  and  is  susceptible  of  no  other  mean- 
ing. I  am,  perhaps,  as  well,  if  not  better  ac- 
quainted with  the  county  of  Jefferson  as  the 
gentleman  who  first  spoke,  but  not  the  last,  for 
he  has  been,  I  believe,  in  every  house  in  the 
county,  and  I  have  not.  I  have  large  interests 
in  the  county  of  Jefferson  outside  of  the  city  of 
Louisville,  and  I  pay  my  taxes  to  it  punctually, 
without  having  any  voice  in  the  direction  of  ils 
affairs.  I  want  tlie  county  to  understand  what 
Avas  the  character  and  force  of  the  arguments  of 
the  gentleman  representing  Jefferson.  The  gen- 
tleman, (Mr.  Bullitt,)  in  the  course  of  his  re- 
marks adverted  to  the  principle  adopted  in  all 
representative  governments,  that  representation 
and  taxation  should  go  hand  in  hand,  and  he 
did  so  in  order  to  prove  that  the  county  of  Jef- 
ferson has  been  taxed  not  according  to  its  popu- 
lation and  its  own  representation  but  the  r^'jDre- 
sentation  of  the  city  of  Louisville.  Now  an 
effort  was  made  fo  impress  the  convention  that 
this  is  a  fact,  but  there  is  not  a  particle  of  truth 
in  it,  not  that  i  mean  to  say  the  gentleman  has 
made  a  wilful  misrepresentation.  Both  the  gen- 
tlemen well  knew  that  a  law  was  passed  giving 
to  the  county  of  Jefferson,  solely  and  entirely 
the  power  to  have  its  own  jnagistracy  impose 
its  own  taxes,  and  collect  and  disburse  its  reve- 
nue. Neither  the  city  of  Louisville,  nor  any 
man  m  it,  has  had  anvthing  to  do  with  the 
management  of  the  affafrs  of  that  county.  And 
yet  they  come  forward  and  say  that,  according 
to  the  new  judicial  system,  about  to  be  adopted, 
Louisville  will  have  a  great  ascendency  and  ad- 
vantage over  the  county  of  Jefferson,  on  account 
of  its  larger  population.  We  do  not  desire  any 
such  thing,  and  do  not  ask  it.  We  wish  Jef- 
ferson to  regulate  its  own  affairs.  We  know  it 
would  not  like  to  bear  a  portion  of  the  taxation 
of  Louisville — for  that  is  more  than  double 
what  its  people  have  to  pay.  No  they  do  not 
ask  it  nor  do  they  want  it. 

The  gentleman  last  up  said  (and  I  do  not 
know  where  he  obtained  his  information,  which 
astonished  me)  that  the  county  of  Jefferson 
has  disbursed  for  the  erection  ot  a  court  house 
and  jail,  the  sum  of  eighty  thousand  dollars. 
I  have  been  a  member  of  the  city  council  for 
many  years,  and  I  know  that  when  the  coun- 
ty of  Jefferson  has  been  called  upon  to  pay  up 
its  proportion  of  money,  on  account  of  public 
improvements,  it  did  not  advance  more  than 
thirty  thousand  dollars.  If  it  has  given  a  lar- 
ger sum,  the  fact  has  escaped  my  memory.  If 
there  be  any  thing  to  show  that  the  county  has 
done  so,  then  I  am  very  much  mistaken.  All 
the  money  went  through  the  hands  of  the  city 
council,  and  was  paid  out  by  them,  to  those  who 
contracted  for  the  erection  of  the  buildings,  and 
I  being  a  member  of  it,  had  as  good  an  oppor- 
tunity of  knowing  all  about  tlie  matter  as  any 
one  in  this  house.     The  V)ui]ding8  were  erected 


425 


at  the  joint  expenso  of  the  city  of  Louisville 
and  the  county  of  Jeflferson,  and  the  repairs  are 
kept  up  by  the  citizens  of  Louisville.  The  city 
and  county  defray  the  expenses  of  maintaining 
the  circuit  and  county  courts,  the  jail,  «tc.  Al- 
though there  are  five  thousand  voters  in  the 
city  of  Louisville,  and  but  two  thousand  five 
hundred  in  the  county  of  Jefferson,  yet  Louis- 
ville pays  one  half  of  "these  expenses.  The  bills 
have  to  pass  the  county  court,  and  if  it  decides 
they  are  correct,  they  are  paid  by  the  city. 
Here  you  see  tlie  lesser  power  ruling  the  greater. 
The  county  has  an  equal  share  in  our  police 
court.  It  is  always  open  to  them.  It  is  sup- 
ported whollv  at  the  expense  of  the  city,  which 
pays  I  think,  two  hundred  dollars — I  do  not 
recollect  exactly  the  sum — over  and  above  what 
is  appropriated  by  the  legislature,  in  order  to 
procure  the  services  of  a  competent  officer  to 
preside  over  the  court.  Our  chancery  court  is, 
likewise,  thrown  open  to  the  citizens  of  the 
county  as  well  as  to  those  of  the  city.  Louis- 
ville being  centrally  situated,  almost  every  man 
comes  there  to  transact  his  business.  If  the 
county  were  to  be  separated  from  the  city,  then 
the  best  position  in  which  to  place  the  county 
scat  would  be  in  the  suburbs  of  Louisville. 

Now,  I  think  I  can  see  what  is  the  object  and 
aim  of  this  movement.  It  is,  sir,  to  obtain  a 
separate  jurisdiction;  to  have  courts,  sheriffs, 
clerks,  and  a  magistracy  exclusively  their  own. 
They  want  a  municipalitv  or  county  court,  just 
outside  of  Louisville,  ancf  then  claim  to  have  it 
in  the  city,  because  they  know  it  would  be  un- 

Sopular  in  the  county,  for  all  its  business  is 
one  in  the  city.  Now  is  it  to  be  supposed  that 
where  there  are  only  three  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred voters,  that  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to 
erect  a  separate  and  distinct  court  which  can- 
not be  as  convenient  as  the  present  one.  They 
cannot  havre  the  same  advantages  as  they  have 
at  present,  and  yet  they  want  a  court  merely 
for  the  sake  of  serving  a  few  officers  outside  of 
the  city.  I  do  not  know  that  the  gentlemen 
have  their  eye  upon  any  particular  person,  but 
tiie  object  is  plain — to  obtain  a  separate  court,  in 
order  to  accommodate  a  few  men  who  are  in 
want  of  office.  The  people  of  the  county  have 
complained  of  no  grievance — pointed  none  out. 
The  gentlemen  seemed  to  suppose  that  the  city 
of  Louisville  would  overrule  and  control  Jeffer- 
son county.  "We  do  not  want  to  do  any  such 
thing.  We  never  had  but  one  high  sheriff  in 
Louisville.  Perhaps  I  may  be  mistaken  in  say- 
ing so,  hut  as  far  as  my  naemory  serves  me,  we 
never  had  but  one.  Now,  where  is  the  griev- 
ance? It  seeras  to  me  that  the  gentlemen  are 
asking  for  Jeffereon,  what  the  body  of  the  peo- 
ple of  that  county  do  not  ask  for  themselves. 
For  my  part,  I  believe  they  are  opposed  to  this 
movement.  I  claim  to  know  someting  about  it, 
and  that  is  my  candid  and  deliberate  opinion. 
This  movement,  I  contend,  is  only  calculated  to 
produce  strife  and  contention  between  the  city 
and  county.  Louisville  does  not  wish  to  have 
any  thing  to  do  with  the  general  arrangement  of 
the  affairs  of  the  county,  but  desires  that  it  shall 
remain  perfectly  independent.  The  gentlemen 
say  the  county  does  not  wish  to  interfere  with 
the  city.  No  doubt  of  that,  for  we  all  know 
they  do  not  want  to  be  taxed  like  the  people  of 
54 


Louisville.  Why  separate  the  county  from  the 
city?  Why  not  keep  them  united?  To  sepa- 
rate them  is  to  bring  about  contention  and 
strife.  Leave  them  as  they  are;  they  ask  no 
division.  Ai^d  I  have  no  idea  that  the  house 
will  make  a  separation  between  them,  particu- 
larly when  no  such  request  is  made,  either  on  the 
part  of  the  county  of  Jefferson,  or  the  city  of 
Louisville. 

Mr.  JAMES.  This  is  a  question  of  a  local 
character,  and  one  in  which  I  have  no  particular 
interest,  except  as  I  desire  such  information  on 
the  subject  as  will  enable  me  to  vote  under- 
standingly.  It  affects  the  city  of  Louisville 
and  county  of  Jefferson,  alone.  I  presume  the 
president  may  have  something  to  say  on  the 
subject,  and  some  information  to  submit  to  the 
convention.  And,  in  order  that  he  may  have 
an  opportunity  to  do  so,  I  move  that  the  conven- 
tion now  resolve  itself  into  committee  of  the 
whole  upon  this  question. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  Mr.  BROWN 
who  had  been  presiding  for  the  President,  re- 
tained the  chair  a.s  chairman  of  the  committee. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  seems  to  me  there  are 
some  considerations  involved  in  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  that  have  not 
been  brought  to  view  in  this  convention.  The 
proposition  is  this;  that '"when  it  shall  appear 
to  the  legislature  that  any  city  or  town  hath  a 
number  of  qualified  voters,  equal  to  the  ratio 
then  fixed,  such  city  or  town  shall  be  invested 
with  the  privilege  of  a  separate  representation 
in  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly,  which 
shall  be  retained  so  long  as  such  city  or  town 
shall  contain  a  number  of  qualified  voters  equal 
to  the  ratio  which  may,  from  time  to  time,  be 
fixed  by  law;  and  thereafter,  elections  for  the 
county  in  which  such  city  or  town  is  situated, 
shall  not  be  held  therein." 

Now,  that  is  a  proposition  that  in  the  county 
of  Jefferson  there  shall  be  two  county  court 
clerks  and  two  county  sheriff's.  What  an  inex- 
tricable confusion  that  will  make.  Which  one 
of  these  county  court  clerks  is  to  have  posses- 
sion of  the  records  of  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
where  the  muniments  and  titles  of  both  city  and 
county  are  held?  Which  one  of  the  two  sheriffs 
will  be  required  to  attend  the  court?  And  when 
a  writ  is  directed  to  the  sheriff  of  Jefferson 
countv,  which  is  to  have  it?  In  truth  and  in 
fact,  tlie  proposition  of  the  gentleman  is,  in  sub- 
stance, to  make  every  city  and  town,  having  a 
separate  representation,  a  separate  county  in  ef- 
fect, with  a  joint  jurisdiction,  with  two  county 
courts,  two  sheriffs,  and  two  clerks.  That  is  a 
matter,  I  conceive,  we  ought  not  to  do,  and 
which  no  legislature  should  do.  The  proposi- 
tion involves  a  difficulty  that  in  my  mind  I  can- 
not get  over.  I  do  not  want  two  county  court 
clerks  squabbling  about  who  is  to  have  the  re- 
cords of  the  court.  Well,  if  you  go  on  and  con- 
cede that  the  county  court  of  Jefferson  shall  be 
a  new  establishment,  then  every  man  will  have 
to  search  the  records  of  the  old  and  new  courts, 
before  he  can  find  the  document  which  he  wish- 
es. If  the  county  court  of  Jefferson  takes  them, 
the  city  of  Louisville  will  then  have  the  trouble 
of  searching  the  records.  The  county  will  have 
the  privilege  of  taking  the  court  there,  and  will 
throw  the  Durden  an<f  inconvenience  upon  the 


4-26 


city.  I  do  not  thiuk  gentlemen  have  conlem- 
plated  what  this  matter  will  lead  to.  I  was  in 
in  the  legislature  when  Louisville  was  invested 
with  a  separate  representation.  Louisville,  at 
that  time,  was  whig,  and  the  county  of  Jeffer- 
son was  democratic,  with  a  controlling  majority 
over  the  whigs.  And  Louisville  was  invested 
with  a  separate  representation  against  the  will  of 
the  representatives  of  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
and  over  their  heads.  I  had  the  honor  of  repre- 
senting her  a  first  time.  I  think  that  was  in 
1831.  In  1837  this  act  was  passed,  which  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson  read : 

"  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act, 
the  justices  of  the  peace  of  Jefferson  county,  re- 
siding without  the  limits  of  Louisville,  slialf  con- 
stitute the  court  for  laying  the  levy  of  the  coun- 
ty of  Jefferson,  and  appropriating  and  disburs- 
ing the  same.' 

After  the  passage  of  that  act,  it  was  not  pos- 
sible for  a  justice  residing  in  Louisville  to  im- 
pose taxes  upon  the  people  of  Jefferson  county, 
so  that  it  was  left  to  the  magistrates  outside  of 
the  city  to  lay  that  levy  and  disburse  it.  And, 
there  was  no  question  as  to  wlien  the  people 
should  be  taxecf  for  their  own  support,  for  the 
people  were  as  fairly  represented  in  the  county 
of  Jefferson  as  any  where  in  the  state.  The  se- 
cond article  ccntains  another  provision  : 

"  That  the  business  of  the  citizens  of  Jefferson 
county,  and  others  without  the  limits  of  the  city 
of  Louisville,  shall,  by  order  of  the  coun- 
ty court  of  Jefferson,  be  heard  on  the  first  week 
of  each  month,  commencing  on  the  first  Mon- 
day, and  continuing  till  all  the  business  of  the 
citizens  of  the  county  of  Jefferson,  and  others 
residing  without  Louisville,  shall  be  heard  and 
disposed  of,  after  which  the  business  of  the  citi- 
zens of  Louisville  may  be  heard  and  disposed 
of;  and  the  business  of  the  citizens  of  Louis- 
ville shall,  by  order  of  the  county  court  of  Jef- 
ferson, be  heard  on  the  second  week  of  each 
month,  commencing  on  the  second  Monday,  and 
continuing  until  all  the  business  of  the  citizens 
of  Louisville  shall  be  heard  and  disposed  of,  af- 
terwhich,  business  of  those  residing  out  of  Lou- 
isville may  be  heard  and  disposed  of." 

This  regulated  the  business  of  the  court,  so 
that  citizens  residing  in  the  county  should  nothave 
their  business  interrupted  by  the  citizens  of  Lou- 
isville taking  up  more  time  than  was  necessary. 
And  so  we  have  also  provided  for  those  expenses 
which  should  be  borne  mutually  by  each,  from 
that  time  to  the  present;  and  in  the  third  section 
this  provision  was  made : 

"  That  the  county  court  of  Jefferson,  the  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  residing  without  the  city  of 
Louisville  presiding,  may  agree  with  the  city 
authorities  of  Louisville  to  build  a  jail  at  the 
joint  expense  of  the  county  and  city,  each  con- 
tributing proportions  as  may  be  agreed  on;  they 
may  also  agree  as  to  who  shall  appoint  the  jailer, 
and  for  the  custody,  management,  and  repair  of 
the  jail." 

They  had  previously  agreed  upon  building  a 
court  "house,  which  has  not  yet  been  finished. 
The  proprietors  of  the  town  of  Louisville,  when 
they  laid  it  off,  gave  four  lots  for  public  build- 
ings. Two  lay  east  of  sixth  street  and  nortli  of 
Jefferson,  and  two  lay  west  of  sixth  street  and 
north  of  Jefferson.    The  court  house  was  first 


built  in  1808,  on  a  lot  east  of  sixth  street;  after- 
wards a  court  house  was  built  on  the  lot  west  of 
it.  Subsequently  the  court  house  was  pulled 
down  and  a  jail  built  on  the  lot  east,  and  a  court 
house  was  built  on  a  lot  west,  and  when  tliey 
came  to  build  the  present  court  house,  the  city 
of  Louisville  purchased  the  two  lots  adjoining, 
running  to  Fourth  street,  and  agreed  with  the 
county  of  Jefferson  to  contribute  a  certain  pro- 
portion, and  take  the  two  lots  west  of  sixth 
street,  and  they  would  build  a  court  house  on 
four  lots  mnning  from  fifth  to  sixth  street,  north 
of  Jefferson  street.  And  the  court  house  was 
there  built,  and  the  city  of  Louisville  contribu- 
ted her  proportion.  When  they  came  to  build  a 
jail,  it  was  erected  on  the  lot  north  of  Jefferson 
and  most  westward  of  sixth  street,  leaving  the 
lot  west  of  Sixth  street  not  built  upon,  and  the 
city  contributed  a  certain  sum,  and  also  the 
county  of  Jefferson.  According  to  my  recollec- 
tion, the  sum  contributed  by  tlie  county  of  Jef- 
ferson, to  botli  court  house  and  jail,  was  $30,000. 
The  amount  of  property  which  other  gentlemen 
have  claimed  was  made  up  by  the  increased 
value  of  these  lots,  which  were  given  by  the 
proprietors  for  the  public  buildings,  and  which 
never  did  exclusively  belong  to  the  county  of 
Jefferson  outside  of  Louisville.  The  county  of 
Jefferson  has  contributed  liberally  and  fairly  to 
these  public  buildings,  and  the  court  house  and 
jail  belong  to  the  county  of  Jefferson  and  the 
city  of  Louisville  as  public  property,  for  their 
joint  benefit,  and  there  is  no  ground  of  com- 
plaint on  that  subject,  in  relation  to  the  joint 
expense  that  each  incurred  to  keep  up  these  two 
establishments.  And  the  only  question  now  is, 
wliether  a  city  or  town,  under  a  provision  of  a 
law  of  the  commonwealth,  shall  have  a  sepa- 
rate representation,  a  separate  or  joint  county 
court,  a  joint  sheriff,  and  if  you  will,  a  separate 
sheriff,  and  these  two  distinct  operations  going 
on  at  the  same  time.  How  is  this  property  to 
be  divided?  Who  is  to  have  itV  Is  the  county 
to  build  again  for  herself?  On  going  out,  is  she 
to  give  up  all  this  property  to  the  city,  and  build 
again  for  herself?  Is  this  a  subject  matter  to  be 
settled  in  the  convention,  and  is  it  proper  that 
it  should  come  up  here  in  the  constitution?  In 
effect,  it  is  forcing  a  separation,  and  constituting 
the  cities  separate  from  the  counties.  The  cir- 
cuit court  of  Jefferson  lias  jurisdiction  in  the 
limits  of  Louisville,  and  when  organized  under 
the  new  constitution,  will  still  be  for  the  whole 
county  of  Jefferson.  The  process  runs,  "to  the 
sheriff  of  the  county  of  Jefferson."  Deeds  are 
to  be  recorded  in  the  county  courts  where  the 
respective  property  lies,  and  you  have  two  coun- 
ty courts  within  the  county  of  Jefferson.  It 
strikes  me  gentlemen  have  not  contemplated  the 
difficulties  connected  with  this  subject.  I  was 
willing  that,  whenever  a  city  should  be  entitled 
to  a  separate  representation,  the  legislature 
should  liave  the  right  to  provide  that  the  muni- 
cipal affairs  of  each  sliould  be  uncontrolled  by 
the  other.  I  do  not  desire  to  have  any  thing  to 
do  with  laying  the  levy  in  the  county'of  Jeffer- 
son or  paying  their  expenses,  nor  do  I  wish 
that  the  county  should  interfere  with  the  affairs 
of  the  city  of  Louisville.  But  I  think  we  can- 
not get  on  in  the  way  indicated,  and  I  shall  be 
compelled  to  vote  against  both  propositions  an 


i2: 


they  are  now  presented.  I  did  desire  that  the 
proposition  should  be  referred  to  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department.  They  did  not 
adopt  my  suggestion,  and  they  \rere  not  bound 
to  do  it.'  Indeed  I  was  desirous  that  vre  should 
eet  together  and  endeavor  to  agree  upon  the  sub- 
ject. Under  these  considerations,  and  with  these 
difficulties  in  the  way,  I  cannot  vote  for  either 

f  reposition,  and  if  no  gentleman  wishes  to  speak 
will  now  ask  that  the  committee  rise. 

The  committee  rose  and  reported  progress  ac- 
cordingly. 

Mr.  PRESTON  then  withdrew  the  amendment 
he  had  offered.  He  had  merely  offered  it  to  show 
his  willingness  to  meet  his  colleague  on  fair 
ground. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  should  not  have  again 
troubled  the  convention,  but  for  a  discrepancy 
which  appears  to  exist  between  the  grentleman 
from  Louisville  and  myself,  in  reference  to  the 
contributions  made  for  these  public  buildings. 
The  firet  suggestion  made  by  the  President  was 
as  to  which  court  should  have  the  custody  of 
the  present  records.  I  apprehend  no  difficulty 
on  this  question,  as  it  is  a  matter  which  the 
legislature  can  readily  decide.  But  I  spoke 
with  reference  to  the  contributions  with  a  dis- 
tinct recollection  of  the  matter.  When  it  was 
determined  to  remove  the  court  house  from  one 
side  of  sixth  .street  to  the  other,  it  was  ascertained 
that  there  were  two  lots  which  were  not  necessa- 
ry for  the  purposes  of  the  county — the  city  and 
county  each  owning  one  half  of  the  interest  there- 
in. It  was  arranged  between  a  committee  on  the 
part  of  the  Louisville  city  council  and  a  part  of 
the  county  court,  that  the  city  should  buy  out  the 
interest  of  tlie  county  in  those  two  lots,  and  a 
price  was  agreed  upon.  The  county  agreed  to 
p»y  $75,000  towards  tlie  erection  of  the  public 
building,  and  the  city  agreed  to  go  on  and  com- 
plete it.  The  city  agreed  to  take  the  interest 
which  the  countvof  Jefferson  owned  in  these  two 
lots  at  some  fSt.SOO,  and  the  remainder  of  the 
$75,000  was  paid  in  money,  for  I  was  one  of 
the  commissioners  on  the  part  of  the  county  to 
pay  it,  and  know  the  facts.  Then  the  question 
came  up  as  to  the  erection  of  the  jail.  The  city 
now  owned  all  the  property  on  the  west  side  of 
f  ixth  street,  and  at  that  time  the  jail  was  on 
the  east  side.  Then  tlie  county  of  Jefferson 
paid  back  to  the  city,  I  do  not  recollect  what 
amount,  to  acquire  a  proportion  of  the  title  in 
the  property  upon  which  the  new  jail  was  to  be 
erected,  which  was  to  be  deducted  from  the 
$16,000  contributed  for  the  erection  of  the  jail. 
The  city  now  owns  the  residue  of  the  two  lots 
on  the  west  side  of  sixth  street,  not  now  oc- 
cupied by  the  jail,  and  the  deed  of  conveyance 
was  made  to  take  effect  whenever  the  city  of 
Louisville  shall  complete  the  court  house  accord- 
ing to  contract.  Therefore,  the  amount  which  has 
been  contributed  by  the  county  is  some  $91 ,000. 

But  all  seem  to  agree  that  we  should  have  a 
separate  tribunal  of  some  sort  or  other  for  the 
levying  and  disbursement  of  taxes.  Well,  if 
there  is  not  a  separate  clerk,  who  is  to  record 
the  proceedings'?  Will  you  permit  us  merely  to 
levy  our  taxes  and  then  Jippoint  for  us  an  officer 
for  their  disbursement?  Want  else  is  the  propo- 
sition of  gentlemen  than  that  we  shall  be  allow- 
ed a  separate  court  to  tax  ourselves,  but  the  ex- 


ecutive officer  of  the  court  must  be  appointed  by 
the  city?  Is  this  right?  Why  do  you  give  to 
every  county  in  the  commonwealth  the  privilege 
of  electinsf  its  clerk?  It  is  because  other  coun- 
ties should  not  interfere  with  them.  Then  I  ask 
for  the  people  of  Jefferson  the  same  privileges 
that  are  extended  to  other  counties.  Let  us  not 
only  have  the  right  to  levy  our  own  taxes,  but 
also  of  appointing  the  officer  who  is  to  collect 
and  disburse  them,  and  the  clerk  who  is  to  re- 
cord the  proceedings. 

The  gentleman  from  Louisville  (Mr.  Rndd,) 
insists  that  my  colleague  and  myself  are  in  fa- 
vor of  a  total  separation.  Now,  if  it  is  not 
known  to  him,  it  i.s  to  others  here,  that  I  have 
stood  up  strenuously  in  the  legislature,  session 
after  session,  against  any  proposition  to  divide 
the  city  and  county.  I  know  that  my  colleague 
as  a  citizen  of  Jefferson  county,  has  also  op- 
posed any  such  division.  Then  why  will  the 
gentleman  persist  in  attributing  motives  to  us 
that  our  past  action,  so  far  from  justifying,  di- 
rectly contradicts?  I  am  sure  that  my  colleague 
and  myself,  and  I  doubt  not  the  citizens  of  Jef- 
ferson county,  will  feel  indebted  to  the  gentle- 
man for  having  taken  us  under  his  guardian- 
ship, and  for  having  been  good  enough  to  in- 
form us  what  the  citizens  of  that  county  require. 
We  acknowledge  our  inability  to  discharge  our 
duties  to  them  here,  and  tender  to  him  our 
thanks  for  the  kind  interest  he  has  seen  proper 
to  manifest  in  our  welfare.  But  I  profess  to 
know  something  of  the  feelings  of  tne  people 
of  Jefferson  on  this  subject,  and  I  beg  leave  to 
be  governed  by  my  own  judgment,  as  to  what 
their  wishes  are,  in  preference  to  yielding  to  his 
mere  opinions  on  the  subject.  And  the  gentle- 
man appears  to  think  that  mv  colleague  and  my- 
self have  some  favorite  individual  whom  we 
want  inducted  into  office.  This,  asl  remarked  in 
reply  to  the  other  gentleman  from  Louisville,  is 
a  most  uncharitable  suggestion.  Were  I  dis- 
posed to  be  as  uncharitable  as  he  is,  might  I  not 
infer  that  he  has  some  favorite  in  the  city  of 
Louisville  upon  whom  he  wishes  to  confer  the 
joint  offices.  Why,  independent  of  the  business 
of  Jefferson,  that  of  the  city  of  Louisville  would 
jifford  an  office  that  would,  be  a  fortune  to  any 
man  who  might  get  it.  The  business  of  Jef- 
ferson will  be  such  as  to  induce  some  of  the 
best  citizens  of  the  county  to  accept  those  offi- 
ces; and  yet  the  gentleman  wants  to  have  both 
devolved  on  the  same  individual.  But  the  gen- 
tleman says  further,  that  he  has  heard  of  no 
general  complaint  on  this  subject.  I  admit  it  and 
we  onlv  desire  to  protect  ourselves  from  the 
probability  of  such  a  thing  hereafter.  Because 
there  has  been  no  grievance  heretofore,  will  you 
deny  us  the  right  of  protecting  ourselves  against 
such  a  contingency  hereafter?  The  same  gentle- 
man also  says  that  the  police  court  of  Louisville 
is  open  to  the  citizens  of  Jefferson.  Now  I 
beg  leave  to  differ  with  him.  It  is  tnie  if  one 
of  our  boys  happens  to  stray  in  Louisville  and 
kicks  up  a  dust  there,  then  the  city  police  take 
hold  of  him;  but  in  no  other  instance  do  they. 
The  county  has  agreed  that  the  boundaries  of 
the  city  police  jurisdiction  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  riots  shall  extend  half  a  mile  around  the 
city;  and  to  that  extent  and  for  that  purpose 
alone,  do  they  have  jurisdiction  over  the  county 


428 


of  Jefferson.  "Well  there  is  another  objection 
made — that  these  officers  of  the  county  will  re- 
side in  the  city.  Will  that  be  any  detriment  to 
the  city?  Even  should  the  county  choose  to 
elect  a  resident  of  the  city  for  any  of  these  of- 
fices, would  it  be  any  cause  of  complaint  to  the 
city?  But  the  point  most  exclusively  dwelt  up- 
on by  all  the  gentlemen  from  Louisville,  is  that 
it  is  a  virtual  separation  of  tlie  city  and  county. 
I  beg  leave  to  differ  with  them.  To  a  certain  ex- 
tent, and  for  certain  purposes  there  will  be,  and 
there  ought  to  be  a  separation.  But  we  shall  be 
united  for  other  and  for  all  purposes,  for  which  it 
is  desirable  we  should  be  united.  So  far  as  I  am 
concerned,  I  now  leave  this  question  to  the  dis- 

Sosition  of  the  convention,  conscious  of  having 
ischarged  my  duty  towards  those  who  sent  me 
here. 

The  amendment  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER  was 
rejected,  the  yeas  and  nays  being  ordered  on  the 
call  of  Mr.  Rudd,  yeas  21  and  nays  55,  as  fol- 
lows : 

Yeas — Alfred  Bovd,  Luther  Brawner,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  David  Meriweth- 
er, James  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh  Newell,ElijahF.  Nut- 
tall,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John 
T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spaulding,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor—21. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballin^er,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wm. 
Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bnstow,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Benjamin  Copelin,  James  Dudley,  Selucius 
Garfieldej  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
William  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E. 
Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  TJiomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis 
B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William  N. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
John  H.  NcHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D. 
Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  William  Preston, 
James  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  How- 
ard Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.White, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 55. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  then  moved  a  reconsid- 
eration of  the  vote,  adopting  the  section  providing 
that  sheriffs  should  be  re-eligible  for  a  second  term. 
The  motion  under  the  rule  would  lie  over 
until  to-morrow,  but  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  TUR- 
NER, the  rule  was  dispensed  with. 

Mr.  GARRARD  then  moved  to  lay  the  motion 
to  reconsider  on  the  table. 

Mr.  HARDIN  suggested  that  as  the  house  was 
thin  the  roll  should  oe  called. 

The  roll  was  accordingly  called,  and  eighty 
one  members  answered  to  their  names. 

The  question  then  being  taken  on  the  motion 
to  lay  on  the  table,  by  yeas  and  nays,  on  the 
call  of  Mr.  CLARKE,  it  prevailed — ^yeas  44  nays 
40,  as  follows  : 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
per8on,John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 


Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrioman,  James  Dudley,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Yinceut  S.  Hay,  Mark  E. 
Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  TnomasN.  Lindsey,  Thomas W.  Lisle, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Maves,  John  H. 
McHcnry,  William  D.  Mitchell, "  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.Nesbitt,  Elijah 
F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
James  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Trip- 
lett, Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Wash- 
ington, Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
George  W.  Williams — 44. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffov,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjaman  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither.  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Tho. 
J.  Hood,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.Lackej-, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  William  N.Marshall,Nathan  McClure, 
David  Meriwether,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh 
Newell,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira 
Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spaulding,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 40. 

The  report  of  the  committee  on  executive  and 
ministerial  offices  as  amended  was  then  adopted. 

LOUISVILLE  CHANCERY  COUET. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HARDIN,  the  conven- 
tion went  into  committee  of  the  whole,  Mr. 
BRADLEY  in  the  chair,  on  the  article  reported 
by  the  committee  on  circuit  courts,  in  relation  to 
the  Louisville  chancery  court,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  -.  TheLouisvillechancerycourtshallex- 
ist  under  this  constitution,  subject  to  repeal,  and 
its  jurisdiction  to  enlargement  and  modification 
by  the  legislature.  The  chancellor  shall  have 
tne  same  qualification  as  a  circuit  court  judge; 
and  the  clerk  of  said  court  as  a  clerk  of  a  circuit 
court,  and  the  marshal  of  said  court  as  a  sheriff; 
and  the  legislature  shall  provide  for  the  election 
of  the  chancellor,  clerk,  and  marshal,  of  said 
court,  at  the  same  time  that  the  judge  and  clerk 
of  the  circuit  court  are  elected  for  the  county  of 
Jefferson,  and  they  shall  hold  their  ofiices  for  the 
same  time." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  committee  on  circuit 
courts  reported  this  article,  and  it  was  drawn  up 
by  the  presiding  officer  of  this  body,  a  gentle- 
man who  has  long  practiced  in  that  court.  The 
report  was  a  unanimous  one  from   the  commit- 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  desire  to  give  the  con- 
vention the  information  I  possess  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  this  court,  and  upon  the  necessity  of  its 
continuance.  I  inferred  from  the  report  of  the 
committees  on  the  court  of  appeals  and  the  cir- 
cuit court,  that  there  would  be  doubt  and  diffi- 
culty as  to  whether  the  Louisville  chancery  court 
would  exist  under  the  proposed  constitution,  and 
in  order  to  have  the  question  settled,  a  resolu- 
tion was  referred  to  the  committee  on  circuit 
couite,  requiring  them  to  take  the  subject  under 


429 


consideration.  They  have  accordingly  reported 
the  provision  under  consideration.  The  Louis- 
rille  chancery  court  went  into  existence  on  the 
13th  of  April,  1835,  and  to  that  court  vras  tran.s- 
ferred  many  of  the  causes  which  were  pending  at 
the  time  in  the  Jefferson  county  circuit  cour^. 
All, however,  were  not  thus  transferred,  butfior(le 
were  retained  in  that  court  and  decided  th^rre. 
There  have  been  6,600  and  odd  cases  brought  or 
removed  into  that  court,  of  which  5,290  and  odd 
were  finally  settled  by  decree  or  dismissal.  And 
there  were  some  three  or  four  hundred  more  partial- 
ly decided,  leaving  altogether  about  1400  causes 
for  the  docketof  that  court.  There  are  also  some 
900  or  1000  causes  which  have  not  been  disposed 
of  or  decided  in  anyway.  Such  is  tlie  present 
condition  of  the  business  in  that  court,  and 
upon  examination  it  will  be  found  that  each  year 
during  its  existence  there  have  been  upwards  of 
400  causes  finally  decided  and  disposed  of  by  it. 
The  court  has  afso  the  jurisdiction  of  settling  the 
rights  of  guardians,  administrators,  and  execu- 
tors, within  the  city  of  Louisville,  and  of  causes 
of  this  character  some  290  and  odd  have  been  set- 
tled and  disposed  of,  and  others  are  in  a  course 
of  final  disposition.  They  are  settled  before  a 
master  in  that  court,  and  examined  by  the  chan- 
cellor, and  if  approved,  declared  to  stand  as  pri- 
ma  facie  evidence.  Including  these  causes,  there 
has  been  upwards  of  450  causes  disposed  of  by 
the  court  annually  since  its  establishment.  Or- 
dinarily the  court  sits  two  davs  in  the  week,  on 
Tuesdays  and  Fridays,  and  gfves  opinions,  hears 
motions,  and  transacts  its  business  generally. 
Causes  are  submitted  to  the  judge  most  generally 
upon  briefs,  and  during  the  period  he  is  out  of 
court,  he  has  the  examination  of  records  to  make, 
and  of  the  authorities  referred  to  by  counsel,  and 
such  as  are  necessary  for  his  own  information. 
Independent  of  these  two  courts  a  week,  and  the 
time  he  labors  during  the  balance  of  the  week  in 
preparing  his  decrees,  the  judge  grants  injunc- 
tions, restraining  orders,  and  ne  exeats,  and  he  is 
likely  to  be  applied  to  every  day,  and  is  frequent- 
ly applied  to  many  times  in  the  day,  to  examine 
the  records  and  decide  as  to  attachments.    Inde- 

Jiendent  of  these  duties  also,  many  writs  of  ha- 
eas  corpus,  and  nice  and  intricate  questions  of 
the  custody  of  children  and  the  power  of  parent'^ 
and  guardians  over  them,  are  brought  before  him. 
Then  all  collision  cases  are  to  be  tried  by  jurors, 
and  when  he  has  prepared  the  venire  he  is  to  have 
a  day  fixed  for  it,  and  that  is  always  some  'lay 
tliat  is  not  a  regular  court  day.  And  we  have  been 
engaged  in  the  trial  of  some  of  these  collision 
cases  for  a  week  and  some  times  ten  days,  on  a 
single  cause.  So  also  in  regard  to  contested  wills, 
they  are  tried  in  that  court,  and  some  of  them 
consume  a  considerable  time.  But  the  heaviest 
jurisdiction  in  relation  to  juries  are  in  collision 
causes.  It  is  in  fact  a  mercantile  court,  for  the 
transaction  of  nearly  all  of  that  description  of  bu- 
siness that  connects  itself  with  the  mercantile 
affairs  of  the  county,  both  as  to  shipping  and 
attachments  against  foreign  debtors,  together 
with  the  usual  amount  of  chancery  business  of 
liens  upon  buildings,  and  assignments,  and  set- 
tlement of  estates,  and  winding  up  of  partner- 
ships, embracing  all  that  variety  of  jurisdiction 
that  under  our  system  of  laws  devolve  particu- 
larly upon  the  chancery  part  of  the  circuit  courts. 


It  was  from  the  great  accumulation  of  busi- 
ness in  the  Jefferson  circuit  court,  on  the  chan- 
cery side,  and  the  fact  that  the  common  law  and 
criminal  hiusiness  occupied  its  whole  time,  so 
that  the  chancery  side  of  the  docket  was  hardly 
ever  reached,  except  by  motion,  that  induced 
the  legislature  in  1835  to  establish  this  court. 
The  business  of  the  community  has  been  done 
in  that  court  with  great  facility,  and  the  chan- 
cery business  kept  down.  A  great  many  of 
these  causes  are  tried  in  that  court,  in  from  fifty 
to  sixty  days  from  the  time  they  are  commeneea, 
if  they  are  plain  cases.  Where  they  are  compli- 
cated, and  where  they  require  a  greater  time  to 
prepare  them,  of  course  it  takes  a  longer  time, 
and  occasionally  a  cause  falls  back,  either  from 
the  neglect  of  the  parties,  or  the  difficulty  of 
getting  at  the  facts.  But  I  have  seen  no  court 
during  the  period  of  time  I  have  practiced,  that 
transacts  its  business  with  more  promptness  and 
certainty  than  it.  And  although  amongst  the 
mass  of  cases  that  come  to  the  court  of  appeals 
there  have  been  a  fair  number  of  reversals,  yet 
there  have  been  a  large  proportion  in  which  the 
individuals  have  been  fully  satisfied,  and  which 
have  never  been  brought  to  the  appellate  court. 
I  am  satisfied  that  the  chancery  business  of  the 
city  of  Louisville  and  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
will  require  the  whole  labors  of  a  judge,  and 
that  it  cannot  be  done  without  it.  A  large  por- 
tion of  the  business  done  in  that  court,  is  of 
persons  who  reside  without  its  jurisdiction,  and 
who  were  connected  with  Louisville  by  the 
commerce  and  trade  of  the  city  and  county.  It 
was  the  conviction  of  these  facts  that  induced 
the  legislature  to  establish  the  court  in  the  first 
instance,  and  it  is  under  the  same  impression 
and  the  belief  that  no  arrangement  can  be  made 
that  will  be  more  beneficial  to  the  litigants  or  to 
the  community  at  large,  that  we  have  been  in- 
duced to  ask  that  it  shall  be  recognized  by  the 
constitution,  an<l  take  its  fate  in  the  legislature 
of  the  country,  as  experience  may  dictate  it  best 
deserves.  Either  to  have  it  repealed,  or  to  have 
its  jurisdiction  enlarged  or  diminished,  as  the 
interests  of  the  county  may  demand.  I  am 
satisfied  that  if  the  convention  shall  diminish 
the  number  of  courts  in  the  commonwealth,  if 
they  do  not  leave  us  the  chancery  court,  that  at 
least  they  will  be  compelled  to  establish  an  ad- 
ditional circuit.  I  do  not  believe,  from  the  im- 
mense number  of  criminal  cases  falling  to  the 
lot  of  the  Jefferson  circuit  court  to  try,  that  it 
will  be  possible  for  one  judge  to  do  the'criminal 
business,  the  common  law  business,  and  the 
chancery  business,  that  exists  and  has  existed 
for  the  last  three  years  in  the  city  alone.  The 
city  is  growing  and  increasing,  and  with  it  will 
increase  the  necessity  of  having  a  court  of  jus- 
tice always  open,  and  always  ready  to  transact 
the  business  constantly  arising  in  a  place  of  in- 
creasing trade  and  commerce.  We  cannot  safely 
dispense  with  such  a  court  in  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville, and  all  1  ask  is,  that  it  shall  be  permitted 
to  exist.  I  see  that  in  the  draft  of  the  bill,  the 
marshal  of  the  court  is  re-eligible  to  office.  This 
I  do  not  desire,  and  I  move  that  the  marshal  of 
the  court  be  ineligible  for  a  succeeding  term. 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.     I   concur  in   the  opinions 
expressed  by  the  President  as  to  the  necessity  for 


430 


the  existence  of  the  court,  but  I  want  to  guard 
it  against  an  evil  that  has  some  times  happened, 
and  may  liappen  again.  I  therefore  oner  the 
following  as  an  additional  section: 

"The  jurisdiction  of  said  court  shall  be  restrict- 
ed to  suits  where  the  property  or  estate,  or  some 
one  or  more  of  the  defendants  reside  in  Louis- 
ville." 

My  object  is  obvious  on  the  face  of  the  amend- 
ment itself.  This  court  is  now  to  be  made  a  con- 
fititiitional  court,  and  I  want  to  know  the  limit  of 
its  jurisdiction.  The  jurisdiction  of  all  the  cir- 
cuit courts  throughout  tlie  state  is  limited  by 
law,  and  I  now  want  to  limit  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  chancery  court  of  Louisville.  So  far  as  re- 
gards Louisville,  and  in  causes  where  the  de- 
fendants or  one  or  more  of  them  reside  in  that 
city,  let  the  court  have  jurisdiction.  Otherwise, 
every  man  who  is  in  the  habit  of  visiting  Louis- 
ville, or  who  may  do  it  occasionally,  is  liable, 
when  caught  in  town  to  be  sued  there,  and  thus 
the  court  would  exercise  jurisdiction  over  a  suit, 
the  subject  matter  of  which,  and  many  of  the  de- 
fendants might  pertain  to  a  remote  part  of  the 
stat«.  Are  you  willing  that  your  constituents 
shall  be  obliged  either  to  stay  out  of  Louisville 
altogether  and  thereby  neglect  their  business,  or 
if  they  go  there  be  liable  to  have  process  served 
on  them,  and  detained  to  attend  to  a  long  and 
sometimes  complicated  chancery  suit?  It  is  to 
guard  against  this  that  I  have  offered  my  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  PRESTON".  I  do  not  see  the  force  of  the 
objection  urged  by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess. 
The  Louisville  chancery  court  has  vested  in  it 
all  the  chancery  jurisdiction  which  was  formerly 
reposed  in  the  Jefferson  circuit  court,  and  thus,  if 
the  separation  had  never  taken  place,  the  same 
persons  under  the  same  circumstances  only, 
would  have  been  subject  to  suits  in  the  Louis- 
ville chancery,  as  on  the  chancery  side  of  the 
Jefferson  circuit  court.  And  this  is  all  the  juris- 
diction we  have  proposed  to  give  this  court  in  this 
report — a  jurisdiction  that  is  exercised  by  every 
circuit  court  on  its  chancery  side  in  this  com- 
monwealth. There  are  two  classes  of  action — 
those  which  relate  to  fixed  property,  which  are 
local,  and  transitory  actions,  which  it  is  right 
and  proper  should  follow  the  person.  The 
Louisville  chancery  court,  therefore,  received 
only  that  jurisdiction  which  the  circuit  court 
on  its  chancery  side  possessed  anterior  to  its 
establishment,  and  it  was  thus  established  only 
because  the  business  was  so  great  under  the  acl- 
vancing  wealth  and  population  of  the  county, 
that  it  was  necessary  to  make  the  division  in 
order  to  administer  justice. 

The  gentleman  certainly  would  not  deprive 
the  chancery  court  of  Louisville  of  that  general 
jurisdiction  over  subjects  which  every  circuit 
court  in  the  commonwealth  possesses.  If  the 
man  be  in  debt,  and  the  remedy  be  in  chancery, 
he  may  be  served  with  process  in  Fayette,  or 
Hickman,  or  Mason  counties,  and  tried  in  the 
circuit  courts  of  those  counties  under  pre- 
cisely similar  circumstances  a-s  in  the  cliancery 
court  in  Louisville.  There  was  no  difference  in 
the  proceeding,  and  yet  the  gentleman  does  not 
object  to  the  iurisdiction  of  the  circuit  courts  in 
Buch  cases.  Now  the  chancery  court  of  Louis- 
ville exercises  a  jurisdiction,  which,  after  the 


experience  of  ages,  has  been  asserted  and  de- 
clared in  the  courts  of  England  and  in  every 
state  of  the  Union,  over  a  certain  class  of  action 
relating  to  matters  whicli  being  transitory  in 
their  character,  the  remedy  should  be  obtained 
wherever  the  person  of  the  defendant  is  found. 
And  this  is  the  jurisdiction  always  exercised  on 
the  chancery  side  of  the  circuit  court,  and  of 
which  no  complaint  has  been  made.  We  only 
ask  that  that  jurisdiction  shall  remain  undimin- 
ished here,  and  leave  it  to  the  legislature  to 
provide  for  its  restriction  or  extension  as  necessi- 
ty may  dictate.  If  it  should  be  found  to  work, 
as  the  gentleman  apprehends,  the  legislature  will 
have  power  to  restrict  it.  This  is  not  a  consti- 
tutional court,  over  which  the  legislature  is  to 
have  no  control,  as  the  gentleman  seems  to  infer. 
The  clause  reads  in  this  way,  "  Tlie  Louisville 
chancery  court  shall  exist  under  this  constitution 
subject  to  repeal,  and  its  jurisdiction  to  enlarge- 
ment and  modification  by  the  legislature."  There 
is  therefore  no  difficulty  in  reaching  the  subject 
of  jurisdiction  by  legislation,  if  it  should  here- 
after become  necessarj'. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  It  is  true  that  this  court  has 
heretofore  existed  by  law,  but  the  legislature 
when  it  created  it  did  not  do  that  justice  to  the 
balance  of  the  citizens  of  the  state  which  was 
due  to  them.  Therefore  now,  when  this  conven- 
tion is  about  to  make  the  court  a  constitutional  i 
one,  by  requiring  its  continuance,  I  desire  to  do  i 

that  Vhich  the  legislature  should  have   done   at         ] 
the  time  it  first  established  the  court.  This  prop-  i 

osition  can  be  made  so  clear  that  no  man  can 
misunderstand  it.  I  have  drafted  this  amend- 
ment with  some  care,  and  the  gentleman's  objec- 
tion to  it  does  not  lie.  By  my  amendment,  if 
the  defendants  or  any  one  of  them  reside  in 
Louisville,  or  if  their  property  being  transitory, 
is  in  Louisville,  then  the  chancery  court  there 
would^  have  jurisdiction  over  it.  But  I  do  not 
want  to  give  that  court  jurisdiction  over  all  the 
citizens  of  the  state,  w"nerever  they  are.  Sup- 
pose my  amendment  does  not  pass,  why  the  very 
evil  now  existing  will  continue  to  exist,  and  we 
know  it.  We  all  know  that  never,  up  to  this 
day,  have  we  had  power  sufficient  in  the  legisla- 
ture to  prevent  this  very  evil  of  which  we  now 
complain.  1  know  from  my  own  personal 
knowledge,  as  do  other  gentlemen  in  this  con- 
vention, that  the  jurisdic-tion  of  suits  has  been 
transferred  to  the  Louisville  chancery  court, 
when  neither  the  subject  matter  in  controversy 
nor  one  of  the  defendants  has  resided  in  that 
city.  The  case  of  Spotts  was  removed  there, 
and  the  land  involved  lay  in  Henderson  county, 
and  everv  one  of  the  defendants  lived  there  ex- 
cept onety  the  name  of  Barbour.  He  was  pass- 
ing through  Louisville,  and  was  served  with  a 
subpoena,  and  he  was  only  a  nominal  defendant. 
Are  delegates  willingtheii  that  their  constituents 
shall  be  forever  hereafter  liable  to  be  subjected  to 
this  inconvenience,  provided  the  legislature  does 
not  correct  it.  And  if  the  circuit  court  possessed 
the  same  jurisdiction,  and  had  exercised  it  in 
this  Avay,  I  ask  if,  according  to  the  gentleman's 
own  proposition,  the  legislature  should  not  have 
deprived  them  of  that  power  ?  Take  an  instance  . 
that  might  occur  at  the  scat  of  government  here. 
Suppose  a  man  comes  here  on  business  which  it 
is  necessary  for  him  to  transact,  and  which  can- 


431 


not  be  transacted  any  where  else, — ought  the 
circuit  court  of  this  county  to  have  jurisdiction 
over  a  tract  of  land  in  Hickman  county,  where 
all  the  witnesses  iire  residing,  merely  because 
this  man,  as  one  of  the  parties  in  the  suit,  "was 
caught  here,  in  the  transaction  of  his  necessary 
business  ?  I  say  no.  It  is  wrong,  and  there  is 
not  a  man  here,  who,  if  his  constituents  were 

? laced  in  that  condition,   would  not  resent  it. 
'hen  if  it  is  wrong  why  should  we  not  reinedv 
the  evil? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.    I  was  a  member  of 
the  legislature  when  the  chancery  court  of  Lou- 
isville was  organized,  and  a  larger  jurisdiction 
was  given  to  it  than  I  thought  it  ought  to  have; ! 
but  as   it    now  exists,   the  jurisdiction   of  that  I 
court,  in  chancery  matters,  is  no  larger  than  the  j 
jurisdiction  of  the  circuit  court.     If  a  man  from  j 
Daviess  county,  against  whom  a  claim  exists,  for  ■ 
which  he  might  be  sued  in  chancery  in  his  own  I 
county,  should  go  to  Louisville,  process  might  i 
be  issued  against  him  there,  by  the  circuit  court.  I 
He  could  be  held  upon  a  writ  of  ne  exeat,  or  1 1 
believe,  as  it  is  now  called,  a  writ  of  "no  go" —  j 
and  the  chancery  court  can  do  no  more.     If  one  ' 
of  the  defendants  in  a  large  suit  should  happen  j 
to  be  there,  the  circuit  court  can  issue  process  i 
against  him,  and  the   chancery  court  has   no  j 
greater  power.     And  it  appears  to  me  that  if  we  ■ 
transfer  the  jurisdiction  in  a  certain  class  of  ca- 1 
ses,  from  the  circuit  court  to  the  chancer}^  court,  '■ 
the  latter  should  have  as  plenary  powers  as  the  j 
former.     I  should  be  unwilling  to  give  to  the  ; 
court  the  power  to  bring  persons  from  another ! 
county  by  process  issued  from  that  court;  but  I  { 
think  they  ought  to  have  the  same  degree  of  ju- 
risdiction that  the  other  courts  have.     I  do  not 
understand  the   chancery    court    as  possessing 
greater  power,  as  regards  jurisdiction,   than  the 
circuit  court  possesses,  in  chancery  business;  but 
be  that  as  it  may,  I  think  we  had  better  leave 
the  regulation  of  the  internal  jurisdiction  of  the 
court,  as  well  as  its  jurisdiction   over  transitory 
persons  and  propertv,  to  the  legislature. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  jurisdiction  of  the 
chancery  court  of  Louisville,  is  precisely  what 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Jefferson  county  circuit 
court  was,  in  relation  to  chancery  business,  be- 
fore the  chancery  court  was  established;  not 
more  and  not  less.  It  has  the  same  jurisdiction 
that  every  circuit  court  in  the  commonwealth  of 
Kentucky  has,  in  relation  to  chaneerv  matters. 
Now,  if  there  is  a  grievance  in  relation  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  chancery  court,  I  would  sug- 
gest to  the  gentleman,  that  this  court  ought  not 
to  be  made  an  exception,  and  that  he  should 
make  his  amendment  to  prohibit  the  legislature 
from  granting  the  same  jurisdiction  to  the  other 
courts  in  the  commonwealth.  I  am  very  sorry, 
sir,  that  the  gentleman  ha.s  instanced,  in  support 
of  his  argument  for  curtailing  the  jurisdiction, 
that  outrageous  case  of  fraud  in  Spott's  case. 
The  children  were  infants,  and  there  was  a  com- 
bination between  the  judgment  creditors,  and 
the  administrator  of  the  estate,  who  fully  ad- 
ministered upon  it,  and  then  bought  in  a  large 
and 'Valuable  tract  of  land  for  a  nominal  price, 
under  the  pretence  outside,  that  it  was  bought 
in  for  the  benefit  of  the  heirs.  The  sheriff  made 
the  deed  with  a  full  knowledge  of  all  the  facts. 
It  was  one  of  the  most  outrageous  frauds  that 


was  over  practiced  upon  infants.  I  have  seen 
the  record;  it  has  been  passed  upon  by  the  court 
of  appeals.  It  is  a  case  that  shows  how  the 
rights  of  those  who  have  no  one  interested  in 
their  behalf,  and  who  cannot  look  after  their  in- 
terests themselves,  may  be  trampled  upon 
through  the  means  of  a  court  of  justice.  It  is 
one  of  the  strongest  evidences  showing  the  reme- 
dial power  that  exists  in  the  brea-^t  of  the  chan- 
cellor. But  that  it  should  be  made  an  argument 
to  restrain  the  jurisdiction  of  the  chancery  court, 
is  somewhat  extraordinary.  If  it  is  the  sense  of 
the  convention,  that  the  jurisdiction  of  this 
court  should  be  restrained,  "make  the  restriction 
applicable  to  the  other  courts;  but  do  not  re- 
strain this,  and  let  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bal- 
ance of  the  courts  remain  as  it  is. 

But  the  gentleman  says  that  this  court  should 
not  be  permitted  to  issue  process  against  a  man 
who  resides  in  another  county.  If  a  man  goes 
into  a  neighboring  county,  and  owes  a  debt  there- 
in, the  sheriff  can  serve  process  on  him,  and  he 
must  answer  to  the  demand  in  a  court  of  law; 
and  so  it  is  in  a  court  of  chancery,  unless  it  is  a 
suit  in  relation  to  real  estate,  wli'ere  the  recovery 
is  to  be  direct  for  the  thing  itself,  and  the  action 
is  termed  local,  and  has  to  be  brought  in  the  cir- 
cuit where  the  property  lies.  But  where  the 
chancery  court  issues  process  upon  the  ground  of 
fraud,  the  party  may  be  served  with  process, 
wherever  he  may  be  found.  There  are  many 
cases  in  which  this  jurisdiction  is  very  appro- 
priate. A  man  comes  into  Louisville,  and  sells 
a  negro,  who  proves  to  be  unsound;  the  individ- 
ual guilty  of  this  kind  of  fraud,  may  be  prose- 
cuted where  the  fraud  was  transacted.  A  man 
buys  a  quantit\'  of  goods  Avithout  any  intention 
of  paying  for  them,  or  obtains  goods  by  false 
pretences,  or  false  representations,  as  to  his  abil- 
ity to  pay;  he  is  within  your  jurisdiction,  and 
process  may  be  served  upon  tim,  wherever  he 
may  be  found.  I  insist  that  it  is  a  subject  that 
ought  to  be  regulated  by  the  legislature. 

This  report  proposes  to  leave  the  existence  of 
the  court,  and  the  extent  of  its  jurisdiction,  en- 
tirely with  the  legislature.  Is  not  that  sufii- 
cient?  Are  we  going  to  legislate  upon  every 
minute  point,  in  making  a  general  law?  If  so, 
we  are  likely  to  be  kept  here  forever.  Now  I 
siibmit  the  question,  whether  we  ought  to  pro- 
vide for  the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts  within 
this  state,  or  whether  we  should  leave  it  to  be 
done  by  the  legislature.  If  we  undertake  to 
make  this  court  an  exception,  it  will  look  very 
extraordinary.  Are  we  to  declare  that  all  the 
courts  in  the  commonwealth  should  Jiave  the 
same  jurisdiction  that  now  exists,  except  the 
chancery  court  of  Louisville,  and  that  shall 
have  less  than  all  the  other  courts  in  the  state? 
That  is  the  effect  of  the  gentleman's  proposition. 
If  he  wishes  to  limit  the  jurisdiction  of  all  the 
courts,  by  a  general  provision,  when  the  wliole 
subject  matter  comes  up,  let  him  make  his 
proposition;  but  I  protest  against  its  being  add- 
ed to  this  bill,  and  thejurisdiction  of  the  chan- 
cellor, either  more  restricted,  or  more  enlarged 
tlian  it  is  elsewhere. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  was  in  hopes  that  some 
other  person  would  reply  to  the  argument  of  the 
gentleman  on  the  other  side.  I  have  already 
attended  to  the  remarks  of  the  two  gentlemen 


4S'J 


from  Louisville,  aiul  to  t)ie  reply  made  by  the 
younger  gentleman  from  Nelson,  and  I  ask  this 
house,  calmly  to  reflect,  %vhat  are  the  argu- 
ments made  use  of  against  itiy  proposition? 
Has  there  been  a  solitary  reason  urged  against 
it?    ]  previously  acknowledged  the  fact,  for  the 

{)urpo.ve  of  savfng  time,  tliat  the  circuit  courts 
lave  got  this  jurisdiction,  as  tlie  gentleman 
states.  But  I  tell  you  candidly,  that  ray  object 
is  to  circumscribe  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Louis- 
ville chancery  court.  In  reference  to  Spott's 
case,  it  was  a  most  outrageous  fraud,  and  1  had 
some  part  in  exposing  the  fraud;  but  that  is  not 
the  question.  The  question  is  as  to  the  locus 
in  quo,  tlie  place  where  the  action  oUglit  to  liave 
been  bnmght.  Ought  it  not  to  have  been 
brought  in  the  county  of  Henderson,  where  the 
parties  resided,  and  Avhere  all  the  witnesses,  and 
all  the  records  were?  If  any  proper  cause  could 
be  shown  why  it  should  not  be  tried  tliere,  it 
could  have  been  remedied  by  a  change  of  venue. 
Let  us  reHect  for  one  monlent  on  the  proposition 
thfit  I  have  submitted.  I  believe  that  in  its  true 
construction,  it  will  include  the  cases  put  by 
the  gentleman.  Whenever  a  contract  is  made  in 
Louisville,  let  the  trial  be  had  there;  if  a  fraud 
be  perpetrated  there,  goods  obtained  under  false 
pretences,  the  amendment  that  I  have  proposed 
covers  the  case;  if  it  does  not,  add  to  it  the 
words,  "where  a  contract  expressed  or  implied 
is  made  in  the  city  of  Louisville."  You  will 
then  cover  the  whole  ground,  and  if  any  law- 
yer on  this  floor  gives  it  as  his  opinion,  that  the 
amendment,  as  drafted,  does  not  cover  the 
ground,  then  I  will  move  to  add  the  words  that 
I  have  suggested. 

The  mere  question  is,  shall  your  constituents, 
because  one  of  them  happen?,  to  go  to  Louisville, 
be  sued  there,  and  all  the  balance  of  the  defend- 
ants be  brought  there?  If  the  owner  of  a  tract 
of  land  lying  in  Hickman,  or  in  Knox,  or  in 
any  other  of  the  border  counties  of  the  state,  be 
sued,  the  courts  tliere  sliould  have  jurisdiction, 
not  only  over  all  the  defendants  in  the  case,  but 
over  the  subject  matter.  What  is  the  effect  of 
giving  jurisdiction  to  a  court  in  a  remote  part  of 
the  state?  Does  any  gentleman  say  it  ought 
to  be  so?  But  the  gentleman  says,  that  I  am 
drawing  a  distinction  between  the  chancery 
court  of  Louisville,  -and  the  ordinary  courts 
having  jurisdiction  in  chancery  ea.ses.  fee  it  so. 
Have  ihey  shown  that  my  proposition  is  wrong? 
No  sir,  so  far  from  it,  they  show  that  the  provis- 
ion ought  to  be  extended  to  all  the  other  courts. 
My  maxim  is  to  remedy  the  evil,  where  it  occurs, 
aud  believing  it  to  be  my  duty,  as  far  as  I  am 
able,  to  provide  that  this  evil  shall  exist  no  lon- 
ger, I  desire  that  this  clause  shall  be  inserted  in 
the  constitution. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  rise  merely  to  answer  one 
or  two  points  in  the  remarks  of  my  friend  from 
Daviess.  He  says  he  has  heard  no  reason  yet 
advanced  why  his  amendment  should  not  be 
adopted;  if  he  has  heard  none  from  the  distin- 
guislied  gentleman  who  preceded  me,  I  am  al- 
most hopeless  of  convincing  him.  "The  deaf 
adder  heedeth  not  the  voice  of  the  charmer." 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  did  listen,  but  I  did  not 
hear. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  understand  that  the  prac- 
tical  application    which    the   gentleman    from 


Daviess  desires  to  mak^  of  liis  proposed  amend- 
ment to  the  report,  is  to  limit  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Louisville  chancery  court,  as  he  frankly  ad- 
mits, in  a  manner  not  known  in  any  other  chan- 
cery court  in  Kentucky;  to  curtail  it  of  the 
rights  enjoyed  by  every  other  circuit  court  on 
the  chancery  side;  to  deprive  it  of  jurisdiction 
that  has,  from  time  immemorial,  been  exercised 
by  such  courts  in  this  country  and  in  England, 
from  whence  we  have  derived  our  system  of 
jurisprudence.  He  has  alluded  to  the  case  of 
Spotts'  heirs  and  Barbour.  I  have  not  read  that 
case,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  the  gentleman  is 
not  taking  the  proper  course  to  cure  the  evil  he 
complains  of.  He  is  endeavoring  to  do  it  by 
restricting  the  jurisdiction  of  the  chancery  court, 
when  the  injury  he  complains  of  arises  from  the 
decision  of  the  appellate  court. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  gentleman  does  not 
understand  me;  I  do  not  object  that  the  decision 
was  wrong,  I  only  cite  the  case  as  an  instance, 
where  the  defendants,  as  well  as  the  subject 
matter  of  the  suit,  were  in  another  county. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  gentleman  proposes  that 
the  Louisville  chancery  court  shall  take  cogni- 
zance of  nothing  except  those  cases  where  the 
contract  has  arisen,  either  in  Louisville  or  in 
Jeff"erson  county.     Do  I  understand  him? 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.     That  is  one  class  of  cases. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Let  us  examine  the  effect  of 
this  proposition.  Suppose  one  of  our  citizens, 
in  London,  borrows  a  thousand  dollars  of  an- 
other to  f:ome  home,  and  to  recover  the  debt  he 
needs  the  aid  of  a  court  of  equity.  In  every 
court  in  the  state,  you  mav  assert  your  right  by 
bill  of  discovery,  except  in  the  chancery  court 
of  Louisville. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  You  cannot  file  a  bill  of 
discovery  in  any  chancery  court,  unless  there 
has  been  a  suit  at  common  law;  so  that  the  illus- 
tration of  the  gentleman  is  not  applicable. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  will  not  make  an  argu- 
ment on  the  illustration.  The  general  principle 
is,  that  the  debtor,  in  any  personal  contract,  may 
be  sued  wherever  he  goes.  A  debt  contracted  in 
one  county  of  the  state  may  be  asserted  in  anoth- 
er; all  actions  arising  upon  contracts,  and  per- 
sonal actions  of  every  description,  may  be  com- 
menced wherever  the  defendant  may  be  found. 
The  gentleman  now  proposes  to  curtail  this  ju- 
risdiction, and  make  personal  actions  local,  and 
I  conceive  this  contrary  to  the  whole  current  and 
policy  of  the  law.  What  will  be  the  efl'ect  of 
the  gentleman's  amendment?  If  I  enter  into  a 
contract  with  him  in  Louisville,  requiring  for  its 
enforcement  the  aid  of  the  chancellor,  and  after- 
wards go  down  to  Owensboro',  he  can  sue  me 
upon  the  contract  there;  but  if  I  make  a  similar 
contract  with  him  there,  and  he  comes  to  Louis- 
ville, I  cannot  bring  suit  upon  it.  Does  he  call 
this  eouality?  Is  there  any  good  reason  why 
the  cliancery  court  of  Louisville  should  be 
deprived  of  the  rights  that  the  circuit  court 
of  Daviess  and  every  other  circuit  court  in 
the  state  possesses?  All  tliat  we  ask  is  that 
its  jurisdiction  shall  be  the  same  as  that  of 
other  courts;  with  tliis  wo  would  be  contented; 
and  I  really  think  the  convention  will  be  satis- 
fied that  it  would  be  highly  improper  to  deprive 
this  court  of  the  power  which  the  other  courts 
possess. 


433 


Air.  TRIPLETT.  1  will  amend  ray  proposi- 
tion bv  adding  these  words,  "contracts  ■which 
have  arisen  directly  or  indirectlv  in  Louisville." 


Mr.  PRESIDENT.  I  am  exceedingly  sorry 
that  the  gentleman  did  not  comprehend  my  ob- 
jection. I  did  not  intend  to  argue  as  to  what 
was  or  was  not  the  proper  jurisdiction  of  the 
court.  I  only  asserted  that  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Louisville  chancery  court  was  the  .same  as 
the  jurisdiction  of  all  the  circuit  courts  in  the 
commonwealth;  and  that  it  was  not  proper  that 
this  convention  should  determine  the  limits  of 
the  jurisdiction  of  that  court.  That  if  it  were 
necessary  to  limit  the  jurisdiction  of  all  the 
courts,  there  would  be  a  more  proper  time  and 
place  for  it.  If  the  legislature  of  the  common- 
wealth cannot  be  entrustcJ  with  the  regulation 
of  the  jurisdiction  of  this  tribunal,  and  it  is  ne- 
ces-sary  that  we  should  determine  the  limits  of 
jurisdiction,  then  let  us  determine  as  to  aU 
the  courts,  and  not  select  one  single  court,  mere- 
ly because  the  gentleman  may  suppose  that  he 
can  array  prejudices  against  the  particular  lo- 
cality where  the  court  is  held,  in  order  to  lessen 
the  jurisdiction  of  that  court.  The  suit,  which 
the  gentleman  alluded  to,  was  brought  by  per- 
sons who  did  not  reside  in  Louisville.  They 
chose  that  tribunal;  perhaps,  sir,  they  may  have 
had  a  preference  for  the  lawyers  there.  When  a 
man  goes  to  law  he  is  very  apt  to  make  choice 
of  a  lawyer  in  whom  he  has  confidence.  Well, 
the  gentleman  says,  that  the  citizens  of  this 
commonwealth  shall  not  have  this  privilege.  I 
maintain  that  it  is  their  privilege  to  bring  their 
suits  wherever  they  think  proper. 

I  submit  that  this  is  not  the  proper  place  to 
determine  the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts.  It  is  a 
matter  for  legislative  enactment,  and  should 
not  be  made  a  constitutional  provision. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  It  is  necessary  to  put  my- 
self right,  for  I  do  not  wish  to  be  misunderstood 
in  regard  to  this  matter.  1  did  not  start  until  I 
kne-K^  I  was  right,  ai\d  I  do  not  intend  to  be  put 
wrong. 

This  is  a  special  court  established  for  a 
special  purpose;  therefore  the  gentleman's  simile 
is  not  applicable  because  the  others  are  general. 
I  am  the  last  man  in  the  house,  to  appeal  to 

Prejudice  that  exists  against  Louisville,  if  any 
oes  exist,  but  it  is  rather  extraordinary  to  hear 
gentlemen  so  frequently  referring  to  a  supposed 
prejudice,  if  none  does'exist.  i 

the  PRESIDENT.  I  did  not  say  there  was  a 
prejudice,  but  that  the  gentleman  'might  array 
prejudice  against  Louisville. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  gentleman  is  mistaken 
if  he  supposes  that  I  asserted  that  any  prejudice 
exists. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  am  glad  to  hear  it.  So 
far  from  arraying  prejudice  against  Louisville  I 
would  remove  any  prejudice  if  it  were  in  my 
power.  It  is  not  on  account  of  any  prejudice 
against  the  place,  but  simply  because  it  is  a 
city  to  which  a  large  majority  of  the  citizens  of 
the  state  are  compelled  to  go  on  business.  And 
the  question  is — and  it  is  a  plain  and  simple 
one — whether  they  shall  be  sued  when  they  go 
there  on  business,  and  be  compelled  to  carrv 
their  witnesses  there,  and  in  some  cases  there 
are  fifty  or  a  hundred  witnesses.  It  is  a  subject 
in  which  every  body  is  interested. 
55 


In   answer  to  the    younger  gentleman   from 
Louisville,  I  will  sav  t"bere  is  not  a  solitary  case 
that  was  quoted  by  Jiim,  in  which  the  common 
law  courts  have  not  jurisdiction.     The  gentle- 
n)an  suppo.ses  the  case  of  a  man  who  borrows  a 
thousand  dollars  in  London,  and  he  thinks  that 
the  chancery  court  should  be  permitted  to  issue 
I  process  against  the  debtor  in  such  case.    But  the 
I  common  law  courts  have  equal  jurisdiction  over 
the  matter,  and  when  you  get. jurisdiction,  then 
I  your  bill  of  disco  very  fallows  of  course;  your  writ 
i  of  ne  exeat  regno — by  the  way,  the  word'does  not 
j  sound   well  in  a  republic.     All  writs   in   that 
;  court  follow  the  writs  of  common  law,  and  I 
tell  the  gentleman  that  there  is  not  a  case  that 
was  stated  by  him,  that  cannot  be  answered.    I 
have  no  doubt  it  is  our  duty  to  adopt  the  amend- 
ment. 

The  question  being  put,  it  was  upon  a  divi- 
sion, rejected,  ayes  ^  noes  28.  So  the  amend- 
ment was  rejected. 

The  committee  rose  and  reported  the  amend- 
ment. 

The  question  then  being  upon  concurrence  in 
the  amendment  reported  by  the  committee. 
It  was  concurred  in 

Mr.  KELLEY.  I  wish  to  amend  the  report 
by  inserting  an  amendment  to  provide  that  the 
Louisville  chancerv  court  shall  exist  under  the 
constitution  like  all  other  chancery  courts  in 
this  commonwealth. 

I  am  not  quite  satisfied  with  this  part  of  the 
report.  Every  lawyer  in  this  house  knows  very 
well  that  it  has  been  the  custom  of  the  chancery- 
courts  in  this  country,  as  Well  as  in  every  other, 
to  encroach  upon  the  business  of  the  common 
law  courts.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  I  move 
this  amendment. 

The  PRESIDENT.  There  is  no  other  chan- 
cery court  iu  this  commonwealth. 

Mr.  KELLY.  There  is  a  chancery  side  of 
every  court. 

Mr.  TURNER.  This  constitution  does  not 
attempt  to  fix  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  at  all. 
It  leaves  it  just  as  it  is,  subject  to  be  increased  or 
diminished  by  the  legislature.  And  every  other 
court  in  the  commonwealth  is  just  in  that  situa- 
tion. It  is  just  where  it  ought  to  be  in  my  opin- 
ion. I  think  the  committee  have  discharged 
[their  duty  exceedingly  well;  they  could  not 
;  place  it  upon  a  better  footing. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  So  far  as  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  is  concerned,  it  may  be  very  ex- 
plicit, and  aU  very  well  suited  to  his  taste.  I 
am  not  prepared  to  say  it  is  to  mine.  I  do  not 
understand  it  well  enough.  So  far  as  I  do  un- 
derstand it,  I  am  not  pleased  with  it;  and  I 
would  prefer  to  understand  it,  because  I  should 
regret,  exceedingly,  to  be  obliged  to  make  an 
assault  upon  it,  as  at  present  advised.  Before 
its  final  passage,  I  shall  ask  to  be  heard  upon 
its  merits.  I  should  be  glad  to  have  it  passed 
over  for  the  present. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  NOVEMBER  1 0th,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rcv.  Mr.  Noetox. 
Mr.  DIXON,  at  his  request  was  discharged 
from  further  (service  on  the  special   committee 


434 


raised  on  Mr.  Gaither's  motion  to  consider  and 
report  on  the  powers  of  tlie  general  and  state 
government. 

COMMITTEE  OF  REVISION. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  following  as 
the  select  committee  of  ten,  appointed  under  the 
resolution  offered  yesterday,  by  Mr.  McHenry,  to 
arrange  and  revise  the  several  articles  of  the 
constitution  that  n^ay  be  adopted,  viz  :  Messrs. 
McHenry,  Moore,  W.  C.  Marshall,  Garrard, 
Machen,  Bowling,  Garfielde,  Williams,  Lisle, 
and  Stone. 

LEAVE  OF  ABSEXCE. 

On  motion, leave  of  absence  was  granted  to  Mr. 
Edwards,  until  Wednesday  next,  to  Mr.  Robin- 
son, until  Tuesday,  to  Mr.  T.J.  Hood,  for  a  few 
days,  and  to  Mr.  Wheeler,  for  a  few  days. 

REPORT  FROM  A  COMMITTEE. 

Mr.  DIXON  from  the  committee  on  the  execu- 
tive for  the  state  at  large,  made  the  following  re- 
port, which  on  his  motion  was  referred  to  the 
committee  of  the  Whole  and  ordered  to  be  print- 
ed. 

ARTICLE  — 

Concerning  the  executive  department. 

Sec.  1.  The  supreme  executive  power  of  the 
commonwealth,  shall  be  vested  in  a  chief  mag- 
istrate, who  shall  be  styled  the  governor  of  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 

Sec.  2.  The  governor  shall  be  elected  for  the 
term  of  four  years,  by  the  citizens  entitled  to 
suffrage,  at  the  time  and  places  where  they  shall 
respectively  vote  for  representatives.  The  per- 
son having  the  highest  number  of  votes  shall  be 
governor  ;  but  if  two  or  more  shall  be  equal  and 
highest  in  Votes,  the  election  shall  be  determined 
by  lot,  in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  may 
direct. 

Sec.  3.  The  governor  shall  be  ineligible  for 
the  succeeding  four  years  after  the  expiration  of 
the  term  for  Which  he  shall  have  been  elected. 

Sec.  4.  He  shall  be  at  least  thirty-five  years  of 
age,  and  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  and  have 
been  an  inhabitant  of  this  state  at  least  six  years 
next  preceding  his  election. 

Sec.  5.  He  sliall  commence  the  execution  of 
his  office  on  the  fourth  Tuesday  succeeding  the 
day  of  the  commencement  of  the  general  elec- 
tion on  which  he  shall  be  chosen,  and  shall  con- 
tinue in  the  execution  thereof  until  the  end  of 
four  weeks  next  succeeding  the  election  of  his 
successor,  and  until  his  successor  shall  have  ta- 
ken the  oaths,  or  affirmations,  prescribed  by  this 
constitution. 

Sec.  6.  No  member  of  congress,  or  person 
holding  any  office  under  the  United  States,  nor 
minister  of  any  religious  society,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  office  of  governor. 

Sec.  7.  The  governor  shall,  at  stated  times, 
receive  for  his  services  a  compensation.  Which 
shall  neither  be  increased  nor  diminished  dur- 
ing the  terra  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elec- 
ted. 

Sec.  8.  He  shall  be  commander-in-chief  of  the 
army  and  navy  of  this  commonwealth,  and  of 
the  militia,  except  when  they  shall  be  called  into 
tije  service  of  the  United  States;  but  he  shall  not 
oemmand  personally  in  the  field,  unless  he  shall 


be  advised  so  to  do  by  a  resolution  of  the  gene- 
ral assembiv. 

Sec.  9.  The  governor  shall  have  power  to  fill 
vacancies  that  may  happen  by  death,  resignation, 
or  otherwise,  by  granting  commissions,  which 
shall  expire  when  such  vacancies  have  been 
filled  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  consti- 
tution. 

Sec.  10.  He  shall  have  power  to  remit  fines 
and  forfeitures,  grant  repnves  and  pardons,  ex- 
cept in  cases  of  impeachment.  In  cases  of  trea- 
son, he  shall  have  power  to  grant  reprieves  un- 
til the  end  of  the  next  session  of  the  general  as- 
sembly, in  which  the  power  of  pardoning  shall 
be  vested.  That  whenever  the  governor  shall 
remit  a  fine  or  forfeiture,  or  grant  a  reprieve  or 
pardon,  he  shall  enter  his  reasons  for  doing  so 
on  the  records  of  the  secretary  of  state,  in  a  sep- 
arate book;  and  on  the  requisition  of  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly,  the  same  shall 
be  laid  before  them,  and  published  if  they  deem 
proper. 

Sec.  11.  He  may  require  information  in  wri- 
ting, from  the  officers  in  the  executive  depart- 
ment, upon  any  subject  relating  to  the  duties  of 
their  respective  offices. 

Sec.  12.  He  shall,  from  time  to  time,  give  to 
the  general  assembly,  informatioion  of  the  state 
of  the  commonwearth,  and  recommend  to  their 
consideration  sucli  measures  as  he  may  deem  ex- 
pedient. 

Sec.  13.  He  may,  on  extraordinary  occasions, 
convene  the  general  assembly  at  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment, or  ata  different  place,  if  that  should  have 
become,  since  their  last  adjouniment,  dangerous 
from  an  enemy,  or  from  contagious  disorders;  and 
in  case  of  disagreement  between  the  two  houses, 
with  respect  to  the  time  of  adjournment,  adjourn 
them  to  such  time  as  he  shall  think  proper,  not 
exceeding  four  months. 

Sec.  14.  He  shall  take  care  that  the  laws  be 
faithfully  executed. 

Sec.  15.  A  lieutenant  governor  shall  be  chosen 
at  every  election  for  a  governor,  in  the  same 
manner,  continue  in  office  for  the  same  time,  and 
possess  the  same  qualifications.  In  voting  for 
governor  and  lieutenant  governor,  the  electors 
shall  distinguish  whom  they  vote  for  as  govern- 
or, and  whom  as  lieutenant  governor. 

Sec.  16.  He  shall,  by  virtue  of  his  office,  be 
speaker  of  the  senate,  have  a  right  when  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  to  debate  and  vote  on  all 
subjects,  and  when  the  senate  are  equally  divi- 
ded, to  give  the  casting  vote. 

Sec.  11.   Whenever    the     office    of   governor 
shall  become  vacant,  the  lieutenant    governor 
shall  discharge  the  duties  of  governor  until  his 
successor  shall  have  been   duly  elected ;  but  no 
new  election  shall  take  place  to  fill  such  vacan- 
cy, unless  the  same  shall  have  occurred  before      »  : 
the  first  two  years  of  the  time  shall  have  expir-     ■ 
ed  for  which  the  governor  Was  elected  ;  and  if,     "] 
during  the  time  the  lieutenant  governor  .shall 
fill  such  vacancy,  he  shall   be   impeached,  re- 
moved from  office,  refuse  to  qualify,  resign,  die, 
or  be  absent  from  the  state,  the  s]>t.ak«<r   of  the 
eenat*  shall,  in  like   manner,    administer  the 
government  for  the  balance  of  tlie  term. 

Sec.  18.  Whenever  the  government  .shall  be 
administered  by  tJie  lieutenant  governor,  or  he 
shall  be  unable  to  attend  as  speaker  of  the  sen- 


435 


ate,  the   seanalora  shall  elect  one  of  their  ovrn 
members  as  speaker  for  the  occasion. 

Sec.  19.  The  lieutenant  governor,  -nrhile  he 
acts  as  speaker  of  the  senate,  shall  receive  for 
hisser\'ices,  the  same  compensation  which  shall, 
for  the  same  period,  be  allowed  to  the  speaker 
of  the  house  of  representatives,  and  no  more;  and 
during  the  time  he  administers  the  government, 
as  governor,  shall  receive  the  same  compensa- 
tion which  the  governor  would  have  received, 
and  been  entitled  to,  had  he  been  employed  iu 
the  duties  of  his  6ftioe. 

Sec.  20.  The  speaker  ;)ro  tempore  of  the  senate, 
during  the  time  he  administers  the  government, 
shall  receive,  in  like  manner,  the  same  compen- 
tion  which  the  governor  would  have  received 
had  he  been  employed  in  the  duties  of  his  office. 

Sec.  21.  If  the  lieutenant  governor  shall  be 
called  upon  to  administer  the  government,  and 
shall,  while  in  such  administration,  resign,  die, 
or  be  absent  from  the  state  during  the  recess 
of  the  general  assembly,  it  shall  be  the  du- 
ty of  the  secretary  for  the  time  being,  to  convene 
tte  senate  for  the  purpose  of  choosing  a  speaker. 

Sec.  22.  The  governor  shall  nominate,  and,  by 
and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate, 
appoint  a  secretary  of  state,  who  shall  be  com- 
missioned during  the  term  for  which  the  gover- 
nor shall  have  been  elected,  if  he  shall  so  long 
behave  himself  well.  He  shall  keep  a  fair  regis- 
ter, and  attest  all  the  official  acts  of  the  governor, 
and  shall,  when  required,  lay  the  same,  and  all 
papers,  minutes  and  vouchers  relative  thereto, 
Detore  either  house  of  the  general  assembly;  and 
shall  perform  such  other  duties  as  may  be  en- 
joined on  him  by  law. 

Sec.  23.  Every  bill  which  shall  have  passed 
both  houses  shall  be  presented  to  the  governor. 
If  he  approve,  he  shall  sign  it;  but  if  not,  he 
shall  return  it  with  his  objections  to  the  house 
in  which  it  shall  have  originated,  who  shall  en- 
ter the  objections  at  large  upon  their  journal, 
and  proceed  to  reconsider  it.  If,  after  such  re- 
consideration, a  majority  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  that  house  shall  agree  to  pass  the  bill, 
it  shall  be  sent  with  the  objections  to  the  other 
house,  by  which  it  shall  likewise  be  reconsider- 
ed, and  if  approved  by  a  majority  of  all  the 
members  elected  to  that  house,  it  shall  be  a  law ; 
but  in  such  cases,  the  votes  of  both  houses  shall 
be  determined  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  the  names 
of  the  members  voting  for  and  against  the  bill 
shall  be  entered  on  the  journals  of  each  house 
respectively.  If  any  bill  shall  not  be  returned 
by  the  governor,  within  ten  days  (Sundays  ex- 
cepted,) after  it  shall  have  been  presented  to 
him,  it  shall  be  a  law,  in  like  manner  as  if  he 
bad  signed  it,  unless  the  general  assembly,  by 
their  adjournment,  prevent  its  return;  in  whicn 
case  it  shall  be  a  law,  unless  .sent  back  within 
three  days  after  their  next  meeting. 

Sec.  24.  Every  order,  resolution,  or  vote,  to 
which  the  concurrence  of  both  houses  may  be 
necessary,  except  on  a  question  of  adjournment, 
shall  be  presented  to  the  governor,  and  before  it 
shall  take  efltect,  be  approved  by  him;  or  being 
disapproved,  shall  be  re-passed  byamajority  of  all 
the  members  elected  to  Doth  houses,  according 
to  the  rules  and  limitations  prescribed  in  case 
of  a  bill. 
Sec.  25.  Contested  elections  for  gorenior  and 


lieutenant  governor  shall  be  determined  bv  both 
houses  of  the  general  assembly,  according  to 
such  regulations  as  may  be  established  by  law. 

Sec.  26.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  a 
term  not  exceeding  two  years,  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  treasurer,  auditor  of  public  accounts, 
register  of  the  land  office,  and  such  other  officers 
of  a  public  nature  as  may  become  necessaiy, 
and  shall  prescribe  their  duties  and  responsibili- 
ties, and,  until  otherwise  directed  by  law,  such, 
officers  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters 
of  this  commonwealth. 

Sec.  27.  A  board  of  commisssioners  shall  be 
appointed  every  two  years  by  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  one  from  each  appellate  dis- 
trict, whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  make  an  examina- 
tion every  two  years,  of  the  accounts  of  the  re- 
ceiving and  disbursing  officers  of  the  state  at 
large,  and  report  to  the  legislature. 

COURTS    OF   JUSTICE. 

Mr.  C.  A.  TVaCKLIFFE,  from  the  jointcommit- 
tees  on  the  court  of  appeals,  circuit  courts,  and 
county  courts,  to  whom  were  re-committed  there- 
ports  of  the  committees  on  the  court  of  appeals, 
circuit  courts,  and  county  courts,  reported  the 
following  amendment  as  a  substitute  for  the 
whole  of  said  reports,  which,  on  his  motion,  was 
ordered  to  be  printed,  and  the  consideration 
thereof  postponed  to  Tuesday  next: 

ARTICLE  — . 
Concerning  the  judicial  department. 

Sec.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  common- 
wealth, both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equity, 
shall  be  vested  in  one  supreme  court,  (which 
shall  be  stvled  the  court  of  appeals,)  the  courts 
established  by  this  constitution,  and  in  such  in- 
ferior courts  as  the  general  assembly  may,  from 
time  to  time,  erect  and  establish. 

Sec.  2.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have  appel- 
late jurisdiction  only,  wuich  shall  be  co-exten- 
sive with  the  state,  under  such  restrictions  and 
regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  constitution, 
as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed  by 
law. 

Sec.  3.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eight 
years,  from  and  after  their  election,  and  until 
their  successors  shall  be  duly  qualified,  subject 
to  the  conditions  hereinafter  prescribed;  but  for 
any  reasonable  cause,  the  governor  shall  remove 
any  of  them  on  the  address  of  two  thirds  of  each 
house  of  the  general  assembly:  Provided,  how- 
ever, That  the  cause  or  causes  for  which  such 
removal  may  be  required,  shall  be  stated  at 
length  in  such  address,  and  on  the  journal  of 
each  house.  They  shall,  at  stated  times,  receive 
for  their  services  an  adequate  compensation,  to 
be  fixed  by  law,  which  shall  not  be  diminished 
during  the  time  for  which  they  shall  have  been 
elected. 

Sec  4.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  consist  of 
four  judges,  any  three  ot  whom  may  constitute 
a  court  for  the  transaction  of  business:  Provided, 
That  whenever  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  said 
court,  from  any  cause,  the  general  assembly 
.shall  have  the  power  to  reduce  the  number  of 
judges  and  districts,  but  iu  no  event  shall  there 
oe  less  than  three  judges  and  districts.  Incase 
a  change  in  the  number  of  the  judges  of  the 


436 


court  of  appeals  shall  be  made,  the  term  of  office 
and  number  of  districts  shall  be  so  changed  as 
to  preserve  the  principle  of  electing  one  judge 
every  two  years.  The  judges  shall,  by  virtue  of 
their  offices,  be  conservators  of  the  peace  through- 
out tlie  state.  The  style  of  all  process  shall  be, 
"The  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky."  All  pros- 
ecutions shall  be  carried  on  in  the  name  and  by 
the  authority  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky, and  conclude  "against  the  peace  and  dig- 
nity of  the  same." 

Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly,  at  its  first  ses- 
sion after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  shall 
divide  the  state,  by  counties,  into  four  districts, 
as  nearly  equal  in  voting  population,  and  with 
as  convenient  limits  as  may  be,  in  each  of  which 
the  qualified  voters  shall  elect  one  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals. 

Sec.  6.  The  judges  first  elected  shall  serve  as 
follows,  to-wit:  one  shall  serve  two:  one  four; 
one  six,  and  one  eight  years.  The  judges,  at  the 
first  term  of  the  court  succeeding  their  election, 
shall  determine,  by  lot,  the  length  of  time  which 
each  one  shall  serve;  and  at  the  expiration  of 
the  service  of  each,  an  election  in  the  proper 
district  shall  take  place  to  fill  the  vacancy.  The 
judge  having  the  shortest  time  to  serve  shall  be 
styled  the  Chief  Justice  of  Kentucky. 

Sec.  7.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  said  court, 
the  governor  shall  issue  a  writ  of  election  to  fill 
such  vacancy,  for  the  residue  of  the  terra,  and 
another  judge  shall  be  elected  by  that  district, 
to  serve  until  the  expiration  of  the  time  for  which 
the  judge  was  elected,  whose  death,  resignation, 
removal,  or  other  cause,  produced  such  vacancy. 

Sec.  8.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  as  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals  who  is  not  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States,  a  resident  of  the  district  for 
which  he  may  be  a  candidate,  two  years  next 
preceding  his  election,  at  least  thirty  years  of 
age,  and  who  has  not  been  a  practicing  lawyer 
eight  years,  or  whose  service  upon  the  bench  of 
any  court  of  record,  when  added  to  the  time  he 
may  have  practiced  law,  shall  be  equal  to  eight 
years. 

Sec.  9.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  hold  its 
sessions  at  the  seat  of  government,  unless  other- 
wise directed  by  law,  but  the  general  assembly 
may,  from  time  to  time,  direct  that  said  court 
shall  hold  sessions  in  any  one  or  more  of  said 
districts. 

Sec.  10.  The  first  election  of  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals  shall  take  place  on  the  second 
Monday  in  May,  1851,  and  every  two  years 
thereafter,  in  the  district  in  which  a  vacancy 
may  occur,  by  expiration  of  the  term  of  office; 
and  the  judges  of  the  said  court  shall  be  com- 
missioned by  the  governor. 

Sec.  11.  There  shall  be  elected,  by  the  quali- 
fied voters  of  thi.s  state,  a  clerk  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  who  shall  hold  his  office  for  the  term  of 
eight  years,  from  and  after  his  election,  and  who 
may  be  removed  by  the  courtof  appeals  for  good 
cause,  upon  information  by  the  attorney  general; 
and  in  case  the  general  assembly  shall  provide 
for  holding  the  court  of  appeals  in  any  one  or 
more  of  said  districts,  they  shall  also  provide 
for  the  election  of  a  clerk  by  the  qualified  vo- 
ters of  such  district,  who  shall  hold  his  office 
for  ^ight  years,  possess  the  same  qualifications, 


and  besubjfct  to  removal  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals. 

Sec.  12.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  of- 
fice of  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  unless  he 
be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  a  resident  of 
the  state  tAvo  years  next  preceding  his  election, 
of  the  age  of  twenty  one  years,  and  have  a  cer- 
tificate from  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or 
a  judge  of  the  circuit  court,  that  he  has  been 
examined  by  their  clerk,  under  the  supervision 
of  the  court  giving  said  certificate,  and  that  he 
is  qualified  for  the  office  for  which  he  is  a  can- 
didate. 

Sec.  13.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the  office  of 
clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals,  the  governor  shall 
issue  a  writ  of  election,  and  the  qualified  voters 
of  the  State,  or  the  district  in  which  the  vacan- 
cy mav  occur,  shall  elect  a  clerk  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  to  serve  until  the  end  of  the  term  for 
which  such  clerk  was  elected:  Provided,  That 
when  a  vacancy  may  occur  from  any  cause,  or 
the  clerk  shall  be  under  charges  upon  informa- 
tion, the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  shall 
have  power  to  appointa  clerk ;?ro  tern,  to  perform 
the  duties  of  clerk  until  such  vacancy  shall  be 
filled,  or  the  clerk  acquitted. 

Sec.  14.  The  general  assembly  shall  direct  by 
law  the  mode  and  manner  of  conducting  and  ma- 
king due  returns,  to  the  secretary  of  state,  of  all 
elections  of  the  judges  and  clerk  or  clerks  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  and  of  determining  contested 
elections  of  any  of  these  officers. 


Concerning  Circuit  Courts. 

Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
in  this  commonwealth,  a  circuit  court. 

Sec.  2.  The  jurisdiction  of  said  courts  shall 
be,  and  remain  as  now  established,  hereby  giv- 
ing to  the  general  assembly  the  power  to  change 
or  alter  it. 

Sec.  3.  The  right  to  take  an  appeal,  or  sue 
out  a  writ  of  error  to  the  court  of  appeals,  is 
hereby  given  in  the  same  manner,  and  to  the 
same  extent,  as  it  now  exists,  giving  to  the  gen- 
eral assembly  the  power  to  change,  alter,  or  mod- 
ify, said  right. 

Sec.  4.  At  the  first  session  of  the  general  as- 
sembly after  this  constitution  shall  go  into  ef- 
fect, they  shall  divide  the  state  into  twelve  ju- 
dicial districts,  having  due  regard  to  business, 
territory,  and  population :  Provided,  That  no 
county  shall  be  divided. 

Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly  shall,  at  the 
same  time  that  the  judicial  districts  are  laid  off, 
direct  elections  to  be  held  in  each  district,  to 
elect  a  judge  for  said  district,  and  shall  prescribe 
how,  and  in  what  manner,  the  elections  shall  be 
held  and  conducted,  and  how  the  governor  shall 
be  notified  of  the  result  of  the  election,  and  who 
has  been  chosen  :  Provided,  That  sucli  election 
shall  be  held  at  a  different  time  from  that  at 
which  elections  areholden  for  governor,  lieuten- 
ant governor,  and  members  of  the  general  as- 
sembly. 

Sec.  6.  All  persons  qualified  to  vote  for  mem- 
bers of  the  general  assembly,  in  each  district, 
shall  have  the  right  to  vote  for  judges. 

Sec.  7.  No  person. shall  be  eligible  as  judge  of  the 
circuit  court  who  is  not  a  citizen  of  the  United 


437 


States,  a  resident  of  the  .ii^irict  lor  svhiJi  Imj 
may  be  a  candidate  two  years  next  preceding  his 
election,  at  least  thirty  years  of  age,  and  who 
has  not  been  a  practicing"  lawyer  eight  years,  or 
whose  service  upon  the  bench  of  any  court  of 
record,  when  added  to  the  time  he  may  have 
practiced  law,  shall  be  equal  to  eight  years. 

Sec.  8.  The  term  of  office  of  me  judges  of 
the  circuit  court  shall  bo  six  years  from  the  day 
of  the  election.  Thev  shall  be  commissioned 
by  the  governor,  anJ  continue  in  office  until 
their  successors  be  qualified.  The  removal  of  a 
judge  from  his  district  shall  vacate  his  office, 
and  when  a  vacancy  may  happen  from  anv 
cause,  it  shall  be  filled  as  hereinafter  prescribepi. 

Sec.  9.  The  general  assemblv.  if  they  deem  it 
necessary,  may  establish  one  district  every  four 
years;  but  the  judicial  districts  shall  not  exceed 
sixteen,  until  after  the  population  of  this  state 
shall  exceed  one  million  five  hundred  thousand. 

Sec.  10.  The  judges  of  tlie  circuit  courts  shall, 
at  stated  times,  receive  for  their  services,  an  ad- 
equate compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  law,  which 
shall  not  be  diminished  during  the  time  for 
which  they  shall  have  been  elected. 

Sec.  11.  The  judges  of  the  circuit  court  shall 
be  removed  from  office  by  a  resolution  of  the 
general  as-sembly,  passed  l>y  two-thirds  of  each 
house.  The  cause  or  causes  for  such  removal 
shall  be  entered  at  large  on  the  journal  of  each 
house. 

Sec.  12.  The  governor  shall  have  no  power  to 
remit  the  fees  of  the  clerk,  sheriff,  or  common- 
wealth's attorney,  in  penal  or  criminal  cases. 

Sec.  13.  If  a  vaeancyshall  occurin  theofficeof 
judge  of  the  circuit  court,  the  governor  shall  is- 
sue a  writ  of  election  to  fillsucli  vacancy,  for  the 
residue  of  the  term,  and  another  judge  shall  be 
elected  by  that  district,  to  serve  until  the  expi- 
ration of  the  time  for  which  the  judge  was 
elected,  whose  death  or  other  cause  produced 
such  vacancy:  Provided,  That  if  the  unexpired 
term  be  less  than  one  year,  the  governor  shall 
appoint  a  judge  to  fill  such  vacancy. 

Sec.  14.  The  general  assembfy  shall  not 
change  the  venue  in  any  criminal  or  penal  pros- 
ecution; but  they  shall  provide,  by  general 
laws,  the  mode  and  manner  in  which  changes  of 
venue  in  such  cases  may  be  had. 

Sec.  15.  In  all  trials  for  treason  or  felony,  the 
commonwealth  shall  be  entitled  to  peremptory 
challenges  of  jurors,  equal  to  one  fourth  the 
number  allowed  the  accused. 

AKTICLE  — . 

Concerning  Countij  Courts. 

Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to 
consist  of  a  presiding  judge  and  two  associate 
judges,  any  two  of  whom  shall  constitute  a  court 
for  the  transaction  of  business. 

Sec.  2.  The  judges  of  the  county  court  shall 
be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  in  each  coun- 
ty, for  the  term  of  four  years,  and  shall  continue 
in  office  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly  qual- 
ified; and  shall  receive  such  compensation  for 
their  services  as  may  be  provided  by  law. 

Sec.  3.  At  the  first  election  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  the  three  judges  shall  be 
elected  at  the  same  time,  but  the  associate  judg- 


es, first  elected,  slioll  hold  their  offices  for  only 
two  years,  so  that,  thereafter,  the  election  of  the 
presiding  judge,  and  that  of  the  associate  judg- 
es, will  not  occur  at  the  same  time. 

Sec.  4.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  office 
of  presiding  or  associate  judge  of  the  county 
court  unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
over  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  of 
the  county  in  which  he  shall  be  chosen,  one 
year  next  preceding  the  election. 

Sec.  5.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  county  court 
shall  be  regulated  by  law;  and,  until  changed, 
shall  be  the  same  now  vested  in  the  county 
courts  of  this  state. 

!  Sec.  6.  The  several  counties  in  this  state  shall 
be  laid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size,  as 
the  general  as.sembly  may,  from  time  to  time, 
direct.  Two  justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elect- 
ed in  each  district,  by  the  qualified  voters  there- 
in, for  the  term  of  four  years,  each,  whose  juris- 
diction shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  county. 
No  person  shall  be  eligible  as  a  justice  of  the 
peace,  unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident 
of  the  district  in  which  he  may  be  a  candidate 
six  months  next  preceding  his  election. 

Sec.  7.  Judges  of  the  county  court,  and  jus- 
tices of  the  peace,  shall  be  conservators'  of  the 
peace.  They  shall  be  commissioned  by  the  gov- 
ernor. County  and  district  officers  shall  vacate 
their  offices  bv  removal  from  the  district  or 
county  in  which  they  shall  be  appointed.  The 
legislature  shall  provide,  by  law,  the  mode  and 
manner  of  conducting  and  making  due  returns 
of  all  elections  of  judges  of  the  county  court, 
and  justices  of  the  peace,  and  for  determining 
contested  elections,  and  provide  the  mode  of  fill- 
ing vacancies  in  these  offices. 

Sec.  8.  Judges  of  the  county  courts,  and  jus- 
tices of  the  peace,  shall  be  subject  to  indictment 

j  or  presentment  for  malfeasance  or  misfeasance  in 

i  office,  in  such  mode  as  may   be  prescribed  by 

I  law,  subject  to  appeal  to  the  court  of  appeals ; 

I  and,  upon  conviction,  their  offices  shall  become 

I  vacant. 

I     8ec.  9.  The  general   assembly    may  provide 

i  by  law  that  the  justices  of  the  peace  m  each 
county  shall  sit  at  the  court  of  claims,  and  as- 

!  sist  in  laying  the  county  levy  and  making  ap- 

j  propriations  only. 

I  LEGISLATIVE   DEPAETMEVT. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  CLARKE  the  conven- 
tion resolved  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole, 
Mr.  MERIWETHER  in  the  chair,  and  proceed- 
ed to  the  consideration  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  legislative  department. 

The  report  was  read  at  length,  and  it  was  af- 
terwards taken  up  by  sections. 

The  first  section  was  read  and  adopted  with- 
out amendment,  as  follows : 

Sec.  1.  The  legislative  power  shall  be  vested 
in  a  house  of  representatives  and  senate,  which 
together  shall  be  styled  the  general  assembly  of 
the  commonwealth^of  Kentucky. 

The  second  section  was  read  as  follows: 

Sec.  2.  The  members  of  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives .shall  continue  in  service  for  the  term 
of  two  years  from  the  day  of  the  general  elec- 
tion, and  no  longer. 

Mr.  BARLOW,  to  test  the  sense  of  the  com- 


43S 


uiittee,  moved  to  strike  out  the  word  "two,"  aud 
insert  "three,"  as  the  number  of  years  during 
which  the  liouse  of  representatives  shall  contin- 
ue in  service. 

The  amendment  was  not  agreed  to,  and  the 
section  was  adopted  without  amendment. 

The  third  section  was  read  as  follows : 

Sec.  3.  Representatives  shall  be  chosen  on  the 
first  Monday  in  August,  in  every  se<;ond  year; 
and  the  mode  of  holding  the  elections  shall  be 
regulated  by  law. 

Mr.  LISLE  moved  to  strike  out  "Monday" 
and  insert  "Thursday." 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  hope  the  amendment  will  be 
adopted.  I  presume  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to 
say  more  than  a  single  word  in  favor  of  it;  and 
that  is  that  while  elections  are  held  on  Monday 
it  occasions  the  desecration  of  the  Sabbath, 
which  in  a  christian  land  we  should  endeavor  to 
avoid. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  gentleman  has,  perhaps, 
overlooked  the  fact  that  the  mode  of  conducting 
our  elections  is  to  undergo  some  change.  His  re- 
marks may  formerly  have  had  some  applicability, 
but  it  seems  to  have  been  determined  that  this 
convention  will  divide  the  counties  into  such 
districts  that  every  man  may,  without  inconven- 
ience, ^o  to  the  voting  place  in  his  precinct  on 
Monday,  and  return  to  his  home  after  exercising 
his  franchise  as  a  freeman. 

Mr.  ROOT.  Every  one  knows  that  an  elec- 
tion more  or  less  agitates  the  public  mind,  and 
it  is  impossible  to  hold  the  election  on  Monday 
without  occasioning  the  violation  of  the  Sal)- 
bath.  On  that  day  there  will  be  party  arrange- 
ments made,  caucus  consultations  held,  and  a 
marshaling  of  forces  for  the  contest  on  the  suc- 
ceeding day.  But  hold  the  election  in  the  mid- 
dle of  the  week,  and  the  desecration  of  the  Sab- 
bath may  be  avoided.  I  think  it  ought  to  be 
done,  and  that  we,  as  a  christian  people,  should 
make  a  constitutional  provision  that  may  have 
a  tendency  to  avoid  the  desecration  of  the  Sab- 
bath, by  preparations  for  a  political  contest. 

Mr.  Clarke.  Monday  IS  the  day  on  which 
elections  have  been  held  in  this  cominonwealtli 
for  the  last  fifty  years;  and  I  do  not  remember 
to  have  heard  one  word  during  my  canvass  for  a 
seat  in  this  convention,  in  favor  of  a  change.  I 
heard  no  complaints  that  elections  on  Monday 
necessarily  involve  a  violation  of  the  Sabbath. 
I  have  had  but  little  political  experience,  but  I 
have  had  enough  to  satisfy  me,  that  before  an 
election  there  will  be  consultations,  and  a  mar- 
shaling of  forces,  aud  whether  the  Sabbath  oc- 
curs the  day  before,  or  three  days  before  the 
election,  candidates  and  their  friends,  if  they 
think  proper,  will  desecrate  the  Sabbath  day, 
I  do  not  see  that  much  is  to  be  gained  by  the 
change  if  the  amendment  should  prevail.  But 
sir,  we  should  not  forget  that  the  people  in  this 
state  have  been  accustomed  to  vote  on  Monday 
for  the  last  fifty  years.  They  have  been  reared 
to  that  custom,  aud  I  have  heard  no  complaints 
of  it,  to  call  for  a  change.  So  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned, however,  I  have  no*  choice  on  the  sub- 
ject. 

Mr.  LISLE.  I  concur  fully  in  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  from  Campbell.  I  do  not  say 
that  the  day  on  which  the  elections  should  be 
held  was  made  a  subject  matter  of  discussion  in 


the  late  canvass;  but,  sir,  I  will  say  that  th« 
course  which  has  been  generally  pursued  on  the 
day  befoi'e  an  election  is  very  much  to  be  depre- 
cated; and  there  will  be  great  propriety  in  mak- 
ing a  change.  If  any  steps  can  be  taken  to  avoid 
the  desecration  of  the  Sabbath  at  such  times,  I 
hope  every  gentleman  will  agree  with  me  that  it 
ought  to  be  done.  The  counties  may  be  divi- 
ded into  election  districts,  as  has  been  suggested, 
but  still  the  Sabbath  will  be  desecrated;  and  I 
think  there  can  be  no  serious  objection  to  the 
change  which  I  propose. 

Mr.  APPERSOX.  I  am  decidedly  in  favor 
of  this  amendment,  and  it  is  not  the  first  time 
that  I  have  reflected  upon  the  subject  and  given 
expression  to  my  opinions.  It  is  not  material 
what  day  you  may  fix,  but  as  Thursday  is  in 
the  middle  of  the  week,  it  seems  to  be  more 
likely  to  avoid  a  desecration  of  the  sabbath. 
Now  although  I  have  no  instructions  on  this 
subject,  I  know  that  in  my  county,  and  in  the 
county  of  Simpson,  there  are  very  many  good 
people  who  pray  that  it  may  be  changed  to  some 
other  day  than  Monday.  In  many  of  the  states 
of  this  union  other  days  are  fixed.  In  Virginia 
and  Tennessee  I  believe  Thursday  is  the  day 
fixed;  in  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  the  elections 
are  held  on  Tuesday.  But  I  prefer  Thursday  to 
any  other  day. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  amend- 
ment, sir,  and  I  am  somewliat  suprised  that  any 
gentleman  should  object  to  it.  It  has  been  our 
custom  to  hold  our  elections  for  three  days — on 
Monday,  Tuesday,  and  Wednesday — but,  sir,  it 
is  understood  that  for  the  future,  the  elections 
are  to  be  limited  to  one  day.  Which  of  the 
three  days  mav  be  determined  upon  can  be  a 
matter  of  but  little  importance,  and  therefore  I 
presume  that  day  will  be  fixed  that  will  be  the 
least  objectionable.  I  have  merely  risen  at  this 
time  to  suggest  to  the  mover  of  this  amendment 
to  select  Wednesday  instead  of  Thursday,  Wed- 
nesday being  one  of  the  three  days  on  which 
the  elections  have  heretofore  been  held.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  the  sabbath  has  been  great- 
Iv  desecrated,  ana  as  a  christian  people  we 
should  avoid  it  as  much  as  possible. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  much 
importance  whether  it  is  Monday  or  Thursday. 
The  only  reason  why  I  shall  vote  for  Monday  is, 
that  we  nave  always  voted  on  Monday.  Under 
the  old  constitution,  we  voted  on  the  first  Mon- 
day in  May;  now  we  vote  ou  the  first  Monday 
in  August.  One  day  is  just  as  good  as  another. 
All  the  difference  on  account  of  religious  opin- 
ions is  but  of  little  consequence.  I  reckon  the 
candidates  are  busv  for  several  Sundays  before 
the  election.  I  will  not  say  that  they  do  not  go 
to  hear  preaching,  but  they  are  generally  on  Sun- 
days doing  a  little  talking,  and  they  will  be 
busy  on  Sunday  if  we  fix  it  on  Thursday,  or  any 
other  day. 

So  far  as  my  experience  goes,  and  it  is  con- 
siderable, the  whole  week  before  the  election  is 
devoted  to  arrangements.  If  one  candidate 
forces  on  the  other,  public  meetings,  he  must  meet 
him;  but  from  the  Monday  previous  to  the  elec- 
tion they  are  making  their  arrangements,  and 
generally  they  lie  on  their  oars  on  Sunday.  That 
has  been  my  practice.  I  work  uncommonly 
well  during  that  week  and  then  lie  still  on  Sun- 


439 


day.  1  consider  that  1  have  done  all  that  1  can 
and  then  I  leave  the  matter  in  the  hands  of  the 
people  and  the  Almighty.  I  would  as  soon 
have  it  on  one  day  as  another,  except  that  we 
have  always  had  it  on  Monday.  We  had  it  first 
in  May,  as  I  have  said,  and  then  after  carrying 
it  on  seven  or  eight  years,  they  fixed  it  on  the 
first  Monday  in  August.  And  I  well  recollect 
the  reason  why  the  elections  were  changed  from 
May  to  August,  as  stated  to  me  by  Mr.  Felix 
Grundy.  It  was,  that  the  people  who  had  to 
travel  a  great  distance,  as  many  did  at  that  time, 
might  be  able  to  cross  the  streams  when  they 
■were  low.  there  being  few  bridijes  at  that  time. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  understo^id  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  to  say,  that  he  would 
not  be  governed  by  any  sort  of  religious  senti- 
ment or  consideration  whatever  in  voting  to  fix 
the  day  for  holding  the  elections  hereafter.  Sir, 
I  did  not  expect  to  influence  that  gentleman's 
vote,  or  reach  his  feelings,  by  any  considerations 
of  that  sort;  he  never  has  had,  I  believe,  a  very 
great  fondness  either  for  religious  principles  or 
religious  people;  but  we  all  know  that  the  sab- 
bath has  been  greatly  desecrated  under  our  pres- 
ent mode  of  holding  elections  on  Monday,  and 
it  is  to  avoid  this  difficulty,  that  I  go  for  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Green — for 
Wednesday  or  Thursday,  instead  of  Monday. 

Mr.  IRWIX.  I  am  for  having  the  election 
on  one  day,  and  I  believe  that  day  should  be 
Thursday.  The  principle  reason  with  me  for 
favoring  Thursday  is,  that  on  that  day  the  elec- 
tion in  Tennessee  comes  on,  as  well  as  in  Vir- 
ginia, and  as  they  are  adjoining  states,  I  know 
there  is  frequently  some  interference.  If,  as  is 
some  times  the  case,  they  .should  happen  to  be 
opposed  to  a  candidate  it  would  go  hard  with 
him.  I  do  not  regard  the  question  as  of  reli- 
gious importance,  fori  never  knew  the  sabbath 
desecrated  for  tlie  purpose  of  canvassing  for 
candidates.  •» 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  remarked  that  I  did  not  care 
whether  the  day  was  changed  or  not,  except  for 
the  reason  that  the  people  have  always  Voted  on 
Monday,  and  what  tliey  are  accustomed  to,  is 
always  agreeable  to  me,  if  it  is  not  positively 
wrong.  1  said  also,  that  whether  the  election 
was  on  Monday  or  Tliursday,  there  would  be  as 
much  sabbath  breaking  in  one  case  as  the  other. 
I  am  sorry  that  the  gentleman  from  Boyle  made 
the  personal  remarks  he  did.  I  think  he  said  it 
was  a  matter  of  indifference  to  me  whether  the 
Sabbath  was  kept  or  not. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  understood  the  gentleman 
to  remark  that  he  would  not  be  controlled  by 
any  sort  of  religious  sentiment  or  consideration 
whatever  in  casting  his  vote  on  this  subject.  If 
I  misunderstood  liim,  1  will  not  attribute  to  him 
that  sentiment.  I  am  not  disposed  to  misrepre- 
sent any  gentleman. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  I  made  theremark,  that  the  peo- 
ple would  be  about  as  much  engaged  in  making 
arrangements  for  the  election  on  Sunday,  if  the 
election  is  on  one  day  as  another.  I  acknow 
ledge  very  candidly,  and  I  acknowledge  it  with 
a  degree  of  shame,  that  I  am  not  a  member  of 
any  church.  I  have  encouraged  ray  family, 
black  and  white,  to  go  to  church,  and  I  have 
contributed  toward  the  erection  of  meeting 
houses,  perhaps  as  much  as  any  man,  and  no  man 


is  more  devoted  to  the  great  christian  schema 
than  I  am,  even  the  gentleman  from  Boyle  not 
excepted.  I  have  never  played  the  Pharisee, 
nor  prayed  and  bellowed  in  the  public  streets, 
nor  proclaimed  my  religion  from  the  house  tops; 
and  the  personal  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from 
Boyle  were  entirely  unnecessary,  and  as  I  think 
without  provocation.  Is  it  possible  that  the 
gentleman  is  offended  at  the  remark  which  was 
attributed  to  me  the  other  day?  I  was  misre- 
ported  in  one  remark  which  I  made  respecting 
him.  Instead  of  saying  the  gentleman  "broke 
down  just  this  side  of  the  flood,"  I  said  he 
"broke  'j<^ound  on  this  side  of  the  flood." 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  liave  had  no  disposition 
to  allude  to  the  gentleman  personally,  to  crimi- 
nate or  recriminate,  to  attack  or  be  attacked  by 
him  in  any  way,  either  personally,  socially,  or 
politically.  I  came  here  with  none  other  than 
the  spirit  of  kindness,  and  I  have  malice  against 
no  man.  But  I  understood  the  gentleman  to 
have  made  the  remark  which  I  attributed  to  him, 
to  be  published  to  the  world;  but  I  withdraw 
my  remarks,  since  he  has  explained  what  he  said, 
and  denies  having  made  the  statement. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  meant  in  what  I  said  the 
other  day,  that  the  gentleman  commenced  his 
argument  just  about  the  time  of  the  flood.  I  did 
not  intend  any  personal  remark  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Boyle,  nor  have  I  had  anv  but  good 
feelings  in  any  remarks  I  have  made  in  refer- 
ence to  any  gentleman.  I  bear  good  feelings  to 
all,  and  I  intend  to  keep  on  good  terms,  and  if  I 
attack  a  man,  to  break  a  lance  with  him,  I  will 
do  it  like  a  true  knight,  for  I  detest  a  man  who 
will  make  an  attack  with  a  battle  axe. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  hope  tliis  debate  on  this 
unimportantmatter  may  end.  I  will  however  sav, 
that  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  frona  Nelson.  K 
persons  are  disposed  to  violate  the  sabbath,  they 
will  do  it  whether  the  election  comes  on  one  day 
or  another.  If  the  election  comes  on  Monday, 
they  will  lay  aside  canvassing  on  the  Sunday 
generally.  Monday  is  a  time-honored  day,  but 
the  question  is  of  no  sort  of  importance,  and  I 
hope  the  vote  may  now  be  taken. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  prefer  that  the  election  should 
occur  on  Tuesday.  It  is  one  of  the  days  on 
which  we  have  been  accustomed  to  vote,  and  one 
which  will  avoid  the  desecration  of  the  sabbath. 
It  is  a  day  fixed  for  the  election  of  the  president 
of  the  United  States,  and  I  think  there  is  a  great 
propriety  in  having  all  elections  on  the  same 
day  of  tile  week.  The  people  expect  us  to  fix 
on  some  day.  and  I  think  Tuesday  tvill  suit  them 
as  well  as  any  other. 

Mr.  IlUDD.  I  am  in  favor  of  continuing 
Monday  as  the  day  for  holding  the  election,  but 
in  prefering  that  day,  I  am  not  governed  by  ex- 
actly the  same  reasons  as  those  assigned  by  gen- 
tlemen who  are  disposed  to  be  religious.  I  like 
that  day  for  several  reasons.  It  has  been  the 
custom  of  this  state  for  the  last  fifty  years,  to 
commence  its  elections  on  a  Monday,  and  there  is 
no  occasion  to  change  the  time.  It  is  a  very 
great  dav  in  Kentucky,  when  the  people,  in 
their  majesty,  are  called  upon  to  express  at  the 
polls,  their  opinions  for  or  against  the  candidates 
in  the  field.  The  day,  in  .short,  is  a  great  politi- 
cal sabbath,  and  one  that  should  be  well  ooserv- 
ed  and  regarded.    I  am  glad  to  perceive  the  re- 


440 


ligious  feeling  ■which  seeres  to  animate  the  dele- 
gates in  this  house,  and  I  would  suggest  to 
them,  ■whether  it  ■would  not  be  •well  for  the  peo- 
ple, in  view  of  the  election  being  held  the  day- 
after  the  sabbath,  to  purify  and  prepare  them- 
selves for  that  event,  by  attending  church,  or 
remaining  at  home,  taking  rest,  and  calmly  re- 
flecting upon  the  important  duties  they  ■will,  as 
good  citizens,  be  required  to  perform  on  Monday. 
Sy  pursuing  this  course,  they  will  be  enabled  to 
give  a  correct  and  honest  Vote,  and  also  promote 
the  religiotis  interests  of  the  country  and  its  po- 
litical welfare.  Select  any  other  day,  and  men 
would  not  go  to  the  polls  in  quite  as  pure  and 
serene  a  state  of  mind  as  on  a  Monday.  I  fully 
agree  with  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  in  the 
remark,  that  all  the  canvassing  is  nearly  over  on 
the  Saturday  night  preceding  the  election.  The 
gentleman  from  Logan  has  said  that  Virginia 
and  Tennessee  hold  their  elections  on  Thursday, 
and  therefore,  he  is  in  favor  of  that  clay  for  hold- 
ing our  elections,  injismuch  as  the  voters  in 
those  states  will  not  have  an  opportunity  to  in- 
terfere with  us.  Now,  the  game  is  perfectly  fair 
for  one  political  party  as  for  the  other.  It  is,  as 
a  gentleman  remarked  the  other  day,  a  fair  fight, 
and  there  is  no  difficulty  about  it.  Illinois  and 
Indiana  hold  their  elections  on  Tuesday,  and 
Ohio  on  Monday,  and  the  people  of  those  states 
might  cross  the  ri^V'er  and  interfere  in  our  elec- 
tions; but  we  must  keep  a  good  look  out,  and 
prevent  them.  It  has  been  said  here,  that  the 
sabbath  is  violated  on  account  of  the  election, 
by  many  persons  and  politicians.  Well,  I  have 
nothing  to  do  with  their  transgressions.  lam 
not  the  conscience-  keeper  of  any  man  or  set  of 
men.  If  men  deport  themselves  in  a  moral  and 
exemplary  manner,  and  do  not  infringe  on  the 
civil  and  religious  rights  of  their  fellow  citi- 
zens, I  conceive  we  have  nothing  to  do  witlt 
their  religious  views  and  habits. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  There  is  a  reason  which  ap- 
plies to  the  voters  in  mypartof  the  state,  which 
inclines  me  to  prefer  Monday  to  any  other  day. 
I  think  there  will  be  more  votes  cast  on  that  day, 
because  there  will  be  less  inconvenience  in  being 
present  on  that  day.  There  are,  as  we  all  know, 
many  young  men,  who  labor  at  a  distance  from 
home,  and  especially  in  the  season  when  the 
election  is  to  take  place,  who  will  desire  to  vote. 
Now  if  the  precincts  are  small,  the.se  young  men 
will  find  it  very  convenient  to  be  at  home  with 
their  families  on  the  Sabbath,  and  to  vote  in 
their  precincts  on  Monday,  whereas  it  will  be 
very  inconvenient  to  leave  their  labor,  at  a  dis- 
tance o(  fifteen  or  twenty  miles,  and  return  to 
vote.  Many  of  these  men  hire  by  the  month 
and  commence  in  the  fii-st  part  of  the  month  and 
that  is  why  I  prefer  the  fir.st  Monday.  I  think 
also,  we  should  not  change  old  customs  unless 
some  good  reason  can  be  given;  but  1  think  gen- 
tlemen who  are  disposed  to  desecrate  the  Sab- 
bath, will  do  it  just  as  much  if  the  election  is  on 
one  day  as  another.  These  reasons  have  satis- 
fied mc  that  we  ouglit  to  continue  the  day  to 
which  we  have  been  accustomed. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  think  we  are  giving  too  much 
consequence  to  this  proposition.  The  gentle- 
man from  Boyle  has  said,  that  he  has  heard  no 
good  reason  why  the  day  fixed  by  the  commit- 
t««  shoxild  not  be  changed.    The  proposition  is 


affirmative,  and  1  suppose  it  should  be  the  duty 
of  the  mover  of  the  amendment  to  give  reasons 
for  the  change.  If  I  Avere  satisfied  that  fixing 
the  election  on  Wednesday  or  Thursday  would 
prevent  the  desecration  of  the  Sabbath,  or  tend 
to  do  it,  I  would  certainly  be  disposed  to  vote 
for  it.  but  I  do  not  think  it  will  change  the 
matter  in  that  respect.  The  people  are  general- 
ly satisfied  with  Monday  for  the  davof  election, 
and  if  it  lias  been  customary  to  violate  the  Sab- 
bath in  consequence  of  its  being  on  that  dfiy,  I 
have  not  hitherto  known  it.  The  practice  has 
not  existed  in  my  part  of  the  state;  but  if  gen- 
tlemen can  satisfy  me  that  it  will  be  better  to 
have  any  other  day  than  Monday,  I  shall  vote 
for  the  cliange. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  This  is  the  idea.  I  wish  to 
convey  in  the  remarks  I  have  tnade.  If  the 
election  should  be  held  on  Monday  in  place  of 
Wednesday  or  Thursday,  that  persons  would 
meet,  on  the  Sunday  immediately  preceding  the 
election,  not  merely  for  the  purpose  of  violating 
or  desecrating  the  day,  but  as  this  is  the  day  on 
which  all  the  churcnes  of  every  denomination 
in  the  land  meet  for  purposes  of  public  worship, 
that  those  candidates  and  politicians  who  have 
no  religious  scruples,  and  who  care  not  for  the 
day;  who  wish  to  band  their  men  and  organize 
their  parties  would  take  advantage  of  these  col- 
lections to  get  their  men  together  and  arrange 
for  the  next  day.  Although  the  candidates 
themselves  might  be  at  home,  yet  sir,  here  would 
be  the  inducement  held  out,  and  the  facilities  af- 
forded for  their  friends  to  visit  those  worshiping 
assemblies,  and  by  drinking  and  electioneering 
desecrate  the  day,  disturb  the  congregations, 
and  thus  deco)'  off  otherwise  sober  and  sen- 
sible young  men  to  some  groggery  or  else- 
where, for  political  training  and  seduction;  and 
by  bribery  and  fraud  to  obtain  their  votes,  and 
by  drinking  and  otherwise,  hold  them  together 
until  the  next  daw  an  end,  in  my  opinion,  they 
could  not  possibly  accomplish,  if  the  election 
was  held  on  Wednesday  or  Thursday.  Every 
man  would  then  be  scattered  throughout  the 
land,  engaged  at  his  respective  trade  or  occupa- 
tion. It  is  sir,  to  avoid  this  difficulty  and  to  at- 
tain this  end  that  I  go  for  the  amencinient  of  the 
gentleman  from  Green. 

Mr.  LISLE.  I  know  it  is  with  great  difficul- 
ty that  the  house  can  resist  the  argument  of  my 
friend  from  Louisville,  but  still  I  differ  from  him 
,is  to  the  propriety  of  holding  the  election  on 
Monday.  If  I  believed  Avhat  he  stated  to  be 
true,  I  Vould  be  the  last  man  to  change  the  day 
of  voting.  If  I  believed  that  such  a  course 
was  taken  as  to  prepare  men  to  give  a  better  vote 
by  the  business  in  which  they  were  engaged  the 
day  before,  that  they  would  in  consequence  give 
a  better  vote  for  the  interests  of  their  country,  I 
would  be  the  last  man  to  change  the  day.  But 
I  believe  it  is  not  so,  at  least  in  many  parts  of 
the  state,  and  I  still  insist  that  the  interest  of  the 
country  requires  that  the  dayshould  bo  changed. 
I  make  no  pretensions  to  religion,  but  I  believe 
that  the  highest  and  best  interests  of  the  country 
require  that  the  religious  institutions  of  this 
country  should  be  maintained.  I  believe  the 
destinies  of  the  countiy  depend  on  their  preser- 
vation. 

I  have  not  been  engaged  in  politics  till  Ibis 


441 


year,  yet  most  of  us  have  witnessed  the  scenes 
that  have  occurred  on  the  day  preceding  the 
election,  and  I  desire  that  they  may  be  avoided 
on  the  Sabbath  if  possible.  I  think  the  remarks 
of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  are  not  perfeeth* 
correct.  We  have  changed  the  day  for  holding 
the  presidential  election,  and  what  was  the  con- 
sequence? The  gentleman  wishes  to  retain 
Monday  because  he  thinks  it  will  be  more  cou- 
venie-at.  Is  this  a  fact?  Though  the  last  presi- 
deritial  election  was  held  on  Tuesday  there  was 
as  larpe  a  vote  cast  as  was  ever  cast  in  the  state. 
Tliis  fallows  that  it  was  not  inconvenient.  If  the 
Sabbath  has  been  desecrated  when  but  few  offi- 
cers were  to  be  elected,  how  will  it  be  when  we 
elect  all  the  officers  that  we  propose  to  elect?  I 
think  the  duty  we  owe  to  a  large  portion  of  our 
constituents — I  speak  with  reference  to  my  own — 
requires  that  a  diiferent  day  should  be  taken. 
It  should  be  the  object  of  this  convention  to  give 
a  fair  opportunity  that  all  classes  may  participate 
in  the  benefits  wfiich  the  constitution  is  to  confer. 

Mr.  ROOT.  Although  it  has  been  suggested 
that  it  is  a  small  affair  to  waste  the  time  of  this 
convention  upon,  if  gentlemen  will  reflect  but 
one  moment,  they  will  find  that  much  time  has 
been  wasted  on  more  trivial  subjects.  Jfotwith- 
standing  what  gentlemen  may  say  about  being 
puiified  by  going  to  church  on  the  Sabbath 
before  the  election,  those  who  have  had  experi- 
ence in  political  life,  know  full  well  that  instead 
of  being  purified  by  attending  the  house  of  God 
on  the  day  before,  they  come  to  the  election 
reeling,  and  covered  over  with  sins  and  in- 
iquities of  the  canvass.  If  Monday  be  fixed  on 
us  the  day  for  election,  and  this  constitution 
stand  fiftv  years,  all  the  wholesome  influences  of 
fifty  Salibaths  will  be  obliterated  and  blotted 
out.  It  will  do  away  with  one  whole  year  of 
Sabbaths  given  to  the  sons  of  Adam  to  fit  them- 
selves for  a  seat  in  a  purer  and  more  happy 
clime.  They  talk  about  electors  that  have  been 
excited  in  a  controversy  waged  in  bitterness  till 
Saturday  night  and  then  resting  in  quiet  on  the 
Sabbath.  But  I  think  it  has  not  been  thus  nor 
will  be  in  future,  but  the  host  of  battle  will  con- 
tinue their  efforts,  and  hold  on  to  victory  or  de- 
feat. Look  at  the  example  of  other  states  in 
this  christian  land,  and  you  find  that  where 
they  have  recently  revised  their  constitutions 
they  have  made  their  elections  come  on  some 
other  day  than  Mondaj';  and  cannot  the  repre- 
sentatives of  Kentucky,  a  large,  free,  christian 
people,  concede  so  small  an  amount  to  our  holy 
religion  by  which  our  very  liberties  are  to  be 
preserved,  as  to  fix  an  election  a  little  removed 
from  that  day.  Talk  about  the  purity  of  elec- 
tion, the  Sabbath  day  of  election  I  To  the  shame 
of  Kentucky,  be  it  said,  that  our  elections  have 
been  any  tiling  else  than  pure.  Directed  by 
party  rancor,  and  led  on  in  many  cases  by  the 
vilest  demagogues,  the  public  mind  has  been 
agitated,  seething  and  boiling ;  and  will  you 
permit  him  who  leads  in  this  excitement  to  enter 
into  the  sanctuary  of  the  Most  High  God,  and 
there  interrupt  His  worship? 

It  has  been  urged  that  the  people  have  been 
accustomed  to  vote  on  Monday.  This  is  not  so. 
A  great  majority  have  voted  on  Tuesday  and 
Wednesday;  but'even  if  it  were  so,  does  the  gen- 
tleman, Ixie  those  who,  in  the  time  of  the  revolu- 
56 


tion,  had  such  a  reverence  for  the  old  institutioiiB 
of  the  mother  country  as  to  earn  the  title  of  to- 
ries,  entertain  such  a  reverence  for  old  customs, 
because  they  are  old,  as  to  insist  on  the  continu- 
ance of  this  day. 

This  is  an  age  of  reforms,  and  among  these  re- 
forms is  the  purification  of  society,  intellectu- 
ally and  morally.  We  may  make  as  good  a  con- 
stitution as  man  can  form,  yet  without  moral 
and  intellectual  culture,  your  laws  are  like  ropes 
of  sand.  Let  what  influence  this  delegation 
has — solemn,  sober  and  intelligent  as  they  are — 
let  their  whole  moral  force  be  turned  in  favor  of 
the  christian  sabbath.  Gentlemen  say  that  it 
will  make  no  difference  with  regard  to  the  ob- 
servance of  the  sabbath,  whether  the  elections 
are  held  on  Monday,  or  any  other  day  of  the 
week;  but  it  will  make  a  difference,  and  it 
seems  to  me  it  is  contrary  to  the  common  sense 
of  every  man  in  this  house  to  say  that  it  will 
not,  for  every  one  knows  that  the  day  before  the 
election  is  the  great  day  in  which  the  party 
leaders  are  particulaly  engaged.  If  the  elec- 
tion is  in  the  latter  part  of  the  week,  the  sab- 
bath will  then  be  quiet. 

Mr.  ^'^EWELL.  I  do  not  think  there  is  much 
importance  attached  to  the  day  in  which  we 
vote.  I  do  not  believe  that  forced  prayer  is  good 
for  the  soul,  under  any  circumstances.  A  man 
can  commit  as  much  crime  on  a  Monday  as  on 
the  sabbath.  It  strikes  me  that  with  some  men, 
the  day  on  which  an  act  is  committed  makes  a 
great  difference.  It  makes  no  diflferenee  what 
a  man  does  on  other  days,  as  they  seem  to  think, 
if  he  draws  on  a  long  face,  and  goes  to  meeting 
on  the  sabbath. 

Mr.  WOODSOX.  I  see  by  the  eighth  section 
of  this  report,  that  the  voters  of  the  common- 
wealth are  required  to  vote  in  their  own  pre- 
cincts, and  no  where  else;  or,  at  least,  they  must 
be  residents  in  the  precincts  in  which  they  vote, 
sixty  days  previous  to  the  election,  ilost  of 
the  county  courts  come  on  Monday,  and  a  great 
many  persons  in  different  counties  have  business 
at  the  different  courthouses  on  Monday.  Some 
precincts  are  large,  and  if  some  of  the  voters 
must  attend  the  court  on  Monday,  thev  cannot 
go  home  and  vote  in  their  own  precincts.  I 
think  Thursday  a  better  day  than  Monday.  I 
will  offer  another  consideration  which  may 
strike  the  minds  of  some  gentlemen.  My  expe- 
rience is  that  the  week  of  the  election  is  lost  by 
a  large  portion  of  the  citizens  of  each  county. 
They  go  to  the  election  on  Monday,  staj'  Tues- 
day and  Wednesday,  and  squander  away  the  re- 
mainder of  the  week.  It  is  a  matter  of  economy 
and  saving  of  time  to  have  the  election  on 
Thursday.  To  say  that  we  should  vote  on  Mon- 
day merely  because  we  have  done  so,  is  not  a 
reason  that  would  influence  me.  It  is  no  argu- 
ment to  me  to  say  that  a  thing  should  exist 
merely  because  it  has  exi.sted. 

Mr.RL^DD.  I  am  sorry  that  anything  I havesaid 
has  aroused  the  religious  feelings  of  my  friend 
from  Campbell,  for  I  thought  I  was  rather  advoca- 
ting and  aiding  the  views  which  he  entertains. 
It  seems,  however,  that  I  have  not  been  so  fortu- 
nate. The  gentleman  has  spoken  of  the  dis- 
reputable and  disorderly  manner  in  which  the 
sabbath  preceding  the  elections  is  spent  in  this 
state,  and  has  intimated  that  the  day  is  no  bet- 


44>i 


ter  observed  iu  Louisville.  I  beg  the  gentleman 
from  Campbell  not  to  judge  my  constituency  by 
his  own.  To  save  the  gentleman's  feelings  in 
reference  to  the  alleged  desecration  of  the  sab- 
bath, he  says  he  would  be  in  favor  of  Tuesday, 
Wednesday,  or  Thursday,  or  any  other  day  than 
Monday.  As  to  Thursaay,  that  would  be  the 
very  worst  time  that  could  be  fixed  upon,  for 
men  would  gather  together  on  the  Sunday  pre- 
vious to  the  election  day,  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
sulting and  arranging  matters  in  relation  to  the 
ensuing  election,  as  they  could  not  break  in  up- 
on the  business  of  the  week,  and  lose  three  days 
in  canvassing  immediately  before  the  contest 
should  begin.  Monday,  as  I  have  already  said, 
is  the  very  best  day  that  can  be  selected,"  and  I 
have  given  many  reasons  why  it  is  so.  I  will  give 
another,  there  are  a  great  m  any  mountain  boys  and 
boys  from  the  flats  on  Green  river,  who  are  not 
quite  as  particular  about  their  dress  and  personal 
appearance  as  we  of  Louisville,  and  do  notputon 
a  clean  shirt,  and  other  apparel  until  Sunday. 
They  are  laboring  men,  and  cannot  do  it.  Well, 
these  poor  fellows  on  the  sabbath  before  the 
election,  put  on  their  clean  clothes,  and  perhaps 
go  to  church,  and  the  following  morning  they 
attend  the  polls  and  give  in  their  votes.  Change 
the  election  to  Tluirsday,  and  these  men  cannot 
appear  on  the  election  ground  in  as  clean  and 
comfortable  condition — to  say  nothing  about 
their  having  to  abandon  their  labor  in  the  mid- 
dle of  the  week,  causing  an  interruption  to  busi- 
ness and  much  inconvenience  to  their  employers. 
As  has  been  truly  remarked  by  a  gentleman  on 
this  floor — if  a  man  sina  on  a  Monday,  it  is  the 
same  as  if  he  had  done  so  on  a  Sunday.  There 
is  no  difference.  Murder  is  the  same  every  day 
of  the  week,  and  so  is  drunkenness,  or  any  other 
crime.  I  say  the  people  are  accustomed  to  vote 
on  Monday;  but  the  gentleman  says  they  are  not, 
and  that  they  vote  more  on  tlie  Wednesday.  I 
say  they  do  not,  and  that  more  than  one  half 
the  votes  are  given  in  on  Monday.  I  shall  now 
conclude  with  the  expression  of  my  hope  that 
the  convention  will  not  change  ihe  day  of  elec- 
tion, for  it  is  the  best  and  most  convenient  one 
that  we  can  select. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  ask  for  a  division  of  the 
question. 

The  question  was  divided  accordingly,  and 
taken  first  on  striking  out  "Monday,"  which 
was  not  agreed  to.  The  motion  to  insert  conse- 
quently fell  with  it. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  desire  to  amend  the  sec- 
tion by  inserting  after  the  word  August,  the 
words  "between  the  hours  of  nine  o'clock  A.  M. 
and  seven  o'clock  P.  M. 

If  there  is  any  thing  on  earth  that  we  should 
preserve  more  free  from  contamination  than  any 
thing  else  in  a  free  countiy,  it  is  the  right  of  suf- 
frage. I  have  listened  to  eloquent  speeches  and 
discussions  on  this  floor,  on  the  subject  of  man's 
capacity  for  self  government.  It  has  been  said 
that  the  people  will  not  be  influenced  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  affect  the  right  of  suffrage.  Not- 
withstanding I  think  the  people  are  capable  of 
self  government,  I,  in  common  with  every  oth- 
er man,  must  admit  that  many  improper  influen- 
ces are  used  throughout  Kentucky.  Indeed  no 
one  can  doubt,  who  has  had  his  eyes  open  to  the 
history  of  the  past  in  thU  commonwealth,  but 


what  money  has  had  a  powerful  influence  in  all 
elections.  Indeed,  treating  and  bribing  have 
been  resorted  tf)  in  some  portions  of  the  countrj-, 
to  a  great  extent.  So  much  money  has  been  re- 
quired to  carry  on  a  canvass,  that  it  has  opera- 
ted against  the  election  of  virtuous  men,  who 
happened  to  be  poor.  Now,  in  Kentucky,  there 
has  Deen  an  almost  universal  condemnation  ^of 
three  days  elections.  Why  ?  Because,  on  Mon- 
day night  the  polls  being  closed  in  one  part  of 
the  county,  Tuesday  and  Wednesday  Avere  spent 
in  carrying  the  news,  and  if  it  was  a  close  con- 
test every  means  was  employed  to  procure  the 
election  of  the  respective  candidates.  If  the 
provision  in  the  present  section  is  retained,  my 
impression  is,  that  improper  influences  will  con- 
tinue to  be  exerted.  1  admit,  if  we  have  but  one 
day,  we  shall  accomplish  much  against  improp- 
er influences.  But  have  we  done  all  we  can,  and 
all  we  are  required  to  do  on  the  present  occasion? 
I  do  not  wish  to  see  the  constitution  encumber- 
ed with  any  thing  that  ought  not  to  be  in  it.  I 
wish  to  see  no  more  detail  than  is  necessary,  but 
I  have  heard  gentlemen  say  that  if  this  provis- 
ion is  permitted  to  remain,  the  legislature  will 
have  poAver  to  prescribe  the  hours  in  which  the 
election  shall  be  held.  I  think  this  will  not  be 
done.  The  constitution  is  the  supreme  law  of 
the  country,  and  it  declares  that  elections  shall 
be  held  on  the  first  Monday  in  August.  There 
I  consider  the  phraseology  as  including  the  en- 
tire day.  Suppose  the  legislature  should  enact 
that  elections  shall  be  held  between  nine  and 
seven  o'clock.  There  would  be  an  act  of  the 
legislature  ;  but  on  the  other  side,  there  would 
be  the  constitution.  The  judges  of  the  election 
would,  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  put  a  construc- 
tion on  the  constitution  by  which  they  might 
keep  the  polls  open  the  entire  day.  What  would 
be  the  consequence?  I  have  known  the  polls 
kept  open  till  midnight  under  the  present  con- 
stitution. What  is  the  language  of  the  old  con- 
stitution ? 

"Representatives  shall  be  chosen  on  the  first 
Monday  in  the  month  of  August,  in  every  year  ; 
but  the  presiding  officers  of  the  several  elections 
shall  continue  the  same  for  three  days,  at  the  re- 
quest of  anyone  of  the  candidates." 

I  have  known  them  kept  open  till  midnight. 
Why  ?  Because  they  wished  to  get  voters  to 
come  in  who  are  often  brought,  even  against  their 
wishes,  to  elect  a  favorite  candidate.  The  liber- 
ties of  the  people  of  this  country  depend  on  the 
free,  unbought  exercise  of  the  right  of  suffrage. 
If  the  amendment  I  offer  is  adopted,  it  will  ac- 
complish this  object,  because  they  cannot  know 
who  is  ahead  among  the  different  aspirants  for 
office.  But  if  the  polls  are  kept  open  through 
the  entire  day,  do  we  not  know  Avhat  will  be  the 
result?  Efforts  will  be  made  to  keep  the  polls 
open  that  the  neighboring  precincts  may  be 
heard  from,  and  when  heard  from,  great  efforts 
will  be  made  to  carry  the  election  of  a  favorite 
candidate.  But,  if  this  is  adopted,  when  the 
hour  of  seven  arrives,  the  polls  will  be  closed, 
the  people  will  have  voted  for  their  representa- 
tive or  member  of  congress,  and  there  will  have 
been  an  exercise  of  the  free,  untrammelled  right 
of  suffrage,  upon  which  the  liberties  of  this 
country,  to  a  great  extent,  depend.  In  looking 
to  the  future  I  see  nothing  more  alarming  than 


443 


the  manner  iu  which  our  elections  are  likely  t-o  I 
be  carried  on,  because  merit  is  not  regarded  as  it 
should  be  by  the  voters,  and  -we  know  that  vo- 
ters are  bought  and  sold  in  lots,  of  dozens  and 
fifties.     Br  this  amendment  you  cut  oflF  the  abil- 
ity of  individuals  to  praetice  these  frauds  on  the  i 
right  of  suffrage,  on  the  great  mass  of  the  peo-  j 
pie  of  Kentucky.     I  do  not  see  what  good  rea.<on  | 
can  be  offered  against  the  amendment  I  propose.  | 
Shall  I  be  told  tliat  the  people  cannot   all   come  i 
to  the  polls  and   vote  within  the  hours  I  have  | 
pointed  out.    I  have  alloted  ten  hours  for  voting.  \ 
If,  in  populous  places,  as  in  the  county  of  Jef- 
ferson and  Fayette,  they  have  not  time  to  come 
to  the  polls,  it'will  be  an  easy  matter  for  the  legis- 
lature to  make  more  precincts  so  that  they  can.  ] 
When  this  is  done,  the  bribery  and  corruption,  1 
which  now  exist,  will  cease. 

Mr.  HARD IX.  I  did  not  distinctly  understand  [ 
the  reason  that  was  assigned  by  the  gentleman 
for  fixing  the  hours  of  9  o'clock  in  the  morning 
and  7  in  the  eveuing  as  the  limit  for  the  contin- 
uance of  the  elections.  The  sun  will  rise,  I  be- 
lieve, on  the  first  Monday  iu  August  about  5  o'- 
clock, and  yet  we  are  to  wait  four  hours  before 
the  polls  will  be  opened.  I  apprehend  that  some 
inconvenience  may  arise  from  deferring  the  hour 
of  commencing.  It  will  be  better  I  think  to  fix 
an  earlier  hour.  It  is  important  to  afford  an  op- 
poitunity  to  old  men  to  give  their  votes  before 
the  crowd  becomes  too  great.  I  am  opposed  to 
making  any  change  in  reference  to  the  hours  for 
opening  and  closing  the  polls  unless  some  good 
reason  be  assigned  why  it  should  be  done. 

This  government  has  been  in  operation  about 
fifty  seven  years,  and  ever  since  it  commenced, 
the' plan  that  we  have  pursued  in  reference  to 
this  matter  has  been  found  to  work  verj-  well. 
"We  have  never  seen  any  good  reason  for  making 


a  ciiange. 


Ir.  WOODSON.  As  the  gentleman  is  anx- 
ious to  have  an  opportunity  to  get  to  the  polls — 
as  he  is  becoming  an  old  man — I  will  move  to 
insert  "6"  in  place  of  "9." 

Mr.  HARDIN.    I  have  no  objection  to  that. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  As  a  member  of  the  legisla- 
tive committee,  to  whom  this  subject  was  refer- 
red, I  will  state,  for  the  information  of  my  hon- 
orable friend,  that  at  one  time  the  committee  con- 
sidered it  would  be  proper  to  insert  a  provision 
regulating  the  hours  at  which  the  polls  should 
be  opened  and  closed;  but  upon  consideration, 
the  committee  struck  out  that  clause  for  the  very 
reason  that  has  been  urged  by  the  gentleman 
from  Knox  why  it  should  be  inserted.  In  the 
first  place,  we  "thought  that  as  we  were  reducing 
the  number  of  days  on  wliich  the  election  should 
be  held,  from  three  to  one,  we  ought  not  to  de- 
clare that  the  time  of  election  should  be  confined 
to  the  fraction  of  a  day;  we  thought  it  would 
not  be  proper  to  restrict  the  time  of  election  be- 
yond a  day.  In  the  next  place,  we  knew  of  no 
evil  that  had  resulted  either  in  this  state  or  any 
other,  from  merely  declaring  the  day  on  which 
the  election  shall  be  held  without  prescribing 
hours.  We  have  been  living  some  fifty  odd 
years  under  the  present  constitution,  as  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  has  observed,  and  no  practi- 
cal evil  has  resulted  from  the  course  that  has  been 
pursued;  and  in  looking  over  the  constitutions  of 
other  states,  I  do  not  find  a  single  one  where  it 


has  been  found  necesary  to  restrict  the  time  of 
holding  the  election  beyond  one  day.  For  thig 
reason  we  thought  it  would  be  better  to  leave  it 
unrestricted,  by  using  the  words  "one  day,"  in- 
stead of  defining  the  hours,  as  it  was  unprece- 
dented to  do  so,  and  consequently  we  did  not 
deem  it  necessary  to  introduce  such  restriction 
here. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  obliged  to  the 
gentleman  from  Knox  for  offering  this  amend- 
ment, and  I  shall  vote  for  it  as  now  modified. 
Gentlemen  say  .*hat  no  evil  has  resulted  from  the 
different  constructions  given  to  the  word  "dav" 
in  our  present  constitution.  I  think,  sir,  if  I 
had  George  Knight  here,  from  Shelbyville,  I 
could  prove  the  reverse.  He  was  defeated  once, 
when  a  candidate  for  congress,  by  means  of  the 
polls  being  kept  open  until  12  o'clock  on  "Wed- 
nesday night.  I  can  state  for  myself,  that  in 
the  first  essay  I  made  for  a  seat  in  the  congress 
of  the  United  States  in  1S22,  with  the  full 
knowledge  that  I  was  at  the  time  three  if  not 
four  hundred  votes  ahead,  an  effort  was  made  at 
sundown  to  keep  the  polls  open  until  12  o'clock, 
on  the  ground  that  that  hour  was  the  termina- 
tion of  tue  uay.  All  the  officers  of  election  were 
opposed  to  me;  but  one  of  the  judges,  believing 
that  such  a  proceeding  was  not  one  that  could 
be  justified  by  a  fair  interpretation  of  the  con- 
stitution, after  candles  were  lighted,  noted  the 
state  of  the  polls,  and  rose  from  his  seat  and 
said  he  would  preside  no  longer  at  the  election. 
His  ueciaration  had  its  effect,  and  the  recollec- 
tiou  ot  an  eiecnon  that  had  taken  place  not  long 
before  being  fresh  in  the  minds  of  an  bonest 
community,  they  cried  out  "no  midnight  elec- 
tion." The  candles  were  blown  out,  and  the 
election  was  declared  to  be  over.  These  are  two 
instances  that  have  occurred  to  my  memory  in 
which  difficulty  has  arisen  from  the  want  of  sta- 
ted hours  for  the  opening  and  closing  of  the 
polls.  I  suppose  that  it  is  understood  and  in- 
tended by  tins  convention  that  no  election  shall 
be  held  after  sundown,  and  to  commence  at  6  o'- 
clock, I  think  is  early  enough.  I  shall  vote 
therefore  for  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Knox. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  think  it  is  very  necessary 
that  there  should  be  a  specific  limitation  as  to 
the  hour  of  opening  and  closing  the  polls. 
There  are  frequent  instances  of  continuing  the 
election  until  12  o'clock  at  night.  I  can  appeal 
to  my  friend  from  Lexington  if  this  has  not  been 
the  case  in  his  countj-.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
the  polls  are  sometimes  closed  at  an  early  hour. 
There  is  no  uniformity,  and  this  want  of  uni- 
formity has  been  productive  of  much  difficulty. 
In  thecounty  of  Montgomery,  in  1843, 1  wanted 
to  introduce  votes  in  the  afternoon  of  the  day 
of  election,  but  I  was  told  that  they  could  not 
be  received.  My  opponent  got  his  certificate  of 
election  in  consequence  of  the  polls  being  closed 
at  ap  early  hour;  but  upon  a  proper  representa- 
tion being  made,  we  run  the  election  over  again, 
and  I  obtained  my  seat  to  which  I  was  entitled 
before.  There  is  a  great  want  of  uniformity.  In 
some  counties,  the  election  is  held  after  night, 
in  others  it  is  terminated  before  the  sun  goes 
down.  Let  ns  fix  the  hours  in  the  consitution 
and  then  there  wiU  be  nothing  to  quibble  about. 

Mr.  HARDIN.    I  am  willing  to  agree  to  the 


444 


resolution,  if  the  hour  of  6  be  inserted,  not  on 
my  own  account,  but  for  general  convenience. 
We  cannot  make  a  provision  in  the  constitution 
for  extreme  cases;  it  is  utterlv  impossible. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  1  can  addVery  little  to  the  re- 
marks of  the  gentleman  from  Louisville,  in  favor 
of  the  section  as  it  is.  The  objection  to  the  section 
is,  that  if  it  remains  in  its  present  shape,  the 
polls  in  the  different  counties  may  be  kept  open 
until  12  o'clock  at  night.  It  wa-s  thought  by  the 
committee  that  the  legislature  of  the  state  would 
have  the  power,  if  any  evil  should  result  from  a 
practice  of  this  sort,  to  change  it.  As  was  re- 
marked by  the  gentleman  from  Louisville,  we 
did  once  agree  to  insert  in  the  section  that  the 
polls  should  be  opened  at  a  certain  hour,  and 
closed  at  a  certain  hour;  but  when  the  committee 
agreed  to  amend  this  portion  of  the  section  by 
this  provision  "and  the  mode  of  holding  elec- 
tions shall  be  regulated  by  law,"  they  concluded 
that  it  would  not  answer  to  restrict  the  voting  to 
a  particular  hour  of  the  day,  but  that  the  legisla- 
ture would  have  the  power,  if  it  should  become 
necessary,  hereafter  to  impose  such  restriction. 
It  is  also  true  that  we  examined  the  constitutions 
of  all  the  different  states,  and  according  to  my 
recollection,  we  found  no  constitution  where 
there  is  any  such  restriction  as  that  proposed  by 
the  gentleman  from  Knox. 

Suppose  the  polls  are  held  open  in  every 
county  until  midnight,  and  illegal  votes  are 
given,  the  party  injured  has  his  remedy.  I  have 
no  recollection  of  an  election  in  the  part  of  the 
country  where  I  reside,  in  which  the  polls  were 
kept  open  after  sun-set;  but  I  ?.m  of  the  ofiaion, 
that  if  exception  should  be  taken  to  voting  after 
Bun-set,  or  if  it  should  be  the  sense  of  the  people 
of  the  state,  that  a  limit  should  be  placed  on  the 
time  of  voting  within  one  day,  the  legislature 
will  have  full  and  ample  power  to  impose  that 
restriction.  I  shall  vote  for  the  section  as  it 
stands  and  against  the  amendment. 

The  question  being  taken  on  the  amendment, 
it  was  adopted. 

The  secretary  then  read  the  4th  section,  which 
■was  adopted  without  amendment,  as  follows: 

Sec.  4.  No  person  shall  be  a  representative, 
•who,  at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen 
of  the  United  States,  and  hath  not  attained  to 
the  age  of  twenty  four  years,  and  resided  in  this 
state  two  years  next  preceding  his  election,  and 
the  last  year  thereof  in  the  county,  town,  or  city, 
for  which  he  may  be  chosen. 

The  5th  section  was  then  read  by  the  secretary 
as  follows : 

Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly  shall  divide  the 
several  counties  of  this  commonwealth  into  equal 
and  convenient  precincts,  or  may  delegate  such 

Eower  to  such  county  authorities  as  they  may  by 
iw  provide;  and  elections  for  representatives  for 
the  several  counties  entitled  to  representation, 
shall  be  held  at  the  places  of  holding  their 
respective  courts,  and  in  the  several  election 
precincts  into  Avhich  the  counties  may  be  di- 
vided: Provided,  That  when  it  shall  appear  to 
the  legislature  that  any  city  or  town  nath  a 
number  of  qualified  voters  equal  to  the  ratio 
then  fixed,  such  city  or  town,  shall  be  invested 
with  the  privilege  of  a  separate  representation, 
iu  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly,  which 
shall  be  reUiined  so  long  as  such  city  or  town 


shall  contain  a  number  of  qualified  voters  equal 
to  the  ratio,  which  may,  from  time  to  time,  be 
fixed  by  law;  and  thereafter,  elections  for  the 
county,  in  which  such  city  or  town  is  situated, 
shall  not  be  held  therein;  but  such  city  or  town 
shall  not  be  entitled  to  a  separate  representation, 
unless  such  county,  after  the  separation,  shall  al- 
so be  entitled  to  one  or  more  representatives. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  will  move  to  strike  out  the 
three  first  lines  of  this  section  down  to  the  word 
'•and,"  and  insert  the  following: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  cause  the  several 
counties  of  this  commonwealth  to  be  divided 
into  civil  districts,  each  of  which  shall  consti- 
tute an  election  precinct." 

The  object  I  have  in  view  in  proposing  this 
amendment,  is  this.  It  will  be  recollected  that 
the  counties  are  to  be  laid  off  into  districts,  for 
the  purpose  of  holding  the  elections  for  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature,  and  I  suppose  the  elec- 
tions in  those  districts  will  proceed  in  the  same 
manner  as  they  would  in  counties.  The  house 
will  readily  perceive  the  object  of  the  amend- 
ment. As  it  has  been  consiaered  necessarj^  to 
make  election  precincts,  for  the  members  ot  the 
legislature,  I  tliink  we  ought  to  provide  that 
such  other  officers  as  we  may  have  to  elect,  shall 
be  elected  at  the  same  places. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  will  remark  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Logan,  that  the  house  has  not  yet 
decided  that  these  districts  shall  be  established. 
It  may  probably  do  so;  I  suppose  it  will.  But 
there  is  nothing  in  the  first  part  of  the  section 
that  precludes  the  legislature  from  doing  pre- 
cisely as  they  may  desire  in  this  matter.  If  it 
should  hereafter  be  determined  to  establish  these 
districts,  it  will  be  entirely  in  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  do  so;  but  as  yet  such  districts 
have  not  been  provided  for. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  take  it  for  granted,  the  coun- 
ties will  be  laid  off  into  districts  or  precincts  for 
the  pui-poses  of  election,  and  my  desire  is  that 
they  shall  harmonize. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  Before  the  question  is  put 
I  will  move  to  strike  out  the  words  "equal  and," 
in  the  second  line.  The  word  "convenient,"  I 
think  will  be  sufficient.  It  will  then  reac',  "The 
general  assembly  shall  divide  the  several  coun- 
ties of  this  commonwealth  into  convenient  pre- 
cincts." 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  have  no  objection  to 
that. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  have  a  difficulty  in  re- 
gard to  the  section  as  it  stands,  which  I  will  sug- 
gest. The  authority  given  to  the  legislature,  to 
divide  the  counties  into  districts  will  occasion  a 
great  amount  of  local  legislation,  on  the  subject 
of  these  precincts,  iu  the  establishment  of  them 
and  in  the  alteration  of  them  from  time  to  time; 
and  it  strikes  me  that  the  legislature  never  can 
actas  well  asthe  local  authorities  who  are  familiar 
with  the  position  of  the  county,  and  although 
this  section  permits  them  to  delegate  the  power 
to  the  local  authorities  of  the  several  counties  in 
the  commonwealth  to  make  these  divisions,  still 
the  legislature  will  have  a  revisory  power  over 
them,  and  that  revision  will  lead  to  an  immense 
amount  of  local  legislation,  which  I  desire,  if 
practicable,  to  avoid.     That   is  the  difficulty 


445 


which  presents  itself  to  my  mind,  in  relation  to 
this  part  of  the  section. 

I  see  it  is  intended  that  there  shall  be 
districts  for  electing  justices  of  the  peace. 

Xow  it  would  be  very  inconvenient  to  have 
tvro  sets  of  districts  in  tne  several  counties,  one 
for  political  elections  and  one  for  the  election  of 
justi»;es  of  the  peace  and  constables.  1  would 
like  to  see  the  districts  that  may  be  laid  off  for 
one  purpose,  subserve  the  purposes  of  both. 

It  strikes  me  that  it  had  better  be  left  to  the 
local  authorities  of  the  county,  with  some  such 
provision  superadded,  as  that  tlie  number  shall  be 
out  so  many,  so  as  to  give  to  each  county  the 
necessary  number  of  magistrates.  I  merely 
make  this  suggestion  for  the  consideration  of  the 
gentleman  from  Logan. 

Mr.  IRWIX.  I  know  that  the  counties  along 
the  state  line  in  Tennessee,  have  been  laid  off  as 
I  propose  here,  into  civil  districts.  I  suppose 
the  ammendment  that  I  have  offered  will  an- 
swer the  purpose  which  the  gentleman  from 
Louisville  has  just  alluded  to. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  In  regard  to  the  clause  to 
which  the  gentleman  from  Logan  alludes,  it  was 
in  the  contemplation  of  the  committee  when  the 
section  was  drafted;  and  I  suppose  it  entered 
into  the  consideration  of  some  of  the  gentlemen 
of  the  committee,  as  into  mine,  that  there  ought 
to  be  double  power  in  regardto  these  precincts, 
by  the  legislature  reserving  to  itself,  in  the  case 
of  its  tyrannical  exercise,  the  right  to  remedy 
any  evil  resulting  from  the  misuse  of  this  power 
by  the  local  authorities,  or  in  case  they  refuse  to 
exercise  it.  That  is  an  answer  to  the  first  objec- 
tion. The  second  objection  is  already  embraced 
in  the  reply  which  I  made  a  few  moments  since, 
in  regard  to  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Logan.  We  were  not  advised  at  the  time 
this  report  was  made,  as  to  what  would  be  the 
ultimate  action  of  the  committee,  on  the  subject 
of  the  county  courts,  as  to  organizing  justices 
districts  within  counties.  I  presume  the  com- 
mittee will  have  no  objection — I  shall  have  none 
— that  the  members  of  the  assembly  shall  be 
elected  in  the  same  precincts  provided  for  the 
election  of  the  justices  of  the  peace.  But  the 
section  may  be  incongruous,  perhaps,  with  the 
various  propositions  that  may  be  submitted. 
All  that  we  intend  to  do  here,  is  to  declare  that 
equal  and  convenient  precincts  shall  be  estab- 
lished, and  when  the  committee  of  arrangement 
takes  up  the  subject,  they  will  make  those  vari- 
ous provisions  harmonize,  and  probably  these 
{)reeincts  for  magistrates  will  be  the  very  best 
or  all  other  purposes. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  gendeman 
will  refrain  from  pressing  his  amendment,  I 
think  the  committee  and  himself  will  agree  in 
regard  to  this  matter,  and  that  his  views  maybe 
carried  out.  My  idea  is,  that  we  should  pro- 
vide for  the  county  courts,  and  if  the  respective 
counties  and  districts  amount  to  no  more  than 
one-half  of  the  number  of  the  justices  of  the 
pea<.e  allotted  to  the  county,  it  may  be  so  arrang- 
ed. My  idea  is,  that  as  the  committee  on  coun- 
ty courts  have  agreed  that  two  magistrates  are  to 
be  allotted  to  each  district,  they  may  make  the 
civil,  as  well  as  the  election  districts  corres- 
pond. 


The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment, and  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  would  invite  the  attention 
of  the  chairman  of  the  committee  to  a  part  of 
the  fifth  section:  "Provided,  that  when  it  shall 
appear  to  the  legislature,  that  any  city  or  town 
hath  a  number  of  qualified  voters  equal  to  the 
ratio  then  fixed,  such  city  or  town  shall  be  in- 
vested with  the  privilege  of  a  separate  represen- 
tation in  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly." 
I  want  to  know  if  the  committee  intend  that  a 
city  that  has  the  number  of  inhabitants  tliat  is 
fixed  as  the  ratio  for  representation  in  the  sen- 
ate, shall  be  entitled  to  elect  a  senator?  I  think 
the  section  needs  some  modification.  Some  del- 
egates on  this  floor  have  directed  my  attention 
to  this  provision  in  the  fifth  section,  and  I  have 
had  occasion  to  examine  it.  There  is  another 
section  in  this  bill,  which  refers  to  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation;  and  the  term  ratio, 
here,  is  used  witli  reference  as  well  to  the  repre- 
sentatives to  the  lower  branch  of  the  general  as- 
sembly as  to  senators.  This  section  may,  per- 
haps, l)e  obnoxious  to  the  charge  of  being  a  lit- 
tle ambiguous;  but  my  own  opinion  is,  that  no 
construction  will  be  regarded  as  a  fair  one,  that 
does  not  permit  a  city  or  town,  where  there  is 
the  requisite  number  of  qualified  voters,  to  send 
a  senator.  My  own  impression  is,  that  this  will 
be  the  fair  construction,  although  if  it  be  con- 
sidered ambiguous,  I  have  no  objection  that  the 
section  shall  be  amended,  so  that  this  intention 
may  be  more  clearly  expressed. 

Sir.  LIXDSEY.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  move  to 
strike  out  the  words  "in  both  houses  of  the  gen- 
eral assembly;"  believing  wego  far  enough  in  sep- 
erating  a  town  or  city  from  her  county,  for  repre- 
sentation in  the  lower  branch  of  the  legislature. 
These  words  stricken  out,  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee will  read  as  the  present  constitution  does, 
and  that  hasbeen  construed  to  withhold  from  cit- 
ies and  towns  separate  representation  in  the 
senate. 

Counties  are  made  for  the  convenience  of  citizens, 
to  enable  them  to  carry  on  their  affairs  where  the 
agency  of  the  government  is  necessary,  and  rep- 
resentation has  to  be  apportioned  in  reference  to 
them,  as  well  as  to  population. 

The  county  of  Jefferson,  for  example,  has  her 
courts,  and  oflices  for  the  transaction  of  county 
business  in  the  city  of  Louisville.  The  interests 
of  city  and  county  are  blended,  and  all  legisla- 
tion for  county  purposes  applies  to  both.  It  ap- 
pears to  me,  the  general  rule  that  keeps  the  peo- 
ple of  counties  together  in  the  selection  of  tneir 
represeotalion,  is  far  enough  departed  from,  in 
giving  separate  members  in  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives to  a  city  or  town. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  only  rose  originally,  and 
do  so  now,  to  say  that  I  certainly  do  not  intend 
to  denythat  a  citvshouldbe  entitled  to  senatorial 
representation  when  they  have  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  voters,  and  if  a  better  substitute  is  not 
provided,  I  will  prepare  one. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  will  ask  leave  to  make 
two  verbal  amendments  by  striking  out  the  word 
"legislature,"  and  inserting  "general  assembly," 
in  the  seventh  line,  and  inserting  the  words 
"either  or"  in  the  tenth  line  of  this  section. 

The  amendments  were  agreed  to. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  amendment 


446 


proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Franklin,  to 
strike  out  from  the  tenth  line,  the  -words  "in 
either  or  both  hoxises  of  the  general   assembly." 

The  PRESIDENT.  Under  the  present  con- 
stitution, and  under,  I  believe,  as  gross  a  con- 
struction as  was  ever  put  upon  such  an  instru- 
ment— after  the  city  of  Louisville  became  enti- 
tled to  a  separate  representation  in  the  lower 
branch  of  the  general  assembly,  and  it  was  forc- 
ed upon  her,  and  after  she  had  the  ratio  that  en- 
titlea  her  to  a  senator,  it  was  denied  to  her  ;  and 
she  has  never  had  a  senator,  though  she  has  had, 
at  two  periods  when  elections  were  held,  a  suf- 
ficient number  of  qualified  voters  to  entitle  her 
to  one.  And  the  phraseology  of  the  provision 
that  has  been  reported  here,  was  intended  to 
place  on  the  correct  ground  her  rights,  and  the 
rights  of  all  other  cities  that  shall  in  time  grow- 
up  in  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky.  The 
city  of  Louisville,  and  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
though  havingvotersenoughtogivetwo  senators, 
have  but  one  ;  and  the  consequence  is,  that  the 
city  of  Louisville  has  the  power  completely  to 
control  and  swallow  up  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
by  force  of  her  superior  numbers,  and  the  dis- 
proportion will  continue  to  increase,  and  the  ef- 
fect will  be,  that  the  voice  of  the  county  of  Jeffer- 
son, will  be  entirely  suppressed  in  the  senate  of 
Kentucky,  for  all  time  to  come;  unless  she  may 
control  the  vote,  by  taking  the  choice  of  two  in- 
dividuals, whom  Louisville  may  present  ;  and 
though  she  may  have  a  sufficient  number  of  qual- 
ified voters,  exclusive  of  Louisville,  to  entitle 
her  to  representation  in  the  senate,  she  never  can 
have  it  under  the  restrictions  that  will  be  put  in- 
to the  present  constitution,  and  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville never  will  have  it. 

The  present  constitution  was  intended  to  make 
representation  as  equal  and  uniform  as  it  could 
be,  and  that  the  voice  of  freemen,  whether  in  the 
city  or  upon  the  mountain,  should  be  the  same 
in  making  the  laws  that  are  to  govern  them  and 
their  posterity.  The  considerations,  and  the 
reasons  that  operated  to  prevent  the  city  ot 
Jjouisville  from  having  representation  in  the 
senate,  appear  to  have  been  of  a  selfish  charac- 
ter. In  order  that  other  sections  of  tlie  state 
mightenjoy  that  representation  to  which  they  were 
not  entitled  by  numbers,  a  senator  was  refused 
1o  Louisville,  although  she  was  entitled  to  one 
according  to  the  construction  put  upon  the  con- 
stitution. Under  the  constitution  tliat  we  are 
about  to  make,  we  expect  that  equal  rights  and 
equal  justice  in  regard  to  representation  will  be 
meted  out  to  all  portions  of  the  state.  I  do  not 
desire  to  lessen  the  voice  of  any  section  of  the 
state  in  the  legislature.  I  desire  that  we  shall 
come,  as  near  as  we  can,  to  an  equal  representa- 
tion in  the  legislature,  and  I  hope  and  trust  that 
gentlemen  will  not  consider  themselves  at  lib- 
erty to  deny  to  us,  in  Louisville,  or  in  the  coun- 
ty of  Jefferson,  the  same  right  of  representation 
which  they  claim  for  themselves.  And  here  is 
the  ground  where  we  shall  be  able  to  test  the 
devotion  of  gentlemen  to  the  principle  of  equal- 
ity of  rights,  about  which  they  have  declaimed 
80  much. 

The  amount  of  political  autliority  that  they 
take  from  the  freemen  in  the  city  of  Louisville, 
and  from  the  freemen  of  the  county  of  Jeffer- 
son, they  appropriate  to  themselves;  and  so  far 


as  they  appropriate  it  to  themselves,  and  stifle 
the  voice  of  a  number  of  freemen,  equal  to  the 
ratio  that  will  give  a  senator,  to  that  same  ex- 
t«mt  do  tliey  deny  that  they  are  in  favor  of  giv- 
ing equal  rights,  and  equal  privileges,  and  equal 
political  power  to  all  the  people  of  the  common- 
wealth. 

I  could  not,  however  much  I  might  debate 
the  subject,  put  the  convention  more  fuily  in 
possession  of  the  ideas  I  have  upon  this  subject, 
and  of  the  feeling  of  injury  that  will  vi-sit  the 
bosom  of  every  individual  who  has  his  rights 
thus  trampled  upon. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  When  the  committee  ap- 
proached this  question,  there  were  various  plans 
suggested,  or  rather  there  were  three  principles 
suggested  on  which  representation  might  be 
based.  The  one,  however,  that  we  considered 
tlie  proper  principle,  was,  that  it  should  be  based 
on  population.  I  am  aware,  sir,  that  the  pro- 
vision contained  in  the  section,  which  was  re- 
garded as  ambiguous,  and  perhaps  to  some  ex- 
tent may  have  been  so,  was  inserted  for  the  pur- 
pose of  enabling  towns  and  cities  in  the  state  to 
be  fully  and  fairly  represented.  Every  member 
of  the  committee  who  assisted  in  its  insertion  in 
this  bill,  did  so  for  that  purpose,  and  none 
other.  I  was  unable  to  discover  why  the  citi- 
zens of  a  town  should  not  be  represented,  where 
the  citizens  of  the  country  were  represented; 
and  I  thought  if  we  established  population  as 
the  basis  of  representation,  that  it  was  but  fair 
and  right  that  the  population  of  a  city,  wherever 
it  might  be,  should  be  fully  and  fairly  repre- 
sented. I  apprehend  that  there  is  no  gentleman 
here,  who  will  say,  that  if  there  are  four  thousand 
legal  voters  within  the  limits  of  the  corporation 
of  the  town  of  Frankfort,  and  four  thousand 
voters  be  the  ratio  fixed  by  law  lor  a  senator, 
those  four  thousand  voters  should  not  be  repre- 
sented in  the  senate  of  the  state.  While  I  make 
this  statement,  I  know  that  perhaps  after  the 
lapse  of  fifty  years,  these  cities  may  grow  to  be 
so  large  that  in  sending  their  concentrated  in- 
fluence into  both  branches  of  the  legislature, 
they  may,  perhaps,  to  some  extent,  overshadow 
the  balance  of  the  state;  but  we  have  laid  down 
the  great  principle,  that  representation  shall  be 
based  upon  population,  and  avc  cannot — unless 
Ave  depart  from  that  principle,  and  I  believe  it 
meets  with  the  sanction  of  every  gentleman  in 
this  house — withhold  from  a  city  the  right  to 
be  represented  in  botli  houses  of  the  general  as- 
sembly, and  at  the  same  time  extend  the  right 
to  the  citizens  of  counties. 

I  think  the  amendment  made  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Louisville,  destroys  all  that  want  of 
distinctness  that  was  thought  to  exist  by  other 
gentlemen.  After  having  inserted  the  words  pro- 
posed by  him  to  be  inserted,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  the  interpretation,  and  a  city  or  town 
having  fifteen  hundred  qualified  voters,  and  fif- 
teen hundred  being  the  ratio  of  representation 
in  the  lower  house,  the  city  or  town  would  bo 
entitled  to  a  representation  in  the  lower  branch 
of  the  general  assembly;  and  if  she  have  four 
thousand,  and  tliat  be  tne  ratio  for  senator,  she 
will  be  entitled  to  a  senator  in  the  legislature  of 
the  state.  That  is  all  right  sir,  and  it  is,  as  I 
now  remember,  nothing  more  nor  less  than  th« 


447 


sense  of  the  whole  committee  that  made  this  re- 
port, or  authorized  it  to  be  made. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  I  made  the  motion  to  strike 
out  in  all  fairness,  not  intending  to  point  at 
Louisville,  or  any  other  place  in  particular.  I 
did  it  to  preserve  the  old  constitutional  provi 
sion,  and  not  extend  separate  city  representation 
to  both  branches  of  the  general  assembly,  as  pro- 
posed by  the  report  of  the  committee.  I  think, 
as  was  remarked  when  the  motion  was  made, 
there  is  propriety  in  adhering  to  the  constitu- 
tional rule  now  in  being,  and  of  not  extending  it. 

The  honorable  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department  contends,  we  must 
look  to  population  alone  as  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation. The  general  principle  is  right,  but 
it  has  to  be  applied  to  other  matters  than  popu- 
lation. We  have  to  apply  it  to  population  ar- 
ranged now  into  counties,  cities,  and  towns,  an 
organization  and  arrangement  we  would  not  de- 
range or  break  up  for  twice  the  inconvieiices 
that  may  result  from  slight  inequality  in  repre- 
sentation. 

This  far,  political  and  civil  regulations  and 
property  must  necessarily  affect  the  principle 
that  representation  shall  be  based  on  popula- 
tion. 

I  need  no  better  arjumcnt  and  proof  of  what  I 
have  just  stated,  than  is  furnished  by  the  whole 
section  reported  by  the  committee.  Take  their 
rule  of  apportionment,  and  apply  it  to  any  ratio 
you  choose  to  assume,  and  see  whether  there 
■will  not  be  inequality.  Counties  having  two- 
thirds  the  ratio  are  to  have  one  representative — 
giving  here  a  violation  of  the  rule.  Counties  hav- 1 
mg  the  ratio  fixed  and  two-thirds  more,  violate  it 
again;  and  so  in  placing  residuums  in  any  form 
you  can  assume.  Indeed  sir,  it  is  obvious,  you 
cannot  take  population  alone,  as  the  basis,  with- 
out disregarding  the  established  internal  organ- 
ization of  the  state,  and  producing  more  difficul- 
ty than  slight  inequality  will  cause.  And  were 
you  to  make  new  lines  and  new  internal  arrange- 
ments geographically,  they  would  be  ever  vary- 
ing and  changing  as  population  increased  or  di- 
minished. 

To  my  mind,  inequality  in  a  greater  or  less 
degree  must  ever  exist  until  we  have  a  more  per- 
manent and  fixed  population,  and  better  and 
more  equal  county  organization — matters  I  do 
not  expect  to  see. 

We  are  sir,  then  to  take  population  not  in  the 
aggregate  as  we  may  find  it  at  any  apportion- 
ment, but  we  must  take  it  as  we  find  it  fixed  and 
circumscribed  bv  county  lines,  and  the  best  rule 
is  that  which  will  leave  the  smalle.<t  numbers 
unrepresented,  and  at  the  same  time  give  to  each 
county  some  weight  and  voice  in  the  administra- 
tion of  state  afiairs. 

Where  taxation  and  fair  representation  go  to- 
gether, as  they  do  in  the  governments  on  this 
continent,  though  the  representation  may  not  be 
based  wholly  on  population,  but  as  nearly  so  as 
IS  convenient  to  existing  county  arrangements, 
and  having  in  view  the  balance  of  power  among 
the  counties,  there  is  no  danger,  as  the  honora- 
ble president  of  the  convention  has  argued,  of 
liberty  and  equality  being  trampled  in  the  dust. 

I  put  it  to  honorable  delegates,  when  they 
give  to  the  city  of  Louisville,  for  example,  her 
separate  city  representation,  backed  too  by  the 


force  and  power  of  the  representation  from  Jef- 
ferson county,  having  county  interests  in  common 
with  the  city,  and  swallowing  up,  perhaps,  and 
adding  to  her  representation  the  force  and  power, 
to  some  extent,  of  a  neighboring  county,  bv  her 
residuums  so  easily  made  at  any  perioil,  cfo  we 
not  give  enough  without  increasing  her  political 
influence  and  strength,  bv  adding  city  senators. 
It  appears  to  me  we  do  all  that  is  right,  and  as 
much  as  should  be  asked.  And  we  do  not  do 
that  violence  which  honorable  gentlemen  sup- 
pose, to  the  rule,  that  population  shall  constitute 
the  basis  of  representation. 

Counties  having  cities  and  towns  ought  not  to 
influence  us  to  break  up  county  organizations 
for  them,  because  they  may  not  have  city  as  well 
as  county  influence  in  both  branches.  Although, 
we  may  slightly  deviate  from  the  rule,  that  pop- 
ulation is  to  be  the  basis  of  representation,  no 
more  than  those  ot  us  of  smaller  counties  having 
no  cities  or  towns,  should  expect  to  see  county  or- 
ganizations abandoned,  because  when  they  are 
regarded,  inequality  of  representation  may  re- 
sult in  numbers  above  or  below  the  ratio  or  in 
residuums.  Itwill  be  found,  when  cyphered  out 
by  any  rule,  the  old  constitutional  plan  is  as  fair 
and  as  equal  as  we  can  make  it. 

But  sir,  government  is  to  look  to  other  matters 
than  equality  of  representation.  The  weak  are 
to  be  protected  from  the  more  powerful ;  the  poor 
from  the  overshadowing  influences  of  the  rich. 
We  may  not  be  able  to  effect  these  desirable  ends 
by  any  constitutional  rules  to  be  applied  to  in- 
dividuals; but  sir,  we  may,  in  looking  to  coun- 
ties, preserve,  to  some  extent,  a  fair  division  of 
power  and  influence,  and  keep  the  stronger  from 
swallowing  up,  in  the  legislation  of  the  county, 
the  interest  of  weaker  counties. 

Some  of  the  arguments  of  mv  Louisville  and 
Jefferson  county  friends  on  tlie  proposition  to 
separate  the  county  and  city,  and  give  them  sep- 
arate municipal  organization  for  county  purpo- 
ses, might  be  applied  here,  but  I  only  make  ref- 
erence to  them. 

You  know,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  this  principle 
of  preventing  -large  interests  from  destroying 
smaller  ones,  is  always  provided  for  in  your' acts 
of  the  general  assembly,  creating  corporations 
for  any  purpose.  The  voting  or  representation 
goes  by  shares  until  you  arrive  at  a  certain  num- 
ber, and  then  decrease  rapidly  in  the  hands  of 
the  holders  of  large  numbers  so  as  to  prevent 
large  interests  from  wholly  overpowering  small 
ones.  I  will  not  proceed,  sir,  to  state  the  rule 
by  which  they  calculate  influence  in  this  wav. 
The  reason  of  it  is  obvious  enough.  It  is  a  fair 
one,  sir,  to  apply  to  representation  to  cities 
where  there  must,  in  the  nature  of  things,  be  a 
concentration  of  strength  from  numbers,  wealth 
and  talent,  and  a  union  of  interests  that  will  al- 
ways give  force  an^l  effect  to  the  wishes  or  wants 
of  a  people  thus  situated.  These  things  are  not 
to  be  found  in  the  diversified  interests  of  a  peo- 
ple scattered  over  a  large  territory  and  following 
pursuits  of  various  kinds,  not  dependent  one  on 
another  as  in  cities.  And  when,  sir,  with  these 
powers  staring  us  in  the  face,  we  depart  from 
this  county  arrangement,  in  order  to  give  city 
representation,  and  we  place  no  restriction  on 
the  increase  of  a  city's  popular  representation 
in  that  house   of  the  general  assembly  which 


448 


governs  the  taxing  power,  the  representation 
from  cities  here  ought  not  to  complain  if  we  re- 
fuse to  depart  from  county  organization  as  to 
senatorial  representation. 

There  is  another  view  of  the  matter  not  to  be 
■wholly  disregarded.  The  several  representa- 
tives from  the  smaller  counties  seeing  the  supe- 
rior advantages  which  concentration  of  Avealth, 
largeness  of  population,  and  union  of  interest, 
found  in  cities,  will  have  over  their  people  scat- 
tered in  large  territories,  especially  when  they 
are  giving  to  the  cities  representation,  where  tax- 
ation can  alone  originate,  have  the  right,  on  the 
principles  of  self-preservation,  to  check  that  su- 
perior influence,  in  some  degree,  by  holding, 
themselves,  more  weight  in  the  senatorial  branch, 
which  branch  of  the  government  we  know  is  not 
designed  or  intended  to  represent  single  inter- 
ests, or  the  immediate  popular  will,  as  in  the 
house  of  representatives. 

For  myself,  I  would  as  soon  give  a  city  an  in- 
■  creased  number  of  representatives  over  what 
she  might  be  entitled  to  by  the  apportionment, 
as  to  give  her  a  separate  senator.  He  will  repre- 
sent a  single  interest  as  much  so  as  if  he  were  a 
representative  in  the  lower  branch,  while  other 
senators  throughout  the  state  will  represent  sev- 
eral interests,  as  distinct  as  separate  county  or- 
ganizations can  make  them — or  the  limited 
number  of  senators  allowed,  must  necessarily 
require  several  counties,  not  having  cities,  to  be 
united  to  form  a  senatorial  district. 

Sir,  as  a  city  grows  in  population  and  wealth, 
and  herconcentrateil  power  expands  thereby,  so 
will  her  overpowering  political  influence  widen. 
For  when  she  gets  two  or  even  tliree  senators, 
there  will  be  but  one  common  interest  to  repre- 
sent— the  one  city's  glory  to  promote.  None 
of  her  senators  will  be  like  those  who  represent 
several  counties,  who  have  always  to  compro- 
mise between  the  several  courty  requirements 
and  wants  and  regard  all  alike.  They  will  strike 
always,  ever  and  alone,fortheir  city's  promotion 
and  power,  and  nothing  else. 

We  are  not  taking  from  a  city  any  right  or 
privilege  she  has  heretofore  en|oyed.  The  re- 
port of  the  committee  is  extending  her  power 
and  influence  in  the  legislative  department.  We 
are  asked  to  give  it;  shall  we  do  it?  AVe  are  not 
bound,  as  I  have  tried  to  show,  on  the  principle 
contended  for  by  the  chairman  of  the  commit- 
tee, as  he  has  assumed  as  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion. We  ought  not,  for  the  other  reasons  I  have 
hinted  at;  and  I  do  believe  when  you  look  to 
proper  equality  and  balance  of  power  in  the 
senate,  you  will  concur  with  me  and  cause  the 
motion  to  prevail.  I  am  too  unwell  to  enlarge 
further,  and  should  not  have  made  the  motion 
in  the  first  place,  or  spoken  now,  liad  other  del- 
egates indicated  a  purpose  to  do  so. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  did  not  expect  that  we 
would  reach  this  subject  to-day,  and  therefore  I 
am  not  prepared  to  express  my  views  upon  it  as 
its  importance  requires.  But  I  will  submit  some 
BUggestions.  I  have  no  desire  to  do  injustice 
either  to  the  people  of  Jefferson  or  Louisville,  or 
of  any  other  portion  of  the  state,  but  it  does 
seem  to  me,  that  by  the  adoption  of  the  princi- 
ple contained  in  tnis  section,  a  great  injustice 
will  be  inflicted  upon  the  general  interests  of 
thii  commonwealth.    I  concede  that  representa- 


tion ought  generally  to  be  based  on  population, 
but  I  belic-ve  also  that  there  are  just  and  proper 
exceptions  to  that  rule,  the  reasons  for  wliich,  at 
a  future  day,  may  strongly  develope  themselves 
in  Kentucky,  'fhe  southern  and  interior  por- 
tions of  the  state  are  and  ever  will  be  agricultu- 
ral. An  agricultural  population  is  never  so 
dense  as  a  manufacturing  and  commercial  one. 
Now  take  the  people  along  the  Ohio  from  one  ex- 
treme of  the  state  to  the  other,  including  the 
cities  and  a  strip  of  territory  of  ten  miles  in 
width  along  that  line,  and  tlieir  pursuits  will 
ultimately  be  commercial  and  manufacturing, 
and  are  so  now  to  a  considerable  extent.  What 
is  the  great  and  predominating  interest  that 
should  be  secured  by  our  policy  here?  It  is  the 
agricultural — the  rights  of  tliose  who  have  in- 
vested tlieir  capital  in  agriculture.  But  unless 
we  adopt  some  proper  safeguards,  the  time  will 
come  when  that  interest  will  be  entirely  sub- 
servient to  the  commercial  and  manufacturing 
interests  of  the  state.  Take  that  region  of  coun- 
try along  the  Ohio  to  which  I  have  referred,  and 
the  prospect  is  that  the  time  will  come,  and 
probably  within  fifty  years,  that  it  will  include 
a  majority  of  the  population  of  the  state.  The 
cities  and  manufacturing  establishments  that 
are  rapidly  growing  up  all  along  that  river,  give 
ample  promise  that  this  will  be  so,  and  I  am  not 
opposed  to  their  growth  or  pursuits.  Shall  we, 
in  fixing  upon  a  basis  of  repiesentation,  put  the 
great  agricultural  interests  of  the  whole  state 
entirely  within  the  power  of  that  strip  of  terri- 
tory along  the  Ohio?  By  what  kind  of  popula- 
tion is  that  territory  to  be  filled  up?  There  is  a 
very  clever  population  there  now,  or  a  large  part 
of  It  is  such,  and  I  doubt  not  a  great  portion  of 
it  Avill  continue  to  be  so;  but  there  will  be  a 
great  portion  who  will  have  no  kindred  feeling 
with  the  great  agricultural  interests  of  Kentucky 
at  all.  It  will  be  manufacturing  and  commer- 
cial in  its  characteristics,  and  will  comprise 
many,  nay  I  apprehend  a  majority,  who  prefer 
different  institutions  from  what  exist  in  Ken- 
tucky; those  institutions  I  mean  which  created 
the  excitement  last  summer.  No  man  can  doubt 
that  those  influences  are  growing  up  in  a  man- 
ner which  will  shake  to  its  foundation  the  great 
institution  we  have  come  here  to  protect,  unless 
we  guard  it  in  fixing  the  basis  of  representation. 
Mark  how  this  institution  is  crumbling  away  all 
along  the  Ohio,  and  how  unsafe  this  description 
of  property  is  becoming  on  that  margin  of  the 
state.  Mark  who  are  taking  the  place  of  the 
black  population,  and  observe  the  feelings  of 
the  great  portion  of  the  people  who  are  filling 
up  these  manufacturing  towns  and  cities  all 
along  the  river.  They  are  generally  hostile  to 
the  institution  of  slavery,  and  disposed  to  go 
hand  in  hand  with  its  enemies  that  live  across 
the  river.  Then  it  behooves  us  to  look  to  this 
state  of  things,  and  to  guard  against  its  effects. 
If  we  are  not  willing  that  our  property  should 
be  placed  within  tlie  reach  of  those  coming  over 
ana  settling  on  our  borders,  and  whojjdo  not  pos- 
sess a  kindred  feeling  on  the  subject  with  the 
residue  of  us,  we  must  provide  a  barrier  to  their 
political  power  and  action  in  the  constitution 
we  are  about  to  make. 

As  the  gentleman  from  Franklin,  (Mr.  Lind- 
sey)  has  said,  representation  is  not  in  the  United 


449 


StaUs,  or  in  any  part  of  the  world,  ba«e(i  entirely 
on  population.  There  may  be  and  there  are  rea- 
sons in  the  organization  of  every  government 
why  it  should  not  be  exclusively  based  on  this 
principle.  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  basing  rep- 
resentation on  property;  it  should  be  based  on 
population  -where  it  is  stable  and  fixed  in  its 
residence,  but  not  where  it  is  floating  and  un- 
settled. 

It  is  not  risrht  where  the  interests  of  a  com- 
munity would  be  insecure  under  its  allowance. 
Why  is  it  not  adopted  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States?  It  was  seen  that  the  large  states 
would  swallow  up  and  control  the  small  ones,  so 
that  their  influence  would  be  as  nothing  in  the  af- 
fairs of  the  federal  government,  unless  the  same 
power  was  given  them  in  one  branch  of  congress 
as  was  given  to  the  larger  states.  And  the  com- 
promise was,  that  in  the  house  of  representatives, 
white  population  should  be  mainly  the  basis  of 
representation,  but  that  in  the  senate  each  state 
Bhould  be  on  an  equal  footing,  the  small  with 
the  large  states.  Little  Delaware  has  as  great  a 
voice  in  the  United  States  senate  as  the  empire 
state  of  Xew  York.  Again,  white  population  is 
not  the  sole  basis  of  representation  in  the  house 
of  representatives  in  congress — nor  is  representa- 
tion in  a  majority  of  the  states  of  the  Union, 
based  without  exception  on  numbers. 

My  honorable  colleague  and  myself  represent 
a  pretty  large  county,  but  if  you  adopt  the  pro- 
position now  pending,  the  little  and  the  interior 
and  second  sized  counties  will  be  greaty  wronged. 

A  large  county  will  be  allowed  on  that  ratio 
one  senator,  or  one-thirty-eighth  of  the  poAver  of 
government,  while  several  small  counties  would 
not  have  that  power,  though  their  population 
should  come  within  ten  votes  of  the  ratio.  The 
result  would  be,  that  a  certain  number  of  voters  in 
a  town  or  city  would  give  the  county  and  town 
a  senator,  when  if  the  same  number  was  dis- 
tributed between  two  counties  they  would  have 
none.  The  principles  embodied  in  this  report 
would  therefore  destroy  the  influence  of  the 
small  and  second  sized  counties  in  the  state  in  its 
senatorial  representation.  Half  a  dozen  of  them 
would  be  huddled  together  to  get  a  representa- 
tive in  the  senate,  and  the  cities  and  towns,  con- 
stantly increasing,  would  soon  gain  the  entire 
control  of  the  legislation  of  the  state.  Adopt 
the  report,  and  the  strip  of  country  on  the  Ohio 
river  to  which  I  have  referred,  in  less  than  fifty 
years,  will  govern  the  state.  "What  then  will  be 
the  result?  "Wherever  commerce  and  manufac- 
tures prevail  all  know  that  the  people  are  gene- 
rally disposed  to  more  extravagance  in  the  pub- 
lic expenditures.  Great  wealth  is  accumulated 
in  a  few  hands  by  these  pursuits.  This  is  not 
the  case  among  an  agricultural  people,  most  of 
whom  after  suppling  their  families  with  the  ne- 
cessaries of  life  find  it  difficult  enough  to  pay 
their  taxes,  let  them  be  as  low  as  they  mav. 
Their  nett  profits  are  small.  The  result  would 
be,  that  these  commercial  and  manufacturingjpeo- 
ple,  disposed  as  tliey  are  to  go  on  a  nvjre  ex- 
travagant figure,  would  tax  the  am-icultural  in- 
terest to  a  burthensome  extent,  and  would  shape 
the  policy  of  the  state  to  subserve  their  interests 
and  not  the  interests  of  agriculturists. 

But  what  is  more  important,  increasing  in  the 
way  I  have  described,  they  will,  a«  soon  aa  they 
57 


I  attain  a  majority  here,  attempt  to  decide  whether 
I  we  shall  keep  a  certain  portion  of  our  property 
1  or  not.  Now,  I  have  not  changed  my  opinion  as 
;  expressed  some  weeks  since,  that  it  is  better  not 
to  Wing  more  of  this  property  here,  for  this  was 
one  of  the  objections  I  have  long  entertained  to 
investing  more  capital  in  slave  property.  I  be- 
lieve it  IS  against  our  interest  to  increase  that 
property,  because  I  have  apprehended  the  dan- 
ger I  have  alluded  to,  and  because  I  believe  that 
if  we  do  not  adopt  some  basis  of  representation 
that  will  secure  the  power  of  the  commonwealth 
to  the  great  agricultural  interest,  the  institu- 
tion  will  go  down.  I  still  adhere  to  all  I  said 
on  the  subject  of  slavery  early  in  the  session. 
What  has  been  the  increase  in  these  Ohio  river 
counties?  When  I  came  here  in  1823  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  legislature,  Campbell  county  was 
scarcely  populous  enough  to  secure  it  one  repre- 
sentative. Since  then  it  has  been  divided,  and 
Kenton  made  from  it,  and  now  Kenton  and 
Campbell,  according  to  the  ratio  proposed  here, 
would  have  three  or  four  representatires  and 
nearly  two  senators.  And  there  are  other  points 
all  along  the  banks  of  the  river  growing  up  in 
the  same  way.  What  has  been  the  growth  of 
the  other  parts  of  the  state?  But  little  com- 
paratively, except  at  the  mouth  of  the  Tennessee 
river,  which  send  two  or  three  more  representa- 
tives— and  every  apportionment  exhibits  the  fact 
that  the  power  is  stealing  away  from  the  great 
agricultutal  interests  of  the  state  towards  the 
Ohio  river,  and  going  over  to  the  commercial 
and  manufacturing  interests.  And  its  tendency 
thus  to  withdraw  from  the  southern  and  interior 
parts  of  the  state,  is  strongly  exhibited  under 
the  basis  of  representation  proposed  in  this  re- 
port. Those  river  counties  now  send  here  men 
who  agree  with  us  in  sentiment  mainly,  but 
there  is  a  feeling  coming  across  the  Ohio  that 
may  send  here  men  who  will  speak  a  different 
language  and  sentiment  from  wnat  these  gentle- 
men do.  They  were  this  year  very  near  carrying 
Louisville,  or  at  any  rate,  were  strong  enough  to 
do  a  great  deal  o{  mischief.  And  I  believe 
that  in  Campbell  they  were  very  near  doing  the 
same. 

Mr.  ROOT.    Xot  at  all, 

Mr.  TURNER.  Does  any  one  believe  that 
this  representation  from  along  the  banks  of  that 
river,  m  fifty  years  to  come,  from  present  indica- 
tions, is  likely  to  be  in  favor  of  that  institution 
we  have  been  assembled  here,  in  part,  to  protect? 
Can  any  one  believe  it,  when  they  see  the  change 
that  is  going  on  in  the  character  of  the  popula- 
tion? The  tendency  of  this  incoming  popula- 
tion is  to  accumulate  in  cities  and  in  manufac- 
turing establishments,  and  their  sympathies  are 
not  with  us.  I  think  that  one-thirty-eighth  part 
of  the  power  of  this  commonwealth  is  as  much 
as  Jefferson  and  Loruis^'ille,  or  as  any  county 
should  a«k;  and  I  believe  that  the  residue  of  the 
state  ought  to  have  the  other  thirty -seven  parts. 
I  do  not  olame  the  gentlemen  from  Louisville  for 
attempting  to  secure  all  the  power  thev  can,  be- 
cause their  constituents  would  be  displeased 
with  them  if  they  did  not;  but  still,  tiiey  must 
be  aware  that  it  is  not  safe  to  the  balance  of  the 
state,  and  that  it  is  the  duty  of  those  represent- 
ing the  agricultural  interests  to  oppose  it. 
There  has  oeen  something  said  in  regard  to  tha 


450 


foreign  vote — I  mean  the  vote  of  those  who  come 
in  from  other  states,  and  foreign  countries.     Go 
to  the  manufacturing   establishments  along  the 
river,  and  you  will   find   one-third,  if  not  one- 
half  of  the  population  there  to  be  those  who  are 
not  Kentuckians  by   birth.     Well,  suppose  the 
whole  country  along  the  river  settled  in  the  same 
way,  are  we  disposed,  when  they  become  a  ma- 
jority of  the  population  of  the  state,  to  let  the 
whole   agricultural  interests  of  the  state,  inclu- 
ding the  mass  of  the  native  population  of  the 
country,  be  governed  and  ruled  by  these  immi- 
grants?   I  see  a  state  of  things  which  1  believe 
will  eventually  result  in  giving  the  majority  and 
full  control,  to  the  hands  of  people   not  favora- 
ble to  the   institutions  of  Kentucky;  and   I  am 
for  checking  it  before  it  is  too  powerful  to  con- 
trol.    Let  us  begin  at  once.     I  mean  no  disrespect 
to  any  of  the  river  counties,  for  it  is  a  state  of 
things  which  I  have  no  idea  those  residing  there 
desire  to  produce;  but  that  it  will  result  in  the 
way  I  have  pointed  out,  I  think  is  most  mani- 
fest.    Go  now   to  the   towns   and  cities  on  the 
Ohio  river,  and   contrast  the  condition  and  ap- 
pearance of  things  to  what  they  were  some  years 
ago.     Who  compose  the  waiters  at  the  taverns, 
and  the  servants  and  laborers  of  the  towns  and 
cities?    Who  do  you  find  filling  these  stations? 
Not  the  blacks  that  Ave  once  saw  there;  but  an- 
other description  of  people  who  are  continually 
coming  in,  and  who  are   ready  to  act  in  concert 
with  others  out  of  the  state,  against  the  institu- 
tion of  slavery,  and  who  will  break  down  our 
institutions  after  a  while,  if  not  checked  by  our 
action.     I  understand   this    to   be  particularly 
true  of  Louisville.     This  part  of  the  population 
is  constantly  migratory — is  unstable,  and  feels 
very  little   community  of  interest  with    native 
Kentuckians.     It  is  here  to-day  and  gone  to-mor- 
row.    I  mean  a   large  part   of  it.     They  never 
have,  and  never  will  settle  in  the  interior,  to  any 
great  extent,  while  the  institution  of  slavery  ex- 
ists.    Their  natural  inclination   is  to  the  banks 
of  the  Ohio  river,  the  vicinity  of  different  insti- 
tutions from  ours.     Well,  it  seems  to  me  that  no 
county  in  the  state  ought  to  have  more  than  one 
senator,  especially  when  a  large  proportion  of 
the  population  to  uphold  it  is  such  as  I  have  de- 
Bcribed.     And  1  see  no  reason  why  this  matter  of 
senators  for  Louisville  is  brought  up  in  this  sec- 
tion, relating  to  representatives.    Why,  if  it  is 
pot  intended  to  make  an  invidious   distinction, 
is  it  not  placed  in  those  sections  where  the  resi- 
due of  the  senat«  is  provided  for,  and  which  we 
have  not  yet  reached?    It  does  not  belong  where 
It  is.     1-3  it  to  secure  Louisville   first,  and  to  let 
the  balance  of  the  state  struggle  for  the  residue 
of  the  senators?    Shall  we  put  no  limitation  on 
the  number  of  senators  or  representatives  a  city 
shall  have?    Shall  we  allow  one  city,  if  it  grows 
large  enough,  to  govern  the  whole  state?    1  have 
thrown  out  these  suggestions  on   this  subject, 
somewhat  crudely,  as  the  question  has  come  up 
when  no  one  expected   it  would,  and  ask   for 
them  the  consideration  they  may  be  entitled  to. 
The  provision  of  the  old  constitution,   that  no 
county  shall  have  more  than  one  senator,  is  far 
preferable  to  the  report  of  the  committee,  in  my 

fstimation.    Let  the  representation  in  the  lower 
ouae  be  mainly  on  the  basis  of  population,  if 
you  choose — not,  however,  without  some  limita- 


tion as  to  cities — but  when  you  come  to  the  sen- 
ators, let  no  county  have,  in  any  event,  more 
than  one  senator,  if  she  does  embrace  a  city 
within  her  boundary.  One-thirty-eighth  part  of 
the  whole  legislative  power  of  this  common- 
wealth is  as  much  as  any  county  ought  to  ask, 
and  as  much  as  the  convention  ought  to  grant. 
Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not  understand  that  this 
question  is  confined  to  the  cities  of  Louisville, 
Covington,  or  any  other  cities  in  the  common- 
wealth. The  gentleman  who  has  preceded  me, 
I  understand  in  the  remarks  which  he  has  thrown 
out,  to  assume  this  position — that  it  is  not  right 
that  the  people  living  upon  the  banks  of  the 
Ohio  river,  embracing  a  district  of  country  ten 
miles  wide  along  the  extent  of  that  river,  and 
the  people  living  in  the  cities  there,  or  the  cities 
in  any  part  of  the  state,  should  be  placed  on  an 
equal  footing,  so  far  as  representation  is  concern- 
ed, with  the  balance  of  the  state. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  did  not  take  that  position. 
I  said  that  I  was  willing  cities  should  have  sep- 
arate representation  from  the  counties. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  am  certainly  not  deceived  in 
the  effect,  at  least,  of  the  gentleman's  argument. 
What  was  that  argument?  Was  it  not  that  the 
whole  of  the  country  lying  on  the  banks  of  the 
Ohio  river,  from  its  upper  to  its  lower  extremity, 
was  to  be  inhabited  by  foreigners,  paupers,  eman- 
cipationists, and  men  without  property,  who,  in 
all  probability,  were  to  control  the  elections  in 
this  country  in  time  to  come,  and  who  also 
would  be  adverse  to  the  best  interests  of  the 
people  of  the  state?  Did  I  not,  then,  under- 
stand the  gentleman's  argument  aright?  The 
disfranchisement  of  a  large  number  of  the  free- 
men of  Kentucky,  and  for  what  purpose?  Be- 
cause, first — a  vast  multitude  of  foreigners, 
emancipationists,  and  men  without  property, 
collect  together  in  cities;  and  from  the  exposure 
of  the  borders  of  the  state  on  the  Ohio  river  to 
the  free  states,  the  same  kind  of  population  will 
inhabit  the  whole  country,  commencing  at  the 
lower  and  running  up  to  the  upper  line  of  the 
state,  and  including  a  distance  of  ten  miles 
from  the  river.  These  people,  says  the  gentle- 
man, will  have  no  common  interest  with  the  ag- 
ricultural community;  that  if  permitted  to  exer- 
cise the  right  of  suffrage,  the  time  will  not  be 
distant,  when  they  will  control  the  elections  of 
the  state,  and  emancipate  all  the  slaves.  Al- 
though a  pro-slavery  man  myself,  in  the  fullest 
extent  of  the  term,  I  am  not  for  disfranchising 
any  citizen,  and  depriving  him  of  the  right  of 
sufirage,  lest,  at  some  future  period,  he  vote  at 
the  polls  that  slavery  shall  no  longer  exist  in 
Kentucky.  To  disfranchise  the  non-slave  hold- 
ers of  Kentucky  from  the  apprehension  that  they 
may,  at  some  future  period,  vote  against  the  in- 
stitution of  slavery,  is  to  arouse  the  wliole  of 
that  class  of  the  population  against  the  institu- 
tion, and  to  insure  its  final  overthrow. 

But  I  will  here  say  to  the  gentleman,  that  in 
the  legislature,  if  the  question  of  slavery  is 
guarded  in  the  new  constitution,  as  I  apprehend 
It  will  be,  that  body  can  never  have  or  exercise 
any  legislative  power  over  the  subject.  We  will 
never  give  to  the  legislature  tlie  right  to  free  the 
slaves,  unless  with  the  limitation  that  the  owners 
shall  be  fairly  compensated  for  them.  I  havo 
no  fears,  then,  of  letting  all  the  freemen  of  Ken 


4S1 


tacky  be  fairly  represented  in  the  legislative  de- 
partment of  the  government.  All  who  are  sub- 
jected to  the  burthens  of  government  should  be 
justly  and  equally  represented  in  the  body  that 
makes  the  laws  by  which  tliese  burthens  are  im- 
posed. To  deny  this,  would  be  to  tax  the  peo- 
ple without  their  consent — to  subject  them  to 
evils  better  suited  to  the  abject  condition  of  the 
serfs  of  Russia,  than  to  the  proud  spirit  of  the 
freemen  of  Kentucky. 

Representation  in  this  state  is  not  to  beeqnal; 
it  is  to  be  made  unequal  on  the  borders  of  the 
state, — it  is  to  be  confined  to  a  particular  cla.ss 
of  people,  and  distinctions  are  to  be  made  be- 
tween the  freemen  of  this  commonwealth  I  This 
I  understand  to  be  the  principle  asserted  by  the 
gentleman  from  Madison,  and  by  way  of  carry- 
ing out  this  new  policv,  and  of  counteracting 
the  eflfect  of  allowing  all  these  people  to  vote, 
he  insists  that  the  basis  of  representation  in  the 
towns  and  cities  should  not  be  the  same  that  it  is 
in  other  parts  of  the  state,  or,  in  other  words — 
numbers  being  established  as  the  basis — a  larg- 
er numoer  of  voters  should  be  required  to  elect 
a  senator  or  representative  in  the  towns  and 
cities,  and  the  country  bordering  on  the  Ohio 
river,  than  should  be  required  in  other  parts  of 
the  Stat*.  This,  certainly  sir,  was  the  gentle- 
man's argument,  or  it  was  nothing  at  all.  It  is 
not  merely  to  def«nd  the  free  citizens  of  the  cit- 
ies of  Louisville,  Covington,  or  the  citizens  of 
any  other  city,  who  fall  under  this  proseriptive 
system  of  the  gentleman ;  for  those  cities  have 
champions  here  npon  this  floor,  able  and  compe- 
tent at  all  times,  to  defend  their  interests  and 
their  people  against  whatever  assaults  may  be 
made  upon  them  ;  but  it  is  to  defend  my  own 
constituents  from  this  unjust  assault,  that  I  pro- 
test against  the  gentleman's  doctrines. 

The  people  on  the  borders  of  the  river  and  in 
the  towns,  and  the  people  of  the  state  who  own 
no  property,  are  to  be  adverse  to  the  interests  of 
the  balance  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  es- 
pecially to  the  interest  of  the  slaveholders. 
This  I  do  not  believe  will  ever  be  the  case  ;  but 
of  one  thing  I  am  certain,  that  the  way  to  pre- 
vent it  is  not  to  disfranchise,  under  the  provisions 
of  the  constitution,  that  portion  of  the  citizens 
who  may  happen  not  to  be  slaveholders.  I  am 
for  protecting  slavery,  but  not  for  departing 
from,  or  striking  out  of  the  constitution  of  the 
state,  the  great  principle  which  secures  the 
equality  of  suffrage. 

The  principle  which  is  asserted  in  all  free  gov- 
ernments is,  that  numbers,and  not  property,  shall 
form  the  basis  of  representation.  'This  is  the 
principle  asserted  in  the  report  of  the  committee, 
and  which  I  am  not  disposed,  unless  for  better 
reasons  than  have  been  given  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  to  depart  from.  I  will  make  no 
distinctions  between  the  citizens  of  Kentucky,  in 
the  right  to  exercise  the  elective  franchise,  nor 
will  I  make  the  basis  upon  which  that  right  ex- 
ists, broad  as  applicable  to  one  class  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  narrow  when  applied  to  another  ;  equal 
rights  to  all,  and  exclusive  privileges  to  none, 
at  least  so  far  as  the  right  of  voting  is  concerned, 
should  be  the  motto  of  every  republican. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison,  by  way  of  illus- 
trating his  theory,  has  attempted  to  show  that 
the  interests  of  the  people  who  inhabit  towns 


I  and  cities  are  antagouistical  te  those  who  lire 
In  the  country.  I  deny  the  correctness  of  this 
position,  and  maintain  that  their  interests  and 
pursuits,  if  not  identical,  are  nevertheless  mu- 
tual and  dependent  on  each  other. 

It  is  the  division  of  labor  which  preserves  and 
stimulates  all  the  various  industrial  pursuits 
of  the  land;  for  if  all  men  were  to  engage  in  the 
same  business,  it  is  clear  that  the  world  would 
be  flooded  with  the  surplus  of  whatever  might 
be  the  products  of  their  labor,  and  which  would 
waste  and  rot  for  the  want  of  a  market.  It  is 
from  the  fact  that  the  people  of  the  world  are 
engaged  in  a  thousand  different  pursuits,  that  a 
market  is  afforded  to  each  for  the  surplus  pro- 
duct of  his  labor.  The  manufacturer,  the  me- 
chanic, the  man  of  commerce,  and  the  farmer, 
are  all  dependent  on  each  other;  and  that  sys- 
tem of  policy  which  weakens  the  one  destroys 
the  interest  of  the  other.  The  mechanic  builds 
a  house  for  the  manufacturer  and  receives 
in  return  for  his  labor  money  or  the  fabric 
which  is  manufactured.  He  affords  to  the  man- 
ufacturer a  market  for  a  portion  of  his  goods. 
He  builds  for  the  farmer  a  house  and  he  receives 
in  pay  his  breadstuffs  and  other  articles  raised 
on  his  farm,  and  thus  becomes  a  market  for  the 
farmer.  The  manufacturer,  with  his  tliousand 
operatives,  whilst  he  buys  from  the  agricultural- 
ist the  raw  material  which  he  works  into  the 
beautiful  fabric,  buys  from  the  farmer  and  is  de- 
pendent on  him  for  all  the  articles  of  food  which 
are  necessary  to  the  subsistence  of  his  hands. 
His  manufacturing  establishment  is  a  great 
home  market  for  the  fanner.  The  law  which 
protects  him,  therefore,  protects  the  farmer.  X 
have  said  that  but  for  this  division  of  labor  and 
diversity  of  employments  we  would  have  no 
market,  and  the  people  engaged  in  all  the  differ- 
ent industrial  pursuits  are  dependent  on  each 
other.  The  sugar  planter  of  the  south,  whilst 
he  sells  to  the  farmer  of  the  west  the  sugar 
which  he  every  day  consumes  in  his  family,  re- 
ceives in  return  the  mules  and  horses  and  bread- 
stuffs  which  are  necessary  in  carrying  on  the  op- 
erations of  his  plantation.  They  afford  mutual 
markets  for  the  surplus  products  of  the  labor  of 
each  other.  If  all  were  mechanics,  all  manu- 
facturers, all  sugar  planters,  or  all  of  any  other 
pursuit,  i-uin  and  blight  would  fall  on  their  en- 
tire business;  do  not  force  then  too  many  people 
to  engage  in  agriculture,  lest  you  breai  down 
the  market  for  his  surplus  products  and  destroy 
where  you  afford  protection. 

Build  up  your  cities  and  your  towns  then  in 
the  midst  of  agricultural  communities,  let  them 
increase  to  their  tens  of  thousands  and  their 
hundreds  of  thousands,  and  the  vast  multitude 
of  merchants  and  mechanics,  and  mantifactur- 
ers  and  professional  men,  and  every  description, 
must  look  to  the  farmer  for  all  the  means  of  sub- 
sistence. Is  it  not  to  the  advantage  of  the  farmer 
then  that  these  towns  and  cities  should  grow  up 
in  his  midst?  He  finds  in  them  a  market  for  his 
beef,  his  pork,  his  poultry,  his  eggs,  his  vegeta- 
bles, his  flour,  his  meal,  his  com,  nay,  for  eveir 
article  that  he  raises  on  his  farm,  and  of  which 
he  has  a  surplus.  Is  it  not  manifest  then  to  all, 
that  where  you  establish  such  a  great  market  in 
the  midst  of  an  agricultural  country,  you,  so 
far  from  breaking  down  the  interest  of  the  ag- 


46'i 


ricultural  community,  ar«  giving  tu  it  iu  very 
life  and  strength. 

Where  is  the  farmer  who  lives  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Louisville,  or  any  other  large  city,  that 
does   not  feel   the   advantage   he   derives  from 
bringing  his   property  to    that  great    market? 
All   must  see  and   feel  the  value  of  it.     All  the 
great  manufacturing  establishments  of  the  coun- 
try are  in  this  way  advantageous  to  the  agricul- 
tural community  at   large.     Does  not  every  one 
see  that  when  you  establish  a  great  manufactory 
with   its   hundreds   of  working  men,  that  you 
have    thus  employed    that  number   of    persons 
who  otherwise  would  be  engaged  in  the  agricultu- 
ral pursuits  of  the  country?     Is  not  a  market  at 
once  opened  to  the  farmer,  which  is  of  great  ad- 
vantage and  benefit  to  him?    All  must  see  and 
feel  it.     Look  at  the   iron  region,   and  we  find 
there  a  thousand  men  engaged  in  the  manufac- 
turing of  iron.     They  have  also  in  use  hundreds 
of  horses,  mules,  and  cattle.    Where  do  all  these 
animals — these    horses,   mules,   and  cattle,  and 
the  corn  and  forage  required   for    them,  jeome 
from?    Was  it  not  from  the  farming  community 
at  large?    And  does  not  the   gentleman  see  at 
once  the  necessity  that   this  great  division  of 
labor  should  exist,  with  a  view  that  all  shall  be 
employed  and  a  market  opened  for  all?     Break 
up  all  your  cities,  and  let  their  populations  go  to 
raising  beef,  and  pork,  and  cattle,  and  tobacco, 
and  hemp — away  with  trade,  manufactures,  and 
commerce.     Throw  all  into  the  agricultural  in- 
terest, and  tlien  you  will  see  the  farmer,  instead 
of  reaping  that  return  for  his  labor  which  he 
now   does,  crushed   by   this    blighting  system, 
and  deprived  of  every  market  for  his  produce. 
It  is  wrong  on  principle  to  assert  on  this  floor 
that  there  is  any  difference  existing  between  the 
people  of  any  portion  of  the  state,  or  that  there 
is  any  antagonism  in  these  interests.     This  great 
principle  of   the  division  of  labor  is  one  for 
which  I  have  contended  all  my  life,  and  it  is 
right  in  itself     I  am  for  building  cities  and  vil- 
lages, and  manufacturing  establishments  wherev- 
er it  is  possible  and  profitable.     And  I  am  not 
for  giving  either  to  the  people  there,  or  to  those 
elsewhere  in  the   state,   exclusive  advantages  or 
privileges,  but  for  putting  them  all  on  an  equal- 
ity.    This  great  system  of  the  division  of  labor 
is  the  very  protection  of  all  the  great  interests  of 
the  country,  and  whenever  that  principle  is  de- 
parted from  those   interests  must  suffer.     Then 
J  will  not  go  with  the  gentleman  from  Madison. 
I  will  go  for  drawing  no  such  invidious  distinc- 
tions between  the  people  in  the   exercise  of  the 
right  of  suffrage.    I  will  not  go  with  him  to  re- 
vive the  old  English,  rotten,  borrough  system, 
which,  springing  out  of  the  division  of  all   the 
lands  ot   England  by  William   the   conqueror 
amongst  his  great  followers,  limited  representa- 
tion to  property  or  territory,  and  crushed,  be- 
neath the  iron  heal  of  a  dark  despotism  and  a 
splendid  aristocracy,  which  followed  in  its  train, 
the  hopes  and  freedom  of  a  great  people  for  cen- 
turies.  We  have  flung  from  our  constitutions  and 
our  statutes  the  English  doctrine  of  entails,  and 
primogeniture,  and  property  qualification,  as  the 
basis  of  representation,  and  I  cannot  go  with  the 
eentleman  when  he  attempts,  in  effect,  to  revive 
tnem  in  carrying  out  the  principle  he  has  here  to- 
day asserted. 


Th*  gentleman  seems  to  think  tliat  th«  tiinti  is 
rapidly  approaching,  when  we  shall  be  overrun 
by  a  foreign  population,  and  because  a  foreign 
population  may  settle  alons  the  banks  of  tSe 
Ohio,  or  in  the  city  of  Louisville,  or  some  other 
city,  that  the  great  principle  of  equal  represen- 
tation .should  be  denied  them.  Does  not  the 
gentleman  know  that  if  he  excludes  the  foreign- 
er according  to  his  basis  of  representation,  that 
he  will  also  exclude  with  him  the  native  born 
American  citizen  from  the  benefits  of  tliat  prin- 
ciple? When  he  strikes  at  the  foreigner  of  the 
cities,  and  along  the  banks  of  the  river,  he  strikes 
also,  him  who  is  born  within  the  limits  of  the 
state,  and  destroys  all  at  a  single  blow.  I  pro- 
test against  this  doctrine  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison.  It  is  unjust  to  the  people  of  that  por- 
tion of  the  state  to  which  he  alludes,  and  des- 
tructive to  a  great  fundamental  principle.  The 
true  basis  of  representation  is  population,  and 
nothing  else,  and  I  protest  against  any  other 
principle  being  introduced  into  the  constitution 
we  are  about  to  form.  I  am  not  for  giving  a 
man  the  right  of  suffrage  merely  because  he  i» 
rich  or  has  property.  The  poor  man,  ever  ready 
to  protect  and  defend  the  interests  of  his  country, 
merely  because  he  is  poor,  I  would  never  exclude 
from  the  right  of  suffrage.  The  gentleman's 
doctrine  is  to  establish  a  new  basis  of  representa- 
tion, perhaps  of  property,  or  at  least  something 
other  than  population,  and  I  will  not  go  with 
him  in  sustaining  it.  Let  every  freeman  in  Ken- 
tucky, unless  he  has  been  guilty  of  some  crime 
which  should  disfranchi.se  him.  exercise  the  glo- 
rious privilege  of  the  elective  franchise.  When 
the  country  calls  to  arms,  and  her  enemies  are  on 
her  borders,  do  youthen  stop  to  enquire  whether 
the  soldier  is  a  property  holder  or  not?  Who  is 
it  that  is  the  first  to  listen  to  the  tap  of  the 
drum?  Whose  spirit  is  it  that  is  first  aroused  by 
the  ear  piercing  fife,  and  wlio  is  it  that  is  the 
first  ready  to  march  to  the  rescue,  when  the  coun- 
tiy  is  invaded,  or  its  flag  is  in  danger?  The  rich 
man  is  confined  to  his  home  by  interests  that  he 
is  loth  to  sacrifice.  It  is  the  men  without  prop- 
erty, but  who  are  ready  to  yield  up  what  IS  far 
dearer  to  them  than  property,  their  lives,  when 
the  country  demands  tlie  sacrifice.  They 
are  the  men  we  all  look  to,  when  the  country 
wants  soldiers  for  her  defence.  Let  it  not  then  be 
proclaimed  as  the  doctrine  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky, that  the  basis  of  representation  is  to  be 
established  here,  other  than  that  of  population. 
Any  thing  else  would  be  unjust,  and  1  never  will 
subscribe  to  it.  I  will  not  here  stop  to  inquire 
Avhether  foreigners  should  have  the  right  to  vote. 
I  know  not  whether  that  question  is  to  be  dis- 
cussed, but  one  thing  is  certain,  that  foreign  cit- 
izens ought  to  be  permitted  to  exercise  all  the  priv- 
ileges that  appertain  to  citizens.  If  you  make 
him  a  citizen  let  him  exercise  the  privileges  of 
a  citizen.  Do  not  give  him  the  shadow,  while 
you  dep.ive  him  of  the  substance.  Do  not  mock 
him  with  the  idea  that  he  is  a  citizen,  while  at 
the  same  time  you  deprive  him  of  all  the  privi- 
leges of  citizenship.  For  my  part,  I  can  never 
go  with  the  gentleman.  His  doctrines  are 
wrong  in  every  particular.  They  are  wrong  to 
the  people  where  I   live,  they  are  wrong  to  the 

f)eople  where  he  lives,  and  they  strike  at  the  very 
oundation  of  the  liberties  of  all  intelligent  peo- 


453 


pie.  Tb«y  ar«  wrong  to  the  people  of  this  stat«, 
ihey  are  wrong  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States,  and  they  are  wrong  lo  the  whole  world. 
The  whole  world  is  looking  anxiously  to  the 

freat  progress  of  free  principles,  and  the  estab- 
ishmeut  of  free  governments  not  only  in  the 
United  States,  but  in  all  Europe.  A  mighty 
struggle  is  going  on  in  the  popular  feeling  in 
the  old  world,  which  is  crumbling  the  thrones 
of  despots  to  ruins.  The  t>ld  corruptions  and 
ancient  abuses  are  passing  away,  and  the  spirit 
of  liberty  is  struggling  with  an  energy  that  will 
be  irresistible  wherever  its  votaries  are  united  in 
defence  of  its  sacred  cause.  That  spirit  is  on- 
ward, and  it  is  marching  to  triumph.  It  is  dear 
to  the  heart  of  every  American,  and  rather  than 
to  yield  or  abandon  it,  he  would  tear  that  heart 
from  his  bosom,  and  throw  it,  a  bleeding  sacri- 
tice,  at  the  feet  of  his  country.  For  one,  1  would 
do  it. 

Mr.  PRESTOX.  A.s  it  is  rather  late,  I  would 
not  now  attempt  to  detain  the  committee  but  for 
the  singular  ground  taken  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison.  It  is^a  position  so  diflferent  from 
what  he  has  heretofore  occupied  on  this  floor, 
and  the  arguments  he  used  are  so  unfounded,  so 
unjust,  that  I  feel,  though  the  youngest  repre- 
sentative from  Louisville,  bound,  on  this  floor, 
to  point  out  the  errors  which  have  characterized 
them,  to  denounce  them  as  unfit  to  be  entertain- 
ed by  this  convention,  and  as  contrary  to  every 
true  principle  of  liberty,  and  to  eVery  right 
which  should  belong  to  the  citizen.  What  is 
the  proposition  in  the  report,  of  the  committee? 
Is  it  iniquitous,  is  it  unjust,  does  it  speak  to  a 
section,  does  it  apply  only  to  Louisville,  or  is  it 
i  a  its  operation  as  wide  spread  as  the  state  of 
Kentucky,  and  as  fair  as  the  character  of  the 
bold  race  that  live  upon  its  soil.  This  proposi- 
tion does  give  Louisville  a  representation  in 
both  houses  of  the  general  assembly,  which 
technicalities  in  former  times  deprived  us  of. 
And  the  legal  acumen  which  mark  many  iu  the 
house  has  been  exerted  in  order  to  inflict  a  vital 
stab  on  the  true  principle  of  representation. 
What  is  that  principle  ?  Representation  rests 
on  three  grounds.  It  can  be  based  on  territorial 
extent,  it  can  be  on  property,  and  it  can  be  upon 
the  free  hearts  and  bold  arms  of  our  countrymen, 
upon  numbers,  upon  population,  and  it  must  be 
upon  one  of  these,  or  upon  combinations  of  them. 
Kentucky  was  the  first  state  in  this  confederacy 
that  asserted  the  proud  doctrine  that  the  principle 
of  representation  was  based  on  territorial  extent, 
or  upon  property, but  upon  the  number  of  her  brave 
citizens.  That  it  was  the  free  bodies  and  the 
free  minds  of  Kentucky,  and  not  the  hoards  of 
an  Astor's  wealth,  or  the  extent  of  a  Van  Rens 
Belaer's  possession  that  was  to  be  represented. 
In  England,  they  adopted,  as  my  eloquent  friend 
from  Henderson  has  stated,  the  principle  of  ter- 
ritorial extent,  and  what  was  the  creature  of  that 
infamous  principle,  for  all  infamous  principles 
will  breed  monsters  in  the  progress  of  time.  It 
was  the  borough  system.  It  caused  old  Sarum 
to  be  represented  when  the  town  of  Birmingham 
was  unrepresented,  when  old  Sarum  with  two 
members  had  not  a  citizen  within  her  borough, 
and  when  Birmingham  contained  forty  thousand 
free,  white,  adult  males.  It  was  this  that  called 
for  the  refrom  bill.     The  principle  of  the  repre- 


sentation of  property  has  been  eipioded,  aud 
we  now  have  a  single  point  to  rest  the  right  of 
suflVage,  and  the  extent  of  representation  upon. 
And  that  is  the  number  of  free  white  male  citi- 
zens. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  gentleman 
from  Louisville  will  give  way.  I  will  move  that 
the  committee  rise, 

Mr.  PRESTON  assented. 

Mr.  TURXER.  I  desire  to  make  an  explana- 
tion at  this  time,  that  it  may  go  out  with  the 
gentleman's  speech,  with  the  permission  of  the 
gentleman  from  Louisville.  So  far  as  I  recollect 
the  argument  of  the  gentleman  from  Henderson, 
it  was,  that  I  wished  to  raise  up  an  aristocracy 
in  the  country.  Now  my  argument  was  directly 
the  contrary.'  Commerce  and  manufactures  pro- 
duce ten  times  the  amount  of  aristocracy  that 
the  agricultural  interests  of  the  country  do. — 
The  poor  farmei-s  who  live  scattered  about  all 
over  the  countrj',  and  barely  raising  surplus 
enough  to  pay  their  taxes,  have  not  the  means  to 
engender  or  to  gratify  aristocratic  taste  or  hab- 
its. I  am  against  raising  up  a  great  city  aris- 
tocracy to  govern  the  country,  and  I  was  object- 
ing to  those  who  are  here  to-day  and  away  to- 
morrow, coming  in  and  voting  in  our  cities 
and  controlling  the  interests  of  the  state.  Iu 
the  large  cities  you  would  find  one  third  of  the 
population  of  tliis  class,  and  of  those  who  never 
settle  there  permanently. 

The  committee  then  rose  and  reported  pro- 
gress, and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again,  and 

The  convention  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  NOVEMBER  12.  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Brish. 

ORDER   OF    business. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  submitted  the  follow- 
ing: 

"Resolved,  Tliat  the  convention  will  proceed 
in  the  following  order  to  dispose  of  the  reports 
of  the  several  committees: 

1st.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legis- 
lative department. 

2.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  the  judicial 
department. 

3.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  the  execu- 
tive department. 

4.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  the  militia. 

5.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  slavery. 

6.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  education. 

7.  The  report  of  the  committee  on  miscellane- 
ous provisions. 

8.  The  report  to  be  made  on  the  mode  of  re- 
vising the  constitution. 

And  that  said  reports  be  taken  up  and  dis- 
posed of  in  the  foregoing  order." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  myself 
fairly  comprehend  the  derangement,  or  arrange- 
ment of  business  at  this  hour,  which  that  reso- 
lution proposes.  I  see  not  why  we  should  de- 
part from  the  ordinary  course.  The  report  on 
the  legislative  department  will,  I  suppose,  come 
up  to-day,  that  having  the  priority;  and  I  think 
the   convention  should  take  up  that  which  is 


^^5^ 


most  convenient.  I  luafce  the  suggestion,  be- 
cause to-morrow,  at  least  it  was  so  annoiniced, 
tJie  report  of  the  committee  on  the  judicial  de- 
partment, and  the  circuit  and  county  courts,  will 
come  up  as  the  special  order. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  If  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  will  reflect,  he  will  see  that  if  the  pre- 
sent order  of  business  be  maintained  we  cannot 
get  at  the  report  he  alludes  to  under  the  rule, 
without  a  vote  of  two-thirds.  It  is  true,  the  re- 
port to  which  the  gentleman  refers  has  been 
made  the  special  order  of  the  day  for  to-morrow, 
but  he  cannot  have  forgotten  that  there  are  other 
special  orders  that  have  precedence.  My  object 
in  presenting  this  resolution  is,  that  each  gentle- 
man may  know  when  the  report,  in  which  he  is 
most  interested,  is  to  be  acted  npon.  Without 
such  a  resolution,  I  apprehend  the  report  of  the 
legislative  committee,  which  was  under  consid- 
eration on  Saturday,  will  have  precedence  over 
all  others,  until  it  is  disposed  of.  It  is  not  with 
a  view  of  giving  precedence  to  any  particular 
report  that  I  offer  this  resolution;  but  I  thought 
the  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive  branches 
should  be  considered  in  succession,  so  as  not  to 
distract  the  mind  of  the  convention  from  these 
great  leading  objects.  That  was  my  sole  rea- 
son; and  gentlemen  will  perceive  that,  so  far 
from  giving  precedence  to  the  report  of  tlie  com- 
mittee of  which  I  am  chairman,  that  report  is 
placed  nearly  last. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  do  not  very  well  understand 
why  this  proposition  is  offered  this  morning. 
It  comes  in  at  a  very  singular  time,  and  I  do  not 
well  comprehend  it.  There  has  been  an  order  of 
business  adopted,  which  has  been  acted  upon 
from  the  commencement  of  the  session  to  the 
present  time.  That  order  has  not  required  the 
legislative  committee  to  report  first,  and  the  ju- 
dicial committee  next,  ana  so  forth;  and  I  do  not 
well  comprehend  the  propriety  of  this  resolu- 
tion this  morning,  unless  it  is  designed  that  the 
reports  of  one  committee,  where  they  have 
thought  proper  to  report  what  belongs  to  anoth- 
er, shall  have  precedence.  Now,  if  this  arrange- 
ment of  business  is  to  obtain  in  this  house,  and 
it  is  to  accommodate  those  interested  in  a  partic- 
ular report,  what  will  be  the  result?  Why,  it 
will  be  that  when  a  report  is  before  the  conven- 
tion, in  which  they  are  not  interested,  they  will 
not  be  here,  and  you  will  not  have  a  quorum  to 
do  business.  I  understood  from  the  honorable 
mover  of  that  proposition,  that  there  might  be  a 
particular  report  in  which  gentlemen  are  inter- 
ested, and  that  these  certain  gentlemen  ought  to 
know  when  it  will  come  up.  Sir,  there  should 
be  no  report  in  which  gentlemen  are  not  interest- 
ed. Gentlemen  should  feel  an  interest  in  every 
report;  and  I  am  not  inclined  to  change  the  or- 
der of  business  here  to  accommodate  gentlemen, 
so  that  they  may  be  absent  when  the  reports,  in 
which  they  have  no  particular  interest,  are  be- 
fore us.  Sir,  1  want  our  business  to  proceed  on 
a  well  settled  principle.  And  I  again  repeat, 
that  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know  why  this  resolution 
comes  in  this  morning.  I  shall  vote  against  it 
till  I  see  more  of  the  effect,  point,  and  object  to 
be  accomplished,  than  I  now  see. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  If  the  gentleman  is 
dull  of  comprehension,  it  is  not  my  fault.  He 
Bays  he  cannot  understand  it.    Sir,  that  is  not 


my  fault.  I  am  not  responsible  for  that  at  all. 
I  alluded,  in  speaking  of  the  reports  in  which 
gentlemen  might  be  interested,  to  the  fact  that 
there  are  certain  gentlemen  who  are  chairmen  of 
committees,  who,  if  they  expected  their  reports 
to  come  up  on  a  particular  day,  would  bring 
their  papers  with  them  when  they  leave  their 
rooms  and  be  prepared  to  act  upon  the  subjects 
of  them.  The  gentleman  says  it  will  change 
the  order  of  the  business  here.  Why,  what  or- 
der have  we  had?  The  reports  of  committees 
have  nearly  all  been  made,  and  they  have  been 
referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  in  the 
order  in  which  they  came;  and  they  will  have 
precedence,  as  they  have  had,  without  anv  con- 
nection with  each  other  at  all.  The  gentleman 
must  be  very  suspicious,  if  he  would  attribute 
any  motive  to  me.  It  is  to  take  up  those 
branches  first  that  relate  to  each  other;  and  that 
is  all  the  motive  I  have.  The  gentleman  will 
see  that  the  report  of  the  committee  of  which  he 
is  chairman,  will  be  the  first  to  be  disposed  of, 
then  the  report  on  the  executive  department, 
and  next  the  report  on  the  judicial  department, 
and  after  which  will  come  up  the  other  subdi- 
visions, and  those  subjects  belonging  especially 
to  no  particular  department. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  know,  sir,  we  have  been  in 
the  habit  when  in  the  committee  of  the  whole, 
for  reasons  which  seemed  to  be  perfectly  satis- 
factory to  the  committee,  of  laying  aside  a  report 
for  the  time  being  and  taking  up  another,  and 
that  practice  has  been  adopted  for  the  convenience 
of  the  house,  and  for  facility  in  the  transaction  of 
business.  Now  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson 
has  been  pleased  to  say,  that  if  I  was  in  want  of 
comprehension,  it  was  not  perhaps  his  duty  to 
furnish  me. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  (in  his  seat.)     No  sir. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Sir,  I  understand  the  remark, 
and  I  beg  leave  to  say  if  I  were  in  want,  I  should 
not  come  to  him.  I  should  be  poor  indeed  if  I 
should  come  to  that  gentleman  under  such  cir- 
cumstances, nor  would  I  leave  him  so  destitute, 
as  I  should  do  b^'^  taking  away  from  him  the 
small  stock  that  he  now  possesses.  Sir,  I  did 
not  pretend  to  impugn  the  motives  of  that  gen- 
tleman in  offering  the  resolution.  I  have  stated, 
and  repeat,  that  I  have  seen  no  reason  for  tliis 
departure  from  the  order  of  business  in  this 
house,  since  this  has  been  a  convention.  It  will 
be  borne  in  mind,  and  I  appeal  to  members  of 
different  committees,  if  there  are  not  reports  fi'ora 
one  committee  embracing  the  same  subject  mat- 
ter that  has  been  reported  upon  by  another  com- 
mittee. Now  if  there  is  no  object  in  this,  what 
will  be  accomplished?  Though  the  report  of  the 
legislative  committee,  as  the  gentleman  puts  it 
first,  encroach,  per  possibility,  on  the  legitimate 
business  of  another  committee,  still  you  make 
that  encroachment  the  first  matter  for  action; 
because  you  cannot  take  up  the  other  till  you 
have  acted  on  this  one.  We  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  laying  over  the  reports  for  tJie  conve- 
nience of  the  liouse,  and  if  convenience  still  re- 
quire it,  I  do  not  want  any  iron  rule  laid  on  me, 
or  this  house  to  prevent  it. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  am  sorry  that  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson,  (Mr.  Clarke),  has 
thought  it  necessary  to  pervert  my  remarks  for 
the  purpose  of  making  a  personal  attack.     T  did 


455 


not  sav  that  if  he  was  dull  of  comprehension  I  was  |  to  the  suggestion  of  the  gentleman  last  up,  that 
bound  to  furnish  him  with  it.  No,  itrequires  a  |  it  will  be  proper  to  change  the  order  of  business 
gentleman  of  more  presumption  than  I  am  pos-  t  from  tliat  which  we  havepursued.  We  have  dis- 
6essed  of  to  make  an  assertion  of  that  kind.  I  j  cussed  the  bill  in  relation  to  the  court  of  appeals; 
said  if  the  gentleman  could  not  comprehend  the    the  county  court  bill  has  also  undergone  discus- 


resolution,  and  if  he  was  dull  of  comprehen- 
sion, I  was  not  responsible  for  it.  And,  as  to  the 
gentleman's  iron  rule,  I  ask,  if  this  resolution  is 


sion,  and  by  this  time  they  are  pretty  well  un- 
derstood. The  gentleman  says  these  bills  i-an 
be  gone  through  with  in  one   or  two  days.     For 


not  adopted,  if  there  is  not  already  an  iron  rule  ;  one,  1  should  like  to  see  a  commeucement  of  bu- 
on  the  house.  Does  not  the  rule  require  that  we  \  siness,  that  we  may  have  something  completed; 
shall  take  up  the  reports  as  they  have  been  made,  \  and  if  our  minds  are  made  up  in  regard  to  the 
unless  made  the  order  for  a  particular  day?  And  j  judiciary  bill,  let  us  take  it  up,  for  I  am  satisfied 
then  if  there  are  several,  has  not  the  first  special  j  that  our  minds  are  not  made  up  as  to  what  we 
order  the  precedence?  The  gentleman  says  that  shall  do  with  the  legislative  bill.  It  has  not 
for  the  convenience  of  the   house,  we  have  dis-  |  been  so  well  considereu;  out  while  we  go  through 

fensed  with  this  rule.  Well  sir,  adopt  the  rule  j  with  the  judiciary  bill,  the  attention  of  the  del- 
propose,  and  we  can  also  dispense  with  it,  egates  can  be  turned  to  the  legislative  bill,  and 
when  the  convenience  of  the  house  shall  require  1  be  ready  to  act  at  a  future  time.  I  think  this  is 
it.  I  again  appeal  to  tlie  house  whether  it  is  |  a  reason  against  taking  up  the  order  of  business, 
not  expedient   that  we  should  consider  the  re- i  as  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Jetferson.    I 


ports  on  the   legislative,  executive,  and  judicial 
Qepartments  as  nearly  together  as  we  can. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  understand  the  reports  of 
the  committees  are  almost  all  in,  and  I  under- 
stajid  this  resolution  is  nothing  more  than  ma- 
king out  a  docket  as  to  how  we  shall  procee<l. 
This  is  generally  done  by  a  committee,  and  the 
order  is  laid  out  so  that  each  mav  know  how  we 


do  not  profess  to  be  more  diligent  than  others; 
but  I  am  a  long  way  from  home,  and  cannot  go 
to  see  my  family  and  return,  as  members  can  who 
live  at  a  less  distance.  But  I  think  every  dele- 
gate should  have  a  deep  interest  in  every  propo- 
sition, ajid  if  this  resolution  is  to  give  a  privi- 
lege to  certain  men  to  be  absent,  I  am  against  it 
for  that  very  reason.     I  want  the  concurrence  of 


are  to  proceed.  Now.  we  have  a  committee  to  i  all  m  the  adoption  of  every  article  of  the  con.sti- 
classify  and  arrange  our  business,  so  that  it  mav  I  tution  that  we  may  mature.  If  the  court  of  ap- 
assume  the  shape  of  a  constitution,  giving  it  \  P^^ls  bill,  and  others  relating  to  the  judiciary, 
symmetry  and  form.  The  order  we  proceed  in  !  ^^n  be  disposed  of  this  week,  I  think  we  had 
is  of  very  little  importance,  but  it  seems  to  be  i  better  take  them  up  an-l  dispose  of  them,  and  in 
proper  to  take  up  the  legislative  branch  first,  the  I  ^^^'^  ^^^n  time  we  may  agree  on  those  points  about 
executive  next,  and  the  judiciary  next.  If  we  do  l  ^^"c'l  ^^«  '^o^y  differ  in  reference  to  the  legisla- 
not,  what  will  be  the  result?  'Why,  we  shall  i  t^'^'e 'lepartment.  I  move  to  lay  the  resolution 
jump  from  subject  to  subject,  and  sit  here  till  the  i  ""^,^®  table. 

first  day  of  March.  Are  we  to  sit  here  till  the  \  The  question  heiug  taken,  there  were  ayes  33, 
last  day  of  December?     Why,  then,  I  suppose,  I  ^oes  40.     So  the  resolution  was  not  laid  on  the 


there  will  be  a  writ  of  forcible  entrj-  and  detain- 
er to  compel  us  to  give  up  the  house  to  the  legis- 
lature. I  want  to  finish  in  four  weeks.  I  think 
we  can  finish  the  reports  of  the  legislative  and 
executive  branches  this  week,  and  when  we  get 
to  the  judicial  department,  as  it  has  been  so  of- 
ten discussed,  I  do  not  believe  we  shall  be  de- 
tained with  tlie  three  courts  more  than  two  or 
three  days.  There  is  scarcely  a  controverted 
point  in  all  the  three  reports,  lor  we  have  made 


table. 

The  resolution  was  then  adopted. 

LEGISLATIVE   DEPABTUENT. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  MERIWETHER  in  the 
chair,  and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  on  the  legislative  depart- 
ment. 

The  pending  question  was  on  the  amendment 
60  manv  compromises  and  concessions  all  round,  [  submitted  by  the  gentleman  from  Franklin,  (Mr. 
that  I  tliink  there  willbe  little  difference  of  views  '■  Lindsey)  on  Saturday. 

in  .the  discussion  of  these  reports.  I  hope  we  j  Mr.  CLARKE  offered  the  following  as  a  sub- 
shall  go  on  with  the  legislative  branch  till  we  ^  stitute,  viz :  to  strike  out  all  after  the  word 
finish  it,  and  then  take  up  the  executive  and  ju-  j  "the,"  in  the  first  line,  and  insert  the  following : 
dicial,  for  I  am  as  anxious  as  any  man  to  have  |  Sec.  5.  The  "general  assembly  shall  divide 
it  finished,  and  I  do  not  think  tliere  will  be  any  ]  the  several  counties  of  this  commonwealth  into 
controversy  about  it.  I  have  no  predilections,  i  convenient  precincts,  or  may  delegate  the  pow 
I  was  asked  yesterday  as  to  the  best  way  to  get  j  er  to  do  so  to  such  county  authorities  as  they 
on  with  the  business.  I  had  no  conversation  f  may,  by  law,  provide.  And  elections  for  repre- 
with  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  but  he  has  j  sentatives  for  the  several  counties,  shall  be  held 
seemed  to  strike  on  the  same  plan  which  was  i  at  the  places  of  holding  their  respective  courts, 
suggested  by  some  gentlemen  yesterday.  It  j  and  at  the  several  election  precincts  into  which 
seems  important  that  we  should  finish.  'Public  I  the  counties  may  be  divided  :  Provided,  That 
sentiment  says  we  have  stayed  too  long,  and  if]  when  it  shall  appear  to  the  general  assembly 
we  stay  here  more  than  four  weeks  longer,  pul>  that  any  city  or  town  hath  a  number  of  qualifieel 
lie  sentiment  will  say  we  have  not  done  our  du-  voters  equal  to  the  ratio  then  fixed,  such  city  or 
ty.  I  hope  that  after  this  day,  this  convention  town  shall  be  invested  with  the  privilege  of  a 
will  take  a  recess  from  one  o'clock  till  three  separate  representation,  in  either  or  both  houses 
o'clock,  and  then  sit  till  five.  We  all  know  of  the  general  assembly;  which  shall  be  retain- 
what  we  have  to  do.  ed  so  long  as  such  city  or  town  shall  contain  a 

Mr.  MACHEN.    It  seems  to  me  sir,  according^  number  of  qualified   voters  equal  to  the  ratio 


45S 


which  may  be  fixed  by  Ihv,- :  Provided,  That  no 
city  ortown,  together  -with  the  county  in  which 
Buch  city  or  town  may  be  situate,  shall,  at  any 
time,  be  entitled  to  more  than  two  senators;  and 
thereafter,  elections  for  the  county  in  which  such 
city  or  town  is  situated,  shall  not  be  held  there- 
in; but  such  city  or  town  shall  not  be  entitled 
to  a  separate  representation,  iinless  such  county, 
after  the  separation,  shall  be  entitled  to  one  or 
more  representatives:  Provided,  further,  That 
the  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power  to  pass 
laws  prohibiting  the  citizens  of  this  common- 
wealth from  importing  slaves  for  their  own  use; 
but  may  pass  laws  requiring  the  importer  of 
slaves  to  take  an  oath,  that  such  slave  or  slaves, 
60  imported,  are  for  their  own  use,  and  not  as 
merchandise;  and  that  he,  she,  or  they,  will  not 
sell  said  slave  or  slaves  Avithin  this  common- 
wealth, within  two  years  after  such  slave  or 
slaves  are  imported,  under  such  penalties  as 
niav,  from  time  to  time,  be  provided  by  law." 

Mr.  TRIPLET!  said  he  also  had  an  amend- 
ment which,  at  the  proper  time,  he  desired  to 
submit,  but  which,  with  the  consent  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville,  he  would  noAV  read,  that 
that  gentleman  might  know,  before  he  commenc- 
ed his  remarks,  that  such  a  proposition  would  be 
offered,  and  be  able  to  apply  his  observations  to 
it,  if  he  should  deem  it  necessary. 

The  secretary  read  the  amendment  as  follows, 
for  the  information  of  the  convention  : 

"Provided,  That  the  cities  unincorporated,  or 
■which  may  hereafter  be  incorporated,  in  this 
commonwealth,  and  to  which  a  senator  or  sena- 
tors may  be  allotted,  shall  not  together,  under 
any  future  apportionment,  be  entitled  to  more 
than  one-fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  sena- 
tors; and  whenever,  under  afty  future  apportion- 
ment, the  whole  number  of  senators  to  which 
said  cities  would  be  entitled,  shall  exceed  one- 
fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  senators  for  the 
whole  state,  the  legislature  shall  apportion  the 
one-fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  senators 
among  the  cities  entitled,  according  to  some  just 
and  equitable  mode  of  apportionment:  And, 
provided,  That  no  city  shall  ever  be  entitled  to 
more  than  two  senators," 

Mr.  PRESTON.  T  had  not  anticipated  sir, 
fully,  the  debate  which  has  sprung  up  on  this 
question. 

At  a  late  hour  on  Saturday  last,  when  the  dis- 
cussion closed,  I  had  made  some  few  remarks  in 
regard  to  what  I  conceived  to  be  the  true  prin- 
ciple upon  which  representation  was  founded. 
I  had  imagined  up  to  the  time  wlien  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison  made  liis  speech,  that 
there  would  be  but  little  resistance  in  this  con- 
vention, to  affording  to  Louisville,  or  to  any 
other  city,  the  same  representative  rights  that  are 
accorded  to  every  other  portion  of  the  state.  In 
as  much  as  it  was  at  a  late  hour  that  I  made 
those  remarks,  and  as  they  are  tlie  basis  upon 
■which  I  intend  to  place  tlie  principle  of  repre- 
sentation, I  shall  rind  it  necessary  briefly  to 
recur  to  them.  The  amendments  that  have  been 
offered  this  morning,  are  to  me,  matter  of  some 
surprise.  I  see  before  me  a  gentlennm  who 
sometimes  i.s  a  little  mischcivous  witli  liis  young 
friends,  and  who  although  he  seemed  to  accord 
■with  me  fuUy  on  Saturday,  now  tolls  me,  that  in 
r«lation  to  tn«  rights  of  cities   to  bo  repre8«nt«d 


— to  use  his  own  language — "  he  feels  smartly 
bothered."  The  amendment  that  was  proposed 
by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  is  also  singular. 
He  seems  desirous  to  create  a  division  or  make  a 
partnership  between  the  gentleman  from  Mad- 
ison and  myself,  in  regard  to  the  importation  of 
slaves  into  this  state.  I  frankly  admit  that  I 
am  afraid  of  such  an  alliance.  I  am  fearful  it 
will  be  what  the  civilians  call  "societas  leonina," 
a  lion's  partnership,  in  which  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  would  get  the  lion's  share.  Out  of 
regard  therefore  to  me,  I  hope  he  will  not  press 
it.  The  amendment  violates  also  a  part  of  the 
legislative  report — a  report  Avhich  I  suppose 
will  receive  the  gentleman's  able  assistance  and 
support,  inasmuch  as  he  is  the  chairmaii  of  the 
connnittee.  He  introduces  a  feature  here,  de- 
claring in  the  thirty  fourth  section  "  that  no 
law  enacted  by  the  general  assembly,  shall  em- 
brace more  than  one  object,  and  that  shall  be 
embraced  in  the  title." 

It  is  a  principle  in  legislation  that  receives  my 
assent,  but  he  has  transgressed  it  in  bringing  up 
the  "  importation  act"  of  negroes,  in  other 
words  the  act  of  1833,  in  the  final  part  of  his 
proposition.  I  will  ask  him  therefore  to  reflect 
for  a  moment,  upon  the  propriety  of  withdraw- 
ing his  amendment,  and  allowing  ns  to  consid- 
er, unperplexed,  the  section  in  the  report;  as  I 
think  we  ought  not  to  set  so  bad  an  example  to 
subsequent  legislatures,  as  to  infringe  the  rule 
established  by  ourselves.  I  merely  mention 
these  facts  as  preliminary  to  the  observations  I 
meait  to  make  in  reference  to  the  subject  gene- 
rally. 

The  amendment  of  the  gentleinan  from 
Daviess  does  not  propose  that  any  city  in  the 
state  shall  never  have  the  right  of  sending  more 
than  one  fourth  of  the  representation,  but  that 
all  the  cities  of  the  state,  collectively,  shall  not. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  That  is  exactly  what  I 
mean. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  do  not  knoAV  that  I  can 
occupy  that  ground.  I  came  here  only  claiming 
that  the  people  of  the  cities  shall  not  be  ostra- 
cised, and  claiming  equal  and  just  privileges 
with  our  rural  brethren.  I  ask  therefore,  that 
no  stigma  shall  be  placed  on  our  brow,  that  no 
act  of  disfranchisement  in  any  shape,  shall  be 
exercised  by  this  conventioji  towards  us,  while 
no  such  restriction  is  decrc^  in  reference  to 
the  population  of  other  portions  of  the  state. 
There  is  the  same  moral  obligation  to  act  to- 
wards us  upon  the  true  principles  of  justice,  and 
there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  be  placed  in 
a  position  different  from  that  which  the  free 
population  of  the  counties  occupy.  I  ask  this 
house,  before  they  cripple  us  by  ijnposing  un- 
just conditions  and  qualifications  upon  our 
right  of  representation,  to  listen  calmly,  and 
decide  justly. 

The  territory  of  Kentucky  is  one-fourth  as 
great  as  that  of  France.  Under  the  blessings 
of  free  institutions,  we,  in  common  with  our 
common  country,  are  advancing  with  iinpar- 
ralleled  progress,  in  wealth  au<l  popuhition. 
We  have  peculiar  institutions.  In  some  parts 
of  the  country  white  labor,  in  other  parts  slave- 
ry. But  the  whole  great  confederacy  moves  on- 
■ward  with  uninterrupted  prosperity/ 


" -Like  the  Pontic  Sea, 

Whose  icy  currem:  and  compulsive  course 
Ke'er  I'eels  retiring  ebb,  but  tiows  right  on 
To  the  Propontic,  and  the  Hellespont." 

Erery  day  we  develope  and  demonstrate  neAV 
principles  in  the  theory  of  government  to  make 
us  what  we  are,  the  model  republic  of  the  world. 
The  country  towards  which  the  eyes  of  freemen 
from  every  "part  of  the  globe — from  Hungary, 
from  Ireland,  from  France,  from  all  nations  that 
are  oppressed— are  turned  to  obtain  an  example  for 
their  study  and  their  imitation.  We  know  that 
France  is  studded  Avith  populous  cities  and  vil- 
lages. So  in  time,  cities  and  villages  will  spring 
up  in  this  country,  to  become  the  abode  of  its 
home  manufactures,  and  to  supply  the  surround- 
ing country  with  the  necessary  fabrics;  while 
they  receive  in  return,  the  products  of  agricul- 
ture. It  was  with  surprise  that  I  heard  an  in- 
vidious comparison  between  the  agricultural 
and  manufacturing  classes,  attempted  to  be  in- 
stituted by  the  gentleman  from  Madivson.  In  it 
there  was  an  attempt  to  array  interest  against 
interest,  in  a  manner  I  could  not  have  expected 
from  such  a  quarter. 

Such  then  sir,  is  the  attitude  of  Kejitucky. 
JTow,  let  us  look  at  her  past  history.  To  what 
should  we  attribute  this  progress?  There  is  but 
one  solution,  and  that  is  comprised  in  a  single 
word — liberty.  To  what  should  we  attribute 
that  liberty?  To  the  great  and  immutable  prin- 
ciples that  were  founded  in  the  revolution,  and 
still  further  carried  out  in  1799  in  this  very  state. 

Sir,  there  are  but  three  principles  to  regulate 
representation,  that  have  oeen  practically  acted 
upon  by  men — three  principles  upon  which  a 
representative  government  is  ever  based.  What 
arc  they?  The  first  is  geographical  extent,  the 
second" is  property,  the  third  is  population.  A 
fourth  has  been  recommended  by  some,  at 
the  head  of  whom  stands  Jeremy  Benthatn. 
This  last,  is  education,  or  popular  intelligence. 
I  mention  this  because  there  are  no  other  princi- 
ples, that  I  am  aware  of,  upon  which  represen- 
tation proceeds.  Sir,  up  to  1799,  the  principle 
prevailed,  that  property,  or  territory,  should  con- 
stitute the  basis  of  representation.  Kentucky 
was  the  first  to  assert  that  it  should  rest  purely 
on  population.  From  the  time  when  the  tents 
of  the  plebeians  whitened  the  sacred  hill,  until 
that  auspicious  day,  the  principle  had  been  the 
continued  subject  of  contest  between  the  people 
and  their  rulers.  In  England,  we  find  that  the 
Xorman  barons  who  conquered  that  country, 
claimed  that  representation  should  be  based 
upon  extent  of  territory,  because  they  possessed 
the  soil.  This  gave  rise  to  the  borough  system, 
and  to  a  contest  that  lasted  from  the  time  of  the 
Norman  conquest,  down  to  the  year  1838. 

In  1838 — I  think  it  was — the  celebrated  "re- 
form bill,"  of  Lord  Grey,  was  introduced  in  the 
British  parliament,  mainly  to  get  rid  of  that  in- 
famous borough  system,  which  had  grown  up 
and  increased  in  the  progress  of  time,  until  Bir- 
mingham and  Manchester,  with  a  population  of 
two  or  three  hundred  thousand  souls,  had  but  a 
single  representative,  while  the  Chiltem-Hun- 
dreds  were  under  ministerial  control,  and  old 
Sarum  sent  two  members  to  parliament.  But 
gentlemen  may  say  that  our  country  is  entirely 
too  wise  to  follow  such  a  system.  By  no  means. 
58 


It  is  now  in  existence  in  this  country.  I  recol- 
lect a  gentleman  of  Carolina  told  me  that  a 
member  of  the  Carolina  legislature  had  invited 
every  one  of  his  constituents  to  a  dinner-party. 
Ill  Virginia,  the  people  have  struggled  in  vam 
to  extirpate  this  cancer  from  the  body  politic, 
and  they  have  almost  succeeded  in  eradicating 
it.  In  Maryland,  the  same  principle  is  now  in 
partial  operation,  and  this  doctrine,  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent,  pervades  the  constitutions  of 
many  states,  particularly  on  the  Atlantic  border. 

In  some  states,  where  the  principle  of  num- 
bers was  forced  upon  their  consideration,  in 
preference  to  free-hold  qualification,  they  ac- 
quiesced on  the  condition  that  paupers  should 
be  excluded,  and  that  some  other  restrictions 
should  remain.  At  this  hour  in  Massachusetts, 
a  property  qualification  is  virtually  required,  by 
excluding  paupers  from  voting.  Let  us  turn  to 
the  constitution  of  Massachusetts. 

"  There  shall  be  annually  elected  by  the  free- 
holders," «fec.  This,  the  original  feature,  under 
the  popular  demand,  was  altered  in  18-21 ,  so  that 
"every  free  male  citizen,  excepting ^au/jers,"  ^c. 
were  acmitted  to  the  right  of  suffrage. 

K'ew  York,  under  her  new  constitution,  has 
done  what?  She  has  declared  the  broad  princi- 
ple that  numbers  shall  be  the  basis  of  represen- 
tation. She  has  adopted  fully  the  Kentucky 
doctrine;  this  was  not  the  case  when  our  common 
confederacy  was  formed. 

In  regard  to  Kentucky,  the  last  of  the  old  thir- 
teen states — if  you  may  so  eall  her — the  eldest 
born  child  of  the  new  thirty — if  you  so  choose 
to  style  her — what  principle  does  she  set  out 
upon?  Let  me  read,  for  it  is  the  first  time  cer- 
tainly that  this  great  truth  ever  emanated  from  a 
constitutional  body.  The  sixth  section  of  the 
constitution  declares,  that  representation  shall 
be  equal  and  uniform,  in  this  commonwealth. 
It  runs  thus: 

"  Representation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
in  this  commonwealth;  and  shall  be  forever  reg- 
ulated and  ascertained  by  the  number  of  quali- 
fied electors  therein." 

To  her  eternal  honor,  be  it  said,  she  was  the 
finst  to  promulge  it. 

This  is  the  principle  that  Kentucky  has  es- 
tablished. This  is  the  ground  she  occupies,  and 
I  want  those  who  seek  to  curtail  the  rights  of 
suffrage  in  this  state,  to  come  up  fairly,  and 
point  out  the  necessity  for  making  an  exception. 

I  have  alluded  to  the  evils  of  the  borough  sys- 
tem. There  is  no  doubt,  at  this  time,  in  the 
hearts  of  the  people  of  many  of  the  states,  as 
wealth  increases,  a  growing  inclination  to  re- 
turn to  the  system  of  property  qualification. 
You  see  them  attempting  to  effect  tnis  in  many 
of  the  states,  although  we  have  always  repudi- 
ated the  principle  here.  In  the  state  of  Virginia, 
Massachusetts,  and  others,  under  their  present 
constitutions,  a  property  qualification  still  ex- 
its. No  mar,  until  he  shall  have  paid  his  taxes, 
01  possesses  some  freehold  qualification,  is  al- 
lowed to  vote.  I  want  to  occupy  a  broad  and 
tenable  ground,  and  it  is,  that  there  shall  be  no 
qualification  required  of  a  man  here,  except  that 
he  shall  be  a  free  white  male  citizen  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky. 

Now,  sir,  gentlemen  tell  us  that  it  is,  necessary 
to  put  this  restriction  upon  senatorial   represen- 


459 


tation,  and  they  compare  the  counties  of  Ken-  ] 
tucky  to  the  states  of  this  confederacy,  and  say 
that  Delaware  has  two  senators  in  congress,  \ 
■while  New  York  has  no  more.  He  must  be  con-  j 
fideut  of  a  credulous  audience  who  would  urge,  i 
with  any  degree  of  gravity,  this  as  a  reason.         j 

Why  has  Delaware  two  senators,  and  New 
York  "but  two  V  It  was  because  the  states  were  | 
sovereign  that  came  into  the  compact,  and  the 
senators  are  the  representatives  of  those  sover- 
eignties. Tlie  larger  states  had  the  same  rights 
of  sovereignty  as  the  smaller;  the  smaller  as 
the  larger.  But  do  gentlemen  say  that  the  coun- 
ties in  the  state  stand  upon  the  same  footing  as 
a  sovereign  power.  I  would  ask  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  if  he  would  assent  that  counties 
irrespective  of  population  shall  be  represented  in 
the  senate.  Does  the  constitution  of  Kentucky 
regard  counties  as  sovereign.  In  the  twelfth 
section  it  says,  "and  where  two  or  more  counties 
compose  a  district,  they  shall  be  adjoining." 

That  is,  it  orders  the  joining  of  two  or  more 
counties  together,  for  the  purpose  of  representa- 
tion, when  circumstances  require,  and  it  seems 
the  framers  of  the  constitution  of  1799,  at  least, 
had  no  idea  of  regarding  the  counties  as  being 
seperate  and  independent  sovereignties.  The 
thing  is  absurd  in  itself.  There  is  no  parallel, 
or  at  least  the  parallel  has  no  force  in  it. 

I  have  claimed  only,  that  this  fifth  section 
shall  give  a  representative  right  to  the  cities  in 
this  state,  according  to  population  ;  such  as  has 
been  accorded  to  cities  in  other  states.  The  city 
of  Cincinnati,  opposite  to  us,  was  at  one  time 
the  special  object  of  the  gentleman's  laudation, 
at  another  of  his  execrations.  In  the  remarka- 
ble speech  that  he  delivered  here,  in  the  early 
part  of  the  session  of  this  convention,  and  which 
will  be  found  in  the  record  of  its  debates,  the 
gentleman  seems  to  have  entertained  as  violent 
an  admiration  of  Cincinnati,  forty  days  ago,  as 
he  has  a  horror  of  Louisville,  and  the  other  cities 
of  Kentucky,  at  this  hour.  Let  us  look  at  the 
constitution  of  Ohio. 

"The  number  of  senators  shall,  at  the  several 
♦periods  of  making  the  enumeration  before  meii- 
'  tioned,  be  fixed  by  the  legislature,  and  appor- 
'  tioned  among  the  several  counties,  or  districts 
'  to  be  established  by  law,  according  to  the  num- 
'  ber  of  white  male  inhabitants  of  the  age  of 
'  twenty  one  years  in  each,  and  shall   never  be 

•  less  than  one  third,  nor  more  than   one  half  of 

*  the  number  of  representatives." 

Do  you  find  there  a  regulation  that  Cincinnati 
shall  not  have  a  senator,  or  is  there  any  such 
provision,  as  that  all  the  cities  of  the  state  shall 
not  have  more  than  one  fourth  part  of  the  repre- 
sentation ?  Ohio  has  been  depreciated  and  con- 
demned on  this  floor,  for  its  illiberality  on  a  cer- 
tain question.  Ohio  at  least  has  not  proscribed 
her  cities,  nor  her  citizens. 

Let  us  go  to  the  state  of  Massachusetts,  anoth- 
er state  that  has  large  and  populous  cities  in  her 
Jborders.  Boston  lias  in  the  senate  a  full  repre- 
sentation. Wc  come  next  to  the  state  of  New 
York,  which  contains  the  most  populous  city  of 
the  union.  What  does  the  constitution  of  the 
Btate  of  New  York  say? 

"That  each  senate  district  shall  contain,  as 
nearly  as  may  be,  an  fqual  nnm'ber  of  inhabi- 
tants," ffc. 


The  city  of  New  York  is  not  proscribed,  nor 
depri  ved  by  rural  jealousy,  of  her  fair  repre- 
sentation, according  to  population,  both  in  the 
senate  and  house  of  representatives.  New  York 
therefore  gives  the  same  right — she  does  not 
proscribe  her  cities.  Ohio  does  not — Massachu- 
setts does  not. 

Now  sir,  in  the  state  ofLouisiana,  the  same  influ- 
ence exists  that  the  gentleman  has  appealed  to, 
in  the  hope  of  procuring  the  strength  of  numbers 
in  this  house,  and  of  overruling  a  right,  by  ap- 
pealing to  the  passions  and  feelings  of  classes 
and  interests.  Louisiana  is  similarly  situated; 
she  has  the  city  of  New  Orleans,  containing 
above  one  hundred  tliousand  inhabitants,  and  a 
population  of  three  hundred  and  fifty  tliousand 
in  the  state  and  city  conjoined.  The  city  con- 
tains one-half  the  white  population  of  the  state. 
But  Louisville,  in  population,  does  not  form 
more  than  the  twentieth,  or  the  twenty-fifth  part 
of  Kentucky.  Yet,  we  are  to  have  these  imagi- 
nary dangers  which  are  to  flow  from  allowing  to 
Louisville  a  fair  representation,  pressed  upon 
us,  in  order  to  perpetrate  an  act  of  gross  injus- 
tice and  wrong.  We  would,  if  our  demands 
were  allowed,  now  have  a  representation  of  but 
one-thirty-third  in  the  loAver  house,  and  one- 
thirty-eightli  in  the  upper.  How  will  that  affect 
the  stateV     The  fear  is  idle. 

In  Louisiana  the  planters  have  become  the  ba- 
sis of  a  splendid  aristocracy.  The  best  villages 
that  you  can  see,  from  Point  Coupee  to  New  Or- 
leans, on  the  river,  are  the  white  cottages  of  the 
negroes,  clustered  together  on  the  plantations  of 
their  oAvners.  You  will  find  a  village  of  five 
hundred  souls,  all  belonging  to  a  single  Louisi- 
ana planter.  Tlie  merchant  and  the  lawyer 
there  form  the  second  class.  All  the  important 
offices,  state  and  federal,  are  filled  by  the  plant- 
ers. They  find  themselves  in  a  position  to  be 
able  to  prescribe  terms,  by  which  tney  retain  the 
aristocratic  features  of  a  representation  based 
somewhat  on  territory.  There,  then,  is  the  cause 
of  the  exception  to  the  rule.  Yet  New  Orleans 
is  allowed  one-eighth  of  the  senate,  and  one- 
tenth  of  the  house.  In  Kentucky,  all  the  privi- 
lege we  can  obtain  for  the  population  of  a  city, 
such  as  Louisville,  is  that  she  shall  have  one 
senator  out  of  thirty -eight,  and  three  representa- 
tives out  of  one  hundred.  Are  we  to  fall  below 
the  cities  of  Ohio,  which  are  represented  in  the 
senate  according  to  the  number  of  people  they 
contain'?  Are  Ave  to  fall  below  the  cities  of  Mas- 
sachusetts, New  York,  Maryland,  and  Virginia? 
Or,  are  we  to  go  far  beyond  Louisiana,  in  that 
aristocratic  feature,  and  cripple  our  cities  in  their 
representation,  in  the  edict  that  is  to  go  forth 
from  this  convention?  I  put  it  plainly,  and  de- 
nounce it  here,  as  a  violation  of  the  right  of  suf- 
frage. We  have  no  terms  to  make — we  claim 
the  right.  If  it  be  denied,  or  if  it  be  qualified, 
it  shall  be  denied  or  qualified  against  our  re- 
monstrance; and  I  demand  at  your  liands,  dele- 
gates, the  rights  which  justice  should  accord. 

We  have  not  only  been  menaced  with  an  out- 
rage of  our  rights,  out  we  have  been  insulted,  in 
common  with  our  sister  counties  of  the  northern 
border  on  tlie  Oliio  river.  If  our  rights  are  de- 
nied to  us,  let  it  be  so.  If  they  are  qualified, 
Iftt  it  be  so.  It  is  against  the  best  defence  that 
I  could  interpose,  and  notwithstanding  my  fee- 


459 


ble  opposiliou.     If  you   are  determined  that  the  ;        "  ^V^icll  when  well  aimed  at  duck  or  plover 
agricultural   classes  sliall    tyrannize   over  die  «°^*  "^"^^  ''"<*  ^'''^'"^  ^^^  »'°''i«  »'«>"•" 

manufacturing  classes — if  you  thrust  them  to  |      I  will  take  the  trouble  to  show  to  those  who 
the  earth,  be  it  so.     But  never  say  it  was   done  |  think  that  taxation  and  representation   should 
without    remonsti"ance    against    the    injustice, 
against  the  wrong. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison  says,  that  this 
iniquitous  movement  is  necessary  to  protect  the 
agricultural,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  manufactur- 
ing interests.  I  now  ask  this  house,  if  they  will 
solemnly  assert,  that  the  manufacturing  inter- 
ests of  Kentucky  are  to  be  proscribed?  Have 
Covington,  Newport,  Louisville,  Paducah,  have 
those  cities  and  counties  along  the  river,  so 
wronged  and  degraded  and  impoverished  the 
state,  that  they  are  to  be  the  subjects  of  political 

f)roscription?  The  gentleman  seems  to  feel  a 
loly  horror  in  looking  at  the  wretched  condi- 
tion— as  he  calls  it — of  the  northern  frontier  of 
the  state.  In  one  sweeping  charge  he  declared 
we  are  all  teeming  with  abolitionism.  He  de- 
nounces the  city  of  Louisville  in  particular,  as  if 


o  hand  in  hand,  the  puolic  burdens  borne 
by  Louisville.  It  is  a  principle  not  to  be  rasldy 
admitted,  though  it  was  asserted  in  the  period 
of  the  revolutionary  war.  The  true  principle  is 
maintained  in  the  constitution  of  Kentucky, 
that  representation  is  based  on  population. 

Xow,  I  have  taken  the  population,  taxable 
property,  and  taxes  paid  by  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville to  compare  them  with  other  portions  of  the 
state.  The  counties  of  Hickman,  Ballard,  and 
Graves — counties  lying  at  the  extreme  end  of  the 
state — compose  the  1st  senatorial  district.  Their 
gross  taxable  property  amounts  to  $2,581,600 — 
about  two  millions  and  a  half — paying  $4,018  30 
per  annum  revenue,  with  a  population  of  two 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifty  eight  white 
males.  The  counties  of  Madison  and  Garrard, 
composing  the  23d  senatorial  district,   contain 


he  did  not  entertain  many  of  tlie  sentiments,  taxable  property  valued  at  $11. "04,942,  yielding 
which  are  esteemed  characteristic  of  that  party,  I  a  revenue  of  $18,076,  and  with  a  population  of 
to  which  ho  alludes.  He  has  eloquently  advo- 1  four  thousand  one  hundred  and  twelve  white 
cated  the  law  of  1833  and  those  sentiments  upon  I  males.  The  counties  of  Carter,  Greenup,  Law- 
this  floor;  but  he  has  changed  his  position,  so  |  rence,  and  Johnson,  composing  the  34th  sen ato- 
rapidly  that  you  would  now  think  him  the  most  I  rial  district,  contain  taxable  property  to  the 
earnest  against  the  abolition  movement  in  this :  amount  of  $2,927,262,  yielding  a  revenue  of 
state.  I  must  call  the  attention  of  the  gentle- 1  $4,600,  and  a  population  of  four  thousand  and 
man  to  his  own  remarks,  recorded  in  the  de- '  fourteen.  And  now  let  us  look  at  the  Madison 
bates,  and  commend  the  chalice  to  his  own  lips.  \  district,  a  rich  central  district.  In  Madison  and 
After  considering  what  is  the  curse  our  slaves  i  Garrard  combined,  they  have  $11,000,000  of  tax- 
impose  on  us,  after  proving  to  us  bv  a  specious  '  able  property,  being  four  times  as  rich  as  the  1st, 
calculation  that  slaves  were  worth  less  than  !  o^"  34th  districts,  yielding$18,000 yearly  revenue, 
three  per  cent,  per  annum,  he  goes  on  to  say:  j  ^^^  ^^^^  a  population  of  four  thousand  one  hun- 
.,T     ..1  •    T   -J     1  I.  1.         -Ti  dred  and  twelve  white  males.      How   does  the 

"Is  there  any  individual  here  who  will  say  .       e  i  ee  -^v,  .v  ^  j-  ..  •  ^« 

.,    .  „    1  •  J  ..       4.  i.'     county  of  Jetferson  compare  with  that  district? 

that  a  grown  working  negro  does  not  cost  his ;  t.^   v       *.->c  en"  ca         U      r  ^       ^.^  ^ 

.     ^1  t     r  .i:  ^-  1    ..  I,    I  It   has  $26,69 /,d63  worth  of  taxable  property, 

nia-;ter,   leaving  out  of  the   question   what  he'       ,        ^  j      t  aao  nnn  *^    ^     ^ 

.     ,    ;        u-      „    J     II      »tT,  ^  t  •      and  pavs  upwards  of  $43,000  per  annum  taxes, 

steals  from  him  and  sells  at  the  nearest  town,  is  i       ji"-^^i  j..i,^ij       ji,.. 

»,  ..    t  „ii  4.1    4.  and  has  nine  thousand  two  hundred  and  eighty 

there  any  one  that  will  sav,  that  an  average  ex-    .i        „i   ,.         i  i  ..-  i  °i  ^ 

/.        »     J  11        e     „i.-       1  f    1  I  three  white  males;  a  population  nearly  equal  to 

pense  of  twenty  dollars  for  this  class  of  slaves  i  ^.i     „i    i      (.4.1         ^if   ^  1  •  4.  ■  4.       tV     ^      i»i 
f  .  11       •    »•„  »        rpi  •    4i       „ii       1  the  whole  of  these  three  districts.     Her  Avealth 

13  too  small  an  estimate.     1  his  then  will  make  a    •  1     ..„■  ..         n  ^1  ,  . ,  , 

million   of   dollars;  and  there  will  be   only   a  j  ^/^ff  L'"^'"' ^SfT  ^^^  ^'f  ^^  ^ 

profit  of  two  millions  left."  -       l]-,  nnn    ^  pay  $26,000  a  year    axes,  she  pays 

^  .  ,      .  j  $43,000,  or  nearly  twice  as  much  as  the  tliree 

The  gentleman  now,  with  singular  consisten-  combined.  And  yet  it  is  asserted  upon  this  floor, 
cy,  deplores  the  loss  of  this  wretched  population,  that  a  district  paying  nearly  twice  as  much  as 
He  said  m  substance  m  his  speech  of  Saturday.  I  three  average  districts— in  point  of  wealtli  and 
"Where  are  those  handsome,  flat  nosed  negroes  j  population— of  the  state,  is  to  have  but  one  rep- 
thatwere  onco  to  be  found  m  Covington?  They  resentative  in  the  senate,  while  those  other  dis- 
are  all  gone.  They  have  been  expelled  by  a  tricts  have  three.  Why,  if  property  and  taxa- 
wretched  race,  which  has  come  in  and  taken ,  tion  was  the  basis  of  representation,  according 
their  position,  and  now  occupy  the  place  they ;  to  the  principle  asserted  at  the  period  of  the 
once  did,  that  race  that  intends  hereafter  to  de-  revolution,  and  to  which  some  fseem  to  wish  to 
stroy  the  institutions  of  our  state.'  The  gen-  return,  Louisville  and  Jefferson  would  be  enti- 
tlemanhas  done  more  in  that  argument  to  de-  tied  to  six  senators.  And  if  population  be  the 
stroy  the  value  of  slave  property  in  Kentucky,  {  basis,  they  should  have  three.  Is  this  justice? 
than  every  emancipationist  that  ever  lived  in  1  is  it  right?  We  have  in  Louisville  and  Jeffer- 
Cov-ington  or  Louisville.  Let  me  go  on  a  little  son  one-tenth  of  all  the  taxable  property  in  the 
further.  I  gtate,  and  we  pay  one-tenth  of  all  the  taxes  that 

"  That  white  labor  is  cheaper  I  have  no  doubt,  are  paid.  Have"  we  one-tenth  of  the  representa- 
I  have  never  entertained  a  doubt  on  that  point.  I  tion  of  the  state?  Xo!  we  have  a  thirty -third  in 
I  have  never  entertained  a  doubt  that  ills  the  I  the  lower  house,  and  a  thirty-eighth  in  the  sen- 
interest  of  the  great  slaveholding  community  of  |  ate.  The  reason  why  we  have  something  like  a 
the  state  to  sell  their  slaves."  fair  proportion  in  the  lower  house  is  because  we 

Xow,  sir,  in  the  argument  of  Saturday,  he   ^^e  not  ostracised  in  our  representation  there, 
takes  exactl}' the  opposite  ground.    He  occupies       The  citizens  of  Louisville  have  always  been 
now  a  position   wholly  irreconcilable  with  that   as  ready  to  give  their  services  to  the  state,  as  the 
he  maintained  then — ^his  logic  is  like  McFingal's   citizens  of  any  other  portion   of  the  common- 
gun,  wealth.     They  have  ever  been  among  the  fore- 


4fi0 


most  in  the  Held.  The  drum  has  never  beat  a 
call  to  arms!  that  was  not  promptly  responded 
to  by  them.  The  gentleman  talks  of  our  adopt- 
ed citizens  as  if  they  were  the  out-easts  of  the 
earth.  One  fourth  of  the  gallant  army,  that  won 
for  us  imperishable  glorv  on  tlie  northern  line, 
and  on  the  route  from  "^^era  Cruz  to  the  capital 
of  Mexico,  were  naturalized  citizens.  Tiiose 
adopted  children  of  the  union  took  up  arms  for 
us;  and  with  musket  in  hand,  in  a  series  of  bat- 
tles, that  will  ever  remain  memorable  in  history, 
asserted  the  character  of  tJieir  adopted  country, 
in  common  Avitli  their  native  born  comrades. 
Their  acts  have  shed  renown  and  fadeless  lustre 
on  the  American  arms.  Louisville,  with  one 
twenty  fifth  of  the  population,  furnished  one 
fifth  of  the  troops  of  the  state;  and  in  twenty 
three  days  from  the  time  the  letter  of  requi- 
sition arrived,  stating  that  General  Taylor 
was  in  danger  at  Palo  Alto,  a  regiment,  the  Lou- 
isville Legion,  reported  themselves  to  General 
Taylor  at  Brazos,  two  thousand  five  hundred 
miles  from  their  city.  This  exhibited  a  rapidity 
of  organization  ana  rapidity  of  movement,  un- 
paralleled in  the  country.     But  enough  of  this. 

All  the  arguments  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison  are  tinctured  with  nativism.  He  thinks 
it  necessary  to  put  restrictions  on  the  right  of 
suffrage,  in  order  to  shield  us  against  the  evils 
of  immigration ;  but  what  has  been  the  effect  of 
this  influx  of  foreign  population  in  our  border 
counties  on  the  Ohio  river?  It  has  brought  to 
us  the  knowledge  of  new  arts,  new  modes  of 
agriculture,  and  is  developing  new  means  of  in- 
creasing our  national  wealth.  It  would  be  in- 
teresting to  enquire  what  effect  this  concentra- 
tion of  the  various  arts  of  Europe,  by  immigra- 
tion, has  produced  upon  American  industry, 
in  stimulating  American  labor  and  exciting 
American  ingenuity.  It  has  produced  an  extra- 
ordinary state  of  prosperity.  Near  Cincinnati 
the  culture  of  the  grape,  heretofore  imknown  in 
our  country,  has  been  introduced.  Did  the  vine- 
dressers come  from  the  county  of  Madison?  I 
do  not  say  this  in  disparagement  of  Madison. 
I  love  ana  respect  the  people  of  ray  native  state, 
but  I  deem  it  necessary  and  right  to  make  these 
remarks,  injustice  to  our  naturalized  fellow  cit- 
izens. 

Vine-dressers  have  come  from  France,  from 
the  banks  of  the  Rhine,  and  the  Moselle,  and 
from  the  tributaries  of  that  great  river  until  it 
enters  the  gorges  of  the  mountains  of  the  Ty- 
rol!, and  have  taught  us  the  mode  of  cultivating 
the  grape  in  the  valley  of  the  Ohio.  They  have 
come  from  the  banks  of  the  Loire  and  the  Ga- 
ronne, and  from  the  department  of  the  Gironde, 
until  we  have  found  new  branches  of  industry 
springing  up  all  around  us. 

We  find  by  tlie  Patent  office  report  of  last  year, 
that  from  only  three  hundred  acres,  devoted  to 
the  culture  of  tlie  vine,  in  the  vicinity  of  Cin- 
cinnati, there  was  a  return  of  sixty  thousand 
gallons,  yielding  to  the  producer  a  profit  of 
some  $200  to  the  acre. 

At  Louisville,  that  class  of  population  of 
whieli  the  gentleman  contemptuously  s])oaks, 
has  manifested  the  same  desire  for  agricultural 
improvement.  A  gentleman  of  my  acquaint- 
ance, upon  ten  acres  of  ground,  raised,  this  year, 
grapes  enough  t/)  make  from  one  thousand  five 


hundred  lo  one  thousand  seven  liundred  gallon^* 
of  wine,  which  are  alreadj'  (contracted  for  at  $1  25 
per  gallon.  Yet  he  would  never  have  done  this, 
nad  not  this  culture  been  introduced  by  foreign- 
ers. Would  it  be  just  to  withhold  from  that 
class  of  our  citizens  an  equal  participation  in 
the  right  of  suffrage?  It  would  be  equally  un- 
wise and  unjust.  'I'he  temper  of  the  people  will 
not  bear  it. 

The  gentleman  seems  to  think  that  the  in- 
stitution of  slavery  is  to  rest  upon  the  exclusion 
of  foreigners.  He  says  if  we  allow  foreigners 
to  vote,  it  will  have  the  effect  of  destroying 
that  institution.  I  tell  him  that  that  is  not 
the  way  to  remedy  the  evil,  if  evil  exists.  Let 
him  declare  that  foreigners  shall  not  vote,  and  he 
will  produce  perpetual  agitation  and  eternal  dis- 
satisfaction. Will  you  impose  burdens  on  them, 
and  yet  refuse  them  the  right  of  suffrage?  1  can 
tell  him,  if  he  thinks  by  "this  sort  of  legislation 
to  promote  the  great  interest  of  the  state,  he  is 
mistaken.  Such  a  policy  has  always  proved 
fatal  in  every  age  and  country.  Tell  these  men 
that  you  will  not  trust  them  to  vote,  and  there 
will  be  a  combined  effort  to  overturn  the  con- 
stitution. You  will  produce  an  agitation  that 
will  be  disasterous  to  the  interests  of  the  state. 
Proscribe  them,  and  you  enlist  the  generous 
and  magnanimous  spirit  of  the  people  among 
Avhom  they  live  in  their  behalf,  and  there  will 
be  one  united  voice  in  favor  of  setting  aside  the 
constitution  you  have  made. 

Sir,  it  is  not  expedient,  in  my  opinion,  that 
you  shoidd  so  arrange  matters  as  to  create  two 
white  classes  in  this  state  with  different  privi- 
leges. It  is  important  that  all  should  be  free, 
or  if  slavery  is  planted  here  by  necessity,  that 
none  but  slaves  should  be  disfranchised.  Create 
no  white  class  that  shall  be  deprived  of  the 
privilege  of  freemen — make  no  pariahs  of  so- 
ciety. God  forefend  that  such  a  class  should 
ever  exist  in  Kentucky.  I  for  one  hope  never 
to  live  to  see  the  day.  I  do  not  believe  the 
people  will  ever  tolerate  it. 

I  have  shown  what  taxation  is  imposed  on 
the  river  counties.  The  city  of  Covington  al- 
ready has  a  population  of  12,000 — Newport 
a  population  of  7,000.  The  city  of  Maysville, 
if  the  contemplated  railroad  be  constructed,  will 
rapidly  advance  in  population.  Foreign  popu- 
lation will  naturally  be  attracted  to  these  points, 
and  I  do  not  believe  there  is  any  reason  why 
this  convention  should  proscribe  them  from  tho 
enjoyment  of  the  right  of  suffrage  and  equal 
representation.  If  it  is  insisted  that  it  is  neces- 
sary to  protect  the  state  on  this  ground,  the 
argument  is  not  tenable.  The  gentleman  al- 
leges that  there  is  a  peculiar  similarity  between 
the  counties  of  a  state  and  the  states  of  this 
confederacy.  The  resemblance  does  not  hold, 
for  the  counties  are  not  sovereign,  and  you 
propose  to  unite  them  for  the  purposes  of  rej)re- 
sentation. 

I  have  shown  that  we  pay  one-tenth  part  of  all 
the  public  revenue  of  tlie  state,  and  that  we  have 
only  a  thirty-eighth  part  of  the  representation. 
I  believe  that  a  full  consideration  on  the  part  of 
this  house,  will  induce  them  to  accord  to  us  the 
right  which,  by  a  technical  construction  of  the 
constitution,  nas  heretofore  been  denied.  If, 
however,   the  construction   was  right,   I  claim 


'4C1 


'.■:il  upon  every  i)rini'iple  ol'  right  :iiid  justice., 
ought  to  be  reversed  m  this  constitution. 
Sir,  there  are  aristocracies  different  from  ran- 1 
nicipal  aristocracies — ^there  is  an  aristocracy  of  > 
wealth,  as  well  in  the  county  represented  by  the  f 
gentleman,  as  in  the  city  which  I  have  the  lionor  j 
to  represent.  There  are  fewer  men  of  capital  in  j 
Louisville  in  proportion  than  in  the  county  of  I 
Fayette.  There  is  less  aggregated  money  capital  j 
than  there  is  in  Madison. 

We  are  about  to  form  a  constitution,  and  we  j 
:  c  about  to  form  it,  as  I  believe,  upon  broad  and  j 
just  principles;  but  I  tell  you,   as  I  tell   this  I 
Douse,  that  if  they  do  us  this  toul,  this  inexpia- 
ble wrong — a  wrongthat  we  have  not  the  strength 
to  remedy — the  people  of  this    state  will   not, 
when  appealed  to  on  this   subject,  sanction  the 
injustice.    I  know  them,  and  I  tnist  them  im- 
jphcitly.    If  we  go  to  them  with  such   a  consti- 
tution in  our  hands,  thev  will  exclaim,  in  the 
language  of  Macbeth,  deluded  by   the  hollow 
promises  of  the  we'ird  woman  of  the  heath: 

'-.\nd  be  the-e  juggling  fiends  no  more  believed. 
That  palter  tvilh  us  in  a  double  sense. 
And  keep  the  word  of  piomise  to  the  ear. 
But  break  it  to  the  hope." 

We  shall  have  the  word  of  promise  broken  to 
the  hope,  if  Louisville  is  to  be  proscribed  and 
stigmatized,  and  refused  her  just  share  of  repre- 
sentation in  the  senate  of  tlie  state. 

I  have  thrown  out  these  remarks  for  the  con- 
sideration of  the  house.  I  do  not  believe  this 
convention  will  be  unjust — I  will  never  believe  it 
until  it  occurs.  I  know  well  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky are  brave,  generous,  and  magnanimous, 
and  that  the  delegate  on  this  floor,  who  attempts 
to  deny  us  equal  justice,  when  he  presents  him- 
self again  before  his  constituents,  is  sure  to 
fall. 

Mr.  ROOT.    I  have  but  few  remarks  to  sub- 
mit, and  I  should  not  have  risen  at  all,  in  my 
present  state  of  health,  had  it  not  been  that  on 
Saturday  my  particular  section   of  country  was 
pointed  out  and  proscribed  by  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  from  Madison.     1  was  led  to  sup- 
pose, on  a  former  occasion,  that  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  intended  to  pursue  a  more  mag- 
nanimous course.     Upon  the  subject  of  the  law 
of  1833  I  stood  by  him  to  a  certain  extent,  as 
far  as  I  could  go,  &ut  he  a  little  out  Heroded 
Herod  upon  that  subject.     And  I  had  supposed 
from  the  position  he  then  took,  that  his  darling 
institution  of  slavery  was  not  to  be  brought  up 
here  by  himself,  at  all  events,  as  the  great  turn- 
ing point  u|K)n  which  he  expected  to  proscribe 
the  free  white  citizens   of  this   commonwealth.' 
He  ontliat  occasion  denounced  the  institutionof 
slavery  as  one  upon  which  lay  the  finger  of  God,  < 
and  whom  God  had  condemned,  would  certain- ' 
ly  wither   and  perish   away.     But  he  seems  to  | 
have  slept  and  dreamed  upon  the  subject,  and  af- 1 
ler  having  then  made  one  of  the  most  denuncia-  \ 
tory  speeches  ever  heard  in  any  hall  against  that  | 
institution,  and  picturing  it  as  a  bitting  blight  I 
on  this  commonwealth,  he  is  now  prepared  to  ! 
cast  an  eye  about,  and  because  he  sees  the  grow- 1 
ing  importance  of  certain  towns  and  cities  in  I 
this  commonwealth,  to  violate  the  great  princi- 1 
pies  of  our  former  constitution,  to  violate  that' 
principle  which  was   acted  on  in  179t?,   that' 
principle  which  Kentucky  is   celebrated  for  es- j 


tablishing.  the  principle  ui"  representation  iti 
proportion  to  population.  He  is  prepared  ia 
this  nineteenth  century,  in  the  year  ls49,  after 
all  the  lights  of  science,  after  all  the  exiwrience 
in  government,  and  after  every  thing  that  has 
beeii  developed  to  elevate  the  human  intellect, 
the  learned  and  erudite  gentleman  from  Madison 
is  prepared  to  maintain  the  doctrine  that  repre- 
sentation ought  not  to  be  based  on  the  popula- 
tion, but  that  the  state  ought  to  be  marked  out 
with  an  eye  of  wisdom  in  relation  to  a  single 
institution.  Here  is  the  principle,  and  the  gen- 
tleman in  his  seeming  desire  to  avoid  the  conse- 
quences of  his  speech  on  a  former  occasion,  is 
now  willing  to  take  the  other  extreme  horn  of 
the  dilemma,  and  become  the  very  prince  of  the 
pro-slavery  men  in  this  house.  Sir,  I  do  not  un- 
derstand the  consistency  of  tlie  gentleman  from 
Madison,  and  I  hope  he  will  take  some  occasion 
to  show  it  to  this  house.  He  proposes  to  apply 
the  principle  of  representation  on  population  to 
every  part  of  the  state  except  that  along  the  Ohio 
river.  The  Ohio  river,  the  overflowing  popula- 
tion of  Louisville,  and  the  increasing  popula- 
tion of  Kenton  and  Campbell,  and  the  growing 
wealth  and  prosperity  along  the  northern  fron- 
tier seem  to  haunt  lus  imagination,  and  he  is 
willing  to  make  himself  popular  by  yielding  to 
the  prejudices,  the  low  prejudices,  if  any  such 
exist  in  the  interior,  among  the  farming  interest. 
He  is  willing  to  array  the  fanning  interest 
against  those  of  the  cities,  when  he  knows  very 
well  that  those  interests  are  so  closely  connected 
that  if  you  sever  them  and  destroy  one,  it  will 
produce  a  lasting  injury  to  the  other.  But  as  a 
great  argument  whv  this  proscriptive  policy 
should  be  pursued  in  relation  to  those  counties 
along  the  Ohio,  he  instances  the  growth  of  the 
counties  of  Campbell  and  Kenton.  Look,  says 
he, at  Campbell  and  Kenton;  in  a  very  few  j-ears 
they  will  be  entitled  to  four  or  six  representa- 
tives, and  with  senators  too  in  proportion  to 
their  population.  What  other  basis  of  repre- 
sentation does  he  propose?  Does  he  propose  to 
strike  at  the  representation  of  Madison  or  Fay- 
ette, or  any  other  of  the  interior  or  mountain 
counties?  No,  he  is  prepared  only  to  strike  at 
Campbell  and  Kenton.  He  is  prepared  to  make 
capital  all  over  the  state,  by  doing  great  inju.stice 
to  one  or  another  portion  of  the  commonwealth. 
Sir,  let  it  go  forth  from  the  halls  of  this  house 
tliat  you  have  made  flesh  of  one  and  fish  of  an- 
other part  of  the  commonwealth — let  it  go  forth 
to  Loiiisvi  le  that  she  is  not  to  be  represented  in 
proportion  to  her  population— let  it  go  to  Camp- 
bell, where  the  first  battle  was  fought  and  the  first 
movement  was  made  for  this  convention,  and 
where  the  people  were  unanimous  for  it — ^not  up- 
on the  subject  of  slavery,  but  other  subjects  con- 
nected with  the  county  courts  and  the  miserable 
rotten  sy.stem  of  the  judiciary  and  of  life  estates 
in  office — I  say  let  it  go  there  that  they  are  to 
be  proscribed  and  only  to  be  represented  in  the 
house  of  representatives  of  the  state — that  they 
are  to  be  taxed  by  the  member  from  Madison 
and  other  parts  of  the  state  without  a  .share  of 
the  representation  of  the  senate,  and  every  man 
of  them  is  against  you.  And  so  they  justly 
should  be.  I  had  thought  that  one  of  the  prin- 
ciples that  kindled  up  Qie  fires  of  the  American 
revolution  was  that  men  .should  be  fully  repre- 


462 


'■eiiteJ  in  the  bodies  that  dared  to  lay  taxes  uj)- 
ou  thein.  It  was  the  principle  that' threw  the 
teas  overboard  in  Boston  harbor — that  fired  the 
first  gun  at  Lexington — that  produced  the  terri- 
ble struggle  at  Bunker  Hill,  and  that  wound  up 
the  contest  in  a  flood  of  glory  at  the  last  great 
struggle  at  YorktoAvn.  All  this  was  in  defence 
•  of  these  principles  of  universal  representation 
■wherever  the  rii,dus  of  taxation  extended.  And, 
sir,  if  this  darling  institution  that  haunts  the 
imagination  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison 
cannot  be  sustained  short  of  denying  a  just  and 
full  representation  to  every  part  of  the  common- 
wealth, and  without  disfranchising  a  part  of  the 
citizens  and  voting  population  of  the  state  of 
Kentucky,  I  say  let  it  perish.  If  the  whites 
are  indeed  at  last  to  become  the  very  slaves  in 
protection  of  the  gentleman's  darling  institu- 
tion, I  say  let  it  perish.  Sir,  yield  but  the  point 
that  to  defend  this  institution  it  is  necessary  to 
cut  off  representation  entirely  from  those  coun- 
ties in  the  one  house,  and  they  will  then  ask  to 
deprive  them  of  representation  in  the  other,  ai»d 
at  last  to  disfranchise  them  altogether — and 
still  retain  the  right  to  tax  and  govern  them — 
they  will  reduce  them  to  the  mere  serfs  and 
slaves  of  the  balance  of  the  commonwealth. 
And  all  this  is  asked  in  defence  of  the  gentle- 
man's darling  institution,  that  but  forty  days 
ago  he  said  God's  finger  was  weighing  heavily 
upon.  And  if  God's  finger  is  upon  it,  in  the 
name  of  God  will  it  not  perish?  Will  the  puny 
or  the  powerful  arm  of  the  gentleman  from  Mad- 
ison be  able  to  sustain  an  institution  that  God 
has  declared  shall  wither  and  perish  away.  Sir, 
he  proposes  to  make  Campbell  and  Kenton  and 
Louisville  the  scape  goat  for  all  his  sins.  He 
proposes  to  expiate  upon  that  section  of  country 
the  sins  he  may  have  committed  by  saying  that 
the  finger  of  God  is  upon  his  darling  institu- 
tion. 

But  they  are  to  be  punished  for  another  rea- 
son. Aliens  and  foreigners  are  coming  into 
those  cities.  Yes  sir,  and  the  yankees  are  com- 
ing from  New  England  there,  and  he  says  that 
all  know  that  the  feelings  and  sympathies  of 
northern  men  are  opposed  to  his  darling  insti- 
tution. And  in  this — the  year  1849 — he  is  wil- 
ling to  proscribe  northern  men  and  to  drive  out 
those  from  the  state  who  might  be  willing  to 
immigrate  here  to  proscribe  and  disfranchise 
northern  men,  the  descendants  of  those  brave 
fathers,  who  were  at  the  very  head  and  front  of 
the  whole  offending  during  the  revolutionary 
war — they  who  warn  magna  pars  fuit  in  striking 
out  this  glorious  system  of  American  liberty — 
and  all  for  what?  Because  forsooth,  the  time 
will  come,  he  thinks,  when  he  will  be  unable  to 
sustain  his  darling  institution,  and  when  a  ma- 
jority of  the  voters  in  the  commonwealth  will  be 
opposed  to  it.  Sir,  although  I  am  not  an  im- 
mediate emancipationist,  or  an  abolitionist,  and 
although  my  county  stand.s  unanimously  with 
rae  upon  all  these  subjects,  I  for  one,  look  for- 
ward to  the  hour,  and  I  hope  in  God  that  the 
hour  will  come,  when  the  slaveholder  and  every 
other  citizen  throughout  this  broad  common- 
wealth, may  say  to  the  sons  of  Africa,  we  are 
now  prepared  to  transplant  you  to  your  native 
soil.  Sir,  the  finger  of  God  is  on  the  institu- 
tion.   Although  I  believe  that  the  negroes  of  this 


commonwealth,  and  most  of  the  states  will  final- 
ly be  driven  quietly  and  prudently  out — yet,  I 
believe  that  the  hour  is  coming  in  some  part  of 
the  world,  either  here  or  elsewhere,  when  Ethio- 
pia shall  indeed  stetch  forth  her  hands  to  God — 
when  the  arm  of  the  oppressor  shall  be  broken, 
and  the  oppressed  shall  go  free.  And  the  gen- 
tleman with  all  his  proscription  of  the  white 
population  and  his  denying  them  the  right  of 
representation,  cannot  stay  that  hour  one  solita- 
ry moment.  I  have  been  denounced  in  some 
quarters  as  the  representative  of  an  abolition 
district.  Sir,  we  have  not  half  the  abolitionism 
and  emancipationism  in  my  county,  that  there 
is  in  the  gentleman's  and  in  Fayette,  and  most 
of  the  interior  counties  of  the  state.  So  little 
did  my  constituents  think  of  it,  that  probably 
not  fifty  in  the  whole  county  agitated  it  in  the 
slightest  degree.  And  yet  as  prudent  men,  as 
men  with  some  little  forecast,  they  apprehend 
that  every  institution  of  man — and  slavery  is  an 
institution  of  man — must  waste  and  perish  and 
wither  away.  I  was  somewhat  amused  at  my 
learned  friend  from  Boyle,  (Mr.  Talbott,)  the 
other  day,  when  he  undertook  to  prove  from  the 
Old  Testament  writing,  that  slavery  was  indeed 
a  divine  institution,  blessed  from  on  High — that 
it  deserved  the  warmest  protection  of  all  good 

Eeople  everywhere — and  that  it  was  a  blessing 
oth  to  the  master  and  the  slave.  And  his  dis- 
play of  his  knowledge  of  scripture  reminded  me 
something  of  a  man  who  Avas  once  talking 
volubly  on  the  same  subject  to  another  a  little 
more  ignorant  on  the  subject,  and  I  was  almost 
induced  to  look  up  and  say  to  the  gentleman 
from  Boyle  in  the  words  of  the  ignorant  man's 
reply — "did  you  write  the  scriptures."  From 
what  I  have  read  of  the  Old  Testament,  I  cer- 
tainly understand  that  in  the  very  passages  the 
gentleman  from  Boyle  quoted,  slavery  is  there 
denounced  as  a  curse.  "Cursed  be  Caanan,  a 
servant  of  servants  shall  he  be."  It  was  de- 
nounced as  a  curse  upon  the  African  race  gener- 
ally, and  if  the  gentleman  Avill  take  the  pains  to 
read  the  Old  Testament  scriptures,  he  will  find 
that  wherever  a  curse  is  pronounced  on  a  people 
or  a  nation,  the  very  hand  that  carries  out  the 
curse  of  high  Heaven  is  itself  accursed.  Look 
when  the  children  of  Israel  were  carried  into 
Babylon  in  captivity,  and  were  held  there  in 
servitude  and  slavery.  It  was  the  decree  of 
God  himself,  and  in  his  oAvn  good  time  Darius 
the  Mode  came  thundering  at  the  Babylonish 
gates,  and  in  one  night  the  king  and  all  his 
lordly  courtiers  perished.  This  was  their  pun- 
ishment for  having  done  injustice  to  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  and  making  them  captives,  and 
violating  the  holy  sanctuary  of  God.  In  all  the 
i  Old  Testament  writings  it  Avill  be  found  that 
I  the  very  hand  which  carries  out  the  curse  is  it- 
self accursed.  Slavery,  so  far  as  the  bible  is 
concerned  is  neither  a  blessing  to  the  slave  nor 
the  master.  It  is  a  curse,  directly  a  curse,  and 
the  bible  authorises  every  man  to  say  it.  If  the 
bible  held  a  different  doctrine,  I  should  be  al- 
most prepared  to  say  with  a  learned  doctor  with 
whom  I  was  acquainted  years  ago,  that  I  would 
tear  the  leaf  out.  I  should  almost  be  prepared 
to  disbelieve  the  whole  bible  if  it  inculcates 
such  monstrous  injustice.  I  am  not  prepared 
to  sav  that  God  is  the  author  of  the  institution 


463 


of  slavery.    It  is  peculiarly  a  municipal  insti- 
tution ;  it  is  a  matter  of  poficy,  and  exists  now 
only  from  policy  and  necessity.,  and  not  by  the 
authority  or  the  command  of  Ileaven.     It  exists 
because  vre  cannot  get  out  of  it,  and  from  poli- 
cy.    That  is  the  basis   upon  "whieh  to  place  it, 
and  "when  gentlemen  place  it  on  any  other,  they 
make  it  their  darling  institution,  and  place  it 
'      among  the  holy  sacraments.    "Why  it  offends  the 
!      comnion  sense  of  all  mankind,  and  we  become 
:      justlv  a  laughing  stock  to  the  better  and  more 
i      jntelleotual  portion  of  the  world. 

But  we  are  now  asked  by  the  gentleman  from 
I  Madison  to  yield  to  this  Jesuitical  policy  of 
!  sacrificing  principle  to  expediency — that  is,  that 
I  you  may  do  any  deed  to  secure  a  supposed  good 
i  end.  The  great  principle  that  the  people  shall 
be  represented  in  proportion  to  the  popula- 
tion of  the  state,  must  now  be  stricken  down, 
because,  as  the  gentleman  says,  who  can  look 
forward  and  not  see  that  the  hour  is  soon  coming 
when  the  strip  of  territory,  bordering  on  the 
Ohio  for  ten  miles  in  wiclth,  will  contain  the 
majority  of  that  population?  For  that  reason 
he  will  sacrifice  that  principle  to  policy,  to 
Madison  county,  and  the  peculiar  interests  with 
which  he  is  identified.  1  am  for  doing  justice 
to  every  part  of  the  commonwealth.  I  wish  the 
farming  interest  to  be  fully,  fairly,  and  ably  rep- 
resented. The  farming  interest  of  the  state  is 
its  great  interest,  nor  do  I  believe  that  there  is 
the  slightest  danger  that  any  other  interest  will 
ever  trample  over  it.  I  believe  that  if  the  whole 
strength  of  the  commonwealth  was  now  in  the 
hands  of  the  citizens  of  Louisville,  and  they 
had  now  a  majority  on  this  floor,  that  the 
farming  interest  would  have  little  or  nothing 
to  fear  from  their  action.  Since  this  state  has 
been  in  existence,  the  farmers  of  this  common- 
wealth have  almost  entirely  been  represented 
by  the  lawyer  interest  of  the  commonwealtli, 
and  yet  I  am  bold  and  proud  to  affirm  that  the 
farming  interest  has  been  just  as  well  represent- 
ed as  though  the  farmers  came  here  personally 
themselves.  It  was  not  therefore  that  particu- 
lar interests  shall  be  represented,  it  is  that  men 
of  sense,  of  experience,  of  enlightened  views, 
and  of  sound  policy,  shall  be  sent  here,  and  if 
they  all  come  from  one  corner  of  the  state,  I 
apprehend  no  man  would  ever  prove  so  recreant 
to  his  own  interest,  as  to  violate  any  of  the 
great  principles  that  operate  to  secure  the  best 
interests  of  the  fanner. 

But  I  rise  only  to  express  my  views,  and  I 
have  nearly  done.    I  am  happy,  to  say  I   feel 

Sroud  of  my  town,  which  is  Newport,  in 
ampbell  county.  It  well  may  haunt  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison's  imagination.  Notwith- 
standing his  phillipics  against  my  particular 
section  of  country,  and  his  envy  of  our  growth, 
our  wealth,  our  prosperity,  and  our  supposed 
future  importance,  I  apprehend  tliat  the  sound 
sense  of  the  delegates  here  assembled,  the 
combined  wisdom  of  the  state,  will  not  per- 
mit them  to  do  a  thing  that  maybe  thrown  upon 
their  children  hereafter,  and  to  the  disgrace  of 
their  own  memory.  I  believe  that  they  will  not 
now  for  the  first  time,  proscribe  any  portion  of 
the  commonwealth,  because  they  apprehend  that 
the  time  may  come  when  they  will  have  a  pretty 
strong  delegation  on  the  f\^oT  of  the  legislature. 


We  are  acting  here,  as  some  men  tell  ns,  for  pos- 
terity, for  our  own  reputation,  that  in  future 
times  the  people  may  take  up  the  book  which 
records  our  proceedings  and  read  the  sentiments 
of  the  various  gentlemen  who  have  participated 
in  our  action,  and  say  of  this  or  that  man  ho 
was  at  least  fifty  years  ahead  of  the  generation 
in  which  he  lived.  A  proud  bequest  is  it  to 
the  sons  of  those  worthy  sires,  when  the  chil- 
dren feel  proud  of  the  sentiment*  Tittered  bv 
their  fathers  on  this  floor.  But  will  the  descen- 
dants of  the  man  thus  feel,  who  says  on  this 
floor  he  is  willing  to  proscribe  a  city  or  section 
of  country  because  we  have  the  power  to  do  it — 
that  he  is  willing  to  eacercise  the  power  because 
we  have  that  power,  without  regard  to  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  thing,  and  who  is  willing  to  violate 
Eriuciple  and  make  it  yield  to  policy?  Sir,  I 
ave  done. 

Mr.  BALLINGER.  I  have  been,  throughout 
the  whole  session  of  this  convention,  a  silent  lis- 
tener to  the  protracted  debates,  on  every  subject, 
that  have  here  taken  place.  I  have,  it  is  true, 
fek  a  deep  interest  in  all  those  subjects,  and 
whilst  silent,  paid  that  attention  to  them  that 
will  enable  me  at  all  times  to  vote  understand- 
ingly  upon  them;  but  a  question  has  now  come 
up  here,  in  which  the  immediate  interests  of  my 
constituents  are  perhaps  more  intimately  in- 
volved, than  in  any  other  question  that  could 
come  up.  That  at  any  rat*  is  the  understanding 
which  I  have  of  the  interest  which  they  have  in 
the  question  now  under  discussion.  Sir,  I  have 
listened  to  the  last  two  speeches  that  have  been 
delivered  with  a  great  deal  of  interest,  and  I 
have  been  delighted  with  the  eloquence  of  gen- 
tlemen; and  it  seems  to  me,  that  the  last  gentle- 
man (Mr.  Root)  especially  has  exercised  the 
j  greatest  ingenuity  possible,  in  withdrawing  the 
minds  of  those  who  listened  to  him  from  the  sub- 
ject under  debate.  Sir,  if  he  touched  it  in  one 
point,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know  what  point  it  was. 
He  has  followed  the  usual  couree  of  able  advo- 
cates, in  advocating  any  cause  not  strong  in  it- 
self, in  withdrawing  the  minds  of  those  who  are 
to  act,  from  the  subject  under  debate,  by  casting 
a  delusive  and  illusive  vail  over  the  whole, 
which  will  withdraw  them  from  the  considera- 
tion of  that  upon  which  they  have  to  determine. 
I  have  listened  also  with  delight  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston,)  and  when 
he  has  confined  himself  to  the  facts  which  ope-« 
rate  upon  this  subject,  when  he  has  not  drawn 
upon  his  fancy  and  gone  off  to  other  subjects 
th.it  have  no  connection  with  it,  I  have  also  oeeii 
delighted.  But  when  he  has  brought  arguments 
and  statistics  to  bear  on  the  subject,  instead  of 
strengthening  his  cause,  they  are  calculated  to 
produce  alarm,  and  to  show  the  dangers  that  are 
to  be  apprehended  from  its  success.  The  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville  shows  conclusively  that 
they  are  building  up  in  his  section  of  the  stat«, 
an  overweening  power  that  is  to  exercise  a  great 
influence  upon  the  state.  He  shows  that  there  is 
a  population  pouring  in  and  increasing  there  now, 
in  an  unparalleled  degree,  over  all  the  other  por- 
tions of  tlie  state.  He  shows  thatthere  is  a  pow- 
er increasing  there,  which  in  connection  with 
tlie  incretaing  power  of  the  surrounding  districts, 
will  be  sufficient  to  carry  almost  any  propasi- 
tion  that  Louisville  may  desire  to  have  carried. 


464 


111  order  to  promote  her  own  interests.  What 
is  tlie  subject  under  debate  here?  It  is  not  one 
that  is  to  call  forth  loud  dejiunciations,  as 
if  it  was  an  atrocious  position  that  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison  has  assumed.  Why,  sir,  if 
any  one  were  to  come  in  here,  and  not  know  wliat 
was  the  subject  under  debate,  he  would  at  once 
deem  that  lie  had  been  advocating  a  proposition 
here  that  was  sufficient  to  draw  upon  his  head  the 
denunciation  of  all  good  and  just  men.  Is  there 
any  thing  atrocious  in  the  principle  he  has  been 
contending  for?  If  there  is,  those  who  engraft- 
ed it  upon  ourprcsent  constitution,  under  which 
Ave  have  been  living  for  the  last  fifty  years,  are 
entitled  to  a  portion  o^  that  denunciation. — 
Those  pure  and  enlightened  patriots,  who,  acting 
for  posterity,  and  they  did  so  act  when  they  gave 
us  a  constitution  under  which  we  have  lived  and 
prospered,  and  whose  memory  we  now  almost 
idolize, — those  men,  I  say,  if  the  gentlem.an  from 
Madison,  who  was  the  first  to  speak  on  this  sub- 
ject, is  entitled  to  any  denunciation,  are  at 
least  entitled  to  their  share  of  the  abuse.  It  is 
the  principle  we  find  engrafted  on  the  present 
constitution,  and  what  is  it?  Every  department 
of  government  is  to  be  a  cheek  upon  and  protec- 
tion against  the  other.  The  executive,  legisla- 
tive, and  judiciary  departments,  have  separate 
and  distinct  duties,  and  separate  and  distinct 
powers — the  one  is  not  a  branch  of  the  other. 
The  legislative  department  then  is  divided  into 
a  senate  and  house  of  representatives.  What  is 
the  use  of  this  senate?  Why  not  go  upon  the 
present  organization  of  the  French  government, 
and  have  a  single  legislative  assembly  based  up- 
on that  foundation?  What  is  the  use  and  neces- 
sity of  the  senate,  if  it  is  not  to  operate  as  a  bal- 
ance wheel,  and  is  not  to  constitute  a  check  up- 
on the  house  of  representatives?  Whj-,  that  is 
its  whole  object,  otherwise  it  would  be  wholly 
unnecessary.  We  find  the  people  to  be  represen- 
ted more  immediately  in  the  house  of  representa- 
tives. They  come  fresh  and  direct  from  the  peo- 
ple, and  represent  them  more  immediately  in  all 
their  monetary  concerns.  The  senate  is  designed 
then,  wlicn  the  representatives  are  disposed  to  go 
into  unnecessary  extravagance,  on  account  of  its 
experience  and  the  more  mature  age  of  its  mem- 
bers, to  step  forward  and  check  tliem.  If  it  is 
so  atroeiouhi  a  principle,  the  gentlemen  themselves 
are  acting  under  it,  and  I  iniagine  they  would  be 
-the  last  to  abolish  it.  If  it  is  good  in  one  asso- 
ciation, it  is  good  in  another;  if  it  is  good  in  one 
relation,  it  is  good  in  another. 

Examine  your  federal  representation,  and  you 
will  find  the  senate  there,  is  not  based  on  popu- 
lar numbers.  Why  is  it  not?  Because  it  is  for 
the  purpose  of  protecting  the  great  interests  of 
society — and  that  minorities  may  be  protected  as 
■well  as  majorities.  Strike  out  this  principle, 
and  you  at  once  come  upon  a  state  of  things 
where  minorities  may  be  crushed.  The  gentle- 
man himself,  the  young  soldier  who  girded  on 
his  sword,  and  went  fortli  to  avenge  his  country, 
and  vindicate  her  honor,  would  be  one  of  the 
first  to  step  forward  and  resist  the  abrogation  of 
that  principle.  It  is  founded  on  a  different  prin- 
ciple from  what  lie  lias  assumed  it  to  be.  It  is 
not  that  one  sovereign  shall  be  protected  again.st 
another,  but  that  the  riffhts  of  tlie  minority  may 
be  protected  against  the  encroachnipnt  of  the 


majority.  Look  at  the  southern  states,  and  see. 
the  helpless  position  they  now  occupy  in  relation 
to  the  rest  of  the  Union.  Sir,  this  institution 
we  have  come  here  to  protect,  and  that  we  are 
seeking  to  perpetuate  to  posterity,  AVould  be 
swept  off  as  with  a  besom  of  destruction  from  eve- 
ry part  of  this  continent,  if  this  was  so.  And  still 
the  gentleman  will  come  forward  and  tell  us  that 
this  representation  exclusively  on  population  is 
the  only  proper  and  right  mode  of  action,  when 
he  himself  would  be  the  first  to  resist  the  en- 
croachments of  the  majority  upon  the  minority. 
If  that  was  the  only  true  principle,  the  soutJi 
Avould  now  be  crouching  and  submissive  to  the 
north,  or  be  obliged  to  tlirow  herself  into  a  re- 
bellious, or  revolutionary  attitude  against  the 
balance  of  the  Union,  and  scenes  of  riot  and 
bloodshed,  and  universal  massacre  ensue.  And 
yet  the  gentleman  will  come  forward  and  tell  us 
that  when  applied  to  our  own  state,  this  princi- 
ple is  an  atrocious  one.  Carry  out  his  argument, 
and  it  will  not  bear  investigation.  What  has  he 
ever  been  contending  for  but  that  the  senate  is 
the  saviour  of  the  If niou?  He,  like  all  others 
has  been  contending  for  the  extension  of  the 
area  of  slavery  to  keep  up  the  balance  of  power, 
and  let  the  great  balance  wheel  of  this  govern- 
ment roll  on  without  a  jostle.  Well,  how  does  it 
apply  to  us.  We  find  that  within  a  few  years, 
our  voting  population  has  sprung  from  133,000, 
to  155,000  voters.  Where  does  this  immense 
increase  come  from  ?  It  is  not  in  the  interior,  or 
on  the  southern  borders,  or  in  the  mountain 
country.  Where  is  it  ?  Why  the  great  increase 
is  here',  upon  the  northern  frontier,  bordering 
upon  the  free  states,  and  into  which  this  foreign 
population  is  now  pouring.  It  is  not  a  native 
increase,  it  is  an  extensive  foreign  increase, 
which  is  pouring  upon  us,  and  against  which  we 
should  guard.  Not  by  excluding  them  from  the 
rights  which  they  may  legitimately  enjoy,  but  to 
provide  against  it,  by  keeping  this  balance  wheel 
as  Ave  found  it.  I  rejoice  in  the  growth  of  the 
city  of  Louisville,  and  in  her  prosperity.  Our 
great  agricultural  region  is  immediately  connec- 
ted Avith  her.  She  is  the  market  into  Avhich  we 
throw  our  wealth  ;  and  the  growth  of  every 
year.  I  Avish  her  therefore  to  continue  to  groAV 
and  prosper,  but  I  do  not  Avish  her  to  attain  a 
position,  nor  the  counties  of  the  gentlemen  from 
Kenton  and  Campbell  and  others,  by  their  rapid 
increase,  to  attain  a  position  to  control  and  gov- 
ern the  commonwealth.  What  is  the  present 
population  of  Louisville  ?  About  50,000.  She 
IS  moving  on  with  giant  stri<les.  She  is  estab- 
lishing manufactures,  and  is  drawing  a  popula- 
tion to  her,  and  every  year  her  thousands  are 
increasing.  Well  noAV,  the  gentleman  is  just 
placing  us  in  the  attitude  that  he  has  been  Avarn- 
mg  us  against.  He  says  Kentucky  constitutes 
about  one  fourth  of  the  area  of  France.  Well  sup-  « 
pose  it  does.  If  then,  a  single  city  can  govern  a  ■ 
country  of  30,000,000  of  people,  cannot  a  single  T 
city ,  by  her  wealth  and  power,  influence  the  legis- 
lation of  Kentucky?  Look  at  Paris.  Whj',  Avhen- 
ever  a  revolution  breaks  out,  whenever  a  single 
movement  is  made  there,  it  vibrates  from  the  cen- 
tre to  the  oxtromity  of  France,  just  like  an  electric 
shock.  It  is  always  the  same  case.  Why,  the 
single  city  of  Paris  gOA'erns  the  Avhole  of  j'^rance. 
She  overtnrowT  a  monarchy  nnd   establiphes  .i 


465 


iin^ublic,  and  then  she  requires  a  standing  army ' 
to  keep  her  from  again   cromiing  some  royal ; 
head  with  the   diadem.      Does  the  gentleman 
want  to    build  up  a  great  city  with    such  an  ' 
influence?  Not  that  I  believe  the  people  of  Louis-  i 
ville  vrould  ever  wish  to  exercise   it  for  such   a  ; 
purpose.     But  look  at  her  condition  now.     She 
IS  increasing  in  commerce  and  manufactures,  and 
exhibits  a  greater  concentration  of  wealth   than  i 
any  other  portion  of  Kentucky.     The  gentleman  i 
has  referred  to  Boston.     Well  sir,  look  at  Boston ; 
has  she  not  now  the  whole  state  of  Massachusetts 
tributary  to  her,  encircling  as  she  has  that  broad 
«!ommonwealth,  with  her  iron  arms.     What  is 

VLouisville  doing.  She  is  building  her  rail  roads 
to  keep  up  her  prosperity,  to  extend  her  intlu- 
euce,  and  to  support  her  people.  She  is  seeking 
to  spread  her  influence  all  through  the  state. 
Here  is  a  rail  road  extending  to  Lexington,  and 
others  are  perhaps  in  contemplation,  and  she  is 
indeed  extending  forth  her  arms  for  the  purpose 
of  grasping  the  whole  state.  Sir,  that  is  the  in- 
fluence the  gentleman  is  here  attempting  to  bring 
upon  the  state  of  Kentucky.  Well,  to  a  certain 
extent,  I  want  to  see  it,  for  these  public  improve- 
ments are  a  benefit  to  other  portions  of  the  state. 
But  I  do  not  wish  to  see  her  influence  extended 
thereby,  so  as  to  control  tlie  state.  I  am  for  her 
legitimate  influence  on  the  floor  of  the  house  of 
representatives,  and  if  that  body  chooses  to  run 
riot  and  go  into  wild  excesses  on  the  subject  of 
internal  improvements,  as  they  have  heretofore 
done,  I  want  to  have  a  check  upon  tliem, 
through  the  senate. 

Well,  how-  is  this  population  made  up?  It 
seem?  strange,  but  you  can  get  a  voting  popu- 
lation there  for  almost  any  purpose.  Look  at 
the  statistics,  as  presented  here  in  the  second 
auditor's  rt^port,  and  wo  find  that  in  1847,  when 
perhaps  a  particular  object  was  in  view,  there 
was  a  voting  population  in  Louisville  alone,  of 
near  7,000.  Well,  in  184S,  we  find  that  it  was 
5,000  and  something  over.  It  is  a  fluctuating 
population,  and  can  be  increased  at  will,  for  al- 
most any  purpose.  It  is  here  to-day,  and  gone 
to-morrow.  Suppose  you  want  to  make  out  an 
apportionment  bill;  if  the  people  are  so  dispos- 
ed, you  can  bring  in  this  amount  of  population 
and  swell  it  up  to  any  amount  that  may  be  ne- 
cessary to  give  thpin  a  powerful  representation 
in  the  senate.     What  is  the  state  of  the  interior 

-^rf  Kentucky?    The  peo])le  tliere  are  stationary. 

■tPhfeir  pursuits  are  agricultural;  and  wealth  and 
population,  and  every  thing  else  there,  is  more 
equally  distributed  and  divided  than  in  the 
cities.  Yon  do  not  find  those  enormous  for- 
tunes, and  that  extreme  and  abject  poverty 
there  that  you  do  in  cities;  but  you  find 
property  more  generally  diffused  among  the 
people.  He  says  that  Ohio  and  Massachusetts 
and  New  York  do  not  proscribe  their  cities.  AYhat 
is  their  situation?  In  Ohio  thev  have  gone  to 
the  extreme  in  every  thing,  and  are  trying  now 
to  get  back  to  the  position  they  foiinerly  occupi- 
ed. Ohio  sees  the  evils  of  her  position,  and  is 
trying  to  get  back  on  the  old  conservative  ground 
she  once  occupied.  So  will  it  be  with  the  state 
of  Kentucky,  if  she  adopts  this  principle  of 
giving  to  these  overgrown  cities  as  much  repre- 
sentation in  the  senate  and  lower  house  as  their 
population  would  entitle  them  to.  The  voting 
5D 


population  of  Jefferson  county  and  Louisville 
now  amounts  to  some  9  or  10,000  voters.  You 
may  take  four  of  the  most  populous  counties  in 
the  interior  of  the  state — ^Lincoln,  Boyle,  Gar- 
rard, and  Jessamine — and  they  have  a  voting 
population  of  5,450,  and  an  agricultural  wealth 
of  something  less  than  $17,000,000.  The  county 
of  Jefferson  and  Louisville  combined,  present  a 
voting  population  of  almost  twice  that  amount, 
and  Jefferson  and  Louisville  have  a  monied 
capital  of  near  $3,000,000;  and  there  is  where 
they  get  a  great  deal  more  of  power  than  the  in- 
terior. We  have  there  land,  and  slaves,  and 
.stock,  but  little  monied  capital.  The  gentle- 
man tells  us  that  Louisville  pays  $43,000  rev- 
enue, or  almost  one  tenth  part  of  the  revenue  of 
the  state.  Sir,  it  is  true,  aud  that  is  another  evi- 
tlence  that  we  should  guard  against  this  thing. 
Why,  although  he  tells  us  of  the  amount  of  rev- 
enue drawn  fi"om  that  county,  yet  he  does  not  tell 
us  that  some  $10,000  or  $lo,000  of  it  are  drawn 
out  of  the  treasury  for  her  expenses.  She  does 
not,  perhaps,  pay  a  much  larger  revenue  than  the 
county  of  Fayette,  and  Fayette  has  but  two  rep- 
resentatives on  this  floor,  and  it  is  probable, 
from  the  nature  of  her  population,  that  she  never 
will  have  more. 

Xow,  I  go  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Franklin,  (Mr.  Lindsey.)  I  think  it 
right.  It  leaves  this  matter  just  as  we  find  it 
in  the  senate,  and  gives  the  cities  a  full  repre- 
sentation in  the  lower  house.  Let  population 
be  the  basis  there.  Let  the  people  be  represent- 
ed there  fully.  On  all  monetary  affairs,  let  them 
have  a  full  voice.  Then  let  not  one  be  subject 
to  the  influence  of  the  other. 

Now,  you  may  take  the  interior  portion  of  the 
state,  and  you  will  see  the  difference.  Take  the 
counties  of  Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Whitlv,  Knox, 
Harlan,  and  Clay,  with  a  voting  population  not 
approaching  that  of  the  city  of  Louisville  and 
the  county  Jefferson,  and  yet  constituting  a  ter- 
ritory of  upwards  of  one  million  of  square 
acres.  That  whole  region  is  to  have  perhaps 
but  one  voice  upon  the  floor  of  the  senate,  while 
the  city  of  Louisville  and  the  county  of  Jeffer- 
son would  have,  under  the  present  arrangement, 
looking  to  the  increase  of  population  that  is  go- 
ing on  there,  representation  to  an  unlimited  ex- 
tent. As  the  gentleman  from  Madison  well 
observes,  take  a  region  of  some  ten  or  twelve 
miles  on  the  Ohio,  that  would  be  intimately  con- 
nected and  interested  in  common,  and  you  will 
find  that  they  constitute  nearly  one  third,  if  not 
one  half,  of  the  voting  population  of  the  state. 
Give  to  Louisville,  with  a  population  of  100,000, 
as  she  will  probably  attain  in  a  few  years — ^give 
to  Covington,  opposite  Cincinnati,  which  has 
now  some  12,000,  and  which  has  broke  on  us 
like  a  meteor,  and  give  her  a  population 
of  50,000 — give  to  the  city  of  Newport  an 
equal  number,  and  to  Maysville  her  morease, 
and  to  other  places  theirs,  and  you  at  once  give 
them  the  power  to  control  the  destinies  of  this 
state.  Now,  is  this  agricultural  interest  to  be 
sacrificed — to  be  placed  like  the  south,  depend- 
ent on  the  north?  It  seems  to  me  there  should 
be  some  balance  preserved,  and  engrafted  upon 
the  constitution.  I  shall  then  be  for  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Franklin,  (Mr.  Lind- 
say-) ^hichleaves  the  representation  in  the  sen- 


466 


ate  as  it  is  in  the  present  constitution,  and  if  I 
cannot  get  that,  then  I  ■will  go  for  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  (Mr.  Trip- 
lett,)  with  a  slight  modiiication,  and  that  is,  to 
insert  one  instead  of  two  senators.  That  seems 
to  me  to  be  the  just  basis  of  representation. 
Now,  with  these  few  remarks  to  the  convention, 
such  as  they  are,  and  which  I  believed  it  to  be 
my  duty  to  submit,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  I 
submit  the  question. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  This  question  is,  perhaps, 
one  of  the  most  important  that  has  or  will  come 
before  this  convention.  It  embraces  the  whole 
subject  of  the  apportionment  of  the  representa- 
tion of  the  state,  and  for  myself,  I  frankly  con- 
fess, I  have  had  more  difficulty  in  satisfying  my 
own  mind  as  to  what  is  the  right  of  the  question, 
than  as  to  any  other  subject  on  which  my  mind 
has  been  brought  to  bear.  I  know  that  the  true 
basis  of  our  representation  is  population — ^or  as 
we  have  it  in  this  state,  the  voting  population. 
When  we  come  to  see.  that  in  carrying  it  out, 
some  inequalities  exist  which  it  is  impossible 
for  us  to  remedy,  we  should  turn  our  minds  to 
the  matter  and  see  liow  we  can  best  arrange  it 
so  as  to  present  as  few  inequalities  as  possible, 
and  aiford  as  fair  a  representation  as  is  in  our 
power.  Our  present  constitution  declares  that 
representation  shall  be  based  entirely  on  num- 
bers, and  lays  down  as  a  rule,  that  it  shall  be  ar- 
ranged so  as  ^to  present  a  perfect  equality  as 
near  as  may  be,  and  it  has  been  an  entire  failure. 
In  some  instances  counties  are  represented  where 
the  voting  population  is  not  a  thousand,  and 
other  counties  who  have  double  that  number 
have  but  a  single  representative.  Let  us  ex- 
amine the  present  bill  and  see  if  it  is  any  better, 
and  whether  inequalities  do  not  exist  in  the 
mode  we  are  asked  to  adopt,  equal  at  least  to 
those  in  the  present  constitution.  And  when 
we  find  that  it  is  impossible  to  carry  out  perfect 
equality,  should  we  not  then  impose  some  limi- 
tation to  the  representation  of  particular  in- 
terests, which  may  otherwise  become  over- 
powerful.  I  have  turned  my  attention  some- 
what, to  the  examination  of  what  would  be  the 
operations  of  the  plan  before  us.  I  find  three 
rules  laid  down:  First,  every  county  that  has 
the  full  ratio  shall  be  entitled  to  a  representa- 
tion; if  it  has  that  ratio  and  two  thirds  over, 
then  it  shall  be  entitled  to  an  additional  repre- 
sentation ;  and  every  county  that  has  two  thirds 
of  the  ratio,  shall  have  a  representative,  and 
those  who  have  not  two  thirds  shall  be  thrown 
together,  and  if  they  are  not  situated  so  as  to 
be  attached  to  any  county  not  having  two  thirds, 
then  they  shall  be  attached  to  the  nearest  county 
adjoining,  having  the  least  number  of  voters. 
According  to  this  mode  of  apportionment  six 
counties  liaving  an  aggregate  of  23,974  voters, 
are  entitled  to  sixteen  representatives  at  a  ratio 
of  1498,  while  six  other  counties  having  only 
13,911  voters  are  entitled  to  twelve  representa- 
tives, at  a  rato  of  1159.  And  twenty  eight 
other  counties  having  51,987  voters  have  only 
twenty  eight  representatives  at  a  ratio  of  185d, 
thus  showing  in  those  twenty  eight  counties  a 
loss  of  9371  votes  or  six  representatives  and 
over.  There  are  thirty  three  counties  with 
thirty  three  representatives,  at  a  ratio  of  12;J3 
voters,  and  the  other  twenty  seven  counties  Vill 


have  fourteeti  representatives,  and  they  will 
have  to  be  thrown  together  as  best  they  may  to 
get  them,  but  it  cannot  be  done  at  all  upon  per- 
fect terras  of  equality.  This  estimate  is  made 
with  reference  to  the  number  of  one  hundred 
representatives,  for  which  the  ratio  at  present  is 
1522.  But  if  we  should  fix  the  number  of  repre- 
sentatives at  seventy  five,  the  inequality  would 
be  still  greater,  if  possible.  Two  counties,  Jef- 
ferson and  Ken  ton )  will  then  have  six  represen- 
tatives with  12,689  voters,  while  sixteen  counties 
with  35,947  voters  Avill  have  but  sixteen  repre- 
sentatives. They  will  thus  lose  4525  votes,  or 
over  two  representatives.  There  will  then  be 
twenty  four  representatives  to  be  divided  among 
the  remaiiung  fifty  two  counties  of  the  state,  a 
division  which  it  will  be  impossible  to  make,  on 
any  thing  like  a  perfectly  equal  arrangement. 
This  proves  to  my  mind  that  we  cannot  make 
representation  exactly  equal,  according  to  the 
principle  we  all  acknowledge  to  be  the  correct 
one.  Was  it  doing  then  any  injustice  to  those 
who  were  more  favorably  situated,  because  their 
population  was  more  contracted,  and  occupied  a 
smaller  territory,  to  fix  some  limit  upon  the 
representation  they  should  have  in  the  house  or 
the  senate? 

I  shall  go  for  the  amendment  giving  to  the 
city  that  may  be  entitled  to  a  representative  in 
the  senate,  a  separate  representative,  but  I  would 
have  the  number  limited.  No  city  or  county  in 
the  state  should  ever  have  more  than  one  senator 
or  five  representatives.  This  would  be  giving 
to  them  one  twentieth  part  of  the  representation 
of  the  state,  and  that  ought  to  content  them.  I 
am  willing  to  give  them  a  fair  representation, 
and  this  Avould  be  a  fair  mode  of  doing  it.  We 
see  that  owing  to  the  great  number  of  counties, 
and  the  manner  in  which  they  are  situated,  and 
the  difference  in  their  population,  that  it  is  im- 
possible to  do  equal  justice  upon  what  we  all 
concede  to  be  the  true  basis  of  representation. 
When  this  cannot  be  done,  should  wc  not  fix  a 
limit,  as  has  been  suggested.  This  limit  had 
better  be  applied  to  the  cities  where  the  people 
are  concentrated,  act  together,  and  can  bring 
their  influence  to  bear  more  directly  on  a  subject, 
than  it  is  possible  for  an  agricultural  people, 
scattered  all  over  the  state.  It  is  true  that  the 
interests  of  the  cities  are  identified  to  some  ex- 
tent, with  the  interests  of  the  balance  of  the 
state,  but  it  is  true  also  that  there  is  a  great  deal 
of  foreign  capital  invested  in  the  business  of  the 
cities  which  has  identity  with  the  intere.-ts  of 
the  rest  of  the  state.  We  know  that  it  is  for  the 
interest  of  the  state  to  keep  up  these  great  manu- 
facturing interests  among  us  ;  yet  we  must  know 
also  that  there  are  combinations  in  those  cities, 
foreign  to  the  rest  of  the  state.  I  know  that  this 
is  not  so  with  a  majority,  yet  men  are  apt  to  go 
for  their  own  interests,  and  for  the  interests  of 
those  more  nearly  connected  with  tliem  in  mone- 
tary concerns,  than  the  balance  of  tlie  state. 
This  may  be  a  broad  assertion,  but  if  we  look 
at  human  nature,  and  see  to  what  a  great  extent 
the  idea  of  making  money  operates  upon  all  of  us, 
we  shall  be  compelled  toacknowledgo  its  justice. 
Louisville  is  now,  Ibcliovc,  entitled  to  thre<i  rep- 
resentatives, and  1  am  willing  that  she  sliould 
have  a  senator.  But  I  am  not  willingto  give  her 
more  than  one  twentieth. part  of  whatever  shall 


467 


be  decided  upon  as  the  legislative  representation 
of  tke  st«t«.  I  prefer  that  we  should  fix  it  at 
one  hundred,  rather  than  seventy-five,  as  the  last 
number  would  increase  the  ratio,  and  make  the 
representation  more  unequal,  and  the  proportion 
of  inlluenee  would  be  greater  in  favor  of  the 
large  cities,  than  it  is  now.  While  therefore  I 
desire  to  see  the  increasing  growth  ot  these  cities 
among  us,  and  desire  to  do  thcni  no  wrong,  I 
must  acknowledge  that  I  desire  to  prevent  their 
exercising  an  undue  control  in  the  affairs  of 
i;Overnment,  by  having  a  majority  of  the  repre- 
sentation. As  we  can  never,  by  any  system  se- 
cure a  perfect  e(^uality  of  representation,  I  am 
for  putting  a  limit  to  them,  as  they  never  can 
lose  more  votes  than  the  other  portions  of  the 
state.  They  will  even  under  the  plan  proposed 
have  more  weight  than  many  of  the  counties  in 
.  the  state.  Take  the  county  of  Logan;  underthe 
proposed  plan,  she  would  have  but  one  represen- 
tative, and  yet  she  has  a  voting  population  of 
2151.  She  therefore  would  lose  628,  almost  one 
third  of  the  entire  voters  of  her  county.  By  fix- 
ing a  limitation  then,  can  we  ever  do  more  in- 
justice to  any  city  that  may  grow  up  among  us 
than  is  done  here  to  Logan  county  V  Many  oth- 
er counties  would  lose  ten  and  twenty  per  cent, 
and  some  twenty  two  or  twenty  three  per  cent, 
while  by  fixing  a  limit  on  the  cities,  they  would 
never  lose  so  great  a  percentage.  I  am  willing 
therefore  to  limit  the  cities  to  one  senator  and 
five  representatives,  and  unwilling  to  go  beyond 
that. 

On  the  subject  of  slavery,  I  shall  not  remark, 
though  I  think  the  amendment  will  fail  to  ac- 
complish its  object  and  hope  therefore  it  will 
not  be  adopted.  At  some  other  time  I  may  give 
my  views  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  but  I  do  not 
think  it  has  any  connection  with  the  present  sub- 
ject. Having  got  through  with  my  remarks  on 
ihis  point,  and  notwithstanding  that  in  so  doing 
I  may  be  considered  out  of  order  I  will  add  no 
more. 

Mr.  STEVENSON".  I  do  not  rise  to  partici- 
pate in  this  discussion,  but  after  the  gentleman 
from  Campbell  (Mr.  Root)  has  undertaken  to 
speak  forthe  county  of  Kenton,  the  constituency  I 
represent,  in  the  manner  which  he  has,  I  should 
be  recreant — 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  spoke  of  Kenton  in  connection 
with  Campbell,  and  only  so  far  as  othei-s  had 
connected  them. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  am  glad  to  hear  the 
explanation  of  the  gentleman,  but  he  certainly 
said  that  Kenton  and  Campbell  were  to  be  made 
the  scape-goats,  and  he  gave  an  expression  of 
feeling  in  a  manner  which  every  member  on  this 
floor  must  have  understood  as  intended  to  indi- 
cate the  feeling  of  the  northern  section  of  the 
state.  I  do  not  rise  to  take  part  in  this  discus- 
sion now,  although  I  may  do  so  before  the  sub- 
ject closes,  but  to  say  that  I  should  be  recreant 
to  my  constituents  and  bastard  to  the  very  title 
of  Kentuckian,  if  I  should  hear  such  sentiments 
uttered  on  this  floor,  without,  in  my  place,  de- 
nouncing them  as  vile  aspersions  upon  the  char- 
acter of  my  constituency.  They  may  live  on 
the  border,  and  within  the  very  foetid  atmos- 
phere of  an  anti-slavery  state,  but  the  sights 
they  have  there  witnessed,  and  the  atmosphere 
that  is  blown  over  to  them  by  every  breeze,  has 


made  thc-m  but  the  firmer  in  their  adherence  to 
the  principles  upon  which  Kentucky  stands.  I 
come  here  yielding  to  no  man  in  a  firm  advoca- 
cy, and  sincere  feeling  for  pro-slavery  princi- 
ples, and  I  made  the  race  against  a  gentleman, 
to  whom,  in  point  of  high  talent  and  superior 
age  and  experience,  I  bow  with  humble  obei- 
sance; I  came  here  as  the  representative,  of  an 
ovenvhelming  majority  of  what  Kentucky  has 
been,  and  what  I  hope  she  ever  will  be — sound 
in  principle,  ready  to  defend  her  rights  from 
whatever  quarter  the  attack  may  come,  whether 
from  the  fanatacism  of  abolitionism  or  any  other, 
and  ready  to  give  her  help  to  those  who  sympa- 
thise witli  her,  when  the  cry  for  help  shall  come. 
As  to  our  claim  for  representation  on  a  fair  and 
equal  footing,  why  we  would  be  whistled 
down  the  winds,  if  the  sentiments  of  the 
gentleman  from  Campbell  are  to  be  regarded  as 
the  true  current  of  public  sentiment  in  our 
quarter.  As  a  distinguished  friend  remarked 
to  me  while  the  gentleman  was  speaking,  "if 
he  had  any  doubt  how  he  should  vote,  if  the 
gentleman  from  Campbell  was  representing  cor- 
rectly his  constituents,  he  would  at  once  go  against 
the  proposition."  We  meet  here  to  settle  great 
and  high  principles,  and  with  a  common  confi- 
dence in  the  generosity  and  common  justice  of 
our  fellow  members  of  this  body,  come  from 
whatever  section  they  may,  and  when  I  come, 
if  I  shall  take  part  in  this  discussion,  to  place 
the  claims  of  Covington  on  proper  grounds,  I 
shall  point  to  my  seat  on  this  floor  as  a  complete 
refutation  of  the  assertion  that  though  my  con- 
stituents live  on  the  border  of  the  state,  they 
will  ever  prove  untrue  to  the  interests  of  Ken- 
tucky. I  am  pained  to  hear  the  sentiments  expres- 
sed by  my  friend  from  Campbell.  I  undertake  to 
interfere  between  no  man  and  his  constituents,  but 
we  live  in  sight  of  each  other,  and  I  know  I  may 
say  emphatically  from  my  own  experience,  that 
he  does  not  speak  the  sentiments  of  a  large  por- 
tion of  Campbell,  when  he  says  that  slavery  is 
a  sin,  and  that  he  would  rip  out  the  leaf  of  his 
Bible  if  it  dared  to  uphold  it.  There  are  slave- 
holders and  pro-slavery  men  in  Kenton,  who 
will  compare  with  any  in  this  convention,  and  I 
think  the  gentleman  casts  an  aspersion  upon 
them,  when  he  attributes  to  them  the  sentiments 
he  has  indicated  here  this  morning.  I  was  pain- 
ed for  another  reason,  and  that  is  the  record  of 
our  proceedings.  The  gentleman's  speech  will 
be  taken  as  a  text  by  the  abolitionists.  When 
the  South  is  fighting  for  her  rights  in  a  national 
point  of  view,  and  when  gentlemen  rise  in  the 
national  halls  and  say  that  while  they  leave  the 
poor  boon  to  the  southern  states,  of  controlling 
slavery  within  their  limits,  they  are  forever 
to  stand  still,  and  never  go  into  a  territory  be- 
longing to  the  Union,  and  won  by  their  joint 
valor.  The  text  of  one  of  the  members  of 
the  Kentucky  Convention  will  be  the  text 
from  which  they  will  preach  their  homilies  of 
abolition.  I  felt  proud  of  my  own  native  state, 
when,  at  a  public  dinner  the  other  day,  I  saw 
among  the  set  toasts,  "Kentucky;  no  enemy  to 
southern  rights  will  hold  a  seat  within  her 
Convention  walls."  I  felt  pained,  that  when 
the  gentleman's  speech  shall  be  reported,  we 
shall  be  obliged  to  make  an  exception  to  that 
fact  in  his  person. 


4oa 


I  rejjeat,  1  had  notiutended  to  participate  in 
this  discussion,  but  a&  the  geiitk-nian  may  be 
supposed  by  some  to  spealj  the  sentiments  of 
northern  Keatucky,  I  felt  that  I  should  be  re- 
creant to  those  whom  I  represent  on  this  flpor, 
if  I  let  the  sentiment  pass  without  an  instant 
d«nial  or  refutation.  1  hope  to  have  an  oppor- 
tunity to  break  a  lance  with  ray.  friend  .un  the 
subject  of  slavery,  wlien  the:rtise5kuti^I.itf-the 
distinguished  gentleman  from  Hi'jxdBrsoj)-,  (jVlj.; 
Dixon,)  shall  come  up;'.aijd-  atiea^t  I.  thiiil?  L 
shall  be  willing  to  go  before  tlie.-peaple'af.  boUu 
counties,  and  appeal '  to  them  Svhich  ha*  most' 
correctly. represented  thera  oit  the  'subject. ;-v.  .    .' 

Mr.  HARDIN.  lhave>ani  amendment, that.I 
propose  to.  offer  at  a  proper  time„.SYhiich  J  iwiH 
read.  It  is  to  be  inserted. after  the-.wor-d;  "in;" 
in  the  10th  line,  and  5ttisoeliou. '  .:,    ■,       ; 

•  "The  house  of  represeutativ.es,  Jind> whenever 
any  city  or  town  shall  liave  qualified  voters 
equal  to  the. rntio 'required  to  entitle  it  to  one 
s'enator,  such  city  osr  town  shall  elect  a  senator: 
Provided,  Tliatdn.  i»o  event  shall  such  city  or 
town  ever  .have  raore'-than  five  representatives 
;^       ■    and  one  senator.".  I  ■ 

S^ft'*  •  I  know  tlie  basis  of  representation  is  popula- 
•  "^^  tion  .and, not  property.  That  is  the  basia  to  a 
^eat  extent,  in  the  government  of  the  Uiiited' 
Statas.  'But  .there  are  two  conservative  princi- 
ples in  the  constitution  of  the  United  States; 
one  is,  that  the  slayeholding  states  get  a  repre- 
sentation for  three  fifihs  of  their  slaves.  To  be 
sure  they  get  a  privilege,  but  they  are  liable  to 
a  direct  tax  in  proportion  to  their  representation 
in  the  house  of  representatives.  Direct  taxes, 
however,  have  never  been  levied  but  twice,  and 
perhaps  they  will  not  be  again.  It  is  a  very 
expensive  tax  to  collect;  it  cost  $14  74  for  every 
hundred  dollars  to  collect  it  and  cover  defalca- 
tions. 

There  is  another  conservative  principle,  and 
that  is,  that  the  smaller  states  are  represented  in 
the  senate  as  sovereignties,  and  Delaware  and 
Rhode  Island  have  the  same  weight  as  Pennsyl- 
vania and  New  York.  The  senate  is  a  congress 
of  sovereignties.  Now,  each  of  these  features 
is  a  departure  from  the  principle  of  representa- 
tion according  to  population.  It  is  a  conserva- 
tive feature  which  does  not  apply  to  counties. 
There  will  be  no  danger  for  twenty  years  to 
come,  that  these  cities  will  have  enough  popu- 
lation for  two  senators.  I  am  unwilling  that 
any  city  shall  send  more  than  one  twentieth 
part  of  the  representatives  to  the  house  of  rep- 
resentatives, or  more  than  one  thirty  eighth  part 
of  the  members  to  the  senate.  Give  them  five 
representatives  and  pne  senator,  and  stop  thera 
at  that. 

I  did  not  rise  for  the  purpose  of  making  any 
remarks,  but  as  I  am  \ip,  I  will  make  a  single 
remark  in  answer  to  the  gentleman  from  Louis- 
ville, (Mr.  Preston,)  who  has  spoken  so  exceed- 
ingly well,  and  in  such  very  fine  taste  and  style. 
He  said  Louisville  had  a  large  portion  of  wealth; 
that  Louisville  is  wealthy,  and  that  Jefferson 
county  is  so  also.  It  is  true.  It  is  fortunately 
situated  in  the  state  of  Kentucky.  It  is  the  gar- 
den spot  of  America.  But  much  of  that  is  ow- 
ing to  its  position  and  locality;  it  seems  to  mo 
though,  that  it  ought  not  lo  be  Aaron's  rod  and 
swallow   up  the  rods  of  the  other  magicians. 


The  gentleman  said  that  Louisville  furnished  a 
large  proportion  of  the  men  that  went  out  in 
the  last  Avar  with  Mexico.  In  furnishing  that 
proportion  however,  it  excluded  a  very  large 
proportion  of  the  balance  of  the  state.  There 
was  no  draught  in  Kentucky,  thank  God,  the 
only  draughting  was,  who  should  be  draughed 
out  and  not  wlio  should  bo  draughted  in.  Five 
thousand,  of  the  best  men  in  Kentucky,  were 
tendered  shortly  after  the  regiment  was  filled. 
It.) was  considered  a  peculiar  favor  to  Louis- 
yijle  that  she  got  her  regiment  in,  Avhile  four  or 
live  thoxisand  more  were  rushing  forward  and 
offei-ing  their  .services.  1  consider  it  a  favor  to 
Louisville,  and  in  that  regard  .she  stood  forth  in 
jslace  of  the  balance  of  the  young  men  in  Ken- 
tucky. She  behaved  very  handsomely,  and  she 
has  had  one-fourth  of  the  officers  that  went 
fronr  the  state  of  Kentucky,  when  the  balance  of 
the  state  was  in  no  Avise  behind  Lor,i.sville. 
But  sir,  Avhen  you  come  to  the  actual  fighting 
part,  the  Louisville  regiment  Avas  not  brought 
into  battle.  Three  days  Monterey  Avas  besieged 
and  there  Avere  three  day's  of  fighting  from  day 
break  to  dark,  and  yet  they  did  not  get  in.  I 
haA'e  no  doubt  they  Avere  as  ready  as  any  men 
in  Kentucky,  but  why  General  Taylor  did  not 
bring  them  into  action,  I  do  not  kuoAV,  nor  Avill 
I  attempt  to  guess,  for  I  might  guess  improperly. 
One  thing  I  do  know,  that  at  the  battle  of  Buena 
Vista  the  second  regiment  from  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky Avas  there,  and  how  pretty  they  came  in. 
Yes  sir,  and  they  bled  too,  and  caused  blood  to 
flow  from  the  enemy,  and  were  called,  and  Avill  be 
for  an  hundred  years  to  come,  "the  bloody  regi- 
ment of  Kentucky."  And  if  you  go  on  the 
hill  here  to  the  burial  place  of  the  Kentucky 
soldiers  in  the  cemetery,  you  will  see  some  indi- 
cations of  it.  I  have  examined  that  place,  and 
I  did  not  see  the  grave  of  one  soldier  from  the 
Louisville  legion  there.  I  examined  it  yesterday 
with  a  young  man  from  Bardstown  who  Avas  un- 
der Taylor,  and  I  did  not  see  one  from  the  Lou- 
isville legion.  Do  not  understand  me  to  say 
that  they  would  not  be  just  as  ready  as  any  men 
in  Kentucky,  but  I  protest  against  Louisville's 
being  put  up  here,  between  Kentucky  and 
danger,  as  if  she  stood  for  the  balance  of 
the  .state.  Kentucky  wis  ready,  and  to  her 
honor  and  glory,  her  sons  had  to  be  draughted 
out  instead  of  draughted  in.  But  in  relation  to 
the  regular  army,  1  must  say  I  regret  to  see  it 
filled  up  with  this  foreign  population.  I  con- 
sider it  tiie  high  road  to  the  loss  of  our  liberties 
in  less  than  one  hundred  years.  It  was  the 
downfall  of  the  ancient  republics  of  Carthage 
and  of  Rome,  and  sooner  or  later  it  will  be 
the  doAvnfall  of  every  republic  the  Avorld  ever 
saw,  that  shall  put  into  its  armies  foreign  mer- 
cenaries. I  regret  very  much  any  invidious 
comparison  should  be  draAvn,  but  I  repeat  what 
I  said  before,  although  I  pity  the  poor  Irish,  the 
oppressed  English,  the  Scotch,  tlic  Frendi,  the 
Italians,  the  Austrians  and  the  Hungarians,  yet 
is  it  very  politic  to  invite  many  more  of  them 
here?  We  have  to  take  care  of  ourselves.  Sir. 
I  have  before  spoken  on  tliis  subject,  and  on  a 
subsequent  occasion  that  may  present  itself,  I 
expect  to  speak  a  little  more  fully  on  this  sub- 
ject. I  will  say  however,  I  wish  to  God  Ave  had 
some  sti'onger  naturalization  laAvs  than  we  have, 


469 


for  DO  one  can  h^lp  seeing  tbat  the  paupers  who 
are  coming  here  fiuin  Europe  iu  suth  numbers, 
or  wealthy  men,  if  you  will  have  it  so,  will 
make  a  population  to  press  on  the  means  for 
the  support  of  the  rest.  What  are  we  to  do 
witJi  tJit^  sixty  millions  there  will  be  iu  this 
country  in  forty  years,  if  this  is  not  stopped  in 
some  way. 

There  Is  a  great  deal  of  force  in  what  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson  said  on  Saturday.  Like 
Absalom's  fair  speeches,  he  ran  off  with  my 
heart;  but  I  have  thought  of  it  since  Saturday 
night,  and  I  do  not  believe  I  am  as  badly  bother- 
ed as  the  gentleman  from  Louisville  thought  I 
was.  We  know  there  is,  on  the  river  border,  a 
population  pouring  in,  whose  business  and  pur- 
suits are  on  the  other  side  of  the  river.  What  is 
it  that  is  swelling  tlie  population  of  Ifewport 
and  Covington?  Why,  I  am  told  it  is  the  popu- 
lation of  Cincinnati  that  is  pouring  in,  not  to 
make  it  a  business  place,  but  a  home  for  their 
families,  while  their  business  is  in  Cincinnati. 
They  have  no  feelings  in  common  with  us.  It 
only  shows  that  my  fears  are  well  founded  when 
one  of  the  ablt-st  men  in  Kentucky  had  to  take 
the  stump,  or  his  antagonist,  who  was  foj 
emancipation,  might  have  carried  the  whole 
county.  It  was  fortunate  that  gentleman 
was  there,  and  fortunate  he  had  some  good 
old  Virginia  feeling.  I,  too,  have  some  of  that 
feeling.  I  am  no  Yankee,  no  anti-slavery  man. 
I  would  not  give  one  good,  .stout,  hearty  Ken- 
tucky man  for  a  dozen  Cape  Cod,  or  Passama- 
qua(fdy  men;  nor  would  I  give  a  dozen  Ken- 
tuckians  for  ten  thousand  east  of  the  Rhine.  I 
pity  them,  but  ray  feelings  are  for  Kentucky,  and 
for  the  slave  population.  I  see  they  are  to  be 
swallowed  up.  I  see  it,  that  with  the  Wilmot 
proviso,  the  slave-holding  states  will  be  swal- 
lowed up  in  forty  yeai^.  But,  thank  God,  I 
shall  be  gone  before  tliat  time.  I  may,  on  some 
future  occasion,  speak  further  on  this  subject. 
My  feelings  are  much  like  those  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon.  I  pity  the.se  foreigners  from 
my  heart,  but  I  love  Kentucky  and  the  slave- 
holding  population;  and  I  repeat  what  I  said  the 
other  day,  that  if  the  whole  of  Europe  were  to 
unite  to  crush  the  United  States,  the  la.st  gun  for 
liberty  would  be  fired  in  the  slave-holding  slates. 
The  people  of  the  slave-holding  states  regard 
liberty  as  a  high  personal  privilege,  which  they 
would  die  for  rather  than  give  up:  and  where 
slavery  does  not  exist,  they  regard  it  as  a  politi- 
cal right. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  am  exceedingly  sorry 
that  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson  hixs  seen 
lit  to  cast  a  base  and  infamous  stigma  upon  the 
gallantry  of  the  soldiers  of  Louisville  and  Jef- 
ferson county.  He  says  he  sees  on  that  hill  no 
name  of  any  citizen  of  Louisville.  If  he  had 
waited  till  the  monument  which  is  to  be  erected 
there  was  completed,  he  would  have  seen  the 
name  of  the  gallant  Cl.at,  who  fell  fighting  in 
the  foremost  ranks;  and  he  would  have  learned 
that  he  wjis  a  citizen  of  Louisville — not  born 
there,  it  is  true — but  a  citizen  by  adoption,  and 
by  choice,  as  raanv  other  of  her  citizens  are,  and 
he  would  have  forfcorne  the  stigma  on  the  city  of 
Louisville,  a  stigma  insinuated,  and  for  that  rea- 
son more  damnable  than  if  it  was  charged  di- 
rect. 


I  was  not  bora  iu  Louisville,  sir,  but  it  is  the 
city  of  ray  adoption,  and  I  can  tell  the  gentle- 
man that  the  spirit  of  freedom  burns  as  pure  and 
as  independently  iu  the  bosoms  of  the  citizens 
of  Louisville,  as  it  does  in  tlie  bosoms  of  the 
citizens  of  any  portion  of  Kentucky.  It  is  true 
sir,  tlie  Louiaville  Legion  shed  no  blood  at  the 
battle  of  Monterey,  and  it  is  true  that  battle 
continued  two  days.  But  where  was  the  Louis- 
ville Legion?  They  were  placed,  by  the  order 
of  General  Taylor,  to  guard  the  battery  that 
shielded  those  who  made  the  charge,  and  for 
twelve  hours  they  endured  the  fire  of  the  enemy 
without  action,  unflinchingly.  Why  they  were 
placed  there  is  in  the  breast  of  that  man,  but 
upon  that  battery  and  its  safety  depended  the 
safety  of  the  army,  and  he  couiided  it  to  those, 
who  he  believed  were  sufiicient  to  defend  it. 

Surely,  in  carrying  out  an  act  of  political  im- 
portance, it  is  not  necessary  to  slander  the  citi- 
zens, who  with  bravery  and  gallantry,  rushed 
en  masse,  to  the  rescue  of  their  country.  The 
proposition  is  a  proposition  to  demolish  our  fair 
portion  of  political  rights  in  the  commonwealth 
of  Kentucky.  It  is  a  proposition  now  directed 
solely  and  exclusively  against  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville, that  she  shall  not  have  an  equal  voice  in 
making  the  laws  that  are  to  govern  a  free  peo- 
ple. It  is  an  act  of  political  injustice,  and 
though  the  gentleman  may  have  had  to  sleep 
upon  it,  in  order  to  bring  himself  up  to  it,  it 
shows  that  that  sleep  has  enabled  him  to  bring 
himself  to  perpetrate  this  act  of  political  injus- 
tice, which  he  had  some  grudging  about  in  the 
first  instance.  - 

The  principle  upon  which  our  government  is 
established  is  universal  suffrage.  We  proclaim- 
ed it  in  the  old  constitution,  and  we  are  about 
to  proclaim  it  in  the  new.  But  it  will  have  to 
be  struck  out,  if  this  act  of  political  injustice  is 
perpetrated;  because  it  will  be  false,  utterly,  to- 
tally, unconditionally,  irremediably  false  to  the 
people  of  Kentucky,  and  to  the  world.  If  a  free 
people  are  equal  and  entitled  to  equal  rights, 
that  is  a  principle,  and  no  man  who  acknowl- 
edges the  principle,  if  he  acts  consistently,  but 
must  carry  it  out  in  all  its  consequences,  or  he 
denies  the  principle,  and  says  that  we  are  not 
entitled  to  equal  political  rights.  Well,  if  we 
are  not  entitled  to  them,  and  you  deny  that 
principle,  where  is  it  to  end?  Where  is  the  lim- 
it to  the  inroads  you  will  make  on  the  political 
rights  of  a  portion  of  your  citizens?  It  will  be 
in  the  will  of  a  majority,  ba«ed  on  no  principle 
but  that  of  expediency.  And  that  majority  will 
have  a  will  not  anchored  by  principle,  but  expedi- 
ency, and  it  will  lead  to  the  very  same  degree  of  des- 
potism that  rules  through  the  Autocrat  of  Russia, 
that  tramples  upon  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the 
continent  of  Europe,  and  has  hitherto  had  no 
footing  on  the  shores  of  America,  or  if  a  foot- 
ing, the  march  and  extension  of  free  principles 
have  been,  sinte  the  days  of  the  revolution, 
constantly  in  advance. 

What  is  the  reason  endorsed  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  for  obliterating  tne.se  principles? 
He  says  that  the  slave  population  will  not  be 
safe  to  their  masters,  if  this  principle  is  carried 
out.  Three  fourths  of  the  votes  that  were  cast 
for  the  delegation  on  this  floor  from  the  city  of 
Louisville,  were  cast  bv  men  who  held  no  slaves 


470 


— by  men  who  did  not  worship  at  that  shrine — 
and  ihey  cast  their  votes  on  principle.  They 
helieveu  that  our  fathers  when  tliey  framed  this 
constitution,  laid  its  foundations  in  justice,  and 
they  determined  that  they  would  stand  upon 
the  platform,  that  private  property  was  not  to 
be  taken  without  just  compensation — that  it  was 
the  great  privilege  of  a  free  people  to  lay  it  on 
that  fouuaation,  and  keep  it  on  that  foundation. 
And  as  the  law  had  authorized  this  property, 
and  individuals  had  invested  in  it,  if  it  was  the 
public  impulse  that  this  species  of  property 
should  be  e.vcluded,  they  thought  they  should 
compensate  those  who  had  acquired  it;  and  so- 
berly appealing  to  that  principle  of  innate  right, 
based  on  the  foundation  of  the  constitution,  we 
appealed  to  men  to  stand  by  the  riglits  to  prop- 
erty as  they  would  stand  by  the  rights  to  liber- 
ertj%  equality,  and  equal  rights,  and  we  did  not 
appeal  in  vain. 

Wo  stand  here  representing  that  people  and 
that  great  principle,  and  it  is  thrown  in  our 
teeth  that  it  is  necessary  to  violate  that  princi- 
ple, in  order  to  secure  our  negroes.  I  would 
want  no  other  reason  and  argument  to  give  ine 
double  power  and  double  force  in  agitating  upon 
the  subject  of  emancipation,  than  to  tell  a  free 
people,  free  white  men,  that  their  rights  have 
been  violated  and  trampled  in  the  dust,  and  their 
equal  political  privileges  in  this  goverument 
have  been  silenced  in  the  legislative  halls  of  the 
country  in  order  to  save  that  property.  How  do 
gentlemen  expect  to  send  back  the  delegates 
from  the  city  of  Louisville  to  their  constituents? 
What  answer  do  they  expect  them  to  make  in 
relation  to  this  question?  They  will  say,  you 
told  us  the  foundations  of  this  government  were 
laid  in  justice,  and  that  you  would  lay  the  foun- 
dations of  the  one  you  are  framing  the  same, 
and  would  give  equal  laws  and  equal  rights  to 
all.  We  should  say  the  balance  of  the  state  has 
deprived  us  of  the  voice  of  freedom,  has  tram- 
pled our  rights  in  the  dust.  And,  for  what 
avowed  reason?  Because  they  feared  the  day 
would  come  when  emancipation  would  have  a 
Lead  in  the  city  of  Louisville  and  upon  the  bor- 
dering counties.  Thank  God,  emancipation  has 
not  drenched  the  fields  of  Louisville,  or  the  bor- 
dering counties,  with  blood.  The  principles 
involved  in  this,  and  the  reasons  for  carrying  it 
out,  are  fraught  with  more  evil  to  this  institution 
than  any  other  act  this  convention  could  l^ossi- 
bly  do.  I  tell  these  gentlemen  who  are  in  favor 
of  the  institution  of  slavery,  that  if  it  can  abide 
at  all,  it  can  only  abide  on  the  sentiments  of 
iustice  and  right  to  the  holders  of  slaves.  Slave- 
iiolders  are  not  a  majority  in  KentucKy.  They 
never  will  be,  and  whenever  you  destroy  that 
principle  of  right  which  deprives  a  man  of  the 
power  of  defending  private  property — when 
you  trample  upon  the  political  rights  of  men  in 
order  to  shiela  it,  you  nave  unloosed  a  force  and 
power  which  will  overturn  this  principle.  If 
we  are  to  be  sacrificed,  if  our  political  princi- 
ples are  to  be  crushed,  and  our  voice  is  no  more 
to  be  heard  iu  the  country,  for  God's  sake  let  it 
be  for  some  other  reason,  and  do  not  sanctify  and 
make  holy  that  abominable  reason  that  will 
■work  against  you  most  fearfully  and  awfully. 
There  is  a  jealousy  against  the  cities.  Has  Ken- 
tucky ever  had  any  reason — any  just  reason — to 


be  jealous  of  any  of  the  cities  in  the  state,  large 
or  small?  And  is  she  likely  ever  to  have?  Are 
they  less  public  spirited — less  desirous  of  en- 
lightening the  public  mind,  and  sustaining  free 
institutions?  The  city  of  Louisville  established 
the  first  public  schools  where  all  went  and  re- 
ceived an  education  without  charge,  except 
from  the  jDublic  purse.  Louisville  now  lays  a 
tax  on  the  property  of  her  citizens  of  twelve  and 
a  half  cents  per  annum  to  sustain  the  public 
schools  in  order  to  enlighten  the  rising  genera- 
tion, and  make  them  acquainted  with  their 
rights.  She  is  in  advance — she  took  the  first 
step  and  is  now  in  advance — of  the  balance  of  . 
the  state  in  reference  to  education. 

Upon  the  subject  of  internal  improvements, 
which  some  men  delight  to  denounce,  but  which 
have  in  their  effect  more  than  doubled,  or  nearly 
doubled,  the  value  of  the  whole  of  the  real  es- 
tate in  the  country,  where  did  Louisville  stand? 
She  was  in  favor  of  them,  and  with  her  voice 
and  her  aid  and  assistance  enabled  them  to  be 
carried  on.  And  it  is  obvious  to  any  one  ac- 
quainted, or  who  will  look  at  the  records  of  the 
legislation  of  that  time,  if  she  had  withdrawn 
her  assistance  there  would  have  been  no  turn- 
pike roads  through  the  state,  and  no  slackwater 
navigation,  and  she  is  now  furnishing  an  exam- 
ple of  enterprise  to  the  balance  of  the  cities,  in 
the  railroad  she  is  building  from  the  city  of  Lou- 
isville to  this  capital,  and  thence  to  the  city  of 
Lexington,  and  from  thence  through  the  north- 
ern portion  of  the  state  to  join  the  Baltimore 
and  Ohio  railroad,  and  thus  open  the  markets 
of  the  east.  This  is  a  thing  that  may  and  will 
be  accomplished  if  we  are  wise,  and  it  is  the  en- 
terprise of  Louisville  that  points  to  this  Avork. 

will  the  citizens  of  Kentucky  derive  no  ad- 
vantage from  this  enterprise?  What  do  they 
fear?  Why,  say  they,  she  gets  all  our  produce. 
Yes,  all  that  you  choose  to  bring,  and  she  pays 
for  it.  I  hope  the  trade  of  Louisville  is  a  mutu- 
al advantage  to  both  city  and  cmuitry;  and  it  is 
obvious  to  every  one  wlio  has  remarked  it,  that 
within  the  borders  of  the  city  there  is  a  home 
market,  beneficial  to  the  citizens  of  Kentucky. 
Six  thousand  hogsheads  of  tobacco  inspected 
and  sold  at  a  home  market,  where  the  planter 
can  receive  his  money,  is  an  evidence  that  Lou- 
isville is  growing  and  producing  a  market  bene- 
ficial to  the  state.  Is  it  that  market  that  causes 
gentlemen  to  look  with  suspicion  upon  her? 
It  is  a  market  where  you  get  supplies.  It  is 
more,  it  is  a  market  for  the  enterprise  of  the  state. 
All  that  are  in  Louisville  were  not  born  there. 
All  that  have  trusted  and  confided  in  that  city 
were  not  born  there.  The  merchant,  the  man  of 
genius  and  enterprise,  goes  there  as  to  a  market 
for  his  genius  and  talents  which  the  country  does 
not  atford. 

She  has  her  medical  hall  and  four  hundred 
students,  and  I  hope  and  trust  she  yields  to  those 
who  come  there  an  equivalent,  and  in  the  in- 
telligence that  she  imparts  she  does  no  harm  to 
the  cause  of  liberty  and  equal  rights.  She  edu- 
cates young  men  in  other  departments,  and  to 
them  the  same  remark  is  equally  true.  What  is 
tJiere  that  Louisville  does  to  cause  the  jealousy 
of  diflerent  portions  of  the  state?  When  dan- 
ger calls  her  citizens  fly  to  the  rescue  as  soon  as 
those  of  any  other  portion  of  the  state.    I   do 


471 


not  say  more  quickly,  for  I  do  not  believe  it,  but 
on  a  proper  occasion,  and  in  a  proper  field,  I  be- 
lieve they  will  meet  the  contingencies  of  battle 
as  boldly  as  any  other  citizens,  and  I  claim  no 
more  for  them. 

When  it  comes  to  the  matter  of  education, 
Louisville  stands  ready  to  show  by  her  acts  what 
she  is  willing  to  do  to  enlighten  the  public  mind 
and  sustain  the  pillars  which  sustain  our  gov- 
ernment. When  we  consider  the  principles 
which  advance  a  people  in  wealtli  and  prosperi- 
ty, the  enterprise  and  the  zeal  in  which  she  en- 
cages in  them,  shows  that  there  is  a  patriotism 
m  it.     Is  it  to  this  that  you  object? 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  know  thebalance  of  the  coun- 
ties of  this  stato  have  it  within  their  power  to 
put  such  provisions  in  this  constitution  as  they 
may  choose,  and  thev  may  deny  to  Louisville, 
or  any  other  city  in  tlie  commonwealth,  any  rep- 
resentation at  all — any  voice  in  it.  They  have 
got  the  power.  Is  it  expedient  they  should  ex- 
ercise itV  They  may  exercise  it  by  violating  the 
great  principle  of  equal  rights.  The  gentlemen 
do  not  propose,  I  understand,  to  go  the  whole, 
but  half  way  only.  They  will  take  from  the 
present  generation  nothing  they  are  entitled  to, 
but  they  will  disfranchise  the  generation  to  come, 
or  lessen  one-half,  or  three-fourths,  or  four-fifths 
of  the  political  power  in  the  commonwealth  of 
Kentucky.  Is  there  any  thing  to  be  more  safe? 
Are  the  political  rights  of  the  people  to  be  more 
safe?  It  is  a  violation  of  principle  that  shows  a 
man  is  not  at  heart  willing  to  allow  to  the  bal- 
ance of  the  oonimnnity  that  freedom  which  he 
enjoys  himself.  If  you  do  these  things  in  the 
small,  let  the  temptation  be  equal  to  it,  and  you 
will  do  it  in  the  great.  I  have  no  more  confi- 
dence in  those  men  that  have  made  up  their  minds 
to  invade  the  rights  of  their  fellow  citizens,  and 
stifle  the  voice  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  than 
I  have  in  the  voice  of  the  autocrat  of  Russia,  who 
thinks  and«cts  for  the  whole.  If  you  do  it  in 
one  thing,  let  the  temptation  be  great  enough, 
and  you  will  do  it  in  another.  I  Know  gentle- 
men have  been  contemplating  this  project.  One 
gentleman  fixes  it  upon  the  necessity  of  securing 
their  negroes.  Another  wants  to  supply  that 
population,  which  they  have  driven  to  other 
states,  in  the  extension  of  their  farms,  and  give 
to  them  votes  for  the  men  they  have  lost,  and 
which  they  have  replaced  in  bullocks.  I  un- 
derstand it,  sir.  And  it  would  be  just  as  sensi- 
ble, and  no  greater  outrage,  in  my  view  of  the 
subject,  if  thty  should  say  their  bullocks  should 
be  represented  in  the  legislature  of  Kentucky,  to 
make  up  for  the  voices  of  the  freemen  congrega- 
ted in  the  cities,  if  there  were  anj'  way  of  cast- 
ing the  votes.  I  beg  gentlemen  to  consider  this 
principle.  I  know  thebalance  of  the  state  have 
the  power;  and  I  know  many  men  claiming  to 
be  democrats,  and  manv  men  claiming  to  be 
whigs,  who  are  contemplating  this  proceeding, 
and  who  are  .sworn  upon  the  principle  of  equzd 
rights  and  equal  justice  to  all;  and  vet,  because 
they  think  they  can  do  this  act  witli  impunity, 
they  are  preparing  themselves  to  carry  their  pur- 
pose into  effect.     I  know  it;  I  have  seen  it. 

Well,  every  gentleman  can  reconcile  it  to  him- 
self in  his  own  way.  That  is  with  him.  His 
constituents,  because  they  receive  the  benefits 
and  advantages  of  it,  may  look  over  it,  but  if 


they  shall  be  chary  in  trusting  him  again,  when 
they  see  he  can  trample  on  their  rights,  as  he 
has  trampled  on  the  rights  of  others,  tbeir  distrust 
will  be  manifested,  and  the  consequences  will  be 
visited  on  his  own  head,  and  not  on  mine. 

I  can  sign  no  constitution  that  denies  to  my 
constituents  those  equal  and  political  rights 
that  other  freemen  have.  I  can  sign  nothing 
which  degrades  and  stigmatizes  my  constituents 
as  unworthy  to  be  partners  with  the  freemen  of 
Kentucky  in  a  government  of  freemen.  I  can-' 
not  ask  them  to  take  this  constitution.  I  cannot 
tell  them  it  is  just.  I  shall  be  bound  in  my  con- 
science, and  before  Go<i,  to  tell  them  it  is  unjust 
— -that  the  liberties  and  equal  rights  of  freemen 
have  been  trampled  upon.  And  why  and 
wherefore?  It  has  been  avowed.  There  is  just 
as  much  danger  to  this  government  if  it  is  ruled 
by  acres,  by  millions  of  acres,  where  there  are 
no  men,  or  but  few,  as  tliere  would  be  if  it  were 
ruled  by  the  voice  of  freemen  who  buy  those 
acres.  I  have  always  understood  it  was  intel- 
ligence and  virtue  embodied  in  jnst,iipright  and 
correct  laws,  which  constituted  the  basis  of 
good  government  and  not  acres  of  land.  Still 
we  pay  one  tenth  of  the  taxes  of  this  common- 
wealth, and  we  liave  one-thirty- eighth  part  of 
political  power  in  the  senate,  and  one-twentieth 
in  the  house.  Has  that  political  power  ever 
been  found  injurious  to  the  state  of  Kentucky? 
Has  the  city  of  Louisville,  or  the  countv  of  Jef- 
ferson ever  failed  in  aught  which  leads  to  the 
firosperitv  of  tbe  state,  to  its  glory,  to  equal 
aws  an5  equal  rights?  Where  a  stigma  is 
placed  on  our  representation  in  the  halls  of  leg- 
islation, or  in  the  halls  here,  we  may  be  ardent 
in  our  support  of  our  rights,  and  we  may  speak 
out  as  freemen  should  speak  out  when  they  feel 
there  is  a  principle  asserted  which  leads  to  the 
stifling  of  tlie  voice  of  freemen.  But  thev  will 
teach  us  some  other  language,  and  it  will  be  a 
long  reign  of  servitude  and  oppression,  which 
will  stifle  our  voice,  or  induce  us  to  lessen  our 
opposition  to  oppression,  wrong,  and  injustice 
when  we  see  it,  or  when  we  apprehend  it.  There, 
is  no  danger  in  giving  the  city  of  Louisville, 
and  every  city  that  sh Si  arise  iii  the  Common- 
wealth of  Kentucky,  whether  they  arise  on  the 
borders  of  the  Ohio,  or  like  the  great  manufac- 
turing cities  that  have  grown  up  in  England, 
shall  rise  in  the  interior,  there  is  no  danger  in 
giving  them  equal  rights  and  equal  privileges. 

Mr.^  C.  A.  WICKLiFFE.  If  the  gentleman 
will  give  wp,y  I  will  move  that  the  convention 
take  a  recess  till  half  past  two  o'clock. 

The  motion  was  modified  so  as  to  read  "tliree 
o'clock,"  and  it  was  agreed  to. 

tVEXlXG   SESSION. 

The  PRESIDENT.  When  I  rose  I  was  ex- 
cited at  what  I  considered  an  infamous  insinua- 
tion upon  the  living  and  upon  the  dead,  and  for- 
got to  name  another  gallant  citizen  of  Louis- 
ville, who  fell  on  the  bloody  field  of  Buena  Vis- 
ta. Young  Dozier  lies  on  yonder  hill.  The 
gentleman  might  have  read  his  name,  and  spared 
his  sneer.  Dozier  was  the  gallant  son  of  my 
first  and  best  teacher — the  man  who  taught  me 
to  think,  the  son  of  James  I.  Dozier,  of  Louis- 
ville. Louisville  lost  other  citizens  in  Mexico; 
but  enough  of  this. 


472 


1  have  endeavored  to  place  my  views  upon 
the  question  we  are  now  considering,  fairly  be- 
,^fore  the  convention.  The  principle,  as  laid 
down  in  the  old  constitution,  is  that  representa- 
tion shall  be  equal  and  uniform  in  this  common- 
wealth. The  principle  of  extending  the  right 
of  suffrage  to  all  citizens  of  the  commonwealth, 
who  have  attained  the  mature  age  of  twenty-one 
years,  is  there  laid  down.  That  was  the  great 
platform  on  which  our  ancestors  based  the  gov- 
ernment— that  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  of  re- 
presentatioji  based  on  tlie  right  of  suffrage, 
should  be  equal  and  uniform.  It  is  true,  the 
rule  thus  prescribed,  when  carried  out,  does  not 
arrive  at  mathematical  certainty.  When  divi- 
ded into  counties  for  convenience  in  regard  to 
local  government — for  convenience  in  holding 
courts,  and  the  dispensing  of  justice,  those  di- 
visions must  necessarily  be  unequal  in  extent  of 
territory,  unequal  in  "point  of  fertility,  and  of 
course  some  of  the  divisions  naturally  become 
populated  faster  than  others.  Different  counties 
never  have  been,  and  never  will  be,  precisely 
equal  in  point  of  numbers,  so  that  that  equal 
and  exact  justice,  in  accordance  Avith  this  prin- 
ciple, can  never  be  obtained— that  is,  mathemat- 
ical equality  in  regard  to  numbers.  But  the 
principle  is  recognized  in  the  old  constitution, 
and  tJie  legislature  was  directed  to  carry  out 
these  principles  as  nearly  as  practicable. 

I  believe  that  I  was  in  the  legislature  when 
three  apportionments  were  made,  and  have  had 
occasion  to  look  back  to  two  tliat  have  been  sub- 
sequently made.  None  of  them  arrive  at  cer- 
tainty, and  1  found  both  political  parties  desi- 
rous, in  the  distribution  of  representatives 
among  the  counties,  to  get  it  as  favorable  as  they 
thought  they  were  warranted  in  doing,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  principle  laid  down  in  the 
constitution.  And  I  sometimes  thought  that 
the  constitution  was  stretched  a  little,  for  the 
purpose  of  arriving  at  such  conclusions;  par- 
ticularly when  Louisville  was  denied  a  senator. 
And  I  could  name  other  instances,  but  I  will 
forbear.  The  clause  directing  the  legislature  to 
apportion  the  representation,  either  did  not  in 
itself  contain  the  correct  principle,  or  it  was  so 
pe'rveited  that  justice  was  not  obtained,  equali- 
ty of  representation  was  not  obtained,  nor  was 
it  brought  as  near  to  equality  as  it  might  have 
been.  For  instance,  I  recollect  that  in  one  ap- 
portionment the  county  of  Bourbon,  with  a  less 
number  of  inhabitants  than  the  county  of  Scott, 
was  allowed  to  have  two  reprcsentatiVes,  while 
Scott  had  but  one.  This  was  done  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  arranging  residuums;  beginning  at  the 
north-eastern  part  of  the  state,  by  which  they 
were  consumed  before  coming  to  Scott  county; 
forinwliich  ever  quarter  you  begin  to  divide 
your  residuums,  you  arrive  at  a  dittcrent  conclu- 
eion;  commence  at  different  points,  and  you  al- 
ways have  difierent  results.  There  were  inex- 
tricable difficulties  in  the  way  of  arriving  at 
that  equality  whicli  the  constitution  contempla- 
ted, or  at  least  there  were  very  great  difKculties, 
and  it  so  turned  out  that  a  large  proportion  of 
the  delegation  allotted  to  a  county,  differed  in 
their  political  sentimentn  from  a  majority  of  the 
people  of  such  county,  and  the  gap  continued 
to  widen.  I  believe  the  last  apportionment  was 
about  the  most  unequal  that  ever  was  made,  and 


since  it  has  got  a  proclivity  in  that  way,  there 
is  no  telling  where  it  will  stop. 

I  was  anxious  that  in  this  constitution,  after 
acknowledging  the  principle  of  universal  suf- 
frage, on  the  part  of  all  male  citizens  over 
twenty-one  years  of  age;  and  the  principle  that 
representation  should  be  distributed  to  every 
county  and  town  in  proiJortion  to  numbers,  as 
nearly  as  might  be,  some  certain  rule  should  be 
adopted  that  would  give  the  representation  to 
the  largest  masses;  and  thus  arrive  as  near  to 
certainty  as  possible,  and  take  from  the  legisla- 
ture, as  far  as  practicable,  the  discretion  they 
possess  in  regard  to  controlling  residuums.  If  I 
sliall  feel  any  interest  in  what  shall  be  done  in 
the  forming  of  this  constitution,  when  I  come  to 
that  section  I  will  endeavor  to  aid  in  fixing  upon 
a  certain  criterion,  and  one  which  will  take 
away  legislative  discretion,  as  far  as  practica- 
ble, so  that  the  greatest  number  shall  have  the 
representation.  I  know  that  divided  into  cities, 
towns,  and  counties,  as  we  are,  an  exact  mathe- 
matical equality  of  representation  according  to 
numbers,  is  impossible  to  be  obtained. 

The  gentleman  from  the  county  of  Ohio  says, 
that  matiiematical  certainty  could  not  be  obtain- 
ed, and  that  there  would  necessarily  be  inequal- 
ities of  representation,  if  such  divisions  are 
carried  out,  and  that  it  would  be  no  departure 
from  the  principle  to  cut  off  the  cities,  and  limit 
them,  so  that  they  can  never  have  more  than  a 
certain  number  of  representatives.  Now,  sir, 
that  is  a  direct  violation  of  the  principle;  and 
it  is  not  a  violation  arising  from  the  clifRculty 
of  coming  to  a  direct  conclusion,  but  it  is  a 
wilful  violation,  made  before  hand,  purposely 
and  intentionally;  and  therefore,  sir,  in  the  view 
I  take  of  it,  wholly  and  altogether  inexcusable, 
not  arising  from  necessity,  but  from  an  intention 
to  violate  the  great  principle  of  equal  represen- 
tation. It  is  either  a  principle,  or  it  is  not;  it  is 
one  that  we  should  follow  as  nearlv»as  practica- 
ble, or  that  we  should  abandon  altogether.  If 
we  abandon  it  altogether,  I  sliould  prefer  giving 
to  each  of  the  one  hundred  counties  in  this  com- 
monwealth one  member.  If  we  abandon  it  al- 
together, I  would  prefer  tltat  we  divide  out  the 
thirty  eight  senators,  among  the  sever.il  coun- 
ties, cities  and  towns,  and  give  tliat  representa- 
tion to  them  absolutely,  and  let  it  go  on  in  per- 
petuity. If  the  system  proposed  by  the  gentle- 
man be  carried  out,  it  would  resemble  the  bo- 
rough system  of  unequal  and  unjust  representa- 
tion, as  it  has  existed  in  England,  and  which 
has  been  for  a  long  period  of  time,  the  subject 
of  great  co'ntention  in  parliament,  between  the 
"  ins"  and  the  "outs;"  for  it  is  manifest  that  the 
cities  will  increase  with  more  rapidity  than  the 
population  of  the  countrv. 

The  gentleman  from  5ladison  s.iys  that  the 
belt  of  counties,  or  that  range  lying  along  the 
Ohio  river,  will  increase  in  population  more 
rapidly  than  the  whole  balance  of  the  state;  and 
that  that  increase  of  population  will  bo  danger- 
ous to  the  political  ascendency  of  tlie  balance 
of  the  state,  in  reference  to  a  particular  descrip- 
tion of  property;  and  thi-refore  it  must  be  guard- 
ed against  in  this  constitution.  That  is  his  ar- 
gument. 

The  honorable  chairman  of  the  committee,  by 
the  amendment  he  offers,  proposes  fo  limit  the 


473 


cities  to  a  certain  representation — provided — 
now  the  proviso  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
subject  matter,  nor  does  it  grow  out  of  it — pro- 
vided every  body  in  this  commonwealth  snail 
have  the  right  to  go  out  of  the  commonwealth 
and  bring  in  negroes  for  his  own  use.  The  gen- 
tleman is  not  contented  with  apportioning  the 
representation  as  indicated  in  his  amendment, 
and  abandoning  the  principle  of  equal  and  uni- 
form representation;  but  he  wants  us  to  engraft 
upon  it  a  provision  permitting  free  trade  in  ne- 

Soes.  Well,  sir,  if  there  are  any  portions  of 
e  people  in  this  commonwealth,  particularly 
those  in  the  border  counties  of  the  state — as  the 
gentleman  from  Madison  maintains — that  are 
opposed,  or  likely  to  be  opposed,  to  the  existence 
of  the  institution  of  slavery,  it  will  fall  with  a 
ten-fold  force  of  revulsion  upon  those  who  shall 
not  only  be  deprived  of  the  right  of  suffrage, 
but  shall  also  have  this  privilege  endorsed  upon 
it,  as  a  sweetening  of  the  dose,  to  make  it  go 
down. 

The  gentleman  from  Daviess  thinks  that  there 
is  not  onlv  a  necessity  for  restraining  Louisville, 
but  all  otlier  cities  that  may  ever  grow  up  in  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  so  that  they  shall 
have — no  matter  what  their  population  may  be 
—no  matter  what  their  situation  may  be — no 
more  than  a  certain  proportion  of  representation 
in  the  two  houses  of  the  general  assembly.  It 
is  very  likely  there  may  grow  up  a  great  city  at 
Maysville.  Maysville  is  increH.sing  rapidly  in 
population,  manufactures  and  commerce.  The 
county  in  which  Maysville  is  situated,  has  in- 
creased very  greatly  within  the  last  eight  years. 
It  is  very  likely  that  Newport  and  Covington 
will  grow  to  be  important  cities,  and  that  the 
counties  iu  which  they  are  situated,  will  grow 
to  forty,  fifty,  sixty,  nay.  a  hundred  thousand 
■within  a  very  short  period;  and  that  Louisville, 
from  her  fiftj'  thousand  may  grow  to  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  or  two  hundred  thousand;  that 
Henderson,  if  the  contemplated  railroad  should 
be  made,  may  likewise  grow  up  to  be  a  great 
city;  that  Paducah,  which  has  already  a  nour- 
ishing commerce,  may  grow  to  be  a  great  city; 
and  if  the  railroad  from  the  Mobile  to  the  mouth 
of  the  Ohio  should  ever  be  completed,  and  Lou- 
isville be  connected  with  the  southern  tier  of 
counties,  a  great  city  must  grow  up  at  some 
point.  And  Lexington  will  become  a  great  in- 
terior manufacturing  city  when  she  has  railroads 
running  to  the  river,  that  will  give  her  the  ben- 
efit of  cheap  fuel.  And,  sir,  it  is  no  idle  expec- 
tation, when  we  look  at  the  immense  manufac- 
turing cities  that  have  grown  up  in  England. 
And  there  will  be  other  portions  of  Kentucky 
in  which  great  cities  will  grow  up.  There  are 
now  in  the  little  island  of  Great  Britain,  more 
than  twenty  cities  that  exceed  fifty  thousand 
inhabitants,  and  which  would  have,  under  our 
eystem  of  laws,  eight  or  ten  thousand  voters 
each.  Well,  if  we  were  to  have  but  ten  cities 
in  Kentucky  in  the  course  of  the  next  fifty  years, 
that  shall  nave  eight  or  ten  thousand  votei-s, 
why  the  ratio  that  the  gentleman  allows  to  them 
would  not  give  a  representative  to  each.  The 
gentleman  must  see  that  this  is  carrying  the 
thing  to  extremes. 

Thirty  years  ago  next  March,  I  went  to  Louis- 
ville, and  at  that  time  there  was  scarcely  four 
60 


thousand  inhabitants  in  Louisville,  and  now 
there  is  more  than  fifty  thousand.  Thirty  years 
had  not  rolled  around,  when  from  four  thousjind, 
the  population  became  over  fifty  thousand, 
MavsviUe  has  grown  within  a  less  period  of  time 
witli  an  equal  rapidity,  from  the  time  she  took 
the  impulse.  Covington  and  Newport,  though 
stigmatised  as  the  suburbs  of  Cincinnati,  and 
the  outpouring  of  her  filth,  are  growing  with 
equal  rapidity,  and  a  great  many  of  the  most 
useful  manufactures  are  carried,  on  this  .side 
of  the  river.  And  if  gentlemen  will  reflect  on 
the  increase  of  population  that  has  taken  place, 
and  that  will  take  place  in  all  human  probabili- 
ty, if  this  government  remains  united,  if  the 
foundation  on  which  all  the  states  have  based 
it,  remains  undisturbed,  if  the  security  of  prop- 
ertv,  the  security  of  life,  the  security  of  the 
fruits  of  industry,  and  the  equal  enjoyment  of 
political  rights  continue,  we  must  increase  for 
the  next  thirty  years,  with  a  rapidity  greatly  be- 
yond that  with  which  we  have  increased  within 
the  last  thirty  years.  The  gentleman  may  say 
that  is  an  argument  against  us.  It  shows  that  you 
who  live  on  the  margin  of  the  Ohio  river  will 
have  the  power,  and  that  we  must  guard  against 
the  increase  of  that  power,  and  we  will  guard 
against  it  now. 

Gentlemen  should  recollect  that  the  founda- 
tion of  a  government  that  is  not  laid  in  justice, 
that  is  not  laid  in  equal  rights  and  privileges  to 
all,  is  laid  in  sand.  It  will  be  as  unstable  be- 
fore the  intelligence,  before  the  unbending  spirit 
of  liberty  in  this  land,  as  the  waters  of  the  ocean; 
as  unstable  as  the  government  that  has  been 
erected  in  France;  as  unstable  as  I  believe  des- 
tiny has  designed  all  tyranical  governments  to 
be.  Lay  the  foundation  of  this  government  in 
justice,  lay  them  in  equal  rights  and  equal  priv- 
ileges, and  you  may  defy  every  thing  that  is 
calculated  to  overthrow  government ;  because 
the  basis  is  firm,  the  principle  is  right,  and 
there  will  arise  from  among  the  people  advocates 
to  sustain  it,  firm  in  purpose,  with  strong  arms, 
as  they  require  who  maKe  themselves  the  cham- 
pions of  liberty. 

Ours  is  a  peculiar  government;  its  pillars  rise 
from  the  masses.  It  is  the  intelligence,  it  is  the 
virtue  of  the  masses,  that  sustain  it.  We  owe 
not  the  strength  of  this  government  to  aristocra- 
cy, either  of  fortune,  birth,  or  talents.  We  have 
done  away  with  the  aristocracy  of  birth;  only  a 
remnant  exists  in  the  practice  of  individuals. 
The  aristocracy  of  wealth  melts  down — either  the 
indulgences  or  the  vices  of  the  sons  of  aristoc- 
racy reduce  them  to  the  level  of  the  masses; 
whilst  the  industry,  energies,  and  ability  of 
the  masses  are  constantly  elevating  them,  as  the 

Sillars  to  sustain  a  free  and  equal  government, 
ature  gave  no  aristocracy  of  talents,  unless 
she  gave  it  to  those  who  are  inured  to  hardship 
and  difficulty,  enduing  them  with  a  knowl- 
edge of  their  rights,  and  the  spirit  to  maintain 
them. 

Sir,  if  we  would  make  this  government  per- 
petual, we  must  base  its  principles  in  justice — 
we  must  give  to  all  citizens  equal  riglits,  and 
equal  privileges.  They  who  wish  to  lay  a  can- 
ker at  the  root  of  liberty,  at  the  foundation  of 
government,  commence  by  trenching  upon  the 
rights  of  freemen,   curtailing  their  privileges, 


474 


anning  them  with  feelings  of  oppression,  and  a 
denial  of  right.  There  is  no  other  principle  on 
which  you  can  base  a  free  government,  there  is  no 
other  principle  on  which  you  can  expect  its  ex- 
istence; there  is  no  other  principle  upon  which 
it  will  draw  the  love,  the  adiniratiou  of  all  men. 
Shall  we  put  it  upon  property?  The  idea  is  ex- 
ploded. Shall  we  put  it  upon  talent?  Who  is 
to  select  the  talent?  Shall  we  put  it  upon  vir- 
tue, reputation?  Nobody  will  put  it  upon  talent, 
virtue,  or  reputation,  but  upon  the  people,  in 
the  selection  of  their  officers.  Kings  have  not 
opposed  it,  neither  have  their  ministers,  nor  has 
the  aristocracy  by  whom  the  throne  is  surround- 
ed. Acurious  circumstance,  sir,  in  the  history 
of  some  of  tlie  governments  ot  Europe,  occurs 
upon  the  introduction  of  the  feudal  tenures. 
"Hie  Kings  divided  out  all  the  lands  among 
their  feudal  lords,  and  they  among  their  depend- 
ents. The  feudal  lords  were  the  brilliants  that 
surrounded  the  throne,  and  stood  between  the 
monarch  and  his  subjects.  They  lived  among 
their  tenants,  and  they  became  the  more  attach- 
ed to  them  on  that  account,  and  claimed  the  stur- 
dy independence  which  talents  and  power  al- 
■ways  claim;  and  the  monarch  granted  liberty 
to  cities,  in  order  to  create  a  counter  balance  to 
the  power  of  the  feudal  lords,  to  hold  them  in 
check,  they  having  obtained  too  much  strength. 
And  this  freedom  that  disenthralled  them  from 
the  iron  grasp  of  despotism  in  the  old  world, 
took  its  first  birth  in  cities,  and  it  has  been 
cherished  in  cities  from  that  day  to  this,  as  much 
as  it  has  been  any  where.  The  gentleman  is 
mistaken  if  he  supposes  that  the  love  of  liberty 
is  not  as  warm,  and  as  great  sacrifices  would  not 
be  made  forit  in  cities  a.s  elsewhere. 

I  think  that  five  years  ago  the  ratio  was  about 
seven  or  eight  hundred.  If  the  apportionment 
were  made  to  day  it  would  be  1522 — ^^it  Avould  be 
doubled.  But  we  have  been  told  we  may  have, 
or  they  will  grant  us  as  a  favor — as  if  among 
equals  any  thing  is  grauted — as  if  freemen  owed 
any  thing"  for  freemen's  rights — a  certain  extent 
of  representation.  They  say  they  will  grant  us 
an  equal  representation  in  the  lower  branch  of 
the  legislature.  Gentlemen  liken  the  counties 
to  the  states  of  this  Union.  There  is  no  simi- 
larity at  all.  The  thirteen  colonies  that  broke 
the  iron  rule  of  despotism,  and  declared  the 
freedom  of  the  United  States  were  all  equally 
sovereign,  and  when  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States  was  formed,  the  Senate  was  con- 
stituted a  representative  body  of  sovereigns,  and 
the  principle  of  equality  was  fully  and  fairly 
acknowledged  among  sovereigns.  That  is 
placing  the  matter  upon  a  right  basis.  The 
sovereign  states  would  never  have  formed  the 
Union,  had  it  not  been  upon  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  equal  rights  in  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  and  it  was  acknowledged.  We  are  all 
sovereign  here,  each  free  citizen  of  the  age  of 
twenty  one  years  is  equally  ho,  as  the  thirteen 
old  states  were  otjually  sovereign,  when  the  con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  was  formed.  We 
are  asked  to  go  into  this  government  upon  terms 
of  inequality.  We  are  told  that  we  wlio  occupy 
cities,  are  less  than  fre<.>men,  are  less  than  sov- 
ereign citizens  of  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tncky;  that  we  are  not  entitled  to  equal  rights. 
Dfl  we  not  breathe  the  same  air  that  g<>ntleroen 


of  the  mountains  breathe?  Were  we  not  born 
under  the  same  stars  and  stripes?  Have  not  we 
the  arm  of  freedom?  Have  not  we  the  con- 
sciousness of  our  rights?  Are  we  not  as  intel- 
ligent and  virtuous?  Is  it  not  so  declared  by 
the  constitution  that  our  fathers  made?  Was  it 
not  one  of  the  objects  that  led  to  the  calling  of 
this  convontion,  that  some  of  the  citizens  of  the 
commonwealth,  were  deprived  of  their  equal 
rights?  This  thing  hasoeen  avowed,  at  least 
it  is  one  of  the  doctrines  that  were  preached,  by 
all  that  portion  of  the  one  hundred  delegates 
here,  outside  of  the  city  of  Louisville.  Had  it 
not  been  so  we  would  never  have  east  our  votes 
for  a  convention.  We  would  never  have  let  go 
the  charter  that  made  us  equal. 

One  gentleman  says  that  this  thing  of  equality 
of  rights,  and  equal  representation  according  to 
number,  is  an  aostraction.  It  is  at  least  a  very 
practicable  abstraction.  Here  are  the  counties 
of  Nelson  and  Larue,  having  3048  voters,  with  a 
senator  in  the  general  assembly.  The  counties  of 
Hardin  and  Meade  with  3633  voters  have  a  sena- 
tor, and  Spencer  and  Bullitt  with  2248,  have  a 
senator. 

These  three  districts  have  less  than  Jefferson 
and  the  city,  and  have  three  senators,  whilst  Lou- 
isville and  Jefferson  county  has  but  one. 

And  yet  gentlemen  tell  us  it  is  an  abstraction, 
to  claim  equality  of  representation.  Now  sir, 
votes  go  by  majorities,  but  when  we  enter  upon 
doubles  and  trebles,  it  is  a  palpable  outrage  up- 
on the  principle  of  equality.  It  is  true,  we  suo- 
mitted  to  it  be<!ause  we  believed  it  was  a  miscon- 
struction, and  we  expected,  if  ever  we  came  be- 
fore the  people  on  the  subject,  they  would  do  us 
justice.  The  people  of  this  commonwealth  will 
never  violate  the  great  principle,  equality  of 
right",  and  equality  of  representation.  But  we 
are  told  thiipi  principle  is  not  acknowledged,  even 
in  the  representation  <if  the  house  of  represen- 
tatives of  the  United  States.  That  three  fifths 
of  the  black  pojjulation  go  into  the  account  in 
distributing  the  representation,  and  that  makes 
it  unequal.  It  is  true  that  three  fifths  of  the 
black  population  are  thrown  in,  in  favor  of  the 
slave  states,  but  otherwise  the  representation  is 
just  exactly  according  to  the  principle  of  equal- 
ity, of  political  rights  to  all  the  free  citizens  of 
the  nation.  And  whenever  it  comes  to  direct 
taxation,  the  slave  states  pay  in  dollars  for  that 
political  advantage.  It  was  a  subject  matter  of 
compromise.  Do  the  gentlemen  propose  any 
compromise  with  the  cities?  What  equivalent 
are  we  to  have,  for  having  the  voice  of  our  con- 
stituents, the  free  citizens  of  cities,  stifled  in  the 
legislative  halls  of  the  state  ?  We  pay  one 
tenth  of  the  taxes  for  the  support  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  state,  over  and  above  what  supports 
our  municipal  government.  Each  county  and 
town  supports  a  muncipal  government,  and  we 
support  ours.  But  in  the  general  charge  and  ex- 
penditure which  falls  alike  on  the  whole  state, 
we  pay  one-tenth,  and  we  have  but  one-thirty 
eighth  of  the  representation  in  the  senate,  and 
but  one-twentieth  of  the  representation  in  the 
house.  We  are  content  to  pay  according  to  our 
privileges;  but  as  we  increase  in  population, 
and  in  wealth,  the  disproportion  of  ourprivileges 
will  be  also  increased.  And  thus  we  shall  bo 
taxed  for  the  benefit  and  support  of  the  balance 


475 


ut'  the  slate,  and  we  will  not  have  a  fair  and 
equal  voice  in  the  legislation  of  the  country,  nor 
in  the  distribution  of  the  money  that  is  expended 
by  the  government.  Do  gentlemen  think  that 
•we  will  esteem  this  a  just  government,  that  im- 
poses upon  us  the  contribution  of  taxes  for  the 
support  of  the  state,  without  aflfordinar  us  an 
equal  voice  in  the  representation,  so  that  we 
shall  be  kss  able  to  resist  encroachments,  that 
are  made  upon  uf . 

I  recollect  being  told  by  a  senator  from  Clarke, 
that  he  knew  a  number  of  farms  in  that  county, 
upon  which  were  living  twenty  eight  indepen- 
dent farmers,  with  their  one  hundred  and  fifty, 
an.l  two  hundred  acres,  furnishing  twenty  eigfet 
voters,  and  that  it  was  afterwards  reduced  into 
one  farm,  the  dwellings  of  the  former  tenants 
pulled  down,  the  orchards  cut  down,  and  there 
was  bat  one  voter  in  the  place  of  the  twenty 
eight,  who  formerly  occupied  the  same  land.  I  am 
not  very  familiar  with  that  part  of  the  country, 
but  I  am  told  it  is  the  case,  that  the  farms  con- 
tinue to  be  enlarged,  and  combined  in  the  hands 
of  individuals,  that  the  small  farmers  are  purch- 
ased out,  and  thai  they  go  to  the  free  states,  and 
that  oxen  take  the  place  of  men.  "Well  sir,  as 
the  population  escapes,  the  political  power  es- 
capes. I  consider  this  a  movement  to  retain  the 
political  power,  after  tliey  liavelost  the  popula- 
tion, after  they  have  driven  out  the  independent 
voters  and  replaced  them  with  oxen.  Let  the  gen- 
tleman mark  the  day,  when  there  shall  be  on  the 
northern  border,  within  ten  miles  range  from  the 
Ohio  river,  twenty  cities,  with  their  59,  and  100,000 
inhabitants  and  they  shall  out  number  the  quali- 
fied voters,  in  the  balance  of  this  pastoral  state  ; 
think  you,  they  will  not  wrdst  from  you  the  po- 
litical rights  you  propose  lo  take  from  them  now. 
They  will  not  be  worthy  tlie  name  of  freemen,  if 
thfv  do  not.  The  spirit  that  burned  in  the  bo- 
soms of  the  fathers  of  the  revolution,  that  made 
them  cast  their  all  upon  the  die  of  the  battles 
that  won  our  liberty,  that  has  been  fostered 
in  our  fourth  of  July  orations,  and  at  our  elec- 
tions, that  has  been  whispered  by  mothers  to 
their  infants,  has  notperished,  and  will  not  per- 
ish, in  the  land.  The  spirit  of  freedom  and 
equal  rights  will  rise  above  all  oppression,  and 
it  will  avenge  itself — that  is  the  word  sir — where 
it  is  down-trodden  in  this  land,  it  will  rise  up 
and  avenge  itself ;  may  it  not  have  cause  to 
avenge  itself  in  blood.  ' 

I  have  no  doubt  that  I  have  detained  this 
committee  longer  than  I  ought.  No  doubt  this 
reflection  has  suggested  itself  to  many  members 
here;  but  they  perhaps  have  not  presented  them- 
selves so  immediately  and  directly  to  the  minds 
of  gentlemen,  as  they  present  themselves  to  my 
mind.  Perhaps  they  have  not  thought  under 
the  same  pressure  of  circumstances,  as  I  have. 
The  man  that  does  wrong  or  contemplates 
doing  wrong  to  others,  never  feels  the  iron 
like  him  who  suflfers  the  wrong,  or  who  is  threat- ' 
ened  with  the  wrong.  ' 

The  city  of  Louisville  is  the  only  city  now  as- 
sailed, although  there  will  be  others  in  the  same 
category,  and  I  am  very  sorry  I  did  not  under-  j 
stand  from  the  gentleman  from  Kenton  whether 
he  is  with  us,  or  against  us,  in  this  contest.  I 
regret  that  the  gentleman  did  not  define  his  po- 
sition; fori  am  prepared  on  this  subject  to  de- 


clare that  he  who  is  not  with  us  is  against  u«. 
He  that  does  not  battle  for  tlie  principle  of 
equal  privileges  and  equal  rights,  has  given  up 
the  ghost ;  is  prepared  to  see  the  principle 
sacrificed.  He  that  does  not  raise  his  voice 
against  it,  showing  that  he  stands  by  the  eternal 
principles  on  whii;h  liberty  and  equal  rights  are 
established,  is  prepared  to  yield  them  up. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  can  say  anything  further 
on  this  subject  that  will  lead  individuals  to  think 
and  reflect  upon  what  they  are  going  to  do.  I 
know  that  the  five  or  six  thousand  voters  that 
are  in  the  city  of  Louisville  are  not  much  re- 
garded in  this  contest,  and  when  j-ou  go  before 
the  people  of  Kentucky  with  your  constitution, 
the  balance  of  the  state  can  afford  to  dispense 
with  those  votes.  But  reflect,  that  there  are  in- 
dividuals who  are  hostile  to  the  constitution 
that  we  are  about  making,  and  who  desire  and 
wish  it  shall  fail,  and  reflect  that  in  departing 
from  the  great  principle  of  the  equality  of  po- 
litical rights,  you  will  array  numbers  of  ene- 
mies who  will  sympatliise  with  us;  that  the 
very  first  inroads  upon  liberty  are  to  be  resisted, 
as  the  first  inroads  upon  a  man's  honor;  to  be 
resisted  at  all  hazards  If  you  submit  to  wrong 
in  one  instance,  you  must  submit  to  it  in  all 
others;  and  those  who  practice  wrong  in  one 
instance,  if  they  practice  it  witli  impunity,  will 
be  encouraged  to  practice  it  again  and  again,  un- 
til your  rights  are  lost.  Every  one  who  resists 
oppression,  in  whatever  shape  or  form  it  presents 
itself,  resists  it  for  the  whole  community.  Every 
man  who  fight-<  a  battle  against  despotism  fights 
it  for  all  who  love  liberty,  and  who  love  equal 
rights;  and  if  we  fall,  gentlemen  may  feel  well 
assured  we  will  not  fall  by  our  act;  we  will 
not  seal  the  deed  that  deprives  us  of  our  equal 
rights.  In  this  land  ot  Kentucky  we  boast  of 
our  independence,  our  equality  of  rights;  let 
them  be  asserted  in  your  constitution,  and  be- 
fore the  world. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  somewhat  unfortunate 
in  getting  into  difficulties.  I  little  expected 
when  I  rose  this  morning  to  get  into  this  one.  I 
said,  when  I  addressed  the  convention  this 
morning,  that  when  I  listened  to  my  friend  from 
Henderson  on  Saturday,  and  had  listened  to  my 
young  friend  from  Louisville,  partly  on  Satur- 
day and  partly  to-day,  I  was  very  much 
struck  with  the  force  of  his  argument,  and  on 
Saturday  I  was  a  good  deal  carried  away  with  it; 
and  I  kept  thinking  the  matter  over,  until  I  came 
to  the  conclusi<m  that  a  reasonable  check  ought 
to  be  put  upon  cities  that  migiit  become  over- 
grown. 

When  Sheridan  concluded  his  speech  against 
Warren  Hastings,  the  ministers  moved  an  ad- 
journment, because  they  said  it  was  impossible 
for  the  house  to  vote  until  the  force  of  that 
speech  had  subsided.  Even  Pitt,  while  listen- 
ing to  that  speech,  was  not  master  of  himself. 
Well,  sometimes  the  impassioned  eloquence  of 
the  gentleman  from  Henderson  carries  one  off  in 
the  same  way.  But  I  kept  thinking  about  it, 
and  thinking  about  it,  and  I  concluded  at  last 
that  some  check  should  be  put  upon  overgrown 
cities,  and  I  framed  a  proposition  on  the  subject, 
which  was  just  about  this:  that  the  county  of 
Jeff^erson  should  continue  her  representation  ac- 
cording to  her  number — and  I  did  not  include 


476 


Louisville — but  that  the  county  should  retain 
the  number  to  which  she  was  entitled.  If  she 
was  entitled  to  two  members  she  should  have 
two.  If  by  being  united  to  some  other  county 
she  was  entitled  to  a  senator,  she  should  have  a 
senator;  and  that  Louisville  alone  should  have  a 
senator;  but  that  neither  Louisville,  nor  any  oth- 
er city,  should  ever  have  more  than  one  senator, 
nor  more  than  five  members  in  the  lower  house. 
Now  suppose  the  county  of  Jefferson  has  two 
members  in  the  house  of  representatives,  when 
this  constitution  goes  into  effect.  And  suppose 
that  Louisville  grows  to  such  a  size,  as  to  entitle 
her  to  five.  And  suppose  the  city  and  the  coun- 
ty together  have  two  senators.  Well  then  sir, 
Louisville  alone  will  have  one  twentieth  part  of 
the  representation  in  the  lower  house,  and  Louis- 
ville and  Jefferson  county  will  have  one  nine- 
teenth of  the  representation  in  the  senate.  And 
yet  the  gentlemen  says — in  his  own  fine  classi- 
cal language — this  is  "ter-in-icle."  (Laughter.) 
I  had  thought  it  was  called  "tyrannical,"  but  we 
have  been  taught  some  new  things  lately. 

STow  here  is  the  city  of  Louisville,  having  one 
twentieth  part  of  the  representation  in  the  house 
of  representatives,  and  the  city  together  with  the 
county  of  Jefferson,  having  one  nineteenth  part  of 
the  representation  in  the  senate.  Is  there  to 
be  no  check?  And  that  is  the  amount  of  my 
proposition.  I  liave  not  offered  it  yet,  but  I 
have  intimated  that  I  would  do  so  at  some  fu- 
ture day.  I  do  not  kn<iiw  when  it  will  come  to 
my  turn,  but  when  it  does  I  will  offer  it.  And 
I  was  glad  to  find  from  the  remarks  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Ohio,  that  it  agreed  with  his  ideas 
that  there  must  be  some  check.  I  will  ask. 
is  not  the  constitution  of  the  United  States 
a  compromise?  Is  the  apportionment  of  represen- 
tation in  both  houses  according  to  the  popula- 
tion? No  sir — not  at  all.  The  slaveliolding 
states  get  a  representation  for  three  fifths  of  their 
negroes;  and  sir,  the  smaller  states  get  an  equal 
representation  with  the  greater  in  the  senate. 
These  are  the  two  conservative  principles  that 
have  been  adopted  in  tl\e  constitution  of  the 
United  States;  and  when  we  follow  the  action 
and  ideas  of  such  men  as  made  that  constitu- 
tion— Madison,  and  Washington,  andtheir  as- 
sociates— we  certainly  will  not  be  acting  very 
"ter-in-icly."  When  we  can  follow  in  Wash- 
ington's footsteps,  I  may  say,  as  Lord  Nelson 
said  to  his  captains  when  going  into  the  battle 
of  the  Nile,  "  if  in  the  darkness  of  the  night 
you  should  not  be  able  to  follow  ray  orders, 
you  Avill  not  be  much  wrong,  if  you  fight  with 
all  your  might  wherever  you  can  find  an  op- 
portunity." If  we  follow  such  men  I  think  we 
shall  not  be  far  wrong. 

I  do  say  we  should  engraft  into  the  con.stitu- 
tion  something  like  conservative  principles.  We 
know  the  gentleman  from  Madison  spoke  the 
truth,  when  lie  said  the  great  body  of  the  popu- 
lation that  is  collecting  along  tne  Ohio  river, 
within  the  distance  of  ten  or  twenty  miles  from 
it,  is  opposed  to  the  institution  of  slavery. 
It  is  a  very  worthy  population  it  is  true,  but  it 
is  a  population  that  ha'<  little  or  nothing  in  com- 
mon with  thema-ss  of  the  great  agricultural  pop- 
ulation in  Kentucky,  and  a  large  portion  of  that 
population  I  know'is  hostile  to  the  institution  of 
slavery;  and  as  a  self-preservative  principle,  we 


ought  at  least  to  put  some  wholesome  and  salu- 
tary check  upon  that  population.  I  know  the 
argument  that  representation  must  be  according 
to  numbers,  is  a  strong  one.  I  know  it  is  a 
great  republican  principle,  but  there  is  a  still 
greater  republican  principle  than  that  sir.  If 
you  and  I  were  upon  the  Ohio  river  upon  a 
single  plank,  and  only  one  of  us  could  escape, 
you  have  the  right  to  shove  me  off,  or  I  have 
the  right  to  shove  you  off;  and  this  self-pre- 
servation principle,  it  seems  to  me,  requires 
that  we  snould  adopt  this  conservative  prin- 
ciple and  reject  this  population  principle  of 
representation  as  to  cities.  Our  fathers  who 
made  the  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
told  us  this;  the  leading  features  of  that  con- 
stitution declare  it,  and  I  am  not  ashamed  to 
follow  their  guidance. 

Sir,  the  gentleman  from  Louisville,'  who  spoke 
partly  on  Saturday  and  partly  to-day — because 
it  takes  gentlemen  from  Louisville — particularly 
while  on  this  subject — two  days  to  make  a 
speech — has  led  me  into  difiiculty,  which  I 
seem  to  have  labored  under.  He  said — if  I  un- 
derstood him  correctly — that  Louisville  had  fur- 
nished a  regiment  of  men,  in  the  war  against 
Mexico.  "Well  she  did.  I  believe  she  got  the 
principal  part  of  the  men  in  Louisville;  some 
perhaps,  in  Oldham,  and  the  surrounding  coun- 
ties; it  was  called  the  "Louisville  legion."  But 
the  gentleman  intimated  that  Louisville  had  to 
do  a  great  deal  of  fighting.  I  replied  that  we 
had  to  draft  men  to  stay  at  home.  It  was  no 
accommodation  to  Kentucky  for  Louisville  to 
furnish  a  legion  for  the  war.  Thousands  of  the 
best  men  in  Kentucky  had  to  be  rejected;  though 
they  were  pressing  forward  <iay  and  night,  iisk- 
ing  to  be  admitted.  Instead  of  being  a  matter 
to  be  thrown  up  to  us,  that  Louisville  had  to  do 
our  fighting;  she  has  been  treated  with  partiality 
by  the  government,  in  having  her  regiment  admit- 
ted into  the  service.  She  got  the  patronage  of 
the  government;  the  furnishing  of  the  regiment — 
the  colonel,  lieutenant  colonel,  major,  and  all 
the  other  officers.  Now  all  I  intended  to  say 
was — for  I  said  it  over  and  over  again — that  the 
Louisville  legion  was  as  brave  as  any  other; 
but  at  all  events,  they  had  done  no  fighting.  I 
spoke  in  reference  to  that  legion;  and  all  I  in- 
tended to  add  was,  that  as  a  part  of  the  bat- 
talion marched  to  take  possession  of  the  "Black 
Fort"  on  the  evening  of  the  first  day,  they  re- 
mained there  that  night,  and  next  day  marched 
back  to  the  Walnut  Springs,  and  remained  two 
or  three  days.  Taylor  himself  went  back  to 
the  Walnut  springs  the  first  night  of  the  battle, 
and  all  the  men,  except  those  guarding  the 
"Black  Fort."  Now  I  did  not  attempt  to  say, 
nor  did  I  intend  to  say,  that  Taylor  distrusted 
the  bravery  of  the  officers,  or  of  the  men  of  the 
Louisville  legion;  but  on  the  contrary,  I  said 
that  the  men  were  as  gallant  as  any  in  the  ser- 
vice; and  I  said  at  the  same  time,  that  the 
second  Kentucky  regiment — a  regiment  that 
was  raised  from  the  body  of  the  state — had 
covered  itself  with  glory.  They  did  sir.  They 
received,  and  justly  received,  the  name  of  the 
"bloody  regiment"  on  account  of  pouring  out  in 
torrents  their  own  blood,  as  well  as  the  blood  of 
the  enemy.  A  gentleman  told  me  that  he  count- 
ed the  dead  bodies  of  eighty  three  of  the  enemy 


477 


on  about  three  acres  of  ground  where  the  Kentuc- 
ky regiment  fought,  besides  the  wounded.  I  know 
tlie  soldiers  composing  the  Kentucky  regiment 
did  distinguish  themselves.  I  know  that  Clay 
had  a  son  killed;  and  I  know  that  Dozier,  an 
intimate  friend  and  schoolmate  of  mine,  had  a 
sou  killed.  But  I  did  not  say  the  Louisville  le- 
gion had  not  the  courage  to  fight;  I  only  said 
they  were  not  in  the  battle.  Now  the  gentle- 
man has  been  pleased  to  designate  this  as  a 
piece  of  calumny  or  something  of  the  kind. 
What  I  said  on  the  subject  no  man  could  mis- 
understand; I  made  no  insinuation  or  imputa- 
tion of  cowardice;  but  on  the  contrary,  I  de- 
clared that  nothing  of  the  kind  was  intended, 
yet  the  gentleman  has  been  pleased  to  designate 
it  as  a  base  insinuation.  All  I  can  say  is,  tliat 
the  man  who  can  make  such  a  remark  would  go 
at  least  as  far  as  that  imputed  to  me,  if  not  fur- 
ther, in  making  base  insinuations.  There  was 
nothing  that  fell  from  me,  that  merited  or  de- 
served such  a  remark.  Louisville  had  the  pri- 
vilege of  raising  a  regiment,  and  officering  it, 
and  the  lieutenant  colonel  of  the  second  regi- 
ment was  taken  from  Louisville.  And  after  she 
had  this  privilege  granted  to  her,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  other  brave,  magnanimous,  gallant,  dar- 
ing young  men  of  the  country,  what  did  she  do 
next? 

When  Hardin,  Bullitt  andXelson  raised  three 
companies,  the  preference  as  to  which  should  go. 
had  to  be  determined  by  lot;  but  Louisville  had 
one  given  her  without  drawing.  And  what  is 
more,  the  lieutenant  colonel  was  taken  from  Lou- 
isville for  the  second  regiment,  a  very  deserving 
man  it  is  true,  a  better  choice  could  not  have 
been  made  perhaps  in  Kentuck^^  But  I  men- 
tion these  things  to  show  that  Louisville  was  fa- 
vored. We  know  that  there  was  animosity 
excited  against  Louisville  on  that  account, 
throughout  the  whole  state,  from  the  mouth  of 
Big  Sandy  to  Mills'  Point,  and  from  Louisville 
to  Cumberland  Gap.  There  was  a  struggle  as 
to  who  should  go.  All  were  anxious;  and  it  is 
a  feeling  of  which  we  have  reason  to  be  proud. 
And  I  do  say  that  Louisville  had  more  than  her 
share.  But,  sir,  I  never  imputed  cowardice  to 
any  man  or  set  of  men,  that  was  out  in  the  last 
war;  and  I  always  contended  that  when  the  In- 
diana regiment  fled,  they  only  fell  back  to  get  a 
better  position,  and  they  had  not  discipline 
enough  to  rally.  So  that  the  gentleman's  re- 
marks of  a  personal  kind  were  entirely  uncalled 
for,  and  entirely  unexpected  by  me.  I  was  per- 
fectly astonished  when  the  gentleman  broke  out 
in  a  thundering  tone  of  voice  against  me  on  ac- 
count of  what  I  had  said.  I  recollect  about  thirty 
years  ago,  there  was  one  Phil.  Thompson  who 
•  was  practicing  in  the  courts  of  Breckinridge 
county,  and  on  one  occasion  when  he  commen- 
ced a  speech  in  the  court  house,  the  first  word 
he  uttered  was  in  a  perfect  scream,  like  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville.  The  crowd  had  been 
accustome<l  to  witnessing  fights,  and  they  all 
rushed  to  the  spot  thinking  there  was  a  fight  go- 
ing on.  When  they  found  out  it  was  Phil. 
Thompson  speaking,  "well  I  declare,"  said  one, 
"I  did'nt  expect  to  seehim  get  crabbed  so  quick. 
He  got  mad  too  soon."  So  I  may  say  of  the  gen- 
tleman, he  got  mad  too  soon. 

The  gentleman  says  that  Louisville  has  done 


a  great  deal  towards  supporting  free  gehools  I 
suppose  she  has.  I  have  no  objection.  Louis- 
ville draws  $1490  60  for  common  schools,  and 
Louisville  and  Jefferson  county  together  pay 
about  $43,000  revenue.  The  county  of  Nelson 
pays  from  $8,000  to  $10,000  per  vear  in  taxes, 
anii  she  has  never  had  a  free  scnool,  and  what  is 
more,  she  loves  to  educat*  her  youth  as  much  as 
Louisville.  Yes,  sir,  I  will  venture  to  say  that 
the  catholic  establishments  in  the  county  of  Nel- 
son have  not,  at  this  dav,less  than  fifty  free  schol- 
lars,  because  they  will  teach  any  cliild  whose 
parents  are  not  able  to  pay  for   its  tuition.     I 

Eicked  up  a  little  Mexican  boy,  who  had  been 
rought  to  this  country,  and  carried  him  to  one 
of  those  establishments,  and  they  are  teaching 
him  without  any  remuneration.  I  Avill  venture 
to  say  that  there  are  as  good  schools  in  the  inte- 
rior of  Kentucky  as  in  any  city,  Louisville  not 
excepted.  Though  they  have  no  free  ^chools  in 
my  county,  and  I  venture  to  say  they  never  will 
have,  our  county  is  full  of  schools  that  are 
established  by  private  enterprise. 

The  gentleman  says  Louisville  has  done  a 
great  deal  for  turnpike  roads.  I  suppose  she  has, 
particularly  if  thev  come  to  Louisville,  where 
they  concentrate  like  a  fan.  Louisville  once 
made  ten  miles  of  a  road  towards  Bardstown,and 
she  graded  it  at  five  degrees,  and  the  company  in- 
corporated afterwards  to  make  the  road,  completed 
some  fifty  miles  more  at  a  grade  of  two  and  a 
half  degrees;  but  the  old  company  finding  that 
the  first  ten  miles  paid  so  much  better  than  there- 
mainder  of  the  road  could  be  expected  to  do,  they 
did  not  permit  the  balance  of  the  stockholders 
to  come  in,  in  the  dividends  arising  from  the 
profits  of  the  first  ten  miles,  and  thus  make  it  a 
joint  company.  Why  it  was,  the  gentleman,  who 
is  a  large  stockholder,  can  answer.  To  be  sure, 
he  does  a  great  many  disinterested  acts  accord- 
ing to  his  own  boasting.  But  Louisville  is  help- 
ing to  make  a  great  railroad  from  here  to  Lexing- 
ton, which  is  in  future  to  be  continued  to  Louis- 
ville. And  why  is  she  doing  it?  Because  it 
will  contribute  to  her  aggrandizement.  She  does 
not  do  it  from  disinterested  motives.  The  road 
when  it  gets  to  Lexington  is  to  connect  itself 
with  a  great  road  somewhere — the  gentleman 
does  not  know  exactly  where — I  suppose  it  is 
the  road  from  Baltimore  to  Cumberland.  Well 
I  do  not  know  much  about  the  geography  of  that 
part  of  the  country,  but  I  supposed  there  were 
mountains  in  the  way,  like  that  which  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson  described  the  soldier  as 
getting  on  top  of  the  other  day.  I  know  it  is 
proposed  to  extend  that  road  to  the  Ohio  river — 
I  do  not  know  exactly  where  it  will  strike,  some- 
times they  talk  of  Pittsburg  as  the  point  to  which 
it  will  be  extended,  but  how  it  is  to  get  to  Lex- 
ington I  have  yet  to  learn.  The  gentleman's 
knowledge  can  point  out. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  trouble  the  com- 
mittee with  auy  more  remarks,  at  least  I  will 
not  add  more  than  one  or  two.  1  rose  merely  for 
the  puipose  of  disabusing  myself  from  the 
charge,  tnat  I  had  insinuated  cowardice  against 
the  Louisville  legion.  I  never  made  such  an  in- 
sinuation against  anv  man  that  ever  went  to 
Mexico.  For,  be  it  said,  that  I  have  been  in  fa- 
vor both  of  the  administration  in  conducting 
the  war,  and  those  who  fought  the  battles.    I 


478 


did  remark,  that  the  Louivislle  legion  did  not  go 
ijiio  battle.  I  did  remark  that  the  2d  Kentucky 
regiment — I  doiit  care  where  they  came  from — 
fought  like  heroes,  and  covered  themselves  with 
renown. 

The  gentleman  says  he  is  attached  to  Louis- 
ville. J  suppose  he  is.  He  has  every  reason  to 
be  so.  I  have  read  somewhere,  in  Josephus  I 
believe,  if  it  is  not  there  it  ought  to  be,  that 
Goliah  was  born  in  Askelon,  a]id  was  not  born 
in  Gath — he  went  there,  and  then  gave  out  in 
speeehes  tliere,  he  belonged  to  the  race  Anack. 
The  gentleman  wa^  born  in  the  county  of  Nel- 
son, he  was  educated  in  Bardstown — and  a  good 
education  it  was — and  he  practiced  law  there, 
and  got  a  good  practice,  and  run  for  the  legisla- 
ture. But  we  all  know — and  we  have  the  testi- 
mony of  holy  writ  to  the  same  effect — that  "a 
propnel  is  not  without  honor,  save  in  his  own 
country."  He  renioved  to  Louisville,  and  he  is 
now  the  Goliah  of  Gath.  Are  we  to  be  dictated 
to,  as  were  tlie  Romans  by  Caesar  ? 

'•  Why.  man,  he  doth  bestride  the  narrow  world 
Lilte  a  colussus;  and  we  petty  men 
Walk  under  his  huge  legs,  and  peep  about, 
To  find  ourselves  dishonorable  graves." 

Is  he  to  play  the  part  of  the  great  Colossus  of 
Khodos  V  Or,  is  he  to  play  the  part  of  the  angel, 
who  is  to  come  down  upon  the  last  day,  placing 
one  foot  upon  the  ocean,  and  one  upon  the  land, 
and  swearing  that  time  shall  be  no  more? — 
Is  he  to  represent  the  arch  angel,  who  shall  pro- 
claim the  end  of  all  things,  to  the  living  and 
the  dead,  and  at  the  sound  of  whose  trump  the 
ocean  shall  give  up  its  contents,  and  the  grave 
its  tenants  V 

Sir,  you  speak  about  representation.  Do  you 
represent  your  constituents'!?  Louisville  is  a  whig 
city.  Did  you  not  contrive,  by  whig  votes,  to 
get  here,  and  then  against  the  sentiments  of  your 
own  constituents  and  your  colleagues,  to  get 
nto  that  chair?  And  that  is  what  you  call  a 
fair  representation,  I  suppose.  Sir,  I  never  re- 
gretted any  thing  more  than  I  did,  when  I  saw 
it  stated  in  a  conmiunication  of  a  letter  writer, 
at  the  commencement  of  the  session,  that  I  had 
spoken  ill  of  the  gentleman.  I  have  always  en- 
tertained the  best  feelings  for  him,  and  never 
uttered  such  sentiments  as  that  letter  writer  im- 
puted to  me.  I  have  thought  that  the  gentleman 
has  been  bearing  down  on  me  ever  since — from 
what  motive,  God  in  his  mercy  only  knows — 
and  there  was  nothing  that  I  ever  did  to  war- 
rant the  manner  in  which  lie  has  attacked  me. 
The  gentleman  ought  to  recollect  that  other 
people  have  rights  in  this  house,  as  well  as  he  ; 
and  if  it  has  happened  that  he  got  here,  and  then 
that  it  happened  he  got  into  that  chair,  he  ought 
to  be  satisiied.  He  got  here  from  a  whig  con- 
stituency, and  he  got  there,  (pointing  to  the 
chair,)  by  a  democratic  caucus,  of  whic-h  he  was 
chairman,  though  we  know  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky is  whig  by  10,000  majority  ;  and  with 
these  two  lucky  happenings,  I  think  he  ought  to 
be  satisfied,  without  thundering  through  this 
house,  with  the  voice  and  manner  of  Ajax,  the 
giant  hero  of  the  Trojan  war.  Every  time  he 
gets  up,  he  reminds  me  of  Homer's  description 
of  Dioniede, 

"  Diie  was  the  clang,  and  dreailful  from  afcr, 
or  armed  Tydides  rushing  to  the  war." 


I  say  again,  that  if  there  had  come  a  clap  of 
thunder  to-day,  as  loud  and  rolling  as  ever  did 
come,  I  could  not  have  been  more  astonished 
than  I  Avas  at  the  opening  of  the  gentleman's 
speech — for  God  knows  I  never  intended  to  say 
that  the  men  who  went  into  the  service  from  Lou- 
isville were  deficient  in  courage.  I  said  that 
Louisville  had  received  favors  to  the  exclusion 
of  other  people  of  this  state,  who  had  stepped 
forward  aud  volunteered  for  the  service.  1  am 
aware  that  Louisville  is  very  necessary  to  the 
region  of  the  country  where  1  live;  but  we  have 
contributed  to  make  Louisville  what  she  is.  Is 
there  any  thing  about  Louisville  that  is  calcula- 
ted to  produce  men  of  extraordinary  talent?  It 
is  true  they  have  to  take  two  days  to  make  a 
speech.  It  is  the  people  of  Kentucky  that  have 
made  Louisville  what  she  is — buying  her  im- 
ports, and  selling  to  her  the  products  of  the 
state  for  exportation.  Louisville  depends  upon 
the  country,  more  than  the  country  depends  up 
on  her.  1  hey  can  find  an  outlet  for  their  pro- 
ducts in  many  other  places,  though  perhaps  not 
so  convenient. 

As  I  said  before,  I  only  rose  for  the  purpose 
of  disabusing  myself  from  the  imputation  of 
having  spoken  disparagingly  of  Louisville,  or 
her  citizens;  of  disabusing  myself  of  the  furious 
charge  which  the  gentleman  made  upon  nie,  and 
I  would  to  the  Lord  God,  that  the  gentleman  up 
yonder,  who  reports  our  debates,  could  just  take 
down  the  looks  of  men,  when  they  speak,  like  old 
Hogarth,  and  not  the  looks  only,  but  the  man- 
ner and  the  tone  of  voice,  and  send  them  down 
to  posterity.  It  Avould  afford  me  a  great  deal  of 
satisfaction,  if  I  could  come  back  and  see  how 
the  gentleman  looks  when  he  is  making  one  of 
his  thundergustical  speeches. 

If  I  have  ever  uttered  a  word,  that  was  disre- 
spectful toAvards  the  gentleman,  from  the  time  I 
first  saw  him,  when  he  Avas  a  boy,  I  hope  I  may 
die  the  death  of  a  sinner. 

Sir,  I  voted  to  keep  thecounty  of  Jefferson  and 
Louisville  together,  but  I  begin  to  sympathise  a 
little  with  my  friends  from  Jefferson  county.  I  dis- 
cover that  they  have  ahard  task-master.  I  intend 
at  some  future  day,  if  I  have  time,  to  take  a  view 
of  this  negro  question,  for  I  see  now,  if  ever  we 
become  a  non-slaveholding  state,  and  destroy 
the  balance  of  power  in  congress,  and  give  to 
the  non-slaveholding  states  a  majority  of  four 
in  the  senate,  this  union  will  be  dissolved;  and 
it  is  indispensably  necessary  that  we  should  nev- 
er place  ourselves  in  danger  of  becoming  a  non- 
slaveholding  state;  because  where  are  Ave  to 
trade  Avhen  that  is  done?  Ourtrade,  as  remarked 
by  the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  is  with  the 
tobacco  groAvers,  cotton  planters,  and  the  plant- 
ers and  manufacturers  of  sugar.  I  do  say  it  is 
our  interest  and  our  bounden  duty  to  take  care  of 
ourselves  noAv,  and  then  sir,  the  interests  of  the 
generation  to  come,  and  the  generations  that  Avill 
succeed  them,  those  who  have  feelings  that  bind 
them  to  the  slaveholding  states,  Avill  be  secured. 
At  scmie  future  day  sir,  perhaps  I  will  advert  to 
some  sentiments  tliat  my  friend  from  Bourbon 
has  advanced.  I  desire  to  see  some  wholesome 
amendment  to  our  naturalization  laws;  but  for 
the  present  I  will  refrain  from  troubling  the  com- 
mittee longer. 

The  PRESIDENT.    I  stand  corrected  by  the 


47^ 


school  master  of  the  age,  in  regard  to  my  pro- 
nunciation. I  am  verv  much  indebted  to  liim — 
and  I  have  no  doubt  tte  whole  state  wiil  be — it 
is  a  matter  of  so  much  importance. 

My  manner  I  know  is  ardent  and  I  do  not 
know-  whether  1  look  as  pleasant  as  the  gentle- 
man does  at  all  times.  I  was  not  educated  sir, 
in  the  same  school  of  politeness  that  he  was,  I 
had  not  the  same  advantages,  and  he  should  look 
over  my  failings  in  that  particular.  I  have  some 
knowledge,  however,  of  a  sneer,  and  what  a 
sneer  is  intended  for.  The  gentleman  says  he 
did  not  intend  to  impeach,  or  impugn  the  valor 
of  the  soldiers,  or  the  people  of  Louisville.  He 
said  with  a  sneer,  that  no  citizen  of  Louisville 
was  ill  the  battle.  I  yield  to  him  the  palm  in 
sneering;  he  is  the  peer  of  all  the  peers  in  this 
land.  1  have  no  rankling  feeling  against  the 
gentleman,  b<!cause  he  declared  when  I  was 
elected  president  of  the  convention,  that  it  would 
be  fatal  to  the  constitution  we  were  about  to 
make. 

Mr.  HARDIIS'.    I  never  said  it  sir. 

The  PRESIDEXT.  Then  the  gentleman  is 
belied,  and  I  suppose  that  it  is  not  the,  first 
time.  It  is  true,  I  was  born  in  the  county  of 
Xelson,  and  that  I  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
law  there.  It  is  true,  that  I  ran  twice  for  the 
legislature,  and  it  is  equally  true,  I  was  beaten 
on  both  these  occasions,  and"  by  popular  men.  I 
am  proud  to  say  sir,  that  even  in  the  county  of 
JTelson,  among  the  people  whom  he  represents, 
they  have  as  much  conhdence  in  my  integrity  as 
they  have  in  his.  As  to  my  misrepresenting 
the  people  of  Louisville;  1  intend  to  ac- 
count to  them.  I  have  never  yet  found  a  diffi- 
culty. Five  times  have  I  been  elected,  when 
they  differed  with  me  in  political  sentiments; 
and  they  have  never  yet  found  fault  with  the 
manner  in  which  I  have  represented  them.  On 
this  occasion  I  appealed  to  them  to  stand  by  the 
balance  of  the  state,  in  relation  to  the  institu- 
tion of  slavery,  and  not  to  separate  from  it. 
When  it  was  ascertained  that  there  was  a  ma- 
jority of  democrats  elected  to  this  convention, 
whigs  and  democrats  came  to  me,  and  insisted 
that  I  should  be  a  candidate  for  president  of 
this  body.  And  before  my  God  and  my  country, 
I  solicited  no  man  for  his  vote;  but  when  the 
chair  was  tendered  to  me,  I  accepted  it,  in  obe- 
dience to  the  wishes  of  those  wlio  voted  for  me, 
and  because  they  insisted  that  I  should  do  so.  I 
never  had  an  ambition  to  preside  over  any  de- 
liberative body;  and  I  have  rode  down  no  man, 
but  when  a  man  sneers  at  my  constituents,  I  re- 
sent it  as  I  would  a  personal  injurv. 

I  acknowledge,  I  am  not  so  polite  as  the  gen- 
tleman, I  have  not  the  capacity  of  getting  along 
as  well;  and  although  it  takes  the  delegates  from 
Louisville  two  days  to  make  a  speech,  I  believe 
that  I  have  not  troubled  this  house  as  much  as 
the  gentleman  from  Xelson  has.  I  have  but  de- 
fended my  constituents.  I  do  not  know  that  I 
have  encroached  upon  the  province  of  the  gen- 
tleman. I  never  intended  to  insult  him,  and  if 
God  keeps  my  heart  and  mind  in  the  right  place, 
I  trust  I  never  shall. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  was  satisfied  from  the  first 
that  it  was  the  statement  contained  in  the  com- 
munication of  the  letter-writer  that  had  offen, 
ded  him.     I  sent  him  word  by  two  or  three  in- 


dividuals that  I  had  never  uttered  such  a  senti- 
ment against  hini.  The  gentleman  says  he  did 
not  become  president  of  this  convention  bv  acci- 
dent, but  that  he  was  elected  bv  the  unsolicited 
votes  of  the  delegates.  I  ask  him  if  he  did  not 
attend  an  organization  meeting  on  theSunday 
night  before  tne  convention  organized,  and  if  he 
did  not  preside  at  that  meeting. 

The  PRESIDENT.  No  sir,  I  did  not  preside, 
and  there  was  no  organization  for  the  election  of 
officers,  and  there  was  nothing  said  about  it. 
The  gentleman  denies  making  the  remark  impu- 
ted to  him  by  the  letter-writer.  I  was  informed 
by  several  creditable  gentlemen  that  he  did 
make  the  remark. 

The  committee  then  rose,  reported  progress, 
and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  NOVEMBER  13,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Geo.  "W.  Brcsh. 

REPHESEXTATIOX  OF  TOWXS  AXD  CITIES. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  Mr.  President,  I  have  a  reso- 
lution which  I  desire  to  offer.     It  is  as  follows; 

Resolved,  That  whenever  a  city  or  town  shall 
be  entitled  to  a  separate  representation  in  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly,  and  by  her  num- 
bers shall  be  entitled  to  more  than  one  represen- 
tative, such  city,  or  town,  shall  be  divided  by 
wards,  which  are  contiguous,  into  representa- 
tive districts,  as  nearly  equal  as  may  be,  equal 
to  the  number  of  representatives  to  which  such 
city,  or  town,  may  be  entitled,  and  one  represen- 
tative shall  be  elected  from  each  district.  In 
like  manner  shall  said  city,  or  town,  be  divided 
into  senatorial  districts,  when,  by  the  apportion- 
ment, more  than  one  senator  shall  be  allotted  to 
such  city,  or  town,  and  a  senator  shall  be  elected 
from  each  senatorial  district;  but  no  ward  or 
i  municipal  division  shall  be  divided  bv  such  di- 
vision of  senatorial  or  representative  district. 

I  do  not  know  whether  this  proposition  comes 
properly  before  the  house  in  this  form  and  at 
this  time;  nor  do  I  exactly  know  how  I  can  legit- 
imately reach  the  object  which  I  have  in  view. 
The  discussion  which  has  arisen  upon  the  amend- 
ments proposed  by  gentlemen  on  yesterday,  has 
assumed  a  wide  range.  Proposition  upon  prop- 
osition has  been  presented,  and  such  is  the  atti- 
tude of  the  question  before  the  house,  that  I  am 
wholly  uncertain  how  I  shall  be  able  to  intro- 
duce this  compromise  resolution.  I  thought  the 
best  way  would  be  to  offer  it,  this  morning,  in 
the  shape  of  a  resolution,  and  ask  that  it  be  prin  ■ 
ted  andplaced  upon  the  table  of  each  member, so 
that  they  may  all  consider  it  and  understand  the 
object  which  I  have  in  view.  I  have  been 
grieved  to  the  heart  to  see  the  spirit  of  rancor 
and  animosity  which  has  sprung  up  between  dis- 
i  tinguished  gentlemen  during  the  discussion  of 
this  question — a  spirit  but  little  calculated  to 
promote  the  great  ends  for  which  we  have  as- 
sembled, and  very  far  from  reflecting  credit  up- 
on a  body  so  august  as  this  should  be.  I  should 
not  hav«  been  surprised  to  see  the  immediate 


480 


representatives  of  the  city  of  Louisville— at  tvhich 
place  the  amendments  and  the  arguments  of  gen- 
tlemen seem  directly  to  strike— alarmed  andag- 
itated  by  a  proposition  which  -would  seem  to  be 
aimed  so  directly  at  the  interests  of  themselves 
and  those  whom  they  represent.  I  should  not 
have  been  surprised  to  see  those  gentlemen  rep- 
resenting counties  bordering  on  the  Ohio  river, 
restless  and  excited  at  the  amendment  offered  by 
the  gentleman  from  this  county,  -when  backed 
and  sustained  by  the  peculiar  arguments  of  the 
gentleman  from  Madison ;  but  while  1  looked  to 
see  great  interest  and  deep  feeling  manifested  in 
regard  to  ihis,  to  them,  vital  question,  I  still 
hoped  there  Would  be  no  departure  from  those 
rules  of  etiquette  and  that  sober  deliberation 
which  are  so  necessary  to  a  just  appreciation  of 
every  subject  which*  we  have  to  consider.  It  is 
as  a  mediator  that  I  now  step  forward  to  pour 
oil  upon  the  troubled  waters,  to  entreat  gentle- 
men to  come  back  to  sober  reason  and  adopt  a 
compromise,  which,  while  it  avoids  the  great 
dangers  resulting  from  the  overshadowing 
growth  of  an  urban  population,  at.the  same 
time  respects  and  preserves  the  great  principle 
of  equal  representation. 

Never  before,  sir,  iu  my  whole  life,  have  I 
found  it  so  difficult  to  come  to  a  correct  conclu- 
sion upon  any  subject  which  has  presented  itself. 
When  I  reflected  upon  the  rapid  growth  of  many 
of  the  large  cities  of  this  union — when  I  con- 
sidered the  irresistible  influence  which  might 
possibly  be  exerted  by  a  city  population,  con- 
centrated upon  a  small  space'  absolutely  a  unit 
in  interests,  and  reflected  upon  the  pernicious 
influences  which  this  mighty  population  and 
undivided  interest  might  exert  iu  all  our  afi'airs, 
and  upon  the  rural  population  which  is  separa- 
ted from  them  partially  in  interest — I  must  ac- 
knowledge that  I  was  strongly  urged  to  restrict 
their  representation.  But,  sir,  when  I  reflect, 
that  in  endeavoring  to  secure  this  rural  interest 
against  an  assault  which  has  not  yet  been  made, 
we  shall  be  compelled  to  violate  the  great  fun- 
damental principle  that  population  shall  be  the 
basis  of  representation— when  by  this  act  We 
virtually  disfranchise  a  large  number  of  free 
white  male  citizens  of  this  commonwealth,  who 
participate  equally  with  ourselves  in  all  the 
burdens  of  government— when  Ave  trample  un- 
der foot  and  destroy  what  has  always  been  con- 
sidered heretofore  one  of  the  first  privileges  of 
an  American  citizen — I  am  strongly,  nay,  irre- 
Bistibly  impelled  to  assert  this  broad  principle 
of  right. 

The  great  danger  to  be  apprehended  from  a 
city  population,  arises  from  the  probability  that 
its  whole  representative  force  will  be  concentra- 
ted for  its  own  benefit,  even  should  it  destroy 
tlie  interest  of  others;  that  there  will  be  a  unity 
of  interest  and  action  among  the  representatives 
of  a  population  covering  so  small  a  space. 

The  amendment  which  I  now  oflFer,  proposes 
to  divide  this  interest  and  place  it  upon  the 
same  footing  with  that  of  the  rural  population, 
to  divide  the  city  against  itself,  as  the  country  is 
constantly  dividecT  against  itself.  It  proposes 
that  when  a  city  shall  be  entitled  to  more  than 
one  representative  or  senator,  it  shall  be  divided 
into  wards  or  districts,  corresponding  with  the 
i)Uinb«r  of  repre««utatirea  to  which,  it  may  be 


entitled,  and  that  each  separate  ward  or  district 
shall  select  its  own  representative.  This  plan 
has  been  pursued  by  the  State  of  New  York  and 
the  State  of  Louisiana — probably  by  Maryland 
— though  in  regard  to  the  last  mentioned  state  I 
am  not  sure  that  I  am  correct.  And,  perhaps, 
we  will  find  the  country  representation  of  no 
section  of  these  states  more  completely  divided 
against  itself  than  the  representatives  of  the 
two  great  cities,  New  York  and  New  Orleans. 
In  cities,  like  the  country,  you  will  find  in  cer- 
tain districts  certain  principles  will  prevail, 
while  in  others,  immediately  adjoining,  princi- 
ples and  sentiments  entirely  antagonistic,  exact- 
ly the  reverse  of  their  nearest  neighbors,  will 
be  cherished  and  entertained.  Such  has  been 
the  experience  of  all  those  cities  which  have 
adopted  this  plan.  If  we  look  to  the  two  great 
cities  which  I  have  cited  as  examples,  you  will 
find  that  in  times  of  high  party  excitement,  in 
the  terrible  rencounters  between  the  whigs  and 
democrats,  no  portion  of  the  country  where  the 
representation  is  more  equally  divided— none 
where  the  interests  would  appear  so  adverse  as 
in  these  same  cities.  Such,  sir,  I  verily  believe, 
would  be  the  case  in  the  cities  of  Kentucky, 
were  they  now  entitled  to  a  separate  represen- 
tation, and  Were  those  representatives  elected 
by  wards  instead  of  the  general  ticket.  Such 
would  be  the  condition  of  representation  from 
the  city  of  Louisville,  which  seems  to  be  the 

freat  Dug-bear  in  the  eyes  of  some  gentlemen, 
believe,  sir,  it  can  be  demonstrated  by  any 
gentleman  acquainted  with  the  people  of  Louis- 
ville, and  the  peculiar  views  entertained  in  the 
different  divisions  of  that  city,  that  were  it  now 
in  the  situation  in  which  I  now  seek  to  place  it — 
were  it  divided  into  wards  and  districts,  and 
each  ward  entitled  to  a  representative  of  its 
own— -say  that  it  were  entitled  to  four  repre- 
sentatives—that there  would  be  two  whigs  and 
two  democrats,  in  all  probability,  elected  from 
that  city,  though  there  is  a  large  preponderance 
of  whigs  in  the  corporate  limits.  Such,  too, 
strange  as  it  may  seem,  is  the  case  with  respect 
to  questions  of  a  local  character.  Such,  I  am 
told.  Would  probably  be  the  result  of  an  election 
were  the  great  question  of  emancipation — that 
question  which,  during  the  past  summer,  shook 
tliis  state  to  its  very  centre — the  test  question 
in  an  election.  Such,  sir,  is  the  inevitable  con- 
sequence springing  from  the  very  nature  of 
man. 

It  would  seem,  then,  that  by  the  plan  I  pro- 
pose, we  would  be  relieved  of  the  great  danger 
to  be  apprehended  from  a  concentration  of  the 
city  representatives.  We  know  that  in  all  ques- 
tions of  a  general  character,  it  is  almost  impos- 
sible that  this  concentration  should  exist;  but 
fears  seem  to  be  entertained,  that  upon  local 
questions — questions  of  internal  improvement 
for  example^a  unity  of  interest  might  render  the 
city  representation  a  unit.  But  if  this  were  the 
case.  We  should  incur  no  risk— be  run  into  no 
danger.  You  will  find,bycxamining  the  twenty 
second  and  twenty  third  sections  of  the  report 
of  the  legislative  committee,  that  it  is  proposed 
to  place  a  constitutional  limitation  upon  the 
power  of  the  legislature  to  contract  debts.  So 
that  there  can  never  be  a  state  debt  con- 
tracted  unless  it  be  first  submitted  to  a  direct 


481 


■  ote  u{  the  pvojilo.     Thure,  then,  can  be  no  fears 
;itfrt;iined  upon  this  score,  if  those  sections  be 
■I'lopted,  as  I  believe  they  will  be. 

I  regret  sir,  that  the  subject  of  emancipation — a 
question  which  seems  to  draw  into  its  mighty 
vortex,  and  like  a  great  maelstroom,  swallow  up 
every  thiny;  wliich  presents  iUelf  to  tlie  cousia- 
.  ration  of  this  convention,  has  been  tacked  on 
I  this  propositii-n.  The  two  questions  are  en- 
tirely distinct,  and  cannot  be  legitimately  con- 
nected. I  regret  that  gentlemen,  in  order  to 
promote  certain  objects,  should  find  it  necessary, 
■instantly  to  excite  the  prejudices  of  members  of 
'lis  hou.se,  upon  almost  every  subject  which  is 
presented,  by  raising  the  cry  of  emancipation. 
Thisconstant  recurrence  to  a  question  so  excit- 
ing, is  calculated  to  do  great  mischief  in  the 
deliberations  of  this  house,  and  to  exercise  a 
most  pernicious  influence  upon  the  minds  of  the 
people.  Sir,  if  emancipation  can  be  in  any  way 
connected  with  this  question,  it  seems  to  me  that 
■lie  adoption  of  the  amendment  offered  by  the 
-cntleman  from  this  citv,  would  tend  greatly  to 
■iromote  the  objects  of' that  party,  and  operate 
most  seriously  upon  the  interests  of  those,  who, 
like  me,  are  in  favor  of  slavery.  A  proposition 
-  sought  to  be  engrafted  into  our  constitution, 
hich  will  cut  off  a  large  number  of  citizens  of 
;tiis  commoiiwealtii,  from  equal  privileges  with 
another  portion.  It  is  sought  by  this  amend- 
ment, offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Franklin, 
virtually  to  disfranchise  a  large  number  of  our 
p- ople,'to  break  through  that  great  principle  for 
which  o!ir  fathers  contended,  that  represent.ation 
iisall  be  based  upon  population  and  taxation. 
You  say  to  a  large  population,  inhabiting  the 
;rie~.  that  you  shall  oe  subject  to  military  duty, 
••)U  shall  pay  taxes,  you  shall  contribute  your 
equal  share  in  all  the  burdens  of  the  government, 
but  you  shall  not  enjoy  the  rights  of  representa- 
tion in  proportion  to  the  taxe.s  you  pay,  the  bur- 
dens you  bear,  and  the  amount  of  your  popula- 
tion— and  for  what  is  this  great  privilege  denied? 
To  better  secure  the  slaveholding  interest  in  this 
state.  Sir,  I  am  a  slaveholder.  I  feel  a  deep  in- 
terest in  the  security  of  this  property,  but  I  most 
solemnly  protest  against  such  a  security  as  this  act 
would  furnish.  What  would  be  the  consequence 
of  such  a  proce  edingV  Would  we  not  array  at 
once  this  large  party  of  freemen,  whose  rights 
have  been  trampled  upon,  in  order  to  secure  this 
property,  directly  against  us  ?  Would  they  not  at 
once  attach  themselves  to  the  emancipation  par- 
ty, which  stands  united,  and  ready  to  seize  upon 
every  opportunity  to  promote  their  philanthrop- 
ic endi-,,  a.s  they  term  them?  This  certainly 
would  be  the  consequence.  Gentlemen  seem  to 
think  it  probable  that  this  urban  population  will 
overshadow  the  balance  of  the  state  in  our  legis- 
lative halls.  If  their  apprehensions  be  well 
founded,  what  will  become  of  the  slave  interest 
when  this  population  is  arrayed  against  it.  They 
tell  us  that  by  restricting  their  representation  no 
injurious  acts  of  our  legislature  can  be  brought 
to  bear  against  this  class  of  property.  True. 
But  they  should  con.«ider  what  a  miserable  bar- 
rier is  here  furnished  against  an  overwhelming 
and  angry  people.  They  may  not  reach  it 
through  this  legislature — but  they  will  rise 
above  the  legislature  itself  :  they  will  strike  at 
the  constitution,  through  which  thev  have  been 
61 


deprived  of  tWif  iiglit^.  The  i^epbrf  of  the  cdttJ- 
mittee  to  which  was  submittea  the  amending 
clause  of  the  constitution,  is  now  upon  our  ta- 
bles— and  that  report  provides,  that  a  convention 
may  hereafter  be  called  to  amend  this  constitu- 
tion by  a  majority  of  the  people.  That  report,  I 
am  inclined  to  believe  will  be  adopted — and  we 
thus  see  how  necessary  it  is  to  the  preservation 
of  this  property,  that  as  little  prejudice  as  may 
be,  be  arrayed  against  it.  The  slaveholding 
population  in  this  country  is  a  very  small  minor- 
ity, and  this  property  is  held  and  secured  by  the 
high  sense  of  justice  and  right,  which  I  liope 
will  always  animate  the  bosoms  of  Kentuckians. 
When  the  question  was  discussed  before  these 
people,  during  the  past  summer — I  allude  to  the 
uon-slaveholding  majority — thev  said,  it  is  not 
just,  it  is  not  right,  that  we  should  deprive  you 
of  your  property,  and  a  pro-slavery  delegation 
now  fills  the.se  halls  in  accordance  with  that 
sentiment.  Would  it  be  right  in  us.  after  we 
have  been  treated  with  such  magnanimity,  to  seek 
to  infringe  upon  the  rights  of  this  generous  peo- 
ple. We  heard  on  yesterday,  the  remarks  of  the 
gentleman  from  Campbell  ;  they  fell  grating  on 
my  ear.  If  we  perpetrate  this  act  of  injustice, 
such  will  be  the  sentiments  proclaimed  all  over 
this  country- — they  will  not  be  confined  to  the 
cities,  they  will  }ye  echoed  through  the  hills  and 
the  hollows,  until  slaveiy  will  find  no  place  in 
Kentucky  npon  which  to  rest  its  foot.  Let  us 
be  just.  Rely  upon  it,  no  institution  ever  prosper- 
ed which  had  to  be  sustained  by  acts  of  injustice. 

Mr.  President,  I  did  not  rise  to  make  a  speech, 
I  rose  simply  to  offer  this  resolution.  It  is  one 
which  I  hope  will  lend  to  quiet  the  angry  feel- 
ings of  this  house — one  upon  which  we  can  all 
sately  compromise. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  have  listened  with  a  great 
deal  of  pleasure  to  the  remarks  of  my  friend 
from  Christian,  and  fully  endorse  all  that  h« 
has  said.  I  like  the  resolution  he  has  offered, 
because  in  this  contingency  it  will  soothe  and 
quiet  the  .stormy  feelings  in  this  body.  I  was 
not  astonished  that  there  should  be  excitement 
upon  this  question.  I  was  not  a.stonished  that 
you,  Mr.  President,  wereexcit€d  upon  this  ques- 
tion. It  was  a  question  well  calculated  to  ex- 
cite the  mind,  for  it  was  nothing  more  nor  less 
than  an  attempt  to  disfranchise  a  large  portion 
of  your  constituency.  You  were  right;  1  honor 
you  from  my  heart;  it  was  just  to  those  whom 
you  represent.  I  should  have  been  excited.  I 
was  excited;  and  I  confess  I  am  not  perfectly 
calm  even  now ;  for  I  never  can  be  calm  when 
I  see  citizens,  even  the  most  abject  citizens 
disfranchised  who  hav«  not  been  guilty  of  crime. 
I  will  never  give  my  sanction  to  such  a  principle. 
J  will  call  the  attention  of  this  convention  to  a 
single  point,  for  I  discover  we  have  lost  sight 
of  it  in  our  extraordinary  excitement.  It  is  the 
main  question  which  the  gentleman  has  spnmg, 
to-v.it,  the  influence  which  the  city  of  Louisville 
or  any  other  city  is  to  exeit  on  the  legtslation  of 
the  state.  Has  any  gentleman  made  the  inquiry 
as  to  what  will  be  the  strength  of  Louisville  up- 
on the  basis  of  the  strength  of  population  which 
they  may  agree  upon?  Can  Louisville  exercise 
the  influence  which  is  attributed  to  her?  Can 
she  place  herself,  by  giving  her  a  fair  and  equal 
representation  in  the  legislature  of  the  state  upon 


48-2 


the  basis  of  numbers,  can  she  by  any  pfobable 
population  over  and  above  tlie  population  of  the 
Dalance  of  the  state,  exercise  the  influence  which 
gentlemen  seem  to  attribute  to  liei',  and  seem  to 
be  alarmed  that  she  may  exerciseV  Have  i^en- 
tlemen  inquired  what  will  be  the  strength  of 
Louisville  when  slie  comes  on  the  legi.-slative 
arena,  and  places  herself  here  with  others? 
TVhat  will  be  her  strength  in  the  senate,  and 
"what  will  be  the  strength  of  the  rest  of  Ken- 
tucky? For  I  understand  that  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville is  to  make  war  on  the  balance  of  the  state, 
and  the  balance  of  the  state  is  to  stand  up 
against  Louisville.  This  was  the  argument  of 
ray  friend  from  Madison, -and  of  others,  that  the 
city  of  Louisville  was  to  combine  and  turn  her 

Sower  against  the  balance  of  the  people  of 
[entucky.  This  is  the  proposition  which  I 
understand  the  gentleman  from  Madison  to  have 
used,  and  others  who  have  followed  have  also 
asserted  the  same  thing.  What  will  be  the 
strength  of  Louisville  on  a  basis  of  numbers? 
I  have  made  a  little  calculation  to  which  I  desire 
to  call  the  attention  of  this  convention,  to  show 
that  there  is  no  reality  at  all  in  this  strength  of 
the  city  of  Louisville.  If  it  does  not  now  exist 
it  can  never  exist.  Slie  comes  here  as  a  criminal 
with  a  prejudice  against  her  as  against  one  not 
entitled  to  a  fair  trial,  and  towards  whom  pub- 
lic opinion  has  sent  forth  its  fiat  to  deprive  her 
of  the  great  rights  which  the  Lalauce  of  the 
people  of  Kentucky  enjoy.  She  stands  as  a 
criminal,  arraigned,  and  the  voice  of  judgment 
has  gone  forth  against  her,  and  it  is  to  strike 
from  her  the  right  which  belongs  to  even  the 
meanest  citizen  of  Kentucky.  She  wages  a  most 
unequal  warfare  with  the  balance  of  the  state, 
as  appears  from  the  feeling  arrayed  against  her. 
She  has  no  feeling  against  the  balance  of  the 
state,  but  they  have  united  to  crash  her.  I  say 
this  because  I  am  a  citizen  of  Kentucky,  and 
because  I  feel  that  a  blow  aimed  against  the 
meanest  citizeji  is  aimed  at  the  state. 

It  was  well  said,  when  the  question  Avas  put 
to  an  ancient  philosopher,  as  to  what  was  the  best 
form  of  government,  that  it  was  "that  govern- 
ment which  felt  an  insult  offered  to  the  poorest 
citizen  as  an  outrage  offered  to  the  state,"  and  I 
feel  that  an  outrage  upon  the  meanest  citizen  of 
Kentucky  is  an  insult  offered  to  the  state. 
These  are  my  feelings  in  relation  to  questions  of 
this  sort,  and  therefore,  I  speak  in  defence  of 
the  people  of  Louisville,  and  those  all  along 
the  Dorder  of  the  Ohio,  and  the  people  of  the 
•whole  state  who  are  to  be  down  trodden  by  this 
strange  and  extraordinary  principle,  which  has 
been  thus  asserted.  But  I  -e&k  again,  what  will 
be  the  power  of  Louisville?  If  I  underetand, 
the  whole  of  this  principle  is  based  on  the  idea 
that  she  will  be  so  powerful,  as  to  control  the 
balance  of  the  state.  That  is  the  argument. 
We  are  to  disfranchise  her  now,  because  she  may 
be  strong  enough  to  control  the  balance  of  the 
state.  Not  that  she  has  done  any  thing  to  ex- 
pose her  to  our  displeasure  or  excite  our  ire,  but 
she  will  some  time  or  other  control  the  legisla- 
tion of  the  country.  This  is  the  whole  sum 
and  substance  of  tlie  proposition.  Let  us  see 
to  what  it  leads,  and  whether  it  is  tme  or  not. 
I  am  not  in  favor  of  having  any  one  section  con- 
trol the  balance  of  tlie  state.    I  am  for  the  rights 


of  all,  and  for  having  no  portion   of  the   state 
control  the  rights  of  the  balance. 

As  I  remarked  on  Saturday,  those  who  have 
no  right  to  vote  may  turn  against  the  slavehold- 
er, when  vou  have  proscribed  them,  wli.-n  van 
have  di;-/:anchiscd  this  people  who  have  a';'.*  d 
most  forbearingly,  and  stood  by  and  aided  and 
sustained  you  against  those  who  would  have 
taken  your  rights  from  you.  They  will  be 
against  you  for  it  would  be  treating  them  cruel- 
ly, unkindly,   and  most  unjustly. 

But  what  is  this  power?  It  is  understood 
that  the  senate  will  consist  of  thirty-eight  mem- 
bers, I  believe.  Now,  on  that  supposition,  take 
the  population  of  Louisville  at  fifty  thousand, 
which  is  the  number  the  honorable  president 
stated  yesterday  as  existing  there,  and  estimate 
the  population  of  the  state  at  one  million.  Here 
then  will  be  fifty  thousand  against  a  million,  or 
the  reverse,  and  that  fifty  thousand  is  to  rise  up 
and  exercise  an  influence  that  is  to  be  destruc- 
tive to  the  rights  of  the  million.  Is  not  that 
the  way  in  which  the  question  presents  itself 
here?  Fifty  thousand  are  to  overawe  nine  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand.  It  is  nonsense  to  talk 
about  it.  Let  us  go  a  little  further.  Suppose  the 
population  of  the  state  to  be  a  million,  and  that 
of  Louisville  to  be  fifty  thousand,  and  that 
there  are  to  be  thirty-eight  senators.  If  you 
give  Louisville  her  fair  proportion,  what  num- 
ber of  representatives  is  she  entitled  to,  and 
wJiat  number  is  the  state,  independant  of  her, 
entitled  to?  Here  is  the  question,  and  let  us  see 
how  it  results.  The  state  would  have  thirty- 
six  and  one  tenth  senators,  and  Louisville  would 
have  one  senator  and  nine  tenths.  The  position 
then  in  the  senate  is  as  oneand  ninetenths  to  thir- 
ty-six and  one  tenth.  Does  any  gentleman  feel 
alarmed  at  this?  Are  thirty-six  and  one  tenth 
to  be  swallowed  up  by  one  and  nine  tenths? 
Do  Kentuckians  talk  about  being  alarmed  at 
one  against  thirty-six?  Let  us  go  a  little  further, 
for  I  have  looked  into  this  matter  a  little  closely. 
My  estimate  may  not  be  exactly  right,  but  this 
is  the  basis,  and  it  will  result  pretty  much  as  I 
have  made  it.  Increase  the  population  of  the 
state  to  twelve  hundred  thousand,  and  that  of 
Louisville  to  seventy-five  thousand,  and  then  see 
how  it  will  stand.  If  Louisville  should  rise  up, 
she  would  have  to  rise  against  what?  Eleven 
hundred  and  twenty-five  thousand.  That  is  the 
mighty  influence  which  she  is  to  exert.  Let  ua 
go  a  litle  further.  What  will  be  the  compara- 
tive number  of  senators  to  which  the  state  and 
the  city  will  be  entitled?  The  state  will  have 
thirty-five  senators  and  nine  twelfths,  and  Louis- 
ville two  and  three  twelfths.  Here  is  the  odds 
against  the  state.  Are  gentlemen  alarmed  at 
that?  What  a  mighty  influence!  Two  against 
thirty-five.  Surely  the  people  of  Kentucky  are 
in  great  danger;  surely  tuey  should  be  alarmed. 
I  am  astonished  that  gentlemen  are  not  more 
alarmed. 

Let  us  go  a  little  further.  Suppose  the  popu- 
lation of  the  state  to  be  increased  to  fifteen  hun- 
dred thousand,  and  that  of  Louisville  to  one 
hundred  thousand.  Here  will  be  one  against 
fourteen.  Is  there  anf  thing  to  be  alarmed  at  in 
that?  Go  on,  and  see  what  will  be  the  number 
of  senators  which  Louisville  will  have,  compar- 
ed with  the  balance  of  the  state.     The  city  will 


483 


be  entitled  totx^o  and  fire-tenths  out  of  thirty- 
eieht.  Surely  gentlemen  cannot  be  in  earnest 
\rBen  they  argue  this  question  in  this  'way. 

I  put  it  iu  another  point  of  view.  Increase 
the  state  to  t\ro  millions,  and  the  population  of 
Louisville  to  two  hundred  thousand — a  numlx>r 
vhich  she  will  not  have  within  tlie  next  hun- 
dred years,  perhaps,  though  I  wish  she  might, 
for  I  glory  in  the  prosperitv  of  our  cities — but 
suppose  she  does,  tnen  how  cioes  it  stand?  There 
will  W  two  hundred  thousand  against  eighteen 
hundred  thousand  iu  the  state,  and  in  the  senate, 
three  and  eight-tenths  against  thirty-four  and 
two-tenths.  That  is  the  sum  and  substance  of 
the  mighty  array  which  the  city  is  to  make 
against  the  whole  force  of  Kentucky,  which 
amounts  to  nothing  in  the  world — a  mere  man  of 
straw,  which  men  have  conjured  up  in  their  ima- 
ffiuations,  bv  which  they  may  destroy  the  great 

ndaniental  rights  of  the  balance  of  the  state. 

I  rose  to  make  a  statement  of  these  facts,  and 
to  say  that  I  think  gentlemen  have  indulged  a 
mistaken  idea.  As  to  the  combination  of  those 
cities,  it  is  impossible  that  they  will  combine. 
Louisville  will  not  combine  with  Covington  or 
Newport.  If  Louisville  wants  a  road  for  her 
special  benefit,  the  other  would  be  against  her 
rather  than  combine  with  her,  and  Louisville 
would  be  opposed  to  them,  in  the  same  circum- 
stances. Then,  I  hold  that  this  war  upon  the 
urban  population  is  wron»;  it  ought  not  to  have 
been  indulged — and  I  declare  in  mv  place,  that 
if  the  right  of  suflFrage  is  to  be  viofated  and  in- 
vaded, if  the  wreat  principle  in  the  constitution 
which  I  delight  to  sustain  is  to  be  stricken  down, 
I  only  regret  that  I  might  not  have  the  glorious 
privilege  of  standing  on  this  floor,  alone,  and 
of  recording  my  vote  against  it.  I  hope  the 
resolution  will  be  adopted.  I  think  it  should  be 
thrown  into  some  fonn  of  an  amendment,  and 
brought  before  the  committee  in  that  form,  and 
I  hope  this  excitement  will  be  at  once  quieted 
and  settled. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  did  not  amve  in  time  to 
hearthe  resolution  read,  but  from  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  in  its  support,  I  learn  it  contains 
a  proposition  for  which  I  am  prepared  to  give 
■   V  vote.    I  do  not  believe  there  is  any  antago- 

ac  principle  between  the  interests  of  the 
..anufacturer,  the  merchant,  ajid  the  agricultur- 
ist. I  believe  that  so  far  as  these  interests,  in 
this  state,  can  be  affected  by  the  measures  of  the 
government,  or  so  far  as  they  can  affect  those 
laeasures,  they  go  hand  in  haiid;  and  I  have  no 
;  ill  apprehensions  in  reference  to  undue  influ- 

es  that  may  be  brought  to  bear,  by  the  man- 
::icturing  and  commercial  interests,'on  the  ag- 

ultural,  as  to  be  willing,  when  a  proper  basis 
:  representation  is  established  by  this  conven- 
tion, to  say  that  any  portion  of  the  citizens  of 
the  state  shall  be  deprived  of  a  representation  in 
the  legislative  halls,  becausethey  happen  to  be 
engaged  iu  the  pursuits  of  commerce,  or  the  bu- 
siness of  manufactures.     A  strong  reason  must 

presented  to  my  mind — a  proper  basis  of  re- 

L'sentation  being  established — for  making  an 
txx'ption  against  a  particular  portion  of  the 
community,  whether  in  a  city  or  out  of  it. 
Has  such  a  reason  been  assigned  on  the  present 
occasion?  So  far  as  1  have  observed  the  progress 
of  the  discussion  on  the  question  involved  in  the 


motion  before  the  convention,  all  admit,  it  seems 
to  lue,  that  there  is  no  danger  for  the  present; 
and  the  effort,  on  the  part  of  gentlemen  who  ad- 
vocate the  proposition  that  cities  ought  to  be  re- 
stricted in  the  number  of  their  representatives, 
is  to  meet  an  apprehended  danger,  that  may 
arise  hereafter.  Is  there  a  just  ground  for  such 
apprehension?  For  myself,  I  feel  sure  that  the 
growth  of  our  cities  and  the  agricultural  por- 
tions of  the  state,  will  he  pari  passu;  the  popu- 
lation of  both,  the  strength  and  power  of  both, 
will  increase  with  equal  pace.  The  one  cannot 
go  beyond  the  other.  Their  interests  are  so  ful- 
ly identified,  that  the  prosperity  and  advance- 
ment of  the  one  always  secures  the  prdsperity 
and  advancement  of  the  other.  In  time  to  come, 
where,  then,  is  the  danger?  Jf  o  fears  should  be 
felt  on  this  subject,  and  I  feel  none;  and  until 
reasons  are  a.ssigned  not  based  upon  a  mere  ap- 
prehension, I  cannot  vote  to  sustain  such  a  re- 
striction upon  cities  as  gentlemen  propose. 

But  it  seems  to  me  there  has  been  a  confound- 
ing of  principles  in  the  discussion  of  the  whole 
♦question.  Have  we  agreed  what  shall  be  the 
basis  of  representation?  The  report  of  the  com- 
mittee adopts  qualified  voters  as  the  basis.  I 
do  not  understand  the  convention  as  yet  to  have 
adopted  that  principle.  Let  the  basis  be  how- 
ever what  it  may,  qualified  voters  or  not,  gentle- 
men should  have  an  eye  to  that,  in  debating 
this  question,  and  not  to  the  right  of  suffrage. 
The  basis  of  representation  and  the  right  of  suf- 
frage are  distinct  principles,  and  in  fixing  the 
number  of  representatives  so  as  to  approximate, 
as  near  as  possible,  to  equal  representation,  we 
must  look  to  the  basis  of  representation  alone, 
and  should  not  confound  it  with  the  principles 
involved  in  the  right  of  suffrage.  >iow,  I  be- 
lieve the  true  basis  of  representation  is  popula- 
tion; population  in  its  true  sense.  All  should 
be  represented  who  have  rights  to  be  protect- 
ed. Xew  York  has  adopted  this  basis  in  her 
new  constitution.  She  has  not  taken  as  her  ba- 
sis, that  which  the  report  of  the  committee  pro- 
poses to  take,  and  which  to  all  appearances,  is 
to  be  received  here  by  common  consent.  The 
whole  of  her  inhabitants  form  the  basis  of  her 
representation,  free  negroes  and  aliens  excepted. 
I  would  myself  prefer  this  to  that  of  the  report; 
but  in  allotting  tJie  number  of  representatives,  or 
in  apportioning  them  among  the  cities  and  coun- 
ties, I  am  for  adhering  to  the  basis  when  adopt- 
ed, be  it  what  it  may,  and  I  will  look  to  it  to 
guide  me  in  the  apportionment,  and  not  to  the 
right  of  suffrage.  I'he  right  of  suffrage  and  the 
basis  of  representation,  I  repeat,  are  two  dis- 
tinct matters,  and  the  one  ought  not  to  be  con- 
founded with  the  other,  and  cannot  properly  be 
in  any  just  measure  of  apportionment. 

As  to  the  right  of  suffrage,  of  which  we  have 
heard  so  much,  whilst  I  would  make  population 
the  basis  of  representation,  giving  to  every  mem- 
ber of  the  community,  the  man  and  the  woman, 
and  the  boy  twelve  years  old,  and  the  youth 
of  eighteen,  who  is  old  enough  to  fight  the  bat- 
tles of  his  country:  to  all,  except  our  slaves 
and  free  negroes — and  I  except  these  because 
they  are  a  different  race  from  us,  and  in  govern- 
ment have  no  identity  of  interest  with  us — ^the 
right  to  bo  represented.  I  would  be  governed 
by  very  different  principles  in  determining  who 


484: 


shall  have  the  right  to  select  iho  rtpivsentative, 
or,  in  other  words,  upon  ■whom  the  right  of  suf- 
frage shall  be  conferred.  1  would  restrict  the 
right  of  suffrage  as  our  present  constitution  has 
restricted  it.  I  would  not  give  it  to  the  female 
because  she  does  not  want  it,  and  wonld  not  ex- 
ercise it.  I  would  not  give  it  to  the  boy  nor  the 
youth  who  is  not  of  mature  years.  Pie  is  pre- 
sumed to  be,  by  non-age,  not  of  maturity  of  in- 
tellect sufficient  to  qualify  him  for  the  exercise 
of  the  high  functions  of  a  voter.  I  would  not 
give  it  to  the  criminal,  the  felon,  because  by  the 
perpetration  of  crime  he  has  shown  that  his 
hand  is  against  the  government,  and  should 
have  no  part  in  the  direction  of  its  affairs.  He 
is  morally  disqualified.  I  would  not  give  it  to 
the  idiot  nor  the  lunatic,  because  he  is  intellec- 
tually disqualified.  These  are  restrictions  I 
would  make  upon  the  right  of  suffrage.  They 
are  moral  and  intellectual  in  their  nature,  and 
have  reference  to  the  mental  and  moral  qualifi- 
cations of  men  to  choose  their  representatives. 
Upon  none  but  upon  those  thus  qualified  ought 
the  right  to  be  conferred,  and  I  w^ould  no  sooner 
confer  it  upon  those  not  thus  qualified,  than  I 
would  confer  the  same  right  upon  a  bullock 
raised  in  the  county  of  Bourbon  or  Clarke. — 
Representation  ought  to  be  based  upon  the  en- 
tire population,  upon  all  who  have  rights  to  pro- 
tect. The  right  to  vote  is  a  franchise,  and 
should  be  given  to  none  but  those  who  are  quali- 
fied by  virtue  and  intelligence.  Property  has 
nothing  to  do  with  either,  and  under  the  light 
of  our  insiitutions,  can  never  form  an  element 
of  either. 

But  to  return.  I  will  support  the  principle  of 
this  resolution  when  presented  by  the  delegate 
from  Christian,  as  an  amendment  to  the  report  of 
the  committee.  1  will  do  it  because  the  interest 
of  the  merchant,  manufacturer  and  agriculturist 
are  so  far  identical,  as  that  they  can  never  be 
separated  in  this  community;  and  cities  can- 
not, and  will  never  exercise  an  undue  or  improp- 
er influence  upon  the  legislation  of  the  country 
except  when  the  state  is  divided  into  great  par- 
ties, and  party  influences  and  partizan  feelings 
become  predominant,  and  this  power  to  do  evil 
will  be  wholly  neutralized  by  the  adoption  of 
the  district  system  which  T  understand  to  be 
proposed  by  the  resolution  now  under  considera- 
tion. In  other  states  this  has  been  done;  and 
the  power  of  party  in  large  cities  is  broken 
down  by  the  district  system.  It  is  so  in  the 
cities  of  New  York,  Philadelphia  and  New  Or- 
leans. Adopt  it  here  and  the  same  results  will 
fdllow. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE.  I  was  pleased  to  hear  the 
resolution  and  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from 
Christian.  I  have,  with  many  others  on  this 
floor,  felt  that  this  question  involves  a  great  and 
fundamental  principle,  and  that  it  was  my  duty 
as  a  freeman  to  enter  my  solemn  protest,  with 
others,  against  sectional  re.'itriction  of  the  elec- 
tive franchise,  or  in  other  words,  limiting  the 
representation  of  certain  districts. 

I  am  from  the  country,  and  the  local  interests 
of  my  constituents  might  be  advanced  by  re- 
stricting the  cities.  But  the  question  involves 
a  great  principle,  one  which  lies  at  the  very  base 
of  self  government,  and  upon  which  the  fair  tem- 
pi^, joi  human  liberty   rests.    But  the  doctrine 


here  advocated,  if  once  engrafted  upon  the  fun- 
damental law  of  the  state,  is  without  limit.  I 
ask  gentlemen,  where  is  the  limit  to  this  course 
of  procedure?  If  the  convention  a,ssembled 
here  have  a  right  to  restrict  a  city  population  in 
its  representation,  have  they  not,  at  the  same 
time,  and  for  the  same  reasons,  a  right  to  limit 
the  representation  of  any  other  section  of  the 
state? 

Again,  we  have  been  taught  in  this  convention 
that  one  great  object  of  human  govenmient  was 
to  protect  the  minority  against  the  encroachments 
of  the  majorit}'.  Learneil  politicians  on  this 
floor,  wliose  heads  are  sprinkled  over  with  the 
frosts  of  many  winters,  and  who  have  grown  old 
in  their  country's  service,  have  taught  us  that 
the  minority  have  rights  which  the  majority 
ought  to  protect.  For  this  purpose  government 
was  instituted.  Yet  upon  this  floor,  in  the  face 
of  these  noble  and  magnanimous  sentiments, 
we  hear  gentlemen  say  it  is  our  right  and  privi- 
lege to  restrict  and  trample  upon  the  rights  of  the 
minority.  Being  a  young  politician,  and  unac- 
quainted with  the  subtleties  of  political  abstrac- 
tions, I  hoped  to  see  those  two  antagonistic  prin- 
ciples harmonized,  if  possible.  But  my  teach- 
ing has  been  very  difi'erent.  Numerous  gentle- 
men in  this  body  have  manifested  their  sympa- 
thy for  the  infiabitants  of  the  New  England 
States,  who  are  suffering  so  much  mi.sery  from 
tyranny  and  degradation.  But  sir,  the  first  les- 
son I  learned  upon  the  bleak  .and  frost  bound 
hills  of  New  England  was,  equal  rights  to  all,  ex- 
clusive privileges  to  none.  I  was  there  taught  that 
representation  and  taxation  go  hand  in  hand, 
that  no  mari  should  be  called  upon  to  support  ;i 
government  which  he  had  no  hand  in  nudcinj;;. 
1  was  there  taught  that  the  proud  privilege  ui' 
bearing  the  name  of  American  citizen,  gave  liim 
the  right  to  be  heard,  by  himself  or  representa- 
tive, in  thelegislative  hall. 

But  a  thought  or  two  in  regard  to  the  senti- 
ments that  have  been  advanced  upon  this  floor. 
Wl»y  are  we  called  upon  to  restrict  the  cities  in 
their  representation?  Why  are  we  called  upon 
to  do  violence  to  the  first  principle  of  a  popu- 
lar government?  To  what  shrine  must  we  bow, 
and  upon  what  altar  must  we  burn  incense  to  en- 
title us  to  orthodoxy?  We  are  told  by  one  gen- 
tleman that  certain  sentiments  are  being  instilled 
into  the  minds  of  the  people  on  the  nortnern  bor- 
ders of  Kentucky  which  are  exceedingly  delete- 
rious to  the  state,  and  unless  those  people  are  re- 
stricted in  their  votes  upon  a  question  of  great 
importance,  the  interests  of  the  slaveholder  will 
be  jeopardized.  Reduce  that  principle  to  its 
original  essence,  trace  it  out  in  its  various  bear- 
ings, and  in  what  will  it  result?  Simply  this: 
that  the  elective  franchise,  in  this  state,  is  based 
upon  a  set  of  opinions  entertained  by  the  ma- 
jority, the  opposite  of  which  being  entertained 
bv  an  individual,  amounts  to  disqualification.  ^ 
'Thus  would  you  stifle  the  free  voice  of  Ken-^ 
tucky's  noble  sons  by  the  tyranny  of  opinion-X 
ism.  Thus  would  you  base  the  right.s  and  liber-f 
ties  of  the  people  upon  the  caprice  of  a  vascilla-1 
ting  majority. 

Again:  what  is  the  other  idea  which  has  beei 
presented  here?    It  is  that  locality  shall  deter^ 
mine  a  man's  right  to  representation.     That  thi%^ 
right  shall  be  held  inviol.iteso  long  as  he  residesj,. 


4«:) 


inoneseoliou  of  ihe  btiuo,  but  ix-moval  to  the  i  lai.' ck-cUoiis  liavt-  ahowu.  Huw  niiiny  iu»d.i»:- 
interdicted  localitv  shall  operate  as  a  disability,  diate  or  gradual  etnancipationisls  are  returned. 
Sir  I  a-^k  vrho  delegated  the  power  to  tliis  con- ;  here.  Not  one  so  far  as  my  knowledge  extends. 
veuMon  to  restrict  me  or  anv  one  else  as  to  my  ;  I  came  not  from  the  region  of  the  shuttle  and 
place  of  habitation?  Who'has  the  right  to  say  |  i^pindle  on  the  one  hand,  nor  do  I  represent  the 
that  persons  congregating  at  a  given  point  shall  blue  gra.=!S  country  on  the  other,  but  I  come  as  the 
be  re^trieted  in  their  representation?  i  trust  that  representative  of  the  tree  coustiti:ency  ot  Flera- 
this  question  will  be  answered  to  the  satisfaction  i  ing,  and  1  feel  called  upon  by  that  constituency 
of  this  house  |  to  maintain  the  rights  of  the  people  at  large.    In 

The  secret  sprino-s  of  action  on  this  question  ;  the  discharge  of  that  duty  I  am  satisfied  that  I 
were  developed  on  Saturdav  last.  It  is  the  mor- ;  shall  receive  the  countenance  and  support  of 
bid  sensibility  of  members  on  the  slave  ques- ,  those  who  sent  me  here.  I  stand  then,  sir,  in 
tion  which  has  driven  them  to  this  issue.  Sir,  1  framing  this  constitution,  not  as  the  advocate  of 
what  is  the  historv  of  this  convention  since  it !  local  interests,  but  of  great  and  fundamental 
assembled  here?  ^'e  ask  for  the  incorporation  of  j  principles. 

the  principle  of  the  law  of  1833  into  the  consti- !      I   therefore  felt  it  my  duty  to  enter  this  my 
tution.     We  are  told  that   it   conflicts  with  the  [  solemn    protest    against    the  violation  of  thi.s 
interest  of  the  slaveholder— that  it  is  the  first  i  great  principle  of  a  free  government, 
step  towards  emancipation,  that  therefore  it  must 
be  sacrificed.     The  ballot  system   of  voting  is 
called  for.     Again,  we  are  informed  that  it  will 
prove  injurious  to  the  slave  interest.     The  spe- 
cific mode  of  amending  the  constitution,  which 
the  spirit  of  the   nineteenth  century  evidently 
calls   for,   is  suggested.     Still  the  cry  is   that 

slave  property  is  endangered  by  it     "Driven  in    _^ 

at  all  points, 'we  ask  that  representation  shall  be    xhe   gentfeman  from  Fleming,  just  up,   states 


Mr.  CLARKE.  This  resolution  came  up  ratlier 
unexpectedly  to  me  this  morning.  In  a  few  re- 
marks whicii  I  had  the  honor  to  submit  on  the 
introduction  of  this  section,  which  is  under  con- 
sideration, in  committee  of  the  whole,  I  stated 
that  population  was  the  true  basis  of  representa- 
tion. 1  still  entertain  that  opinion,  my  mind 
has  undergone  no  change  in  that  particular. — 


equal  and  uniform  throughout  the  common 
wealth.  Even  at  this  point  they  meet  us  and 
say  that  we  must  yield.  They  tell  us  that  the 
dearest  right  of  a  Kentucky  freeman  must  yield 


that  the  principle  that  representation  and  taxa- 
tion should  go  hand  in  hand,  was  the  first  politi- 
cal lesson  he  was  taught;  and  vet  he  says  he  is 
in  favor  of  population  as  the  basis  of  represen- 


to  the  slave,  that  the  time  has  arrived  when  one    tation.     I  should  like  to  have  him  make  the  two 


section  of  the  state  must  be  deprived  of  repre 
sentatiou,  must  be  disfranchised,  to  protect  the 
interests  of  another.  Where  is  this  matter  to 
stop?  How  far  shall  the  ideal  interests  of  one 
section  of  the  state  control  the  absolute  rights  of 
the  other?  Are  110,000  non-slaveholding  voters 
to  be  disfranchised  for  fear  they  will  emanci- 
pate the  slaves. 

I  stand  here  the  warm  advocate  of  the  rights 
of  the  people.  The  property  of  individuals,  of 
w^hatever  kind  should  be  inviolate,  and   I  will 


positions  harmonize;  I  cannot  do  it.  I  under- 
stand them  as  .two  distinct  principles — Taxa- 
tion as  a  basis  was  considered  by  our  commit- 
tee. Taxation  is  making  property  the  basis; 
population  is  taking  the  people  for  the  basis; 
and  yet  that  gentleman  tells  the  convention  and 
the  country  that  he  is  in  favor  of  both  principles. 
It  is  for  him  to  reconcile  the  two,  not  me,  I 
think  they  are  antagonistical. 

Before  I  proceed,  I  beg  leave  in  a  most  respect- 
ful manner,  to  reply  to  some  remarks  of  the  gen- 


go  as  far  as  any  other  man  for  the  rights  of  the  tleman  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston,)  in  his 
property,  ^o  man  or  set  of  men  have  the  right  speech  of  yesterday,  which  was  a  courteous,  po- 
to  take  from  me  the  property  which  I  held  by  a  ijte,  and  exceedingly  sensible  speech,  and  one. 
law  of  nature,  anterior  to  the   organization   of  j -with  the  sentiments  of  which,  I  in  the  main  agree. 


society.  But  there  is  a  right  to  preserve,  for 
which  I  would  sacrifice  my  property.  That  right 
is  involved  in  the  question  before  us.  Rather 
than  see  this  inalienable  right  trampled  upon,  I 
am  willing  for  those  rights,  based  upon  muni- 
cipal law,  to  be  abolished.  In  a  word,  if  the 
slavery  of  the  black  is  to  be  based  upon  the  deg- 
radation and  slaveiT  of  the  white,  then  sir,  I 
am  prepared  to  see  the  institution  abolished.  No 
institution  is  consistent  with  the  genius  of  our 
form  of  government,  which  requires  the  best 
rights  and  dearest  interests  of  the  people  to  be 
trampled  upon  in  order  to  its  protection,  and  the 
doctrine  advocated  here  is,  tnat  we  must  dis- 
franchise a  portion  of  the  people  of  the  state  for 
the  purpose  of  protecting  the  interests  of  the 
slavehouler.  Sir,  such  principles  are  antagon- 
istic to  human  liberty. 

But  I  conceive  gentlemen  have  taken  an  in- 
correct view  of  this  subject.  The  people  of 
northern  Kentucky  are  as  conservative  upon  the 
question  of  slavery  as  any  other  section  of  the 
state.  Look  at  the  northern  counties  and  cities 
and  tell  me  what  indications  of  radicalism  the 


But  in  that  speech  he  took  occasion  to  say 
there  was  a  wild  reckless  spirit  pervading  the 
democracy  of  the  country. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Does  the  gentleman  refer 
to  me? 

Mr.  CLARKE.    Particularly  to  you. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Then  you  are  particularly 
mistaken.  I  observed  that  the  spirit  manifest- 
ed by  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Tur- 
ner,) in  arraying  class  against  class,  and  in- 
terest against  interest,  was  worse  than  the 
worst  demagogue  spirit  which  I  had  seen 
manifested  even  when  the  democracy  opposed 
the  home  manufactures  of  the  country.  I  think 
that  was  the  idea  I  intended  to  convey.  I 
represent  here  whigs  and  democrats,  and  cer- 
tainly can  assure  the  gentleman,  and  I  know 
he  would  not  intentionally  misrepresent  me,  I 
never  can  be,  on  this  floor,  so  ungrateful  for 
past  favors  from  the  democratic  party,  as  to 
cast  upon  it  any  reflection. 

Mr.  CLARKE'  I  am  very  glad  to  hear  the 
explanation  of  the  gentleman,  and  I  supposed 
at  the  time  that  he  would  make  no  remark 


488 


diareipectful  to  any  party  in  the  stat*,  unless 
he  vras  carried  away  by  the  excitement  about 
us.  I  thought  it  was  the  result  of  the  excite- 
ment of  the  moment.  His  explanation  is  en- 
tirely satisfactory.  I  stand  here  representing 
whigs  and  democrats  myself.  I  obtained  in 
ray  county  a  Large  number  of  whig  votes  at 
the  polls.  I  told  them,  and  I  repeat  it  here, 
that  I  did  not  think  a  constitution  to  be  formed 
to  exist  for  fifty  years  should  be  made  on  party 

grounds  or  party  principles,  and  that  if  I  came 
ere  I  would  not  represent  a  party,  but  the  peo- 
ple. And  I  take  occasion  to  return  to  those 
whigs  who  gave  me  their  votes  my  sincere 
thanks,  and  to  say  that  their  kindness  shall 
not  be  forgotten  on  this  floor. 

But  there  was  one  thing  that  my  friend 
from  Louisville  did  say.  He  said  that  1  offered 
an  amendment  here  which  proposed  that  Louis- 
ville should  have  two  senators,  and  that  the 
citizens  of  the  state  should  have  the  right  to 
import  slaves  under  certain  restrictions.  He  said 
that  I  offered  it  as  a  sort  of  compromise,  and  if 
it  prevailed  my  portion  would  be  the  lion's 
share  and  his  would  be  the  lamb's. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  That  remark  was  not  made 
with  reference  to  you,  but  in  reply  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison.  I  said  it  would  force  me 
into  a  partnership  with  that  gentleman  which  I 
was  unwilling  to  go  into. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  want  to  say  that  I  have 
proposed  no  partnership.  I  have  brought  my 
proposition  in  here  and  offered  it  withont  any 
partnership.  I  intend  to  show  that  if  it  does 
contain  the  elements  of  compromise,  I  shall  not 
be  obnoxious  to  the  charge  of  having  done 
•wrong  in  offering  it,  and  thus  following  in  the 
footsteps  of  illustrious  individuals  who  have 
gone  before  me,  who  not  only  in  this  house  and 
in  the  legislative  halls  of  this  state,  but  in  the 
halls  of  congress,  have  offered  compromises,  and 
have  received  the  blessings  of  the  Union  for 
having  done. 

I  say  I  am  willing  to  yield  something,  if  gen- 
tlemen will  yield  something;  but  if  they  think 
f)roper  to  spurn  the  proposition,  they  must 
)ear  the  consequences.  I  only  speak  for  myself. 
The  gentleman  from  Louisville  supposes  he  has 
convicted  me  of  inconsistency.  He  stated  that 
ray  amendment  was  in  violation  of  the  thirty- 
fourth  section  of  the  report  which  I  had  the 
honor  to  submit,  under  the  instructions  of  the 
committee  on  the  legislative  department.  How 
is  it  in  violation  of  that  section?  What  does  the 
report  say  in  the  thirty-fourth  section? 

"No  law,  enacted  by  the  general  assembly, 
shall  embrace  more  than  one  object,  and  that 
shall  be  expressed  in  the  title." 

Very  well,  does  not  the  report  say  there  are 
other  things  which  the  legislature  shall  not  do? 
In  the  next  section  we  find, 

"No  law  shall  be  revi.sed,  or  amended  by  ref- 
erence to  its  title;  but,  in  such  case,  the  act  re- 
vised, or  section  amended,  shall  be  re-enacted 
and  published  at  len^h." 

In  section  thirty-third  we  find  that, 
"No  act  of  the  general  assembly  sliall  author- 
ize any  debt  to  be  contracted  on  behalf  of  the 
commonwealth,  except  for  thepurposes  mention- 
ed in  the  thirty-second  section  of  this  article." 
Tber«  are  various  inhibitions  upon  legislative 


action  contained  in  that  report.  There  are  but 
few  things  which  this  convention  may  not  do- 
many  things  which  the  legislature  will  be  re- 
strained in  doing.  I  am  not  guilty  of  inconsis- 
tency, then,  when  I  propose,  as  I  do  in  my 
amendment,  that  citizens  may  import  slaves  un- 
der certain  restrictions  and  restraints. 

I  repeat,  that  I  believe  the  principle  of  rep- 
resentation based  on  population,  is  the  true  prin- 
ciple. What  sort  of  a  principle  is  that,  and 
where  does  it  originate?  It  has  its  origin  in 
the  construction  of  municipal  rules  aud  reg- 
ulations, without  which  there  is  no  power 
that  does  authorize  the  exercise  of  the  ri^lit 
of  suffrage.  It  is  the  creature  of  municip- 
al organization  and  regulations,  but  it  is  a  right, 
and  it  lies  at  the  foundation  of  republican  insti- 
tutions. But  are  there  not  other  rights,  and 
rights  which  are  superior  to  those  existing  only 
by  municipal  regulations?  There  are  rights 
that  existed  before  any  municipal  regulations 
ever  did  exist.  And  what  are  they?  The  right 
to  enjoy  life,  liberty,  and  I  say,  a  natural  right  is 
the  right  to  accumulate  and  enjoy  property. 

I  am  aware  that  some  elementarv  writers  dif- 
fer as  to  whether  property  and  the  enjoyment 
of  it,  is  a  natural  right.  I  think  it  is  a  nat- 
ural right.  Go  upon  the  frozen  summit  of  your 
rocky  mountains,  and  find  the  savage  who 
knows  nothing  of  civilization,  and  who,  but  for 
the  buffalo  robe  which  covers  him,  would  be 
exposed  to  the  peltings  of  the  pitiless  storm. 
This  robe  is  property,  and  I  ask  if  his  very  ex- 
istence does  not  depend  upon  its  retention  and 
enjoyment.  When  we  take  into  consideration 
the  constitution  of  man  and  his  condition,  he 
cannot  exist  without  the  enjoyment  of  property. 
When  the  starving  savage  stretches  forth  his 
hand  and  takes  from  the  vine  a  cluster  of 
grapes,  it  is  property,  without  which  he  could 
not  subsist.  It  is  a  natural  right.  This  is  the 
same  natural  right  that  I  would  have,  if  you 
and  I  were  cast  away  upon  the  ocean  upon 
a  plankwhich  could  notsustain  us  both.  I  have 
the  right  in  this  case,  to  preserve  myself  and 
throw  you  overboard,  as  my  friend  from  Nelson 
illustrated  it  the  other  day.  So  with  respect  to 
property.  If  you  attempt  to  take  it  from  me,  I 
have  the  natural  right  to  slay  before  I  permit  you 
to  do  it. 

Then  while  it  is  insisted  there  are  rightswhich 
must  be  sacred  to  the  citizens  under  this  consti- 
tution, and  while  I  concede  it  is  a  right  which 
ought  not  to  be  violated,  and  allow  representa- 
tion to  be  based  and  predicated  on  population, 
I  maintain  there  are  other  rights.  I  maintain  we 
havetherighttoimportslavesinto  this  state,  they 
being  property,  and  we  have  the  right  to  purchase 
where  we  can  the  cheapest,  and  sell  where  we 
can  get  the  highest  price.  If  we  can  buy  slaves 
cheaper  in  Virginia,  and  the  demand  for  labor 
will  justify  the  purchase,  I  want  this  right  se- 
cured in  the  constitution  to  the  citizens  of  the 
state.  It  is  a  right  to  enjoy  property,  and  I 
want  that  right  secured  to  me  now. 

I  intend  to  come  to  the  point.  I  am  a.«ked 
to  do  what  ?  I  am  requested  to  assist  in  mak- 
ing such  a  change  in  the  present  constitution  of 
the  State  as  will  secure  to  Louisville  and  other 
cities  in  the  Stat^,  additional  ^'presentation  in 
the  Senate.    If  the  right  of  th«  citizen  lo  im- 


487 


port  slaves  for  his  own  use  is  not  secured  at  the 
same  time  that  the  increase,  (iu  behalf  of  cit- 
ies,) of  senators  is  secured,  what  guarantee,  I 
a>k,  will  I  have,  that  this  right  will  be  allowed 
to  t.sist?  It  is  a  part  of  the  history  of  LouU- 
.  ville,  that  her  representation  in  the  State  legis- 
lature, for  the  last  nineteen  or  twenty  years, 
have  upheld  and  supported  the  act  of  l«.i3,  pro- 
hibiring  the  iniportatton  of  slaves ;  yet  I  am  ask- 
ed to  increase  her  power  by  a  change  in  the  pres- 
ent constitution,  to  leave  unprotected  the  right 
for  which  my  constituents  contend,  and  thus 
strengthen  the  power  in  her  hands  which  is  to 
be  wielded  to  our  destruction!  Suppose,  Mr. 
President,  by  this  change  in  the  "constitution  we 
do  increase' the  city  strength  in  the  senate,  and 
suppose  the  right  to  import  slaves  is  to  be  left 
to  legislative  discretion.  If  the  honorable  Pres- 
ident of  this  convention,  and  the  honorable  gen- 
tleman from  Madison,  (though  occupying  ex- 
tremes on  the  question  now  before  the  conven- 
tion,) if  they  should  be  returned  to  the  Senat;e, 
they  would  strike  hands  as  brothers  in  reinstat- 
ing upon  your  statute  books  the  odious  act  of 
1833.  When  T  return  to  my  constituents — those 
to  whom  I  look  for  all  I  shall  ever  seek  to  be, 
what  can  I  say  to  them  ?  What  will  be  the  sad 
and  alarming  story  that  I  must  relate  ?  First, 
that  we  have  made  a  change  in  the  constitution 
never  demanded  by  or  discussed  before  the  peo- 

f>le,  which  change  increases  an  influence  in  the 
egislature  directly  hostile  to  their  slave  inter 
est  which  is  left  unprotected  by  any  constitu- 
tional provision ;  may  they  not  well  say  that 
the  relation  which  exists  between  master  and 
slave  is  not  so  well  secured  by  the  new  as  the 
old  constitution  ?  Will  they  not  say  to  me, 
sir,  you  went  into  that  convention  and  by  your 
vote  you  have  changed  the  old  constitution  and 
increased  a  power  dangerous  to  our  rights;  by 
constitutional  provision  you  have  strengthened 
the  arm  of  those  opposed  to  us,  and  left  us  un- 
protected. May  they  not  well  say  all  this,  yea, 
more  ? 

It  was  said  by  the  honorable  president  of 
this  convention,  if  this  principle  of  represen- 
tation, based  upon  population,  did  not  prevail  he 
would  not  sign  this  constitution.  I  will  not  go 
so  far  as  that.  I  despise  the  term  conservative 
in  the  manner  in  which  it  is  used;  but  I  am 
more  conservative  than  that.  Might  I  not  put 
a  question  in  respect  to  the  president  like  the 
one  asked  by  Daniel  Webster,  when  about 
to  be  read  out  of  the  whig  church — "In  the 
name  of  God  where  .shall  I  go?"  Now,  if  you 
should  not  succeed  in  this  matter,  where  will 
you  go?  Will  you  be  bettered  by  going  back 
to  the  old  constitution,  for  that  is  the  very  thing 
of  which  you  complain. 

Now,  I  take  this  ground:  ifweshall  confer  upon 
or  restore  the  powerto  the  people  to  come  to  the 
polls  and  vote  for  all  their  officers,  from  a  governor 
down  toa  constable, — if  we  shall  secure  that  right 
in  this  constitution, — if  we  shall  secure  to  the  peo- 
ple of  this  state  the  right  to  be  exempt  from  an 
improper  contracting  of  debts  and  expenditure 
of  money,  and  if  we  secure  the  limitation  of  the 
terms  of  the  legislature  to  two  years,  I  shall  think 
we  have  gained  much,  though  we  do  not  gain 
the  favorite  project  which  we  have  in  view.  I 
have  understooa  that  all  those  were  favorite  pro- 


jects of  the  president.  Now,  suppose  we  do  not 
carry  this  question,  will  the  spirit  of  conserva- 
tism lead  to  taking  the  old  constitution?  Be- 
cause you  fail  in  one  instance  merely,  will  you 
throw  away  all  the  rest?  I  tris.^t  Wii^,-n  the  presi- 
dent made  "his  .speech  he  was  laboring  under  ex- 
citement, and  I  hope  we  may  ail  come  together, 
and  though  we  maybe  disappointed  in  one  thing, 
there  may  be  other  redeeming  qualities  in  the 
constitution  which  will  bring  the  president  to  us, 
and  that  he  will  go  for  it.  If  we  cannot  make 
the  new  constitution  as  perfect  as  many  of  us 
may  desire,  yet  if  we  improve  upon  the  old  one 
let  us  agree  upon  the  new.  I  trust  we  may  all 
ultimately  agree  here. 

But  when  I  go  back  to  my  people,  and  talk 
to  them  about  the  changes  we  have  made,  my 
course  will  be  to  tell  them  what  I  approve  and 
what  I  disapprove.  I  intend  to  votefor  the  con- 
stitution. II  you  will  only  let  the  people  elect 
their  officers,  i  have  little  fear,  if,  at  the  same 
time,  you  restrain  the  legislature  in  its  action. 
But  I  am  prepared  to  say,  that  unless  this  great 
natural  right  of  the  people  in  my  portion  of  the 
state  is  secured,  I  never  will  strengthen  the  arm 
raised  to  strike  that  right  down.  Never.  I 
should  be  recreant  to  the  trust  they  have  confi- 
ded to  me.  I  should  sacrifice  my  right  to  their 
confidence,  if  I  were  to  stand  on  this  floor  and 
strengthen  the  legislative  department  of  this 
government  by  a  constitutional  provision,  when 
[  left  my  own  people  exposed  to  that  strength- 
ened arm. 

I  only  speak  for  myself;  but  I  would  dislike 
very  much  to  strengthen  the  power  of  those 
counties  along  the  Ohio  river,  by  a  constitution- 
al provision,  while  they  are  opposed  to  the  fur- 
ther importation  of  slaves,  and  go  back  to  my 
people,  and  in  the  very  next  session  of  the  legis- 
lature, see  my  friend  from  Louisville  and  my 
friend  from  Madison,  in  one  or  the  other  branch, 
shaking  hands  and  uniting  in  renewing  the  act 
of  1833.  I  could  not  stand  at  home  were  I 
to  do  this,  nor  will  I  do  it.  Both  are  great 
principles,  and  if  one  must  be  yielded  in  part, 
the  other  must  be  yielded  in  part.  I  came 
here  with  a  determination  to  labor  for  the  prin- 
ciple that  my  people  might  import  slaves  for 
their  own  use,  and  in  saying  they  shall  be  for 
I  their  own  use,  I  have  compromised  something 
to  accommodate  the  views  and  feelings  of  per- 
sons here.  Whilst  I  do  that,  and  whilst  others 
would  place  a  restriction  on  the  growth  of  city 
population,  I  have  said  they  should  be  entitled 
to  two  senators. 

Reference  has  been  made  to  the  constitution 
of  New  York,  and  it  is  said  that  the  great  prin- 
ciple which  is  contended  for  here,  is  not  violated 
in  that  constitution.  If  I  recollect  the  provisions 
of  that  con.stitntiou,  and  I  have  it  here,  there 
will  be  found  in  article  third,  section  third,  these 
words: 

"The  state  shall  be  divided  into  thirty-two 
districts,  to  be  called  senate  districts,  each  of 
i  which  shall  choose  one  senator.  The  districts 
shall  be  numbered  from  one  to  thirty-two  inclu- 
sive. 

"District  number  one  (1)  shall  consist  of  the 
counties  of  Suffolk,  Richmond,  and  Queens. 

"District  number  two  (2)  shall  consist  of  the 
county  of  Kings. 


488 


"Dislricts  number  three,  (3,)  number  lour,  (4,) 
number  live,  (5,)  and  number  six,  (6,)  shall  con- 
sist of  the  cityand  county  of  Xew  York." 

Only  four  senators  in'the  great  city  of  New 
York.  If  1  recollect  aright,  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  Maryland,  Baltimore  is  entitled  to  but 
one  senator.  Baltimore,  when  compared  with 
Maryland,  has  a  larger  population  than  Louis- 
ville will  have  in  one  hundred  years  compared 
with  the  population  of  Kentucky.  Tlie  framers 
of  our  own  constitution  restricted  the  number  of 
senators  to  not  more  than  one  in  a  county;  I 
will  read  fi'om  the  present  constitution  of  the 
state  of  Kentucky,  in  the  twelfth  section,  article 
second : 

"The  same  number  of  senatorial  districts 
shall,  from  time  to  time,  be  established  by  the 
legislature,  as  there  may  then  be  senators  allot- 
ted to  the  state;  which  shall  be  so  formed  as  to 
contain,  as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  number  of 
free  male  inhabitants  in  each,  above  the  age  of 
twenty-one  years,  and  so  that  no  county  shall 
be  divided,  or  form  more  than  one  district;  and 
where  two  or  more  counties  compose  a  district, 
they  shall  be  adjoining." 

That  section  of  our  constitution  h^s  been 
settled  by  legislative  enactments,  from  time  to 
time,  and  in  the  apportioraent  of  representation 
Louisville  Avas  entitled  to  no  representative, 
apart  from  the  county  of  Jefferson.  That  has 
been  the  course  of  our  ancestors,  and  they  may 
have  been  influenced  by  the  same  reasons 
which  operated  in  forming  the  constitution  of 
New  York  or  Maryland.  There  are  other  con- 
stitutions to  which  I  might  refer,  but  I  will 
not  at  present.  .  Then,  if  there  be  a  violation  of 
a  principle  here,  we  have  the  example  of  New 
York  and  Maryland,  and  of  our  own  state,  for 
this  violation,  and  I  apprehend  there  Avere  rea- 
sons for  it.  Still,  I  repeat,  I  believe  it  is  a  vi- 
olation of  a  great  principle.  But  when  you  at- 
tempt to  establish  a  great  principle,  which  i.s  to 
be  fraught  Avith  disastrous  consequences  to  anoth- 
er great  principle  and  right ;  in  the  name  of 
heaven  do  secure  in  that  constitution  this  prin- 
ciple and  right,  so  that  you  cannot  press  us 
down.  That  is  all  we  ask.  Many  of  the  best 
lawyers  in  the  state,  (and  Avith  them  I  concured,) 
believed  that  the  act  of  1833  Avas  in  direct  and 
flagrant  violation  of  the  constitution.  The  pow- 
er conferred  upon  the  legislature,  was  to  pass 
laws  to  prevent  the  importation  of  slaves  as  mer- 
chandize. Under  this  power  they  passed  the 
act  of  1833,  and  in  this,  in  my  judgment,  vio- 
lated the  spirit  of  the  constitution  and  the  in- 
tentions of  those  who  framed  it.  Fail  to  secure 
the  right  inviolate  to  import  slaves,  in  the  con- 
stitution you  are  now  making,  and  at  whose  mer- 
cy are  Ave  placed  ;  Ave  shall  get  the  lamb's  share, 
and  my  friend  from  Louisville,  who  spoke  yes- 
terday, will  get  the  lion's  share.  I  took  occa- 
sion the  other  day  to  say  that  I  Avas  in  favor  of 
perpetual  slavery.  I  made  that  statement  Avith 
a  full  knoAvledge  of  its  length  and  breadth,  and 
heighth  and  depth.  The  institution  of  slavery 
has  existed  in  this  union  for  more  than  two  hun- 
dred years. 

Slaves  were  brought  here  from  Africa,  not  as 
kidnaped  freemen,  torn  from  a  land  of  liberty 
»B<i  Bold  in  bondage — ^they  were  found  the  slaves 
of  barbarian  petty  kings,  enduring  all  the  crn- 


!  elty  of  savagism  of'  Avhich  liumanity  is  capable. 
'  And  ill  tliis  condition  they  were  purchased  and 
brouglit  to  America — to  this  land  of  civilization 
and  plenty.  All  exoept  one  I  believe  of  the 
original  thirteen  states,  were  slave  states,  and 
Avherever  slave  labor  is  profitable,  they  retain 
the  institution.  The  number  of  slaves  in  the 
present  slave  states,  since  the  first  importion,  has 
increased  to  about  four  millions.  I  have  seen  no 
plan  of  emancipation  or  colonization  by  Avhich 
this  immense  population  Avith  its  perpetual  in- 
crease, can  be  colonized,  as  freemen  in  Africa  or 
elsewhere.  Mr.  President,  I  do  not  believe,  if 
you  could  command  every  dollar  in  the  univer- 
sal Avorld,  together  with  the  British  debt,  all, 
all,  Avould  be  adequate  to  the  .accomplishment 
of  such  an  undertaking,  consistent  with  the 
constitution  and  Liavs  of  this  nation.  Its  imprac- 
ticability and  impossibility,  I  think,  susceptible 
of  mathematical  demonstration. 

We,  sir,  are  united  to  the  slave  states  of  this 
Hnion  by  the  strongest  and  most  indissoluble 
ties  Avhich  can  bind  sovereign  states  together — 
unity  of  feeling,  unity  of  sentiment,  unity  of 
interest,  and  a  deep  and  abiding  sense  of  the  ne- 
cessity of  such  an  union  of  the  slave  states  to  en- 
able each  one  to  expect  and  receive  the  support 
of  the  Avhole  in  deiending  its  peculiar  institu- 
tutioiis  against  the  invasions  of  the  foul  and 
damning  spirit  of  abolitionism.  All  plead  that 
Ave  should  remain  as  one.  Sir,  I  love  the  slave 
states  of  this  union — a  glorious  old  slave  state 
gave  me  birth- -and  I  still  look  to  that  old 
Dominion,  from  whence  most  of  us  sprang,  as 
the  home  of  virtue,  patriotism,  genius  and  chiv- 
alry. I  still  remember,  and  look  back  upon  the 
haunts  of  my  boyhood,  her  hills,  her  valleys,  her 
chrystal  streams,  Avith  pride  and  pleasure;  and  I 
trust  that  Kentucky  Avill  never  depart  from 
the  lofty  example  of  that  glorious  old  mother,  in 
her  devotion  to  the  safety  of  the  slave  states. — 
Our  markets  for  most  of  the  surplus  produce  of 
the  country  is  to  be  found  in  our  sister  slave 
states.  They  reward  our  labors  with  money. — 
We  hand  our  money  over  to  the  spinning  jennies 
of  the  north,  whose  owners  perpetually  com- 
plain of  slavery  and  slave  owners,  because,  I 
suppose,  that  the  labor  of  these  slaves  fill  their 
coffers  with  the  precious  metals.  This  must  be 
the  cause  of  complaint,  for  I  am  sure  we  nev- 
er disturb  the  institutions  of  the  north. 

Emancipation  has  been  the  continual  cry.  It 
has  been  said  by  some  of  the  wisest  men  m  the 
union,  (and  I  think  with  much  truth,)  that 
emancipation  and  colonization  Avould  depopu- 
late many  of  the  slave  states;  for  such  is  the  cli- 
mate in  many,  that  the  white  man  could  not 
make  agricultural  pursuits  sufficiently  profita- 
ble by  his  own  labor  to  induce  him  to  remain 
there.  No  one  among  us,  I  apprehend,  Avould  be 
in  favor  of  turning  them  loose  among  us  as  free- 
men; for  of  all  abominations  that  ever  cursed  a 
country,  a  free  negro  population  is  the  very 
worst.  Kence,  Mr.  President,  if  Ave  had  the 
means  to  buv  and  colonize  them,  it  would  be 
Avretched  poficy,  in  my  judgment,  to  do  so.  You 
make  the  condition  of  the  African  infinitely 
worse  by  tlie  removal  of  the  infiuencos  and  re- 
straints of  a  superior  race  from  around  him,  by 
which  he  has  been  civilized,  and  in  many  in- 
stances  christianieed,  and  allow  him  to  d*gen- 


489 


erate  into  that  state  of  savage  barbarism  which 
attended  all  emancipatiou  projects  both  in 
France  and  England;  and  you  depopulate  the 
fair  fields  of  some  of  the  fairest  ana  brightest 
sisters  of  this  uniou. 

It  would  be  bad  policy  to  frae  them  among 
us.  None  I  hope  can  desire  that.  Therefore,  1 
regard  the  perpetuation  of  slavery  in  some  or  most 
of  the  present  slave  states,  as  a  fact,  fixed  and  cer- 
tain ;  and  if  any  state  shall  falter  and  forget  her 
obligation  and  her  duty  to  her  sisters,  I  trust  in 
God  Kentucky  will  never  be  that  State. 

I  am  thoroughly  convinced  and  satisfied  that 
the  institution  of  slaverv,  as  it  exists  in  Ken- 
tucky, elevates  the  morals  and  the  chivalry  of 
the  white  race,  and  enhances  the  happiness  of 
both  races.  The  great  disproportion  in  the  free 
states  over  crime  in  the  slave  states,  attests  the 
first,  and  the  blood  of  an  hundred  battle  fields 
will  vouchsafe  the  latter.  The  gentleman  from 
Campbell  lias  been  pleased  to  say  that  the  in- 
stitution of  slavery  was  a  curse  and  in  violation 
of  the  laws  of  God  and  the  laws  of  man.  I 
have  no  answer  to  make  to  that  argument,  save 
one.  I  will  just  ask  him  to  go  to  the  hundred 
court  liouses  in  this  state,  and  listen  to  the  ech- 
oes from  the  voices  of  one  hundred  and  forty 
thousand  freemen  at  the  polls  in  August  last. 
Yes  sir,  freemen  blessed  with  cultivated  morals 
and  intelligence,  and  imbued  with  the  highest 
and  holiest  principles  of  patriotism.  They,  sir, 
have  replied  to  his  argument.  They  have  an- 
swered the  question  whether  they  or  the  gen- 
tleman with  the  few  thousand  with  whom  he 
acted,  shall  erect  the  standard  of  morals  in  this 
commonwealth.  It  is  strange  that  that  gentle- 
tleman,  and  those  with  whom  he  acts,  should 
think  themselves  the  only  persons  in  the  state 
competent  to  determine  what  is  morals,  what  is 
christian,  what  is  humane,  what  is  patriotic. 

If  you  increase  your  power  by  voting  as  you 
and  as  other  gentlemen  desire,  what  is  to  be  the 
result?  Why,  the  very  next  session  you  will 
plant  down  upon  us  the  infamous  act  of  1833; 
you  will  have  said  to  the  southern  part  of  the 
state,  where  slave  labor  is  in  demand,  you  must 
come  to  the  middle  or  northern  portion  of  the 
state  to  procure  your  slaves.  You  shall  not 
be  allowed  to  go  to  other  states  where  perhaps 
you  might  buy  better  slaves  for  a  less  price,  but 
you  shall  buy  your  slaves  from  us  at  such  prices 
as  we  in  the  enjoyment  of  this  monoply  in  slave 
dealing  shall  think  proper  to  ask,  of  you  may 
go  without.  I  desire  to  show  this  house  ancl 
the  country  what  would  be  the  result  of  such  a 
course.  What  will  die  southern  members  of 
the  legislature,  who  come  here  as  your  tributa- 
ries, say  and  do?  What  ought  they  to  do?  3Iake 
speeches  continually  against  your  act  of  1833, 
force  you  to  defend  it  and  thus  preach  abolition- 
ism; this  would  stimulate  Ohio  abolitionists 
and  others  to  make  incursions  into  your  part  of 
the  state,  endanger  the  tenure  by  which  you 
hold  your  slaves,  and  reduce  them  in  value. 
The  southern  part  of  the  state  is  secure  in  the 
enjoyment  of  their  slave  property,  and  hence 
they  could  with  perfect  impunity  retaliate  upon 
you  for  the  injustice  of  the  act  of  1833,  by  which 
you  attempt  to  monopolize  the  whole  slave  traf- 
fic of  the  state,  ana  they  ought  to  do  it  and 
doubtless  will  do  it,  if  they  be  true  to  them- 
62 


I  selves.     Is  it  not  better  then  to  secure  to  us  our 

rights  by  constitutional  provision,  when  we  are 

willing  to  secure  yours  to  you  ?    Is  it  not  just, 

I  ask,  that  it  should   be  done  ?    Acquire  the 

(  power  vou   now  seek    and  leave  us  exposed  ; 

I  place  the  principles  of  the  law  of  1833  upon 

I  your  statute  books,  as  you  doubtless  will  do  in 

I  the  exercise  of  your  increased  power,  and  my 

judgment  for  it.  it  can   never  remain  there  iu 

peace  if  the  south  of  the  state  shall  remain  true 

to  herself.     They  will  wipe  it  from   the  statute 

book,  or  keep  up  an   agitation  of  abolitionism 

that  will  bring  down  the  prices  of  your  slaves 

as  low  as  they  could  be  obtained  from  other 

states. 

There  is  another  view  of  this  subject.  The 
five  great  cities  of  the  north  and  east  are  now  con- 
nected with  the  town  of  Cumberland,  at  the  foot  of 
the  Alleghany  mountains  on  the  east.  There  is 
now  a  railroad  being  constructed,  which  will 
extend  to  Wheeling,  or  Pittsburg.  There  is  a 
railroad  from  Lexington  to  your  own  city,  that 
will  be  extended,  in  less  than  ten  years,  to  Nash- 
ville, Tennessee,  and  there  intersect  the  Chata- 
hooche  railroad.  From  this  great  line,  branches 
will  spring  out  in  every  direction.  The  fu- 
ture power  and  wealth  of  the  state  in  part  will 
be  found  in  the  mountains  when  the  bosoms  of 
those  mountains  shall  be  opened  up  by  the  en- 
ergies of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  their  im- 
mense wealth  shall  be  thrown  into  the  lap  of  the 
north,  the  east,  the  west,  and  the  south. — 
There  will  then  be  the  means  of  bringing  into 
market  these  sources  of  wealth,  and  there  will 
be  an  increased  demand  for  labor.  If  the  act  of 
1833  is  fastened  upon  us,  when  we  come  to  re- 
quire one  hundred  and  fifty,  two  hundred,  or 
three  hundred  thousand  additional  laborers  to 
bring  out  the  hidden  treasures  of  your  state, 
where  will  vou  get  them?  You  will  get  them 
from  abolition  Ohio — in  part  abolition — and 
from  other  free  states;  and  what  description  of 
people  will  you  bring  in  here  to  supply  that  de- 
mand for  laoor  which  we  would  supply  with 
blacks?  The  very  worst  that  can  be  found 
in  the  cities  and  towns  of  those  states;  and 
they  will  not  fail  to  come  imbued  with  the  spirit 
of  fanaticism  and  abolitionism,  and  with  the 
conviction  that  slavery  is  against  the  laws  of  God 
and  man.  And  in  less  than  ten  years  after  this 
increased  demand  for  labor  shall  arise,  if  our 
rights  are  not  secured  as  here  proposed,  this  pop- 
ulation wiU  come  to  the  polls  and  separate  the 
slaves  from  their  owners.  My  object  is,  that  the 
people  of  this  state  shall  be  permitted  when  they 
want  laborers  to  go  to  the  other  states  and  buy 
and  bring  them  in  here.  They  are  better  labor- 
ers, more  reliable,  and  I  woulA  rather  have  them 
than  the  great  portion  of  those  who  will  come 
into  the  state  if  the  demand  for  labor  shall  in- 
crease. 

Mr.  President,  I  am  not  alarmed  from  my 
propriety  or  purpose  by  the  cry  that  I  am  fa- 
voring native  americanism.  I  am  doing  no  such 
thing.  I  yield  to  no  man  in  my  opposition  to 
that  other  fanaticism.  I  have  no  fears  of  the 
brave  and  patriotic  Irish,  Dutch,  Poles  and  Hun- 
garians who  have  fled  from  a  land  of  tyranny 
and  oppression  to  this  land  of  liberty ;  my  fears 
are  in  another  quarter.  I  fear  native-bom  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States,  who  have  been  raised 


490 


in  the  cradle  of  dislike  for  and  hostility  to  our 
institutions,  and  who  would  immigrate  here, 
(not  as  the  foreigner,)  to  support  thcni,  but  to 
make  war  upon  and  destroy  them. 

Sir,  why  not  allow  the  citizens  of  the  state, 
wlien  tliey  are  competent  to  elect  their  iudges,  and 
all  their  offiers,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  and 
when  we  hare  acknowledged  their  competency 
fully  and  fairly  to  transact  their  own  business — in 
the  name  ofGod  why  not  in  this  constitution  secure 
to  them  also  the  right  to  exercise  their  own 
judgment  upon  the  question,  whether  they  want 
more  laborers,  and  whether  they  should  buy 
them  or  not ! 

The  act  of  1833,  though  passed  seventeen  years 
ago,  was  at  the  time  a  concession  to  the  very 
spirit  against  which  we  have  been  warring 
throughout  the  last  sunnner,  and  for  the  past 
two  years.  Yes  sir,  that  act  has  been  claimed 
as  a  concession  to  the  spirit  of  abolitionism  and 
emancipationism.  And  I  never  want  to  see  it 
re-enacted  again.  Go  to  the  halls  of  congress  and 
see  what  it  has  done  there.  A  Giddings,  a  Slade, 
a  Root,  a  Hudson,  or  a  Hale,  never  stood  up  in 
his  place  there  and  attacked  the  institution  of 
slavery,  that  he  did  not  declare  that  even  Ken- 
tucky herself,  one  of  the  first  slave  states  in  the 
Union,  was  tired  of  it,  and  believed  it  to  be  an 
injury.  When  the  gentlemen  from  the  south  call 
for  tlieir  authority  for  this  assertion,  what  was 
their  reply  !  Look  to  the  Kentucky  act  of  1833! 
Yes  sir,  when  southern  men  there  were  standing 
in  one  solid  phalanx,  battling  for  southern  rights, 
against  the  encroachments  of  the  abolitionists 
of  the  north,  that  act  of  1833,  that  Kentucky 
act,  was  hurled  in  their  teeth  by  these  abolition- 
ists. The  passage  of  that  act  was  a  concession 
to  the  northern  abolitionists,  and  one  step  to- 
wards the  embrace  of  northern  fanaticism.  To 
leave  it  open  so  that  it  may  be  passed  again 
would  be  another  concession  to  that  detestable 
spirit,  that  intends,  if  it  can,  to  override  the 
whole  of  the  people  of  the  south.  Yes  sir,  en- 
courage them,  and  at  the  darkest  hour  of  mid- 
night, when  the  husband  is  slumbering  in  the 
embraces  of  his  family,  the  torch  will  be  placed 
in  the  one  hand  and  the  tomahawk  in  the 
other,  of  the  slave  population,  and  if  any  of  the 
whites  are  permitted  to  escape  it  will  be  by  the 
light  of  the  conflagration  of  their  own  homes. 
It  was  a  concession  sir,  to  this  fell  spirit. 

There  are  those  on  this  floor,  who,  when  this 
mighty  and  dangerous  and  exciting  question 
has  agitated  the  councils  of  the  Union,  have 
seen  the  thirty  bright  stars  that  constitute  our 
glorious  political  constellation,  tremble  in  their 
orbits,  ready  at  a  moment  madly  and  wildly  to 
shoot  from  their  spheres.  They  have  stood  upon 
broad  platform  of  the  constitution,  sir,  and  al- 
most felt  that  this  glorious  fabric  of  human  lib- 
erty, conescrated  by  the  best  blood  of  our  fa- 
thers, and  dedicated  to  the  eternal  principles  of 
freedom,  was  reeling,  tottering  and  tumbling  to 
tJie  dust.  And  why  was  all  this?  The  power 
of  the  abolitioniHts  liad  l)een  strengthened  or 
rather  encouraged,  and  flattered  by  this  conces- 
sion of  the  act  of  1833.  The  strongest  argu- 
ment against  southern  men  I  ever  heard  from 
the  lips  of  an  abolitionist  Avas  based  upon  that 
act.  Go  to  the  halls  oi  congress  and  you  will 
gee  the  whigs  from  the  slave  states  with  very 


few  exceptions,  and  the  democrats,  when  this 
great  question  comes  up,  shake  hands  as  a 
band  of  brothers,  and  there  standing  in  un- 
divided ranks  battling  for  southern  rights.  Place 
in  this  constitution  a  power  under  whicli  tlie 
legislature  can  re-enact  the  law  of  1833,  and  by 
which  the  citizen  shall  be  deprived  of  the  lib- 
erty and  privilege  of  importing  slaves  for  his 
own  use,  and  you  concede  to  them,  and  allow 
the  increasing  demand  for  laborers  to  be  sup- 
plied, not  with  blacks,  but  with  whites,  and  the 
state  after  a  while  will  become  abolitionized  and 
emancipationized.  And  when  that  spirit  takes 
possession  of  the  ballot  box,  I  ask  you  then 
in  whose  hands  will  you  fall.  You  go  into  the 
kind  embraces  of  that  region  of  country  that 
has  been  making  war  upon  you  from  the  foun- 
dation of  our  government  to  the  present  time. 

I  for  one  have  no  higher  earthly  hope  than 
that  proud,  chivalrous  old  Kentucky  will  now 
and  forever  strengthen  the  cords  that  bind  the 
slave  states  of  this  union  in  one  glorious  sister- 
hood. 

Mr.  President,  I  know  that  mv  remarks  have 
been  desultory.  I  arose  to  address  the  house 
under  the  impulse  of  the  moment,  and  have  spo- 
ken longer  than  I  intended.  I  will  make  but  a 
few  more  remarks  and  I  have  done. 

Abolitionism  in  its  present  sense  was  scarcely 
known  in  this  countrj'  until  about  the  year  1790. 
A  sect  called  Quakers  brought  the  subject  to 
the  attention  of  Congress,  by  petition.  The 
dark  cloud  of  fanaticism  presented  but  a  speck 
upon  our  then  bright  political  horizon.  This 
spirit  gradually  increased  imtil  some  twenty 
years  or  more  since,  a  combination  between  the 
spirits  of  abolitionism  in  France  and  England, 
brought  about  the  insurrection  and  massacre  in 
the  island  of  St.  Domingo.  This  was  followed 
up  by  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  in  the 
West  India  Islands  oy  Great  Britain,  and  imme- 
diately upon  the  heel  of  these  acts  of  a  false 
and  sickly  philanthropy,  our  act  of  1833  made 
its  appearance  upon  our  statute  book.  That 
little  speck,  sir,  that  was  seen  in  the  far  off  dis- 
tance in  1790,  has  grown  into  a  black  and  angry 
cloud,  sending  forth  its  thunders  from  the  whole 
northern  hemisphere.  Sir,  it  threatens  to  del- 
uge one  half  of  this  union  in  blood  and  tears. 
I  ask,  in  the  name  of  our  common  interests,  I 
ask  in  the  name  of  our  sister  states  of  the  south, 
I  ask  in  the  name  of  those  who  are  to  come,  and 
who,  (if  we  are  faithful,)  will  be  entitled  to  all 
the  privileges  that  we  now  enjoy,  I  ask  in  the 
name  of  all  these  high  and  pressing  considera- 
tions, if  it  be  not  our  duty,  as  the  sworn  repre- 
sentatives of  the  sovereignty  of  the  state,  to 
withhold,  by  constitutional  provision,  from  the 
legislature,  all  means  by  which  this  threatening 
storm  of  the  north  shall  be  invited  to  the  desola- 
tion of  this  now  free  and  happy  country.  I  trust 
in  my  God  that  such  will  be  the  result  of  our  la- 
bors. 

In  conclusion,  I  beg  leave  to  say,  that  if  I 
sliall  have  no  guarantee  that  the  legislature 
will  be  restricted  by  constitutional  provision 
from   an   interference  with   our  riglits,  by  the 

ftassage  of  prohibitory  laws,  I  cannot,  consistent- 
y  with  the  duty  I  owe  to  those  I  represent,  in- 
crease the  power  of  those  who  are  in  favor  of  the 
act  of  1833,  and  I  will  not  do  it  by  my  vote. 


491 


Mr.  DAVIS.  In  relation  to  the  leading  fea- 
ture of  the  resolution,  and  so  far  as  that  feature 
is  common  to  both  houses  of  the  legislature — 
which  proposes  to  establish  single  districts  for 
the  choice  of  both  senators  and  representatives — 
I  am  in  favor  of  it.  But  the  latter  branch  of  the 
proposition  seems  to  forbid  the  principle  that 
there  is  to  be  any  restriction  of  the  right  of  cities 
to  representation  in  the  senate  according  to 
numbers.  I  cannot  give  my  a.'ssent  to  it.  In  re- 
lation to  districting  cities,  I  think  it  is  in  per- 
fect conformity  to  the  great  principle  of  equal 
representation.  If  it  were  po.ssible  that  the 
State  of  Kentucky  could  bo  laid  out  into  a  hun- 
dred geographical  districts,  each  containing  no 
more  nor  less  than  the  ratio  of  representation,  if 
the  number  of  one  hundred  is  to  constitute  the 
house  of  representatives,  and  would  best  secure 
the  representation  of  the  whole  people,  it  would 
certainly  be  desirable.  Well,  sir,  any  regulation 
which  approximates,  in  any  degree,  to  that  great 
popular  principle  which  would  bo  so  desirable, 
and  which  would  conduce  so  much  to  the  gen- 
eral safety  of  the  country,  in  ray  judgment, 
ought  to  receive  the  serious  consideration  and 
tJie  approval  of  the  convention.  I  will  illus- 
trate tJie  position  by  this  supposed  case.  Ken- 
tucky is  divided,  we  will  say,  into  two  equal 
districts,  so  far  as  population  is  involved,  and 
one  half  of  the  state  is  allowed  to  elect  their 
representatives  by  general  ticket,  and  the  other 
is  required  to  elect  by  single  districts.  Which 
half  would  rule?  Every  gentleman  will  have 
but  one  answer  ready  to  the  question.  We  saw 
it  illustrated  a  few  years  ago,  in  the  election  of 
president  of  the  United  States,  not  exactly  to 
that  extent,  but  still  to  a  degree  that  was  con- 
trolling in  its  practical  result.  The  great  State 
of  Xcw  York  had  tliirty  eight  electors,  all  elect- 
ed by  general  ticket;  the  consequence  was,  her 
whole  strength  was  thrown  to  one  candidate, 
which  controlled  and  decided  the  election.  The 
same  mode  of  electing  her  representatives  to 
congress  would  give  her  so  much  power  as  that 
she  would  generally  hold  the  balance  in  that 
branch  and  decide  all  great  questions.  To  pre- 
vent our  cities  from  engrossing  and  concentra- 
ting by  the  same  principle,  a  dangerous  amount 
of  power,  I  am  in  favor  of  districting  them  for 
the  election  of  representatives. 

It  seems  to  me  that  gentlemen  here  have  pro- 
ceeded on  a  fallacy — ray  friend  from  Henderson 
among  others — in  computing  the  ratio  of  in- 
crease between  the  cities  and  the  country.  I 
think  there  will  be  a  groat  disproportionate  in- 
crease between  the  two  in  favor  of  the  cities,  and 
especially  the  cities  located  upon  the  Ohio  river. 
Not  only  that,  but  the  counties  also  located  on 
that  river  from  the  convenience  of  navigation 
and  other  advantages  which  their  position  gives 
them,  will  necessarily  experience  an  accelerated 
impulse  in  the  increase  of  the  population,  great- 
er than  a  natural  increase  would  give  them,  and 
a  disproportionate  one  over  the  rest  of  the  state. 

Mr.  DIXON.  The  proposition  I  assumed 
was,  that  the  cities  would  increase  in  the  ratio 
of  four  hundred  per  cent,  and  the  counties  in  the 
ratio  of  fifty  per  cent. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  beg  pardon,  then,  for  I  had 
misunderstood  the  gentleman.  I  have  a  table  of 
the  iacrease  of  the  population  of  Louisville  at 


various  periods,  when  this  population  was  enu- 
merated under  the  law  of  congress.  Louisville 
in  ISIO  had  a  population  of  1,357;  in  1820,  of 
4,012;  in  1830,  of  10,352;  in  1840,  of  21,125; 
and  now,  after  the  lapse  of  nine  years  of  time, 
gentlemen  say  she  has  upwards  50,000  inhabi- 
tants. According  to  that  rate  of  progress,  in 
1860,  Louisville  will  have  between  100  and  140 
thousand  people.  Look  at  Covington,  which  is 
admitted  to  bo  the  second  city  in  size  in  the 
state.  Independent  of  an  intrinsic  and  pecu- 
liarly local  principle  of  growth  which  Coving- 
ton has,  there  is  a  cause  at  work  much  more  po- 
tent in  its  operation  in  the  proximate  position 
of  Cincinnati  with  her. 

The  great  and  continuous  growth  of  the  Queen 
of  the  West,  in  numbers,  business  and  wealth, 
will  necessarily  build  up  Covington  rapidly  into 
a  considerable  city.  In  1840,  Covington  had  a 
population  of  2,046,  and  now  she  has  upwards 
of  10,000.  What  the  city  of  New  York  has  been 
to  Brooklvn,  will  Cincinnati  be  to  Covington. 
If,  in  I860,  Louisville  numbers  125,000  people, 
Covington  will  probably  have  75,000.  The  ag- 
gregate population  of  the  two  cities  will  be  at 
least  200,000,  and  I  have  no  doubt,  at  that  time, 
one-fifth  of  the  entire  population  of  the  state  of 
Kentucky.  Now  the  question  is,  are  you  going 
to  give  these  cities  an  equal  representation  ac- 
cording to  numbers,  with  the  rest  of  the  state, 
in  both  houses  of  your  legislature,  senate  as  well 
as  the  house  of  representatives?  I  deny  that,  as 
a  practical  question,  equality  is  ever  exactly,  or 
to  a  mathematical  certainty,  obtained  in  govern- 
ment, or  the  division  and  adjustment  of  political 
power  among  the  people.  We  lay  down  the 
principle  that  there  shall  be  equality  both  of 
right  and  power  in  our  system — it  is  a  general 
principle,  but  no  man  dreams,  or  if  he  does  he 
IS  a  dreamer  indeed,  that  we  ever  can  exactly 
attain  to  it.  All  that  we  do  in  practice  is  to  ap- 
proximate to  it,  and  in  that  attempt  he  is  an  un- 
wise man  who  endeavors  to  make  that  approxi- 
mation so  near  as  to  destroy,  or  seriously  to 
jeopardize  the  safety  of  the  community  at  large. 
Self  protection  and  self  preservation  is  a  greater 
and  paramount  principle  to  be  considered  in 
connection  with  it.  Sir,  this  principle  of  an 
equal  distribution  of  political  power  does  not 
exist  in  any  system,  general  or  subordinate,  in 
the  United  States,  because  practically  it  is  un- 
attainable, and  if  it  were  otherwise,  it  would 
be  greatly  inconvenient  and  unsafe,  if  it  were 
practicable  to  put  into  operation  in  its  universal 
and  complete  perfection.  It  does  not  exist  in 
the  general  government,  or  in  a  single  state  gov- 
ernment in  the  United  States. 

"\Yhat  is  the  declaration  of  independence — 
what  is  this  Utopian  principle  that  is  so  beauti- 
ful in  theory,  but  when  you  attempt  to  put  it  ex- 
actly in  practice  always  eludes  your  grasp? — 
That  all  persons  are  by  nature  equal,  and  that  in 
the  business  of  government  all  persons  have  a 
perfect  right  to  an  equal  share  of  the  power.  Why 
sir,  woman  is  excluded  in  every  system  that  pre- 
vails in  the  civilized  world — and  the  youth  under 
twentv-one  years  of  age  are  excluded  in  all  the 
American  systems.  Not  only  these, but  numerous 
elas-ses  of  male  adults  are  excluded,  not  only 
from  office,  but  from  the  right  to  vote  itself.  You 
make  qualifications  of  citizenship,  of  residence. 


492 


of  periods  of  residence,  and  of  age,  all  proper 
in  themselves,  and  you  apply  all  these  restric- 
tions upon  the  natural  right  and  the  beautiful 
theoretical  principle  that  all  persons  are  equal, 
and  all  share  equally  the  power  of  government. 
Well,  what  are  these  restrictions,  but  to  modify 
and  to  restrict,  in  some  degree,  the  operation  of 
the  general  principle  of  equality?  And  when 
you  apply  this  principle  to  those  who  are  can- 
didates for  office,  why,  you  make  a  further  ex- 
tension of  these  restrictions,  and  you  further  im- 
pinge upon  this  natural  right  of  equality.  Your 
fovernor,  under  the  present  constitution,  is  to 
e  forty  years  of  age;  under  the  proposition  the 
committee  on  the  executive  department  has  re- 
ported, he  is  to  be  thirty-five;  but  it  is  not  ma- 
terial which  you  require,  as  to  him  there  is  a 
qualification  of  age,  an  interdict  of  all  under  it 
from  the  office,  and  that  beyond  middle  life. 
You  subject  senators  to  a  qualification  of  age, 
and  representatives  also.  You  throw  qualifica- 
tions around  every  office  of •  government,  by 
which  are  excluded,  from  some,  at  least  four- 
fifths  of  the  aggregate  population — from  some, 
fully  one-half  of  the  adult  male  population, 
and  from  all,  a  very  large  amount  of  this  adult 
male  population.  What  a  departure  from,  what 
a  sacrifice  of,  this  great  principle  of  natural 
equality,  in  its  application  in  the  business  and 
science  of  government!  And  why  do  you  do 
this?  Simply,  because  the  good,  the  security, 
the  self-preservation  of  the  larger  number  re- 
quires it.  The  paramount  principle,  of  the  right 
and  duty  of  the  mass  of  the  men  of  a  country 
to  protect  themselves  intervenes  and  modifies 
the  other  and  subordinate  right.  You  laid  down 
the  general  principle  of  equality  of  power  and 
right,  as  a  great  leading  landmark,  to  blaze  in 
beauty  and  splendor  ahead  of  you,  and  it  is 
your  guide  that  directs  you  in  fixing  the  barque 
of  state  in  its  course;  but  it  is  not  the  haven  to 
which  you  are  sailing.  That  port,  the  great  end 
of  all  human  government,  is  the  security  and 
the  happiness  of  the  greatest  number;  and  so  far 
as  a  safe  anchorage  on  its  deep  and  peaceful  bo- 
som requires  the  wise  political  mariner  to  de- 
fiart  from,  and  pass  the  guiding  and  cheering 
ight  house,  "equality  to  all,"  he  does  it;  and 
because  this  beacon  light  is  not  the  port  in  which 
he  is  to  rest,  does  not  impair  the  truth  or  value 
of  the  great  light  by  which  alone  he  has  been 
enabled  to  reach  it. 

In  the  formation  of  the  constitution  of  the 
tlnited  States,  there  have  been  numerous  and 
great  departures  from  this  principle  of  universal 
and  perfect  equality,  and  1  suppose  that  instru- 
ment is  as  wisely  and  justly  adapted  to  its  ends, 
as  any  which  this  convention,  or  any  other  con- 
vention of  this  day  could  form.  We  have  thir- 
ty states  in  this  union,  and  there  is  a  perfect 
equality  of  representation  in  proportion  to  fed- 
eral numbers,  in  all  of  these  states,  in  the  house 
of  representatives;  and  there  is  an  absolute 
equality  of  them  as  states,  without  regard  to 
popular  numbers,  in  the  senate.  And  upon 
what  principle,  and  for  what  reason,  has  this 
positive  and  absolute  eouality,  without  regard 
to  numbers,  been  secureu  to  each  in  the  senate? 
It  is  because,  in  all  governments,  there  are  two 
great  principles  of  action — the  one  of  action,  or 
aggression  if  you  please,  and  the  other  of  resis- 


tance,  of  self-defence.     And    neither   of  these 

Erinciples  is  to  be  lost  sight  of,  by  any  wise 
ody,  in  framing  the  fundamental  law.  Both 
these  two  principles  are  recognized,  and  operate 
in  the  organization  of  the  house  of  representa- 
tives in  congress,  elected  as  it  is  upon  the  prin- 
ciple of  numbers,  but  by  states;  for  whilst  nu- 
merical representation  gives  the  full  capacity 
tor  progress,  action,  and  aggression,  this  repre- 
sentation, not  of  a  body,  one  and  indivisible,  a 
totality  and  a  unit,  but  of  separate  states,  pro- 
duces an  antagonism  and  contlict  of  interest,  by 
which  representation  in  the  house  also  performs 
the  function  of  protection  and  self-defence.  But 
this  constitution  is  a  mixed  and  complicated 
structure.  It  was  formed  in  the  house  for  the 
people  of  the  United  States,  acting  by  states; 
whilst  in  the  senate  the  state  sovereignties  and 
governments  are  represented,  and  provision 
made  for  their  security.  There  were  large  states 
and  small — ^Virginia  and  Delaware — New  York 
and  Rhode  Island.  The  small  states  never 
would  have  signed  the  bond  of  this  political 
partnership,  unless  it  had,  as  it  does,  secure  to 
them  a  power  to  protect  themselves  against  the 
large  states;  and  the  latter  knew  this  was  the 
alone  condition  upon  which  the  association 
could  be  formed.  Delaware  and  Rhode  Island 
have  each  two  senators,  and  in  that  body  as  much 
power  as  the  colossal  New  York  and  Virginia. 
What  a  vast  departure  from  the  principle  of  re- 
presentation in  proportion  to  numbers.  It  is  said 
m  this  debate,  that  the  case  of  the  states  and  of 
the  United  States  government  are  in  no  degree 
analagous  to  the  counties  and  the  cities  of  Ken- 
tucky. The  subjects  to  which  the  principle  is 
to  be  applied  are  diff'erent,  but  the  principle  is 
the  same,  and  is  equally  applicable  to  both,  and 
as  necessary  for  its  application  in  our  constitu- 
tion as  well  as  in  that  of  the  United  States. 
This  principle  is,  that  the  safety  and  proper 
protection  of  the  community  at  large  is  the  par- 
amount, predominating  principle  of  our  system, 
and  all  others  must  yield  to  it.  That  for  the 
purposes  of  protection,  defence,  and  self-preser- 
vation, the  large  states  must  surrender  in  the 
senate,  to  the  small  states,  a  large  portion  of 
their  power;  and  the  cities,  for  the  same  ends,  in 
our  senate,  must  surrender  to  the  counties  and 
the  rural  population  of  the  state  a  portion  of 
their  power.  Such  is  the  nature  of  all  human 
government — for  all  involve  a  surrender  of  right, 
concession,  and  compromise.  Nor  is  this  re- 
quired, in  either  case,  for  action  or  aggression, 
but  only  for  .security  and  defence.  If  the  small- 
er states  of  the  union  should  combine  in  the 
senate,  and  pass  bills  through  that  body,  de- 
structive of  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  large 
states,  their  capacity  for  self-defence  in  the 
house,  by  a  representation  there,  based  upon 
numbers,  would  be  complete,  and  guard  them 
from  all  wrong;  whilst  the  same  protection  is 
assured  to  the  small  states,  against  the  over- 
wlielming  strength,  and  all  combinations  of  the 
great  states,  in  the  house,  by  their  equality  of 
power  in  the  senate.  Without  this  ability  to 
protect  and  preserve  themselves,  in  the  senate, 
the  small  states  would  long  since  have  been  de- 
voured by  the  larger  ones,  as  the  smaller  crea- 
tures of  the  deep  are  by  its  great  leviathans. 
The  small  states  nad  wise  men  to  represent  them 


49S 


in  the  conventiou,  who  wefe  deeply  read  in  the 
history,  character,  and  nature  of  man.  They 
knew  that  the  posseesion  of  power,  and  partic- 
ularlvi  irresponsible  power,  corrupted  his  heart; 
and  that  he  would  be  guilty  of  wrong  and  op- 
pression, particularly  when  acting  with  a  mul- 
titude; ana  these  great  men  took  measures  time- 
ly and  effective  to  protect  their  stales,  wiih  a 
t'udgment  and  wisdom  which  stand  vindicated 
)y  all.subsequent  experience.  Will  we  profit  by 
their  example? 

The  same  principle  of  defence  of  the  weak 
and  disunited  against  the  strong,  the  united 
and  the  compact,  has  been  adopted  to  some  ex- 
tent in  many  of  the  States  in  the  formation  of 
their  constitutions. 

Pennsylvania,  in  her  last  constitution,  gave 
the  city  of  Philadelphia,  for  the  time,  two  sena- 
tors, and  limited  the  number  permanently  to 
four,  and  the  maximum  was  even  then  less 
than  numbers  would  have  entitled  her  to  claim. 
The  citv  of  Baltimore  is  restricted  to  one  sena- 
tor, alt&ough  her  population  is  about  one  fourth 
of  the  whole  of  Maryland.  But  there  is  in  that 
state  a  much  more  extensive  infraction  of  this 
principle  of  equality  in  her  house  of  represen- 
tatives, they  being  distributed  among  all  her 
counties  without  regard  to  numbers,  and  the  city 
of  Baltimore  being  limited  to  two.  Virginia,  by 
her  constitution  is  divided  into  two  great  sena- 
torial districts,  separated  by  the  Blue  Ridge. 
To  the  eastern  is  given  nineteen  members,  and  to 
the  western  but  thirteen,  and  yet  the  western 
district  contains  the  largest   amount  of  voting 

f>opulation.  In  South  Carolina  there  is  also  a 
ike  restriction — Charleston  and  the  parishes  of 
St.  Philip  and  St.  Michael  having  but  two  of 
thirty  seven  senators,  whilst  they  have  fifteen  of 
seventy  six  representatives.  Her  voting  popu- 
lation would  give  her  about  one  fifth  of  the  rep- 
resentation in  both  houses,  and  whilst  she  is  al- 
lowed that  proportion  in  the  house  of  represen- 
tatives she  has  less  than  an  eighteenth  of  the 
senate.  A  similar  provision  exists  in  the  con- 
stitution of  Louisiana  for  Xew  Orleans,  except 
that  it  is  applicable  to  both  houses,  though  in  a 
smaller  degree  to  the  house  of  representatives. 
She  has  thirty  two  senators,  a  maximum  of  one 
hundred  and  a  minimum  of  seventy  representa- 
tives. With  more  than  one  fifth  of  the  aggre- 
gate population  of  the  state,  and  this  proportion 
growing  rapidly  from  year  to  year,  she  is  limit- 
ed by  the  constitution  to  four  senators  and  nine 
representatives. 

In  the  adjustment  of  political  power  by  all  these, 
and  also  by  other  states,  ther  have  proceeded  up- 
on a  truth  of  universal  and!  permanent  applica- 
tion, that  the  same  numbers  in  a  city ,  from  concen- 
trative  intelligence  and  wealth,  compactness  of 
residence  and  rapid  interchangeof  opinions.from 
the  monopoly  and  power  of  the  newspaper  press, 
from  the  ramification  and  extent  of  business  and 
social  intercourse,  from  a  superior  facility  in 
raising  lai^e  sums  of  money  and  forming  and 
executing  party  organization,  from  a  greater 
unity  and  energy  of  interests,  will,  and  person- 
al exertions,  are  greatly  more  effective  and  pow- 
erful in  all  political  movements  than  the  same 
amount  of  rural  population.  They  knew  that, 
scattered,  holding  bat  little  int^roximmunion 
with  each  other,  unacquainted  with  partizan 


tactics,  without  nionev  or  ot^nization  for  elec- 
tions, divided  by  van'ous  interests,  and  forming ' 
opinions  and  acting  without  concert  and  union, 
their  safety,  the  good,  the  safety  and  the  preser- 
vation of  the  whole  community,  required  that 
for  the  mere  purpose  of  self-defence,  they  should 
have  in  the  senate  at  least  a  larger  representation  ; 
than  the  cities.  That  the  constitution  should 
give  power  of  self-defence,  commensurate  with 
and  equal  to  protect  them  against  the  irregular 
j  power  of  aggression  which  the  cities  always 
have  had  and  always  will  have  over  the  countrv. 
So  that  the  proposition  to  restrict  the  cities  m 
their  representation  in  the  senate  is  neither  new, 
monstrous,  or  tyrannical.  It  is  true  that  it  in- 
fringes the  captivating  abstraction  of  the  uni- 
versal and  perfect  equality  of  all  mankind  in 
practical  life;  and  the  unjilterable  destiny,  the 
various,  but  changeless,  exigencies  of  human  so- 
ciety requires  this,  and  will  exact  it  forever. 

Some  of  the  existing  considerations  which  call 
upon  the  delegates  from  the  interior  to  guard  it 
against  the  growing  power  of  the  cities  have 
been  adverted  to  by  otlior  gentlemen,  and  have 
a  great  and  increasing  strength. 

Kentuckv  has  upwards  of  200,000  slaves, 
worth  $80,000,000,  or  about  one  fourth  of  her 
aggregate  wealth.  What  is  it  that  most  threat- 
ens this  vast  amount  of  propertv  and  has  most 
disturbed  the  owners  in  its  legal  and  peaceable 
enjoyment?  Duringyears  by-gone, before  the  op- 
posite margin  of  the  Ohio  wa.s  inhabited,  the 
slaves  of  Kentucky,  in  the  enjoyment  of  all  the 
comforts  of  a  laboring  population,  kindly  treat- 
ed by  their  owners,  mutUcQlv  attached  and  trust- 
ing,the  slave  was  contented  and  happy,  and  the 
master  was  unannoyed  and  secure  in  the  pos- 
session of  services  of  this  propertv.  But  the  ab- 
olitionist came  and  seated  himself  in  our  neigh- 
borhood, and  opened  an  intercourse  with  our 
slaves.  He  instilled  in  them  discontent,  disaf- 
fection and  insubordination ;  and  in  all  the  bor- 
der counties,  the  slaves  now  know  no  content- 
ment, and  the  master  has  no  a-sssurance  of  his 
property  in  him.  For  many  years,  the  great 
cause  of  the  disturbance  between  the  slave  and 
the  owner,  in  north  Kentucky,  has  been  the 
neighborhood  of  the  free  states  beyond  the  Ohio; 
but  the  enemy  has  invaded  our  own  shore,  and 
is  now  in  our  midst.  I  speak  not  of  emancipa- 
tionists, but  of  abolitionists ;  those  who  abhor 
slaverv  and  desire  to  see  it  terminated  by  almost 
any  means  whatever.  These  people  are  amongst 
us,  and  they  have  increased,  are  increasing,  and 
ought  to  be  diminished.  But  who  make  up  the 
emancipation  partv,  that  party  which  seeks  to 
abolish  slavery  without  making  compensation 
to  the  owner?  What  portion  of  them  in  the 
whole  state  are  native  Kentuckians?  Probably 
three  fourths  were  bom  in  other  lands,  in  the  free 
states  of  the  Union,  or  of  Europe.  I  have  con- 
versed with  manv  natives  of  the  free  states,  both 
in  and  out  of  Kentucky  on  this  subject,  and  I 
never  met  with  one  that  was  not  deep  and  im- 
movable in  his  feelings  against  slavery.  I  do 
not  condemn  them  for  the  sentiment,  I  only  state 
the  fact;  and  it  is  possible  if  I  had  been  raised 
and  educated  where  thev  were,  I  might  have 
shared  it  with  them.  All  the  foreigners  whose 
opinions  on  this  subject  I  have  learned,  are 
equally  hostile  to  slavery-  and  its  continuance. 


494 


These  classes  of  immigrants  to  Kentucky  locate 
themselves  principally  on  the  Ohio  and  Missis- 
sippi rivers,  in  the  cities,  or  within  the  narrow 
strip  of  country  bordering  on  tlicm,  indicated 
by  my  friend  from  Madison  (Mr.  Turner.)  A 
lar^e  proportion  of  the  greatly  increasing  popu- 
lation of  these  cities  and  counties  are  those  im- 
migrants. They  are  the  uncompromisingenemies 
of  the  rights  of  the  slave  interest,  and  now 
whilst  he  has  the  power  and  may,  will  )iot  that 
master  protect  himself,  by  restricting  the  power 
of  those  who  are  making  incessant  war  upon 
him  by  restricting  their  representation  in  the 
senate?  The  foreign  immigrants  particularly 
crowd  the  cities.  In  New  York,  thev  and  their 
immediate  descendants  are  about  fialf  of  the 
whole  population;  they  are  a  full  moiety  in  Cin- 
cinnati, and  preponderate  considerably  in  St. 
Louis.  In  Louisville,  Covington,  and  Maysvillc, 
they  are  rapidly  and  greatly  increasing.  These 
people,  reared  in  tin;  midst  of  ignorance  and 
despotism,  unacquainted  with  our  institutions 
and  the  principles  upon  which  they  are  founded, 
opposed  to  one  of  our  great  property  interests 
and  the  most  of  them  speaking  other  languages, 
and  having  imbibed  some  wild  notions  of  a  su- 
perstitious religion,  which  is  revolting  to  a  large 
majority  of  our  people,  they  ought  not  to  share 
equally  with  the  native  born  citizen  political 
power.  It  is  the  poor  of  Europe  generally  who 
immigrate  to  America,  and  their  vocation  most- 
ly is  to  labor.  They  are  coming  in  such  and 
vastly  increasing  numbers,  as  every  year  great- 
ly to  disturb  the  existing  proportion  between  the 
aernand  and  the  supply  of  labor.  They  become 
formidable  competitors  of  the  native  mechanic 
and  laborer  in  the  United  States:  and  when 
they  get  into  Kentucky,  they  find  negroes  to  be 
their  most  numerous  competitors.  A  slavehold- 
er who  has  slaves  enough  for  his  service  will  not 
employ  the  German  or  the  Irishman;  but  deprive 
him  of  his  slaves  and  he  is  forced  to  employ 
them.  The  foreigner  soon  learns  this,  and  con- 
sequently in  addition  to  the  repugnance  of  a 
strange  race,  and  a  kind  of  slavery  with  which 
in  his  own  country  he  had  no  acquaintance,  he 
acquires  the  stronger  motive  of  self-interest  to 
prompt  him  to  become  an  emancipationist — an 
abolitionist.  He  generally  is  such,  and  in  my 
section  of  the  state  he  is  so  known,  and  is  claim- 
ed and  relied  upon  by  the  emancipation  party. 
This  position  is  the  natural  and  inevitable  one 
for  him. 

Now,  I  am  not  as  great  a  friend  of  the  insti 
tution  of  slavery  as  tlie  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son, and  cannot  vote  for  the  amendment  which 
he  has  indicated.  But  I  am  for  giving  to  the 
owner  of  a  slave  an  equal,  and  precisely  the  same 
guaranty,  for  that  property,  which  he  has  for 
his  land  or  his  cattle.  My  position  is,  he  ought 
to  have  it  both  by  legal  and  constitutional  pro- 
visions. The  principle  that  property  is  not  to 
be  taken  by  the  state  from  its  owner,  without 
full  compensation,  is,  I  think,  just  as  applica- 
ble to  slaves  as  any  other  description  of  proper- 
ty. It  does  not  belong  to  us  to  pa-ss  upon  or  de- 
prive the  owner  of  slaves  of  liis  property,  upon 
any  notions  or  convictions  of  justice  or  policy, 
without  a  full  equivalent;  for  he  has  exactly  the 
same  title  to  his  slave  that  he  has  to  any  other 
property  which  belongs  to  him. 


But  time  and  its  fruitful  womb,  will  bring  up 
many  other  points  and  occasions  of  conflict  be- 
tween the  cities  and  the  great  agricultural  dis- 
tricts. There  will  be  competing  interests,  di- 
versity of  object  and  purpose,  adversary  opin- 
ions and  principles.  The  cities  will  be  the  first 
to  become  degenerate  and  corrupt,  and  to  pro- 
pose to  change  or  to  assault  popular  constitu- 
tional institutions.  The  opponents  of  this  prop- 
osition sav  the  people  of  the  cities  are  now,  and 
ever  will  he,  greatly  in  the  minority,  and  cannot 
therefore,  wrong  or  oppress  the  greater  number 
of  the  people.  Every  section  of  the  state  is 
more  or  less  always  divided  and  distracted  in  it- 
self. "When  it  becomes  the  interest  or  passion 
of  the  cities  to  foment  and  increase  these  divis- 
ions, they  could,  successfully  do  it,  by  the  fa- 
cility with  which  they  could  make  combina- 
tions, and  form  coalitions  with  contending  fac- 
tions. They  would  soon  constitute,  not  only 
the  balance,  but,  by  unity  of  will,  energy  of 
purpose,  vigor  of  action,  resources  of  money 
and  intelligence,  there  would  be  great  danger  of 
their  becoming  the  positive  and  controlling  pow- 
er. To  prevent  this  state  of  things  at  all,  and 
on  all  occasions — to  postpone  it,  if  not  effectual- 
ly and  forever  to  prevent — it  is  proposed  to  limit 
the  representation  of  the  cities  in  the  senate, 
and  to  divide  it  by  requiring  elections  to  the 
house  for  them,  to  be  made  in  single  districts. 
We  contemplate  to  make  upon  them  no  war,  no 
aggression  whatever.  We  ask  no  sword  to  be 
placed  in  our  hands,  to  cleave  down  them  or  any 
of  their  interests;  but  we  only  ask  a  shield  to 
protect  us  against  them,  whenever  interest,  or 
2)assion,  or  fanaticism,  shall  impel  them  to  as- 
sault us.  If  they  should  never  have  such  pur- 
poses, there  will  be  no  harm  done,  because  their 
power  of  defence  against  us  will  be  just  as  ef- 
fective by  their  being  fully  represented,  accord- 
ing to  numbers,  in  the  house,  as  if  they  were 
likewise  so  represented  in  the  senate;  and  we 
will  have  the  security  and  the  tranquility  of 
knowing,  or  at  least  believing,  ourselves  to  be 
safe. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  arrival  of 
of  the  hour  for  taking  up  the  special  order. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  moved  that  the  order  of 
the  day — being  the  consideration,  in  committee 
of  the  whole,  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department — be  dispensed  with; 
and  it  was  agreeclto. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  have  said  about  as  much,  and 
indeed  more,  than  I  intended  to  say;  and  I  will 
not,  therefore,  detain  the  convention  longer. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  have  been  very  much 
surprised  in  the  progress  of  this  debate,  at  the 
very  many  subjects  altogether,  as  I  conceive,  un- 
connected with  the  question  at  issue,  that  are 
being  made  to  play  a  prominent  part  in  the  dis- 
cussion. It  presents  a  panorama  in  which  al- 
most all  the  elements  of  active  and  passive  be- 
ing have  been  strangely  and  grotesquely  group- 
ed together.  The  debate  lias  gone  on  acumulat- 
ing  in  its  progress  like  a  rolling  snowball.  First, 
the  fat  cattle  of  the  grass  region  are  driven  into  the 
arena;  then  comes  the  inarching  legions  of  our 
valiant  volunteers  who  went  to  Mexico  ;  then  we 
are  delighted  with  therefreshingprospect  of  blue 
crass  pastures.  The  scene  shift^s;  luxuriant  to- 
bacco fields  present  themselves  to  our  view,  and 


493 


vre  are  asked  to  regard  the  institution  of  slavery 
in  this  connection  ;  and  last  sir,  comes  upon  the 
staere,  the  dusty  pilgrim  from  a  foreign  land,  who 
is  seeking  to  -worship  at  the  shrine  of  our  liberty. 
I  confess,  I  was  astonished  at  the  range  which 
this  debate  has  taken.  The  question,  when  it 
first  presented  itself,  was  to  me,  simply,  one  in- 
volving a  principle  which  I  had  supposed  was 
acknowledged  throughout  the  length  and  breadth 
of  this  country.  It  was  acknowledged  at  least 
by  Kentucky,'  when  she  took  the  lead  on  the 
great  question  of  extending  the  elective  franchise, 
and  placing  it  upon  its  true  basis.  And  in  what 
that  true  basis  consists,  is  at  last  the  only  ques- 
tion now  legitimately  under  consideration.  I 
agree  in  the  views  of  the  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son, that  the  agitation  of  the  slave  question 
should  be  prohibited,  that  some  constitutional 
bulwark  should  be  thrown  around  this  discrip- 
tion  of  property.  1  think  it  is  right  that  legisla- 
tive discretion  upon  this  subject  should  be  re- 
stricted, but  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  that  these 
two  subject*  are  to  be  disposed  of  in  connection. 
Whenever  that  question  shall  come  up  I  shall 
be  found  voting,  I  have  no  doubt,  with  the  gen- 
tleman from  Simpson.  I  do  not  regard  the  two 
questions  as  so  connected  that  you  cannot  look 
at  the  one  without  looking  at  the  other.  In  the 
opening  of  this  debate,  I  admired  the  stealthy 
and  cat-like  pace  with  which  the  gentleman  from 
Franklin,  who  offered  the  amendment,  traced  his 
devious  way  through  the  difficulties  which  pre- 
sented themselves  to  his  mind,  conceding  as  he 
did,  numbers  to  be  the  true  basis  of  representa- 
tion, until  he  arrived  at  the  point,  and  came  to 
the  conclusion,  that  because  equality  could  not 
in  every  instance  be  attained,  therefore  conven- 
ience was  to  control.  No  gentleman  who  has 
addressed  the  convention  upon  this  subject,  has 
dt^nied  population  to  be  the  true  basis  of  repre- 
sentation. The  gentleman  from  Ohio,  (Mr.  Mc- 
Henry,)  exhibited  a  statistical  table,  by  which 
he  showed,  and  perhaps  correctly,  that  in  the 
political  division  of  the  state,  it  was  impossible 
to  produce  perfect  equality,  and  he  argued  that 
because  that  equality  could  not  be  produced, 
therefore  we  were  authorized  to  depart  from  the 
principle,  on  which  representation  is  based,  as 
far  as  convenience  might  require.  We  cannot 
be  moving  forward  to  the  accomplishment  of  our 
object,  keeping  that  principle  in  view,  if  we  per- 
mit convenience  to  control  us.  If  we  cannot  at- 
tain it  precisely,  if  we  cannot  arrive  at  matliemat- 
ical  equality,  may  we  not  approximate  to  it,  and 
is  it  not  our  duty,  so  long  as  we  acknowledge 
that  the  principle  should  obtain  to  approximate 
our  action  to  it,  as  near  as  may  be.  If  the  prin- 
ciple be  right  in  itself,  are  we  pursuing  that 
principle  unless  we  do  thus  approximate  to  it. 

A  distinction  has  been  attempted  to  be  drawn 
between  the  senate  and  house  of  representatives. 
According  to  the  existing  constitution,  according 
to  the  report  of  the  committee,  and  according  as 
I  conceive  to  the  principles  of  propriety,  the 
members  of  the  senate  are  just  as  muc-h  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  people  as  are  the  members  of 
the  lower  house.  What  is  the  difference.  One 
branch  is  elected  for  a  longer  period  of  time, 
and  has  a  larger  constituency,  but  both  of  them 
are  elected  by  the  people.  They  are  both  then 
the  representatives  of  the  people,  and  I  do  not 


perceive  how  any  distinction  can  be  made  upon 
this  point.  The  senators  are  of  greater  age,  and 
they  liold  their  office  for  a  longer  period,  of  time. 
If  it  was  intended  that  the  senate  should  act  as 
a  check  upon  the  other  branch  of  the  legislature, 
that  check  is  to  be  found  In  their  more  advanced 
age.  in  the  greater  length  of  theirofticial  term,  and 
in  the  larger  constituency  whom  they  represent. 
Gentlemen  have  attetnpted  to  assimilate  the  senate 
of  Kentucky  to  the  senate  of  the  United  States, 
and  have  drawn  an  argument  from  the  constitu- 
tion of  that  body,  justifying  a  departure  from 
the  great  principle  for  which  those  who  advocate 
the  report,  have  contended.  Why  the  United 
States  government  is  a  great  confederation  of 
states.  The  United  States  senators  do  not  rep- 
resent the  people,  but  the  states  in  their  sovereign 
character.  The  house  of  representatives  is  the 
popular  branch  of  the  national  legislature.  Hence 
then,  the  little  state  of  Rhode  Island  is  entitled 
to  as  large  a  representation  in  the  senate  of  the 
United  States,  as  the  great  state  of  New  York  ; 
because  as  sovereigii  states,  they  stand  on  a  per- 
fect equality.  It  will  not  be  pretended,  that  the 
counties  of  this  state  sustain  a  similar  r«lation 
to  one  another.  How  then  can  any  argument  be 
drawn  from  the  constitution  of  the  senate  of  the 
United  States,  to  influence  our  action  here  V  If 
population  is  not  to  be  the  basis  of  representation 
whv  something  else  mxist  be.  Is  it  to  be  wealth? 
If  Tt  is  to  be  wealth,  why  those  who  possess  that 
wealth,  should  have  the  exclusive  privilege  of 
wielding  the  political  power  which  it  bestows, 
and  you  create  a  political  inequality  altogether 
foreign  to  our  institutions.  Is  it  to  be  territory  ? 
If  it  is,  why  then  the  state  shoidd  be  divided  in- 
to equal  sections,  without  regard  to  population. 
If  it  is  to  be  neither  wealth,  nor  territory,  nor  a 
mixture  of  wealth,  territory  and  popxtlation, 
what  is  it  to  be  then  I  Will  you  place  it  upon 
the  loose  basis  of  convenience  ?  Will  vou  say 
that  without  regard  to  numbers,  to  wealth,  or  to 
territory,  this  body  assuming  that  a  certain  ar- 
bitrary mode  of  action  is  convenient,  may  here 
lay  down  a  rule  for  the  government,  not  only  of 
the  gener.ition  in  which  we  live,  but  of  posterity? 
Why,  no  matter  how  disre^rdful  of  individual 
right  the  rules  may  have  been  which  have  here- 
tofore governed  in  instances  of  this  kind,  these 
rules  have  been  extended  to  the  whole  country. 
Individuals  and  classes  have  been  disfranchised, 
but  it  yet  remains  for  an  American  constitution 
to  disfranchise  regions.  Where  it  has  been  deter- 
mined that  wealth  should  rule — why,  wealth  from 
one  end  to  the  other  of  the  country  is  the  great 
principle  upon  which  representation  is  predica- 
ted. If  it  has  been  determined  that  population 
should  govern — why  then,  from  one  end  of  the 
country  to  the  other,  has  population  been  the  ba- 
sis. But  is  that  the  position  assumed  here  ?  No: 
one  rule  is  made  to  apply  to  one  section  of  the 
country,  and  a  different  rule  is  made  to  apply  to 
another. 

It  has  been  said  here  that  there  were  certain 
restrictions  placed  on  individuals  by  all  govern- 
ments, and  an  argument  has  been  attempted  to 
be  adduced  from  this  in  favor  of  the  restriction 
under  consideration.  For  example,  that  twenty 
one  years  had  been  determined  as  the  period  of 
discretion,  and  that  no  one  should  exercise  the 
elective  franchise,  until  that  period  of  life  had 


496 


been  attained.  It  is  true,  sir,  but  when  tlie  rule 
is  once  established  it  is  made  to  apply  to  all  the 
citizens  of  the  country.  Here  is  a  rule  designed 
to  be  framed  which  is  partial  in  its  application,  or 
rather  which  has  a  double  application.  One  for 
the  country  and  one  for  tlie  town — a  rule  for  a 
population  existing  at  one  point,  and  another 
and  a  different  rule  for  a  population  existing  at 
another  point.  You  might  as  well — if  you  say 
that  he  who  lives  in  the  city  shall  not  have  the 
same  right  as  he  who  lives  in  the  country — de- 
clare that  the  man  who  lives  in  a  cottage  shall 
not  have  the  same  rights  as  the  man  who  lives 
in  a  palace.  Perhaps  convenience  might  require 
such  a  rule  as  that,  but  principle  can  never  sanc- 
tion it.  What  does  it  all  result  in,  and  from 
what  does  this  movement  originate?  Would  it 
not  appear  to  be  an  effort  on  the  part  of  those 
now  in  a  majority,  Avho  labor  uncler  an  appre- 
hension that  they  may,  at  some  future  time,  be- 
come the  minority,  to  fasten  down  upon  the 
country  a  rule  which  shall  give  them  when  they 
do  become  that  minority,  a  power  to  control  the 
majority?  I  cannot  imagine  that  gentlemen 
will  get  up  here,  and  gravely  say  that  this  re- 
gion of  country  which  lies  along  the  Ohio  river, 
could  ever  attain  the  ascendancy  in  the  councils 
of  the  country,  until  it  had  attained  a  superi- 
ority in  point  of  population.  Would  it  not  be 
to  stultify  the  residue  of  the  state?  How  is  it 
until  this  majority  is  attained  to  control  the 
councils  of  the  country?  It  has  been  said  that 
Paris  controls  France,  that  because  its  popula- 
tion is  compressed  together  in  a  small  space  it 
acts  w^ith  more  unanimity  and  promptitude. 
Paris  does,  perhaps,  control  France,  not  from 
any  peculiar  privileges  which  have  been  given 
to  it,  but  from  the  existence  and  exercise  of  a 
moral  force,  independent  of  legislation — the  in- 
telligence of  the  city  and  the  ignorance  of  the 
country  contribute  much  to  this  result.  This  is 
scarcely  true  of  Kentucky.  And  if  it  be  true 
that  the  denizens  of  cities  from  their  intellect 
and  their  energy  have  the  power  to  overrule 
those  who  dwell  in  the  rural  districts,  it  will  be 
equally  true,  whether  you  give  or  withhold 
political  power.  If  such  be  the  fact,  they  will 
compass  by  the  force  of  mind  what  your  sense 
of  justice  does  not  vouchsafe  to  them.  But  I 
am  not  one  of  those  who  apprehend  that  such  a 
state  of  things  can  ever  come  about.  Intelli- 
gence is  too  generally  diffused  throughout  the 
country.  Besides  Louisville  is  an  inland  town, 
situated,  it  is  true,  on  a  large  and  navigable 
stream,  but  what  is  the  scope  of  its  trade,  what 
the  limit  of  its  commercial  destiny?  It  is  cut 
off  by  St.  Louis,  by  Chicago,  and  by  Cincinnati. 
It  is,  perliaps  to  some  extent  cut  off  by  some  of 
the  southern  cities;  for  auglit  I  know  by  Nash- 
ville. With  this  scope  only  and  with  so  many 
rivals  continually  springing  up,  has  Louisville 
the  prospect  of  ever  attaining  one  fifth  the  size 
of  Paris  or  London?  Whilst  I  wish  her  all  suc- 
cess, I  am  not  prepared  to  believe  that  slic  is  to 
become  an  overgrown  monster,  that  shall  swal- 
low up  the  residue  of  the  state.  Besides  there 
are  evidencea  now  that  Louisville  is  not  to  be 
the  only  city  of  Kentucky.  Covington  is  fast 
treading  upon  her  heels,  and  she  has  now  a 
population  as  great  as  had  Louisville  when  I 
nrst  knew  it,  and  it  is  increasing  in  a  ratio 


greater  it  is  said  than  the  increase  of  Louisville. 
It  is  reasonable  to  suppose  from  its  proximity  to 
Cincinnati,  from  its  situation  on  the  Ohio  river, 
and  from  its  having  almost  equal  advantages 
with  Louisville  as  it  respects  back  country,  that 
it  will  at  an  early  day  very  nearly  approximate 
to  Louisville  in  point  of  size.  The  interest  of 
these  cities  that  are  springing  up  on  the  Ohio, 
■will  not  be  identical,  nor  will  the  population  be 
homogenous.  How  then  is  this  city  interest  to 
array  itself  against  the  whole  of  the  rest  of  the 
state?  Each  will  have  its  own  interest,  and 
there  will  be,  perhaps,  as  much  antagonism 
among  these  cities  as  the  diversity  of  interests 
in  various  parts  of  the  state  may  present.  These 
very  antagoni.stical  interests  would  defeat  any 
effort  to  compass  political  power,  and  should 
overcome  the  apprehension  which  exists  in  the 
minds  of  gentlemen  who  would  be  led  to  de- 
part from  a  great  principle  for  the  purpose  of  ac- 
complishing what  they  regard  as  necessary  for 
self  defence.  Suppose  that  the  northern  part  of 
the  country  looking  to  the  increasing  popula- 
tion of  the  southern  region,  and  to  the  fact  that 
there  is  a  vast  area  of  territory  there  which  is 
yet  to  be  populated — and  the  period  is  ap- 
proaching when  the  population  of  that  region  of 
country  will  be  greater  than  that  of  the  northern 
part  of  the  state — I  say,  suppose  that  the  north- 
ern part  of  Kentucky  having  the  predominance 
in  political  power  were  to  look  to  that  region  of 
country,  and  say  we  regard  it  as  necessary  to 
our  interests,  as  in  fact  necessary  for  our  self  de- 
fence, that  the  power  which  as  a  majority  we 
now  have,  should  be  secured  to  us  when  we  be- 
come a  minority,  by  putting  restrictions  on  the 
southern  region,  which  may  overpower  us,  when 
the  time  rolls  around  and  population  has  ac- 
cumulated at  that  point?  I  ask  you  if  it  is  not 
as  inevitable  as  any  thing  in  the  course  of  hu- 
man events,  that  such  a  result  will  occur,  that 
the  predominance  of  population  will  be  in  the 
south — tliat  the  pastoral  must  yield  to  the  grain 
and  tobacco  growing  region?  And  would  it  not 
be  equally  as  just  on  the  part  of  northern  Ken- 
tucky to  place  restrictions  around  southern  Ken- 
tucky, as  for  us  to  attempt  now  to  restrict  the 
citizens  of  Kentucky  who  reside  in  towns  which 
have  grown  or  may  grow  into  importance?  Is 
there  any  thing  in  the  present  constitution  that 
warrants  this  thing,  apart  from  tlie  distortions 
that  construction  has  produced  in  it?  Was  there 
in  the  cry  for  reform  that  went  up  throughout 
the  length  and  breadth  of  this  state  one  svllable 
uttered,  declaring  that  Louisville  was  likely  to 
attain  such  an  influential  magnitude  as  to  over- 
shadow the  rest  of  the  state,  and  that  therefore 
the  convention  about  to  be  called  should 
devise  some  plan  even  if  principle  had  to  be 
sacrificed,  to  check  tlie  onward  march  of  this 
city  to  overshadowing  political  influence.  There 
was  not  a  word,  so  far  as  I  heard,  on  this  sub- 
iect — not  a  single  cry  from  the  stump,  not  a 
warning  from  the  press.  And  when  she  comes 
up  here  and  demands  to  be  represented  accord- 
ing to  her  numbers,  upon  principles  of  justice, 
and  asks  no  more  than  is  conceded  to  other  por- 
tions of  the  state,  because  her  population  hap- 
pens to  dwell  within  smaller  limits,  and  is  com- 
pressed in  a  smaller  space,  forsooth  we  are  told 
that  an  .overshadowing  influence  is  to  rise  up 


49' 


Jiere  whioh  will  control  the  councils  of  the 
country?  Now  if  luinibers  is  tlie  true  basis  of 
representation,  if  population  congregates  at  that 
j)oiiit,  so  a-i  to  creatf  numerical  asi-eiKlancy,  it  is 
hut  just  and  right  that  she  should  have  a  cor- 
responding inriuence.  If  you  say  that  it  is  nut 
just  and  right,  then  you  say  that  the  few  should 
rule  the  many,  and  that  political  power  should 
be  wielded  hj  the  minority.  I  have  heard  no 
argument  to  show  that  uutil  the  cities  and 
towns  did  attain  the  majority  or  acquire  a  nu- 
merical superiority,  they  could  control  the 
councils  of  the  country.  Is  there  any  delegate 
who  comes  from  a  rural  district,  on  this  floor, 
who  is  willing  so  far  to  stultify  his  constituents 
;  s  to  say  that  although  inferiority  of  numbers 
;:iay  exist,  tliey  are  to  acquire  by  their  superior 
uitflligeiice,  power  that  does  not  belong  to  their 
nunibtjrs. 

From  my  position,  and  the  position  of  my 
oustituency,  I  have  no  individual,  no  personal 
iter<«t,  nor  have  they  in  this  question.  I  have 
■me  here  for  thf  purpose  of  doing  justice,  as  J 
niceive,  and  for  the  purpose  of  aiding  in  form^ 
nig  a  constitution  that  shall  proclaim  correct 
})rinciples.  My  constituents,  although  they  bor- 
iler  on  the  Ohio  river,  have  none  of  the  elements 
of  that  overshadowing  power  which  has  excited 
the  apprehensions  of  gentlemen  here.  Nor  does 
the  county  which  I  have  the  honor  to  represent, 
cherish  in  her  bosom  those  elements  of  discord 
which  it  was  supposed  at  some  time  or  other 
would  fearfully  agitate  this  state,  and  be  the 
means  of  wresting  from  the  rural  districts  their 
rights — of  overturning  the  institution  of  slavery, 
anti  of  depriving  the  citizen  of  his  property.  I 
npresent  a  county  where  more  than  three  fourths 
of  the  people  are  pro-slavery,  ultra  pro-slavery 
men.  They  stop  not  where  many  gentlemen  here 
8t«ps — ^they  bide  not  with  the  gentleman  from 
■  Madison,  who  is  disposed  to  fasten  down  the 
law  of  1S.33  on  the  county,  but  they  go  for  giv- 
ing the  fullest  and  the  most  unrestrained  power 
compatible  with  humanity  to  the  citizen  on  this 
subject.  They  go  for  constitutional  provision 
against  legislative  discretion.  They  go  for  cre- 
ating the  strongest  and  highest  constitutional 
bulwarks  to  protect  this  description  of  property, 
and  they  have  sent  me  here  to  advocate  these 
measures  anil  principles,  and  I  have  in  mv  poor 
and  feeble  way  endeavored  to  do  it.  1  look 
along  the  Ohio  river  and  1  d<»  not  see  those  who 
•  iwcll  on  its  banks,  who  are  within  that  ten 
miles  of  territory,  that  has  here  been  denounced 
as  entertaining  views  and  principles  dangerous 
to  the  residiie  of  the  state.  I  sav,  that  in  cast- 
ing my  eye  over  that  territory,  I  do  not  perceive 
the  evidences  of  the  exi.stence  of  a  spirit  among 
itJi  iidiabitants  which  threat^uis  the  institution 
of  slavery.  I  do  not  see  that  generally  along 
the  banks  of  the  Ohio  the  citizens  are  less  favor- 
able to  the  preservation  of  this  institution  than 
are  those  who  dwell  in  the  interior.  The  returns 
to  this  convention  show  no  such  state  of  case. 

And  while  I  recollect,  I  will  say  to  the  con- 
vention that  I  felt  gratified  when  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  explained  his  re- 
marks in  regard  to  the  Louisville  legion,  and  by 
that  ex]>lanation  removed  all  imputation  which 
had  seemed  to  be  cast  upon  the  prowess  of  those 
brave  men  who  went  out  from  Louisville. 
63 


There  was  a  company  in  that  legion  who  were 
from  my  own  county,  and  a  braver  one  never 
marched  to  the  battle  field.  There  was  not  a 
man  in  that  company,  of  whom  the  Spartan 
mother,  who  gave  the  shield  to  her  son  when  he 
went  forth  to  battle  and  said  to  him,  "return 
with  it  or  upon  it,"  might  not  have  been  proud. 

I  have,  in  a  very  desultory  way,  and  indeed 
without  intending  to  make  a  speech  on  this  sub- 
ject, given  my  views.  I  believed  it  necessary 
that  1  should  do  so  from  my  proximity  to  Louis- 
ville, and  from  the  position  I  occupy  in  regard 
to  the  slave  question.  I  believed  it  proper  that 
I  should  protest  against  the  connection  attempt- 
ed to  be  established  between  emancipation  and 
the  advocacy  of  the  con-ect  principle  of  repre- 
sentation. Having  done  thus  much  in  the  re- 
marks submitted  by  me,  I  have  accomplished, 
])}'  defining  my  own  position  and  that  of  my 
constituency,  all  that  1  proposed  to  mvself. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFF^l,  the  con- 
vention took  a  recess  txntil  3  o'clock. 

EVEXIXG   SESSION. 

The  PRESIDEXT  stated  the  question  to  be  on 
the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  to 
refer  his  resolution  to  the  committee  of  the  whole, 
and  that  it  be  printed. 

Mr.  GARRARD  was  satisfied  that  a  majority 
of  the  convention  were  ready  to  vote  on  that  mo- 
tion, and  therefore  he  moved  the  previous  quea- 
tion. 

The  PRESIDENT  said  as  no  gentleman  ap- 
peared desirious  to  discuss  the  subject  further,  if 
there  were  no  objection  he  would  put  the  ques- 
tion on  the  motion  to  refer. 

The  motion  to  print  and  refer  was  agreed  to. 

THE   LEGISLATIVE   DEPARIMEXT. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole.  Mr.  MERIWETHER  in  the 
chair,  on  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legis- 
lative department. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  expressed  his  appro- 
val of  the  resolution  offered  this  morning  by  the 
gentleman  from  Christian,  and  suggested  tfiat  it 
would  be  gratifying  to  him  to  have  it  offered  as 
an  amendment  to  thesection  under  consideration, 
if  such  a  motion  were  now  in  order. 

Mr.  CLARKE  claimed  that  an  amendment 
which  he  submitted  yesterday  was  pending  as 
an  amendment  to  the  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Franklin,  and  hence  that  a  further 
ameiklment  was  not  in  order. 

A  long  conversation  ensued  on  the  question  of 
prioritv. 

The'CHATR  decided  that  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Franklin  had  precedence,  on 
the  ground  that  the  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Simpson  being  to  strike  out  the  friends 
of  the  portion  proposed  to  be  stricken  out  had  a 
right  to  perfect  it  before  the  vote  could  be  taken 
upon  striking  out. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  Mr.  Chairman:  As  remarked 
heretofore  the  proposition  made  by  myself  to 
strike  out  the  words  as  now  amended,  "in  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly."  was  not  made 
for  the  purpose  of  levelling  any  feeling  enter- 
tained by  me  against  Louisville,  for  I  have  none 
but  the  best  towards  her.  In  her  prosperity  and 
advancement  I  feel  as  much  pride  and  as  lively 
an  interest  as  I  can  entertain   for  the  town  in 


498 


which  1  reside.  Towards  Covington  and  New- 
port, and  their  growing  strength  and  greatness, 
I  look  with  pride,  as  they  are  situated  in  what 
constituted  the  old  county  of  Campbell,  within 
wliose  borders  I  was  born  and  reared.  Witli 
these  feelings,  that  make  me  wish  not  only  that 
Louisville  shall  be  great,  but  that  slie  may  yet 
even  outstrip  her  rival,  the  "Great  Queen  of  the 
West,"  I  could  but  regret  to  hear  imputations 
such  as  tlie  presiding  ofticser  has  east  upon  my 
proposition,  its  mover,  and  those  who  ailvocate 
it.  He  was  pleased  to  say  that  if  tlie  committee 
adopt  my  proposition  it  would  be  taking  from 
the  city  of  Louisville  a  riglit,  and  be  violating 
a  principle  that  would  prompt  him  to  witldiold 
his  signature  from  any  constitution  we  may  adopt. 
This  would  certainly  produce  on  my  part  much 
regret;  such  regret  hs  can  only  be  consoled  by 
the  fact  that  there  will  be  enough  of  us  left  to 
give  force  and  effect  to  our  labors  without  his 
aid. 

It  was  going  far,  very  far,  to  say,  as  he  did  , 
that  any  one  who  would  vote  to  strike  out  would 
misrepresent  his  own  .sentiments,  violate  a  sa- 
cred principle,  and  need  but  the  opportunity  to 
violate  any  other  high  principle.,  if  the  tempta- 
tion were  presented  in  suitable  form.  To  this 
I  will  make  no  other  reply  than  must  silently 
be  given  by  every  member  to  such  an  imputation. 
I  will  not  again  allude  to  such  remarks.  Re- 
crimination will  not  prove  me  right,  and  I  am 
sure,  whether  riglit  or  wrong,  nothing  is  to  be 
attained  by  mere  empty  declamation  or  wild  de- 
nunciation. 

■  Sir,  I  ask,  if  my  proposition  prevails,  does  it 
take  from  Louisville,  (the  only  example  we  can 
use,  as  no  other  city  or  town  lias  separate  repre- 
sentation,) any  prviilege,  right,  or  power  she 
now  enjoys?  It  (Joes  not,  as  it  will  leave  the  sec- 
tion precisely  as  it  is  in  the  present  constitution. 
She  will  liave  full  representation,  based  on  pop- 
ulation and  numbers,  in  the  lower  branch  of  the 
legislature,  and  representation  in  the  senate,  as 
fihe  has  heretofore  had,  with  the  balance  of  Jef- 
ferson county.  It  is  not  then  taking  from  her 
that  which  she  has  and  now  enjoys,  but  the  ef- 
fect is  to  be  to  withhold  additional  representa- 
tive power  in  ilie  senate,  which  her  delegates  de- 
mand for  her  as  matter  of  right,  as  well  as  for 
all  other  cities  and  towns  that  may  hereafter 
attain  sufficient  numerical  strength  in  popula- 
tion. 

Let  us  examine  for  a  moment  tliis  demand  of 
right — this  command  of  our  presiding  officer, 
which  we  must  obey  at  such  heavy  perils.  1  beg 
pardon  sir,  I  did  not  mean  again  to  allude  to 
what  has  passed.  This  right  is  based  on  the 
proposition — the  abstract  proposition — that  vo- 
ting population  alone  shall  constitute  the  basis 
of  representation  in  both  houses  of  the  general 
assembly.  This  principle,  like  all  elementary 
principles,  reads  beautifully  to  theear.  It  is  like 
its  kindred  one  that  all  men  are  equal,  and  en- 
titled to  equal  rights,  personal,  social,  civil,  and 
political — principles  tliat  are  violated,  if  that  is 
the  word  to  be  used,  at  every  step  we  have  ad- 
vanced in  framing  this  constitution. 

Sir,  ono  of  the  first  lessons  I  learned  in  the 
science  of  government — a  science  which  I  do  not 
pretend  to  know  mach  about — was,  tliat  gov- 
ernment itself  is  a  concession  of  rights  that  men 


possess  in  a  state  of  nature,  wlien  they  form 
themselves  into  political  condition,  to  be  gov- 
erned and  ruled.  It  is  a  mere  compact  or  agree- 
ment into  which  we  enter,  in  which  every  one 
that  comes  has  equal  voice  and  equal  rights. 
Tliis  concession  is  made  for  the  common  weal. 
It  is  true  sir  that  there  are  principles  to  be  ap- 
plied that  ought  not  to  be  lost  sight  of  at  every 
step  we  take,  but  they  must  have  their  arrange- 
ment in  reference  toother  principles  equally  as 
potent  and  necessary  to  be  preserved. 

When  we  say,  as  we  have  said,  tliat  no  citizen 
shall  be  judge  of  certain  courts  until  he  has  first 
served  an  apprenticeship  as  a  practicing  lawyer, 
we  entrench  upon  the  principle  that  all  shall 
have  equal  rights.  When  we  make  tests  of  qual- 
ification, as  we  have  done,  that  exclude  the  lar- 
gest numbers  from  receiving  the  office  of  clerk  at 
the  election  of  the  people,  we  shoAV  again  an  ex- 
ception to  the  rule — a  violation  of  tlie  principle 
of  equality,  if  you  please.  When  you  provide 
that  it  shall  require  two  thirds  of  your  legisla- 
ture to  pass  or  repeal  certain  acts,  you  depart 
from  the  general  principle  tliat  majorities  shall 
govern.  The  speech  of  the  honorable  delegate? 
from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis,)  was  replete  with  the 
exceptions  that  imperious  necessity  compels  us  to 
make  on  general  principles  at  every  step  we  take 
in  making  a  constitution  for  the  state.  But  I 
will  not  pursue  the  ground  which  he  has  so  well 
and  so  ably  occupied. 

These  departures  sir,  arise  from  the  imperfec- 
tions in  all  human  affairs.  They  apply  to  gov- 
ernments as  well  as  to  individuals,  and  the  great 
desideratum  is  not  whether  this  or  that  is  a  de- 
parture from  principle,  general,  abstract  princi- 
ple, but  what  is  best  under  the  given  state  of  the 
ciise,  to  be  provided  for,  and  what  will  give  the 
greatest  equality,  all  interests  weighed  and  con- 
sidered, and  do  the  least  harm  to  general  princi- 
ple, admitted  to  be  right,  and  the  greatest  amount 
of  good  to  the  greatest  number. 

Sir,  in  this  view  we  are  to  apply  the  principle 
of  representation,  not  to  population  or  numbers 
oidy,  but  to  population  with  reference  to  territo- 
ry, as  demarlced  and  bounded  V)y  internal  exist- 
ing state  arrangements  into  counties,  cities  and 
towns.  The  general  municipal  arrangement  is 
into  counties,  on  which  the  machinery  of  inter- 
nal regulation  is  made  to  depend.  Courts  for 
the  dispensing  of  justice,  and  for  the  punishment 
of  wrongs  are  arranged  with  a  view  to  this  gen- 
eral rub;.  The  separation  of  cities  an<l  towns 
into  separate  organizationsf  or  courts  and  police 
purposes  is  a  departure  from  the  general  plan. 
It  is  right  enough  in  itself,  but  it  certainly  gives 
to  the  people  thus  thrown  together  in  large  num- 
bers within  a  small  space,  advantages  which  are 
not  possessed  by  those  distributed  over  ef)unties. 
For  example,  the  Louisville  chancerv  court,  es- 
tablished, or  continued  if  you  will,  hy  th(!  ccui- 
stitution  we  are  making,  will  illustrate  my  idea. 
By  that  court  an  advantage  is  given  to  the  citi- 
zens of  Louisville,  and  all  those  who  sue  there, 
whether  resident  in  the  city  or  not,  in  the  oppor- 
tunities which  it  affords  of  abtaining  decrees  to 
establish  their  rights — ^decrees  attainable  in  per- 
haps sixty  days  that  could  no  where  else,  on  tlie 
chancery  side  of  any  circuit  court  for  a  county, 
be  accomplished  in  eighteen  months  or  two  years. 
Of  this  I  make  no  complaint.    It   is  right.     It 


499 


IS  necessary ;  and  consequently  the  exception 
V.  urks  no  wrong;  at  least  not  such  a  wrong  as 
would  subject  it  to  the  imputation  of  violating 
principie.  So  sir,  in  relation  to  the  incorpora- 
tion ot' monied  institutions  and  companies  for 
all  other  puj-poses.  These  exceptions  sir,  are 
made  in  gis'ing  exclusive  privileges  and  in  ex- 
emptions that  are  not  sustainable  except  on  the 
ground  of  covenience  and  necessity. 

But  sir,  let  us  examine  tlie  proposition,  that 
P  presentation  shall  be  based  on  population 
alone.  Do  gentlemen  expect  or  intend  to  break 
up  county,  citv,  and  town  organizations,  and 
make  new  divisions  solely  that  representation 
may  be  varied  as  population  shall  diminish  or 
increase?  If  so,  they  have  but  to  convince  me 
that  they  will  not  produce  greater  inconvenience 
to  tlie  people  by  increased  expense  and  addition- 
al government  machinerj' than  any  inequality 
of  representarion,  when  territorial  arrangement  j 
i8  taken  into  account,  and  I  am  with  them  heart  I 
and  soul;  for  I  can  see  that  equality  can  be  ob- 
tained by  this  new  way  more  perfectly  than  any 
other. 

Would  the  delegates  from  Louisville  and  Jef- 
ferson county  agree  to  risk  the  being  divided  for 
voting  purposes,  for  representation  with  portions 
of  people  living  in  contiguous  counties?  I  put 
it  to  honorable  delegates,  whether  their  people 
would  take  the  inconvenience  and  expense  of 
this  new  plan  to  attain  equality  in  representa- 
tion, or  not  rather  do  as  I  contend  we  should  all 
do  liere  and  elsewhere,  yield  even  much  more 
than  we  desire  to  do. 

I  cannot  conceive  any  other  mode  than  that 
which  I  have  just  suggested  by  which  the  much 
lauded  principle  is  to  be  preserved  inviolate. 

Mr.  Cliairman,  it  is  too  obvious  to  require  fur- 
ther remark,  that  as  much  as  we  all  desire  equal- 
ity in  representation,  and  representation  by 
population,  we  cannot,  in  reference  to  existing 
:ui-angements,  attain  that  end.     We  must  look  to 

:  ritorial  arrangement  as  well  as  to  population; 

;d  when  we  do  this,  we  are  also  to  look  to  the 
interests  of  the  classes,  agricultural,  commer- 
cial, and  manufacturing,  and  to  counties  large 
and  small.  All  must  be  represented  and  fairly 
represented,  if  we  can  so  have  it;  and  we  must 
look  to  the  proper  exercise  of  county  influence 
in  legislation,  so  as  to  preserve,  as  near  as  may 
be,  the  voice  of  these  several  municipalities,  if 
I  may  so  call  them,  and  let  not  one,  or  a  few, 
overshadow  the  rest.  The  regulation  of  these 
matters  is  perplexing,  I  admit;  bu  t  vet,  we  must 
attempt,  and  sliould  approach  it  with  no  view  to 
perpetrate  wrong  on  any  point,  looking  only  to 
the  high  object  of  fairness  and  equality,  both 
as  to  numbers,  and  as  to  political  power  and  in- 
fluence. 

I  have  taken  upon  myself,  sir,  to  present,  in 
tabular  form,  the  effect  of  representation   on  the 

veral  larger  counties  in  the  .state,  after  the  rules 
►^ported  in  the  next  section  of  the  report  of  the 
committee. 


-9.796 


Voters. 

Rep 

Adair, 

1,560 

I 

Bracken, 

1,606 

1 

Bourbon, 

1,914 

1 

Barren, 

2,959 

2 

Breckinridge, 

1,757 

1- 

2.  Boone, 
Bath, 

Campbell,  - 
Caldwell,  - 
Christian,  - 
Clarke, 

3.  Daviess, 
Franklin, 
Fayette, 
Fleming, 
Graves, 

4.  Greenup, 
Garrard, 
Hopkins, 
Henderson,  - 
Hardin, 
Henry, 

5.  Harrison, 
Kenton, 
Logan, 
Muleuburg, 
Mercer, 

6.  Madison, 
Marion, 
Mason, 
Nicholas,     - 

7.  Nelson, 
Owen, 
Ohio, 
Pulaski, 
Shelby, 
Scott; 

8.  Todd, 
Warren, 
Washington, 

40  counties. 


It  will  be  seen  that  40  counties  will  have  a 
representation  of  45  members  in  the  lower  brEinch 
of  the  legislature,  with  a  voting  population  of 
82,115  in  the  aggregate.  An'anging  them  under 
the  rule  given,  so  that  counties  sending  six  rep- 
resentatives may  show  their  aggregate  voting 
strength,  it  will  be  seen  the  loss  the  counties  hav- 
ing no  city  representation  will  sustain.  The 
difference  may  be  easily  tested  by  subtracting 
the  number  of  voters  in  Jefferson  from  the  num- 
ber in  counties  arranged  to  have  the  same  rep- 
resentation Jefferson  would  get  on  any  assumed 
ratio. 

To  illustrate  it,  a«sume  the  auditor's  report  of 
white  males  as  the  voters,  and  1500  as  the  ratio. 
All  counties  having  this  number,  and  less  than 
two  thirds  more,  will  get  one  representative. 
All  having  the  ratio  and  two  thirds  over,  will 
have  two  representatives.  All  the  counties  hav- 
ing two  thirds  the  ratio,  to  have  one  representa- 
tive, <fec. 

Now,  the  counties  in  the  table  first  named,  for 
six  representatives  have  an  aggregate  voting 
population  of  9,796 

Jefferson  county  would  have  six  repre- 
sentatives on  an  aggregate  voting 
population  of  9,283 

513 


1,958 
1,886 
2,162 
2,016 
2,248 

1.691 

1— 

-11.381 

2,112 
2,024 

2.649 

2,316 
1,665 

1— 

-10,766 

1,936 
1,624 

1,886 
1,589 
2,419 

1,862 

1- 

-11,316 

2,150 

3,406 
2,179 

1,625 
2.093 

1— 

-11,453 

2,563 

2 

1,762 

3,114 
1,792 

2 

—9,231 

2,035 
1,796 
1,576 
2,392 
2,321 
1,891 

-12,011 

1,499 
2,215 
1,847 

45 

— 5,561 

. 

82,115 

■ — ■ 



1 


500 


The  counties,   five  iu  number,  lose  513  votes, 
while  Jeflfersou  only  loses  283.        Tlie    other 
counties  can  be  examined  in  the  same  way   and 
by  the  same  rule,  and  it  will  be  found   that  49 
counties,  and  those  of  the  largest  out  of  the  lOO 
in  the  state,  are  compelled  to   yield   up   a  large 
voting  influence  in  order  to  yield  to  the  counties 
having  less  than  the  ratio,  something  like  a  fair 
amount  of  influence  and  power  in  legislation. 
The  use  of  residuums  to  consume  representatives 
not  apportioned,  will  make  a  slight  change   in 
the  aggregate  votes  lost  by  the  large  counties, 
but  still  will  leave  great  inequality.     On  these 
tables  every  one  of  the  45  members,   represent 
1824  voters,  instead  of  1500,  the  ratio  assumed, 
and  still  leave  a  fraction,  while  the  members  from 
Jefferson  would  represent  each  1531  voters.     By 
an  examination  of  the  auditor's  report,   it  will 
be  seen,   on   the  basis   I   have   assumed,    that 
there  will  be  33  counties  having  two   thirds  the 
ratio,  and  26  less  than  two  thirds.     Suppose  the 
45  larger  counties  should   say  to  the  smaller 
ones,  the  principle   of  representation   according 
to  population,  is  the  rule.      Why  then,  sliould 
you  ask  us  to  let  you  into  the  legislature?    Is  it 
our  fault  you  lack  the  number  of  voters?      But, 
sir,  these  couties  must  be  represented,  and  to 
effect  it  we  must  bend  the  rule.      Is   it  not  right 
and  proper?     Indeed,   is   it  not  approximating 
equality  of    representation   in   its    true    sense, 
when  applied  to  population,  territorial  arrange- 
ment, and  county  organization,  that  it  should  be 
so?     Yet,  sir,  while  the  delegates  from  all  these 
counties  are  thus  willing  to  yield,   to   some  ex- 
tent, their  popular  strength  to  give  equality   in 
legislation  amongst  the  smaller  counties,  and  the 
delegates  from  Louisville  will  stand  by  and  vote 
it  fair  and  right,  when  she  is   asked  to   abate   a 
little  the  high  claims  she  demands,  and  that  too, 
not  in  the  popular  branch  of  the  legislature,  but 
the  senate.      The  only  reply  is,  in  us  there  must 
be  no  yielding,  for  the  pure,  and  only  principle 
of  representation,   that   of  numbere,  which    we 
can  apply  to  our  people,  works   beautifully   to 
our  advantage  and  political  strength,  and  will 
so  work  to  the   advantage   of  other  cities   and 
towns  as  they  grow  up.     They  know,  sir,  on  any 
ratio  of  representation,  while  they  vote  together 
in  their  city  in  any  aggregate  number,  they   can 
have  but  small  loss,  and  never,  on   the  commit- 
tee's rule  of  apportioning,  more  tlian  a  fraction 
less  than  two   thirds  the  ratio.      She   may,    as 
given   in  the  example,   in  her   population     of 
9,283,  lose  but  283  excess  over  the  exact  ratio, 
while  my  county  of  Franklin,  for  example,  must 
loose  524;  some  other  counties  more,  some  others 
less.     These  los.ses,  as  I  have  remarked,  in  force 
of  numbers,  have  to  be  made  in  order  to  approx- 
imate towards  fairness  amongst  the  smaller  coun- 
ties, and  give  them  something  like  proper  influ- 
ence. 

Cannot  Louisville  spare  something  from  her 
force  of  numbers  in  arranging  representation  as 
ian  equivalent  for  the  advantages  she  possesses 
in  separate  city  organization.  The  extra  courts 
given  her,  and  the  command  of  the  great 
monied  influences  of  the  statt^;.  and  the  small 
loss  she  can  ever  sustain  in  the  popular  branch. 
Is  there  injustice  in  neutralizing  the  power  her 
representative  will  have  over  the  same  number, 
coming  from  diflferent  counties  covering  large 


territories,  with  scattered  population,  they  com- 
coniiug  under  the  control  and  influence  of  one 
will,  and  armed,  as  they  must  be,  by  the  power 
that  numbers  give,  having  but  one  end  to  attain. 
The  lionorablc  delegate  from  Louisville  (Mr. 
Preston,)  referred  to  the  constitutions  of  Massa- 
chusetts, New  York  and  Louisiana,  to  show  that 
those  states  allowed  to  their  cities  senatorial 
representation,  and  proceeded  on  the  principle 
that  population  alone  should  be  the  basis  of 
representation. 

By  turning  to  the  constitution  of  the  first 
state  named,  we  find  the  following  article  under 
the  head  of  house  of  representatives. 

"Article  1.  There  shall  be  in  the  legislature 
of  this  commonwealth,  a  representation  of  the 
people  annually  elected  and  founded  on  the 
principle  of  equality." 

Here  you  see  Mr.    Chairman,  the  principle  is 
equality".    But  let  us  see  what  that  equality  is. 
•'Article  2.  And  in  order  to  provide  for  a  rep- 
resentation   of   the   citizens   of   this    common- 
wealth, founded  on  the  principles  of  equality, 
every  corporate  town  containing  one   hundred- 
and 'fifty  rateable  polls  may  elect  one  represen- 
tative; every  corporate  town   containing  three' 
hundred  and  seventy  five   rateable  polls,  may' 
elect  two  representatives.     Every  corporate  town  ' 
containing  six  hundred  rateable  polls  may  elect 
three  representatives,   and  proceeding  in   that 
manner,  making  two  hundred  and  twenty  five 
rateable  polls  the  mean  increasing  number  for 
every  additional  representative." 

You  see  sir,  what  is  regarded  in  Massachusette 
as  equality  in  representation.  They  provide 
against  the  power  that  large  places  possess  oyer  ' 
small  ones  by  requiring  for  every  additional  repr) 
resentative,  an  increased  number  of  polls  over 
the  basis  fixed  for  one.  It  will  be  seen  that  the 
same  constitution  in  providing  for  senators,  di- 
rects that  .senatorial  districts  shall  be  arranged 
with  reference  to  the  proportion  of  public  taxes 
paid  by  the  district,  "and  no  district  shall  be  so 
large  as  to  entitle  it  to  more  than  six  senators." 
This  you  see  sir  is  another  mode  of  attaining 
equality  in  representation  not  by  numbers  solely 
but  in  reference  to  a  "due  proportion  of  public 
taxes,"  and  a  limit  to  senatorial  influence.  Turn 
to  the  latest  constitution  of  New  York,  and  you 
there  find  that  senatorial  arrangement  is  not 
made  exclusixely  on  population.  But  the  lan- 
guage is,  the  districts  are  to  contain  as  near  as 
may  be  an  equal  number  of  inhabitants,  but 
this  is  to  have  reference  to  "convenient  and  con- 
tiguous territory"  and  "no  assembly  district  is  to 
be  divided  in  tne  formation  of  a  senate  district." 
And  in  arranging  for  assembly  districts,  the 
constitution  is  as  follows: 

"Each  assembly  district  shall  contain  as  near 
a.s  may  be  an  equal  number  of  inhabitants  ex- 
cluding aliens  and  persons  of  color  not  taxed, 
and  shall  consist  of  convenient  and  c.oiUiguou§ 
territory;  but  no  town  .shall  be  divided  in  t3if\ 
formation  of  assembly  districts."  ._,^ 

As  a  matter  of  course;  if  no  town  is  to  be  di- 
vided in  forming  .assembly  districts,  and  no  as- 
sembly district  is  to  be  divided  in  the  formation 
of  senatorial  districts,  the  argument  drawn  from 
the  example  of  New  York  is  wholly  destroyed. 
It  only  proves  that  in  giving  the  city  of  New 
York  senators,  they  have  made  an  exception  to 


501 


their  rule  as  applicable  to  llicir  towns.  But  my 
point  established  by  these  examples  is  that  terri- 
tory and  municipal  organizatiou  are  regarded, 
and  necessary  to  be  regarded,  in  representation 
as  well  as  population. 

But  sir,  the  delegate  from  my  old  county. 
(Campbell,)  has  been  pleased  to  refer  to  the 
breaking  out  of  the  revolution,  and  places  the 
whole  action  of  our  fathers  in  causing  a  separa- 
tion from  the  mother  country,  on  the  grouna  that 
they  were  taxed  without  being  represented. — 
Tliis,  he  says,  caused  the  Bostoniaus  to  "heave 
the  tea  overboard  in  their  harbor."  Well  I 
hope  because  I  have  had  the  i-ashness  to  advo- 
cate restriction  to  some  extent  ou  senatorial  rep- 
resentation by  cities  and  towns,  that  my  old 
mother  jNewport,  now  represented  by  the  gen- 
tleman, will  not  "heate"  me  overboard,  for  I 


tor  frouj  a  city  or  town?    He  would   represent, 
but  asingle  interest,  and  have  the  same  impul- 
ses and  feelings  in  common  with  the  representa- 
tives from  hio  city  or  town  in  the  lower  branch  . 
of  the  legislatuie.     He,  sir,  would  have  no  oj)po-  .. 
site  intere.stii  to  be  reconciled — no  imposing  pow- 
ers to  impel  him  to  a  middle  and  safe  ground  on 
any  proposition  his  immediate  constituents  might 
demand.     For  all  practical  purpo.se.s,  he  might, 
as  well  l>e  in  the  house  of  representatives   as  iu 
the  senate. 

ilr.  0.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Do  I  understand  the 
gentleman  to  state  that  .senatorial  representation 
ought  not  to  be  ou  numbers,  but  on  territory? 

Sir.  LINDSEY.  I  am  asked  by  the  honorable 
delegate  from  Xelson,  if  1  would  regulate  sena- 
torial districts  exclusively  by  territorv\  My  re- 
spouse  is,  I  would  not. 


But,  sir,  I  ask  him  the 
can  assure  her  as  well  as  my  friend,  that  I  am  i  question,  if  he  would  regulate  it  exclusivelv  by 
not  for  taxatioxi  witiiout  representation.  The  |  population?  Will  he  disregard  territorial  or 
effect  of  my  motion,  if  carried,  will  not  be  to  ;  county  arrangement,  either  in  fixing  senatorial 
put  any  restriction  on  the  taxing  representation  ,  representation,  or  representation  iu  tlie  lower 
of  Louisville,  for  let  her  population  be  what  it  branch  of  the  legislature?  Xo  one  has  advanced 
may,  the  effect  of  my  motion  will  not,  iu  the  the  proposition,  sir,  that  county  arrangement  is 
least,  lessen  her  representation  in  the  lower  j  to  be  abandoned.  Then,  sir,  the  principle  is,  in 
branch  of  the  general  assembly;  and  consequent- I  apportioning  for  representation  iu  the  lowei; 
ly,  as  taxation  originates  in  the  house  of  repre-  ;  branch,  we  are  to  look  to  population  as  it  is  in 
sentatives  alone,  taxation  and  representation  go  i  county  arrangements,  ana  concessions  are  to  be 
together  in  the  fullest  extent.  There  is,  in  my  i  made  and  given,  arising  out  of  the  inequality  of 
judgment,  nothing  in  the  argument  of  the  gen-  j  voters  in  the  several  counties,  that  all  may  liave 
tleman  from  Campbell,  nor  any  violation  of  the  |  a  share  in  general  legislation,  and  sufficient  lo- 
principle  that  taxation  and  representation  should  j  cal  protection.  In  senatorial  arrangement,  1  am 
go  together.  I  for  districting  with  reference  to  county  arrange- 

Mr   Chaimian:  For  what  purpose,  let  me  ask,  I  meut,  so  that  the  people  of  no  county   shall  lie 
did  the  framers   of  our  old   constitution  divide    divided  in   voting  for  senators.     These  districts 


the  law-making  power  into  two  departments? 
Was  the  senatorial  branch  framed  with  reference 
to  taxation  or  immediate  popular  representatou? 
My  understanding  is,  no  such  design  was  in- 
tended. On  the  contrary,  it  was  to  be  a  check 
upon  the  popular  branch.  The  very  fact  that 
counties  were  not  to  be  divided  for  senatorial 
representation,  shows  they  regarded  the  princi- 
ple for  which  I  contend,  as  necessary  in  the  due 
regulation  of  the  checks  and  balances  of  power 
in  the  government.  The  illustration  of  the 
principle  and  iL-^  operations  upon  the  powers  of 
the  government  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
protection  given  the  states  by  the  regulation  of 
the  senate  and  house  of  repretentatives  in  con- 
gress, so  graphically  given  by  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon,  I  commend  to  the  calm  consid- 
eration of  delegates. 

Mr.  Chairman:  The  old  constitution  in  pro- 
viding for  senatorial  representation  wisely  look- 
ed to  the  fact  that  every  senator  representing 
several  counties,  or  a  city  and  county,  would  al- 
most, in  the  very  nature  of  things,  represent  di- 
vided or  opposite  interests  so  far  as  local  matters 
were  concerned,  and  would  necessarily  be  less 
under  the  direct  action  of  the  popular  will 
of  one  place  having  but  one  interest  to  sub- 
serve, and  consequently  every  senator  having 
the  opposing  interests  to  reconcile  and  protect 
would  necessarily  be  less  liable  to  go  beyond 
the  proper  point  in  legislation.  I  look  to  the 
senate  sir,  as  the  great  balance  power  of  the 
state,  as  the  check  upon  the  hasty  action  of  the 
more  popular  branch  of  the  general  assembly, 
and  our  fathers  so  regarded  it  in  its  creation. 

What,  sir,  would  be  the  condition  of  a  sena- 


are  required  by  the  present  constitution,  to  con- 
tain as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  voting  popula- 
tion, but  that  no  county  shall  be  divided  even  to 
attain  that  equality.  Sir,  is  there  anymore  in- 
justice that  a  citv  or  town  shall  yield  to  the  pol- 
icy of  the  divismn  suggested,  because  .she  has, 
from  locality  and  pursuits,  tlie  means  of  com- 
manding larger  population,  and  may  have  to 
yield  a  little  more  in  numbers  to  a  safe  ride,  than 
some  of  the  counties?  The  large  counties,  as  I 
have  endeavored  to  show,  yield  to  cities  and 
towns,  by  giving  separate  representation  in  the 

f»opular  branch  to  it:»  fullest  extent,  and  with  the 
OSS  of  less  in  popular  numbers  than  they  loose 
in  any  rule  of  apportionment.  I  am  for  pnitect- 
ing  the  counties  against  the  advantage  thus  had 
by  cities  and  towns.  But  a  much  higher  and 
more  important  principle  is  attained,  of  making 
senators  what  they  sh<mld  be  and  what  they 
must  be,  to  preserve  the  proper  checks  and  bal- 
ances iu  the  legislative  department  of  govern- 
ment. 

Allusion  has  been  made  to  the  population  now 
filling  u])  our  borders,  and  the  power  they  will  in 
time  exert  upon  the  existing  domestic  institutions 
of  the  state.  This  fact  is  not  and  cannot  be  over- 
looked ;  but  I  have  not  sir,  iu  the  views  I  have 
presented,  looked  to  this  interest  .ilone.  There 
are  otliers,  high  and  important,  to  be  guarded. 
I  am,  sir,  for  guarding  all  the  interests  of  our 
people,  and  by  the  regulation  of  representative 
power  and  influence,  so  to  provide  that  the  con- 
centration of  intelligence,  of  wealth,  of  com- 
mercial and  manufacturing  influence  in  cities 
and  towns,  shall  not  have  an  undue  control  over 
the  interests  of  the  counties  and  their  agricultu- 


502 


rril  interests, — that  all  our  people,  let  their  pur- 
Kuits  be  what  they  iiiav,  and  all  their  interest';, 
maybe  duly  guarded  and  preserved.  In  other 
words,  tliat  the  several  interests  shall  yield  to 
eaeh  other  in  the  distribution  of  power  in  the 
state,  that  no  one  of  them  shall  have  the  strength, 
if  they  should  ever  have  the  will,  to  overpower 
or  do  violence  to  the  others. 

If  1  am  wrong  in  my  views,  let  me  beg  dele- 
gates to  do  nie  the  justiee  to  believe,  that  no 
jealousies  against  Louisville,  Covington,  or  If  ew- 
port,  liave  prompted  me  to  my  course.  All  the 
interests  of  relationship  and  property  I  have,  or 
nearly  all,  are  in  the  first  and  the  lastplace,  and 
in  the  countv  I  represent. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  The  gentleman  from  Frank- 
lin has  thought  proper  to  make  out  tables  of  sta- 
tistics to  be  used  here  in  debate,  and  I  thiidc  it  is 
my  duty  to  correct  some  of  the  statements  he  lias 
made.  He  first  says  the  county  of  Jefferson  has 
y,231  voters,  and  has  six  representatives.  The 
gentleman  has  made  the  number  of  voters  less 
than  they  are  in  fact,  by  about  51.3.  His  second 
table  denies  the  county  of  Christian  a  second 
member  to  which  .she  is  entitled,  and  which 
would  give  sevi>n  members  instead  of  six,  as  the 
gentleman  has  it,  with  an  average  of  1,711  voters 
to  one  member.  The  third  table  denies  to  Flem- 
ing the  second  member,  to  which  she  is  entitled 
by  the  sixth  section  of  the  report  of  the  legisla- 
f  ive  committee,  with  an  averaire  of  1,5.38  voters 
to  one  member.  The  fourth  table  gives  Hardin 
but  one  member,  when  she  is  entitled  to  two,  with 
an  average  of  1,616  to  a  member.  The  fifth  table 
is  the  only  one  in  which  there  is  a  loss  to  the 
counties  worthy  of  notice.  The  sixth  table  has 
fifty  two  voters  less  than  the  county  of  Jefterson, 
and  is  not  therefore  liable  to  the  objection  made 
try  the  gentleman.  The  seventh  table  has  12,011 
voters.  The  gentleman  from  Franklin  allows 
six  members,  when  this  list  of  counties  is  enti- 
tled to  eight  members,  which  makes  an  average 
of  1,501  voters  to  a  member.  The  counties  of 
Shelby  and  Pulaski  have  each  one  member  in 
this  table,  while  they  are  entitled  to  two  each. 
1  hope  the  gentleman  will  take  this  and  work  it 
out  by  the  rule  of  three;  for  if  he  is  as  much 
wrong  in  his  other  statements  as  he  is  in  these 
statistics,  what  he  has  said  iu  reference  to  ap- 
iiortionment  is  entitled  to  little  confidence. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  has  taken 
an  extreme  case.  Where  they  have  a  small  frac- 
tion, more  than  enough  for  one  representative, 
that  is  contributed  to  the  smaller  counties,  and 
however  large  the  fraction  may  be,  they  will  be 
entitled  to  but  one  until  they  have  the  full  num- 
ber to  entitle  them  to  two.  That  is  not  enough, 
say.s  the  gentleman.  I  will  take  into  considera- 
tion the  declaration  that  I  made,  and  I  beg  every 
gentleman  to  take  into  consideration  that  if  liis 
county  is  deprived  of  a  fair  and  equal  represen- 
tation, with  what  face  can  lie  meet  the  people  of 
his  county  when  he  goes  back? 

The  CriAIRMAN  proceeded  to  put  the  ques- 
tion on  the  amendment. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  Paid  it  would  be  well 
that  the  amendment  should  be  properly  under- 
stood; those  therefore  who  were  against  giving 
Henators  to  cities  would  vote  to  strike  out,  and 
those  who  were  in  favor  of  senatorial  representa- 
tion of  cities  would  vote  against  the  amendment.  I 


Mr.  MACHEN  did  not  so  understand  it;  but 
that  they  might  have  time  for  reflection,  he  mov- 
ed that  the  committee  rise  and  report  progress. 

The  committee  accordingly  rose,  reported  pro- 
gress, and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  NOVEMBER  14,  1849. 

SENATORIAL    DISTRICTS. 

•Mr.  WOODSON.  I  beg.  sir,  to  offer  the  fol- 
lowing resolution,  and  I  move  that  it  be  referred 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole  and  printed: 

Resolved,  That  there  shall  never  be  more  than 
thirty-seven  senators  in  Kentucky,  and  that  the 
legislature  shall  only  regard  counties  in  the  ap- 
portionment of  senatorial  representation.  That 
the  counties  shail  all  lie  contiguous,  out  of 
which  a  senatorial  district  is  formed;  and  that, 
as  near  as  may  be,  each  district  shall  consist  of 
an  equal  num&er  of  counties. 

Mr.  President:  In  presenting  the  resolution 
just  read,  I  am  actuated  by  a  high  sense  of  duty 
towards  those  immediately  represented  by  me 
in  this  convention — as  well  as  by  a  thorough 
conviction  on  my  part,  that  the  mountain  coun- 
ties, in  the  midst  of  which  I  have  the  honor  to 
live,  are  all  to  be  strengthened  in  the  councils  of 
the  state  by  its  adoption — and  notwithstanding 
tlic  arguments  tliat  I  may  offer  in  its  support,  to 
some  extent,  may  be  characterized  by  selfishness, 
yet,  in  this  peculiarly  selfish  age,  1  hope  that  I 
shall  be  pardoned  by  all  who  have  used  now,  or 
at  other  times,  or  upon  other  occasions,  equally- 
culpable  arguments:  and  if  so,  perhaps  I  shall 
not  be  punished  for  the  want  of  guiltless  agents 
to  enforce  the  sentence. 

I  had  thought,  Mr.  President,  until  the  pres- 
ent discussion  commenced,  that  representation 
in  Kentucky,  under  all  circumstances,  accord- 
ing to  numbers,  would  be  conceded  by  all — that 
no  one  would  be  willing  to  make  inv'idious  dis- 
tinctions in  the  political  rights  of  the  freemen 
of  this  commonwealth  living  in  different  por- 
tions of  the  state — I  frankly  confess  that  I  Avas 
wholly  mistaken;  and  I  feel  sure,  sir,  that  num- 
bers ought  to  have  little,  if  any  thing  at  all,  to 
do  with  senatorial  representation  at  least — how 
far  interest  and  the  ingenious  arguments  of  gentle- 
men have  had  a  ten<3ency  to  bring  iny  mind  to 
this  conclusion,  I  will  not  pretend  to  say,  know- 

"That  If  self  the  waverin;;  balance  tihakc, 
Itsrarely;right  adjusted." 

One  thing  I  do  know,  though,  and  that  is,  if 
numbers  do  not  control  us  in  allotting  represen- 
tation, ihiit  territory  must.  And  I  know  equally 
well  that  my  region  of  country  is  to  have  its 
political  importance  greatly  enhanced  by  the 
adoption  of  the  latter  principle — to  what  extent 
the  advantage  we  may  tlius  acquire  is  to  be  at 
the  expense  of  justice,  and  to  the  injui-y  of  num- 
bers, 1  leave,  to  others  to  determine.  It  is  not 
meet  that  1  sliould  present  the  solution  of  the 
problem.    I  will  have  the  candor  to  avow,  how- 


503 


ever,  that  if  the  principles  asserted  in  the  reso- 
lution prevail,  several  of  the  senatorial  <listriots 
of  the  state  will  not  reach  over  two  thousand 
voters,  and  will  not  contain  exceeding^  twt»  mill- 
ions of  property,  whilst  others  will  reach  ten  or 
twelve  thousan(i  voters  and  possess  within  tnem 
from  thirty  to  fifty  millions  of  taxable  property. 
But  I  submit  it  to  you,  Mr.  President,  to  the  del- 
egates upon  this  floor,  and  to  the  world,  if  the 
apparent  injustice  inflicted  upon  numbers  and 
property,  is  not  amply  at«ined  for.  by  the  injus- 
tice that  a  difterent- principle  would  inflict  upon 
territor}'? 

Do  not  understand  me,  though,  sir,  as  inti- 
mating the  bare  idea  that  there  would  be  the 
slightest  justice  in  taking  property  into  consid- 
eration in  apportioning  representation  among 
freemen.  Such  a  thought,  so  diametrically  op- 
poses to  the  spirit  of  equal  liberty,  and  so  little 
in  keeping  with  the  theory  and  genius  of  our 
institutions,  has  no  favor  with  me.  And  I  would 
be  one  of  the  la.^t  men  who  would  willingly  see 
the  gnat  principle  of  numbers  disregarded  in 
the  distribution  of  political  rights  among  the 
people.  Yet,  if  this  great,  and,  as  I  had  hoped, 
sacred  principle  is  to  be  invaded,  (and  I  regard 
the  proposition  of  the  delegate  from  Franklin 
(Mr.  Liudsey)  as  a  direct  invasion  of  it,)  I  de- 
sire to  insure  to  those  I  represent  all  the  good  I 
can  therefrom. 

With  this  view,  I  have  offered  the  resolution 
iustread;  and  I  shall  not  permit  myself  to  doubt 
but  that  every  delegate  upou  this  floor,  who  dis- 
regards the  standard  of  numbers,  will  give  it  a 
cocdial  support. 

Gentlemen  tell  us  that  counties  should  be  con- 
federated in  apportioning  .senatorial  representa- 
tion, in  imitation  of  the  constitution  of  the  na- 
tional government  in  the  fonuation  of  the  fed- 
eral senate.  We  are  told  that  the  little  state  of 
Delaware  has  as  much  power  in  the  senate  of 
the  United  States  as  New  York — and  so  she  has. 
Upon  the  same  principle  let  me  ask,  why  shall 
not  Harlan  county,  with  her  seven  hundred  free 
white  citizens,  have  equal  power  in  the  senate 
of  Kentucky  with  Jefferson,  with  her  nine  thou- 
sand citizens? 

I  desire  gentlemen  to  look  at  these  things  iu 
their  true  light;  and  if,  upon  due  reflection,  it 
shall  be  thought  advisable  to  give  one  man  in 
either  county  I  represent  .-is  much  political  pow- 
er as  a  dozen  in  Louisville,  I  shall  he  truly  grate- 
ful, and  .shall  return  my  most  unfeigned  thanks 
to  the  convention  for  so  signal  a  favor.  I  move 
you,  sir,  as  I  do  not  wish  to  discuss  the  princi- 
ples involved  in  the  resolution,  that  it  be  print- 
ed and  refenedto  the  committee  of  the  whole. 

The  motion  to  refer  and  print  was  agreed  to. 

LEGISLATIVE   1)EPARTME>T. 

The  convention  resolvol  it->^elf  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  Mr.  MERIWETHER  iu  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  legislative  department. 

The  CHAIRMAN  announced  that  the  gentle- 
man from  Caldwell  was  entitled  to  the  floor. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  Sir,  when  I  made  the  motion 
yesterday  that  the  committee  rise,  report  pro- 
gress, and  ask  leave  to  sit  again,  it  was  not  with 
the  intention  of  addressing  the  house  on  the 
question  as  it  has  been  presented  to  us.  I  do 
not  design  doing  so  now.    I  then  thought  it 


better  that  we  should  adjourn  and  take  lime  for 
reflection,  and  I  now  think  that  the  house  is  a-; 
well  prepared  to  vote  on  this  question  as  it  will 
be,  if  we  discuss  it  to  the  end  of  the  wi*ek.  I 
shall,  however,  take  occasion  to  present  my 
views  on  the  main  proposition,  at  what  I  shall 
consider  a  suitable  time. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  ask  a  few  moments 
of  the  committee,  while  I  consider  some  of  the 
arguments  which  have  l>een  presented  by  the  ad- 
vocates of  the  present  motion,  and  which  at  first, 
I  must  confess,  had  upon  my  mind,  considerable 
influence,  until  I  examined,  and  traced  them  to 
their  ultimate  eon.sequences.  I  am  now  free  to 
acknowledge,  that  I  came  to  this  hall  strongly 
impressed  with  the  necessity,  or  rather  the  poll-, 
cy,  if  it  could  be  done  consistently  with  the 
preservation  of  the  great  printiples  upon  which 
our  government  is  based,  of  tnrowiug  around, 
what  has  been  termetl  in  this  debate,  tlie  urban 
or  city  representation,  something  of  security 
against  the  dangers  of  its  concentrated  and  uni- 
ted action.  I  do  not  look  upon  such  a  necessity, 
arising  from  the  institution  of  slavery  in  this 
country.  I  have  regarded  it  as  more  necessary, 
in  reference  to  .some  of  our  other  domestic  meas- 
ures of  legislation,  unconnected  with  that  inter- 
est. But  sir,  I  have  not  brought  my  own  mind 
to  the  conclusion,  that  I  could  adopt  a  practical 
plan,  by  which  the  evil,  which  has  been  contem- 
plated, or  imagined  in  argument,  may  be  reme- 
died without  doing  violence,  as  I  have  remark- 
ed, to  the  great  principle  upon  which  this  gov- 
emmeat  must  stand,  and  niu.st  be  maintained, 
that  is,  equalUy  of  representation,  according  to 
population  or  numbers  .'  I  have  listened  with  in- 
tense anxiety,  and  I  have  read  with  care,  the  ar- 
guments so  far  as  published  upon  this  question, 
lo.see  whether  there  did,  or  could,  exist  in  our 
commonwealth,  the  necessity  for  exercising  this 
restrictive  power,  under  the  plea  of  self  preserva- 
tion or  self  protection,  asrainst  the  possible  <lang- 
er  of  citv  representation.  I  confess  that  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Christian 
has  furnished,  to  my  mind,  the  only  legitimate 
antidote  for  any  suppose<l  evil  growing  out  of  a 
consolidated  representation  of  cities  or  mas-scs, 
thatis,  election  by  districts,  in  both  houses  of  the 
general  assembly,  according  to  numbers.  This 
regulation  of  the  right  of  equal  representa- 
tion, according  to  population,  does  no  violence 
to  the  principle,  and  whilst  it  secures  the  enjoy- 
ment of  the  inestimable  privilege  of  equality  to 
all  in  the  law  making  power,  gives  security  to 
the  commonwealth  against  the  possible  dangers 
of  congregated  communities.  It  is  by  the  adop- 
tion of  the  conservative  principle  of  the  amend- 
ment of  ray  friend  from  Christiou,  (Mr.  Morris,) 
that  our  sister  states  have  preserved  the  principle 
of  equal  representation  to  their  cities,  and,  at  the 
same  time,prot**cted  the  commonwealth  against  all 
possible  danger  of  consolidated  representation. 
I  shall  give  that  amendment  my  support,  and 
extend  to  all  portions  of  our  commonwealth  the 
same  equality  of  political  right. 

What  is  the  argument  for  the  amendment  by 
which  cities  are  to  be  deprived  of  a  separate  and 
equal  representation  in  the  senate?     It  is  an  ap- 

Erehension,  that  we  shall  have  built  up  iu   our 
order  counties,  on  the  banks  of  the  Ohio  river, 
large,  populous,  and  powerful  cities,  filled   with 


r.04 


it.  population,  whose  interests  and  feelings  will 
be  hostile  to  tlie  general  interests  and  prosperity 
of  the  commonwealth.  Sir,  I  am  one  '  of  those 
Avho  have  never  given  to  the.  only  eity  (Louis- 
ville,) at  ■vvliich  this  amendment  is  aimed,  in  my 
imagination,  that  future  magnitude,  power  and 
population,  which  some  have  assigned  to  her. 
She  is  de.stined  to  be  limited  by  the  population 
and  business  of  our  own  state."  She  is  surround- 
ed by  too  many  rival,  connnereial  and  manufac- 
tariikg  cities  at  present,  to  threaten  by  her  num- 
bers, any  thing  of  danger  to  the  interests  of  the 
conmionweallh.  Her  increase  in  the  last  twenty 
years  has  been  rapid,  1  admit.  But  the  spring- 
ing up  of  other  towns  around  her,  the  establish- 
ment of  other  commercial  points  in  her  neigh- 
Iwrhood,  have  as  cert^iinly  fixed  her  limits  of 
numbers  and  power  within  the  control  of  all 
future  legislative  assemblies  that  may  be  conven- 
ed under  the  new  constitution,  as  anything  can 
be  fixed,  in  reference  to  population,  connnerce 
and  trade.  I  rose,  Mr.  Chairman,  more  for  the 
purpose  of  considering  some  of  the  arguments 
which  liave  been  urged  upon  us,  why  we  should 
adopt  this  measure,  than  to  present  arguments, 
in  support  of  the  principle  of  equal  representa- 
tion. The  argument  to  prove  thatthe  amendment 
is  in  violation  of  one  of  the  great  principles  upon 
which  this  government  is  based,  has  been  fully 
exhauste<i,  by  gentlemen  who  have  preceded  me 
in  this  debate.  Let  us  see  if  there  is  any  thing 
in  the  reason  assigned  by  gentlemen,  who  admit 
the  justice  of  the  principle,  why  Ave  should  de- 
part from  it  in  the  formation  of  our  constitution. 
1  listened  to  mv  friend  from  Madison,  and  those 
who  succeeded^  him  on  that  side,  and  I  think  he 
ha.s  presented  the  whole  argument  in  one  single 
sentence,  though  it  has  been  amplified  by  others. 
Tlie  argument  sir,  is  in  these  words : 

"  But  what  is  more  important,  increasing  in 
'the  way  i  have  described,  they  will,  as  soon  as 
'they  altain  a  majority  here,  attempt  to  decide 
'  whether  we  shall  keep  a  certain  portion  of  our 
'property  or  not.  Now,  I  have  not  changed  mv 
'opinion,  as  expressed  some  weeks  since,  that  it 
'  is  better  not  to  bring  more  of  this  property  here, 
'for  this  was  one  of  the  objections  I  liave  long 
'entertained  to  investing  more  capital  in  slave 
'property.  I  believe  it  is  against  our  interest  to 
'  increi\se  that  property,  because  I  have  appre- 
'hended  the  danger  I  have  alluded  to,  and  be- 
' cause  I  believe  that  if  we  do  not  adopt  some 
'  basis  of  representation  that  will  secure  the  pow- 
'er  of  the  conunonwealth  to  the  great  agricultu- 
•ral  interest,  the  institution  will  go  down." 

The  argunieiit  is,  that  unless  we  do  something 
by  way  of  restraining  a  certain  portion  of  the 
qualified  voters  of  this  C(m)monwealth — a  certain 
portion  of  the  freemen  of  this  state — a  majority 
maybe  returm>d  to  the  liallsof  legislation,  tinc- 
tured with  the  sentiments  that  are  denounced 
here,  and  will  endanger  the  security  of  the  prop- 
erty of  the  citizens  of  the  conmionwealth;  and 
hence,  thnt  we  should  guard  against  it,  while  we 
are  forming  our  pre.<-ent  organic  law. 

That  argument  might  be  worth  more  than  I 
think  it  is^  if  it  be  tlie  design  of  this  convention 
to  leave  that  description  of  property  at  the  will 
flnd  mercy,  and  whim,  of  a  legislative  majority 
in  the  general  assembly.  But  1  presume  it  is 
lie  intention  of  the  gentleman — as  it  is  mine — 


that  in  tlie  eonstitutiou  about  to  be  made,  we 
shall  give  security  to  the  property  in  slaves;  that 
we  shall  so  guard  and  protect  that  inteset,  and 
all  other  property,  that  no  legislative  majority 
of  this  country,  shall  have  power  or  authority 
to  touch,  handle,  or  disturb  it.  The  argument 
tliat  there  is  danger  to  that  description  of  prop- 
erty, when  guarded  by  constitutional  guaranty, 
presupposes  or  assumes  that  some  future  legis- 
lature, in  disregard  of  constitutional  restraints, 
and  all  right,  will  usurp  power  and  tare  by  vio- 
lence the  estate  and  property  from  uur  citizens. 
This  would  be  revolution,  against  which  all  con- 
stitutions are  but  paper  blockades. 

The  advocates  of  the  amendment  under  con- 
sideration imagine  they  see  danger  to  our  slave 
property,  if  you  do  not  deprive  our  fellow  citi- 
zens who  reside  in  cities  and  towns  of  their  per- 
fect equality  with  the  rest  of  their  fellow  citi- 
zens who  own  that  description  of  pro])erty  and 
reside  in  the  country.  For  myself,  Mr.  Ohair- 
man,  I  know  there  will  be  danger  not  only  to 
that,  but  to  any  species  of  property,  whenever 
you  undertake  to  secure  it  by  the  proscription 
and  disregard  of  the  principle  of  equality  in  all 
political  rights  of  the  citizen,  and  especially  in 
the  law  giving  power  of  our  government. 

Mr.  Chairman:  If  the  object  of  the  mover  of 
the  amendment,  and  its  advocates,  be  as  they 
avow,  to  give  security  to  our  slave  property,  by 
denying  to  the  population  of  the  cities,  and  bor- 
dercounties  upon  the  Ohio  river,  equal  partici- 
pation in  the  law  making  department  of  our 
government,  because  of  their  peculiar  hostile 
opinions  to  the  existence  of  the  right  to -that 
description  of  property,  they  do  not  go  far 
enough — they  stop  short  of  the  point  to  which 
it  is  necessary  for  them  to  advance.  They  but 
half  do  the  business  they  design.  They  only 
propose  to  lessen  the  power  of  the  emancipation- 
ists, U)eated  in  a  particular  region,  in  the  halls  of 
legislation.  Why  not  extend  your  reducing 
power  to  all  portions  of  the  state  where  these 
men  now  or  may  reside?  If  it  be  dangerous  to 
our  domestic  institutions  to  permit  the  emanci- 
pationists of  the  cities,  or  of  the  Ohio  river 
counties,  to  have  their  full  voice  and  po-wer  heard 
and  felt,  and  therefore  they  should  be  deprived  of 
a  modicum  of  their  political  strength,  why  not 
api)ly  this  stringent  constitutional  process 
alike  to  all  emancipationists,  as  well  those  who 
reside  in  Madison  and  Faanklin  as  those  whore- 
side  in  the  cities  of  Louisville  and  Covington? 
Gentlemen  tell  us  they  do  not  desire  to  de- 
prive these  men  of  the  right  of  sufrra<,^e;  they 
allow  them  to  vote;  but  the  vote  of  a  citizen  on 
the  bank  of  the  Ohio  shall  not  be  equal  to  the 
vote  of  a  citizen  Avho  is  blessed  with  a  resi- 
dence in  the  county  of  Franklin  or  of  Scoli. 
The  object  avowed  is  not  total  disfranchisement 
of  the  freeman.  Power  is  more  likely  to  effect 
its  purpose  of  wrong  Avlien  its  approaches  are  . 
gradual.  Open  wrong  awakes  the  sense  of  dan-  |r  || 
ger,  and  the  power  of  resistance  is  instantly  in-  *'  fl 
voked. 

Of  what  value,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  the  equal 
right  of  suffrage  when  you  deny  the  citiz.n 
equal  representation V  You  hut  mock  him,  and 
•  insult  his  pride  by  the  offer  of  such  a  right. 

Sir,  whenever  you,  proclaim  by  your  organic 
law,  to  tlmt  class  of  mou  against  whom  you  and 


>o: 


vour  aruemliuent  is  aimed,  I  care  not  where  thej 
lire,  •whether  along  the  Ohio,  or  on  the  southern 
border  of  the  state,  upon  the  monntau  or  in  the 
vale,  wliether  thej  come  from  the  north  or  the 
east,  or  whether  they  be  native  or  of  foreign 
birth,  that  their  voice  is  not  as  fully  and  fairly 
and  equally  heard,  as  the  voice  of  their  neigh- 
bors and  fellow  citizens,  you  implant  in  the  con- 
stitution an  element  of  destruction  and  not  of 
security.  Freemen  must  be  equal  in  our  gov- 
ernment. 

A  fundamental  law,  in  order  to  be  sustained, 
must  be  foimJed  in  principles  of  justice  and 
equality.  You  cannot  expect  the  people  of  any 
country  to  maintain  a  constitution,  unless  they 
love  and  cherish  the  principles  upon  which  that 
constitution  is  based.  They  must  see  it  charac- 
terized by  equality  and  justice,  and  when  these 
two  principles  are  secured,  and  all  political 
powers  and  privileges  made  equal,  you  may  then 
rely  upon  the  affections  of  the  people  for  the 
.support  of  that  constitution.  But  if  they  see 
engrafted  in  it  a  feature  or  principle  which  their 
sense  of  justice  does  not  approve,  you  may  as 
well  call  on  an  honest  man  to  do  a  dishonest 
deed,  as  to  expect  of  a  liberty-loving  citizen  that 
he  will  sustain  a  constitution  that  he  does  not 
approve. 

But  my  honorable  friend  docs  not  go  far 
enough,  if  he  desires  to  engraft  this  principle  in 
the  constitution  for  the  purpose  of  securing  this 
right  of  property  in  slaves.  He  imagines  that 
all  the  danger  lies  in  the  border  counties  on  the 
Ohio  river,  and  in  order  to  make  certain,  and  to 
.secure  the  right  of  property  of  which  he  speaks, 
he  proposes  that  in  all  future  apportionment  of 
representation,  there  sliall  not  be  perfect  equali- 
ty, as  far  as  is  practicable  under  our  government, 
so  far  as  cities  and  towns  are  concerned.  Sir,  al- 
low me  to  suggest  to  him  a  much  more  certain 
remedy  for  the  evil  he  dreads,  and  one  which 
will  more  certainly  attain  his  object,  if  his  ob- 
ject be  to  keep  out  of  the  halls  of  legislation  the 
power  of  representative  numbers  that  the  eman- 
cipation population  is  enabled  to  give — one,  sir, 
that  would  work  much  more  equitably  through- 
out the  commonwealth — one  which  would  ope- 
rate equal  and  impartial  justice,  not  only  to  every 
section  of  this  commonwealth,  but  to  every  coun- 
ty of  every  section.  It  is  this,  sir — and  we  will 
see  whether  my  friend  will  be  willing  to  adopt 
it — that  in  all  future  enumerations,  which  are  to 
be  the  basis  of  representation  in  the  two  houses 
of  the  general  assembly,  direct  tliat  nb  man  who 
voted  the  emancipation  ticket  in  any  county  in 
this  commonwealth,  or  .shall  be  in  favor  of  eman- 
cipation, shall  be  considered  a  qualified  voter, 
or  constitute  a  portion  of  the  population  on 
which  that  apportionment  shall  oe  made.  My 
friend  does  not  go  far  enough,  sir,  to  meet  the 
evil  which  he  apprehends.  How  many  voters 
would  be  stricken  from  the  list  of  this  basis  of 
representation  in  the  county,  of  Madison,  repre- 
sented by  the  gentleman.  1  do  not  know.  I  be- 
lieve sir,  there  are  one  or  two  counties  in  which 
it  would  be  necessary  under  this  rule  to  strike 
off  near  one  half  of  the  voting  population,  for  I 
believe  the  county  of  Fayette  was  nearly  equal- 
ly divided,  so  far  as  there  was  a  test  furnished 
at  the  last  August  election.  My  friend  from 
Franklin  elaborated  this  argument  a  little  on 
64 


yesterday.  He  alluded  particularly,  he  said,  to 
this  objection;  but  he  said  there  were  other  great 
interests  in  the  commonwealth  besides  this,  con- 
nected with  general  legislatson,  that  might  be 
affected,  if  we  did  not  guard  and  protect  the 
people  of  the  state  against  the  influence  of  our 
cities,  towns,  and  river  population.  He  did  not 
tell  us  what  those  interests  were.  My  imagina- 
tion at  this  time  presents  one,  that  I  suppo- 
sed crossed  the  mind  of  the  honrable  delegate 
at  the  time.  Now  let  us  test  the  principle  the 
gentleman  is  contending  for.  True,  it  is  a  local 
question — a  question  that  has  long  agitated  the 
state  of  Kentucky  in  its  legislation.  It  is  the 
location  of  the  seat  of  government  permanently 
at  this  point.  It  has  been,  in  times  past,  often 
agitated  in  the  halls  of  the  general  assembly  of 
this  commonwealth.  I  know  not  how  it  has 
been  within  the  past  ten  or  fifteen  years;  but 
the  large  majority  of  voters  that  have  been  fa- 
vorable to  a  change  of  location,  have  come  from 
that  section  of  the  country  which  lies  south  of 
Green  river.  There  is  a  majority  of  the  repre- 
sentatives from  that  portion  of  the  state  who  are 
favorable  to  a  change  of  a  location  of  the  seat  of 
government.  That  section  of  the  state  is  most 
rapidly  filling  up  and  increasing,  and  the  time 
may  come,  unless  there  is  some  check  given  to 
popular  representation,  when,  perhaps,  the  ques- 
tion might  receive  consideration,  and  the  result 
be  different  from  what  it  has  been  in  times  past. 
The  sentiment  for  a  change  or  removal  of  the 
seat  of  government  is  rapidly  increasing,  as  also 
the  southern  population. 

Suppose  the  geiitleman  was  to  propose  by 
way  of  securing  the  state  against  so  great  a 
calamity  as  the  removal  of  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment, tfie  representation  hereafter  alloted  to  the 
countie-s  south  of  Green  river,  shall  not  exceed 
the  number  to  which  thev  now  are  entitled,  and 
no  more.  Thirty  is  all  tliey  are  entitled  to  now, 
and  all  they  shall  have,  no  matter  what  may  be 
the  number  of  population.  In  the  language  of 
the  gentleman,  we  could  say,  we  take  nothing 
from  you,  we  withhold  from  you  nothing  that 
the  present  constitution  gives  you;  but  to  secure 
this  great  state  interest  of  ours,  the  permanent 
location  of  the  seat  of  government  at  Frankfort, 
we  will  engraft  in  this  constitution,  that  in  all 
future  apportionments  this  section  of  state  shall 
have  but  thirty  members,  no  matter  what  the 
population  may  be. 

It  appears  to  me,  sir,  that  the  representatives 
in  this  nail,  from  that  section  of  the  country, 
will  not  consider  this  a  fair  and  equitable  prin- 
ciple to  be  engrafted  in  the  constitution.  Yet  it 
is  precisely  the  same  principle  that  you  propose 
to  adopt,  only  transferred  from  the  cities  now 
existing,  or  which  mav  hereafter  exist,  to  another 
region  of  country.  'The  argument  is,  we  take 
nothing  from  you,  we  give  you  the  number  of 
representatives  to  which  you  are  at  present  en- 
tiled, and  that  number  shall  not  be  hereafter 
increased ;  we  have  got  you  now  in  our  power, 
and  we  will  maintain  that  ascendency  over  you, 
in  order  that  we  may  secure  certain  great  local 
interests;  and  you  have  no  right  to  complain. 
What  is  the  difference  between  that  proposition 
and  the  one  now  before  the  convention?  The 
city  of  Louisville  is  the  only  city  or  town  that  is 
entitled  to  a  separate  representation,  and  accord- 


oOf) 


in»  to  the  gentleman's  argument,  slie  is  only  en- 
titled now  to  representation  in  the  lower  branch. 
Says  another  gentleman,  she  is  entitled  to  three 
members  on  this  floor  now — and  we  eertainly  do 
not  do  her  injustice  when  we  say  that  hereafter 
she  shall  be  entitled  to  one  senator  and  live 
representatives,  and  we  say  this  b<'caiise  the 
population  that  Ave  intend  to  restrict,  resides  in 
a  mass,  within  the  confines  of  a  corporate  city. 
Now  sir,  I  ask,  what  principle  of  justice  is  there 
in  this?  They  say  to  tlie  freemen,  if  you  reside 
within  the  limits  of  a  city,  you  shall  be  shorn  of 
a  portion  of  your  political  rights  in  this  com- 
monwealth. Whether  a  freeman  shall  reside  on 
the  mountain  or  in  the  valley;  whether  he  shall 
reside  on  a  farm  or  within  the  confines  of  a  city, 
he  is  equally  a  freeman  of  the  commonwealth, 
and  entitled  to  all  the  political  rights  and 
privileges  of  a  freeman,  so  long  as  we  continue 
to  preserve  the  principles  that  were  engrafted  in 
our  constitution  of  1792  and  1798. 

The  equal  political  rights  of  our  citizens,  Mr. 
Chairman,  cannot,  must  not  depend  upon  what 
portion  of  the  soil  of  this  comraonweath  they 
may  reside. 

It  will  never  do  to  say  to  the  citizen  of  our 
towns,  you  are  taxed  for  the  support  of  your 
government  in  proportion  to  your  estate,  as  liigh 
a?  your  fellow  citizen  who  is  separated  from  you 
by  the  corporate  line  between  town  aiid  county, 
but  you  are  not  equal  to  him  in  political  rights; 
your  urban  residence  has  deprived  you  of  a 
portion  of  your  equal  share  in  your  common 
government.  All  the  burthens  of  citizenship 
shall  be  imposed  upon  you,  but  we  vrill  deny 
you  a  full  voice    in  the  councils  of  your  state. 

But  sir,  this  provision  is  a  direct  attack  upon 
a  portion  of  country  where  there  is  a  large  voting 
population  who  are  not  themselves  the  owners  of 
slaves.  There  is  a  tier  of  counties  in  the  south- 
eastern part  of  the  commonwealth  in  which,  I 
suppose,  tliere  are  at  least  ten  free  white  males 
to  one  slave,  ilay  it  not  be  dangerous  to  the  in- 
terests of  the  slaVeholder,  if  we  permit  these 
counties,  in  the  organization  of  the  senate  and 
liouse  of  representatives,  to  have  their  full  and 
equal  representation  in  the  general  assembly? 
May  not  some  evil  disposed  persons  hereafter, 
do  what  they  have  not  been  able  to  do  hereto- 
fore? May  they  not  excite  that  population  by 
addressing  its  prejudices — ^by  eloquent  appeal's 
from  the  stump  convince  them  that  the  existence 
of  this  institution  of  slavery  is  oppressive — call 
on  them  to  unite  as  one  man  against  the  slave- 
holder, for  the  purpose  of  <lestroying  the  tenure 
by  which  that  property  is  held?  Sir,  lest  they 
might  have  this  influence  hereafter,  and  avail 
themselves  of  it,  in  these  border  counties,  it 
might  be  well,  while  the  gentleman  is  guarding 
this  property  against  the  north  west  that  he 
guard  it  also  against  the  south  east;  and  he 
should  provide  against  any  possible  danger  that 
might  arise  from  this  non-slaveholding  popula- 
tion. You  cannot  have  a  perfect  paper  security 
until  you  limit  the  biisia  of  rt^jresentation  to  the 
slaveholders  themselves.  "V  ou  mnst  come  to 
that,  if  you  intend  to  secure  this  property,  and 
you  must  do  it  by  having  only  a  representation 
of  the  slave  holaing  intere.sts. 

Sir,  we  were  admouiahed  by  the  gentleman, 
and  by  others  on  this  floor,  that  it  was  necessary 


to  apply  this  principle  only  to  the  border  coun- 
ties on  the  Ohio  river,  because  independently  of 
the  population  that  comes  from  other  states,  lios- 
tilc  to  the  institution  of  slavery — independently 
of  native  bora  citizens--there  is  a  description  of 
foreign  population  that  Ve  must  guard  against, 
and  to  whom  we  must  deny  the  privilege,  not 
only  of  fair  representation  in  the  two  houses  of 
the  general  a.ssenibly;  but  some  go  further  and 
deny  to  them  the  right  of  suffrage.  One  word 
sir,  on  that  subject — for  perhaps  it  is  the  only 
opportunity  I  shall  liave  to  express  iny  opinions 
upon  this  Jfative  American  question.  Some  go 
so  far  in  this  crusade  of  political  fanaticism  as 
to  declare  that  if  they  had  the  power  now,  they 
would  stop  European  immigration  into  the  Uni- 
ted States;  others  would  permit  them  to  come 
in,  but  deny  to  ihein  the  privilege  of  citizenship 
until  after  a  period  of  some  fifteen  or  twenty 
years.  In  regard  to  the  native  american  party, 
as  it  may  be  termed,  in  other  portions  of  the 
United  Slates,  I  have  watched  its  progress,  its 
commencement,  its  rise  and  its  present  elevation; 
and  I  believe  its  embodiment  now,  so  far. as  the  na- 
tional councils  are  concerned,  is  in  a  single  mem- 
ber from  some  district  in  a  portion  of  the  city  or 
county  of  Pliiladelphia.  It  is  a  party  that  has 
sprung  up  of  the  mushroon  tribe,  and  like  all 
other  parties  which  are  based  on  injustice,  in  ref- 
erence to  principle,  it  can  only  exist  temporarily. 
It  cannot  form  the  basis  of  a  great  national  par- 
ty or  a  great  state  party;  it  may  serve  sir,  to 
cliange  temporarily  the  representation  of  a  dis- 
trict in  congress  or  the  police  of  a  city,  but  it 
never  can,  until  the  spirit  of  justice  shall  be 
extirpated  from  the  American  bosom,  become  an 
American  party;  because  according  to  my  hum- 
ble conception,  it  is  founded  on  injustice  to  hu- 
man rights,  and  human  liberty.  By  our  laws, 
by  our  constitution,  by  the  sympathies  of  our 
people  the  oppressed  and  liberty  loving  of  all 
nations  have  Ibeen  and  still  are  invited  to  our 
shores.  They  are  tendered  the  blessings  of  a 
free  government  and  citizenship. 

The  patriots  and  sages  who  formed  the  fed- 
eral constitution,  did  not,  thank  God,  even  leave 
to  the  federal  agents  un<ler  that  eonstittuion, 
the  power  to  close  the  door  against  immigration. 
They  have  a  right  to  come.  If  they  choose, 
there  is  no  power  left,  either  in  the  state  govern- 
ment or  in  the  federal  government,  to  prohibit 
their  immigration  in  to  the  United  States;  and 
if  the  increase  of  foreign  immigration  is  an  evil, 
if  it  is  calculated  to  overturn  or  to  endanger  our 
own  civil  or  political  institutions,  I  tell  gentle- 
men who  are  the  advocates  of  native  American- 
ism, here  and  elsewhere,  if  they  wish  to  reach 
the  evil  they  imagine,  they  should  apply  to  a 
higher  power  tlian  this  convention — a  power 
competent  to  change  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  and  laws  of  congress  upon  the 
subject.  European  poi)ulation  have  come,  and 
come  they  will;  and  the  question  that  presents 
itaelf  to  my  mind  is,  when  they  are  permitted  to 
come,  whether  from  Ireland,  France,  (Tcrnniny, 
or  Hungary,  what  is  the  sound  policy  of  Ameri- 
can statesmen  in  regard  to  the  treatment  they 
shall  receive.     The  sooner,  within  a  reasonable 

f»eriod,they  .shall  be  required  to  satisfy  the  pub- 
ic   authorities   that  they  are  men  of  orderly 
habits,  and  of  good   deportment — who  indeed 


507 


claim  to  bo  citizens  of  the  United  States — the 
sooner  you  can  impress  them  vith  the  high  and 
uoble  idea  that  they  are  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  the  greater  seciiritv  yon  have  for  their 
good  conduct  and  devotion  to  the  institutions 
of  the  country.  A  man  who  is  treated  in  this 
way  -will  feel  that  he  possesses  the  rights  and 
privileges  of  a  freeman  in  his  adopted  country, 
and  he  will  exercise  these  privileges  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  promote  the  interests  of  the  coun- 
try. He  loves  the  country  that  has  made  him 
free  and  invested  him  with  the  immunities  oi 
citizenship,  and  he  will  fight  for  that  country. 
Apply  the  principle  which  some  gentlemen 
wisn  to  adopt  as  part  of  the  constitution  and 
laws:  what  will  oe  the  result?  Why  sir,  they 
will  become  almost  what  the  gentleman  says 
they  are  now.  If  vou  require  a  foreigner  to  re- 
main here  half  a  life  time  before  he  .•^hall  feel 
that  he  has  an  interest  in  the  government,  you 
tax  him  to  maintain  before  he  has  part  or  lot 
in  the  political  affairs  of  the  country  of  his 
adoption,  he  will  become  the  very  offscouring 
of  the  state,  and  will  be  always  prepared  at 
the  instance  of  the  leaders  of  mobs,  to  commit 
disturbances  and  offences  of  all  sorf  against 
the  peace  of  society.  The  freeman  who  owes 
no  allegiance  to  governmt^nt,  who  feels  that  he 
IS  not  equal  in  political  rights,  is  ever  ready  to 
lend  his  physical  energies  to  those  who  seek  to 
disturb  the  order  of  society,  and  the  steady  op-  j 
erations  of  the  laws.  Vest  the  same  man  with  I 
the  privileges  of  citizenship,  and  he  at  once  be-  j 
comes  the  advocate  of  the  principles  of  that 
government  to  whom  he  has  sworn  allegiance; 
that  government  which,  in  return  therefor,  has 
thrown  around  him  and  infused  into  him  the 
panoply  and  spirit  of  a  free  and  equal  citizen. 

But  sir,  there  is  a  still  greater  objection  to  the 
principle  advanced,  and  particularlv  to  the  in- 
sertion of  it  in  our  constitution.  The  constitu- 
tion and  laws  of  the  United  Stales  permit  for- 
eigners to  land  on  your  shores;  and  as  a  matter 
of  choice  or  necessity,  they  become  citizens  or 
inhabitants  of  some  one  of  the  states.  They  are 
met  here  by  a  constitutional  provision,  and  told, 
that  if  you  come  to  Kentucky  and  locate  your- 
selves, you  have  to  remain  for  a  period  of  fif- 
teen or  twenty  years,  before  you  shall  be  per- 
mitted to  exercise  the  political  rights  of  freemen 
or  citizens.  What  would  be  the  effect  of  such 
state  policy,  sir,  must  be  obvious  to  every  re- 
flecting, well-balanced  mind.  All  the  wealth 
and  enterprise  of  future  foreign  immigration, 
much  of  which  we  now  have  and  enjoy,  in  all 
the  departments  of  science  and  labor,  would 
stop  short  of  the  borders  of  your  state  These 
men  will  avoid  your  state  as  a  man  would  a  pes- 
tilence, and  we  shall  have  none  but  those  who 
care  nothing  for  your  institutions,  who  value  not 
the  rights  of  citizenship,  and  who  are  ready,  at 
all  times,  to  commit  all  sorts  of  crimes,  and  to 
practice  every  scheme  of  fraud  and  villainy,  that 
can  be  devised.  The  true  American  policy  is,  so 
long  as  you  permit  them  to  come  within  the  con- 
fines of  tlie  state,  to  make  them  citizens,  and 
impress  them,  by  that  verj'  act,  with  the  impor- 
tance of  the  new  character  they  have  acquired. 

Sir,  I  appeal  to  the  personal  knowledge  of  any 
member  of  this  delegation.  Look  about  among 
your  own  con.stituents,  and  tell  me  what  sort  of 


citizens  these  naturalized  foreigners  are.  Sir.  1 
will  not  say  they  make  better  citizens  than  out 
own,  but  I  have  seen  them  in  the  hour  of  dan-  ' 
ger  and  difficulty,  and  I  hare  always  found  them 
on  the  side  of  liberty  and  free  institutions.  It 
was  but  the  other  day,  in  the  very  city  to  which 
this  amendment  looks  so  invidiously,  that  a  re- 
giment, or  legion,  alluded  to  the  other  day  in 
debate,  was  formed  in  a  single  day,  at  the  call 
of  our  common  country.  Two  whole  compa- 
nies, constituting  part  of  that  legion,  were  form- 
ed, exclusively,  from  this  foreign  population. 
I  never  shall  forget  an  incident  going  to  illus- 
trate the  character  of  this  foreign  naturalized 
population,  which  occurred  in  lc<l2,  in  my  own 
presence.  A  company  was  formed  in  the  town 
where  I  resided,  composed  of  one  hundred  men. 
One  of  them  was  an  Irishman,  the  oldest  man  in 
the  company — ^well  known,  no  doubt,  to  my  col- 
league. He  was  a  naturalized  citizen.  At  the 
margin  of  Lake  Erie,  we  were  ordered  to  dis- 
mount, and  some  were  required  to  remain  and-* 
take  charge  of  the  horses.  None  would  volun- 
teer to  remain,  and  a  draft  was  ordered,  and 
among  others,  the  Irishman  was  drafted  to  re- 
main. When  we  were  about  to  embark,  the  first 
man  I  saw  jump  into  the  boat  was  the  Irishman, 
with  his  knapsack  and  rifle.  He  was  ordered 
by  the  captain  to  go  ashore,  and  attend  to  the 
duty  for  which  he  had  been  drafted.  In  his  o'R'n 
peculiar,  emphatic  manner  and  language,  he 
said  to  the  captain  :  "Sir,  I  will  not  disobey  any 
order  you  give  me,  but  I  did'nt  volunteer  under 
vou,  sir,  to  take  care  of  horses,  but  to  fight  the 
iBritish.  I  am  now  iuyour  boat,  and  if  I  am  to  go 
out,  you  must  take  me  out  a  dead  m.on."  He  then 
threw  himself  down  in  the  boat,  and  was  suf- 
fered to  remain.  This  was  one  of  thosedespised 
foreigners,  and  it  is  but  one  evidence,  among 
many,  as  far  as  my  experience  goes,  of  the  attach- 
ment and  devotion  to  the  cause  of  their  adopted 
country,  that  this  description  of  our  population 
always  has  furnished  me.  I  ask  gentlemen  if 
they  would,  provided  they  had  the  power,  un- 
der the  federal  constitution  at  this  time,  close 
the  door  against  the  immigration  of  a  class  of 
population  of  this  description,  who  are  seeking 
an  asylum  from  oppression  in  everj'  portion  of 
the  globe?  Sir,  would  to  God  I  had  tne  power 
this  day  to  speak  and  to  say — and  to  execute 
the  purpose — to  Kossuth  and  his  five  thousand 
Hungarian.s— compelled,  to  avoid  death  upon  an 
ignominious  scaffold,  to  seek  the  protection  of 
the  Mus.sleman,  at  the  sacrifice  of  the  faith  of 
their  fathers — I  would  welcome  them  to  our 
shores.  Nay,  I  would  assure  them  of  a  welcome 
in  the  hearts  of  the  people  of  Kentucky;  and 
when  they  give  evidence  of  their  devotion  to 
our  institutions,  of  their  moral  character  and  de- 

rjrtmeut,  according  to  the  law  as  it  now  stands, 
would  clothe  them  with  citizenship,  and  there- 
by make  them  better  citizens,  better  men,  at- 
taching them  more  closely  to  the  institutions 
they  had  sworn  to  support.  I  cannot,  therefore, 
vote  for  this  proposition,  because  of  the  addi- 
tional element  thrown  into  the  argument  that  it 
is  intended  and  designed  to  operate  oppressive- 
ly upon  a  portion  of  our  citizens,  both  native 
and  naturalized. 

I  ro.se  merely  for  the  purpose  of  shewing,  at 
least,    that  the  arguments    which    have    been 


508 


thrown  oiutW  wie  mover o^the  proposition,  have 
not  presentee!  to  my  mind  a  sufficient  reason  for 
the  adoption  of  his  amendment.  The  proposi- 
tion, if  I  nnderstand  it  is,  as  appears  from  the 
gentleman's  argument,  and  from  that  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison  also,  a  denial  to  the  citizens 
of  our  cities  incorporated  and  entitled  to  sepa- 
rate representation,  senatorial  representation  ac- 
cording to  numbers. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  If  the  gentleman  will  per- 
mit me.  I  have  not  contended  for  any  proposi- 
tion that  would  exclude  Louisville  entirely  from 
a  senatorial  representation.  I  am  for  giving  her, 
in  conjunction  with  the  county  of  Jefterson,  a 
senatorial  reprcvsentation. 

Mr.  C.  A.  VVICKLIFFE.  I  certainly  under- 
stood the  gentleman  correctly;  his  proposition 
is,  that  Louisville  and  Jefferson  county  shall 
constitute  one  senatorial  district.  I  was  there- 
fore correct,  when  I  said  that  he  was  opposed  to 
giving  Louisville  a  separate  senatorial  represen- 
tation according  to  her  numbers. 

I  know  sir,  that  the  house  is  impatient  to  take 
the  vote  upon  this  question.  I  have  perhaps  oc- 
cupied more  time  tlian  I  ought,  in  stating  my 
objections  to  this  amendment.  I  think  that  the 
evil  Avhich  the  gentleman  apprehends,  may 
be  rendered  entirely  harmless,  if  he  will  ajjply 
the  principle  of  election  by  districts.  Take  the 
city  of  Is  ow  York.  She  is  entitled  to  eighteen 
representatives  in  the  general  assembly  of  that 
state;  by  her  constitution  she  is  entitled  to  an 
equal  senatorial  representation  according  to  her 
numbers,  as  compared  with  the  balance  of  the 
state,  and  whenever  an  enumeration  takes  place 
she  is  to  have  her  equal  proportion.  But  how 
does  the  state  guard  against  the  consolidated 
mass  of  that  city?  It  is  by  engrafting  into  the 
constitution  such  a  provision  as  the  gentleman 
from  Christian  proposes,  that  senators  and  rep- 
resentatives shall  be  elected  by  districts.  A  city 
divided  against  itself,  weakens  its  own  strength. 
And  they  will  be  likely  to  be  divided  in  rela- 
tion to  all  manner  of  internal  policy.  So  it  will 
be  in  this  commonwealth. 

The  gentleman  has  referred  to  the  state  of  Mas- 
sachusetts. Look  at  her  constitution;  it  had  its 
existence  in  the  year  1780,  before  the  close  of  the 
revolutionary  war.  Thegentleman  seems  tothink 
that  tne  term,  incorporated  town,  in  that  consti- 
tution, is  synonymous  with  incorporated  city, 
and  entitled  in  the  same  manner  to  representa- 
tion. Towns  is  the  name  of  political  or  repre- 
ssntative  divisions  in  that  state,  and  the  rule  he 
read  applies  to  all  equally.  One  other  argument 
that  was  presented  by  the  gentleman,  and  by  my 
friend  from  Oliio,  with  some  force;  it  is  an  at- 
tempt to  shew  that  by  giving  to  a  city  this  equal 
representation,  or  rather  by  denying  to  a  city 
this  equal  representation,  you  only  compensate 
counties  and  sections  for  the  losses  whicn  they 
may  sustain  in  the  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion among  themselves.  Is  this  true?  It  would 
be  to  some  extent  true,  if  the  immbers  included 
in  fractions  were  unrepresented,  but  they  are 
represented  in  power,  because  they  aid  some  oth- 
er county  in  tlie  neighborhood  to  obtain  a  mem- 
ber. Not  80  in  an  incorporated  city,  for  by  the 
present  constitution  ami  the  clause  under  con- 
Bideration,  fractions  in  cities  are  not  transferred 
to  counties.    If  there  was  always  to  be  found  in 


a'city  the  precise  number  necessary  to  give  a 
certain  number  of  r>jpresentatives,  so  far  imme- 
diate local  representation  would  be  preserved. 
But  suppose  that  1500  be  the  ratio,  and  that 
Louisville  should  have  a  sufficient  number  of 
qualified  voters  to  give  lier  three  representatives, 
and  999  over;  that  999  would  not  be  represented, 
as  it  would  be  if  the  residuum  was  transferred  to 
a  county.  Many  counties  have  at  every  appor- 
tionment a  residuum,  it  cannot  be  avoided,  Vjut 
where  there  is  a  residuum  it  must  be  contribu- 
ted to  a  neighboring  county,  and  then  it  is  rep- 
resented. There  is  nothing  in  this  argument  of 
either  of  the  gentlemen,  which  justifies  the  pro- 
posed departure  from  the  great,  essential  and 
just  principle  of  equal  representation  based 
upon  numbers. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH.  Mr.  Chairman :  It  was 
my  intention  and  wish  to  remain  a  silent  but  in- 
terested, deeply  interested,  listener  to  this  debate. 
But  w^e  have  a  journal  which  is  to  record  the 
votes  given  in  the  convention;  and  we  have  an- 
other record  which  is  to  send  out  to  the  country 
and  to  the  world  the  reasons  for  those  votes. 
Gentlemen  advocating  the  proposition  by  whicJi 
Louisville  is  to  be  restricted  in  the  legislative 
cauncils  of  the  state,  have  thus  already  sent 
their  reasons  abroad.  The  most  imposing  of 
which,  and  that  chiefly  relied  on  is,  that  to  give 
Louisville,  and  the  other  cities  whioh  may  here- 
after spring  up  in  the  state,  representation  in  the 
senate,  according  to  the  common  basis,  to  be  es- 
tablished in  the  constitution  for  the  state  at  large, 
is  giving  "aid  and  comfort"  to  the  emancipa- 
tionist. This  I  understand  to  be  the  position  of 
perhaps  all  those  in  favor  of  the  restriction. 
The  constituencv  I  have  tlie  honor  to  represent 
is  pro-slavery.  1  claim  to  be  a  pro-slavery  man, 
and  on  that  subject  as  well  as  every  other  intend 
to  represent  tliat  constituency  truly,  faithfully, 
and  according  to  the  best  of  my  humble  ability. 
And  knowing  that  upon  tlie  subject  of  slavery 
especially  they  justlv  feel  deep  interest,  I  am 
am  apt — nay,  sir,  feef  it  my  duty,  to  scan  closely 
the  ground  I  may  occupy  in  any  vote  I  shall 
give  touching  that  subject.  If  I  shall  vote 
against  that  restriction,  the  speeches  on  the  oth- 
er side  represent  me  iis  doing  the  work  Avhich 
will  either  presently  or  remotely  contribute  to 
tlie  cause  of  emancipation.  I  hence  desire  brief- 
ly to  inquire  whether  such  will  be  the  result. 
But  before  proceeding,  I  take  occasion  to  remark 
that  I  am  free  from  that  local  feeling  which  of 
necessity  must  influence  some  members  of  the 
convention.  Representing  as  I  do  an  agricultural 
county  in  the  very  centre  of  the  state,  and  there- 
fore can  act  on  this  subject  as  a  citizen  of  the 
state  without  any  peculiar  or  local  interest  what- 
ever. Tlie  present  constitution  prescribes  the  qual- 
ifications necessary  to  entitle  a  citizen  to  the 
right  of  suffrage.  It  further  proceeds  to  make 
the  number  of  citizens  thus  qualified  the  basis 
of  representation.  The  report  of  the  committee 
now  before  the  convention  is  b.ised  upon  the 
same  principle  precisely,  and  recognizes  it  as 
the  only  basis  of  representation.  Tlie  state, 
however,  is  cut  up  into  counties  of  almost  every 
size,  shape,  and  population.  Taking  these  coun- 
ties as  we  find  them,  it  is  positively  and  abso- 
lutely impossible  to  devise  any  mode  which 
will,  with  mathematical  certainty,  give  on  this 


509 


Kasis  equal  representation.     Being  unable  to  ar- 1  feared  from  the  present  non-slaveholding  popu- 
rive  at  this  perfection,  the  committee  have  gone  !  latian  of  the  state. 

into  details   and  regulations,  the  sole  and  only  |      The   object  is  to  strike  at  the  foreign  popu- 

object  of  which  -were  to  appro.xiiuate  as  nearly  j  latjon    of   the    state.      How   the    cool    <lispa.s- 

a<  possible  to  the  general  rule  they  had  assumed  i  sionate    deliberation  which     characterized   our 

-  the  true  and  proper  ba^is.     This  all  admit  on  j  citizens  la.<t  summer  in  their  decision   of   the 

■  :h  sides.     The  difficulties  of  carrying  outthe  i  question  of  slavery!     Have  we  anv  great  interest 

iieral  principle,  in  many  cases  absolutely  in-  j  which  would  be  un-safe  in  their  Lands?    If  so, 

perable,  all  vanish   when  you  approach  the  :  vou  have  the  power  to  disfranchise  them.     And 

cuy  of  Louisville.     This  is  too  obvious  to  re- ;  Vou  begin  bj-  lopping  off  a  i-mall  branch  only. 

quire  elaboration.     But  strange  to  tell,   at  the  ,  Vou  give  them  all  the  higli  privileges  of  citizens. 

very  point  where  your  principle  is  of  easy  and  |  You  arm  them  with  all  the  powers  which  you 

practical  application,  you  abandon   it.     1  here  j  yourselves  have  on  this   question  of    slavery. 

pause  a  moment  to  appeal  to  the  convention  if ,  Xnd  then  goad  and  provoke  them  to  topple  the 

this   is   not  so.     There  sir,  is  no  denying. — '  institution  into  the  dust,  by  proclaiming  your 

Abandoning  the  principle  which  all  admit  to  be  i  suspicions  to  the  world,  and  that  they  are  unwor- 

the  true  and  sound  one,  some  give  one  reason,  j  thy  the  high   trusts  you  have  reposed   in  them. 

some    another;  each   however,    reconciling    the   If 'verily,  and  in  truth  they  are  not  to  be  trusted 

thing  in  h  is  own  way.  j  lay  the  axe  to  the  root  of  the  tree  and  at  once  em- 

The  gentleman  from  Franklin,  for  example,  ex- 1  brace  tlte  native    Ameriean    resolution   of  the 

hibits  his  tables  of  representation  taken  from  ;  gentleman   from  Bourbon,  and   place  its  prin- 

the  report  of  the  committee  to  illustrate  the  in- ;  ciples  in  the  constitution.    1  see   no  medium 

equalities   that  will   exist  in  other  part.s   of  the  I  ground. 

state.  VTlxy  did  he  not  tell  the  convention  that '  Hr.  Chainnan,  it  is  in  vain  to  talk  or  think  of 
the  committee  had  exerted  all  their  ability  to  .  sustaining  or  strengthening  slavery  by  some 
arrive  at  equality,  and  that  they  had  approxi-  ■  of  the  means  which  have  so  often  Wen  recom- 
raated  it  as  nearly  as  the  nature  of  the  ca.se  j  mended.  Such,  for  example,  as  silencing  dis- 
would  admit.  But  no.  He  traverses  the  state  j  cussion  and  preventing  agitation.  Fix  your 
and  parades  these  imperfections  which  admit  of  ;  constitution  as  you  will,  the  people  will  still 
no  remedy,  to  show  that  when  you  come  to  a  discuss  and  agitate  according  to  their  own  good 
city  where  no  barrier  exists,  you  may  wantonly  I  pleasure.  You  cannot  prevent  them  by  legal 
violate  it  and  disfranchi.se  a  part  of  the  free  enactment;  you  may  by  fair  argument.  In  that 
citizens  of  Kentucky — native  born  as  well  as  for- i  ^av  the  emancipationist  was  met  last  summer, 
eign — no  distinction  is  made,  for  you  strike  !  and  after  full  and  fair  trial  during  the  whole 
strike  at  the  city  itself.  If  your  blow  is  effectual ;  canvass,  he  lost  at  least  half  his  numbers.  If 
the  whole  will  feel  the  shock.  The  whole  thing  ;  vou  wish  to  keep  the  ascendency,  you  have  only 
when  simplified  is  this,  that  because  our  coun-  \  go  to  meet  him  at  all  points  and  in  all  time, 
ty  organizations  are  such  that  some  inequality  i  But  though  you  excite  this  population  against 
fromthe  necessity  of  the  case  must  be  borne  in  j  you  by  the^  amendment,  still  nothing  is  gained 
some  sections — when  you  get  to  the  city  of  j  by  it.  To  suppose  so,  is  a  flimsy  fallacy.  Few 
Louisville,  where  no  such  necessity  exists,  you  j  woras  will  prove  it.     Under  the  "constitution,  as 


abandon  your  principle  for  no  other  reason  than 
to  make  her  feel  inconvenience,  because  it  was 
the  misfortune  of  some  other  county  in  the  state 
to  experience  for  a  time  the  impracticability  of 
carrying  out  your  system  in  complete  perfection. 
"Aid  and  comfort"  to  tlie  emancipationist  is 
the  cry.  That  is  to  carr>-  every  point.  It  is  to 
overslaugh  everything  in  the  convention.  It 
has  become  familiar  to  the  ear.  I  for  one  can 
hear  it  without  trepidation.  You  are  suspicious 
of  a  part   of  our  population.     They   are  non- 


you  intend  framing  it,  no  power  in  the  state  can 
touch  our  slave  property  tul  another  convention 
is  called.  But  this  foreign  population  is  to  have 
a  voice  in  calling  that  convention  and  in  elect- 
ing its  delegates.  "Where  then  will  be  the  con- 
stitution by  which  you  have  violated  a  great 
principle  to  sustain  slavers?  At  the  mercy  of 
the  very  people  whom  you  have  wronged  in  the 
violation  of  that  principle. 

Instead   ot    strengthening  the   institution   of 
slavery  by  the  amendment,  you  are  weakening 


slaveholders.     Gentlemen  talk   as   if  the  slave- !  it.     You  afford  the  emancipationist  the  argu 


holder  held  the  power  in  Kentucky,  and  as  if 
they  represented  tliem  alone.  I  would  remind 
them  that  it  is  by  the  voice  of  the  non- 
slaveholder  alone,  that  the  institution  ex- 
ists for  a  single  day.     It  was   in  the  power  of 


ment  that  you  are  afraid  to  meet  him  in  fair  fight 
before  tlie  whole  people,  but  tliat  you  are  com- 

felled  to  resort  to  unjust  restrictions  to  keep 
im  down.  I  am  against  his  having  this  undue 
advantage.  To  show  that  no  county  in  the  state 
tbenon-slaveholerstohave  returned  a  convention!  should  have  more  than  one  senator,  whatever 
more  unanimously  anti-slavery  tlian  this  body  is  its  population  might  be,  honorable  delegates 
pro-slavery,  for  they  are  as  six  to  one  in  the  have,  by  analogy,  referred  to  that  provision  in 
Btate.  the  cons'titntion  'of  the  United  States  by  which 

In  the  canvass  last  summer  the  pro-slavery  each  state,  whether  great  or  small,  is  entitled  to 
men  had  no  time  for  special  pleading.  The  i  two  senators,  and  two  only.  Nothing,  however, 
guaranties  thrown  around  slavery  by  the  laws  is  gained  by  this  position.  The  little  state  of 
and  constitution  had  all  been  torn  away,  and  Delaware  has  as  much  sovereignty  as  the  largest 
the  institution  lay  at  the  feet  and  mercy  of  the  state  in  the  union.  Her  senators  represent  that 
non-slaveholder. '  To  them  we  appealed  as  we  sovereignty.  This  entitles  her  to  an  equal  num- 
were  bound  to  do  on  the  great  principles  of  ber  with  Xew  York  or  any  other  state  in  the 
justice  and  truth.  They  decided  in  our  favor,  union.  Besides,  the  federal  government  was 
We  therefore  now  know   that  nothing  is  to  be   formed  by  the  transfer  of  a  part  of  the  power 


510 


-m 


an  J  sovereignty  of  the  people  of  the  several 
states  to  that  organization.  Tlie  poM'ers  not 
tlelegated  were  retained  by  the  states.  A  line, 
therefore,  had  to  be  drawn  between  federal  and 
8t^tu  jurisdiction.  Many  interesting  questions 
in  the  history  of  our  country  have  arisen  as  to 
the  true  position  of  this  line,  and  a  conflict  of 
powers  between  the  federal  and  state  govern- 
ments. These  coiiHiets  were  foreseen  by  the 
franiers  of  the  federal  compact,  and  by  the  con- 
ventions of  the  several  states  called  to  ratify 
that  instrument.  When  the  rights  of  the  states 
are  encroached  upon,  or  about  to  be  encroached 
upon,  the  smaller  states  have  as  much  at  stake 
as  the  larger  ones,  and  that  without  resjard  to 
numbers  or  population.  Hence,  ;in  equal  repre- 
sentation in  the  senate  of  the  United  States.  If 
representation  were  given  in  both  branches  of 
the  congress  according  to  population,  a  combi- 
nation of  four  or  five  of  the  larger  .states  might 
easily  overwhelm  and  swallow  up  the  smaller 
ones.  For  that  reason,  among  others,  this  nega- 
tive power  was  given  in  one  branch  of  congress 
to  the  smaller  states,  as  a  means  of  self  preser- 
vation. There  is,  then,  in  point  of  fact,  no  anal- 
ogy m  the  two  cases.  If  there  is,  the  smallest 
county  in  the  state  is  as  much  entitled  to  a  sena- 
tor as  the  largest,  and  I  should  insist  that  the 
principle  be  carried  out,  and  that  my  county  is 
as  much  entitled  to  a  senator  as  any  other,  and 
•would   claim  it  at  the  hands  of  the  convention. 

After  this  analogy  has  been  so  strenuously  urg- 
ed, I  am  not  surprised  that  the  resolution  now 
on  your  tableshould  have  been  offered,  proposing 
to  apportion  our  senators  according  to  the  num- 
ber of  counties  without  regard  to  population. 
If  the  analogy  is  well  founded,  the  principles  of 
the  resolution  ought  to  carry. 

We  are  also  told  that  slave  labor  is  yielding 
to  free  labor,  and  must  yield  to  it;thatthis  fact  is  j 
now  seen  in  the  Ohioborder  counties  of  the  state. ' 
In  proof  of  the  general  proposition,  the  free  states  I 
formerly  holding  slaves  is  cited  in  illustration. ! 
Why  sir,  the  free  states  of  the  Union,  all  taken  i 
together,  never,  at  any  time,  contained  more  j 
than  40,000  slaves — a  mere  handful.  Nothing 
is  proven  then  b}'  showing  that  this  handful  has  ; 
disappeared  in  the  north.  , 

Taking  the  southern  states  in  a  body,  the  slave  j 
population  has  been  steadily  increasing.  True,  i 
on  the  eastern  shore  of  Maryland,  and  in  the  ' 
state  of  Delaware,  a  section  geographically  sep-  i 
arated  from  the  main  body  of  the  slave  territo- ' 
ry  of  the  Union,  the  number  of  slaves  has  dimin- 
ished. In  no  other  section  of  the  slave  territory  : 
has  this  been  the  case.  1 

The  slave  population  of  Virginia  and  North  \ 
Carolina  is  perhaps  not  quite  so  great  as   at  one 
time.     They,  however,  furuished  the  new  states 
with  slaves  which  slightly  diminished  their  num- ; 
hers  only,  and  is  no  evidence  that  slavery  ia  dis- 
appearing. I 

Another  position  is,  that  Louisville,  owing  to 
her  numerous  population  and  its  rapid  increase,  ] 
may,  if  allowed  full  representation,  ultimately  i 
control  the  state.  | 

Within  the  last  decennial  period,  her  population 
has  more  than  doubled.  I  am  glad  that  this  is 
so.  It  is  evidence  that  capital,  industry,  and 
enterprise  are  there.  And  a  market  is  also  there 
for  all  the  agricultural  productions  of  every  part 


of  the  state  commercially  connected  with  that  ■ 
city.  My  section  of  the  state  finds  a  market  there  ' 
for  all  her  agricultural  staples.  Remove  Louis-'  "*' 
ville  and  we  have  no  market  Cripple  her  '' 
growth  and  prosperity  and  vou  affect  all  that 
part  of  the  state  from  which  1  have  the  honor  to 
come.  She  is  now  going  foremost  in  building  a 
railroad  from  that  place  to  this;  I  am  glad  of 
it.  I  wisixshe  had  the  ability  to  build  one  from 
Cumberland  Gap,  running  through  my  section 
of  the  state  and  intersecting  the  other  road  at 
some  convenient  point.  We  would  then  have  a 
market  at  our  very  doors.  I  profess  to  know 
something  experimentally  of  the  interests  of  the 
farmers  in  my  county, because  I  am  one  of  them. 
I  am  not  contending  that  by  this  restriction  on 
Louisville,  you  will  cripple  her  energies  in  a 
commercial  point  of  view,  but  make  these  re- 
marks to  show  that  the  interests  of  the  rural  and 
city  districts  arenot  antagonistical.  as  gentlemen 
have  contended,  but  are  one  and  the  same,  or 
rather  that  they  support  and  sustain  each  other. 

And  that  instead  of  entertaining  feelings  of 
jealousy  towards  that  city,  that  it  is  the  interest 
of  every  section  of  the  state  connected  with  her 
commercially,  to  cheer  her  onward  in  her  pro- 
gress of  enterprise  and  prosperity. 

I  see  no  danger  in  her  numbers.  The  cities  of 
Cincinnati,  Philadelphia,  and  New  York,  have 
equal  representation  in  both  branches  of  the 
legislatures  of  their  respective  states.  No  dan- 
ger seems  to  have  been  apprehended  there. 

If  the  city  of  New  York,  having  a  popula- 
tion of  four  hundred  thousand,  does  not  over- 
ride the  rest  of  the  state,  and  can  be  tru.sted  with 
equal  rights,  I  can  apprehend  no  fears  from 
Louisville. 

The  only  fear  I  have,  is  that  the  predictions  of 

gentlemen,  of  the  great  and  rapid  growth  of 
ouisville,  and  the  other  towns  on  the  Ohio, 
will  not  be  realized.  I  would  be  gratified  to  see 
them  multiply  and  increase  fully  up  to  the  pre- 
dictions of  the  most  sanguine;  and  instead  of 
discouraging  and  checking, I  would  encourage 
and  cheer  them  on  in  their  progress;  and  would 
be  proud  to  see  them,  as  places  of  my  native 
state,  going  forward  in  strides  more  rapid  than 
is  now  expected.  I  feel  so,  because  I  am  sure  it 
is  the  interest  of  the  agricultural  part  of  the 
country  that  it  should  be  so.  If,  however,  they 
have  a  population  which  cannot  be  trusted  with 
all  the  nigh  privileges  of  citizens — which  I  do 
not  believe — come  at  once  up  to  the  Native 
American  principle,  and  lay  the  axe  at  the  root 
of  the  tree.  To  that,  however,  I  am  utterly  op- 
posed, and  will  vote  against  it  in  all  its  stages. 
Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  have  probably  delayed 
too  long  already  bringing  to  the  notice  of  this 
hou.se,  the  proposition  that  I  intimated  some  day 
or  two  ago,  that  I  should  advocate.  Evil  has 
probably  arisen  from  that  delay,  because  I  find 
in  listening  to  the  arguments  of  the  different 
gentlemen  who  have  spoken  on  this  subject,  that 
there  appears  to  be  rapidly  growing  up  in  this 
convention  an  opinion,  in  which  I  do  not  agree, 
that  whenever  a  delegate  votes  for  a  {rcntleman's 
proposition,  he  necessarily  adopts  all  the  argu- 
ments and  reasons  the  mover  may  think  neces- 
sary to  give  for  introducing  it.  I  shall  vote 
against  the  proposition  of  the  gentlenian  from 
Franklin  because  it  goes  too  far.     And  I  do  not 


>11 


roiieiir  in  the  reasons  given  for  its  support  by 
my  friend  from  Madison,  because  tlie  ground  he 
occupies  is  too  broad.  Tunj  vour  eve  to  the 
map  of  Kentucky  hanging  on  tLe  ■vrall  behind 
you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  commencing  at  one  end 
of  the  state  and  running  to  the  other,  along  the 
margin  of  the  Ohio  river,  and  you  have  some 
twenty  four  countie.s,  and  a  rivt-r  belt  of  some 
six  hundred  miles.  Take  ten  miles  upon  that 
belt  and  you  have  six  thousand  miles  of  terri- 
tory. Xow  the  influences  arising  from  the  ex- 
pected increase  of  the  spirit  of  emancipation, 
against  which  he  desires  to  guard,  are  not  only 
not  inherent  in  the  rural  population  in  that  dis- 
trict, but  they  are  not  more  liable  to  exist  there 
than  in  the  rural  population  of  the  state  else- 
where. Let  it  be  where  it  mav,  the  proposition 
which  I  gave  notice  I  intended  to  introduce,  and 
in  advocating  which,  I  shall  undoubtedly  come 
in  conflict  with  some  of  the  gentlemen  who  have 
precedeii  me,  1  will  now  read  to  tho  coDTentioii 
to  show  its  length  and  breadth: 

"Prorided,  That  the  cities  unincorporated,  or 
which  may  hereafte;-  be  incorporated,  in  this 
commonwealth,  and  to  which  a  senator  or  sena- 
tors may  be  allotted,  shall  not  together,  under 
any  future  apportionment,  be  entitled  to  more 
than  one  fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  sena- 
ators;  and  whenever,  under  any  future  appor- 
tionment, the  whole  number  of  senators  to  which 
said  cities  would  be  entitled,  shall  exceed  one 
fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  senators  for  the 
whole  state,  the  legislature  shall  apportion  the 
one  fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  senators 
among  the  cities  entitled,  according  to  some  jast 
and  equitable  mode  of  apportionment." 

And  now,  sir,  comes  the  point  to  which  so 
many  have  objected.  "And  provided,  Tliat  no 
city  shall  ever  "be  entitled  to  nnjre  than  two  sen- 
ators." Xow  what  has  l^een  laid  down  in  this 
house  as  the  great  fundamental  principle,  and  I 
will  call  upon  the  gentleman  who  has  just  sat 
down,  and  not  only  him,  but  on  every  other  who 
has  taken  the  opposite  side  of  the  question,  to 
answer.  Point  me  to  the  man  in  this  house,  or 
in  the  State  of  Kentucky,  who  denies,  as  a  gen- 
eral proposition,  the  great  fundamental  princi- 
ple that  representation  must  be  according  to 
numbers.  1  acknowledge  its  truth  in  its  full 
length  and  breadth,  and  no  man  here  denies  it. 
But  upon  theother  hand,  where  is  the  man  in 
this  house,  or  elsewhere,  who  will  deny  that 
there  is  another  principle,  paramount  to  all 
others,  in  its  operation  upon  states  and  govern- 
ments, as  well  as  upon  individuals — the  great 
principle  of  self  preservation.  Precisely  where 
one  of  these  principles  ceases,  and  the  other 
commences — or  rather  to  speak  more  accurately, 
the  point  where  thev  so  come  in  contact  that  one 
must  give  way  to  tLe  other — it  is  not  verj'  easy 
to  ascertain.  But  we  can  strike  tolerably  near 
that  point,  and  it  is  not  necessarv  therefore  for 
gentlemen  to  run  to  extremes  on  either  proposi- 
tion. Fundamental  as  is  the  first,  tlie  other  is 
omnipotent.  It  is  that  by  which  individuals  are 
authorized  to  take  the  life  of  a  fellow  creature, 
and  states  to  go  to  extremes,  when  self  preserva- 
tion, and  the  existence  of  the  state  itself,  or  of 
some  great  institution,  or  some  great  essential 
principle  is  endangered.  There  is  not  a  think- 
ing man  in  this  house  but  must  see  that  the  time 


may  come  when  tliese  two  principles  will  come 
in  contact.  It  is  inevitable,  and  it  will  take 
the  cool  deliberation,  and  sound,  clear-lieade<l 
judgment  of  a  patriot  and  statesman  to  strike 
precisely  the  true  ground  we  should  occupy.  It 
IS  with  that  view  I  offer  this  proposition,  and  I 
call  on  the  elder  and  more  experienced  gentle 
men  here  to  assist  in  perfecting  it,  for  it  is  not 
amidst  the  buz  and  confusion  (come  fn>m  what 
quarter  it  may)  that  this  calm  reflection  can  be 
attained.  Yet,  gentlemen  tell  me  that  this  prop- 
osition is  intended  to  shackle  Louisville.  Is 
that  a  fair  argument?  I  appeal  to  the  few  who 
have  attacked  this  proposition  with  the  threat 
that  I  or  any  man  who  voted  with  me,  shall  be 
denounced  throughout  this  commonwealth — 
that  we  are  endeavoring  to  shackle  Louisville, 
and  shall  bring  down  upon  us  the  denunciations 
of  the  press  to  stay  their  hand  and  think  Ix'fore 
they  strike.  Tell  me  not  that  we  are  to  be  fright- 
ened from  our  propriety  by  any  arguments  of 
tliat  sort,  or  any  anticipations  of  such  an  event. 
!  I  am  sensible,  as  is  probably  every  man  here, 
i  that  it  is  not  representation  alone  that  gives 
I  power,  and  strength,  and  influence  to  cities.  No, 
1  sir,  there  are  other  and  almost  as  powerful  causes 
I  operating  upon  us.  What  are  theyV  Is  not  the 
I  power  of  the  press  of  Louisville  nearly  equal  to 
that  of  the  three  delegates  on  this  floo"r?  Their 
delegates  act  upon  the  opinions  and  influence 
the  votes  of  other  delegates  by  their  arguments 
and  impassioned  eloquence;  and  they  have  few 
equals  on  this  floor.  The  press  speaks  with  lan- 
guage equally  as  strong,  and  goes  not  only  to 
this  hall,  but  throughout  the  state.  Its  power, 
too,  operates  strongly  on  the  gentlemen  here, 
and  few  there  are  who  are  not  alive  to  its  praise 
and  sensitive  to  its  attack.  The  sprey  from  the 
pen  of  some  of  its  correspondents  has  reached 
to  the  hem  of  mv  garments,  and  I  am  not  sure  it 
may  not  have  disturbed  my  equanimity.  The 
power  of  ridicule,  strongly  as  some  gentlemen 
j)ossess  it  here,  and  which  has  already  fright- 
ened from  their  propriety,  I  fear  some  of  the 
members  of  this  house,  who  originally  favored 
my  proposition,  is  not  as  strong  as  that  power  of 
ridicule  possessed  by  some  of  the  press  of  our 
cities,  and  which,  too,  operates  as  far  as  the  Eng- 
lish language  is  read.  And  is  not  this  element 
of  power  p-jsse.ssed  by  the  cities  to  be  taken  into 
consideration?  I  speak  of  it  so  far  as  it  influ- 
ences public  opinion.  And  who  would  deny 
that  legislation  was  influenceil  by  public  opin- 
ion? Every  member  comes  up  here  imbued 
with  the  public  sentiment  prevailing  in  this 
country;  and  how  was  that  sentiment  formed? 
Previous  to  the  meeting  of  the  legislature;  was 
it  not  as  much  by  the  newspaper  press  as  any 
thing  else? 

This  thing  narrows  itself  down  to  a  nutshell, 
at  last;  for  although  we  may  not  be  able  to  strike 
exactly  the  proper  point  itself,  it  is  not  so  diffi- 
cult a  proposition  to  comprehend  as  some  gen- 
tlemen .seem  to  imagine.  Our  ancestors  in  1799, 
who  have  been  praised  to  the  very  skies  by  gen- 
tlemen on  the  other  side,  have  incorporated  in 
our  constitution  a  principle,  that  up  to  this  day 
no  man  denies.     What  is  it? 

"  Representation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  forever  be  reg- 


4>1; 


tilated  and  aacertaihed  by  tlie  numberof  qualdeJ 
voters  therein." 

Now  turn  to  tlie  opposite  page,  ■written  by  the 
same  patrioti(%  wi-;c,  niul  nobl'-  n\e<i  who  maile 
this  constitution,  ainl  wliat  do  wo  find  tlieruV 
In  apportioning  tlio  senators,  that  same  consti- 
tution says,  "that  no  countyshall  be  divided,  or 
form  more  than  one  district." 

AVlaat  becomes,  now,  oi"  all  your  patriotic  fer- 
vor, of  all  your  admiration  of  your  ancestors  of 
1799,  when  they  incorporated  tliis  clause  also,  in 
the  same  constitution'/  If  tliey  are  shackles  up- 
on you,  as  you  say,  I  propose  to  strike  them 
from  your  limbs,  and  let  this  young  giant  of 
Kentucky  walk  forth  in  all  its  full  proportions 
and  strength.  I  propose  to  go  even  farther.  I 
am  willing  to  say  that  Louisville,  as  she  is  now, 
and  as  she  will  be  with  her  future  increase  of 
natural,  or  rather  native  born  population,  shall 
be  represented  to  tlie  very  fullest  extent  you 
dare  ask.  What,  then,  is  the  converse  of  this 
proposition?  It  is  plainly  this.  That  you  may 
take  Louisville,  as  she  is,  or  as  she  will  be  fifty 
years  hence,  provided  she  goes  on  increasing, 
alone  by  the  natural  increase  of  her  present  pop- 
ulation, whether  that  p  jpulation  is  native  or 
foreign;  and  supposing  she  increases  in  popula- 
tion twice  as  fast  as  the  rural  parts  of  the  state, 
and  sir,  fifty  years  hence,  yon  enjoy  all  the 
strength  in  both  houses  of  the  legislature  that 
you  would  be  entitled  to,  if  my  amendment  was 
not  adopted.  But  the  increase  of  population 
against  whose  influence  we  intend  to  guard,  is 
that  which  is  the  result  of  immigration  from 
abroad,  wliether  from  foreign  states,  or  from  for- 
eign lancls  exterior  to  the  United  States.  Then 
the  question  comes  np,  whether  we  have  aright 
to  do  so.  Has  brave  and  good  old  Kentucky,  as 
Khe  i.s  now,  tlie  right  to  provide  that  in  all  fu- 
ture time,  she  shall  bear  at  least  some  faint  re- 
semblance to  wliat  she  is  now — to  the  land  in 
which  we  now  live,  and  love  so  much,  becau.se 
she  is  just  lohat  she  is?  Or  shall  we  now  place 
her  in  a  position  in  which  Kentucky,  as  she  now 
is,  shall  be  ruletl  and  governed  by  what  Ken- 
tucky may  become,  when  this  flood  of  immigra- 
tion from  abroad  shall  pour  in  upon  her,  and  be- 
come, in  her  cities,  a  majority  of  the  population"? 
I  provide  for  that  contingency  also.  It  is  not 
applicable  to  Louisville  alone,  but  to  every  city 
that  may  grow  up,  either  on  the  Ohio  or  else- 
where in  the  state.  You  are  to  have  tAvo  sena- 
tors each  of  you,  but  the  representation  in  that 
branch  of  tlie  legislature,  from  all  of  you  com- 
bined, shall  only  be  one-fourth  of  that  of  the 
"Whole  state.  Is  tliis  a  wise  provision?  Bear  in 
mind  that  I  offered  this  pjroposition  three  days 
ago,  and  before  this  debate  had  sprung  up  and 
gone  to  the  extent  which  it  has.  It  was  suggest- 
ed on  mature  reflection,  looking  at,  and  with  a 
"view  to,  occupy  and  cover  the  whole  ground. 
And  does  it  not  do  so?  Cities  are  to  spring  np, 
not  only  in  the  border  counties,  but  in  the  inte- 
rior— manufacturing  cities.  There  is  the  length 
and  breadth  of  the  whole  matter.  Commerce,  of 
itself,  will  never  make  a  city  large  enough  to  be- 
come dangerous  to  the  country,  in  any  point  of 
view  whatever.  Commerce  is  too  transitory. 
It  is  the  manufacturing  establishments,  the  la- 
borers which  are  here  to-day  and  stay  so  long 
as  they  get  wages,  and  who,  when  they  can  get 


them  no  longer,  go  elsewhere.  Or  if  ihey  be- 
come rich  in  Kentucky,  we  know  that  in  Ken- 
tucky they  do  not  settle.  When  wasies  have 
made  them  so  independent  as  to  buy  land,  where 
do  your  manufacturers  go?  Do  they  buv  land 
in  Kentucky?  No  sir.  Their  hearts,  their  pre- 
viously formed  opinions,  and  sometimes  their 
conscientious  opinions  on  a  peculiar  subject, 
carry  them  o\it  of  Kentucky  into  a  non-slave- 
holding  state.  Count  them  ujj — those  whom 
you  know  to  live  by  manufat-turing — and  an- 
swer me  this  simple  question  :  Of  all  the  opera- 
tives in  the  manufacturing  establishments,  who 
are  now,  or  may  be  entitled  to  vote,  is  there 
more  than  one  in  five  who  is  not  at  heart  and  in 
conscience  an  emancipationist?  Such,  at  all 
events,  has  been  my  experience.  liaised  and 
educated  where  they  were — nine  out  of  ten  of 
them— it  is  notat  all  astonishing  that  they  should 
entertain  opinions  hostile  to  this  institution. 
They  do  not  know  tlie  relative  position  between 
master  and  slave  in  this  state,  and  opinions  have 
been  ground  into  them  on  a  false  statement  of 
facts,  which  make  them  conscientiously  antag- 
onistic, and,  to  some  extent,  imbued  witli  strong 
antipathies  to  the  slaveholders  throughout  the 
state.  Am  I  right  in  these  facts?  Will  the  in- 
creased votes  in  these  factories,  as  they  grow  up, 
continue  to  be  of  the  same  character?  I  believe 
they  will,  and  so  believing,  I  have  done — what? 
1  have  only  provided  for  the  future  protection  of 
the  interest  of  Kentucky,  in  her  slaves. 

It  was  a  daring  deed  in  the  man  who  first  in- 
troduced this  question  here,  because  he  must 
have  known  then,  that  lie  would  bring  down 
upon  himself  not  only  the  powers  of  ridicule 
and  the  sneers  of  those  who  stand  opposed  to 
him,  but  also  of  a  very  powerful  opposition  at 
home.  He  who  has  and  does  risk  all  this,  at 
least  deserves  some  credit  for  sincerity  of  opin- 
ion, because  he  may  be  loser,  and  can  be  by  no 
possibility  a  gainer  thereby.  In  mere  popularity 
seeking,  and  in  making  votes  for  hims<!lf,  he 
cannot  be  a  gainer,  and  he  must  be  a  loser.  Is 
the  question  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  make  it 
a  duty  to  asssume  this  risk?  That  is  a  question 
for  every  man  to  ask  of  himself.  Here,  on  the 
one  hand  is  the  strong  fundamental  principle, 
that  not  only  now,  but  in  all  future  time,  repre- 
sentation shall  be  based  on  population  ;  on  the 
other  hand  is  the  present  increase  and  the  prob- 
able continued  increase  of  those  numbers,  of  a 
character  that  may  become  dangerous — and  be- 
fore it  becomes  so,  I  wish  to  arrest  it.  Just  liere 
let  me  ask,  if  gentlemen  are  correct  in  their  po- 
sitions, why  they  do  not  vote  formy  amendment? 
You  say  that  there  is  not  the  slightest  danger 
that  all  the  cities  combined  ever  will  have  more 
tlian  one  quarter  of  the  senators  of  the  state. 
Then  vote  for  the  proposition.  Their  influence 
will  not  become  dangerous  until  it  docs  amount 
to  something  like  one  quarter  of  tliat  of  the 
state,  and  right  there  I  want  to  stop  it.  But  it 
is  said  that  we  shall  then  come  in  contact  with 
another  principle  equally  as  strong  and  power- 
ful as  this:  that  representation  should  be  in  pro- 
portion to  taxation,  or  in  still  plainer  teims,  that 
men  should  not  bo  taxed  where  tliey  are  not 
represented.  Turn  over  to  the  last  article  of  the 
constitution,  and  you  will  there  find  that  all  biU« 
laying  taxation  must  originate  in  the  lower  house. 


^3 


Now  I  Jo  not  propose  to  limit  the  represeutation 
in  the  lower  house,  of  any  city  throughout  the 
state;  and  why"?  In  order  thatVe  may  not  come 
in  coutact  -n-itK  more  principles  than  are  neces- 
sary. Whenever  a  man  is  taxed,  he  ought  and 
must  have  the  power  of  representation,  and 
furtliermore,  his  voice  ought  to  be  heard  in  the 
other  branch  in  order  that  when  the  bill  goes 
there  it  may  be  fairly  debated  and  understood. 
And  for  this  purpose',  I  give  these  cities  a  repre- 
sentation in  the  upper  branch,  and  at  the  same 
time  allow  them  their  full  ratio  in  the  lower 
house.  There  is,  therefore,  full  representation 
where  taxation  only  can  be  originated — in  the 
lower  house,  and  therefore  my  amendment  is  not 
in  violation  of  that  great  principle.  Cast  vour 
eye  rapidly  over  the  map  of  the  state,  and  look 
at  the  nuuiber  of  cities  now  approximating  to 
the  right  of  separate  senatorial  representation. 
Louisville  is  entitled  to  one,  and  nearly  to  two; 
Covington,  JIaysville,  Lexington,  and  Newport, 
each  nearly  one.  Well,  the  senate  is  to  consist 
of  thirty-eight  members,  and  if  we  give  to  these 
cities  to  be  divided  among,  nine,  or  at  furthest, 
beyond  which  I  will  not  consent  to  go,  ten  sena- 
ators,  out  of  that  number,  ought  that  not  to  sat- 
isfy them  for  the  next  fifty  years  at  least? 

We  were  told  in   loud   and   stentorian   tones, 
that  fell  upon  the  ear  like  peals  of  thunder,  by 
the  President  of  this  convention,  that  whenever 
the  institution  of  slavery  was  in  such  a  predic- 
ament, that  a  majority  of  the  people  of  Kentuc- 
ky were  opposed  to  it,  it  would  not  be  worth  de- 
fending.     That  is  the  very  thing  against  which  j 
I  wish  to  provide.     I  do   not  fear  that   slavery' 
ever  will  be  driven  to  that  position  in  Kentucky  ! 
by  Kentuckians,  or  the  descendants  of  Keiituck-  j 
ians,  as  slie  now  exists,  but  tlie  time  may  come  ; 
when  the  population  that  now  pours  into  the  fac-  j 
tories  of  the  state,  will  become  a  majority.     lam  j 
the  la«t  man  in  the  house  to  prevent  the  building ' 
up.  or  the  increase,  and  the  rapid  increase,  of  fac-  j 
tories  in  this  state.     I  go  for  a  manufacturing  r 
state.     No  man  in  this  place  favors  more  than  I  j 
do,  the  increase  of  our  cities.      God  send  that ' 
Louisville  may  have   a  population   of  500,000,  j 
and  I  could  speak  by  the  hour  of  the  advanta- 
ges which  would  result  therefrom   to  the  rural  i 
population  of  the  state.      But  because  I  enter- 1 
tain  these  sentiments,  is  it  less  my  duty  to  pro-  j 
vide  for  the  future  protection,  if  not  salvatiou  of  | 
the  rest  of  the  state?     Louisville  is  held  up  here  ! 
as  if  she  was  attacked  by  this  proposition.      So 
far  from  that,  1  go  for  taking  off  the  shackles 
now  placed  on  her  by   the   present  constitution. 
You  tell  me  that  the  young  lion  is  caged,  and  I 
am  willing  to  .strike  off  the   bars.      But  I  want 
also,  to  place  a  chain  around  him  so  that  when 
he  attains  the  plenitude  of  his  strength  and  pow- 
er, the  balance  of  the  state  may  be  protected 
against  injurj-  from  its  exercise.      What  is  the 
reply?     Why  that  this  young  lion  will  never  at- 
tain that  strength  and   power  that  will  enable 
him  to  work  this  injury  to  the   balance  of  the 
state,  and  that  therefore,  there  is  no  need  of  this 
chain  of  safety.      If  that  be  true,   then  no  evil 
can  result  from  putting  the  chain  upon  him,  as  he 
never  will  feel  it  until  his  strength  does  become 
thus  dangerous. 

The  influence  of  Louisville  may  never  become 
dangerous,  until  its  increase  of  numbers  is  such 
65 


as  to  outvote  the  rest  of  the  state.  And  as  thiB 
is  at  least  pos.sible,  then  it  becomes  the  duty  of 
the  present  race  ot  native  bom  Kentuckians,  or 
of  those  now  here  to  protect  their  native  bom 
children,  and  their  children's  children,  against 
its  results  in  the  future.  And  when  I  say  na- 
tive born  I  mean  all  now  in  Kentucky.  And  in 
regard  to  the  foreigners  now  resident  in  the 
state,  whether  naturalized  or  not,  I  declare  that 
so  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with  their  opinions 
there  is  not  one  who  does  not  agree  with  me  in 
the  opinion  that,  the  time  may  come  when  the 
large  cities  in  this  state,  like 'those  of  Europe, 
will  rule  and  govern,  and  sometimes  with  an  iron 
rod,  the  rural  districts  around  them.  That  is 
what  I  am  looking  forward  to.  I  want  now 
while  we  have  the  power  to  throw  the  necessary 
protection  around  our  slave  property,  for  unless 
this  protection  is  provided  now,  in  twenty  or 
thirty  years  from  this  time,  we  may  not  be  able 
to  provide  it. 

1  to  some  extent  agree  with  the  sentiment  of 
the  President.  Whenever  a  majority  of  our 
population  turns  agaiust  slavery,  it  is  in  some 
danger,  but  whenever  a  majority  of  the  votes  iu 
both  badls  of  the  legislature  turns  against  it,  it  is 
gone.  Put  in  your  constitution  whatever  safe- 
guards you  may  choose, and  I  will  show  you  how 
they  will  be  evaded.  They  need  not  violate 
the'constitutiou,  but  they  can  drive  every  sliive 
out  of  the  state  by  a  rule  as  inevitable  in  its  ef- 
fects as  that  two  and  two  make  four.  You  have 
not  yet  provided  against  special  taxation,  and 
whenever  you  do  attempt  it,  you  will  find  array- 
ed against  you  a  most  powerful  interest.  I  will 
show  you  at  once  by  what  a  simple  process,  if 
they  liad  now  a  majority  in  the  legislature,  the 
emancipationists  could  drive  out  every  negro  in 
the  Stat*;,  and  at  the  same  time  not  interfere  with 
the  priuciples  of  the  constitution.  Let  them  tax 
every  negro  in  the  state  fifty  dollars  as  a  specific 
tax. '  Why  even  now  my  spectacles  are  taxed  fif- 
ty cents  a  year,  and  God  knows  I  would  not 
wear  them  if  I  could  help  it.  Tax  the  negroes 
fifty  dollars  a  head,  aud  the  slave  owner  would 
at  once  begin  to  calculate  whether  they  were  suf 
ficiently  profitable  to  him  to  allow  him  to  keep 
them  and  to  pay  this  tax.  How  many  would 
keep  them?  But  suppose  they  all  did,  and  that 
some  ten  years  afterwards  the  emancipationists 
found  they  had  not  driven  the  slaves  out,  they 
could  at  once  double  the  tax  and  increase  it  to 
one  hundred  dollars  a  head.  All  know  that  this 
is  a  tax  which  the  slave  owner  could  not  exist 
under.  Now  my  amendment  provides  for  this 
contingency  to  this  extent:  that  while  the  city 
and  manufacturing  population  will  be  fully  rep- 
resented in  tlie  lower  house,  and  able  to  protect 
themselves,  I  want  this  other  interest  to  be  strong 
enough  to  protect  itself  in  the  upper  house.  I 
want  one  house  still  left  to  stand  firm  for  Ken- 
tucky as  Kentucky  is  now  and  as  I  want  her  de- 
scendants to  be  hereafter.  Let  that  day  come 
when  tlie  emancipationists  shall  triumph,  and 
what  will  become  of  nine- tenths  of  the  gentle- 
men in  this  hall.  We  will  be  in  some  foreign, 
some  southern  state  perhaps,  and  when  asked 
from  whence  we  came,  like  the  Swiss  exile,  we 
will  say, 

"We  carae  from  Kentucky,  for  she  was  Kentucky  of  yore. 
But  degraded  spot  o(  earth,  ihou  art  Kentucky  iio  more," 


514 


and  we  left  her.  This  would  be  the  fate  of  one 
half  if  not  two,  thirds  of  the  representatives  in 
this  house,  and  their  descendants.  Like  begets 
like,  and  the  noble  and  free  spirits  here  now  have 
a  right  to  expect  that  their  children  will  possess 
the  same  spirit.  You  have  a  right  to  suppose 
that  the  high  and  chivalrous  feelings  of  the 
slaveliolding  people  will  go  down  to  our 
children,  and  that  when  this  institution  shall 
have  been  expelled  through  the  means  I  have 
spoken  of,  they  will  depart  from  their  beloved 
Iventucky.  And  I  would  therefore  provide 
against  tne  occurrence  of  such  a  contingency. 
"Coming   events   cast  their   shadows  before.'" 

Look  at  the  speech  of  the  gentleman  fro!n 
Kenton — I  ask  pardon  of  the  gentleman  from 
Kenton,  (Mr.  Stevenson,)  I  meant  the  gentleman 
from  Campbell,  (Mr.  Root,) — for  the  centre  of 
heaven  is  not  further  from  the  crater  of  the  in- 
fernal world  than  the  gentlemen  are  from  each  oth- 
er on  the  subject  of  slavery — and  you  will  see  that 
this  feeling  is  already  becoming  manifest.  I  al- 
lude to  the  gentleman  whose  speech  in  the  house 
■will  be  the  Root  of  ten  thousand  evils.  "What 
will  be  the  effect  of  his  speech  in  and  out  of  this 
state,  declaring  that  slavery  is  a  curse — a  curse 
to  the  white  man  and  a  curse  to  the  black?  What 
also  will  be  the  effect  of  his  declaration  that  if 
he  believed  the  bible  sanctionedslavery  he  would 
agree  to  tear  the  leaf  from  its  place,  and  deny 
the  authenticity  of  its  Idgh  character!  And  this 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  a  fanatical  opinion 
into  operation!  The  Christian  religion  is  to  be 
desecrated  and  made  to  fall  before  this  immense 
fanaticism.  There  is  a  sample  of  the  extent  to 
which  fanaticism  drives  even  a  mind  tolerably 
well  regulated.  And  when  we  see  it  in  these 
halls,  having  that  effect  on  a  mind  tolerably 
well  regulated,  what  may  we  anticipate  from  fu- 
ture events.  And  I  for  one  am  determined  to 
prepare  for  these  coming  events. 

Look  also  to  the  gentleman  from  Fleming, 
(Mr.  Garfielde),  and  the  arguments  he  has 
made  use  of  here.  When  we  first  met  here,  we 
■were  as  a  band  of  brothers,  I  thought,  harmoni- 
ous on  this  one  subject;  but  the  very  moment  a 
question  is  started  bringing  out  a  man's  inner- 
most thoughts,  we  find  difHculties  springing  in- 
to existence.  We  now  perceive  that  there  are  at 
least  two  members  on  this  floor  who  look  upon 
slavery  as  a  great  moral,  religious,  and  political 
evil.  How  many  more  there  may  be,  we  do  not 
know.  Now  the  gentleman  from  Fleming,  when 
he  uttered  this  opinion,  told  us  that  he  was 
raised  in  the  pure  mountain  air  of  the  state  of 
New  Hampshire.  I  am  glad  he  was  raised 
there,  at  least  I  rejoice  he  was  not  born  or  rais- 
ed in  Kentucky.  Where  are  your  manufacturers 
and  operatives  to  come  from?  Are  they  not  also  to 
come  from  the  pure  mountain  air  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, orfroni  the  non-slaveholding  states  of  this 
Union,  or  from  Europe,  where  the  emancipation 
feelings  are  as  deeply  ground  into  them  as  in  the 
non-slaveholding  states.  Nine  out  of  ten  are 
immigrants  from  the  non-slaveholding  states.  I 
have  no  question  about  it,  and  I  ask  gentlemen 
therefore,  to  review  their  opinions.  I  am  the 
last  man  to  shackle  Louisville,  or  any  of  the 
cities,  and  I  only  ask  now  that  we  may  provide 
for  a  contingency,  that  it  is  evident  to  all 
muBt  happen  if  they  continue  to  increase  in  the 


manner  they  have.  I  ask  them  then  to  review 
their  opinions  and  .see  if  they  are  doing  strict  jus- 
tice to  their  present  constituency?  Who  are 
those  constituents?  Are  gentlemen  who  are 
now  in  your  counties,  voting  for  or  against  you, 
your  constituents,  or  are  your  constituents  those 
who  may  immigrate  to  this  state  fifteen  or  twen- 
ty years  hence?  Here  are  your  constituents  and 
the  men  to  whose  interests  you  ought  now 
to  look.  Look  to  the  interests  of  your  constitu- 
ents as  they  are  now,  and  defend  those  interests 
as  they  are  now,  against  those  who  may  hereaf- 
ter attempt  to  interfere  with  and  destroy  them. 
I  am  not  done,  but  I  must  stop,  becau.se  my  voice 
and  my  strength  are  exhausted.  If  I  find  it  ne- 
cessary I  will  resume  this  subject,  and  finish  it 
hereafter. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  The  eloquence,  the  abili- 
ty, and  the  violence  of  this  debate,  attest,  in 
my  humble  judgment,  the  importance  of  the 
question,  which  Is  involved  in  it.  I  represent  a 
portion  of  the  state,  which  if  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Franklin  prevails,  is  to  come 
under  the  ban  of  proscription;  but  while  I  am  vital- 
ly interested  as  an  individual,  and  still  more  as  a 
representative  of  those  whose  rights  are  to  be  os- 
tracised, I  shall  not  discuss  the  question  in  any 
local  or  sectional  view.  I  have  been  surprised  at 
the  amendment,  and  still  moi'e  sui-prisfcd  at  the 
arguments  which  have  beeu  adduced  in  support 
of  it.  I  understand  that  the  object  of  all  govern- 
ment is  to  produce  the  greatest  happiness  to 
the  greatest  number,  and  that  that  government  is 
best,  which  nearest  approximates  to  this  result. 
I  have  understood,  and  I  had  not  supposed  that 
there  was  a  delegate  on  this  floor,  who  denied 
what  my  eloquent  friend  from  Daviess,  (Mr. 
Triplett)  has  just  announced,  that  population 
was  to  be  the  true  and  only  basis  of  representa- 
tion. He  asked  us  in  very  eloquent  and  earnest 
terms,  is  there  a  man  on  this  floor,  who  would 
dare  to  deny  that  proposition?  I  reply  to  him, 
there  sits  my  friend  from  Franklin,  who  dis- 
tinctly announced  last  night,  that  he  denied  it, 
and  who  boldly  asserted  that  numbers  alone 
ought  not  to  be  the  basis  of  representation,  but 
that  it  should  rest  on  numbers  and  territory  com- 
bined. He  Avas  asked  the  question,  and  he  de- 
fined his  position.  I  leave  then  the  answer  of 
the  gentleman  from  Franklin  as  a  full  and  com- 
plete one,  to  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  both 
of  them  acting  side  by  side,  not  it  is  true,  on 
this  particular  amendment,  but  on  a  principle 
which  is  embraced  in  both  these  amendments. 
Sir,  we  have  made  poor  progress  in  this  mighty 
ago  of  improvement,  if  after  fifty  odd  years,  we 
are  to  retrograde  and  by  our  action  in  tliis  body 
practically  tieiiy  the  great  principle,  that  popula- 
tion is  the  true  and  only  proper  basis  of  represen- 
tation. I  propose  briefly  to  reply  to  my  friend  t 
from  Daviess, and  atteinptan  answerto  theseveral  fc 
arguments  of  gentlemen  who  have  preceded  ? 
him.  I  shall  attempt  to  show  that  while  the 
friends  of  this  amendment  may,  and  honestly  too, 
(for  I  impugn  neither  the  motives,  integrity,  hou-  iL 
or  or  honesty  of  any  gentleman  on  this  floor,)  J 
spurn  tlie  imputation  of  disregarding  this  great  * 
principle,  yet  that  their  action  and  profession 
are  in  direct  conflict;  and  if  I  establisn  the  fact 
that  the  adoption  of  this  contradicts  their  pro- 
fessions, I  shall  ask  and  expect  them  to  retrace 


515 


their  steps  and  come  baok  with  us  to  fundaiuen-  j 
tal  principles.     It  is   a   fundamental  principle,  ^ 
sir,  tliat  population  is  the  only  true  basis  of  rep- ; 
r&sentation — a  principle,  the  greatness  of  which  i 
all  profess  to  admire,  and  to  abide  by  too.     The  j 
violent,  the  able  and  the  ingenious  attacks  that 
have  been  made  upon  it,  omy  .show  its  impreg- 
nability to  attack,  in  despite  of  the   eloquence  ; 
and  ability  ot  the  distiuguislied  gentleman  from  1 
Bourbon — in  despite  of  the  subtle  reasoning  of 
the  gentleman  from  Franklin — notwithstanding  | 
tlie  gigantic  efforts  of  my  venerable  friend  from  | 
Xelson — the  burning  and  fervid  eloquence  of  my  | 
friend  from  Davies.s — and  the  cool,  dispassion-  j 
ate  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Lincoln — in 
despite  of  all  this  combined  mass  of  talent,  that  | 
niightv  principle,  untouched  and  uninjured,  still  j 
rears  us  truthful  head  above  the  conflict,  Tene-  j 
eriffe  like,  as  quiet  as  the  sky,  but  as  mighty  as  j 
the  sea.     Sir,  it  is  a  principle  dear  to  freeemen  j 
and  only  to  be  fearea  by  tyrants.     That  princi- 
ple is  now  sought  to  be  overthrown.  I 
I  always  listen  with  pleasure  and   intere.st  to  ! 
the  distinguished  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  (Mr. 
Davis,}  but  he  will   pardon   me   for  saving  his 
argument  was   more  specious  than  solid.     He 
told  us  tliat  there  was  no  equality  in  government, 
and  that  though  the  declaration  of  American  In- 
dependence, and  all  our  state   constitutions  by  | 
their  bill  of  rights,  recognized  men  as  free  and  ■ 
equal,  that  there  was  no  such  thing  as   perfect  I 
equality.     I  admit  it ;  but  while  there  is  no  such  i 
thing  as  perfect  equal itv,  we   certainly  can   ap- 

Eroximate  to  it.  If  it  is  a  principle  wortliy  of, 
eing  acquired,  let  us,  in  this  age  of  progress,  if; 
we  cannot  attain  it,  approximate  as  near  to  the  i 
promised  goal  as  we  can.  Do  not  let  us  go  back;  j 
do  not  let  usretrogade  in  this  mighty  march  ofi 
sci.nce  and  intellect.  If  we  cannot  reach  perfec- , 
tion,  and  there  is  nothing  human  perfect,  do  not  i 
let  us  stop  and  give  up  the  contest,  but  press  j 
with  vigor  on.  Why  sir,  the  highest  hopes  of| 
man,  not  only  here,  but  hereafter,  would  be  cut  | 
off,  if  such  a  rule  should  prevail.  He  cannot  j 
reach  perfection  but  by  reliance  on  a  higher  pow- : 
er;  he  can  through  the  mercv  and  mediation  of| 
his  saviour,  with  fervent  and  unshrinking  faith  I 
in  him,  become  a  holier  and  better  man.  Does  i 
the  exception  proposed  by  the  gentleman  con-  j 
tradict  the  propriety  of  approximating  to  this  i 
equality  1  He  asks  why  are  not  women  repre- 
sented ?  Their  very  nature  forbids  their  partici- } 
pation  in  government.  They  become  exceptions  i 
to  the  rule;  the  very  exception  proves  it.  And  j 
here  I  would  ask,  what  rule  is  there  to  which  j 
exceptions  are  not  to  be  found?  Women  are  not  i 
the  only  exception  to  this  rule  of  equality.  It  j 
applies  to  lunatics,  and  to  infants.  They  are  : 
founded  still  upon  reason,  upon  justice,  and  up-  ; 
on  the  high  principles  which  tend  to  the  per-  | 
fection  of  government.  These  lunatics  and  in- ', 
fants  have  not  that  maturity  of  intellect,  neces- 1 
sary  to  attain  and  to  take  their  part  in  the  for- ' 
mation  of  the  government  provided  for  the  lib-  i 
erty  of  man,  and  the  protection  of  his  property. 
I  think  then,  that  there  is  nothing  in  this  excep- 
tion, but  that  the  exception  itself  only  proves 
the  rule.  We  were  next  referred  to  the  ^deral 
government,  both  by  the  gentleman  from  Xelson, 
and  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  We  were  em- 
phatically asked  to  look  at  the  organization  of  the 


U.  States  senate  for  a  contradiction  of  this  rule 
of  equality.  I  ask  both  of  these  distinguished 
gentlemen',  if  the  distinction  between  the  federal 
and  the  state  government  is  not  self-evident?  I 
ask  if  their  whole  operation,  their  whole  object 
and  their  whole  character  is  not  entirely  distinct. 
If  their  structure  does  not,  for  obvious  reasons, 
so  far  as  representation  is  concerned,  rest  on 
a  different  basis  ?  Some  of  the.se  distinctions 
were  ably  and  eloquently  pointed  out  by  my 
friend  from  Anderson,  but  he  did  not  run 
out  the  parallel  of  dissimilarity  V  The  fed- 
eral government  is  not  a  perfect  and  plena- 
ry government  for  all  purposes.  It  is  a  lim- 
ited government  with  limited  powers.  It  does 
not  partake  of  the  sovereignty  or  the  char- 
acteristics of  the  state  government.  It  was  de- 
signed for  specific  purposes.  All  power  not  del- 
egated to  it  was  retained  in  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple. The  federal  government  has  not  a  right  to 
interfere  with  the  municipal  regulations  of  the 
states.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson,  spoke  of 
this  balance  in  the  senate.  Sir,  the  federal  gov- 
ernment is  a  union  of  sovereignties,  whereas  the 
government  of  Kentucky  is  a^pUection  of  indi- 
viduals, each  of  whom  is  regarded  as  a  sovereign. 
In  the  federal  government  we  have  a  diversity  of 
interests.  It  is  charged  with  ourforeign  relations. 
It  is  clothed  with  power  to  settle  differences  be- 
tween the  states,  as  members  of  a  common  con- 
federacy. It  is  composed  of  thirty  distinct  sov 
reigniies — co-equal  and  indepeudent ;  but  in 
each  of  these  states,  exist  jarring  and  local  in- 
terests, diametrically  opposed,  and  the  framers 
of  that  mighty  iustruiuent,  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States  foresaw  this,  and  therefore  pro- 
vided for  it.  How '!  By  checks  and  balances. 
By  giving  to  each  of  the  several  slates  equality 
of  representation  in  the  senate,  and  carrying  out 
the  principles  of  minibers  in  the  lower  house. 
This  was  necessary-  to  reconcile  opposite  inter- 
ests. But  is  there  any  such  cause  existing  in 
Kentucky  V  We  are  an  association  of  brothers, 
bound  together  for  a  common  purpose — and  that 
purpose  is  the  formation  of  a  government.  This 
government  has  no  jarring  elements  of  discord — 
no  opposing  antagonistical  interests.  The  peo- 
ple of  this  revered  old  commonwealth  have  no 
cause  for  any  jealousy  towards  each  other, 
whether  in  the  north  or  south,  the  east  orthewest, 
but  feeling  ourselves  Kentuckians  in  heart  and 
feeling,  and  bound  together  by  the  cords  of  com- 
mon interests  and  kindred  affection,  we  have 
only  to  act  for  the  general  good.  Is  there,  when 
you  look  then  at  the  character  of  the  two  gov- 
ernments, any  thing  to  be  drawn  in  favor  of  the 
argument  that  proposes  to  violate  the  great  prin- 
ciple of  representation  in  the  state  government, 
on  the  basis  of  numbers,  because  in  the  senate 
of  the  United  States,  as  one  of  the  checks  and 
balances  that  entered  into  the  composition  of  the 
federal  government,  this  principle  was  disregar- 
ded ?  Can  the  same  reasons  which  led  to  the 
lormation  of  the  United  States  senate  apply  to 
the  state  of  Kentucky  ?     Unquestionably  not. 

My  friend  from  Nelson  knows  that  under  the 
federal  government  the  judges  are  appointed, 
and  yet  one  of  the  objects  for  which  he  came  to 
this  house,  as  repeatedlv  announced  to  us  by 
himself,  was  to  secure  the  popular  election  of 
the  judges.    Why  sir,  the  very  fact  that  he  cam« 


51^ 


here  amiounciug  that  object,  takes  away  the 
force  of  his  argument,  destroys  his  attempted  an- 
alogy between  the  two  governments,  ana  shows 
that  the  state  of  Kentucky  rests  in  its  govern- 
ment upon  wholly  and  totally  different  founda- 
tions from  that  of  the  federal  government.  My 
friend  from  Daviess  concedes  this  principle,  that 
numbers  and  numbers  alone  is  the  true  basis  of 
representation;  and  yet  his  amendment  propo- 
ses to  violate  it.  Ho  attempts  to  justify  himself, 
however,  by  another  principle,  which  he  says  is 
equally  sacred  and  undeniable,  and  that  is  the 
principle  of  self-preservation.  He  says  that 
"these  two  principles  must  go  together,  pari  pas- 
su." He  is  satisfied  that  self-preser%'^ation  will 
justify  a  violation  here  of  the  principle  of  num- 
bers. And  he  likens  it  to  the  case  of  two  drown- 
ing men  on  a  plank,  where,  for  self-presers-ation, 
one  has  the  right  to  throw  the  other  off.  Now 
let  me  ask  my  friend  that  if  he  was  to  avow 
that  principle,  and  to  justify  himself  by  it  in  a 
court  of  law,  whether  the  onus  would  not  be  on 
him  to  show  that  the  necessity  existed"?  Can  he 
show  that  the  necessity  exists?  Surely  he 
"Would  not  contem  that  the  variety  of  physical 
and  mental  formations  among  men,  and  the  un- 
certain tests  of  their  poor  judgment,  should 
alone  decide  upon  so  dire  a  necessity.  For  ex- 
ample, if  he  and  1  were  in  a  skiff  crossing  the 
Ohio  river,  and  the  skiff  should  cortimence  rock- 
ing, and  I,  a  poor  cowardly  miserable  creature, 
with  weak  nerves,  should  become  alarmed  at  the 
first  jostle,  would  I  have  the  right  to  throw  him 
out  and  drown  him,  and  then  come  forward  and 
justify  myself  on  the  ground  that  I  thought  my- 
self in  danger  and  self-preservation  required  it? 
Is  the  cowardly,  the  constitutionally  timid  man, 
when  he  sees  danger  rather  in  his  imagination 
than  in  fact,  and  fears  that  he  shall  be  attacked 
when  there  is  no  possible  ground  for  such  fear, 
is  he  to  draw  a  weapon  and  kill  an  unoffending 
man,  and  then  be  allowed  to  justify  himself  on 
ihis  principle,  that  he  thought  himseif  in  dan- 
ger? Is  this  the  principle  of  self-preservation 
that  the  gentleman  from  Daviess  speaks  of?  No, 
ray  friend  is  too  good  a  lawyer  to  argue  or  con- 
tend for  such  a  position.  The  man  who  com- 
mits murder  and  justifies  under  a  plea  of  self- 
defence,  must  show  the  absolute  existence  of 
such  necessity.  So  I  say  the  onus  is  upon  him 
to  show  that  the  citizens  of  the  cities  of  this 
commonwealth,  Kentuckians  as  they  are,  and 
looking  as  they  do  upon  all  the  citizens  of  this 
broad  commonwealth  as  brothers  in  interest  and 
feeling,  are  so  inimical  as  to  wish  to  destroy  the 
country  before  he  will  be  justified  in  the  viola- 
tion of  a  principle  which  he  admits  to  be  right. 
Before  his  plea  is  a  good  one,  he  is  bound  not  to 
assume,  but  clearly  to  show  this  convention 
the  necessity  for  self-preservation  that  re- 
quires him  or  them  to  commit  this  outrage.  I 
say  it  cannot  be  done;  and  I  say  further  to  my 
friend  from  Daviess,  as  well  as  to  every  other 
gentleman  opposed  to  me,  if  he  or  they  can 
show  even  an  approximation  to  the  result  of  ut- 
terly destroying  this  commonwealth,  by  carry- 
ing out  this  just,  correct  and  equal  principle,  of 
representation,  (that  principle  to  the  correctness 
of  which  he  liimseli  subscribes,)  I  would  go 
with  them.  Sir,  my  friend  from  Henderson, 
yesterday  morning  made  this  matter  as  clear  as 


light.  He  conclusively  showed  by  figures,  which 
gentlemen  have  not  even  attempted  to  answer, 
that  this  supposed  danger  was  a  chimera  of  the 
imagination ;  and  bold  and  true  as  he  always  is 
to  principle,  he  was  not  to  be  frightened  from 
the  Tpath  of  duty  by  any  supposed  evil  or  danger, 
but  is  found  fighting  gallantly  by  our  side. 
What  are  the  facts  presented  by  him?  "We  will 
suppose  the  population  of  Kentucky  to  be  one 
million  at  this  time,  and  that  of  Louisville  fifty 
thousand,  which  is  rather  more  than  she  has, 
but  I  want  to  give  gentlemen  the  full  advantage 
of  figures,  and  I  hope  my  friends  from  Franklin 


or  Daviess,  if  they  can  ansAvcr  these  figures,  will 
do  so.  Taking  the  constitution  of  the  senate  to 
be  thirty  eight  members,  and  alloAviiig  ihe  in- 
crease of  Louisville  to  be  four  times  greater  than 
that  which  the  state  would  have  attained  in  tlie 
same  time,  and  supposing,  while  the  Avliole  ag- 
gregate of  the  state  had  increased  with  lier  mil- 
lion only  two  hundred  thousand,  Louisville  with 
her  fifty  thousand  had  increased  to  seventy  five 
thousand,  what  would  then  be  the  ratio,  and  the 
proportion,  if  we  act  upon  this  equal  principle 
of  representation,  according  to  numbers?  Why 
the  state  itself  would  have  thirty  six  and  one 
tenth,  whereas  Louisville,  with  all  her  increase, 
would  have  but  one  and  nine  tenths.  Go  on 
with  that  calculation,  and  allow  the  state  to  in- 
crease from  one  million  two  hundred  thousand 
to  one  million  five  hundred  thousand,  and  the 
same  relative  ratio  of  four  to  one  in  favor  of 
Louisville  being  observed,  Louisville  from  sev- 
enty five  thousand  to  one  hundred  tlioiisand, 
what  would  then  be  the  proportion  of  represen- 
tation? Why  the  state  at  large  Avould  have  thir- 
ty five  and  seven  fifteenths.  So  go  on  still  fur- 
tlier,  until  you  bring  the  aggregate  population 
of  the  state  to  two  millions  and  Louisville  to 
two  hundred  thousand — and  I  suppose  no  gen- 
tleman here  supposes  that  Louisville  will  ever 
exceed  two  hundred  thousand — what  would  then 
be  the  proportion  of  representation?  Why  the 
state  at  large  would  have  thirty  four  and  four 
twentieths,  wliile  Louisville  with  her  two  hun- 
dred thousand  would  have  thirty  six  and  sixteen 
twentieths. 

But  I  want  to  deal  with  this  argument  fairly. 
It  is  one  which  if  wrong  can  be  cyphered  out, 
and  if  there  is  any  error  in  it,  let  gentlemen 
point  it  out.  I  wish  to  make  the  strongest  case 
against  the  cities  that  can  be  made  out.  Sup- 
pose Covington  goes  on  in  the  same  ratio,  and 
that  she  lierself,  born  but  yesterday,  and  now 
proudly  taking  her  strides  onward  among  the 
cities  of  the  state — God  speed  her — suppose,  sir, 
she  doubles  her  population,  or  quadruples  it,  if 
you  please,  and  goes  up  from  10,000  to  50  or 
100,000;  if  she  reaches  100,000  she  would  have 
but  two  senators  and  a  fraction.  Add  her  two 
senators,  if  you  please,  to  the  three  from  Louis- 
ville with  her  200,()0(),  and  you  have  but  five 
senators.  Let  Maysville  come  in,  and  spring  up 
from  li  or  4,000  to  50,000,  and  she  has  one  sen- 
ator and  a  fraction.  Go  down  to  Henderson  and 
Paducah,  and  let  them  spring  up  through  their 
railroads,  that  are  to  be  extended  there,  to  50,000 
each,  and  you  give  them  one  senator  and  a  frac- 
tion each.  But  give  them  threesenators  between 
them,  and  one  loMavsville, making  four,  and  ad- 
ding the  number  to  wTbich  Louisville  and  Coving- 


517 


ton  would  be  entitled,  and  you  \ruuld  fitill  be 
within  the  proposition  of  tlie  gentleman  from 
Daviess. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.     Add  Lexington. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  Add  Lexington,  if  you 
please,  and  1  think  p«rhaps  tlie  number  would 
reach  ten.  Now,  this  is  a  most  extravagant 
calculation  for  our  cities;  but  what  harm  couhi 
ten  senators  do  against  twenty  eight?  The  idea 
is  idle  and  absurd.  But  I  am  to  suppose  gen- 
tlemen will  deal  with  this  argument  fairly,  and 
is  it  to  be  expected  that  Louisville  and  Coving- 
ton are  not  to  have  antagonistic  interests  to  Hen- 
derson and  Padueah?  If  the  sectional  border- 
feeling  is  such  as  has  been  spoken  of  and  por- 
trayt-d  here,  and  the  norrfi  is  to  become  antagon- 
istical  to  the  southern  portion  of  Kentucky — and 
such  has  been  declared  by  the  advocates  of  the 
amendment — will  not  Hendei-son  and  Paducah 

fo  against  that  section  of  countrv  in  which 
louisville,  Covington,  and  Maysville,  are  loca- 
ted? Will  they  not  have  interests  so  wholly 
inimical  as  to  become  rival  cities  ?  Could 
they  unite  against  the  counties  in  which  they 
arelocateil?  Could  any  combination  be  formed 
among  them  dangerous  to  the  country?  Would 
the  cities  in  the  south  join  their  circumadjacent 
counties  against  the  northern  cities?  Would 
not  the  cities  be  checks  ujx>n  one  another? 
Would  not  the  rivalry  of  Louisville  and  Cov- 
ington keep  off  any  combination?  But  suppos- 
ing ever}-  city  to  unite,  how  timid  are  certain 
gentlemen  to  suppose  ten  senators  could  have 
any  influence  against  twenty  eight  I  There  is  not 
the  slightest  fear  of  combinations — and  there  is 
no  hope  of  any  such  increase  in  our  cities  as  is 
here,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  supposed ! 
The  argument  utterly  fails  when  we  come  to 
the  figures.  No  danger  is  to  be  apprehended 
from  any  sectional  feeling,  and  I  have  no  feare 
of  going  before  the  country  upon  the  exhibit 
and  calculation  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson,  and  to  whose  liberality  I  am  in- 
debted for  this  calculation  I  Gentlemen  are 
contradicted  by  figures  which  are  perfectly  un- 
answerable. Their  fears  have  run  away  with 
their  judgments.  The  principle  of  self-preser- 
vation, that  my  friend  from  Daviess  so  eloquent- 
ly argued,  and  on  which  he  relied,  will  not  suf- 
fer us  or  him  to  trample  under  foot  the  funda- 
mental principle  of  all  free  government,  that 
populatitm  is  the  true  and  only  basis  of  repre- 
sentation! It  is  the  foundation  stone  of  our 
constitutional  edifice.  Let  us  never  deface  or 
impair  it — no,  never. 

tJut  my  friend  from  Daviess  says,  that  he 
thinks  there  is  an  inconsistency  between  the  two 
clauses  of  the  present  constitution  of  Kentucky. 
He  read  the  clause  from  6th  section,  2d  article 
constitution  of  Kentucky : 

'•  Representation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  forever  reg- 
ulated and  ascertained  by  the  number  of  qualfied 
electors  therein." 

He  thought,  sir,  that  the  principle  of  represen- 
tation upon  numbers,  so  broadly  and  clearly  set 
forth  in  the  present  constitution,  was  contradict- 
ed by  this  clause,  if  I  understood  him : 

"Section  12.  The  same  number  of  senatorial 
districts  shall,  from  time  to  time,  be  established 
by  the  legislature,  as  there  may  then  be  senators 


]  allotted  to  the  state;  which  shall  Ijc  so  formed  as 
to  contain,  as  near  as  may  be.  an  equal  number 
of  free  male  inhabitants  in  each,  above  the  age  of 
twenty  one  vears,  and  so  that  no  count\'  shall  be 
divided,  or  fx)rm  more  than  one  district ;  and  wheif 
two  or  more  counties  compose  a  district,  they 
I  shall  be  adjoining." 

I  Now.  if  my  friend  had  read  another  clause,  I 
think  he  would  have  been  perfectly  satisfied 
'  that  there  was  no  apparent  contradiction  between 
!  those  two  clauses.  It  is  the  5th  section,  2d  article 
;  of  constitution,  as  follows  : 

j  "  Section  5.  Elections  for  representatives  for 
!  the  several  counties  entitled  to  representation, 
I  shall  be  held  at  the  places  of  holding  their  re- 
1  spective  courts,  or  in  the  several  election  pre- 
!  cincts  into  which  the  legislature  may  think 
;  proper,  from  time  to  time,  to  divide  any  or  all  of 
■  those  counties :  Provided,  That  when  it  shall  ap 
'  pear  to  the  legislature  that  anv  town  hath  a  num- 
I  ber  of  qualified  voters  equal  Jo  the  ratio  then 
;  fixed,  such  town  shall  be  invested  with  the  priv- 
I  ilege  of  a  separate  representation;  which  shall  be 
retained  so  long  as  such  town  shall  contain  a 
;  number  of  qualified  voters  equal  to  the  ratio 
i  which  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  fixed  by  law; 
;  and  thereafter,  elections  for  the  countv  in  which 
;  such  town  is  situated,  shall  not  be  held  therein.', 
i  Now,  where  is  the  contradiction?  Separate 
i  representation  allowed  to  a  city — that  repiesen- 
I  tation  based  upon  numbers,  and  no  inhibition  or 
'  prohibition  upon  cities  if  they  possessed  the 
number  of  qualified  voters  required  by  ratio  of 
representation.  Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  impossible 
'  for  me  to  detect  any  contradiction  in  these  claus- 
es, and  taken  in  unison,  they  seem  entirely  to 
!  harmonize. 

;      Mr.  TRIPLETT.     If  the  gentleman  will  allow 
i  me,  the  President  of  this  convention,  I  imagine, 
!  will  bear  testimony  that  under  the  construction 
given  to  this  clau.se  by  the  legislature,  the  city 
i  of  Louisville  and  the  county  of  Jefferson  have 
!  never  been  entitled  to  a  separate  representation 
in  the  senate.     He  contends  that  it  is  unjust,  but 
be  it  so  or  not,  it  has  been  so  decided  by  the 
legislature  from  the  foundation  of  the  constitu- 
tion to  the  present  time. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  only  desire  to  say  to 
my  friend,  on  that  subject,  that  if  errors  and 
doubts  of  construction  have  prevailed  formerly, 
it  is  our  duty  to  leave  no  ground  for  doubt  here. 
Let  us  act  on  principle,  and  fix  the  matter  so 
plain  that  there  can  be  no  doubt  about  it.  Do 
not  let  us  act  wrong,  because  doubts  may  have 
been  entertained  in  the  construction  of  the  old 
constitution.  There  is  nothing  to  justify  a  de- 
parture from  the  great  principle,  that  numbers 
are  the  true  basis  of  representation,  and  that  it 
must  be  equal  and  uniform,  in  the  old  consti- 
tution. There  is  nothing  to  be  drawn  from  it, 
from  the  idea  that  self-preservation  requires  it. 
This  fallacy  has  been  exposed.  No  analogy  can" 
either  be  drawn  from  the  federal  government,  as 
has  been  attempted  to  be  shown,  to  justify  it.s 
violation.  Gentlemen,  then,  must,  like  the  del- 
egate from  Franklin,  deny  that  numbers  is  the 
true  basis;  or,  they  must  seek  to  justifv  this  fla- 
grant violation  of  a  mighty  principle,  which 
they  profess  to  admire  and  subscribe  to,  on  the 
ground  of  a  timid  fear,  and  from  an  univorthy 
mistrust  of  the  population   upon   the    bank  of 


518 


yonder  beautiful  river,  ftiat  divides  us  from  the 
state  of  Ohio.  That  division  line  seems  as  a  lit- 
tle silver  thread,  scarcely  perceptible,  but  how- 
ever small  and  diminutive,  when  you  cross  it, 
you  will  find  a  people  upon  this  side  wholly  and 
totally  diftWent  from  the  other.  It  is,  sir,  a  dif- 
ference in  heart,  a  difference  in  sentiment,  a  dif- 
ference in  feeling,  a  difference  running  through 
a  long  line  of  progeny,  descended  from  a  differ- 
ent people.  And  though  they  may  live  upon  the 
bank  of  that  river,  in  the  vicinity  of  a  people  to 
whom  they  are  opposed  in  sentiment,  let  me  tell 
gentle  nen,  who  seem,  upon  this  floor,  to  mistrust 
them,  tliat  they,  by  such  distrust,  do  a  fine  and 
gallant  people  wrong, — ay,  sir,  a  people  as  no- 
ble as  they  arc  generous,  and  generous  as  they 
are  brave;  and  should  that  day  ever  come,  (wliicK 
God  in  his  mercy  avert,)  when  the  sun  of  liber- 
ty is  destined  ever  to  set  and  go  down  in  this 
happy  and  far-favored  land  of  ours,  the  people 
of  that  border  will  be  found  at  that  sad  and  drea- 
ry hour,  keeping  tTieir  holy  vigils  around  the  al- 
tar of  patriotism,  watching  with  anguish  and 
dismay,  the  last  flickering  ray  that  shall  be 
emitted  from  that  luminary. 

I  do  not  say  this  in  simple  compliment  to  the 
people  upon  the  border  line.  I  only  speak  the 
truth  as  1  know  it  to  exist.  It  has  been  said, 
that  the  people  of  that  border  are  to  be  governed 
and  to  act  solely  by  self-interest.  Yetj  if  you 
look  along  that  entire  border,  from  the  county  of 
Greenup  to  the  city  of  Louisville,  where  this 
slave  population  has  been  decreasing, — if  you 
look  to  Campbell  and  to  Kenton,  where  you  find 
comparatively  few  if  any  slaves,  and  where  com- 
paratively they  can  have  no  great  personal  inter- 
est in  this  slave  question,  you  will  find  that 
when  the  tocsin  of  emancipation  gave  alarm  to 
the  slaveholders  of  the  interior  and  southern  por- 
tions of  Kentucky,  that  border  shouldered  their 
muskets  and  sto"od  firm  to  their  brethren,  to 
their  principles,  and  to  the  best  interests  of  Ken- 
tucky. They  have  ever,  on  this  question,  stood 
true  to  themselves  and  true  to  their  state;  and  1 
ask  every  delegate  on  this  floor  to  pause  and 
consider,  before  they  ostracise  and  disgrace  the 
defenders  of  their  rights!  I  beseech  and  implore 
them  to  ponder  well,  before  they  strike  so  fatri- 
cidal  a  blow!  How  can  it  be  justified?  How 
will  it  be  borneV  How  can  we,  who  are  pro- 
slavery  men,  go  home  to  our  people  and  explain 
this  outrage  upon  their  rights?  Sir,  this  ques- 
tion was  agitated  upon  the  Ohio  river,  from  the 
Virginia  line  to  Louisville,  and  emancipation 
banners  were  flying,  and  a  call  from  the  pro- 
nlavery  party  was  made  ^on  their  border  friends. 
How  was  that  call  answered?  By  a  return  of 
pro  slavery  delegates!  And  shall  now  a  pro- 
slavery  convention  undertake  to  say  to  those  gal- 
lant defenders  of  their  rights,  that,  although  you 
have  given  us  the  best  practical  proof  of  your 
fidelity,  and  the  most  convincing  evidences  of 
your  patriotism,  yet  we  cannot  trust  you, — you 
Htood  by  us,  it  is  true,  fighting  our  battles,  yet 
still  we  want  faith  in  youl  When  I  go  back  to 
my  people,  and  tliey  li-arn  from  me  the  liistory 
of  tnis  outrage,  do  you  not  know  that  the  eman- 
cipationists and  anti  convention  men,  would 
make  it  the  trumpet-note  of  attack  against  the 
result  of  our  labors?  1  ask  gentlemen  to  consid- 
er in  what  position  they  will  place  delegates  who  I 


represent  that  border.  I  entreat  this  eoTivenlion 
not  to  make  the  bulwark  of  our  defence,  a  sword 
of  assault  in  the  hands  of  our  foes. 

And  Avho,  Mr.  Chairman,  are  the  people  that 
it  is  supposed  here  by  the  advocates  of  this 
amendment,  are  to  make  this  assault  upon  the 
rights  ami  property  of  the  citizens  of  their  na- 
tive state?  Is  it  those  foreign  citizens,  who  by 
their  industry,  their  frugality,  and  their  scientif- 
ic skill,  are  aiding  in  bnildfng  up  these  cities 
within  our  borders?  Is  it,  I  ask,  our  own  citi- 
zens who,  by  their  energy,  and  their  associated 
wealth,  are  opening  railroads  and  turnpikes, 
and  who,  while  building  up  the  cities,  are  yet 
giving  increased  and  accelerated  impetus  to  the 
population  of  the  country;  and  who  by  their  en- 
terprise are  making  the  desert  wastes  of  the 
hunter  upon  the  Licking  and  the  Kentucky 
rivers  to  yield  to  the  axe  of  the  emigrant,  caus- 
ing the  rose  to  blossom,  and  flowers  and  fruits 
to  spring  up  where  now  nothing  is  visible  but  an 
uninhabited  forest?  Are  the  enterprizing  and 
industrious  men  who  are  coming  into  Kentucky, 
and  by  their  capital  and  labour  are  building  up 
these  cities;  are  they  the  men  who  are  to  make 
war  upon  your  rights?  If  they  are  the  merce- 
nary, lawless  fanatics  that  the  fears  of  some  of 
the  gentlemen  would  indicate,  may  they  not  at- 
tempt higher  usurpation,  and  attack  our  liberties? 
If  they  are  dead  to  honesty  and  integrity  of  pur- 
pose— aliens  to  high  and  ennobling  feelings — 
enemies  to  the  spirit  and  genius  of  our  govern- 
ment— what  may  they  not  dare  attempt?  Do 
gentlemen  suppose  that  parchment  barriers 
would  cheek  or  stop  such  ruthless  plunder- 
ers? But  allow  me,  in  the  kindest  spirit,  to  as- 
sure this  convention,  that  gentlemen  are  led  off 
by  distempered  fancies,  and  excited  fears?  They 
know  notliing  of  our  border,  or  the  people  who 
inhabit  it,  if  they  would  detract  from  their  pat- 
riotism, their  talent,  their  enterprise,  their  in- 
tegrity, or  their  M^orth!  It  is  true,  that  within 
both  the  cities  and  counties  of  that  border,  we 
have  foreigners;  and  it  is  equally  true,  that  they 
are  worthy  and  industrious  citizens. 

When  this  Mexican  war  broke  out,  and  the 
first  tap  of  the  drum  called  to  arms,  and  when 
the  rallying  cry  for  recruits  resounded  through- 
out this  commonwealth,  the  city  of  Coving- 
ton, small  as  she  is,  raised  three  volunteer  com- 
panies, two  of  whom  went  from  that  city ; 
troops  too,  as  fearless  and  as  gallant  as  ever 
trod  a  battle  field  or  faced  a  foe!  If  there  is  a 
sceptic  here  who  is  disposed  to  doubt,  let  him  but 
go  to  yonder  cemetery  hill,  and  when  that  mon- 
ument shall  be  reared,  with  the  melancholy  list 
of  noble  young  heroes,  for  whose  early  fall 
Kentucky  has  been  called  upon  to  mourn, 
and  in  memory  of  whose  gallantry  that  towering 
memorial  is  to  rise,  he  will  find  the  names  of  a 
Powell,  a  Morgan,  an  Oliver,  with  a  host  of 
others  Avho  are  now  quietly  sleeping  in  a  foreign 
land!  Sir,  among  the  bravest  who  went  from 
that  city,  was  a  young  foreigner,  profitably  en- 
gaged in  the  selling  of  dry  goods  and  laces  in 
Covington,  and  with  a  mother  and  sister  depen- 
dent in  part  on  his  exertions  for  a  support.  He 
enlisted,  and  was  deaf  to  all  persuasions  which 
would  liave  detained  him  at  home.  He  said  he 
owed  allegiance,  to  his  adopted  state,  and  that 
hede!>ircd  an  opportunity  of  repaying  it.      And 


519 


when  the  mighty  shock  of  Buena  Vista  caused 
the  stoutest  heart  to  quail,  they  besought  him  to 
return,  but  he  told  them  he  had  never  seen  an 
enemy  before,  and  he  could  not  turn  his  back  on 
the  first  foe  that  he  encountered.  He  fell,  and 
however  humble,  no  nobler,   braver,  and  more 


portrait  hangs  over  yonder  mantle  piece,  tlint 
patriotic  Frenchman,"  (Lafayette,)  who,  though 
an  ocean  divided  him  from  this  continent,  vet 
felt  the  plowing  spark  of  liberty  in  his  bosom, 
and  in  our  darkest  hoar  of  need,  hurried  to  our 
relief — that  foreigner  whose  blood  and  treasure 


patriotic  name  will  adorn  that   monument  than    was  poured  out  for  our  freedom — gallantly  aid- 
.L  r  r-ML  .^  jjjg  j^g  matchless  efforts  of  that  venerable' man, 

(pointing  to  the  portrait  of  Wa>hington)  who  is 


the  name  of  Gilbert 

What  is  there  in  Kentucky  to  divide  us?  Have 
we  not  every  incentive  to  harnionv?  Does  it  not, 
at  this  terrible  moment,  when  tlie  entire  south 
are  required  to  a«sert  their  rights  against  the 
unholy  crusade  of  northern  fanaticism,  to  nerve 
our  arms  and  be  ready  for  any  emergency? 
Are  we  not  every  day,  as  my  friend  from  Simp- 
son said,  taunted  in  the  halls  of  our  national 
legislature  with  the  cry  that  we  are  retrograding, 
and  that  we  are  striking  examples  of  the  blight- 
ing influence  of  slave  institutions?     Shall  it  be 


emphatically  the  father  of  his  country.  Mr. 
Chairman,  away  with  this  illiberal  restrictive 
policy.'  It  is  unworthy  the  model  republic  in 
this  nineteenth  oentur)- 1  I  say  let  foreigners 
come.  I  say  we  have  'nothing  to  fear.  Are  we 
afraid  to  trust  the  buiMing  of  our  cities,  or  to 
trust  our  projjeity  or  our  rights  to  anv  portion 
of  our  brethren  of  this  eonmionweaith?  Mr. 
Chairman,  we  are  making  a  constitution  to 
guard  and  protect  the  property  and  the  rights  of 


in  this  constitution  declared,  that  we  do  not  de-  the  entire  commonwealth.  In  the  discharge  of 
sire  to  repel  this  slander,  and  are  not  anxious  this  holy  and  responsible  trust,  let  us  keep  the 
that  our  state  should  increase  her  power  in  the  |  «-*hart  and  compass  of  freemen  before  us.  In 
national  councils?  Are  we  not  alive  to  the  mo-  j  God's  name,  let  not  principle  be  trodden  under 
mentous  issue  which  is  now  being  carried  on?  I  foot  by  expediency.  That  expediency  which 
And  how  can  we  expect  to  increa<?e  our  popula-  looks  to  narrow,  .selfish  and  temporary  interests 
tion — develope  our  resources — or  build  up  cities  ;  — that  expediency  which  is  one  thing  to  day 
— if  we  say  in  our  fundamental  law  to  our  own  !  and  changes  to-morrow — that  expediency  which 
people  and  those  disposed  to  immigrate  here-live  I  ^ould  dethrone  reason  and  allow  sopliistry  to 
in  the  country,  and  you  shall  have  the  right  of  I  take  its  place — that  expediency,  sir,  which, 
suffrage  and  equal  anil  uniform  representation  ac-  |  when  principle  is  dethroned,  may,  through  jeal- 
cordingto  numbers,  however  great — but  settle  in  i  ousy  and  distrust,  lead  us,  before  we  are  aware 
the  town,  and  no  matter  how  devoted  you  may  \ "/  it,  upon  the  shores  of  ruin  and  sclf-destmc- 
be,  or  how  ready  to  defend  the  best  interests  of  j  tion.  1  have  myself  the  utmost  confidence  in 
Kentucky,  no  matter  how  enterprising  or  Indus-  ■  this  as.sembly,  and  I  believe  they  will  treat  us  and 
trious,  vou  shall  never,  no  never,  go  beyond  a  \  the  cities  we  represent,  as  equals  and  co-equals, 
certain  limit.'  I  want  myself  to  see  these  cities  !  I  have  the  utmost  confidence  that  they  will  not 
built  up,  and  I  am  one  of'those  who  believe  that  j  ostracise  us  from  an  equal  ai:d  just  participation 
such  an  intimate  and  vital  connection  exists  be-  \  ^ith  them  in  all  the  affairs  of  government, 
twee n  the  country  and  the  town,  that  whatever  |  They  cannot  cut  us  off,  with  that  evidence  of 
operates  to  the  prosperity  of  the  one  is  indisso-  !  our  devotion  to  the  best  interests  of  the  state 
lubly  connected  with  the  prosperity  of  the  oth-  which  the  last  August  elections  called  forth, 
er.  It  is  the  impetus  of  cities  that  populate  the  when  as  is  made  manifest  in  the  presence  here 
country.  I  want  to  see  railroads  and  canals  of  the  distinguished  president  of  the  conven- 
stretched  throughout  this  commonwealth;  com-  tion  and  other  delegates  along  the  border,  party 
mon  schools  built  up,  and  the  whole  state  peo-  j  and  every  thing  else  was  disregarded,  to  prevent 
pled.     Then  I  desire  to  see  banished  from  among  j  any  interference  with  slave  property.     To  do  so 


us  that  jealous,  unworthy  spirit  of  distrust  to- 
wards each  other,  which  shall  kindle  any  il- 
liberal sectional  differences  between  our  cities 
and  the  country.  Let  us  be  one  in  sentiment 
and  action;  let  common  sympathies,  interest  and 
confidence  bind  us  together,  and  when  we  meet, 
at  home  or  abroad,  nothing  should  prevent  us 
from  embracing  each  other,  in  that  fraternal 
spirit  fif  state  pride  and  social  intercourse,  that 
would  make  us  proud  that  we  were  citizens  of 
the  same  state.  I  want  the  chords  of  love  and 
affection  to  be  bound  indis-solubly  around  this 
entire  state.  I  want  Kentucky  to  stand  as  she 
stood  in  the  davs  when  that  man  (pointing  to 
the  portrait  of  feoone)  first  trod  these  plains.  I 
would  open  the  door  to  immigration — I  would 
gladly  welcome  the  honest  and  industrious  for- 
eigner to  our  growing  state — I  would  hold  out 
inducements  to  him  to  aid  us  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  resources  of  the  state.  I  have  no 
fear  of  our  adopted  citizens.  I  feel  that  it  is 
their  love  of  liberty  and  admiration  for  our  in- 
stitutions that  attracts  them  to  us.  That  thev 
are  prompted  by  the  same  kindred  feeling  which 
prompted  that  liberty-loving  foreigner  whose 


would  be  to  humiliate  us,  to  degrade  and  stig- 
matize, and  the  pro-slavery  victory  of  last  sum- 
mer would  turn  to  ashes  on  our  lipsl  I  ask  the 
convention  to  pause  and  consider,  and  act  for 
us  as  they  would  act  for  themselves.  I  implore 
them  not  to  vield  to  any  groundless  prejudices 
or  chimerical  fears,  but  to  stand  boldly  upon  the 
broad  platform  of  right  and  equality!  Do  so, 
and  all  will  be  safel  Let  us  m.  te  out  even  han- 
ded, exact  justice.  Let  us  never  make  invidious 
distinctions,  and  we  shall  leave  here,  having 
made  a  constitution,  which,  with  prayers  on  our 
lips  of  esto  perpetua,  we  shall  submit  to  the  peo- 
ple for  their  approval,  and  return,  individuallv, 
to  the  bosoms  of  our  families,  with  the  con- 
scious rectitude  of  having  di.soharged  our  entire 
duty  to  our  God,  ourselves,  and  the  entire  .state. 
Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  do  not  intend  to  vote  for 
the  amendment  offered  by  the  gentleman  from 
Franklin,  nor  by  giving  that  pledge  do  I  wish 
to  be  understood  as  binding  my.self  to  support 
the  views  of  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  of  the 
question.  But  I  think  that  a  constitutional  lim- 
it ought  to  be  introduce*.!  in  the  fundamental 
law,  so  aa  to  prevent  the  large  cities  from  draw* 


20 


ing  iuto  their  vortex  the  general  legislation  of 
the  country.  I  shall  vote  to  give  L()iui?yille  a 
senator  in  order  to  disconnect  her  in  that  re- 
spect from  the  county  of  Jefferson.  I  int(Mid  to 
act  in  relation  to  the  apportionment  bill  ac- 
cording to  tlie  dictates  of  my  own  judgment. 
There  has  been  but  one  proposition  submitted 
to  the  house,  which  strikes  me  as  being  cor- 
rect, and  tliat  is  the  one  presentetl  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Knox  and  Harlan.  When  the  proper- 
time  shall  arrive,  I  purpose  to  make  a  further 
amendment,  which,  connected  together,  I  think 
Avill  be  more  conducive  to  the  ends  of  justice,  and 
throw  into  every  region  of  the  state  a  proper 
political  weiglit.  I  subscribe  to  the  fullest  ex- 
tent to  t]je  cardinal  principle  tliat  numbers 
.should  be  the  basis  of  representation.  But 
"when  was  ever  representation  under  the  old  con- 
stitution according  to  numbers?  I  recollect  hav- 
ing a  scat  on  this  floor,  when  the  countv  of  Har- 
din— and  like  cau.ses  will  produce  like  effects 
thnjiighout  all  time — was  entitled  to  two  rep- 
resentatives, and  the  county  of  Meade  to  one. 
Yet,  from  party  considerations  operating  most 
powerfully  in  the  house  of  representatives,  the 
county  of  Hardin  was  not  permitted  to  have 
two  representatives,  nor  the  county  of  Meade 
one;  but  Hardin  and  Meade  together"had  three. 
Now,  if  you  do  not  provide  atrainst  this  sort 
of  political  manoeuvering,  it  will  be  practiced 
in  all  time  to  come.  And  what  remedy  do  I 
propose?  It  is  to  give  each  county  a  separate 
representation,  and  then  you  cannot  gerryman- 
der, manoeuver  and  contrive  so  as  to  gerryman- 
«ler  one  party  in  and  another  out.  One  good 
senator  is  enough  for  the  city  of  Louisville;  one 
man  who  lias  capacity  is  sufficient  to  represent 
any  county  and  city' in  Kentucky,  This  will 
give  a  further  guaranty  to  the  "people  of  the 
county  that  when  you  choose  but  one  man,  that 
man  will  be  selected  who  is  best  qualified  to 
represent,  and  who  is  best  acquainted  with  the 
wishes  and  interests  of  the  people. 

The  county  of  Bourbon  which  has  some  16,- 
000  or  17,000  voters,  has  two  representatives 
liere.  and  in  the  house  of  representatives,  and 
mine  has  only  one.  Look  at  the  county  of  Xel- 
son,  with  perhaps  not  so  many  voters,  yet  hav- 
ing two  rcuresentatives,  while  my  county  has 
but  one.  Look  at  the  county  of  Kenton  with 
21,000  voters,  and  only  one  representative.  Da- 
viess has  only  one  where  there  are  22.000  voters, 
and  in  Warren  with  about  the  same  number; 
they  each  have  but  one  representative.  You 
talk  about  equality  of  representation!  Why,  so 
long  as  there  are  parties  in  this  country,  and  you 
give  them  the  pt)wer  contemplated  in  this  con- 
stitution, they  will  gerrymander  as  certain  as 
you  have  a  seat  on  this  floor. 

My  plan  gives  to  all  the  counties  except  nine  or 
ten,  just  exactly  the  political  weight  wtiich  they 
now  liave,  ami  they  can  liave  no  more;  and  it 
exalts  the  smaller  counties  and  gives  to  them 
their  own  r«'presentatives  on  the  floor  who  un- 
derstand their  interet-ts,  and  wlio  live  and  move 
among  them.  It  is  much  better  for  tlie  country 
to  have  it  in  this   way.     I    do  not  oppose  the 

f)lan  of  the  gentleman  from  Franklin  l)ecause 
oreigners  might  have  too  much  or  too  little  in- 
fluence in  the  country.  I  am  too  dull  of  com- 
prehcnsiofl,  and  my  vision  is  too  obtuse  to  see 


as  far  into  a  millstone  as  these  gentlemen  Mho 
have  been  pecking  at  it  for  the  last  three  days. 
lam  willing  that  large  commercial  cities  .shall 
grow  up  in  this  commonwealth,  but  I  am  not 
willing  that  six  or  eight  cities  shall  combine  and 
control,  and  crush  the  agricultural  interests  of 
the  state.  Sir,  they  control  the  commerce,  the 
banks,  and  the  capital  of  the  country,  and  Avhen 
they  want  prices  high,  they  can  effect  it  by  com- 
biriation.  I  do  not  say  they  will  do  it,  but  I 
would  guard  the  rights  and  interest  of  the  peo- 
ple. I  do  not  appeal  to  selfishness,  thouj^h  I 
think  there  is  a  little  on  both  sides.  I  may  be 
operated  upon  by  selfish  considerations,  but  my 
countv  will  gain  nothing.  It  now  has  1,800 
or  l.dOO  voters;  there  thoy  stand  and  there 
they  live,  and  I  have  notliing  to  lose  nor  gain. 
But  I  address  myself  to  gentlemen  from  small 
counties,  whose  political  weight  is  not  brought 
into  consideration  here:  and  I  ask  tliem  to 
stand  up  for  representation  of  each  county  in 
the  state. 

It  is  the  boast  of  many  of  the  representatives 
in  South  Carolina,  that  they  can  dine  well  all 
their  constituents  in  a  single  day,  and  they 
boast  also  that  their  constituents  are  the  best  in- 
formed in  the  country.  I  know  it  is  impossible 
— they  can  be  as  densely  populated  in  the  moun- 
tain regions  as  in  the  other  parts  of  the  state, 
but  they  have  a  pure  atmosphere,  and  I  am  de- 
sirous that  they  shall  be  equally  and  justly 
represented. 

My  friend  from  Kenton  says  that  numbers  is, 
and  ought  to  be  the  basis  of  representation.  I 
,say  so  too.  I  look  at  that  basis  just  as  a  man 
contending  for  a  great  principle.  I  acknowl- 
edge it  is  as  firm  as  the  earth,  as  fixed  as  the 
heavens,  and  as  immovable  as  the  rock  of  Gi- 
bralter.  Nevertheless,  when  an  exception  to  a 
rule  arises,  I  shall  go  for  it  when  it  is  on  tlie 
basis  of  expediency  and  justice.  Now  if  these 
cities  have  grown  to  so  great  an  extent,  I  am 
glad  of  it,  and  1  hope  there  may  be  five  hundred 
more  struggling  for  fame,  but  I  am  unwilling 
that  when  they  shall  have  ten  senators  out  of 
thirty  eiglit,  tliey  shall  be  able  to  combine  and 
draw  the  whole  of  the  legislation  of  the  state 
into  the  vortex  of  city  legislation.  Now  if  you 
give  to  each  county  in  the  state  a  representative, 
you  cannot  make  an  unfair  apportionment  law. 
You  cannot  unite  Hardin  aud  Meade  in  any  fu- 
ture operations  in  politics,  nor  in  any  future 
convulsions  of  party,  can  leading  whigs  or 
democrats  unite  together  two  counties,  and  send 
three  representatives,  when  being  separate,  one 
is  entitled  to  two,  and  the  other  to  one. 

These  rolling  residiums,  are  mere  foot-balls  in 
the  hands  of  skillful  political  tacticians,  to  roll 
and  tumble  about  to  suit  particular  occasions. 
I  shall  vote  against  the  amendment  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Franklin,  and  wlien  the  gentleman 
from  Knox  brings  forward  his  proposition  to  di- 
vide this  state  into  an  equal  numoer  of  senato- 
rial districts,  I  shall  go  for  it;  and  then  I  .shall, 
if  1  can  gather  strength  cnougli  in  this  house, 
obtain  a  representative  for  eadi  county  in  the 
state.  And  by  that  time,  as  1  have  not  liad  an 
opportunity — or  if  I  have  had  I  liave  not  em- 
braced it— 'l  will  examine  the  relative  political 
strengtli  of  each  county  of  the  state.  A.s  gen- 
tlemen are  in  the  habit,  and  take  pleasure  in  ar- 


521 


guing  in  figures,  and  sometimes  in  tropes,  I 
shall,  I  repeat,  take  oeeasiou  to  exliibit  the  rela-  i 
tive  political  strength  of  the   counties   m   the 
state,  and  shall  show  the  perfect  justice  which 
this  apportionment  will  give  to  each  county.        j 
I  rose  merely  to  indicate  the  course  I  shall ; 
pursue,  as  on  former  occasions  I  concurred  with  j 
very  few  on  this  side  of  the  question.     Of  one  ' 
tiling  gentlemen  may  rest  a.ssu red :  let  the  result ; 
be  •wiiat  it  may,  I  am  not  going  to  lose  ray  tem-  i 
per.     If  you  choose  to  vote  down  my  proposi- ' 
tion,  I  nevertheless  shall  go  shoulder  to  shoulder  | 
with  you   in  trying  to  make  a  good  constitu-  j 
tion. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN.  I  move  that  the  committee  ' 
rise,  and  I  propose  making  a  few  remarks  before  ! 
the  vote  is  taken  on  the  question.  I  have  been  : 
sitting  here  forty-five  days,  I  believe,  and  we ' 
have  made  but  little  progress.  Sir,  I  am  tired  of ' 
hearinir  these  questions  discussed.  I  came  pre- 1 
pared  to  cast  my  vote  on  all  subjects,  and  I  am  \ 
not  so  fickle  us 'the.se  speaking  gentlemen  would 
suppose.  I  cannot  be  changed  by  every  speech  ' 
made  on  this  floor.  I  have  my  mind  made  up,  \ 
and  I  suppose  every  gentleman  has  his  mind 
made  up  on  these  questions.  Now,  my  object  is  i 
to  get  out  of  the  committee  of  the  whole.  I  do  \ 
not  believe  we  can  get  on  in  this  way.  "We  have  ■ 
tried  it  forty-five  days,  and  what  have  we  done? 
We  have  adopted  the  preamble  and  the  first  and  : 
second  sections  of  the  old  constitution.  I  can  ' 
make  this  motion  without  drawing  down  upon  | 
myself  the  charge  of  being  a  demagogue.  My  j 
votes  will  demonstrate  that  I  am  not  of  that  ] 
stripe.  I  am  ready  to  do  my  duty,  and  I  now  j 
eall  upon  the  non  speaking  gentlemen  to  come 
to  the  rescue.  Already  public  sentiment  is  rising  j 
against  the  instrument  which  we  are  forming, 
and  unless  we  bring  our  labors  speedily  to  a 
close,  I  doubt  w^hether  the  result  of  our  labors 
will  be  approved  and  adopted  by  the  people  of 
Kentucky.  When  we  get  out  of  committee  of 
the  whole,  we  can  perfect  the  business  of  the 
convention.  I  do  not  want  to  gag  any  delegate. 
All  I  desire  is,  that  we  may  place  ourselves  in 
such  a  position  that  we  can  proceed  to  business; 
but  I  see  no  way  in  which  we  can  accomplish  it, 
if  we  continu-i  our  present  course.  We  have 
now  a  book  of  debates  of  some  four  or  five  hun- 
dred pages.  If  we  continue  this  latitudinous 
debate,  when  can  we  ever  get  through"'  I  hope 
we  may  go  into  convention,  and  then  if  bored 
to  death  with  speeches,  we  can  call  the  previous 
question.  I  am  not  afraid  of  the  censure  that 
delegates  may  be  disposed  to  cast  upon  me  for 
any  step  in  this  matter  which  luy  dutv  to  the 
people  mav  constrain  me  to  take.  Self-preser- 
vation will  induce  me  to  do  it,  for  I  have  been 
bored  forty -five  days,  and  I  do  not  feel  disposed 
to  be  bored  any  longer.  I  move  that  the  com- 
mittee rise  and  report  the  bill  to  the  house. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Is  that  motion  in  order,  until 
we  have  voted  on  the  pending  amendments? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  has  been  tlie  practice 
of  the  convention  on  previous  occasions,  and 
therefore  I  presume  it  is  in  order. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  never  heard,  sir,  in  any  de- 
liberative body,  of  a  committee  rising  wimout 
first  taking  the  question  on  every  pending 
amendment.  What,  sir,  will  become  of  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Franklin? 
66 


It  is  clearly  out  of  order  to  entertain  such  a  mo- 
tion, for  the  committee  has  first  to  dispose  of  the 
amendments  pending,  and  then  the  amendments 
that  may  be  offered,  before  the  bill  can  be  re- 
ported to  the  convention. 

The  CHAIRM  AN.  I  will  barely  remark  that 
this  course  has  been  pursued  by  the  convention, 
and  the  present  chairman  does  not  feel  at  liberty 
to  reverse  what  has  been  done  before,  althougn 
he  thinks  it  is  a  practice  of  questionable  pro- 
priety. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Sir,  I  never  heard  of  such  a 
practice  in  any  deliberative  body,  and  I  again 
ask,  what  willbecome  of  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman  from  Franklin? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  amendments  adopt«d 
will  be  reported  to  the  convention  with  the 
bill. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  In  the  case  to  which  the 
chairman  refers,  the  committee  rose,  reported 
progress,  and  asked  leave  to  sit  again,  and  leave 
was  refused. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  ask  the  gentleman 
to  change  his  proposition.  If  he  now  makes  the 
usual  motion  to  rise  and  report  progress,  he  can 
in  convention,  offer  a  resolution  of  instniction 
to  the  committee  to  proceed  without  debate  to 
act  upon  amendments.  But  if  we  get  the  bill 
into  the  house  without  even  reading  many  of  its 
sections,  we  shall  have  great  difficulty  in  the  ap- 
plication of  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN.  I  will  then  simply  make  a 
motion  to  rise,  and  call  upon  all  the  non-speak 
ing  members  of  this  convention,  and  upon  those 
who  wantto  do  the  busin&ssfor  which  we  have 
been  sent  here,  to  come  up  to  the  good  work,  and 
silence  this  eternal  talking.     I  am  tired  of  it. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  If  the  committee  now  rise 
and  we  go  into  the  convention  on  this  bill,  there 
are  some  amendments  for  which  gentlemen  are 
desirous  to  vote  who  wish  to  terminate  debate, 
which  thei-e  will  not  be  an  opportunity  to  offer. 
I  could  never  offer  my  amendment  which  has 
been  read  here,  if  the  gentleman  adheres  to  his 
proposition,  and  it  should  be  sustained  by  the 
house.  I  think  the  gentleman  can  attain  his  ob- 
ject by  moving  that  the  committee  rise,  and  in 
convention  offering  a  resolution  to  limit  debate, 
and  at  a  given  time  to  report  the  bill. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  motion  which  the 
gentleman  has  made  is,  that  the  committee  rise, 
and  report  progress. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  motion  and  it 
was  agreed  to. 

The  committee  then  rose  and  by  its  chairman 
reported  progress,  and  a-sked  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  question  is  on  grant- 
ing leave  to  sit  again. 

Mr.  M  ACHEN.  Before  that  question  is  taken 
I  should  like  to  make  an  inquiry,  as  I  am  not 
verj'  familiar  with  the  rules  of  parliamentary 
bodies.  I  wish  to  know  whether,  in  convention, 
we  can  offer  and  take  the  yeas  and  nays  upon 
propositions  which  have  not  been  submitted  in 
committee  of  the  whole.  An  intimation  has 
been  given  here,  that  we  cannot,  and  I  wish  to 
be  informed  on  thatpoint. 

The  PRESIDENT.  Any  amendment,  in  the 
opinion  of  the  chair  can  be' offered  in  convention 
whether  it  has  been  offered  in  committee  of  the 
whole  or  not. 


522 


Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIPFE.  The  chair  is  perfect- 
ly correct,  when  the  previous  question  is  not  cal- 
led. I  would  again  sut^est  that  the  usual  course 
should  be  pursued,  and  in  convention  a  resolu- 
tion may  be  offered,  instructing  tiie  comniittee  of 
the  whole  to  commence  voting  at  such  hour  as 
may  be  deemed  proper.  Tlius  tlie  debate  may 
be  ended.  I  beg  the  pardon  of  the  gentleman 
from  Wayne,  for  any  time  I  may  have  consumed 
in  the  debate. 

The  PRESIDENT.  If  the  convention  refuse 
leave  to  sit  again,  tlie  bill  will  betaken  xip  in 
convention,  section  by  section,  and  if  the  pre- 
vious question  should  be  moved  and  sustained, 
it  will  bring  the  convention  to  a  vote  on  the 
amendments  that  may  be  pending,  and  then  on 
the  main  question,  which  will  be  the  particular 
section  under  consideration.  The  convention 
will  then  proceed  with  the  succeeding  sections 
in  their  order,  and  they  will  each  be  debateable, 
unless  the  convention  should  exercise  its  power 
of  enforcing  the  previous  question.  Such  is  the 
course  of  proceeding  under  the  rule  which  we 
have  for  our  government. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  object  of  the  gentle- 
man who  moved  that  the  committee  rise  is  to  cut 
off  debate,  but  by  his  course  lie  would  cut  off 
amendments  also,  and  that  I  believe  he  does  not 
desire. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN.  I  am  not  a  good  parlia- 
mentarian. This  is  the  first  time  I  have  been  in 
a  deliberative  body.  I  do  not  wish  to  cut  off 
liberal  discussion,  but  sir,  here  I  have  sat  for 
forty  five  days,  listening  to  debates,  from  the 
continuance  of  whicli  I  can  see  no  possible  good 
that  can  result.  Ssir,  I  will  stand  it  no  longer, 
if  there  is  any  relief  for  me.  I  am  desirous  to 
vote  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Da- 
viess. I  shall  also  vote  to  restrict  Louisville  ; 
but  I  want  to  stop  this  unceasing  talking. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  granting 
leave  to  sit  again,  and  it  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  sat  here  all  day  and 
now  I  desire  to  move  an  adjournment — a  motion 
•which  1  am  not  much  accustomed  to  make,  nor 
■was  I,  as  a  member  of  the  legislature.  But  be- 
fore I  do  it  I  wish  to  say  a  few  words.  There 
has  been  frequent  all  usion  made  to  a  speech 
"which  I  delivered  here  some  short  time  since, 
"Which  I  think  a  proper  self-respect  and  a  due  re- 
regard  for  my  constituents,  will  not  permit  me  to 
pass  over,  without  attempting  to  make  some  re- 
ply. I  do  not  intend  to  say  anything  ill-natured. 
I  am  an  old  man,  and  I  shall  say  nothing  incon- 
sistent witli  my  own  self-respect,  but  I  intend  to 
reply  let  what  will  come.  I  now  move  an  ad- 
jouirnment. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  convention 
adjourned. 


THURSDAY,  NOVEMBER  15,  1849. 
TPrayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuart  Robis'sos. 

INSTRUCTIONS  TO  CLOSE   DEBATK. 

Mr.  OHRISMAN.  Mr.  President,  I  offer  the 
following  resolution: 

Resolved,  That  all  debate  in  committee  of  the 
whole,  uu  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 


legislative  department,  shall  cease  on  the  IGth 
instant,  at  12  o'clock,  M.,  and  the  comniittee 
shall  then  proceed  to  vote  upon  such  amend- 
ments as  are  then  pending,  or  may  be  tiieroafter 
offered:  Provided,  That  the  mover  of  any  amend- 
ment maybe  allowed  ten  minutes,  and  any  other 
delegate  who  may  desire  it,  five  minutes  to  ex* 
plain  or  oppose  the  amendment,  but  in  such 
limited  debate,  the  speaker  shall  confine  his  re- 
marks to  the  amendment  under  consideration. 

My  object  in  the  proposition  I  made  yesterday 
was  to  get  to  work.  As  I  then  stated,  there 
was  no  delegate  on  this  floor  more  willing  to 
listen  to  a  reasonable  amount  of  discussion  than 
myself,  but  forty-five  days  have  been  consumed 
in  this  body,  and  the  non-speaking  gentlemen 
have  sat  like  a  parcel  of  hawks  wln-n  it  was 
raining,  and  the  harder  it  raine<lr  1ii\>  more  pa- 
tient they  sat.  I  regret  tliat  the  junior  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  is  not  in  his  seat,  but  I  desire 
to  pay  my  respects  to  him  this  morning.  Yes- 
terday, he  remarked  tliat  he  begged  the  pardon 
of  the  gentleman  from  Wayne,  for  having  con- 
sumed so  much  time  in  debate,  I  can  say  to  the 
gentleman,  that  in  one  event  I  am  willing  to 
pardon  him,  and  that  is,  if  he  will  resume  his 
position  on  the  side  of  the  question  originally 
occupied  by  him.  I  understood  him  originally 
to  be  one  of  the  warmest  advociitcs  for  restrict- 
ing this  particular  region  of  country  on  the 
Ohio  river  in  her  representation.  I  have  tres- 
passed upon  the  time  of  this  house  very  little, 
but  I  have  given  considerable  attention  to  the 
gentleman's  speeches  delivered  on  this  floor; 
and  when  the  gentleman  on  yesterday  evening 
sneeringly  asked  mv  pardon  for  having  occupied 
so  much  time,  I  did  take  it  as  unkind.  I  have 
noticed  a  disposition  on  the  part  of  some  dele- 
gates here  to  cut  down  every  young  man  who  at- 
tempts to  bring  forward  any  proposition.  I  recol- 
lect when  tlte  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Lewis  was  ofterea  the  other  day,  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe)  rose  in  his 
place  and  rebuked  him  for  it.  Now,  I  intend  to 
reply  to  such  rebukes  when  directed  to  me,  come 
from  what  quarter  they  may.  I  did  not  move 
the  resolution  with  a  view  of  making  any  capi- 
tal at  home.  As  I  remarked  yesterday,  fortv- 
five  days  have  been  consuniecl  in  debate.  "V^e 
have  gotten  out  the  material  for  a  new  constitu- 
tion, and  it  lies  on  tlie  ground,  and  all  that  is 
necessary  is,  for  the  non-speaking  members  to 
come  right  up  to  the  good  work  and  erect  the 
building:  if  we  sit  here,  with  our  fingers  in  our 
mouths,  this  speaking  will  continue  to  tlie  first 
of  next  June.  For  one,  when  Ave  have  had  de- 
bate to  a  reasonable  extent,  I  am  disposed  to  cut 
it  off,  and  march  up  to  the  vote.  If  I  am  mis- 
taken in  the  charge  I  have  made  against  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  or  to  his  having  occu- 
pied a  position  on  both  sides  of  this  question,  I 
am  not  mistaken  when  I  say  he  has  occupied 
each  side  of  every  leading  question  that  has 
agitated  this  union  for  half  a  century.  Tlie  first 
election  I  liave  any  recollection  of,  the  gentle- 
man led  tlie  whig  party  as  a  candidate  for  the 
office  of  lieutenant  governor.  He  stood  forth  as 
the  standard  bearer  of  the  whig  party.  Sliortly 
after  that  time,  I  believe  he  was  found  in  the 
ranks  of  the  democratic  party.  Again,  in  lt-40, 
!  he  was  found  iu  the  ranks  of  the   whig  party 


5'23 


fighting  undiT  the  banner  of  Tippecanoe  and 
Tyler  too.     Folloxring  the  gentleman  through 
his  political  life.  I  tiud  that  when   John  Tyler 
was  kicked  out  and  stood  between  the  two  great 
parties,  the  gentleman  came  to  his  relief,  and  he 
was  found  fighting  under  the  banner  of  thai  re- 
creant.    Again,   a  year  or  two  since,  when  the  [ 
race  for  an  ekction'of  member  of  congress  came  ' 
off  in  his  district,  I  find  him  with  the  democratic  \ 
banner  unfurled,   fighting  in  advocacy   of  the 
claims  of  the  democratic  party.     Sir,  when  gen- 
tlemen throw  out  such  intimations,  and  when 
they  endeavor  to   prejudice  me  at  home,  and 
sncf  r  at  what  I  say  on  this  floor,  I  will  expose 
their  political  aberations  to  the  country.     Now 
1  want  the  gentleman's  constituents   and  this 
house  to  know  that,  on  this  particular  question, 
he  was  foremost  in  declaring  his  hostility  against 
that  portion  of  the  countn.-  from  which  you,  ilr. ' 
President,  come,  and  that  now  he  is  found  bat-  ■ 
tling  on  the  side  of  Louisville. 

The  PRESIDENT.    I  will  take  this  occasion 

'  1  remark,  if  we  are  to  confine  our  attention  to 

i.e  points  in  issue  at  present,  we  shall  have  an  ; 

opportunity  to  attend  to  these  remarks.     I  hope  | 

we  shall  confine  ourselves  to  the  matter  in  issue.  ] 

Mr.  HARGIS.  I  shall  feel  compeUed  toop-j 
pose  the  gentleman's  motion  to  stop  all  discus- ^ 
sion  on  the  16th  of  this  month,  because  I  know 
-^veral  gentlemen  oii  this  floor  who  desire  to  ex- 
ress  their  sentiments  on  this  subject,  and  whose 
-onstitueuts  are  anxious  to  learn  them.  While  j 
other  delegates  have  spoken  ou  this  floor,  I  have  j 
said  nothing,  although  the  discussion  has  con- , 
tinued  for  nearly  a  week.  I  beg  the  indulgence! 
of  the  house  therefore  for  a  few  minutes,  and  I  j 
^hall  not  trouble  it  again  till  the  vote  is  taken,      j 

I  belong  to  a  party  that  holds  the  opinion 
that  representation  s&ould  always  be  based  on  ; 

i)opulation.    In  that  principle  I  was  educated;  I  i 
:now  no  other;  and   I  hope  never  to  advocate  j 
any  other.     But  is  there  nothing  else  to  be  con- 
sidered in  apportioning  and  giving  equality  and  ! 
justice  to  this  mode   of  representation?    I  have  j 
always  believ.ed  that  a  system  of  legislation  has  i 
existed  as  w^ell  under  the  United  States  govern- 
ment as  the  governments  of  the  states,  having 
for  its  object  the  protection  of  the  few  and  the 
weakfrom  thepowerof  the  great,  and  the  mighty,  | 
and  the  strong.     The  fraraers  of  the  constitution  i 
of  the  United  States   adopted  that  as  its  princi- 1 
pie  of  action.     Gentlemen  here  say  that  the  or- 1 
ganizatiou  of  the    government  of   the  United 
States  has  no  analogy  to  that  of  the  states,  and 
that  the  states  are  sovereignties.     It  is  true  they 
are  sovereign,  and  that  a  part  of  their  sovereign- 
ty is   represented  in   the  senate  of  the  United 
States,   each  state  having  an  equal   voice  and 

Participation  in  the  proceedings  of  that  body, 
here  Khode  Island  and  Delaware  have  an  equal 
voice  with  New  York.  AndJ  for  what  reason? 
That  the  interests  and  welfare  of  the  smaller 
states  may  be  protected  against  the  influence  of 
the  greater,  more  populous,  and  powerful  states,  j 
When  that  arrangement  was  made  in  the  con- 
vention which  framed  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  it  was  also  agreed  that  the  gene- 
ral government  should  guarantee  to  each  state  a 
republican  form  of  government.  I  maintain 
then  that  that  arrangement,  notwithstanding  the 
assertions  of  some  gentlemen  to  the  contrary, 


does  bear  an  analogy  to  the  goTemment  of  tbo 
States. 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  rise  to  a  question  of  order. 
I  am  not  for  restricting  legitimate  debate,  but  it 
is  impossible  for  us  to  make  any  progress  with 
the  business  before  us,  unless  the  debate  be 
confined  within  reasonable  limits  to  the  question 
properly  under  consideration.  The  gentleman 
IS  now  discussing  the  amendment  of  tlie  gentle- 
man from  Franklin,  which  is  pending  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  when  the  question  before 
the  house  is  on  the  resolution  of  tlie  gentleman 
from  Wayne. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  I  know  what  is  before  the  con- 
vention. And  I  see  that  a  disposition,  as  has 
been  truly  said,  exists  here  on  the  part  of  some 
gentlemen  to  bear  down  on  certain  delegates, 
whom  they  do  not  wish  to  hear  speak.  I  have 
seen  it.  1  he  convention  has  seen  it.  It  seems 
to  me  we  cannot  say  anything  without  being  de- 
clared out  of  order.  The  oldest  gentlemen  pres- 
ent differ  as  to  what  is  or  what  is  not  in  order, 
and  for  myself,  I  confess  I  do  not  understand 
the  rules,  and  what  is  in  order  I  cannot  tell . 

Mr.  BROWN.     The  gentleman  has  mistaken 
my  purpose.     I  wish  to  bring  the  house  to  the 
!  consideration  of  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
;  from  Wayne,  which  is  properly  before  it.  1  have 
I  no  disposition  to  restrict  debate,  when  it  is  in 
:  order,     but   the    gentleman   is    discussing  the 
amendment  of  the    gentleman   from    Franklin, 
I  when,  in  fact,  the  resolution  offered  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Wayne  is  the  legitimate  subject  be- 
fore us. 

Mr.HARGIS.  What  amendment  do  you  mean? 
I  do  not  understand. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  feel  great  reluctance  to 
call  any  gentleman  to  order,  and  require  a  strict 
adherence  to  the  matter  under  debate.  Some- 
time since  I  was  overruled  by  the  house  when  I 
called  the  gentleman  now  in  possession  of  the 
floor  to  order,  and  leave  was  given  him  to  proceed. 
I  thought  that  was  anadraonition  to  the  chair 
that  each  gentleman  could  proceed  as  he  thought 
proper,  and  that  if  delegates  choose  to  let  him 
run  riot,  it  was  not  a  matter  for  the  interference 
of  the  chair.     The  gentleman  will  proceed. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  It  is  extremely  embarrassing 
that  many  gentlemen  get  in  this  way  in  this 
house.  It  appears  we  cannot  get  along  in  har- 
mony and  proceed  with  our  business  as  we 
should  do.  I  have  contended  that  there  is  a  dif- 
ference in  representation  where  there  is  a  vastly 
crowded  population  in  the  cities  and  large 
towns,  than  where  it  is  scattered  in  the  country. 
I  believe  the  states  generally  have  acted  upon 
that  principle,  in  the  organization  of  their  repre- 
sentation. The  state  of  Maryland  amended  her 
constitution  in  1638,  and  gave  the  city  of  Balti- 
more one  senator.  She  has  twenty-one  counties, 
and  each  of  them  is  represented  by  a  senator. 
The  large  state  of  Pennsylvania  gives  her  city 
of  Philadelphia,  as  all  other  cities  should  have, 
four  senators  oulv.  New  Orleans,  in  the  state 
of  Louisiana,  witli  a  population  of  one  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  souls^-one-third  of  the  pop- 
ulation of  the  state,  is  entitled,  under  her  new- 
constitution,  made  in  1845,  to  four  senatore,  and 
she  is  never  to  have  more.  Richmond,  in  the 
state  of  Virginia,  has  one  senator  and  three  re- 
presentatives.   Nov,  in  all  the  older  states  that 


524 


have,  of  late  years,  ameiuled  their  constitutions  :  thing  in  matter  or  manner,  or  had  I  done  any 
— as  for  instance,  Maryland,  Louisiana,  Penn-  thing  whicli  he  considered  a  cause  of  complaint 
sylvania,  and  Virginia— they  have  inserted   a  '  on  yesterday,  and  had  he,  either  then  or  in  pri- 

Erovision,  limiting  their  cities  to  a  certain  num-  i  vate,  asked  an  explanation,  or  suggested  that  I 
er  of  senators.  had  done  him  injustice,  or  wounded  his  feelings. 

The  great  city  of  IS'ew  York  can  never  over-  or  his  just  pride  on  this  floor,  no  man  would 
balance  the  state  in  the  legislature;  hence  the  have  been  more  anxious  and  ready  than  myself, 
reason  why  the  framers  of  the  constitution  in-  i  to  have  made  that  atonement  which  is  due  from 
serted  no  restriction  in  it  on  the  subject.  Ohio  I  one  gentleman  to  another,  when  he  supposes  lie 
is  a  very  large  state,  and  no   apprehension  need    has  been  injured. 


be  entertained  that  her  cities  will  obtain  an  ad- 
vantage over  the  remainder  of  the  state.  There 
would  be  some  danger  in  not  putting  a  restric- 
tion upon  the  cities  of  Baltimore  and  New  Or- 
leans, in  reference  to  the  number  of  senators  to 
which  they  are  entitled,  because  in  those  cities 
the  population  is  rapidly  increasing,  and  there 
is  a  possibility  that  the'  rest  of  Maryland  and 
Louisiana  may  be  put  entirely  in  the  power  of 
these  large  cities.  When  large  bodies  of  people 
are  thrown  into  cities,  the  presumption  is  they 
can  be  better  represented  by  a  small  delegation 
than  a  large  district  can.  A  man  living  in  a 
city  knows  all  the  wants  of  the  community,  and 
he  can,  consequently,  better  represent  live  thou- 
sand souls,  than  he  could  a  populatiou  of  two 
thousand  living  in  any  other  portion  of  the 
state.  Louisville  has  about  fifty  thousand  peo- 
ple, and  fifty  years  hence  she  may  have  tAvo  hun- 
dred thousand,  and  if  so,  she  will  have  the  pow- 
er to  control  the  legislative  department  of  the 
state.  Therefore  the  necessity  of  our  imposing 
a  check,  and  restricting  her  to  a  certain  number 
of  senators.  My  plan,  however,  of  doing  so,  is 
different  from  any  other  yet  proposed.  I  would 
give  that  city  four  senators.  Whatever  the  sup- 
position may  be,  I  do  not  think  gentlt-men  here 
have  any  unkind  feelings  towards  Louisville. 
The  cities  of  Newport,  Covington,  and  Lexing- 
ton, also  will  become  great  cities,  and  have  large 
Populations,  and  they  must,  at  some  future  day, 
e  limited  to  a  certain  number  of  senators,  or 
they  may  control  the  legislation  of  this  state. 

I  think  that  the  question  of  slavery  has  no- 
thing to  do  with  this  subject.  I  do  not  know 
that  it  would  make  any  great  difference  whether 
the  proposed  representation  is  given  to  Louis- 
ville, or  not,  so  far  as  slaverj'  is  concerned.  I 
am  willing  to  give  my  opinion  about  it,  let  me 
belong  to  what  party  I  may.  I  Avish  that  my 
opinion  may  go  forth,  and  that  is,  that  when 
cities  become  very  large,  there  should  be  a  check 
imposed  on  their  power  of  legislation. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Mr.  President:  I 
was  not  in  my  seat  at  the  commencement  of  the 
discussion  upon  this  resolution,  and  I  am  in- 
debted to   the   information    of   gentlemen,    for 


I  must,  therefore,  suppose  that  this  has  been 
somewhat  a  matter  of  premeditation,  of  nightly 
concoction;  perhaps  not  entirely  prompted  by 
the  gentleman's  own  sense  of  offended  feelings. 
I  must  be  permitted  to  say,  on  this  occasion,  and 
I  think  1  may  appeal  to  my  fellow  delegates  on 
this  floor,  whether  my  habit,  either  in  the  house 
or  out  of  it,  has  been  that  of  discourtesy  to  my 
equals  and  associates  in  debate. 

It  is  true,  sir,  that  I  have  conceived  myself, 
occasionally,  somewhat  the  object  of  attack  upon 
points  not  exactly  connected  with  the  subject  of 
immediate  consideration;  and  the  propriety  of 
repelling  that  attack,  the  time  and  mode,  was  a 
subject  matter  of  ray  own  consideration. 

Little  did  I  expect  sir,  that  we  were  to  have 
new  recruits  enlisted  in  this  crusade,  in  reference 
to  the  political  consistency  of  the  humble  indi- 
vidual before  you.  It  is  true,  that  I  partake  of 
the  frailtv  of  my  fellow  men.  I  pretend  not  to 
be  infalliW  either  in  politics,  in  opinion,  or  in 
judgment,  and  he  who  asserts  his  claims  to  con- 
fidence, because  of  his  own  supposed  infallibil- 
ity and  undeviatin^  consistency,  may  some- 
times learn  a  lesson  by  a  review  of  his  own  life, 
to  see  how  far  his  pretensions  are  sustained  by 
a  reference  to  his  own  history  and  political  bio- 
graphy. If  he  shall  feel  incompetent  to  the  task 
I  would  advise  him  to  call  to  his  aid  some  kind 
friend. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  spent,  by  the  kindness 
of  my  fellow  citizens,  with  whom  I  was  born 
and  Ijrought  up,  almost  half  a  century  in  public 
life.  I  have  seen  parties  rise  and  fall,  and  po- 
litical dynasties  pass  almost  into  oblivion  in 
this  commonwealth,  as  well  as  in  this  Union.  I 
have  had  in  an  humble  degree,  a  portion  and  part 
in  some  of  these  exciting  scenes,  which  have 
past. 

I  have  had  occasion,  sir,  to  review  my  own  ac- 
tions and  my  own  opinions.  I  have  seen  on  my 
pathway  errors,  that  experience  and  a  more  ma- 
tured judgment  have  pointed  out  in  my  political 
course,  and  the  part  I  have  been  caJled  on  to 
take  in  the  party  contests  which  have  passed,  yet 
I  have  had  the  consolation,  which  to  me  is  worth 
more  than  the  opinion  of  the  man,  of  to  day,  to 


my  knowledge  of  the  manner  in  which  my  j  know  that  in  no  political  act  of  my  life,  when 
uame  has  been  introduced  bv  the  delegate  from  !  called  upon  to  discharge  the  duties  of  public 
Wayne,  into  this  morning's  discussion.  I  know  i  agent,  have  I  ever  been  governed  by  any  other 
not  under  what  pretext  that  assault  was  made  1  principle  than  a  desire  to  promote  the  great  in- 
upon  me,  especially  as  that  gentleman  was  a  j  terests  of  the  commonwealth,  a.«  I  understood 
stranger  to  me  personally,  previous  to  the  time  and  believed  them  to  be  at  the  time.  No  per- 
thatl  first  met  him  in  this  hall.  So  far  as  1 1  gonal,  no  political  advancement  has  ever  swayed 
know  my  own  feelings,  thev  have  been  any  thing  j  or  governed  that  little  quantum  of  judgment 
else  than  unkind  towards  him,  and  1  have  which  my  God  gave  me,  when  called  upon  to 
avoided  in  matter,  manner,  and  intention,  any  i  act  with  reference  to  the  great  interests  entrust- 
thing  which  might  give  hiin  the  slightest  cause  j  gj  to  me  by  kind  and  confiding  fellow  citizens, 
of  complaint.  I  understand  the  delegate  wjus  pleased  to  say 

Nothing  could  have  surprised  me  more  Uian  i  that  I  had  been  on  both  sides  of  the  present 
the  language  applied  to  me.    Had  I  said  any  1  question  before  the  house.      I   thought  I  an- 


525 


uounced  yesterday — smA  if  the  gentleaian  ha<l 
done  me  the  hunor  to  luten  to  me,  he  would 
hare  uuderstood  it,  the  first  opinions  en- 
tertained bv  me  on  this  question.  I  said  I 
had  come  liere,  I  had  entered  this  hall  and 
before  I  had  heard  the  debate,  impressed  with 
the  opinion  that  something  should  he  dune  in 
reference  to  consolidated  constituencies,  repre- 
sented by  consolidated  numbers  in  the  legisla- 
tive department  of  the  government,  but  that  the 
debate  which  had  taken  place,  had  satisfied  me 
that  the  mode  proposed  bv  ostracising  and  pro- 
scribing a  portion  of  the  freemen  from  a  parti- 
cipation in  the  councilsof  the  state,  was  not  a  just 
and  correct  mode  of  doing  it.  1  said  if  it  could 
not  be  done  in  some  other  mode,  I  had  made  up 
my  mind  to  risk  the  possible  evil  with  the  coun- 
try,! am  willing  to  tru.st  to  that  judgment  and 
patriotism  of  my  fellow  citizens,  which  under 
the  guidance  of  a  kind  providence  had  conduct- 
ed them  in  safety  tlirough  all  former  dangers, 
and  I  hope  that  the  same  spirit  would  guide  us 
through  the  anticipated  evils  of  such  a  state  of 
things  as  this  amendment  presupposes. 

But  sir,  the  delegate  from  Wayne  is  not  the 
first  gentleman  who  has  been  pleased,  within  the 
halls  of  this  hou.se,  to  allude  to  what  they  have 
called  my  political  inconsistencies.  Possibly 
sir,  in  the  opinion  of  that  gentleman  and  those 
who  think  with  him,  and  whose  purposes  he 
may  be  serving,  I  have  in  some  respects  greatly 
politically  sinned.  Butsir,  I  would  remind  gen- 
tlemen "who  live  in  glass  houses,  not  to  throw 
stones,"  and  he  who  has  not  changed  his  opin- 
ions, if  he  ever  had  any.  upon  some  of  thegrea 
leading  questions  of  state  or  national  policy  and 
expediency,  which  have  arisen  within  the  last 
thirty  years,  mav  be  authorised  to  sit  in  judg- 
ment upon  me;  tut  I  deny  that  right  to  either  of 
the  gentlemen  who  have  assumed  to  be  my  ac- 
cusers. But  those  who  have,  like  myself,  upon 
conviction  of  the  error  of  opinion,  changed  that 
opinion,  should  at  least  remember  to   exercise 

i'udgment  in  charity  upon  a  fellow  sinner.  1 
inow  not  whether  tte  delegate  from  Wayne  is 
obnoxious  to  the  charge  of  ever  having  changed 
any  political  opinion  which  he  may  have  enter- 
tain«id;  for  to  me  his  course  is  unknown  and  un- 
cared  for.  Upon  our  introduction  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  session,  he  made  a  favorable 
impression,  and  I  regret  he  has  given  me  cause 
to  change  the  opinion  I  then  formed. 

Mr.  President:  I  cannot  so  well  meet  this 
charge  of  political  inconsistency,  so  improperly 
for  a  second  time  introduce.i  into  this  hall,  first 
by  my  colleague,  and  now  by  the  delegate  from 
Wayne,  without  a  reference  to  some  few  of  tie 
prominent  questions  upon  which  I  have  been 
called  to  act.  In  doing  so,  I  hope  I  shall  be 
pardoned  by  this  house  for  any  thing  of  seeming 
egotism.  It  is  necessary  that  I  should  speak  of 
myself  to  do  myself  justice. 

I  was  elected  a  member  of  congress  from  what 
was  called  the  Louisville  district,  amidst  the 
conflict  for  the  presidency  of  the  United  States, 
then  waged  between  those  distinguished  indi- 
viduals. Clay,  Crawford,  Jackson,  Adams,  and 
Calhoun.  In  that  contest,  so  long  as  the  states- 
man from  Kentucky  was  in  the  field,  I  was  for 
him,  as  was  at  that  time  nine-tenths  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky,  and  I  have  no  doubt  the  gentle- 


man, if  old  enough  to  take  part  and  cast  his  vote, 
voted  for  him  in  that  contest.  This  election  for 
the  office  of  president,  as  neither  candidate  re- 
ceived a  majority,  devolved  on  the  house  of  rep- 
resentatives, of  which  I  was  an  humble  member, 
one  of  the  twelve  delegates  from  this  state.  As 
uch  1  was  called  upon  to  cast  the  sovereign  voice 
of  Kentucky,  between  Gen.  Jackson  and  Mr. 
Adams.  At  that  point,  perhaps,  commenced, 
in  the  estimation  of  some  itho  nectr  diange,  mj- 
political  sins.  Independent  of  my  own  judg- 
ment as  to  what  was  the  voice  of  Kentucky,  and 
particularly  those  who  had  sent  me  to  proclaim 
their  voice,  I  was  furnisheil  with  ofiicial  light  by 
legislative  resolution.  The  citizens  of  Kentucky 
were  undivided  in  sentiment.  Thepopularvoice 
everywhere  proclaimed  that,  as  between  Jack- 
son and  Adams,  it  was  the  duty,  av,  the  bounden 
duty  of  the  delegates  from  Kentucky,  to  cast  her 
vote  against  Adams  and  in  favor  of  Jackson. 

We  were  not  left  to  conjecture  this  opinion  and 
decide  upon  our  duty  by  our  own  judgment; 
but  your  legislature  was  then  in  session,  and  I 
have  the  resolution  they  passed  and  the  speeches 
made  by  the  statesmen  of  that  time,  instructing 
me,  and  calling  upon  me  as  one  of  the  delegates 
charged  with  that  high  trust,  by  considerations 
that  it  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  state,  to  cast  the 
vote  as  I  did  give  it.  It  was  in  accordance  with 
my  own  judgment,  and  I  gave  it  with  pleasure, 
but  that  has  cost  me  trouble — though  no  regret — 
,  no  tears.  When  I  returned  home  to  my  constitu- 
I  ency  to  give  an  account  of  my  stewardship  in 
I  thus  carrying  out  their  will  and  the  orders  of  the 
legislature,  1  found  the  very  men — ^yes  sir,  men 
I  who  charged  me  with  political  inconsistency — 
j  who  had  been  instrumental  in  procuring  this 
.  legislative  mandate — whose  speeches  in  the  legis- 
lature I  hold  in  my  hand — upon  the  stnmp  in  my 
\  county  and  district,  attempting  to  destroy  the 
\  prospects  of  a  young  politician — to  undermine 
i  the  confidence  of  his  constituency  in  him  be- 
cause he  had  acted  honestly,  and  obeyed  the  dic- 
:  tates  of  the  legislature,  and  the  still  iiigher  com- 
\  mauds  of  public  sentiment  upon  him. 
I  My  constituency  continued  to  return  me  to 
congress  for  ten  years,  and  as  you  know,  ilr. 
'  President,  and  you  can  do  me  the  justice  to  say, 
,  longer  than  I  desired  to  remain.  There  sprung 
.  up  in  my  pathway,  during  a  portion  of  my  po- 
i  liiical  pilgrimage  in  the  national  councils  ques- 
tions, about  which  at  one  time  there  seemed  to 
i  be  no  division  among  the  politicians  or  the  pop- 
I  ulatiou  of  this  state.  I  allude  to  the  necessity 
j  of  the  United  States  Bank.  I  looked  upon  the 
!  power  of  congress  to  charter  an  institution  of 
j  that  kind  as  a  question  which  had  received  the 
j  settled  opinions  of  the  people,  or  as  lawyers 
•  term  it,  it  was  res  adjudicata.  It  was  only  then 
:  a  question  of  public  policy  and  necessity.  I 
I  voted  to  re-charter  that  ban\,  because  I  labored 
i  under  the  belief  of  its  necessity,  inculcated  by 
I  events  which  took  place  in  the  war  of  1812,  and 
:  the  consequent  evils  growing  out  of  it — a  derang- 
I  etl  and  prostrated  paper  currency.  I  had  looked 
j  to  that  institution  as  a  great  purifier  and  regula- 
{ tor  of  the  state  paper  currency.  I  thought  Gen. 
I  Jack.son  committed  an  error  when  he  vetoed  the 
bill  to  re-charter  that  bank.  Was  I  alone  in 
'  Kentucky  in  this  opinion  among  those  who 
I  had  vote<i  with  me,  and  who  with  me  contribu- 


526 


t«;.l  to  the  elevation  to  the  presiJ.-ncy  of  that 
^reat  manV  I  thought  him  wrong  in  some  meas- 
ures that  succooded  the  veto  of  the  act  to  re- 
charter  that  institution,  and  this  difference  upon 
a  question  of  policy  respecting  the  currency, 
separated  me  from  what  was  then  called  the 
Jackson  party  in  Kentucky.  And  during  the 
excitement  of  subseciuent  .elections  and  contests 
in  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  this  differ- 
ence of  opinion  necessarily  called  down  upon 
me  the  denunciation  of  the  partizan  presses  of 
the  day.  I  defended  myself,  and  in  this  defence 
I  have  no  doubt  I  dealt  blows  as  hard  as  those 
I  received,  and  probably  as  often  undeserved. 

Mr.  President:  Sixty  Avintera  have  made  the 
impress  of  their  frosts  upon  my  head,  and  men 
of  but  to-day,  and  others  whose  years  have  not 
improved  their  habits,  or  softened  their  feelings, 
take  pleasure  in  perpetuating  their  names  by 
connecting  them  with  political  sins  imputed  to 
me.  Among  their  charges  sir,  I  understand  the 
delegate  has  referred  to  the  fact  that  I  joined  the 
administration  of  Mr.  John  Tyler. 

It  is  true  sir,  that  without  any  knowledge  on 
my  part,  and  without  the  slightest  expectation, 
with  no  personal  desire  or  political  ambition  to 
gratify,  sufficiently  powerful  to  induce  me  to 
tear  myself  from  the  retirement  of  a  quiet  and 
happy  home,  upon  the  disruption  of  the  cabinet 
of  Mr.  Tyler,  with  the  particulars  of  which  I 
have  nothing  to  do — and  I  would  scorn  to  intro- 
duce them  into  this  house,  and  harrow  up  the 
feelings  or  perpetrate  an  outrage  on  the  humblest 
individual  in  the  community — unexpectedly,  I 
received  the  appointment  of  Post  Master  Gene- 
ral, accompanied  by  a  private  letter  from  that 
gentleman,  with  whom  I  had  lived  and  been  as- 
sociated at  Washington  for  many  years  upon 
terms  of  the  utmost  personal  kindness,  and 
which  I  suppose  begat  in  his  bosom  a  confi- 
dence in  my  integrity  and  capacity  for  the  duties 
of  one  of  the  most  laborious  departments  be- 
longing to  the  federal  government.  He  placed 
my  acceptance  of  that  commission  on  the  ground 
of  private  friendship  to  him,  and  without  refer- 
ance  to  political  considerations.  At  the  sac- 
rifice of  much  of  individual  comfort,  and  indi- 
vidual convenience,  J  had  the  temerity,  without 
consulting  the  delegate  from  Wayne,  or  the 
other  gentleman  in  this  house  who  thinks  with 
him,  to  accept  that  office,  and  to  discharge  the 
duties  to  the  best  of  my  humble  capacity.  What 
the  judgment  of  public  sentiment  may  be  on  my 
official  acts,  and  official  duti(!S,  I  will  leave  to 
be  decided  by  ray  country,  whose  province  it  is, 
content  to  meet  its  decision. 

It  is  not  my  purpose,  nor  is  it  necessary  that  I 
should  speak  of  the  measures  of  that  adminis- 
tration. When  the  member  from  Wayne  himself 
shall  pass  from  this  stage  of  existence;  when 
perhaps  there  will  be  left  scarcely  a  grave  stone 
to  tell  the  passer  by  who  lies  beneath  the  sod  of 
the  valley  whicii  covers  his  remains;  the  results 
of  that  administration,  the  consequences  which 
flow  from  its  measures,  guided  by  no  selfish  or 
sectional  policy,  looking  alone  to  the  great  in- 
terest of  our  great  and  common  country — an  ad- 
ministration stamling  amid  the  crash  and  rush 
of  both  great  political  parties  for  a  time,  each 
seeking  who  could  be  most  powerful  to  crush  it, 
disgrace  its  head,  and  his  humble  associates — I 


i  say,  when  he  sliall  have  passed  from  the  meino- 
i  ry  of  man,  and  the  historian  shall  come  to  re- 
!  cord  some  of  the  events  Avhich  have  stamped 
and  given  it  character — aye  sir,  and  I  inio-ht  al- 
'  most  say  a  new  and  independent  destiny  \o  our 
I  common  country,  and  opened  up  to  the  world, 
!  broad  and  wide,  her  shores,  her  enterprize,  and 
j  liberty  to  the  oppressed  of  all  the  world — justice 
I  will  be  done  to  those  Avhom  it  is  tlie  pleasure  of 
i  others  now  seeking  distinction,  to  denounce  and 
j  condemn. 

I  Sir,  during  my  association  with  that  adminis- 
I  tration,  the  question  of  the  annexation  of  Tex- 

I  as  was  presented.     I  saw,  or  at  least  I  thought 

I I  saw,  that  unless  the  United  States  acted,  and 
i  acted  promptly,  and  with  united  public  senti- 
'  ment  and  political  energy,  our  western  limits 

would  be  circumscribed  by  the  little  stream  of 
the  Sabine — that  we  .should  have  an  empire 
hostile  to  our  institutions  spreading  along  tlie 
most  defenceless  portion  of  our  southern  fron- 
tier, the  southern  slave-holding  states.  I  thought 
I  saw  in  the  annexation  of  that  country  an  al- 
most absolute  necessity,  if  we  desired  to  pre- 
serve and  promote  the  prosperity,  and  give  quiet 
to  the  planter  and  cotton  grower  of  that  portion 
of  the  union.  I  did  not  act  alone.  I  acted,  it 
is  true,  in  accordance  with  my  own  judgment, 
but  I  always  like  to  have  that  Judgment  aided 
by  the  counsels  of  older  heads.  I  consulted 
some  of  these  from  my  own  state.  Their  advice 
to  me  was,  by  all  means,  accomplish  the  an- 
nexation of  Texas,  we  must  have  it,  and  we 
ought  to  have  it.  And  I  was  told  that  now  was 
the  time  to  take  it.  I  need  not  say  who  they 
were;  there  is  one,  at  least,  present  will  bear  wit- 
ness. Sir,  my  surprise  was  great  I  confess, 
when  I  looked  across  the  mountains  ami  saw 
the  political  conflict  of  the  presidential  race  of 
1844,  to  find  the  very  men  who  had  advised  me  to 
the  measure  of  annexation,  on  the  stump  de- 
nouncing it  as  a  measure  wicked,  unholy  and 
unworthy  of  our  people.  Some  of  these  men 
now  arraign  me  oy  a  charge  of  a  change  in 
my  political  sentiments.  It  Avas  during  my  ad- 
ministration of  the  post  office  department,  I  be- 
come satisfied  that  the  opinions  I  liad  entertained 
of  the  necessity  of  a  bank  of  the  United  States 
as  a  government  agent,  were  founded  in  error. 
In  that  department  alone,  I  found  myself  able 
to  collect,  by  dimes  and  half  dimes,  a  revenue 
of  between  four  and  six  millions  of  dollars,  and 
safely  to  keep  and  disburse  it  without  a  United 
States  bank.  And  the  records  of  our  country 
will  not  show  in  that  department  the  loss  of  a 
single  dollar  by  defalcation  while  I  had  the  hon- 
or of  managing  its  finances,  save  in  tiie  case  of 
one  postmaster,in  the  region  of  country  near  the 
locality  of  the  gentleman  from  Wayne,  I  know 
not  exactly  where,  whom  I  detected  in  having 
altered  his  post  bills,  and  thus  causing  the  loss 
of  about  forty  dollars  a  year,  for  some  years. 

Mr.  President :  It  will  be  remembered  that 
during  the  years  1841  and  1842-3,  the  bank 
of  the  United  States,  which  had  originally 
charmed  a  large  portion  of  my  native  state  into 
its  support — the  supposed  necessity  of  whose 
existence  had  led  me  to  believe  that  a  great 
error  had  been  committed  by  (ieii. Jackson, 
in  the  exercise  of  the  veto  power — exploded, 
when  the  stockholders  entered   its  vaults  and 


527 


opened  its  books,  examined  its  papers  and  ex- 1  and  I  can  assure  the  delegate  who  has  been  the 
posed  its  financial  operations  for  a  series  of  fif- 1  immediate  cause  of  thus  compelling  me  to  do  what 
teen  or  twenty  years;  there  was  an  exposure  of  j  I  most  sincerely  regret  itm  necessity  of  doing, 
political  corruption  and  fraud,  in  the  financial  j  that  I  had  no  intention,  purpose,  nor  design  of 
operations  of  that  bank,  which  stunk  in  the  j  casting  censure  upon  him,  or  wounding  his  feel- 
nostrils  of  the  nation  ;  transactions  which  had  ■  ings.  My  own  self-respect  and  a  regard  for  the 
been  concealed  from  a  committee  of  congress,  sent  i  decorum  of  this  body,  forbid  that  I  should,  wiih- 
to  make  an  invtstigatiou  into  tlie  condition  of  the  out  cause,  violate  its  sense  of  propriety, 
bank  ;  at  the  head  of  which  was  McDuffie  and  j      j^r.   CHRISMAX.     The   gentleman   savs  he 


Col.  Johnson,  of  our  state.     Yes,  Mr.  President, 
so  concealed  as  to  induce  that  committee   to   re- 

Eort  that  all  which  had  been  charged  against  the 
ank  was  untrue  and  false.  I  believed  it.  But 
when  the  books  were  opened  to  the  stockholders, 
they  found  their  pockets  robbed,  the  country 
cheated,  and  themselves  bankrupt.  Tes  sir, 
there  were  children,  of  a  citizen  of  my  own 
county,  whose  whole  property  was  invested  in 
that  institution,  some  thirty  or  forty  thousand 
dollars,  robbed  of  every  dollar  of  their  estate. 
But  thp.t  was  ouly  as  a  drop  in  the  bucket,  com- 
pared Avith  other  cases  of  loss.  I  became  satis- 
fied on  looking  into  the  transactions  of  the  bank 
thus   exposed,  and  on  a  review   of  my  former 


does  not  know  under  what  circumstances  I  in- 
troduced his  name.  When  I  made  the  motion 
yesterday  evening,  I  said  I  was  anxious  to  get 
along  with  the  business  of  the  convention;  that 
we  were  making  very  little  progress,  and  that 
already  from  the  hills  and  hollows  of  Kentucky 
there  was  arisiug-a  complaint  against  this  body. 
Action  was  demanded.  I  heard  it  from  every 
member  that  left  this  floor  to  visit  his  constitu- 
ents on  his  return,  that  complaints  were  being 
made  in  the  country,  and  that  tlie  people  de- 
manded that  this  body  should  move  forward  in 
the  great  work  they  were  sent  here  to  perform. 
The  gentleman  from  Nelson  yesterday,  after  I 
had  indicated  a  disposition  to  proeeed  with  our 


opinious  on  tliat  subject,  and  the  opinions  of  that  j  labors,  arose  and  verv  sneeriuglv  remarked 
man,  wnose  judgment  was  more  matured,  and  |  that  he  begged  pardon  of  the  gentlemen  from 
different  from  mm^,  and  stronger  of  course,  and  |  Wavne,  for  the  time  he  had  consumed  in  his 
better  informed,  that  he  was  governed  by  the  j  speeches  upon  this  floor.  I  understood  that 
highest  sense  of  justice  in  vetoing  the  bill;  that ,  sneer  and  obsen-ation  sir.  It  was  a  sort  of  left- 
he  was  right  and  I  was  wrong.  And  I  had  the  banded  "lick"  at  me.  It  was  intended  to  show 
boldness,  the  temerity,  folly  perhaps,  in  the  opiu-  \  me  up  rather  badly  to  the  people  I  have  the  hon- 
ion  of  some,  the  feeling  thus,  not  only  to  act  i  or  to  represent  on  this  floor, 
upon  a  sense  of  right,  but  to  acknowledge  it.  j  Any  proposition  coming  from  me,  the  gentle- 
A\  ho  among  us  now  advocates  the  charter  of  a  j  nian  could  snceringly  strike  out  of  the  way,  dis- 
united States  Bank  '?  j  nosing  of  me  as  he  attempted  to  dispose  of  the 
I  am  not  governed  nor  influenced  by  the  course  j  honorable  gentleman  from  Lewis,  the  other 
of  policy,  which  has  governea   and  influenced  j  raorniug,  when  he  offered  his  resolution  to  hold 


others.  Whenever  I  am  satisfied  that  I  am  wroa 
on  a  political  question,  a  question  of  policy,  or 
one  involving  a  principle,  1  take  the  consequen- 
ces of  acknowledging  that  error.  It  is  more 
magnanimous,  more  consoling  to  my  concience 
than  to  persevere  in  error.  And  when  the  annexa- 
tion of  Texas  was  made  the  great  leading  ques- 
tion upon  which  the  contest  for  the  presidency 
of  lS+4  was  made  to  turn,  I  had  no  choice  but 
the  choice  which  my  judgment  dictated,  and 
that  was,  that  the  annexation  of  that  country  to 
the  United  States  was  demanded  bv  the  highest 
political  and  self-preserving  principles  in  refer 


evening  sessions.  He  says  I  was  not  prompted 
by  a  sense  of  offended  feeling,  intimating  that 
some  other  gentleman  had  prompted  me  to 
make  the  attack  upon  him,  as  I  understand  it. 
Now  sir,  no  gentleman  prompted  me.  I  was 
prompted  by  his  own  conduct.  His  sneer  of 
yesterday  prompted  me  to  say  what  I  did.  I 
know  what  I  said,  and  I  knew  he  would  obtain 
the  information  when  he  came  into  the  house. 
I  am  sorry  he  was  not  here,  but  I  felt  certain  the 
facts  would  be  related  to  him,  and  sure  enough 
the  moment  he  arrived  he  was  taken  out  of  the 
hall,  and  every  thing  was  communicated  to  him 


ence  to  our  future  destiny  ;  and  if  my  venerated  j  tliat  I  did  say.  I  did  charge  tliat  the  gentleman 
father,  then  reposing  in  his  grave,  had  been  liv-  j  had  taken  both  sides  of  this  question,  and  I  re- 
ing,  and  a  candidate  for  the  presidency,  and  had  j  peat  it  here;  but  I  was  not  aware  that  he  con- 
opposed  the  annexation  of  Texas,  I  would  have  j  fessed  it  yesterday.  I  am  prepared  to  show  that 
cast  my  little  might  in  the  scale  against  hiru.  |  he  has  occupied  two  sides  of  this  question. 
Thiscontestbroughtmeagaininto  political  union  There  are  several  gentlemen  on  this  floor  by 
with  the  democratic  party.  My  principles  of  j  whom  I  can  prove  that  the  gentleman  was 
government  ever  have  been  democratic,  and  I  j  urging  that  Louisville  and  the  district  border- 
hope  ever  will  be.  They  have  not,  nor  will  not  |  ing  on  the  Ohio  river  should  be  restricted  in 
be  made  to  depend  upon  expe<Jiency,  or  the  choice  :  representation;  but  yesterday  he  rose  in  his 
of  a  president.  The  charge  of  inconsistency,  |  place  and  joined  the  ranks  of  those  who  resisted 
come  from  what  quarter  it  may,  will  not  change  .  the  restriction,  and  made  an  able  speech  against 
the  honest  purpose  of  my  soul — a  desire  ever  to  j  the  opinions  he  had  thrown  out  for  several  days 
do  right.  Mr.  President,  I  am  in  one  re.spect  to  some  members  of  this  body.  I  did  say  that  if 
like  king  Lear  in  the  play.  "Tray  Blanche  ;  the  rumor  I  had  heard  was  incorrect,  he  at  least 
and  Sweetheart,  all  bark  at  me."  Bark  on  I  say, '  had  occupied  both  sides  of  every  great  question 
I  shall  not  calm  you  by  whistling.  '    j  that  had  agitated  the  country.     This  morning 

I  beg  pardon  of  this  convention  for  thus  he  comes  forward  and  acknowledges  the  corn; 
throwing  too  much  of  my  own  affairs  and  po- ;  acknowledges  that  he  has  been  every  man's 
liiical  history  before  it.  I  could  not  do  less,  i  man;  that  he  has  occupied  every  side  of  this 
I  hape  I  shall  have  no  occasion  again  to  do  it, '  great  question.    He    alludes  to    my    political 


528 


conrae.  Well,  sir,  It  is  true,  I  was  cnnglit  in  the 
coon  skin  frolick  of  1840.  I  supported  "Tip- 
pecanoe" and  your  oAvn  beloved  "Tyler  too." 
But  wlien  Tyler  turned  traitor  and  deserted  his 
friends;  -when  he  sliowed  himself  a  Judas,  I  fol- 
lowed not  John  Tyler;  and  he  is  the  last  man 
that  walks  the  soil  of  this  proud  confederacy  I 
Would  follow.  The  gentleman  says  he  has  no 
doubt  that  in  the  contest  between  Jackson  and 
Crawford,  and  Clay,  I  was  found  voting  for  Clay. 
1  was  a  very  small  boy  at  that  time,  and  was 
not  entitled  to  a  vote.  He  thinks  I  am  piqued 
because  he  detected  a  peculating  postmaster  in 
iny  town,  who  had  swindled  the  government  out 
of  $40.  The  postmaster  in  my  town  was  my 
political  and  personal  enemy,  and  in  all  the 
races  1  have  run  in  my  county  he  has  been 
against  me.  He  has  exerted  all  the  influence  he 
could  bring  to  bear  not  only  to  defeat  nie  for  the 
state  legislature,  but  also  for  this  convention. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  did  not  allude  to 
the  post-master  of  Wayne.  He  is  not  the  gentle- 
man I  referred  to. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN.  There  is  not  a  more  high- 
minded  and  respectable  gentleman  in  Kentucky 
than  the  post-master  he  removed,  whilst  he  Avas 
the  Post-master  general  of  John  Tyler.  In  jus- 
tice to  him  I  say  it,  notwithstanding  he  is  my  per- 
sonal and  political  enemy.  1  would  ask  the  gen- 
tleman, how  it  is  lie  occupies  a  seat  on  this  floor 
from  the  county  of  Nelson,  where  there  is  a  whig 
majority  of  six  or  seven  hundred? 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  will  answer  the 
question.  The  citizens  of  that  county  are  hon- 
est, well  thinking,  generous  people.  They  hap- 
pened to  think  me  an  honest  man,  and  trustwor- 
thy, although  they  diffi^red  with  me  on  some 
questions  of  national  policy,  and  that  is  the  Avay 
1  got  my  appointment. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN.  Well,  I  did  not  know  but 
there  had  been  another  political  revolution.  I 
am  not  posted  up  as  he  seems  to  intimate.  I 
have  not  pestered  myself  about  his  political  his- 
tory, but  I  did  suppose  another  political  revolu- 
tion had  taken  place,  for  I  knew  there  was  a 
whig  majority  in  Nelson  of  some  six  or  seven 
huliured,  and  I  supposed  he  had  to  make  some 
concessions  to  get  here.  But  he  says  they  want- 
ed au  honest,  clever  man,  and  hence  they  select- 
ed him. 

When  I  came  here,  T  had  the  kindest  feelings 
for  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  and  was  prepar- 
ed to  vote  for  him  cheerfully  to  preside  over  this 
body;  but  the  left  handed  6low  he  gave  me  yes- 
terday did  not  sit  Well  upon  me.  Tlie  motion  I 
made  was  not  for  the  purpose  of  making  politi- 
cal capital  at  home,  nor  any  where  else.  I  kncAV 
that  I  should  be  attacked  from  every  quarter  in 
this  house,  and  that  it  would  be  said  that  it  was 
done  for  effect. 

Sir,  I  came  here  prepared  to  vote  on  all  occa- 
sions, and  I  consider  questions  as  they  arise, 
and  having  duly  weighed  them,  I  make  up  my 
mind,  and  I  am  not  as  fickle  as  a  woman  of  six-, 
ty,  changing  and  undergoing  revolutions  every 
twenty  four  hours.  If  I  were  as  fickle  as  the 
gentleman  has  shown  himself  to  be,  I  would 
stand  here  and  clamor  for  debate  till  the  first  of 
jiext  January.  I  would  call  upon  the  house  to 
give  me  ligiit  that  I  might  be  enabled  to  vote 
correctly  upon  all  questions.    I  do  not  make  up 


my  mind  very  hastily,  and  when  it  is  made  up, 
I  do  not  very  frequently  have  occasion  to  change 
it. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  thought  it  proper,  in 
justification  of  myself  to  submit  these  remarks, 
and  I  shall  now  leave  them  with  the  conven- 
tion. AVhich  will  doubtless  give  them  all  the  con- 
sideration, to  wliich  they  may  be  entitled.  I 
now  move  the  adoption  of  the  resolution. 

Mr.  EOYD.  I  move  to  amend  the  resolution 
by  striking  out  the  sixteenth  and  inserting  the 
nineteenth. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL   moved  the  previous 
question,  which  was  sustained. 
_  And  the  question  being  taken  on   the  resolu- 
tion it  was  adopted. 

APPORTIONMENT  OF  REPRESENTATION. 

Mr.  BOYD  offered  the  following  resolution  : 

Resolved,  That  representation  sh.all  be  equal 
and  uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall 
be  forever  re";ulated  and  ascertained  by  the  num- 
ber of  qualified  electors  therein.  The  house  of 
representatives  shall  consist  of  one  hundred 
members,  and  to  secure  uniformity  and  equality 
of  representation  as  aforesaid,  the  state  shall  be 
districted  into  twelve  districts  : 

District  No.  1.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Fult(m,  Hickman,  Graves,  Ballard,  McCrack- 
en,  Calloway,  Marshall,  and  Livingston. 

District  No.  2.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Trig^,  Christian,  Caldwell,  Crittenden,  Union, 
Henderson,  and  Hopkins. 

District  No.  3.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Todd,  Muhlenburg,  Logan,  Simpson,  Allen, 
Warren,  Butler,  and  Edmonson. 

District  No.  4.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Daviess,  Ohio,  Hancock,  Breckinridge,  Grayson, 
Hart,  Larue,  Hardin,  and  Meade. 

District  No.  5.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Monroe,  Barren,  Cumberland,  Clinton,  Adair, 
Green,  Taylor,  Wayne,  and  Russell. 

District  No.  6.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Jefferson,  Bullitt,  Nelson,  Shelby,  Spencer, 
Washington,  and  Marion. 

District  No.  7.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Oldham,  Trimble,  Henry,  Franklin,  Owen,  Car- 
roll, Gallatin,  Grant,  and  Boone. 

District  No.  8.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Scott,  Harrison,  Pendleton,  Kenton,  Campbell, 
Nicholas,  Mason,  and  Bracken. 

District  No.  9.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Fayette,  Woodford,  Bourbon,  Clarke,  Jessa- 
mine, Anderson,  Mercer,  Boyle,  and  Garrard. 

District  No.  10.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Lewis,  Fleming,  Bath,  Montgomery,  Morgan, 
Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  and  Johnson. 

District  No.  11.  To  consist  of  tlie  counties 
of  Estill  Owsley,  Breathitt,  Floyd,  I'iko,  IVmit, 
Letcher,  Clay,  and  Harlan. 

District  I^o.  12.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Madison,  Rockcastle,  Lincoln,  Laurel,  Casey, 
Pulaski,  Whitley,  and  Knox. 

In  tln!  year  and  every  fourth  year 

thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified 
electors  of  the  state  shall  be  made  in  such  man- 
ner as  shall  be  directed  by  law. 

In  the  several  years  of  making  such  enumera- 
tion, each  district  sliall  be  entitled  to  represen- 
tatives equal   to  the  number  of  times  the  ratio 


529 


is  contained  in  the  •whole  number  of  qualified 
electors  in  said  districts:  Prodded,  That  the  re- 
maining representatives,  after  making  such  ap- 
portionment, shall  be  given  to  those  districts 
Laving  tJie  largest  unrepresented  fractions. 

Representatives  to  which  each  district  may  be 
1  iititlod,  shall  be  apportioned  among  the  several 
counties,  cities,  ana  towns,  of  the  district,  as 
near  as  mav  be,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
qualified  electors;  but  when  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  qualified  electors  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and  when  th^-  ad- 
jacent county  or  counties,  within  the  district, 
may  not  have  a  residuum  or  resiJuums,  which, 
when  added  to  the  small  county,  would  entitle 
i:  to  a  separate  representation,  it  shall  then  be 
in  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  join  two  or 
more  togetlier,  for  the  purpose  of  sending  a  rep- 
restfutativr:  Provided,  That  when  there  are  two 
or  more  counties  adjoining,  and  in  the  same  dis- 
trict, wliich  have  residuums  over  and  above  the 
ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when 
added  together,  will  amount  to  such  ratio,  in 
that  cas^,  one  representative  shall  be  added  to 
the  county  having  the  largest  residuum. 

Mr.  BOYD.  I  move  to  refer  that  resolution 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  that  it  be 
printed.  My  object  in  submitting  this  resolu- 
tion is  to  have  it  brought  to  the  knowledge  of 
the  convention,  as  I  shall  offer  it  as  a  substitute 
for  the  sixth  section  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  legislative  department,  when  the 
proper  time  comes. 

The  motion  to  print  and  refer  was  agreed  to." 

The  convention  resolved  itself  into  commit- 
tee of  the  whole,  on  tlie  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department,  Mr.  MERI- 
WETHER in  the  chair. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  The  question  before  the 
committee  is  one  of  great  interest,  but  was  it 
one  of  those  questions  that  were  discussed  be- 
fore the  people?  What  were  the  questions  dis- 
cussed, and  what  were  the  reforms  demanded  by 
the  people  when  the  delegates  to  this  convention 
were  elected?  Was  the  disfranchisement  of  a 
portion  of  the  free  citizens  of  this  common- 
wealth one  of  them?  If  it  were,  it  was  not  heard 
of  in  ni}'  section  of  the  country.  The  questions 
which  were  discussed  in  my  county  were  a  cur- 
tailment of  the  sessions  of  the  legislature,  so 
that  the  sessions  .shall  be  held  even'  second  or 
third  year,  instead  of  annually^— the  placing  of 
the  appointing  power  in  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple, instead  of  in  the  hands  of  the  executive — 
the  limiting  of  the  elections  of  officers  of  the 
commonwealth  to  one  day— and  the  restricting 
of  the  power  of  the  legislature  in  the  passage 
of  local  acts,  and  in  contracting  state  debts.  On 
the  question  of  slaverv,  too,  my  constituents 
have  their  views:  they  believe  that  that  subject 
should  remain  as  it  is  in  the  present  constitu- 
tion, and  as  it  was  in  the  constitution  of  1792; 
or  if  change  is  neces-sary.  that  that  change  shall 
be  as  little  as  possible.  I  have  heard  no  com- 
plaints that  tne  present  constitution  does  not 
protect  the  rights  of  slave-holders;  no  such  rea- 
son was  given  for  calling  this  convention.  The 
prominent  reason  was,  that  the  people  might  take 
into  their  own  hands  the  election  of  their  own 
officers;  and  the  question  now  before  the  commit- 
tee is  one  in  whicn  my  constituents  have  no  im- 
67 


mediat«  interest;  they  certainly  did  not  expect 
that  anv  portion  of  the  freemen  of  this  com- 
monwealth were  to  be  deprived  of  the  right  of 
equal  suffrage  in  electing  their  representatives 
and  of  equal  representation  in  the  councils  of 
the  state.  Was  that  question  discussed  before 
the  constituents  of  any  gentleman  on  this  floor? 
If  it  was,  it  never  reached  my  ears.  And  what 
is  the  reason  given  for  such  an  infringement  of 
the  rights  of  a  portion  of  the  people  of  this 
commonwealth?  Sir,  I  have  heard  no  other  rea- 
son alleged  than  that  1  understood  to  be  given 
by  the  gentleman  from  Madison  (Mr.  Turner,) 
for  restnoting  the  representation  in  cities,  that 
it  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  institu- 
tion of  slavery. 

And,  sir,  a  portion  of  this  commonwealth,  ex- 
tending from  Greenup  county  to  Hickman,  ten 
miles  out  from  the  river,  is  to  be  denounced  and 
disfranchised,  I  suppose,  in  order  to  protect  the 
institution  of  slavery.  Why,  sir,  you  cannot 
place  in  the  hands  of  the  emancipationists  a 
more  powerful  weapon,  than  by  adopting  this 
principle  of  proscribing  a  portion  of  our  state. 
I  would  advi.se  gentlemen  to  look  a  little  at 
home  before  they  travel  so  far.  What  was  the 
poll  of  the  emancipation  vote  in  Madison  coun- 
tv?  It  was  six  hundred  and  eighty  eight  votes. 
What  was  the  emancipation  vote  taken  in  your 
county,  Mr.  Chairman?  It  was  five  hundred 
and  fifteen.  The  party,  headed  by  that  man  of 
distinguishe<l  talents,  character  and  worth — the 
great  Ajax  of  the  emancipation  party  of  this 
commonwealth.  What  was  the  ground  taken 
by  the  delegates  from  Louisville?  I  can  testify 
to  their  gallant  bearing  throughout  the  struggle, 
to  secure  the  rights  and  the  property  of  tnose 
very  gentlemen  who  are  now  endeavoring  to 
disfranchise  them.  How  is  it  in  the  county  of 
Kenton,  one  of  the  border  counties  on  the  Otio? 
What  pledge  does  Kenton  .send  here,  that  she 
is  fit  to  participate  in  the  rights  of  representa- 
tion? Her  representative  has  told  you,  in  a 
manner  that  does  him  honor  as  a  man,  and  as  a 
delegate.  Proscribe  the  citizens  of  Louisville, 
send  their  delegates  back,  place  them  without 
the  pale  of  the  constitution,  but  by  doing  so,  tou 
secure  to  the  emancipation  party  a  more  glori- 
ous triumph  than  if  they  had  beaten  you  and 
the  delegation  from  Louisville  in  the  contest, 
and  had  elected  the  whole  of  their  ticket.  Gen- 
tlemen say  that  the  population  of  Louisville 
will  increase  so  wonderfully,  that  there  is  danger 
they  will  become — if  I  may  use  the  term — a 
mammoth  population.  Do  gentlemen  suppose 
that  the  country  is  to  .stand  still  meanwhile? 
Most  certainly  not.  The  population  of  the 
country  will  increase  pari  passu  with  the  popu- 
lation of  the  towns.  Whom  do  we  disfranchise 
by  placing  this  restriction  upon  the  cities?  Are 
not  the  sons  of  all  the  diflferent  counties  in  the 
state,  in  the  city  of  Louisville?  Go  there,  and 
you  will  find  the  sons  of  old  Nelson,  the  mother 
of  counties  south  of  Salt  river.  Do  you  not 
find  there  the  sons  of  Bullitt,  and  of  Shelby, 
and  of  Spencer,  who  have  made  that  city  the 
home  of  their  adoption?  Are  you  willing  to 
deprive  them  of  the  rights  that  the  people  of 
other  parts  of  the  state  enjoy,  and  that  they 
would  enjoy,  if  they  lived  in  another  part  of  the 
state?    It  is  a  very  strange  doctrine,  tnat  a  man 


msy  be  a  frtefean  m  f rkntfoTt,  But  ifTie'tKinlc's 
proper  to  remove  to  Louisville  or  Covington, 
nis  right  of  suiFrage  is  to  be  abrogated.  It  is,  I 
say,  strange  doctrine  to  me,  to  be  preached  in  a 
free  country. 

It  is  an  important  question  sir.  Suppose 
gentlemen  were  to  introduce  a  resolution  here, 
confiscating  the  property  of  any  freeman  in  this 
commonwealth,  I  Jiave  no  doubt  every  delegate 
would  be  horror-stricken  at  the  idea.  Are  not 
the  political  rights  which  freemen  enjoy  in  this 
commonwealth  dearer  to  them  than  the  right  of 
property?  Nay,  are  they  not  dearer  to  them 
than  the  very  air  they  breathe"?  Are  you  willing 
then,  to  deprive  them  of  those  inestimable  po- 
litical rights,  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  the  right 
of  representation?  Why,  sir,  this  it  is  that  con- 
stitutes a  freeman;  this"it  is  that  constitutes  the 
difference  between  the  freemen  of  this  glorious 
confederacy,  and  the  subjects  of  the  monarchies 
of  Europe.  A  man  may  own  property  in  Tur- 
key or  in  Russia,  but  to  be  a  freeman  there  is  a 
vain  and  idle  thought.  I  would  be  the  last  man 
on  earth  to  violate  vested  rights,  or  to  deprive 
the  citizen  of  his  property;  and  equally  adverse 
would  I  be  to  deprive  any  freeman  of  this  com- 
monwealth of  tliose  high  political  privileges 
that  all  freemen  value  so  highly. 

It  seems  to  be  admitted  by  almost  every  gen- 
tleman, that  the  true  basis  of  representation  is 
population.  But,  say  they,  it  becomes  a  matter 
of  self-defence,  to  impose  certaiii  restrictions. 
As  was  justly  remarked  by  the  gentleman  from 
Kenton  yesterday,  upon  gentlemen  who  make 
this  as.sertion  rests  the  onus  pruhandi.  Ei  incum- 
eit  probotio,  qui  dicit  non  qui  negat.  And  I  call 
upon  those  gentlemen  who  lay  down  this  propo- 
sition for  the  proof.  What  proof  have  you  that 
it  is  necessary  to  disfranchise  these  citizens,  in 
order  to  secure  your  own  safety?  Have  not  the 
people  of  Louisville,  and  of  S^entou  county — 
Avho  are  now  menaced  with  the  loss  of  their  po- 
litical privileges — sent  to  this  convention  living 
evidences  that  they  are  true  to  their  state?  that 
they  are  prepared  to  protect  all  the  great  inter- 
ests of  the  state?  They  have  sir.  But  how 
have  other  states  regulated  this  matter?  Have 
they  proposed  to  disfranchise  any  of  their  citi- 
zens? ISio  sir.  I  refei  you  to  their  constitutions 
for  the  truth  of  my  assertion.  The  fourth  arti- 
cle, third  section,  of  the  constitution  of  Wiscon- 
sin, is  as  follows: 

"  The  legislature  shall  provide,  by  law,  for  an 
enumeration  of  the  inhabitants  of 'the  state,  in 
the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty- 
five,  and  at  the  end  of  every  ten  years  thereafter, 
and  at  thr  end  of  tlieir  first  session  after  such 
enumeration,  and  also  after  each  enumeration 
made  by  the  authority  of  the  United  States,  tlie 
legislature  shall  apportion  and  district  anew  the 
members  of  tlie  senate  and  assembly,  according 
to  the  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding  Indi- 
ans not  taxed,  and  soldiers  and  officers  of  the 
United  States  army  and  navy." 

lu  the  fourtli  article,  thirty -first  section,  of  the 
constitution  of  Iowa,  I  find'this  provision  : 

"  The  number  of  senators  and  representatives 
shall,  at  the  first  regular  session  of  the  general 
assembly  after  such  enumeration,  be  fixed  by 
l*E#  ?"^  ■PPOfti9!B?^4.#Blpng  the  several  coun- 


ties according  to  the  number  of  white  inhabi- 
tants in  each,"  <fec. 

In  the  constitution  of  Texas,  the  basis  of  re- 
presentation is  qualified  electors. 

In  Arkansas,  representation  is  regulated  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  free  white  male  inhab- 
itants. 

In  Michigan,  the  basis  of  representation  is 
fixed  according  to  the  number  of  white  inhab- 
itants. 

In  Florida,  the  senatorial  representation  is 
based  on  population. 

In  Missouri,  representation  is  apportioned  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  free  white  male  inhab- 
itants. 

In  Alabama,  representation  is  regulated  by 
the  number  of  white  inhabitants. 

In  Illinois,  representation  is  based  on  the  num- 
ber of  white  inhabitants. 

In  Mississippi,  it  is  placed  upon  the  number 
of  free  white  inhabitants. 

In  Indiana,  representation  is  based  on  the 
number  of  white  male  inhabitants  of  the  age  of 
twenty-one  years. 

In  Ohio,  it  is  the  same  as  in  Indiana. 

In  Tennessee,  represertation  is  based  on  the 
number  of  qualified  electors,  giving  to  any 
county  having  two-thirds  of  the  ratio,  a  repre- 
sentative. 

In  New  Tork,  representation  is  based  on  the 
number  of  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens  and 
persons  of  color,  not  taxed.  There  the  great 
eity  of  New  York  has  her  full  representation, 
and  is  under  no  invidious  restriction. 

As  I  conceive,  the  foregoing  states  of  this 
union  place  the  basis  of  representation  upon 
population,  or  upon  numbers  of  qualified  elec- 
tors, without  any  such  restrictions  as  are  sought 
to  be  placed  in  this  constitution.  It  is  true, 
there  is  restriction  in  Louisiana,  Pennsylvania, 
and  probably  in  Maryland;  but  if  you  look  at 
the  constitutions  of  the  states  adjacent  to  Ken- 
tucky, you  will  find  the  basis  of  representation 
is  placed  either  on  immbers  of  qualified  elec- 
tors or  on  population;  and  in  fact  I  scarcely 
know  of  a  gentleman  who  gainsays  the  propo- 
sition, that  population  should  be  the  basis  of 
representation.  But,  say  they,  it  is  necessary 
for  our  self-defence,  that  the  right  of  suffrage,  or 
of  representation,  should  be  denied  to  a  portion 
of  our  fellow  citizens.  As  I  remarked  before, 
where  is  the  proof  that  any  such  necessity  ex- 
ists? I  affirm  sir,  that  it  exists  only  in  the  ima- 
ginations of  gentlemen. 

Sir,  there  is  not  a  truer  people,  there  are  none 
that  are  more  devoted  to  the  institutions  of  this 
country  than  the  population  of  the  border  coun- 
ties along  the  Ohio  river,  from  Greenup  to  Hick- 
man. None  sir,  stood  up  more  manfully  in  the 
great  fight  that  took  place  in  August  last,  for  I 
was  an  eye-witness  to  the  struggle  between  the 
emancipationists  and  their  opponents.  What 
does  your  bill  of  rights  say?  Has  a  single  del- 
egate declared  that  he  is  in  favor  of  changing 
any  of  tliose  great  principles  that  were  laid 
down  in  tlie  billof  rights  in  the  constitution  of 
171)2,  and  re-adopted  in  the  constitution  of  1799, 
and  proposed  by  your  committee  to  be  re-adopt- 
in  tlie  constitution  Me  are  about  to  make?  "  that 
'  all  freemen  are  equal,  and  that  no  man  shall 
'  be  entitled  to  exclusive  privileges,  or  to  eraolu- 


531 


'  rn«-nts,  except  in  consiJeratiou  of  public  st-rvicc 
•  rendered."  No  gentleman  is  in  favor  of  chang- 
ing this  great  paramount  principle.  If  then, all 
are  equal,  preserve  that  equality,  do  not  pro- 
scribe a  man  because  he  happens  to  be  in  a  par- 
ticular locality.  Let  him  be  as  free  in  Jefferson 
county  as  in  any  county  on  the  border  of  the 
Ohio.'as  in  Madison  or  Franklin  counties.  Then 
vou  will  preserve  this  great  principle  ;  without 
this,  it  is  a  dead  letter,  aud  ought  to  be  stricken 
from  the  constitution. 

It  has  been  said  by  other  gentlemen,  that  this 
restriction  is  necesisary  in  order  to  keep  down 
foreign  population.  Sir,  I  hear  sentiments  ut- 
tered— but  thank  God  they  come  from  but  few 
persons — which  are  in  direct  contradiction  of  one 
of  the  many  grounds,  alleged  in  the  declara- 
*ion  of  independence  as  reasons  for  making 
that  declaration,  and  for  throwing  off  the 
yoke  of  Great  Britain.  What  were  the  reasons 
assigned  by  Thomas  Jefferson,  when  he  penned 
that  memorable  declaration?  In  the  list  of 
grievances  alledged  in  that  document  against 
King  George,  the  third  is  this: 

"  He  has  endeavored  to  prevent  the  population 
of  these  states;  for  that  purpose  ob.structing  the 
laws  for  naturjilization  of  foreigners;  refusing  to 
pass  others  to  encourage  their  migration  hither, 
and  raising  the  conditions  of  new  appropria- 
tions of  lands." 

This  is  one  of  the  reasons,  that  they  had  for 
declaring  their  independence,  and  sir,  the  decla- 
rations and  acts  of  some  gentlemen  at  this  day, 
coincide  almost  exactly  with  the  acts  of  King 


to  remain  here  twenty-one  years  before  ihey 
should  be  permitted  to  become  citizens?  Those 
men  who  have  stake-l  their  lives,  who  have  staked 
their  all  for  the  freedom  of  their  country.  I 
would  to  God  they  would  come  to  this  land  of 
freedom,  and  then  let  the  Emperor  of  Russia  or 
Austria  demand  them  from  this  government.  A 
shout  would  go  up  from  Maine  to  Mexico  against 
it  that  would  nerve  the  arm  of  old  Zack  for  any 
crisis.  Sir,  who  builds  your  railroads?  TVlio 
makes  your  canals?  Who  constructs  vour  turn- 
pikes? It  is  the  poor  laborers,  the  foreigners, 
who  seek  an  asylum  on  your  shores,  from  tho 
hand  of  oppression.  I  sir,  you  know,  am  a 
native  bom  Kentuckian:  I  hail  from  old  Nelson, 
but  old  Bullitt  is  my  beloved,  my  adopted  home, 
and  sir,  I  know  there  are  men'  whose  land  of 
adoption  Kentucky  is,  that  feel  as  much  for  her 
welfare  and  interests  as  I  do. 

What  was  another  ground  set  out  in  the  de- 
claration of  independence,  for  .separation  from 
Great  Britain?  In  the  specification  of  the  usur- 
pations of  King  George,  we  find  the  following: 

"He  has  forbidden  his  governors  to  pass  laws 
of  immediate  and  pressing  importance,  unless 
suspended  in  their  operation ,  till  his  assent  should 
be  obtained;  and  wlien  so  suspended,  he  has  ut- 
terly neglected  to  attend  to  tnem.  He  has  re- 
tnsed  to  pass  other  laws  for  the  accommodation 
of  large  districts  of  people,  unless  those  people 
would  relinquish  the  right  of  representation  iu 
the  legislature — a  right  inestimable  to  them,  and 
formidable  to  tyi-ants  only." 

We  here  see,  Mr.  Chairman,  how  the  right  of 


George  III  at  that  dav.  They  would  deny  to  j  representation  was  held  by  such  men  as  Han- 
foreign  ?rs  the  right  of  suffrage  for  a  perioci  of  j  cock,  Jefferson,   and  others,  the  signers   of  the 

wenty-on.j   vears.      Was  that  the  Jeffersonian    declaration  of  independence. 

■octri'ne?  Was  thatthe  doctrine  promulgated  by  i  Probably  I  have  detained  this  committee 
Hancock,  Jefferson,  and  others  who  signed  the  I  longer  than  I  should  have  done.  There  are  cer- 
declaration?  We  have  millions  of  acres  of  pub-  |  tain  great  reforms  that  the  people  of  Kentucky- 
lie  land  DOW  uninhabited;  our  country  extends  '  ]iave  sent  us  here  to  make — to  limit  the  sessions 
from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific  oceans.  I  say  to  i  of  the  legislature,  to  place  the  appointing  power 
foreigners,  come  on  gentlemen,  come  on  ;  our  i  of  every  ofiicer  in  the  hands  of  the  people,  and 
laws  are  strong  enough  to  protect  our  citizens,  j  j  believe  tliere  arc  hardly  three  men  on  this  floor 
Sir,  what  is  vour  naturalization  law?  It  is  that :  who  are  opposed  to  the.s*e  reforms.  Let  the  sub- 
no  man  shall  become  a  citizen,  unless  he  has  be-  |  ject  of  slavery  remain  as  it  is,  with  little  or  no 
haved  himself  like  a  worthy  man  for  five  years,  alteration;  be'cause  there  was  no  complaint  from 
In  the  act  of  congress  of  1802,  passed  in  the  the  |  slaveholders  that  their  rights  were  not  protected, 
administratmn  of  the  great  apostle  of  liberty.  |  Limit  the  time  of  holding  your  elections  to  one 

day.  When  we  do  tliis,  I  think  we  shall  have 
done  all  the  people  sent  us  here  to   do.     As  for 


Thomas  Jefferson,  section  first,  third  paragraph, 
reads  as  follows: 

"  That  the  court  admitting  such  alien  shall  be 
satisfied  that  he  has  resided  within  the  United 
States  five  years  at  least,  and  within  the  state  or 
territory  where  such  court  is,  at  the  time,  held, 
one  year  at  least;  and  it  shall  further  appear  to 
their  satisfaction,  that  during  that  time  ne  has 
behaved  as  a  man  of  a  good  moral  character, 
attached  to  the  principles  of  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States,  and  well  disposed  to  the  good 
order  and  happiness  of  the  same  :  Provided,  that 
the  oath  of  the  applicant  shall,  in  no  case,  be  al- 
lowed to  prove  his  residence." 

If  men  who  are  unworthy  are  admitted  to  the 
privileges  of  citizenship,  it  is  not  the  fault  of 
the  law,  but  it  is  the  fault  of  the  administrators 
of  the  law.  Sir,  suppose  that  Kossuth,  Bern,  and 
their  co-patriots,  that  now  find  protection  even  in 
the  land  of  Turkey,  from  the  tvrant  now  seeking 
their  blood,  should  come  to  this  country  ;  where 
is  the  man  in  America  who  would  require  them 


myself.  I  known  that  my  people  never  sent  me 
here  to  abridge  the  right  of  suffrage  or  of  repre- 
sentation, and  I  should  dislike  very  much  that 
my  name  should  go  down  to  posterity  upon  the 
record  as  having  voted  to  abridge  the  right  of 
suffrage,  or  the  right  of  representation,  of  any 
freeman  of  this  commonwealth.  The  peopfe 
will  judge  our  judgment,  and  their  judgment 
will  be  that  of  ages.  They  will  judge  of  the 
actions  of  every  delegate  on  this  floor.  Every 
gentleman  knows  thtj  instructions  he  has  receiv- 
ed from  his  constituents;  let  him  act  according 
to  those  instructions.  For  myself,  I  was  not  in- 
structed to  abridge  the  right  of  suffrage  of  any 
man,  or  to  deny  to  any  freeman  in  this  common- 
wealth the  right  of  representation. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  As  I  shall  vote  to  restrict,  to 
some  extent,  the  city  of  Louisville  and  all  other 
cities  which  may  grow  up  in  this  commonwealth, 
in  the  senatorial  aepartment  of  the  government. 


53i> 


I  claim  the  aUeiitioii  of  the  coinniittee  while  1 
make  a  brief  explanation  of  the  reasons  wliich 
will  influence  my  vote.  Representing,  as  I  do, 
a  county  bordering  on  the  Ohio  river,  I  will  take 
occasion  to  remark  tliat  I  cannot  believe  the 
question  of  emancipation  has  anything  to  do 
-With  the  question  under  consideration.  Sir,  I 
repudiate  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison,  (Mr.  Turner,)  so  far  as  they  may  have 
been  intended  to  apply  to  my  constituents,  for 
they  are  as  much  aevoted  to  the  institutions  of 
the  state  as  any  portion  of  the  people  of  the 
commonwealth.  They  have  been  and  ever  will 
be  true  and  devoted  friends  of  the  south.  But 
what  has  slavery  and  emancipation  to  do  with  the 
question  under  consideration?  Here  we  have  a 
plain  and  simple  question  in  itself,  which  has 
no  connection  whatever  with  that  of  slavery; 
and  they  ought  not  here  to  be  united. 

Sir,  a  reason  lias  been  asked  by  the  gentleman 
last  up,  why  cities  should  hereafter  be  restricted 
in  the  Senate.  I  will  endeavor  to  furnish  him 
with  one. 

I  represent  a  county,  it  is  true,  which  pays 
but  a  small  revenue  into  the  treasury.  The  nett 
revenue  paid  by  my  county,  after  paying  her 
portion  of  the  general  expenses  of  the  govern- 
ment, is  but  some  seven  or  eight  hundred  dollars 
per  annum.  Owing  to  our  geographical  position 
we  are  removed  from  the  benefits  arising  from 
the  works  of  internal  improvement,  which 
have  been  carried  on  and  conipleted  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  people  of  the  state  at  large.  In  ad- 
dition to  the  large  appropriations  for  these  pur- 
f>oses  which  have  heretofore  been  made  by  our 
egislature,  our  state  is  also  now  indebted  some 
four  millions  of  dollars.  This  debt  must  be 
paid;  the  faith,  the  honor,  the  credit  of  the  state 
require  it.  The  entire  population  of  Kentucky, 
withoutregard  to  location,  or  benefitto  be  derived 
from  these  works,  must  and  will  be  taxed  to  pay 
these  debts;  and  sir,  my  constituents  and  the 
constituents  of  other  gentlemen  upon  the  floor 
of  this  convention,  who  have  derived  no  prac- 
tical benefit  from  these  works,  will  have  to  bear 
their  portion  of  these  burdens.  In  this  sir,  we 
have  carried  out  in  practice  what  gentlemen  so 
much  condemn  in  theory — taxation  without  rep- 
resentation. 

But,  Mr.  Chairman,  we  have  been  told  by 
gentlemen  during  this  discussion,  that  he  who 
would  do  a  wrong  in  a  small  matter,  would  per- 
petrate a  greater  wrong  if  you  would  but  give 
him  the  power;  and,  sir,  it  is  to  guard  against 
this  improper  exercise  of  power  that  I  will  vote 
for  the  restrictions  that  I  have  indicated.  We 
have  seen  what  power  members  of  the  legisla- 
ture have  exercised  in  making  appropriations  of 
the  public  money  for  works  of  internal  improve- 
ment, which  have  been  local  and  partial  in  their 
beneficial  influence;  and  as  we  have  been  warned 
that  those  who  once  perpetrate  a  wrong  will  re- 
peat it,  whenever  an  opportunity  offers — acting 
upon  the  principle  that  "self-preservation  is  the 
first  law  of  nature,"  and  that  self-interest  is  the 
great  lever  that  unfortunately  too  much  con- 
trols public  and  private  action,  I  shall,  in  de- 
fence of  those  wnom  I  represent,  cast  my  vote 
to  restrict  the  overwhelming  influence  of  any  lo- 
cal or  sectional  interest  in  this  commonwealth. 
The  question  lias  been  asked  why  restrict  the 


rights  of  any  portion  of  the  freemen  of  this  com- 
monwealth? Sir,  we  have  heard  beautiful  theo- 
ries advanced  upon  this  floor;  but  When  you 
come  to  carry  them  into  practical  operation,  you 
find  that  they  will  not  work.  If,  sir,  our  gov- 
ernment is  to  be  based  upon  popular  represen- 
tation alone,  without  any  checks  and  balances, 
why  I  ask  do  we  have  a  senate  at  all?  The  great 
object  is,  that  the  senate  is  to  operate  as  a  check 
upon  the  iiasty  legislation  of  the  country,  and 
to  act  as  a  conservative  barrier  between  popular 
legislative  excitement  and  the  rights  of  the  peo- 
ple. Look,  sir,  at  the  formation  of  your  federal 
constitution,  and  the  relative  position  of  the 
states  of  this  Union.  Take  for  example,  sir,  the 
great  states  of  New  York,  Pennsylvania  and 
Ohio — three  powerful  states — now  having  an 
aggregate  representation  of  eighty  one  members 
upon  the  floor  of  congress.  Give  to  those  states 
a  representation  in  the  senate  as  potent  as  that 
in  the  lower  branch  of  congress,  and  what  meas- 
ure could  they  not  carry,  and  what  influence 
could  they  not  exert?  Hence,  sir,  the  wisdom 
of  our  fathers  was  signally  displayed  in  forming 
that  charter  of  our  liberties,  whose  conservative 
influence  is  thrown  around  the  different  depart- 
ments of  the  government,  especially  in  giving 
to  the  senate  a  check  upon  the  hasty  legislation 
of  the  lower  branch  of  congress.  This  is  done 
by  giving  to  the  smallest  state  in  the  Union  an 
equal  influence  with  the  largest.  And,  sir,  I 
would  ask  gentlemen,  when  they  vociferate  so 
loudly  in  praise  of  the  "dear  people,"  and  their 
right  of  suffrage,  why  it  is  that  they  would 
have  a  senate  at  all?  Why  not  give  to  the  pop- 
ular branch  of  the  legislature  all  power  to  pas.s 
laws?  The  very  fact,  sir,  that  youhave  a  senate, 
is  a  restriction  upon  the  rights  of  the  people. 
And,  sir,  when  we  come  to  apportion  representa- 
tion in  the  senate,  some  regard,  in  my  humble 
judgment,  should  be  paid  to  the  great  inerest  of 
different  portions  of  the  state,  without  regard 
alone  to  numV)ers. 

For  these  reasons,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  vote 
to  restrict  the  local  influence  of  the  large  cities, 
which  may  hereafter  grow  up  in  this  common- 
wealth. And,  sir,  as  this  question  of  slavery 
and  emancipation  has  been  so  frequently  lugged 
into  the  discussions  of  various  propositions 
brought  before  the  convention,  I  will  take  this 
occasion  again  to  remark  that  I  cannot  conceive 
that  the  question  of  emancipation  has  any  thing 
to  do  with  the  subject  matter  before  us.  I 
thought,  Mr.  Chairman,  when  I  first  came  to  this 
convention,  that  we  should  have  no  discussions 
and  have  no  divisions  upon  this  all  exciting 
question;  but  in  this  I  have  been  sadly  disap- 
pointed. I  have  deeply  regretted  to  see  a  dis- 
cussion growing  up  here  upon  the  abstract  ques- 
tion of  slavery  that  can  lead  to  no  practical  re- 
sults, but  which  will  tend  to  distract  our  delib- 
erations. But,  sir,  as  gentlemen  have  thought 
proper  to  allude  to  the  institution  of  slavery,  in 
a  local  and  sfctional  point  of  view,  I  feel  it  due 
to  those  whom  I  represent  here  in  my  place,  to 
rise  and  repel  the  charge  that  has  been  made 
against  them,  in  common  with  the  other  river 
counties  in  the  state,  for,  sir,  they  are  as  true 
and  unflinching  in  their  devotion  to  the  slave 
interest  in  this  country,  as  are  they  of  any  other 
section  of  the  state.    It  is  true,  sir,  that  we  have 


533 


only  about  Iwo  hundroJ  or  two  huii-lred  and 
fifty  slaves  ill  my  couuty,  and  that,  we  are  a  bor- 
der county,  and  have  but  little  inlt-rest  in  the 
matter  so  far  as  the  value  of  our  slaves  is  con- 
cerned, still,  sir,  we  have  an  interest  in  common 
with  our  common  country.  The  iion  slavehold- 
ers of  the  county  of  Lewis  will  be  the  last  to 
desert  the  institution,  and  they  will  be  among 
the  first  to  repel  an  invasion  or  an  assault  made 
upon  it,  let  it  emanate  from  whatever  source  it 
may. 

Mr.  Chairman,  though  a  large  majority  of  my 
constituents  are  non-slaveholders — it  was  no 
ditficult  task  ou  my  part  to  convince  them  that 
they  were  as  deeply  interested  in  protecting  and 
defending  this  institution,  as  is  the  slaveholder 
himself.  I  contend  that  it  is  the  poor  man,  the 
native  born  laborer  of  Kentucky,  who  is  most 
deeply  interested  in  the  perpetuity  and  preser- 
vation of  the  institiitioii  of  slavery — for  .sir,  once 
emancipate  your  slaves — permit  the  starving 
ho«ies  of  Eun^pe  to  pour  in  upon  us,  as  they  un- 
qm^^^k/TratJly  would — and  the  consequence 
would  be,  as  was  contended  by  the  slaveholding 
emancipationist  throughout  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky— that  the  wages  of  labor  would  be  reduced, 
while  the  value  of  land  would  be  enhanced — 
consequently  the  native  bom  Kentuckian.  would 
either  be  compelled  to  drag  out  an  existence  of 
poverty  and  dependence,  or  to  seek  a  home  in 
the  far  west.  Sir,  in  such  an  event  the  price  of 
lands  would  advance,  and  the  wages  of  labor 
would  decrease — the  poor  man  therefore,  never 
could  acquire  the  means  that  would  enable  him 
to  purchase  a  home  for  himself  and  family — and 
a  system  of  landlord  and  tenancy  woulcl  grow 
up  in  Kentucky,  (where  there  are  already  very 
extensive  land  holders),  that  would  be  danger- 
ous to  the  liberties  and  rights  of  the  poor,  and 
God  save  my  country  from  a  system  of  this  kind. 
I  repeat,  sir,  1  do  hold  that  the  poor  man  in 
Kentucky  is  more  deeply  interested  in  sustain- 
ing this  institution  tlian  any  other  portion  of 
the  community;  but  if  the  argument  is  to  pre- 
vail here  that  the  slaveholder  is  alone  to  be  con- 
sulted; if  that  doctrine  is  to  be  maintained  by 
those  professing  to  be  pro-slavery  men — then 
truly,  IS  this  property  held  by  a  slender  thread; 
but  I  trust  no  such  sentiment  prevails  here. 

Mr.  Chairman,  gentlemen  have  thought  pro- 
per during  this  discussion  to  allude  to  this 
question  in  a  moral  point  of  view,  and  they  have 
told  us  that  they  believed  that  the  finger  of  God 
■was  upon  the  institution.  Sir.  while  I  believe 
that  divine  providence  is  employed  now  as  in 
the  days  of  the  "  Jewish  Theocracy,"  when  the 
children  of  Israel  were  led  bv  the  pillar  of 
cloud  by  day  and  the  pillar  of  fire  by  night,  in 
moulding  and  impressing  the  character  and  in- 
stitutions of  my  countrv' — I  also  believe  as  firm- 
ly as  I  believe  in  holy  writ,  that  that  same  pro- 
vidence has  destined  the  African  race  to  slaverr 
in  these  United  States.  But  sir,  be  that  as  it 
may,  it  is  an  institution  of  our  country — ^we 
must  take  it  as  it  is.  No  plan  has  been  or  can 
be  devised  by  which  they  can  be  .sent  from  the 
borders  of  our  land;  and  to  talk  about  it  is  onlv 
to  talk  about  an  abstraction,  which  may  lead  to 
the  most  fatal  results.  Sir,  if  we  once  permit 
our  feelings  to  become  excited  upon  this  great 
question,  and  if  our  common  country  should  un- 


fortunalplv  give  way  to  the  madness  of  some 
factitous  liour,  to  the  phrenzy  of  some  fanatic 
spirit — if  upon  some  great  question  like  this, 
they  should  in  an  evil  hour  permit  our  glorious 
union  to  sink,  overwhelmed  in  some  horrible 
struggle,  of  brother  with  brother,  they  will 
never  gain  their  liberties  until  the  sun  shall 
slumber  in  the  cloud,  forgetful  of  the  voice  of 
the  morning.  Sir,  let  us  then  upon  a  question 
so  momentous,  and  fraught  with  such  mighty 
consequences,  pause  and  reflect  well,,before  we 
rashly  act.  1  do  hope  that  in  the  future  discus- 
sion of  the  various  propositions  that  may  be  pre- 
sented to  the  consideration  of  this  convention  it 
will  not  be  thought  necessary  to  introduce  the 
subject  of  slavery  in  the  arena  of  debate.  Sir, 
though  I  come  from  a  county  included  in  the  re- 
mark of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  I  stand 
here  as  firm  and  untlinching  an  advocate  of  the 
slave  in.stitutions  of  the  state  as  any  gentleman 
upon  this  floor.  And  if  that  great  day  should 
ever  come  when  a  dissolution  of  this  Union  shall 
jtake  place,  which  I  hope  and  trust  in  high 
1  heaven  will  never  be,  we  upon  the  Ohio  river, 
j  are  to  occupy  the  front  of  the  battle  ground, 
I  and  let  me  tell  you,  sir,  if  come  it  must,  we  will 
prove  ourselves  true  to  the  institutions  of  Ken- 
I  tucky. 

j  But  Mr.  Chairman,  in  framing  a  constitution, 
I  that  is  to  protect  all  the  great  interests  in  this 
i  stat«,  I  snail  not  be  influenced  by  empty  dec- 
lamation upon  this  subject,  let  it  emanate  from 
whatever  source  it  may ;  and  sir,  as  I  consider 
that  this  question  of  emancipation  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  settlement  of  tne  question  now  un- 
der consideration,  1  shall  disregard,  so  far  as  I  am 
concerned,  all  that  argument  of  gentlemen  who 
have  such  an  object  in  view.  But  sir,  as  we  have 
the  example  of  our  federal  constitution,  and  a 
number  of  the  states,  and  as  we  have  the  still 
more  potent  example  in  the  acts  of  our  legisla- 
ture, in  the  partial  and  corrupt  manner  in  which 
the}'  have  appropriated  and  managed  the  funds 
of  the  state;  and  sir,  as  I  look  at  tne  senate,  as  a 
conservative  check  upon  the  hasty  and  improvi- 
dent legislation  of  the  country,  I  shall  vote 
against  giving  to  local  and  sectional  interests 
an  undue  influence  in  the  senate  of  the  state. 
Sir,  we  know  the  pernicious  influence  which  this 
sectional  legislation  has  had  upon  the  country 
in  days  past :  and  as  this  power  has  been  exer- 
cised to  the  detriment  and  injury  of  my  constit- 
uents, I  intend  to  exercise  tlie  power  which  I 
have,  upon  the  floor  of  this  convention,  in  pro- 
tecting them,  as  far  as  I  can,  from  its  exercise  in 
future.  And  sir,  whenever  gentlemen  will  come 
up  and  vote  for  a  clause  in  the  constitution,  that 
the  legislature  never  shall  have  the  power  to 
make  an  appropriation  for  any  work  of  internal 
improvement,  for  which  my  constituents  shall 
be  taxed,  without  their  consent,  I  will  go  with 
them  for  their  proposition.  My  constituents 
have  been  taxed  without  their  consent,  they  will 
be  taxed  to  assist  in  paying  the  present  state  debt, 
which  was  created  for  the  purposes  of  building 
your  railroads  and  turnpikes,  from  which  my 
constituents  have  derived  no  immediate  advan- 
tage. And  sir,  this,  to  say  the  least  about  it,  is 
nothing  more  nor  less  than  taxation  without  rep- 
resentation. As  our  legislators,  who  come  from 
those  sections  that  are  to  be  benefitted  by  these 


5^4 


works,  have  done  a  "little-  wrong,  in  small 
things,"  I  fear  tliat  they  will  cany  it  out  in  biff 
ones,  if  they  have  the  opportunity.  I  shall  there- 
fore, in  self-defence,  vote  for  some  Jrestriction  up- 
on this  senatorial  representation  of  large  cities 
which  mav  in  time  grow  up  in  our  state. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  I  shall  record  my  vote  in  fa- 
vor of  the  principle  for  which  I  contended,  in 
the  remarks  which  I  addressed  to  the  convention 
a  few  davs  ago,  that  is  a  perfect  equality  of  rights 
as  regards  city  and  country.  I  contend  that  the 
very  first  principle  in  this  government,  the  basis 
upon  which  its  whole  superstruction  rests,  is 
perfect  equality.  "What  these  words  imply  is. 
equality  in  regard  to  the  exercise  of  sovereignity 
in  the  protection  of  civil  rights,  and  in  the  en- 
joyment of  life,  liberty  and  property.  While  I 
would  be  wholly  unwilling  to  entrust  to  cities 
any  advantage.  I  would  have  them  enjoy  that 
equality,  which  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Christian  would  give  them.  If 
you  suffer  a  city  to  send  an  undivided  vote  to 
the  legislature,  it  will  give  her  a  decided  advan- 
tage over  an  adjoining  county. 

My  position  is,  that  there  is  no  constitutional 
power  in  this  convention  to  impose  a  restriction, 
or  to  make  any  distinction  between  those  living 
in  town  or  country,  upon  rich  or  poor  land,  or 
■wherever  they  may  be.  There  are  but  two  forms 
of  government  that  can  exist.  One  is  a  govern- 
ment of  force,  and  the  other  is  a  government 
which  rests  upon  affection.  Ifow  sir,  if  j'ou  will 
bring  an  intelligent  Russian  here,  seeing  every- 
thing moving  on  smoothly,  the  first  inquiry  that 
will  suggest  itself  to  his  mind,  is,  where  is  the 
power  of  this  government.  He  does  not  see  an 
armed  soldiery,  which  he  considers  to  be  absolu- 
tely necessary?  It  it  necessary  only  when 
the  people  are  interested  in  the  destruction  of  the 
government.  Here  every  one  is  a  sovereign.  A 
violation  of  the  laws  of  this  land,  is  a  violation 
of  ray  rights.  I  have  a  portion  of  the  sovereign 
power  ;  every  man  around  me  has  a  portion  of 
the  sovereign  power,  therefore  every  man  comes 
to  the  aid  of  the  law  ;  and  the  sovereign  power 
existing  in  the  people  of  a  republic,  is  the  only 
reason  wliy  we  can  carry  on  the  government 
without  a  standing  military  force.  The  first 
clause  of  the  constitution  under  which  we  are 
now  acting  provides  : 

"We,  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky, in  convention  assembled,  to  secure  to  all 
the  citizens  thereof,  the  enjoyment  of  the  right 
of  life,  liberty  and  property,  and  of  pursuing 
happiness,  do  ordain  and  e.stablish  this  constitu- 
tion for  its  government." 

The  word  citizen  is  of  Roman  deirvation.  We 
get  it  from  the  civic  law.  The  Roman  citizen  exer- 
cised a  portion  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  state. 
When  he  went  to  one  of  the  provinces  he  car- 
ried with  him  this  sovereign  power,  or  in  other 
words  the  rights  it  securerl  to  him.  Cicero 
speaks  of  it  as  the  most  heinous  crime  that 
could  be  committed,  to  subject  a  Roman  citizen 
to  the  torture.  In  the  dark  ages  that  succeeded 
the  downfall  of  the  Roman  empire,  when  politi- 
cal power  was  divided  between  the  Princes  and 
the  Barons,  there  was  almost  perpetual  war  kept 
up  between  them.  The  Princes  found  it  necessa- 
ry, in  order  to  cripple  the  Barons,  to  rear  up  a 
middle  cla.s8,  and  these  consisted  of  the  artisans 


residing  in  the  town«  and  villages.  To  these 
were  given  certain  rights  and  privileges.  They 
became  freemen,  having:  before  been  denominated 
villians  or  slaves.  The  word  freeman  or  citi- 
zen was  applied  to  them,  denoting  that  they 
were  inhabitants  of  a  city,  and  not  oidy  deno- 
ting that  they  were  inhabitants  of  a  city,  but 
that  they  we're  sovereigns  of  the  city.  When 
our  constitution  was  formed,  the  same  principle 
was  adopted.  Constrain  the  term  in  that  sense, 
how  do  I  apply  it?  We  are  sent  here  by  the 
people,  of  Kentucky  to  secure  to  all  the  citizens 
thereof  the  enjoyment  of  the  right  of  life,  liberty, 
and  property.  Now,  sir,  I  will  ask,  would  it  not 
be  a  perfect  abstirdity  to  say  that  v,e  are  sent 
here  to  secure  to  all  tlie  sovereign  people  of  this 
commonwealth  the  enjoyment  of  life,  liberty, 
and  property,  and  that  we  have  the  power  to 
destroy  the  sovereignty  upon  which  all  this 
rests-?  Sir,  when  you  destroy  their  sovereignty, 
can  you  secure  to  the  sovereign  people  the  en- 
joyment of  life,  liberty,  and  property?  Certainly 
not.  The  basis  of  this  government,  as  I  remark- 
ed before,  is  equality — in  all  those  lights  which 
belongs  to  the  citizen,  perfect  equality,  as  far  as 
regards  the  sovereign  power,  an  equality  of  right 
in  the  enjoyment  of  their  property,  and  I  cany 
it  out  and  apply  it  to  property  of  every  de- 
scription. 

Now,  sir,  we  are  told  by  Blackstone,  that  the 
power  of  parliament  is  omnipotent.  Is  it  to  be 
contended  here  in  our  government  that  this  con- 
veution  is  omnipotent?  I  am  perfectly  willing 
to  contest  the  question  wholly  upon  this  ground; 
I  say  we  are  limited  in  our  power — we  have 
no  right  of  destruction.  If  I  appoint  an  agent 
to  attend  to  my  estate,  does  it  imply  that  he  has 
a  right  to  destroy  the  estate?  Certainly  it  does 
not.  We  have  not  the  power  of  destruction. 
The  whole  object  of  government  would  be  lost — 
the  whole  object  of  civil  society  would  be  lost, 
if  this  convention  possessed  such  power.  We 
are  not  the  people,  but  the  agents  of  the  people, 
sent  here  to  make  an  organic  law,  for  the  pro- 
tection of  life,  liberty,  and  property.  Now  let 
us  test  this  thing.  llave  we  the  right  so  far  to 
destroy  the  sovereignty  of  this  nation  as  to  de- 
cree that  we  will  hereafter  live  under  an  aristoc- 
racy, or  to  declare  that  one  man  shall  be  empe- 
ror of  king  or  Kentucky?  Every  one  will  at 
once  acknowledge  that  there  would  be  absurdity 
in  the  proposition.  Then,  if  you  have  not  the 
right  to  destroy  sovereignty  entirely  as  it  exists 
in  the  citizens  of  this  commonwealth,  have  you 
the  right  to  take  away  sovereignty  from  a  single 
county  or  individual?  Surely  not.  Carry  the 
principle  out.  We  are  sent  here  to  guaranty  the 
rights  of  property.  This  convention  has  no 
right  to  take  away  one  atom  of  property  which 
I  possess,  and  to  apply  it  to  the  public  use, 
without  compensation.  They  have  no  power  to 
decree  any  distinction  in  the  enjoyment  of  prop- 
erty between  slaves,  horses,  lands,  and  any  other 
description  of  property.  Because,  sir,  any  ac- 
tion of  this  convention,  which  goes  to  the  de- 
struction of  any  of  those  rights  lo  which  I  have 
alluded,  is  opposed  to  the  object  for  which  we 
are  assembled.  I  deny  the  right  of  the  people 
themselves,  in  their  sovereign  capacity,  to  do 
any  act  that  Avould  amount  to  the  destruction 
of    their    sovereignty — much    loi^s    does     that 


535 


right  belong  to  this  convention.  If  then,  sir, 
thev  have  no  right  to  take  awaj  my  property 
•without  compensation — if  this  convention  have 
no  right  to  say  that  I  shall  not  -worship  the 
Deitv  as  I  please — if  it  has  no  right  to  destroy 
the  form  of  our  government,  they  certainly  have 
no  right  to  destroy  the  sovereignty  of  any  one 
in  it.  And  tLe  consequence  is,  they  have  no 
right  to  draw  a  distinction  between  the  people 
residing  in  a  city  and  those  residing  m  the 
country.  I  am  for  an  equality  of  rights  on 
the  part  of  city  and  countrv'.  To  carry  out 
this  principle  a  little  further.  This  conven- 
tion nave  no  right,  if  thev  have  tbe  pow- 
er, to  draw  this  distinction  wliieh  I  seethe  legis- 
lative report  does  on  the  subject  of  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation.  We  have  al  the 
right  of  representation,  whether  rich  or  poor, 
whether  living  in  the  country  or  a  city,  whether 
they  are  numerous  or  otherwise.  How  does  it 
operate?  Suppose  the  ratio  to  be  1,500,  it  gives 
to  a  county  Laving  but  two  thirds  of  the  ratio, 
in  many  instances,  a  representative.  If  my 
countv  happened  to  have  the  full  ratio  of  1,500, 
and  9^9  over,  it  would  have  but  one  represen- 
tative. And  the  residuum  added  to  the  quali- 
fied voters  of  a  smaller  adjoining  county  would 
give  to  that  county  two  representatives. 

Upon  this  principle  of  perfect  equalitv,  in  our 
rights  of  property,  and  in  our  political  rights, 
the  same  reason  Avill  apply  in  regard  to  the  act 
of  1833,  which  has  been  modified,  but  which 
will  be  attenjpted  to  be  engrafted  in  this  consti- 
tution. There  is  a  violation  of  right.  Every 
man  in  this  community  having  an  equal  right 
to  purchase  property  and  bring  it  from  whatever 

I  dace  he  pleases.  "Whilst  I  would  leave  that 
aw  as  it  now  stands,  I  am  ntterlv  opposed  to 
engrafting  it  in  the  constitution,  f  would  leave 
it  -as  it  stands,  because  dire  necessity  may  re- 
quire that  it  exist.  How  far  nece-ssity  may 
justify  a  departure  trom  this  general  rule  of 
equality,  is  a  question  that  would  be  somewhat 
difficult  to  settle.  If  Louisville  had  sent  the 
emancipation  representatives  here,  and  they  had 
shown  a  disposition  to  carry  out  that  law,  I  will 
not  sav  what  might  have  been  my  course.  Be- 
cause I  should  consider  that  an  attempt  at  de- 
struction. But  as  the  present  representatives 
come  here  representing  fully  and  fairly  the  slave 
interests  of  the  country,  it  has  no  application 
whatever,  aud  therefore,  I  will  not  go  into  that 
question. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  I  will  ask  the  indulgence  of 
this  committee  for  a  few  moments,  for  I  am  un- 
willing to  give  a  silent  vote  upon  this  question. 
When  in  the  committee  that  presented  this  re- 
port, I  was  of  the  impression  that  there  ought 
to  be  restrictions  placed  upon  the  senatorial 
representation  of  those  pjints  that  might,  be- 
come exceedingly  populous.  I  felt  too,  that 
there  were  great  principles  at  stake,  but  I  had  not 
suflSciently  matured  the  subject.  I  had  not  in- 
vestigated the  ground  on  which  my  action  would 
be  based  suflaciently  according  to  mv  own  judge- 
ment, to  sustain  myself  in  the  position  in  which 
I  would  be  placed.'  I  therefore  sir,  when  listen- 
ing to  the  colloquial  eloquence  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Louisville,  who  was  my  coadjuior  on 
the  committee,  was  charmed  away  from  my  first 
view  of  the  subject.     I  was  led  to  adopt  the  ar- 


guments he  presented,  and  to  feel  that  there  was 
a  force  and  power  in  those   arguments,  which 
would  be  irresistible  in  this  house,  and   in  the 
state  of  Kentucky.     But  the  spell  by  which  I 
was  bound  in  the  colloquial  intercourse  which  I 
had  with  the  gentleman,  is  now  broken.    I  think 
i  I  see  light  in  a  different  direction,  and  I  come 
•  back  to  my  first  love,  and  stand  here  now  as  the 
'  advocate — to  use  a  hackneyed   term — of  some 
I  conservative  restriction,  not  only  upon  the  city 
I  of  Louisville,   but  every  other  portion   of  the 
j  state  that  niav»  by  this  excess  of  numbers,  be 
liable  to  do  cfamage  to  the  general  interests  of 
the  state.     I  know  sir,  that  if  I  were  not  the 
representative  of  a  free  and  independent  people, 
!  1  should  not  have  been  enabled  to  stand  up,  af- 
i  ter  such  denunciations  as  have  fallen  upon  gen- 
tlemen who   shall  act  as  I  do  upon  this  floor. 
But  sir,  I  thank  God,  I  thank  those  that  reared 
me  up  from  childhood  to  maturity,  that  the 
spirit  of  independence  was  infused  into  me  in 
infancy,  as  fully   as  in  any  man  here  or  else- 
where; and  that  what  my  judgment  dictates  to 
me  should  be  done,  I  have  a  determination  to 
dare  attempt  to  do.     I  care  not  what  the  power 
may  be  that  resists  the  position  I   occupy,  un- 
less my  judgment  is  convinced,  I  stand  by  that 
judgment. 

I  have  been  a  good  deal  astonished  since  this 
discussion  commenced,  I  must  confess.     I  was 
astonished   at  my  friend  from  Christian,  when 
I  he  came  in  witli  that   glorious   compromise  of 
j  his.     I  was  surprised  to  find  that  a  change  had 
'  come  over  the  spirit  of  his  dreams.     What  has 
I  been  his  position  heretofore?     I  was  sir,  more 
:  firmly  based  in  the  position  I  occupy,  by  the 
;  eloquent   language  of  the    gentleman  himself, 
I  only  the  dav  before  he  presented  that  compro- 
1  mise,    He  declared  it  was  the  last  battle  for  our 
;  country's  rights,  that  was  to  be  fought.    He 
!  seemed  to  doubt  the  firmness  of  my  nerves,  and. 
i  endeavored  to  strengthen  me  in  my  position,  so 
I  that  no  power  in  the  house  or  out  of  it  might 
j  shake  me.    But  sir,  the  guardian  angel  watching 
I  over  the  gentleman,  perhaps,  whispered  a  lesson 
I  of  wisdom  in  his  ear,  of  which  he  had  never  be- 
fore learned;  and  he  came  to  this  house  on  the 
following  morning  with  a  proposition  which  he 
blandly    calls  a    compromise — compromise    of 
i  what  sir?     Was  it  a  compromise  of  tlie  princi- 
'  pie  for  which  he  contended,  or  was  it  a  compro- 
mise of  opinions,  which  he  held  the  day  before^ 
Ah!  sir,  it  was  the  dictum  of  an  entire  change  of 
policy.     A  compromise  bv  giving  to  those  on 
one  side  of  the  question,  aft  that  they  asked  for, 
and  leaving  those  who   think  that  a  different 
course  should   be  pursued,  without   having  a 
single  crumb   fall  to  them  from  their  master's 
table.     I  stand  by  no  such   compromises.     If  I 
compromise  at  all,  it  is  on  terms  of  liberality; 
on  such  terms  as  will  extend  to  me,  a  portion  at 
'least  of  that  for  whicrh  I   fight;  but  I  presumed 
;  the  gentleman's  reasons  were  satisfactory.    They 
'  have   not  however  convinced  me.     They  have 
had  no   influence  on  my  judgment  so  far;  and 
though  the  gentleman  "has  departed  from  me, 
I   stand    in  the    firm   position    where  he    left 
me.     Though  he  may  think  proper  to  take  shel- 
ter under  the  banner  of  the  leaders  of  the  oppo- 
site side,  yet  sir,  I  fight  under  the  star  spangled 
i  banner  under  which  I  started. 


536 


There  has  been  sir,  a  great  deal  'of  extraneous 
matter  introduced  in  this  discussion.  We  are 
told  that  on  the  Ohio's  broad  and  beautiful  shores 
the  spirit  of  patriotism  and  valor  dwells  in  rich 
abundance,  and  that  whenever  the  bugle  not*'  is 
Bounded,  and  the  first  tap  of  the  martial  drum  is 
heard,  all  her  sons  are  found  rushing  to  defend 
their  country's  glory.  Sir,  when  the  first  note 
was  sounded,  my  constituents  were  rushing  in 
tlieir  majesty,  to  the  rescue  of  their  country. 
Yes  sir,  my  own  county  raised  a  company  at  the 
first  intimation  of  the  proclamation  of  war  with 
Mexico:  but  so  far  from  the  centre  of  attraction 
■was  she.  that  the  company  was  entirely  too  late. 
As  soon  as  we  heard  that  there  was  a  call  to 
arms,  our  people  came  gallantly  up— I  do  not 
include  myself,  I  was  not  a  volunteer— but  the 
people  of  my  county  ranged  themselves  under 
the  star  spangled  banner  and  asked  of  the  govern- 
ment to  be  permitted  to  take  a  share  in  the  toil 
and  danger,  the  strife  and  hazard  that  were  im- 
pending over  the  country.  This  Avas  denied 
them  at  that  time.  Afterwards  when  the  4th 
regiment  Kentucky  volunteers  was  organi.?cd, 
she  did  send  forth  a  gallant  company;  but  they 
sir  were  too  late  to  join  in  the  conflict  before  the 
city  of  Mexico,  and  yet  they  revelled  in  her  halls, 
and  some  of  them  sir  now  lie  bf-neath  her  soil. 

The  subject  of  emancipation  has  been  drawn 
also  into  this  discussion.  I  sir  most  solemnly 
aver  that  until  this  discussion  began  upon  this 
floor  it  never  entered  my  head  that  slavery  liad 
any  thing  to  do  with  the  subject  under  consider- 
ation. 

The  gentleman  from  Bullitt  talks  most  elo- 
quently upon  this  proposition  to  disfranchise  a 
portion  of  the  people  of  Kentucky.  Sir  1  am 
not  sent  here  for  the  purpose  of  disfranchising  a 
single  man,  woman  or  child,  or  to  take  away  a 
single  privilege  from  any  man;  but  sir  1  am  for 
preventing  a  combination  of  force  from  bringing 
destruction  on  tlie  country  by  such  combination. 
We  give  to  everv  portion  of  Kentucky  a  full  rep- 
resentation in  the  lower  house,  according  to  its 
numbers.  I  sir  am  not  to  be  deteired  from  ex- 
pressing the  sentiments  I  entertain,  by  being 
told  that  the  Autocrat  of  Russia  is  not  less  to  be 
trusted  than  those  who  act  as  I  intend  to  act. 
iS'o  sir,  and  I  dare  assert,  that  the  source  whence 
the  denunciation  emanated,  has  no  more  of  the 
love  of  country  burning  on  tlie  altar  of  his 
heart,  than  I  have;  nor  of  correct  principles  ei- 
ther. 

Now  sir.  it  is  contended,  that  if  we  limit  the 
representation  of  cities  in  the  senate,  we  are  de- 
stroying the  right  of  stifi'rage  in  Kentucky. 
What  is  the  object  of  government?  It  is  that 
the  greatest  amount  of  good  may  be  dissemina- 
ted to  the  greatest  extent.  Why  is  the  senate 
created  at  all?  Is  it  for  the  same  purpose  that 
the  lower  branch  of  the  legislature  exists?  No 
sir,  I  take  on  myself  to  aver,  that  it  has  a  differ- 
ent purpose  in  view.  Representation  should  ex- 
ist wherever  taxation  is  exercised;  and  it  is  ful- 
ly carried  out  in  the  lower  house  of  our  general 
assembly.  It  is  so  in  the  liouse  of  representa- 
tives of  "the  United  States,  and  it  is  right  that  it 
should  be  so;  but  is  it  so  in  the  senate  of  Ken- 
tucky, or  is  it  so  in  the  senate  of  the  United 
States?  No  sir,  it  is  not  so.  How  is  the  Senate 
or  the  United  States  oTonrntedt    I  need  not  an- 


swer  this  question,  for  it  would  be  an  insult  to 
the  intelligence  of  this  house,  if  I  should  at- 
tempt to  answer  it.  Why  was  it  that  every  lit- 
tle state  that  was  organized  in  this  union  requir- 
ed, at  the  hands  of  the  general  government,  that 
it  should  have  an  eqal  amount  of  representation 
in  the  United  States  Senate?  It  was  sir,  upon 
the  same  principle  upon  which  I  now  intend  to 
act.  It  was  upon  the  principle  of  self-preserva- 
tion. It  was,  that  in  the  senate,  there  might  be 
a  Avholesome  check  against  the  evil  influences,  if 
they  .should  ever  be  directed  to  evil,  which 
might  be  exercised  in  the  lower  house.  Was  it 
right  or  was  it  wrong?  The  history  of  this 
country,  in  past  days,  attests  the  wisdom  (jf  the 
policy.  Had  it  not  been  for  that  principle,  our 
government  would  have  reeled  and  tottered  like 
a  drunken  man,  and  prostrate  might  have  lain. 
It  is  this  inequality  that  secures  this  govern- 
ment of  ours,  as  far  as  the  two  senatorial  votes  of 
each  state  have  power. 

The  little  State  of  Delaware  having  but  three 
counties,  and  a  population  of  about  one  hun- 
dred thousand,  has  an  equal  voice  in  the  senate 
with  the  largest  state  of  the  union.  Why  is  it 
so?  It  is  that  the  commuiuty  may  be  protected 
against  combinations  of  large  masses.  But  gen- 
tlemen say  it  is  a  departure  from  principle,  that 
we  are  about  to  make  here;  no  sir,  it  is  no  de- 
parture from  principle.  I  ask  you  what  city  or 
town  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky  had 
the  right  to  separate  representation  in  the  senate 
at  the  time  this  convention  was  called?  The 
same  mode  of  representation  is  acted  on  in  ev- 
ery portion  of  the  union.  Virginia  is  divided 
into  two  grand  senatorial  districts;  one  east,  the 
other  west  of  the  blue  ridge;  one  represented  by 
thirteen,  and  the  other  by  nineteen  senators;  and 
these  divisions  are  kept  up  irrespective  of  popu- 
lation; and  it  takes  two  thirds  of  the  legislature  of 
that  state  to  change  this  constisutional  provision 
once  in  ten  years.  I  come  next  to  Maryland, 
where  the  same  doctrine,  for  which  I  contend,  is 
carried  out.  The  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
stated  the  other  day,  that  there  were  but  eleven 
counties  in  Maryland.  I  believehe  is  mistaken.  I 
think  there  are  twenty.  How  is  their  senatorial 
representation  apportioned?  It  is  divided  into 
twenty  one  districts;  each  county  sends  one  sena- 
ator,  and  the  city  of  Baltimore  one,  which  com- 
pletes her  senate.  I  ask  you  how  it  is  that  Balti- 
more sends  but  one,  when  each  county  is  entitled 
to  one?  It  is  on  tlie  principle  of  self-preservation. 

The  gentleman  from  Fleming  (Mr.  Garfielde,) 
a  few  days  since  delivered  an  eloquent  discourse 
on  the  sources  from  which  his  first  principles  of 
republican  equality  were  gathered.  He  crossed 
the  Alleghany  mountains  and  sought  in  New 
England  those  lessons.  He  learned  very  strange 
lessons,  or  lie  learned  tliose  lessons  very  badly. 
What  does  the  history  of  that  country  teach  us? 
In  Rhode  Island  they  have  one  senator  for  each 
county  and  one  for  each  city  in  the  state.  Con- 
necticut has  adopted  a  principle  which  I  hope 
never  to  see  engrafted  in  the  constitution  of 
Kentucky.  She  has  no  districting,  but  (dects  by 
the  state  at  large,  twtdvc  senators.  Did  the  gen- 
tleman gatlier  lessons  of  wisdom  from  her  course 
of  policy,  or  from  that  of  the  State  of  Rhode 
Island?    He  certainly  did  not  from  the   latter, 

for  he  is  not  carrying  them  out.    How  is  it  in 

■IV.  '■>«.»  ..f;'if)&  tv?  jr^j  -iflry  i     .-y^jfii,-  m- 


537 


Ne\r  Jersey?  One  senator  from  each  county. 
How  is  it  in  Delaware?  Three  counties  sending 
three  representntives  each,  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment being  embraced  in  one  of  them.  Is  that 
not  the  doctrine  of  equalitv  of  representation 
according  to  numbers  ?  liV^here  is  Pennsyl- 
vania. She  elects  by  districts,  and  no  city  is 
entitled  to  elect  more  than  four  senators. — 
"Where  in  the  United  Stales  is  there  more  of  the 
spirit  of  republicanism  than  in  the  Keystone 
state?  Xo  where,  sir,  though  I  claim  an  equal 
amount  for  old  Kentucky.  And  I  would  rather 
have  been  bom  in  Kentucky,  than  in  any  other 
part  of  the  union.  But  to  pass  on  to  Xorth  and 
South  Carolina.  North  Carolina  bases  her  sen- 
atorial representation,  exclusively  on  property. 
South  Carolina  upon  population  and  property. 
I  am  opposed  to  the  first  scheme  entirely,  andl 
do  not  like  the  other.  It  shows  there  is  a'  depart- 
ure inboth  these  states,  from  the  principle  which 
was  adopted  in  those  others  to  which  I  adrert- 
ed  and  from  the  general  princ  iple  laid  down  here, 
that  population  shall  be  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion? How  is  it  in  Yennont?  a  state  from  which 
the  gentleman  from  Fleming  the  other  dav  drew 
his  wisdom.  She  elects  her  representatives  on 
the  principle  of  taxation;  and  Massachusetts  re- 
gards taxation  as  the  basis  of  representation.  I 
do  not  quote  Xew  England  as  authority  for  rov 
course  of  policy.  I  am  willing  to  stop  on  thfs 
side  of  that  silver  cord  so  eloquently  described 
by  the  gentleman  from  Kenton  yesterdav.  How 
is  it  in  Tennessee?  She  is  districted,  ^er  con- 
stitution is  similar  to  that  of  Kentucky,  and  it 
■was  made  in  an  enlightened  period;  it  does  not 
•  late  further  back,  I  believe,  tlian  1835.  She  ba- 
ses her  representation  almost  entirely  on  popula- 
tion; but  in  order  to  prevent  city  influence  from 
towering  above  other  influences,  her  constitu- 
tion provides  that  no  county  shall  be  divided  in 
order  to  give  senatorial  representation.  She  has 
cities  growing  up.  She  has  the  beautiful  city 
of  Rocks  on  the  Cumberland,  and  her  great  em- 
porium of  the  west  on  the  Mississippi.  She  ex- 
pects that  the  time  will  come,  when  those  cities 
will  add  dignity,  power  and  wealth,  to  that  state; 
yet  her  constitution  provides  that  no  division  ! 
shall  take  place  for  the  purpose  of  senatorial 
representation.  How  is  it  in  Louisiana.  The 
very  principle  we  contend  for  is  engrafted  in  her 
constitution.  She  has  thirty  two  senators,  and 
no  parish  is  allowed  to  have  more  than  one 
eighth  of  the  senatorial  representation.  At  the 
time  her  constitution  was  adopted,  the  cit}-  of 
Xew  Orleans,  according  to  her  population,  was 
entitled  to  four  senators,  and  she  is  prohibited 
from  ever  having  more. 

Xow,  I  ask  if  it  is  not  a  fact,  that  these  con- 
flicting interests  do  exist?  I  harbor  no  animos- 
ity against  cities;  much  less  do  I  envy  Louis- 
ville, or  wish  to  deprive  her  of  any  riglits  which  I 
she  ought  to  enjoy.  I  have  had  favors  from  the 
people  of  that  city,  in  the  time  of  pecuniary  dif- 
licnlty,  which  have  given  me  a  warm  attach- 
ment to  this  city,  and  my  feelings  of  gratitude 
are  still  warm  for  her.  As  an  evidence,  when  I 
was  called  upon  to  cast  my  vot«  for  some  one  to 
fill  the  honorable  station  of  president  of  this  con- 
vention, my  eye  and  voice  Ml  upon  one  of  her 
distinguished  delegates.  But  I  feel  that  there 
are  greater  interests  in  this  countrv,  than  those 
68 


j  that  are  circumscribed  by  the  limits  of  any  citj. 
The  battle  of  liberty  has  to  be  fought  through- 
out this  land  yet,  and  if  we  give  to  any  portion 
an  overwhelming  power,  we  at  once  enable  them 
to  tie  our  hands,  and  dictate  to  us  the  pathway 
which  we  shall  pui-sue  in  future.  I,  for  one,  am 
not  willing  to  be  placed  in  that  position.  Mis- 
sissippi districts  for  the  election  of  senators. 
Her  constitution  contains  the  same  provisions 
that  are  contained  in  the  present  constitution  of 
Kentucky.  She  has  the  cities  of  Yicksburg  and 
Jackson,  and  she  looks  forward,  probably,  to 
the  time  when  those  cities  shall  be  filled  with 
an  industrious  population,  which  will  perhaps 
amount  to  ouc-haJf  of  the  population  of  the 
state.  Alabama  districts  for  senatorial  repre- 
sentation. I  look  to  the  lessons  of  wisdom 
that  are  taught  me  by  these  three  last  mentioned 
stales.  I  believe  they  are  based  upon  the  immu- 
table principle  of  wisdom  and  self-protection. 
Missouri  has  the  same  provision.  Each  one  of 
them  district,  but  allow  no  division  of  counties 
in  their  constitutions.  Arkansas  districts,  but; 
forbids  the  division  of  any  county  in  forming 
senatorial  districts.  It  is  contended  here,  that 
city  and  country  influences  always  work  har- 
moniously together  for  the  good  of  the  whole. 
I  ask  you  to  cast  your  eye  to  the  magnificent 
city  of  Xew  York,  and  what  lesson  do  you  learn? 
Whenever  there  is  an  election  for  chief  magis- 
trate of  this  union  approacuing,  what  is  the  note 
that  is  sotmded  from  one  end  of  this  union  to 
the  other?  As  goes  the  city  of  Xew  York,  so 
goes  the  state.  It  is  a  doctrine  preached  from 
hill  to  vale;  and  as  gO'is  the  great  state  of  Xew 
York,  SO  goes  the  union.  K  the  citv  governs 
the  state,  and  the  state  governs  the  union,  I  ask 
is  there  not  an  influence  at  work,  that  ought  to 
be  arrested  in  its  progress?  Senatorial  repre- 
sentation is  apportioned  for  the  purpose  of  pre- 
serving a  proper  balance  in  the  legislature.  It 
is  based  upon  the  principle,  that  representatives 
coming  from  sections,  might  be  disposed  to 
combine,  and  by  combined  influence  run  into 
unhealthy  legislation.  TThy  do  vou  want  a  sen- 
ate at  all,  having  a  representation  already  on 
the  principle  of  equality,  in  the  lower  house? 
Because,  coming  from  the  larger  districts  of  a 
state,  it  is  presumed  that  experience  and  wisdom 
will  be  the  characteristics  of  that  bodv;  and 
that  sectional  feelings  and  interests  will  be  de- 
stroyed. But  sir,  give  to  the  cities  the  demand- 
ed increase  of  senatorial  representation,  and 
what  do  you  do?  You  place  in  the  hall  oppo- 
site to  us,  a  half  dozen  men  from  one  point,  who 
come  there  with  an  identity  of  interest  for  a  par- 
ticular purpose — it  mav  he  for  weal,  it  may  be 
for  woe.  I  know  that  city  influence  has  opera- 
ted heretofore,  in  some  respects,  at  least,  to  the 
detriment  of  the  commonwealth.  In  what  man- 
ner it  has  operated,  let  your  beautiful  railroads, 
slackwater  navigation,  and  turnpike  roads,  all 
concentrating  in  one  city,  as  a  focal  point  at- 
tests. 

This  policy  has  resulted  in  an  enormous  debt, 
from  which  the  people  will  not  be  relieved  for 
these  many  years  to  come.  The  people  have 
been  led,  by  this  syren  song  of  Louisville  and 
the  middle  districts]!  into  a  mesh  from  which  it 
is  not  easy  to  escape. 

I  ask  if  two  senators  cannot  represent  a  city 


538 


or  town  as  effectually  as  half  a  dozen?  There 
are  but  two  great  interests  in  The  city;  they  are 
those  of  the  rich  and  tlie  poor,  and  the  elder 
gentleman  from  Louisville,  who  lias  argued  tliis 
question,  furnishes  us  an  evidence  of  the  influ- 
ence that  may  be  exerted  upon  the  latter  class. 
District  the  cities,  and  when  their  population 
justifies,  give  them  two  senators,  and  each  inter- 
est will  be  represented.  I  go  witli  the  gentle- 
man's beautiful  compromise  that  far;  but  I  will 
stop  short  of  the  point  to  which  he  tends.  I  go 
for  equal  rights  and  privileges,  and  to  secure 
them  I  would  put  a  check  upon  thispower,  which 
may  become  so  overwhelming  in  this  common- 
wealth as  to  destroy  the  balance,  and  swallow 
up  all  other  intere.sts.  Tell  me  not  that  the  con- 
centration of  heavy  capital  is  not  liable  to  pro- 
duce injurious  consequences.  Yes  sir,  it  does, 
it  will  do  it.  Combine  numbers  with  wealth, 
and  add  talent  also — of  which  the  gentleman 
from  Louisville  justly  boasts — and  then  you  will 
see  that  the  lines  in  legislation  will  begin  to 
open,  the  roads  will  begin  to  diverge,  the  inter- 
ests of  the  poor  will  be  lost  sight  of.  You  need 
not  tell  me  that  city  influence  will  always  be 
exerted  for  the  good  of  the  people  of  the  coun- 

If,  as  some  gentlemen  sav,  city  influence  is  poli- 
tical purity  itself,  why  is  it  that  we  find,  upon  ex- 
amination of  our  penitentiary  register,  that  about 
nine  outof  every  ten  convicts  are  from  the  cities. 
Sir,  degradation  and  crime  delight  to  revel  in 
the  city  full.  Have  their  votaries  any  just  ap- 
preciation of  the  principles  of  free  government? 
Compare  city  and  country  morality,  according 
to  the  calends  above  referred  to,  and  theji  tell 
me  to  which  you  would  entrust  your  country's 
dearest  treasure?  Cities  always  have  been,  suid 
still  will  be,  infested  with  these  thieving  rascals. 
They  have  the  rights  of  suffrage,  without  the 
feelings  of  Kentuckians.  We  cannot  deny  them 
the  right  of  suffrage,  but  we  can  place  such  re- 
striction on  their  representation  as  to  render 
them  harmless.  Give  to  each  city  two  senators, 
and  they  will  have  no  reason  to  complain.  Has 
Louisville  a  senator  now?  K'o,  sir.  Why^  Be- 
cause our  forefathers  deemed  it  right  to  protect 
the  country  against  city  influences.  The  gen- 
tleman says,  tliat  he  was  sent  here  to  preserve 
an  equality  of  legislative  power  to  every  portion 
of  the  state.  Was  he  sent  here  to  mete  out  to 
Louisville  what  she  never  heretofore  had?  As 
for  myself,  I  had  no  instruction  in  regard  to  this 
matter.  It  was  not  expected  that  it  would  be 
brought  forward.  I  am  here  to  act  as  my  judg- 
ment dictates,  and  I  will  take  the  responsibility 
of  acting  for  myself;  and  I  do  not  fear  that  I 
shall  not  be  able  to  satisfy  myiconstituents.  I  do 
not  fear  that  I  shall  not  receive  from  them,  their 
approval  of  my  course  on  this  subject. 

I  want  no  distinction  in  this  country,  but  I 
see  abundant  indications  of  a  disposition  to  in- 
troduce invidious  distinctions.  And  when  the.se 
overtowering  influences,  of  the  agcnt,s  of  your 
cities  are  concentrated  in  your  legislative 
halls,  the  weakness  and  divisions  of  the  country 
will  not  be  able  to  resist  these  influences.  We 
shall  be  led  like  sheep  to  the  dliearer,  and  not  be 
permitted  to  open  our  mouths.  I  want  to  guard 
against  such  influences,  come  from  what  quar- 
ter they  may.  "     '  '  " 


I  have  given  some  of  the  reasons  that  will 
operate  with  me,  in  giving  my  vote  upon  this 
question,  but  I  want  to  refer  for  a  moment,  to  some 
of  the  remarks  of  the  distinguished  gentleman 
from  Henderson.  He  says  Ave  are  casting  an  in- 
sult upon  Louisville.  Wliat  insult  do  we  cast 
upon  her?  We  propose  to  give  to  her  citizens 
full  representation  in  the  lower  branch,  and  two 
senators  as  soon  as  she  has  population  to  demand 
them.  We  propose  to  give  her  as  much  as  slie 
can  claim  for  her  pojjulation  in  tlie  way  of  rep- 
resentation. Is  it  casting  an  insult  upon  lier,  to 
say,  at  a  certain  point  tiiy  proud  step  sliall  be 
stayed?  How  co  we  insult  her?  I  deny  that, 
my  action  leads  to  any  such  result.  He  says  Ave 
bringher  here  as  a  criminal — to  be  sacrificed,  I 
suppose,  ui^on  the  altar  of  our  folly.  I  arraign 
her  not  as  a  criminal.  She  is  filled  up  now 
Avith  native  born  citizens,  to  a  great  extent.  I 
knoAV  her  action  Avill  be  judicious,  at  least  as  f;u- 
asher  own  interest  is  concerned.  WJiere  is  the 
increase  of  her  population  to  come  from?  From 
across  that  silvery  cord,  of  Avhich  the  gentleman 
from  Kenton  talked  so  eloquently  yesterdav. 
Yes  sir,  Avhat  is  its  object?  It  is  to  virtually 
destroy  that  bright  and  brilliant  silvery  cord,  by 
Avhich  the  great  antagonistic  interests  of  the 
country  are  noAv  separated.  Yes  sir,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  placing  the  poAver  of  the  south  at  the 
feet  of  the  north,  and  tliose  principles  for  Avhich 
our  fathers  fought,  bled,  and  died,  are  to  be  for- 
ever extinguished.  Tell  me  not  that  we  should 
introduce  men  from  beyond  the  Ohio,  to  teach 
us  lessons  of  goA'ernment.  Look  at  your  nation- 
al councils.  Where  is  the  spirit  of  conserva- 
tism, of  AA'hich  men  delight  to  boast  so  mucli  in 
this  house?  It  is  to  be  found  only  in  the  dele- 
gations from  southern  states,  Avhile  in  the  north, 
the  spirit  of  give  us  all  power  is  practised 
upon.  We  are  asked  to  surrender  our  dear- 
est rights;  and  for  Avhat?  That  this  very  doc- 
trine of  equality  of  right  may  be  carried  out. 
Sir,  surrender  our  dearest  interests  into  their 
hands!  I  am  not  for  doing  it.  I  Avould  leave 
the  nortJi  to  foUoAv  its  oAvn  policy;  but  God  de- 
fend me  from  that  portion  of  her  population 
that  will  come  here.  Why?  if  a  northern  man  is 
a  good  citizen  there,  as  a  general  rule,  he  comes 
not  here.  There  is  no  inducement  for  him  to 
come  here,  whilst  the  vast  plains  of  the  west  re- 
main unsettled.  If  the  doctrine  of  the  gentle- 
man is  carried  out,  Avhat  Avill  it  result  in?  It 
does  not  require  the  forcast  of  a  prophet  to  tell 
that  vast  numbers  of  the  more  inferior  portion  of 
northern  population  Avill,  as  they  thicken  there, 
and  are  pressed  out,  find  a  home  alongthe  banks 
of  the  great  dividing  line  between  the  north  and 
the  south.  And  sir,  are  the  renegades  from  jus- 
tice, the  .outpourings  of  northern  jails  and  peni- 
tentiaries, and  the  A'ile  abolitionists,  to  come  in 
upon  us,  and  demand  an  equal  share  in  the  laAv 
makingjioAver  of  our  state,  and  above  all  sir, 
are  Ave  to  be  friglitened  into  compliance  Avith 
their  demands  before  they  come?  Are  avo  sir, 
to  open  Avide  the  door  and  send  out  our  mes- 
sengers to  bid  them  Avelcome  in.  Sir,  let  us 
provide  for  ourselves  and  Ave  shall  have  done  all 
that  our  constituents  expect  at  our  hands. 

The  gentleman  from  Henderson  enters  into  a 
mathematical  calculation  to  sIioav  that  a  dange- 
rous preponderance  is  not  likely  to  exist  in  our 


539 


cities  on  account  of  their  growing  population. 
He  says,  sir,  that  when  the  state  has  1,200,000, 
Louisville  will  have  75,000.  How  does  he  ar- 
rive at  it?  In  1620  Louisville  had  4,000  popula- 
tion, and  the  state  about  400,000.  In  1840  Louis- 
ville had  20,000,  and  the  state  700,000.  In  1849 
Louisville  has  50,000,  and  the  state  perhaps  as 
much  as  850,000  outside  of  Louisville.  What 
has  been  the  relative  increase?  Wliilst  Louis- 
ville has  twelve  and  a  half  times  the  number 
she  had  in  1820,  the  state  has  a  little  over  dou- 
bled her  population.  If  we  take  the  increase  of 
the  last  nine  years  as  an  indication  of  her  future 
advancement"  the  disproportion  against  the  state 
will  be  inucJi  greater  than  even  shown  as  above. 

But  the  gentleman  .shows  that  a  great  period 
must  elapse  before  Louisville  can  become  poten- 
tial in  the  councils  of  the  state,  through  her  sen- 
atorial representation.  I  dare  believe,  sir,  that 
his  mathematieal  skill  is  much  at  fault  in  this 
matter.  She  is  now  entitled  to  one  senator,  ana 
perhaps  by  the  time  representation  is  apportion- 
ed, under  the  new  constitution,  she  will  have  the 
numbers  to  give  her  two.  Double  her  popula- 
tion in  ten  years  more,  and  she  will  have  three, 
and  a  large  fraction  npon  which  to  ask  a  fourth. 
(Jo  ten  years  further  on,  and  she  will  have  five 
senators  at  least,  and  about  fifteen  representa- 
tives in  the  lower  house.  One  eighth  of  the 
power  in  the  senate  at  least,  and  one  seventh  in 
the  other  branch.  Bring  twenty  men  from  one 
point,  with  one  common  object  in  view,  and  I 
ask  you,  if  it  is  not  a  power  that  will  give  tone 
and  direction  to  our  statute  laws.  If  her  inte- 
rests coincide  with  the  balance  of  the  state,  all 
will  be  well;  but  sir,  if  they  should  differ,  it 
will  be  then  too  late  to  look  back  in  regrets  at 
the  principle  bv  which  Ave  are  now  governed  in 
this  matter.  Inhere  are  other  great  interests  in 
this  state  that  demand  our  vigilant  watchfulness 
besides  those  of  Louisville. 

There  is  a  tendency  in  all  our  institutions  to 
centralization.  When  a  young  man  far  removed 
from  the  capital  is  ambitious  of  distinction,  can 
he  expect  to  find  it  there?  Jfo  sir,  he  breaks  up, 
and  as  true  as  the  needle  to  the  north,  steere  his 
way  to  the  capital.  'Tis  sir,  because  this  has 
become  the  fountain  from  whence  all  honors 
flow.  How,  sir,  are  they  dispen.sed?  Xot  to  the  ex- 
tremes, but  to  those  who  fawn  at  the  foot  of  pow- 
er. There  is  a  central  influence  which  is  dan- 
gerous to  the  body  politic.  There  is,  so  to 
speak,  a  hypertrophy  of  the  heart  of  state. 
There  is  a  power  to  draw  in,  but  not  to  throw 
out  to  the  extremities.  It  is  fitly  illustrated  in 
my  own  person.  Whilst  the  chest  is  overbur- 
dened, the  extremities  are  without  the  necessary 
circulation  to  kee])  up  a  comfortable  degree  of 
warmth  and  vitality.  The  seeds  of  dissolution 
are  sown  in  this  frame;  let  us  beware  how  we 
sow  them  by  our  action  in  this  particular,  in  the 
body  politic. 

There  is  a  concentration  of  the  wealth  of  the 
state  within  the  cities,  and  its  tendency  is  to  ac- 
cumulate, and  to  produce  a  preponderating  pow- 
er and  influence.  I  am  for  diffusing  this  influ- 
ence, by  securing  to  the  countrj-  a  suitable  rep- 
resentation. I  am  for  securing  to  the  citizens  of 
the  country  their  just  rights,  and  when  this  is 
done,  the  rights  of  allwul  be  maintained.  They 
have  no  interest  in  departing  from  correct  prin- 


ciples in  legislation;  but  it  is  not  so  with  cities; 
thev  are  ever  watchful  and  anxious  to  increase 
their  own  power,  and  to  do  this  they  lay  the 
hard  fisted  yeoraaniy  under  contributions.  They 
are  called  upon  to  bear  the  expense  of  all  those 
improvements  that  are  calculated  to  benefit  the 
large  cities.  I  am  for  sustaining  the  interests 
of  every  part  of  the  state.  I  want  no  influence 
in  the  country  that  can  destroy  the  city,  and 
none  in  the  city  that  can  destroy  the  interests  of 
the  countiy.  Let  us  go  arm  in  ann,  and  hand  in 
hand,  consulting  together  for  our  mutual  advan- 
tage, and  we  shall  reach  the  pinnacle  of  that 
temple  which  the  gentleman's  imaginations  have 
created.  I  deny  that  we  are  attempting  to  take 
away  from  any  portion  of  the  inliabitauts  of  this 
state,  the  elective  franchise,  or  any  other  privi- 
lege to  which  they  are  entitled.  tV'e  are  endea- 
voring only  so  to  diffuse  the  powers  of  govern- 
ment, that  they  may  act  in  a  healthy  manner 
upon  the  body  potitic.  I  have  now  Mr.  Chair- 
man exhausted  my  strength,  and  occupied  more 
of  the  time  of  the  house  than  ought  to  have  been 
done.  But  sir  I  did  not  feel  willing,  after  the 
aspersions  that  had  been  thrown  out  by  gentle- 
men in  the  opposition,  to  cast  my  vote  without 
saying  as  muc^h  as  I  have.  My  purposes  sir  are 
as  pure  as  those  of  any  gentleman  upon  this 
floor,  and  all  insinuations  to  the  contrary  I  hurl 
back  upon  those  from  whom  they  come,  irres- 
pective of  position  or  distinction.  I  thank  you 
sir  and  this  bouse  for  the  patience  with  which 
my  remarks  have  been  received. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  I  confess  that  my  mind  has 
been  on  the  stretch  for  four  or  five  days  past  in 
regard  to  the  amendments  that  have  been  offer- 
ed to  the  report  of  the  committee.  The  subject 
of  slavery,  nativism,  internal  improvements,  and 
I  dont  how  many  other  subjects,  have  been  dis- 
cussed, all  of  wnich  I  thought  entirely  foreign 
to  the  subject,  that  this  house  was  endeavoring 
to  arrive  at.  It  seems  to  me  the  whole  ground 
could  be  covered  by  one  of  these  inkstands. 
The  matter  before  the  house,  as  I  understand  it, 
is  about  this:  shall  representation  be  based  upon 
the  voting  population.  I  think,  sir,  as  far  as  I 
have  been  able  to  understand  gentlemen,  w^ho  have 
expressed  their  views,  they  all  unanimously  agree 
upon  this  point.  Therehas  not  been  adissentng 
voice,  1  believe,  except  that  of  the  gentleman  over 
the  way,  who  thought  that  the  liberty  of  voting 
ought  to  be  based  upon  a  certain  degree  of  in- 
telligence. 2s^ow  it  appears  to  me  this  would  be 
a  difficult  matter  to  determine,  without  a  com- 
mittee of  investigation.  The  whole  matter  is, 
is  this  city  representation  of  so  great  importance 
that  we  sflould  deviate  from  a  rule  that  we  all 
say  is  just  and  right.  That  is  the  question.  Sir, 
I  would  despair  of  our  government,  I  would 
despair  of  Kentucky  continuing  what  she  has 
been,  if  we  have  to  deviate  from  that  rule.  For 
what?  For  the  purposes  which  gentlemen  have 
urged  from  every  corner  of  this  house.  It  is 
a  yielding  up  of  the  fundamental  principle  up- 
on which  republican  government  is  based.  What 
have  gentlemen  told  you  about  city  population? 
They  have  not  said  they  were  fearful  of  such  a 
population  at  present,  but  the  day  will  come 
when  a  population  will  assemble  along  that 
"silvery  cord,"  as  it  is  termed,  that  will  be  dan- 
gerous to  the  interests  of  the  state.    According 


540 


to  the  argiiment  of  gentlemen,  every  farming 
community  is  honest,  but  whenever  you  get  into 
the  city  you  find  a  population  of  rogues  and  ras- 
cals. Are  we  to  denounce  a  portion  of  our  coun- 
trymen by  such  epithets  as  these?  They  say 
that  the  population  along  the  banks  of  the  Ohio, 
become  contaminated  by  intercourse  with  for- 
eigners. Tell  me  not,  that  an  enlightened  dele- 
gation, like  this  convention,  can  be  imposod  up- 
on by  such  statements  as  these.  If  it  be  riglit 
to  curtail  the  representation  of  a  city,  it  is  equal- 
ly right  to  curtail  the  representation  of  a  county. 
1  ask  gentlemen  wh<;re  they  will  stop?  Sir, 
there  is  but  one  cour.so  to  pursue,  and  that  is  to 
grant  equal  rights  to  all,  exclusive  privileges  to 
none,  and  if  this  principle  be  not  carried  out,  I, 
for  one,  shall  despair  of  our  republican  govern- 
ment. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  Mr.  Lindsey's 
amendment,  and  it  was  rejected. 

The  committee  then  rose,  i-eported  progress, 
and  obtained  leave  to  sit  again. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  NOVEMBER  IC,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuaet  Robinsox. 

LEGISLATIVE   DEPAKTMEXT. 

Mr.  IRWIN  offered  the  following  resolution: 

Resolved,  That  no  county,  town,  or  city,  now 
entitled  to  separate  representation  in  the  lower 
house  shall  ever  be  entitled  to  more  than  one 
senator. 

Mr.  President:  I  offer  the  resolution  which  I 
have  just  sent  to  the  clerk's  table,  with  a  firm 
belief  that  it  will  be  adopted  by  the  house;  and 
my  object  is,  to  have  a  direct  vote  upon  it,  that 
the  house  may  know  whether  or  not  there  is  to 
be  any  restrictions  on  counties  and  towns  that 
may  be  entitled  to  a  separate  senator. 

The  object  of  the  Article  presented  by  the 
legislative  committee,  and  those  who,  for  several 
days,  have  addressed  the  committee  in  favor  of 
no  restriction  as  to  senators  in  the  cities,  has 
been,  to  prove  that  it  would  be  unjust,  and  un- 
equal— that  it  disfranchised  one  part  of  the 
Ptate  for  the  benefit  of  the  other,  and  destroyed 
the  equality  which  should  exist  i»  a  free  govern- 
ment, where  all  are  acknowledged  as  equal — 
where  numbers  are  aekaowledged  as  the  true 
basis  of  representation. 

I  undertake  to  demonstrate,  in  a  few  words, 
without  the  fear  of  successful  opposition,  "that 
without  this  restriction,"  you  never  can,  after 
this  first  apportionment,  increase  the  senatorial 
representatioji  in  Louisville,  or  any  other  city, 
without  brino;ing  that  city  into  direct  antago- 
nism to  the  whole  state. 

The  Article  sets  out  by  agreeing  that  there  are 
to  be  one  hundred  representatives  in  the  lower 
house,  and  thirty  eight  senators.  This  is  tlie 
maximum,  and  no  effort  can  reduce  it.  If,  there- 
fore, Louisville  gets  one  senator,  the  whole  bal- 
ance of  the  statti  can  get  but  thirty  seven.  Sup- 
pose, for  the  sake  of  argument,  tliat  the  whole 
Btate  shall  increase  in  ten  years  fifty  thousand 


voters,  and  Louisville  ten  thousaml  voters  (as- 
suming the  number  of  voters  noAv  to  be  in  the 
state  at  one  hundred  and  forty  thousand,)  the 
ratio  would  tlien  be  about  five  thousand  seven 
liundred  and  ninetj'  two.  Accordingly,  Louis- 
ville, would  be  entitled  to  two  more  "senators, 
and  the  state  at  large  reduced  to  thirty  five.  The 
state,  then,  in  no  contingency,  could  increase  a 
single  senator,  but  must  lose,  at  each  returning 
ratio,  throughout  all  time  to  come.  As  long  as 
one  city,  or  two  cities,  could  increase  at  the  ratio 
I  have  just  mentioned,  they  would  increase,  if 
time  were  long  enough,  until  the  state  could  not 
have  a  single  senator,  and  every  senator  would 
be  from  the  city.  I  do  not  say  that  acity  ever  can 
maintain  a  population  sufficient  to  produce  this 
result;  indeed  I  know  it  cannot;  but  such  would 
be  the  tendency  of  the  iDrinuiple.  This  brings  us, 
by  my  first  pvoi)osition,  to  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  sixty.  If  the  assumption  for  my  first 
increaseinthe  firstten  years  becorroct,  in  iSTOthe 
voting  population  in  the  commonwealth  will  be 
two  hundred  and  eighty  five  thousand  nine  hun- 
dred and  fourteen.  T^he  ratio  then  Avould  be 
seven  thousand  five  hundred  and  twenty  four, 
and  the  increase  in  the  voting  population  of 
Louisville  will  have  gained  prei-isely  seventeen 
thousand  votes,  which  will  again  entitle  her  to 
two  additional  senators,  and  a  surplus  of  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty  two  voters; 
thereby  reducing  the  state  representation  to 
thirty  two.  This  process  is  bound  to  continue, 
no  extraordinary  circumstance  intervening.  If 
our  happy  country  continues  to  progress,  (as  I 
most  devoutly  hope  it  will,)  I  ask  gentle- 
men if  they  are  prepared  to  incorporate  a  prin- 
ciple so  disastrous  to  the  representative  princi- 
ple, so  absorbing  in  its  charrcter,  and  so  destruc- 
tive in  its  consequences?  Again,  you  must  see 
that  this  principle  operates  oppressively  upon 
the  whole  state,  because,  although  the  whole 
state  increases  five  times  as  fast  as  the  city,  y<jt 
the  only  consequence  is,  that  it  diminishes  the 
senatorial  representation  in  the  state,  because  it 
is  frittered  away  by  thirty  seven  districts.  Yet 
when  it  operates  in  a  single  concentrated  point, 
it  must,  of  necessity,  absorb  the  whole.  In  otlier 
words,  adopt  any  other  principle  than  that  con- 
tained in  my  resolution,  and  you  immediately 
set  up  Louisville  against  the  whole  state,  for  she 
is  compelled  to  gain,  and  the  balance  of  the 
state  must  lose. 

Some  of  those  who  address  the  house  upon 
this  subject,  seem  to  think  that  this  principle  of 
self-preservation,  on  the  part  of  the  balance  of 
the  state,  is  a  wanton  infringement  upon  the 
equal  rights  of  the  free  citizens  of  a  particular 
part  of  the  state.  But  I  ask,  ought  a  principle 
to  be  adopted  that  must,  of  necessity,  disfran- 
chise the  balance  of  the  state?  No,  sir.  I  must, 
from  my  undei-stunding  of  the  question,  be  for 
restricting  the  counties,  cities  and  towns  that 
maybe  now  entitled  to  a  separate  representation 
in  the  lower  house  to  one  senator. 

Sir,  I  am  proud  of  the  city  of  Louisville.  I 
am  proud  of  her  commerce'and  her  manufac- 
tures, yet  when  she  asks  me  to  incorporate  a 
principle  wliich  is  eventually  to  absorb  tins 
whole  senatorial  representation,  she  asks  of  me 
too  much.  Sir,  I  have  no  disposition  to  restrict 
Louisville,  more   than  any  other  county,  town, 


541 


or  oitv.  I  associate  with  her  taleuted  members 
j  wQ  this  floor  with  great  pleasure,  and  I  feel,  if  I 
I     kpow  my  owu  heart,  I  wish  to  do  her  no  injus- 

j  •  .  I  will,  sir,  take  one  other  position  on  this  sub- 
jfeet.  Suppose  to-morrow  the  state  could  increase 
one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  voters,  and 
Louisville  should  have  only  ten  thousand  of 
those  voters,  she  would  have  the  benefit  of  this 
great  increase,  and  the  slat«  must  lose  one  scna- 
ator;  because,  so  long  as  the  Louisville  district 
shall  keep  ahead  in  population,  she  must,  of 
necessity,  have  the  senator,  and  the  state  must 
lose. 

The  honorable  president  has  remarked,  that  if 
any  principle  oi  restriction  should  be  incorpora- 
tvd  in  this  constitution,  he  would  not  sign  it; 
and  if  I  did  not  think  that  it  would  be  in  bad 
taste,  I  might  follow  his  example,  and  the  con- 
sequences might  be  fatal. 

Some  gentlemen  argue  this  question  as  to  its 
1  caring  on  the  slave  pro{)erty  of  the  country, 
but  I  do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  suppose  that  we 
ought  to  apprehend  that  any  danger  is  to  accrue 
to  the  interior  from  the  increase  of  population  on 
our  Ohio  border. 

It  is  trae,  that  the  population  on  the  Ohio 
river  is  perhaps  alien  to  this  interest.  But  reiv- 
ing for  the  perpetuity  of  the  institution  of  sla- 
very upon  the  public  justice  of  the  good  citizens 
of  the  state,  I  know  that  no  constitutionjd  guar- 
anty for  this  property  that  does  not  receive  the 
Mtnction  of  the  people,  as  just  and  right,  can 
long  remain  as  the  organic  law  of  the  laud. 

It  will  be  recollected,  that  upon  this  subject 
of  slavery,  a  few  days  ago,  I  was  ankious  to  in- 
corporate the  law  of  thirty  three,  but,  sir,  I 
shall  not  insist  upon  it,  because  I  knew  then,  as 
■well  as  now,  that  the  most  that  could,  or  perhaps 
all  that  ought  to  be  done,  was  to  leave  this  ques- 
tion to  the  legislature;  and  I  shall  be  perfectly 
satisfied  thus  to  leave  it 

The  legislature  emanating  directly  from  the 
people,  representing  their  interest,  and  knowing 
their  wauts,  can  more  appropriately  carry  out 
the  details  and  the  policy  of  the  state  on  this 
subject. 

I  am  anxious  that  a  direct  vote  may  be  had  on 
my  resolution  that  we  may  know  whether  or  not 
auv  principla  of  restriction  is  to  be  incorpora- 
ted. 

It  is  known  that  the  debate  on  this  subject 
must  cease  on  Monday  the  19th  instant,  and  pre- 
vious to  that  time  we  should  exartiine  the  sixth 
section,  which  apportions  the  representation  in 
tile  state;  it  is  the  mo.st  important  section  in  the 
article,  and  should  be  particularly  and  critically 
examined. 

1  am  done  sir.  I  wished  to  make  the  demon- 
stration which  I  have  presented  to  the  house.  I 
think  it  is  clear,  conclusive,  and  just,  audi  sub- 
mit the  proposition  to  the  house. 

Mr.  TlJRXER.  I  wish  to  offer  an  amendment 
as  a  substitute  for  the  resolution  ofthe  gentleman 
from  Logan  as  follows: 

1.  Resolved,  That  as  a  general  rule,  represen- 
tation should  be  based  on  numbers,  but  tliis  like 
most  general  rules  is  liable  to  exceptions,  and 
when  the  general  welfare  and  public  safety 
would  be  jeoparded  by  the  full  allowance  of  this 
principle,  it  should  be  departetl  froui. 


.  2.  Resoled,  That  each  catitity  and  chy  in  the 
;  state,  should,  in  the  apportionment  of  represen- 
;  taiion,  he  allowed  its  full  share,  according  to  its 
'  present  number  of  voters,  but  that  we  are  under 
■  no  obligation  to  grant  an  equality  of  political 
i  power,  where  the  public  safety  forbids  it,  to 
;  those  who  may  hereafter  migrate  to  Kentucky. 
I  3.  Resolved,  That  no  county  or  city  should 
j  ever  be  entitled  to  more  than  one  senator,  but 
should  have  a  full  representation  according  to 
I  nujnbers  in  the  house  of  representatives. 

1  desire  to  make  some  remarks  sir,  on  my  prop- 
osition. It  will  be  seen  that  in  principle  it  is  the 
same  as  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from 
Logan.  But  before  I  proceed  with  my  remarks 
on  the  pending  question,  I  desire  to  make  some 
observations  on  what  has  been  said  here  in  rela- 
tion to  m>-self,  and  to  a  speech  which  I  deliver- 
ed some  days  ago.  Sir,  1  think  I  may  say  with 
great  confidence  that  I  have  never  uttered  one 
word  or  given  expression  to  one  sentiment  of 
unkindness  towards  any  gentleman  on  this  floor. 
I  have  attempted  to  discuss  principles — not  so 
ably  and  so  forcibly  as  some  other  gentlemen — 
but  I  have  done  it  courteously,  and  I  claim  for 
myself  the  same  courtesy  and  the  same  respect 
that  I  extend  toothers.  I  do  not  say  that  gen- 
tlemen have  been  intentionally  discourteous,  and 
that  they  have  wiiftilly  misrepresented  me,  but  I 
have  witnessed  a  practice  growing  up  in  the  con- 
vention of  imputing  positions  to  gentlemen 
which  they  have  never  taken. 

Sir,  the  younger  gentleman  from  Louisville, 
(Mr.  Preston)  has  charged  me  with  haviugtraduc- 
ed  the  citizens  of  Loui.<ville.  Ee  has  erroneous- 
ly done  so.  There  is  not  a  gentleman  here 
who  has  kinder  feelings  for  the  citizens  of  Lou- 
isville than  I  have.  Take  the  course  I  have 
Eursued  as  an  indication  of  my  feelings  towards 
ouisville.  One  of  the  first  acts  I  did  here  was 
one  of  kindness  towards  Louisville  and  her  citi- 
zens. In  the  discussion  and  controversy  be- 
tween the  delegates  from  the  city  of  Louisville 
and  the  countj'  of  Jefferson,  I  took  part  with  the 
city  of  Louisville,  because  I  thought  what  was 
asked  by  the  county  of  Jefferson  woidd  lead  to 
mischievous  results,  and  I  believed  her  grievan- 
ces could  be  properly  redressed  in  another  man- 
ner. 

Again,  when  the  subject  of  the  Louisville 
chancery  court  came  up,  I  believed  that  it  was 
right  that  there  should  be  such  a  court  at  Louis- 
ville. She  is  a  great  commercial  mail,  and  it  is 
right  that  she  should  have  a  court  of  that  char- 
acter, and  I  rose  in  my  place  and  said  so. 

With  regard  to  Covington  I  entertain  no  un- 
kind feelings.  If  I  were  disposed  to  cherish 
such  feelings,  she  has  a  representative  on  this 
floor  whose  gentlemanly  demeanor,  propriety  of 
conduct,  and  commanding  talent,  wouM  at  once 
disarm  me.  I  certainly  did  allude  to  the  fact 
that  there  are  persons  in  Louisville  and  Coving- 
ton who  are  in  favor  of  emancipation.  That  is 
a  fact  that  is  well  known;  but  I  have  not  inti- 
mated, nor  do  I  believe  that  the  great  body  of 
their  citizens  are  disposed  to  take  away  the  rights 
of  others.  I  beleive  they  are  in  the  main  friend- 
ly to  our  institutions,  but  on  one  point  I  believe 
a  part  of  them  are  mistaken.  They  have  been 
misled  sir,  and  though  I  differ  from  them  in  sen- 
timent on  that  question,  I    would   not  Vound 


542 


their  feelings,  or  ofRrto  thct»aa  iusult.-  In  the 
county  from  which  I  came  sir,  nine  tenths  of  the 
t-mancipationists  are  my  j^articular  friends, 
though  they  voted  against  me  at  the  polls.- 
They  exercised  tlw;  right  which  the  constitution 
gaurantees  to  them,  and  I  have  no  desire  to  de- 
prive tliem  of  that  right. 

With  respect  to  the  senatorial  representation 
of  Louisvill-e,  I  have  thouglvt  that  one  senator 
was  SHfRcient  for  that  city;  hut  I  am  leilling  to 
meet  tftem  lialf  way.  I  am  willing  to  give  Lou- 
isville and  th-e  county  of  Jefferson,  outside  of 
the  city,  representation  according  to  the  ratio. 
I  am  willimrto  go  the  same  extent  in  relation  to 
Covington, Xexington,  and  other  cities  of  the 
state,  but  I  am  unwilling  to  give  any  city  more 
than  one  senator. 

I  knoAV,  sir,  that  some  excitement  has  grown 
up  here,  and  I  luight  have  passed  over  some- 
things which  liave  been  said,  if  it  were  not  that 
a  remark  of  the  gentleman  from  Louisville, 
(Mr.  Preston,)  in  relation  to  myself,  was  repeat- 
ed by  the  gentleman  in  reply  to  an  inquiry  by 
the  gentleman  from  Simpson  (Mr.  Clarke.)  The 
remark  to  which  I  allude  was  to  the  effect  that 
the  gentleman  from  Madison  had  e.vhibit«d  the  •■ 
spirit  of  a  demagogue.  This,  sir,  is  language  ; 
whicli  I  regretted  to  hear,  and  I  hope  it  will  not ! 
be  repeated.  Although  we  may  eecasionally  i 
get  involved  in  excitement,  we  should  not  lose 
sight  of  a  proper  self-respect,  and  I  throw  it 
back  at  the  feet  of  the  gentleman.  If  I  am  just- 
ly chargeable  with  any  thing  more  particularly, 
it  is  with  being  to<i  conservative  to  suit  the 
times.  Instead  of  striking  too  low,  I  may  have 
struck  too  high  to  suit  the  sentiments  of  this 
honorable  body,  and  the  leveling  spirit  abroad 
in  the  country;  and  if  I  should  Ik)  charged  with 
being  too  conservative,  I  would  offer  no  vindica- 
tion of  myself  from  such  an  imputation.  My 
conservatism,  sir,  will  not  prove  injurioitsto  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky.  I  teai-,  ssr,  that 
Wo  are  doijig  and  aixj  about  to  do  niore  than  this 

f;reat  commonwealth  expects  us  to  do,  iu  pul- 
ing dowa  and  subverting  the  constitution  of 
1798. 

Tliere  was  another  remark  of  the  gentleman 
from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston.)  which  I  cannot 
pass  unnoticed.  It  was,  that  I  have  made  an  at- 
tack (iu  a  speech  delivered  some  weeks  ago)  on 
tlie  institution  of  slavery.  Sir,  that  was  an  ex- 
travagant statement.  The  gentleman's  position 
now,  I  do  consider  dangerous  to  that  insti- 
tution. I  shall  Hot  enter  upon  a  (Jefenee  of  my- 
self against  the  charge.  It  is  sufficient  for  me 
to  say,  that  my  constitucHts  are  satisfied.  I 
know  their  wishes  and  d€sir*s,  and  with  my 
conduct  tlKjy  have  expressed  no  dissatisfaction. 
But  I  take  this  occAsion— not  for  mj'  defeiice  (I 
need  none) — to  say  that  gentlemen  shall  not, 
without  a  refutation,  impute  to  me  sentiments 
Wliich  I  have  never  entt^rtained  or  uttered.  So 
far  as  regards  tJie  institution  of  slavery  as  it 
now  exists,  no  gewtlenjan  in  tliis  coavention 
will  go  further  than  I  will  according  to  the  lights 
I  possess.  Kut  I  aiu  against  the  importation  of 
more  slaves  into  the  state.  I  thi«k  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves  will  tend  to  render  the  property 
here  of  that  kind  more  insecure.  I  believe  to  per- 
mit the  importation  of  slaves  will  ultimately  cause 
the  destruction  of  that  institution  in  Kentucky. 


I  belrsve  that  capital  can  be  more  prolitably  ves- 
ted than  in  importing  slaves;  besides  it  is  a  traf- 
fic that  is  against  the  lights  and  feelings  of  the 
age  in  whicli  we  live. 

That  I  may  not  be  charged  with  having  utter- 
ed that  which  I  have  not  said,  permit  me  to  read 
a  few  extracts  from  my  speech,  delivered  on  the 
lOth  October,  to  which  gentlemen  have  so  often 
referred: 

"It  will  be  perceived  that  in  this  resolution, 
a  portion  of  the  old  constitution — the  clause 
which  gives  the  power  to  emancipate  by  mak- 
ing just  and  previous  provision  to  the  owners — 
is  oiiMtted.  I  am  opposed  to  taking  the  proper- 
ty of  an  individual,  Avhich  he  has  acquired  un- 
der the  sanction  of  the  law  and  the  constitution, 
at  all,  unless  with  liis  freewill  and  consent.  I 
do  not  believe  that  it  is  consistent  with  the 
principles  of  our  government  to  do  so.  The 
very  first  principle  of  the  government  of  the 
United  States,  and  of  the  state  of  Kentucky, 
and,  indeed,  one  of  the  grounds  assigned 
in  the  declaration  of  indepe2idence,  as  a 
cause  of  .separation  from  the  mother  country, 
was,  that  private  property  should  be  secured 
against  the  exactions  of  government." 

Again  sir:  "I  therefore  have  regaided  this 
principle  of  the  right  of  property,  as  asserted  iu 
tli<3  declaration  of  independence,  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  and  in  that  of  Ken- 
tucky, and  I  look  to  it  as  lying  at  the  very 
foundation  of  our  government,  and  as  a  moral 
priaciple  which  ought  not  to  be  violated  under 
any  circumstances,  or  in  any  way  or  shape." 

Again  sir:  "I  believe  that  the  slaves  in  Ken- 
tucky are  in  better  condition  now,  than  any 
in  which  you  could  place  them — that  they 
are  in  a  better  condition  than  the  laboring  popu- 
lation of  any  part  of  the  globe — an<l  I  do  not  be- 
lieve it  will  benefit  them  to  send  them  to  a  for- 
eign country,  or  to  sell  them  to  the  south  or  any 
where  else.  But  if  you  would  benefit  them,  the 
question  is,  whetlier  you  would  enslave  thewhite 
men  for  the  purpose — for  you  might  as  well  do 
so  as  to  impose  upon  them  a  tax  of  $4,200,000  a 
year,  in  addition  to  the  taxation  now  necessary  to 
carry  on  the  government  and  pay  the  interest  ou 
the  public  debt." 

Again  sir:  "I  wish  to  make  the  prohibition 
against  free  negroes  as  stringent  and  extended  in 
its  ©porationas  ispossible.  I  wish  inthismatter 
to  go  to  the  verge  of  our  power  under  the  federal 
constitution.  I  believe  that  if  there  is  a  curse 
alike  to  the  white  and  tlie  black  race,  it  is  in 
having  free  negroes  where  there  are  vicious 
white  men." 

Again  sir :  "It  is  the  working  portion  of  this 
commonwealth,  those  who  have  to  work  their 
way  up  from  small  beginnings  in  order  to  gain  a 
position  for  themselves  and  their  families,  it  is 
this  class  of  the  community  wJio  are  interested 
iu  retaining  the  institution  of  slavery  in  this 
state;  because  the  slaves  keep  outa  pauper  {j<)])u- 
lation;  the  emptying  of  tlie  jails  and  the  jxior 
houses  of  Europe,  the  renegades  from  all  parts  of 
the  earth,  who  coni«  here  and  compete  with  the 
whole  population  in  point  of  labor." 

And  again  sir:  "We  all  know  that  the  insti- 
tution of  slavery  is  the  best  in  the  world  for 
keeping  society  from  becoming  fixed  and  settled. 
Look  at  those  who  were  originally  overseers  in 


543 


Virginia  and  Kentuckv,  at  their  first  settlement,  i  will  see  tiat  slaves  axe  an  obstacle  to  his  getting 
They  have  many  of  them  become  the  proprietors  j  employment,  and  he  -will  turn  against  the  insti- 
of  the  very  estates  upon  -which  they  were  at  first  j  tution.  Sir,  this  is  no  new  doctrine  with  me. 
eraployed'as  overseers.  And  their  descendants  I  have  long  thought  it  would  be  better  not  to 
now  fill  the  halls  of  legislation  and  the  courts  1  bring  in  any  more  slaves.  It  was  the  policy  of 
of  judicature  of  the  country,  whilst  the  descen-  Kentucky  seventeen  or  eighteen  years  ago.  It 
dauts  of  the  original  proprietors  have  descended  was  certainly  overturned  last  winter,  but  it  was 
to  a  different  level  in  the  scale  of  society,  done  without  being  demanded  by  the  people,  or 
Such  revolutions  in  the  condition  of  individu-  I  previously  discussed  in  the  canvass,  or  in  the 
als  do  not  take  place  half  so  often,  where  the  i  public  press,  and  without  being  asked  for  or  de- 
institution  of  slaverj'  does  not  exist,  where  it  is  |  sired  by  a  majority.  In  many  instances  num- 
not  recognized.  Go' to  Kew  York  and  to  Massa-  I  bers  voted  for  the  modification  of  the  law  of 
chusetts,  cvnd  you  will  find  many  estates  that  1 18.33,  against  the  wishes  of  their  constituents, 
have  descended  in  the  same  families  while  the  |  Why,  sir,  in  1830,  the  Hon.  James  Love,  who  af- 
poor  laborer  is  the  poor  laborer  still.  It  is  true,  j  terwards  represented  the  district  in  which  I  re- 
there  are  exceptions,  but  not  the  same  number  of  side  in  congress,  introduced  a  bill  into  the  state 
exceptions  as  under  our  institutions.  So  you  |  legislature,  providing  that  every  slave  thereaf- 
will  see,  though  I  am  against  extending  this  in-  I  ter  brought  into  Kentucky  by  purchase,  should 
stitutiou  or  increasing  it,  it  has  a  wholesome  !  be  free  as  soon  as  he  came  in;  and  you,  Mr. 
effect  in  some  respects,  while  it  has  in  other  re-  |  President,  and  I,  sir,  voted  for  it. 
spects  a  highly  injurious  effect.  I  believe  that  j  The  PRESIDEST.  The  gentleman  is  mis- 
they,  who  are  "raise<l  up  where  the  institution  ;  taken.  I  never  gav«  such  a  vote  with  such  an 
of  slavery  exists,  with  some  exceptions,  have  j  avowal.  4 

been  uniformly  distinguished.  "Who  has  ever  !  Mr.  TURXER.  Sir,  I  know  nothing  about 
seen  such  a  constellation  of  great  men  as  the  I  the  avewal.  But  I  will  turn  to  the  journal  of 
southern  states  have  produced,  since  we  have  i  that  session,  pages  236-7,  and  see  who  is  right, 
achieved  our  liberties?  Look  at  the  great  men  !  Here  is  the  bill  and  the  vote  ou  it,  with  your 
of  Virginia,  South  Carolina,  and  of  Kentuckv,  vote  side  by  side  with  mine, 
and  where  are  the  men  who  are  worthy  to  be  <'A  bill  more  effectuallv  to  prevent  the  importa- 
compared  with  them,  in  the  free  states  of  the  ^ion  of  slaves  into  ttis  state,  as  merchandise, 
north.  We  have  had,  it  is  true,  an  Adams  or  was  read,  as  amended,  as  follows,  viz: 
two,  a  Webster  and  a  Wright,  but  they  are  few  -Sec.  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly 
and  far  between.  But  you  will  find  them  in  the  |  gf  the  Cantmonttealth  of  Kentucky.  That  none 
great  south.  And  sir,  there  is  a  nobleness  of  ,  JhaH  \^  slaves,  except  such  as  shall  be  slaves 
spirit,  a  feeling  above  littleness,  a  greatness  of  1  within  this  commonwealth,  ou  tlie  firet  dav  of 
soul  that  grows  up  where  the  institution  of  j  June  aext,  and  tlie  descendants  of  the  females 
slavery  exists,  thaJt  is  scarcely  to  be  found  m  of  tjiem  and  such  slaves  as  shall  thereafter  be 
any  other  country."  j  lawfully  imported  into  this  commonwealth,  and 

ilr.  President,  in  these  extracts  is  there  any-  i  the  descendants  of  the  females  of  them, 
thing  found   inconsistent  with  what  I   said  on  I     "Sec.  2.  Be  it  further  enacted.  That  from  and 
la-st  ^turday?    Is  not  every  word  of  these  ex-    after  the  said  first  day  of  June,  it  shall    not  be 
tracts  consistent  with  the  resolution  which  I  !  lawful  for  any  person  or  persons,  to  import  into 


have  offered  this  morning?  What  ground  then 
is  there  for  the  imputations  which  have  been 
made  against  me?  Sir,  either  I  do  not  under- 
stand what  is  requisite  to  secure  the  institution 
of  slavery,  or  the  gentleman  does  not  uuder- 
etand  it.     If  slavery  is  to  be  sustained,  there 


this  commonwealth,  any  slave  or  slaves,  ex- 
cept emigrants  to  the  state,  bringing  their  slaves 
with  them,  for  tieir  own  use,  and  not  for  mer- 
chandise, and  citizens  of  this  state,  claiming 
slaves  in  another  state,  by  devise,  descent,  or 
marriage;  in  all  which  cases,  it  shall  be  lawful 


must  be  no  more  slaves  brought  into  Kentucky,  !  for  any  such  persons,  to  import  such  slaves  for 
nor  many  more  of  the  rene^ide  description  of  i  their  own  use,  and  not  as  merchandise 


foreigners  or  yankees.  I  do  not  desire  to  ex 
elude  those  from  settling  among  us  who  are  up- 
right, honest,  industrious,  care  taking-citizen-s. 
How,  sir,  did  we  procure  tlie  suffrages  of  the 
non-slaveholders,  la-st  summer.  By  convincing 
them  that  if  the  further  importation  of  slaves 
was  stopped,  and  the  migration  of  foreign  pau- 
pers was  checked,  the  reward  of  labor  of  those 
who  are  dependent  on  their  own  industry,  would 
be  increased;  and  that  if  we  inundated  Ken- 
tucky with  more  slaves  and  the  renegades  from 
Europe,  the  price  of  labor  would  be  reduced, 
and  the  native  population  would  consequently 
be  injured.  The  foreigners  to  whom  I  allude, 
when  thev  come  here,  can  live  cheaper  and  work 
for  less  ttau  the  native  Kentuckian  can;  and  if 
their  introduction  be  continued,  and  more  slaves 
are  brought  in,  the  native  laboring  white  men 
will  have  no  chance  to  get  along  and  improve 
their  condition.  The  consequence  will  be,  as 
the  price  of  labor  falls,  the  laboring  white  man 


"Sec.  3.  All  laws  now  in  force  prohibiting  the 
importation  of  slaves  into  this  commonwealth, 
shall  be,  and  tlie  same  are  herebv  repealed,  from 
and  after  the  said  first  day  of  June:  Frovided, 
That,  the  provisions  of  this  bill  shall  not  ap- 
ply to  persons  transiently  passing  through  the 
commonwealth,  with  slaves,  on  their  way  to  any 
other  state  or  country:  Provided,  That  nothing 
in  this  act  shall  be  construed  as  to  prevent  per- 
sons emigrating  to  this  state,  and  settleing  per- 
manently in  it,  from  selling  their  slaves. 

"The  question  weis  then  taken  on  engrossing- 
the  said  bill,  for  a  third  reading,  which  was  de 
cided  in  the  negative,  and  so  the  said  bill  was 
rejected. 

"The  yeas  and  nays  being  required  thereon,  by 
Messrs.   Love  and  Chambers,  were  as  follows: 

"Yeas — Mr.  Speaker,  Messrs.  C.  Allan,  B.  Al- 
len, Barrett,  Brown,  Butler,  Bums,  Cassidy, 
Colglazer,  Crutchfield,  Curd,  Fields,  Fowler, 
Gaines,  Grundy,    Guthrie,   Hayes,  Henderson, 


544 


Hobbs,  Hunton,  Jackson,  A.  Johnson,  E.  L. 
Johnson,  Love,  McAffoe.  J.  T.  jVIorehead,  Mur- 
ray, Patrick,  Phelps,  Kodes,  Rudd,  Russell, 
Sliauks,  Smith,  Spoedsinith,  Strothcr,  Thomas, 
Tomliuson,  Tompkins,  Turner,  A.  S.  "White,  D. 
White,  Worthain  and  Yantis — 44. 

"Is^AYs — Messrs.  Anderson,  Baker.  Barlow, 
Beall,  Calhoon,  Chambers,  Cliiles,  Churehill, 
Colyer,  Copelin,  Dawson,  Diekson,  Dyer, 
Ewing,  Gass,  Girton,  Gri<j»by,  Hall,  Hardy,  Har- 
ris, Haynes,  Heady,  Helm,  Hiekman,  James, 
Lackey,  Lewis,  Mcrfary,  J.  K.  Mars-hall,  Mizc, 
P.  Morehead,  New,  Norvell,  Patterson,  Pierce, 
Preston,  Ray,  Robb,  Roberts,  Sisk,  Sprigg, 
Stewart,  Stutts,  Stout,  True,  Vallandignlium, 
■Ward,Whittington,G.W.  Williams,  S.  Williams, 
W.  J.  Williams  and  Wilson — 52." 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Will  the  gentleman  excuse 
me;  I  think  it  better,  for  obvious  reasons,  that 
•we  should  go  into  committee  of  the  whole  on 
tlie  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legislative 
department,  where  this  discussion  may  be  con- 
tinued. I» 

Mr.  TURNER.  If  it  will  be  the  understand- 
ing that  when  we  are  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
I  shall  have  the  floor  to  continue  my  speech  I 
have  no  objection.     [Agreed,  agreed.] 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  beo;  to  suggest  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Daviess,  tliat  a  difficulty  presents  it- 
self. The  convention  has  now  before  it  for  its 
action  a  resolution  and  an  amendment  thereto, 
which  will  not  be  before  the  committee  of  the 
whole.  I  submit  therefore  whether  it  will  not 
be  necessary  to  dispose  of  this  resolution  in  con- 
vention 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  To  obviate  that  objection 
I  will  move  that  the  pending  resolution  and 
amendment  be  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole  having  charge  of  the  n-port  from  the 
committee  on  the  legislative  department,  and 
that  the  convention  now  resolve  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  thereon. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  convention 
resolved  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole,  ac- 
cordingly, Mr.  MERIWETHER  in  the  chair. 

Mr.  TIJRNER.  I  simply  refer  to  the  facts, 
and  so  far  as  respecte  the  vote  of  the  represen- 
tatives from  Jefferson  and  Louisville,  I  think,  I 
cannot  be  mistaken.  And  if  tliere  has  been  any 
difference  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  the  honorable 
President  or  the  Chairman,  (Mr.  Meriwether)  and 
myself,  till  the  present  time,  I  did  not  know  it.  I 
bring  this  matter  forward  simply  to  sJiow  that 
gentlemen  who  have  gone  the  same  way  witli 
me,  in  relation  to  slavery  for  nineteen  years, 
now  come  here  and  throw  it  in  my  face,  that  I 
occupy  a  portion  of  the  ground  wliich  the  eman- 
cipationists do,  as  thelionorable  President,  and 
you  Mr.  Chairman,  did  some  weeks  since.  When 
1  take  ground  I  will  tnaintain  it,  and  I  am  not 
to  be  scared  by  an  old  shirt  hung  up  in  a  jBeld 
as  if  I  were  a  crow.  In  my  canvass  for  a  seat  in 
the  house  of  representatives  the  year  that  tliis 
vote  was  taken,  I  went  to  a  meeting  at  a  Baptist 
church,  and  was  there  on  Saturday,  l^iere 
came  up  a  question  at  that  meeting,  whether 
they  should  nave  what  they  called  a  decorum  or 
constitution  of  the  church.  Some  were  for  ta- 
king the  bible  as  a  whole  for  their  sole  guide, 
and  others  wanted  the  decorum  or  constitution, 
to  Aid  in  matters  of  church  discipline.    A  large 


majority  were  in  favor  of  the  decorum  or  con- 
stitution, but  before  a  final  vote  was  taken  an 
old  man  who  was  a  member  went  out  from  the 
meeting,  and  returned  soon  with  a  very  Avise 
look,  and  said  he  to  the  congregation,  '•  I  have 
just  the  information  that  will  surprise  and  as- 
tound you.  I  have  ascertained  that  the  very 
decorum  we  are  about  adopting,  was  written  by 
a  pope  of  Rome  three  hundred  years  ago."  Tlie 
consequence  of  this  information  was  that  the 
decorum  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  four  out  of 
five,  because  the  Pope  of  Rome  had  written  it 
originally,  not  because  one  word  of  it  was 
wrong  in  principle. 

Now,  because  the  emancipationists  take  the 
ground  that  you  and  I,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  the 
honorable  president,  have  occupied  for  twenty 
years,  must  we  run  and  leave  it,  and  cry  popery, 
popery — as  our  only  reason  for  so  doing? — 
The  emancipationists  in  my  part  of  the  state 
are  generally  in  favor  of  electing  all  the  offi- 
cers of  government.  Should  we  run  from  that 
ground  because  they  believe  it  right?  I  have 
assumed  it;  if  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  the  hon- 
orable president  are  made  of  such  materials,  I 
am  not,  and  my  constituents  are  not. 

There  are  some  little  matters  of  which  I  wish 
to  speak,  before  I  go  on  with  the  main  debate. 
There  were  a  few  things  said  the  other  day  by 
the  honorable  president  of  this  convention, 
which  I  now  wi.sh  to  pay  so27ie  attention  to.  In 
speaking  of  my  position,  he  uses  this  language. 
My  attention  was  called  off  at  the  tinie,  and  if 
I  had  not  been  afterwards  informed  of  what  had 
been  saicl,  I  should  not  probably  have  read  the 
speech.  But  there  is  this  sentiment,  and  if 
there  is  one  heart  in  this  liouse,  or  in  this  great 
commonwealth,  that  responds  to  it,  besides  the 
honorable  president's,  I  am  deceived.  Replying 
to  wliat  I  had  said  in  debate,  the  president  said: 
"Thank  God,  emancipation  has  not  drenched 
the  fields  of  Louisville  with  blood." 

I  understand  that  the  honorable  president 
when  he  uttered  that  sentiment,  thrust  out  his 
huge  head  at  me,  as  if  he  wanted  to  send  in- 
creased pangs  to  my  heart.  I  have  nothing 
more  to  say  about  that.  If  it  was  intende<l  for 
me  I  envy  not  the  heart  that  conceived,  or  the 
tojiguc  that  uttered  it.  It  is  true  sir,  it  is  true 
that  jnisfortune  happened  in  my  county  in  the 
•ciuivass  and  blood  Avasshed — yes,  Vjlood  dear  to 
me — and  it  is  likewise  true  tliat  if  you  go  to  the 
great  and  glorious  battle  field  of  Buena  Vista, you 
will  find  there  w;i.s  kindred  blood  poured  out 
there,  and  in  both  instances  to  sustain  and 
maintain  the  institutions  of  my  country,  and 
there  is  more  of  it  still  that  will  be  offered  up 
when  there  is  a  requisition  for  it  in  such  a  cause. 

Here  is  another  sentiment  which  I  will  read. 
The  honorable  president  in  the  same  speech  said 
in  speaking  of  the  proposed  restriction  on  city 
representation:  "I  have  no  more  confidence  in 
those  men  that  have  made  up  their  minds  to 
invade  tJhe  rights  of  their  fellow  citizens,  and 
stifle  the  voice  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  than 
I  have  in  tlie  voice  of  the  Autocrat  of  Russia, 
wlio  thinks  juid  acts  for  tlie  whole." 

Now  this  is  quite  courteous — is  it  not?  It  is 
true  that  it  is  rather  stronger  than  I  allow  my 
overseer  to  use  towards  my  slaves,  unless  the 
offfia-e  is  great    I  came  not  here  to  stifle  the 


545 


voice  of  any  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  I 
deny  that  that  remark  will  embrace  me.  But 
this"  was  manifestly  uttered  here  for  some  pur- 
pose or  other.  Was  it  to  deter  us  from  free  de- 
bate and  free  action?  I  dislike  to  think  that 
after  being  honored  with  a  high  seat  in 
this  convention,  he  would  make  such  a  dec- 
laration for  that  purpose.  But  the  honora- 
ble president  did  not  stop  at  this  remark. 
He  said  we  would  go  as  far  as  the  Auto- 
crat of  Russia,  and  would  go  further  if  the 
temptation  were  sufficient.  We  must  be  a 
wretched  set  of  scamps  if  this  be  true — and  it 
goes  very  far  to  show  that  those  wlio  sent  us 
here  are  not  very  highly  qualified  for  self-gov- 
ernment. The  president  further  declared:  "I 
can  sign  no  constitution  which  denies  to  my 
constituents  those  equal  and  political  rights 
that  other  freemen  have." 

I  do  not  think  we  shall  put  on  them  anv  re- 
strictions which  other  freemen  have  not.  This 
was  spoken  with  reference  to  a  future  state  of 
things.  I  regret  he  should  say  this.  It  might 
make  an  impression  on  the  people,  that  if  he  did 
not  sign  the  new  constitution,  they  could  not 
have  the  benefit  of  it.  This  would  be  terrible — 
awful  I  It  is  painful  to  separate  from  the  gen- 
tleman on  ordinary  occasions,  but  when  he  talks 
about  not  signing  the  constitution,  as  Jack 
Downing  would  say,  "it  is  almost  too  painful 
for  human  natur  to  bear."  If  he  does  not  sign 
the  constitution,  the  residue  of  the  convention 
can,  and  if  a  majority  of  the  people  agree  upon 
it,  it  will  be  valid  without  Lis  name.  But  he 
has,  to  add  to  his  cruelty,  avowed  that  he  will 
go  before  his  constituents  and  oppose  its  adop- 
tion. Merciful  Heavens  !  save  us,  and  the  fruits 
of  our  labor,  from  such  overpowering  opposi- 
tion. 

I  will  say  a  word  or  two  about  the  general  ap- 
portionment bill,  as  I  understand  we  are  to  take 
a  vote  on  it  in  one  or  two  days.  I  have  made 
out  a  list  of  twenty-six  counties,  which  contain 
a  voting  population  of  twelve  thousand  three 
hundred  and  ten  over  and  above  the  number  of 
)nembers  they  will  be  entitled  to,  under  the  re- 
port of  the  committee.  These  counties  run 
through  the  heart  of  the  state.  In  many  cases, 
-tiie  residuums  of  these  counties  are  taken  off  and 
applied  at  a  distance  of  one  hundred  or  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  miles,  to  counties  with  pursuits 
differing  from  those  whence  they  are  taken.  I 
think  the  old  constitution,  in  this  respect,  is  the 
best.  It  gives  the  residuums  to  the  adjacent 
counties.  There  is  a  great  difference  of  interests 
in  the  agricultural  portions  of  the  state.  Some 
of  the  residuums  from  a  corn  growing  or  gra- 
zing county  are  taken  to  a  tobacco  raising  coun- 
ty. The  counties  in  the  south  are  mainly  inter- 
ested in  raising  pork  and  in  distilling,  or  in 
growing  tobacco,  while  those  of  the  blue  grass 
region  raise  stock — horses,  mules,  and  cattle. 
Now,  whenever  a  residuum  is  taken  from  any 
county,  it  should  be  taken  to  one  having  the 
same  general  interests.  The  old  constitution  at- 
tempts to  guaranty  this  common  identity  of  in- 
terests and  sympathies.  I  know  that  in  prac- 
tice, there  has  been  some  injustice  committed 
under  its  provisions;  but  so  far  as  we  can  put  a 
check  on  this  we  ought  to  do  it.  I  do  not  want 
it  in  the  power  of  any  political  party  to  pro- 
69 


scribe  another;  but  it  is  in  the  power  of  one  or 
two  great  interests  to  proscribe  a  third  interest, 
under  the  report  of  the  committee. 

Xow,  so  far  as  respects  the  senatorial  represen- 
tation, you  will  see  by  the  resolutions,  which 
are  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,   that 
they  assume  the  position  that  every  senatorial 
district  shall    have  a  representation  according 
to  the    present    number   of    its    population. — 
Those  resolutions  are  offered  in  a  spirit  of  con- 
cession  and  compromise.     You  will   see  they 
accord  to  every  county  in  the  state  a  full  repre- 
sentation in  the  house  of  representatives  accord- 
ing to  numbers,  now  and  hereafter.     The  sena- 
torial restriction  on  the  future  power  in  relation 
to  cities,  is  to  apply  also  to  the   counties — for 
there  are  some  counties  that  grow  up  very  fast, 
particularly  those  in  which  there  are  railroads, 
or  in  which  iron  ore  is  found,  as,  for  instance,  in 
the  county  of  Estill,   where  there  is  iron  ore 
enough  to'last  the  United  States  for  a  thousand 
years.     The  mountains   where  this  mineral   is 
found  in  superabundance,  are  two  or  three  hun- 
dred feet  in  height,  and  twenty  miles  in  length. 
There  is  a  large  coal   region  near  them.     It  is 
j  probable  that  the  iron  and  coal  interests  in  that 
1  county,  and  the  adjacent  counties,   will  be  the 
,  means  of  introducing  a  large  population.     My 
I  proposition,  it  will  be  observed  is,  that  no  coun- 
I  tv  or  city  shall  have  more  than  one  senator  each. 
j  'there  are  other  counties,  besides  the  one  I  have 
I  named,  where  the  population  would  rapidly  in- 
'  crease.  N'ew  Englanaisnowlooking  to  the  water 
:  power  of  Kentucky.     It  is  exciting  the  attention 
i  of  the  capitalists  of  Lowell  and  Boston.  This  wa- 
j  ter  power  isfound  notonlyou  the  margin  of  Ohio, 
j  the  Kentucky  and  Green  rivers,  but  in  other  por- 
;  tions  of  the  state.     There  will   be  individuals 
brought  there  to  work  as  operators  in  the  vari- 
ous   branches   of    manufactures — iron,    cotton, 
wool,   <fcc.     We  are  making  a  constitution  for 
posterity,  and  not  for  ourselves  alone.     We  are 
charged  with  a  desire  to  proscribe  some  portion 
of  the  citizens  of  Kentucky.     We  have  no  such 
object  in  view.    All  we  ask  is,  that  the  great 
law  of   nature,  self-preservation,  shall  be  ob- 
served, and  that  our  institutions  shall   be  pre- 
served in  the  constitution  which  we  shall  make. 
Are  we  making  a  constitution  for  the  outpourings 
of  the  jails,  penitentiaries,  and  alms  houses  of 
Europe,  and  of  our  large  cities  in  other  states, 
or  is  the  instrument  for  the  great  body  of  the 
yeomanry  of  Kentucky?      It  has   been  argued 
here  as  if  we  were  going  to  proscribe  a  part  of 
our  own  people.     I  deny  it,  but  I  say  it  is  our 
duty  to  protect  those  who   are  here,  and  their 
posterity,  in  their  lives,  liberty,  and  property, 
and  to  see  that  our  institutions  are  kept  sacred 
from  the   contaminating  touch  of  the  tens  of 
thousands  of  foreign  paupers   and  immoral  im- 
migrants who  are  daily  landing  on  our  shores, 
and  migrating  to  Kentucky  from  the  large  cities 
I  in  other  states. 

I  intend  to  allude  to  one  or  two  of  the  argu- 
ments of  the  younger  gentleman  from  Ifelson, 
who,  in  the  early  part  of  the  session,  in  remark- 
ing upon  a  speech  I  had  made,  said,  if  I  under- 
stood him  aright,  that  my  arguments  were  made 
to  suit  the  other  side  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line. 
That,  however,  is  a  matter  of  opinion.  Now,  I 
thought  when  he  made  his  speech  a4&y  pr  two 


646 


ago,  that  he  went  further  beyond  this  line,  than 
I  had  ever  done.  How  far  did  the  gentleman  go'l 
Why,  he  went  all  the  way  to  Europe,  and  like 
Macbeth,  collected  around  him,  and  seemed 
about  to  introduce  into  Kentucky  all  sorts  of 
people  or  spirits — black,  and  white,  and  red — 

green,  spotted  and  striped,  grey  and  grisly,  and 
lue.  But  when  he  marched  on  his  motly  crew 
to  the  confines  of  the  state,  apprehending  that 
we  would  not  receive  them,  lie  went  back  and 
brought  in  Kossutli  and  his  band  of  proscribed 
patriots  to  march  at  their  head,  and  in  their 
high  names  to  render  his  renegades  welcome  to 
Kentucky.  I  would  divorce  that  illustrious 
patriot  and  his  companions  from  such  a  crew,  as 
that  he  was  bringing  to  Kentucky.  Those  brave 
Hungarians  who  Jiave  fallen  on  the  field,  fell  in 
behalf  of  the  last  rights  of  man;  as  noble  pat- 
riots, they  have  poured  out  their  blood  for  the 
liberties  of  their  country.  If  Kossuth  and  his 
com-patriots  were  to  come  to  Kentucky,  I  would 
open  my  heart,  and  say,  "  welcome."  As  God 
Almighty  is  my  judge,  I  would,  if  they  come  to 
Kentucky,  and  I  will  divide  with  them  the  last 
dime,  and  the  last  cruinb  of  bread  I  have.  I 
"Will  treat  them  as  brethren.  But  I  do  protest 
against  these  gallant  people  being  classed  with 
and  spoken  of,  in  connection  with  the  rogues 
and  cut-throats  of  other  countries,  and  against 
their  migrating  to  Kentucky  in  any  such  compa- 
ny. I  protest  against  it  in  the  name  of  high 
heaven,  and  the  character  and  great  interests  of 
the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky.  Sir,  ten  years 
ago  I  had  a  seat  in  the  house  of  representatives, 
and  at  that  time  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  was 
the  governor  of  tills  state.  He  had  his  excellent 
lady  and  his  charming  family  residing  here,  and 
he  and  they  went  hand  in  hand  with  me  against 
the  importation  of  more  slaves  into  this  com- 
monwealth. His  lovely  daughters  came  to  the 
house  day  after  day,  and  cheered  us  on,  and 
finally,  from  being  in  a  minority,  we  got  a  ma- 
jority of  five,  and  prevented  the  repeal  of  the 
law  of  1833.  I  should  have  thought,  looking  to 
the  fact  of  our  having  pursued  the  same  course 
together,  that  he  would  not  have  talked  of  my 
arguments  being  made  to  suit  the  other  side  of 
Ma-son  and  Dixon's  line. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  regret  very  much 
that  the  gentleman  has  thought  proper  to  intro- 
duce the  name  of  my  family. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  did  it  in  all  kindness,  sir. 
Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  no  doubt  of 
that.  My  remark  with  reference  to  tlie  subject 
of  the  gentleman's  speech,  was  made  respecting 
that  portion  of  it  in  which  he  alluded  to  the 
treatment  of  slaves  in  the  slave  states,  and  gave 
such  a  gra])hic  description  of  it  as  I  have  often 
Been  in  the  newspapers  of  the  day.  It  was  not 
•with  reference  to  the  principles  of  the  law  of  '33. 
That  law,  as  now  raodifiea,  meets  my  approba- 
tion, as  I  understand  it.  When  a  member  of 
the  legislature  I  believe  I  Voted  against  its  re- 
peal. It  was  not  that  he  advocated  the  princi- 
ple of  tlie  law  of  1833,  but  it  was  that  graphic 
ilescription in  wliich he  portrayed  to  ouriniagina- 
tions,  and  in  which  he  called  on  us  t )  know  how 
■we -Would  like  to  see  our  wives  and  daughters 
chained  and  dragged  from  our  bosoms  and  our 
firesides 


gument,  because  1  thought  it  necessary  to  reach 
a  man's  feelings,  as  well  as  his  judgment — not 
that  slaves  are  chained  in  Kentucky,  or  treated 
amiss  in  thesouth — a  sentiment  I  never  uttered— 
but  I  objected  to  their  being  chained  and  brought 
here.  1  supposed  it  was  not  a  sight  desirable  to 
anv.  If  it  is  to  the  gentleman  he  can  say  so,  I 
will  give  Way.  As  the  gentleman  is  silent,  I 
take  it  we  agree.  I  do  not  believe  there  is  a 
country  where  slaves  are  as  well  treated  as  in 
Kentucky.  I  think  they  are  in  a  better  condi- 
tion in  Kentucky  than  the  poorer  laboring  class 
of  any  state  of  the  Union.  When  remarks  are 
thrown  outabout  my  position,  I  will  try  to  throw 
them  back,  perhaps  not  as  gently  as  the  gentle- 
man from  Mason  Hays  the  lover  strikes  his  mis- 
tress with  a  boquet. 

I  think  we  ought  to  make  a  constitution  for 
the  people  of  Kentucky;  for  those  who  are  here 
now  ana  their  desceudents,  to  protect  them  in 
their  rights.  If  we  had  been  aske<l  last  sum- 
mer, will  you  make  a  constitution  to  sustain  the 
people  of  Kentucky  against  the  great  and  over- 
whelming tide  of  pauper  emmigration,  or  for 
those  paupers,  what  would  we  have  said?  We 
would  have  said  we  will  make  a  constitution  for 
you — we  will  look  to  you  first,  and  if  we  can 
give  these  other  people  as  much  political  rights 
with  safety  as  you  have,  we  will  do  it.  If  we 
cannot,  we  will  not  do  it. 

Did  you  ever  look  into  this  matter  of  an  organ- 
ized city  with  its  government?  It  is  a  govern- 
ment within  a  government.  Is  there  not  some- 
thing that  requires  that  such  a  population  as  fill 
up  cities,  sliould  not  have  as  much  political 
legislative  power  as  those  who  live  in  the  coun- 
try? We  have  nothing  of  a  mayor  or  other  oifi- 
cers  of  that  sort;  we  have  no  city  courts,  no 
government  within  a  government.  Under  the 
old  constitution,  you  granted  out  the  whole  legis- 
lativepower  of  the  government  to  the  cities  over 
their  citizens,  and  then  the  cities  make  laws  for 
themselves,  if  not  inconsistent  with  the  consti- 
tution or  statutes  of  the  state  government.  The 
city  has  its  mayor,  aldermen,  marshals,  &c., 
and  after  having  ninety-nine  hundredths  of  the 
power  which  the  legislature  possesses,  they  have 
equal  power  in  the  legislature  itself.  Is  this 
right?  Suppose  the  gentleman  from  Fleming 
comes  and  asks  that  a  little  portion  of  his  coun- 
ty shall  have  power  to  enact  laws  for  itself,  and 
after  this  is  granted,  should  ask  for  equal  pow- 
er in  the  legislative  jrovernnient  with  the  residue 
of  the  state.  Would  it  be  right  and  proper  she 
should  have  it?  Are  they  to  be  made  so  great,  and 
then  come  back  and  have  equal  power  in  gene- 
ral legislation  with  all  the  agricultural  portion 
of  the  state?  We  first  give  them  power  to  legis- 
late for  themselves,  and  then  they  ask  for  full 
power  to  come  and  legislate  for  us.  I  think  this 
IS  not  right.    It  is  asking  too  much. 

It  has  been  objected  that  we  brought  in  here 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  of 
other  states,  and  we  were  then  asked  if  we 
would  adopt  their  provisions  in  our  constitu- 
tion. We  brought  these  in,  to  sliow  that  num- 
bers was  not  practically  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion in  the  federal  or  state  governments.  Look 
at  the  District  of  Columbia.  She  lias  no  represen- 
tation in  congress.    I  suppose  those  who  framed 


Mr.  TURNER.,   Jji  1831   I  ugcd  the  same  ar- 1  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  understood 


547 


vhe  riglits  of  man  as  wdl  an  we  do.  Whj  is  il 
that  the  great  states  ol"  Maryland,  Georgia,  and  1 
Louisiana  have  said  their  cities  shall  not  have  j 
more  than  half  the  legislative  power  to  which  I 
their  numbers  would  entitle  them.  It  is  because  : 
tJiey  have  delegated  to  them  a  large  portion  of 
the  legislative  power  of  the  rouniry  for  their 
benefit,  and  they  ought  not  to  govern  other  peo-  | 
pie.  But  we  accord  to  them  full  representation  1 
in  the  house,  and  one  senator  to  every  county  • 
and  city  to  prot-sct  their  local  rights.  j 

Instead   of    our  wi-jhiiig  to  proscribe  cities, 
they  wish  to  proscribe  us.     They  first  ask  us  to 
give  them  full  power,  without   our  having  any 
partnership  in  their  local  governments,  and  then  \ 
they  come  back  and  kindly  ask  us,  as  you  have  I 
given  us  this,  why  not  in  your  great  generosity  ' 
let  us  gov^-m  you  also?  j 

I  have  the  same  opinion  in  regard  to  this   that 
my  friend  Mr.  Mize  from  Estill  had  on  a  differ-  : 
ent  occasion.     When  he  and  I  were  members  of 
the  legislature,  he  was  a  democrat  and  I  a  whig;  ' 
he  professed  a  great  regard  for  me,  and  said,  a^ 
he  called  on  me  almost  every  morning,!  like  you 
better  than  any  man  I  ever  saw.    I  said  to  liiro, 
there  is  a  United  States  senator  to  be  made  now,  , 
and  your  vote  will  elect  me.     Said  he.j" Turner  ! 
that  is  carrying  the  joke  a  little  too  far."    It  is 
carrying  my  love  for  the  cities  a  little  too  far  to  ] 
ask  me  to  give  them  power  to  govern  themselves 
and  then  have  a  general  partnership  power  to 
govern  me  besides. 

TSTiat  are  we  to  ask  ourselves  when  we  go  back 
to  our  constituents,  or  what  will  our  constituents 
ask  us?     They  will  ask,  did  you  make  a  consti- 
tution for  us,   or  for  the   paupers   of  Europe. 
"Will  you  say  you  thought  numbers  was  the  ba- 
.Ms  of  representation?      Again,   they  will  ask 
what  numbers,  Kentuckians,  or  Germans,  or  the 
renegades  from  New  York  or  Boston?    I  thought 
the  states  of  Xew  York  and  Massachusetts  made  , 
laws  for  their  people,   and  the  countries  of  Eu-  '■■ 
rope  for  theirs.     Why  we   are  carrying  this  fur-  : 
ther  than  they  did  in  France  in  1792,  when  they 
proclaimed  universal  liberty,  equality,  and  fra-  ; 
temity  to  all  the  world.     It  is  saying  come  one 
come  all  you  outcasts  of  Europe  and  of  the  great : 
cities,  and  as  you  are  so   much  better  skilled  in  , 
government  than  we  are,  we  will  give  up  the  • 
government  of  Kentucky  to  you,  and  let  you  con- 1 
trol.  '  ' 

Why,  we  see  what  has  been  done  in  Ohio.     I 
am  not  for  making  a  constitution  for  whigs  or  ' 
democrats.    Here   is  a  foreign  interest   in   the ', 
.8tat« — Wilmot  proviso  politicians,  free  soilers —  \ 
and  they  elect  a  few  representatives  to  your  legis- 1 
lature.     The  two  great  political  parties  of  the 
state  are  pretty  equally  divided,  and  these  few  , 
individuals  who  Wong  to  neither  one  nor  the 
other  party,  can,  if  thev  choose,  give  one  of  them  , 
the  ascendancv.    Wefl,    this   free    soil    power ; 
throws  itself  between  the  two   great  political  ; 
parties  of  the  commonwealth,  and  offers  a  carte  ; 
blanche  to  be  filled  up  by  the  one  who  will  give 
them   the  most   in  power  or  station.     Now,   I 
will  ask,  if  we  came  here  to  make  a  constitution 
to  have  such  a  state  of  things?    Did  we  come  i 
here  to  sell  our  rights?.     Xo.    In  the  resolutions 
which  I  have  offered,  I  said  nothing  about  Louis- ; 
ville,  Covington,  Lexington,  or  any  particular  I 
city  or  county.    It  is  to  carry  oat 'the  general' 


principle  of  protecting  the  rightE,  iiiterests,  and 
institutions  of  Kentucky,  that  freemen  of  this 
commonwealth  are  to  hold  the  power  of  govern- 
ing. We  are  not  Avilling  to  invite  men  here  to 
destroy  our  institutions  and  drive  us  out  of  the 
country.  Can  any  man  doubt  that  if  these  for- 
eigners are  invited  to  our  country  without  stint 
thev  will  take  possession  of  your  shores  first 
ani  afterwards  find  their  way  into  the  heart  of 
the  country,  and  finally  they  will,  if  not  re- 
stricted, have  the  balance  of  power  in  the  state, 
and  the  institution  of  slavery  will  be  abolished? 
These  men  will  be  opposed  to  it  because  they 
do  not  understand  it.  And  yet  they  have  lived 
in  slavery  and  starvation  under  a  government 
of  their  own  in  Europe.  Our  negroes  are  a  fine, 
hearty  set  of  fellows.  It  would  do  your  heart 
good  to  see  tliem  on  a  Sunday,  neatly  clad,  re- 
turning from  church,  talking  and  laughing  with 
their  wives  and  children,  and  all  appearing  as 
happy  as  possible.  2s' ow,  I  wish  to  Keep  them 
in  that  happy  condition,  and  I  do  not  want 
those  ignorant  and  degraded  foreigners  to  come 
in  amongst  us  and  disturb  our  peace  and  quiet, 
and  drive  the  poor  negroes  out  of  the  state.  I 
have  sympathy  for  those  poor  creatures,  many 
of  whom  nave  nursed  us  when  we  were  young, 
and  our  children  since.  I  desire  to  see  them 
well  treated  and  taken  care  of.  There  was  a 
gentleman  of  my  acquaintance  in  Madison  coun- 
ty, who  last  summer,  having  attended  a  political 
meeting,  on  returning  home,  found  that  his 
negroes  had  been  told  they  would  all  be  free  in 
August.  They  were  in  a  hurly  burly  way  in 
consequence,  and  very  xinsettled.  The  gentle- 
man called  them  all  before  him,  and  told  them 
that  by  the  next  Sunday  morning  week  they 
must  have  their  clothes  fixed  up,  as  he  was 
going  to  send  them  to  Liberia.  They  were 
much  astonished  and  alarmed,  and  the  negroe 
who  was  at  the  head  of  them,  stepped  forward 
when  the  period  came,  and  imploringly  exclaim- 
ed, "for  God's  sake,  master,  let  me  stay — don't 
send  us  to  Hellberia;"  and  all  of  them  promised 
to  be  the  most  obedient  servants  in  the  world  if 
permitted  to  remain.  The  fact  is,  we  do  not 
want  foreigners  in  such  crowds  in  Kentucky — 
we  want  plenty  of  elbow  room.  We  do  not 
wish  that  character  of  population  that  there  is 
in  the  city  of  New  York.  There  are  many  men 
there  worth  half  a  million  of  dollars,  whilst 
there  are  100,000  persons  who  have  neither  bread 
to  eat  nor  clothes  to  wear. 

I  will  illustrate  my  views  between  our  own 
people  and  foreigners,  by  telling  you  a  little  an- 
ecdote. My  friend,  Jesse  Jones,  who  was  known 
to  some  gentlemen  here,  was  courting  a  young 
woman  named  Sally  Newland,  a  member  of  the 
Baptist  church,  and  he  wanted  to  join  that 
church.  But  before  he  could  be  admitted,  it 
was  required  that  he  should  possess  the  proper 
religious  qualifications,  and  subscribe  to  the 
rules  of  the  church,  one  of  which  was,  that  he 
must  declare  he  loved  all  the  brethren  and  sis- 
ters. When  this  question  was  put  to  him,  "do 
vou  love  all  the  brethren  and  sisters?"  he  prompt- 
ly replied,  "ves  I  I  love  them  all,  and  sister  Sal- 
ly Xewland  In  particular! "  2s'ow,  sir,  I  have  a 
liind  heart  for  ail  the  citizens  of  our  sister  states 
and  of  other  nations,  and  I  like  them  all;  but  I 
like  the  citizens  of  Kentucky,  in  particular.    I 


548 


came  here  to  protect  her  citizens  J^nd  her  institu- 
tions against  all  foreign  immigration  that  may 
come  in  here. 

Now,  I  am  only  bringing  forward  a  projjosition 
to  protect  the  state  at  large,  what,  in  principle, 
one  of  the  honorable  delegates  from  Louisville 
(Mr.  Rudd,)  has  brought  forward  to  protect  the 
property-holding  citizens  of  Louisville.  They 
want  to  protect  tnemselves  against  themselves  in 
Louisville,  but  are  not  willing  to  protect  those 
Vho  live  out  of  the  city.  He  brougnt  in  a  reso- 
lution to  have  a  constitutional  provision,  that  in 
voting  a  tax  on  the  city,  none  but  tax  payers 
should  have  the  right  of  suffrage.  Now,  it  is 
obvious  that  this  is  aimed  at  the  ignorant,  pau- 
per population  that  is  flooding  Louisville.  The 
same  delegate,  and  his  colleagues,  are  using 
their  influence  here  to  secure  to  these  ignorant, 
degraded  paupers — these  people  who  may  not 
vote  to  tax  their  neighbors — may  come  in  and 
vote  so  as  to  control  and  tax  the  farmers,  who 
have  but  little  profit  left,  after  they  have  paid 
the  expense  of  maintaining  their  families.  He 
has  objected  to  these  men  voting  in  Louisville, 
but  when  we  object  to  their  drawing  the  traces 
too  tight  in  our  part  of  the  state,  and  to  their 
coming  in  here  and  voting  upon  our  rights,  they 
say,  you  are  accustomed  to  a  rough  course  of 
life — you  are  hardy  and  tough,  and  you  can 
bear  it;  but  we  are  tender  people  in  the  cities, 
and  must  be  protected  against  our  own  opera- 
tives. God  save  us  from  such  one-sided  institu- 
tions. Well,  it  is  for  us  to  vote  whether  this 
shall  be  the  ease  or  not. 

Now,  these,  very  men  are  brought  in  here  to 
vote  upon  our  rights  and  interests,  but  not  in 
accordance  with  the  policrj'  of  the  gentleman 
from  Louisville  to  vote  on  their  rights  and  their 
interests.  I  think  we  should  provide  for  our- 
selves— for  our  own  protection  and  safety.  The 
first  law  of  nature  is  self-preservation. 

I  have  detained  the  committee  longer  than  I 
ought  to  have  done.  I  have  no  feelings  to  grat- 
ify. I  wished  to  put  myself  properly l^efore  the 
country.  I  brougnt  here  the  slave  bill  of  1830, 
and  the  ayes  and  noes  on  it,  to  show  the  gentle- 
man from  Louisville  that  he  should  not  have  re- 
proved me  for  occupying,  in  part,  the  same 
ground  which  he  and  I  have  occupied  together 
in  reference  to  the  question  of  slavery  for  nine- 
teen years.  I  told  my  constituents  that  I  did 
not  expect  to  get  any  thing  more  embodied  in 
the  new  constitution  than  the  power  to  re-enact 
the  statute  of  1833.  1  highly  regard  the  gentle- 
man from  Simpson  and  others — they  no  doubt 
represent  the  feelings  of  their  constituents,  and 
I  claim  to  represent  nothing  more  than  the  feel- 
ings of  my  own  constituents,  and  with  a  ma- 
jority of  whom  I  agree  in  every  respect. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  But  for  the  resolution 
•which  was  adopted  yesterday,  that  the  debate 
on  the  legislative  report  should  close  on  Mon- 
day next,  I  should  not,  upon  the  fifth  section  of 
the  report,  have  submitted  any  views  of  my  own 
whatever.  But  ina,smuch  as  I  have  some  views 
to  submit  to  the  convention  upon  apportion- 
ment of  representation,  and  inasmuch  as  I  may 
not  have  an  opportunity  hereafter,  or  at  any  rate 
as  only  ten  minutes  will  be  allowed  to  each  del- 
egate after  twelve  o'clock  on  Monday,  to  give 
hiB  views  on  the  report,  I  have  risen  for  the  pur- 


{)os«  of  making  known  mine.  The  discussion 
las  taken  a  very  wide  range,  some  of  which  I 
have  not  considered  as  legitimate.  But  I  un- 
derstand that  the  resolutions  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  on  his  motion,  are  now  brought 
before  the  committee  along  with  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  legislative  department. 
Then  it  becomes  legitimate  to  make  allusion  to 
slavery.  I  did  not  so  consider  it  in  the  discus- 
sion of  the  fifth  section  of  the  report  now  under 
consideration.  We  have  heard  very  much  on 
the  subject  of  slavery,  much  more  than  I  antici- 

fiated  when  I  came  here.  I  presumed  there  was 
ittle  difficulty  in  the  convention  as  to  the  mode 
in  which  that  question  should  be  settled.  Al- 
though we  had  a  great  excitement  last  summer, 
and  it  was  a  question  which  swallowed  up  all 
others,  I  have  for  the  first  time  to  learn  that  there 
has  been  one  emancipationist  elected  to  the  con- 
vention. So  far  as  I  had  formed  any  opinion  of 
fjublic  sentiment  on  that  question,  not  only  at 
lome,  but  abroad,  I  had  supposed  that  the  pro- 
vision as  it  stood  in  the  old  constitution,  would 
be  exactly  the  provision  that  would  stand  in  the 
new.  I  was  apprised  that  there  were  delegates 
elected,  who  were  in  favor  of  incorporating  the 
act  of  1833  into  the  constitution;  but  so  far  as 
my  knowledge  extended,  and  so  far  as  the  news- 
papers gave  me  information,  that  numberl  knew 
was  small. 

\  The  act  of  1833  always  had  my  support,  and 
imost  probably  always  would  have  had  it,  as  a 
jlegislative  enactment,  but  I  am  utterly  opposed 
'to  incorporating  it  into  the  constitution.  That 
law  is  a  matter  of  expediency,  and  I  conceive 
that  the  people,  through  the  law  making  power, 
had  the  necessary  power  to  pass  such  an  act, 
and  at  a  subsequent  period  to  repeal  it.  The 
section  of  country  from  which  I  came  have  been 
almost  unanimous  in  favor  of  the  law  of  1833. 
Since  1833,  the  county  of  Montgomery  has  had 
a  representation  in  both  branches  of  the  legis- 
lature, with  few  exceptions,  in  favor  of  that  law, 
and  the  surrounding  counties  with  perhaps  the 
exception  of  Clarke,  have  also  been  in  favor  of 
it.  1  do  nut,  however,  think  the  repeal  of  that 
law  has  had  so  dreadful  an  effect  as  was  antici- 
pated. But  few  slaves  have  been  introduced 
into  Kentucky  since  its  repeal;  in  northern  Ken- 
tucky none.  Although  some  were  disposed  to 
embark  in  the  purcha.se  of  thein,  yet  when  they 
went  abroad  and  ascertained  their  cost,  they  re- 
turned without  them.  I  have  thought  that  law 
could  have  but  little  effect;  because  I  have  known 
negro  traders  to  visit  the  county  in  which  I  re- 
side and  there  to  buy  slaves  to  take  south.  I 
was  satisfied  if  they  could  buy  slaves  cheaper 
in  other  states  they  would  not  come  to  Ken- 
tucky. Hence  I  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
slaves  were  perhaps  as  high  abroad  as  at  home, 
and  consequently  but  few  would  be  imported 
into  the  state.  However,  were  I  a  representa- 
tive now,  I  should  vote  for  the  law  of  1833  as  a 
legislative  enactment.  But  I  do  not  believe  a 
majority  of  the  people  of  Kentucky  are  in  favor 
of  incorporating  that  act  into  the  constitution. 
So  far  as  the  people  whom  I  represent  are  con- 
cerned, I  know  they  do  not  desire  it.  I  have 
thought  it  was  very  unnecessary  that  there  should 
have  been  so  protracted  a  discussion  on  this 
subject,  and  I  will  therefore  dismiss  it. 


549 


We  have  heard  this  morninoj  that  there  are 
two  sorts  of  voters  in  Louisville.  I  would  ask, 
if  the  voters  in  Louisville  who  voted  for  mem- 
bers of  this  convention,  or  ■who  have  the  right 
to  vote  for  members  of  the  general  assembly, 
have  greater  privileges  than  other  voters  of  Ken- 
tucky? Is  there  a  portion  of  the  citizens  who 
have' a  right  to  vote  in  Jefferson  who  would  not 
have  a  right  to  vote  in  Fayette?  Does  not  the 
same  class  ot  citizens  vote  in  one  as  the  other 
county?  I  take  it,  it  is  so.  The  qualifications 
are  the  same,  and  all  must  have  them,  or  they  are 
not  entitled  to  vote. 

We  have  been  told,  that  in  consequence  of  the 
immense  growth  of  the  cities,  particularly  Lou- 
isville and  Covington,  they  would  in  a  short 
time  exercise  a  power  and  a  very  unhappv  influ- 
ence on  the  legislation  of  the  state.  We  have 
been  told  that  there  has  been  a  greater  increase 
in  Louisville  than  in  the  country,  and  that  it  will 
continue  to  surpass  the  increase  in  the  counties 
generally,  till  it  controls  the  legislation  of  the 
state. 

Let  us  examine  as  to  the  truth  of  the  charge. 
I  deny  it,  so  far  as  a  portion  of  the  counties  is 
concerned.  Suppose  we  consider  one  of  the 
rural  districts  to  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  Johnson,  Floyd, 
Morgan,  and  Lewis,  which  lie  contiguously,  it 
will  be  seen  that  the  voting  population  was  as 
follows  : 

1839        1848 


Greenup, 

Carter, 

Lawrence, 

Johnson, 

Floyd, 

Morgan, 

Lewis, 


946 

695 
949 


1597 
908 
956 
570 
961 
1225 
1409 


through  the  county  of  Jefferson.  In  1849  ther* 
was  no  list  taken — in  1848  there  was.  Making 
the  comparison  on  these  data,  I  ascertain  that 
the  county  of  Jefferson  increased  in  those  years 
a  little  less  than  forty-two  per  cent. 

The  counties  of  Greenup,  Carter,  Lewis,  Law- 
rence, Johnson,  Floyd,  Pike,  Letcher,  Perry, 
Breathitt,  Clay,  Owsley,  Estill,  and  Morgan,  as 
exhibited  in  the  two  tables,  liave  increased  in 
voters  within  a  small  fraction  of  fifty  per  cent., 
in  the  nine  years  past.  Is  not  that  a  rural  pop- 
ulation? And  when  we  are  told  that  the  city  is 
to  overshadow  and  overbalance  the  rest  of  the 
state — that  our  rural  districts  are  to  be  swallow- 
ed up,  we  should  make  the  inquirv',  is  it  true  ? 
When  we  look  at  the  figures  we  can  tell,  and  I 
deny  that  it  is  true.  I  have  no  doubt  you  may 
take  counties  in  other  parts  of  the  state,  and  you 
will  find  it  pretty  much  the  same.  But  go  into 
the  rich  blue  grass  districts,  and  some  of  the 
counties  have  not  passed  twelve  per  cent,  within 
nine  years,  while  some  of  the  mountain  coun- 
ties have  passed  fifty-five  per  cent. 

Bourbon,  Harrison,  Scott,  Fayette,  Jessamine, 
Clarke,  and  Woodford,  lying  contiguous,  and 
amongst  the  richest  counties  in  the  state,  had  a 
voting  population  as  follows  : 

1839        1848 


Bourbon, 

Harrison, 

Scott, 

Favette, 

Woodford. 

Jessamine, 

Clarke, 


1601 

1773 

1696 

2060 

1518 

1839 

2571 

2584 

1153 

1255 

1198 

1325 

1461 

1719 

537 

807 

365 

423 

463 

359 

590 

707 

750 

566 

1017 

1011 

3043 

4652 

Total.        -        -        •  4969        7626 

Or  take  another  district,  to  be  composed  of  the 
following  counties : 

1839        1848 


Pike, 

Letcher, 

Perry, 

Breathitt, 

Clay, 

Owsley, 

£still. 


Total, 

Let  us  turn  our  attention  to  th<»se  mountain 
counties,  and  see  how  it  is.  Let  us  examine 
these  spai^ely  populated  portions,  and  make  a 
comparison  between  them  and  the  county  of 
Jefferson,  including  the  great  city  of  Louisville, 
which  in  1839  had  a  voting  population  of  4770, 
and  in  1848  of  6774;  thus  showing  that  in  nine 
years,  the  increase  in  Jefferson  countv  and  the 
city  of  Louisville  is  a  fraction  less  tfcan  forty- 
two  per  cent.  Taking  the  apportionment  of 
1839  and  1848,  how  do  we  find  it?  I  take  1848, 
because  I  wish  to  confine  myself  to  the  voters 
of  1848  and  not  of  1849,  because  we  all  know 
there  is  a  manifest  difference.  There  is  a  large 
male  population  who  are  not  entitled  to  vote,  as 
aliens    and  others   in  Louisville  and  scattered 


Total,  -        -         -      11,198      12,555 

These  counties  have  gone  a  little  over  twelve 
per  cent.,  taken  collectively,  but  Fayette  has  not 
reached  one-fourth  of  one  per  cent. 

I  have  made  my   calculations  from  the  audi- 
tor's reports  for  1839  and  1848,  as  to  the  number 
of  voters,  not  deeming  it  necessary  to  go  further 
back  than  1839;  and  in  1848  the  last  list  of  vo- 
ters was  taken  by  the  commissioners  throughout 
the  state.     The   printed   table  which  we  have 
shows  the  number  of  white  males  in  each  coun- 
ty in  the   present  year;  but  as  there  are  many 
who  as  aliens,  and  for  other  causes,  are  not  le- 
gal voters,  in  all  my  calculations  I  adopt  the  list 
of  voters  of  1848,  the  last  which  has  been  taken. 
To  show  the  fairness  of  mv  calculations,  and 
that  the  counties  were  not  selected  for  their  great 
increase  of  population,  and   without  regard  to 
locality,  it  will  be  seen,   they  are  in   one  block, 
reaching  from  Big  Sandy  to  the  rich   counties, 
and  lying  between  the  Ohio  and  Kentucky  riv- 
ers.    It  was    necessary  I   should    include  the 
county  of  Clay,  which   lies  south  of  the  Ken- 
tucky, because  a  portion  of  the  county  of  Ows- 
ley was  taken  from  Clay,  and  without  including 
t  the  county  of  Clay  it  was  impossible  to  compare 
j  the  increase.     If  we  look  at  Harlan,   I  thinic  it 
will  show  an  increase  of  more  than  fifty-five  per 
cent.,  and  it  is  most  probable  that  Knox,  Whit- 
ley, and  other  mountain  counties  have  increased 
I  in  the  same  ratio.    Mason   is  one  of  the  richest 
I  counties  in  the  state,  with  a  thriving  city  lying 
I  on  the  Ohio  river,  and  yet  she  has  only  increas- 
i  ed,  in  nine  years, a  little  over  seventeen  percent. 


55a 


W*?  see  then,  lliut  the  county  of  Jt'ffer^ou,  inclu- 
ding the  city  of  LoiiisviUe.'is  not  likuly  to  over- 
balance the  rest  of  the  state.  Tlie  eounty,  in- 
cluding the  city,  has  not  increased  very  rapidly 
in  voting  population,  though  there  are  many  for- 
eigners, not  naturalized,  in  the  vicinity  of  the 
city. 

In  the  rich  limestone  regions  of  the  state, 
sometimes  termed  the  blue  grass  country — be- 
cause of  the  extensive  grazing — the  rich  are  in- 
creasing rapidly  in  wealth;  they  extend  their 
possessions,  although  at  high  prices,  and  the 
smaller  farmers  are  constantly  leaving  those  fine 
lands.  This  is  the  reason  that  there  is  so  incon- 
siderable an  increase  of  voters.  And  we  mav 
expect  the  same  cause  and  the  same  result  will 
continue. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison  spoke  of  the 
fanners — in  which  class  he  seemed  to  include 
himself — as  if  they  were  liardly  able  to  pay  their 
taxes,  and  that  this  inability  was  produced  by 
some  controlling  power  exercised  by  the  cities  in 
the  state.  Now,  if  we  will  examine  the  audi- 
tor's report,  we  shall  find  that  the  county  of 
Madison  has  naore  wealth,  in  proportion  to  pop- 
ulation, than  the  county  of  Jefferson,  incluaing 
Louisville.  If  that  be  tlie  situation  of  the  pop- 
ulation which  he  represents,  then  they  appear  to 
be  richer  than  the  city  population.  But  let  all 
these  matters  be  as  they  may,  I  suppose  that 
when  we  declare  that  "representation  shall  be 
equal  and  uniform,"  we  mean  what  we  say;  "we 
do  not  mean  to  insinuate  that  the  representation 
shall  be  as  our  interests  happen  to  be;  that  if  we 
represent  a  city  and  its  interests,  that  they  shall 
have  a  preponderance  of  power,  irrespective  of 
population ;  or,  if  we  represent  a  rural  popula- 
tion, that  they  shall  have  privileges  which  the 
city  population  are  not  entitled  to.  I  know  that 
the  people  whom  I  represent  are  mainly  agri- 
culturalists, and  of  course  belong  to  the  rural 
class,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  I  but  fairly  repre- 
sent them  in  my  feeble  advocacy  of  the  princi- 
ple, that  all  voters,  rich  or  poor,  residing  in  the 
country  or  in  the  city,  should  stand  oil  the  same 
footing,  and  be  heard  in  the  legislative  halls  in 
proportion  to  their  numbers. 

I  think  the  gentleman  from  Franklin  made  a 
mistake  when  he  spoke  of  the  apportionment,  as 
reported  in  the  sixth  section  of  the  report  now 
under  consideration;  the  forty  counties  instead 
of  being  entitled  to  forty-five,  will,  I  under- 
stand, be  entitled  to  fifty  representatives.  I  ex- 
amined his  tables  and  the  sixth  section  a  little 
this  morning,  and  when  I  come  to  make  the  cal- 
culation on  the  principles  of  that  section,  I  find 
if  we  fix  the  ratio  at  1416,  (and  I  do  this  because 
this  would  be  the  ratio  according  to  the  number  of 
voters  in  1848,)  and  if  that  ratio  Retaken,  the  coun- 
ty of  Jefferson  will  be  entitled  to  five  or  six  repre- 
sentatives, and  the  balance  of  the  state  is  entitled 
to  be  represented  in  exactly  the  same  ratio,  and 
must  have  it;  all  residuums  whether  in  Jefferson 
county,  the  city  of  Louisville  or  elsewhere,  must 
be  applied  some  where  else.  In  doing  this,  we 
have  been  in  the  habit,  sometimes,  of  passing  by 
many  counties,  and  taking  residuums  to  those 
more  distant,  and  inthismannerthestatehas  been 
laid  off,  or  apportioned  for  representation,  and 
■which  has  caused  on  some  occasions  dissatisfac- 
tion on  the  partof  the  minority  in  tlie  legislature. 


I  believe  lean  satisfy  this  convention,  that  in 
the  disposition  of  the  representation  of  the  diffe- 
rent counties  of  the  state,  it  has  been  done  fair- 
ly; at  least  so  far  as  the  last  apportionment  was 
concerned. 

I  find  Bourbon,  Logan,  Nelson,  Christian. 
Fleming,  Madison,  Fayette,  and  Hardin,  under 
the  last  apportionment,  have  each  two  represent- 
atives ;  without  drawing  residuums  they  were 
only  entitled  to  one  each,  that  is,  after  giving 
them  one  meinber,  the  surplus  of  voters  in  each 
county  is  not  equal  to  the  ratio,  and  hence,  ta 
get  a  second  member,  each  of  these  counties  must 
draw  a  residuum.  The  following  counties,  un- 
der the  last  apportionment,  had  one  member 
each,  "yet  neither  of  them  have  the  full  ratio,  to 
wit:  Jessamine,  Whitley,  Boyle,  Woodford,  Ca- 
sey, Russell,  Meade,  Grayson,  Todd,  and  Living- 
ston. They  draw  residuums  from  other  portions 
of  the  state,  and  all  of  these  counties  are  looked 
upon,  and  counted  on  as  being  on  the  whig  side 
in  politics.  How  is  it  on  the  other  side '?  Let  us 
see  if  it  is  not  about  equal.  The  county  of  Har- 
rison has  two  representatives,  but  not  enough 
voters  for  more  than  one,  without  drawing  a  res- 
iduum from  other  counties;  and  the  following 
counties  have  each  one  representative,  though 
the  number  of  qualified  voters  in  each  is  under 
the  ratio,  to-wit :  Pendleton.  Trimble,  Oldham, 
Grant,  Anderson,  Spencer,  Bullitt,  Monroe,  Hart, 
Larue,  Taylor,  Green,  Union,  Simpson,  Trigg, 
and  Crittenden,  and  the  counties  of  Fulton  and 
Hickman  united,  have  a  representative,  but  are 
under  the  ratio. 

Here  are  eighteen  representatives  on  the  oppo- 
site side  in  politics,  representing  constituencies 
which  are  below  the  ratio;  thus  it  seems  the 
number  on  each  side  is  exactly  equal.  This  be- 
ing the  case,  it  seems  to  me  there  is  no  cause  of 
complaint.  I  have  a  table  now  before  rae,  which 
was  not  laid  off  with  a  view  to  representation, 
but  since  there  have  been  propositions  submit- 
ted for  fixing  a  principle  for  the  apportionment 
of  representation,  I  have  concluded  to  submit 
that  table  now,  so  that  when  the  sixth  section 
shall  come  up  for  consideration,  gentlemen  may 
understand  it,  and  I  flatter  myself  that  if  gen- 
tlemen Avill  examine  this  table  they  will  see 
that  it  is  as  fair  in  the  division  of  the  state,  and 
in  the  apportionment  of  representation  as  can 
very  well  be  made. 

I  know  it  is  impossible  to  make  representation 
exactly  equal  and  uniform,  and  having  exactly 
the  same  number  of  voters  in  each  electorial 
district.  But  we  must  approximate  as  nearly  to 
equality  and  uniformity  as  may  be,  and  that  is 
evidently  the  design  of  all  of  us. 

The  gentleman  from  Trigg  has  submitted  a 
proposition  to  lay  off  the  state  into  twelve  rep- 
resentative districts.  I  can  hardly  see  why  the 
state  should  be  thus  laid  off,  particularly  when 
we  look  at  the  inequality.  The  gentleman's 
proposition  makes  tne  first  district  to  consist 
of  eight  counties,  embracing  Fulton,  Hickman, 
Graves,  Calloway,  Ballard,  McCrackcn,  Mar- 
shall, and  Livingston,  with  a  voting  population 
of  7171,  according  to  the  returns  of  1848.  Now 
look  at  the  sixth  district,  embracing  the  coun- 
ties of  Jefferson,  Bullit,  Nelson,  Washington, 
Marion,  Shelby,  and  Spencer,  and  in  these  coun- 
ties we  find  we  have  a  voting  population    of 


551 


17,184,  being  a  little  more  than  ten  tliousand 
difference.  Is  that  all?  Let  us  examine  the 
ninth  district.  There  are  nine  counties,  embra- 
cing Fayette,  Woodford,  Bourbon,  Clarke,  Jessa- 
mine, Anderson,  Mercer,  Bovie,  and  Garrard, 
which  have  14,566  voters.  W'hat  is  the  object 
of  this?  If  -we  are  to  lay  off  tlie  state  into  dis- 
tricts, let  them  be  as  equal  as  may  be,  and  let  us 
not  look  this  vray  or  that,  with  regard  to  politi- 
cal preferences. 

Look  again  at  district  number  one.  It  may  be 
exactly  right  that  these  counties  should  stand  in 
representation  as  they  are  placed.  For  instance, 
Fulton  and  Hickman  will  have  one  representative, 
Graves  one,  Callowav  one,  Ballard  and  McGrack- 
en  one,  and  Marsha"ll  and  Livingston  together 
one;  but  this  is  not  the  way  they  now  stand,  for 
Calloway  and  Marshall  now  vote  together,  and 
Livingston  has  a  member  to  herself.  I  admit  it 
mav  be  right  so  to  place  the  counties,  but  why 
raalie  such  a  district?  It  looks  amazingly  strange 
P£  thougli  it  was  designed  for  some  purpose  not 
apparent  on  its  face.  The  formation  of  some  of 
tlie  other  districts  looks  equally  strange.  Why 
not,  instead  of  thus  laying  off  the  districts,  lay 
them  off  as  nearly  equal  as  may  be,  and  in  as 
convenient  form,  havinsr  proper  regard  in  every 
instance,  to  territory,  form,  population,  associa- 
tion, and  intercourse?  I  have  now  before  me  a 
table  which  very  nearly  divides  the  state  into 
four  equal  parts,  at  least  in  population  and  form, 
and  having  a  due  consideratnm  for  the  inter-  i 
course  and  association  of  the  people.  In  laying 
off  these  counties,  as  I  have  done,  into  four  dis- 
tricts, I  have  undertaken  to  do  it  impartially 
and  fairly;  and  whatever  may  be  the  errors, 
an  opportnity  will  be  afforded  to  have  them 
pointed  out. 

The  first  district  is  as  follows,  to  wit 


Counties, 

Pike.     - 

Floyd,  - 

Johnson, 

Lawrence, 

Carter,  - 

Greenup, 

Lewis, 

Mason, 

Fleming, 

Bracken, 

Harrison, 

Nicholas, 

Bourbon, 

Bath,     - 

Mont^omerv, 

Clark'e, 

Morgan, 

Estill,  - 

Madison, 

Rockcastle,   - 

Laurel, 

Clay,     - 

Owslpy, 

BreatKitt,      - 

Perry,   - 

Letcher, 

Harlan, 

Knox,    - 

Whitley, 


Voters.    Members. 

807 

961 1,768  1 

570 

956 1 ,526  1 

908  1 

1,597  1 

1 ,436  1 

2,845  2 

2,311  2 

1,4^6  1 

2,060  1 

1,713  1 

1,773  1 

1 ,823  1 

1 ,398  1 

1,719  1 

1 ,225  1 

1,011  1 

2,566  2 

802  1 


777 

750 1 ,527 

566 


590- 
463 
365 
661- 


-1,156 


-1.489 
1,091 
1,021 

36,451 


1 


1 
I 
1 

36 


This  district  has  more  counties  than  either  of 
the  otliers,  but  I  aimed  to  make  tlie  population 
of  each  district  nearly  equal.  The  reason  whv 
I  embraced  Whitley  in  this  district,  is  that  she 
has  always  been  connected  with  Knox,  Harlan, 
Laurel,  <fcc.,  in  the  .same  judicial  district,  and  the 
intercourse  and  a<:sociations  of  her  population 
is  with  the  others  named,  and  she  will  most 
probably,  hereafter  be  placed  in  the  same  circuit 
court  district,  and  it  is  the  most  convenient  for 
the  whole  of  one  circuit  to  be  in  the  same  appel- 
late district,  and  if  the  court  of  appeals  should 
be  required  to  sit  in  each  district,  the  circuit 
should  all  be  in  the  same  district.  The  voting 
population  in  this  district  is  36,451 ,  and  the  num- 
ber of  counties  is  twenty-nine,  and  number  of 
members  twenty-six. 

The  following  table  comprises  the  second  dis- 
trict: 

Counties. 

Pendleton,    - 

Campbell, 

Kenton, 

Boone,  - 

Carroll, 

Gallatin, 

Trimble, 

Oldham, 

Owen,   - 

Scott,    - 

Fayette, 

Grant,   - 

Jessamine,     - 

Garrard, 

Lincoln, 

Boyle,   - 

Mercer, 

Anderson, 

Shelby, 

Spencer, 

Henry, 

Franklin, 

Woodford,     - 


Voters. 

Members 

. 

1,210 

. 

1,447 

. 

2.560 

- 

1,865 

923 

813 

1,736 

994 

1,073 

1,674 

1.839 

2,584 

1,098 

1,325 

1,563 

1,436 

1,136 

2,125 

1,086 

2,.317 

1,383 

1,649 

1 ,723 

1,255 

35,278 


25 


This  district  embraces  twenty  three  counties, 
has  a  voting  population  of  35,278,  and  is  entitled 
to  twenty  five  members. 

The  third  district  is  composed  of 

Counties. 

Pulaski, 

Casey,  - 

Russell, 

JIarion, 

Washington, 

Nelson, 

Bullitt, 

Jefferson, 

Hardin, 

Meade. 

Grayson, 

Monroe, 

Cumberland, 

Clinton , 

Wayne, 
•  Adair,  - 


Voters. 

Members' 

- 

2,305 

2 

938 

919 

1,857 

1 

. 

1,768 

1 

. 

1,770 

1 

- 

2,007 

1 

. 

1,165 

] 

. 

6,774 

5 

- 

2,384 

2 

- 

1,022 

1 

. 

1,127 

I 

. 

1,230 

1 

971 

807 

1,777 

1 

. 

1,427 

1 

1,507. 

1 

552 


Barren, 
Hart,     - 
Larue,  - 
Taylor, 

Green,  • 


-    981 
1,097 


2,939 
1,345 


2,078 
1,305 

35,789 


1 
1 

25 


The  population  of  this  district  is  35,789. 
T'W'enty  one  counties  are  embraced  in  it,  and  it 
■will  be  entitled  to  twenty  five  members. 


The  fourth  district 

is  con 

posed  of 

Counties. 

Voters. 

Members 

Breckinridge, 

- 

1,745 

1 

Hancock, 

- 

560 

1 

Daviess, 

. 

1,923 

1 

Ohio,    - 

. 

1,510 

1 

Henderson,   - 

1,467 

1 

Union, 

. 

1,264 

1 

Hopkins, 

- 

1,813 

1 

Muhlenburg, 

- 

1,539 

1 

Butler,  - 

875 

Edmonson,    - 

647- 

— 1 ,522 

1 

Warren, 

- 

2,131 

1 

Allen,  - 

. 

1,413 

1 

Logan, 

- 

2,016 

1 

Simpson, 

- 

924 

1 

Todd,    - 

. 

1,383 

1 

Christian, 

. 

2,138 

2 

Trigg,  - 

. 

1,381 

1 

Caldwell,      - 

. 

1,860 

1 

Calloway, 

. 

1,206 

1 

Graves, 

. 

1,576 

1 

Fulton, 

631 

Hickman, 

656 

1,287 

1 

Ballard, 

728 

McCracken,  - 

742 

1,470 

1 

Marshall, 

824 

Livingston,  - 

808 

1,632 

1 

Crittenden,    • 

- 

947 

1 

34,820 


24 


This  district  has  a  population  of  34,837;  has 
twenty  seven  counties,  and  will  be  entitled  to 
twenty  four  representatives. 

Now  I  will  enquire  if  gentlemen  can  lay  off 
the  state  more  equally  for  representation,  having 
regard  to  the  court  of  appeals  and  circuit  court 
districts  as  they  will  most  likely  be,  at  the  same 
time,  and  keeping  the  circuit  district  as  near  as 
maybe  in  the  same  appellate  district?  Perhaps 
the  circuit  court  district  may  have  to  be  divided 
sometimes,  as  it  is  hardly  to  be  expected  it  can 
remain  undivided  in  every  instance;  but  gene- 
rally it  can  be  done. 

Gentlemen  will  see  that  though  I  carry  residu- 
ums  on  some  occasions,  yet  they  are  carried 
fairly,  and  never  taken  from  a  county  in  one 
district  and  carried  to  a  county  in  anotner. 

If  Pike  and  Johnson  join,  then  they  will  com- 

foee  one  representative  district,  and  Floyd  will 
ave  a  member  herself.  If,  however,  Pike  and 
Johnson  do  not  join,  then  Pike  and  Floyd  must 
compose  one  district,  Johnson  and  Lawrence  an- 
other, and  Carter  will  get  the  member.    Now 


whether  Floyd  or  Carter  shall  have  a  member, 
politically  speaking,  the  result  is  the  same,  as 
the  political  majority  in  each  county  is  on  the 
same  side.  It  will  be  seen  that  Lawrence  in  1848 
had  forty  eight  voters  more  than  Carter,  and  five 
less  than  Floyd.  Why  then  not  let  her  have  the 
member?  The  answer  is,  because  of  her  locali- 
ty. If  a  member  be  given  to  her  then  what 
county  will  Johnson  be  attached  to,  if  Pike 
be  not  contiguous?  There  is  none  but  Morgan, 
which  has  two  or  three  hundred  more  than  Law- 
rence. Politically  it  would  suit  me  for  Lawrence 
to  have  the  member,  but  viewing  the  whole 
ground  aright  she  is  not  entitled  to  it.  And  why 
IS  it  that  Morgan,  which  lies  broadside  of  Car- 
ter, should  get  a  member?  Because,  although 
Carter  needs  to  draw  residuums  of  over  500,  yet 
Morgan  is  the  largest  of  the  small  counties  in  the 
same  neighborhood,  and  north  of  Kentucky  river, 
and  can  ^raw  residuums  from  the  counties  near. 
Estill  can  do  the  same.  So  also  the  counties  of 
Owsley  and  Breathitt,  and  thus  the  principle  will 
go  on.  Let  these  several  counties  draw  residu- 
ums from  other  counties,  neighboring  counties 
in  the  same  district;  for  instance  from  Harrison, 
Nicholas,  Bath,  Bourbon,  Clarke.  <fec.,  which  will 
have  considerable  residuums  to  spare,  and  which 
Morgan,  Carter,  Estill,  <fec.,  are  entitled  to  take. 
My  object  is  to  cast  all  residuums  throughout 
the  whole  district,  and  thus  to  equalize  the  repre- 
sentation as  near  as  I  can,  and  always  keeping  the 
same  principle  in  view.  Having  thus  disposed 
of  all  the  counties  in  one  district,  I  go  to  anoth- 
er, carrying  out  the  same  principle  throughout 
the  whole  state. 

Further  to  illustrate  my  principle,  I  will  take 
the  counties  of  Calloway,  Marshall  and  Livings- 
ton— the  two  former  counties  once  composed 
one  county,  and  since  the  division,  have  been 
united  in  sending  a  representative,  whilst  Liv- 
ingston, which  is  separated  from  Marshall  by  the 
Tennessee  river  has  heretofore  had  a  member 
alone,  but  as  she  has  a  smaller  number  of  votes 
than  Calloway,  I  give  the  latter  county  a  mem- 
ber and  unite  Marshall  and  Livingston  for 
another.  The  same  principle  I  have  applied  in 
giving  a  separate  member  to  Rockcastle,  which 
has  but  a  little  over  eight  hundred  votes.  She 
is  larger  than  Laurel  or  Clay,  and  hence  the  lat- 
ter two  are  united  for  one  member,  and  Rock- 
castle alone  for  another.  Crittenden,  although 
having  a  small  number  of  votes  more  than 
Livingston  is  given  a  separate  member.  The 
county  of  Hancock  has  always  presented  diffi- 
culties in  apportioning  representation,  and  in 
consequence  of  her  contiguity  to  Daviess  and 
Breckinridge,  which  have  large  residuums  and 
the  other  adjacent  counties  not  requiring  those 
residuums,  they  are  thrown  together  and  given  to 
Hancock. 

In  making  out  this  table  I  had  special  refer- 
ence to  the  circuit  court  districts  and  appellate 
districts  as  they  will  most  likely  be  formed,  and 
if  the  judicial  or  representative  districts  can  be 
laid  off  more  fairly,  impartially,  equally  and 
uniformly  than  I  have  presented,  then  1  hope  to 
see  it  done. 

In  this  way  the  whole  people  will  be  fairly 
represented,  and  almost  to  a  positive  certainty, 
the  very  same  party  that  has  a  majority  in  one 
county  which  has  a  residuum  will  have  that  resi- 


553 


duum  carried  over  to  a  county  of  the  same  poli- 
tics, and  thus  all  these  residuums  will  be  repre- 
sented. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Will  the  gentleman  please  state 
how  many  counties  under  nis  arrangement,  hav- 
ing less  than  the  ratio,  will  be  represented;  and 
how  many  counties  having  less,  will  be  divided 
between  the  two  parties. 

Mr.  APPERSOX.  I  do  not  know  exactly,  but 
all  will  be  able  to  see  it  from  the  tables,  which  I 
flatter  myself  is  made  outmost  impartiallv.  By  a 
hasty  glance,  however,  I  find  that  the  whigs  will 
have  members  most  likely  without  a  full  ratio,  as 
follows:  Fleminff,  Estill,  Madison,  Rockcastle, 
Whitley,  Knox,  Fayette,  Jessamine, Boyle,  Shel- 
bv,  Woonford,  Hardin,  Meade,  Grayson,  Todd, 
Hancock  and  Montgomery — one  in  each,  making 
eighteen  representatives. 

The  democrats  will  have  most  probably  one 
in  each  of  the  following  counties,  whict  are 
under  the  ratio,  viz;  Carter,  Morgan,  Breathitt, 
Pendleton,  Campbell,  Trimble,  Oldham,  | 
Grant,  Anderson,  Spencer,  Pulaski,  Bullitt, 
Monroe,  Hart,  Green,  Union,  Allen,  Simpson, 
Trigg,  Calloway,  Crittenden  and  Fulton,  <fec., 
making  twenty  two  members. 

If  gentlemen  will  examine  my  tables,  I  think 
they  will  say  that  they  could  not  have  laiil  ofl 
these  districts  more  compactly  than  they  are 
laid  off.  In  politics  the  first  district  would 
gain  two  to  the  party  diflFering  with  me,  and 
perhaps  three.  In  my  list  I  have  stated  what 
each  one  should  have,  and  I  think  those  who 
differ  with  me  in  politics  will  sav  that  I  have 
given  to  each  what  they  are  equitably  entitled  to. 
Larue  has  a  member,  though  she  lacks  nearly 
five  hundred  of  the  full  number.  Boyle  has 
one  and  lacks  nearly  three  hundred.  Grant 
lacks  nearly  four  hundred  and  yet  will  have 
one.  Fayette  will  lack  about  two  hundred  and 
fifty,  Oldham  will  lack  nearly  four  hundred, 
Trimble  will  lack  more  than  four  hundred  and 
Peudleton  a  little  less  than  two  hundred,  and 
they  all  get  one. 

Xow  I  think  there  have  been  some  matters 
brought  in  in  regard  to  the  election  of  senators, 
that  should  not  be  taken  as  arguments,  so  far  as 
senators  in  the  general  assembly  are  concerned. 
I  hear  it  said  that  every  state  has  two  senators 
in  the  senate  of  the  United  States;  but  it  should 
be  remembered  that  every  state  is  a  sovereignty, 
and  the  senators  in  congress  represent  sovereign- 
ties. It  is  not  so  with  our  counties,  they  are  not 
sovereignties,  but  are  parts  of  the  one  sovereign- 
ty. We  have  heard  something  said  about  the 
apportionment  in  Virginia,  and  it  is  said  they 
have  nineteen  districts  east  and  thirteen  west  of 
the  Blue  Ridge.  That  is  but  a  poor  criterion  to 
govern  us,  for  I  understand  that  Virginia  was 
originally  represented,  not  by  voters  but  by  ter- 
ritory, each  county  large  or  small  in  territory  or 
in  population  being  entitled  to  two  representa- 
tives, and  each  borough  one.  That  plan  of 
representation  was  borrowed  from  England. 
But  when  they  formed  their  new  constitution, 
did  they  give  up  this  notion?  Not  entirely,  but 
they  adopt  a  mixed  system.  If  you  will  ascertain 
the  number  of  voters'  east  and  west  of  the  Blue 
Ridge  in  Virginia,  you  will  find  that  they  were 
nearly  equally  divided;  but  there  was  a  numer- 
ous and  valuable  negro  population  in  the  east, 
70 


which  the  convention  determined  should  be 
represented.  So  far  as  Virginia  is  concerned,  I 
do  not  think  that  her  example  should  have  the 
least  influence  on  our  action.  The  gentleman 
from  Franklin  the  other  day  said  that  represen- 
tation should  be  a  mixed  question  with  us,  that 
we  should  look  at  the  population  and  the  ter- 
ritory, in  apportioning  representation. 

I  learn  from  the  historj-  of  Kentucky  that  the 
late  George  Nicholas,  one  of  the  wisest  and  best 
of  men,  in  a  speech  in  the  convention  which 
formed  the  first  constitution  for  Kentucky,  in 
1791,  denounced  the  doctrine  of  representation 
of  territory,  and  insisted  that  population  exclu- 
sivelv  be  the  basis  of  representation.  We  have 
heard  the  amusing  storj'  relating  to  the  subject 
of  a  property  qualification,  as  told  by  Doctor 
Franklin.  A  certain  man  living  in  a  state  where 
a  given  amount  of  property  was  required  to  en- 
title one  to  vote,  owned  a  donkey  of  the  pre- 
scribed value  to  entitle  him  to  exercise  the  right 
of  suffrage.  It  happened  that  the  donkey  died, 
and  the  man  was  disfranchised  thereby.  The 
Doctor  enquired  whether  it  was  the  man  or  the 
donkey  that  had  previously  voted. 

I  understand  that  it  is  not  property  nor  terri- 
tory, but  white  population  on  which  representa- 
tion should  be  based.  If  territory  should  be 
considered,  then  why  not  property,  and  thus  the 
indigent  and  virtuous  laborer  might  be  cut  off. 
1  want  representation  to  be  governed  by  voting 
population  as  near  as  it  can  be  done — it  is  true 
It  cannot  be  done  exactly,  because  the  counties 
have  not  exactly  the  same  amount  of  population. 

If  we  start  off  with  a  determination  to  do 
even  handed  justice  to  all,  if  we  intend  that  this 
representation  shall  be  as  near  equal  and  uni- 
form as  we  can  make  it,  let  us  not  say  to  a  man 
residing  in  a  city  and  engaged  in  commerce  or 
manufactures  you  shall  not  nave  the  same  voice 
as  the  agriculturalist.  The  people  represented 
by  me  are  an  agricultural  people,  who  demand 
every  privilege  to  which  they  are  entitled.  Does 
the  agriculturalist  require  at  our  hands  that  in 
consequence  of  his  calling  he  should  have  great- 
er rights  than  others?  I  believe  not.  I  thought 
the  creed  of  the  party  with  whom  I  act,  main- 
tain that  we  should  foster  manufactures  and  sus- 
tain them  with  agriculture,  whilst  the  other 
party  have  most  especially  advocated  commerce. 
I  have  been  under  the  impression  that  we  had 
all  agreed  there  should  be  no  difference  between 
the  merchant,  the  manufacturer,  and  the  agri- 
culturist, so  far  as  political  rights  are  con- 
cerned. They  are  all  equally  necessary  in  every 
community.  Let  me  inquire  how  it  is  when  you 
approach  any  large  commercial  town  that  the 
land  of  the  agriculturalist  is  greatly  enhanced 
in  value"?  Is  it  not  because  he  has  a  market 
near  his  door?  If  vou  remove  that  market  from 
him,  will  his  land  be  as  valuable?  Is  he  not 
benefitted  as  well  as  the  merchant  and  manufac- 
turer? It  seems  to  me  he  is ;  and  how  we  can, 
consistently  with  justice  and  fairness,  make  any 
distinction  between  the  agriculturist,  the  man 
of  commerce,  and  the  manufacturer,  in  permit- 
ting one  class  to  vote  and  another  not,  I  cannot 
see. 

Xow,  I  have  heard  it  said  that  the  city  of  Lou- 
isville, in  consequence  of  the  representation 
which  she  has  had,  and  must  have  in  the  legis- 


554 


lature,  will  hereafter  control  tlie  action  of  the 
legislature  to  a  very  great  extent.  I  am  not  sure 
8he  has  not  controlled  it  to  some  extent.  But  if 
you  look  at  the  lists  of  ayes  and  noes  of  the 
members  from  the  northern  counties,  or  from  the 
Green  river  counties,  you  will  find  them  about 
as  united  as  those  from  Louisville.  I  know  there 
are  individuals  in  the  cities  and  large  towns 
who  do  undertake  to  interfere  w-ith  legislation. 
I  saw  it  last  winter  on  the  part  of  gentlemen 
connected  with  banks,  -who  were  here  doing  all 
they  could  to  prevent  those  additional  banking 
facilities  from  being  afforded,  which  had  been 
asked  for.  One  gentleman  in  high  office  in 
bank,  wrote  to  a  member  of  the  legislature,  if 
you  shall  charter  another  bank,  I  Avill  have  the 
circulation  in  the  bank  with  which  I  am  con- 
nected curtailed  to  the  extent  of  the  capital  of 
the  new  bank — such  threats  should  be  treated 
with  merited  contempt.  Although  this  great 
bank  influence  Avas  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
representatives  from  Louisville  last  winter,  yet 
they  believed  that  additional  banking  facilities 
■were  needed,  disregarded  all  such  threats  and 
acted  in  accordance  with  their  own  judgments 
of  propriety.  I  do  not  see  how  it  is  Ave  can 
consistently  make  a  distinction  between  voters 
in  different  sections;  and  if  Jefferson  county  is 
entitled  to  iive  or  six  representatives,  let  her 
have  them.  And  if  there  be  a  residuum,  let  it 
go  somewhere  else. 

With  regard  to  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Christian,  it  may  be  right,  or  not.  I 
have  thought  but  little  about  it;  but  with  a  view 
to  make  representation  equal,  it  seems  to  me 
there  is  but  one  road  to  travel.  At  a  proper 
time,  I  propose  to  offer  the  tables  which  1  have 
read,  as  a  substitute  for  the  sixth  section  of  the 
report  now  under  consideration. 

Mr.  BOYD.  I  am  not  a  talking  man,  and  I 
do  not  therefore  know  whether  it  will  be  in  my 
power  to  make  clear  to  every  gentleman's  un- 
derstanding the  object  I  have  in  view  in  pre- 
senting this  proposition.  The  great  complaint 
I  have  heard  against  the  present  mode  of  appor- 
tioning the  state,  has  been  that  residuums  have 
been  rolled  out  from  the  section  of  country 
■where  they  occurred  and  settled  down  on  some 
other.  My  object  in  presenting  the  plan  which 
I  did,  was  to  prevent  that,  and  1  believe  that  un- 
der it  every  section,  every  twelfth  of  the  state 
would  have  secured  to  it  its  share  of  represen- 
tation. And  if  the  gentleman  Avould  take  the 
map  of  the  state,  he  would  find  that  the  two 
first  districts,  the  location  of  which  he  has  com- 
plained, was  on  congenial  grounds,  run  very  near 
across  the  state,  from  the  state  line  to  the  Ohio 
river.  I  am  not  Avedded  to  my  plan,  and  shall 
be  willing  to  go  for  the  one  which  is  most  con- 
venient, just  and  proper.  I  had  nothing  more 
in  view;  and  I  declare  to  tliis  committee  that  I 
did  not  exam'ine  as  to  the  political  bearing  of  a 
single  county,  when  I  undertook  to  lay  off  these 
districts.  My  object  was  to  make  them  as  com- 
pact us  possible,  and  so  that  each  particular  sec- 
tion of  the  state  Avould  hav«  Jt>»  full  weight  in 
tiic  legislafcurw-  1  Avill  not  be  so  uncharitable 
to  my  friend  from  Montgomery  as  he  avus  to  me. 
In  his  plan  for  apportioning  the  appellate  dis- 
tricts, if  I  recollect  right,  it  aeeras  to  me  he  pla- 
ces Mt.  Sterling  junt  about  the  centre  of  a  dis- 


trict. I  Avill  not  be  so  uncharitable  as  to  charge 
the  gentleman  Avith  figuring  this  out  to  suithim- 
self,  for  I  presume  it  is  all  right;  but  I  desire  to 
repel  the  charge  he  made  that  my  plan  Avas  pro- 
posed Avith  a  vicAv  of  affecting  the  strength  of 
the  political  parties  in  this  state.  That  Avas  not 
my  object  at  all.  I  have  no  objection  to  sustain- 
ing any  plan  that  the  gentleman  or  any  other 
may  offer,  if  he  shall  convince  me  that  it  is  the 
better  plan. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  have  not  designed,  and 
could  not  in  my  present  state  of  health,  if  so 
disposed,  make  a  speech.  The  gentleman  from 
Madison  has  spoken  of  the  act  of  '33,  and  my 
vote  of  a  previous  period.  I  was  in  the  legis- 
lature when  the  act  of  '33  passed,  as  well  as  the 
preceding  year.  The  question  as  to  the  impor- 
tation of  slaves  had  been  agitated  in  the  senate 
for  several  years,  and  in  1832  I  believe  was  the 
first  time  they  passed  a  law  on  the  subject,  and 
sent  it  to  the  house  of  representatiA'es.  It  Avas 
there  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  courts  of 
justice,  of  which  I  then  had  the  honor  to  be 
chairman.  If  I  recollect  right,  this  act  to  Avhieh 
he  refers  Avas  reported  to  that  committee  in  lieu 
of  the  senate's  bill,  and  it  failed  in  that  house. 
It  is  to  this  effect : 

"Sec.  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly 
of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  That  none 
shall  be  slaves,  except  such  as  shall  be  slaves 
within  this  commonAvealth  on  the  first  day  of 
June  next,  and  the  descendants  of  the  females 
of  them,  and  such  slaves  as  shall  thereafter  be 
lawfully  imported  into  this  comnioinvealth,  and 
the  descendants  of  the  females  of  them. 

"  Skc.  2.  Be  it  further  enacted,  That  from  and 
after  the  said  first  day  of  June,  it  shall  not  be 
laAvful  for  any  person,  or  persons,  to  import  into 
this  commoiiAvealth  any  slave  or  slaves,  ex* 
cept  emigrants  to  the  state  bringing  their  slaves 
Avith  them,  for  their  own  use,  and  not  for  mer- 
chandise; and  citizens  of  this  state  claiming 
slaves  in  another  state,  by  devise,  descent,  of 
marriage;  in  all  which  cases  it  shall  be  lawful 
for  any  such  persons  to  import  such  slaves  for 
their  own  use,  and  not  as  merchandise. 

"  Sec.  3.  All  laAvs  now  in  force,  prohibiting  the 
importation  of  slaves  into  this  commonAvealth, 
shall  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  repealed,  from 
and  after  the  said  first  day  of  June :  Provided, 
That  the  provisions  of  this  bill  shall  not  apply 
to  persons  transiently  passing  through  the  com- 
monAvealth with  slaves,  on  their  way  to  any 
other  state  or  country  :  Provided,  That  nothing 
in  this  act  |liall  be  so  construed  as  to  prevent 
persons  emigrating  to  this  state,  and  settling 
permanently  in  it,  from  selling  their  slaves." 

There  Avas  prior  to  that  time  a  good  deal  of 
agitation,  with  the  object  of  putting  an  end  to 
the  slave  trade  from  other  states  to  this.  Wheth- 
er rightfully  or  AvrongfuUy,  I  Avas  in  favor  of  a 
prohibition  of  that  trade — the  prejudices  against 
which  those  who  Avere  in  favor  of  destroying 
the  institution  itself,  were  using  as  a  lever  by 
which  to  agitate  the  public  mind  on  that  subject: 
and  intending  to  vote  for  a  law  Avhich  would 
have  the  effect  of  executing  itself,  I  voted  for 
that  act.  It  Avas,  hoAvever,  sis  the  vote  will 
show,  rejected.  The  next  year,  the  act  of  1833 
as  it  is  called  was  pa.s8ed,  and  under  the  saina 
feelings  which  had  induced  me  to  vote  for  the 


555 


Ser  bill,  I  voted  for  this  act.  The  other 
was  reject*Kl,  on  the  suggestion  that  as 
the  effect  would  be  to  set  free  all  negroes  who 
came  into  this  state,  it  would  be  an  inducement 
for  those  in  other  states,  who  desired  to  get  rid 
of  vicious  and  aged  negroes,  to  bring  them  into 
this  state,  where,  bv  the  operation  of  our  laws 
they  would  at  once  "become  free,  and  we  obliged 
to  provide  for  them.  I,  with  others,  yielded  to 
that  view,  and  the  result  was  the  passage  of  the 
law  of  1833.  For  seven  or  eight  years,  afffer  the 
passage  of  that  act,  the  agitation  of  the  subject 
was  quieted,  and  we  were  at  peace.  Then  com- 
menced an  agitation  on  the  part  of  those  who 
desired  to  introduce  slaves,  and  that  agitation, 
in  my  judgment,  had  quite  as  deleterious  an  ef- 
fect on  the  interests  of  tlie  slaveholder,  as  did 
the  agitation  wliich  the  law  of  1833  had  quieted. 
Now,  I  believe  that  no  law  should  exist  on  the 
statute  book  that  does  not  give  peace  and  quiet 
to  the  community.  A  bare  majority  should  not 
hold  ou  the  statute  book  a  law  that  dissatisfies 
and  renders  discontented  a  large  and  highly  re- 
spectable minority;  and  it  is  better  for  the  peace 
of  community  that  it  should  be  withdrawn. 
I  have  said  ou  a  former  occasion,  that  I  am  for 
leaving  the  present  constitution  on  the  subject 
of  slavery,  with  a  single  exception,  where  we 
found  it.  I  will  not  go  over  that  ground  or  into 
this  argument  again.  I  came  here,  if  pledged  at 
all  on  any  subject  to  my  constituents,  pledged  to 
the  course  I  have  indicated  on  this  slavery 
question. 

The  position  of  Louisville  on  this  subject  of 
representation  is  rather  an  unfortunate  one.  The 
gentleman  from  Madison,  who  is  for  putting  the 
act  of  1833  in  the  constitution,  or  rather  the  pro- 
posed act  of  1S32  in  the  constitution,  votes  to  re- 
strict Louisville  because  we  are  likely  to  go  for 
emancipation.  The  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
and  some  others,  will  not  vote  to  give  Louisville 
her  fair  representation,  because  we  stand  upon 
the  old  constitution,  and  do  not  enter  into  his 
peculiar  notions  of  the  citizen's  right  of  buying 
these  negroes  at  will  and  pleasure.  We  are  "still 
more  unfortunate.  Louisville,  more  than  any 
other  point  in  Kentucky,  aggregates  a  large  pro- 
portion of  those  who  flee  from  oppresson  in  the 
old  world,  and  seek  an  asylum  and  liberty  in 
this;  and  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  would 
restrict  our  representation,  because  they  found  it 
to  be  their  interest  to  locate  there,  to  a  greater 
extent,  than  any  other  portion  of  the  state,  and 
he  deeming  them  unworthy  to  have  a  voice  in 
this  government.  Now,  between  those  in  favor 
of  the  act  of  1833,  and  those  in  favor  of  a  full 
and  free  trade  in  negroes  for  their  own  use,  and 
those  who  desire  to  deny  to  these  foreigners  who 
are  naturalized  here  under  the  laws  of  the  United 
States  the  rights  of  citizenship — and  all  these 
interests  we  have  but  a — I  will  not  say,  fair 
chance.  But  we  appeal  to  that  sense  of  justice 
and  right,  which  I  trust  characterizes  this  con- 
vention, not  to  deny  us  our  legitimate  and  equal 
voice  in  the  representation  of  the  state.  We 
have  not  the  liberty  the  old  thirteen  states  had 
when  the  federal  compact  was  formed.  It  is  not 
given  to  us  to  accept  or  reject  this  con.stitution. 
We  cannot  keep  out  of  this  commonwealth  be- 
cause we  shall  be  denied  equal  rights  and  privi- 
leges.   We  are  bound  to  be  apart  of  the  common- 


wealth of  Kentucky,  and  if  we  do  not  come  in 
on  equal  terms  we  shall  be  obliged  to  conic  in  on 
unequal  terms. 

The  gentleman  says  we  have  our  loosi  pjT»w« 
ments.  So  has  every  town  in  this  conxmon- 
wealth,  and  so  has  every  county,  for  it  is  the 
beauty  of  our  system  that  we  govern  ourselves  in 
our  towns,  cities  and  counties  by  the  voice  of  a 
free  people,  equally  represented  in  the  legislative 
halls  of  the  country.  The  same  laws,  the  same 
provisions,  are  given  to  towns  and  counties  as 
their  situation  demands;  and  the  further  addi- 
tional legislation,  if  you  will,  to  cities  where  a 
greater  number  of  individuals  congregate,  and 
where  it  requires  more  vigilance  in  the  officers, 
and  more  stringent  rules  to  maintain  the  admin- 
istration of  the  laws  predominant,  by  applying 
them  correctly,  certainly,  and  efficientlv,  to  those 
who  offend.  But  it  all  flows  from  the  policy, 
the  justice,  and  the  wisdom  of  the  representa- 
tives of  the  people,  in  applying  a  set  of  laws  to 
each  section,  county,  town,  or  city,  that  its 
necessities  require. 

Gentlemen  apprehend  danger  that  the  voice 
of  the  cities  will  control  the  voice  of  the  coun- 
try. I  will  not  go  into  the  arguments  which 
gentlemen  have  offered:  they  have  been  met  by 
others  and  met  fully.  I  maintain  that  un- 
der our  system  of  laws  and  government,  the 
country  has  as  little  to  fear  from  the  freemen  of 
the  city  controlling  in  the  legislature,  as  the 
cities  have  to  fear  from  the  voice  of  the  people 
of  ttie  country  controlling  in  the  legislature.  If 
the  cities  are  in  a  majority,  and  by  their  num- 
bers are  entitled  to  it — wliy  if  it  was  a  govern- 
ment of  force  they  would  liave  it.  If  the  coun- 
try is  in  a  majority  and  this  was  a  government  of 
force,  they  would  have  it.  If  it  is  a  govern- 
ment of  equal  rights  and  equal  laws,  blessed 
with  equal  and  fair  representation,  why  the  con- 
trol will  be  with  the  majority  wherever  it  is. 
and  no  where  else  can  it  be  vested.  When  I 
was  up  on  a  former  occasion,  I  examined  this 
sulyect  with  care,  and  some  think  with  boldness, 
and  that  I  pushed  my  arguments  further  than 
I  should  have  done.  I  will  not  go  back  upon 
it.  If  no  man  can  apply  conscientiously,  any- 
thing I  said,  to  his  own  \x)som  and  heart  in  re 
lation  to  this  thing,  then  I  will  not  apply  it  to 
him.  It  is  true  I  thanked  God  that  emancipa- 
tion had  shed  no  blood  in  Louisville  or  in  the 
river  counties,  and  I  still  thank  God  that  was 
the  case.  It  does  not  follow  however,  that  I 
thanked  God  it  shed  blood  elsewhere.  That  is 
as  far  from  my  feelings  as  any  man  in  this  con- 
vention, and  if  any  man  here  felt  more  for  the 
gentleman  from  Madison  than  I  felt  on  that  oc- 
casion, I  do  not  know  him.  But  when  he  is 
seeking  here  on  account  of  emancipation  to  stifle 
the  voice  of  my  constituents,  I  thought  he 
should  look  at  home,  and  I  used  the  bold  lan- 
guage calculated  to  bring  him  to  reflect  on  the 
subject.  If  any  protection  of  the  country  from 
the  emancipation  feeling  is  desired,  let  gentle- 
men march  up  to  it,  and  put  a  test  article  in  the 
constitution,  and  allow  no  man  to  vote  who  is 
in  favor  of  emancipation.  That  will  .secure  the 
slaveholders,  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  doubt, 
from  all  that  are  here  now  in  our  state,  and  all 
who  shall  come  hereafter,  whether  fleeing  from 
oppression  in  a  foreign  land,  or  from   Yankee- 


i56 


dora,  or  from  wherever  it  may  choose  them  to 
come.  It  is  a  restriction,  and  gentlemen  will 
not  and  they  ou^ht  not  put  it  into  the  constitu- 
tion. Yet  the  effect  of  the  proposition  here  is 
to  deny  the  city  and  country  are  equals,  and  in 
truth  to  put  such  a  proposition  in  the  constitu- 
tion. I  ask  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  why 
not  put  this  test  in  the  constitution  and  apply  it 
to  his  constituents.  There  are,  according  to  the 
best  estimate,  I  have  been  able  to  make,  some 
three  thousand  naturalized  citizens  in  the  com- 
monwealth of  Kentucky,  who  are  entitled  to 
vote.  I  have  lived  now  near  thirty  years  in 
Louisville,  where  more  of  these  naturalized  citi- 
zens are  congregated  than  any  where  else,  and 
during  all  of  that  time,  we  have  never  had  one 
of  them  in  the  legislature  of  the  state  to  my 
knowledge.  Nor  do  I  recollect  that  one  has 
ever  come  from  the  country.  They  are  sensible, 
industrious,  frugal,  economical  people,  and  they 
do,  more  generally  than  any  other  people  in 
this  commonwealth,  attend  to  the  eleventh  com- 
mandment— that  is,  to  mind  thsir  own  business 
and  not  interfere  with  that  of  others.  There 
are  occasionally  among  that  class  bad  men,  as 
there  will  be  in  all  classes;  and  therefore  if  you 
apply  a  rule  that  is  to  exclude  bad  men,  apply 
it  to  all  classes.  If  congress  was  to  repeal  the 
naturalization  laws,  we  are  content,  for  we  do 
not  want  anybody  to  vote  who  is  not  a  citizen 
of  the  United  States,  and  who  has  not  resided 
the  proper  time  among  us.  For  myself,  I  am 
not  willing  that  any  man  shall  be  a  citizen  of 
this  commonwealth,  and  not  be  entitled  to  all  of 
the  priviliges  of  citizenship.  I  do  not  Avant  to 
see  a  class  here  wlio  shall  be  less  than  citizens 
to  raise  up  citizens  and  poison  their  minds 
against  the  government  under  which  they  live, 
for  denying  them  the  rights  which  they  give  to 
others.     I  do   not  desire   to  look  forward  to  a 

{)eriod  in  this  government  Avhen  tliere  shall  be  a 
arge  class  of  citizens  who  feel  no  interest  in  the 
operations  of  the  institutions  of  the  country. 
Let  them,  after  they  have  remained  a  sufficient 
length  of  time,  become  citizens  and  take  their 
places  as  such,  and  feel  that  they  are  freemen 
as  we  are.  Gentlemen  may  entertain  their  own 
views  on  this  subject,  but  surely  we  are  not  go- 
ing to  change  the  constitution  of  Kentucky  be- 
cause we  have  three  thousand  naturalized  citi- 
zens among  us.  Surely  they  are  not  going  to 
adopt  a  principle  that  is  to  deny  to  free  born 
American  citizens,  and  the  descendants  of  those 
who  bled  in  the  battles  that  won  our  liberties, 
equality  of  representation  with  his  fellow  citi- 
zens. And  yet  in  seeking  to  exclude  the  for- 
eigner from  this  privilege,  they  will  inevitably 
exclude  also  the  native  citizen.  But  I  am  acf- 
monished  by  the  soreness  of  my  breast  to  bring 
my  remarks  to  a  close. 

The  amendment  proposed  by  Mr.  CLARKE 
was  then  read. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  desire  to  separate  the  white 
from  the  black  in  this  matter,  and  I  move  to 
strike  out  so  much  of  the  proposition  as  refers 
to  the  importation  of  slaves. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  sliould  be  very 
much  gratified  if  the  gentleman,  instead  of  mov- 
ing to  strike  out,  had  asked  for  a  division  of  the 
question,  so  that  the  house  might  vote  directly 
on  each  of  the  propositions  of  the  gentleman 


from  Simpson.  I  make  the  suggestion  because 
I  am  convinced  that  the  votes  of  some  gentle- 
men upon  the  latter  part  of  the  proposition  will 
be  governed,  in  some  measure,  by  the  decision 
of  the  convention  upon  the  first  branch. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  It  is  my  object,  as  well  as  that 
of  otliers  on  this  floor,  to  have  a  vote  taken  on 
this  proposition  by  ayes  and  nays.  I  therefore 
request  the  gentleman  who  moved  to  strike  out 
to  withdraw  his  motion,  until  I  make  another. 
This  is,  that  the  committee  rise  and  report  the 
bill  to  the  house,  where  I  can  call  the  ayes  and 
nays.  There  he  can  renew  the  motion  he  has 
made,  and  I  thank  him  for  it,  as  I  desire  to  have 
this  question  tested. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  assented  to  the  withdrawal  of 
his  motion  to  strike  out. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Does  the  chair  consider  my 
proposition  before  the  house,  in  such  a  shape  as 
to  get  a  vote  upon  it. 

The  CHAIR  did  not  consider  it  as  having  been 
formally  offered  at  all,  but  said  that  it  was  in 
order  for  the  gentleman  to  do  so  now. 
Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Then  I  offer  it  now. 
There  was  some  conversation  as  to  whether 
the  course  suggested  by  Mr.  Clarke  would  be 
strictly  parliamentary,  when 

Mr.  CLARKE  withdrew  his  motion  that  the 
committee  rise  and  report. 

Mr.  Taylor  then  renewed  his  motion  to 
srrike  out  the  last  clause  of  the  proposition,  as 
before  indicated  by  him. 

The  question  being  then  taken,  the  motion  to 
strike  out  was  rejected,  a  count  being  had,  ayes 
34,  nays  35. 

The  question  was  then  on  the  adoption  of  the 
amendment. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  asked  for  a  division 
of  the  question. 

The  CHAIR  stated  the  question  to  be  on 
-striking  out  the  section  as  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee, and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof  the  amend- 
ment of  Mr.  Clarke.  A  division  being  asked,  the 
question  would  be  first  taken  on  striking  out. 

Mr.  DAVIS.     The   original  section  is    then 
open  for  any  amendment  that  may  be  oflfered. 
The  CHAIR.    Yes  sir. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  then  offer  to  amend  the  sec- 
tion as  follows:  "  Provided  further ,  That  no  coun- 
ty or  city  shall  ever  be  entitled  to  more  than 
one  senator." 

There  was  some  conversation  as  to  which 
question  was  prior  in  order,  whether  on  the 
amendment  of  Mr.  Triplett  or  that  of  Mr.  Davis, 
when  the  latter  gentleman  withdrew  his  amend- 
ment. 

The  question  was  then  on  the  amendment  of- 
fered by  Mr.  Triplett. 

Mr.  LINDSEY  suggested  that  the  numbers 
should  be  left  blank. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  assented  to  that  suggestion, 
and  his  proposition  was  so  amended. 

It  was  then  rejected,  a  count  being  had,  ayes 
34,  navs  39.  i- 

Mr.  MORRIS  then  renewed  his  amendment, 
to  strike  out  all  after  the  word  "provided"  in  the 
seventh  section,  and  to  insert  the  following: 

"Resolved,  That  whenever  a  city  or  town  shall 
be  entitled  to  a  separate  representation  in  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly,  and  by  her  num- 
bers shall  be  entitled  to  more  than  one  represen- 


557 


tative,  such  eivy,  or  town,  shall  h^  JlviJcd  by 
wards,  which  are  contiguous,  into  representa- 
tive districts,  as  nearly  equal  as  may  be,  equal 
to  the  number  of  representatives  to  which  such 
citv,  or  town,  mav  be  entitled,  and  one  represen- 
tative shall  be  elected  from  each  district.  In 
like  manner  shall  said  city,  or  town,  be  divided 
into  senatorial  districts,  when,  by  the  apportion- 
ment, more  than  one  senator  shall  be  allotted  to 
such  city,  or  town,  and  a  senator  shall  be  eleeted 
from  each  senatorial  district;  but  no  ward  or 
municipal  division,  shall  be  divided  bv  such  di- 
vision of  senatorial  or  representative  district." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  rise  to  suggest  to 
the  mover  of  that  proposition,  a  modification  of 
it,  and  I  do  so,  I  must  confess,  with  some  degree 
of  solicitude  that  he  will  a.ssent  to  it.  I  do  so  to 
obviate  an  objection  which  has  not  been  suggest- 
ed in  debate,  but  in  conversation,  striking  at 
what,  I  know  from  the  honorable  mover  of  that 
proposition,  was  not  one  of  the  purposes  he  had 
in  view  to  attain.  And  certainly,  in  expressing 
my  determination  to  vote  for  it  when  first  pre- 
sented, I  had  no  object  or  view  sueh  as  has  been 
understood.  It  isafactwell  knowntothishouse, 
that  the  city  of  Louisville  now,  so  far  as  ques- 
tions of  national  policy  are  concerned,  stands 
whig  with  a  majority  of  some  six  or  seven  hun- 
dred votes.  The  majority  of  this  house  is  upon 
the  side  of  the  democratic  division  in  the  na- 
tion, and  it  has  been  urged  that  this  proposition, 
if  it  succeeds,  in  applying  to  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville, under  its  present  numerical  representation, 
or  under  that  of  the  next  census,  will  have  the 
effect  to  destroy  the  political  strength  of  that  ci- 
ty, as  it  has  been  divided  upon  the  questions  to 
which  I  have  alluded.  It  is  said  that  if  we  di- 
vide the  citv  into  some  three  or  four  districts,  the 
result  may  oe  the  choice,  in  some  of  them,  of  re- 
presentatives differing  from  what  would  be  the 
sentiment  of  a  majority  of  the  city.  I  do  not 
wish,  favorable  as  I  am  to  this  amendment,  and 
acting  with  that  majority  to  which  I  have  re- 
ferred in  this  house,  to  oe  subjected  to  the  charge, 
while  I  am  endeavoring  to  support  a  proposi- 
tion to  modify  the  section  that  will  prevent  these 
difiiculties  we  have  been  discussing,  that  I  am 
governed  or  influenced  by  a  desire  to  strike  down 
the  political  majority  in  that  city.  That  is  not 
the  position  I  occupy.  I  ask  the  mover  of  the 
proposition  so  to  modify  it,  that  when  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  city  in  the  lower  branch  shall  be 
four,  it  shall  be  divided  into  two  election  dis- 
tricts, giving  to  the  people,  as  in  NeLson  county 
and  elsewhere,  the  right  to  vote  for  two  representa- 
tives. And  when  the  number  shall  exceed  four, 
then  apply  the  principle  of  establishing  another 
district.  Again,  as  is  well  known,  in  the  elec- 
tion of  delegates  from  that  city,  national  politics 
were  not  brought  into  the  question,  or  at  least 
the  sentiment  of  the  delegates  returned  here 
stand  two  to  one,  and  it  may  be  supposed,  un- 
less the  proposition  is  amended  as  I  suggest,  that 
it  was  offered  in  furtherance  of  the  desire  of  one 
of  those  delegates.  So  far  as  I  am  able  to  speak 
on  the  subject,  I  take  it  for  granted  that  that 
gentleman  was  taken  as  muc-h  by  surprise  by 
that  amendment,  as  any  gentleman  in  this  house. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  is  true  that  I  knew 
nothing  of  the  proposed  amendment  now  offered. 
My  desire  is,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  that  the 


j  representation  of  Louisville  should  stand  preeise- 
!  ly  as  it  dijl  before.  I  do  not  wish  or  desire  my- 
self, to  make  any  change.  I  will  state  that  ac- 
cording to  the  present  division  of  the  wards  in 
Louisville,  there  would  have  to  be  three  districts 
in  order  to  give  the  democratic  party  a  represen- 
tative, if  the  people  vote  according  to  their  present 
political  sentiments.  If  the  city  should  be  enti- 
tled to  two  senators,  their  location  in  two  districts 
would  not  change  the  political  sentiments  of  the 
delegation.  The  wards  now,  are  divided  at 
fourth  street,  four  above  and  four  below,  with  a 
population  in  both,  very  nearly  equal.  If  the 
population  should  increase  in  each  in  the  same 
proportion,  and  each  would  probably  preserve 
Its  present  political  sentiments.  The  two  upper 
wards  are  democratic,  and  the  two  next  whig, 
but  stronger  in  proportion  than  tlie  others.  I 
am  certainly  willing  that  gentlemen  should  take 
anv  measure  that  they  may  deem  safe  for  the  in- 
terests of  the  state,  as  regards  the  arrangement 
of  the  representation  of  the  city,  but  I  should 
be  placed  in  an  awkward  situation  if  this  prop- 
osition was  to  pass.  I  did  not  come  here  from 
either  party,  and  I  wish  not  to  lie  under  imputa- 
tion of  being  actuated  by  any  party  motives.  I 
had  retired  from  politics  because  I  would  no 
longer  struggle  to  represent  those  with  whom  I 
differed.  I  only  consented  to  make  this  race,  and 
stand  here  as  a  delegate,  at  the  request  of  those 
who  desired  that  Louisville  should  stand  right 
on  a  question  that  was  agitating  the  state. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  It  certainly  could  not  be  more 
foreign  to  the  disposition  of  any  gentleman  on 
this  floor,  to  introduce  in  the  house  a  proposition 
which  would  array  against  each  other,  the  two 
parties  in  this  house,  or  in  the  state,  than  to  myself. 
I  occupy  apcculiarposition,  one  quite  as  peculiar 
as  the  gentleman  who  represents  Louisville.  I 
mean  the  democratic  gentleman.  I,  like  hira, 
represent  a  whig  constituency,  and  when  I  intro- 
duced that  compromise  amendment,  for  so  I  in- 
tended it.  I  had  hot  the  remotest  idea  that  it 
would  strike  this  house  as  a  party  move,  nor 
even  the  slightest  intimation  of  the  fact  that  it 
did  so,  until  yesterday,  when  I  saw  a  short  letter 
in  the  Louisville  Journal,  intimating  that  it 
would  secure  the  election  of  ademocratic  member 
in  that  city.  I  did  state,  in  the  remarks  I  sub- 
mitted on  offering  the  proposition,  that  in  all 
probability  the  city  of  Louisville  would  stand 
divided,  and  I  stated  that  in  order  that  the  posi- 
tion which  I  assumed  might  be  strengthened  be- 
fore this  house,  I  thought  if  I  could  prove  to 
this  house,  that  if  these  great  interests  of  Louis- 
ville, which  were  to  overshadow  the  whole  coun- 
try, could  be  divided  on  great  questions  against 
itself,  that  it  would  strengthen  the  proposition  I 
made.  Certainly  I  never  have  been  placed  in  a 
more  embarrassing  situation.  If  we  were  here 
to  be  driven  to  a  strict  party  vote  on  any  ques- 
tion, I  really  do  not  know  on  which  side  I  should 
vote.  I  came  here  to  represent  neither  of  the  great 
parties.  I  came  here  like  some  other  gentlemen, 
to  advocate  certain  propositions  which  I  believe 
right,  independent  of  all  parties.  As  to  the 
amendment  of  my  friend  from  Xelson,  I  think  it 
would  be  defeating  the  proposition  itself,  and  be 
throwing  embarrassments  in  the  way  of  its  pass- 
age. If  ray  proposition  was  to  secure  the  election 
of  three  whigs  instead  of  one  democrat,  I  should 


558 


have  rua.le  it  ln-re.  I  think  w«?  stand  here  ahove 
all  pariy.  I  made  the  proposition  fur  'the  pur- 
pose of  breaking  that  vast  influeiict;  of  Louis- 
ville that  some  gentlemen  vSeem  to  fear.  Perliaps 
after  further  deliberation,  1  may  agree  to  accept 
the  proposition  of  juy  friend  from  Nelson,  but 
as  I  now  feel  some  disinclination  so  to  do,  and 
should  like  to  consult  witli  my  friends  on  the 
subject,  I  now  move  that  the  committee  rise,  and 
report  progress,  and  ask  leave  to  sit  again. 

Mr.  IRWIN  moved  a  recess,  this  was  not  con- 
curred in,  and  then  the  committee  rose  and  re- 
ported progress  and  had  leave  to  sit  again. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  NOVEMBER  17th,  1849. 
Prayer  by  Rev  Stuart  Robertson. 

KVENIXG    SESSIONS. 

Mr.  BARLOW  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion: 

Resolved,  That  on  Monday  next,  and  every 
day  thereafter,  the  convention  will  take  a  recess 
and  hold  an  evening  session,  to  commence  at  3 
o'clock. 

After  a  brief  conversation  on  its  propriety,  the 
yeas  and  nays  were  called,  and  on  being  taken, 
were — yeas  57,  nays  17. 

So  the  resolution  was  agreed  to. 

LEGISLATIVE   RKPRESENTATIOX. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE  offered  the  following  reso- 
lution: 

Resolved,  That  the  house  of  representatives 
shall,  at  all  times,  consist  of  as  many  members 
as  there  may  be  counties  in  the  state,  and  each 
county  shall  be  entitled  to  a  separate  representa- 
tive. The  state  shall  be  divided  into 
senatorial  districts,  in  each  of  which,  one  sena- 
ator  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters 
thereof:  Provided.  That  each  representative  and 
each  senator  shall  be  entitled  to  one  vote  for 
every  one  hundred  electors  in  his  county  or  dis- 
trict. 

As  I  am  a  young  member  in  this  body,  I  feel  a 
delicacy  in  offering  a  resolution  which  runs  coun- 
ter to  the  report  of  any  of  its  committees,  but 
upon  reading  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department,  I  found  that,  like  all  the 
■works  of  man,  it  was  defective.  I  think  it  will 
be  conceded  that  the  resolution  which  I  have 
offered,  has  at  least  three  merits.  First,  that  it 
deprives  the  legislature  of  tlie  power  of  taking 
any  action  upon  the  question  of  apportioning 
the  representatives.  In  the  second  place,  it 
metes  out  justice  to  every  county  and  citizen  of 
the  commonwealth;  and  lastly,  it  gives  to  every 
municipality  its  own  separate  and  independent 
representative. 

Wherein  has  the  difficulty  existed  heretofore 
in  apportioning  the  representation  of  this  state? 
It  has  been  in  the  fact  that  you  were  compelled 
to  give  the  legislature  a  power  whicli  might  be 
used  for  party  purposes.  This  is  a  serious  and 
crying  evil.  Here  is  a  county  with  two  thousand 
qualified  voters — five  hundred  more  than  is  suf- 


ficient to  entitle  it  to  a  representative.  This 
surplus  is  transferred  to  a  county,  perhaps  fifty 
miles  distant,  to  supply  its  deficiency;  to  one 
also  whose  political  sentiments  and  local  inter- 
ests may  be  directly  opposite  to  the  sentiments 
and  interests  of  the  residuum  thus  transferred. 

Under  such  circumstances,  are  these  five  hun- 
dred voters  represented  at  all?  Do  they  exert 
any  influence  in  the  legislature,  politically  or 
otherwise?  I  apprehend  not.  So  far  as  their 
power,  influence  or  interests  are  concerned,  they 
might  as  well  be  disfranchised. 

This  resolution,  and  this  alone,  lays  down  a 
basis  by  which  the  political  sentiments,  local 
interests,  and  wishes  of  every  county  in  the  state, 
and  of  every  voter  in  the  county  may,  and  will 
be,  fully  represented.  Where  is  the  county 
which,  unless  it  has  its  share,  or  more  than  its 
share  of  representation,  is  not  complaining  con- 
tinually of  the  injustice  done  to  it?  Is  there 
not  a  feeling  of  universal  discontent  throughout 
the  body  politic  in  relation  to  this  question  of 
apportionment?  There  is  sir.  The  resolution 
which  I  have  submitted,  proposes  a  plan  which 
will  operate  justly  and  equally  upon  all  in  this 
respect. 

It  proposes  that  each  countv  shall  send  its 
own  representative,  who  shall  he  entitled  to  one 
vote  for  every  one  hundred  qualified  electors  in 
his  county.  Thus,  if  a  countv  has  two  thousand 
voters,  its  representative  in  tlie  legislature  shall 
cast  twenty  votes  for  or  against  any  bill  which 
may  come  up  for  decision.  If  a  county  has  two 
thousand  five  hundred  voters,  its  representative 
shall  cast  twenty  five  votes.  If  it  has  one  thou- 
sand, then  ten  will  be  his  number  of  votes,  and  so 
on  for  any  possible  number  which  the  county 
may  contain.  Does  not  this  mete  out  equal  jus- 
tice to  the  whole  community?  Does  it  not  do  so 
more  fully  and  perfectly  than  any  system  which 
has  been  presented  to  this  convention?  I  think  it 
does,  sir.  The  entire  body  of  the  people  will 
thus  be  fairly  represented.  It  gives  to  every 
freeman  a  voice  in  the  councils  of  the  state.  It 
does  not  make  property  or  territory  the  basis  of 
representation,  but  men,  thinking,  reasoning, 
intelligent  men.  And  it  gives  every  such  man 
who  is  a  citizen  of  the  state  the  means  of  being 
heard,  and  the  power  of  acting  through  his  rep- 
resentative in  the  legislature.  I  ask  gentlemen 
to  point  out  wherein  a  system  of  this  character 
can  possibly  work  injustice  to  any  portion  of 
the  community. 

But,  sir,  let  us  notice  the  plan  of  apportion- 
ment now  in  operation.  The  county  of  Bour- 
bon, with  some  nineteen  hundred  voters,  sends 
two  representatives  to  the  legislature,  while  the 
county  of  Campbell,  with  two  thousand  four 
hundred,  sends  out  one.  The  county  of  Casey, 
with  about  one  thousand  voters,  sends  one  mem- 
ber; while  the  county  of  Hardin,  with  two  thou- 
sand four  hundred,  sends  two.  Cases  of  this 
kind  might  be  multiplied,  but  it  is  unnecessary. 
Where  is  the  reason  or  justice  of  an  apportion- 
ment of  this  kind? 

But  it  is  argued  that  the  report  of  the  legisla- 
tive committee  obviates  this  great  <lifficulty  bv 
taking  the  power  from  the  legislature  to  work 
these  great  political  enormities.  Let  us  notice, 
for  a  moment,  the  workings  of  the  system  pro- 
posed in  that  report.     The  county  of  Larue, 


)59 


xrith  one  thousand  voters,  being  two  thirds  of  i 
the  ratio,  gets  one  representative,  while  the  coun- 
ty of  Harrison,  with  two  thousand  two  hundred 
voters,  not  having  one  ratio  and  two  thirds,  gets  I 
but  one.     Here,  bv  a  course  of  political  reason-  | 
ing,  wholly  unintelligible  to  me,  it  is  supposed  ; 
that  the  seven  hundred  surplus  in  Harrison,  is 
taken  to   Larue  to  supplv  the   deficiency  there, 
and  that  by  this  means  tliis  seven  hundred  sur- 

Elus  is  fairly  represented  by  the  member  from 
arue.  To  my  mind,  sir,  this  is  nothing  more 
nor  less  than  a  political  sophism,  based  upon 
the  supposed  necessity  of  the  case.  This  seven 
hundred  surplus  is  not,  in  reality,  represented 
at  all,  or  if  represented,  it  is  by  a  member  in 
the  selection  of  whom  they  had'  no  voice,  and 
who  feels  no  identity  of  interest  with  them. 

Again,  the  report  provides  that  a  county  hav- 
ing two  thirds  of  the  ratio  shall  be  entitled  to 
one  representative,  and  that  the  ratio  and  two 
thirds  over  shall  be  required  to  give  two.  How 
will  this  work? 

Thirteen  counties  can  be  selected  which  will 
have  about  13,d00  voters,  and  they  will  he  enti- 
tled to  thirteen  representatives,  while  thirteen 
other  counties  with  26,500  voters  will  be  enti- 
tled to  but  thirteen.  Xow  sir,  where  shall  the 
first  thirteen  counties  supply  their  deficiency  of 
6,000  voters,  and  what  shall  the  last  thirteen  do 
with  their  7,000  surplus?  Sir,  in  truth  you  cre- 
ate 6,000  imaginary  men  fur  the  benetit  of  the 
small  counties  andyoupoliticallykill7,000  in  the 
large  couiities.  You  never  can  give  to  each 
county  its  exact  representation  in  vour  legisla- 
tive halls  by  this  method  of  apportionment. 

But  there  is  another  consideration  in  favor  of 
the  plan  contained  in  my  resolution.  It  gives  to 
each  county  its  independent  representation. 
Each  countv  sends  its  member  whether  it  has  its 
500  or  2,5O0  voters,  whether  750  or  3,000.  Each 
county,  to  a  certain  extent,  constitutes  a  separate 
and  independent  municipality.  Take  any  two 
adjoining  counties  and  notice  what  difference  of! 
feeling,  what  prejudices,  likes  and  dislikes  ex- ! 
ist.  There  is  an  imaginary  line  dividing  two 
counties.  On  one  side  the  people  congregate  at 
one  point  to  transact  their  business,  to  attend 
their  courts,  <kc.,  on  the  other  side  of  this  line 
they  go  to  another  point  for  the  same  purposes. 
Each  county  has  an  identity  of  interest  peculiar 
to  itself,  and  desires  to  have  its  own  representa- 
tion in  the  councils  of  the  state. 

According  to  the  report  of  the  committee  we 
shall,  in  many  ca.ses,  have  to  throw  two  or  three 
counties  together  in  order  to  entitle  them  to  a 
representative.  By  this  act  their  identity  is  de- 
stroyed; besides  the  larger  counties  overrule  and 
trample  upon  the  rights  of  the  smaller  ones.  The 
feelings,  wishes,  and  interests  of  the  county  in 
which  the  member  lives  are  attended  to,  to  the 
neglect  of  the  others  attached  to  it.  If  a  question 
arises  wherein  the  interests  of  the  two  counties 
are  antagonistic,  the  member's  own  county  re- 
ceives the  preference.  These  things  engender 
jealousy,  ill-will,  and  hatred. 

Again,  other  counties  in  the  state  will  be  enti- 
tled to  two  or  more  representatives.  It  frequent- 
ly happens,  where  two  are  elected  from  the  same 
county,  that  a  person  is  elected  who  is  the  choice 
of  neither  party,  by  voters  throwing  one  of  their 
votes  for  him.     Thus  the  interests  and  wishes  of 


the  people  are  represented  by  a  man  who  is  not 
their  choice  by  the  occurrence  of  this  circum- 
stance, which  is  known  to  happen  frequently. 
All  these  difficulties  are  obviated  by  the  plan 
proposed  in  my  resolution.  The  largest  county 
in  the  state  will  have  but  one  representative, 
whose  power  will  be  equal  to  the  number  of  elec- 
tors in  his  county,  and  the  smallest  county  will 
have  one  member  also. 

There  may  be  some  objections  urged  against 
my  proposition  which  it  may  be  well  to  antici- 
pate. It  may  be  said  that  it'will  be  difficult  to 
carry  tliis  plan  into  operation  in  the  legislature; 
that  there  may  be  a  difficulty  in  taking  the  votes 
where  members  have  an  unequal  number.  There 
is,  however,  in  reality  no  difficulty  at  all.  I  have 
consulted  the  secretary  of  this  convention,  who 
has  discharged  the  duties  of  clerk  of  the  house 
of  representatives  with  great  credit  for  several 
years,  and  find  that  his  views  of  this  matter  co- 
incide with  mine.  He  assured  me  that  the  vote 
can  be  taken  almost  as  speedily  as  it  can  be  un- 
der the  present  plan.  But  suppose  it  should 
take  five  minutes  longer,  should  that  weigh  in 
the  scale  against  the  rights  of  the  people  which 
are  so  much  more  equally  secured?  tinder  the 
present  plan  it  taikes  about  tliree  weeks  every 
four  years  for  the  legislature  to  apportion  the 
state.  This  time  being  saved  would  amply 
compensate  for  the  extra  time  consumed  in  vo- 

The  question  may  be  asked,  how  will  you  de- 
cide a  vote  when  the  veas  and  nays  are  not  cal- 
led? The  answer  is  simple.  In  every  such  case 
each  member  has  an  equal  vote.  This  works  no 
injustice,  for  if  any  member  is  dissatisfied  with 
the  result,  he  can  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays.  It 
may  be  suggested  that  this  plan  throws  too 
much  power  into  the  hands  of  an  individual 
where  he  represents  the  interests  of  twenty  five 
hundred  constituents,  and  consequently  has 
twenty  five  votes  in  ,his  hands.  It  gives  him 
but  his  just  proportion.  There  is  no  danger 
here  unless  we  admit  that  representatives  are 
susceptible  of  being  easily  corrupted;  that  they 
may  be  swayed  from  the  path  of  duty  by  bribe- 
ry and  corruption.  If  this  doctrine  be  affirmed, 
then  we  had  better  increase  our  representation 
largely,  as  the  extra  cost  would  not  weigh  in 
the  scale  against  general  security. 

Again  it  may  be  argued  that  new  counties  will 
be  formed,  and  by  this  means  the  legislature 
may  be  increased  to  too  large  a  size.  This  plan 
of  apportionment  will  act  as  a  check  upon  the 
legislature  to  prevent  them  from  forming  new 
counties.  No  representative  will  dare  to  cur- 
tail the  power  of  his  county  by  cutting  off  a 
part  of  it  except  upon  the  most  pressing  neces- 
sity. Thus  it  will  act  as  a  cement  to  bind  the 
various  parts  of  a  county  together. 

The  present  plan  of  apportionment  has  been 
a  proline  source  of  evil  in  this  respect.  A  coun- 
ty having  two  thousand  voters  could  send  but 
one  member  although  it  had  five  hundred  spare 
voters.  This  made  the  people  willing  to  have 
this  five  hundred  stricken  off  and  attached  to 
other  fractions  to  form  a  new  county.  The  di- 
vision of  the  county  has  not  affected  its  political 
power. 

Give  this  county  a  representative  empowered 
to  cast  a  vot«  for  everv  one  hundred  voters  in 


.&G0 


his  county  and  the  difflcultv  is  obviated.  That 
county  win  not  suffer  itself  to  be  divided.  An 
adhesive  principle  is  at  once  applied  which  will 
bind  all  the  parts  of  the  county  together. 

With  these  hasty  remarks  and  imperfect  views, 
I  desire  the  resolution  printed  and  referred  to 
the  committee  of  the  whole,  believing  that  com- 
mittee will  give  it  whatever  consideration  its 
merits  deserve. 

It  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole 
and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

Mr.  HARGIS  offered  the  following  resolution; 

Provided,  That  no  city  or  town  shall  ever  be  en- 
titled to  more  than  two  senators,  until  her  popu- 
lation increase  to  300,000,  after  which  such  city 
may  have  three  senators,  and  no  more:  Provided, 
That  in  the  house  of  representatives,  represen- 
tation shall  always  be  in  proportion  to  the  num- 
ber of  qualified  voters  in   such   city  or  town. 

In  relation  to  the  important  question  of  repre- 
sentation, he  believed  it  should  be  based  onpop- 
\ilation,  but  still  he  contended  that  there  is  a  dif- 
ference between  population,  when  crowded  into 
cities,  and  when  diffused  over  the  country.  The 
states  which  have  amended  their  constitutions 
within  the  last  eight  or  ten  years,  have  nearly  all 
restricted  their  cities.  It  may  not  have  been 
done  in  the  state  of  Ifew  York,  as  gentlemen 
have  suggested,  inasmuch  as  there  is  less  danger 
of  the  undue  influence  of  cities  in  large  states, 
than  in  those  which  are  smaller.  But  the  state 
of  Maryland  has  given  tlic  city  of  Baltimore  no 
ereater  representation  than  each  of  the  counties 
of  the  state.  Virginia,  and  Pennsylvania  have 
adopted  the  principle  of  restriction.  The  city 
of  Philadelphia  is  limited  to  four  senators,  and 
the  number  is  not  to  be  increased.  The  state  of 
Louisiana  has  limited  the  representation  of  the 
citv  of  New  Orleans  to  four,  although  according 
to  her  present  population,  she  would  be  entitled 
to  six.  In  short,  if  there  is  a  rule  well  establish- 
ed in  the  United  States,  it  is  that  cities  should  be 
restricted,  and  why  should  it  not  be  enforced  in 
Kentucky?  Louisville,  and  the  county  of  Jef- 
ferson have  now  here,  five  delegates,  and  if  that 
city  continues  to  increase,  as  she  has  increased, 
in  fifty  years  she  would  be  entitled  to  five  or  six 
senators.  It  has  been  contended  that  in  this 
there  is  no  danger  to  be  apprehended,  but  that, 
if  the  restriction  should  be  enforced,  whenever 
the  cities  on  the  Ohio  river   become  sufficiently 

SoWerful,  they  will  arise  and  avenge  their  wrongs. 
,ead  the  history  of  the  oriental  nations,  and 
what  do  we  learn  ?  That  cities  grow  up  and  be- 
come proud  of  their  numbers,  and  that  the  more 
they  have,  the  more  they  want.  For  himself,  he 
had  no  objection  if  these  cities  should  grow  up 
and  rival  in  population  and  power  the  ancient 
cities  of  Ninevah  and  Babylon,  and  that  each 
city  should  be  able  to  send  out  of  her  hun- 
dred gates,  ten  thousand  fighting  men  in  arms, 
but  he  would  take  care  to  impose  such  a  restric- 
tion on  this  power  and  greatness  as  would  pre- 
vent any  disadvantage  therefrom  to  the  other 
portion  of  the  state. 

What  had  Louisville  already  received?  She 
has  a  chancery  court,  with  a  salary  for  her  chan- 
cellor of  $2,000.  Her  circuit  judge  receives 
more  than  the  circuit  judges  in  other  portions  of 
the  state,  and  she  receives  a  larger  share  of  the 
Kchool  fund.     He  thought  there  was  great  dang- 


er to  be  ajjprehended  from  the  influence  she 
might  exercise  arising  from  the  consolidation  of 
wealth  and  numbers  ;  and  the  completion  of 
railroads  to  terminate  there,  would  serve  to  in- 
crease it. 

Much  had  been  said  upon  the  question  of  sla- 
verj'.  The  gentlemen  who  were  here  voting 
against  any  restriction  on  the  city  of  Louisville 
were  those  who  were  in  favor  of  the  introduction 
of  the  law  of  1833.  To  that  law  he  stood  as  an 
opponent.  He  believed  that  slavery  was  sanc- 
tioned by  the  bible  ;  but  he  did  not  believe  that 
the  question  of  slavery  and  the  restriction  of 
cities  had  any  necessary  connection. 

He  repeated  the  remark  that  the  population  of 
a  city  can  be  represented  by  a  smaller  number  of 
representatives  than  the  cotinty  wliose  inhabi- 
tants are  spread  over  a  larger  surface.  He 
then  returned  to  the  law  of  1833,  and  said  he  be- 
lieved it  would  never  have  been  passed  if  there 
had  been  a  fair  vote  taken  on  the  subject  through- 
out the  state.  He  reiterated  the  statement,  that 
the  restrictions  of  cities  and  the  question  of 
slavery  had  no  necessary  connection,  but  he 
added,  he  would  not  say  that  the  question  in  re- 
gard to  foreigners  had  nothing  to  do  with  it,  for 
they  were  coming  over  here  in  thousands,  drop- 
ping amongst  us  like  black  birds  or  Avild  geese, 
who  were  here  to  day  and  gone  to-morrow.  He 
regretted  to  hear  the  Mexican  war  mentioned  in 
this  convention.  Kentucky  did  her  duty  in  that 
war,  and  it  should  have  no  influence  here  in 
promoting  the  interest  of  Louisville  alone.  He 
came  here  with  no  other  view  than  to  make  a 
good  constitution.  He  believed  that  every  man 
here  had  a  desire  to  promote  the  best  interests  of 
his  country,  but  it  was  unreasonable  to  expect 
that  they  could  all  agree  upon  any  one  proposi- 
tion. Our  government  was  originally  based  on 
mutual  conces.sions  and  compromise,  and  we 
must  concede  also.  He  expected  to  yield  much 
of  his  opinions  and  prejudices,  and  ne  could  in 
the  end  say  that  what  had  been  done  by  the  ma- 
jority was  right. 

He  had  before  said  that  large  cities  when  they 
have  much,  want  more.  Louisville  and  Jefferson 
couuty  have  five  delegates  here,  at  this  time, 
and  he  was  willing  to  deal  liberally  with  her; 
but  some  restriction  on  large  cities  wliere  popu- 
lation is  increased  by  immigration  from  foreie:n 
countries  may  be  found  to  be  necessary.  He 
desired  a  representation  based  on  a  permanent 
and  not  on  a  floating  population. 

The  restriction  of  cities  might  not  be  of  much 
importance  now,  but  one  hundred  years  hence  it 
might  be  of  great  importance.  He  expressed  a 
great  desire  that  his  opinions  should  be  pub- 
lished to  the  world,  and  he  contemplated  with 
great  satisfaction,  a  harmonious  termination  of 
the  labors  of  this  convention.  He  spoke  at  very 
great  length  and  very  earnestly. 

The  PflESlDENT  rose  and  asked  whether  the 
gentleman  thought  it  necessary  to  consume  the 
time  of  the  convention  by  repeating  his  proposi- 
tion and  arguments  twenty  times  over. 

Mr.  HARGIS  said,  he  had  expected  to  be 
called  to  order,  and  as  he  had  nearly  done  he 
would  sit  down. 

Tlie  resolution  was  rejected. 

LEGISLATIVE   DEPARTMENT. 

The  convention  resolved  itself  int^  committee 


561 


of  the  wliole,  on  the  report  of  the  committee  ou 
the  legislative  department,  Mr.  MERIWETHER 
in  the  chair. 

The  pending  question  was  on  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Chiistian,  (Mr.  Morris.) 
Mr.  DIXON  offered  the  following  as  a  substi- 
tute for  the  pending  amendment : 

•'And  provided,  that  whenever  any  town  or  city 
shall  become  entitled  to  two  or  more  representa- 
tives in  either  branch  of  the  legislature,  the 
legislature  shall  have  power  to  divide  such  town 
or  city  into  as  many  election  districts  as  there 
may  be  members  to  elect,  in  each  of  which  dis- 
tricts an  election  shall  be  held,  for  the  election 
of  the  number  to  which  such  district  maybe  en- 
titled." 

Mr.  DIXON.  When  my  honorable  friend 
from  Christian  submitted  his  resolution,  I  an- 
nounced to  the  committee  that  I  endorsed  the 
principles  contained  in  it.  I  still  endorse  the 
principle,  a.s  applicable  to  the  stat«  of  the  case 
which  I  understand  the  resolution  was  intended 
to  meet.  Xor  is  it  my  intention,  in  offering  the 
amendment  to  the  amendment  proposed  by  my 
friend  from  Christian,  to  depart  from  the  princi- 
ple contained  in  his  amendment,  to  which  I  have 
given  my  sanction.  The  principle  of  unity  of 
representation  in  counties  seems  to  have  been  re- 
cognized in  the  old  constitution,  and  in  the  re- 
port of  the  committee,  which  is  now  under  dis- 
cussion. The  principle  is  this — ^that  a  county 
entitled  to  two  or  more  representatives,  accord- 
ing to  the  population,  should  have  the  privilege 
of  electing  its  representatives  by  the  whole  peo- 
ple of  the  county,  and  not  by  dividing  the  coun- 
ty, and  giving  to  each  portion,  so  divided,  the 
right  of  electing  a  separate  representative. 

This  principle,  I  apprehend,  was  founded  in 
wisdom.  It  was  intended  to  secure  harmony 
among  all  of  the  free  voters  of  the  country.  The 
state  of  Kentucky,  for  great  and  wise  purposes, 
has  been  laid  off,  under  the  constitution  of  1799, 
into  counties  and  senatorial  districts.  It  was 
laid  oft"  into  counties  for  the  purpose  of  conven- 
ience to  all  the  people  of  the  state.  It  was  laid 
off  into  senatorial  districts  with  the  same  ob- 
ject, and  for  the  same  purpose.  The  two  great 
bodies  composing  the  legislature  were  intended 
to  act,  to  some  extent,  as  checks  upon  each  other; 
and  population,  so  far  as  regarded  each  branch, 
was  recognized  by  the  framers  of  the  constitu- 
tion as  the  basis  of  representation  in  both.  This 
basis,  to-wit,  of  population,  has  been  carried 
out  by  the  report  of  the  committee,  and  I  think 
correctly.  The  state,  as  I  before  said,  has  been 
laid  off  into  counties  and  districts,  for  the  con- 
venience of  the  people  of  the  state,  and  at  the 
same  time,  with  a  view  to  produce  harmony  and 
concentrate  action  among  the  people  of  each  par- 
ticular county,  the  wisdom  and  advantage  of 
which  will  at  once  be  perceived  and  acknowl- 
edged by  all. 

That  unity  of  action,  on  the  part  of  a  county, 
was  thought  by  the  committee  to  be  important, 
and  so  far  as  senatorial  representation  is  con- 
cerned, it  was  thought  to  be  equally  important, 
and  in  each  case  population  is  adopted  as  the 
basis  of  representation.  The  gentlemen  of  the 
opposite  side  of  the  question  thought  that  there 
would  be  an  advantage  in  adopting  a  restrictive 
policy,  in  regard  to  cities,  where  population  is 
71 


concentrated;  because,  otherwise  their  action 
might  have  an  injurious  tendency  upon  the  in- 
teresUs  of  the  people  in  the  balance  of  the  state. 
Sir,  if  the  population  of  a  city  is  to  act  against 
the  balance  of  the  state,  and  if,  by  so  acting,  any 
injury  is  to  result  to  the  great  body  of  the  farm- 
ing community,  I,  for  one,  would  place  myself 
in  opposition  to  it.  Those  who  have  maintained 
that  tliis  power  would  be  exercised  against  tho 
balance  of  the  people,  have  not  maintained  that 
the  power  whicu  now  exist*  in  cities  can  be  ex- 
erted to  the  prejudice  of  any  portion  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky.  They  do  not  assert,  nor  do 
tliey  seem  to  believe,  that  the  power  of  any  city 
now  in  the  commonwealth,  though  it  may  bo 
concentrated,  can  operate  to  the  prejudice  ot  the 
balance  of  the  people  of  Kentucky;  not  taking 
the  position  that  the  population  of  cities,  as  it 
now  stands,  can  be  dangerous,  but  assuming  the 
fact  to  be — as  it  is  within  the  range  of  possibili- 
ty— that  the  time  may  come,  when  that  power 
can  grow  to  such  strength  and  force  that  it  may 
be  used  to  the  prejudice  of  other  portions  of 
Kentucky.  Gentlemen  on  the  opposite  side  of 
the  question  ha%'e  proposed  to  lay  restrictions 
upon  the  people  of  the  cities  in  the  exercise  of  the 
right  of  suffrage;  not  that  they  are  to  chain  the 
lion  as  they  now  find  him — for  they  now  regard 
him  as  harmless — not  to  place  manacles  upon 
the  population  of  the  cities  as  they  now  exist — 
for  they  look  upon  them  now  as  weak  and  im- 
potent— ^but  they  would  have  the  chains  prepar- 
ed for  the  lion,  by  the  time  he  becomes  strong 
and  powerful,  and  when  he  will  be  in  a  condi- 
tion to  make  the  whole  people  tremble  at  his 
roar.  The  gentleman  from  Christian  is  not  for 
chaining  the  beast  in  his  infancy,  but  for  keep- 
ing him  weak  by  dividing  his' strength  whilst 
he  is  still  young,  and  preventing  its  concentra- 
ted exercise  when  he  has  grown  to  his  full  size. 
Gentlemen  think  that  the  commonwealth  is  not 
yet  in  danger,  the  body  politic  is  not  yet  diseas- 
ed. I  see  no  necessity,  then,  for  calling  in  a 
physician.  Would  he  call  in  a  surgeon  to  am- 
putate a  limb,  whilst  it  is  yet  sound  and  healthy, 
and  in  mere  anticipation  that  at  some  time  or 
other  it  would  become  diseased,  and  that  gan- 
grene would  follow?  Why  not  wait  until  the 
f  roper  time  arrives,  for  placing  this  restriction? 
f  it  is  to  be  applied  at  all,  let  it  be  applied 
when  the  necessity  arrives.  The  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Christian  is,  to  apply  it  at 
once — to  apply  the  remedy  before  the  disease 
exists — to  amputate  the  limb  befoie  gangrene  has 
taken  possession  of  it.  I  can  see  no  necessity 
for  it. 

I  have  remarked  that  unity  of  representation 
in  counties  has  been  provided  in  all  the  constitu- 
tions of  the  various  states,  and  for  the  wisest 
purposes.  This  unity  of  representation  should 
be  extended  to  towns  and  cities.  I  can  see  no 
good  reason  why  it  should  not  be.  Whenever 
gentlemen  can  show  a  good  reason  why  unity  of 
representation  should  be  denied  to  cities,  then 
let  it  be  done;  but  I  say  the  time  has  not  yet  ar- 
arrived,  at  least  so  far  as  any  facts  have  been  ad- 
duced to  indicate  it,  and  until  it  does  arrive  no 
such  principle  should  be  applied,  because  by  ap- 
plying it  you  depart  from  the  great  principle  run- 
ning through  the  report  of  the  committee,  and 
running   through     the   old   constitution,  and 


563 


through  tlic  constitutions,  I  think,  of  all  the 
states,  that  unity  of  representation  in  counties, 
and  in  towns  and  cities,  ought  not  to  be  abroga- 
ted, unless  for  very  good  and  sufficient  reasons. 
Does  the  reason  exist  at  this  time  for  breaking  in 
upon  this  harmonious  action  of  the  people  in 
•towns  and  cities?  What  is  tliat  reason,  if  any 
does  exist?  Is  it  that  the  power  of  Louisville, 
of  Covington,  of  Maysville,  or  of  any  other  town 
on  the  ohio  river  that  is  to  wield  this  tremen- 
dous influence,  is  such  now  as  to  make  it  neces- 
sary to  break  down  this  principle? 

Let  us  look  at  the  condition  of  things,  because 
it  is  important  that  tbe  question  should  be  prop- 
erly understood.  What  is  tlie  power  of  Louis- 
ville? She  lias  three  rejjresentatives — not  tivc, 
as  the  gentleman  from  Breatiiitt  has  said.  They 
are  distinguished  gentlemen,  possessing  great 
talents  and  influence,  and  every  way  worthy  of 
the  city  wliich  they  represent,  fully  able  to  de- 
fend her  rights  and  interests.  But  Avhat  is  the 
amount  of  influence  that  can  be  exerted  by  those 
highly  respectable  delegates,  over  tlie  great  body 
of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  or  over  the  balance 
of  the  delegates  to  this  convention?  Can  these 
three  gentlemen  place  themselves  in  opposition 
to  the  power  of  the  mighty  people  of  Kentucky? 
Are  we  apprehensive  that  their  power  is  or  will 
become  so  great  a.s  to  be  irresistible?  I  acknowl- 
edge that  their  power  is  considerable,  but  I  confess 
I  am  not  at  all  alarmed  at  it^  nor  do  I  admit  that 
it  is  greater  than  that  of  other  gentlemen  on  this 
floor.  Let  them  come  !here  with  any  proposition 
they  may  think  proper  to  bring,  and  let  them 
unite  all  their  forces  upon  it,  if  the  proposition 
be  objectionable  to  the  balance  of  the  delegates 
here,  we  can  over-rule  them,  and  put  them  down 
without  scarcely  an  efi"ort.  Let  them  bring  all 
their  powers  into  the  field,  they  cannot  drive  the 
remaining  ninety  seven  naembers  from  their  po- 
sition. Take  the  city  of  Covington.  Let  us  see 
the  power  that  she  can  wield  agauist  the  balance 
of  the  state.  She  is  represented  by  a  gentleman 
who  is  able  to  sustain  the  interests  of  his  con- 
stituents, a  man  of  weight  and  influence  I  admit, 
but  when  united  with  the  three  gentlemen  from 
Louisville  what  can  they  do  against  the  remain- 
ing ninety  six  delegates?  Pass  on  to  Maysville. 
She  is  not  entitled  to  a  representative,  nor  in 
fact  is  Covington,  but  I  take  both  county  and 
city  together,  and  add  one  delegate  for  Lexing- 
ton, and  here  are  six  arrayed  against  ninety  four. 
Is  this  so  powerful  an  array?  Can  they  exert  so 
powerful  an  influence  that  we  are  now  obliged 
to  place  restraints  upon  them,  to  prevent  their 
overslaughing  the  balance  of  Kentucky?  I  do 
not  believe  we  have  any  cause  to  be  alarmed.  I 
say  then  to  my  friend  from  Christian  tliat  I  do 
not  think  this  is  the  time  to  apply  the  principle 
contained  in  his  proposition. 

But  let  us  trace  this  matter  a  little  further  and 
see  how  this  power  is  to  be  exeiled.  Is  it  be 
exerted  in  relation  to  the  finances  of  the  state? 
In  raising  the  taxes?  In  the  ])uilding  up  a  great 
system  of  internal  ininrovements,  or  in  the  bor- 
rowing of  monej?  1  hese  are  important  meas- 
ures of  state  policy,  alike  interesting  to  the  peo- 
Ele  of  the  country,  and  to  towns  and  cities. 
!ow  far  can  the  cities  of  Kentucky  control  the 
Rtate  in  carrying  out  all  or  anyone  of  these 
mea.sures.    If  their  p<wer  is  such  as  some  geo- 


tlemen  imagine,  they  have  but  to  will  the  ac- 
complishment of  any  purpose  and  it  is  already 
done.  Like  the  greatest  general  of  the  Romans, 
they  have  but  to  come,  to  see,  and  to  conquer. 
Let  us  examine  the  extent  of  their  power  over 
the  first  of  these  important  measures.  And  here 
permit  me  to  .remark  tliat  there  is  nothing  upon 
which  the  people,  not  only  in  the  country,  but 
in  towns  and  cities,  are  more  sensitive  than  on 
the  subject  of  raising  the  taxes — it  concerns  ev- 
ery citizen  of  the  commonwealth — and  so  alive 
to  the  proper  exercise  of  this  great  power  are 
the  people  of  every  republic,  that  each  man 
seems  to  stand  as  a  sentinel,  not  only  to  guard 
his  own,  but  the  property  and  person  of  every 
otlier  citizen,  from  unjust  or  oppressive  taxation. 
According  to  our  present  constitution,  all  bills 
for  raising  the  revenue  are  to  originate  with  the 
lower  house  of  the  legislature — with  the  imme- 
diate representatives  of  the  people — fresh  from 
their  bosoms — sympathising  wtth  them — ac- 
quainted with  their  Avants,  and  ready  to  make 
any  sacrifice  to  protect  their  rights.  It  is  a  fear- 
ful array  this,  which  a  city  would  have  to  break 
through,  in  the  accomplishing  of  any  purpose 
of  injustice  in  the  raising  the  taxes  of  the  state. 
Their  o-wn  people  (as  they  certainly  would  be) 
resisting  tiie  people  of  all  other  parts  of  the 
state,  and  the  members  of  the  legislature,  high 
on  the  watch  tower  of  freedom,  calmly  survey- 
ing the  advanced  posts  of  the  enemy,  and  ready 
to  sound  the  tocsin  of  alarm  on  the  first  approach 
of  danger.  With  such  watchful  sentinels — with 
such  powerful  protectors — what  could  the  puny 
arm  of  a  single  city — nay,  of  all  the  cities  com- 
bined— a  ccomplish  in  the  way  of  injustice  or 
oppression  in  raising  the  taxes  on  the  people  of 
the  commonwealth.  They  would  be,  when  op- 
posed to  the  balance  of  the  state,  as  a  pigmy  op- 
posed to  a  giant.  The  wrath  of  the  people, 
once  awakened,  would  sweep  tliem  away  as  chaff 
before  the  wings  of  the  •Storm-God  careering 
in  his  might.  There  is  no  danger  at  this  point 
upon  this  subject,  the  whole  people  of  the  state 
are  bound  together,  as  by  magnetic  cords,  and 
where  you  touch  the  interest  of  one,  it  vibrates 
along  these  cords  to  the  hearts  of  all.  There 
can  be  no  danger  then  at  this  point.  Whenever 
a  proposition  to  increase  the  revenue  of  the  state 
is  made,  -whether  by  the  representation  of  city  or 
country,  it  is  responded  to  by  the  people  from 
every  part  of  t5ie  commonwealth.  Their  voice 
comes  up  to  tiie  halls  of  legislation  from  every 
city  and  hamlet — from  every  valley  and  hill  top 
• — proclaiming  their  assent  or  dissent  to  the 
measure,  and  woe  be  to  tiie  faithless  representa- 
tive who  disregards  the  warning  of  that  voice; 
they  will  never  disregard  it;  and  I  again  repeat, 
that  I  have  no  fear  of  danger  at  this  point. 

Is  the  danger  greater  in  building  up  a  great 
system  of  internal  improvements  for  the  im- 
provement of  the  roads  and  rivel«  of  the  com- 
monwealth? 

Mr.  Chairman:  The  sectional  divisions  of  the 
state,  as  well  as  local  and  conflicting  interests, 
forbid  that  there  should  be  any  concert,  or  uni- 
ty ©f  action,  when  a  proposition  is  made  to  im- 
Freve  any  one  road  or  river.  I  remember  that 
was  a  member  of  tlie  senate  of  Kentucky 
when  the  project  for  the  making  of  the  great 
southern    railroad    was    brought    before    the 


5G3 


legislature.  I  remember  tliat  the  nortBi  and 
the  south  and  middle  sections  of  the  statCr  as 
^ell  as  all  the  cities,  so  far  from  harmonizing 
in  support  of  the  measure,  found  it  impossible 
to  agree  as  to  the  route  it  should  take,  or  the  town 
on  the  Ohio  river  at  which  it  should  terminate, 
and  it  fell  under  the  ponderous  blows  of  those 
who  would  have  been  its  friends,  could  they 
have  shared  with  the  rest  of  the  state  its  bene- 
fits. One  portion  of  the  people  wanted  the 
road  to  terminate  at  the  lower  extremity  of  the 
state;  another  was  for  extending  it  to  the  city  of 
Louisville;  and  another  to  some  other  town  on 
the  Ohio  river  in  the  northern  part  of  the  state; 
and  thus  situated  they  could  never  have  but  one 
city  on  the  river,  or  but  on-?  section  of  the  state 
in  favor  of  the  measure.  It  was  lost,  as  I  be- 
fore  remarked,  by  these  eonflicting  interests. 

But,  sir  how  was  the  great  system  of  internal 
improvements  for  the  state  spoken  into  exist- 
ence? Xot  bv  tlie  influence  of  any  one  city, 
nor  by  the  intluence  of  all  the  towns  and  cities 
of  the  state  combined ;  but  by  the  union  of  the 
interests  of  the  different  sections  of  the  state, 
stimulated  by  sectioual  advantages  and  strength- 
ened by  the  idea  of  general  good  to  the  whole 
people  of  the  commonwealth.  Through  a  beau- 
tiful and  fertile  country  in  the  middle  section  of 
the  state,  comes  winding  the  Kentucky  river,, 
inviting,  as  it  passes  along,  the  products  of  the 
farmer  and  the  mineral  wealth  of  the  mountain, 
to  take  passage  on  its  bosom  to  the  great  and 
beautiful  Ohio,  and  from  thence  on  its  broad 
and  capacious  waters  onward  to  everv  market 
in  the  world.  Far  above,  in  the  northern  part 
of  the  state,  and  termination  at  the  city  of  Cov- 
ington on  the  Ohio,  might  have  been  seen  the 
Licking,  meandering  its  way  through  a  country 
little  less  rich  than  that  on  the  banks  of  the 
Kentucky,  and  pouring  its  waters  down  from 
mountains  stored  with  mineral  of  alnx>st  every 
description,  and  which  had  slept  in  their  quiet 
bosoms  through  the  long  lapse  of  ages;  whilst 
in  the  distant  south,  stretching  gracefully 
through  a  level  and  fruitful  country,  inhabitecL 
on  each  side  by  thousands  of  the  honest  and 
hardy  yeomanry  of  the  state,  comes  the  Green 
river,  starting  from  the  same  range  of  moun- 
tains, and  mingling  its  waters  with  those  of  the 
Ohio  in  the  county  of  Henderson.  These  great 
natural  outlets  for  the  rich  products  of  the  far- 
mer and  the  mineral  wealth  of  the  mountains, 
were,  nevertheless,  obstructed,  during  a  large 
portion  of  the  year,  by  shoals  and  rocks,  which 
prevented  navigation,  and  requiretJ  the  united 
wealth  and  energy  of  the  whole  people  of  the 
state  to  remove.  It  is  true  that  the  towns  and 
cities  along  the  banks  of  the  Ohio  were  to  share 
with  the  farmers  in  the  country  the  benefits  of 
navigation,  and  to  secure  the  advantages  which 
might  result  to  all,  from  the  removid  of  these 
obstructions. 

But  how  was  this  great  end  to  be  attained? 
Could  it  be  brought  about  simply  by  the  ex«r- 
tions  of  one  particular  section  of  country? 
Coidd  one  county,  or  one  range  of  counties,  ef- 
fect anytliing  bv  their  exertions?  No  sir,  it  re- 
quired the  combined  and  miited  efforts  of  the 
people  at  large.  All  of  these  separate  interests 
were  joined  together,  and  by  mcBiis  of  a  univer- 
sal and  united   appeal  to  the  liberality  of  the 


state  for  her  encouragement  and  support,  they  ac- 
complished that  which  they  so  much  desired. 
This  co-operation  resulted  from  the  fact  that  it 
was  deemed  essential  and  important  by  the  peo- 
ple of  the  state  at  large,  that  their  resources, 
their  rich  and  wa\-y  fields  of  com,  tobacco,  and 
hemp,  and  all  the  other  products  of  the  soil, 
should  find  a  market  upon  the  banks  of  the 
principal  river,  or  some  other  great  point,  and 
this  was  utterly  impossible,  unless  these  obstruc- 
tions were  removed  and  a  great  system  of  inter- 
nal improvements  instituted.  The  people  of  all 
parts  of  the  commonwealth  united  sir;  out  they 
aid  not  unite  for  the  purpose  of  building  up  a 
particular  city.  Nothing  of  the  kind.  Tney 
joined  hand  in  hand  to  accomplish  a  great  ob- 
ject, and  that  was  to  promote,  oy  a  general  and 
united  movement,  the  interests  of  the  whole 
state.  Neither  the  influence  of  one  city  or  of 
all  the  cities  combined,  nor  of  one  section  of  the 
state,  could  have  brought  about  this  result.  It 
required  the  united  anil  conj'oined  efforts  of  all 
the  people  of  Kentucky  to  accomplish  it.  This 
was  the  view  taken  by  the  statesmen  who  advo- 
cated that  great  system.  I  was  opposed  to  it — 
not  to  the  improving  the  navigation  of  the  ri- 
vers, or  tO' the  making  of  roads  such  as  would 
have  been  of  utilitv  to  the  whole  state — ^but  to 
the  tacking  on  to  t&e  system  objects  not  of  pub- 
lic advauatge,  but  intended  merelv  to  secure  to 
it  the  support  of  particular  localities.  For  sir, 
I  beheld  it  starting  up  like  a  giant  with  its  hun- 
dred hands  stretching  its  arms  into  every  part 
of  the  state,  and  holding  out  golden  promises  to 
the  wavering,^  the  venal,  and  the  corrupt.  I 
did  not  think  it  projected  in  fairness,  or  carried 
out  in  principle.  But  this  unfairness  was  not 
from  city  influence,  it  was  from  the  force  of  a 
thousand  causes  which  circumstances  had  uni- 
ted to  bring  about  the  result.  Its  blessings  or  its 
evils,  whatever  they  may  have  been,  were  not 
from  city  influence  more  than  from  that  of  the 
country.  I  do  not  see,  therefore,  that  the  dan- 
ger of  city  influence  is  to  be  feared  in  the  im- 
provement of  the  rivers  and  roads  of  the  com- 
monwealth. 

But  let  us  come  to  the  last  proposition,  and 
that  is,  to  the  borrowing  of  money  on  the  credit 
of  tb«  state.  That  Kentucky  has  involved  her- 
self in  a  large  debt,^  but  not  bevond  her  capacity 
to  pay,  there  can  be  no  doubt;  l)ut  that  the  influ- 
ence of  towns  or  cities,  or  any  particular  section 
of  the  state,  was  alone  exerted  to  bring  about 
this  result,  no  one  believes.  All  the  interests 
and  sections  of  the  state  united  in  pledging  her 
credit;  but  it  was  to  effect  and  accomplish  ob- 
jects in  which  all  were  deeply  interested,  and 
which  are  now  dispensing  their  benefits  to  all, 
broadcast  through  the  land.  But  sir,  if  any  dan- 
ger is  to  be  appreliended  from  the  exercise  of  this 
power,  the  determination  of,  I  think,  a  majority 
of  the  members  of  this  convention  to  restrain  the 
legislature  in  the  future  exercise  of  it,  by  deny- 
ing it  to  them  without  first  referring  it  to  the 
people,  should  forever  put  an  end  to  even  the 
fear  of  danger.  Whether  the  principle  here  in- 
dicated be  inserted  in  the  new  constitution  or 
not,  I  am  certain  that  the  mere  influence  of  the 
towns  can  never  bring  about  an  extravagant  ex- 
ercise of  the  power.  I  have  shown  before,  in 
the  address  made  by  me  some  days  since  to  tlie 


564 


committee,  that  the  interests  of  the  towns  and 
country  wero  dependent  on  eacli  other,  and  that 
they  should  mutually  aid  and  assist  each  other. 
This  I  still  think.ancfl  am  confident  that  no  great 
measure  of  state  policy  is  ever  likely  to  be  adop- 
ted unless  mutually  advantageous  to  the  people 
of  the  towns  and  country.  Are  the  people  in- 
deed so  utterly  ignorant  of  tlieir  own  interests 
as  to  be  swayed  from  the  path  of  duty  by  the 
mere  influences  of  the  towns?  Have  we  not 
lieard  gentlemen  here — wlien  it  was  proposed  to 
require  qualifications  from  clerks,  and  the  inel- 
igibility of  judges  for  fear  of  the  corrupting  ex- 
ercise of  their  power  upon  the  people — insist 
that  the  intelligence  and  purity  of  the  people, 
their  soundness  of  judgment,  quickness  of  ap- 
prehension, and  powei'S  of  discrimination  for- 
bids the  conclusion  that  they  could  be  deceived 
or  imposed  upon?  If  this  be  true,  can  that  people 
then  be  overpowered  and  overreached  by  that  in- 
fluence which  gentlemen  seem  to  think  must  ex- 
ist in  the  cities.  But  it  is  an  influence  which 
does  not  and  cannot  exist,  as  I  have  shown  be- 
fore in  a  calculation  I  have  made  on  a  fair  and 
correct  basis.  I  liave  shown  that  allowing  the 
ratio  of  increase  in  the  cities  to  be  four  hundred 
per  cent,  over  the  country,  that  Avhen  Louisville 
reached  a  population  of  200,000  she  would  still 
have  but  three  senators,  while  the  state  would 
have  the  balance.  It  therefore,  must  be  utterly 
impossible  for  gentlemen,  with  these  facts  before 
them,  to  argue  any  body  into  the  conclusion 
that  this  overpowering  influence  can  ever  exist. 
But  the  gentlemen  from  Madison  and  Bourbon 
would  lay  these  restrictions  upon  the  people  of 
the  cities  with  a  view  of  protecting  certain  in- 
terests in  this  commonwealth.  If  so,  why  not 
apply  the  principle  to  their  own  counties,  and 
elsewhere,  wherever  the  spirit  of  emancipation 
may  displaj^  itself.  The  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son has  insisted,  in  the  first  speech  made  by  him 
on  this  question,  and  again  repeated  it  in  tlie 
one  made  by  him  yesterday,  that  numbers,  in 
the  towns  and  cities  along  the  Ohio  river,  should 
not  form  the  basis  of  representation. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  gentleman  will  permit 
me  to  remark  that  I  represented  the  proposition 
that  property  or  territory  should  be  the  basis  of 
representation. 

Mr.  DIXON.  It  Would  not  be  Well,  probably, 
for  me  to  read  the  gentleman's  speech  ou  that 
subject. 

Mr.  TURNER.  You  had  better  read  it. 
Mr.  DIXON.  Then  here  it  is:  "I  protest,"  says 
the  gentleman,  "against  basing  representation  ex- 
clusively on  population."  Now  will  tlie  gentle- 
man from  Madison  inform  me,  if  he  will  not  base 
the  principle  of  representation  on  numbers,  on 
what  will  he  base  it?  On  what  else  can  he  base 
it,  unless  on  territory  or  property?  I  understand 
there  are  tliree  bases  of  representation,  one  is 
population,  another  is  property,  and  a  tliird  is 
territory.  If  he  does  not  mean  to  base  it  upon 
property  or  territory,  will  he  be  good  enough  to 
tell  us  upon  wliat  he  will  base  it.  Does  he  mean 
to  a-ssert,  that  he  will  liave  no  basis  at  all?  I 
would  like  to  be  informed  upon  this  point. 

But  sir,  let  us  return  to  the  subject.  The  gen- 
tleman would  protect  the  slaveholder  by  disn-an- 
chising  thousands  of  those  who  do  not  own  that 
description  of  properly,  and  from  llie  groundless 


apprehension  that  this  is  the  best  mode  of  pro- 
tecting the  interest  of  the  slaveholder.  Sir,  such 
a  system  of  proscription  would  be  not  only  un- 
just, but  in  violation  of  every  principle  of  pro- 
priety. It  cannot,  and  it  surely  will  not  be  done. 
Such  a  principle  in  the  constitution,  and  for  such 
a  purpose,  would  alarm  all  the  people  of  the 
commonwealth;  it  would  strike  terror  into  the 
hearts  and  minds  of  men.  It  would  arouse  a 
spirit  of  indignation  amongst  the non-slavehold- 
ing  portion  of  the  people,  that  would  sweep  the 
whole  institution  to  d!bstruction.  I  know  of  no 
magic  power  by  which  it  could  be  appeased. 
Sir,  as  well  might  you  attempt  witli  your  puny 
hand  to  arrest  the  white-crested  wave  of  the 
ocean,  when  rising  and  swelling  to  mountain 
lioight  it  sweeps  resistless  on  before  the  storm 
compelling  power,  or  to  chain  the  lightnings 
when  loosed  from  their  home  of  slumber  in  the 
clouds,  they  da^h  on,  destroying  and  blasting 
in  their  mad  career.  Remember  sir,  that  they  who 
owns  slaves  are  but  a  fraction  of  the  whole  people 
of  the  state ;  and  that  the  fact  that  we  constitute 
a  majority  here,  is  no  authority  to  exercise  our 
short-lived  power  to  the  destruction  of  the  rights 
of  others.  1  implore  gentlemen  to  be  more  care- 
ful of  what  they  do.  Do  not  attempt,  under  the 
pretence  of  protecting  the  institution  of  slavery, 
to  inflict  upon  it  a  stab  from  which  its  heart's 
blood  must  flow.  Beware,  beware — lest  witli 
the  besom  of  destruction  you  sweep  the  whole 
institution  away,  and  that  you  leave  nothing  to 
tell  that  it  existed  but  the  records  that  we  are 
now  publishing  to  the  world. 

Beware,  I  say,  how  you  trample  on  the  rights 
of  the  non-slaveholding  portion  of  the  commu- 
nity. I  have  the  utmost  confidence  in  that  com- 
munity, and  I  take  leave  to  say,  tliat  were  it  not 
for  their  forbearance,  their  high  sense  of  justice, 
aud  their  noble  and  elevated  attachment  to 
principle,  the  institution  would  have  been  very 
greatly  endangered.  They  know  that  you  are 
entitled  to  the  property  that  you  have  inherited 
and  purchased,  and  they  fully  recognize  the 
great  principle,  in  our  constitution,  that  no  man's 
property  shall  be  taken  without  full  and  fair 
compensation.  Tliis  was  a  high,  aud  a  great 
principle  asserted  by  the  people  of  the  whole 
state,  in  the  August  elections,  and  whether  from 
the  Ohio  border,  or  any  other  part  of  the  coun- 
try, I  believe  there  is  not  a  single  emancipation- 
ist returned  here  to  proclaim  the  wislies  of  that 
portion  of  our  people  who  believe  in  the  proprie- 
ty of  emancipating  the  negroes  witliout  compen- 
sation. Is  not  this  an  evidence  of  the  fidelity 
of  the  people  on  the  banks  of  the  river  to  the 
institutious  of  Kentucky,  and  the  institution  of 
slavery  itself?  I  understand  from  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  that  there  were  polled,  in  his 
county,  at  the  last  election  GSOodd  emaucipatiou 
votes.  Are  not  those  people  in  his  county  ob- 
noxious to  the  same  restriction  that  he  would  im- 
po.se  on  those  who  live  on  the  banks  of  the  Ohio. 
But  the  gentleman  in  his  argument  did  not  refer 
to  that  fact.  He  did  not  seem  to  think  that  they 
became  obnoxious  to  that  censure,  but  allowed 
the  wliole  weight  of  it.  that  fell  from  his  lips,  to 
come  with  its  withering  iuflueuco  solely  upon 
those  who  reside  on  the  banks  of  the  Ohio.  But 
it  falls  upon  the  whole  state,  if  not  so  intended, 
vet  witli  the  random  shot  that  destroys.    I  can 


565 


never  assent  to  any  such  principle  of  proscrip- 
tion. 

I  go  along  -with  my  friend  from  Christian, 
(Mr.  Morris,)  in  the  principle  avowed  in  his 
proposition,  and  desire  to  apply  it  wherever  the 
necessity  for  its  application  shall  exist.  I  say  if 
such  a  danger  exists  from  Louisville,  apply  it  at 
once;  if  not,  why  apply  the  principle  at  all.  If 
there  is  no  reason  for  it,  no  benefitwill  come  out  of 
it.  There  is  no  reason  for  breaking  down  the 
unity  of  representation  for  a  proposition,  which, 
when  attained,  will  accomplish  no  good.  The 
amendment  I  offer  proposes  to  give  full  pow- 
er to  the  legislature,  when  they  deem  it  necessary 
as  a  safe-guard  for  the  interest  of  the  country,  at 
any  moment,  to  impose  this  restriction  upon  the 
city  of  Louisville,  by  dividing  their  representa- 
tion. Whilel  go  withmy  friend  as  to  the  principle 
of  his  resolution,  I  wish  that  we  could  hannomze 
as  to  its  details  and  its  mode  of  application.  I 
.still  trust  we  may,  but  I  fear  we  will  not.  I 
stand  here  as  the  representative  of  my  own  coun- 
ty, on  a  great  principle.  I  came  not  here  to  rep- 
resent any  party,  but  as  the  representative  of 
both  parties  in  my  own  county.  I  had  no  op- 
po.sition  to  the  place  I  hold  here.  I  was  suppor- 
ted by  both  parties.  Those  wlio  differed  from 
me  on  questions  of  national  policy,  were  as  ar- 
dent in  my  support,  as  the  friends  who  had  long 
entertained  the  same  political  sentiments  that  I 
do.  I  received  their  united  vote,  and  was  elected 
to  carry  out  certain  great  principles,  which  no 
mere  party  consideration  shall  ever  induce  me 
to  depart  from. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  am  sorry  to  find  that  my 
highly  est^jemed  friend  from  Henderson  and  ray- 
self  will  have  to  part  company  here.  I  am  sor- 
ry wo  are  to  be  separated  upon  what  I  consider 
a  high  conservative  principle.  I  am  sorry  that 
more  mature  reflection  has  mduced  him  to  scratch 
out  his  endorsement  of  the  amendment  which  I 
pr()pose<l  the  other  day. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  not 
misunderstand  me.  I  stated  at  the  outset  that  I 
did  not  retract  mv  endorsement  of  the  principle, 
but  that  I  differed  with  him  as  to  its  application. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  That  is  right,  it  is  only  a  differ- 
ence between  us  as  to  the  application  of  the  prin- 
ciple, and  not  as  to  its  correctness.  I  am  satis- 
fied that  ray  friend  misapprehended  its  applica- 
tion, as  indicated  in  my  resolution,  and  only  in- 
tended to  endorse  the  principle.  My  proposition 
is,  that  the  legislature  shall  now  be  required  to 
district  those  cities  entitled  to  more  tlian  one  rep- 
resentative. Put  off  this  operation  until  the  con- 
tingency, which  gentlemen  seem  to  apprehend, 
Bhall  arise;  the  danger  we  are  seeking  to  ward 
off  will  then  liave  arrived,  and  it  will  be  too  late 
to  apply  the  remedy.  Apply  the  principle  to 
every  city,  as  it  becomes  entitled  to  more  than 
one  representative,  and  the  difficulty  we  appre- 
hend will  be  met  before  the  danger  arrives.  De- 
lay its  application,  and  the  whole  conservative 
force  of  my  amendment  will  have  been  destroyed. 
We  are  seeking  to  break  the  force  of  a  united  city 
representation;  for  that  is  the  danger  we  appre- 
hend. We  say  to  the  legislature,  as  my  friend 
proposes,  you  shall  have  the  power  to  district 
the  cities,  and  thereby  destroy  their  unity  of 
representation,  whenever  the  contingency  arises. 
But  when  that  contingency  does  arise,  when  this 


city  power  shall  have  grown  strong  in  our  legis- 
lature,  may  it  not  be  too  late  for  the  legislature 
to  act?  May  it  not  be  possible  that  this  influ- 
ence will  be  too  powerful  to  overcome? 

Perhaps  it  may  be  necessary,  on  account  of  the 
pecidiar  position  which  I  occupy  upon  tliis  ques- 
tion, and  tlie  remarks  made  by  the  junior  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  on  yesterdav,  with  respect  to 
himself,  the  honorable  president  of  this  body, 
and  myself,  and  the  party  tendency  which  this 
amendment  has  been  made  to  assume  in  the  eyes 
of  some  people,  for  me  to  say  that  no  conversa- 
tion nor  communication  ever  took  place  between 
the  president  and  myself,  with  regard  to  the 
amendment  which  we  now  have  under  conside- 
ration. I  am  confident  ho  knew  nothing  what- 
ever of  my  intention  to  offer  the  amendment,  un- 
til it  was  submitted  to  the  house.  It  is  true  that 
I  did  exhibit  it  to  some  of  my  friends,  irrespec- 
tive of  party,  and  consulted  with  them  as  to  its 
propriety  and  strength.  It  is  equally  true,  that 
the  idea  of  its  effect  upon  the  two  great  parties 
never  for  one  moment  entered  the  head  of  one  of 
us.  We  were  consulting  and  deliberating  upon 
a  great  principle  of  comproniLse,  ujwn  whicli  I 
hoped  the  chafed  and  agitated  spirit  of  the  house 
might  possibly  unite.  It  is  true  that  my  friends 
concurred  with  me  in  the  belief  that  it  Avould 
probably  promote  haniiony  and  union;  thatwhile 
it  would  secure  the  great  principle,  that  repre- 
sentation should  be  based  on  population,  it 
would  at  the  same  time,  by  dividing  the  cities 
against  themselves,  preserve  the  rural  districts 
against  the  dangerous  influence  of  a  united  city 
representation.  I  had  not  the  remotest  idea  that 
sinister  motives  could  be  attributed  to  me,  and 
nothing  could  give  me  more  pain,  than  that  the 
insinuation  could  be  thrown  out  against  me,  that 
I,  a  democrat,  representing  a  whig  constituency, 
could,  for  the  purpose  of  accomplishing  the  mis- 
erable party  gain  of  one  member  in  the  legisla- 
ture, coolly  introduce  into  this  body  a  measure 
solely  calculated  to  promote  the  democratic  cause, 
and  with  that  object  in  view.  I  never  dreamed 
of  such  a  thing;  such  an  idea  never  entered  my 
brain.  And  yet,  such  "sijiister"  motives  have 
been  attributed  to  me  by  one  of  the  leading  journ- 
als of  this  state,  and  judging  from  the  remarks 
made  by  my  friend  from  Nelson,  on  yesterday, 
have  found  their  way  into  this  house. 

Sir,  there  are  men  in  tliis  world — I  will  not 
say  they  are  to  be  found  in  this  body — who  have 
been  so  long  chained  to  the  car  of  party,  who 
have  so  long  fed  upon  the  crumbs  which  have 
been  sparincly  doled  out  from  the  party  table,  and 
fawned  and  flattered  that  afew  more  morsels  might 
be  offered — who  have  so  long  breathed  the  pol- 
luted atmosphere  of  the  party  brothel — who  are 
so  completely  prostittited,  ootli  in  mind  and  body, 
to  the  trickery  and  chicaner}'  of  party  politics, 
that  they  can  no  more  understancl  the  oj>eration8 
of  an  honest  and  independent  mind,  or  appre- 
ciate an  independent  course,  than  the  fiends  of 
hell  can  appreciate  the  enjoyments  of  heaven. 
WTien  any  great  question  is  proposed  to  them, 
instead  of  considering  the  great  principle  which 
may  be  involved  in  it;  instead  of  asking  them- 
selves, is  it  riglit?  is  it  proper?  is  it  for  the  good 
of  the  country  at  large? — the  single  and  sole 
view  which  they  take  of  tlie  subject,  the  only 
question  which  they  ask  is,  will  it  promote  the 


566 


democratic  or  tlie  whig  cause?  God  forbid!  that 
I  should  be  classed  with  such  men. 

Sir,  an  enlightened  and  a  patriotic  consituen- 
ey,  a  large  majority  of  them  differing  from  me 
in  political  sentiments,  has  honored  me  with  a 
seat  upon  this  floor.  I  came  here  pledged  to 
represent  them  correctly.  I  came  here  fully  pos- 
sessed with  the  belief  that  a  member  of  this 
convention  should  stand  high  above  the  petty 
manoeuvres  of  party  politics.  I  came  here  to  as- 
sist in  making  a  constitution  which  will  rise  far 
above  all  party  differences.  I  think  there  are 
gentlemen  m  this  house,  with  whom  I  liave  been 
intimately  associated,  who  will  sustain  me  in 
the  declaration,  tliat  I  have  .all  along  been  actua- 
ted by  higher  principles  than  mere  party  con- 
siderations. 

Mr.  DIXOI^.  I  have  been  intimately  associa- 
ted with  the  gentleman,  and  he  has  grown  more 
and  more  upon  my  esteem  and  confidence  every 
day,  and  if  any  man  upon  this  floor  or  elsewhere, 
has  placed  himself  entirely  above  all  party  influ- 
ence, in  his  action  here,  I  certainly  think  it  is  the 
gentleman  from  Christian.  If  it  was  necessary 
to  endorse  him,  and  I  know  it  is  not,  it  is  but 
justice  to  him  to  say,  that  in  all  things  he  has 
acted  on  the  most  elevated  principles,  irrespective 
wholly  of  party,  and  with  a  sole  eye  to  the  good 
of  his  country. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  am  extremely  gratified  at  the 
high  compliment  the  gentleman  has  paid  me, 
and  for  his  kind  endorsement. 

When  I  introduced  the  amendment  which  is 
now  under  consideration,  it  was  done  in  a  pure 
spirit  of  compromise — it  was  done  with  every 
feeling  of  kindness  towards  the  population  of 
Louisville,  and  her  distinguished  representatives 
upon  this  floor.  The  only  fault  I  found  with  it. 
was,  that  it  was  an  insufficient  guaranty  to  the 
country  population.  I  have  not  now  the  least 
ideaof  making  a  further  concession;  the  feverish 
and  excited  stat«  of  mind  among  the  members 
seemed  to  call  for  a  compromise;  the  most  dis- 
tinguished gentlemen  on  this  floor  were  almost 
ready  to  fight;  a  high  state  of  excitement  exist- 
ed all  over  the  house;  it  was  impossible,  under 
their  existing  state  of  mind  in  the  house,  that 
correct  conclusions  could  be  arrived  at;  it  was 
necessary  that  something  should  be  done;  I  fal- 
tered and  found  myself  retracing  a  step  which  I 
had  already  determined  upon;  I  molified  my  po- 
sition, and  by  this  course  gave  my  friend  from 
Caldwell  an  opportunity  to  give  me  the  heavy 
blow  which  he  fairly  dealt  me  in  the  able  speech 
which  he  delivered  to  the  committee  the  other 
day;  I  brought  forward  this  amendment;  when 
it  was  read,  many  gentleman  who  had  stood  out 
against  the  broad  principle  of  representation  up- 
on numbers,  and  who  had  determined  to  restrict 
l^uisville  and  all  city  population,  stepped  for- 
ward and  declared  their  willingness  to  support 
it;  and  it  was  not  until  the  base  insinuation  was 
thrown  out,  that  its  principle  object  was  to  pro- 
mote the  democratic  cause,  that  it  began  to  lose 
favor. 

I  did  not  rise  sir,  for  the  purpose  of  discussing 
this  amendment^ — ray  object  was  simphr  to  re- 
liere  myself  from  a  false  position.  Tlie  sub- 
ject has  been  fairly  eviscerated,  and  tliere  is 
scarcely  afoot  of  ground  upon  which  to  rest  an 
argument  which  lias  not  already  beeu  occupied 


by  some  one  of  the  able  gentlemen  who  have 
discussed  this  question.  I  have  stated  to  the 
committee  that  I  cannot  go  with  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson,  for  the  amendment  which  he 
has  just  offered.  It  is  weakening  the  force  of 
the  amendment  which  I  offered,  and  my  own  is 
not  strong  enough  for  my  taste.  I  cannot  say 
that  I  apprehend  no  danger  from  the  city  repre- 
sentation— I  think  that  its  strength  is  derivecl,  to 
a  great  extent,  from  sources  even  above  popula- 
lation.  It  is  stated,  and  a  computation  has 
been  made  by  the  gentleman  from  Henderson, 
and  the  gentleman  from  Montgomery,  (who  is 
great  at  figures),  that  the  city  population  is 
not  increasing  to  such  an  extent  over  the  ru- 
ral poplation,  as  to  renderthe  danger  imminent 
at  this  time.  I  believe  this  to  be  true.  I  too 
have  made  a  little  estimate,  and  the  result  of 
my  calciilation  is  that  the  increase  of  the  whole 
urban  population  in  all  the  towns  and  cities, 
over  all  the  rural  population  in  every  part  of  the 
state,  is  in  the  ratio  of  three  to  two.  Now  I  do 
not  think  there  is  anything  so  terrible  in  this — 
but  I  would  ask  you,  sir,  and  this  committee,  if 
there  are  not  other  causes  which  are  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  legislative  halls  of  the  state,  by 
the  larger  cities.  Time  was,  sir,  when  Lexing- 
ton and  its  junto  controlled  the  whole  destinies 
of  Kentucky,  because  there  was  the  concentra- 
tion of  the  talent,  the  wealth,  and  the  political 
influence  of  the  state.  The  time  may  not  be  far 
distant  when  Louisville  may  occupy  the  same 
position.  The  city  of  Louisville  is  the  concen- 
tration of  the  fashion,  the  intelligence,  and  the 
power  of  Kentucky — there  the  great  men  congre- 
gate to  reap  the  rewards  which  belong  to  their 
talents — 'tis  there  that  banking  accommodations 
are  extended  to  the  people — 'tis  there  that  tlie 
merchants  from  the  various  parts  of  the  state 
do  congregate,  to  supply  themselves  and  their 
customers  with  merchandise — 'tis  there  that  in- 
dividuals, of  all  classes,  go  to  dispose  of  their 
surplus  productions.  There  sir,  last,  but  not 
least,  is  the  mighty  and  controling  press  of  the 
state — the  press  which  controls  public  opinion 
and  popular  action  in  this  country,  more  com- 
pletely than  any  man  or  particular  set  of  men — 
the  press  which  is  almost  above  the  people  them- 
selves. There  sir,  is  the  Louisville  Journal,  the 
Democratic  Chronicle,  and  many  other  papers  of 
different  political  hues.  Where,  sir,  is  the  whig 
politician  who  is  anxious  to  rise  in  the  politicjQ 
world,  who  will  dare  to  stand  opposecl  to  the 
Louisville  Journal?  He  cannot  be  found.  Let 
any  whig  in  this  state  but  incur  the  displeasure 
of  that  paper,  and  down  he  sinks  like  Lucifer, 
never  to  rise  again.  Let  the  same  paper  place 
its  stamp  of  approval  upon  any  individual  and 
up  goes  his  flag — he  at  once  rises  in  the  political 
scale — he  walks  into  the  legislature,  congress, 
and  the  senate  of  the  United  States.  This,  sir, 
is  an  influence  and  a  power  greater  than  that 
which  will  spring  from  any  excess  of  population. 
This  is  the  power  which  has  always  operated  so 
heavily  upon  our  legislatures,  and  plays  its 
part  in  this  hall,  at  this  time.  It  was  this  in- 
fluence operated  upon  me,  and  caused  me  to 
hesitate  wnether,  in  order  to  check  it,  I  should 
not  break  one  of  the  great  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  our  government.  Go  into  the  demo- 
cratic ranks,  and  there  you  will  find  the  demo- 


567 


cratic  presses — there  is  the  Chronicle  and  other 
papers,  and  though  they  have    not  ^roira  so 

freat  as  the  Journal,  yet  it  will  be  difficult  to 
nd  an  ambitious  democrat  who  would  willingly 
incur  this  democratic  displeasure.  It  is  this 
power  which  renders  Louisville  far  more  form- 
idable than  any  increase  of  population,  how- 
ever rapid — it  is  this  influence  which  controls 
our  legislature,  guides  our  senate,  elects  our 
governor,  makes  small  men  great,  and  controls 
public  sentiment.  This  is  a  power  which  you 
cannot  estimate  by  figures — ^you  cannot  reach 
the  mind  of  man  by  figures — ^you  cannot  fathom 
the  motive  which  induces  him  to  take  a  particu- 
lar stand — you  cannot,  by  your  mathematical 
calculations,  tell  why  a  gentleman  turns  whig  to 
day  and  democrat  to-morrow,  nor  why  he  votes 
one  way  on  a  proposition  one  time  and  another 
way  at  another.  These  are  the  unfathomed 
secrets  of  man's  heart,  but  many  of  these  se- 
crets, could  the  truth  but  out,  would  be  found 
depending  on  the  press  at  Louisville. 

In  monarchical  governments,  the  king  is  the 
fountain  of  all  power — and  I  have  read  that 
there  are  many  who  flatter  and  bend  the  knee 
to  this  fountain  of  power — seeking  that  its 
waters  may  be  poured  upon  their  humble  heads. 
In  republican  governments  like  ours,  the  foun- 
tain of  all  power  is  the  people.  The  great 
controller  of  the  people  is  the  press;  and  you 
will  find  many  men  bowing  and  cringing  at  the 
footstool  of  this  political  press,  praying  that 
its  waters  be  poured  upon  their  heads. 

These  are  some  of  the  influences  which  Louis- 
ville can  bring  to  bear  in  tiis  state — whenever 
her  interests  may  make  it  necessary — her  popu- 
lation, her  talent,  her  fashioa,  her  commercial 
capital,  her  banking  capital,  her  press — and 
shall  there  be  no  guard  at  all,  backed  against 
this  power?  Sir,  I  fear  this  conservative  amend- 
ment of  mine  is  too  weak.  I  am  willing  to 
compromise  upon  it,  but  I  can  go  no  further.  I 
cannot  go  witn  my  friend  from  Henderson  into 
the  details,  even  though  the  principle  be  pre- 
served. It  is  proper  sir,  that  great  principles 
be  preserved  though  we.  incur  danger  in  their 
preservation.  I  am  willing  to  stand  bv  this 
amendment,  be  it  whig  or  be  it  democratic.  If 
the  democratic  party  is  to  be  promoted  by  the 
support  of  great  principles  in  this  convention, 
let  it  be  so.  If  whig  principles  are  to  be  weak- 
ened by  the  same  course,  let  it  be  so.  I  care 
not;  I  stand  above  party  here,  and  whether  it 
be  whiggery  or  democracy  that  is  promoted  by 
the  amendment  upon  your  table,  itis  the  same 
thing  to  me. 

Mr.  DIXON".  I  extremely  regret  ^at  my 
honorable  friend  has  found  canse  of  offence  in 
the  Louisville  Journal.  I,  of  course,  do  not  eon- 
cur,  nor  can  I  be  held  responsible  for  the  articles 
in  that  paper.  It  is  a  valuable  and  justly  influ- 
ential and  popular  public  journal  with  the  par- 
ty to  which  I  am  proud  to  belong,  and  which  I 
have  acted  for  a  quarter  of  a  century.  I  regret 
that  anything  has  appeared  in  it  in  regard  to 
my  friend's  conduct  in  this  matter,  which  he  is 
constrained  to  regard  as  personally  disrespect- 
ful to  himself.  I  doubt  if  it  was  designed  to 
impute  to  him  any  improper  or  dishonorable 
motive.  Most  assuredly  none  who  know  the 
gentleman  as  I  know  him  would  ever  think  of 


imputing  to  him,   in  the  eomse  which  he  ha.<i 

Eursued  nere,  any  other  than  motives  the  most 
onorable  and  patriotic.  It  is  verv  tnie  that 
we  differ  widely  in  political  sentiment  upon 
questions  of  national  policy,  but  I  have  not  re- 
garded this  as  the  arena  for  tournaments  be- 
tween gladiators  espousing  the  cause  of  one  or 
the  other  of  the  great  national  parties.  So  far 
as  I  know  or  believe,  no  such  feeling  has  been 
manifested  by  the  gentleman  from  Christian, 
(Mr.  Morris.)  I  heartily  concurred  with  him 
in  the  principle  of  his  amendment  when  he  pre- 
sented it  the  other  day.  I  yet  concur  in  the 
principle.  I  propose,  however,  to  modify  his 
proposition  so  as  to  assert  the  principle  and 
give  to  the  legislature  the  power  to  apply  it, 
whenever,  in  the  wisdom  of  that  branch  of  the 
government,  it  shall  be  deemed  necessary  or 
expedient. 

I  do  not  impute  to  him  any  desire  to  make  the 
proposition  which  he  offeredf  subservient  to  par- 
ty. I  trust,  and  believe,  that  he,  and  all  others 
on  this  floor,  will,  in  making  the  new  constitu- 
tion, rise  above  party  and  party  considerations, 
and  look  steadily  and   alone  to  the   honor  and 

flory  of  our  great  state.  Sucli,  I  know,  are  the 
onest  sentiments  of  my  heart — such  I  believe 
to  be  the  honest  sentiments  of  my  friend  from 
Christian.  I  ha ve  not  changed  in  myjposition  to- 
wards thepropositionnowunderconsideration.  I 
am  for  the  principle,  and  the  only  difference  be- 
tween the  honorable  mover  and  myself,  is,  that 
we  differ  as  to  the  mode  of  applying  the  princi- 

f)le  and  the  time  of  its  enforcement.  If  the 
egislature  shall  believe,  at  the  first  apportion- 
ment of  representation  under  the  new  constitu- 
tion, that  the  time  has  arrived  when  the  good  of 
the  state  demands  that  the  le^slative  delegation 
from  Louisville  shall  be  disunited,  I  would 
cheerfully  give  the  power  to  that  legislature  to 
disunite  the  delegation.  I  would  not,  however, 
disunite  that  representation,  nnless  it  is  believed 
that  the  safety  of  tlie  state  demands  such  a 
course.  I  propose,  by  my  amendment,  to  au- 
thorize the  legislature  to  judge  of  that  necessi- 
ty. This  is  the  position  toccupv;  and  I  trust 
my  friend  will  consent  to  the  modification,  that 
we,  who  so  fully  concur  in  the  principle  con- 
tained in  his  amendment,  may  not  be  separated 
in  declaring  how  that  principle  shall  be  appli- 
ed. 

Mr.  RUDD.  This  question  seems  to  have  nar- 
nowed  down  to  a  point  here.  It  is  apprehended 
that  Louisville  will  have  too  great  an  influence 
upon  the  agricultural  section  of  the  state,  and  to 
guard  against  that,  gentlemen  who  came  here 
advocating  the  pure  republican  principle  of 
equal  representation  according  to  numbers,  are 
ready  at  once  to  abandon  it.  It  seems  to  be  a 
desire,  on  the  part  of  some,  to  punish  Louisville 
for  the  failure  of  some  favorite  measure  of  their 
own.  Others  have  expressed  their  desire  to  ap- 
ply the  restriction  to  all  the  counties  bordering 
on  the  Ohio  river;  some  twenty-four  or  five  in 
number.  It  is  a  strange  doctrine  to  be  advoca- 
ted here  by  men  of  clear  heads  and  sound  hearts. 
Even  if  it  had  the  power,  why  should  Louisville 
desire  to  oppress  the  rest  of  tne  state,  or  any  por- 
tion of  it?  Is  it  not  interested  in  the  prosperity 
of  the  whole  state?  And  vet  the  patriotism  and 
the  enterprise  of  Louisville,  in  the  public  im- 


ste 


pifewmeinfe  sLeaas  project od  aatl  carried  out  for 
tlie  benefit  of  tlie  state,  and  to  enable  the  ugri- 
oultural  community  to  reach  a  sure  and  certaiji 
market,  have  actually  been  made  a  theme  of  re- 
proach by  gentlemen  here,  as  if  it  -was  a  great 
crime.  Is.  it  not  the  best,  the  most  stable 
market  in  the  western  country?  Why,  then, 
should  Louisville  be  restrictecf  in  her  right  to 
full  and  equal  representation?  Is  she  not  a  part 
and  parcel  of  this  commonwealth?  or  is  she  in- 
habited by  a  separate  anddistiuctpeople?  Why, 
if  a  stranger  had  heard  the  arguments  of  gen- 
tlemen, he  would  have  supposed  that  the  city 
belonged  to  a  different  people,  one  hardly  speak- 
ing the  same  language  with  the  rest  of  the  state. 
Is  not  LouisTille  benefitted,  too,  as  well  as  the 
rest  of  tlie  commonwealth,  by  these  public  im- 
provements? Certainly — it  v/as  not  to  be  sup- 
posed that  her  citizens  were  to  sj>end  their  mon- 
ey and  construct  improvements  for  the  benefit  of 
the  state,  Avilhout  some  apparent  compensation 
for  it.  And  instead  of  seeking  to  throw  obsta- 
cles in  the  way,  gentlemen  should  rather  seek  to 
aiil  her  in  these  works.  Who  is  to  receive  the 
benefit  of  them?  Why,  the  whole  state,  the  city 
of  Louisville  of  course  included.  The  state 
would  not  take  stock  in  them,  nor  did  the  peo- 

Ele  of  the  country,  generally,  and  the  city  of 
ouisville,  consequently,  was  mainly  forced  to 
do  it  herself.  Aud  iu  this  great  work  of  open- 
ing to  the  vast  products  of  the  country  a  sure 
and  stable  market,  we  should  go  together  as  a 
band  of  brothers,  for  the  benefit  is  mutual. 
Lands  through  whicli  these  improvements  have 
run,  have  been  increa,sed  thereby  to  double  their 
former  value.  Louisville  did  not,  of  course, 
alone  do  this,  but  I  say  she  aided  most  essential- 
ly in  doing  it. 

Gentlemen  have  argued  that  the  institution  of 
slavery  is  to  be  endangered  by  the  growth  of 
Louisville,  and  the  kind  of  population  that  is 
forming  that  growth.  And  this  population  has 
been  described  as  the  offscourings  of  the  jails  of 
Europe,  as  the  renegades  from  the  northern  aud 
eastern  states,  and  as  not  desirable  citizens  of 
the  great  state  of  Kentucky.  Where  was  our 
opposition  to  slavery  in  Louisville  during  the 
last  canvass?  Why,  there  was  far  more  opposi- 
tion to  it  in  the  very  heart  of  the  city,  than 
among  the  emigrants  from  the  centre  counties 
of  the  state.  It  was  these  people  that  composed 
tlie  very  head  and  front  of  the  emancipation 
party. 

Gentlemen  have  drawn  on  their  imagination 
iu  the  fear  thev  have  expressed  of  the  influence 
of  Louisville  being  cast  against  the  institution 
of  slavery.  And  upon  these  fears  gentlemen 
would  deprivethatcity  of  her  fair  and  equal  repre- 
sentation, and  violate  a  great  fundamental  re- 
publican principle.  How  is  Louisville  situated? 
She  is  vitally  concerned  in  the  interests  and 
prosperity  of  tho  state;  because  if  it  prospers 
she  prospers,  if  it  is  blighted  she  is  blighted; 
and  she  will  ever  be  the  first  to  step  forward  in 
defence  of  the  institutions  and  interests  of  the 
state.  She  is  the  great  market  for  the  whole  of 
the  commonwealth;  as  an  evidence  of  which  it 
may  be  stated,  that  L30,000  liogs  were  slaugh- 
tered in  Louisville  during  tho  last  year.  It  is 
the  great  commercial  and  manufacturing  cit/y  of 
Uie  state,  and  every  one  must  see  how  vitally  it 


is  interested  in  all  the  agrcultural  pursuits  of  the 
commonwealth.  There  is  nothing  then  to  be 
feared  by  those  interests  from  the  influence  of 
Louisville.  And  so  far  from  ever  seeking  to 
destroy  or  injure  the  agricultural  interest  which 

fentlemen  seem  apprehensive  of,  she  will  ever 
e  the  readiest,  even  if  governed  alone  by  self- 
interest,  to  foster  and  protect  it. 

As  to  the  emancipationists,  I  will  admit  that 
we  had  at  one  time  a  strong  party  of  them  in 
our  city.  The  act  calling  a  convention  had 
scarcely  passed  when  the  office  holders  and  the 
men  in  power  avowed  emancipation  principles, 
and  by  their  exertions  got  the  leading  mer- 
chants, lawyers,  and  mechanics,  the  leading  men 
of  the  butchering  interests,  and  river  men,  (both 
of  whom  wield  a  powerful  influence,)  to  unite 
with  them.  They  held  their  meetings  and  de- 
bates, and  within  three  weeks  of  the  election 
seemed  to  be  sweeping  every  thing  before  tliem. 
The  pro-slavery  men  seemed  afraid  to  move, 
until  the  President  of  this  convention  came  for- 
ward and  took  ground  against  this  strong  ajTray 
in  opposition  to  the  interests  of  the  state.  Meet- 
ings were  held,  and  arguments  used,  appealing 
to  the  patriotism  and  the  understanding  of  these 
men.  The  Germans  were  shown  that  they  came 
amongst  us  of  their  own  free  will,  knowing 
what  our  institutions  were,  and  that  they  pros- 
pered under  them,  and  that  therefore  it  was  not 
their  interest  to  subvert  any  of  those  institu- 
tions. This  appeal  took  like  wild  fire  among 
them.  They  instantly  saw  its  reason  and  jus- 
tice, and  despite  the  exertions  and  the  money  of 
the  emancipationists,  they  rallied  to  the  support 
of  the  interests  of  the  country.  The  people 
were  appealed  to  by  arguments,  their  connection 
with  the  interests  of  the  state  was  clearly  point- 
ed out,  aud  their  duty  urged  upon  them  to  unite 
with  the  pro-slavery  men  of  the  rest  of  the  state 
in  sustaining  the  institution  of  slavery.  They 
were  appealed  to  iu  language  of  this  import: 

Do  not  let  it  be  said  that  you  stood  back,  or 
made  common  cause  with  the  enemies  of  an  in- 
stitution of  your  country.  They  listened  at- 
tentively to  what  was  said  to  them,  and  in  the 
course  of  twenty  five  or  thirty  days  they  came 
forward  and  acknowledged  tliat  the  advice  was 
good,  right,  and  just,  that  they  ought  to  support 
the  pro-slavery  candidates,  that  it  was  their  in- 
terest to  do  it.  In  the  upper  ward,  where  the 
German  population  principally  reside,  and  the 
emancipationists  expected  a  large  majority,  wo 
beat  them  one  hundred  and  fifty  four  votes,  I 
think.  We  talked  to  the  Irish  and  other  foreign- 
ers living  in  the  lower  wards,  in  a  similar  strain, 
and  we  defeated  them,  but  in  the  fifth  and  sev- 
enth wards,  where  there  was  scarcely  a  foreigner, 
they  were  successful  against  us.  As  to  the  pop- 
ulation, which  had  emigrated  into  the  city  from 
the  rural  districts,  of  which  gentlemen  have 
spoken,  as  being  so  moral,  pure  aud  immaculate, 
how  did  they  vote?  Why,  against  us,  and  per- 
haps for  want  of  reflection;  and  no  doubt,  a 
great  many  who  did  so,  would  now  be  glad,  if 
they  could  say  they  had  not  been  on  that  side  of 
the  question.  What  reason,  I  ask,  has  the  rest 
of  the  State  of  Kentucky  to  fear  the  growth  of 
our  city  population?  None.  Tho  gentleman 
from  Madison,  who  denounced  our  population 
in  the  most  uumeasured  terms^  calls  upon  me  to 


y^ 


endorse  his  statemeut.  He  says  that  I  intro- 
duced a  resolution  in  this  convention  to  prevent 
our  citizens  from  running  into  excess  in  times  of 
excitement,  which  went  to  show  I  have  no  confi- 
dence in  the  people.  He  is  mistaken;  but  I  say 
I  have  more  confidence  in  the  proper  exercise  of 
the  elective  franchise  in  the  election  of  the 
judges  and  other  officers  than  in  any  other  mode 
of  appointment.  I  will  read  the  thirty  first  sec- 
tion of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legis- 
lative department  for  the  purpose  of  showing 
what  confidence  they  have  in  the  people.  It  is 
in  the  following  language: 

"The  credit  of  this  commonwealth  shall  never 
be  given  in  aid  of  any  person,  association,  mu- 
nicipality, or  corporation,  without  the  concur- 
rence of  two  thirds  of  each  house  of  the  general 
assembly." 

Why  should  the  gentleman  make  this  charge 
against  us?  The  section  I  have  read  is  almost 
identically  the  same  as  the  resolution  to  which 
he  ha^  referred.  But  here  they  call  in  the  aid 
of  two  thirds  of  each  house  to  carry  the  law  in- 
to effect.  I,  however,  acted  more  on  the  repub- 
lican principle,  fori  required  only  a  majority. 

I  anticipate  that  after  the  great  railroad  from 
Louisville  to  Frankfort  is  completed,  we  shall 
have  one  to  Nashville,  to  strike  the  head  of  nav- 
igation, but  I  do  not  want  it  till  the  people  are 
prepared  for  it.  The  gentleman  from  Madison 
said  we  restricted  the  property  holders.  I  do  not 
want  any  reflections  to  be  cast  upon  us,  or  the 
Yankees  and  foreigners  who  reside  among  us,  for 
I  think  we  are  as  pure  and  upright  as  other  peo- 
ple. The  great  question  is,  whether  Louisville 
.'<hall  permit  herself  to  be  trampled  down  and 
disfranchised,  without  raising  her  voice  against 
the  injustice  attempted  to  be  done  her.  Shall  it 
be  said  our  people  are  not  capable  of  represent- 
ing themselves — that  we  are  not  worthy  of  being 
represented  in  the  legislative  halls  in  proportion 
to  our  numbers?  I  trust  not;  and  yet  those  very 
men  professing  to  be  governed  by  republican 
principles  have  come  here  and  declared  that  a 
man  should  no:  be  qualified  for  a  clerk,  or  be  a 
lawyer  to  trv  a  case  of  yours  or  mine,  without 
first  obtaining  a  certificate  from  a  judge.  But 
when  it  comes  to  the  great  principle  of  the  elec- 
tiv^e  franchise,  I  say  give  the  vote  according  to 
population.  The  gentleman  from  Logan,  in  his 
proposition,  comes  forward  and  almost  declares 
that  Louisville  is  to  swallow  up  the  whole  of  the 
rural  or  agricultural  part  of  the  country.  Xow, 
he  need  not  be  afraid  that  Louisville  will  swal- 
low them  up,  for  the  smaller  cannot  swallow  the 
greater,  the  greater  must  swallow  the  lesser.  I 
think,  however,  one  of  the  gentleman  from  Lo- 
gan, from  his  appearance  and  happy  counte- 
nance, is  with  us.  No,  we  will  not  swallow 
them  up,  but  they  can  swallow  us  up,  and  tram- 
ple upon  us,  if  they  please,  and  give  us  what 
representation  they  think  proper.  They  have 
the  power,  but  I  believe  they  have  souls  above 
exercising  it. 

When  the  proposition  of  my  friend  from 
Christian  was  brought  forward,  the  whole  house 
was  in  a  state  of  agitation  and  confusion,  and  it 
appeared  to  me  that  Louisville  was  not  to  be  rep- 
resented. Really  I  did  not  know  but  what  there 
would  be  a  motion  made  to  cut  her  off  entirely ; 
but  that  was  not  done,  and  I  thank  the  house  for 
72 


it.  Wlien  the  gentleman  from  Christian  brought 
forward  his  proposition  as  a  compromise  I  knew 
nothing  about  it,  and  he  asked  me  if  I  was  wil- 
ling  to  agree  to  it.  He  said  to  me,  "you  had  bet- 
ter go  for  it,  it  will  be  a  benefit  to  your  city.  If 
your  city  had  a  little  larger  population,  I  would 
say  it  was  just  and  right."  Now,  when  I  found 
the  house  arrayed  against  Louisville,  and  trying 
to  disfranchise  her  of  her  power  and  weight  in  the 
legislative  halls,  to  which  she  is  justly  entitled,  I 
told  the  gentleman  I  would  support  it  on  prin- 
ciple, but  that  I  preferred  the  proposition  offered 
by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson.  If  we  should 
have  but  three  representatives,  I  should  prefer 
they  would  vote  in  a  body;  if  four,  to  have  two 
wards,  and  if  five,  districted  in  five  wards.  But, 
if  it  will  settle  this  question  and  quiet  the  house, 
I  will  go  for  it  as  it  stands.  I  came  here  to  do 
justice  to  all  parties,  as  far  as  ray  vote  and  voice 
are  concerned.  I  came  to  make  a  constitution  on 
equitable  principles,  and  I  hope  that  gentlemen 
who  differ  with  me  in  opinion,  in  relation  to  my 
city  being  partially  disfranchised,  will  reflect 
that  we  have  promised  these  people,  who  have 
fought  the  battles  of  our  country,  that  they 
should  be  dealt  with  justly,  their  persons  held 
sacred,  their  property  protected,  and  that  their 
voices  should  be  heard  in  the  legislative  halls. 
Now,  with  all  the  ingenuity  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  I  should  like  him  to  place  himself 
in  my  situation,  and  have  him  to  go  back  and  tell 
his  constituents  he  could  not  vote  to  give  them  a 
full  representation.  Why?  they  would  ask.  Be- 
cause you  are  a  mixed  population  of  foreigners, 
Germans,  Irish,  and  others.  We  could  not  give 
you  just  representation — vou  had  not  virtue 
enough.  Would  they  not  'be  almost  inclined  to 
throw  him  over  the  /ence,  and  tell  him  they  had 
no  further  use  for  him?  W^e  do  not  claim  for 
Louisville  more  of  virtue  than  any  other  portion 
of  the  state.  We  claim  an  equality  and  nothing 
more.  But  if  you  fear  the  power  of  Louisville, 
put  us  in  the  same  relation  to  the  rest  of  the 
state  that  the  counties  stand  in,  so  that  we  may 
have  opposing  influences  within  ourselves,  by 
being  divided  into  wards.  I  am  willing  to  go 
for  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Chris- 
tian to  district  the  city.  I  like  to  please  those 
whom  I  represent,  but  I  intend  to  do  justice,  let 
the  opposition  come  from  what  source  it  may. 
I  was  not  pledged  to  any  particular  principles 
in  forming  the  constitution,  but  I  am  to  act  as 
my  judgment  shall  direct  when  matters  come 
up.  The  emancipationists  called  a  meeting  of 
whigs  and  democrats  after  the  whigs  had 
brought  out  their  ticket.  They  rejected  the 
whig  nominees  and  nominated  a  ticket  of  their 
own,  and  thus  caused  the  defeat  of  the  whig 
ticket.  The  democrats  stuck  together,  and  there 
were  sent  here  two  democrats  and  one  whig 
emancipationist.  It  was  difficult  to  find  three 
men  who  were  willing  to  run  for  this  conven- 
tion. But  men  were  found,  men  who  never 
gave  an  inch,  who  were  not  in  favor  of  the  act 
of  1833,  or  of  incorporating  its  principles  in  the 
constitution.  We  accepted  no  terms,  but  insis- 
ted on  standing  by  our  own  principles,  un- 
pledged. I  do  not  blame  the  gentleman  from 
Madison  for  his  course,  because  he  is  pledged  to 
carry  out  the  principles  of  the  act  of  1833.  We 
came  here  to  make  a  constitution,  not  only  for 


570 


ourselveis,  but  posterity.  Soma  gentlemen  seem 
to  think  it  is  sufficient  that  we  should  have  a 
representation  only  for  the  present  population, 
and  they  say,  'we  do  you  no  ■wrong,  we  give  you 
what  you  now  have.  This  is  the  language  of 
the  emancipationists  applied  to  a  different  sub- 
ject. They  said,  we  will  not  take  your  present 
slaves  from  you.  but  those  only  that  may  be 
hereafter  bora.     So  gentlemen  here  say,  we  will 

five  you  what  you  now  have  of  representation, 
ut  we  will  grant  no  more  in  the  constitution 
for  posterity.  That  is  a  principle  which  cannot 
be  sustained,  and  he  who  advocates  it  before  the 
people,  will  be  beaten,  as  was  an  individual  in 
the  fifth  congressional  district,  who  advocated 
the  Wilmot  proviso,  as  was  said,  merely  to  as- 
certain how  the  people  stood  in  regard  to  it,  and 
though  he  had  a  capital  of  about  800  votes  in 
his  favor,  he  was,  notwithstanding,  beaten  about 
1200.  Why  was  it  so?  Because  those  who  held 
slaves  contended  for  the  principle,  though  it 
wasnot  a  matter  in  which  they  had  a  direct  pe- 
cuniary interest.  They  held  that  the  people  of 
the  territories  had  a  right  to  make  a  constitution 
for  themselves,  and  to  <idmit  slavery  or  reject  it. 
It  was  the  principle  of  equal  right  forwhich  they 
contended. 

This  question  is  pretty  much  the  same.  It  is 
not  to  deprive  us  of  property,  but  of  the  privi- 
lege of  equal  rights  in  the  existence  of  the  elec- 
tive franchise.  Property,  what  is  it '?  It  was 
mine  and  it  is  yours,  but  liberty  is  a  very  differ- 
ent thing.  The  principle  we  are  contending  for 
is  representation  according  to  population,  and  if 
■we  were  to  give  it  up,  we  would  go  home  dis- 
honored and  disgraced.  What  could  I  say  in 
answer  to  charges  that  might  meet  me  from  my 
constituents,  if  I  did  not  resist  this  attempt  to 
deprive  us  of  equal  rights?  If  I  were  to  tell  them 
that  this  republican  convention  had  overruled  us 
and  deprived  us  of  our  just  representation  in  the 
legislative  halls,  -would  they  not  say,  we  will  go 
with  you  no  more,  we  will  go  with  the  emanci- 
pationists. Thus  you  see  you  would  arm  the 
emancipationists,  and  they  would  carry  the  city, 
and  might  carry  some  of  the  adjacent  counties. 
Do  not  arm  then  I  beg  you.  Give  us  equal  rights, 
we  ask  nothing  more,  nothing  but  equality.  Let 
us  have  a  constitution  on  the  republican  princi- 
ple of  representation  accordingto  the  population, 
and  we  can  go  home  satisfied,  and  ready  to  urge 
every  man  to  endorse  it. 

The   committee  then  rose,   reported  progress, 
and  had  leave  to  sit  again. 
The  convention  then  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  NOVEMBER  19,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Norton. 

EEPRESliXTATlOX    OK    T0W.V8   AND    CITIES. 

Mr.  IRWIN  offered  the  following  resolutions: 
1.  Resolved,  That  elections  for  representatives 
for  the  several  counties  entitled  to  representa- 
tion, shall  be  held  at  the  places  of  holding  their 
rwpectivo  courts,  or  in  tne  several  election  pre- 


cincts   into    v»hich   the  legislature  may   think 
proper  to   divide  any   or  all  of  the  counties: 
Frovided,  that  when  it  shall  appear  to  the  legis- 
lature that  any   town  or  city  hath  a  number  of 
j  qualified  voters  equal  to  the   ratio  then  fixed, 
j  such  town  or  city  shall   be  invested   Avith   the 
j  privilege   of  a   separate   representation;  which 
I  shall  be  retained  so  long  as  such  town  or  city 
shall  contain  a  number  of  qualified  voters  equal 
to  the  ratio   -which  may,  from  time  to  time,  be 
fixed  by  law,  and  thereafter  elections  for  the 
county  in  which  such  town  or  city  is  situated, 
shall  not  be  held  therein. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  same  number  of  senato- 
rial districts  sliall,  from  time  to  time,  be  estab- 
lished by  the  legislature  as  there  may  then  he 
senators  allotted  to  the  state,  Avhioh  shall  be  so 
formed  as  to  contain  as  near  as  may  be  an  equal 
number  of  free  white  male  inhabitants  in  each, 
above  the  age  of  twenty  one  years,  so  that  no 
county,  town,  or  city  shall  form  more  than  one 
district,  and  when  two  or  more  counties  com- 
pose a  district,  they  shall  be  adjoining. 

I  would  simply  remark  that  this  proposition 
contains  the  fifth  and  twelfth  sections  of  the 
second  article  of  the  present  constitution,  ex- 
cept that  it  is  .so  changed  as  to  give  to  cities  and 
towns  a  separate  representation.  I  only  desire 
to  place  it  before  the  convention,  and  to  move 
that  it  be  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole, 
having  in  charge  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department,  with  the  inten- 
tion of  asking  for  a  direct  vote  upon  it. 
The  motion  to  refer  was  agreed  to. 

LEGISLATIVE    DEPAETMENT. 

The  convention  resolved  itself  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  Mr.  MERIWETHER  in  the  chair, 
and  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  legislative  department. 

The  CHAIRMAN  stated  the  pending  question 
to  be  on  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon)  submitted  as  a  substi- 
tute for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Christian  (Mr.  Morris.) 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  will  suggest  that  we 
shall  never  be  able  to  get  along  in  committee  of 
the  whole  with  the  business  before  us.  It  will  be 
much  better  to  consider  this  bill  in  convention. 
I  simple  make  this  sugge.stion.  I  shall  make  no 
motion ;  but  I  hope  every  gentleman  will  consid- 
er the  suggestion  I  have  made. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  concur  fully  with  the  gen- 
tleman, and  that  has  ever  been  my  opinion.  If 
■we  are  to  go  on  with  the  discussion  of  tliese 
questions  in  committee  of  the  Avhole,  and  they 
are  all  to  be  reargued  in  convention,  when  are 
we  to  complete  our  business? 

Mr.  IRWIN.  To  test  the  sense  of  the  conven- 
tion, and  ascertain  whether  that  is  its  disposi- 
tion, I  move  that  the  committee  rise,  and  report 
the  article  back  to  the  house  with  all  the  amend- 
ments that  have  been  made  and  offered. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  apprehend  it  is  out  of 
order  to  report  the  pending  amendments  to  the 
house. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  should  like  the 
clerk  to  read  the  rule  in  relation  to  the  transac- 
tion of  business  in  committee  of  the  whole.  We 
have  a  rule  which  directs  the  manner  in  which 
we  shall  proceed  in  the  consideration  of  article». 


^ 


If  I  recollect  aright,  the  rule  says  they  shall  be 
referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  there 
considered  in  a  prescribed  manner. 

The  secretary  read  the  rule  as  follows  : 

"Rule  54.  Upon  a  proposition  being  commit- 
ted to  a  committee  of  the  whole  house,  the  same 
shall  be  first  read  through  by  the  secretary,  (un- 
less otherwise  ordered  by  a  majority,)  and  then 
again  read  for  amendment  by  clauses  and  sec- 
tions, leaving  the  preamble,  if  any,  to  be  last 
considered.  After  report,  the  proposition  shall 
again  be  read,  if  desired  by  a  majority,  for 
amendment  and  debate,  before  a  question  be  ta- 
ken." 

Sir.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  That  is  the  rule  to 
which  I  referred. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  rule  occurred  to  the 
chair,  and  the  chair  apprehends  that  to  change 
that  rule  will  require  a  vote  of  two-thirds. 

The  chair  will  put  the  question  on  the  motion 
of  the  gentleman  from  Logan. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

The  committee  then  rose,  and  reported  the  bill 
and  its  amendments  to  the  convention. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  It  having  been 
agreed  to  proceed  with  the  consideration  of  this 
article  in  the  convention,  I  ask  the  convention 
to  adopt  a  resolution,  such  as  that  adopted  in 
committee  of  the  whole  for  the  regulation  of  de- 
bate, by  stopping  all  discussion,  except  ten  and 
five  minute  speeches,  at  12  o'clock  this  day.  In 
the  convention  at  present  we  have  no  rule  to  lim- 
it debate,  except  the  previous  question,  and  that 
will  preclude  all  amendments  also.  I  ask  unan- 
imous consent  to  the  introduction  of  such  a  res- 
olution as  I  have  indicated.     (Leave,  leave.) 

The  secretary  read  the  resolution  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  all  debate  in  the  convention, 
on  the  report  of  the  eonunittee  on  the  legislative 
department,  shall  cease  this  day  at  12  oclock, 
m.,  and  the  convention  shall  then  proceed  to 
vote  upon  such  amendments  as  may  then  be 
pending  or  may  be  thereafter  oifered:  Provided, 
That  the  mover  of  any  amendment  may  be  al- 
lowed ten  minutes,  and  any  other  delegate  who 
may  desire  it  five  minutes,  to  explain  or  oppose 
the  amendment,  but  in  such  limited  debate  the 
speaker  shall  confine  his  remarks  to  the  amend- 
ment under  consideration. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  move  to  amend  the  resolu- 
tion by  striking  out  "five"  and  inserting  "ten," 
so  that  each  member  shall  have  the  same  right  to 
speak  ten  minutes,  as  the  mover  of  an  amend- 
ment. 

Tlie  amendment  was  agreed  to  and  the  resolu- 
tion as  amended  was  adopted. 

Mr.  JAMES.  I  have  been  indisposed  for 
some  days,  and  I  am  not  well  this  morning,  but 
before  the  discussion  shall  be  closed,  I  desire  to 
offer  some  remarks,  and  I  desire  to  do  it  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  as  more  appropriate  and 
convenient  to  me.  I  ask  the  convention  again 
to  resolve  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  move  that  the  gentleman  be 
allowed  to  proceed. 

Mr.  JAMES.  I  feel  obliged  to  the  gentleman, 
but  it  would  be  more  convenient  to  me  to  speak 
in  committee  of  the  whole. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  I  move  that  the  convention 
again  resolve  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole 


on  this  article,  for  the  special  purpose  of  hearing 
the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Hickman. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  committee 
again  resolved  itself  into  committee  of  tho 
whole  on  the  article  on  the  Legislative  Depart* 
ment.     Mr.  MERIWETHER  in  the  Chair. 

Mr.  JAMES.  In  the  remarks  I  am  about  to 
submit  to  the  consideration  of  the  committee 
upon  this  occasion,  if  I  do  not  confine  myself 
strictly  to  the  question  in  issue,  I  shall  but  fol- 
low tKe  example  of  several  gentlemen  who  have 
preceded  me. 

I  have  had  the  honor  of  a  seat  in  one  or  the 
other  branch  of  the  legislature  when  five  appor- 
tionment bills  have  been  passed,  and  I  have  al- 
ways found  the  question  of  apportionment  one 
of  the  most  exciting  questions  that  has  ever  been 
presented  for  the  consideration  of  the  legisla- 
ture, and  why?  Because  it  affects,  to  some  ex- 
tent, the  interests  of  every  portion  of  the  coun- 
try. While  some  are  struggling  to  acquire  more 
strength,  others  are  endeavoring  to  retain  what 
they  have;  whilst  the  neutral  portions,  those 
which  do  not  themselves  expect  to  be  affected 
by  the  decision  of  the  question,  generally  take 
sides  with  one  or  the  other  of  the  parties  inter- 
ested, and  hence  the  excitement  which  always 
attends  its  agitation.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at,  therefore,  that  when  this  convention  is  en- 
gaged in  framing  an  organic  law,  to  direct  and 
settle  the  principles  that  shall  govern  the  legisla- 
ture in  its  future  action  in  regard  to  this  impor- 
tant question,  there  should  be  manifested  some 
little  excitement. 

I  came  here  with  my  opinions  matured,  in  re- 
lation to  the  great  leading  questions  that  have 
been  agitated  throughout  the  commonwealth 
upon  the  subject  of  constitutional  reform.  I  did 
expect,  however,  upon  coming  here,  that  we 
should  have  some  discussion  in  respect  to  de- 
tails; but  when  asked,  upon  leaving  home,  how 
long  I  supposed  the  convention  would  continue 
in  session,  I  gave  it  as  my  opinion,  unhesitat- 
ingly, that  they  would  be  enabled  to  close  their 
labors  within  seven  or  eight  weeks,  but  we  are 
now  entering  upon  the  eighth  week,  and  it  is 
impossible  to  say  when  we  shall  be  ready  to  ad- 
journ. It  is  all  very  well  for  gentlemen  who 
live  near,  and  who  are  enabled  to  go  home  occa- 
sionally, about  one  third  of  whom  have  availed 
themselves  of  that  privilege,  but  this  I  have  no 
opportunity  of  doing. 

I  regret  that  crimination  and  recrimination 
have  been  indulged  in  upon  this  exciting  sub- 
ject, and  none  do  I  regret  more  than  fell  from 
the  lips  of  the  honorable  president  of  this  con- 
vention. He  took  part  in  this  discussion  on  the 
13th  and  the  16th  instant,  and  indulged  in  a  very 
wide  range  indeed;  in  the  course  of  which,  he 
took  occasion  to  denounce,  in  very  unqualified 
terms,  those  who  felt  it  their  duty  to  sustain  the 

Eroposition  that  was  then  under  consideration, 
[e  alluded  to  the  subject  of  internal  improve- 
ment, education,  and  the  proposed  negro  law  of 
1830.  I  say  proposed  law,  because  it  did  not 
pass.  He  also  alluded  to  the  act  of  1833.  Well, 
sir,  I  have  been  in  the  legislature  for  a  number 
of  years,  and  if  I  do  not  know  something  about 
the  history  of  these  questions,  it  must  be  admit- 
ted that  I  ought  to.  My  district  composes 
the  one  hundredth  part  o'f  the  sovereignty  of 


672 


the  commonwealth,  and  I  came  here  to  exercise 
the  right  to  which  she  is  entitled.  The  question 
that  was  under  consideration  at  the  time  the 
honorable  president  addressed  the  committee, 
was  the  proposition  to  restrict  the  cities  in  ap- 
portioning the  representation  in  the  senatorial 
branch  of  the  legislature;  and  he  then  took  oc- 
casion to  denounce  those  who  were  disposed  to 
favor  it,  as  invading  the  rights  of  his  constitu- 
ents. If  that  proposition  invades  the  rights  of 
the  citizens  of  Louisville,  the  convention  of 
1799  invaded  them.  Let  me  call  the  attention 
of  the  committee  to  the  twelfth  section  of  the 
second  article  of  the  constitution  of  Kentucky; 
it  reads  as  follows: 

"  Thesame number  of  senatorial  districts  shall, 
from  time  to  time,  be  established  by  the  legisla- 
ture, as  there  may  be  then  senators  allotted  to 
the  state;  wliich  shall  be  so  formed  as  to  con- 
tain, as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  number  of  free 
male  inhabitants  in  each,  above  the  age  of  twen- 
ty one  years,  and  so  that  no  county  shall  be  di- 
vided, or  form  more  than  one  district,  and  where 
two  or  more  counties  compose  a  district,  they 
shall  be  adjoining." 

Did  not  that  restrict  the  county  of  Jefferson 
to  one  senator?  Well,  sir,  whose  names  do  you 
find  appended  to  that  constitution?  First,  the 
name  of  Alexander  S.  Bullitt,  the  delegate  from 
the  county  of  Jefferson,  who  presided  over  the 
convention  that  framed  this  constitution,  and 
the  father  of  the  distinguished  delegate  now,  in 

?art,  representing  the  same  county  on  this  floor, 
'ou  find  the  name  of  Col.  Richard  Taylor,  the 
father,  I  believe,  of  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  an  early  pioneer  of  Kentucky,  and  a 
most  worthy  and  honorable  gentleman.  I  had 
the  pleasure  of  serving  with  nim  in  the  legisla- 
ture, as  early  a.s  the  year  1825. 

The  gentleman  says  we  are  here  sworn  to  do 
justice.  Well,  that  is  the  very  thing  we  are 
about  to  determine;  and  the  question  presents 
itself  to  this  committee — is  it  proper  and  right 
to  restrict  the  representation  of  large  masses, 
when  congregated  within  a  small  space?  I  think 
it  is,  and  the  convention  of  1799  thought  so  too. 
The  gentleman  says  it  is  an  invasion  of  the 
rights  of  his  constituents.  I  cannot  help  that. 
In  carrying  out  a  great  principle,  though  it  is  by 
no  means  ray  design  to  invade  the  rights  of  the 
gentleman's  constituents — yet  if  they  suffer 
what  the  gentleman  may  call  an  invasion  of 
their  rights,  in  consequence  oif  the  application 
of  such  principle,  be  it  so.  I  am  one  who 
thinks  the  establishment  of  the  principle  neces- 
sary for  the  public  good.  It  is  a  principle  that 
is  recognized  in  the  federal  constitution,  and  in 
the  constitutions  of  many  of  the  states.  We 
have  many  illustrious  precedents  for  this  course. 
I  am  told  that  a  great  many  cities  will  fall  under 
this  proscription,  this  invasion  of  rights.  Sup- 
pose they  ao,  that  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
great  principle — that  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  a 
reason  why  the  principle  should  not  be  applied. 
I  am  told  that  tliere  are  many  towns  along  the 
Ohio  river,  that  are  destined  to  become  greataud 
populous  cities,  and  that  it  will  be  an  injustice 
towards  them,  to  make  them  fall  under  this  pro- 
scription. I  design  nothing  prejudicial  or  in- 
jurious to  them,  sir.  Covington,  Henderson, 
»pd  Paducah  have  been  named  as  cities  which 


are,  in  time,  to  fall  under  this  principle.  Surely 
sir,  I  would  do  nothing  calculated  to  prejudice 
either  of  them.  The  latter  city  I  have,  in  times 
past,  represented,  first  in  one  and  then  in  the 
other  branch  of  the  state  legislature.  I  rejoice 
in  her  prosperity — in  her  growth  and  her  prom- 
ise of  greatness  and  wealth.  I  have  many 
friends  among  her  citizens — friends  of  long 
standing.  I  would  not  injure  them.  I  believe, 
sir,  they  will  cheerfully  acquiesce  in  the  adop- 
tion of  this  principle — though  it  may,  in  some 
degree,  restrict  them — if  thereby  the  public 
good  is  to  be  promoted. 

Columbus  and  Mills'  Point  have  been  also  al- 
luded to;  they  will  be  populous  cities,  no  doubt. 
Thirty  years  ago  my  attention  was  turned  to 
that  section  of  the  country,  and  I  then  believed 
the  day  Avas  not  far  distant  when  a  great  city 
would  spring  up  near  the  junction  of  the  Ohio 
and  Mississippi  rivers.  I  have  not  yet  lost  the 
hope,  but  my  expectation  has  been  greatly  post- 
poned. I  trust,  however,  a  brighter  day  is 
dawning  upon  them.  To  the  former  place,  es- 
pecially, a  promising  future  is  now  opening. 
The  great  enterprise  of  uniting  the  city  of  Mo- 
bile with  the  Ohio  or  Mississippi  rivers,  we  have 
now  a  just  reason  to  hope  will  be  pressed  for- 
ward energetically.  Part  of  the  road  is  already 
under  contract,  and  the  best  spirit  prevails 
throughout  all  the  section  immediately  inter- 
ested in  its  completion.  Should  Columbus  be 
its  terminus,  as  many  hope  and  believe,  it  must 
become  a  great  city,  and  its  influence  shed  upon 
neighboring  towns  must  greatly  advance  them. 
And  I  am  sure  these  towns,  if  tne  bright  picture 
we  noAv  paint  for  them  shall  be  realized,  will 
not  clamor  against  the  principle  which  we  now 
propose  to  insert  in  the  constitution. 

The  honorable  President  took  occasion  to  tell 
us,  in  rather  a  loud,  authoritative,  and  dictato- 
rial tone,  that  if  the  rights  of  his  constituents 
were  thus  invaded,  he  Avould  not  sign  the  con- 
stitution— that  he  would  go  home  and  denounce 
it.  I  was  really  very  much  alarmed  when  he 
said  this.  I  know  that  gentleman  claims  long 
to  have  been  the  advocate  of  constitutional  re- 
form. I  claim,  however,  to  be  his  senior  in  that 
respect.  I  heard  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  Hardin.)  say,  the  other  day,  he  had  advo- 
cated constitutional  reform  for  five  years.  I 
take  occasion  to  say  I  advocated  it  for  thirty 
years.  I  have  never  given  a  vote,  in  or  out  of 
the  legislature,  that  has  not  tended  that  way. 
I  say,  I  was  alarmed  when  I  heard  the  gentle- 
man declare  that  he  would  denounce  the  consti- 
tution, for  I  know  his  weight  and  influence  in 
the  country:  but,  after  a  moment's  reflection,  I 
consoled  myself  with  the  hope  that  the  Sun 
would  not  be  veiled  in  mourning — thatitwould 
rise  in  the  east,  and  net  in  the  west,  as  usual — 
that  the  seasons  would  roll  on,  as  heretofore — 
that  we  should  have  spring  and  autumn,  suni- 
mer  and  winter  yet;  and  that  neither  war,  pesti- 
lence, nor  famine  would  be  visited  upon  those 
wlio  felt  it  tlieir  duty  to  engraft  this  conserva- 
tive principle — a  principle  that  wiis  recogni- 
zed by  the  framers  of  the  federal  constitution, 
and  by  those  who  made  the  present  constitution 
of  Kentuckv — in  the  constitution  we  are  about 
to  make,  took  at  the  great  state  of  New  York ; 
she  has  but  two  senators,  while  Tesa-s  and  little 


573 


Delaware  each  have  the  same  number.  Had 
Washington,  Jeiferson,  Franklin,  and  Madison 
denounced  this  principle,  in  its  application  to 
the  federal  government,  and  declared  thevwoukl 
not  sustain  the  constitution,  what  would  have 
been  our  condition?  It  -would  have  been  disas- 
trous, indeed.  But  I  trust  that  no  such  evil 
will  result,  should  our  President  carry  out  his 
determination.  In  discussing  this  question,  he 
took  occasion  to  use  this  language  : 

"Well,  every  gentleman  can  reconcile  it  to 
himself,  in  his  own  way.  His  constituents,  be- 
cause they  receive  the  benefit*  and  advantages 
of  it,  may  look  over  it,  but  if  they  shall  be  chary 
in  trusting  him  again,  when  they  see  he  can 
trample  on  their  rights,  as  he  has  trampled  on 
the  rights  of  others,  their  distrust  will  be  mani- 
fested, and  the  consequences  will  be  visited  on 
his  own  head,  and  not  on  mine." 

Now,  this  might  be  received  in  a  two-fold 
point  of  view.  First,  as  a  caution,  or  warning; 
secondly,  as  a  piece  of  advice.  Well,  I  suppose 
that  every  school  boy  of  ten  years  old  in  my 
district,  is  aware  that  the  president  is  not  respon- 
sible for  my  conduct  on  this  floor,  and  I  will 
take  occasion  to  say,  that  I  think  my  constitu- 
ents have  as  much  confidence  in  my  integrity, 
and  disposition  to  do  right,  as  the  constituents 
of  the  gentleman  have  in  his. 

It  was  a  maxim  of  Lord  Coke,  I  believe,  that 
a  man  should  not  be  permitted  to  adjudicate 
upon  matters  in  which  he  was  personally  inter- 
ested. When  I  am  in  need  of  the  president's 
advice,  I  will  call  upon  him  for  it.  1  am  rather 
distrustful  of  advice  that  is  given  without  being 
asked  for.  The  principle  laid  down  by  Lord 
Coke,  would  apply  in  either  case. 

I  regret  exceedingly  that  those  who  are  acting 
with  me  in  discussing  this  important  question, 
have  alluded  to  the  subject  of  emancipation. 
All  such  paltry  considerations  have  nothing  to 
do  with  my  action.  I  came  here  as  thorough  a 
pro-slavery  man  Jis  any  in  this  convention.  I 
was  born  and  educated  in  this  faith.  I  told  my 
constituents — and  my  worthy  friend  from  Graves 
heard  me  declare  it — that  I  would  not  accept  a 
seat  in  this  convention  with  a  view  to  the  dis- 
turbance of  the  slavery  question.  It  was  stated 
by  a  writer  in  the  News  Letter,  about  tliat  time, 
that  there  was  a  majority  in  the  representative 
district  in  favor  of  emancipation.  That  was  the 
reason  why  I  made  the  declaration,  and  I  added, 
that  if  they  were  inclined  to  elect  a  man,  who 
would  act  in  a  manner  so  injurious  to  the  inter- 
ests of  the  country,  as  to  favor  the  schemes  of 
the  emancipationists,  they  might  select  some 
other  person,  I  would  not  answer  their  purposes. 
Well,  what  was  the  result?  I  was  elected  with- 
out opposition,  and  came  here,  not  to  disturb 
the  question  of  slavery,  with  two  exceptions; 
and  they  were  to  secure  to  the  citizen  the  right  to 
import  slaves  for  his  own  use,  and  to  prohibit 
the  emancipation  of  slaves  without  a  provision 
for  their  deportation  when  emancipated. 

The  president  has  told  us,  that  he  was  an  ad- 
vocate of  the  proposed  negro  emancipation  law 
of  1830.  That  law  did  not  pa.ss.  I  beg  leave 
to  refer  for  a  moment  to  that  enactment. 
"  A  bill  more  eiFectually  to  prevent  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves  into  the  state  as  merchandise. 

"  Sec.  I.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly 


of  the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky ,  That  none  shall 
be  slaves,  except  such  as  shall  be  slaves  within 
this  commonwealth  on  the  first  day  of  June  next, 
and  the  descendants  of  the  females  of  them,  and 
such  slaves  as  shall  thereafter  be  lawfully  im- 
ported into  this  commonwealth,  and  the  descend- 
ants of  the  females  of  them. 

"  Sec.  2.  Be  it  further  enacted,  That  from  and 
after  the  said  first  day  of  June,  it  shall  not  be 
lawful  for  any  person,  or  persons,  to  import  into 
this  commonwealth  any  slave,  or  slaves,  except 
emigrants  to  the  state,  bringing  their  slaves  with 
them  for  their  own  use,  and  not  for  merchandise, 
and  citizens  of  this  state  claiming  slaves  in 
another  state,  by  devise,  descent,  or  maniage;  in 
all  which  cases,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  such 
persons,  to  import  such  slaves  for  their  own  use, 
and  not  as  merchandize. 

"Sec.  3.  All  laws  now  in  force,  prohibiting 
the  importation  of  slaves  into  this  common- 
wealth, shall  be,  and  the  same  are  hereby  repeal- 
ed, from  and  after  the  said  first  day  of  June: 
Provided,  That  the  provisions  of  this  bill  shall 
not  apply  to  persons  transiently  passing  through 
the  commonwealth  with  slaves,  on  their  way  to 
any  other  state  or  country:  Provided,  That  noth- 
ing in  this  act  shall  be  so  construed,  as  to  pre- 
vent persons  emigrating  to  this  stiite,  and  set- 
tling permanently  in  it,  from  selling  their 
slaves." 

The  yeas  and  nays  being  demanded  upon  the 
question  of  engrossing  it  for  a  third  reading, 
the  name  of  the  president  of  this  convention 
(Mr.  James  Guthrie)  is  found  among  those  voting 
in  favor  of  the  bill. 

Now  what  would  have  been  the  effect  of  this 
act,  had  it  gone  into  operation?  Would  it  not 
have  emancipated  all  the  slaves  that  had  been 
purchased  for  a  valuable  consideration  bv  our 
citizens  and  brought  within  the  state?  I  aslv  the 
President,  if  in  this  act  of  his,  he  was  not  inva- 
ding the  rights  of  my  constituents,  when  he  vo- 
ted for  this  bill?  He  was.  And  when  I  looked 
at  the  names  recorded  in  this  journal  I  thought  I 
stood  "solitary  and  alone,"  in  opposing  this 
atrocious  measure.  But  when  I  looked  around  I 
found  ray  worthy  friend  from  Monroe,  (Mr.  Bar- 
low,) who  voted  with  me  against  that  bill.  It 
has  been  my  good  fortune  often  to  act  with  him, 
and  I  have  found  him  about  right,  on  all  impor- 
tant questions.  I  was  gratified  to  find  that  he 
was  a  delegate  to  this  convention. 

I  said  the  President  was  invading  the  rights  of 
my  constituents  in  that  vote  of  his,  and  I  will 
thank  the  president,  with  the  chairman  and  this 
committee,  to  accompany  me  to  the  state  line, 
for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  my  views  upoa 
this  subject. 

Suppose  that  one  of  mv  constituents  has  gone 
to  Tennessee — (many  of  them  came  originally 
from  that  state — and  very  good  citizens  they  are 
— they  make  good  Kentuckians — I  would  be 
glad  of  a  thousand  more,  and  I  have  no  doubt 
my  frie«d  over  the  way  from  Graves  would  glad- 
ly receive  as  many  more,) — to  buy  a  servant  to 
assist  in  the  labors  of  their  farm.  I  want  them 
to  have  the  right  to  do  so.  And  to  attempt  to 
prevent  them  doing  so  is  a  flagrant  violation  of 
their  constitutional  rights.  Now  suppose  one  of 
them  is  bringing  his  servant  across  the  line, 
and   our  president  meets   him,  with   this  act 


Jf4 


^^ftfTfii^i^^S^^-^y^^^Tfm  sliall  not ' 
bring  your  servant  into  this  state,  for  if  you 
do,  I  have  assisted  in  passing  a  la^^  -n-hich 
sots  your  negro  free  the  moment  he  comes  with- 
in the  limits  of  Kentucky.  This  being  heard  by 
the  negro,  produces  insubordination.  My  con- 
stituent, thus  accosted,  says,  your  law  is  a  nulli- 
ty; my  right  is  secured  to  me  by  a  higher  power 
llian  your  law,  the  constitution  of  your  state;  and 
here  it  is: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power  to 
pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves,  with- 
out the  consent  of  their  owners,  or  without  pay- 
ing their  owners,  previous  to  such  emancipation, 
a  full  eqivaleut  in  money  for  the  slaves  so  eman- 
cipated." 

upon  this  guaranty  in  the  constitution,  regard- 
less of  this  law  which  you  have  aided  in  pass- 
ing, I  demand  my  right  to  enter  as  a  citizen  of 
your  state,  and  to  bring  with  me  such  chattels 
a-s  are  held  and  esteemed  property  by  the  con- 
stitution, whether  that  property  be  in  slaves  or 
not. 

Tlie  statute  proposed  by  the  president  contem- 
plated the  emancipation  of  the  slave  without 
compensation;  but  my  constituent  says  to  him, 
when  thus  standing  upon  the  line,  I  shall  disre- 
gard your  statute.  I  claim  protection  for  my 
froperty,  not  under  or  by  virtue  of  your  law, 
ut  under  the  constitution,  and  tliough  you  de- 
clare by  virtue  of  your  law  that  my  slave  ceases 
to  be  property  and  becomes  free  whenever  he 
crosses  the  line,  the  constitution,  which  I  hold 
to  be  the  paramount  law  of  the  land,  and  which 
must  be  co-extensive  Avith  law,  secures  me  in  the 
possession  and  property  of  my  slave  until  just 
compensation  shall  have  been  made  for  xiim;  and 
he  will  say  to  the  president,  while  thus  attempt- 
ing to  enforce  the  power  of  his  statute,  I  stand 
by  the  guaranties  of  the  constitution  of  my  state; 
you  propose  to  disregard  those  guaranties,  and 
to  set  at  defiance  the  fundamental  law  of  the 
land — your  law  cannot  be  enforced — it  is  an  in- 
fraction of  the  constitution — a  direct  inva.sion  of 
my  rights  as  a  citizen  of  the  commonwealtli. 
_  I  under^rtand  the  president  has  said  that  at  one 
time  the  friends  of  the  proposed  act  of  1830 
abandoned  it,  because  it  might  result  in  bring- 
ing into  this  state  a  great  number  of  worthless 
slaves,  to  be  emancipated  and  supported  at  the 
public  charge,  the  owners  having  no  further  use 
for  them,  and  choosing  this  manner  to  get  rid  of 
them.  I  was  in  the  legislature,  but  never  heard 
that  reason  assigned  for  the  abandonment  of  that 
law.  I  do  notclispute  the  president's  word  how- 
ever. There  was  a  very  distinguished  gentle- 
man from  old  Logan,  Judge  Ewing,  who  raised 
his  voice — and  it  was  heard  throughout  the  com- 
mouwealth — advocating  the  rights  of  the  pro- 
slavery  party,  and  this  commonwealtli  is  more 
indebted  to  Iiim  tlian  to  any  other  man  for  defeat- 
ing that  nefarious  act.  I  heard  him  with  pleas- 
ure; the  advocates  of  the  law  were  panic-strick- 
en. Well,  says  the  president,  I  don't  want  you 
to  bring  in  any  more  slaves,  we  have  got  plenty. 
He  was  living  in  the  blue  grass  region,  where 
they  could  hire  white  laborers,  M'ho,  when  sick, 
could  be  turned  out  of  doors  to  shift  for  them- 
selves. The  people  in  his  region,  while  they 
could  get  such  labor,  did  not  want  more  slaves; 
they  could  invest  their  money  more  protitably  in 


bank  .stocks,  and  other  stoc^,  w!6fcTi*  pay'^enor- 
mous  dividends — and  in  the  erection  of  princely 
residences.  Such  persons  needed  no  more  slaves, 
and  hence  their  representative,  the  president, 
was  willing  to  proscribe  my  constituents;  but  I 
did  not  then  tamely  submit  to  the  outrage,  and  I 
will — so  long  as  my  voice  can  be  heard — be  found 
opposing  such  an  iniquitous  measure. 

Now  1  call  upon  the  common  sense,  the  plain 
and  thinking  men  of  this  convention — for  1  will 
not  ask  alone  the  judgment  of  the  lawyer,  with 
his  nice  distinction — Tiis  subtleties  and  his  tech- 
nicalities— to  look  fairly  at  the  illustration  of  the 
law  of  the  president,  which  I  have  presented, 
!ind  say  if  it  does  not  present  the  operation  of 
that  law  fairly  and  justly;  and  if  it  was  not  an 
infraction  of  the  constitution  and  an  invasion  of 
the  rights   of    my   constituents?    Was  not  the 

g resident's  voice  raised  in  support  of  this  law? 
id  he  not  override  the  constitution  in  voting  for 
this  act?  And  in  response  to  his  denunciation 
of  those  who  dared  differ  with  him  here,  I  will 
say  "I  have  no  more  confidence  in  those  men" 
that  have  heretofore  attempted  "to  invade  the 
rights  of  their  fellow  citizens,  than  I  have  in  the 
voice  of  the  Autocrat  of  Russia." 

The  proposed  act  of  1830,  was  a  concession, 
not  only  to  the  emancipationists,  but  to  the  abo- 
litionists; because  it  was  abolition  in  its  grossest 
shape.  The  friends  of  this  measure,  I  will  not 
say  retreated,  but  they  fell  back  upon  the  act  of 
1833.  What  did  they  propose  by  that  act? 
They  proposed  again  to  pa>s  an  act  that  con- 
flicted with  the  constitution.  The  constitution 
|:ives  the  legislature  the  right  to  prohibit  the 
importation  of  slaves  as  merchandise,  and  of 
course,  and  by  the  universally  accepted  rule  of 
construction,  the  legislature  has  not  the  right  to 
prohibit  their  introduction,  for  any  other  pur- 
pose. There  is  a  large  and  respectable  minority 
in  Kentucky,  who  believe  it  to  be  unconstitu- 
tional, notwithstanding  the  appellate  court  has 
recognized  its  constitutionality;  and  another 
reason  why  I  have  reason  to  suppose  it  uncon- 
stitutional, the  act  remained  a  dead  letter  upon 
your  statute  book;  for  sixteen  long  years,  it  nad 
no  operation,  except  that  it  served  to  expel  from 
Kentucky  some  of  her  best  citizens.  This  was 
its  effect.  Whenever  a  man  who  had  some  in- 
fluence, was  instructed  by  his  constituents,  to  ob- 
tain the  passage  of  an  act,  permitting  them  to 
bring  in  slaves  for  their  own  use,  it  was  done, 
and  hundreds  of  slaves  were  imported  in  this 
way.  I  will  call  the  attention  of  the  committee 
to  the  fourth  section  of  this  celebrated  act  of 
1833,  commonly  known  as  the  negro  law.  The 
attention  of  the  country  was  not  called  to  the 
design  of  this  law,  it  having  been  transferred  to 
the  digest,  under  the  head  of  "Attorneys." 
The  fourth  section  reads  thus:  "  It  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  attorneys  for  the  commonwealth, 
now  in  ofHce,  at  the  first  court  after  the  passage 
of  this  act,  and  every  other  attorney  for  the  com- 
monwealth, who  may  be  hereafter  commission- 
ed, at  the  time  of  taking  the  oath  of  office,  to 
take  a  .solemn  oath,  that  they  will  faithfully 
prosecute  all  offenders,  against  this  act,  within 
their  knowledge,  or  of  wliich  they  may  bo  in- 
formed, and  who  may  be  found  within  their 
respective  districts,  and  in  eadi  <ase  of  con- 
viction, the  prosecuting  attorney  shall  be  entitled 


575 


to  a  tee  of  twenty  per  cent,  out  of  the  amount 
collected,  and  the  balance  shall  be  paid  into  the 
public  treasun,',  and  set  apart  as  a  fund,  t«  be 
under  the  direction  of  the  governor,  and  such 
otiier  or  others  as  the  legislature  may  appoint, 
for  colonizinff  the  free  persons  of  color,  on  the 
coast  of  Africa."  Now,  sir,  the  country  is  to 
be  taxed  for  sustaining  courts  of  justice,  whose 
time  is  to  be  devoted  to  the  trial  of  such  cases, 
and  the  commonwealth  attorney,  in  addition  to 
his  regular  salary,  is  to  receive  after  being  sworn 
to  prosecute  such  cases,  for  fear  he  would  not 
do  it,  twenty  per  cent,  of  the  amount  received 
as  an  additional  inducement  to  prosecute. 

I  have  said  that  many  excellent  citizens  were 
driven  out  of  the  country,  on  account  of  the  op- 
pression of  tliis  act.  Two  of  those  cases  are 
from  my  own  county,  and  another  was  from  the 
county  of  Livingston,  now  Crittenden  county. 
The  facts  in  the  latter  case,  as  \  obtained  them 
from  a  delegate,  who  is  better  informed  upon  the 
subject,  are  these: 

"  Richard  Cruse  in  1838  bought  a  family  of 
negroes,  seven  in  number — mother  and  six 
children.  They  had  been  hired  out  one  year  by 
a  lady,  removing  from  Tennessee  to  Illinois, 
and  at  the  end  of  that  year  she  came  to  him 
again,  and  Cruse  bought  them.  He  was  ma- 
liciously indicted  for  it  and  had  to  leave  the 
county.  He  did  not  even  know  at  the  time  that 
such  a  law  was  on  the  statute  books.  He  was 
worth  about  twenty  or  twenty  five  thousand 
dollars." 

This  old  lady,  I  understand, was  of  theopinion 
that  if  slie  went  to  Illinois,  with  her  servants, 
having  an  agreement  with  them  that  they  would 
serve  her,  they  would  be  bound  to  do  so.  She 
found  she  was  mistaken,  however,  and  hired 
them  out  in  Livingston  countv.  And  let  me 
state,  that  Mr.  Cruse  knew  notliing  about  this 
statute  of  1833,  for  it  had  lain  on  the  statute 
book  a  dead  letter  for  many  years.  Cruse  de- 
signing to  accumulate  such  property,  struck  a 
trade  with  the  old  lady,  and  gave  her,  I  believe, 
$300  each  for  her  family  of  slaves,  taking  old 
and  young  together,  making  a  total  of  ,$2100. 
Some  of  Cruse's  neighbors,  who  thought  he  had 
made  a  bargain  to  their  detriment,  informed 
against  him,  and  he  was  therefore  indicted. 
Finding  he  could  not  get  relief,  he  abandoned 
his  native  state,  and  went  to  Missouri.  What 
would  have  been  the  consequence  if  he  had  re- 
mained and  defended  the  ca.se^  The  fine  was 
$4200,  double  the  value  of  the  negroes  he  had 
bought.  The  attorney  getting  $84U  for  his  ser- 
vices, and  the  remaincier  of  the  fine,  $3360  going 
into  the  treasury,  but  not  to  pay  the  interest  on 
the  state  debt,  not  to  defray  the  expenses  of 
your  courts  of  justice,  but  to  be  set  apart  for 
colonizing  free  persons  of  color,  for  colonizing 
the  slaves  that  might  be  extorted  from  the  good 

Eeople  of  the  state,  to  send  them  to  the  coast  of 
liberia,  where  an  attempt  has  been  made  for 
many  years  to  build  up  a  colony,  and  where 
there  are  now  some  three  or  four  thousand 
blacks  in  a  stat«  of  wretchedness  and  starvation. 
You  cannot  get  an  intelligent  negro  to  go  there. 
I  told  one  of  my  negroes,  who  has  a  wife  and 
child  that  are  free,  he  might  go  if  he  would 
take  them  with  him  and  stay  there.  He  con- 
Bented  to  go,  but  could  not  be  prevailed  on  to 


promise  to  stay.  It  was  a.  splendid  idea  to  give 
to  the  commonwealth's  attorney  $849,  ana  to 
exjjend  the  other  in  colonizing  those  blacks,  ia 
tliat  unhealthy  region;  you  might  as  well  con- 
sign them  to  the  grave  at  once  as  to  send  them 
there. 

There  is  another  view  that  I  have  not  heard 
advanced — though  I  do  not  mean  to  take  credit 
for  having  made  any  very  great  discovery.  We 
are  now  engaged  in  forming  a  constitution,  and 
I  would  like  to  call  the  attention  of  the  conven- 
tion to  the  tenth  article  of  the  miscellaneous  pro- 
visions of  the  present  constitution.  If  it  does 
not  inhibit  imposition  of  the  fine  specified  in 
the  act  of  1833,  I  call  on  the  convention  to  sav 
what  it  does  mean,  it  reads,  "That  the  genera), 
great,  and  essential  principles  of  liberty  ami 
free  government  may  be  recognised,  and  estab- 
lished. We  declare  <fcc."  Now  turn  your  atten- 
tion to  the  fifteenth  section  of  this  bill  of  rights. 
and  we  find,  "that  excessive  bail,  shall  not  be 
required,  nor  excessive  fines  imposed,  nor  cruel 
punishment  inflicted."  And  I  believe  the  com- 
mittee that  has  had  this  matter  under  considera- 
tion, have  reported  the  same  clause.  What  is 
its  meaning'^  Its  meaning  is  evident,  excessive 
fines  .shall  not  be  imposed.  The  framers  of  the 
constitution  evidently  intended  to  prohibit  the 
legislature  from  passing  any  act  by  which  ex- 
cessive fines  should  be  imposed.  What  is  the 
object  of  a  fine?  Is  it  not  to  punish  the  indi- 
vidual for  any  injuries  he  may  inflict  on  society, 
and  to  furnish  a  warning  to  those  who  are  dis- 
posed to  ofi"end  in  like  manner  ?  But  was  it  not 
intended  by  this  provision,  that  the  legislature 
should  not  have  power  to  inflict  a  fine  so  exorbi- 
tant as  to  break  a  man  up.  Now  what  great  sin 
was  Cruse  guilty  of?  He  was  merely  endeavor- 
ing to  better  his  condition,  and  to  enable  hi  iiself 
to  extend  his  agricultural  pursuits.  He  had 
committed  no  sin  against  his  fellow  citizens  of 
Livingston  county,  nor  against  the  common- 
wealth of  Kentucky.  If  he  had,  it  was  not  to 
the  extent  of  $4200,  and  in  this  view  of  the 
case,  if  that  clause  of  the  constitution  has  any 
meaning  at  all,  it  is  a  prohibition  upon  the  leg- 
islature. 

Well  sir,  one  of  the  most  worthy  citizens  of 
Hickman  county,  a  man  who  owned  land  in  Mis- 
souri  and  Tennessee,  as  well   as   in  Kentucky, 
!  and  I  believe  had  negroes  employed  in   cultivat- 
I  inghis  lands  in  those  different  states,  brought  three 
j  negroes  to  Hickman  county.     And  I  have   heard 
j  him  say,  he  did  not  think  he  was  violating   this 
I  law  in  doing  so — he  was   indicted   however   in 
three  cases,  and  the  fines  would  have  been   $1,- 
I  800,  and  although  he  was  able  to  pay  it,  he  was 

I  indignant  at  such  treatment,  and  left  the  country. 

I I  met  him  in  New  Orleans  afterwards,  and  he  ei  - 
j  quired  if  the  act  had  been  modified.  I  told  him 
i  it  had  not,  and  asked  him  if  he  would  <ome 
1  again  to  Kentucky  if  it  had  been;  he  said  he 
j  believed  not,  he  was  doing  very  well  where  he 
I  was.     This  was  a  most   useful    citizen  ;  many 

young  men  owe  their  advancement  to  his  assis- 
tance, and  he  was  driven  from  this  state  by  the 
operation  of  this  law. 

There  was  anotlier  case  at  Mills'  Point.  A 
very  worthy  citizen  there,  was  in  need  of  a  few 
servants,  and  a  man  residing  just  over  the  line 
oflfered  to  sell  him  such  as  ne  wanted  ;  he  told 


hU 


him  he  could  not  purchase,  a^  it  would  be  ia  vi- 
olation of  the  act  of  1833.  The  man  afterwards 
moved  over  into  Hickman  county,  and  then  sold 
him  the  negroes,  and  then  moved  back.  This 
raised  a  suspicion  that  there  had  been  some  com- 
bination. He  was  indicted,  and  I  believe  a  fine 
of  $1200  was  imposed  ;  however,  the  result  was 
he  left  the  county,  and  went  to  Tennes,see.  Now 
was  not  this  an  excessive  fine,  to  extort  from  his 
earnings?  I  have  regarded  the  population  of 
Louisville,  from  the  time  this  act  was  passed,  as 
making  concessions  to  the  emancipationists.  I 
had  a  conversation  recently  with  citizens  of 
Louisville,  wlio  told  me,  if  the  voting  had  been 
by  ballot,  the  emancipation  ticket  would  have 
been  elected  by  500  votes. 

A  case  of  this  kind  occurred  whilst  I  was  in  the 
.senate.  A  gentleman  died  in  Tennessee  leaving  to 
two  of  his  sons  a  negro;  one  of  the  sons  resided  in 
Fulton  and  the  other  in  Tennessee.  The  one  in 
Fulton,  was  able  to  buy  his  brother  out;  he 
wrote  on  to  me  asking  me  to  get  a  law  passed 
for  the  purpose  of  permitting  him  to  bring  the 
negro  into  the  state.  In  the  progress  of  the  act 
I  met  with  opposition  from  Jefferson  county.  I 
was  somewhat  astonished  at  this  opposition,  as 
it  was  a  case  of  such  evident  justice,  that  the 
owner  should  have  the  privilege  of  bringing  his 
negro  into  the  state,  being  the  owner  of  half  of 
the  negro,  and  there  being  no  law  to  cover  the 
case.  This  I  thought  was  drawing  a  very  nice 
distinction. 

There  are  some  two  or  three  other  topics,  to 
which  I  will  barely  allude,  for  I  fear  that  I  am 
trespassing  upon  the  indulgence  of  the  commit- 
tee. The  subject  of  internal  improvement  and 
the  subject  of  education.  I  concur  with  the 
president  in  the  declaration  which  he  here 
makes:  "Upon  the  subject  of  internal  improve- 
ment, which  some  men  like  to  ilenounce,  but 
which  have  in  their  effect  more  than  doubled,  or 
nearly  doubled,  the  value  of  the  whole  of  the 
real  estate  in  the  country,  where  did  Louisville 
stand?  She  was  in  favor  of  them,  and  with  her 
voice,  and  her  aid  and  assistance,  enabled  them 
to  be  carried  on."  I  know  the  great  influence 
and  power  which  the  president  of  this  conven- 
tion exercised  over  the  legislation  of  the  coun- 
try at  that  day:  but.  sir,  whether  it  is  for  weal 
or  for  woe,  I  am  disposed  to  adjourn  the  ques- 
tion for  posterity  to  decide,  for  those  who  may 
have  these  debts  to  pay,  with  the  interest  that 
may  have  accumulated  upon  them.  I  raised  my 
feeble  voice  against  it;  and  I  recollect  on  one  oc- 
casion, in  the  senate,  I  stood  with  my  iriend 
from  Henderson,  in  a  lean  minority  of  five,  in 
opposition  to  the  extravagant,  wasteful  system 
of  internal  improvement.  The  president  says 
it  has  doubled  the  value  of  the  property  in  the 
Btate.  I  deny  the  fact.  It  may  have  doubled 
the  value  of  property  in  Louisville,  but  it  has 
more  than  doubled,  yes  sir,  it  has  trebled  the 
taxes  on  the  balance  of  the  state,  while  the  val- 
ue of  property  has  not  been  enhanced.  What  is 
the  effect  of  the  system?  It  is  a  sj'stem  of  in- 
justice, calculated  to  build  up  the  few  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  many.  What  did  the  president  of 
the  board  of  internal  improvement  report  to  the 
legislature  in  1847?  That  to  the  people  navigating 
the  Kentucky  river,  there  was  a  saving  of  over 
$170,000  per  annum;  yet  they  were  not  willing  to 


increase  the  tolls  sufficiently  to  pay  the  interest 
on  the  cost  of  these  improvements,  though  they 
were  reaping  more  benefit  than  all  the  taxes  they 
pay  annually.     When   the   surplus   revenue   of 
the  general  government  was  about  to  be  distrib- 
uted, $850,000  were  set  apart  and  solemnly  ded- 
icated and  pledged  as  a  fund  for  common  school 
education.     The  president  of  this  convention,  I 
believe,  advocated  that  feature,  and  in  this  he 
had  my  hearty  co- operation;  but  when  we  were 
short  of  means  to  carry  out  the  system  of  inter- 
nal improvements,  and  the  state  bonds  could  not 
be  disposed  of,   money   was  borrowed  from  the 
banks,  which  so  increased  their  circulation,  that 
brokers  were  enabled  to  make  a  rush  upon  the 
banks,  which   mainly  caused  the  suspension  in 
1839,  and  this  education   fund  was  invested  in 
state  bonds.     Well,  it  is  true  that  the  interest  on 
thse  bonds  belonging  to  education  must  be  raised 
by  taxation,  and  it  has  induced  the  legislature 
to  violate  a  sacred,  republican  democratic  prin- 
ciple.    What  has  been  done?    You  have  resorted 
to  your  odious  and  specific  taxation,  which  is 
unequal  and  unjust.     You  tax  carriages,  buggies, 
watches,  and  even  our  grandmother's  spectacles, 
all  this   to  resuscitate   the  credit  of  the  state. 
How  has  this  money  been  expended?     $2,525,- 
456  15  have  been  expended  in  turnpike  roads. 
What  has  been  the  effect  of  this  measure  upon 
the  country?     There  was  a  committee  raised    in 
1847  to  ascertain  the  amount  that  had  been  ex- 
pended and  the  revenue   that  had   been  raised 
from  that  expenditure.     Well,  sir,  these  $2,525,- 
456  15  have  only  yielded  a  dividend  of  $291,- 
000,  in  the  ten  years  previous  to  the  date  of  the 
report.     Now  what  is  the  interest  of  that  sura 
for  the  same  period  of  time?     It  is  $1,515,000, 
leaving  a  deficiency  of  $1,224,000  to  be  supplied 
by  taxation  or  otherwise.     And  the   other  im- 
provements  are  in  but   little  better   condition. 
Take  the  whole  amount  that  has  been  expended, 
viz:  $5,344,764  82,   it  does   not  yield   two  per 
cent,  interest.     I  have  alluded  to  this  matter  out 
of  no  unkind  feeling  to  the  president.     He  has 
thought  proper  to  allude  to  it  himself,  and  has 
claimed  the  credit  of  having  carried  these  meas- 
ures through  the  legislature.     I  know  he  took  a 
prominent   part,  an<l  I  know  a  portion  of  the 
delegation  from  my  section  favored  it,  and  for 
what  reason?     Because  they  had  the  promise  of 
a  small  appropriation  of  $5,000  for  the  improve- 
ment  of  Bayou   de  Chien,  and  other  small  ap- 
propriations which   Avere   to   rest  upon   certain 
contingencies.     The  board  of  internal  improve- 
ment decided  that  Bayou  de  Chien  ought  to  have 
$3,000;  but  not  a  dollar  has  yet  been  expended. 
The  same  bill  that  contained  this  conditional 
appropriation  gave  to  the  Louisville.  Lexington 
and  Ohio  railroad  company,  $200,000  uncondi- 
tionally, which  she  received.     There  was  an  ap- 
propriation to  this  company  besides  of  $20,000 
for  building  a  bridge   acro.ss   Kentucky   river, 
at  the  mouth  of  Benson.     Tlie   state  also  en- 
dorsed for  the  company  to  the  amount  of  .$150,- 
000,  and,  after  all  tnis.  the  only  manner  in  which 
she  could  get  out  of  the  contract,  was  by  taxing 
her  citizens  an<l  paying  up. 

Thus,  Mr.  Chairman,  was  the  state  almost 
hopelessly  involved  in  debt,  and  thus  was  the 
fund  set  apart,  and  with  all  the  forms  of  law 
and  thB  solemnity  of  legislative  action,  dedica- 


577 


ted  and  set  apart  to  the  children  of  this  com- 
monwealth, squandered  in  unproductive  works — 
and,  sir,  the  president  of  this  convention  was 
one  of  the  chief  actors  in  that  scene — he  was 
among  the  foremost  in  concocting  and  executing 
this  misapplication  of  the  fund  dedicated  to 
the  poor  children  of  the  commonwealth.  He  it 
was  that  invaded  the  rights  of  the  orphan  and 
the  fatherless,  and  swept  from  them  tne  means 
which  the  state  had  provided  for  their  education. 

I  take  the  ground  that  it  was  improper,  thus 
to  squander  the  poor  children's  money — that  it 
was  an  unwise,  an  injudicious  act,  thus  in  a 
conflict  between  the  education  of  the  children  of 
the  state  and  the  improvement  of  roads  and  riv- 
ers, to  choose  the  latter  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
former.  I  also  believe  it  was  improper  and  un- 
just to  impose  upon  posterity  the  enormous  debt 
created  by  the  president  (Mr.  Guthrie)  and 
those  who  acted  with  him,  for  internal  improve- 
ments. I  was  unwilling  to  create  a  largo  state 
debt,  and  leave  it  for  those  who  come  after  us  to 
bear  the  burden. 

Take  the  amount  that  was  expended  on  Lick- 
ing river — .$372,520  70 — and  tell  me  how  much 
this  has  benefitted  the  state?  I  am  informed 
that  so  far  as  improvement  is  concerned,  the  mo- 
ney there  expended  might  as  well  have  been 
thrown  in  the  river.  The  work  has  been  aban- 
doned in  an  unfinished  state,  and  amounts  to  an 
obstruction. 

This  is  the  system  of  intem.il  improvement, 
which  the  honorable  president  boasts  of  having 
been  instrumental  in  adopting. 

Although  the  constituents  of  the  honorable 
president  may  have  approved  his  course  on  all 
these  questions,  yet  I  have  also  the  satisfaction 
of  knowing  that  my  constituents  regard  my 
course  as  worthy  of  their  approbation,  for  they 
have  continued  me  in  the  councils  of  the  country 
for  many  years,  as  long  perhaps  as  any  man  in 
the  state,  for  which  I  take  the  present  occasion 
to  return  them  my  sincere  acknowledgments.  I 
have  never  appealed  to  them  on  questions  of 
national  policv,  although  in  that  respect  my 
opinions  have  harmonized  with  them. 

I  have  felt  it  my  duty  to  make  these  remarks, 
for  I  have  hitherto  taken  no  part  in  this  discus- 
sion during  the  seven  long  weeks  we  have  been 
in  session.  I  have  made  a  motion  or  two,  and 
have  said  yea  or  nay  when  called  upon  to  vote. 
That  is  all.  My  constituents  are  beginning  to 
enquire  what  has  become  of  me,  and  I  desire 
that  they  shall  know  where  I  am.  I  am  some- 
what like  a  very  intelligent  gentleman,  (the  del- 
egate from  Mercer,)  with  whom  I  fell  in  compa- 
ny a  few  days  since,  and  who  has  not  as  yet  1 
believe  addressed  the  convention.  I  enquired  of 
him  the  reason  for  his  silence.  And  sir,  he 
gave  me  a  very  good  reason.  It  is  the  very 
same  reason  by  which  I  have  been  influenced 
myself.  Why,  said  he,  I  came  here  with  my 
opinions  formed,  in  regard  to  the  leading  ques- 
tions; there  has  been  a  good  deal  of  discussion, 
and  the  country  will  hold  the  convention  re- 
sponsible for  these  proracted  debates,  and  I 
thought  I  would  not  take  the  responsibility  of 
participating  in  them.  That  was  precisely  my 
own  view.  When  we  come  to  put  tnis  constitu- 
tion together  section  by  section,  I  intended  to 
aid  in  the  accomplishment  of  the  great  work  for 
73 


which  we  have  assembled.  I  shall  at  all  events, 
not  detain  the  convention  long  with  any  speech- 
es of  mine.  If  I  deserve  any  thing  for  my  course 
in  legislating  heretofore,  it  is  not  for  making 
long  speeches.  I  am  not  much  for  talking,  but 
I  am  somewhat  inclined  to  investigation;  I  am 
governed  a  great  deal  by  facts.  One  fact,  with 
me,  outweighs  whole  volumes  of  arguments. 

The  honorable  president  has  said  that  Louis- 
ville has  done  a  great  deal  for  education.  I 
am  not  disposed  to  take  from  that  city  any  credit 
she  may  have  on  that  score.  I  believe  .^he  has 
done  much  for  the  support  of  schools.  But  we 
find  by  the  report  of  the  2nd  Auditor  that  the 
citv  of  Louisville  has  received$7,597,  besides  $13,- 
506  for  the  Blind  School.  Thus,  it  will  be  seen, 
that  Louisville  has  received  more  than  one  half 
the  sum  expended— considerably  more  than  dou- 
ble her  share  of  the  school  fund.  I  never  sup- 
posed that  she  had  been  slighted  in  regard  to  this 
school  fund,  or  in  any  way.  I  remember  when 
we  were  about  fixing  the  salaries  of  the  ofiicers 
of  government,  the  Louisville  judges  were  allow- 
ed $1,500  per  annum,  salary,  while  other  judges 
were  allowed  but  $1,200.  'That  was  based  upon 
the  ground  that  living  was  very  high  in  Louis- 
ville. I  believe  it  is  a  maxim,  that  when  the 
reason  for  a  law  ceases,  the  law  itself  should 
cease.  I  have  an  extract  from  the  "Louisville 
Journal,"  of  date  September  25th,  and  I  was 
very  much  gratified  to  find  the  price  of  living  so 
much  reduced  there.  Now,  as  this  paper  is  very 
good  authority  in  Kentucky,  I  would  recommend 
the  committee  to  amend  their  report  in  relation 
to  salaries  of  judges,  and  make  tliem  equal  and 
uniform  throughout  the  commonwealth.  But  the 
extract : 

"As  to  the  cost  of  living,  those  who  know  any 
thing  about  the  matter,  know  tliat  living  is  as 
cheap  in  Louisville  as  in  Frankfort.  Fuel  and 
provisions  are  decidedly  cheaper." 

I  am  very  glad  to  know  that.  I  hope  the 
"Journal"  will  not  come  down  upon  me,  as  a 

Baper  did  the  other  day  upon  my  friend  from 
•aviess,  (Mr.  Triplett,)  because  he  dared  to 
oppose  what  was  demanded  for  Louisville.  He 
was  spoken  of  in  very  disrespectful  terms.  I 
have  no  desire  to  war  with  an  editor,  because 
gentlemen  of  that  profession  wield  their  pens 
with  great  force  and  severity,  and  the  paper  is 
sent  to  places  where  a  man  has  no  opportunity 
to  defend  himself.  They  can  bark  at  my  heels 
if  they  choose,  it  shall  never  deter  me  from  do- 
ing my  duty. 

This  proposition,  it  is  said,  is  intended  to  ar- 
ray citv  and  countiy  interests  in  opposition  to 
each  otlier.  This  is  no  part  of  my  motive.  I 
have  no  hostility  to  anj'  city  in  the  common- 
wealth. But  the  question  is,  is  it  right  and 
proper  that  we  should  impose  this  restriction? 
The  patriots  who  formed  the  constitution  of  1799, 
thought  it  necessaiy  to  impose  such  restriction 
— many  of  the  states  have  done  the  same.  Loui- 
siana has  done  so;  although  New  Orleans  con- 
tains one-third  of  the  whole  population  of  the 
state,  and  will,  probably,  soon  contain  one- 
half,  yet  she  is  restricted  to  four  senators.  Is 
that  invading  their  rights?  Did  we  hear  the 
delegates  from  that  city  make  the  declaration 
that  they  would  not  sustain  the  constitution  if 
it  contained  such  a  provision?    Did  they  take 


578 


any  such  stand?  And  here  follows  another  re- 
striction: "That  the  seat  of  gov^jiimont  shalL, 
nntil  the  close  of  the  year  1848,  continue  at 
New  Orleans,  and  that  the  general  assomby 
which  shall  meet  after  the  first  election  of  rep- 
resentatives, shall  within  the  first  month  after 
the  commenccmont  of  the  session,  designate  and 
fix  the  seat  of  government  at  some  place  not 
less  than  sixty  miles  from  the  city  of  New  Or- 
leans, by  the  nearest  travelling  route,  and  if  on 
the  Mississippi  river  by  the  meanders  of  the 
same;  and  when  so  fixed,  it  shall  not  be  remov- 
ed without  the  consent  of  four-fifths  of  the  mem- 
bers of  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly." 
And  this  restriction  was,  no  doubt,  imposed  for 
wise  purposes,  and  cheerfully  acquiesced  in  by 
her  patriotic  citizens. 

The  honorable  president  says  we  are  sworn 
to  do  justice.  He  says  the  foundations  of  gov- 
ernment were  laid  in  justice.  This  is  what  no 
one  is  inclined  to  dispute.  We  are  all  contend 
ing  for  the  same  principle.  As  the  Irishman 
said  when  about  to  be  tried  for  his  life — a  very 
honest  fellow — but  he  did  not  understand  the 
technicalities  of  the  law,;  when  the  question 
was  put  to  him  "guilty  or  not  guilty,"  he  re- 
plied "that  is  what  you  are  about  te  try."  Now 
we  want  to  examine  the  question.  This  is  a 
great  conservative  principle.  We  give  to  all 
cities,  their  free  representation  in  the  popular 
branch  of  the  legislature.  It  is  very  .properly 
based  on  population  in  that  dapartment,  either 
according  to  the  ratio  of  voters,  or  according  to 
the  whole  number  of  soids — and  I  am  inclined 
to  think,  the  latter  is  the  best  mode.  But  the 
president  says  we  are  invading  the  rights  of 
Louisville.  If  she  falls  under  the  restriction, 
that  is  her  misfortune.  I  came  hereto  do  jus- 
tice, but  where  a  question  comes  up  in  which 
city  interests  are  arrayed  against  those  of  the 
country,  I  am  always  to  be  found  on  t3ie  side  of 
the  country.  It  is  the  country  that  sustains  the 
city.  The  city  is  sustained  by  her  trade.  And 
what  is  it  that  sustains  that  trade?  The  rural 
population.  Your  wealth  arises  from  your  im- 
ports and  your  exports.  The  country  furnishes 
your  exports  and  consumes  your  imports.  I  am 
disposed  to  do  injustice  to  no  city,  but  self 
preservation  is  the  first  law  of  nature.  But  I 
shall  not  be  influenced  by  any  supposed  [power 
the  emancipationists  may  gain  by  an  increased 
representation,  and  I  regret  that  the  subject  was 
introduced. 

I  will  not  cast  any  imputation  upon  cities. 
But  if  you  want  to  find  industry,  contentment, 
virtue  and  morality,  will  you  go  to  a  city  to 
find  them?  If  you  do,  you  will  be  mistaken. 
To  sustain  this  position,  I  "will  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  committee  to  a  few  facts.  It  appears 
that  in  1847,  there  were  one  hundred  and  sixty 
six  convicts  in  our  penitentiary,  seventy  nine 
of  them  were  from  the  city  of  Louisville — almost 
one-half  of  them.  And  for  the  twelve  years  be- 
ginning in  1835  up  to  1847,  there  have  been 
sentenced  from  the  various  towns  and  cities  in 
the  commonwealth,  eight  hundred  and  eight  con- 
victs, and  how  do  you  tliink  they  are  apportioned? 
The  city  of  Louisville  sentthree  hundred  andfifty 
six,  averaging  a  fraction  over  twenty  nine  per 
annum.  In  the  whole  of  the  balance  of  the 
state,  the  convictions  were  but  fojrty  six  per  an- 


num— not  averaging  one  for  two  counties.  It 
is  said  that  these  convicts  are  not  of  the  legiti- 
mate population  of  Louisville.  This  I  believe 
is  .true.  But  it  only  sustains  me  in  the  position 
I  took,  that  there  is  something  to  induce  per- 
s«ns  to  commit  crimes  and  felonies  in  cities. 
It  seems  to  show  that  crime  is  stalking  abroad 
t^ere,  at  ixsonday.  Look  at  the  mobs  that  have 
couunitted  violence  in  almost  everv  city  in  the 
union.  Not  long  since  a  mob  took  possession 
of  a  church  in  the  city  of  Pittsburgh;  the  mayor 
was  compelled  to  call  out  the  military  to  stop  it. 

I  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood  that  I  am 
making  no  invidious  distinction  to  the  preju- 
dice of  Louisville  in  particular.  I  merely  men- 
tion tiiese  facts  to  show  that  a  great  (5eal  of 
crime  is  perpetrated  in  cities,  and  for  the  proof 
of  this,  I  have  written  testimony.  Is  it  prop- 
er then,  that  this  character  «f  population  should 
be  trusted  with  the  representation  there  is  de- 
manded f»r  it? 

Having  labored  under  severe  indisposition  for 
several  'daj's,  1  must  bring  .my  remarks  to  a 
close.  And  here  I  wish  to  be  distinctly  under- 
stood, that  in  any  allusion  I  have  made  to  the 
honorable  president  of  this  convention,  I  have 
not  been  actuated  by  any  ill'will  towards  him, 
but  as  he  lias  thought  proper  in  some  degree  to 
impugn  the  motives  af  myself  and  others,  be- 
cau.se  we  are  in  favor  of  restricting  over-grown 
cities,  I  have  thought  it  necessary  to  make  these 
remarks.  I  have  the  utmost  respect  for  his  au- 
thority in  the  chair;  but  when  he  chooses  to  come 
down  on  the  floor,  and  give  admonition  and  ad- 
vice to  delegates,  and  make  threats,  I  regard  him 
as  no  more  than  any  other  delegate,  and  he  must 
not  expect  exclusive  privileges.  I  do  not  intend 
that  tte  little  reputation  I  may  have  gained  du- 
ring my  political  couree,  shall  be  destroyed  by 
the  denunciations  of  any  man.  It  may  be  all 
the  legacy  I  shall  have  to  loaveray  children,  and 
I  intend  that  to  go  to  them  untarnished,  if  my 
feeble  efforts  can  su.staiu  it. 

I  return  ray  sincere -thanks  to  the  committee 
for  the  kind  attention  they  have  given  my  desul- 
tory remarks. 

And  then,  on  motion  of  Mr.  MITCHELL,  the 
committee  rose  and  reported  the  article  and 
amendments  to  the  house. 

The  first  amendment  of  the  committee,  fixing 
tihe  hours  during  which  the  polls  should  be 
opened,  at  from  6,  a.  m.,  to  7,  p.m.,  was  then  read. 

Mr.  MACHEN  understood  the  amendment  not 
positively  to  require  the  polls  to  be  opened  and 
closed  at  those  hours,  and  inquired  if  such  was 
the  iirtention  of  the  mover. 

Mr.  WOODSON,  I  intended  to  leave  it  en- 
tirely at  the  di.scretion  of  the  judges  of  the  elec- 
tion. There  may  be  instances  where  it  may  be 
required  to  open  at  an  earlier  hour  in  the  morn- 
ing than  others,  and  others  where  a  later  hour  of 
closing  them  might  be  deemed  necessary.  The 
only  object  was  to  prevent  the  polls  from  being 
kept  open  until  too  late  an  hour  of  night,  and  to 
prevent  voters  being  then  brought  in  improperly 
to  control  flie  electioii. 

There  was  some  conversation  as  to  the  proprie- 
ty of  amending  the  section,  when 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIPFE  expressed  his  opinion 
that  the  subject  could  better  be  dispo.sed  of  in  a 
separate  clause,  3;v:hi<vti  should  have  the  effect  to 


579 


require  that  in  all  electrons  the  polls  slould  not 
be  opened  before  six,  nor  cantinaed  open  after 
seven. 

The  section,  as  amended  in  committee,  \eas 
then  adopted. 

The  second  amendment,  beingts-strike  out  the 
words  in  the  second  line  of  the  oth  section,  "and 
equal,"  was  concurred  in. 

The  third  amendment,  being  to>  the  same  sec- 
tion, to  strike  out  the  word  "legislature"  and  in- 
sert in  lieu  thereof  the  words  "general  assem- 
bly," was  concurred  in. 

The  fourth  amendment,  being  a  verbal  one  to 
the  section  apportioning  the  representation  of 
cities,  was  then  concurred  in, 

Mr.  IRWIN  then  offered  bis  proposition,  sub- 
mitted this  morning,  as  a  substitute  fer  the  whole 
section. 

The  PRESIDENT  decided  that  motions  to 
amend  and  perfect  the  section,  would  have  pre- 
cedence over  those  to  strike  »ut. 

Mr.  MORRIS  then  proposed  his  proposition, 
(heretofore  published,)  as  an  additiunsd  ckiuse 
of  the  section. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  desire  to  oflFer  aai  aisend- 
raeut,  which  will  not  be  in  order  until  the  vote 
is  taken  on  that  of  the  gentleman  fr»m  Chris- 
tian. I  would  ask  that  gentleman  what  he  in- 
tends by  it,  not  having  heard  the  reasons  as- 
signed for  it  at  the  time  it  was  first  offered.  Is 
it  to  establish  in  this  part  of  the  country,  that 
principle  known  in  New  England  as  gerryniiin- 
aering?  Take  for  instance  Nelson  county,  which 
is  now  entitled  to  two  members.  It  gives  700 
whig  majority,  but  yet  you  can  lay  off  the  coun- 
ty in  such  a  way  that  its  representation,  will  he 
equally  divided.  That  was  the  principle  estab- 
lished in  New  England  by  Eldridge  Gerry,  and 
from  him  has  since  been  called  gerrymandering. 
I  understand  tliat  the  gentleii«an*s  proposi- 
tion is  to  lay  off  Louisville  so  that,  although 
there  is  a  whig  majority  there  of  41)0  or  500  votes, 
yet  that  there  will  be  one  or  two  democratic 
members  returned  to  the  legislature.  I  do  not 
know  whether  such  was  the  inteiation  of  theg«n- 
tleman,  but  such  obviously  will  be  its  effect. 
Let  the  whole  voice  of  the  city  or  county  be 
heard,  whatever  may  be  its  representation,  and 
not  be  divided.  I  am  informed  that  the  propo- 
sition was  offered  as  a  compromise.  Now  a  com- 
promise supposes  a  mutual  yielding,  but  in  this 
castj  it  seems  to  me  that  the  yielding  is  all  on 
one  side. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  When  I  offered  this  amend- 
ment, I  explained  to  the  convention,  tl«e  motives 
which  influenced  me,  and  I  also  stated  the 
grounds  upon  which  I  considered  it  a  compro- 
mise. I  am  sorry  that  my  venerable  friend  was 
not  in  the  house  to  hear  me,  but  I  have  no  dispo- 
sition to  go  over  the  ground  I  then  occupied,  and 
with  which  I  suppose  the  convention  to  be  gen- 
erally acquainted.  I  had  no  disposition  t»  ger- 
rymander Louisville,  or  any  otber  city  in  the 
state.  The  great  difficulty  was,  how  Ve  could 
give  to  Louisville,  and  tlie  other  citits,  a  proper 
representation  according  to  numbers,  and  at  the 
same  time  prevent  that  concentration  of  city  in- 
fluence, which  seemed  so  much  to  be  apprehen- 
ded by  gentlemen  on  this  floor.  I  thought  there 
was  a  great  principle  which  was  established  in 
the  old  constitution,  and  which  we   are  seeking 


to    establish  in   this — that  representation  and 

Fopular  numbers  should  go  hand  in  hand.  But 
still  saw  and  felt  that  there  were  great  dangers 
to  be  apprehended,  of  tie  power  that  might  be 
exercised  by  the  concentration  in  the  legislative 
halls  of  the  representation  of  the  large  cities 
that  were  springing  up,  and  believing  it  to  have 
been  demomsti-ated  by  experience  in  other  states, 
that  by  dividing  the  cities  into  districts,  we 
would  divide  the  representation  of  those  cities 
against  themselves,  as  tlie  country  representation 
in  this  state  is  divide<I  against  itself,  I  offered 
this  proposition.  I  am  arware  that  a  democratic 
legislature  by  an  unjust  sj'stem  of  gerrymander- 
ing might  send  tothe  legislature  from  Louisville, 
two  or  three  democrats  instead  of  whigs,  but 
yet  we  are  obliged  to  trust  something  to  the  le- 
gislature. I  have  already,  most  emphatically,  on 
the  day  before  yesterday,  expressed  that  I  was 
not  governed  by  party  views,  and  I  am  sorry  the 
gentleiaan  was  not  here,  to  hear  my  vindication 
on  this  point. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  The  whole  point  here  is  this, 
thfe  gentlemen  from  Louisville  desire  an  equal 
senatorial  representation  with  the  rest  of  the 
state.  Now,  m  tliie  proposition  I  present,  I  say 
she  shall  have  but  one  senator ;  and  gentlemen 
who  prefer  "two"  can  move  to  strike  out,  and  so 
rasert,  or  if  the  gentleman  from  Louisville  will 
move  to  strike  out  "one"  and  insert  "equal"  then 
the  question  on  each  of  these  propositions  can 
be  presented  at  once,  and  the  convention  come  to 
a  speed V  Jetemii nation. 

The  f  RESIDENT  stated  the  amendment  of 
Mr.  Morris  to  be  first  in  order. 

Mr.  MORRISi  I  witidraw  my  amendment, 
so  that  the  vote  can  be  taken  on  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman. 

The  question  was  then  stated  to  be  on  Mr.  IR- 
WIN'S proposition  wluch  was  then  formally  of- 
fered. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  For  myself,  I  intend  to  stand 
by  the  fifth  section,  simply  because  it  declares 
that  equal  representation  shall  be  allowed  to  the 
cities,  in  both  houses  of  the  general  assembly. 
I  prefer  that  the  house  should  test  the  question 
by  standing  by  the  report  of  the  committee. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  vi  ill  amend  the  proposition  so 
as  to  leave  the  number  blank,  and  gentlemen 
can  fill  it  as  they  desire. 

Mr.  MERRl  WETHER.  I  apprehend  the 
whole  question  to  be,  whether  we  shall  or  shall 
not  place  restrictions  on  cities.  I  beg  leave  to 
suggest  to  the  convention  that  there  is  a  restric- 
tion existing  now,  and  which  wi!l  exist,  even  if 
the  section  is  passed,  as  reported  by  the  commit- 
tee, which  will  effectually  protect  the  balance 
from  all  danger  from  the  increase  of  Louisville. 
The  present  boundaries  of  that  city,  if  as  com- 
pactly settled  as  is  possible,  can  never  accommo- 
date, at  the  furtljxfSt,  more  than  100,000  people, 
and  those  boundaries  are  restricted  by  law.  Tlie 
legiskiture  will  have  it  in  their  power,  if  deemed 
necessary  to  restrict  her  influence,  by  refusing 
to  extend  those  limits;  therefore  let  the  section 
stand  as  it  is. 

Mr.  CLARKE  desired  to  offer  his  amendment 
proposed  in  committee. 

The  PRESIDENT  ruled  it  out  of  order,  whila 
the  present  ^aendments  were  pending. 

Mr.   BROWN.    I   believe  the  friends  of  the 


580 


section  have  a  right  to  amend,  and  perfect  it,  be- 
fore action  is  had  upon  a  substitute.  I  make 
the  same  motion  made  in  eonimittoe  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Franklin,  (Mr.  Lindsoy,)  to  strike 
out  the  words  -both  houses  of  the  general  as- 
sembly." If  this  amendment  prevails,  it  allows 
the  city  her  full  representation,  based  on  num- 
bers, in  the  house.  So  far  as  representation  in 
the  senate  is  concerned,  that  canoe  provided  for 
afterwards. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  asked  for  the  yeas  and 
nays  on  the  amendment. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  This  amendment  goes  a  lit- 
tle further  than  any  I  have  seen  yet.  There  have 
been  many  propositions,  either  from  those  friend- 
ly or  hostile  to  the  city,  some  to  give  one,  and 
some  two  senators  to  Louisville.  To  all  of  these 
I  am  opposed.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  section  as 
it  stanas.  But  the  gentleman  goes  further  still, 
and  proposes  to  cut  us  off  from  any  senator  at 
all,  leaving  it  m-ecisely  as  we  were  imder  the  old 
constitution.  The  amendment  to  give  the  city 
any  senatorial  representation  at  all  may  not  be 
adopted,  and  it  is  for  that  reason  I  think  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Hardin,  (Mr. 
Brown,)  goes  further  than  any  yet  offered.  I 
appreciate  the  compromise  offered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Christian,  for  it  was  offered  when  we 
needed  aid,  but  I  still  have  confidence  in  the 
justice  of  the  convention.  I  believe  it  is  not 
going  to  compound  a  debt  of  justice,  or  mete  out 
to  us  by  instalments,  our  rights.  I  believe  it  in- 
tends to  pass  the  section  as  it  stands,  and  to  give 
us  our  full  representation  in  the  upper  house.  I 
never  will  believe  this  convention  will  compro- 
mise a  principle  of  justice,  until  I  see  the  act 
consuraated.  We  want  ua  compromise.  We 
claim  it  as  a  right,  which  I  believe  the  house 
will  accord  to  us. 

Mr.  BROWN.  The  gentleman  has  not  correct- 
ly represented  the  ground  I  occupy.  My  object 
is  not  to  deprive  the  city  of  all  representation 
in  the  senate  ;  but  to  go  for  some  restriction.  I 
am  willing  to  go  for  one  senator  to  the  cities,  and 
as  I  said  before,  the  effect  of  the  amendment  is 
not  to  cut  them  off  from  all  representation  in  the 
senate.  I  intend  at  a  proper  time,  if  no  other 
gentleman  does,  if  this  amendment  is  adopted, 
to  offer  another,  which  will  secure  to  cities  one 
senator.  As  to  what  is  right  and  just,  I  intend 
to  be  governed  by  my  convictions,  and  the  dictates 
of  my  own  judgment,  regardless  of  all  imputa- 
tions which  may  be  made  against  me. 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON.  I  shall  vote  to  strike  out, 
because  I  want  some  kind  of  restriction.  Those 
who  go  with  my  friends  from  Louisville,  will 
vote  against  striking  out. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  shall  vote  against 
striking  out,  and  I  mean  to  vote  for  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  if  he  re- 
news it;  if  not,  I  will  renew  it,  or  something 
like  it,  myself.  I  cannot  understand  why  it  is 
that  gentlemen  will  give  unlimited  representa- 
tion in  one  branch  to  the  cities,  and  restrict  it  as 
to  the  other.  When  it  is  acknowledged  that  in 
both,  representation  is  based  on  numbers,  you 
are  but  doing  lialf  the  business  if  you  restrict  it 
in  one  and  not  the  other.  To  my  mind,  there  is 
more  reason  for  the  restriction  in  tlie  popular 
than  in  tho  upper  branch;  for  it  is  the  number 
of  representatives  that  is    to    control.    If  the 


amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Cliristian  is 
not  adopted,  then  I  shall  vote  for  some  other  re- 
striction as  to  the  representation  of  numbers 
from  the  city. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  gone  over  the  census 
of  the  United  States,  for  the  years  1H20,  1830, 
and  1840,  and  over  the  list  of  voters  as  they 
have  been  returned.  I  find  that  when  represen- 
tation was  to  be  apportioned,  in  1843,  Jefler- 
son  county,  including  the  city  of  Louisville, 
returned  5398  voters.  In  1847,  when  the  next 
apportionment  was  made,  she  had  6799,  and  yet 
in  1848,  when  there  was  no  apportionment  to  be 
made,  the  returns  showed  but  5076.  This  year, 
when  it  was  known  that  some  change  was  to  be 
made,  it  run  up  to  9283.  Now,  wliat  does  all 
this  prove?  Why,  that  the  commissioners,  when 
any  thing  is  to  be  done,  include  the  itinerant 
men  who  are  not  residents  of  Louisville.  Go 
back  for  twenty  years,  and  it  would  be  found 
that  whenever  there  was  an  apportionment  to  be 
made,  there  was  a  remarkable  increase,  and 
whenever  there  was  not,  an  equally  remarkable 
falling  off.  The  reason  is,  that  the  commission- 
ers know  what  is  to  be  done,  and  they  Avill  take 
in  men  who,  in  reality,  are  not  qualified  voters. 
The  other  cities  present  the  same  facts,  but  not 
to  the  same  extent.  It  is  a  matter  of  impor- 
tance, therefore,  that  we  should  put  a  limit  upon 
the  representation  of  these  cities.     I  would  pro- 

{)ose  that  it  should  never  exceed  five  in  the 
louse,  nor  more  than  one  in  the  senate.  Louis- 
ville, or  any  other  city,  would  then  have  a  very 
full  representation  in  the  legislature.  Represen- 
tation meant  tho  power  to  present  their  Avishes, 
wants,  and  grievances;  and  was  not  five  in  one 
house  and  one  in  the  otlier  enough  for  this  pur- 
pose? There  were  counties — Bullitt  and  Spen- 
cer, for  example — in  regard  to  whicli  it  was  a 
matter  of  great  doubt  whether  the  next  appor- 
tionment would  entitle  them  to  a  representative 
at  all,  and  they  will  go  to  Louisville  to  swell 
her  representation,  when  she  would,  as  I  have 
shown,  be  sufficiently  represented  without  it. 
And  I  have  shown,  too,  how  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation in  the  cities  is  run  up  just  before  an 
apportionment  is  to  be  made.  It  is,  as  Ave  know, 
a  city  of  great  influence  in  the  state.  There  al- 
ways was  a  town  which  stood  as  the  metropolis 
of  every  state,  and  that  toAvn  is  tlie  one  to  which 
our  exports  go,  and  our  imports  come;  and  from 
this  and  other  causes,  it  has  an  immense  influ- 
ence upon  the  legislation  of  the  country.  It  is 
the  point  to  which  all  ncAvs  is  brought,  and  the 
newspapers  themselves  give  it  a  great  and  un- 
due influence.  I  shall  vote  for  limiting  Louis- 
ville to  one  senator  and  five  r^ipwisentatives,  and 
that  is  giving  them  much  more  than  they  would 
have  under  the  present  constitution.  And  it 
seems  to  me,  so  far  from  being  an  act  of  injus- 
tice, tliat  every  requirement  of  justice  woula  be 
complied  witli. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  shall  vote  against  the  motion 
of  the  gentleman  from  Hardin.  Whetlior  so  in- 
tended or  not,theeftect,  itseenis  tonie,  will  be  to 
deprive  tlie  cities  of  tlieir  fair  representation  in 
the  senate.  We  see  it  in  our  old  constitution, 
and  in  this  report,  laid  down  as  a  principle  that 
representation  should  be  equal  and  uniform 
througliout  the  state,  and  forever  to  be  based  on 
the  number  of  qualified  voters  therein.    If  that 


561 


principle  is  a  correct  one,  and  should  occupy  a 
place  in  this  constitution,  then  every  portion  of 
this  comraon\realth  should  be  operated  upon  by 
it.  Every  gentleman  here,  I  believe,  except  the 
gentleman  from  Frauklin,  has  declared  that  rep 
resentation  should  be  on  population,  or  th<?qujil- 
ified  voters,  which  is  the  same  thing  in  princi- 
ple. In  New  York,  negroes  not  subject  to  taxa- 
tion, and  aliens,  were  excluded  from  the  basis  of 
representation,  as  they  were  also  excluded  from 
voting  and  participating  in  the  government.  In 
this  state,  also,  slaves  were  not  represented,  and 
the  basis  was  the  number  of  qualified  voters, 
and  they  act  as  the  trustees  of  the  community  at 
large  in  selecting  the  men  to  represent  them.  If 
this  is  a  corrt^ct  principle — and  ail  say  that  it  is — 
what  is  the  apology  offered  here  for  departing 
from  it?  I  have  heard  none.  When  brought 
down  to  a  nutshell,  the  "rrbole  apology  amounts 
to  this,  that  it  will  be  entrostins:  too  much  pow- 
er to  a  particular  locality.  The  principle  of 
self-preservation,  I  am  aware,  ought  to  be  guard- 
ed in  all  republican  governments,  and  it  is  pro- 
per that  the  majority  should  not  be  entrusted 
with  the  power  to  oppress  and  override  the  mi- 
nority, but  I  ask,  where  is  the  proper  place  to 
guard  against  if^  Here  in  the  formation  of  the 
organic  law,  we  have  the  right,  for  the  protec- 
tion of  that  minority,  to  impose  restrictions  on 
the  majority.  Is  there  any  right  more  si>cre<l 
than  that  of  suffrage,  or  which  the  minority  de- 
sire more  strongly  to  Jje  secured  to  them?  But 
gentlemen  say  that  they  do  not  propose  Ic  de- 

f)rive  the  cities  of  the  fight  of  sufirage  but  mere- 
y  to  restrict  their  representation.  Does  it  not 
amount  to  the  same  thing  in  principle?  It  is  to 
say  to  one  hundred  thousand  voters,  if  you  live 
in  the  city  vou  shall  vote  for  but  one  senator, 
but  if  you  live  in  the  country,  you  may  vote  for 
five  or  six.  It  amounts  to  the  same  thing  f*ccor- 
diug  to  my  idea.  And  the  only  apology  offered 
for  this,  is  the  desire  to  protect  otirselves.  I  con- 
tend it  will  never  have  that  effect.  Place  in  this 
constitution  all  the  rights  that  are  dear  to  us  as 
citizens,  and  which  ought  to  be  protected,  and 
then  take  it  away  from  the  power  of  the  majori- 
ty of  the  legislature — for  there  the  power  is  ex- 
ercised— to  infringe  upon  those  rights.  There  is 
the  place  to  put  this  restriction.  Another  apol- 
ogy offere<i  for  the  violation  of  this  great  princi- 
ple is,  that  it  is  done  by  other  states.  But  are 
gentlemen  willing  to  adopt  other  erron?  which 
those  states  have  engrafted  into  their  organic 
law?  They  are  not.  The  gentleman  from  Cald- 
well, who  offered  this  apology  for  the  violation 
of  this  great  principle,  referred  to  the  constitu- 
tions of  many  of  the  states  for  this  purpose.  In 
Virginia,  east  of  the  mountains,  they  mive  nine- 
teen, and  west  of  them  never  but  thirteen  sena- 
tors. There  is  this  principle  violated  there, 
and  for  what  reason?  Would  the  gentleman 
from  Caldwell  ever  be  willing  that  the  Green 
river  county  should  be  placed  under  a  similar 
restriction  as  compared  to  the  rest  of  the  state? 
This  restriction  was  laid  on  western  Virginia, 
because  the  eastern  section,  with  its  po^ulaticm 
and  wealth,  had  the  power  to  do  it.  But  was  it 
an  exercise  of  power  which  gentlemen  could 
justify  upon  principle  before  their  constituencv? 
I  contend  it  is  not.  Another  apology  is,  that  it 
would  not  be  depriving  the  cities  of  any  rights 


which  they  enjored  under  the  old  con-stilatioai. 
When  that  constitution  was  formed,  was  any 
community  at  thattime  thus  restrieted?  No' sirj 
our  fathers  at  that  time  saw  no  city  in  the  state 
that  was  entitled  to  a  separate  representation, 
and  tliat  there  probably  would  not  be  until  the 
people  in  their  wisdom  saw  fit  to  change  the  con- 
stitution. I  believe  Louisville  at  tliat  time  con- 
tained only  about  five  or  six  hundred  inhabi- 
tants. In  1810,  eleven  years  thereafter,  she  had 
only  thirteen  hundred.  Therefore,  no  question  of 
this  sort  was  agitated  by  the  framers  of  the  present 
constitution.  And  the  very  principle  they  have 
there  declared,  of  representation  upon  popula- 
tion, is  in  contradiction  of  such  a  proposition. 
My  friend  from  Hickman  knows  that  ever  since 
Louisville  has  been  entitled  to  a  senatorial  rep- 
resentation, the  legislature  have  seen  the  injus- 
tice of  her  being  deprived  of  it,  and  bv  way  of 
compensation,  they  have  given  to  Bullitt  and 
Spencer,  where  they  are  not,  from  the  number  of 
their  voters — some  twenty -throe  or  twenty -four 
hundred— entitled  to  a  senator  between  them. 
They  are  counties  adjacent  to  Louisville  and  Jef- 
ferson, where  they  do  not  get  their  fair  and  just 
proportion  upon  the  principle  laid  down  in  the 
constitution.  I  hope  tht-  principle  of  represen- 
tation according  to  population  will  govt-rn,  and 
it  must  always  in  this  state,  where  the  people 
are  in  favor  of  equal  rights  and  privileges.  And 
all  tlie  feelings  of  the  people  of  the  country,  so 
far  as  I  understand  them,  have  been  against  any 
such  propositions  for  restriction,  as  have  been 
here  proposed.  Then,  sir.  I  am  opposed  to  stri- 
king out,  and  in  favor  of  the  section  as  it  stands. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
strike  out,  and  it  was  rejected — ^yeas  38,  nays  50, 
as  follows : 

Ye.*s. — John  L.  Ballinger,  Wm.  K.  Bowling, 
Thomas  D.  Brows,  James  S.  Chris»an,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Jess«  Coffey,  William  Cowper,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ben. Hardin, 
John  Hargis,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  ThoKnas 
James,  William  Johnson,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  John  J.  Thunnan,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  Wheeler— 38. 

K.VYS. — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 

Bradlev,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Charles  Chambers, 

\N'in.  Clienault, Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward  Curd, 

Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 

F.   Edwards,   Green   Forrest,    Nathan   Gaither, 

Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,   Ninian 

E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 

William   Hendrix,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,   George 

W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lack- 

I  ev,   Peter    Lashbrooke,    George  W.   Mansfield, 

I  Martin    P.  Marshall,   Wm.  C.  Mai^hall,   John 

H.  McHenrv,   David   Meriwether,    William   D. 

Mitchell,   Thomas   P.  Moore,   John  D.  Morris, 

}  Hugh  Newell,  Wm.  Preston,  John  T.  Robinson, 

j  Ira'  Root,  James  Rudd,    Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 

John  W.  Stevenson,  John^D.  Taylor.  William 

I R.   Thompson,   John    L.    Waller,   Andrew  S. 


58-2 


White,.  Cbarles  A.  Wietliffs,  Robt.  N.  Wickliffe, 
George  W.  Williuius,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J. 
Wiiglit— 50. 

Mr.  BROWN  then  pro)>osed  to  anwnd  the  &th 
section  bv  adding  the  words,  "aad  no  city  ©r 
town  shall  ever  have  more  than  one  senator." 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  to  amend  tlie  amend- 
nicndnient  by  striking  enit  the  word  town,  and 
inserting  county,  and  by  .bidding  the  -woTds,  "nor 
more  than  five  rcpreseMtatives." 

A  division  was  called  for,  so  thattfce  question 
eoadd  be  taken  separately  on  each  proposition. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  I  will  then  offer  but  o^ne, 
and  move  to  strike  out  "town"  and  insert 
"county." 

Mr.  BROWN  accepted  that  amendment. 

Mr.  McHENRY  then  moved  to  add,  "nor 
More  than  five  representatives." 

Mr.  T  RIPLET  T.  I  would  suggest  to  my  fri<;nd 
from  Ohio  to  permit  us  to  vote,  if  it  can  be  done, 
upon  these  amendments  severally.  There  ar© 
several  delegates  who  are  for  restricting  the  cities, 
and  who  believe  it  to  be  not  only  within  the 
scope  of,  but  denianded  by  considerations  of 
justice.  The  delegates  from  Louisville  have  a 
right  to  act  upon  a  standard  of  justice  they  may 
establish  for  themselves,  but  tljey  have  no  right 
to  attempt  to  erect  one  for  the  balance  of  the 
state,  or  to  denounce  the  object  which  delegates 
wish  to  attain,  as  unjust  or  improper.  Talk  to 
me  about  a  sense  ol"  justiee.  l>oyou  not  protect 
yourselves  when  it  comes  to  the  taxing  power? 
l)o  you  desire  to  permit  vagrants  and  vagabonds 
t*>  vote  to  tax  the  property  of  Louisville?  All 
that  I  ask,  is,  that  we  of  the  rural  districts  should 
be  permitted  by  the  same  standard  of  justice  to 
protect  ourselves,  should  our  interests  ever  come 
in  contact  with  those  of  Louisville  or  any  of  the 
other  cities.  I  want — and  I  believe  a  majority  of 
the  delegates  Itere  are  willing  to  go  for  it — the 
power  to  protect  ourselves  against  high  taxation, 
if  ever  that  question  should  come  before  the 
legislature,  as  come  it  must.  You  tell  mo,  and 
tell  me  truly,  that  to  some  extent,  railroads, 
canals,  and  turnpikes,  wherever  they  may  lead, 
benefit  tlie  district  through  which  they  may  run. 
But  they  are  beaefited  to  but  a  small  extent, 
compared  with  the  point  at  which  they  termi- 
nate, and  this  is  generally  Ijouisville.  I  am  for 
a  n>ore  equal  division.  All  the  tracks  go  into 
th('  lion's  den,  and  few,  very  few,  come  out 
again.  And  it  is  necessarj^  that  there  should  be 
one  conservative  bran  eh  ot  the  legislature  where 
the  properly  of  the  rural  districts  may  be  protect- 
ed froniexees.sive  taxation  fortlio  benefit  of  these 
cities,  or  even  of  particular  rural  districts.  This 
view  has  been  well  presented  by  my  friend  from 
Hickman,  (Mr.  James.)  The  Gretu  river  and 
Kentucky  river  improvements  were,  to  some  ex- 
tent, beneficial  to  the  people  in  their  vicinity,  but 
they  were  muck  n)ore  so  to  the  cities,  while  to 
other  portions  of  tlie  state  they  realized  nothing 
but  taxation.  And  we  desire  that  there  should 
b«  one  branch  of  the  legislature  which  will  guard 
us  against  this  ovcrwiielming  infiiifnee  of  the 
cities  when  tlicy  sliall  attain  their  full  strength, 
and  the  taxation  whieh  lh<-ir  desire  for  internal 
improvenienls  for  their  benefit  may  entail  upon 
U8.  It  is  for  these  reasons,  togetlier  with  others 
that  I  stated  the  otiier  day,  that  I  advocate  these 


restrictions  upon  their  representation.    It  is  with 
us  a  principle  of  self-preservation. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.     If  any  apology  be  necessaiy 
for  my  addressing  the  convention  now,  it  is  to  be 
found  in  the   fact  (aixl  I  will  use  no  stronger 
term,  and  to  some  extent  it  is  almost  too  strong,) 
that  an  unkind  and  ungenerous  act  is  sought  to 
be  perpetrated  upon  theeities  of  this  common- 
wealth, in  one  of  which  I  have  the  pleasure  to 
reside.     It  is   an   unjust  and   unkind   attempt, 
upon  the  part  of  the   delegates  from  the  rural 
districts  of  the  state,   to  array  them   in  positive 
and  deadly  hostility  to  the  cities  in  this  com- 
monwealth.    It  has  been  beautifully  and   aptly 
said,  that  "man  made  the  town,  but  God  made 
the  country."     But  some  gentlemen  seem  to  ar- 
gue upon  the  principle,   that  while  God   made 
the  man  who  resides  in  the  rural  districts,  the 
old  gentleman  who  lives  below,  and  who  seems 
a  saint  when  most  he  plays  the  devil,  made  all 
of  us  whose  lot  is  cast  in  the  cities  of  this  com- 
monwealth.    And  I  will  venture  to  say,  tliat  if 
a  stranger  had  come  into  this  convention  during 
the  pending  of  this  question  in  respect  to  city 
representation,  and  had  not  known  it  was  a  body 
organized   for  the  purpose  of  making  a  new  or- 
ganic law  for  the  state,  he  would  have  thouglit 
that  the  presiding  officer  was  a  judge,  and  my 
friends  around  me  a  jury,  and  that  an  action  of 
assumpsit  had  been  brought  against  Louisville 
for  money  paid,  laid  out,  and   expended  for  her 
use.     Thne  after  time  have  the  statistics  been 
summed  up  and  paraded  here,  and  gentleineu 
have   enquired  what  has  Louisville  got,  rather 
than  to  what  she  is  entitled.     All  admit,  that 
population  is  the  true,  just,  and  proper  basis  of 
representation,  and  we  are  for  its  liberal  applica- 
tion to  tlie  rural  districts,  and  yet  desire  to  witli- 
hold  it  from  theeities.     I  ask   gentlemen  upon 
what  just  principles  can  they  give  full  represen- 
tation, according  to  numbers,  to  the  former  and 
deny  it  to  the  latter?     And  this  question  will  be 
asked  with  much  more  significance  by  the  peo- 
ple.    If  Louisville  should  have  a  population  of 
one  hundred  thousand,  why  is  it  that  she  is  to 
be  entitled  to  but  one  senator?     The  people  will 
certainly  ask  for  a  bill  of  particulars — for  the 
reasons  for  this  unjust  treatment  of  their  urban 
fellow   citizens.     Has   it  come  to  this,  that  the 
right  to  be  fully  and  fairly  represented  in  the 
legislature,  depends  upon  the  veiute  of  the  voter? 
So  long  as  a  citizen  resides  in  the  country,  he  is 
entitled  to  a  fair  and  full  representation   in  the 
legislature;  but  if  operated  upon  by  motives  of 
convenience  or  interest,  he  moves  into  Louisville, 
or  any  other  city  entitled  to  separate  representa- 
tion, that  moment  he  is  stripped  of  a  large  por- 
tion of  his  political  and  social   influence  and 
power. 

Is  this  rigl»t?  Is  there  any  good  reason  for 
this  condition  of  things?  It  is  true,  we  are  told 
that  Louisville  is  strongly  represented  in  tlie 
penitentiary.  So  she  may  bt — 'tis  lior  and  our 
misfortune  that  such  is  the  case.  Wo  are  told, 
also,  that  she  lias  her  internal  improvements — 
lier  railroads  and  turnpikes,  all  conferring  upon 
her  positive  benefit,  and  imparting  to  her  gnat 
influence.  Be  it  so.  Do  these  works  confer  no 
benefit  upon  the  country  through  wliioh  they 
pass?  They  wer<!  constructed  as  much  for  tlie 
benefit   of  the    whole  btate    as   for  Louisville. 


583 


The  interests  of  commerce  r^uir<^  the^  should 
terminate  at  some  point  on  the  Ohio  nver,  and 
because  they  terminate  *t  Louisville,  they  are  to 
be  pleaded  as  a  set-oflF  to  her  claims  to  *  projwr 
ancl  just  representation  in  the  legislative  halls  of 
the  state.  Is  it  not  one  of  the  objects  of  all  con- 
stitutions to  prevent  partial  legislation?  Is  there 
any  thing  to  which  the  people  had  «  stronger  re- 
pugnance than  to  partial  legislati»n?  And  yet 
It  is  proposed  to  embody  in  the  organic  law  a 
principle  which  would  deny  to  your  fellow  citi- 
zens—because they  reside'  in  a  particular  dis- 
trict— their  proper  political  right-s  aad  influence. 
For  my  own  part,  I  mean  to  vote  far  the  princi- 
ple that  population  is  the  true  ba«is  of  repre- 
sentation, to  the  correctness  of  whicb  every  gen- 
tleman here  almost  has  borne  testinaony.  I  care 
not  how  it  works,  it  is  just  in  itself;  and  I  mean, 
so  far  as  my  action  is  concerjied,  to  incorporate 
in  this  constitution  no  principle  that  is  not  just 
in  itself.  The  judge  who  asks  himself,  when 
about  to  render  a  decision,  what  will  be  its  pop- 
ularity, by  that  ver^'  question  he  puts  to  him- 
self, he  has  already  soiled  thejudicisd  ermine  with 
which  the  confidence  of  the  people  has  invested 
him.  And  the  man  in  this  convention,  1  care 
not  who  he  is,  who  asks  himself  whether  an  ap- 
portionment is  to  operate  to  the  benefit  of  one 
party  or  the  other,  has  already  exhibited  his  un- 
fitness for  the  discharge  of  the  responsible  duties 
his  constituents  have  confided  to  him.  In  this 
great  work  in  which  we  are  now  engaged,  I 
than  God  that  we  are  all  wiiigs  and  sol  demo- 
crats— (or  ought  to  be.) 

There  is  a  beautiful  allegory  I  once  read,  of  a 
good  and  just  man  who  pursuing  a  long  jour- 
ney, and  every  night  he  laid  down  with  nope 
and  confidence  in  his  heart  and  prayer  and 
thanksgiving  xipon  his  lips,  he  found  himself  in 
the  morning  surroundea  with  a  tent  to  shelter 
and  protect,  the  work  and  providence  of  a  kind 
hearted  and  benevolent  fairy.  I  mean  to  vote 
that  population  is  the  true  and  just  basis  of  rep- 
resentation, and  when  I  vete  for  the  incorpora- 
tion in  this  constitution  of  principles  which  by 
their  inherent  justice  commend  themselves  to 
my  confidence  and  support,  I  shall  have  the 
cheering  assurance  that  it  will  be  to  us  all  in- 
deed a  fairy  tent  which  will  be  over  and  around 
us  whithersoever  we  may  go,  or  wherever  our  lot 
may  be  cast.  I  do  not  stop  to  enquire  what  par- 
ty influence  any  principle  here  proposed  may 
have,  or  whether  it  will  extend  the  influence  of 
this  or  that  section  of  the  state,  bnt  is  it  just 
and  right  in  itself?  I  mean  to  act  upon  the 
maxim  so  pertinently  cited  a  few  days  ago  by 
my  venerable  friend  from  Harrison,  (Col.  Xew- 
ell,)  '-equal  rights  to  all,  exclusive  privileges  to 
none."  When  I  see  gentlemen,  in  reference  to 
this  demand  for  equal  representation,  guUty  of 
special  pleading,  attempting  to  excite  the  preju- 
dices of  one  portion  of  the  community  against 
another,  I  put  at  once  upon  it  the  seal  of  my 
condemnation,  and  I  will  go  for  no  principle 
which  requires  to  be  strengthened  by  such  ap- 
peals. I  in  part  represent  a  city,  one  which  ha? 
not  set  up  for  housekeeping  as  yet,  but  the  time 
may  come,  and  I  hope  it  is  not  far  distant, 
when  she  will  so  do.  And  when  that  time  does 
come,  I  want  her  to  have  as  many  representa- 
tives, both  in  the  sijpate  and  house,  as  her  popu- 


lation will  entitle  tcr  to.  I  care  not  where  a 
man  lives,  whether  in  tSie  city  -or  the  country, 
if  he  is  a  citizen  of  this  commonwealth,  as  such, 
he  is  entitled  to  equal,  just,  and  fair  representa- 
tion in  the  legislative  halls  of  the  state.  This 
tiling  of  making  fish  «f  one  and  fowl  of  anoth- 
er nxv  do  in  the  legislatiiTC  of  the  country,  but 
not  here,  and  1  sh&U  therefore  vote  against  the 
restriction  proposed  in  the  amendment. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  The  county  which  I  have 
the  honor  to  represe«t,  contains  within  its  bor- 
ders no  city  or  large  town,  nor  is  it  probable 
that  it  ever  will  have  one  entitled  to  a  separate 
represeatation,  yet  I  shall  v«te  against  all  re- 
strictive amendments  to  the  fifth  section,  and 
for  a  fair  and  equal  apportionment,  applicable 
alike  to  town  and  countrj'.  These  restrictions 
and  distinctions  are  not  only  unjust  towards  the 
inhabitante  of  our  larger  towns  and  cities,  but 
t«  my  mind  they  are  a  violatioaof  one  of  the  first 
principles  of  our  government,  the  political  equal- 
ity of  freejnen. 

I  can  perceive  no  good  reason  why  the  same 
man,  when  lie  may  chance  to  reside  in  a  town 
or<sty,  should  possess  less  political  weight  and 
consequence  than  when  l>e  lives  in  the  country, 
nor  why  the  inhabitants  <}f  cities  should  be  re- 
stricted beyond  those  of  the  country — they  are 
all  citizens  of  Kentucky,  and,  so  far  as  I  can  see, 
entitled  to  equal  represeiitatioa.  But  I  forbear 
to  press  Bsv  views  further  than  to  say  I  fuUj 
conctir  in  tLe  remarks  made  by  tie  gentleman 
from  Mason. 

The  convention  then  took  a  recess  until  3  o'- 
clock. 

KVEXIXG    SESSIOS. 

Mr.  RUDD  read  the  following  amendment  as 
one  which  he  intended  to  offer  when  the  proper 
time  should  arrive.  He  would  submit  it  as  a 
compromise  for  the  settlement  of  the  question 
which  occupied  the  attention  of  the  convention. 
There  were  fears  expressed  of  the  concentrated 
influence  of  the  city  of  Louisville,  but  he  ap- 
prehended tliev  would  be  diminished  and  their 
cause  removecl  by  the  adoption  of  his  amend- 
ment, which  was  m  these  words: 

"That  whenever  any  city  is  entitled  to  four 
representatives,  it  shall  6e  divided  into  two 
wards,  or  districts;  and  when  it  is  entitled  to 
five  or  more  representatives,  it  shall  be  divided 
into  single  electivedistricts;  and  whenever  it  is 
entitled  to  two  or  more  senators,  it  shall  be  laid 
off  into  senatorial  districts." 

Mr.  HARGIS,  after  recapitulating  the  positions 
which  different  gentlemen  had  taken  on  this 
question,  re-stated  the  population  of  the  cities 
of  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and  New  Orleans, 
and  the  several  districts  into  which  they  are  di- 
vided. He  also  again  noticed  the  division  of  the 
state  of  Virginia,  and  pointed  to  these  facts  as 
examples  for  the  convention. 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  MERIWETHER, 
the  vote  was  taken  on  the  pending  amendment, 
to  add  to  the  5th  section  the  worcls,  "no  city  or 
county  shall  ever  have  more  than  one  senator," 
which  was  rejected;  veas  31,  nays  60. 

Yeas— John  L.  Baljinger,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford 
Elliott,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 


5^4 


Mark  E.Huston,  James  W.Irwin,  Thomas  James, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,   Willis 

B.  Machen,  Richara  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McCluro, 
John  H.  McHeury,  James  ~M.  JSTesbitt,  Jonathan 
Newcuia,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Micliael  L. 
Stoner,   John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner — 31. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
persoTi,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Hen- 

Sr  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
owper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald 
Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Foirest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
William  Johnson,   George  W.  Johnston,  Charles 

C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Georgo"W.  Mansfield,  William  C.  Marshall,  Da- 
vid Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah 
F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Jekn  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James 
W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Williare  R.  Thompson,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L. 
Waller,  Jolin  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W^ 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 60. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  off<;red  the  following  amend- 
ment, to  beadded  to  the  section: 

That  the  cities  now  incorporated,  or  which 
may  hereafter  be  incorporated  in  this  com- 
monwealth, and  to  which  a  senator  or  senators 
may  be  allotted,  shall  not,  together,  under  any 
future  apportionment,  be  entitled  to  more  than  one 
fourth  of  the  whole  number  of  senators;  and  when 
even,  under  any  future  apportionment,  the  whole 
number  of  senators  to  whicli  said  cities  would 
he  entitled,  shall  exceed  one  fourth  of  the  whole 
number  of  senators  for  the  whole  state,  the  legis- 
lature sliall  apportion  tke  one  fourth  of  the 
whole  number  ef  senators  among  the  cities  en- 
titled, according  to  some  just  and  equitable  mode 
of  apportionment;  and  previded  that  no  city 
shall  ever  be  entitled  to  more  than  two  senators. 

The  amendment  was  rejected;  yeas  41,  nays 
49,  as  follows: 

Ykas — John  L.  Ballinger,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
James  S.  Clirisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Cof- 
fey, William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dud- 
ley. Milford  Elliott,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thos. 
J.  Gough,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Andrew 
Hood,  Tho.  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston.  J.  W.  Ir- 
icin,  Alfred  M.Jackson,  Tho.  James,  Wra.  John- 
son, Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Tho.  W.  Lisle,  Willis 
B.  Machen,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
James  M.  Ncsbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  Thonia.s  RockhoM,  John  T.  Rogers, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett, 
Sqiiire  Turner, Jno.  L.Waller — 41. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person.  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Cl»arI<;H  Chambers,  Wil- 
liam Chenault, Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  buLon,  Cliasteca  T. 


Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Nix'ian  E.  Grey,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Gcjb.  W.  John- 
ston, Charles  C-  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Geo.  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall.  William  C.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, Wm.  D.  Mitchell,  Thos.  P.  Moore,  John 
D.Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  William  Preston,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor, William  R.  Thompson,  John  Wheeler,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 49. 

Mr.  JACKSON  offered  an  amendment,  but  the 
President  ruled  it  out  of  order,  as  being  in  sub- 
stance an  amendment  which  had  been  voted 
down. 

Mr.  RUDD  offered  the  amendment  to  which 
he  had  just  called  the  attention  of  the  con- 
vention. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  suggested  to  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville  to  strike  out  the  words 
"the  city  of  Louisville"  and  insert  "any  city." 

Mr.  RUDD  asssented,  and  so  amended  his 
amendment. 

Mr.  IRWIN  remarked  that  if  cities  could  be 
gerrymandered,  he  could  not  see  why  counties 
could  not  be  gerrymandered  also.  He  under- 
stood the  object  which  gentlemen  had  in  view 
was  to  avoid  tke  concentrated  influence  of  cities, 
but  he  suggested  that  counties  also  could  have 
tlieir  concentrated  influence. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  asked  the  gentleman 
from  Logan  to  be  goo<l  enough  to  express  his 
opinion  as  a  representative  on  this  floor,  whether 
any  county,  Avith  the  limited  number  of  one 
hundred  representatives  in  the  legislature,  would 
be  entitled  to  four  representatives. 

Mr.  IRWIN  replied  that  such  a  case  might 
arise. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFEE  said  when  such  a 
case  should  arise,  he  would  vote  for  it. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  cannot  conceive  that  this 
amendment  is  in  effect  a  compromise.  I  think 
with  my  friend  from  Logan,  and  can  see  no  rea- 
son why  a  city  should  be  divided  in  her  repre- 
sentation any  more  than  a  county.  Gentlemen 
have  argued  a  great  deal  about  the  power  of 
these  cities,  from  the  concentration  of  a  large 
number  of  citizens  or  representatives  in  one 
body.  In  what  respect  are  we  to  apprehend 
danger  from  the  action  of  these  numbers?  Is  it 
from  any  general  principle  on  which  the  cities 
will  oppose  the  state  at  large?  I  think  not.  If 
I  understand  the  objection,  it  is  tliat  there  may 
bo  some  private  interests  or  views  peculiar  to 
the  cities  that  would  influence  them,  and  cause 
them  to  unite  together  in  advocating  a  single 
principle  iu  wliich  they  would  oppose  the  inter- 
ests of  the  agricultural  portion  of  the  state.  I 
ask  if  dividing  up  the  city  and  allowing  her  a 
single  representative  Jfroni  each  locality,  will 
weaken  the  force  that  she  will  have  in  the  legis- 
lature? If  there  are  interests  peculiar  to  the 
city  as  oppo.sed  to  tlie  balance  of  the  state,  they 
will  vote  in  a  solid  phalanx.  I  cannot  see  that 
dividing  the  cities  is  to  do  any  good,  or  that 
this  is  any  .compromise  at  all.  It  can  do  no 
good  unless  it  is  to  divide  up  the  influence  of 


565 


the  great  political  parties  of  the  country,  ;ind 
on  local  questions  they  will  unite.  There  is 
another  objection  to  it.  It  provides  for  just 
what  is  provided  for  in  the  twelfth  section. 

Mr.  BRADLEY  oflFered  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman  from  Christian,  (Mr.  Morris,)  which 
has  been  lieretoforc  published. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  When  tliat  resolution  was 
first  presented,  it  was  attempted  to  make  it  pal- 
atable by  calling  it  a  compromise.  I  have  not 
been  able  to  see  in  it  the  idea  of  a  compromise. 
A  compromise  is  a  mutual  concession.  What 
are  the  interests  which  are  supposed  to  be  ar- 
rayed against  each  other  between  the  city  and 
the  countiy.  They  are  the  agricultural  interest 
on  the  one  part,  and  the  commercial  and  manu- 
facturing interests  on  the  other.  I  see  no  con- 
cession on  either  part,  nor  the  first  feature  of  a 
compromise.  I  can  well  conceive  how  a  con- 
flict may  spring  up  in  the  city  in  relation  to 
municipal  regulations,  but  when  the  interests  of 
the  whole  city  are  opposed  to  those  of  the  state, 
the  city  will  be  united.  Suppose  a  work  of 
internal  improvement  affecting  the  city  is  pro- 
posed, will  the  first  ward  oppose  the  second  or 
third?  Their  interest  is  united  in  such  a  case, 
and  no  division  will  arise  except  with  reference 
to  local  questions.  If  the  city  is  to  be  divided, 
with  a  view  to  creating  dissensions,  why  should 
not  a  county  be  divided  for  the  same  reason? 
On  what  principle  is  it  that  cities  are  to  be  di- 
vided ana  not  counties?  The  object  is  said  to 
be,  to  divide  the  concentrated  power  of  cities  in 
the  legislature.  Why  not  do  it  in  the  counties? 
I  am  opposed  to  the  principle  as  applied  to 
both. 

Mr.  RUDD.  The  gentleman  asks,  where  has 
there  been  an  example  of  a  city  being  divided 
into  wards  or  elective  districts.  We  have  ex- 
amples throughout  the  United  States.  There  is 
no  city  which  has  as  many  as  four  members, 
which  is  not  divided  into  wards.  New  York 
has  four  senatorial  districts.  Philadelphia  and 
New  Orleans  are  likewise  divided  off  in  the 
same  way.  The  object  of  my  amendment  is  to 
approximate  as  nearly  as  possible  to  the  present 
system  of  districting  the  counties.  No  county 
in  Kentucky  has  more  than  two  representatives. 
My  amendment  says,  that  when  the  city  of  Lou- 
isville is  entitled  to  four,  she  shall  be  laid  off 
into  two  districts;  and  when  she  has  five,  they 
shall  be  chosen  in  five  separate  wards.  This 
will  prevent  their  coming  up  here  and  speaking 
with  one  voice  in  vour  legislative  halls.  I  think 
this  is  fair.  We  did  not  ask  for  more  at  first, 
than  to  have  equality  of  rights,  and  perhaps  this 
is  equal  and  just. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  I  shall  be  satisfied  to  leave 
this  matter  to  the  legislature,  and  thereby  we 
shall  relieve  ourselves  from  the  responsibility  of 
incorporating  such  a  provision  in  the  constitu- 
tion, and  we  shall  not  expose  the  constitution 
that  we  may  make  to  the  opposing  interests  that 
may,  in  consequence,  be  brought  against  it.  I 
am  willing  that  Louisville  shall  be  districted 
■when  she  knocks  at  the  door  of  the  legislature 
and  asks  for  it. 

Mr.  CLARKE.    I  have  been  struck  by  the 

opinions  expressed  by  gentlemen  this  evening. 

Some  two  or  three  days  ago,  this  proposition 

offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  was 

74 


very  popular,  and  now  a  vote  lias  been  taken,  to 
which  I  submit,  wliich  shows  that  the  sense  of 
the  house  is  to  give  Louisville  a  representation 
ba^ed  on  popular  numbers.  It  has  been  well 
said  bv  the  elder  gentleman  from  Louisville, 
(Mr.  ftudd),  that  in  every  city  in  the  United 
States,  the  rule  proposecf  by  him  has  been 
adopted,  and  there  is  not  a  single  state,  so  far  as 
I  know,  where  they  vote  in  a  mass  for  senators 
or  for  representatives,  where  they  are  entitled  to 
more  than  one.  What  the  reason  has  been  for 
this,  I  cannot  tell,  but  it  was  argued  the  other 
day  by  the  gentleman  from  Christian  and  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson,  that  as  there  were 
those  who  were  afraid  of  the  concentration  of 
power  from  Louisville  if  she  should  send  five  or 
six  members  into  the  lower  house,  this  was  the 
best  means  of  avoiding  this  concentration  of 
power;  and  I  confess  that  I  see  some  reason  in 
the  suggestion.  That  it  may  have  that  effect 
permanently,  I  do  not  pretena  to  argue,  but  that 
It  may  by  possibility  prevent  that  concentration 
of  influence  and  power  which  some  gentlemen 
apprehend,  there  can  be  no  good  objection  to 
the  resolution  offered  by  the  gentleman  from 
Christian  or  the  one  offered  by  the  gentleman 
from  Louisville.  I  hope  that  either  the  amend- 
ment or  the  substitute  may  be  adopted. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  was  much  astonished  to 
hear  gentlemen  who  are  opposed  to  representa- 
tion in  Louisville  according  to  numbers  urging, 
the  impropriety  of  any  such  restriction,  as  has 
been  proposed  in  these  two  amendments, 
and  calling  on  members  for  some  good  reason 
why  this  restriction  should  be  imposed.  From 
what  I  have  heard  here,  the  unity  of  repre- 
sentation, the  concentration  of  numbers  within 
so  small  a  space,  was  the  great  objection  which 
was  urged  by  those  who  were  opposed  to  ex- 
tending to  Louisville  a  representation  corres- 
ponding to  her  numbers. 

The  proposition  now  before  us  is  to  break  the 
population  up  into  separate  political  associa- 
tions, and  thus  make  their  interests  separate.  It 
was  said  they  would  come  up  in  solid  phalanx, 
shield  locked  in  shield.  It  was  urged  that 
there  was  an  identity  of  purpose,  and  this  would 
give  them  power.  Now  when  it  is  proposed  to 
break  up  this  power  into  separate  political  as- 
sociations, the  very  same  gentlemen  come  here 
and  seem  to  be  opposed  to  it.  You  cannot  con- 
vince me  that  one  Avho  represents  ten  thousand 
would  have  the  same  responsibilities  and  be 
governed  bv  the  same  influences  as  one  who 
represents  fifteen  hundred.  Break  them  up  then 
and  you  create  separate  political  interests,  you 
destroy  that  unity  of  representation  which  has 
constituted  the  great  objection  to  giving  Louis- 
ville what  I  conceive  to  be  her  due.  I  went 
for  representation  based  on  political  numbers, 
for  giving  Louisville  this  representation,  let  the 
consequences  be  what  they  may.  But  I  con- 
ceive she  may  be  broken  up  in  this  way  with- 
out doing  her  injustice.  By  dividing  her  into 
districts  she  will  lose  none  of  the  strength  to 
which  she  is  entitled,  and  the  objection  which 
is  urged  is  overcome.  It  has  been  said  it  would 
be  better  to  leave  the  matter  to  the  legislature. 
I  would  rather  it  should  be  passed  as  it  is.  I 
would  not  give  it  to  a  party  in  the  legislature  to 
district  at  one  time  and  repeal  at  another,  as 


58G 


party  purposes  miijjlit  require  1  wniit  Home 
lixed  rule,  aiul  :us  lljelieve  the  niueiulinent  pro- 
posed Avill  effect  this  I  shall  go  for  it. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  Avish  to  state  my  position 
in  reference  to  this  matter,  before  I  cast  my  vote. 
The  house  seems  inclined  to  give  the  city  of 
Louisville  the  same  representative  privileges 
tJiat  the  report  indicates.  I  announced  this 
morning  that  I  did  not  feel  inclined  to  compro- 
mise that  matter,  and  I  feel  assured,  if  the  house 
were  to  adopt  the  amendment  proposed  bv  my 
friend  and  colleague,  a  gentleman  -whom  I  "know 
desirous  to  harmonize  the  conflicting  views  of 
delegates,  I  believe,  without  effecting  any  great 
or  material  good,  it  would  work,  in  some  res- 
pects, an  important  injury  to  us.  It  would  pre- 
scribe one  Tuodo  of  voting  in  Louisville,  and 
another  in  the  counties.  It  would  declare  the 
principle  that  it  was  necessary  to  cut  up  into 
wards  and  representative  districts  cities,  when 
it  was  unnecessary  to  divide  the  counties  into 
separate  districts,  and  the  consequence  would  be 
a  great  deal  of  domestic  dissatisfaction.  If  we 
go  back  to  our  constituents  after  having  put 
this  principle  in  the  new  constitution,  they 
will  say,  you  have  achieved  no  good  by  adopt- 
ing the  district  system.  You  send  ns  back  to 
meet  this  injurious  imputation  everywhere. 
You,  Mr.  President,  will  be  spoken  of  as  having 
been  in  favor  of  the  district  system  in  the  city, 
when  the  same  rule  did  not  prevail  in  the  coun- 
ties. After  having  gone  in  a  body  for  those  rep- 
resentative rights  and  privileges  to  which  the 
cities  are  justly  entitled,  we  are  now  to  go  back 
to  meet  a  great  many  objections,  to  hear  a  great 
deal  of  cavil,  and  to  furnish  our  enemies,  and 
those  of  constitutional  reform,  with  tliis  weapon 
to  assail  us.  And  if  we  go  V)ack  to  our  city, 
having  obtained  the  equal  rights  of  representa- 
tion, we  are  enabled  to  give  an  aid,  strength, 
and  support  to  this  constitution,  which  no  oppo- 
sition caji  possibly  overcome.  It  is  for  this  rea- 
son I  must  respectfully  ask  the  house  to  pa-ss  the 
fifth  section  of  the  report  as  it  stands.  I  know 
the  worthy  desire  that  actuates  my  colleague  to 
allay  this  difficulty,  but  I  believe  if  we  pass 
the  substitute,  it  will  not  be  a  source  of  strength 
to  us,  and  there  is  no  necessity  of  sending  us 
back  to  Louisville  to  meet  the  storm  of  opposi- 
tion which  may  await  us  there,  and  about  a 
thing  which  amounts  to  nothing  in  itself.  I  am 
therefore,  unwilling  to  accept  any  compromise. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered that  the  other  evening  I  made  a  sugges- 
tion to  the  gentleman  fron  Christian  to  modify 
his  proposition,  so  as  to  relieve  it  from  the  at- 
tack which  has  been  made,  that  we  restrict  the 
cities  as  we  do  not  the  counties.  So  far  as  I  was 
concerned  in  announcinpf  my  determination  to 
vote  against  all  restrictions,  and  going  for  rep- 
resentation according  to  numbers,  I  yielded  the 
difficulties  that  had  been  presented  to  my  mind 
against  thi.s  representation  in  solid  matises.  But 
1  beg  to  be  understood,  that  while  I  have  voted 
against  every  species  of  restriction  heretofore,  I 
^Te  not  been  deaf  to  what  has  been  thrown  out 
as  to  the  possible  danger  of  that  description  of 
representation.  I  scorn  the  imputation  that  I 
desire,  or  that  those  who  act  with  mo  desire  to 
change  the  local  representation  either  from  whig 
t6  democrat  or  from  democrat  to  whig.     Tliose 


who  are  familiar  with  the  character  of  a  city 
population,  know  that  great  changes  are  made 
l)y  removing  from  one  ward  to  another.  The 
application  for  districting  will  come  up  as  well 
from  Covington  as  Louisville,  and  may  operate 
differently  there  from  what  it  maybe  supposed 
to  do  in  Louisville.  Now  I  could  have  hoped 
that  those  who  are  against  concentration  of  pow- 
er in  small  space,  when  the  proposition  to  di- 
vide into  districts  was  made,  Avould  have  met  it. 
I  was  prepared  to  do  it.  I  will  take  either  the 
oriu'inal  amendment  or  the  substitute. 

the  PRESIDENT.     If  the  convention   will 

Eardon  me,  I  <lesire  to  make  a  statement.  (Leave, 
lave.)  I  did  desire  that  we  should  go  on,  in  re- 
lation to  the  subject  of  representation,  as  we 
have  gone  heretofore.  I  consulted  with  both  the 
gentlemen,  and  told  the  elder  gentleman  I  would 
go  with  him  in  whatever  course  he  might  take. 
I  would  state  that  I  prefer  his  amendment  to  that 
of  the  gentleman  from  Christian.  If  this  is  re- 
ceived there  will  be  no  division  until  her  popula- 
tion entitles  her  to  four  representatives.  If  the  pop- 
ulation remains  as  it  is,  it  will  make  no  change 
probably  in  the  present  condition  of  parties,  and 
as  I  did  not  come  here  to  gain  political  advan- 
tages, I  prefer  that  amendment;  but  if  the  con- 
vention deem  it  essential  to  district  the  city^  I 
yield  to  that  wish. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  wish  to  make  a  statement 
to  show  my  consistency.  I  have  not  urged  the 
restriction  of  Louisville  on  the  ground  of  her 
consolidated  vote.  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  the 
proposition  offered  by  my  friend  from  Louisville. 
I  do  not  believe  that  the  people  of  Louisville 
want  it,  nor  the  people  of  the  state  at  large. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  am  in  favor  of  districting  ci- 
ties, if  it  can  be  fairly  and  equitably  done,  Avith- 
out  leaving  too  much  to  legislative  discretion, 
and  consequently  to  legislative  power.  And  up- 
on this  principle  the  cities  have  a  general  p<di- 
tics  as  well  as  a  local  politics.  My  idea  is  this, 
that  wherever  there  is  a  representation  in  any  as- 
sembly, in  either  the  general  or  state  govern- 
ments, that  that  representation  ought  to  be  sin- 
gle, as  far  as  practicable,  in  congress,  in  the  leg- 
islature, and  in  the  election  of  a  president  in  the 
college  of  electors.  I  cannot  conceive  any  rea- 
son for  districting  a  city  that  would  not  make 
the  argument  the  stronger  in  favor  of  single  than 
double  districts.  And  for  that  reason  would  I 
be  opjjosed  to  the  proposition  of  my  friend  from 
Louisville,  that  the  city  of  Louisville  be  divi- 
ded into  two  districts.  If,  then,  it  be  proper  to 
district  the  city  at  all.  in  my  judgment  it  ought 
to  be  divided  into  single  districts,  that  each  num- 
ber of  separate  people  entitled  to  a  representa- 
tive in  the  general  assembly  should  be  represen- 
ted there  by  a  man  reflecting  their  own  princi- 
ples and  their  own  wishes.  But  that  object  and 
end  might  be  defeated  by  the  double  district  sys- 
tem. I  do  not  know  what  would  be  its  present 
effect,  or  its  probable  effect  Avithin  a  short  time, 
in  the  loAvcr  house.  It  might  be  that  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Louisville  Avoiild 
divide  that  city  equally  between  the  two  Parties. 
And  suppose  that  Avould  be  the  effect,  Avhat  ef- 
fect Avould  it  have  on  Covington?  His  double 
district  Avould exclude  Covington  giving  one  par- 
ty the  advantage  in  both  cases.  I  should  be 
opposed  to  that,  and  to  any  arrangement   now 


58  r 


wtib  a  view  to  parties  iu  ibis  body,  or  any  oth- 
er body.  And,  if  there  is  any  proposition  to  dis- 
trict Louisville,  or  any  other  city,  by  single  dis- 
tricts, and  legislative  discretion  is  so  controlled 
as  to  prevent  much  abuse,  I  will  vote  for  the 
proposition,  because  I  believe  it  to  be  right  in 
principle.  I  think  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man is  not  sufficiently  guarded.  Now, the  wards 
of  a  city  might  be  large  and  numerous;  and, 
while  1  would  prefer  that  different  language 
should  be  used,  that  the  cities  should  be  divi- 
ded into  single  di.stricts  by  squares  of  contigu- 
ous territory,  so  as  to  tlirow  the  districts  into  as 
compact  a  form  as  possible,  I  would  leave  the 
matter  to  legislative  discretion.  It  might  be  that 
the  wards  would  be  strung  out  into  a  long  line. 
I  want  a  general  regulation  for  the  convenience 
of  votere  and  without  reference  to  party  advan- 
tage. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  am  obliged  to  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon  for  his  suggestion.  Nothing  has 
given  me  more  pain  than  the  idea  which  has 
been  thrown  out,  that  I  have  been  influenced  by 
party  consideration.  I  wish  to  place  the  matter 
so  that  the  city  cannot  be  gerrymandered,  and  I 
accept  the  proposition  he  has  made,  to  substi- 
tute the  word  "squares"  for  "wards,"  and  after 
the  word  "contiguous"  to  insert  "so  as  to  make 
the  most  compact  form." 

Mr.  RUDD  suggested  Uiat  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville should  be  laid  off  by  wards,  divided  by 
the  different  cross  streets,  commencing  at  the 
river,  and  running  south  to  the  extreme  limits  of 
the  city.  This  would  place  tliem  in  a  compact 
form.  He  would  like  such  a  provision  put  into 
the  constitution,  as  it  would  prevent  all  future 
trouble. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WIGKLIFFE  agreed  with  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville.  He  thought  that  gen- 
tleman's amendment  contained  the  best  descrip- 
tion of  localities,  and  when  they  were  taktni  as 
electoral  limits,  all  temptation  to  gerrymander 
was  avoided.  He  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  substitute. 

The  question  was  then  taken,  and  it  was  de- 
cided in  the  affirmative — ^yeas  56,  nays  34: 

Yeas — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Bovd,  William 
Bradley,  Jas.  S.  Clirisman,  B.  L.  Clarke,  Jes.se 
Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benj.  Copelin,  Wm. 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius 
Desha,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  H.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  W. 
Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  James,  Wm. 
Johnson,  Charles  C.  Kelley,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  l^ashbrook,  Thomivs  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.Machen,  George  W.Mansfield, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Mer- 
riwetlier,  William  D.  Mitcliell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt.  Jonathan 
Newcnm,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  J.  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 56. 

Navs — President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Apper- 
6on,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 


Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Archibald  Dixon, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavau,  Nathan  Gaither.  Nini- 
an  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W. 
Irwin, Geo.  W.  Johnston,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
William  C.  Marshall,  Hugh  Newell  William 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L. 
Waller,  Silas  Woodson — 34. 

So  the  amendment  of  Mr.  Morris  was  substi- 
tuted for  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Louisville. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  amendment. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  the  previous 
question. 

Pending  this  question  the  convention  adjourn- 
ed. 


TUESDAY.  NOVEMBER,  20, 1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Laxcastkr. 

BASIS   OF  KEPBESEXTATIOX. 

Mr.  CLARKE  offeredthe  following  resolution: 

Whereas,  in  the  formation  of  a  republican  con- 
stitution, it  is  right  and  proper  to  establish  some 
true  and  correct  basis  of  representation.  Where- 
fore, 

Resdmd,  That  all  free  white  inhabitants  who 
have  been  born  iu  this  commonwealth,  and  re- 
side therein,  or  who  shall  have  resided  in  the 
county,  town,  or  city,  in  which  they  shall  bo 
enumerated,  one  year  preceding  the  census  or 
enumeration  of  tlie  people,  (aliens  not  naturaliz- 
ed excepted,)  shall  form  tlie  basis  of  representa- 
tion. 

I  offer  that  resolution  to  test  the  sense  of  the 
convention  whether  population  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  is  pesented  iu  that  resolution,  is  the 
true  basis  of  representation  as  many  gentlemen 
have  contended.  There  are  many  persons  iu  this 
commonwealth  who  ought  to  be  considered  as 
well  as  the  qualified  voters. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  understand 
the  object  of  the  mover  of  that  resolution.  If  I 
understand  it,  we  are  to  base  representation  up- 
on the  number  of  individuals,  whether  male  or 
female,  qualified  voters  or  not  qualified  to  vote. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  desire  to  change  the  word 
"or"  to  "and,"  so  that  it  shall  read,  "and  reside 
ding  therein." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  a  still  strong- 
er objection  to  it  as  it  now  stands;  fori  under- 
stand its  purport  to  be  to  exclude  naturalized 
citizens,  iu  forming  the  basis  of  representation^ 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  gentleman  certaiidy 
mi.sunderstands  me.     I  mean  no  such  thing. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  presume  my  friend 
does  not  intend  to  make  the  exclusion,  but  I 
think  a  proper  construction  would  have  the  ef- 
fect which  I  named. 

Mr.  CLARKE  modified  the  resolution,  so  as  to 
exclude  aliens  not  naturalized. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.    That  makes  a  great, 
difference?    I  do  not  desire  to  pursue  the  di^us- 
sion,  for  I  presume  this  convention  Iiave  made 


588 


lip  their  minds  on  the  subject  of  the  qualifica- 
tions of  voters,  and  are  satisfied  to  leave  that 
matter  as  it  is  at  present,  and  to  take  the  basis  of 
our  fathers — to-wit,  the  qualified  voters  of  our 
country — as  that  on  which  we  shall  act. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  understand  this  is  a  gov- 
ernment of  the  people.  The  people,  I  umier- 
stand  to  be  men,  women,  and  children,  who  are 
white,  and  who  are  born  citizens  of  tlio  United 
States,  or  of  foreigners  who  have  been  natural- 
ized. That  I  understand  to  be  the  qualification 
•when  you  take  the  gentleman's  resolution  as  it 
stands.  And  he  meant  nothing  but  that  before 
m  the  use  of  the  word  alien,  meaning  those  who 
have  not  been  naturalized.  The  basis  then  pro- 
posed is  the  whole  free  white  population  that 
are  citizens  of  the  U.  States,  and  are  residents  of 
the  county,  or  town,  or  city,  in  which  they  may 
have  been  resident  one  year.  Upon  the  subject  of 
the  uniformity  of  that  basis,  I  do  not  think  the 
gentleman  is  correct.  The  basis  of  representa- 
tion in  the  congress  of  the  United  States  is  ex- 
actly the  basis  laid  down  there,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  slaves  in  the  slaveholding  states.  By 
way  of  compromise,  they  were  allowed  a  represen- 
tation of  their  slaves,  upon  the  basis  of  three 
fifths.  With  that  exception  the  representation  is 
that  precisely  which  is  laid  down  in  the  gentle- 
man's proposition.  I  have  not  examined  the  con- 
stitutions of  the  various  states,  in  order  to  ascer- 
tain what  is  the  basis  that  has  been  adopted.  I 
believe  it  varies  in  some  of  the  states;  in  some  it 
is  the  free  voting  population,  and  in  others,  the 
free  white  population.  I  have  no  doubt  my 
worthy  friend  from  Bullitt,  (Mr.  Thompson,)  in 
his  remarks  the  other  day,  was  correct  in  quoting 
the  provisions  in  the  different  constitutions  of 
the  states,  as  to  what  forms  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation. And  that  only  goes  to  show  that  the 
federal  government  has  the  basis  of  white  popu- 
lation. Now,  I  ask  why  in  the  nature  of  things 
it  should  not  be  so  in  all  the  states,  and  why 
should  not  Women  and  children  under  twenty 
one  years  of  age  have  a  right  to  be  represented 
by  the  law-making  poW«ri'  Are  they  not  sub- 
ject to  the  laws?  Do  they  not  pay  taxes  upon 
their  nroperty?  Have  they  not  rights  at  stake 
as  well  as  men?  Are  not  their  persons  subject 
to  the  laws  just  as  much  as  if  they  were  voters? 
To  be  sure  it  is  so.  A  young  man  of  eighteen 
fights  like  Voters,  and  works  oa  the  roads,  does 
militia  duty,  and  many  other  acts,  and  I  cannot 
see  whyyoung  men,  women,  and  children  should 
not  form  the  basis  of  representation,  and  have  a 
voice  in  the  government.  And  there  is  another 
reason.  Yougotoyour  citiesand  large  towns,  and 
there  is  a  floating  population  of  unmarried  men. 
Go  to  the  least  village  in  your  state,  (God  forbid 
I  should  again  mention  Louisville,)  and  you 
find  a  disproportion  of  voters  to  the  number  of 
the  population:  some  journeymen  mechanics, 
some  young  unmarried  men  in  stores,  or  young 
men  studying  law  or  medicine.  And  go  to  eve- 
ry town  and  take  the  number  of  people  in  the 
town,  and  then  go  into  the  country  and  take  the 
same  number,  and  you  find  the  town  furnishes 
more  voters  in  proportion  than  the  country.  I 
think  the  basis  of  the  gentleman  is  tlie  correct  one ; 
it  is  based  upon  the  same  nriuciple  an  the  con- 
gress of  the  U.  States,  and  1  believe  at  least  half 
of  the  states.    I  beg  pardon  if  I  should  again 


go  to  Louisville;  tliere  is  a  floating  population 
there,  if  it  is  not  treason  against  my  worthy 
friend  from  Louisville  to  say  so.  They  stop  also 
at  Covington,  at  Newport,  and  at  Maysville 
awhile,  and  they  are  taken  in  among  the  list  of 
voters.  They  are  meclianics,  working  men,  and 
pedlers,  and  have  no  permanent  residence;  and 
what  is  more  they  will  give  in  their  names  to 
the  commissioners  when  an  apportionment  is  to 
be  made.  And  hence  if  you  go  over  all  the 
towns  in  the  state,  and  take  Lexington,  Mays- 
ville, Covington, and  Paducah,you  will  see  a  clis- 
proportion  of  voters  taken  down  the  year  the 
representation  is  to  be  apportioned.  Louisville 
gave  as  many  in  1843  as  in  1848;  not  that  there 
was  as  many  people  there,  but  she  took  in,  in 
1843,  a  moving,  itinerant  population.  Lexing- 
ton was  in  the  same  position.  I  want  the  coun- 
try to  have  a  chance.  We  have  been  taught  by 
our  fathers — what?  That  it  should  be  a  white 
population.  They  let  the  free  negroes  vote  from 
1792  to  1800,  but  we  were  taught  certain  princi- 
ples of  government  which  were  excluded  by  the 
present  constitution,  and  that  constitution  con- 
tains many  things  to  which  the  people  now  ob- 
ject, and  we  are  sent  here  to  make  a  new  one. 
We  are  not  to  consider  that  constitution  as  bind- 
ing upon  us  either  as  precedents  or  in  any  other 
way.  We  came  here  to  reconstruct  and  remodel 
it.  What  was  in  the  constitution  in  1792  wrc 
excluded  in  1799,  and  what  was  in  in  1799  will 
be  excluded  in  1849.  The  world  is  advancing; 
the  world  is  improving.  We  appear  to  be  stand- 
ing still,  but  we  move  as  the  world  moves,  in 
all  the  arts  and  sciencies.  We  do  not  see  our 
advance,  but  we  are  advancing.  The  world  is 
improving  as  well  in  the  arts  and  sciences  gene- 
rally as  in  the  science  of  government;  and  I  say 
that  men,  women,  and  children  have  aright  to  be 
represented.  I  looked  around  me  the  other  day, 
and  found  that  I  had  twenty  five  grand  children, 
and  not  one  of  them  can  be  represented  under 
this  constitution,  and  yet  more  than  half  are 
just  verging  into  manhood  and  womanhood,  and 
some  of  them  pay  taxes  on  i|25,000.  I  am 
obliged  to  the  gentleman  for  bringing  in  that 
resolution. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  This  convention 
was  called  to  re-model  our  form  of  government 
in  those  respects  where  experience  had  pointed 
to  existing  evils  in  llie  present  constitution.  I 
did  not  understand  that  it  was  called  for  the 
purpose  of  changing  those  great  principles 
which  seemed  to  have  been  sanctified  by  time, 
and  acquiesced  in  by  common  consent,  approved 
by  .ill,  and  complained  of  by  none.  Uncler  this 
opinion,  I  did  not,  when  adciressing  my  fellow 
citizens  who  sent  me  Jiere,  feel  it  my  duty  to 
say  to  them  that  I  desired,  or  expected  to  change 
certain  great  principles  secured  to  the  country  in 
the  present  constitution  and  bill  of  rights.  1  in- 
sisted that  this  should  remain  undisturbed  as  it 
was;  that  tiie  right  of  representation,  as  therein 
guarantied,  should  remain  secure  and  inviolate ; 
that  liberty  of  conscience,  and  the  freedom  of 
the  press  should  also  remain  secure,  and  guar- 
antied to  the  people  and  to  posterity. 

Now,  if  the  basis  of  representation  has  been 
any  where  in  Kentucky  a  cause  of  complaint,  or 
has  entered  into  the  elements  whicli  led  to  the 
call  of  this  convention,  it  has  escaped  my  vision 


589 


and  my  hearing,  and  I  understand  now  from  my 
collejigue  that  he  has  come  into  it  since  his 
warfare  upon  cities  commenced.  I  have  not 
looked  at  tables,  or  tho  census  of  this  common- 
Avealthjto  see  where  this  will  strike  heaviest,  or 
benefit  most,  nor  would  I  care. 

He  saj-s  that  population  is  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation, and  that  it  is  the  basis  adopted  by  the 
federal  government.  Does  not  mv  colleague 
know,  that  when  the  thirteen  sovereignties  were 
forming  this  compact  of  states,  that  very  point 
was  the  subject  of  dispute,  and  ultimately  of 
compromise,  and  none  more  so  than  this  very 
question  of  representation  according  to  numbei-s, 
in  the  two  houses  of  congress?  The  slave  states, 
contended  for  the  representation  of  persons  whose 
lives  they  had  under  their  charge  and  protection. 
The  free  states  insisted  on  free  population 
A  compromise  was  made,  by  which  the  whole 
population  was  to  be  enumerated,  and  three  fifths 
of  the  slaves.  We  have  no  such  contending  in- 
terests of  sovereignties  in  this  state  to  allay,  set- 
tle, adjust,  and  compromise. 

The  resolution  is  to  change  the  basis  of  rep- 
resentation as  it  has  existed  for  fifty  years  with- 
out complaint,  so  far  as  my  recollection  goes, 
from  any  quarter.  The  argument  is,  that  tlie 
women  and  children  shall  be  represented,  and 
young  men  who  bear  arms.  I  am  against  giving 
to  matter,  property,  or  territory,  or  to  persons, 
the  right  of  representation,  when  they  are  placed 
in  a  condition  where  they  cannot  exercise  it.  I 
have  no  idea  of  giving  to  one  man  whose  locali- 
ty may  place  him  in  the  neighborhood  of  men, 
women,  and  children,  more  political  power  than 
the  man  who  lives  where  they  are  not  so  abun- 
dant. I  am  for  placing  on  each  man  who  acts, 
the  responsibility  of  a  citizen,  the  same  equal 
privileges,  though  he  may  not  be  wealthy.  The 
gentleman  objects  that  there  is  a  floating  popula- 
tion— voters  who  have  no  responsibility,  i  am 
opposed  to  giving  one  of  that  class  any  more 
than  his  due  political  weight,  on  account  of  his 
being  surrounded  by  men,  women,  or  children. 
Let  him  have  his  own  weight  and  no  more. 

Why  this  change  at  this  late  hour,  when  I  be- 
lieve the  members  of  this  convention,  individu- 
ally and  collectively,  are  anxious  to  bring  the 
labors  assigned  to  us,  to  a  close;  when  the  coun- 
try is  impatient  to  see  the  end  of  these  labors; 
wLen  the  bill  on  your  table  which  we  had  under 
consideration  for  some  days,  fixed  the  basis  of 
representation  by  the  judgment  and  sanction  of 
the  chairman  and  the  whole  committee?  Why 
introduce  at  this  late  hour  into  this  hall,  and 
into  this  con.stitution,  this  new  element,  which 
is  not  calculated,  let  me  assure  my  colleague, 
to  form  a  constitution  in  conformity  with  the 
wishes  of  the  people?  1  believe  my  colleague 
desires,  as  mucn  as  I,  or  any  man,  to  form  a  con- 
stitution which  will  be  satisfactory  to  them.  1 
will  not  follow  out  the  argument,  but  unless  I 
can  see  some  better  ground  for  changing  the  ba- 
sis which  I  think  my  countrymen  desire  still  to 
maintain,  I  will  not,  for  the  sake  of  stripping 
any  city  or  any  town  of  one  fiftieth,  or  one  twen- 
tieth part  of  the  political  weight  which  it  enjoys, 
introduce  into  this  constitution  this  new  basis  of 
representation. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  desired  leave  to  record 


his  vote  on  the  question  taken  yesterday  in  his 
absence,  which  was  granted. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  always  believed  that 
representation  should  be  according  to  numbers, 
that  is,  the  free  white  population  of  this  state 
who  are  citizens  either  by  naturalization  or  by 
birth.  Now  I  know  many  widows  in  this  coun- 
ty, who  have  perhaps,  a  property  of  eight  or 
ten  thousand  dollars  -and  pay  taxes,  and  they 
are  subject  to  our  laws,  and  though  they  cannot 
vote  they  ought  to  be  represented.  In  the 
formation  of  tiie  federal  constitution,  the  ne- 
gro population  was  a  subject  of  compromise. 
The  slave  holding  states  for  fear  they  would  be 
swallowed  up  by  the  north,  insisted  that  their 
slaves  should  be  represented,  and  if  there  was 
any  compromise  about  the  white  population.  I 
have  not  seen  the  article  which  shows  that  on 
the  journal.  I  do  not  believe  it  was  a  matter  of 
compromise. 

My  colleague  asks  if  we  knew  of  this  propo- 
sition when  we  came  up  bore.  No,  he  says,  it 
was  not  mentioned  in  any  way  in  the  discussions 
of  the  canvass.  I  will  ask,  was  it  mentioned 
that  Louisville  should  be  gerrymandered  as  it 
was  yesterday?  •  No  sir,  you  may  say  what  you 
will,  that  was  the  first  time  that  principle  was 
ever  introduced  in  Eentuckv,  either  in  the  con- 
stitution of  1792  or  of  1795,  that  you  shall  di- 
vide a  town  or  city  into  precincts  or  wards  to 
make  it  give  a  divided  vote.  This  will  be  vir- 
tually making  a  division  of  a  county.  We  are 
not  to  turn  a  deaf  ear,  nor  shut  our  eyes  to  what 
is  going  on.  Any  man  can  see  that  the  agricul- 
tural interests  are  to  be  led  up  and  sacrificed  at 
the  altars  of  the  towns  and  cities  in  the  state. 
Yes  sir,  they  are,  and  to  give  them  a  fair  chance, 
I  want  the  free  white  population  to  be  the  basis 
of  representation.  I  know  that  the  county 
which  I  represent  can  in  no  wise  be  afiected. 
It  was  once  an  extensive  county,  but  has  been 
cut  and  cut  till  it  has  lost '  all  form  and 
shape  that  it  ever  had,  and  is  reduced  to  the 
lowest  point  of  representation.  We  never  can 
get  but  one,  and  you  never  can  take  that  one 
from  us,  and  our  county  never  can  be  gerryman- 
dered, thank  God.  I  speak  that  word  without 
any  disrespect  to  any  one.  The  practice  of 
thus  dividing  was  first  introduced  by  the  cele- 
brated Elbridee  Gerry,  and  was  carried  into 
various  states,  but  I  never  thought  it  right.  The 
whigs  were  accused  of  it  in  the  division  made 
in  this  state  in  1833.  I  believe  it  was  called 
gerrymandering,  but  I  think  the  division  was  as 
fair  as  could  be  made.  I  can  see  that  we  are  to 
be  sacrificed  by  a  great  and  leading  party.  Our 
party  is  to  be  sacrificed  this  day  or  to-morrow. 
1  know  it,  I  can  see  it,  hut  so  long  as  I  can  raise 
ray  voice,  sick  or  well,  I  will  protest  against  it. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  came  here  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  tile  people  of  my  county  without 
regard  to  party  politics,  to  act  according  to  my 
conceptions  of  what  isjust.  In  the  discharge  of 
my  duty  I  .shall  not  regard  the  influence  ■n^ich 
my  action  may  have  on  the  political  parties  of 
this  state.  Regarding,  as  I  do,  political  num- 
bers as  the  true  basis  of  representation,  I  should 
think  sir,  that  if  the  resolution  under  considera- 
tion were  to  receive  the  countenance  of  this  con- 
vention, its  action  would  be  a  departure  from 
principles  that  have  in  Kentucky  been  long  and 


590 


Veil  pcttled.  Representation  results  from  nc- 
w^sitv.  If  the  people  coul<l  assemble  together 
and  directly  perform  all  political  acts  nect!s- 
sary  for  governieutal  purposes,  there  ■would  be 
no  necessity  for  representation.  But  as  in  large 
states  they  cannot  thus  assemble,  it  is  necessary 
tliat  thousands  should  be  represented  by  one 
man.  Wliom  do  we  represent?  "Whose  voice 
<loes  the  representative  speak?  Is  it  t)ie  voice 
of  the  whole  population  or  that  of  those  wjio,  if 
assembled  together  primarily,  AVould  do  the 
business  of  legislation?  Has  it  ever  been  the 
case  from  the  earliest  history  of  man,  that  wo- 
men and  children  have  constituted  any  part  of 
tlie  assemblage  for  the  purpose  of  political  ac- 
tion? Such  was  not  the  case  in  Athens?  When 
the  Athenian  democracy  assembled  for  political 
purposes,  the  convention  was  composed  of  those 
who  had  arrive!  at  full  age,  the  men  of  the 
country,  male  adults,  who  alone  were  entitled  to 
vote.  And,  sir,  if  we  could  thus  assemble,  such 
would  be  the  individuals  who  would  vote  Avith 
lis.  But  as  primary  legislation  is  altogether  im- 
practicable, it  is  necessary  that  its  exercise 
should  be  delegated.  Out  of  this  necessity  has 
grown  representation,  wliich  is  designed  to  re- 
flect the  intelligence  of  the  country,  to  embody 
the  Avill  of  those  who  are  vested  with  political 
power.  It  is  the  concentration  of  the  popular 
voice — that  voice  Avhich  speaks  at  the  polls.  It 
is  the  creature  obeying  the  behests  of  its  creator. 
It  is  the  ascertained  will  of  the  freemen  of  the 
country  expressed  through  their  representative. 

The"resohition  under  consideration  proposes 
that  won)en  and  children  who  are  born  in  the 
country,  as  Avell  as  men,  shall  constitute  the 
basis  of  representation,  excluding  aliens;  and 
yet  the  children  of  the  country  have  no  more 
right  to  the  exercise  of  political  poAver  than  the 
alien.  The  alien  may  acquire  it  but  the  female 
child  never  can;  the  male  child,  it  is  true,  Avill 
also  be  entitled  to  it  at  a  proper  age,  but  until 
that  time  he  is  as  devoid  of  political  poAver  as 
the  alien.  Why  then  exclude  the  alien?  Nay, 
Avhy  exclude  the  free  negro  or  any  one  else,  if 
population  Avithout  regard  to  political  numbers 
IS  to  be  the  basis?  If  the  burden  of  taxation  is 
to  have  any  influence,  the  free  negro  may  ac- 
quire property  and  be  taxed.  He  may  be  com- 
pelled to  contribute  toAvard  the  support  of  tlie 
government,  as  well  as  the  white  man,  as  Avell 
as  the  child.  The  child  has  no  more  political 
right — has  no  more  voice  in  the  councils  of  the 
country,  than  the  free  negro.  Why  make  tliis 
discrimination  if  population,  in  its  broadest 
sense,  is  to  be  the  basis  of  representation?  I  do 
not  see  hoAv  gentlemen  can  escape  from  this  dif- 
ficulty. Tlio  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr. 
Hardin),  says  that  this  is  the  principle  on  Avhich 
representation  is  based  in  tlie  congress  of  the 
U.  States.  Free  negroes,  aliens,  and  three  fifths 
of  the  slaves  are  taken  into  the  estimate.  The 
constitution  of  the  United  States  declares,  that 

"  Representatives  and  direct  taxes  shall  be 
apportioned  aniony  the  several  states  Avhich  may 
V>e  included  within  this  Union,  according  to 
their  respecstive  numbers,  which  shall  be  determ- 
ined by  adding  to  the  Avhole  number  of  free 
persons,  including  those  bound  to  service  for  a 
term  of  years,  and  excluding  Indians  not  ta^ed, 
three  fifllis  of  all  other  persons." 


Here  all  free  persons  are  included,  Avithout  re-  • 
gard  to  color,  so  that  free  negroes  and  aliens  are 
actually  included  in  the  estimate  made  in  the 
jipportionment  under  the  federal  constitution. 
Then  so  far  as  that  example  goes,  and  indeed 
any  other  example  Avithin  my  knoAvledge,  this 
resolution  presents  a  novelty.  It  proposes  to 
exclude  aliens  and  all  those  from  other  states 
who  have  not  a  year's  residence.  Why  make  these 
exclusions,  if  population  in  its  broadest  sense, 
is  to  be  the  basis  of  representation?  I  should 
like  to  hear  the  philosophy  of  the  thing,  why 
population  in  its  broadest  sense  should  be  the 
basis,  and  I  should  like  to  hear,  then,  the  rea- 
sons Avhy  women  and  children  who  pay  taxes 
should  be  repre.scnted,  and  aliens  and  free  ne- 
groes Avho  also  pay  taxes  should  not  be  repre- 
sented. 

If  repr&sentation  is  to  be  based  on  the  intelli- 
gence of  the  people  you  cannot  place  it  on  the 
basis  of  taxation.  We  exclude  property  because 
the  idea  of  intelligence  does  not  attach  to  it.  We 
say  that  our  government  is  supported  upon  the 
intelligence  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people. 

It  is  not  the  errand  of  woman's  destiny  to  go 
forth  and  wrestle  on  the  political  arena.  Her  du- 
ty is  to  dispense  the  blessings  that  cluster 
around  the  domestic  hearth.  She  constitutes 
the  brightest  link  in  the  chain  of  man's  associa- 
tion— that  tie  Avhich  makes 

•'A  paradise  on  earth, 

Where  hcaits  and  hands  combine." 

To  her,  as  the  mother  of  mankind,  is  entrusted 
the  task  of  fashioning  the  mind  of  childhood 
for  future  greatness — her  teachings  are  seen  on 
the  battle-field,  heard  in  tlie  senate  chamber. 
Her  glory  is  like  the  Roman  Cornelia's,  Avhose 
jewels  were  her  children.  To  man,  from  the  be- 
ginning of  time,  has  been  assigned  the  task  of 
cultivating  the  earth,  defending  the  country  and 
controlling  its  political  destiny.  It  is  proposed 
here  to  enlarge  the  basis  of  representation  so  as 
to  embrace  women  and  children,  and  yet  give 
them  no  voice.  How  could  an  individual  come 
up  here  and  reflect  the  Avill  of  his  constituents, 
Avhen  but  a  minor  portion  of  that  constituency  has" 

e laced  him  in  the  position  which  he  occupies? , 
'oes  it  not,  to  some  extent,  contravene  the  great ' 
principle  of  the  right  of  instruction?  If  the 
Avhole  people  constitute  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion, how  is  he  to  be  instructed  by  a  part  and 
not  a  majority  of  the  whole?  The  Avoinen  and 
children  will  be  his  constituency,  and  hoAV  is  he 
to  reflect  the  Avill  of  that  constituency  Avhen  the 
larger  portion  of  them  are  voiceless?  I  do  not 
perceive  any  reasons  for  this  proposed  extension 
of  the  basis  of  representation. 

It  occurs  to  me  that  Avhen  Kentucky  fixed  her 
representation  on  political  numb(^rs,  I  mean  on 
those  who  have  the  elective  franchise,  she  idaced 
it  on  the  true  principle:  .she  was  then  in  advance 
of  all  her  sisters  and  shone  out  among  them 

" Veluti  inter  ignes 

Luna  mi n ores.'' 
Mr.  CLARK.  The  younger  gentleman  from 
Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklifle)  asks  Avhy  it  is,  at 
this  late  hour,  I  have  thouglit  jiroper  to  intro- 
duce this  resolution.  If  1  Avere  to  cmicede  the 
right  to  him  to  ask  tliat  question,  I  would  an- 
SAver  and  say  it  Avas  introduced  for  the  purpose  ' 
of  basing  representation  upon  what  1  believe  to 


591 


be  tlie  true  basis.  An  J,  whether  wo  have  Jis- 
ousseil  another  question,  to  some  extent,  iuvolv- 
iny  the  same  principle,  for  several  days,  or  not, 
is  not  a  matter  of  any  consequence  when  I,  as 
the  representative  of  a  free  and  enlightened  con- 
stituency, think  proper  to  submit  a  resolution  to 
the  house.  That  gentleman,  as  well  as  the  gen- 
tleman who  has  just  taken  his  seat,  (Mr. 
Mitchell,)  has  assumed  that  this  was  a  ques- 
tion not  discussed  last  summer  before  the  people 
any  where.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson  says 
he  came  here  a  reform  delegate — that  lie  had 
pledged  himself  to  the  people  to  bring  al>out 
certain  reforms,  and  that  this  reform  was  never 
mentioned.  He  says  this  is  changing  a  great 
principle,  and  the  gentleman  from  Oldham  agrees 
with  him  in  that  statement.  Xow  I  put  it  to  the 
two  gentlemen  whether  there  has  not  been  an- 
other change  made  within  the  last  two  suns  in 
the  old  constitution,  and  one  which  was  not 
discussed  in  the  newspapers  or  by  the  delegates 
during  the  last  canvass.  I  allude  to  the  change 
made  in  the  constitution  yesterday  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  city  representation  in  the  senate.  When 
it  is  proposed  to  make  a  change  that  does  not 
correspond  with  the  views  of  certain  gentlemen, 
it  is  very  easy  for  them  to  get  up  and  say,  you 
are  now  proposing  to  make  inroads  on  establish- 
ed rules  and  principles,  which  have  been  sanc- 
tioned by  time  an<l  hallowed  by  experience  in 
this  country — ^you  are  attempting  to  do  this 
without  having  informed  the  people  when  you 
came  here  that  such  was  your  intention.  But 
when  the  same  gentlemen  think  proper  to  make 
inroads  on  principles  that  have  been  sanctified 
by  time  and  experience,  then  tliese  arguments 
are  of  no  weiglit  whatever.  The  gentleman 
from  Oldham  declares  this  to  be  a  departure 
from  principle.  What  principle?  He  inquires 
how  it  is  you  intend  to  allow  women  and  chil- 
dren to  be  represented,  and  at  the  same  time  he 
says  money  shall  not  be  represented;  that  repre- 
sentation is  based  on  the  idea  of  patriotism,  vir- 
tue and  intelligence,  and  that  intelligence  can- 
not be  expected  except  in  adults,  and  according 
to  the  rule  for  which  he  is  contending,  those 
adults  must  be  male  adults.  It  has  been  well 
remarked  by  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
that  there  was  no  controversy  in  the  convention 
that  framed  the  federal  constitution  as  to  the 
basis  of  representation  in  the  sense  indicated  by 
some  speakers  here.  There  was  a  controversy 
in  the  convention  as  to  whether  population  or 
property  should  be  tlie  basis  of  representat  ion ;  but 
there  never  was,  according  to  my  recollection,  and 
1  have  read  with  some  care  the  Madison  Papers 
and  Elliott's  Debates,  a  controversy  as  to  wheth- 
er population  in  a  restricted  sense,  (such  as  here 
proposed)  or  in  an  unlimited  sense,  should  form 
the  true  basis.  I  have  yet  to  see  where  there 
ever  was  a  controversy  in  the  federal  conven- 
tion as  to  whether  population,  restricted  or  pop- 
ulation unrestricted,  should  furnish  the  true  ba- 
sis of  representation,  whether  population,  as 
used,  meant  free  white  inhabitants,  or  those  on- 
ly who  were  qualified  voters. 

When  you  lay  off  your  state  into  ten  congression- 
al districts  for  representation  in  congress,  do  you 
not  take  men,  women,  and  children  into  the  cal- 
culation? Have  not  women  and  children  their 
rights?    And  although  you  deprive  them  of  vo- 


ting', should  they  not  be  roprcstnted  when  you 
tax  them  to  the  last  dollar,  as  well  as  those  who 
make  the  laws  are  taxed?  I  am  perfectly  satis- 
fied, from  the  examination  I  have  made,'that  in 
the  towns  and  cities,  and  particularly  the  cities, 
there  are  more  voters  in  proportion  to  the  bal- 
ance of  the  free  white  population,  than  can  be 
found  in  the  rural  districts.  There  are  those  who 
apprehend,  and  I  think  justly,  that  there  is  dan- 
ger to  be  expected  from  the  cities,  as  far  as  the 
rights  and  interests  of  the  rural  districts  are 
concerned,  perhaps  not  now,  but  in  after  times. 
Yoii  then  here  insist  upon  a  basis,  which  does 
what?  A  basis,  which  is  a  departure  from  the 
great  principle  of  population  as  a  basis.  And 
your  restricted  basis  of  population  gives  to  eve- 
ry city  an  advantage  over  the  rural  districts. 
AVhy  select  that  basis?  Why  select  qualified 
voters,  when  if  you  will  take  up  the  auditor's 
rejwrt,  or  the  census  for  1840,  it  will  satisfy  ev- 
ery mind  that  that  basis  gives  an  advantage  to 
the  cities  over  tlie  rural  districts.  Why  do  that? 
If  you  make  qualified  voters  the  basis,  it  only 
goes  half  way.  When  you  stop  there,  you  give 
tlie  cities  an  advantage  over  the  country;  but  if 
you  take  the  free  white  inhabitants  of  the  state, 
if  you  give  any  advantage  at  all,  you  give  it  to 
the  rural  districts. 

Now,  why  stop  at  this  half  way  house?  What 
is  the  fact?  Go  to  tlie  manufacturing  establish- 
ments in  the  cities,  you  will  find  a  number  of 
men  there,  as  well  as  upon  vour  wharves  and 
steamboats,  who  have  no  families  at  all.  They 
cannot  aflford  to  keep  families  in  the  cities.  They 
go  there,  and  according  to  this  half  way  princi- 
ple, they  go. to  the  ballot  box  and  elect  their  rep- 
resentatives, and  control  the  rights  of  men,  wo- 
men, and  children.  I  should  like  tlie  gentleman 
from  Oldham,  when  he  returns  to  his  constitu- 
ents, to  explain  to  them  why  he  stopped  at  the 
half  way  house.  Let  him  take  the  number  of 
qualified  voters  in  his  county,  and  then  the  num- 
ber of  children  between  five  and  sixteen  yeai"s 
old;  then  take  the  same  classes  in  Jefferson  coun- 
ty, and  city  of  Louisville,  and  I  will  ask  if  there 
are  not,  inproportion  to  the  voting  population, 
more  children  Detween  these  ages,  than  in  the 
county  of  Jefferson  and  city  of  Louisville. 
What  is  he  doing?  He  is  depriving  his  ovni 
county  of  a  full  representation  on  the  great  prin- 
ciple tliat  population  is  the  true  basis  of  repre- 
sentation. With  all  your  schools,  charitj"  es- 
tablishments, and  asylums  in  the  city  of  Louis- 
ville, the  fact  does  still  exist,  that  there  are  more 
children,  according  to  a  given  number  of  voters, 
in  the  rural  districts  than  in  the  cities.  Now, 
by  way  of  illustration,  I  will  take  the  counties 
of  Christian,  Trigg,  Todd,  and  Logan.  These 
are  the  heaviest  slave  counties  in  the  southern 
part  of  the  state.  They  give  a  voting  popula- 
tion of  6,792.  According  to  the  Auditor's  re- 
port for  1847,  those  four  counties  have  within 
their  limits,  children  between  the  ages  of  five 
and  sixteen,  to  the  number  ot  8,677.  Take  the 
voting  population  of  the  city  of  Louisville,  and 
the  county  of  Jefferson,  which  is  6,737,  and 
there  is  but  55  difference  between  them;  where- 
as, Louisville  and  the  county  of  Jefferson,  have 
but  7,406  children  between  those  ages,  thus 
showing,  with  an  equal  voting  population,  a 
difference  in  favor  of  those  counties  over  the 


592 


city,  of  12G1  children  l>etwoen  those  ages.  Take 
the  counties  of  Simpson,  Hart,  Alk-n,  and  Barren, 
and  tliero  are  6,373  qualified  voters.  They  have 
quite  aheavy  slave  population.  The  number  of 
eiiilJren  in  them  between  five  and  sixteen  years 
of  age  is  8,849.  Tlie  voting  population  of  those 
four  counties  is  less  than  that  of  Jefferson  and 
Louisville  by  364,  and  there  are  1443  children 
in  favor  of  those  four  counties. 

There  are  great  principles  that  regulate 
population,  an<l  increase  or  diminish  it,  and 
every  one  of  them  is  in  favor  of  the  rural  dis- 
tricts, unless  the  philosophy  of  the  schools  be 
false.  First,  the  morals  of  a  community  have 
much  to  do -with  the  increase  or  diminution  of 
population.  I  will  be  understood,  and  it  is  a 
fact,  without  intending  any  disrespect  to  the 
population  of  any  city  in  this  Union,  that  there 
IS  more  innnorality,  and  such  immorality  as  to 
prevent  the  propagation  of  our  own  species,  in 
the  cities  than  in  the  rural  districts.  Ey  a  cal- 
culation made  by  a  distinguished  gentleman  in 
the  state  of  Ohio,  when  you  estimate  the  popu- 
lation of  New  York  and  Boston,  and  compare 
the  numl)er  of  deaths  among  children  between 
birth  and  the  age  of  five  years,  with  the  same 
number  of  the  rural  population;  it  is  a.s  six  to 
one.  That  is  one  great  principle  which  governs 
the  increase  of  population,  and  the  superior  mor- 
als will  always  secure  an  increase  to  the  country 
over  the  city.  There  is  another  principle:  go  to 
your  populous  cities,  and  there  you  will  see 
hundreds  of  half  fed  children,  a  spectacle  you 
never  witness  in  the  rural  districts  ;  tliere,  they 
may  be  poor,  and  in  humble  circumstances,  yet 
they  have  always  a  sufficiency  to  sustain  life, 
and  are  hearty  and  healthy.  Exposure  exists  in 
the  cities,  to  a  greater  extent,  than  in  the  country. 
Nor  will  it  be  denied  that  the  pure  and  balmy 
air  of  the  country  is  more  conducive  to  health 
than  the  malventilated  atmosphere  of  a  croAvded 
city.  I  maintain  it  can  be  demonstrated  that 
the  growth  of  the  rural  districts,  with  a  given 
nunioer  of  inhabitants  to  begin  with,  must  al- 
ways outstrip  the  cities,  so  far  as  their  own 
production  of  population  is  concerned.  If  gen- 
tlemen av  ill  carry  out  the  principle*  on  which 
that  increase  of  power  has  been  conferred  upon 
the  cities,  by  the  vote  of  yesterday,  they  will  do 
much  to  di.ssipate  the  danger  apprehended  here. 
It  is  right  and  just,  and  is  a  principle  agreed 
upon  by  the  framers  of  the  federal  constitution. 
Not  more  than  two  years  ago,  the  same  princi- 
ple was  adojjted  by  the  convention  which  framed 
the  constitution  of  New  York.  Gentlemen  have 
drawn  upon  the  example  of  other  states,  as  pre- 
cedents py  which  to  govern  their  own  action. 
In  1847  the  convention  which  assembled  in  New 
York  for  the  purpose  of  revising  the  constitution 
of  that  state,  adopted  the  following  article: 

"  An  enumeration  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
state  shall  be  taken  under  the  direction  of  the 
legislature,  in  the  year  1855,  and  at  the  end  of 
every  ten  years  thereafter;  and  the  said  districts 
shall  be  so  altered  by  the  legislature  at  the  first 
session  after  the  return  of  every  enumeration, 
that  each  senate  district  shall  contain,  as  nearly 
as  may  be,  an  equal  number  of  inhabitants,  ex- 
cluding aliens  and  persons  of  color  not  taxed; 
und  shall  remain  unaltered." 
The  very  principle  laid  down  in  my  resolu- 


tion is  the  very  principle  adopted  in  the  consti- 
tution of  New  York.  It  is  one  of  the  very  last 
conventions  that  have  met  for  the  purpose  of 
framing  a  constitution.  Now,  I  put  it  to  the 
gentleman  on  this  floor,  when  it  is  perfectly 
manifest  and  apparent,  if  you  establish  this  as 
the  true  principle  of  representation,  you  will 
shield  the  rural  districts  from  that  overshadow- 
ing and  impending  danger  which  they  appre- 
hend from  the  recently  increased  power  of  the 
cities.  If  you  do  thus  shield  them,  I  ask  my 
friend  from  Nelson,  why  he  opposes  it?  Why 
not  carry  out  the  principle"?  And  if  it  does 
give  the  rural  districts  any  advantage,  let  it  do  it. 
And  I  protest  against  stopping  at  that  very  point, 
if  there  be  danger  to  the  rural  districts,  which 
will  place  them  at  the  mercy  of  the  cities. 

I  have  said  that  throughout  almost  every  re- 
port that  has  been  made  from  the  committees, 
qualified  voters  have  been  made  the  basis  of 
representation;  but  there  is  nothing  in  the  world 
more  easy  than  to  strike  out  the  words  "quali- 
fied voters,"  wherever  they  occur,  and  insert 
"  white  inhabitants."  An<3  the  declaration  of 
gentlemen  that  we  are  going  back  to  undo  all 
that  we  have  done,  is  a  mere  scarecrow,  for  not 
more  than  half  a  yard  of  talk  and  work  (I  be- 
lieve some  gentlemen's  speeches  are  measured  by 
the  yard)  will  be  necessary  to  accomplish  all.  I 
hope  the  subject  will  be  discussed  by  gentlemen 
better  acquainted  with  it  than  I  am,  and  I  trust 
the  reasons  and  advantages  here  suggested,  will 
be  so  demonstrated,  that  there  will  scarcely  be  a 
dissenting  voice  to  the  adoption  of  the  resolu- 
tion.    I  shall  ask  for  the  ayes  and  noes. 

Mr.  MAYES.  This  is  an  interesting  question, 
and  one  that  I  think  merits  the  calm  considera- 
tion of  the  members  of  this  body.  I  shall  not 
be  actuated  in  my  vote  on  this  subject,  by  the 
question  whether  the  adoption  of  the  resolution 
of  the  gentleman  from  Simp'^on,  will  affect  cities 
or  the  country.  I  inquire  whether  it  is  right  or 
wrong.  Is  it  just,  or  if  adopted  will  it  operate 
oppressively  or  unju.stly  on  any  portion  of  the 
state.  I  have  thought,"and  I  still  think,  that 
the  cities  have  been  very  improperly  drawn  into 
the  various  discussions  we  have  had  in  this  con- 
vention. We  are  acting  with  a  view  to  promote 
the  general  interests  of  the  state,  and  local  in- 
terests are  not  to  be  taken  into  the  general  action 
for  the  general  weal.  Yet  we  have  seen  the  city 
of  Louisville  arrayed  on  almost  every  question, 
presented  for  the  consideration  of  gentlemen, 
and  now  that  we  are  on  the  question  touching 
representation  in  some  degree,  we  find  that 
Louisville  and  other  cities  are  brought  up  here 
In  all  their  grandeur.  That  is  no  part  of  the 
question.  If  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
from  Simpson  be  right,  whether  it  affect  the  city 
or  country  materially,  it  becomes  our  duty  to 
adopt  it.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  to  fix  on  the  ba- 
sis of  qualified  voters  is  more  just,  it  becomes 
our  duty  to  adopt  that  principle.  Tliat  is  the 
view  that  I  take.  It  strikes  me  forcibly,  and  at 
present  I  give  my  assent  unqualifiedly  to  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  that 
It  is  right  and  will  redound  to  the  general  good. 
I  do  not  restrict  it  to  town  or  country  particular- 
ly. This  is  not  a  new  question.  True,  hereto- 
fore representation  in  Kentucky  has  been  based 
on  the  number  of  qualified  voters  in  the  coun- 


593 


ties  and  towns.  Th<>  proposition  now  is,  to 
change  the  principle  on  wiiicli  Kentuciy  has 
acted  heretofore  in  reference  to  this  subject. 

Will  it  be  right  to  change '!  We  know  that 
under  the  present  system,  if  I  am  twenty  one 
years  of  age,  though  I  do  not  possess  a  cent's 
"worth  of  property,  and  feel  no  interest  whatever 
in  the  government  in  which  I  live,  still  I  have 
the  right  to  vote,  and  thereby  determine  and 
select  the  man  who  is  to  stand  on  this  floor,  and 
control  tlie  property  of  others  wlio  have  no  voice 
in  it,  and  are  not  to  be  represented  in  tlic  slight- 
est degree.  It  seems  to"  nw;  there  should  be  some 
provision  for  protection  of  that  class  of  persons 
■who  own  property  in  the  state,  who  have  a  deep, 
abiding;  and  powerful  interest  in  the  govern- 
ment. Can  we  not  ascertain  the  number  of  free 
white  persons  in  Kentucky,  when  we  apportion 
tlie  representation  ?  That  can  be  learned  with 
as  much  ease  as  we  can  ascertain  the  inimber  of 
qualified  voters.  Then  the  widows,  or  unmar- 
ried ladies  who  own  property,  who  have  a  stake 
in  the  government,  will  be  counted,  because  they 
have  an  interest  to  be  protected.  The  free  white 
children  should  also  be  counted,  for  the  same 
reason,  for  they  have  an  interest  which  should  be 
guarded  and  shielded  by  the  law  making  power 
of  the  state. 

I  am  glad  this  question  has  been  presented. 
How  it  will  be  determined  by  the  convention,  I 
know  not,  but  I  have  no  doubt  they  will  deter- 
mine it,  for  the  common  good,  without  regard  to 
city  or  country. 

1  rose  to  turn  tlie  attention  of  the  convention 
to  some  of  the  constitutions  which  have  provis- 
ions of  this  kind,  that  the  delegates  may  see 
there  are  other  states,  or  statesmen,  who,  in  form- 
ing the  organic  law  of  their  country,  regarded 
tliis  as  an  unjust  provision  as  it  now  exists  in 
this  state.  These  it  seems  had  reference  to  the 
general  good,  and  I  wish  we  might  talk  less 
about  sectional  interest*,  and  more  about  the 
general  good.  I  hope,  however,  no  such  motives 
have  operated,  as  have  been  attributed  to  gentle- 
men. I  do  not  believe  there  has  been  any  refer- 
ence to  national  politics  on  this.iloor,  but  gentle- 
men on  both  sides  have  been  engaged  in  what 
they  thoughj  would  redound  to  the  best  interests 
of  Kentucky.  I  regret  to  see  gentlemen  referring 
to  national  politics  when  forming  a  constitution. 
I  will  read  first  from  the  constitution  of  Pennsyl- 
vania. 

"Within  three  years  after  the  first  meeting  of 
the  general  assembly,  and  within  every  subse- 
quent term  of  seven  years,  an  enumeration  of  the 
taxable  inhabitants,  shall  be  made  in  such 
manner  as  shall  be  directed  by  law.  The  num- 
ber of  representatives  shall,  at  the  several  peri- 
ods of  making  such  enumeration,  be  fixed  by 
the  legislature,  and  apportioned  among  the  city 
of  Philadelphia  and  the  several  counties, accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  taxable  inhabitants  in  each; 
and  shall  never  be  less  than  sixty,  nor  greater 
than  one  hundred.  Each  county  shall  have  at 
least  one  representative,  but  no  county  hereafter 
erected,  shall  be  entitled  to  a  separate  representa- 
tion, until  a  sufficient  number  of  taxable  inhab- 
itants shall  be  contained  within  it,  to  entitle  them 
to  one  representative,  agreeably  to  the  ratio  which 
shall  then  be  established." 

What  principle  operated  on  the  convention  of 

75 


Pennsylvania  in  formiivji^their  constitution?  It 
w;is  that  which  was  weJl  illustrated  by  the  elder 
gentleman,  as  he  is  calltd,  from  Nelson,  that  al- 
though we  niay  have  no  right  to  vote  we  have 
deep  interests  which  should  be  protected  by  the 
country,  and  therefore  in  that  sense  we  have  a 
right  to  representation.  The  constitution  of 
Mississippi  is  as  follows : 

"  The  legislature  sluJl,  at  their  first  session, 
and  at  periods  of  not  less  than  eveiy  four,  nor 
more  than  every  six  years,  until  the  year  184.'), 
and  therafter  ait  periocfe  of  not  less  than  every 
four,  nor  more  tnan  every  eight  years,  cause  an 
enumeration  to  be  made  of  all  the  free  white  in- 
habitants of  the  state." 

That  constitution  goes  on  the  same  idea  as  that 
of  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from  Simp- 
son. 

Now,  look  at  the  constitution  of  Illinois: 

"  The  number  of  senators  and  representatives 
shall,  at  the  firet  session  o€  the  general  assembly, 
holden  after  the  returns  herein  provided  for  are 
made,  be  fixed  by  the  general  assembly,  and  ap- 
portioned among  the  several  counties  or  districts 
to  be  established  by  law,  according  to  the  num- 
ber of  white  inhabitants." 

These,  with  the  exception  of  that  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, are  the  constitutions  of  new  states;  and 
in  that  state  we  see  that  the  voting  population  is 
not  the  only  criterion. 

If  gcntlcHQicn  will  be  patient,  I  shall  soon  be 
done.  I  liave  not  troubled  the  convention  at 
great  lengtb;  my  n  ame  Tf  ill  not  appear  on  the 
journal  very  frequently.  It  is  necessary  that  we 
should  express  our  views  and  interchange  our 
sentiments. 

The  constitution  of  Missouri,  says: 

"The  general  assembly,  at  their  first  session, 
and  in  the  yt^ars  1822  and  1824,  respectively, 
and  every  fourth  year  thereafter,  shall  cause  an 
enumeration  of  the  inhabtants  of  this  state  to  be 
made;  and  at  the  first  session  after  such  enume- 
ration, shall  apportion  the  number  of  representa- 
tives among  the  several  counties,  according  to 
the  Bumber  of  free  white  male  inhabitants 
therein." 

The  constitution  speaks  of  free  white  male  in- 
habitants, while  the  others  based  the  representa- 
tion on  free  white  inhabitants  as  a  proper  crite- 
on.  In  Pennsylvania  taxable  inhabitants  are 
represented. 

The  gentleman  from  Oldham,  says,  why  ex- 
clude aliens  from  being  counted  when  you  come 
to  fix  the  ratio  of  representation?  I  should  have 
supposed  a  gentleman  of  his  intelligence  would 
not  have  propounded  such  a  question.  Why  not 
include  them?  The  reason  is  ob^aous  to  every 
gentleman.  Why  not,  he  says,  include  free  ne- 
groes? If  he  is  disposed  to  include  them,  he 
can  offer  an  amendment  to  that  effect.  I  am  not 
willing  to  give  free  negroes,  nor  foreigners  not 
naturalized,  the  right  of  determining  the  manner 
in  which  I  shall  dispose  of  my  property,  nor  the 
right  to  influence  the  law  which  may  take  away 
my  life  and  libertv,  because  they  have  not  a  suf- 
ficient stake  in  the  government.  But  those  who 
are  part  and  parcel  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States  have  a  deep  interest,  and  I  am  disposed  to 
think  they  should  have  a  part  in  the  enactment 
of  such  laws  as  shall  protect  and  secure  that 
interest. 


6ft4 


I  tliank  tlie  house  for  tlie  indul^ence^ey  have 

fiveii  me,  and  will  not  trespass  lonj^er.  nor  phiiU 
speak  often  iu  future,  uiiless  it  may  be  with 
reference  to  some  section  whicli  I  desire  to  see 
modified  in  some  slight  degree. 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON.  I  aiu  inclined  to  vote  for 
this  proposition — and  in  order  to  trywhethor  the 
principle  is  a  good  one,  allow  nie  to  state  an  ex- 
treme case.  If  it  is  good,  I  intend,  as  far  as  my 
vote  is  concerned,  to  carry  it  out.  Suppose  there 
are  five  hundred  voters  in  one  county,  each  of 
them  having  a  family  of  ten  persons,  making  five 
thousand  persons  in  all;  and  su})pose  in  another 
county  you  have  five  hundred  voters  who  have 
no  families,  is  it  right  that  the  five  hundred  vo- 
ters without  families  shall  have  the  same  influ- 
ence in  the  government  as  the  five  hundred  vo- 
ters with  families?  Is  it  right  to  say  that  four 
thousand  five  hundred  beings  shall  count  noth- 
ing? If  the  principle  is  good  iu  itself,  it  is  good 
every  where. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  To  carry  out  the  gentleman's 
principle  thoroughly,  he  had  better  provide  that 
the  number  of  votes  shall  be  regulated  by  the 
number  of  children. 

Mr.  MA  CHEN.  In  reference  to  the  suggestion 
of  the  gentleman  from  Harrison,  I  ask  if  it  would 
not  be'as  well  to  include  widows,  and  base  rep- 
resentation on  the  number  of  widows  and  chil- 
dren? I  have  reflected  some  little  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  believe  the  proposition  is  founded  on  a 
correct  principle.  It  appears  to  me  that  the 
house  should  vote  upon  this  proposition  at  once, 
and  adopt  it  by  a  unanimous  vote.  I  will  refer 
you  to  an  analagous  principle  that  has  already 
been  acted  upon  in  this  house.  It  is  that  repre- 
sentation shall  be  based  on  federal  numbers. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Does  the  gentleman 
desire  that  representation  be  based  on  federal 
numbers,  which  includes  three  -fifths  of  the 
negroes? 

Mr.  MACHEN.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  mean  that 
negroes  are  to  be  taken  into  the  account  at  all. 
The  constitution  of  Wisconsin  has  the  same  pro- 
vision, and  there  are  no  negroes  there.  On  what 
basis  does  the  gentleman  place  representation? 
I  believe  that  only  a  few  days  since  this  hall 
was  made  to  resound  with  his  eloquent  voice  in 
favor  of  basing  representation  upon  population. 
Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  have  never  con- 
tended for  any  other  basis  than  that  of  popula- 
tion, as  recognized  in  the  old  constitution;  that 
is,  the  voting  population. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  I  do  not  know  the  exact 
phrase  used  by  the  gentleman.  But  I  presume 
the  house  has  intended  that  the  white  popula- 
tion should  constitute  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion. That  is  the  doctrine  that  has  been  con- 
tended for,  and  although  gentlemen  may  choose 
to  narrow  it  down  to  the  voting  population,  it 
seems  to  me,  to  confine  it  to  that,  would  be  de- 
parting from  the  principle  upon  which  the  gov- 
ernment has  been  erected.  Property  is  entirely 
unrepresented — the  widow  and  orphans  arc  de- 
prived of  that  protection  which  renresentation 
would  give  them,  yet  they  arc  held  subject  to 
the  laws  which  you  enact.  We  do  not  propose 
to  give  them  the  right  to  vote,  but  we  propose 
that  their  voice  shall  bo  heard,  to  some  extent, 
by  computation  of  numbers.  That  I  hold  to  bo 
the  correct  principle. 


Mr.  TRIPLETT.    I  have  not  yet  lieard  (Ids 
proposition  placed  precisidy  on  a  eorroct  basis, 
according  to  my  view.     I  have  great  disinclina- 
tion to  detain  the  committee  with  any  remarks, 
and  would  not  do  so  now,  if  I  was  not  .aware 
that  there  h.is  been  an  effort  made  by  the  young- 
er delegate  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Wickliire) — though 
probably  it  was  unintentional — to  place  those 
who  shall  vote  for  this  proposition  in  a  false  po- 
sition.    First,  he  endeavors  to  connect  us  with 
those  who  desire  to  establish  a  property  qualifi- 
cation; next  he  endeavors  to  connect  us  with 
those  who  want  to  make  federal  numbers  the 
basis   of  representation.     He  shall  not  do  either 
with  me.     There  can  be  no  plainer  proposition 
than  this.     What  is  the  duty  of  the  legislature? 
It  is  to  protect  persons  and  property.     Do  they 
protect  only  the  persons  and  property  of  the  vot- 
ing population?    Not  at  all ;  they  protect  the  per- 
sons and  property  of  the  whole  state.     Then,  in 
putting  members  of  the  legislature  into  office, 
what  should  be  the  basis?     Plainly,  those   on 
whose  persons,  as  well  as  those  on  whose  prop- 
erty they  are  to  operate.     But  how  are  you  to 
get  the  true  basis,  as  they  are  to  operate  on  per- 
sons and  property  both?    Why,  clearly,  persons 
or  white  inhabitants,  whether  thoy  own  property 
or  not.     Suppose  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  luus 
fifteen  children  and  grand  children,  and  he  the 
only  male  representative  of  the  family,  and  that 
he  loses  his  life,  while  fighting  the  battles  of  his 
country.     Previous  to  that  event  the  persons  and 
property  of  his  widow  and  descendants  were  rep- 
resented.    Well,  he  fell  not  by  his  own  act,  but 
while  defending  the  rights  of  these  identical  men 
who   are  opposing  this  resolution.     What  then 
becomes  of  the  rights  of  his  widow,   children, 
and   grand  children?     They  are  represented  no 
longer.    They  are  stricken  down,  trampled  und«'r 
foot.     Now,  1  ask  if  the  gentleman  can  reconcile 
it  to  his  conscience,  that  the  loss  of  the  head  of 
the  family  shall  be  followed  by  the  further  mis- 
fortune of  the  loss  of  the  right  of  having  their 
persons  and  property  wholly  unrepresented,  by 
having  their  pereons  stricken  out  of  the  basis  of 
representation? 

There  is  another  point  of  view  in  which  this 
question  presents  itself  to  my  mind.  It  is  this  : 
Although  pei-sons  that  have  no  property  have  not 
the  same  interests  to  protect  in  that  respect  Avilh 
those  who  have,  yet  they  have  persons  and  char- 
acter to  protect;  and  it  seems  to  me  that  women 
and  children  have  the  same  right  to  have  their 

f)ersons  and  reputation  protected,  whether  they 
lave  property  or  not,  that  men  have.  Tliey  own 
persons  and  reputixtion,  and  persons  and  reputa- 
tion have  the  same  right  to  be  represented  and 
pretected  that  property  has.  It  strikes  me,  that 
when  you  look  at  the  object  of  all  laws,  (which  is 
to  protect  and  regulate  persons  and  property,) 
that  all  persons,  capable  of  owning  property,  or 
having  persons  and  character  to  jirotcct,  should 
be  represented. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  Mr.  President :  When  this  prop- 
osition was  first  presented,  I  regarded  it  as  a  re- 
striction upon  the  river  counties,  and  the  foreign 
population  that  seemed  to  concentrate  in  the 
large  cities  on  the  Ohio  river— that  were  con- 
stantly roving  from  one  point  of  the  state  to  an- 
other, and  that  ought  not  be  represented — nioro 
than  the  stationary  population  in  the  country. 


5»5 


althougli  that  population  mit^ht  be  females  or 
minors.  I  regard  tlwit  population  as  the  true  ba- 
sis of  representation;  but,  I  see  that  the  effect  of 
the  proposition  will  be  to  affect  the  rich  coun- 
ties as  well  as  the  cities;  and  if  the  ricli  coun- 
ties choose  to  barter  that  part  of  their  ]>opula- 
tion  wliose  "heritage  are  their  children,"  why, 
let  them  take  the  consequences. 

I  have  made  out  a  table  of  twelve  counties. 
Six  I  consider  anjong  tlie  most  wealtliy,  and 
six  are  considered  as  p<x)r;  and  you  will  see 
that  the  children  in  the  six  poor  counties  will 
give  tliom  great  advantages,  by  increasing  their 
political  power: 


Anderson, 

108G  voters 
1546  children 

Breathitt, 

- 

588  voters 
996  children 

Butler, 

- 

870  voters 
1312  childTCn 

Wayne, 

- 

1423  voters 
2281  chilJrsn 

Allen 

- 

1413  voters 
2221  children 

Morgan, 

- 

1225  voters 
1815  children 

Breathitt,      - 
Morgan, 

Voters. 
588 
-      1225 

Children. 
996 
1815 

Total, 


Total, 


1813 


2811 


Bourbon, 

■ 

1769  voters 
1628  children 

Jessamine, 

- 

1323  voters 
1482  children 

Woodford, 

- 

1255  voters 
1242  children 

Clarke, 

- 

1715  voters 
2030  children 

Madison, 

- 

2549  voters 
2913  children 

Scott, 

- 

1839  voters 
2.387  children 

Bourbon, 
Woodford,    - 

Voters. 

-  1769 

-  1255 

Children. 
1628 
1242 

3024 


2870 


The  result  of  the  above  table  is  very  remarka- 
ble. Take  the  counties  represented  by  tlie  gen- 
tleman from  Morgan  and  Breatliitt,  (Mr.  Hargis) 
and  we  have  the  astonishing  fact,  tliat  the  ag- 
gregate voters  only  amount  to  1,813,  and  there 
are  2,811  children  between  the  age  of  five  and 
sixteen.  Truly,  this  is  a  great  place  for  cliil- 
dren.    Sir,  I  believe  that  all  the  free  population  I  peioon,  Charles  Chambei-s,  Garrett  Davis,  Ben 


is  the   best  basis  of  representation,  and  shall 
vote  for  the  proposition. 

Mr.  NUT  TALL.  We  have  got  along  very 
Well  under  our  old  systeni  of  enumeration,  and 
by  trying  to  amend  it,  it  is  possible  we  may 
make  it  worse.  This  is  not  a  new  proposition 
to  mc,  and  it  does  not  strike  me  as  altogether 
just.  I  think  that  the  voting  community,  should 
De  the  basis  of  representation.  If  we  are  going 
to  .ittempt  to  provide  in  this  constitution  for 
every  possible  contingency  that  may  arise,  our 
labors  w  ill  be  endless.  I  am  as  much  in  favor 
of  widows  and  orphans  as  any  delegate  on  this 
floor.  I  have  always  Jiad  a  special  leaning  in 
that  direction;  but  I  do  not  propose  to  make  a 
constitution  tliat  will  meet  the  case  refeiTed  to 
by  the  gentleman  from  Daviess.  If  a  lady  is 
made  a  widow  by  her  husband  falling  in  battle, 
it  is  only  a  casualty;  and  for  such,  no  constitu- 
tional provision  can  be  made.  But  if  the  gen- 
tleman will  go  a  stop  further,  and  propose  that 
widows  shall  be  allowed  to  vote,  I  could  never 
oppose  such  a  proprosition  as  that.  I  would 
go  for  it  as  certain  as  the  Lord  liveth.  But  there 
being  nothing  of  this  sort  contemplated,  I  shall 
adhere  to  the  old  doctrine,  of  basing  represen- 
tation on  tlie  voting  population.  I  am  very 
much  like  the  boy  who  was  found  one  morning 
trying  to  jump  into  his  breeches.  When  asked 
wliat  he  was  doing  he  replied,  "why  daddy 
jura]K?d  into  his  breeches  this  way,  and  I  am 
following  the  old  plan." 

Mr.  GHOLSON,  It  is  to  me  a  matter  of  as- 
tonishment that  upon  so  plain  a  proposition 
there  should  be  so  much  debate.  If  it  be  in  or- 
der, I  will  move  the  previous  question. 
The  previous  question  was  then  sustained. 
The  question  was  then  taken  upon  the  reso- 
lution offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
(Mr.  Clarke,)  and  it  was  adopted;  yeas  69, 
nays  23, 

Yeas— John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wm. 
K.   Bowling,   Alfred    Boyd,   William   Bradky, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.Brown,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  ColTey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius 
Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Natlian  Gaither, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.   Garrard,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent    S.    Hay,    William  Hendrix,   Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.   Irwin,   Thoni:is   James,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  George   W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.   Machen, 
George  W.   Mansfield,  Alexander  K.   Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Jfathan 
McClurc,  John  H.  McIIenry,  John  D    Morris, 
James   M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Jfewcum,  Henry 
B.   PoUard,   William   Preston,  Johnson    Price, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T, 
Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  J. 
Thurman,  Philip   Tripktt,  John  WheeJer,  An- 
drew S.   White,    George    W.   Williams,    Silas 
Woodson — 69. 
Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 


596 


jamin  P.  Edwards,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  D&vid 
Meriwether,  William  1).  MikJliell,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  Hugh  NcAtell,  Elijah  h\  Nuttall,  J'ohn 
T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L. 
Waller,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
litfe,  Wesley  J.  Wiight— 23. 

LEGISLATIVE  DEpArTMEXT. 

The  convention  then  proceeded  to  the  consid- 
eration of  tlie  report  of  the  committee  ou  tke 
legislative  department. 

The  pending  question  being  upon  the  amend- 
ment olfored  by  the  gentleman  from  CliristiaH, 
(Mr.  Morris,)  to   the  fiftfi  section  of  said  report. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  If  it  is  in  order,  I  will 
move  to  strike  out,  the  latter  clause  of  this 
amendment.  "But  no  ward  or  imunicipal  di- 
vision shall  be  divided  by  such  division  of  sena- 
torial or  representative  districts." 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  amendment  having 
been  adopted  as  a  substitute,  it  will  not  be  in 
order  to  amend  by  striking  out. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  amendment  as  i 
it  now  stands,  is  perfectly  correct.  It  is  n (Sees-' 
sary,  I  think,  to  preserve  t?ie  municipal  divis- 
ions of  the  city,  that  no  ward  shall  be  divided 
in  forming  a  representative  district.  There  is' 
no  necessity  for  it;  and  if  the  latter  portion  of 
tlie  amendment  be  stricken  out,  it  will  be  in 
the  power  of  the  legislature,  if  such  should  be 
their  inclination,  to  gerrymander  tlie  citv. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  If  you  permit  a  di- 
vision of  wards  in  forming  an  electoral  district, 
a  portion  of  the  voters  may  have  to  g®  to  two 
wards  to  vote.  A  voter  may  h&vc  to  go  to  one 
ward  to  vote  for  representative,  and  to  another 
to  vote  for  senator. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  As  I  have  heretofore  stated, 
I  will  vote  against  the  amendment,  and  for  the 
section  as  it  has  been  reported.  But  if  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Christian 
should  be  adopted,  I  Would  like  to  liave  it  in  as 
proper  a  shape  as  possible.  It  strikes  me  how- 
ever, that  it  would  be  better  to  leave  it  alone 
altogether,  lest  difficulty  should  arise  out  of 
those  divisions  of  wards. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  It  does  appear  to  rae,  with 
all  deference  to  the  gentlen*an,  that  it  will 
still  be  subject  to  the  same  objection  that  lies, 
against  confining  representation  to  county  lintfs. 
My  object  was  to  make  it  incumbent  upon 
the  city  authorities,  to  divide  the  city  into 
districts,  tliat  this  gerrymandering  should  not 
be  practiced. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  think  I  «an  obvi- 
ate the  difficulty  by  in.serting  the  words  "repre- 
sentative district,  '  so  that  it  wjJl  read  "uo  rep- 
resentative district  shall  be  divided." 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  camiot  believe  it  is  nccessaiy 
that  the  city  should  be  dividcnl  into  wards  for 
representation.  She  will  not  liavc  more  than 
three  or  four  representatives  in  the  lower  Louse. 
Suppose  when  you  divide  out  the  city  in  this 
way,  you  have  two  individuals  in  favor  of  eman- 
cipation, and  two  oppj)sed  to  it;  and  suppose 
the  open  clause  shall  be  adopt(?«l  in  tliis  consti- 
tution. You  immediately  raise  the  question  of 
emancipation.  I  believe  that  if  you  adopt  the 
principle  of  dividing  the  city  for  representation 
va.  the  lower  house,  ilwill  have  tlio  worst  possi- 


ble influence.  I  can  see  no  reason  why  Jeffer- 
son, or  any  otJier  county,  might  not  be  divided 
for  a  similar  purj)ose. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  difficulty  in  relation  to  this 
matt«r,  occurred  to  my  mind  last  evening,  when 
I  suggested  some  verlwil  alterations.  If  a  city  is 
to  be  divided  into  election  districts,  it  ccilainly 
is  desirable  tliat  the  districts  should  be  e(iual, 
that  they  should  each  contain,  as  nearly  as  may 
be,  the  exact  ratio  of  representation.  Tlieiv. 
must  be  ward  arrangements,  and  if  these  M'ard 
arrangements  are  to  be  adhered  to  strictly,  in  the 
formation  of  districts,  they  might  constitute  dis- 
tricts ■of  unequal  strengtli,  in  point  of  voters.  I 
think  this  ought  to  be  guarded  against  while  we 
are  on  the  subject,  and  I  will  suggest  an  amend- 
ment, to  be  added  to  the  latter  partof  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Cliristian.  It  is 
this,  "unless  it  be  necessary  to  equalize  the  sen- 
atorial or  representative  districts." 

Mr.  RUDD.  If  gentlemen  will  reflect,!  think 
it  will  be  evident  to  them,  tliat  the  city  council, 
being  themselves  elected  in  wards,  are  better 
qualified  to  make  the  proper  divisions  than  any 
other  persojis.  The  census  is  taken  once  in  eve- 
?y  year,  and  the  wards  become  from  time  to  time 
unequal  in  population.  You  cannot  prevent  it. 
Leave  the  matter  then  as  it  is,  without  any  al- 
teration, and  let  the  representative  districts  be 
equalized  by  the  city  council.  They  are  better 
qualified  to  regulate  the  election  precincts  than 
any  other  body  of  men.  If  j^ou  leave  the  amen<l- 
ment  of  the  gentleman  from  Christian  as  it  is, 
there  will  be  no  danger  of  (/errymaTulering.  That 
is  what  I  want;  I  do  not  want  any  of  this  cut- 
ting and  dividing. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  satisfied  with 
the  amendmeait  that  is  proposed  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis,)  and  I  will  there- 
fore withdraw  mine. 

The  question  was  then  taken  upon  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentlenia,n  from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis,) 
and  it  was  agreed  f»,  ou  a  division,  ayes  41,  noes 
18. 

And  the  question  being  tJien  put  upon  the 
amendment  as  amended,  and  the  yeas  and  nays 
being  demanded,  they  were  taken,  and  resulted 
as  follows,  yeas  G2,  nays  29: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Gutlirie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Joim  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  I5oyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  M.Bristow,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffvy.  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjaniiii  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  GaJ^rett  Davis,  Lucius  Dcslia, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Se- 
lucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gh<!>ison,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Wil- 
liaje  Ilendrix,  Thomas  James,  William  John.son, 
George  W,  Johnston,  George  W^  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.Kellcy,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  L.-ush- 
brooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machon, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  David 
Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  Jolin  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jon- 
atlian  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah F.  Nuttall, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thoma.s 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spaldiii":,  James  W.  Stone, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor.  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  Wheeler,   Andrew  S.   White, 


597 


Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffo,  Geo. 
W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 62. 

Nays — John  L.  Biillinger,  William  K.  Bowl- 
ing, Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Archibald  Dixon,  Thomas  J. 
Goiij^h,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hoodli  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark 
E.  Huston,  James  W.Irwin,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
"shall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure, 
John  H.  McHenry,  W^illiam  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  i'roctor,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thnrman,  Howard 
Toild,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L. 
Waller,  Silas  Woodson— 29. 

So  the  amendment,  as  amended,  was  adopted. 

Mr.  WM.  JOHNSON.  I  will  re-offer  the 
amendment  that  was  proposed  by  the  gentleman 
from  Muhlcnburg,  (Mr.  Jackson.)  It  is  this, 
"Provided,  That  no  city,  or  county,  shall  ever 
be  entitled  to  more  than  two  senators." 

This  motion  the  president  heretofore  ruled  out 
of  order,  but  after  an  argimieut  on  the  point  by 
Mr.  W.  JOHNSON  the  decision  was  reversed, 
and  the  motion  received. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  demanded  the  yeas 
and  naj's. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  suppose  that  I  represent  the 
only  county  of  the  state,  in  which  the  question 
of  restricting  cities  has  been  discussed.  Thei-e 
were  several  adjourned  meetings  for  the  purpose 
of  nominating  candidates  for  this  convention, 
and  there  was  draAvn  up,  by  the  old  preceptor  of 
the  gentleman  from  Todd,  a  platform,  or  a  set  of 
resolutions,  one  of  which  was,  that  it  would  be 
expedient  to  incorporate  into  the  constitution,  a 
provision  for  restricting  the  representation  of 
cities  and  towns.  The  resolution  was  submitted 
on  county  court  day,  and  I  believe  it  did  not 
meet  with  a  single  dissenting  voice,  until  it 
came  to  me.  I  remarked  to  the  gentleman  who 
drew  it  up,  that  he  had  put  it  in  a  little  too 
strong  language,  that  it  would  be  as  well  to  let 
tlie  constitution  remain  as  it  is,  in  that  respect; 
that  it  Avould  furnish  restriction  enough.  1  be- 
came the  nominee,  and  pledged  myself  to  sus- 
tain the  old  constitution  in  every  provision,  where 
I  was  not  instructed  to  change  it,  but  reserved 
to  myself  the  right  to  act  as  a  free  delegate  on 
this  lloor,  on  all  questions  on  which  I  was  not 
instructed,  and  on  which  the  old  constitution 
was  silent.  In  carrying  out  what  I  believed  to 
be  the  will  of  the  ])eople  of  my  county,  I  have 
universally  voted  in  favor  of  restriction  upon 
cities. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  My  course  on  this 
subject  has  been  a  silent  one.  I  have  voted  for 
restricting  cities,  and  shall  vote  for  this  proposi- 
tion. Upon  almost  every  proposition  that  has 
been  submitted  to  this  body,  I  have  been  able 
to  form  some  idea  of  the  opinions  and  feelings 
of  my  constituents,  and  felt  instructed  by  the 
knowledge  of  what  these  feelings  were.  This 
proposition  however,  was  entirely  a  new  one, 
and  as  I  have  always  felt  desirous  of  carrying 
out  the  wishes  of  my  constituents,  I  took  occa- 
sion yesterday — it  being  court  day  in  my  coun- 
ty, to  visit  the  county,  and  I  conversed  freely  with 
the  people  upon  this  subject.  It  was  not  new  to  them 
— they  had  examined  the  discussions  which  have 
taken  place  in  this  house,  and  with  but  one  single 
exception,!  found  the  people  of  Jessamine  county. 


most  decidedly  in  principle,  agreeing  with  me  in 
the  course  which  I  had  pursued.  They  have  always 
believed  that  it  was  essential  to  maintain  the 
separation  of  the  two  branches  of  the  legisla- 
tive department  of  the  government,  that  it  was 
essential  that  the  senate  and  house  of  represen- 
tatives should  be  differently  constituted.  They 
look  upon  the  division  that  exists  in  the  legisla- 
tive department,  into  two  branches,  as  a  concer- 
vative  principle.  They  have  believed  that  those 
two  branches  would  be  found  to  be  in  some  de- 
gree, a  check  upon  each  other.  And  they  be- 
lieved that  if  constituted  exactly  alike,  the  ob- 
ject of  division  is  entirely  lost.  I  shall  vote  for 
the  proposition. 

The  question  being  taken  by  yeas  and  nays, 
resulted  thus,  yeas  40 — nays  53. 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper, 
Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford  Elliott, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark 
E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  Thomas  W, 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  James  M. 
Nisbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert 
G.  Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller. 
John  Wheeler— 40. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Ben. 
Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  Chesteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaitlier,  Selu- 
cius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  William  Hendrix,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  l\'ter  Lashbrook,  George  AV.  Mans- 
field, Martin  P.  Marshall,  John  H.  McHenry,  D. 
Merriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  TJiomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  William  Preston,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Charles  A.  Wiokliffe,  Robert  N.  Wicklille,  Geo. 
W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright, 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  IRWIN  moved  to  strike  out  the  5th  sec- 
tion, and  insert  the  following. 

"Elections  for  representatives  for  the  several 
counties  entitled  to  representation,  shall  be  held 
at  the  places  of  holding  their  respective  courts, 
or  in  the  several  election  precincts  into  which  the 
legislature  may  think  proper  to  divide  any  or  all 
of  those  countiesj:  Provided,  That  when  itshall 
appear  to  the  legislature  that  any  town  or  city 
hath  a  number  of  qualified  voters  equal  to  the 
ratio  then  fixed,  such  toAvn  or  city  shall  be  in- 
vested with  the  privilege  of  a  separate  represen- 
tation ;  M'hich  .shall  be  retained  so  long  as  such 
town  or  city  shall  contain  a  number  of  qual- 
ified voters  equal  to  the  ratio  which  may,  from 


898 


time  to  time,  l»e  fixoJ  by  law  ;  and  (hereafter, 
elections  for  the  county  in  wliieh  such  town  or 
city  is  sitiiattrl  shall  not  be  held  therein. 

"The  same  number  of  senatorial  districts  shall, 
from  time  to  time,  be  established  by  the  legisla- 
ture as  tliere  may  then  be  senators  allotted  to 
the  state,  which  shall  be  so  formed  as  to  contain 
as  near  as  may  be  an  equal  number  of  free  wliitc 
male  inhabitants  in  each,  above  the  age  of  twen 
tv  one  years,  so  that  no  county,  town,  or  city 
sltall  form  more  than  one  district ;  and  when 
t.W(j  or  more  counties  compose  a  district,  they 
shall  be  adjoining." 

A  division  was  called  for  by  Mr.  "Waller,  aiid 
the  question  was  taken,  first  on  striking  out,  and 
it  was  decided  in  the  negative,  as  follows — 
yeas  36,  nays  55 : 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballingcr,  Wm.  K.  Bowling, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  William  Cowpcr,  James 
Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Tliomas  J.  Gough,  Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W. 
Irwin,  William  Johnson,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Mac.hen,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ard L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  Mc- 
Henry,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman,  HoAvard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Wal- 
ler—36. 

Navs — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benja- 
min Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F. 
E<lwards,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Seluci- 
iis  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Jas.  P.  Hamilton,  Jolin  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
William  Hendrix,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Geo. 
W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
William  Preston,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson, James  VV^  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  Jolin 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Jolin  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  WickliflFc,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright— 55. 

The  question  then  recurred  upon  the  adoption 
■of  the  oth  .section  as  amended.  The  yeas  and 
nays  being  taken,  they  resulted  as  follows: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
penwn,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  William  Cowpcr,  Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha.  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard 
D.  Gliolson,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Jas.  P.  Hamilton, 
John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  J<»hnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Cliarlcs  C.  Kelly,  Jas.  M.  Lack- 
4ey,  Peter  Labhbrouke,  Geo.W.  llaiwtield,  Martin 


P.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Wra.  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  I).  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Ncwoll,  Eli- 
jah F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert 
G,  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  WicklifFe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffc,  Geo.  W.  Wit- 
liams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 61. 

Nays — John  L.  Ballinger,  Wm.  K  Bowling, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beveiiy 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Tliomas  J.  Gough,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark 
E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jaeknon, 
Tliomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Maclieu,  Alexander 
K.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
John  II.  McHenry,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John 
T.  Rogers,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller- 30. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  convention  then  took  a  recess  until  3 
o'clock,  P.  M. 

EVENING    SESSION. 3   o'CLOCK,   T.  M. 

The  sixth  section  was  then  read. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  strike  out  the  section, 
and  insert  the  following: 

"Sec.  6.  Representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be, 
forever  regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number 
of  free  white  citizens  therein.  At  the  first  ses- 
sion of  the  general  assembly,  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  provision  shall  be  made,  by 
law,  that  in  the  year  ,  and  every  eighth 

year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  free 
white  citizens  of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The 
number  of  representatives  shall,  in  the  several 
years  of  making  these  enumerations,  be  so  fi.vod 
as  not  to  be  less  than  fifty-cij!;ht,  nor  more  than 
one  hundred;  and  they  shall  be  apportioned  for 
the  eight  years  next  following,  as  near  as  may 
be,  among  tlic  several  counties,  cities,  and 
towns,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  free  while 
citizens;  but  when  a  county  may  not  have  a  suf- 
ficient number  of  free  white  citizens  to  entiilc  it 
to  one  representative,  and  when  the  adjacent 
county  or  counties  may  not  have  a  residuum  or 
r<!siduiuns,  which,  when  added  to  tlic  small 
county,  would  entitle  it  to  a  separate  representa- 
tion, it  shall  then  be  in  the  power  of  the  legisla 
turetojoin  two  or  more  together,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  sending  a  representative :  Provided,  That 
when  there  arc  two  or  more  counties  adjoining, 
which  have  residuums  over  and  above  the  ratio 
then  fixc<l  by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when  ad 
ded  together,  will  amount  to  such  ratio;  in  iJiat 
case,  one  representative  shall  be  added  to  that 
county  having  the  largest  residuum." 

Here  is  the  principle  contained  in  the  old  con- 
stitution, amended  so  as  to  correspond  with  the 
indication  given  by  the  vote  of  the  convention 
this  morning,  of  what  should  constitute  the  ba- 
sis of  representation,  and  in  relation  to  tlie  talk- 
ing of  the  census  every  eight  years,  in  which  it 
corresponds  with  the  rej)ort  of  the  comnutloc 
I  am  not  particular  about  this  last  change,  and 
do  not  cure  whetlier  the  convention  fjialf  think 
proper  to  require  the  apporlionincnt  of  rcpro- 


!m 


mentation  on  the  returns  of  the  United  States 
census,  or  one  taken  every  eip^ht  years,  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  stat«i.  Under  the  old  plan  of  mak- 
ing the  apportionment  once  in  every  four  y<-ars, 
it  was  complained  of,  tliat  there  would  sometimes 
b<?  two  senators  residing  in  the  same  district, 
and  this,  at  least,  would  not  happen  more  than 
half  as  often  under  the  proposed  plan.  The 
plan  of  apportionment  in  the  present  constitu- 
tion, I  thiiiK,  the  people  are  satisfied  with  it,  and 
that  it  is  far  more  equal  in  its  operation  than 
would  be  tlie  plan  either  of  the  committee  or  the 
gtuitleman  from  Trig!^,  (Mr.  Boyd.)  The  plan 
of  the  committee — as  shown  by  the  tables  of  the 
gentleman  from  Montgomery — is  very  unequal. 
It  would  give  six  representatives  to  counties 
with  eight  thousand  nine  hundred,  and  only  the 
same  number  to  counties  with  ten  or  twelve 
thousand  voters.  That  clearly  is  a  greater  in- 
equality than  any  which  ever  existed  under  the 
f)rescnt  constitution.  If  it  is  thought  proper, 
lowever,  to  provide  here  for  an  apportionment 
by  districts,  I  should  much  prefer  that  of  the 
gentleman  from  Montgomery,  (Mr.  Apperson) 
as  being  more  equal,  to  that  of  the  gentleman 
from  Trigg.  I  have  made  some  cjuculations 
which  will  show  the  inequality  of  the  latter 
gentleman's  plan.  In  his  eleventh  and  twelfth 
districts,  lying  in  the  same  section  of  the  stat<3, 
there  is  a  residuum  of  one  thousand  three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  voters  not  represented.  These 
districts  are  composed  of  the  following  counties: 
Estill,  Owsley,  Breathitt,  Floyd,  Pike,  Perry, 
Letcher,  Clay,  Harlan,  Madison,  Rockcastle, 
Lincoln,  Laurel,  Casey,  Pulaski,  Whitley,  and 
Knox.  Now,  his  eighth  district,  with  a  residu- 
um of  only  seven  hundred  and  fifty -seven  votes, 
has  an  additional  representative  upon  that  re- 
siduum. This  district  is  composed  of  the  coun- 
ties of  Scott,  Harrison,  Pendleton,  Kenton, 
Campbell,  Nicholas,  Mason,  and  Bracken.  Now 
this  certainly  was  a  very  great  inequality.  Two 
•listricts  lying  together,  with  a  joint  residuum 
of  thirteen  hundred  and  eighteen,  were  to  have 
no  additional  representative,  while  another  dis- 
trict, with  a  residuum  of  only  seven  hundred 
and  fifty-seven,  has  an  additional  representa- 
tive. These  inequalities  show  the  plan  to  be 
imi>erfect,  and  not  so  well  adapted  to  the  situa- 
tion of  the  counties  as  the  plan  under  the  old 
constitution.  I  hope,  therefore,  we  shall  adhere 
to  the  old  constitution  on  this  subject,  amended 
as  I  have  proposed  in  my  proposition. 

Mr.  BOYD.  I  would  offer  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  amendment: 

"That  representation  shall  be  equal  and  uni- 
form in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  forev- 
er regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of 
qualified  free  white  citizens,  electors,  therein. 
The  house  of  representatives  shall  consist  of  one 
hundred  members,  and  to  secure  uniformity  and 
equality  of  representation  as  aforesaid,  the  state 
is  hereby  districted  into  twelve  districts. 

District  No.  1.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Fult«>n,  Hickman,  Graves,  Ballard,  McCrack- 
en,  Calloway,  Marshall,  and  Livingston. 

DisTBicT  No.  2.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Trigg,  Christian,  Caldwell,  Crittenden,  Union, 
Henderson,  and  Hopkins. 

DisTKicT  No.  3.    To  consist  of  the  counties  of 


Todd,  Muhlenbnrg,  Logan,  Simpson,  AHeu, 
Warren,  Butler,  and  £dmonson. 

District  No.  4.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Daviess,  Ohio,  Hancock,  Breckinridge,  (Jraysou, 
Hart,  Lame.  Hardin,  and  Meade. 

DisTRK-r  No.  5.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Monroe,  Barren,  Cumberland,  Clinton,  Adair, 
Green,  Taylor,  Wayne,  and  Rus.sell. 

District  No.  6.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Jefferson,  Bullitt,  Nelson,  Shelby,  Spencer, 
Washington,  and  Marion. 

District  No.  7.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Oldham.  Trimble,  Henry,  Franklin,  Owen,  Car- 
roll, Gallatin,  Grant,  and  Boone. 

District  No.  8.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Scott,  Harrison,  Pendleton,  Kenton,  Campbell, 
Nicholas,  Mason,  and  Bracken. 

District  No.  9.  To  consist  of  the  counties  of 
Fayette,  Woodford,  Bourljon,  Clarke,  Jessa- 
mine, Anderson,  Mercer,  Boyle,  and  Garrard. 

District  No.  10.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Lewis,  Fleming,  Bath,  Montgomery,  Morgan, 
Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  and  Johnson. 

District  No.  11.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Estill  Owsley,  Breathitt,  Floyd,  Pike,  Perry, 
Letcher,  Clay,  and  Harlan. 

District  No.  12.  To  consist  of  the  counties 
of  Madison,  Rockcastle,  Lincoln,  Laurel,  Casey, 
Pulaski,  Whitley,  and  Knox. 

lu  the  year  and  every  fourth  year 

tliereafter'  an  enumeration  of  all  the  free  white 
citizens  of  the  state  shall  be  made  in  such  man- 
ner as  shall  be  directed  by  law. 

In  the  several  years  of  making  such  enumera- 
tion, each  district  shall  be  entitled  to  represen- 
tatives equal  to  the  number  of  times  the  ratio 
is  contained  in  the  whole  number  of  free  white 
citizens  in  said  districts:  Provided,  That  the  re- 
maining representatives,  after  making  such  ap- 
Eortionment,  shall  be  given  to  tliose  districts 
aving  the  largest  unrepresented  fractions. 

Representatives  to  wnich  each  district  may  be 
entitled,  shall  be  apportioned  among  the  several 
counties,  cities,  and  towns,  of  the  dsitrict,  as 
near  as  may  be,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
free  white  citizens;  but  when  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  free  white  citizens  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and  when  the  ad- 
jacent county  or  counties,  within  the  district, 
may  not  have  a  residuum  or  residuums,  which, 
when  added  to  the  small  county,  would  entitle 
it  to  a  separate  representation,  it  shall  then  be 
in  the  power  of  the  general  assembly  to  jo  in  twoor 
more  together,  for  the  pui-pose  of  sending  a  rep- 
resentative: Provided,  That  when  there  are  two 
or  more  counties  adjoining,  and  in  the  same  dis- 
trict, which  have  residuums  over  and  above  the 
ratio  then  fixed  b}-^  law,  if  said  residuums,  when 
added  together,  will  amount  to  such  ratio,  in  that 
case,  one  representative  shall  be  added  to  the 
county  having  the  largest  residuum." 

As  I  remarked  on  a  fonner  occasion,  my  ob- 
ject in  proposing  this  plan  of  districting  the 
."^tateinto  representative  districts  was  to  prevent 
the  carrying  of  residuums  from  one  section  of 
the  state  to  another,  which  was  the  practice  un- 
der the  present  mode  of  apportionment.  It  does 
not  make  any  difference  whether  any  of  the 
districts  I  have  proposed  have  a  greater  or  less- 
er number  of  representatives,  so  that  each  get 
the  share  it  is  entitled  to,  according  to  the  ratio. 


GOO 


Tlie  gentleman  from  Montgomery  tlie  otlicr  day 
vjis  pleased  to  intimate  that  iu  making  these 
districts,  roajard   had  been  had  to  tlie  jjolitical 
strength  of  parties  in  these  districts.     To  satis- 
fy the  gentleman  and  all  others  that  I  had  not 
that  oV)jeet  in  view,  an  examination  of  my  pro- 
position only  is  required.     In   the  first  district 
composed  of  the  counties  of  Fulton,  Hickman, 
Graves,  Ballard,  McCracken,  Callaway,  and  Liv- 
ingston, they  would  have  their  full  ratio  of  five 
members  and  a  residuum  of  470;  that  residuum 
will  be  unrepresented,  and  the  district  is  demo- 
cratic by  about  1300  majority.     The  second  dis- 
trict will  be  fully  entitled  to  seven  members,  and 
there  would  be  a  residuum  of  1009  which  would 
entitle  it  to  an  additional   representative.     This 
will  fall  to  the  county  of  Christian  and  bo  ta- 
ken from  the  democratic  counties   of  Hopkins 
and  Caldwell.     It  would  be  the  whigs  therefore, 
who  would    gain    there.     The    Third    district 
Avould  be  entilled  to  seven  members,  and  there 
would  be  a  residuum  of  856,  and  be  entitled  to 
an  additional   representative.     That   district   is 
whig  by  some  1700  or   1800.     The  foui'th   dis- 
trict   would   have    eight    members,   and    there 
would  be  a  residuum  of  913  which  would    en- 
title it  to  an  additional  member.     The  district  is 
also  whig    by    some    1400.     The  fifth   district 
would  have  eight  members  and  a  residuum  of 
207.     The  district  is  democratic  by  about  200 
majority.    The  sixth  district  would  be  entitled 
to  twelve  members,  and  there  w^ould  be  a  large 
residuum  of  some  1224,  and  entitling  it  in  any 
way  to  an  additional  representative.     The   dis- 
trict is  Avhigby  some  1700  to  2000.     The  seventh 
district,  it  is  true,  gets  an  additional   member 
upon  a  residuum  of  735.     It  is  democratic,  and 
in  that  perhaps,  the  gentleman    may  find  sojne 
grounds  of  complaint.  The  eighth  district  would 
be, entitled  to  eleven  members  with  a  residuum 
of  7.35,  only   five  less  than  the  seventh,  and  it 
gets  no  additional    member.     It  is    democratic 
also.     There  is  but  one  district,  it  will  be  seen, 
where  there  is  any  considerable  residuum,  which 
gives  a  wiiig  majority,  Avhere  it  will  not  receive 
an  additional   member.     It  is   the  twelfth  dis- 
trict composed  of  the  loUowing  counties:  Estill, 
Owsley,  iireathitt,  Floyd,  Tike,  Perry,  Letcher, 
Clay  and  Harlan,  and  they  will  have  aresiduum 
of  740.     1   am  sure,  therefore,  that  there  is  no 
gentleman  but  what  is   satisfied  that  I  had  no 
such  intention,  as  was  insinuated  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Montgomery,  in  view  in  offering  my 
proposition.     No  plan  I  have  seen  is  more  fair 
and  equal  than  this,   except  that  of  my  friend 
from  Fulton,  which  is  certainly  more  equal,  but 
I  have  my  doubts  whether  it  is  practicable  in  its 
details. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say 
what  effect  the  alteration  of  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation may  have  in  the  sixth  section  of  the 
report,  but  if  that  change  had  been  made,  I  be- 
lieve the  section  notwithstanding  the  many  at- 
tempts that  have  been  made  upon  it,  would  have 
more  friends  here  than  it  now  seems  to  have. 
The  desire  of  all  is  to  agree  upon  some  plan  that 
will  forever  put  it  out  of  the  power  of  any  party 
that  may  be  m  the  majority  in  the  legislature  to 

gerrymander  the  state  for  their  particular  bene- 
t.    The    plan  of  tlie  committee,  if  the  relative 
strength  of  the  countied  continue  as  they  uow 


arc,  will  not  operate  more  injuriously  upon  any 
particular  section  of  country,  than  any  plan  we 
may  possibly  adopt.  I  have  made  up  a  calcula- 
tion upon  mature  reilection  and  examination, 
which  I  think,  will  satisfy  gentlemen  that  the 
plan  of  the  committee  is  about  iis  near  correct  as 
any  that  can  be  devised. 

All  the  calculations  are  based  upon  the  list 
furnished  the  convention  by  the  second  auditor, 
for  },he  year  1849,  of  white  male  citizens  over  the 
age  of  twenty  one  years,  and  not  by  the  qualified 
voters,  and  I  only  propose  to  show  how  the  sec- 
tion would  operate  under  this  list. 

By  the  first  provision  all  the  counties  that  have 
two  thirds  of  the  ratio  are  entitled  to  a  separate 
representative.  They  are,  Allen,  Anderson, 
Boyle,  Bullitt,  Carter,  Crittenden,  Calloway, 
Grant,  Grayson,  Green,  Hart,  Jessamine,  Knox, 
Larue,  Lewis,  Lincoln,  Montgomery,  Meade, 
Monroe,  Morgan,  Oldham,  Pendleton,  Simpson, 
Spencer,  Todd,  Taylor,  Trigg,  Trimble,  Union, 
Woodford,  Wayne,  and  Wliitley;  in  all  thirty 
two.  Larue,  with  1 ,013,  the  smallest,  and  Todd, 
with  1,499,  the  largest  county  in  the  list.  The 
thirty  two  counties  have  an  aggregate  popula- 
tion of  39,G26,  which  is  an  average  of  1,238  to  a 
representative,  and  an  actual  deficit  of  282  to 
each  county. 

The  counties  under  the  second  provision  hav- 
ing the  ratio,  and  not  two  thirds  over,  and  which 
will  not  under  this  plan  have  but  one  member, 
are,  Adair,  Bracken,  Breckinridge,  Boone,  Bath, 
Campbell,  Caldwell.  Clarke,  Daviess,  Franklin, 
Graves,  Greenup,  Garrard,  Hopkins,  Henry,  Har- 
rison, Bourbon,  Logan,  Mercer,  Marion,  Nicho- 
las, Owen,  Henderson,  Muhlenburg,  Scott,  and 
Washington,  in  all  twenty  seven;  with  an  ag- 
gregate population  of  50,543,  which  is  1872  to  a 
member,  or  a  surplus  of  352  in  each  county. 

The  cities  ami  counties  under  the  third  pro- 
vision, that  have  the  ratio  and  two  thirds  are, 
Louisville  city,  three.  Barren,  Fayette,  Hardin, 
Kenton,  Madison,  Mason,  Jefferson,  Pulaski, 
Shelby,  Fleming,  Christian,  and  Warren.  They 
will  have  two  representatives  each,  in  all  twenty 
four,  and  the  city  of  Louisville  three,  with  an 
aggregate  population  of  37,885,  or  1,403  to  each 
mcnd)er,anda  deficit  of  117  to  each  representa- 
tive. The  counties  of  Hardin,  Pulaski,  Shelby, 
Fleming,  Christian,  and  Warren  have  two  mem- 
bers each,  under  the  last  provision  of  the  sixth 
section,  which  gives  to  the  largest  unn^presented 
fraction  the  surplus  members,  notwithstanding 
the  counties  of  Christian  and  Warren  have  not 
the  ratio  and  one  hcdf  of  the  ratio,  and  yet  com- 
plaint is  made  that  counties  near  their  numbers 
are  treated  badly  by  this  section. 

The  remainder  of  the  counties  under  the  fourtli 
provision  are  attached  together  under  tAvo  pro- 
visions of  this  section:  firet,  small  counties  with 
less  than  two  Uiirds  of  the  ratio  attached  togeth- 
er. Secondly,  where  there  is  no  similar  adjacent 
county,  they  are  united  with  the  smallest  contig- 
uous county.  Caisey  and  Russell  one,  Ohio  .and 
Hancock  one,  Estill  and  Owsley  one,  Breathitt, 
Perry  and  Letcher  one,  Ballard  and  McCracken 
one,  Butler  and  Edmonson  one,  Carroll  and  Gal- 
latin one,  Cumberland  and  Clinton  one.  Clay 
and  Harlan  one,  Floyd  and  Pike  one,  Hickman 
and  Fulton  one,  Lawrence  and  Johnson  one, 
Kookcastle  and  Laurel  one,  Livingston  and  Mar- 


601 


shall  one.  These  twenty  nine  counties  have  an  j  adopted,  those  counties  will  only  have  eleven' 
aggregate  population  of  26,450,  or  1 ,888  to  each  |  members,  thereby  depriving  that  region  of  two 
member,  and  a  surplus  of  368  to  each  member,  i  representatives,  to  which  it  is  justly  entitled. 
So  that  the  twenty  nine  counties  attached  to-  i  It  may  be  said  that  I  am  actuated  by  interested 
gether  to  send  fourteen  members  have  a  larger  motives,  but  in  this  matter  I  only  claim  clear 
surplus  fraction  than  any  other  lot  of  counties,  [justice.  I  represent,  as  I  believe,  a  just  people, 
Still  this  is  said  to  be  a  proposition  for  the  ben- 1  and  I  want  to  convince  them  that  justice  has 
'  cfit  of  the  small  counties.  j  been  administered  to  them  as  well  as  to  all  oth- 

This  gives  fifty  nine  counties  a  separate  repre- 1  er  portions  of  the  state.  And  who  gains  the 
seutative.  They  have  an  aggregate  population  ,  representatives  that  we  lose?  Their  are  gained  by 
of  90,159,  and  an  average  to  each  member  of  the  small  counties  in  the  southwest  that  have  but 
152S — ^TS'ithin  eight  of  the  ratio. 


Under  the  present  apportionment  fifty  seven 
counties  have  separate  members.  At  tlie  time 
the  apportionment  was  made,  Russell,  the  smal- 
lest, had  but  822,  and  Pulaski,  the  largest,  had 
2156  votes,  by  this  plan  Larue  with  1013  has  a 
member,  and  Campbell,  the  largest,  has  2182, 
which  is  much  nearer  equality  than,the  old  plan, 
when  comparing  counties  represented  by  a  sin- 
gle member.     I  have  not  examined  what  would 


two  thirds  of  the  ratio.  Is  it  fair  that  the  resid- 
oums  belonging  to  this  section  of  the  state 
should  be  rolled  to  the  opposite  extreme?  It 
would  give  to  them,  when  questions  came  up  in 
the  legislature  aflfecting  particular  localities,  a 
decided  advantage  over  the  section  from  which 
I  came.  With  these  views,  I  am  decidedly  of 
the  opinion  that  the  principle  contained  in  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg  is 
much  more  correct,  and  awards  even  handed 


be  the  effect  politically,  but  I  have  tmderstood  |  justice  to  everv  portion  of  the  state.  The  twelve 
from  a  friend,  who  generally  attends  to  such  different  localities  would  have  their  fair  repre - 
matters,  that  there  would  be  about  sixty  whigs  j  sentation  in  the  house,  and  therefore  the  plaii  in 
and  fortv  democrats,  if  the  counties  voted  as  |  this  respect,  woidd  operate  far  more  upon  the 
usual.  1  find  that  in  this  respect,  there  is  i  principle  of  even  justice.  I  hope  gentlemen 
positively  no  difrerenee  between  the  plan  of  the  I  will  take  the  matter  into  consideration,  and  if 


committee  and  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Mont 
gomery,  which  seemed  to  meet  with  so  much  fa- 
vor here.  But  there  was  this  difference  in  the  new 
plan.  The  one  reported  by  the  committee,  re- 
quires the  legislature  under  any  and  all  circum- 
stances to  confine  themselves  to  numbers  which 
might  not  be  the  case  under  the  plan  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Montgomery.  I  have  not  fully  ex- 
amined the  plan  of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg, 
but  I  am  fully  satisfied  that  in  both  his  and  that 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Christain,  there 
would  be  a  greater  inequality  between  the  coun- 
ties than  could  possibly  arise  under  the  plan  of 
the  committee.  I  have  no  personal  interest  in 
this  matter,  as  my  county  can  in  no  case  be  af- 
fected by  any  apportionment,  and  my  only  de- 
sire is  to  guard  against  the  improper  adjustment 
of  the  matter  hereafter  by  any  party  which  may 
be  in  power  in  the  legislature. 

Mr.  DESHA.  From  the  reflection  that  1  have 
given  the  subject,  I  have  been  letl  to  believe 
that  the  principle  contained  in  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg  is  more  correct 
than  any  tliat  has  been  submitted,  or  that  I  can 
conceive.     The  twelve  different  localities  to  be 

f)rovided  for  under  it,  would  leave  to  the  legis- 
aturebut  little  discretion  in  the  manner  of  rol- 
ling residuums  as  they  have  heretofore.  They  are 
compelled  to  be  confined  to  the  district  in  which 
they  occur,  and  thus  each  and  every  locality  in 


they  have  not  made  their  calculations,  will  look 
to  it,  and  .see  how  they  are  all  affected,  if  the 
principle  proposed  b}-  the  committee  is  adopted. 
Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  have  made  up  my  mind 
to  vote  for  the  substitute  presented  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Trigg,  believing  it  to  approach  near- 
er to  equality  in  representation  than  any  other 
that  I  have  seen  or  can  conceive  of.  I  prefer  it 
to  the  plan  under  the  existing  constitution,  as 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  and 
I  differ  with  him  when  he  as-serts  that  there  has 
been  no  fault  found  in  the  country  against  the 
present  constitution  on  that  account.  There  was 
great  complaint,  to  my  knowledge,  on  the  sub- 
ject. If  he  wUl  remember,  he  will  find  that  in 
the  celebrated  platform  laid  down  by  the  friends 
of  constitutional  refonn,  to  which  some  gentle- 
men attach  a  great  deal  of  consequence,  this  ve- 
ry subject  is  complained  of  as  one  of  the  wrongs 
in  the  present  constitution  which  requires  amend- 
ment. Some  statesmen  in  by-gone  days,  and  of 
very  considerable  experience  too,  have  held  that 
it  was  utterly  impracticable,  under  the  present 
constitution,  to  apportion  representation  equal- 
ly. We  can  only  approximate  to  it  as  near  as 
possible,  and  tlus  I  think  is  done  by  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg.  Of  the 
twelve  districts  into  which  he  divides  the  state, 
but  six  of  these  dis^tricts  have  any  residu- 
ums, and  the  great  principle  is  sought  to  be  es- 


the  state  will  be  fairly  represented  in  the  house    tablished  there  of  settling  representation  in  each 


of  representntives.  By  the  plan  reported  by  the 
committee,  the  region  of  country  from  which  I 
come  would  be  deprived  of  two  representatives. 
Bv  reference  to  the  second  auditor's  report,  it 
"Will  be  seen  that  the  counties  of  Mason,  Brack- 
en, Nicholas,  Harrison,  Pendleton,  Campbell. 
Kenton,  Boone,  and  Grant,  embrace  in  the  aggre- 
gate a  voting  population  of  18,756.  The  ratio 
being  1520  would  entitle  these  counties  to  thir- 
teen representatives,  if  it  be  determined  that  the 
house  of  representatives  shall  consist  as  now  of 
one  hundred  members;  whereas,  if  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  legislative  department  be 
76 


locality,  and  of  preventing  residuums  being 
rolled  beyond  the  districts  where  they  arise.  Bj 
this  arrangement,  the  largest  unrepresented  re- 
siduum in  any  one  district  would  be  735;  and  ta- 
king all  the  ai:?tricts  together,  the  unrepresented 
residuums  would  amount  to  only  3140.  Believ- 
ing that  no  system  can  be  proposed  which  will 
be  founil  to  approximate  so  nearly  to  just  and 
equal  apportionment,  I  shall  vote  for  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg.  I  amat  any 
rate  decidedly  against  the  provisions  of  the  old 
constitution  on  the  subject. 
Mr.  JACKSOX.    I  came  here  -with  the  design 


GO-2 


to  effect  certain  changes  in  our  constitution,  such 
as  were  demanded  by  the  citizens  of  the  state. 
I  did  not  come  here  to  alter  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation, nor  can  I  aid  in  doing  it;  but  if  the 
vote  taken  this  morning  on  the  proposition  sub- 
mitted by  tlie  gentleman  from  Simpson  be  an  in- 
dex to  the  mind  of  the  convention,  then  a  most 
unexpected  alteration  in  that  basis  will  be  effect- 
ed. Nor  did  I  come  here  to  cut  up  cities  into 
tepresentative  districts,  and  thus  destroy  their 
unity;  but  this  has  been  effected. 

I  did  hope  to  preserve  to  some  extent  that  car- 
dinal conservative  principle,  recognised  in  our 
present  constitution,  in  relation  to  the  senatorial 
representation  of  the  state,  and  with  that  view  I 
offered  my  amendment  yesterday,  which,  be- 
ing ruled  out  of  order,  was  offered  by  my  friend 
from  Scott,  (Mr.  Johnson)  to-day;  but  that  great 
principle  has  been  overthrown. 

In  relation  to  the  apportionment,  it  is  certain- 
ly to  be  desired  that  we  adopt  some  plan  for  ap- 
portioning representation,  which  will  he  as  far  as 
possible  just  and  accurate  in  its  results.  1  am 
sensible  of  the  difficulty  of  the  task.  After  cast- 
ing my  eye  over  the  various  plans  submitted  for 
this  purpose,  I  am  convinceci  that  the  one  sub- 
mitted by  the  gentleman  from  Trigg,  approxi- 
mates as  near  to  correctness  as  we  may  hope  to 
arrive,  and  I  Avill  give  it  my  support,  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  amendment  offered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Christian. 

Mr.  GRAY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 
The  question  was  then  taken  on   substituting 
Mr.  Boyd's  proposition  for  that  of  Mr.  Gray,  and 
it  was  agreed  to,  yeas  49,  nays  38,  as  follows: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coftev,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copeliu,  \^illiam  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis, 
William  Hendrix,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Tliomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.Kavanaugh, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K, 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.McHenry, 
David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thom- 
as P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  New- 
cum,  Hugh  Nesvell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry 
B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  John  D.  Taylor,  John  Wheeler, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wrightr-49. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Thomas  D.Brown,  Charles 
Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Garrett  Davis, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew  Hoo<l,  Tliomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, James  W.  Irwin,  George  W.  Johnston, 
Charles  C.  Kelley,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  D.  Morris,  William  Preston, 
Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Trip- 
lett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 38. 
Th«  question  was  then  taken  on  sub.stituting 


Mr.  BOYD'S  proposition  for  the  sixth  section, 
as  reported  by  the  committee,  and  it  was  reject- 
ed, yeas  34,  nays,  53,  as  follows; 

\  EAS — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow, Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jessee  Coffey,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Lucius  Desha,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  William-  Hen- 
drix, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Wil- 
liam Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K, 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  Tlumias  P.  Moore,  Jona- 
than Neweum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spal- 
ding, John  W.  Stevenson,  John  Wheeler — 34. 

Nays — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person, John  L.  Ballinger,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vin- 
cent S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Jan^ies  M.  Lackey, 
Thomas  W. Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  John  H. 
McHnery,  David  Meriwether,  John  D.  Morris, 
James  M.  Nesbit,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G,  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wil- 
liam R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  SilasWoodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 53. 
Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  amend  the  6th  sec- 
tion by  striking  out  the  words  "qualified  voters 
therein,"  and  substituting  the  following:  "  free 
white  inhabitants  of  such  county,  toAvn,  or 
city,  and  who  shall  be  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  and  residents  of  the  state  two  years,  or 
of  the  county,  town,  or  city,  one  year  next  pre- 
ceding the  enumeration,  or  chililren  born  with- 
in one  year,  of  mothers  who  are  entitled  to 
be  enumerated." 

It  was  designed  merely  to  carry  out,  in  the 
section,  the  idea  in  the  amendment  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Simpson,  adopted  by  the  convention 
this  morning. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  conclude,  from 
the  vote  given  this  morning,  that  it  is  the  settled 
purpose  of  the  convention  to  cliange  the  basis 
of  representation.  I  could  add  something  to 
what  I  said  this  morning  upon  the  subject,  but 
I  will  not  detain  the  committee  with  any  addi- 
tional re.asous  why  I  am  not  in  favor  of  doing  it 
at  this  time,  except  that  I  think  we  may  be  mis- 
led by  adverting  to  the  tabular  statements  pre- 
sented by  the  Auditor's  report,  as  to  its  effect  or 
operation.  1  was  not  mistaken  in  supposing, 
this  morning,  that  it  was  the  warfare  oetween 
the  rural  districts  and  the  cities,  that  in  some 
degree  led  to  this  innovation  upon  the  basis  of 
representation.  The  tendency  of  population  iu 
our  state  is  found  to  be,  I  admit,  to  the  borders 
of  the  state,  and  gentlemen  will  be  mistaken  if 
they  do  not  suppose  that  tendency  will  be  as 
great,  aye,  greater  for  the  next  fifty  years.     So 


603 


far  as  relates  to  the  purpose   •which  this   ameud- : 
ment  is  calculated  to  effect,  time  will  prove  that 
it  has  beeu  founded  in  a  mistake. 

I  suppose  it  is  the  intention  of  gentlemen  j 
who  vrian  this  innovation,  that  all  the  citizens  ' 
of  Kenl\icky,  native  born  and  qualified  voters  , 
shall  be  enumerated  somewhere  in  this  common-  i 
wealth,  when  the  assessors  are  directed  to  take 
the  enumeration.  Ours  is  rather  amoving  popu- 
lation, and  a  large  portion  of  ournative  popula- 
tion are  in  the  habit  of  changing  their  residence. 
Now  if  a  citizen  of  Madison,  in  the  month  of 
July,  shall  remove  to' Allen,  though  he  may 
have  a  familv  and  become  a  resident,  yet  the 
resolution  adopted  this  morning,  forbids  him 
and  his  family  to  be  enumerated  until  he  has 
been  a  resident  of  the  county  twelve  months  be- 
fore he  is  a5.<essed,  and  becomes  a  part  of  the 
basis  upon  which  representation  is  authorized. 
All  will  find  by  referring  to  the  resolution 
adopted  this  morning,  that  such  will  be  its  ef- 
fect. Was  it  the  intention  of  the  convention 
thus  to  exi:lude  native  born  citizens  who  might 
be  removing  from  one  county  to  another  for  per- 
manent or  temporary  residence? 

Mr.  HARDlS'.  A  reference  to  the  books  of 
the  census  aud  the  tables  of  population  ex- 
hibits the  fact,  that  the  population  of  women 
and  children  in  the  country  is  much  larger  than 
in  the  town.  1  can  show  that  it  is  so  in  any 
county  in  the  state,  if  gentlemen  desire  it.  Go 
to  Malthus  on  population,  the  best  author  that 
has  ever  written  on  the  subject,  and  he  gives 
you  the  tables  of  the  population  of  every  city 
*iid  country  in  Europe,  and  they,  in  all  cases, 
«how  that  there  is  a  greater  proportion  of  men 
in  the  town  than  in  the  country,  in  the  same 
amount  of  population.  And  the  reason,  as  as- 
signed by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson  this 
morning  is,  that  the  people  in  the  country  are 
more  inclined  to  marry  than  in  the  town.  The 
same  reason  is  given  by  Malthus,  and  is  explain- 
ed by  the  fact  that  men  have  not  the  means, 
do  not  own  land  and  houses,  and  if  they  do, 
may  not  possess  the  inclination.  As  to  the 
objection  of  my  colleague,  (Mr.  Wickliffe,)  the 
amendment  might  be  liable  to  it  if  the  word 
"and"  instead  of  "or"  had  been  u.sed,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  requirements  of  residence.  The 
amendment  also  provides  for  the  enumeration  of 
children  born  within  the  year,  because  it  is  said 
soraewliere,  they  are  to  come  uuto  the  Lord,  and 
I  think  they  ought  to  be  taken  care  of.  I  liavc 
no  feeling  on  the  subject  myself,  and  have  in- 
troduced the  amendment  merely  to  carry  out 
what  I  suppo.se  from  the  vote  this  morning,  to 
be  the  settled  purpose  of  the  house  in  regard  to 
the  basis  of  representation. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  My  objection  to 
changing  the  basis  of  representation  is  not 
based  upoa  the  question  whether  more  children 
are  born  ia  the  county  or  in  the  town,  but  on 
higher  grounds.  We  should  not  throw  into 
the  element  of  representation  either  property, 
territory,  or  human  beings  who  cannot  act  la  the 
selection  of  the  public  servants. 

Ajad  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  NOVEMBER  21,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

B.VSIS  OF  REPRESEXTATIOX. 

Mr.  BROWN  gave  notice  of  a  motion  to  re- 
consider the  vote  taken  yesterday  adopting  the 
resolution  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Simp- 
sou,  (Mr.  Clarke.) 

LEGISL.VTIVE  DEP.\ETiIEXT. 

The  convention  then  resumed  the  considera- 
tion of  the  article  reported  by  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  convention  adjourned 
last  evening  after  a  few  remarks  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wiclcliffe.)  which 
attracted  mv  attention,  and  for  a  moment  alarm- 
ed me.  I  thought  if  I  had  allowed  a  provision 
to  pass  without  my  usual  watchfulness,  that 
could  bear  the  construction  which  the  gentle- 
man gave  it,  I  had  done  that  which  I  did  not 
intend.  The  purport  of  the  gentleman's  re- 
marks was,  that  if  this  resolution  was  not  alter- 
ed the  free  white  inhabitants  would  not  be 
enumerated  unless  they  had  been  born  in  Ken- 
tucky, and  had  also  resided  in  the  town  orcoun- 
tv  two  years.  On  reading  it  over.  I  thought 
there  might  be  something  in  it.  But  on  further 
examination,  I  am  satisfied  it  will  not  bear  the 
construction  which  was  put  upon  it,  and  that 
it  should  not  be  altered,  provided  the  principle 
is  right.  Our  present  constitution  provides 
that, 

"In  all  elections  for  representatives,  every 
free  male  citizen  (negroes,  mulattoes  and  Indians 
excepted.)  who,  at  the  time  being,  hath  attained! 
to  tlie  age  of  twenty  one  years,  and  resided  in 
the  state  two  years,  or  the  county  or  town  in 
which  he  offers  to  vote  one  year  next  preceding 
the  election,  shall  enjoy  the  right  of  an  elector; 
but  no  person  shall  be  entitled  to  vote,  except  in 
the  county  in  which  he  may  actually  reside  at 
the  time  of  the  election,  except  as  herein  other- 
wise provided." 

The  provision  now  proposed  makes  all  who 
have  resided  in  the  county,  town,  or  city,  one 
year  preceding  the  census  or  enumeration  of  the 
people,  (aliens  not  naturalized  excepted,)  the 
basis  of  representation. 

It  is  be-st  always  in  writing  out  an  instrument 
which  is  to  last  for  ages,  as  1  hope  this  constitu- 
tion will,  to  use  language  to  which  a  construc- 
tion has  been  given,  with  which  we  are  familiar, 
provided  it  corresponds  to  the  course  we  wish 
to  pursue.  The  old  constitution  says  "every 
free  male."  The  word  free  is  surplusage,  because 
whites  are  free  of  course.  The  language  is  pre- 
cisely that  which  is  used  in  the  resolution  which 
this  house  adopted,  with  the  exception  of  the 
words  relating  to  a  residence  of  one  year  in  the 
town,  county,  or  city,  preceding  the  election. 
If  not  born  in  the  state,  out  having  resided  one 
year  in  the  county,  town,  or  city,  you  are  a  citi- 
zen. I  would  prefer  that  the  resolution  should 
be  so  altered  as  to  agree,  word  for  word,  with 
the  old  constitution,  and  also  adopt  the  resolu- 
tion, that  where  the  party  has  resided  in  the 
state  two  years,  he  shall  be  enumerated,  al- 
though he  has  not  resided  in  thecounly  of  towa 
one  year. 

When  in  order,  I  will  move  to  strike  out  all 
of  that  part  of  the  sixth  section  of  the  present 


604 


report,  which  comes  in  contact  with  this,  which 
I  propose  to  oflFer,  and  insert  this  in  lieu  of  it. 
It  will  save  the  very  difficulty  into  which  we 
have  sometimes  fallen  in  the  old  constitution — 
the  difficulty  of  construction.  That  is  a  thing 
on  which  I  wish  to  keep  my  eje  fixed,  to  leave 
is  little  as  possible  to  judicial  construction. 
The  principles  are  not  the  same  in  two  respects, 
as  the  house  will  see. 

.  "At  the  first  session  of  the  general  assembly 
?ift«r  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  and  every 
eighth  year  thereafter,  the  general  assembly 
shall  cause  an  enumeration  to  be  made  of  the 
representative  population  of  this  commonw'ealth, 
and  sucli  a  ratio  shall  be  fixed  as  will  give  one 
hundred  representatives,  which  shall  be  divided 
among  the  different  counties,  cities,  and  towns, 
in  the  following  ratio:  Each  county,  city,  or 
town,  having  two-thirds  of  such  ratio  shall  be 
entitled  to  one  representative:  each  county,  city, 
or  town,  having  the  full  ratio  and  two-thirds 
over,  shall  have  two  representatives;  and  when 
any  county,  city,  or  town,  shall  have  less  than 
two-thirds  of  the  ratio,  it  shall  be  added  to 
the  next  adjoining  county  having  the  smallest 
representative  population:  and  if,  when  thus 
added,  the  two  counties  shall  have  the  full  ratio 
and  two-thirds  over,  they  shall  together,  be  en- 
titled to  two  representatives." 

Some  advantage  is  gained  here  by  the  clear- 
ness of  expression,  leaving  little  to  construction. 
Another  matter  in  which  it  differs  is,  it  au- 
thorizes the  legislature  to  vary  from  seventy 
five  to  one  hundred  representatives.  I  am  op- 
posed to  that,  and  I  believe  the  convention  will 
DC.  Wiien  it  is  necessary  to  decrease  or  increase 
for  party  purposes,  they  can  do  it  to  some  ex- 
extent,  as  they  formerly  rolled  residuums  from 
one  part  of  the  state  to  the  other.  It  is  better  to 
have  it  fixed  in  the  constitution.  Who  has  a 
better  right  to  say  how  many  representatives 
Kentucky  shall  have  than  this  conventionV 

Mr.  C.'A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  remarks  I  made 
last  evening,  were  more  immediately  directed  to 
the  amendment  offered  to  the  section  under  con- 
sideration, and  a  little  reflection  and  examina- 
tion of  that  amendment,  have  not  changed  my 
own  opinion  of  the  proper  construction  and  rea- 
ding of  it,  nor  do  I  rise  to  extend  any  philologi- 
cal disctissiou  on  the  article.  But  1  suggest  to 
my  friend  to  take  that  article  and  read  it.  I 
think  it  proposes  to  enumerate  all  persons  who 
pay  taxes,  though  not  entitled  to  vote;  that  you 
propose  to  make  population  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation; that  you  intend  to  enumerate  all  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States,  who  are  inhabitants 
living  within  any  county.  Do  I  imderstand  the 
advocates  of  the  amendraentV  I  will  put  the  case. 
A  citizen  removes  from  Indiana  into  Kentucky 
with  his  property,  or  from  Tennessee,  or  Virgin- 
ia, being  a  native  bom  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  and  will  not  be  entitled  to  vote  for  two 
years.  But  do  you  not  intend  to  have  liim  enu- 
merated? Your  resolution  does  not  reach  him, 
according  to  my  construction. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  It  is  perfectly  apparent  that 
if  a  family  move.s  across  the  Oliio  tlie  day  be- 
fore the  election,  they  should  not  be  enumerated, 
and  it  was  to  prevent  frauds  that  a  residence  of 
one  year  was  required.  Ono  of  the  causes  of 
complaint  against  the  river  counties  and  cities 


is,  that  with  great  ease  they  could  import  voters 
when  voters  were  the  basis  of  representation. 
Unless  you  require  aresidenceof  sometime  with- 
in a  city,  county,  or  town,  you  do  not  got  clear 
of  that  fraud.  On  the  contrary,  you  leave  it  wi- 
der than  before,  because  if  they  could  move  vo- 
ters across  the  Ohio,  now  they  can  remove  fami- 
lies, and  by  enumeration  would  increase  the  rep- 
resentation from  that  city  or  county.  Therefore, 
it  was  proper  thataresidence  of  some  time  should 
be  required.  How  long  a  residence?  Tlie  pro- 
bability is,  that  if  they  live  in  a  county  for  one 
year,  they  will  feel  an  interest  in  the  state,  and 
should  be  added  to  the  population.  It  is  only 
those  whose  interests  are  identified  with  Ken- 
tucky that  Kentucky  should  represent.  We 
ought  not  to  represent  those  who  have  no  Ken- 
tucky feelings  or  interests.  I  am  willing  that 
those  who  liave  resided  in  the  state  two  years 
should  be  added,  although  they  have  not  resided 
in  the  city  or  county  one  year,  and  thus  place 
them  on  the  same  footing  that  voters  formerly 
occupied. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  constitution  now  requires 
that  a  man  should  have  lived  two  years  in  the 
state  and  one  year  in  the  county,  immediately 
preceding  the  election.  If  he  has  resided  in  the 
state  two  years,  he  may  vote,  although  he  has 
not  resided  in  the  county  one  week.  The  pres- 
ent provision  of  the  report  requires  all  tliat  the 
present  constitution  requires,  in  the  eighth  sec- 
tion, with  this  addition,  that  they  must  have  re- 
sided in  the  precinct,  town,  or  county,  sixty  days ; 
and  further,  that  each  voter  must  vote  in  the  pre- 
cinct in  which  he  lives;  because,  before  that  time 
he  miglit  vote  in  different  precincts.  I  know  a 
man  who  once  voted  in  three  precincts  in  one 
day.  This  is  a  wise  provision,  that  they  shall 
vote  only  in  the  precinct  "where  they  live,  and 
shall  have  lived  in  that  precinct  sixty  days  be- 
fore the  election.  I  recollect  there  was  a  whig 
out  at  the  furnace  in  Bullitt  county,  who  went 
over  into  Hardin  and  Grayson,  and  hired  a  num- 
ber of  wood-choppers  ten  days  before  an  elec- 
tion. That  is  what  they  call  in  the  state  of  New 
York  "pipe  laying."  It  was  to  prevent  that,  that 
a  residence  of  sixty  days  was  required.  This 
provision  requires  that  the  qualifications  of  those 
enumerated  shall  come  up  to  those  contained  in 
the  eighth  section;  that  is,  they  shall  be  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  residents  of  the  state  two 
years,  and  of  the  county  sixty  days.  Whatever 
would  qualify  a  man  to  vote,  would  qualify  him 
to  be  enumerated. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  offer  the  following  substi- 
tute for  the  amendment  of  the  senior  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin.)  Strike  out  the 
words,  "qualified  voters,"  and  insert,  "free  white 
inhabitants." 

We  have  heard  this  subject  discussed  with  a 
great  deal  of  ability  in  this  liouse,  and  though 
differing  from  my  colleagues  in  my  vote,  I  went 
for  the  resolution  offered  by  the  gentleman  from 
Simpson,  and  am  preparcU  to  maintain  it,  hnd 
not  only  to  maintain  it,  but  to  proceed  a  step  be- 
yond it.  I  listened  with  no  little  pleasure,  to  the 
senior  gentleman  from  Nelson,  when  he  proposed 
and  advocated  liis  amendment  yosterday.  He 
invoked  the  authority  of  tlie  federal  government, 
cited  the  practice  of  our  sister  states,  and  pro- 
posed  that   a  different  basis  of  representation 


603 


should  be  introduced  into  the  commonwealth  of 
Kentucky.  Now,  the  right  of  suffrage  is  one 
thing,  and  the  basis  of  representation  another. 

For  instance,  under  the  federal  constitution 
three  fifths  of  the  negroes  in  Kentucky  are  rep- 
resented. They  enter  into  the  basis  of  repie- 
sentation,  and  fall  within  the  enumeration,  but 
they  constitute  no  part  of  the  voting  population. 
And  so  far  as  I  understand,  those  states  of  the 
union  that  have  adopted  white  inhabitants — in- 
cluding the  women  and  children — as  the  basis  of 
enumeration,  not  one  has  deemed  it  nece.ssary  to 
place  the  same  guards  around  it  that  they  do 
around  tlie  right  of  suffrage;  but  simply  state 
that  the  white  inhabitaut^i  are  to  be  enumerated. 
Thus  the  federal  constitution  operates,  and  you 
eimmerate  every  alien  in  this  state  in  order  to 
send  our  represt^ntativos  to  congress.  The  rea- 
son of  that  enumeration  was  the  one  referred  to 
by  the  gentleman  yesterday;  that  is,  the  alien 
pays  taxes,  as  well  as  the  women  and  children, 
and  that  motive  has  induced  mo-st  of  the  states 
of  the  union — fourteen,  as  I  find  from  examina- 
tion— not  to  make  the  qualified  voters  the  basis 
of  enumeration,  but  the  free  inhabitants  of  the 
several  states.  I  would  direct  attention  to  the 
list  of  .states,  and  mention,  in  order  to  be  brief, 
that  there  are  three  bases  of  enumeration,  in  the 
states  of  the  union.  First,  qualified  voters;  se- 
cond, inhabitants — (in  .some,  free  white  inhabi- 
tants, in  others,  are  enumerated  free  negroes) — 
and  in  the  third,  it  is  arbitrary,  thus : 

Wisconsin,  Texas,  Indiana,  Tennessee,  New 
Jersey,  Maine,  and  Kentucky,  require  an  enu- 
meration to  be  made  of  qualified  voters;  making 
six  states  of  the  union.  But  Iowa,  Texas,  aud 
Missouri  require  the  white  inhabitants  to  be 
enumerated.  Michigan  requires  the  whole  pop- 
ulation to  be  enumerated,  free  negroes  and  oth- 
ers. Ohio,  and  our  sister  states,  Alabama,  Mis- 
sissippi, and  South  Carolina,  require  the  free 
white  inhabitants  to  be  enumerated,  with  no  re- 
strictions, such  as  the  gentleman  desires  to  be 
thrown  around  them.  Pennsylvania  requires 
those  who  pay  taxes  to  constitute  the  basis. 
New  York  makes  it  broad,  and  applies  it  to  all 
her  inhabitants,  excluding  simply  aliens.  Con- 
necticut uses  the  broad  worcf,  "population" — 
Rhode  Island  the  same — Massachu.setts,  "inhab- 
itants," and  some  arbitrary  provisions.  Taxa- 
tion is  the  ba*is  in  North  Carolina.  The  state 
of  Georgia  adopts  the  federal  plan  of  enumera- 
ting three-fifths  of  the  negroes.  Virginia,  Ma- 
ryland, Delaware,  New  Hampshire,  and  Ver- 
mont are  arbitrary  in  their  provisions. 

Now,  what  I  mean  to  say  is  this :  that  Ken- 
tucky and  her  six  sister  states  use  the  term,  qual- 
ified voters,  in  forming  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion. Fourteen  of  the  states  have  generally  de- 
clared for  the  free  white  inhabitants;  some  of 
them,  however — the  northern  states — making  a 
variation  in  relation  to  free  negres,  to  form  the 
basis  of  representation.  In  order  to  be  consis- 
tent, we  have  to  come  to  one  of  those  three 
plans. 

But  what  is  the  necessity  of  throwing  the 
guards  around  the  enumeration  which  the  gen- 
tleman has  introduced?  Are  we  to  invest  the 
census  taker  with  the  power  of  judging  whether 
an  alien  has  received  his  naturalization  papers 
or  not?    Are  we  to  give  him  the  right  of  saying 


whether  a  man  is  a  citizen  or  not?.  Is  there  any 
state  in  the  union  that  constitutes  a  census  taker 
to  bo  a  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  citizens? 
Is  he  like  a  man  midwife,  to  tell  the  period  of 
tlie  birth  oi  children?  Is  he  to  proceed  and  as- 
certain how  long  a  man  has  been  in  the  country? 
and  cross  question  him  about  his  domestic  af- 
fairs? With  what  compulsory  powers  is  he  to 
be  invested?  These  exist,  and  are  exercised  on- 
ly, by  the  judges  of  election;  but  they  are  ab- 
solutely unknown  to  the  cen.sus  taker,  either  un- 
der the  federal  or  state  government.  It  is  per- 
fectly impracticable  in  itself.  Now,  this  is  the 
first  great  practical  difficulty  inthrowing  guards 
around  the  enumeration.  1'he  gentleman  from 
Daviess  says,  unless  you  throw  guards  around 
the  mode  of  taking  the  enumeration,  and  unless 
you  make  the  census  taker,  he  says,  the  judge 
in  this  case,  you  will  be  flooded  by  immigration 
from  all  tlie  neighboring  states  around  our  bor- 
ders. Is  not  the  fear  absolutely  idle?  It  is  a 
hard  enough  thing  to  colonize  the  real  voters 
when  a  pressing  election  is  near  at  hand,  for  the 

Eurpose  of  making  an  enumeration  in  the  city, 
ul  to  set  to  work  a  year  before  the  legislature 
meets  in  this  Jiall,  to  frame  its  apportionment 
bill,  and  get  men,  women,  and  children  all  hud- 
dled together — because  a  cliild  does  just  as  well 
as  a  man  under  this  plan — and  bring  them  across 
to  Kentucky  to  be  represented,  is  absurd,  and 
not  at  all  likelv  to  take  place. 

Mr.  TRIPLfiTT.  I  expressly  said  the  object 
of  putting  in  one  year,  was  to  prevent  their  be- 
ing brought  in,  as  heretofore,  just  before  the 
election. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  It  amounts  to  the  same 
thing.  The  fear  is  perfectly  unfounded.  The 
city  of  Louisville,  it  is  said,  is  not  bles.sed  with 
the  same  number  of  children  as  the  country — 
that  she  is  not  so  prolific  as  the  counties.  Gen- 
tlemen go  to  a  certain  extent  in  reference  to  form- 
ing a  basis.  I  am  willing  to  go  further.  We 
have  some  fifteen  hundred  children  in  the  coun- 
ties of  Hart,  Todd,  Logan,  and  Trigg,  more  than 
Louisville  has.  It  seems  to  be  made  an  incident 
in  the  proposed  restriction.  I  was  willing  to  do 
any  thing  fair,  and  I  voted  for  it,  and  I  will  not 
only  sustain  the  gentleman  iu  that,  but  I  will 
vote  to  put  the  whole  population  of  the  state  in, 
and  carry  that  principle  out  to  tlie  extent  to 
which  fourteen  states  have  gone.  I  will  give 
him  all  the  assistance  I  can,  in  the  furtherance 
of  his  plan.  To  return  to  the  gentleman  from 
Daviess.  Is  it  not,  let  me  ask  the  house,  an  un- 
necessary apprehension,  tliat  when  seven  or 
eiglit  thousand  souls  will  constitute  the  basis  of 
an  assembly  district,  we  will  proceed  to  colonize 
just  before  an  enumeration  takes  place,  in  order 
to  swell  it  up?  I  want  the  attention  of  the  house 
to  that  point  for  one  moment.  That  is  the  main 
argument  of  the  genlleman  from  Nelson,  on 
which  all  his  othei"s  are  based,  if  I  understand 
him  correctly.  Now,  out  of  all  these  fourteen 
slates,  none  of  them  have  ever  deemed  it  neces- 
sary to  tlirow  this  guard  around  the  enumera- 
tion. None  have  armed  the  census  taker  with 
the  examination  of  the  rights  of  citizensliip  and 
suffrage. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  voted  for  that  resolution,  of- 
fered by  mv  friend  from  Simpson  like  many  oth- 
ers.    I  suspect  I  voted  too  hastily,  although  it 


60G 


looks  well  ill  the  resolution.  J  am  not  disposed 
to  attach  any  thing  to  the  constitution  which  1 
think  will  weigh  it  down,  when  it  comes  to 
be  acted  on  by  the  people.  I  have  examined  the 
amendment  offered  by  my  friend  from  Nelson, 
and  I  say,  that  in  his  opinions  on  this,  and  all 
other  suDJects,  1  have  the  greatest  confidence, 
and  I  would  yield  to  his  views,  if  I  could  with 
consistency.  But  I  am  not  prepared  to  go  for  his 
amendment. 

I  .see  many  difficulties  growing  out  of  this 
matter,  which  cause  me  to  pause  before  I  proceed 
further.  The  difficulty  suggested  by  my  friend 
from  Louisville  is  a  great  one,  which  is,  that  of 
determining  who  is,  and  wlio  is  not  to  form  the 
elt-inent  of  this  basis.  We  start  the  census  taker 
through  the  state  or  city  to   find   out  who  the 

aualitied  persons  are.  He  comes  to  a  house  where 
lere  are  children,  a  woman,  and  a  man,  and  the 
question  comes  up,  is  that  man  naturalized.  He 
may  be  a  foreigner;  the  children  may  have  been 
born  here,  or  not;  the  wife  may  have  been  natu- 
ralized, or  not.  I  do  not  see  how  in  the  'name 
of  justice  he  is  to  tell,  who  is  to  form  the  basis. 
Tliere  is  another  objection.  It  is  substituting 
one  basis  for  another,  and  this  will  have  some 
eflfect.  It  will  transfer  representation  from  one 
point  to  another,  or  from  one  class  to  another 
class.  I  want  to  know  if  gentlemen  have  made 
up  their  minds  that  this  transfer  is  fair.  Are 
you  to  take  it  from  the  slaveholding  popula- 
tion, and  transfer  it  elsewhere?  How  will  it  ef- 
fect the  slaveholder?  I  do  not  know,  and  I 
•want  gentlemen  to  inquire  into  it. 

1  understood  it  was  the  object  of  the  gentle- 
man to  restrict  cities,  but  I  think  this  will  not 
do  it.  If  I  understand  it,  Louisville  contains 
50,000  inhabitants,  and  the  whole  population  of 
the  state  is  700,000.  If  from  the  50,000  in  tlie 
the   city   of  Louisville,  10,000  are  taken  for  ne- 

froes  and  aliens,  it  will  reduce  the  population  to 
e  represented  to  40,000.  If  those  not  represent- 
ed in  the  balance  of  the  state  .ire  subtracted,  it 
will  leave  600,000,  beside  the  40,000  in  Louis- 
ville. If  this  is  true,  Louisville  will  then  have, 
insteadof  four  representatives,  six  and  two  thirds. 
That  is  the  way  the  matter  presents  itself.  I 
•was  for  giving  them  the  old  basis,  but  it  is  now 
a  question  whether,  if  the  principle  is  correct, 
we  .should  apply  it  in  this  instance.  If  we  take 
the  new  basis  of  representation,  we  transfer  that 
•which  belongs  to  other  parts  of  the  .state  to  the 
city  of  Louisville.  I  do  not  wish  to  do  it. 
Whether  children  are  born  there  in  as  great  num- 
bers as  in  other  parts  of  the  state,  in  proportion 
to  numbers,  or  not.  people  are  moving  in  there 
from  all  parts  of  the  United  States,  and  swelling 
the  population  of  the  city.  I  am  not  for  taking 
population  from  the  slave  counties,  and  transfer- 
ring it  to  that  city. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  We  are  now  about  to  settle — I 
suppose — what  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  just  repre- 
sentative principle;  and  some  of  our  friends  are 
very  fon<l  of  following  out,  and  identifying  prin- 
ciples. The  question  is,  what  princinle  does 
the  convention  intend  to  adopt,  and  adhere  to, 
in  regard  to  representation?  Lt  -was  a  favorite 
notion,  a  few  days  past,  tliat  iwpulation  should 
be  the  basis  of  representation — not  jiopulation 
generally,  because  if  so,  the  slave  uopulation 
would  be  represented,  or  at  least  would  be  made 


one  of  the  elements  of  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion; and  free  negroes,  also,  would  be  made  one 
of  the  elements  of  this  basis  of  representation. 
But  all  gentlemen  repudiate  these,  as  two  of  the 
components  of  this  basis  of  representation  which 
we  are  about  to  form. 

Something  has  been  said  about  the  mingling 
of  taxation,  in  the  adjustment  of  the  principle 
of  representation.  If  this  should  be  the  case, 
my  county  would  fare  much  better  than  she  is 
likely  to  do.  The  taxable  property  of  Bourbon, 
county,  is  about  $12,000,000;  furnishing  a  reve- 
nue of  from  $18,000  to  $20,000  a  year.  But  I 
believe,  on  the  principle  of  representation,  as 
indicated  yesterday,  she  would  fare  worse  than 
any  county  in  the  state;  for  she  Sccms  to  have  a 
smaller  proportion  of  children  than  many  other 
counties — wiiatever  the  reason  may  be,  I  am  not 
able  to  account  for  it. 

It  seems  to  me,  that  there  is  a  principle,  that 
should  be  traced  as  a  golden  thread,  in  the  adop- 
tion of  a  basis  of  representation.  We  have  a 
representative  government,  and  we  are  about  to 
adopt  a  basis,  upon  which  the  representative 
principle  shall  be  carried  out.  What  is  the  cor- 
rect basis  ?  It  is,  that  the  population  of  the 
country  which  possesses  the  political  power,  and 
which  has  a  right  to  possess  it,  shall  form  the 
basis  of  representation.  It  is  not  numbers  that 
we  propose  to  represent,  it  is  not  slaves,  it  is  not 
free  negroes,  it  is  not  women  and  children  that 
are  to  be  represented,  according  to  the  philoso- 
phy of  our  system  of  government.  It  is  tlie  po- 
litical authority  of  the  country  that  is  represen- 
ted ;  and  that  alone  can  be  represented.  Wo* 
men  do  not  vote,  children  do  not  vote  ;  they  do 
not  petition  for  a  change  of  measures,  they  do 
not  remonstrate  against  the  adoption  of  measures. 
Thev  exercise  no  control  whatever,  over  the  op- 
erations of  government.  There  is  a  power  that 
does  exercise  the  control,  and  what  power  is 
that?  It  is  the  adult  male  voting  population  of 
the  country.  It  is  not  numbers  alone,  it  is  will 
and  purpose  that  is  represented — it  is  only  pur- 
pose— will,  that  ought  to  be,  and  in  truth  is  rep- 
resented. We  may  give  to  a  country  additional 
political  power  and[  strength,  on  account  of  chil- 
dren, yet  they  do  not  vote;  or  on  account  of  wo- 
men, yet  they  do  not  vote.  They  have  no  voice 
in  the  adoption  of  measures  of  government — like 
that  which  is  spoken  by  men  ;  no  persons  have 
a  right  to  be  heard,  save  the  men  who  have  the 
power  and  the  right  to  vote.  They  instruct  the 
representatives  at  the  polls,  and  they  instruct  them 
afterwards  by  petition  and  remonstrance.  Tliis 
being  the  only  controling  power,  then,  it  is  i<llo 
to  say,  that  women  and  children  are  to  be  an  ele- 
ment" in  forming  the  basis  of  representation. 
Your  political  power  is  derived  from  the  voting 
population,  and  all  you  have  to  do  is,  to  repre- 
.sent  that  power.  Suppose  you  could  modify 
your  form  of  representation,  and  instead  of  es- 
tablishing agents,  go  back  to  the  primary  and 
original  holders  of  power,  and  let  them  wield 
that  power,  and  rule  the  destinies  ot  the  coun- 
try. Upon  whom  then  would  it  fall?  Unon  the 
voting  iwpulation  of  the  country.  But  ttiis  be- 
ing inconvenient,  and  in  fact  impracticable,  it 
l)ecoiueH  necessary  to  rule  by  agencies.  Is  it  not 
as  important  then,  that  the  voting  population 
should  be  the  basis,  when  agencies  prevail,  as 


007 


when  the  primary  power  ib  employed — other- 
wise you  suDvert  and  revolutionise  tlie  principles 
upon  which  the  government  is  founded.  1  hat 
is  the  power  that  Avields  all  political  authority  ; 
that  power  alone  speaks  potentially  in  all  tlie 
measures  of  government ;  and  it  is  that  power 
alone  that  has  a  right  to  be  represented. 

Now  it  seems  to  me  very  plain,  that  all  you 
have  to  do,  is  to  ascertain  the  voting  population 
of  the  country,  and  when  you  have  done  that, 
provide  for  the  impartial  and  just  representation 
of  their  power.  wTiateverthe  frauds  which  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson  adverted  to  yesterday— 
that  intervene  in  cities,  and  that  may  be  preven- 
ted by  legislative  enactments — may  be,  guard 
this  mode  of  representation,  represent  fairly  that 
jK)wer,  and  constitute  it  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion, and  when  you  have  done  that,  you  Iiave  ad- 
hered to  the  true  principle  upon  which  represen- 
tation should  be  based.  Any  departure  from  it 
is  a  departure  from  the  true  philosophy  of  our 
system  of  government. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  A  great  part  of  the  argument 
of  the  gentleman  from  Henderson  and  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville  consists  in  the  supposed 
difficulties  of  ascertaining  the  number  of  quali- 
fied voters  on  the  part  of  the  individual  who 
takes  the  census.  Are  not  the  gentlemen  aware, 
that  as  the  law  now  stands,  he  is  required  to 
take  the  number  of  qualified  voters?  Any  man 
who  chooses  to  see  spirits,  can  see  them.  Gentle- 
men can  conjure  up  difficulties  where  none  exist. 
The  assessor  or  commissioner  is  now  not  only  re- 
quired to  ascertain  who  are  entitled  to  vote  and 
who  are  not,  but  he  is  also  required  to  ascertain  the 
number  of  children  between  the  ages  of  five  and 
sixteen  years;  and  the  United  States  marshal  is 
required  to  a.scertain  the  number  of  individuals 
between  the  ages  of  ten  and  fifteen,  and  so  on 
to  one  hundred.  I  understand  the  force  of  the 
gentleman's  argument  very  well.  You  are,  says 
he,  only  to  take  those  who  are  inhabitants  of  a 
county  or  a  city.  That  is  the  very  thing  I  want 
to  guard  against.  I  want  the  population  which 
is  to  be  the  basis  of  representation,  to  have  pre- 
cisely the  same  qualifications  that  voters  have 
in  regard  to  naturalization,  and  not  swell  your 
representation  by  taking  in  persons  who  are  not 
citizens.  It  is  upon  this  point  that  we  are  at 
issue.  The  gentleman  assigns  one  set  of  rea- 
sons and  I  another.  He  says  it  is  impossible  to 
take  into  the  enumeration  women  and  children 
tinder  the  age  of  twenty  one  years.  I  say  there 
is  no  difficulty  whatever  in  doing  so. 

My  friend  who  was  last  up,  says  it  should  be 
confined  to  the  voting  population  because  they 
are  the  only  persons  who  have  the  power  to  act 
in  relation  to  the  measures  of  government.  Well 
sir,  I  take  the  whole  population.  Suppose  the 
whole  population  in  a  county  is  sufficient  to  en- 
title it  to  a  representative  in  the  house,  and  the 
voting  population  is  not  sufficient.  Take  the 
county  of  Larue,  she  has  about  two  thirds  of  the 
ratio  for  a  representative.  And  in  the  course  of 
two  years,  if  the  river  counties  should  increase 
as  they  have  done,  and  the  interior  stock  raising 
counties  should  not  increase  in  the  same  pro- 
portion, Larue  will  fall  below  two  thirds;  but  if 
Tou  take  in  the  women  and  children,  Larue  will 
be  entitled  to  a  representative.  Take  Hardin 
county,  and   at  the  end  of  two  years,  she  will 


hardly  have  enough  fi»r  one  representative  and 
two  thirds  over;  but  if  you  take  in  women  and 
children,  she  will  have  a  number  amply  sufficient 
for  two  without  any  controversy.  The  voters  in 
Hardin  county  are  2,367,  the  children  between 
five  and  sixteen  years  of  age  are  3,308 — a  differ- 
ence of  about  1000.  The  gentlemen  can  see  ex- 
actly what  I  am  driving  at.  It  is  that  the  inte- 
rior counties  will  be  cut  off  from  their  due  .share 
of  representation,  if  you  take  the  voting  popula- 
tion as  the  basis  of  representation;  whereas  they 
will  be  entitled  to  their  proper  share  if  you  in- 
clude women  and  children;  and  as  to  tne  diffi- 
culty of  enumerating  them,  there  is  none  what- 
ever. 

As  to  the  argument  of  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson.  He  says  there  is  a  constant  crowd 
of  population  pouring  into  the  cities.  I  know 
there  is;  but  there  is  a  larger  proportion  of  men 
than  of  women  and  children.  Why  is  it  so? 
Because  men  go  their  for  business  purposes. 
SIxamine  the  commissioners'  books  all  over  the 
United  States,  beginning  at  Massachusetts  and 
going  to  the  moutli  of  the  Mi>sissippi  river,  and 
you  will  see  that  the  numbers  of  the  two  clas.ses 
of  population,  male  and  female,  in  city  and 
country,  approximate  much  nearer  between  the 
ages  of  twenty  and  forty,  than  at  any  other  age. 
Take  any  age  below  twenty  and  above  forty,  and 
you  will  find  a  wide  difference  in  the  popula- 
tion. What  does  this  prove?  It  proves  that 
there  is  less  difference  between  tlie  votere  and 
the  whole  population  in  the  towns  and  cities 
than  there  is  in  the  country. 

The  gentleman  from  Bourbon  advanced,  I  pre- 
sume witliout  much  reflection,  a  proposition 
wliich  I  hope  he  will  retract.  That  women  and 
children  have  no  right  to  petition.  They  are 
the  very  class  of  population  that  are  entitled  to 
the  right  of  petition. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  did  not  intend  to  assert  that 
thev  have  not  that  right. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  That  is  what  I  supposed.  I 
know  my  friend  from  Louisville,  wants  to  get 
in  men,  women,  and  children,  who  are  not  citi- 
zens, and  if  his  amendment  should  be  adopted, 
he  will  get  in  hundreds  and  thousands  who  are 
not  citizens;  who  are  not  Americans,  and  who 
may,  perhaps,  not  have  been  in  the  country  fifty 
days.  I  want  to  exclude  them,  unless  they  have 
been  here  two  years.  The  gentleman  says  we 
should  protect  the  foreign  population.  Well 
sir,  I  shall  vote  for  makingthe  native  population 
and  the  naturalized  aliens  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  It  seems  to  me,  the  whole 
scope  of  the  gentleman's  argument  goes  to  show 
that  what  has  been  presented  here  as  the  basis 
of  representation,  is  not  in  fact,  such  a  basis. 
The  principle,  if  there  be  any  principle,  that  is 
embodied  in  this  resolution,  is  designed  not  to 
fix  what  I  regard  as  the  basis  of  representation, 
but  to  establish  the  means  of  distributing  politi- 
cal power  throughout  the  state.  It  amounts  to 
nothing  more  than  that,  a  means  for  the  distri- 
bution of  political  power  throughout  the  state; 
and  we  shall  be  at  length  compelled,  in  estab- 
lishing representative  responsibility,  to  fallback 
upon  the  true  basis  of  representation,  which  is 
political  numbers.  In  the  federal  constitution, 
population  is  assumed^  for  what  purpose?    Not 


608 


as  I  coin>eIve,  to  fix  the  basis  of  representation; 
but  to  give  to  each  state  the  inea.sure  of  its  po- 
litical power.  I  apprehend  that  federal  numbers 
assigns,  by  our  national  compact,  the  measure 
of  its  political  power  to  each  state,  and  tliat  the 
state  itself  afu  rwards  fixes  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation. This  results  from  compromise  and 
necessity.  In  some  of  the  states  the  right  of 
sutfrage  is  restricted,  in  others  it  is  more  extend- 
ed; hence  the  necessity  fur  adopting  the  plan 
"which  is  laid  down  in  the  federal  constitution; 
V'hich  amounts  to  nothing  more  than  a  distribu- 
tion of  political  pow*^r  among  the  states,  and  the 
state  afterwards  fixes  her  basis  of  representation 
Avhen  she  determines  the  extent  of  her  elective 
franchise.  The  very  term  basis,  itself,  implies 
that  sometliing  must  rest  upon  it.  When  there- 
fore, you  say  that  tlie  whole  population  is  the 
basis  of  representation,  and  yet  that  that  repre- 
sentation covers  but  a  part  of  this  basis,  there 
is  a  portion  of  the  basis  on  which  nothing 
rests.  In  adopting  the  resolution  which  has 
been  adopted  here,  and  engrafting  the  amend- 
ment now  proposed  to  be  engrafted  on  the  sec- 
tion under  consideration,  we  depart  from  the 
principle  which  has  heretofore  governed  us  in 
our  apportionment  of  political  power  among  the 
different  sections  of  the  state,  and  adopt  a  new 
mode.  But  when  we  carry  out  the  principle  of 
representation,  we  are  compelled  to  fall  back 
upon  the  old  principle.  Whose  voice  does  the 
representatve  brinar  into  the  council  chamber? 
It  is  not  the  voice  of  the  whole  population.  It 
is  the  voice  of  those  who  created  the  representa- 
tive! Representation  must  be  as  large  as  its 
basis.  I  cannot  conceive  of  an  agent,  without 
supposing  some  principal  who  has  vested  power 
in  the  agent;  I  cannot  conceive  of  a  principal 
outside  of  those  who  have  created — if  you  please, 
this  agency.  It  is  true,  sir,  that  there  are  other 
interests  in  the  country,  besides  these  which  re- 
side in  the  political  numbers,  who  wield  the 
power  of  the  country;  but  these  other  interests 
are  so  intimately  associated  with  the  interests  of 
those  who  wield  the  political  power,  that  while 
subserving  the  one  you  subserve  the  other,  also. 
The  voting  population  of  the  countrv  is  the 
quasi  guardian  of  all  other  interests  in  the  coun- 
try which  are  not  represented.  By  adopting  the 
principle  contained  in  the  resolution,  and  con- 
tained in  the  amendment  now  proposed,  you 
create  an  irresponsible  mediate  representation. 
Inasmucli  as  there  is  no  voice  represented,  but 
that  of  the  voting  population,  the  voting  popu- 
lation must  represent  the  other  interests.  If 
this  be  true,  then,  those  who  have  the  largest 
amount  of  this  sort  of  association  connected 
■with  tliem  should  have  the  largest  voice.  If  the 
husband  represent  the  interests  of  his  wife  and 
children,  tlie  husband  ought  to  have,  at  the 
polls,  a  more  potential  voice  than  the  man  who 
has  none  of  these  interests  connected  with  him. 
If  on  the  other  hand  it  is  right  that  every  free- 
man who  is  entitled  to  vote  sliould  have  an 
equal  voice,  then  sir,  there  is  none  of  this  me- 
diate representation  which  this  new  basis  would 
seem  to  contemplate.  I  take  it,  sir,  that  tliis  is 
nothin;^  more  than  a  provision  for  the  distribu- 
tion of  political  power — it  is  not  a  basis  of 
representation.  I  was  opposed  to  the  resolution, 
and  I  am  also  opposed  to  tins  amendment. 


Mr.  WOODSOX.  Mr.  President:  The  amend- 
ment just  offered  by  my  friend  from  the  city  of 
Louisville,  (Mr.  Pre.ston,)  involves  an  interest- 
ing aTid  an  exceedingly  important  principle — no 
less  sir,  than  the  true  basis  of  a  free  representa- 
tive government.  I  have  given  no  vote  since  I 
have  occupied  a  seat  upon  this  floor,  that  has  not 
had  for  its  object  the  promotion  of  the  interest, 
the  welfare,  and  liappiness  of  the  greatest  possi- 
ble number  of  my  fellow-citizens.  The  maxim, 
"the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,"  has 
never  beeii  lost  sight  of  in  any  vote  I  have  giv- 
en— any  speech  I  have  made,  or  in  any  act  I  have 
performed. 

I  have  been  voting  for,  and  uncompromisingly 
advocatin'g,  for  the  last  five  or  six  days,  the  ex- 
tension of  equal,  political,  and  representative 
rights  and  privileges  to  all  the  citizens  of  every 
portion  of  the  state,  regardless  of  partizan  or  lo- 
cal considerations;  permitting  my  love  of  equal- 
ity and  my  devotion  to  principle  alone  to  govern 
my  action.  And  when  the  convention  on  yes- 
terday determined,  by  an  overwhelming  majori- 
ty, to  regard  nothing  but  numbers  in  the  distribu- 
tion of  political  representative  rights,  I  suppos- 
ed that  the  same  high  and  elevated  considera- 
tions were  influencing  every  other  delegate  upon 
this  floor. 

The  resolution  of  the  delegate  from  Simpson, 
(Mr.  Clarke,)  which  this  convention  adopted 
yesterday  morning  almost  without  a  dissenting 
voice,  asserts  that  the  free  white  inhabitants  in 
the  state  shall  constitute  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion in  both  branches  of  the  legislature.  The 
amendment  now  pending  reiterates  the  same 
great  principle,  and  nothing  more  or  less.  We 
yesterday  d<|;clared,  in  the  most  solemn  manner — 
no  one  seri()ii);ly  objecting  that  I  remember — that 
such  should  be  the  basis.  This  morning  we  are 
about  to  reverse  the  decision  of  yesterday,  and 
declare  that  representation  shall  be  founded  upon 
the  number  of  qualified  voters,  and  not  the  num- 
ber of  free  inhabitants  in  the  state. 

The  resolution  was  presented  yesterday,  and 
its  inherent  merits  were  so  manifest  to  all,  that 
few  of  us  failed  to  give  it  our  support.  The  pil- 
lows of  gentlemen  during  the  past  night,  suggest- 
ed I  suppose,  a  different  policy;  and  we  find  this 
morning  the  friends  of  the  measure  yesterday, 
most  boisterous  in  its  denunciation.  It  is  not 
for  me  to  say,  why  this  change?  Gentlemen 
have  sufficient  reasons,  I  doubt  not.  I  trust, 
however,  that  a  bare  suggestion,  that  figures  may 
have  been  resorted  to  by  them,  and  that  a  mathe- 
matical demonstration,  that  certain  localities 
were  to  be  shorn  of  a  portion  of  their  political 
privileges,  may  have  had  a  tendency  to  overcome 
their  preconceived  predilections  for  the  intrinsic 
merits  of  the  proposition,  will  not  be  unkindly 
received.  Sir,  -when  an  attempt  was  made  re- 
cently to  deprive  the  counties  bordering  on  the 
Ohio  river  of  their  just  rights  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  government  of  Kentucky  hereafter,  I 
did  not  stop  to  enquire  what  effect  the  injustice 
attempted  would  have  upon  my  particular  local- 
ity; I  only  looked  at  the  great  principle  of  equal 
representation  which  was  souglit  to  be  violated, 
and  I  determined,  at  every  liazard,  to  do  all  I 
could  to  prevent  its  consummation.  We  suc- 
ceeded—and now,  let  us  adopt  what_  basis  we 
may,  there  are  no  invidious  distinctions  to  bo 


609 


drawn  between  ihe  rights  of  the  citiseu  living  I 
upon  the  green  banks  of  tJie  beantiful  Ohio,  and 
the  citizen  of  the  interior.  This  is  all  as  it  | 
should  be.  But  sir,  I  desire  to  regard  other  in- 
terests than  those  of  the  qualified  voters,  in  fix- 
ing the  basis  of  representation.  The  widows, 
orphans,  mothers,  and  children  of  this  common- 
wealth, in  ray  estimation,  have, equal  claims  up- 
on our  attention.  Where  ever  a  woman  or  child 
is  found,  protection  is  required.  The  truth  is, 
the  children  of  Kentucky  have  a  greater  interest 
in  what  we  do,  and  what  the  legislature  may  do, 
than  ourselves.  The  subject  of  education  has 
occupied  much  of  the  attention  of  our  legisla- 
tures for  many  years  past,  and  no  subject  is  more 
worthy  the  attention  of  this  convention,  or  will 
have  higher  claims  upon  those  who  are  destined 
to  fill  our  legislative  nails  under  the  new  consti- 
tution. Mothers  and  children  are  peculiarly  in- 
terested in  the  legislation  of  the  state  upon  the 
subject  of  education.  Yet  sir,  if  qualified  voters 
are  to  be  the  established  basis  of  representation, 
the  wishes  and  interests  of  mothers  and  children 
are  not  to  be  consulted  in  this  matter.  I  do  not 
desire  that  minors  or  women  shall  exercise  the 
right  of  suffrage.  The  first  has  not  the  maturity 
of  judgment  to  warrant  its  judicious  exercise, 
nor  is  the  latter  to  be  soiled  by  being  thrown  in- 
to the  political  arena.  What  I  desire,  is,  that 
they  shall  be  represented  by  some  one  who  feels 
an  interest  for  them.  Why  sir,  if  there  was  not 
a  qualified  voter  in  the  counties  I  represent,  I 
should  still  feel  the  responsibility  resting  upon 
me  here,  or  in  the  legislative  councils  of  the 
country,  to  be  quite  as  great  as  at  present — in- 
deed, more  so.  I  represent  upon  this  floor  two 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  forty  six  children, 
between  the  ages  of  five  and  sixteen.  Shall  I 
be  told  that  these  children  have  no  interests  in 
the  government?  No  one  will  do  it  sir.  Yet  in 
the  apportionment  of  representation  under  the 
present  constitution,  they  have  no  more  weight 
than  so  manv  cattle,  horses,  or  hogs.  I  do  not 
think  that  this  is  as  it  should  be. 

But  my  friend  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,) 
says  that  when  the  proposition  to  apportion  rep- 
resentation according  to  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson,  that  is  to  say,  when 
the  proposition  to  apportion  representation  agree- 
ably to  the  number  of  inhabitants  in  each  coun- 
ty, including  women  and  children,  was  voted 
upon,  that  it  was  passed  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
stricting the  rights  of  the  cities — particularly  the 
city  of  Louisville — ^but  that  it  has  now  been  as- 
certained, that  so  far  from  injuring  Louisville, 
that  she  will  get  an  additional  representative, 
and  that  he  does  not  suppose  that  gentlemen  wish 
to  give  her  anv  more  political  power  than  she 
already  has.  Kow  sir,  I  must  confess  that  I  was 
greatly  surprised  indeed,  when  the  gentleman  re- 
sorted to  such  an  argument.  He  has  been  the 
bold,  fearless  champion  of  the  right-s  of  Louis- 
Tille,  in  all  that  has  been  done  to  affect  her,  in 
any  wise,  since  we  have  been  here;  and  I  now 
venture  to  say  that  if  he  were  directly  asked  if 
he  voted  for  the  resolution  because  it  was  to  in- 
juriously affect  Louisville,  he  would  not  own  it — 
indeed  I  know  that  he  did  not — that  he  could 
not  have  been  influenced  by  any  such  considera- 
tions, after  the  unlimited  and  unqualified  advo- 
eacj  of  equal  rights  to  all,  in  whicn  he  indulged 


a  day  or  two  since.  No  air,  no.  But  then  there 
are  perhaps  gentlemen  upon  this  floor  who  were 
influenced  hy  such  motives,  and  who  the  gentle- 
man may  think  will  reverse  their  steps  wheneve* 
it  is  ascertained  that  Louisville  is  to  be  benefit- 
ted by  their  course.  How  fr.r  the  remarks  allu- 
ded to  were  intended  or  expected  to  influencesuch 
gentlemen,  the  author  of  them  is  better  aware 
than  myself.  I  have  not  been  able  thought©  in- 
crease the  strength  of  Louisville  by  the  estaV 
lisliment  of  the  basis  proposed.  I  do  not  believe 
that  it  will  be  increased. 

That  the  mountains  are  to  be  benefitted  by  it, 
however,  no  one  doubts.  For  sir,  let  the  resi- 
due of  the  state  outstrip  us  as  far  as  may  be  in 
every  other  sort  of  prosperity,  thank  God  we 
stand  unrivalled  in  the  number,  the  beauty,  and 
(equal  opportunities  afforded,)  the  intelligence 
of  our  children. 

If  the  proposition  under  discussion  should  be 
carried,  the  county  of  Knox  will  not  only  have 
the  full  ratio  entitling  her  to  a  separate  repre- 
sentative, but  a  large  overplus.  The  same  ad- 
vantage will  accrue  to  Whitley,  Laurel,  Rock- 
castle, and  Flovd,  and  perhaps  Clay.  And  if 
the  increase  of  tlie  population  of  the  mountain 
counties  increases  as  much  faster  for  the  next  ten 
years,  as  it  has  for  the  last  ten,  over  the  counties 
of  the  interior,  every  mountain  county  will  have 
a  separate  member  upon  the  floor  of  the  house  of 
representatives.  And  wheii  such  shall  be  the 
case,  does  any  gentleman  suppose  that  because 
the  mountain  representative  has  the  interests  of 
the  rising  generation  in  his  hands,  particularly, 
that  he  will  occupy  a  less  interesting,  important, 
or  responsible  position,  than  if  he  were  repre- 
senting qualified  voters  alone?  But  sir,  I  will 
extend  mj-  remarks  no  farther,  simply  suggesting 
that  when  the  rights  of  the  city  of  Louisville 
were  pending  in  this  hall  gentlemen  were  ap- 
pealed to — their  sense  of  justice  invoked — and 
equal  rights  have  been  extended  to  her.  I  now 
ask  for  no  equal  rights  for  a  great  city — already 
the  proud  metropolis  of  a  great  state- — I  ask  sir, 
though,  for  justice  to  be  done  the  women  and 
children  of  our  beloved,  glorious  old  common- 
wealth. I  admit  that  some  portions  of  the  state 
will  be  deprived  of  the  privileges  they  now  en- 
joy. But  gentlemen  ought  to  be  and  will  be 
consoled  by  the  reflection  that  all  they  have  lost, 
the  women  and  children,  the  pride  and  glory  of 
our  common  countrv,  have  gained. 

Mr.  XUTTALL.'  I  understand  that  the  prin- 
ciple contained  in  the  resolution  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Simpson,  is  now  proposed  to  be  en- 
grafted in  the  Constitution.  Whilst  I  would 
not  vote  with  my  friend  from  Hardin  (Mr. 
Brown,)  for  a  re-consideration  of  the  vote,  by 
which  that  resolution  was  adopted,  I  neverthe- 
less cannot  vote  for  the  incorporation  of  an  ab- 
stract proposition  in  the  constitution.  It  is 
strange  indeed,  that  the  pro-slavery  men  in  this 
convention  who  have  been,  on  all  other  subjects, 
so  vigilant,  so  watchful,  so  careful,  to  guard 
their  interests,  are  now  for  the  incorporation  of 
a  principle  in  the  constitution  that  will  pull 
down  one  of  the  bulwarks  by  which  their  prop- 
erty is  protected.  1  will  not  stop  here  to  as- 
sign the  reasons  why  it  will  have  this  effect.  I 
think  they  ought  to  suggest  themseves  to  the  mind 
of  every  delegate.    We  have  heard  a  great  deal 


610 


about  the  river  counties,  by  which  the  interior- 
of  the  state  is  belted.  With  what  sort  of  popu- 
lation are  those  counties  and  the  cities  that  are 
to  grow  up  within  them,  to  be  filled?  "With 
a  population  sir,  that  care  nothing  about  your 
slave  property.  And  you  do  not  base  your  rep- 
resentation on  the  population  of  the  state. — 
The  negro  population  is  to  be  totally  disregard- 
ed in  the  enumeration. 

I  declared  originally  that  I  was  willing  to 
violate  one  of  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  repub- 
lican government,  in  order  to  restrict  the  cities; 
and  I  shall  not  go  now  for  giving  them  greater 
power  under  the  enumeration  proposed,  than 
they  would  otherwise  have.  I  understand  that 
the  adult  voting  population  is  the  proper  basis 
of  representation  in  this  country.  They,  and 
none  other,  have  the  riglit  to  exercise  political 
functions.  No  other  class  of  the  population 
is  clothed  with  political  power.  The  women 
and  children  of  the  country  liave  no  political 
powers — have  no  power  to  control  the  measures 
of  government.  They  ought  not  therefore,  to 
enter  into  the  enumeration,  in  order  to  form  a 
basis  for  representation.  I  shall  vote  against 
this  proposition,  believing  it  is  wrong  in  prin- 
ciple. 

Mr.  BROWN".     The  question  is  not  whether 
women  and   children  should  be  taken  into  the 
enumeration;  it  is  whether  the  voting  popula- 
tion of  the  countiy  shall  be  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation.    I  conceivp  tlieir  interests  will   be  as 
well  represented  upon  one  basis  as  the  other. 
The  question  is  not  whether  we  shall   permit 
them  to  come  to  the  polls  and  cast  their  votes. 
They  are  not  allowed  to  do  this.    If  they  were, 
I  would  be  in   favor  of  including  them  in  the 
basis  of  representation.     The  senior  gentleman 
from  Nelson  has  taken   occasion  to  refer  to  my 
county  and  to   present  the  fact,  tliat   it  has  a 
larger  proportion   of  children  than  other  coun- 
ties.    That  may  be  true;  and  I  am  glad  if  it  be  so. 
But  I  shall  allow  no   siioli   consideration  to  in- 
fluence me  here.     For  more  than  half  a  century, 
the  voting  population  has  constituted   the  basis 
of  representation;  and  there  has   been   no  dis- 
satisfaction expressed  on  the  part  of  the  people 
— ^they  have  not  demanded  a  change  in  this  re- 
spect.    But  I  have  seen   a  disposition  on  the 
part  of  delegates  to  go  beyond  the  public  de- 
mands, in  reference  to  reforms  in   the  constitu- 
tion of  Kentucky.    I  have  occasionally  had  the 
honor  to  represeni  my  county,  and  as   a  public 
man,    I  have   always  been    prepared  to  meet 
my  responsibility.      The  gentleman  need  not 
give  himself  any   uneasiness  on  my  account.     I 
do  not  fear  that  my  county  will  be  deprived  of 
her  two  representatives.    I  have  no  such  appre- 
hension.   And   if  I  had,   I  would  not  permit 
any  consideration  of  that  kind  to  induce  me  to 
depart  from   an  established  principle — a  princi- 
ple sanctioned  by  time  and  experience. 

Mr.  McHENRY.  I  voted  yesterday  for  the 
resolution  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
though  my  intention  was  originally,  to  vote  for 
no  abstract  proposition  whatever;  and  subsequent 
reflection  has  confirmed  me  in  luy  first  determi- 
nation. I  believe  that  vote  was  wrong.  The 
people  have  not  complained  of  the  present  ba- 
sis of  representation,  and  I  think  it  is  better  to 
let  the  present  system  remain,  than  to  adopt  an- 


other that  might  operate  unequally,  and  detri- 
mentally to  some  portiofns  of  the  state;  and  wliich 
might  create  many  enemies  to  the  new  constitu- 
tion. I  have  not  arrived  at  this  conclusion, 
from  any  calculation  by  figures,  as  the  gentle- 
man from  Knox  (Mr.  Woodson)  has  suggested, 
in  regard  to  the  effect  it  may  have  upon  niy  coun- 
ty, in  fact,  I  liave  not  been  able  to  see,  pre- 
cisely, how  it  will  operate.  As  the  resolution 
for  which  I  voted  was  a  mere  abstract  proposi- 
tion, I  do  not  feel  myself  bound  to  vote  for  its 
introduction  into  the  constitution,  but  shall  sus- 
tain the  old  basis  of  representation;  that  is,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  qualified  voters.  That 
is  a  system  that  the  people  understand,  and  I 
believe  it  is  the  one  they  most  approve  of. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  do  not  su])pose  I  can  shed 
any  light  upon  the  subject;  indeed  I  will  not  at- 
tempt it.  1  want  to  know  the  nearest  mode  of 
getting  a  vote  upon  the  question.  If  I  was 
ever  astonished  in  my  life,  it  was  to  see  the  ex- 
hibition that  has  been  made  here.  The  proposi- 
tion that  was  before  tlie  house  yesterday,  was  so 
evidently  founded  in  justice,  that  I  thought  the 
house  could  have  no  hesitation  in  coming  to  a 
conclusion;  I  therefore  moved  the  previous  ques- 
tion. 

Now,  I  want  to  see  liow  many  of  the  talented 
gentlemen  of  this  body — to  whom  we  have  been 
accustomed  to  look  up,  as  examples  for  our  imi- 
tation, in  point  of  consistency — will,  within 
twenty-four  hours,  change  their  minds,  and  vote 
against  a  proposition  which  they  were  Once  in 
favor  of.  What  does  it  matter,  where  the  repre- 
sentation shall  fall,  so  long  as  the  result  must  be 
that  representation  will  be  equal,  in  proportion 
to  numbers.  If  it  be  now  in  order,  I  will  move 
tlie  previous  question. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  liope  the  gentleman  will 
withdraw  the  motion  for  the  previous  question 
for  a  moment,  and  I  Avill  renew  it  if  he  desires 
that  I  shall  do  so. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  Certainly,  I  withdraw  it. 
Mr.  CLARKE.  I  had  supposed,  after  tlie  de- 
bate which  took  place  yesterday,  and  after  the 
vote  that  was  taken,  that  the  principle  had  been 
settled,  that  the  description  of  population  refer- 
red to  in  the  resolution  1  had  tlie  honor  to  sub- 
mit, sliould  form  the  basis  of  representation.  I 
supposed  the  principle  had  been  settled,  and 
permanently  settled, by  that  vote.  I  should  not 
trouble  the  convention,  however,  with  any  re- 
marks, were  it  not  for  the  fact,  that  the  gentle- 
man from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon)  has  presented 
an  argument  here,  based  upon  a  calculation,  tliat 
in  my  judgment,  is  fallacious,  and  logically 
speaking,  false.  The  gentleman  assumes  that 
we  are  all  in  error  when  we  say,  that  the  rural 
districts  of  this  state  will  be  benefited,  by 
making  the  whole  white  population  of  the  state 
— with  the  restrictions  thrown  around  them 
by  the  resolution — the  basis  of  representation  ; 
and  he  contents  himself  with  assuming  this  to 
be  the  fact,  without  furnisliing  the  basis  upon 
which  lie  arrives  at  such  a  conclusion. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  presented  the  basis  of  my 
cajculation  as  I  received  it  from  the  lionorable 
president  of  this  convention,  from  the  gentle- 
man from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston)  and  from  my 
friend  from  Shelby,  (Mr.  G.  "W.  Johnston.)  I 
gave  what  I  supposed  to  be  a  fair  basis. 


611 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  have  no  <lonbt  the  informa- ,  the  basis  of  representation,  I  appeal  to  every 
lion  of  the  honorable  president,  and  of  the  I  gentleman  on  this  floor,  whether  it  is  not  safer 
other  gentleman  from  Louisville  a>ay  be  correct; ;  and  better,  an  far  as  the  rural  districts  are  con- 
they  may  have  the  means  of  obtaining  tlie  nnm- !  cerned,  that  we  should  base  representation  upon 
ber  of  free  white  persons  in  Louisville.      I    say  |  the  whole  white  population,  than that_w'e  should 


they  may  be  correct,  because  I  do  not  know 
what  their  city  regulations  are;  I  have  not  ex- 
amined the  subject  fur  I  ftlt  no  interest  in  it. 
But  I  would  like  to  know  how  it  is  that  gentle- 
men can  state  with  any  certainty,  what  the  free 
white  population  now  is,  or  what  it  has  been  at 
any  period  since  1840?  I  grant,  that  if  you  al- 
low gentlemen  to  assume  their  facts,  there  is 
no  difficulty  in  arriving  at  the  conclusion  to 
which  they  wish  to  come.  But  when  the  census 
was  taken  in  1840, 1  believe  the  whole  popula- 
tion of  Louisville  was  but  21,000,  and  at  that 
time  the  population  of  the  .state  was  590,000.  Is 
it  not  reasonable  to  conclude,  that  if  Louisville 
has,  since  1S40,  grown  from  a  population  of 
21 .000  up  to  50,000,  the  state  has  grown  in  the 
same  ratio"?  Let  me  assume  facts, and  lean  give 
to  Louisville,  or  any  other  city  in  the  state,  twen- 
ty members  in  the  lower  house.  But  there  has 
never,  since  I84lj,  been  a  criterion  furnished,  by 
whicli  tlie  white  population  of  the  city  can  be 
ascertained.  I  grant,  sir,  that  we  can  ascertain 
the  number  of  white  citizens  over  twenty-one 
yeare  of  age;  I  grant,  sir,  that  we  can  ascertain 
the  number  of  qualified  voters;  I  grant,  sir,  that 
we  can  ascertain  the  numberof  children  between 
the  ages  of  tire  and  sixteen.  We  ascertain  all 
these  facts  from  the  Auditor's  report ;  but,  sir, 
when  you  go  to  the  innumerable  number  of  those 
males  and  females  under  five  years  of  age,  and 
fema'es  over  sixteen,  there  are  no  data  furnished, 
by  which  you  can  arrive  at  a  correct  conclusion. 

Xow,  sir,  allow  me  to  assume  a  fact.  If  it  be 
assumed  here  that  Louisville  has  a  population 
of  fifty  thousand,  I  assume  that  the  state  has  a 
white  population  of  one  million,  and  then  let 
the  gentleman  make  his  calculation  upon  this 
assumption  of  facts. 

Many  difficulties  present  themselves  to  gen- 
tlemen here  this  morning.  One  is  the  supposed 
difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  number  of  the 
white  male  citizens  of  Kentucky;  and  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville  undertook  to  say  that 
you  are  conferring  upon  the  commissioner  the 
exercise  of  an  arbitrary  jjower,  in  permitting 
him  to  determine  who  are  the  qualLned  voters 


b;t«e  it  upon  the  voting  population?  For  no  one 
liere  will  be  bold  enough  to  say  that  if  there  is 
an  increa.se  of  population  that  increase  consists 
of  voters,  and  not  to  the  same  extent  of  women 
and  children.  You  may  take  any  place  you 
plea.se,  in  the  union,  that  is  increasing  in  popu- 
lation, and  you  will  find  that  where  an  increase 
of  voters  has  taken  place,  more  women  and 
children  are  to  be  found,  in  proportion  to  those 
voters,  in  tlie  rural  districts  than  in  any  city  or 
town. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  I  fear  that  we  are  attaching 
rather  too  much  importance  to  Louisville.  I 
have  been  constantly  voting  to  give  to  Louis- 
ville equal  representation  with  the  balance  of 
the  state.  I  did  so  because  I  thought  it  was  but 
just  and  proper  that  she  should  have  it.  But  I 
apprehend  that  if  every  question  is  to  be  settled 
by  a  reference  to  the  bearing  it  is  to  have  upon 
Louisville,  we  shall  find  ourselves  involved  in  ^ 
some  difficulty. 

But  we  are  about  to  settle  a  very  important 

Question.  It  is  proposed  to  change  a  principle 
lat  has  been  acted  upon,  under  our  present  con- 
stitution, ever  since  it«  formation,  and  which 
has  been  entirely  satisfactory  to  the  country. 

It  is  one  of  the  points  on  which  I  was  partic- 
ularly guarded  before  I  left  home,  that  I  would 
not  spring  new   questions,    nor    vote  for  new 
propositions,  which  had  not  been  considered  by 
the  people.     I  came  here  to  make  changes  on 
those  subjects  only,  upon   which  complaint  ex-    ,j 
isted.     But  the  principle  contended    for  here, 
gentlemen  say,  is  so  clear,  so  palpably  just,  that 
we  ought  not  to  hesitate  to  adopt  it;  especially 
as  we  voted  for  it  yesterday.     There  are  a  great    -j 
many  principles  that  I  would  vote  for,  as  abstract    ^ 
principles,  that  I  would  not  put  into  the  consti-    i^ 
tution.     Looking  at  this  question  in  a  practical   ,g 
point  of  view,  I  am  satisfied  that  the  qualified 
voters  in  the  state  should  be  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation.    My  course  in  regard  to  this  proposi- 
tion, is  not  influenced  by  any  eff'ect  it  may  nave 
on  my  section  of  countrv;  for  I  suppose  gentle- 
men are  correct  when  they  say  it  will  increase 
our  representation.     But  if  the  elder  gentleman 


]S"ow,  sir,  if  1  know  any  thing  about  the  duties    from  I^elson  is  correct,  I  am  the  more  confirmed 


of  a  commissioner,  as  prescribed  by  the  laws  of 
this  state,  they  are,  that  he  shall  ascertiiin  the 
number  of  qualified   voters,  and  it  is  upon  liis 


report  that  the  apportionment  of  representation  }  stitute  the  bivsis  of  representation,  I 
is  ba-sed.     There  is  no  other  practical  mode  bv  j  would  be  if  we  put  a  new  element  i 


the  head  of  a  family  how  much  taxable  property  i 
he  has,  to  ascertain,  at  the  same  time,  how  many 
children  there  are  in  his  family  between  certain 
ages.  And  yet  this  has  presented  an  insuperable 
objection  to  the  minds  of  some  gentlemen.  I  have 


in  my  opposition  to  the  introduction  of  this 
new  principle:  for  if  all  these  frauds  can  be 
committed  in  cities,  when  qualified  voters  con- 

~  ask  how  it 
into  that  ba- 

which  you  can  aijcertain  the  number.  Why,  |  .sis?  We  must  then,  of  course,  be  swallowed  up 
the  commissioner  has  the  power  of  fixing  the ,  entirely.  How  do  gentlemen  find  out  that 
value  of  your  property.  If  you  do  not  place  it  |  frauds  are  committed?  The  proper  mode  of 
as  high  a!s  he  thinks  you  ought  to  place  it,  he  I  preventing  fraud  is,  to  constitute  the  voting  pop- 
can,  put  his  own  value  upon  it.  And  I  ask  how  j  ulation  the  basis  of  representation.  It  is  true, 
long  it  will  take,  when  he  is  ascertaining  from    1  voted  for  the  resolution  on  yesterday,  but  I 


would  not  then  liavc  voted  to  incorporate  the 
principle  into  the  constitution.  How  can  we 
tell  what  the  result  will  be?  We  have  not  the 
data  before  us  to  enable  us  to  come  to  a  conclu- 
sion.    Gentlemen  ear  thev  care  not  what  the  re- 


nottimeto  discuss  the  merits  of  the  principlecon- ;  suit  may  be,  if  we  have'  a  correct  principle  to 
tained  in  the  resolution;  but  if  we  are  to  estab-  st^nd  upon;  but  I  would  like  to  test  its  practi- 
lish  the  principle  that  population  shadl  furnish  '  cal  operation  before  adopting  it.     Besides,  the 


U13 


question  has  not  been  discussed  before  the  peo- 
ple, and  they  are  not  prepared  for  it.  However 
clear  it  may  seem  to  some  gentlemen,  it  may  not 

E rove  advantageous  in  its  operation;  and  it  is 
etter  that  we  should  not  risK  the  introduction 
of  a  new  principle,  that  may  prove  injurious  in 
its  operation. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  I  am  one  of  the  few  who 
voted  against  the  new  basis  of  representation 
adopted  yesterday,  and  I  shall  continue  to  vote 
against  it,  however  just  and  correct  its  princi- 
ples may  appear  to  other  gentlemen.  This  new 
measure  of  representation  appears  to  me  as  but 
another  effort  to  create  political  inequality 
amongst  the  freemen  of  this  commonwealth,  and 
it  loses  none  of  its  inherent  vice  and  injustice 
by  being  involved  in  such  uncertainty,  that  gen- 
tlemen cannot  point  to  the  particular  locality 
which  is  to  be  unduly  benefitted  or  injured  by 
it.     Indeed,  this  uncertainty  enhances  its  dan- 

fers,  and  to  such  a  degree,  that  they  may  be 
ire  to  the  friends  of  this  movement  and  their 
constituents,  and  may  work  out  results  the  very 
reverse  of  those  anticipated  by  these  gentlemen 
yesterday.  Gentlemen  seem  to  be  sensitive  on 
this  point  this  morning,  and  many  of  them  wil- 
ling to  retrace  their  steps;  hence  they  move  a  re- 
consideration. 

This  is  a  struggle  to  transfer  political  power 
from  one  portion  of  the  commonwealth  to  anoth- 
er; and  to  effect  it,  gentlemen  resort  to  a  basis 
of  representation  containing  new  elements,  and 
propose  to  take  from  the  qualified  voters  of  some 
section,  (but  what  section  is  uncertain,)  their 
political  power,  influence,  and  weight,  and  to 
transfer  and  lodge  the  same  with  the  women  and 
children  of  another  section  of  the  state,  but  de- 
nying to  these  women  and  children  the  exercise 
of  these  powers,  whilst  their  husbands  and  fa- 
thers are  allowed  the  double  privilege  of  voting 
for  themselves  and  their  families,  and  for  the 
widows  and  orphans  of  these  favored  districts. 
Sir,  if  this  new  basis  is  to  be  acted  uppn,  let  us 
confer  upon  the  women  of  this  commonwealth 
the  right  of  suffrage,  and  let  them  vote  for  them- 
selves and  their  children;  but  let  us  not  give 
to  one  freeman  double  the  political  weight  and 
importance  of  another  in  tne  legislation  of  the 
country. 

I  have  examined  the  auditor's  book,  and  I  find 
that  the  new  basis  of  representation  would  prob- 
ably advance  the  weight  and  influence  of  ray 
county  as  greatly  as  that  of  almost  any  other 
county.  I  find  that,  whilst  in  many  counties 
the  children  aged  between  five  and  sixteen  do 
not  exceed  in  numbers  the  qualified  voters  there- 
in, in  Boone  there  is  an  excess  of  children, 
within  the  years  before  named,  of  near  four  hun- 
dred over  tne  voters;  and  it  is  not  from  any  ap- 
prehension that  my  constituents  will  lose  by  the 
change  that  I  oppose  this  new  measure  of  rep- 
resentation. No  sir.  It  is  becau.se,  to  my  mind,  it 
appears  unequal  and  unjust,  and  full  of  inconve- 
nience, that  I  liave  recorded  my  vote  against  it. 
Sir,  let  us  strip  the  tiling  of  all  disguise  and 
concealment,  and  how  will  it  appear?    Is  there 

any  delegate  upon  this  floor  that  is  willing  to 
say  that  he  will   vote  for    an   apportionment 

which  shall  give  to  one  thousand  voters  in  the 
county  of  Cumberland,  or  any  other   interior 

county,  as  much  political  importance  and  weight 


as  he  gives  to  1500  or  2000  voters  in  Jefferson, 
or  a  border  county.  Scarcely,  sir,  will  any  one 
be  found  to  advocate  such  a  proposition.  Yet, 
sir,  in  principle  the  new  basis  of  representation 
is  the  same,  and  in  practice  it  may  work  out 
very  similar  results. 

Ihus  stands  this  measure  in  its  naked  deform- 
ity; but  when  disguised  under  the  habiliments 
of  conferring  rights  upon  women  and  children, 
it  appears  a  veiy  different  thing  from  what  it 
really  is.  Our  present  constitution  provides  "that 
all  freemen,  wneii  they  form  a  social  compact, 
are  equal,"  but  I  have  never  yet  heard  of  any 
declaration  of  principles,  or  political  platform, 
declaring  that  women  and  children  were  equal, 
or  that  they  were  equal  with  men  in  a  political 
point  of  view.  At  present  the  qualified  voters 
of  the  commonwmltli  form  the  basis  of  represen- 
tation and  I  think  the  correct  basis.  These  vo- 
ters are  the  husbands,  fatliers,  or  guardians,  of 
the  females  and  children  of  our  state,  and  they 
represent  them  and  do  their  voting;  and  as  the 
people  have  not  demanded  any  change  I  shall 
not  vote  for  any. 

But  as  to  the  mode  of  apportioning  represen- 
tation, whatever  basis  may  be  adopted,  I  have  a 
word  to  say.  My  county,  with  a  large  residu- 
um above  the  ratio  required  for  one  representa- 
tive, has  never  yet  been  entitled  to  two;  but  has, 
for  many  years,  been  a  creditor  of  her  adjoining 
counties — lending  them  herresiduums  to  entitle 
tliem  to  a  representative.  But,  sir,  under  this 
new  or  amended  constitution,  which  we  are 
making,  we  want  to  use  our  whole  force  for  our- 
selves; and  if  I  can  ascertain  that  the  plan  of- 
fered by  the  gentleman  from  Fleming  can  be 
made  practicable,  1  shall  go  for  it.  1  his  plan 
proposes  one  representative  to  each  county,  and 
that  each  representative  shall  be  entitled  to  one 
vote  for  every  one  hundred  constituents  he  may 
have.  This  would  leave  no  residuums,  and 
would  give  to  each  county  its  just  weight  in  the 
legislature  of  our  state;  but  in  committee  of  the 
whole  I  do  not  see  hoAv  the  vote  could  bo  taken 
under  this  plan,  and  it  would  be  somewhat 
troublesome  even  in  the  house. 

I  hope  we  shall  adhere  to  the  old  basis  of  rep- 
re:sentation,  and  adopt  that  plan  of  apportion- 
ment which  shall  operate  most  equally  and  just- 
ly upon  the  counties,  towns,  ana  cities,  entitled 
to  separate  representation. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  rise,  more  partic- 
ularly, to  ask  my  friend  from  McCracken  and 
Ballard,  (Mr.  Gholson,)  that  although  his  per- 
ception is  so  clear  upon  this  subject,  that  he  is 
astonished  that  men  differ  with  him,  I  hope  he 
will  bear  with  this  convention,  and  allow  us  to 
take  a  little  time  for  reflection  and  further  ex- 
.ami nation  of  this  important  subject.  I  said 
yesterday,  I  thought  I  saw,  without  the  aid  of 
figures,  without  the  aid  of  the  Auditor's  report, 
or  the  old  census  books,  the  general^effect  of  this 
principle,  if  engrafted  in  the  constitution  of  your 
state.  I  do  hope,  that  there  will  not  be  manifes- 
ted by  my  friend — with  whom  1  differ  with  great 
pain  on  this  occasion — so  much  impatience,  and 
so  much  astonishment,  that  we  arc  consuming 
time  on  this  important  question.  I  said  yester- 
day, that  the  effect  of  the  proposition  is,  to  give 
to  certain  persons,  wherever  located,  a  greater 
political  power  than  they  had  underjthe  old  ba- 


613 


sis  of  representation.  When  gentleniLMi  talk  j  I  will  thereforaniove,  tiiat  this  subject  be  passed 
about  constituting  women  and  children  a  part  I  over  until  to-morrow.  I  think  we  shall  then  b« 
of  the  ba.sis  of  representation,  I  ask  theni  to  en-  i  better  prepared  to  act  upon  it. 
graft  iu  the  constitution,  if  they  fear  that  the!  Mr.  DIXOX.  I  believe  the  gentleman  is  right 
interests  of  married  women,  widows  and  child-  ;  in  making  that  motion.  My  friend  from  Simp- 
ren  will  not  otherwise  be  secured — the  principle  j  son  (Mr.  Clarke)  has  satisfaed  me  it  should  be 
that  once  existed,  if  it  does  not  now,  in  the  con  !  done,  both  for  his  sake,  and  for  the  sake  of  all 
stitution  of  Xew  Jersey — to  give  to  widows  and  {  of  us,  iu  order  that  we  may  come  to  a  right  un- 
unmarried  women  of  mature  age,  the  privilege  :  derstanding.  The  gentleman  a-sked  me  how  I 
of  voting.  But  do  not  sir,"  under  the  plausible  j  knew  my  basis  of  calculation  wa.s  correct.  I  told 
declaration  that  emanates,  I  know,  from  a  kind  I  him,  and  he  replied,  that  that  was  no  basis  of 
heart — that  you  are  giving  to  women  and  child-  j  calculation  which  any  body  could  say  was  cor- 
ren  additional  security,  while  in  fact  you  give  i  rect — that  there  was  no  data  on  which  I,  or 
them  nothing — increa.se  the  number  upon  which  |  any  member  of  the  convention,  could  determine 
representation  is  based.  Give  them  the  power  to  j  the  number  of  the  white  population  in  Kentucky, 
vote,  if  you  will,  and  let  them  exercise  it.  When  I  Mr.  CLARKE.  The  gentleman  certainly  mi's- 
you  establish  the  true  principle  of  responsibil-  I  understood  me.  I  did  not  .say  there  was  no  data 
jty  in  reference  to  the  basis  of  representation,  |  upon  which  he  could  base  such  a  calculation.  I 
and  place  all  freemen  upon  a  perfect  equality,  i  said  there  had  been  no  census  taken  since  1840, 
then  1  am  content.  I  do  not  wish  to  increase  tiie  |  of  the  whole  population  of  the  state, 
power  of  one  freeman,  when  his  location  may  |  y^j.  DIXON.  I  understood  the  gentleman, 
be  among  women  and  children,  at  the  expense  of  j  jje  said,  according  to  his  basis  of  calculation,  the 
another,  who  may  not  be  similarly  ble.ssed.  j  population   of  the  rural   districts  increased   as 

Sir,  I  know  that  gentlemen  may  go  to  the  Aud-  ;  f^^  ^  that  of  the  cities  and  towns.  But  he  does 
itor's  books  and  reports,  and  ascertain  the  num-  ;  pot  pretend  to  sav  that  his  basis  of  calculation 
ber  of  children,  of  a  particular  description,  in  j  i<;  correct.  Is  it  fair  for  the  gentleman  not  only 
different  parts  of  the  stat€  ;  and  ascertain  the  .  ^o  grope  his  own  wav  in  the  dark,  but  to  insist 
number  of  the  foreign  population  that  is  contain-  j  t^^t  others  shall  follow  such  a  lead?  I  do  not 
ed  in  the  despised  city  of  Louisville,  and  how  ,  .j^-jj-jj  ^^  ^^^^  ^ny  innovation  upon  the  great  prin- 
much  that  population  is  to  increase  the  power  of  .  ^.^pl^^  ^f  ^jj^  ojj  constitution,  unlessi  know  what 
the  city;  yet  all  this  does  not  affect  the  great  ;  j  am  doing.  I  am  not  for  doing  injustice  to  the 
principle  of  equal  representation.  j  people  of  anv  portion  of  Kentucky.     If  the   gen- 

How  this  provision    is  to   operate,   I   do  not  ,  tigman  chooses  to  rush  madly  into  the  adoption 


know.  But  I  do  not  wish  to  engraft  in  the  con 
stitution,  an  element  in  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion that  will  have  the  effect  of  creating  a  pre- 
judice against  this  constitution  that  we  are  now 
making,  when  it  shall  be  submitted  to  the  peo- 
ple 


of  a  principle,  the  result  of  which  he  cannot  cal- 
I  culate,  he  ought  not  to  expect  us  to  follow  him. 
!      The  PRESIDENT.     I  ask  leave  of  the  con- 

I  vention  to  state  in  a  very  few  words  the  position 

I I  occupy  on  this  question.     I  am  in  favor  of  the 
j  basis  established  in  our  present  constitution  and 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  There  are  certain  gentlemen  j  voted  for  it,  not  that  I  believe  the  new  basis 
in  this  house,  who  seem  desirous  of  having  every  j  would  unjustly  affect  my  constituency,  for  I  be- 
thing their  own  way.  I  recollect  that  I  made  a  j  Ijeve  from  all  the  calculations  I  have  made  that 
movement  in  this  house  at  an  early  period  of  tlie  it  would,  in  all  human  probability,  give  them  an 
session.  Gentlemen  were  not  then  prepared  to  |  additional  member;  but  I  have  felt  satisfied 
vote  upon  the  proposition  I  submitted.      They  |  that  the  old  basis  was  correct,  and   understood 


wanted  time  for  reflection.  It  was  granted  to 
them,  and  they  then  had  it  all  their  own  way. 
Now  I  am  again  told  not  to  press  this  question, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  gentlemen  will  have  this 
matter  all  their  own  way  too.     Yet  I  have  no  ob- 


by  the  people,  and  that  no  change  was  demand- 
ed. I  did  not  come  here  to  vote  for  any  thing 
that  would  give  ray  constituency  any  advantage 
to  which  they  were  not  entitled.  All  that  I  de- 
sired for  them  was  equal  representation  accord- 


jection  to  pass  this  section  over,  and  take  up  the  i  ing  to  the  number  of  qualified  voters  in  every 
next.  I  am  willing  they  shall  have  as  much  time  !  portion  of  the  state.  That  was  the  reason  I 
as  they  want.  What  I  object  to  is,  so  much  i  voted  against  this  nitasure  yesterday,  well  ap- 
talking  and  no  voting.  |  prised,  from  a  calculation  maide  by  my  colleague, 

Mr.  MACHEX.  There  seems  to  have  been  j  and  my  own  observation,  that  in  all  probability 
such  an  entire  revolution  iu  this  house,  within  i  it  would  give  Louisville  another  member.  I 
the  twenty- four  hours  past,  that  perhaps  the  same  |  will  state  my  objections  to  the  proposed  basis.  It 
course  of  reasoning  that  has  superinduced  the  j  might  so  happen  that  a  gentleman  who  had 
change  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  gentlemen  who  |  been  twenty  years  a  natursdized  citizen  might 
oppose  this  proposition,  might,  when  under- i  have  a  wife  whenever  had  been  naturalized,  and 
stood,  change  the  opinions  of  the  balance  of  us.  |  who,  under  the  provisions  of  this  proposition, 
I  think  it  is  due  to  us,  that  we  should  at  lea.st  i  would  not  be  entitled  to  be  enumerated;  she  not 
have  time  for  reflection.  The  resolution  was  i  being  a  citizen;  though  the  laws  of  the  state  en- 
passed  by  such  atriumphant  vote  yesterday,  that '  title  her  to  all  the  civil  rights  of  holding  prop^r- 
1  did  not  think  it  neces-sary  to  prepare  any  ar-  ;  tv   and  enjoying  it.     If  he    came  with   infant 


guments  in  its  support;  for  I  did  not  expect  it 
would  meet  any  opposition  to-day.  I  tnought 
the  question  was  settled.    It  is  now  pronounced 


cliildren  they  would  be  aliens  and  not  entitled 
to  be  enumerated.  Those  that  are  bom  here, 
though  of  foreign  parents,  according  to  my  un- 


to be  an  abstraction;  if  so,  it  is  an  importautab-  i  derstanding  of  the  law,  are  free  born  citizens, 
straclion;  it  is  one  on  which  a  great  deal  of  the  and  when  they  come  to  mature  age  are  entitled 
future  action  of  this  government  is  to  be  based.  I  to  the  rights  of  mature  age  upon  that  subject. 


614 


Thus,  according  to  my  understanding  of  the  law, 
all  that  are  born  in  Kentucky  or  in  tlie  United 
States  are  citizens,  although  of  foreign  born  pa- 
rents. The  assessor  then,  in  making  out  the 
enumeration,  is  to  select  from  the  hou.sehold  of 
the  naturalized  citizen  and  leave  the  wife  out  if 
slie  is  not  native  born,  and  to  exclude  the  chil- 
dren not  native  born  and  to  take  only  those  born 
here.  I  have  another  objection,  and  that  is,  the 
requirement  of  I'esidence  one  year  in  the  city 
and  county  next  preceding  the  enumeration. 
They  would  by  tlie  time  the  apportionment  was 
made  for  two  j^ears  have  been  entitled  to  vote, 
and  thus  for  one  year  they  would  have  been  ex- 
cluded from  the  apportionment.  It  struck  me 
that  even  if  it  be  true  that  a  larger  portion  of 
children  between  the  ages  of  five  and  six  are 
found  in  certain  counties  of  the  state  than  in 
others,  there  wauld  be  the  same  proportion  of 
from  sixteen  to  twenty,  and  that  the  years  as 
they  elapse  will  add  to  those  counties  their  fair 
proportion  of  representation  according  to  their 
increase  in  numbers,  and  that  they  will  thus  be 
represented.  Well,  I  have  another  objection,  it 
is  the  principle  (if  gentlemen  will  forgive  me 
for  the  word,)  of  native  Amercanism,  which 
excludes  the  family  and  children  of  men  natu- 
ralized from  the  enumeration,  and  proscribing 
them,  for  it  has  that  effect,  from  participating  in 
the  government  of  the  country.  It  was  un- 
doubtedly not  designed,  and  I  feel  satisfied  that 
many  who  voted  for  this  principle  were  unaAvare 
that  it  was  striking  at  tliat  population,  and  in- 
directly at .  file  naturalization  laws.  I  have 
made  these  statements  that  gentlemen  may  re- 
flect on  it,  and  to  show  my  position,  which  is 
upon  the  basis  of  political  numbers.  Tlio.se  to 
whom  you  give  the  right  to  vote  should,  in  my 
judgment,  be  the  basis  of  the  representation.  If 
we  were  a  democracy,  where  all  might  meet  to 
make  the  laws  and  govern  themselves,  you 
would  select  some  to  do  it.  We  select  all  that 
are  twenty  one  years  of  age,  native  born  and 
naturalized  citizens,  and  when  we  make  a  repre- 
sentative government  it  is  to  represent  them. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  beg  leave  to  ask  if  it  was 
the  original  resolution,  as  adopted  by  the  house, 
or  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  upon  which  the  ])rcsident  com- 
mented. 

The  PRESIDEjN'T.  It  was  the  amendment 
now  pending.  I  was  not  able  to  get  hold  of  the 
original  resolution. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  In  drawing  that  resolution  I 
certainly  did  not  intend,  either  directly  or  indi- 
rectly, 1o  witlihold  from  tlie  children  of  our  nat- 
uralized citizens  the  right  to  be  enumerated. 
Nobody  can  be  more  opposed  to  Native  Ameri- 
canism, in  any  shape  or  form,  than  myself.  And 
if  there  be  any  language  contained  in  my  reso- 
lution that  couM  be  construed  into  sucli  a  thing, 
I  am  willing,  when  tlie  ])rinciplc  shall  have  been 
adopted,  to  place  it  in  language  so  clear  that  no 
such  construction  can  be  placed  upon  it. 

The  section,  by  general  cgnseut  was  then  pass- 
ed over. 

The  seventh  section  was  then  read,  and  adop- 
ted without  amendment. 

The  eighth  section  was  then  read  as  follows: 

"Sbc.  a.  Every  free,  white  male  citiz«>n  of  the 
age  of  twenty  one  years,  who  hiM  resided  in  this 


slate  two  years,  or  in  the  county ,' town,  or  city^,'' 
in  whicli  he  offers  to.  vote,  one  year  next  prece-  ' 
ding  the  election,  shall  be  a  voter,  but  siich  vo- 
ter shall  have  been,  for  sixty  days  next  preceding 
the  election,  a  resident  of  the  precinct  in  which 
he  offers  to  vote,  and  he  shall  cast  his  vote  in 
said  precinct,  and  not  elsewhere.  Voters,  in  all 
cases  except  treason,  felony,  breach,  or  surety  of 
the  peace,  shall  be  privileged  from  arrest  during 
their  attendance  at,  going  to,  and  returning  from 
elections. 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  to  strike  out  the  word 
"precinct,"'  and  insert  "county,"  so  that  it  should 
require  a  residence  of  sixty  days  in  the  county 
instead  of  the  precinct,  before  the  citizen  should 
be  entitled  to  vote. 

Mr.  DESHA  moved  as  an  amendment  to  the 
amendment,  to  strike  out  all  of  the  section  ex- 
cept the  clause  requiring  a  residence  in  the  state. 
He  had  no  desire  to  disfranchise  a  citizen  of  the 
state  merely  because  he  removed  from  one  county 
to  another,  a  couple  of  months  before  the  elec- 
tion. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  will  briefly  state  the  rea- 
sons which  influenced  the  committee  to  repoit 
the  section.  They  were  aware  that  in  some  in- 
stances it  might  operate  as  a  hardship  upon  citi- 
zens of  the  state,  Avho  had  removed  to  another 
county  a  day  or  two  before  the  election,  but  there 
were  evils  suggested,  the  necessity  for  the  remo- 
val of  which,  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  the 
elective  franchise  from  imposition,  was  so  pow- 
erful as  to  outweigh  the  consideration  of  these 
little  sacrifices.  When  counties  are  nearly  equally 
divided, so  far  as  parties  are  concerned,  itveiy  fre- 
quently occurs  that  voters  are  colonized  there 
from  other  counties,  and  it  intended  to  guard 
against  this.  And  where  one  would  be  disfran- 
chised by  the  operation  of  this  section,  every 
gentleman  at  all  acquainted  with  politics  will 
bear  me  out  in  saying  that  three  now  come  into 
a  county  and  give  their  vote  where  they  are  not 
entitled  to.  Again,  the  committee  assumed  as 
the  sense  of  the  convention,  that  the  different 
counties  in  the  state,  should  be  laid  off  into  dis- 
tricts,andthattherewouldbe  election  precincts  in 
each  district,  and  the  very  same  reasons  which  in- 
fluenced them  in  the  firit  instance,  induced  them 
to  say  that  no  voter  should  vote  out  of  the  limits 
of  his  district.  If  this  thingof  colonizingvotes  in 
districts  was  not  restrained,  it  would  allow  dis-  '^ 
tricts  where  parties  were  strong  to  send  their  sur-  ' 
plus  vote  into  other  districts  whore  they  were  not 
ho  strong,  and  determine  wrongfully  the  result  of 
their  elections.  These  wci\;  among  the  reasons 
which  influenced  the  committee  in  reporting  the 
section  as  it  stands, 

Mr.  MACHEN.     I  go  with  the  gentleman  from 
Harrison,  (Mr.  Desha,)  in  striking  out  the  re- 
quirement of  a  residence  of  sixty  days  in  the     "' 
precinct;  but  I  am  in  favor  of  requiring  him  to     2 
vote  in  tlie  precinct  in  which  he  resides.     Is  that 
the  purport  of  the  gentleman's  amendment? 

Mr.  DESHA.  My  object  is  to  leave  the  con- 
stitution in  this  respect,  as  it  noAv  is,  and  as  I 
stated  before,  to  give  to  every  citizen  of  the  state 
wlio  proposes  to  become  a  permanent  resident 
of  any  county,  the  right  to  vote  there,  even  if 
he  lias  come  only  a  day  before  tlio  election. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  This  vote  is  to  decide  wheth- 
er the    votere   shall  vote    within    or  without 


G15 


their  precincts.  The  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Harrison  gives  them  tlie  right  to  vote 
anywhere  in  the  county  or  in  the  precinct  as 
heretofore  provided  under  the  old  constitution. 
This  section  restricts  the  voter  to  his  precinct, 
and  the  object  of  this  xras  explained  by  my 
friend,  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  (Mr. 
Clarke,)  to  be  to  prevent  what  lias  frequently 
been  complained  of,  pipe-laying  and  frauds  up- 
on the  elective  franchise  in  this  state.  If,  as  it 
seems  to  be  contemplated,  the  counties  shall  be 
divided  into  convenient  districts  for  voting, 
nothing  is  so  sure  as  that,  if  you  give  the  elector 
the  right  to  vote  any  where  in  the  county  or  at 
the  county  seat,  it  will,  in  excited  elections, 
retard  the  operation  of  fair  voting  by  crowding 
the  polls,  rendering  it  difficult  to  take  the  votes, 
and  leading  to  great  disorders.  But,  if  the  section 
is  to  be  stricken  out,  I  desire  tliat  Louisville  shall 
be  made  an  exception.  Otherwise,  should  the 
city  be  divided  into  assembly  districts,  the  voter 
would,  under  the  proposed  amendment,  be  al- 
lowed to  vote  out  of  his  district,  and  where  ever 
he  chose  in  the  city. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  Upon  this  subject  at  least,  I 
came  here  instructed  fully.  It  was  fully  dis- 
cussed in  my  section;  and  if  the  people  there 
want  any  thing,  it  is  that  the  voter  shall  be  con- 
fined to  his  county  and  his  precinct,  and  that 
this  pipe-laying  shall  be  put  an  end  to.  If  there 
was  any  objection  to  the  section  in  my  judgment, 
it  was  perhaps  to  the  length  of  residence  requir- 
ed in  the  state,  and  in  the  county.  Where  a  man 
moves  into  a  county,  pays  taxes,  and  becomes  a 
bona  fide  resident,  he  should  be  entitled  to  the 
right  of  suffrage.  However.  I  shall  vote  for  the 
section  as  it  stands,  believing  that  the  voter 
should  be  required  to  vote  in  his  precinct,  and  to. 
have  resided  sixty  days  in  it.  Otherwise,  men 
might  ride  all  over  the  county  and  vote  in  as 
many  precincts  as  they  choose.  Such  tilings  have 
been  done. 

Mr.  GRAY.  The  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Ohio,  (Mr.  McHenry,)  if  I  understand 
it,  does  not  alter  the  operation  of  the  section, 
but  merely  allows  those  who  may  remove  from 
one  district  to  another  in  the  same  county,  the 
right  to  vote  wherever  they  may  reside,  and  be- 
fore the  end  of  sixty  days,  if  they  are  bona  fide 
citizens  of  the  precinct,  and  have  the  requisite 
residence  of  sixty  days  in  the  county.  Then 
the  amendment  does  not  permit,  as  suggested 
by  the  gentleman,  the  voters  to  go  from  one  pre- 
cinct to  another  to  vote.  If  a  gentleman  has 
resided  sixty  days  within  a  county,  there  clear- 
Iv  can  be  no  reason  why  he  should  be  deprived  of 
tlie  right  of  suffrage.  If  he  has  that  residence,  it 
makes  no  difference  in  what  precinct  he  votes, 
so  that  he  does  not  vote  in  more  than  one.  But  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio  is  a  suf- 
ficient guard  against  fraud,  in  that  it  requires 
him  to  vote  in  the  precinct  in  which  he  resided. 
The  words  '"and  not  elsewliere,"  should  be 
stricken  out  as  mere  surplusage,  a  fault  not  to 
be  desired  in  a  constitution.  The  restriction  is 
sufficiently  explicit  without  it. 

Mr.  Turner,  it  was  the  necessity  for  re- 
form in  the  legislative  department  of  the  gov- 
ernment that  mainly  induced  the  region  of  coun- 
try in  which  I  live,  to  go  for  a  convention.  It 
was  an  every  year's  practice  in  the  upper  part 


of  the  state,  and  I  presume  all  over  the  state,  for 
young  men  to  migrate  from  one  county  to  an- 
other in  contested  elections  for  the  purpose  of 
influencing  the  result.  For  instance,  there 
might  be  a  contested  election  in  Franklin,  and  a 
very  easv  race  in  Anderson.  Well,  the  candi- 
d.ates  in  franklin  would  get  young  men  to  come 
from  A.nderson  into  their  county,  and  tliey 
might  reside  or  even  work  there  for  a  few  day.s 
before  the  election,  and  vot«  there  and  thus  con- 
trol the  result.  This  is  an  abominable  abuse  of 
the  elective  franchise,  and  is  practised  to  an 
outrageous  extent.  It  is  so  in  other  elections. 
I  could  allude  to  an  election  in  my  congressional 
district,  which  made  a  figure  in  the  national 
councils  some  years  ago,  in  which  more  than 
twelve  hundred  votes  were  cast  that  did  not  re- 
side in  the  district.    This  clearly  was  all  wrong. 

It  is  very  seldom  that  I  differ  from  the  gentle- 
man from  Ohio,  and  I  always  doubt  my  own 
judgment  when  I  do,  for  he  is  a  gentleman  of 
most  clear  and  dispassionate  judgment,  but  on 
this  occasion  I  feel  constrained  to  do  so.  Be- 
sides members  of  the  legislature,  it  should  be  re- 
membered that  we  have  to  elect  magistrates, 
constables,  and  other  officers,  to  do  the  public 
business.  It  is  necessary  to  distroy  this  corrupt- 
ing influence  to  which  I  have  referred  in  refer- 
ence to  them,  for  there  will  doubtle.ss  be  a  strug- 
gle for  those  offices,  and  if  pemiitted  in  the  choice 
of  these  minor  officers,  they  will  extend  to  other 
and  greater  ones.  This  colonizingpractice  would 
therefore  be  likely  to  be  increased,  from  the  fact 
that  there  would  be  more  persons  interested  in  it, 
who,  by  their  combination,  would  carry  it  to  a 
greater  extent  than  has  yet  been  known.  I  hope 
therefore  the  section,  as  reported  by  the  commit- 
tee, will  be  retained,  and  that  not  a  word  of  it 
will  be  changed.  It  is  a  proposition  which  will 
carry  out  correctly  and  thoroughly  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  the  government.  Every  voter  should 
be  confined  to  the  precinct  in  which  he  resides. 
If  you  allow  them  to  vote  at  any  point  hi  the 
county,  all  this  corruption  which  now  arises 
from  the  congregation  of  a  large  body  of  men  at 
the  court  house,  and  their  often  illegal  and  im- 
moral proceedings,  will  continue  to  go  on.  Let 
us  have  cool  and  deliberate  elections.  Let  every 
man  vote  in  his  own  precinct,  and  then  all  the 
votes  can  be  taken  in  one  day,  and  the  result  will 
be  a  cool,  deliberate,  and  dispassionate  one.  But 
allow  all  the  floating  votes  to  collect  at  one 
place,  as  heretofore,  and  you  keep  back  the  old 
staid  citizens,  and  allow  all  the  young,  passion- 
ate, and  daring  in  spirit,  to  go  forward  and  con- 
trol the  elections.  Such  has  been  too  much  the 
case  in  Kentucky,  and  I  would  prevent  such  a 
thing  hereafter.  The  people  desire  a  govern- 
ment based  on  the  free,  uncontrolled,  and  delib- 
erate expression  of  opinion,  and  not  one  based 
on  brute  force  and  outrage.  I  think  therefore  we 
ought  not  to  vary  even  in  a  word  from  tlie  propo- 
sition as  report-ed  bv  the  committee. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  It  will  be  perceived 
by  the  convention,  that  if  they  adopt  either  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Harrison,  or 
that  of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio,  the  great  evils 
complained  of  in  one  section  of  the  country 
will  not  be  remedied.  Now,  we  have  some  ex- 
perience in  Jefferson,  which  goes  to  show  the 
utility   of  confining  voters  to  their    precincts. 


616 


Our  county  seat  ia  at  Louisville,  and  by  law,  for 
the  last  eight  or  ten  years,  the  voter  has  been 
required  to  vote  in  his  precinct,  because  by  law 
he  was  not  allowed  to  go  to  the  county  seat. 
Now,  if  a  man  resides  in  Louisville,  he  is  also 
a  resident  of  the  county  of  Jefferson,  and  if  a 
sixty  days  residence  iu  his  precinct  is  not  re- 
quired, he  has  but  to  change  his  residence  to 
Jefferson,  and  then  he  becomes  a  legal  voter. 

Mr.  GRAY.    He  ought  to  be  so. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Then  it  ought  to  be  in 
the  power  of  the  city  of  Louisville  to  control 
the  election  in  Jefferson  county,  if  that  principle 
is  right.  I  have  seen  an  occasion  when  three 
hundred  voters  were  thus  moved  in  Jefferson, 
and  I  do  not  attach  the  blame  to  either  party;  but 
if  you  look  at  the  vote  for  and  against  a  conven- 
tion in  the  year  preceding,  you  will  find  that  there 
were  only  one  hundred  and  seventy-four  votes 
for  a  convention  in  1837.  In  1847,  after  these 
frauds  were  committed,  it  would  be  found  that  a 
large  majority  iu  the  county  went  for  a  conven- 
tion, and  oue  of  the  principal  reasons  for  it, 
■was  a  desire  to  corect  this  thing.  If  you  re- 
quire the  voter  to  reside  sixty  days  in  a  precinct, 
the  judges  of  the  election  or  "the  clerk  will 
know  the  voter,  and  whether  he  is  entitled  to 
vote  or  not,  and  they  can  permit  him  to  vote  or 
not,  as  he  may  be  authorized  under  the  constitu- 
tion. But  if  you  permit  a  man  to  come  in  but 
yesterday,  and  vote  to-day,  you  put  it  in  the 
power  of  either  candidate  who  may  so  wish  to 
obtain  the  election  by  fraud,  to  succeed  in  the 
county  of  Jefferson,  more  particularly  perhaps 
than  elsewhere,  because  the  sixty  days  residence 
in  the  county  would  also  include  a  residence  in 
Louisville.  As  to  the  remark  of  the  gentleman 
from  Harrison,  that  the  voter  changing  his  resi- 
dence immediately  preceding  the  election, 
should  not  be  deprived  of  the  right  of  suffrage. 
It  is  true  there  may  be  some  liafdships  thereby 
produced,  but  it  must  also  be  recollected  that 
there  are  very  few  bonajide  residents  of  the  state 
who  change  their  residence  at  that  season  of  the 

f'ear.  And  as  for  the  few  who  do,  it  is  better  to 
et  them  submit  to  that  deprivation,  than  to 
open  the  flood-gates  to  "pipe-laying"  throughout 
the  state. 

Mr.  HAMILTON,  if  in  order,  desired  to  offer 
an  amendment,  reducing  the  requirement  of 
residence  from  sixty  to  thirty  days. 

The  PRESIDEN  T  ruled  it  out  of  order  at  that 
time. 

Mr.  IRWIN  called  for  a  division  of  the  ques- 
tion, so  that  the  vote  could  be  taken  first  on 
striking  out. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  was  at  first  disposed  to 
go  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Ohio,  but  on  reflection  I  am  satisfied  that  it 
■would  lead  us  into  difficulty.  The  counties  are 
to  be  districted  for  the  election  of  justices  of 
the  peace  and  constables,  and  experience  proves 
to  us  that  there  will  be  just  as  much  excitement 
about  the  election  of  those  officers  as  any  other. 
Now,  if  the  voter  is  only  required  to  be  sixty 
days  in  the  county,  without  reference  to  the  pre- 
cint,  will  they  not  rnn  over  from  one  precinct  to 
another,  fortne  purpose  of  electing  a  magistrate 
in  a  particular  district?  Therefore,  it  seems  to 
ine  we  had  better  stick  to  the  text,  as  presented 
to  OS  by  the  committee. 


Mr.  COFFEY.  I  ain  against  striking  out,  and 
for  the  best  reason  in  the  world.  I  came  here 
tied  hand  and  foot,  and  for  the  very  reason  as- 
signed by  my  friend  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner) 
that  there  is  a  class  of  young  men  iu  the  coun- 
try, that  change  their  residences,  and  come  into 
counties  to  influence  the  election.  It  was  this 
that  brought  me  here  tied  hand  and  foot.  I 
speak,  therefore,  from  my  own  knowled,^e. 
There  were  some  six  or  eight  votes  of  tliis  de- 
scription polled,  for  and  against  me,  and  this  led 
to  the  tie.  Let  the  section  stand  as  it  is,  re- 
stricting every  man  to  voting  in  the  precinct 
where  he  resides  and  is  known. 

Mr.  McHENRY  changed  his  amendment  to 
meet  the  views  of  some  gentlemen,  so  as  to  sub- 
stitute for  county,  the  words  "city  or  county." 
He  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on  his  motion. 

Mr.  DESHA.  I  shall  vote  for  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Ohio,  but  I  shall  vote 
against  the  adoption  of  the  section,  unless  it  is 
further  amended,  as  I  have  indicated. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  Like  the  gentleman  from 
Ballard  and  McCracken,  if  I  have  been  instruct- 
ed on  any  thing,  it  is  to  vote  to  require  a  man  to 
have  a  residence  some  length  of  time  in  the 
county,  before  he  is  entitled  to  vote.  The 
ground  upon  which  I  ran  the  race  was,  that  he 
should  be  required  to  live  there  nine  months, 
and  the  people,  by  a  strong  majority,  ratified  it. 
I  would  like  to  enquire  of  the  gentleman  from 
Harrison  if  he  desires  to  perpetuate  what  we 
call  importing  votes  and  frauds  on  elections,  by 
allowing  a  candidate  and  his  friends  to  go  to  an 
adjoining  county,  where  they  do  not  have  so 
much  use  for  the  voters,  and  bring  them  over  by 
scores  to  determine  the  election?  I  have  seen 
the  people  so  outraged  by  transactions  of  this 
character,  that  they  have  come  to  the  polls  arm- 
ed, and  driven  off  these  imported  voters.  I 
know  in  one  particular  instance,  where  to  the 
number  of  twelve;  and  I  could  call  the  names 
of  every  one  of  them,  and  where  they  live. 
They  were  brought  into  my  county  from  the  ad- 
joining counties-  They  were  taken  to  one  pre- 
cinct, where  the  old  precinct  law  was  rung  in 
upon  them,  and  they  were  refused  the  right  to 
vote.  They  then  came  to  the  court  house,  where 
every  body  has  a  right  to  vote,  and  nothing  but 
the  force  of  arms  drove  them  off.  And  they 
went  to  another  precinct,  and  my  friends  and 
the  friends  of  good  order  generally,  had  to  in- 
tercede to  prevent  the  people  from  going  and  at- 
tacking them  on  the  highway,  as  a  band  of  po- 
litical robbers. 

The  people  of  Kentucky,  are  in  my  opinion 
en  Twasse  honest,  and  they  do  not  desire  that  a 
man  from  another  county  should  be  allowed  to 
step  into  another,  and  there  first  cast  his  vote, 
and  step  back  again.  Some  gentlemen  seem  to, 
think  that  under  the  report  of  the  committee," 'i 
some  honest  bona  tide  voter  of  the  county  will 
be  deprived  of  voting.  That  difficulty  can  be 
remedied  very  easily,  by  every  man  who  desires 
to  retain  the  exercise  of  the  right  of  suffrage 
taking  the  spring  of  the  year,  about  the  time  he 
intends  to  plant  a  crop,  and  raise  something  for 
his  family,  for  the  period  of  his  removal.  The 
sixty  days  then  would  not  touch  him.  But  those 
fellows  who  dodge  about  and  come  in  to  cut 
wood,  or  get  out  iron  ore,  and  who  vote  for  th« 


61^ 


dollar,  and  nothing  else,  and  whose  residence  it 
■would  be  hard  to  fix  ;  these  are  the  men  I  desire 
to  guard  against.  I  am  opposed  to  pipe-laying, 
and  against  it  out  and  out.  I  therefore  hope 
that  the  convention  will  adopt  the  report  of  the 
committee  just  as  it  stands.  It  is,  to  be  sure, 
not  quite  as  strong  as  I  am  instructed  to  go, 
but  I  \rill  take  it,   believing  that  it  will  do. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  These  things  are  certainly 
new  to  me.  We  have  nothing  of  this  kind  in 
my  county,  and  I  should  like  to  hear  tlie  experi- 
ence of  other  gentlemen  on  the  subject  of  pipe 
laying,  and  see  if  it  corroborates  that  of  the  gen- 
tleman last  up.  I  certainly  am  disposed  to  act 
for  the  good  order  of  the  country. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  merely  ask' that  Uie  gentle- 
man should  suspend  his  vote  at  the  next  election, 
and  I  think  I  can  carry  him  where  he  will  have 
ocular  demonstration  of  these  facts. 

Mr.  DIOSHA.  I  am  as  much  in  favor  of  guard- 
ingthe  purity  of  the  elective  franchise,  as  any  gen- 
tleman can  be,  and  notwithstanding  I  have  been 
engaged  in  several  canvasses,  the  citiaens  of  my 
county  and  all  who  know  me,  will  attest  that  1 
abhor  corruption  in  elections,  and  have  never 
resorted,  to  it.  My  amendment  was  only  to  guard 
the  bona  fide  innocent  residents  from  being  de- 
prived of  the  right  of  suffrage.  As  to  the  re- 
mark, that  verv  few  would  change  their  resi- 
dences, except  in  the  spring,  this  would  apply 
very  well  to  tliose  engaged  in  agricultural  pur- 
suits, but  there  are  many  in  other  professions, 
mechanics  and  others,  that  would  come  within 
that  two  months  requisition,  and  thus  be  depriv- 
ed of  their  votes.  It  was  these  that  I  desired  to 
protect. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  regard  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman  from  Ohio  as  proper  and  right.  It  re- 
q^uires  that  the  voter  shall  reside  in  the  county 
sixty  daj's  before  the  election,  which  is  a  safe- 
guard against  fraud.  If  a  citizen  has  lived  that 
length  of  time  in  the  county,  why  not  let  him 
vote  at  any  point  in  it?  It  can  do  no  wrong. 
The  object  was  to  prevent  those  who  live  out  of 
the  county  from  coming  in  and  voting.  I  shall 
Tote  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Ohio  and  again.st  excluding  an  honest  citizen 
from  voting  merely  because  he  may  cliance  to 
remove  from  one  precinct  to  another. 

Mr.  RUDD.  The  amendment  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Ohio,  in  my  view,  would  promote 
those  very  practices  against  which  the  commit- 
tee are  seeking  to  guard.  The  object  of  *he  sec- 
tion was  to  prevent  this  immigration  from  one 
precinct  to  another,  by  requiring  a  fixed  term  of 
residence  in  the  precinct.  Without  such  a  re- 
quisition, voters  would  be  transferred  from  one 
ward  to  the  other  in  the  citv  of  Louisville,  as 
candidates  might  desire  to  effect  a  particiUar  ob- 
ject. It  was  to  prevent  occurrences  like  those 
referred  to  by  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson  (Mr. 
Meriwether)  that  the  section  of  the  committee 
■was  designed.  It  was  hard,  to  be  sure,  for  a 
man  to  lose   his  vote   for  want  of  the  requisite 

time,  but  it  was  a  greater  hardship  for  the  people  j  Coleman,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Chas- 
of  a  county  to  see  a  man  foisted  upon  them '  teen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green 
against  their  will,  by  voters  from  other  counties.  |  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Jas, 
I  know  an  instance  where  one  of  the  parties  had  i  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J. 
forty  voters  concealed  in  the  neighborhood  of  {  Gough,  Xinian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent 
the  city,  with  the  intention  of  having  tiemvote  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
the  next  day  in  a  certain  precinct.  That  night, '  M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
78 


however,  men  of  the  other  party  Went  out  and 
stole  them,  if  you  please — took  every  one  of 
them  off  and  voted  every  man  of  them.  Well , 
it  was  perhaps  all  fair,  seeing  that  they  were 
brought  there  for  a  fraudulent  purpose.  This  is 
the  kind  of  practice  tliat  I  desire  to  prevent. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  desire  to  present  this  amend- 
ment : — "Provided,  That  when  any  city  or  town, 
shall  be  entitled  to  a  separate  representation  the 
sixty  days  residence  here  required,  shall  be  in 
the  city,  and  not  in  the  county,  and  when  any 
town  or  city  shall  have  been  divided  off  into 
separate  election  districts,  the  same  period  of 
residence  shall  be  required  in  such  district. 

Mr.  PRESTOX'^  moved  the  previous  question, 
which  was  seconded,  and  the  main  question  was 
ordered. 

The  amendment  of  Mr.  McHEXRY  was  then 
rejected — the  yeas  and  nays  being  demanded  by 
him — yeas  30,  nays  60,  as  follows  : 

Teas — William  Bradley,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Benja- 
min Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Milford  Elli- 
ott, Selucius  Garfielde,  X^'inian  E.  Gray,  John 
Harris,  William  Hendrix,  Tho.  J.  Hoocl,  Mark 
E.  Huston,  Thomas  James,  Geo.  W  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  John  H.  Mc- 
Henry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Hugh  Xewell,  Thom- 
as Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Steven-son, 
James  W.  Stone,  William  R.  Thompson — 30. 

Xats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

f>erson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wu- 
iam  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Garrett  Davis,  Jas.  Dudley,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green 
Forrest,  Xathan  Gaither,  Jas.  H.  Garrard,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben. Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jactson,  Wil- 
liam Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
William  C.  Marshall,  Xathan  McClure,  David 
Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Mor- 
ris, James  M.  Xesbitt,  Jonathan  Xewcum,  Eli- 
jah F.  X'uttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Pres- 
ton, Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  John  J.  Thurman,  Ho-vvard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  John 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Chas.  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  X^.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 60. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  section 
as  reported,  and  it  was  agreed  to — ^j'eas  66,  nays 
24,  as  follows : 
Yeas— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

f>erson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wfl- 
iam  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse   Coffey,  Henry  R.  D. 


618 


ston,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos. 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Wm.  C.  Marshall, 
Ifathari  McClure,  John  H.  McHeury,  David  Mer- 
iwether, William  D.  Mitehell,  John  D.  Morris, 
James  M.  Nesbith,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah 
F.  Xuttall,  Ilenrv  B.  PoUarcl,  William  Preston, 
Jonathan  Price,  tarkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Kob- 
inson,  John  T.  Rogers,  James  Riidd,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert  U.  Tal- 
bott,  John  D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thiirmau,  How- 
ard Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffo,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Geo. 
W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
— G6. 

Nays — William  Bradlejy,  William  Chenault, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Milford 
Elliott,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Wm. 
Hendrix,  Thos.  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Thos. 
James,  George  W.  Kavaiiaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marsliafl, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  Hugh  Newell,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Stevenson,  William  R. 
Thompson — 24. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY.  NOVEMBER  22,  1849. 

Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  that  the  roll  he  called. 

The  attendance  of  members  was  smaller  tlian 
usual,  attributable  probably,  to  the  .stormy  and 
inclement  weather. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for,  and  taken 
on  the  motion  to  call  the  roll,  and  it  was  re- 
jected; yeas  2:3,  nays  56. 

Mr.  BARLOW  submitted  a  resolution  to  ob- 
.tain  an  expression  of  the  sense  of  the  conven- 
tion on  the  subject  of  evening  sessions.  He 
proposed  that  each  day  at  one  o'clock,  the  presi- 
•dent  should  announce  a  recess  to  2^2  o'clock. 

After  a  brief  conversation,  the  resolution  was 
laid  oa  the  table. 

BASIS  o?  reprp:sentation. 

Mr.  APPERSON  offered  the  following,  which 
on  his  motion,  was  ordered  to  be  printed: 

Resolved,  That  representation  shall  be  equal 
and  uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  as  near  as 
may  be,  and  shall  be  forever  regulated  and  as- 
certained by  the  number  of  representative  popu- 
lation therein.  At  the  first  session  of  the  gen- 
eral assembly  after  the  adoption  of  this  consti- 
tution, and  every  eighth  year  thereafter,  pro- 
■visioa  shall  be  made  by  1  aw,  •  that  in  the  year 
,  and  every  eighth  year  thereafter,  an 
enumeration  «f  all  tie  representative  popula- 
tion of  tlie  state  shall  be  made.  The  number 
of  representatives  i^iall,  in  the  several  vears  of 
making  these  enunaeratious,  be  so  fixecf  as  not 
to  be  less  than  eighty,  nor  more  than  one  hun- 
dred; Biid  /or  the  purpose  of  apportionment,  the 
state  is  hereby  divid6<l  into  four  districts. 

The  first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
oeunttes  of  Pike,  Floyd,  .lohnson,   Lawn^nce, 


Carter,  ('rrecnup,  Lewl^,  Ma^on,  Bracken,  Har- 
rison, Nicholas,  Bourbon,  Clarke,  Estill,  Mont- 
gsmery,  Bath,  Fleming,  Morgan,  Breathitt, 
wsley,  Clay,  Laurel,  Rockcastle,  Madison, 
Whitley,  Knox,,  Harlan,  Perry,  and  Letcher. 

The  second  district  shall  be  composed  of  tlie 
counties  of  Pendleton,  Campbell,  Kenton,  Boone, 
Gallatin,  Carroll,  Trimble,  Oldham,  Henry, 
Franklin,  Owen,  Grant,  Scott,  Fayette,  Wood- 
ford, Jessamine,  Garrard,  Lincoln,  Boyle,  Mer- 
cer, Amlcrsoii,  Shelby,  and  Spencer. 

The  third  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Pulaski,  Casey,  Russell,  Marion, 
Washington,  Nelson,  Bullitt,  Jefferson,  Hardin, 
Meade,  Grayson,  Monroe,  Clinton,  Cumberland, 
Wayne,  Adair,  Barren,  Hart,  Larue,  Taylor,  and 
Green. 

The  fourth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Hancock,  Breckinridge,  Davies,  Hen- 
derson, Union,  Hopkins,  Muhlenburg,  Ohio, 
Butler,  Edmonson,  Warren,  Allen,  Logan,  Simp- 
son, Todd,  Christian,  Trigg,  Caldwell,  Callo- 
way, Graves,  Fulton,  Hickman,  Marshall,  Liv- 
ingston, McCracken,  Ballard,  and  Crittenden. 

And  the  representatives  shall  be  apportioned, 
as  near  as  may  be,  among  the  counties,  towns, 
and  cities,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  rep- 
resentative population;  but  when  a  county  may 
not  have  a  suffiicent  number  of  representative 
population  to  entitle  it  to ,  one  representative, 
then  such  county  may  be  joined  to  some  adja- 
cent county  or  counties,  to  send  one  representa- 
tive, or  it  may  draw  a  residuum  or  residuums, 
from  one  or  more  counties  in  the  same  district, 
as  may  be  most  equitable,  having  due  regard  to 
the  number  of  representative  population  in  each 
county,  and  the  locality  of  such  county  to  the 
residuums  from  other  counties:  Provided,  If  there 
should  be  any  county  not  having  a  sufficient 
number  of  representative  population  to  entitle 
it  to  one  representative,  yet  it  shall  have  one 
representative  if  all  the  adjacent  counties  in  the 
same  district  have  a  sufficient  number  of  repre- 
sentative population  to  entitle  them  respectively 
to  one  representative:  And  provided  fart  her,  That 
due  regard  shall  always  be  had,  in  carrj^ing  re- 
siduums through  the  district,  to  that  county 
having  the  largest  number  of  representative 
population  above  the  fixed  ratio,  or  which  has 
not  a  separate  representative:  And  provided  fur- 
ther, That  residuums  shall  not  be  taken  from 
any  county  or  city  in  one  district,  to  a  county  or 
city  in  another  district:  And  provided,  That  any 
county  which  may  hereafter  be  formed,  may  be 
placed  in  such  district  as  the  general  assembly 
may  order. 

LEGISLATIVE  DEPAHTMEST. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legislative 
department. 

The  ninth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  9.  Senators  shall  be  chosen  for  the  term 
of  four  years,  and  the  senate  shall  have  power  to 
choose  its  officers  bienniallv." 

Mr.  TURNER  sugL'cstccl  that  the  section  re- 
quired amendment.  If  the  governor  should  re- 
sign, the  lieutenant  governor  would  be  required 
to  take  his  place,  and  it  would  be  necessary  that 
tlie  senate  should  be  convened  for  the  purpose 
of  filling  the  vacancy  occasioned  by  the  remov- 
al of  the  lieutenant  governor  from  the  ilic  presi- 


619 


deney  of  the  senate.  But  if  this  soctitm  bhouM 
remain  unaltered,  such  vacancy  cuuld  not  be 
filled  as  the  e>enate  would  be  rc»tricl«id  to  bien- 
nial elections  of  its  officers. 

After  a  few  words  of  explanation,  in  which 
several  members  of  the  convention  took  part, 
Mr.  TURNER  withdrew  his  objection,  as  it  was 
understood  that  provision  would  be  made  else- 
wliere  to  meet  the  case  suggested. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  tenth  section  was  next  read  and  adopted, 
as  follows: 

"Skc.  10.  At  the  first  session  of  the  general  as- 
sembly after  this  constitution  takes  effect,  the 
senators  shall  be  divided  bv  lot,  as  equally  as 
may  be,  into  two  classes.  The  seats  of  the  first 
class  shall  be  vacated  at  the  end  of  two  years, 
from  the  day  of  the  election,  and  those  of  the 
.Second  class  at  the  end  of  four  years,  so  that  one 
lialf  shall  be  chosen  every  two  years;  and  when 
an  additional  member  shall  be  added  to  the  sen- 
ate, he  shall  be  annexed  by  lot,  to  one  of  these 
vla.sses. 

The  eleventh  section  was  read  as  follows : 

'•Sec  11.  The  senate  shall  consist  of  not  less 
than  thirty,  nor  more  than  thirty  eight  mem- 
bers." 

On  a  suggestion  of  Mr.  TRIPLETT,  this  sec- 
tion was  pa<sed  over  for  future  consideration. 

The  twelfth  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"Sec.  \'2.  The  same  number  of  senatorial  dis- 
tricts shall,  from  time  to  time,  be  established  by 
the  general  assembly  as  there  may  be  senators 
allotted  to  the  state,  which  shall  be  so  formed  as 
to  contain,  as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  number 
of  qualified  voters,  and  so  that  no  county  shall 
be  divided  in  the  formation  of  a  senatorial  dis- 
trict., except  siK'h  county  shall  be  eutitled,  under 
the  enumeration,  to  two  or  more  senators." 

Mr.  IRWIX  said  the  question  arose  on  this 
section  which  had  been  discussed  on  a  preced- 
ing one.  Tlie  convention  had  not  determined 
what  shoulcl  be  the  basis  of  representation,  and 
hence  this  section  should  be  postponed  for  con- 
sideration, when  a  kindred  section  should  again 
come  up. 

After  a  few  words  from  Messrs.  TRIPLETT 
and  CLARKE  the  section  was  passed  over. 

The  thirteenth  section  was  next  read : 

"Skc.  13.  One  senator  for  each  district  shall 
be  elected,  by  the  qualified  voters  therein,  who 
shall  vote  in  the  precincts  where  they  reside,  at 
the  places  where  elections  are  by  law  airect*:d  to 
be  lield." 

Mr.  GARFIELDE  moved  to  strike  out  the 
word.s,  "who  shall  vote  in  the  precincts  where 
they  reside,  at  the  places  where  elections  are  by 
law  directed  to  be  held." 

The  motion  to  strike  out  was  rejected,  and  the 
tiection  was  then  adopted. 

The  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  sections  were 
read  and  adopted,  as  follows  : 

"  Sec.  14.  iJs^o  person  shall  be  a  .senator,  who, 
at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen  of 
the  L^nited  States,  who  has  not  attained  the  age 
of  thirty  years,  and  who  has  not  resided  in  this 
state  six  years  next  preceding  his  election,  and 
the  last  year  thereof,  in  the  district  for  which  he 
may  be  chosen. 

"  Sec.  15.  The  first  election  for  senators  shall 


be  general  througlioul  the  stat«,  aoci  at  the  same 
time  that  the  election  for  representatives  is  held, 
and  thereafter,  there  .shall  l>e  a  biennial  election 
for  senators  to  fill  tlie  places  of  those  whose 
term  of  service  may  have  expired." 

The  sixteenth  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"  Skc.  16.  Thegenend  assembly  shall  convene 
on  the  first  Monday  in  November,  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  and  on  the  same  day 
of  every  second  year,  unless  a  different  day  tie 
appointed  by  law,  and  their  sessions  shall  be 
held  at  the  seat  of  government;  but  if  the  pub- 
lic Welfare  require,  the  governor  may  call  a  spe- 
cial session." 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  strike  out  "November" 
and  insert  "December,"  which  was  both  more 
convenient  and  in  accordance  with  the  custom  in 
this  state,  for  a  large  portion  of  the  last  fifty 
years. 

Mr.  MACHEN  explained  that  "the  committee 
had  fixed  tlie  month  of  November  for  the  com- 
mencement of  the  first  session  after  the  new  con- 
stitution should  go  into  operation,  inasmuch  as 
there  would  be  then  an  unusual  amount  of  legis- 
lative busiues.s  to  be  transacted,  and  it  was  in- 
convenient for  many  members  of  the  state  legis- 
'  lature  to  remain  from  their  homes  beyond  the 
first  of  March.  The  time  of  meeting,  after  that 
se.ssion,  was  left  by  the  section  to  legislative 
discretion. 

Mr.  BOYD  called  for  a  division  of  the  ques- 
tion, so  that  the  vote  could  first  be  taken  on 
striking  out. 

The  motion  to  strike  out  was  negatived,  and 
consequently  the  motion  to  insert   lell  with  it. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  seventeenth,  eighteenth,  nineteenth,  and 
twentieth  sections  were  read  and  adopted,  as  fol- 
lows : 

"Skc.  17.  Not  less  Uian  a  majority  of  the  mem- 
bers of  each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business,  but 
a  smaller  number  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day, 
and  shall  be  authorized,  oy  law,  to  compel  the 
attendance  of  absent  members,  in  .such  manner 
and  under  such  penalties  as  may  be  prescribed 
thereby. 

"Skc.  18.  Each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  judge  of  the  qualifications,  elections,  and 
returns  of  its  members;  but  a  contested  election 
shall  be  determined  in  such  manner  as  shall  be 
directed  bv  law. 

"  Sec.  ill.  Each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
may  determine  the  rules  of  its  proceedings,  pun- 
ish a  member  for  di.sorderly  behavior,  and  with 
the  concurrence  of  two-thirds,  expel  a  member, 
but  not  a  second  time  for  the  same  cause. 

"  Sec.  20.  Each  house  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  keep  and  publish,  weekly,  a  journal  of  its 

Eroceedings,  and  the  yeas  and  nays  of  the  mem- 
ers  on  any  question,  shall,  at  the  desire  of  any 
two  of  them,  DC  entered  on  their  journal." 

The  twentv-first  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"  Sec.  21.  5«  either  house,  during  the  session  of 

!  the  general  assembly,  shall,  without  the  consent 

of  the  other,  adjourii  for  more  than  tliree  days, 

nor  to  any  other  place  than  that  in  which  they 

may  be  sitting." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Do  I  understand 
that  the  committee  design  that  the  two  houses  of 
the  legislature  shall  not  have  power  to  adjourn. 


620 


for  the  purpose  of  transacting  public  business, 
to  any  other  place  than  that,  which  is  fixed  as 
the  seat  of  government?  If  it  is  the  object  of 
the  section  to  take  away  the  power  of  the  two 
houses  to  adjourn  and  meet  at  some  point,  when 
the  necessities  of  the  country  may  require  it,  I 
am  opposed  to  it.  I  know  that  is  the  reading  of 
the  present  constitution.  I  very  well  remember 
that  owing  to  that  constitutional  restriction,  the 
legislature  of  1814,  convened  in  Frankfort,  had 
their  session  broken  up  in  consequence  of  the 
breaking  out  of  a  pestilence,  called  the  Canada 
fever.  I  think  three  or  four  members  died  in  a 
single  night,  and  we  terminated  our  session, 
leaving  important  business  unfinished.  Had 
there  been  power  to  adjourn  to  some  other  place, 
the  business  might  have  been  completed.  Un- 
less this  is  provided  for  by  the  committee,  in 
some  way,  1  shall  be  opposed  to  this  section. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  When  the  convention  was  act- 
ing on  the  16th  section,  this  objection  occurred 
to  my  own  mind;  and  I  am  inclined  to  think 
that  some  power  should  be  conferred  on  the  ex- 
ecutive, to  convene  the  legislature  at  some  other 
point  in  case  of  necessity.  As  the  section  now 
stands,  no  discretion  is  vested  any  where  to 
change  the  place  of  meeting. 

A  conversation  ensued,  in  which  Mr.  MA- 
CHEN,  Mr.  DIXON,  Mr.  T.J.  HOOD,  and  Mr. 
PRESTON  took  part,  on  the  propriety  of  certain 
changes  of  the  phraseology. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  said  he  foresaw  that 
the  amendment  of  this  section  would  involve 
the  removal  of  the  seat  of  government,  and 
therefore  on  any  amendment,  he  should  demand 
the  yeas  and  nays. 

All  opposition  was  withdrawn,  and  the  sec- 
tion was  adopted. 

Mr.  IRWIN  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the 
vote  adopting  the  20th  section,  with  a  view  of 
moving  to  take  away  the  power  from  two  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature  to  demand  the  yeas  and 
nays  on  any  question,  and  to  confer  iton  one  fifth, 
as  in  the  house  of  representatives  of  the  congress 
of  the  United  States. 

Mr.  CLARKE  opposed  the  motion,  contending 
that  it  was  the  right  of  a  representative  of  the 
people  to  have  the  votes  of  the  house  put  on  re- 
cord. 

Mr.  IRWIN  replied,  and  argued  that  such  pow- 
er should  not  be  given  to  two  individuals  to  ob- 
struct legislation.  It  would  be  much  better  to 
five  it  to  one  tenth  than  to  two  members,  though 
e  was  willing  to  add  a  provision,  that  on  the 
passage  of  all  laws,  and  the  adoption  of  all  res- 
olutions, the  yeas  and  nays  should  be  entered  on 
the  journal. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HARDIN,  the  motion 
to  reconsider,  was  laid  on  the  table. 
The  22d  section  was  read  as  follows: 
"  Sec.  22.  The  members  of  the  general  assem- 
bly shall  severally  receive  from  the  public  treas- 
ury a  compensation  for  their  services,  which 
Bhall  be  three  dollars  a  day  during  their  attend- 
ance on,  going  to,  and  reluruing  from  the  ses- 
sions of  their  respective  houses:  Provided,  That 
the  same  may  be  increased  or  diminished  by  law; 
but  no  alteration  shall  take  effect  during  the  ses- 
sion at  which  such  alteration  shall  be  made,  nor 
shall  a  session  of  the  general  assembly  continue 
beyond  sixty  days,  except  by  a  vote  of  two 


thirds  of  each  house;  but  this  shall  not  apply  to 
the  firet  session  held  under  this  constitution." 

Mr.  K AV ANAUGH  moved  to  .strike  out  "  two 
thirds  of  each  house,"  and  insert  "unless  it  be 
by  a  direct  vote  of  a  majority  of  each  house, 
which  shall  be  entered  upon  the  journal." 

Mr.  NUTTALL  thought  that  if  there  was  to  be 
but  one  session  in  two  years,  the  legislature 
should  not  be  thus  limited.. 

Mr.  McHENRY  thought  nothing  would  be 
gained  by  limiting  the  legisLature  to  biennial 
sessions,  unless  some  such  restriction  was  placed 
upon  it. 

Mr.  DESHA  approved  of  the  section  as  it 
stood.  He  thought  sixty  days  was  sufficient, 
and  with  such  a  limitation,  the  members  would 
go  to  work  when  they  met  here. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  replied  that  the  example  which 
the  convention  had  set,  furnished  an  argument 
against  the  position  which  gentlemen  had  as- 
sumed. 

Mr.  NEWELL  disapproved  of  the  frequent  in- 
troduction of  the  two  thirds  principle.  As  they 
were  proceeding,  he  should  not  be  surprised  if 
it  was  proposed  that  the  same  principle  should 
be  carried  into  ordinary  legislation. 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON  called  the  attention  of  the 
convention  to  the  fact  that  after  the  expiration 
of  sixty  days,  this  section  would  place  the  de- 
feat of  the  legislation  of  the  country  in  the  hands 
of  a  minority  of  one  third,  how  necessary  so 
ever  such  legislation  might  be. 

Mr.  TURNER  was  in  favor  of  this  section, 
and  he  would  be  willing  even  to  make  it  more 
stringent  than  it  is.  If  there  was  one  thing  of 
which  the  country  complained  more  than  an- 
other, it  was  excessive  legislation.  This  had  a 
powerful  influence  in  inducing  the  people  to 
call  for  a  convention.  A  session  of  sixty  days 
was  long  enough;  but  if  an  extraordinary  emer- 
gency should  arise,  the  governor  could  call  an- 
other session  on  the  very  next  day  after  their  ad- 
journment. 

Mr.  GRAY  suggested  that  an  effectual  mode 
of  shortening  the  duration  of  the  session  would 
be,  to  provide  that  the  compensation  of  the 
members  and  officers  should  be  reduced  one 
third  at  the  expiration  of  sixty  days. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  If  I  were  to  make  any  change 
in  this  section,  it  would  be,  to  make  it  more  ab- 
solute than  it  is,  for  the  purpose  of  getting  rid  of 
so  much  legislation.  I  call  for  a  division,  so 
that  the  vote  shall  first  be  taken  on  the  motion  to 
strike  out. 

Mr.  KAV ANAUGH.  I  did  not  intend  to  say 
a  word,  but  I  know  that  one  of  the  reasons  for 
calling  this  convention  was  that  biennial  ses- 
sions might  be  had  for  the  purpose  of  lessening 
the  expenditures  of  the  government.  I  know 
that  the  salvation  of  some  sixty  thousand  dollars 
annually  was  one  reason  held  up  by  others,  and 
by  myself,  for  the  calling  of  this  convention. 
We  say  they  shall  meet  once  in  two  years.  The 
business  of  the  session  may  be  increased  or  it 
may  not.  I  think  it  probable  it  will  not,  al- 
though they  meet  only  once  in  two  years,  be- 
cause I  know  it  is  the  desire  of  the  convention 
to  cut  off  special  legislation  by  the  constitution. 
But  can  the  convention  foresee  what  emergencies 
may  arise  in  the  future?  Important  questions 
may  arise,  requiring  legislative' action  near  the 


621 


close  of  a  session,  which,  unless  the  amend- 
ment prevail,  would  be  under  the  control  of  the 
minority.  What  does  this  amt^ndment.  propose? 
That  at  the  expiration  of  sixty  days  the  session 
shall  close,  unless  a  majority  of  both  branches 
shall  enter  their  names  on  the  journal  in  oppo- 
sition to  it,  upon  a  call  of  the  ayes  and  noes.  The 
legislature  will  know  that  their  session  will  close 
at  the  end  of  sixty  days,  unless  their  names  go 
out  to  continue  the  session  longer.  It  seems  to 
me  that  this  will  be  a  sufficient  guaranty,  and 
I  therefore  desire  it  may  be  left  to  a  majority. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  There  is  no  truer  maxim,  and 
thank  God  the  people  of  Kentucky  are  satisfied 
of  it,  that  the  world  is  governed  too  much.  1 
can  easily  conceive  that  in  a  youn^  and  growing 
state,  like  those  on  our  western  border,  there  may 
be  a  necessity  for  the  legislature  to  sit  more  than 
sixty  days;  but  in  an  old  community  like  ours, 
I  can  See  no  reason  for  this.  Sir,  one  of  the 
prophets  of  old,  in  looking  down  the  vista  of 
coming  years,  exclaimed,  "when  shall  the  tears 
of  Judah  be  dry?" 

"VVe  are  engaged  in  the  most  solemn  acts  of 
legislation,  and  we  know  the  people  are  restive 
at  our  delay.  I  will  ask  gentlemen  to  walk  in- 
to the  library  with  me,  and  I  think  they  will  be 
satisfied  that  we  have  been  governed  too  much. 
One  strong  inducement  for  calling  this  conven- 
tion was,  because  there  had  been  too  much  mo- 
ney and  too  much  time  spent  in  legislation.  The 
legislation  too  was  like  a  running  stream:  "a 
moment  it  was,  and  a  moment  it  was  not."     The 

feiitleman  wislies  the  word  majority  inserted, 
f  public  interest  or  public  necessity  require  it, 
the  patriotic  representatives  of  the  people,  pos- 
sessing that  virtue,  intelligence,  and  patriotism, 
about  which  we  have  heard  so  much,  will  con- 
tinue the  session,  and  the  pe»iple  will  be  satis- 
fied. I  have  been  forcibly  reminded  of  the  old 
distich: 

"The  honey  bee  makes  boner,  and  fills  chock  fuUthe 

comb. 
Who  are  the  drones  that  eat  it,  they  are  those  who  speak 

for  hoiue  " 

Mr.  CHRISM  AN.  I  oromised  my  people  that 
I  should  go  for  a  sixty  days'  session,  and  I  shall 
be  in  favor  of  striking  out.  I  hope  the  house 
will  indulge  me  in  an  explanation  respecting  the 
table  presented  by  the  gentleman  from  Logan. 
He  has  as  he  says  taken  six  of  the  most  wealthy 
and  six  of  the  poorest  counties,  and  he  has  placecl 
Wayne,  my  countv,  among  the  poorest  counties. 
I  find  the  fact  is,  tliat  there  are  forty  eight  coun- 
ties that  pay  less  into  the  treasury  of  the  state 
than  Wayne.  He  refers  to  the  number  of  chil- 
dren. We  have  in  our  county  2,221  children.  I 
suppose  we  must  account  for  it  from  the  pure  air 
we  hreathe. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  There  maybe  many  imperfec- 
tions ill  this  section,  but  take  it  as  a  whole  and  I 
am  anxious  to  see  it  pass  through  the  house. 
We  have  in  this  same  report  restricted  the  legis- 
lature in  special  legislation.  We  have  saidthev 
shall  not  grant  divorces,  which  has  consumed 
one  fourth  or  one  third  of  the  time  of  each  legis- 
lature for  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years.  We  have 
restricted  special  legislation  in  other  respects,  and 
it  was  the  opinion  of  the  committee  that  the 
restrictions  imposed  upon  the  legislature  would 
result  in  a  diminution  of  the  time  nccessarv  to 


transact  tlie  public  business,  and  tliat  there 
would  be  no  session,  after  the  first  Session  im- 
mediiitely  succeeding  the  adoption  of  the  new 
constitution — if  it  shall  be  adopted — which  need 
sit  longer  than  sixty  days.  It  was  thought  if 
there  were  questions  of  paramount  importance 
pending  before  the  legislature— questions  in 
which  the  whole  state  was  interested,  the 
speedy  settlement  of  which  involved  the 
rights  of  the  entire  community,  there  could 
be  no  doubt  a  majority  of  two-thirds  of  the 
legislature  would  concur  in  lengthening  it. 
These  are  the  reasons  why  the  two  third  prin- 
ciple was  adopted  by  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department.  The  past  history  of  the 
legislature  of  the  state — I  saj-,  without  in  the 
remotest  degree  intending  to  reflect  upon  their 
industry,  their  motives,  or  anv  thing  of  the 
sort — shows  that  the  first  moiitli,  or  forty  davs, 
was  consumed  in  a  variety  of  ways  not  altoget&er 
compatible  with  the  transaction  of  business. 
And,  just  at  the  close  of  the  session,  the  most  im- 
portant matters  are  brought  up  in  the  reports  of 
committees  for  the  action  of  the  two  bodies,  and 
they  are  consequently  either  compelled  to  dis- 
pose of  them  without  due  deliberation,  or  leave 
them  untouched.  Now,  I  am  of  opinion  that  if 
this  section  shall  be  adopted,  the  members  will 
go  to  work  immediatelv  on  their  assembling 
here,  and  dispose  of  the  "business  of  the  legisla- 
ture before  the  expiration  of  the  sixty  days. 
There  will  never  be  any  necessitj'^  for  a  longer 
session,  in  all  probability,  and  ifthere  should 
be,  there  will  be  no  difficulty  about  extendin"' 
the  time. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  If  the  legislature  is  to  de- 
termine the  length  of  the  session,  I  shall  vote 
for  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  An- 
derson, (Mr.  Kavanaugh.)  This  matter  has 
been  acted  upon  by  the  conventions  of  several 
states  lately,  and  they  have  been  inclined  to  fa- 
vor the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Chris 
tian.  Louisiana,  however,  has  provided  that 
no  session  shall  extend  beyond  the  period  of 
sixty  davs,  from  the  date  of  its  commencement, 
and  any  legislative  action  had  afterwards,  shall 
be  null  and  void.  Then  the  sessions  are  bien- 
nial, and  we  propose  to  require  the  sessions  of 
our  legislature  to  be  the  same.  In  the  state  of 
Iowa,  they  have  adopted  a  provision  similar  to 
that  prese'nted  by  tlie  gentleman  from  Christian. 
After  fifty  days  the  pay  of  the  members  shall  be 
reduced  one  half,  and  I  believe  a  similar  pro- 
vision has  been  adopted  in  Illinois.  I  think 
that  the  best  mod* to  remedy  this  evil.  It  is  ad- 
mitted by  all  that  the  country  has  for  years  past 
groaned  under  ex>ressive  legislation,  and  no  re- 
form has  been  louder  called  for  than  a  limitation 
upon  the  session.  If  the  power  is  to  be  given 
t^  the  legislature  to  declare  how  long  they  will 
sit,  I  am  in  favor  of  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Anderson,  that  a  majority  of  all 
elected  to  both  houses  should  decide,  by  yeas 
and  nays,  to  be  entered  upon  the  journal, 
whether  they  will  extend  the  session.  I  am 
opposed  to  tLe  two  third  principle  in  this  re- 
spect. However,  I  think  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Christian,  would  be  a  better 
remedy  for  this  evil  than  any  I  have  yet  heard 
mentioned. 

Mr.  MORRIS.     I  am  opposed  to  any  of  this 


622 


rlose  yaiikcf  legislation  (hat  lias  takfii  place  in 
the  state  of  Illinois  and  Iowa,  to  wliich  gentle- 
men have  alluded,  and  also  to  tiie  amendment 
of  my  colleague,  from  Christian.  If  it  boeonics 
important  and  necessary  that  the  legislature 
should  set  over  sixty  days,  I  want  them  to  have 
enough  pay  at  least  to  live  on.  I  am  not  dis- 
poned to  restrict  their  p<ty,  small  as  it  now  is. 
As  regards  tlie  two  tlurds,  I  think  it  to  be  par- 
ticularly applicable  here,  and  if  we  leave  the 
power  to  a  majority  to  decide  as  to  the  length  of 
the  session,  it  will  still  leave  the  question  open 
to  all  those  objections  of  the  people  which  en- 
tered largely  into  the  calling  of  the  convention. 
All  will  concede  that  the  people  have  impera- 
tively demanded  that  there  should  be  some  re 
striction  on  the  length  of  the  sessions  and  on 
excessive  legislation.  I  see  very  distinctly  that 
emergencies  in  the  disposition  of  important  pub- 
lic business  may  arise,  when  it  will  be  nt-ces- 
sary  for  the  legislature  to  set  over  sixty  days, 
and  I  believe  that  tlie  members,  generally,  will 
be  honest  enough  to  continue  in  session  until 
such  business  is  disposed  of.  I  hope  therefore, 
this  restriction  of  two  thirds  will  be  retained. 

The  question  was  then  takeii  on  the  motion 
to  strike  out  and  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  to  amend,  so  as 
to  allow  to  the  members  of  the  legislature  twelve 
and  a  half  cents  per  mile  as  the  necessary  travel 
fee,  in  going  to  and  from  their  homes,  in  con 
formance  with  tlie  present  law  on  the  subject, 
leaving  to  future  legislatures  to  change  it. 

The  amendment  was  adopted,  as  was  tlie  sec- 
tion, as  amended. 

The  twenty-third  section  was  then  read,  as 
follows: 

"Skc.  2.■^.  The  members  of  the  general  assem- 
Vjly  shall,  in  all  cases,  except  treason,  felony, 
breach  or  surety  of  the  peace,  be  privileged  from 
arrest,  during  their  attendance  at  the  sessions  of 
their  respective  houses,  and  in  going  to  and  re- 
turning from  the  same,  and  for  any  speech  or  de- 
liate  in  either  house,  they  shall  notbe  questioned 
in  any  other  place." 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  original  object  of  this 
provision  was,  that  members  of  the  legislature 
should  be  privileged  from  arrest,  in  order  that 
thev  might  notbe  interfered  with  in  the  discharge 
of  the  public  business.  At  the  tune  that  provis- 
ion was  adopted,  there  was  arrest  for  debt  allow- 
ed, which  is  not  the  case  now.  If  the  object 
now  is,  that  they  shall  not  be  compelled  by  any 
legal  process  to  be  carried  to  another  part  of  the 
Ktate,  while  in  the  discharge  of  their  public  du- 
ties, it  is  necessary  that  the  section  shoidd  be 
amended.  A  man  might  now  be  sued,  or  by  oth- 
er process  prevented  from  attending  Jiere  with- 
out neglecting  his  private  interests  to  an  incoi^- 
venient  degree. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  would  enquire  of  the  gen- 
tleman if  there  are  not  now  laws  in  this  state,  by 
which  a  citizen  may  be  detained  by  civil  pro- 
cess. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Ho  can  by  attachment, 
when  he  is  a  witno-ss,  but  I  do  not  recollect  any 
other. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  He  may  bo  sued  on  an  action 
for  trespass,  and  on  a  judgment  being  got  against 
him,  be  nut  in  jail  for  twentv  days. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.    My  object  is,  that  a  man 


may  attend  here  as  a  member  of  the  legislature, 
and  not  be  compelled  to  attend  to  suits  at  home, 
and  the  way  to  attain  that  would  be  to  put  in 
some  clause,  declaring  that  all  suits  against  a 
man  shall  remain  continued  during  the  time  ho 
shall  be  acting  as  a  member  of  the  legislature. 
Such  has  been  the  course  adopted  in  several 
states,  in  consequence  of  changes  in  their  law. 
I  throw  out  the  suggestion  that  it  may  be  acted 
upon  or  not,  as  gentlemen  think  proper. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  clause  of  the  old  con- 
stitution was  retained  because  we  did  not  know 
but  that  the  legislature,  in  its  discretion  hereaf- 
ter, may  revive  the  ca.  sa.  as  it  existed  in  the 
year  1799,  when  the  old  constitution  was  adopt- 
ed. Neither  did  the  committee  design  to  carry 
the  immunity  of  the  member  so  far  as  the  gen- 
tleman seems  to  think  desirable.  For  these  rea- 
sons the  committee  believe  the  clause  had  better 
be  adopted  as  reported. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  twenty-fourth  section  was  then  read,  as 
follows : 

"Sec.  24.  No  senator  or  representative  shall, 
during  the  term  for  wliich  he  was  elected,  nor 
for  one  year  thereafter,  be  appointed  or  elected 
to  any  civil  office  of  profit,  under  this  common- 
wealth, which  shall  have  been  created,  or  the 
emoluments  of  which  shall  have  been  increased 
during  the  time  such  senator  or  representative 
was  in  office  ;  except  to  such  offices  or  appoint- 
ments as  may  be  filled  by  the  election  of  the 
people." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  agree  with  what  1 
understood  to  be  the  principle  of  the  section,  and 
perhaps  the  intention  of  the  committee  in  re- 
porting it.  Itis,  that  the  legislature  shall  not 
create  offices  that  they  themselves  may  fill  them 
by  appointment  or  by  election.  1  agree  with  the 
section  until  it  comes  down  to  the  words  in  the 
fifth  line  "in  office"  and  the  latter  clause  "except 
to  such  offices  or  appointments  as  may  be  filled 
by  the  election  of  the  people."  We  intend  by 
this  constitution,  that  all  apiioiiitnients  to  office 
of  trust  or  profit  shall  be  made  by  the  people,  and 
the  appointing  power  we  are  taking  away  from  the 
governor.  The  old  constitution  prohibited  the 
appointment  of  a  man  to  any  office  created  dur- 
ing the  time  he  was  a  member  of  the  legislature, 
and  in  office.  Such  is  the  clause  as  reported, 
and  I  propose  to  strike  out  the  words  "in  office" 
and  amend  so  that  it  shall  read  "during  the  time 
for  which  such  senator  or  representative  was 
elected  ;"  and  also  to  strike  out  the  last  clause, 
"except  to  such  offices  or  appointments  as  may 
be  filled  by  the  election  of  the  people."  I  do 
this  from  an  actual  knowledge  of  occurrences  that 
have  taken  place  under  tlie  jiresent  constltu 
tion.  I  have  seen  the  members  of  our  state  leg 
islature  laboring  to  create  oftices,  and  continuing 
those  labors  until  just  before  tlie  final  passage  of 
the  measure  through  the  last  house  of  action,  and 
then  resigning  their  seats  to  receive  the  executive 
appointment.  I  Avould  therefore  take  away  all 
temptation  to  the  creation  of  unnecessary  offices 
by  tin!  legislature,  whether  the  appointment  is  to 
come  through  an  election  by  the  people,  or  from 
the  executive. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  object  of  retaininfj  the 
clause  as  it  is  in  the  pi-esent  constitution,  js  to 
provide  for  offices  created  by  the  legislature — such 


G23 


as  fln  assistant  superintemlent  of  common  schools 
for  instance — the  appointment  of  which  may  be 
devolved  on  the  executive  rather  than   Ihe    peo- 
ple.    But  if  such  officer  should  be  elected   by 
the  people,  the  committee  were  not  willing  that 
the  fact  that  a  c;entleinan  was  a  member  of  the  j 
legislature   at  the   time  the  office   was  created,  | 
should  exclude  him    from    being    a   candidate  { 
therefor.     The    first  amendment   of  the  gentle- 
man the  committee  have  no  objection  to. 

Mr.  MACHEX.     I  do  not  see  that  any  thing 
will  be  attained  by  striking  out  the  words  as- 
sented to  by  the  gentleman  from  Louisville  (Mr. 
Preston)  unless  at  the  same  time  the  latter  clause 
of  the  section  is  also  stricken  out.     I  am,  how- 
ever, opposed  to  both  changes,  and  for  these  rea- 
sons.    It  very  frequently  happens  that   after  a 
senatorial  election  has  taken  place,  circumstan- 
ces afterwards  spring  up  surrounding  the  sena- 
tor elect,  which  necessarily   require  him  to  re- 
sign his  seat.     This  may  occur  at  the  very  first  \ 
session  after  he  is  elected,  and  then  if  this  amend- 1 
ment  was  adopt+'d  he  would   not  be  eligible  to  I 
any  office  that  might  be  created  by  the  legisla-  j 
ture  during  the  four  years   for  which  he  was  j 
elected.     This  exclusion  I  think  is  not  desired  ! 
by  the  people.     I  am  opposed   also  to  striking  { 
out  the  last  clause   of  the  section,  as  I  believe 
the  people  ought  to  have  the  privilege  of  select-  j 
ing  from  the  great  mass  of  candidates.    And  if  i 
the  office  was  created  for  the  purpose  of  being  I 
filled  by  those  who  help  to  create  it,  I  think  the  ! 
people  will   have  wisdom  enough  to  see   and  I 
judge  of  that  fact  for  themselves.     Xor  do   I  ■ 
think  any  man  would  risk  his  reputation  by  a  j 
resort  to'anv  such  action  before  the  people.  I 

Mr.  "WOODSOX.     It  appears  to  me  that  the  | 
section  is  highly  inconsistent  and  contradictory  ! 
in  itself:  in  that  it  seems  to  draw  a  distinction  ' 
between  officers  elected  and  those  elected  by  the 
people.     I  have  not  heard  it  suggested  that  offi- 
cers are  to  be  appointed  by  any  other  power  than 
the  people.    I  would,  therefore,  strike  out  the 
word  "elected"  in  the  second  line. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  There  are  several  electoral 
bodies  beside  the  people.  Some  elections  are 
made  by  the  legislature,  and  some  by  the  coun- 
ty courts,  and  that  I  presume  was  the  reason  for 
tie  adoption  of  the  last  clause  of  the  section, 
which  gave  the  members  the  right  to  accept  those 
offices  elected  by  the  people,  but  excluded 
them  from  those"  filled  by  the  other  <iifFerent 
modes  of  election.  For  instance,  the  justice  of 
the  pieace  is  nominated  by  the  county  court, 
and  that  is  in  fact  an  election;  and  tliere  are 
various  other  modes  of  election  to  office. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  we  intended  to 
leave  the  offices  of  trust  and  profit  to  be  filled 
in  the  same  way  as  required  by  the  present  con- 
stitution, I  should  have  no  objection  to  the  re- 
tention of  the  section  as  it  now  stands.  I  might 
consent  to  leave  the  officers  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple, as  an  exception,  under  the  old  constitution, 
because  that  instrument  prescribed  that  most  of 
them  should  be  constituted  by  the  governor  and 
senate;  but  when  it  is  proposed  that  the  ap- 
pointing power  shall  be  transferred  to  the  peo- 
ple, do  not  the  same  reasons  which  require  you 
in  the  fonner  case,  to  guard  against  an  improper 
exercise  of  the  appointing  power,  and  the  puri- 
ty of  the  legislature,  by  disqualifying  the  mem- 


ber elected  here  to  pass  your  laws,  and  who  bad 
the  power  of  increasing  the  salaries  of  your 
judges,  independent  of  the  power  of  creating 
new  oflices,  operate  in  the  other  ca.<5e  also?  You 
get  into  the  legislative  halls  a  popular  man  from 
some  district,  and  the  election  of  judges  is  about 
to  come  off — he  lias  reputation  for  purity  of 
character  at  home,  and  if  he  can  induce  the 
legislature  to  increase  the  salary  of  the  judges, 
he  goes  home  and  can  be  a  candidate  for  the  of- 
fice underthe  section  as  it  now  stands.  The  ar- 
gument for  the  retention  of  the  principle  is,  that 
the  people  will  judge  properly  of  the  motives 
of  the  man  who  is  a  candidate  before  them,  and 
who  has  been  instrumental  in  getting  the  sal- 
ary raised.  It  is  difficult  to  trace  the  motives 
of  individual  members  for  their  action.  There 
may  be  such  a  thing  as  a  member  not  voting  to 
increase  the  salary,  if  a  majority  without  his 
vote  is  in  favor  of  it.  I  have  frequently  witnes- 
sed men  in  legislative  bodies,  anxious  to  get  a 
lawpa-ssed  by  any  other  votes  than  theirown,  and 
my  object  is,  that  as  we  are  to  transfer  the  entire 
appointing  power  to  the  people,  where  it  ought 
to  ue,  we  shall  guanl  the  purity  of  the  legisla- 
ture by  saying  that  the  members  elected,  who 
have  the  power  of  raising  salaries  or  creating  of- 
fices, should  be  disqualified  from  filling  them 
during  the  term  for  which  thev  were  elected.  T 
want  to  take  away  all  temptation  from  the  legis- 
lature to  do  wrong.  As  for  the  objection  sug- 
gested by  the  gentleman  from  Caldwell,  (Mr. 
Machen)  in  the  case  of  a  member  resigning  from 
other  causes,  if  the  convention  agree  with  the 
principle  I  propose,  the  cases  referred  to  by  him 
can  be  especially  provided  for. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  If  I  felt  as  confident 
as  the  gentleman  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklifie)  that  all 
appointing  power  should  be  placed  in  the  hands 
of  the  people,  I  should  feel  assured  that  all  the 
difficulties  he  apprehends  wouM  be  obviated  bv 
that  appointing  power.  I  cannot  understand, 
how  any  one,  confiding  as  he  does  in  the  judg- 
ment au(l  purity  of  the  people,  and  relying  as 
he  seems  implicitly  upon  it,  can  hesitate  for  a 
single  moment  as  to  commiting  into  their  hands 
the  care  and  guardianship  of  those  offices.  I 
differ  with  him  in  one  respect.  He  says  that  he 
is  exceedingly  anxious  to  remove  all  temptation 
out  of  the  way  of  these  gentlemen  to  do  wrong, 
while  I  am  exceedingly  anxious  to  put  all  man- 
ner of  temptation  in  tlieir  way.  1  think  that 
the  best  way  is  to  place  them  before  the  people,  as 
then  the  people  could  decide  whether  they  can 
or  ought  to  trust  them.  I  shall  vote  against 
striking  out  any  thing.  I  think  the  section  is 
correct  as  it  is.  It  is  precisely  the  language  of 
the  old  constitution,  and  those  who  framed  that 
instrument  did  not  seem  to  have  much  confi- 
dence in  the  popular  wisdom  and  purity;  jmd 
yet  if  even  they  could  trust  tlie  people,  I  think 
we  who  profess  unlimited  confidence  in  the  peo- 
ple will  not  do  wrong  in  following  their  exam- 
ple. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  concur  with  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  in  the  propriety  of  his  first  amend- 
ment. If  that  section  means  any  thing,  it  has 
been  entirely  perverted  by  the  construction  that 
has  been  given  it  by  the  executive,  sanctioned  I 
believe  by  the  decision  of  the  court  of  appeals. 
I  know  o'f  a  member  of  the  legislature  who  vo- 


024 


ted  for  a  law  creating  rtn  ofTice,  and  retained  his 
Beat  until  the  law  was  passed  tlirongh  the  sen- 
ate, and  who,  while  it  was  waiting  tlio  signature 
of  the  governor,  resigned  that  seat,  and  under 
the  construction  placed  on  that  clause  of  tlio 
present  constitution,  received  the  appointment  to 
that  office.  Whether  that  was  the  object  of  the 
gentleman,  in  seeking  to  create  the  office,  such 
at  anv  rate  were  the  facts.  This  construction  of 
the  clause  was  certainly  a  perversion  of  all  the 
franiers  of  the  constitution  had  in  view;  and,  if 
"With  these  liglits  before  us  we  re-adopt  the  section, 
it  will  be  sanctioning  all  the  action  that  has 
occurred  under  it.  I  am  aware  that  in  making 
all  these  officers  elective  by  the  people,  it  will 
obriate  in  a  great  measure  the  necessity  for  this 
provision.  Nor  am  I  in  favor  of  restricting  the 
people.  If  they  desire  to  select  a  man  who  par- 
ticipated in  creating  the  office,  they  have  a  riglit 
to  do  it,  and  I  Avould  not  restrict  them.  I  am 
therefore  in  favor  of  the  amendment  first  suggested 
by  the  gentleman  from  IS'elson,  and  I  would  make 
its  object  so  plain  as  not  to  be  misunderstood. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  sliould  be  very  slow  to  be- 
lieve that  any  man,  influenced  by  improper  mo- 
tives in  a  legislature,  in  voting  for  the  crea- 
tion of  an  office  or  the  increase  of  the  salary  of 
an  office,  would  be  taken  up  and  elected  by  the 
people  to  fill  such  office  in  either  case.  But  if 
the  people  are  willing  to  do  that,  for  one  I  am 
willing  to  give  them  the  privilege  of  so  doing, 
and  I  have  no  fears  of  tlie  occurrence  of  such 
cases  as  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  (Mr. 
Gray,)  has  referred  to  as  having  occurred  under 
the  old  constitution.  I  can  very  well  under- 
stand how  there  could  be  great  abuses  under 
executive  appointments,  and  how  there  might  be 
arrangements  and  combinations  to  secure  an  ap- 
pointment to  office  through  that  medium,  but 
there  can  be  no  such  arrangement  between  the 
people  and  the  legislature,  if  the  appointing 
power  is  restored  to  the  people.  And  any  at- 
tempt to  create  an  office  for  the  purpose  of  being 
selected  to  fill  it,  would  operate  against  the  man 
when  he  earne  to  be  a  candidate  before  the 
people. 

Mr.  TURNER.  All  concede  their  readiness  to 
trust  the  people,  but  that  is  not  the  question 
here.  It  is  whether  we  shall  place  a  member  of 
the  legislature  or  any  officer  of  the  government 
in  the  discharge  of  his  duties  in  a  position  where 
he  would  be  liable  to  temptation,  and  to  be 
swerved  in  his  action  from  the  influence  of  those 
disinterested  and  patriotic  motives,  which  should 
govern  statesmen  in  their  action.  Even  after 
a  man  has  yielded  to  such  temptation,  he  might 
po.ssibly  succeed  before  the  people,  and  it  is  there- 
fore desirable  in  making  a  constitution  to  guard 
against  it  as  far  as  possible.  Would  it  be  right 
for  a  judge  to  have  the  power  of  benefiting  him- 
self by  his  decision?  If  we  would  not  allow  a 
judge  to  platjc  himself  in  that  attitude,  why 
should  we  allow  a  member  of  the  legislature? 
It  is  true,  the  present  constitution  only  refers  to 
executive  appointments,  but  here  wc  are  going  to 
make  all  onicera  elective,  and  shall  we  put  no 
restriction  on  the  action  or  motives  of  individ- 
uals in  the  creation  of  offices  or  the  increasing 
of  salaries?  I  think  every  conservative  princi- 
ple of  government  requires  that  we  should,  and 
It  argues  no  distrust  of  the  people  so  to  do. 


If  we  wore  to  put  a  clause  in  the  constitution 
declaring  that  no  man  should  be  elected  a  judge 
who  had  been  in  the  penitentiary,  or  been  con- 
victed of  a  high  crime  or  misdemeanor,  it  would 
be  said  that  we  were  distrusting  the  people;  still 
no  person  will  say  that  such  a  man  ouglit  to  fill 
the  office.  An  individual  who  came  to  the  legis- 
lature and  exerted  his  influence  for  the  creation  of 
a  new  office,  or  to  increase  the  salary  of  an  office, 
with  a  view  of  going  home  and  becoming  a  can- 
didate for  that  office,  would  be  under  the  influ- 
ence of  just  as  improper  motives  as  the  individ- 
ual who  commits  a  high  crime.  Wliy  do  we  ex- 
clude from  office  those  who  liold  positions  under 
the  federal  government?  Because  their  allegiance 
to  the  state  government  might  be  influenced  by 
their  office  under  the  federal  government,  and  it 
would  be  a  temptation  for  them  to  sacrifice  state 
rights  and  sovereignty  to  the  federal  government. 
This  matter  might  be  presented  in  various  as- 
pects, but  I  think  what  I  have  said  sufficiently 
illustrates  the  matter.  I  shall  go  therefore  for 
the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson. 

Mr.  MACHEN  here  suggested  a  verbal  change 
in  the  first  proposition  of  Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklifl"e, 
not  changing  its  principle,  to  which  that  gen- 
tleman assented. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  amendment, 
and  am  glad  that  it  has  come  up,  as  it  off^ers  a 
very  favorable  opportunity  for  the  presentation 
of  a  proposition  which  I  made  at  an  early  stage 
of  the  session.  I  would  propose  as  an  amend- 
ment to  the  amendment  to  add  the  resolution  I 
offered  in  relation  to  the  exclusion  of  members 
of  this  body  from  office  for  ten  years,  and  on  it 
I  call  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

The  amendment  was  read  as  follows: 

"And  that  no  member  of  this  convention  shall 
be  eligible  to  any  office,  or  place  of  trust  or 
profit,  established  directly  by  it,  or  that  may  be 
established  under  the  authority  of  any  constitu- 
tional provision  which  it  may  adopt;  or  the  mode 
of  appointment,  or  election,  to  which  may  be 
prescribed  by  any  such  constitutional  provision, 
or  by  any  such  law,  until  after  the  expiration 
of  —  years  from  the  ratification  and  approval 
of  this  constitution  by  the  qualified  Voters  of 
this  commonwealth." 

The  questi<m  being  taken  resulted  as  follows, 
yeas  22,  nays  66 : 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowl- 
ing, Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Da- 
vis, James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Vin- 
cent S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Nathan 
McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris, 
Hugh  Newell,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
Squire  Turner,  George  W.  Williams — 22. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradlc-y,  Charles  Chambers,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Cofi'ey,  Henry  R.  D  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  W  illiam  Cowper,  Lucius  Desha,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  El- 
liott, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son.  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Wil- 
liam Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.Jack- 
son,  William    Johnson,    George  W.  Johnston, 


6-25 


George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Jara«?s 
M.  Lackey,  Peter  Laahbrooke,  Willis  B.Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  "William  C.  Marshall,  John 
H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Heury  B.  Pollard,  William 
Preston,  John  T.  Robinson,  Tliomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  flow- 
ard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L.  Waller,  John 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
liffe,  Silas  Woodson— 66. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  can  attain  mv  ob- 
ject by  modifying  my  amendment.  I  will  tliere- 
fore  move  to  strike  out  the  following  words, 
"except  to  such  offices  or  appointments  as  may 
be  filled  by  the  election  of  the  people." 

The  vote  was  then  taken  upon  the  amendment, 
a^  modified,  by  yeas  and  nays,  which  resulted  as 
follows — Teas  39,  nays  47: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  Chenault,  Garrett 
Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  James 
Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  Xathan  McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell, 
Johathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Kewell,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  James  Rudd,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spauldin^.  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Tavlor,  Phillip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner.  John  L. 
Waller,  Andrew  3.  White,  Charles  A.  Wiekliffe, 
George  W.  Williams — 39. 

Nays — -Richard  Apperson,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
li.im  Bradley,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Milford  Elliott,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson,  Niuian  E.  Gray,  John 
Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Al- 
fred M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.Johnston,  George W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B. 
Machen.  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  JohnH.  McHen- 
ry, David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John 
I).  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers.  Ira 
Root,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman  John 
Wheeler,  Silas  Woodson — 47. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  amend  the  twenty  fourth 
section  by  striking  out  the  words  "the  time  such 
senator  or  representative  was  in  office,"  and  iji- 
sert  in  lieu  thereof  the  words  "the  term  of  such 
office."  Which  amendment  was,  upon  a  divis- 
ion, adopted.     Ayes  41,  noes  30. 

The  section,  as  amended,  was  then  adopted. 
The  twenty  fifth  section  was  next  read  as  fol- 
lows: 

"  Sec.  25.  No  person  while  he  continues  to  ex- 
ercise the  functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest,  or 
79 


teacher  of  any  religious  persuaston,  society,  or 
sect,  nor  while  he  holds  or  exercises  any  office  of 
profit  under  this  commonwealth,  or  under  the 
government  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  general  assembly,  except  attorneys  at 
law,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  militia  officers: 
Provided,  That  attorneys  for  the  commonwealth, 
who  receive  a  fixed  annual  salary,  shall  be  inel- 
igible." 

Mr.  WALLER  requested  the  convention,  as  a 
favor  to  him,  to  pass  over  that  section  for  the 
present.  Other  sections  had  been  passed  over, 
and  as  he  desired  to  make  some  remaiks  on  that 
now  before  the  convention,  which  he  was  too 
much  indisposed  to  make  at  this  time,  he  hoped 
it  would  be  passed  over  also. 

The  section  Wiis  passed  over  accordingly. 

The  twenty  sixth,  twenty  seventh,  twenty 
eighth  and  twenty  ninth  sections  'vrere  adopted 
without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  26.  No  person  who  at  any  time  may 
have  been  a  collector  of  taxes,  or  public  moneys 
for  the  state,  or  the  assistant  or  deputy  of  such 
collector,  shall  be  eligible  to  the  general  assem- 
bly, unless  he  shall  have  obtainecT  a  quietus,  six 
months  before  the  election,  for  the  amount  of 
such  collection,  and  for  all  public  moneys  for 
which  he  may  have  been  responsible." 

"Sec.  27.  No  bill  shall  have  the  force  of  a 
law,  until,  on  the  three  several  days,  it  be  read 
over,  in  each  house  of  the  general  assembly,  and 
free  discussion  allowed  thereon,  unless  in  cases 
of  urgency,  four  fifths  of  the  house,  where  the 
bill  shall  be  depending,  may  deem  it  expedient 
to  dispense  with  this  rule. 

"Sec.  28.  All  bills  for  raising  revenue  shall 
originate  in  the  house  of  representatives,  but 
the  senate  may  propose  amendments  as  in  other 
bills,  provided  that  they  shall  not  introduce 
any  new  matter  under  the  color  of  an  amend- 
ment which  does  not  relate  to  raising  revenue. 

"Sec.  29.  The  general  assembly  shall  regu- 
late, by  law,  by  whom,  and  in  what  manner 
writs  of  election  shall  be  issued,  to  fill  the  va- 
cancies which  may  happen  in  either  branch 
thereof." 

The  thirtieth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"  See.  30.  Divorces  shall  not  be  granted,  save 
bv  courts  of  justice,  in  conformity  to  law." 

'  Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  desire  to  offer  this  amend- 
ment as  a  substitute  for  the  thirtieth  section  of 
the  report. 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to 
pass  laws,  to  regulate  divorce  and  alimony;  also 
to  prescribe,  by  like  general  laws,  the  manner  in 
which  the  names  of  individuals  maybe  changed; 
or  the  lands  of  infant  heirs,  or  other  persons  la- 
boring under  legal  disabilities  to  act  for  them- 
selves, may  be  sold  or  conveyed.  But  in  no 
case  shall  special  laws  be  passed  for  the  benefit 
of  individuals  in  either  of  the  above  class  of 
cftses." 

By  an  examination  of  the  thirtieth  section, 
gentlemen  will  perceive  that  it  provides  but  for 
one  class  of  cases.  The  substitute  that  I  have 
offered  embraces  two  other  cla-sses  that  fall  with- 
in the  same  category,  and  which  have  been  a 
fruitful  source  of  legislation.  Year  after  year 
a  great  portion  of  the  time  of  the  general  assem- 
bly has  been  consumed  in  the  paseage  of  acts, 
for  the  benefit  o€  private  individuals.    Against 


6^ 


this  unnecessary  consumption  of  time,  and  the 
expense  attendant  upon  it,  there  has  been  uni- 
versal complaint  throughout  the  commonwealth. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  provision  contained  in 
the  thirty-sixth  section  will  supercede  the  ne- 
cessity for  my  amendment;  but  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  amendment  provides  more  effectually 
against  the  evil;  because,  if  adopted,  the  discus- 
sions which  might  arise  in  the  legislature,  upon 
the  subjects  embraced  under  these  heads,  will  be 
cut  off. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  committee  all  concurred 
in  the  opinion  that  the  legislature  should  be 
restricted  in  the  practice  that  has  prevailed,  to 
k  considerable  extent,  for  many  years  past,  of 

f ranting  divorces.  The  question  came  up  as  to 
ow  we  could  express  this  restriction,  in  the 
inost  proper  terms;  and  my  friend  from  Louis- 
ville, (Mr.  Preston)  being  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee, drafted,  with  much  care,  the  section  that 
is  now  proposed  to  be  amended.  I  believe  that 
the  constitution  of  every  state  in  the  union, 
■where  a  restriction  lias  been  placed  upon  legis- 
lation in  relation  to  this  subject,  if  they  have 
not  followed  the  language  employed  in  this  sec- 
tion, have  at  least  carried  out  the  same  idea. 

I  believe  we  all  understand  that  under  the 
federal  constitution,  all  powers  that  are  not  del- 
egated to  the  federal  government,  in  express 
terms,  or  by  necessary  implication,  have  been 
reserved  to  the  states.  But  the  same  rule  does 
not  attain,  as  far  as  state  constitutions  and  state 
legislatures  are  concerned.  All  powers  that  are 
Dot  specially  withheld  from  the  state  legislature 
by  the  constitution  of  the  state,  may  be  exercised 
by  the  legislature.  I  grant  that  the  legislature 
•would  have  power  to  settle  all  cases  of  alimony, 
and  all  questions  that  might  be  presented,  in  re- 
gard to  the  sale  of  estates,  in  which  infants  are 
concerned.  Although  I  am  opposed  to  special 
legislation,  yet  there  are  many  cases  having  re- 
ference to  the  rights  of  individuals,  in  which 
the  legislature  ought  to  have  power  to  act.  I 
have  been  informed  that  within  the  last  two  or 
tliree  years,  there  have  been  cases,  in  which  the 


prayer  of  the  petitioner,  by  the  guardian,  in  be- 
nalf  of  infants,  for  the  sale  of  lands  and  the  ap- 
plication of  the  proceeds  for  the  benefit  of  the 
heirs,  has  been  refused,  and  injustice  has  been 
done  to  them.  If  the  petitioner  had  to  stop 
there,  there  would  be  no  remedy,  and  I  incline 
to  the  opinion,  that  in  such  cases  as  these  it 
tr^ould  be  right  and  proper  for  the  legislature  to 
Act,  by  laying  down  a  rule  by  which  the  court 
Bhall  De  governed,  in  order  that  justice  may  be 
t^hed. 

We  say  in  this  report  that  the  legislature  shall 
ndt^rant  divorces;  but  we  do  not  say  the  legis- 
lature shall  not  pass  laws — on  the  contrary  they 
arie  required  to  pass  snch  laws — conferring  on  the 
judicial  department  the  power  to  act  upon  ap- 
plications ior  divorce;  and,  as  a  necessary  con- 
sequence, the  power  to  settle  alimony,  and  all 
the  incidental  rights  existing  between  the  par- 
tie«,  or  that  grow  up  under  the  separation  of 
husband  and  wif*!. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  am  at  a  loss  to  perceive 
the  force  of  the  objection,  or  of  the  reasons  urged 
by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  (Mr.  Clarxe,) 
▼hy  the  legislature  should  not  be  restricted  in 
ito  power  to  pass  laWs  regarding  the  righta  of 


infant  heirs.  If  I  understand  the  reason  he 
assigns,  it  is,  that  justice  is  not  always  done  by 
the  courts.  Now,  this  is  an  objection  that  may 
exist  in  reference  to  all  other  cases.  We  have 
provided  a  remedy  for  a  failure  of  justice  in 
courts  of  original  jurisdiction,  by  the  establish- 
ment of  an  appellate  court.  If  the  principle 
contended  for  by  the  gentleman  is  correct,  it 
would  only  be  converting  the  legislature  into  a 
high  court  of  errors,  to  correctthe  decisions,  not 
only  of  the  inferior,  but  of  the  superior  courts 
of  the  state. 

As  I  have  said,  these  subjects  haveoccupid  so 
mucli  of  the  time  of  the  legislature,  that  it 
seems  to  me  to  be  required  of  this  convention  to 
establish  in  tlie  constitution,  some  restrictive 
provision  that  will  save  the  state  in  future,  the 
expense  attendant  upon  special  legislation. 

The  convention  then  took  a  recess,  until  3 
o'clock,  P.  M. 

E^'ENING  SESSION. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  thirtieth  section,  pro- 
vides simply,  that  divorces  shall  not  be  granted, 
save  by  courts  of  justice,  in  conformity  to  law. 
That  is  one  class  of  cases  embraced  in  tlie  amend- 
ment that  is  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from 
Carter,  (Mr.  T.J.  Hood,)  and  the  thirty -sixth 
section  provides,  "that  the  general  assembly 
shall  have  no  power  to  pass  special  laws  for  in- 
dividual benefit,  unless  a  majority  of  two-thirds 
of  both  houses  concur  therein."  The  committee, 
in  drafting  the  thirtieth  section,  desired  to  pro- 
hibit the  legislature  from  acting  at  all,  upon  the 
subject  of  divorce  ;  and  that  the  power  of  act- 
ing in  relation  to  that  subject,  should  be  confided 
to  the  courts  of  justice  alone  ;  that  the  decision 
should  be  a  judicial  act.  The  substitute  offered 
by  the  gentleman  from  Carter,  is  liable  to  the 
objection,  that  it  does  not  require  the  decision 
of  the  court  of  justice  in  order  to  pronounce  the 
decree  of  a  divorce.  So  far  then  as  any  materi- 
al difference  between  the  substitute  and  the  pro- 
vision in  the  report  goes,  it  relates  to  these  class- 
es of  cases.  One  is  alimony,  another  is  empow- 
ering the  legislature  to  act  in  regard  to  the 
estates  of  infants  ;  and  the  third  is  in  regard  to 
changing  the  names  of  individuals.  In  regard 
to  alimony,  I  have  never  heard  a  doubt  expressed , 
that  the  legislature  had  the  power  to  act,  without 
any  constitutional  provision  conferring  that  pow- 
er. It  is  therefore  unnecessary  to  insert  any 
such  provision.  Another  objection  to  the  gen- 
tleman's proposition  is,  that  it  does  not  provide 
where  the  decree  of  divorce  shall  come  from. 
The  substitute  says  the  legislature  shall  have  the 
general  power  of  regulating  divorces.  No  one 
doubts,  that  they  have  such  power  already.  And 
this  section  is  decided  by  the  committee  to  be 
better  than  the  substitute,  because  it  says,  that 
divorces  sliall  not  be  granted,  sjive  by  courts  of 
justice  ;  making  it  a  judicial  act,  which  the  sub- 
stitute does  not  require  it  to  be. 

If  it  shall  be  deemed  desirable  by  the  conven- 
tion, that  the  legislature  shall  have  the  power  to 
act,  in  regard  to  the  changing  of  the  names  of  indi- 
viduals, or  to  prescribe  a  general  law  for  that 
purpose,  and  tne  proposition  be  brouglit  forward 
at  the  proper  time,  I  do  not  know  but  I  will  vote 
for  it.  So  in  regard  to  the  provision  relating  to 
the  estates  of  infants,  or  other  persons  laboring 
under  a  disability  to  act  for  tnemselves.    Th« 


627 


provision  regarding  these  two  classes  of  oases 
nad  better  be  incorporated  in  a  different  section. 
The  committee  are  desirous  that  the  thirtieth 
section  should  relate  exclusively  to  the  case  of 
divorces,  without  having  any  otlier  question 
inserted  in  it.  It  was  also  thought  by  the  com- 
mittee, that  the  provision  contained  in  the  thirty 
sixth  section — for  this  amendment  is  virtually  a 
substitute  for  both — requiring  the  concurrence  of 
two  thirds  of  the  general  assembly,  was  a  suf- 
ficient barrier  to  prevent  repeated'  applications 
being  made.  But  if  it  should  be  the  opinion  of 
the  convention  that  this  is  insufficient,  it  can  be 
remedied  by  a  substitute,  such  as  the  gentleman 
now  proposes,  when  we  reach  that  section. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  have  no  objection  that 
the  provision  contained  in  my  amendment  should 
form  a  separate  section;  but  I  see  no  reason  for 
dividing  It  from  a  class  of  cases  precisely  simi- 
lar, which  have  given  rise  to  much  complaint, 
on  account  of  the  consumption  of  time,  and  the 
expense  attending  their  investigation  by  the 
legislature.  I  did  not  design  that  my  amend- 
ment should  be  a  substitute  for  the  36th  section; 
if  I  had  I  would  have  extended  its  provisions 
to  some  lialf  dozen  other  classes  of  ca.ses,  which 
do  not  certainly  occur  so  frequently,  but  which 
nevertheless  sometimes  do  occur.  The  check  of 
two  thirds  may  be  a  sufficient  barrier  to  these ; 
but  in  relation  to  granting  divorces,  and  in  rela- 
tion to  the  estates  of  infant  heirs,  they  occur 
every  year;  and  in  great  numbers;  and  I  desire 
that  my  proposition  shall  embody  these  para- 
mount points.  The  gentleman  suggests,  that 
the  36th  section  will  meet  the  difficulty.  I  would 
like  to  hear  the  answer  of  the  gentleman  to  this 
view  of  the  matter.  If  the  complaint  be  in  re- 
gard to  the  consumption  of  time,  and  the  ex- 
pense, how  will  the  36th  section  remedy  it — since 
the  vote  by  which  it  is  to  be  ascertained,  wheth- 
er there  be  a  majority  of  two  thirds,  or  only  a 
bare  majority,  cannot  be  taken  until  the  discus- 
sion is  completed?  The  time  will  have  been  ex- 
pended, and  the  expense  attending  it  will  have 
accrued?  My  object  is  to  cut  off  tlie  discussion 
by  the  legLslature  altogether;  and  it  is  with  this 
view  that  I  have  offered  the  amendment  in  this 
connection. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  very  much  in  favor  of 
the  section  prohibiting  the  legislature  from  ex- 
ercising the  power  of  granting  divorces.  It  has 
been  a  growing  evil  for  twenty  years,  and  last 
year  I  understand,  there  were  perhaps  some 
three  hundred  cases  or  more.  It  is  time  to  stop 
this  kind  of  legislation. 

I  have  two  or  three  objections  to  this  substi- 
tute, which  I  will  suggest  to  the  honorable  mo- 
ver. I  understand  that  the  legislature  can  do 
any  thing  that  is  within  the  power  of  legisla- 
tion; any  thing  that  the  law-making  power  can 
do,  unless  they  are  prohibited  by  the  federal 
constitution,  or  the  constitution  of  Kentucky. 
Their  power  is  unlimited,  as  to  sovereignty,  ex- 
cept in  those  cases  where  the  exercise  of  that 
power  is  prohibited  by  one  or  the  other  of  these 
constitutions.  It  is  now  proposed,  that  we  shall 
give  to  the  general  assembly  the  power  to  do 
what?  To  pass  a  general  law  regulating  divorces. 
They  have  that  power  now.  I'hey  have  passed 
laws  on  that  very  subject ;  and  those  laws  have 
been  adjudicated  upon,  and  their  validity  deci- 


detl  upon,  for  more  than  twenty  years.  We  are 
then  proposing  to  confer  upon  the  legislature  a 
power  that  they  have  already.  They  have  the 
power,  not  only  of  regulating  divorces,  but  of 
regulating  controversies  relating  to  alimony;  and 
they  have  exercised  that  power  ever  since  w© 
have  had  a  state  government.  Our  statute  book 
is  filled  with  acts  of  this  description  ;  and  the 
decisions  of  the  courts  upon  them  are  numerous; 
yet  here,  for  the  first  time,  we  are  told  tliat  the 
power  ought  to  be  conferred  upon  the  legisla- 
ture, to  act  upon  these  subjects,  and  that  they 
should  have  the  power  to  prescribe  by  a  general 
law,  the  manner  in  which  the  names  of  individu- 
als shall  be  changed.  If  they  choose  to  pass 
such  a  law,  they  can  do  it  now.  But  I  go  furth- 
er than  that.  A  man  may  change  his  name  with- 
out the  intervention  of  the  legislature;  and  if  he 
do  so,  he  may  be  sued  by  the  name  which  he 
adopts. 

The  amendment  goes  on  to  provide,  that  the 
legislature  shall  have  power  to  pass  laws  regu- 
lating the  estates  of  infant  heirs,  or  other  per- 
sons laboring  under  legal  disaljilities.  Have 
they  not  that  power  now?  They  have  the  pow- 
er at  any  time  to  remove  the  disability  of  infants, 
by  providing  that  an  earlier  age  may  be  the  pe- 
riod of  majority.  Does  it  require  a  constitution- 
al provision  to  give  to  the  legislature  these  pow- 
ers? Xot  at  all.  Why?  Because  there  is  no 
constitutional  disability. 

The  amendment  declares  that  "in  no  case  shaU 
special  laws  be  passed  for  the  benefit  of  individ- 
uals in  either  of  the  above  class  of  cases."  In 
regard  to  this  part  of  the  proposition,  I  think  it 
had  better  be  put  into  another  section,  a«  suggest- 
ed by  the  gentleman  from  Louisville  (Mr.  Pres- 
ton.) The  first  part  of  the  proposition,  I  do  not 
consider  necessary.  Besides,  it  makes  us  commit 
ourselves,  by  the  expression  of  an  erroneous 
view,  in  regard  to  constitutional  law.  I  do  not 
wish  to  declare  to  the  world  an  opinion,  as  to 
the  powere  of  the  legislature,  which  I  know  to 
be  at  war  with  the  opinion  that  has  always  been 
entertained  by  legislators  and  jurists. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  am  very  much  inclined  to 
favor  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Carter.  It  strikes  me,  it  is  not  subject  to  the  ob- 
jection taken  by  the  gentleman  from  Xelson, 
(Mr.  Hardin.)  He  seems  to  think,  because  it  is 
generallv  understood,  that  the  legislature  pos- 
sesses all  the  power  of  legislation,  unless  spe- 
cially restricted  by  the  constitution,  that  it  is, 
therefore,  unnecessary  to  say  any  thing  in  rela- 
tion to  legislative  power,  unless  it  be  by  way  of 
restriction.  Xow  this  appears  to  be  a  construc- 
tion which  prevails  or  not,  according  as  it  may 
suit  the  case.  Our  courts  apply  such  construc- 
tion when  it  coincides  with  tlie  views  that  they 
are  attempting  to  establish:  but  when  it  fails  to 
accord  with  those  views,  that  principle  of  con- 
structicm  does  not  seem  to  be  acknowledged,  as 
entirely  obligatory,  in  all  cases.  But  the  gen-« 
tleman  says,  that  it  will  commit  us  to  the  state-, 
ment,  that  the  legislature  shall  have  a  power 
which  they  already  possess.  I  cannot  conceive 
of  any  objection  to  that.  Suppose  the  legisla- 
ture has  the  power.  Is  it  not  permissible  to  say, 
that  they  shall  have  such  power?  It  certainly 
can  do  no  harm.  But  here  you  propose  to  re- 
strict the  legislature,  by  saying,  they  shall  not 


628 


pass  special  \a.yrs  upon  certain  subjects.  I  think 
It  is  proper,  that  when  you  place  a  restriction 
you  should  declare  in  the  same  clause  what 
powers  they  shall  have.  And  the  manner  in 
which  those  powers  should  be  exercised  by  the 
adoption  of  general  provisions,  and  let  the 
courts  of  judicature  act  upon  the  particular 
cases  that  may  fall  within  such  general  pro- 
vision. That  1  understand  to  be  the  object  and 
intent  of  the  amendment.  There  is  a  similar 
provision  in  our  present  constitution,  relating  to 
the  subject  of  slavery.  The  legislature  is  pro- 
hibited from  passing  any  act  for  the  emancipa- 
tion of  slaves,  without  the  consent  of  the  owner, 
and  the  constitution  goes  on  to  say  tliat  the 
legislature  shall  have  full  power  to  pass  an  act 
to  prevent  slaves  being  brought  into  the  state  as 
merchandise. 

Now  if  the  construction  of  my  friend  from 
Nelson  is  right,  all  this  is  ridiculous  and  ab- 
surd. 

It  seems  to  me  to  be  very  proper,  that  in  the 
same  clause  which  contains  the  restriction,  you 
should  give  them  the  power  to  pass  general  en- 
actments in  relation  to  the  subject,  if  you  intend 
they  shall  have  such  power;  whilst  you  take 
away  from  them  the  power  to  act  in  individual 
cases. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  language  used  in  the 
report  is  not  the  clearest  in  the  world.  It  is, 
"  divorces  shall  not  be  granted  save  by  courts  of 
justice,  in  conformity  to  law."  I  think  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Carter,  car- 
ries out  the  same  principle,  and  makes  it  much 
more  explicit;  because  it  says,  they  shall  pass 
laws  in  relation  to  divorces  and  alimony;  but 
that  they  shall  not  pass  laws  granting  divorces 
in  individual  cases.  But  it  seems  to  me,  if  it 
were  intended  merely  to  restrict  the  legislature, 
it  should  have  been  expressed  thus,  "  that  the 
legislature  shall  have  no  power  to  grant  divor- 
ces." I  am  for  all  the  principles  contained  in 
the  amendment.  I  think  it  is  better  than  the 
original  section,  and  I  can  see  no  objection  to 
substituting  it  for  that  section. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  I  am  decidedly  in  favor  of 
the  principle  embraced  in  the  proposed  substi- 
tute. There  are  many  things  that  certainly 
ought  not  to  be  the  subject  of  special  legislation. 
But  the  wording  of  the  amendment  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Carter,  does  not  exactly  suit  my 
ear.  I  will  read  one  which  I  have  drawn  up, 
and  it  will  probably  suit  the  views  of  the  gentle- 
man.    I  believe  it  covers  the  whole  ground. 

"  The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  grant  divorces,  to  change  the  names  of  indi- 
viduals, or  direct  the  sales  of  estates  belonging 
to  infants,  or  other  persons  laboring  under  legal 
disabilities  by  special  legislation;  but,  by  gene- 
ral laws,  shall  confer  such  powers  on  the  courts 
of  justice." 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  am  not  at  all  wedded  to 
the  phraseology  of  my  amendment.  All  that  I 
desire  is  that  the  principle  sliall  be  incorporated. 
I  aceept  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  as  a 
substitute  for  mine. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  no  objection  to  that 
amendment. 

Mr.  APPER80N.  I  think  the  gentleman 
from  Carter  has  given  a  very  good  reason  why 
this  is  the  proper  place  forthe  amendment.  Every 


one  understands  the  reason  why  the  lagislature 
should  not  have  power  to  act  'upon  individual 
cases.     The  great  object  is,  to  save  time  and  ex- 

f)ense.  But  you  will  not  save  either,  if  you 
eave  the  matter  to  be  regulated  as  provided  for 
in  the  thirty  sixth  section;  because  you  never 
can  determine  until  the  final  passage  of  the 
act,  w'hether  there  be  tAvo  thirds  for  it  or  not. 
And  I  believe  there  is  a  general  feeling  through- 
out the  community,  not  only  in  regard  to  divor- 
ces, but  in  regard  to  other  classes  of  cases  that 
the  legislature  shall  not  interpose  its  action  in 
individual  cases.  The  estates  of  infants  have 
been  disposed  of  with  great  facility  and  with 
very  little  regard  for  justice,  in  many  instances 
by  the  legislature. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  substitute,  and 
it  was  agreed  to. 

The  30th  section,  as  amended,  was  then  adop- 
ted. 

The  31st  section  was  next  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  31.  The  credit  of  this  commonwealth 
shall  never  be  given  or  loaned  in  aid  of  any  per- 
son, association,  municipality,  or  corporation, 
without  the  concurrence  of  two  thirds  of  each 
house  of  the  general  assembly. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  to  strike  out 
after  the  word  "corporation"  the  words  "without 
the  concurrence  of  two  thirds  of  each  house  of 
the  general  assembly."  He  was  opposed  to  lend- 
ing the  credit  of  the  state  byway  of  endorse- 
ment, even  though  a  vote  of  two  thirds  of  the 
legislature  were  obtained. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to,  and  the  section, 
as  amended,  was  then  adopted. 

The  32d  and  33d  sections,  in  relation  to  the 
contracting  of  debts  by  the  general  assembly, 
were  passed  over  for  the  present. 

The  34th  section  was  read  and  adopted  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Sec.  34.  No  law  enacted  by  the  general  as- 
sembly shall  embrace  more  than  one  object,  and 
that  shall^be  expressed  in  the  title." 

The  35th  section  was  adopted  as  follows: 

"Sec.  35,  No  law  shall  be  revised  or  amended 
by  reference  to  its  title,  but,  in  such  case,  the  act 
revised,  or  amended,  shall  be  re-enacted  and  pub- 
lished at  length. 

The  3Gth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  36.  The  general  assembly  shall  have  no 
power  to  pass  special  laws  for  individual  bene- 
fit, unless  a  majority  of  two  thirds  of  both  houses 
concur  therein." 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  strike  out  the  whole 
section.     He  was  utterly  opposed  to  the  princi- 

f)le  that  two  thirds  should  be  required  to  pass  a 
aw. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  amend  by  striking  out 
after  the  word  "benefit,"  the  words,  "unless  a 
majority  of  two  thirds  of  both  liouses  concur 
therein,"  and  adding  the  words  "except  in  cases 
of  claims  against  the  commonwealth,  preferred 
by  public  creditors." 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  there  were  other  cases  in 
which  it  might  be  necessary  to  have  a  special 
law.  such  as  for  the  erection  of  a  toll  gate  or  a 
dam.  He  hoped  the  whole  might  be  struck  out. 
The  same  law-making  power  that  could  take  life 
or  lands,  was  competent  to  enact  a  law  for  an  in- 
dividual benefit. 

The  amendment  was  not  agfreed  to. 


629 


The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
strike  out  the  section,  and  it  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  offered  the  following  substi- 
tute for  the  section  which  was  stricken  out. 

'•The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power,  by 
special  enactment,  to  allow  any  private  claim 
against  the  commonwealth;  and  shall  direct,  by 
law,  in  what  manner  claims  against  the  com- 
monwealth are  to  be  adjusted,  and  in  what  courts 
suits  may  be  brought  against  tiie  common- 
wealth." 

The  present  constitution  has  this  section: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  direct,  bylaw,  in 
what  manner,  and  in  what  courts,  suits  may  be 
brought  against  the  commonwealth." 

The  legislature  has  failed  to  point  out  how 
suits  shall  be  brouglit  against  the  commonwealth. 
The  consequence  has  been,  that  ever  since  the 
present  constitution  has  been  in  existence,  there 
nave  been  many  claims  presented  to  the  legisla- 
ture, and  much  time  has  been  con.sumed.  I  am 
satisfied  the  legislature  should  have  power  to 
authorize  the  courts  to  adjudicate  claims  between 
individuals  and  the  commonwealth,  and  to  point 
out  how  these  claims  shall  be  adjusted.  This 
will  save  time  and  expense;  and,  besides,  Vhese 
claims  are  rarely,  if  ever,  adjusted  fairly  when 
brought  before  the  legislature. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  Tliere  is  not  a  single  session 
of  the  legislature  in  which  there  are  not  a  hun- 
dred claims  allowed  in  the  bill  concerning 
claims.  A  man  carries  a  lunatic  to  the  hospital, 
or  another  furnishes  a  few  articles  to  the  assem- 
bly, and  they  bring  in  special  claims.  We  are 
not  to  allow  the  claim  at  all.  The  man  must 
bring  his  suit.  I  am  well  aware  of  the  difficulty 
the  gentleman  has  spoken  of.  But  I  have  al- 
ways been  unwilling  to  pass  any  law  of  that 
kind,  because  there  will  be  too  many  interested 
against  the  government,  and  none  for  it,  as  in 
the  case  of  an  old  man  who  had  some  beef  cat- 
tle to  sell  to  the  federal  government  in  the  time 
of  the  Indian  war  in  1793.  He  said  to  the  agent, 
remember  there  is  the  whole  United  States 
against  poor  old  Jesse  Black,  now  give  me  about 
double  price,  because  I  have  always  labored  un- 
der great  disadvantages.  If  this  passes,  I  think 
we  shall  labor  under  a  thousana  worse  disad- 
vantages than  we  do  now. 

Mr.  BROWN.  I  have  had  the  honor  to  be 
chairman  of  the  committee  on  claims  in  the 
house  of  representatives,  and  I  do  not  think  that 
one  hour  was  consumed  in  the  pas.sage  of  the 
appropriation  bill,  although  it  contained  a  hun- 
dred little  claims.  If  the  gentleman's  amend- 
ment prevails,  the  allowance  of  these  claims  by 
the  general  assembly  will  be  precluded. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  My  design  is  to  exclude 
those  claims  which  may  be  decided  by  the  courts 
of  the  country,  and  not  those  which  relate  to  the 
ordinary  expenses  of  the  government.  I  am 
perfectly  aware  of  the  difficulty,  named  by  the 
gentlenian  from  Nelson,  but  it  seems  to  me  there 
is  another  class  of  claims  that  has  consumed 
more  time,  and  been  decided  with  less  Justice  in 
the  legislature,  than  would  have  been  the  case, 
had  they  been  decided  in  courts  of  justice.  I 
desire  to  add  the  following  to  the  substitute  I 
have  already  offered: 

"No  money  shall  be  drawn  from  the  treasury 


but  in  pursuance  of  appropriation  made  by  law. 
and  no  privat*  claim  tor  money  shall  be  allowed 
in  appropriation  laws  except  for  necessary  ex- 
penditures of  the  government;  nor  shall  any  ap- 
propriation of  money  for  the  support  of  an  ar- 
my be  made  for  a  longer  time  than  one  year;  and 
a  regular  account  of  the  receipts  and'expendi- 
tiires  of  all  public  moneys  shall  be  published 
annually." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  There  is  some  complicacy  in 
that.  There  are  many  claims  which  government 
should  allow  and  which  a  court  would  not.  I 
will  state  two  cases  which  occurred  during  the 
administration  of  President  Jefferson.  He  or- 
dered General  Wilkinson  to  Louisiana  to  arrest 
Aaron  Burr  and  all  others  whom  he  thought 
concerned  with  him.  Among  others,  he  arrested 
General  Adair  and  put  him  in  confinement  and 
sent  him  around  from  New  Orleans  to  Virginia. 
There  was  no  proof  against  him  and  he  sued 
Wilkinson  and  recovered  $3,280  for  assault  and 
battery.  Wilkinson  was  not  worth  a  doUar,  and 
the  execution  was  returned, "no  property  found." 
Mr.  Rankin  furnished  me  a  copy  of  the  record, 
and  I  presented  Gen.  Adair's  claim  and  congress 

Said  it,  with  the  interest,  to  a  dollar,  without  a 
issenting  voice  in  either  house.  If  that  claim  had 
been  presented  in  any  court  not  adollar  could  have 
been  recovered.  That  was  the  sum  total  of  Gen- 
eral Adair's  being  concerned  in  the  conspiracy 
General  Wilkinson  relied  on  probable  cause  for 
proof,  and  there  was  not  a  shadow  of  it.  An- 
other case  was  that  of  James  McCarty,  of  Har- 
din county,  who  sold  a  boat  load  of  lime  to  the 
contractors  for  the  erection  of  certain  public 
works.  The  contractor  failed  and  could  not 
pay.  The  government  of  the  United  States 
stepped  in  and  paid  the  demand,  because  the 
lime  had  been  appropriated  for  the  benefit  of  the 
United  States.  There  would  have  been  no 
claim  upon  which  a  suit  could  be  based.  There 
are  many  claims  of  that  kind,  in  which  the  gov- 
ernment is  bound  in  honor  and  justice  to  pay,  in. 
which  no  suit  would  lie.  This  is  a  reason  why 
it  is  proper  it  should  be  left  open  for  the  legisla- 
ture, for  there  are  many  strong  cases  in  which  the 
government  is  bound  in  honor  to  pay. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  am  not  in  favor  of  the  substi- 
tute of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  It  has 
been  the  practice  of  the  government,  and  I  be- 
lieve of  all  governments,  to  appropriate  money 
to  individuals,  and  to  public  purposes  by  legis- 
lative enactment.  I  do  not  know  a  state  in  the 
Union  which  has  a  provision  by  which  the  state 
itself  is  to  be  sued.  I  believe  some  have  pro- 
vided laws  for  the  presentation  of  petitions,  not 
to  the  legislature,  out  to  some  power  created  for 
that  purpose.  But  the  gentleman  provides  that 
the  legislature  shall  not  pass  anv  laws  appro- 

{)riating  money  to  individuals,  while  it  may  pass 
aws  to  provide  the  code  by  which  courts  snail 
settle  individual  claims.  Now,  if  the  legislature 
provides  how  courts  shall  settle  claims  by  bring- 
ing a  suit  against  the  state,  after  having  recover- 
ed judgment,  how  will  you  enforce  it?  There 
will  be  no  use  in  obtaining  the  judgment,  unles.4 
you  have  some  means  of  enforcing  the  collec- 
tion of  the  demand.  I  do  not  see  how  that  can 
be  effected.  Suppose  the  court  decides  a  case  in 
favor  of  an  individual,  and  the  legislature  thinks 
the  decision  wrong  and  will  not  pay  the  mon- 


630 


ey — the  decision  of  tlie  court  falls  to  the  ground 
of  course. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  do  not  like  to  oppose  (ho 
wishes  of  gentlemen.  Tlie  first  proposition  con- 
tains two  provisions — the  first  of  which  author- 
izes the  legislature  to  direct  in  what  nu)do  claims 
against  the  commonwealth  shall  be  adjusted. 
My  proposition  does  not  necessarily  take  the 
claims  before  the  courts;  it  merely,  as  I  have  al- 
ready saiil,  leaves  it  to  the  Legislature  to  point 
out  the  mode  in  which  they  shall  be  properly 
and  justly  settled.  The  legislature  may  point 
out  by  law  the  court,  or  direct  the  establishment 
of  a  tribunal,  or  a  commission  before  wliich 
these  claims  may  be  examined  and  speedily  dis- 
posed of.  My  second  provision  is,  that  no  money 
shall  be  drawn  from  the  treasury  but  in  pursuance 
of  appropriations  made  by  law;  and  no  private 
claim  for  money  shall  be  allowed  in  appropria- 
tion laws.  With  regard  to  the  position  taken  by 
the  gentleman  from  Henderson,  it  amounts,  in 
ray  opinion,  to  nothing;  because,  is  notthelegis- 
lature  competent  to  provide  by  law  that  when 
an  indiviilual  has  a  claim  against  the  common- 
wealth, that  claim  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  treas- 
ury, if  substantiated?  Every  gentleman  who  has 
been  in  the  habit  of  attending  here  when  the 
legislature  is  in  session,  knows  that  the  greater 
part  of  its  time  has  been  consumed  in  the  con- 
sideration of  private  claims.  I  know  one  case 
that  has  been  before  the  legislature  for  the  last 
four  years,  session  after  session,  the  case  of  Rob- 
ert Williams,  which  was  a  claim  on  account  of 
some  contract  on  Licking  river,  and  I  believe  it 
can  be  shown  he  has  received  money  time  after 
time.  I  repeat  that  the  object  of  tnis  proposi- 
tion is  not  at  all  to  interfere  with  the  ordinary 
expenses  of  the  government. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  have  listened  to  the  argu- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  and 
I,  by  no  means,  think  his  amendment  ought  to 
be  adopted.  I  suggested  a  difiiculty  which  I 
still  think  would  exist,  and  that  was  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  judgment  of  the  court.  But  there 
is  another  still  greater,  to  which  I  will  call  the 
attention  of  the  convention.  There  are  a  great 
many  individual  claims  that  must  come  before 
the  legislature  to  be  adjusted,  and  nowhere  else. 
There  are  claims  too,  growing  out  of  commit- 
tees appointed  by  the  legislature,  of  individuals 
who  appeared  as  witnesses  before  them,  and 
other  claims  of  a  similar  description,  which 
must  be  paid  in  some  form  or  other.  I  think 
the  power  is  better  where  it  is  with  the  legisla- 
ture, than  in  the  hands  of  an  individual. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  BOYD  offered  the  following  as  an  addi- 
tional section: 

No  charter  shall  be  granted  giving  banking 
or  trading  powers,  without  providing  that  the 

fjrivate  property  of  stockholders  be  made  liable 
or  all  the  debts  and  obligations  of  any  such 
CLtrporations  or  chartered  company. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  sub.stitute  the  following: 
"Taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform  through- 
out the  state." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  In  reference  to  the  proposi- 
tion of  my  friend  from  Trigg,  (Mr.  Boyd,)  I  do 
not  see  how  we  can  act  on  it.  It  will  cut  down 
every  corporation  in  Kentucky.  It  will  be  a 
reto  on  all  corporations  so  long  as  this  ccuisti- 


tution  shall  stand,  because  we  know  no  compa- 
ny will  ever  be  incorporated.  Would  I  take  a 
liundred  dollars  stock  in  any  company?  Never 
in  the  world.  It  is  nearl}^  as  broad  as  that  of 
David  Trimble,  when  he  offered  a  resolution  in 
congress.  He  said  he  would  take  the  world  for 
his  theatre, that  heaven  should  contribute  to  his 
speech,  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  as  his  quarry, 
and  with  the  indulgence  of  the  house,  he  would 
take  a  whack  ab  eternitv.  [Roars  of  laughter.] 
This  is  the  broadest  whack  at  eternity  I  ever 
saw.     [Renewed  laughter.] 

Pending  this  question,   tlie  convention   ad- 
journed. 


FRIDAY.  NOVEMBER  23.  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

CLERICAL  representatives. 

Mr.  DAVIS  presented  the  memorial  of  two 
clergymen  of  the  city  of  Frankfort — Mr.  Robin- 
son and  Mr.  Brush — in  opposition  to  the  twenty 
fifth  fection  of  the  report  on  the  legi^ative  de- 
partment, which  provides  that  no  person  while 
he  continues  to  exercise  the  functions  of  a  cler- 
gyman, priest,  or  teacher  of  any  religious  per- 
suasion, society,  or  sect,  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
general  assemt)ly. 

It  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole, 
and  is  as  follows: 

To  the  Honorable,  the  Constitutional  Convention  of 
Kentucky,  now  in  Frankfort  assembled. 

The  memorial  of  the  undersigned,  citizens  of 
Kentucky,  respectfully  shewetli. — 

That  your  memorialists  have  observed,  with 
much  concern,  in  the  report  of  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department,  (section  25,)  a  clause 

Eroposed  for  the  adoption  of  your  honorable 
ody,  as  a  part  of  the  new  constitution,  to  the 
following  effect,  to-wit : 

"No  person,  while  he  continues  to  exercise  the 
functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest,  or  teacher  of 
any  religious  persuasion,  society,  or  sect,  shall 
be  eligible  to  the  general  assembly." 

In  regard  to  which  proposition,  your  memori- 
alists beg  leave  to  lay  before  your  honorable  body 
certain  considerations,  which,  m  their  view,  go 
to  establish  the  injustice  and  inexpediency  of 
any  such  constitutional  provision. 

We  make  no  objection  to  the  opinion  that,  as  a 
matter  of  practical  duty,  clergymen  ought  not  to 
be  aspirants  for  political  office,  nor  mingle  in 
political  strife.  Not  only  are  we  averse  to  such 
a  course,  but  we  should  feel  bound,  moreover,  as 
office-bearers  in  the  church,  to  vote  for  the  sus- 
pension of  any  clergyman  from  his  office  in  the 
church,  who  should  be  shown  to  have  prostitu- 
ted the  influence  of  his  ministerial  character  to 
the  promotion  of  his  political  elevation.  And 
that  this  is  the  general  sentiment  of  the  various 
bodies  of  christians  in  our  country  at  large,  is 
most  clearly  evident  from  tliis  fact, — that  in 
twenty  one  .states  of  the  Union  no  such  constitu- 
tional provision,  as  we  here  complain  of,  exists; 
this  provision  being  found  only  in  the  constitu- 
tions of  nine  states — namely,  Virginia,  North 
and  South  Carolina,  Florida,  Texas,  Louisiana, 


631 


Misaonri,  Tennessee,  and  Kentucky.  And  yet 
in  the  twenty  one  states  no  more  disposition  to 
interfere  with  politics  has  ever  been  manifested 
by  the  clergy,  than  in  the  nine  states  in  which 
the  clergy  are  excluded  from  political  preferment 
by  the  constitution. 

It  will  not  fail  to  occur  to  any  one,  on  reflec- 
tion, that  such  a  prohibition  in  the  constitution 
is,  practically,  wholly  inoperative  to  prevent  the 
perversion  of  their  clerical  influence,  by  design- 
ing men,  for  the  purposes  of  political  promotion. 
Facts  show,  that  none  who  sincerely  love  their 
calling  as  clergymen,  will  be  willing  to  endanger 
their  ministerial  influence  and  reputation  by  be- 
coming candidates  for  political  favor.  "While  on 
the  other  hand,  it  is  obvious  that  tliose  whose 
clerical  character  sits  loosely  upon  them,  and 
who  aspire  after  political  distinction,  can  very 
easily  qualify  themselves  for  holding  office  un- 
der such  a  constitutional  prohibition,  by  some 
immorality  of  conduct,  if  they  be  ministers  in 
churches  which  hold  that  the  clerical  office  may 
not  voluntarily  be  laid  aside;  or  by  a  t^mporarv 
resignation,  (when  the  views  of  their  church 
may  admit  of  it)  as  has  frequently  been  done  in 
this  and  other  states.  Or  they  may  render  the 
constitution  inoperative  against  themselves,  by 
holding  in  fact,  the  position  and  influence  of  a 
clergyman,  without  formally  assuming  the  title. 

Thus  the  practical  effect  of  such  a  clause  is  to 
restrain  and  preclude  only  the  worthy  and  con- 
scientious of  the  clergy,  whose  influence  need 
not  be  feared  in  any  position;  while  it  is  no  re- 
straint whatever  upon  the  unscrupulous,  who 
might  be  disposed  to  make  a  V)ad  use  of  the  in- 
fluence over  the  minds  of  men,  which  their 
office   confers. 

Considerations  of  this  kind  alone,  would  not, 
however,  have  induced  your  memorialists  to  re- 
monstrate, thus  publicly  against  the  adoption  of 
the  proposed  clause  in  the  constitution.  But  we 
conceive  there  are  far  more  important  objections 
to  this  measure — objections  arising  out  of  the 
grounds  on  which,  if  adopted  at  all,  this  clause 
must  be  adopted.  Here  we  believe  are  involved 
certain  great  principles  of  civil  and  Religious 
Freedom. 

We  suppose  that  any  constitutional  provision 
clearly  in  conflict  witfi,  or  an  exception  to  the 
general  rule  of  equal  privileges  to  all  classes — 
or  which  operates  in  restraint  of  the  power  of 
the  people  to  choose  whom  they  please  to  office; 
ought  to  be  founded  on  the  plainest  reasons  of 
expediency,  if  not  of  necessity.  The  provision 
in  question  is,  manifestly,  such  an  exception  in 
both  points  of  view.  In  the  first  place,  it  ex- 
cludes a  large  and  reputable  class  of  citizens 
from  the  enjoyment  of  one  of  the  highest  privi- 
leges of  citizenship — the  privilege  of  being 
chosen  to  office.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  an  ex- 
ception to  the  great  law  that  the  people  are  ca- 
Eaole  of  judging,  and  ought  to  judge,  who  may 
e  chosen  to  office. 

The  adoption  of  the  proposed  clause,  as  a  part 
of  the  constitution  implies  therefore,  of  necessi- 
ty, some  more  important  reason  for  it,  than  any  as 
yet  alluded  to.  And  though  no  reason  for  this  in- 
eligibility of  the  clergy  is  set  forth  in  the  clause 
reported  by  your  committee,  we  are  constrained 
to  conclude,  and  we  doubt  not,  the  great  mas.s  of 
men  will  come  to  the  same  conclusion, — Uiat  the 


ground  on  which  a  provision,  is  adopted  so  obvi- 
ously in  conflict  with  generally  admitted  princi- 
ples, as  above  shown,  must  be  some  supposed  in- 
compatibility of  the  clerical  office  in  its  very  na- 
ture with  the  duties  of  civil  life.  And  we  are  led 
the  more  certainly  to  this  conclusion  by  the  fact 
that  we  find  this  reason  actually  assigned  for  the 
ineligibility  of  ministers  to  civil  office  in  three 
out  of  nine  of  the  state  constitutions  which  make 
ministers  ineligible.  In  each  of  the  three,  (and 
only  three  assign  any  reason)  the  same  words  in 
effect  are  used — namely  :  "Ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel are  by  their  profession  dedicated  to  the  ser- 
vice of  God,  and  the  care  of  souls,  and  ought  not 
to  be  diverted  from  the  great  duty  of  their  func- 
tions, therefore  no  minister  shall  be  eligible  <fec." 

If  this,  therefore,  be  the  implied  ground  of  the 
restriction  reported  by  your  committee — and  we 
can  conceive  of  no  other  ground  sufficient  to  jus- 
tify a  manifest  departure  from  the  general  law  of 
equal  rights  to  all — then  we  ieel  l)ound,  solemn- 
ly, to  protest  against  any  such  provision,  as  in 
conflict  with  one  great  principle  of  free  govern- 
ment— which  it  is  the  peculiar  gloij  of  the  Amer- 
ican states  to  recognise — the  principle  of  non-in- 
terference of  civil  government  with  matters  of  re- 
ligion. 

We  deny  tlie  competency  of  the  civil  govern- 
ment to  define  the  cnaract«r  and  functions  of  the 
gospel  ministry.  Admitting  the  truth  of  the 
general  sentiment  above  quoted,  still  we  protest 
against  such  a  declaration,  as  a  portion  of  con- 
stitutional law.  It  is  solely  the  office  of  the 
church  to  declare  the  functions  of  her  ministers. 
To  say  nothing,  therefore,  of  the  fact  that  the 
tastes,  the  views,  and  the  habit-s  of  those  com- 
posing the  bodies  which  frame  state  constitu- 
tions, are  not  necessarily,  nor  always,  such  as  to 
qualify  them  for  decid^ing  justly,  in  regard  to 
the  proper  character  and  duties  of  the  gospel 
ministry,  we  hold  that  this  declaration,  cither 
expressed  or  implied,  in  any  constitution,  is  in 
conflict  with  the  great  doctrine  of  non-interfer- 
ence with  religion.  And  tlie  hi.story  of  modern 
nations  teaches,  that  it  behooves  freemen  to 
watch,  with  jealousy,  any  interference  of  the 
state  with  the  church;  seeing  that  from  the 
slightest  beginning,  the  precedent  shall  grow 
till  designing  and  ambitious  politicians  corrupt 
the  purity  of  the  church,  and  thereby  render 
her  a  fit  instrument  for  the  purposes  of"  tyrants. 

I^ot  to  mark,  either,  the  obvious  impropriety 
of  a  declaration  either  in  words,  or  in  effect,  by 
the  civil  authority — or  indeed  any  other  author- 
ity that  the  ministry,  any  more  than  all  other 
christians,  are.  by  their  profession,  dedicated  to 
the  service  of  God — we  object,  furthermore,  to 
the  conclusion  derived  from  that  premise,  that 
"ministers  ought  not  to  be  diverted  from  the 
great  duty  of  their  functions,"  by  being  eligible 
and  elected  to  the  legislature.  Why  select  this 
one,  out  of  a  thousand  modes  of  being  divert- 
ed from  their  duty,  as  the  sole  object  of  consti- 
tutional guardianship?  Wliy  not  as  well  declare 
that  ministers  shall  not  engage  in  farming  or 
merchandise,  or  in  any  other  than  this  single 
pursuit — the  care  of  souls?  Or  why  provide, 
Dv  constitutional  enactment,  that  this  profession 
alone  shall  not  be  diverted  from  the  auty  of  its 
functions?  It  is  obviously  equally  competent 
for  the  constitution  to  declare  that  physicians. 


633 


who  hate  the  important  care  of  the  lives  of  men, 
ought  not  to  be  diverted  from  the  duty  of  their 
functions,  and,  therefore,  should  not  be  eligible 
to  political  office.  And  also,  that  aged  men, 
especially  those  yet  impenitent,  ought  not  to  be 
diverted  from  the  high  duty  of  preparation  for 
death,  and  therefore  shall  not  bo  eligible  to 
political  distinctions,  which  are,  in  their  nature, 
BO  unfavorable  to  this  great  duty. 

The  chief  objection,  hov^'cver,  and  that  which 
has  led  your  memorialists  to  obtrude  themselves 
upon  your  honorable  body,  is,  that  -^N'hile  this 
provision  is  advocated  most  warmly,  by  those 
who  are  peculiarly  jealous,  as  all  men  ought  to 
be,  of  any  interference  between  the  church  and 
Btate;  yet ,  the  insertion  of  such  a  clause  in  the 
constitution,  on  such  grounds  as  we  have  shown 
to  have  been  expressed,  and  as  are  necessarily 
implied  in  so  doing,  is  a  decision  by  civil  au- 
thority of  the  great  theological  question  of  the 
age. 

The  great  point  in  dispute  between  the  church 
of  Rome  ana  those  Who  sympathise  with  her  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  churclies  of  the  Refonna- 
tion  on  the  other,  is  iJivolved  in  the  question-^Is 
the  minister  of  religion  a  priest?  Is  he  a  pecu- 
liar sacred  person — 'Standing  to  mediate  between 
God  and  his  offending  creatures,  by  the  offering 
of  sacrifice?    Or  is  he  chiefly  a  teacher— an  ex- 

f»ounder  of  the  truth,  and  aclministrator  of  seal- 
ng  ordinances  in  the  church?  The  church  of 
Rome,  if  we  understand  aright  her  teachings, 
holds)  the  former  vieW|  and  consistently  Avith 
that  view,  has  for  her  ministers  priests,  minister- 
ing at  an  altar— ^offering  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass 
—absolving  the  penitent  on  confession  and  pen- 
nance,  and  constituting  the  channel  of  mysteri- 
ous grace  to  the  faithful.  Protestant  churches, 
on  the  other  hand,  have  for  their  ministers  teach'- 
ers,  called  of  God  as  they  believe,  and  chosen 
by  the  people  to  instruct  the  people,  and  admin- 
ister ordinances  established  to  be  signs  and  seals 
of  spiritual  blessing.  Of  course  the  ministry  of 
the  latter  has  not  that  sort  of  sacredness  of  char- 
acter, Avhich  necessarily  separates  them  from  the 
mass  of  christian  people- — nor  that  spiritual  pow- 
er and  that  control  over  the  conscience,  which 
the  office  of  a  priesthood  in  its  very  nature  con- 
fers. 

Now  if  the  minister  of  religion  be  aj3j'ics<"-a 
man  apart  from  the  mass  of  christian  people,  by 
the  mysterious  sacrednesss  of  his  office,  and  if 
in  virtue  of  his  office,  he  have  a  spiritual  power 
which  can  be  shown  to  be  incompatible  with 
the  free  suffrage  of  the  people  in  any  Way-"there 
might  then  be  some  good  reason  for  debarring 
him  from  civil  office.  But  if  the  minister  of  re- 
ligion be  merely  one  of  the  people,  set  apart  to 
the  duty  in  the  chufch  of  expounding  the  truth 
and  dispensing  ordinances,  with  no  other  influ- 
ence and  power  than  that,  which  the  faithful 
discharge  of  his  duty  confers  upon  him;  then 
clearly  there  is  no  reason  for  making  any 
distinction  between  him  and  other  citizens  in  re- 
gard to  the  privileges  of  citizenship. 

If  this  statement  of  the  question  bo  correct — 
nnd  We  have  no  motive  to  misstate  it — or  do  We 
think  anyone,  whichever  view  of  the  question 
he  takes,  will  be  disposed  to  controvert  its  main 
features,  then  it  follows  that  to  decide  by  the 
constitution,  that  ministers  of  the  gospel  shall 


be  ineligible  topolitical  preferment,  is,  insofar, 
to  decide  this  great  theological  controversy 
against  Protestants.  Our  complaint,  however, 
is  not  that  it  is  decided  agaist  us' — but  that  it  is 
decided  at  all  by  such  autliority. 

It  may  haVe  been  wise  to  provide  against  the 
undue  influence  of  the  priesthood  in  trie  govern- 
ment, in  an  age  when  statesmen  still  had  reason 
to  fear  the  influence  of  a  doctrine  that  held  the 
power  of  the  chui'ch  to  be  aboVe  all  civil  power. 
For  in  that  case  the  priests  Would  be  the  subjects 
of  an  adversary  power  to  the  civil  govenuneat. 
But  we  can  see  no  strong  reason  for  such  a  pro- 
vision, even  against  a  priesthood,  in  an  age  when 
all  men  treat  with  derision,  the  claim  of  a  spiri- 
tual power  aboVe  civil  government,  more  espe- 
cially does  it  seem  to  us  needless,  to  apply  such 
a  prohibition  to  those- teachers  of  religion,  whose 
distinguishing  characteristic  as  a  body  of  men, 
has  ever  been  to  be  foremost  in  the  war  against  the 
domination  of  the  spiritual  over  the  civil  power. 

Entertaining  these  views  we  respectfully  sub- 
mit them  to  vour  honerttble  body  for  considera- 
tion. Nor  do  We  doubt  tliat  a  careful  examina- 
tion of  the  subject,  will  lead  you,  as  it  recently 
led  the  convention  of  New  York,  to  strike  this 
clause  from  the  constitution  of  the  state,  as  in- 
compatible with  those  enlightened  views  of  re- 
publican government,  which  are  the  glory  of  our 
age  and  country. 

And  thus  your  memorialists  will  ever  pray. 
STUART  ROBINSO^N. 
GEO.  W.  BRUSH. 

BASIS  OF  REl'RESBJTTATrOJT. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  offer  the  following  reso- 
lution: 

Resolved,  That  the  basis,  as  well  as  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation,  as  provided  in  the 
sixth  section  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department,  is  justan<l  equitable, 
and  that  this  convention  Will  not  depart  there- 
from. 

On  this  resolution  I  wish  to  offer  a  few  re- 
marks. We  have  been  engaged  about  two  weeks 
in  the  discussion  of  the  proper  basis  of  repre- 
sentation and  apportionment  among  the  several 
counties  of  the  commonwealth.  I  am  embold- 
ened to  offer  this  resolution  from  the  fact, 
that  if  it  is  adopted,  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
basis  of  free  white  inhabitants,  it  injures  my 
immediate  constituency  as  much,  if  not  more, 
than  that  of  any  other  delegate  on  this  floor.  I 
have  been  figuring  pretty  extensively  to  see 
what  peculiar  benefits  would  accrue  to  my  re- 
gion of  country  by  the  adoption  of  the  oasis 
contained  in  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
from  Simpson;  and  I  find  the  mountain  coun- 
ties, except  two,  will  be  entitled  to  a  separate 
representative  in  the  lower  branch  of  the  next 
legislature.  At  the  first  blush,  I  was  inclined 
to  the  opinion  that  it  was  right  and  proper  that 
that  basis  should  be  adopted.  And  1  now  must 
V)e  peiTuitted  to  say  I  am  not  convinced  its  adop- 
tion Would  be  improper,  or  that  the  basis  is  not 
the  true  basis  in  all  free  and  well  organized 
governments.  I  know  we  have  the  precedents 
of  many  state  governments  for  its  adoption. 
But,  as  the  people  arc  not  familiarized  with  it, 
and  as  I  would  do  nothing  calculated  to  be  the 
slightest  drawback  to  the  constitution  we  shall 


633 


make,  I  should  be  unwilling  to  see  this  new  ba- 
sis adopted;  for  I  care  not  whatever  benefits 
might  accrue  to  my  own  region  of  countrr,  I 
trust  I  shall  not  overlook  the  interests  of'^the 
whole  state.  Whilst  I  know  it  would  benefit 
my  own  section  of  country,  I  am  sure  it  would 
injure  the  largest  and  most  wealthy  portion  of 
the  state;  and  I  feel  assured  if  we  were  to  adopt 
this  basis,  that  in  the  large  or  blue  grass  coun- 
ties, it  would  sink  any  constitution  we  might 
frame,  so  that  it  would  never  be  resurrected 
again. 

I  have  examined  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department,  and  I  find  that 
the  old  basis  of  representation  is  departed  from, 
to  some  e.Kteut,  and  a  new  basis,  or  rather  a  dif- 
ferent basis  from  that  which  iias  obtained  hereto- 
fore in  Kentucky,  has  been  adopted.  According 
to  the  new  rules  of  apportionment  adopted  iu 
the  report  of  the  committee,  the  smallest  coun- 
ties, or  the  counties  next  to  the  smallest  cla.ss  iu 
this  state,  I  admit,  are  to  be  benefitted  to  some 
extent.  But  I  wish  die  convention  to  bear  in 
mind  the  benefits  which  are  to  accrue  to  the 
smaller  counties.  There  are  thirteen  large  coun- 
ties having  twenty  nine  representatives,  and 
tliev  are  to  have  one  representative  for  every 
1,198  voters  within  those  counties.  They  gain, 
on  the  present  mode  of  representation,  two  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  voters  for  each  representa- 
tive, and  four  hundred  and  eighty  six  for  each 
county,  included  in  the  large  class.  If  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  was  aiiopted,  what  would 
be  the  effect  on  the  large  counties?  The  thirteen 
large  counties  have  two  members  each,  and  up- 
wards. Instead  of  twenty  nine  members  they 
Will  have  twenty  two,  and  instead  of  gaining 
two  hundred  and  eighteen  voters  for  each  mem- 
b^-r,  and  four  hundred  and  eighty  six  for  each 
county  and  a  representative  for  1,198  voters, 
they  will  lose  one  hundred  and  sixty  four  vo- 
ters to  each  member,  three  hundred  and  one  in 
each  county,  and  will  still  have  a  member  for 
every  1,580  voters  each  county  may  contain. 
This  looks  to  me  more  like  justice,  and  it  is  cer- 
tainlv  more  in  accordance  with  the  rights  of 
numbers.  Now  the  Jipportionmeut  according  to 
the  number  of  qualified  voters  in  the  state,  as 
set  forth  iu  the  auditor's  report  for  1848,  will 
be  fourteen  hundred  and  sixteen  for  one  represen- 
tative. The  larger  counties  will  still  have  a  rep- 
resentative for  1,580  voters. 

I  think  there  is  a  little  injustice  in  the  mat- 
ter; but  for  the  purpose  of  compromising  the 
whole  matter,  and  closing  this  protracted  and 
unprofitable  discussion,  let  us  adopt  the  report 
of  the  committee,  which  has  been  well  matured. 
It  gives  general  satisfaetion  and  does  equal  jus- 
tice to  every  portion  of  the  commonwealth.  I 
have  offered  the  resolution  as  a  test  question, 
and  I  ask  the  convention  to  manifest  its  feeling 
iu  reference  to  the  principle  contained  in  the  re- 
port of  the  committee.  We  can  do  it  at  once, 
and  settle  the  matter. 

If  the  convention  adopt  the  resolution,  it  is 
evidence  that  they  will  adopt  the  report  of  the 
committee,  and  thus  put  an  end  to  this  exciting 
debate. 

Mr.  MACHEN.    It  seems  to  me  that  if  we 
should  adopt  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
80 


from  Knox,  (Mr.  Woodson,)  this  body  would  be 
presented  to  the  country  in  rather  a  farcical  atti- 
tude. Two  or  three  days  since  we  adopted  a 
resolution,  that  population  should  be  the  basis 
of  representation.  Notice  has  been  given,  un- 
der the  rules  of  tiiis  house,  that  a  reconsideration 
of  the  vote  by  which  that  resolution  was  adopt- 
ed, would  oe  moved.  The  gentleman  now 
comes  in  with  a  resolution,  and  a.«ks  this  house 
to  adopt  it,  asserting  an  entirely  different  basis 
for  representation,  leaving  the  other  resolution 
upon  our  journal,  sustained  by  an  overwhelm- 
ing majority.  Jf  ow,  sir,  which  of  the  two  shall 
prevail?  If  his  resolution  is  adopted,  I  suppose 
the  squabble  will  then  come  up  as  to  which  one 
of  the  two  antagonistic  resolutions  expresses 
the  sense  of  the  house.  The  gentleman's  viewa 
upon  the  proper  basis  of  representation  seem  to 
have  undergone  a  change,  and  his  mote  mature 
judgment  brings  him  back  to  that  under  which 
we  have  lived  for  fifty  years  past. 

I  wish,  sir,  to  submit  to  this  house  a  few  of 
the  reasons  which  governed  me  in  casting  my 
vote,  when  the  resolution  now  sought  to  be  ren-- 
dered  void  was  adopted,  and  which  will  s.till 
govern  me  in  my  course  in  this  house.  And,  as 
the  best  argument  that  can  be  presented  is  that 
based  upon  facts,  demonstrated  by  figures,  I  w^l 
ask  the  particular  attention  of  members  to  the 
following  table,  taken  from  the  census  of  1840. 
This  is  certainly  the  best  source  from  which  "V^e 
can  draw  information  upon  this  subject.  „-,n 

In  this  table  I  have  divided  the  popalatiqii- 
into  three  classes.  The  first  column  contains 
all  those  under  twenty  years  of  age;  the  second, 
all  the  males  twenty  years  old  and  upwards; 
the  third,  all  the  females  twenty  years  old  and 
upwards;  and  the  fourth  the  aggregate,  made  up 
of  the  three  classes.  I  have  placed  the  popula- 
tion of  the  city  of  Louisville  at  thfe  head  of  the 
table,  and  have  made  up  the  table  by  ^ouping 
adjacent  counties  of  similar  character  in  sou 
and  production,  and  have,  by  these  groups  or 
blocks,  succeeded,  as  I  believe,  in  fairly  repre- 
senting the  population  of  every  portion  of  the 
state. 

TABLE 


Comparative  population  in  difierenC  sections  of  the 
State,  as  shown  by  Census  of  1340. 


Counties,  Cities, 
&c. 


Children 
ander  30 
years  old 


Males 
20  years 
old  and 
upward 


Females 
20  yeare 
old  and 
upward. 


total 

free 

white 

popula'n. 


Louisville  City,    - 


7.940 


5,341 


3,880       17,161 


Adair, 
Allen, 
Barren, 


4,060 

1,358 

1,351 

3,957 

1,348 

1,170 

7,816 

2,704 

2,627 

15,834 

5,310 

5,148 

6,770 
13,147 


2632 


034 


Bracken, 
Pendleton, 
Harrison, 
Nicholas, 


Nelson, 
Shelby, 
Spencer, 


Caldwell, 
Hopkins, 
Livingston, 
Trigg,    - 


3,655 
2,335 
4,976 
44256 


1,271 


1,784 
1,531 


1,167 

742 
1.692 
1,523 


13,222        5,524        5,124        25,870 


5,030 

1,944 

1,894 

6,224 

2,650 

2,352 

2,643 

1,037 

970 

13,937 

5,631 

5,216 

4,857 

1,678 

1,557 

4.611 

1,496 

1,330 

44J65 

1,742 

1,351 

3,338 

1,173 

1,103 

17,070 

6,089 

5,341 

Waabington, 

Marion, 

Franklin,  (town  j 
excluded,)        | 

Anderson, 


4,756 

1406 

1,548 

5,031 

1,672 

1,637 

2,9-.8 

1,210 

1,031 

2,U0j 

1 

92« 

843 

15,35q 

5,402 

5,059 

6,003 
4,015 
8,45.' 
7,310 


Bourton, 

4,188 

1,993 

1,671 

7,852 

Clark, 

3,862 

1,450 

1,443 

6.755 

Jessamine, 

3,282 

1,311 

1,217 

5,810 

Woodford, 

3,198 

1,380 

1,238 

5,816 

14,530 

6,134 

5,569 

26,233 

8,868 
11,266 
4,650 


24,784 


8,091 
7.437 
7,338 
5,614 


28,500 


Wayne, 

4,269 

1,271 

1,214 

6,754 

Clinton, 

2,247 

714 

713 

3,674 

Cumberland. 

2,798 

902 

866 

4,568 

Pulaaki, 

5,290 

1,680 

1,612 

8,582 

Russell, 

2.350 

742 

735 

3,827 

16,954 

5,309 

5,142 

27,405 

Henderson, 

3,571 

1,466 

1,144 

6,181 

Daviess, 

3,7?5 

1,402 

1,105 

0,3r2 

Ohio. 

3,529 

1,143 

1,076 

5,748 

Union, 

2.956 

1,265 

892 

5,113 

-■■ 

13,791 

5.2:  G 

4,307 

23,374 

7,900 
8,340 
5.199 
4,371 


35,812 


GalIo«<ray, 
Graves, 
Hickman, 
McCrackenj 


5,569 

1.679 

1,592 

4,157 

1584 

1,203 

4,462 

1,571 

1,312 

2,42^ 

892 

743 

16,615 

5.426 

4,852 

8,840 
C,644 
7,343 
4,064 


Christian, 
Todd,    - 
Logan, 


5,396 
3,->C9 
4,802 


2,059 
1.33(1 

1,877 


1,836 
1,231 
1,800 


9,491 
6,070 
8,479 


13,907        5,206        4,867        24,040 


Madison, 
Garrard, 
Lincoln, 


6,242 
4,103 

3,737 


2,537 
1,527 
1,425 


2,161 
1,476 
1,400 


144204        5,489        5,037        24,730 


11,040 

7,108 


TotaM'eac"hcTass,      IS^'^l^      60,856      55,662      283,932 


To  have  increased  the  population  of  males 
twenty  years  old,  and  over,  in  the  above  coun- 
ties, to  the  same  ptoportion  of  Louisville,  with 
the  whole  population  would,  instead  of  60,856, 
have  given  88,309 — near  50  per  cent.  The  above 
counties  were  entitled  to  48  or  49  members,  it 
males,  over  twenty  years  old,  had  governed,  they 
would  haVe  been  reduced  in  proportion  to  Lou-- 
isville,  to  34  members. 

In  1840,  Louisville  liad  a  small  fraction  ovef 
one  twenty  fourth  part  of  the  male  population 
of  the  state  of  twenty  years  old  and  over.  She 
had  one  forty  fourth  part  of  the  children  undei* 
twenty  years  old,  and  one  twenty  nintli  pjirt  of 
the  female  population.  She  had  one  thirty  fifth 
part  of  the  free  white  population. 

The  population  was  then  divided  as  follows: 
Males,  20  years  old,  and  over,    -    ■     -     127,990 
Females,  20  years  old,  and  over,      -     -     114,994 
Children,  under  20  years  old,      -     -    -    347,279 


Total, 


-    590.263 


By  her  commissioner's  return  in  1848,  Jefferson 
county  Wc^s  entitled  to  one  twenty  eiglith  part  of 
the  representation.  By  the  clerk's  return  for 
the  same  year,  to  one  twenty  first  part;  and  by 
commissioner's  return  for  1849,  to  one  sixteenth 
part. 

TJie  above  table  may  not,  in  all  particulars, 
be  exactly  correct,  but  approximates  so  near  to 
it,  that  for  all  practical  purposes  it  may  be  re-- 
lied  on  with  confidence. 

Mr.  President:  The  above  tabic  speaks  for 
itself  and  needs  but  little  comment.  The  blue 
grass  region  of  the  state  has  nothing,  as  I  con^ 
ceive,  to  fear  from  this  change.  There  is  no  ba-- 
sis  of  app<jrtionment,  (hat  can  be  adopted  (un- 
less property  be  made  that  basis,)  by  which  she 


635 


can  retain  the  full  amount  of  represontalioii  have  voters  enough  for  the  twenty-five  repre- 
whicli  she  now  has.  Tlie  mountain  region,  an<l  \  sentatives,  and  just  one  voter  more  to  eauh  rep- 
southern  portion  of  the  state,  are  rapidly  in-  resentative.  The  second  district  will  lack  only 
creasing  in  population  and  niu?.t  draw  a  part  of  five  voters  for  each  representative,  to  reach  the 
the  representation  from  the  centre.  This  plan  |  ratio.  The  third  district  will  have  eleven  votes 
will  give  to  the  country  the  full  force  of  popu-  i  over  the   ratio,  to  each  representative,  and  the 


lation,  and,  to  some  e.xtent,  keep  up  the  equi 
libriuro  between  it  and  the  cities  on  the  border. 
Mr.  APPERSON.     The  subject  of  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation,  including  the  basis 
of  representation  in  the  legislature,   was  passed 
over  by  consent,  some  days  ago,  and  it  was  not 
expected   that  the   attention  of  the  convention 
would  have  been  called  to  them  a»ain  until  the 
sixth  section  of  the  report  on  the  legislative  de- 
partment should  be  considered;  but  suddenly 
this  morning,  my  friend  from  Knox  sprung  the 
subject  into  the  convention,  by  way   of  resolu- 
tion.    This  was  wholly  unlooked  for,  and  out  of 
the  order  in  which  every  one  had  supposed  the 
business  would  have  bt-en  conducted.     But,  Mr. 
President,  as  the  resolution  has  brought  the  sub- 
ject up,  I  must  be  permitted  to  say,  that  no  suf- 
ficient reason  has  been  presented  to  my  mind 
for  changing  the  basis   of  representation  from 
"duly  qualified  voters"  to  "white  population." 
No   suc-h  question   was   ever  made,  so  far  as  I 
know  or  have  ever  heard.     No  complaints  have 
ever  been   heard,  as  being  made  by  the  people, 
that  they  desire  so  fundamental  a  change  in  the 
constitution;  and  indeed,  I  am  fully  persuaded 
that  were  we  to  consult  the  people,   we  should 
hear,  from  one  extremity  of  the  commonwealth 
to  the  other,  that  the  basis  of  representation 
upon  the  number  of  duly  qualified  voters,  is  the 
true  basis,  and  the  only  one  that  they  desire. 
Why  propose  a  change,  when   no  such  change 
has  been  asked  for  by  the  people?    I  hope  that 
tlie   basis  of  representation  will    continue  the 
same  in  the  constitution  which  we  are  about  to 
form  as  it  is  in  the  old  one.     I  hope  no  radical 
innovations  will  be  made,  except  such  as  public 
sentiment  has  pointed  out — that  the  material  al- 
terations which  the  country  has  required  will  be 
made,  and  other  material  points  will  be  left  un- 
touched.    Let  us    not    launch    forth  upon  the 
ocean  of  experiment,   but   speedily  reform  the 
obnoxious  portions  of  the  olci  constitution,  and 
submit  the  result  of  our  labors  to  the  people,  for 
their  ratification  or  rejection. 

I  desire  now  to  call  the  attention  of  the  con- 
vention to  the  resolution  which  I  heretofore  sub- 
mitted, and  which  has  been  printed  and  now 
lies  on  the  desks  of  delegates.  I  announced  here- 
tofore, that  at  the  appropriate  time  I  would  offer 
the  proposition  embodied  in  that  resolution  as  a 
substitute  for  the  sixth  section  of  the  legislative 
report.  My  proposition  is,  to  lay  off  the  state 
into  four  representative  districts.  The  first  dis- 
trict will  be  entitled  to  twenty-six  members  in 
the  house  of  representatives,  the  second  to 
twenty-five,  the  third  to  twenty-five,  and  the 
fourth  to  twenty-four.  If  gentlemen  desire  it, 
the  county  of  Whitley  can  be  taken  from  the 
first  and  put  into  the  third,  and  the  county  of 
Grayson  taken  from  the  third  and  put  into  the 
fourth.  Should  this  be  done,  then  each  district 
■will  be  entitled  to  the  same  number  of  represen- 
tatives. In  this  state  of  case,  as  no  residuums 
are  to  be  taken  from  any  county  in  one  district 
to  any  county  in  another,  the  first  district  will 


fourth  will  liave  twenty-one  votes  more  than  the 
ratio,  to  each  representative.  Exact  equality  is 
not  to  be  expected,  and  I  think  it  would  be  dif- 
ficult to  approximate  nearer  to  it  than  has  been 
done  by  my  mode  of  apportionment.  I  lay 
down  a  positive  rule  by  wliich  the  apportion- 
ment of  representation  is  to  be  made,  but  do  not 
confine  residuums  to  counties  immediately  ad- 
jacent, but  take  them  through  the  district  and 
give  the  member  to  that  county  having  the  great- 
est number  of  voters  under  the  ratio,  and  which 
is  so  situated  as  not  to  be  united  to  another 
county  in  opposition  to  another  principle.  To 
illustrate  my  principle,  I  will  take  the  counties 
of  Lawrence  and  Carter,  one  of  which  will, 
most  probably,  get  a  separate  representative. 
Lawrence  has  950  voters,  and  Carter  only  908; 
yet  the  latter  would  get  the  representative,  be- 
cause Greenup,  Lewis,  and  Morgan  will  all  have 
a  separate  representative,  and  there  is  no  small 
county  to  which  to  attach  Carter;  whereas,  Law- 
rence joins  the  small  county  of  Johnson,  and 
they  can  be  united  for  representation.  It  might, 
however,  turn  out  that  Hoyd  would  get  the  sep- 
arate representative,  and  in  that  event  Carter  and 
Lawrence  would  continue  together.  This  would 
depend  upon  the  number  of  voters,  and  also  the 
fact  whether  Pike  and  Johnson  lie  so  as  to  be 
united  in  a  district.  Estill  and  Morgan  would 
each  have  a  separate  representative,  although 
the  adjacent  counties  have  but  small  residuums; 
but  the  counties  of  Bath,  Harrison,  Bourbon, 
and  so  forth,  would  be  taken  to  those  weaker 
counties. 

By  another  principle  in  ray  proposition  the 
small  county  of  Hancock  will  obtain  a  separate 
representation.  This  however,  occurs,  because 
all  the  counties  which  are  adjacent  to  her  have 
the  full  ratio  and  some  of  them  large  residuums. 
It  is  not  doing  justice  to  a  county  which  has  the 
full  ratio,  to  attach  a  small  county  to  her  without 
giving  them,  united,  any  greater  representative 
strength  than  the  one  had.  The  county  of  Ohio 
has  nearly  one  hundred  votes  more  than  the 
ratio,  and  yet  if  Hancock  should  not  be  repre- 
sented alone,  she  would  have  to  be  united  with 
Ohio,  she  being  the  weakest  of  all  the  counties 
adjacent  to  Hancock.  The  ratio  of  representa- 
tion which  I  have  assumed  is  1416,  as  I  adopt 
the  auditor's  last  report  of  the  number  of  voters 
in  the  state.  With  Whitley  retained,  there  are 
36,.35l  voters  in  the  first  district;  if  she  should 
be  taken  to  the  third,  there  are  35,430  voters.  In 
the  second  district  there  are  35,278.  In  the  third 
including  Whitley  and  excluding  Gray.son, 
there  are  35,683  voters ;  and  in  the  fourth  dis- 
trict, including  Grayson,  there  are  35,947  voters. 
The  residums  should  be  represented  some 
where,  and  to  avoid  all  difliculties,  a  principle 
is  laid  down  in  my  proposition  to  govern  future 
legislation.  My  figures  may  not  be  exactly  cor- 
rect, but  if  there  be  any  errors  they  are  very  in- 
considerable. 

Mr.   IRWIN.      I  had  not  intended  to  have 
made  a  single  remark  on  this  subject  of  repre- 


f)3G 


sentation,  or  of  tlie  basis  of  representation,  be 
cause  I  saw  that  in  any  event  Logan  must  lose  a 
member,  but  on  this  question  of  the  -'free  white 
population"  being  the  basis  of  representation,  I 
nave  made  some  tables  which  may  be,  perhaps, 
useful  to  the  convention,  in  coming  to  a  correct 
conclusion  as  to  what  basis  shall  be  adopted.  I 
do  this  for  another  consideration.  I  am  clearly 
of  the  opinion,  that  the  report  of  the  committee 
is  unjust,  and  unequal,  and  that  the  house  should 
not  adopt  it;  it  is  especially  unjust  to  Logan,  to 
Nelson,  and  counties  of  that  size.  My  first  ob- 
ject is  to  prove  (which  I  think  I  can  do,)  that  by 
adopting  the  free  white  basis,  you  will  throw 
the  weight  of  representation  on  the  Tennessee 
border.  '  I  have  taken  the  entire  line  .of  counties 
on  the  Ohio  border,  and  I  find  that  the  increase 
of  children  over  the  voting  population  is  not  so 
large  as  the  middle  line;  and  that  the  middle 
tier  of  counties  do  not  increase  so  rapidly,  as 
the  line  of  counties  on  the  Tennessee  border. 
I  will  read  the  tables  which  I  have  prepared. 


McCrackeiij    - 

Livingston,    - 

Union, 

Henderson,     - 

Daviess, 

Hancock, 

Breckinridge, 

Meade, 

Bullitt, 

Jefferson, 

Oldham, 

Carroll, 

Gallatin, 

Campbell, 

Kenton, 

Boone, 

Pendleton, 

Bracken 

Mason, 

Lewis,    - 

Greenup, 


OHIQ    BOEDER 1847. 

Voters. 
603 
822 
1,300 
1,476 
1,751 
523 
1,689 
1,096 
1,130 
6,737 
1,038 
846 
786 
1 ,282 
2,089 
1,863 
1,214 
1,510 
2,729 
1,2.32 
1,582 


33,098 


Children. 

•919 

909 

573 

1,860 

2,031 

740 

1,969 

1,412 

1,406 

7,406 

1,240 

1,113 

829 

J, 927 

2,722 

1,872 

1,049 

1,755 

2,838 

1,653 

1,665 

37,888 


TENNES.SKE    BORDER — 184'( 


The  increase  is  about  14)^  per  cent. 

MIPDLE  COUNTIES — 1847. 


Hopkins, 

Munlenburg,  - 

Ohio, 

Grayson, 

Nelson, 

■Washjiigtoy,  - 

Anderson, 

Woodford, 

Fayette, 

Bourbon, 

Nicholas, 

Flenjing, 


Here  the  increase  is  about  SiO  per  cent. 


Voters. 

Children 

1,751 

2,582 

1,477 

1,873 

1,463 

1,969 

1,075 

1,617 

1,967 

2,017 

1,672 

2,403 

998 

1,474 

1,244 

1,222 

2,603 

2,119 

1,819 

1,510 

1,587 

2,100 

2,321 

2,720 

19,977 

23,606 

Pike,      - 

Perry,     - 

Whitley, 

Wayne, 

Clinton, 

Cumberland,  - 

Monroe, 

Allen,     - 

Simpson, 

Logan,   - 

Todd,     - 

Christian. 

Tri^g, 

Calloway, 

Graves,  - 

Fulton,  - 

Hickman, 

Floyd,    - 

Lawrence, 


Voters. 

Children 

781 

1 ,301 

457 

706 

985 

1,451 

1,436 

2,545 

769 

1 ,234 

985 

1,398 

1.152 

1,719 

1 ,228 

2,103 

952 

1,312 

2,047 

2,537 

1,322 

1,954 

2,086 

2,321 

1,337 

1,865 

1,269 

1,902 

1,525 

2,529 

602 

775 

633 

893 

920 

1,631 

877 

1,514 

21 ,363 


30,696 


The  increase  is  about  45  per  cent. 
The  largest  increase  of  children  is  in 


Voters. 

Children 

Rockcastle,     - 

790 

1,120 

Laurel,  - 

715 

1,122 

Knox.     - 

1,036 

1,614 

Harlan,  - 

631 

1,009 

Clay,      - 

697 

1,214 

3,869 

6,069 

Now  sir,  the  committee  on  the  legislative  de- 
partment have  made  an  arrangement  by  which 
the  state  is  to  have  one  hundred  members  in  the 
lower  house,  and  have  adopted  the  principle  that 
when  a  small  county  shall  have  a  fraction  over 
two  thirds  of  the  ratio,  the  county  shall  have 
a  member;  but  when  they  come  to  carry  out  the 
principle,  and  apply  it  to  the  larger  class  of 
counties,  they  provide  that  the  county  shall  have 
the  ratio  and"  a  fraction  over  two  thirds,  or  she 
shall  have  but  one  member.  Now  let  us  sup- 
pose that  the  ratio  by  the  committee's  report  will 
be  1,500.  If  a  county,  according  to  the  com- 
mittee's bill,  have  1,001,  she  will  be  entitled 
to  one  member.  Now,  take  a  large  county  and 
if  it  has  2,499  voters,  it  can  have  but  one  mem- 
ber, according  to  the  committee's  plan. 

Now  sir,  this  is  manifestly  unjust.  If  1,001  vo- 
ters in  a  small  county  are  to  have  a  member, 
surely  a  large  county,  with  2,002  voters  ought  to 
have  an  equal  right.  Now  if  the  committee  have 
adopted  the  principle  for  large  counties,  that 
they  should  have  a  ratio  and  three  eighths  of  a 
ratio,  it  would  have  placed  the  large  counties 
upon  a  footing  of  equality  with  the  small  coun- 
ties. Equality,  justice,  and  a  fair  consideration 
of  the  position  of  the  largest  class  of  counties 
is  all  that  I  want. 

The  committee  have  divided  the  state  into  four 
classes  of  counties;  and  you  will  see  that  there 
is  manifest  injustice  in  the  application  of  the 
principle  of  the  committee's  bill. 

The  first  cla.ss  of  counties,  thirty  two  in  num- 
ber, representing  39,626  voters,  get  32  represen- 
tatives, and  they  are  as  follows: 


63T 


Allen,  Jessamine,  Mpnroe, 

Anderson,  Knox.  Morgan, 

Bovle,  L^rue,  Oldham, 

Bullitt,  Lewis,  Pendleton, 

Carter,  Lincoln.  Simpson, 

Crittenden,         Montgomery,  Spencer, 

Calloway,  Union,  Todd, 

Grant,  Woodford,  Taylor, 

Grayson,  Wayne,  Trigg. 

Green,  Whitley,  Trimble. 

Hart,  Meade, 

The  above  counties  have  39,626  voters, 
have  32  representatives. 

The  secon4  class  of  counties  are 


{ipd 


tlemaji's  table,   J^ogau  will  be   entitled    to  two 
members. 

With  regard  to  the  resolution  offered  by  the 
gentlepiau  from  Knox,  in  relation  to  altering 
representation,  I  ^m  in  the  condition  of  many 
of  my  friends,  disposed  to  take  back  mv  vote  on 
that  subject.  I  think  the  country  will  be  bet- 
ter satisfied  ^  have  representation  based  upon 
the  nuniber  of  qualifiea  voters.  I  would  sug- 
gest to  n^y  friend  frppa  Knox,  therefore,  to  with- 
draw his  resolution  and  let  the  question  of  re- 
consideration be  taken. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  pot  wish  to 
prevent  the  gentleman  from  Knox  having  a  vote 
taken  on  his  resolution;  but  if  he  will  allow  me, 
I  will  move  to  lay  it  on  the  t^ble  for  the  present, 
with  a  view  tq  take  up  the  sixth  section  of  the 
legislative  report. 

Jdr.  WOODSON.  I  have  no  p^icular  de- 
sire tq  press  \aj  resolution.  My  ol^ect  was  to 
brii^g  the  convention  to  a  direct  vote,  supposing 
they  were  prepared  to  do  so.  If  the  object  can 
be  attained  more  expeditiously  by  adopting  the 
suggestion  of  the  gentleman,  I  have  no  objec- 
tion. 

The  resolution  was  accordingly  laid  on  the 
table. 

Mr.  DESHA  offered  the  following  resolution: 
Resolved,  That  the  house  of  representatives 
shall  consist  of  one  hundred  members,  and  to 
secure  uniformity  and  equality  of  representa- 
tion, the  state  is'  hereby  laid  off  into  ten  dis- 
tricts. 

District  Nq.  1,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of: 
(Legal  voters  for  1848.) 


Adair,  Franklin,  Mercer, 

Bracken,  Graves,  Marion, 

BreokiHfidge,     Greenup,  Jfichol^s, 

Boone,  Garrard,  Nelson, 

Bath.  Hopkins,  Henderson, 

Campbell,  Henry,  Muhlenburg, 

Caldwell,  Harrison,  Scott, 

Clarke,  Bourbon,  Washingtqn, 

Daviess,  Logan,  Owen. 

The  above  27  counties  represent  50,543  voters, 
and  thev  get  27  jnembers. 

The  tliird  class  of  counties  are 

Louisville  city,  Madison,  Henry, 

Barren,  Mason,  Christian, 

Fayette,  Jefferson,  Warren. 

Hardin,  Pulaski, 

Kenton,  Shelby, 

Xow  the  above  12  counties  have  only  37,885 
voters,  and  yet  they  get  27  representatives. 
I  would  as&  is  this  just?  Js  it  right  that 
37,885  voters  shall  have  the  same  power  as  50,543 
voters?  Surely  not.  There  is  a  difierence  of 
nearly  13,000  voters,  ^nd  the  same  difference 
should  exist  in  the  representation. 

In  the  application  of  principles,  when  all  the 
circumstances  are  equal,  I  hope  thehousewill  not 
give  an  advantage  to  the  small  counties  that  can- 
not be  participated  in  by  the  large  counties.  It 
will  operate  against  the  adoption  of  this  new  con- 
stitution we  are  about  making,  and  which  J  hope 
will  be  made  satisfactory  to  the  country. 

I  shall  vote  for  the  free  population  basis;  but  I 
am  induced  to  favor  its  principles,  because  the 
committee's  bill  I  consider  manifestly  unjust.  If 
the  committee  would  strike  out  <'two  thirds," 
and  insert  <'three eights,"  as  it  would  be  an  equiv- 
alent basis,  I  shall  be  better  satisfied  with  the 
report. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  The  gentleman  from  Lo- 
gan, if  I  understand,  wishes  to  alter  the  basis 
of  representation  so  that  a  ratio  and  three- 
eighths  shall  entitle  a  county  to  two  members. 
If  I  recollect  the  gentleman's  position,  this  would 
include  Logan,  and  would  injure  that  class  of 
counties  of  which  he  has  complained.  He  does 
not  complain  of  the  present  apportionment 
under  which  this  house  IS  constituted.  By  that 
apportionment  there  are  twenty  seven  counties  I  Meade, 
having  an  aggregate  vote  of  46,307,  which  have  j  ggn^erson^ 1,467 

'        -        -        -        -    l'510 


Ballard,  - 

Callowav, 

Caldwell, 

Crittenden, 

Graves,  - 

Hickman, 

Hopkins, 

Livingston, 

Marshall, 

McOracken, 

Trigg,     - 

Union,    - 

Pulton,  - 


728 
1,206 
1,860 

947 
1,576 

656 
1,813 

808 

824 

742 
1,381 
1,264 

631 

14,436 


District  No.  2,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of: 

Breckinridge,  -      (Legal  voters  for  1848.)     1,745 

Butler, 875 

Christian, 2,138 

Daviess, 1,933 

647 

1,127 

560 

1,022 


Edmonson, 

Grayson, 

Hancock, 


one  member  each,  making  the  average  vote  to  j  Muhlenburg, 
each  member,   1,733.     There  are  thirteen  other   Qhio, 
counties  and  the  city  of  Louisville,  having  an 
aggregate  of  34,328  voters  and  twenty  nine  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature.     This  agrees  with  the 
report  of  tJie  committee,  except  that,  by  the  gen- 


14,563 


B38 


District  No.  3, 
Allen,  - 
Barren, 
Hart,    - 
Logan, 
Monroe, 
Simpson, 
Todd,  - 
Warren, 


shall  consist  of  the  comities  of; 

( Legal  voters  for  1 848. )     1 ,4 1 3 

-        -        -       2,939 

1,345 

-  2,016 
1.230 

924 

1,383 

-  2,131 


13,381 


District  No.  4,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of: 

Adair,-        -        (Legal  voters  for  1848.)  1,507 

Boyle,  -         -         -         '         -         -         -  1,136 

Casey,          ..,,..  938 

Clinton, 807 

Gumberland,        .        ,        ,        .        .  97j 

Green, 1,340 

Lincoln,       -        -        -        -        -        -  1,436 

Pulaski, 2,305 

Russell, 919 

Taylor,         -         -         -         -         r         -  1,025 

Wayne,        .        -        -        -        ^        -  1,426 


13,810 

District  No.  5,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of: 
Anderson,  -  (Legal  voters  for  1848.)  1,086 
Bullitt, 


Hardin, 

Larue,  - 

Marion, 

Mercer, 

Nelson, 

Spencer, 

Wa-shington, 


1,165 

2,384 
981 
1,768 
2,125 
2,007 
1,007 
1,770 


14,293 


District  No.  6,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of : 

Clay,    -        -        (Legal  voters  for  1848.)  750 

E.still, l.OU 

Flovd, 961 

Garrard, 1,563 

Harlan,  --.--.-  661 

Knox. 1,091 

Laurel, •  777 

IjCtcher,          -         •         -         -        •         •  365 

Madison, 2,566 

Owsley, 566 

Perry, 463 

Pike, 807 

Rockcastle,    -                 -        -        -        -  802 

Whitley. 1,021 

Breathitt, 590 

13,994 

District  No.  7,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of : 


Carroll, 

Gallatin, 

Henry ;^  -     .    •     .  - 

Jeffei-son  and  Louisville, 

Oldham,      "  -     '  -        - 

Trimble, 

Shelby,  .        .        -        - 


(Legal  voters  for  1848.) 


923 
813 
1,849 
6,774 
1,073 
994 
2,317 


HJ43 


District  No.  8,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of: 

Bourbon,     -          (Legal  voters  for  1848.)  1,773 

Fayette, 2,584 

Franklin, 1,723 

Jessamine, 1,325 

Owen, 1,674 

Scott, 1,839 

Woodford, 1,255 


12,172 


District  No.  9,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of 

Bath,            -        (Legal  voters  for  1848.)  1,823 

Carter,    -         ^ 908 

Clarke,  - 1,719 

Fleming,         - 2,311 

Greenup, 1,597 

Lawrence, 956 

Lewis, 1,336 

Morgan, 1,225 

Montgomery,          .        ,        .        .        .  1,398 

Johnson, 570 


13,843 


District  No.  10,  shall  consist  of  the  counties  of: 
Boone,    -         •      (Legal  voters  for  1848.)     1,865 

Bracken, 1,586 

Campbell, 1,447 

Grant, 1,098 

Harrison, 2,060 

Kenton,  - '  2,560 

Mason,   -         -         -        -         -         -         -      2,845 

Nicholas, 1,713 

Pendleton,      .        -      .  /       .        -        -     1,210 


16,384 


BECAPITUIATION    OF    DLSTttlCTS. 

First  District,  14,436,  ten  members,  and  a  frac- 
tion of  276. 

Second  District,  14,303,  ten  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  143. 

Third  District,  13,381,  nine  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  637. 

Fourth  District,  13,810,  nine  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  1,066. 

P'ifth  District,  14,293,  ten  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  133. 

Sixth  District,  13,995,  nine  membei-s,  and  a 
fraction  of  1,251. 

Seventh  District,  14,743,  ten  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  583. 

Eighth  District,  12,173,  eight  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  845. 

Ninth  District,  13,844,  nine  members,  and  a 
fraction  of  1,100. 

Tenth  District,  16,384,  eleven  members  and  a 
fraction  of  808. 

The  number  of  representatives  shall,  in  the 
several  years  of  making  these  enumerations,  be 
apportioned  among  the  ten  several  districts,  pro- 
portioned to  each  according  to  their  re.spective 
representative  population.  And  the  legislature, 
in  apportioning  the  representatives  to  each  dis- 
trict, shall  be  governed  by  the  following  rules: 
[  Rules  to  be  supplied.  ] 

When  a  new  county  shall  be  formed  of  terri- 
tory belonging  to  more  than  one  district,  that 
county  shjul  be  added   to,   and  form  a  part  of. 


G39 


that  district  having  the  least  number  of  repre- 
sentative population. 

Mr.  DESHA.  In  submitting  that  proposition, 
I  wish  it  to  be  distinetlv  understood  that  I  am 
not  governed  by  any  selfish  or  political  motives. 
I  believe,  as  I  said  the  other  day,  that  the  meth- 
od of  laying  off  the  state  into  a  certain  number 
of  districts  is  best,  and  the  greater  the  number  of 
districts  the  better,  in  order  to  provide  that  the 
diflfereut  localities  of  the  state  maybe  fairly  rep- 
resented according  to  the  respective  numbers 
embraced  in  each  district.  I  hate  laid  off  these 
districts  into  the  ten  congressional  districts,  with 
two  exceptions.  The  reasons  for  these  ejfcep- 
tions  I  think  will  be  obvious  to  this  house.  The 
first  exception  is  that  of  the  county  of  Gallatin, 
which  belongs  to  the  tenth  district,  but  which  I 
have  added  to  the  seventh,  for  this  reason,  that 
the  counties  of  Gallatin  and  Carroll  are  both 
small  counties,  neither  of  them  being  entitled  to 
a  separate  representative.  They  are  so  ^ituated, 
with  respect  to  surrounding  counties,  that  neith- 
er could  be  attached  to  any  other  so  as  to  entitle 
it  to  a  representative.  Hence  I  have  thrown 
them  together.  The  other  change  is  in  the  north- 
eastern part  of  the  state.  Johnson  is  added  to 
the  ninth  congressional  district,  whereas  Breath- 
itt is  taken  from  the  ninth  and  added  to  the  6th. 
This  is  done  for  the  same  purpose.  So  far  as 
the  politics  of  the  counties  are  concerned,  both 
now  have  a  majority  on  the  same  side  of  the 
question.  I  do  not  think  that  politics  should 
govern  any  member  here,  and  I  am  satisfied  it 
will  not,  so  as  to  prevent  the  adoption  of  some 
safe  and  just  method  of  representation.  We 
have  no  assurance  that  the  disparity  will  remain 
as  it  now  is,  and  consequently  it  could  have  lit- 
tle influence,  if  members  were  so  disposed.  If  I 
thought  I  could  be  governed  by  selfash  or  polit- 
ical motives,  I  should  consider  myself  unwor- 
thy of  a  seat  in  this  body.  Mv  object  is  to  pre- 
vent rolling  residuums  beyond  the  district,  and 
I  wish  to  take  away  discretionary  power  from 
the  legislature,  if  it  can  be  done,  and  to  insure 
a  just  apportionment  to  the  different  parts  of 
the  state.  I  therefore  move  that  the  resolution 
be  printed. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

tKGISLATIVE  DEPARTMENT. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legislative 
depEirtment. 

Mr.  KAVAXAUGH.  I  rise  to  give  notice, 
under  the  rule,  that  I  shall,  at  the  proper  time, 
move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  by  ^Vhich  the 
thirty-fifth  section  of  the  report  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  was  adopted  yesterday. 

The  object  of  the  provision  was  to  require  that 
the  whole  law  on  any  given  subject  should  be 
contained  in  one  statute  only,  that  it  all  might 
be  seen  at  a  single  view.  But  as  the  section  now 
reads,  it  will  in  my  opinion  be  burdensome  to 
the  legislature,  expensive  to  the  treasury,  and 
will  utterly  fail  of  accomplishing  its  purposes. 

While  I  am  up,  I  will  ask  the  indulgence  of 
the  convention  to  make  a  correction.  The  gen- 
tleman from  Logan,  (Mr.  Irwin,)  a  day  or  two 
since,  took  occasion  to  distinguish  between  what 
he  termed  the  rich  and  the  poor  counties  of  the 
state  ;  and  I  see  he  has  placed  Anderson  in  the 


latter  class.  In  his  remarks  he  seemed  to  think 
the  people  must  be  poor  wherever  children  were 
numerous,  and  as  Anderson  has  a  fine  crop  of 
them,  he  has  placed  her  among  the  poor  counties. 

Now  I  beg  leaVe  to  give  the  gentleman  a  small 
item  of  information.  It  is  this :  That  though 
Anderson  is  a  small  county,  and  has  but  feW  vo- 
ters compared  with  some  others,  she  yet  pays 
more  nett  revenue  into  the  treasury,  than  any 
one  of  fortjj^  eight  other  counties  in  the  state.  I 
speak  advisedly.  And  sir,  it  is  true,  that  we 
have  abundant  crops  of  children.  We  are  proud 
of  it.  And  we  intend  to  teach  them,  at  least 
this  much  of  politeness-^that  whenever  any  of 
them  may  by  accident  or  otherwise  get  rich,  they 
are  not,  in  the  next  company  into  which  they 
mav  happen  to  fall,  to  say  to  this  one  or  that : 
"Sir,  I  am  rich  and  you  are  poor."' 

Mr.  BOYD.  As  tuere  seems  to  be  considerable 
anxiety,  on  the  part  of  delegates  to  get  on  with 
the  business  of  the  legislative  rt-port,  I  rise  to 
withdraw  the  amendment  I  ofTcjred  yesterday, 
with  a  view  of  offering  it  again  when  the  report 
of  the  committee  on  miscelladeous  provisions 
shall  come  up. 

Mr.  GRAY  offered  the  following  amendment, 
as  an  addition  to  the  section  which  he  olfered 
yesterday : 

"All  property,  except  franchises  and  corporate 
privileges,  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its 
value,  to  be  ascertained  as  provided  for  by  law." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  much  in  favor 
of  the  principle  of  the  proposed  amendment.  I 
will  however,  suggest  that  it  would  be  more 
appropriate  under  the  head  of  miscellaneous 
provisions.  The  term  property,  may  be  inter- 
preted variously.  It  may  be  interpreted  so  as 
to  exclude  the  right  of  taxation  on  the  principle 
of  what  is  called  the  equalization  law.  I  am  iu 
favor  of  the  principle,  tliat  all  property  shall  be 
taxed  according  to  its  intrinsic  value,  equally  ; 
yet  there  are  many  subjects  of  taxation,  which 
perhaps  would  not  fall  under  the  exception 
which  the  gentleman  proposes.  I  therefore  will 
ask  him  to  withdraw  it  for  the  present,  that  it 
may  be  matured  with  reference  to  the  system  of 
taxation,  which  may  be  done  by  the  gentleman, 
I  think,  in  such  a  way  as  Avill  entirely  meet  my 
approbation,  and  that  of  tlie  house. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  have  no  objection.  My  object 
is  to  have  some  regulation,  so  that  taxes  may  be 
equal  and  uniform,  and  that  the  legislature  may 
not  have  the  right  to  discriminate  between  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  property.  I  think  the  words 
franchises  and  incorporated  privileges  would 
embrace  every  species  of  property  that  ought  to 
be  specifically  taxed.  But  1  will  withdraw  it, 
as  it  may  be  better  to  come  up  under  the  general 
provisions. 

Mr.  HAMILTON  offered  the  follotving  as  an 
additional  section. 

"Within  five  years  after  the  adoption  of  this 
constitution,  the  legislature  shall  appoint  not 
le&s  than  three,  nor  more  thati  five  persons,  learn- 
ed in  the  law,  who  shall  revise,  digest,  and  ar- 
range the  statute  laws,  civil  and  criminal,  so  as 
to  have  but  one  law  on  any  one  subject,  to  be  in 
plain  english,  in  such  manner  as  the  legislature 
may  direct — and  a  like  revision  shall  be  had  as 
often  as  shall  be  found  necessary." 

Mr.  HAMILTON.    This  is  a  section  which  I 


m 


thlaU  bxigbi  Id  he  addect  id  the  cotistlllition,  and 
it  will  be  a  benefit  to  the  people,  by  making  the 
laws  clear  to  all.  It  is  plain  that  we  have  now 
too  large  a  quantity  of  statute  laws.  I  believe 
there  are  more  than  3,000  pages  of  them.  We 
have  laws  on  every  subject,  and  amonj^  them, 
old  british  laws,  Vhich  Avere  made  in  the  four- 
teenth century.  The  reason  is,  that  when  Vir- 
giniasprang  into  existence,  she  was  without  a  code 
of  laws,  and  had  to  adopt  theSe  old  laws  ;  and  if  I 
mistake  not;  she  did  not  revise  her  laws  till  after 
Kentucky  became  a  distinct  commonwealth.  We, 
under  the  same  necessity,  adopted  the  Virgina 
code.  We  have  stdtutes  made  400  or  500  years 
ago,  and  some  of  them  made  by  old  women. 

Why  this  subject  has  been  permitted  to  remain 
so  long  in  Kentucky,  while  we  have  had  so  many 

f;reat  statesmen,  has  been  a  wonder  to  me.  Our 
aws  have  been  multiplied  to  sUch  a  degree  that 
no  man  except  ^  regular  lawyer  can  keep  up 
with  them.  If  a  man  learned  in  the  law  cannot 
do  it,  what  must  be  the  situation  of  the  ctlmmon 
justices  of  the  country?  It  is  as  clear  as  A,  B,  C, 
that  they  cannot  do  it.  Frequent  appeals  are 
taken  from  the  ^^t^isions  of  the  circuit  court 
judges,  because  they  have  pursued  a  kind  of 
guessing  principle  in  manj^  cdses.  I  wish  to  call 
attention  to  an  act  passed  in  1838,  entitled,  "an 
act  to  regulate  equitable  proceedings  under  five 
pounds  before  justices  of  the  peace."  In  1839 
that  act  was  amended)  and  then  again  in  1840  it 
was  so  amended  fts  to  increase  the  jurisdiction 
of  justices  of  the  pe^ce  to  all  sums  under  fifty 
dollars  and  over  five  pounds.  I  happened  to  be 
a  kind  of  jack-leg  magistrate  and  was  applied  to 
for  an  injunction*  Avhich  was  granted.  It  is 
plain  I  had  no  jurisdiction  Over  five  pounds.  It 
was  not  strange  that  a  common  magistrate  like 
me  should  be  mistaken.  I  recollect  my  friend 
from  Bourbon  told  m^  he  once  had  a  case  of  the 
same  kind,  in  which  it  was  difficult  for  him  to 
persuade  the  learned  jud^e  of  the  mistake  that 
had  been  made.  This  shows  the  necessity  of 
having  the  laWs  plain.  And  it  is  necessary 
they  should  be  plain  English  too.  There  are 
many  technical  terms  that  I  cannot  see  the  use 
of  to  any  body  under  the  heavens  but  a  lawyer. 
In  Hardin  county  a  case  of  mine  came  before 
the  county  court  in  tfrhichtlle  lawyer  put  a  tech- 
nical term  into  the  plea,  which  I  knew  ho  more 
of  than  of  the  sound  of  a  Dull  frog  in  a  pond. 
(Laughter.)  I  found  out  tthen  it  was  too  late, 
that  the  plea  could  not  be  sustained ^  for  it  was 
not  applicable  to  the  case.  If  the  plea  had  been 
in  plain  English,  I  ■^ould  ndthave  suffered  it  to 
be  put  in.  1  think  the  necessity  of  this  is  plain 
to  every  body,  and  I  am  in  hopes  the  convention 
will  aaopt  this  section. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  understand  that  this 
amendment  is  the  first  section  of  a  report  Of  a 
select  committee.  That  report  has  been  ref'erred 
to  the  committee  of  the  whole,  and  I  think  It  is 
now  out  of  order  to  offer  it  as  an  amendment  to 
this  article;  but  I  will  submit  the  question  to  the 
convention  whetlier  it  shall  be  taken  up. 

Mr.  HAMILTON.  That  committeehave taken 
two  or  throeof  the  resolutions  which  I  sometime 
since  offered,  and  I  want  them  all  to  go  together. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  was  on  that  select  com- 
mittee and  drafted  that  amendment,  and  I  have 
something  to  say  about  it,  but  I  am  not  prepar- 


ed to  say  it  tibw;  rwishiltd  lie  laid  bv^t  foi" 
the  present. 

Mr.  HAMILTON.  I  will  consfent  to  lay  it 
over.  . 

It  was  laid  over  accordingly. 

Mr.  MACHElf  offered  the  iolloA»'ing  as  an  ad- 
ditional section; 

"The  legislature  shdll  have  no  power  to  pass 
laws  sanctjioning,  in  ahy  manner,  directly  or  in- 
directly, the  suspeiisibn  of  specie  payments  by 
any  person  or  corporation,  issuing  bank  notes  of 
any  description." 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  pass  ov^r  the  further 
consideration  of  this  report  till  Monday  nextj 
which  was  agreed  to. 

COURT   OF   APPEALS. 

The  report  of  the  joint  committee  on  the 
court  of  appeals,  circuit,  and  county  courts,  was 
then  taken  up  for  consideration. 

The  1st,  2nd,  and  3rd  sections  of  the  1st  arti- 
cle of  the  report  were  r&ad  and  adopted,  with- 
out amendment,  as  follbws: 

"Skc.  1.  The  judicial  power  of  this  cotnmon- 
T^'ealth,  both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equity, 
shall  be  vested  in  One  supreme  court,  (whicli 
shall  be  styled  the  court  of  appeals.)  the  courts 
established  by  this  constitution,  and  in  such  in- 
ferior cottrts  as  the  general  assembly  may,  from 
time  to  time,  erect  and  establish." 

"Sec.  2.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  only,  which  shall  bo  co- 
extensive with  the  state,  under  such  restrictions 
and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  constitu- 
tion, as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed 
by  law." 

"Sec.  3.  The  judges  Of  the  cburt  of  appeals 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  eight  years, 
from  and  after  their  election,  and  until  thelrsuc- 
cessbrs  shall  be  duly  qualified,  subject  to  the 
conditions  hereinafter  prescribed;  but  for  any 
reasonable  cause,  the  governor  shall  remote  any 
of  them  on  the  address  of  tWo-thirds  of  each 
house  of  the  general  assembly:  Provided,  hoic- 
ever,  That  the  cause  or  causes  for  which  such  re- 
movdJ  may  be  required,  shall  be  stated  at  length 
in  such  address,  and  on  the  journal  of  eachhouse. 
They  shall,  at  stated  times,  receive  for  their  ser- 
vices ii}  adequate  compensation,  to  be  fixed  by 
law,  wiiich  sliall  not  be  diminished  during  the 
time  for  Tvhich  they  shall  have  been  elected." 

The  4th  section  was  then  read  as  follows: 

"Sec  4.  The  coljrt  of  appeals  shall  consist  of 
four  judges,  any  three  of  whom  may  constitute 
a  court  for  the  transaction  of  business:  Provided, 
That  whenever  a  vacrtncy  shall  occur  in  said 
coui't,  from  any  cause,  the  general  assembly  shall 
have  the  power  to  redute  the  number  of  judges 
and  districts;  but  in  no  event  shall  there  be  less 
than  three  judges  and  districts.  Incaseachiinge 
in  the  number  of  the  judges  of  the  cOurt  of  ap- 
peals shall  be  mri.de,  the  term  of  office  and  num- 
ber of  districts  shall  be  so  changed  as  to  preserve 
the  prinfciple  of  electing  one  judge  every  two 
years.  The  judges  shall,  by  virtue  of  their  ofl5- 
ces,  be  conservatoi's  of  the  peace  throughout  the 
state.  The  style  of  all  process  shall  be.  "The 
commonli'ealth  of  Kentucky."  All  prosecutions 
shall  be  carried  on  in  the  name  and  by  the  au- 
thority of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and 
conclude  "against  the  peace  and  dignity  of  the 
same." 


641 


Mr.  HARDIN.  I  vrill  merely  mention  that 
this  section  is  the  one  that  was  so  much  contro- 
verted, and  its  present  state  is  the  result  of  a 
compromise  bj  the  committee. 

Mr.  CLARltE.  Whilst  the  propriety  of  hav- 
ing four  judges  was  under  consideration,  I  un- 
derstood the  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin) 
to  say,  that  he  had  been  informed  by  one  of  the 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  that  a  fourth 
judge  was  unnecessary;  that  three  judges  could 
transact  all  the  business  devolving  on  that  branch 
of  the  judiciary.  I  was  originally  in  favor  of 
the  appointment  of  a  fourth  judge,  on  the  ground 
that  if  the  court  of  appeals  should  be  branched, 
the  labors  of  the  court  might  be  somewhat  in- 
creased; and  I  was  in  favor  of  it  also  on  the 
ground,  that  I  was  informed,  and  believed  the 
information  to  be  correct,  that  three  judges  could 
not  transact  the  business  well. 

According  to  this  bill,  however,  the  court  of 
appeals  is  not  to  be  branched;  and  for  one,  I  am 
unwilling  to  increase  the  expense  by  adding  an- 
other judge.  I  shall  act  upon  the  statement  made 
by  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Har- 
din,) who  has  always  been  opposed,  I  believe, 
to  branching  the  court.  I  shall  act  on  the  state- 
ment made  by  him,  upon  the  authority  of  one  of 
the  judges  of  the  present  court  of  appeals.  If, 
as  he  states,  three  judges  are  sufficient,  I  shall  be 
inclined  to  move,  and  do  now  move,  to  strike  out 
"four"  and  insert  "three." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  did  not  talk  with  chief  jns- 
ti'ce  Marshall  myself  on  the  subject,  but  Mr. 
Jas.  Harlan  told  me  he  had.  I  will  mention  again 
that  I  have  been  in  favor  of  having  only  three 
judges;  but  we  had  to  make  a  compromise  on  the 
subject,  and  I  am  willing  to  stand  by  that  com- 
promise. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  took  occasion  not 
onlv  to  talk  with  chief  justice  Marshall,  but  also 
with  ex-chief  justice  Robertson,  on  the  subject. 
And  in  the  conversation  that  I  had  with  judge 
Robertson,  he  expressed  a  preference  for  four 
judges  instead  of  three.  I  asked  him  why,  and 
enquired  particularly  whether  it  was  because  the 
labors  of  the  court  of  appeals  had  so  increased 
as  to  render  four  judges  necessary.  He  said  no; 
that  so  far  from  a  fourth  judge  expediting  the  bu- 
siness of  the  court,  it  would  rather  retard  the 
business.  He  gave  rather  a  different  explana- 
tion of  the  course  pursued  by  the  court  of  ap- 
peals from  that  which  has  been  given  by  some 
gentlemen  on  this  floor.  He  stated  that  it  was 
the  habit  of  the  court  of  appeals  to  consult  the 
opinion  of  each  judge,  and  of  course  the  more 
judges  there  were  to  be  consulted,  the  more  time 
would  be  consumed  in  the  consideration  of  each 
case.  But  he  stated  as  a  reason  vhv  he  preferred 
four,  that  he  thought  there  would  he  more  dig- 
nity attached  to  the  opinions  of  the  court  if  it 
were  composed  of  four  judges.  I  do  not  exact- 
ly agree  with  this  view  of  the  case.  It  occurs  to 
me,  that  unless  we  place  men  in  office  whose 
character  and  standing  can  give  dignity  to  their 
proceedings,  we  might  multiply  the  number  ad 
infinitum  without  giving  additional  dignity  to 
the  court.  In  respect  to  some  things,  two  heads 
are  said  to  be  better  than  one,  but  I  do  not  think 
it  is  applicable  in  this  particular  instance.  In 
the  conversation  that  I  had  with  judge  Marshall, 
he  expressed  no  preference  for  three  or  four,  but 
81 


stated  emphatically  that  three  were  amply  suffi- 
cient to  transact  the  business  of  the  court;  and 
he  coincided  with  the  opinion  of  judge  Robert- 
son, that  four  judges  would  rather  retard  than 
expedite  the  business,  and  that  it  would  be  no 
disadvantage,  as  far  as  the  transaction  of  the  bu- 
siness of  the  country  was  concerned,  that  the 
court  should  consist  of  but  three  judges. 

I  for  one  shall  go  against  the  addition  of  a 
fourth  judge.  I  cannot  conceive  on  what  possi- 
ble ground  we  are  to  advocate  the  creation  of  an 
additional  officer,  when  those  who  now  hold  the 
office,  and  who  are  best  qualified  to  form  an 
opinion  on  the  subject,  tell  us  that  an  additional 
judge  is  unnecessary.  What  excuse  can  we 
make,  either  to  ourselves  or  to  our  constituents, 
for  adding  another?  If  the  business  of  the 
court  requires  four  judges,  I  shall  be  in  favor  of 
having  four;  but  I  must  be  satisfied  that  the 
fourth  jndge  is  necessary,  before  I  can  vote  for 
adding  a  fourth.  While  those  gentlemen,  who 
certainly  have  no  interest  in  the  matter,  and  who 
are  best  qualified  to  know  whether  or  not  the 
interests  of  the  country  require  it,  tell  us,  one 
and  all  of  them,  that  so  far  from  there  being  a 
necessity  for  it,  there  are  strong  reasons  why  an 
additional  officer  should  not  be  created,  I  can- 
not very  well  understand  how  we  can  apologize, 
either  to  ourselves  or  to  the  state,  for  increasing 
the  number  of  officers,  and  thereby  increasing 
the  expenses  of  the  state. 

I  am  told  there  are  about  fifteen  or  twenty- 
candidates  for  the  judgship  upon  this  floor.  I 
am  not  one  of  them.  If  I  were,  in  all  human 
probability  I  should  be  in  favor  of  creating  an 
additional  judgeship.  If  that  be  the  motive  by 
which  gentlemen  are  actuated  in  seeking  to  cre- 
ate an  additional  judge,  it  may  be  a  good  reason 
with  them,  but  it  does  not  suit  me.  I  shall  be 
compelled,  therefore,  to  go  against  it.  We  have 
had  three  judges  on  the  bench  of  the  appellate 
court  for  some  time,  and  the  business  of  the 
court,  I  believe,  has  been  pretty  well  attended 
to.  I  have  heard  very  little  complaint  on  the 
subject,  on  the  part  of  the  people.  The  judges 
themselves  say,  that  three  are  enough  to  transact 
all  the  business  that  comes  before  tliem,  and 
that  if  you  place  another  judge  upon  the  bench 
you  will,  instead  of  expediting  the  business,  re- 
tard the  action  of  the  court.  There  are  some 
forty  or  fifty  lawyers  in  this  house,  and  as  this 
office  is  confined  entirely  to  the  legal  profession; 
and  as  one  of  the  most  eminent  lawyers  upon 
this  floor  has  told  me  there  will  be  twenty  can- 
didates at  least,  among  the  delegates  here  as- 
sembled, for  the  office  of  judge,  I  have  almost 
been  induced  to  suppose  that  this  is  intended  as 
a  provision  for  supplying  the  wants  of  the  legal 
profession,  by  providing  an  office  for  one  of 
them.  For  myself,  I  could  offer  no  sufficient 
apology  to  my  constituents  for  adding  another 
judge  to  the  bench  of  the  appellate  court. 

Mr.  MANSFIELD.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  I  voted  at  the  outset  to  strike  out  from  the 
bill  four  judges  and  insert  three.  I  have  been 
in  favor  of  branching  the  court  of  appeals,  but 
it  appeared  to  me  that  it  could  be  branched  with 
three  judges;  that  was  my  calculation,  but  after- 
wards I  was  made  to  believe  that  it  would  re- 
quire four.  It  was  for  this  reason  that  I  moved 
a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  striking  out  the 


642 


fourth  judge.  My  desire  was,  that  the  court  of 
appeals  should  be  branched;  if  tliat  is  uot  to  be 
done,  or  if  it  is  to  bo  left  to  future  legislation,  I 
should  fall  back  to  three  judges,  as  the  number 
which  shall  constitute  th«  court. 

Mr.  WOODSOIS^.  I  voted  originally  for  stri- 
king out  the  fourth  judge,  believing  that  three 
were  competent  to  discharge  the  duti<?s  devolv- 
ing on  tiie  court  of  appeals,  but  the  whole 
matter  has  been  referred  to  a  committee  of  tliirty 
intelligent  gentlemen.  They  gave  it  a  thorough 
investigation,  and  I  think  their  report  ought  to 
be  sufficient  evidence  to  us  of  tJie  propriety  of 
adding  a  fourth  judge.  Consequently,  as  it 
comes  endorsed  by  this  high  authority — confess- 
ing that  I  do  not  perceive  tlie  necessity  for  it 
myself — I  feel  inclined  to  vote  for  th-e  report  of 
the  committee. 

In  regard  to  the  remark  of  the  gentleman 
from  Jessamine,  (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall,)  that  the 
legal  profession  are  endeavoring  to  create  sine- 
cures for  themselves — 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  did  not  say  that 
there  was  any  effort  of  that  kind  made  here.  I 
stated  emphatically,  that  if  my  constituents  call- 
ed on  me  for  the  reason  for  creating  an  addition- 
al judgeship,  I  did  not  know  any  other  that  I 
could  give. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  understood  the  gentleman 
distinctly.  He  said  that  was  the  only  reason  he 
could  assign  for  the  creation  of  this  additional 
office;  and  I  understood  from  the  gentleman's 
remarks  that  he  thought,  from  the  number  of  the 
members  of  that  profession  in  tills  house,  some 
such  provision  was  necessary.  I  have  no  doubt 
there  are  a  great  many  laAvyers  in  the  coimtry 
who  are  sufficiently  needy,  but  they  are  not  more 
numerous  nor  more  needy  than  those  of  the  pro- 
fession to  which  the  gentleman  "belongs;  nor  are 
they  a  greater  blessing  to  the  country,  nor  a 
greater  curse,  than  those  of  his  profession.  I 
cannot  conceive,  sir,  that  there  is  any  lawyer 
upon  this  floor — I  care  not  how  aspiring  he  may 
be — who  is  influenced  by  such  considerations  as 
those  the  gentleman  has  intimated.  I  do  not 
know  that  there  is  a  single  aspirant  for  office 
upon  this  floor.  I  have  heard  nothing  of  the 
sort;  but  I  know  that  there  are  prejudices  exist- 
ing in  the  country  against  the  legal  profession, 
and  I  am  sorry  to  see  that  there  are  a  great  many 
men  who  are  endeavoring  to  pander  to  this 
popular  prejudice.  It  is  not  necessaiy  that  I 
should  endeavor  to  exculpate  the  profession, 
from  the  calumnies  that  are  so  frequently  cast 
upon  it.  The  lawyers,  sir,  in  this  country,  need 
no  defence  at  my  hands.    I  care  not  at  what 

{•eriod  of  the  history  of  this  government  you 
ook.  The  lawyers  of  1776  need  no  vindication 
of  their  patriotism,  or  devotion  to  their  country. 
Sir,  when  the  first  fires  of  liberty  Avere  kindled 
in  New  England,  and  answerecl  back  by  the 
equal  lights  that  were  reared  in  the  Old  Domin- 
ion, I  ask  where  the  bright  particular  stars  of 
that  period  were  to  be  found,  if  not  among  the 
legal  profession  of  the  Old  Dominion  and  of  New 
EufflandV  The  names  of  Adams,  of  Quincy, 
and  of  Henry,  will  be  remembered  as  long  as 
liberty  finds  a  votary  on  earth.  Go  back  to  the 
revolution  in  England.  Who  was  it  contributed 
most  in  delivering  the  people  from  the  shackles 
of  ienpoiiam'l    Lawyers  were  particularly  con- 


spicuous. I  care  not  to  what  period,  or  to  what 
epoch  you  refer,  whenever  the  question  of  pop- 
ular rights  has  been  involved,  the  legal  pro- 
fession has  always  stood  up  for  the  rights  of  the 
people.  The  members  of  the  legal  profession, 
sir,  are  behind  none — notwithstanding  the  inti- 
mation of  the  gentleman  that  lawyers  come  here 
endeavoring  to  create  offices  for  themselves — 
they  are  second  to  none,  sir,  in  patriotism,  talent, 
aud  devotion  to  the  rights  of  the  people. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  sir,  am  no  lawyer,  and  the 
report  of  the  committee,  unfortunately  for  me, 
has  appropriated  the  office  of  judge,  for  the  ben- 
efit only  of  tlie  lawyers.  This  of  course  cuts 
me  off  from  any  chance  of  ever  being  a  candidate 
for  a  judgeship.  Although  1  have  no  chance  of 
being  a  judge,  yet  I  am  for  having  four  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  and  I  am  extremely  sorry 
that  my  talented  friend  from  Simpson,  (Mr- 
Clarke,)  has  flown  oft",  just  at  the  time  of  our 
greatest  want  of  his  aid.  Now  sir,  I  was  for 
four  judges,  for  four  districts,  and  for  putting  the 
machinery  into  operation  at  once,  because  1  knew 
that  such  was  the  will,  and  wish  of  those  who 
sent  me  here.  But  I  could  not  have  the  thing  all 
my  own  way,  and  must  take  what  I  can  get.  My 
talented  friend  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  voted 
with  many  others,  to  limit  the  number  to  three, 
and  I  was  overruled.  The  compromise  agreed 
upon  by  the  committee,  however,  gives  to  those 
who  are  in  favor  of  branching  the  court,  a  very 
decided  advantage.  Being  unable  to  procure  the 
branching  of  the  court  at  once,  as  I  desired,  I 
am  willing  to  take  the  report  of  the  committee, 
which  gives  us  four  districts,  andfour  judges,  be- 
lieving that  with  these  we  shall  certainly  have 
much  less  difficulty  in  consummating  our  wishes 
through  the  legislature,  than  with  three  districts 
and  three  judges.  Besides  this  sir,  no  man  here 
should  expect  to  have  all  things  to  suit  his  own 
particular  views,  regardless  of  the  wishes  or 
opinions  of  others.  We  should  all  concede  some- 
thing, in  order  that  we  may  come  to  an  amicable 
agreement.  I  neither  have,  nor  will  I  bluster 
and  threaten.  No  sir,  I  have  not  seen,  and  do 
not  expect  to  see,  anything  done  that  will  make 
me  oppose  this  constitution. 

I  appreciate  the  patriotism  and  the  talent  of 
the  legal  profession,  as  highly  as  any  gentle- 
man on  this  floor,  and  I  concur  fully  in  all  that 
was  said  of  their  patriotism  &c.  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Knox.  Yet,  were  I  to  speak  my  sober 
opinion,  I  must  be  permitted  to  say,  that  in  my 
own  humble  judgment,  Kentucky  is  most  wofnl- 
ly  lawyer-ridden.  I  am  not  for  assisting  the 
lawyers;  far  from  it  sir.  But  I  am  for  helping 
the  people  to  liavt;  justice  within  their  reach, 

It  was  contended  by  many  who  opposed  the 
branching  of  the  court,  and  by  others  who  were 
willing  it  should  bo  done,  that  the  question  was 
entirely  new,  that  they  did  not  know  the  wishes 
of  their  constituents;  that  the  question  was  uot 
heard  of  in  many  sections  of  the  country.  TJiis 
being  the  case,  is  not  sometliing  due  to  those  gen- 
tlemen who  are  willing  that  the  court  should  be 
branched,  but  not  willing  to  make  it  unwmdi- 
tional  in  the  constitution,  lest  it  might  not  plcivso 
their  constitutents.  Mr.  President,  I  think  much, 
very  much,  is  due  those  magnanimous  gentle- 
men from  the  central  portions  of  the  state,  who 
thus  nobly  offer  to  meet  us  with  so  liberal  a  com- 


643 


promiPe  as  that  reported  by  the  committee.  Now 
if  the  people  ■want  it  branched,  they  wilt  cer- 
tainly have  it  done ;  if  not,  the  legislature  will 
provfde  that  there  shall  not  be  a  fourth  judge, 
after  the  first  term  of  two  years  shall  have  expir- 
ed. The  report  of  the  committee  puts  it  entire- 
ly within  the  power  of  the  people,  and  for  one,  I 
sav  their  will  be  done.  The  paying  a  two  years 
safar}--  for  one  judge,  cannot,  will  not  be  of  very 
ereat  consequence.  But  sir,  the  opinion  of  this 
body  will  no  doubt  have  great  weight  with  the 
people,  and  I  want  the  advantage  of  that  opin- 
ion as  indicated  in  the  report  of  the  committee, 
when  the  subject  is  presented  to  the  people. 

As  to  the  opinion  of  my  talented  friend 
from  Jessamine,  (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall,)  that  this 
is  designed  to  furnish  an  office  forlawyers,  I  beg 
leave  again  to  assure  him,  nothing  is  further  from 
my  wishes.  How  many  candidates  there  are  up- 
on this  floor,  I  do  not  know.  But  in  my  portion 
of  the  state,  I  think  sir,  there  are  many  gentle- 
men, not  now  on  this  floor,  who  in  talents,  at- 
tainments, int«grety,  and  in  all  that  adorns  the 
head  and  heart  of  man,  have  few  superiors  here 
or  elsewere,  that  might  perchance  be  found  very 
formidable  competitoi-s  of  any  a.spirant  in  this 
body  (if  any  such  there  be.)  I  sir,  am  not  at- 
tempting to  create  an  office  for  lawyers.  I  am 
for  the  good,  the  convenience  of  the  people.  I 
am  for  procuring  a  cheaper,  more  equal,  and 
more  perfect  administration  of  justice  to  all. 

There  is  another  feature  in  this  matter,  that  I 
had  greatly  at  heart,  sir ;  it  was  overruled  how- 
ever, but  lam  strongly  tempted  to  try  it  again. 
It  is,  that  the  concurrence  of  three  judges  shall 
be  required  to  reverse  the  decision  of  the  inferior 
tribunal.  This  I  think  sir,  is  due  to  the  circuit 
judge,  who,  if  equally  capable  and  honest,  all 
I  think  will  agree,  must  in  the  very  nature  of 
things,  be  a  better  judge  of  the  real  merits  of  a 
case,  than  any  set  of  judges  here,  who  act  from  a 
mere  brief  of  the  case. 

It  was  the  overruling  of  what  I  believed  a  cor- 
rect opinion  (one  judge  dissenting,)  that  first 
suggested  to  my  mind  the  addition  of  a  fourth 
judge.  It  is  wrong  sir,  to  let  the  opinion  of  two 
men  overrule  that  of  two  others,  when  one  of 
those  overruled  must  best  understand  the  case. 

I  beseech  those  who  favor  four  judges  and  four 
branches,  to  stand  bv  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee. Do  this  and  I  doubt  not  our  wishes  will  be 
consummated  by  the  people.  To  them  I  am  will- 
ing to  leave  the  matter,  and  I  again  say,  their 
will  be  done. 

Mr.  BOYD.  I  am  one  of  those  who  voted  to 
strike  out  the  fourth  judge.  I  was  also  on  the 
judiciary  committee,  but  unlike  a  good  many 
of  the  members  of  that  committee,  I  never  gave 
in  ray  adhesion  to  all  that  was  done  there.  My 
friend  from  Ballard  (Mr.  Gholson,)  says,  that 
those  in  favor  of  four  judges  and  the  district 
system,  have  the  vantage  ground.  It  ismy  opin- 
ion that  he  is  correct  in  that.  As  a  matter  of 
compromise,  then,  I  am  willing  to  go  for  four 
judges,  if  the  court  is  branched,  and  made  to  sit 
in  each  of  the  districts;  and  I  am  inclined  to 
think  that  I  am  not  alone  in  this.  If  the  con- 
vention is  disposed  to  pass  over  this  section  for 
the  present,  and  take  up  the  ninth  section  and 
act  upon  it,  and  if  they  decide  that  the  court 
ehall  be  branched,  I  shall  then  be  prepared  to 


five  my  vote  for  the  four  judges;  if  they  do  not, 
am  still  in  faver  of  three. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  was  in  favor  of  four 
judges,  and  I  gave  my  reasons  for  it.  And  I  was 
in  favor,  also,  of  branching  the  court.  I  believe 
with  the  gentleman  from  Ballard,  (Mr.  Gholson,) 
that  the  probability  is  that  tlie  legislature  will 
branch  the  court,  if  the  convention  determine 
that  there  shall  be  four  judges.  This,  however, 
is  left  entirely  at  the  option  of  the  legislature; 
and  if  it  be  decided  by  the  legislature  that  the 
court  shall  not  be  branched,  there  will  only  be 
the  additional  expense  of  a  judge's  salary  for 
two  years. 

Something  has  been  said  about  creating  offi- 
ces for  lawyers.  So  far  as  my  district  is  con- 
cerned, like  that  of  my  friend  from  Ballard, 
(Mr.  Gholson,)  there  are  within  its  limits  indi- 
viduals who  not  only  have  talent  enough  to  fill 
such  an  office,  but  who  would  only  have  to  sig- 
nify their  willingness  to  accept  the  office,  and 
it  would  be  tendered  to  them.  I  allude  to 
Judge  Simpson,  particularly,  as  belonging  to 
that  class  of  individuals.  I  presume  every  gen- 
tleman is  disposed  to  cast  his  vote  in  the  man- 
ner which  he  conceives  will  most  redound  to  the 
general  benefit;  and  I  see  no  mode  which  I 
think  is  better  calculated  to  harmonise  the  con- 
flicting views  of  delegates,  than  the  one  here 
proposed. 

Mr.  CHRISMAK^.  When  this  question  was 
first  up,  the  younger  gentleman  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliff"e,)  moved  to  strike  out  "four" 
and  insert  "three."  "When  that  vote  was  taken 
I  chanced  to  be  absent.  I  desire  to  state  here, 
that  I  am  in  favor  of  four  judges,  in  the  event 
of  the  court  being  branched;  but  if  this  body 
refuses  to  branch  the  court,  I  am  determined  to 
fall  back  on  the  old  number — three. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  It  is  known  to  all 
that  I  have  been  opposed  to  having  four  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals.  I  voted  against  four, 
and  one  of  the  many  objections  that  operated 
with  me  was,  that  I  believed  the  appointment  of 
a  fourtli  judge  would  necessarily  result  in 
branching  the  court  of  appeals.  And  according 
to  the  convictions  of  my  mind,  branching  the 
court  would  be  one  of  the  greatest  calamities 
that  could  be  inflicted  upon  the  state.  I 
have  never  changed  that  opinion.  And  I 
believe  that  the  proposition  for  the  appointment 
of  an  additional  judge  to  the  bench  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  could  not  prevail  if  separated  from 
the  idea  of  braneiiing  the  court.  I  did  not  ex- 
pect there  would  be  perfect  harmony — I  did  not 
expect,  in  coming  here,  that  I  could  obtain  all 
that  I  desired.  I  came  prepared  to  yield  some- 
what, in  order  to  secure  unanimity.  And  if  ev- 
ery gentleman  would  act  with  that  view,  we 
might  come  together  upon  one  common  platform; 
and  by  mutual  concession  and  compromise, 
agree  upon  a  constitution  that  would  be  satisfac- 
tory to  all.  I  gave  my  voice  for  the  committee 
of  thirty,  in  the  hope  "that  a  compromise  would 
be  agreed  upon  by  them,  that  would  meet  the 
views  of  all,  and  in  the  belief  that  more  good 
would  grow  out  of  tlieir  deliberations  in  com- 
mittee, than  we  would  be  able  to  secure  by 
means  of  discussion  in  the  convention;  because, 
in  committee  it  is  not  as  here,  where  speeches 
are  made  that  are  to  go  to  the  couotry-.— speeches 


644 


which  gentlemen  make  with  a  view  to  being 
well  spoken  of  in  the  newspapers.  I  was  sorry 
to  hear  from  the  gentleman  from  Trigg,  (Mr. 
Boyd,)  that  he  is  so  tenacious  of  his  opinion.  I 
suggested  to  the  gentleman  that  I  was  willing 
to  make  concession,  and  that  if  the  people  of 
the  country  desired  the  branching  of  the  court, 
I  was  willing  they  should  have  it.  But  I  was 
not  willing  to  make  it  a  constitutional  provision, 
for  it  would  be  putting  into  the  hands  of  those 
who  are  opposed  to  the  reforms  you  are  about  to 
make,  a  power  which  they  can  wield  against 
you.  My  venerable  friend  who  sits  near  me 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  occupies  the  same  position  that  I 
do  upon  this  subject;  he  agreed  with  me,  and 
we  both  went  in  favor  of  the  additional  judge. 
It  was  carried  through  the  committee  with  some- 
thing like  unanimity  of  feeling;  and  although 
the  gentleman  from  Trigg  feels  disinclined  to  go 
for  it  here,  yet  as  the  committee  have  agreed  up- 
on four  judges,  by  way  of  compromise,  I  think 
we  should  all  go  in  favor  of  it.  Suppose  you 
strike  out  "four"  and  insert  "three,"  what  is  to 
be  gained  by  it?  Many  gentlemen  believe  that 
three  judges  are  not  sufficient  to  do  the  business. 
But  it  you  allow  the  section  to  stand  a.s  it  is, 
there  will  be  four  judges,  until  the  question 
comes  up  before  the  people,  whether  they  want 
the  court  branched.  It  will  be  discussed  in  eve- 
ry county.  If  they  want  the  four  judges  they 
will  retain  them — if  they  require  the  four  judg- 
es without  branching,  the  four  will  remain — if 
they  require  but  three,  they  will  have  but  throe. 
If  the  court  is  to  be  branched,  four  judges  will 
be  requisite.  But  I  am  against  the  branching  of 
the  court — I  believe  it  is  wrong.  I  believe  that 
the  court  should  be  held  at  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment, where  the  judges  will  have  the  use  of  a 
food  library.  It  is  the  only  security  we  can 
ave  for  the  stability  of  the  decisions  of  the 
court;  for  the  correctness  of  the  rules  and  prece- 
dents that  will  be  established  by  the  court,  and 
which  are  to  govern  and  control  the  rights  and 
interests  of  the  people  of  the  country.  I  hope 
my  friend  from  Simpson  will  withdraw  his  prop- 
osition, and  allow  the  report  to  remain  as  it  is. 
I  think  this  is  the  course  we  ought  to  take,  and 
I  trust  he  will  withdraw  it,  when  he  comes  to 
review  the  matter. 

Mr.  LISLIJ.  When  the  proposition  was  first 
up  in  the  house,  to  strike  out  "four"  and  insert 
•'  three,"  I  was  in  favor  of  it.  Afterwards,  when 
the  three  committees  were  united,  forming  a 
committee  of  thirty,  I  was  a  member  of  that 
committee,  and  voted  in  committee  against  four 
judges,  and  shall  continue  to  do  so.  As  has  been 
said  by  some  gentlemen  who  have  addressed  the 
house,  it  has  been  urged  throughout,  as  the 
strongest  reason  why  Ave  should  add  anotlier 
judge,  that  the  branching  of  the  court  would  ne- 
cessarily result  from  the  increased  number  of 
judges.  That,  sir,  is  not  proposed  to  be  done.  I 
ask  gentlemen,  if  this  proposition  for  adding  a 
fourth  judge  to  the  court  of  appeals  had  come  up 
upon  its  own  merits,  disconnected  with  the  ques- 
tion of  branching  the  court,  how  large  a  support 
would  it  have  received?  I  imagine  from  the  ar- 
guments we  have  heard,  that  its  supporters  would 
nave  been  few. 

We  are  told  by  various  gentlemen  Avho  profess 
to  be  well  informed  oa  uie  subject,  and  who 


give  us  the  information  as  coming  from  the  pres- 
ent judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  that  an  addi- 
tional judge  will  not  facilitate  the  dispatch  of 
business.  For  what  purpose,  then,  are  we  to  add 
another  judge?  It  has  been  said,  that  the  object 
is,  that  it  may  ultimately  lead  to  the  branching 
of  the  court  of  appeals.  If  it  be  necessary  to 
branch  the  court,  let  us  do  it  at  once. 

I  will  give  the  reason  which  shall  influence 
me  in  the  vote  I  am  about  to  give;  but  it  is  a 
reason  that  may  not  perhaps  influence  others. 
As  far  as  I  am  concerned,  until  I  came  into  this 
body,  I  did  not  hear  of  a  politician,  I  did  not 
know  of  a  ncAvspaper,  or  in  fact  of  a  single  man 
in  the  country,  who  advocated  the  addition  of  a 
judge  to  the  court  of  appeals.  It  was  perfectly 
new  to  me  when  proposed  here,  and  delegates 
will  recollect,  that  it  was  proposed  and  argued 
in  connection  with  branching  the  court;  and  in 
that  connection  only,  is  it  entitled  to  any  force. 
Now  this  is  the  ground  I  occupy  ;  I  am  willing 
to  let  the  number  of  the  judges  of  the  court  of 
appeals  stand  just  where  it  is,  because  I  do  not 
believe  that  an  increase  is  demanded,  as  far  as 
the  public  is  concerned — at  least  this  is  the  case 
so  far  as  I  am  informed  upon  the  subject — and  to 
authorize  the  legislature  whenever  the  public 
good  requires  it,  to  add  to  the  number  of  the 
judges ;  and  if  the  branching  of  the  court  be  de- 
manded by  public  sentiment,  to  authorize  the 
legislature  to  do  so.  Why  should  we  act  in 
anticipation  of  public  sentiment?  And  when- 
ever the  court  ot  appeals  shall  be  branched,  if 
the  legislature,  in  its  wisdom,  deem  it  necessary 
that  there  shall  be  an  additional  judge,  let  the 
power  be  confided  to  the  legislature  to  authorize 
the  election  of  such  judge.  I  therefore,  shall 
vote  against  retaining  the  fourth  judge,  because 
I  have  heard  no  demand  for  an  addition  being 
made  to  the  number  of  the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeals. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Mr.  President,  I  did 
not  anticipate  the  motion  from  the  delegate  from 
Simpson.  I  am  content,  sir — individually — to 
abicie  by  the  judgment  of  the  house,  in  whatever 
form  that  judgment  may  be  pronounced. 

I  am  one  of  those  who  believe  that  the  public 
sentiment  of  Kentucky — yes  sir,  I  repeat  it  in 
the  hearing  of  the  members  of  the  legal  profes- 
sion, and  they  will  sustain  me — demanded  that 
in  the  reorganization  of  the  judicial  department 
of  the  government,  there  should  be  infused  into 
it  something  of  new  element  by  which  to  in- 
sure public  confidence  in  the  decisions  of  thiit 
tribunal.  Having  formed  the  opinion  from  some 
practical  knowledge  of  thati  tribunal,  that  a 
fourth  judge  was  necessary  to  increatse  tliat  con- 
fidence, I  should  have  been  in  favor  of  constitu- 
ting the  court  with  the  number  of  four  jiidges, 
with  or  without  the  districting  the  court  in  its 
sessions.  My  duty  as  chairman  of  the  committee, 
necessarily  required  me  to  advocate  tlie  report 
of  the  committee  as  originally  made,  and  I  shall 
vote  for,  and  sustain  it  as  agreed  upon  in  a  spirit 
of  harmony. 

The  remark  of  the  gentleman  from  Jessemine, 
(Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall),  that  he  was  informed  by 
the  ablest  lawyer  in  this  house,  there  are  at  least 
twenty  lawyers,  membere  of  this  convention, 
who  were,  or  would  be  candidates  for  the  oflice 
of  judge;  that  he  (Mr.  Marshall)  had  heard  no 


645 


reason  assigned  for  the  addition  of  a  fourth 
judge  to  the  appellate  court,  and  when  he  return- 
ed to  his  constituents  he  could  give  them  no 
other  reason  than  that  the  office  was  created  by  the 
legal  profession,  that  some  of  them  might  fill  it^ — 
with  what  justice  and  with  what  paniamentary 
propriety  the  remark  has  been  made,  I  will  leave 
others  to  decide  for  themselves.  I  have  never 
yet,  sir,  aspired  to  the  judicial  ermine — though 
tendered  to  me — and  I  never  shall.  I  would  be 
unworthy  of  the  position  I  occupy  here,  if  I 
could  be  influenced  by  a  motive  so  unworthy  as 
the  remarks  of  the  gentleman  would  seem  to  im- 
ply. I  know,  sir,  that  iu  deliberative  bodies, 
constituted  as  this  is,  of  diflferent  professions,  it 
is  sometimes  unfortunately  the  case,  that  men 
seek  to  excite  prejudices  against  tlie  legal  pro- 
fession. I  shall  leave  themwhoattempt  it,in  this 
house,  to  the  enjoyment  of  all  the  pleasure  and 
power  which  such  a  course  may  §ive.  I  shall 
not  attempt  to  enter  into  any  vindication  of  the 
profession.  It  is  enough  for  me  to  know,  that  so 
far  as  the  gentleman's  implication  of  motive 
was  designed  or  calculated  to  have  eflfect  upon 
the  action  of  this  house,  or  upon  the  country  at 
large,  I  certainly  claim  the  privilege  of  saying, 
I  should  not  fall  within  the  denunciation.  And 
on  this  subject,  I  will  let  those  who  sent  me 
here  decide. 

I  do  not  know  to  what  distinguished  member 
of  this  house  tlie  delegate  from  Jessamine  refer- 
red, as  furnishing  the  fact,  that  there  were  twen- 
ty lawyers  in  the  convention  who  would  be 
candidates  for  this  office,  if  it  should  be  created 
by  the  convention. 

Mr.  President,  most  of  the  stat€S  of  this  Union 
— three  fourths  of  them,  at  least,  I  think — have 
their  appellate  courts  constituted  of  at  least  four 
judges — some  of  them  as  many  as  eight.  I  gave 
the  reason  when  this  subject  was  up  on  a  fonner 
day,  why  I  thought  a  fourth  judge  on  the  appel- 
late bench  was  necessary.  I  think  that  we 
should,  in  organizing  the  court,  fix  the  number 
of  judges  in  the  constitution,  beyond  which 
legislative  discretion  should  not  be  permitted  to 
increase  them,  to  prevent,  if  a  crises  should 
arise,  the  temptation  in  times  of  high  excite- 
ment, such  as  we  have  passed  through,  the  leg- 
islature from  adding  to  the  number  of  appellate 
judge.s.  This  thing  has  been  done  in  some  of 
the  states,  to  secure  decisions  in  conformity  to  a 
misdirected  and  misguided  public  opinion. 
Hence  I  was  for  fixing  and  limiting  the  number 
in  the  constitution.  It  is  the  court  of  last  re- 
sort. Its  decisions  become  the  law  of  the  land. 
The  legislature  should  not  have  power,  at  discre- 
tion, to  add  to  or  diminish  the  number  of  its 
judges.  No  doubt  there  are  members  upon  this 
floor,  whose  opinions,  as  to  the  necessity  for 
four  judges  are  based  on  the  propriety  of  dis- 
tricting the  court,  and  requiring  it  to  hold  its 
sessions  in  the  different  districts.  I  confess  sir, 
that  I  am  in  favor  of  districting  the  court,  and  if 
I  had  the  power,  I  would  at  once  prescribe  in 
the  constitution,  that  they  should  hold  their  sit- 
tings in  each  district,  at  times  and  places  to  be 
fixed  by  the  legislature.  But  I  will  not  disturb 
the  compromise  made  by  the  three  committees. 
I  will  take  the  whole  as  it  is.  There  are  two  or 
three  modes  by  which  it  is  proposed  this  court 
shall  be  organized.    One  is  an  electioo,  by  the 


people  at  large,  by  what  is  termed  genera^ 
ticket.  Another  mode — and  I  believe  the  gen- 
tleman from  Jessamine  submitted  the  proposi- 
tion— is  to  elect  the  chief  justice  by  general 
ticket,  and  to  elect  two  associates,  by  districts; 
and  there  is  the  present  mode,  to  elect  one  judge 
in  each  district,  and  one  every  two  years.  These, 
I  believe,  are  the  only  conflicting  propositions 
before  the  house  which  looks  to  the  election  of 
the  appellate  judges.  I  prefer  the  article  as  it 
now  stands  for  the   election  of  four  judges.     I 

E refer  it  because  the  people  in  each  district  will 
ave  a  better  opportunity  of  electing  a  man, 
known  to  them  to  be  qualified  to  fill  that  high 
and  responsible  station,  than  they  would  by 
general  ticket.  Xor  do  I  see  the  reason  why  we 
should  dignify  the  presiding  officer  of  the  court — 
the  chief  justice — by  an  election  by  general 
ticket. 

I  see  no  reason  why  we  should  make  an  ex- 
ception in  the  mode  of  selecting  the  one  judge 
or  the  other  ;  their  salary  is  the  same ;  their 
power  is  the  same ;  their  duties  are  the  same ; 
and  I  presume  that  their  talent  will  not  be  in- 
creased by  general  ticket  election.  By  this  dis- 
tribution of  the  power  of  appointment  to  the 
different  sections  of  the  state,  you  bring  the 
court  more  immediately  under  tlie  proper  influ- 
ence of  the  people,  who  will  have  a  just  appre- 
ciation of  their  talent,  worth  and  responsibility. 
As  you  enlarge  the  district,  if  you  make  the 
election  by  general  ticket  for  the  whole  court, 
or  if  you  nave  three  districts  and  divide  your 
state  into  throe  divisions,  and  elect  but  three 
judges,  one  object  we  have,  that  is  to  infuse  into 
the  tribunal  something  more  of  public  confi- 
dence, will  be  defeated.  In  proportion  as  you 
remove  the  personal  knowledge,  or  opportunities 
of  knowing  an  individual,  you  defeat  one  of  the 
objects  which  I  have  in  view  in  voting  for  an 
elective  judiciary. 

"When  this  subject  was  under  the  consideralion 
of  the  convention,  some  weeks  since,  I  remember 
very  distinctly  that  the  very  able  member  from 
Franklin,  (Mr.  Lindsev,)  who  is  a  resident  and 
practisinglawyerin  this  city,  and  who  is  opposed 
to  districting  the  court,  so  far  as  its  sessions  are 
concerned,  distinctly  stated  it,  as  his  opinion, 
that  four  judges  were  necessary  in  the  appellate 
court,  whether  you  district  the  court  or  not;  and 
he  so  voted.  Upon  what  facts  he  based  that  opin- 
ion, I  do  not  now  remember.  We  are  told,  how- 
ever, that  the  present  distinguished  chief  justice 
is  of  opinion  that  three  judges  can  do  the  busi- 
ness better  than  four,  and  that  three  are  sufficient. 
Yes  sir,  and  one  could  do  it  perhaps  quicker 
than  three.  It  is  not  always  that  business  is 
best  done,  when  it  is  done  most  speedily,  es- 
pecially in  reference  to  adjudications  in  courts 
of  justice  of  the  last  resort.  I  stated  on  a  for- 
mer occasion,  that  in  conversation  with  gentle- 
men who  have  filled  that  bench  with  as  much 
distinction  as  the  present  incumbents  fill  it,  they 
told  me  before  this  convention  met,  that  the 
number  should  be  increased  to  four ;  and,  sir,  for 
the  last  six  or  seven  years,  during  the  sitting  of 
this  court,  I  have  heard  but  one  opinion  expres- 
sed upon  this  subject,  and  that  was  that  the 
number  of  judges  on  that  bench  ought  to  be  in- 
creased. I  never  have  heard  a  different  opinion 
in  Frankfort  until  the  conflict  arose  upon  the 


646 


question  of  district  sittings  of  the  court.  With 
tlie  present  incumbents  on  the  bench  of  that 
court,  I  have  not  had  the  honor  of  holding  any 
conversation  on  the  subject.  I  felt  that  I  could 
not,  with  propriety,  converse  ■with  them,  being, 
a  member  of  the  committee  which  had  charge  of 
the  subject,  or  I  should  have  done  so.  The  num- 
ber of  tour  judges  seemed  to  have  been  disap- 
proved of  by  gentlemen  who  thought  that  four 
judges,  connected  with  branching,  was  wrong. 
The  argument  was,  do  not  put  this  principle  of 
branching  j'our  court  in  tne  constitution,  be- 
cause it  was  not  expected  by  the  people.  It  will 
endanger  the  constitution  ;  public  sentiment 
does  not  require  it.  But  the  offer  was  made  in 
this  house  to  constitute  the  court  of  four  judges, 
and  leave  the  question  of  district  sessions  to  be 
decided  by  the  legislature,  and  by  the  people 
hereafter.  In  that  state  of  the  case,  the  article, 
at  the  suggestion  of  gentlemen  who  were  not 
members  of  the  committee,  which  originally 
reported  the  project,  together  with  the  other  ar- 
ticles of  the  judiciary  department  of  the  govern- 
ment, was  referred  to  a  joint  session  of  three 
committees,  having  the  three  articles  under  their 
immediate  consideration,  that  the  conflict  of 
opinion  might  be  compromised  and  the  coven- 
tion  induced  to  harmonize  on  the  question.  I 
should  have  done  justice,  when  I  reported  the 
article  from  the  joint  committee,  to  the  motives, 
principles — and  if  the  word  is  not  too  much 
hackneyed — the  patriotism  of  the  members  of 
this  committee.  They  manifested  a  disposition 
to  harmonize;  to  yield  up  opinions  once  enter- 
tained; to  meet  on  some  safe  ground  that  would 
consolidate  the  two  portions  of  this  house;  those 
who  opposed  the  four  judges  because  they  were 
opposed  to  the  branching;  und  those  in  favor  of 
the  four  judges  because  they  desired  the  branch- 
ing of  the  court.  And,  sir,  my  colleague  who 
led  the  opposition  to  branching  in  this  house, 
and  whose  powers  were  great  and  were  felt  in 
the  contest,  submitted  the  proposition  which  \\'c 
have  now  under  consideration,  as  the  terms  of  a 
compromise  between  the  extremes  in  tliis  house. 

Some  believe  that  four  judges  are  necessary, 
whether  the  court  is  branched  or  not;  others 
think  three  are  enough,  whether  branched  or 
not.  Some  believe  that  the  court  ought  to  be 
branched  by  provision  in  the  constitution ;  oth- 
ers think  that  it  ought  to  be  left  to  legislative 
discretion,  after  an  expression  of  public  senti- 
ment on  the  subject;  and  therefore  it  was  pro- 
posed to  leave  the  subject,  whether  the  court 
should  be  required  to  hold  its  sessions  in  more 
places  than  one,  to  legislative  action.  It  was 
agreed  to  in  the  large  committee,  and  you  have 
now  under  consideration  the  result  of  their  har- 
monious action. 

For  myself  sir,  I  would  prefer  to  put  the  pro- 
vision in  the  constitution ;  but  I  have  not  the 
vanity  to  suppose  that  what  I  most  desire  is 
best  for  the  country,  especially  on  this  subject. 
I  yielded  my  assentto  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Franklin,  and  others  on  this  floor, 
in  lieu  of  the  section  districting  the  court, 
and  requiring  its  sessions  to  be  held  in  each  dis- 
trict. I  am  willing  to  leave  the  subject  where 
the  opponents  of  districting  said  it  ought  to  be 
left,  to  the  people  through  their  agents — the 
legislative  department — properly    advised  and 


instructed  on  the  subject.  If  they  believed, 
two  years  after  the  first  election,  that  three 
judges  are  sufficient  to  transact  the  business  of 
the  court,  and  best  calculated  to  create  that  in- 
creased confidence  which  the  convention  think 
necessary  they  should  possess,  I  am  content.  I 
have  no  cause  Mr.  President,  of  complaint 
against  a  member  of  that  committee;  they  have 
treated  me  always  with  the  utmost  respect,  still 
sir,  Avhen  I  am  called  on  to  form  a  constitution, 
and  to  re-organize  and  re-construct  the  judiciary 
department  upon  a  different  principle  than  that 
upon  which  it  is  now  constructed.  I  will  not 
consent,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  to  construct 
it  in  such  a  mode  or  manner,  as  would  look  ex- 
clusively to  the  re-appointraent,  bygeneral  tick- 
et, of  the  same  gentlemen  who  now  fill  the 
offices. 

What  would  be  the  effect  of  the  two  sections 
of  the  bill,  which  are  so  intimately  connected  in 
this  discussion,  if  the  legislature  shall  believe 
that  it  is  necessary,  for  the  promptjand  cheap  ad- 
ministration of  justice,  in  any  of  the  districts  of 
this  commonwealth,  remote  from  the  seat  of 
government,  that  the  judges  should  be  required 
to  hold  terms  in  that  district,  they  can  do  it, 
leaving  the  court  to  transact  the  business  of  the 
balance  of  the  state  at  the  seat  of  government. 
This  would  be  more  convenient,  perhaps,  than 
if  the  balance  of  the  state  were  at  once  district-* 
ed  by  constitutional  provision.  It  is  due  per- 
haps, that  I  should  give  my  opinion  as  to  what 
may  be  the  probable  operation  of  it.  In  all  pro- 
bability, there  may  never  be  more  than  tAvo  pla- 
ces for  holding  this  court  under  the  operation  of 
this  constitution,  besides  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment. I  think  this  highly  probable ;  and  I 
judge  not  so  much  from  what  I  see  manifested 
here,  as  from  my  knowledge  of  the  composition 
of  the  state  legislature,  in  times  past. 

I  think  it  very  probable  that  the  legislature  will, 
in  the  course  of  time,  answer  the  demands  of  the 
southern  extreme  of  the  state  to  meet  the  wants 
of  that  portion  of  the  state,  and  direct  the  court 
to  hold  one  or  more  terms  there,  while  the  bal- 
ance of  the  state  will  perhaps  be  content  to  have 
their  business  done  at  the  seat  of  government,  as 
now.  And  hence  it  was  that  I  the  more  willing- 
ly acquiesced  in  the  proposition  contained  in  the 
nth  section,  and  the  proposition  which  is  now 
under  consideration.  If,  however,  experience 
should  point  out,  during  the  two  first  years  of 
the  existence  of  the  court  under  this  constitu- 
iton,  that  four  judges  are  not  necessary  for  the 
transaction  of  the  business,  the  legislature  will 
declare  so  by  law.  I  do  not  mean  tne  mere  man- 
ual labor  of  writing  out  opinions  alone — I  do  not 
mean  the  drudgery  of  mind  in  searching  up  au- 
thorities alone;  but  I  mean  the  union  of  mind 
and  talent — the  concentration  of  thouglit  and  in- 
tellect, in  the  discharge  of  the  important  duties 
of  that  tribunal.  If  the  general  assembly  be- 
lieve that  a  fourth  judge  is  not  necessarv,  they 
will  have  power  to  direct  the  court  to  be  held  by 
three  judges,  and  to  make  the  districts  conform 
to  that  number,  and  to  make  the  term  of  office 
conform  to  that  number,  electing  the  judges  ev- 
ery two  years.  This  is  the  effect  of  the  compro- 
mise, and  I  am  unwilling  sir  to  insert  in  thiscou- 
stitution,  what  a  large  portion  of  this  house, 
probably  a  majority,  are  opposed  to.    I  do  not 


647 


know,  if  the  question  were  now  presented  br'aws. 
amendment  to  this  bill,  to  retain  the  four  judges, 
and  reinstate  the  provision  to  require  the  court 
to  hold  sessions  in  four  districts,  how  that  ques- 
tion would  be  decided;  but  I  know  there  is  a 
powerful  array  of  numbers,  as  well  as  talent, 
against  it,  and  to  that  I  defer.  I  ara  willing  to 
accept  the  proposition  of  these  gentlemen,  to 
leave  the  whole  subject  of  branching  to  the  legis- 
lature. And  with  this  explanation  of  the  ob- 
jects of  the  two  sections;  and  of  the  principles 
upon  which  the  committee  compromised,  and  as 
I  thought,  harmonised,  I  am  willing  to  leave 
the  decision  of  the  question  to  the  house.  I  do 
jiot  know  that  I  should  have  arisen  at  all,  had  it 
not  been  for  the  gentleman's  remark,  in  suppo- 
sing that  the  advocates  for  the  fourth  judge,  must 
have  designed  it  to  have  an  improper  influence 
on  the  country,  or  that  it  was  calculated  at  least 
to  provide  a  place  for  lawyers.  I  rose  to  say  to 
him,  and  to  the  country,  that  whether  you  dis- 
trict the  court  or  not,  whether  you  have  four 
judges  or  not,  the  humble  individual  who  ad- 
dresses you  has  never  thought  of  filling  the  of- 
fice, and  if  the  power  to  give,  should  ask  me  to 
fill  it,  I  would  not  do  it.  Thank  God,  He  has 
blessed  me  in  his  kindness  with  something  to 
live  on  in  old  age,  and  although  I  cannot  boast 
of  much,  I  do  not  belong  to  that  class  of  the 
profession  to  which  the  gentleman  so  unkindly 
alluded. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  When  I  remarked  a 
few  moments  since  that  I  had  understood  that 
there  arv,  some  twenty  lawyers  in  this  house  who 
are  candidates  for  the  judgeship,  I  had  sup- 
posed that  the  tone,  and  spirit,  and  manner  in 
which  the  remark  was  made,  would  have  re- 
deemed it  from  being  considered  by  any  body  in 
the  least  degree  offensive.  When,  however,  the 
gentleman  from  Knox  (Mr.  Woodson,)-seemingly 
not  at  all  in  the  spirit  of  anger — alluded  to  the 
remark,  I  deemed  it  necessary  to  disavow  to  him, 
and  to  the  house  publicly,  the  slightest  disposi- 
tion, or  intention  on  my  part,  to  make  a  remark 
that  might  be  regarded  as  offensive.  I  do  not 
often  apologise  once;  I  never  do  twice,  to  any 
body.  Having  publicly  disavowed  that  I  inten- 
ded to  make  the  remark  applicable  to  any  one 
on  this  floor,  individually,  1  think  it  shoula  have 
been  sufficient  to  have  prevented  any  gentleman 
here  from  having  commented  so  very  extensive- 
ly upon  it;  and  especially  if  the  remark  did  not 
appnr  to  him.  I  have  only  to  say  that  if  any 
gentleman  feels  it  to  be  applicable  to  himself, 
"Let  the  galled  jade  wince,  my  withers  are  un- 
wrung." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  When  I  met  this  convention  I 
looked  around  to  see  what  kind  of  men  it  was 
composed  of;  and  I  have  since  repeatedly  re- 
marked, that  although  I  have  been  in  many  de- 
liberative bodies — ten  years  in  congress,  and  ten 
years  in  the  legislature  of  this  state — ^yet  I  think 
that  in  the  whole  course  of  my  public  life  I  have 
never  been  associated  with  an  hundred  men  of 
more  talent — men  with  whom  I  am  more  proud 
to  beassoiated — than  the  hundred  men  that  com- 
pose this  convention.  I  did  intend  at  some  time 
in  the  course  of  the  session,  to  draw  a  portrait  of 
tlie  whole  house  collectively,  and  of  some  of 
the  distinguished  men  separately;  that  posterity 
might  know  of  what  kind  of  men  this  conven- 


tion was  composed;  because  it  has  been  a  great 
desideratum  with  me  in  reading  the  debates  of 
theVirgina  convention,  and  the  debates  of  the 
convention  that  made  the  constitution  of  the 
United  Siates,  to  know  the  particular  history 
and  description  of  the  men  who  figured  in  those 
conventions;  and  if  I  ever  worried  a  gentleman 
in  my  life  it  was  Mr.  Madison,  when  I  first  went 
to  congress,  to  get  from  him  the  personal  anec- 
dotes, and  the  reminiscences  of  the  incidents  of 
the  time  of  the  formation  of  the  federal  constitu- 
tion, with  which  his  mind  was  well  stored. 

I  have  procured  a  statement  .showing  the  oc- 
cupation and  ages  of  the  delegates  here,  which  I 
will  read: 

Lawyers,  -----        42 

Doctors,  9 

Farmers,  .         ....        39 

Minister,  1 

Salt-maker, 1 

Trader,  1 

Sheriff,  1 

Merchant, 1 

Miller,  1 

Clerk,  1 

Inn -keeper, 1 

Mechanics, 2 


AGES. 

Between  20  and  30, 
Between  30  and  40, 
Between  40  and  50, 
Between  50  and  60, 
Between  60  and  70, 
Between  70  and  80, 


Delegates,  100 


4 

24 

41 

24 

6 

1 

100 


James  Dudley,  oldest  delegate,  72. 

Selucius  Garfielde,  youngest  delegate,  26. 

I  had  this  paper  prepared  preparatory  to  the 
work  I  had  proposed  to  myself,  of  drawing  the 
portrait  of  this  convention;  and  it  was  probably 
something  that  I  may  have  said  in  connection 
with  this  that  was  referred  to  by  the  gentleman 
from  Jessamine,  (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall,)  a  few 
moments  since.  When  the  subject  of  the  court 
of  appeals  was  under  consideration  some  weeks 
ago,  I  remarked,  I  believe,  in  a  jocular  manner 
to  my  worthy  friend — for  I  am  proud  to  call 
every  one  of  the  name  my  friend — a  name  that 
comes  from  old  Fauquier  county — that  I  thought 
this  house  could  furnish  candidates  enough  for 
the  judgeships  we  were  about  to  create;  that 
as  I  was  going  on  to  sixty  six  years  of  age,  I 
was  too  old,  and  that  my  colleague,  common- 
ly called  "  the  young  gentleman"  from  2felson, 
was  going  on  to  sixty  two,  and  he  was  too 
old;  but  that  there  were  as  many  as  fifteen  or 
twenty  who  were  not  too  old.  It  was  all  a 
piece  of  fun  from  beginning  to  end.  I  have  been 
personally  acquainted  with  every  distinguished 
man,  I  believe,  who  has  figured  in  public  life 
in  the  United  States,  from  the  year  1815  up  to 
this  time,  and  I  have  served  year  after  year  in 
deliberative  bodies,  and  I  do  not  think  that  I 
flatter  this  convention  when  I  say  that  I  have 
never  seen  a  more  talented  body  of  men,  of  the 
same  number,  any  where. 


648 


Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  been  nniformly  against 
branching  the  court  of  appeals,  and  am  so  still. 
I  have  been,  and  am  still,  in  favor  of  having 
four  judges,  because  I  think  I  have  seen  the  neces- 
sity for  it;  and  I  will  say  this,  that  in  no  con- 
versation that  I  have  liad  with  lawyers  of  this 
city,  and  members  of  the  court,  have  I  heard  a 
different  opinion  expressed  by  any  one  of  them 
until  it  seemed  to  enter  a  little  into  the  matter  of 
branching  the  court;  and  I  care  not  what  any 
judge,  or  what  any  lawyer  has  intimated,  since 
the  subject  has  been  talked  of  here.  I  do  not 
believe  judge  Marshall  has  given  an  opinion; 
he  is  one  ot  the  most  cautious,  prudent,  discreet 
men,  that  lam  acquainted  with.  •  I  do  not  think 
that  any  gentleman,  occupying  the  station  that 
he  does,  could  or  would  give  such  an  opinion.  I 
know  that  in  the  matter  of  consultation  it  does 
take  a  little  additional  time,  but  there  is  an  oppor- 
tunity of  arriving  at  a  more  correct  result;  and 
when  you  come  to  writing  out  opinions  you  gain, 
in  point  of  time,  five  times  as  much  as  you  lose 
in  consultation;  because  it  is  the  writing  out 
finally,  in  which  the  great  labor  consists,  m  or- 
der that  the  opinions  of  the  court  may  be  pre- 
sented in  such  a  manner  as  to  settle  the  law 
definitely,  correctly,  and  concisely.  There  is 
the  difficulty.  Many  a  man  can  arrive  at  a  cor- 
rect conclusion,  in  much  less  time  than  it  would 
take  him  to  write  out  his  opinion.  And  it  is 
exceedingly  improper  that  any  opinions  should 
be  written  and  published  as  authority,  for  gov- 
erning future  decisions,  that  are  not  correct  in 
every  particular.  It  is  a  matter  of  infinite  im- 
portance to  the  country,  because  incorrect  decis- 
ions must  tend  to  increase  litigation,  and  conse- 
quently to  increase  the  profits  of  the  profession. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  for  me  to  say,  that  I 
do  not  expect  a  judgeship  under  any  circum- 
stances. There  is  no  office  that  I  wish  or  desire. 
I  have  never  asked  for  one,  and  I  never  shall. 

There  is  another  reason  why  I  desire  that 
there  shall  be  four  judges.  If  any  thing  of  a 
party  nature  enter  into  the  composition  of  the 
bench,  I  say  in  all  candor  that  I  do  believe  that 
the  court  will  be  better  constituted,  if  there  be 
four  divisions  and  one  judge  be  taken  from  one 
section  of  the  country,  and  one  from  another 
section.  I  believe  it  will  keep  down  all  politi- 
cal contention,  so  far  as  the  judges  are  concern- 
ed, and  that  they  will  be  more  circumspect  in 
regard  to  having  any  thing  to  do  with  the  party 
politics  of  the  country,  and  more  devoted  to  the 
duties  of  their  .station. 

There  is  another  reason  that  influences  me. 
If  you  have  but  three  judges,  the  term  of  office 
■will  be  but  six  years.  1  do  not  think  that  even 
eight  is  long  enough  to  give  the  proper  stability 
to  the  decisions  of  the  court,  and  I  appeal  to 
gentlemen  cm  all  sides,  if  we  would  avoid  hav- 
ing a  partizan  court,  whether  it  is  not  better  that 
there  should  be  four  districts,  and  four  judges, 
and  a  ter/u  of  service  of  eight  years.  I  hope 
this  section  will  be  pennitted  to  stand;  fori 
tliink  the  recommendation  of  the  committee  is 
entitled  to  some  weight  and  consideration. 

Mr.  O.  W.  JOHNSTON.  The  county  which 
I  represent  in  part,  in  this  body,  lias  no  interest 
in  brar\ching  tne  court  of  appeals,  that  will  in- 
fluence me  to  vote  for  it.  The  people  of  my 
coynty  have    suffered  no  inconvenience — they 


have  nothing  to  complain  of  in  this  respect;  and 
in  the  canvass  during  the  last  summer  in  Shel- 
by county,  there  was  nothing  said  on  the  sub- 
ject. I  came  here  uninstructed  and  without  know- 
ing the  opinions  of  those  I  represent  in  relation 
to  this  matter.  I  know,  however,  that  the  peo- 
ple of  Shelby  will  not  expect  me  to  withhold 
any  benefit  or  privilege  from  any  part  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky,  which  they  enjoy,  on  ac- 
count of  their  peculiar  location.  I  came  here, 
sir,  without  having  reflected  on  this  subject.  I 
listened,  however,  to  the  arguments  of  gentle- 
men, and  became  satisfied  that  a  large  number  of 
the  people  of  Kentucky  suffer  much  incon- 
venience, because  of  the  distance  at  which  they 
live  from  the  seat  of  government,  rendering  it 
difficult  for  them  to  be  represented  in  that  court, 
by  the  counsel  who  have  been  in  the  first  in- 
stance engaged  in  their  causes;  and  I  determin- 
ed, therefore,  to  extend,  as  far  as  possible,  to 
those  who  live  in  remote  sections  of  the  state, 
the  benefits  that  we  enjoy,  in  regard  to  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice.  I  could  only  do  this  by 
voting  to  branch  the  court  of  appeals.  I  have 
voted  for  it.  I  have  served  on  the  committee 
to  which  the  matter  was  referred.  I  voted  for  it 
there,  and  united  with  the  other  members  of  the 
committee  in  the  compromise  that  was  made  in 
relation  to  the  whole  matter. 

Now,  sir,  although  I  was  willing  and  did  vote 
for  incorporating  in  the  constitution  a  provision 
for  branching  the  court  of  appeals  and  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  four  judges,  yet  we  have  not  done 
that,  as  delegates  will  perceive,  but  we  have  left 
the  whole  matter  for  the  people  to  determine 
hereafter,  through  their  representatives  in  the 
legislature.  And,  in  doing  this,  we  have  risked 
nothing ;  we  have  imposed  no  burden  on  the 
treasury,  save  the  salary  of  one  judge  for  two 
vears.  If  the  court  should  be  branched  by  the 
legislature,  it  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  four 
judges  would  be  necessary.  If  it  be  not  branch- 
ed, then,  at  the  expiration  of  two  years,  the 
fourth  judge  may  be  discharged  by  action  of  the 
legislature. 

Mr.  RUDD.  This  s^ibject  has  been  discussed 
for  two  weeks,  and  then  referred  and  acted  up- 
on by  a  committee  of  thirty,  and  it  seems  to 
me  that  every  gentleman  in  the  convention,  that 
has  paid  any  attention  to  the  debate,  must  be 
prepared  at  this  time  to  vote.  Believing  that 
the  opinion  of  ninety  out  of  the  hundred  members 
is  fully  formed,  ana  that  not  a  word  that  may  bo 
offered  will  change  the  mind  of  a  single  man,  I 
will  now  move  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  with- 
draw his  motion,  as  I  desire  to  submit  a  few  re- 
marks on  this  question,  important  as  T  view  it, 
to  my  constituents.  We  certainly  have  not  as 
yet  consumed  much  time  on  this  report,  having 
already,  although  it  was  first  taken  up  this 
morning,  adopted  three  sections  of  it. 

Mr.  RUDD.  I  do  not  desire  to  interfere  with 
the  expression  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  any 
gentleman,  and  I  will  therefore  withdraw  the 
call  for  the  previous  question,  and  move  an  ad- 
journment. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  feel  that  I  ought  to  return  my 
thanks  and  the  thamks  ©f  the  people  of  my  sec- 
tion of  the  country  to  my  friend  from  Shelby 


649 


(Mr.  G.W.Johnston)  for  the  magnanimous  man- 
ner in  which  he  has  expressed  himself  on  this 
occasion,  and  his  desire  to  carry  out  the  true 
principle  that  should  actuate  "every  gentleman 
in  the  formation  of  a  government.  I  conceive  eve- 
ry government  to  be  formed  for  the  benefit  of  the 
■whole  people,  and  that  its  blessings  ought  to  be  ex- 
tended to  them  as  far  as  it  can  be.  If  this  court 
of  appeals  confers  auv  blessing  or  benefit  oil  the 
people  of  this  state,  wliy  should  it  not  be  brought 
down,  as  far  as  practicable,  within  the  reach  of 
all?  That  is  all  we,  in  my  section  of  the  coun- 
try, a.sk.  Gentlemen  have  said  that  this  question 
was  not  agitated  before  the  people  in  any  of  the 
counties  in  this  state,  but  I  will  say  to  them 
that  it  was  made  directly  before  the  people  of 
my  county.  I  argued  the  question  there  on  the 
stump,  and  I  never  heard  the  first  man  oppose 
the  braching  of  the  court;  on  the  contrary,  all 
of  them  desired  that  one  of  its  sessions,  at  least, 
should  be  held  in  their  neighborhood,  or  some- 
where nearer  to  them  than  Frankfort.  The 
principle  objection  urged  against  it  here  is,  that 
these  judges  will  not  have  so  fair  an  opportunity 
of  arriving  at  correct  conclusions  and  decisions 
under  such  a  system.  When  the  question  was 
up  before,  my  friend  from  Kenton  (Mr.  Steven- 
son) seemed  to  think  that  if  the  judges  were  re- 
quired to  go  down  into  tne  Green  river  country, 
so  far  off  from  the  seat  of  government,  and  trav- 
el around  over  the  dirt  roads  to  which  we  are 
forced  to  submit,  there  was  something  in  the  at- 
mosphere there  that  would  cloud  their  minds  so 
that  there  decisions  would  not  be  as  clear  and  as 
enlightened  as  if  delivered  in  the  capitol.  I 
can  assure  my  friend  that  there  is  no  such  cor- 
rupting influence  in  the  atmosphere  of  that  region; 
and  I  can  tell  gentlemen  that  although  we  are 
so  far  away  from  Frankfort,  there  are  a  few 
books  there  out  of  which  the  great  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals  might  enlighten  even  their  well 
stored  minds.  And  if  they  would  decide  from 
the  lights  they  can  procure  from  the  libraries 
now  lu  that  country,  I  think  no  apprehension 
need  be  entertained  of  the  correctness  and  just- 
ness of  their  decisions. 

This  question  has  been  fully  di.scnssed,  and  I 
do  not   intend  to  repeat  the   arguments  on  the 
subject;  but  I  think  the  branching  of  the  court 
is  a  measure  the  people  call  for,  which  they  have 
a  just  right  to,  and  which  this  convention  should 
not  deny  to  them.     The  people  have  repeatedly 
demanded  it  at  the  hands  of  the  legislature,  anS 
have  been  put  off  by  the  pretext — whether  right 
or  not— that  the  constitution   denied  them   the  I 
power  to  do  it.     We  are  now  forming  a  consti- 
tution, and  this   act  of  justice   may,  therefore, 
now  be  done  without   injury  to  any  one.     For 
myself,  I  shall  go  with   my  friend  from   Trigg,  I 
(ilr.  Boyd,)  in  requiring  tte  constitution  to  de-  | 
clare  that  this  court  shall  be  branched;  but,  if  i 
we  cannot  get  that,   then  I  am  willing  to  take  j 
the  report  as  it  is.     I  believe  it  is  a  duty  which  ! 
I  owe  to  my  people,  to  secure,  so  far  as  I  can,  the 
holding  of  one  of  the  sessions,  at  least,  of  this  ! 
court  somewhere  in  our  section  of  the  state,  i 
Now,  I  have  no  objection,  if  it  is  the  sense  of 
the  convention,  at  once  to  take  up  the  ninth  sec- 
tion, as  suggested  by  my  friend  from  Trigg,  and 
settle  the  question  whether  we  shall,  or  shall 
not,  require  this  measure  to  be  inserted  in  the 
82 


constitution,  and  then  to  return  to  the  section 
now  under  consideration.  Or  I  £tm  willing  at 
once  to  vote  for  this  section  as  it  now  stands. 
Whether  there  is  a  necessity  for  four  judges  in- 
stead of  three,  I  am  not  as  able  to  judge  as  oth- 
ers who  are  more  experienced  on  this  subject. 
I  am  willing  to  go  for  four,  and  as  remarked  by 
the  gentleman  from  Shelby,  if  the  people  should 
think  proper  to  diminish  the  number,  they 
would  nave  the  power  to  do  so  at  the  end  of  two 
years,  and  the  only  expense  incurred  would  be 
that  of  two  years'  salary  to  one  judge.  I  hope 
my  friend  from  Simpson,  therefore,  will  with- 
draw his  opposition  to  the  four  judges. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  report  provides  for  four 
judges,  and  leaves  the  question  of  branching  to 
the  legislature.  I  have  declared  myself  in  fa- 
vor ol  branching,  which  this  report  does  not  do. 
I  have  also  declared  myself  in  favor  of  four 
judges,  if  the  court  should  be  branched.  If  it 
18  necessary  that  the  one  question  should  be  left  to 
the  legislature,  is  it  not  quite  as  necessary  that 
the  other  should?  I  will  go  for  that,  but  I  will 
not  provide  for  the  four  judges  by  constitution- 
al provision,  and  then  leave  it  to  the  discretion 
of  the  legislature,  as  to  whether  the  court  shall 
be  branched  or  not.  That  is  the  position  I  oc- 
cupy. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  as  to 
the  branching,  but  I  believe  we  shall  be  more 
apt  to  get  it  if  we  have  four  judges,  than  if  we 
have  but  three,  and  that  is  one  of  the  strongest 
arguments  which  induces  me  to  go  for  four 
judges.  Another  reason  is,  that  experienced 
practitioners  in  the  appellate  court — such  as  the 
gentleman  from  Madison  and  the  President — 
have  told  us  that  four  judges  were  necessary  for 
the  better  discharge  of  the  business  there.  And 
I  believe  that  if  the  section  is  adopted  as  it  is, 
that  a  sense  of  justice  in  the  legislature  will  pro- 
vide that  the  people  of  all  sections  of  the  coun- 
try, in  accordance  with  the  desire  of  that  people, 
shall  have  this  court  brought  nearer  to  them. 
This  belief  is  a  strong  inducement  to  my  sup- 
port of  this  proposition  as  it  comes  from  the 
committee.  1  hope,  also,  that  my  friend  from 
Simpson  will  adopt  the  same  views.  If  you  re- 
duce the  number  of  judges  to  three,  you  reduce 
our  chances  of  having  this  court  branched. 
This  is  a  compromise  reported  by  the  committee, 
and  although  I  am  not  bound  by  it,  yet  it  seems 
to  be  the  plan  that  comes  nearest  to  justice  in 
this  matter,  and  I  am  for  taking  it  as  it  is,  unless 
we  can  do  better. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  Every  body  knows,  if  they 
have  not  forgotten,  that  I  was  against  four 
judges,  and  against  branching;  and  upon  that 
question  we  fought  a  hard  battle  for  two  or 
three  weeks.  I  gave  up  part  of  my  own  views 
to  get  a  compromise,  and  that  was,  to  leave  it  to 
the  people,  whether  they  would  branch  or  not, 
and  to  place  it  in  a  situation  so  that  they  might 
do  so  if  they  chose.  In  this  I  yielded  a  great 
deal,  but  the  gentleman  last  up,  and  the  gentle- 
man from  Trigg,  say  they  do  not  feel  bound  by 
that,  and  that  they  will  try  to  break  up  the 
present  compromise.  I  have  only  to  say,  tliat  if 
they  do  that,  I  shall  vot«  for  retainine  the  four 
judges,  and  then  move  for  a  reconsideration,  if 
they  persist  in  this  branching  business.    I  do  not 


650 


mean  to  yield  ail>  when  they  take  back  what 
they  give  to  me. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  do  not  intend  to  enter 
tipon  an  argument  of  this  question  now.  I  de- 
livered veiy  briefly  my  vieAvs,  when  this  subject 
was  under,  consideration  before,  in  which  I 
avowed  myself  strongly  opposed  to  branching. 
The  gentleman  from  Christian  (Mr.  Gray)  whol- 
ly mistakes  me,  if  he  supposes  I  intended  to 
cast  any  reflection  on  any  portion  of  the  state. 
If  he  will  read  my  speech,  I  tliink  he  will  find 
that  the  whole  character  and  tenor  of  it  was 
against  any  thing  like  sectional  feeling.  I  never 
was  in  the  Green  river  country,  but  there  is  no 
portion  of  the  state  which  more  sincerely  com- 
mands my  respect. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  did  not  understand  the  gentle- 
man as  casting  anv  reflection,  and  it  was  only 
the  arguments  he  used  in  opposition  to  the 
branching  of  the  court  to  that  section,  that  I 
was  replying  to. 

Mr.  STEVENSON".  I  thought  the  whole  ten- 
or of  his  remarks  were  to  show  that  I  had  sup- 
posed there  was  sometliing  in  the  atmosphere  of 
the  Green  river  country  that  would  render  a 
judge  unfit  to  the  discharge  of  his  duties,  and 
that  certainly  would  have  been  an  unjust  and  un- 
warranted remark  on  my  part.  I  referred  to  no 
particular  section  of  the  county,  and  my  argu- 
ment was,  tliat  by  establishing  the  court  cat  one 
point,  the  building  up  a  large  librarj--,  and  con- 
siderations of  that  nature,  it  would  give  charac- 
acter  to  the  court  itself,  and  I  cited  the  supreme 
court  of  the  United  States,  to  show  that  the 
same  arguments  which  would  apply  in  favor  of 
branching  the  court  of  appeals,  would  apply  to 
branching  the  supreme  court  of  the  United 
States.  I  have  the  highest  respect  for  the  Green 
river  country,  and  for  the  people  who  inhabit  it; 
and  if  I  had  ever  doubted  their  intellectual 
ability  or  purity,  those  doubts  would  have  been 
a^eeably  removed  by  the  specimens  which  they 
have  sent  here.  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  from 
Christian,  that  government  is  for  the  benefit  of 
the  whole  people,  and  I  think  I  ain  disposed  to 
give  a  stronger  evidence  of  my  faith  in  tliat 
great  principle  than  he  is.  He  says  his  people 
want  the  branching  of  the  court  of  appeal,  and 
therefore  he  is  fur  it.  Yet  if  a  majority  of  the 
people  in  other  sections  of  the  stale  was  oppos- 
ed to  it,  my  friend  ought  to  give  it  up,  if  he  is 
disposed  to  subscribe  to  tlie  principle  that  the 
interests  of  a  small  portion  ought  to  yield  to  the 
demands  of  the  balance  of  the  state.  Now  I 
stated  in  my  speech  before,  that  although  I  be- 
lieved this  court  ought  not  to  be  branched,  yet  I 
was  ready  to  bow  to  the  popular  will,  and  wa-s 
willing  to  leave  the  question  to  the  legislature, 
in.pfder  that  if  the  people  desired  the  branching, 
no  matter  Vfliat  my  feelings  or  those  of  ray  con- 
stituents miglit  be,  their  will  might  prevail.  Is 
not  thfit  a  practical  carrying  out  of  the  doctrine? 
1  think  it  IS. 

..lam  opposed  to  four  judges,  and  I  think,  if 
•li^e  desire  that  the  popular  will  should  be  cx- 
pV^sed  on  the  subject  of  branching,  it  should 
aUo  be  expressed  as  to  wliethcr  they  require 
fourjudges.  Let  us  have  three  judges,  giving 
the  legislature  the  power  to  increase  it  to  four 
»nd  to  branch  if  they  desire.  I  think  wheu 
qiiestiohi  arp   pr<'s.'ntrd  t-   thi'  pnoplr   fnr  thfir  i 


decision  they  ou|tht  to  come  up  fairly,  and  my 
friend  from  Dhistian  frankly  avowed  that  the 
reason  he  desired  four  judges  was  in  order  to  get 
the  advantage  in  the  submission  of  the  question 
of  branching  to  the  people.  I  can  very  clearlv 
see  that  is  the  object  of  my  friond,  because  if 
you  have  provided  in  the  constitution  for  four 
judges  and  four  districts,  why  in  the  legis- 
lature you  will  have  the  advantage  at  once,  by 
concentrating  the  very  feelings  ray  friend  avow- 
ed— a  desire  of  local  benefit  to  his  constituents. 
If  there  are  four  districts,  why  you  will  have 
the  delegates  from  each  district  in  favor  of 
branching.  I  think  if  we  desire  the  public 
opinion  on  both  of  these  questions  we  should 
submit  them  both  to  the  people. 
_  Mr.  W.  0.  MARSHALL.  Believing  that  the 
time  would  be  better  applied  in  mutual  consul- 
tation with  a  view  of  compromise  on  this  ques- 
tion, than  in  the  making  of  speeches  here,  I 
move  that  the /jonvention  adjourn. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  convention 
adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  NOVEMBER  24,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Norton. 

COURT   OF    AI'PKALS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  joint  committees  on  the  court 
of  appeals. 

The  pending  question  was  the  motion  to  strike 
out  of  the  fourth  section  the  word  "four,"  and 
insert  "tliree,"  as  the  number  of  which  the 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  shall  consist. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays,  and  being  taken,  they  were — ^yeas  35,  nays 

Ye.\s — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Earlow, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Charles  Cham-' 
bers,  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrismani* 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffev,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Miiford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Andrew  Hood,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, Nathan  McClure,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  John- 
son Price,  John  T.Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
Ira  Root,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman, 
John  Wheeler — 35. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas 
James,  George  W.  Johnston,  Peter  Laslibrooke, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H. 
McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  James  Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Philip  Trip- 
I'M.SnMii'    T'lrii'i-     AiTln>-A-  S   Wliii-    ('harleo 


651 


A.  Wiekliffe,   Robert  N.  Wicklift'e,  \Vesley  J  -Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 

Wright — 37.  jChrisman,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  James  Du3- 

ley,  Chasteen  "f.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Vincent  S.   Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark 


So  ihe  amendment  was  rejected 
The  section  was  tlien  adopted. 
Tlie  fifth,  sixth,   and  seventh   sections  were 
adopted  as  follows,  without  amendment: 

"  Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly,  at  its  first 
session  after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution, 
shall  divide  the  state,  by  counties,  into  four  dis- 
tricts, as  nearly  equal  in  voting  population,  and 
with  as  convenient  limits  as  may  be,  in  each  of 
which  the  qualified  voters  shall  elect  one  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals." 

"Sec.  6.  The  judges  first  elected  shall  serve 
as  follows,  to-wit:  one  shall  serve  two,  one  four, 
one  six,  and  one  eight  years.  The  judges,  at 
the  tir>st  terra  of  the  court  succeeding  their  elec- 
tion, shall  determine,  by  lot,  the  length  of  time 
which  each  one  shall  serve;  and  at  the  expira- 
tion of  the  service  of  each,  an  election  in  the 
proper  district  shall  take  place  to  fill  the  vacan- 
cv.  The  judge  having  the  shortest  time  to  serve 
shall  be  styled  the  Chief  Justice  of  Kentucky." 
"Sec.  7.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  said 
court,  the  governor  shall  issue  a  writ  of  election 
to  fill  such  vacancy  for  the  residue  of  the  term, 
and  another  judge  shall  be  elected  by  that  dis- 
.  trict,  to  serve  until  the  expiration  of  the  time  for 
which  the  judge  was  elected,  whose  death,  re- 
signation, removal,  or  other  cause,  produced 
such  vacancy." 

The  eighth  section  was  read  as  follows: 
"  Sec.  8.  JS'o  person  shall  be  eligible  as  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  who  is  not  a  citizen  of 
-the  United   States,  a  resident  of  the  district  for 
.^which  he  may  be  a  candidate  two  years  next  pre- 
ceding his  election,  at  least  thirty  years  of  age, 
and  who  has  not  been  a  practicing  lawyer  eight 
years,  or  whose  service  upon  the  oencli  of  any 
.  court  of  record,  when  added  to  the  time  he  may 
have  practiced   law.  shall   be  equal    to  eight 
years." 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MITCHELL,  a  correc- 
tion was  made  by  inserting  the  word  "not,"  be- 
fore the  words  "be  equal  to  eight  years,"  at  tlie 
close  of  the  section. 

Mr.  WM.  JOHNSON  called  ior  the  yeas  and 
navs  on  the  adoption  of  the  section. 

Mr.  BOYD  thought  there  was  a  portion  of  the 
section  which  should  be  preserved,  and  there- 
,  fore  he  moved  to  strike  out  the  words  "and  who 
has  not  been  a  practicing  lawyer  eight  years,  or 
whose  service  upon  the  bench  of  any  court  of 
record,  when  added  to  the  time  he  may  have 
practiced  law,  shall  not  be  equal  to  eight  years." 
The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for  on  the  mo- 
tion to  strike  out,  and  they  were — yeas  26,  nays 
45. 


Yeas — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cow- 
per,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Milford  Elli- 
ott, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Wil- 
liam Hendnx,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.  Macheu,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  HeniV  B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Rob- 
in.son,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  Wheeler — 
26. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie)  Richard  Ap- 
persou,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 


E.  Huston,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  W .  Li.sle,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ard L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  Mc- 
Henry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 45. 

So  the  motion  to  strike  out  was  rejected. 
Mr.  W.   JOHNSON  withdrew   his    call    for 
the  yeas  and  nays,  and  the  section  was  adopted. 
The  ninth  section  was  read  and  adopted,  as 
follows : 

"  Sec.  9.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  hold  its 
sessions  at  the  seat  of  government,  unless  other- 
wise directed  by  law;  but  the  general  assembly 
may,  from  time  to  time,  direct  that  said  court 
shall  hold  its  sessions  in  any  one  or  more  of  said 
districts."  ' ' 

The  tenth  section  was  read,  as  follows :  ? 
"  Sec.  10.  The  first  election  of  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals  shall  take  place  on  the  second 
Monday  in  Mav,  1851,  and  every  two  years  there- 
after, in  the  district  in  which  a  vacancy  may 
occur,  by  expiration  of  the  term  of  ofiic'e;  and 
the  judges  of  the  said  court  shall  be  commission- 
ed by  the  governor." 

Mr.  GHOLSON  said  that  an  August  election 
was  a  time-honored  custom  in  Kentucky,  and 
he  disliked  to  change  it.  He,  therefore,  moved 
to  strike  out  the  words,  "and  every  two  vears 
thereafter,  in  the  district  in  which  a  vacancy 
may  occur,  by  expiration  of  the  term  of  office." 
This  would  leave  the  first  election  under  tha 
new  constitution  to  be  held  in  May,  and  after- 
wards in  August,  as  heretofore. 

Mr.  C.A.  WICKLIFFE  explained.  The  rea- 
son why  the  month  of  May  was  fixed,  was,  that 
it  was  desired  to  separate  the  judicial  from  the 
political  elections,  and  thus  prevent  the  one  hav- 
ing an  influence  on  the  other;  and  the  year  1851 
was  fixed  because  that  was  the  earliest  period  at 
which  an  election  could  be  held.  As  it  was  in- 
tended to  submit  the  new  constitution  to  the  p^- 
ple,  and  as  the  legislature  must  necessarily 
make  laws  to  carry  the  new  constitution  into  ef- 
fect, an  earlier  period  was  not  practicable. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  approved  of  the  ob- 
ject of  the  committee,  to  separate  the  political 
from  the  judicial  elections,  but  he  believed  this 
could  be  accomplished  without  changing  the 
election  from  the  month  of  August.  As  it  was 
intended  to  elect  the  legislature  biennially,  he 
suggested  that  the  members  of  congress,  mem- 
bers of  the  general  assemblv,  governor,  lieuten- 
ant governor,  ifec,  could  be  elected  one  year  in  the 
month  of  August,  and  the  judicial  officers  in 
the  same  mouth  of  the  alternate  years. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  replied,  that  it  was 
impossible  that  these  judicial  elections  could 
take  place  in  the  year  1850,  and  in  August, 
1851,   the  congressional  elections  would  take 


652 


plac-e.     The  raembert  of  the  legislature  would 
oe  elected  in  the  same  month  of  the  year,  1852. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  still  thought  a  provis- 
ion could  be  made  to  avoid  th«  contemplated 
change  from  the  usual  period.  The  convention 
had  certainly  the  power  to  change  the  period  of 
holding  the  legislative  elections. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  urged  that  the  month  of  May 
was  unfavorable  for  the  farming  population,  as 
it  was  with  them  a  busy  season  of  the  year,  and 
if  that  month  was  retained  they  would  not  be 
able  to  participate  in  the  election. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  called  the  attention  of  the 
convention  to  the  fact  that  it  was  impossible  to 
hold  the  election  in  May,  1850,  and  hence  it  was 
better  to  let  the  section  stand  as  it  is. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  moved  the  previous  ques- 
tion, under  the  operation  of  which  the  amend- 
ment was  rejected,  and  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  eleventh  section  was  read  and  adopted, 
as  follows : 

"  Sec.  11.  There  shall  be  elected,  by  the  qual- 
ified voters  of  this  state,  a  clerk  of  the  court  of 
appeals,  who  shall  hold  his  office  for  the  term  of 
eight  years  from  and  after  his  election,  and  who 
may  he  removed  by  the  court  of  appeals  for  good 
cause,  upon  information  by  the  attorney  general; 
and  in  case  the  general  assembly  shall  provide 
for  holding  the  court  of  appeals  in  any  one  or 
more  of  said  districts,  they  shall  also  provide 
for  the  election  of  a  clerk  by  the  qualified  voters 
of  such  district,  who  shall  hold  his  office  for 
eight  years,  possess  the  same  qualifications,  and 
be  subject  to  removal  in  the  same  manner  a.s  the 
clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals." 

The  twelfth  section  was  next  read : 

"  Sec.  12.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
office  of  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals,  unless  he 
be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  a  resident  of 
the  state  two  years  next  preceding  his  election, 
of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  and  have  a  cer- 
tificate from  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or 
a  judge  of  the  circuit  court,  that  he  has  oefin  ex- 
amined by  their  clerk,  under  the  supervision  of 
the  court  giving  said  certificate,  ana  that  he  is 
qualified  for  the  office  for  which  he  may  be  a 
candidate.' ' 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  McHENRY,  the  word 
"judge"  was  substituted  for  "court,"  in  the 
passage  which  provides  that  the  examination  of 
candidates  for  the  clerkship  has  been  made  "un- 
der the  supervision  of  the  judge  giving  such  cer- 
tificate." 

Mr.  THOMPSON  moved  to  strike  out  the 
words,  "  and  have  a  certificate  from  the  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  or  a  judge  of  the  cir- 
cuit court,  that  he  has  been  examined  by  their 
clerk,  under  the  supervision  of  the  judge  giving 
said  certificate,  and  that  he  is  qualified  for  the 
office  for  which  he  maybe  a  candidate." 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for  and  taken 
on  the  amendment,  and  resulted  thus — ^yeas  29, 
nays  42. 

Yeas — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  Williain  Cowper,  Lucius  Desha, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Miltord  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
driz,  Thomas  James,  James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B. 


Maohen.  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, Thomas  P.  Moore,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Thomas  Rockhold.  Michael  L.  Stoner,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  Wheeler— 29. 

Nays — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Edward  Curd,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin 
F.Edwards,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kav- 
anaugh,  Peter  Lashbrookc,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  JohnH.  McHenry,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  John 
J.  Thunnan,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  WieklifFe,  Robert 
N.  WieklifFe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 42. 
So  the  convention  refused  to  strike  out. 
Mr.  MOORE,  when  his  name  was  called,  said 
he  should  vote  in  the  affirmative  in  obedience  to 
instructions,but  it  was  decidedly  against  his  own 
judgment. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 
The  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  sections  were 
also  adopted  without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  13.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the  office 
of  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals,  the  governor 
shall  issue  a  writ  of  election,  and  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  state,  or  of  the  district  in  Avhich 
the  vacancy  may  occur,  shall  electa  clerk  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  to  serve  until  the  end  of  the 
tenn  for  which  such  clerk  was  elected  :  Provi- 
ded, That  wlien  a  vacancy  may  occur  from  any 
cause,  or  the  clerk  shall  oe  under  charges  upon 
information,  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
shall  have  power  to  appoint  a  clerk  pro  tern.,  to 
perform  the  duties  of  clerk  until  such  vacancy 
shall  be  filled,  or  the  clerk  acquitted. 

"Sec.  14.  The  general  assembly  shall  direct, 
by  law,  the  mode  and  manner  of  conducting 
and  making  the  returns  to  the  secretary  of  state, 
of  all  elections  for  judges  and  clerk  or  clerks  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  and  determining  contes- 
ted elections  of  any  of  the  officers." 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  offer  the  following  addi- 
tional sections: 

"  Sec.  15.  Writs  of  error  shall  be  allowed  on 
questions  of  law,  to  the  accused,  in  penal  and 
criminal  cases." 

"Sec.  16.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  have 
such  other  officers  as  may  be  prescribed  bylaw." 
There  is  now  no  provision  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  tipstaff  and  other  minor  officers,  which 
the  court  will  need,  and  I  offer  this,  to  allow  the 
legislature  to  permit  their  appointment. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKL'iFFE.  I  hope  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison  will  not  press  this  amend- 
ment in  this  part  of  the  constitution.  Indeed, 
I  should  be  unwilling  to  engraft  the  first  section 
tion  in  the  constitution.  It  is  perfectly  within 
the  power  of  the  legislature,  unless  we  inhibit 
it,  to  authorise  the  prosecution  of  writs  of  error 
in  criminal  cases,  as  to  matters  of  law  or  fact 
either.  I  was  once  honored  with  a  seat  in  the 
legislature,  when  I  undertook  to  prepare  such  a 
law  in  obedience  to  my  own  judgment,  and 
what  I  thought  the  public  sentiment  at  that 


053 


time,  but  I  found  it  did  not  meet  with  favor  in  I  granted.  I  never  6aid  that  before,  but  in 
the  lower  house.  Pardon  nie  for  using  that  term » |  that  ease  we  agreed  on  every  principle,  and  w« 
for  when  I    first  served   in  the   legislature,   tlie    investigatedit  nearly  two  weeks,  the  whole  of  the 


popular  branch  occupied  the  lower  floor,  and  the 
senate  occupied  a  room  just  above.  We  always 
called  it  the  upper  house  from  its  locality. 

There  is  a  great  diversity  of  sentiment  on  the 
propriety  of  such  a  law  as  the  geiitlenian  propo- 
ses, and  indeed  the  popular  opinion  is,  that  the 
means  of  escape  of  those  who  deserve  punish- 
ment are  sufficiently  numerous.  The  argument 
is,  tliat  no  man  who  is  convicted  would  rest  short 
of  an  appejJ  to  the  higher  court.  The  difficulty 
and  expense  of  such  an  arrangement  would  be 
great.  I  would  not  therefore  make  it  imperative 
to  pass  such  a  law,  but  would  leave  it  for  the 
people  to  direct  whether  the  legislature  shall  do 
It.  As  a  member  of  the  legislature,  I  would  vote 
for  it,  but  as  a  member  of  this  convention  I  can- 
not do  it. 

With  reference  to  the  other  section,  the  gen 


record,  and  the  arguments  of  every  gentleman. 
The  governor  did  right  in  refusing  to  pardon, 
becau.se  I  never  would  pardon  where  the  jury- 
has  not  done  wrong,  unless  there  were  circum- 
stances which  could  not  come  out  on  trial.  I 
hope  tlie  gentleman  will  withdraw  hi.s  motion. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  remarks  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  may  make  it  necessciry  that  I 
should  say  something  on  the  other  side,  that 
both  sides  of  the  question  may  go  out  together. 
I  had  two  cases,  one  in  Garrard  and  the  other  in 
Madison  county,  in  the  same  year.  The  punish- 
ment in  Garrard  county  was  thirty  nine  lashes, 
and  in  Madison  it  was  hanging,  for  the  same 
identical  offence.  Cases  like  this  occur  every 
year,  andIthink,auniformityof  decisionsshould 
be  had  where  the  penalty  is  life  or  liberty.     I 


,    ,  ,.  .       .     i  have  known  cases  where  the  popular  current  was 

tleman  has  charge  of  the  very  subject  matter,  in  ]  j^gj.  ^n  individual,  and  he  was  condemned, 
the  bill  providing  for  the  appointment  of  minis-  j  ^j^jj^  ^^j^^^^  ^^^.^  j^^^^  acquitted  when  they 
terial  officers,  in  which  he  can  more  appropriate-  j  ^^  ,  ^  ^^^  ^^  ^^  rj-^^  j.  ^^^  ^^  jj^j^  country 
ly  introduce  it.  Another  gentleman  has  charge  I  ^^|  ^^^.^  ^^^^  ^^^  acquitted,  but  the  poor  men 
of  a  bill  for  the  appointment  of  officers  general-  ,  ^^  convicted,  and  sometimes  contrary  to  law, 
ly,  to  which  it  may  be  attached,  but  1  believe  it  j  ,,^^^^1^,  ^^  gratify  popular  prejudice  at  the  time, 
is  unnecessary  to  give   this  power,  for  if  we  do    ^^^^  ^j^^^  they  would  not  have  been  convicted 


not  take  it  away  the  legislature  will  have  it  as  a 
matter  of  course. 

Mr.  HARDIN.    If  this  amendment  comes  in 
at  all,  it  would  be  more  appropriate   in  the  bill 
relating  to   circuit  courts.     The  writ  of  error 
would  be  from  that  court.     But  I  protest  against 
its  cominw  in  any  where.     I  know  the  desidera- 
tum which   the  gentleman  wishes  to  secure;  to 
produce  uniformity  of  decisions  in   relation  to 
criminal  cases.    That  is  what  we  all  desire.   But 
if  you  shall  take  a  writ  of  error  for  all  cases  what 
would  be  the  result?     It  would  be  that  in  case  of 
conviction  a  writ  of  error  would  be  prosecuted 
almost  invariably.      Where   a  man  is  sent  to 
the  penitentiary  or  condemned  tobe  hung  he  will 
take  a  writ  of'error  and  trust  to  the   chapter  of 
accidents  to  have  something  turn  up  in  his  favor. 
I  would  put  the  case  to  my  friend  from  Madison, 
who  has   as  warm   a  heart  as  any  man   1  ever 
knew,  suppose  he  or  I  have  a  son  who  is  a  hot- 
spur of  a  man,  and  he  should  kill  a  man  and  be 
sent  to  the  penitentiary,   all  that  we  were  worth 
would  be  turned  into   a  golden  key  to  turn  the 
lock  of  that  prison.     If  1  were  worth  millions  of 
dollars,  and  a  son  of  mine  was  condemned  to  the 
penitentiary  or  to  be  hung,  every  dollar  should 
go  if  necessary  to  unlock  that  door.     During  the 
time  the  writof  error  was  pending  in  the  court  of 
appeals  it  would  take  a  strong  guard  to  keep  him, 
because  all  I  had   and  nearly  every  friend  I  had 
would  aid  in   getting  him  out.     If  the  guard 
should  succeed  in  keeping  him  it  would  be  at  an 
enormous  expense. 

During  the  time  that  the  unfortunate  Mr.  Ba- 
kerwas  confined  in  Clay  county,  after  the  gov- 
ernor had  respited  him,  there  was  some  alarm  lest 
he  would  break  out,  or  be  rescued,  and  the  guard 
in  that  case  cost  between  five  and  six  thousand 
dollars.  I  will  take  occasion  to  remark  that  if 
the  governor  in  that  case  was  blameable  for 
any  Siing  it  was  for  granting  the  respit*.  He 
and  I,  after  consulting  over  and  over,  heart- 
ly  concurred  that  a  pardon  ought  not  to  be 


ley 

if  there  had  been  a  settled,  uniform  code  through- 
out this  commonwealth.  I  have  seen  this,  aad 
I  do  know  that  the  penal  laws  are  not  sufficient- 
ly explicit,  and  that  life  is  not  sufficiently  se- 
cure. The  hotspurs  of  the  country  are  going  at 
large,  and  too  often  public  sympathy  is  in  favor 
of  the  criminal.  It  is  a  mistaken  sympathy  in 
their  favor.  I  think,  we  ought  also  to  do  away 
with  the  practice  of  carrying  concealed  weapons. 
We  ought  to  do  every  thing  we  can  to  secure  life 
and  property,  and  punish  the  great  of  the  land 
when  they  are  guilty,  and  on  the  other  hand  se- 
cure the  poor  and  'the  weak  against  the  im- 
proper current  of  public  opinion,  and  get  the 
best  talents  of  the  country  to  sustain  and  pro- 
tect them.  This  right  of  appeal  is  allowed  un- 
der the  federal  government.  If  a  man  is  con- 
victed in  California,  he  can  appeal  to  the  seat  of 
government.  This  is  allowed  in  Great  Britain, 
where  they  hang  a  man  with  as  little  compunc- 
tion as  if  he  were  a  dog;  still  they  give  the 
right  of  a  decision  by  the  highest  court.  But 
as  some  who  are  friendly  to  the  proposition,' 
think  it  will  be  better  to  'bring  it  in  in  another 
place,  I  will  withdraw  the  first  section  for  the 
present,  but  I  shall  ask  for  a  vote  on  the  second. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  §o  heart  and  hand  with 
the  gentleman  against  this  practice  of  carrying 
concealed  weapons,  and  I  will  go  further  to  put 
something  into  the  constitution  against  duelling, 
to  prevent  these  b.irbarous  murders.  I  drew 
the  duelling  law  of  1811.  Such  were  the  sen- 
timento  I  then  had  and  I  have  them  still.  Hang- 
ing a  man  is  not  to  reform  him,  but  to  deter 
others.  When  vou  put  a  man  in  the  penitentiary, 
he  mav  reform,"but  if  he  is  sent  there  when  con- 
demned to  be  hung,  in  the  pendency  of  the  ap- 
peal, attempts  to  get  him  out  will  be  made,  and 
a  guard  will  have  to  attend  around  the  prison. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  adoption 
of  the  section  proposed  by  Mr.  Turner,  and  it 
was  rejected. 


fi54 


CI&OLIT  couaTS. 
The  convention  continued  the  consiJeraticn  of 
the  report  of  the  joint  eomniittee  of  thirty,  pro- 
cfioding  with  the  article  concerning  circuit  courts 
which  was  next  in  order. 

The  first,  second,  andthird  sections  were  adopt- 
ed, without  amendment  as  follows: 

"Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
in  this  commonwealth,  a  circuit  cpurt." 

"Sec.  2.  The  jurisdiction  of  said  courts  shall 
be,  and  remain  a!s  now  established,  hereby  giv- 
ing to  the  general  assembly  the  power  to  cliange 
or  alter  it." 

"  Sec.  3.  The  right  to  take  an  appeal  or  sue 
out  a  writ  of  error  to  the  court  of  appeals,  is 
hereby  given,  in  the  same  manner  and  to  the 
same  extent,  as  it  now  exists,  giving  to  the 
general  assembly  the  power  to  change,  alter,  or 
modify,  said  right." 

The  fourth  section  was  read  as  follows: 
"Sec.  4.  At  the  first  session  of  the  general  as- 
sembly after  this  constitution  shall  go  into  effect, 
they  shall  divide  the  state  into  twelve  judicial 
districts,  having  due  regard  to  business,  terri- 
tory, and  population:  Provided,  That  no  county 
shall  be  divided." 

Mr.  HARDIN".  It  may  be  necessary  that 
some  explanation  should  be  given  of  that  section. 
The  convention  will  perceive  that  seven  parts 
out  of  nineteen  of  the  Business  will  be  added  to 
the  labors  of  the  judges. 

We  have  nineteen  judges  now  and  we  propose 
to  have  but  twelve,  which  will  increase  the 
business  seven  parts  out  of  nineteen.  It  was  be- 
lieved by  the  committee  that  we  had  more 
judges  than  were  necessary,  and  I  am  satisfied 
that  two  or  three  districts  Avere  created  to  get 
some  troublesome  men  out  of  the  legislature.  It 
would  be  ill-natured  to  mention  names,  but  I 
believe  this  was  the  fact.  I  have  made  the  best 
estimate  I  could,  and  I  have  had  opportunities  to 
judge.  My  practice  during  forty  three  years, 
has  been  principally  in  the  circuit  courts.  I 
come  to  the  court  of  appeals  occasionally  by 
way  of  self-defence,  but  I  come  with  as  few 
cases  as  po.ssible.  I  reckon  there  is  not  a  man 
more  intimate  with  the  operations  of  the  circuit 
courts  of  Kentucky  than  I  am,  and  there  will 
not  be  for  fifty  years  to  come.  When  I  am  dead 
and  gone,  there  will  be  no  other  as  well  acquain- 
ted with  them. 

The  business  of  the  circuit  courts  now  oc- 
cupies from  seventy  five  to  ninety  juridicial  days. 
It  will  not,  perhaps,  go  over  ninety,  nor  fall  be- 
low seventy  five  or  eighty.  We  know  very  well 
that  the  salary  of  the  circuit  judge,  which  is 
$1200,  will  scarcely  command  the  second  rate 
talents  at  the  bar,  and  our  system  has  run  down 
on  that  account,  and  got  into  disrepute.  The  ob- 
ject of  the  committee  was  to  get  tne  best  talents 
which  the  bar  could  furnish  and  to  give  them 
employment  equal  to  140  or  150  days  in  a  year. 
Here  is  my  friend  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner) 
and  myself,  and  I  could  name  many  others 
.■who  are  on  the  down  hill  of  life,  and  yet  take 
the  labor  in  our  offices  and  in  riding  from  court 
to  court  in  which  we  are  employe*!  nearly  300 
days  in  the  year.  I  think,  therefore,  the  circuit 
judge  can  labor  140  or  150  days  and    do    his 


work  well;  and  I  believe  tliat  the  best  lawyers  in 
Kentucky  will  accept  tlie  office. 

I  will  explain  the  plan  of  the  circuit  court  bill. 
Itis  that  there  shall  be  aminimumsalaryof  $1600 
in  order  to  command  the  best  talents.  On  that 
subject  we  voted  in  the  committee,  beginning  at 
$2,000  and  finally  settling  on  this  as  a  minimum 
salary,  and  the  whole  plan  of  the  bill  will  fail, 
and  be  brought  into  disrepute,  unless  we  carry 
the  whole  plan  of  the  committee  into  effect.  We 
intend  tliat  there  shall  be  twelve  districts,  and 
to  add  seven  parts  outof  twelve  more  tothe  judge. 
We  intend  to  give  $1,600  salary,  and  unless  you 
will  say  to  the  legislature  thatthey  sliall  not  come 
lower  than  $1,600  you  had  better  strike  out 
twelve  and  put  in  nineteen. 

Why  do  I  say  it  ?  Because  we  want  the  best 
talent^,  and  there  are  many  lawyers  of  high  pri- 
vate character,  who  would  rather  take  an  office 
worth  ,f  1,600  from  their  fellow  citizens  than  to 
take  one  Avorth  $16,000  under  the  government. 
It  is  a  matter  of  feeling,  and  of  pride,  because 
he  stands  high  in  the  opinion  of  his  neighbors. 
I  believe  $1,600  will  bring  this  talent,  f  know 
it  Avill  not  do  to  leave  this  to  the  legislature,  for 
the  members  will  hunt  popularity  at  home,  by 
reducing  salaries. 

In  the  memorable  controversy  between  the  old 
and  new  courts,  we  among  tfie  old  court  party 
saw  that  the  new  court  party  were  endeavoring 
to  court  popularity,  by  reducing  the  salaries, 
and  Ave  determined  to  out  Herod  them.  We 
reduced  them  and  cut  them  down  in  a  most 
scandalous  manner.  We  had  to  do  it  because 
we  Avere  determined  not  to  be  beat  by  them. 

I  hope  the  salaries  Avill  be  fixed  at  a  minimum 
of  $1,600,  and  if  there  are  tAA^elve  judges,  this 
will  save  to  the  state  ,$5,700.  The  circuit  court 
system  now  costs  $28,000  and  over.  The  plan 
we  propose  will  reduce  the  judges  seven  parts 
out  of  nineteen,  and  will  add  to  the  salaries  only 
one  fourth.  There  Avill  also  be  seven  attorney- 
ships to  be  cut  down.  Just  take  it  then  as  it  is 
and  restore  the  minimum  and  I  think  it  Avill  be 
acceptable  to  the  people  every  where. 

I  will  remark  once  more,  give  us  a  good  judi- 
ciary, and  if  we  can  make  it  cheaper  than  the 
old  system,  it  will  Avin  its  way  with  the  body  of 
the  people  at  large.  This  constitution  has  to  go 
thi-ough  a  trial.  There  Avill  be  thousands  and 
tens  of  thousands  of  objections  to  every  thing. 
Let  us  make  it  good,  and  at  the  same  time  invite 
llie  favor  of  the  people,  by  making  it  as  economi-  . 
cal  as  possible. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  supposed  the  subject  of 
the  circuit  courts  was  a  subject  of  compromise 
as  well  as  that  of  the  court  of  appeals,  and  I 
was  astonished  to  hear  tlie  chairman  of  tlie  com- 
mittee on  the  circuit  court  urges  this  minimum. 
I  am  disposed  to  adopt  the  section  as  it  stands. 
As  it  has  been  left  out  of  the  provisions  in  the 
reporton  the  court  of  appeals,  I  think  it  should 
be  left  out  here.  It  may  be  a  clog  to  the  consti- 
tution. I  am  willing  to  leave  it  to  the  legislature, 
fori  believe  they  will  give  ample  salaries. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  If  that  Avas  understood  to  be 
a  compromise  in  the  committee,  I  will  stand  to  it 
till  I  die.     But  I  think  it  Avas  not. 

Mr.  BALLINGER.  I  do  not  believe  tliat  the 
committee  have  chosen  a  sufficient  number  of 
circuit  judges  to  transact  tlip  business  of  the  com- 


nionwealth.  Aud  1  think  it  will  be  foUhd,  that 
there  is  a  great  disproportion  between  the  labor 
they  are  required  to  perform,  aud  the  coinpensa- 
tion  to  be  allowed  them.  I  am  willing  to  give 
them  a  salary  that  will  compensate  them  for 
their  labor,  tune,  and  the  talents  reqiisite  to  the 
efficient  discharge  of  the  onerous  auties  of  their 
responsible  office.  This  matter  was  much  dis- 
cussed in  the  county  1  have  the  honor  to  repre- 
sent, during  the  last  summer,  and  whilst  the 
canvass  was  going  on,  for  a  delegate  to  this  con- 
vention. The  opinion  of  the  people,  as  there 
manifested,  was,  that  thev  should  have  the  elec- 
tion of  all  the  judges,  and  all  the  other  officers 
that  heretofore  have  been  appointed.  But,  whilst 
they  entertained  this  opinion,  they  were,  so  far 
as  respects  the  judges,  for  selecting  men  of  the 
highest  talents  to  tlischarge  the  duties  imposed 
upon  them,  and  paying  them  liberally.  Xow, 
wherever  it  is  a  mere  matter  of  expediency,  and 
I  know  what  my  constituents  ask,  I  will  endeavor 
to  carry  out  their  wishes ;  but  when  I  do  not 
know  what  their  opinions  are  on  particular  sub- 
jects, I  shall  do  what  I  consider  to  be  right,  and 
not  suffer  my  action  to  be  controlled  or  influenc- 
ed by  what  I  believe  personal  consequences  to 
myself.  We  have  here  appointed  four  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  and  what  is  the  amount  of 
the  labor  they  are  to  perform  during  the  year  ? 
In  1848,  there  were  575  cases :  divide  that  among 
four,  and  it  gives  143?^^  cases  to  eacli  judge. 

The  judges  of  the  circuit  couits  will  have  to 
decide  17,312  cases,  excluding  from  the  calcula- 
tion the  Louisville  chancery  court.  So  that 
twelve  judges  will  have  over  1440  cases  each: 
and  besides,  they  have  a  large  district  to  travel 
over,  and  their  physical  labor  and  expenses  are 
greater  than  those  of  the  judges  of  the  court  of 
appeals.  The  judge  who  presides  im  the  dis- 
trict where  I  live,  although  an  old  man,  is  of 
an  iron  constitution,  and  performs  all  of  his 
duties  with  despatch.  He  remains  in  the 
court  house  from  eight  o'clock  in  the  morning 
till  sundown,  and  that,  too,  frequently  with- 
out disposing  of  all  the  business  before  the 
court.  It  will  be  found  difficult  for  twelve 
judges  to  discharge  the  duties  imposed  upon 
them,  therefore  I  would  move  to  strike  out 
"twelve"  and  insert  fourteen.  That  will  be  few 
enough  to  dispose  of  the  busine.ss  that  will  come 
before  them.  Heretofore  the  judges  have  been 
unable  to  dispose  of  all  the  cases  that  came  be- 
fore them,  and  citizens  have  petitioned  the  legis- 
lature, year  after  year, and  from  time  to  time,  for 
the  erection  of  judicial  <listricts.  According  to 
the  report  before  the  convention,  it  allows  the 
legislature  the  power  every  fourth  year  to  create 
additional  judges  and  another  judicial  district, 
bnt  I  do  not  believe  that  twelve  circuit  court 
judges  are  sufficient  at  this  time,  and  therefore  I 
nave  made  the  motion  that  fourteen  be  the  num- 
ber. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  had  the  honor  to 
be  appointed  a  member  of  the  circuit  court  com- 
mittee, and  of  course  that  appointment  contin- 
ued over  to  the  committee  of  thirty.  This  ques- 
tion of  limiting  the  number  of  circuit  judges 
was  considered  with  uncommon  attention  on 
the  part  of  the  committee.  As  much  informa- 
tion as  could  be  obtained  from  lawyers — for  I 
am  not  a  practicing  lawyer — we  had  before  us. 


One  of  the  great  faults  of  the  present  systettt 
was  considered  to  be  the  number  of  circuit  court 
judges,  amounting  to  nineteen.  Our  inquiries 
led  us  to  the  conclusion  that  many  of  the  nine- 
teen judges  did  not  occupy  more  than  half  the 
juridical  days  allowed  tnem.  We  considered 
this  matter  with  much  deliberation,  aud  conclu- 
ded that  by  reducing  the  number  of  judges  we 
would  really  increa.se  the  efficiency  of  the  cir- 
cuit corps;  and  after  getting  all  the  information 
we  could,  we  concluded  that  twelve  could  do 
the  business  of  the  commonwealth,  as  the  pop- 
ulation and  business  now  stands,  and  if  twelve 
could  do  it,  the  treiisury  would  be  able  to  pay 
them  easier  than  an  increased  number.  With  a 
view  of  increasing  their  efficiency  and  giving 
them  an  increased  salary  we  reduced  the  num- 
ber to  twelve,  still  giving  power  to  the  legisla- 
ture to  increase  the  number  to  sixteen.  We  fixed 
the  salary  at  a  minimum  of  $1600.  We  came  to 
that  result  from  making  the  calculation  that  We 
could  well  aflford  to  pay  the  increased  salary, 
when  we  decreased  the  number  of  judges,  and 
we  concluded  that  by  paying  $1600,  we  could 
command  the  best  talent.  Sonie  of  us  consid- 
ered the  fact  that  we  were  making  an  experi- 
ment; that  we  were  making  an  elective  judiciary; 
and,  in  order  to  have  a  fair  trial,  we  should  com- 
mand the  best  abilities  of  the  state  to  carry  it 
out  before  the  people.  As  an  inducement  to  get 
this  talent,  we  put  it  in  the  power  of  the  treasury 
of  the  country  to  pay  them  well  for  their  ser- 
vices. 

These  reasons  resulted  in  the  report  of  the  cir- 
cuit court  committee.  We  threw  that  report  be- 
fore the  house,  and  the  reports  of  the  appellate 
and  county  courts  both.  They  created  much 
debate  with  various  opinions,  and  the  wisdom 
of  this  house  appointed  a  coiumittee  of  thirty 
aud  enjoined  on  them  to  make  a  report.  We 
went  into  that  committee  to  expre-ss  the  mean- 
ing of  this  house  and  compromise  our  own  cher- 
ished feelings  and  present  a  report  which  should 
be  acceptable  to  the  house. 

For  one,  I  will  say,  it  does  not  present  all  my 
favorite  views  upon  the  subject  of  a  judicial 
structure.  But  the  favorite  views  which  I  had, 
I  saw  were  not  the  views  of  this  house,  and  it 
was  my  duty,  if  I  would  compromise,  to  give 
up  those  views  which  I  still  consider  correct,  in 
order  to  produce  peace  and  harmony.  And  at 
the  altar  of  peace  I  did  agree  to  sacrifice  my 
views  to  a  very  great  extent,  and  now  this  re- 
port is  made  with  the  proposition  for  twelve 
judges  in  it,  which  meets  my  hearty  approval. 
This,  with  the  mininmm  proposed, embraced  two 
of  my  favorite  views,  and  if  you  had  added  inelli- 
gibifity,  these  would  have  t'onstituted  the  whole 
of  the  relics  of  my  view  of  the  circuit  court  tri- 
bunal. 

It  must  be  conceded,  so  far  as  I  can  gather  the 
opinions  of  practical  lawyers,  that  twelve  cir- 
cuit judges  can  now  do  the  business.  By  reduc- 
ing the  number  to  twelve  and  increasing  the  sal- 
ary, you  increase  the  talent  and  efficiency.  For 
depend  upon  it,  talent  is  to  be  bought.  It  is  to 
be  called  from  the  bar  not  only  by  money,  but 
by  honor.  When  you  diffuse  this  honor,  it  in 
weakened  to  a  great  extent,  and  when  you  dif- 
fuse the  pay,  the  motive  for  labor  is  weakened. 
The  two  ideas  are  both  met  by  reducing  tha 


656 


number  of  judges.  Give  them  such  a  salary 
that  they  may  have  full  command  of  their  time, 
and  you  increase  their  efficiency,  ^hich  efficien- 
cy you  cannot  have  without  talent.  If  I  had  my 
way,  I  should  insist  on  the  increase  of  the  sala- 
ry to  $1600.  My  knowledge  is  limited  on  the 
subject,  but  my  observation  induces  me  to  be- 
lieve that  in  a  great  majority  of  the  circuit 
courts,  one  half  of  the  juridical  days  are  not 
employed.  Just  increase  the  salary  and  make 
them  fill  out  the  term  of  juridical  employment, 
and  you  gain  for  the  people  that  which  they 
sent  us  to  confer  upon  them,  good  judges,  labo- 
rious, industrious,  well  paid,  and,  if  it  is  not 
offensive  to  this  house,  dignified. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  did  not  originally  belong 
to  the  circuit  court  committee,  but  as  a  member 
of  the  court  of  appeals  committee  I  became  one 
of  the  committee  of  thirty.  Before  the  large 
committee  met,  1  had  not  made  any  calculation 
as  to  what  the  necessary  labors  of  the  circuit 
judges  would  be.  However,  inasmuch  as  that 
report  was  laid  before  the  committee,  of  which  I 
was  a  member,  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  make  a 
calculation  to  ascertain  what  amount  of  labor 
would  be  required  of  each  judge  that  the  busi- 
ness of  the  state  might  be  well  done.  I  ac- 
knowledge I  am  one  of  those  who  are  in  favor 
ot  paying  the  judges  liberal  salaries,  but  at  the 
same  time  I  would  give  them  plenty  of  employ- 
ment, and  their  salaries  should  much  depend 
upon  the  amount  of  their  labors.  I  became  sat- 
isfied, as  I  went  on  with  the  investigation,  that 
twelve  circuit  judges  could  do,  and  convenient- 
ly too,  all  the  business  that  legitimately  comes 
before  these  courts.  The  gentleman  from  Lin- 
coln remarked  that  the  judges  of  the  court  of 
appeals  have  only  five  hundred  and  seventy  five 
cases  to  determine  annually,  which  he  has  been 

{)leased  to  divide  by  four,  because  there  are  to  be 
our  judges,  as  though  each  judge  had  not  to  be 
consulted  as  to  the  determination  of  each  case 
and  to  agree  as  to  the  proper  judgment  to  be 
rendered.  Although  but  one  judge  writes  the 
opinion,  still  they  have  all  to  understand  the 
merits  of  tlie  case,  and  the  whole  five  hundred 
and  seventy  five  cases  have  to  be  understood  by 
the  whole  four  judges.  But  he  says  there  were 
■upwards  of  seventeen  thousand  cases  institu- 
ted in  the  circuit  courts  during  the  past 
year.  This  is  true,  and  according  to  my  calcu- 
lation, one  thousand  four  hundred  and  forty 
cases  will  be  the  average  for  each  judge,  assum- 
ing there  will  be  twelve  judges — but  does  not 
the  gentleman  know  that  something  like  one 
third,  or  perhaps  one  half,  are  generally  unde- 
fended, such  as  actions  upon  plain  notes,  and 
small  presentments,  as  for  Sabbath  breaking, 
swearing,  <fec.?  Does  he  not  know  further,  that 
generally  speaking,  it  is  our  most  important 
cases  which  are  taken  from  the  circuit  court  to 
the  court  of  appeals — and  of  course  they  are  the 
most  difficult  and  require  the  most  investiga- 
tion? We  uee  there  are  about  one  thousand  four 
hundred  and  forty  cases,  including  the  common 
law,  chancery,  and  penal,  or  criminal  prosecu- 
tions, to  be  disposed  of  by  twelve  judges.  Now, 
let  us  see  if  twelve  cannot  do  that  business,  I 
bad  some  hesitation  about  it.  because  an  old  and 
experienced  lawyer,  with  whom  I  conversed, 
uid  who  hati  done  a  great  deal  of  business,  was 


of  opinion  it  would  not  do.  Let  us  examine 
this  matter.  I  have,diyided  the  state  into  twelve 
districts,  not  that  I  design  to  offer  any  proposi- 
tion so  to  divide  the  state  in  the  constitution,  but 
simply  as  a  matter  of  experiment,  that  gentle- 
men may  reflect  whether  the  work  of  each  dis- 
trict cannot  be  conveniently  done  by  one  judge. 
The  1st  district  embraces  fourteen  counties,  and 
the  9th  embraces  thirteen.  These  are  the  heavi- 
est districts  because  of  the  territory,  but  there  is 
less  business  in  each  than  any  other  of  the  nine. 

The  1st  district  embraces  the  counties  of 
Whitley,  Laurel,  Knox,  Harlan,  Rockcastle, 
Owsley,  Clay,  Breathitt,  Perry,  Letcher,  Pike, 
Floyd,  Johnson,  and  Morgan.  The  appear- 
ances in  these  counties  amounted  last  year 
to  only  about  one  thousand  one  hundred  and 
forty,  which  number  is  about  three  hundred 
under  the  avera^re  for  each  circuit. 

Permit  me,  Mr.  President,  again  to  remark 
that  in  naming  the  counties  to  compose  the 
district,  it  is  not  by  any  means  designed  to 
be  incorporated  into  the  constitution,  but  to 
satisfy  gentlemen  that  twelve  judges  can  do 
the  business. 

The  2d  district  would  include  Lawrence, 
Carter,  Greenup,  Lewis,  Fleming,  Bath,  Mont- 
gomery, and  Clarke,  which  hacf  one  thousand 
four  hundred  and  three  appearances,  being  thirty 
seven  less  than  the  average.  I  know  one  judge 
can  do  all  the  business  in  this  district. 

Well,  the  next  district  had  one  thousand  four 
hundred  and  ninety  five  appearances,  and  em- 
braces Mason,  Nicholas,  Bourbon,  Harrison, 
Bracken,  Pendleton,  and  Campbell,  and  is  a 
very  compact  district,  and  not  too  much  for  one 

The  4th  district  is  composed  of  Fayette,  Scott, 
Franklin.  Anderson,  Woodford,  and  Jessamine, 
with  one  thousand  four  hundred  and  eighty  two 
appearances. 

If  we  allow  three  weeks  to  Fayette,  two  to 
Scott,  two  to  Franklin,  two  to  Anderson,  two  to 
Woodford,  and  two  to  Jessamine,  there  will  be 
but  thirteen  weeks  at  each  term,  making  twenty 
six  in  the  year. 

The  5th  district  embraces  Madison,  Estill, 
Garrard,  Lincoln,  Pulaski,  Boyle,  and  Mercer, 
with  one  thousand  four  hundred  and  eleven  ap- 
pearances; and  if  two  weeks  be  given  to  each 
county  at  each  term,  there  will  be  only  twenty 
eight  weeks  labor  in  the  year. 

The  6th  district  embraces  Kenton,  Boone, 
Gallatin,  Carroll,  Trimble,  Henry,  Owen,  and 
Grant,  which  has  one  thousand  four  hundred 
and  six  appearances,  and  is  but  little  more  labor 
than  judge  Pryor  now  has.  The  business  of  this 
district  would  not  require  more  than  twenty  six 
weeks  of  labor  in  the  year. 

The  7th  district  embraces  Shelby,  Spencer, 
Jefferson,  and  Oldham,  with  one  thousand  four 
hundred  and  seventeen  appearances.  Allow 
Jefferson  ten  weeks  at  each  term,  and  yet  the 
business  for  the  whole  circuit  would  not  occupy 
more  than  twenty  eight  weeks  in  the  year. 

TheSlh  district  is  Nelson,  Washington,  Mari- 
on, Meade,  Bullitt,  Larue,  Hardin,  and  Breckin- 
ridge, with  one  thousand  four  hundred  and 
ninety  one  appearances.  This  district  might  re- 
quire twenty  eight  or  thirty  weeks  annually,  but 
not  morc> 


657 


The  9th  district  is  composed  of  "Wayne,  Rus- 
sell, Adair,  Cumberland,  Casey,  Clinton,  Taylor, 
Green,  Barren,  Hart,  Edmonson,  Monroe,  and 
Allen,  with  one  thousand  three  hundred  and 
sixty  nine  appearances.  This,  like  the  first  dis- 
trict, has  under  one  thousand  four  hundred  ap- 
pearances, but  has  a  large  territory. 

It  will  appear  that  except  the  first  and  the 
ninth  districts,  all  the  others  have  over  07ie 
thous.ind  four  hundred  appearances,  and  under 
one  thousand  five  hundrea  except  the  twelfth, 
which  has  one  thousand  five  hundred  and  seven- 
ty four,  and  embraces  Caldwell,  Livingston,  Me- 
Cracken,  Marshall,  Calloway,  Graves,  Ballard, 
Hickman  and  Fulton. 

The  tenth  district  embraces  Hancock,  Gray- 
son, Butler,  Muhlenburg,  Ohio,  Daviess,  Hen- 
derson, Union,  Hopkins,  and  Crittenden,  which 
had  one  thousand  four  hundred  and  seventy 
seven  appearances,  and  is  a  district  requiring 
as  much  labor  as  any  other;  but,  yet  lawyers 
from  that  district  say  the  business  can  be  well 
done,  at  the  most,  in  thirty  two  weeks. 

The  eleventh  district  embraces  Warren,  Simp- 
son, Logan,  Todd,  Christian,  and  Trigg,  with 
one  thousand  four  hundred  and  forty  four 
appearances,  and  the  business  in  this  dis- 
trict can  be  well  done  in  twenty  eight  weeks. 

As  at  present  laid  off,  the  districts  are  very 
unequal — for  instance,  in  the  eighth  district 
there  were  only  three  hundred  and  seventy 
five  appearances;  a  few  more  than  there  were  in 
the  county  of  Harrison,  fewer  than  in  the  coun- 
ty of  Fayette,  and  fewer  than  in  the  county  of 
Mason,  or  the  county  of  Christian. 

The  eighteenth  circuit  was  taken  from  the 
eighth,  and  it  was  said,  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
viding a  place  for  one  who  was  in  the  way  of  oth- 
ers. The  eighteenth  district  had  but  six  hun- 
dj"ed  and  sixty  eight  appearances,  and  to  unite 
it  and  and  the  eighth  together  as  they  formerly 
were,  they  had  but  one  thousand  and  forty 
three.  This  shows  that  the  districts  should  be 
greatly  reduced  in  number. 

The  twelfth  district  is  the  largest,  but  it 
must  necessarily  have  all  the  counties  south- 
west of  the  Tennessee  river  in  it,  and  also 
Caldwell  county.  With  these  counties  it  had 
less  business  than  the  tenth  district  which  ad- 
joins it;  and,  of  course  the  county  of  Living- 
ston has  to  be  united  with  the  twelfth,  and  thus 
constituted,  it  is  the  heaviest  district  in  the 
number  of  appearances,  though,  perhaps,  will 
not  require  more  labor  than  the  tenth.  I  have 
been  assured  that  the  business  of  this  district 
can  be  conveniently  done  by  one  judge.  It  will 
be  seen  that  the  nineteenth  district,  which  was 
the  last  one  made,  has  as  much  business  nearly, 
as  both   the  eighth   and    eighteenth   together. 

In  my  judgment,  as  far  as  I  have  been  able  to 
learn  of  the  business  done,  and  likely  to  be 
done,  twelve  judges  will  be  amply  sufiicient.  I 
know  that  this  is  givir>g  a  great  deal  more  labor 
to  the  judges  than  they  now  have,  and  some 
gentlemen  think  it  is  too  much.  They,  how- 
ever, should  remember  that  the  judges  now  are 
not  occupied  half  their  time  in  judicial  capaci- 
ty, and  tliey  cannot  practice  at  the  bar  whilst  in 
the  receipt  of  a  salary.  I  would  say  to  a  judge, 
I  will  give  you  more  salary,  but  I  intend  to  give 
you  more  work  to  do.  In  the  very  largest  dis- 
83 


trict  yon  can  lay  off,  you  cannot  have  more  than 
thirty  or  thirty  five  juridical  weeks.  Many  would 
like  to  see  a  minimum  salary  inserted  in  the 
constitution.  I  think,  however,  that  when  the 
legislature  is  satisfied  of  there  being  more  labor, 
to  be  performed,  they  will  be  disposed  to  pay 
for  it.  I  believe  that  by  netting  good  judges, 
and  giving  them  much  to  do,  they  will  do  their 
work  well.  They  will  feel  there  is  more  obli- 
gation resting  upon  them,  as  they  receive  their 
appointments  direct  from  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple. I  suppose  that  every  judge  will  feel  some 
pride  in  having  been  selected  by  the  people  to 
administer  justice  among  them.  They  can  do 
all  the  work  well,  and  easily,  and  comfortably. 
The  following  are  the  tables  which  were  used 
by  Mr.  Apperson  during  his  speech. 

TWELVE  CIRCUIT    COURT  DISTRICTS. 


FIKST  DISTRICT. 


'No.  Cases. 


Whitley, 

Laurel, 

Knox, 

Harlan, 

Rockcastle, 

Owsley, 

Clay, 

Breathitt, 

Perry, 

Letcher, 

Pike, 

Floyd, 

Johnson, 

Morgan, 


SECOND   DISTRICT. 


Lawrence, 

Carter, 

Greenup, 

Lewis, 

Fleming, 

Bath, 

Montgomery, 

Clarke, 


THIRD    DISTRICT. 


Mason, 

Nicholas, 

Harrison, 

Bracken, 

Bourbon, 

Pendleton, 

Campbell, 


Fayette, 

Scott, 

Franklin, 

Anderson, 

Woodford, 

Jessamine, 


FOCBTH  DISTRICT. 


1140 


1403 


1495 


1482 


658 


FIFTH  DI3TEICT. 


fc.  Estill, 

s.  Madison, 

•i  Garrard, 

j<  Lincoln, 

Pulaski, 

Boyle, 

Mercer, 


t,   Kenton, 
^-^  Boone, 
k..  Gallatin, 
■  Carroll, 
Trimble, 
Henry, 
Owen, 
Grant, 


Shelby, 
Spencer, 
Jefferson, 
Oldham, 


SIXTH  DTSTBICT. 


SEVENTH  DISTRICT. 


EIOHTH  DISTEICT. 


Nelson, 
.  Washington, 
Marion, 
Meade, 
Bullitt, 
Larue, 
Hardin, 
Breckinridge, 


NINTH    DISraiCT. 


Wayne, 

Russell, 

Adair, 

Cumberland, 

Casey, 

Clinton, 

Taylor, 

Green, 

Barren, 

Hart, 

Edmondson, 

Monroe, 

Allen, 


TENTH    DISTRICT. 


Hancock, 
Grayson, 
:  Butler, 
Muhlenburg, 
Ohio, 
Daviess, 
Henderson, 


No.  Cases 

-  145  ' 

-  215 

-  237 

-  163 

-  ]71 

-  134 

-  346 

1411 

No.  Cases. 

-  363 

-  142 

63 

89 
78 

-  225 

-  230 

-  216 

1406 

No.  Cases. 

-  296 

77 

-  886 

-  158 

1417 

No,  Cases, 

-  203 

-  311 

-  244 

-  138 

-  158 

-  113 

-  199 

-  125 

1491 

No.  Cases, 

-  113 

60 
97 

-  105 

94 
63 
40 

-  200 

-  279 

85 
83 
50 

-  100 

1369 

No.  Cases. 

63 
64 
73 

-  171 

-  148 

-  180 
•   188 


Union, 

Hopkins, 

Crittenden, 


Warren, 

Simpson, 

Logan, 

Todd, 

Christian, 

Trigg, 


195 

205 
190 

1477 


ELEVF.NTH  DISTRICT. 


1444 


TWELFTH  DISTRICT. 


Caldwell, 

Livingston, 

McCracken, 

Ballard, 

Graves, 

Calloway, 

Marshall, 

Hickman, 

Fulton, 


1574 


IN'umber  of  suits  and  prosecutions  in  nineteen 
circuit  court  districts,  to-wit: 


District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 
District, 


N"o. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 


1, 

2, 
3, 
4, 
5, 
6, 
7, 
8, 
9. 


No.  10, 
No.  11, 
No.  12, 
No.  13, 
No.  14, 
No.  15, 
No.  16, 
No.  17, 
No.  18, 
No.  19, 


Chancery, 

245 
151 

267 
278 

39 
251 
228 

82 
197 
296 
284 
225 
287 
199 
106 
290 
309 
135 
114 


Total. 


3,983  10,175     3,104   17,262 


Mr.  NUTTALL.  It  was  a  wise  stroke  of 
policy  to  submit  these  three  propositions  for  a 
judiciary  system  to  a  joint  committee  for  the 
purpose  of  compromise  and  concession,  and  it 
IS  my  decided  opinion  that  unless  there  is  an 
obvious  necessity,  the  convention  should  not 
depart  from  the  report  of  that  committee.  Not 
that  I  regard  it,  as  of  itself,  binding  on  the  con- 
veation,  but  because  it  is  a  matter  of  concession 
and  compromise  on  which  extremes  have  met 
and  united.  It  is  upon  this  ground  that  all  gov- 
ernments have  been  framed,  and  it  is  upon  this 
ground  that  I  shall  support  the  report  of  the 
committee.  I  am  glad  also  to  hear  the  confes- 
sion of  my  venerable  friend  from  Nelson,  (Mr. 


669 


Hardin,)  for  'an  open  confession  is  good  for  the 
soul;'  thus  saith  the  Lord.  I  will  not  say  of 
him,  that  in  the  times  to  which  I  allude,  he 
"magnum  partem  vidit  et  magna  para  fuit;"  but  it 
is  said  in  the  good  book  that — 

"Long  as  the  lamp  holds  out  to  burn, 
The  vilest  sinner  may  return." 

When  the  great  question  "was  agitated  as  to 
the  constitutionality  of  the  reorganizing  act, 
and  of  the  old  court  and  the  new  court,  I  had 
the  honor  of  a  seat  in  the  legislature,  and  I 
recollect  that  tlie  gentleman  himself,  and  the 
party  who  acted  with  him,  went  so  far  as  not 
only  to  break  down  the  new  court,  but  the  old 
court  with  it,  for  they  refused  to  gire  them  a 
salary,  and  with  it  fell  every  prosecuting  attor- 
ney in  Kentucky.  I  went  against  the  whole 
thing,  for  I  was  a  new  court  man,  and  as  long  as 
any  did  stand  up  for  it,  I  was  among  them. 

Well,  for  all  I  know,  we  in  this  body,  as  the 
senior  gentleman  from  !Xelson  says,  are  a  very 
wise  set  of  individuals.  I  have  gone  around  for 
the  last  two  or  three  evenings  for  the  purpose  of 
visiting  the  members,  for  none  of  them  will 
come  and  see  me,  and  I  really  can't  account  for 
it,  and  I  will  venture  to  predict,  as  the  result  of 
my  observation,  that  during  the  last  three  or 
four  nights  in  the  town  of  Frankfort,  there  have 
been  more  figures  made  than  in  the  balance  of 
the  United  States,  for  the  same  length  of  time. 
I  have  never  before  seen  the  same  amount  of 
figures  on  the  face  of  tlie  earth.  I  am  not  much 
at  figures  myself,  never  having  cyphered  further 
than  the  rule  of  three,  and  if  we  are  not  to  comte 
to  a  conclusion  except  through  cyphering,  then  I 
have  no  earthly  chance  at  all.  With  my  friend 
from  Montgomery,  (Mr.  Apperson.)  and  not  him 
alone  either.,  there  is  nothing  in  the  world  that 
cannot  be  done  by  figures.  Is  it  the  court  of 
appeals,  or  the  circuit  courts,  or  the  basis  of 
population  that  is  being  argued?  It  makes  no 
difference,  in  either  case  or  in  whatever  case,  the 
gentleman  is  prepared  with  his  figures,  and  has 
the  matter  all  laid  off  into  districts.  He  re- 
minds me  of  the  doctor  who  was  called  on  by  a 
gentleman  to  see  his  wife,  then  on  a  sick  bed. 
He  called  on  her,  and  drawing  out  his  big 
bottles  prescribed  doses  to  be  given  her,  a  quart 
at  a  time.  Says  the  husband — "See  here,  hoss, 
no  more  of  that."  "Let  me  alone,"  replied  the 
doctor;  "I  only  want  to  throw  her  into  fits,  and 
if  I  can  do  that  she  is  cured,  for  I  am  hell  on 
fits."  So  with  the  gentleman;  if  he  can  only 
throw  the  question  into  figures,  he  will  carry  it 
beyond  a  doubt.     [Laughter.] 

5^ow,  I  am  for  the  twelve  judges,  believing 
that  they  can  do  all  the  work.  We  have  a  very 
excellent  judge  in  my  district,  and  I  believe  he 
can  do  the  business  for  three  or  four  more  coun- 
ties. But  if  their  labors  are  to  be  increased,  I 
should  like  to  see  them  better  paid,  and  I  regret 
that  the  committee  did  not  adopt  the  minimum 
of  $1600  for  their  salaries.  I  want  to  secure 
good  men,  and  do  not  desire  to  see  any  jack- 
legged  lawyers  on  tlie  bench.  Men  sufficiently 
qualified  will  not  leave  their  practice  for  a  less 
salary  than  $1600.  My  idea  of  a  judiciary  is  to 
have  fewerand  better  men, who  will  do  morework 
and  to  pay  them  well  for  it. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  Some  misappieheneion  as 
to  the  amount  of  additional  labor  which  each 


of  the  twelve  circuit  judges  will  have  to  perform, 
in  case  this  provision  is  adopted,  may  grow  out 
of  the  statements  of  gentlemen  on  this  subject. 
The  senior  gentleman  from  Nelson  says,  the  ad- 
ditional labor  will  be  seven -twelfths;  the  gen- 
tleman from  Oldham  corrects  him,  and  says  it  is 
seven-nineteenths,  which  is  right  as  to  the 
amount  of  additional  labor  imposed  upon  the 
twelve,  and  this  gives  the  one-twelfth  of  seven- 
nineteenths  as  the  additional  labor  of  each  of 
the  twelve  judges,  which  is  somewhere  about 
the  one-thirty- fifth  part  of  the  whole  business 
of  our  circuit  courts.  I  am  inclined  to  think 
that  twelve  judges  can  do  the  business,  and  do 
it  well,  if  they  are  adequately  paid,  and  I  shall 
go  tor  the  section,  with  the  understanding  that 
the  9th  section,  which  is  restrictive  of  the  legis- 
lative power  to  create  additional  circuits,  shall 
be  striken  out.  I  live  in  the  same  judicial  cir- 
cuit with  the  gentleman  last  up,  and  concur 
with  bim  fully  in  opinion,  as  to  the  high  quali- 
fications, integrity,  and  business  habits  of  our 
judge.  It  appears  by  the  statements  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Montgomery,  that  the  judicial  dis- 
trict in  which  I  live  contains  as  great  a  number 
of  counties  as  any  other  judicial  district  in  the 
state  save  one,  and  that  the  judge  of  this  dis- 
trict decides  as  many  cases  as  any  other  judge 
in  the  state;  yet  I  am  certain  he  could  pertbrm 
the  additional  labor  of  one  more  county,  and 
this  would  be  his  one-twelfth  of  the  seven- 
nineteenths  to  be  divided,  if  the  labor  of  the 
whole  state  be  equally,  distributed  among  the 
twelve  judges. 

Mr.  GRAT.  I  am  satisfied,  from  my  own 
knowledge,  that  twelve  circuit  judges  will  not 
do  all  the  business  of  the  state.  Even  now,  with 
nineteen  judges,  in  some  of  the  counties,  in 
Washington  for  instance,  I  understand  that  their 
chancei-v  docket  is  so  crowded  that  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  get  a  cause  tried.  Well,  this  evil 
will  certainly  be  increased,  if  we  reduce  the 
number  of  judges  to  twelve.  The  judicial  busi- 
ness of  the  country  is  now,  probably  at  as  low 
an  ebb  as  it  ever  was  in  this  state,  and  in  making 
a  constitution  for  future  years,  we  should  take 
into  consideration  the  possible  increase  of  litiga- 
tion. It  is  only  a  few  years  since  the  popular 
will,  from  the  want  of  facilities  for  the  transac- 
tion of  their  judicial  business,  demanded  the 
increase  of  the  number  of  judicial  districts  to 
eighteen  or  nineteen.  In  the  district  where  I 
reside,  the  business  had  increased  so  that  a  judge 
had  to  be  brought  from  the  northern  section  of 
the  state,  where  there  were  too  many,  in  order  to 
relieve  the  litigants.  And  the  judge  had  only 
about  fifteen  hundred  appearances  there,  when 
this  relief  was  considered  necessary.  I  think, 
therefore,  in  contemplation  of  what  must  be  the 
natural  increase  of  business,  we  should  not  re- 
strict the  number  of  judges  in  the  constitution, 
but  leave  it  to  the  legislature  to  increase  or  de- 
crease it,  as  the  public  necessities  may  require. 
But  if  we  do  fix  the  number,  we  clearly  ought 
not  to  reduce  it  below  fifteen,  for  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  even  at  this  time,  less  than  that  num- 
ber can  get  through  with  the  dockets  in  each 
county  in  Kentucky  Avithout  it,  and  with  but 
twelve  judges  there  would  be  such  an  accumula- 
tion of  chancery  business  on  the  docket,  that 
there  would  soon  be  no  such  thing  as  trying  a 


660 


chancery  cause  at  all.  But  there  vas  another 
portion  of  the  report  even  more  objectionable 
than  this.  It  is,  that  no  matter  what  niaj'^  be  the 
exigencies  of  the  community,  or  the  necessity 
for  the  increase  of  judicial  labor,  the  people 
shall  be  denied  the  right,  through  the  legisla- 
ture, to  increase  the  number  of  judges.  Such,  I 
maintain,  will  be  the  practical  operation  of  the 
section  providing  that  the  number  shall  not  be 
increased  over  sixteen,  until  the  population  of 
the  state  shall  exceed  one  million  and  a  half. 
All  know  that  the  increase  of  litigation  is   not 

r»verned  by  the  increase  of  population.  "Now, 
am  for  restricting  legislation  in  some  degree, 
but  in  a  matter  of  this  kind,  so  vitallr  important 
to  the  best  interests  of  the  people,  t  would  not 
prevent  the  legislature  from  affording  relief  to 
the  people,  when  their  will  and  necessities  may 
demana  it.  I  doubt  whether  sucli  a  restriction 
exists  in  the  constitution  of  any  state  in  this 
Union,  andifitdoes,itcertainlyoughtnotto.  Let 
the  people  decide  the  matter  for  themselves.  If 
they  require  more  judges,  give  them  the  power 
to  create  them,  and  do  not  adopt  a  provision 
which  will  ever  prevent  them  from  increasing 
the  number  above  sixteen.  I  believe  that  num- 
ber to  be  necessary  now,  or  that  it  will  be,  if  the 
business  of  the  state  continues  to  increase  in 
any  thing  like  the  proportion  it  has  heretofore, 
by  the  next  five  or  six  years.  And  what  is  the 
reason — the  apology  offered  fordoing  this?  Why, 
it  is  said  that  if  we  pay  them  well,  the  judges 
will  be  more  industrious  in  the  discharge  of 
their  duties,  and  that  therefore,  a  less  number 
will  be  required.  I  acknowledge  this  in  part, 
but  gentlemen  ha*'e  abandoned  this  ground. 
While  they  refuse  to  the  legislature  the  right  to 
increase  this  number,  they  give  to  that  body  the 
full  power  to  fix  the  salaries.  Gentlemen  should 
not  feel  themselves  bound  or  restrained  by  the 
report  of  the  committee;  but  if  any  amendment 
is  needed  they  should  be  prepared  to  make  it. 
The  people  certainly  ought  to  have  the  right  to 
create  what  tribunals  they  may  need,  and  the 
right  to  pay  their  officers  such  salaries  as  may 
be  proportionate  to  the  labors  they  are  required 
to  perform.  Do  gentlemen  believe  that  these 
salaries  will  ever  be  increased  by  the  legislature, 
to  the  point  that  is  here  suggested  and  desired? 
I  say  they  will  not,  for  the  people  generally,  be- 
lieve that  $1,200  is  as  much  as  the  services  of  a 
nidge  are  worth.  I  should  therefore,  have  pre- 
ferred that  the  salary  should  be  fixed  here.  The 
legislature  did  once,  when  money  was  plenty, 
and  every  thing  high,  increase  the  salaries  to 
$1,500,  but  it  did  not  stand  the  test  of  time,  and 
they  were  again  reduced  to  $1,200.  And  gen- 
tlemen may  certainly  expect  that  if  the  matter  is 
left  to  the  legislature  again,  they  will  be  fixed  at 
not  more  than  that  amount. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Does  the  gentleman  want  to 
make  a  constitution  which  will  prevent  the  peo- 
ple from  reducing  the  salaries  of  their  officers, 
if  they  desire  it* 

•  Mr.  GRAY.  I  have  made  no  motion  of  that 
sort.  I  believe  that  twelve  judges  are  not 
enough,  and  that  if  we  had  more,  their  salaries 
could  not  to  be  increased.  And  I  say  that,  tak- 
ing as  an  index  for  the  future  the  course  hereto- 
fore pursued,  the  salary  will  not  be  above  $1200, 
and  thiit  therefore,  the  purposes  of  those  gentle- 


men, who,  by  fewer  judges  with  higher  salaries, 
expect  to  have  all  the  judicial  business  perform- 
ed, will  not  be  achieved.  I  call  upon  gentlemen 
to  consider  these  facts.  If  there  are  to  be  fewer 
judges  with  more  duties  imposed  on  them,  I 
should  certainly  be  willing  to  increase  their  sal- 
aries; but  I  believe  the  effect  would  be  to  clog 
the  constitution,  and  risk  its  adoption  by  the 
people.  I  hope  we  shall  not  fix  the  number  of 
judges  in  this  constitution,  or  if  the  number 
should  be  retained  there,  I  trust  we  may  strike 
out  the  provision  which  prohibits  the  legislature 
from  increasing  the  numoer. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  In  my  district  the  judge  not 
only  discharges  all  the  duties  imposed  upon 
liim,  but  coufd  do  it  were  they  thrice  as  much. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  the  previous 
question,  and  it  was  ordered. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
strike  out  twelve  and  insert  fourteen,  by  yeas 
and  nays,  on  the  call  of  Mr.  BALLINGER.  and 
the  convention  refused  to  strike  out — yeas  7, 
nays  64,  as  follows  : 

Yeas — .John  L.  Ballinger,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Thomas 
James,  John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner — 7. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  W'illiam  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Ghasteeu 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  El- 
liott, Green  Forrest,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis.  Vin- 
cent S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  David 
Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Roek- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers.  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Philip  Triplett, 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffc,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 64. 

The  fourth  section  was  then  read  and  adopt- 
ed. 

The  fifth  section  was  read,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  5.  The  general  assembly  shall,  at  the 
same  time  that  the  judicial  districts  are  laid  off, 
direct  elections  to  be  held  in  each  district,  to 
elect  a  judge  for  said  district,  and  shall  pre- 
scribe how,  and  in  what  manner,  the  elections 
shall  be  held  and  conducted,  and  how  the  gov- 
ernor shall  be  notified  of  the  result  of  the  elec- 
tion, and  who  has  been  chosen  :  Provided,  That 
such  election  shall  be  held  at  a  different  time 
from  that  at  which  elections  are  held  for  gov- 
nor,  lieutenant  governor,  and  members  of  tJio 
general  assembly." 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  suggested  a  verbal  amend- 
ment, by  which  the  "election  of  circuit  court 
judges  should  be  first  held  on  the  second  Mon- 


661 


daj  of  Mar,  1851,  «s  was  provided  in  the  cases 
of  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals. 

The  amendment  vras  adopted,  as  was  the  sec- 
tion thus  amendeii. 

The  sixth  section  was  then  read  and  adopted, 
as  follows : 

"Sec.  6.  All  persons  qualified  to  vote  for 
members  of  the  general  a.ssembly,  in  each  ais- 
trict,  shall  have  the  right  to  vote  for  judges." 

The  seventh  section  was  read : 

••  Sec.  7.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  as  judge 
of  the  circuit  court  who  is  not  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  a  resident  of  the  district  for 
which  he  may  be  a  candidate,  two  years  next 
preceding  his'  election,  at  least  thirty  years  of 
age,  and  who  has  not  been  a  practicing  lawyer 
eight  vears,  or  whose  service  upon  the  bench  of 
any  court  of  record,  when  added  to  the  time  lie 
may  have  practiced  law,  shall  be  equal  to  eight 
years." 

Mr.  WM.  JOHNSON.  This  section  contains 
a  principle  entirely  new,  and  which  I  believe 
has  never  been  incorporated  into  the  constitution 
of  any  state  in  this  union,  to  the  extent  in  which 
it  is  "here  provided.  I  refer  to  the  requisition  of 
eight  years'  practice  of  the  law,  or  practice  and 
service  as  judge  equal  to  that  time,  as  a  qualifi- 
cation for  a  candidate  for  the  judgeship.  No 
constitution  of  any  state  that  I  know  of,  adopts 
this  principle  save  Louisiana,  and  there  the  re- 
quisition IS  for  only  five  years.  When  we  are 
about  to  enter  upon  new  ground  and  establish  a 
principle  of  this  kind,  particularly  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  there  are  forty  two  lawyers  in  this 
convention,  and  I  say  nothing  against  them, 
there  ought  at  least  to  be  full  investigation.  In 
the  State  of  Mississippi,  there  is  no  such  restric- 
tion. In  New  York,  the  only  restriction  is,  as 
to  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  who  are 
required  to  have  been  judges  of  some  inferior 
court.  In  Louisiana  there  is  a  restriction,  and 
they  are  required  to  have  been  practicing  law- 
yers for  five  years.  TSTiat  has  been  the  rule  in 
Kentucky?  Under  the  present  constitution  the 
candidate  was  not  even  required  to  be  a  citizen 
of  the  state,  or  twenty  one  years  of  age — there 
was  no  restriction  at  all.  Therefore,  when  you 
are  about  to  say  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  thou- 
sand voters  in  this  state,  not  one  of  you  shall  be 
a  judge,  and  to  give  to  some  fwo  or  three  hun- 
dred citizens  alone  this  exclusive  privilege,  I 
say  it  becomes  necessary  to  look  at  the  suBject 
and  to  investigate  it.  It  will  be  a  liberal  al- 
lowance to  say  that  there  are  one  thousand  two 
hundred  practicing  lawyers  in  Kentucky,  and 
of  these  not  more  than  one  fourth  have  prac- 
ticed eight  years,  and  it  is  to  these  alone  you 
propose  to  give  the  exclusive  right  of  being 
candidates  forjudge.  You  sav  that  the  people 
are  the  proper  oodv  to  select  these  oflScers,  and 
yet  you  restrict  their  choice  out  of  one  hundred 
and  fiftv  thousand  to  some  few  hundred  individ- 
uals, ^o  matter  how  well  qualified  the  can- 
didate may  be,  vou  fix  the  iron  rule  that  he 
shall  not  be  eligible  to  the  office  unless  he  has 
been  a  practicing  lawyer  for  eight  years.  No 
matter  if  he  had  practiced  for  seven  years  and 
eleven  months,  and  become  as  good  a  lawyer  as 
was  possible  for  hiui  to  become  in  another  month, 
still  he  would  not  be  eligible.  I  had  this  idea 
in  my  mind  when  I  callw  for  the  yeas  and  nays 


on  a  similar  section  in  the  article  in  relation 
to  the  court  of  appeals.  My  objection  to  the 
restriction,  however,  is  not  so  great  in  regard  to 
that  body,  as  in  regard  to  the  circuit  judges.  I 
now  move  to  strike  out  that  restriction  in  this 
article,  with  a  view,  at  least,  to  secure  a  reduc- 
tion in  the  term  of  years  required,  and  on  that 
motion  I  ask  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  action  of  the  circuit  court 
committee  has  been  to  maketheinarticl**  conform 
and  harmonize,  as  far  as  possible,  with  that  on 
the  court  of  appeals,  and  in  so  doing  they  have 
conceded  many  qualifications  as  to  age,  &c., 
which  they  were  disposed  to  require.  This 
qualification,  which  the  gentleman  from  Scott 
proposes  to  strike  out,  is  the  same  as  that  con- 
tained in  the  court  of  appeals  article,  and  if  it 
isnecessarv-  for  the  judgc-s  of  tliat  court,  surely 
it  is  necessary  for  the  circuit  judge.  He  has  no 
body  to  help  liim,  no  time  given  nini  to  make  up 
his  opinion,  and  must  decide  hundreds  of  con- 
troversies during  the  rapid  progress  of  a  jury 
trial,  and  he  ought,  therefore,  to  be  a  remarkably 
well  read  lawyer,  and  not  only  that,  but  he  should 
be  one  whose  mind  has  great  powers  of  concen- 
tration and  energy,  because  the  lives,  liberty, 
and  the  fortunes  of  men  are  to  depend  upon  his 
decisions,  given  upon  the  spur  of  the  occasion, 
and  without  a  moment's  time  for  consideration. 
The  court  of  appeals  may  take  time.  A  circuit 
judge,  above  all  others  in  the  state,  should  be  a  man 
of  the  highest  order  of  talents  and  attainments. 
We  know  that  there  are  men  of  remarkable  elo- 
quence who  can  run  off  with  the  feelings  of  the 
voters,  and  perhaps  secure  an  election  from  the 
people  thereby,  who  possess  no  legal  attain- 
ments, and  who  woula  never  get  the  appoint- 
ment from  a  governor  and  senate,  upon  whom 
this  influence  could  not  be  brought  to  operate. 
I  knew  a  young  man  who  was  the  finest  orator  I 
have  ever  heard,  and  I  do  verily  believe  that  if 
the  candidate  was  eligible  at  the  age  of  twenty 
on«  or  twenty  two,  unless  his  opponent  was  a 
man  of  great  ability,  he  would  run  off  with  all 
tie  voters.  Great  God,  how  the  boys  would 
gather  around  him  at  a  battalion  muster.  I 
have  seen  him  pour  in  the  hot  shot,  one  after 
another,  until  he  would  set  the  whole  battalion 
in  a  flame.  There  will  be  such  men  now  and 
then,  and  what  sort  of  a  judge  would  they 
make?  I  will  not  say  a  word  against  him,  for  the 
poor  fellow  is  dead  and  gone,  but  he  never  would 
nave  made  a  judge.  I  do  hope,  therefore,  we 
shall  retain  this  qualification  for  a  judge.  We 
have  already  required  a  qualification  of  age, 
and  this  being  the  most  reponsible  oflice  in  the 
state,  for  the  truth  of  which  I  appeal  to  every 
practicing  lawyer,  requiring  the  greatest  expe- 
rience and  the  highest  attainments.  I  do  hope 
the  gentleman  will  be  content  with  having  call- 
ed the  yeas  and  nays,  as  he  says,  on  the  section 
of  the  court  of  appeals  article,  and  let  this  sec- 
tion go  as  it  is. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  concur  with  the  gentleman 
last  up,  and  with  the  gentleman  who  offered  this 
amenament,  but  not  upon  the  same  points.  Asa 
general  thing,  these  brilliant  and  sparkling  men 
to  whom  the  gentleman  referred  as  firing  their 
hot  shots  and  carr\'ing  off  whole  battalions,  nev- 
er make  good  lawyers.  Yet  this  very  young 
man,  at  the  end  of  eight  years  practic«,  without 


"% 


662 


being  abetter  lawyer  than  he  ■was  at  the  end  of 
four  years,  might  then,  with  the  aid  of  his  liot 
shot,  according  to  the  section  as  it  stands,  have 
mounted  the  circuit  court  bench.  I  agree  with 
the  gentleman  as  to  the  importance  of  the  office, 
and  that  its  incumbent  should  be  a  man  well 
qualified,  but  just  here  the  gentleman  and  I  sep- 
arate, and  I  go  with  the  gentleman  from  Scott, 
(Mr.  W.  Johnson.)  I  maintain  that  the  people 
are  competent  to  judge  of  these  qualifications. 
Under  our  present  constitution  none  cf  these 
qualifications  have  been  required;  neither  has  it 
been  required  that  tlie  governor  and  a  majority  of 
the  senate  should  be  lawyers;  yet  to  them  was 
given  the  power,  without  restriction,  to  judge  of 
the  legal  abilities  and  attainments  of  a  candi- 
date. But  when  you  are  about  to  place  the  ap- 
pointment in  the  hands  of  the  people,  then  you 
come  in  with  your  instructions,  and  seeli  to 
throw  shackles  upon  their  exercise  of  that  pow- 
er. If  the  people  are  capable  of  self  govern- 
ment, and  of  choosing  their  own  officers,  why 
throw  these  restrictions  around  them.  If  you 
•would  not  impose  them  on  the  governor,  why 
should  you  on  the  people?  If  you  were  to  give 
to  the  governor  the  power  to  appoint  his  own 
secretary  of  state,  would  you  say  in  the  consti- 
tution that  this  secretary  should  be  a  fine  pens- 
man  and  a  good  clerk?  I  reckon  not.  You  leave 
this  to  the  governor  to  determine,  though  the  sec- 
retary of  state  is  a  very  responsible  officer,  but 
as  I  have  remarked  through  the  whole  sitting  of 
the  convention,  whenever  it  is  proposed  to  make 
an  officer  elective  by  the  people,  a  mutual  dis- 
trust of  them  pervades  the  minds  of  a  large  ma- 
jority of  this  body,  and  they  at  once  proceed  to 
throw  such  restrictions  around  the  people  as  will 
stamp  upon  the  face  of  this  constitution  our  dis- 
trust of  their  capacity.  I  shall  in  this  instance, 
as  in  regard  to  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
vote  against  these  restrictions.  I  believe  in  the 
capacity  and  the   competency  of  the  people  to 

1'udge  as  to  these  qualifications  for  themselves. 
have  not  the  remotest  idea  that  the  time  will 
ever  come  in  this  commonwealth  when  the  peo- 
ple of  any  judicial  district  will  be  soblina  to, 
and  regardless  of  their  own  interests  and  rights 
as  to  .select  for  the  office  of  judge  a  man  who  is 
not  competent  to  the  discharge  of  its  duties. 
Having  the  most  abiding  and  lasting  confidence 
in  the  intelligence  of  the  people  on  this  subject,  I 
am  willing  to  submit  the  right  unrestricted  to 
them.  And  if  they  do  on  one  occasion  select  a 
rtan  who  is  not  qualified,  their  interests,  their 
dearest  rights,  are  all  in  jeopardy,  and  if  any 
body  suffers,  it  is  them,  and  as  they  can  soon  as- 
certain when  they  liave  done  wrong,  they  have 
then  the  motive  to  do  right,  and  will  do  it. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  The  gentleman  has  poured 
out  a  torrent  of  indignant  eloquence  against 
those  who  are  so  unfortunate  as  to  believe  that 
certain  restrictions,  if  you  please,  in  the  consti- 
tution will  be  wholesome.  He  has  thought  prop- 
er to  denounce  that  portion  of  the  house,  who 
entertain  such  opinions,  as  being  distrustful  of 
the  intelligence  of  the  people.  I  either  do  not 
understand  the  suhject,  or  else  the  gentleman 
does  not.  He  seems  to  distinguish  between  this 
convention  and  the  people,  and  he  says  this  con- 
vention is  about  to  throw  shackles  around  the 
action  of  the  |)eople.    Why,  the  action  of  this 


convention,  whatever  it  may  be,  is  to  be  submit- 
ted to  the  people,  and  if  they  ratify  it,  then  it 
becomes  the  direct  action,  and  the  will  of  the  whole 
people.  It  is  then  the  whole  people  prescribing 
to  tne  various  districts  of  the  state,  what  is  their 
will.  You  might  as  well  attempt  to  throw  shack- 
els  about  a  flash  of  lightening,  as  around  the  sov- 
ereign people  of  this  commonwealth.  As  long 
as  the  constitution  about  to  be  made,  shall  exist, 
it  will  be  the  will  of  the  whole  people  of  this 
commonwealth,  ascertained  by  their  ratification 
of  it,  and  whenever  they  object  to  it,  they  will 
take  measures  to  revoke  that  will — they  will  call 
a  convention  and  modify  their  organic  laws. 
Upon  the  principle  the  gentleman  contends  for, 
that  you  should  remove  all  restrictions,  where  is 
the  propriety  of  declaring  that  the  citizen  shall 
be  twenty  one  yeai's  of  age  before  he  is  entitled 
to  vote  ?  The  sovereign  people  have  the  intelli- 
gence to  judge  of  that  matter.  Why  are  we  as- 
sembled to  make  any  fundamental  law?  If  there 
is  no  necessity  for  some  fixed  principles  of  gov- 
ernment, Avhy  not  say  at  once,  that  the  people,  in 
their  sovereign  capacity,  are  capable  of  self  gov- 
ernment, and  adopt  no  such  fundamental  law. 
I  say,  carry  out  the  principle  urged  by  the  gen- 
tleman, and  it  amounts  to  that,  and  does  not 
stop  short  of  the  destruction  of  all  fundamental 
law.  The  doctrine  of  the  gentleman  reminds 
me  of  an  anecdote,  \  once  heard,  of  an  old  gen- 
tleman who  had  been  engaged  for  some  time  in  a 
debauch.  He  came  home  after  nightfall,  and  found 
his  wife  in  bed,  and  feeling  considerable  nausea 
about  the  stomach  and  desiring  something  acid, 
he  went  to  her,  and  asked,  "Jinsey,  is  there  any 
buttermalk  ?"  He  was  told,  alta  voce,  to  look  for 
it  in  the  press,  and  after  fumbling  about  in  the 
dark  witnout  finding  any,  he  again  approached 
his  sulkv  wife  and  said,  "Jinsey  dear,  did  you 
say  the  buttermilk  was  in  the  press."  "Yes"  was 
her  angry  reply,  "go  'long  and  look  for  it." 
Meeting  with  no  better  success,  said  ho,  atlength 
"Jinsey,  Jinsey, (raising  his  voice.)  Jinsey,  I  say, 
is  the  buttermilk  in  a  crock,  orisit  just  loose  so." 
It  occurs  to  me  we  ought  to  put  our  buttermilk 
in  a  crock,  and  not  leave  it  "just  loose  so."  But 
carry  out  the  argument  of  the  gentleman  and  we 
are  to  have  every  thing  "just  loose  so."  Tlie 
gentleman  who  first  made  the  motion  to  strike 
out,  does  not  seem  to  object  to  the  restriction.  He 
does  not  think  the  sovereign  people  assembled 
here  through  their  delegates  may  not  impose  re- 
strictions upon  the  various  districts  of  the  state — 
tlie  whole  speaking  to  a  part ;  but  lie  thinks  f  lie 
time  of  practice  required,  too  long,  and  is  against — 
not  the  principle,  but  the  matter  in  its  details. 
He  thinks  eight  years  too  long,  and  he  says  that 
a  practicing  lawyer  of  seven  years  and  eleven 
montlis  may  be  just  as  good  a  judge  as  the  man 
who  has  practiced  eight  years,  and  yet  you  ex- 
clude him.  We  have  to  fix  upon  some  time,  and 
if  it  was  seven,  six,  or  five  yeare,  still  there 
would  be  tlie  same  objections  existing.  It  was  the 
experience  and  declaration  of  one  of  the  greatest 
legal  sages  the  world  ever  saw,  that  it  is  neces- 
sary there  should  be,  "viffinti  aniws  lucuLrationes," 
twenty  years  of  study,  to  compass  the  science  of 
law.  We  have  not  prescribed  so  long  a  period. 
We  have  proposed  that  eight  years  shall  be  tlie 
time.  The  mind  and  the  judgment,  at  the  age 
of  thirty,  are  usually  matured,  and   the  profes- 


sional  experience  which  eight  years  bring  with 
ihein,  gives  promise  that  our  judicial  candidates 
will  be  conversant,  not  only  with  the  theoiy  but 
the  practice  of  the  law.  A  judge,  no  matter  how 
well  learned  he  may  be  in  the  theory  and  ele- 
ments of  the  law,  would  be  exceedingly  awkward, 
if  called  upon  to  dispense  justice,  without  hav- 
ing become  familiar  with  the  practice  of  our 
courts.  This  is  rarely  acquired  to  the  extent 
required,  in  less  than  eight  years.  The  experi- 
ence of  all  lawyers,  and  the  practice  which  has 
obtained  in  judicial  appointments  in  Kentucky, 
justify  this.  I  do  not  know  that  an  instance  has 
ever  come  to  my  knowledge,  where  a  man  was 
placed  on  the  bench  in  this  state  who  had  not 
practiced  for  eight  or  ten  years. 

The  gentlemen  have  said  that  we  were  about 
to  impose  restrictions  which  were  not  required 
in  the  old  constitution.  Gentlemen  would  find  by 
referring  to  that  instrument  that  the  circuit  court 
is  not  the  creature  of  the  old  constitution,  but 
of  the  legislature.  It  has  been  demanded  that 
in  the  fundamental  law  of  the  land  there  should 
be  less  discretion  given  to  the  legislature,  and 
hence  we  are  fixing  these  details  in  the  constitu- 
tion. It  is  the  people,  by  their  delegates  here, 
doing  this  thin^,  which,  when  submitted  to 
them  and  ratified,  will  become  their  direct  act. 
Mr.  THOMPSOX.  I  am  one  of  those  who  be- 
lieve that  the  people  are  competent  to  select  all 
their  officers.  If  so,  there  is  no  necessity  for 
these  restrictions  in  the  constitution — if  they  are 
incompetent,  why  then  the  power  to  make  the  se- 
lection should  be  confided  to  some  other  tribunal. 
InX.  York,  Illinois,  Mississippi,  Iowa  and  Wis- 
consin, the  onlystates  I  believe  in  the  Union  who 
elect  their  judges,  you  find  none  of  these  restric- 
tions imposed  on  the  people.  Nor  were  there  any 
restrictions  of  a  similar  character  imposed  upon 
the  appointing  power  of  the  governor  in  Kentucky 
under  the  old  constitution.  The  only  restric- 
tions, as  to  governor,  members  of  the  legislature, 
<fcc.,  were  a.s  to  age  and  residence.  Underthe  fed 
eral  constitution  it  is  the  same.  Now  we  are 
willing  to  go  as  far  in  this  matter  of  restriction 
as  in  the  instances  to  which  I  have  referred,  but 
no  further.  Turn  your  attention  to  those  states 
where  they  elect  their  clerks,  and  you  will  find 
that,  except  in  Indiana,  a  certificate  is  required 
of  none  of  them.  I  shall  support  the  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  it  was  ordered. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  Mr.  JOHN- 
SON'S amendment,  and  it  was  rejected  yeas  31, 
nays  38,  as  follows  : 

Yeas — .lohn  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm. 
Bradlev.  Luther  Brawner,  Thos.D.  Brown,  Wm. 
Chenault,  B.  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coifey,  Henry  R.D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wra  Cowper,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
drix,  William  Johnson,  James  M.  Lackey,  Wil- 
lis B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Nathan 
McClure,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
Jhhn  T.  Rogers,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  Wheeler — 31. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Charles  Chambers, 
Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Jas.  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dun- 


avan,  Benj.  F.  Edwards,  Thomas  J.  Qough,  Nin- 
ian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thos.  J  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Al- 
fred M.  Jackson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Geoive 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Alex.  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  JIarshall, 
Richard  L.  Maves,  John  H.  McHenry,  Wm.  D. 
Mitchell,  Thonj-as  P.  Moore,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall. 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Ira  Root.  Jas. 
Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talhott,  JohnD.  Taylor,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 38. 
And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  NOVEMBER  26,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Geoege  W.  Beush. 

I>*ELIGIBILITY    OF   CIECUIT  JUDGES. 

Mr.  LISLE.  Mr.  President,  I  offer  the  fol- 
lowing resolution: 

"  Whereas,  it  is  necessary  for  the  protection 
and  security  of  the  citizens  of  this  common- 
wealth, that  the  independence  of  the  judiciary 
shall  be  strictly  preserved,  and  nothing  should, 
be  done  which  would  be  calculated  to  weaken 
or  destroy  the  independence  of  that  department 
of  the  government.    Therefore, 

Resolved,  That  the  circuit  judges  should  be 
ineligible  for  the  term  of  one  year  from  the  ex- 
piration of  the  term  for  which  they  may  be 
elected." 

Mr.  President:  Before  any  action  is  taken  on 
the  resolution  which  has  just  been  read  by  the 
secretary,  I  desire  to  submit  a  few  remarks.  The 
subject  of  the  election  of  the  circuit  judges  has 
not  been  discussed  in  the  committee  of  the 
whole.  I  regard  it  as  one  of  the  most  important 
which  has  come  under  the  consideration  of  the 
convention. 

I  am  satisfied,  from  the  manifestations  I  have 
seen  in  this  house,  that  the  fate  of  my  proposi- 
tion will  be  somewhat  similar  to  that  of  my 
friend  from  Bourbon;  nevertheless, I  am  willing 
to  risk  what  little  reputation  I  have  on  the  truth 
of  the  proposition. 

Perhaps  it  is  proper  that  I  should  say  that 
before  my  constituents  I  advocated  the  election 
of  the  judges  bv  the  people,  nay,  I  may  say  that 
I  desired  the  election  of  all,  or  nearly  all,  the 
officers,  and  I  still  desire  it.  I  advocated  the 
election  of  the  judges  by  the  people,  not  because 
I  thought  it  free  from  objection,  but  because  I 
thought  it  less  objectionable  than  the  present 
mode,  or  any  other  mode  which  I  had  heard  sug- 
gested. How  it  will  work,  time  only  will  show. 
I  believe,  if  well  guarded,  it  will  do  well. 

In  relation  to  the  judges  of  the  appellate  court, 
I  desire  to  see  them  elected  by  districts.  The 
object  to  be  attained  is  an  intelligent,  upright, 
independent  judiciary.  When  I  say  an  inde- 
pendent judiciary,  I  mean  that  the  judges  shall 
be  free  from,  and  above  all  improper  influence. 
Such  a  judiciary  all  desire.  It  is  admitted  that 
such  a  judiciary  is  necessary  to  the  safety  a.wi. 
protection  of  all  classes,  and  more  particularly 
to  the  humble  in  society.    It  is  agreed  and  ^t- 


664 


tied  that  the  judges  shall  be  elected.  Sir,  I  de- 
sire to  see  the  experiment  of  electing  judges 
fairly  tested  in  Kentucky,  though  I  acknowl- 
edge that  I  have  not  so  much  contidence  in  it  as 
some  gentlemen  profess.  We  have  been  assured 
that  thereis  no  danger  to  be  apprehended  from 
that  mode  of  selecting  a  judge.  We  have  been 
assured  that  we  have  the  light  of  experience  in 
other  states  to  direct  us,  and  that  this  light  so 
illuminates  our  pathway,  that  the  way-faring 
man,  though  a  fool,  need  not  err  therein.  The 
light  which  we  have  from  our  sister  states  on 
this  subject,  is  not  so  clear  to  my  mind  as  it  has 
appeared  to  other  gentlemen.  Let  us  examine 
for  a  moment  what  that  light  is.  Mississippi 
was,  I  believe,  the  first  state  in  this  union  which 
ventured  on  the  election  of  her  inferior  judges. 
She  has  been  electing  them  since  1831  or  lb32. 
In  that  state  the  circuit  judges  are  required  to 
interchange  or  alternate  circuits.  This  inter- 
changing is  a  conservative  feature  in  her  system; 
but  even  with  that  feature,  how  has  it  worked 
there?  I  acknowledge  that  I  am  not  well  in- 
formed in  relation  to  its  practicable  operation  in 
Mississippi.  I  have  been  informed,  however, 
by  respectable  gentlemen,  who  professed  to  have 
been  present  and  witnessed  it,  that  during  the 
pressure  in  1836  and  1837,  their  judges,  perhaps, 
and  sheriffs,  resigned  to  avoid  holding  courts 
and  making  sales  of  property,  and  were  imme- 
diately re-elected.  Such  a  course  as  that  might 
suit  a  state  where  the  doctrine  of  repudiation 
meets  with  popular  favor;  but,  sir,  I  hope  the 
day  may  never  come,  when  it  will  be  counte- 
nanced in  Kentucky.  She  has  given  the  high- 
est evidence,  under  the  most  trying  circumstan- 
ces, that  it  would  not.  Sir,  during  the  pressure 
in  this  state  in  1823  and  1824,  when  the  country 
was  largely  involved  in  debt,  when  ruinous  sac- 
rifices of  property  were  made,  by  sales  under 
execution,  ana  when  the  legislature  interposed 
and  passed  laws  and  formed  a  court,  to  protect 
the  debtor  class  from  those  great  sacrifices,  Ken- 
tucky, be  it  said  to  her  honor,  law-abiding  as 
she  ever  has  been,  and  as  I  hope  ever  will  be, 
rose  up  as  one  man,  and  repudiated  this  new 
court  and  those  relief  laws,  and  sustained  an 
upright  and  independent  judiciary  which  had 
declared  those  laws  unconstitutional. 

Georgia,  though  she  has  elected  her  superior 
judges  for  some  time,  has  only  recently  com- 
menced electing  her  inferior  juclges.  New  York 
and  Iowa  have  been  electing  their  judges  since 
1846,  and  Wisconsin  since  1848.  So,  sir,  it  will 
be  si-en  that  in  none  of  the  states  in  which  they 
•elect  their  judges,  except  Mississippi,  has  the 
«ystem  been  long  enough  in  exi.stenceto  test  its 
practicable  operation,  and  it  becomes  the  friends 
.of  an  elective  judiciary  to  be  cautious,  and  to 
Ithrow  such  guards  around  it,  as  will  avoid  the 
tevils  which  many  good  and  wise  men  fear  will 
.result  from  it. 

Sir,  there  is  another  consideration  which  in- 
iduoes  me  to  proceed  with  caution  and  prudence, 
and  to  guard  in  every  possible  way  against  any 
^yils  which  may  result  from  an  elective  judici- 
■M,ry.  It  is,  that  the  sages  and  patriots  who 
/omped  our  federal  and  most  of  our  state  consti- 
tutions, w«re  unwilling  to  elect  judges.  It  has 
.been  asserted  on  this  floor,  that  we  are  disposed 
P>ty^y  Uio  much  deferens  to  the  opinions  of 


our  ancestors.  But,  sir,  the  men  who  formed 
those  constitutions  were  wise  and  patriotic. 
They  loved  liberty;  it  had  cost  them  much. 
They  had  confidence  in  the  people  and  btlieved 
that  they  were  capable  of  self-government, 
though  they  may  not  have  professed  as  much 
devotion  to  them  as  we  have.  I  acknowledge, 
sir,  that  I  revere  the  memory  of  those  great  and 
good  men.  They  were  the  devoted  friends  of 
civil  and  religious  liberty,  and  I  respect  the 
works  of  their  hands.  They  were  willing  to 
confide  to  the  people  of  this  country  the  election 
of  their  governor,  members  of  congress,  and 
members  of  the  state  legislatures,  and  virtually 
of  the  President  of  the  United  States.  Why 
was  it  that  thev  thought  it  unsafe  to  risk  the 
election  of  tin?  judges?  There  was,  I  suppose, 
some  reason  for  withholding  from  the  people  the 
election  of  judges,  while  they  confided  to  them 
the  election  of  other  officers.  I  acknowledge, 
sir,  that  I  am  timid,  when  we  are  about  to  sXib- 
vert  great  principles  which  are  recognized  in 
our  constitutions,  state  and  federal,  under  wliich 
we  have  lived  and  prospered  for  half  a  ceuturj^ 
and  from  a  few  scattered  colonies,  have  grown 
to  be  a  great  nation  of  thirty  states — the  admi- 
ration of  the  world — principles  which  were 
sanctioned  by  a  Washington,  a  Madison,  a 
Franklin,  an  Adams,  and  a  Jefferson,  and,  to 
come  nearer  home,  by  a  Breckinridge,  a  Rowan, 
a  Marshall,  and  other  illustrious  names.  Sir, 
my  friend  from  Knox  (Mr.  Woodson,)  while  he 
charges  others  with  too  much  respect  for  the 
opinions  of  tho.se  sages  and  patriots,  boldly  pro- 
claims that  he  is  for  carrying  bis  principles  out, 
and  is  for  electing  all  the  federal  ofiicers,  judges, 
posmasters,  &c.  Sir,  when  this  is  done,  what 
will  be  its  effect  on  the  peeuliar  institutions  of 
this  country?  They  will,  most  assuredly,  be 
swallowed  up  by  what  the  gentleman  was  pleas- 
ed to  call  the  aristocracy  of  numbers. 

Have  gentlemen  reflected  on  the  difference 
there  is  between  the  election  of  executive  and 
legislative  officers,  and  that  of  judges?  It  is 
the  duty  of  executive  officers  to  see  that  the  laws 
are  executed,  and  that  they  operate  alike  on  all. 
Your  congressmen  and  legislators  enact  laws, 
which  affect  all  alike.  If  they  pass  oppressive 
laws,  they  and  their  families  and  relations  and 
friends  live  under  them.  If  an  oppressive  law 
is  passed,  or  an  objectionable  vote  given  by  a 
legislator,  as  it  affects  th*  whole  community, 
they  become  excited,  and  call  their  representa- 
tive to  an  account.  This  we  have  all  witnessed. 
But,  sir,  it  is  not  so  with  a  judge;  he  decides 
private  rights  between  individuals,  in  which  the 
comniunity  at  large  are  not  particularly  inter- 
ested. In  a  legal  contest  between  you  and  my- 
self, Mr.  President,  the  judge  may  decide  for  you 
and  against  me,  without  affecting  liimself  or  the 
community.  It  was,  I  imagine,  for  this  reason 
that  the  framers  of  our  federal,  and  most  of  our 
state  constitutions,  thought  it  unsafe  to  elect  a 
judge,  and  it  is  for  this  reason,  that  while  I  de- 
sire the  election  of  tlie  judges,  I  still  wi.sh  to 
guard  against  any  evils  which  may  arise  from 
it. 

I  have  said  sir,  that  before  my  constituents  I 
advocated  the  election  of  the  judges.  I  have 
heard  no  argument  whicli  has  shaken  ray  opin- 
ion and  views  onUiatsubjeot;  but  while  I  advo- 


<m5 


eated  the  election  of  judges,  I  gave  it  as  my  de- 
liberate opinion  to  the  people  irhom  I  have  the 
honor  to  represent  here,  that  it  was  unsafe  to 
elect  a  judge  and  make  him  re-eligible  im- 
mediately after  the  expiration  of  the  term 
for  "wrhich  he  was  elected.  I  desired  their  elec- 
tion, but  that  they  should  be  ineligible.  Enter- 
taining these  views,  which  were  freely  expressed 
and  discussed,  I  was  returned  as  a  delegate  to 
this  body.  I  desire  faithfully,  as  far  as  I  can,  to 
carry  these  opinions  out.  It  has  been  urged 
against  the  principle  of  ineligibility,  that  it 
strikes  at  the  principle  of  electing  by  the  peo- 
ple. Sir,  there  may  oe  plausible  objections  urg- 
ed against  any  mode  of  appointment  which  I 
have  heard  named.  I  have  stated  that  I  advo- 
cated the  election  of  juages — not  because  I  con- 
sidered it  free  from  objection — ^but  because  it  is 
less  objectionable  than  anv  other  mode  which  I 
have  heard  pointed  out.  Xow,  sir,  when  a  gen- 
tleman presents  himself  the  first  time  as  a  can- 
didate for  a  judgeship,  he  presents  himself  on 
the  great  platform  of  equality.  He  has  no  offi- 
cial power  which  he  can  use  to  secure  his  elec- 
tion. But  when  you  once  place  him  in  power, 
you  should  throw  such  guards  around  him  as  to 
prevent  his  using  his  official  power  to  perpetu- 
ate its  continuance.  It  is  a  dangerous  principle 
in  government,  to  place  power  in  the  hands  of 
any  man  which  he  may  use  to  continue  his  pow- 
er. Sir,  can  the  power  of  a  judge  be  thus  used? 
I  think  it  can,  and  I  am,  therefore,  for  making 
him  ineligible  for  one  year,  to  avoid  its  exer- 
cise. 

It  has  not  been,  and  I  suppose  will  not  be,  de- 
nied, that  the  judges  have,  and  will  continue  to 
have,  immense  power  in  their  hands.  They  are 
to  decide  on  the  lives,  the  liberties,  and  the  for- 
tunes of  the  citizens  of  this  commonwealth; 
and,  to  some  extent,  will  have  them  in  their 
hands.  Will  any  gentleman  venture  to  assert 
that  this  immense  power  in  the  hands  of  a  cor- 
rupt judge,  might  not  be  used  to  secure  his  re- 
election? I  do  not  say  that  it  often, or  even  ever, 
would  be  so  used;  but  I  maintain  that  it  might 
be,  and  that  it  is  the  part  of  prudence,  in  ar- 
ranging our  organic  law,  so  to  form  it  as  to 
c  avoid,  as  far  as  possible,  the  improper  use  of 
f  .  this  power,  by  anv  judge.  If  we  are  so  fortu- 
nate as  always  to  £ave  good  judges,  it  will  do 
no  harm;  but  if  we  should  have  bad.  ones,  it 
may  do  much  good. 

VVe  have  been  assured  by  honorable  gentle- 
men on  this  floor,  that  there  is  no  danger  of  a 
judge  ever  attempting  to  exercise  his  power  for  ■ 
improper  purposes.  This  may  or  may  not  be.  i 
Judges  are  men,  and  sometimes  not  the  best  of; 
men.  Sir,  it  was  said  by  my  friend  from  Bour-  j 
bon,  (Mr.  Davis.)  that  the  Lord's  prayer  could  > 
not  be  bettered.  I  would  applr  a  portion  of| 
that  inimitable  prayer  to  the  judges  which  we  : 
may  have — "lead  us  not  into  t<;mptation,  but ' 
deliver  us  from  evil."  ' 

My  friend  from  Simpson  (Mr.  Clarke,)  told  us  | 
on  Saturday,  that  the  judges  posse.ssed  more  j 
power  than  any  officers  of  this  government —  j 
that  they  had  in  their  hands  the  lives,  liberties, ' 
and  fortunes  of  the  citizens.  And  my  friend 
from  Adair  (Mr.  Gaither,)  drew  us  a  dark  pic-  i 
ture  of  the  judiciary  of  this  and  other  coun-  j 
tries.  When  speaking  of  the  judiciary,  he  said :  < 
84 


"  I  have  witnessed  tlie  operations  of  the  ju- 
dicial arm  of  the  government,  and  paid  some 
attention  to  the  judicial  history,  not  only  of 
our  country,  but  of  times  past  in  other  gov- 
ernments. And  I  find  that,  according  to  their 
number,  there  were  as  many  blood-thirsty 
despots  and  tyrants,  and  infinitely  more, 
among  the  judiciary,  than  ever  disgraced  the  le- 
gislative halls  of  any  country.  Let  any  man 
read  the  history  of  the  state  trials  in  Great 
Britain,  and  he  will  learn  that  the  best  blood  the 
world  ever  saw,  has  been  sacrificed  at  the  shrine 
of  judicial  tyranny.  Mark  the  history  of  the 
United  States,  and  what  will  you  there  discov- 
er in  relation  to  the  judiciary?  Does  it  exhibit 
them  in  a  light  to  be  regardea  as  the  depot  and 
reservoir  of  our  liberties,  and  the  asylum  to 
which  we  must  carry  ourselves  for  safetv?  In 
this  country  we  have  been  taught  a  different 
doctrine,  it  may  be  however,  of  a  school  which 
certain  portions  of  this  community  will  not  re- 
cognize or  adopt.  We  are  told,  and  every  man 
who  has  regarded  the  practical  operations  of 
our  judiciary,  must  concede  it,  that  they  are 
embarrassing  and  suppressing  the  liberties  of 
the  country,  gradually,  yet  certainly,  by  their 
decisions,  and  by  their  operations  on  the  politi- 
cal acts  of  government,  depriving  the  sovereign 
people  of  many  of  their  rights.  They  are  the 
great  high  priests  of  political  Jesuitism,  and 
passive  obedience  and  non-resistance  will  be  the 
inevitable  consequence,  if  the  people  listen  to 
the  doctrines  being  inculcated  by  many  of  the 
judiciary." 

Sir,  after  the  gentleman  had  drawn  this  dark 
and  frightful  picture  of  the  judiciary,  and  as- 
serted its  power,  they  oppose  any  restraints  to 
prevent  its  improper  exercise,  ana  propose  that 
the  judges  shall  be  eligible  for  re-election  as  of- 
t«n  as  they  choose  to  present  themselves;  and 
thus,  sir,  they  would  throw  on  the  community 
these  "great  tigh  priests  of  political  Jesuitism," 
with  the  strongest  temptation  to  exercise  their 
priestly  and  Jesuitical  powers.  And,  sir,  they 
will  exercise  them,  whenever  it  becomes  neces- 
sary to  secure  their  re-election. 

"fhere  is  no  class  in  society  which  are  so  deep- 
ly interested  in  having  an  independent,  intelli- 
igent,  and  upright  judiciary,  as  the  poor  and 
humble.  Government  was  instituted  to  protect 
the  weak  and  humble  in  society  against  the  ag- 
gressions of  the  strong  and  powerful.  The 
strong  man  in  society  can  protect  himself.  Sir, 
the  goddess  of  justice  is  represented  as  being 
blind,  that  the  parties  whose  causes  were  to  be 
decided,  might  not  even  be  seen;  but  now,  sir, 
the  parties  are  not  only  to  be  seen,  but  if  you 
make  your  circuit  judges  re-eligible,  there  will 
be  the  strongest  temptation  held  out  to  them,  to 
court  the  favor  of  the  powerful  and  influential 
in  society,  at  the  expense  of  the  more  humble. 
But  it  is  said,  that  if  a  judge  should  thus  act  he 
would  array  all  the  humble  in  society  against 
him,  and  as  they  are  much  the  most  numerous, 
such  a  course  would  be  fatal  to  him.  Sir,  would 
it  be  so?  I  think  not.  Men  take  but  little  in- 
terest in  the  affairs  of  other  men,  and  particular- 
ly in  their  law  suits.  It  is  not  like  legislation. 
J^udgments  and  decrees  affect  individuals  only, 
but  legislation  affects  all.  An  oppressive  law 
affects  all,  and  all  become  parties  to  it;  but  not 


660 


«o  of  the  decisions  of  a  court.  Sir,  if  I  was  dis- 
posed, I  could  refer  to  hundreds  of  cases  with 
which  history  abounds,  to  show  that  gentlemen 
are  mistaken  in  this  position.  I  will  mention 
only  one.  And  it  is  a  strong  case,  sir.  There 
once  lived  a  man — nay,  he  was  raoie  than  man — 
he  was  God  and  man.  He  was  poor  and  humble 
as  far  as  this  world's  goods  were  concerned.  He 
had  not  where  to  lay  his  head.  He  had  ^oue 
about  all  his  life  doing  good.  He  had  raised 
the  dead,  he  had  opened  the  eyes  of  the  blind, 
he  had  healed  the  sick,  and  he  had  fed  the  hun- 
gry. And  yet  the  Saviour  of  the  world  was 
Drought  before  a  jud^e.  His  character  and 
course  of  life  were  certainly  well  calculated  to 
excite  the  sympathy,  affection,  and  admiration 
of  the  multitude;  yet  we  are  informed  that  "when 
'  the  chief  priests  and  the  officers  saw  him,  they 

*  cried  out,  "crucify  him,  crucify  him.      Pilate 

•  saith  unto  them,  take  ye  liim,  and  crucify  him, 
'  for  I  find  no  fault  in  him."      Here,  sir,  we  find 
this  judge  yielding  to  the  popular  feeling  against 
justice,  and  against  the  convictions   of  his  own 
conscience;  and  this  example  illustrates  another 
point  in  my  argument;  that  is,  that  a  judge  may 
use  irnproperly  his  official  power.      We  are  told 
thafrilate  saiduntohim,  whence  art  thou?  but 
•Jesus  gave  him  no  answer.      Then  said  Pilate 
'unto  him,  speakest  thou  not  unto  me,  knowest 
'thou  not  that  I  have  power  to  crucify  thee,  and 
'  I  have  power  to  release  thee?"      Sir,  may  it  not 
be,  if  you  make  your  circuit  judges  re-eligible, 
and  they  desire    a  re-election,  that  they  will 
thus  speak,  or   intimate   to   the  hundreds  and 
thousands,     whose     lives,    liberties,     and    for- 
tunes, will  be,  to  some  extent,    in  their  hands. 
Men  are  the  same  frail,  imperfect  creatures  now, 
■which  they  were  two  thousand   years  ago.      I 
ask  honorable  gentlemen   who  are  disposed  to 
differ  with  me,  if  this  great  power  in  the  hands 
of  a  judge  who  was  disposed  to  use  it  to  secure 
his  re-election,  would  not  be  irresistible.      Sir, 
■we  have  been  told   by  honorable  gentlemen  on 
this  floor,  that  there  are  men  all  over  this  state, 
■who  can  and  do  exercise  immense  influence  in 
elections.     Suppose  a  judge  desires  a  re-election; 
and  suits  shoula  come  up  before  him  in  the  various 
counties  of  his   circuit,  between  gentlemen  of 
this  class,  who  could   control  their  fifties  and 
hundreds,  on  one  side,  and  an  humble  individu- 
al who  had  but  one  vote,  on  the  other;  think 
you  that  a  judge  might  not  use  his  official  pow- 
er to  secure  his  reelection?      It  seems  to  me  that 
no  judge  would  desire  to  be  placed  in  such  a  sit- 
uation.   Sir,  it  is  not  only  desirable  that  the  law 
should  be  administered  impartially,  without  fa- 
vor or  affection,  but  it  is  important  that  litigants 
should  feel  as.sured  that  no   improper   influence 
has  been  brought  to  bear  in  the  decision  of  their 
causes.    Nothing  is  more  calculated  to  lessen  the 
respect  for  judicial  decisions  than  a  want  of  this 
confidence.     Sir,  it  is  due  to  the  judge  to  place 
him  in  a  situation  where  his  motives  cannot  be 
impugned,  and  while  we   do  this,  we  should 
form  our  constitution  with  an  eye  to  the  fact  that 
men  are  frail  and  erring,  and  that  bad  men  may 
and  will  get  into  power.     If  men   -were  perfect, 
•we  shoula  need  no  constitution  or  laws. 

To  show  the  power  and  influence  of  a  judge, 
I  will  mention  another  fact,  which  will  be  duly 
appreciated  by  flvery  gentleman  of  the  profes- 


sion of  which  I  am  an  humble  member.  When 
a  judge  refuses  to  sign  a  bill  of  exceptions,  you 
call  on  by-standers  to  sign  it,  and  every  lawyer 
will  agree  with  me,  that  it  is  very  difficult  to  get 
by-standers  to  sign  a  bill  of  exceptions  -when  a 
judge  refuses  to  do  it.  Few  men  are  ■willing 
voluntarily  to  incur  his  displeasure.  All  desire 
to  be  on  good  terms  with  flie  judge  who  may  be 
called  on,  we  know  not  how  soon,  to  decide  on 
our  rights.  Though  we  may  not  be  involved  in 
law,  yet  no  man  knows  when  that  misfortune 
may  befal  him. 

Sir,  you  propose  to  make  your  governor  ineli- 
gible, and  your  sheriff,  after  the  second  term, 
and  "why?  Because  they  may  use  their  official 
power  to  perpetuate  it.  I  conceive  that  itis  much 
more  important  that  a  judge  should  be  ineligible, 
for  after  his  election  he  has  more  power  which 
he  might  bring  to  bear  to  secure  his  re-election, 
than  either  or  both  these  other  officers.  If  you 
have  an  upright,  learned,  and  independent  juclge, 
he  will  act  as  a  restraint  on  your  sheriff,  your 
clerk,  and  many  other  officers;  but  sir,  let  all 
these  officers  combine  to  secure  their  re-election, 
as  they  most  likely  would  do,  and  the  man  who 
comes  in  contact  with  them  and  their  official  pow- 
er would  have  most  ■woeful  odds  to  contend 
against.  Sir,  I  desire  that  every  man,  who  pre- 
sents himself  before  the  people  for  public  favor, 
shall  present  himself,  so  far  as  practicable,  on 
terms  of  perfect  equality,  and  that  capacity  and 
merit  alone  shall  decide  the  contest. 

We  have  been  told  by  my  friend  from  Oldham, 
(Mr.  Mitchell,)  that  now  is  the  time  to  raise  the 
judicial  superstructure.  So  say  I ;  but  let  us  lay 
its  foundation  with  wisdom  and  caution.  We 
have  been  admonished  by  that  gentleman,  that 
we  should  disregard  the  dogmas  of  conservatism. 
Perhaps  it  Avould  be  as  well  for  the  country,  if 
some  of  us  possessed  a  little  more  of  it.  He  and 
my  friend  from  Adair,  animadverted  on  the  in- 
dependence of  the  judiciary.  Sir.  whilst  I  de- 
sire to  see  the  judges  elected  by  the  people  that 
they  may  be  responsible  to  them  for  their  con- 
duct, and  that  they  shall  acknowledge  them  as 
the  source  of  their  power,  still  I  hope  that  the 
day  may  never  come  when  this  glorious  com- 
monwealth, the  land  of  ray  nativity,  shall  be 
cursed  with  an  ignorant,  weak,  time-serving, 
electioneering  judiciary.  Sir,  I  agree  with  the 
gentleman  from  Bracken,  (Mr.  W.  C.  Marsliall,) 
that  no  greater  curse  could  befall  any  country. 

It  lias  been  objected  that  the  principle  of  in- 
eligibility in  a  circuit  judge,  argues  a  want  of 
capacity  in  the  people  to  elect  their  officers.  I 
think  not.  To  gentlemen  who  argue  thus,  I 
would  say  be  consi.stent.  You  propose  that 
your  governor  shall  be  ineligible,  and  that  your 
sheriff  shall  be  made  ineligible  after  the  second 
term;  you  propose  to  throw  certain  restrictions 
around  almost  all  your  officers;  you  propose 
that  no  man  shall  be  a  judge,  unless  lie  has  been 
a  licensed  lawyer  and  has  practiced  his  profes- 
sion a  certain  time,  and  that  he  has  attained  a 
certain  age  and  resided  in  the  district  or  cir- 
cuit for  a  period  of  time;  you  require  your  clerk 
to  have  a  certificate  of  his  qualification;  and  you 
require  qualification  as  to  age  and  residence  in 
your  senators  and  legislators.  All  these  are  but 
restraints  on  the  elective  franchise,  and  gentle- 
men who  profess  such  high  devotion  to  princi- 


6(17 


pie,  should  strike  out  all  the^se  restrainUi.  Sir, 
government  itself  is  a  svstem  of  restraint.  I 
admit  that  no  restraint  sliould  be  impose<l  on 
any  individual,  which  is  not  necessary  for  the 
welfare  and  preservation  of  the  whole.  But  the 
question  is,  is  the  restraint  of  ineligibility  on  a 
circuit  judge,  a  necessary  one?  That  is  the  great 
question. 

Sir,  it  is  not  a  matter  of  so  much  importance 
to  the  great  body  of  the  community,  whether 
A  or  6  is  judge;  but  they  are  all  interested  and 
<ieeply  interested  in  having  the  duties  of  the 
station  well  performed.  The  great  object  is  not 
to  provide  stations  for  a  few  iudividusds,  for  but 
a  few,  comparatively  speaking,  can  be  judges; 
but  it  is  to  obtain  a  proper  discharge  of  the 
duties  of  the  station.  Sir,  the  people  desire  a 
good  judiciary;  it  is  necessary  for  their  protec- 
tion and  for  the  peace  aad  welfare  of  society, 
and  they  will  submit  to  such  restraints  as  are 
necessary  to  the  attainment  of  that  great  object. 
Sir,  one  of  the  objects  for  which  we  have  been 
called  here  by  the  people  is  to  throw  greater  re- 
straints around  legislators  elected  directly  by  the 
j>eople.  The  people  themselves  have  demanded 
this  at  our  hands.  They  demand  that  the  power 
of  contracting  debt,  except  in  cases  of  emergen- 
cy, and  that  to  a  limited  extent,  and  the  power 
of  granting  divorces  shall  be  taken  from  the 
representatives  elected  directly  by  their  votes. 
And  they  require  that  their  representatives  shall 
not  meet  as  often  as  they  have  done. 

Gentlemen  who  ai^ue  against  all  restraints  on 
individuals,  strike  at  the  first  great  principle  of 
all  governments.  In  the  formation  of  govem- 
m«-nt  each  individual  agrees  to  surrender  a  por- 
tion of  his  natural  rights,  in  order  that  he  may 
be  secured  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  balance.  Sir, 
do  gentlemen  wish  to  see  our  judicial  decisions 
as  uncertain  and  as  changeaWe  as  our  legisla- 
tion has  been?  If  they  do,  let  them  so  organize 
the  system,  that  the  judicial  decisions  shall  re- 
flect trulv,  all  the  changes  in  public  opinion,  and 
they  will  have  accomplished  their  object.  Such 
a  judiciary  would  unhinge  society.  None  of  the 
rights  which  we  hold  so  dear  would  be  secure. 
If  you  would  have  decisions  uniform  and  con- 
sistent, you  must  give  some  element  of  stability 
to  the  system.  I  would  as  soon  suppose  that  the 
majestic  oak  would  stand  unmoved  without  sup- 
port, amidst  theragingstorm.asihat  your  courts 
would  withstand  the  frequent  changes  of  public 
Bentiment,  without  some  element  of  the  kind. 
Sir,  when  you  elect  vour  circuit  judges  for  a 
«hort  time,  and  make  t^em  re-eligible,  you  court 
the  storm  with  little  or  no  power  of  resistance. 
Say  at  once  how  long  you  tliink  it  prudent  that 
a  circuit  judge  should  preside,  elect  him  for  that 
periml,  and  make  him  ineligible  for  one  vear 
thereafter,  and  you  thus  to  a  great  extent  araw 
him  from  the  arena  of  politics  during  th*  time 
he  is  judge,  and  he  applies  himself  to  the  duties 
of  his  station,  and  to  reading  and  study  which 
are  so  indispensable  to  a  iudKO.  Some  weeks 
since,  I  procured  a  list  which  was  made  out 
from  the  record  in  the  office  of  the  secretarv  of 
state,  of  all  the  circuit  judges  which  we  have  liad 
in  Kentucky  since  the  adoption  of  the  circuit 
court  system.  The  list  may  not  be  entirely  com- 
plete, as  there  was  some  difficulty  in  making  it, 
owing  to'the  want  of  au  index  to  the  early  execu- 


j  live  journals.  I  suppose,  however,  that  the  list 
:  may  oe  relied  on.  From  this  list  it  appears  that 
we  have  hadin  the  state  sixty-two  circuit  judges, 
including  the  Louisville  chancellor.  In  thislist 
persons  are  not  included  who  were  appointed 
and  did  not  accept,  and  yet  I  find  that  said  sixty- 
two  judges  have  served  on  an  average  eight  years 
and  eight  months.  Of  these  seven  have  died,  thir- 
i  ty-tive  have  resigned,  and  twenty  are  still  acting. 
:  ^veral  of  these  judges  have  been  twice  commis- 
!  sioned — and  in  making  the  estimate  of  the  aver- 
'  age  length  of  time  which  they  have  served,  the 
I  computation  has  been  made  of  the  whole  length 
j  of  time  thev  served  under  both  commissions,  as 
i  if  there  haJ  been  but  one. 

It  has  been  objected  to  the  principle  of  ineli- 
gibility in  a  circuit  judge,  that  it  would  with- 
draw from  the  judge  all  stimulant  to  improve- 
ment, and  that  in  timethe  high  judicial  character 
of  Kentucky  would  be  lowerea.  I  am  not  for 
lowering  but  elevating  it,  and  I  ask  my  friend 
from  Todd,  (Mr.  Bristow,)  and  my  friend  from 
Oldham,  (Mr.  Mitchell,)  who  hare  urged  this 
objection,  to  examine  the  list  to  which  I  have 
referred,  and  they  will  there  find  that  it  is  not  to 
those  judges  who  have  presided  longest  on  the 
circuit  court  bench,  to  whom  they  can  refer  as 
the  brightest  ornaments  in  the  list  of  Kentucky's 
distinguished  jurists.  Sir,  there  are  other  sta- 
tions sufficiently  alluring  to  excite  and  stimu- 
late men  of  talents  and  ability  to  exertion;  but 
shall  we  risk  inflicting  on  the  countrv  the  evils 
of  an  electioneering  judiciary  with  t^e  hope  of 
stimulating  a  few  men  to  greater  exertion? 

What  evil  to  the  community  can  arise  from 
making  the  circuit  judges  ineligible?  There 
will  be  no  circuit  in  the  state  in  which  there 
will  not  be  several  persons,  between  whose  quali- 
fications for  a  judgeship,  there  will  be  but  little 
difference.  It  will  bring  about  rotation  in  office, 
which  was  one  of  the  objects  for  which  this  con- 
vention was  called;  competition  will  thus  be 
excited,  and  it  will,  as  I  verily  believe,  be  a  con- 
servative and  wholesome  feature  in  our  consti- 
tution. But  let  the  fate  of  the  proposition  be 
what  it  may,  I  shall  have  the  proud  satisfaction 
of  having  advocated  the  position  here  which  I 
did  before  my  constituents. 

Sir,  at  this  time  1  will  not  ask  for  a  vote  of 
the  convention  upon  my  resolution,  for  it  may 
come  up  in  anotner  shape  when  we  have  the 
judiciary  articles  before  us.  I  now  merely  ask 
that  it  be  passed  by  informally. 

It  was  passed  over  accordingly. 

THE   ClRCriT   COURTS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  articles  on  the  judiciary. 

The  question  first  in  order  was  on  the  eighth 
section  of  the  article  concerning  circuit  courts, 
which  was  read  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  8.  The  term  of  office  of  the  judges  of 
tlie  circuit  court  shall  be  six  years  from  the  day 
of  the  election.  They  shall  6e  commissioned  bj 
the  governor,  and  continue  in  office  until  their 
successors  be  qualified.  The  removal  of  a  judge 
from  his  district  shall  vacate  his  office,  and  when 
a  vacancy  may  happen  from  any  cause,  it  shall 
be  filled  *as  he'reinafter  prescribed." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  There  were  three  proposi- 
tions in  the  committee  on  circait  eoxuta,  fixing 


m 


the  terra  of  the  judge — one  for  eight  years, 
another  for  six  years,  and  another  for  four  years. 
The  ooraraittee  finally  settled  on  six  years,  but 
finding  the  committee  on  the  court  of  appeals 
had  fixed  the  tenu  of  those  judges  at  eiglit  years, 
the  matter  was  reconsidered,  and  the  term  of 
the  circuit  judges  made  to  conform  to  that.  In 
the  committee  of  thirty  it  was  again  fixed  at  six 
ytars.  That  committee  also  provided  that  the 
term  should  commence  on  the  day  of  election, 
with  a  view  of  uniformity  throughout  the  state. 

Mr.  LISLE  moved  to  amend  by  inserting  the 
words,  "  and  that  they  shall  be  ineligible  for  the 
term  of  one  year  from  the  expiration  of  the  term 
for  which  they  may  be  elected." 

Mr.  KELLY.  On  that  question  I  call  for  the 
yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  no  argument  to  make 
on  this  subject.  It  was  a  matter  upon  w^hich 
the  committee  divided  equally,  and  was,  there- 
fore, reported  as  it  is  found. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  was  opposed  to 
making  the  judges  re-eligible,  because  1  consid- 
ered one  of  the  great  means  of  securing  the  in- 
dependence of  the  judiciary  to  be  ineligibility.  1 
was  opposed  also  to  the  shortness  of  the  term, 
believing  that  six  years  was  not  a  term  sufficient 
to  secure  the  best  men  of  the  country.  How- 
ever, in  the  committee  of  thirty,  a  compromise 
was  had  on  six  years.  I  believe  that  either  six 
or  eight  years  is  too  limited.  If  the  number  of 
years  shall  be  fixed  at  six,  and  the  number  of 
judges  reduced  to  twelve,  as  proposed  in  this 
report,  ray  word  for  it,  and  I  call  the  conven- 
tion to  witness  it  this  day,  it  will  be  the  great- 
est misfortune  that  ever  befell  this  country. 
What  man  of  the  proper  character,  ability  and 
legal  learning  in  the  state  would  occupy  the  po- 
sition of  circuit  judge  under  such  circumstances? 
None;  it  would  be  accepted  only  by  men  whol- 
ly unfit  for  the  place,  and  who  could  not  make 
their  salt  at  the  bar.  I  am  fully  satisfied  that 
this  will  be  tlie  case  if  the  term  is  reduced  to 
six  years,  and  the  judge  made  re-eligible.  I  am 
against  re-eligibilty  if  you  give  a  fair  term  and 
proper  salary.  My  favorite  idea  is,  that  no  man 
fchoald  go  on  the  bench  of  the  circuit  court  un- 
til he  liad  attained  the  age  of  thirty,  and  that  no 
man  should  come  off  of  it  by  a  limitation  of  the 
term  until  he  had  served  for  fifteen  years.  And 
I  was  willing  to  give  him  a  salary  of  $2000,  so 
that  it  should  be  an  inducement  to  competent, 
qualified  men  to  go  on  the  bendi,  with  the  pros- 

f>ect  when  they  retired  of  having  received  sonie- 
hinglike  a  comj)ensation  fortheir  services.  But 
to  go  on  the  bench,  with  the  certainty  of  being 
turned  out  at  the  end  of  six  years,  after  the  loss 
of  all  their  practice,  and  being  obliged  then  to 
come  in  competition  with  the  boys  who  had 
sprung  up  around  them  in  the  struggle  for  ex- 
istence, a  man  of  the  proper  qualifications  would 
never  consent  to  do  it.  Hold  out  the  inducements 
to  which  I  have  referred  and  you  will  have  men 
of  talent  on  the  bench;  restrict  it,  as  the  gentle- 
man from  Green,  (Mr.  Lisle)  proposes,  and  pru- 
dent men  of  that  character  will  not  accept  of 
the  office.  If  the  term  is  to  be  limited  to  six 
years,  the  incumbent  of  the  ofl^ce  ought  to  be  re- 
eligible.  I  have  made  these  remarks  to  define 
my  ppsition,  having  before  opposed  re-eligi- 
bflity. 


Mr.  MORRIS.  I  have  been  in  favor  of  alon^ 
term  and  ineligibility.  I  have  no  dispositioti, 
however,  to  interfere  with  the  compromise  of 
the  committee,  but  in  order  that  I  may  not  be 
misunderstood,  hereafter,  I  wish  to  sa'y  that  I 
shall  vote  tor  re- eligibility  because  I  consider 
the  term  proposed  to  be  too  short  to  admit  of 
ineligibility. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  am  opposed  to  the  re-eligi- 
bilily  of  judges,  and  I  think  the  term  proposed 
too  short.  I  move  to  strike  out  six  and  to 
insert  tw^elve  years,  and  upon  that  question  I  call 
for  the  veas  and  nays. 

The  "PRESIDENT  ruled  the  amendment  out 
of  order,  there  being  a  pending  amendment. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  re- 
eligibility  of  the  judiciary,  and  I  am  so  on  prin- 
ciple. I  regard  the  re-eligibility  of  the  judges, 
as  bringing  about  what  we  all  desire  and  aim  to 
secure — an  independent,  a  safe,  and  an  enlight- 
ened judiciary.  There  is  no  system  in  govern- 
ment, no  appointment  to  any  office  under  any 
government  to  which  the  ingenuity  of  man  may 
not  find  some  objection.  In  considering  the 
question,  whether  a  judge  should  be  re-eligible 
or  not,  the  proper  light  in  which  to  view  it  in  my 
judgment,  is  whether  the  inducement  and  incen- 
tive to  labor  and  to  integrity  is  not  best  secured 
by  holding  out  to  him,  especial!}'  when  he  has 
to  come  before  a  popular  tribunal,  the  prospect 
of  are-election — and  whether  the  inducement  to 
good  behavior  and  purity  is  not  greater  thereby, 
than  if  you  tell  him  that  no  matter  how  he  be- 
haves or  acts,  whetlier  he  is  corrupt  or  indolent, 
or  comes  up  to  the  highest  standard  of  judicial 
excellence,  in  either  event  he  is  unfit  for  re-elec- 
tion. According  to  my  judgment,  there  is  no 
doubt  on  the  subject.  I  think  every  thing  goes 
to  show,  that  a  bad  man  will  be  actuated,  as  all 
bad  men  are,  by  selfish  motives,  and  that  the 
very  fact,  that  he  might  lose  his  office  when  he 
came  before  the  people  for  re-election,  would  re- 
press his  bad  feelings,  and  hold  out  a  corrective 
on  his  bad  passions.  A  good  judge  would  also 
have  every  motive  to  the  pure,  intelligent,  and  in- 
dustrious discharge  of  his  duties,  in  the  knowl- 
edge that  he  would  be  rewarded  for  it  by  the 
people.  Gentlemen  talk  about  rotation  in  office, 
and  those  who  have  talked  about  itas  a  democrat- 
ic principle,  will  get  up  and  ask  us  to  fix  a  term 
of  twelve  years  1  That  would  be  rotation  in  of- 
fice with  a  vengeance.  My  idea  of  rotation 
in  office  is,  to  let  the  people  have  the  right 
to  vote  a  man  in  or  out  of  office,  and  to  have 
short  terms,  so  as  to  give  them  the  choice.  It 
is  not  re-eligibility,  for  that  deprives  the  peo- 
ple of  the  right  to  rotate  in  office.  It  is  snort 
terms  that  gives  them  that  right.  I  am  therefore 
in  favor  of  the  term  of  six  years  and  of  the  re- 
eligibility  of  the  judiciary,  and  I  believe  that 
both  will  tend  to  bring  about  the  object  we  all 
have  in  view,  an  independent,  enlightened,  and 
pure  administration  of  justice. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  rise  to  express  my  full  appro- 
bation of  the  principle  contained  in  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Green.  I  thought 
when  I  came  here  it  was  right  and  I  still  think 
so,  and  I  shall  vote  for  the  amendment.  I  ask 
my  friend  from  Kenton,  (Mr.  Stevenson,)  this 
question;  suppose  a  judge  on  the  bench,  under 
the  expectation  that  he  may  be  re-elected,  should 


669 


surrender  up  the  rights  of  some  weak  litigant,  to 
secure  the  influence  of  some  powerful  litigant, 
would  his  rejection  by  the  people  remedy  the 
evil  and  the  wrong  inflicted  on  the  weaker  liti- 
gant? I  do  not  see  how  it  would.  The  fact 
thatthe  judge  was  not  re-elected,  would  not  in 
any  •way  remedy  or  mitigate  the  wrong  to  whicli 
the  individual  had  been  subjected.  I  have  giv- 
en my  views  on  this  subject  before,  and  I  am  sat- 
isfied that  the  principle  of  the  amendment  is 
right,  and  I  should,  though  I  have  little  hope  of 
it,  like  to  see  it  adopted  in  this  constitution. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  am  disposed  to  stand  by 
the  compromise,  reported  by  the  committee,  and 
I  have  at  all  times  been  in  favor  of  the  re-eligi- 
bility of  judges.  Those  gentlemen  -who  are  op- 
f)ose'd  to  it,  seem  to  look  to  the  single  idea  that 
)y  a  long  term,  sufficient  inducements  will  be 
held  out  to  secure  men  of  the  first  order  of  abil- 
ity to  occupy  the  station.  Now  then,  those  in 
fa'vor  of  re-cdigibility,  look  further  and  beyond 
that.  We  also  wish  toliold  out  the  inducement 
when  the}'  have  attained  that  station,  to  dis- 
charge its  duties  faithfully,  by  making  them  re- 
sponsible at  sliort  periods  to  the  people.  Then, 
if  satisfied  with  his  discharge  of  the  duties,  the 
people  will  reward  him,  by  re-electing  liim,  and 
if  he  has  been  incompetent,  they  will  place  the 
seal  of  public  disapprobation  upon  him.  We 
■wish  to  hold  out  an  inducement  that  will  not  on- 
ly secure  talent,  but  diligence  and  industry  in 
office.  And  I  think  we  may  properly  and  safe- 
ry  trust  this  power  of  discrimination  between 
the  competent  and  tlie  incompetent,  in  the  hands 
of  the  people,  those  most  interested. 

Mr.  ROOT  moved  the  previous  question,  and 
the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

Messrs.  KELLY  and  GHOLSOX  called  for  tlie 
yeas  and  nays  upon  the  amendment,  which  be- 
ing taken  resulted  as  follows — yeas  9,  nays  80. 

Yeas — Archibald  Dixon,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  J.  W.  Irwin,  Wra. 
Johnson,  Tho.  W.  Lisle,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
Jno.  L.  Waller— 9. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie.)  Richard  Ap- 

f)erson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  WU- 
iam  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Brad- 
ley, Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos. 
D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
JamesS.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Je.-ise  Cof- 
fey, Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowpcr,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Grey,  Jas. 
P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hav,  Wil- 
liam Hendrix,  Tho.  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  ftuston, 
Alfred  M.Jackson,  Tho.  James,  George  W.  Kav- 
anaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackev,  Pe- 
ter Lashbrooke,  Willis B.  Machen,  Geo.  W.  5lans- 
field,  Alexander  K.  Marshall.  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John 
H.  McHenrv,  David  ileriwether,  Wm.  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thos.  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcuni,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Sto- 
ner,  Albert  G.Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 


R.  Thompson,  Jolin  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd> 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  Wheeler, 
Charles  A.  Wicklitfe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Geo. 
W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
—80. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  On  Friday  last,  in 
the  course  of  debate,  I  made  the  following  re- 
marks : 

"In  the  conversation  that  I  had  with  Judge 
Marshall,  he  expressed  no  preference  for  three  or 
four,  but  statea  emphatically  that  three  were 
amply  sufficient  to  transact  tiie  business  of  the 
court;  and  he  coincided  with  the  oj)inion  of 
Judge  Robertson,  that  four  judges  would  rather 
retard  than  expedite  the  business,  and  that  it 
would  be  no  disadvantage,  as  far  as  the  transac- 
tion of  the  business  of  the  country  was  concern- 
ed, that  the  court  should  consist  of  but  three 
judges." 

1  left  the  room  immediately  after  concluding 
my  remarks,  and  consequently  did  not  hear  what 
was  said  by  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  (Mr. 
Turner,)  but  my  attention  has  been  called  this 
morning  to  the  following  remarks  of  that  gentle- 
man : 

"I  care  not  what  any  judge,  or  what  any  law- 
yer has  intimated,  since  the  subject  has  been 
talked  of  here.  I  do  not  believe  Judge  Mar- 
shall has  given  an  opinion;  he  is  one  of  the  most 
cautious,  prudent,  discreet  men,  that  I  am  ac- 
quainted with.  I  do  think  that  any  gentleman, 
occupying  the  station  that  he  does,  could  or 
would  give  such  an  opinion." 

I  have  read  these  remarks,  sir,  for  the  purpose 
of  making  an  inquirv — 

Mr.  TURNER.  With  the  permission  of  the 
gentleman,  I  will  state,  that  I  did  not  under- 
stand him  as  asserting  that  he  had  had  a  con- 
versation with  Judge  Marshall.  I  supposed  that 
he  derived  his  information  from  some  third  per- 
son. If  I  had  understood  the  gentleman  as  ma- 
king the  assertion,  of  course,  I  should  not  have 
thought  of  contradicting  it. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  am  gratified  to 
hear  the  explanation  of  the  gentleman,  for  I  was 
sure  that  he  either  misunderstood  me,  or  had  not 
been  correctly  reported. 

The  nintli  section  was  tlien  read,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  9.  The  general  assembly,  if  they  deem 
it  necessary,  may  establish  one  district  every 
four  years,  but  the  judicial  districts  shall  not 
exceed  sixteen,  until  after  the  population  of  this 
state  shall  exceed  one  million  five  hundred  thou- 
sanil." 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  move  to  strike  out  the  whole 
section,  and  insert  the  following: 

"Tho  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to 
increase  tiie  number  of  judges  and  districts,  as 
the  exigencies  of  the  country  may  require:  Pro- 
vided, that  no  more  than  one  district  shall  be  es- 
tab  ished  at  any  one  session  of  the  legislature." 

I  do  not  think  we  ought  to  restrict  legislation 
upon  this  subject,  as  proposed  in  tlie  report.  I 
think  the  legislature  should  have  power  to  in- 
crease the  number  of  judges  and  judicial  districts, 
wlieu  an  increase  sliall  be  demanded  by  the  peo- 
ple. Providing,  as  I  do,  that  only  one  district 
shall  be  established  at  any  one  session  of  the 
legislature,  we  shall  avoid  any  thing  like  com- 


675 


Sination  between  different  sections  of  country. 
This,  I  think,  will  insure  us  against  the  estab- 
lishment of  any  judicial  district,  unless  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  country  require  it. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  tfiink  tho  whole  provision 
■will  be  valueless,  if  we  adopt  this  amendment. 
"We  began  our  circuit  court  system  with  ten  or 
eleven  districts,  and  we  have  been  adding  to 
them,  until  we  have  now  got  the  most  cumber 
some  system  of  circuit  courts  in  the  United 
States.  '  We  have  now  got  nineteen  judges,  and 
if  we  leave  it  to  the  legislature,  we  shall  have  as 
many,  if  not  more,  in  future.  Gentlemen  are 
aware  that  for  the  last  five  hundred  years,  they 
have  had  but  twelve  circuit  judges  in  England, 
until  within  a  few  years  past,  when  I  under- 
stand thev  have  added  a  thirteenth  judge.  There 
was  a  judge  for  the  high  court  of  chancery,  and 
a  master  of  the  rolls,  making  but  fourteen  in 
all,  while  we  have  had  nineteen  judges.  I  think 
there  ought  to  be  some  restriction  upon  the  pow- 
er of  the  legislature  in  this  respect.  While  up 
— for  I  am  more  anxious  upon  this  subject  than 
anv  other — and  that  we  may  adjourn  in  the 
course  of  a  few  weeks,  I  call  for  the  previous 
question . 

Tlie  previous  question  was  sustained,  and  un- 
der its  operation  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  tenth  section  was  then  read  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  10.  The  judges  of  tlie  circuit  courts 
shall,  at  stated  times,  receive  for  their  services 
an  adequate  compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  law, 
which  shall  not  be  diminished  during  the  time 
for  which  they  shall  have  been  elected." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  bill  as  originally  framed, 
fixed  the  minimum  of  the  salaries  to  be  paid  to 
the  judges  at  $1,600,  the  number  of  judges  be- 
ing reduced  from  nineteen  to  twelve.  The  com- 
mittee of  thirty  struck  out  $1,600.  I  want  to 
see  the  best  talent  that  can  be  obtained  placed 
upon  the  bench,  and  in  order  to  secure  that  tal- 
ent, I  think  the  minimum  ought  not  to  be  less 
than  $1,600. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  inclined  to  the 
opinion  that  in  putting  together  the  amendments 
adoped  by  the  committee  of  thirty,  one  was  pre- 
termitted. My  recollection  is,  that  there  was  an 
amendment  adopted  at  the  instance  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  HicKinan,  (Mr.  James,)  that  the  sal- 
aries of  judges  should  be  equal  and  uniform 
throughout  the  commonwealth.  I  therefore  beg 
pardon  of  the  committee  and  of  the  house  for 

J)retermitting  the  amendment,  and  now  offer  it 
or  insertion. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  following 
words  inserted  aft«r  the  word  "law,"  "which 
shall  be  equal  and  uniform  throughout  the 
state." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  will  offer  the  follow- 
ing as  a  substitute  for  tho  section  under  conside- 
ration ; 

"  Each  circuit  judge  shall  receive  from  the 
public  trojiHury  an  ailoquate  compensation,  to  be 
fixed  by  law,  and  sliall  not  be  diminished  during 
their  respective  continuance  in  office,  and  shall 

never  be  less  than  hundred  dollars  per 

annum,  and  which  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
throughout  the  state." 

It  will  b«  perceived  that  this  is  precisely  the 


same  as  the  original  section,  except  that  it  fixes 
a  minimum  salary. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  beg  to  offer  as  an  amend- 
ment fo  the  amendment  the  following  : 

"Provided,  That  whenever  a  new  judge  is  add- 
ed, his  salary  shall  be  raised  by  deductions  from 
the  salaries  of  those  already  in  office." 

Mr.  HARGIS.  There  is  much  in  this  article 
that  is  not  agreeable  to  me,  but  in  the  spirit  of 
compromise,  I  am  willing  to  sacrifice  some  of 
mv  own  views,  and  therefore  I  hope  the  section 
will  be  allowed  to  stand  as  it  is. 

The  amendment  to  the  amendment  was  re-, 
jected. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  I  prefer  that  the  whole  sub- 
ject shall  be  left  to  tlie  people,  unless  we  fix  a 
large  minimum.  It  appears  to  me  that  $1,600  is 
the  smallest  salary  that  will  give  us  any  reasona- 
ble chance  of  procuring  the  services  of  men  of 
the  best  talent.  But  I  think  it  will  be  better  to 
leave  the  whole  matter  to  the  legislature. 

Mr.  W.C.MARSHALL.  I  propose  that  $1,800 
be  the  minimum  fixed,  as  tne  salary  of  these 
judges. 

Mr.  WALLER.  I  propose  $1,600  as  the  mini- 
mum. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  accept  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Woodford,  (Mr. 
Waller.) 

The  question  then  being  upon  striking  out 
$1,600,  and  inserting  $1,800. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  shall  vote  for  the 
largest  amount  named.  I  believe,  from  my  in- 
tercourse with  the  delegates  upon  this  floor,  that 
there  will  be  perhapsno  better  opportunity  to  test 
the  views  of  this  convention,  as  to  whether  the 
judges  shall  be  liberally  compensated  for  their 
services.  I  am  disinclined,  however,  to  fix  eitlier 
a  minimum  or  maximum  salary  in  the  constitu- 
tion, for  there  is  great  sensitiveness  on  the  .sub- 
ject of  the  salaries  of  officers;  and  although  a 
large  portion  of  the  community  who  are  in  favor 
of  a  well  regulated  judiciary,  would  be  willing 
to  vote  a  large  and  competent  salary,  yet  if  you 
were  to  tell  these  men  that  the  organic  law  had 
fixed  it  beyond  their  control,  you  might  produce 
intheirminds  aprejudice  againstthis constitution 
difficult  to  be  removed.  I  had  intended  at  the 
proper  time,  to  offer,  on  my  own  responsibility, 
the  amendment  which  I  proposed  in  committee; 
that  the  next  legislature,  coining  in  under  the  new 
constitution,  fully  impressed,  Jis  I  trust  it  will 
be,  with  the  importance  of  giving  this  experi- 
ment a  just  and  impartial  trial,  sliould  fix  the 
salaries  of  the  judicial  officers  at  a  standard 
which  shouhl  not  be  diminished  for  eight  or  ten 
years;  and  by  that  means  we  should  secure 
better  salaries,  and  free  the  constitution  from  the 
danger  of  attack,  because  of  its  inhibition  on  the 
subject  of  salaries. 

If  the  amendment  under  consideration  should 
be  rejected.  I  shall  offer,  in  the  shape  of  an  addi- 
tion section,  the  substance  of  what  I  have  indi- 
cated. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  My  opinion  is,  that  if  we 
fix  a  minimum  in  the  constitution,  we  ought  to 
give  the  legislature  the  power  t«  reduce  that 
iniiiimum  whenever  they  increase  the  number  of 
judges.  I  have  no  objection  to  fixing  a  mini- 
mum, provided  this  principle  be  adopted.  The 
legislature  may  increase  the  number  to  twenty. 


671 


and  if  so^  it  is  not  to  b*  expected  that  they  f  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
should  each  receive  a  salary  of  $1,600.  When  [Martin  P.  Marehall,  William  C.  Marshall,  John 
in  order,  I  \rill  move  to"  add  the  following  j  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
proviso:  JMitdiell,  John   D    Morris,  Larkin  J.   Proctor, 

"Provided,  That  when  the  general  assembly  I  James  Rudd,  John  W,  Stevt-nson,  Albert  G. 
shall  deem  it  neoessarv  to  increase  the  number  Talbott,  Philip  Tripl»rtt,  Squire  Turner,  John 
of  judges,  they  shall  have  the  power  to  reduce  JL.  Waller,  George  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.- 
the  salary  thereof ;  but  they  shall  not  have  pow-    Wright — 24. 

er  to  depart  from  the  principle  of  equality  and  Navs — Richaid  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
uniformity."  John   S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,   William  Brad- 

Mr.  MfiRIWETHER.  I  presume  the  legisla-  ley,  Luther  Brawner.  Fraucis'M.  Bristow,  Thom- 
ture  will  never  increase  the  number  of  judges  :  as  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Che- 
tintil  there  shall  be  an  increase  of  business  to  i  nault,  James  S.  Chrisraan,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
justify  it.  And  whenever  there  is  that  increase  !  Jesse  CofFev,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
of  business,  there  should  be  no  reduction  of  the  I  Copelin,  ^\  illiam  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius 
existing  salary,  because  the  old  judges  would  I  Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
have  the  same  amount  of  business  to  perform.  I  i  wards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  ^Nathan 
make  this  remark  in  opposition  to  the  amend- 1  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
ment  of  the  gentleman  from  Bath,  (Mr.  Nesbitt,)  j  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P. 
but  we  are  now  about  to  test  the  plan  of  an  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William 
elective  judiciary,  and  I  want  it  to  have  a  fair  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston, 
test;  and  unless  you  give  salaries  that  will  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
elicit  the  best  talents  in  the  country,  we  shall  ■  son,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
never  get  good  judges.  I  trust  therefore,  that  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
those  who  are  in  favor  of  giving  this  question  !  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
a  fair  test,  will  vote  for  a  minimum  salary.  j  field,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Thom- 

Mr.  XESBITT.  I  presume  that  if  the'  power  !  as  P.  Moore,  JamesM.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  New- 
is  given  to  the  legislature  to  reduce  the  sala-  j  cum,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  John- 
ries  of  the  judges,  when  it  shall  be  found  neces- I  son  Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rock- 
sary  to  increase  the  number,  they  will  never  '  hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root.  Ignatius  A. 
think  proper  to  say  they  have  too  much  work  to  :  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
do.  Suppose  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson  (Mr.  i  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John 
Meriwether,)  should  be  elected  judge  under  the;  J.  Thurman,  Howard  To<ld,  Johu  Wheeler, 
new  con.stitution,  and  a  minimum  salary  of  j  Charles  A.  Wickliife,  Robert  N.  Wicklifle,  Silas 
•$1,600,  is  fixed,  he  would  find  it  convenient  to  j  Woodson — 66. 
say,  I  can  do  the  business  of  my  district,  provided  ',  So  the  substitute  was  rejected, 
you  leave  it  as  it  is,  and  not  reduce  the  salary.  |  The  section  was  then  adopted. 
But  if  I  should  happen  to  be  elected  judge,  and  j  The  eleventh  section  was  then  read  as  follows: 
power  be  given  to  the  legislature  to  increase  the  j  'Sec.  11.  The  judges  of  the  circuit  court  shall 
number  of  judges,  without  the  power  to  reduce  I  be  removed  from  ofiice  by  a  resolution  of  the 
their  salaries,  I  might  say,  I  have  entirely  too  I  general  assembly,  passed  loy  two  thirds  of  each 
much  work  to  do,  you  must  add  to  the  number  s  house.  The  cause  or  causes  for  such  removal 
of  judges.  i  shall  be  entered  at  large  on  the  journal  of  each 

Mr.   MERIWETHER.      The  gentleman   has  |  house." 
supposed  a  case   that  can   never  exist.     They  ;      Mr.   MITCHELL.     I   propose  the  following 
have  rendered   me  ineligible   for  the  ofiice   of  |  substitute  for  that  section: 

judge,  but  he  is  not  ineligible.  The  gentleman  !  "The  governor  shall  remove  the  judges  of  the 
therefore  can  best  judge"  of  the  motives  that  I  circuit  courts  on  the  address  of  two  thirds  of 
would  control  his  own  action.  !  each  house  of  the   general   assembly:  Provided 

Mr.  NESBITT.  I  assumed  some  part  of  the  1  however,  that  the  cause  or  causes  for  which  such 
responsibility  by  taking  myself  into  the  illus-  j  removal  may  be    required,  shaU    be  stated  at 


tration.  I  rather  think  that  if  a  minimum  sala- 
ry should  fixed,  the  gentleman  would  soon  have 
a  certificate  in  his  pocket. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  withdrew  his  propo- 
sition to  fix  the  minimum  at  $1,800. 

Mr.  BALLINGER.  I  move  to  strike  out 
$1,600,  and  insert  $1,500. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  question  then  recurred  upon  the  sub- 
Btitut*. 

Mr.  NESBITT  moved,  as  an  amendment  to 
the  substitute,  the  proviso  which  he  had  indica- 
ted his  intention  to  oflFer. 

The  amendment  to  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

Messrs.  GHOLSON  and  JAMES  called  for  the 


length  in  such  address  on  the  journal  of  each 
house." 

This  is  a  provision  that  has  been  adopted  in 
regard  to  the  court  of  appeals;  and  it  occurs  to 
me  there  is  no  good  reason  for  departing  from 
tlie  rule  in  relation  to  the  judges  of  the  circuit 
courts. 

The  question  being  taken,  the  substitute  was 
rejected. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  twelfth  section  was  tlien  read  as  follows^ 

"Sec.  12.  The  governor  shall  have  no  power 
to  remit  the  fees  of  the  clerk,  sheriif,  or  common- 
wealth's attorney,  in  penal  or  criminal  cases." 

Mr.  HARDIN.     I  never  believed   the  gover- 


yeas  and  nays  on  the  substitute,  and  being  taken,  |  nor  had  this  power,  but  I  have  heard  a  great 
they  resulted  as  follows:  j  deal  of  complaint  on  the  part   of  sheriffs   and 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  K.  others,  on  account  of  having  their  fees  remitted. 
Bowling,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  I  It  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  constitution, 
SeluciuH  Garfielde,  Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  j  that  these  fees  were  intended  to  be  a  part  of  the 


672 


compensation  of  these  officers,  and  it  is   conse-  | 
quently  out  of  the  power  of  the  governor  to 
deprive  them  of  sueh  compensation.  i 

ilr.  MAYES.     I  will  eall  the  attention  of  the  | 
chairman  of  the  committee  to  thi.s  point.     It  ap- 
pears to  me  that  the   section  is  wholly  unneees- 
ry.     The  governor  has  no  power  to  remit  any  ' 
part  of  the  compensation    that  is    due  the.se  ; 
officers.  j 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  drawn  up  an  amend-  ; 
ment  which  I  think  will  meet  the  views  of  the  1 
gentleman;  it  is  as  follows,  insert  after  the  words  | 
"commonwealth's  attornev,"  the  folloAving: 

"Or  the  portion  of  a  fine  or  forfeiture,  given 
by  law  to  the  latter  office." 

I  supposed,  with  the  gentleman  la.st  up,  that 
tlie  governor  had  no  power  to  remit  the  fees  of 
officers;  but  1  am  told  there  are  instances  in 
■which  he  has  attempted  to  do  it,  and  there  has 
been  no  judicial  decision  upon  the  point.  I 
should  have  oifered  tliis  amendment  at  an  earlier 
day,  had  it  not  been  for  the  position  of  a  mem- 
ber of  my  family.  A.  son  of  mine  was  common- 
wealth's attorney,  and  I  knew  my  motive  might 
be  misconstrued,  if  I  offered  it  while  he  occupied 
that  situation.  I  am  satisfied  we  shall  never  get 
persons  who  are  competent  to  discharge  the  du- 
ties of  commonwealth's  attorney,  unless  we  take 
from  the  governor  the  power  to  remit  that  por- 
tion of  the  fines  which  the  law  gives  to  these  of- 
ficers, as  part  compensation  for  tlieir  services. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  intended  by  the  word  "fees" 
to  embrace  the  very  case  the  gentleman  has  men- 
tioned, because  it  is  the  money  that  belongs  to 
the  officers.  The  sheriff,  clerk,  and  common- 
wealth's attorney,  each  have  their  fees.  How- 
ever, I  am  willing  to  agree  to  any  thing  that  will 
make  it  more  explicit. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  I  think  there  are  many  ca- 
ses in  which  the  interposition  of  the  governor  is 
called  for.  A  man  mav  be  unjustly  convicted  of 
an  offence;  he  may  be  improperly  fined.  If  the 
case  does  not  require  the  interposition  of  the  gov- 
ernor he  will  not  interfere.  I  am  utterly  op- 
posed to  restricting  him  in  the  way  tlie  amend- 
ment proposes. 

Mr.  TURNER.  We  do  not  propo.se  to  prohi- 
bit the  governor  from  remitting  fines  that  go  in- 
to the  treasury;  but  only  that  portion  which  goes 
to  these  officers,  as  a  part  of  their  compensation 
for  service  rendered  the  commonwealth,  which 
is  given  to  them  in  order  to  stimulate  them  to  a 
proper  discharge  of  tlieir  duties.  Without  this, 
it  would  be  necessary  eitlier  to  fix  an  adequate 
salary  for  these  officers,  or  else  we  must  not  ex- 

Eect  to  obtain  competent  persons  to  fill  this  of- 
ce.  Public  opinion  demands  that  there  should 
be  a  check  upon  the  power  of  the  governor  in 
this  respect. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  Mr.  President:  Having  dis- 
charged the  duties  of  attorney  for  the  common- 
wealth in  the  15lh  judicial  district  for  several 
years,  and  having  now  resigned  that  office,  and 
not  expecting  that  it  will  ever  be  confered  upon 
me  again,  I  cannot,  in  justice  to  myself,  allow 
the  present  occasion  to  pass  without  giving  to 
the  convention  a  very  brief  statement  of  my  ob- 
servation and  experience  in  reference  to  the  sub- 
jects involved  in  the  section  as  reported  by  the 
eommitt«e — in  the  amendment  of  the  delegate 


from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner,) — and  alluded  to  ia 
the  course  of  the  present  discussion. 

The  office  of  attorney  for  the  commonwealth 
is  a  responsible  and  a  very  laborious  one,  and  I 
am  sure  that  few  men  in  the  state,  possessing  the 
requisite  qualifications  for  an  able  and  satisfac- 
tory discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  office,  can  be 
induced  to  accept  it,  after  the  judicial  districts 
shall  be  enlarged  according  to  the  provisions  of 
the  report  of  the  committee,  in  consideration  of 
the  very  low  salary  now  paid  that  officer,  provi- 
ded the  governor,  asheretofore,  is  invested  with 
the  power  to  take  from  him  all  the  valuable  per- 
quisites of  the  office. 

Laws  are  enacted,  high  penalties,  extending 
to  the  forfeiture  of  lifi',  liberty,  and  property,  are 
denounced  against  all  who  violate  their  provi- 
sions— the  expensive  organization  of  the  neces- 
sary tribunals,  to  bring  to  the  light  and  punish 
the  guilty,  incurred, — grand  juries  present,  petit 
juries  find  the  delinquents  guilt}-;  the  courts  pro- 
nounce the  penalties  of  the  law,  without  any  ter- 
rors to  the  guilty  ear,  upon  which  the  sentence 
ought  to  fall  with  all  the  solenmity  of  the  thun- 
ders of  the  judgment  day.  And  why?  Simply  be- 
cause of  the  facilities  afforded  for  the  acquisition 
of  executive  smiles,  remissions,  and  pardons. 
Sir,  I  have  heard  the  awful  sentence  of  death 
pronounced  without  any  striking  effectuponthe 
guilty  culprit,  executive  sunshine  enlivening 
by  anticipation  the  gloom,  the  horrors,  the  aw- 
fulness  of  the  scene.  Hence,  I  confess  that  I  am 
not  satisfied  with  the  report  of  the  ci)mmittee,  or 
the  amendment,  because  they  do  not  go  far. 
enough  in  their  restrictions  of  the  exercise  of  the 
panloning  prerogatives  of  the  executive.  But, 
as  the  report  is  the  result  of  compromi.se,  I  feel 
it  my  duty  to  support  it  and  such  amendments 
as  the  committee  will  allow. 

I  wish  to  speak  particularly  though,  Mr.  Pres- 
ident, in  reference  to  the  defects  in  the  present 
constitution,  sought  to  be  remedied  by  the  sec- 
tion under  consideration,  and  the  amendment  of 
the  delegate  from  Madison.  Little  regard  has 
been  paid  to  the  penal  statutes  in  Kentucky,  by 
those    whose    interests    or    abandoned    natures 

Srompted  them  to  set  them  at  defiance,  and  why? 
ot  because  grand  juries  were^Misinclined  to  fer- 
ret out  offences,  or  because  petit  juries  and  courts 
were  opposed  to  inflicting  the  appropriate  and 
legal  penalties  ;  but  they  have  been  trampled  un- 
der the  feet  of  the  lawless  desperadoes  of  the 
country  in  consequence  of  the  certain  refuge 
universally  extended,  almost,  by  the  executive  to 
them.  I  have  known  more  than  one  unprinci- 
pled law-defying  villian,  to  laugh  at,  and  defy 
the  officers  of  government,  in  their  efforts  to  en- 
force the  penal  statutes  of  Kentucky,  knowing 
sir,  that  let  their  delinquencies  be  never  so  great, 
that  a  merciful  executive  would  avert  the  chas- 
tising rod  in  the  name  of  poYcrtjjr,  mercy,  or 
something  of  the  sort.  So  much  cfoes  not  de- 
pend upon  the  number  or  the  severity  of  penal 
statutes  as  a  rigid  enforcement  of  their  penalties 
when  violated!  The  certainty,  more  than  the 
character  of  the  punishment  deters  from  the  com- 
mission of  crime,  and  a  violation  of  the  moral 
precepts  of  our  penal  code.  I  do  not  pretend  to 
speak  of  the  practice  in  any  portion  of  Ken- 
tucky, save  that  immediately  represented  by  lue 
upon  this  floor  ;  but  I  do  know  sir,  that   within 


673 


my  knou'kdge,  tlie  exercise  of  the  pardoning  \ 
power  by  the  governor,  and  the  indiscriminate 
remission  of  all  fines  imposed  br  the  courts  and 
juries  of  the  country,  have  done  more  to  embol- 
den crime,  interupt  the  peace  of  society,  and 
trample  under  foot  the  morals  of  the  communi- 
ty, than  all  other  causes  combined.  I  would  be 
■willing  to  deprive  the  governor  of  the  power  to 
remit  fanes  altogether,  and  say  that  after  an  en- 
lightened court  and  jury  had  found  a  man  guilty 
of  a  gross  violation  of  the  penal  laws,  he  should 
suffer  that  punishment  which  the  wisdom  of  the 
law-making  power  had  provided.  But  a.s  I  can- 
not succeed  to  the  full  extent,  I  do  hope  that  the 
report  of  the  committee  will  be  sustained.  There 
has  been  a  constant  warfare  going  on  between 
the  virtuous  law-abiding  citizens,  determined  to 
sustain  the  morals  and  well  being  of  society,  on 
the  one  side,  and  the  reckless  out-breaking  law- 
defying  desperado  on  the  other,  ever  since  law 
was  invented  and  applied  to  human  action.  The 
innocent  man  will  never  suffer  in  consequence 
of  the  application  of  the  remedy,  which  the  sec- 
tion under  consideration  proposes,  to  the  evils 
complained  of.  The  guilty  aJone  are  destined 
to  reap,  in  merited  punishment  by  it,  the  legiti- 
mate fruits  of  their  desperate  deeds. 

Mr.  President,  no  tongue  can  tell  the  evils 
which  have  resulted  to  Kentucky,  in  a  thousand 
•ways,  from  the  grog  shops,  and  tiplin^  houses 
in  the  country.  The  young — the  middle  aged, 
the  old,  black,  white,  ricli  and  poor,  have  been, 
and  I  fear  are,  destined  to  be  the  victims  of  these 
sinks  of  iniquity  in  Kentucky.  As  long  sir,  as 
tipling  houses  <tc.  are  permitted  to  be  set  up  and 
money  to  be  made  at  them  in  violation  of  law, 
under  the  protecting  influences  of  executive  fa- 
vor, so  long  will  your  sons,  your  brothers,  vour 
nephews,  and  your  neighbors  be  decoyed  within 
their  influence — so  louj^  will  the  tears  of  the 
mother  flow — so  long  will  the  heart  of  the  wife 
bleed,  over  the  fallen  depraved  fortunes  of  her 
husband.  If  you  wish  to  destroy  crime,  wretch- 
edness, woe  and  miserv,  you  must  begin  at  the 
fountain  head.  And  i  now  say  to  you,  and  this 
convention,  that  the  whole  penal  code  might  as 
well  be  repealed,  and  every  man  allowed  to 
drink,  gamble,  fight,  and  do  all  he  can  to  ruin 
the  morals  of  the  country,  without  any  restraints 
at  all,  as  to  continue  upon  your  statute  books, 
laws  which  are  rendered  wholly  and  almost 
universallv  inoperative  by  executive  clemency. 
The  time  tas  not  long  pas.sed,  when  the  gover- 
nor was  not  only  in  the  habit  of  remitting  the 
fines  and  forfeitures  imposed  upon  the  guilty  vio- 
lators of  the  laws,  but  the  clerks,  sheriffs,  and  at- 
torneys fees,  allowed  by  statute.  The  section 
now  under  discussion  only  deprives  him  of  the 
power  to  make  the  officers  of  the  law  labor  in 
their  laudable  effort  to  preserve  tlie  morals  and 
■well  being  of  society  for  nothing. 

Mr.  MAYES.  lam  not  commonwealth's  at- 
torney nor  do  J  expect  to  be,  but  I  have  acted  in 
that  capacity,  first  under  the  appointment  of 
Gov.  Letcher,  and  then  under  the  appointment  of 
Gov.  Owsley.  It  is  proposed  that  the  common- 
"wealth's  attorney,shall  have  a  salary  of  three  hun- 
dred dollars,  ana  as  an  inducement  for  gentlemen 
of  talents  to  accept  the  office — and  that  violators 
of  the  law  shall  not  go  unpunished — a  portion  of 
the  fiines  and  forfetures  are  appropriated  as  fees, 
85 


in  payment  of  the  services  of  these  officers:  I 
hope  the  principle  of  the  amendment  will  be 
adopted. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  1  offer  the  following  as  an 
amendment  to  the  substitute  for  the  section. 

"The  governor  shall  have  no  power  to  remit 
anv  fine  orfor  eiture,  except .suuh as  maybe  pay- 
able into  the  public  treasury." 

The  governor  has  no  power  to  remit  the  fees 
of  clerks,  sheriffs,  or  commonwealth's  attorneya 
in  penal  prosecutions.  This  twelfth  section  is, 
therefore,  merely  declarative  of  wliat  the  law  is, 
and  is  wholly  unnecessary. 

The  amendment  proposes  to  take  from  the 
governor  his  right  to  remit  so  much  of  any  fine 
or  forfeiture,  as  the  legislature  may  have  given 
or  appropriated  to  the  prosecuting  attorney  or 
others  as  pay  or  inducement  to  successful  pros- 
ecution. I  am  opposed  to  the  amendment.  It 
is  calculated  to  put  it  in  the  power  of  the  legis- 
lature to  render  the  executive  power  to  remit 
fines  and  forfeitures  entirely  nugatory.  If  the 
legislature  may  give  a  part  of  the  fine  or  for- 
feiture to  the  attorney  prosecuting,  it  can  give 
the  balance  to  others,  and  thus  withdraw  all 
fines  and  forfeitures  from  executive  clemency. 
We  have  already  deprived  the  executive  of  most 
of  the  powers  delegated  to  him  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  1799,  and  it  would  be  wrong  to  trench 
further  upon  his  prerogative.  If  the  common- 
wealth's attorney,  and  other  officers,  have  not 
sufficient  compensation,  let  it  be  increased  in 
some  other  way,  and  let  us  leave  with  the  gov- 
ernor the  power  to  remit  fines  and  forfeitures, 
unrestricted. 

I  shall  vote  against  both  the  amendment  and 
the  twelfth  .section,  for  I  am  unwilling  to  deprive 
the  executive,  to  any  extent,  of  his  power  to  re- 
mit fines  and  forfeitures  in  meritorious  cases. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I,  too,  have  been  state's  at- 
torney, and  know  the  necessity  for  having  men 
of  talents  to  fill  that  office.  I  have  seen  that 
office  dwindled  down  to  a  mere  nothing,  when 
compared  to  what  it  once  was.  The  object  of 
the  committee  was,  to  give  to  the  commonwealth's 
attorney  such  compensation  as  wiU  induce  gen- 
tlemen of  the  best  talents  to  accept  the  office. 
I  think  the  house  is  sufficiently  informed  on  the 
subject,  I  will  therefore  call  for  the  previous 
question. 

The  question  being  stated,  ".shall  the  main 
question  be  now  put,"  it  was  carried,  upon  a  di- 
vision— yeas  35,  nays  21. 

The  question  was  then  taken  upon  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Madison. 

The  yeas  and  navs  being  called  for,  by  Messrs. 
FORREST  and  HARDIN,  resulted  as  follows— 
yeas  37,  nays  52 : 

Ye-^s — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  W  illiam  Chenault,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  HarHin,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John 
H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  John  D.  Mor- 
ris, Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  PoUard,  John- 
son Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  James  Eudd,  Al- 
bert G.  Talbott,  John  J.  Thunnan,  Philip  Trip- 


074 


lett.  Squire  Turner,  Audrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  WicklifiFe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright 

Nays— John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Charles  Chambers,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Heury  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  LuciusDesha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Ben- 

i'amin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  P'orrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Thos.  J.  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  Charles  C.  Kelley, 
Peter  Jjashbrooke,  George  W.Mansfield.  Alexan- 
der K.  Marshall,  Nathan  MeClnre,  William  D. 
Mitchell.  James  M.  Nesbitt,  William  Preston, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rookhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor, William  R.  Thompson, Howard  Todd,  John 
L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
George  W.  Williams — 52. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 
^  The  question  was  then  taken   upon  the  adop- 
tion of  the  twelfth  section,  by  yeas  and  navs,  on 
the  call  of  Messrs.   MITCHELL  and  BR6WN, 
and  were — yeas  50,  nays  38 : 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  De- 
sha, Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjainin  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thos. 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Mar- 
shall, William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
John  H.  McHenry,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, Thomas  Rockhold,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 50. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner.  Tliomas  D.  BroAvn, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Hen- 

3r  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
owper.  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Ham- 
ilton, Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas 
James,  Charles  C.  Kelley,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether,  William 
D.  Mitchell.  William  Preston,  John  T.  Rogers, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spahfing, 
John  W.  Steveuson,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd 
John  L.  Waller,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe— 38. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  sections  were 
then  read  and  adopted  as  follows: 

"Skc.  13.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  the  office 
of  judge  of  the  circuit  court,  the  governor  shall 
iBBue  a  writ  of  election  to  fill  nucn  vacancy,  for 


the  residue  of  the  term,  and  another  judge  shall 
be  elected  by  tliai  district,  to  serve  until  the  ex- 
piration of  the  time  for  which  the  judge  was 
elected  whose  death,  or  other  cause,  produced 
such  vacancy:  Provided,  That  if  the  unexpired 
term  be  h^ss  than  one  year,  the  governor  shall 
appoint  a  judge  to  fill  such  vacancy." 

"Sec.  14.  The  general  assembly  shall  not 
change  the  venue  in  any  criminal  or  penal  prose- 
cution, but  they  shall  provide,  by  general  laws, 
the  mode  and  manner  in  which  changes  of  venue 
in  such  cases  may  be  had." 

The  fifteenth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  15.  In  all  trials  for  treason  or  felony, 
the  commonwealth  shall  be  entitled  to  peremp- 
tory challenges  of  jurors  equal  to  one-fourth  the 
number  allowed  the  accused." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  As  the  law  now  stands,  in 
cases  of  felony,  the  accused  has  the  privilege  of 
challenging  without  showing  cause,  but  the 
commonwealth  has  no  such  right,  unless  they 
show  good  cause.  It  is  known  to  gentlemen 
who  have  prosecuted  criminal  cases,  that  men 
are  placed  upon  the  jury,  sometimes  upon  their 
mere  allegation  that  they  have  formed  no  opin- 
ion in  the  case,  and  who  go  there  predetermined 
to  acquit  the  accu.sed.  This  was  the  reason  that 
operated  with  the  committee,  and  caused  the  in- 
sertion of  this  section. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  will  offer  the  following 
amendment: 

"Provided,  That  in  all  penal  and  criminal 
prosecutions,  the  accused  shall  have  the  right  to 
jprosecute  an  appeal,  or  writ  of  error,  to  the  court 
of  appeals." 

The  first  thing,  no  doubt,  that  strikes  the 
mind  of  delegates  in  this  house,  upon  a  few  mo- 
ments reflection,  is  that  there  is  a  vast  difference 
between  the  life,  liberty,  and  character  of  a  citi- 
zen, and  his  property.  In  a  controversy  involv- 
ing but  $50  you  have  a  right  to  appeal,  you  have 
a  right  to  spread  upon  the  record  a  bill  of  ex- 
ceptions, to  any  opinion  that  the  judge  may 
render  in  the  progress  of  the  trial;  -dnd  you  have 
a  rightto  a  writ  of  error  to  the  court  of'appeals; 
and  to  have  the  decisions  of  the  circuit  courts  re- 
versed, if  wrong.  But  sir,  upon  a  question  in- 
volving life,  liberty,  or  reputation,  you  have  no 
such  right.  I  ask  every  delegate  on  this  floor, 
to  put  the  question  to  himself,  and  answer  it, 
wliy  this  difference  between  the  property  of  the 
citizen  on  the  one  hand,  and  his  life,  liberty,  and 
reputation  on  the  other?  The  constitution  of 
Virginia,  which  is  said  to  be  the  mother  of  com- 
monwealths, and  which  has  produced  such  men 
as  John  Marshall — and  time  nas  not  placed  upon 
the  sepulchre  of  the  dead  anobler  name — allows 
the  accused  to  appeal  from  the  decision  of  the 
court  below,  and  a  worthier  example  we  could 
not  follow. 

I  was  struck  with  a  remark  made  by  the  ven- 
erable gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  the 
other  clay.  It  was,  that  the  circuit  judge,  has 
the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  the  citizen  in 
the  palm  of  his  hand,  and  it  was  a  remark  that 
came  from  his  heart.  And  he  added,  that  if  he 
had  a  son  upon  trial,  he  would  expend  tlie  whole 
of  his  fortune  in  order  to  purchase  his  reloa<«e. 
He  might  have  gone  further,  and  said  that  he 
would  have  coined  his  heart's  blood  for  the  re- 
demption of  his  son. 


675 


The  power  and  influeucf  that  a  ciivuit  ^juJge 
has  over  the  life  and  liberty  of  the  citizen,  is  ex- 
hibited upon  the  admission  or  rejection  of  tes- 
timony. Suppose  that  I  am  on  trial,  and  that 
the  admission  of  certain  testimony  which  I  seek 
to  introdui-e  to  the  consideration  of  the  jury, 
wouid  absolve  me  from  the  charge;  and  make  j 
m}'  innocence  as  clear  as  sunshine,  in  shady 
places,  and  the  judj^e  should  exclude  it,  tlien  it 
IS  that  the  power  of  the  circuit  Judge  is  felt. 
Why  should  we,  I  ask,  make  this  invidious,  this 
inexcusnble  and  unjust  distinction,  between  the 
property  and  life  of  a  citizen'/  The  old  con- 
stitution is  radiant  with  the  principle  of  pro- 
tection, in  relation  to  property,  as  the  firmament 
with  stars.  And  gentlemen  have  introduced 
here  certain  abstract  principles,  which  they  in- 
tend to  incorporate  iu  the  bill  of  rights,  that 
are  not  only  to  protect  us  now,  in  the  enjoyment 
of  our  property,  but  at  all  future  times.  And 
this  convention  is  laboring,  by  a  thousand 
methods,  to  secure  and  protect  persons  in  the 
eiijoyment  and  acquisition  of  property;  whilst 
liu!,  liberty,  and  reputation  is  entrusted  to  a 
single  judge,  without  check  or  limitation,  in  any 
form  whatever. 

Gentlemen  say  it  would  have  a  tendency  to 
increase  the  expenses  of  the  judiciary.  It  is  true, 
that  in  many  cases  it  would  be  expensive.  But 
I  ask,  is  any  gentleman  so  wedded  to  his  pecu- 
liar notions,  as  to  be  willing  to  make  life  and 
liberty  a  question  of  pounds,  shillings,  and 
pence.  It  is  proper,  that  the  humblest  as  well 
as  the  most  exalted,  should  have  the  right  of  ap- 

f»eal,  upon  questions  involving  his  liberty  or  his 
ife. 

If  gentlemen  have  talked  about  bribery  and 
corruption,  sir,  this  provision  is  intended  to 
prevent  Vjribery  and  corruption;  to  prevent 
money  from  having  an  influence  in  our  crimi- 
nal jurisprudence;  and  to  adjourn  questions, 
involving  life  and  liberty  to  another  court 
Avhere  the  matter  may  be  clearly  and  deliberate- 
ly examined,  in  all  the  lights  possible  to  be 
thrown  upon  it.  The  decision  of  the  judge  is 
sometimes  given,  under  the  influence  of  feelings 
favorable,  or  hostile  to  the  parties;  sometimes 
under  the  influence  of  the  powerful  arguments 
of  counsel,  upon  questions  that  aflfect  a  man's 
life,  liberty  or  character.  What  is  a  man's 
character?  Like  his  shadow,  it  sometimes  goes 
before  liim,  and  at  others  follows  him.  And 
when  this  and  other  interests  dear  to  him,  are 
at  stake,  I  for  one,  would  admit  of  no  petty  con- 
sideration of  pounds,  shillings  and  pence,  to 
interfere  and  prevent  protection  by  having  the 
questions  of  law,  involving  their  safety,  examin- 
ed and  settled  by  an  appellate  tribunal,  and 
hence  I  have  submitted  my  amendment. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  The  power  is  now  in  the 
legislature  to  give  the  right  of  appeal  to  the  ac- 
cused, and  our  government  has  been  in  operation 
for  fifty  seven  years,  last  June,  and  such  a  right 
has  never  been  granted.  And  if  this  provision 
.should  now  be  put  into  the  constitution,  I  do  not 
believe,  that  any  application  would  ever  receive 
the  support  of  more  than  one-tenth  of  the  legis- 
lature. I  will  venture  to  say,  one  thing  certain, 
that  there  would  not  be  one  conviction  out  of 
ten,  unless  lie  be  some  poor  beggarly,  vagrant, 
in  which  there  would  not  be  a  writ  of  error  de- 


manded; and  before  th«  trial  came  on,  the  ac-. 
cused — if  out  on  bail — would  make  his  escape, 
and  if  in  jail,  would  require  three  or  four  men  to 
guard  him.  I  ask  the  gentleman,  if  he  is  not  as 
likely  to  get  justice  in  the  circuit  court  as  in  the 
court  of  appeals.  Some  judge  must  decide  the 
case,  and  tne  inconvenience  of  suspending  the 
execution  of  a  judgment  in  e%'ery  case,  would  be 
beyond  the  endurance  of  the  countrj'.  But  that 
is  not  all;  sometimes  escapes  might  be  had 
through  the  great  influence  of  money.  I 
want  it  left  to  the  legislature.  If  we  adopt  it 
here,  we  cannot  afterwards  get  clear  of  it.  It 
is  an  old  adage,  "  that  it  is  better  that  ninety 
nine  guilty  men  should  escape,  than  that  one 
innocent  man  should  be  punished."  I  do  not 
think  I  ever  saw  an  innocent  man  punished  in 
my  life;  but  I  believe  that  ninety  nine  guilty 
scoundrels  escape  for  everj'  one  that  is  punishea. 
I  hope  the  proposition  will  not  be  adopted. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  am  against  the  entire  section 
and  against  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor.)  The  commonwealth 
has  advantages  enough  over  the  accused  now, 
and  I  am  not  disposetfto  increase  them.  I  have 
been  engaged  a  great  deal  in  the  management  of 
cases  of  a  criminal  character,  and  I  know  the 
great  difficulties  which  the  accused  has  always 
to  contend  against.  The  very  fact  that  a  man  is 
charged  with  a  high  offence  as  murder,  excites 
the  public  suspicion  and  prejudice  against  him, 
and  the  ciy-  of  the  community  at  once,  too  often 
without  .stopping  to  enquire  into  the  facte,  is 
crucify  him,  and  the  protection  which  the  law 
affords  him  and  the  ability  of  his  advocate  can 
scarcely  save  him  from  becoming  a  victim  to 
that  popular  prejudice.  The  commonwealth  has 
advantages  enough,  and  the  accused  should  have 
every  opportuuitv  afforded  him  of  an  impartial 
trial.  He  shonld  have  a  jury  not  packed  to  de- 
cide his  case  against  law  and  in  favor  of  him- 
self, but  one  that  will  secure  him  an  impartial 
trial.  This  was  the  object  of  allowing  him  the 
right  to  challenge  twenty  jurors  peremptorily, 
and  thus  to  secure  himself  against  the  influence 
of  popular  prejudice.  The  commonwealth  have 
nothing  to  fear  from  any  such  prejudice,  and 
therefore  there  is  no  such  reason  why  it  should 
have  the  right  of  peremptorj'  challenge.     It  is  a 

firinciple  in  the  laws  of  Kentucky,  except  to  a 
imited  extent.     I  believe  in  the  correctness  of 
!  the  maxim,  to  which  my  friend  from  Nelson  has 
!  referred,  "that  it  is  better  that  ninety  nine  guil- 
!  ty  men  should  escape,  than   that  one  innocent 
I  man   .should  suff"er."     Although  I  am  for  pun- 
I  ishing  crime,  I  would  save  those  who  are  not 
I  guilty.     I  am  satisfied  with  the  constitution  as 
I  it  is,  and  I  hope  the  section,  together  with  the 
!  amendment,  will  be  rejected. 
I     Mr.  MAYES.    I  wish  to  say  a  few  words  upon 
this  section  before  the  vote  shall  be  taken.    I 
have  never  yet  been  able  to  see  why  it  is  that 
the  man  charged  with  crime  should  be  allowed 
to  challenge  twenty  persons  presented  as  jury- 
men, without  being  required  to  show  cause  for 
j  such  challenge,  when  the  right  is  denied  to  the 

1'  people  of  the  state  to  object  to  a  single  one,  un- 
less  cause  can  be  shown  for  such  an  objection. 
The  gentleman  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,) 
says  that  the  state  has  advantages  enough  now 
over  the  man  arraigned  for  crime.    I  know  not 


I 


676 


of  the  advantages  of  which  that  gentleman 
speaks.  He  says  that  great  prejudice  is  engen- 
dered in  the  public  mind  against  the  accused, 
and  that  this  is  an  advantage.  Another  advan- 
tage he  tells  us  consists  in  the  fact  that  the  at- 
torney for  the  state  has  the  right  to  open  and 
conclude  the  argument  before  the  jury.  Now, sir, 
I  cannot  admit  that  the  public  are  prejudiced 
against  a  citizen  merely  because  he  may  be  ac- 
cused of  crime.  No  sir.  Our  sympathies  are 
all  in  favor  of  the  accused,  unless  the  evidence 
of  his  guilt  be  clear.  If  it  be  true  that  the  con- 
cluding speech  operates  as  an  advantage  in  fa- 
vor of  the  state — which  I  by  no  means  admit — 
the  defendant  in  a  civil  action  for  the  same  rea- 
son should  have  the  right,  without  cause,  to  ob- 
ject to  at  lea.st  six;  for  in  such  case  the  plaintiff 
has  the  right  to  open  and  conclude  the  argument. 
I  do  not,  however,  admit  that  an  honest  jury 
can  be  swayed  or  controlled  by  the  last  argu- 
ment. They  are,  generallv,  and  at  all  times 
should  be,  controlled  by  tlie  law  and  the  evi- 
dence touching  the  subject  under  eonsideration, 
and  not  by  the  last  speech,  as  supposed  by  the 
distinguished  gentleman  from  Henderson. 

It  may  be  that  I  occupy  a  singular  position 
upon  the  subject  under  consideration,  for  I  am  a 
member  of  the  legal  profession,  and  it  is  said 
that  all  men  are  controlled  in  their  action  by 
that  which  may  be  regarded  as  affecting  their 
own  peculiar  interest.  I  however  contend  that 
there  have  been  instances,  and  there  have  been 
many  such,  where  persons  have  lost  sijght  of  per- 
s(mal  aggrandizement,  and  have  done  thatwhich 
was  best  calculated  to  advance  the  greatest  good 
to  the  greatest  numbers.  lam  and  have  long 
been  satisfied  that  the  right  of  challenge  should 
be  given  to  the  state  in  criminal  causes;  and  that 
without  it,  in  many  instances,  the  criminal  law 
of  the  country  is  nothing  more  than  a  farce,  and 
is  renderea  wholly  impotent  and  ineffectual  to 
suppress  and  punish  crime.  There  have  been 
instances  of  packed  juries.  I  have  thought, 
nay,  I  am  sure  I  have  seen  this  thing  done. 
All  who  are  conversant  with  the  admiuinistra- 
tion  of  the  criminal  law  of  the  state,  have  seen 
it  outraged  by  bribery  and  perjury  upon  the  part 
of  persons  sworn  as  jurymen.  Yes,  sir,  they 
have  seen  those  miserable  wretches  standing  at 
and  around  the  court  house  door,  ready,  when- 
ever the  regular  panel  should  be  exhausted,  to 
present  themselves  as  jurymen .  They  have  been 
thus  presented — have  sworn  that  they  had  formed 
no  opinion  as  to  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  ac- 
cused, and  have  taken  their  seats  on  the  jury ;  and 
in  defiance  of  the  most  positive  proof  of*^  the  guilt 
of  the  fiend  in  human  shape,  he  who  had  perhaps 
crimsoned  his  murderous  hands  in  the  olood  of 
the  husband  antl  the  father,  by  their  verdict  have 
declared  hiiu  not  guilty,  and  turned  him  loose 
to  prey  again  upon  society,  and  again  to  violate 
that  law  with  impunity,  which  was  made,  as  it 
is  supposed,  to  secure  to  the  citizen  the  right  to 
his  life  and  property.  They  have  done  this  too 
when  all  who  lieard  the  facts  of  the  case — and 
who  have  no  wish  to  gratify  but  that  the  guilty 
be  punished,  and  the  majesty  of  ihe  law  vindi- 
cated— are  satisfied  of  his  guilt.  It  is  not  pro- 
posed, sir,  to  take  from  the  accused  the  right  of 
challenge — nor  is  it  proposed  to  deprive  him  of 
»ny  advantage  whatever,  which  he  may  now  en- 


joy.    The  object  is  to  secure  to  the  people — for 
whose  protection  the  law  has  been  made — some 
little  chance,  that  the  man  who  has  no  regard 
for  the  law  of  the  country,  and  who  is  reaov  at 
all  times  and  upon  all  occasions  to  commit  crime, 
shall  not,  by  a  packed  and  corrupt  jury,  be  de- 
clared innocent,  when  his  guilt  is  manifest  to  all. 
Sir.  we  all  know  the  power  of  money;  its  power 
has  been  wielded  in  such  a  Way  as  often,  very 
often,  to  set  at  open  defiance  the  criminal  law  of 
the  country,  and  set  at  liberty  the  veriest  mur- 
derers and  scoundrels  that  ever  disgraced   the 
shape  of  man;  yes,  it  has  entered  the  very  tem- 
ple erected  and  dedicated  to  justice,   and   has 
contaminated  and   poisoned  that  stream  which 
should  ever  be  kept  pure.    It  has  bribed  jury- 
men and  witnesses,  and  has  rendered  the  crimin- 
al law  of  your  state  little  better  than  a  dead  let- 
ter.    What  is  more  common    at  this   day,   than 
when  it  is  said  that  murder  has  been  commit- 
ted, to  hear  the  information  answered  by  the  re- 
mark  that  the  man  who  may  have  committed 
the  deed  is  in  no  danger,  he  has  too  much  wealth, 
his  family  connexion  is  too  extensive   and  pow- 
erful, and  that  the  law  was  not  made  for  nim? 
What,  sir,  does   all  this  meanV    It  only  means 
that  if  you  give  a  man  money,  united  with  strong 
family  friends  and  influence,  he  may  at  his  will 
laugh  to  scorn  your  courts  of  justice,  trample  the 
law   with   impunitv   under  his  feet,   and  com- 
mit crime  without  tlie  fear  of  punishment.    The 
poor,  the  weak,  the  humble,  and  the  penniless, 
regard  the  criminal  law  as  but  a  poor  shield  in- 
deed to  them,  against  the  wrongs  and  outrages 
which  the  strong  and  mighty  impose  upon  them. 
The  people  have,  in  a  great  measure,  lost  confi- 
dence in  the  security  oflfcred  by  the  criminal  law. 
Let  a  poor  and  friendless  man  be  indicted  for 
crime,  and  he  is  convicted  or  executed,  or  sent  to 
the  penitentiary  to  expiate  his  crime;  and  to  ef- 
fect this,  the  evidence  of  his  guilt  need  not  be 
very  strong.     The  unfortunate  man  has  no  mon- 
ey; no  powerful  and  influential  friends  to  stand 
by  him  in  the  hour  of  his  need.    He  has  no 
money  with  which  to  bribe  miserable  wretches 
to  come  in  and  take  their  seats  on  the  jury 
bench,  predetermined  to  acquit  him.    This  pro- 
vision allowing  a  challenge  to  the  state,  as  far 
as  the  man  thus  friendless  may  be  concerned, 
may  not  be  so  very  important;  but  sir,  I  main- 
tain that  it  is  most  important,  when  the  man  of 
wealth  and  influence  is  charged  with  and  guilty 
of  crime,  to  combat  in  some  degree  the  wicked 
use   he  may  make,   and  which   he   often  does 
make,  of  his  money,   when   he   has  robbed  a 
better  man   than  himself  of  his  life,  deprived 
the  wife  of  her  husband,  and  the  children  of 
their  father  and  protector.    I  have  said,  sir,  tliat 
as  I  am  engaged  in  the  practice  of  law,  and  am 
sometimes  engaged  in  the  defence  of  such  as  are 
charged  with  crime,  it  may  appear  singular  that 
I  advocate  this  section  of  the  report,  as  it  is  the 
interest  of  the  lawyer  to  use  all  honorable  means 
to  succeed  in  his  client's  cause.     I  expect  to  find 
most  of  the  members  of  the  profession  arrayed 
against  this  section,   for  the  reason  that,  if  it 
should  be  adopted,   it  will  take  from  them  in 
some  small  degree  a  portion  of  the  advantage 
wliifh  the  law,   as  it  now  is,  gives  (o  the  man 
charged  with  orime,  over  the  people  of  the  state 
whose  rights  havfc  been  by  him  trampled  nndet 


«r7 


foot;  and  for  that  reason,  some  of  them  at  least 
may  be  expected  to  oppose  it.  As  a  class,  there 
is  it  not,  in  the  wide  -world,  a  more  honorable 
high-minded,  and  patriotic  portion  of  the  citi- 
zens of  this  or  any  other  country,  than  are  the 
la-wyers.  Their  love  of  coiintrj-,  their  hatred  of 
tyranny  and  oppression,  has  been  evidenced 
upon  eVery  battle-field  wherever  and  whenever 
the  flag  of  liberty  and  free  fjovernment  has  been 
raised.  They  have  at  all  times  been  found 
along  side  of 'the  friends  of  free  government  in 
every  country  upon  earth.  Yes,  sir,  their  blood 
has 'been  freely  and  nobly  shed,  and  their 
treasure  has  been  expended'  to  secure  to  us  the 
free  government,  the  benefit-s  of  which  we  this 
day  so  abundantly  enjoy.  Still,  Mr.  President, 
they  are  but  men'  subject  to  all  the  frailties  and 
imperfections  of  our  unhappy  and  fallen  condi- 
tion; and  perhaps  as  a  class,  they  may  feel  it  to 
be  a  duty  they  owe  to  their  present  and  future 
clients  to  oppose  this  section.  We  should,  how- 
ever, and  1  hope  we  shall,  upon  this  occasion, 
fo  get  all  other  considerations  save  the  public 
good,  and  vote  upon  this  question  with  an  eye 
alone  to  the  just  administration  of  justice.  I 
presume  all  will  thus  vote. 

Why  is  it,  sir,  that  the  sympathies  of  gentle- 
men appear  to  flow  so  freely  in  favor  of  those 
who  are  charged  with  crime,  or  who  may  be  ar- 
raigned for  trial?  I  too  can  sympathise  with  the 
wretch  who  has  wantonly  outraged  the  law  of 
the  country,  but  at  the  same  time,  when  he  has 
my  sympathy  and  my  sorrow,  1  desire  that  he 
shall  De  punished  as  certainly  as  he  has  commit- 
ted crime.  I  have  much  sympathy  for  those 
upon  whom  he  has  brought  ruin,  distress,  mise- 
ry, and  wretchedness,  by  his  high-handed  viola- 
tion of  law.  The  man  of  crime  has  no  symathy. 
In  cold  blood  he  can  take  the  life  of  his  fellow, 
without  mercy,  or  remorse.  In  my  judgment  he 
is  not  entitedto  a  great  deal  of  compassion,  and 
should,  when  arraigned,  be  allowed  no  advan- 
tage over  the  state.  He  should  have  a  fair  trial. 
So  should  the  state  have  an  equally  fair  chance. 
If,  sir,  we  would  banish  from  our  land  crime  and 
immorality,  the  laws  made  for  the  punishment 
of  such  as  may  be  guilty  of  it  must  Ix)  enforced, 
and  all  the  facilities  and  aids  necessary  to  its  en- 
forcement must  be  afforded.  Without  this,  it  is 
and  ever  will  be  futile  to  think  of  suppressing 
crime.  If  it  be  understood  that  the  heavy  pen- 
alty of  the  offended  law  will  certainly  be  visited 
on'him  who  may  dare  violate  it,  then  we  may 
hojie  to  see  less  of  crime,  and  not  otherwise;  for 
sir,  when  it  is  seen  that  the  punishments  de- 
manded by  the  law  against  such  as  commit 
crime,  are  easily  evaded,  and  that  there  is  little 
or  no  certaintj  that  such  will  be  punished,  ju.st 
so  sure  as  this  is  the  case,  will  crime  increjise 
in  the  land.  And  sir,  to  this  unfortunate  con- 
dition we  have  arrived,  and  the  people  of  the 
stat«  have  in  a  great  measure  lost  confidence  in 
the  power  of  the  law  to  protect,  shield,  and  se- 
cure them  against  outrage  and  wrong.  It  is,  Mr. 
President,  the  hope  with  which  I  flatter  myself, 
that  the  principle  contained  in  the  section  under 
consideration,  will,  if  adopted,  afford  some  lit- 
tle aid  in  bringing  to  justice  such  as  regard  not 
the  law,  that  I  am  induced  to  advocate  it.  If 
adopted,  as  I  have  before  said,  it  will   not  take 


from   the  man  charged  with  crime  one  singl« 
privilege  which  he  now  has. 

The  gentleman  from  Mason  has  offered  a  sub- 
stitute by  which  it  is  proposed  to  allow  appeals 
in  criminal  causes.  1  am  disposed  sir,  to  vote 
for  some  principle  which  will  give  the  accu.sed 
an  opportunity  to  have  an  error,  committed  to 
his  prejudice  when  upon  trial,  corrected;  for  al- 
though I  am  anxious  that  sueh  as  commit  crime 
should  be  punished,  still  sir,  I  would  have  no 
one  improperly  or  illegally  punished.  I  do  not 
know  why  it  is  that  in  criminal  causes,  the  judg- 
ment as  rendered  in  the  circuit  court,  must  stand 
unchanged,  whether  it  be  supported  by  law  or 
not.  We  have  no  tribunal  to  which  the  accused 
can  appeal,  that  an  erroneous  opinion  which 
may  deprive  him  of  his  life  or  liberty  may  be  re- 
vised and  corrected.  Ourcircuit  judges  entertain 
different  opinions  upon  different  questions  of 
criminal  law,}'et  we  have  no  court  to  which  such 
opinions  may  betaken,  and  when  wrong,  correct- 
ed. That  which  is  a  crime  in  one  circuit,  may 
be  no  crime  in  the  adjoining  circuit.  I  have 
never  been  able  to  see  why  it  wa.s,  that  Kentuc- 
ky had  no  tribunal  of  last  resort,  where  the  crim- 
inal law  of  the  state  could  be  settled,  and  made 
to  operate  in  all  parts  of  the  state  alike.  I  think 
there  should  be  some  such  tribunal.  It  has  ever 
been  a  source  of  surprise  to  me  sir,  that  persons 
are  allowed,  when  they  deem  that  justice  has 
not  been  done  upon  the  trial  of  a  civil  action,  to 
take  an  appeal,  and  have  such  errors  as  may  have 
been  committed  corrected,  and  the  same  may  be 
done  in  penal  prosecutions,  and  yet  when  the 
life  or  liberty  of  the  citizen  is  in  peril;  when  he 
has  been  tned  and  condemned  upon  what  he 
and  his  counsel  regard  as  an  erroneous  construc- 
tion of  the  law,  there  is  no  appeal  except  to  the 
clemency  of  the  executive.  This  looks,  Mr. 
President,  somewhat  as  if  we  thought  more  of 
property  than  of  that  which  we  all,  in  fact,  hold 
most  dear,  our  lives,  our  liberty,  and  our  reputa- 
tions. It  is  said,  as  an  argument  against  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Mason,  that 
if  persons  condemned  for  crime  are  allowed  to 
appeal,  the  costs  of  criminal  prosecutions  will 
be  greatly  increased.  This  may  be  true;  but  sir, 
it  will  surely  be  better  tliat  additional  cost  be 
incurred,  than  that  one  who  may  have  been 
wrongfully  condemned  should  be  punished;  and 
this  shows  that  those  who  oppose  the  right  of 
appeal  in  such  cases,  are  hard  run  for  argument 
to  sustain  their  position. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  am  against  the  section  as  it 
stands,  and  in  lavor  of  the  amendment.  This 
.section  is  the  introduction  of  a  principle  that 
has  been  adopted  in  no  country,  so  far  as  my 
reading  extends.  It  is  true,  that  in  Great  Brit- 
ain peremptory  challenges  on  the  part  of  the 
crown  are  allowed,  but  even  then  it  is  confined 
to  Ireland,  and  does  not  apply  to   the  English 

Eeople.  In  no  state  in  this  union,  so  far  as  I 
now,  is  this  right  conferred  upon  the  common- 
wealth. It  has  been  asked  what  advantages  has 
the  commonwealth  over  the  accused?  Why,  in 
the  first  place,  the  very  fact  that  an  indictment 
is  found  against  a  man  excites  public  suspicion 
and  prejudice  against  him,  and  places  the  mark 
of  Cain  upon  his  brow,  without  his  having  the 
opportunity  at  all  to  explain  the  circumstances 
which   operate  against   him.      There   the  com- 


67  ( 


monwealUi  has  its  oavh  fsed  altorney,  an<J  bj'  the 
vote  of  this  morning,  you  do  not  even  allow  the 
governor  to  say  liis  fees  shall  be  cut  down  by 
the  exercise  of  the  pardoning  power.  And  with 
all  these  powers  heaped  upon  tlie  head  of  the 
accused  man,  it  is  now  proposed  to  give  to  the 
commonwealth  the  additional  power  of  peremp- 
torily challenging  five  jurors.  Who  has  not 
seen,  the  very  moment  a  man  is  apprehended  ou 
suspicion  of  crime,  the  women  and  children 
gaze  on  him  as  he  walks  through  the  streets, 
and  heard  the  murmurs  that  pass  through  the 
crowd  as  he  passes  along.  Some  then  say  that 
"they  do  not  think  his  eyes  look  exactly  right," 
or  that  "he  has  a  bad  countenance;"  and  otliers, 
that  they  "knew  him  when  a  boy,  and  from  lit- 
tle circumstances  that  tlien  occurred,  they  .al- 
ways supposed  he  would  turn  out  badly."  Oth- 
ers again,  significantly  shake  their  heads  and 
repeat  stories  that  have  been  told  in  the  neigh- 
borhood where  he  once  lived,  and  therp  will  be 
a  thousand  influences  of  this  kind  operating 
against  the  accused,  and  exciting  the  public  pre- 
judice against  him.  And  just  in  proportion  to 
the  magnitude  of  the  offence  and  the  severity  of 
the  punishment  which  is  impending  does  the 
popular  condemnation  of  tlie  moment  rest  on 
the  accused,  and  deprive  him,  in  many  instan- 
ces, of  a  just  and  impartial  trial.  I  trust  tliis 
innovation  will  not  be  made  upon  the  establish- 
ed usage  of  this  state.  No  proposition  has  been 
presented  to  this  convention  to  which  I  am  more 
opposed  than  to  tlie  fifteenth  section  of  this  re- 
port. There  is  no  evil  existing,  or  that  has  ex- 
isted in  this  .state,  demanding  this  innovation. 

I  desire  that  the  accused  shall  also  be  al- 
lowed to  take  an  appeal  to  a  higher  tribunal. 
I  want  the  man  whose  life,  and  liberty,  and 
reputation,  and  the  reputation  of  his  family,  are 
put  in  jeopardy,  to  be  permitted  to  take  an  ap- 
peal. If  you  allow  it  to  a  man  in  a  matter  of 
dollars  and  cents,  in  the  name  of  heaven  give 
him  the  same  privilege  where  these  sacred  rights 
are  endangered.  I  had  the  occasion  the  other 
day,  when  speaking  on  the  question  of  uniform- 
ity of  decision,  to  refer  to  a  fact  well  known  to 
those  who  live  in  the  southern  part  of  the  state. 
It  was  the  case  where,  in  one  county,  upon  a 
motion  to  give  a  prisoner  the  benefit  of  clergy, 
the  judge  sustained  the  motion,  and  the  prison- 
er, who  had  been  tried  and  convicted  of  the 
highest  offence  known  to  our  laws,  was  set  at 
liberty.  In  another  q^)unty,  a  man  was  tried  for 
a  less  offence,  found  guilty,  and,  on  the  same 
motion  being  made  before  another  judge,  it  was 
overruled,  and  the  criminal  paid  the  penalty  of 
his  crime  under  the  gallows.  Here  was  one  man 
hung  and  another  set  at  liberty  under  the  very 
same  code  of  laws.  One  or  the  other  of  these 
decisions  must  have  been  wrong.  There  is  a 
want  of  uniformity  in  the  decisions  of  the  cir- 
cuit court,  upon  questions  of  law.  Give  to  the 
prisoner  the  right,  then,  if  his  counsel  is  con- 
vinced that  questions  of  law  liave  been  wrong- 
fully decided,  of  n|)peal  to  the  hifjhcr  tribunal. 
There  is  great  need  of  some  uniformity  of  decis- 
ion being  established.  As  it  is  now,  the  circuit 
judges  decide  according  to  the  lights  they  have 
derived  from  their  various  reading,  and  accord- 
ii>g  to  various  authorities,  and  thus  we  see  one 
man  hung  and  another  tstt  at  liberty,  under  the 


same  slate  of  circumstances.  If  a  court  of  ap- 
peals is  to  be  established  in  this  state  for  the 
sake  of  securing  uniformity  in  decisions,  in  the 
name  of  common  sense  give  to  the  man  who 
has  life  and  liberty  at  .stake,  the  benefit  of  it.  I 
shall  vote  to  strike  out  every  word  of  this  sec- 
tion, and  I  trust  that  a  majority  of  this  conven- 
tion cannot  be  found \o  vote  for  this  privilege  of 
peremptory  challenge  on  the  part  of  the  com- 
monwealth. I  trust,  also,  that  we  shall  all  con- 
cur in  the  opinion,  that  the  life,  liberty,  and 
reputation  of  a  man  are  just  as  sacred  as  his 
property  in  dollars  and  cents,  and  that  if  we 
give  the  party  the  riglit  of  appeal  in  the  one  case, 
we  shall  be  r'-ady  to  do  it  in  the  other.  The 
right  of  appeal  in  criminal  cases  has  existed  in 
Tennessee  from  the  formation  of  the  present 
constitution  down  to  the  present  time,  and  I 
have  never  heard  any  complaint  from  lawyers, 
judges,  or  from  any  other  source,  as  to  its  work- 
ing wrong.  Nor  have  I  heard  the  least  com- 
plaint that  the  additional  expense  is  so  great 
that  this  privilege  should  be  withheld  from  the 
citizen.  I  would  rather,  at  this  moment,  see  the 
state  incur  an  expense  of  $500,000,  than  believe 
that  from  an  erroneous  opinion  of  the  circuit 
judge  an  innocent  man's  blood  had  been  shed. 
Such  things  have  been  done,  or  guilty  men  have 
been  turned  loose  on  the  community  as  in  the 
case  I  put. 

The  convention  took  a  recess. 

EVENING  SESSION. 

Mr.  APPERSON  proposed  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  whole  section. 

"Provided,  that  the  general  assembly  shall  pro- 
vide, bylaw,  that  any  criminal  who  may  be  con- 
victed in  the  circuit  court,  may,  under  proper 
restrictions,  have  the  law  of  his  case  tried  by  the 
court  of  appeals,  provided,  one  of  the  judges  of 
the  latter  court  shall  order  a  supersedeas  to  is- 
sue to  restrain  the  execution  of  the  sentence  un- 
til the  case  can  be  heard  and  determined  by  the 
court  of  appeals." 

Mr.  TAYLOR  asked  and  obtained  leave  to 
withdraw  his  amendment,  and  to  offer  the  fol- 
lowing substitute  for  the  whole  section  in  lieu 
thereof : 

"In  all  trials  for  treason  and  felony,  as  well  as 
in  all  prosecutions  forpenal  offences,  the  accused 
shall  have  the  right  to  prosecute  an  appeal,  or 
writ  of  error,  to  the  court  of  appeals,  to  any 
judgment  which  the  circuit  court  may  render 
against  him,  and  the  general  assembly  shall  pro- 
vide, by  law,  in  what  manner  such  appeal,  or 
writ  of  error,  may  be  prosecuted:  Provided,  hoir 
ever,  that  such  appeal,  or  writ  of  error,  shall  ex- 
tend only  to  questions  of  law  which  may  arise 
upon  and  be  decided  during  the  progress  of  the 
trial  in  the  circuit  court. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  do  not  agree,  for  one,  to 
either  of  these  substitutes.  For  God's  sake,  if 
we  intend  to  punish  any  man  in  Kentucky,  let 
us  continue  the  right  to  clialhuige  to  the  connuon- 
wealth,  and  for  this  the  substitute  does  not  pro- 
vide. My  exnerience  teaches  me  that  your  very 
rich,  moneyed  man,  can  purchase  jurors  enough 
where  this  right  of  challenge  is  not  granted  to 
the  commonwealth  to  keep  their  necKa  out  of 
the  halter.  It  is  to  prevent  men  being  bought 
and  sold  in  the  marlict  and  placed  where  the/ 


679 


'can  be  put  in  the  jurj*  hot,  that  this  right  of 
challenge  is  proposed.  It  has  become  a  remark 
in  ray  section  of  the  country  that  you  cannot 
hang  or  punish  a  moneyed  man.  Indeed  I  have 
heard  men  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  they  wouhi 
not  hesitate  to  shoot  any  man  who  would  offend 
them,  if  they  had  five  or  ten  thousand  dollars 
to  expend  to  get  themselves  clear.  Instead  of 
striking  it  out  entirely.  I  should  prefer  to  ex- 
tend the  right  of  the  commonwealth  to  chal- 
lenge. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  am  decidedly  against  the  sec- 
tion, and  greatly  prefer  the  substitnte  of  the 
gentleman  from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor.)  That  is, 
5iat  there  shall  be  an  appeal  taken  only  in  ca- 
ses where  there  is  a  dispute  upon  a  question  of 
law  merely,  and  nothing  else.  I  do  not  know 
that  1  am  in  favor  of  the  right  to  appeal  at  all, 
but  I  greatly  prefer  it  to  the  section  as  it  stands. 
I  think  that  the  arguments  adduced  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Graves,  (Mr.  Mayes.)  are  very  far 
from  proving  the  proposition  he  assumes.  As  I 
stated  before,  the  accused  has  but  a  poor  chance 
against  the  commonwealth,  with  the  advantages 
it  ha3  on  its  side.  He  is  compelled  to  rebut  as 
far  as  possible  the  popular  prejudices  which  the 
very  fact  that  he  is  charged  with  crime  excites 
against  him  before  he  can  have  a  fair  trial.  The  i 
commonwealth  should  stand  as  the  protector  of 
the  accused  and  stand  between  him  and  the  pop- 
ular prejudice,  rather  than  in  the  attitude  of 
seeking  to  urge  him  to  the  sacrifice  without  an 
opportunity  to  defend  himself.  The  gentleman 
tells  us  that  he  is  a  prosecuting  attorney,  and 
that  because  he  has  discovered  that  errors  have 
crept  into  our  criminal  system,  he  desires  this 
amendment.  And  he  tells  us  that  gentlemen  of 
the  bar  are  deeply  interested  in  protecting  the 
accused.  Are  not  commonwealth  attorney's  deep- 
ly concerned  in  convicting  the  accused. 

Mr.  MAYES.  The  gentleman  is  mistaken  if 
he  supposes  I  learned  the  facts  I  stated  only  du- 
ring an  experience  as  commonwealth  attorney. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  have  no  doubt  but  that  gen- 
tleman has  learned  it  by  experience,  but  the 
question  is  whether  he  has  been  rightly  taught 
or  not.  The  school  in  which  he  was  taught  was 
that  of  prosecuting  the  accused,  and  what  pros- 
ecuting attorney  does  not  come  forward  with  a 
determination  that  the  culprit  should  be  con- 
victed whether  he  is  guilty  or  not ;  and  then  if  the 
jury  happen  to  differ  with  him,  what  is  his  opin- 
ion? Whv  that  there  is  a  great  defect  in  the 
criminal  jurisprudence  of  the  state,  and  that  it 
ought  to  be  remedied.  Of  course  there  is  no 
man  who  defends  the  accused,  but  who  believes 
if  he  is  found  not  guilty  the  verdict  is  right. 
The  one  is  a  fair  set  off  for  the  other.  The  rieh 
and  the  powerful  can  protect  themselves;  but 
who  shall  shield  the  poor  and  the  impotent  from 
the  storm  of  popular  prejudice  when  it  is  exci- 
ted against  him.  Would  the  gentleman  break 
down  the  great  barriers  to  this  prejudice  which 
the  law  has  thrown  around  tlie  weak  and  the  de- 
fenceless. And  yet  to  get  at  the  rich  and  pow- 
erful, you  must  strike  down  all  the  poor  and 
powerless.  That  is  the  argument,  and  I  do  not 
assent  to  it.  The  most  powerful  talents  are 
brought  to  assist  the  rich  and  powerful,  while 
the  poor  devil  who  comes  into  court  with  sus- 
picion upon  him,  if  he  has  no  money  in  his 


pocket,  will  find  it  difficult  to  array  this;  talent 
in  his  defence.  And  when  the  suspicions  of  ih.* 
moment  have  excited  the  popular  prejudi^en 
against  him,  under  these  circumstances,  would 
you  take  from  him  the  little  protection  th<»  law 
has  extended  to  him  in  the  right  to  challenge 
tliose  who  are  prejudiced  against  him,  or  give 
to  the  commonwealth  the  right  to  challenge  the 
few  who  might  be  disposed  to  do  him  justice? 
This  is  the  whole  sum  and  substance  of  the 
proposition.  I  am  not  for  that,  for  I  well  know 
how  difficult  it  is  sometimes  for  men  to  get  even 
a  show  of  justice. 

I  was  once  engaged  in  the  county  of  Hopkins 
in  the  case  of  a  miserable  negro,  who  was  charged 
with  breaking  open  a  house,  with  the  intention 
to  commit  a  felony.  There  were  two  counts  in 
the  indictment, — one  charging  him  with  inten- 
tion to  commit  a  rape,  and  tlie  other  with  inten- 
tion to  commit  a  theft.  Under  one  of  these 
counts,  of  course  he  could  not  be  punished  oth- 
er than  by  stripes,  because  the  crime  would  not 
constitute  a  felony;  but  the  intent  to  commit  a 
rape  was  a  felony,  for  which  the  punishment 
was  death.  The  suspicion  however  went  forth, 
that  he  intended  to  commit  a  rape  on  the  lady  of 
the  house,  though  her  husband  was  in  bed  with 
her  at  the  time,  and  the  excitement  ran  so  high 
against  the  accused,  that  when  a  jury  came  to 
be  called  up  the  pannel  was  exhausted  as  well  a% 
the  crowd  outside ;  for  the  reply  to  the  usual 
question  put  to  jurors  on  such  occasions,  was  al- 
most invariably  that  they  had  made  up  their 
minds,  and  that  was  that  the  negro  ought  to  be 
hung.  It  was  an  honest  and  a  generous  feeling 
which  impelled  the  people — it  was  a  desire  for 
the  safety  of  the  commonwealth;  but  in  this 
case  it  was  mislead,  misdirected,  by  passion. 
We  labored  for  a  long  while  in  securing  a  jurj-; 
and  such  was  the  influence  of  this  feeling  upon 
them  that  they  could  not  agree;  and  another  ju- 
ry had  to  be  called,  when  the  same  difficulties  of 
empanuelling  one  were  encountered.  At  last  one 
was  formed,  and  they  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  man  was  not  guilty,  and  acquitted  him. 
What  chance  had  he  under  that  .state  of  facts 
with  the  commonwealth?  Had  he  any  power  to 
pack  a  jury?  Xone.  Xothing  but  the  justice  of 
his  cause  and  the  shield  of  the  law  had  he,  to 
save  him  from  the  sacrifice  demanded  by  the  pas- 
sion-led and  excited  multitude.  I  am  not  there- 
fore for  wresting  from  the  accused  the  oulv  chance 
which  the  law  gives  him  of  securing  a  fair  and 
impartial  trial.  And  I  tell  gentlemen  that  if 
bribery  and  corruption  is  to  be  brought  to  bear,  that 
if  they  do  give  the  commonwealtn  the  right  to 
challenge  four  or  five  of  the  jurors,  it  will  not 
deprive  the  rich  and  powerful  of  the  means  to 
exercise  it.  But  you  take  from  the  poor  man  the 
protection  which  the  law  throws  around  him 
with  a  view  of  securing  him  a  fair  and  impartial 
trial.  I  would  not  extend  the  power  the  com- 
monwealth now  has,  when  it  can  array  whatever 
talents  it  may  desire  to  prosecute  any  man  who 
may  be  accused  and  bring  him  toconviction, even 
when  not  guilty.  It  has  been  said  here  that  the  cry 
comes  up  from  all  parts  of  Kentucky,  that  the 
guilty  are  allowed  to  escape  from  the  punish- 
ment dn«  their  crimes.  Has  it  not  been  com- 
plained of  also,  that  men  have  been  sacrificed  to 
the  popular  fiiry  and  excitement  of  the  moment. 


080 


Have  vre  hot  recently  be^rd  of  two  negroes  who 
were  charjed  with  killing  their  master,  and  who 
without  trial,  iipon  the  mere  charge,  wereburned 
at  tJie  stake?  It  was  against  these  popular  ex- 
citements this  right  of  challenge  was  designed 
to  protect  the  accused,  and  to  secure  hi  in  a  fair 
trial.  Let  justice  then  be  administered  without 
prejudice,  and  in  the  spirit  of  mercy,  and  not  of 
revenge.  If  a  victim  has  to  be  offered  up  to  jus- 
tice in  her  high  place,  let  mercy  and  pity  be  al- 
lowed to  drop  a  tear  on  the  sacrifice.  Do  not 
give  all  these  things  to  the  wild  and  mad  fury, 
gotten  up  to  reflect  the  feelings  and  passions  of 
the  multitude.  Give  the  accused  a  fair  opportu- 
nity of  being  heard,  and  then  if  he  is  convicted, 
let  nim  suffer  the  penalty  of  his  crime.  Eut  I 
■would  not  give  to  the  commonwealth  any  more 
power  than  it  has.  The  chained  and  trembling 
culprit  stands  at  the  august  bar  of  the  common- 
wealth, with  all  her  strength  and  power  around 
him,  and  she  has  but  to  speak  the  word,  and  he 
dies.  And  yet  gentlemen  desire  to  increase  that 
power,  and  it  is  sought  to  deprive  the  miserable 
accused  of  the  chance  of  warding  off  the  influ- 
ence that  the  prejudices  and  excitement  of  the 
community  may  bring  to  bear  against  him.  I 
am  for  striking  out  the  section  altogether. 

Mr.  HARDIX.  There  is  a  great  deal  of  very 
fine  declamation  in  what  the  gentleman  has 
said,  but  he  does  not  meet  the  question  fair- 
ly. The  proposition  is  this:  the  accused  may 
challenge  for  cause,  if  he  can  show  any  cause 
"which  is  known  to  the  law  as  good  ground  for 
challenge,  and  in  addition  to  that,  he  can  chal- 
lenge twenty  without  showing  any  cause.  That 
is  the  situation  of  the  accused  at  this  time. 
The  commonwealth  can  challenge  for  cause,  and 
I  need  not  enumerate  all  the  causes  that  exist  and 
areknown  to  the  law.  The  cause  of  complaint  is 
this:  the  commonwealth  has  no  right  to  chal- 
lenge, without  showing  cause,  the  men  who  are 
brought  forward  and  hired  to  come  to  the  court 
house  to  get  on  the  jury  after  the  regulgir  pannel 
has  been  exhausted,  with  a  view  of  saving  the 
prisoner,  who  will  always  swear  that  they  nave 
not  made  up  an  opinion,  and  then  the  com- 
monwealth IS  obliged  to  take  them.  I  rec- 
ollect very  well  hearing  judge  Buckner  say 
that  he  had  tried  a  man  who  lived  in  Jef- 
erson  county,  some  six  miles  from  Louisville 
on  the  Bardstown  road,  some  half  a  dozen 
times  or  more,  for  either  counterfeiting  bank 
notes  or  passing  those  which  were  counterfeit, 
and  he  never  could  convict  him,  because  he  had 
a  great  many  strikers  unknown  to  the  body  of 
the  people,  who  hung  about  the  court  house  and 
contrived  to  get  on  the  jury,  and  thus  managed 
to  hang  the  jury.  I  recollect  the  case  of  a  man 
by  the  name  of  Carter,  who  murdered  another 
on  a  boat  on  the  Ohio  river.  The  victim  was  a 
man  of  money,  who  came  up  to  buy  a  load  of 
lime,  and  Carter  murdered  him  and  sold  the  boat 
and  the  lime  and  pocketed  the  money.  It  was 
as  clear  a  case  of  guilt,  I  reckon,  as  any  man 
ever  saw  or  read  of.  Carter  had  some  funds, 
together  with  the  money  of  the  murdered  man, 
and  I  was  one  of  the  two  or  three  lawyers  who 
defended  him.  And  without  our  knowing  any- 
thing about  it,  or  having  a  chance  to  know,  ex- 
cept to  guess,  some  man  hung  about  the  court 
bouse,  and  hung  the  jury  for  him.    And  so  for 


four  successive  trials,  on  each  occasion,  one  man 
hung  the  jury,  until  at  last,  a  jury  could  not  be 
got  in  the  county.  He  laid  there  in  the  Bran- 
denburg jail  for  tliree  years  without  a  jury  be- 
ing procured,  and  the  judge  and  oSicers  were 
obliged  ,  at  last,  to  declare  that  the  whole  coun- 
ty had  made  up  their  opinion,  and  that  no  trial 
could  be  had,  and  governor  Metcalfe  was  obliged 
to  let  him  out.  And  yet  perhaps,  a  more  guilty 
man  never  lived.  He  told  his  wife,  I  think,  of 
his  guilt,  for  he  was  married  to  a  very  respecta- 
ble woman  who  lived  in  Mason  county ;  for  when 
I  took  the  pardon  to  her  in  New  Albanv,  In- 
diana, she  staid  and  made  him  up  some  clothes, 
and  when  she  handed  them  to  him,  she  told 
him  to  go  away  from  her,  she  never  wanted  to 
sec  him  again.  Four  times  this  man,  with- 
out the  knowledge  of  his  lawyers,  succeeded 
in  securing  one  man  on  the  jury,  and  thus 
avoided  a  conviction. 

I  believe  the  eloquence  of  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson  to  have  been  entirely  misdirected. 
What  is  the  proposition?  Is  it  to  restrict  the 
challenges  of  the  accused?  No.  Whenever  they 
show  cause  they  may  challenge,  and  when  they 
cannot,  they  still  may  chalenge  twenty.  But  I 
would  give  to  the  commonwealth  the  right  of 
challenging  one-quarter  of  the  number  allowed 
the  accused.  That  is  all.  Now  a  man  may  kill 
my  father,  son,  or  relation,  and  have  I  not  the 
right  to  see  that  justice  is  done  upon  him;  and 
when  the  law  in  such  a  case,  should  allow  me 
only  four  challenges,  does  it  take  away  a  single 
right  that  the  accused  has?  No;  it  is  only  to 
give  the  government  the  right  to  get  clear  of  the 
men  who  come  to  the  court  house  prepared  to  go 
on  the  jury. 

The  gentleman  from  Henderson  has  said  that 
a  man  who  has  been  a  long  time  a  common- 
wealth's attorney,  is  apt  to  run  off  too  much 
against  the  accused,  I  suppose  upon  the  same 

Erinciple  that  in  England  they  would  not  let  a 
utcher  serve  on  a  jury.  But  at  the  same  time, 
IS  there  not  a  danger  of  gentlemen  who  have 
never  prosecuted,  but  have  always  defended,  of 
running  off  too  far  in  favor  of  the  accused?  I 
hope  we  shall  give  the  government  this  right  to 
a  mere  one-fourth  of  the  number  of  challenges 
alloAved  to  the  accused.  We  know  that  there  is 
no  protection  to  a  man's  life  in  this  country,  and 
that  the  hotspurs  of  the  land  are  in  the  habit  of 
walking  around  and  shooting  down  and  stabbing 
whoeverthey  please,  just  by  way  of  playing  'big 
airs.'  Take  away  from  a  man  the  protection  of 
the  law,  and  that  very  instant  life  is  rendered 
insecure,  and  men  will  kill  sooner  than  they 
ought  in  self-defence.  Whenever  you  proclaim 
to  the  peaceable  citizen  that  his  life  is  not  safe, 
and  that  upon  slight  provocation  a  man  may 
take  it,  that  instant  you  render  hiin  the  aggressor 
in  his  desire  for  self-defence.  I  say,  without  the 
fear  of  contradiction,  that  already  in  the  case  of 
crimes  which  cry  to  heaven  for  justice,  there  are 
too  many  facilities  for  the  escape  of  the  guilty. 
Who  do  they  employ  to  defend  them?  Why 
some  four  or  five  gentlemen  just  as  eloquent  as 
my  friend  on  the  right,  (Mr.  Dixon.)  And  who 
has  the  commonwealth?  Why  some  little  law- 
yer, who  is  sometimes  called  quten's  solicitor, 
and  who  has  got  the  oflice  by  way  of  charity, 
and  who  cannot  represent  the  government  at  all. 


681 


I  think  I  may  say  that  I  have  defended  or  prose- 
cuted some  one  thousand  cases  of  felony  and 
other  offences.  From  1808  to  18151  was  a  pub- 
lic prosecutor,  and  since  then  I  have  alternately 
prosecuted  and  defended,  but  more  of  the  last 
than  the  first.  I  never  prosecute  a  man  unless  I 
believe  him  to  be  guilty,  and  then  I  \vould  just 
as  leave  prosecute  him  as  I  would  a  sheep-steal- 
ing dog.  I  recollect  very  well  the  case  of  a  man 
by  the  name  of  Spencer,  who  six  or  seven  years 
ago  was  arrested  on  a  charge  of  killing  his  step- 
son, a  boy  some  eight  years  old,  in  the  most  bar- 
barous and  cruel  manner.  The  evidence  against 
him  was  entirely  of  a  circumstantial  kind,  and 
it  was  made  up  of  little  scraps  of  circumstances, 
but  which,  when  put  together,  amounted  to  a 
demonstration  to  my  mind,  at  least,  of  his  guilt. 
The  commonwealth's  attorney  did  not  view  the 
testimony  as  I  did,  and  therefore  did  not  push 
the  prosecution  with  his  accustomed  energy.  I 
\irged  him  to  push  it,  but  he  declined,  and  at 
last  I  persuaded  him  to  make  an  excuse  to  go  to 
Hodgensville,  that  the  case  might  fall  into  my 
hands.  He  did  so,  leaving  me  to  prosecute  the 
case.  Spencer  was  very  ably  defended,  but  the 
jury  was  not  out  more  than  five  minutes  before 
they  found  him  guilty,  and  the  court  being  sat- 
isfied, he  was  condemned.  I  did  not  know  but 
that  I  might  be  wrong,  and  1  rode  over  to  Eliza- 
beth on  the  day  he  was  hung,  to  see  whether  he 
"would  make  a  confession.  I  went  with  the  sheriff, 
a  clergyman,  and  the  clerk,  and  after  they  had 
prayed  and  sang  with  him  forsome  time,  and  we 
Were  about  to  go,  said  the  clergyman  to  him, 
"Now,  Spencer,  tell  us  whether  you  are  guilty 
or  not."  Said  he,  "it  is  not  worth  while  to  go 
over  all  the  circumstances;  I  will  only  say  that 
Mr.  Hardin  was  about  right  in  what  he  said,  ex- 
cept that  I  killed  the  boy  about  half  an  hour 
sooner  than  he  said  I  did."  This  man  was  near 
being  cleared  merely  because  the  common- 
wealth's attorney  did  not  view  the  facts  and  cir- 
cumstances as  I  did,  during  the  examination  of 
witnes.ses.  One  thing  satisfied  me  that  he  was 
the  murderer.  This  was  when  the  horse  came 
home  without  the  boy,  and  his  mother  started  to 
go  and  seek  him,  the  step-father  drove  her  home 
and  would  not  let  her  go.  I  could  name  a 
thousand  cases  where  men  have  escaped  the  pun- 
ishment due  their  crimes.  I  know  at  first  there 
is  a  strong  prejudice  against  the  accused,  but  is 
there  a  lawyer  who  allows  his  case  to  come  on 
for  trial  at  such  a  time?  "So ;  you  do  not — ^you 
get  a  continuance,  and  you  get  one  again  and 
again,  until  at  last  the  people  begin  to  say, 
"poor  fellow,  he  has  suffered  enough,  God  knows. 
"W  e  can't  bring  the  dear  man  to  life  again,  so  let 
him  go." 

I  recollect  the  case  of  a  man  named  Sy.  Hults, 
who  shot  another,  but  who,  however,  did  not 
die.  He  did  not  give  bail,  and  I  did  not  want 
him  to  do  so,  prefering  that  he  should  remain  in 
jail.  For  a  while,  every  time  that  he  was  brought 
out,  I  would  always  walk  with  him.  I  found 
that  there  was  a  strong  prdudice  against  him, 
rendering  it  necessary  that  I  should  get  a  con- 
tinuance. After  laying  in  jail  for  two  win- 
ters, and  becoming  frost  bitten,  he  was  brought 
out  in  the  spring,  and  as  we  passed  along,  I 
could  hear  the  people  saying,  "poor  Sy.  he  has 
suffered  enough  (xod  kuowi> — and  he  fought  the 
8G 


British  too,"  and  similar  expressions  of  commis- 
seration.  Said  I,  "Sy.  now  is  the  time,  I  shall 
clear  you  now;"  and  the  suit  being  brought  on, 
he  was  cleared  in  five  minutes  after  the  jury  retired. 
There  is  a  prejudice  against  the  accused  at  first; 
but  lawj'ers  of  skill  and  ingenuity  will  not  let  a 
tiial  como  on  until  that  prejudice  shall  subside, 
and  the  public  sympathies  become  excited  in  his 
favor.  There  w'ill  be  no  right  therefore,  of  which 
the  accused  will  be  deprived,  by  giving  to  the  com- 
monwealth this  privilege  to  challenge.  I  know 
the  government  has  the  advantage  in  w^hat  is  cal- 
led the  last  speech  to  the  jury.  But  on  the  other 
hand,  theaceusedhas  the  benefit  offourorfivefirst 
rate  speeches,  and  by  the  time  you  come  to  the 
last  speech,  the  jury  are  in  pretty  much  the 
same  condition  we  are  here  sometimes,  so  tired 
out,  as  to  feel  no  desire  to  listen  to  the  last 
speech. 

As  to  this  proposition  to  allow  an  appeal  in 
criminal  cases,  I  am  opposed  to  it.  It  is  said 
that  appeals  are  only  to  oe  taken  on  questions 
of  law;  but  cannot  an  ingenious  lawyer  make  a 
law  point  on  almost  any  question  that  arises? 
Hardly  a  question  can  be  suggested,  that  may 
not  be  made  one  of  law.  Once  a  delay  of  a  few 
months  is  obtained,  a  hundred  hopes  are  excited 
of  the  escape  of  the  prisoner.  He  may  escape 
from  jail,  important  witnesses  may  die  off,  or  be 
bribed  to  leave  the  state.  In  a  word,  you  would 
double  the  chances  of  the  prisoner  for  escape, 
and  in  addition,  you^eatly  increase  the  expen- 
ses of  the  courts.  Js  ow,  there  is  one  way  in 
which  an  appeal  may  be  taken,  to  which  I  see 
no  real  objection  myself,  although  I  am  not  pre- 
pared to  go  for  it.  It  is  the  plan  proposed  in 
the  amendment  of  my  friend  from  Daviess,  (Mr. 
Triplett,)  that  provides  that  whenever  the  cir- 
cuit judge  entertains  doubts  on  any  point  of 
law,  in  a  criminal  case,  he  may  refer  the  case  to 
the  court  of  appeals  for  their  opinion.  This  too 
is  the  plan  in  England  ;  anci  it  is  the  only 
form  of  an  appeal  which  I  could  in  any  way 
consent  to  see  introduced  here.  I  do  not  know 
that  I  ever  saw  an  innocent  man  convicted  in 
my  life,  but  I  have  seen  many  guilty  men  ac- 
quitted. "We  come  here  to  make  laws  for  the 
protection  of  the  commonwealth,  of  the  whole 
people,  and  not  solely  for  the  accused. 

I  appeal  to  gentlemen  not  to  overload  this 
constitution  to  any  greater  extent  than  they 
have.  If  they  do,  I  warn  them  that  it  wifl 
break  down  l>efore  the  people  by  its  own  weight. 
The  people  demand  that  tnere  shall  no  longer 
exist  so  many  facilities  for  the  escape  of  the 
guilty  from  the  punishment  due  their  crimes, 
and  I  ask  gentlemen  not  to  add  to  these  com- 
plaints by  increasing  these  facilities.  Give  to 
the  commonwealth  the  right  of  challenge,  and 
you  give  the  people  a  protection  against  those 
who  come  to  the  court  house  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  being  hired  to  go  on  juries.  Give  it  to 
them  also,  if  you  desire  to  meike  friends  for  your 
constitution  and  secure  its  adoption. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  the  previous  question, 
but  Mr.  MACHEN  claimed  the  floor,  and  the 
main  question  was  not  ordered. 

Mr.  MACHEX.  I  feel  much  like  the  elder 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  on  this  matter  of  mak- 
ing a  constitution.  I  do  not  wish  to  burden  it, 
and  I  expected  we  should  strike  out  a  part  of 


682 


the  report  of  the  committee,  because  I  believe  it 
will  be  oppressive  to  it  when  it  comes  before  the 
country. 

"What  do  you  propose  to  do?  To  give  to  the 
commonwealth  the  right  to  do — what?  Of  say- 
ing that  some  of  her  proud  sons  are  not  worthy 
to  sit  in  a  jury  box,  and  not  assign  a  reason  for 
it.  I  ask  where  you  can  place  a  more  damning 
stain  on  a  man's  character,  than  to  deny  him  the 
privilege  of  sitting  as  a  juror  in  trying  the 
rights, liberties,  or  life  of  his  fellow  citizen?  It 
is  this  to  which  I  am  opposed.  1  never  will,  by 
my  vote,  sanction  any  such  proceeding.  I  hold 
that  it  is  the  duty  of 'the  commonwealth  to  look 
upon  all  her  citizens  as  true  and  loyal,  till  the 
reverse  is  proved.  But,  without  proof,  there  is 
an  attempt  to  auttorize  the  commonwealth, 
through  her  ministerial  agents,  to  say,  "you  are 
unworthy  of  the  rigkts  of  freemen."  I  think 
the  commonwealth  has  nothing  to  fear,  as  long 
as  the  elder  gentleman  from  K"eison  will  be  able 
to  come  to  the  rescue.  How  has  it  been  hereto- 
fore, when  his  mind,  blessed  with  intuition,  has 
been  brought  to  bear,  and  he  has  had  the  privi- 
lege of  coming  to  the  rescue?  The  guilt  of  the 
accused  is  as  clear  as  the  beams  of  the  sun,  and 
nothing  but  his  own  power  can  resist  the  de- 
structive power  of  the  commonwealth.  Again, 
when  he  sees  he  has  carried  the  jest  a  little  too 
far  for  the  commonwealth,  and  destruction  is 
about  to  fall  on  the  man,  he  interferes,  and  says, 
my  power  has  carried  you  a  little  astray,  and  he 
saves  the  victim. 

I  hold  that  the  commonwealth  has  now  power 
enough  in  her  hands,  and  there  is  a  vast  differ- 
ence between  the  right  of  the  accused  to  chal- 
lenge, and  its  being  extended  peremptorily  to 
the  commonwealth.  When  the  man  is  once  ar- 
raigned, and  on  his  indictment  a  true  bill  is 
found,  declaring  him  guiltv,  it  is  enough  to 
speed,  throughout  the  Avhole  circle  of  his  ac- 
quaintance, the  impression  that  he  is  guilty. 
Twelve  men  have  pronounced  him  guilty,  on 
their  oaths.  His  reputation  goes  abroad,  with 
guilt  attached  to  it,  and  when  he  comes  up  for 
trial,  there  is  a  propriety  in  giving  him  the  right 
to  chalfenge  peremptorily.  Many  will  come  in- 
to court  with  their  minds  made  up,  and  I  ask  if 
he  may  not  exclude  these,  that  justice  maybe 
done?  I  think  tliis  is  an  improper  power,  to  be 
placed  iu  the  constitution. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  have  an  amendment 
which  I  wish  to  offer  as  a  substitute  for  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Mason  : 

"  Whenever  the  circuit  court  judge,  before 
whom  a  criminal  or  penal  prosecution  is  had, 
shall  entertain  doubts  on  any  point  of  law  which 
shall  be  decided  by  him  during  such  trial,  he 
shall  have  th.o  power  of  adjourning  over  such 
doubtful  points  of  law,  to  be  decided  by  the 
court  of  appeals;  and  in  the  meantime,  may  de- 
lay the  execution  of  the  sentence  in  such  case, 
until  the  court  of  appeals  have  decided  such 
doubtful  points  of  law ;  or  the  accused  may  ap- 
ply to  a  judge  (rf  the  court  of  appeals  for  a  writ 
of  error,  [in  any  criminal  or  pejuai  prosecution,] 
which  may  be  granted  by  him,  and  shall  act  as 
a  supersedeas  to  the  judgment  of  the  court  in 
which  the  trial  was  had,  until  the  opinion  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  on  the  questions  mvolved, 


shall  be  entered  in  the  circuit  court,  which  shall 
be  governed  thereby." 

I  will  state  the  object  I  have  in  view,  and  the 
reasons  for  that  object.  After  the  most  mature 
examination,  I  am  satisfied  that  the  great  body 
of  the  argument  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
is  correct.  I  have  been  m  the  criminal  practice 
for  some  twenty  years,  and  I  am  satisfied  that 
there  is  not  one  case  in  twenty,  that  would  not 
be  taken  up.  But  there  is  another  thing  which 
has  not  attracted  the  attention  of  this  house.  It 
is  a  fact  that  we  have  not  at  this  day  in  Ken- 
tucky, a  settled  criminal  code,  though  we  have 
the  best  civil  code  in  the  world.  One  judge  in 
one  circuit  is  governed  by  one  criminal  code  and 
another  by  another.  I  could  go  on  from  now  till 
midnight,  to  enumerate  differences  between  the 
two  courts,  in  which  I  practice.  This  ought  not 
to  be.  The  lives  and  liberties  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky,  are  too  valuable  to  be  sacrificed  by 
judges  going  too  far  on  the  one  hand,  or  not  far 
enough  on  the  other.  I  would  call  to  my  aid, 
both  of  the  gentlemen  from  Nelson,  and  they 
are  both  astute  lawyers. 

The  commonwealth  has  the  right  to  the  bene- 
fit of  their  experience.  I  would  like  to  hear,  not 
only  their  experieiice,  but  the  experience  of  the 
older  delegates,  whether  the  commonwealth 
ought  not  to  have  some  means  of  sending  up  ap- 
peals, where  cases  have  been  decided  against  the 
commonwealth,  improperly.  We  should  have  a 
universal  and  equal  code  throughout  the  com- 
monwealth. But  I  have  not  gone  so  far.  I  have 
stated  two  propositions.  First,  where  the  judge 
doubts  upon  a  point  of  criminal  law,  he  has  the 
right  to  test  his  doubt,  and  adjourn  the  case  up 
to  the  court  of  appeals.  Ought  he  not  to  have 
that  right  ?  If  it  is  a  matter  of  property 
the  parties  will  take  it  up.  But  when  the  judge 
who  sits  on  the  bench,  doubts,  surely  he  ought 
to  have  tlie  right  to  send  up  the  case  to  the  court 
of  appeals,  where  it  may  be  ably  and  lengthily 
argued  by  a  court  that  have  time  to  give  it  full 
consideration. 

That  is  one  point.  The  other  is  this.  If  the 
counsel  for  the  accused,  or  the  accused  think  the 
judge  is  prejudiced  against  him,  and  he  refuses 
to  take  an  appeal,  then  the  accused  has  the  right 
to  apply  to  the  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals. 
And  if  that  judge  is  willing  to  take  the  respons- 
ibility, and  sees  good  cause  for  issuing  a  sup*r- 
cedeas,  he  ought  to  have  the  benefit  of  it.  I  go 
so  far,  and  if  gentlemen  say  the  commonwealth 
shall  also  have  the  right,  1  am  not  prepared  to 
say  I  shall  oppose  it,  for  I  do  know,  that  I  have 
heard  points  of  law  urged  against  the  common- 
wealth, without  any  good  reason,  for  the 
purpose  of  saving  the  criminal.  From  that  day 
forward  it  is  put  down  in  that  lawyer's  mind, 
and  other  lawyers  appeal  to  it,  till  in  some  cases, 
more  particularly  in  cases  of  burglary,  it  is  im- 
possible to  convict  a  man  at  all.  I  do  not  go  so 
far  as  that.  I  leave  that  matter  to  other  gentle- 
men, but  so  far  as  I  do  go,  I  do  most  sincerely 
hope  the  delegates  will  support  me.  It  is  neces- 
sary to  have  a  settled  criminal  code,  throughout 
the  state.  No  danger  can  arise,  for  the  judge 
will  not  send  up  a  case,  unless  there  is  a  doubt. 
It  has  been  tried  in  England,  four  hundred  years, 
and  I  have  heard  of  no  complaint  from  lawyers. 


683 


the  bench,  or  the  citizens.  Let  us  at  least  have 
as  much  mercy  as  they  have  there. 

Mr.  RUDD  moved  the  previous  question,  and 
the  main  question  was  ordered. 

Mr.  PRICE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Tlie  question  was  then  taken  on  the  substitute 
of  Mr.  TRIPLETT  for  the  amendment  of  Mr. 
TAYLOR,  and  it  was  agreed  to — veas  54,  nays 
31. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
JBradley,  Luther  Brawuer,  Francis.  M.  Bristow, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Garrett 
Davis,  James  Dudley,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thos. 
W.  Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  MeClure, 
John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Lai-kin  J.  Proctor, 
Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson, James  W.  Stoae,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,.  John  L.  Waller,  John 
Wheeler,  Robert  N.  WickliiFe,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright — 54. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward 
Curd,  Archibald  Dixon,  Chasteeu  T.  Dunavau, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Huston, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B. 
Maclien,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  John- 
son Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  James  Rudd,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe— 31. 

The  question  recurred  on  striking  out  the  fif- 
teenth section  and  substituting  the  amendment 
offered  by  Mr.  Triplett. 

Mr.  GRAY  called  for  a  division  of  the  ques- 
tion, so  that  the  vote  should  first  be  taken  on 
striking  out. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays,  and  being  taken,  they  were — yeas  42,  nays 
46. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, Wm.  K  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas 
D.  Brown,  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Archibald  Dixon,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Duuavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  For- 
rest, James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Jas.  P.  Hamilton,  William  Hendrix,  Mark  E. 
Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  Nathan  McClure,  Wm.  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson, Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompsoo,  Howard 
Todd,  Andrew  3.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe 
—42. 


Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow, Charles  Chambers,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ninian  £.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Geo.  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander 
K.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonatlian  Newcum,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
John  Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 46. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  strike  out  the 
section. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  adopting  the 
fifteenth  section.  The  yeas  and  nays  were 
called  for  by  Messrs.  MITCHELL  and  BROWN, 
and  resulted  as  follows — yeas  41,  nays  47. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Cowper,  Garrett 
Davis,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Jolin 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wiliam  0. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry, 
David  Meriwether,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 41. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawuer,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  Chenault,  James 
S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  Archibald  Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van,  Millford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
William  Hen<Jrix,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W. 
Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelley,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B, 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Nathan  Me- 
Clure, William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Will- 
iam R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe— 47. 

So  the  section  was  rejected. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  gave  notice  that  he  should 
move  to  offer  his  amendment  as  an  additional 
section. 

Mr.  PRICE  gave  notice  that  on  Wednesday 
next,  he  should  .move  a  reconsideration  of  the 
fourth  section  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on 
the  court  of  appeals — fixing  the  number  of 
judges. 

The  conventioiv  then  adjourned. 


684 


TUESDAY,  NOVEMBER,  27,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  G.  W,  Brush. 

EXPENSES   OF    LEGISLATIVE   SESSIONS. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  ofifered  the  following  reso- 
lution: 

"Resolved,  That  the  second  auditor  be  re- 
quested to  report  to  this  convention  the  annual 
cost  and  lengtn  of  the  sessions  of  the  legislature 
of  this  commonwealth  for  the  last  ten  years,  in- 
cluding all  expenses  incident  to  the  same.  Also, 
a  comparative  statement  of  the  expenses  of  the 
sessions  of  the  legislature  since  the  time,  of 
meeting  was  changed  to  the  last  day  of  Decem- 
ber; also,  a  like  number  of  sessions  commenc- 
ing on  the  first  Monday  in  December,  omitting 
in  said  report  appropriations  not  connected  with 
the  annual  expenses  of  each  session,  but  giving 
such  as  are  incident  to  a  long  or  short  session." 

In  a  brief  conversation  between  Mr.  THOMP- 
SON and  Mr.  JAMES  on  the  subject  of  this  res- 
olution, its  object  was  stated  to  be,  to  ascertain 
what  would  be  the  probable  saving  of  expense 
by  the  adoption  of  biennial  sessions. 

The  resolution  was  adopted. 

APPORTIONMENT  OF  REPRESENTATION. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  offered  the  following 
resolution: 

"Resolved,  That  so  much  of  the  article  on  the 
legislative  department,  and  all  amendments  pro- 
posed to  the  same,  as  relates  to  the  subject  ot  the 
apportionment  of  representation,  be  referred  to 
a  committee  of  ten  delegates,  one  to  be  appoint- 
ed from  each  congressional  district." 

He  said  there  was  one  question  which  remain- 
ed unsettled,  and  if  he  could  look  forward  to  its 
speedy  settlement,  he  could  fix  in  his  own  mind 
the  time  when  this  convention  would  close  its 
labors.  He  alluded  to  the  apportionment  bill. 
To  that  subject  his  resolution  related. 

He  proposed  to  raise  a  committee  from  each 
congressional  district,  to  be  selected  by  the  pre- 
siding officer,  to  whom  that  subject  may  be  re- 
ferred, with  the  hope  that  by  taking  into  con- 
sideration the  various  projects,  a  union  may  be 
agreed  on  which  will  give  the  house  but  little 
trouble.  He  did  not  allude  to  the  basis  of  rep- 
resentation, but  merely  to  the  principle  of  the 
apportionment  of  representation. 

Mr.  COFFEY  moved  to  amend  the  resolution 
by  striking  out  "one,"  and  inserting  "two." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  had  no  particular 
objection  if  twenty  were  considered  necessary, 
but  a  smaller  committee  had  been  thought  more 
likely  to  lead  to  harmonious  action. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  said  the  resolution, 
as  it  stands,  met  his  entire  approbation.  He  be- 
lieved that  good  would  grow  out  of  it.  If,  how- 
ever, the  number  should  be  increased,  he  feared 
the  action  of  the  committee  would  be  retarded 
rather  than  promoted.  One  member  from  each 
district  would  be  amply  sufficient,  inasmuch  as 
he  could.and  doubtless  would,  confer  with  the 
other  delegates  from  the  same  district. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  strike  out  "  one,"  and 
insert "  three." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  in  answer  to  a  ques- 
tion from  Mr.  Hardin,  again  stated  the  object  of 
the  resolution.    It  was  not  intended  to  appor- 


tion the  representation  among  the  counties,  but 
to  settle  a  principle  to  regulate  the  apportion- 
nfent  equally  hereafter. 

Mr.  WALLER  said  he  should  like  to  have 
the  resolution  include  the  basis  of  representation 
as  well.  He  was  unwilling  to  settle  on  any 
ratio  till  the  basis  of  representation  was  set- 
tled. 

Mr.  TURNER  hoped  the  resolution  would 
not  be  adopted.  They  had  not  yet  fixed  on  the 
basis  of  representation,  and  how  a  committee 
could  arrange  the  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion between  the  different  counties  of  the  state, 
without  knowing  what  basis  they  should  finally 
adopt,  was  to  him  inexplicable.  He  was  op- 
posed to  delegating  this  power  to  a  committee, 
and  therefore,  he  desired  that  the  resolution 
should  be  laid  on  the  table  for  the  present. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  beggecl  gentlemen  to 
understand,  that  whether  they  fixed  the  basis 
according  to  the  resolution  which  the  convention 
had  already  passed,  or  whether  they  retained  it 
as  it  is  in  the  old  constitution,  or  adopted  any 
other  element  in  the  basis  of  representation, 
still  the  question  of  apportionment  of  that  rep- 
resentation was  different,  and  wholly  unconnect- 
ed with  it.  It  was  designed  simply  to  lay  down 
in  the  constitution  a  general  principle  by  which, 
whenever  the  basis  of  representation  should  be 
fixed,  the  legislature  should  apply  that  princi- 
ple in  assigning  the  members  as  equally  as  they 
could  be  assigned  by  such  a  rule.  And  in  the 
appointment  of  the  committee  under  this  resolu- 
tion, he  hoped  he  should  be  omitted.  He  would 
also  suggest  the  propriety  of  the  delegates  from 
each  congressional  district,  selecting  from  a- 
mongst  themselves  who  should  serve  on  the 
committee,  to  be  appointed  under  the  resolution. 

Mr.  TURNER  could  not  see  why  it  was  ne- 
cessary now  to  raise  such  a  committee.  He  pro- 
tested against  referring  this  subject  to  a  commit- 
tee of  ten  men,  for  they  shoula  thereby  commit 
themselves  to  what  those  ten  men  might  after- 
wards submit.  He  more  especially  objected 
when  there  was  so  great  a  diversity  of  opinion 
on  the  subject  of  the  basis  of  representation 
amongst  the  delegates  from  the  several  congres- 
sional districts  themselves. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  replied  that  he  did 
not  propose  to  refer  that  subject  to  the  commit- 
tee at  all. 

Mr.  TURNER.  Can  we  build  a  house  with- 
out a  foundation?  What  is  the  principle  un- 
less it  is  the  basis  of  representation?  I  move  to 
lay  the  resolution  on  the  table. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays,  and  being  taken  they  were — ^yeas  37, 
nays  54. 

Yeas — JohnL.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Luther  Brawner,  William  Chenault.  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  James 
Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben. 
Hardin,  William  Hendrix,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Thomas  James,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  John  H.  McHenry,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  William  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  Miehael 
L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  How- 


085 


ard  Todd,  Squire  Tnmer,  John  L.  Waller,  Hen- 
ry Washington,  Andrew  S.  White — 37. 
'  Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

g arson,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
radley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomsis  D.  Brown, 
Charles  Chambers,  James  S.  Cbrisman,  Jesse 
CoflFey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Garrett  l)avis,  Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  John  Hargis,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  Charles  C.  Kel- 
ly, Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis 
B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  M'.Clure, 
David  Meri wether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Philip  triplett, 
John  Wheeler,  Chas.  A.  Wickliife,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  GeorsfC  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wriglit — 54. 

So  tne  resolution  was  not  laid  on  the  table. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  called  for  a  division,  so 
that  the  vote  should  first  be  taken  on  striking 
out. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  motion  to 
strike  out  the  word  "one,"  and  it  was  negatived. 

The  resolution  was  then  adopted. 

The  PRESIDENT  stated  that  it  would  be 
agreeable  to  him  to  receive  from  the  delegates 
from  each  congressional  district,  the  name  of  a 
delegate  that  they  might  be  desirous  to  serve  on 
the  committee. 

LEAVE   OF   ABSEXCE. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  asked  leave  of  ab- 
sence for  Mr.  M.  P.  Marshall  on  account  of  sick- 
ness, which  was  granted. 

CIECUIT   COURT. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  joint  committee  ol  thirty,  con- 
cerning circuit  courts. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  believe  when  the  house 
adjourned  yesterday  evening,  I  had  just  offered 
the  following  amendment,  as  an  additional  sec- 
tion: 

"  Whenever  the  circuit  court  judge,  before 
whom  a  criminal  or  penal  prosecution  is  had, 
shall  entertain  doubts  on  any  point  of  law  which 
sliall  be  decided  by  him  during  such  trial,  he 
shall  have  the  power  of  adjourning  over  such 
doubtful  points  of  law,  to  be  decided  by  the 
court  of  appeals;  and  in  the  meantime,  may  de- 
lay the  execution  of  the  sentence  in  such  case, 
until  the  court  of  appeals  have  decided  such 
doubtful  points  of  law;  or  the  accused  may  ap- 
ply to  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals  for  a  writ 
of  error,  [in  any  criminal  or  penal  prosecution,] 
which  may  be  granted  by  him,  and  shall  act  as  a 
supersedeas  to  tne  judgment  of  the  court  in  which 
the  trial  was  had,  until  the  opinion  of  the  court 
of  appeals,  on  the  questions  involved,  shall  be 
entered  in  the  circuit  court,  "which  shall  be  goy- 
erned  thereby." 

I  was  somewhat  surprised  to  find,  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  house  last  evening,  that  a 
misapprehension  prevailed  among  members,  in 
reference  to  the  character  of  my  amendment.    It 


containstwo  propositions,  that  are  perfectly  sim- 
ple in  their  character.  The  first  is,  that  when  a 
judge  of  a  circuit  court  tries  a  case,  and  enter- 
tains a  doubt  on  a  point  of  law,  he  may  cany 
the  point  of  law  to  the  court  of  appeals.  Now, 
what  will  be  the  result  of  that  proposition? 
Where  a  point  of  law  is  such  that  a  judge  en- 
tertains serious  doubts,  and  is  unwilling  that 
the  life  or  liberty  of  the  accused  shall  be  lost, 
without  first  having  the  decision  of  the  court  oi 
appeals,  he  may  adjourn  the  case  to  that  tribu- 
nal. One  answers,  it  very  seldom  happens.  If 
so,  then  the  remedy  for  the  evil  is  not  frequent- 
ly called  into  operation.  What  is  the  next 
point?  It  will  immediately  strike  the  mind  of 
every  thinking  man  in  this  house,  that  there  is 
a  possibility  that  the  counsel  for  the  accused 
may  be  satisfied  that  there  ought  to  be  a  doubt 
raised-;— that  the  point  of  law  is  not  well  settled. 
Take,  for  instance,  the  case  stated  here  a  day  or 
two  ago,  of  one  judge  having  decided  that  a  ne- 
gro was  entitled  to  benefit  of  clergy,  whilst  an- 
other judge  decided,  in  a  similar  case,  that  he 
was  not.  Now,  one  of  them  was  wrong,  and  the 
other  right.  A  case  as  strong  as  this  I  met  with 
myself. 

In  1823-6  the  legislature  of  Kentucky  passed 
a  law  as  important  as  ever  was  enacted  by  them, 
that  a  jurjman,  when  called  up  and  examin- 
ed on  his  voir  dire,  whether  he  had  conversed 
with  the  witnesses  in  the  ease,  should  be  liable 
to  exception.  I  know,  and  I  so  stated  at  the 
time,  that  in  two  adjoining  districts,  one  circuit 
judge  decided  this  law  to  be  constitutional,  and 
that  it  was  our  duty  to  obey  it,  whilst  another 
judge  decided  it  to  be  unconstitutional  and  that 
we  ought  not  to  obey  it.  Is  that  law  important 
or  not?  Nothing  can  be  more  important  than 
that  a  roan  should  be  tried  by  an  impartial  jury, 
and  the  question  arises,  what  is  that  impartiali- 
ty, while  one  judge  decides  one  way  and  anoth- 
er another.  If  the  court  of  appeals  were  once 
to  decide  that  question,  it  would  operate  obliga- 
torily upon  the  circuit  judges.  I  could  go  on 
and  give  instances  innumerable,  of  the  uncer- 
tainty of  the  law  in  such  cases.  This  is  enough 
for  the  present.  What  are  the  benefits  to  be  de- 
rived from  uniformity  of  decisions?  We  may 
not  probably  derive  any  benefit  from  it,  but  our 
children  anS  our  grand  children  may.  At  the 
present  time,  there  is  no  settled  criminal  juris- 
prudence in  Kentucky;  but  if  my  amendment  is 
adopted,  it  will  go  far  to  secure  that  desirable 
object.  There  will  grow  up,  by  degrees,  a  set- 
tled, permanent,  jurisprudence,  arising  from  the 
decisions  of  the  court  of  appeals  in  this  state 
upon  all  the  important  points  that  will  be  car- 
ried thither,  either  by  the  circuit  court  judges,  or 
by  the  accused,  and  thus  by  and  by,  we  shall 
have  here,  what  has  been  the  glory  and  ornament 
of  Great  Britain,  throughout  the  whole  land. 
How  did  her  criminal  law  grow  up?  Look  at 
her  acts  of  Parliament,  all  of  which  may  be  con- 
densed within  one  small  volume,  while  her  crim- 
inal laws  are  contained  in  volume  upon  volume. 
The  law  on  criminal  evidence,  since  1776,  has 
been  obligatory  on  the  general  assembly  of  this 
and  other  states.  For  a  time,  the  criminal  juris- 
prudence could  not  even  be  read  in  this  country. 
But  legislation,  like  every  thing  else,  is  progres- 
sive and  improving;  and  five  or  six  years  ago. 


686 


the  legislature  agreed  that  they  might  be  read, 
but  must  not  be  authoritative.  Now,  that  is  a 
Very  nice  question.  These  questions  will  be 
settled  and  made  obligatory  on  our  court  of 
appeals,  and  the  circuit  courts  throughout  the 
state,  and  then  the  judges  will  decide  alike, 
and  that  will  be  some  consolation  to  the  crimi- 
nal. 

Mr.  DAVIS  offered  the  following  as  a  substi- 
tute for  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Daviess. 

"  The  legislature  shall  pass  laws  authorizing 
■writs  of  error,  and  regulating  the  right  of  chal- 
lenge of  jurors  in  crinnnal  cases." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  only  remark,  that  I 
think  the  legislature  have  that  right  now,  unless 
the  constitution  prohibits  it. 

Mr.  DAVIS.    Not  unless  it  is  granted. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  waive  that  for  the  pres- 
ent. I  have  not  much  objection  to  the  jfirst  part 
of  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Da- 
viess; but  to  the  second,  I  have  stronger  objec- 
tions than  to  any  that  has  been  offered. 

In  England,  twelve  judges  ride  the  circuits, 
and  if  they  have  doubts  on  any  point  of  law, 
they  respite  the  sentence  till  they  get  the  opin- 
ion of  the  twelve.  The  part  to  "which  I  object 
in  the  proposition  offered  is,  that  a  supersedeas 
may  be  obtained,  on  application  to  any  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals.  The  trial  of  criminal 
cases  is  generally  during  the  first  week  of  the 
session  of  the  court.  If  the  man  is  sent  to  the 
penitentiary,  he  is  usually  sent  off  as  early  as 
the  second  week.  When  is  the  supersedeas  to 
be  applied  for?  There  is  no  limit.  Is  it  one 
year,  or  six  months,  or  three  years?  .When  is  he 
to  give  bail?  The  sentence  or  judgment  is  set 
aside,  or  at  least  suspended  so  as  to  take  bail,  if 
it  is  a  bailable  offence.  Who  is  to  take  bail?  Is 
it  the  keeper  of  the  penitentiary?  The  circuit 
court  has  adjourned,  and  if  he  gets  bail,  do  you 
think  he  will  ever  appear?  He  will  be  out  bush- 
whacking, and  if  the  court  of  appeals  decides 
against  him,  he  will  not  appear. 

I  will  repeat,  there  are  too  many  means  for 
criminals  to  escape,  for  the  good  of  the  great 
body  of  the  community,  and  I  do  hope  they  will 
not  be  increased.  I  hope  the  second  member  of 
the  proposition  will  be  withdrawn.  There  is  no 
demand  in  public  sentiment  for  carrying  crimi- 
nal cases  to  the  court  of  appeals.  I  will  ask 
gentlemen  if  they  have  heard  of  any  such  de- 
mand. I  have  heard  no  man  make  such  a  claim, 
except  some  of  our  profession.  Nobody  has  the 
right  of  appeal  but  the  accused.  Government 
does  not  have  it.  I  never  saw  an  innocent  man 
convicted,  while  I  have  seen  a  thousand  guilty 
escape. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  If  there  are  any  minor  provis- 
ions of  the  constitution,  in  which  the  people  of 
my  section  of  the  country  feel  a  deep  interest, 
it  is  those  provisions  which  are  to  regulate  the 
trial  of  criminal  cases.  It  may  be  called  preju 
dice,  or  it  may  be  called  cruelty;  but  whenever 
a  man  perpetrates  a  crime,  that  strikes  at  the 
safety  of  the  citizen,  and  the  general  welfare  of 
society,  I  want  him  punished.  I  want  him  pun 
ished  for  the  sake  of  justice,  and  especially  for 
the  sake  of  tJie  example,  and  the  security  which 
that  example  gives  to  the  community. 

In  regulating  the  subject  of  eriminal  trials. 


what  ought  to  be  the  object  of  this  convention, 
and  of  all  law-makers?  It  certainly  should  be 
that  justice  should  be  done,  as  well  to  the  com- 
monwealth as  to  the  accused;  and  that  such 
modes  of  proceeding  should  be  adopted,  as  would 
most  certainly  secure  the  impartial  and  enlight- 
ened administration  of  justice.  Now  sir,  is  the 
present  mode  of  trial  in  criminal  cases,  so  far  as 
it  involves  the  mode  of  selecting  the  jury,  and 
especially  the  right  of  challenge  in  favor  of  the' 
criminal — is  it  of  such  a  character  as  to  secure 
the  great  end — the  proper  administration  of 
criminal  justice?  I  think  not.  The  right  of 
challenge,  as  it  now  exists,  is  a  statutary  right, 
though  formerly  it  was  a  common-law  right. 
What  was  the  state  of  criminal  jurisprudence, 
when  this  right  Avas  secured  to  the  accused? 
The  judges  were  appointed  by,  and  held  office 
during  the  pleasure  of  the  crown.  We  all  know 
that  a  large  class  of  criminal  proceedings,  in- 
volved state  criminals,  where  the  minister  of  the 
crown  took  part,  and  where  the  crown  influence 
was  used  to  sacrifice  the  accused;  where  tlie  king 
having  the  power  to  displace  the  judge  at  his 
pleasure,  and  appoint  a  more  humble  tool  to  fill 
the  office — when  desirous  of  having  a  great  state 
criminal  convicted — it  became  a  matter  of  interr 
est  in  order  to  secure  justice,  that  the  accused 
should  have  tliis  peremptory  right  of  challenge. 
This  feature,  as  to  the  mode  of  administering 
justice,  did  not  exist  ia  this  country,  and  a  great 
blessing  it  was  to  our  citizens  that  it  did  not — 
nor  does  it  exist  now  in  England.  But  there 
were  other  important  features  attending  the  ad- 
ministration of  criminal  justice,  and  what  were 
they?  The  accused  was  denied,  on  the  merits  of 
his  case,  the  privilege  of  counsel  for  his  defence. 
Upon  mere  collateral  questions,  he  was  allowed 
the  benefit  of  counsel;  but  upon  the  general 
question  of  guilt  or  innocence,  upon  which  gen- 
eral question  the  fate  of  the  accused  depended, 
he  was  not  allowed  the  benefit  of  counsel  to  aid 
him  in  making  his  defence.  If  such  were  now 
unfortunately  the  condition  of  persons  accused 
of  crime  in  this  country,  it  is  probable  that  I 
would  be  opposed  to   a  change  such  as  I  have 

Eroposed  in  the  amendment.  But  no  such  bar- 
arous  principle  does  prevail  in  this  country. 
Well,  what  are  the  other  important  features  in 
the  administration  of  criminal  justice?  The 
judge  invariably  instructs  the  jury,  that  the  law 
prefers  that  ninety  nine  guilty  persons  should 
escape,  rather  than  that  one  innocent  persoa 
should  be  punished;  and  that  if  the  jury,  upon  a 
review  of  all  the  facts  in  the  case,  entertain  a 
rational  doubt,  as  to  the  guilt  of  the  accused, 
they  must  acquit.  Well,  now,  the  principle  of 
law,  as  it  is  administered  in  relation  to  criminals 
almost  amounts  to  a  total  and  unconditional  irar 
munity  to  criminals;  especially  to  those  Avho 
have  monev,  or  powerful  and  influential  con- 
nexions, but  there  are  some  other  features  ia 
the  administration  of  criminal  law.  The  jury 
may  acquit.  If  they  acquit,  there  is  no  new 
trial  granted  to  the  commonwealth  against  the 
accused.  An  acquittal,  though  it  may  be  against 
evidence — against  law,  is  final  and  irreversible  i» 
favor  of  the  accused;  but  on  the  other  hand,  if 
there  is  a  conviction  against  evidence,  where  a 
reasonable  doubt  prevails,  it  is  not  only  the 
privilege  of  the  accused  to  have,  but  the  duty  of 


687 


the  court  to  grant,  a  new  trial.  These  being  the 
general  features  of  the  administration  of  crim- 
inal law,  in  the  trial  of  criminals,  the  question 
is,  whether  they  are  of  such  a  character,  as  to 
secure  justice  as  well  to  the  commonwealth  as 
to  the  accused.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  has  given  us  his  experience  on 
tliis  subject.  1  also  have  had  my  experience  sir, 
during  a  period  of  twenty-five  years.  I  have 
never  been  prosecuting  attorney,  though  I  have 
sometimes  been  engaged  to  assist  the  prosecu- 
tion ,  but  I  have  generally  been  engagea  for  the 
defence  of  criminals.  And  I  can  say  with  him, 
in  perfect  truth  and  sincerity,  that  in  twenty  five 
years  practice,  in  which  practice  I  have  seen  many 
criminals  tried,  and  have  been  engaged  in  the 
defence  of  many,  I  have  never  known  an  inno- 
cent man  to  be  punished,  but  I  have  kno^Ti  very 
many  guilty  ones  to  go  unwhipt  of  justice. 

Xow,  what  is  the  great  object  that  we  ought 
to  have  in  view,  when  devising  a  mode  of  trial 
in  criminal  cases?  Do  you  want  to  create  a 
piece  of  machinery  that  shall  result  inevitably, 
in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  or  even  a  majority  of 
cases,  in  the  necessary  acquital  of  the  criminal. 
Is  that  the  purpose  of  your  legislation?  Is 
that  the  object  that  members  of  this  convention 
have  in  view  when  they  refuse  to  incorporate 
such  a  principle,  as  is  embodied  in  my  amend- 
ment, in  the  constitution,  against  the  experience 
of  the  country,  and  against  the  proper  juiminis- 
tration  of  justice.  Gentlemen  say  they  are  for 
mercy.  Sir,  I  am  for  mercy;  but  the  best  mercy, 
would  be  a  faithful  execution  of  the  criminal 
law.  The  best  mercy  is,  for  the  law  to  throw 
its  shield  as  a  panoply  over  the  citizen  for  his 
protection.  That  shield  is  not  now  interposed 
between  the  assa-ssin  and  his  victim.  Well 
.  what  is  proposed  to  be  done?  Why,  that  you 
should  allow  the  legislature  to  pass  laws,  regu- 
lating the  right  of  peremptory  challenge,  in 
criminal  cases;  and  also  to  authorize  the  grant- 
ing of  writs  of  error  in  the  same  cases.  Crimi- 
nals now  have  the  right,  in  cases  of  high  treason, 
to  challenge  thirty  five  jurors,  according  to  the 
principles  of  the  common  law;  and  in  other 
cases  they  have  the  right,  by  statute  law,  to 
challenge  twenty.  We  do  not  propose  to  ab- 
rogate that  right ;  we  do  not  propose  to  interfere 
■with  it  at  all;  we  only  say  that  the  conimon- 
"wealth  shall  have  the  right  to  challenge  one- 
fifth  as  many  as  the  accused.  I  say  this  is 
right — it  is  necessary  to  the  impartial  adminis- 
tration of  justice;  and  it  is  demanded  at  the 
liands  of  this  convention.  What  is  it  that  goes 
to  stimulate  the  perpetration  of  crime?  What 
is  it  that  induces  the  murderer  to  imbrue  his 
hands  in  his  brother's  blood?  It  is  the  manner 
in  which  the  criminal  justice  of  this  country  is 
administered;  it  is  that  when  he  looks  around 
him,  he  sees  that  slaves  are  punished — that  the 
humble,  and  the  friendless  are  punished — there 
is  no  difficulty  in  punishing  them — ^but  the  man 
who  has  the  oenefit  of  influential  connexions — 
the  man  who  possesses  wealth,  goes  unpunished. 
Your  law  is  rendered  inoperative,  so  far  as  re- 

{jards  these — it  is  but  a  dead  letter — human 
ife  becomes  cheap  under  vour  mode  of  admin- 
istration of  the  criminal  law — there  is  no  se- 
curity— no  protection  under  it.  Why  sir,  within 
the  range  of  my  experience,  I  could  point  to 


cases  that  have  occured  in  days  gone  by,  where 
a  large  and  influential  party  in  the  state  have 
committed  crime — bold  and  atrocious  crime. 
They  were  arraigned  and  acquitted;  whereas,  if 
they  had  been  punished,  the  example  would 
now  operate  as  a  terror  to  evil  doers.  This  im- 
punity of  crime,  has  emboldened  men  to  com- 
mit crimes,  at  which  humanity  shudders.  A 
peaceable  citizen  while  walking  along  the  street, 
is  shot  down  by  a  man  whom  he  had  undesign- 
edly made  his  enemy;  and  if  a  trial  be  attempted, 
it  is  but  a  solemn  mockery — ^the  guilty  party  is 
never  punished,  and  it  is  a  consciousnes.s  of  this 
that  stimulates  him  to  do  the  deed ;  whereas,  if 
he  knew,  that  punishment  would  follow  the 
commission  of  the  crime,  it  would  have  the 
effect  of  restraining  him — his  victim  would  be 
spared — and  a  mourning  widow  and  dependent 
orphans  would  be  saved  the  direst  calamity  that 
could  be  inflicted  upon  them. 

My  purpose  is  simply  not  to  deprive  the  ac- 
cused of  any  right  that  he  now  has,  but  to  give 
to  the  commonwealth  a  right  that  is  essential  to 
the  administration  of  public  justice,  so  far  as 
regards  the  criminal  jurisprudence  of  the  coun- 
try. I  knew  of  a  case  in  Nicholas  countv, 
wliere  a  young  man,  walking  up  to  another  in 
the  streets,  drew  his  knife,  and  stabbed  him. 
The  man  sunk  in  his  tracks  and  died,  leaving  a 
wife  and  three  children,  in  a  state  of  penury  and 
want.  That  man's  blood  cried  aloud  from  the 
ground  for  jiistice,  and  the  sense  of  the  commu- 
nity demanded  it  so  strongly,  that  the  young 
man  was  indicted.  I  was  engaged  to  aid  in  the 
prosecution.  The  criminal  had  his  friends  hover- 
ing about  the  court  house,  and  five  of  them  were 
put  upon  the  jurj'.  I  wanted  to  set  aside  the 
array  on  that  account,  but  failed.  Well  sir,  the 
jury  were  provoked  by  the  motion — I  suppose — 
and  they  found  him  guilty  of  manslaughter  on- 
Iv,  when  the  facts  made  the  case  one  of  the  most 
diabolical  and  outrageous  murders  that  was  ev- 
er perpetrated.  The  man  was  convicted  and 
sentenced  to  the  penitentiary ;  and  the  judge 
granted  a  new  trial.  Before  the  time  of  holding 
another  court,  the  culprit  had  given  bail  and 
fled.  And  sir,  three  of  those  jurymen,  who 
were  packed  for  his  trial,  and  who  prevented  him 
from  being  sentenced  to  be  hung,  were  afterwards 
arraigned  for  perjury,  and  sent  to  the  peniten- 
tiary. And  sir,  in  the  same  county,  within  the 
last  eighteen  months,  there  was  a  simple  hearted 
fellow,  who  had  $2,200  in  his  pocket.  It  became 
known  to  a  man  of  desperate  character,  who  en- 
ticed him  into  the  sequestered  hills  of  Licking, 
after  night  fall,  and  had  him  robbed.  Well,  he 
was  indicted,  and  arraigned  for  trial.  I  was  en- 
gaged in  his  prosecution  also — and  sir,  I  recog- 
nize no  diflference  between  lending  my  assistance 
in  the  prosecution  of  an  infamous  scoundrel,  and 
the  defence  of  an  innocent  man  who  is  arraign- 
ed for  an  alleged  misdemeanor.  Well,  I  aided 
in  the  prosecution  of  this  man  for  robbery.  He 
had — as  in  the  other  case — his  friends  auS  sup- 
porters, standing  around  waiting  to  be  summon- 
ed upon  the  jury.  We  chanced  to  get  one  of 
these  men  upon  the  jury — and  I  knew  as  well 
before  he  was  brought  to  the  book,  as  I  did  af- 
ter the  trial,  that  he  was  predetermined  to  ac- 
quit the  culprit.  This  man  hung  the  jury;  and 
if  we  had  been  entitled  to  the  right  of  challenge. 


we  wovild  have  excused  him,  and  a  veixlict  of 
conviction  would  have  taken  place.  At  the  late 
session  of  the  Nicholas  circuit  court,  this  juror 
was  indicted  for  perjury.  There  is  no  lawyer, 
who  has  had  experience  in  criminal  cases,  but 
knows  that  such  occurrences  are  frequent.  It  is 
to  guard  against  such  occurrences — to  enable  the 
commonwealth,  as  well  as  the  accused,  to  obtain 
justice,  that  some  such  provision  is  necessary. 
Is  there  any  thing  in  this  to  prevent  a  fair  and 
impartial  jury  from  being  empaunelled  in  the 
case  of  the  commonwealth  against  a  criminal  ? 
Nothing.  Then  why  not  allow  to  the  common- 
wealth the  privilege  of  challenging  jurors,  to 
one-fifth  the  number  that  the  accused  may  chal- 
lenge. When  the  jury  is  told  by  the  court,  that 
if  they  entertain  a  reasonable  doubt  of  the  guilt 
of  the  accused,  he  should  be  acquitted,  and  that 
the  law  prefers  that  ninety  and  nine  guilty  men 
should  escape,  rather  than  one  innocent  man 
should  suffer — and  when  counsel  is  allowed  to 
the  accused  to  argue  the  law  of  the  case,  in  most 
of  the  circuits  in  the  state — I  ask  you,  if  the 
commonwealth  should  not  be  allowed  the  priv- 
ilege of  challenging  at  least  five  out  of  twenty. 
Would  it  at  all  prevent  a  fair  and  impartial  tri- 
al between  the  accused  and  the  commonwealth  ? 
Why  sir,  it  is  the  object,  and  should  be  tlie  ob- 
ject of  all  m«n,  to  secure  an  impartial  trial.  There 
lives  no  man,  who  does  not  desire  that  the  com- 
monwealth should  have  this  power  at  least. 
Now,  unless  gentlemen  shall  satisfy  this  conven- 
tion that  this  innovation  upon  the  right  of  chal- 
lenge, will  produce  such  a  state  of  things  as  will 
prevent  an  impartial  trial,  it  seems  to  me  the 
convention  should  not  hesitate  to  grant  to  the 
commonwealth  this  right  of  challenge.  It  seems 
to  me,  that  justice  should  be  done,  not  only  to 
the  accused,  but  to  the  commonwealth.  I  will 
refer  to  a  single  passage  upon  this  subject. 

"Challenges  upon  any  of  the  foregoing  ac- 
counts are  styled  challenges  for  cause  ;  which 
may  be  without  stint  in  both  criminal  and  civil 
trials.  But  in  criminal  cases,  or  at  least  in  cap- 
ital ones,  there  is,  in  favor  em  viiae,  allowed  to 
the  prisoner  an  arbitrary  and  capricious  species 
of  challenge  to  a  certain  number  of  jurors,  Avith- 
out  shewing  any  cause  at  all ;  which  is  called  a 
peremptory  challenge ;  a  provision  full  of  that 
tenderness  and  humanity  to  prisoners,  for  which 
our  English  laws   are  justly   famous.     This  is 

f  rounded  on  two  reasons.  1.  As  every  one  must 
e  sensible,  what  sudden  impressions  and  unac- 
countable prejudices  we  are  apt  to  conceive  upon 
the  bare  looks  and  gestures  of  another  :  and  how 
necessary  it  is,  that  a  prisoner  (when  put  to  de- 
fend his  life)  should  have  a  good  opinion  of  his 
jury,  the  want  of  which  might  totally  di,sconcert 
nim  ;  the  law  wills  not  that  he  should  be  tried 
by  any  one  man  against  whom  he  has  conceived 
a  prejudice,  even  without  being  able  to  assign  a 
reason  for  such  his  dislike.  2.  Because,  upon 
challenges  for  cause  shewn,  if  the  reason  a-ssign- 
ed  prove  insufficient  to  set  ;iside  the  juror,  per- 
haps the  bare  questioning  his  indifference  may 
Boraetimes  provoke  a  resentment ;  to  prevent  all 
ill  consequences  from  which,  the  prisoner  is  still 
at  liberty,  if  he  pleases,  peremptorily  to  set  liim 
aside." 

I  will  also  read  the  law  which  denies  to  "the 
accused,  the  aid  of  counsel,  in  making  his  -de- 


fence in  chief."  When  the  jury  is  sworn,  if  it 
be  a  cause  of  any  consequence,  the  indictment  is 
usually  opened,  and  the  evidence  marshalled,  ^ 
examined,  and  enforced  by  the  counsel  for  the  S 
crown,  or  prosecution.  But  it  is  a  settled  rule 
at  common  law,  thai  "no  counsel  shall  be  allow- 
ed a  prisoner  upon  his  trial,  upon  the  general 
issue,  in  any  capital  crime,  unless  some  point  of 
law  shall  arise  proper  to  be  debated." 

"The  prisoner  is  not  allowed  counsel  to  plead 
his  cause  before  any  jury,  in  anv  felony,  whether 
it  is  capital,  within  benefit  of  clergy,  or  a  case 
of  petty  larceny.  But  in  misdemeanors  the  pris- 
oner or  the  defendant  is  allowed  counsel  as  in 
civil  actions."     4tli  Bla.  Com.  355. 

Now,  tJiis  examination  is  begun  and  conduct- 
ed by  the  commonwealth,  and  its  results  are 
such  as  are  indicated  here.  Is  there  any  such 
reason  existing  in  this  commonwealth  at  all? 
Does  the  convention  assembled  in  the  state  of 
Kentucky  for  tlie  purpose  of  instituting  its  fun- 
damental law,  and  creating  a  legitimate  and  im- 
Eortant  principle  by  which  the  government  shall 
e  controlled,  intend  to  assume  the  position 
that  this  right  of  challenge  should,  in  no  case, 
and  to  no  extent,  be  given  to  the  commonwealth? 
If  it  does  sir,  in  my  judgment,  it  lends  itself  in 
some  degree,  to  granting  to  criminals  immunity 
from  punishment.  They  have  immunity  from 
punishment  now;  and  this  is  one  of  the  princi- 
pal causes  AN'hy  they  liavo  such  immunity — not 
the  sole  cause,  but  one  of  the  operating  causes, 
and  it  ought  to  be  removed.  Where  is  the  place, 
except  perhaps  in  Mississippi  or  Arkansas, 
where  human  life  is  held  in  so  low  estimate  as 
it  is  in  Kentucky?  Who  is  there,  when  he  has 
received  an  imaginary  wrong,  who  liesitates  to 
assault  his  adversarj^?  Who  is  there  that  fails 
to  strike  when  passion  and  vengeance  virges  him 
on?  There  ought  to  be  some  stay,  some  curb, 
some  controlling  principle;  and  the  only  stay — 
the  only  curb — is  the  seven  years'  punishment. 
Yes  sir !  Blackstone  says  truely,  and  Avith  a 
deep  knowledge  of  human  nature,  that  it  is  not 
the  sanguinary  punishments  of  the  law,  but  the 
certainty  of  punishment,  that  restrains  the  crim- 
inal, and  prevents  the  perpetration  of  crime. 
This  certainty  does  not  exist  in  this  country; 
and  it  is  because  it  does  not  exist — it  is  because 
those  who  perpetrate  crime  know  that  they  have 
nine  chances  in  ten  to  escape,  that  they  do  com- 
mit it.  But  sir,  if  you  let  them  know  tliat 
when  they  perpetrate  crime,  punishment  will 
inevitably  follow  its  pei-petration,  the  conse- 
quence Avill  be,  that  crime  will  decrease.  But 
until  you  read  to  them  sonw  such  salutary  les- 
son, it  will  go  on  increasing  as  it  has  increased, 
and  there  will  be  no  protection — no  security  for 
human  life.  No  true  liberty  can  exist  Avhere  the 
law   does   not  give  this  protection.    Under  the 

{)resent  mode  of  administration  of  the  criminal 
aw,  in  the  empanneling  of  the  jury,  the  right  of 
challenge,  and  the  disposition  of  the  judge  to 
allow  counsel  to  argue  the  law,  and  the  princi- 
ple which  authorizes  the  jury  to  give  the  accus- 
ed the  benefit  of  a  doubt,  it  amounts  to  a  per- 
fect immunity  from  punishment.  Now,  I  say, 
and  I  say  it  with  tlie  deepest  conviction  of  the 
importance  of  the  duty  resting  upon  me,  and 
from  my  knowledge  of  the  great  estimation  in 


6S9 


which  such  reform  is  held  by  my  constituency, 
that  some  such  reform  ought  to  be  made. 

I  do  not  propose  lo  incorporate  in  the  consti- 
tution any  specific  provision  for  the  regulation 
of  the  trial  of  criminal  cases.  I  do  not  think  it 
appropriate  that  the  constitution  should  con- 
tain any  such  details.  I  merely  propose  to  vest 
a  general  power  in  the  legislature  to  regulate 
■writs  of  error,  and  to  regulate  the  subject  of  the 
right  of  challenge.  I  believe  that  both  these  are 
reforms  necessary  to  the  due  administration  of 
the  law.  As  the'gentleman  from  Daviess,  (Mr. 
Triplett,)  has  said,  there  is  no  uniform  adminis- 
tration ot  the  criminal  law  of  the  state,  and  it 
results  mainly,  I  believe,  from  the  fact,  that  there 
is  no  revisorv  power  to  regulate  and  establish  a 
code  containing  the  great  principles  which 
•should  guide  the  action  of  the  judiciary  in  the 
exercise  of  this  branch  of  their  auties. 

Mr.  MAYES.  Will  it  be  in  order  to  oflFer  a 
substitute  for  both  propositions? 

The  PRESIDENT.     It  is  not  in  order. 

Mr.  MAYES.  Then  I  will  have  it  read  for 
the  information  of  the  house,  and  at  the  proper 
time  will  ask  a  vote  upon  it.  The  amendment 
was  then  read  as  follows : 

"  The  legislature  shall  hare  the  power  to  pass 
laws,  giving  to  the  commonwealth  the  rignt  of 
peremtory  challenge  in  criminal  causes." 

Mr.  STEVEXSOX.  I  voted  yesterday  for 
striking  out  the  loth  section.  I  confess  I  did 
it  with  great  doubt  as  to  the  policy  of  the  step. 
I  was  actuated  in  that  vote  by  being  unwilling 
to  engraft  into  the  constitution  more  details  them 
were  absolutelv  necessar}'.  So  far  as  I  have  ex- 
amined the  subject,  this  right  of  challenge  has 
been  incorporated  in  very  few  constitutions.  I 
think  it  is  the  duty  of  the  convention  to  avoid 
details  in  the  constitution.  It  is  not  necessary, 
and  it  may  have  the  effect,  notwithstanding  a 
good  constitution  may  be  formed,  of  increasing 
the  strength  which  is  already  arrayed  against  it. 
It  occurs  to  me  that  every  detail  we  put  into 
the  constitution  furnishes  an  additional  weapon 
to  our  opponents.  I  therefore  voted  against  the 
section.  But  I  am  very  happy  that  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis.)  has  offered  this 
proposition.  I  think  it  is  a  medium  ground  up- 
on which  all  can  unite.  He  proposed  to  leave  to 
the  legislature  the  right  to  carrj-  out  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Daviess,  (Mr. 
Triplett,)  and  also  to  provide  against  this  crying 
injustice,  which  has  been  so  eloquently  depicted 
to  us  in  regard  to  the  escape  of  criminals.  If 
the  people  demand  an  appellate  jurisdiction, 
thev  have  but  to  let  their  will  be  known  in  the 
legislative  halls,  and  their  fiat  will  be  carried 
out.  I  suppose  that  there  are  very  few  gentle- 
men on  this  floor  who  deny  the  propriety  of 
having  an  appellate  jurisdiction  in  criminal 
cases,  and  yet  there  is  scarcely  a  gentleman  who 
can  say  that  the  people  demand  it.  I  have  seen 
several  efforts  made  in  the  legislature  to  have 
granted  to  the  court  of  appeals  jurisdiction  in 
criminal  cases,  and  if  vou  refer  to  the  legisla- 
tive records  you  will  find  that  bills  have  been 
introduced  from  year  to  year  to  give  to  the  court 
the  jurisdiction,  and  they  have  been  voted  down. 
And  those  who  argue  that  this  is  a  crying  evil 
that  should  be  remedied,  must  nevertheless  ac- 
knowledge that  the  people  have  notso  received  it. 
87 


I  ask  gentlemen  then,  with  this  fact  before  them, 
not  to  put  into  the  constitution  that  which  will 
be  an  element  in  the  hands  of  its  enemies  which 
may  give  us  more  trouble  than  we  anticipate.  In 
regard  to  the  right  of  challenge  in  criminal 
cases,  the  gentleman's  amendment  provides  for 
it.  And  if  this  crving  evil — ^which  I  do  not  so 
clearly  perceive,  although  I  have  heard  a  great 
deal  about  it — does  really  exist,  the  legislature 
will  have  power  to  remove  it,  if  the  popular 
voice  demand  that  it  should  be  done. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  With  my  friend 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Haniin,)  I  must  beg  leave  to 
differ.  The  right  to  challenge  in  criminal  trials 
is  taken  away  from  the  commonwealth  by  the 
constitution,  as  I  understand  it;  and  unless  the 
power  is  conferred  upon  the  legislature,  or  incor- 
porated into  the  constitution  about  to  be  made, 
the  right  will  not  exist.  I  ask  gentlemen,  who 
contend  that  the  power  under  the  present  con- 
stitution may  not  be  exercised  by  the  legislature, 
to  explain  to  me  the  meaning  of  this  provision: 
"That  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury  shall  be 
held  sacred,  and  the  right  thereof  remain  invio- 
late." Was  the  right  of  challenge  extended  to 
the  crown?  All  admit  that  it  was  not;  it  was 
alone  extended  to  the  criminal.  If  tlien  it  could 
not  be  exercised  by  the  crown,  and  that  mode  of 
trial  is  to  be  held  sacred,  the  legislature  in  my 
judgment  cannotextend  it  to  the  commonwealth. 
If  that  section  of  our  constitution  means  any 
thing,  I  care  not  how  loudly  public  sentiment 
and  public  justice  may  demand  it,  the  legisla- 
ture is  disarmed  of  all  power  on  that  subject,  un- 
less we  here  provide  for  it.  Does  public  senti- 
ment and  the  due  administration  of  the  criminal 
laws  of  our  country  call  for  this  provision?  From 
my  limited  experience  and  observation,  I  would 
say  that  it  was  imperiously  demanded  in  some 
form. 

I  would  greatly  prefer  a  provision  securing  to 
the  commonwealth  aright  to  at  least  one-fourth 
of  the  challenges.  As  this  could  not  be  done,  as 
was  shown  by  the  striking  out  of  the  15th  sec- 
tion of  the  report,  the  amendment  proposed  by 
the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis,)  I  am 
disposed  to  favor,  as  the  best  that  is  now  offered. 
Upon  what  ground  is  it  that  gentlemen  oppose 
the  exercise  of  this  power?  Sympathy.  And 
for  whom?  The  murderer,  thea.s6asin,'the  fel- 
on, the  violator  of  the  public  peace,  the  wanton 
invader  of  private  rights.  Such  as  these,  Mr. 
President,  their  sympathies  cluster  around,  with 
a  devotion  worthy  of  a  better  object.  The  blood 
of  liim  who  has  fallen  by  the  hands  of  the  as- 
sasin,  cries  aloud  to  the  violated  laws  of  society, 
the  laws  of  his  country — not  for  vengeance,  but 
for  the  due  enforcement  of  the  criminal  law;  and 
how  is  this  responded  to?  Gentlemen  tell  me, 
let  him  be  tried,  letajurvbe  called.  It  comes, 
and  what  is  the  result?  The  whole  array,  if  they 
are  composed  of  the  intelligent  and  most  respect- 
able citizens  of  the  vicinage,  are  turned  off. 
Who  comes  in  their  stead?  Stool-pigeons,  that 
hang  around  and  about  the  court  house!  You 
know  them,— can  point  them  out.  They  are 
called  into  the  box;  the  culprit  quietly  whispers 
into  the  ear  of  his  counsel,  "he  will  do,  take 
him."  The  judge  upon  the  bench,  the  prosecu- 
ting attorney,  the  friends  of  the  murdered  man 
know  him."  The  commonwealth  has  bo  chal- 


6&0 


lenge,  and  "he  fs  thus  firmly  fixed  on  the  jury; 
and  one  after  another  is  brought  to  the  book,  un- 
til the  panel  is  filled;  the  trial  proceeds;  the  ju- 
ry retire;  and  in  a  few  minutes  they  return  ■with 
tneir  verdict.  What  is  that  verdict?  "Not  guil- 
ty!" The  murderer  is  turned  loose  upon  socie- 
ty, to  repeat  the  hellish  deed  again.  And  for 
such  as  these  the  gentlemen  have  the  tenderest 
sympathies.  Give  to  the  commonwealth  the 
right  of  challenge,  and  their  sense  of  justice  is 
most  awfully  shocked!  Mr.  President,  it  is  but 
the  form  of  a  trial,  a  mere  mockery,  a  mere 
farce.  I  trust  the  good  sense  of  the  delegates 
■will  see  that  something  is  called  for.  The  other 
branch  of  the  amendment,  I  am  equally  sure 
should  be  adopted.  My  friend  from  I^enton, 
(Mr.  Stevenson,)  I  think  is  mistaken,  if  he  sup- 
poses the  legislature  will  pass  a  law  authorising 
Writs  of  error  in  criminal  cases.  I  had  the  hon- 
or of  introducing  a  proposition  of  that  kind  in 
the  legislature,  and  urged  the  propriety  of  such 
a  law  with  all  the  force  I  could  command;  but 
it  failed,  not  because  it  was  not  demanded  or 
called  for,  but  because  it  was  introduced  by  a 
young  lawyer,  although  advocated  by  nearly  all 
the  legal  gentlemen  in  the  legislature.  I  there- 
fore hope  the  amendment  will  not  prevail;  strike 
out  the  word  "shall"  and  insert  "may,"  and  you 
defeat  the  object  all  have  in  view.  Uniformity 
of  decision  is  all  important  in  criminal  trials. 
We  should  have  some  rules,  some  land-marks, 
to  govern  the  profession  in  Kentucky.  We  have 
none.  Allow  writs  of  error,  and  in  a  few  years, 
what  is  law  iu  one  circuit,  will  be  law  over  the 
entire  commonwealth.  You  have  heard  upon 
this  floor — in  truth,  sir,  it  is  a  part  of  the  histo- 
ry of  this  commonwealth — that  in  the  lower  part 
of  this  state,  in  one  circuit,  by  the  decision  of 
one  judge,  a  murderer  had  extended  to  him  the 
benefit  of  clergy,  and  he  went  free.  Shortly  af- 
ter, in  another  circuit,  it  was  refused,  and  the 
murderer  was  hanged.  Sir,  this  is  not  right;  it 
should  be  remedied;  and  it  can  only  be  done  by 
allowing  writs  of  error.  In  the  circuits  in  which 
I  practice,  I  know  diff'erent  rules  of  decision 
obtain.  A  remedy  is  called  for,  it  must  be  cor- 
rected, and  it  can  only  be  done  in  this  way. 

Mr.  DIXON.  lam  not  particularly  averse  to 
the  proposition  of  my  friend  from  Bourbon,  and 
with  a  little  modification  so  as  not  to  make  it 
imperative,  but  leave  it  discretionary  with  the 
legislature,  and  I  believe  I  am  willing  to  give  it 
my  support.  But  I  must  confess  that  I  think 
it  unnecessary,  because  I  believe  that  under  the 
constitution  of  the  commonwealth,  as  it  now  ex- 
its, the  power  does  reside  in  the  legislature,  to 
regulate  this  matter  of  challenging  jurors  in 
criminal  cases;  and  If  I  understand  tiie  proposi- 
tion, it  goes  to  that  extent  only. 
.  In  1796,  the  legislature  passed  an  act  reducing 
'^the  number  of  challenges  on  the  part  of  the  ac- 
cused to  twenty  four  in  the  case  of  treason,  and 
to  twenty  in  the  case  of  murder  or  felony.  The 
section  of  the  act  to  which  I  allude  is  in  these 
words:  "No  person  arraigned  for  treason  shall 
be  admitted  to  a  peremptory  challenge  above 
the  number  of  twenty  four,  nor  shall  any  per- 
son arraigned  for  murder  or  felony  be  admitted 
to  a  peremptory  challenge  above  the  number  of 
twenty."  This' act,  it  is  true,  was  parsed  under 
^e  ol'l  constitution;  but  1  believe  tne  provitiions 


of  the  old  constitutiofi,  so  far  as  it  regards  the 
power  of  the  legislature  to  pass  the  act,  are 
similar  to  those  contained  in  the  existing  con- 
stitution of  tlie  state.  Now,  it  is  very  clear,  I 
apprehend,  that  it  was  believed  by  the  legisla- 
ture that  passed  this  act,  that  the  power  to  pass 
it  did  exist,  and  that  it  was  not  violating  any 
constitution.ll  principle.  Here  is  also  a  decision 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  to  which  I  will  call  the 
gentleman's  attention;  it  is  found  in  J.  J.  Mar- 
shall's reports,  3d  vol.  folio  138.  It  does  not 
determine  the  question  as  to  the  power  to  pass 
the  law,  but  it  recognizes  the  existence  and  va- 
lidity of  the  law,  which  amounts  to  the  same 
thing. 

I  have  said  that,  at  the  common  law,  the  par- 
ty accused  had  the  right  to  challenge  thirty  five 
jurors,  and  it  is  clear  that  the  statute  which  re- 
duces it  in  the  case  of  treason  to  twenty  four, 
and  of  murder  and  other  felonies  to  twenty,  is 
in  derogation  of  this  right;  still  it  was  done, 
and  has  been  for  years  past,  acquiesced  in  as 
the  law  of  the  land.  As  the  gentleman  seems  to 
think,  however,  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  this 
power,  without  the  section  which  he  has  offered, 
can,  under  the  new  constitution,  be  exercised  by 
the  legislature,  I  am  willing  to  vote  for  his 
proposition  if  he  will  so  change  it  as  to  leave 
some  discretion  with  the  legislature  as  to  the 
propriety  of  exercising  the  power  he  would  con- 
fer; not  that  I  believe  the  legislature  will  ever 
exercise  such  a  power,  or  at  least  to  the  extent  of 

fiving  the  state  the  right  of  peremptory  chal- 
enge  of  jurors  against  the  accused,  because  it 
would,  to  some  extent,  impair  the  right  of  trial 
by  jury,  which,  of  all  things,  should  be  held 
most  sacred  by  the  people  of  every  free  govern- 
ment. If  the  power  wliich  is  proposed  to  be 
conferred  is  only  to  regulate  the  right  of  chsl- 
lenge,  and  not  to  deprive  the  accused  of  it,  or 
to  confer  upon  the  state  the  power  of  chal- 
lenging, which  she  does  not  now  possess,  there 
can  certainly  be  no  objection  to  it;  and  I  sup- 
pose the  legislature  will  construe  it  to  mean,  as 
its  language  purports,  merely  to  regulate. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  merely  desire  to  satisfy  my 
friend  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon),  that  the 
legislature  under  the  present  constitution  have 
not  the  power  to  act  on  the  subject.  That  in- 
strument provides  that  the  right  and  mode  of 
trial  by  jury  shall  be  held  sacred  and  inviolate. 
If  a  proposition  was  brought  into  the  legislature 
to  talte  from  criminals  the  right  of  peremptory 
challenge,  would  it  not  strike  at  that  principle 
of  the  constitution?  That  tests  the  question  of 
power  whether  the  legislature  may  act  upon  the 
subject  of  controlling  the  peremptory  right  of 
challenge  or  not.  Such  a  law,  if  passed,  would 
be  null  and  void,  and  of  no  effect.  In  the  case 
referred  to  by  the  gentleman,  that  question  was 
not  decided.  It  was  the  c<ise  of  a  prosecution 
against  a  man  for  keeping  a  gaming  house.  His 
counsel  made  the  point,  that  he  had  the  same 
right  to  challenge  as  the  accused,  for  felony,  and 
the  question  wa.'j,  whether  he  should  challenge 
six  or  twenty.  The  court  of  appeals  decided 
that  as  a  writ  of  error  is  given  in  all  cases  in 
Kentucky,  in  the  prosecution  of  a  misdemeanor, 
the  right  of  challenge  does  not  and  cannot  ap- 
ply, anji  therefore  he  had  the  right  to  challenge 


$»t 


bat  four  and  not  twenty.    Here  is  the  povcr.    I 
read  from  3  J.  J.  Mar.  137: 

"  By  the  common  law,  the  prisoner  has  a 
right,  In  all  prosecutions  for  felony,  to  challenge 
thirty  five  jurors,  peremptorily:  but  by  the 
statute,  22d  Hen.  8th  c.  14.  s.  57",  made  perpetual 
by  that  of  32  Hen.  8th,  c.  3,  this  right  of  chal- 
lenge was  restricted  to  twenty,  in  all  felonies 
except  high  treason;  and  hv  the  33d  Hen.  8th.  c. 
23  s.  3,  the  same  restrictions  applied  to  high 
treason.  But  the  statute  of  1  and  2  Ph.  and  Si. 
c.  10,  revised  the  common  law  as  to  challenges, 
in  cases  for  treason,  and  consequently,  in  those 
eases,  extended  the  challenge  t«  thirty  five." 

'*  By  the  I9th  section  of  an  act  of  the  legisla- 
ture of  this  state,  (December  17,  1796,)  entitled, 
"  an  act  to  reduce  into  one  the  several  acts  con- 
cerning the  examination  and  trial  of  criminals, 
grand  and  petit  jurors,  veniries,  and  for  other 
purposes,"  it  is  enacted  that  "no  person  ar- 
raigned for  treason  shall  be  admitted  to  a  per- 
emptory challenge  above  the  number  of  twenty 
four;  nor  shall  any  person  arraigned  for  murder 
or  felony,  be  admitted  to  a  peremptory  chal- 
lenge, above  the  number  of  twenty."  1  Di^.  438. 

I  admit  that  on  the  question  of  the  right  of 
challenge  in  cases  of  treason,  there  is  a  conflict 
between  the  law  of  England  and  the  act  of  1796, 
and  it  never  has  been  decided  in  this  country 
which  law  prevails.  But  whenever  the  question 
shall  be  made  under  that  law,  our  courts  will 
decide  that  the  common  law  stands  supreme  in 
this  case,  and  that  persons  charged  with  treason 
have  the  right  to  thirty  five  peremptory  chal- 
lenges, and  that  the  act  of  1796  in  that  respect  is 
unconstitutional,  because  it  does  infringe  upon 
the  right  of  trial  by  jurr,  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant essences  of  which,  being  this  right  of 
challenge.  If  the  legislature  mav  restrict  the 
number  of  challenges  to  which  tlie  accused  is 
entitled,  to  a  dozen,  it  may  restrict  it  wholly.  I 
maintain  that  they  have  no  right  to  legislate  on 
the  subject  at  all,  because  it  would  be  in  dero- 
gation of  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  bv  jury. 

In  explanation  of  the  case  to  which  I  referred 
in  Nicholas  county,  I  will  state,  that  it  was  a 
prosecution  for  murder.  Eight  or  nine  of  the 
lury  were  for  convicting  the  criminal  for  murder, 
but  being  out  six,  eight,  or  ten  days,  they  were 
at  length  worried  into  a  compromise,  and  in- 
duced to  bring  in  a  verdict  of  manslaughter, 
and  consign  him  to  the  penitentiary  rather  than 
to  the  gallows.  And  such  eases  often  occur  in 
civil  and  criminal  causes,  both.  Tliere  was 
Scarcely  ever  a  court  held  in  any  county  in  Ken- 
tucky, where  juries  were  empanneled  that  such 
compromises  did  not  take  place.  The  other  case 
put,  was  that  of  a  man  charged  with  robbery, 
and  one  of  his  accomplices  being  smuggled  into 
the  jury  box,  hung  the  jury.  And  now  he  stands 
indicted,  and  I  trust,  he  will  be  convicted  of 
perjury,  in  swearing  that  he  had  neither  formed 
or  expressed  an  opinion  as  to  the  question  of 
the  man's  guilt  at  the  time  he  was  empanneled 
a  juror.  It  is  to  sweep  such  men  from  the  juries 
and  to  prevent  them  from  polluting  the  pure 
streams  of  justice,  and  prostrating  the  criminal 
laws  of  the  country,  that  I  desire  the  adoption 
of  such  a  principle  as  my  amendment  contem- 
plates. 

Mr  BROWN.    I  find  the  amendment  of  the 


g«ntleman  from  Bourbon,  too  imperative  in  its 
direction  to  the  legislature.  I  move  to  strike  out 
the  word  "shall"  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof  the 
word  "mav." 

Mr.  ST£YENS0X.  I  rose  for  the  same  pur- 
pose. I  had  supposed  the  word  "may"  was  used 
instead  of  "shall"  and  based  my  remarks  on  that 
supposition. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  desire  that  it  shall 
be  made  imperative  on  the  legislature  to  do  what 
we  require  of  them.  If  it  is  left  discretionary 
with  them,  they  may  not  do  it.  I  trust  the 
amendment  will  not  prevail. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  If  it  is  a  fact,  as  the  gentleman 
says,  that  under  the  old  constitution,  it  would 
be  unconstitutional  to  pass  .such  a  law,  then  I  do 
not  want  now,  to  make  it  imperative  on  the  leg- 
islature to  pass  a  law  under  the  new  constitu- 
tion which  would  be  in  violation  of  the  great 
right  of  trial  by  jury.  I  prefer  permitting  the 
legislature  on  this  question  to  think  for  them- 
selves. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Was  not  the  number  of  chal- 
lenges allowed  to  the  accused  reduced  by  the 
act  of  1796  from  thirtv-five  to  twentv. 

Mr.  DIXON.     I  think  so. 

Mr.  DA'V^S.  If  the  legislature  has  the  power 
to  make  this  reduction,  what  is  to  prevent  them 
from  taking  the  whole  right  awayT 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  think  thev  have  the  power  to 
take  it  away.  There  we  differ.  The  gentleman 
believes  that  power  does  not  exist,  and  he  is  for 

ftroviding  in  tne  constitution  that  it  shall.  I  be- 
ieve  that  it  does  exist,  and  am  opposed  to  giv- 
ing the  power  if  it  does  not.  If  it  does  not  exist, 
I  will  never  consent  to  give  to  any  body,  the 
right  to  act  in  derogation  of  the  right  of  trial  by 
jury.  If  the  commonwealth  already  has  that 
power,  let  it  be  exercised,  when  the  occasion  shall 
require  it — I  would  not  compel  its  exercise, 
when  it  was  not  required.  I  am  willing  to  go 
this  far,  but  I  will  never  consent  to  do  any  thing 
in  derogation  of  the  right  of  trial  by  jury.  I  am 
willing  that  it  shall  be  protected  as  it  now  is,  but 
I  am  not  willing  to  deprive  the  accused  of  any 
right  the  constitution  now  secures  to  them. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  hope  that  the  word  "shall" 
will  not  be  stricken  out.  If  gentlemen  desire  to 
accomplish  the  object  my  friend  from  Hender- 
son seems  to  have  so  much  at  heart,  let  them 
vote  to  put  in  the  word  "not"  after  "shall." 
The  legislature  had  disregarded  for  the  last  fifty 
years  a  positive  command  that  thev  should  provide 
a  manner  in  which  suits  should  be  brought 
against  the  commonwealth,  and  therefore  genue- 
men  need  not  be  afraid  that  they  will  be  too 
anxious  to  obey  this  injunction.  I  never  was 
more  astonished  at  anything  than  at  the  course 
of  the  gentleman  from  Henderson  on  this  occa- 
sion. Why,  I  have  known  in  my  county,  and 
there  are  gentlemen  here  cognizant  of  the  facts, 
the  most  cold  blooded,  deliberate  crimes  to  have 
been  committed  that  ever  disgraced  human  na- 
ture, and  the  perpetrators  to  escape  by  this  dia- 
bolical plan,  tnrough  the  bribery  of  a  juror,  of 
hanging  a  jury.  And  the  gentleman  appeals  to 
the  mercv  of  this  convention  to  allow  such  a 
state  of  tilings  to  continue.  It  is  not  proposed 
to  array  a  single  right  of  the  accused,  but  only 
in  some  small  degree  to  place  the  commonwealth 
on  a  footing  of  equality  with  him. 


693 


Mr.  PROCTOR  moved  the  previous  question 
and  it  was  ordered. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
strike  out  the  word  "shall"  and  insert  the  word 
"may"  bv  yeas  and  nays,  on  the  call  of  Mr.  W. 
C.  MARSHALL,  and  it  was  agreed  to,  yeas  57 
nays  35,  as  follows  : 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Thomas  D.  Brown.  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald 
Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Nathan  McClure,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, Albert  G.  Talbott,  William  R.  Thompson, 
Howard  Todd,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Wesley 
J.  Wright— 57. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Selucius  Garnelde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ninian 
E.  Gray,  John  Hargis,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J. 
Hood,  James  W.Irwin,  James  M.  Lackey,  Alex. 
K.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan 
Newcura,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W. 
Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  John 
J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  J. 
L.  Waller.  Robejt  N.  Wickliffe,  G.  W.  Williams, 
Silas  Woodson — 35. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  substi- 
tute in  lieu  of  the  section  as  proposed  by  Mr. 
TRIPLETT,  and  it  was  adopted,  the  veas  and 
nays  being  called  for  by  Mr.  KAVA'NAUGH, 
yeas  83,  nays  9,  as  follows: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 
Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James,  William  John.son, 
George  W.  Johnston,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Ma- 
chen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Hayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  Da- 
▼id  Meriwether,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nes- 


bitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John 
T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Heniy  Washing- 
ton, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 83. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles 
C.  Kellv,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.   Taylor,  Philip  Triplett— 9. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  adoption 
of  the  amendment  as  a  section  of  the  article,  and 
it  was  agreed  to,  the  veas  and  nays  being  called 
for  by  Mr.  MITCHELL— yeas  85,  nays  7,  as  fol- 
lows: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

fterson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wil- 
iam  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Brad- 
ley, Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thom- 
as D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Che- 
nault, Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Jas.  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian 
E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Wm.  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thos.  J.  Hood",  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Thos.  James,  William  Johnson,  Geo. 
W.  Johnston,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke, Thos.W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wm.  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry, 
David  Meriwether,  John  D.  Morris,  James  JVI. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John 
T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man, Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
liffe, Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams, 
Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 85. 

Nays — James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Nathan 
McClure,  William  D.  Mit«hell,  Thomas  P.  Moore 
—7. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  desire  to  supplv  what  I 
conceive  to  be  an  omission  in  the  fourtn  section 
of  the  report.  The  increase  in  the  business  oi 
some  of  the  districts,  may  render  it  necessary 
and  desirable  that  the  labors  should  be  further 
divided,  although,  taking  the  whole  twelve  dis- 
tricts together,  the  judges  may  be  able  to  attend 
veryeasily  to  the  whole  of  the  business.  The 
amendment  is  designed  to  obviate  this  difficulty, 
and  to  allow  the  legislature  to  make  such  changes 
in  the  districts,  whenever  it  shall  be  desirable. 
The  amendment  is  as  follows: 

"The  general  assembly  shall,  after  the  first  di- 
vision of  the  state  into  twelve  circuit  court  dis- 


093 


tricts,  at  their  session  next  preceding  the  regular 
election  of  circuit  judges,  thereafter  so  change 
and  regulate  said  districts,  as  to  equalize,  as  near 
as  may  be,  the  labors  in  the  several  districts  then 
in  being,  having  due  regard  to  the  number  of  ap- 
pearances, and  to  population  and  territory." 

Mr.  HARDIN  moved  to  strilie  out  the  word 
"shall,"  and  insert  the  word  "may"  in  lieu 
thereof. 

This  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Believing  that  the  addition- 
al section  proposed  by  the  gentleman  but  reiter- 
ates a  part  of  the  fourth  section  of  the  article, 
and  agreeing  with  him  in  the  end  he  seeks  to  at- 
tain, 1  offer  the  following  as  a  substitute  for 
his  amendment : 

"Sec.  — .  The  judicial  districts  and  circuits 
of  this  state  shall  not  be  changed,  save  at  the 
first  session  afterevery  enumeration,  unless  when 
new  districts  mav  be  establi.shed." 

Mr.  PRESTON 'S  amendment  was  then  adop- 
ted in  lieu  of  that  offered  by  Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD. 

Mr.  BROWN.  This  proposed  amendment  is 
but  a  reiteration,  in  my  opinion,  of  what  is  al- 
ready provided  for  in  this  report.  I  am  opposed 
to  putting  any  thing  in  this  constitution  that  is 
not  absolutely  required,  and  shall,  therefore,  vote 
against  this  amendment.  If  the  constitution  is 
rejected  by  the  people,  it  will  certainly  not  be 
because  tfiere  is  too  little  provided  for  in  it,  but 
because  there  is  too  much. 

The  question  being  taken,  the  amendment  was 
adopted  as  an  additional  section  of  the  article. 

EVEXIXG   SESSION". 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH.  I  offer  the  following  as 
an  additional  section  to  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee : 

"Sec.  16.  In  regulating  the  right  of  challenge 
of  jurors  in  criminal  cases,  the  general  assembly 
shall  nfver  give  the  commonwealth  more  than 
one-fifth  the  number  of  peremptory  challlenges 
which  may  be  allowed  the  accused." 

I  deem  it  unnecessary  to  add  any  thing  to  the 
full  discussion  which  has  already  been  had  on 
this  subject.  The  sense  of  the  convention  yes- 
terday, however,  seemed  to  be  against  giving 
the  right  of  peremptory  challenge  to  the  com- 
monwealth, in  criminal  cases;  and  to-day,  by 
the  section  just  adopted,  as  to  regulating  the 
right  of  challenge,  and  appeals,  and  writs  of  er- 
ror in  such  cases,  we  have  given  the  whole  pow- 
er over  this  subject  to  the  legislature.  I,  my- 
self, voted  against  the  section,  in  all  its  sta- 
ges. 

By  the  old  constitution,  the  legislature  had 
the  power  to  regulate  appeals  and  writs  of  error 
in  criminal  cases,  but  they  have  never  exercised 
it.  This,  to  ray  mind,  is  strong  evidence  that  it 
is  not  now  demanded  by  public  sentiment.  If 
it  is,  the  legislature  could  give  the  right  of  ap- 
peal under  the  new  constitution,  as  well  with- 
out the  section  we  have  adopted   as  with  it. 

The  present  constitution  provides  that  the  an- 
cient mode  of  trial  by  jury  shall  be  held  sacred. 
The  same  provision  is  substantially  contained 
in  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  in 
most,  if  not  all,  the  states  in  the  union.  This 
ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury,  has  been  con- 
strued by  our  courts  to  mean,  such  right  of  trial 
by  jury  as  existed  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of 


the  constitution.  At  that  time,  the  accused  had 
the  right  of  peremptory  challenge,  to  the  num- 
ber of  twenty;  while  the  commonwealth  had  no 
right  to  challenge,  peremptorily,  a  single  juror. 
In  my  opinion,  the  legislature  had  no  power  un- 
der the  old  constitution  to  interfere  with  the 
right  of  challenge  thus  given.  But  on  this 
point  there  seems  to  be  some  difference  of  opin- 
ion. Be  this  as  it  may,  the  legislature  has  never 
interfered  with  the  right,  and  never  would  inter- 
fere with  it,  under  a  constitution  having  the  pro- 
vision on  that  subject  contained  in  the  present 
one.  But,  by  the  section  just  adopted,  full  pow- 
er is  given  the  legislature  over  the  whole  sub- 
ject. That  body  may  not  only  give  the  com- 
monwealth the  right  of  challenge,  but  may  give 
it  to  the  same  extent  with  the  accused.  It  may 
even  take  the  right  from  the  defendant  altogeth- 
i  er,  and  give  it  to  the  commonwealth  to  any  ex- 
tent. Why,  sir,  a  day  or  two  ago,  we  were 
throwing  every  kind  of  restriction  around  the 
legislature;  now,  we  are  giving  them  almost  un- 
limited power  as  to  the  right  of  trial  by  jury — 
a  right  held  sacred  by  the  people.  Tney  have 
demanded  no  change  on  this  subject — they  did 
not  expect  it  at  the  hands  of  the  convention. 
In  my  section  of  country,  the  ancient  mode  of 
trial  Dy  jury  was  to  be  held  sacred,  and  I  great- 
ly doubt  if  the  question  were  directly  made  be- 
fore the  people,  as  to  giviner  the  commonwealth 
the  right  of  challenge,  without  cause,  whether 
it  would  be  sanctioned. 

The  section  which  I  have  offered  only  pro- 
vides that  the  legislature  in  regulating  the  right 
of  challenging  jurore  in  criminal  cases  shall 
never  give  the  commonwealth  more  than  one- 
fifth  the  number  which  may  be  given  to  the  de- 
fendant. It  is  designed  as  some  limit  to  the 
power  of  that  body  over  the  subject.  This  power 
may  never  be  abused — it  is  probable  it  never 
will — but  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury 
should  be  held  sacred,  and  the  power  to  infringe 
it  ought  not,  in  my  opinion,  to  be  placed  in  the 
hands  of  any  body  of  men  whatever;  for  this 
reason  among  others  I  voted  against  any  change 
on  this  subject,  and  have  now  offered  the  section 
as  a  restriction  upon  the  legislature,  and  am  of 
opinion  that  it  should  pass.  As  this  subject, 
however,  has  already  been  discus-sed  at  some 
length,  any  furtlier  remarks  are  deemed  unne- 
cessarv. 

Mr.MITCHELL.  I  feel  disposed  to  claim 
the  indulgence  of  the  house  for  a  short  time, 
while  I  endeavor  to  set  myself  right  before  ray 
constituents,  with  reference  to  the  vote  I  gave 
this  morning.  I  rise  with  no  expectation  of  ma- 
king any  impression  on  the  convention,  or  of 
changing  the  deliberat*  vote  which  has  been 
given,  but  simply  to  state  the  reasons,  verj- 
briefly,  which  influenced  me  in  pursuing  the 
course  that  I  did.  I  have  always  regarded  the 
ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury  as  a  tower  of 
strength  to  the  citizen,  and  I  have  always  looked 
on  it  as  a  feature  in  our  judicial  system  which 
should  be  preserved  inviolate.  I  should  ap- 
proach it  with  great  apprehension  of  doing  mis- 
chief, even  if  I  were  to  abstract  a  single  brick 
or  stone  from  the  massive  pile,  and  should  be 
apprehensive  that  to  disturb  it  in  the  least, 
would  threaten  the  whole  structure. 

This  convention  is  called  to  frame  a  constitu- 


694 


tion.  Pufnre  conventions  ina^  be  called,  and 
will  look  to  the  action  of  this  convention  as 
sanctioning  their  action.  If  \ve  now  commence 
the  ■work  of  innovation,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  see  to 
what  extent  in  future  times  it  may  be  carried. 
It  is  urjjed  that  the  necessities  of  the  country 
require  it;  that  crime  goes  unwhipt  of  justice, 
and  hence  some  modification  of  this  ancient  sys- 
tem is  necessary.  Some  future  convention,  in- 
fluenced by  the  same  motive,  may  carry  the 
matter  still  further;  it  may  be  urged  as  neeessa- 
rv  not  only  to  regulate  the  right  of  challenge  but 
they  may  go  further  and  say  that  a  concurrence 
of  the  peers  of  the  accused  shall  not  be  necessary 
for  his  conviction.  They  may  say  that  a  major- 
ity of  the  jury  shall  be  sufficient  to  authorize 
conviction  and^  death.  When  innovation  once 
commences  we  know  not  at  what  point  it  will, 
stop.  We  are  told  that  to  regulate  the  right  of 
challenge  is  perhaps  not  to  impugn  the  ancient 
trial  by  jury.  It  seems  to  me  to  attack  it  in  a 
vital  point,  if  the  accused  has  not  the  right  of 
peremptory  challenge:  if  that  right  is  abridged, 
then  tlie  ancient  right  of  trial  does  not  remain 
inviolate.  When  we  come  to  that  portion  of  the 
old  constitution  which  declares  that  the  ancient 
mode  of  trial  by  jury  shall  remain  inviolate, 
tlierewill  have  to  be  an  alteration.  We  cannot 
make  the  same  declaration.  W^e  have  placed 
within  the  grasp  of  the  legislature  a  power  very 
materially  to  modify  the  ancient  trial  by  jury. 
We  have  given  them  a  discretion  which  in  my 
judgment  may  be  more  dangerous  than  the  prop- 
osition contained  in  the  report.  There  they 
were  limited  to  one-fourth.  Here  there  is  no 
limit.  They  may  extend  a  right  of  peremptory 
challenge  to  the  commonwealth  equal  to  that 
given  to  the  ac(!used;  nay,  they  may  go  further 
and  give  the  commonwealth  the  right  to  chal- 
lenge more  than  the  accused.  This  is  extending 
discretion  much  beyond  what  the  original  prop- 
osition contemplated.  The  reasons  Avhich  have 
been  assigned  for  doing  this — for  obliterating 
this  ancient  land-mark — have  not  been  satisfac- 
tory to  my  mind.  We  have  been  told  that  it  is 
necessary  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  ends  of 
justice. 

My  observation  has  taught  me  that  justice  is 
fully  executed  ia  Kentucky.  There  is  perhaps  an 
exception  as  to  one  class  of  cases,  that  of  homicide. 
Tihere  has  not  been  meted  out  the  punishment 
wiiich  in  the  minds  of  just  men  is  deemed  to  be 
due  to  tiaat  offence.  Does  this  originate  in  any 
defect  Lu  our  judicial  system?  Does  it  not  rath- 
er originate  iii  public  opinion,  and  is  it  not  sub- 
ject to  the  control  of  that  all  powerful  influence? 
Tlie  same  system  prevails  here  now  which  pre- 
vailed in  England  when  her  tribunals  were 
dMncfaed  in  blood,  when  the  temple  of  justice 
was  cwiverted  into  shambles,  and  the  ermine 
foully  stained  with  the  blood  of  innocence. 
Tiie  same  provision,  in  this  respect,  obtained 
there  aft  here;  the  same  right  on  tlie  part  of  the 
accused,  when  that  right  could  not  be  exercised 
on  tJie  part  of  the  government. 

I  think  this  exemption  from  punishment  origi 
nates  in  public  sentiment,  and  cannot  be  con- 
trolled by  legislative  enactment,  which  rises 
above  the  law  itself.  The  citizen  of  this  com- 
monwealth seems  to  reserve  for  himself  the  priv- 
ilege of  righting  the  "  wrong  where'er  'tis  giv- 


en;" he  metes  out,  in  dispensing  justice,  that 
measure  to  others  which  he  claims  for  himself. 
If  the  same  want  of  justice  in  the  execution  of 
the  laws  were  observable  throughout  the  whole 
series  of  criminal  offences,  that  argument  might 
be  deduced  to  show  the  insufficiency  of  the  sys- 
tem. But  when  it  is  confessedly  confined  to  one 
description  of  crime,  we  must  look  for  the  evil — 
if  there  be  an  evil — in  the  force  of  public  opin- 
ion, acting  on  and  modifying  tlie  laws  of  the 
country  and  regulating  their  execution. 

We  have  heard  it  read  here  to  day,  that  this 
right  of  peremptory  challenge  originated  in  that 
great  principle  in  favor  of  human  life — which 
should  distinguish  every  system  of  jurispru- 
dence— that  it  was  given  to  the  accused  in  ten- 
derness— in  javorem  vitce.  Will  you  give  it  to 
the  commonwealth  in  favorem  tnorlis,  to  favor 
execution,  to  favor  condign  punishment?  The 
individual  who  conies  into  a  court  of  justice 
charged  with  crime,  comes  with  the  stamp  of 
suspicion  upon  him ;  he  is  prima  facie  guilty, 
notwithstanding  the  maxim  of  the  law,  that 
every  man  shall  be  deemed  innocent  'till  his 
guilt  is  proved.  He  has  undergone  an  exami- 
nation in  the  county,  or  the  charge  has  been 
passed  upon  by  a  grand  jury,  and  he  stands  as 
one  with  the  impress  of  guilt  upon  him.  Prima 
facie  he  is  guilty.  Give  liim  then  the  privilege 
of  some  share  in  selecting  his  jury,  the  poor 
privilege  in  this  struggle  for  life,  of  acting 
without  a  reason — let  him  not  go  to  the  scaffold 
under  the  conviction  that  he  has  been  sent 
thither  by  his  enemy — let  not  this  cloud  darken 
his  dying  hour;  but  let  not  the  commonwealth 
enjoy  the  same  privilege;  for  she  should  never 
act  without  a  reason ;  let  not  the  commonwealth 
stultify  her  own  citizens,  and  not  without  a  suffi- 
cient reason  say,  "Sir,  you  are  unworthy  to 
serve  upon  a  jury — you  bear  on  your  face  the 
stamp  of  degradation — you  have  achieved  for 
yourself  a  character  tliat  excludes  you  from  a 
service  of  this  kind." 

It  does  seem  to  me  that  by  some  provision  of 
law,  the  matter  can  be  regulated  without  taking 
away  this  ancient  land  mark.  Let  the  sheriff 
be  required,  in  summoning  jurors,  to  exclude 
from  the  panel  those  hanging  about  the  courts  of 
justice;  let  those  Avho  thrust  themselves  in  the 
waj',  in  order  to  be  placed  on  the  jury,  be  ex- 
cluded. Let  proof  of  such  conduct  be  good 
cause  for  rejection;  but  never  let  the  common- 
wealth, actuated  by  a  spirit  of  vengeance,  and 
lest  she  should  be  foiled  of  her  prey,  without  rea- 
son, exclude  her  citizens,  and  declare  them  un- 
worthy of  sitting  on  the  jury.  I  am  opposed  to 
the  whole  matter.  I  am  opposed  to  the  intro- 
duction of  such  a  provision  into  the  constitu- 
tion; but  if  we  must  have  it,  let  us  have  the 
restriction  of  my  friend  from  Anderson. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  moved  the  previous  question 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  demanded  on  the 
amendment,  and  being  taken  they  were — yeas 
30,  nays  55. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  Che- 
nault,  James  S.  Chrisraan,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
William  Cowper,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dud- 
ley, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Thomas  J. 
Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  James,  Georgo  W.  Kav- 


693 


anaugh,  Charlea  C.  Kelly,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwetlier,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  ThoNias  P.  Moore,  Jonathan  New- 
cum,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Rogers,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Andrew  S.  White,  Chas. 
A.  Wicklifife— 30. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Wni.  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Charles  Chambers,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Gopelin,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Nathan  Gaither,  Jas. 
H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Jfinian  E. 
Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Geo.  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  JS"athan  McClure, 
John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  William 
Preston,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Jonn  Wheeler,  Robert 
N.  Wicklifife,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
— 55. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

COUXTY   COURTS. 

The  convention  continued  the  consideration 
of  the  report  of  the  joint  committee  of  thirty, 
the  article  concerning  county  courts  being  the 
next  in  order. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  sent  to  the  secretary's 
desk  to  be  read,  the  following  substitute  for  the 
entire  article,  which  he  intended,  when  the 
proper  time  came  to  ofiFer: 

ABTICLE  — . 

"Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
in  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to  con- 
sist of  a  presiding  judge,  and  the  severad  justices 
of  the  peace  of  the  county. 

"Sec.  2.  Thepresiding  judge  shall  be  elected 
by  the  qualified  voters  of  eacli  county,  for  the 
term  of  four  years,  and  until  his  successor  shall 
be  duly  elected  and  qualified,  and  shall,  from 
time  to  time,  receive  for  his  services  such  com- 
pensation as  may  be  fixed  by  law,  to  be  paid  by 
fees,  or  out  of  the  county  revenue. 

"Sec.  3.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
ofBce  of  presiding  judge  of  the  county  court, 
unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  over 
twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  in  the 
county  in  which  he  shdl  be  elected,  one  year 
next  preceding  his  election. 

"  Sec.  4.  The  presiding  judges  of  the  county 
courts  shall  be  sole  probate  judges  for  their  re- 
spective counties,  with  testamentary  and  such 
other  jurisdiction  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be 
given  by  law. 

"  Sec.  5.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  county  court 
shall  be  regulated  by  law;  and,  until  changed, 
shall  be  the  same  now  vested  in  the  county 
courts  of  this  state,  except  as  herein  provided. 

"Sec.  6.  The  several  counties  in  this  state 
shall  be  laid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size, 
as  the  general  assembly  may,  from  time  to  time. 


direct.  Two  justices  of  the  peace,  aiid  one  coft* 
.stable,  shall  Be  elected  in  each  district  by  the 
qualified  voters  therein.  The  jurisdiction  of 
said  officers  shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  coun- 
ty. Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected  for 
the  term  of  four  years,  and  constables  for  the 
term  of  two  years;  they  shall  be  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and 
shall  have  resided  six  months  in  the  district  in 
which  they  may  be  elected,  next  preceding  their 
election. 

"Sec.  7.  Presiding  judges  of  the  county  court, 
and  justices  of  the  peace,  shall  be  conservators 
of  the  peace,  and  shall  be  commissioned  by  the 
governor.  County  and  district  officers  .shall  va- 
cate their  offices  by  removal  from  the  district  or 
county  in  which  they  shall  be  appointed.  The 
legislature  shall  provide,  by  law,  for  the  mode 
and  manner  of  conducting  and  making  due  re- 
turns of  all  elections  of  presiding  judjjes  of  the 
county  court,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  consta- 
bles, and  for  determining  contested  elections, 
and  also  provide  the  mode  of  filling  vacancies 
in  these  offices. 

"  Sec.  8.  Presiding  judges  of  the  county 
courts,  justices  .of  the  peace,  and  constables, 
shall  he  subject  to  indictment  or  presentment 
for  malfeasance  or  misfeasance  in  office,  in  such 
mode  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law,  subject  to 
appeal  to  the  court  of  appeals;  and,  upon  con- 
viction, their  offices  shall  oeconie  vacant." 

The  first  section  was  then  read,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  erected 
within  this  commonwealtn,  a  county  court,  to 
consist  of  a  presiding  judge  and  two  associate 
judges,  any  two  of  whom  shall  constitute  a  court 
for  the  transaction  of  business." 

Mr.  LISLE.  I  desire  to  say  only  a  few  words 
on  this  county  court  system,  as  recommended  by 
the  committee,  and  also  on  tlie  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Jefferson.  This  is  an  im- 
portant court,  and  the  subject  is  one,  in  my  opin- 
ion, that  is  deserving  of  a  great  deal  of  consid- 
eration. I  know  the  difficulty  under  which  a 
man  labors,  when  he  attempts  to  resist  a  propo- 
sition which  is  presented  to  the  house  in  the  at- 
titude and  under  the  circumstances  as  the  one 
now  before  it.  The  proposition  of  the  county 
court  committee  was  referred  to  the  committee 
of  thirty,  and  they  have  re-adopted  the  plan  as 
recommended  by  the  original  committee,  with 
some  slight  modifications.  In  the  committee  of 
thirty,  I  oflfered  a  substitute,  which — if  I  knew 
exactly  when  to  ofiFer — I  would  present  again . 
Now,  I  hold  it  to  be  a  correct  principle,  that  no 
important  change  should  be  made  in  the  funda- 
mental law  of  Kentucky,  unless  there  was  a 
strong  reason  to  suppose  it  would  be  for  the  ben- 
efit of  the  people.  I  suppose  this  proposition 
will  not  be  denied  by  any  man.  From  the  ex- 
amination I  have  given  the  subject,  I  entertain 
the  opinion  that  we  shall  be  no  better  ofif  if  we  ac- 
cept the  plan  presented,  than  we  should  be  by 
adopting  a  system  of  layingofif  the  several  coun- 
ties into  districts,  and  giving  the  people  the  right 
to  elect  their  magistrates  to  hold  court.  I  know 
there  is  a  great  deal  of  objection  to  the  county 
court  system,  and,  I  am  aware  it  has  been  at- 
tacked all  over  the  commonwealth;  but  the  com- 
plaint has  not  been  greater  against  Uie  county 


696 


court  than  the  court  of  appeals  and  the  circuit 
court.  You  propose  to  remedy  the  defects  in 
the  court  of  appeals  and  the  circuit  court,  by 
electing  the  judges  for  a  limited  time.  Why 
not,  then,  carry  out  the  principle  in  respect  to  the 
county  court?  By  the  first  section  of  this  bill, 
you  propose  to  impose,  permanently  and  irrevo- 
cably, upon  the  commonwealth,  the  burden  of 
supporting  three  hundred  additional  salaried 
ofiicers.  Besides  that,  you  have  added  a  judge 
to  your  appellate  court.  I  know  not  how  it  may 
be  with  other  gentlemen,  but  I  came  not  here  to 
add  to  the  expenses  of  the  government,  unless 
circumstances  rendered  it  imperatively  necessa- 
ry. Now,  what  reason  have  we  to  suppose,  tliat 
by  the  proposed  new  system,  recommended  by 
the  committee,  men  of  better  standing  and  qual- 
ifications will  be  obtained,  than  by  laying  off 
the  counties  into  districts,  and  electing  magis- 
trates to  hold  court,  as  heretofore? 

You  propose,  in  the  report  of  the  committee, 
that  the  salaries  shall  be  paid  as  provided  for 
by  law.  I  ask  gentlemen  who  advocate  this 
plan,  whether  there  is  to  be  a  general  law,  ope- 
rating alike  on  all  these  judges  and  the  associate 
judges  throughout  the  state?  Are  their  salaries 
to  be  uniform?  Is  there  to  be  a  large  salary  al- 
lowed the  judges  in  all  the  large  counties,  as  in 
Jefferson  and  Fayette?  or  are  the  salaries  to  be 
fixed  and  graded  according  to  the  size  of  the 
county?  It  is  probable  that  the  legislature  will 
provide  for  the  payment  of  the  salaries  out  of 
the  county  levies.  How  is  that  to  be  regulated? 
I  understand  that  one  of  the  principal  objects  in 
calling  this  convention,  is  to  cut  off  the  exces- 
sive legislation  that  has  existed  in  this  common- 
wealth for  many  years  past.  But  here  you  pro- 
pose to  organize  the  county  court  in  such  a  man- 
ner as  must  necessarily  produce  mucli  legislation. 
Does  any  gentleman  here  pretend  to  say  that 
these  judges  are  to  be  paid  large  salaries?  They 
will  not  venture  to  say  that.  Gentlemen  talk 
about  procuring  the  best  men  in  the  state.  Now, 
what  motive,  what  reason  is  held  out,  to  show 
that  such  men  are  to  be  had?  I  have  heard  it  said 
the  salary  of  each  will  not  amount  to  more  than 
thirty,  forty,  or  fifty  dollars.  And  suppose  you 
pay  a  man  fifty  dollars — and  there  is  no  magis- 
trate whose  fees  would  not  amount  to  more  than 
that  sum — then,  as  there  will  be  three  hundred 
officers  employed,  the  aggregate  amount  will  be 
fifteen  thousand  dollars.  Suppose  the  salary  of 
each  to  amount  to  one  hundred  dollars,  then 
there  would  be  an  expense  incurred  to  the  state 
of  thirty  thousand  dollars — a  larger  sum  than  is 
paid  to  the  whole  of  the  circuit  judges. 

Another  objection  I  have  to  the  organization 
of  the  coiirt,  as  proposed  by  the  committee,  is, 
that  it  is  to  be  held  oy  a  judge  and  two  associ- 
ates. They  also  propose  that  the  magistrates 
shall  convene,  and  assist  in  laving  the  county 
levy.  Now,  this  court  not  only  pos.se.s.ses  ju- 
dicial, but  legislative  functions.  It  is  to  have 
the  power  of  taxation,  wliich  is  one  of  the  high- 
est attributes  of  sovereijjnty.  lam  opposed,  if 
it  can  be  avoided,  confiding  this  power  to  so  few 
hands.  But  I  ask  gentlemen,  if  the  magis- 
trates are  to  be  consulted  when  debts  are  con- 
trated  for  wliich  the  county  is  bound?  No. 
These  justices  of  the  peace  are  not  to  be  con- 
sulted when  the  debts  are  contracted,  but  they 


are  to  be  called  upon  only  when  you  lay  a  levy 
and  make  an  appropriation  to  pay  the  debt. 
Now,  I  ask  if  the  object  that  the  gentlemen  have 
in  view  is  accomplished  by  it?  Suppose  the 
judge  and  his  two  associates  contract  debts,  one 
on  account  of  building  a  bridge,  another  for  im- 
proving a  road,  and  another  in  relation  to  the 
clerk's  office,  the  county  is  bound  to  pay  them. 
The  justices  are  only  to  come  in  aud  levy  the 
money.  I  want  the  county  represented  Avhen 
the  debt  is  contracted.  I  know  there  is  a  strong 
objection  to  the  county  courts.  It  will  be  urged 
they  have  been  universally  repudiated.  I  ad- 
mit they  have  been  regarded  as  objectionable. 
I  know  it  is  said  a  change  was  required.  What 
was  it?  The  people  required  that  the  mode  of 
appointing  the  magistrates  should  be  changed, 
and  that  they  should  be  elected  for  a  limited 
term;  and,  by  the  plan  I  propose,  these  two 
changes  will  be  effected. 

But  there  is  another  objection  I  have  to  this 
article.  And  it  is  with  great  reluctance  and  regret 
I  shall  oppose  the  plan  recommended  by  the 
committee.  Now,  these  three  judges  will  be  se- 
lected from  about  the  cities  anfl  towns,  and  in 
all  probability  with  a  view  to  the  influence  they 
can  bring  to  "bear  upon  certain  improvements. 
And  if  so,  your  county  improvements  will  be 
partial,  and  that  portion  of  a  county  thinly  pop- 
ulated will  be  imposed  upon.  The  people  will 
be  taxed  by  these  men,  for  the  purpose  of  ma- 
king improvements  in  the  more  densely  popula- 
ted parts  of  the  county.  Your  circuit  judges, 
senators,  and  members  of  congress,  are  elected 
from  the  districts,  and  your  members  of  the 
legislature  from  the  different  counties.  And 
why  is  that?  In  order  that  every  part  of  the 
state  may  be  represented.  Is  it  not  important 
that  this  principle  should  be  carried  out  in  the 
county  court  system?  I  do  not  propose  to  fix  it 
permanently  in  the  constitution,  but  that  these 
justices  of  the  peace  shall  hold  the  court  until 
otherwise  directed  by  law.  I  want  to  give  the 
legislature  the  powerto  remedy  it,  if  it  should  be 
found  not  to  operate  well.  I  do  not  wish  every 
thing  fixed  and  tied  up.  We  have  been  told 
that  this  court  is  to  be  a  very  important  one;  and 
that  a  large  amount  of  the  business  now  done  in 
the  circuit  court  will  ultimately  be  transferred 
to  it.  If  this  be  done,  it  will  require  judges 
Avho  are  well  qualified,  to  whom  good  salaries 
will  have  to  be  paid,  and  thus  our  expenses  will 
be  increased,  to  which  I  am  opposed. 

I  will  thank  the  secretary  to  read  my  substi- 
tute, for  the  information  of  the  convention. 

The  SECHET.\Ry  read  the  following  substitute 
for  the  report  of  the  committee. 

"  ARTICLE  . 

"Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  which  now  is,  or  may  hereafter  be  erect- 
ed within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court, 
which  shall  consist  of  justices  of  the  peace,  until 
otherwise  directed  by  law. 

"  Sec.  2.  The  several  counties  in  this  state 
shall  be  laid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size, 
as  the  general  assembly  may,  from  time  to  time, 
direct.  Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected  in 
each  district,  by  the  qualified  voters  therein,  for 
the  term  of  four  years,  whose  jurisdiction  shall 
be  co-extensive  with  the  county. 


69: 


"  Skc.  3.  Justices  of  the  peace  bhall  be  cou-  i  ried  officers  were  to  be  made  at  once  by  this  re- 
eervators  of  the  peace.  They  shall  be  ooniniis-  j  port.  We  put  no  salary  in  the  report.  'We  sim- 
sioned  by  the  governor.     The  legislature  shall  i  ply  allow  tne  county  to  select  individuals  to  do 

Srovide,  Dy  law,  the  mode  and  mauner  of  con- |  tlie  duty.  His  system  allows  the  county  to  se- 
ucting  and  making  due  returns  of  all  elections  I  lect,  and  if  there  are  more,  of  course  the  ex- 
of  justices  of  the  peace,  and  for  determining  pense  will  be  more.  The  gentleman  need  not 
contested  elotions,  and  for  filling  vacancies  in  tell  us  that  magistrates,  because  they  are  magis- 
their  offices.  trates,  will  discharge  the  duties  for  nothing.     I 

"Sec.  4.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  county  court,  suppose  the  court  will  require  pay;  biit  if  you 
and  of  justices  of  the  peace,  shall  be  regulated  .can  find  persons   who  will   descharge  the  *du- 


by  law,  and  until  changed,  shall  remain  the 
same  that  it  now  is. 

"  Sec.  5.  Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  sub- 
lect  to  indictment  or  presentment  for  malfea- 
sance or  misfeasance  in  office,  in  such  mode  as 
may  be  prescribed  by  law,  subject  to  an  appeal 
to  the  coiirt  of  appeals,  and  upon  conviction, 
their  offices  shiill  become  vacant." 

Mr.  BRI3T0W.  I  am  gratified  that  gentle- 
men have  presented  what  they  consider  a  com- 
plete system  for  the  county  courts.  This  is  the 
best  way  to  furnish  the  whole  plan,  and  if  the 
delegates  prefer  one  to  the  other,  they  can  have 


tiesbetter  without  pay,  choose  them.  The  gen- 
tleman thinks  three  not  enough  to  lay  the  levy 
and  taxes.  Three  men  can  control  the  county 
courts  generally,  and  we  supposed  it  best  to 
throw  the  business  on  individuals  selected  to 
discharge  the  duties.  They  will  be  more  prompt, 
and  they  are  the  men  to  be  complained  of.  We 
give  them  no  scape-goats  to  carry  off  their  sins. 
Let  them  be  accountable  for  the  county  court. 

The  gentleman  says  the  magistrates  can  do 
the  business.  I  have  a  high  respect  for  the 
county  court,  such  as  I  propose,  but  not  for  such 
a  one  as  he  proposes.     And  it  grows  out  of  the 


a  view  of  the  whole.  I  cannot  say  that  I  am  I  nature  of  things.  Men  will  not  prepare  them- 
particularly  wedded  to  the  plan  recommended  I  selves  for  the  duties,  unless  they  have  a  motive. 
Dy  the  committee.  In  tl»e  committee  we  com-  i  If  there  is  any  one  tribunal  unpopular  it  is  the 
pared  our  views.  Some  were  in  favor  of  one  i  county  court,  and  gentlemen  need  not  try  to 
plan,  and  some  of  another.  But  we  came  to  |  hide  behind  the  mode  of  appointment  to  account 
the  conclusion  that  the  best  we  could  adopt,  was  i  for  this.  It  is  a  court  of  individuals  got  up  in 
the  one  we  reported,  and  which   has  been   but !  the  county,  and  in  some  cases,  wholly  unqualifi- 


slightly  moditied  by  the  committee  of  thirty 
In  the  first  place,  we  thought  a  county  court 
should  be  more  permanent  than  it  would  be  if 
left  to  the  action  of  the  legislature.  We  there- 
fore made  a  constitutional  provision  forthe  coun« 
ty  court  as  necessary  in  every  government. 
I  think  it  is  a. serious  objection  to  the  amend- 


ed to  discharge  the  duties.  There  are  neighbor- 
hoods where  there  are  no  individuals  qualified 
to  be  a  judge  of  any  sort.  They  get  no  com- 
pensation, they  have  no  motive,  and  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  get  them  to  hold  a  court — ^you  must  hunt 
them  down  through  the  court  yard  to  get  them 
to  do  it.    When  you  get  them,  sometimes  they 


ment  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Green,  (Mr.  i  are  excellent  men  and  do  well,  but  frequently^ 
Lisle,)  that  fie  leaves  it  to  the  legislature  to  j  they  do  not.  I  know  much  can  be  said  on  this 
repeal  and  alter  wlien  they  please.  There  should  subject;  and  as  we  are  in  the  habit  of  having 
be  some  county  tribunal  to  discharge  the  duties  j  what  we  say  put  in  books,  I  will  not  make  re- 
required  of  them  by  the  county.  In  addition,  i  marks  about  particular  cases.  Every  gentleman 
it  will  be  required  'of  them  to  try  many  little  i  knows  that  the  court  is  unwieldy.  This  court 
matters  between  individuals,  such  as  county  j  is  to  lay  taxes  it  is  said;  and  we  must  have 
courts  have  been  in  the  habit  of  trying.  But  |  many  to  do  that.  Are  we  ready  to  appoint  men 
their  important  duty  is,  to  attend  to  county  bu-  ■  to  tax  us  whom  we  do  not  elect?  The  district 
siness,  and  we  concluded  to  present  the  simple    cannot  be  composed  of  the  same  number  of  in 


machinery  of  three  individuals,  elected  by  the 
county.  Why  not  select  one  only?  Wetliought 
the  responsibility  too  great.  All  counties  are 
interested  in  the  duties  to  be  discharged,  and 
indeed  we  thought  the  taxing  power  should  not 
be  confined  to  one.  We  thought  three  would  do 
it,  and  less  than  three  we  thought  could  not  do 
it,  and  more  than  that  number  we  thought  would 
be  too  expensive.  He  says  the  salaries  of  three 
judges  for  eairh  county  would  amount  to  $15,000. 
1  suppose  the  magistrates  would  not  be  less 
than  twelve  in  each  countv,  according  to  his 
plan.  They  would  cost  $60,000  then  by  the 
same  rule.  The  gentleman  seems  to  suppose 
the  magistrates  can  do  the  business  without  pay. 
If  the  county  think  the  magistrates  can  do  the 
business,  we  allow  them  to  do  it,  and  if  the 
gentleman  thinks  there  is  something  about  the 
magistrates  which  prepares  them  above  all  oth- 
ers for  the  business,  the  people  have  the  right  to 
choose  them. 

It  seems  to  me  my  friend  lost  some  of  the 
modesty  which  I  gave  him  credit  for  when  he 
published  to  the  world  that  three  hundred  sala- 
88 


dividuals.  Territory  must  control  districts,  and 
what  follows?  In  some  districts  there  will  be 
twenty  men,  and  in  some  five  hundred.  Should 
there  be  that  difference  between  representation 
and  taxation?  Is  it  not  right  that  all  should 
have  something  to  do  in  selecting  the  men  who 
are  to  tax  them?  The  gentleman  says  we  elect 
judges  by  districts.  We  elect  them  as  judges, 
not  to  lay  taxes.  Again,  he  says  we  elect  repre- 
sentatives by  counties,  and  not  by  the  general 
vote  of  the  state.  There  is  a  necessity  for  this. 
We  are  not  acquainted  with  individuals  all  over 
the  state,  while  we  are  acquainted  in  the  county 
and  can  select  for  it.  But,  says  the  gentleman, 
they  will  all  be  confined  to  one  spot.  Let  him 
remedy  that  by  saying  that  no  two  shall  be 
chosen  from  the  same  district.  These  judges 
elected  by  counties  will  be  superior  to  some  of 
the  men  in  districts,  and  you  need  to  get  the 
best  men  if  you  can.  I  would  remark  here,  that 
any  man  who  is  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and 
has  the  requisite  qualifications,  may  be  elected. 
This  is  the  only  tribunal  which  is  stripped  of 
lawyers.    This  court  then  may  be  composed  of 


698 


just  such  men  as  I  would  select  of  all  others — 
men  of  sound  minds  and  high  reputation.  Wheth- 
er they  ever  saw  a  novel  would  be  of  little  im- 
portance. It  is  true,  if  the  court  is  to  assume  the 
dignity  which  some  suppose,  a  difterent  class  of 
men  may  be  required;  but  in  ray  opinion,  the 
best  selection  now  would  be  the  men  that  I  have 
named.  I  prefer  that  the  county  should  elect 
three  men  belonging  to  the  county.  My  friend 
says  that  no  reasons  are  given  for  this  change. 
I  suppose  the  county  court  will  be  changed  en- 
tirely. The  selection  of  magistrates  will  be 
changed.  Having  been  heretefore  self- constitu- 
ted, they  will,  I  presume,  be  elected  by  districts. 
Let  the  old  magistrates  go  on  and  liold  courts; 
the  people  will  elect  them  if  they  choose.  We 
only  change  the  mode  of  appointing,  and  we 
say  three  shall  discharge  all  the  duties,  believ- 
ing they  will  do  so  better  than  a  greater  number. 
We  have  supposed  it  was  the  cheapest  system 
that  could  be  adopted.  Surely  we  would  not 
impose  duties  on  the  judges  without  compensa- 
tion. In  Tennessee  they  get  a  per  diem  allow- 
ance for  holding  the  court,  and  I  presume  tliat  is 
what  the  legislature  will  do  here.  If  this  is  al- 
lowed, I  know  it  will  amount  to  a  great  deal; 
but  surely  in  any  county  where  there  are  duties 
to  be  performed,  the  people  will  be  willing  to 
pay  them.  The  gentleman  might  as  Avell  say 
that  because  the  fees  of  the  justices  of  the  peace 
amount  to  fifty  dollars  a  j'^ear;  therefore,  we  are 
creating  an  immense  number  of  salaried  officers. 
I  know  not  how  they  will  be  paid.  We  contem- 
plate that  the  presiding  judge  Avill  discharge 
many  duties — for  instance,  such  as  that  of  the 

Srobate  judge,  and  such  as  have  been  discharged 
y  the  commisssioners,  and  many  others  for 
which  the  legislature  may  allow  him  fees.  It 
was  our  duty  only  to  provide  for  a  good  court. 
As  to  the  mode  of  payment,  and  as  to  jurisdic- 
tion, we  left  that  to  the  legislature,  presuming 
it  will  be  the  same  as  that  which  the  county 
court  now  exercises.  My  friend  thinks  the 
whole  matter  should  be  left  to  the  legislature. 
If  80,  we  had  better  only  say  there  shall  be  such 
a  court,  and  leave  the  legislature  to  form  it. 

My  objections  to  the  magistrates  holding  the 
court  have  been  given.  First,  they  will  not  be 
qualified;  second,  it  is  not  proper  that  represen- 
tation and  taxation  shall  V^e  unequal.  If  three 
men  are  not  enough,  take  more;  if  too  many,  se- 
lect fewer.  If  Kentucky  were  divided  into 
towns,  then  the  gentleman's  plan  might  be  proper 
aud  right,  but  we  make  our  appropriations  and 
levies  by  oouuties,  and  it  is  a  common  burden 
oa  the  county.  Then  I  hold  that  any  one  coun- 
ty shall  elect  the  men  to  do  tliis,  because  it  will 
be  convenient  for  them  to  do  it. 

I  have  said  all  I  wished  to  say.  I  hope  not 
much  time  will  be  spent  on  this  subject,  though 
it  is  a  matter  which  requires  all  the  light  we 
have.  It  will  be  seen  that  we  provide  that,  if 
the  legislature  think  it  will  be  right  and  proper, 
that  the  magistrates  should  come  together,  t^iey 
may  do  it.  The  gentleman  complains  that  the 
magiiitrat*s  are  not  allowed  to  coino  together 
■when  the  debts  are  contracted.  The  levy  is 
made  and  the  amount  assessed  in  the  same  court. 
That  being  the  case,  they  will  be  present  and 
afip-ee  on  the  debts  they  will  pay,  and  the  amount 
Woich  shall  be  levied  on  the  towns.  I 


Mr.  PROCTOR  offered  the  following  amend- 
ment, viz: 

"Promled,  That  the  general  assembly  shall 
have  power,  whenever  it  shall  be  deemed  expedi- 
ent, to  abolish  the  offices  of  the  associate  judges, 
and  in  that  case,  the  presiding  judge  shall  be 
vested  with  the  same  power  and  jurisdiction  now 
given  to  the  three  judges." 

Mr.  President,  I  liave  offered  this  amendment, 
believing  that  it  will  compromise  the  different 
interests  which  divide  this  convention.  While 
I  am  in  favor  of  tlie  substitute  proposed  by  the 
gentleman  from  Jefferson,  and  prefer  one  judge 
to  three,  still  sir,  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Green,  and 
prefer  even  the  report  of  the  committee.  But  it 
does  seem  to  me,  Mr.  President,  that  mine  is  a 
proposition  upon  which  all  gentlemen  may 
unite,  for  I  propose  to  leave  to  the  legislature, 
the  question  wliether  there  shall  be  one  or  three 
judges  in  each  county,  and  by  doing  this  sir, 
you  give  to  the  people  of  each  county  the  power 
of  instructing  their  representatives,  as  to  wheth- 
er they  will  have  one  or  three  judges,  and  you 
also  leave  to  the  people  the  question  of  deciding 
whether  the  magistrates  elected  in  the  county 
shall  compose  and  constitute  a  part  of  the  court 
or  not.  For  my  part,  I  have  no  objections  to  the 
justices  of  the  peace  elected  in  each  county,  sit- 
ting and  holding  court  in  connection  with  the 
presiding  judge,  when  laying  the  county  levy 
and  making  changes  in  the  public  roads,  and 
appropriations  of  money  for  county  purposes,' 
but  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  giving  to  these  jus- 
tices the  power  of  sitting  and  determining  upon 
appeals  and  questions  of  law.  Sir,  I  differ  with 
my  friend  from  Green,  when  he  says  that  the  de- 
cision of  these  courtsandtheirmanner  of  admin- 
istering the  law  has  not  been  complained  of  by  the 
people.  That  gentleman  seems  to  think  that  the 
mode  of  appointment  of  these  officers  alone  wa.s 
complained  of  by  the  people.  My  experience 
and  my  judgment  teach  me  sir,  that  if  there  was 
any  system  of  our  government  which  was  odi- 
ous to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  which  called 
for  redress  at  the  hands  of  this  convention,  it  is 
the  county  court  system  of  the  state.  It  is  not 
my  intention,  Mr.  President,  to  enter  into  an  in- 
vestigation of  the  errors  and  corruptions  of  this 
system;  they  are  familiar  to  the  people  and 
known  to  all.  But  one  great  reason,  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, which  I  have  against  creating  a  court,  to 
be  composed  of  all  the  justices  of  the  peace  to 
be  elected  in  each  county,  and  of  investing  that 
court  with  tlie  power  of  trying  appeals,  and 
other  questions  of  law,  is,  that  under  such  a 
system,  there  would  be  no  uniformity  of  deci- 
sion, and  no  certainty  of  obtaining  justice.  As 
the  court  would  be  composed  of  a  large  number 
of  individuals,  you  would  divide  the  responsi- 
bility ot  their  decisions  among  the  different 
members  of  the  court,  and  whenever  you  divide 
responsibility,  there  will  not  be  that  correct  and 
deliberate  consideration  given  to  any  question 
that  there  would  be  if  all  the  responsibility  of  a 
decision  were  thrown  on  one  man;  neither  will 
there  be  that  uniformity  of  decision  which  is  so 
necessary  to  the  equal  administration  of  justiee, 
and  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  all. 

Why  sir,  iu  the  county  which  I  represent,  in 
a  contest  before  a  justice  of  the  peace,  where  the 


699 


plaintifT  claimed  five  pounds  in  his  warrant,  the 
justice  of  the  peace  rendered  judgment  against 
the  defendant  for  a  less  sum  tiian  25  shillings. 
From  this  judgment  the  defendant  appealed  to 
the  couaty  court.  Upon  the  trial  of  the  appeal, 
the  plaintiff  moved  the  court  to  di-sniiss  the  ap- 
peal for  want  of  jurisdiction  in  the  court  to  try 
the  cause,  but  the  court  overruled  the  motion, 
and  tried  the  cause.  At  a  subsequent  term  of 
the  court  an  appeal  was  taken  in  a  case  precise- 
ly similar,  and  another  court,  composed  of  dif- 
ferent members,  decided  that  the  defendant  was 
not  entitled  to  an  appeal  where  the  judgment 
against  him  was  less  than  25  shillings,  and  in 
my  judgment  they  decided  correctly.  In  this 
case  they  dismissed  the  appeal  for  want  of  juris- 
diction. 

Now  sir,  it  is  to  guard  against  this  in.stabili- 
ty  and  uncertainty  of  decision  that  I  will  oppose 
the  revival  of  that  old  system.  Under  that  sys- 
tem our  county  courts  became  a  bye-word  ana  a 
reproach, — they  were  composed  of  men,  many  of 
whom  were  incompetent  to  discharge  the  duties 
of  their  office,  ana  to  seek  justice  before  such  a 
tribunal  is  about  as  uncertain  as  a  game  of 
chance. 

But  I  repeat,  I  do  not  intend  to  ent«r  into  an 
elaborate  aescription  of  the  errors  of  this  system, 
as  it  has  heretofore  existed  in  Kentucky;  but  I 
will  say  that  if  there  is  any  one  thing  that  has 
been  loudly  called  for  by  the  people  of  Kentucky, 
it  is  that  the  present  county  court  system  shfSl 
be  abolished. 

I  will  here  remark  sir,  that  while  I  am  satis- 
fied with  the  substitute  as  offered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Jefferson,  I  prefer  that  we  should  have 
but  one  judge  to  do  all  the  probate  business   of 
the  county  and  to  try  appeals;  and  when   the 
levy  is  tol)e  laid  and  appropriations  to  be  made 
that  the  justices  of  the  county  shall  sit  with  him. 
Tet  sir,  I  have  offered  my  proposition,  leaving  it 
to  the  people  of  each  county  to  decide   whether 
they  will  have  a  court  composed  of  one  or  three  ! 
judges.     By  this  plan  the  whole  of  the  subject  | 
will  be  left  in  the  hands  of  the  people;  and  it  | 
seems  to  me  that  this  is  a  compromise  ground,  1 
upon  which  all  parties   and  all  interests  in  this  { 
house  can  unite.     But  if  my  amendment  should 
not  prevail,  I  will  support  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Jefferson. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY,  NOVEMBER  28,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  G.  W.  Bbvsb. 

DAY    OF   THAXKSGIVIXG. 

Mr.  MATES.     Mr.  President,  to-morrow  is ' 
the  day  recommended  by  the  executive  of  the ! 
state  to  be  set  apart  as   a   day  of  thanksgiving ' 
and  prayer;  and  to  test  the  sense  of  the  house 
whether  we  shall  observe  that  day,  I  offer  the 
following  resolution: 

"  Resolved,  That  when  this  convention  shall 
adjourn  this  day,  it  will  adjourn  until  the  30th 
inst." 


j  The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for,  and  being 
I  taken,  were — ^yeas  60,  nays  23. 
I  Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
j  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Francis 
I  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chris- 
I  man,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  El- 
liott, Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Vincent  S.  Hav,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  W  .  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W, 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHneiy, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  Si. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Roekhold,  Jas. 
Rudd.  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Al- 
bert G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thomp.son,  John  J.  Thurman,  Henry  Washing- 
ton, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  George 
W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
— 60. 

Nays— Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Charles 
Chambers,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Edward  Curd,  James  Dudley,  Nathan 
Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether,  Hugh 
Newell,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner — 
23. 
So  the  resolution  was  adopted. 

APPELLATE   JUDGES. 

Mr.  PRICE,  in  accordance  with  notice  which 
he  gave  on  Monday  last,  moved  a  reconsidera- 
tion of  the  vote  adispting  the  fourth  section  of 
the  article  on  the  court,  of  appeals,  which  fixes 
the  number  of  judges  of  the  appellate  court  at 
four.  On  that  motion  he  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays,  and  being  taken  they  were — ^yeas  41,  nays 

At  a  subsequent  part  of  the  day  Messrs.  CHE- 
NAULT  and  KELLY  obtained  permission  to 
record  their  votes  in  the  affirmative,  and  Messrs. 
JAMES  and  MITCHELL  in  the  negative,  and 
the  result  was  then,  v^as  43,  nays  49. 

Yeas — John  L.  ifiallinger,  William  K.  Bow- 
ling, Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Charles 
Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Garrett  Davis,  Jaines  Dudley,  Milford 
Elliott,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Jas. 
P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Johnson 
Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Roekhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  John  L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler— 43. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Gathrie,)  Richard  Ap* 


700 


'person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  Fran- 
cis M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Henry  R.  D. 
yColeman,  William  Co wper, Edward  Curd.'^Lucius 
'Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Niniau  E. 
Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.   Hay,   Mark   E. 
J  Huston,  Thomas  James,  George   W.   Johnston, 
'Peter  Lashbrooke.  Willis  B.Machen,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry, 
David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  ^"esbitt, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  William   Preston,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  James  Rudd,  James   W.  Stone,   Albert 
G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son,  Philip    Triplett,    Squire    Turner,     Henry 
Washington,    Andrew    S.   White,    Charles    A. 
WieklifFe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Sihis  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 49. 
So  the  convention  refused  to  reconsider. 

BASIS    OF   EEPEESENTATIOX. 

Mr.  WOODSON  moved  to  take  up  for  consid- 
eration a  resolution  offered  by  him  on  Friday 
t  last,  and  on  his  motion  laid  upon  the  table,  on 
c  the  subject  of  basis  of  representation. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

COUNTY    COUKTS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 

,  the  article  in  relation  to  county  courts. 

At  the  adjournment  yesterday  the  first  section 

^  was  under  consideration,  to  which  Mr.  PROC- 

^  TOR  had  offered  an  amendment. 

f  Mr.  MERlWETHERsent  up  a  series  of  amend- 
ments which  he  desired,  at  the  proper  time,  to 
ofifer;-the  first  of  which  he  submitted  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Lewis. 

A  brief  conversation  in  relation  to  this  amend- 
ment   ensued  between    Messrs.   MERIWETH- 

\ER,  CHAMBERS,  W\  C.  MARSHALL,  BRIS- 

■'  TOW,  and  others. 

Mr.  TURNER.      I  am  in  favor  of  having  the 
county  court  formed  by  the  constitution.      The 

.  idea  of  having  a  court  that   is  partly  constitu- 

'  tioual  and  partly  legislative,  I  am  opposed  to. 
If  you  give  to  the  legislature  the  power  to  add 
to,  and  diminish  the  number  of  judges  at  pleas- 
ure, there  will  be  no  stability — they  will  be  con- 
stantly pulling  down  and  building  up.  I  have 
an  amendment  which  I  shall  offer  at  uie  proper 
time,  and  which  I  think  is  preferable  to  either  of 
the  propositions  before  the  convention.  It  seems 
to  me  it  will  be  a  proper  compromise  between 
the  extremes  of  all  parties  upon  this  matter.  I 
am  not  in  favor  of  magistrates  holding  court  al- 
together, according  to  the  plan  suggested  by  the 
?;entlemau  from  Green,  (Mr.  Lisle) — nor  am  I  in 
avor  of  the  plans  suggested  by  the  gentleman 
from  Lewis,  (Mr.  Proctor)  nor  that  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Jefferson  (Mr.  Meriwether.)  I  am  in 
favor  of  having  the  court  held  by  one  judge  at 
all  times,  except  when  there  are  county  debts  to 
be  contracted,  when  there  are  expenditures  to 
be  authorized,  and  when  the  county  levy  is  to  be 
laid;  then  I  want  the  magistrates  of  the  county 
to  come  in,  and  constitute  a  part  of  the  court. 
It  has  been  said  that  the  magistrates  are  not  the 
representatives  of  the  county  at  large,  for  they, 
are  to  be  elected  by  districte,  and  some  of  the 
districts  may  be  smaller  than  others.    It  strikes 


me  that  the  magistrates  when  elected  under  the 
plan  proposed  to  be  adopted  in  the  constitution, 
will  be  the  representatives  of  the  county,  in  like 
manner  as  are  the  representatives  in  the  legisla- 
ture; and  coming  from  different  parts  of  the 
county,  the  court,  when  assembled,  Avill  be  ac- 
quainted with  the  wants  of  the  whole  county. 
They  will  be  well  informed  upon  all  subjects  de- 
manding their  attention  as  legislators  for  the 
county;  and  will  not  represent  sectional  inter- 
ests merely,  as  would  be  the  case  if  you  consti- 
tute this  court  with  but  three  permanent  judges. 
The  body  of  the  magistracy  thus  elected  ny  dis- 
tricts, will  better  represent  the  Avishes  of  the 
people,  than  the  old  self-constituted  court,  which 
we  are  about  to  dispense  with.  In  regard  to  the 
judicial  business  of  the  county,  it  appears  to  me 
that  itcanbe  doneaswell  by  one  judge, as  the  bus- 
iness of  the  circuit  court  can;  for  the  power  that 
is  given  to  the  judge  of  the  county  court  is  not 
so  extensive  as  that  which  the  judge  of  the  cir- 
cuit court  exerci-ses.  The  county  court  does  not 
adjudicate  upon  questions  affecting  life  and  lib- 
erty, and  its  decisions  are  not  final.  You  can 
appeal  from  its  decisions  to  the  circuit  court,  or 
to  the  court  of  appeals.  If  you  extend  the  num- 
ber of  judges  to  three,  unless  vou  give  them  such 
amount  of  salary  as  the  people  would  be  unwil- 
ling to  pay,  you  will  not  be  able  to  procure  three 
men  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  qualify  them- 
selves in  all  those  matters  which  appertain  to 
that  court,  and  which  require  a  good  deal  of  study 
and  reflection. 

I  practiced  a  Utile  while  under  the  assistant 
judge  system,  where  there  was  one  principal 
judge,  learned  in  the  law,  who  received  a  com- 
petent salary;  and  two  assistant  judges,  who  re- 
ceived two  dollars  per  day  each  for  their  servi- 
ces. I  recollect  the  assistant  judges  were  in  the 
habit  of  coming  in  and  directing  the  clerk  to 
enter  their  names  as  being  present  so  as  to  enti- 
tle them  to  receive  their  two  dollars;  in  five 
minutes  afterwards  they  were  gone.  They  knew 
they  were  of  no  service.  The  legislature  found 
they  were  only  an  expense,  and  removed  them. 
I  am  satisfied  that  one  judge,  with  the  assistance 
of  the  magistrates,  as  occasion  may  require,  will 
do  the  business  much  better  than  three  perma- 
nent judges.  I  shall  therefore,  if  the  pending 
amendment  should  fail,  offer  my  proposition  to 
strike  out  the  words  "two  assistant  judges,"  and 
add  in  substance  these  words:  "which  court 
shall  be  holden  by  a  presiding  judge,  except  at 
the  term  at  which  the  county  levy  shall  be  laid 
and  county  debts  contracted;  at  which  term  in 
each  year,  the  county  magistrates  shall  be  assist- 
ant judges  of  the  court,  and  magistrates, 
together  with  the  presidingjudge,  shall  be  requi- 
red to  constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of 
business."  If  necessary,  there  might  be  two 
such  terms  holden  in  each  year. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  Before  the  convention  pro- 
ceeds to  take  a  vote  upon  the  proposition  to 
amend,  I  will  be  extremely  glad  if  gentlemen 
will  reflect  upon  the  consequences  which  are  to 
flow  from  striking  out  the  three  judges  and  sub- 
stituting one.  In  the  fifth  section  of  the  report, 
it  will  De  found  that  "the  jurisdiction  of  the 
county  court  sh^ll  be  regulated  by  law,  and 
until  changed  shall  be  the  same  now  vested  in 
the  county  courts  of  this  state." 


701 


1  hope  gentlemen  will  reflect  what  an  immense 
po"sver  the  county  court,  as  now  organized  in 
this  commonwealth,  possesses.  Suppose  it  be 
desired  to  establish  a  road  through  my  land — I 
obtain  a  writ  of  ad  quod  davinum,  and  the  jury 
give  me  $1200  for  the  injury  I  sustain  by  the  lo- 
cation of  the  road  across  my  farm.  The  county 
court,  with  the  jurisdiction  they  now  possess, 
eitlier  consent  that  I  shall  have  the  $1200  or  not. 
It  is  a  matter  within  their  discretion;  and  if 
they  do  not  choose  to  pay  me  the  damages  that 
have  been  assessed  by  the  jury,  they  have  only 
to  issue  another  writ  of  ad  quod  damnum,  and 
have  the  damages  again  assessed  by  another 
jury;  and  so  on  until  they  come  down  to  what 
they  consider  the  proper  sum  to  be  paid.  If 
there  is  any  one  thing  more  than  another,  that 
touches  the  interests  of  the  people,  it  is  the  right 
to  take  private  property  for  public  u.se;  and,  sir, 
never — never  would  I  trust  a  power  of  that  sort 
to  any  one  man.  What  else,  sir.  The  county 
court  in  my  countv,  before  they  had  authority 
given  to  them  by  tlie  legislature  of  the  state,  to 
take  stock  in  the  Lexington  and  Maysville  turn- 
pike road,  had  as  much  right  to  go  into  partner- 
ship with  a  banker  and  raise  funds  by  a  county 
levy,  and  place  them  in  the  hands  of  the  banker 
for  the  purpose  of  accumulation  by  illegal  inter- 
est, as  they  had  to  take  stock  in  that  road.  But 
the  act  was  sanctified — if  I  may  use  the  term — 
by  subsequent  legislation.  Suppose  you  have  a 
court  house  to  build,  or  a  bridge  to  construct;  it 
is  in  the  discretion  of  the  court,  whether  these 
w^orks  shall  be  authorized  or  not.  Just  look  at 
it.  The  very  safety  of  the  countrj-  requires  that 
these  powers  should  not  be  delegated  to  one  man; 
that  one  man  should  not  be  allowed  to  run  the 
county  in  debt,  ad  libitum.  But  these  magis- 
trates, the  gentleman  says,  are  to  come  in  from 
all  parts  of  the  country,  and  form  a  court,  to  do 
what?  Why,  just  to  examine  the  accounts — to 
ascertain  to  what  extent  this  one  man  power  has 
run  the  county  in  debt — and  to  say  that  the 
countv  levy  shall  be  so  much — for  so  much  is  re- 
quireci  on  account  of  this  debt.  Thank  God, 
tne  levy  cannot  go  beyond  $1  50. 

Xow  I  ask  if  we  are  going  to  trust  this  im- 
mense power  to  one  man?  What  security  is 
there,  that  the  country  will  not  be  so  involved, 
as  to  be  unable  to  discharge  her  obligations? 
We  iire  told  that  the  magistrates  will  come  in 
and  assist  in  laving  the  county  levv.  There  is 
no  security  in  ttat.  The  evil  has  been  done — 
the  obligations  liave  been  incurred — the  honor 
of  the  county  is  at  stake,  and  the  debts  must  be 
paid.  What  else?  I  know  the  old  county 
court  has  been  a  most  objectionable  system — a 

Eerfect  eyesore.  I  know  it  has  done  more  to 
ring  about  the  meeting  of  this  convention 
"than  any  other  one  thing.  The  court  has  been, 
like  the  fabled  bird,  that  is  said  to  reproduce  it- 
self. A  friend  near  me  remarks,  that  the  repro- 
duction generally  have  longer  ears  tlian  the 
original  stock  have. 

Now  the  danger  is  this.  They  want  to  boil 
the  county  court  down,  in  some  sort  of  conven- 
tional cauldron,  and  have  the  court  consist  of 
but  one  man.  God  forbid!  It  is  not  always  the 
case,  with  the  countv  court,  that  in  a  multitude 
of  counsellors  there  is  wisdom,  but  let  us  cling 
to  the  old  maxim  still. 


j  I  can  assure  gentlemen  of  one  thing,  that  if  - 
you  have  but  one  judge,  you  cannot  get  a  man  of 
talents  and  acquirements,  you  cannot  get  a  man 
who  will  fill  the  bench  as  it  ought  to  be  filled — 
you  cannot  get  a  man  to  take  upon  himself  the 
responsible  duties  that  will  be  imposed  upon 
him — -you  will  find  few  men,  willing  to  under- 
take the  ofiice,  who  are  qualified  to  discharge 
the  duties.  I  am  opposed  to  striking  out  three, 
and  making  it  incumbent  on  the  magistrates, 
that  thev  shall  assist,  at  certain  terms  of  the 
court.  I  want  three  judges.  Suppose  now,  in 
my  city,  that  they  elect  this  one  judge,  and 
clothe  him  with  all  this  power — there  has  been 
a  good  deal  said  about  the  influence  of  cities, 
stretching  out  like  Briaerius,  their  hundred 
hands  to  clutch  all  the  power  in  the  state — sup- 
pose the  election  of  one  judge  be  authorized  as 
contemplated  by  this  report,  he  can  be  trium- 
phantly elected  by  the  city,  and  he  wiU  most 
assuredly  subserve  the  interests  of  those  who 
elected  nim.  But  if  there  be  three  judges  to  be 
elected,  no  such  operation  can  take  place;  and 
you  will  bring  to  the  discharge  of  these  im- 
portant duties,  three  men  in  whose  actions  the 
people  will  have  more  confidence  than  they 
would  in  the  action  of  a  single  man.  I  hope 
and  trust,  that  gentlemen  will  put  on  their  think- 
ing caps,  and  reflect  upon  this  subject — and  I 
think  they  will  come  to  the  same  conclusion  at 
which  I  have  arrived. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  As  the  amendment 
proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Lewis,  (Mr. 
Proctor)  has  been  modified,  so  as  to  suit  the 
views — as  I  understand — of  the  honorable  Chair- 
man of  the  committee,  by  leaving  it  to  the  legis- 
lature to  determine  whether  there  shall  be  as- 
sistant judges  or  not,  I  will  withdraw  the 
amendment  I  offered.  But  I  will  remark  to  my 
friend,  that  there  is  another  amendment  pro- 
posed that  will,  perhaps,  obviate  his  objections. 
The  legislature  must  convene,  before  this  court 
can  go  into  operation;  and  they  may  provide 
that  whenever  any  indebtedness  is  to  be  created 
on  the  part  of  the  county,  the  magistrates  shall 
come  in  and  act  as  a  portion  of  the  court. 

Mv  friend  from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor,)  seems  to 
think,  that  if  but  one  Judge  is  to  constitute  this 
court,  too  much  power  would  be  placed  in  his 
hands.  The  power  now  possessed  by  the  court, 
is  either  to  confirm  or  set  aside  the'  finding  of 
the  jury,  and  it  is  easy  to  provide,  that  in  cases 
where  the  property  of  an  individual  is  concerned, 
a  concurrence  of  a  majority  of  the  magistrates 
shall  be  required.  I  think  this  will  obviate  the 
objection  of  the  gentleman. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  desire,  when  it  shall  be  in 
order,  to  offer  the  substitute  that  was  proposed 
by  the  gentleman  from  Green,  (Mr.  Lisle.)  It 
takes  the  old  county  court  system,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  the  manner  in  which  that  court  was 
constituted. 

I  have  no  recollection,  during  the  whole  can- 
vass of  last  summer,  or  during  the  agitation  of 
the  convention  question  throughout  the  state,  of 
having  heard  any  complaint  made  as  to  the 
number  of  judges  of  the  county  court  ;  nor  any 
complaints  in  regard  to  the  county  court  at  all, 
save  and  except,  as  to  the  manner  of  appoint- 
ment of  the  judges  of  that  court — the  self-con 
stituing  and  self-making  power  they  possessed— 


702 


4hd  the  further  fact  that  the  senior  magistrate 
receives  the  ofBce  of  sheriflF,  by  virtue  of  his 
senority. 

Some  of  the  amendments  propose  to  constitute 
one  judge  for  this  court,  and  some  three.  Tliere 
will  be  a  very  radical  change  made  in  the  whole 
system,  and  as  we  are  making  a  number  of  very 
radical  changes,  1  apprehend  it  will  be  safer  for 
us  to  consider  whether  or  not,  we  are  called  up- 
on by  our  constituents  to  make  any  change  m 
relation  to  that  court,  save  the  change  proposed 
by  the  gentleman  from  Green,  which  I  desire 
shall  be  substituted. 

Mr.  G.  W.  JOHNSTON.  I  understand  that 
to  be  a  substitute  for  the  whole  report ;  and  it 
will  be  in  order  first  to  perfect  the  report.  I  have 
a  plan  for  constituting  this  county  court,  which 
I  think  will  meet  the  views  of  a  majority  of  the 
members  of  this  house,  and  it  corresponds  to 
some  extent,  with  that  proposed  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Green  (Mr.  Lisle).  I  will  offer  my  sub- 
stitute, and  ask  the  yeas  and  nays  upon  it. 

Strike  out  all  that  part  of  the  section  after  the 
word  "judge,"  in  the  third  line,  and  substitute  in 
lieu  thereof  the  following : 

"and  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  commission 
in  each  county.  The  presiding  judge  and  two 
justices  of  the  peace,  or  any  three  of  the  justices 
of  the  peace,  shall  constitute  a  court  for  the 
transaction  of  business,  except  at  the  court  of 
claims,  when  the  presidingjudge  and  a  majority 
of  the  justices  shall  be  required  to  constitute  the 
court. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  "When  this  subject  was  under 
consideration  in  the  committee  of  thirty,  I  un- 
derstood that  this  proposition  was  offered,  to- 
gether with  a  good  many  of  similar  nature.  I 
do  not  believe  we  could  establish  a  better  prin- 
ciple than  that  agreed  upon  by  the  committee.  I 
should  be  oppo.sed  to  the  county  court  being  held 
by  one  judge.  It  is  a  court  that  is  important  to 
the  interests  of  the  people.  They  are  all  interes- 
ted in  the  proper  discharge  of  the  duties  devolv- 
ing upon  that  court,  and  the  rights  of  the  people, 
it  seems  to  me,  will  be  better  represented  by 
liaving  the  court  composed  of  three  judges,  than 
if  you  have  but  one. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  this  building  up  of  in- 
ferior courts  is  no  ea-sy  task.  It  is  not  like  a  tai- 
lor fa.shioning  a  suit  of  clothes.  I  think  on  the 
contrary,  that  much  reflection,  time,  and  experi- 
ence would  be  required  to  enable  us  to  establish 
inferior  courts — especially  courts  for  counties.  We 
all  know, thatin  attending  to  the  civil  business  of 
the  state,  the  inferior  court  system  began  with  a 
court  of  quarter  se-ssions  ;  this  was  afterwards 
superceded  by  the  circuit  court.  Our  system  of 
inferior  courts  has  grown  into  disfavor,  to  some 
extent,  and  is  to  be  modified.  The  county  court 
system  would  have  fallen  long  ago,  before  the 
system  of  experiment  and  improvement,  if  it 
had  not  been  a  constitutional  court.  It  seems  to 
me,  it  would  be  an  erroneous  mode  of  proceeding 
to  encumber  the  constitution  with  many  details. 
The  best  plan  will  be  to  establish  a  few  general 

f)rinciples,  and  leave  the  details  to  Imj  regulated 
rom  time  t«  time,  by  legislative  action,  as  ex- 
periment and  experience  shall  instruct  us.  I 
think  myself  that  a  provision  of  this  kind  would 
be  the  best  thing  that  we  could  adopt,  in  relation 
to  county  courts. 


"In  addition  to  circuit  courts,  the  general  a' 
sembly  shall  constitute  such  other  inferior  courts, 
justices  of  the  peace,  and   other  magistrates,   as 
may  be  necessary  and  proper,  to  be  elected  by 
popular  vote." 

If  you  intend  to  establish  in  the  constitution 
a  frame  work  for  a  county  court  system,  you 
mav  establish  such  a  system  as  will  not  work 
well.  It  may  become  objectionable  to  public 
sentiment,  and  whether  it  shall  be  wrong  in 
truth  and  fact,  or  only  in  public  sentiment,  the 
consequences  are  practically  the  same.  I  think 
the  constitution  ought  merely  to  provide  a  few 
general  terms,  and  that  the  legislature  should 
have  power  to  establsh  such  inferior  courts  as 
the  people  shall,  from  time  to  time,  require; 
and  then  if  the  system  be  found  not  to  work 
well,  instead  of  resorting  to  a  convention  to  re- 
model the  law,  all  you  would  have  to  do  would 
be,  when  enlightened  by  experience,  to  refer  the 
necessary  changes  to  legislative  action.  In  this 
mode,  I  think  the  system  would  work  much 
more  to  the  convenience  and  satisfaction  of  the 
people;  and  that  the  necessary  changes  would 
DC  much  more  easily  and  readily  made  than  if 
you  incorporate  a  system  in  the  constitution, 
and  make  it  the  fixed  and  irrevocable  law  of  the 
land.  1  am  pretty  much  a  looker  on  this  morn- 
ing, and  I  merely  make  these  suggestions  as  a 
matter  of  counsel — as  a  sort  ot  amicus  conven- 
tionis — a  friend  to  the  convention.  If  the  sug- 
gestions are  not  agreeable,  I  have  not  a  word  to 
say  in  their  advocacy.  If  they  meet  with  favor, 
I  shall  be  satisfied — if  with  disfavor,  I  shall  not 
be  dissatisfied.  When  the  other  amendments 
are  disposed  of  so  as  to  make  this  in  order,  I 
will  offer  it. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  If  there  is  any  court  that 
I  know  any  thing  about,  it  is  the  county 
court.  I  have  had  some  experience  in  it,  and 
I  have  reaped  some  of  its  benefits.  I  have  been 
elected  county  attorney  for  eight  consecutive 
years,  and  I  believe  I  never  absented  myself  but 
one  term,  and  we  have  twelve  terms  a  year.  One 
term  I  served  twelve  days  consecutively.  I  be- 
lieve, sir,  the  report  of  the  committee  presents 
the  best  foundation  for  the  county  court  that 
can  be  adopted  by  the  convention;  and  if  I  had 
from  now  until  the  end  of  the  session  to  prepare 
a  report,  I  do  not  believe  I  could  find  a  solitary 
point,  as  far  as  regards  the  general  principle,  to 
amend,  except  one.  I  would  give  to  the  presi- 
ding judge  tne  power  to  hold  the  court,  which 
this  article  proposes  as  the  foundation  for  the 
legislature  to  build  upon.  I  do  not  agree  with 
some  gentlemen  here,  that  we  should  fix  the  ju- 
risdiction of  the  court.  That  is  a  matter  to  be 
left  entirely  with  the  legislature.  When  we 
have  this  foundation,  giving  the  presidingjudge 
the  power  to  hold  court,  what  will  the  legisla- 
ture do?  My  opinion  is,  thev  will  invest  the 
presiding  judges  with  power  in  probate  alone — 
with  power  to  receive  and  take  proof  of  wills — 
appoint  guardians— executors — take  bonds  from 
commissioners,  and  such  like.  I  suppose  we 
would  have  to  invest  power  in  somebody,  and 
the  convenience  of  the  thing  demanded  that  one 
man  should  have  the  power  to  hold  court.  In 
some  counties,  it  is  necessary  that  the  court 
should  be  held  every  month  in  the  year,  and  in 
others  not  quite  so  often.  The  law  provides,  fur- 


-on 


thermore,  that  there  shall  be  appointed,  hy  each 
county  court  in  the  state,  three  commissioners, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  settle  with  executors,  i 
guardians,  and  administrators.  It  is  the  easiest 
thing  in  the  world  for  the  legislature  to  say  that 
the  assooiaie  judges  of  the  court,  together  with 
the  presi<liiig  judge,  if  necessary,  shall  exercise 
the  power  of  county  commissioners. 

It  is  required  that  each  county  court  shall  ap- 
point various  appraisers,  whose  duty  it  is  to  take 
charge  of  matters  out  of  doors.    Well,  how  easy 
it  would  be  that  the  legislature  should  send  two 
associate  judges  to  perfonu  this  duty.     It  is  ob- 
jected that  the  power  of  this  court  would  be  too  , 
great.     I  am  not  like  some  gentlemen,  who  think 
this  court  ha-s  no  virtues.    I  think  there  are  some  > 
good  points  about  it,  and  some  bad  ones.     But ; 
the  principal  grievance  the  people  have  labored  [ 
under,  is  the  manner  in  which  the  court  is  con- ! 
stituted.     There  should  be  I  think  no  alteration  | 
except  as  to  the  court  of  claims — and  I  ask  it  as  ; 
a  matter  of  right — that  the  people  of  the  whole  ' 
county  shall  be  represented  in   that  court  if  it ' 
should  become  necessarj'.    I  suppose  all  that  is  ' 
desired  can  be  obtained,  by  giving  the  power  to  j 
the  presiding  judge  to  hold  the  court.     But  my  [ 
opinion  is,  that  it  would  be  a  little  more  har- 1 
monious,  if  the  power  be  left  to  the  legislature 
to  make  the  necessary  provision.     I  am  satisfied 
with  the  report  as  it  is.     It  is  true,  we  had  a 
great  deal  of  talk  about  it  in  committee,  and  we 
finally  settled  down  on  the  plan  reported,  and  I 
hope  that  plan  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  would  not  trouble 
the  convention  at  this  time  with  any  remarks, 
but  tliat  I  was  a  member  of  the  committee  which 
reported  this  bill,  and  it  seems  to  be  expected 
that  each  member  of  that  committee  should  give 
his  views  upon  the  subject. 

The  remarks  that  were  made  by  thegentleman  on 
my  right,  (Mr.  Davis,)  who  seemed  to  have  a  fath- 
erly feeling  for  the  people,  were  certainly  conceiv- 
ed in  a  kindly  spirit.  He  expects  to  do  nothing 
himself,  but  expects  that  all  that  is  done  should  be 
done  under  his  super\ision  and  discretion.  I 
know  his  kindly  feelings,  and  I  appreciate  his  mo- 
tives. What  does  he  propose?  After  the  committee 
had  spent  days  in  preparing  this  report,  after 
the  question  had  been  presented  in  various  pha- 
ses to  this  house,  he  comes  in  and  tells  us  it  is 
all  wrong,  and  that  we  ought  to  allow  the  pro- 
visions in  the  old  constitution  to  remain  and  al- 
low the  legislature — that  body  which  is  always 
composed  of  the  best  materials — to  concoct  a 
court;  and  that  this  convention,  composed  as  it 
is  of  combustible  materials,  is  incapable  of  deci- 
ding what  would  be  a  proper  court.  I  confess 
this  is  a  subject,  as  has  been  remarked,  of  more 
importance  to  the  counties  than  either  the  circuit 
court  or  the  court  of  appeals.  It  is  a  court  in 
which  the  people  of  the  various  counties  feel  a 
deep,  essential,  and  more  abiding  interest,  than 
they  do  in  the  circuit  court.  It  is  a  matter  which 
is  brought  to  their  houses  and  their  firesides. 
It  is  brought  down  to  the  every  day  intercourse 
which  subsists  between  men;  and  when  you  talk 
about  interfering  with  the  county  court,  the  peo- 

Sle  will,  in  the  language  of  the  gentleman  from 
[ason,  (Mr.  Taylor,)  regard  vour  action  with 
jealousy,  and  look  upon  it  with  suspicion.  It 
nas  hitiierto  been  a  self-constituted  body,  and  in 


the  language  of  my  eloquent  friend  from  Mason 
the  reproduction  always  has  longer  ears  than  the 
original.  I  trust  in  Clod  they  may  have  longer 
yearn. 

What  other  objection  was  made  to  this  county 
court?  It  was  claimed  that  the  people  should 
say  who  should  costitute  the  court.  This  right 
we  are  about  to  give  them.  Do  they  claim  any- 
thing further?  They  object — I  only  speak  of 
the  region  of  country  from  whence  1  came — that 
the  members  of  the  court  will  be  too  numarous 
if  all  the  magistracy  be  included.  That  the 
machineiy  would  be  cumbersome — that  the  num- 
ber would  be  too  large.  Well  this  may  be 
remedied  by  the  legislature  if  the  community 
do  not  require  it.  One  of  the  objects  of  calling 
a  convention  was,  that  the  counties  might  be 
laid  off  into  districts;  and  that  this  self-creating 
court  should  be  differently  constituted.  How 
do  you  propose  to  remedy  the  evils  that  have 
been  complained  of?  In  the  first  place,  you 
give  to  the  people  the  election  of  judges;  and 
then  it  is  proposed  by  some  that  they  shall  have 
but  one  judge,  and  by  others  that  they  shall 
have  a  full  bench  of  magistrates.  It  appears  to 
me,  there  is  safety  in  a  medium  course.  The 
committee  having  heard  various  projects,  de- 
cided upon  the  one  now  substituted  in  their  re- 
port. I  ask  gentlemen  who  have  advocjited  the 
associations  of  magistrates,  how  they  are  to 
procure  an  attendance — what  inducement  will 
this  hold  out  to  insure  an  attendance?  It  is  very 
rarely  that  you  can  get  a  majority  of  the  magis- 
trates to  go  upon  the  bench,  because  there  is  no 
inducement  for  them  to  go  there,  except,  perhaps, 
the  sheriffalty  to  which  they  are  looking  for- 
ward. Do  you  propose  to  give  them  compen- 
sation? If  you  do,  you  will  place  a  load  upon 
the  treasury  that  will  make  it  stagger.  How 
many  districts  will  a  county  compose?  Some 
sixteen  or  eighteen,  I  suppose.  Tlie  improve- 
ment that  will  have  to  be  made,  according  to 
the  views  of  the  gentleman,  will  compel  them 
to'  put  their  hands  deeply  into  the  pockets  of  the 
people,  and  on  these  occasions,  all  these  little 
municipalities  are  to  be  represented;  and  how 
often  must  they  come  together?  If  a  road  is  re- 
quired to  be  opened,  you  must  call  them  to- 
gether. WTienever  an  appropriation  is  to  be 
made,  the  whole  of  them  must  come  in;  and  if 
it  becomes  necessary  to  hold  these  terms  four  or 
five  times  a  year,  and  give  them  two  dollars  a 
day,  the  expense  will  amount — as  vou  will 
find— to  Ibetween  $75,000  and  $100,000.  You 
cannot  get  men  to  do  business  unless  vou  pay 
them.  What  does  the  bill  provide?  'fhat  the 
legislature  shall  be  clothed  with  power  to  make 
such  change  as  the  people  may  hereafter  de- 
mand. This  is  the  power  I  am  willing  to  con- 
cede to  the  people.  I  wish  to  see  the  report 
stand  precisely  as  it  does,  and  if  the  people 
hereafter  demand  a  change,  the  legislature  will 
be  ready  and  willing  to  cany  it  out. 

What  is  the  objection  to  the  three  judges?  It 
is  that  a  large  power  will  be  vested  in  the  hands 
of  three  individuals.  But  in  whatmanuerare  they 
to  be  invested  with  this  power?  They  are  to  lie 
elected  by  the  people  of  the  county  at  large;  and 
they  wilT  therefore  represent  the  whole  county. 
But  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  (Mr  Turner,) 
says  it  is  necessary  to  have  them  represent  these 


704 


«listinct  muhloipalilies;  and  that  the  wants  of 
the  whole  community  will  by  that  means  be  best 
represented.  But  mark  my  words;  they  will 
come  up  with  narrow  and  selfish  feelings,  and 
when  appealed  to  for  an  appropriation  to  erect  a 
briage  aeross  a  stream ,  or  for  some  other  object 
in  which  a  portion  of  the  country  may  be  inter- 
ested; each  one  will  be  prepared  to  say,  it  shall 
not  be  granted,  because  my  particular  section  is 
not  to  be  benefited  by  it.  Hero  is  an  extreme 
power  to  be  exerted  upon  the  people  of  the 
county,  while  a  large  portion  of  them  have  had 
no  voice  in  the  election  of  those,  by  whose  action 
their  interests  are  to  be  affected.  Sir,  give  the 
power  to  tliree  judges.  They  will  give  their  at- 
tention to  the  interests  of  the  whole  county. 
They  will  discharge  their  duties  with  a  due  re- 
gard to  their  responsibility.  He  who  is  unwill- 
ing to  assume  responsibility,  is  unfit  to  hold 
any  public  office.  Give  us  three  judges,  and  my 
word  for  it,  the  country  will  be  satisfied. 

The  gentleman  from  Lewis,  (Mr.  Proctor,)  has 
offered  a  proposition,  to  which  I  have  not  much 
objection,  for  I  find  that  it  corresponds  almost 
entirely  with  my  own  views.  But,  it  appears  to 
me  that  the  report  of  the  committee,  as  it  stands, 
is  the  best  plan  that  we  can  adopt.  Since  it  was 
reported  by  the  committee,  I  have  communicated 
with  my  constituents,  and  they  have  expressed 
themselves  satisfied  with  it;  and  have  directed 
me,  as  far  as  practicable,  to  carry  it  out.  Hence 
I  am  inclined  to  sustain  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  shall  vote  for  almost  any 
proposition  that  may  be  submitted,  in  preference 
to  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Shelby,  (Mr. 
Johnston.)  I  believe  it  to  propose  the  worst 
court  we  could  adopt.  I  shall  offer  another 
amendment  if  his  shall  be  voted  down. 

Mr.  KELLY.  As  it  is  fashionable  .so  to  do 
here,  I  wish  to  define  my  position.  I  was  a 
member  of  both  the  county  court  committee,  and 
the  committee  of  thirty,  and  voted  against  al- 
most every  proposition  in  the  report;  and 
although  voted  down,  I  reserved  to  myself  the 
right  to  oppose  it  in  convention.  This  I  shall 
do  by  my  vote.' 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  am  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee on  county  courts,  and  as  such  voted  for 
the  substitute  proposed  by  tlie  gentleman  from 
Green,  (Mr.  Lisle,)  and  I  prefer  it  now.  I  am 
opposed  to  the  constitution  of  three  judges. 
The  suggestion  of  the  gentleman  from  Green  as 
to  the  expense  this  system  would  devolve  upon 
the  state,  led  me  to  reflect  somewhat  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  to  arrive  atthe  conclusion  that  it  would 
be  even  more  expensive  than  the  circuit  courts. 
The  country,  I  am  satisfied,  will  be  astounded 
and  dissatisfied  if  we  present  them  with  any 
system  of  that  kind.  Let  us  examine  this  mat- 
ter a  little.  The  circuit  court,  it  is  proposed,- 
shall  consist  of  twelve  judges,  and  if  the  legis- 
lature should  fix  their  salary  at  $1,600,  which  is 
here  suggested  as  a  minimum,  it  will  amount  to 
$19,900.  Add  to  that  the  salaries  of  twelve 
commonwealth's  attornies,  at  .$300  each,  and  it 
will  amount  to  $3,600.  This  would  make  the 
whole  cost  of  the  system  amount  to  $22,800. 
This  report  proposes  to  create  three  hundred 
new  and  salarted  oflScers,  in  the  shape  of  three 
county  court  judges  for  each  county.    Of  course 


if  they  are  to  be  men  qualified  and  learned  in 
the  law,  they  are  to  be  paid  for  their  services, 
and  if  they  are  not  to  be  such  men  what  will  the 
country  gain  by  the  change  in  the  system?  Can 
men  possessing  the  proper  qualifications,  and  to 
whom  the  people  would  be  willing  to  confide 
the  whole  taxing  and  appropriating  power  of 
the  county,  be  secured  for  less  than  $50  per  an- 
num? I  think  myself  they  cannot  be  procured 
at  less  than  $100.  But  take  them  at  $50  each, 
and  three  hundred  of  them  Avould  amount  to 
$15,000.  Then  there  are  100  county  court  attor- 
nies to  be  provided  for.  Allowing  for  their  ser- 
vices $100  each,  which  I  think  is  as  little  as  they 
can  be  obtained  for,  and  you  have  an  additional 
item  of  $10,000.  The  cost  of  the  system  then 
would  be  $25,000  per  annum,  exceeding  the 
whole  cliarge  and  expense  of  the  circuit  court 
system.  I  do  not  believe  the  people  are  prepar- 
ed for  such  a  proposition.  The  complaint 
against  these  courts  grows  out  of  the  manner  of 
their  apppointment,  and  the  neglect  and  derelic- 
tion of  duty  consequent  upon  its  being  in  fact  a 
self-constituted  tribunal.  Tlie  people,  at  least 
in  my  county,  would  be  satisfied  with  some  sys- 
tem under  which  the  counties  would  be  divided 
into  districts,  and  the  magistrates  elected  for  a 
limited  period  of  time.  Another  objection  I 
have,  is  to  tiie  vesting  of  the  power  of  county 
taxation  and  appropriation  in  a  court  constitu- 
ted as  this  report  provides.  These  three  judges 
would  generally  be  three  young  lawyers  living 
about  the  town,  and  but  little  conversant  with 
the  general  interests  of  the  county.  Would  this 
be  a  safer  depository  of  this  power  of  taxation 
and  appropriation  than  a  tribunal  composed  of 
men  selected  in  the  several  neighborhoods,  and 
understanding  and  representing  fully  the  inter- 
ests of  each  district?  In  my  judgment  it  would 
not.  I  am  therefore  against  the  three  judges,  and 
shall  vote  for  the  substitute  of  the  gentleman 
from  Green.  If,  however,  that  substitute  shall 
fail,  then  I  shall  go  for  the  smallest  number  of 
judges  in  addition  to  the  magistracy. 

Mr.  MAYES.  If  any  department  of  our  gov- 
ernment has  met  the  unqualified  condemnation 
of  the  country  it  has  been  the  existing  system  of 
county  courts,  and  the  question  now  is  how  shall 
it  be  changed.  The  gentleman  from  Bourbon 
desires  to  leave  it  to  the  legislature  to  establish 
a  system.  This  is  the  very  thing  to  which  the 
people  object,  at  least  in  my  section  of  the  coun- 
try. They  desire  that  the  convention  shall  pro- 
vide in  the  constitution  for  a  system,  and  the 
plan  reported  by  the  committee  is  very  much  in 
accordance  with  that  discussed  and  aesired  by 
them.  The  present  constitution,  in  declaring 
that  there  shall  be  established  in  each  county  a 
county  court,  gave  the  legislature  full  power  over 
this  subject,  and  yet  for  fifty  years  they  have  not 
thought  proper  to  change  or  mould  the  court  so 
as  to  conform  to  the  public  desire.  And  yet  all 
admit  that  the  system  as  it  exits  has  been  con- 
demned by  the  people,  and  a  change  demanded. 
As  far  as  the  expense  of  the  system  proposed  by 
the  committee  is  concerned,  I  suppose  each 
would  gladly  pay  theexpense  requisite  to  secure 
a  court  in  which  they  might  repose  full  confi- 
dence. The  matter  of  compensation  is  very 
properly  left  to  the  legislature.  Men  of  sound 
sense  and  integrity,  I  suppose,  could  be  secured 


703 


at  a  per  dieiu   of  two   dollars.     Supposing  the ;  home.     I  coueeJe  that  there   has  been  a  great 

„„„-^+^  u„ij  .„.,.i „_   -.  ^.„  u,  _i-i.    jjg^i  Qj-  eomplaint  among  the  people  in  regard 

to  the  county  court,  and  though  I  have  been  of 
it,  I  have  ever  regarded  it  as  a  rotten  concern, 
^y)lich  ought  to  be  reformed.  The  great  objec' 
tion,  however,  has  been  to  the  manner  of  its  ap- 
pointment, and  also  of  its  exercise  of  its  own 
appointing  power.  They  appointed  men  of  their 
own  political  views,  and  1  have  known  a  coun- 
ty  not  far  from  where  I  live,  where,  with  very 
few  exceptions,  every  magistrate  had  a  son  or  a 
son-in-law  ridin?  under  him.  In  that  case,  if  a 
constable  should  not  pay  over,  and  a  motion 
should  be  made  against  him,  it  would  be  the  fa- 
ther who  decides  upon  his  son.  This  is  one  of 
the  greatest  objections  to  the  system,  and  which 
the  people  desire  to  see  remedied.  The  objec- 
tion urged  by  gentlemen  in  regard  to  the  fre- 
quencvof  appeals  I  think  is  not  well  founded. 
At  all  events  it  will  applv  with  equal  force  to 
the  three  judges  proposed,  for  they  certainly 
will  not  be  so  much  abler  and  wiser  than  tlie 
present  court,  that  their  decisions  will  never  be 
appealed  from.  They  were  not  to  receive  any 
more  compensation  than  the  present  magistrate!*; 


court  to  hold  twelve  terms  a  year,  ana  to  be  able 
to  get  through  with  them,  as  is  the  case  in  my 
county,  with  a  population  of  seventeen  hundred, 
in  a  day  or  two,  the  cost  would  be  only  about 
$30  or  $40  per  year  for  the  judges.  But",  it  was 
said  that  county  attornies  were  to  cost  f  100  per 
year.  Not  so,  their  compensation  would  be  left 
to  be  regulated  by  law,  as  is  the  case  at  present, 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  What  is  the  usual  compen- 
sation allow^edthem? 

Mr.  MAYES.  In  my  county  it  is  $60,  and 
in  others  it  is  higher  and  lower.  So  under  this 
report,  the  county  court  eis  the  representatives  of 
the  people,  coulcl  allow  the  attorney  only  ten 
dollars,  if  they  thought  that  was  all  his  .services 
deserved.  How  would  it  happen,  as  the  gentle- 
man seems  to  apprehend  that  all  these  judges 
would  be  selected  from  men  in  the  towns?  The 
selection  has  to  be  mttde  by  the  free  voice  and 
votes  of  the  people  of  the  whole  county,  and 
they  would  certainly  understand  their  own  in- 
terests sufficiently  to  guard  against  the  contin- 
gency the  gentleman  predicts.  Satisfied  that 
the  people  never  will  be  satisfied  with  a  consti- 


tution continuing  the  present  system  of  county  I  and  I  know  from  experience  that  the  fees  they 


receive  are   far  from  fairly  compensating  them. 
They  do  a  great  deal   of  labor,  nearly  half  of 
which  they  do  not  receive   any  compensation 
for.    I  know  of  a  case  which  eame  before  me, 
where  I  had  to  write  a  warrant,  in  the  first  in- 
stance, and  sixteen  summonses,  and  then  had  to 
continue  the  case,  and  then  wrote  sixteen  or  sev- 
opposite  of  each  other.  "  It  ^as  been  urged  iere, !  enteen    more    subpcenas.     Then    I   had    to    sit 
as  one  objectioji,  that  the  court  thus  constituted,  i  Immped  up  and  listen  while  four  or  five  lawyers 
would  repre.sent  conflicting  interests  and  render    P^**"  t^i*^  cause,  and   after  it  was   decided,  to 


courts,  and  that  if  left  to  the  legislature  the  de 
sired  reforms  will  never  be  obtained,  and  be- 
lieving the  plan  reported  by  the  committee  to 
meet  the  approbation  of  those  I  represent,  I 
shall  therefore  give  it  my  support. 

Mr.  LISLE.     Jfy  proposition  has  been  oppo- 
sed in  the  debate  here,  by  arguments  directly  the 


it  difficidt  to  arrive  at  correct  conclusions.  An- 
other objection  urged  is,  that  in  some  neighbor- 
hoods a  man  could  not  be  obtained  qualified  for 
the  magistracy.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any 
such  neighborhood  in  any  county.  Another 
gentleman  says  that  under  the  committee's  sys- 
tem, the  cost  will  be  but  forty  dollars  a  year. ' 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  said  I  supposed  the  judges 
would  probably  be  allowed  a  per  diem  of  two 
dollars. 

Mr.  LISLE.  Xow^  I  want  to  know  upon  what 
principle  it  is  expected  to  get  men  better  quali- 
fied at  that  compensation,  than  are  the  present 
justices  of  the  peace?  Their  fees  would  amount 
to  that  much.  I  would  give  the  legislature  the 
power  to  increase  the  fees  of  the  justices;  to  ex- 
empt them  from  working  on  roads,  and  from 
jury  duty,  (fee,  in  order  to  compensate  them  for 
the  loss  of  the  sheriffalty.  But  if  we  take  from 
them  the  right  of  hohiing  a  court,  it  will  de- 
tract from  their  dignity  and  destroy  their  char- 
acter; and  to  do  this  merely  to  create  a  new  set 
of  officers,  it  seems  to  me  is  entirely  uncalled 
for.  ^ 

Mr.  HAMILTON.  It  seems  to  be  a  settled 
question  that  the  report  of  thi.s  great  joint  com- 
mittee is  to  be  sustained  in  every  particular,  and 
as  they  have  said  that  we  shall  nave  three  coun- 
ty juciges,  perhaps  it  is  useless  to  contend 
against  it.  I  should  have  heen  afraid  to  say  a 
■word  against  it,  had  not  its  members  differed 
among  themselves  on  the  subject.  It  is  a  great 
pity  perhaps  that  the  grand  committee  had  not 
Deen  charged  with  tne  duty  of  framing  the 
vhole  constitution,  and  the  balance  of  us  gone 
89 


write  some  ten  or  fifteen  certificates.  If  a  clerk 
had  had  the  thing  to  do,  it  would  have  amoun- 
ted to  at  least  fifteen  or  twenty  dollars,  and  my 
fees  were  only  some  twelve  and  a  half  cents. 
(Laughter.)  Pay  the  magistrates  what  is  rea- 
sonable for  their  services,  and  tliey  will  attend 
to  the  county  court.  As  it  is  now,  magistrates 
only  attend  there  who  may  be  brought  to  town 
in  discharge  of  their  own  business,  and  yet  the 
courts  were  generally  very  well  attended  to.  But 
gentlemen  say  that  they  want  qualified  men,  and 
how  do  they  expect  to  get  them?  They  say  by 
the  election  of  these  judges  by  the  people!  Are 
not  the  magistrates  also  to  be  elected  by  the 
people,  and  will  not  the  chances  for  getting 
good  men  be  as  strong  in  the  one  case  as  in  the 
other?  The  gentleman  from  Lewis,  (Mr.  Proc- 
tor,) says  his  county  court  decided  that  a  man 
had  no  right  to  take  an  appeal  under  five  pounds. 
I  did  not  think  there  was  a  county  court  in  Ken- 
tucky, where  the  magistrates  and  the  lawyers 
about  it,  did  not  know  the  difference  between 
twenty  five  shillings  and  five  pounds,  and  if 
such  a  county  does  exist,  I  say  it  becomes  a 
question  whether  it  ought  not  to  be  dissolved, 
and  thrown  back  upon  its  original  elements. 
(Laughter.)  The  gentleman  from  Bracken,  (Mr. 
W.  C.  Marshall,)  said  that  the  magistrates  were 
too  much  under  the  influence  of  the  people,  and 
therefore  he  wanted  these  three  judges  to  come 
in,  like  so  many  Julius  Caesars,  to  tax  the  peo- 
ple whether  they  wanted  it  or  not.  I  believe 
there  is  no  necessity  for  the  three,  and  that  the 
people  will  be  satisfied  with  the  election  of  ma- 
gistrates by  districts,  who  shall  form  the  county 


700 


court,  and  will  not  tax  the  people  contraiy  to 
their  will. 

,  The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment of  Mr.  PROCTOR,  and  it  was  rejected. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  question 
then  to  be  on  the  proposition  of  Mr.  G. W .  JO?IN- 
STON,  to  strike  out  the  original  section,  and  sub- 
stitute his  amendment  in  lieu  thereof. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  move  to  strike  out  the  pro- 
vision for  two  justices  in  the  amendment.  My 
object  is  to  make  it  conform  to  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner.) 
I  think  there  is  no  necessity  for  the  justices  to  be 
associated  with  the  judges,  except  in  cases  where 
they  sit  on  questions  of  claims  and  roads. 

The  amendment  of  Mr.  GHOLSON  was  reject- 
ed. 

.  kr,  "W.  C.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  on  Mr.  G.W.JOHSTON'S amendment. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  asked  for  a  division 
of  the  question,  so  that  the  vote  could  be  taken 
first  on  striking  out. 

The  question  being  then  taken,  the  convention 
agreed  to  strike  out — yeas  56,  nays  36,  as  follows: 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad- 
ley, Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  Chenault,  Jas. 
S.  Crisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James 
Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly. 
James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, Nathan  McClure,  David  MeriAvether, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh 
Newell,  Johnson  Price,  JohnT.  Robinson,  Thos. 
Roekhold,  JohnT.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.Spalding, 
.  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Robert  N. 
Wickliflfe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson 
—56. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Cowper,  Archibald 
Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  P2d- 
wards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincents.  Hay,  Mark  E.Huston,  Thomas  James, 
Willis  B.Machen,  William  C.  Marshall,  Richard 
L.  Mayes,  John  H.  NcHenry,  William  D.  Mitch- 
i«U,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Henry  B. 
tPoUard,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,' Ira 
Boot,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael 
.L.  Stoner,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J  Wright 
— 36. 

ft  Mr.  TURNER.  I  offer  my  proposition  aa  a 
'substitute  for  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Shel- 
by. I  suppose  that  those  wlio  suslained  the  re- 
port will  now  go  for  rtiy  proposition  as  being 
nearer  to  it  than  any  tliat  has  been  proposed. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  As  one  of  those  who 
ifcitained  the  report,  r  shall  be  prepared  to  rote 
Ibir'itll,  if  I  caunot  get  the  thlee  judges. 

Mr.  MACHEN.     Does  the  gentleman  propose 


in  his  amendment  to  make  it  imperative  on  the 
legislature  to  require  the  magistrates  to  come  in? 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  desire  that  the  direction 
shall  be  imperative  on  the  legislature  to  pre- 
scribe it.  I  should  like  to  have  the  support  of 
the  gentleman  from  Bracken,  (Mr.  W.  G.  Mar- 
shall,) but  at  any  rate,  unless  I  am  mistaken, 
there  will  be  a  majority  for  the  proposition  with- 
out his  vote. 

Mr.  W.  0.  MARSHALL.  It  will  not  be  the 
first  time  that  the  gentleman  has  been  mistaken 
in  his  life.  Many  of  his  propositions  have  been 
rejected  here,  of  course  not  because  they  were 
wrong,  but  because  the  obtuseness  of  the  house 
was  too  great  to  comprehend  their  beauties.  This 
one  judge  .system,  this  lawyer  operation,  this 
business  of  fixing  up  little  pettifoggers  to  act  as 
a  court,  seems  to  be  a  favorite  notion  of  the  gen- 
tleman, but  I  can  tell  him  that  if  it  goes  forth  to 
the  people  as  the  concoction  of  the  brain  of  one 
of  the  most  distinguished  lawyers  in  the  state, 
they  will  be  very  apt  to  regard  it  as  a  lawyer 
project,  and  to  look  upon  it  Avith  abhorrence.  I 
believed  the  plan  of  three  judges  would  give 
more  satisfaction  to  the  people  and  the  better 
accord  with  their  views.  It  having  been  re- 
jected, I  prefer  to  let  all  the  magistrates  come  in, 
and  shall  vote  against  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  There  are  insuperable  diffi- 
culties which  present  themselves  to  my  mind  as 
likely  to  arise  under  the  propositions  either  of 
the  gentleman  from  Green  or  Madison.  We  are 
taking  away  from  the  magistracy  the  only  stim- 
ulus we  have  heretofore  presented  to  them  to 
come  on  the  county  court  bench.  There  are 
very  few  men  so  devoted  to  their  country  as  to  be 
utterly  devoid  of  selfishness.  Men  will  not 
work  efficiently  in  any  department  of  govern- 
ment without  being  paid  for  it.  It  is  proposed 
now  to  require  the  magistrates  to  act  in  the  court 
when  claims  are  disposed  of,  and  I  ask  you,  by 
what  power  you  will  bring  them  to  the  bench? 
Can  you  by  any  other  than  that  of  remuneration? 
I  believe  nothing  less  will  draw  them  to  the 
bench.  No  man  will  otherwise  assume  the  great 
responsibility  of  levying  and  appropriating  the 
funds  of  the  county.  If  we  direct  the  legisla- 
ture to  require  a  man  to  come  on  the  bench,  and 
he  refuses,  they  will  have  no  power  to  compel 
him.  Remuneration  for  his  services  is  the  only 
inducement  that  will  secure  him.  Is  the  court, 
then,  in  such  a  case,  not  to  be  holden  at  all?  It 
does  .>^eera  to  me,  that  the  proposition  will  result 
in  that.  I  am  willing  to  go  so  far  as  to  say,  that 
the  legislature  may  have  the  power  to  authorize 
a  majority  of  the  magistracy  to  sit  on  the  bench, 
but  I  am  opposed  to  making  it  imperative  on 
them.  I  never  heard,  during  the  canvass,  a  dis- 
senting voice  to  the  proposition  of  establishing 
the  court  of  three  judges  of  some  character,  and 
since  the  report  of  the  committee  has  been  in- 
troduced, I  have  heard  only  the  highest  appro- 
bation awarded  to  it  by  my  people.  I  certainly 
prefer  it  to  any  that  has  been  introduced  here. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE.  As  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee, I  took  pains,  after  the  report  was  intro- 
duced, to  ascertain  the  public  feeling  in  my  own 
county  in  regard  to  it,  and  I  find  it  meet^  with 
the  unqualified  approbation  of  my  constituent*. 
And  although  I  am  not  a  lav'yer,  and  conse- 


707 


quently  do  not  know  as  much  about  what  should 
be  its  practical  workings,  perhaps,  as  some  other 
gontlemen,  vet  it  has'bfen  a  favorite  scheme 
with  me.  it  is  said,  in  making  this  constitution, 
we  should  be  governed  by  a  spirit  of  compro- 
mise upon  these  numerous  questions  of  detail 
where  a  difference  of  opinion  exists.  To  that 
spirit  I  have  endeavored  to  conform,  and  I  have 
compromised  one  thing  after  another  until  now 
nearly  every  original  view  1  had  has  been  aban- 
doned. I  fiave  met  jnembers  fairly  in  this  mat- 
ter, and  yet  I  have  always  found  myself  in  a 
minority.  Be  it  so.  I  had  hoped,  however,  that 
the  report  of  the  committee,  meeting  the  appro- 
bation of  the  people  as  it  has.  would  have  re- 
ceived also  the  approbation  of  the  convention. 
I  find  it  has  not,  and  asthe  next  best  proposition 
I  shall  go  for  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon (Mr  Davis.)  It  seems  to  me  a  very  serious 
matter  to  impose  the  county  business  upon  one 
individual.  It  was  suggested  to  the  committee, 
and  opposed  on  the  very  grounds  stated  by  one 
gentleman  (Mr.  Bradley)  here,  that  the  selection 
would  be  probably  that  of  alawyer  residing  at  the 
county  seat  who  could  know  but  very  little,  and 
might  care  less,  about  the  interests  of  the  whole 
people  of  the  county.  I  therefore  proposed  to 
add  two  other  magistrates  to  the  court,  who  could 
understand  and  represent  the  farming  interests. 
This  having  been  rejected,  I  now  prefer  leaving 
the  whole  subject  to  the  legislature,  believing 
that  they  will,  in  their  wisdom,  devise  some 
system  by  which  all  the  various  interests  of  the 
country  will  be  promoted. 

Mr.  CHRISMAX.  By  the  rejection  of  this 
first  section,  I  deem  the  whole  report  to  have 
been  rejected.  This  is  an  important  subject, 
upon  which  due  time  should  be  had  for  consid- 
eration, and  I  therefore  move  an  adjournment. 

The  motion  was  negatived. 

Mr.  NESBITT.  The  vote  just  given  to 
strike  out  the  first  section,  makes  it  necessarj'  for 
some  of  us  to  define  our  position  in  regard  to 
the  report.  It  will  be  recollected  that  in  the 
early  part  of  the  session  I  oflFered  a  resolution 
providing  for  a  single  probate  judge.  It  was  the 
mere  beginning,  so  far  as  I  was  concerned,  of  a 
svstem.  Upon  that  subject  I  appeared  before 
the  committee,  and  introduced  such  arguments 
as  I  was  then  prepared  with,  but  ihey  disagreed 
with  me, and  reported  three  judges  for  the  court. 
Then  the  whole  matter  being  referred  to  the 
joint  committee,  it  gave  me  some  time  to  send 
the  report  to  my  county,  and  write  letters  to  di- 
vers individuals  for  their  opinions  upon  it.  In 
return  I  have  received  the  strongest  assurances 
that  the  report  of  the  committee  is  universally 
approved.  In  view  of  that  fact,  although  it  is 
in  direct  conflict  with  the  resolution  I  offered,  I 
voted  against  striking  out.  I  prefer,  and  would 
risk  more  to  carry  out  the  will  of  the  people  I 
represent,  than  ray  own  views,  let  them  be  what 
they  might.  Their  opinions  have  had  a  fair  test 
before  the  convention,  and  this  body  has  decided 
against  them.  What  will  be  the  action  hereaf- 
ter, I  cannot  pretend  to  say,  but  after  having 
voted  once  to  carry  into  effect  the  will  of  my 
people  on  the  subject,  I  am  now  left  to  act  for 
myself,  and  I  shall  now  fall  back  upon  my  origi- 
nal proposition,  and  go  for  one  judge,  giving  the 
pow«r  to  the  legislature  to  call  other  justices  on 


to  the  bench  at  any  time  they  may  see  propcf , 
but  preferring  to  have  it  imperative  wh«n  the 
court  is  considering  claims. 

EVENING   SES8I0.V. 
LEGISL.\TIVE    EXPENSES. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  that  he  had 
been  furnished  by  the  Second  Auditor  with  a 
table  of  the  expenses  of  the  legislature  for  a 
series  of  years,  in  compliance  with  a  resolution 
heretofore  adopted,  on  the  motion  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Bullitt,  (Mr.  Thompson),  which 
be  now  presented  to  the  convention. 

COUNTT   COURTS. 

The  convention  then  resumed  the  coiisidera-' 
tion  of  the  report  on  county  courts.  ' 

Mr.  TURNER  said  he  had  been  authorized  by 
the  gentleman  from  Shelby,  to  withdraw  that 
gentleman's  amendment,  which  was  pending 
when  the  convention  took  a  recess,  and  also  de- 
sired to  withdraw  his  own  proposition,  and  to 
offer  a  proposition  as  a  compromise,  which  met 
the  approbation  of  himself,  the  gentleman  from 
Shelby,  (Mr.  G.  W.  Johnston,)  the  gentleman 
from  "Jcffer&ou,  (Mr.  Meriwether,)  and  some 
others.    It  was  as  follows: 

"  And  all  tlie  justices  of  the  peace  in  each 
county:  Provided,  That  the  general  assembly 
shall  have  the  power,  from  time  to  time,  to  pro- 
vide by  law,  what  part  of  the  business  of  said 
court  shall  be  transacted  by  the  presiding  judge, 
and  what  portion  by  said  judge  and  one  or  more 
of  the  justices  of  the  peace,  and  what  justice 
shall  act  as  presiding  judge  during  a  vacancy  in 
that  office,  or  in  the  absence  of  the  presiding 
judge." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  reminded  the  conven- 
tion of  the  position  of  the  question,  a  vote  har-^ 
iug  been  taken  on  striking  out,  and  hence  he 
questioned  the  propriety  of  the  course  suggested. 

The  PRESIDENT  stated  that  tlie  substitution 
could  be  made  with  the  general  assent  of  the 
convention. 

Objections  were  made. 

Mr.  JOHNSTON  enquired  if  he  could  not  ac- 
cept that  proposition  for  the  one  which  he  had 
before  submitted. 

The  PRESIDENT  replied  that  he  could  not 
without  general  consent,  inasmuch  as  his  propo- 
sition was  in  possession  of  the  convention,  and 
had  been  voted  upon.  If.  however,  it  was  ce- 
sired,  he  would  put  the  question  to  the  conven- 
tion, on  granting  leave. 

Mr.  GRAY  said,  he  desired  to  vote  on  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison.  If 
that  gentleman  had  withdrawn  it  he  would 
himself  again  present  it  to  the  convention,  for  it 
came  up  to  what  he  thought  a  county  court 
should  be. 

Mr.  TURNER  said  he  preferred  his  own  to 
any  other  proposition,  but  still  it  would  be  found 
necessanr  to  make  concessions  all  around. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  not 
take  the  expression  he  has  received  from  a  few 
members  around  him.  as  the  full  sense  of  this 
house,  upon  a  question  of  this  character.  I  do 
not  think  we  ought  to  proceed  in  this  manner, 
for  it  is  not  calculated  to  accelerate  our  progress. 
It  is  easy  to  take  a  vote  upon  the  proposition;  it 
will  not' take  us  long;  and  if  the  majority  favor 


70« 


it  let  us  adopt  it,  but  if  Lliej^  vote  against  it, 
then  we  can  take  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison  and  take  the  sense  of  the 
convention.     In  ray  opinion  it  comes  up  to  the 
manner  in  wliich  wo  are  called  upon,  as  I  believe, 
by  the  people,  to  establish  the  county  court.     It 
is  easier  to  pay  one  judge  than  three,  and  one 
can  do  all  the  business  that  is  assigned  him  by 
the  amendment  wliich  the  gentleman  offered  be- 
fore the  convention  took  a  recess.     What  is  the 
business  he  Avill  have  to  transact?     To  probate 
wills,  to  manage  estates,  to  appoint  guardians, 
and  all  matters  of  this  sort,  wliich  are  now  en- 
trusted to  the  county  court;  and  from  its  decisions 
we  have  a  right  to  appeal  to  the  circuit  court,  and 
there  one  judge  decides.     Why  cannot  one  judge 
also  decide  in   a  county  court"?     And  Avhy  not 
one  man  as  Avell  as  three?     Indeed,  it  is  admit- 
ted that  one  able  and  intelligent  man  will  do 
equally    as    well    as    three,     in    the    decision 
and  settlement    of    private    rights    in    dispute 
between  individuals  and  the  community.     I  ask 
if  we  cannot  afford  to  pay  one  man  better  than 
three?     Now   this  is  a  matter,  it  strikes  me,  in 
which  the  community  at  large  have  an  interest, 
especially  in  all  that  relates  to  the  imposition  of 
taxes,  the    laying  of    levies,  the    changing   of 
roads,  the  erection  of  bridges,  and  all  expenses 
which -the  people  of  the  county  will  have  to  de- 
fray.    The  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison  provides  that  a  majority  of  the  magis- 
trates, who  .are  elected,  shall  be  called  up  arid 
consulted  on  all  such  subjects  in  connection  with 
the  judge  elected  by  the  people  at  large.     JN'ow, 
does  that  not  give  the  county   an  opportunity 
of  being  fairly  represented   as  the  people  are 
represented  in  the  legislature,  when  they  impose 
taxes  on  the  state  at  large  ?    But  the  gentleman 
objects  that  some  of  the  divisions  are  larger  than 
others,  and  says  there  is  something  unequal  in  it. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  objection;  it  makes  no 
more  discrimination  than  in  the  legislature.     All 
parts  of  the  county  are  represented,  and  we  do 
not  leave  it  to  one  man  to  say  what  the  balance 
shall  do.     And  if  they  cannot  get  a  majority,  I 
take  it  for  granted  it  ought  not  to  be  pjissed.     It 
is  as  fair  a  representation  as  you  can  get  in  any 
other  way.     I  think  if  the  juages  are  elected  the 
county  will  be  better  represented,  if  tliose  who 
lay  the  levy  are  from  the  county  at  large.    Here 
we  divide  it  into  sections,  and  each  section  has 
its  voice  and  is  heard. 

Now,  for  these  reasons,  I  think  that  would  be 
the  best  plan.  But  gentlemen  say,  if  we  adopt 
the  one  judge  plan,  that  it  is  "a  lawyer  project." 
That  is  an  extraordinary  way  of  killing  off  a 
proposition,  because  if  you  u.se  the  word  lawyer 
among  the  people,  they  will  think  it  is  all 
wrong.  But  I  do  not  think  we  should  be  fright- 
ened from  a  good  project  because  a  lawyer  hap- 
pened to  introduce  it;  almost  all  the  amend- 
ments introdced  have  been  by  lawyers.  I  am 
opposed  to  killing  off  a  project  in  this  manner, 
if  there  be  merit  in  it.  If  it  be  right,  equal  and 
just,  I  will  support  it  with  as  much  zeal  and 
sincerity,  whether  it  comes  from  a  lawyer,  or  a 
farmer,  or  a  man  of  any  other  vocation.  Does 
not  the  report  of  the  committee  provide  the 
same  Uiing,  that  there  shall  be  a  presiding  judge? 
Y«i,  the  people  there  are  to  elect  a  lawyer.  Is 
it  not  as  much  of  a  lawyer  project,  an  if  one 


judge  and  two  associate  judges  were  to  sit  on  the 
oench?  The  gentleman  says  it  is  necessarv  that 
a  man   should  have  some  legal  abilitv.     If  you 

Eut  two  fanners,  or  men  of  no  legal  ability  on  the 
ench,  do  they  constitute  an  efficient  court?  I 
suppose  the  two  farmers  are  to  sit  and  "guess," 
and  if  they  "guess"  wrong,  why  the  third  judge, 
if  he  is  to  be  a  lawyer,  would  be  overruled  in  ■ 
his  decision.  This  is  an  objection,  I  think,  to 
these  two  associates.  The  people  elect  whom 
they  please.  I  care  not  whether  he  be  a  lawyer 
or  a  farmer,  I  believe  they  will  elect  a  man  who 
is  better  qualified  to  discharge  the  duties  of  a 
judge  than   if  three   men  were  to   preside,  as  is 

Eroposed.  You  can  pay  a  competent  man  much 
etter,  if  he  is  able  to  do  all  the  duties,  than  you 
can  three  men,  in  proportion  to  their  respective 
services.  Thus  you  will  save  the  expense  in- 
curred by  employing  two  associate  judges,  and 
the  business  of  the  court  will  be  infinitely  bet- 
ter performed.  If  not,  why  do  not  gentlemen 
propose  to  put  two  associates  with  the  circuit 
judge?  Because  it  is  the  same  kind  of  busi- 
ness, these  judges  are  called  upon  to  transact. 
On  all  subjects  you  can  take  an  appeal  from 
the  circuit  court.  In  all  matters  that  concern 
the  counties  at  large,  as  the  laying  of  levies, 
and  the  opening  of  roads.  I  think  it  would  be 
better  to  leave  it  to  the  magistrates.  .  Let  it  be 
designated  on  what  terras  they  shall  come. — 
That,  however,  is  a  subject  for  legislation.  You 
can  pay  them  by  the  day  to  do  the  business.  It 
will  oidy  take  them  a  day  or  two.  The  gentle- 
man from  Caldwell  savs  you  have  no  means  of 
bringing  them  up.  \^'e  have  the  same  power 
to  bring  up  all,  that  you  have  to  bring  up  the 
presiding  judge,  and  his  two  associates.  If  you 
are  going  to  pay  him,  you  will  pay  them.  They 
will  come  for  one  dollar  a  day,  and  we  can  im- 
pose penalties  for  failing  to  do  it.  We  have  re- 
quired the  county  court  to  do  this  business  with- 
out compensation.  It  seems  to  me  we  can  have 
no  difficulty  in  it.  The  plan  proposed  by  the 
gentleman  from  Madison  is  the  cheapest,  the  best, 
and  the  most  certain  and  safe,  and  will  meet 
with  the  most  favor  among  the  people.  If  you 
do  not  choose  to  adopt  it,  I  will  agree  to  the 
one  the  chairman  of  the  committee  has  pro- 
posed. But  I  think  we  had  better  fix  it  with 
one  judge,  to  determine  all  these  matters.  We 
must  acknowledge  he  is  as  competent  to  do  it, 
as  with  two  associates.  We  can  leave  the  la}'- 
ing  of  the  levy  and  taxation  to  the  justices  of 
the  peace. 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  report  of  the 
committee,  and  it  strikes  me,  if  the  friends  of 
that  report  will  hold  to  that  a  little,  tlie  gentle- 
men who  have  presented  various  propositions, 
will  finally  abandon  them,  and  agree  on  the  re- 
port of  tins  committee.  The  project  of  electing 
one  judge  is  spoken  of,  and  of^  bringing  up  the 
old  system  of  the  county  court,  which  caused 
the  magistrates  once  in  a  month  to  come  up  to 
the  county  seat.  If  there  is  anv  one  part  ot  the 
old  order  of  things  objectionable  in  my  county 
it  is  the  county  court  system.  Not  only  the 
number  of  the  county  court.s,  but  the  manner  of 
appointment,  and  the  length  of  time  they  were 
held  were  strong  objections  to  it.  If  the  people 
imagine  that  the  old  form  or  shape  of  the  court; 
is  again  to  exist  in  my  county,  it  will  induce 


709 


many  to  vote  against  the  constitution.  On  what 
ground  is  it  that  we  shall  resort  partially  to  the 
old  system  ?  Is  it  on  the  score  of  economy  '! 
Let  us  see  how  it  will  stand. 

Is  it  to  be  supposed  the  magistrates  will  come 
up  and  hold  courts,   and   transact  business   for' 
the  county  without  pay  ?     That  they  will  be   so  ' 
generous  as  to  give  their  services   without  any  i 
compensation  V     Why  was  it,  tliat  under  the  old  j 
system,  men  of  ordinary  intelligence  could   be  ! 
itiduced  to  ride  up  to   the  county  seat  in   heat  | 
and  cold,  summer  and  winter,  in   dry   and  wet 
weather,  without  compensation  ?  Tt  was  because 
they  held  on  to  the  oflice  with  the  hope   of  one 
day  becoming  sheriff.     That  feature  of  the  sys- 
tem will  be  cut  off.     Suppose  the  favorite  prop- 
osition of  some  gentlemen  succeeds,  and  we  in- 
corporate in  the  constitution  a  provision,  which  ! 
requires  twelve  or  fifteen  magistrates  to  come  up  I 
periodically,    to    transact  the  business  of    the  ' 
county.     If  they  are   paid   one  dollar  per  day 
and  meet  one  day  in  a  month,  there  will  be  an 
annual  expense  to  the  state  of  $14,400.  Suppose 
we  adopt  the  report   of  the   committee  and   ap- 
point three  persons  imder  the  dignified  term   of 
judges,  giving  to  the  presiding  judge,  and   asso- 
ciate judges  two  dollars  per  day  ;  we  shall  there- 
by save  to  the   state,  $7,200   annually,   and  do 
away  with  the   prejudice   w-hicli  has  heretofore 
existed  against  the  county  court. 

It  has  not  been  the  court  of  appeals  nor  the 
circuit  court,  which  has  induced  the  people  to 
rise  en  masse  and  call  a  convention.  It  has  been 
the  court  before  their  eyes,  the  ignorance  of 
the  magistracy,  and  the  tenure  bv  which  they 
held  their  office.  It  has  been  tlieir  constables 
and  other  officers  of  the  county,  and  not  the 
higher  officers  about  whom  the  people  knew  lit- 
tle, and  cared  less. 

If  we  wish  to  add  strength  to  this  new  con- 
stitution, we  must  Set  about  suiting  it  to  the 
prejudices  of  the  people  at  home,  and  on  the 
county  court  rests  much  with  respect  to  the  fa- 
vor with  which  the  new  constitution  will  be  re- 
ceived. If  gentlemen  wish  to  save  money,  the 
adoption  of  the  report  of  the  committee  will  be 
the  means  of  doing  it,  as  contrasted  with  the 
other  proposition  ;  for  in  the  one  case  we  pro- 
pose to  pay  three  judges  instead  of  twelve. 

It  has  been  .said,  that  if  three  judges  are  plac- 
ed on  the  bench,  certain  sections  of  the  county 
may  be  overlooked.  In  order  to  obviate  that, 
the  county  may  be  districted,  and  the  judge  may 
be  instructed  by  the  people  to  execute  tlieir 
wishes.  The  original  convention  men,  when 
they  raised  their  voice  for  the  measure,  attacked 
most  zealously  the  county  court,  and  from  this 
subject  drew  their  weapons  and  their  aiiiinuni- 
tion,  and  if  it  is  suffered  to  appear  again  with 
some  of  the  former  obnoxious  features  it  will 
destroy  the  constitution. 

There  is  another  reason  why  the  long  courts 
should  not  be  permitted  to  appear  again.  Where 
there  are  many  men  engaged  in  the  same  cases, 
every  man  is  disposed  to  throw  the  responsibili- 
ty on  his  neighbor.  The  act  which  the  people 
condemn,  caimotbe  settled  and  fixed  on  any  one 
in  particular.  Each  fixes  it  on  his  neiglibor; 
but  if  there  are  three  only  vou  can  tell  who  is 
responsible,  and  there  will  be  a  unity  of  action, 


and  ihe  people  will  be  better  satisfied,  for  their 
business  will  be  better  done. 

I  sav  then  to  the  friends  of  the  report  of  the 
committee  of  thirty,  that  after  alittle  more  breath 
has  been  spent,  they  will  be  able  to  carry  it;  be- 
cause I  believe  the  great  body  of  the  delegates 
know  it  is  nearest  the  thing  which  the  people 
want. 

Mr.  G.  W.  JOHNSTON.  I  have  been  some- 
what surpri.sed  at  the  debate  on  this  report. 
Gentlemen  seem,  in  their  anxiety  to  make  a 
county  court,  to  have  forgotten  that  we  are  to 
have  a  body  of  magistracy,  to  wlioin  is  to  be 
given  an  important  jurisdiction.  I  look  on  that 
office  as  next  in  importance  to  that  of  the  county 
court.  They  have  jurisdiction  to  the  amount  of 
$50.  It  is  important  that  they  should  be  quali- 
fied for  this  office.  Do  gentlemen  suppose  they 
will  get  men  to  discharge  the  duties  of  this  office, 
if  you  say  they  are  unfit  to  sit  on  the  bench  of 
the  county  court?  I  want  tliis  court  kept  up  by 
men  as  well  qualified  to  sit  on  the  bench  of  the 
county  court,  as  they  have  been  heretofore.  How 
it  may  be  in  other  counties,  I  do  not  know,  but 
in  Shelby  they  are  a.s  well  qualified  as  any 
county  court  in  Kentucky.  I  do  not  expect  to 
find  persons  better  qualified  for  the  office  than 
the  justices  of  the  peace  in  Shelby.  There  is 
not  a  man  on  the  bench  who  is  not  well  qualified 
to  discharge  all  the  duties  which  will  be  impo- 
sed on  this  court. 

The  plan  of  the  committee  was  to  dispense 
with  the  services  of  the  magi.«tracy,  and  substi- 
tute three  judges.  I  liave  been  all  tlio  time  opposed 
to  that  plan.  The  amendment  which  I  proposed 
and  the  vote  of  the  convention  cuts  off  the  thre*; 
judges,  andl  believe,  taking  that  vote  as  the  sens« 
of  the  majority  of  the  convention,  it  is  intend- 
ed to  substitute  the  magistrates  of  the  county 
for  the  three  judges.  The  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Madison  goes  to  that  extent,  and 
further,  and  I  like  it  better  on  that  account.    It 

Eroposes  to  have  a  presiding  judge,  as  a  sort  of 
ead  to  this  court,  and  to  have  the  magistrates 
assist  him.  But  it  goes  further,  and  gives  the 
legislature  the  power  to  confer  on  the  presiding 
judge,  the  probate  jurisdiction  in  each  county. 
That,  I  know,  is  a  favorite  project  of  many  on 
this  floor.  .  They  will  be  able  to  accomplish 
their  wishes  through  the  legislature.  This  goes 
further  and  designates  what  number  of  magis- 
trates, with  the  presiding  judge,  shall  have  juris- 
diction in  the  county,  giving  power  to  the  legis 
lature  to  call  in  the  whole  or  a  part  of  the 
magistrates,  when  business  of  importance  is  to 
come  before  them,  covering  my  proposition,  and 
going  further.  I  prefer  it,  and  in  giving  my 
vote,  I  shall  do  it  to  reach  the  proposition  oi 
tlie  gentleman  from  Madison.  I  have  no  idea 
it  will  suit  those  who  still  hold  on  to  the  three 
judges  and  the  report  of  the  committee,  but  it 
seems  to  me  to  cover  all  the  ground  taken  by 
the  difl^erent  delegates,  and  I  believe  will  meet 
tlie  wishes  of  tlie  majority. 

Mr.  KAVAXAUGH.  I  ask  tlie  indulgence  of 
the  convention,  to  offer  a  remark  or  two  only,  on 
the  subject  under  consideration.  To  my  mind, 
the  mode  of  organizing  a  county  court  system,  is 
of  more  importance  to  the  people  generally,  than 
the  subject*  either  of  the  circuit  courts,  or  of  the 
court  of  appeals.      True,  the  subject  of  county 


710 


court*  is  not  one  on  which  such  high  8(iun<ling 
speeches  may  be  made,  as  on  that  of  these  other 
courts ;  yet  the  people  feel  much  more  tieeplj'  inter- 
ested in  it.  1  he  county  court  has  heretofore  pos- 
sessed multifarious  and  extensive  powers,  and  this 
must  be  the  case  with  that  court  hereafter,  what- 
ever its  form  may  be.  Of  tliis  tlie  convention 
is  fully  sensible;  lience  the  interest  I  am  grati- 
fied to  see  manifested  relative  to  the  proper  or- 
ganization of  this  court. 

One  of  the  most  important  poAvers  which  it 
has  heretofore  possessed,  and  wluch  it  "will  here- 
after possess,  is  the  right  of  taxation.  This  pow- 
er, when  exercised  by  the  legislature,  has  ever 
been  closely  and  jealously  watched,  and  much 
has  been  said  in  this  state  concerning  it,  wiiile 
the  power  of  these  courts  on  this  subject,  has 
been  exercised  without  attracting  as  much  of  the 
attention  of  the  people  as  it  should  have  done. 
I  would  therefore  remind  the  convention,  that 
the  county  courts  of  this  state,  taken  altogether, 
have  annually  levied  and  collected,  in  the  form 
of  county  revenue,  nearly  as  much  money  from 
the  people  as  the  legislature  itself;  and  we  are 
now  to  organize  a  tribunal  for  the  exercise  of  the 
same  power.  The  report  of  the  committee,  and 
the  several  amendments  M'hich  have  been  offered, 
present  the  question,  whether  this  right  of  taxa- 
tion shall  be  given  to  a  county  judge  and  two  as- 
sociates, or  Avhether  it  shall  be  given  to  all  the 
magistrates,  each  elected  by  a  separate  district, 
and  thus  representing  every  part  of  the  county. 
The  vote  already  taken,  by  which  the  two  asso- 
ciate justices  have  been  stricken  out,  is  some- 
thing indicative  of  the  sense  of  the  convention 
in  favor  of  the  latter  mode.  That  mode  itseems 
to  me,  would  be  most  apt  to  give  satisfaction  to 
the  people.  Every  part  of  the  county  would 
then  be  represented  by  a  justice,  elected  by  the 
people  themselves,  in  all  matters  relative  to  rais- 
ing and  appropriating  county  revenue. 

The  amendment  first  offered  by  tlie  gentleman 
from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner,)  contemplates  asso- 
ciating the  justices  of  a  county  with  the  presi- 
ding judge,  at  such  terras  as  may  be  prescribed 
by  law,  for  the  purpose  of  laying  and  appropri- 
ting  the  county  levy,  and  of  establishing  and 
altering  roads.  This  amendment  meets  my  ap- 
probation. In  the  first  place,  these  are  perhaps, 
the  only  cases  in  wliich  a  popular  or  representa- 
tive court  is  necessary. 

The  other  duties  conferred  on  the  court,  are  of 
a  character  which  can  be  performed  more  ex- 
peditiouslv,  more  convenientlv,  and  more  satis- 
factorily, \>y  a  single  judge,  tfian  by  any  multi- 
tudinous assembly  of  justices  which  can  be 
brought  together.  Why  require  more  than  one 
in  any  other  case  ?  Is  there  any  other  case 
whore  more  than  one  is  necessary  '?  What  will 
be  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court,  besides  such  as 
it  may  Imve  over  roads  and  county  levies  ?  It 
will,  in  the  first  place,  have  such  jurisdiction  as 
usually  appertains  to  a  court  of  probate,  as  ad- 
milting  wills  to  record,  granting  letters  of  ad- 
ministration, appointing  guardians,  settlingwith 
administrators,  executors,  guardians,  and  the 
like..  It  may  also  appoint  commi-ssioners  to  as- 
sign, dower,'  divide  lands,  Ac,  and  it  may  hear 
and  determine  appeals  from  justices  of  the 
peace  in  certain  ca-scs.  Is  more  than  one  judge 
n^uired  for  the  discharge  of  all  these  duties? 


For  myself,  I  would  always  prefer  a  single 
justice  of  the  peace  in  such  cases.  One  actiQg 
by  himself,  in  these  cases,  will  always  get  on 
better  than  all  the  magistrates  of  a  county  taken 
together.  I  would  greatly  prefer  risking' his  de- 
cisions alone.  Bring  them  altogether  for  such 
purposes,  and  it  usually  results  in  "confusion 
worse  confounded."  I  agree  with  the  gentleman 
from  Campbell,  (Mr.  Root,)  that  the  complaints 
of  the  people  were  long  and  loud  against  our 
county  court  system.  If  any  one  thing  was 
more  complained  of  than  another,  it  was  that. 
If  any  one  thing  more  than  another  accelerated 
the  call  of  the  convention,  it  Avas  that.  And  I 
verily  believe  that  we,  to-day,  would  not  have 
been  here  forming  a  constitution,  but  for  the 
universal  dissatisfaction  felt  against  our  county 
courts.  1  am  not  making  these  remarks  to  throw 
odium  on  that  body.  The  very  nature  of  its  or- 
ganization, no  matter  who  its  members  might 
be,  Avas  such  as  to  bring  it  down  in  the  estima- 
tion of  the  country.  Its  mode  of  appointment 
was  not  its  only  objectionable  feature.  It  was 
too  numerous — a  sort  of  multitudinous  assem- 
bly, totally  unfit  for  the  discharge  of  its  duties. 
Any  other  court,  of  like  numbers,  will  fail  to  give 
satisfaction.  The  people  desire  a  change  in  this 
feature  of  the  court;  and  unless  it  be  made,  they 
Avill,  in  my  humble  opinion,  be  disappointed  in 
their  expectations  at  the  hands  of  tne  conven- 
tion. But  Avhile  1  am  in  favor  of  a  single 
judge  for  the  transaction  of  county  court  busi- 
ness, yet  when  it  comes  to  levying,  collecting, 
and  appropriating  taxes,  I  am  for  associating 
the  justices  with  the  county  judge,  that  every 
part  of  the  county  may  be  represented;  nor 
would  I  permit  magistrates  to  be  multiplied 
at  pleasure  as  formerly;  and  I  take  this  oc- 
casmn  to  call  the  attention  of  the  convention 
to  this  point,  for  I  have  been  much  gratified  to 
see  special  legislation  taken  aAvay  in  a  number 
of  cases.  I  hope  the  convention  Avill  apply  the 
same  rule  to  this  thing  of  increasing  justices  by 
special  acts,  and  Avill  provide  that  each  county 
shall  be  districted,  and  be  entitled  to  justices 
according  to  its  population.  Each  district  Avould 
then  have  a  fair  and  equal  \'oice  in  laying  a 
county  levy,  and  applying  the  money. 

Mr.  President,  I  regretted  to  hear  gentlemen  in 
favor  of  three  judges,  announce  the  one  judge 
plan  as  a  lawyer  project.  I  imagine,  however, 
'that  this  will  have  no  influence  here,  nor  before 
the  people.  They  further  insist  that  the  a.sso- 
ciate  judges  are  necessary  to  represent  the  fann- 
ing interest.  But  sir,  this  court  is  not  a  repre- 
sentative body,  except  in  the  cases  already  allu- 
ded to.  In  those  cases,  I  Avould  have  the  farm- 
ing interests  represented  by  all  the  justices,  com- 
ing from  every  part  of  the  county.  If,  however, 
they  are  to  form  the  court  in  all  cases,  as  well  as 
on  all  occasions,  wlien  the  question  of  taxation 
is  not  involved,  as  Avhen  it  is,  then  I  am  against 
it,  and  in  preference,  Avill  go  for  the  report  of  the 
committee.  The  gentleman  from  Campbell  in- 
vokes this  committee  of  thirty,  to  come  to  the 
rescue;  I  Avas  sorry  to  hear  it,  tor  that  power  has 
already  been  often  enough  appealed  to.  It  Avas 
called  up  in  aid  of  putting  four  judges  on  the  court 
of  appeals  bench,  anil  succectfed  when  I  believe 
a  majority  of  tlie  (convention  Avas  originally 
against   it.     I  hope  then,  that  hereafter  every 


m 


question  will  stand  or  fall  ou  us  own  ineHts, 
and  not  according  to  compromises  in  conirniltee 
rooms;  and  that  this  will  be  the  case  with  the 
report  novr  before  the  house. 

It  is   further  insisted  that  this  county  judge 
plan,  will  be  expensive.     I  think  not.     Sir,  why 
IS  it  that  your  county  courts  now  appoint  com- 
missioners to  settle  with  guardians,  executors,  i 
«tc.     It  is  because  the  court  itself  is  too  nuilti  ' 
tudinous  and  unwieldy  for  the  transaction  of  I 
such  busineiss.     This  would  not  be  so  of  a  single  j 
judge.     These  commissioners  might  then  be  dis» 
pensed  with,  and  their  fet^  go  towards  paying  a 
county  judge.    I  only  mention  this  as  one  item 
among  manv. 

Mr.  CHA^IBERS.  The  views  and  sentiments 
of  the  distinguished  gentleman  fronj  Bourbon, 
(Mr.  Davis,)  as  indicated  by  the  amendment 
which  he  has  offered,  and  the  remarks  which  he 
has  made  upon  the  subject  of  the  county  courts, 
are  those  which  I  entertained  and  express'rd  du- 
ring my  ca:ivass  for  a  seat  in  this  body,  ajid  up 
to  tne  time  of  my  arrival  here.  I  went  further — 
before  my  constituents  I  opposed  the  establish- 
ment of  any  court  by  constitutional  provision — 
except  the  supreme  appellate  court,  supposing 
that  it  would  be  sufficient  and  best  to  delegate 
the  power  for  the  creation  of  all  others,  to  the 
legislature.  The  uncertainty  whether  these  in- 
stitutions would  work  well  in  practice,  and  the 
difficulty  of  altering  them  if  they  should  not, 
were  sufficient  reasons,  if  no  others  existed,  to 
induce  such  a  course;  but  in  addition  to  these, 
experience  in  the  case  of  the  county  courts,  had 
already  taught  us  the  impropriety  of  making 
these  inferior  tribunals,  constitutional  fixtures. 
But,  sir,  I  had  not  been  here  long,  before  I  ascer- 
tained to  my  entire  satisfaction — <m:  rather  dis- 
satisfaction— that  such  was  not  the  pleasure  of 
this  convention,  and  that  not  only  the  circuit  but 
the  county  courts  were  to  become  creatures  of 
the  constitution.  I  then,  in  common  with  the 
other  members  of  the  committee  to  whom  this 
subject  was  referred,  labored  to  present  the  best 
system  that  we  could  devise,  and  the  report  now 
before  the  house  is  the  result  of  our  counsels.  I 
regret  that  it  should  have  been  met  at  the  very 
threshold,  by  the  onset  of  the  gentleman  from 
Green,  and  thai  its  success  should  be  jeoparded 
by  the  accidental  junction  of  those  who  favor 
one  justice,  and  those  who  go  for  the  whole  body 
of  the  magistracy.  But  with  the  gentleman  from 
Campbell,  I  do  not  regard  this  vote  as  a  true  in- 
dication of  the  intentions  of  this  house;  it  is  the 
meeting  of  two  extremes  which  can  never  be 
made  to  harmonize,  except  upon  the  middle 
ground  of  this  report. 

Sir,  let  us  examine  this  subject  with  some  care 
and  attention,  and  let  us  find  our  true  course,  as 
judges  sometimes  find  out  the  meaning  of  a  pe- 
nal statute — that  is  by  considering  the  old  law, 
the  mischief,  and  the  remedy.  The  old  law, 
constitutional — provides,  that  '"there  shall  be 
established  within  each  county,  now  or  which 
may  hereafter  be  erected  within  this  common- 
wealth, a  county  court,"  it  also  provides  that  "a 
competent  number  of  justices  of  the  peace  shall 
be  appointed  in  each  county,"  and  lodges  the 
power  of  appointment  in  their  own  hands,  mak- 
ing them  a  6elf-peri)etuating  body.  The  old 
law  statutory  declares,  that  these  justices  of  the 


peaee'shall  compose  the  county  court ;  nnd  coij- 
lers  upon  it.  juri.sdiction  over  very  important 
and  multifarious  subjects.  The  mischief,  or 
mischiefs  growing  out  of  this  organization  of 
our  county  courts,  and  out  of  its  administration 
of  the  matters  committed  to  it,  are  almost  as 
numerous  as  the  subjects  of  its  jurisdictiou. 
Gentlemen  need  not  tell  me  that  the  only  things 
complained  of  were  the  mode  of  appointment 
and  tenure  of  office.  These  it  is  true  were  seri- 
ously objected  to,  but  so  were  others — its  num- 
bers are  too  great  for  a  judicial  body ;  it  is  an  un- 
wieldy, inconvenient,  and  disorderly  court.  It 
is  frequently  a  difficult  matter  to  get  the  justices 
upon  the  bench,  and  keep  them  there  throughout 
the  hearing  of  a  cause.  Instances  are  known  of 
those  justices  who  had  heard  the  evidence  on  the 
one  side  having  left  the  bench,  and  the  cause  be- 
ing decided  by  those  who  had  heard  but  a  part 
of  the  evidence.  Many  subjects  now  require  a 
majority  of  the  justices  in  commission  to  be 
present  at  the  time  of  their  adjudication.  This 
is  a  source  of  much  trouble  an<i  disappointment, 
and  I  am  inclined  to  think,  that  these  laws  re- 
quiring a  majority,  should  all  be  repealcl.  They 
were  not  enacted  because  a  majority  would  do 
the  business  any  better  than  three,  but  as  a  kind  of 
restraint  on  that  kind  of  business,  and  their  on- 
ly effect  is  to  put  the  party  wanting  this  kind  of 
business  attended  to,  to  a  great  deal  of  very  un- 
necessary trouble. 

There  is  no  one  who  would  not  prefer  apply- 
ing to  the  court,  in  any  kind  of  case  whatever, 
when  thee  or  four  of  the  most  intelligent  mem- 
bers are  pre.«ent,  to  an  application  when  the 
bench  is  full,  and  consisting  of  from  twelve  to 
twenty  members.  But  the  most  objectionable 
thing  about  the  county  court,  is  its  politico  ju- 
dical character.  Many  of  the  duties  of  this 
court,  are  of  an  executive  and  ministerial,  rather 
than  judicial  nature,  and  if  you  would  see  a  strict 
adherence  to  political  party,  go  into  your  county 
courts  when  engaged  in  these  executive  or  min- 
isterial duties. 

Sir,  political  bias  should  never  be  permitted 
to  enter  our  courts  of  justice.  But  organized  as 
these  county  court;*  now  are,  or  as  they  will  be 
if  the  whole  elected  magistracy  forms  the  court, 
it  can  never  be  kept  out.  Xo,  it  will  be  va.stly 
increased  by  electing  the  magistrates  until  your 
county  courts  will  become  nothing  but  political 
arenas.  Do  gentlemen  expect  that  the  quality  of 
the  magistracy  will  be  improved  by  electing 
them  if  they  do,  they  will  find  themselves 
mistaken — it  will,  unless  I  am  deceived,  be  great- 
ly deteriorated.  The  chance  of  becoming  sheriff 
is  taken  away,  and  no  inducements  to  take  so 
troublesome  an  office  is  left.  Many  of  the  dis- 
tricts wUl  have  no  one  residing  within  them, 
qualified  to  make  a  good  justice,  and  men  will 
not  be  voted  for  on  account  of  their  qualifica- 
tions, to  act  as  judge,  or  justice  of  the  county 
court,  but  because  of  some  personal  or  political 
predilection.  Besides  sir,  it  is  rather  singular 
that  we  should  choose  men  because  of  their 
qualifications  to  make  good  country  justices, 
and  then  throw  upon  them  as  an  incident  and 
adjunct  of  their  office,  the  far  more  important 
and  responsible  duties  of  county  court  judge. 
In  this  way  the  responsibility  of  the  judge  is  too 


Xl9 


way   from  the  county  courts 
itive  ami  ministerial  duties, 


indirect  and  too  niucJi  JiviJeJ   evtn  to  operate 
■well. 

We  shall  take  aw 
most  of  their  executi 
au(i  we  ought  to  create  a  court  purely  judi- 
cial, and  with  practical  responsibility.  This 
never  can  be  the  case,  so  loujj  as  all  the  justices 
in  commission  are,  ex  officio,  members  of  the 
court.  Now  sir,  I  have  spoken  of  the  old  law, 
and  of  a  part — but  a  very  small  part — of  the 
mischiefs  arising  out  of  the  organiEation  and  ad- 
ministration of  our  county  courts;  and  Avhat  is 
the  remedy  proposed?  So  faras  the  appointment 
and  tenure  of  office  are  concerned  our  duty  is 
plain.  We  give  one  to  the  people,  and  limit  the 
other  to  a  term  of  years,  and  this  will  perhaps 
stop  complaints  upon  these  two  subjects  ;  but  it 
will  not  correct  the  evils,  nor  redress  the  griev- 
ances of  a  badly  constructed  court.  This  can 
only  be  done  by   electing  suitable   persons  di- 


erns,  anJ  fixing  their  rates,  bastardy,  settle- 
ments with  sheriffs,  commissioners,  division 
and  partition  of  lands  and  slaves,  assignment  of 
dower,  awarding  writs  of  ad  quod  damnum,  and 
lovvingthe  damages  assessed,  which  involves  the 
power  of  takint'  private  property  for  public  use, 
with  a  thousand  other  important  duties  and  res- 
ponsibilities; too  much  to  be  incurred  by  any 
one  man.  Moreover,  this  is  to  be  a  monthly 
court,  and  to  insure  its  regular  sitting,  it  is  better 
to  have  three  judges.  One  might  have  business 
before  the  court  that  would  make  it  improper 
that  he  should  act,  or  he  might  be  absent  or  sick. 
It  is  not  intended  to  have  a  presiding  judge  and 
two  stuffed  paddies,  as  some  have  supposed. 
No,  the  judges  will  be  equal  in  power  and  au- 
thority, and  for  aught  I  know,  the  associate  may 
often  be  superior  in  capacity  to  the  president ; 
but  it  is  necessary  to  have  one  of  them  designa- 
ted as  presiding  justice,  for  the  certification  of 
records,  deeds,  and  powers   of  attorney,   under 


rectly  into  the  office  of  county  court  judge,  and    ^j^^  requirements  of  the  acts  of  congress  and  th 
i."?^'."?  ^•'''?   immeuiately   responsible  for  the   j^^g  ^f  gjgter  states.      Nor   is   it  ^intended,  a 
faithful  discharge  of  its  duties.     Then  the  ques- 
tion comes  up,  of  how    many  members   should 
this  court  be  made  to   consist.      This  question 


Was  fully  debated  and  considered,  both  in  the 
committee  on  county  courts,  and  in  the  commit- 
tee of  thirty.  The  single  judge,  the  whole  body 
of  the  county  magistracy,  and  the  three  judge 
system, each  had  its  advocate,  and  the  last  Mas 
adopted  as  uniting  in  itself,  all  the  benefits, 
and  being  free  from  the  objections  of  both  the 
others. 

I  have  already  shown  some  of  the  reasons 
■why  the  whole  corps  of  iustiees  of  the  peace 
should  not  come  upon  the  bench  of  the  county  ; 
it  ■would  not  be  hard  to  state  many  others,  and 
good  ones;  but  one  is  sufficient,  and  I  think 
ought  to  be  conclusive.  The  people  have  de- 
manded an  entire  change  in  this  court.  I  came 
here  the  mere  agent  of  my  constituents,  and  I 
intend  to  try  to  conform  to  their  behest.  They 
required  something  more  than  a  mere  change  in 
the  mode  of  ap{)ointment,  and  the  tenure  of  of- 
fice; they  want  a  radical,  thorough  change  in 
the  organisation  of  this  court.  They  do  not  ob- 
ject to  its  retaining  its  name,  and  jurisdiction  ; 
but  thev  want  new  incumbents,  chosen  with  a 
view  to' the  duties  of  this  office,  and  nothing  else. 
It  will  not  be  hard  to  show  that  three  judges,  any 
two  of  whom  shall  hold  the  court,  "vvill  do  bet- 
ter than  one.  The  remarks  of  my  friend  from 
Mason  (Mr.  Taylor)  on  this  subject,  are  entitled 
to  great  weight.  The  county  courts  in  this  com- 
monwealth have  a  very  extensive  jurisdiction; 
it  embraces  a  great  variety  and  number  of  inter- 
esting subjects,  and  creates  such  an  amount  of 
reBponsibility,  that  no  one  man  would  like  to 
incur  it.  Part  of  its  business  affects  the  whole 
county,  and  every  individual  in  it;  such,  for 
instance,  as  laying  the  levy,  altering,    estab- 


some  have  suggested,  that  the  office  of  judge  of 
the  county  court  is  to  be  filled  by  the  little  pet- 
tifogging lawyers  of  our  villages  and  county 
towns.  I  know  not  how  it  may  be  in  the  coun- 
ties of  those  who  urge  such  an  objection;  but  in 
my  county  it  will  be  any  body  else.  This  is  the 
only  judgeship  which  is  not  exclusively  appro- 
priated to  the  lawyers  by  the  provisions  of  the 
article  on  the  judiciary,  and  in  my  county  we 
have  experienced  and  intelligent  farmers,  men 
who  have  already  been  presiding  justices  and 
sheriffs,  intelligent  and  "well  qualified  mechan- 
ics, retired  lawyers,  clerks,  and  others  well  qual- 
ified to  become  county  judges,  and  who  would 
accept  of  that  office,  but  who  could  not  be  in- 
duced to  be  elected  a  justice  of  the  peace. 

Next,  sir,  "we  will  consider  the  expense  and 
economy  of  this  court,  and  here  my  friend  from 
(4reen  rushes  upon  us  with  the  startling  cry  of 
three  hundred  new  salaried  officers.  But  what 
does  he  propose  as  a  substitute?  Why,  sir,  a 
plan  offering  us  at  least  one  thousand  or  twelve 
hundred  new  salaried  officers.  That  gentleman 
should  reflect  that  we  have  taken  from  the  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  the  little  bonus  of  expectancy 
upon  the  sheriffalty  which  they  formerly  had  ; 
and  however  inferior  and  indifferent  their  qual- 
ifications for  and  services  upon  the  bench  maybe, 
we  cannot  expect  and  should  not  Avant  them  for 
nothing.  Allowing  then,  that  each  justice  of 
the  peace  is  to  have  one  dollar  per  day  for  his 
services  as  county  court  judge,  and  supposing 
there  are  one  hundred  counties,  averaging  twelve 
justices  to  the  county,  and  that  only  half  these 
justices  attend  to  liold  the  monthly  courts,  then 
we  shall  have  to  pay  for  the  services  of  one  half 
of  the  magistrates,  as  county  court  judges,  the 
sum  of  seven  thousand  two  hundred  dollars  per 
annum  to  have  our  business  very  badly  done, 


lishing,  and  workingthe  roads,  the  administra-    -R'hilstifweelectthree  county  courtjudges  in  each 


tion  of  the  poor  laws,  and  appointing  officers  of 
elections.  Another  portion  of  its  business,  and 
a  very  large  one,  concerns  individuals  directly, 
and  the  public  incidentally;  such,  for  instance, 
aa  the  probate  of  wills,  and  administration  of 
estates,  guardians  and  wards,  apprentices,  ap- 
proving securities  and  taking  bonds  from  all  the 


county  and  suppose  that  all  three  attend  each 
court  at  a  per  diem  pay  of  two  dollars  each,  it 
would  cost  but  six  thousand  dollars  to  the  .state, 
And  the  business  would  be  well  done.  These 
county  judges,  it  is  expected,  will  be  paid  out 
of  the  county  revenue,  and  they  will  not  cost 
each  county  over  one  hundred  dollars.     And  in 


officers  of  the  county,  establishing  ferries,  tar-  my  opinion  it  is  destined  to  become  the  most 


713 


popular,  useful,  cheap,  and  convenient  court  in 
our  state. 
To  meet  the  wishes  of  those  who  wish  the 

1'ustices  from  all  parts  of  the  county  occasional- 
y  to  come  upon  the  bench,  we  have  added  a 
section  allowing  the  justices  of  the  peace  to  at- 
tend the  court  of  claims  and  assist  in  making 
appropriations  and  laying  the  levy. 

If  tnis  court  be  established  as  reported,  I  ver- 
ily believe  its  jurisdiction,  now  great,  will  be 
vastly  increased  in  a  few  years.  There  are  ma- 
ny subjects  now  given  to  our  circuit  courts  that 
could  be  more  conveniently  attended  to  by  the 
county  courts;  and  as  we  have  (as  I  think  very 
unwisely)  limited  the  number  of  circuits  to 
twelve,  and  are  about  to  try  the  working  facili- 
ties of  our  judges  to  their  utmost  extent,  the 
transfer  of  such  matters  to  the  county  courts  is 
still  more  desirable. 

Mr.  President,  in  what  I  have  said,  I  am  actu- 
ated by  no  personal  considerations.  I  have  no 
grievances  of  that  kind  to  complain  of.  The 
justices  of  the  peace  in  my  county  will  compare 
very  advantageously  with  those  of  any  other 
county.  They  are  all  men  of  good  character, 
fair  capacity,  and  sound  integrity,  and  some  of 
them  will  no  doubt  be  found  upon  the  county 
court  bench,  if  this  report  be  adopted.  But  I 
have  objections  to  the  existing  county  court  sys- 
tem, arising  from  its  inherent  defects,  which  can 
only  be  obviated  by  the  election  of  suitable  per- 
sons for  the  express  purpose  of  holding  these 
courts. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


FRIDAY,  NOVEMBER  30,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  "Wardeb. 

LEGISLATIVE   EXPENSES. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  JAMES,  the  report  of 
the  second  auditor  in  answer  to  a  resolution 
adopted  on  the  motion  of  the  gentleman  from 
Bullitt,  (Mr.  Thompson)  showing  the  expenses 
of  a  series  of  sessions  of  the  legislature,  was 
ordered  to  be  printed. 

AITEXDMENT    OF   THE   ECLES. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TRIPLET  T,  the  rules 
were  so  amended  as  to  provide  that  a  motion  to 
strike  out.  and  insert,  is  indivisible. 

COL^NTY   COURTS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  article  concerning  county  courts. 

The  first  section  was  under  consideration  in 
these  words: 

"Sec.  1.  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  now,  or  which  may  heniafter  be  erected 
within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to 
consist  of  a  presiding  judge,  and  two  associate 
judges,  any  two  of  whom  shall  constitute  a  court 
for  the  transaction  of  business." 

To  this,  Mr.  G.  "W.  JOHNSTON,  on  Wednes- 
day, moved  the  following  amendment: 

Strike  out  all  after  the  words   "presiding 
judge,"  and  insert  "  and  the  justices  of  the  peace 
in  commission  in  each  county.      The  presiding 
90 


judge,  and  two  justices  of  the  peace,  or  any  three 
of  the  justices  of  the  peace,  shall  .  constitute  a 
court  for  the  transaction  of  business,  except  at 
the  court  of  claims,  or  when  debts  are  contract- 
ed, when  the  presiding  judge  and  a  majority  of 
the  justices  shall  be  required  to  constitute 'the 
court." 

A  division  of  the  question  was  called  for,  and 
the  convention  agreed  to  strike  out. 

Mr.  TURNER  then  moved  to  amend  the  por- 
tion proposed  to  be  inserted,  by  substituting  the 
following: 

"  And  all  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  each 
county:  Provided,  That  the  general  assembly 
shall  have  the  power,  from  time  to  time,  to  pro- 
vide by  law  what  part  of  the  business  of  said 
court  shall  be  transacted  by  the  presiding  judge, 
and  what  portion,  by  said  judge  and  one  or 
more  of  the  justices  of  the  peace,  and  what  justi  ee 
shall  act  as  presiding  judge  during  a  vacancy  in 
that  office,  or  in  the  absence  of  the  presiding 
judge." 

In  this  state  the  question  stood  at  the  last  ad- 
journment, and  the  question  now  came  up  on 
the  adoption  of  the  substitute  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison. 

The  question  was  taken  and  the  substitute 
rejected. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  amendment 
of  Mr.  G.  W.JOHNSTON. 

Mr.  JOHNSTON,  by  general  consent,  modi- 
fied his  substitute,  by  inserting  the  words,  "  or 
when  debts  are  contracted " — which  form  part 
of  the  amendment  as  given  above. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved,  as  a  substitute  for  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Shelby,  the 
following,  which  was  offered  on  Wednesday, 
and  afterwards  withdrawn,  by  Mr.  TURNER: 

"Which  court  shall  be  hol'den  by  said  judge, 
except  at  such  times  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
law,  at  which  the  county  levy  is  to  te  laid,  debts 
upon  the  county  contracted,  or  roads  opened  or 
established,  altered  or  discontinued,  in  which 
case  a  majority  of  the  justices  in  commission  in 
each  county,  shall  be  associated  with  the  pre- 
siding judge,  for  the  transaction  of  such  busi- 
ness, under  such  rides  and  regulations  as  the 
general  assembly  may  direct." 

Mr.  JAMES  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  substitute,  and  they  'were 
taken,  and  were — ^yeas  26,  nays  51. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Gudirie)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  Charles  Chambers,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Edward 
Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Milford  Elliott,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.Gray,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  George  w. 
Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thiirman,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  George  W.  WiUiams— 26. 

Nats — Richard  Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow. 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  Chenault,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Green  Forrest, 
James  H.  Garrard,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  James  W. 
Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Wil- 


714 


liam  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooko,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Wil- 
lis B.  Maclioii,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William  C. 
Mai-shall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
John  H.  MoHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D. 
Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Hen- 
ry B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, Thomas  RockholJ,  John  T.  Rogers,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  Micliael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 51. 

So  the  amendment  Tvas  rejected. 

The  question  again  recurred  on  the  amend- 
ment of  the  gentleman  from  Shelby. 

Mr.  McHENRY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  being  taken,  they  were  yeas  18,  nays  63, 

Yeas — Jolin  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Chenault,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Milford  Elliott,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  P.  Ham- 
ilton, James  W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Johnston,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Johnson  Price, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 18. 

Nays — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 
Chambers,  James  S.  Chrisman.  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Beniamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteeu  T.  Dunavan,  Green 
Forrest,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Har- 
din, John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William 
C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D. 
Morris,  Jonathan  New  cum,  Hugh  Newell,  Eli- 
jah F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Pres- 
ton, Larkin  J.  Procter,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos. 
Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  Ign.  A.  Spalding,  Jas. 
W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry 
Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
liffe, George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson— 63. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the 
vote  by  which  the  convention  had  stricken  out 
that  portion  of  the  section  relating  to  the  associ- 
ate justices. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  that  the  rule  be  dis- 
pensed with,  which  requires  a  motion  to  recon- 
sider to  lie  over. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  rule  was 
dispenfled  with. 

The  question  recurred  on  the  motion  to  recon- 
sider. 

Mr,  GARRARD.  I  think  it  has  been  fully 
determined  by  the  action  of  the  convention,  that 
there  is  no  one  proposition  which  has  been  be- 
fore it,  that  can  command  a  majority  in  favor  of 
it,  except  the  report  of  the  committee,  I  am  of 
opinion  the  report  of  the  committee  is  better 
than  anything  else  we  can  posfsibly  adopt.  Mv 
residence  is  in  that  portion  of  the  commonwealth 
vrhete  the  hope  of  the  office  of  sheriff  has  been 


the  sole  inducement  to  those  who  hold  the  office 
of  magistrate,  and  it  will  be  recollected  that  ac- 
cording to  tlio  report  of  the  committee,  no  gen- 
tleman will  have  that  inducement  before  him  as 
a  reason  for  holding  the  office  of  a  justice  of  the 

Eeace.  I  am  satisfied  that  the  office  will  not 
e  filled  by  men  of  so  much  experience,  whose 
judgment  and  character  will  have  so  much 
weight  ill  the  community,  as  if  they  were  elect- 
ed solely  for  the  purpose  of  performing  the  du- 
ties of  the  county  court.  On  this  subject  we 
must  make  some  compromise,  and  endeavor  to 
obtain  that  which  comes  nearest  to  our  united 
opinions.  During  the  canvass  in  my  county, 
last  summer,  I  proposed  to  my  constituents,  that 
the  magistrates  should  be  paid  out  of  the  county 
levies,  and  not  a  single  individual  objected  to 
the  adoption  of  that  course.  1  hope  the  house 
will  agree  to  the  motion  to  reconsider.  And  if 
it  agrees  to  do  so,  I  am  sure  we  can  get  through 
the  report  in  a  few  hours. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  gentleman  has  said  what 
I  was  about  to  say.  The  bill  as  reported,  I 
thought  was  the  best  we  could  get,  and  I  did 
not  anticipate  any  trouble  in  carrying  it  through. 
We  took  away  from  the  magistracy  the  office  of 
sheriff,  and  allow  the  people  to  select  whom 
they  please.  Heretofore  we  could  not  get  one 
magistrate  to  sit  long  enough  to  finish  one  ap- 
peal, and  that  made  me  abjure  the  county  court 
system  forty  three  years  ago.  The  old  court  of 
quartersessions  did  a  great  deal  of  small  business, 
and  sat  about  three  days  at  a  term.  I  Avant  this 
court  so  organized  that  it  may  take  the  small 
business,  the  trash,  as  we  call  the  last  hogshead, 
in  separating  the  different  sorts  of  tobacco. 
With  regard  to  expense,  I  do  not  think  the  sala- 
ry of  each  magistrate  will  amount  to  more  than 
thirty  six  dollars,  which  will  make  the  whole  ex- 
pense$10,800.  I  can  go  for  the  report,  with  a  small 
alteration  respecting  indictment  for  wilful  neg- 
lect of  duty. 

Mr.  ROGERS.  I  have  had  little  to  say  on 
this  subject,  and  would  not  now  say  anything  if 
the  county  court  had  not  been  made  the  scape- 
goat for  others'  sins.  It  seems  to  me  tlie  great 
reason  for  opposition  to  this  court  was  because 
the  judges  held  their  office  during  good  behavior, 
and  because  there  was  no  responsibility.  My 
people  thought,  if  we  could  make  them  responsi- 
ble by  appointing  them  for  a  term  of  years,  tliey 
Avould  do  well.  There  was  as  much  objection  to 
the  circuit  as  to  the  county  court.  To  be  sure, 
in  legal  ability  this  court  was  not  equal  to  the 
higher  court.  They  lay  the  taxes  and  disburse 
the  money,  and  I  would  be  glad  to  have  the 
magistrates  act  in  this  business  with  the  presid- 
ing judge.  I  should  be  unwilling  to  have  three 
men  do  the  whole.  You  might  as  well  appoint 
three  men  to  lay  the  tax  for  the  state.  If  they 
are  expected  to  be  the  "trash  hogshead,"  accora- 
ing  to  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  and  to  do 
the  "trash  business,"  I  presume  they  will  take 
the  "trash"  fees  also.  I  think  it  will  be  better 
to  have  one  judge,  to  act  with  the  justices,  and 
then  give  the  legislature  the  power  to  say  what 
business  shall  be  given  to  the  judge  and  wliat  to 
the  justices.  I  have  an  abiding  faith  that  those 
who  come  after  us  will  have  as  much  patriotism 
if  not  as  much  ability  as  we  have.  If  we  consti- 
tute all  the  patriotism,  when  we  are  gone,  woe 


715 


will  come  on  the  country.  I  iroald  be  willing  to 
adopt  the  propositiou  of  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon— just  say  there  shall  be  a  county  court 
and  leave  the  whole  arraugemept  of  it  to  the 
legislature,  or  I  would  take  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Green. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  It  is  said  that  to  win  the 
world's  esteem  we  must  walk  side  by  side  with 
it,  and  yield  to  its  caprices.  I  am  willing  to 
yield  to  the  report  of  the  committee,  but  I  cannot 
help  thinking  of  the  case  of  a  witness,  who  was 
called  to  swear  to  the  identity  of  a  hog  after  it 
was  dressed.  He  saw  the  hog  hanging  up  with 
a  cob  in  its  mouth,  and  its  bristles  oif;  and,  said 
he,  "I  cannot  swear  to  it,  but  I'll  be  cust  if  its 
face  is  not  mighty  familiar."  This  court,  I  think, 
will  look  mighty  familiar  to  the  people.  All 
the  difference  will  be  as  in  the  case  of  the  hog; 
the  one  had  the  bristles  on,  and  the  other  had 
them  off,  and  a  cob  in  its  mouth. 

Mr.  EUDD.  There  seems  to  be  great  objec- 
tion on  the  part  of  some  gentlemen,  to  the  biU 
reported  by  the  committee,  chiefly  on  account  of 
the  great  expense  they  suppose  will  be  entailed 
on  the  people,  by  the  organization  of  the  county 
courts,  on  the  plan  proposed.  I  do  not  enter- 
tain that  opinion.  I  think  the  expense  of  the 
system  will  not  be  so  great  as  gentlemen  im- 
agine, inasmuch  as  power  is  conferred  upon  the 
legislature  to  regulate  the  duties  of  the  judges 
.  and  magistrates,  elected  in  the  several  counties. 


enough  to  lay  the  levy.  We  provide  that  the 
legislature  may  call  a  court  to  do  this.  As  to 
the  expense,  I  think  three  men  can  be  found  in 
each  countv  who  will  serve  in  this  court  for 
nothing,  ^here  are  men  who  would  serve  vol- 
untarily in  transacting  the  business  of  the  coun- 
ty court,  who  would  not  act  as  magistrates. 
There  are  men  on  this  floor  who  will  do  tha 
business,  and  do  it  well,  without  compensation. 

It  is  said  by  some,  that  the  Jiomination  will 
be  made  by  a  clique  about  the  towns  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  the  offices.  Their  compen- 
sation will  not  be  very  high,  if  they  are  paid  at 
all,  and  of  course  there  will  be  little  inducement 
held  out  to  such  men  as  would  compose  the 
cliques  referred  to.  If  there  is  danger  that  the 
towns  will  have  all  the  offices,  let  the  county 
be  divided  into  districts,  and  require  that  no 
two  shall  be  from  the  same  district.  We  shall 
save  money  to  the  counties  by  the  organization 
of  the  court,  as  recommended  by  the  committee. 
Heretofore  individuals  of  the  magistracy  look- 
e<l  forward  to  the  sheriffalty  as  a  compensation 
for  their  services,  and  often  paid  $5CK)  for  the 
office.  If  he  could  afford  to  give  that  to  get  the 
office,  he  can  afford  to  do  the  work  for  thai 
amount  less  than  heretofore.  We  shall  save 
then,  upon  an  average  $500  to  each  county. 
That  being  the  case,  can  we  be  complained  of 
for  establishing  a  costly  tribunal? 

The  people  will  not  complain  if  the  number 


and  to  fix  their  fees.  I  believe  the  legislature  i  we  fix  upon  is  right,  while  we  leave  the  selection 
will  do  what  is  right  and  just  in  the  matter,  and  I  of  the  men  to  them.  The  number  three  is  the 
not  lose  sight  of  tlie  fact  that  the  magistracy  will  I  one  to  which  they  are  accustomed,  and  the  elec- 
have  no  cliance  for  the  sheriffalty  under  the  pro-    tion  of  that  number  will  not  add  to  the  expense 


posed  new  system.  They  will,  no  doubt,  raise 
the  fees  from  twelve  and  a  half  cents  to  twenty 
five,  and  upwards. 

No  difficulty  will  be  found  in  obtaining  good 
and  competent  men  to  fill  the  office,  by  raising 
the  fees  to  double  what  the  countv  commission- 
ers now  receive.  Looking  to  all  the  proposi- 
tions that  have  been  introduced,  and  some  of 
them  are  veiy  excellent,  still  I  think,  as  a  whole, 
that  the  bUl  reported  by  the  committee  is  pre- 
ferable to  anv  of  them. 

Mr.  BRIStOW.  Much  of  the  discussion  that 
has  arisen  on  this  subject,  has  been  in  conse- 
quence of  the  desire  of  a  few  men   to  amend 


The  county  will   simply  say  what  three  persons 
shall  do  the  business. 

I  will  take  occasion  to  say  that  the  magistrates 
court  is  one  that  cannot  be  improved,  but  that 
they  should  necessarily  form  a  court  for  the 
county,  is  rery  strange.  The  bill  provides  for 
the  appointment  of  magistrates  in  different  dis- 
tricts in  the  county.  We  do  not  limit  the  num- 
ber, and  that  has  been  a  cause  of  complaint.  It 
is  difficult  to  do  it.  There  is  so  much  difference 
in  the  population  and  territory  of  the  different 
counties.  If  the  number  of  <Jistricts  in  a  coun- 
ty is  limited,  there  will  be  some  inducement  to 
be  a  magistrate.     I  have  examined  this  subject 


some  of  the  sections.    I  desire  that  the  result  of  i  with  much  attention,  and  can  come  to  no  other  con 


our  labors  on  this  subject  should  go  to  the  peo 
pie  recommended  by  the  fact  that  it  is  not  only 
the  best  but  the  cheapest  system  we  could  adopt. 
It  is  a  simple  proposition  if  we  could  divest 
ourselves  of  the  prejudice  we  may  have  in  re- 
gard to  the  justices  of  the  peace.  I  heard  this 
remark  from  some  one:  "  I  am  not  willing  to  cut 
off  so  large  and  respectable  a  body  of  men  as 
the  magistracy."  Does  that  apply  to  what  we 
are  dome?  Surely  not.  We  cut  off  all  alike. 
All  will  nave  to  obtain  their  offices  under  the 
new  constitntion,  and  all  offices  will  be  open  to 
be  contended  for. 

The  simple  inquiry  is,  how  shall  we  provide  a 
tribunal  to  do  the  business  of  the  county;  and 

the  proposition  in  the  report  is,  that  the  county  person,  John  L.  Ballinger,Luther  Brawner,  Fran- 
may  select  three  men  to  do  it.  Some  say,  let  cis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 
there  be  one  man.  I  am  utterly  opposed  to  that.  I  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Henry  R.D.  Cole- 
Can  one  man  settle  all  the  questions  which  may  [  man,  WiUiam  Cowper,  Archibald  Dizoa,  Chas- 
come  up?  Surely  not.  Three  is  a  compromise  teen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  James  H.  Gar- 
between  extremes.    Gentlemen  say  three  is  not '  rard,  Thomas  J.  Gougb,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 


elusion  than  that  which  I  have  given.  I  cannot 
agree  to  say  that  a  hundred  men  in  the  legisla- 
ture shall  appoint  these  officers.  We  know  that 
the  legislature  is  composed  of  young  men. 
Would  it  be  right  to  leave  this  subject  with  the 
boys  who  may  come  up  here  to  the  legislature 
because  we  cannot  get  just  what  we  want  ?  I 
hope  we  shall  go  on  and  get  through  with  all 
our  business  before  christmas. 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  COFFEY,  Mr. 
HARDIN  moved  the  previous  question,  and  the 
main  question  was  ordered.  The  yeas  and  nays 
were  called  for,  on  the  motion  to  reconsider,  and 
being  taken  they  were  yeas  49,  nays  34. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Af- 


716 


Hardin,  John  Hareis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Thomas 
J.  Hood,  Thomas  James,  Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D. 
Morris,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Larkin  J .  Procter,  James  Rudd, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  John '  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler,  Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 49. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James 
Dudley,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Andrew  Hood, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Nathan 
McClure,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner,  George  W. 
Williams— 34. 

So  the  motion  was  reconsidered. 
The  question  recurred  on  striking  out,  and  it 
was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HAMILTON  then  moved  to  amend  the 
section  by  striking  out  all  after  the  words  "coun- 
ty court"  and  insert  the  following  : 

"The  legislature  shall  regulate  by  law,  the 
number  of  judges,  their  duty  and  salary." 
;'     The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD  moved  to  amend  by  adding 
,  the  following  by  way  of  compromise : 
t  "Provided,  the  general  assembly  may,  at  any 
l?time,  abolish  the  office  of  associate  judges 
,j?(7henever  it  shall  be  deemed  expedient,  and  may 
*lso  associate  with  said  court  any  or  all  of  the 
justices  of  the  peace  for  the  transaction  of  any 
^iDusiness." 

i     Mr.  WOODSON  moved  the  previous  question, 
,Bnd  the  main  question  was  ordered. 

The  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Car- 
.  ter  was  then  adopted. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  desired  to  offer  the  following 
as  a  substitute  for  the  entire  section: 

"There  shall  be  established  in  each  county 
now,  or  which  hereafter  may  be  erected  in  this 
commonwealth,  a  county  court,  to  consist  of  all 
the  magistrates  in  each  county,  any  three  of 
■whom  may  constitute  a  couit  for  the  transaction 
of  business,  subject  to  such  modifications  and 
regulations  as  the  general  assembly  may,  from 
time  to  time,  deem  necessary." 

The  President  ruled  it  out  of  order,  the  main 
question  having  been  ordered. 

The  section,  as  amended,  was  then  adopted, 
yeas  63,  ns^s  22. 

Yeas — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 
Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Henr^  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Jas. 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 


win, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Wm. 
Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kav- 
anaugh, Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Wm.  C.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ard L.  Mayes;  John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.Morris,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry 
B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  L. 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Jas.  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Jas. 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John.  J. 
Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Phillip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
Jno.  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
—63. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin, William  Cowper,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Green  Forrest, Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son, Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thom- 
as W.  Lisle,  Nathan  McClure,  Jonathan  New- 
cum  Hugh  Newell,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  Silas  Woodson— 22. 

The  second,  third,  fourth,  and  fifth  sections 
were  adopted  without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  2.  The  judges  of  the  county  court  shall 
be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  in  each  coun- 
ty, for  the  term  of  four  years,  and  shall  continue 
in  office  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly  qual- 
ified, and  shall  receive  such  compensation  for 
their  services  as  may  be  provided  by  law. 

"  Sec.  3.  At  the  first  election  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  the  three  judges  shall 
be  elected  at  the  same  time,  but  the  associate 
judges,  first  elected,  shall  hold  their  offices  for 
only  two  years,  so  that,  thereafter,  the  election 
of  the  presiding  judge,  and  that  of  the  associate 
judges,  will  not  occur  at  the  same  time. 

"  Sec.  4.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
office  of  presiding  or  associate  judge  of  the 
county  court,  unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  over  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a 
resident  of  the  county  in  which  he  shall  be  cho- 
sen, one  year  next  preceding  the  election. 

"  Sec,  5.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  county  court 
shall  be  regulated  by  law;  and,  until  changed, 
shall  be  the  same  now  vested  in  the  county  courts 
of  this  state." 

The  sixth  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"  Sec.  6.  The  several  counties  in  the  state  shall 
be  laid  off  into  distrivits  of  convenient  size,- as 
the  general  assembly  may,  from  time  to  time,  di- 
rect. Two  justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected 
in  each  district,  by  the  qualified  voters  therein, 
for  the  term  of  four  years  each,  whose  jurisdic- 
tion shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  county;  no 
person  shall  be  eligible  as  a  justice  of  the  peace 
unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  of  the 
district  in  which  he  may  be  a  candidate." 

Mr.  IRWIN  moved  to  strike  out  "four"  and 
insert  "two,"  as  the  number  of  years  for  which 
the  justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected. 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  moved  to  amend  the  sec- 
tion by  inserting  the  following  proviso : 

"  Provided,  That  no  county  shall  have  less 
than  six,  nor  more  than  twelve  justices,  exclu- 
sive of  cities." 


717 


After  a  few  \rords  in  explanation  from  Messrs. 
KAVAXAUGH.  McHENRY,  C.  A.  WICK* 
LIFFE,  WOODSON,  and  CHAMBERS— 

Mr.  PROCTOR  moved  the  previous  question, 
nnder  the  operation  of  ■which  the  amendment 
was  rejected,  and  the  section  adopted. 

The  seventh  section  "was  adopted  as  foUovs, 
without  amendment : 

"  Sec.  7.  Judges  of  the  county  court,  and  jus- 
tices of  the  peace,  shall  be  conservators  of  the 
peace.  They  shall  be  commissioned  by  the  gov- 
ernor. County  and  district  officers  shall  vacate 
their  offices  by  removal  from  the  district  or  coun- 
ty in  which  they  shall  be  appointed.  The  legis- 
lature shall  provide,  by  law,  the  mode  and  man- 
ner of  conducting  and  making  due  returns  of 
all  elections  of  judges  of  the  county  court  and 
justices  of  the  peace,  and  for  determining  con- 
tested elections,  and  provide  the  mode  of  filling 
vacancies  in  these  offices." 

The  eighth  section  was  read  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  o.  Judges  of  the  county  courts  and  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  shall  be  subject  to  indictment 
or  presentment  for  malfeasance  or  misfeasance 
in  office,  in  such  mode  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
law,  subject  to  appeal  to  the'  court  of  appeals; 
and,  upon  conviction,  their  offices  shall  become 
vacant." 

Mr.  HARDIX  moved  to  amend  by  inserting  af- 
ter "misfeasance,"  in  the  third  line,  "or  wilful 
neglect  in  the  discharge  of  their  official  duties." 

After  a  brief  explanation,  in  which  Messrs. 
HARDIX,  BRISTOW,  DAVIS,  and  C.  A. 
VVICKLIFFE,  took  part,  the  amendment  was 
adopted. 

Mr.  GHOLSOS"  moved  to  strike  out  the  words 
"to  indictment  or  presentment  for  malfeasance 
or  misfeasance  in  office,  in  such  mode  as  may 
be  prescribed  by  law,  subject  to  appeal  to  the 
court  of  appeals;  and,  upon  conviction,  their  of- 
fices shall  become  vacant,"  and^nsert  the  follow- 
ing: "To  be  removed  from  office  by  a  resolution 
of  the  general  assembly,  passed  by  two  thirds 
of  each  house.  The  cause  or  causes  for  such 
removal  shall  be  entered  at  large  upon  the  jour- 
nal of  each  house." 

He  said  the  section  as  it  now  stood  created 
unjust  and  invidious  distinctions  between  the 
circuit  and  county  judges,  and  he  for  one  would 
never  tolerate  it  by  his  vote. 

The  judges  of  the  county  courts  and  justices 
of  the  peace,  he  presumed,  would  be  as  high- 
mindea  and  as  honorable  gentlemen  as  the  cir- 
cuit judges.  Their  characters,  at  least,  it^would 
be  admitted,  were  as  dear  to  them  as  that  of  the 
circuit  judges  or  any  other  men.  It  was  argued 
that  the  circuit  judges  were  subject  to  indict- 
ment— that  they  would  be  liable  to  petty  annoy- 
ances" from  malevolent  persons.  If  this  was  an 
argument  against  allowing  the  circuit  judge  to 
be  indicted  at  home,  did  it  not  operat«  with 
tenfold  force  against  the  indictment  of  an  igno- 
rant justice  of  the  peace?  A  provision  had  just 
been  adopted  allowing  them,  in  effect,  to  be  in- 
dicted for  their  ignorance.  He  regarded  the 
sending  of  a  circuit  judge  off  to  Frankfort, 
away  from  both  the  witnesses  and  the  injured 
party  to  be  tried,  while  the  humble  individaal, 
as  a  justice  of  the  peace,  was  forced  into  a  trial 
within  the  reach,  perhaps  at  the  door,  of  both. 
It  is  an  outrageous  and  invidious  distinction. 


Again,  he  repeated,  he  wanted  all  to  stand  upon 
a  level;  and  in  behalf  of  his  constituents,  he 
protested  against  nnjust,  unreasonable,  and  anti- 
republican  distinctions  between  the  judicial  offi- 
cers of  the  country. 

Mr.  THOMPSOS"  said  he  would  vote  against 
the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Ballard, 
because  he  thought  the  judges  of  the  court  of 
appeals  and  the  circuit  court  ought  to  be  re- 
moved in  the  sarne  way  as  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee recommended  in  reference  to  the  county 
court  judges,  for  dereliction  of  duty.  He  would 
be  even  willing  to  extend  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee so  as  to  cover  the  whole  ground. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  would  vote  for  the 
amendment  to  save  tlie  judges  of  the  county 
courts  from  the  annoyance  to  which  they  would 
otherwise  be  subjected. 

Mr.  MAYES  said  he  would  vote  against  the 
amendment,  because  he  did  not  like  the  idea  of 
having  a  judge  brought  all  the  way  to  Frank- 
fort, to  answer  for  any  dereliction  of  duty  that 
he  might  be  charged  with. 

Mr.  DUXAYA^^  moved  the  previous  ques- 
tion, and  the  main  question  was  ordered. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for  on  the 
adoption  of  the  amendment,  and  being  taken 
were,  yeas  25,  nays  55. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Wm. 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
Milford  Elliott,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  James  M.  Lackev,  John  H.  MoHenry, 
Thos.  P.  Moore,  Elijah  F.'Xuttall,  John  T.  Ro- 
gers, Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Jno.  L.  Waller,  Jno.  Wheeler,  C.  A.  Wick- 
liffe,  Robt.  X.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 25. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  Alfred  Boyd,  Thos. 
D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  Wm.  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Green  Forrest,  Thomas  tl. 
Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thos.  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Willis 
B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Xathan  McClure, 
John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Xewcum,  Hugh  Xew- 
ell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Wm.  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  James 
W.  Stone.  Michael L.  Stoner,  Wm.  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Trip- 
lett,  Henry  Washington,  George  W.  Williams, 
Silas  Woodson — 55. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

The   section  was  then  adopted. 

The  ninth  section  was  read  and  adopted  as 
follows: 

"Sec.  9.  Thegeneral  assembly  mayprovide,by 
law,  that  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  each  county 
shall  sit  at  the  court  of  claims  and  assist  in  lay- 
ing the  county  levy  and  making  appropriations 
only." 

Mr.  RUDD  offered  the  following  as  an  addi- 
tional section: 


718 


"Sec.  10.  When  any  city  or  town  shall  have  a 
separate  representation,  such  city  or  town,  and 
the  county  in  which  it  is  located,  may  have  such 
separate  municipal  courts,  and  executive  and 
ministerial  officers,  as  the  general  assembly  may, 
from  time  to  time,  provide." 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  PRESTON,  the 
amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  LISLE  now  offered  his  substitute  for  the 
entire  article  as  follows: 

"article  — . 

"Sec.  1  There  shall  be  established  in  each 
county  which  now  is,  or  may  hereafter  be  erect- 
ed within  this  commonwealth,  a  county  court, 
which  shall  consist  of  justices  of  the  peace,  un- 
til othei^wise  directed  by  laAv." 

"Sec.  2.  The  several  counties  in  this  state 
shall  be  laid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size, 
as  the  general  assembly  may,  from  time  to  time, 
direct.  Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  elected  in 
each  district,  by  the  qualified  voters  therein,  for 
the  term  of  four  years,  whose  jurisdiction  shall 
be  co-extensive  with  the  county." 

"Sec.  3.  Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  con- 
servators of  the  peace.  They  shall  be  commis- 
sioned by  the  governor.  The  legislature  shall 
provide,  by  law,  the  mode  and  manner  of  con- 
ducting and  making  due  returns  of  all  elections 
of  justices  of  the  peace,  and  for  determining 
contested  elections,  and  for  filling  vacancies  in 
their  offices." 

"Sec.  4.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  county  court, 
and  of  justices  of  the  peace,  shall  be  regulated 
by  law,  and  until  changed,  shall  remain  the 
same  that  it  now  is." 

"Sec.  5.  Justices  of  the  peace  shall  be  sub- 
ject to  indictment  or  presentment  for  malfea- 
sance or  misfeasance  in  office,  in  such  mode  as 
may  be  prescribed  by  law,  subject  to  an  appeal 
to  the  court  of  appeals,  and  npon  conviction, 
their  offices  shall  become  vacant." 

Mr.  McCLURE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  being  taken  they  were,  yeas  33,  nays  49. 

Yeas. — John  S.  Barlow,  Wiliara  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverlv 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  James  Dudley,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Richatd  D.  Gholson,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Al- 
fred M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Nathan  McClure,  Jonatlian  Mewcum,  Hugh 
Newell,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Micliael, 
L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe— 33. 

Nays. — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard 
Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  Chastcen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford 
Elliott,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  "Vin- 
cent S.  Hay,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thomas  James, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenrv, 
John  D.  Morris,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin 


J.  Proctor,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  How- 
ard Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe.  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 49. 
So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

LOUISVILLE   chancery   COURT. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HARDIN,  the  conven- 
tion resumed  the  consideration  of  the  section  in 
relation  to  the  Louisville  chancery  court.    . 

When  this  section  was  last  before  the  conven- 
tion it  was  amended  by  the  insertion  of  a  pro- 
viso to  render  the  marshal  ineligible  for  a  suc- 
ceeding term.  It  now,  therefore,  stood  as  fol- 
lows: 

"  Sec  — .  The  Louislille  chancery  court  shall 
exist  under  this  constitution,  subject  to  repeal, 
and  its  jurisdiction  to  enlargement  and  modifi- 
cation by  the  legislature.  The  chancellor  shall 
have  the  same  qualifications  as  a  circuit  court 
judge,  and  the  clerk  of  said  court  as  a  clerk  of  a 
circuit  court,  and  the  marshal  of  said  court  as  a 
sheriff;  and  the  legislature  shall  provide  for  the 
election  of  the  chancellor,  clerk,  and  marshal  of 
said  court,  at  the  same  time  that  the  judge  and 
clerk  of  the  circuit  court  are  elected  for  the 
county  of  Jefferson,  and  they  shall  hold  their 
offices  for  the  same  time:  Provided,  That  the 
marshal  of  said  court  shall  be  ineligible  for  a 
succeeding  term." 

Mr.  KELLY  withdrew  a  pending  amendment 
which  ho  offered,  when  the  section  was  last  un- 
der consideration. 

Tlie  section  was  amended  on  the  motion  of  Mr. 
THOMPSON,  by  the  insertion  of  the  words  "by 
the  qualified  voters  within  its  jurisdiction,"  af- 
ter the  word  "election,"  and  before  the  words 
"  of  tlie  chancellor,  clerk,  and  marshal." 

The  section  was  adopted  without  further 
amendment. 

Mr.  PRESTON  offered  an  additional  section, 
as  follows: 

Sec.  — .  That  the  city  court  of  Louisville,  the 
Lexington  city  court,  and  all  other  police  courts 
established  in  any  city  or  town,  shall  remain 
until  otherwise  directed  by  law,  with  their  pres- 
ent powere  and  jurisdictions,  and  the  judges, 
clerks,  and  marsiiHls  of  such  courts,  shall  liave 
the  same  qualifications,  and  shall  be  elected  by 
the  qualified  voters  of  such  cities  or  towns,  at 
the  same  time,  and  in  the  same  manner,  and  hold 
their  offices  for  the  same  term  as  county  judges, 
clerks,  and  marshals,  respectively,  and  shall  be 
liable  to  removal  in  the  same  manner. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  to  amend  by 
adding  the  following: 

"  The  general  assembly  may  vest  judicial  pow- 
ers for  police  purposes  in  the  mayors  of  cities 
and  towns." 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to,  and  the  sec- 
tion, as  amended,  was  adopted. 

The  articles  on  the  court  of  appeals,  the  cir- 
cuit courts,  the  county  courts,  and  the  Louis- 
ville chancery  court,  were  then  referred  to  the 
committee  on  revision  and  arrangement. 

committee   on    APrORTIONMENT. 

The  President  announced  the  following  as  the 
committee  on  the  apportionmeut,  under  the  reso- 


719 


lution  adopted  a  few  days  since,  on  the  motion 
of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  : 

Messrs.  Apperson,  Garrard,  Dixon,  Ir^vin, 
Desha,  G.  W.  Johnston,  Kelly,  James,  Waller, 
and  Macben. 

MORXIXG,   EVEXIXG,   AXD   XIGHT  SESSI0X8. 

Mr.  MAYES  submitted  the  following  resolu- 
tion: 

Resolved,  That  the  convention  will  hereafter 
hold  night  sessions,  commencing  at  seven  and  a 
half  o'clock  P.  M. 

After  a  brief  conversation  on  the  propriety  of 
substituting  night  sessions  for  the  present  eve- 
ning sessions, 

Mr,  MACHEN"  moved  to  lay  the  resolution 
on  the  table. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  then  called  for,  and 
were — yeas  42,  navs  39. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person, John  L.  Ballinger,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S  Crisman,  Jesse  Cof- 
fey, Benjamin  Copelin.  William  Cowper,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Nathan  Gai- 
ther,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Grey,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.  Machen,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Jonathan  Ifewcum,  Hugh  Newell, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  John 
L.  Waller,  Heniy  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N".  Wickliffe,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 42. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Wtlliam  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Green  Forrest,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  John  D. 
Morris,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  James  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thonip- 
son,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  George  W. 
Williams— 39. 

So  the  resolution  was  laid  on  the  table. 

STENINO  SESSIOK. 
EXKCL'TIVK  DEPAETMEXT. 

The  convention  proceeded  to  the  consideration 
of  the  article  concerning  the  executive  depart- 
ment. 

The  first  and  second  sections  were  adopted 
without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  1.  The  supreme  executive  power  of  the 
commonwealth,  shall  be  vested  in  a  chief  magis- 
trate, who  shall  be  styled  the  governor  of  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 

"  Sec.  2.  The  governor  shall  be  elected  for  the 
term  of  four  years,"  by  the  citizens  entitled  to 
suffrage,  at  the  time  and  places  where  they  shall 
respectively  vote  for  representatives.  The  per- 
son having  the  highest  number  of  votes  shall  be 


fovemor;  but  if  two  or  more  shall  be  equal  and 
ighest  in  votes,  the  election  shall  be  detennined 
by  lot,  in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  may 
direct. 

The  third  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"  Sec.  3.  The  governor,  shall  be  ineligible  for 
the  succeeding  four  years  after  the  expiration  of 
the  term  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elected." 

Mr.  KELLY.  As  the  necessity  for  ineligibili- 
ty does  not  now  exist,  inasmuch  as  we  have 
stripped  the  executive  of  all  patronage,  I  am 
willing  to  give  him  a  chance  for  a  re-election. 
I  therefore  move  to  strike  out  the  section. 

The  question  was  taken  by  veas  and  nays,  on 
the  call  of  Mr.  PRICE,  and  tlie  convention  re- 
fused to  strike  out — yeas  27,  nays  53,  as  follows: 

Yeas — Alfred  Boyd,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  Jonathan  Mewcura,  Hugh  Newell, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe— 27. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person, John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  William  Bradley,  Charles 
Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Edward  Curd,  Ar- 
chibald Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John 
H.  McHenrv,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  4).  Morris, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W. 
Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
Jon  Wheeler,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 53. 

The  third  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  fourth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  4.  He  shall  be  at  least  thirty  five  years 
of  age,  and  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  and 
have  been  an  inhabitant  of  this  state  at  least  six 
years  next  preceding  his  election." 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  strike  out  the  word 
"five"  in  the  first  line. 

Mr.  KELLY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays. 

Mr.  GAITHER  inquired  if  it  would  be  in  or- 
der to  move  "forty  five"  instead  of  '-thirty 
five." 

The  PRESIDENT.  Not  until  the  motion  to 
strike  out  is  disposed  of. 

The  question  was  then  taken  and  the  conven- 
tion refused  to  strike  out;  yeas  16,  nays  64,  as 
follows: 

Yeas — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley, Luther 
Brawner,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son, James  P.  Hamilton,  Thomas  James,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  Willis   B.  Machen,  Johnson  Price, 


720 


Lark  in  J.  Proctor,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Stevenson 
—16. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos. 
D.  Brown,  Cliarles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis, 
Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanangh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield, 
William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Na- 
than McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  'James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 64. 

The  fourth  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  fifth  section  was  adopted,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  5.  He  shall  commence  the  execution  of 
his  office  on  the  fourth  Tuesday  succeeding  the 
day  of  the  commeneemgnt  of  the  general  elec- 
tion on  which  he  shall  be  chosen,  and  shall  con- 
tinue in  the  execution  thereof  until  the  end  of 
four  weeks  next  succeeding  the  election  of  his 
successor,  and  until  his  successor  shall  have  ta- 
ken the  oaths,  or  affirmations,  prescribed  by  this 
constitution." 

The  sixth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  6.  No  member  of  congress,  or  person 
holding  any  office  under  the  United  States,  nor 
minister  of  any  religious  society,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  office  of  governor." 

Mr.  PRICE  moved  to  strike  out  the  words 
"nor  minister  of  any  religious  society." 

Mr.  WALLER  asked  that  the  section  might 
be  passed  over  until  Monday.  He  did  it  at  the 
request  of  gentlemen  who  desired  to  be  heard  on 
the  subject. 

This  was  agreed  to,  and  the  section  was  pas- 
sed over. 

The  seventh,  and  eighth  sections  were  read 
and  adopted,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  7.  The  governor  shall,  at  stated  times, 
receive  for  his  services  a  compensation,  which 
shall  neither  be  increased  nor  diminished  dur- 
ing the  term  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elec- 
ted." 

"  Sec.  8.  He  shall  be  commander-in-chief  of 
the  army  and  navy  of  this  commonwealth,  and 
of  the  militia,  except  when  they  shall  be  called 
into  the  service  of^  the  United  States;  but  he 
shall  not  command  personally  in  the  field,  un- 
less he  sliall  be  advised  so  to  do  by  a  resolution 
of  the  general  assembly." 
The  ninth  section  was  read. 
"  Sec.  9.  The  governor  shall  have  the  power 
to  fill  vacancies  that  may  happen  by  death,  re- 
signation, or  otherwise,  by  granting  commis- 
iions,  which  shall  expire  when  such  vacancies 


have  been  filled  according  to  the  provisions  of 
this  constitution." 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  to  insert  the  word 
"  have"  after  the  word  "  vacanies"  where  it  oc- 
curs for  the  second  time. 

This  was  agreed  to  and  the  section  was  then 
adopted. 

The  tenth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  10.  He  shall  have  power  to  remit  fines 
and  forfeitures,  grant  reprives  and  pardons,  ex- 
cept in  cases  of  impeachment.  In  cases  of  trea- 
son, he  shall  have  power  to  grant  reprieves  un- 
til the  end  of  the  next  session  of  the  general  as- 
sembly, in  which  the  power  of  pardoning  shall 
be  vested.  That  whenever  the  governor  shall 
remit  a  fine  or  forfeiture,  or  grant  a  reprieve  or 
pardon,  he  shall  enter  his  reasons  for  doing  so 
on  the  records  of  the  secretary  of  state,  in  a  sep- 
arate book;  and  on  the  requisition  of  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly,  the  same  shall 
be  laid  before  them,  and  published  if  they  deem 
proper." 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  oJBfer  the  following 
amendments  to  this  section. 

" In  the  third  line  after  the  .word  "impeach- 
ment," insert,  "under  such  rules  and  regula- 
tions as  may  be  prescribed  by  law,  in  relation  to 
the  manner  of  application." 

"  Also,  strike  out  all  after  the  word  "  vested," 
in  the  seventh  line,  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof  the 
following:  "Whenever  the  governor  shall  grant 
a  reprieve  or  pardon,  he  shall  enter  his  reasons  for 
doing  so,  on  the  record  of  the  secretary  of  state, 
in  a  separate  book ;  and  shall  lay  the  same  be- 
fore the  next  general  assembly,  thereafter,  to- 
gether with  the  name  of  the  convict,  the  crime, 
the  sentence,  and  its  date;  and  such  other  mat- 
ters connected  with  the  same,  as  may  be  required 
by  law." 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  Some  weeks  ago  I  intro- 
duced a  resolution  before  this  convention,  which 
was  adopted,  directing  the  committee  on  the 
executive  for  the  state  at  large,  to  inquire  into 
the  expediency  of  imposing  such  checks  and 
restrictions  upon  the  exercise  of  the  pardoning 
power,  as  to  prevent  its  abuse  by  the  governor, 
under  partial  or  false  representations  to  him,  by 
the  friends  of  the  convict  or  otherwise.  And  I 
did  so  from  a  firm  conviction  in  my  own  mind, 
that  this  power-this  high  attribute  of  sovereign- 
ty, which  should  exist  in  some  form  or  other,  in 
every  civilized  government,  has,  under  the  gen- 
eral provision  of  our  old  constitution,  been 
shamefully  imposed  upon  and  abused.  That  in- 
stead of  having  been  a  mantle  in  the  hands  of 
the  executive,  to  be  thrown  over  the  innocent  or 
unfortunate,  to  shield  and  protect  them  from  un- 
merited suffering,  it  lias  too  frequently  been 
instrumental  in  rescuing  the  guilty  murderer 
from  that  punishment  which  the  malignity  of 
his  crime  so  richly  deserved ;  that  instead  of 
operating  in  particular  cases  in  mitigation  of  the 
rigid  rules  of  law,  which  must  be  general  in  its 
provisions,  and  may  therefore  sometimes  bo  op- 
pressive; it  has  been  instrumental  in  turning 
lawless  felons  loose  again  upon  society,  to  com- 
mit even  more  daring  outrages.  And  thus,  as  I 
conceive,  this  most  important  power  has  been 
shockingly  perverted  and  abused. 

Now,  I  would  not  be  understood,  in  any  re- 
marks I  shall  make,  as  designing  to  cast  any  im- 


m 


putatiou  upon  the  distinguished  indiridual  who  I  refua«  the  prayers  and  importuniues  of  a  woman 
at  present  occupies  the  execuiive  chair  in  Ken-  in  tears,  whose  heart  is  wrung  with  the  deepest 
tuoKv — nor  indeed  upon  his  predecessors.     For   anguish,  and  feel  no  kind  »ympathy  for  the  suf- 

onder 
these 


I  know  very  Well,  that  the  pivsent  governor  of  ferer,  must  be  almost  a  monster.     No  won 
Kentucky, 'is  incapable  of  knowingly   abusing   then  that  the  governor  so  often  yields  to  tli 


this,  or  any  other  delegated  power,  through  any 
deliberate"  design  of  doing  wrong.  And  I 
nra  persuaded  that  its  exercise,  not  only  while 
in  his  hands,  but  also  of  those  who  have  pre- 
ceded Iiira,  has  always  sprung  frono  the  Wst 
feelings  of  our  nature;  that  it  has  been  promp- 
ted by  the  warm  and  active  sympathies  of  gener- 
ous and  noble  heart.*,  keenly  alive  to  the  suffer- 
ings of  a  fellow  man  ;  and  perhaps  in  most  in- 
stances, the  facts  and  circumstances  connected 
with  the  case,  a.s  laid  before  the  govenior,  wouhl 
Beem  to  have  warranted  his  interposition.     But 


overwhelming  influencies,  and  justified  by  the 
representations  in  the  petition,  turns  the  felon 
loose  again,  and  thus  robs  justice,  and  the  vio- 
lated laws  of  the  country,  of  a  most  appropriate 
victim.  And  all  tliis  is  done  too,  sir,  frequently, 
without  any  information  on  the  part  of  the 
friends  and  relatives  of  those  who  have  so  deep- 
ly suflFered  from  the  crime,  and  without  any 
knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  govenior  of  those 
aggravating  facts  and  circumstances  connected 
with  the  case,  which  have  induced  twelve  hon- 
est jurors,  under  the  solemn  obligations  of  an 


while  I  am  ready  to  concede  this  much,  no  gen- 1  oath,  to  consign  the  guilty  wretch  to  the  peni- 
tleman  upon  this  floor  I  presume,  will  deny  that  I  tentiary  or  the  scaffold.  Such,  sir,  have  been 
this  high  power  has  been  most  egregiously  im-  i  the  operations  of  this  high  power  under  the  un- 
posed  upon  and  abused.  And  how  has  this  been  |  restricted  provisions  of  the  old  constitution; 
done?  Every  delegate  here  is  familiar  with  the  I  such  have  been  the  delusive  representations,  and 
manner  in  which  pardons  are  procured.  No  |  the  bewildering  influences  which,  though  they 
sooner  is  the  sentence  of  the  law  pronounced  j  in  no  wise  expiate  the  crime,  have  yet  hurried 
upon  an  individual — it  matters  not  how  horrible  i  the  governor  into  an  abuse  of  this  power;  and 
may  have  been  the  crime— how  conclusive  the  |  such  must  continue  to  be  tlie  case,  unless  some 
testimony — how  honest  the  jury,  or  how  just  the  j  wholesome  checks  and  restrictions  be  thrown 
sentence^llian  We  see  petitions,  with  long  fx  1  around  its  exercise.  But  I  do  not  desire  wholly 
partt  statements  of  the  case,  circulated  bv  the  i  to  destroy  this  power,  nor  indeed  to  embarrass 
friends  of  the  convict,  for  subscribers.  This  is  j  its  just  and  legitimate  exercise;  for  I  regard  it 
almost  universally  the  ca.se  ;  unless,  indeed,  the  \  as  a  necessar\^  and  important  power  appertain- 
person  be  some  poor  miserable  creature,  whose  I  ing  to  all  sovereignty,  and  one  which  must  be 
poverty  or  obscurity  in  life,  have  drawn  around  !  confided  to  some  one  department  of  the  govem- 
him  no  prominent  or  influential  friends.  And  j  raent  or  other;  and  it  cannot,  in  my  opinion,  bo 
how  are  signatures  to  these  petitions,  tilled  with  i  more  safely  or  appropriately  entrusted  to  any 
exaggerated,  and  soraetimea  false  statements, pro- j  other  than  to  the  chief  magistrate  of  the  state 


cured.  One  signs  it  to  accommodate  a  friend  ; 
a  second,  after  continued  inij^wrtuuity  ;  a  third 
through  svmpathy;  a  fourth  carelessly,  because 
forsooth.  It  costs  nothing  ;  and  others  have  sign 


ed  it,  a  fifth — the  wily  and   desiuing  politician   special  or  unforseen  cases.     Besides,  it  is  found 


or  demagogue — for  the  purpose  of  attaching  to 
himself  the  friends  and  relations  of  the  convict, 
for  future  political  purposes,  and  so  on  another 
and  another,  and   often  times  too,  without  so 


The  necessity  of  such  a  power,  in  all  govern- 
ments, grows  out  of  the  imperfections  of  all 
human  laws,  which,  as  before  remarked,  must 
be  getieral,  and  cannot  be  so  framed  as  to  meet 


ed  on  principles  of  justice,  as  Well  as  humanity. 
For  althougn  its  exercise  may  be  in  some  in- 
stances  a  mere  act  of  mercy  to  the  convict;  yet 
cases  may  arise  in  which  its  interposition  would 


much  as  reading  the  statements  they  certify —  I  be  a  matter  of  right  and  justice,  not  only  to  the 


until  a  long  list  of  names  are  procured.  These 
are  all  then  paraded  before  the  governor,  as  so 
many  worthy  and  orderly  citizens,  living  in  the 
very  coniiuuliity  in  whicli  the  outrage  was  com- 
mitted— yet  begging  for  mercy  up<jii  the  con- 
vict, and' representing  him  in  the  petition  they 
have  signed,  more  in  the  light  of  a  persecuted 
saint,  than  of  a  guilty  felon.  And  thus  the  gov- 
ernor is  imposed  upon,  and  seduced  into  the  be- 
lief that  the  penalty  is  severe  and  ought  not  to 
be  executed. 

But  this  is  not  all.    In  aid  of  these  partial 
and  highly  colored  statements,  the  tears  and 


individual  himself,  but  also  to  the  community  in 
which  he  lives;  and  I  need  but  instance  the  case 
where  an  innocent  man  is  about  to  become  the 
victim  of  perjury  and  corruption.  In  such  a  case, 
justice  demands  that  tliore  should  be  a  strong 
arm  somewhere  to  rescue  the  unfortunate  suffer- 
er. That  power  I  Would  not  destroy  or  trammel 
so  as  to  prevent  its  healthy,  vigorous  operation. 
But  I  would  throw  about  it  those  checks  and 
guards  that  would  most  effectually  prevent  its 
abuse,  witliout  impairing  its  usefulness.  This 
end  I  conceive  will  be,  in  some  measure,  attain- 
ed by  adopting  some  such  provisions  as  are  in- 


pravers  of  disconsolate  relatives,  of  bereaved  1  dicated  in  my  amendments.  But  if  any  gentle 
wives  and  children,  begging  the  life  or  liberty  '"an  ^^»11  suggest  how  tins  may  be  more  certain- 
of  a  father,  a  brother,  a  husband,  or  a  son;  in  a  ^7  accomplished,  I  will  cheerfully  abandon  these 
word,  every  manifestation  of  grief  or  distres.-*  and  acquiesce  in  his  propositions, 
that  can  awaken  the  sympathies  of  a  generous  \  By  my  first  amendment,  I  propose  inserting 
heart,  are  called  into  requisition.    Under  tlie  ac- '  after  the  word  "impeachment,"   in  the  second 


cumulated  weight  of  these  favorable  representa 
tions  and  absorbing  influences,  what  can  a  gov- 
ernor do?  Sir,  the  man  who  can  resist  the  soft 
entreaties  and  gentle  solicitations  of  a  woman, 
even  with  a  smile  upon  her  lips,  must  be  made 
of  the  sternest  material;  and  th«  man  who  can 
91 


line,  these  words,  vir:  "under  such  rules  and 
regulations  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law,  in  re- 
lation to  the  manner  of  application."  My  ob- 
ject in  this  is  to  empower  the  legislature,  by 
some  general  laws,  to  provide  means  for  giving 
notice  of  the  application,  to  the  citisens  of  th« 


722 


County  In  which  the  trial  was  had;  and  also  of 
securinff  to  the  governor  the  most  perfect  infor- 
mation in  reference  to  the  facts  of  the  case,  as 
developed  upon  the  trial,  that  can  be  obtained; 
and  thus  guarding,  as  far  as  possible,  the  exec- 
utive from  imposition;  and  the  community  from 
surprise. 

In  my  second  amendment,  I  depart  somewhat 
from  the  provision,  as  reported  by  the  commit- 
tee, in  making  it  incumbent  upon  the  executive, 
whenever  a  reprieve  or  pardon  shall  have  been 
granted,  to  lay  liis  reasons  therefor,  together 
with  the  name  of  the  convict,  the  crime,  sen- 
tence, (fee,  before  the  next  legislature.  The  ob- 
ject of  this  provision  is  to  guard  against  any 
wilful  or  capricious  exercise  of  this  power, 
should  any  governor  be  so  disposed,  and  to  re- 
strict it  to  those  cases  in  which  some  good  and 
sufficient  reason  could  be  assigned  for  the  inter- 
position. Besides,  sir,  I  believe  the  propriety 
of  requiring  the  governor  to  assign  his  reasons, 
in  such  cases,  is  well  founded  in  principle. 
What  is  this  power?  It  is  a  virtual  veto  on  the 
adjudications  of  our  criminal  courts.  It  is  the 
right  to  say  to  these  courts,  when  they  are  about 
inflicting  the  penalty  of  the  law  upon  one  found 
guilty  of  its  violation,  /  forbid.  If  upon  the 
passage  of  any  law  by  the  general  asseraoly,  the 
governor  shall  interpose  his  veto,  he  is  required 
to  render  a  reason  for  his  dissent.  Is  it  requir- 
ing too  much  then  of  him,  when  he  assumes  the 
right  to  dispense  with  established  laws,  and  de- 
feat their  enforcement,  to  require  of  him  to  ren- 
der a  reasonV  I  think  not.  Under  the  last 
clause  of  this  amendment,  the  legislature  may 
require  other  matters  connected  with  each  case, 
than  those  already  indicated,  to  be  laid  before 
them.  The  object  of  this  is  to  deter  men  from 
carelessly  and  inconsiderately  signing  false  or 
exaggerated  statements  to  the  governor,  with  the 
view  of  procuring  a  pardon.  Let  men  once  un- 
derstand that  their  names  may  be  published  to 
the  country,  as  certifying  the  statements  con- 
tained in  such  a  petition,  and  they  will  be  much 
more  cautious  how  they  sign  them.  The  result 
will  be  that  applications  will  be  less  frequent, 
and  the  governor  himself  will  not  be  liable 
to  be  imposed  upon  or  misled  by  them. 

Mr.  DIXON.  When  the  proposition  requiring 
that  the  governor  should  keep  a  book  upon 
which  he  should  spread  his  reasons  for  all  the  par- 
dons that  he  might  grant,  was  first  presented  in  the 
committee,  it  struck  me  with  much  force,  and  I 
believe  we  were  unanimous  in  favor  of  its  adop- 
tion. Subsequently,  however,  our  action  pre.sent- 
ed  a  difference  of  opinion,  and  I  confess  I  was 
among  those  who  came  to  the  conclusion  that  it 
■was  improper  to  engraft  such  a  requisition  upon 
the  executive,  in  the  constitution.  I  think  it 
would  subject  the  governor  to  a  great  deal  of  in- 
convenience, and  tnat  perhaps  it  would  go  very 
far  to  defeat  the  exercise  of  what  was  intended 
to  be  vested  in  him,  the  pardoning  power  itself. 
Various  descriptions  of  men,  it  is  to  be  expected, 
will  be  chosen  governors  of  the  commonwealth, 
and  some  will  be  weak,  vascillating,  and  timid, 
liud  .some  will  not.  I  desire  the  governor,  in 
granting  pardons,  to  exercise  his  discretion  with 
An  eye  single  to  theTeal  interests  of  the  country, 
$aA  the  justice  of  the  application,  and  I  do  not 
beli«ve  all  executives  we  may  have  will  so  exer- 


!  cisa  it,  if  thev  shall  be  required  to  spread  outona 
[  book,  in  each  case,  the  reasons  which  influenced 
I  their  action.  This,  it  will  be  seen,  is  required 
j  even  where  the  pardon  is  for  the  most  trivial  of- 
I  fences.  In  almost  every  instance  where  a  man 
is  convicted  of  crime,  tliere  are  two  parties,  one 
for,  and  the  other  against  him,  and  in  the  case  of 
a  pardon,  the  party  favoring  a  conviction  are  al- 
ways certain  to  censure  the  executive  ff)r  his  ex- 
ercise of  that  power.  The  mere  spreading  out 
in  a  book  of  his  reasons  therefor,  woidd  never 
satisfy  the  party  in  favor  of  conviction.  That 
there  are  cases  also,  where  an  executive  should 
interpose  his  clemency,  and  where  he  could  give 
no  good  reason  therefor,  I  am  fully  satisfied. 
Without  undertaking  to  designate  such  a  case,  I 
can  well  understand  how  one  might  arise,  where 
the  law  exacted  the  full  execution  of  the  penal- 
ties upon  the  unfortunate  man,  and  vet  which 
strongly  and  deservedly  appealed  to  the  clemen- 
cy of  the  executive,  and  of  the  whole  country 
for  mercy.  Are  such  unfortunate  men  to  be  sa- 
crificed, or  the  governor  to  come  before  the  legis- 
lature and  perhaps  have  his  motives  impugned, 
and  his  feelings  outraged?  Is  that  the  inten- 
tion of  my  young  friend  from  Carter. 

Mr.  T.J.HOOD.  The  gentleman  misunder- 
stands me.  I  do  not  propose  that  the  authority 
to  exercise  this  power  shall  be  subject  to  the 
control  of  the  legislature.  My  amendment  has  ref- 
erence only  to  the  mode  of  making  applications 
for  pardon,  to  the  governor,  and  merely  author- 
izes the  legislature  to  call  on  him,  to  lay  before 
them  the  names  of  the  applicants,  and  the  crim- 
inal. 

Mr.  DIXON.  Well,  then  it  is  in  relation  to 
the  manner  of  making  the  application.  By 
whom  is  it  to  be  provided  that  the  application 
shall  be  made?  I  know  of  but  one  source  to 
whom  it  should  be  left,  and  that  is  to  those  who 
feel  an  interest  m  the  unfortunate  man  for  whom 
the  pardon  is  required.  If  it  was  to  be  left  to 
the  judge  or  the  jury  with  their  minds  preju- 
diced against  him,  or  to  those  who  desired  to 
see  him  sacrificed,  then  the  application  would 
never  be  made.  Would  the  gentleman  debar 
the  unfortunate  wife,  or  the  still  more  unfortu- 
nate children,  from  appealing  to  the  executive 
clemency  in  behalf  of  a  husband  or  a  father? 
And  if  a  governor  should  yield  to  such  solicita- 
tions, would  he  not  find  a  response  in  the  hearts 
of  the  whole  people  of  Kentucky?  It  was  for 
this,  among  other  purposes,  that  this  power  of 
mercy  was  vested  in  tiie  governor,  and  so  long 
as  it  is  exercised,  independent  of  bribery,  cor- 
ruption, or  any  improper  influences,  the  people 
will  never  complain  of  it.  And  to  prevent  any- 
thing of  that  kind,  I  am  willing  to  go  as  far  as 
any  gentleman.  Yet  I  have  never  heard  of  any 
complaint  on  the  part  of  the  people  in  that  par- 
ticular. But  when  the  tears  of  women  and  chil- 
dren are  brought  to  operate  on  an  executive,  let 
him  have  the  privilege  of  bearing  himself,  at 
least,  as  a  man  should  do.  For  my  own  part,  I 
do  not  know  how  I  should  act,  were  I  an  ex- 
ecutive, but  I  agree  with  my  young  friend.  I 
do  not  know  that  I  could  v  ithstand  the  tears  of 
woman  or  resist  her  gentle,  but  all  controlling 
influence,  however  exerted:  for  God  knows  that 
wb^n  they  bhould  appeal  to  me  in  behalf  of  an 
unfort^inate  husbann,  or  rod,  or  brother,  or  any 


72» 


other  near  aud  dear  relative,  I  do  Dot  know 
whether  I  could  resist  them.  I  might,  or  I 
might  not.  But  whether  I  did  or  not,  I  might  be 
reproached  for  my  want  of  firmness,  but  never 
condemned  for  a  lack  of  those  noble  and  gener- 
ous ft^lings  of  the  heart,  which  give  man  his 
elevation  above  the  brute,  and  approximate  him 
in  his  nature    to  the  gods.    If  the  pardoning 

f)owfr  is  to  be  exercised  at  all,  and  it  must  be, 
eave  it  to  the  discretion  of  the  executive.  Let 
him  exercise  it  in  mercy — uncontrolled  and  un- 
restrained by  anything  save  his  obligations  to 
his  country,  to  himself,  and  to  tlie  unfortunate 
victim. 

"The  quality  of  mercy  is  not  strained. 
It  droppetb  as  th«  gentle  rain  from  heaven 
Upon  the  place  beneath;  it  is  twice  blessed- 
It  blesseth  him  that  gives,  and  him  that  takes, 
Tis  mightiest  in  the  mightiest. 
It  isan  attribute  to  God  himself— 
And  earthly  power  doth  then  show  likeest  God's, 
When  mercy  seasons  justice." 

Mr.  DAVIS.  When  the  subject  was  in  com- 
mittee, I,  myself,  was  in  favor  of  making  this 
Erovision  a  little  stronger  than  it  is,  if  we  could 
ave  done  so  with  proper  respect  to  the  chief 
executive  officer  of  the  government.  I  will  read, 
before  I  set  down,  a  proposition  which  I  will 
oflPer  as  an  amendment  to  the  section  under  con- 
sideration, whether  the  amendment  proposed  by 
my  young  friend  from  Carter,  (Mr.  T.  J.  H«>od,') 
be  adopted  or  not.  The  power  we  are  about  to 
regulate  is  one  of  the  highest  exercised  in  the 
government.  It  is  no  less  than  the  power  to  dis- 
pense with  the  criminal  and  penal  laws  of  the 
country  by  the  governor.  "We  know — at  least 
I  have  heard  such  complaints  ever  since  my  boy- 
hood— that  the  exercise  of  this  power  under  our 
constitution,  has  been  subject  to  some  abuse, 
and  some  considerable  abuse  too.  I  do  not 
know  how  the  present  executive  has  exercised 
this  power  to  remit  fines  and  forfeitures  and  to 
grant  pardons,  but  in  a  single  instance,  and  thai 
through  publications  in  the  newspapers;  but  for 
twenty  five  years  I  have  heard  frequent  and 
constant  complaints  of  the  abuse  of  this  power, 
and  especially  in  regard  to  the  rerai.ssion  of  fines 
and  forfeitures;  and  I  imagine  that  no  gentle- 
man will  contend  that  in  that  respect,  at  least, 
the  power  has  not  been  abused  and  considera- 
bly so,  within  the  last  twenty  five  years,  in  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky.  I  suppose  it  is 
the  business  and  the  duty  of  every  gentleman 
here  to  reflect  the  wishes  and  feelings  of  his 
constituents  in  relation  to  constitutional  re- 
forms, so  far  as  he  can  consistently  do  it.  Well, 
I  do  know  that  in  my  section  of  country  this 
has  been  a  subject  of  frequent  complaint,  and  I 
even  heard  charges  made  against  successive  ex- 
ecutives for  the  free  and  unnecessary  use  of  this 
function  of  remitting  fines  and  forfeitures.  I 
have  heard  a  very  strong  desire  for  a  remedy  that 
will  be  efficient  in  itself,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
proper  and  respectful  to  the  executive;  if  such 
an  one  can  be  devised,  and  I  consider  it  the  du- 
ty of  the  convention  to  interpose  such  a  remedy, 
ifow  it  is  the  business  and  the  duty  of  the  infe- 
rior courts  to  execute  the  criminal  and  penal 
laws,  and  when  they  are  in  the  course  of  execu- 
ting these  laws,  the  executive  interposes,  and  of 
his  own  will  arrests  their  functions  and  prevents 
them.    This  is  a  high  power,  important  to  the 


j  public  welfare*  and  in  the  proper  exercise  of 

which  the  executive  ought  to  be  held  to  a  per- 

I  feet  responsibility.     He  ought  never  to  interpose 

\  this  power,  in  my  judgment,  without  a  reason, 

and  a  sufficient  one;  and  I  think  that  when  he 

■  does  exercise  it,  he  ought  to  be  required  to  give 

■  his  reasons  to  the  court  with  whose  functions 
'  he  interferes.  I  propose  to  add  to  the  end  of  the 
!  section  these  words  : 

Amend  the  tenth  section  by  adding  these 
words :  "and  the  said  governor  shall  state,  spe- 
cifically, and  cause  to  be  certified  to  the  court 
rendering  judgment  for  any  fine,  forfeiture,  or 
conviction  of  crime,  for  which  any  remission, 
reprieve,  or  pardon,  the  reasons  upon  which  he 
may  have  granted  such  remission,  reprieve,  or 
pardon." 

When  the  governor,  by  the  exercise  of  this 
constitutional  function,  interferes,  and  in    fact, 
says  to  the  inferior  court,  you  shall  not  execute 
the  criminal  law,  it  seems  to  me  he  ought  to  have 
a  good  reason  for  doing  so.     And  it  would  be 
but  respectful  to  the  co-ordinate  branch   of  the 
government,  the  judiciary,  that  he  should   give 
to  them  the  reasons  which  induced  him  so  to  in- 
terpose.    Ifow,  my  amendment  would  require 
the  executive  to  state  these  reasons   at  length, 
and  to  communicate  them  to  the  court.     What 
,  would  be  the  effect?    I  take  it  for  granted  that 
!  no  executive  of  this  state,  having  a  due  regard 
'  to  his  own  self-respect,  the  high  dignity  of  the 
I  station  he  fills,  and  the  interest  of  the  commu- 
I  nity.  would  ever  interpose  and   arrest  a  judg- 
j  ment,  under  such  circumstances,   without  suffi- 
i  cient  reason,  and  without  being  willing  to  give 
it  to  the  public.     It  seems  to  me,  that  such  a  re- 
I  quirement  would  act  as  a  check  upon  the  free 
i  and  negligent  use  of  this  power.     I   do  not  be- 
I  lieve  it  has  ever  been  corruptly  exercised  in  this 
I  state,  but  it  has  been  certainly  with  great  fre- 
i  queney,    and  without   due  examination  of  the 
I  fects  of  the  case,  by  the  executive.     I  think  this 
\  mode  of  exercising  that  power,  will  be  prevent- 
ed, in  some  degree  at    least,   if  the   executive 
should  be  required  to  assign  to   the  courts  the 
reasons  for  his  interposing  this  extraordinarv' pow- 
er.   I  am  not  myself  opposed  to  the  amendments 
offered  bv  my  talented  young  friend  from  Carter, 
(Mr.  T.  J.  Hood.)      I  will  vote   for  them,  but 
whether  they  are  adopted  or  not,  it  seems  to  me 
there  ought  to  be  some  check  at  least,  upon  the 
power  to  remit  fines  and  forfeitures,  and  that  the 
governor  ought  to  be  held  to  some  responsibility 
which  would  make  hira  more  chary  in   its  exer- 
cise.    I  should  be  gratified  if  some  amendment 
should  be  offered,  more  perfect  in  itself,  and  more 
respectful  to  the  officer,  than  the  one  I  have  indi- 
cated. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  against  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Carter,  as  well  as  against 
the  larger  portion  of  the  section  itself.  What  is 
meant  by  "such  rules  and  regulations  as  may  be 
prescribed  by  law,  in  relation  to  the  manner  of 
application?"  The  gentleman  (Mr.  Hood)  says, 
it  means  only  that  the  legislature  shall  prescribe 
that  the  names  of  the  men  who  sign  the  petition 
shall  be  published,  and  he  says  further,  that  the 
governor  is  frequently  imposed  upon  by  the 
statement  of  things  in  those  petitions  that  are 
not  true.  The  objection  I  have  to  the  amend- 
ment is,  that  it  gives  to  the  legislature  the  pow- 


m 


*r  to  take  away  the  right  of  pardohlng  entirely, 
if  they  choose.  Suppose  they  were  to  prescribe 
that  the  governor  never  should  grant  a  pardon 
unless  upon  the  application  of  the  judge  who 
convicted  the  man,  and  suppose,  by  chance,  we 
should  get  a  Jeflfries  on  the  bench,  who  delights 
in  blood;  or  suppose  they  should  pass  a  law, 
that  the  governor  never  should  parcion  a  man, 
unless  both  the  judge  and  the  jury  who  convict- 
ed him,  should  unanimously  sign  the  petition. 
Would  it  not  be  taking  away,  to  a  great  extent, 
the  pardoning  power?  A  thousand  instances 
may  be  enumerated,  where  circumstances,  in  the 
case  of  a  convicted  person,  address  themselves 
strongly  to  the  clemency  and  mercy  of  the  ex- 
ecutive, which  are  not  and  cannot  be  presented 
before  a  court  and  jury.  A  youth,  for  instance, 
of  from  twelve  to  fafteen  years  of  age  is  persua- 
ded by  some  one  else  to  commit  a  crime.  Well, 
you  cannot  get  the  evidence  of  that  fact  in  before 
a  jury,  and  vet  you  could  before  the  governor, 
and  It  would  be  a  strong  appeal  to  his  mercy. 
Should  not  the  friends  of  the  convicted,  in  such 
a  case,  be  permitted  to  sign  a  petition  for  the  ex- 
ecutive clemency?  Suppose  a  judge  and  jury 
are  about  to  hang  a  man,  or  send  him  to  the  pen- 
itentiary, in  open  and  manifest  violation  of  law 
and  fact;  is  there  to  be  no  pardoning  power  any 
where?  Clearly  there  should  be.  Are  we  not 
all  agreed,  that  the  governor  should  have  this 
power?  Yes.  Why  then  say  that  the  legisla- 
ture may  take  it  away  from  him? 

My  friend,  (Mr.  Davis,)  says  in  relation  to  re- 
mitting fines  and  forfeitures,  that  the  governor, 
out  of  courtesy,  should  assign  reasons  therefor 
to  the  court  below.  A  magistrate  imposes  a 
fine  of  one  dollar,  and  the  governor,  choosing 
to  remit  it,  must,  out  of  courtesy  to  that  magis- 
trate, lest  his  dignity  should  be  offended,  give 
him  the  reasons  why!  A  petty  court  martial 
fines  a  man  improperly,  and  the  governor  remit- 
ting it,  whv  he  must  certify  to  them  the  reasons 
therefor!  What  is  to  grow  out  of  this?  Can  any 
action  be  taken  on  the  subject  by  the  court  when 
they  have  got  the  reasons?  IsTo.  The  governor 
then  is  to  be  obliged  to  write  out  and  furnish  them 
with  his  reasons,  merely  as  an  act  of  courtesy  to 
the  magistrate,  and  to  be  put  into  his  pocket,  I 
suppose.  I  concur  with  my  friend  that  the  gov- 
ernor is  too  often  mislead  in  the  exercise  of  this 
power,  but  we  mu.st  vest  this  pardoning  power 
somewhere.  In  the  government  of  the  United 
States  it  is  vested  in  the  president;  in  the  gov- 
ernment of  each  and  every  state  of  this  Union 
it  is  vested  in  the  executive  of  the  state  govern- 
ment; in  Great  Britain,  in  the  king;  and  in 
every  power  in  Europe  it  is  in  the  hands  of  the 
executive  department  of  the  government.  We 
have  left  it  to  the  governor  from  the  formation 
of  our  constitution  down  to  the  present  day, 
and  we  do  not  intend  to  take  it  away  from  him. 
Why  then  subject  him  to  the  humiliation  of 
sending  to  a  little  petty  conrt  the  reasons  why 
he  has  remitted  a  fine?  A  man  is  fined,  for 
swearing,  five  shillings  an  oath,  or  for  any 
other  of  the  hundred  little  offences,  and  the  rea- 
sons are  to  be  gravely  spread  out  in  a  book  for 
fublic  inspection  or  tne  satisfaction  of  thecourts! 
am  against  such  a  requirement.  What  is  to 
grow  out  of  it?  Nothing  that  I  can  conceive  of, 
except  it  will,  as  8ai<l   oy  the  gentleman  from 


Carter,  expose  the  tnan  who  signs  the  petitions 
and  certifies  to  a  false  statement  of  facts.  I 
acknowledge  there  is  a  great  deal  of  sense  in 
that  suggestion,  but  at  the  same  time  no  good 
can  grow  out  of  it.  I  am  for  leaving  the  power 
as  it  existed  under  the  present  constitution. 
And  rather  than  deprive  the  friends  of  the  con- 
victed of  the  right  to  petition,  I  prefer  to  sub- 
mit to  occasional  abuses  of  the  power,  not  in- 
tentional, on  the  part  of  the  governor.  It  is 
better  to  submit  to  that  than  to  degrade  and 
humble  that  elevated  officer. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  This  report  is  from  the  com- 
mittee of  which  I  have  the  honor  to  be  a  mem- 
ber, and  I  wish  to  place  myself  in  a  proper  atti- 
tude before  the  house,  having  jiledged  myself  to 
support  the  reports  of  coaunittees  unless  there 
should  be  an  obvious  necessity  for  departing  from 
them.  On  the  present  occasion,  however,  I  shall 
be  prepared  to  vote  against  this  requirement,  that 
the  reasons  of  the  governor  shall  be  spread  out 
in  a  book.  I  shall  not  make  any  motion  to 
strike  out  myself,  but  if  it  should  be  made  I 
shall  vote  for  it  most  cheerfully. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  move  to  strike  out 
the  whole  of  the  latter  part  of  the  section. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  is  not  in  order  until 
the  pending  amendments  are  disposed  of. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  reason  which  induced  me  to 
suggest  the  amendment,  was  not  as  a  matter  of 
courtesy  to  the  petty  tribunals  which  are  author- 
ized by  the  laws  of  the  land,  to  impose  fines, 
but  that  the  governor  should  not  exercise  the 
power  of  remitting  fines  and  forfeitures  or  par- 
don without  a  reason.  Now,  he  may  do  it  with 
or  without  a  reason.  Well,  if  we  require  him 
to  assign  a  reason  to  the  court  which  has  exer- 
cised jurisdiction,  he  must  have  one  upon  which 
he  is  to  act.  It  is  for  the  purpose  of  having  the 
security  of  a  reason  for  his  important  action  iu 
matters  of  this  kind,  that  I  would  require  him 
to  assign  a  reason  for  the  act.  And  I  would  re- 
quire it  to  be  transmitted  to  the  court  which  im- 
posed the  fine,  or  exercised  their  functions  of 
judicial  power,  in  order  that  his  act  of  remission 
or  pardon,  and  reprieve,  shall  be  made  public, 
ana  not  only  that,  but  made  public  too  that  he 
had  a  reason,  and  a  sufficient  one  so  to  act.  The 
effect  would  be,  in  my  judgment,  to  make  the 
governor  amenable  to  public  opinion  and  senti- 
ment. I  merely  want  .sonif  provision  that  will 
require  him  to  act  upon  a  reason,  and  that  a  suf- 
ficent  one.  This  then  would  be  some  restraint 
upon  the  abuses  of  power.  The  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  admits  that  the  power 
has  been  abused,  and  if  so,  I  desire  a  remedy  so 
far  as  one  can  be  devised  which  is  proper  in  it- 
self, and  the  only  one  I  can  think  of  interposing 
would  be  to  make  the  gc^vernor  amenable  to  pulv 
lic  opinion,  by  having  the  reason  for  his  action 
spread  before  the  community.  And  I  think  that 
would  be  effected  by  the  proposition  I  have  sug- 
gested, that  he  be  required  to  give  to  the  court, 
the  reasons  upon  which  he  lias  acted.  Now,  I 
ask  my  friend  from  Nelson,  if  there  is  not  a  great 
difference  between  a  man's  doing  an  act  and  be- 
ing clothed  with  power  upon  which  he  may  act 
without  reason,  and  a  case  where  he  is  required 
to  state  the  reasons  which  influenced  him?  In 
the  latter  case  would  he  not  be   more   likely  to 


725 


«ct  apon  wis«,  good,  and  eufficient  reasons  Utao 
in  the  former? 

Mr.  XEWELL.  As  a  member  of  the  commit- 
tee who  made  this  report,  it  may  be  proper  for 
me  to  say  a  few  words.  I  am"  in  favor  of  tlie 
report  of  the  committee.  I  would  be  a*  far  a.«  any 
other  gentleman  in  this  house  from  calling  upon 
the  executive  to  do  any  thing  tliat  would  be  de- 
grading to  his  station;  and  I  am  vet  to  be  con- 
vinced that  merely  calling  upon  fiira  to  give  a 
rea.son  for  his  action  would  be  degrading  him. 
Now  this  is  a  veto  power  above  all  vetoes,  that 
vou  now  place  in  the  hands  of  your  executive. 
It  is  a  veto  power  over  all  your  courts  and  their 
decisions,  to  be  exercised  without  a  why  or 
wherefore.  I  am  willing  to  confer  the  power  in 
all  its  strength,  as  now,  but  1  have  always  be- 
lieved that  every  man  in  power  ought  to  be  will- 
ing to  give  a  reason  for  his  action.  It  is  said 
that  eveiy  man  ought  to  be  able  to  give  a  reason 
for  the  hope  that  is  within  him.  And  is  it  degrad- 
ir.gto  the  executive  then, to  ask  him  to  give  a  rea- 
son why  he  reverses  the  decisions  of  the  courts? 
I  think  it  would  be  neither  inconvenient  nor  de- 
grading to  that  high  functionary  to  givf  such  a 
reason.  And  I  think  it  would  be  a  restraint  up- 
on the  improper  or  negligent  exercise  of  the 
power.  He  would  feel  it  incumbent  on  him  to 
reflect  and  to  examine,  unless  there  were  good 
reasons  to  justifv  him,  before  he  granted  a  par- 
don. My  frieu'l  from  Henderson  said,  if  he  was 
an  executive,  he  could  not  resist  a  woman  any 
how.  I  apprehend  it  would  be  perfectly  satis- 
factory to  the  country  if  he  would  give  that  as  a 
reason  for  his  action,  and  I  have  no  doubt  he 
would  be  willing  to  give  it.  I  am  for  the  report 
just  as  it  stands. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  will  say  to  my  friend  that  I 
should  be  verj'  happy  to  leave  it  to  the  commu- 
nity, if  I  had  any  such  reasons.  I  repeat,  I  do 
not  see  how  I  could  resist  a  woman  beseeching 
me  and  pouring  out  her  tears  in  behalf  of  some 
near  and  dear  relative,  unles-s  I  had  a  heart  of 
stone  and  was  les.s  than  a  man.  1  might  turn 
away  and  refuse  the  pardon  if  the  ut-ces.sities  of 
justice  required  it,  still  I  should  feel  for  the  un- 
fortunate wonian  as  a  man  should. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  I  ilo  not  doubt  what  the  gen- 
tleman says,  and  I  think  he  would  be  able  to 
justify  himself  bv  oflFering  it  a.s  a  good  reason 
for  the  exercise  ut  the  executive  clemency. 

Mr.  DIXON.  If  so,  then  there  appears  to  be 
no  difFerence  between  us. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  either  of  these 
gentlemen  should  be  governor,  from  what  they 
have  said,  we  may  expect  that  no  married  man 
will  be  hung  or  punished  in  Kentucky,  during 
their  i  ontinnancc  in  office.  I  am  against  the 
amendment  and  the  whole  of  the  latter  clause  of 
the  section.  The  exercise  of  the  pardoning 
power  is  a  high  exercise  of  sovereignty,  fori 
suppose  that  all  will  admit  that  it  is  an  exercise 
of  sovereign  power  delegated  to  the  chief  mag- 
istracy representing  the  whole  state.  It  is 
not  usual  in  government  to  a«k  the  sovereign 
people  to  give  a  reason  for  their  acts.  If  I  could 
.see  auythino;  that  was  to  grow  out  of  the  requi- 
sition that  these  reasons  shall  he  recorded  in  the 
executive  office,  or  reported  to  the  legislature,  by 
which  the  error  the  governor  had  comniitted  was 
to  be  corrected,  and  the  man  pardoned  was  to  be 


returned  to  punishment,  then  I  might  b«  in- 
duced, under  the  apprehensions  of  abuses  that, 
have  been  or  might  oe  practiced,  to  acquiesce  in 
the  necessity  of  requiring  this  provision.  No  such 
purpose,  however,  is  intendc-d  or  expected.  We 
delegate  to  the  executive  this  higli  sovereign 
power  of  pardoning  offences,  and  the  very  term 
itself  presupposes  guilt  in  the  individual  par- 
doned, and  the  exercise  of  mercy  towards  the 
offender  for  the  violation  of  the  law.  And  be- 
ing thus  an  exercise  of  mercy,  delegatetl  by  the 
sovereign  people  to  their  agent,  the  executive, 
what  better  reasons  could  be  given  bv  a  gover- 
nor than  to  say  he  exercised  it  out  of  mercy  to 
the  offender  and  violator  of  the  law.  Suppose  a 
man  condemned  to  be  hung,  and  though  his 
guilt  has  been  admitted,  and  there  is  no  doubt 
that  the  man  has  forfeited  his  life  under  the 
laws,  the  executive  should  say,  I  pardon  him 
because  I  think  him  a  fit  subject  of  mercy.  Is 
that  not  a  good  reason  for  the  exercise  of  the 
pardoning  power?  What  good  is  there  then  to 
result  from  requiring  these  reasons  to  be  entered 
upon  an  executive  journal?  What  are  these  rea- 
sons, generally  speaking?  Why,  that  a  man  ha.s 
been  justly  convicted,  but  that  he  has  borne  a 
good  character,  and  it  is  his  first  offence,  or  that 
the  collection  of  the  fine  would  distress  his  family 
and  ruin  him,  and  that  the  governor,  therefore, 
believing  it  to  be  a  case  for  the  exercise  of  mer- 
cy, pardons  the  offender  or  remits  the  fine.  I  ad- 
mit there  have  been  some  complaints  against  the 
exercise  of  this  power. 

I  have  never  heard  much  complaint  against 
any  executive  for  pardoning  men  condemned  to 
the  forfeiture  of  their  lives,  or  for  turning  men 
out  of  the  penitentiarv,  except  recently.  That 
was  a  case  of  which  I  know  nothing,  of  some 
man  who  was  convicted  of  negro  stealing.  We 
have  heard  complaints  that  our  penal  laws  have 
been  somewhat  nullified  by  the  executive  par- 
dons. If  it  is  wrong,  then  take  away  the  power 
altogether;  but  as  an  independent  co-ordinate 
branch  of  the  government,  if  you  give  him  the 
power  at  all,  leave  him  to  its  fi-ee  exercise,  with- 
out attempting  to  alarm  him  like  a  scared  child, 
with  threats  of  the  influence  of  public  opinion 
on  his  acts.  Do  not  deter  a  man  from  the  exer- 
cise of  this  high  and  merciful  prerogative — ^yesl 
call  it  the  heavenly  prerogative  of  government — 
where  his  judgment  and  feeling  would  prompt 
him  so  to  do.  lest  he  should  be  called  up  by  a 
resolution  of  a  member  of  the  legislature,  and 
his  motives  arraigned  and  his  feelings  insulted. 
During  the  short  time  I  was  called  upon  to  ad- 
minister this  government  as  lieutenant  governor, 
1  found,  I  admit,  the  exercise  of  this  power  to 
be  no  plea.saiit  task.  I  know  something  of  the 
mode  and  luanner  in  which  it  is  exercised.  The 
most  numerous  in.stances  of  its  exercise  by  myself, 
was  in  the  ca-'^e  of  men  just  before  the  expiration 
of  their  term  of  service  in  the  penitentiarv-,  who 
had  given  high  evidence  of  reformation.  And  I 
have  had  several  instances  given  to  me  where 
such  a  restoration  to  the  rights  of  citizenship 
has  proved  beneficial  to  society  and  to  the  man 
himself,  and  where  he  has  gone  home  and  be- 
come a  reformed  man.  If  we  intend  to  give  to 
the  governor  this  pardoning  power,  let  him  ex- 
ercise it  on  the  high  responsibility  he  owes  to 
his  Gkx)  and  to  his  country.    Do  not  alarm  hiu) 


72« 


by  requiring  the  reasoBS  for  his  action,  to  be 
dragged  before  the  publii-.  I  know  but  two  in- 
stances where  I  was  called  upon  to  exercise  this 
power,  that  would  have  produced  any  difficulty 
in  my  mind.  One  was  a  niaii  who  was  sentenc- 
ed to  be  hung  for  murder,  and  inasmuch  as  I  be- 
lieved that  the  sentence  was  a  liarth  one,  and 
that  the  highest  oflience  for  wliich  he  ought  to 
have  been  convicted  was  manslaughter,  1  par- 
done<l  him.  And  I  only  deprived  the  grave  of 
its  victim  for  a  few  months,  for  he  died  within 
that  time  of  consumption.  The  other  was  the 
case  of  a  man  from  the  southern  part  of  the  state 
■who  was  sentenced  to  ten  years  in>jTTH§onment. 
He  served  for  three  or  four  years,  and  was  linger- 
ing with  disease,  and  on  a  full  investigation  of 
the  ca.se,  being  satisfied  that  the  offence  was 
atoned  for,  even  if  it  was  of  the  degree  charged, 
I  pardoned  him.  These  are  individual  cases. 
What  I  object  to  is,  that  when  you  clothe  a  de- 
partment of  the  government  with  power  to  act, 
that  there  should  be  any  interference  with  the 
free  exerercise  of  that  power.  We  might  just  as 
well  require  the  legislature  to  spread  out  upon 
their  journals  the  reasons  for  every  law  that 
they  enact,  as  to  require  the  executive  to  spread 
out  tile  reasons  for  his  action  upon  his  record. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  do  not  wish  to  protract 
this  debate,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  both  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson  and  the  senior  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  have  misconstrued  my 
amendments,  and  misunderstood  my  remarks. 
Those  amendments  do  not  contemplate  an 
abridgement  of  the  right  of  petition  as  to  any 
one;  nor  did  I  advocate  any  sucn  abridgement  in 
my  remarks.  For  I  venture  to  say  that  neither 
of  those  gentlemen  more  thoroughly  recognizes 
the  sacredness  of  that  right  than  I  do,  and  I 
trust  it  will  be  guarantied  to  every  citizen  in  the 
country,  in  a  peaceable  way,  to  meet  together 
with  his  neighbors,  and  petition  for  the  redress 
of  any  grievances.  I  would  not  impair  that 
right, but  perfect  it  by  subjecting  men  at  the  bar 
of  public  opinion  for  its  abuse.  But  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson  treats  the  amendment  as 
though  every  application  for  a  pardon  under  it, 
would  have  to  be  made  in  conformity  to  a  special 
act  of  the  legislature  in  relation  to  that  particu- 
lar ca.se.  If  he  will  but  examine  the  amend- 
ment, he  will  perceive  that  nothing  of  the  kind 
is  contemplated,  but  that  it  merely  confers  upon 
the  legislature  the  powerto  provide  general  laws 
upon  the  subject,  which  may  be  altered  or  amen- 
ded from  time  to  time,  so  as  to  meet  and  remedy 
the  evils  complained  of.  Again,  both  of  these 
gentlemen  speak  of  the  amendments  as  though 
they  contained  provisions  new  and  unprecedent- 
ed in  constitutions.  If  they  will  but  examine 
the  fifth  section  of  the  fourth  article  of  the  con- 
stitution of  New  York,  they  will  see  that  the 
governor's  powerto  grant  pardons,  <fec.,  is  "sub- 
ject to  such  regulations  as  may  be  provided  by 
law  relative  to  the  manner  of  applying  for  par- 
dons." Also,  that  "he  shall  annually  cotninu- 
cate  to  the  legislature  each  ease  of  reprieve,  com 
inutiition,  or  pardon  granted,  <fec."  The  sixth 
section  of  the  fifth  article  of  the  constitution  of 
Wisconsin  authorizes  the  governor,  "to  grant  re- 
prieves, commutations,  and  pardons,  subject  to 
such  regulations  as  may  be  provided  by  law, 
relative  to  the  manner  of'^  applying  for  pardons." 


Also  "he  shall  annually  eoratnunicate  to  the  le- 
gislature, such  cases  of  reprieve,  commutation, 
or  pardon  granted,  &c."  The  thirty  third  sec- 
tion of  the  constitution  of  Maryland,  authorizes 
the  governor  to  grant  pardons,  <fcc.,  "for  any 
crime,  except  in  such  cases  where  the  law  shall 
otherwise   direct."     This   is  more  general,  and 

foes  much  further  than  even  my  amendment, 
'he  fourth  section  of  the  fourth  article  of  the 
constitution  of  Virginia,  gives  him  the  same 
power,  except  where  "the  law  shall  otherwise 
particularly  direct."  The  eleventh  section  of 
the  fourth  article  of  the  constitution  of  Alabama 
qualifies  the  power  by  these  words:  "under  such 
rules  and  regulations  as  shall  be  prescribed  by 
law."  The  eleventh  section  of  the  third  article 
of  the  constitution  of  Florida,  qualifies  it  in  the 
very  same  words,  and  the  eleventh  section  of  the 
fifth  article  of  the  constitution  of  Arkansas,  also 
uses  the  same  restrictive  words.  And  it  may  be 
that  the  constitutions  of  other  states  use  some 
such  qualifications  upon  the  exercise  of  this 
power.  So,  sir,  my  amendments  are  neither  new 
in  themselves  nor  unprecedented.  And  I  have 
yet  to  learn  of  any  of  those  hardships  orextreme 
cases,  which  the  gentleman's  imagination  has 
conjured  up,  having  actually  occurred  in  any  of 
the  above  named  states. 

Mr.  BROWN  asked  for  a  division  of  the  ques- 
tion on  the  two  amendments. 

The  question  was  then  taken  bv  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  call  of  Mr.  STEVENSOiST,  on  the  first 
amendment  of  Mr.  Hood,  and  it  was  rejected, 
yeas  8,  nays  73,  as  follows: 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  Jesse  Coffey.  Garrett 
Davis,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Johnson  Price,  George  W. 
Williams— 8. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd.  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
PVancis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William 
Chenault.  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wil- 
liam Cow  per,  Edward  Curd,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  Dudley.  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thom- 
as J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gra\%  James  P.  Hamil- 
ton. Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelley,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.Mansfield,  William  C.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ard L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHen- 
ry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan 
Ifewcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Hen- 
ry B.  Pollard.  William  Preston,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Sto- 
ner,  Albert  G.  Talbot,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Charles  A. 
Wickliflfe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wrightr-73. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  second  amend- 
ment of  Mr.  Hood,  and  it  also  was  rejected. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  moved  to  strike  out 
the  last  clause  of  the  section  as  follows: 


727 


"That  whenever  the  governor  shall  remit  a  {  monarchy  the  power  is  all  In  the  king,  and  the 
fine  or  forfeiture,  or  grant  a  reprieve  or  par-  ]  people  have  none  except  what  is  ceded,  and 
don,  he  shall  enter  his  reasons  for  doing  so  ,  nence  there  are  frequent  controversies.  The 
on  the  records  of  tlie  secretary  of  state,  in  a>?Epa-  ]  people  claim  power  as  conceded,  wliich  the  king 
rate  book;  and  on  the  requisition  of  either  house  ,  denies.  The  king  claims  hi.s  power  as  a  prerog- 
of  the  general  assemblv,  the  same  shall  be  laid  i  ative,  for  he  is  tne  fountain  of  power,  and  the 
before  them,  and  published  if  they  deem  proper.'  i  people  have  what  he  grants  and  no  more.  In  a 
Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  introduced  that  resolu-  •  republic,  the  fountain  of  all  pewer  is  in  the 
tion,  and  I  will  give  mvrea<;ons  for  doing  so>  but^  people,  and  the  officers  have  as  much  power  as 
at  the  same  time  I  willVemark  that  I  do  not  fvxl '  the  people  grant,  and  no  more.  What  would  be 
the  slightest  interest  in  it.  Having  been  iu- ,  a  prerogative  in  the  king,  is  power  in  the  peo- 
duced  to  believe,  from  conversation  I  had  witii  ,  pl«-  The  people  have  chosen  to  grant  the  power 
some  elderlv  gentlemen,  that  it  was  important. !  of  mercy  to  tlio  governor.  That  prerogative 
I  proposed  It.  But  while  I  do  not  now  think  it  j  must  be  some  where,  either  m  the  legislature, 
very  important,  still  it  ought  not  to  be  mutila-  i  the  judiciary,  or  the  executive  department.  If 
ted.  Gentlemen  seem  to  think  it  was  intended  I  the  people  could  meet  as  they  did  in  Athens, 
as  a  reflection  on  the  governors.  The  real  object  i  ^li^n  they  banished  a  man,  the  same  power  that 
is  entirely  the  reverse.  It  is  for  the  purpose  of '  met  to  ostracise  him  could  meet  and  reeall  him 
giving  the  governor  an  opportunitv  to  disabuse  j  again.  But  the  people  cannot  meet  here.  They 
himself  bv  giving  his  reasons.  I  know  an  in- ;  are  obliged  to  delegate  to  some  one  department 
stance  now,  so  far  as  a  man  can  know  what  is  i  of  the  government.  The  United  States  govern- 
within  the  breast  of  another,  where  the  world  is  1  "lent  delegates  to  the  executive,  and  the  state 
now  uninformed,  and  where  if  they  could  be  in-  i  ^vemraents  all  do  the  same.  It  must  be  there, 
formed,  the  reasons  would  be  perfectly  satisfac-  i  ^''^ll-  '^  it.  is  there,  I  want  to  know  why  in  the 
tory.  I  understood  the  gentleman  from  Nelson, '  name  of  God  you  call  on  a  man  for  reasons  when 
(Mr.  Wickliffe,)  to  base  his  argument  upon  the  I  it  amounts  to  nothing.  It  ia  enough  that  he 
ground  that  the  pardoning  power  was  a  preroga-  i  ^^^^^  ^^  ought  to  grant  it. 

tive  of  the  executive.  ^Y  friend,  (Mr.  Davis,)  says  the  Stuart  fami- 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  said  the  pardon-  Ij.  '"^hen  on  the  throne  of  Great  Britain,  render- 
ing power  was  an  attribute  of  sovereigntv,  not  a  *=<!  themselves  odious  by  the  too  frequent  use  of 
prerogative  of  the  governor,  for  he  has  none.  I  !  the  oardoning  power.  That  became  an  abuse 
deny  to  the  executive  auv  prerogative.  Sover-  j  i"  their  hands.  That  is  not  the  fact.  James 
•iguty  is  seldom  called  on'for  reasons.  j  the  first,  incurred  great  odium  for  not  pardoning 

'  Ttfr.  TRIPLETT.  That  is  it  precisely.  Sove- !  Sir  Walter  Raleigh.  Charles  the  first  was  de- 
reigntv  is  not  to  be  called  on  for  reasons.  It  is  j  tested  for  signing  the  death  warrant  of  his  min- 
the  attribute  of  the  sovereigntv  of  the  people  in  I  i^ter,  the  Earl  of  Strafford.  Charles  the  second 
the  person  of  the  governor.  '  But  sovereigntv  i  "^^as  equally  detested  because  he  let  Lord  Staf- 
itself  ought  to  have  reasons  for  its  acts.  It  is  a  j  ford  suffer  death  by  the  perjuries  of  Titus  Gates, 
plain  proposition,  that  the  pardoning  power  in  I  and  James  the  second  was  equally  abhorred  be- 
the  governor  is  an  act  of  mercy.  There  is  this  cause  he  did  not  save  the  life  of  his  deluded 
difference  between  an  act  of  mercv  when  exer-  \  nephew,  the  Duke  of  Monmouth.  The  real  his- 
tory of  those  monarchs  is,  they  were  tyrants — 
unfeeling  monsters.  Charles  the  first  brought 
his  head  to  the  block  because,  under  the  pretence 


cised  by  a  human  being,  and  the  supreme  God. 
The  Deitv   mav   exercise  that  mercv.  without 


giving  his  reasons  to  man,  but  tell  me  what  pos- 
sible reason  can  be  given  whv  the  governor,  who 
depends  on  the  public  for  his  office,  and  who  is 
responsible  to  them,  when  a  wife  kneels  to  him 
ana  asks  him  to  spare  the  life  of  a  husband, 
should  not  state  the  rea^^on  why  he  exercises 
mercv,  if  he  does  so.  Suppose  a  case  comes  be- 
fore him,  like  the  one  stated  bv  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  where  evidently  there  has  been  a 
hasty  or  harsh  sentence,  if  the  reason  is  trulv 
made  known  to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  will 
they  not  sanction  his  conduct?  Is  it  not  placing 
it  on  the  ground  that  the  governor  is  more  mer- 
ciful in  his  conduct  than  the  people  are  in  their 
feelings?  Let  the  governor  enter  his  true  rea- 
sons, and  the  people  will  not  censure  him.  But 
it  is  not  necessary  that  the   reason  should   be 

Erinted.  They  are  not  universally  to  be  laid 
efore  the  legislature.  It  is  only  when  they  are 
called  for.  It  is  fair  to  be  presumed  the  legisla- 
ture will  not  call  for  them,  except  on  extraordi- 


of  ship-money,  he  attempted  to  dispense  with 
parliament  and  levy  a  tax  on  the  people  with- 
out their  consent.  James  the  second  was  com- 
pelled to  alKiicate  his  throne  and  fly  his  king- 
dom because  he  attempted  to  dispense  with  acts 
of  parliament. 

There  was  a  case  of  a  man  who  was  a  moulder 
in  a  furnace  in  Bullitt,  charged  with  robbery. 
Both  the  parties  were  drunk,  and  the  story  was, 
that  one  knocked  down  the  other  and  robbed 
him.  My  colleague  was  sitting  by  and  I  acted 
for  the  defence,  and  he  was  satisfied  the  story 
was  a  drunken  lie  from  beginning  to  end.  The 
judge  did  not  view  the  case  as  I  did,  and  he 
sentenced  him  to  prison. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  recollect  tliat  case. 
TJie  trial  and  conviction  took  place  a  few  weeks 
before  I  was  called  upon  to  aaminister  the  gov- 
ernment. I  saw,  and  was  satisfied,  that  the  of- 
fence of  which  he  v\  as  charged  was  the  result  of 


nary  oec.isions,  and  that  they  will  not  publish  j  a  drunken  frolic,  and  the  testimony  upon  which 


them  unless  they  think  them  so  bad  that  the 
people  will  not  approve  them.  If  they  are  so 
Dad,  the  people  ought  to  know  them. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  glad  the  gentleman  from 
Bracken  introduced  this  amendment.  If  he  had 
not  done  it  I  should.    I  understand  that  in  a 


he  was  convicted  was  false;  he  was  a  poor  devil 
and  had  no  friends,  and  I  exercised  an  act  of 
mercy  in  pardoning  him,  I  was  not  concerned 
in  the  cause. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  it  was  ordered. 


n» 


The  yeas  and  rmys  being  demarukd  on  slrik- 
luff  out,  they  were — yeas  52,  nays  30. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  WillifiiM  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boycl,  Wm. 
Bradley,  Francis  M.Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
^Villiatn  Ghenault,  Jnmes  S.  Chrisman,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward 
Curd,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chas- 
leen  T.  Dunavan,  Gl'een  Forrest,  Thomas  J. 
Goueh,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew 
Hood,  James  W.  Irwi'n,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavananjrh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly.  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Wi^iam  0.  Marshall,  Richard  L.Mayes,  John  H. 
McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
Jonathan  NeWcuni,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Joiin  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Charles  A. 
Wicklilfe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 
62. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Luther  Brawncr,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Milford  Elliott, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Thos. 
J.  Hood,  Peter Lashbrooke,  George  W.  Mansfield, 
Nathan  McClure,  Hugh  iCeWell,  Johnson  Price, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  Ijjnatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Sto- 
iier,  John  D.  Taylor,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
George  W^  Williams— 30. 

So  the  amendment  was  adopted. 

The  tenth  section,  as  amended,  was  then  a- 
dopted. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


COUNTY  counts. 

Mr.  Triplett's  remarks  on  his  amendment  to 
the  report  on  the  county  courts,  delivered  on 
Tuesday,  ;'he27th  ult.,  contained  some  inaccura- 
cies, which  we  correct,  and  republish  them  in 
their  corrected  form,  as  follows: 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  believe  when  the  house 
adjourned  yesterday  evening,  I  had  just  offered 
the  following  amendment  as  an  additional  sec- 
tion: 

"Whenever  the  circuit  court  judge,  before 
whom  a  criminal  or  penal  prosecution  is  had, 
Hhall  entertain  doubts  on  any  point  of  laWAvhich 
ehall  be  decided  by  him  daring  such  trial,  he 
Bhall  have  the  power  of  adjourning  over  sucli 
doubtful  points  of  law,  to  be  decided  by  the 
court  of  appeals,  and  in  the  meantime  may  de- 
lay the  execution  of  the  sentence  in  such  case, 
ttntil  the  court  of  appeals  have  decided  such 
doubtful  points  of  law;  or  the  accused  may  ap- 
ply to  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals  for  a  writ 
of  error,  (in  any  criminal  or  penal  prosecution,) 
which  mav  be  granted  bv  him,  and  shall  act  as 
a  supersedeas  to  the  judgment  of  the  court  in 
which  the  trial  was  )iad, until  theopinion  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  on  the  questions  involved,  shall 
be  entered  tn  the  circuit  court,  which  shall  be 
governed  thereby." 


1  wJis  fiomewhat  surprised  to  find,  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  house  last  evening,  that  a 
misapprehension  prevailed  among  members,  in 
reference  to  the  character  of  my  amendment.  It 
contains  two  propositions,  that  are  perfectly  sim- 
ple in  their  character.  The  first  is,  that  when  a 
judge  of  a  circuit  court  tries  a  case,  and  enter- 
tains a  doubt  on  a  point  of  law,  he  may  carry 
the  point  of  law  to  the  court  of  appeals.  Now, 
what  will  be  be  the  result  of  that  proposition? 
Where  a  point  of  law  is  such  that  a  judge  enter- 
tains serious  doubts,  and  is  unwilling  that  the 
life  or  liberty  of  the  accused  shall  be  lost,  with- 
out first  having  the  decision  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, he  may  adjourn  the  case  to  that  tribu- 
nal. One  answers,  it  verv  seldom  happens.  If 
so,  then  the  remedy  for  tfie  evil  is  not  frequent- 
ly called  into  operation.  What  is  the  next 
point?  It  will  immediately  strike  the  mind  of 
every  thinking  man  in  this  liouse,  that  there  is 
a  possibility  that  the  counsel  for  the  accused 
may  be  satisfied  that  there  ought  to  be  a  doubt 
raised — that  the  point  of  law  is  not  well  settled. 
Take,  for  instance,  the  case  stated  here  a  day  or 
two  ago,  of  one  judge  having  decided  that  a  ne- 
gro was  entitled  to  benefit  of  clergy,  whilst 
another  judge  decided,  in  a  similar  case,  that  he 
was  not.  Now,  one  of  them  was  wrong,  and  the 
other  right.  A  case  as  strong  as  this  1  met  with 
myself. 

Jn  1825-G,  the  legislature  of  Kenluckv  passed 
a  law  as  important  as  ever  was  enacted  by  them. 
That  it  should  be  no  cause  of  challenge  or  ex- 
ception to  a  venire  man,  that  he  had  formed  or 
expressed  an  opinion  as  to  the  guilt  or  inno- 
cence of  the  accused,  on  mere  rumor,  without 
having  conversed  with  the  parties,  or  the  wit- 
nesses. I  know,  and  I  so  stated  at  the  time, 
that  in  two  adjoining  districts,  one  circuit  judge 
decided  this  law  to  be  constitutional,  and  it  was 
our  duty  to  obey  it,  while  in  the  other  the  cir- 
cuit judge  pronounced  the  law  to  be  unconstitu- 
tional, and  he  AVould  disobey  it,  and  compel  us 
to  do  so.  Is  that  law  important  or  not?  Noth- 
ing can  be  more  important  than  that  a  man  shall 
be  tried  by  an  impartial  jury,  and  the  question 
arises,  what  constitutes  impartiality  in  a  venire 
man,  before  lie  is  sworn  on  the  jury?  And  one  cir- 
cuit court  judge  decides  the  question  oneway, 
and  another  adifferent  and  directly  opposite  way. 
If  the  court  of  appeals  were  once  to  decide  th"^is 
controverted  que.stion,  under  the  plan  propo-sed 
in  my  amendment,  their  decision  would  be  ob- 
ligatory on  all  the  circuit  courts,  and  we  should 
have  uniformity  of  decision  on  this  vital  ques- 
tion throughout  the  state. 

I  could  goon  and  give  instances  innumerable 
of  the  uncertainty  ot  tlie  law  in  criminal  cases, 
in  this  state,  but  those  that  I  have  enumerated 
are  sufficient  to  answer  my  purpose,  and  show 
forth  the  evil  I  Avishto  remedy,  by  obtaining  uni- 
formity of  decision  in  criminal  cases,  as  well  as 
correct  and  legal  decisions.  We  who  are  now  in 
this  hall  may  not  derive  any  benefit  from  it,  as 
it  must  take  some  years  before  the  present  exist- 
ing evils  can  be  remedied,  but  our  children  and 
our  children's  children  may.  At  the  present 
time  there  is  no  settled  criminal  jurisprudence 
in  Kentucky;  but  if  ray  amendment  is  adopted, 
it  will  go  far  to  secure  that  desirable  object. 
There  will  grow  up  by  degrees  a  sottlcd,  perma- 


729 


nent  criminal  jurisprudence,  arising  from  the 
decisions  of  tlie  court  of  appeals  in  this  state, 
on  all  the  important  points  of  criminal  law,  that 
■will  be  sent  up  or  carried  up,  either  by  the  cir- 
cuit court  judjjes  tliemselves,  or  the  accused — 
until  by  and  by,  wo  sliall  have  here  what  has 
been  the  glory  and  honor  of  England  through- 
out her  whole"  land,  a  permanent  and  intelligible 
criminal  oo<ie  of  laws.  How  did  her  criminal 
code  grow  upV  All  of  her  acts  of  parliament  in 
relation  to  crimes,  now  in  force,  may  be  conden- 
sed in  one  volume;  while  the  decisions  of  her 
courts  expounding  and  explaining  these  acts  of 
parliament,  which  form  in  reality  her  criminal 
code,  are  contained  in  volume  on  volume.  The 
criminal  law  of  England,  previous  to  1776,  h;is 
been  rendered  obligatory  in  this  state  by  acts  of 
assembly,  but  for  a  time  the  decisions  of  her 
courts,  on  criminal  as  well  as  civil  questions  of 
law,  could  not  be  read  here. 

But  legislation,  like  everything  else,  is  pro- 
gressive and  improving;  and  five  or  six  years 
ago  the  Legislature  agreed  that  they  might  be 
read  in  our  courts,  but  .shonld  not  be  authorita- 
tive. Xow  that  is  a  very  nice  distinction,  I  con- 
fess; I  am  anxious  that  all  the  controverted  and 
difficult  points  of  criminal  law,  which  from  time 
to  time  may  arise,  shall  be  settled  by  the  court 
of  appeals,'and  thus  be  obligatory  upon  our  cir- 
cuit courts;  and  compel  the  judges  to  decide 
alike  in  the  different  circuits,  in  all  criminal  ca- 
ses; and  it  will  then  be  some  consolation  to  a 
criminal  to  know,  if  he  suffers,  that  all  who 
commit  similar  crimes,  will  suffer  a  similar  pun- 
ishment. 


SATURDAY,  DECEMBER  1,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  W.vkder. 

ADDREIJS   TO   THE   PEOPLE. 

Mr.  CLARKE  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, with  the  expression  of  a  wish  that  he  would 
not  be  one  of  the  committee  to  be  appointed  un- 
der it. 

"  Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  President  to  prepare  an  address 
to  the  people,  to  accompany  the  new  constitu- 
tion." 

The  resolution  was  adopted. 

COUXTY    COl-RTS. 

Mr.  JAMES  asked  and  obtained  leave  to  re- 
cord liis  vote  on  the  question  taken  yesterday  on 
the  impeachment  of  county  court  officers.  He 
voted  against  the  proposed  change. 

committ>:e  of  claims. 

Mr.  HARDIN  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion: 

*'  Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  delegates 
be  appointed,  styled  tlie  committee  on  claims, 
against  the  commonwealth,  incurred  by  the  pres- 
ent convention." 

In  support  of  his  resolution,  he  said  the  act  of 

the  general  a-ssembly  had  made  no  provision  for 

certain  necessary  incidental  expenses.     There 

were  some  expenses  incurred  in  taking  care  uf 

92 


the  room  in  which  they  met  and  lighting  the 
fires;  also,  in  connection  with  the  contested 
election  from  Henry  county,  and  as  they  were 
likely  to  adjourn  in  about  ten  days,  a  committee 
should  now  be  appointed  to  ascertain  the  amount 
of  claims,  that  some  provision  might  be  made 
for  their  payment. 

The  resolution  was  adopted,  and  the  President 
appointed  the  following  delegates  the  commit- 
tee: Messrs.  Hardin,  Lisle,  Chambers,  Boyd, 
and  Brawuer. 

execctive  depahtmext. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  executive  de- 
partment. 

The  eleventh,  twelfth,  thirteenth,  fourteenth, 
fifteenth,  and  sixteenth  sections  were  read  and 
adopted,  without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  11.  He  may  require  information  in  wri- 
ting, from  the  officers  in  the  executive  depart- 
ment, upon  any  subject  relating  to  the  duties  of 
their  respective  offices. 

"  Sec.  12.  He  shall,  from  time  to  time,  give  to 
the  general  assembly,  information  of  the  state 
of  the  commonwealth,  and  recommend  to  their 
consideration  such  measures  as  he  may  deem 
expedient. 

"  Sec.  13.  He  may,  on  extraordinary  occasions, 
convene  tlie  general  assembly  at  the  seat  of 
government,  or  at  a  different  place,  if  that  should 
have  become,  since  their  last  adjournment,  dan- 
gerous from  an  enemy,  or  from  contagious  dis- 
orders; and  in  ca.se  of  disagreement  between  the 
two  houses,  with  respect  to  the  time  of  adjourn- 
ment, adjourn  them  to  such  time  as  he  shall 
think  proper,  not  exceeding  four  months. 

"  Sec.  14.  He  shall  take  care  that  the  laws  be 
faitlifully  executed. 

"Sec.  15.  A  lieutenant  governor  shall  be  cho- 
sen at  every  election  for  a  governor,  in  the  same 
manner,  continue  in  office  for  the  same  time,  and 
possess  the  same  qualifications.  In  voting  for 
governor  and  lieutenant  governor,  the  electors 
shall  distinguish  whom  they  vote  for  as  govern- 
or, and  whom  as  lieutenant  governor. 

"Sec.  16.  He  shall,  by  virtue  of  his  office, be 
speaker  of  the  senate,  have  a  right  when  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  to  debate  and  vote  on  all 
subjects,  and  when  the  senate  cire  equally  divi- 
ded, to  give  the  castiiio^vote. 

The  seventeenth  action  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  17.  Whenever  the  office  of  governor 
shall  become  vacant,  the  lieutenant  governor 
shall  discharge  the  duties  of  governor  until  his 
successor  shall  have  been  duly  elected;  but  no 
new  election  shall  take  place  to  fill  such  vacaii- 
cv,  unless  the  same  shall  have  occurred  before 
the  first  two  years  of  the  time  shall  have  expired 
for  which  the  governor  was  elected;  and  if,  dur- 
ing the  time  the  lieutenant  governor  shall  fill 
such  vacancy,  he  shall  be  impeached,  removed 
from  office,  refuse  to  qualify,  resign,  die,  or  be 
absent  from  the  state,  the  .speaker  of  the  senate 
shall,  in  like  manjier,  administer  the  goyem- 
ment  for  the  balance  of  the  term." 

Mr.  MANSFIELD  moved  to  strike  out  the 
word  "  two  "  and  insert  "three,"  so  that  the  new 
election  should  not  be  called,  unless  the  vacancy 
to  be  filled  occurred  during  the  first  three  years 
of  the  term  for  which  the  governor  was  elected. 


730 


Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  he  saw  no  ne- 
cessity for  changing  from  the  present  article  in 
the  old  constitution.  It  had  been  well  settled 
that  upon  the  deatli  of  the  governor,  or  his  re- 
moval, the  lieutenant  governor  should  serve  out 
his  term.     The  people  had  acquiesced  in  it. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  stated  that  a  majority  of  the 
committee  thought  it  necessary  to  make  this 
subject  plain,  in  order  to  prevent  any  such  ex- 
citement on  the  question  whether  a  new  election 
should  take  place  or  not,  as  had  occurred  in 
Kentucky.  They  thought  it  best  to  provide  that 
if  a  governor  died  before  half  of  liis  term  ex- 
pired, a  new  election  should  be  called.  He 
thought  two  years  long  enough  for  any  officer. 

Mr.  DAVIS  remarked  that  he  was  present  at 
the  second  meeting  of  the  committee,  when  this 
subject  was  considered,  and  was  in  favor  of  re- 
taining the  provision  of  the  present  constitution. 
It  was  true,  that  some  years  ago  there  was  an 
excitement  on  this  subject,  and  the  provision 
was  considered  rather  ambiguous,  but  it  was 
now  settled  in  the  minds  of  the  people.  He 
thought  the  election  of  the  lieutenant  governor 
was  made  with  a  view  to  the  succession  to  the 
office  of  governor,  in  the  event  of  the  governor's 
death.  He  was  of  opinion  that  the  lieutenant 
governor  was  a  proper  and  safe  depository  of 
the  powets  of  the  governor  in  such  an  event. 
He  did  not  believe  it  necessary  to  put  the  whole 
people  to  the  trouble  of  a  general  election,  to  fill 
such  a  vacancy.  Under  the  new  constitution 
the  duties  of  the  governor  would  be  confined 
pretty  much  to  filling  up  militia  commissions, 
remitting  fines  and  forfeitures,  and  other  duties 
which  might  be  as  well  performed  by  the  one 
who  should  succeed  by  his  death,  as  by  a  new 
officer  elected  for  the  purpose.  There  were  al- 
ready too  many  elections.  The  business  of  life 
should  consist  in  something  besides  elections  and 
electioneering. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  would  be  glad  to 
move  to  strike  out  the  whole  of  the  section,  and 
insert  the  sections  in  the  old  constitution  which 
relate  to  the  same  subject,  if  an  opportunity  pre- 
sented itself. 

Mr.  NEWELL  believed  it  would  be  right,  in 
case  of  the  death  of  the  governor  in  the  first  two 
years  for  which  he  was  elected,  that  his  place 
should  be  filled  by  an  election.  One  considera- 
tion that  influenced  him  so  to  vote  in  committee 
was,  that  in  case  of  a  vacancy  by  any  cause,  in 
the  offices  of  governor  and  lieutenant  governor, 
the  speaker  of  the  senate  would  be  called  on  to 
fill  the  office.  He  did  not  believe  the  people  of 
Kentucky  would  be  willing  to  have  an  individ- 
ual, chosen  by  a  bare  majority  of  tlie  senate,  ex- 
ercise the  office  of  governor.  The  people  would 
desire  an  opportunity  to  choose  for  themselves. 
All  the  other  offices  are  to  be  filled  hy  the  peo- 
ple, why  wasthistobemade  an  exception?  As  to 
the  time  spent  in  elections,  they  would  all  be  on 
one  day  under  the  new  constitution,  and  the  ob- 
jection on  that  account  was  not  a  good  one. 

Mr.  GAITHER  considered  it  important  in  the 
election  of  the  lieutenant  governor,  to  have  an 
eye  to  the  contingency  of  his  succeeding  the 
governor;  and  without  any  provision  in  tlic  con- 
Rtitution  to  that  effect,  it  had  been  done,  and  on 
one  occasion  tlie  duty  thus  devolved  had  been 
performed  faithfully  and  ably.    He  desired  to 


avoid  frequent  elections,  if  possible.    He  would 
move  to  strike  out  the  following  words : 

"But  no  new  election  shall  take  place  to  fill 
such  vacancy,  unless  the  same  sliall  have  occur- 
red before  the  first  two  years  of  the  term  shall 
have  expired  for  which  the  governor  was  elect- 
ed." 

Mr.  MANSFIELD  desired  to  have  the  vote  ta- 
ken on  his  motion  to  strike  out  "two  "  and  in- 
sert "three."  He  believed  such  a  change  would 
be  agreeable  to  his  constituents. 

Mr.  McCLURE  stated  that  he  had  offered  a 
resolution  early  in  the  session,  which  required 
that  a  new  election  should  be  had  in  case  of  a 
vacancy  in  the  office  of  governor.  He  was  op- 
posed to  having  the  office  filled  by  one  who  was 
chosen  as  lieutenant  governor,  and  still  more  op- 
posed to  having  a  person  chosen  by  the  seuate 
preside  as  governor. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  cared  little  about  the  matter, 
but  he  was  opposed  to  having  the  senatfe  convert- 
ed into  a  political  electioneering  arena.  When 
a  governor  was  about  to  be  appointed  to  a  high 
office  abroad,  this  had  been  the  case.  He  agreed 
in  the  opinion  that  the  senate  should  not  have 
the  power  of  making  the  chief  executive  officer 
of  the  state.  He  would  not  vote  for  a  man  for 
one  office,  with  a  view  to  his  filling  another,  in 
any  event.  The  office  of  governor  it  was  true, 
was  stripped  of  much  of  its  importance  by  the 
new  constitution,  but  tliere  were  still  important 
duties  to  perform,  and  he  would  have  the  person 
who  filled  the  office  appointed  by  the  people  for 
that  special  purpose. 

Mr.  NEWELL  called  the  attention  of  the 
house  to  a  case  where  one  lieutenant  had  been 
made  a  captain,  in  consequence  of  the  provision 
that  when  a  president  leaves  his  seat  vacant  the 
vice  president  succeeds.  They  might  perhaps 
remember  there  was  a  case  not  long  since,  when 
a  president  died,  and  there  was  a  great  cry  that 
the  vice  president  was  not  the  choice  of  the  peo- 
ple. 

Mr.  ANDREW  HOOD  moved  the  previous 
question,  and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to 
be  now  put. 

The  motion  of  the  gentleman  from  Allen  to 
strike  out  "two"  and  insert  "three"  was  re- 
jectod. 

The  question  was  then  stated  to  be  on  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Adair,  to  strike 
out  a  portion  of  the  section. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for,  and  being 
taken,  they  were  yeas  39,  nays  41,  as  follows: 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos.  D.  Brown, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Garrett  Davis,  Nathan  Gaither,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  J.  W.  Irwin,  Al- 
fred M.Jackson,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, John  H.  McHenry,  John  D.  Morris,  Jon- 
athajQ  Newcum,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Micliael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  J.  Thunnan, 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  Jolin  L.  Waller, 
Charles  A.Wickliffe.  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright— .'59. 
Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K,  Bowling, 


731 


Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  JeSse  Coffej,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Richard  D.  Gholsou,  Jas.  P.  Hamiltou, 
John  Hargis,  Andrew  Hood,  Tho.  J.Hood,  Thos. 
James,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackev,  Pe- 
ter Lashbrooke,  Tho.  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Ma- 
chen,  Greo.  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Xa- 
thanMcClure,  Hugh  Xewell,  Elijah  F.'Nuttall, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry 
Washington,  John  Wheeler — ll. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  strike  out. 

The  (Question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  section. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  being  taken  thev  were  yeas  37,  navs  40. 

Yeas— John  S. 'Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
liam Bradlev,  Luther  Brawner,  James  b.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffev,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cow- 
per,  Edward  Curd,  Archibald  Dixon,  James 
Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M.  Lackev, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  fe. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Xathan  McClure, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard. Johnson  Price,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  John  D.  Taylor,  Philip  Triplett, 
George  W.  Williams.— 37. 

Nats — ^Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  William  K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  Garrett  Davis,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J. 
Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson, William  C.Marshall,  Richard L.  Mayes, 
John H.McHenry,  John  D.Morris,  Jonathan>iew- 
cum,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  James  W. 
Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  How- 
ard Todd,  Squire  Turner  Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 40. 

So  the  section  was  rejected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  then  moved  to  supply 
the  place  of  the  section  stricken  out,  with  the 
eighteenth  section  of  the  present  constitution,  as 
follows: 

"In  ca.se  of  the  impeachment  of  the  governor, 
his  removal  from  office,  death,  refusal  toqualify, 
resignation,  or  absence  from  the  state,  the  lieut. 
governor  shall  exercise  all  the  power  and  au- 
thority appertaining  to  the  office  of  governor, 
until  another  be  duly  qualified,  or  the  governor 
absent  or  impeached  shall  return  or  be  acquit- 
ted." 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TRIPLETT,  the  words 
"elected  and "  were  inserted  after  the  words 
"until  another  be  duly"  and  before  the  word 
"qualified." 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to,  and  the  sec- 
tion was  adopted. 


The  eighteenth  section  was  then  read  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Sec.  18  Whenever  the  government  shall  be 
administered  by  the  lieutenant  governor,  or  he 
shall  be  unable  to  attend  as  speaker  of  the  sen- 
ate, the  senators  shall  elect  one  of  their  own 
members  as  speaker  for  the  occasion." 

Mr.  DIXON  moved  as  a  substitute  for  that 
section,  the  following: 

"Whenever  the  government  shall  be  adminis- 
tered by  the  lieutenant  governor,  or  he  shall  be 
unable  to  attend  as  speaker  of  the  senate,  the 
senators  shall  elect  one  of  their  own  members 
as  speaker  for  that  occasion,  and  if,  during  the 
vacancy  of  the  office  of  governor,  the  lieutenant 

fovemor  shall  be  impeached,  removed  from  of- 
ee,  refuse  to  qualify,  resign,  die,  or  be  absent 
from  the  state,  the  speaker  of  the  senate  shall  in 
like  manner  administer  the  government." 

He  thought  there  should  be  some  provision  to 
meet  the  case  of  a  vacancy  during  tne  impeach- 
ment of  a  governor. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  thought  it  would  be  suffi- 
cient if  they  adopted  the  practice  in  the  United 
States  Senate  of  electing  a  president  pro  tempore, 
and  thus  they  would  avoid  the  expense  of  a  spe- 
cial session  of  the  senate,  to  elect  a  speaker  in 
the  event  of  the  lieutenant  governor  becoming 
the  acting  governor. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  thought  the  matter 
had  better  be  left  as  it  now  stands.  The  contin- 
gency which  was  to  be  provided  for,  was  too  re- 
mote to  make  it  necessary  to  take  it  into  con- 
sideration. The  senate  would  elect  their  pre- 
siding officer  with  a  view  to  his  becoming  the 
governor  in  case  of  such  vacancies  as  would  re- 
quire it.  If  it  was  made  a  duty  to  elect  a  speak- 
er pro  tern,  they  might  be  brought  into  the  same 
difficulty, into  which  the  sister  state  of  Ohio  was 
once  brought.  They  had  a  practice  in  Ohio  of 
making  the  governor  a  senator  in  congress.  The 
governor  would,  therefore,  abdicate  his  office 
soon  after  his  election,  and  the  lieutenant  gover- 
nor would  come  in,  and  after  a  short  time  he 
too  would  resign.  For  amusement  the  senate 
elected  an  old  gentleman  by  the  name  of  Kirt- 
land,  who  was  chosen  to  fill  a  vacancy,  and  he 
was  called  to  fill  the  office  of  the  governor  for 
three  weeks.  At  the  time  hLs  term  expired  he 
was  asked  to  be  again  a  candidate  for  tne  office; 
to  which  he  replied,  that  he  "had  become 
chagrinated  with  the  office,  and  had  deteimined 
to  go  into  a  state  of  retiracy  among  the  Abro- 
gans."     (Laughter.) 

It  was  not  desirable  to  have  such  a  state  of 
things  in  Kentucky,  and  he  preferred  that  in 
such  an  emergency  the  senate  should  be  left  to 
call  a  special  session  for  the  purpose  of  electing 
one  of  their  own  body  to  fill  the  chair  for  the 
residue  of  the  term. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  to  amend  the  amendment, 
by  adding  the  following  proviso,  and  he  asked 
the  yeas  and  nays  thereon. 

Provided,  That  whenever  a  vacancv  shall  oc- 
cur in  the  office  of  governor,  before  tfie  first  two 
years  of  the  tenn  shall  have  expired,  a  new 
election  for  governor  shall  take  place. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  hoped  the  convention  had  not 
deliberately  determined  to  give  to  a  person  hav- 
ing one-thirty-eighth  part  of  the  power  of  the 
senate,  the  right  to  administer  the  government 


732 


for  a  ^eat  part  of  a  term  for  which  a  governor 
was  chosen.  The  last  man  whom  tlie  people 
■would  choose  for  governor  miglit  thus  get  into 
the  office,  and  he  Avanted  to  provide  against  the 
possibility  of  such  an  event. 

A  conversation  ensued  in  which  Mr.  BROWN, 
Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  Mr.  DIXON,  Mr.  TAL- 
BOTT,  and  Mr.  M  ACHEN  took  part,  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  admissibility  of  Mr.  Brown's  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  RUDD,  to  bring  the  conveiition  to  the 
business  before  them,  moved  the  previous  ques- 
tion. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  remarked  that  the  attendance 
in  the  house  was  not  very  full,  and  therefore  he 
desired  the  roll  to  be  called. 

The  roll  was  called  accordingly. 

The  main  question  was  then  ordered,  and  the 
question  was  taken  on  the  amendment  to  the 
amendment  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  they  were, 
yeas  45  nays  34. 

Yeas — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm. 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawuer,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thos.D.  Brown,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  B.  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Wm  CoAvper,  Edward  Curd,  Archibald 
Dixon,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  T.  J. 
Hood,  Thomas  James,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thos. 
Rockhold,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  JohnD.  Taylor.  William  R.  Thompson, 
Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  John  Whee- 
ler— 45. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.Bal- 
linger,  William  K.  Bowling,  Charles  Chambers, 
Wm.  Chenault,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudlev, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  ti. 
Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.Jackson,  William  Johnson, 
William  C.  Marshall,  John  l3.  Morris,  William 
Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Ira  Root,  Jas.  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman' Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 34. 

So  the  amendment  to  the  amendment  was 
adopted. 

The  substitute  for  the  section  stricken  out,  as 
amended  was  also  adopted. 

The  nineteenth  and  twentieth  sections  were 
next  read  and  adopted,  without  amendment 
as  follows: 

Sec.  19.  Thelieutenantgovernor,  while  he  acts 
as  speaker  of  the  senate,  shall  receive  for  his 
services,  the  same  compensation  which  shall,  for 
the  same  period,  be  allowed  to  the  speaker  of  the 
house  of  representatives,  and  no  more ;  and 
during  the  time  he  administers  the  government, 
as  governor,  shall  receive  tlie  same  compensa- 
tion which  the  governor  would  have  received, 
and  been  entitled  to,  had  he  been  employed  in 
the  duties  of  his  ofhce. 

Skc.  20.  The  speaker  pro /mporc  of  the  senate, 
during  the  time  he  administers  the  government, 


shall  receive,  in  like  manner,  the  same  compen- 
sation which  the  governor  would  have  received 
had  he  been  employed  in  the  duties  of  his  office. 

The  twenty  first  section  Avas  read  as  foUoAvs  : 

Sec.  21.  If  the  lieutenant  governor  shall  be 
calledupon  to  administer  the  government,  and 
shall,  Avhile  in  such  administration,  resign,  die, 
or  be  absent  from  the  state  during  the  recess  of 
the  general  assembly,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
secretary  for  the  time  being,  to  convene  the  sen- 
ate for  the  purpose  of  choosing  a  speaker. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  moved  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  section  : 

"At  the  close  of  each  regular  session  of  the 
general  assembly,  a  speaker  pro  tempore  of  the 
senate,  shall  be  elected  by  the  senators,  Avho  shall 
continue  in  office  until  the  next  regular  biennial 
meeting  of  the  legislature,  unless  sooner  called 
upon  to  administer  the  government." 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  This  is  a  point  in  the  ex- 
ecutive report,  Avherc  we  may  exercise  a  little 
saving  foresight.  If  our  senate  should  be  re- 
quired to  conform  to  the  practice  of  the  United 
States  senate,  and  elect  a  speaker  pro  tempore,  at 
each  session,  it  Avould  anticipate  the  contingen- 
cy upon  the  happening  of  Avhich  he  might  be 
called  upon  to  administer  the  government,  and 
Avould  save  the  trouble  and  expence  of  conven- 
ing the  senate.  Prospectively,  in  view  of  the 
happening  of  such  contingency,  an  officer  may 
be  selected  to  meet  them,  as  Avell  as  after  they 
have  occurred,  and  Avith  considerable  saving  to 
the  treasury. 

Mr.  DIXON.  But  suppose  the  speaker  pro 
tempore  should  himself  die,  Avhat  then  ? 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  That  is  another  contin- 
gency, and  too  remote  to  require  any  precaution- 
ary action  at  our  hands. 

The  amendment  Avas  rejected,  and  the  section 
was  adopted. 

The  twenty  second  section  was  read  as  fol- 
loAvs : 

"Sec.  22.  The  governor  shall  nominate  and,  by 
and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate, 
appoint  a  secretary  of  state,  Avho  shall  be  com- 
missioned during  the  term  for  which  the  gov- 
ernor shall  have  been  elected,  if  he  shall  so  long 
behave  himself  Avell.  He  shall  keep  a  fair  re- 
gister, and  attest  all  the  official  acts  of  the  gov- 
ernor, and  shall,  Avhen  required,  lay  the  same, 
and  all  papers,  minutes  and  vouchers,  relative 
thereto,  before  either  house  of  the  general  assem- 
bly; and  shall  perform  such  other  duties  as  may 
be  enjoined  on  him  by  law." 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  strike  out  the  words, 
"the  governor  shall  nominate  and,  by  and  Avith 
the  aavice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  appoint  a 
secretary  of  state,  Avho  shall  be  commissioned," 
and  substitute  the  folloAving:  "A  secretary  of 
state  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  of 
thiscommonAvealth,  Avho  shall  hold  liis  office." 

Mr.  THOMPSON  moved  the  following  a.s  a 
substitute  for  the  amendment  proposed  to  be  in- 
serted: "asecretary  of  state  shall  bo  elected  for  four 
years,  by  the  citizens  entitled  to  suffrage,  at  the 
times  and  places  Avhere  they  shall  respectively 
vote  for  governor,  Avho  shall  be  commissioned." 

Mr.  DIXON  stated  tliat  the  committee  Avere 
unanimous  in  the  opinion  that  the  governor 
should  have  the  right  to  appoint  his  own  secre- 
tary.    That  was  considereci   necessary,  as  the 


^is 


secretary  would  be  the  confidential  adviser  of 
the  jjovernor.  Otherwise  the  committee  thought 
it  possible  that  the  people  might  select  a  man 
who  was  hostile  in  feeling  to  tlie  governor,  and 
the  interests  of  the  state  would  suffer  in  conse- 
quence. 

Mr.  DUDLEY  moved  the  previou3  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put.  ; 

Mr.  THOMPSON   withdrew  his  amendment  j 
to  the  amendment. 

Mr.  KELLY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  amendment  of  Mr.  BOYD,  and  being  taken, 
thev  were  years  38  and  uavs  41.  i 

Veas — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther 
Brawner,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  '■ 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copeliu,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.   Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.   Gough, ' 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har-  I 
din,  John  Hargis,   Thomas  J.  Hood,   Thomas  , 
James,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kel- 
ly, James  M.   Lackey,   George   W.   Mansfield, 
ftichard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Roekhold,  Ira 
Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner.  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William 
11.  Thompson,  Silas  Woodson,  Weslev  J.Wright  i 
—38.  '  I 

X.ws— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie.)  John  L.  Bal- ' 
linger,  John  S.   Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  , 
S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Garrett  Davis,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 1 
van,  Nathan  Gaither,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.Jackson,  Wil-  j 
liam  Johnson,  Peter    Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. : 
Lisle,  Willis   B.  Machen,  William  C.  Marshall, ; 
John  H.  McHenrv,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Wm.  j 
Preston,   Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  i 
James  Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson,  John  D.  Tay- ' 
lor,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  i 
Triplett.   Squire    Turner,    Henry  Washington, , 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  j 
Williams,— 11. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  twenty  third,  twenty  fourth,  and  twenty 
fifth  sections  were  read  and  adopted  without 
amendment  as  follows : 


cepted,)  after  it  shall  have  been  prciiented  to 
him,  it  shall  be  a  law,  in  like  manner  as  if  he 
had  signed  it,  unless  the  general  assembly,  by 
their  adjournment,  prevent  its  return;  in  which 
case  it  snail  be  a  law,  uidess  sent  back  within 
three  days  after  their  ne.xt  meeting. 

"Sec.  24.  Every  order,  resolution,  or  vote,  to 
which  the  concurrence  of  both  houses  may  be 
necessary,  except  on  a  question  of  adjournment, 
shall  be  presented  to  the  governor,  and  before  it 
shall  take  effect,  be  approved  bv  him;  or  being 
disapproved,  shall  be  re-passe<l  by  a  majority  of 
all  the  members  electea  to  both  houses,  accord- 
ing to  the  rules  and  limitations  prescribed  in 
case  of  a  bill. 

"Sec.  25.-  Contested  elections  for  governor  and 
lieutenant  governor  shall  be  determined  by  both 
houses  of  the  general  assemblv,  accordingto  .euch 
regulations  as  may  be  established  by  law." 

The  twentv  sixth  section  was  next  read : 

"Sec.  26.  the  legislature  shall  provide  for  a 
term  not  exceeding  two  years,  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  treasurer,  auditor  of  public  accounts, 
register  of  the  land  ofiice,  and  such  other  officers 
of  a  public   nature  a««   may  become  necessary, 

nsibili- 


"Sec.  23.  Everv  bill  which  shall  have  passed 
both  houses  shalf  be  presented  to  the  governor. 
If  he  approve,  he  shall  sign  it ;  but  if  not,  he 
shall  return  it  with  his  objections  to  the  house 
in  which  it  shall  have  originated,  who  shall  en- 
ter the  objections  at  large  upon  tlieir  journal, 
and  proceed  to  reconsider  it.  If,  after  such  re- 
consideration, a  majority  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  that  house  shall  agree  to  pass  the  bill, 
it  shall  be  sent  with  the  objections  to  the  other 
house,  by  which  it  shall  likewise  be  reconsider- 
ed, and  if  approved  by  a  majority  of  all  the 
members  elected  to  that  house,  it  shall  be  a  law; 
but  in  such  cases,  the  votes  of  both  houses  sliall 
be  determined  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  the  names 
of  the  members  voting  for  and  against  the  bill 
shall  be  entered  on  the  journals  of  each  house 
respectively.  If  any  bill  shall  not  be  returned 
by  the  governor,  within  ten  days  (Sundays  ex- 


and  shall  prescribe  their  duties  and  responsil 
ties,  and,  until  otherwise  directed  by  law,  such 
officers  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  of 
this  commonwealth. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  was  opposed  to  leav- 
ing this  section  so  that  the  legislature  might 
prescribe  a  different  mode  of  appointing  the 
officers  named  in  it.  He  moved  to  strike  out 
the  words  "until  otherwise'  directed  by  law." 
His  object  was  to  secure  the  election  of  these 
officers  by  the  people. 

Mr.  DIXON  said  they  would  be  elected  by  the 
people  as  the  section  now  stood.  The  object  of 
inserting  those  words,  was  to  provide  for  any 
difficulty  that  might  arise  from  the  election  of 
these  officers  bv  the  people. 

Mr.  MANSFIELD  hoped  the  house  would  sus- 
tain the  amendment. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  think  I  am 
mistaken  in  the  effect  of  this  section.  If  it  re- 
mains as  it  is  the  people  will  now  elect  these  of- 
j  ficers.  But  it  will  be  in  the  power  of  the  legis- 
lature to  prescribe  a  different  mode.  Suppose 
j  we  apply  the  same  expression  to  all  the  officers 
;  whose  election  is  provided  for,  they  will  be 
'  elected  by  the  people  "  until  otJierwise  directed 
j  by  law."  You  thereby  give  the  legislative  de- 
partment tlie  power  of  taking  the  elections  of 
these  officers  from  the  people.  I  am  opposed  to 
j  that.  I  think  if  any  should  be  elected,  it  is  Uie 
i  treasurer.  I  need  not  state  the  reasons  why  I 
think  the  appointing  of  that  officer  has  not  been 
heretofore  benefic.ial  to  the  state. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  It  is  said  that  this  section 
gives  the  people  the  right  to  elect  their  officers. 
That  is  true,  but  this  question  arises  whether 
the  legislature  shall  have  the  right  to  alter  that 
mo<le  of  election.  I  object  to  their  altering  the 
mo<le  of  electing  the  treasurer.  That  is  one 
of  the  most  important  and  responsible  offices  in 
the  state,  and  one  in  which  the  people  have  felt 
the  greatest  interest  for  a  number  of  years. 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON.  I  think  the  people  have 
the  undoubted  right  to  elect  all  their  officers. 
But  while  they  have  this  right,  there  may  be  cer- 
tain officers  who  can  be  better  appointed  by  an 


nu 


agent  than  by  themselves.  If  the  people  think 
their  agents  can  do  the  business  they  desire  to 
have  done,  or  if  it  is  inconvenient  for  them  to 
meet  and  do  it,  1  want  them  to  have  the  right  of 
transferring  this  power  to  others  to  do  it  for 
them. 

Mr.  BRADLEY  offered  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson: 

"There  shall  be  elected  for  four  years  by  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  state,  an  auditor  of  pub- 
he  accounts,  register  of  the  land  office,  attorney 
general,  and  such  other  officers  of  a  public  nature 
as  may  be  necessary,  and  the  general  a^semby 
shall  prescribe  their  duties  and  responsibilities." 
Mr.  G.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  made  the  motion 
•which  I  did  to  test  the  sense  of  the  convention 
upon  the  question  wliether  the  liouse  think  Lliese 
officers  should  be  elected  by  the  people  at  large. 
If  the  vote  is  taken  to  strike  out  tlie  words  I 
have  named,  it  will  be  in  order  to  insert  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Hopkins. 
It  gentlemen  wish  to  leave  the  choice  of  these 
officers  to  the  legislature  they  will  vote  against 
my  amendment;  but  I  a.sk  if  when  we  have 
made  the  appellate  court  elective,  and  other 
mere  ministerial  offices,  we  shall  refuse  to  tlie 
people  the  power  of  electing  these  important  of- 
ficers. No  officers  are  more  important  than  those 
of  the  treasurer  and  auditor  of  public  accounts. 
If  this  is  left  so  that  the  legislature  may  change 
the  mode,  it  may  be  thrown  back  upon  tlie  ex- 
ecutive, or  the  joint  vote  of  the  two  houses, 
which  is  the  worst  possible  appointing  power 
that  I  can  conceive  of.  I  am  opposed  to  leaving 
so  important  a  duty  as  the  selection  of  these  of- 
ficers to  depend  upon  the  will,  the  whim,  or  the 
caprice  of  any  future  legislature. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  I  am  in  favor  of  this  section, 
and  yet  I  am  thought  by  some  to  be  very  radical 
on  that  subject;  but  I  should  liave  been  glad  to 
see  some  other  provisions  of  the  constitution  left 
as  this  is.  I  desire  to  fix  as  few  subjects  in  the 
constitution  as  the  nature  of  the  case  will  admit 
of,  for  it  is  to  be  for  the  present,  like  the  laws  of 
the  Medes  and  Persians,  unalterable.  I  am  for 
trusting  generations  that  may  come  after  us. 
We  have  given  the  power  of  electing  these  offi- 
cers, and  then  we  have  given  them  the  power,  if 
a  majority  of  the  people  wish  it,  to  change  the 
mode  of  appointment.  This  will  give  the  con- 
stitution stability,  if  some  of  these  sections  are 
left  so  that  they  may  be  clianged;  but  if  we  fix 
all  these  subjects  there  will  be  complaint,  and 
no  alteration  can  be  made  withont  calling  an- 
other convention. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  know  the  section,  as  it 
stands,  gives  to  the  people  the  right  to  elect 
their  officers;  but  it  also  gives  the  legislature 
the  power  to  take  away  that  right,  and  to  vest 
it  in  the  executive,  or  any  other  branch  of  the 
government.  I  differ  from  ray  friend  from  Har- 
rison, and  also  with  the  gentleman  from  Scott. 
1  desire  that  all  the  officers  of  this  government 
— these  as  well  as  others — shall  be  elected  by 
the  people.  Suppose  we  had  said  the  judges 
may  be  elected,  but  that  the  legislature  may 
change  that  mode  if  they  think  proper,  and  give 
the  appointing  power  to  the  executive,  would 
that  have  met  the  public  expectation  on  this  sub- 
ject?   1  hope  the  power  will  not  be  given  to  the 


legislature  to  change  the  mode  of  electing  by 
the  people. 

Mr.  NEWELL.    If  one  legislature  changes  it, 
the  next  can  change  it  back. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.    Yes,  and  then  we  might 
never  have  a  settled  system. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  am  inclined  to  doubt  my 
judgment  when  I  differ  with  my  friend  fiom 
"Harrison  in  the  sentiments  he  has  expressed;  but 
I  concur  in  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Hopkins.  If  there  were  such  a  provision 
in  every  section  of  the  constitution  as  is  propos- 
ed to  be  inserted  in  this  section,  we  should  have 
no  constitution  at  all.  All  the  power  would  get 
into  the  hands  of  the  legislature,  and  at  one 
election  it  would  be  regarded  as  constitutional 
for  the  people  to  elect  a  treasurer,  and  at  the 
next  unconstitutional,  and  so  on,  ad  infinilum. 
If  we  intend  to  carry  out  the  expectations  of  the 
people,  we  will  give  the  people  the  right  to  elect 
their  officers.  And,  if  they  do  not  choose  to  ex- 
ercise it,  we  can,  after  the  constitution  shall  have 
been  submitted  to  the  people,  make  such  altera- 
tion in  it  as  will  meet  their  wishes.  This  is  the 
veiy  worst  possible  shape  in  which  these  .specific 
amendments  can  be  made.  You  have  said,  in  so 
many  words,  the  people  sliall  not  elect  tlieir 
treasurer.  Why,  then,  confer  upon  them  the 
power  of  electing  their  judges?  Why  do  you 
not  say  to  them  that  they  shall  not  elect  their 
clerks?  Why  do  you,  inthis  particular  instance, 
refuse  the  people  this  right?  Does  any  man 
doubt  that  they  are  as  anxious  to  vote  for  a  treas- 
urer as  for  the  judges,  or  any  other  officer?  I 
believe  it  was  the  universal  sentiment  of  the 
people,  from  one  end  of  the  state  to  the  other, 
fast  summer  that  the  right  should  not  depend  up- 
on the  whims  and  caprices  of  the  legislature. 
There  is  no  more  responsible  office  in  Kentucky 
than  that  of  treasurer,  for  he  holds  the  purse  of 
the  people  of  the  state.  I  hope  the  section  will 
be  struck  out,  and  that  the  amendment  of  the 
gentleman  from  Hopkins  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  see  nothing  objectionable 
in  this  section.  These  officers  are  to  be  elected, 
"until  otherwise  directed  by  law,"  by  the  qual- 
ified voters  of  the  commonwealth.  The  qualifi- 
ed voters  are  the  commonwealth,  asl  understand 
it.  No  other  persons  have  a  right  to  control 
this  government,  but  thequalified  voters,  through 
their  agents  or  representatives.  I  have  no  idea 
that  when  the  people  once  commence  electing 
these  officers  they  will  ever  change  the  mode. 
I  think  there  is  no  danger  in  leaving  it  as  it  is. 
Mr.  MAYES.  It  strikes  me  we  should  say- 
that  these  officers  shall  be  elected,  or  they  shall 
not.  It  is  true,  the  power  of  electing  the  treas- 
urer and  other  officers  is  given  for  the  time  be- 
ing, but  the  legislature  have  the  power  to  take 
away  this  right.  The  people  of  one  county 
may  favor  the  appointment  of  the  treasurer  by 
their  representatives,  and  those  of  another  may 
choose  to  vote  directly.  This  will  create  an  in- 
terminable confusion  in  the  legislature,  and  lead 
to  great  expense  and  loss  of  time  in  that  body. 
Mr.  HARDIN.  The  explanation  of  tliis  sec- 
tion as  given  by  the  chairman  of  the  committee 
(Mr.  Dixon)  is.  that  the  treasurer  and  other  offi- 
cers shall  be  elected  by  the  people,  subject  to  the  j 
power  of  tlie  legislature  to  cliange  the  mode  of  1 
election.     I  am  opposed  to  that  altogeUier.    I        1 


735 


know  very  well  that  if  you  bring  a  parcel  of 
young  men  here,  many  of  them  smujjfMed  in  un- 
<ler  the  constitutional  age,  they  will  take  the 
power  into  their  own  hands,  tower  is  uncom- 
monly sweet,  and  it  will  be  a  rich  treat  to  them. 
We  see  how  much  our  best  governors  are  in  favor 
of  power.  If  they  have  to  appoint  a  judge  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  they  will  take  him  from  the 
bench  of  the  circuit  court,  and  that  will  make 
another  vacancy  to  be  filled.  This  power  is  so 
sweet,  as  sure  as  the  Lord  lives  and  our  souls 
live,  they  will  find  out  some  reasons  for  chang- 
ing this  mode  of  appointing  these  ofiicers.  I 
want  to  have  all  the  officere  appointed  by  the 
people.     The  treasurer  and  auditor  are  very  im- 

fiortant  officers.  Let  them  all  be  elected,  and 
et  the  men  throughout  Kentucky  have  a  fair 
chance  of  the  election.  If  the  legislature  do  it 
you  will  never  get  to  South  Frankfort  for  any  of 
them;  they  will  all  be  taken  from  North  Frank- 
fort. I  an\  against  having  the  legislature  assume 
the  power  in  anv  ca.se. 

Mr.  J^EWELL,  I  hope  the  house  do  not  un- 
derstand me  as  opposing  the  election  of  these  of- 
ficers. If  any  gentleman  goes  further  than  I, 
in  favoring  the  election  by  the  people,  he  goes  a 
great  way.  My  object  in  leaving  this  Jis  it  is,  is 
to  give  the  people  the  right  to  accomplish  a  cer- 
tain thing  in  either  of  two  ways.  I  have  not  so 
little  confidence  in  the  legislature  as  some  gen- 
tlemen express.  There  are  eighty-five  gentlemen 
here  who  have  been  in  the  legislature,  and  Avhen 
they  tell  you  that  the  legislature  is  not  to  be 
trusted,  they  only  tell  you  that  they  themselves 
have  been  unworthy  to  he  trusted. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  gentleman  from  Harrison 
says  this  is  leaving  to  the  people  the  power  of 
changing  the  mode  of  appointment.  1  cannot 
agree  with  him,  for  I  do  not  recognize  the  legis- 
lature as  the  people.  If  he  is  right,  you  might 
a.s  well  say  the  legislature  have  the  right  to  alter 
the  whole  constitution. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  I  said  it  was  better  to  give 
the  people  the  right  to  elect  their  judges  and 
some  other  ofiicers.  But  I  believe  it  is  best  to 
leave  the  people  to  elect  some  officers,  and  at  the 
same  time  give  the  legislature  power  to  change 
the  mode  if  it  should  be  found  necessary  to  do  it. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  think  mv  friend  from  Nel- 
son, (Mr.  Hardin,)  is  mistaken  in  saying  there 
is  an  obscurity  in  this  section.  I  think  it  plain 
and  easily  to  be  understood.  It  provides  in  the 
first  place,  that  the  ofiicers  shall  be  elected  by 
the  people  until  the  people  themselves  shall  di- 
rect otherwise.  That  is  the  sum  and  substance 
of  it.  Now,  I  understand  the  younger  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  to  be  utterly  opposed  to 
taking  from  the  people  the  power  to  elect  their 
own  officers.  Does  this  section  take  from  the 
people  the  power  to  elect  their  own  officers?  In 
the  first  place,  it  gives  the  power,  and  in  the 
second,  it  authorizes  the  people,  when  tliey 
think  proper,  to  change  the  mode  of  appointment. 
If  you  give  the  people  a  mode  of  appointment, 
does  it  necessarily  take  away  their  right  of  elec- 
tion? Surely  it  cioes  not.  It  is  said  that  this  is 
abridging  the  rights  of  the  people.  Now,  what 
is  the  constitution  itself  but  an  abridgment  of 
the  natural  rights  of  the  people?  It  is  the  very 
object  of  your  organic  law  to  restrain  the  peo- 
ple lest  they  should  run  riot  in  the  exercise  of 


their  natural  rights.  I  do  not  propose  to  re- 
strain them.  I  only  propose  to  give  them  the 
power  which  some  gentlemen  think  it  would  be 
unsafe  to  entrust  them  with.  We  are  not  the 
people;  we  are  but  their  organs  through  which 
they  speak  in  this  convention.  It  is  true,  we  are 
not  under  restraints  as  the  legislature  is,  but 
we  owe  obligations  to  our  constituents  for  the 
powers  we  have,  which  are  more  unlimited  than 
those  vested  in  the  legislature.  The  power  of 
the  people,  as  spoken  through  their  representa- 
tives in  the  legislature,  is  limited  by  the  consti- 
tution. We  propose  to  reserve  to  tlie  people  the 
right  to  speak  their  will  on  a  particular  question; 
but  the  gentleman  says  it  is  wrong  to  entrust  the 
people  to  speak  their  will.  Does  the  gentleman 
mean  to  say  that  those  who  come  here  as  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people,  have  a  right  to  disre- 
gard the  wishes  of  tlieir  constituents?  The 
representative  is  supposed  to  speak  the  voice, 
and  feelings,  and  wishes  of  those  whom  he 
represents.  The  gentleman  asks  wliy  we  did 
not  give  this  right  as  to  all  other  officers  of  the 
government.  VTe  did  not  think  any  body  would 
be  in  favor  of  it,  but  we  thought  they  might  be 
in  favor  of  electing  these  particular  officers. 
These  are  the  reasons  that  influenced  us  in 
making  our  report.  If  the  people  think  it  bet- 
ter to  let  the  legislature  act  on  the  subject,  they 
will  require  them  to  do  it.  My  friend  from  Nel- 
son, (Mr.  Hardin,)  thinks  that  the  young  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature  will  come  here  ana  legis- 
late in  relation  to  these  officers,  right  or  wrong, 
regardless  of  the  wishes  of  the  people.  I  will 
tell  him  that  they  are  not  apt  to  do  things  which 
the  people  do  not  desire,  nor  are  the  old  repre- 
sentatives. When  an  important  question  like 
this  comes  up,  members  will  not  be  found  taking 
ground  in  opposition  to  the  views  and  senti- 
ments of  their  constituents.  And,  certainly  if 
any  man  did,  he  would  bring  about  his  own 
destruction. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  It  seems  that  these  officers 
are  to  be  elected  by  the  people,  but  the  legisla- 
ture may  prescribe  another  mode  if  they  please. 
I  deny  that  the  legislature  is  the  people.  The 
law  making  power  is  the  house  of  representa- 
tatives,  the  senate  and  the  governor.  The  legis- 
I  lature  represent  the  people;  they  are  only  one 
branch  of  the  government.  Why  was  this  con- 
vention called?  It  was  to  prescribe  hov,-  the 
officers  of  this  government  shall  be  elected,  and 
when  that  is  done,  the  legislature  cannot  touch 
it.  What  does  the  gentleman  from  Henderson 
say?  That  the  legislature  are  the  people,  and 
whenever  the  people  choose  to  act,  they  can  do 
so  in  despite  of  all  constitutions.  That  is  ex- 
actly the  amount  of  it.  Why  not  say,  that 
since  the  legislature  is  the  people,  they  shall 
prrscribe  all  appointments? 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  took  the  ground  that  this  con- 
vention was  the  representative  of  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people  of  Kentucky.  I  took  the  ground 
that  tlie  constitution  of  Kentucky  imposed 
restraints  on  the  legislature,  and  that  all  the 
powers  they  exercised  are  derived  from  the  peo- 
ple and  are  limited  by  the  constitution. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  There  is  no  great  misunder- 
standing on  my  part.  We  know  very  well  that 
all  power  is  in  the  people  as  a  reserved  power 
unless  it  is  delegated  to  the  law-making  power. 


im 


and  the  legislature  may  do  any  thing  and  every 
thing  that  has  not  been  delegated  to  congress. 
But  that  is  not  the  question;  and  I  ask  the  gen- 
tleman, since  the  legislature  is  the  sovereign  peo- 
ple, why  not  say  to  them,  you  may  chanjje  the 
mode  of  electing  the  governor  when  you  please"? 
Why  not  give  them  power  to  cliange  all  the  de- 
partments of  the  government?  Why,  we  do  not 
intend  to  confide  to  them  such  important  powers. 
Why  not  say  to  them  that  tliey  shall  have  all  the 
power  of  the  government — that  they  shall  have 
power  to  say  how  the  judges  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals shall  be  elected  whenever  they  please,  or 
the  judges  of  the  circuit  court'?  Because  we 
will  not  confide  that  power  to  them.  And  I  ask 
my  friend  if  he  will  confide  to  them  the  power 
to  elect  the  most  important  officers  for  the  state 
at  large,  when  he  will  take  away  from  them  the 
power  to  appoint  tlie  judge  of  a  district  or  a 
justice  of  a  little  magistrate's  district'?     If  you 


take  away  from  the  legislature  the  power  to  ap- 

Eoiiit  a  justice  of  the  peace,  or  as  Austin  Hun- 
ard  used  to  say,  "a  piece  of  a  justice,"  why 


not  take  away  from  them  the  power  to  elect  a 
treasurer,  an  auditor,  or  a  register"?  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  the  elections  lemaining  with  tlie  people, 
and  I  wisli  it  to  be  part  of  the  organic  law  of 
Kentucky  that  the  governor  and  every  other  offi- 
cer shall  be  elected  by  the  people. 

As  to  the  secretary  of  state,  I  have  not  said  a 
word  about  that;  for  God  knows  I  care  nothing 
about  that.  I  do  not  care  to  hear  that  word 
again.  (Laughter.)  I  would  be  the  last  man 
in  the  world  to  say  a  word  about  it. 

The  effect  of  the  doctrine  of  the  gentleman 
would  be  to  give  the  legislature  power  to  alter 
the  mode  of  appointment  entirely  with  reference 
to  these  important  officers.  Why  not  say  the 
legislature  miiy  have  power  to  set  our  negroes 
free?  Just  because  we  are  unwilling  to  trust 
them.  And  I  am  as  unwilling  to  trust  them 
with  reference  to  one  power  as  to  the  other. 

I  hope  that  as  we  came  here  to  change  the  ap- 
pointing poAver,  and  separate  it  from  everv  other 
department  of  this  government,  we  shall  give 
the  power  back  to  the  people.  The  appointing 
power  originally  belonged  to  the  people,  and  to 
delegate  it  any  where  else  would  be  wrong.  I 
came  here  to  give  it  back  where  it  originally  be- 
longed, being  unwilling  to  trust  it  to  any  de- 
partment. I  know  a  little  about  how  things  are 
managed  here.  We  are  not  made  of  such  stern, 
obstinate  stuff  that  Ave  cannot  be  operated  upon 
here.  We  can  be  softened  down, sometimes,  for- 
ty ways.  There  are  a  great  many  ways  in  which 
a  young  man  may  be  softened  down.  I  Avill  not 
enumerate  them  all.     Why  was  it  the  seat  of 

fovernment  was  taken  away  from  New  Orleans'? 
t  was  because  the  local  power  was  too  influen- 
tial for  tlie  people.  It  was,  in  consequence,  ta- 
ken to  Baton  Rouge.  Why  was  it  taken  ,  from 
Philadelphia?  It  was  because  the  local  power 
of  Philadelphia  was  too  great  for  the  balance 
of  the  people  to  trust  it  there.  Why  was  it  re- 
moved from  the  city  of  New  York?  For  the 
same  reason.  We  know  there  is  a  local  power 
at  the  seat  of  government  wJiich  will  operate 
more  or  loss  on  t)ie  membere  of  tlie  legislature. 
The  gentleman  says  it  may  operate  on  us.  Well, 
it  may;  but  I  do  not  think  it  as  likely  to  operate 
upon  us  as  on  a  parcel  of  boys,     i  ou  may  go 


over  the  list  of  members  and  j'ou  will  find  one 
half  of  them  do  not  exceed  thirty  years  of  age. 
I  am  unwilling  to  trust  four  or  five  of  the  most 
important  offices  in  this  government  to  be  dispo- 
sed of  by  them. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  rise  to  move  the  previous 
question,  but  before  I  do  so,  I  wish  to  say  a  few 
words.  I  shall  vote  with  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson  and  the  gentleman  from  Harrison, 
because  I  am  in  favor  of  giving  the  people  the 
right  to  say  whether  the  legisl.ature  shall  appoint 
these  officers,  if  they  do  not  wish  to  elect  tiiem. 
I  am  an  elective  man,  but  I  have  had  very  great 
doubts  as  to  the  executive  officers,  and  in  conse- 
quence of  those  doubts,  I  am  inclined  to  leave 
this  provision  as  it  luis  been  reported  by  the 
committee.  Some  gentlemen  have  expressed 
their  fears  of  entrusting  the  legislature  in 
relation  to  this  matter.  In  the  report  of 
the  committee  of  thirty,  there  was  a  provision 
leaving  to  the  legislature  the  branching  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  should  it  hereafter  be  demand- 
ed by  the  people.  And  why  not?  Is  there  any 
more  danger  to  be  apprehended  than  there  will 
be  in  the  pre,sent  instance?  Not  at  all;  and  I 
conceive  there  will  be  none.  Did  we  not  adopt 
the  same  course  in  regard  to  the  election  of  mag- 
istrates in  the  several  counties?  And  we  have, 
in  some  other  respects,  left  the  people,  through 
their  representatives,  to  carry  out  the  principles 
we  have  laid  down  in  the  constitution.  My 
friend  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  in  the  love  he 
has  expressed  for  the  people, remimls  me  of  Gov- 
ernor Letcher,  Avho  has  gone  to  Mexico,  Avhere 
he  Avill  represent  this  country  very  ably,  Avho 
said  that  if  he  had  any  fault  in  the  Avorld,  it 
was  that  he  was  too  candid.  Now  if  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  has  any  fault  in  his  old  age, 
it  is  that  he  is  so  excessively  in  love  Avith  the 
people.  NoAv,  I  do  not  think  that  the  boys  that 
are  to  come  to  the  legislature  will  be  more  in 
love  with  the  sweet  things  here  than  the  gentle- 
man is. 

With  regard  to  the  proposition  offered  by  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  0.  A.  Wicklif^e,)  I 
am  opposed  to  it,  for  the  reason  that  I  Avould 
not  put  a  man  in  office  for  so  long  a  period  as 
four  years,  and  permit  him  to  handle  large 
amounts  of  the  public  money,  without  more  se- 
curity being  required  of  him  than  is  now  given. 
There  is  great  danger  in  doing  so.  Why  there 
is  not  a  treasurer  under  the  sun  wlio  would  bo 
so  independent,  and  to  Avhoin  so  much  poAver 
Avould  be  entrusted,  as  tlie  treasurer  Avhich  the 
gentleman  from  Nelson  Avould  create.  Suppose 
he  were  to  abuse  his  trust,  Iioav  are  Ave  to  n-ach 
him?  Before  you  could  impeach  him,  he  could 
go  on  embezzling  tlie  public  money,  and  in 
short  ruin  the  commonwealth.  I  hope  if  Ave  do 
not  make  any  provision  on  the  subject,  the  legis- 
lature Avill,  and  elect  the  treasurer  for  one  or 
two  years,  or  provide  some  other  mode  of  ap- 
pointment. As  to  the  present  treasurer.  I  be- 
lieve him  a  faitliful  officer.  The  second  audi- 
tor and  the  register  of  the  land  office,  are  also 
good  officers,  and  they  Avore,  I  understand,  born 
here.  However,  I  care  not  Avhere  a  man  is  born, 
provided  he  attends  to  liis  duties  faitlifully 
and  promptly.  I  say  then,  in  conclusion,  I 
Avould  give  fhe  poAver  to  the  people  to  say  in 
Avhat  manner  these  officers  shall  hereafter  be  ap- 


737 


puiaU<J-  I  'A'iil  Qo^  may  tb«  pr«TioU8  quM- 
tion. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  If  the  gentleman  will 
permit  me  to  sav  a  word  or  two,  by  way  of  ex- 
planation, I  shall  be  obliged  to  him,  and  I  will 
then  call  tlie  previous  question. 

Mr.  TURNER  then  withdrew  the  motion. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  committee  pro- 
posed to  elect  a  treasurer  for  two  years,  but  my  a- 
mendment  proposes  to  elect  him  for  four.  The 
gentleman,  who  has  just  taken  his  seat,  says  it  is 
dangerous  to  leave  so  much  money  in  the  hands 
of  the  treasurer.  He  should  recollect  that  that 
officer  is  subject  to  the  impeaching  power,  and 
has  to  give  bonds  in  a  large  amount  for  the 
faithful  performance  of  hi.s  duty.  And  these 
bonds  are  put  into  the  hands  of  the  executive, 
according  to  law.  It  is  made  the  duty  of  the 
governor  to  examine  into  and  see  that  he  keeps 
his  accounts  safe  and  accurately,  as  well  during 
the  time  the  legislature  is  iu  session  as  after- 
wards. The  governor  does  not  discharge  his 
duty  properly,  if  he  does  not  look  into  the  treas- 
urer's accounts  and  a.scertain  how  they  stand. 
I  trust  we  sihall  provide  for  the  supervision  of 
the  books  of  the  treasurer,  by  requiring  a  rigid 
and  close  examination  of  his  accounts  from  time 
to  time,  so  that  if  ther*;  shall  be  an  abstraction 
of  a  single  dollar,  he  shall  be  immediately  sus- 
pended. I  know  the  house  is  impatient  to  take 
the  question,  therefore  I  shall  say  nothing  fur- 
ther.    I  move  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  PRICE  said  as  this  was  an  important 
proposition,  it  .should  be  voted  upon  by  a  full 
nouse;  and  as  the  house  was  not  now  full,  he 
moved  an  adjournment. 

The  vote  upon  the  motion  to  adjourn  was  a 
tie,  31  in  the  affirmative,  31  in  the  negative. 

The  PRESIDENT  announced  the  motion  to 
adjourn  to  be  decided  in  the  negative. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  asked  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  upon  the  proposition. 

A  recess  was  moved  and  negatived. 

The  main  question  was  then  ordered  to  be 
now  put. 

Mr.  BRADLEY,  bv  consent,  on  the  sugges- 
tion of  3Ir.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  modified  his 
proposition  by  separating  the  trea.surer  there- 
from, so  that  that  officer  might  be  embraced  in 
another  and  separate  section,  with  a  diflFerent 
term  of  office. 

The  question  was  then  taken  bv  yeas  and 
nays,  on  Mr.  BRADLEY'S  amemlment,  and 
thev  were — veas  56.  nays  20. 

Yeas— John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Tliomai  D.  Brown,  Wil- 
liam Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman.  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey.  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin.  William'  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D. 
Qholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thomas  James,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  'W.  Li.sle,  Willis  6. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L. 
Maves,  John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A. 
03 


Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Suum, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor.  William  R.  Thompson.  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickhflfe,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 56. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  Charles  Chambers,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  Dudley,  James  H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  Andrew'  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  William  Johnson,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, Nathan  McClure,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh 
Newell,  Elijah  F.  NutuU,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
James  Rudd,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner — 
20. 

So  the  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

The  section,  as  amended,  was  then  adopted. 

The  twenty  seventh  section  was  read  as  fol- 
lows : 

"Sec.  27.  A  board  of  commissioners  shall  be 
appointed  every  two  years  by  the  judges  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  one  from  each  appellate  dis- 
trict, whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  make  an  examina- 
tion every  two  years,  of  the  accounts  of  the  re- 
ceiving and  disbursing  officers  of  the  state  at 
large,  and  report  to  the  legislature." 

Mr.  JAMES  moved  to  strike  out  the  entire 
section. 

Mr.  HARDIN  concurred  in  that  motion.  To 
retain  it  would  be  to  incur  an  expense  of  $1,000 
biennially  for  no  apparent  possible  good. 

The  motion  to  .strike  out  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  GARRARD  expressed  the  hope  that  the 
convention  would  dispose  of  this  report  before 
adjourning.  He  therefore  moved  to  take  up  the 
sixth  section  which  was  passed  over  yester- 
day, at  the  request  of  the  gentleman  from 
Woodford,  (Mr.  Waller.)  who  then  expressed  a 
desire  to  give  his  views  upon  the  principle  which 
that  section  embraced.  He,  however,  had  now 
the  authority  of  that  gentleman  for  stating  that 
ho  could  accomplish  His  object  on  another  report, 
and  consequently,  he  did  not  wish  the  action  of 
the  convention  upon  this  section  to  be  further 
delayed. 

The  sixth  section  was  accordingly  taken  up 
and  passed  without  amendment  as  follows: 

"Sec.  6.  No  member  of  congress,  or  person 
holding  any  office  under  the  United  States,  nor 
minister  of  any  religious  society,  shall  Ite  eligi- 
ble to  the  office  of  governor." 

Mr.  KELLY  oflfered  the  fellowing  as  an  addi- 
tional section,  which  was  adopted  after  being 
modified  on  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  PRICE: 

"Sec.  — .  There  shall  be  elected  biennially, 
by  the  qualified  voters  of  this  commonwealth,  a 
treasurer,  whose  duties  and  responsibilities  shall 
be  defined  by  law." 

There  being  no  further  amendments,  the  article 
on  the  executive  department  was  disposed  of. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


-m 


MONDAY,  DECEMBEH,  3,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

LEGISLATIVE   DEPARTMENT. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  the 
convention  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  on  the  legislative  depart- 
ment. 

When  last  under  consideration,  the  twenty 
fifth  section  -was  postponed  at  the  request  of  Mr. 
"WALLER.     It  Avas  now  taken  up,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  25.  No  person,  while  ne  continues  to 
exercise  the  functions  of  clergyman,  priest,  or 
teacher  of  any  religious  persuasion,  society,  or 
sect,  nor  while  he  holds  or  exercises  any  office 
of  profit  under  this  commonwealth,  or  under  the 
government  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  general  assembly,  except  attorneys  at 
law,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  militia  officers: 
Provided,  That  attorneys  for  the  commonwealth, 
■who  receive  a  fixed  annual  salary,  shall  be  inel- 
igible. 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  amend  the  section  by 
striking  out  the  words  "continues  to  exercise 
the  functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest,  or  teacher 
of  any  religious  persuasion,  society,  or  sect,  nor 
while  he." 

Mr.  WALLER.  Mr.  President:  I  arise  under 
circumstances  of  considerable  embarra.ssment. 
The  fact  that  several  days  ago  I  requested  the 
postponement  of  this  subject,  in  order  that  my- 
self and  others  might  be  heard  in  relation  to  it, 
has  created  an  expectation  Avhich  I  am  sure  I 
cannot  meet.  I  have  had  other  and,  in  my  esti- 
mation, more  important  matters  claiming  my 
time,  and  have  bestowed  very  little  reflection  on 
the  question  now  before  the  convention. 

I  nave  another  serious  cause  of  embarrass- 
ment: I  am  liable  to  be  charged  with  a  want  of 
delicacy.  Some  may  suppose  that  owing  to  the 
relations  I  sustain  to  the  matter  in  debate,  I 
ought  to  have  been  silent,  and  left  this  cause  in 
the  hands  of  others.  I,  however,  throw  myself 
upon  the  magnanimity  of  the  convention  to  re- 
lieve me  of  this  imputation.  I  but  walk  in  the 
foot-steps  of  other  delegates.  Mv  course  has 
the  sanction  of  tlie  custom  here.  The  other  day 
"when  the  delegate  from  Jessamine  (Mr.  A.  K. 
Marshall)  incidentally  and  playfully  alluded  to 
the  lawyers,  the  members  of  that  profession  iri 
all  parts  of  the  liouse  arose  in  reply  and  retort. 
When  restrictions  were  attempt crl  to  be  placed 
upon  the  representation  of  cities,  their  delegates, 
in  emphatic  and  indignant  tones,  denounced 
■what  they  believed  io  be  an  infringement  of  their 
rights.  And  so  it  would  be  if  any  other  pro- 
fession or  interest  having'a  representative  here, 
werea.s.sailed.  Why,  then,  should  it  be  thought 
indelicate  in  me,  standing  almost  solitary  and 
alone,  of  a  profession  it  is  propo.sed  to  proscribe 
from  civil  oflice,  that  I  should  arise  in  remon- 
strance. 

Those  who  know  me  will  not  su.spect,  that  I 
have  any  selfish  ends  to  attain.  My  habits  of 
life  and  my  pursuits  have  been  such  iis  to  pre- 
clude the  supposition  that  I  seek  cither  tlie  offi- 
ces or  emoluments  of  civil  government.  1  have 
ever  preferred  the  silence  and  solitude  of  the 
closet.  I  have  mingled  but  little  with  the  great 
world.  I  have  held  more  communion  with  the 
sentiments  of  the  dead  thaoof  the  living.  I  have 


lived  almost  a  hermit  among  my  neighbors,  f 
have  never  been  a  political  partizan.  I  have 
had  but  little  to  do  or  to  say  on  political  sub- 
jects except  quietly  to  vote.  While  I  have  look- 
ed upon  the  masses  of  both  the  great  political 
parties  into  which  our  country  is  divided,  as 
seeking  honestly  and  earnestly  the  welfare  of  the 
nation;  I  very  frankly  confess,  I  have  long  sus- 
pected that  with  the  leaders,  it  was  but  a  con- 
test between  the  ins  and  the  outs — that  they  were 
mainly  influenced  by  the  seven  principles  of 
John  Randolph — '"the  Jive  loaves  and  ihc  two 
fishes." 

Bftt  there  is  still  another  source  of  embarrass- 
ment. I  am  told,  and  I  suppose  truly,  that  this 
question  is  settled  in  the  minds  of  an  over- 
whelming majority  of  this  convention;  that  it  is 
contemplated  not  only  to  exclude  ministers  of 
the  gospel  from  the  offices  created  by  this  con- 
stitution, but  that  some  even  wish  to  exclude 
them  from  any  future  convention,  thereby  virtu- 
ally declaring  them  out  of  the  social  compact! 
Well,  if  we  are  again  to  be  put  under  the  ban  of 
government — if  the  axe  of  proscription  is  again 
to  fall,  I  may  at  least  exclaim  with  the  old 
Greek,  "strike,  but  hear  me!"  I  want,  howev- 
er, to  bear  my  testimony  against  this  measure — 
and  if  fall  we  must,  ere  we  fold  up  our  arras  to 
die,  I  wish  to  look  at  you,  Mr.  President,  and  at 
each  member  of  this  convention,  the  elect  and 
eloquent  champion  of  equal  rights,  and  say,  "et 
tu  Brute  !  "  Are  you,  the  guardians  of  republi- 
can principles,  about  to  proscribe  any  portion  of 
Kentucky's  freemen  and  American  citizens  from 
the  offices  of  this  government? 

This  restriction,  making  ministers  ineligible 
to  civil  office,  is  contrary  to  the  great  American 
principle  of  equal  rights  and  privileges.  I  call 
this  an  American  principle,  oecause  in  other 
countries  of  the  civilized  world  the  right  to  hold 
office  has  been  guarantied  to  a  favored  class, 
who,  by  birth  or  fortune,  are  considered  superi- 
or to  the  mass  of  their  fellow  men.  Some  are 
born  to  office.  Angels  in  the  form  of  kings — so 
the  sentiment  runs — are  commissioned  of  Heaven 
to  sit  on  thrones,  wear  crowns,  and  wield  scep- 
tres! And  in  the  most  free  of  other  nations  be- 
sides this,  the  doctrine  prevails,  that  no  individ- 
ual must  be  chosen  to  office,  unless  by  birth  or 
by  wealth  he  is  elevated  into  a  favored  and  priv- 
ileged class.  Tims  monarchs  and  aristocrats 
have  usurped  authority  over  the  million. 

It  is  the  brightest  gem  in  the  diadem  of  our 
nation's  glory,  that  the  United  States  have  abol- 
ished this  principle — that  here  we  have  no  priv- 
ileged classes,  to  whom  belong,  exclusively,  the 
oflfices  and  emoluments  of  the  government — that 
liere  the  higli,  the  low,  the  rich  and  the  poor, 
the  learned  and  tlie  rude — every  free  white  male 
citizen  who  is  not  a  convict  or  a  traitor — is  eli- 
gible to  the  highest  oflice  in  the  gift  of  the  peo- 
f)le.  Even  to  the  persecuted  exiles  of  other 
ands,  who  immigrate  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of 
freedom,  if  they  shall  become  citizens,  is  pre- 
sented the  boon  of  eligibility  to  the  chief  places 
under  government. 

And  this  is  considered  an  invaluable  and  in- 
estimable right  and  privilege,  of  which,  under 
our  national  government  and  most  of  our  state 
governments,  the  humblest  citiaen  is  never  de- 
prived, except  for  the  highest  crimes. 


739 


And  Uiis  great  American  principle  has  work- 
ed well,  and  is  esteemed  the  noblest  and  the 
proudest  birthright  of  our  citizens.  Under  its 
operations,  we  have  seen  the  "millboy  of  the 
slashes"  of  Hanover  county,  Virginia,  rising 
through  all  the  various  grades  of  ofhce,  and  now 
in  the  senate  of  the  United  States — we  have 
seen  a  son  of  a  poor  "exile  of  Erin,"  left  to  pov- 
erty and  orphanage  in  earlv  life,  become  the  he- 
ro of  New  Orleans,  and  tlien  elevated,  by  the 
voice  of  this  might}'  nation,  to  the  chief  execu- 
tive chair.  And  we  now  see  the  son  of  an  hum- 
ble farmei-  on  Beargrass,  unaided  by  the  pride  of 
birth  or  the  charms  of  wealth,  holding  the  gov- 
ernmental roins  of  this  great  republic.  Of  our 
country  in  truth  it  may  be  said,  that 

"Honor  and  shame  from  no  coudition  rise: 
Act  well  your  part,  there  all  the  honor  lies." 

Under  this  system,  our  country  has  been  rais- 
ed to  the  proud  eminence  it  now  occupies ;  and 
this  svstem,  judging  by  the  speeches  of  gentle- 
men, has  been  very  precious  lu  the  eyes  of  this 
convention.  Upon  no  sentence  have  more 
changes  been  rung,  than  that  of  "equal  rights 
to  all,  and  exclusive  privileges  to  none."  And 
how  are  the  doctrines  of  this  darling  political  max- 
im  to  be  maintained  inviolate,  while  you  deny 
to  the  ministers  of  religion,  rights  which  you 
guaranty  to  every  voter  in  the  commonwealth? 
Can  you  declare  them  ineligible  to  seats  in  the 
general  assembly  according  to  the  republican 
principle  of  equal  rights  and  privileges?  Is  not 
their  right  to  be  candidates  for  office  as  perfect 
and  complete  as  that  of  any  other  class  of  citi- 
zens whatever?  If  nature  and  the  social  compact 
did  not  give  them  this  privilege,  why  this  prohi- 
bition? Does  not  its  very  existence  prove  incon- 
testibly  their  right  to  seek  civil  office? — a  right 
of  which  only  the  strong  arm  of  constitutional 
law  could  deprive  them?  You  take  from  a  large 
and  respectable  class  of  your  fellow  citizens,  a 
great  and  inestimable  right;  and  all  to  manifest 
your  profound  reverence  for  equality  of  rights. 

Nor  is  this  the  most  remarkable  exhibiton  of 
this  favorite  political  niaxim  with  which  it  is 
proposed  to  illustrate  and  adorn  the  constitution 
now  in  process  of  formation.  Not  content  with 
the  manifestation  of  your  love  for  equal  rights 
by  depriving  the  ministers  of  rt;iigion  of  one  of 
the  most  precious  rights  known  to  our  political 
institutions,  von  intend  to  show  your  fond  affec- 
tion for  "exclusive  privileges  to  none,"  by  de- 
<;laringthat  none  except  a  lawyer  of  a  specified 
character  shall  be  eligible  for  the  office  of  circuit 
or  appelate  judge,  or  for  county,  commonwealth, 
or  attorney  general!  Aye,  you  not  only  give  to  this 
worthy  and  patriotic  class  of  our  citizens,  (fori  en- 
terlain  the  highest  respect  for  them,)  the  exclusive 
benefit  of  the  chief  offices  created  by  this  con- 
stitution, (and  in  this  respect  the  new  will  be  a 
vast  improvement  upon  the  old  constitution,) 
but  you  restrain  executive  clemency  when  it 
would  interpose  to  lift  a  burden  from  some  poor 
•wretch  who  nas  been  mulct  in  damages  for  a  pet- 
ty offence — so  far  at  least  as  the  attorney's  fees 
are  concerned!  The  governor  mav  remit  so  much 
of  the  fine  as  goes  into  the  pockets  of  the  peo- 
ple; but  not  that  part  which  goes  into  the  poc- 
Kets  of  the  attorney !  That  worthy  functionary 
nvustnot  be  hindered  in  his  work  of  coining  into 
fees  the  crimes  of  the  people ! 


This  all  may  be  right.  At  least  I  now  enter 
no  objections  to  it.  It  may  even  be  in  accordance 
with  the  maxim  of  Holy  writ,  which  declares, 
that  "he  who  will  not  provide  for  his  own,  and 
especially  for  those  of  his  own  house,  has  denied 
the  faith,andis  worse  than  an  infidel  "  Ishould 
certainly  never  think  of  voting  for  any  but  a  law- 
yer forjudge  or  attorney:  and  am  sincerely  sorry 
that  by  a  constitutional  presumption,  we  lead 
the  world  to  believe,  that  the  electors  of  Kentiu- 
ky  would  be  so  simple  as  to  vote  otherwise,  ex- 
cept for  this  conservative  restriction. 

I  have  alluded  to  these  regulations  merely  to 
show  the  picture  which  we  propose  to  hold  up 
to  the  admiration  and  wonder  of  our  constitu- 
ents— a  picture  here  representing  the  poor  minis- 
ters of  tiie  gospel  under  the  ban  of  the  constitu- 
tion, denied  access  to  all  the  civil  offices:  and 
there  representing  the  lawver  occupying,  solitary 
<ind  alone,  almost  all  the  fiigh  places,  and  revel- 
ing and  luxuriating  in  all  the  fat  salaries  of  the 
state.  And  underneath,  by  way  of  explanation 
and  illustration,  written  in  glaring  capitals,  the 
sentence,  "  Equal  rights  to  all,  axd  exclusive 

PRIVILEGES  TO  NONe!" 

Well  may  you  smile.  The  pencil  of  a  Cruik- 
shanks  never  perpetrated  a  more  grotesque  cari- 
cature. 

Sir,  the   great  mistake  in  this  whole  matte 

consists  in  not  making  the  distinction  betweer 

eligibility  to  office,  and  the  actual  election  of  th» 

man  to  office.     No  delegate  here  is  more  opposec 

than  myself  to  electing  ministers  of  the  gospe' 

to  seats  in  the  legislature.     They  have  other 

nobler,  and   holier  duties  to   discharge.     Thai' 

time  and  their  talents  can  be  more  profitably  em 

ployed.     But  their  eligibility  is  one  thing,  anu 

whether  they  should  be  elected  is  quite  another. 

The  true  principle  of  our  government  is,  as  I  have 

demonstrated,   to  throw  open  its  offices  to  every 

voter — to  declare  none  ineligible  except  for  high 

crimes  and  misdemeanors.     Every  citizen  born, 

when  he  arrives  at  a  certain  age.  is  eligible  for 

the  presidency  of  the  United  States;  and  yet 

who  would  think  of  electing  any  and  everj-  one 

to  that  high  office?     To  refuse  to  elect  a  man  to 

office  is  to  deprive  him  of  no  right.    He  asks  us 

for  our  votes,   and  we  have  the  perfect  right  to 

withhold  or  bestow   them;  and  we  give  no  just 

cause  of  offence  and  inflict  no  wrong:  but  when 

we    declare  him   ineligible,  we  violate  a  great 

principle  of  repubii<:anism,  and  deprive  him  of 

i  a  sacred  right — we  inflict  upon  him  that  which, 

I  accordingto  the  genius  of  our  government,  ought 

I  to  be  inflicted  only  upon  the  worst  of  criminals. 

'  There  are  many  men  I  would  not  vote  for  to  fill 

1  any  office  in   the  state,  but  there  is   no  man,  I 

j  care  not  how  mean  and  groveling,  unless  convic- 

1  ted  of  some  heinous  oftence,  whom  I  would  de- 

;  clare  ineligible. 

;  This  I  believe  to  be  the  principle  which  should 
guide  us  ill  our  action  upon  the  .section  now  un- 
der consideration;  this  1  am  sure  is  the  princi- 
ple wliich  governed  the  patriots  and  statesmen 
who  formed  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States. 

This  restriction  is  a  violation  of  the  rights  of 
conscience — it  is  depriving  a  man  of  a  great  po- 
litical and  natural  right  for  serving  his  God  in 
the  way  that  his  judgment  and  conscience  dic- 
tate,   "the  true  policy  of  every  civil  government 


740 


is,  to  let  religion  alone — to  let  the  ehurch  witli 
all  it«  concerns  take  care  of  itself.  The  Redeemer 
declared  that  his  kingdom  was  not  of  this  world. 
Its  ends,  its  aims,  its  hopes,  all  have  reference  to 
tie  spirit  land.  The  great  mistake  of  the  an- 
cient politicians  was,  that  they  assumed  to  regu- 
late the  affairs  of  a  kingdom  m  which  the  Great 
God  himself  claimed  to  be  the  sole  and  sovereign 
ruler  and  law-giver.  The  ministers  belong  to 
that  kingdom.  They  are  its  accredited  officers. 
They  derive  their  commissions  from  God  and 
not  from  man.  P'or  the  faithful  discharge  of  the 
duties  of  their  office  they  are  responsible  to  God 
and  not  to  man.  As  ministers  they  should  be 
unknown  to  the  state.  The  government  should 
recognize  them  as  citizens  and  not  as  ministers. 
Over  their  conduct  as  citizens  human  legislation 
is  sovereign  and  supreme;  over  them  as  minis- 
ters every  action  of  human  government  is  a 
usui-pation  and  a  wrong. 

They  present  themselves  here  simply  as  citi- 
zens, proposing  to  share  the  burdens  and  asking 
to  partake  of  tlhe  privileges  of  the  government 
we  may  form. 

Now  if  you  assume  a  guardianship  of  their 
ministerial  functions,  are  you  not  directly  in- 
terfering with  matters  belonging  exclusively  to 
the  church?  And  if  you  may  legislate  on  the 
oflScers  of  the  church,  may  you  not  legislate  on 
the  ordinances  and  the  doctrines  of  the  churdi? 
And  what  is  this  but  that  monstrous  union  of 
church  and  state,  concerning  which  so  much 
horror  has  been  expressed? 

One  of  the  dearest  privileges  of  an  American 
citizen,  is  to  worship  God  according  to  the  dic- 
tates of  his  conscience.  No  matter  whither  this 
may  lend  him — whether  to  bend  before  an  idol, 
to^offer  incense  to  Baal,  to  worship  Mahomet,  or 
to  recognize  the  only  true  living  God  and  his 
Son  our  Saviour — his  adoration  should  never  be 
hindered,  nor  his  conscience  be  fettered  by  law. 
And  the  mode  of  serving  his  God  acceptably 
should  never  be  disturbed  by  state  interference. 
One  may  choose  to  serve  his  God  in  a  quiet  way 
and  only  in  his  family.  There  he  may  erect  his 
altar  and  present  his  offering.  Another  may 
•  choose  to  retire  to  the  mountain  cave,  or  to  the 
desert  and  the  wilderness,  and  in  the  stillness  of 
a  solitude  where  no  human  voice  but  his  own  is 
heard,  worship  and  serve  his  Maker.  And  still 
another  may  choose  to  hymn  his  praises;  or  to 
preach  theAvay  of  life  and  salvation  in  the  con- 
gregation of  the  people.  Now  all  of  these,  per- 
forming what  they  believe  to  be  acceptable  ser- 
vice to  God,  according  to  the  principle  contain- 
ed in  the  bill  of  right*  of  all  the  states,  have  but 
done  what  they  had  a  perfect  right  to  do;  and  to 
subject  them  to  any  penalty  in  consequence,  is 
unjust  and  tvranical.  And 'what  does  the  min- 
ister more  than  exercise  this  undisputed  right? 
He  is  serving  God  according  to  the  dictates  of 
his  own  conscience.  He  believes  that  he  is  un- 
der obligations  to  liis  Creator  to  t(;ach  and 
preach  his  religion.  And  because  he  thus  wor- 
ships his  Maker  according  to  the  dictates  of  his 
conscience,  you  put  him  under  the  ban  of  the 
constitution — you  deprive  him  of  a  political 
privilege  deaf  to  every  freeman,  and  the  birtli- 
right  of  every  American  citizen! 

And  how  does  this  r«.strJction  conij)ort  with 
the  liberty  of  speech?    This  is  regarded  as  an- 


other of  our  dearest  privileges.  Man  may  speak 
freely  of  any  and  every  other  subject  except  re- 
ligion, and  it  would  be  thought  monstrous  in- 
deed to  declare  him  ineligible  for  office!  But 
let  him  speak  in  behalf  of  his  religion  and 
publicly  plead  the  cause  of  his  Redeemer,  and 
he  becomes  not  only  unfit  for  office,  but  wholly 
unworthy  of  being  even  a  candidate!  A  poli- 
tician on  the  stump  may  vindicate  the  principles 
of  liis  party,  the  lawyer  at  the  bar  may  speak  for 
hours  for  or  against  truth  and  justice,  and  this 
only  renders  him  more  Avorthy  of  office;  but  the 
minister  who  pleads  for  the  good  of  souls  is  ren- 
dered thereby  unworthy  of  seeking  civil  office! 
This  is  consistency  witha  witness — this  is  liberty 
of  speech! 

llie  exclusion  of  the  gospel  ministry  from  of- 
fice, as  in  this  section,  makes  a  very  'invidious 
and  odious  distinction — such  a  one  as  I  think 
AvhoUy  unworthy  of  the  characterand  the  consti- 
tution of  this  renowned  commonwealth. 

The  exclusion  applies,  you  perceive,  to  any 
preacher,  teacher,  or  priest'of  reliyion.  A  man 
may  preach  anything  else,  deism  or  atlieism,  and 
the  restriction  does  not  apply.  He  may  teach 
the  grossest  immorality — he  may  inculcate  rob- 
bery under  the  specious  name  of  gamblinjj,  or 
murder  baptized  dueling;  he  may  be  the  high 
priest  of  Fourierism,  abolitionism,  or  any  other 
of  the  thousand  and  one  liumbugs  of  the  day, 
and  bv  this  section  he  is  still  eligible  for  any 
and  all  offices  in  tlie  gift  of  tlie  people.  He  may 
even  teach  the  doctrines  of  devils,  and  still  be 
eminently  qualified  for  office.  It  is  only  the 
man  who  teaches  that  life  and  immortality  are 
brought  to  light  by  the  gospel — who  seeks  to 
diffuse  the  benign  influences  of  Christianity — 
that  is  to  be  proscribed  from  all  direct  partici- 
pation in  the  affairs  of  legislation! 

Any  man  distinguished  for  his  patriotism — 
who  lias  rendered  eminent  service  to  his  coun- 
try— by  becoming  a  teacher  of  religion,  forfeits 
the  great  right  of  a  freeman — becomes  ineligible 
to  office!  But  he  may  deny  the  faith  and  be- 
come an  infidel,  be  profligate  and  abandoned, 
and  thus  once  more  be  eligible — be  worthy  to  re- 
ceive the  people's  votes! 

Here  is  a  miserable  gambler,  and  drunkard, 
and  debauchee.  He  is  now  eligible  to  office.  He 
reforms,  however,  and  unites  Avith  the  church. 
Ho  dedicates  his  talents  and  influence  to  the 
cause  of  religion.  He  teaches  religion,  and  for 
that  offence,  forfeits  tlie  birth-right  of  an  Ameri- 
can citizen — renders  himself  iiieligibb  to  office! 
What  a  distinction  to  constitute  a  part  of  the 
fundamental  law  of  acliristian  state! 

See  the  poor  wretch  staggering  along  your 
streets  or  wallowing  in  the  gutters.  He  is'pol- 
luted  with  every  vice.  He  has  reduced  his  wife 
and  children  to  beggaiy  and  starvation.  He  has 
spent  his  all  in  the  grog  shop.  He  is  reduced 
almost  to  the  level  of  the  brute.  Still  he  is  eli- 
gible for  the  office  of  governor!  But  behold  that 
other  man,  eminent  for  every  virtue  that  digni- 
fies and  ennobles  humanity.  Gifted,  good, 
learned,  and  eloquent.  Known  and  loved  by  all 
for  the  splendor  of  his  genius,  and  the  extent  of 
his  erudition.  But  he  is  ineligible  even  to  a  seat 
in  your  house  of  representatives;  and  simply  be- 
cause he  is  a  minister  of  iJie  gospel!  I  have 
drawn  no  fancv  sketch.      This  is  a  veritable  re- 


^1 


alilv-^a  fair,  practical  illustration  of  the  doctrine 
of  tliis  section.  I  ask  emphatioallv,  if  such 
policy  comports  witli  the  dignitv  ancf  character 
of  the  stateY 

This  restriction  applies  only  •while  the  indi- 
vidual continues  to  be  a  teacher  or  preacher  or 
priest  of  religion.  Eligibility — the  faeinations 
of  political  honors,  and  especially  the  cliarnis  of 
the  salaries — are  held  upas  tetnptations  to  induce 
hira  to  resign  his  office  in  the  church  of  God. 
This,  to  good  ministers, would  be  no  temptation. 
Before  he  entered  his  ^vork,  he  made  up  his  mind 
to  undergo  privation  and  the  vorld's  scorn. 
But  this  shows,  that  the  restriction  would  be  no 
restraint  upon  tlie  minister  ambitious  of  such 
honors,  and  covetous  of  filthy  lucre.  He  could 
easily  surrender  his  ministerial  credentials  ;  or 
else  he  could  become  a  drunkard,  a  liar,  a  gam- 
bler, or  in  some  other  way  disregard  the  requisi- 
tions of  religion,  and  trample  upon  the  man- 
dates of  the  decalogue,  and  be  expelled  from 
the  church,  and  then  he  would  walk  the  high- 
way to  the  offices  and  emoluments  within  the 
gift  of  Kentuckians!  You  declare  him  then  to 
Be  worthy  to  receive  the  suflFragcs  of  the  free  and 
virtuous  electors  of  our  state. 

Yes,  sir,  the  bog  trotter  of  Ireland,  the  boor 
of  Germany,  the  serf  of  Russia,  the  inhabitant 
of  any  countrj'  or  clime,  the  hue  of  whose  skin 
has  not  been  tinged  by  an  Indian  or  an  African 
sun.  who  may  become  a  citizen  of  the  state,  is 
eligible  to  all  its  offices;  while  you  deny  eligi- 
bility to  a  virtuous  and  intelligent  class  of  na- 
tive born  citizens,  simply  because  they  serve  God 
according  to  the  dictates  of  their  conscience.  1 
do  not  condemn  your  course  in  the  first  instance; 
on  the  contrary,  it  meets  my  hearty  approval  ; 
but  I  ask,  when  vou  contrast  it  with  the  second, 
how  can  you  vindicate  your  justice  or  your  con- 
sistency' 

I  remark  again,  sir,  that  this  restriction  is 
wholly  unnecessary  and  uncalled  for. 

There  was  some  show  of  an  excuse  for  it,  but 
not  the  shadow  of  reason  in  its  justification, 
when  it  was  first  introduced  into  an  American 
constitution — in  that  of  Virginia,  adopted  in 
1776.  That  state  was  then  influenced  by  pecu- 
liar circumstances.  Previous  to  that  time,  under 
colonial  regulations,  the  episcopal  church  was 
established  there  by  law.  To  support  the  cler- 
gy of  that  church,  certain  lands,  called  glebe 
lands,  were  appropriated;  besides  a  large  sti- 
pend in  tobacco  was  annually  paid  them.  This 
became  oppressive.  Other  denominations  of  re- 
ligionists sprang  up,  who  felt  unwilliug  to  sup- 
port a  church  to  which  they  did  not  belong  and 
to  whose  doctrines  they  did  not  subscribe.  The 
law  was  appt?aled  to  by  the  friends  of  the  estab- 
lishment Persecution  ensued.  My  own  ances- 
tors suffered  severely — were  whipped  and  ea.st 
into  prison.  This  odious  and  persecuting  estab- 
lishment was  put  down,  the  year  that  the  first 
Virginia  constitution  was  ordained.  The  min- 
isters of  all  other  denominations  submitted  to  it 
quietly,  because  it  debarred  their  persecutors 
from  office. 

But  there  was  another  and  a  more  controlling 
reason  for  this  restriction.  The  great  statesman 
who  drafted  that  constitution  was  no  friend  to 
religion.  He  had  tasted  and  felt  the  influence 
of  the  French  philosophy,  which  just  then  be- 


gan to  lower  upon  the  brow  of  the  moral  Arma- 
ment, and  poon  after  shrouded  in  darkest  gloom 
the  moral  heavens  of  the  civilized  world.  The 
great  men  of  the  earth,  and  many  of  our  own 
statesmen,  were  enveloped  in  its  darkness.  This 
philosophy  subsequently  led  its  disciples  to  de- 
clare there  was  no  God,  and  that  death  was  an 
eternal  sleep.  It  was,  I  sav,  the  promptings  in 
part  of  this  philosophy  wLich  first  gave  birtfa 
to  this  proscription  of  gospel  ministers. 

No  matter,  however,  what  the  cause  prompting 
its  first  introduction;  there  is  no  reason  for  its 
existence  now.  We  have  no  established  church 
to  put  down.  The  dark  cloud  of  infidelity  and 
atheism  has  nearly  all  been  brushed  away.  We 
live  under  happier  auspices;  and  can  survey  the 
premises  with  other  and  more  unbiassed  vision. 

This  prohibition  is  unnecessary',  because  even 
if  their  admission  into  the  offices  of  state  were 
dangerous,  it  is  evident  they  do  not  covet  those 
offices.  This  I  prove  from  their  course  in  those 
states  where  no  such  restriction  exists.  In  the 
constitution  of  twenty  one  of  the  states  of  this 
union,  there  is  no  such  prohibition.  By  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  ministers  of 
the  gospel  are  eligible  to  all  the  national  offices. 
I  appeal  to  the  candor  of  delegates,  and  I  ask 
them  if,  in  those  twenty  one  states,  or  under  the 
government  of  the  United  States,  they  ever  saw 
or  heard  of  ministers,  to  any  extent  worthy  of 
note,  seeking  political  preferment?  Do  those 
tw-enty  one  states.or  our  nation,  suffer  any  evil  or 
incur  any  danger  by  not  having  this  restriction? 
They  do  not.  It  is  wholly  useless  and  unneces- 
sary— condemned  by  the  experience  of  more  than 
two  thirds  of  the  American  people. 

Ministers,  generally,  have  chosen  their  calling 
in  full  view  of  the  consequences.  They  know 
it  is  not  the  road  to  wealth  and  fame — they  know 
thev  subject  them.selves  to  the  world's  hatred 
ana  scorn,  on  account  of  their  profession — thev 
might  have  sought  other  pui-suits — they  might 
have  been  lawyers,  or  physicians,  or  fanners,  or 
something  else,  where  wealth  and  honor  would 
have  smiled  upon  their  pathway.  The  life  of 
the  ministry  is  one  of  toil,  privation,  and  penu- 
ry. Much  of  their  time  they  are  necessarily 
from  their  families,  and  when  sickness  or  the 
pestilence  prevails,  they  are  around  the  beds  of 
the  di-seased  and  the  dying,  administering  the 
consolations  of  religion.' 

The  ministers  in  the  states  where  this  restric- 
tion is  not,  possess  as  much  of  the  confidence  of 
the  people,   and  are  in  every  respect  as  accom- 

?lished  and  as  able  as  here,  or  in  any  state, 
here  is  nothing  to  prevent  iheir  seeking  office, 
and  obtaining  it  too,  but  their  settled  disinclina- 
tion. I  think  I  may  safely  claim  as  much  for 
the  ministers  of  this  .state.  Why  this  stigma, 
then?  Why  do  you  thus  subject  them  to  the 
suspicion,  that  the  safety  of  their  country  re- 
quires their  exclusion  from  civil  office?  Why 
furnish  an  occasion  to  the  pert  infidel,  and  the 
pot-house  politician,  to  point  derisively  at  them, 
as  i>ersons  who,  like  criminals,  negroes,  and  In- 
dians, are  ostracised  from  tlie  offices  of  the 
state? 

To  place  this  restriction  upon  ministers,  is  to 
doubt  the  capacity  of  the  people  for  self-govern- 
ment. Ought  we  not  to  presume  that  the  peo- 
ple, at  tlie  polls,  are  competent  to   settle  this 


749 


question?  Are  they  not  to  be  l rusted  in  tlie  se- 
lection of  their  own  representatives?  Are  thev 
likely  to  be  so  recreant  to  tlieir  interests,  and  so 
blind  to  their  safety,  as  to  clioose  nx-n  who  are 
unworthy  and  unsafe,  to  manage  the  aflairs  of 
KtateV  If  so,  our  government  is  based  upon  a 
foundation  of  sand — it  is  but  a  superstructure 
of  vapor,  to  be  blown  away  by  the  slightest 
breath  of  air.  I  entertain  no  such  doubts  of  the 
peoplf,  and  hence  believe  tliat  this  restriction 
should  not  exist.  And,  if  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel must  be  proscribed,  why  not  proscribe  all 
professors  of  religion?  If  there  is  danger  in  the 
gospel  ministry,  it  is  made  dangerous  by  the  re- 
ligion they  profess.  That  is  what  gives  them 
their  distinguishing  peculiarity.  It  is  their  re- 
ligion then,  and  not  their  mere  talking  about  it, 
■which  should  be  placed  under  the  ban  of  the 
government.  Ministers  make  no  pretension  to 
that  e.\clusive  sanctity  and  elect  righteousness 
which  gentlemen  seem  to  assign  them.  They 
are  but  men — but  common  citizens  of  the  state, 
with  no  other  civil  interests  than  those  possessed 
by  their  neighbors.  This  supposed  peculiar 
sanctity  of  the  ministerial  profession  is  a  fig- 
ment of  the  dark  ages,  and  is  worthy  only  of 
the  dark  ages.  I  had  supposed,  that  in  this 
boasted  age  of  liglit  and  science — of  steam  en- 
gines and  magnetic  telegraphs — that  the  doctrine 
that  ministers  wtre  a  class  separate  from  the 
people,  of  different  instincts  and  interests, 
would  be  treated  as  but  a  school  boy's  dream. 

I  admit  that  under  certain  circumstances,  an 
individual  should  be  deprived  of  his  natural 
rights.  When  the  safety  of  the  government  and 
the  security  of  the  conmiunity  demand  it,  it  is 
right  and  proper.  Hence  persons  guilty  of  high 
crimes,  the  thief,  the  robber,  the  man-slayer,  the 
traitor,  forfeit  their  political  birthright  by  their 
outrages  upon  society,  and  ought  to  be  put  un- 
der the  ban  of  the  government.  The  question 
arises,  then — does  the  good  of  the  state  abso- 
lutely demand  tlie  exclusion  of  ministers  from 
civiroffice?  Why  should  they  be  declared  ineli- 
gible to  seats  in  the  general  assembly? 

It  is  said,  in  justification  of  this  restriction, 
that  to  make  ministers  eligible  for  civil  office 
will  corrupt  them — that  they  have  a  high  and 
holy  calling,  and  ought  not  to  be  permitted  to 
forsake  it  for  the  polluting  contests  of  political 
life — that  it  will  impair  their  usefulness  and  sully 
their  purity! 

Now,  tliis  is  a  very  good  reason  to  present  to 
the  minister  himself,  why  he  should  not  be  a 
candidate,  but  surely  it  is  no  state  reason  why 
the  constitution  should  deprive  him  of  a  great 
right — a  right  of  which  only  criminals,  for  high 
crimes,  arc  deprived.  Suppose  all  that  i.s  said 
be  true,  and  1  will  not  call  it  in  question,  does 
he  thereby  commit  an  offence  against  the  state? 
Does  he  subject  liimsclf  to  criminal  prosecution? 
Do  you  proceed  with  e<jual  rigor  towards  other 
citizens  who  may  lapse  into  vice  and  sully  their 
purity?  Wliy  not  be  equally  careful  of  the  mor- 
als ot  others? 

And  if  you  must  assume  to  direct  the  business 
of  citizens,  and  see  that  they  do  not  neglect  it, 
extend  your  guardianship  furtlier.  Say  to  the 
phybician,  that  he  has  the  health  of  men  s  bodies 
to  see  to — that  if  he  mingles  in  nolititss  and  goes 
to  the  legislature,  he  will  neglect  his   patients 


and  injure  his  practice — and  therefore  he  must 
be  ineligible.  Let  the  lawyer  be  told  that  his 
vocation  is  a  vastly  important  one — that  no  man 
can  be  a  good  lawyer  without  giving  his  whole 
energies  to  his  profession — that  he  must  neglect 
his  clients  and  injure  his  legal  reputation  by  en- 
gaging in  politics — and  therefore  he  must  be  in- 
eligible. Declare  the  farmer  and  mechanic  ineli- 
gible, because  they  cannot  successfully  and 
properly  carry  on  their  business  when  away 
from  it,  and  engaged  in  legislation!  Consisten- 
cy will  carry  you  at  least  thus  far — will  lead  you 
to  bring  ruin  upon  the  state,  by  driving  every 
person  worthy  to  fill  them  from  its  offices. 

But  this  tender  and  kind  regard  for  tlie  morals 
of  the  clergy  is  rather  oppressive.  Such  terms 
of  compliment  and  such  fond  expressions  of  so- 
licitude sound  rather  svreu-like.  It  is  the  voice 
of  the  enchanter  alluring  to  destruction.  It  is 
decorating  the  victim  with  garlands  as  it  is  led 
to  the  sacrifice.  It  is  the  executioner  asking 
pardon  of  the  criminal  for  cutting  off  his  head. 
This  is  loving  us  most  too  much.  Like  the  bear, 
gentlemen  would  hug  us  to  death.  The  gentle- 
man engaged  in  this  amiable  decapitation  but 
proves  himself 

"as mild  a  mannered  man 
As  ever  cut  a  throat  or  scuttled  ship." 

And  when  or  where,  let  me  ask,  were  you  ap- 
pointed the  guardian  angels  of  the  ministers? 
When  did  you  become  the  refiner's  fire  and  the 
fuller's  soap  to  purify  the  clerical  profession? 
And  if  you  have  assumed  guardianship  over  our 
manners  and  morals,  why  stop  here?  Why  not, 
insert  a  constitutional  provision  that  we  must 
not  get  drunk,  or  gamble,  or  blaspheme?  Or  di> 
vou  suppose  that  like  other  citizens  we  can  b*- 
left  to  our  own  judgment  and  to  our  own  sense  of 
propriety,  in  all  such  matters?  That  only  in 
politics  do  you  esteem  it  necessary  to  throw  your 
tegis  around  us?  In  relation  to  the  corruptions 
of  civil  office  only,  do  you  profess  to  have  supe- 
rior moral  perception.  You  perhaps  speak  ex- 
perimentally. "You  speak  what  yoti  do  knoAv 
and  testify  to  that  Avhich  you  have  seen!"  Verv 
well;  I  hesitate  not  to  say  that  the  ministers  will 
receive  your  testimony;  and  doubtless  their  good 
sense  and  their  religion  will  lead  them  to  avoid 
that  pool  of  pollution  in  which  you  have  so.  long 
bathed.  I  think  that  if  they  will  not  of  their 
own  accord  avoid  this  contamination, that  a  vir- 
tuous and  sagacious  people  will  very  cheerfully 
take  ytuir  wards  off  your  hands,  and  see  that 
they  suffer  no  evil.  You  need  not,  I  am  sure, 
think  the  preachers  and  the  people,  like  the 
blind  leading  tlie  blind,  will  both  fall  into  the 
ditch.  All  moral  perception  and  all  sense  of 
proprietj"  are  not  garnered  in  this  convention. 
The  people  are  not  demented,  nor  arc  the  mini^ 
tersall  knaves  and  simpletons. 

I  remember  thcit  even  in  the  times  of  the  Sa- 
vior's incarnation,  there  was  a  certain  class  of 
gentlemen — the  lawyers  and  doctors — who  as 
sumed  the  guardiansliip  of  the  morals  of  the 
Son  of  God.  They  were  apnrehensive  that  his 
manners  might  be  corrupted  oy  consorting  with 

Eublicans  and  sinners — they  feared  lest  he  might 
ecoine  gluttonous  and  a  wine-bibber!  If  they 
did  these  things  in  the  green  tree,  what  may  we 
not  expect  thev  will  do  in  the  dry?  If  these 
things  were  done  to  our  divine  Master,  what 


7^3 


can  we,  Ins  servants,  expect,  but  to  be  classed 
witb  thieves  and  traitors  by  such  exemplary 
guardians  of  our  morals? 

The  Redeemer  of  men  was  crucified  between 
two  tliieves,  and  the  recollection  of  that  event 
can  well  bo  perpetuated,  by  classifying  his  min- 
isters, constitutionally,  with  thieves  and  rob- 
bers. 

It  is  argued,  that  to  make  ministers  eligible, 
is  a  virtual  union  of  church  an<l  state. 

And  here,  sir,  the  note  is  changed.  Just  now 
this  restriction  was  justified  on  the  ground  that 
ministers  were  too  good  to  mingle  in  legislation; 
now,  however,  gentlemen  veer  round,  tack  to 
another  breeze,  and  tell  us  that  they  are  too  bad ! 
Those  who  awhile  ago  were  so  holy  and  so  pure, 
have  doffed  their  robes  of  righteousness — ^^are 
now  like  ministers  of  hell,  seeking  to  subvert 
the  liberties  of  their  eountryl  Well,  if  this  be 
so,  I  confess  it  furnishes  a  good  reason  for  ex- 
cluding them  from  office.  But  even  then.  I  do  j 
not  think  you  sufficiently  proviile  against  the 
evil.  They  might  obtain  some  disinterested  in- 
dividual, who  for  a  fee,  would  undertake  their 
cause  forthem;  and  thus  accomplish  their  un- 
hallowed purposes.  You  had  better  then  banish 
them  from  the  state.  Everv  consideration  of 
self-defence  would  justify  sucK  a  course. 

But,  sir,  this  apprehension  of  the  union  of 
church  and  state  is  but  the  phantom  of  a  diseas- 
ed imagination — but  "gorgeous  hydras  and  chim- 
eras dire,"  seen  in  the  same  way  that  Hamlet 
perceived  his  father's  ghost,  by  "the  mind's 
eye!"  Do  you  beholcl  any  tendency  to  the 
union  of  church  and  state  in  Georgia,  Alabama, 
Mississippi  arid  Arkansas? — or  in  any  of  the 
states  north? — or  in  the  government  of  the  Uni- 
ted States?  And  yet,  in  all  these,  ministers  are 
eligible  to  oflice.  There  is  no  danger  of  the 
sort  apprehended  there  ;  then  why  should  there 
be  in  Kentucky?  Are  we  more  tintid — more  lia 
ble  to  be  alarmed  by  mere  creations  of  the  brain 
than  our  neighbors? 

Such  a  union  belongs  to  the  things  that  were. 
Every  where  it  is  falling  into  disrepute  and  be- 
ing  overthrown.     In    Europe  it   is  being   con- 1 
sumed  bv  the  fires  of  freedom.     There  is  not  a  I 
man  in  all  this  country  who  is  in  favor  of  such  a  I 
union.  The  ministers  of  this  country  are  a«  dead-  | 
ly  hostile  to  it  as  any  other  class  of  citizens  { 
whatever.      And   how   could   such   a  union   be  , 
brought  al.Mnit?      If  the  thing  can  be  done,  let  j 
gentlemen  demonstrate  how  it  is  to  be  done?    Of 
course,  some  one  sect  would  liave  to  control  the  I 
majority  of  the  voters  in  the  state.     They  would  i 
either  by  force  of  arms  or  else   by  convention  j 
called  for  the  purpose,  make  another  constitu- 
tion.    They  would,  to  be  secure,  have  to  destroy  j 
the  press,  iJanishor  burn  the  ministers  and  niem-  j 
bers  of  all  other  persuasions,  and  throw  a  wall  of 
adamant  around  Kentucky,  to  keep  out  the  in- 
dignant expression  of  opinion  which  would  else 
deluge  them  from  her  sister  states! 

No  man  of  reflection  can  believe  for  a  moment 
that  the  slightest  «langer  is  to  be  apprehended 
from  any  such  source.  The  resort  to  such  a  sub- 
terfuge but  betrays  the  weakness  of  the  cause 
sought  to  be  defended. 

But  it  is  urged  that  it  would  endanger  the  lib- 
erties of  the  people  to  permit  ministers  to  hold 
or  even  to  seek  political  ofiSce.    Have  gentle- 


men examined  iht  history  \>f  their  country?  Oan 
they  find  in  this  broad  land  acla^s  *>f  rue'n  more 
patriotic — who  have  done  more  for  the  interests 
and  glory  of  their  country,  than  the  ministere? 
Why,  sir.  they  pre.sid.d  over  the  foundation  of 
this  great  republic.  They  induced  "the  pilgrim 
fathers"  to  .-icttle  in  the  wilds  of  America.  The 
first  constitution  in  Christendom  which  guaran- 
tied to  all  men  the  right  to  worship  God  accord- 
ing to  tlie  dictates  of  conscience,  was  drawn  by 
Roger  Williams,  a  minister  of  the  gospel. 

Sir,  the  old  Continental  congres-s  did  not  think 
that  ministers  of  the  gospel  were  the  enemies  of 
liberty.  In  those  days  which  tried  men's  souls — 
when  the  assembled  patriotism  of  America  took 
council  together,  ministers  were  not  excluded 
from  their  deliberations. 

They  were  not  proscribed  by  the  congress  of 
1776 — that  noble  assembly  of  patriots  who 
pledged  their  lives,  their  fortunes,  and  their  sa- 
cred honors,  to  maintain  the  independence  of 
the  United  States.  In  that  august  body,  who 
more  eloquent  for  liberty  and  who  more  firm  and 
undaunted  in  its  maintenance  than  Dr.  Wither- 
spoon?  His  name  stands  subscribed  to  the  Dec- 
laration of  Independence. 

The  convention  which  formed  tlie  federal 
constitution — over  which  presided  the  great 
Washington — in  the  deliberations  of  which 
mingled  Franklin,  and  Madistm,  and  Hamilton, 
and  Randolph,  and  others  the  most  gifted  and 
the  best  of  revolutionary  heroes  and  patriots — 
that  convention,  I  say,  did  not  esteem  ministers 
of  the  go^pel  dangerous  men.  They  did  not 
put  them  under  the  ban  of  government.  They 
threw  open  to  them  all  the  offices  of  the  nation. 
Are  we  afraid  to  walk  in  the  foot-steps  of  these 
men? 

No  class  of  men,  in  the  war  of  the  revolution, 
were  more  patriotic,  were  more  con.sistent  and 
undeviating  friends  of  liberty,  than  the  minis- 
ters of  the  gospel. 

But  it  has  been  said  in  certain  quarters,  that 
almost  all  the  ministers  of  Kentucky  are  eman- 
cipationists. 

Granting  this  even  to  be  so,  if  we  are  to  infer 
hence  that  the  ministry  and  emancipation  are 
synonymous,  and  if  emancijiation  mu.st  be  put 
»lown  by  this  constitution,  then  you  cannot  ac» 
accomplish  your  work  without  saying  that  no 
man  shall  be  a  minister!  But  might  not  the 
matter  be  more  ea<ily,  certainly  more  fairly 
reached,  by  simply  declaring  all  the  emancipa- 
tionists ineligible?  This  would  lay  the  axe  at 
the  root  of  the  tree. 

It  is  not  true,  however,  that  nearly  all  the 
ministers  of  Uiis  state  favor  emancipation.  I 
have  taken  considerable  pains  to  obtain  the  exact 
truth  of  the  c;ise,  and  I  speak  understandingly 
when  I  declare  that  an  overwhelming  majority 
of  them  were  opposed  to  emancipation — that  a 
greater  proportion  of  lawyers  than  preachers 
were  emancipationists.  But  who  would  think 
of  assigning  that  as  a  reason  for  declaring  that 

Eatriotic  portion  of  our  fellow-citizens  ineligi- 
le? 

C.  M.  Clav,  and  chancellor  Nicholas,  and  the 
Hon.  Henry  Clay,  and  others,  the  prime  movers 
of  emancipation  in  Kentucky,  are  no  ministers; 
nor  are  Garrison,  and  Birney'  and  Hale,  and  Gid- 
dings,  the  great  northern  lights  of  abolitionism. 


ru 


t>*utlfctji«n   arc   lin*   tr«aJiiig  upon   eawlianted 

S round.  I  atn  uut  of  tlio-^e  who  are  liaunteJ  by 
le  spectre  of  financipaiioij.  It  is  not  a  name 
that  I  invoke  to  frigliten  children  and  nervous 
persons.  No  niaii  ought  to  make  emancipa- 
tion a  cause  for  declaring  a  citizen  ineligible  to 
office. 

It  is  said  that  ministers  have  an  influence  in 
community;  and  that  if  eligible,  they  would,  in 
some  way  or  other,  by  using  it,  endanger  the 
Country. 

Why,  you,  Mr.  President, have  an  influence,  or 
you  would  not  now  fill  that  chair;  and  nil  the 
delegates  here  have  an  influence,  or  they  would 
not  be  here.  Gen.  Washington  was  a  man  of  in- 
fluence, and  so  is  Gen.  Taylor,  and  so  is  every 
man  who  is  worth  anything  at  all.  But  is  the 
influence  suscribed  to  the  minister  of  the  gospel, 
dangerous  of  itself?  This  is  the  true  question; 
and  on  it  I  am  prepared  to  meet  any  gentleman 
who  will  take  issue.  I  utterly  deny  that  preach- 
ing the  gospel  gives  to  any  man  a  dangerous  in- 
fluence. There  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  oSice 
of  the  ministry  which  necessarily  works  injury 
to  any  one.  That  bad  men  have  worn  the  name 
of  ministers  as  they  have  of  every  profession,  I 
do  not  deny.  But  these  bad  men  in  ministerial 
garb  are  the  very  men  whom  this  section  bene- 
fits— the  man  who  has  "stole  the  livery  of  heav- 
en to  serve  the  devil  in,"  can,  w-ith  all  imagina- 
ble facility,  accommodate  himself  to  the  letter 
and  spirit  of  your  restriction,  and  revel  in  the 
offices  and  honors  of  the  state. 

We  have  been  referred  to  liistory,  and  told  that 
its  voice  warns  to  beware  of  the  eligibility  of 
ministers.  The  blood  and  carnage  of  by  gone 
ages,  under  the  outraged  name  of  Christianity, 
have  been  summoned  to  testify  of  the  enormi- 
ties that  must  be  expected,  if  ministers  be  allow- 
ed to  become  candidates  for  office. 

Infidelity  is  wont  to  refer  to  tliis  page  of  his- 
tory, not  to  prove  that  ministers,  butchristianity 
itself  is  the  greatest  curse  and  scourge  ever  in- 
flicted upon  an  abused  world.  But  all  this  is  the 
result  of  not  taking  a  proper  view  of  the  subject. 
It  is  the  confounding  of  tilings  wholly  distinct. 
Neither  Christianity  nor  its  ministers  Avere  the 
authors  of  these  things.  The  genius  of  the  one, 
and  tlic  commission  borne  by  the  other  emphat- 
ically condemn  them.  That  they  were  perpetra- 
ted under  the  name  of  Christianity  is  true  ;  but 
there  is  not  a  syllable  in  the  Bible  to  justify 
them.  They  were  all  anti-ehristian.  You  might 
as  well  condemn  the  good  coin  for  the  counter- 
feit, as  ascribe  that  to  Christianity  which  it  con- 
demns though  performed  in  her  name — as  to  con- 
demn indiscriminately  all  ministers  of  tlie  gos- 
pel because  some  bad  men  have  a.Hsumed  their 
vocation. 

But  even  admitting  the  worst  aspect  of  the 
case — go  to  tlie  darkest  night  of  the  dark  ages — 
and  then  I  maintain  that  almost  the  only  lights 
■which  gilded  the  moral  sky  were  emitted  by  the 
ministers: — that  then  as  not  now,  they  were  far 
in  advance  of  their  age  and  gent-ration.  They 
■were  called  clenry  c)ecause  they  alone  could 
•write.  They  ptissessed  almost  exclusively  the 
learning  ana  philosophy  of  the  times. 

If,  however,  appeals  must  bo  made  to  history, 
l«t  all  her  testimony  be  taken;  let  her  tell  the 
-whole  of  her  story.    If  we  must  hear  the  bad 


deeds  of  niiui»terij,  let  us  not  forget  ihe  good 
thcv  have  done.  I  am  willing  to  plant  mvaelf 
upon  liistory  and  let  its  records  be  my  vindica- 
tion. 

Let  us  go  back  to  the  beginning  of  the  chris- 
tian era,  and  what  was  the  state  of  the  world 
then,  in  morals,  in  religion,  in  science,  and  in 
civilization?  "  Darkness  covered  the  earth  and 
gross  darkness  the  people."  Before  what  light 
was  this  darkness  driven  away?  It  was  the 
light  of  that  religion  for  the  diffusion  of  which 
you  propose  to  make  men  ineligible  to  civil  of- 
fice. 

W^hy  are  we  not  idolaters  like  the  ancient  law 
makers  of  Greece  and  Rome?  How  happens  it, 
that  we  are  emancipated  from  the  superstition 
which  beclouded  their  minds?  We  have  been 
raised  in  a  christian  land.  Religion  has  dispel- 
led from  our  minds  the  folly  which  envelopes 
thos<;  sitting  in  the  regions  of  heathenism. 
Stand  back  in  the  darkness  where  our  religion 
has  never  prevailed,  and  cast  your  ej^es  to  Chris- 
tendom, and  how  bright  and  glorious  she  ap- 
pears! W'hat  is  it  that  has  made  her  nations 
and  people  so  much  superior  to  other  nations  of 
the  earth? — has  so  elevated  them  intellectually 
and  morally?  It  is  the  christian  religion,  whose 
ministers  you  iu)W  seek  to  proscribe  from  civil 
office! 

I  appeal  to  woman.  Let  her,  as  she  contrasts 
herself  with  her  sister  in  heathen  lands,  tell  you 
what  has  redeemed  her  from  bondage  and  deg- 
radation? Ask  her  by  what  means  she  has  been 
elevated  to  that  proud,  almost  angelic  position 
she  now  occupies?  And  with  sparkling  eye 
and  beaming  countenance  she  will  respond,  it 
Avas  that  religion  whose  ministers  you  declare 
unworthy  to  till  office  under  this  government! 

Sir,  no  class  of  citizens  have  done  more  for 
the  real  and  enduring  good  of  this  countrj',  tlian 
those  very  men  whom  you  are  about  to  class 
with  its  worst  enemies.  They  have  built  most 
of  our  institutions  of  learning.  They  preside 
over  the  most  important  of  our  colleges  and  our 
universities.  They  are  our  principal  teachers 
not  only  in  religion  and  morals,  but  in  all  the 
useful  arts  and  sciences.  They  have  to  a  greater 
extent  than  any  others,  formed  and  fashioned  the 
mind  and  manners  of  the  people  of  this  country. 
Are  these  considerations  which  should  induce 
you  to  drive  them  from  all  participation  in  legis- 
lation! 

But  I  will  press  this  subject  no  further.  I 
have  already  detained  the  convention  longer 
tiian  I  intended.  1  thank  you,  Mr.  President,  and 
all  the  delegates,  for  the  very  polite  attention 
with  which  you  have  listened  to  me.  I  felt  called 
upon  to  say  thus  much.  I  have  now  discharged 
my  duty.  If  this  system  still  remains  in  our 
constitution,  and  I  suppose  it  will,  I  shall  bow 
submissively.  Persecution  is  the  lot  of  the  min- 
ister's inheritance.  The  world,  said  our  divine 
Master,  will  hate  you,  for  it  hated  me.  You 
shall  be  hated  of  all  men  for  my  name's  sake. 
But,  sir,  be  assured  we  will  return  good  for  evil. 
And  no  matter  liow  hate<l  or  how  proscribed, 
you  will  still  have  our  best  wishes.  (3ur  country 
and  our  countrymen  will  ever  lie  near  our  hearts. 
Is  not  "this  our  own,  our  native  land?"  What- 
ever position  civilly  you  may  assign  us,  under 
every  privation  we  may  experience,  we  will  ever 


745 


earnestly  and  fervently  ejaculate, "  GJod  save  the 
commonwealtlil    God  save  the  commonivealth!" 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  desire  to  submit  a  few  re- 
marks to  the  consideration  of  the  convention, 
not  so  much  in  reply  to  the  gentleman  from 
Woodford,  as  to  a  paper  which  has  been  intro- 
duced into  the  journals  and  records  of  this  house, 
remonstrating  against  the  exclusion  of  clergv- 
raen  from  the  legislature  of  this  coramonwealtn. 
Permit  me  to  remark  that  there  is  not  a  man  in 
this  house  who  has  a  higher.regard  for  religion 
than  myself,  although  I  admit  I  have  never  taken 
upon  me  that  yoke  which  is  said  to  be  easy, 
and  that  burden  which  is  light. 

I  beg  leave  to  read  the  following  preamble 
•which  I  desire  to  have  adopted  as  prefatory  to 
the  section  now  under  consideration: 

"  "Whereas  the  history  of  modern  nations 
teaches  that  it  behooves  freemen  to  watch  with 
jealousy  any  interference  of  the  church  with 
state,  and  fearing  that,  from  the  slightest  begin- 
ning, the  precedent  shall  grow  till  designing  and 
ambitious  churchmen  corrupt  the  purity  of  the 
church  and  render  it  a  fit  instrument  of  tyrants: 
and,  whereas,  ministers  of  the  gospel  are  by 
their  profession  dedicated  to  God  and  the  care 
of  souls,  and  ought  not  to  be  diverted  from  the 
great  duties  of  their  calling,  therefore  no  minis- 
ter of  the  gospel,  priest,  or  teacher,  of  any  de- 
nomination whatever,  shall  be  eligible  to  a  seat 
in  either  house  of  the  general  assembly." 

I  do  not  claim  the  parentage  of  this  preamble. 
The  latter  portion  of  it  is  taken^from  uie  consti- 
tution of  the  state  of  Tennessee*  and  exhibits  a 
just  and  proper  appreciation  of  the  duties,  char- 
acter, and  avocations  of  the  christian  ministry; 
the  first  part  is  drawn  from  the  remonstrance 
(against  the  exclusion  of  the  clei^  from  a  seat 
as  legislators  in  the  general  assembly  of  this 
commonwealth)  presented  some  days  ago  by  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon  (Mr.  Davis.)  In  this 
remonstrance  they  argue  the  right  of  tlie  clergy 
to  the  oflSce  of  representative  of  the  people,  and 
they  use  this  language:  "The  history  of  modem 
nations  teaches  that  it  behooves  freemen  to  watch 
with  jealousy  any  interference  of  the  state  with 
the  church;  seeing  that  from  the  slightest  be- 
ginning the  precedent  shall  grow  till  designing 
and  anabitioas  politicians  corrupt  the  purity  of 
the  church,  and  thereby  render  her  a  fit  instru- 
ment for  the  purposes  of  tyrants." 

It  will  he  perceived  by  reading  the  preamble, 
that  I  have  changed,  in  some  respects,  the  phra- 
seology of  the  above  quotation  from  the  remon- 
strance, and  so  altered  it  as  to  make  it  declare  a 
freat  truth,  and  one  which  I  hope  to  see  adopted 
y  this  convention,  to-wit:  "That  fearing  that 
from  the  slightest  beginning  the  precedent  shall 
grow  till  designing  and  ambitious  churchmen 
corrupt  the  purity  of  the  church  and  of  the  elec- 
tive franchise,  and  thereby  render  both  (the 
church  and  the  elective  franchise)  fit  instruments 
of  tvranny."  Then  follows  the  corrollaty  taken 
from  the  constitution  of  Tennessee,  that  those 
who  are  dedicated  to  the  service  of  (Jod  ought 
not  to  be  diverted  from  their  duties  as  his  min- 
isters. 

Why  has  congress,  by  the  constitution  of  the 

United  States,  been  forbidden  to  pass  any  law 

authorizing  the  e-stablishment  of  any  religion? 

Why  is  it  that  in  many  states  of  this  Union  min- 

94 


isters  of  the  gospel  are  prohibited  from  holding 

a  seat  in  the  legislature? 

Mr.  WALLER.  W'ill  the  gentleman  allow  me 
to  say  twenty  states  never  had  any  such  provis- 
ion in  their  constitutions,  and  twenty  one  have 
none  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  admit  that  many  of  the  states 
have  not, in  the  reconstruction  of  theirorganiclaw, 
excluded  from  oflicetlie  clergy;  but  I  ask  again 
whvit  is  that  in  anv  of  them  the  right  of  holding 
civil  or  political  oftice  has  been  denied  them?  It  is 
a  question  easily  answered,  sir.  Let  your  mem- 
ory run  back  into  the  long  vista  of  the  past  and 
it  will  return  laden  with  convictions  that  there 
is  danger  in  permitting  priests  and  ministers  to 
have  any  participation  in  the  political  and  civil 
administration  of  government.  It  is  becau.se  all 
history  is  fraught  with  startling  instances  of  that 
danger. 

Look,  sir,  at  the  spirit  of  this  remonstrance; 
as  Hamlet  said  of  the  ghost  of  his  father,  "it 
comes  in  such  a  questionable  shape,  I  dare  speak 
to  it;"  and  of  it.  The  book  of  life  informs  us 
that  it  is  the  duty  of  every  man  "to  work  out 
his  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling."  It 
is  because  it  is  the  office  of  these  gentlemen 
^ministers)  to  aid  the  penitent  sinner  to  perform 
this  great  duty  of  working  out  his  personal  "sal- 
vation with  fear  and  trembling,"  that  the  fra- 
mers  of  the  constitution  of  Tennessee  inserted  the 
clause  prohibiting  them  from  holding  political 
offices  and  thereby  diverting  them  from  the  care 
of  souls,  and  from  the  service  of  the  living  God. 
I  believe  it  is  a  sufficient  reason  for  their  exclu- 
sion, one  which  will  withstand  alike  "the  scru- 
tiny of  human  talents  and  of  time,"  as  it  will  be 
acceptable  to  the  great  governor  and  judge  of 
all  men,  and  of  him  who  has  said  "take  up  your 
cross  and  follow  me." 

Let  us  read  a  little  more  from  this  clerical  re- 
monstrance : 

"If  tliis,  therefore,  be  the  implied  ground  of 
the  restriction  reported  by  your  committee — and 
we  can  conceive  of  no  other  ground  sufficient 
to  justify  a  manifest  departure  from  the  general 
law  of  equal  rights  to  all — then  we  feel  bound, 
solemnly  to  protest  against  any  such  provision, 
as  in  conflict  with  one  great  principle  of  free 
government — which  it  is  the  peculiar  glory  of  the 
American  states  to  recognise — the  principle  of 
non-interference  of  civil  government  with  mat- 
ters of  religion." 

What  does  the  past  teach  us  aU  on  this  sub- 
ject; it  is  this,  that  wherever  or  whenever  min- 
isters of  the  gospel  have  acquired  civil  or  polit- 
ical power,  they  have  almost  uniformly  inter- 
fered with  matters  of  religion,  and  made  that 
power  subservient  to  some  peculiar  creed  or  sys- 
tem of  morals. 

WTierever  the  doctrine  of  non-interference  with 
the  civil  government  by  the  priests  and  teachers 
of  religion  has  prevailed,  the  safety  and  peace  of 
the  country  has  been  promoted.  I  appeal  to  all 
history  to  prove,  that  wherever  the  clergy  have 
been  clothed  with  civU  power,  that  human  liber* 
ty  and  human  rights  have  been  unsafe. 

Say  the  memorialists,  "we  deny  the  competen- 
cy of  the  civil  government  to  define  the  charac- 
ter and  functions  of  the  gospel  ministry."  You 
do.  "Admitting  the  truth  of  the  general  senti- 
ment above  quoted,  still  we  protest  against  such 


746 


a  declaration  as  a  portion  of  constitntional  la^v. 
It  is  solely  the  duty  of  the  church  to  declare  the 
functions  of  her  ministers."  Who  denies  the 
right  of  the  church  to  declare  the  duties  of  its 
ministers?  No  one  here  or  elsewhere  I  presume. 
This  convention  has  assumed  no  such  power. 

Again — we  are  told  by  the  memorialists,  "that 
the  tastes,  the  views,  and  the  habits  of  those 
composing  the  bodies  which  frame  state  consti- 
tutions are  not  necessarily,  nor  always  such  as 
to  qualify  them  (meaning  us,)  for  deciding  just- 
ly in  regard  to  the  proper  character  and  duties 
of  the  gospel  niinistrv." 

In  view  of  this  clerical  denunciation  of  our 
unfitness,  I  am  almost  inclined  to  say  with  the 
poor  publican,  "Lord  be  merciful  unto  me  a 
sinner."  What  man  among  us  all  has  pre- 
tended to  judge  of  or  define  the  character  or  de- 
clare the  functions  of  the  minister  of  the  gospel? 
No  one.  They  have  been  defined  and  declared 
by  the  supreme  legislator,  by  him  "  who  spoke 
and  'twas  done,  who  commanded  and  it  stood 
fast."  All  we  ask  of  them  is  non-interference 
with  our  civil  institutions — that  they  shall  in- 
deed be  non-combatants  upon  the  political  are- 
na. The  charge  that  this  convention,  in  the 
adoption  of  the  section  excluding  ministers  from 
the  possession  and  exercise  of  legislative  pow- 
ers, are  arrogating  the  right  to  judge  of  the 
duties  of  the  gospel  ministry  is  untrue,  and  this 
clerical  denunciation  of  our  capacity  and  fit- 
ness for  such  purpose  is  to  alarm  us — It  is  to  tell 
us  in  the  language  of  Burns ; 

"If  there's  a  hole  in  a'  your  coats, 

1  rede  ye  tent  it : 
A  chiel's  amang  you  taking  notes, 

And,  faith,  he'll  prent  it." 

"We  are  told,  however,  in  this  petition,  "that 
the  ministry  are  not  any  more  than  all  other 
christians  by  their  profession  dedicated  to  the 
service  of  God."  Sir,  I  had  always  thought 
they  were  indexes  to  point  the  Avay  to  heaven, 
and  that  they  were  "burning  and  shining  lights" 
to  indicate  to  us  the  true  way.  Strange  is  it  not, 
that  while  they  deny  that  the  ministry  are  not 
more  than  other  christians  dedicated  to  the 
service  of  God,"  that  they  should  yet  assert  that 
"protestant  churches  have  for  their  ministers 
teachers  called  of  God  as  they  believe,  and 
chosen  by  the  people  to  instruct  the  people  and 
administer  ordinances  established  to  be  signs  and 
seals  of  spiritual  blessing." 

So,  sir,  in  one  sentence  they  deny  that  they 
are  more  dedicated  to  God  than  other  christians, 
and  in  another,  as  just  quoted  above,  they  assert 
that  they  are  called  of  God. 

The  memorialists  tell  us,  however,  in  this 
state  paper  of  theirs  which  I  am  now  anali- 
zing,  that  "their  chief  objection,  however,  and 
that  which  has  led  your  memorialists  to  obtrude 
themselves  upon  vour  honorable  body,  is,  that 
•while  this  rrt-ovision  is  advocated  most  warmly, 
by  those  wno  are  peculiarly  jealous,  as  all  men 
ought  to  be,  of  any  interference  between  the 
church  and  state;  yet,  the  insertion  of  such  a 
clause  in  the  constitution,  on  such  grounds  as 
■we  have  shown  to  have  been  expressed,  and  as 
are  necessarily  implied  in  so  doing,  is  a  decision 
by  civil  authority  of  the  great  theological  ques- 
tion of  the  age. 

Why  sir,  we  must  shrink  back,  we  must  hesi- 


tate, because  we  are  about  to  decide  "the  great 
theological  question  of  the  ago."  What  is  this 
great  theological  question,  which  the  exclusion  of 
the  christian  ministry  from  political  preferment 
will  decide?  Let  us  read  what  it  is.  These 
reverend  gentlemen  say — 

"The  great  point  in  dispute  between  the  church 
of  Rome  and  those  who  sympathise  with  her  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  churches  of  the  Reforma- 
tion on  the  other,  is  involved  in  the  question — Is 
the  minister  of  religion  a  priest?  Is  he  a  pecu- 
liar sacred  person — standing  to  mediate  between 
God  and  his  offending  creatures,  by  the  ofioring 
of  sacrifice?  Or  is  he  chiefly  a  teacher — an  ex- 
pounder of  the  truth,  and  administrator  of  seal- 
ing ordinances  in  the  church?  The  church  of 
Rome,  if  we  understand  aright  her  teachings, 
holds  the  former  view ;  and  consistently  with 
that  view,  has  for  her  ministers  priests,  minister- 
ing at  an  altar — offering  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass 
— absolving  the  penitent  on  confession  and  pen- 
nance,  and  constituting  the  channel  of  mysteri- 
ous grace  to  the  faithful.  Protestant  churches, 
on  the  other  hand,  have  for  their  ministers  ieacA- 
ers,  called  of  God  as  they  believe,  and  chosen 
by  the  people  to  instruct  the  people,  and  admin- 
ister ordinances  established  to  be  signs  and  seals 
of  spiritual  blessing.  Of  course  the  ministry  of 
the  latter  has  not  that  sort  of  sacredness  of  char- 
acter, which  necessarily  separates  them  from  the 
mass  of  christian  people — nor  that  spiritual  pow- 
er and  that  control  over  the  conscience,  which 
the  oflacers  of  a  priestliood  in  its  very  nature 
confers. 

"Now  if  the  minister  of  religion  be  upriest — a 
man  apart  from  the  mass  of  christian  people,  by 
the  mysterious  sacredness  of  his  office,  and  if 
in  virtue  of  his  office,  he  have  a  spiritual  power 
which  can  be  shown  to  be  incompatible  with 
the  free  suffrage  of  the  people  in  any  way — there 
might  then  be  some  good  reason  for  debarring 
him  from  civil  ofiSce.  But  if  the  ministers  of  re- 
ligion be  merely  one  of  the  people,  set  apart  to 
the  duty  in  the  church  of  expounding  the  truth 
and  dispensing  ordinances,  with  no  other  influ- 
ence and  power  than  that,  which  the  faithful 
discharge  of  his  duty  confers  upon  him,  then 
clearly  there  is  no  reason  for  making  any  dis- 
tinction between  him  and  other  citizens  in  re- 
gard to  the  privileges  of  citizenship. 

"If  this  statement  of  the  question  be  correct — 
and  we  have  no  motive  to  misstate  it — or  do  we 
think  any  one,  whichever  view  of  the  question 
he  takes,  will  be  disposed  to  controvert  its  main 
features,  then  it  follows  that  to  decide  by  the 
constitution,  that  ministers  of  the  gospel  shall 
be  ineligible  to  political  preferment,  is,  in  so  far, 
to  decide  this  great  theological  controversy 
against  Protestants.  Our  complaint,  however, 
is  not  that  it  is  decided  against  us — but  that  it  ia 
decided  at  all  by  such  authority." 

So  wo  see  that  'tis  the  church  of  Rome,  they 
are  after,  that  whore  of  Babylon.  If  they  can 
only  persuade  us  that  in  excluding  ministers  of 
the  gospel  from  political  preferment,  we  are 
deciding  the  greattlioolofjical  controversy  against 
protestants,  they  flatter  themselves  that  we  will 
open  the  door  of  the  legislative  halls  to  the  as- 
pirations of  the  ambitious  minister  of  the  new 
covenant. 

Mr.  President,  I  want  no  better  evidence  of 


747 


the  propriety  of  their  exclusion  from  interfer- 
ing in  the  politics  of  the  country,  than  is  to  be 
found  in  this  very  sentence  just  quoted  by  me. 
When  they  are  knocking  at  the  door,  and  de- 
manding admittance,  they  are  saying  to  one  of 
their  roman  catholic  brethren  "stand  back,  for  I 
am  liolier  than  thou — there  is  no  danger  in  my 
admission,  but  beware  of  a  priest,  for  he  claims  a 
spiritual  power  and  control  over  the  conscience," 
and  therefore  be  jealous  of  hin> ;  but  we  clam 
no  such  mysterious  sacredness  of  office,  and 
wield  no  power  incompatible  with  the  free  suf- 
frage of  tnejwople. 

Mr.  WALLER.  Will  the  gentleman  aUow  me 
to  interfere  again.  I  do  it  because  the  gentle- 
men cannot  do  it  themselves.  They  do  not  in- 
tend to  cast  any  reflection  on  the  catholic  relig- 
ion. There  is  a  notorious  controversy  between 
catholics  and  protestants,  in  relation  to  their 
ministry.  I  am  sure  they  intend  no  reflection 
against  the  catholic  priesthood  ;  they  only  say 
they  do  not  want  this  convention  to  interfere 
with,  and  settle  the  question  against  the  catho- 
lics. They  do  not  desire  the  catholic-s  should 
be  kept  out.  They  think,  according  to  the 
American  doctrine  of  the  independence  of  the 
church  from  the  state,  that  the  clergy  ought  not 
to  be  excluded  from  civil  office — that  is  their  ar- 
gument. I  know  they  believe  as  firmly  as  I  do, 
that  the  catholic  priests  have  as  much  right  to 
be  regarded  as  eligible  as  any  other  teacher  of 
religion. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  resumed,  and  observed  (that 
when  he  gave  way  to  bis  friend  Mr.  Waller,)  he 
was  attempting  to  show  that  the  tendency  of  the 
remarks  of  the  memorialists  was  to  convince  us 
that  there  was  a  denomination  of  clergy  in  this 
country  ,of  whom  we  should  be  especially  jealous. 
Mr  President,  I  am  for  excludiag  them  all,  as  well 
those  who  do  not,  as  tliose  who  do  wear  the  cowl 
and  gown;  as  well  he  who  bows  to  the  cardinal's 
cap,  as  liim  who  does  not.  As  to  this  matter,  they 
are  all  alike  to  me;  they  are  all  teachers  of  religion, 
and  the  experience  of  the  past,  and  the  admoni- 
tions of  history  teach  me,  that  'tis  safe  policy  to 
exclude  all,  and  hence  I  am  in  favor  of  the 
clause  reported  by  the  committee.  The  language 
of  the  report  is  "no  person,  while  he  continues 
to  exercise  the  functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest, 
or  teacher  of  any  religious  persuasion,  society, 
or  sect,  shall  be  eligible  to  the  general  assembly." 
This  includes  all  denominations,  embracing 
mormons.  Tell  me  not  sir,  that  in  voting  for 
this  clause,  that  I  am  deciding  "the  great  theo- 
logical controversy  of  the  age,"  and  that  too 
against  protestants.  No  sir,  I  am  placing  all 
upon  an  equality,  making  no  distinction  among 
the  sects — I  am  prompted  neither  by  inclination 
or  duty  to  do  so. 

I  do  not  know  enough  of  the  peculiar  tenets  of 
the  catholic  church  at  present,  to  speak  of  the 
power  of  the  priest  over  the  layman;  but  I  un- 
derstand there  is  an  alliance  existing  in  the  coun- 
try called  "the  protestant  alliance."  the  object 
of  which  is  to  prevent  as  far  as  possible  the  pro- 
pagation of  the  catholic  faith  here.  I  am  no  ro- 
man catholic;  I  am,  however,  a  firm  believer  in 
the  divinity  of  our  savior.  1  have  many  rela- 
tives and  friends  who  are  members  of  the  various 
{>rotestant  churches;  those  whom  I  have  most 
oved  and  cherished  on  earth,  aod  whom  I  desire 


to  meet  in  heaven,  belonged  to  the  protestant 
church.  1  exclude  all  catholics  and  all  protes- 
tants. They  may  form  alliances  among  them- 
selves, but  so  far  as  my  vote  can  go  in  this  con- 
vention, none  of  their  ministers  or  priests  shall 
form  any  alliance  or  eonneetion  witii  the  politi- 
cal power  of  this  commonwealth,  as  that  power 
is  di.splayed  in  the  legislative  halls. 

I  drew  the  preamble  read  by  me  when  I  first  rose 
to  address  the  convention.  I  am  not  solicitous 
for  its  adoption,  but  it  contains  reasons  sufficient 
in  my  estimation  to  justify  the  exclusion  of  the  cler- 
gy as  reported  in  uie  elause  by  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department.  Obsta  principiit — ^re- 
sist things  in  tlie  beginning.  In  obedience  to 
this  maxim,  I  liave  determined  never  to  vote  for 
a  man  who  was  in  favor  of  stopping  the  mail  on 
Sunday.  That  was  intended  but  as  the  begin- 
ning to  still  greater  and  more  serious  attempts 
upon  the  liberty  of  the  citizen.  It  is  the  dictate 
of  prudence  therefore  to  exclude  all  and  every  at- 
tempt upon  the  part  of  teachers  of  any  and  eve- 
ry religious  denomination  whatever,  to  place 
themselves  where  either  their  interest  or  their 
mistaken  and  misdirected  zeal  for  the  cause  of 
their  n>aster  would  induce  them  to  exercise  pow- 
er and  forget  right.  The  spirit  manifested  in  this 
very  mesaorial  convinces  me  of  the  propriety  of 
the  vote  I  am  about  to  cast. 

Mr.  6ARFIELDE.  Personally,  I  feel  no  in- 
terest ia  the  question  of  eligibility  of  ministers 
of  the  gospel  to  a  seat  in  the  legislature,  for  two 
or  three  very  good  reasons.  I  coidd  not  come  to 
the  legislature  from  my  county  if  I  would,  and 
I  woutd  not  if  I  could,  and  if  I  both  could  and 
would,  the  restriction  contained  in  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  the  legislative  department 
would  not  act  as  a  barrier  to  prevent  me. 

It  is  very  singular  that  tne  able  committee 
who  made  this  report,  and  the  very  critical  gen- 
tleman who  has  just  preceded  me,  have  not  ob- 
served one  point  in  the  report  on  this  subject. 
It  says:  "2«o  person,  while  he  exercises  the 
functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest,  «fec."  Xotice 
the  sentence,  "while  he  exercises  the  functions." 
The  mere  cessation  of  the  functions  of  a  cler- 
gyman renders  a  man  eligible  to  a  seat  in  the 
legislature  of  the  state.  This  amounts,  in  re- 
alitv,  to  no  dis(^uaLification.  The  preacher  with 
his  license  in  his  pocket,  may  be  elected  to  the 
legislature  and  take  his  seat,  simply  by  ceasing 
to  preach  during  the  session  of  the  legislature. 
This  prohibition  amounts  then  to  a  shadow 
without  a  substance,  a  name  without  a  realtty, 
and  simply  proves  the  sentiments  of  the  com- 
mittee who  originated  the  clause,  and  tlie  gen- 
tlemen who  support  it  without  accomplishing 
the  object  intended. 

It  does  however,  accomplish  one  thing,  and 
that  is,  it  permits  those  who  wear  their  clerical 
robes  loosely,  to  come  to  the  legislature,  while 
the  more  conscientious  are  restrained;  thereby 
aggravating  the  very  evil  which  is  sought  to  be 
remedied.  But  I  leave  this  matter  to  be  per- 
fected by  the  friends  and  supporters  of  the  meas- 
ure. I  possess  neither  the  eloquence  nor  the 
power  to  handle  this  subject  as  it  should  be;  I 
shall  therefore  say  but  Lttle,  leaving  the  advo- 
cacy of  the  great  principles  contained  in  it  to 
wiser  heads  and  more  eloquent  tongues. 

There   are,  however,  one  or  two    thoughts 


748 


which  are  as  yet  untouched,  and  which  I  will 
present  to  the  consideration  of  the  convention. 
So  far  as  this  memorial  is  concerned,  which  the 
last  gentleman  on  the  floor  has  dissected,  I  had 
nothing  to  do  with  it,  neither  am  I  responsible 
for  the  arguments  contained  in  it;  still  I  will  take 
occasion  to  say  that  it  is  an  able  document,  un- 
answered, and,  to  my  mind,  unanswerable — full 
of  sound  reason,  and.  appeals  to  the  love  of  lib- 
erty and  equal  rights  which  is  the  choicest  in- 
heritance derived  from  our  revolutionary  an- 
cestry. 

I  have  felt  this  morning,  more  than  ever  be- 
fore, the  great  necessity  of  every  kgislator  being 
a  lawyer.  And  the  reason  why  every  legislator 
should  be  a  lawyer  is  this:  that  lie  may  the  bet- 
ter understand  the  hackneyed  phrases  a  thou- 
sand times  used,  which  the  fraternity  bring  in 
when  short  of  argument.  If  a  proposition  is 
driven  home  with  a  force  of  reason  and  power 
of  argument  wholly  unanswerable,  the  cry  of 
"special  pleading"  is  raised,  and  behind  this 
terrible  phrase  gentlemen  strive  to  conceal  the 
weakness  of  their  own  positions.  Now  I  must 
confessi  do  not  know  the  meaning  of  the  phrase 
as  used  hefe.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  means 
in  common  parlance,  "I  acknowledge  the  corn," 
(laughter,)  or  that  the  arguments  of  the  special 
pleader  are  unsound.  I  sincerely  trust  that  if 
this  argument  goes  much  further,  gentlemen 
will  be  so  good  as  to  enlighten  us  upon  this 
very  essential  point.  (Laughter.)  One  thing  is 
certain,  when  gentlemen  are  unable  to  meet  ar- 
gument with  argument,  fact  with  fact,  and  rea- 
son with  reason,  they  shield  themselves  under 
legal  technicalities,  and  from  behind  this  screen 
cry  "special  pleading"  to  the  home  thrusts  of 
their  adversaries. 

I  have  been  somewhat  amused  at  the  course 
this  discussion  has  taken.  We  are  very  gravely 
informed  by  the  very  pious  gentleman  from  Ma- 
son (Mr.  Taylor)  that  ministers  of  the  gospel 
should  not  be  eligible  to  a  seat  in  the  legislature 
because  they  have  the  care  of  souls  under  their 
charge;  and  he  raises  his  hands  in  holy  horror  at 
the  bare  idea  of  one  of  these  children  of  the 
church  becoming  corrupted.  It  is  somewhat 
strange  to  me,  I  must  confess,  that  gentl'Cmen 
should  take  so  great  interest  in  the  spiritual  wel- 
fare of  others  to  the  neglect  of  their  oAvn  salva- 
tion. I  hope  the  gentleman  will  pardon  me,  but 
if  it  devolves  upon  me  to  work  out  my  own  sal- 
vation with  fear  and  trembling,  does  not  the 
same  obligation  reach  every  fallen  son  of  Adam? 
And  will  not  this  category  per  possibility  reach 
the  gentleman  from  Mason?  Still  we  are  told 
that  if  preachers  become  members  of  the  legisla- 
ture, it  will  constitute  the  first  step  towards  the 
union  of  church  and  state.  The  clanger  is  just 
as  imminent  if  you  admit  laymen;  and  accord- 
ing to  this  doctrine,  if  a  legislator  join  the 
church  his  seat  should  be  vacated  for  fear  the 
church  will  exercise  some  undue  influence  over 
him.  What  is  tlie  difi^erenee  between  electing  a 
minister  and  a  layman?  If  the  designs  of  the 
church  are  evil,  you  incur  the  same  danger  in  the 
one  case  as  in  the  other.  The  principle  carried 
out  works  the  exclusion  of  all  professors  of  reli- 
gion. I  repeat  sir,  vou  must  proscribe  all  church 
members  and  leave  the  helm  of  stnte  in  the  hands 
of  non-professors  for  fear  cbrisCiaas  will  abuse 


their  power  and  effect  the  union  of  church  and 
state.  This  is  the  legitimate  tendency  of  the  ar- 
guments of  the  opposition. 

Again,  we  are  told  that  great  wickedness  has 
been  perpetrated  under  the  name  and  sanction  of 
the  church.  Grant  that  such  has  been  the  case. 
Is  that  a  fair  argument  for  excluding  ministers 
from  your  legislative  halls?  Is  that  a  reason  for 
prohibiting  the  people  from  electing  the  men  of 
their  choice  when  that  choice  happens  to  be  a 
preacher  of  the  gospel?  If  the  only  wickedness 
committed  on  earth  had  been  perpetrated  in  the 
church,  by  tlie  church,  and  under  the  sanction  of 
the  church,  then  indeed  there  would  be  some 
force  in  the  argument.  But  we  have  a  lesson 
from  high  authority  on  this  subject.  We  have 
been  wisel}'  exhorted  to  take  the  beam  out  of  our 
own  eye  and  then  we  can  the  more  clearly  discern 
the  mote  in  our  brother's  eye.  If  then  the  church 
has  gone  astray,  the  world  has  always  been 
astray.  And  it  must  first  be  proven  that  the 
church  of  Christ  is  the  peculiar  seat  and  habita- 
tion of  sin,  vice,  and  immorality,  and  that  holi- 
ness, purity,  and  uprightness  dwell  entirely  with 
non-professors,  before  we  urge  the  deviations  of 
the  church  as  an  argument  against  the  eligibili- 
ty of  either  ministers  or  laymen. 

Sir,  we  find  hypocrites  everywhere,  we  find 
designing,  crafty,  wicked  men  everywhere.  In 
!ill  places  and  in  all  conditions  we  find  a  class  of 
individuals  who  are  disposed tohide their  selfish 
and  iniquitous  purposes  under  any  cloak  Avhich 
will  best  conceal  thicni.  But  are  clergymen  the 
only  designing  men  in  the  world?  Are  preach- 
ers of  the  gospel  the  peculiar  depositories  of  vice 
and  corruption?  Does  their  calling  peculiarly 
qualify  them  for  the  basest  acts  of  which  liuraan 
nature  can  be  guilty?  Are  they  the  only  men 
who  will  sell  their  own  and  their  fellow  citizen's 
birthright  for  a  mess  of  pottage?  Do  they  above 
all  other  men  abhor  a  republican  form  of  govern- 
ment, and  would  they  seek  every  means  to  sub- 
vert it?  Are  they  the  only  traitors  in  the  world? 
Such,  indeed,  would  gentlemen  induce  us  to  be- 
lieve tliera.  This  is  the  high  estimate  placed 
upon  men  who  sacrifice  wealth,  honor,  and  fame 
for  the  benefit  of  their  fellows,  and  such  is  the 
high  meed  of  praise  which  they  receive.  The 
gentleman  from  Mason  forms  no  better  estimate 
of  the  body  politic  and  politicians.  He  says  the 
politician  is  corrupt,  the  legislator  iscorrupt,  the 
body  politic  is  corrupt,  from  the  crown  of  the 
head  to  the  solo  of  the  foot.  Has  he  not  told  you 
gentlemen,  that  it  is  his  kind,  benevolent  de- 
sign to  save  the  sleek  coats  of  the  clergy  from  the 
quagmire  of  political  corruption  in  which  you 
all  are  floundering?  This  is  a  keen  thrust  at 
your  political  characters  which  I  leave  you  to 
ward  oif. 

I  know  but  little  of  that  political  mire  and 
filth  which  he  says  is  so  thickly  spread  over  the 
face  of  this  commonwealth.  1  know  but  little 
of  the  quagmires  of  political  degradation  whiili 
have  been  depicted  to  you  in  such  disgusting 
but  unnatural  coloi-s,  and  in  which  the  gentle- 
man would  make  you  believe  lie  Inul  Hounilered 
all  his  life.  But,  sir,  I  have  learned  one  thing 
which,  in  me,  has  plumed  the  pinions  of  hope, 
which  has  made  me  rejoice  for  my  country,  and 
which  has  given  me  a  new  supply  of  political  . 
courage.    I  nave  IcaraeU  tliat  the  people  are  not 


749 


so  comipt,  so  bespattered  with  the  mire  of  po- 
litical corruption  as  is  represented.  1  liave 
learned  that  the  people  of  Kentucky  can  ap- 
preciate political  truth,  and  that  they  are  pre- 
pared to  stamp  upon  any  man's  forehead  the 
brand  of  demagogue  who  is  disposed  to  pander 
to  the  political  views  of  the  age.  I  have  learn- 
ed tliat  they  are  qualified  to  distinguish  between 
the  vile  demagogue  and  the  honest  man.  I  have 
learned  that  they  are  unprepared  to  recognize 
an}'  man  as  their  representntive,  whether  church- 
man or  worldling,  who  bows  at  the  shrine  of 
self-aggrandizement  alone;  who  worships  no 
deity  but  self,  and  who  labors  to  build  his  own 
personal  elevation  npon  the  ruins  of  his  country. 
But  sir,   it  is  designed  to  accomplish  some 

food  by  this  restriction.  It  is  intended  either  to 
eep  the  preachers  pure,  or  to  preserve  the  state 
from  some  supposed  danger.  In  regard  to  the 
first  design,  tbe  protection  of  the  clergy,  it  is  not 
legitimately  within  the  province  of  constitution- 
al provision.  The  state  has  a  right  to  preserve 
itself  and  to  legislate  upon  all  matters  purely 
political.  But  it  has  no  right  to  legislate  for  the 
church.  The  purity  of  the  gospel  ministry  Ls  a 
question  belonging  solely  to  the  church  to  set- 
tle. If  we  have  a  right  to  legislate  for  the  puri- 
ty of  the  ministers,  then  we  have  the  right  to 
deprive  them  of  their  oflSces  when  they  violate 
our  rules  of  clerical  decorum;  and  this  would, 
in  effect,  prostitute  the  church.  It  would  be 
compelled  to  receive  its  faith  and  rules  of  prac- 
tice from  legislative  enactment,  instead  of  the 
pure  fountain  of  divine  revelation.  But  I  ap- 
prehend, that  upon  reflection,  this  argument 
of  the  puritv  of  the  clergy  will  not  be  seriously 
entertained  W  any  member  present.  It  devolves 
upon  the  church  to  regulate  the  conduct  of  its 

?)ublic  teachers,  and  I  have  no  doubt  the  same 
eeling  would  obtain  here  which  exists  in  the 
states  where  there  is  no  constitutional  prohibi- 
tion, and  that  we  should  rarely  see  a  preacher  in 
the  legislature.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  gre<it 
majority  of  the  churches  in  this  st-ate  would  de- 
prive those  ministers  of  their  offices  who  would 
so  far  forget  the  sacreduess  of  their  calling  as 
to  engage  regularly  in  political  strife.  Such  a 
course  does  not  become  the  station  of  a  minister. 
His  duties  are  as  much  higher  as  heaven  is  above 
earth.  The  effect  of  his  labors  are  as  much  more 
enduring  as  eternity  is  more  enduring  th.in  time, 
and  the  relative  station  of  clergyman  and  poli- 
tician, according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Mason,  are  as  far  asunder  as  heaven 
an>i  hell. 

I  think  sir,  that  the  other  argument,  the  pre- 
servation of  the  state,  is  inapplicable  to  the  case, 
for,  if  necessary,  it  might  be  proven  that  the 
preachers  of  this  country  are  as  patriotic,  hoaest 
and  upright  as  any  other  class  of  citizens,  and 
the  opposite  opinion  is  but  the  conclusion  of  a 
prejudiced  mind.  Priests  and  people  in  differ- 
ent ages  have  participated  in  the  corruptions  of 
our  nature;  but  that  the  priests  of  any  age  have 
been  more  corrupt  than  the  political  powers  of 
the  same  age  is  a  proposition  which  yet  lacks 
demonstration. 

This  question  of  prohibition  involves  a  great 
principle,  and  for  the  principle  only  do  I  con- 
tend. What  induced  tie  citizens  of  Boston  to 
dress  as  Mohawks  and  overturn  the  tea  in  the 


Boston  harbor?  What  induced  our  forefathers 
to  resist  the  stamp  act?  Was  it  the  paltry  pit- 
tance required  of  them  on  stamped  paj>erf  No 
sir.  It  was  the  great  principle  involved.  It  was 
for  that  principle  they  resisted  the  enactments  of 
parliament,  and  when  it  became  necessary  pour- 
ed out  their  blood  freely  in  maintaining  their 
rights.  We,  their  descendants,  are  this  day  re- 
enacting  the  injustice  of  the  British  parliament 
in  drawing  this  invidious  distinction  between 
ministers  of  the  gospel  and  other  members  of 
community. 

But,  it  is  thought  that  by  excluding  preach- 
ers from  the  legislature,  we  protect  the  govern- 
ment from  an  undue  religious  influence.  This 
theory  is  idle.  "It  is  wrought  of  such  stuff  aa 
dreams  are,  and  baseless  as  the  fantastic  visions 
of  the  evening."  Before  adopting  any  great 
principle  of  exclusion,  we  should  be  certain  that 
it  will  accomplish  the  object  intended.  Why 
was  the  doctrine  of  ministerial  disqualification 
originally  incorporated  into  our  constitution? 
It  was  because  our  fathers  had  formerly  fled  from 
an  intolerant  church.  But  the  state  was  as  in- 
tolerant as  the  church;  and  he  who  deduces 
from  our  early  history  the  idea  that  all  the  evils  of 
the  institutionsof  our  mother  country  were  to  be 
found  in  the  clergy,  has  studied  history  to  little 
purpose.  But  admit  for  a  moment  all  the  imag- 
inary evils  which  a  diseased  brain  can  invent, 
will  the  prohibition  remove  them?  2f  o  sir.  Evil 
priests  produce  evil  members,  and  you  must  ex- 
clude the  follower  as  well  as  the  leader  or  you 
have  accomplished  nothing.  The  line  of  de- 
mai"ation  between  tlie  dangerous  and  useful 
citizen  is  a  moral  line  which  cannot  be  traced 
by  the  avocations  of  men,  but  must  be  regidated 
by  the  conduct.  If  you  wish  to  exclude  a  given 
influence  you  must  proscribe  all  under  that  in- 
fluence. If  therefore  you  wish  to  exclude  undue 
religious  influence,  you  must  exclude  all  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  for  the  most  dangerous  pow- 
er is  that  which  has  a  concealed  origin  and 
manifests  itself  through  a  third  person.  Such 
would  be  the  influence  of  the  clergy  through  lay 
members. 

It  is  urged  that  ministers  of  religion  shall  not 
be  eligible  to  the  legislature  because  they  have 
the  care  of  souls.  For  the  same  reason  lawyers 
should  be  ineligible  because  they  have  the  care 
of  estates,  and  physicians  because  they  have  the 
care  of  the  body;  (which,  by  the  way,  many  be- 
lieve to  be  of  much  more  importance  than  the 
soul;)  thus  the  tbree  professions,  by  the  same 
reasoning,  would  be  excluded.  How  much  more 
anxious  men  often  are,  when  fever  is  preying 
upon  their  vitals,  to  cure  the  body  than  the  soul; 
and  yet  these  very  men  tell  us  that  as  preachers 
are  appointed  to  cure  the  soul,  therefore  they 
should  not  be  eligible  to  the  legislature.  Con- 
sistency, thou  art  a  jewel. 

The  man  who  does  not  intnide  himself  upon 
public  notice,  who  pursues  the  even  tenor  of  his 
way,  who  leads  the  peaceful  and  quiet  life,  and 
who  is  not  a  political  brawler,  has  rights  Which, 
although  unexercised,  are  dear  to  him;  and  it  is 
the  exercise  of  might  unaccompanied  by  right, 
when  those  rights  are  taken  from  him.  It  is  sir, 
trampling  upon  the  rights  of  an  honorable,  gen- 
tlemanly, useful,  and  learned  class  of  Kentucky 
ekizeus,  to  incorporate  this  prohibition  in  thie 


750 


I 


constitution.  As  has  been  justly  observed,  in 
other  states  where  tliere  is  no  prohibition,  you 
will  but  seldom  see  a  preacher  in  the  legislature. 
On  the  otlier  hand,  where  restrictions  exist  as  in 
this  state,  you  will  frequently  find  preachers  in 
the  legislature.  Viewing  tlie'  subject  in  all  its 
attitudes,  the  conclusion  is  forced  upon  my  mind 
that  Ave  arc  violating  a  great  fundamental  princi- 
ple without  deriving  the  least  possible  benefit 
from  that  violation. 

I  have  been  induced,  sir,  to  offer  these  remarks, 
not  from  any  personal  motives,  but  because  I 
wished  to  see  tliat  old  relic  of  the  dark  ages  re- 
moved from  our  organic  law,  and  every  freeman 
placed  upon  a  level,  making  character,  integrity 
and  qualification  the  only  prerequisites  to  of- 
fice. 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  am  told  that  "pure  and  un- 
defiled  religion  consists  in  visiting  the  widows 
and  the  fatherless,  and  keeping  oneself  unspot- 
ted from  the  world."  I  will  substitute  the  above 
quotation  as  a  preamble  to  the  clause,  if  it  will 
suit  my  friend  from  Fleming  any  better.  I  can- 
not see  how  a  man  can  keep  himself  pure  and 
un.spotted  from  the  world,  if  he  mingles  in  the 
ardent  and  bitter  political  conflicts  of  the  day. 
When  I  was  first  up,  I  spoke  of  the  turmoil,  con- 
fusion and  strife  engendered  by  political  excite- 
ment, the  retaliation,  recrimination  and  fanati- 
cism of  party.  There  are  men  engaged  on  eith- 
er side  who  answer  Philips'  description  of  a  big- 
ot, "one  who  has  no  head  and  cannot  think,  and 
no  heart  and  cannot  feel."  The  gentleman  from 
Fleming  (Mr.  Garfielde)  made  one  true  remark, 
"that  it  was  not  becoming  in  a  minister  of  the 

f:ospel,  nor  was  it  his  duty  to  mingle  in  the  po- 
itical  strifes  of  the  country,  that  his  calling 
was  elevated  as  far  above  this,  as  the  heavens 
are  above  hell."  It  is  to  keep  him  above  these 
influences  and  to  preserve  his  character  pure;  it 
is  that  lie  may  stand  like  Moses  on  Mount  Pis- 
gah  and  point  us  on  to  the  promised  land;  it  is 
to  prevent  him  from  coming  down  to  the  base  of 
the  mountain  to  mingle  in  the  beggarly  ele- 
ments and  pollutions  of  the  world,  participa- 
tion in  which  unfits  him  for  the  great  vocation  to 
which  he  is  called  by  his  divine  master.  These 
are  some  of  the  reasons  which  induce  me  to  vote 
for  their  exclusion  from  political  life.  I  desire 
that  they  may  indeed  be  "burning  and  shining 
lights,"  and  so  desiring,  I  intend  to  vote  for  the 
prohibitory  clause  reported  by  the  committee. 

Mr.  WALLER.  I  cannot  see  from  all  I  have 
heard  from  my  friend  from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor,) 
but  what  his  argument  applies  as  pointedljr  and 
as  powerfully  against  all  professors  of  religion, 
as  against  preachers.  His  preamble  last  react 
certainly  applies  to  all  christians  indiscrimin- 
ately. But  I  appeal  to  the  candor  of  this  Ivouse, 
if  the  position  he  assumes,  and  especiallv  the 
amendment  which  he  read,  does  not  strike  at 
the  foundation  of  the  very  principle  he  opposes, 
and  favor  the  union  of  church  and  state.  If 
government  may  regulate  any  of  the  oflSces  of 
the  church,  it  has  a  right  to  regulate  all,  and  if 
you  say  a  man  who  speaks  in  favor  of  religion 
shall  not  be  eligible  to  office,you  restrict  the  free- 
dom of  speech,  and  you  strike  a  fatal  stab  at  the 
right  of  man's  speaking  on  tlie  most  important  of 
all  subjects  to  himself.  I  tliink  you  should  not 
attempt  to  iutcrfcre  with  religion  in  any  way. 


The  gentleman  has  read  history  to  little  pur- 
pose if  he  has  failed  to  learn  this  lesson,  that  it 
was  an  efi^ort  of  politicians  to  regulate  the  church, 
and  not  of  the  church  to  regulate  the  state,  which 
brought  about  that  union  he  now  so  justly  con- 
demns. But  for  regarding  the  ministers  as  a  dis- 
tinct class  by  the  Justinian  code,  to  subserve 
the  purposes  of  state,  there  would  have  been  no 
union  of  church  and  state.  It  is  the  right  of  the 
state  to  interfere  in  matters  of  religion,  against 
which  I  most  emphatically  protest.  The  gen- 
tleman's modern  history  is  at  fault  likewise  in 
anotlier  respect.  He  alluded  to  the  "  blue  laws" 
of  Connecticut.  I  supposed  every  reading  man 
had  long  since  learnt  that  these  laws  are  mere 
fictions,  and  that  no  such  code  ever  existed  in 
any  state  upon  earth.  If  the  gentleman's  histo- 
ry is  of  the  same  kind,  it  is  of  little  consequence. 
I  remember  one  record  however  given  in  sacred 
history  to  which  I  may  refer.  The  prophet  was 
once  rebuked  by  an  animal  not  accustomed  to 
speak;  but  it  seems  a  slightly  diff"erent  fate  has 
been  my  portion  on  this  occasion. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  expect  I  shall  have  to  give 
a  vote  against  a  majority  of  the  convention,  and 
I  shall  make  only  a  few  remarks  before  doing 
so.  I  have,  for  the  last  forty  years,  from  time  to 
time,  noted  the  exclusion  from  the  legislative 
halls  of  Kentucky,  of  the  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel; and  I  could  never  see  any  good  reason  for 
it.  I  recollect  when  there  were  efforts  made  to 
force  the  president  of  the  United  States  into  a 
recognition  of  the  independence  of  Spanish 
America.  In  some  remarks  I  made  in"congiess 
on  that  subject,  I  said  I  did  not  believe  they 
could  establish  a  republic  there.  They  wore 
all  of  one  religious  denomination.  And  it  turn- 
ed out  to  be  true.  Our  government  is  very  hap- 
pily balanced.  All  our  foreign  relations,  all 
our  matters  and  things  belonging  to  the  nation, 
tlie  army  and  the  navy,  are  managed  by  the 
government  of  the  United  States;  and  that  gov- 
ernment is  divided  into  three  departments — the 
legislative,  the  executive  and  the  judicial.  They 
check  and  balance  each  other.  But  it  would 
soon  become  a  consolidated  government  and  a 
despotism,  were  it  not  the  municipal  regulations 
of  the  country  belong  to  the  state  government, 
and  they  are  divided  into  three  departments — 
the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial.  Tliey 
check  and  balance  each  other.  The  state  gov- 
ernments balance  the  general  government,  and 
the  general  government  balances  the  state  gov- 
ernments. And  the  state  governments  check 
and  balance  each  other.  But  the  great  check 
is  this:  we  have  in  the  United  States,  and  in 
all  the  states  and  territories,  religion,  and  a  great 
many  religious  denominations  have  sprung  up. 
They  are  all  Avorshipping  God  and  their  Savior 
in  the  manner  their  conscience  points  out  to 
them.  And  it  is  fortunate  for  the  United  States 
that  no  one  sect  has,  perhaps,  one  twentieth  part 
of  the  people.  I  have  some  statistics  of  the 
difterent  religious  denominations  in  Kentucky, 
which  I  think  correct,  Avhich  were  taken  about 
three  years  ago.  Of  method ists,  there  are  about 
one  hundred  and  fifty  ministers,  thirty  thousand 
white  members;  united  baptists  about  fifty 
tliousand;  reformers,  from  forty  to  fifty  tliou- 
saud,  white  and  bla<tk;  old  school  presbytorians, 
ninety  ministers^  and  ten  thousand  membeiB; 


751 


priest  "who  prays  for  us  here  every  few  days. 
These  men  have  a  right  to  go  to  the  legislature. 
They  pay  their  taxes  as  we  do — they  submit  to 
the  laws,  and  help  to  sustain  the  government. 
And  if  there  is  a  war,  do  you  not  see  them  at  the 
head  of  your  regiments,  volunteering  to  pray  to 
the  Almighty  lor  the  success  of  our  arms?  I 
know  the  idea  of  the  danger  of  mixing  up 
church  and  state  has  come  to  us  from  the  Britisn 
government.  But  there  we  see  the  church  hav- 
ing a  representation  in  the  house  of  lords.  I  did 
not  intend  to  make  an  argument,  but  I  rose 
merely  to  give  the  information  I  hold  in  my 
hand.  But,  I  repeat,  that  there  is  no  reason  why 
we  should  exclude  them.     They  have  the  same 

who  has" eight  thousand  two  hundred  and  fifty  ■  riglits  that  we  have— they  are  of  an  age  required 

voters.    Will  there  be  any  combination  of  the  |  by  law— they  are  native  Americans,  orif  not, 

methodists  and  baptists?     Willthe  catholics  and 

presbyterians  confederate?  No;you  might  as  well 

expect  oil  and  water  to  mix.     There  can  be  no 


new  school  presbyterians,  twenty  one  ministers 
and  twelve  hundred  members,  episcopal,  twen- 
ty seven  ministers,  and  about  twelve  hundred 
membere;  and  of  roman  catliolics,  fifty  to  sixty 
ministers,  and  a  white  population  of  forty  thou- 
sand. The  whole  together  of  tlie  religious  de- 
nominations will  notaniount  to  more  than  thirty 
thousand  voters.  We  have  now  about  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand  voters  in  the  state. 
What  danger  then  is  tliere  of  a  unity  of  church 
and  state?  There  is  a  gentleman  over  the  way,  I 
do  not  know  whether  he  is  a  minister  of  the  gos- 
pel or  not.  Well,  if  he  says  he  belongs  to  the 
church  and  he  has  two  hundred  and  fifty  voters; 
here  is  my  worthy  friend  before  us,  (Mr.  Waller,) 


naturalized  citizens — ^they  submit  cheerfully  to 
the  law — they  are   a  virtuous  body,  and  they 

contribute  to  the  support    of  the  government. 

cofluson,  and  there  will  be  no  conspiracv,  espe-  j  and  what  is  more,  to  the  educational  part  of  the 
c-ially  when  out  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  two  i  country  they  have  contributed  more  than  any 
thousand,  there  are  only  thirty  thousand  mem- ;  other  class.  Why  is  it  we  call  gentlemen  to 
bers  of  the  church.  I  io  not  vouch  for  my  in-  I  pray  for  us  every  day?  It  is  to  address  the 
formation  being  correct,  but  a  gentleman  con-  Throne  of  Grace.  "  But,"'  says  the  gentleman 
nected  with  the  church  has  furnished  me  with  from  Mason,  "  there  is  danger  to  the  country, 
the  statistics  I  have  read.  What  class  of  men  and  therefore  we  must  have  the  preamble  which 
are  the  clergy?  Thev  are  moral,  virtuous  and  has  been  offered,  and  the  exclusion  of  the  cler- 
iutelligent  men,  and"  as  a  body,  are  the  most  |  gy."  I  am  utterly  against  the  preamble,  and 
learned  men  in  Kentucky;  and  I  say  this  with- 1  against  the  exclusion. 

out  fear  of  contradiction.  Some  to  be  sure,  j  Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  It  is  not  my  inten 
start  out  on  the  ground  that  they  have  a  calling  j  tion  to  detain  the  convention.  My  mind  is  fully 
that  way.  They  say  Christ  made  preachers  out  I  made  up  to  exclude  ministei-s  of  religion  from 
of  fishermen,  and  that  learning  is  calculated  to     '         '    '     '  -nr    i         i  ji    „ 

spoil  the  preachers.  The  catholic  clergy  are 
learned  men,  we  know.  The  father  of  the  gen- 
tleman who  prayed  this  morning,  sent  him  four 
years  to  Rome  that  he  might  be  educated.  All 
denominations  are  trying  to  give  their  clergy  an 
education. 

We  know  that  the  presbyterians  are  doing  ev- 
ery thing  to  instruct  their  clergy.  So  are  the 
methodists,  so  are  the  baptists,  and  so  is  every 
religious  denomination.  And  it  must  be  con- 
fessed that  they  are  a  learned  body  of  men — 
much  more  learned  and  intelligent,  generally, 
than  the  doctors  and  lawyers.  I  will  not  say 
that  there  is  more  virtue,  but  I  say  there  is  as 
much.  I  will  not  say  they  possess  more  natural 
gifts.  Well,  what  harm  have  they  done?  Here 
is  my  friend  near  me,  (Mr.  Waller,)  one  of  the 
best' informed  men  in  the  house;  he  has  been 
here  nine  weeks,  and  he  has  not  troubled  the 
house  but  once,  and  that  was  to-day.  There  is 
the  gentleman  from  Mason,  who  has  not  spoken 
much,  but  when  he  does  speak,  speaks  well. 
We  all  expect  to  die  in  a  few  days,  [laughter,] 
he  goes  off  so  much  like — 


"Harii !  from  the  tombs,  a  dolefal  souud, 

Mine  ears  attend  the  cry : 
Ye  living  men  come  view  the  ground, 

Wheie  you  must  shortly  lie."    [Laughter.] 

I  am  in  favor  of  the  admission  of  the  clergy. 
There  is  no  exclusion  in  congress.  I  have  never 
seen  less  than  from  ten  to  twenty  there,  and 
they  are  as  praiseworthy  a  body  of  men,  and  as 
good  members  as  you  can  find  any  where.  I  see 
nothing  in  any  of  these  men  to  exclude  them, 
whether  they  be  presbyterians  or  baptists;  and 
there  is  not  a  man  whom  I  would  moie  willing- 
ly meet  than  my  worthy  catholic  friend,   the 


the  political  arena.  We  have  been  engaged  here 
several  weeks  in  amending  the  constitution  of 
the  state,  and  a  considerable  portion  of  that  time 
has  been  spent  in  devising  Avhat  restrictions 
shall  be  put  on  those  who  may  become  candi- 
dates for  public  ofiice.  We  have  said  that  no 
man  shall  oe  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals 
unless  he  is  qualified  by  having  practiced  eight 
years  at  the  bar.  We  have  also  said  he  shall  be 
thirty  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  tor  a  certain 
time  in  the  disti'ict  in  which  he  may  be  a  can- 
didate. These  are  the  requirements  we  have 
made  in  regard  to  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals. 
Now  we  are  called  upon  to  consider  what  shall 
be  the  qualifications  of  a  candidate  for  the  legis- 
lature. That  is  a  question  which  I  think  should 
be  fairly  and  dispassionately  considered.  We 
are  asked  bv  a  most  respectable  portion  of  the 
people,  by  tLe  clergy,  by  men  whose  minds  and 
pursuits  are  elevated  beyond  human  concerns,  to 
remove  the  restrictions  which  are  placed  upon 
them,  and  to  open  to  them  the  arena  of  politics. 
They  have  asked  us  in  a  most  respectful  and  el- 
oquent manner  to  admit  them  to  occupy  seats  in 
our  legislative  halls.  I  object  to  complying  with 
their  request  on  account  of  their  utter  disquali- 
fication for  the  office  of  a  legislator.  I  voted  that 
a  lawyer  should  have  served  eight  yeare  at  the 
bar  in  order  to  qualify  him  for  a  judgeship.  I 
object  to  a  preacher  being  brought  upon  this 
floor,  because  he  is  sworn  by  hi.s  ordination 
vows  to  relinquish  the  pomps  and  vanities  of 
the  world.  He  has  sworn  that  henceforth  he 
will  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  world  and  its 
vanities;  that  he  will  be  ignorant  of  all  the 
great  concerns  of  man  that  relate  to  this  earth 
and  confine  himself  entirely  to  the  consideration 
1  of  those  tendencies  which  lead  to  heaven  above. 


752 


He  has  sworn  to  this;  and  that  oath — that  orcH- 
iialion  vow — expressly  disqualifies  him,  because 
either  he  has  sworn  to  the  truth,  or  he  has  not. 
If  he  has  not  sworn  to  tlie  truth,  then  he  is  per- 
jured; if  he  has  sworn  to  the  truth,  and  aban- 
dons it,  still  he  is  perjured.  On  either  horn  of 
this  dilemma,  therefore,  he  is  disqualified  in  my 
estimation.  One  objection  I  have  to  their  com- 
ifig  here  is,  that  from  my  acquaintance  with  the 
clergy — which  is  but  limited — I  have  met  among 
them  more  interesting,  more  educated,  more 
highly  cultivated,  more  innocent  minded  men, 
than  among  any  other  class  of  men,  Avhether.  pro- 
fessors of  religion  or  not.  Looking  to  the  posi- 
tion in  which  our  state  is  placed,  it  would  be 
wrong  in  this  body  to  give  them  a  voice  in  our  le- 

fislative  halls.  I  shall  vote  against  them,  because 
deem  it  impolitic  that  they  should  interfere 
with  matters  of  a  civil  and  political  character. 
I  shall  vote  against  them  because  they  have 
sworn  that  they  are  disqualified  for  any  other 
office;  and  if  weftre  to  have  disqualified  men, 
then  you  incorporate  into  your  new  constitution 
that  which  your  old  constitution  repudiates. 

Mr.  BULLITT.  I  have  no  hesitation  in  vot- 
ing against  the  admission  of  the  clergy  into  our 
legislative  assemblies,  and  I  will  now  give  my 
reasons  for  so  doing.  They  are  the  ambassadors 
of  God  on  earth.  For  three  hundred  years  after 
the  crucifixion  of  Christ,  they  were  considered 
the  purest  men  on  earth.  From  the  establish- 
ment of  the  government  of  the  United  States, 
the  clergy  have  possessed  the  same  character,  and 
I  wish  to  keep  them  in  that  state  of  purity.  The 
first  account  we  have,  is  in  Tacitus,  contained 
in  a  letter  from  Pliny  to  Trajan,  who  was  then 
the  Emperor  of  Rome.  The  officer  stated  that 
several  christians  had  been  brought  forward, 
wiio  had  refused  to  worship  according  to  the 
laws  of  the  land ;  and  Pliny  enquired  what 
should  be  done  with  them.  The  officer  stated  it 
had  been  proved  that  they  were  pure  men,  and 
had  not  interfered  with  the  government,  nor 
been  found  guilty  of  any  crime.  Trajanreplied, 
that  Pliny,  as  governor  of  the  province  must, 
whenever  a  christian  was  brought  before  him, 
and  proven  to  be  guilty,  enforce  the  laws  against 
him  ;  but  he  did  not  wish  him  to  encourage  in- 
formers on  the  subject.  This  purity  remained 
■with  them  up  the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great, 
who  placed  the  church  by  the  side  of  the  throne. 
It  cannot  be  questioned  that  for  long  after  that 
fatal  association  of  the  church  with  the  state, 
the  greatest  crimes  were  committed,  the  greatest 
outrages  perpetrated  upon  the  liberties  and  mor- 
als of  society,  under  the  sanction  of  state  reli- 
gion, that  have  ever  disgraced  the  annals  of  the 
history  of  mankind.  Witness  the  massacre  of 
'Saint  Bartholomew" — the  history  of  which  is 
familiar  to  you  all — having  a  woman  at  its  head. 
In  order  more  effectually  to  accomplish  the  object 
of  destruction,  a  royal  wedding  was  proclaimed, 
to  wliich  all  the  most  distinguished  protestants 
of  botli  sexes,  in  tlie  kingdom  of  France  were 
invited,  and  by  this  means  a  wholesale  ma-ssa- 
cre  was  accomplished.  In  this  general  rising, 
70,000  persons  were  murdered  in  one  night.  In 
making  allusion  to  this  particular  instance  of 
criminality,  1  do  not  intend  to  throw  out  any  in- 
sinuations'against  the  Roman  catholics  as  a  sect. 
There   is  little  doubt  that  any  other  sect,  had 


they  been  subject  to  the  sartie  influences,  would 
have  acted  precisely  in  the  same  manner. 

The  government  of  the  United  State  is  the 
first  that  has  ever  established  full  and  fair  tolera- 
tion. The  best  writers  on  the  subject  of  the 
connection  between  church  and  state — the  best 
writers  of  England,  and  many  of  the  ablest  of 
ancient  times,  have  considered  it  impossible  for 
any  government  to  stand  for  any  period,  with- 
out an  established  religion  ;  but  the  liistory  of 
the  United  States  has  fully  proved,  that  all  re- 
ligions are  harmless  to  the  safety  of  a  state  so 
long  as  they  ai-e  not  incorporated  with  state  in- 
stitutions— nay,  that  in  many  respects  they  have 
been  productive  of  much  benefit  when  let  alone. 

Let  us  bring  about  a  union  of  church  and  state, 
and  thp.t  union  will  destroy  this  or  any  other 
government  that  ever  was, or  ever  can  be  framed. 
I  should  therefore,  be  inclined  to  adopt  the  prin- 
ciple and  the  practice  of  Andrew  Jackson,  who 
was  applied  to  by  a  minister  of  the  Gospel  for 
an  office,  under  his  administration.  His  reply  to 
the  applicant  was,  "you  hold  already  an  office 
much  higher  than  any  I  can  bestow  upon  you  ; 
I  would  advise  you  to  go  home  and  attend  to 
the  duties  of  that  office." 

Now,  1  shall  vote  against  the  admission  of 
clergymen  into  the  legislature  for  two  control- 
ling reasons:  one  is,  that  the  connection  of  the 
clergy  with  the  legislature  will  have  a  tendency 
to  corrupt  the  church  itself;  and  the  other  is, 
that  such  a  connection  would  have  an  equal 
tendency  to  corrupt  the  state.  We  all  know  that 
the  preachers,  from  their  very  vocation,  have  a 
controlling  influence  in  their  particular  circles. 
It  is  true,  that  like  all  other  men,  when  they 
come  before  the  public,  they  ought  to  stand  upon 
their  own  merits.  And  would  not  the  Catholic 
priest  have  the  same  influence? 

But  we  are  told  that  the  church  is  specially 
represented  in  other  countries.  Yes;  now  is 
she  represented  in  Rome?  By  absolute  authori- 
ty. How  is  she  represented  in  Spain?  By  the 
inquisition.  How  is  she  represented  in  Prussia? 
By  cringing  to  the  requirements  of  the  Czar, 
who  is  the  high  priest.  And  how  is  she  repre- 
sented in  England?  Whv,  the  people  are  all 
tythed  one  tenth  of  all  tlieir  produce  for  her 
maintenance — the  bishops  and  archbishops  re- 
ceiving enormous  sums — the  two  archbishops 
get  each  over  £50,000  sterling,  and  perhaps  the 
poor  curate,  who  does  all  the  duty,  and  who  at- 
tends most  assiduously  to  the  care  of  the  flock, 
receives  the  pittance  of  twenty  pounds  a  year. 
I  hope  gentlemen  hardly  expect  we  shall  ever 
get  as  high  as  the  archbishop  of  England. 

No  man  ought  to  be  eligible  to  the  legislature, 
who  can  bring  to  bear  in  the  canvass  an  official 
influence  to  elevate  him  to  a  post  which  he  ha.s 
not  individual  merit  to  reach  without  such  in- 
fluence. A  preacher  of  talent  and  merit  always 
possesses  a  controlling  influence  over  his  congre- 
gation, which  would  be  used  for  his  own  ag- 
grandizement. It  is  contended  that  the  virtu- 
ous preacher  ought  not,  and  would  not,  forsake 
the  duties  of  the  church,  and  intermingle  in 
politics,  if  he  was  eligible.  To  this  I  reply,  that 
they  possess  all  the  ambition  common  to  our  na- 
ture, which  was  fully  evinced  in  the  lat<»  can- 
vass for  the  convention.  As  soon  as  the  restric- 
tion was  removed,  we  found  the  preachers  in 


758 


diftefent  parts  of  the  state  actively  engaged  in 
the  elections— many  of  them  engaged  in  slump 
speaking— 'wliilst  others  became  candidates. 
We  have  now  in  this  body  two  or  three  preach- 
ers of  eminent  talents  and  -worth,  and  as  good 
members  as  any  we  have.  I  should  be  sorry  to 
exclude  them;  but  the  public  good  requires  a 
general  exclusion,  and  we  can  make  no  excep- 
tions. 

As  evidence  of  the  great  influence  of  the 
preachers,  I  would  state  that  I  have  found,  as 
far  as  mv  knowledge  extends,  that  the  poli- 
ticians of  the  country  generally,  si  and  ia  great 
awe  of  them,  and  would  be  afraid  to  meet  them 
on  the  stump,  in  the  same  manner,  and  with  the 
same  freedom,  with  which  they  would  meet 
other  men. 

It  was  not  my  intention  to  make  any  re- 
marks on  this  section,  or  on  the  resolution  offer- 
ed as  an  amendment;  but  as  the  debate  has  run 
somewhat  high,  I  have  thrown  out  these  sug- 
gestions, which  will  be  taken  for  what  they  are 
Worth. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  Mr.  President:  So  far  as  I 
can  ascertain  the  opinions  of  the  delegates  on 
this  floor,  I  am  satisfied  that  they  desire  to  get 
through  with  the  business  beforn  them,  and  to 
ndjourn  by  the  20th  of  this  mouth;  and  so  far  as 
I  know  anything  about  the  business  of  this  con- 
vention, I  am  disposed  on  all  occasions  to  hear 
HS  much  discussion  as  will  do  the  subject  any 
good;  but  I  will  say  to  that  portion  of  the  con- 
vention, who  like  myself  have  been  chained 
down  to  our  duties  for  the  last  two  months,  that 
it  is  time  we  should  take  the  power  into  our  own 
hands,  especially  after  the  example  of  this  morn- 
ing, when  we  have  had  speeches  from  gentlemen 
Who  have  just  returned  from  their  own  homes  on 
a  subject  on  which  two  thirds  of  the  convention 
have  no  difference  of  opinion.  I  regret  that  it 
Bhould  be  necessary  on  any  occasion  to  apply 
the  previous  question;  but  from  what  I  nave 
heard  this  morning  I  am  satisfied  that  this  is  a 
necessary  occasion.  I  call  for  the  previous 
question. 

The  main  question  was  now  ordered  to  be 
put. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFPE  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  on  the  motion  to  strike  out,  and  they 
Were  taken,  and  were— yeas  17,  navs  74. 

YEAS—Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
"William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Charles 
Chambers,  James  Dudley,  JTathan  Gaither,  Se- 
hicius  Garflelde,  Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew  Hood, 
William  Johnson,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
John-son  Price,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
John  L.  Waller,  Silas  Wood.son— 17. 

Nays— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown.  William  C. 
Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Willi-im  Oowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon, 
Chasteen  T.  Duuavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Kinian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Har- 
gis,  Vincent  3.  Hay,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James, 
Georg«  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
05 


Charles  C.  K^elly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  N".  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  w.  Mansfield,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenrs',  Da- 
vid" MeriAvether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  New- 
cum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold.  John  T. 
Rogers,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A  Spalding, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L  Stoner,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Charles 
A.  Wicklifife,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 74. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  strike  out. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

Mr.  GHOLSON,  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining 
an  opportunity  to  state  the  reasons  for  the  vote 
which  he  had  just  given,  moved  a  reconsidera- 
tion of  the  vote  by  which  the  section  was  adopt- 
ed. He  said  he  had  given  his  vote  in  obedience 
to  the  instructions  of  his  constituents,  but  against 
the  conclusions  of  his  own  judgment.  He  then 
withdrew  the  motion  to  reconsider. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  the 
convention  proceeded  to  the  consideration  of  the 
thirty  second  section,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  32.  The  general  assembly  may  contract 
debts  to  meet  casual  deficits  or  failures  in  the 
revenue,  or  for  expenses  not  provided  for,  but 
such  debts,  direct  or  contingent,  singly  or  in 
the  aggregate,  shall  not  at  any  time  exceed  five 
hundred  thousand  dollars;  and  the  moneys, 
arising  from  loans  creating  such  debts,  shall  be 
applied  to  the  purposes  for  which  they  were  ob- 
tained, or  to  repay  such  debts:  Prooided,  That 
the  state  may  contract  debts  to  repel  invasion, 
suppress  insurrection,  or,  if  hostilities  are  threat- 
ened, provide  for  the  public  defence." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  this  section  is 
designed,  as  I  suppose  it  was  by  the  committee, 
to  enable  the  legislature  to  provide  for  any  pos- 
sible deficit  of  revenue,  I  am  prepared  to  vote 
for  it;  but  I  am  not  prepared  to  vote  for  extend- 
ing the  pt-rmission  to  contract  a  loan  for  half  a 
million  of  dollars  annually.  I  move  to  strike 
out  "five  hundred;"  and  I  do  it  with  the  view 
of  offering  to  insert  a  smaller  sum. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  That  subject  was  referred  to 
the  committee  of  which  I  was  chairman.  The 
reason  why  I  did  not  call  them  together  on  this 
subject,  was,  I  discovered  that  another  commit- 
tee iiad  reported  on  the  same  subject.  I  will 
read  some  papers  which  I  have  in  relation  to  it. 
The  State  of  Kentucky  is  now  indebted  $4,497,- 
15'2  81.  Her  bank  stock  is  $1,270,500,  and  it  is 
fair  to  presume  these  banks  will  pay  the  whole, 
dollar  for  dollar.  Besides  that,  We  are  indebted 
to  public  schools  the  following  sum,  in  which 
interest  is  included:  $1,299,268  42.  This  in- 
debtedness we  are  bound  to  pay.  I  do  not  de- 
sire, therefore,  to  give  the  legislature  unlimited 
power  to  increase  that  indebtedness.  I  should 
prefer  that,  instead  of  being  allowed  to  incur  a 
debt  of  $500,000,  they  should  be  restricted  to 
$50,000.  I  have  got  a  statement  here  that  will 
show  the  enormous  amounts  that  have  been  ex- 
pended, and  through  which  this  debt  has  b«en 


7M 


Incurred.  The  Green  river  improvement  cost 
$859,126  79— the  Kentucky  river  $901,932  70— 
the  Licking  river  $372,520  70;  and  from  this 
last  named  improvement  we  have  never  derived 
a  cent.  Besides  this,  we  have  expended  the  fol- 
lowing sums  on  turnpike  roads: 
Maysville,    Washington,    Paris 

and  Lexington  road,        -        -  $213,200  00 
Franklin  county,  road  to  Louis- 
ville,         20,000  00 

Shelby  co.,  road  to  Louisville,  -  45,000  00 
Muldrow's  Hill  road,  -  -  -  55,145  46 
Mercer  CO.,  Crab  Orchard  road,  -  71,800  00 
Frankfort,  Lexington  and  Ver- 
sailles road,  -  -  -  -  78,122  00 
Danville,  Lanca-ster  and  Nicho- 

lasville  road,  -        -        -        -  151,382  00 

Scott  county,  road  to  Frankfort,    -  43,.325  00 

Franklin  co.,  road  to  PVankfort,     -  15,400  00 

Winchester  and  Lexington  road,    -  45,100  00 

ijincoln  CO.,  Crab  Orchard  road,     -  51,299  00 

Covington  and  Georgetown  road,    -  170,135  77 

Richmond  and  Lexington  road,      -  75,383  00 

Georgetown  and  Lexington  road,  -  30,270  00 
Andereon  countv.  Crab  Orchard 

road,        -   "    -        -        ■        -  42,950  00 
Louisville  to  mouth  Salt  river,       -  65,340  99 
Mouth  Salt  river  to  Elizabeth- 
town,      84,581  16 

Elizabethtown  to  Bell's  tavern,      -  118,778  24 

Bell's  tavern  to  Bowlinggreen,       •  85,488  70 

Bowlinggreen  to  Tennessee  line,    -  87,194  16 
Franklin  countv.  Crab  Orchard 

road,       -   '     -        -        -        -  17,064  00 

Bardstown  and  Springfield  road,    -  65,190  60 
liexington ,  Harrodsburg  and  Per- 

ryville  road,   -        -        -        .  109.646  00 

Bardstown  and  Louisville  road,    -  100,000  00 

Bardstown  and  Green  river  road,    -  289,825  19 

Glasgow  and  Scottsville  road,        -  110,385  38 
Mount  Sterling:  and   Maysville 

road, 88,072  59 

Versailles  to  Kentucky  river,         -  20,000  00 

Logan,  Todd  and  Christian,           -  149,428  91 

Maysville  and  Bracken  road,         -  25,948  00 


Total,  on  turnpike  roads. 


$2,525,456  15 


And  for  railroads  the  followingsuras: 
Amount  expended  on  Green  river  rail 

road, $1,903 

Amount  expended  on  Lexington  and 
Ohio  railroad  between  Frankfort 
and  Louisville,  -  ."  ■  -  220,000 
Amount  exfiended  on  Lexington  and 
Ohio  railroad,  between  Frankfort 
and  Lexington,      -        -        -  -100,650 


Total  expended  for  railroads,  -        -  $322,553 

And  from  these  works,  the  state  does  not  re- 
ceive any  thing  like  a  sura  to  pay  the  interest 
on  the  expenditure;  or  scarcely  to  keep  those  of 
them  that  are  in  operation,  in  repair.  I  hope, 
therefore,  the  $500,000  will  be  stricken  out. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  concur  in  the  necessity  of 
putting  some  restriction  on  the  power  of  the  le- 
gislature to  involve  the  people  in  debt.  And  I 
ask  the  attention  of  the  convention  to  the  thirty- 
seoond  section  of  the  article,  that  thev  may  see 
iu  what  attitude  it  places  the  power  of  the  legis- 


lature on  this  subject,  before  they  determine  up- 
on adopting  the  propositions  of  either  of  the 
gentlemen  from  Nelson.  The  legislature  of  this 
state  have  heretofore  had  an  unlimited  power  to 
create  debt,  ajtd  nearly  every  state  in  this  union 
has  the  same  power.  Those  which  are  most 
democratic  in  their  form  of  government,  with 
the  exception  of  New  York,  Louisiana,  and  one 
or  two  others,  have  not  deemed  it  nec<^ssary  to 
put  any  other  check  upon  the  power  of  their  le- 
gislatures to  create  debt,  than  the  responsibility 
of  the  members  to  their  constituents.  We. 
therefore,  are  about  to  tread  on  new  ground,  and 
the  vote  which  delegates  here  are  about  to  give 
is  one  probably  for  which  they  will  be  called  to 
a  stricter  account  than  any  other  which  they 
may,  or  have,  given,  during  the  session.  Every- 
one must  have  oeen  struck  with  the  evils  which 
have  been  alluded  to  by  the  elder  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin);  the  quantity  of 
money  we  have  spent,  the  indebtedness  in  which 
we  are  involved  as  a  state,  and  the  amount  of 
taxation  necessary  to  pay  the  interest  and  prin- 
cipal of  that  indebtedness.  In  view  of  these 
facts,  what  then  do  the  committee  who  reported 
this  article  propose  to  do,  to  check  this  debt- 
creating  power?  In  the  thirty-third  section, 
they  say  that  the  legislature  of  Kentuckv.  from 
this  time  henceforward,  shall  never  haVe  the 
right  to  contract  debt,  except  by  the  consent  of 
the  people  to  whom  the  act  creating  the  debt, 
with  a  provision  incorporated  in  it  for  the  liqui- 
dation of  it,  shall  first  be  submitted  for  their  as- 
sent or  dissent.  Let  me  ask  them  if  it  is  desira- 
ble that  we  should  proceed  further,  and  declare 
that  tlie  legislature  shall  be  shorn  of  all  power, 
and  not  even  have  the  miserable  privilege  of  cre- 
ating a  debt  to  the  extent  of  one  year's  income, 
and  that  whatever  may  be  the  failure  in  the  rev- 
enue, they  shall  not  have  power  to  supply  the 
(ieficiencyV  What  have  tlie  committee  done  in 
this  particular?  They  have  declared  that  the 
state  legislature — notwithstanding  the  advance 
in  wealth  and  population  of  the  state — never 
shall  increase  the  public  indebtedness  beyond  a 
sum  Avhich  the  annual  income  will  pay — say  five 
hundred  tliousand  dollars — inasmuch  as  difficul- 
ties might  spring  up,  the  effect  of  which  would 
be  to  disgrace  the  state,  unless  this  provision 
existed.  Disa.strous  periods  might  occur,  like 
that  of  1840,  when  it  was  necessary  to  borrow 
rnoney  to  save  us  from  the  disgrace  of  repudia- 
tion. You  who  have  been  claiming  for  the  legis- 
lature such  authority  as  to  say  that  they  should 
have  the  power  to  remove  the  whole  judiciary, 
are  now  declaring,  with  most  singular  inconsis- 
tency, tliat  they  should  not  have  the  power  of 
contracting  a  debt  whicli,  altogether,  singly  or 
in  the  aggregate,  will  not  exceed  the  annual 
revenue  of  the  state.  I  do  not  understand  why 
it  is  that  one  moment  you  wish  to  repose  a  pow- 
er so  vast  in  tlie  legislature,  and  in  the  next  wisli 
to  deny  them  even  this  small  privilege,  when  it 
may  be  necessary,  perhaps,  to  save  the  state  from 
disgrace.  Suppose  this  capitol  should  burn — 
why,  fifty  thousand  dollars  would  not.be  suffi- 
cient to  restore  the  library  or  to  supply  the  fur- 
niture even.  This  building,  itself,  cost  more 
than  one  hundred  thousand  dollars.    And  would 

!rou  leave  the  legislature  of  the  state  houseless 
or  three  or  four  intervening  years,  until  an  act 


"756 


sould  b«»  submitted  to  the  people  and  passed  by 
the  legislature?  I  am  utterly  averse,  also,  to 
striking  out  fire  hundred  thousand  dollars  and 
substituting  therefor  one  hundred  thmisand  dol- 
lars; and  for  the  same  reasons.  Would  it  be  im- 
provident to  say  that  a  man  may  contract  debts 
to  an  amount  ■which  his  annual  income  Trould 
reimburse?  Would  it  be  improvident  then  to  say 
the  samethingof  the  state?  Might  it  nothereafter 
lead  to  great  evils  in  the  conduct  of  the  aflfairs  of 
the  state,  to  impose  such  a  restriction?  Notv, 
liere  is  the  thirty-third  section,  and  if  it  Is  not 
stringent  enough  in  all  conscience,  to  satisfy  ei- 
ther of  the  gentlemen  from  Nelson,  I  cannot 
conceive  what  will  answer  that  purpose.  It 
provides: 

"  No  act  of  the  general  assembly  shall  author- 
ize any  debt  to  be  contracted,  on  behalf  of  the  . 
commonwealth,  unless  provision  be  made  there- 
in, to  lay  and  collect  an  annual  tax,  sufficient  to 
pav  the  interest  stipulated,  and  to  discharge  the 
debt  within  years;  nor  shall  such   act 

tAke  effect  until  it  shall  have  been  submitted  to 
the  people  at  a  general  election,  and  shall  have 
receivea  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  for  and 
against  it." 

So  that,  in  fact,  the  committee,  by  this  clause, 
have  declared  that  not  only  is  the  action  of  the 
legislature  necessary  to  create  a  debt,  but  that 
the  people  themselves,  at  the  general  election 
following,  shall  sanction  or  disapprove  of  their 
act. 

Now,  at  the  time  of  the  general  bankruptcy  in 
1S40,  no  state  in  the  Union  had  such  a  restriction 
on  its  legislature.  The  then  aggregate  of  the 
indebtedness  of  the  several  states  amounted  to 
about  $240,000,000,  and  nearly  every  one  of 
them  repudiated  or  were  on  the  verge  of  that 
disgrace.  The  state  of  Kentucky  at  that  time, 
under  the  general  depreciation  of  property  and 
great  failures  in  the  revenue,  was  only  saved 
from  the  bankruptcy  which  threatened  by  plun- 
dering the  school  fund.  The  gentleman  from 
Nelson  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklifife)  says  no,  but  so  I 
understand  the  facts  to  be. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  legislature  set 
apart  the  sum  of  $300,000,  according  to  my  re- 
collection, from  that  portion  of  the  surplus  rev- 
enue of  the  United  States  allotted  to  the  state  of 
Kentucky.  The  remainder  of  the  sum  was  sub 
scribed  in  stock  to  the  bank  of  Kentucky,  if  I 
r  collect  aright.  The  law  setting  apart  the 
$800,000  for  school  purposes,  provided,  that  it 
should  be  vested  in  profitable  stocks.  The  then 
executive  being  authorized  by  a  separate  statute 
to  borrow  a  million  of  money  by  the  issue  of  the 
bonds  of  the  state,  bearing  five  per  cent,  interest, 
and  unable  to  sell  these  bonds  abroad,  or  think- 
ing that  these  bonds  were  a  good  investment  for 
the  school  fund, therefore,  made  those  bonds  pay- 
able to  the  school  coram i.ssioners  to  the  amount 
of  $890,000.  That  was  the  disposition  of  that 
fund,  and  its  proceeds  were  applied  to  the  ob- 
ject of  internal  improvements.  Sometime  du- 
ring the  administration  of  Governor  Letcher  the 
legislature,  with  a  view  of  reducing,  on  paper, 
the  state  debt,  ordered  the  bonds  given  to  the 
school  commissioners  to  be  cancelled,  and  thus 
was  blotted  out  the  school  fund.  The  public 
revenue  uid  credit  did  not  suffer  in  1840,  and  the 


income  upon  the  sinking  fund  paid  the  interett 
upon  ilie  foreign  debt, 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Notwithstanding  the  expla- 
nation of  the  gentleman,  which  leaves  me  al- 
most as  much  in  the  dark  as  I  was  at  first,  I  still 
think  that  the  main  part  of  my  facts  are  unan- 
swered. The  fact  was,  as  I  understood,  that  the 
part  of  the  surplus  revenue  of  tlie  United  States 
allotted  to  Kentucky,  and  set  apart  to  be  applied 
to  school  purposes,'  was  applied  to  the  liquida- 
tion of  the  internal  improvement  debt.  Our 
bonds  baring  sunk  to  seventy  per  cent,  on  the 
one  hundred  in  the  northern  market,  this  school 
fund  was  then  seized  upon  and  applied  for  that 
purpose.  These  are  the  facts  about  it  if  my  mem- 
ory serves  me  aright.  I  will  not  allude  further 
to  that  part  of  the  subject.  Every  member  here 
must  see  the  necessity  of  allowing  the  legisla- 
ture to  remedy  these  casual  deficiencies  in  the 
revenue,  or  expenses  not  provided  for — such  for 
instance,  as  the  destruction  of  the  public  build- 
ings-^by  the  creation  of  indebtedness,  but  not  to 
exceed  singly  or  in  the  aggregate,  the  sum  of  $500,- 
000.  Is  tlie  thirty -third  section  not  sufficient 
guard  against  the  abuses  of  legislative  discretion 
m  the  creation  of  state  debts?  I  think  it  is.  I 
shall  vote  against  the  amendment  reducing  the 
amount,  and  I  hope  the  convention  will  pause 
before  they  strip  the  legislature,  and  through  it 
the  people,  of  all  power  or  discretion  in  this 
matter.  At  least  allow  them,  when  they  are  ut- 
terly restricted  from  the  creation  of  debts  for  any 
other  purpose,  to  provide  for  casual  deficits  in 
the  revenue,  or  unforseen  expenses  not  provided 
for. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  I  thought  there 
could  probably  arise,  under  a  frugal  and  pru- 
dent administration  of  the  government  of  Ken- 
tucky, the  necessity  for  the  exercise  of  this  debt- 
contracting  power,  to  the  extent  of  half  a  mil- 
lion of  dollars,  like  the  gentleman  from  Louis- 
ville, I  might  go  with  him  to  retain  the  section. 
But  retain  it  as  it  is,  and  my  word  for  it  no  fu- 
ture legislature  will  ever  have  occasion  to  resort 
to  the  loan  prescribed  in  the  following  section. 
What  is  this  thirty-second  section?  Why  that 
you  may  borrow  $500,000,  annually,  to  meet  the 
contingencies  of  deficits  in  your  annual  reve- 
nues. Stop  there,  and  perhaps  there  would  be 
no  dangerous  or  improvident  exercise  of  this 
power;  but  there  are  also  in  this  clause,  expres- 
I  sions  and  v-  ords  I  do  not  tmderstand,  or  else 
I  they  ambigiiously  confer  a  power  that  mav  be  im- 
j  providently  exercised — "to  meet  casual  deficien- 
I  cies  in  the  revenue,  or  to  meet  expenses  not  pro- 
1  vided  for."  "VSTiat  does  the  committee  mean  by 
"expenses  not  provided  for?"  The  legislature 
I  may  run  the  state  into  debt  upon  this  old  sys- 
;  tem  of  internal  improvement,  to  the  amount  of 
i  $500,000,  and  the  next  year  may  borrow  $500,- 
I  000  more  to  meet  that  indebtedness  not  provided 
i  for  by  law,  and  which  the  revenue  is  not  equal 
to  pay.  That  is  my  reading  of  the  section,  and 
i  it  is  nothing  nmre  or  less  than  authorizing  the 
i  legislature  to  borrow  at  pleasure,  if  they  can 
i  create  a  necessity  therefor  by  any  system  of  ex- 
!  penditure,  however  provident  or  improvident. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  The  section  provides  that 
they  shall  not  at  any  time,  singly  or  in  the  ag- 
gregate, exceed  $.500,000. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.    Does  the  gentleman 


756 


;iDean  in  all  tiaie  to  come,  or  cw long  a«  the  con- 
stitution shall  be  in  force? 
-  Mr.  PRESTOjSi  .  Yes  sir. 
.  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  so  read  the 
section,  but  if  that  is  the  intent,  then  it  ought 
to  be  amended,  because  in  the  course  of  fifty 
years  we  may  be  under  the  necessity  of  borrow- 
ing an  amount  largely  beyond  that.  Now  we 
provide  for  the  raising,  every  year,  by  our  sys- 
tem of  taxation,  the  money  necessary  to  defray 
the  expenses  of  government.  There  may  be  oc- 
casions in  which  deficits  of  40,  50,  or  $100,000 
may  occur,  from  the  failure  of  the  collecting  of- 
fices, or  the  depreciation  of  property;  but  I  do 
not  see  that  tliere  can  be  a  failure  arising  from 
these  causes,  to  the  amount  of  half  a  million  at 
any  one  time,  and  thus  creating  the  necessity 
for  the  borrowing  of  that  amount  of  money. 

In  relation  to  the  school  fund,  of  which  I 
spoke,  I  mistook  the  amount  by  $50,000.  It 
was  $850,000,  not  $800,000;  and  the  facts  in  re- 
gard to  it  are  as  I  have  stated  them.  But  so  far 
as  paying  the  interest  on  the  state  debt,  and  the 
demands  which  fell  on  the  sinking  fund,  even 
during  the  crash  of  1840,  alluded  to  by  the  gen- 
tleman, -when  the  banks  stopped  specie  pay- 
ments, and  when  credit  at  home  and  abroad  was 
made  to  falter  and  to  sink,  this  state  was  able  to 
maintain  her  credit,  by  the  prompt  payment  of 
her  coupons  for  every  dollar,  the  day  it  become 
due.  A  bill  of  exchange  was  drawn  by  our 
banks  on  New  Orleans,  which  was  negotiated 
at  New  York.  The  debt  fell  due  on  the  same 
day  the  bank  dividend  fell  due,  and  in  order  to 
meet  the  payment  in  New  York,  the  sinking 
fund  commissioners  had  always  to  anticipate  its 
payment  by  a  bill  of  exchange  drawn  tnrough 
the  bank,  and  based  on  the  debt  the  bank  would 
owe  to  the  fund  on  the  first  of  January.  That 
is  the  way  in  which  the  debt  Avas  met  in  1840. 
My  object  is  to  strike  out  $500,000,  and  to  fill 
the  blank  with  such  sum  as  may  be  likely  to 
be  needed  in  case  of  a  deficit  of  the  revenue. 
In  relation  to  the  other  section,  authorizing  the 
borrowing  of  money,  with  proper  guards.  I  am 
prepared  to  go  with  the  gentleman  as  far  as  is 
prudent  and  proper. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  government  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  after  the  national  debt  was  paid,  had 
a  surplus  of  about  $28,000,000,  and  its  annual 
income  being  amply  suflicient  for  the  ordinary 
expenses  of  government,  an  act  of  congress  was 
passed,  dividing  this  money  among  the  states, 
according  to  their  representation  in  congress. 
Kentucky  having  ten  representatives  and  two 
senators,  was  entitled  to  twelve  parts,  according 
te  the  whole  representation  in  congress.  Several 
of  the  states,  Virginia,  I  think,  and  one  of  the 
Carolfnas,  refused  to  receive  their  shares.  Ken- 
tucky received  $1,433,756  29,  and  became  re- 
sponsible, whenever  the  necessities  of  the  general 
government  should  demand  it.  to  return  the 
money;  and  I  presume  this  will  never  be.  unless 
we  should  get  into  some  war  of  several  years 
duration,  and  entirely  exhaust  our  means.  When 
that  money  was  received,  Kentucky,  bv  some 
act  of  legislation,  set  apart  $850,000  of  it,  for 
common  school  purposes.  Previous  to  that  time, 
there  was  no  common  school  fund  at  all;  and 
that  act  is  just  a.s  binding  and  obligatory  on  the 


water  navigation.  The  school  fund,  as  a  fund, 
is  based  merely  on  a  promise  of  the  state  to 
herself,  that  she  will  set  apart,  and  hold  sacred 
$850,000  for  common  school  purposes.  She  gave 
to  the  trustees  of  the  school  fund  the  following 
bonds: 

On  18th  January,  1840,  one  bond,  $500,000 
On  22d  January,  1840,  one  bond,  170.000 
On  22d  January,  1840,  one  bond,      180,000 

$850,000 
These  bonds  drew  five  per  cent,  interest.  The 
interest  accumulated,  and  continued  to  accumu- 
late, until  the  whole  amount  due  by  the  state  to 
the  school  fund,  comprising  interest  and  princi- 
pal was  $1,299,268  42.  Since  then,  and  down 
to  January  1,  1850,  interest  has  accumulated, 
and  not  included  in  that  sum,  to  the  amount  of 
$51,223  29. 

The  gentleman  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston,) 
says  that  our  stock  fell  in  the  market  to  about 
sixty  eight  on  the  hundred.  I  think  he  is  in 
error  there;  and  that  our  six  per  cent,  stocks, 
never  fell  below  par.  The  five  per  cents,  per- 
haps did.  A  report  made  to  the  legislature  in 
1845-6,  exhibits  the  terms  and  conditions  of  every 
loan  in  the  state;  and  it  shows  that  the  five  per 
cent,  stocks  were  never  sold  at  less  than  at  par,  ex- 
cept in  one  instance,  and  then  ninety  eight  forono 
hundred,  while  the  six  per  cents,  never  fell  below 
it.  There  was  some  railroad  and  turnpike  bonds 
that  fell  below  par;  but  the  actual  loans  wera 
never  obtained  at  that  disadvantage.  We  now 
owe,  taking  it  altogether,  upwards  of  $7,000,000; 
and  we  pay  $271,289  35  interest.  There  is 
an  annual  clrain  upon  us  for  interest,  to  that 
amount;  and  it  now  goes  beyond  the  mountains. 
Our  expenses  have  increased  at  a  remarkable 
rate.  I  will  read  now  a  table,  to  show  what  4 
wonderful  knack  we  had  of  getting  up  stairs,  ou 
this  subject. 

The  whole  amount  of  revenve  collected  by  the 
sheriffs — 


In  1829,  was 
In  1830,  was 
In  1831,  was 
In  1832,  Avas 
In  1833,  was 
In  1834,  was 
In  1835,  was 
In  1836,  was 
In  1837,  was 
In  1838,  was 
In  1839,  was 
In  1840,  was 
In  1841,  was 
In  1842,  was 
In  1843,  was 
In  1844,  was 
In  1845,  vas 
In  1846,  was 
In  1847,  was 
In  1848,  was 
In  1849,  was 


$61,396  05 

66.309  38 

62,351  44 

70,598  82 

64,758  58 

74,119  93 

124,518  80 

139,381  02 

169,864  35 

205.7t?3  62 

218,363  53 

255,009  76 

261,898  98 

370,842  05 

325,413  88 

284.084  4") 

315,413  35 

348.742  38 

350,838  39 

.346,000  22 

415,009  20 


The  sum  for  1849,  refers  to  the  tax  levied  for 
the  year  ending  October  1,  1849.  The  lew  for 
the  coming  year  ending  October  1,  1850,  is 
$562,000.  If  that  increase  is  not  enough  to  sat- 
isfy  gentlemen,  for  God's  sake  what  will?  From 
■'"4.000  in  1834 — we  have  increased  it  up  to  this 


state,  as  are  those  passed  providing  for  slack  |  time  to  .$562,000.    But  says  the  gentleman,  New 


757 


York  has  a  larjrer  debt,  and  so  has  Ohio.  Yes — 
and  I  will  tell  tho  gentleman  another  secret; 
Great  Britain  has  a  larger  debt.  France  has  a 
larger  debt;  and  all  tlie  great  powers  of  Europe 
have  a  larger  debt.  But  it  does  not  follow  that 
there  is  much  comfort  in  owing  about  $7,000,000 
and  paying  $271,000  per  year  interest,  to  go 
where?  Is  it  paid  out  liere?  No.  Where  does 
it  go  then?  It  goes  to  New  York,  and  is  about 
a-s  much  loss  to  Kentucky  as  if  it  went  to  the 
East  Indies,  and  was  there  worked  up  into  im- 
ages. Now  what  is  the  interest  anu  duty  of 
Kentucky?  It  is  to  provide  a  competent  and  ac- 
tive sinking  fund  to  extinguish  the  debt  as  it 
shall  become  due;  and  that  will  be  in  about 
twenty-five  years.  My  plan — if  I  had  the  pow- 
er— would  be,  to  keep  the  sinking  fund  up  to 
what  it  now  is,  and  by  saving  and  economy,  to 
withdraw  from  other  purposes,  money  enough 
to  pay  the  debt  in  twenty  seven  or  twenty  eight 
years.  I  was  greatly  in  hopes  that  this  conven- 
tion would  so  construct  the  government  that  we 
should  be  able,  to  economise  at  least  $50,000  a 
year;  but  it  has  not  done  so;  and  I  am  for  a  tax 
to  raise  that  sum;  to  be  appropriated  over  and 
above  what  the  sinking  fund  now  is.  The  fund 
thus  increased,  the  first  year  would  pay  $50,000 
— the  next $53,000 — the  next  $56,180  a'nd  soon, 
until  it  will  pay  the  debt  in  twenty -five  years. 
I  do  not  want  the  legislature  to  have  the  power 
to  run  us  in  debt  any  more.  If  the  section 
nieaijs,  that  they  never  sljall  so  long  as  this  con- 
stitution may  stand,  incur  more  than  $500,000 
indebtedness  in  the  aggregate,  then  it  Improves 
the  section;  yet  I  should  be  unwilling  thus  to 
restrict  the  legislature,  because  in  the  course  of 
fifty  years,  we  may  expect  in  a  great  state  like 
this,  to  be  obliged  to  liorrow  more  than  that 
sum. 

The  gentleman  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston,) 
said,  suppose  the  capitol  should  burn  down. 
Well  sir,  if  this  miserable  building,  drawn  after 
a  Grecian  Temple,  and  looking  for  all  the 
world,  when  across  the  bridge,  like  the  end  of 
another  bridge  to  the  hill  back  here — and  which 
is  a  disgrace  to  the  state — if  it  should  take  fire  ; 
why  in  the  name  of  God  let  it  burn.  We  have 
had  one  or  two  eapitols  burned  down,  and  a 
meeting  house,  or  two  ;  and  I  do  jiot  care  how 
Boon  we  get  rid  of  this  mean,  contemptible, 
bridge  looking  edifice.  It  is  any  thing  but  a 
capitol,  in  which  to  do  business.  Let  the  gen- 
tleman goto  Mississippi,  and  see  the  magnificent 
capit<d  at  Jackson ;  and  as  a  Keutuckian,  he 
will  feel  disgraced  and  humbled  at  the  compari- 
son. But  our  building  cost  70  or  $biO,000  ;  and 
if  it  should  burn,  would  it  be  necessary  to  bor- 
row $500,000  to  re-builu  it?  Will  not  two  cents 
additional  tax,  provide  the  amount  necessary? 
Certainly  ;  and  the  same  means  should  be  re- 
sorted to,  to  meet  any  similar  emergency.  I  am 
not  against  spending  a  thousand^  or  a  million 
dollars,  if  it  js  necessary  to  the  prosperity  of  the 
country.  But  I  am  unwilling  to  confer  upon 
the  legislature  tlie  power  of  getting  us  into 
debt.  They  have  got  us  into  debt  enough  al- 
ready. The  gentlemen  who  have  argfued  here, 
do  not  seem  to  understand  the  condition  of  the 
common  people  of  the  country.  It  i.<«  a  very 
hard  task  for  a  man  now  to  pay  his  taxes ;  and 
yet  gentlemen  seem  to  regard  it  as  a  mere   noth- 


iiij^.  Why  ill  the  name  of  God,  what  it  half  a 
million  dollars — says  one  ;  and  yt-t  the  pcopln 
are  called  upon  to  pay  nineteen  cents,  under  tha 
equalization  law,  and  if  a  man's  wife  has  to 
wear  spectacles,  or  if  she  has  got  too  old,  or  too 
fleshy  to  ride  on  horse  back,  and  has  a  buggy, 
he  must  also  pay  the  specific  tax  on  them.  Gen- 
tlemen have  a  happy  knack  of  saying  all  this  is 
nothing ;  and  yet  out  of  these  nothings,  an  en- 
ormous debt  has  been  created.  The  Ohio  river 
at  its  source  is  nothing,  and  yet  when  it  gets  to 
Louisville,  it  is  a  big  river.  How  the  state  debt 
has  been  swollen  to  $7,000,000  is  fully  exhibited 
in  the  tables  to  which  I  have  referred.  And  I 
will  say  that,  in  traveling  through  the  country, 
no  reform  have  I  heard  so  loudly  called  for,  as 
that  a  restriction  should  be  put  on  the  power  of 
the  legislature  to  contract  debts  hereafter.  lam 
not  for  repudiation.  I  am  for  paying  every  dol- 
lar we  owe.  There  is  no  calamity  that  could 
fall  on  the  country,  thati  believe  would  be  equal 
to  repudiation. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Early  in  the  session  of  this 
convention,  resolutions  were  offered  by  some 
two  or  three  gentlemen,  and  my  remembrance  is, 
that  some  one  or  two  were  referred  to  the  commit- 
tee of  which  I  have  the  honor  to  be  chairman. 
These  resolutions  were  on  the  subject  of  impos- 
ing some  restriction  upon  the  power  of  the  le- 
gislature, in  the  contraction  of  public  debt,  and 
they  were  duly  considered  by  the  committee.  I 
think  I  but  express  the  sentiments  of  every 
member  of  that  committee  when  I  say,  that  they 
all  concur  in  the  opinion,  that  some  restriction 
ought  to  be  imposed.  There  were  in  the  com- 
mittee, those  who  believed  that  one  restriction 
would  be  sufficient,  while  others  believed  a  more 
rigid  one  would  be  necessary,  hut  there  were 
none  who  did  not  believe  that  some  restriction 
should  be  imposed  on  the  legislative  action  on 
the  subject.  The  past  history  of  the  state  has 
satisfied,  not  only  them,  but  as  I  believe  a  largo 
majority  of  the  people  of  the  state,  that  a  wild 
and  reckless  system  of  running  into  debt,  had 
pervaded  the  legislature  in  by-gone  times,  for  a 
number  of  years,  and  that  their  heedless,  head- 
long practice  in  this  particular,  should  be  re- 
strained.  This  thirty-second  section  was  in- 
corporated into  this  report  for  that  purpose. 

There  Avero  those  in  the  committee  who  be- 
lieved that  the  legislature,  for  this  purpose  of 
supplying  casual  deficits  in  the  revenue,  should 
not  go  beyond  $50,000  in  their  power  to  borrow; 
others  believed  the  limit  should  be  $100,000, 
others  $250,000,  and  others  again  $500,000.  But 
at  the  time  that  section  was  drafted  in  commit- 
tee, it  was  not  intended  or  supposed  that  a  dis- 
cretion was  conferred  on  the  legislature  at  any 
time,  singly  or  in  the  aggregate,  to  create  a  deVJt 
exceeding  $500,000.  No  one  of  them  supposed 
that  the  legislature,  under  this  phraseology,  "or 
for  expenses  not  provided  for,"  could  at  one  ses- 
sion appropriate  half  a  million,  thus  incurring 
expenses,  and  then  at  the  next  session,  could 
levy  a  tax  or  issue  state  bonds  for  the  purpose 
of  defraying  that  expense;  and  so  on  from  ses- 
sion to  session  running  the  state  into  debt.  I  am 
constrained  to  acknowledge  that  the  section  does 
not  meet  my  entire  approbation,  because  if  there 
is  any  ambiguity  in  its  language,  I  am  well  sat- 
isfied that  the  construction  placevl  on  it  will  be 


irss 


to  allow  th«  legislature  to  borrow  money.  My 
experience  and  reading  have  taught  nie  that  legis- 
lative bodies  in  all  countries  are  not  disposed  to 
give  up  any  thing,  but  that  on  the  contrary  they 
are  inclined  to  encroachment.  If,  therefore,  the 
section  is  susceptible  of  any  other  than  a  plain, 
palpable  and  definite  construction,  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  making  it  so  plain  that  none  can  mistake 
or  niisunderstaud  it.  I  am  willing  here  to  state, 
that  I  have  not  supposed  that  at  any  period  in  the 
future  history  of  Kentucky,  there  will  be  a  ne- 
cessity to  borrow  more  than  $50,000  or  $100,000 
to  meet  the  deficiences  of  the  revenue.  It  was 
urged  in  the  committee,  as  it  has  been  urged 
here  to-day,  that  if  our  capital  should  be  de- 
stroyed, then  it  might  be  necessary  to  contract 
a  larger  debt.  That  is  a  very  good  argument, 
and  might  furnish  an  exception  to  the  general 

Frinciple  laid  down  in  the  thirty  second  section. 
do  not  feel  disinclined  to  sav  or  allow  that  if 
an  accident  of  that  sort  should  happen  in  our 
state,  some  provision  might  be  made  to  meet 
the  emergency.  But  I  declare  that  my  purpose, 
as  one  of  the  committee,  is  to  restrict  the  debt 
contracting  power  of  the  legislature.  If  the  sec- 
tion, as  it  is  reported,  does  not  do  it,  to  the  ful- 
le.st  and  utmost  extent,  I  hope  that  one  or  the 
other  of  the  gentlemen  from  Nelson,  will  so  per- 
fect it  as  to  bring  it  up  to  the  expectations  of  the 
people  of  the  state.  For  if  I  know  the  past  histo- 
ry of  the  state,  it  has  wrung  from  the  people  an 
expression  of  dissatisfaction  at  the  wild  and 
reckles.s  system  of  legislation  that  has  charac- 
terized the  last  fifteen  or  twenty  years. 
The  convention  then  took  a  recess. 

EVEMNG   SESSIO.>I. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  withdrew  his  motion 
to  strike  out  $500,000  and  insert  $100,000,  and 
in  lieu  thereof  moved  to  strike  out  the  words  "or 
for  expenses  not  provided  for,"  Avith  a  view  of 
obviating  any  difhculty  a.sto  the  construction  of 
the  section.  He  then  moved  that  the  conven- 
tion resolve  itself  into  committee  of  the  whole, 
on  the  article  under  consideration,  as  the  Presi- 
dent expressed  a  wish  to  be  heard. 

This  was  agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  resolved  itself  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  Mr.  BOYD  in  the  chair. 

Mr  GHOLSON.  I  desire  to  make  a  very  few 
remarks  upon  this  subject.  The  whole  matter 
at  issue  is  this:  does  this  convention  intend 
to  leave  in  the  legislature  unlimited  power 
to  contract  debts'?  If  it  allows  them  to  go  to  the 
extent  of  $500-000  per  annum,  it  might  as  well 
do  it;  for  they  would  seldom  wish  to  borrow 
a  greater  amount  than  that  at  one  time,  and 
thus  they  could  go  on  from  year  to  year,  and  run 
the  state'  in  debt  as  nmch  as  they  please.  I  am 
as  much  opposed  to  repudiation  as  any  man;  and 
with  the  whole  taxing  power  left  unlimited,  as  it 
■will  be,  to  the  legislature,  no  apprehension 
need  be  entertained  of  such  a  misfortune.  My 
object,  in  wishing  to  restrain  the  legislature,  is 
to  prevent  repudiation;  for  if  they  go  on  run- 
ning the  state  in  debt  as  they  plea.se,  the  people 
might  refuse  to  submit  to  it,  and  declare  that  re- 
pudiation was  preferable  to  inordinate  taxation. 
And  if  actual  deficits  should  occur,  the  governor 
has  the  power  to  convene  the  legislature  nt  any 
time;  and   they  possess  the  power  of  taring 


the  people  to  rai^je  the  money  to  me*t  such  de- 
ficit. There  is  no  necessity,  therefore,  for  this 
provision  granting  them  the  power  to  borrow 
$500,000.  There  is  no  one  subject,  on  which 
the  people  are  so  universally  agreed,  as  the  pro- 
priety of  limiting  the  debt-contracting  power  of 
the  legislature,  and  no  reform  was  more  loudly 
called  for.  All  know  that  our  taxes  have  been 
largely  increased  in  consequence  of  the  state 
debt;  and  I  do  not  want  any  thing  done  by  the 
legislature  to  increase  that  taxation,  unless  the 
question  shall  liave  been  first  submitted  to  the 
people  for  their  ixssent  or  dissent.  This  is  what 
the  people  of  my  section  of  the  country  at  least, 
expect  at  the  hands  of  this  convention.  There 
can  be  no  necessity  then  for  this  proposition; 
and  if  I  understancl  the  force  and  meaning  of 
langu;^ge  at  all,  the  gentleman  is  entirely  mis- 
taken, in  construing  this  section,  as  preventing 
the  inci'ease  of  the  debt  at  any  time  beyond 
$500,000.  They  might  create  that  amount  of 
indebtedness  in  any  given  year,  and  so  on,  year 
after  year;  for  the  section  does  not  say,  that  for 
all  time  to  come  the  whole  indebtedness  shall 
amount  to  $500,000  and  no  more.  It  is  one  of 
those  adroitly  worded  propositions  that  will  ad- 
mit of  any  construction  emergency  may  call 
for. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  wish  to  offer  an  addi- 
tional section,  to  precede  the  thirty  second  sec- 
tion of  this  report,  in  the  following  words  : 

"  The  general  assembly  that  shall  fii-st  con- 
vene under  this  constitution,  shall  set  apart  an 
annual  sum  of  at  least  $50,000  of  the  public 
money,  Avhich  shall  be  the  first  to  be  paid;  and 
provide  that  the  same  shall  be  faithfully  applied 
to  the  purchase  and  withdrawal  of  the  eviden- 
ces of  the  debt  of  this  commonwealth,  until  the 
whole  of  the  said  debt  shall  be  discharged: 
Provided,  If  the  annual  sum  so  appropriated 
shall  not  be  sufficient  to  discharge  the  debt  as  it 
becomes  due,  the  general  assembly  shall  have 
authority  to  create  additional  loans  for  the  punc- 
tual payment  of  said  debt:  And  provided  further, 
That  the  general  assembly  shall  have  authority, 
except  as  hereinafter  provided,  to  contract  other 
loans." 

I  was  a  member  of  the  legislature  when  the 
original  state  debt  was  contracted.  I  voted  for 
that  .system  of  internal  improvements,  which 
gentlemen  take  occasion  now  to  denounce  as  wild, 
reckless,  and  extravagant.  The  men  who  were 
the  members  of  the  legislature  at  that  time,  in- 
stituted and  carried  out  that  system  of  inter- 
nal improvements,  did  it  with  the  sanction  of 
their  constituents.  From  year  to  year  they  re- 
turned to  their  constituents,  who  had  a  full 
knowledge  of  what  they  had  done;  and  these 
men  were  again  and  again  elected,  for  the  pur- 
pose, and  witJi  the  view,  of  fully  currving  out 
that  system.  And  in  the  part  which  I  bore  in 
that  matter.  ^act«d  in  accordance  with  tlie  wishes 
of  those  I  represented;  and  under  the  same  cir- 
cumstances, I  Avould  so  act  again.  To  hear  gen- 
tlemen speak  now,  in  regard  to  this  subject,  it 
would  appear  there  were  none  left  of  those  who 
gave  their  sanction  to  the  system  of  internal  im- 
provements as  it  has  been  carried  out:  and  that 
they  are  wiser  than  the  generation  which 
has  passed,  and  had  no  hand  in  contracting  this 
debt.     I  will  not  go  back  to  the  record  and  refer 


759 


to  the  yea«  and  nays,  to  show  •ttho  sustained  by 
their  votes  this  system  of  internal  improvements 
and  the  contraction  of  this  debt.  It  is  sufficient 
for  nie  to  know  that  there  "was  a  majority  of  the 
representatives  of  tlie  people  who  voted  for  it; 
and  that  those  men  have  never  forfeited  the  con- 
fidence of  their  constituents  for  their  participa- 
tion in  the  creation  and  carrying  on  of  that  sys- 
tem. Some  of  them  have  been  elevated  to  high 
and  distinguished  stations,  notwithstanding 
those  votes.  And  it  is  a  matter  of  some  pride 
and  some  credit  to  Kentucky,  that  notwithstand- 
ing she  contracted  these  debt*,  in  carrying  on 
thase  internal  improvements,  she  carried  ou  that 
system,  so  far  as  it  went,  with  much  more  pru- 
dence, and  with  greater  economy,  than  many  of 
her  .sister  states;  and  that  whilst  they  were  driv- 
en to  repudiate  their  debts,  either  from  inability 
to  pay,  or  unwillingness  to  sustain  the  burden 
of  taxation,  Kentucky  has  always  been  able  to 
pay  the  interest,  and  as  I  believe,  is  now  able 
and  willing  to  provide  for  the   payment  of  the 

Erincipal  of  her  indebtedness.  I  do  not  know  of 
ut  one  gentleman  now  on  this  floor — the  honor- 
able gentleman  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,) — 
who  IS  entirely  guiltless  upon  this  subject.  He 
was  uniform  and  consistent  in  his  opposition  to 
the  system  of  internal  improvements.  But  if  I 
recollect  aright,  though  there  are  a  great  many 
others  who  voted  against  it,  still,  wheneverthey 
could  draw  any  little  bonus  to  their  section  of 
the  state,  they  always  accepted  it.  Why,  the 
lands  west  of  the  Tennessee  river  were  given  up 
to  that  section  of  the  country,  to  be  there  expen- 
ded for  internal  improvements;  and  the  statutes 
show  that  they  received  and  used  them.  To  the 
mountain  region  we  gave  but  little;  but  we  gave 
them  the  unappropriated  public  domain;  and 
they  received  and  used  it.  A  pitiful  gift  it  cer- 
tainly was,  yet  they  took  it. 

The  first  appropriation  that  was  made  for 
slackwater  navigation,  was  for  the  benefit  of  the 
Green  river  country — to  lock  and  dam  Green 
liver.  Now  those  who  will  look  back  to  the 
early  stages  of  this  country,  will  find  that  the 
lands  south  of  Green  river — except  the  military 
Burvcys — belonged  to  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky. They  were  sold  out  to  the  citizens  who 
settled  there,  under  "head-right  claims,"  as  they 
were  called,  to  be  paid  into  the  treasury  of  the 
commonwealth  by  instalments.  Thus  the  set- 
tlers in  that  portion  of  tlie  eountrj'  were  indebt- 
ed to  the  commonwealth  for  the  lands  on  which 
they  lived;  and  the  interest  on  that  indebted- 
ness, for  a  long  period  of  years,  drew  from  that 
country  into  the  treasurj'  considerable  sums  of 
money,  although  the  legislature  granted  them, 
from  time  to  time,  indulgences.  That  money 
was  placed  in  the  old  Bank  of  the  common- 
wealth, and  constituted  its  capital  stock,  and 
amounted  at  last  to  upwards  of  $500,000.  In 
relief  of  the  taxation  of  the  richer  portion  of 
the  state,  we  took  the  dividends,  drawn  from  a 
part  of  those  public  lands,  and  assigned  them  to 
the  government, together  with  the  revenue  drawn 
from  the  southern  portion  of  the  state.  Then 
we  made  the  commonwealth's  bank,  a  mere  pa- 
per machine.  We  provided  to  turn  into  that 
bank  the  proceeds  of  our  stock  in  the  bank  of 
Kentuckv;  and  we  loaned  the  credit  of  the  state, 
in  the  shape  of  b.aak   notes  on  the  common- 


wealth's bnnk,  to  th»  amount  of  upwards  of 
$2,100,000,  and  we  sustained  the  governineni  by 
the  interest  upon  our  credit  added  to  our  taxes. 
Thus  we  drew  from  the  necessities  of  tlie  peo- 
ple, by  loaning  our  credit,  the  means  of  sus- 
taining the  government;  and  from  the  Green 
river  country,  that  portion  of  our  lands,  in  re- 
lief of  the  taxation  of  the  richer  portion  of  the 
state.  And  when  they  came  and  said  that  thev 
were  shut  out  from  all  the  advantages  of  navi- 
gation, by  the  interior  location  of  their  country, 
and  could  only  get  to  market  with  their  produce 
when  the  river  was  high — and  year  after  year, 
for  want  of  a  freshet,  their  produce  was  rotting 
in  their  barns  and  on  their  plantations,  and 
asked  for  an  appropriation  to  lock  and  dam 
Green  river,  the  representatives  of  the  people 
of  Kentucky  voted  for  it,  and  designed  and  in- 
tended by  tne  accomplishment  of  that  work,  to 
give  them  the  advantages  of  navigation,  as  well 
as  to  give  to  that  section  of  country  some  equiv- 
alent for  the  immense  sums  drawn  from  it,  in 
relief  of  the  balance  of  the  state.  And  although 
the  work  does  not  now  yield  any  thing  like  an 
interest  on  the  sum  expended — and  perhaps  this 
year  will  not  pay  expenses,  on  account  of  the 
extraordinary  repairs  that  have  been  made— still 
I  believe  that  the  sum  expended  there  was  wise- 
ly and  beneficially  expended  ;  and  that  that 
section  of  the  country  draws  an  adequate  com- 
pensation from  it ;  and  that  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky, by  the  increased  value  of  the  lands, 
draws  a  sum  in  increased  taxation  equal  to  in- 
terest on  the  expenditure.  Is  ext  we  undertook 
to  lock  and  dam  Kentucky  river,  and  that  worked 
— so  far  as  we  Jiave  proceeded  with  it— well,  and 
has  effected  and  accomplished  the  object  had  in 
view.  It  has  made  Kentucky  river,  so  far  as 
improved,  a  better  navigation  than  that  of  the 
Ohio;  and  it  has  given  to  the  section  of  country, 
within  reach  of  it,  the  benefit  and  advantage  of 
steamboat  navigation,  which,  without  it,  they 
never  could  have  enjoyed.  And  though  it  does 
not  yield  a  revenue  to  the  state  a  sunT  equal  to 
the  interest  on  the  sum  expended,  it  yields  a 
benefit  to  the  people  of  the  state  more  than  equal 
to  the  amount  of  money  appropriated  to  the  im- 
provement. True  it  does  not  yield  what  was 
calculated  and  expected,  because  it  is  a  work 
not  accomplished.  Kentucky  was  paving  from 
$500,000  to  $600,000,  annually,  to  other  states 
for  lumber  and  fuel — for  the  lumber  of  New 
York  and  the  coal  of  Pennsylvania — and  it  was 
the  design  and  intention  of  those  who  under- 
took to  lock  and  ilam  Kentucky  river,  to  reach 
the  coal,  iron,  and  lumber  region  of  the  state, 
and  thus  to  save  to  Kentucky  the  annual  sums 
we  were  giving  for  the  products  of  the  mines 
and  forests  of  other  states,  and  witli  those  suras 
to  stimulate  the  industry,  prosperity  and  wealth 
of  our  own  commonAvealth.  If  that  work  should 
be  accomplished — as  I  hope  and  trust  in  time  it 
will  be — it  will  save  this  half  million  of  dollars 
annually  to  the  people,  and  by  th.it  sum  paid 
outto  the  industry  and  enterprise  of  our  own  citi- 
zens, will  increase  the  prosperity  of  all.  I  have 
nothing,  therefore,  to  regret  in  the  votes  I  gave 
for  that  work,  nor  the  debts  which  are  the  eon- 
sequence  of  it.  I  believe  that  the  increased  val- 
ue of  the  lands  in  all  the  neighborhood  around 
it,  Kentucky,  in  her  revenue,  does  now,  and  will 


Y60 


in  all  time  to  come,  tlerlve  &  fair  and  full  equiv- 
alent for  the  expenditure. 

The  project  to  lock  and  dam  Licking  river  Avas 
tiiidertaken  for  the  same  principles  and  AVith  the 
same  views;  and  it  must  be  acknowledged  that 
the  Work  is  a  total  failure;  and  the  money  there 
invested  a  total  loss.  The  difficulty  was  clearly 
perceived  by  those  engaged  in  the  enterprises  of 
that  day;  and  the  effect  of  the  distraction  of  the 
efforts  of  the  state  in  the  accomplishment  of  these 
AVorks,  bv  being  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of 
three  of  tliiem  at  one  and  tlie  sam.e  time,  Av^as  then 
apprehended  as  of  dangerous  consequences,  and 
now  Ave  see  tliat  it  Avas  fatal  to  the  .system.  If 
AVe  had  combinea  all  our  purpose,  all  ouvnioncy, 
and  all  our  energies  uptm  one  of  them,  We  AVould 
have  effected  our  object;  and  the  benefits  and 
advantages  flowing  from  it,  Avould  have  enabled 
us  in  time  to  have  accomplished  the  others.  The 
change  of  time-s— the  bursting  of  tlie  bubble- 
brought  a  period  to  the  labors  of  Kentucky  upon 
the  system  of  internal  improvements.  Anaal' 
though  We  did  not  sell  our  bonds  beloW  par)  to 
meet  the  balances  against  us,  We  gave  them  to 
contractors  at  par,  in  payment  of  what  Avas  due 
to  them,  when  Ave  knew  they  would  have  to  sell 
them  at  a  discount;  and  in  many  instances  they 
did  sell  them  at  a  (liscouut  of  from  ten  to  fifteen 
per  cent.  That  Avas  just  as  much  repudiation 
on  the  part  of  the  state,  inasmuch  as  it  took 
that  sum  from  men  who  were  fairly  entitled  to 
it,  as  Was  the  refusal  of  other  states  to  pay  their 
debts;  and  AVe  need  not  claim  that  AVe  are  entire- 
ly free  from  it.  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  say  this 
much  in  relation  to  this  matter. 

The  system  of  turnpike  roads  lias  been  refer- 
red to.  When  We  commenced  that  system,  there 
Avas  but  one  turnpike  road  IntheeonunonAvealth, 
and  that  was  an  oldroad  leading  from  Louisville 
to  Middletown,  not  exceeding  eleven  miles  in 
length.  Through  the  enterprise  of  individuals 
and  by  the  assistance  of  the  state,  considerable 
A^as  done  upon  that  subject.  And  here  let  me 
add,  I  differ  AVitK  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nel- 
Bon,  (Mr.  Hardin.)  I  believe  that  there  has  been 
an  much,  or  even  greater  loss,  upon  the  sums  ex^ 
pended  for  turnpike  roads,  than  on  the  amounts 
expended  for  the  improvement  of  rivers.  In  the 
progress  of  internal  improvements,  I  believe  that 
since  the  adaptation  of  railroads  to  the  wants  of 
the  commercial  and  traveling  community,  that 
both  turnpike  roads  and  river  navigation  Avill 
yield  measurably  to  raili'oads.  I  have  had  oc 
casionto  review  the  system  of  internal  improve- 
ments—its effects  and  its  consequences — and  I 
am  free  to  confess,  that  so  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
I  greatly  prefer  that  it  should  be  done  by  private 
enterprise,  than  for  the  public  to  have  anything 
to  do  with  it.  I  believe  that  a  system  of  inter- 
nal improvements  by  the  general  government. 
Avhere  immense  sums  of  money  are  paid  out 
through  commissioners  and  officers,  bestowed  on 
one  section  of  the  country,  In  order  to  incraa.ee 
the  power  and  itifluence  of  the  government  in 
that  section;  and  denied  to  other  portions,  in 
order  to  puni;-!!  them  for  political  opinions,  or 
any  other  thing,  is  one  or  the  ino.st  dangerous 
powers  that  can  be  exercised  by  the  genersQ  gov- 
ernment. I  favor  that  strict  construction  Avhich 
fields  to  it  nothing  but  conceded  powers. 

Looking  over  the  acts  of  the  state,  th«  records, 


I  find  that  1  differed  AVith  a  large  portion  of  mj 
own  political  friends  ;  and  was  there  found  vot- 
ing generally,  in  the  ranks  of  our  opponents, 
and  often  have  I  met  the  charge,  that  in  aiithor- 
izing  that  expenditure,  under  their  management, 
as  it  generally  was,  I  had  aided  and  assisted 
them  in  procuring  the  means  to  strengthen  and 
perpetuate  their  poAver  in  the  state.  1  believed 
that  great  advantages  Avere  to  be  derived  by  the 
state,  from  that  system  of  internal  improvements. 
My  constituents  wanted  this  system  ;  and  I  find 
that  they  sustained  me  from  time  to  time,  in  the 
votes  that  I  gave  ;  and  I  am  content.  The  pub- 
lic mind  has  changed  ;  and  public  sentiment  is 
for  leaving  this  thing  to  private  enterprise.  The 
people  now  desire  to  provide  for  the  payment  of 
this  debt,  and  to  limit  the  poA^'er  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  contract  debts  ;  and  I  am  willing  to  go 
with  them.  But  I  see  in  the  report  of  this  com- 
mittee, nothing  that  provides  for  the  payment  of 
the  present  debt,  and  only  a  restriction  as  to 
borroAving  money,  If  AVe  do  not  provide  for 
the  payment  of  the  present  debt ;  ana  we  restrict 
the  legislature  in  the  power  of  borrowing,  Avhen 
the  debt  falls  due,  how  is  it  to  be  paid  'i  Is  it 
to  be  met  immediately  and  directly  by  taxation? 
Or  is  the  loan  to  be  extended  V  In  the  section 
that  I  offer,  I  propose,  that  the  first  general  assem- 
bly which  shall  meet,  under  the  neAV  constitu- 
tion, shall  set  apart  from  the  revenue  of  the 
oommonAvealth,  $50,000  annually  ;  to  be  appro- 
priated to  the  AvithdraAval  of  the  evidences  of 
this  debt ;  and  if  that  is  not  sufficient  to  meet 
those  debts,  as  they  fall  due,  that  then  the  legis- 
lature sliall  have  power  to  contract  loans  to  ful- 
fil the  fjiith  of  the  state.  And  this  $50,000,  ap- 
propriated annually,  will  in  time  pay  off,  and 
discharge  the  Avhole  debt.  I  believe  the  senti- 
ment of  the  people  is  ripe  for  it ;  that  they  de* 
sire,  and  Avill  sustain  it— that  our  duty  lo  the 
comraouAVealth,  is  thus  to  provide  for  it.  Then 
I  will  go  Avith  gentlemen  to  restrict  the  legisla- 
ture beyond  Avhat  may  be  considered  a  fair  sum, 
for  dehciencies  that  may  arise  in  the  annual 
revenue  ;  also  to  restrict  them  in  the  poAVer  to 
contract  debts  for  internal  improvements,  unless 
it  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Avhole  people. 

Tn  reviewing  this  matter,  I  will  say,  that  the 
benefits  and  advantages  from  th*  sums  that  we 
have  laid  out,  fall  immediately  and  directly  to 
particular  sections  of  country  ;  and  although  it 
has  increased  the  general  wealth,  prosperity,  and 
revenue  of  the  state,  yet  all  sections  are'obliged 
to  bear  the  burden  of  taxation,  to  pay  the  inter- 
est, and  will  havu  to  bear  it,  to  pay  the  princi- 
pal of  these  debts.  Thus,  to  some  extent,  the 
benefits  and  advantages  of  these  improvements, 
carried  on  by  the  state,  as  they  AVere,  or  as  any 
other  Will  be,  full  particularly  on  the  sections 
where  the  works  are  located;  while  the  whole 
state  must  equally  contribute  to  defraying  their 
costs.  Therefore  there  AVill  be  very  little  likeli- 
hood of  public  debt  beinif  contracted  for  such 
Works,  uidess  they  .shall  be  of  such  general  im- 
portance as  to  interest  a  large  portion  of  the 
commonAvealtli. 

All  the  revenue  that  goes  to  the  sinking  fund, 
is  not  derived  from  direct  taxation  on  the  coun- 
try. We  have  a  tax  of  fifty  cents  on  the  hun- 
dred dollars,  on  $1,250,000  stock  in  the  Bank  of 
Louisville;  on  $3,700,000  stock  in  the  Bonk  of 


'Ml 


Kentucky,  au«J  ou  $2^0,000  in  the  Kurtheru 
Bank;  audthesesums constitute  apart  uf  the  reve- 
nue of  the  state.  In  addition  to  that,  we  have  the 
dividends  on — I  do  not  know  the  exact  sum  be- 
longing to  the  state — I  believe  about  $1,250,000 
banK  scook — the  greattr  portion  in  the  Xorthern 
Bank,  paying  eight  or  nine  per  cent.,in  the  Bank 
of  Louisville,  paying  eight  percent.,  and  in  the 
Bank  of  Kentucky,  paying  eight  per  cent.,  and 
which  will  pay  an  extraordinary  per  cent.,  when 
they  get  in  the  proceeds  of  recovery  from  the 
Sch'uylkill  Bank,  exceeding  $500,000 — to  aid 
and  assist  the  sinking  fund,  or  to  assist  in  pay- 
ing the  interest  on  the  internal  improvement 
debt.  The  capital  stock  of  the  Bank  of  Kentuc-  ' 
ky,  was  recently  increased  to  $5,000,000 — $3,- 
000,000  of  winch  was  to  be  subscribed  by  indi- 
viduals, and  $2,000,000  by  the  commonwealth, 
which  she  was  to  pay  in  by  bonds  bearing  five 
per  cent,  interest;  and  in  consideration  ot  that, 
she  was  to  draw  a  tax  of  half  per  cent.,  and  in 
addition  to  that,  the  increase  of  the  dividends. 
The  same  thing  was  done  in  relation  to  the 
Northern  Bank.     Thus,  a  sum  exceeding  $100,- 

000  annually,  was  derived  through  these  institu- 
tions, in  aid  of  the  revenue  of  the  common- 
wealth of  Kentucky,  and  more  than  that  sum  is 
now  derived  to  the  sinking  fund,  from  the  stock 
in,  and  the  tax  on  the.so  banks.  It  was  hoped, 
that  with  these  additional  aids,  and  the  profits 
that  might  be  derived  from  the  public  works, 
that  we  should  be  able  to  provide  for  the  pay- 
ment oi  the  interest  of  the  debt,  without  resort- 
ing to  taxation.  But  the  fraud  upon  the  Schuyl- 
kill Bank,  and  the  change  of  times,  made  it  ne- 
cessary to  resort  to  taxation.  And  the  predic- 
tions of  those  engaged  in  the  system  of  internal 
improvements,  of  being  able  to  carry  it  on  with-  ' 
out  taxation,  by  these  means,  were  rendered  as 
are  the  calculations  of  many  men,  futile.  But  ! 
since  that  time,  with  an  improvidence  that  is  re-  ; 
markable,  upon  the  mere  boon  that  the  Xortliern 
Bank  and  the  Bank  of  Kentucky  should  loan  to 
the  people  at  six  per  cent. — to  be  divided  among 
the  counties— of  some  $500,000  or  $600,000,  to  be 
paid  back  on  small  calls — and  I  believe  every  j 
dollar  of  it  was  paid  back  in  about  eighteen 
montns — the  state  cancelled  the  obligations  of 
those  banks,  and  thus  wa'*  lost  the  annual  sum 
to  the  sinking  fund  formerly  derived  from  those 
sources,  and  which  has  now  to  be  supplied  by 
taxation.  It  was  not  a  very  wise  or  prudent 
system  of  financiering,  and  it  was  based  on  a 
mere  desire  to  induce  the  banks  to  loan;  which 
they  would  have  done,  because  they  must  loan 
their  money  to  make  a  profit.  They  are  very 
keen  at  making  goo<l  bargains,  and  they  made 
an  immen.se  bargain  out  of  the  state  on  tliat  oc- 
casion. I  desire  to  throw  no  imputation  on  any 
man,  or  set  of  men,  in  regard  to  this  matter;  for 

1  believe  the  sentiments  of  the  people  are  chang- 
ed in  regard  to  it.  But  there  is  no  reason  that 
we  should  brand  as  profligate  or  extravagant,  a 
system  of  internal  improvement,  that  has  the 
sanction  and  support  of  the  people,  and  which 
was  carried  on  in  accordance  with  their  wishes 
and  sentiments.  I  believe  the  action  of  those 
who  participated  in  that  system  was  in  accord- 
ance with  the  wishes  of  their  constituents;  and  I 
think  that  when  we  have  changed  our  opinions 
in  relation  to  it,  it  is  useless  to  stigmatise  them. 

96 


In  cliaugiag  our  opinions,  let  us  not  put  our 
condemnation  upon  the  system,  without  honest* 
ly  and  fairly  providing  for  the  paYment  of  the 
debt  to  the  last  dollar,  and  it  can  be  certainly, 
and  easily  paid  by  an  annual  sum  appropriated 
for  that  purpose.  1  believe  that  was  the  object 
of  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Har- 
din,) when  he  asked  for  a  committee  on  this  sub- 
ject; and  I  hope  and  trust  we  shall  have  his  aid 
and  assistance,  in  pas-sing  this  provision,  or 
something  like  it,  that  will  provide  for  the  pay- 
ment of  this  debt.  This  is  all  I  have  to  say  on 
the  subject. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  desire  to  make  a  state- 
ment, which  the  remarks  of  the  president  has 
rendered  somewhat  necessary  on  mv  part.  I 
never  had  the  honor  of  serving  in  the  legislature 
with  him;  but  I  did  have  the  honor  of  a  seat  in 
the  legislature  the  year  after  the  svstera  of  inter- 
nal improvements  was  commenced,  and  I  served 
here  for  four  years  successively.  The  president 
of  this  convention  was,  I  think,  a  member  of  the 
senate  at  that  time;  and  I  presume  he  is  not  well 
informed  touching  the  votes  I  then  gave.  I  hope 
he  had  no  allusion  to  me  when  he  referred  to  the 
gentlemen  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,)  as  be- 
ing the  only  gentleman  on  this  floor  who  had 
been  consistent  upon  this  subject.  I  was  against 
the  system  from  the  beginning;  and  I  believe  my 
votes  stand  recorded  upon  the  journals  against 
borrowing  about  $4,000,000  of  this  debt.  The 
gentleman  from  Henderson  then  represented  the 
connty  in  which  I  live,  in  the  .senate;  and  we 
had  frequent  conference  upon  this  subject,  and 
understood  the  course  that  each  other  pursued  at 
that  time.  I  have  made  this  explanation,  as  due 
to  myself,  after  the  remarks  of  the  president  on 
this  subject. 

With  regard  to  the  effect  of  these  internal  im- 
provements on  the  portion  of  country  where  I  re- 
side, I  differ  with  the  president.  I  do  not  think 
they  have  been  beneficial  or  advantageous  to  that 
particular  region,  except  to  a  very  small  portion 
of  the  country  lying  on  the  margin  of  the  river. 
And  these  improvements  generallv  have  been 
more  or  less  local  in  their  effects.  I  have  not  ar- 
raigned the  course  of  any  gentleman  in  this  mat- 
ter. I  have  differed  in  opinion  with  them  in  re- 
gard to  the  policy  of  these  measures,  and  I  still 
differ  with  them  in  regard  to  its  results.  I  am, 
to  come  to  the  question  more  directly,  in  favor 
of  restricting  the  power  of  the  legislature  here- 
after to  contract  d«bts;  and  I  believe  such  to  be 
now,  almost  unanimously,  the  public  sentiment 
of  Kentucky.  I  came  here  under  pledges,  so  far 
as  my  vote  would  go,  to  place  a  restriction  in 
the  constitution  on  the  power  of  the  legislature 
to  contract  debts  in  the  future,  except  to  a  very 
limited  extent.  I  agree  in  sentiment  with  the 
president  with  regard  to  the  payment  of  the  debt 
already  contracted:  and  I  shall  be  in  favor  of 
taking  some  mild  step,  that  looks  to  the  accom- 
plishment of  that  endl 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  was  in  the  lower  house  of  the 
legislature  at  the  session  of  '36,  '37,  when  the 
question  of  internal  improvement  was  in  full 
blast.  I  do  not  suppose  it  is  a  matter  ot  conse- 
quence, whether  I  voted  for  or  against  it;  if  it  is, 
gentlemen  can  a.scertain  the  fact  hy  a  reference  to 
the  journals  of  that  session.    I  uierefore  move 


769 


that  the'eomuiittee  rise,  and  report  the  bill  to  the 
house. 

The  motioD  was  withdrawn,  by  general  re- 
quest, in  order  that  the  question  might  be  taken 
on  the  amendment. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  When  I  explained  the  mo- 
tives which  influenced  the  committee  in  adopt- 
ing this  section  of  the  report,  I  took  occasion  to 
remark,  that  I  thought  a  large  majority  of  the 
people  of  the  state  concurred  in  the  opinion, 
that  the  legislature  sliould  be  re.stricted  m  con- 
tracting debts,  and  in  the  wild  and  extravagant 
use  of  the  public  money  and  public  credit  ex- 
hibited in  its  history  for  the  last  twenty  years. 
In  making  the  statement  I  did,  I  denounced  that 
species  of  legislation  as  wild  and  reckless.  I 
have  not  arraigned,  and  I  see  no  reason  now  to 
arraign,  the  votes  or  motives  which  were  given 
by,  or  influenced  any  gentleman  in  his  partici- 
pation in  bygone  legislation.  I  have  no  doubt 
that  every  gentleman,  in  voting  for  the  adoption 
of  that  system,  honestly  and  fairly  represented 
his  constituents.  But  while  I  concede  this  much, 
I  will  add  that  I  well  remember — though  I  was 
but  a  boy  at  the  time — that  the  people  were  told 
in  both  branches  of  the  legislature  that  all  the 
money  they  were  borrowing  for  those  internal  im- 
provements would  'be  re-paid  by  the  profits 
of  those  works,  and  that  the  people  would  never 
be  called  upon  to  pay  a  dollar  of  it.  They  were 
told  that  these  improvements  would  yield  a  di- 
vidend sufficient  to  pay  not  only  the  accruing 
interest,  but  the  principal  of  the  debt,  and  also 
aid  in  lessening  the  taxes  of  the  people.  Well 
the  people,  by  sad  experience,  Jiave  found  out 
that  these  gentlemen  were  mistaken  upon  the 
subject?  Not  only  that,  but  they  find  saddled 
upon  them  a  debt  between  5  and  $7,000,000,  and 
that  the  taxes  have  been  increased  to  a  burden- 
some extent,  to  meet  the  interest  upon  that  debt. 
And  they  find  now,  and  I  think  properly  and 
correctly,  a  proposition  made  to  meet  tne  princi- 
pal. H!ence  it  was,  that  with  a  know^ledge  of 
these  facts,  that  the  people  in  almost  every  county 
in  the  state  called  upon  the  candidates  for  seats 
here  to  declare  whether  they  were  or  were  not  in 
favor  of  restricting  the  debt-creating  power  of  the 
legislature.  The  people  have  been  deceived  in 
the  accumulation  of  a  mighty  and  ponderous 
debt,  that  is  now  weighing  down  the  energies 
of  the  state,  and  abstracting  from  the  proceeds 
of  their  labor  and  property  large  amounts  annu- 
ally in  taxation  to  par  the  interest  on  that  debt. 
These  evils  have  all  been  brought  upon  them  by 
legislation,  and  now  we  are  called  upon  in  this 
convention  to  throw  shackles  upon  the  power  of 
the  legislature  to  subject  the  labor  of  the  country 
to  the  payment  of  debts  tlius  contracted.  In 
speaking  of  that  legislation,  I  characterized  it 
as  wild  and  reckless,  and  its  sequel  proves  that 
it  is  80.  Take,  as  an  instance  of  it,  the  two 
turnpike  roads  running  from  Louisville  to  the 
state  line  in  the  direction  of  Nashville.  There 
they  run,  scarcely  separating  for  forty  miles, 
ana  at  some  points  coming  so  close  together  as 
almost  to  enable  a  man  to  stand  in  one  and 
jump  on  to  the  other.  Was  it  remarkable  then, 
that  works  thus  carried  out  should  not  yield  a 
dividend  on  the  amount  expended  in  their  con- 
struction, much  less  to  extinguish  the  principal 
on  the  debt  incurred?    Then,  even  if  the  people 


were  led  on  lo  send  repregentatives  to  the  legis- 
lative halls  to  make  an  appropriation,  and  did 
do  it  in  obedience  to  the  will  of  the  people,  1 
still  feel  authorized  to  say  that  these  appropria- 
tions were  wild  and  reckless,  because  tht-y  never 
have,  and  never  will,  carry  out  tha  expectations 
of  those  in  favor  of  the  improvements.  Hence, 
the  people  now  denounce  that  system  of  internal 
improvements,  and  of  pledging  the  labor  of  the 
state  to  the  payment  of  large  debts  incurred  in 
making  these  sectional  improvements.  Having 
denounced  it,  tliey  have  sent  us  to  this  conven- 
tion to  frame  a  constitution  that  will  withhold 
such  power  from  the  legislature  in  future. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  comprehend  what  the  Pres- 
ident means,  and  his  amendment,  with  a  slight 
addition,  will  do  exactly.  That  is,  I  suppose  he 
intends  that  the  sinking  fund  shall  be  kept  up 
to  what  it  now  is,  and  then  this  other  $50,000 
shall  be  added  to  it. 

The  PRESIDENT.    Yes  sir. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Then  it  will  do  exactly,  and 
will  provide  for  the  payment  of  every  dollar  of 
the  debt.  I  have  a  table,  showing  how  this  debt 
was  created,  which  may  be  interesting  to  the 
convention.  Three  or  four  years  since  it  was 
correct,  and  is  nearly  so  now.  It  is  as  follows  : 
5  per  cent,    bonds,   payable  35 

years  after  date,  -  -     $165,000  00 

5  per  cent,   bonds,    payable  30 

years  after  date,  -      450,000  00 

6  per  cent,  bonds,  payable    30 

years  afterdate,  -         -  3,579,000  00 

6   per    cent,    bonds,   pavable  6 

years  after  date,         "   -  -       100,000  00 

6  per  cent,  bonds,  for  repair  of 
railroad,  payable  6  years  af- 
ter date,  -         -'       -         -         54,000  00 
Money  borrowed  from  the  Bank 

of  Louisville,  -         -         -         30,000  00 

Due  to  United  States  goverment,  1 ,433,757  39 
Due  School  Fund,  -  -  -  1,115,430  00 
To  Northern  Bank  of  Kentucky,  250,000  00 
Craddock  Fund,  -        -        -         3,000  00 


Total, 


$7,210,157  39 


The  amount  of  the  debt  has  been  somewhat 
changed  since  this  report  was  made  out.    While 
I  am  up,  I  will  read,  for  the  information  of  the 
house,  a  pa])er  I  could  not  before  find  : 
There  has  been  paid,  on  the  Ken- 
tucky river  navigation,  for 
the  building  of  locks  and 
dams,  itc,  -        -        -    $901,932  70 

There  has  been  paid  for  the  same 
purpose,  on  the  Licking  riv- 
er navigation,  -  -  -  372,520  70 
Tliere  has  been  paid  for  the  same 
purpose,  on  Green  and  Bar- 
ren river  navigation,      -        -      859,126  79 

Total  expended  for  navigation,  $2,133,580  19 

There  has   been  expended  for  railroads,  as 
follows : 

Amount  expended  on  Green  river  rail- 
road,   $1,903 


Amount  cmrried  forward. 


$1,903 


768 


Amount  brou^bt  forwarl,  - 
Amount  expended  on  Lexington  and 

Ohio  railroad,  between  Frankfort 

and  Louisville, 
Amount  expended  on  Lexineton  and 

Ohio  railroad,  between  Irankfort 

and  Lexington, 

Total  expended  for  railroads. 


$1,903  i      Deduct  from  this,  the  expenses  of  thi«  slack- 
■  •water  navigation,  as  follows: 
:  Kentucky  rivei  navigation,     -        -    $26,600  00 
220,000   Green  and  Barren  river  navigation,       12,532  06 


100,650  . 


$39,132  06 


And  thus,  there  is  left  a  balance  of  $10,969  38, 

$322,553  ;  which  is  all  these  improvements  contribute  to 

~^=^=^    pay  the  interest  on  the  public  debt,  amounting 

There  h^  also  been  paid  for  turnpike  roads, '  to  $271 ,287  35. 


as  follows 

Maysville,    Washington,    Pans, 

and  Lexington  road, 
Franklin  county,  road  to  Louis- 
ville,     -   "     - 
Shelby  co.,  road  to  Louisville, 
Muldrow's  Hill  road,     - 
Mercer  co..  Crab  Orchard  road, 
Frankfort,  Lexington,  and  Ver- 
sailles road,  .         .         . 
Danville,  Lancaster,  and  Nicho- 

la-sville  road, 
Scott  CO.,  road  to  Frankfort, 
Franklin  co.,  road  to  Frankfort,  - 
Winchester  and  Lexington  road,  - 
Lincoln  co..  Crab  Orchard  road.  - 
Covington  and  Georgetown  road,  - 
Richmond  and  Lexington  road,  - 
Georgetown  and  Lexington  road,  - 
Anderson  county.  Crab  Orchard 

road,  .         .         -         . 

LouisTille  to  mouth  Salt  river,  - 
Mouth  Salt  river  to  Elizabeth- 
town,  .  .  .  . 
Elizabethtown  to  Bell's  tavern,  - 
Bell's taveni  to  Bowlinggreen, 
Bowlinggreen  to  Tennessee  line,  - 
Franklin  county.   Crab  Orchard 

road,  .        -        .        . 

Bardstownand  Springfield  road,  - 
Lexington,  Harrodsburg  and  Per- 

ryville  road, 
Bardstown  and  Louisville  road,    - 
Bardstown  and  Green  river  road,  - 
Glasgow  and  Scottsvill  road. 
Mount    Sterling  and    Maysville 

road,  -         -    '    - 

Versailles  to  Kentucky  river, 
Logan,  Todd,  and  Christian, 
Maysville  and  Bracken  road. 

Total.,  on  turnpike  roads. 

EEC-.APITLLATION. 

Amount  expended  for  slack-wa- 
ter navigation. 
Amount  expended  for  railroads. 
Amount  expended  for  turnpike 
roads,         .... 


Here,  also,  is  a  statement  of  the    imount  of 
bank  stock  we  own.  or  did  own,  in  1846: 
$213,200  00   7,000  shares  of  stock  in  Bank  Ky.,        $700,000 
2,000  shares  of  stock  in  Northern 
20.000  00  Bank  Kentucky,      -        -        -  250,000 

45,000  00  I  In  tJie  name  of  the  commissioner 
55,145  46  ,  of  the  sinking  fund  406  shares 

71,800  00 '         stock  in  Bank  of  Louisville,  40,600 

:  2,399  shares  stock  in  Bank  Ky.,     -  239,900 

78,122  00    400  shares  stock  in  Northern'Bank 


151,382  00 
42,325  00 
15,400  00 
45,100  00 


Kentucky, 
Total, 


40,000 


$1,270,500 


In  relation  to  the  lands  west  of  the  Tennessee 

51 ,299  00  '  river,  to  which  reference  has  been  made  here,  I 

170,135  77  i  will  only  say,  that  it  was  the  paper  of  the  Com- 

75,383  00    monweaith  Bank  that  was  received  in  payment 

31,270  00  .  of  them,  and  as  fast  as  it  was  received,  it  was 

i  burned.     Verr  little   of  the  proceeds  were  ex- 

42,950  00  i  pended  for  tli«^  expense  of  government,  and  a 

65,340  99  i  great  deal  of  it  was  taken  to  cover  bad  debts.    I 

I  will  further  remark,  that  I  have  not   voted  for 

84,581  16 ;  any  part   of  this  system   of  internal   improve- 

118,778  24  i  ments.     I    was   chairman  of  the   committee  on 

85,4s8  70  I  finance  of  the  state  senate  for  six  years,  and  I 


87,194  16 

17,064  00 
65.190  60 

109,646  00 
100,000  00 
289,825  19 
110,385  38 

88,072  59 

20.00)3  00 

149,428  91 

25,948  00 


$2,525,456  15 


$2,133,580  19 
322,553  00 

2,525,456  15 


Total  am't.  paid  for  Int.  Imp.,     $4,981,589  34 


The  whole  amount  the  slackwatcr  now  yields, 
is  this. — 

Kentucky  river  tolls,  gross,  -  -  $41,688  38 
Green  and  Barren  river  tolls,  gross,  7,932  06 
Rent  of  water  power  on  Ky.  river,  480  00 


$50,101  44 


checked  the  system  up  to  the  time  I  left  that 
body,  the  eighth  day  of  February,  1833,  the  last 
time  I  served  in  the  legislature.    What  has  taken 

fdace  there  since  that  time,  I  know  not  particu- 
arly.  but  I  doubt  not  that  every  gentleman  acted 
honestly  and  for  the  interests  of  the  state.  But 
one  thing  is  certain,  and  that  is,  the  system  of 
slackwater  navigation  has  failed  entirefy.  The 
system  of  turnpike  roads  does  not  yield  so  much 
as  was  expected,  but  they  have  been  of  great 
benefit  to  the  country.  The  whole  amount  they 
yielded  during  the  "past  year,  is  $34,095  67 — 
while  the  whole  amount  expended  on  them  is 
$2,525,456  15. 

1  regret,  extremely,  that  I  have  not  made  a 
regular  report  on  this  subject,  as  chairman  of  the 
committee  on  the  subject  of  state  debts,  but  other 
committees  had  reported  on  the  same  subject, 
and  1  had  no  desire  to  aid  in  bringing  before  the 
convention  two  reports  on  the  same  subject. 
There  is  a  table  in  the  report  of  the  secretary  of 
state,  four  years  ago,  snowing  how  our  state 
debt  can  be  paid  oflf.  It  was  prepared  by  Mr. 
John  Sharpe,  Austin  P.  Cox,  and  myself,  as  fol- 
lows: 


1st  Jan.  '47,  invested, 
1st  year's  interest, 
2nd  year's  inyestment. 


2nd  year's  interest. 
3rd  year's  investment. 


$50,000  00 

3,000  00 

50,000  00 

103,000  00  Jan.  1, 1848 
6,180  00 
50,000  00 


159,180  00  Jan.  1, 1849 


764 


159,180  00 
3rd  year's  interest,  9,550  80 

4th  year's  investraent,       50,000  00 


4th  year's  interest, 
5th  year's  inyestnient. 


5th  year's  interest, 
6th  year's  investraent, 


6th  year's  interest, 
7th  year's  investment, 


7th  year's  interest, 
8th  year's  investment, 


8th  year's  interest, 
9th  year's  investment, 


218,730  80  Jan. 1, 1850 
13,123  84 
50.000  00 


281,854  60  Jan.  1,1851 
16,911  27 
50,000  00 


348,765  87  Jan.  1,  1852 
20,925  95 
50,000  00 


419,691  82  Jan.  1,1853 
25,181  50 
50,000  00 


494,873  32  Jan.  1. 
29,692  39 
50,000  00 


1854 


574,565  71  Jan.  1,  1855 
9th  year's  interest,  34,473  94 

10th  year's,  investment,    50,000  00 


lOth  year's  interest, 
11th  year's  investment. 


659,039  65  Jan.  1,1856 
39,542  37 
50,000  00 


748,582  02  Jan.  1. 1857 
11th  year's  interest,  44,914  92 

12th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

843,496  94  Jan.  1,1858 
12th  year's  interest,  50,609  81 

13th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

944,106  75  Jan.  1,  1859 
13th  year's  interest,  56,646  40 

14th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

1,050,753  15  Jan.  1,  1860 
14th  year's  interest,  63,045  18 

15th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

1,163,798  33  Jan.  1,  1861 
15th  year's  interest,  69,827  89 

16th  year's  investment,      50,000,00 

1,283,626  22  Jan.  1, 1862 
iSth  year's  interest,  76,997  57 

Utb  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

1,410,623  79  Jan.  1,  1863 
17th  year's  interest,  84,637  42 

18th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

1.545,261  21  Jan.  1,  1864 
18th  year's  interest,  92,715  67 

19th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

1,687,926  88  Jan.  1, 1865 
19th  year's  interest,         101,278  60 
20th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

1,839,255  48  Jan.  1, 1866 


1,839,255  48 
20th  year's  interest,  110,355  32 
21st  vear's  investment,      50,000  00 


1,999,610  80  Jan.  I',  1867 
21st  year's  interest,  119,976  64 

22nd  year's  investment,    50,000  00 

2,169,587  44  Jan.  1,1868 
22nd  year's  interest,        130,175  24 
23rd  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

2,349,762  68  Jan.  1,  1869 
23rd  year's  interest,         140,985  75 
24th  year's  investraent,      50,000  00 

2,540,748  43  Jan.  1,  1870 
24th  year's  interest,  152,444  90 

25th  vear's  investment,      50,000  00 


2,743,193  33  Jan.  1,1871 
25th  year's  interest,         164,591  59 
26th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

2,957,784  92  Jan.  1,  1872 
26th  year's  interest,  177,467  09 

27th  year's  investment,      50,000  00 

3,185,252  01  Jan.  1,  1873 
27th  year's  interest,  191,115  12 

28th  year's  investment,     50,000  00 

3,426,367  13  Jan.  1,  1874 
28th  year's  interest,         205,582  02 
29th  year's  investment,      50,000  00 

3,681,949  15  Jan.  1.1875 
29th  year's  interest,  220,916  94 

30th  year's  investment,      50,000  00 


30th  year's  interest, 


3,952,866  09  Jan.  1,  1876 
237,171  96 


$4,190,038  05 
Mr.  PHESTON.  The  proposition  of  the 
President  is  one  that  will  afford  nie  great  plea- 
sure to  vote  for.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson 
seems  to  misunderstand  me  in  regard  to  the  price 
obtained  for  our  state  bonds.  1  referred  to  the 
current  prices  of  our  stocks  in  the  nortliern  mar- 
kets, and  they  in  common  with  others  sunk  in 
the  years  '40  and  '41,  to  about  seventy  cents  on 
the  dollar.  The  contractors  to  whom  those 
stocks  were  paid  were  compelled,  I  know,  to  sell 
them  at  a  neavv  loss.  "I'he  otlier  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (iJr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe,)  seems  to 
think  lliat  there  is  .some  ambiguity  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  thirty  second  section.  It  was  not 
the  intention  of  the  committee  to  leave  the 
least  ambiguity  in  that  section,  and  if  it  does 
exist  it  is  not  the  fault  of  their  intention.  They 
intended  not  that  the  legislature  each  year  should 
contract  a  debt  amounting  to  $500,000,  but  that 
they  should  never  in  all  time  to  come,  contract  a 
debt  exceeding  tliat  amount,  .«o  4as  to  make  it  a 
charge  on  tlie  state.  They  intended  tliat  the 
legislature,  meeting  for  instance  next  year,  might 
contract  a  debt  to  the  amount  of  $500,000  and 

Say  it  live  years  hence,  if  fhey  chose,  and  then 
lere  would   be  left  them  a  margin  of  $500,000 
again  to  contract  debts  as  the  public  emergenoies 


1^ 


might  require,  but  declariug  in  the  coustitution 
that  they  shoiUd  not  go  beyond  that  unless  they 
first  submitted  it  to  the  people  for  their  sanction. 
Such  Mas  the  intention  of  the  committee,  and  it 
strikes  me  that  the  language  is  not  at  all  ambigu- 
ous, but  if  itis,  the  cominitt«^e  of  revision  can  cor- 
rect it.  It  is  in  the  language  of  the  constitution 
of  New  York;  \re  only  altered  two  words  in  it, 
which  was  to  insert  the  words  five  hundred 
thousand  instead  of  one  million.  "We  looked  to 
the  growing  wealth  of  Kentucky,  to  the  time 
whfJi  she  would  have  three  millions  of  people 
living  under  this  constitution  on  her  sod,  and 
to  the  necessities  that  might  arise  in  the  progress 
of  manv  years,  and  thought  certainly  we  were 
not  giving  to  the  legislature  too  much  power. 
We  give  this  as  a  safety  valve,  through  which 
when  the  state  was  in  clifficulty  they  might  ex- 
ercise this  power.  It  was  not  our  desire  to 
clothe  thara  with  the  power  of  creating  a  debt 
of  $500,0O<3  at  each  session,  as  the  gentleman 
from  kelson  supposes.  If  that  is  not  the  signifi- 
cation of  the  section,  then  I  do  not  understand 
the  force  of  language,  and  if  it  should  be  the 
opinion  of  the  convention  that  the  language  is 
susceptible  of  a  diflFerent  interpretation — then  it 
can  be  corrected  by  the  committee  of  revision. 

Mr.  BARLOW.  It  meets  not  only  my  appro- 
bation, but  that  of  the  people  of  my  county,  to 
restrict  the  legislature  in  its  power  to  involve 
the  state  in  debt,  and  if  I  am  instructed  on  any 
one  point  in  this  convention,  it  is  on  that.  And 
these  instructions  were  given  me  by  my  constitu- 
ents from  the  fact  that  the  system  of  internal 
improvements  have  created  the  debts  which  now 
exist  and  hang  over  them.  I  was  a  member  of  the 
legislature  about  the  time  the  system  was  com- 
menced, and  I  invariably  voted  against  it,  and 
took  the  occasion  to  speak  against  it  when  at 
home.  I  never  voted  for  but  one  of  these  works, 
except  on  one  occasion,  and  that  was  in  obedi- 
ence to  what  I  conceived  to  be  the  will  of  rav 
constituents,  though  my  own  feelings  were  wefl 
known  to  be  in  opjwsition  to  the  system.  It 
was  an  appropriation  to  that  beautiful  stream, 
the  Cumberland  river,  of  some  $500,000,  of 
which  not  a  cent,  if  my  recollection  serves  me, 
was  ever  expended.  And  yet  my  constituents 
were  willing  to  contribute  their  part  to  paying 
the  debt,  and  are  not  willing  that  it  shall  be  re- 
pudiated. But  at  the  same  time,  as  a  safeguard 
for  the  future,  they  desire  that  the  legislature 
shall  be  restricted  in  its  power  of  again  involv- 
ing the  people  in  debt. 

Mr.  TCRXER.  I  never  was  a  member  of  the 
legislature  but  once,  during  the  time  the  svstein 
of  internal  improvements  was  agitated,  anil  then 
I  voted  for  it.  I  believe  that  system  to  have  been 
beneficial  and  profitable  to  the  countn-,  and  I 
never  intend  to  give  up  anything  because  every 
body  is  abandoning  it,  or  becauseit  becomes  un- 
popular. I  was  for  it  in  it-s  popularitv,  and  I 
am  for  it  still.  I  believe  it  to  be  a  gootf  s}-s>tem, 
and  that  the  country  will  never  get  along  unless 
it  shall  be  fully  carried  out.  Why,  what  is 
this  system?  I  would  rather  pay  my  share  of  the 
taxforone  year,  than  beoblige*?  in  going  home  to 
be  three  or  four  days  floundering  along  on  horse- 
back through  the  mud.  Gentlemen  view  this  sys- 
tem only  as  to  the  amount  of  money  it  brings  into 
the  treMiiry,  but  that  is  not  the  way  to  judge  of 


the  benefits  it  ha«  conferred  on  the  people.  It  M 
the  fine  roads,  the  improved  navigation,  and 
means  of  getting  to  and  from  market.  That  is 
the  way  in  which  it  is  profitable  to  the  people, 
and  if  there  was  not  a  cent  of  revenue  derived 
from  it,  still  it  is  a  beneficial  system  tothecoun- 
try,  so  far  as  it  developes  its  resources  and  in- 
creases its  wealth  and  prosperity.  That  at  least 
is  my  view  of  it.  Before  this  turnpike  system 
was  entered  upon,  and  the  country  was  sparsely 
settled,  we  could  not  travel  in  tliose  sections  of 
the  country  where  the  soils  are  rich,  until  the 
middle  of 'May.  And  are  we  then  to  have  no 
more  turnpike  roads?  To  this  it  will  be  answer- 
ed that  they  may  be  built  by  individual  subscrip- 
tion. In  that  ease  the  expense  will  fall  on  a  few 
generous  men,  and  those  who  use  it  most  will 

Eay  the  least.  I  desire  that  the  legislature  shall 
ave  the  power  to  compel  the  miserly  to  bear 
their  share  in  the  burdens  of  the  country,  and 
not  leave  them  to  be  borne  by  the  more  generous 
and  liberal  men. 

.ils  regards  the  proposition  of  the  president, 
I  am  in  favor  of  it.  I  want  to  pay  the  debt,  al- 
though I  am  ready  to  admit  that  a  great  deal  of 
it  was  imprudently  contracted.  Ten  years  ago, 
when  I  attempted  to  point  out  some  of  the  de- 
fects of  the  system,  such  was  its  popularity  that 
the  people  were  almost  ready  to  hiss  me  from 
the  lobby.  I  found  about  here,  some  half  a  doz- 
en little  engineers  with  salaries  of  $600  to  $1,- 
000,  and  with  nothing  to  do  except  to  wait  ou 
the  great  engineer,  or  to  carry  an  order  from  one 
lock  to  anotJier.  And  in  some  cases,  the  state 
itself  engaged  in  cutting oflf  timber  by  the  river, 
instead  of  letting  it  out  by  contract,  and  there 
were  instances  where  it  cost  $600  or  $800  per 
acre  to  do  it,  when  the  land  and  all  would  not 
have  sold  for  one  hundredth  part  of  the  money. 
I  attempted  to  point  out  these  extravagancies  at 
the  time,  but  I  could  not  be  heard,  such  was  the 
blaze  of  glorv  in  which  the  system  was  surroun- 
ded. But  still  I  desired  that  the  system  should 
be  carried  on,  and  I  believe  that  even  under 
these  disadvantages  it  has  been  benefical  and 
prosperous  to  the  people.  There  is  the  Green 
river,  once  dried  up  for  whole  seasons,  and  where 
a  steamboat  was  a  rarity,  the  convenience  affor- 
ded to  the  inhabitants  amply  repays  all  the  ex- 
pence  incurred  there.  There  are  the  fine  turn- 
pike roads,  through  the  land,  enabling  people  to 
get  about,  and  improving  the  means  of  ousiness 
and  social  intercourse,  and  which  have  taken  the 

Slace  of  the  miserable,  and  almost  impassable 
irt  roads  of  former  times.  The  same  beneficial 
results  have  been  the  consequence  of  the  Ken- 
tucky river  improvement.  Why,  the  very  reduc- 
tion In  the  price  of  groceries  alone,  to  say  noth- 
ing of  the  reduced  price  of  transportation  and 
the  increased  facilities  of  travel,  would  fully 
repay  to  tlie  people,  the  increased  taxation  these 
works  have  imposed  on  them.  These  are  the 
advantages  we  derive,  and  they  are  worth  double 
to  the  people,  the  money  it  cost  to  obtain  them. 
I  raise  my  voice  against  this  wholesale  denuncia- 
tion of  tliiat  system,  which  now  seems  to  be  so 
popular  in  this  convention,  and  shall  continue 
to  advocate  it,  for  the  reasons  I  have  given,  if 
every  other  man  in  the  country  opposes  it.  I  am 
for  paying  this  debt,  and  for  tne  amendment  of 
the  president,  but  I  shall  vote  against  the  sectiont 


766 


now  under  consideration.  Not  that  I  want  the 
legislature  to  go  into  extravagances,  but  I  hope 
that  in  fifty  years  time  we  shall  have  on  our  soil 
3,000,000  of  inhabitants,  and  are  we  to  put  a 
straight  jacket  upon  their  energies,  so  that  they 
can  do  nothing  in  the  way  of  improvement  when 
the  great  emergencies  of  the  country  sliall  re- 
quire itV  Besides,  the  time  may  come  when,  as 
lias  been  the  fate  of  almost  every  Innd,  we  shall 
be  visited  with  famine  and  desease,  and  to  such 
an  extent  that  the  people  will  not  be  able  to  pay 
their  taxes,  and  yet  gentlemen  talk  about  pre- 
venting the  legislature  from  borrowing  money 
to  supply  the  deficiency.  There  are  many  emer- 
gencies which  may  arise  to  produce  a  dencicncy 
in  the  revenue,  and  the  legislature  should  have 
the  power  of  supplying  that  deficiency.  I  sup- 
pose that  the  legislature  will  have  some  little  dis- 
cretion, and  that  we  in  this  convention  do  not 
possess  all  the  wisdom  of  the  world. 

The  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  has 
said  that  we  are  a  great  body  of  wise  men,  but  that 
is  all  soft  soap,  and  we  know  it.  We  do  not,  at  any 
rate,  stand  so  high  in  the  estimation  of  those  out 
of  this  convention,  if  one  may  judge  from  the 
newspapers.  It  is  all  a  mistake  about  our  being 
greater  men  than  any  who  are  to  come  after  us. 
A  week  or  two  ago,  when  the  question  of  fixing 
salaries  was  under  consideration,  gentlemen 
urged  that  the  legislature  was  an  illiberal  body, 
and  now  we  have  the  same  gentlemen  contend- 
ing that  it  is  a  great  deal  too  liberal.  I  think 
the  legislature  can  be  trusted  upon  this  subject, 
and  I  hope  the  section  will  not  be  adopted. 
With  regard  to  submitting  the  question  to  the 
people,  before  incurring  large  indebtedness,  I 
."^ee  no  objection.  I  have  no  objection  to  con- 
sult the  people  on  this  subject,  and  I  believe 
the}-  will  not  withhold  their  approval  from  any 
work  of  internal  improvement  that  is  calcula- 
ted to  enhance  their  convenience,  their  prosperi- 
ty, or  their  wealth.  I  am  not  surprised  that  gen- 
tlemen from  portions  of  the  commonwealth 
where  this  system  has  never  reached,  should  op- 
pose it;  but  as  for  gentlemen  who  have  fine  turn- 
pike roads  running  through  their  county  and  in 
iheir  neighborhood,  like  the  gentlemen  from 
Nelson,  that  they  siiould  turn  against  and  repu- 
diate the  system,  I  confess  1  am  a  little  aston- 
ished. The  elder  gentleman,  I  know,  stood  here 
and  warred  aa;ainst  it  for  a  good  while,  but  if 
the  junior  gentleman  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe)  did 
notsustain  it,thenniy  memory  has  failed  me.  Nor 
did  1  ever  liear  of  the  elder  gentleman  (Mr.  Har- 
din) making  war  on  him  for  so  doing.  I  think- 
when  a  man  has  derived  all  the  benefit  possible 
from  it  to  his  county,  he  ought  to  be  willing  to 
extend  the  same  benfits  to  the  neople  of  the 
whole  state.  A  contrary  course  is  hardly  gener- 
ous or  proper. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  amendment  I  have 

rroposed,  is  to  make  the  section  nciform  the  office 
understand  the  committee  to  desire  it  should — 
that  is,  to  limit  the  right  of  the  legislature  to  l)or- 
row  money  to  provide  for  deficits  in  the  reven- 
ue—whetlier  to  $50,000  or  $100,000,  is  a  matter 
of  total  indifFerence  to  me.  I  therefore  moved 
to  strike  out  the  words  "to  meet  expenses  not 

f)rovidcd  for."  1  do  not  wish  to  leave  to  the 
egidature  the  power  to  create  debts  not  expec- 
t«a  by  the  people  to  meet  the  ordinary  expenses 


of  the  government,  and  then  to  borrow  money 
to  pay  that  debt;  but  should  there  be  a  deficit  in 
the  ordinary  revenue  of  the  country,  then  I  am 
willing  that  the  legislature  shall  borrow  money 
to  meet  that  emergency. 

Upon  the  subject  of  internal  improvements, 
gentlemen  are  defining  their  positions,  as  if  it 
was  a  matter  of  necessity  to  do  so  on  the  present 
occasion.  I  believe  between  the  years  '33  and 
'37  there  was  not  an  internal  improvement  ap- 
propriation that  I  did  not  vote  for,  and  I  do  not 
regret  a  vote  that  I  then  gave.  I  believe  I  voted 
right,  and  I  think  so  now.  But  I  believe  it  is 
right  now  to  meet  the  public  sentiment  of  the 
country,  that  we  should  impose  on  future  legisla- 
tion a  restriction  against  the  borrowing  and  appro- 
priation of  money  for  internal  improvements. 
The  gentleman  from  Madison  has  spoken  about 
turnpike  roads  in  my  county,  and  I  should 
like  to  know  how  much  stock  he  owns  in  them. 

Mr.  TURNER.  My  stock  is  all  in  Madison 
county. 

Mr.''C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  How  much  do  you 
own? 

Mr.  TURNER.  About  one  thousand  dollars 
of  it. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Well,  we  are  about 
in  the  same  condition — I  have  unfortunately 
about  twice  as  much  as  he. 

The  PRESIDENT  here  modified  his  amend- 
ment to  read  asfoUows: 

"The  general  assembly  that  shall  first  convene 
under  this  constitution,  shall  s<'t  apart  an  an- 
nual sum  of  at  least  $50,000,  of  the  public  reve- 
nue; which  shall  be  the  first  to  Vje  paid,  and  pro- 
vide that  the  same  and  the  surplus  of  the  sink- 
ing fund  after  paying  the  interest  on  the  public 
debt,  shall  be  faithfully  applied  to  the  purchase 
and  withdrawal  of  the  evidences  of  the  debt  of 
this  commonwealth,  until  the  whole  of  said  debt 
shall  be  discharged:  Provided,  If  the  annual 
sum  so  appropriated,  shall  not  be  sufficient  to 
di.scharge  the  debt  as  it  shall  become  due,  the 
general  assembly  shall  have  authority  to  create 
additional  loans  for  the  punctual  payment  of 
said  debt:  And,  provided  further.  That  the  gen- 
eral assembly  shall  have  authority,  except  as 
hereinafter  provided,  to  contract  other  loans." 

Mr.  JAMES.  Many  having  availed  them- 
selves of  this  occasion  to  define  their  position  in 
relation  to  the  system  of  internal  improve- 
ments, I  shall  take  this  opportunity  to  define 
mine.  I  have  come  here  prepared  to  re- 
strict the  power  of  the  legislature  to  run  the 
state  in  debt,  to  the  least  possible  amount.  The 
safest  criterion  to  judge  of  the  future,  is  to  look 
to  the  past  history  of  the  country;  and  acting 
upon  tliis  rule,  I  think  there  is  no  one  but  will 
concur  in  the  propriety  of  imposing  some  strin- 
gent restriction  on  the  debt-creating  power  of 
the  legislature.  I  was  in  the  legislature  when 
the  system  of  internal  improvements  was  origi- 
nated, and  even  some  years  before.  I  first  had 
the  honor  of  a  seat  in  tliat  body  in  the  session 
of  1825-'26,  and  was  returned  again  in  1828.  I 
continued  four  years  in  the  house,  and  was  then 
elected  to  the  senate,  where  I  continued  until 
the  year  1848.  The  first  internal  improvement 
project  was  made  in  the  years  1828  and  '29. 
There  was  then  a  surplus  in  the  treasurj-,  rejd- 
ized  from  the  profits  of  the  Bank  of  the  Com- 


Uionwealth  aui  the  Bank  of  Kentuckv,  anJ  a  j  state  in  au  enormous  debt,  howerer  anxinut  luY 
proposition  was  made  to  distribute  $2(J0,000  of '  section  of  country  might  havt  been  to  stcurc  » 
this  surplus  among  the  several  counties,  in  pro-  \  small  pittance,  1  should  most  certainly  have 
portion  to  the  number  of  voters,  for  internal  im-  ]  voted  against  it.  What  was  done  at  t&e  suc- 
provement  purooses.  I  thought  it  a  fair  and  j  ceeding  session  of  the  legislature?  Why,  the 
equitable  distribution.  I  was  renresenting  a  ]  restriction  requiring  the  appropriation  of  this 
section  of  country  in  which  the  Inaian  title  nad  j  money  in  fair  proportions  to  the  three  grand  divi- 
just  been  extinguishiid,  and  which  is  comprised  j  sions  of  the  couniry,  was  repealed.  But  first  let 
of  the  territory  west  of  the  Tennessee  river,  i  me  call  the  iittention  of  the  convention  to  tho 
known  as  "the  purchase."  The  Indian  title  twenty-seventh  section  of  this  bill : 
was  extinguished  in  1S18,  under  what  is  known  j     '•  Sec.  27.  That  not  exceeding  two  hundred 


as  Jackson's  treaty,  and  after  an  examination  of 
that  location.  1821,  concluding  that  it  offered  a 
fair  opening  for  a  young  man  to  make  a  living, 
I  removed  thither  with  my  family,  in  the  year 
succeeding.     Then,  the  only  roads  through  that 


thousand  dollars  of  the  scrip  authorized  to  be 
sold,  shall  be  sold  before  the  first  d:iv  of  Janua- 
ry next;  and  not  exceeding  one-thini  of  the  res- 
iilue  shall  be  sold  in  each  of  the  three  following 
years;  nor  shall  the  gorernor  subscribe  for  more 


section  of  the  country,  were  a  few  Indian  trails;  |  stock  annually,  than  he  is  hereby  authorized  to 
and  down  to  1828  and  1829  there  were  but  few  I  issue  scrip  for,  as  restrited  by  this  act." 
roads,  and  the  country  was  still  thinly  settled.  |  Gentlemen  will  see  how  well  this  act  was 
The  first  settlers,  for  the  want  of  bridges,  were  'guarded.  Of  this  million  that  was  proposed  to 
obliged  to  cross  the  streams  on  logs,  or  to  .swim  |  be  borrowed,  not  more  than  $200,000  could  be 
their  horses.  Xo  part  of  the  commonwealth  \  borrowed  before  the  next  session  of  the  legisla- 
was  more  in  need  of  aid  and  assistance  in  these  |  ture,  and  not  exceeding  one  third  of  the  residue 
respects,  than  that  region  of  countrj'.  The  bill  I  could  be  borrowed  in  each  of  the  three  succeed- 
of  1829,  however,  did  not  pass.  In  1834,  a  ]  ing  years,  and  the  governor  could  not  go  on  and 
proposition  oris:inated  in  the  house  for  the  bor-  \  subscribe  for  stock,  so  that  not  more  than  $200.- 
rowing  of  a  million  of  dollars.  I  was  then  rep-  i  000  could  be  borrowed  prior  to  1836. 
resenting  my  district  in  the  senate,  and  two  rep-  ]  This  is  the  extent  of  mv  sinning,  if  any  I 
resentatives  came  to  consult  me  at  my  room  in  ,  have  committed,  on  the  subject  of  internal  im- 
relation  to  it.  They  told  me  that  the  commit- jprovements.  I  have  stated  the  circumstances 
tee  had  agreed  to  set  apart  f«>r  our  section,  the  .  under  which  I  was  induced  to  go  for  this 
proceeds  of  the  vacant  lands  then  remaining  [  measure,  and  I  confess  that  even  then,  Iliad  some 
there.  I  made  some  further  enquiries  as  to  the  1  misgivings  as  to  the  consequences  that  were  to 
purpose  and  provisions  of  the  bill,  and  they  in-    grow  out  of  it. 

formed  me,  as  well  as  they  could.  I  told  them  ;  w^ell,  after  this  restriction  was  taken  off,  what 
I  would  take  the  matter  into  consideration,  and  ;  ^-as  the  proposition  made  to  the  legislature?  I 
give  them  ananswerduringthenextday.  When  !  ^in  read  from  the  act  of  1836,  the  twenty-sev- 
I  came  to  examine  it,  I  discovered  that  the  bill  i  ^^^tjj  section: 

proposed  an  equitable  and  just  distribution  of  j  <'Sec.  27.  That  the  sum  of  five  thousand  dol- 
the  money  between  the  three  grand  divisions  of  j  lars  be  appropriated  to  the  improvement  of 
the  state,  and  witli  a  view  of  satisfying  the  com-  i  Bayou  du  Chien;  five  thousand  dollars  be  ap- 
mittee  on  that  subject,  allow  me  to  read  the  four-  prJpriated  to  the  improvement  of  Clark's  river; 
teenth  section  of  that  bill :  one  thousand  five    hundred  dollars  be    appro- 

"Sec.  14.  That  the  boaid  of  internal  improve-  priated  to  the  improvement  of  Little  Obion 
ment,  in  subscribing  for  stock  under  this  act,  j  and  Mayfield's  creek  in  the  county  of  Hickman; 
in  the  several  turnpike  roads  now  chartered,  or  '  one  thousand  dollars  be  appropriated  to  the  im- 
Avhich  may  be  hereafter  chaitered.  shall  not  sub-  i  provement  of  Little  Barren  river:  Provided,  That 
scribe  more  than  one-third  of  the  sum  hereby  j  the  board  of  internal  improvement  shall  believe 
authorised  to  be  borrowed,  for  the  purpose  of  j  that  the  said  improvements  are  expedient,  and 
making  such  roads  on  the  north  side  of  Kentuc-  i  will  be  of  public  benefit,  and  that  the  said  sums 
ky  river  ;  and  in  like  manner,  not  more  than  j  of  money  are  necessary  for  those  purposes;  and 
one-third  of  the  sum  aforesaid,  on  roads,  be- 1  the  sum  of  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars 
tween  the  Kentucky  and  Green  rivers;  and  in  |  be  appropriated  out  of  the  sales  of  the  scrip  of 
like  manner,  not  more  than  one-third  of  the  !  the  >tate,  shall  be  applie<l,  under  the  direction 
aforesaid  sums  on  roads  on  the  south  side  of  j  of  said  board,  to  the  improvement  of  the  navi- 
Green  river:  Provided,  That  if  the  said  board  I  gation  of  Panther  creek:  Provided  further,  That 
of  internal  improvement  should  not  be  called  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  of  internal  ini- 
on,  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  act,  to  :  provement  to  have  surveyed  by  a  competent  en- 
subscribe  the  full  amount  of  money  authorized  !  gineer  or  engineers,  all  of  the  streams  which 
to  be  borrowed  under  this  act,  for  making  turn-  j  this  act  proposes  improving,  west  of  the  Ten- 
pike  roads,  within  one  year;  then,  and  in   that    nessee  river,  within  the  mouths  of  May  and  June 


event,  the  aforesaid  board  of  internal  improve- 
ment may  subscribe  the  sum  which  may  remain 
unsubscribed,  in  turnpike  roads  in  any  part  of 
this  commonwealth  where  individuals  or  corpo- 
rate bodies  may  have  subscribed  and  paid  in 
the  like  amount  which  the  said  board  of  inter- 
nal improvement  may  be  required  to  subscribe." 
I  determined,  upon  due  reflection,  to  give  the 
bill  my  vote;  but  if  I  could  have  supposed  that 
it  was  to  lay  th«  foundation   for  invoWing  the 


next,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  engineer 
or  engineers  to  make  a  report  to  the  board  of  in- 
ternal improvement,  by  the  first  day  of  Septem- 
ber next,  or  as  soon  as  practicable  tht-reafter;  and 
if  it  shall  appear  from  said  report,  that  all  or  a 
part  of  said  streamscan  be  beneficially  improved, 
the  engineer  shall  report  the  plan  ana  probable 
cost;  upon  which  report  said  board  of  internal 
improvement  shall  proceed  to  lay  the  same  un- 
der contract,  and  have  said  stream  improved  as 


7«S 


spv-dilyas  pnu;ti.;ubl(%  uutJl  the  wLole  of  the 
l^efore  several  amounts  shall  be  expended:  And, 
provided  further ,  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
board  of  internal  improvement  to  cause  the 
snags,  drifts,  and  other  obstructions  in  Panther 
creek  to  be  removed  before  the  same  are  sub- 
merged by  the  erection  of  tlie  dams  in  Green 
river;  and  the  amount  appropriated  to  said 
stream  by  the  act  of  the  last  session,  shall  not 
be  absolute,  but  may  be  withheld  by  the  board 
of  internal  improvement,  if  they  aeem  its  ex 
penditure  inexpedient,  and  not  of  sufKcient  pub- 
lic importance." 

The  system  had  now  fully  developed  itself  to 
me,  and  I  became  satisfied  that  it  was  not  to  be 
carried  out  in  good  faith.  I  therefore  voted 
against  the  bill,  notwithstanding  the  represen- 
tatives from  my  section  took  strong  ground  in 
favor  of  it,  and  denounced  me  for  my  course  on 
my  return  home.  I  was  satisfied  that  the  design 
■was  to  give  to  the  centre  and  wealthy  portions  of 
the  state  the  benefits  of  the  appropriation,  and 
that  the  promises  held  out  to  my  section  of  the 
country  were  merely  to  secure  their  votes.  If  it 
•was  intended  to  give  my  county  this  111,500,  in 
good  faith,  why  was  not  the  appropriation  at 
once  made  positive  and  specific,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  grant  of  $200,000  to  the  Lexington  and  Ohio 
railroad. 

Well,  as  I  have  stated,  I  entered  the  senate  in 
18U2,  and  I  was  a  candidate  for  re-election  in 
1836.  On  one  occasion  while  addressing  the 
people  at  Clark's  river,  I  heard  that  the  enginctr 
"was  traveling  up  Clark's  river  for  the  purpose  of 
surveying  it,  and  intended  to  go  ou  towards 
bayou  du  Chien.  I  went  to  him  and  he  told  me 
that  he  had  examined  that  stream  and  thought 
■well  of  it.  He  said  notliing  more  to  me,  but  he 
placed  in  the  hands  of  my  competitor,  an  offi- 
cial report  showing  that  .$3000  was  to  be  expend- 
ed on  that  stream.  It  was  not  used  publicly, 
but  generally  in  a  private  and  secret  manner. 
And  I  took  the  occasion  then  to  tell  the  people 
that  they  would  never  get  a  dollar,  and  though  I 
am  no  prophet  or  the  son  of  a  jirophet,  yet  the 
prediction  has  been  fully  verified.  I  do  believe 
that  engineer  was  sent  tkere  on  that  occasion  for 
the  purpose  of  engineering  Tom  James  out  of 
tlie  senate. 

Mr.  HARDIN'.    Name  the  engineer. 

Mr.  JAMES.  His  name  is  Buford,  and  I  be- 
lieved it  then  and  I  believe  it  at  this  day.  I  liad 
discovered  the  workings  of  the  system,  and  was 
opposing  its  being  carried  out.  Though  I  live 
between  two  of  tlie  streams  that  were  to  be  im- 

E roved,  yet  I  was  not  to  be  bought  up,  and  I 
ad  the  nerve  to  vote  against  it.  And  thank 
God  my  constituency  sustaineil  me  for  it,  al- 
though they  never  knew  that  they  would  not 
get  the  appropriation  until  after  the  election 
"was  over.  I  can  only  account  for  being  thus 
sustained  in  the  face  of  the  opposition  against 
me,  from  the  fact  tiiat  my  constituency  had  an 


abiding  confidence  in  the  honesty  and  purity  of 
my  motives,  and    believed,  deeply  ideniifieu  a 
my  interests  were  with  theirs,  tiiat  I  was 


as 
as  govern' 


inv 

eu  solely  in  my  action  by  a  sincere  regard  for 

the  public  good. 

I  do  not  charge  improperniotives  on  any  body, 
for  the  whole  country  was  inflamed  witli  the  in- 
ternal improTcment  fever,  and  ui«ti  in  my  coun- 


ty declared  that  if  my  competitor  w;h  elected, 
property  would  go  up,  but  if  Tom  James  was 
returned,  it  would  have  a  disastrous  fall.  If  the 
system  was  carried  ou,  men  were  told  that  the 
country  would  be  chequered  over  with  railroads 
and  turnpike.*,  and  that  they  would  only  have 
to  roll  their  produce  out  of  their  barns,  and  in 
a  moment  it  would  be  on  its  way  to  market. 

From  that  day  I  washed  my  hands  of  the  in- 
ternal improvement  system,  and  I  voted  against 
every  appropriation  that  came  up.  A  good  ma- 
ny have  given  in  their  experience  as  to  the  oper- 
ations in  regard  to  the  education  fund,  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  was  set  apart  and  disposed 
of.  My  recollection  is,  that  after  the  distribu- 
tion of  the  United  States  surplus  revenue  and 
the  reception  by  Kentucky  of  her  share,  there 
were  two  parties  in  the  legislature — the  internal 
improvement,  and  the  education  parties.  I  be- 
longed then,  and  do  still,  to  the  education  par- 
ty, and  I  am  opposed  to  improving  the  face  of 
the  country,  at  the  expense  of  the  minds  and 
education  of  the  children  of  the  state.  Final- 
ly the  sum  of  $850,000  was  set  apart  o  ut  of  the 
United  States  deposite  fund  and  pledged  to  the 
object  of  education,  and  the  balance  was  appro- 
priated to  internal  improvements.  The  system 
of  internal  improvements  went  on  swallowing 
up  million  after  million — not  in  Kentucky 
alone,  but  in  all  of  the  states  of  the  Union,  un- 
til the  several  states  were  indebted  to  the  extent 
of  some  $200,000,000,  the  interest  on  which  is 
,$12,000,000,  all  of  which  went,  not  to  our  own 
citizens,  but  to  the  foreign  capitalists.  Those 
capitalists  had  their  agents  in  Wall  street.  New 
York,  buying  our  stocks,  the  interest  on  which 
was  to  be  paid  in  gold  and  silver,  to  be  transpor- 
ted across  the  water  for  the  support  of  the  na- 
bobs and  aristocracy  there.  Well,  in  1838,  the 
credit  of  Kentucky  was  good  at  home  and 
abroad,  but  in  18.39  our  bonds  could  not  be  sold, 
we  never  having  authorized  their  sale  at  less 
than  their  par  value.  Then  it  was  that  provis- 
ion was  made  that  the  contractors  should  take 
them  at  their  par  value.  They  received  them, 
but  were  unable  to  hold  them,  owing  to  the  de- 
mands upon  them  for  compensation  to  their  la- 
borers and  for  their  materials.  What  was  the 
resnlt?  Why  they  had  to  go  to  the  brokers  and 
sell  our  bonds  at  from  fifteen  to  twenty-five  per 
cent,  discount.  It  was  not  right,  but  the  contrac- 
tors were  forced  to  take  those  bonds  or  nothing, 
and  though  they  have  been  knocking  at 
the  door  of  your  legislature  for  relief,  the  relief 
has  never  been  extended  to  them.  The  banks 
were  appealed  to  for  relief,  and  they  loaned  to 
the  board  of  internal  improvement  several  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars,  and  thereby  greatly  in- 
creased their  circulation.  These  contractors  and 
laborers  were  mo.stly  foreigners,  and  not  wanting 
Kentucky  money,  they  sold  it  to  brokers,  who 
made  a  rush  on  the  banks,  and  thus  forced  those 
institutions  to  suspend.  Kentucky  Avas  engag- 
ed in  an  unfortunate  and  wasteful  system  of  in- 
ternal improvements,  ana  the  school  moneys 
were  invested  in  the  bonds  for  the  construction 
of  those  works,  most  of  them  bearing  five  per 
cent  interest. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  education  fund 
was  invested  before  1839  and  1840,  in  the  second 
or  third  loan  mad«> 


769 


Mr.  JAMES.  I  may  not  b«  precisely  correct 
as  to  dates,  not  having  had  time  to  look  in- 
to them,  but  I  am  as  to  the  facts.  What  then 
was  the  prospect  for  the  diffusion  of  education? 
Their  funds  were  exhausted.  The  bonds  given 
that  fund  have  not  been  paid,  and  it  is  reported 
to  us  that  the  state  has  not  even  the  means  to 
pay  the  interest  on  thera.  I  will  not  say  this  is 
repudiation,  but  it  is  certainly  postponing  the 
pavment  of  a  debt  justly  due. 

^his  system  of  internal  improvements  never 
should  have  been  carried  on  unless  each  work 
could  have  been  able  to  sustain  itself,  and  thus 
justify  and  obtain  the  support  of  the  whole 
state.  Its  friends  saw  that  it  would  not  do  that, 
and  with  a  view  of  securing  its  adoption,  held 
out  promises  to  various  portions  of  the  state, 
that  never  were  complied  with.  They  acted  on 
the  theory  of  the  quack  doctor,  who  said  that 
because  a  little  medicine  was  good,  more  was 
better,  and  he  went  on  until  he  Killed  the  pa- 
tient. To  show  how  inducements  were  held  out 
and  means  resorted  to,  to  secure  the  adoption  of 
certain  measures,  I  will  call  the  attention  of  the 
convention  to  the  two  turnpike  roads  from  Lou. 
isville  to  the  Tennessee  line,  referred  to  by  ray 
friend  from  Simpson  (Mr.  Clarke.)  One  of  them, 
by  the  way  of  Bowliuggreen,  cost  $441,383  15; 
and  the  other,  by  the  way  of  Glasgow,  $500,- 
216  32;  and  for  miles  they  run  almost  side  by  side, 
each  about  140  miles  in  length.  What  was  the 
necessity  for  these  parallel  roads?  Xone  what- 
ever— at  least  in  which  the  public  were  interes- 
ted. If  one  was  proper,  or  demanded  by  the 
public  interest,  certainly  the  other  was  not 
needed. 

This  is  not  all.  Xot  satisfied  with  the  turn- 
pike from  here  to  Louisville,  costing  I  know  not 
now  much,  and  the  Kentucky  river  improvement, 
which  to  a  certain  extent  is  a  benefacial  work, 
and  which  cost  upwards  of  $900,000,  these  verv 
same  men  applied  to  the  legislature  for  a  rail- 
road to  run  between  the  Kentucky  river  naviga- 
tion and  the  turnpike  road.  The  road  will  soon 
be  completed,  and  if  it  succeeds,  its  success 
must  be  purchased  at  the  expense  of  the  state's 
interests  in  the  turnpike  road  and  river.  What  is 
to  become  of  the  profits  from  the  river  naviga- 
tion and  the  turnpike?  The  greater  portion  of 
the  travel  and  the  transportation  must  go  over 
the  railroad,  and  then  what  is  to  supply  the  de- 
ficiency on  the  other  improvements?  Why  it  is 
to  be  done  by  taxation  on  the  people. 

I  have  always  been  for  sustaining  the  credit  of 
the  state,  and  have  ever  stood  opposed  to  repu- 
diation, and  when  a  debt  has  been  contracted, 
whether  I  approved  of  its  creation  or  not,  I  am 
for  meeting  it  and  paying  it  promptly.  And 
w  ith  a  view  to  prevent  a  recurrence  of  that  spe- 
cies of  legislation  under  which  this  system  of 
internal  improvements  was  originated  and  car- 
ried on,  I  desire  to  go  to  the  utmost  extent  in 
restricting  the  debt-creating  power  of  the  legis- 
lature. A  public  debt  is  neither  more  nor  less 
than  a  mortgage  on  the  land  of  every  roan  in  the 
commonwealth,  and  he  cannot  escape  from  it. 
If  he  sells  his  land  under  such  a  liability,  the 
purchaser  will  have  an  eye  to  that  fact,  and 
demand  a  reduction  accordingly.  It  is  precise- 
ly a  lien  on  the  sweat  of  the  brow  of  the  toiling 
millions  of  the  country:  and  in  proof  of  this,  I 

97 


need  but  point  this  convention  to  the  example 
afforded  by  our  sister  state — the  young  and  once 
thriving  state  of  Illinos.  How  her  prospects 
have  been  blighted  by  the  overpowering  weight 
of  a  vast  state  debt.  Her  energies  have  been 
crushed,  and  hor  citizens  have  been  driven  al- 
niQSt  to  dispair  by  the  weight  and  burden  of 
taxation.  Purchasers  of  lands  have  been  con- 
strained to  decline  making  invesments  there, 
because  they  knew  they  must  buy,  subject  to 
the  taxes  charged  and  payable  upon  the  lands 
of  the  state,  and  many  hol<5ing  lands  there,  have 
been  driven  by  this  system  of  taxation  to  for- 
feit their  lands  to  the  state. 

I  will  go  for  any  prudential  measure  that  may 
be  proposed  here,  to  save  my  state  from  the  pos- 
sibility of  such  a  calamity. 

The  amendment  of  the  President  was  then 
adopted. 

The  committee  then  rose  and  reported  the  ar- 
ticle to  the  convention. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  DECEMBER  4,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Laxcastek. 

LEGISXATIVE    DEPAKTMEXT. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  legislative 
department. 

The  question  pending  was  on  concurring 
with  the  committee  of  the  whole  in  the  adoption 
of  an  additional  section. 

Mr.  APPERSOX.  I  do  not  feel  incb'ned  to 
vote  for  this  amendment,  and  with  the  permis- 
sion of  the  convention,  I  will  give  two  or  three 
reasons.  And  one  of  them  is,  that  it  will  ap- 
pear that  we  are  setting  ourselves  up  as  the  over- 
seers of  the  people.  We  have  come  here  to 
make  an  organic  law  which  we  hope  will  con- 
tinue for  many  years.  Every  two  years  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky  will  assemble  by  their  legisla- 
ture. Debts  have  been  contracted  heretofore  by 
the  legislature  according  to  the  will  of  the  peo- 
ple; and  not  a  whisper  of  "  repudiation  "  has 
been  heard.  And  has  it  become  necessary  for 
us  to  read  a  lesson  to  the  representatives  of  the 
people,  and  to  tell  them  what  is  their  duty?  I 
cannot  imagine  for  a  moment  but  that  the  peo- 
ple, having  determined  that  their  public  debt 
shall  be  paid,  will,  through  the  law-making 
power,  in  due  and  proper  time,  make  provision 
for  payment  of  that  public  debt.  So  far  as  I 
^m  concerned,  sir,  I  was  never  instrumental  in 
the  creation  of  that  debt;  and  unlike  most  of 
the  members  of  this  convention  who  have  spo- 
ken on  this  subject,  I  regret  that  I  was  not.  I 
believe,  sir,  that  the  expenditures  for  public  im- 
provements in  Kentucky  have  been  of  vast  ben- 
efit to  Kentucky.  I  believe  that  the  public  im- 
provements that  have  been  made  in  consequence 
of  that  expenditure  have  increased  the  aggregate 
wealth  in  an  almost  immeasureable  ratio  over 
the  expenditure.  I  believe,  Mr.  President,  that 
the  increased  value  of  property,  both  to  Individ- 


770 


uals  and  the  public,  and  the  increased  revenue 
wliich  has  accrued  and  is  accruing  to  the  state, 
in  consequence  of  that  increased  value,  has 
greatly  exceeded  the  expenditure  of  the  state; 
and  whilst  I  hear  gentlemen  say  that  they  deep- 
ly regret  that  so  much  should  have  been  expend- 
ed on  works  of  internal  improvement,  some  of 
those  gentlemen  too  being  the  very  men  who 
voted  for  that  expenditure — I,  on  the  other  side, 
regret  that  I  never  did  vote  for  that  expenditure. 
I  believe  the  expenditures,  take  them  in  the  ag- 

fregate,  Avere  wise,  a  portion  of  them  unwise. 
am,  however,  willing  to  acknowledge  that 
those  gentlemen  who  advocated  those  expendi- 
tures could  see  further  ahead  than  I  could.  And, 
with  regard  to  the  further  indebtedness  of  the 
state,  I  take  it  that  the  people  will  always  speak 
their  will;  and  whenever  you  adopt  such  a  sec- 
tion as  the  thirty  third,  I  can  conceive  no  neces- 
sity for  the  adoption  of  any  other  upon  the 
same  subject.  If  the  people  will  it  to  borrow 
money  for  public  improvements  let  them  do  so — 
they  can  as  well  speak  through  the  law-making 

Sower  as  through  us.  Shall  we  put  an  inter- 
iction  upon  the  people  and  say  "  you  shall  not 
have  power  to  borrow  money  for  public  im- 
provements?" According  to  one  section  in  the 
constitution  no  indebtedness  shall  be  created,  no 
money  shall  be  taken  unless  the  people  shall 
vote  for  the  expenditure.  And  can  it  Be  possi 
ble  that  we  want  to  trammel  the  people  more 
than  that?  Can  it  be  possible  that  we  should 
set  ourselves  up  as  censors  of  the  people  and 
say  you  shall  not  have  the  opportunity  of  mak- 
ing public  improvements  if  you  find  it  necessa- 
ry to  do  so?  There  are  as  wise  heads  to  follow 
us  as  are  now  in  this  convention;  and  if  we  are 
to  restrict  the  legislature  in  this  way,  and 
through  the  legislature,  the  people,  from  expend- 
ing what  they  may  deem  necessary  for  the  im- 
provement of  our  public  works,  I  do  not  see 
that  this  convention  will  gain  much  credit.  The 
people  are  the  proper  judges  of  this  matter;  and 
whenever  they  shall  speak  through  the  law- 
making power,  and  it  shall  be  submitted  to  them 
to  say,  do  you  approve  of  such  appropriations, 
I  hope  the  people  will  not  be  prevented  from 
giving  their  assent,  and  from  carrying  that  as- 
sent into  effect.  I  hope  the  amendment  will  not 
be  adopted. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  When  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department  were  acting  upon  the 
subjects  embraced  in  the  thirty-second  and  thir- 
ty-third sections  of  their  report,  the  existing 
state  debt  would  have  occupied  their  attention, 
but  for  the  fact  that  a  special  committee  had 
been  charged  therewith. 

Looking  to  the  action  of  that  special  commit- 
tee for  an  efficient  plan  to  guide  tlie  general  as- 
sembly in  extingui.shing  the  state  debt,  my  mind 
has  not  been  occupied  with  it,  and  now  I  would 

S refer  passing  by  the  proposition  of  the  Presi- 
ent  for  the  present,  unless  the  special  commit- 
tee do  not  intend  reporting. 

The  subject  is  important,  and  should  be  de- 
liberated upon  with  all  the  facts  we  can  have 
before  us. 

The  thirty-second  section,  it  will  be  seen,  em- 
braces only  two  propositions :  "  casual  deficits 
in  the  ordinary  revenue,"  and  "expenses  not  pro- 
vided for."    "the  sum  for  which  we  propose  the 


legislature  may  contract  <lebts — $500,000 — is 
not  larger,  in  my  opinion,  than  it  should  be.  A 
less  sum  might  embarriiss  and  discredit  the  state 
under  circumstances  thatnmy  happen  frequent- 
ly in  the  course  of  one  life.  Suppose  the  ordi- 
nary revenues  should  fall  off  by  reason  of  a  de- 
f)ression  in  the  value  of  property,  $50,000,  and  a 
oan  has  to  be  contracted  therefor,  there  should, 
before  this  $50,000  was  paid,  be  a  suspension  of 
the  banks  to  which  the  sinking  fund,  as  now  ar- 
ranged, looks  for  the  means  of  paying  a  large 
proportion  of  the  interest  on  the  state  debt,  a 
$100,000  might  be  required,  temporarily,  to  pre- 
serve our  credit  in  this  way.  Before  these  are 
paid,  the  falling  off  of  receipts  from  the  public 
works,  by  destruction  of  locks  and  dams,  or  oth- 
er causes,  might  require  $50,000  more.  Other 
causes  might  arise  to  increase  the  sum  remiired 
to  fill  the  limit  fixed  by  that  section.  These 
views  prompt  me  to  oppose  striking  out  $500,- 
000  and  inserting  a  less  sum. 

The  principle  of  imposing  such  restrictions 
on  the  legislature  is  somewhat  questionable,  as 
we  cannot  foresee  the  state  of  things  tliat  may 
come  about  in  a  scries  of  yeare,  making  it  the 
interest  of  the  state  to  contract  debts,  tempora- 
rily, even  to  a  much  larger  sum  than  that  fixed 
by  the  committee. 

The  restriction  in  the  thirty-third  section  is 
enough  to  prevent  the  dangers  of  any  future  in- 
ternal improvements  to  be  started  or  carried  on 
by  the  legislature.  No  debts  can  be  contracted 
without  the  assent  of  a  majority  of  the  people, 
for  that  or  any  other  purpose,  except  those  named 
in  the  thirty-second  section. 

Those  gentlemen  who  have  been  explaining 
the  reasons  why  they  voted  in  the  legislature  for 
internal  improvements,  ought  not  to  feel  that 
they  merited  censure.  They  did  much  good  in 
some  of  the  works  made,  though  tliey  cost  ex- 
travagant sums.  But  they,  as  legislators,  have 
only  done  what  individuals  do  often  in  their 
own  private  affairs.  In  endeavoring  to  better 
their  condition  they  involve  themselves  in  debt. 
For  myself,  I  can  say  that  no  sins  of  omission  or 
commission  lie  at  my  door,  as  I  never  held  a  seat 
in  the  legislature.  Yet,  I  am  free  to  say,  if  I 
had  been  there  when  the  system  of  internal  im- 
provement was  in  progress,  I  would  certainly 
have  voted  for  many  of  them — perhaps  would 
have  gone  almost,  if  not  quite,  as  far  as  many 
gentlemen  who  have  spoken  on  the  subjects  now 
before  the  convention. 

I  cast  no  reflections  on  any  gentlemen  for  the 
debt  now  existing;  on  the  contrary,  appreciating 
the  motive  that  prompted  the  legislature  in  con- 
tracting it,  I  am  willing  to  vote  for  any  provision 
thought  best  to  compel  the  legislature  to  look 
continually  to  the  gradual  extinguishment  of 
t]ie  present  debt,  and  to  prevent  the  creation 
of  any  other,  without  the  assent  of  our  sove- 
reigns. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  understand  that  the  first  prop- 
osition before  the  house,  is  tlio  section  offered 
by  the  President,  in  the  committee  of  the  whole. 
As  I  understand  that  section,  it  proposes  to  in- 
crease the  resources  of  the  sinking  fund  $50,000, 
and  this  is  to  be  taken  first  from  the  ordinary 
revenue,  before  any  other  debt  is  paid.  Now, 
sir,  I  incline  to  the  opinion  that  this  additional 
section  will — as  I  am  sure  it  ought — receive  the 


771 


largest  support  of  any  proposition  that  has 
been  presented  to  the  consideration  of  the  con- 
vention. 

It  is  not  a  matter  that  ought  to  enter  into  the 
consideration  of  the  payment  of  a  debt,  tliat 
that  debt  was  improvidently  created.  It  is  suffi- 
cient for  us  to  know  that  the  debt  is  an  honest 
obligation  on  the  part  of  the  state,  which  it  is 
our  bounden  duty  to  make  some  provision  to 
pay,  and  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  1  would  pay 
It  to  the  last  dollar,  although  the  representatives 
should  have  improvidently  squandered  the 
whole  of  it. 

For  one,  sir,  I  do  not  believe  that  the  present 
debt  of  the  state  was  improperly  created.  It  is 
true,  that  in  carr}'ing  out  the  system  of  internal 
improvement  some  improvident  expenditures, 
and  some  mistaken  objects  of  public  interest, 
were  undertaken.  This  was  the  result  of  inex- 
perience. What  now  system,  sir,  having  such 
multifarious  objects,  could  be  perfect  at  first? 
In  the  organization  of  the  board  of  internal  im- 
provement, they  had  no  discretion  in  the  appli- 
cation of  the  public  money.  It  was  made  im- 
perative on  the  board,  that  when  the  stock  to  be 
taken  by  individuals  in  any  road  company  was 
subscribed,  the  state  was  bound  to  take  her 
share  of  the  stock.  This  produced  misapplica- 
tion, and  some  projects  were  undertaken  which 
we  greatly  regret. 

But,  sir,  that  the  system  was  wrong — that  the 
state,  throughout  its  length  and  breadth,  did  not 
demand  it  at  the  hands  of  her  representatives,  I 
deny.  That  our  state  has  not  been  benefitted, 
improved,  and  her  resources  greatly  augmented, 
no  gentlemen  will  deny.  Then  why  do  gentle- 
men wish  to  show  that  they  had  no  hand  in  cre- 
ating this  debt?  Is  it  to  prove  that  they  better 
understood  the  real  interests  of  the  state?  or  to 
bring  into  disrepute  those  who  voted  for  the  sys- 
tem? Sir,  I  voted  for  it.  I  did  so  at  the  desire 
of  an  intelligent  constituency,  and  the  confi- 
dence they  have  uniformly  reposed  in  me,  proves 
thatthey  i)elieve  I  acted  honestly.  Sir,  I  acted 
as  I  conscientiously  believed,  for  their  best  in- 
terest. 

In  relation  to  the  section  on  the  subject  of  re- 
stricting the  legislature  from  the  creation  of  a 
large  debt,  I  sliall  be  for  it.  I  advocated  it  be- 
fore the  people,  and  shall  perhaps  vote  for  it. 
But,  sir,  I  am  not  sure  that  I  was  right ;  and  I 
am  not  sure  that  I  ought  not  to  retrace  my  steps 
and  throw  myself  upon  an  intelligent  constitu- 
ency, for  future  agreement.  Sir,  it  is  well  known 
that  the  bank  capital  of  the  stat«  is  mainly  loca- 
ted in  the  northern  and  middle  sections  of  the 
state;  it  is  true,  we  have  in  the  Green  river  coun- 
try, that  part  so  much  lauded  and  loved  by  gen- 
tlemen here  when  they  want  support,  two  small 
branches  of  the  Bank  of  Kentucky — one  inBow- 
linggreen  and  the  other  in  Hopkinsville — but  they 
have  but  little  capital.  I  could  almost  use  one 
of  them  myself,  and  when  they  come  to  supply 
the  wants  of  all  the  country,  they  really  are  of 
no  use;  they  are  hardly  known  in  the  commer- 
cial relations  of  the  country. 

Now,  sir,  it  is  known  that  some  time  since, 
the  legislature  chartered  a  Southern  Bank  of  Ken- 
tucky, audit  seemed  that  it  met  the  approbation 
of  the  country ;  and  I  am  not  advised  but  they 


may  hereafter  desire  some  aid  on  the  part  of  tho 
state  for  that  object. 

But  if  we  adopt  the  thirty-third  section,  the 
state  can  never,  under  any  state  of  the  case,  in- 
crease the  banking  capital  of  the  state. 

Sir,  we  are  a  great  and  growing  people,  with 
vast  resources;  with  a  gallant  and  energetic  pop- 
ulation; with  a  most  fertile  soil  and  unequaled 
climate,  and  I  much  doubt  the  propriety  of  crip- 
pling the  energies  of  the  legislature  by  tying 
them  down  to  so  small  a  sum,  that  hereafter  they 
will  not  be  able  to  meet  the  wants  of  tlie  coun- 
try. 

But,  sir,  as  to  the  proposition  immediately  be- 
fore the  house,  being  the  section  presented  by 
the  honorable  president  and  adopted  by  the 
committee  of  the  whole,  I  sincerely  hope  it  may 
be  adopted  because  I  see  clearly,  that  by  adcf- 
ing  tills  amount  of  $50,000  to  the  present  sink 
ing  fund,  the  debt  of  the  state,  in  about  thirty 
years,  will  be  paid  off  without  the  people  ever 
feeling  it.  So  small  a  sum  annually,  can  surely 
be  supplied  out  of  the  ordinary  revenue. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  understood  the  gentleman 
from  Xelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  to  state,  that  he  was 
decidedly  in  favor  of  the  additional  section  pro- 
posed by  the  honorable  president.  That  gentle- 
man is  the  chairman  of  the  committee  upon  the 
public  debt,  and  after  a  most  mature  delibera- 
tion has  concluded  that  the  scheme  proposed  in 
this  additional  section  is  the  very  best  mode  of 
extinguishing  the  heavy  public  debt  by  which 
we  are  oppressed.  For  my  own  part,  I  most 
heartily  concur  in  the  provisions  of  that  section. 
Long  explanations  have  been  made  by  various 
gentlemen,  as  to  their  personal  instrumentality 
in  promoting  these  works  of  internal  improve- 
ment, which  have  resulted  in  the  accumulation 
of  the  heavy  public  debt  under  which  the  state 
is  laboring.  It  seems  to  me,  they  are  all  foreign 
to  the  subject  under  consideration.  The  ques- 
tion is  not,  how  the  debt  was  contracted?  but 
what  means  shall  be  devised  for  its  liquidation. 
I  have  no  doubt  that  the  people  of  Kentucky  are 
honest,  and  will  cheerfully  subscribe  to  any 
measure,  which  will  tend  gradually  to  extin- 
guish their  liabilities,  provided  it  does  not  press 
too  heavily  upon  them  at  once.  I  believe  the 
proposition  made  by  yourself,  in  the  section  now 
under  consideration-^that  $50,000  be  annually 
set  aside,  for  the  gradual  liquidation  of  this 
debt,  and  its  ultimate  extinction — will  accom- 
plish the  end  for  which  it  is  intended  and  will 
not  be  a  heavier  burden  than  they  are  willing  to 
bear. 

The  thirty-second  and  thirty-third  sections 
of  the  legislative  report,  which  are  now  before 
us,  were  intended,  in  a  measure,  to  provide 
against  the  recurrence  of  the  reckless  spirit  of 
internal  improvement  which  once  pervaded  the 
land — to  prevent  the  further  accumulation  of  the 
state  liabilities,  witout  the  sanction  of  a  direct 
vote  of  the  people — and  not,  as  some  seem  to 
apprehend,  to  place  a  full  .stop  upon  all  internal 
improvements.  At  the  commencement  of  this 
spirit  for  improvements,  I  have  leanied — I  was 
not  then  a  resident  of  the  state — that  nearly 
every  county — the  whole  people  of  the  state — 
were  swept  along  with  the  current  ;  and  it  was 
almost  universally  believed,  that  instead  of  be- 
ing a  hindrance  and  an  incumbrance  upon  the 


772 


revenue,  they  would  pay  for  themselves;  and  ul- 
timately go  far  to  relieve  the  people  of  the  bur- 
dens of  taxation.  I  was  amused,  in  looking 
over  the  charter  of  the  Maysville  turnpike  road, 
to  see  an  express  provision  made,  that  whenever 
the  revenue  arising  from  tolls  should  exceed 
twelve  per  cent.,  the  tolls  should  be  reduced,  so 
as  to  bring  the  receipts  down  to  twelve  per  cent. 
This  work,  I  believe,  has  never  yielded  an  amount 
over  two  per  cent.  I  merely  mention  this  as  an 
indication  of  the  sentiment  whicli  then  existed, 
with  regard  to  the  immense  productiveness  of 
these  public  works.  Time  wore  on — the  bubble 
bursted — experience  proved  th.at  not  one  of  them 
could  be  made  to  pay  the  interest  of  the  money 
expended  in  their  construction — direct  taxation 
had  to  be  resorted  to,  to  save  the  state  from  re- 
pudiation and  disgrace — and  now  we  find  many 
gentlemen  who  were  its  most  earnest  advocates, 
are  making  excuses  for  the  course  they  then  pur- 
sued. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison  said  he  had  al- 
ways been  in  favor  of  improvements — that  he 
still  is  favorable  to  them — that  though  they  had 
cost  much,  yet  the  benefits  arising  from  them 
would  much  more  than  compensate  for  the  cost-^ 
that  the  property  in  large  sections  of  the  coun- 
try through  which  these  improvements  had 
passed,  was  largely  improved  in  value — and  that 
the  convenience  of  the  people  had  been  greatly 
promoted.  These  are  points  which  no  doubt  are 
true;  and  I  am  not  surprised  that  he,  and  others 
who  have  been  so  largely  benfited,  do  not  com- 
plain. The  complaints  come  from  those  large 
regions  of  country  which  have  in  no  wise  been 
benefited.  The  question  is,  whether  these  un- 
improved sections  shall  be  equally  responsible 
with  those  so  much  benefited — whether,  in  the 
improvements  hereafter  to  be  made,  the  expen- 
ses shall  be  borne  by  those  immediately  benefit- 
ed, or  by  the  state  at  large.  In  liquidation  of 
the  debts  already  contracted,  when  the  tax-gath- 
erer goes  round  to  collect  the  revenue,  he  calls 
as  surely  at  the  door  of  the  poorest  man  in  the 
remotest  part  of  the  state,  and  collects  his  little 
mite,  as  at  the  palace  of  the  rich  man,  whose 
fortune  has  been  made  by  these  very  works.  Is 
this  right?  Are  not  these  burdens  unequally  dis- 
tributed? 

It  seems  to  me,  that  no  system  of  internal  im- 
provements should  be  gone  into,  where  the  prof- 
its arising  from  it  will  not  pay  a  sufficiency  to 
liquidate  the  interest  of  the  money  expended  in 
its  completion.  In  times  like  these,  money  can 
always  oe  raised  by  individual  and  local  compa- 
nies, for  the  erection  of  any  work,  whenever  it 
becomes  manifest  that  such  work  will  pay  the 
interest,  without  the  endorsement  of  the  state. 
Whenever  the  necessity  arises,  the  improvements 
will  be  made  by  those  interested,  independent  of 
the  state;  and  it  strikes  me  that  in  tliis  way,  all 
works  of  a  local  character,  should  be  carried  on. 

I  am  not  one  of  those,  who  would  put  a  stop 
to  all  internal  improvements;  but  I  think  that 
the  people  who  liave  to  pay  for  them,  should  be 
allowed  to  say  whether  they  will  have  them  or 
not. 

So  far  as  relates  to  the  banking  capital  in  the 
Oreen  river  country, to  which  thu  gentleman  from 
Logan  has  alluded,  I  question  mucli  if  the  peo- 
ple are  not  fortunate  in  being  deprived  of  it 


Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  have  a  substitute  for  the 
amendment  which  I  think  will  accomplish  the 
object.    I  desire  now  to  offer  it: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  Taws  to  diminish  the  resources  of  the 
sinking  fund  as  now  established  by  law,  but 
may  pass  laws  to  increase  it;  and  the  whole  re- 
sources of  said  fund,  from  year  to  year,  shall  be 
sacredly  set  apart  and  applied  to  the  payment 
of  the  interest  and  principal  of  the  state  debt, 
and  to  no  other  use  or  purpose,  until  the  whole 
debt  of  the  state  is  fully  paid  and  satisfied." 

If  I  understand  the  amendment,  it  proposes 
to  set  apart  $50,000  annually,  to  he  applied  to 
sinking  the  debt  of  the  state.  Gentlemen  with 
whom  I  have  conversed,  are  of  the  opinion  that 
this  cannot  be  done  without  producing  the  ne- 
cessity of  a  resort  to  immediate  taxation.  I 
think  it  may  be  done,  and  I  am  sure  that  if  the 
substitute  which  I  have  offered  shall  prevail,  the 
amount  within  the  sinking  fund  will  reduce  the 
amount  of  the  debt,  and  there  will  then  be  no 
need  of  taxation.  I  will  read  from  the  message 
of  the  governor  in  relation  to  the  public  debt: 

"The  public  debt  of  the  state  on  the  first  day 
of  January,  1848,  amounted  to  the  sum  of  four 
millions,  six  hundred  and  eight  thousand,  three 
hundred  and  thirty  nine  dollars.  The  following 
changes  have  occurred: 

State  debt,  as  above,  on  January 

1st,  1848,  ...  -  $4,608  339  00 
January    26 — Cash    of  Craddock 

Fund, 642  81 

January  15—30  year  six  per  cent. 

bond  issued,  ....  1,000  00 


$4,609,981  81 
77,068  00 


Since  that  time  the  debt  has  been 
reduced,         ... 

Leaving  the  total  debt  of  the  state 
on  the  20th  December,  1848— 
this  sum,         ....   $4,532,913  81 

From  the  above  sum  it  has  been 
usual  to  deduct  the  amount  of 
bank  stocks  owned  by  the  state, 
as  the  state  is  in  possession  of 
the  means  to  pay  this  without 
imposing  taxation  on  the  people. 
The  amount  of  bank  stock  thus 


owned  by  the  state,  is 


$1,270,500  GO 


This  deduction  will  make  the  ac- 
tual debt  of  the  state,    -        -     $3,262,413  81 
To  provide  for  the   payment  of  the   interest, 

and  for  the  gradual  extinction  of  this  debt,  the 

general  assembly,  at  an  early  period,  established 

a  sinking  fund. 

That  fund  is  composed  of  tlie  following  items: 

1.  Tax  on  the  capital  stock  of  the  bank  of 
Kentucky,  and  dividends  on  9.399  shares  of  stock 
in  the  said  bank,  held  by  the  stftte  and  by  the 
commissioners  of  the  sinking  fund. 

2.  Tax  on  the  capital  stock  of  the  Northern 
bank  of  Kentucky,  and  dividends  on  2,900  shares 
of  stock  in  saidljlank,  held  by  the  state  and  the 
commissioners  of  the  .sinking  fund. 

3.  Tax  on  the  capilRl  stock  of  the  bank  of 
fiouisville,  and  dividends  on  406  shares  of  stock 
ia  said  bank. 


773 


4.  Profits  of  the  commonwealth's  bank. 

5.  Proceeds  of  the  stat«  stock  in  the  old  bank 
of  Kentucky. 

6.  Five  cents  on  every  one  hundred  dollars 
worth  of  propertj'  liable  to  tiaxation. 

7.  One-third  of  the  taxes  collected  on  non-res- 
ident.*' lands. 

8.  Excess  over  five  thousand  dollars  in  the 
treasury  at  the  end  of  each  year,  after  deducting 
all  demands. 

9.  Rent  of  the  Lexington  and  Ohio  railroad. 

10.  Tolls  from  slack  water  navigation  on  the 
Kentucky,  Green  and  Barren  rivers,  and  rent  of 
water  power. 

11.  Dividends  on  the  state's  stock  in  the 
Tarious  turnpike  roads  and  bridges  in  the  state. 

12.  Two-thirds  of  the  profits  of  the  peniten- 
tiary. 

13.  Taxes  on  brokers  and  insurance  offices. 

14.  Premium  on  sale  or  exchange  of  state 
bonds. 

A  few  of  the  least  important  of  these  resour- 
ces have  ceased,  while  the  productiveness  of  oth- 
ers has  been  greatly  enhanced. 

For  a  detailed  account  of  the  management  and 
operations  of  this  ample  fund,  the  general  as- 
sembly is  referred  to  the  reports  of  the  first  and 
second  auditors,  and  of  the  commissioners  of  the 
sinking  fund.  A  brief  abstract  from  the  official 
statements  will  suffice  for  a  general  idea  of  what 
is  the  present  condition  of  this  fund. 

Balance  on    hand    10th    October, 

1847, $139,387  12 

Reeeipts  from  that  date  to  10th  Oc- 
tober, 1848,       ...        -       328,265  61 

Receipts  from  10th   Oct.,  1848^  to 

20th  Dec,  1848,        -        -        -         40,022  17 

Add  amount  due  from  revenue  de- 
partment,        ....  27,258  20 


Making, 

EXPENDITURES. 

"Warrants  issued  and 

paid  same  time,      $385,163  11 

Necessary  to  pay  in- 
terest due  1st  Jan., 
1849,        -        -         131,807  41 


$534,933  10 


Making, 
Leaving  a  balance  of 


-    516,970  52 


$17,962  58 


KESOURCES  FOB   1849. 

The  resources,  including  the  bal- 
ance on  hand  as  before  stated, 
(1848.) $373,486  39 

Amount  necessary  to 

pay  interest,        -  $263,614  82 

Jlepairs  on  Kentucky 

nver,  -         -        -        15,000  00 

Renairs  on  Green  and 

Barren  river,        -       10,000  00 

Contingent  expenses,         900  00 


Making, 


289,514  82 


$  83,971  57 


Surplus  for  1849,    - 

It  appears  from  the  foregoingthat  the  sinkinij 
fund  has,  in  the  course  of  the  present  year,  not 


only  furnished  the  means  of  paying  punctually 
the  interest  of  tlie  public  debt,  but  also  of  ex- 
tinguishing $77,068  of  the  principal.  And  the 
estimates  made  for  the  year  1849,  assure  us  of  an 
equally  favorable  result,  and  exhibit  a  balance, 
after  payment  of  interest,  of  $83,971  57,  appli- 
cable to  a  further  reduction  of  the  debt." 

Now  it  will  be  seen  that  this  substitute  which 
I  have  had  tlie  honor  to  propose,  requires  that 
the  legislature  shall  never  reduce  the  resources 
of  the  sinking  fund,  but  may  increase  them,  and 
it  requires  that  all  the  resources  of  that  fund 
shall  be  faithfully  and  bonajide  applied,  till  the 
wliole  debt  is  paicl  off.  No  additional  taxes  will 
be  necessary,  and  the  state  of  the  fund  is  such 
that  the  sums  named  in  the  me.ssage,  may  be  ap- 
plied to  that  use.  I  do  not  wish  to  alarm  gen- 
tlemen on  that  subject.  I  really  desire  to  have 
the  resources  of  this  fund,  applied  to  the  ex- 
tinguishment of  the  debt,  and  to  no  other  pur- 
pose. I  know  many  wish  to  take  what  is  over 
and  above  the  annual  interest,  and  upon  that 
borrow  more  money,  and  with  the  money  thus 
borrowed  go  on  to  make  additional  appropria- 
ations  for  internal  improvement,  or  complete 
those  already  begun.  1  wish  to  provide  against 
that,  and  that  nothing  more  shall  be  done  in  that 
way,  at  least  out  of  the  sinking  fund.  That 
fund  was  to  be  applied  to  the  pavment  of  the 
interest  of  the  debt,  and  finally  to  tfie  extinguish- 
ment of  that  debt.  This  may  be  done  with  the 
present  resources  of  the  sinking  fund.  I  think 
if  gentlemen  bestow  some  attention  to  this 
matter  they  will  find  there  is  perfect  safety  in 
the  plan  I  propose  ;  that  there  is  no  danger 
of  taxation,  and  that  there  is  a  certainty  the 
debt  will  be  reduced  more  by  this  mode  than  by 
the  other  plan  proposed. 

Mr.  KAYANAUGH.  The  question  now  un- 
der consideration  is  one  of  the  great  questions  to 
be  settled  by  the  convention.  The  manifesto 
published  at  Frankfort,  two  years  successively 
by  the  convention  party,  proposed  as  one  of  the 
refonns  in  the  constitution,  some  restriction  on 
the  legislature  in  contracting  debts.  This  pro- 
position, every  where,  met  the  sanction  of  the 
people.  I  remember  having  met  with  none,  who 
were  opposed  to  it.  A  heavv  debt  had  been 
hastily  contracted  by  the  legislature,  with  which 
the  people  were  dissatisfied.  They  hence  de- 
termined to  limit  the  power  of  that  body,  on 
this  subject,  in  all  the  future.  True,  gentlemen 
tell  us  that  by  this  limitation,  we  manifest  a 
want  of  confidence  in  the  legislature.  The  peo- 
ple themselves,  have  manifested  this  want  of 
confidence;  and  have  required  the  restriction,  at 
our  hands.  Our  work  is  to  carry  out  their  will. 
The  debt  has  been  contracted,  and  must  be  paid. 
The  people  of  Kentucky  are  for  paying  it.  They 
are  a  tax  paying  people — a  debt  paying  people. 
They  have  heard  much  said  among  them,  about 
the  public  debt  of  the  state.  And  have  long  ar- 
dently desired  to  see  the  day  of  its  extinguish- 
ment. They  have  looked  to  the  legislature  in 
vain.  In  vain  tliey  will  look  to  it.  One  legis- 
lature may  set  apart  a  fund  for  this  purpose. 
The  next  lias  the  power  to  repeal,  and  undo  all 
that  may  tlius  have  been  done.  "VVe  have  seen 
funds  set  apart  by  a  legislature  for  given  pur- 
1  poses,  Trhile  subsequent  legislaturvs  have  either 
I  squandered  the  money  or  diverted  it  to  other 


n« 


uses.  This  will  ever  be  the  case  with  our  pub- 
lic debt.  Of  what  avail  is  it,  for  a  legislature 
this  year  to  make  provision  for  the  gradual  ex- 
tinguishment of  our  public  debt,  if  the  next  one 
which  may  assemble,  can  and  will  apply  the 
money  in  a  different  way?  We  have  tried  the 
legislature,  and  failed,  long  enough  to  know, 
that  the  debt  will  never  be  paid  as  long  as  we 
trust  to  legislation.  The  country  is  consequent- 
ly looking  to  this  body  for  action  on  the  subject. 
A  fund  set  apart  by  the  constitution  itself  for 
the  gradual  extinguishment  of  the  interest  and 
principal  of  the  state  debt  will  bo  beyond  the 
reach  of  the  legislature,  and  beyond  the  reach 
of  any  one,  as  long  as  the  constitution  shall 
last.  Such  a  fund  would  be  permanent  and  re- 
liable, and  would  have  the  confidence  of  the 
people.  Till  such  a  step  is  taken,  I  believe  the 
debt  of  the  state  will  not  be  paid. 

The  report  of  the  committee  provides  a  limi- 
tation on  the  power  of  the  legislature,  in  con- 
tracting debts.  That  some  such  limitation  will 
be  incorporated  into  the  constitution,  there  seems 
to  be  no  doubt.  I,  for  one,  am  for  it.  My  con- 
stituents are  for  it.  Shall  an  efficient  mode  for 
paying  the  debt  already  contracted  be  also  pro- 
vidcdV  That  the  people  would  hail  with  joy, 
such  a  provision  in  the  constitution,  I  make  no 
doubt.  In  my  section  of  the  state,  they  are 
anxious  to  see  the  debt  discharged,  and  would 
sanction  any  proper  mode  which  maybe  devised, 
for  that  purpose.  Tlie  constitution,  in  fact, 
would,  when  submitted,  gain  strength  by  it.  I 
am  therefore  for  the  most  available  mode  for  the 
payment  of  this  debt,  and  the  amendment  sub- 
mitted by  the  gentleman  from  Hopkins  isj  as  I 
think,  that  mode.  The  proposition  of  the  pres- 
ident of  the  convention,  adopted  in  committee 
of  the  whole,  and  now  also  pending,  requires  the 
legislature  to  set  appat  annually,  $50,000,  for tlie 
payment  of  the  principal  of  the  state  debt.  Now- 
even  though  this  provision  be  passed,  still  the 
legislature  might  disregard  it.  The  old  consti- 
tution required  positively,  that  provision  should 
be  made  by  law,  for  suing  the  state,  yet,  in  this 
respect  it  was  disregarded.  So  the  legislature 
might  come  here  and  appropriate  all  the  revenue 
toother  purposes,  and  then  refuse  to  set  apart 
the  $50,000,  because  thoy  would  not  have  it  to 
set  apart.  This  they  might  very  well  do,  if  it 
required  a  resort  to  taxation,  against  the  will  of 
the  people.  Nor  is  there  any  thing  in  the  prop- 
osition, prohibiting  the  legislature  from  divert- 
ing the  proceeds  of  the  sinking  fund  from  its 
legitimate  objects.  That  fund,  if  held  sacred 
to  the  payment  of  interest  and  principal  of  the 
state  debt,  will  discharge  the  debt  soonerthan  will 
$50,000,  annually  applied  to  the  payment  of  the 
principal  of  this  debt.  I  have  taxen  some  pains 
in  looking  into  the  condition  of  the  sinking 
fund,  and  am  satisfied  that  it  is  so,  and  I  be- 
lieve that  any  gentleman  who  will  take  the 
trouble  of  an  examination,  will  come  to  the 
same  conclusion. 

The  state  debt  a  year  or  two  ago,  was  $.'),.390,500 
It  was,  on  the  first  day  of  January  last  3,261,413 

The  sum  of $129,087 

of  the  jirincipal  has  rflcently  been  paid  by  this 
fund,  besides  discharging  the  interest.  Some 
$77,000  of  this  part  of  the  principal  was  paid 


last  year,  as  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  last 
annual  message  of  his  excellency  governor  Crit- 
tenden, and  the  report  of  the  commissioners  of 
the  sinking  fund.  The  same  report,  in  estimat- 
ing the  receipts  and  disbursments  of  the  sinking 
fund,  for  the  present  year,  shows  that  after  pay- 
ing the  interest  on  the  whole  state  debt,  t  nere 
will  remain,  at  the  end  of  the  year,  $97,485  18 
to  be  applied  in  paying  the  principal  of  the 
debt.  The  receipts  are  however,  estimated  too 
low.  That  fact  is  now  known,  and  may  be  as- 
certained by  referring  to  the  auditor's  office. 
For  example,  the  sum  of  $129,807  17  is  the  esti- 
mated amount  coming  into  the  sinking  fund  this  j 
year,  from  the  five  cents  on  the  hundred 
dollars  worth  of  property,  but  the  returns  are 
now  all  in,  and  they  show  that  the  taxable  prop- 
erty of  tlie  state  has  gone  up  to  over  $285,000,- 
000.  In  this  single  item  then,  the  sinking  fund 
will  this  year,  receive  some  $12,000  more  than 
Avas  supposed  by  the  estimates  already  alluded 
to.  It  is  thus  shown,  that  the  sinking  fund  is 
in  a  more  flourishing  condition  than  at  any  time 
before  ;  that  it  is  now,  and  has  been  for  several 
years,  gaining  on  the  state  debt,  and  if  preserv- 
ed for  that  purpose,  as  it  should  be,  will  ulti- 
mately discharge  the  whole  of  it.  The  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Hopkins,  (Mr.  Brad- 
ley,) is  to  that  effect.  It  is  to  hold  tlie  fund  we 
already  have — to  put  it  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
legislature,  and  to  set  it  apart  in  the  constitution 
as  it  was  originally  designed,  for  the  payment  of 
our  debts.  If  this  is  done,  it  will  discharge  the 
public  debt  much  more  rapidly  than  any  plan 
yet  proposed.  Besides,  it  Avill  create  no  neces- 
sity for  additional  taxation.  It  is  only  an  appli- 
cation of  the  means  already  in  our  hands,  and 
the  question  now  is,  will  we  hold  this  fund,  and 
thus  apply  it,  or  leave  it  to  bo  squandered  at 
pleasure,  by  any  legislature  which  may  hereaf- 
ter convene — and  simply  require  them  by  a  sort 
of  mandate  in  the  constitution,  to  provide  a  sum 
of  $50,000  annually,  for  the  same  purjioscAvhich 
they  possibly  might  not  regard,  and  thus  leave 
the  debt  unpaid.  I  am  for  settling  this  question 
now — settling  it  in  the  constitution,  and  that  in 
a  manner  the  most  available.  Some  gentlemen 
insist  that  by  adopting  a  clause  of  this  kind, 
we  imply  a  want  of  confidence  in  the  legisla- 
ture— tlie  representatives  of  the  people,  why 
sir,  we  have  the  example,  if  we  choose  to  follow 
it,  of  several  other  states  in  the  Union. 

The  constitution  of  New  York,  and  to  that  I 
am  not  ashamed  to  refer,  and  especially  on  a 
question  of  this  sort,  has  this  provision: 

"Article  7.  Sec.  1.  After  paying  the  expenses 
of  collection,  superintendence,  and  ordinary  re- 
pairs, there  shall  be  appropriated  and  set  apart, 
in  each  fiscal  year,  out  of  the  revenues  of  the 
state  canals,  commencing  on  tlie  first  day  of 
June,  one  thousand  eight  nundred  and  forty  six, 
the  sum  of  one  million  and  three  hundred  tliou- 
sand  dollars,  until  the  first  day  of  June,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty  five,  and  from 
that  time,  the  sum  of  one  million  seven  hundred 
thousand  dollars  in  each  fiscal  year,  as  a  sink- 
ing fund,  to  pay  the  interest  and  redeem  tJie 
principal  of  that  part  of  the  state  debt,  called 
the  canal  debt,  as  it  existed  at  the  time  first 
aforesaid,  and  including  three  hundred  thousand 
dollars  then  to  be  borrowed,  until  the  same  sliall 


ffW 


be  wholly  paid;  and  the  principal  and  income, 
of  said  sinking  fund,  shall  be  sacredlj  applied 
to  that  purpose." 

Tho  second  section  has  a  similar  provision  for 
redemption  of  another,  and  different  debt  against 
the  state.  In  a  financial  point  of  view,  the  state 
of  New  York  may  successfully  challenge  tlie 
■world  for  a  rival.  She  has  e.Tpended  on  canals 
alone,  more  than  thirty  millions  of  money;  and 
these  canals  are  now  yielding  more  than  nine 
per  cent,  net,  on  the  whole  original  cost.  Her 
works  of  internal  improvement  were  begun,  and 
carried  forward  by  her  legislature.  The  result 
shows  that,  that  body  acted  wisely  and  provi- 
dently. The  world  perhaps  can  show  nothing 
to  equal  the  success  of  their  internal  improve- 
ments; yet  the  convention  of  that  state,  in  re- 
modeling their  constitution,  thought  proper  to 
provide  a  fund  for  the  payment  of  the  state  debt, 
and  to  put  it  beyond  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture. This  constitution  was  submitted  to  the 
people  for  their  approval,  and  was  adopted  by 
an  overwhelming  majoritv.  That  state,  well 
worthy  of  imitation  in  tliis  respect,  did  not 
leave  this  subject  to  the  legislature,  but  at  once 
settled  the  question  in  the  constitution  itself. 
If  New  York  did  not  think  it  an  imputation  on 
her  legislature,  which  had  acted  providently  in 
the  premises,  to  lay  this  restriction,  much  less 
should  we  think  it  so  of  ours,  when  it  has  ac- 
ted improvidently  and  hastily. 

The  convention  of  Illinois,  which  has  just 
formed  a  constitution  for  that  state,  took  tho  re- 
sponsibility of  providing  for  the  pavment  of  the 
state  debt,  by  direct  taxation,  as  will  be  seen  bv 
the  following  clause  in  the  now  constitution  of 
that  state: 

"  Aettcle  15.  There  shall  be  annually  assessed 
and  collected,  in  the  same  manner  as  other  state 
revenue  maybe  assessed  and  collected,  a  tax  of 
two  mills  upon  each  dollars  worth  of  taxable 
property,  in  addition  to  all  other  taxes,  to  be  ap- 

{lied  as  follows:  The  fund  so  created  shall  be 
ept  separate,  and  shall  annually,  on  the  first 
day  of  January,  be  apportioned  and  paid  over, 
pro  rata  upon  all  such  state  indebtedness,  other 
than  the  canal  and  school  indebtedness,  as  may 
for  that  purpose,  be  presented  by  the  holders  of 
the  same,  to  be  entered  as  credits  upon,  and  to 
that  extent  in  extinguishment  of  tne  principal 
of  said  indebtedness."  Adopted  August  31st, 
1847. 

This  constitution  providing  direct  taxation, 
for  the  state  debt  was,  as  I  am  informed,  submit- 
ted to  the  people,  and  carried  by  a  large  majori- 
ty. And  so,  whenever  this  constitution  is  sub- 
mitted to  the  people,  containing  a  provision  for 
tlie  payment  of  our  state  debt,  such  provis- 
ion will  meet  their  sanction,  and  instead  of 
weakening,  will  greatly  strengtlien  it,  for  they 
are  not  only  willing,  but  auxioas  to  make  pay- 
ment. 

If  we  do  not  begin  this  work  now,  when  will 
we?  When  will  be  a  better  time  than  the  pres- 
ent? The  Stat*  is  now  enjoying  more  solid  pros- 
perity than  at  any  time  before  in  our  whole  his- 
tory. The  condition  of  our  revenue  is  flourish- 
ing. The  amount  of  our  taxable  property  has, 
for  several  years,  been  regularly  going  up.  It  is 
this  year  thirteen  millions  in  value,  higher  than  | 
it  was  last  year,  and  is  in  fact  some  millions 


higher  than  ever  at  any  time  before.  The  pro- 
ceeds of  our  sinking  fund  are  going  up,  while 
our  debt  is  going  down.  In  respect  to  this  debt, 
we  now  hold  the  vantage  ground.  My  doctrine 
j  is  to  keep  it,  by  taking  the  means  alrcadv  in  our 
hands,  and  setting  it  apart,  for  the  payment  of 
our  debts.  This  we  can  do  without  one  cent  of 
taxation.  The  people  are  expecting  something 
at  the  hands  of  the  convention,  on  the  subject 
of  this  debt.  I,  for  one,  am  for  meeting  these 
expectations;  for  if  nothing  is  done  here,  in  vain 
may  we  expect  any  thing  hereafter. 

In  setting  down  the  indebtedness  of  the  state, 
I  have  of  course  omitted  the  amount  owing  for 
bank  stock,  for  an  equal  amount  of  stock  is 
owned  by  the  state.  These  two  amounts  will, 
as  admitted  by  all,  liquidate  and  settle  each 
other.  Nor  have  I  taken  into  the  estimate  the 
amount  due  by  the  state  to  the  school  fund. 
That  fund  is  separate  and  apart  from  the  other 
debts  of  the  state,  and  has  not  been,  and  is  not 
a  charge  upon  the  sinking  fund.  It  is  under 
the  control  and  power  of  the  state,  and  mav  be 
met  as  heretofore,  and  in  such  other  manner  as 
may  be  found  right  and  proper.  I  had  expected 
a  report  on  this  subject  from  the  committee  on 
the  debt  of  the  state,  but  the  chairman  of  that 
committee  has  already  explained  why  a  report 
has  not  been  made,  and  that  none,  as  the  subject 
is  now  under  consideration,  will  be  made.  It 
may  therefore  be  right  to  pass  this  question  a 
day  or  two,  to  give  more  time  for  looking  into 
the  condition  of  the  sinking  fund.  If  so,  I  am 
sure  gentlemen  will  come  to  the  same  conclu- 
sions to  which  I  have  arrived. 

ilr.  GRAY.  This,  sir,  is  a  subject  of  great 
importance.  The  section  which  was  proposed 
by  the  President,  is  neither  more  nor  less  in  my 
estimation  than  directly  imposing  a  tax  upon 
the  people  of  Kentucky  by  this  convention, 
which  you  will  do  if  this  section  forms  part  of 
the  constitution.  If  I  understand  the  proposi- 
tion sir,  it  is  to  require  that  the  legislature  shall 
take  out  of  the  ordinary  revenue  of  the  state 
$50,000  yearly,  and  appropriate  it  to  the  pay- 
ment of  the  public  debt  of  Kentucky.  So  far  as 
I  am  concerned,  I  came  here  to  pass  no  such 
law.  There  was  no  proposition  before  the  peo- 
ple whom  I  represent  for  imposing  taxation 
upon  them:  and  I  think  this  is  a  species  of  legis- 
lation which  belongs  entirely  to  the  legislature. 
Sir,  in  this  state  the  people  will  provide  for  the 

Eayment  of  their  public  debt  as  they  have  done 
eretofore,  and  I  tliink  we  might  trust  the  peo- 
ple's representatives,  whom  they  may  elect,  who 
will  hereafter  look  to  it  with  sufficient  cautious- 
ness and  wisdom.  So  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
therefore,  I  shall  vote  against  the  proposition. 

I  think  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Hopkins  is  proper,  and  much  more  appropriate. 
I  have  much  less  objection  to  the  plan  which  he 
proposes  than  to  that  of  imposing  a  tax  upon 
the  people  of  $50,000  yearly,  for  the  payment 
of  this  debt.  If  this  sinking  fund  is  sufficient 
to  pay  the  interest  of  the  debt  and  to  sustain 
the  character  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  let  it 
be  appropriated  to  that  purpose.  If  it  is  not 
sufficient,  let  the  legislature,  when  the  proper 
time  comes,  make  an  appropriation;  let  them 
impose  a  tax,  and  sir,  tne  people  ■will  justify 


I  them.    There  is,  therefore,  m  my  opinion,  no 


776 


propriety  in  putting  such  a  provision  as  this  in 
tlie  fundamental  law. 

Sir,  in  reference  to  the  proposed  restriction  up- 
on the  legislature  to  create  public  debts,  I  would 
ask  how  far  does  that  restriction  go?  Certainly 
the  people  of  this  state  do  not  expect  you  to  re- 
strict them  so  that  they  never  can  borrow  a  dol- 
lar; so  that  they  never  can  hereafter  make  any 
improvement,  unless  they  have  the  means  before- 
hand in  the  treasury  of  carrying  such  improve- 
ment to  perfection.  The  restriction  already  pro- 
vided, which  prohibits  an  increase  of  debt  or  of 
borrowing  money,  ought  to  be  sufficient;  and  if 
the  people  are  of  opinion  that  a  further  amount 
ought  to  be  raised  for  the  improvement  of  those 
vorks  for  which  that  debt  was  originally  crea- 
ted, they  ought  to  have  the  right  of  carrying  out 
such  a  proposition. 

But,  in  relation  to  this  thirty  second  section,  it 
appears  that  gentlemen  do  not  understand  it.  Cer- 
tainly it  does  not  imply  that  any  debt  should  be 
created  under  it  for  any  purpose  not  necessary 
for  the  business  of  this  state.  It  merely  provides 
for  casualties  thai  may  happen  and  that  have 
heretofore  happened.  Unless  those  casualties  do 
occur,  certainly  the  legislature  have  no  power  to 
increase  the  debt  and  impose  any  greater  bur- 
dens upon  the  people  whatever. 

Now,  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  considers 
that  the  legislature  would  have  power  every  two 
years  to  create  a  debt  of  half  a  million  of  dol- 
lars. Sir,  there  is  nothing  more  plain  to  my 
mind  than  tlie  language  used  here.  If  gentle- 
men will  read  this  language  and  connect  it  to- 
gether, they  Avill  readily  discover  that  it  deprives 
the  legislature  of  the  power  of  ever  creating  any 
debt  beyond  the  sum  of  $500,000.  They  may 
create  a  debt  of  $100,000  one  year  ;  of  $200,000 
the  next ;  and  of  $300,000  the  next ;  but  they 
never  can  exceed  the  amount  of  $500,000,  until 
that  amount,  when  expended,  is  paid.  There  is 
no  stepping  beyond  that. 

It  is  as  plain  as  language  can  make  it.  They 
never  can  create  a  debt — no  matter  what  the 
exigences  of  the  state  may  be — beyond  this 
$500,000,  without  submitting  it  to  the  people.  If 
I  understand  the  proposition  as  it  now  stands, 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson  proposes  to  strike 
out  the  words  ,'expenses  not  provided  for."  I 
think  there  is  no  necessity  for  it.  There  are  ne- 
cessities that  may  befal  the  country.  Here,  for 
instance,  is  our  bank  stock.  The  taxes  upon 
the  stock  of  the  bank  are  part  of  the  sinking 
fund.  Suppose  sir,  from  any  casualty  that 
fund  should  fail  entirely,  as  it  has  failed  hereto- 
fore, would  there  not  be  a  deficit  which  would 
come  under  "expenses  not  provided  for."  That, 
it  seems  to  me,  would  not  come  under  the  head  of 
"doticit,"  but  under  that  of  "expenses  not  pro- 
vided for."  Ought  there  not  then  to  be  a  power 
somewhere  to  protect  and  guard  the  credit  of  the 
state?  Certainly  there  ought.  That  is  the  only 
object  of  this  provision;  you  cannot  create  any 
deot  here,  except  for  such  casualties  as  may  oc- 
cur. Would  any  thing  like  "state  improve- 
ments" come  under  such  a  head  as  that?  Cer- 
tainly they  could  not.  Gentlemen  should  ex- 
amine these  things;  they  should  consider  them 
ad  they  will  be  seen  and  considered  by  the  coun- 
try. Gentlemen  should  consider  that  our  reve- 
nue mij^ht  be  reduced,  and  our  buildings  destroy- 


ed, pestilence  and  famine  might  overspread  the 
land,  and  in  such  emergency  the  credit  of  the 
state  could  not  be  sustained.  In  such  cases,  I 
am  aware  some  gentlemen  say  "meet  all  these 
emergencies  by  taxes."  The  people  sir,  are 
willing  to  pay  their  debts,  but  are  not  always 
ready  to  pay  taxes;  they  are  not  at  all  times  in 
a  condition  to  pay  them,  but  if  you  can  borrow 
money  for  a  short  period,  and  give  the  people  a 
little  time,  they  will  come  up  to  the  work,  and 
without  any  question  at  all.  It  is  forthat  reason 
and  on  that  supposition  that  this  power  should 
be  granted.  We  should  not  go  too  far  and  say 
that  there  shall  be  no  power  vested  anywhere  to 
provide  for  casualties  of  this  sort.  These  re- 
strictions I  regard  as  amply  sufficient.  Now 
sir,  we  propose  to  give  to  the  legislature  the 
power  to  borrow  $500,000.  I  do  not  think  that 
sum  is  any  too  much;  but  if  gentlemen  think  so, 
let  them  make  what  provision  they  may  deem 
proper.  We  have  some  means  in  the  sinking 
fund  that  cannot  be  classed  with  revenue  at  all. 
These  may  all  fail  as  they  have  failed  heretofore. 
Some  gentlemen  will  say  that  the  casualtes  I 
have  spoken  of  cannot,  or  at  least,  may  not  oc- 
cur; but  they  have  occurred  heretofore,  and 
may  occur  again,  and  certainly,  gentlemen,  in  a 
matter  of  such  importance,  ought  to  learn 
wisdom  from  the  past. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  The  sections  to 
which  the  gentleman's  remarks  apply,  are  not 
now  under  consideration.  I  shall  therefore  say 
nothing  in  reply  to  those  remarks.  If  I  have 
seen  any  proposition  which  seemed  to  command 
a  majority  of  the  votes  of  this  body,  it  is,  that 
$50,000  shall  be  sacredly  applied  to  extinguish 
the  state  debt.  I  only  desire  to  state  now  the 
reasons  why  I  prefer  the  proposition  of  the  com- 
mittee to  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Hopkins, 
(Mr.  Bradley.)  He  proposes  to  guard  the  sink- 
ing fund  by  making  a  constitutional  provision 
which  shall  direct  the  surplus,  after  paying  cur- 
rent expenses,  to  cancel  the  debt.  I  will  go 
with  him  to  provide  that  any  unexpended  bal- 
ance shall  go  to  extinguish  this  debt. 

Gentlemen  say  this  tends  to  tax  the  people  to 
the  amount  of  $50,000.  If  that  proposition  was 
couched  in  the  language  of  the  constitution  of 
Illinois,  I  would  go  for  it.  and  should  think  I 
was  discharging  a  debt  to  the  people  and  to  pos- 
terity. I  should  be  willing  to  take  upon  myself 
the  responsibility  of  setting  apart  a  fund  which 
no  future  legislature  could  touch  or  divert  from 
the  discharge  of  that  <Uity  resting  on  this  com- 
munity. It  is  admitted  on  all  hands  we  shall 
save,  by  having  our  legislative  sessions  bienni- 
ally, $50,000  annually,  if  our  revenue  remains 
as  it  now  stands.  I  wish  to  lay  hold  of  that 
surplus  by  a  constitutional  provision  and  apply 
it  to  the  extinguishment  of  the  debt,  and  not 
leave  it  for  the  legislature  to  appropriate  to  some 
other  purpose.  This  is  the  reason  why  I  prefer 
the  proposition  of  the  committee  to  that  of  tiio 
gentleman. 

Besides,  there  maybe  a  necessity  for  the  latter 
clause,  the  power  to  fund,  or  borrow  and  extend 
the  time  of  payment  when  not  able  to  niciet  a 
payment  At  the  time  it  falls  due.  That  I  think 
should  be  left  in  the  control  of  the  legislature. 
If  I  recollect  right,  that  power  was  asked  of  the 
legislature  in  1838  or  1839,  that  they  should  set 


777 


apart  a  fund  beyond  the  control  of  the  cominis- 1  The  question  was  then  put,  "shall  the  main 
sioners  of  the  'sinking  fund,  to  be  applied  to  !  question  be  now  taken?"  vhich  was  decided  in 
the  gradual  extinction  of  the  debt  independent  j  the  negative 


of  the  interest  accruing  from  the  debt.  It  was 
not  thought  proper  to  set  apart  such  a  fund. 

I  will,  therefore,  move  to  add  the  words — 

"  The  general  assembly  shall  also  set  apart, 
annually,  any  overplus  in  the  sinking  fund,  in 
addition  to  the  $50,000,  which  shall  be  applied 
to  the  payment  of  the  principal  of  the  state 
debt." 

The  meaning  of  the  amendment  in  this — that 
besides  the  $50,000  which  the  amendment  of  the 
President  proposes  to  devote  to  the  payment  of 
the  debt  from  the  annual  revenue,  (about  the  sum 
to  be  saved  by  dispensing  with  the  annual  ses- 
sions of  the  legislature,)  we  should  set  apart  the 
sinking  fund  also,  and  apply  the  whole  to  can- 
cel the  debt. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  will  see 
his  amendment  is  unnecessary. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  You  are  right,  sir; 
I  had  overlooked  the  interliueatiou  made.  I 
withdraw  the  amendment. 

Mr.  BRADLEY.  I  believe  I  have  pretty 
much  the  same  object  in  view  as  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  and  there  is  no  great  necessity  for 
controversy  between  us.  There  is,  however,  one 
diflference  to  which  I  wish  to  call  the  attention 


The  question  then  recurred  on  adopting  the 
substitute  of  the  gentleman  from  Hopkins  for 
the  section  adopted  by  the  committee  of  the 
whole. 

Mr.  BRADLEY  called  for  the  yeas  and  navs, 
and  being  taken,  thev  were,  yeas' 56,  navs  33:' 

Yeas— -John L.  Balfinger,  William  K.  bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  if  Bristow,  William  C.  Bullitt,  James 
S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Ben- 
jamin F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  For- 
rest, Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  John  Hargis,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  Geoijge  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Hugh  Newell,  Henrj-  B.  Pollard.  Johnson  Price, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  James   W.  Stone,   Albert  G.  Tal- 


of  the  convention.  He  proposes  by  his  amend-  |  bott,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman, 
ment  to  set  apart  $50,000  of  the  ordinary  reve-  |  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Robert  N. 
nue  of  the  state,  in  addition  to  the  excess  over  I  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 56. 
and  above  what  will  pay  the  interest  upon  the  i  N.ws — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
state  debt,  remaining  in  the  sinking  fund.  I  { low,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  Chenault.  Gar- 
wisli  to  call  that  gentleman's  attention  and  rett  Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
that  of  the  convention,  to  this  point.  If  the  j  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  SelueiusGarfielde,  James 
ordinary  revenue  does  not  furnish  the  sum  of 'P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
$50,000"    does   not  this  constitution  go  to  the    drew  Hood,  James   W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James, 


people  with  an  additional   clog  of  taxation  to 

that  amount?     Clearly  it  does.     But  when  you 

secure  the  whole  resources  of  the  sinking  fund, 

by  authorizing  the  legislature  to  increase  it,  and 

by  forbidding  them  to  diminish  it,  you  secure, 

for  this  year,  $83,000.  The  last  year  there  would 

have  been  secured  $77,000,  and  the  resources  of 

the   sinking   fund  will  still  be  in  no  wise  di-  ;  son — 33. 

minished.     Besides,  unless  the  object  be  to  in-        So  the  substitute  was  adopted. 

crease   taxation,  it  must  be  remembered  that  the        Mr.  JAMES  proposed  to  amend  the  section  by 

exce.ss  in  the  treasury,  except  $5,000,  goes  to  the    adding  the  following: 

sinking  fund,  and  according  to  my  amendment,  j      "The  legislature  shall  provide  by  law  for  col 


Peter  Lashbrooke,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  John  H. 
McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston, 
James  Rudd,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe,   George  W.  Williams,    Silas  Wood- 


will  necessarily  go  to  diminish  our  debt.  It  can 
be  applied  to  nothing  else.  If  we  are  required 
to  draw  from  the  revenue  .$50,000  in  addition  to 
this,  we  go  to  the  country  with  our  constitution 
loaded  with  taxes.  I  am  as  anxious  as  any  man 
to  pay  this  debt.  I  had  no  hand  in  contracting 
it.  but  I  am  prepared  to  do  my  part  towards  pay- 
ing it  at  the  most  convenient  time,  and  in  the 
be.st  wa^^  I  think  we  should  forbid  the  legisla- 
ture to  use  the  sinking  fund  for  any  other  pur- 
pose. 

Mr.  DESHA.  It  strikes  roe  all  this  discussion 
is  out  of  order,  for  the  previous  question  was 
moved  before  the  adjournment  yesterday, "as  the 
journal  read  here  this  morning  shows. 

The  PRESIDENT.  It  was  certainly  called 
at  the  time  of  the  adjournment,  but  as  it  was  not 
renewed  this  morning,  I  have  not  interfered  to 
•stop  the  discussion. 

Mr.  TURNER.    Well,  sir,  then  I  now  call 
or  the  previous  question. 
98 


lectingsuch  a  rate  of  tolls  from  the  roads  and  riv- 
ers as  have  been  or  may  hereafter  be  improved  at 
the  public  expense,  as  will  pay  the  interest  on 
the  sum  so  expended,  including  the  repairs  and 
expen.ses." 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  dont  think  there  should 
be  any  con.stitutional  legislation  on  this  subject 
at  all. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  hope  ceitainly  the  house  will 
not  adopt  that  proposition.     The  interest  on  the 

Sublic  aebt,  it  has  been  said,  amounts  to  $271,- 
00  or  near  $300,000  anuuallv;  and  if  you  im- 
pose a  rate  of  toll  on  the  roatfs  and  rivers  to  meet 
that  sum,  there  will  never  be  another  steamboat 
come  up  the  river,  or  a  private  carriage  on  the 
turnpikes.  I  am  sure  the  gentleman  is  mista- 
ken. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  If  my  friend  proposes  to  pay 
the  interest  on  all  we  have  expended,  it  will  put 
a  stop  to  all  vessels  on  the  Kentucky  river.  The 
expenses  on  the  Kentucky  river  have  been  $901,- 


77S 


000,  aDd  on  the  Gre«u  river  thejr  have  been  over 
$800,000.  The  expenses  have  hitherto  exceeded 
the  receipts.  If  you  attempt  to  raise  the  inter- 
est ou  this  sum  by  tolls,  there  will  not  bo  even 
a  canoe  on  the  river.  And  the  same  may  be  said 
of  the  turnpike  roads.  But  I  cannot  think  that 
my  friend  is  in  tarnest. 

Mr.  JAMES.  Mr.  President,  I  came  here  pre- 
pared to  vote  to  deprive  the  legislature  of  the 
power  to  contract  debts,  or  in  any  manner  run 
the  state  further  in  debt,  and  I  am  prepared  to 
go  for  the  lowest  possible  restriction  which  may 
not  be  likely  to  endanger  the  public  credit.  I 
did  not  expect  that  we  should  oe  called  upon  to 
prescribe  the  mode  and  manner  of  liquidating 
the  debt  alreadj'-  contracted,  but  as  that  question 
has  come  up,  I  am  prepared  to  meet  it.  I  there- 
fore submit  for  the  consideration  of  the  conven- 
tion my  plan,  which  is  contained  in  the  amend- 
ment that  I  have  just  offered.  I  propose  to  fe- 
auire  the  legislature  to  increase  the  tolls  upon 
18  roads  and  rivers,  so  as  to  raise  a  revenue 
sufficient  to  pay  the  interest  upon  the  sum  ex- 
pended for  their  improvement,  keeping  thera  in 
repair,  paying  expenses,  &c.  This  proposition 
will  test  tiie  sincerity  of  the  internal  improve- 
ment party.  What  did  they  promise  the  coun- 
try when  'they  commenced  this  system?  They 
8aid  the  profits  arising  from  it  would  not  only 
pay  the  interest,  but  yield  a  surplus  which 
could  be  so  invested  as  to  produce  a  sum  suffi- 
cient by  the  time  the  principal  fell  due,  to  pay 
that  also,  and  that  the  people  were  never  to  be 
.taxed  to  support  or  sustain  it.  Those  who  be- 
lieved that,  have  been  badly  taken  in.  Let  me 
-  call  your  attention  to  the  condition  of  the  coun- 
try, when  this  system  was  commenced.  Ourtaxes 
were,  comparatively,  light;  six  and  a  quarter  cents 
on  the  hundred  dollars  worth  of  property,  and 
then  nothing  was  listed  for  taxation  but  land  and 
slaves,  horses  and  mules.  This  was  soon  found 
to  be  insufficient,  and  you  resorted  to  a  strata- 
gem, to  raise  more  revenue  by  increasing  the 
subjects  of  taxation,  cattle,  bonds,  or  promisory 
notes,  and  money  was  taxed,  in  fact  every  thing 
that  a  man  possessed,  save  one  hundred  dollars, 
and  all  this  was  not  enough;  you  then  increased 
the  taxes  to  ten  cents,  and  from  that  to  fifteen 
cents,  and  now  one  third  of  all  the  taxes  col- 
lected in  the  state  goes  into  your  sinking  fund  to 
pay  the  interest  on  the  debt  created  for  internal 
improvement  purposes,  and  some  fourteen  or 
fifteen  thousand  dollars  collected  by  spleeific 
taxation.  Now  I  propose  to  tax  those  who  are 
osing  and  enjoying  the  benefits  of  these  im- 
provements to  pay  the  interest  on  the  sum  ex- 
pended. No  object  ever  was  entitled  to  public 
patronage  unless  such  a  tariff  could  be  imposed 
as  vould  support  it.  My  constituents  and  many 
other  portions  of  the  state  receive  no  benefit 
from  these  improvements,  and  I  most  solemnly 
protest  againsttheir  being  taxed  to  sustain  them, 
or  to  speak  more  plainly,  being  made  "hewers 
of  wood  and  drawers  of  wafer  '  for  another  por- 
tion of  the  country.  But  I  am  told  if  the  taxes 
are  raised  so  as  to  ])ay  the  inturest,  the  country 
cannot  stand  it,  and  ih-.  works  must  be  aban- 
doned and  go  xlown.  This  declaration  does  not 
,»Unn  me.    No,  not  at  all 

What  was  transportation  or  the  price  of  freight 
'from  Frankfort  to  Louisville,  beiore  the  Ken- 


tucky river  was  locked  and  darned?  It  was  from 
forty  to  fifty  cents.  What  is  it  now?  Only  fif- 
teen cents.  What  an  immense  reduction  besides 
the  benefits  and  advantages  of  expedition  and 
certainty,  two  grand  desideratums  in  commerce. 
Ex-governor  Metcalfe  in  his  report  to  the  legisla- 
ture in  1847-48,  in  speaking  of  the  Kentucky 
river  navigation,  and  the  benefits  and  advan- 
tages resulting  to  those  who  enjoy  it,  says:  "It 
mav  be  well  to  inquire  whether  the  amount  ac- 
tually saved  to  the  inhabitants  who  enjoy  the 
immediate  advantages  of  this  navigation,  does 
not  exceed  the  whole  amount  of  their  taxes  an- 
nually." In  another  part  of  the  same  report  he 
estimates  the  amount  saved  by  those  using  this 
navigation  at  more  than  $170,000  annually. 
What  is  the  interest  on  the  money  expended 
upon  the  Kentuckv  river?  It  is  about  $56,000, 
"iou  collect  now  by  your  tolls  about  $30,000; 
raise  the  tolls  a  little  nigher  and  you  would  col- 
lect $26,000  more,  and  you  would  then  have 
enough  to  pay  the  interest.  Gentlemen  need  not 
be  afraid  then,  that  by  raising  the  tolls  so  as  to 
make  them  pay  the  interest,  it  will  drive  every 
steamboat  out  of  it.  My  venerable  friend  the 
senior  gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin,) 
says,  he  cannot  think  me  in  earnest,  and  that  I 
certainly  must  be  jesting.  Well,  he  will  know 
by  waiting  a  while.  This  is  no  new  notion  of 
mine.  A  few  years  since  when  a  member  of  the 
senate,  I  was  foremost  there,  I  believe,  in  ad- 
vocating a  law  providing  for  increasing  the  tolls 
upon  this  river,  and  at  one  moment  I  was  flat- 
tered with  success,  but  a  combination  was  form- 
ed and  its  provisions  were  made  to  apply  to 
Green  river,  the  improvements  on  which  were  in 
their  infancy,  scarcely  completed,  and  this  caus- 
ed my  efforts  to  prove  abortive. 

I  desire  now  to  call  the  attention  of  the  con- 
vention and  the  country  to  the  condition  and 
management  of  our  turnpike  roads.  I  beg  leave 
to  read  from  a  counter  report  made  by  G.  W. 
Johnson  of  Scott  county,  a  very  prominent  and 
distinguished  man,  the  nephew,  I  believe,  of  the 
ex-vice  president  of  the  United  States,  Col.  R.  M. 
Johnson.  This  report  was  made  to  the  house  of 
representatives.     See  journal  1839-40,  page  484, 

"The  state  and  individuals  have  improved 
467.67  miles  of  road,  and  the  amount  of  tolls 
collected  at  the  gates,  during  the  year  1839,  is 
reported  by  the  board  of  internal  imprevement 
at  $92,641  86;  while  it  is  stated  by  the  commis- 
sioners of  the  sinking  fund,  that  only  $7,576  37 
have  been  received  by  them.  Upon  the  suppo- 
sition that  the  state  is  iuteresteci  only  one  half 
in  these  improvements,  it  is  evident  that  $77,- 
489  12,  or  nearly  $80,000  must  have  been  expen- 
ded, during  the  year  1839,  in  repairs,  anci  the 
payment  of  presidents,  treasurers,  toll-gate  keep- 
ers, and  agents  of  tlie  local  boards,  and  inciden- 
tal expenses. 

"The  expenditure  of  so  large  a  sum,  for  suoh 
purposes,  it  is  believed,  results  from  mismanage- 
ment or  fraud.  If  it  be  true,  that  neither  mis- 
management or  frauds  have  had  any  agency  in 
producing  this  result,  it  is  evident  that  the  sys- 
tem of  borrowing,  at  five  or  six  per  cent,  large 
sums  at  compound  interest,  to  be  invested  m 
turnpike  roacfs,  must  ultimately  be  ruinous  in 
the  extreme.  The  state  has  paitl  $2,027,614  89 
and  individuals  ^1,999,398  towards  the  comple- 


tion  of  thes«  roads.  Six  per  c«nt.  on  ^,000,000 
amounts  to  $120,000  annually.  The  state  has 
received,  as  stated  above,  only  $7,576  37  during 
the  year  1839,  on  its  investment  of  $2,027,614 
89,  or  a  fraction  more  than  the  one  third  of  one 
per  cent,  per  annum.  Two  millions  of  dollars,  at 
six  per  cent,  compound  interest,  will,  in  thirty 
two  years,  amount  to  the  sum  of  sixteen  mif- 
lions,  a  sum  so  enormous  as  to  be  almost  incred- 
ible, if  figures  did  not  establish  its  truti  bevond 
contradiction.  The  most  rigid  economy  is  in- 
dispeusabl*;  in  a  system  involving  such  vast  re- 
sults, and  a  radical  reform  must  be  necessary." 

Mr.  President,  does  not  the  extract  which  I 
have  just  read,  present  our  systeni  Of  internal 
improvements  in  a  most  deplorable  condition? 
It  surely  does;  and  in  the  language  of  the  elo- 
quent writer,  "radical  reform  must  be  necessa- 
ry." And  what  do  I  propose  by  the  proposition 
which  I  have  just  submitted?  It  is  to  require 
the  legislature  to  provide,  by  law,  for  laying 
such  tariff  on  the  travel  and  transportation  on 
pur  roads  and  rivers  as  will  raise  a  revenue  suf- 
ficient to  pay  the  interest,  cost  of  repairs,  expen- 
ses, »tc.  And  surely  those  who  have  acted  a 
conspicuous  part  in  bringing  about  such  a  state 
of  things  cannot  and  will  not  refuse  to  come  up 
and  tax  those  who  are  in  the  enjoyment  and  pos- 
session of  the  grand  and  magnificent  improve- 
ments, and  those  too  whose  property  has  becB 
more  than  doubled  in  value  by  their  construc- 
tion. If  you  do  this,  and  it  should  be  onerous, 
the  burden  will  but  fall  where  it  properly  be- 
longs. 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  can  scarcely  think  my  friend 
from  Hickman  is  in  earnest,  but  if  he  is,  I  think 
it  will  be  well  to  look  into  the  effect  of  that 
;amendment.  I  understand  the  amendment  is 
introduced  to  test  the  sincerity  of  the  friends  of 
internal  iniprovement.  If  the  amendment  pre- 
vails, it  will  affect  those  who  are  not  in  favor  of 
internal  improvements  as  much,  and  perhaps 
more  than  those  who  are  in  favor  of  them.  Those 
who  live  above  slackwater  navigation  are  deep- 
ly interested  in  the  navigation  of  the  rivers,  and 
tkose  who  live  below  are  interested  in  the  trans- 
portation up  and  down  the  river.  The  gentle- 
man proposes  to  lay  a  tax  on  the  roads  and  riv- 
ers suffieieut  to  pav  the  interest  on  the  money 
expended  in  making  roads  and  other  public 
works.  On  what  is  that  tax  to  belaid?  On  the 
produce  of  the  country  of  course.  It  will  fall 
diructly  on  steamboats  and  other  boats  engaged 
in  transporting  up  and  dnwn  the  rivers.  But  is  it 
not  a  fact  when  you  tax  the  vessels  which  carry 
the  produce,  you  indirectly  tax  the  produce 
which  they  carry  to  market?  Tiiis  cannot  be  de- 
nied. The  tax  falls  on  all  the  people  on  the  banks 
of  the  rivers,  but  it  will  not  fall  on  all  the  peo- 
ple of  the  state  alike.  Impose  such  a  tax,  and 
It  would  put  a  stop  to  navigation.  The  tax  on 
the  produce  going  out  of  Green  river  would  ab- 
sorb the  whole  value.  The  object  of  mv  friend 
I  believe  is  good,  but  he  cannot  carry  it  out  in 
this  way  without  great  injustice.  Those  who 
live  at  the  head  waters  of  the  Kentucky  and 
Green  rivers  will  be  compelled  to  pay  the  taxes 
on  improvements  below,  as  well  as  those  who 
are  in  favor  of  the  improvements.  I  cannot 
think  my  friend  is  in  earnest,  and  I  hope  he  will 
•withdraw  his  amendment. 


Mr.  OHOLSOX.  I  know  not  whether  lh«  gen- 
tleman from  Hickman  (Mr.  James)  is  in  earnest 
or  not;  but  if  he  is  not,  he  certainly  onght  to 
be.  We  have  been  told,  indirectly,  that  we,  in 
the  extremes,  are  to  pay  the  fidtller,  while  the 
people  in  the  centre  dance.  In  heaven's  name, 
who  should  the  expense  fall  upon,  but  those 
who  derive  the  benefit  of  these  improvements  ? 
But  because  they  would  be  taxed,  we  are  told 
the  proposition  will  not  do.  I  have  been  de- 
nounced and  abused  out  of  this  house,  and  in- 
sulted in  it,  because  I  voted  for  restricting  the 
city  of  Louisville.  Why  did  1  do  it?  Because  I 
thought  one  thirty-eighth  part  of  the  senato- 
rial representation  was  as  much  as  any  city 
should  nave.  And  now  we  are  told  these  im- 
provements shall  go  on,  and  the  present  rates  of 
toll  shall  remain  as  they  are.  We  must  be  taxed, 
it  is  intimated,  in  all  time  to  come,  instead  of 
those  who  are  benefited.  We  never  have  been 
benefited  by  the  improvements.  Gentlemen  are 
only  asked  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  sums  that 
have  been  expended  for  the  advantage  of  par- 
ticular sections  of  the  state;  but  we  are  torn  br 
gentlemen  that  this  will  not  do.  Ishould  have  been 
glad  to  have  heard  from  my  friend  from  Madison, 
who  glories  so  much  in  internal  improvements.  I 
would  have  been  glad  to  hear  Irom  the  hon- 
orable president,  and  from  many  other  gentle- 
men on  this  subject.  I  ask  gentlemen  to  say,  if 
it  will  not  do  now,  to  tax  these  roads  and  other 
local  objects,  when  will  it?  I  ask  gentlemen  to 
name  a  time  when  we  are  to  be  relieved  froqj 
taxation?  I  want  to  know  when  thev  are  wil- 
ling to  take  the  burden  upon  their  own  shoul- 
ders, for  it  is  properly  their  burden  and  not  ours. 
My  constituents  want  to  know  the  time,  and 
therefore  I  am  desirous  that  gentlemen  shall 
name  a  period  which,  I  hope,  may  satisfy  those 
whom  I  represent.  1  know  there  is  an  objection 
to  this.  We  are  told  every  day  in  this  hall,  if 
you  put  this  in  the  constitution,  or  that  in  the 
constitution,  it  will  induce  many  to  vote  against 
it.  I  have  seen  nothing  yet  that  will  induce  me 
to  vote  against  it.  Sir,  I  should  be  willing  to 
be  ridden,  booteil,  and  spurred  a  little  longer, 
rather  than  do  that,  as  I  have  got  accustomed  to 
it.  When  the  questi<in  is  one  of  expediency 
merely,  and  not  one  of  justice,  I  would,  as  a 
member  of  this  convention,  vote  against  it.  But 
as  a  member  of  the  legislature,  as  an  act  of  jus- 
tice to  mv  constituents,  I  would  vote  for  it. 

I  would  suggest  to  my  friend  from  Hopkins, 
(Mr.  Bradley,}  wliether  there  is  not  danger  in 
adopting  the  course  he  advo*ates.  If  the  inter- 
nal improvement  men  would  be  affected  in  their 
purses  by  this  mo>t  just  principle,  and  should 
turn  against  thisprojK»sition,wc  sliould  lose  our 
constitution. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  have  said  nothing  about  my 
being  for  or  against  internal  improvements,  nor 
do  I  intend  to  say  any  thing  about  it  now. 

The  gentleman  thfnks  1  am  abandoning  my 
principles  here.  Why?  Because  I  will  not  go 
for  laying  a  tax  on  the  people  on  the  banks  of 
the  rivers,  to  an  extent  tJiat  will  pay  the  interest 
on  the  debt  for  improvements,  and  at  the  Same 
time  meet  all  the  expenses  for  repairs.  Has  that 
gentleman  inquired  what  effect  it  will  have  on 
uie  navigation  of  the  rivers?  Has  he  settlej^  jy 
his  own  mind,  that  it  will  not  stop  Ji*>'igatJOn 


1 


m 


«Qtirely?  And  if  it  sboultl,  uhall  he  tell  me 
that!  am  acting  inconsistently,  if  I  will  not  go 
with  him  in  his  mad  scheme  of  oppress] on?  Let 
him  show  that  the  people  are  capable  of  bear- 
ing such  a  taxation — let  him  show  that  it  would 
be  just,  so  to  tax  them — let  him  show  that  it  will 
not  destroy  the  navitration  of  the  rivers^:— and 
then  he  may  come  and  say  it  is  right  and  proper 
to  lay  such  a  tax  exclusively  on  the  people  on 
the  oanks  of  tlie  rivere.  Let  us.  says  lie,  tax 
those  who  have  the  benefit  of  the  improvement. 
I  told  the  gentleman,  that  if  the  section  was  adopt- 
ed, many  would  be  taxed  who  had  not  the  bene- 
fit of  it. 

In  1841-2, 1  Was  a  member  of  the  legislAtute, 
and  there  came  petitions  to  that  body  from  the 
people  near  the  source  of  the  Kentucky  river, 
that  they  might  be  relieved  from  the  tax  in  p?ass- 
ing  through  the  locks  and  dams.  The  reasbn 
was,  they  could  come  down  when  the  floods 
were  higli  without  the  locks  and  dams,  which 
were  of  no  particular  advantage  to  them,  but 
subjected  them  to  enormous  taxes.  The  people 
on  Green  river  are  in  the  same  condition.  1  he 
tax  on  the  locks  is  a  tAx  on  the  produce  as  'well 
as  on  those  wlio  live  near  the  river.  But  if  it 
falls  on  the  people  on  the  banks  of  these  two 
rivers,  it  will  put  a  stop  to  navigation,  which 
every  body  will  agree,  should  not  be  done.  That 
it  would  do  this,  I  haVe  no  doubt.  The  whole 
amount  of  taxes  on  the  people  on  the  banks 
of  these  rivers  for  a  year,  would  be  about 
$150,000,  or  rather  it  would  be  on  their  pro- 
duce. My  friend  from  Ballard  and  McCrait- 
ken  surely  cannot  be  be  in  earnest.  He  is  a  gen- 
tleman of  fine  feelings,  I  have  no  doubt.  He  is 
opposed  to  taxation,  to  oppression.  He  startles, 
when  we  talk  about  taxing  one  portion  of  the 
commnnity  for  the  benefit  of  another,  and  yet  he 
wishes  to  tax  those  on  the  banks  of  the  rivers  to 
an  extent  that  would  be  the  extreme  of  oppression. 
Mr.  GHOLSOI^'.  I  have  said  that  these  works 
are  wholly  worthless — that  they  are,  in  fact,  of 
no  profit  to  the  state.  The  gentleman  says  if 
you  tax  the  people  you  will  send  their  produce 
out  some  other  way.  That  is  what  we  have  al- 
ways contended  for.  We  did  not  want  the 
works  made,  nor  do  we  want  them  sustained. 
But,  I  ask  gentlemen  to  put  a  period  to  this  bur- 
den, or  to  tell  us  how  long  we  are  to  pay  taxes 
to  meet  the  interest  on  this  money,  and  probably 
the  principal,  for  the  benefit  of  those  wlio  live 
on  tne  various  routes. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not  think  we  have  any 
thing  to  do  with  that.  I  think  it  belongs  to  the 
legislature  of  the  country. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  That  is  about  as  good  an 
answer  as  I  expected,  and  as  good  as  any  other 
gentleman  will  ever  give  in  this  hall.  Why 
leave  it  to  tlie  legislature?  Why  does  he  not 
say  what  day  we  may  expect  it  to  come  to  an 
end?  Ho  man  can  tell  when  it  will  end,  unless 
the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Hickman 
should  be  adopted. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  I  have,  upon  two  or  three 
occasions,  moved  the  previous  question;  and,  as 
this  session  should  draw  to  a  close — though  I  am 
willing  to  hear  reasonable  debata — I  think  this 
question  has  bien  suthciently  discussed,  andl 
shall  be  under  the  necestity  of  demanding  the 
previous  question. 


Thfe  main  question  Was  ordered. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  amendment. 

The  secretary  commenced  calling  the  roll,  but 
before  he  got  through 

Mr.  JAMES  rose,  and  asked  permission  to 
withdraw  his  amendment. 

Leave  was  granted. 

The  question  recurred  on  the  adoption  of  the 
section,  as  amended. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays,  and  thej'  were — yeas  52,  nays  42. 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowl- 
ing, Alfred  Brtyd,  William  Jkadley,  Luther 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Cofft-y,  Henry  K.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Richai-d  D.Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  John  Hargis,  Alfred  M.  Jack- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly.  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thoma,s  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  Mc- 
Henry,  Jonathan  Newcum  Hugh  Newell,  Henry 
B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael 
L.  iStoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  Wm.  R.  Thomp- 
son, Henrv  Washington,  Jno.  Wheeler,  Charles 
A.  WicklffTe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 52. 

Nays — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Garrett 
Davis,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.Irwin, 
Thomas  James,  Wm.  Johnson,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Mar- 
shall, William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure, 
David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thos. 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston,  Jas.  Rudd, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  Jas.  W.  Stone,  John  D. 
Taylor,  John.  J.  Thurmau,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  Andrew  S.  White,  George  W. 
"\\  illiams,  Silas  Woodson — 42. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  desire  to  submit 
the  following,  as  an  additional  clause  to  the 
section  just  adopted.  It  is  to  provide  for  an  an- 
nual sum,  of  at  least  $50,000,  to  be  applied  to 
the  extinguishment  of  this  debt.  The  reason 
why  I  preferred  the  original  amendment  of  the 
President  was  this  :  there  were  too  many  con- 
tingencies upon  which  that  fund  depends  I 
wish,  while  we  devote  that  fund  to  pay  the  state 
debt,  to  add  also  this  clause  : 

"  If  there  shall  not  be  an  annual  surplus  in  the 
sinking  fund,  equal  to  $50,000,  to  be  devoted  to 
the  payment  of  the  principal  of  the  state  debt, 
the  deficiency  shall  be  made  up  by  an  appropri- 
ation from  the  revenue  of  the  state,  so  that  at 
least  the  sum  of  $50,000  shall  be  annually  devo- 
ted tO'  the  extinguishment  of  said  debt." 

I  barely  wish  to  provide,  that  whenever  it  is 
ascertained  that  there  will  not  be  this  surplus 


rsi 


from  the  sinking  fund,  the  niflnagers  of  that 
fund  may  make  their  arrangements  to  extinguish 
$50,000  of  this  debt.  And  when  there  is  not 
this  amount,  the  legislature  may  provide  for  it, 
so  that  we  may  apply  the  pn'nciple  of  extin- 
guishing this  sum  every  year. 

Mr.  BROWN.  It  seems  to  me  we  are  running 
too  mueh  into  legislation.  I  am  opposed  to  this 
amendment,  by  which,  whenever  there  is  not 
$50,000  which  can  be  applied  from  the  sinking 
fund,  wo  may  take  that  sum  from  our  ordinary 
revenue.  It  will  accomplish  notliing  but  to 
give  the  legislature  the  power  to  resort  to  taxa- 
tion. 

Mr.  HARGIS.  I  will  vote  for  no  provision 
that  provides  for  direct  taxation  of  the  people. 
Such  a  provision  is  legislation,  and  should  not 
be  engrafted  on  a  constitution.  Besides,  this  is 
a  subject  which  was  not  discussed  before  the 
people  in  the  late  canvass.  I  am  as  willing  as 
any  gentleman  to  make  provision  to  meet  the 
obligations  of  the  state  to  the  last  dollar,  togeth- 
er with  interest  on  the  principal  as  it  becomes 
due;  but  I  am  not  willing,  in  the  formation  of 
an  organic  law  for  the  state,  to  run  into  such  de- 
tails, and  insert  in  this  instrument  that  which 
should  be  the  subject  of  legislative  enactment. 
I  am  not  willing  in  this  way  to  make  an  impera- 
tive provision  for  all  time  to  come,  whereby  the 
people  will  be  taxed  annually  to  the  amount  of 
$50,000,  in  addition  to  the  taxes  which  they  now- 
pay.  Whether  the  internal  improvement  sys- 
tem was  right  or  wrong,  I  will  not  now  say;  but 
I  will  go  for  paying  all  the  debts  we  have  incur- 
red, and  leave  to  the  legislature  the  passage  of 
such  laws  as  will  be  a  safeguard  for  the  future. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  wish  to  be  under- 
stood here  and  at  home,  that  I  came  hero,  for  the 
purpose  of  providing  some  system  by  which  the 

fiublic  debt  can  be  relieved.  I  know  the  legis- 
atures  have  been  called  upon  from  time  to  time, 
by  the  executives  of  this  commonwealth  to  set 
apart  a  fund  annually  for  the  gradual  liquida-tion 
of  the  public  debt.  That  has  not  been  done, 
though  the  people  have  always  desired  that  the 
debt  should  be  paid.  It  is  believed  the  sinking 
fund  will  have  an  increase  greater  than  $50,000. 
I  hope  it  may,  but  when  we  remember  the  fund 
is  drawn  principally  from  taxation  on  bank 
stock,  from  dividends  of  bank  stock,  from  divi- 
dends of  public  roads,  it  is  subject  to  casualties 
and  loss.  There  may  be  and  has  been  a  surplus 
for  the  last  two  or  three  years.  But  if  in  conse- 
quence of  breaking  away  of  a  dam,  the  in- 
come from  the  river  .should  be  stopped ;  there  are 
not  $50,000,  and  this  surplus  fails,  what  does 
my  proposition  contemplate?  That  there  shall 
be  at  least,  the  sum  of  $50,000 — to  be  appro- 
priated to  reduce  the  debt.  That  is  what  1  want 
to  secure.  Gentlemen  need  not  be  apprehensive 
of  telling  the  people  of  the  state  that  they  have 
secured  an  appropriation  of  $50,000  annually — 
no  matter  how  or  in  what  manner  it  may  be 
raised — that  in  the  course  of  thirty  years,  will 
extinguish  our  state  debt.  This  will  meet  the 
approval  of  the  people.  They  will  hail  our  act 
as  one  fitted  to  protect  them  against  excessive 
taxation.  I  do  not  suppose  that  a  provision  of 
this  kind  will  lead  to  the  necessity  for  a  tax  to 
the  amount  of  the  forty-eighth  part  of  a  cent  per 
cent.    It  may  be  the  means  of  compelling  some 


future  legislature,  when  making  appropriations, 
to  look  to  this  constiutional  demand  upon  the 
public  treasury. 

'      The   yeas  and   nays  were  called  for  on   the 
I  amendment,   and   being  taken,   were — yeas  34, 
nays  57: 
j      Ye.as— Mr.   President,  (Guthrie,)  William  K. 
I  Bowling,   Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Lu- 
i  ther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  Che- 
nault,  Jes.se   Coffey,  Archibald  Dixon,  Seluciua 
Garfielde,   James   P.   Hamilton,    Ben.   Hardin, 
Vincent  S.  Hav,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,    I'homas   N.    Lindsey,   Martin   P. 
Marshall,  John  H.  McHenrj-,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.   Morris,  Jona- 
than Newcum  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
William  Preston,   Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  D.  Taylor,  Henry  Washington,  Charles  A. 
WicklifiFe,   Silas  Woodson,   Wesley  J.   Wright 
—34. 

Nats — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Jas.  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian 
E.  Gray,  John  Hargis,  Andrew  Hood,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  Thos.  James,  William  Johnson, 
Geo.  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Thos.W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Geo. 
W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Mar.shall,  William 
N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  David  Meriwether,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Steven 
son,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stouer,  Alber" 
G.  Talbott,,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  Jt 
Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John- 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
George  W^.  Williams — 57. 

So  the  section  was  rejected. 

The  thirty  second  .section  of  the  report,  which 
is  now  the  thirty  third,  was  next  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  32.  The  general  assembly  may  contract 
debts  to  meet  casual  deficits  or  failures  in  the 
revenue,  or  for  expenses  not  provided  for,  but 
such  debts,  direct  or  contingent,  singly  or  in 
the  aggregate,  shall  not  at  any  time  exceed  five 
hundred  thousand  dollars;  and  the  moneys, 
arising  from  loans  creating  such  debts,  shall  be 
applied  to  the  purposes  for  which  they  were  ob- 
tained, or  to  re-pay  such  debts:  Provided,  that 
the  state  may  contract  debts  to  repel  invasion, 
suppress  insurrection,  or,  if  hostilities  are  threat- 
ened, provide  for  the  public  defence." 

To  this  section  there  was  a  pending  amend- 
ment to  strike  out  the  words  "or  for  expenses 
not  provided  for." 

Mr.  MACHEN.  It  seems  to  me  sir,  that  there 
is  no  use  in  making  this  change  in  the  .section. 
I  am  as  fully  in  favor  of  restricting  the  legisla- 
ture in  its  powers  of  contracting  debt,  as  any 
man  on  this  floor;  but  it  appears  to  me  that  there 
may  be  occasions  when  extraordinary  revenue 
may  be  required,  so  that  it  would  in  my  opinion 
be  advisable  to  allow  this  section  to  remain  as 
it  is.  Many  gentlemen  appear  to  think  that  .$50,- 


782 


000  voiild  tie  a  siifficieTit  nhiount  of  extrn  taxa- 
tion, >vith  which  to  invest  the  legislature;  others 
sry"$100,000,  and  others  more,  as  coming  under 
the  words  "expenses  not  provided  for."  I  am 
f.jr  a:-,  little  as  appears  necessary  to  meet  the 
case;  but  1,'entlenicii  well  know  tiiat  there  are  in- 
cidental expenses  wlii<-.h  spring  up  in  govern- 
ments which  cannot  be  anticipated  at  all  times. 
Tlie  small  sum  of  $50,000  may  be  thought  suffi- 
cient by  some,  but  if  you  go  back  into  the  histo- 
ry of  I^entucky  for  a  few  years  you  will  readily 
see  liow  circumstances  may  spring  up  rendering 
it  necessary  to  go  to  the  amount  of  .$500,000. 

From  1839  to  1843  the  valuation  of  the  prop- 
erty of  the  state  was  reduced  by  commercial 
convulsions  seventy  seven  millions  of  dollars. 
Such  an  emergency  may  arise  again,  and  be  of 
such  a  character  as  to  deprive  the  treasury  of  one 
half  of  its  ordinary  revenue.  In  what  condition 
would  the  state  be  placed  should  tliis  misfortune 
befal  us,  and  the  restriction  be  limited  to  meet 
the  views  of  those  who  think  $50,000  would  be 
as  far  as  the  legislature  should  go  in  borrowing? 
Repudiation  is  to  be  the  result. 

Some  will  say  it  is  time  enough  to  call  the 
legislature  to  meet  contingencies  when  they  have 
arisen.  There  I  ditier;  for  in  my  opinion  that  is 
just  the  time  when  it  may  be  too  late — too  late 
either  to  call  the  legislature  or  to  levy  a  tax  to 
meet  these  requirements.     For  thesereasons,  sir, 

1  think  there  is  no  necessity  for  changing  the 
section;  but  that  we  will  best  consult  the  inter- 
ests of  the  state  by  permitting  it  to  remain  as  it 
is. 

Mr.  PRESTOIS^.  I  think  the  observation  of  the 
gentleman  from  Caldwell  so  good,  that  it  needs 
no  recommendation.  The  words  are  distinct — 
intelligible — there  is  no  ambiguity  about  them — 
"expenses  not  provided  for."  You  have  now 
tied  up  the  sinking  fund  by  this  morning's  vote. 
Suppo.se  the  locks  and  dams  of  the  river  here 
were  destroyed;  you  have  no  power  to  borrow 
money  to  relieve  the  embarrassment  in  wliich 
the  state  would,  by  such  a  casualty,  find  lierself. 
Imagine  the  case  of  your  capitol  being  burned 
down,  a  similar  difficulty  would  occur.  The 
words  "or  other  expenses,"  were  intended  to 
give  that  very  latitude  which  the  gentleman 
must  deem  necessary  to  give  the  right  to  contract 
a  debt  of  half  a  million  of  dollars  if  the  popu- 
lar necessities  appear  to  demand  it.  That  was 
the  effect  of  that  provision;  if  you  strike  it  out 
you  embarrass  the  state.  If  I  had  to  vote  either 
way,  1  would  rather  do  without  both  the  thirt}'- 
second  and  thirty-third  sections,  than  omit  the 
words  suggested;  for  if  you  strike  them  out,  you 
certainly  destroy  the  effect  of  both  of  these  sec- 
tions. The  city  of  Louisville  alone  has  a  reve- 
nue which  amounts  to  nearly  half  a  million  of 
dollars  annually;  the  city  of  New  York  pays 
nearly  that  amount  for  cleaning  her  streets;  Bos- 
ton expends  more  tlian  half  a  million  annually 
for  her  city  expenses,  and  we  are  here  to  restrict 
the  state  of  Kentucky,  and  we  repose  so  little 
confidence  in  her  legislature  as  to  deny  her  the 
paltry  j)ower  to  contract  a  debt  of  lialf  a  million, 
or  to  repose  that  amount  of  confidence  in  her 
sovereign  iegislnturc.  I  hope  these  words  will 
not  be  stricken  out;  if  they  are,  you  will  muti- 
late the  section  so  as  to  render  it  entirely  inop- 
erative.   We  have  now  not  only  taken  the  sink- 


ing fund  from  under  the  contTol  of  the  legisla- 
ture, but  we  have  decided  that  $50,000  from  the 
surplus  revenue,  shall  annually  be  applied  to  the 
payment  of  the  public  debt.  Casualties  may 
arise,  and  in  such  case  from  three  to  four  years' 
must  elapse  before  any  provision  can  be  mad© 
for  their  repair.  In  1839,  we  were  in  such  a  state 
of  embarrassment  that  we  were  compelled  to  bor- 
row from  the  banks  $267,000.  Whatwould  have 
been  the  effect  if  this  feature  had  been  in  the  con- 
stitution of  1799?  Repudiation  and  disgrace. 
There  area  lumdred  reasons  why  this  margin 
should  be  left  with  the  legislature;  and  I  hope 
that  no  personal  differences  of  opinion,  no 
little  spirit  of  parsimony  will  prevail  on  this 
floor,  on  such  a  subject  as  this.  I  hope 
by  our  vote  on  this  question  we  will  at  least  say 
that  the  people  of  the  commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky can  afford  to  repose  discretion  in  their  le- 
gislature, to  redeem  the  honor  of  their  state,  as 
its  emergencies  might  require.  Impose  this  re- 
striction, and  you  will  find  that  in  five  or  six 
years  an  impulse  will  have  sprung  up  under  the 
influence  of  wealth  and  growing  prosperity  that 
will  call  for  another  constitution.  In  five  or  six 
years  the  people  under  the  influence  of  those 
hopes  which  always  exist  and  expand  with 
wealth,  may  require  and  induce  us  to  embark  in 
schemes  of  internal  improvement;  pass  restric- 
tions of  an  extreme  character,  and  you  may  de- 
pend upon  it  that  before  five  or  six  years  have 
elapsed,  you  will  be  called  upon  to  reconsidef 
this  work  which  you  are  here  to  perform  to-day. 

Look  at  Virginia.  What  did  she  do  last  year? 
At  the  last  session  of  her  legislature  she  was  in- 
fluenced by  the  pro.sperity  of  Kentucky  and 
Georgia — two  sister  slave  states — to  contract  a 
debt  of  some  four  millions  to  invest  in  the  Par- 
kersburgh  railroad,  and  in  perfecting  the  com- 
munication between  the  waters  of  the  Kanawha 
and  James  rivers. 

I  merely  mention  this  to  show  that  there  is  an 
alteration  in  the  public  mind — an  alteration 
which  i.s  certain  to  exist  in  the  minds  ot  the 
people  of  this  state,  as  our  wealth,  resources, 
and  population  advance ;  and  when  it  comes, 
woe  be  to  this  constitution,  if  we  so  cripple  the 
will  of  the  people  that  we  cannot  accomplish 
their  wishes.  Pa.ss  this  restriction,  and  what  do 
we  say  to  the  people  of  Kentucky?  Why,  that 
"we  are  making  you  a  constitution  for — how 
long? — five  years  to  come?"  No!  A  constitu- 
tion, sir,  is  a  thing  that  should  be  made  for 
ages,  if  made  as  it  ought  to  be.  It  is  the  em- 
bodiment of  the  great  principles  lying  at  the 
foundation  of  society,  which  should  be  dis- 
turbed as  seldom  as  possible.  We  are  making 
this  constitution,  as  we  hope,  to  continue  not 
only  when  we  are  in  our  graves,  but  when  many 
generations  after  us  shall  have  followed  us 
thither.  Are  we  then  to  assume  that  this  con- 
vention alone  are  the  true  representatives  of  the 
people — a  better  index  of  the  wislies  of  a  gene- 
ration which  will  exist  when  we  are  all  dead, 
than  the  representatives  of  their  own  choice-— 
their  own  day,  and  their  own  generation?  As  well 
indeed  might  we  say  that  the  convention  of  1799 
was  a  convention  that  had  a  right  to  control  our 
privileges  in  all  time  to  come,  and  that  they 
were  the  true  representatives  of  the  people,  in- 
stead of  ourselves  or  the  legislature  of  the  state. 


tss 


I  merely  ask  gentlemen  to  use  some  discretion; 
I  ask  them  not  to  stigmatiie  the  slate  by  saying 
that  they  shall  have  no  power  in  all  time  to 
come;  I  ask  them  not  to  deprive  the  state  of 
that  self-control  which  b«long^  to  all  truly  and 
■well  organized  bodies. 

Sir,  I  am  a:*  anxious  as  any  gentleman  in  this 
house  to  restrict,  in  a  wholesome  manner,  the 
«xercise  of  this  debt -contracting  power;  but  we 
niay  urge  it  too  far;  and  I  feel  it  my  duty  to 
warn  you,  as  far  as  I  am  able,  and  to  entreat 
that  we  should  not  be  governed  by  a  parsimony 
60  odious.  For  fifty  years  we  have  enjoyed  this 
right.  The  federal  government  has  no  check 
upon  it.  Most  of  the  states  have  no  cheek  up- 
on it;  and  now,  when  we  propose  to  take  away 
from  the  legislature  of  the  state  of  Kentucky  the 
power  of  contracting  debt,  and  leave  them  the 
pittance  of  half  a  million  as  a  maximum  for 
which  they  may  contract  debt,  we  are  told  that 
it  is  an  extravagant  sum.  One  moment's  reflec- 
tion mnst  convince  every  gentleman  that  it  is 
not  so. 

I  hope  therefore,  that  as  unforeseen  difficulties 
may  arise  to  depress  the  public  business  of  my 
native  state,  the  convention  will  leave  to  the 
legislature  the  exercise  of  such  discretionary 
power  as  will  in  some  measure  seem  likely  to 
meet  the  case,  and  that,  at  all  events,  they  will 
not  attempt  to  lay  any  restriction  on  the  amount 
proposed  m  this  section.  I  have  said  thus  much, 
out  I  of  course  f<  el  bound  to  abide  by  the  decis- 
ion of  the  convention  in  the  matter. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Most  of  the  remarks 
of  the  gentleman  froni  Louisville,  seem  to  be 
made  in  reference  to  his  own  work — the  thiny 
third  section.  He  proposes  not  to  trust  the  fu- 
ture legislature  with  the  power  of  borrowing 
money  without  consulting  the  people,  before  the 
contract  is  made. 

If  he  has  convinced  himself  that  that  section 
is  wrong,  I  hope  he  will  move  to  strike  it  from 
the  article  of  the  constitution.  The  amend- 
ment xmder  consideration  has  been  denounced  by 
the  honorable  member,  as  being  the  result  of  parsi- 
monious feelings  and  opinions.  Wliatever  may  be 
its  form  or  it.s  character,  it  does  not  change  the 
nature  or  effect  of  the  amendment.  It  is  by 
speeches  of  the  kind  wehave  just  heard,  that  the 
pride  of  members  of  the  legislature  is  sometimes 
excited ;  and  the  immense  appropriations  of 
which  we  have  recently  heard  lu  this  and  other 
states,  have  been  inconsiderately  obtained.  The 
gentleman  provides  in  tills  section,  that  the  le- 
gislature may  create  a  debt  not  exceeding  $500,- 
OOOwithoutthe  provision  of  the  condition  annex- 
ed to  the  succeeding  section,  rendering  it  neces- 
sary to  submit  such  a  proposition  to  the  people, 
for  their  approval.  I  for  one, would  be  willingto 
-!«ave  the  power  of  creating  a  debt  in  the  hanas 
of  any  future  legislature,  if  you  will  just  retain 
the  section — or  rather  I  would  say,  make  a  pro- 
vision in  the  section,  to  the  effect  that  in  such 
case,  the  legislature  shall  provide  the  means  of 
paying  both  principal  and  interest.  That  is  as 
much  guaranty  as  I  want  upon  the  subject  of 
creating  debt.  The  gentleman  from  Louisville, 
however  goes  further;  he  proposes  in  the  thirty 
third  section,  that  independent  of  that  guaran- 
■ty,  a  bill  shall  be  submitted  to  the  peopk  at  the 
Tegular  elections  to  rot*  upon.      Now,  I  ■will  go 


with  him  if  he  will  adhere  to  his  original  prop- 
osition to  give  an  additional  guaranty,  or  I  wjll 
vote  for  the  section  if  that  guaranty  is  stricken 
out  and  the  one  which  lotfer  is  retained.  But  what 
is  this  section  V  The  gentleman  tells  us  it  is  to 
meet  the  demands  of  tlie  ordinan'  expenses  of 
the  government,  arising  from  a  deficit  of  the 
revenue.  That  is  the  language ;  and  he  pro- 
poses to  borrow  not  exceeding  $500,000  to  meet 
such  deficit.  Yesterday,  when  I  moved  to 
strike  out  $500,000  and  substitute  a  smaller 
sum,  it  was  said  that  the  thirty  third  section 
was  an  ample  restriction  ;  and  upon  looking  at 
the  section,  and  hearing  the  explanation,  I  find 
that  the  section  means  "you  are  not  to  exceed 
$500,000  without  consulting  the  people." 

But  there  are,  in  that  section,  the  words  which 
I  propose  to  strike  out,  the  power  given  to  the 
legislature  to  borrow  or  to  create  a  debt  of 
$500,000  when  the  necessities  of  the  country 
don'trequire  it ;  and  that  is  power  I  don't  intend 
to  grant,  unless  the  gentleman  will  put  into  the 
section  some  guaranty  that  when  they  borrow 
money  they  will  provide  the  means  to  pay  both 
thejprincipal  and  interest. 

Jiow,  I  will  put  a  case  to  the  gentleman,  and 
to  the  memt)er  from  Logan.  Under  this  section, 
would  it  not  be  in  the  power  of  the  legislaturw 
to  create  a  demand  for  $500,000  in  the  Russel- 
ville  Bank.  Suppose  this  to  be  the  case.  We 
now  see  a  spirit  of  enterprise  going  on  in  rail- 
roads and  turnpike  roads  ;  suppose  the  legisla- 
ture should  think  proper  to  create  a  demand  for 
$500,000  or  even  $250,000,  to  aid  a  company  in 
construetiug  one  or  other  of  such  enterprises ; 
would  they  not  have  the  power,  under  this  sec- 
tion, containing  the  words  which  I  propose  to 
strike  out  ?  Unquestionably  in  my  view  they 
would,  and  it  is  to  avoid  this  concealed  power, 
which  is  still  left,  and  which  I  wish  to  destroy, 
that  I  propose  to  strike  out  these  words.  With- 
out detaining  this  convention,  therefore,  I  put 
it  to  the  gentleman  who  has  just  addressed  the 
convention — supposing  I  am  understood — I  put 
it  to  him  to  answer,  whether — taking  the  section 
as  it  now  stands — whether  the  legi.sTature  would 
not  have  power  to  take  $500,000  stock  in  the  Ohio 
andLexington  railroad,  and  borrow  the  money  on 
the  faith  of  the  state  to  pay  for  it  ?  That  is' my 
question. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  certainly  regard  that,  un- 
der the  words  "or  for  expenses  not  provided  for,'* 
there  is  an  absolute  discretionarj'  power  given 
to  the  legislature  to  contract  a  debt,  not  at  any 
time  over  $500,000,  and  that  when  that  debt  is 
paid  olf,  it  has  the  power  to  re-contract  another 
debt;  and  so  on  as  emergencies  may  dictate; 
but  the  utmost  extent  to  which  the  fegislature 
can  encumber  the  people  of  Kentucky   is  $500,- 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  I  am  correct,  sir, 
it  is  proposed  to  invest  the  legislature  with  the 
power  of  appropriating  half  a  million  for  any 
purpose  they  may  deem  expedient;  it  may  he 
in  bank  stock,  or  railroad  stock,  or  any  other 
stock.  Is  it  the  intention  of  the  convention  to 
pass  such  a  section  as  this  without  putting  some 
restriction  upon  it,  or  to  grant  this  power  wiUi- 
out  any  restriction  at  all V 

Mr.  (CLARKE.  I  am  satisfied,  Mr.  President, 
after  aJi  examination  of  the  section,    that  the 


784 


OtTords,  "or  for  expenses  not  provided  for,"  should 
.'be  stricken  out.  So  far  as  I  know  the  sense  of 
the  comiiiittee,  and  those  with  whom  I  liave  con- 
versed upon  the  subject,  it  never  was  intended 
that  that  power  sliould  be  so  construed  as  to 
confer  upon  the  legislature  the  right  to  contract 
a  debt  even  of  $100,000,  much  less  of  $500,000, 
by  taking  stock  in  banks,  or  railroad  companies, 
or  for  constructing  locks  or  dams,  which  may  be 
destroyed  by  casualty;  and  if  it  were  the  opin- 
ion of  "that  committee  that  we  were  conferring 
anv  such  power,  I  confess,  for  one,  I  did  not 
understand  it;  and  if  that  be  its  meaning,  I  am 
decidedly  opposed  to  it.  I  would  have  gone  for 
the  resolution  proposed  this  morning  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Hopkins,  but  for  two  rea.sons.  I 
■would  have  voted  for  that  resolution,  exceptthat 
the  improvements  referred  to  were  made  with  the 
consent  of  the  whole  people  of  the  state;  and 
•whether  that  consent  was  obtained  by  holding 
out  false  promises  or  not,  they  did  consent  to  it, 
and  I  suppose  each  division  of  the  state  is  will- 
ing to  pay  its  proportionable  part  of  the  expen- 
ses. There  was  a  second  reason  why  I  did  not 
vote  for  the  resolution,  and  it  was  this:  if  I  were 
to  vote  for  the  resolution  in  its  present  shape, 
the  improvements  of  the  country  might  go  to  de- 
struction; but  I  now  slate  that,  if  the  improve- 
ments upon  the  Green  and  Kentucky  rivers  are 
not  sufficient  to  sustain  themselves  hj  the  amount 
of  dividends  that  accrue  from  the  different  locks 
and  dams  upon  those  rivers,  and  by  those  who 
lire  mainly  benefitted  by  them — I  say,  in  such 
case,  1  am  opposed  to  sustaining  these  improve- 
ments at  the  expense  of  the  people  of  the  whole 
state.  There  are  tliose  in  the  house  who  would 
have  voted  for  this  resolution;  but  I  for  one 
could  not,  if  it  is  intended  to  tax  the  whole  people 
for  these  locks  and  dams,  because  the  whole  peo- 
ple are  not  benefitted  by  them. 

Now,  if  there  exists  a  power  in  this  sec- 
tion to  confer  upon  the  legislature  the  power  of 
borrowing  money  for  the  repairs  of  locks  and 
dams  on  these  rivers,  I  am  opposed  to  it;  and 
you  may  bring  up  the  question  at  any  future 
time,  I  shall  still  be  opposed  to  it.  Suppose, 
for  instance,  the  locks  or  dams  were  destroyed 
within  ten  miles  of  this  city,  who  is  injured? 
Some  nine  or  ten  counties  on  the  banks  of  the 
river;  and  if  they  who  are  reaping  all  the  bene- 
fits of  the  river  and  its  improvements,  dont  go 
•lowork  and  repair  the  injury,  it  shall  not  be 
with  my  consent  that  the  whole  people  shall  be 
taxed  for  that  which  is  merely  a  local  benefit; 
and,  in  stating  this  much,  I  am  convinced  that 
I  state  nothing  but  what  is  the  universal  feeling 
of  the  whole  people  I  have  the  honor  to  repre- 
sent. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  wa.s  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  CLARKE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were  taken,  and  were  yeas  51,  nays  42: 
.  Yeas— John  S.  Barlow.  William  K.  Bowling, 
•Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Hradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  Cliarles  Chambers,  James  S. 
Crisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholsou,  Thomas  J,  Oough, 
B«n.  Hardin,  John  HargiH,  Thomas  Jarae*,  Wil- 


liam Johnson,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Jas.  M.  Lackev, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh 
Newell,  Henrv  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
JohnT.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T.  Ro- 
gers, Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W. 
Stone.  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wil- 
liam R.  Thompson,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 51. 

Navs — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Jesse 
Coifey,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald 
Dixon,  James  Dudley.  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.Garrard,  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, John  H.  NcHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  James 
Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Andrew  S.  White,  George  W.  Williams — 42. 

So  the  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN  enquired  if  it  would  now  be 
in  order  to  move  to  strixe  out  $500,000,  and  in- 
sert a  smaller  sum. 

The  PRESIDENT  replied  that  it  would  not, 
as  the  main  question  had  been  ordered. 

Mr.  PRESTON  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  adoption  of  the  section,  and  being  taken, 
they  were — yeas  63,  nays  31. 

1 EAS — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,W"illiam  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Thomas  D.  15rown,  Charles  Chambers,  Jaines  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin, William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  De- 
sha, Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
Jaines  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Ma- 
chen. George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh 
Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Chas. 
A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 62. 

Nays — Mr.  President  (Gutlirie,)  Richard  Ap- 
John  L.  Ballinger,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  \Villiam  Chenault,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Garrett  Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dud- 
ley, Chasloon  T.  Dunavan,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Vincent  S.  liav,  Andrew 
Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  >f.  Jackson, 
George  W.  Johnston,   Alexander  K.  Marshall 


785 


Martin  P.  Marshall.  William  N.  Marshall,  Da- 
vid Meriwether,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William 
Prestou,  Johnson  Price,  James  RuJd,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  Squire  Turner, 
"Andrew  S.  White,  George  W.  Williams — 31. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  tliirty  third  section  (now  the  thirty  fourth) 
Was  next  read,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  33.  No  act  of  the  general  assembly 
shall  authorize  any  debt  to  be  contracted  on  be- 
half of  the  commonwealtli,  except  for  the  pur- 
poses mentioned  in  the  thirty  second  section  of 
this  article,  unless  provision  be  made  therein  to 
lay  and  collect  an  annual  tax  sufficient  to  pay 
the  interest  stipulated,  and  to  discharge  the 
debt  within  years;  nor  shall  such  act  take 

effect  until  it  shall  have  been  submitted  to  the 
people  at  a  general  election,  and  shall  have  re- 
ceived a  majority  of  sill  the  votes  cast  for  and 
against  it." 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  amend  the  section 
by  adding  the  following  proviso: 

"Provided,  That  the  general  assembly  may 
contract  debts  without  submission  to  the  people, 
by  borrowing  money  to  pay  any  part  of  the 
public  debt  of  the  state,  and  without  making 
provision  in  the  act  authorizing  the  same,  for  a 
tax  to  discharge  the  debt  so  contracted,  or  the 
interest  thereon." 

Pending  this  amendment,  on  the  motion  of 
Mr.  MITCHELL,  the  convention  took  a  recess. 

EVENING   SESSION. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment of  Mr.  TURNER,  by  yeas  and  nay.s,  and 
it  was  agreed  tfj — ^yeas  51,  nays  30. 

Yeas— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Wiliam  K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bris' 
low^.  William  0.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Jesse  Coffey,  Garrett  Davis, 
James  Dudley,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thonjas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  N.  Lind- 
sey,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry,  David 
Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Mor- 
ris, Jonathan  Mewcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Wil- 
liam Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  John 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J. 
Thurmau,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  Henry 
Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffrt.  RobertN.Wickliffe.  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson,  Weslev  J.  Wright — 51. 

NatTs— John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
liam Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  BeverlyL.  Clarke, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Bcujarain  Copelin,  Ed- 
wanl  Curd,  Lucius  Desha, Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson.  John  Hargis,  Thomas 
James,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Tiiomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alex- 
ander K.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan 
McClure,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, John  T.  Rogers,  John  Wheeler — 30. 

The  blank  in  the  section  was   filled  up  with 
the  word  "  thirty,"  as  the  number  of  years  with- 
in which  the  dent  should  be  discharged. 
99 


Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  to  amend  the 
section  by  striking  out  the  words  "  except  for 
the  purposes  mentioned  in  the  thirty  second 
section  of  this  article." 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  PRESTON  and 
Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL,  the  amendment  was 
rejected. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  section,  as  amended. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays,  and  they  were,  yeas  73,  nays  15. 

Yeas — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  L.  Brawner,  Francis 
M.Bristow,Tho. D.Brown, Wm.  C. Bullitt, Chas. 
Chambers,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  'W  illiam  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett 
Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Benjamin  F.  EdAVards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thos. 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter 
LashDrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Willis  B.  Ma- 
chen, Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Jno. 
H,  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  'fhomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Jeis. 
W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Henry 
Washington,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  Geo.  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
—73. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  Chenault, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  William  C.Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Squire 
Turner,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Silas 
Woodson — 15. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  CLARKE  and  Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL 
asked  and  obtained  leave  to  record  their  votes 
on  the  amendment  of  Mr.  TURNER,  on  which 
the  question  was  taken  in  their  absence. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  move  to  reconsider  the  vote 
just  passed.  If  it  should  be  reconsidered,  I  shall 
offer  an  amendment  to  the  clause.  I  am  oppos- 
ed to  this  mode  of  saying  whether  any  law 
shall  become  a  law  of  the  land  or  not.  I  believe 
it  is  not  congenial  with  the  genius  of  a  repre- 
sentative government,  that  such  proceedings 
should  take  place.  I  believe  on  that  subject, 
and  on  all  other  subjects,  that  representatives 
ought  to  speak  fairly  and  fully  the  wishes  of 
those  whom  they  represent.  But  the  idea  of  a 
convention  authorizing  a  law  for  any  particular 
subject,  to  be  submitted  to  the  people,  to  be 
passed  upon  by  them  by  their  popular  vote,  is, 
to  my  mind,  perfectly  incompatible  with  rep- 
resentative government.  Now,  I  am  opposed  to 
a  bare  majority  of  the  legislature  creating  a  pub- 
lic debt  in  the  future.  That  power  has  been  im- 
providently  exercised  in  this  state,  but  not  bo 


786 


much  as  in  some  others.  But  I  think  we  have 
had  enough  experience  in  our  own  common- 
wealth, and  certainly  know  enough  of  that  of 
others,  to  admonish  us  to  guard  that  power  with 
a  little  more  care  than  it  has  existed  under  the 
present  constitution.  If  this  motion  shall  pre- 
vail, and  the  question  be  reconsidered,  of  which 
I  have  no  expectation,  I  will  then  move  to  amend 
that  clause  so  that  it  shall  require  the  concur- 
rence of  two  thirds  of  both  houses  of  the  legis- 
lature before  any  debt  shall  be  created.  I  think 
that  would  be  a  sufficient  guard.  I  believe  that 
whenever  two  thirds  of  the  legislature  of  Ken 
tucky  shall  solemnly  decide  it  is  necessary  to 
create  a  public  debt,  that  the  people  will  acqui- 
esce. And  I  do  not  believe  that  two  thirds  of 
both  branches  would  concur  in  creating  a  debt 
tor  the  state  unless  the  public  interest  and  the 
public  will  imperiously  demand  it.  It  would 
be  more  congenial  to  our  system  and  to  the  mode 
by  which  the  popular  Avill  is  to  be  expressed 
and  carried  out  in  the  legislature,  that  that  plan 
should  be  adopted,  rather  than  that  any  law 
should  be  submitted  directly  to  the  people  for 
their  acceptance  or  rejection.  I  see  no  reason 
■why  this  particular  subject  should  be  submitted 
any  more  than  a  hundred  others  of  equal  im- 
portance that  I  could  name.  But  I  do  not  think 
such  a  submission  should  be  made.  I  know 
that  the  expression  of  such  an  opinion  may  be 
perverted  and  made  to  receive  the  popular  disfa- 
vor. It  is  a  step  about  which  prejudice  may  be 
unjustly  and  untruthfully  made  to  arise  in  rela- 
tion to  a  man.  But,  humble  as  I  am,  I  am  wil- 
ling to  submit  myself  to  that  consequence,  or 
any  other  consequence  that  may  meet  me  in  a 
proper  and  conscientious  discharge  of  my  du  y 
on  this  floor.  I  do  not  believe  that  that  mode 
of  checking  the  legislature,  ought  to  be  intro- 
duced by  the  convention.  I  do  not  believe  the 
people  have  demanded  such  a  check.  I  do  not 
Delieve  tliat  tliis  convention  has  been  instructed 
to  depart  from  the  great  representative  principle 
in  our  system  of  government.  I  believe  that  an 
ordinary  investment  of  power  is  liable  to  abuse, 
and  it  should  be  guarded  against.  And  I  be- 
lieve it  would  be  more  congenial  with,  and  more 
consonant  to  their  judgment,  that  two  thirds 
should  concur  in  a  law  for  the  creation  of  a  debt 
before  it  should  be  passed.  I  moved  to  change 
my  vote,  in  order  to  afford  me  an  opportunity  to 
express  my  sentiments,  regretting  1  had  not  done 
it  before. 

The  motion  to  reconsider  was  not  agreed  to — 
ayes  37,  noes  40. 

Mr.  PRESTON  offered  the  following  as  an  ad- 
ditional section: 

"The  power  of  the  cities  and  towns  of  this 
commonwealth,  to  contract  debts,  lend  their 
credit,  or  impose  taxes,  sliall  be  prescribed  from 
time  to  time  by  general  laws;  and  no  special  law 
authorising  cities  or  towns  to  contract  debts, 
lend  their  credit,  or  impose  additional  taxes  to 
those  permitted  by  the  general  laws,  shall  here- 
after be  enacted,  unless  provision  shall  in  the 
'  same  act  be  made,  to  levy  a  tax  sufficient  to  pay 
the  interest  stipulated,  and  extinguish  the  debt 
itself  in  such  time  as  may  be  directed  bylaw: 
nor  shall  such  act  take  effect,  until  it  shall  have 
"been  submitted  to  the  qualified  voters  of  the 
city  or  towft  to  be  taxed,  under  such  regulations  ) 


as  the  general  assembly  may  prescribe,  and  shall 
have  received  three-fifths  of  the  votes  of  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  city  or  town  to  be  taxed: 
nor  shall  such  tax  be  repealed  until  the  debt  is 
extinguished." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  My  friend  has  embra- 
ced the  words  taxing  by  counties.  I  doubt 
whether  the  taxes  are  the  same  for  any  two  years 
in  a  county.  I  would  suggest  to  strike  out  the 
word  "special"  and  insert  "but  by  a  general 
law." 

Mr.  PRESTON.  My  object  is  to  require  any 
special  law  for  the  benefit  of  any  city  or  town, 
which  involves  expense  for  internal  improve- 
ments, to  be  first  submittedto  the  people  of  those 
cities,  towns,  or  counties.  This  requires  that  a 
majority  of  three-fifths  of  the  people  shall  be 
obtained.  This  was  thought  the  best  restriction 
which  we  can  place  upon  the  power  of  special 
legislation  in  this  case. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  have  no  objections,  if  that  is 
made  to  apply  to  cities  only,  but  it  is  a  principle 
which  would  not  be  recognized  by  my  constitu- 
ents. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  difficulty  in  my  county 
has  been  to  get  the  people  to  come  up  to  a  sys- 
tem of  internal  improvement.  There  is  no  desire 
and  no  necessity  for  such  a  restriction  in  my 
county.  So  far  as  it  applies  to  Louisville  I  have 
no  objection;  but  I  want  old  Madison  taken  out 
from  under  this  part  of  the  constitution.  You 
will  have  according  to  this,  a  general  law  passed 
requiring  three-fifths  to  vote  a  tax,  if  I  under- 
stand it. 

Mr.  PRESTON.     On  special  taxes. 

Mr.  TURNER.  There  has  been  no  complaint 
about  special  laws  and  special  taxes ;  the  great 
difficulty  has  been  to  get  the  people  to  come  up 
and  open  their  purses  a  little  more.  I  tliink  we 
are  making  restriction  upon  restriction,  which 
appear  not  to  be  needed  by  the  people  in  my  sec- 
tion, and  I  move  to  strike  out  the  word  "coun- 
ties." 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  have  no  objection  to  the 
word  counties  being  stricken  out,  though  I 
think  a  moment's  consideration  will  convince 
the  house  that  it  may  be  best  to  apply  to  them. 
Special  legislation  has  been  a  growing  evil  upon 
the  country.  An  inspection  of  the  resolution 
will  show  that  it  does  not  prevent  those  works 
of  improvement  in  counties  which  the  gentleman 
wishes  to  see  completed,  but  simply  that  when- 
ever a  law  is  made  different  from  the  general  law 
of  the  state,  where  it  prescribes  a  rule  for  one 
county  and  another  for  a  different  county,  one 
for  one  city  or  town,  and  another  for  a  different 
city  or  town,  that  such  special  law  shall  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  people  upon  whom  it  is  to  operate. 
Special  laws  are  an  abhorrence  to  legislation, 
audi  believe  we  should  ii)sert"three-fifths,"and 
make  no  exception  to  the  general  law  without 
that  majority.  This  does  not  prevent  underta- 
king a  work  which  may  be  for  the  benefit  of  the 
public,  but  authorizes  a  restriction  against  per- 
.sons  coining  up  here  and  log-rolling  to  obtain 
the  pa.ssage  of  special  laws,  rather  for  individu- 
al than  public  benefit. 

We  wish  to  provide  that  where  the  tax  affects 
only  a  single  community,  and  not  the  whole 
state,  this  restriction  shall  operate,  and  not  till 
then.    The  gentleman  inquires  respecting  the 


787 


burdens  and  expenses  of  cities.  I  can  tell  him 
that  in  the  cit}-  of  Louisville,  with  a  population 
of  about  fifty  thousand,  these  public  expenses 
are  nearly  as  great  as  in  the  whole  state  besides. 
They  amount  to  some  $400,000  annually.  One 
half  of  this,  it  is  true,  is  for  special  taxation 
for  works  which  we  have  begun,  and  with  which 
we  are  willing  to  go  through;  but  we  ask,  that 
whenever  a  great  debt  is  to  be  saddled  on  us  and 
our  posterity,  we  may  have  our  attention  called 
to  it,  instead  of  allowing  two  or  three  gentlemen 
to  involve  us  in  this  great  public  debt  without 
the  people  knowing  any  thing  about  it.  I  be- 
lieve it  will  be  equally  wise,  for  a  county,  where 
it  is  to  contract  a  debt.  I  believe  it  will  be 
equally  right  and  proper  in  such  case  to  submit 
it  to  the  people  of  the  county  first.  That  is  the 
ground  we  go  upon.  If  the  gentleman  moves  to 
strike  out  me  word  "counties,"  it  is  a  matter  of 
indifference,  so  far  as  the  constituency  1  have 
the  honor  to  represent  is  concerned. 

Mr.  TURNER.  At  present  no  tax  can  be  laid 
on  a  county,  without  a  special  act  of  legislation, 
and  a  special  act  is  never  applied  for  unless  the 
representatives  of  the  county  consent  to  it;  and 
they  are  skittish  in  doing  tliis,  unless  they  know 
tliepeople demand  it. 

Tne  county  of  Bourbon  is  attempting  to  get  a 
road  to  run  to  the  Kentucky  river.      If  Bourbon 

Eetitions  to  levy  a  tax  to  do  this,  shall  she  not 
ave  the  power  to  do  so?  Madison  has  never 
come  up  sufficiently  to  the  work  of  internal  im- 
provement; but  I  hope  the  time  will  come  when 
ahe  will  do  so,  and  when  we  may  get  about  upon 
improved  roads,  which  are  now  often  in  a  con- 
dition which  renders  traveling  dangerous.  The 
state  is  not  going  into  county  improvements, 
and  if  you  require  a  majority  of  three-fifths  you 
will  be  throwing  the  country  back,  and  throw- 
ing us  into  the  wind  for  generations  to  come; 
whereas,  every  enlightened 4nan  knows,  that  if 
these  improvements  are  made,  the  value  of  prop- 
erty will  be  enhanced  tenfold;  and  not  oidy  that, 
but  all  the  enjoyments  of  social  life  will  be  great- 
ly increased. 

I  appeal  to  any  gentleman  to  tell  me  whether 
there  has  ever  been  an  abuse  of  this  power,  and 
whether  a  tax  has  ever  been  laid  upon  a  county ,  un- 
less a  majority  desired  it.  We  in  the  country  do 
Hot  create  a  great  debt  to  bind  our  children  and 
grand  children.  If  we  make  a  debt,  we  go  about 
paying  it  at  once. 

ilr.  DAVIS.  I  think  laws  of  the  character  in- 
dicated by  that  provision  can  sometimes  be 
pa.ssed  with  advantage  to  particular  sections  of 
thestate.  Such  laws  ought  to  have  prudent  and 
sufficient  guards  thrown  around  them,  and  I  do 
uot  believe  they  ought  to  be  pa-sseil  without  the 
concurrence,  and  the  full  and  free  consent  of  the 
people  of  the  county  whom  they  affect.  There 
are  laws  of  that  kind  in  some  of  the  counties. 
"We  have  two  in  the  county  of  Bourbon.  Our 
county  court  has  appropriated  and  expend- 
ed upon  two  of  our  roaids,  $5,000  each,  to 
aid  private  companies  in  McAdamizing  them. 
They  have  appropriated  altogether,  $19,000  on 
account  of  roads  which  are  in  course  of  con- 
struction. And  the  section  of  the  county 
through  which  these  roads  pass  have  it  in  con- 
templation to  McAdamize  tJiem  also,  and  they 
will  expect  the  same  assistance  as  the  roam 


to  which  I  have  referred  hav<"  received.  I  do 
not  think  it  would  be  just  to  the  portions  of  the 
county  of  Bourbon,  which  have  not  yet  underta- 
ken this  improvement,  that  a  three-nfths  vote  of 
the  people  of  tlie  county  should  be  required  to 
authorize  the  county  court,  or  any  other  tribunal, 
to  subscribe  to  those  roads  which  may  hereafter 
be  commenced. 

In  some  form  I  think  the  question  ought  to  bo 
submitted  to  the  people  of  each  county,  whether 
they  are  willing  to  submit  to  be  taxed  for  the 
construction  of  McAdamised  roads.  I  do  not 
believe  that  in  the  interior  of  the  state,  particu- 
larly, three  fifths  should  be  required  in  order  to 
determine  whether  such  a  tax  should  be  imposed. 
On  the  contrary,  I  believe  that  a  majority  snould 
be  competent  to  decide  that  question  and  es- 
tablish the  policy  of  McAdamizing  the  great 
leading  roads  in  any  county.  Situated  as  my 
county  is,  I  believe  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Louisville  might  work  some  in- 
justice to  a  portion  of  ray  constituents,  as  it 
might  the  constituents  of  any  member  of  this 
body,  who  are  in  the  same  condition  as  a  por- 
tion of  the  people  of  Bourbon.  Now,  with  a 
view  to  have  justice  done  them,  and  at  the  same 
time  prevent  the  abuse  of  power,  I  think  the 
provision  I  have  suggested,  or  something  of  the 
kind,  would  be  quite  sufficient. 

The  question  was  then  taken,  and  the  word 
"counties"  was  stricken  out,  so  that  the  pro- 
vision applies  only  to  towns  and  cities. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  wish  to  add  the  following 
words  as  a  proviso  "but  the  provision  shall  not 
apply  to  the  town  of  Henderson." 

After  some  conversation  Mr.  DIXON  with- 
drew his  amendment. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  If  anything  is  going  to 
defeat  this  constitution  it  is  going  so  much  into 
detail ;  and  if  we  progress  as  we  have  for  the 
last  five  days,  I  shall  begin  to  loose  all  hopes 
that  the  people  will  approve  our  work.  My  peo- 
ple have  derived  as  little  benefit  from  the  puolie 
treasury  as  any  portion  of  the  state,  however 
much  they  may  liave  contributed  to  it.  We 
have  lately  attempted  to  do,  what  the  state  has 
been  unwilling  to  do,  for  us — to  open  a  railroad 
between  the  middle  and  northern  portion  of  the 
Stat*,  which  will  tend  to  aggrandize  the  whole 
commonwealth.  We  have  a  law,  by  which,  if 
the  majority  think  proper,  they  may  subscribe 
for  a  great  railroad  to  connect  Lexington  and 
Covington.  A  principle  is  about  to  be  engrafted 
upon  the  constitution  that  no  law  shall  be  pas- 
sed here  unless  three  fifths  shall  vote  for  it.  It 
seems  to  me  to  be  uncalled  for.  I  can  see  no 
good  to  which  it  will  lead,  and  I  think  I  can 
see  great  harm. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL,    I  move  to  strike  ont  . 
the  word  "towns." 

Mr.  PRESTON.  It  seems  to  me  the  conven- 
tion are  under  the  impression  that  this  proposi- 
tion is  different  in  its  tenor  from  what  it  is.  The 
constitution  asserts  that  taxation  shall  be  equal 
and  uniform  in  thi.s  commonwealth,  and  yet  we 
violate  the  principle  by  permitting  special  taxa- 
tion, and  allowing  municipalities  unrestrained 
power  when  the  state  is  restrained. 

The  gentleman  from  Kenton  may  be  interested 
in  internal  improvements,  but  not  more  so  than 
the  city  I  have  the  honor  to  represent.    I  think 


7i» 


I  understand  as  clearly  as  he  can  tlie  necessity 
of  placing  some  curb  upon  the  cities  and  to-wns, 
to  contract  heavy  debts,  against  the  will  of  the 

f»eople;  some  restriction,  in  order  to  prevent  them 
rom  running  into  extravagance.  Shall  we  say 
to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  after  tlie  solemn  act 
of  this  morning,  you  shall  not  go  into  debt  be- 
yond the  amount  of  $500,000,  and  yet  give  some 
great  municipality  the  power  to  do  so  to  the  ex- 
tent of  millions.  Is  it  unwise  that  three  fifths 
shall  act  upon  it,  and  if  not  three  fifths,  would 
it  not  be  well  to  impose  a  check,  such  as  is  pro- 
posed by  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon?  The 
power  of  taxation  has  been  exercised  in  some 
cities  to  an  enormous  extent,  and  it  will  be  in 
every  growing  city  under  the  present  system  of 
internal  improvements  which  are  springing  up. 
I  believe  the  method  proposed  is  a  healthy  way 
to  get  at  public  sentiment  before  taxes  are  laid. 
I  know  my  friend  and  colleague,  (Mr.  Rudd,) 
who  had  the  honor  of  originating  this  measure, 
and  who  has  served  ten  or  fifteen  years  in  the 
councils  of  the  city  of  Louisville,  could  give 
ample  evidence,  and  is  far  more  able  than  my- 
self to  show  the  necessity  of  engrafting  this 
feature  on  the  constitution. 

Mr.  RUDD  next  addressed  the  convention,  and 
entered  into  a  minute  detail  of  the  expenditures 
incurred  by  the  city  of  Louisville,  for  many 
years  past,  on  account  of  her  numerous  and 
costly  public  improvements,  which  had  yearly 
entailed  upon  her  a  large  debt  which  was  still 
unpaid.  He  hoped  the  amendment  of  his  col- 
league would  prevail,  as  it  was  high  time  some 
restrictions  should  be  placed  upon  the  munici- 
pal authorities  of  our  cities  and  toAvns  to  prevent 
them  from  involving  the  people  in  debt. 

Mr.  ROOT  moved  the  previous  question,  which 
was  sustained. 

The  motion  to  strike  out  the  word  towns  was 
adopted,  and  the  section  wa.s  confined  to  cities. 

Mr.  PRESTON  asked  leave  to  withdraw  his 
amendment,  which  was  granted. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


4    •••    « 


WEDNESDAY,  DECEMBER  5,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

ADDRESS  TO  THE   PEOPLE. 

The  PRESIDENT  appointed  the  following 
as  the  committee  to  prepare  an  address  to  the 
people  of  Kentucky,  under  the  resolution  sub- 
mitted a  few  days  since  by  Mr.  CLARKE: 
Messrs.  Clarke,  C.  A.  Wicklifre,  Apperson,  Dix- 
on, and  Taylor. 

REPRINTING  AMENDED   ARTICLES. 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  adopted  after  a  brief  exjilaua- 
tion  of  its  necessity  to  enable  the  committee  of 
revision  and  arrangement  satisfaotorily  to  dis- 
charge its  duty : 

"Resolved,  That  when  changes  are  made  in  any 
report,  and  the  same  is  adopted  by  the  conven- 
tion in  a  form  different  from  the  printed  report, 
the  same  shall  be  reprinted  as  adopted   by  the 


convention,  and  the  usual  number    of  copies 
furnished." 

COMMITTEE   ON    APPORTIONMENT. 

Mr.  APPERSON  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  adopted  : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  apportion- 
ment of  representation  have  leave  to  sit  during 
the  sessions  of  the  convention." 

LEGISLATIVE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  moved  a  reconsideration 
of  the  vote  by  which  the  following  was  adopted 
as  a  section  of  the  article  on  the  legislative  de- 
partment : 

"  No  law  shall  be  revised  or  amended  by  re- 
ference to  its  title,  but  in  such  case,  the  act  re- 
vised, or  section  amended,  .shall  be  re-enacted 
and  published  at  length." 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  said  he  saw  no  good  to 
be  accomplished  by  retainingthis  section,  where- 
as it  would  occasion  a  heavy  expenditure  to  the 
government. 

After  a  brief  conversation  in  which  Mr. 
BROWN,  Mr.  McHENRY,  and  others  partici- 
pated, the  section  was  rejected. 

THE   WILMOT   PROVISO. 

Mr.  KELLY  submitted  the  following  pream- 
ble and  resolutions,  which  he  wished  to  be  post- 
poned and  printed  : 

"  Whereas,  the  rights  of  life  and  liberty  are 
natural,  inherent,  and  inalienable  ;  and  whereas, 
the  right  of  property  is  intrinsically  necessary 
to  the  full  and  complete  enjoyment  of  them  ; 
and  whereas,  the  right  of  property — being  se- 
condary only  to  those  of  life  and  liberty — exists 
prior  to  government  and  independent  thereof, 
and  government  is  only  framed  to  protect  Jind 
secure  those  rights,  which  a  free  people  can  nev- 
er surrender  witliout  becoming  slaves ;  and 
whereas,  some  of  the  northern  states  of  this  con- 
federacy have,  from  the  year  1816  up  to  the  pre- 
sent time,  made  war,  unjustifiably  and  unwor- 
thily, upon  the  rights  of  property,  as  secured 
by  the  laws,  organic  and  legislative,  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  and  of  the  several  southern  states,  and 
thereby  have,  to  some  extent,  made  the  tenure  of 
property  in  slaves  insecure  ;  and  whereas,  it  is 
the  delilierate  sense  of  the  people  of  Kentucky, 
expressed  by  this  convention,  that  congress  has 
no  power  to  interfere  with  the  slave  institutions 
of  the  District  of  Columbia,  or  of  the  territo- 
ries: 

"1.  Resolved,  That  the  passage  of  the  Wilmot 
proviso,  by  congress,  as  a  part  of  any  bill  to  or- 
ganise a  state  or  ti'rritory,  would  be  a  direct  and        J 
flagrant  invasion  of  the   rights  of  the  south — a       9 
violation  of  the   true  principles   of  the  federal        ^ 
compact — a  submission  to  which  would  dishonor 
tlie  ancient   fame   of  this  great  commonwealth, 
and  be  fruitful  of  disgrace  to  the  national  coun- 
cils 

"2.  Resolved,  That  while,  by  the  will  of  the 
free  people  of  Kentucky,  slavery  exists  within 
her  borders,  and  wliife  it  exists  in  any  other 
state  of  this  union,  the  right  of  the  citizen  of 
this  state  to  purchase  in  that,  and  bring  to  this, 
for  his  own  use,  slaves,  can  never  rightly,  and 
shall  never,  be  abridged." 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL  moved  to  lay  them  on 
the  fable,  for  the  present. 


7e»9 


Mr.  CLARKE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  thev  were — veas  51,  navs  38  : 

YEAS^Mr.  President.  (Guthrie)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlov,-, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenauit,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett  Davis,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Har- 
din, John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thos.J.Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  Thomas  X.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
2s"athan  McClure,  John  H.  McHeni-v,  David 
Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  t).  Morris, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  William 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washing- 
ton, Andrew  S.  White,  George  W.  Williams,  Si- 
las Woodson — 51. 

JT AYS— Alfred   Bovd,  Wm.  Bradley,  William 

C.  Bullitt,  Beverly  £..  Clarke,  Jesse  CofFev,  Hen- 
ry R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  fidward 
Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 'W.  Mansfield, 
William   N^.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Wm. 

D.  Mite  1  ell.  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Lark  in  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe— 38. 

So  the  preamble  and  resolutions  were  laid  on 
the  table. 

MEETING   OF  THE   GEXEHAL   ASSEMBLY. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  a  reconsidera- 
tion of  the  vote  adopting  the  following  section 
of  the  report  on  the  legislative  department : 

"Sec.  16.  The  general  assembly  shall  convene 
on  the  first  Monday  iu  November,  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  and  on  the  same  day  of 
every  second  year,  unless  a  different  day  be  ap- 
pointed by  law,  and  their  session  shall  be  held 
at  the  seat'of  government;  but  if  the  piiblic  wel- 
fare require,  the  governor  may  call  a  special  ses- 
sion." 

He  stated  his  object  to  be,  to  move  to  amend 
the  section  by  substituting  the  f-econd  Monday 
of  January,  for  the  day  fixed  in  the  .section,  as  it 
now  staiKis. 

The  rule  M'hich  requires  a  motion  to  reconsid- 
er to  lie  over  one  dav  wa-s  dispensed  with,  and 
the  motion  to  reconsider  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  then  moved  to  amend 
as  indicated. 

Mr.  JAMES  moved  to  amend  the  amendment, 
bv  substituting  the  first  Monday  of  January. 
"On  these  araendmentn  a  conversation  ensued, 
in  which  Messrs.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  JAMES, 
IRWIN,  BARLOW,  MACHEN.  GARRARD, 
KAVANAUGH,  and  others,  took  part. 

The  motion  to  strike  out  the  second  and  in- 
sert the  first  Monday  of  January,  was  negatived, 
by  a  majority  of  39  to  33. 


Mr.  KAVANAUGH  moved  to  postpone  the 
further  consideration  of  the  subject,  for  the  pre- 
sent. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

The  amendment  submitted  by  Mr.  C.  A. 
WICKLIFFE  was  also  rejected,  and  the  section 
was  again  adopted. 

THE   MILITIA. 

The  convention  proceeded  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  report  from  the  committee  on  the  mi- 
litia : 

"article  — . 

"Sec.  1.  The  militia  of  this  commonwealth 
shall  consist  of  all  free,  able-bodied  male  per- 
sons (negroes,  mulattoes,  and  Indians  excepted,) 
resident  in  the  same,  between  the  ages  of  eigh- 
teen and  fortv-five  years;  except  such  persons  as 
now  are,  or  Iiereafter  may  be,  exempted  by  the 
laws  of  the  United  States  or  of  this  state";  but 
those  who  belong  to  religious  societies  whose 
tenets  forbid  them  to  carry  arms,  shall  not  be 
compelled  to  do  so,  but  shall  pay  an  equivalent 
for  pei-sonal  services. 

"  Sec.  2.  The  governor  shall  appoint  the  adju- 
tant general,  and  his  other  staff  officers;  the  ma- 
jors general,  brigadiers  general,  and  command- 
ants of  regiments,  shall,  respectively,  appoint 
their  staff  ofl5cers;  and  commandants  of  compa- 
nies shall  appoint  their  non-commissioned  ofii- 
ct^rs. 

"Sec.  3.  All  other  militia  officers  shall  be 
elected  by  persons  subject  to  military  duty, 
within  the  bounds  of  their  respective  compa- 
nies, battalions,  regiments,  brigades,  and  divis- 
ions, under  such  rules  and  regulations  as  the 
legislature  may,  from  time  to  time,  direct  and  es- 
tablish." 

The  first  and  second  sections  were  considered 
and  adopted,  without  amendment. 

The  third  section  was  amended,  on  the  mo- 
tion of  Mr.  McHENRY,  by  inserting  the  words, 
"  and  for  such  term,"  after  the  word  "  regula- 
tions." 

The  section,  as  amended,  was  adopted. 

IHFEACHJfENTS. 

The  convention  proceeded  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  miscella- 
neous provisions,  concerning  impeachments,  as 
follows : 

"article  — . 
"coxceexixg  impkachhknt8. 

"Sec.  1.  The  house  of  representatives  shall 
have  the  sole  power  of  impeachments. 

"  Sec.  2.  All  impeachments  shall  be  tried  by 
the  senate.  When  sitting  for  thatpui^ose,  the 
senators  shall  be  upon  oath  or  affirmation.  No 
person  shall  be  convicted  without  the  concur- 
rence of  two-thirds  of  the  members  present. 

"  Sec.  3.  The  governor,  and  all  civil  oflSeera, 
.shall  be  liable  to  impeachment  for  any  misde- 
meanor in  ofiice;  but  judgment,  in  such  cases, 
.shall  not  extend  further  than  to  removal  from  of- 
fice, and  disqualification  to  hold  any  office  of 
honor,  trust,  or  profit,  under  this  commonwealth ; 
but  the  partv  convicted  shall,  nevertheless,  be 
subject  and  liable  to  indictment,  trial,  and  pun- 
ishment by  law." 

The  sections   were  considered,  teriatim,  and 


790 


-vreri^  adopted,  with  a  mere  verbal  amendment  of 
the  tliird  section. 

GENERAL   PROVISIONS. 

The  convention  next  proceeded  to  the  consid- 
•evsition  of  another  report  of  the  same  committee, 
on  General  provisions. 

The  first  section  was  read  as  follows: 
"Sec.  1.  Members  of  the  general  assembly, 
and  all  officers,  executive  and  judicial,  before 
they  enter  upon  the  execution  of  their  respective 
offices,  shall  take  the  following  oath  or  affirma- 
tion: I  do  solemnly  swear,  (or  affirm,  as  the 
case  may  be,)  that  I  will  be  faithful  and  true  to 
the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  so  long  as  I 
continue  a  citizen  thereof,  and  that  I  will  faith- 
fully execute,  to  the  best  of  my  abilities,  the 
office  of  according  to  law,  and   that  I 

have  neither  directly  nor  indirectly,  given,  ac- 
cepted, or  knowingly  carried  a  challenge,  to  any 
person  or  persons,  to  fight  in  single  combat  or 
otherwise,  with  any  deadly  weapon,  either  in 
or  out  of  the  state,  since  the  adoption  of  the 
present  constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  that  I 
will  neither  directly  nor  indirectly,  give,  accept, 
or  knowingly  carry  a  challenge  to  any  person 
or  persons,  to  fight  in  single  combat  or  other- 
wise, with  any  deadly  weapon,  either  in  or  out 
of  the  state,  during  my  continuance  in  office." 

On  motion,  the  further  consideration  of  this 
section  was  postponed  for  the  present. 

The  second  section  was  read  and  adopted,  as 
follows: 

"  Sec.  2.  Treason  against  the  commonwealth 
shall  consist  only  in  levying  war  against  it,  or 
in  adhering  to  its  enemies,  giving  them  aid  and 
comfort.  No  person  shall  be  convicted  of  trea- 
son, unless  on  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses  to 
the  same  overt  act,  or  his  own  confession  in  open 
court." 

The  tliird  section  was  read  as  follows: 

'•  Sec.  3.  Everj-^  person  shall  be  disqualified 
from  holding  any  office  of  trust  and  profit  for 
the  t«rm  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elected, 
who  shall  be  convicted  of  having  given  or  offered 
any  bribe  or  treat  to  procure  his  election. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  to  strike  out 
the  words  "  or  tie^t." 

Mr.  McHENRY  defended  the  section  as  it 
stood. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  was  unwilling  to  re- 
tain that  in  the  section  by  the  solemn  adoption 
of  this  convention,  whicdi  was  contradicted  by 
their  uniform  practice. 

Mr.  HARGIS  was  of  opinion  that  the  words 
ought  to  be  stricken  out. 

Mr.  MAYES  called  the  attention  of  the  gen- 
tleman to  the  fact  that  the  section  only  applied 
to  treating  for  a  particular  purpose. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays  on  striking  out. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  withdrew  his  amend- 
ment. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL  renewed  it. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  then  taken,  and  were, 
yeas  lo,  nays  G9. 

Yeas— Alfred  Boyd, William  Bradley.WilUara 
C.  Bullitt,  William  Cowper,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  Willis  H.  Machen,  Alexander 
K,  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah 


F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Howard  Todd,  John  Wheeler 
—18. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L. 
Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bow- 
ling, Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha, 
James  Dudlev,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Se- 
lucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, Thomas  J.  Hood, 
James  W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
Thomas  P.  Moore.  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Roekhold,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John 
J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wnght — 
69. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  strike  out. 

Mr.  HARGIS  moved  to  strike  out  the  entire 
section. 

The  motion  was  rejected. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  McHENRY,  the  section 
was  verbally  amended  by  substituting  the  word 
"or"  for  "and,"  between  the  words  "trust"  and 
"profit." 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  fourth,  fifth,  sixth,  seventh,  eighth,  ninth, 
tenth,  eleventh,  twelfth  and  thirteenth  sections 
were  adopted  without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"  Sec.  4.  Laws  shall  be  made  to  exclude  from 
office  and  from  suffrage,  those  who  shall  there- 
after be  convicted  of  bribery,  perjury,  forgery, 
or  other  high  crimes  or  misdemeanors.      The 

firivilege  of  free  suffrage  shall  be  supported  by 
aws  regulating  elections,  and  prohibiting,  un- 
der adequate  penalties,  all  undue  influence 
thereon  from  power,  bribery,  tumult,  or  other 
i  m  p roper  practices . 

"Sec.  5.  No  money  shall  be  drawn  from  the 
treasury  but  in  pursuance  of  appropriations 
made  by  law,  nor  shall  any  appropriations  of 
money  tor  the  support  of  an  army  be  made  for 
a  longer  time  than  two  yeare,  and  a  regular 
statement  and  account  of  the  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures of  all  public  money  shall  be  publish- 
ed annually. 

"Sec.  6.  The  general  assembly  may  direct,, 
by  law,  in  what  manner,  and  in  what  courts, 
suits  may  be  brouglit  against  the  common- 
wealth. 

"Sec.  7.  The  manner  of  administering  an 
oath  or  affirmation,  shall  be  such  as  is  most  con- 
sistent with  the  conscience  of  the  deponent,  and 
shall  be  esteemed  by  the  general  assembly  tlie 
most  solemn  appeal  to  God. 

"  Sec.  8.  All  laws  which,  on  the  first  day  of 


791 


June,  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  ninety 
two,  "were  in  force  in  the  State  of  Virginia,  and 
•which  are  of  a  general  nature,  and  not  local  to 
that  state,  and  not  repugnant  to  this  constitu- 
tion, nor  to  the  laws  which  have  been  enacted 
by  the  legislature  of  this  commonwealth,  shall 
be  in  force  within  this  state,  until  they  shall  be 
altered  or  repealed  by  the  general  assembly. 

"Sec.  9.  The  compact  with  the  State  of  Vir- 
ginia, subject  tosuch  alterations  as  may  be  made 
therein  agreeably  to  the  mode  prescribed  by  the 
said  compact,  shall  be  considered  as  part  of  this 
constitution. 

"  Sec.  10.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general 
assembly  to  pass  such  laws  as  shall  be  necessary 
and  proper  to  decide  differences  by  arbitrators, 
to  be  appointed  bv  the  parties  who  may  choose 
that  summary  mo"3e  of  adjustment. 

"Sec.  11.  All  civil  officers  for  the  common- 
wealth at  large,  shall  reside  within  the  state, 
and  all  district,  county,  or  town  officers,  within 
their  respective  districts,  counties,  or  towns, 
(trustees  of  towns  excepted)  and  shall  keep  their 
respective  offices  at  such  places  therein  as  may 
be  required  by  law,  and  all  militia  officers  shall 
reside  in  the'  bounds  of  the  division,  brigade, 
regiment,  battalion,  or  company,  to  which  they 
mav  severally  belong. 

•'Sec.  12. 'Absence  on  the  business  of  this 
state,  or  the  United" States,  shall  not  forfeit  a  res- 
idence once  obtained,  so  as  to  deprive  any  one 
of  the  right  of  suffrage,  or  of  being  elected  or 
appointed  to  any  office  under  this  common- 
wealth, under  the  exceptions  contained  in  this 
constitution. 

"Sec.  13.  Tt  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general 
assembly  to  regulate,  by  law,  in  what  cases,  and 
what  deductions  from  the  salaries  of  public  of- 
ficers shall  be  made,  for  neglect  of  duty  in  their 
official  capacity." 

The  fourteenth  section  was  then  read  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Sec.  14.  Returns  of  all  elections  by  the  peo- 
ple shall  be  made  to  the  secretary  of  state  for  the 
time  being,  except  in  those  case^  otherwise  pro- 
rided  for  in  this  constitution." 

Mr.  MITCHELL  thought  it  unnecessary  to 
make  returns  of  all  elections  of  officers,  down  to 
magistrates  and  constables,  to  the  secretary  of 


Mr.  PRESTON  moved  to  amend,  by  adding 
the  words  "or  in  such  manner  as  may  be  pre- 
scribed by  law."  On  this  amendment  he  moved 
the  previous  question,  and  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  nov"  put. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  teikeu  on  the  amend- 
ment, and  were  yeas  22,  nays  68. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  James  Dudlev,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  Ric'hard  D.  Gholson,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  Thomas  N.  Lindsev,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Slartin  P.  Marshall, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Xew- 
ell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William  Preston,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,Howard  Todd,  John  Wheeler, 
Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe— 22. 

Nays— John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd.  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisraan,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  VJ^illiam  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Grav,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Andrew  flood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W. 
Irwin,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  Geo. 
W.  Johnston,  Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  William  C.  ilarshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jona- 
than Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price, 
Larkin  J .  Procter,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spal- 
ding, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Al- 
bert G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner, 
John  li.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew 
S.White,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson, 
Weslev  J.  Wright— 68. 
So  tile  amendment  was  rejected. 
Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  amend  by  adding  the  fol- 
lowing proviso: 
"Provided,  That  dumb  persons  entitled  to  fran- 


state,  and  therefore  he  moved  to  strike  out  the   j-hise  mav  vote  by  ballot." 


section. 

Mr.  McHENRY  had  no  expectation  that  the 
election  of  the  officers  mentioned  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Oldham,  would  be  returned  to  the  of- 
fice of  the  secretary  of  state;  but  if  the  section 
■were  stricken  out.  there  would  \je  no  provision 
made  for  returning  officially  the  result  of  the 
elections  bv  the  people  at  large. 

Mr.  MlT'CHELL  said,  if  all  the  officers  elect- 
ed by  the  people  were  to  be  commissioned  by  the 
governor,  there  would  be  some  propriety  in  the 
provision,  but  he  saw  none  at  present. 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  STEVENSON 
and  Mr.  TURNER,  the  motion  to  strike  out  was 
rejected. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  fifteenth  section  was  next  read  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  15.  In  all  elections  by  the  people,  and 
also  by  the  senate  and  house  of  representatives, 
iointly  or  separately,  the  votes  shall  be  personal- 
ly and  publicly  given,  viva  voce." 


Mr.  MITCHELL  moved  to  amend  the  amend- 
ment, by  adding  the  following: 

"Provided  further.  That  the  legislature  may, 
upon  the  petition  of  any  city  or  county  of  this 
commonwealth,  authorize  the  voters  of  such  city 
or  county  to  vote  by  ballot." 

Mr.  STEVENSON  inquired  how  it  would  be 
possible  to  carry  out  such  a  provision  in  practice. 
How,  he  inquired,  were  the  votes  to  be  return- 
ed, if  half  or  three  fourths  should  vote  by  bal- 
lot, and  the  rest  vita  voce. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  saw  no  difficulty  ;  but  the 
regulations  that  would  be  necessary  he  would 
leave  to  the  legislature. 

The  vote  on  the  amendment  to  the  amendment 
was  taken  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  were  yeas  9, 
nays  83. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie)  William  Cow- 
per, Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Richard  D.  Gholson 
William  D.  Mitchell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William 
Preston,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd^9. 


Nays — John  L.  Balliuger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
^Villia^l  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  fhonias  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James 
S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Cof-  i 
fey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Beiyamin  Cope- 
in,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha, 
Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudlev,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  JS^inian  E.  Gray,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  VincentS.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashorooke,  Thomas  N. 
Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Wil- 
liam N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  John- 
son Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W. 
Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John 
J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams  Silas  Wood- 
eon,  Wesley  J.Wright — 8.3. 

So  the  amendment  to  the  amendment  was  re- 
jected. 

Mr.  BOYD'S  amendment  was  then  agreed  to, 
and  the  section  as  amended  was  adopted. 

The  sixteenth  section  was  next  read: 

"Skc.  16.  No  member  of  congress,  nor  person 
holding  or  exercising  any  office  of  trustor  profit 
under  the  United  States,  or  eitlier  of  them,  or 
Under  any  foreign  power,  shall  be  eligible  as  a 
jnember  of  the  general  assembly  of  this  com- 
monwealth, or  hold  or  exercise  any  office  of  trust 
or  profit  under  the  same." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  to  insert  the  word 
"appointment"  for  the  purpose  of  including  per- 
Kons  to  whom  the  words  "holding  or  exercising 
any  office  of  trust  or  profit"  would  not  apply. 
He  said  there  were  njaii  agents,  pension  agents, 
and  others  who  should  be  embraced  in  the  section, 

Mr.  HARDIN  said  if  the  amendment  were 
agreed  to,  any  person  "appointed"  to  conduct  a 
suit  for  the  government  in  the  United  States 
courts,  or  to  assess  damages,  would  be  exclu- 
ded by  it. 
The  amendment  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  37  to  31. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  seventeenth  section  was  then  read  and 
adopted,  as  follows: 

"Skc.  17.  The  general  assembly  shall  direct, 
bylaw,  how  persons  who  now  are,  or  may  here* 
after  become,  securities  for  public  officers,  may 
be  relieved  or  discharged  ou  account  of  such  se- 
curityship." 

The  eighteenth  section  was  next  read: 

"Sec.  Itf.  Any  person  who  shall,  after  the 
adoption  of  this  constitution,  either  directly  or 
indirectly,  give,  accept,  or  knowingly  carry  a 
challenge  to  any  p«rbon,  or  persons,  to  fight  in 


single  combat,  or  otherwise,  with  any  deadly 
weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  state,  shall  be 
deprived  of  the  right  to  hold  any  office  of  honor 
or  profit  in  this   commonwealth,  and  shall  be 

{)unished  otherwise  in  such  manner  as  the  legis- 
ature  may  prescribe  by  law." 

Mr.  BULLITT  said,  before  that  section  Avas 
adopted,  he  wislied  to  give  the  reasons  which 
Would  influence  his  vote  upon  it. 

Mr.  NUT  TALL  said  he  had  some  notes  on 
this  subject  which  he  desired  to  use  in  some  brief 
remarks  upon  this  section,  but  as  he  had  them 
not  at  hand  now,  he  moved  that  the  section  be 
passed  over  for  the  present. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  add  to  the  article  the 
following  additional  sections: 

"Sec.  19.  Taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
throughout  this  state.  All  property,  on  which 
taxes  may  be  levied,  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion 
to  its  value,  to  be  ascertained  as  directed  by  law. 
No  one  species  of  property  shall  be  taxed  higher 
than  another  species  of  equal  value:  Provided, 
The  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to  tax 
merchants,  brokers,  hawkers,  pedlars,  shows, 
theatrical  performances,  laAV  process,  seals,  deeds, 
licenses,  stocks,  playing  cards,  corporations,  and 
privileges,  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  pre- 
scribed by  law." 

"Sec.  UO.  The  general  assembly  sliall  have 
poAver  to  authorize  the  several  counties,  and  in- 
corporated cities  and  towns,  in  this  slate,  to  im- 
pose taxes  for  county  and  corporate  purposes, 
respectively  ;  and  all  property  sliall  be  taxed 
upon  the  principles  established  in  regard  to  state 
taxation;  Provided,  A  poll  tax  maybe  assessed 
for  county  and  corporate  purposes." 

Mr.  NUTT  ALL  moved  the  following  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  sections  offered  by  Mr.  GRAY: 

"The  general  assembly  .shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  laws  compelling  any  citizeu  of  this  com- 
monwealth to  pay  taxes  upon  more  than  he,  she, 
or  they,  may  be  intrinsically  worth." 

Mr.  PRESTON  thought  those  sections  would 
be  in  conflict  with  other  sections  which  had  been 
adopted,  by  which  the  sinking  fund  was  declar- 
ed to  be  forever  intact.  The  legislature  had  no 
power  over  it.  It  would  take  twenty,  thirty,  or 
forty  years  under  the  present  plan  to  extinguish 
the  debt,  and  before  that  was  accomplished,  the 
tax  on  these  articles  was  not  repealable. 

Mr.  GRAY  did  not  believe  that  the  tax  on  some 
of  the  articles  enumerated  in  his  sections,  wa-s 
appropriated  to  the  sinking  fund;  but  if  it  were, 
he  hoped  the  convention  would  reconsider  what 
it  had  done,  and  make  such  a  provision  as  would 
be  consistent  with  the  sections  which  he  had  of- 
fered. 

Mr.  HARDIN  read  from  the  auditor's  report 
the  following  list  of  the  sources  of  revenue: 
Tax  on  valuation,         -        -        -    $409,27169 
Tax  on  carriages  and  barouches,  •  3,207  GO 

Tax  on  buggies,  -        -        -        -  1,542  50 

Tax  on  pianos.     -        -         -        -  1 ,5 10  GO 

Tax  on  gold  spectacles,         -        -  fiOO  50 

Tax  on  gol.l  watches,     -         -         -  5,934  00 

Tax  on  silver  levers,      -        -        -  1,418  00 

Tax  on  auditor's  list,    -        -        •  3,839  62 

Tax  on  clerk's  list,        ■        •        -  810  10 


Total  revenue, 


$428,163  31 


793 


He  said  these  were  lai^e  items,  and  hence  he 
hoped  they  would  maturely  consider  before  they 
did  anything  to  affect  them.  It  would  be  better 
to  postpone  the  subject  for  further  considera- 
tion. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  that  the  sub- 
ject be  passed  over,  and  that  the  proposed  sec- 
tions be  printed. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

THE   SEJIT   OF   GOVEKXMENT. 

The  next  article  in  the  same  report  was  read 
as  follows: 

AETICLK  . 

"  The  seat  of  government  shall  continue  in 
the  town  of  Frankfort,  until  it  shall  be  removed 
bylaw:  Provided,  hoieever,  That  two  thirds  of 
all  members  elected  to  each  house  of  the  general 
assembly,  shall  concur  in  the  passage  of  such 
law." 

Mr.  HOOD  moved  to  strike  out  all  after  the 
words  "  the  seat  of  government  shall  continue 
in  the  town  of  Frankfort." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  to  strike  out 
"two  thirds"  and  insert  "a  majority,"  and  on 
that  he  called  for  the  veas  and  nays. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said,  I  make  this 
motion,  Mr.  President,  upon  principle.  I  will 
not,  by  my  vote,  lefuseto  a  majority  of  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  to  pass  a  law.  We  leave 
the  power  with  a  majority  of  both  houses  of  the 
legislature  to  pass  laws  to  take  away  the  life, 
liberty,  and  property  of  the  citizen,  for  crime, 
and  deny  to  the  same  majority  the  power  to  fix, 
by  law,  the  seat  of  government.  I  am  unwilling 
to  say  to  the  freemen  of  this  state,  that  though  a 
majority  of  them  shall  desire,  some  twenty  or 
thirty  or  fifty  years  hence  to  change  the  location 
of  their  Seat  of  government,  that  their  power  to 
do  so  shall  be  controlled  by  one  third. 

If  the  present  seat  of  government,  with  all  the 
advantages  which  nature  has  blessed  it;  with  all 
that  art  has  added;  the  influence  which  the  pub- 
lic buildings  and  public  expenditures  have  given 
it,  cannot,  in  opposition  to  any  other  point,  com- 
mand a  majority  of  the  representatives  of  the 
people  in  all  time  to  come,  then  it  is  wrong  that 
It  should  remain  where  it  is  by  the  arbitrary  and 
absurd  power  of  one  third. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  the  previous  question. 

The  question  was  stated  to  be, "  shall  the 
main  qut-stion  be  now  put." 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  moved  that  the  roll  be  called, 
and  it  was  called  accordingly. 

On  ordering  the  main  question  the  yeas  and 
navs  were  called  for,  and  were  yeas  48,  nays  45. 

"Teas — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
Wm.  Chenault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Ducon,  James  Dudley, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ben.  Hardin, 
Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Wm.  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Thomas  N.  Lind-sev.  Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  John  fi.  McHenry,  David  Meri- 
wether, William  D.  Mitchtll,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Hu^h  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T. 
100 


;  Rogers.   Ifa  Root,  Howard  Todd.  Squire  Tur-  ^ 
I  ner,    Henry   Washington,    Jno.    Wheeler,  An-^* 
I  drew  S.  WTiite,   Robt.  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams— 48. 

Xays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Bovd, 
Wra.  Bradley,  Thos.  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
Cowper,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliottj 
i  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son,  Ninian  E .  Gray,  James  P.  Hamiltoni 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  Thos.  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wm.  C. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Thos.  P.  Moore,  John 
D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Wm.  Preston, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R. 
Thompson  John  J.  Thurman,  Jno.  L.  Waller, 
C.  A.  Wickliffe.  Silas  Woodson,  Weslev  J. 
Wright— 45. 

So  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Before  the  vote  was  announced,  Mr.  CLARELE 

changed  his  vote,  so  that  his  name  appeared 

with  the  majority.    He  did  this  for  the  purpose 

I  of  moving  a  reconsideration,  but  it  was  ruled 

out  of  order  by  the  chair. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  Mr.  C.  A. 
Wickliffe 's  amendment,  and  it  was  rejected,  jeas 
23,  nays  70. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradlev.  Benjamin  Copelin,  Chasteen 
T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott.  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, William  C.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure, 
David  Meriwether,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, William  Preston,  James  Rudd,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J. 
Thurman,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe— 23. 

Nays — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C. 
Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coffev,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cow- 
per, fidward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha, 
Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomns  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Alex- 
ander K.  Marshall",  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm. 
N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  Mc-. 
Henry,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D  Morris, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Nuwcum,  Elijah 

F.  Nuttall,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John 
T.  Rogers,  Ii:a  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  W.   Stevenson,    James  W.  Stone,  Albert 

G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Wash- 
ington, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert 


794 


N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  WilHamS,  Silas  Wood- 
son,    Wesley  J.  Wright— 70. 

The  question  was  next  taken  on  Mr.  Hood's 
amendment  and  it  was  rejected,  yeas  10  nays  84. 

Yeas — William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner, 
Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Andrew  Hood, 
James  W.  Irwin,  John  D.  Morris,  Johnson  Price, 
John  Wheeler,  George  W.  Williams — 10. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L. 
Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  M.Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisnlan,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coifey.  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Millford  Elliott, 
Green  Fon-est,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelley,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsev, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.Machen,  George  "V'k^. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  Wiliam  C.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John 
H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newel],  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert 
G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  J.  Thurraan,  Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
— 84. 

The  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  a  reconsideration  of 
the  vote  adopting  that  section,  and  he  moved  to 
lay  his  motion  on  the  table. 

Mr.  CLARKE  said  that  was  a  double  motion, 
and  as  one  was  debateable,  lie  called  for  a  di- 
vision. 

The  President  replied  that  the  question  was 
on  the  motion  to  lay  the  motion  to  reconsider 
on  the  table,  which  was  not  a  debatable  motion. 

The  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  was  agreed  to. 

The  convention  then  took  a  recess. 

EVKNIXO  8ES8I0X. 
BILL  OF  RIGHTS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  tlie  committee  on  miscellaneous 
provisions. 

The  preamble  of  article ,  or  the  bill  of 

rights,  was  then  read  and  adopted,  as  follows  : 

"That  the  general,  great,  and  es.sential  princi- 
ples of  liberty  and  free  government  may  be  re- 
cognized and  established:  wk  declare. 

The  first  section  was  then  read  and  adopted, 
as  follows : 

"Sec.  1.  That  all  freemen,  when  they  form  a 
social  compact,  are  equal,  and  that  no  man,  or 


set  of  men.ar*  eiuitled  lo  exclusive,  separate 
public  emoluments  or  privileges  from  the  com- 
munity, but  in  consideration  of  public  services." 

Mr.  DIXON  submitted  the  following  as  an 
additional  section  to  the  article,  to  come  in  as 
the  second  section : 

"Sec.  2.  That  absolute,  arbitrary  power  over 
the  lives,  liberty,  and  property  of  freemen,  (ex- 
cept for  crimes,)  exists  no  where  in  a  a  republic 
— not  even  in  the  largest  majority." 

Mr.  APPERSON  moved  that  the  proposition 
be  passed  over,  and  printed,  in  order  to  afford 
time  for  an  examination  of  it. 

The  motion  to  postpone  and  to  print  was 
agreed  to. 

The  second,  third,  and  fourth  sections  were 
read  and  adopted,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  2.  That  all  power  is  inherent  in  the  peo- 
ple, and  all  free  governments  are  founded  on 
their  authority,  and  instituted  for  their  peace, 
safety,  happiness,  security,  and  protection  of 
their  property.  For  the  advancement  of  these 
ends  they  have  at  all  times  an  inalienable  and 
indefeasible  right  to  alter,  reform,  or  abolish, 
their  government,  in  such  manner  as  they  may 
think  proper. 

"Sec.  3.  That  all  men  have  a  natural  and  in- 
defeasible right  to  worship  Almighty  God  ac- 
cording to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences  ; 
that  no  man  .«hall  be  compelled  to  attend,  erect, 
or  support  any  place  of  worship,  or  to  maintain 
any  ministry  against  his  consent;  that  no  hu- 
man authority  ought,  in  any  case  whatever,  to 
control  or  interfere  with  the  rights  of  conscience; 
and  that  no  preference  shall  ever  be  given,  by 
law,  to  any  religious  societies  or  modes  of  wor- 
ship. 

"Sec.  4.  That  the  civil  rights,  privileges,  or 
capacities,  of  any  citizen,  shall  in  no  wise 
be  diminished  or  enlarged  on  account  of  his  re- 
ligion." 

The  fifth  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"Sec.  5.  That  all  elections  shall  be  free  and 
equal." 

Mr.  ROOT  enquired  what  was  meant  by  free 
and  equal  elections. 

Mr.  STEVENSON  explained  that  it  was  the 
language  of  the  old  constitution  and  was  there- 
fore adopted  by  the  committee. 

The  section  was  adopted. 

The  sixtli  section  was  read,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  6.  That  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  ju- 
ry shall  be  held  sacred,  and  the  right  thereof  re- 
main inviolate." 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  I  move  to  add  to  the  section 
the  following:  "But  the  general  assembly  may 
provide  by  law  that  juries,  in  civil  cases,  shall 
consist  of  less  number  than  twelve,  and  that  two 
thirds  of  a  jury  may  find  a  verdict  in  any  case 
cither  civil  or  criminal." 

The  proposition  submitted  for  the  considera- 
tion of  the  convention,  in  ray  judgment,  ought 
to  be  adopted.  It  will  be  perceived  it  does  not 
lessen  or  authorize  the  legislature  to  lessen  the 
number  of  jurors  now  required  in  a  criminal 
case,  it  only  provides  that  a  verdict  may  be  ren- 
dered by  two  thirds  of  the  jury,  if  the  legisla- 
ture shall  80  authorize  by  law. 

My  experience  both  in  defence  and  in  prose- 
cution of  criminal  cases,  though  not  very  great, 
has  satisfied   me  the  commonwealth  is  not  on 


I 


795 


equality  with  an  accused.  The  simple  fact  that 
he  may  challenge  twenty  jurors  peremptorily, 
jfives  him  so  many  chances  of  escape  over  any 
there  are  of  improper  conviction.  Who  that  has 
ever  attended  an  excited  criminal  trial,  and  seen 
a  juror  sworn  to  answer  questions,  and  heard 
him  say  that  he  had  conversed  with  witnesses, 
perhaps  heard  the  whole  examining  trial,  and 
yet  had  no  opinion  as  to  guilt  or  innocence — an 
occurence  continually  witnessed  in  courts,  that 
can  deny  the  accused  has  the  advantage  I  have 
named.  '  A  hung  jury  or  acquittal,  through  the 
influence  and  voice  of  such  jurors,  is  always  the 
case.  A  hung  jury,  .in  a  criminal  case  in  Ken- 
tucky, is  tantamount  to  a  verdict  of  not  guilty. 
For  a  second  trial  finds  the  horrors  of  the  deed 
forgotten.  A  witness  gone — all  sympathy  for 
the  living,  though  in  tnith  a  guilty  felon — ver- 
dict for  the  accused  follows. 

WTiy  shall  one  man's  opinion  and  judgment, 
in  such  cases,  control  those  of  eleven,  or  why 
shall  three  control  nine?  Xo  argument  can  be 
given,  that  carries  any  weight,  in  requiring 
unanimity  except  that  of  douDt.  If  you  doubt 
you  must  acquit,  has  gone  very  far  to  aid  the  es- 
cape of  many  who  merited  punishment.  This 
doubting  principle  operates  on  the  whole  jury, 
generally,  by  the  way  the  law  is  expounded  to 
them;  and  my  mind  is,  where  two  thirds  or  three 
fourths  have  no  doubts,  they  should  control  the 
others,  though  they  may  be  doubters. 

When  we  take  into  consideration  the  judge 
with  his  control  over  the  verdict,  if  improper- 
ly formed  against  the  accused,  and  the  advan- 
tage, as  stated  before,  of  the  twenty  challenges, 
without  any  rea«on  assigned,  it  does  seem  to  me 
that  so  large  a  proportion  of  the  jury  as  sugges- 
ted, ought  to  be  trusted  with  the  determination 
of  the  cause,  though  it  might  involve  liberty  or 
even  life. 

We  leave  the  decision  of  the  gravest  and 
weightiest  matters  in  legislation  to  a  majority. 
We  trust  the  decision  of  whole  estates  to  tne  de- 
termination of  one  judge  sitting  as  chancellor. 
We  give  the  accused  the  advantages  I  have  sta- 
ted, and  by  requiring  two  thirds  to  find  him 
guilty,  we  again  give  advantages  nearly  two  to 
one  over  the  prosecution. 

Sir,  the  experience  of  all  must  admit  that  the 
criminal  code  of  Kentucky  needs  alteration  in 
acme  way  to  check  the  progress  of  crime  and 
punish  those  who  commit  it.  Give  the  legisla- 
ture the  opportunity  of  placing  the  state  on 
something  near  equality  in  investigation  and  de- 
cision with  any  one  accused  of  crime.  If  it 
should  be  found  to  operate  to  the  injury  of  per- 
sonal security,  and  not  promote  the  ends  desired, 
we  can  easily  fall  back  to  the  existing  plan. 

In  civil  cases,  my  object  is  to  allow  the  legis- 
lature to  lessen  the  number  of  jurors  to  nine  or 
even  seven.  Why  twelve  shall  be  required  to 
decide  a  matter  of  account,  for  example,  be- 
tween parties,  and  shall  be  unanimous  in  their 
decision,  is  not  seen  by  me.  If  a  controversy 
about  fifty  dollars  arises  between  parties,  either 
matter  of'account  or  about  property'  of  that  val- 
ue, where  three  or  five  or  seven  could  better  and 
more  readily  examine  into  it  than  a  larger  num- 
ber, there  must  be  twelve,  and  if  one  dissents, 
there  can  be  no  decision.  The  commonwealth 
laukt  pay  twelre,  perhaps  fifty  dolUrs,  if  one 


disagrees  with  eleven  to  try  such  a  case  and 
then  not  have  it  decided. 

To  the  single  judge,  as  a  chancellor,  we  com- 
mit the  decisions  of  law  and  facts,  involving 
thousands.  To  a  majority  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals we  commit  the  revision  of  the  acts  of  a  full 
jury  and  the  circuit  court  or  other  inferior  court, 
controlling  all,  and  yet  for  somo  reason,  not 
comprehended,  we  must  have  twelve  jurors,  and 
all  must  concur. . 

Sir,  is  there  any  delegate  who  would  not  rath- 
er leave  a  controversy,  involving  a  complex  ac- 
count, to  one  than  a  dozen  for  certainty  of  cor- 
rectness. To  a  half  dozen,  any  number  of  dis- 
puted points,  than  to  a  dozen. 

There  is  nothing  to  me  very  cabalistic  in  the 
number  twelve,  nor  do  I  see  any  danger  to  the 
trial  by  jury,  in  allowing  the  legislature  to  les- 
sen the  number  from  twelve  to  seven. 

In  the  saving  of  expenses  to  the  state  for  pay- 
ing jurors  the  sum  would  be  very  great,  as  they 
have  to  be  paid  out  of  the  treasury.  The  expec- 
tation that  the  fines  and  forfeitures  would  com- 
pensate the  juries,  has  been  found  fallacious. 
The  fines  are  nearly  all  remitted,  and  the  treasu- 
ry has  to  pay. 

If  we  had  eighteen  jnrors  instead  of  twenty 
four  to  make  two  full  pannels,  it  would  save  six 
dollars  per  day  in  each  circuit  court  of  the  state. 
If  fourteen,  ten  dollars.  The  sum  thus  saved, 
would  go  very  far  towards  helping  to  make  up 
our  sinking  fund,  and  thereby  contribute  to  pay 
the  public  debt.  Nothing  would  be  saved  as  re- 
gards criminal  trials,  as  my  proposition  will  not 
allow  the  legislature  to  lessen  the  number  of  ju- 
rors in  such  cases  below  twelve.  It  only  con- 
templates that  nine  may  find  the  verdict. 

I  have  briefly  suggested  some  of  the  reasons 
that  induce  me  to  present  the  proposition  now 
before  the  convention.  For  one,  I  would  be  wil- 
ling to  see  the  experiment,  if  such  it  shall  be 
called,  fully  tested.  If  it  succeeded,  much  good 
would  result:  if  not,  we  would  but  be  as  we  now 
are  by  a  repeal  of  any  legislative  enactment  ma- 
king the  change. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  gentleman  asks  why  it  is 
that  nine  members  of  a  jury  in  a  criminal  cause- 
should  not  be  allowed  to  oringin  a  verdict  against 
the  accused.  The  reason  is  just  this :  if  twelve 
men  shall  be  selected  to  try  a  citizen  under  a 
charge  of  committing  a  criminal  oflFence,  and 
three  of  them  shall  entertain  doubts  as  to  the 
guilt  or  innocence  of  the  accused,  it  is  manifest, 
if  they  are  honest  men — and  we  must  presume 
they  are — tliat  there  is  some  doubt,  and  the  hu- 
mane principle  of  the  law  is,  that  it  is  better 
that  ninety  nine  guilty  men  should  go  unpun- 
ished, than  that  one  innocent  man  should  suflFer. 
And  just  so  long  as  there  is  a  doubt  in  the  breast 
of  one,  two,  three,  or  five  jurors,  just  so  long  is 
there  a  doubt  as  to  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the 
accused,  and  just  so  long  should  his  life  be  saved. 
I  am  opposed  to  giving  to  the  majority  of  a 
jury — to  eight,  nine,  or  eleven  members  even,  the 
right  to  decide  upon  the  life  or  liberty  of  the 
citizen,  when  twelve  men  are  requireii  to  try 
him.  Let  them  all  concur,  for  while  there  is  one 
dissenting  voice  there  must  be  doubt,  and  whilst 
there  is  doubt  no  man's  life  or  liberty  «houId  be 
taken  from  him. 


796 


Mr.  BOYD  moved  to  amend,  so  that  the  prop- 
osition should  not  apply  to  criminal  causes. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  am  against  the  whole  propo- 
sition, and  the  amendment  proposed  by  my  friend 
from  Trigg,  (Mr.  Boyd.)  I  venerate  the  old 
right  of  trial  by  jury,  and  I  look  upon  it  as  af- 
fording above  all  things  the  greatest  security  to 
the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  the  citizen,  and 
I  cannot  consent  that  it  shall  be  impaired  or  in- 
terfered with  eitlier  by  this  convention  or  by  the 
legislature.  It  is  one  of  those  rights  which  I 
would  never  touch,  and  which  I  look  upon  as 
the  most  sacred,  and  the  dearest  enjoyed  by  any 
man  who  is  sensible  to  the  real  blessings  of 
liberty.  I  shall  not  attempt  to  go  into  the  history 
of  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  or  say  how  it  origina- 
ted, how  tt  groped  its  way  through  the  darkness 
of  the  middle  ages,  how  it  burst  through  the  shac- 
kles which  the  despotism  of  the  past  had  thrown 
around  the  liberties  of  men,  and  how  it  finally 
took  its  position  above  the  storms  and  strifes  oi 
revolution,  the  safeguard  and  protection  of  the 
people  and  their  rights  against  the  evils  of  des- 
potism or  unbridled  anarchy.  It  is  a  right  that 
comes  to  us  hallowed  and  sanctified  by  the  blood 
of  patriots  and  martyrs,  and  I  would  not  inter- 
fere with  it.  Next  to  the  bible,  I  regard  it  as 
most  sacred,  and  I  would  no  sooner  raise  my 
hand  against  the  one  than  the  other.  Do  gen- 
tlemen really  pretend  to  stop  to  calculate  the 
cost  of  trying  a  man  by  twelve  jurymen?  Do 
they  pretend  to  say  that  the  state  of  Kentucky 
is  so  anxious  for  the  lives  of  her  citizens  that  we 
must  coolly  and  calmly  sit  down  and  make  an 
estimate  of  how  much  it  will  cost  to  get  a  man 
hung — that  life  is  of  so  little  value  in  Kentucky 
that  a  few  dollars  thrown  into  the  scale  is  to  de- 
cide it  against  human  life?  This  I  understand  to 
be  the  argument  of  the  gentleman  from  Frank- 
lin, (Mr.  Lindsey,)  that  it  will  cost  less  to  try  a 
man  if  you  reduce  the  number  of  the  jury  to 
nine,  or  allow  two  thirds  to  say  that  he  shall  die. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  If  the  gentleman  will  exam- 
ine he  will  see  that  my  proposition  provides  for 
twelve  jurors  in  criminal  cases,  and  my  remarks 
in  reference  to  the  expense  therefore,  do  not  ap- 
ply particularly  to  such  cases.  I  propose  that 
twelve  shall  constitute  the  jury  in  such  cases, 
but  I  allow  nine  of  them  to  find  the  verdict. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  understand  the  proposition 
then  to  be  that  you  will  allow  nine  men  to  take 
a  man's  life  instead  of  twelve.  Nine  will  cost 
less  than  twelve,  and  therefore  they  should  have 
the  power.  That  is  the  argument  if  it  is  not  the 
proposition.  Rather  than  to  stand  here  calcula- 
ting how  much  it  would  cost  to  take  a  man's 
life,  I  would  prefer  to  estimate  how  much  it 
would  cost  to  save  it.  If  a  man  is  not  guilty, 
I  will  go  as  far  as  possible  to  save  his  life,  no 
matter  now  much  it  may  cost.  Life  has  become 
but  a  cheap  thing  in  lientucky,  or  money  has 
become  more  potential  than  ever  I  could  suppose 
it  to  be  with  the  people,  when  drops  of  blood 
are  to  be  weighed  in  the  same  scale  with  dollars 
and  cents.  'To  use  an  expression  of  my  friend 
from  Ballard  and  McCracKen,  (Mr.  Gholson,)  I 
say  that  I  am  astonished  to  hear  such  an  argu- 
ment. I  trust  that  the  sacred  right  of  trial  by 
jury  will  be  let  alone,  and  I  do  not  think  the 
people  are  prepared  for  any  sort  of  innovation 
upon  it.    ITiey  will  never  consent  that  the  legis- 


lature shall  have  the  power  to  interfere  with  the 
subject,  and  to  give  them  that  power  is  pre- 
supposing at  once  that  they  ought  to  exercise  it. 
And  this  convention,  without  in  fact  doing  it 
themselves,  would  thereby  encourage  the  legis- 
lature to  impair  the  right  of  trial  by  jury.  I 
hope  neither  the  proposition  or  the  amendment 
offered  to  it  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  BOYD.  The  gentleman  from  Henderson 
seems  to  have  mistaken  the  object  of  my  amend- 
ment. I  shall  vote  with  him  against  the  propo- 
sition, but  if  the  convention  intend  to  ad!opt  it, 
I  do  not  wish  to  extend  the  power  to  the  legis- 
lature to  permit  less  than  twelve  jurors  to  try  u 
criminal  case.  I  have  not  so  much  objection  to 
less  than  twelve  in  civil  cases,  but  still  I  am 
against  the  whole  proposition. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  the  previous 
question. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put, 
and  the  amendment  to  the  amendment  was  re- 
jected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  asked  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  on  the  proposition  of  Mr.  LINDSEY. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  At  the  suggestion  of  friends 
around  me,  and  for  the  purpose  of  allowing 
another  to  present  a  proposition,  I  will  ask 
leave  to  withdraw  the  amendment  offered  by  me. 

Mr.  DAVIS  expressed  a  desire  to  offer  an 
amendment,  but 

The  PRESIDENT  decided  it  to  be  cut  off  by 
the  previous  question. 

The  sixth  section  was  then  adopted. 

Mr.  A.  K  MARSHALL  moved  a  reconsidera- 
tion of  the  vote  just  taken. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  A  few  days  ago  the  legislature 
was  invested  with  discretionary  power  to  give 
to  the  commonwealth  the  right  of  challenge  to 
the  amount  of  one  fifth  the  number  allowed  the 
accused.  There  might  be  a  conflict  upon  the 
subject,  if  the  section  is  left  as  it  now  reads — 
"that  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury  shall  be 
held  sacred,  and  the  right  thereof  remain  invio- 
late;" and  for  the  purpose  of  jire venting  any  such 
result,  I  move  to  add  to  the  section,  the  words, 
"subject  to  such  modifications  as  may  be  author- 
ized Dy  this  constitution." 

This  amendment  was  agreed  to,  and  the  sixtli 
section,  as  amended,  was  adopted. 

The  seventh  section  was  then  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  7.  That  printing  presses  shall  be  free  to 
every  person  who  undertakes  to  examine  the 
proceedings  of  the  legislature,  or  any  branch  of 
government,  and  no  law  shall  ever  be  made  to 
restrain  the  right  thereof.  The  free  communi- 
cation of  thoughts  and  opinions  is  one  of  the 
invaluable  rights  of  man,  and  every  citizen 
may  freely  speak,  write,  and  print,  on  any  sub- 
ject, being  responsible  for  the  abuse  of  that 
libety." 

Mr.  JAMES  expressing  a  desire  to  prepare  an 
amendment  to  it,  the  section  was  passed  over. 

The  eighth  and  ninth  sections  wore  read  and 
adopted  as  follows: 

"Sec.  8.  In  prosecutions  for  tlie  publication 
of  papers  investigating  tlie  official  conduct  of 
officers  or  men  in  a  public  capacity,  or  where  tlie 
matter  published  is  proper  for  public  informa- 
tion, the  truth  thereof  may  be  given  in  evidence; 
and  in  all  indictments   lor  the  libels,  the  jury 


797 


nhall  havi 
facts  under 


e  a  right  to  determine  the  law  and  the  j 
ir  the  direction  of  the  court,  as  in  other 


Sec.  9.  That  the  people  shall  be  secure  in 
their  persons,  houses,  papers,  and  possessions, 
from  unreasonable  seizures  and  searches,  and 
that  no  ^^'arrant  to  search  any  place,  or  to  seize 
any  person,  or  things,  shall  issue,  without  do- 
scribing  them  as  nearly  as  may  be,  nor  without 
probable  cause,  supported  by  oath  or  affiirma- 
lion." 

The  tenth  section  was  read  as  follows: 
"Sec.  10.  That  in  all  criminal  prosecutions, 
the  accused  hath  a  right  to  bo  heard  by  himself 
and  counsel;  to  demand  the  nature  and  cause  of 
the  accusation  against  him;  to  meet  the  witness- 
es face  to  face;  to  have  compulsory  process  for 
obtaining  witnesses  in  his  favor;  and  in  prosecu- 
tions by  indictment  or  information,  a  speedy 
public  trial  by  an  impartial  jury  of  the  vicinage; 
that  he  cannot  be  compelled  to  give  evidence 
against  himself;  nor  can  he  be  deprived  of  his 
life,  liberty,  or  property,  unless  by  the  judg- 
ment of  his  peers,  or  the  law  of  the  land." 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  move  to  strike  out 
the  word  "vicinage"  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof, 
the  word  "commonwealth."  I  believe  that  the 
construction  given  to  that  word  in  our  present 
constitution  confines  the  selection  of  jurors  to 
the  county.  It  might  happen,  and  1  think  I 
would  not  be  far  out  of  the  way  if  I  say  it  has 
happened;  that  in  some  criminal  prosecutions 
it  has  been  impossible  to  obtain  a  jury  in  the 
county  where  the  offence  was  committed,  and 
the  offender  passed  unpunished,  because  of  the 
construction  given  to  this.  word.  I  desire  there- 
fore, to  enable  the  public  prosecutor  to  select  a 
jury,  if  necessary,  from  the  commonwealth  at 
large. 

The  question  being  taken  by  yeas  and  navs, 
on  the  call  of  Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL— yeas  29, 
navs  61,  as  follows: 

1''e.\s — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Edward 
Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford 
Elliott,  Selueius  Garfielde,  Ninian'  E.  Grav, 
Andrew  Hood,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Alexander  fc. 
Marshall,  Martin  P  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jonathan  Meweum,  Elijah  F. 
STuttall,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, Michael  L.  Stoner,  George  W.  Williams, 
Silas  Woodson — 29. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballin- 
ger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Lu- 
ther Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D. 
Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Williana  Cowper,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald 
Dixon,  C.  T.  Dunavan,  B.  F.  Edwards,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  R. 
D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Wilis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  William  C.  Marshall,  William  N. 
Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  David   Meriwether, 


W.  D.  Mitchell,  J.  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh  Newell,  H- 
B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Rogers,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Howard  Todd,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry 
Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffts, 
Wesley  J.Wright— 61. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 
Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  move  to  strike  out  the 
words,  "of  the  vicinage,"  entirely.  It  some- 
times happens,  from  the  atrocity  of  the  crime 
perpetrated  by  an  individual,  and  the  whole 
country  is  so  fully  informed  of  the  facts  in  the 
case,  that  from  those  very  reasons  the  offender 
cannot  be  brought  to  trial .  I  hope  we  shall  adopt 
some  provision  which  will  obviate  this  evil,  and 
I  think  that  result  may  be  attained  by  not  con- 
fining the  selection  of  jurors  to  the  vicinage,  or 
to  the  county,  as  the  term  is  construed  to  mean. 
Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE.  I  voted  "no"  on  the 
other  question,  with  the  intention  of  moving  a 
reconsideration  of  the  vote.  I  think  that  the 
term  "vicinage"  has  no  meaning  in  our  consti- 
tution. It  had  one  in  England,  whence  it  is  de- 
rived. In  old  times  there  it  was  always  custom- 
ary to  take  the  jury  from  the  place  of  controver- 
sy, where  the  facts  and  all  the  circumstances 
were  known  to  the  jury.  Now,  the  universal 
rule  is,  and  the  judge  so  charges  the  sheriff,  to 
get  a  jury  as  far  away  from  the  scene  of  contro- 
versy as  is  possible,  and  to  be  composed  of  men 
who  know  nothing  about  the  facts  of  the  case, 
and  have  expressed  no  opinion  in  relation  there- 
to. I  intend  therefore  to  move  a  reconsideration 
of  the  vote  rejecting  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Jessamine,  (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall.) 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  We  are  here  making  a 
bill  of  rights,  and  the  section  we  are  considering 
is  emphatically  a  right.  There  are  a  great  many 
propositions  in  this  bill  that  seem  trite  and  axio- 
matic, and  this  I  deem  to  be  the  best  evidence 
of  the  wisdom  of  the  men  who  framed  the  pres- 
ent constitution,  from  which  they  are  cppied. 
The  gentleman  from  Campbell,  (Mr.  Root,)  asked 
what  was  meant  by  "equal  elections."  I  have 
no  doubt  it  has  never  occurred  to  the  gentleman 
what  it  did  mean;  but  if  he  will  look  to  Vir- 
ginia he  will  see  that  in  that  state,  from  the  very 
want  of  this  term  "equal  elections,"  in  some 
of  the  counties  there  are  three  days  election., 
while  in  the  others  only  one.  Now  it  is  proposed 
to  strike  out  the  words,  "of  the  ^vicinage,"  and 
gentlemen  say  it  has  no  meaning.  It  had  a 
meaning  in  the  old  constitution,  and  it  has  one 
here.  It  is  that  a  man,  in  his  own  county  where 
his  character  is  known,  can  come  before  those 
who  have  known  him  and  stand  the  test  of  a 
criminal  examination  so  far  as  a  trial  by  jury. 
Take  a  man  and  try  him  before  a  jury  of  another 
section  of  the  stat»»  in  which  the  public  opinion 
differs  wholly  from  the  section  in  which  lie  re- 
sides, on  the  subject  of  slavery  for  instance,  or 
anything  else,  and  the  natural  feelings  and  im- 
pulses of  men  will  induce  them  to  go  against 
him.  Would  a  man,  brought  from  Hopkins 
county,  before  a  jury  of  the  northern  part  of  the 
state  to  be  tried,  a  perfect  stranger,  be  as  likely  to 
secure  a  safe  trial  as  at  home?  I  think  not.  In 
framing  a  constitution,  let  us  act  coolly  and  dis- 
pabsionately,  and  if  extreme  cavf.  <•-?;--(    i.t..i.»- 


iJfctlii'' 


(his  KGction,  it  is  better  to  provide  for  Miem  hv  a 
hcparatti  section  than  to  override  great  principles. 
One  or  the  other  must  yieU- 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  Iliave  been  surpris- 
ed at  nothing  so  much  in  this  convention  as  in 
witnessing  the  extreme  anxiety  manifested  on 
tJie  part  of  some  gentlemen  to  defend  and  protect 
and  screen  guilt.  It  is  a  fact,  I  presume,  that  is 
well  known  to  every  one  in  this  house,  and  a 
fact  thut  is  known  to  the  shame  of  Kentucky, 
that  our  criminal  code  has  almost  become  a  dead 
letter  on  the  statute  book.  And  there  is  scarcely 
an  offence  thatcan  be  committed  which  can  pos- 
sibly be  punished  under  the  laws,  provided  the 
offender  has  the  means  of  corrupting  the  court 
or  the  jury.  It  is  known,  I  presume,  to  every 
one  here  present,  that  the  decisions  of  our  juries 
and  the  construction  of  our  laws,  are  such  now, 
that  offences  are  committed  and  pleas  are  admit- 
ted in  our  courts  of  justice,  which  savage  ven- 
geance itself  would  be  ashamed  to  offer  in  ex- 
tenuation of  crime. 

I  made  the  proposition  to  amend,  which  I  did, 
because  there  are  instances  that  have  occurred  in 
the  history  of  my  own  county  and  my  own 
neighborhood,  that  bring  forcibly  to  my  own 
mind,  a  sense  of  its  importance.  I'here  are  gen- 
tlemen on  this  floor,  who  know  perfectly  well 
that  offences  are  sometimes  committed  in  this 
state  of  a  character,  so  outrageous,  so  perfectly 
startling  to  an  entire  neighborliood,  and  so  whol- 
ly inexcusable,  that  it  has  proved  to  be  utterly 
impossible  to  obtain  a  jury  to  try  the  offender  in 
the  county  where  the  crime  was  committed,  and 
the  criminal  has  gone  unwhipt  of  justice,  simply 
fromthatcau.se.  Do  gentlemen  desire  this  thing  to 
goonV  Do  they  desire  aclauseinthe  fundamental 
law  of  the  land,  for  it  is  equivalent  to  that,  that 
a  man  may,  by  committing  so  enormous  an  out- 
rage that  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  be  tried  in 
the  county  where  the  crime  Avas  committed,  se- 
cure himself  against  punishment?  I  believe  our 
courts  have  decided  that  any  man  who  has  form- 
ed or  expressed  an  opinion  in  respect  to  an  of- 
fence, is  not  to  be  considered  a  competent  juror. 
And  do  we  not  all  know  that  cases  have  occurred 
where  it  was  utterly  out  of  the  question  to  ex- 
pect that  a  single  rational  man,  in  the  county 
where  the  offence  was  committed,  could  be  found 
who  had  not  been  compelled  by  the  enormity  of 
the  offence  itself,  to  form  some  opinion — aye, 
and  express  one,  too — in  reference  to  the  guilt  of 
the  offender?  .My  object  was  to  give  to  the  com- 
monwealth some  little  power  to  arrest  this  un- 
hallowed march  of  crime,  that  has  tracked  our 
entire  country  with  blood.  Scarcely  a  young 
man  is  there  of  the  present  day,  who  does  not 
think  himself  degraded  orunfit  to  associate  with 
men  until  he  has  stained  his  diploma  with  blood. 
And  the  last  act  of  the  education  of  the  bloods 
of  the  present  day,  is  to  throw  themselves  into  a 
position  where  they  may  commit  an  act  of  that 
kind.  And  tlie  best  mark  of  courage  one  of  them 
can  give,  is  to  stab  in  the  dark,  and  our  law 
gives  them  protection.  I  hope  the  amendment 
of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Williams,) 
mine  having  been  rejected,  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  STEVENSOX.  I  hope  that  I  am  willing 
to  go ai<  far  as  my  friend  from  Jessamine,  (Mr. 
A.  K.  Mari»hall,)  in  the  punislimentof  all  crime. 
But  while  I  desire  to  see  crime  punislud,  and 


the  laws  of  the  country  upheld,  I  am  not  for 
undermining  what  I  regard  to  be  the  great  pil- 
lars of  free  government,  to  punish  any  man. 
Now  let  us  test,  and  see  the  danger  of  striking 
out,  as  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon, 
(Mr.  Williams,)  and  the  consequences  likely  to 
result  therefrom.  He  proposes  to  strike  out  the 
words  "of  the  vicinage".  Then  if  a  man  is  charg- 
ed with  any  crime  it  is  in  the  power  of  the  legis- 
lature to  remove  him  from  any  one  county  of  the 
commonwealth  to  another.  There  is  no  remedy. 
My  friend  shakes  his  head,  but  I  tell  him  there 
is  no  remedy  when  you  strike  out  those  words 
"of  the  vicinage."  I  admit  that  there  have  been 
crimes  where  juries  could  not  be  obtained  to  try 
the  offender  in  the  county,  but  the  law  now 
authorizes  jurors  from  adjacent  counties  to  sit. 
As  the  law  is  now,  the  citizens  of  Jessamine 
are  competent  jurors  to  sit  in  Fayette,  if  they 
are  caught  there,  although  you  cannot  go  out  of 
the  county  to  summon  a  juror.  All  this  provis- 
ion in  the  bill  intends,  is,  that  the  criminal 
should  not  be  taken  where  he  would  be  in  a  land 
of  strangers,  where  he  would  be  unknown,  and 
where  he  might  not  have  extended  to  him  the 
panoply  of  justice.  One  of  our  greatest  rights, 
as  was  saia  by  the  eloquent  gentleman  from 
Henderson,  is  this  trial  by  jury.  And  when  you 
fritter  it  away,  you  fritter  away  one  of  the  strong 
pillars  upon  which  the  government  itself  stands. 
Why  is  it,  that  we  have  twelve  men  on  a  jury  ? 
Because  the  excitements  we  desire  to  keep  away 
from  the  jury  box,  may  seize  on  the  minds  of 
six,  eight,  or  ten  men,  when  it  might  not  on 
twelve.  And  whenever  you  disturb  that  num- 
ber, you  overthrow  the  great  right  itself.  I  am 
unwilling  to  take  away  the  least  of  the  safe- 
guards by  which  it  is  surrounded. 

Mr.  DUNAVAN  moved  the  previous  question. 

The  previous  question  was  ordered  to  bo  now 
put,  and  the  amendment  of  Mr.  Williams  was 
rejected.  The  question  being  taken  by  yeas 
and  nays,  on  the  call  of  Mr.  Stevenson — yeas 
31,   nays  59,  as  follows  : 

Yeas— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  A.  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Edward 
Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford  El- 
liott, Selucius  Garfielde,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  An- 
drew Hood,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Alexander  KM.  ar- 
shall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
David  Meriwether,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijan  F. 
Nuttall,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  Ira  Root.  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W,  W^illiams,  Silas 
Woodson — 31. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Lutlier 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.Brown, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  H. 
R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wm.  Cow- 
per,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Chasteen 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green  For- 
rest, Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard 
D.Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamil- 
ton, Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Jolmston,  (reorge  W.  Kav- 
anaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Thomas  N.   Lindsey, 


7«9 


Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Macheii.  WiUiaiu 
0.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  Mo- 
Clure,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
James  M.  Nisbett,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, John  T.  Rogers,  John  W.  Stevenson,  J.  W. 
Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wm. 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheel- 
er, Andrew  S.  WKite,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Wesley  J.  Wright — 59. 

The  tenth  section  was  then  adopted. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  reconsider  this  vote  with 
a  view  of  enabling  Mr.  WILLIAMS  to  offer  the 
following  amendment : 

"But  the  legislature  may  pass  laws  providing 
for  the  selection  of  jurors  from  adjacent  counties 
in  cases  where  a  jury  cannot  be  had  in  the  coun- 
ty where  the  offence  was  committed." 

The  convention  refused  to  reconsider,  a  count 
being  had,  yeas  37 — uays  46.  The  eleventh 
section  was  then  read  as  follows : 

Sec.  11.  That  no  person  shall,  for  anv  indict- 
able offence,  be  proceeded  against,  criminally, 
by  information,  except  in  cases  arising  in  the 
land  or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia  when  in 
actual  service,  in  time  of  war  or  public  danger, 
by  leave  of  the  court,  for  oppression  or  misde- 
meanor in  office." 

The  PRESIDENT  called  attention  to  the  fact, 
that  the  section  was  evidently  imperfect  in  its 
reference  to  the  "leave  of  the  court." 

Mr.  STEVENSON  suggested  the  insertion  of 
the  word  "but"  before  the  words,  "by  leave  of  the 
court." 

Mr.  GRAY  thought  it  was  better  not  to  act 
hastily  inasmuch  as  the  section  was  copied  from 
the  old  constitution. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY,  DECEMBER  6,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Noetox. 

RULES   OF    0RD>JI. 

The  PRESIDENT  desired  to  explain  a  de- 
cision which  he  made  yesterday.  He  said  on 
reflection,  he  was  satisfied  that  his  decision  on 
the  motion  to  reconsider  and  to  lay  on  the  table 
was  wrong.  The  motion  to  reconsider  should 
have  been  made  and  stated  from  the  Chair  before 
the  motion  to  lay  upon  the  table  was  entertained. 
He  made  this  statement  that  the  convention 
might  know  the  rule  by  which  the  Chair  would 
be  governed  in  future. 

PKIXCIPLE   OF   APPORTIONMEJfT. 

Mr.  APPERSON  from  the  select  committee, 
some  time  since  appointed  under  a  resolution  of- 
fered by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  G.  A. 
Wickliffe,)  on  the  subject  of  apportionment 
made  the  following  report: 

"Sec.  6.  That  representation  shall  be  equal 
and  uniform  in  this  commonweath,  and  shall  be 
forever  regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  num- 
ber of  representative  population,  which  shall  be 
first  ascertained  in  the  year  1850.    At  the  first 


session  of  the  general  assembly  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  provision  shall  be 
made  by  law,  that  in  the  year  1858,  and  every 
eighth  year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all 
the  representative  population  of  the  state  shall 
be  made.  The  house  of  representatives  shall 
cousi.st  of  one  hundred  members,  and  to  secure 
uniformity  and  equality  of  representation,  the 
state  is  hereby  laid  off  into  ten  districts. 

The  first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Fulton,  Hickman,  Ballard,  McCrack- 
en.  Graves,  Callowav,  Marshall,  Livingston, 
Crittenden,  Union,  llopkins,  Caldwell,  and 
Trigg. 

The  second  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
countiesof  Christian,  Muhlenburg,  Hemlerson, 
Daviess,  Hancock,  Ohio,  Breckinridge,  Meade, 
Grayson,  Butler,  and  Edmonson. 

The  third  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Todd,  Logan,  Simpson,  Warren,  Al- 
len, Monroe,  Barren,  and  Hart. 

The  fourth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Cumberland,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor, 
Clinton,  Russell,  Wayne,  Pulaski,  Casey,  Boyle, 
and  Lincoln. 

The  fifth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Hardin,  Larue,  Bullitt,  Spencer,  Nel- 
son, Washington,  Marion,  Mercer,  and  Anderson. 

The  sixth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Garrard,  Madison,  Estill,  Owsley, 
Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Clay,  Whitley,  Knox,  Har- 
lan, Perry,  Letcher,  Pike,  Floyd,  and  Johnson. 

The  seventh  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Jefferson,  Oldham,  Trimble,  Carroll, 
Henry  and  Shelby,  and  the  city  of  Louisville. 

The  eigth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Bourbon,  Fayette,  Scott,  Owen,  Frank- 
lin, Woodford,  and  Jessamine. 

The  ninth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Clarke,  Montgomery,  Bath.  Fleming, 
Lewis,  Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  Morgan  and 
Breathitt. 

The  tenth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Mason,  Bracken,  Nicholas,  Harrison, 
Pendleton,  Campbell,  Grant,  Kenton,  Boone,  and 
Gallatin. 

The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the 
several  sessions  of  the  general  assembly,  next  af- 
ter the  making  of  these  enumerations,  be  appor- 
tioned among  the  ten  several  districts,  propor- 
tioned accordiag  to  the  respective  representative 
population  of  each:  and  the  representatives 
shall  be  apportioned,  as  near  as  may  be,  among 
the  counties,  towns  and  cities  in  each  district; 
and  in  making  such  apportionment  the  follow- 
ing rules  shall  govern,  to  wit:  Every  county, 
town  or  city  having  the  ratio  shall  have  one 
representative;  if  double  the  ratio,  two  represen- 
tatives, and  so  on.  Next,  the  counties,  towns  or 
cities  having  one  or  more  representatives,  and 
the  largest  representative  population  above  the 
ratio,  and  counties,  towns  ana  cities  having  the 
largest  representative  population  under  the  ratio, 
regard  being  always  nad  to  the  greatest  repre- 
sentative population:  Provided,  hotceter.  That 
if  there  should  be  any  county  not  having  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  representative  population  to  en- 
title it  to  one  representative,  yet  it  shall  have  a 
representative,  if  all  the  adjacent  counties  in  the 
same  district  have  a  sufficient  number  of  repre- 
sentative population  to  entitle  them  respective- 


800 


Iv  to  oue  representative:  And,  provided  further, 
'f  hat  when  a  county  may  not  have  a  sufficient 
number  of  representative  population  to  entitle  it 
lo  one  representative,  then  such  county  may  be 
joined  to  some  adjacent  county  or  counties  to 
send  one  representative,  provided  such  adjacent 
county  has  not  a  full  ratio.  When  a  new  coun- 
ty shall  be  formed  of  t<»rritory  belonging  to 
more  than  one  district,  it  shall  form  apart  of 
that  district  having  the  least  number  of  repre- 
sentative population." 

I  do  not  know  that  it  will  be  necessary  for  me 
to  make  many  remarks;  but  as  wo  arc  getting 
along  with  business  pretty  rapidly,  perhaps  gen- 
tlemen would  like  to  know  how  it  will  operate. 
The  principle  of  representation  is  that  which  I 
submitted  some  days  ago.  It  is  only  carrying  it 
out  as  applicable  to  ten  districts  instead  of  four. 
The  smaller  the  districts  the  greater  will  be  the 
inequality.  To  exemplify  this,  the  district  of 
which  Fayette  is  a  portion,  will  have  eight  mem- 
bers and  a  greater  residuum  than  any  other;  but 
giving  it  nine  members,  Scott  having  1,839  vo- 
ters, will  be  entitled  to  two  representatives;  and 
the  same  applied  to  another  district,  of  which 
Pulaski  is  one  of  the  counties,  will  give  Pulaski 
one  member. 

But  notwithstanding  this  seeming  great  ine- 
quality, if  gentlemen  will  make  a  calculation 
tney  will  find  it  impossible  to  lay  down  any  par- 
ticular principle  of  apportionment  but  inequal- 
ities will  arise  some  where.  Again,  the  county 
of  Gallatin,  now  connected  with  the  county  of 
Carroll,  with  883  voters,  would  be  entitled  to 
a  member,  because  all  the  adjacent  counties  in 
the  district  will  have  a  full  ratio.  I  only  make 
these  remarks  because  these  are  the  hArd  places 
where  the  principle  may  seem  to  work  unequal- 
Iv.  We  have  tried  many  principles  and  none  of 
them  are  without  similar  difHculties.  I  move 
that  the  report  be  printed  and  postponed  till  to- 
morrow. 

The  motion  to  print  and  to  postpone  was 
agreed  to. 

MODE   OK    AMENDING   THE   CONSTITUTION. 

Mr.  M.  p.  MARSHALL.  Mr.  President,  I 
beg  to  move  the  following  resolution: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  to  whom  was 
referred  the  mode  of  amending  the  constitution, 
be  instructed  to  inquire  into  the  propriety  and 
expediency  of  adopting  the  specific  mode  of 
amending  one  or  more  clause  or  clauses  at  a  time, 
to  be  first  proposed  by  a  vote  of  the  people  at 
the  polls,  and  tlien  considered  by  the  legisla- 
ture, and  if  approved  by  a  majority  of  all  the 
members  thereof,  then  submitted  again  to  the 
people  for  their  approval,  on  two  several  ocea- 
Hions,  under  such  restrictions  as  may  be  safe  and 
advisable. 

The  people  of  Fleming  county,  whom  I  have 
the  honor  to  represent  on  this  floor,  entertain  a 
class  of  opinions  in  regard  to  the  amendment  of 
the  constitutiou  of  1799,  which  my  duty  impels 
me  to  offer  to  the  consideration  of  this  house. 
They  were  moved  to  sustain  the  call  of  a  con- 
vention to  revise  the  present  constitution  by  two 
reasons.  They  desired  to  increase  the  popular 
power  over  the  agencies  of  the  government,  and 
to  increase  their  power  over  the  constitution. 
Experience  had  demonstrated  to  them  the  ineffi- 


ciency of  the  amendatory  clause  to  produce  the 
efl'ect  for  which  it  was  inserted,  and  tiirough  me, 
their  representative,  they  offer  the  plan  i^ei  forth 
in  the  resolution  on  vour  table  as  aproper  amen- 
datory clause.  It  places  the  constitution  of  the 
state  where  it  ought  to  be,  in  the  custody  of  the 
people  who  created  it,  and  restrains  popular  ac- 
tion for  its  amendment  within  the  bounds  of 
prudence  and  wisdom.  This  is  not  the  proper 
period  to  elaborate  the  reasons  why  this  resolu- 
tion should  be  adopted.  I  therefore  move  its 
reference  to  the  committee  of  revision  and  slave- 
ry, that  they  may  give  it  the  consideration  its 
merits  deserve.  I  am  not  informed  when  that 
committee  will  report,  but  hope  the  house  will 
allow  this  resolution  to  take  the  usual  course — 
be  printed  and  referred. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  will  observe  to  the 
honorable  gentleman,  that  the  committee  to 
which  he  refers  is  ready  to  report;  we  will,  how- 
ever, take  his  resolution  into  consideration. 

Mr.  BARLOW  moved  to  amend  said  resolu- 
tion by  striking  out  the  words  "a  majority  of 
all  the  members  thereof,"  and  insert  in  lieu 
thereof  the  words  "two  thirds  of  both  houses  of 
the  general  assembly." 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  lay  tlie  resolution  and 
amendment  on  the  table,  and  he  called  for  the 
yeas  and  nays  thereon. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  taken,  and  were,  yeas 
43,  nays  44: 

Yeas — William  K.  Bowling,  William  Bradle}', 
Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.D.  Cole- 
man, William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  John  P.Hamilton,  Ben. 
Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson.  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall,  Na- 
than McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry 
B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Tavlor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  3ow- 
ard  Todd,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe— 43. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger.  John  S.  Barlow,  Al- 
fred Boyd,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenault,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James 
Dudley,  Benjamin  Y.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Geo. 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Ihomas 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  David  Meriwether,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Jas. 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 44. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  lay  on  the  ta- 
ble. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  remarked  that  the  reso- 
lution was  simply  a  resolution  of  enquiry,  and 


8(ft 


therefore  he  hoped  the  convention  would  adopt 
it. 

The  resolution  "was  then  referred,  and  ordered 
to  be  printed. 

POLITICAL  AXD  JUDICIAL  ELECTIONS. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MAESHALL  offered  the  following 
resolution: 

'•Resolved,  That  the  committee  of  revision  be 
instructed  to  enquire  into  the  propriety  of  pro- 
viding that  the  civil  and  political  elections  shall 
be  held  on  different  years." 

After  a  brief  conversation,  in  which  Mes.srs. 
C.  A.  Wickliffe,  Maehen,  A.  K.  Marshall,  Jam<;s, 
aiul  Garrard,  took  part,  the  resolution  was  adop- 
ted. 

ge:.eral  provisioxs. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  tlie  committee  ou  general  provis- 
ions. 

The  11th  section  was  under  consideration  when 
the  convention  adjourned  yesterday.  It  was  now 
verbally  amended  ou  the  motion  of  Mr.  GRAY, 
by  the  insertion  of  the  word  "or"  after  the  words 
"public  danger." 

The  section  as  amended  was  then  adopted. 

The  12th,  13th.  14th,  15th,  and  iGtJi  sections, 
were  adopted  without  amendment  as  follows: 

"Sec,  12.  Xo  person  shall, for  thesame  offence, 
bo  twice  put  in  jeopardy  of  his  life  or  limb;  nor 
shall  any  man's  property  be  taken  or  applied  to 
public  use,  without  the  consent  of  his  r<-presen- 
talives,  and  without  just  compensation  being 
previously  made  to  him." 

"Sec.  13.  That  all  courts  shall  be  open,  and 
every  person,  for  an  injury  done  to  him  in  his 
laucfs,  goods,  person,  or  reputation,  shall  have 
remedy  Dv  the  due  course  of  law,  and  right  and 
justice  administered,  without  sale,  denial,  or  de- 
lay." 1 

"Sec.  14.  That  no  power  of  suspending  laws 
shall  be  exercised,  unJes-s  by  the  legislature  or  its 
autliority." 

"Sec.  15.  That  excessive  bail  shall  not  be  re- 
quired, nor  excessive  fines  imposed,  nor  cruel 
punishments  inflicted." 

"Sec  16.  That  all  prisoners  shall  be  bailable 
by  sufficient  securities,  unless  for  capital  offen- 
ces, wlien  the  proof  is  evident  or  presumption 
great;  and  the  privilege  of  tlie  writ  of  habeas  cor- 
pus shall  not  be  suspended,  unless  when  in  cases 
of  rebellion  or  invasion  the  public  safety  may 
require  it." 

The  seventeenth  section  wa.s  read  as  follows  : 

"Sec  17.  Tliatthe  person  of  a  tiebtor,  where 
there  is  not  strong  presumption  of  fraud,  shall 
not  be  continued  in  prison  after  delivering  up  his 
estate  for  the  benefit  of  liis  creditors,  in  such 
manner  as  shall  be  prescribed  by  law." 

Mr.  HAMILTON  moved  to  amend,  by  striking 
out  the  words  "continued  in  prison  after  deliv- 1 
ering,"  and  inserting  "imprisoned,  who  deliv- 
ers." 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  section  was  then  adopted.  I 

The  eighteenth,  nineteenth,  twentieth,  twenty- 
first,  and  twenty-second  sections  were  adopted 
without  amendment,  as  follows  :  [ 

"Sec.  18.  That  no  ex  post  facto  law,  nor  any! 
law  impairing  contracts,  shall  be  made.  j 

"Sec  19.  That  no  person  shall  be  attainted  ' 
of  treason  or  felony  bv  the  general  a.ssemblv. 

lor 


"Sec.  20.  That  no  attainder  shall  work  cor- 
ruption of  blood,  nor,  except  during  the  life  of 
tlie  offender,  forfeiture  of  estate  to  thie  common- 
wealth. 

"Sec  21.  That  the  estates  of  such  persons  as 
shall  destroy  their  own  lives,  shall  descend  or 
vest  as  in  case  of  natural  death  ;  and  if  any  per- 
son shall  be  killed  by  casualty,  there  shall  be 
noforf«;iture  bv  reason  therof. 

"Sec.  22.  That  the  citizens  have  a  right,  in  a 
peaceable  manner,  to  assemble  together  for  their 
common  good,  and  to  apply  to  those  invested 
with  the  powers  of  government,  for  redress  of 
grievances,  or  other  proper  purposes,  by  peti- 
tion, address,  or  remonstrance." 

The  twentv-third  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  23.  That  the  rights  of  the  citizens  to 
bear  anus  in  defence  of  themselves  aiid  the  state, 
shall  not  be  questioned." 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  moved  to  amend,  by  adding 
the  following: 

"But  the  general  assembly  may  pass  laws  to 
prevent  persons  from  earrving  concealed  arms." 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas  and 
navs,  and  tliey  were  yeas  50,  navs  39. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  Jolin  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow.  Luther  Brawuer,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Jes- 
se Coflfey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Garrett  Davis, 
James  Dudley,'  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thom- 
as J.  Gough,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Harris,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  James 
W.  Irwin,  George  W.  Johnston,  Thomas  N.Lind- 
sov,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis B.  Machen,  Alexan- 
der K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Xathan  McClure,  Jonathan  Xewcum, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson, James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson 
—50. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  K. 
Bowling,  Alfred  Bovd.  William  Bradley,  Thom- 
as D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamil- 
ton, Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thos. 
James,  William  Johnson, George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kolley,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Greorge  W. 
Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, William  D.  Mitcliell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Larkin,  J.  Proctor,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spal- 
ding, John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman' Henry  Washington,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe— 39. 

So  the  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  BULLITT  called  for  the  veas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  section,  and^  they  were  yeas 
82,  nays  7. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person, John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wm. 
k.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Lu- 
ther Brawner,  Thomas  D.Brown,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Bev- 


m 


eily  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archibald 
Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Thomsis  J.  Gough,  Niuian  E.  Gray,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  H.ardin,  John  Harris,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thom- 
as J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  X.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitcliell,  James  M.  Ncsbitt,  Jona- 
than Newcuiu,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.Robinson, Thom- 
as Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Igcatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, James  W,  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert 
G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 82. 

Nays — William  C.  Bullitt,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh — 7. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  twenty-fourth  ana  twenty-fifth  sections 
were  adopted  without  amendment,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  24k.  That  no  standing  army  shall,  in 
time  of  peace,  be  kept  up,  without  the  consent 
of  the  legislature;  and  tne  military  shall,  in  all 
cases  and  at  all  times,  be  in  strict  subordina- 
tion to  the  civil  power. 

"Sec.  25.  That  no  soldier  shall,  in  time  of 
peace,  be  quartered  in  any  house  without  the 
consent  of  the  owner  ;  nor  in  time  of  war,  but 
in  a  manner  to  be  prescribed  by  law." 

The  twenty-sixth  section  was  read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  26.  That  the  legislature  shall  not  grant 
any  title  of  nobility,  or  hereditary  distinction; 
nor  create  any  office,  the  appointment  to  which 
shall  be  for  a  longer  term  tnan  good  behavior." 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  moved  to  strike  out  the  word 
"term"  and  insert  "time;"  also,  to  strike  out 
"good  behaviour"  and  insert  "term  of  years." 

The  amendments  were  adopted. 

Mr.  NESBITT  moved  to  in.sert  the  word  "six" 
before  the  word  "years." 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  section  as  amended  was  tlien  adopted. 

The  twenty  seventh  and  twenty  eighth  sections 
were  then  adopted  without  amendment  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Sec.  27.  That  em igmtion  from  the  state  shall 
not  be  prohibited." 

"Sec.  28.  To  guard  against  transgressions  of 
the  high  powers  whicli  we  have  delegated,  we 
DECLARE,  that  every  tiling  in  this  article  is  ex- 
cepted out  of  the  general  powers  of  government, 
and  shall  forever  remain  inviolate;  and  that  all 
laws  contrary  thereto,  or  contrary  to  this  consti- 
tution, shall  be  void." 

The  seventh  section,  which  wa.s  heretofore 
passed  over  at  the  request  of  Mr.  JAMES,  was 
aj^n  taken  up  and,  read  as  follows : 


"Sec.  7.  That  printing  presses  shall  be  free  to 
every  person  who  undertakes  to  examine  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  legislature,  or  any  branch  of  gov- 
ernment, and  no  law  shall  ever  be  made  to  re- 
strain the  right  thereof.  The  free  communica- 
tion of  thoughts  and  opinions  is  one  of  the  in- 
valuable rights  of  man,  and  every  citizen  may 
freely  speak,  write,  and  print,  on  any  subject, 
being  responsible  for  the  abuse  of  that  liberty." 

Mr.  JAMES.  Mr.  President,  I  move  to  strike 
out  the  words  "the  free  coinmun  ication  of  thoughts 
and  opinions  is  one  of  the  invaluable  rights  of 
man,  and  every  citizen  may  freely  speak,  write, 
and  print,  on  any  subject,  being  responsible  for 
the  abuse  of  that  liberty." 

I  rise  to  address  the  convention  on  this  oc- 
casion under  very  peculiar  and  embarrassing 
circumstances.  It  may  be  necessary  before  I 
conclude,  to  make  some  allusion  to  myself,  which, 
to  me,  is  always  unpleasant  in  any  discussion, 
but  more  especially  so  in  a  parliamentary  body. 
I  hope  this  convention  Avill  not  be  afraid  that  I 
am  about  to  revive  what  are  called  the  "alien 
and  sedition  laws"  which  have  become  so  noto- 
rious and  unpopular,  at  the  same  time  I  doubt 
not  they  will  admit  the  justice  of  the  remarks 
I  am  about  to  make. 

It  has  been  well  said,  Mr.  President,  that  the 
power  of  speech  is  a  faculty  peculiar- to  man, 
and  was  bestowed  upon  hini'b}'  his  beneficient 
Creator  for  the  purpose  of  communing  with  his 
fellow  man,  and  of  enabling  him  thereby  to 
enjoy  to  a  fuller  extent  the  social  relations  oi 
life.  But,  alas !  how  often  is  this  power  convert- 
ed to  the  worst  of  purposes !  The  same  remark, 
Mr.  President,  may  be  made  with  regard  to  the 
printing  press — confessedly  an  instrument  of 
much  good  or  of  great  evil — according  as  it  is 
ill  or  \yell  directed.  Wh*-!!  properly  directed, 
none  will  deny  that  it  is  calculated  to  enlighten 
and  improve  a  community  by  diffusing  the  most 
useful  information.  But  when,  like  the  power 
of  sj)eech,  it  is  resorted  to  for  the  purpose  of 
abusing,  traducing,  and  calumniating  the  citi- 
zens of  this  comnionwoalth,  I  ask  you  if,  in 
such  case,  it  is  not  converted  to  the  worst  of 
purposes.    It  has  been  well  said,  Mr,  President, 

'•Who  steals  my  purse  steals  trash. 
'Twas  mine,  'tis  his,  and  has  been  slave  to  thousands. 
Hut  he  who  filches  from  irie  my  good  name, 
Robs  me  of  that  which  not  enriches  him, 
And  mukes  me  poor  indeed." 

I  have  never  heard  the  correctness  of  those 
sentiments  controverted  in  all  my  life.  Then, 
sir,  if  this  is  true,  what  is  the  condition  of  that 
man  who  will  willingly,  wilfully,  wantonly,  cor- 
ruptly, and  wickedly  attempt  to  steal  and  rob 
from  any  titizen  of  this  commonwealth — or  any 
body  of  citizens — that  reputation  which  does 
not  enricli  him,  but  makes  others  "poor  indeed?" 
We  know  that  this  commonwealth  has  been  ex- 
cited for  years,  throughout  the  lengtli  and 
breadth  of  this  land,  upon  party  questions,  and 
under  the  influence  of  party  feelings;  but  when 
this  convention  was  called,  what  did  the  people 
do?  To  their  honor  be  it  said,  tliat  tliey  regar- 
ded this  as  an  important  consideration,  affecting 
alike  the  interests  of  all,  and  laying  aside  all 
party  feeling  and  animosity,  they  came  up  to 
this  question  like  men,  like  statesmen,  like  pa- 
triots ;  for,  Mr.  President,  it  is  well  known  that 


803 


many  gentlemen  who  now  occupy  seats  on  this 
floor  are  indebted  to  those  wlio  are  opposed  to 
them  in  politics  for  those  seats.  And  why  did 
they  do  this?  Because  they  wanted  to  assemble 
the  wisdom  and  talent  and  experience  of  Ken- 
tucky to  frame  an  organic  law  that  should  con- 
tinue, not  merely  for  a  year,  but  that  shall  be 
held  in  respect  by  our  children,  and  that  shall 
be  venerated  by  our  children's  children. 

I  here  remark,  Mr.  President,  that  if  our  fore- 
fathers in  1799  succeeded  in  framing  a  constitu- 
tion that  has  continued  for  half  a  century,  we 
shall,  indeed,  be  greatly  behind  them,  if,  with 
the  additional  knowledge  and  experience  which 
we  posses-s,  the  lights  we  have  before  us,  and  the 
widely  different  and  more  improved  materials  we 
have  to  work  upon — we  cannot  frame  such  a 
constitution  as  will  continue  at  least  a  hundred 
years. 

Well  sir,  I  congratulated  ravself  when  I  was 
about  to  leave  my  family  and  friends,  that  I 
should  be  associated  with  some  eighty  of  my  old 
as.<iociatt:s  in  legislation — the  ablest  politlcans 
and  statesmen  of  Kentucky.  And  I  found  here 
;)imong  those  with  whom  I  had  not  had  the  plea- 
sure of  an  acquaintance,  many  young  gentle- 
men to  whom  the  road  of  fame  is  open  and 
clear.  I  thought  we  should  meet  again,  not  for 
party  purposes,  to  engage  in  a  work  for  the 
common  good  of  the  country;  mightlnothave  ex- 
pected under  these  circumstances,  when  the  con- 
vention was  conveneil,  that  it  would  be  free  from 
vituperation  and  billingsgate  abuse  of  any  portion 
of  the  press  of  this  state?  But,  sir,  what  are 
the  facts?  It  is  humiliating  to  look  at  them  ;  it 
is  humiliating  to  reflect  upon  and  acknowledge 
them.  Letter-writers  and  editors  have  been  as- 
Sailing  the  dek-gates  to  this  convention  in  the 
most  virulent  and  disreputable  manner.  Let  me 
call  your  attention,  Mr.  President,  to  what  has 
been  published  in  a  newspaper,  emanating  from 
the  city  of  Louisville,  called  thu iMvisrille  Chron- 
icle. I  will  pass  over  the  name  of  the  gentle- 
man he  refers  to;  fori  determined,  in  the  outset, 
never  to  bring  the  name  of  any  gentleman  into 
question  in  connection  with  any  little  discussion 
I  might  be  engaged  in,  unless  it  should  be  cal- 
led for. 

The  first  extract  is — 

"We  understand  tliat  old has  at  last 

openly  come  out — 

Mr.  HARDIX.  Name  the  man  ;  name  the 
man. 

Mr.  JAMES.  The  gentleman  says  "name  the 
man."  As  Nathan  said  unto  David,  "Thou  art 
the  man."     The  extract  reads — 

"sale  avowed. 

"We  understand  that  old  Ben  Hardin  has  at 
last  openly  come  out  and  declared  that  he  will 
oppose  the  new  constitution.  We  stated  some 
time  since  that  old  Ben  was  at  heart  against  con- 
stitutional reform,  and  had  sold  himsflf  to  the 
central  power  at  Frankfort,  and  now  the  avowal 
of  the  sale  is  made  by  himself.  Nor  does  he 
stand  alone.  There  are  many  others  with  him 
who  have  their  price  in  their  pockets;  and  the 
democratic  party  will  learn  with  astonishment 
that  among  them  are  some  men  who  dare  to  call 
themselves  democrats." 

Well,  sir,  I  dont  know  how  many  there' are. 


but  this  imputation  evidently  embraces  more 
than  one, for  the  charge  is  in  theplural,not  inthe 
singular.  Well,  Mr.  President,  if  that  is  true, 
those  delegates,  whoever  they  are,  ought  to  be 
expelled  from  this  convention.  If  it  is  untrue, 
he  who  published  it — the  editor  of  the  Chron- 
icle— ought  to  be  branded  as  a  base  calumnia- 
tor, and  forever  shunned  by  every  honorable 
man.  Who  will  controvert  this  position?  No 
man  I  trust. 

Well,  sir,  what  does  he  say  in  a  preceding 
number  of  his  paper?  After  going  on,  when  al- 
luding to  my  name  he  says — 

"Through  six  ponderous  columns  of  the  Com- 
momtealth  he  poured  forth  the  most  nauseating 
twaddle  and  aisgustino;  billingsgate  upon  every 
body  who  is  not  as  willing  as  himself  to  sell  out 
to  the  Frankfort  Whi<f  Junto." 

What  is  meant  by  this,  Mr.  President?  This 
is  another  charge  that  I  pronounce  a  base,  wil- 
ful, vile,  and  corrupt  calumny,  and  no  other  but 
a  vile  and  filthy  sheet  would  have  printed  it.  I 
have  had  the  honor  of  serving,  at  various  times, 
with  more  than  two  thousand  of  Kentucky  poli- 
ticians and  statesmen;  I  have  had,  with  them, 
to  consider  a  great  many  important  questions — 
questions  afl'ecting  our  most  vital  interests,  as 
well  those  of  my  immediate  constituents  as  the 
constituency  of  other  gentlemen,  and  I  say  to 
this  base  calumniator,  that  the  lips  of  every  man 
in  this  commonwealth  are  unsealed,  and  I  chal- 
lenge them  all  to  declare  if  ever  I  have,  by  word, 
act,  or  deed,  attempted  the  exercise  of  an  im- 
proper influence,  to  induce  any  man  to  swerve 
from  the  discharge  of  his  duty;  and  I  call  upon 
him  to  retract  this  charge,  or  I  say  again  that  he 
is  a  base  calumniator.  I  here  dismiss  this  sub- 
ject, and  leave  the  slanderer  to  his  fate.  "Cea.se, 
viper;  you  gnaw  a  file." 

I  have  voted  on  many  questions  in  which 
the  people  of  Frankfort  were  interested — I  may 
have  voted  on  these  questions  in  conformity  with 
their  interests;  and,  Mr.  President,  I  shall  al- 
ways do  so  when  I  think  the\'  are  in  the  right. 
There  are  other  questions  in  which  they  were 
deeply  interested,  and  I  voted  against  them 
when  I  believed  it  for  the  good  of  the  common- 
wealth to  do  so.  This  also,  Mr.  President,  I 
am  sure  all  honorable  men  will  say  is  equally 
right. 

Where  is  this  "  whig  junto "  that  the 
Chronicle  is  talking  about?  Who  has  seen 
it  here?  Where  is  it  to  be  found?  No- 
where within  my  knowledge.  I  have  been  for 
many  measures  that  interested  the  section  of 
country  in  which  Frankfort  is  located.  I  hare 
strenuously  opposed  others  in  which  that  section 
was  thought  to  be  interested.  I  have  always 
endeavored  to  do  right.  'Twas  but  the  other 
dav  that  I  advocated  a  proposition  in  regard  to 
tolls,  wliich  it  was  declared  would  injure  Frank- 
fort. I  believed  it  was  right,  and  I  took  my 
stand  because  I  believed  it  right.  I  have  madfe 
this  my  home  for  twenty-three  winters,  and  I 
will  say  that  a  more  upright,  deserving,  hospita- 
ble community  I  have  never  had  acquaintance 
with.  But  they  need  no  encomiums  from  the 
humble  individual  who  addresses  you. 

But  I  appear  already  to  have  trespassed  too 
long.  I  came  here,  sir,  not  to  legislate  for,  or 
against,  Frankfort,    I  came  here  to  represent  a 


804 


higli-miiultHl,  honest,  ami  honorable  constituen- 
cy; and  I  regard  any  imputation  cast  upon  n»e 
as  an  iuiputatiou  cast  upon  them.  They  proba- 
bly don't  drive  out  in  their  one  or  two-thousand- 
dollar  carriages:  but  do  you  raise  the  curtains  of 
a  carriage  to  find  honesty,  bedecked  in  robes?  I 
would  as  soon  go  to  tbe  individual  clothed  in 
home-spun.  I  cast  no  reflections  upon  the  rich, 
and  I -will  suffer  none  to  be  cast  upon  the  poor;  be- 
cause they  are  the  main-stay,  the  support  in  ev- 
erj'  sense  of  the  word  of  our  commonwealth — 
for  the  toiling  millions  have  always  been  the 
men  who  have  sustained  this  country.  They 
sustain  it  by  producing  what  the  drones  of  the 
country  need  for  their  consuraptiorii  and  when 
our  country  is  assailed  and  invaded,  they  are  al- 
ways to  be  found  foremost  in  the  ranks  to  de- 
fend it. 

I  know  there  are  men  in  this  convention  who 
will  think  I  shoald  not  have  condescended 
to  notice  an  article  of  this  kind.  I  have  con- 
sulted with  but  few  on  the  matter,  but  I  thought 
a  resolution  of  inquiry  into  an  affair  casting  so 
foul  an  imputation  on  the  character  of  this  body, 
ought  to  be  offered;  and  if  any  menibc-r  of  this 
convention  be  guilty,  as  imputed  in  the  article  I 
have  referred  to,  he  ought  most  certainly  to  be 
expelled.  But  I  do  not  offer  any  resolution  of 
inquiry.  This  is  the  last  legislative  body  1 
shall  probably  ever  enter.  I  have  been  sustain- 
ed for  many  years  by  a  generous  constituency, 
and  I  could  not  permit  this  opportunity  to  pass 
without  giving  this  expression  to  my  feelings. 

This  is  a  very  important  article,  and  although 
the  privileges  granted  to  the  press  and  tlie 
tongue  may  be  abused,  I  trust  that  public  senti- 
ment will  always  correct  the  influence  of  this 
abuse. 

With  these  remarks,  Mr.  President,  I  will  add 
no  more;  I  could  not,  in  justice  to  my  constitu- 
ency, say  less.  1  withdraw  my  amendment. 
The  section  was  then  adopted. 
The  PRESIDENT  then  announced  the  ques- 
tion to  be  on  the  section  offered  by  Mr,  DIXON 
as  a  second  section  : 

"Sec.  2.  That  absolute,  arbitrary  power  over 
the  lives,  liberty,  and  property  of  freemen,  (ex- 
cept for  crimes,)  exists  nowhere  in  a  republic — 
not  even  in  the  largest  majority." 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not  feel  it  necessary  to 
make  any  speech  on  this  proposed  section.  It 
fully  explains  itself.  But  1  wish  the  yeas  and 
nays  to  be  taken  on  its  adoption. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  It  appears  to  me,  if  I  un- 
derstand the  section  which  it  is  propo.sed  to 
adopt,  that  it  conflicts  with  the  succeeding  sec- 
tion. It  asserts  "that  absolute  and  arbitrary 
power  does  not  exist  in  a  republic."  The  next 
section  declares  "that  all  power  is  in  the  peo- 
ple." I  think  "all  power"  would  include  this 
"arbitrary  power."  It  seems  to  me  there  is  an 
absolute  power  somewhere,  wherever  there  is  a 

Eolitical  organization.  In  Russia  it  is  in  the 
zar.  In  a  limited  monarchy  it  may  be  di- 
vided, and  in  a  republic,  it  is  in  the  people.  I 
think  there  is  an  inconsistency  in  the  two 
sections. 

Mr.  DIXON.  There  is  not  the  least  inconsis- 
tency. The  section  to  which  the  gentleman  al- 
Indos  says:  "that  all  power  is  inherent  in  the 
people,  and  all  free  goreruments  are  founded  on 


their  authority,  and  instituted  for  their  peace, 
safety,  happiness,  security,  and  protection  of 
their  property.  For  the  advancement  of  these 
ends,  they  have  at  all  times  an  inalienable  and 
indefeasible  right  to  alter,  reform  or  abolish 
their  government  in  such  manner  as  they  may 
think  proper."  The  section  which  I  offer  is: 
"that  aosolute,  arbitrary  power  over  the  lives, 
liberty  and  property  of  freemen,  (except  for 
crimes,)  exists  no  where  in  a  republic — not  even 
iH  the  largest  majorities."  That  is  it.  There  is 
no  inconsistency.  The  power  does  not  exist  in 
a  majority,  however  large,  to  cut  a  man's  throat, 
or  to  take  away  his  liberty,  or  his  property  arbi- 
trarily. It  is  only  denying  this  arbitrary  power 
when  it  is  exercised  by  a  port  ion.  When  it  is 
exercised  by  tlie  whole,  there  is  no  question. 
The  section  to  which  the  gentleman  from  Old- 
ham lias  referred,  asserts  the  right  only  for  the 
ends  therein  named;  that  is  for  the  "peace,  safe- 
ty, happiness  security  and  protection  of  pioper- 
ty."  For  the  advancement  of  these  ends,  they 
have  a  right  to  alter  or  abolish  their  government 
at  all  times.  They  have  no  right  to  adopt  a 
constitution  which  would  not  advance,  but 
which  would  destroy  those  ends,  which  would  not 
secure  his  liberty,  but  which  would  make  him  a 
slave.  I  think  the  section  is  not  inconsistent, 
but  is  carrying  out  the  same  principle 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  do  not  rise  sir,  to  make  a 
speech,  I  merely  wish  to  define  my  position.  If 
I  uuderstand  the  mover  of  this  section,  it  is  to 
substitute  it  for  a  resolution  offered  by  the  gen- 
tleman some  time  since,  and  for  which  I  w;is 
very  willing  to  have  voted.  That  resolution,  if 
I  recollect  rightly,  contained  the  sentiment  or 
declaration  that  this  convention  has  no  right,  hj 
any  principle  it  may  incorporate  in  the  consti- 
tution it  may  form,  to  deprive  the  citizen  of  liis 
property  without  his  consent,  except  for  public 
use,  and  only  then,  by  making  to  him  a  just 
and  full  compensation  therefor.  This  sentiment 
I  adopt.  This  declaration  I  believe  to  be  true, 
and  the  resolution  containing  them  I  should 
have  I  voted  for  most  cordially.  But  sir,  I  un- 
derstand the  section  here  offered,  to  contain  an 
entirely  different  sentiment,  one  at  war  with 
that  resolution.  It  reads:  "that  absolute  arbi- 
trary power  over  the  lives,  liberties  and  proper- 
ty of  freemen  no  where  exists  in  a  republic, 
except  for  crime.  Now  sir,  I  understand  all 
power  in  governments  to  be  absolute  and  arbi- 
trary. It  is  so  from  the  very  nature  of  govern- 
ment. What  I  understand  by  absolute,  arbitra- 
ry power  is  plenary,  positive,  irresistible  power, 
or  right  to  execute  tne  will  or  law  of  the  gov- 
ernment, contrary  to,  or  without  the  consent  of 
the  citizen.  This  sir,  is  admitted  on  the  face 
of  the  proposition  as  far  as  crime  is  concerned. 
If  it  exists  for  the  punishment  of  crime,  it  cer- 
tainly does  for  the  coercion  of  debt;  and  if  it 
exists  for  the.se  purposes,  it  seems  to  me  sir,  it 
must,  in  the  very  nature  of  government,  exist 
for  any  and  every  other  purpose  of  government. 
None  deny,  that  in  time  of  invasion,  a  republic 
like  all  other  governments,  has  absolute  power 
over  the  lives,  liberties  and  proj)erty  of  her  citi- 
zens to  compel  them,  even  contrary  to  their  will, 
to  furnish  men  and  means  to  prosecute  the  war 
in  defence  of  their  country's  riglits,  and  their 
country's  honor.    None,  I  presume,  Mr.  Presi- 


305 


f, 


dent,  will  deny  this.  But  sir,  I  wish  to  b<» 
clearly  and  distinctly  understood  on  this  sub- 
ject. While  I  vote  against  this  section,  I 
deny  the  right  that  this  convention,  or  any 
ofier  that  may  hereafter  assemble,  has.  or 
will  have,  by  any  principle  to  be  incorporated 
in  the  constitution  we  are  about  to  frame,  or  any 
constitution  hereafter  to  be  framed,  to  appropri- 
ate private  property  to  public  use,  without  pay- 
ing therefor,  a  full  and  fair  equivalent  in  money. 
Sir,  this  is  a  constitutional  convention,  assem- 
bled for  purposes  of  protection — not  plunder — 
to  secure  the  rights  of  our  citizens — not  to  de- 
stroy them. 

ilr.  DIXON.  There  has  been  a  section  adopt- 
ed which  meets  the  gentleman's  views. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  announce  my  in- 
tention to  vote  against  the  section .  There  is  a  ques- 
tion whether  we  have  not  delegated  this  power 
alrea<ly.  If  we  have  done  this,  is  not  the  sec- 
tion proposed  inconsistent  with  the  one  we  have 
adopted? 

Mr.  DIXOX.  I  will  explain.  The  power 
which  is  delegated  to  the  legislature  to  take  away 
iroperty,  life,  or  liberty,  is  a  qualified  po^er. 
t  is  consistent  with  the  law  of  the  land,  which 
law  has  been  made  in  conformity  to  the  powers 
delegated  by  the  people,  and  which  powers  so 
delegated,  have  resulted  from  the  necessitv  of 
the  case,  and  not  from  the  exercise  of  absolute 
and  arbitrary  power.  The  power  to  punish  a 
man  for  crime,  to  take  away  his  property  when 
the  public  good  may  require  it,  oy  paying  him 
a  just  compensation  for  it.  is  not  only  necessary 
to  the  security  of  the  lilwrties  of  the  people,  but 
no  free  government  could  exist  or  maintain  itself 
without  the  right  to  exercise  this  power.  This 
power  is  derived  from  the  people,  who  constitute 
a  free  government,  by  their  consent;  and  it  is 
agreed  bv  them  that  it  shall  b-j  exercised  Avith  a 
view  to  tlieir  mutual  protection,  in  the  promotion 
of  all  the  great  blessings  of  free  government. 

Arbitrary  and  absolute  powers  a.-e  opposed  to 
the  rery  idea  of  consent, so  faras  it  respects  those 
on  whom  it  is  to  operate.  It  is  the  exercise  of 
an  unrestrained  will,  either^n  an  individual  or 
a  multitude;  and  whether  exercised  bv  the  one 
or  the  other,  over  the  lives,  liberty,  and.  property 
of  the  citizen,  it  is  tyranny,  it  is  despotism  in  its 
darkest  form.  This'  power,  whether  exercised 
by  one  or  a  inaiority,  is  never  binding,  except  so 
far  as  force  may  make  it  so,  on  those  whose  lib- 
erties are  cloven  down  and  destroyed  by  it.  It 
is  opposed  to  the  great  principle  of  self-preser- 
vation, written  by  God  himself  on  the  hearths  of 
all  his  intelligent'creatures,  and  wliieh  principle, 
according  to  a  beautiful  writer,  "is  the  primal 
compact  and  bond  of  society,  not  graven  on 
stone,  nor  sealed  with  wax,  nor  put  down  on 
parchment,  nor  set  forth  in  any  express  form  of 
words  by  men.  when  of  old  they  came  together; 
but  implied  in  the  very  act  that  they  came  to- 
gether, presupposed  in  all  subsequent  law,  not 
to  be  repealed  by  any  authority,  not' invalidated 
by  being  omitted  in  any  code;  inasmuch  as  from 
thence  are  all  codes  and  all  authority."  Kingly 
governments  look  to  the  exercise  of  absolute 
and  arbitrary  power,  in  derogation  of  all  the 
rights  of  the  people.  But  all  free  republics  de- 
rive their  existence  from  the  people;  are  created 
for  their  protection  and  happiness,  aird  in  the 


making  of  laws,  as  well  as  in  the  execution  of 
them,  are  restrained  by  the  very  objects  and  pur- 
posesof  theircreation.  Whenevertliey  cea=e  so  to 
be  restrained,  they  cease  to  be  republics, 
and  bocome  engines  of  tyranny  and  oppres- 
sion. The  section  which  I  have  offered,  and 
which  1  wish  inserted  in  the  bill  of  rights,  as- 
serts the  great  principle  which  lies  at  the  foun- 
dation of  all  free  governments,  that  absolute,  ar- 
bitrary power  over  the  lives,  liberty  and  proper- 
tv  of  freemen,  exists  nowhere  in  a  republic,  not 
even  in  the  largest  majorities. 

I  have  offered  this  section  because  there  are 
many  persons  in  this  commonwealth  who  do 
believe  these  powers  exist,  and  that  they  may  be 
rightfully  exercised.  The  laugu;ige  which  it  em- 
ploys is  stronger  than  that  in  the  second  section 
of  the  report,  and  I  prefer  having  it  adopted, 
because  it  imposes  not  by  implication,  but  di- 
rectly, a  negative  upon  the  exercise  of  these 
powers.  I  wish  this  principle  incorporated  in 
tJie  bill  of  rights,  that  the  people  of  Kentucky 
and  of  other  states,  may  know  and  understand 
that  this  convention  does  not  admit  that  the 
power  exists  in  a  bare  majority,  or  in  a  large  ma- 
jority, to  take  from  the  meanest  citizen  his  prop- 
erty without  compensation,  or  his  liberty  or  life 
unjustly.  I  wish  it  to  be  incorporated  that  it 
may  be'fuUy  understood  in  all  time  to  come,  that 
this  convention  denies  the  right  of  any  majority, 
however  constituted,  to  free  the  slaves  of  this  com- 
monwealth without  the  consent  of  their  owners 
and  without  making  to  them  a  just  and  fair  com- 
pensation for  them.  I  wish  it  incorporated  be- 
cause it  opposes  the  idea  which  has  been  so  long 
prevalent,  that  majorities  in  convention  are  om- 
nipotent, and  that  they  have  ab-solute power  over 
the  lives,  liberty  and  property  of  the  citizen. 
Even  here.  Mr.  President,  we  haveheard  it  assert- 
ed again  and  again,  that  this  convention  is  un- 
limited in  its  power,  that  it  can  do  whatever  it 
thinks  proper  to  do,  and  that  its  voice  is  as  the 
voice  of  fate,  and  there  is  none  to  resist  it.  Ac- 
cording to  the  opinions  of  some  gentlemen,  this 
convention  might  constitute  it«elf  the  sovereign 
power  of  the  state,  proclaiming  itself  the  hun- 
dred— I  will  not  call  them  tvrants — but  kings  of 
Kentucky.  Does  anybody  Wieve  it  would  not 
be  usurpation?  Beyond  all  question  it  would. 
Suppose  the  convention  attempts  to  perpetuate 
power  in  itself  and  its  successors.  Does  any 
one  believe  this  would  not  be  usurpation?  What 
I  mean  to  assert  is,  the  limitation  of  the  power 
of  all  future  conventions, and  all  majorities;  and 
this  is  what  is  embraced  in  the  section,  and 
which  I  wish  gentlemen  distinctly  to  under- 
stand. If  they  mean  to  saytliat  at  any  time, 
the  power  of  a  majority  may  take  away  property 
without  compensation,  let  it  go  forth. 

The  PRESIDEXT.  I  acknowledge,  that  so 
far  as  relates  to  the  life  and  property  of  citizens, 
we  have  no  riyht  to  invade  it,  but  as  to  property 
necessarv  for  public  use,  have  we  not  a  right  to 
take  it?"  That  is  a  difficulty  which  presents 
itself  to  my  mind. 

Mr.  DIXOX.     There  is  nothing  in  the  section 

which  I  propose,  that  controverts  that  view.     If 

i  there  is,  I  am  willing  to  amend  it  in  such  a  form 

j  that  it  will  not  oppose  taking  property  for  pub- 

!  lie  use,  on  paying  a  compensation.    I  nave  used 


806 


stron;';  laiii^iiage,  because  I  wish   it  to  tx?  fully 
lui.lers^lood. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  do  not  believe  this  con- 
vention, or  any  other,  has  a  right  to  take  away 
the  property  of  the  citizen  without  compensa- 
tion. 1  umlerstand  the  import  of  this  proposi- 
tion to  be:  wo  have  no  right  to  take  it  with  or 
•without  compensation — justly  or  unjustly.  I 
shall  vote  against  it. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  tl) ink  the  suggestion  of  the 
President  entirely  correct.  Arbitrary  means 
taking  without  the  consent  of  the  owner,  and 
would  include  those  cases  where  property  is  paid 
for  as  where  it  is  not,  if  the  consent  is  not  given. 
They  have  a  right  to  take  it  for  the  public  good, 
even  against  the  will  of  the  owner,  and  that  is 
ar})itrary.  But  I  cannot  vote  for  it.  It  is  en- 
tirely an  abstract  proposition.  Does  the  gen- 
tleman mean  to  say  that  a  man  cannot  be  called 
out  to  serve  his  country,  for  six,  eight,  or 
twelve  months.  We  cannot  take  his  property 
without  paying  for  it,  but  we  have  a  right  to  call 
out  citizens  to  fight,  to  repel  invasion,  and  that 
is  the  most  arbitrary  power  in  the  world.  I  have 
seen  men  turn  as  pale  as  if  there  was  no  blood 
in  them,  wjien  they  came  to  draw.  This  was 
very  arbitrary  on  them.  Many  a  man  I  have  seei 
draw,  and  many  a  man  I  have  told  to  feel  for 
the  loose  ticket,  for  the  prize  ticket  would  be 
sure  to  be  folded  np,  and  how  they  have  fum- 
bled about  to  get  the  right  ticket. 

Mr.  (tHOLSON.  I  think  the  provisions  already 
made  arc  sufficient.  No  pro-slavery  man  woulH 
wish  for  other  provisions.  Why,  the  power  to 
make  a  man  serve  on  a  jury  is  arbitrary,  and 
would  conflict  with  this  section.  Slave  prop- 
erty is  sufficiently  safe  so  long  as  we  have  the 
guaranty  that  property  shall  not  be  taken  with- 
out compensation.  In  a  republican  government 
majorities  must  rule,  and  if  the  day  should  conic 
when  we  shall  be  in  a  minority  on  this  question, 
we  must  either  submit  or  fight.  That  is  the  sum 
total  of  it.  There  is  no  necessity  for  this  pro- 
vision, and  I  hope  it  will  not  pass. 

Mr.  STEV'ENSON.  I  wish  to  enquire  of  the 
gentleman  from  Henderson,  if  he  intends  this 
amendment  as  a  substitute  for  his  resolutions,  or 
does  he  intend  to  call  them  up  hereafter? 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  do  not.  I  intend  to  have  that 
resolution  voted  on. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  have  no  objection  to 
the  amendment,  but  will  cheerfully  give  it  my 
support.  It  strikes  me  as  being  rather  too  ab- 
stract and  not  well  calculated  to  have  any  prac- 
tical effect.  The  convention  will  perceive  that 
the  committee  amended  the  old  constitution  in 
this  section,  by  adding  the  words  "protection  of 
their  property,"  which  was  all  we  thought  was 
require<l.  They  intended  to  come  witliin  the 
prmciple  of  my  friend's  amendment,  that  while 
the  right  of  the  government  exists  to  take  prop- 
erty, yet  they  can  never  do  it  without  just  com- 
pensation. The  committee  thought  that  the 
addition  of  the  words  "protection  of  their  prop- 
erty" was  all  that  the  people  now  or  at  any  ott- 
er time  would  demand.  They  considered  the 
addition  of  these  words  would  fully  come  up  to 
every  possible  state  of  case  which  might  arise, 
and  De  amply  sufficient  for  any  crisis. 

This  amendment  is  a  mere  abstract  proposi- 
tion, which,  although  true,  will  not  have  any 


obligator}'  force  on  any  future  convention.  Like 
many  olliors  which  we  have  adopte<l,  it  is  at 
least  but  the  expression  of  opinion  of  this  con- 
vention. The  gentleman  from  Oldham  suggest- 
ed that  it  was  inconsistent  with  other  sections. 
I  do  not  so  understand  it.  All  declarations  of 
abstract  rights  are  apparently  contradicted  by 
subsequent  provisions  in  the  same  constitution. 
They  should  be  regarded  rather  as  necessary  ex- 
ceptions than  contradictions!  I  am  sure  if  we 
adopt  this  amendment  we  shall  not  be  guilty  of 
any  inconsistency.  Its  adoption  would  not  be 
more  contradictory  than  another  section  which 
we  have  adopted.  In  the  fourth  secton  we 
declare: 

"  That  the  civil  rights,  privileges,  or  capaci- 
ties of  any  citizen,  shall  in  no  wise  be  diminish- 
ed or  enlarged  on  account  of  his  religion." 

In  the  first  section  we  declare : 

"  That  all  freemen,  when  they  form  a  social 
compact,  are  equal,  and  that  no  man  or  set  of 
men  are  entitled  to  exclusive  separate  public 
emoluments  or  privileges  from  the  community, 
except  in  consideration  for  public  services." 

Although  we  have  these  two  sections,  declar- 
ing that  all  men  are  equal,  and  that  no  restric- 
tion shall  be  placed  upon  the  political  rights  or 
capacities  of  any  citizen  on  account  of  his  reli- 
gion,.we  have  excluded  ministers  from  certain 
civil  privileges;  andwhil.stwehavedeclared  these 
great  principles  of  equality  and  freedom  of 
opinion;  yet,  before  the  sound  had  ceased  to  re- 
verberate in  this  hall,  by  which  we  gave  utter- 
ance to  them,  we  in  another  breath  declare,  that 
ministers  of  the  gospel  shall  not  hold  a  seat  in 
the  legislature.  Now,  my  friend  from  Oldham 
voted,  I  believe,  for  this  restriction  on  ministers, 
and  does  he  think  it  contradicts  the  other  sec- 
tions of  the  bill  of  rights?  I  apprehend  he 
would  justify  his  vote  for  restriction  on  the 
necessity  of  an  exception  to  the  great  truths 
contained  in  the  bill  of  rights ! 

I  am  glad  to  hear  that  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson  has  not  given  up  his  resolutions,  be- 
cause I  regard  them  as  embracing  the  most  im- 
portant principles  which  we  shall  bo  called  to 
act  upon.  I  feel  an  abiding  interest  in  their 
adoption.  They  assert  a  great,  and  just  now,  a 
vital  principle.  They  proclaim  boldly  that 
there  is  no  difference  between  property  in  slaves 
and  other  property,  and  I  hope  this  convention 
will  not  separate  without  giving  their  opinion 
upon  them!  The  voice  of  a  great  and  united 
people  must  and  will  have  its  influence  on  the 
great  political  struggle  which  is  now  going  on 
at  Washington!  P'or  we  shall  let  them  see  that 
we  are  united  in  the  assertion  of  our  constitu- 
tional rights — that  we  regard  tlie  property  in  our 
slaves  as  sacred  as  the  property  in  any  thing 
else — and  that  in  the  defence  and  protection  of 
that  property  we  mean  to  stand  together.  But 
I  forbear. 

I  merely  rose  to  say  that  I  did  not  regard  the 
section  of  the  gentleman  as  liable  to  the  objec- 
tions made  to  it ;  although  I  thought  it  unneces- 
sary, in  consequence  of  the  amendment  of  the 
committee,  yet  I  will  vote  for  it  cheerfully. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  a  good  deal  abstract,  but  I  do  not  see 
any  objection  to  its  general  truth,  nor  do  I  think 
there  id  any  impropriety  in  its  phraseology.    It 


ao7 


is  proposed  that  this  resolution  shall  become  a 
section  of  the  constitution.  In  construing  it, 
and  ascertaining  its  meaning,  if  it  be  incorpora- 
ted in  the  constitution,  it  would  be  considered 
in  connexion  with  every  other  part  of  the  instru- 
ment, and  especially  with  that  article  of  which 
it  is  to  form  a  section,  and  the  proper  force  and 
effect  be  given  to  every  part.  It  is  very  general 
in  its  terms,  and  in  the  same  article  you  find  an- 
other section  which  is  more  particular  and  pre- 
cise, and  which  admits  the  right  of  the  govern- 
ment to  take  private  property  for  public  use  up- 
on making  just  compensation  therefor.  What  is 
the  construction  then  of  the  two  sections?  This 
particular  provision  is  the  exception,  the  quali- 
fication of  the  more  general  one  which  my  friend 
from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon)  offers,  to  "become 
a  part  of  the  constitution. 

There  is  a  section  in  general  terms  in  the 
proposed  projet  of  a  constitution  which  inter- 
dicts the  withholding  any  right  or  privilege 
from  the  citizen  on  account  of  his  religious 
opinions.  But  there  is  a  qualification  of  it  in 
another,  which  declares  a  man  who  entertains  a 
religious  opinion,  by  which  he  conceives  it  to 
be  his  duty  to  instruct  his  fellow  man  in  chris- 
tian doctrine,  is  denied  a  seat  in  the  legislature. 
The  state  of  case  is  just  this  :  the  constitution 
embodies  general  truths  and  principles,  and  also 
others  specific,  that  are  incompatible  with  and 
are  intended  to  qualify  those  more  general  ones. 

If  this  proposition  be  adopted,  a  man  taking 
up  the  constitution  and  reading  this  section — 
"that  absolute,  arbitrary  power  over  the  lives, 
liberty,  and  property  of  freemen,  exists  no  where 
in  a  republic — not  even  in  the  largest  majority :" 
and  by  turning  to  another  section  of  the  same 
article,  he  would  learn,  nevertheless,  that  pri- 
vate property  could  be  taken  for  public  use,  but 
only  upon  proper  compensation  being  made  to 
the  owner,  the  examiner  would  see  no  im- 
proper confliction,  no  discrepancy,  but  a  plain 
declaration  of  a  general  right  and  immunity  of 
the  citizen,  with  a  proper  and  necessary  encroach- 
ment upon  it,  for  which  a  fair  equiualent  was  se- 
cured. 

The  other  objections  gentlemen  make,  are  to 
the  particular  import  of  the  words,  "  absolute 
arbitrary  power  over  the  lives,  liberty,  and  prop- 
erty of  freemen,  exists  no  where  in  a  republic." 
A  question  arises,  what  is  absolute  and  arbitra- 
ry power?  We  all  know  that  private  property 
frequently  becomes  necessary  for  the  purposes  of 
government;  yea,  that  government  could  not  be 
maintained  and  administered  without  the  exis- 
tence of  the  right  to  take  private  property  for 
the  public  use.  When  this  property  becomes 
thus  ueces-sary,  and  is  taken  from  the  owner  in 
virtue  of  a  constitutional  principle,  which  also 
provides  it  shall  not  be  taken  without  making 
just  compensation  to  the  owner,  the  power  is  not 
absolute  and  arbitrary.  What  is  absolute  pow- 
er? It  is  power  without  condition.  It  is  power 
to  take  property  without  compensation.  It  is 
power  upon  mere  will,  and  without  limit. 
What  is  arbitrary  power?  It  is  power  simply 
emanating  from  volition — a  man's  will  without 
restriction,  by  which  he  wrests  from  an  individ- 
ual his  property,  when  and  how  he  pleases,  in  the 
exercise  of  his  own  mere  purpose.  When  you  say 
oue  may  take  private  property  without  compen- 


sation—without any  terms  or  condition  whatev- 
er— without  any  imaginable  restriction,  it  is  ab- 
solute and  arbitrary  power;  and  nothing  short 
of  that  is  of  such  a  character.  When  the  con- 
stitution authorizes  private  property  to  be  taken 
for  public  use,  but  requires  the  owner  to  be  ful- 
ly remunerated  as  an  indispensable  precedent 
condition,  this  cannot  be,  with  any  reason  or 
truth,  denominated  an  absolute  and  arbitrary 
power.  It  is  a  reasonable,  proper,  and  necessaiy 
power  of  government.  It  is  oue  consistent  with 
the  public  liberty,  and  not  an  encroachment 
on  it.  I  believe  the  exception  taken  to  the  lan- 
guage by  several  gentlemen  cannot  be  sustain- 
ed; out  even  if  properly  taken,  it  would  be  ob- 
viated, when  we  consider  this  clause  in  con- 
nexion with  the  other  particularclau.se  of  the  con- 
stitution, which  necessarily  is,  and  was,  intend- 
ed to  be  an  exception  to  the  general  truths  con- 
tained in  it.  But  1  am  like  the  gentleman  from 
Kenton,  (Mr.  Stevenson,)  willing  to  meet  this 
lion  in  my  path,  and  I  am  ready  to  make  the 
slavery  question  fully  and  at  once.  I  lay  down 
the  position  that  the  legal  essence  and  nature  of 
this  property  is  identical  with  every  other  class 
of  property  whatever — that  the  owner  of  it  has 
the  same  indefeasible,  absolute,  and  inviola- 
ble right  of  property  in  his  slaves  a.s  he  has  in 
his  land  or  iuliis  horses;  andthat  no  majority  has 
the  power  to  deprive  him  of  it,  in  any  manner, 
without  compensation.  And  when  I  use  the 
term  power.  1  do  not  mean  brute  force,  or  the 
mere  physical  strength  of  numbers,  but  a  func- 
tion of  legitimate  government,  that  may  be 
rightfully  exercised.  And  I  mean  especially  to 
proscribe  any  system  of  emancipation,  immedi- 
ate or  prospective,  of  slaves  in  being  or  not  in 
esse,  without  paying  a  full  equivalent  to  their 
owners. 

We  know  the  power  of  the  majority  in  a 
physical  point  of  view  is  omnipotent.  So 
a  man,  who  has  more  strength  than  1  have, 
assails  me  at  night  as  I  am  going  to  my  domi- 
cil,  and  says  to  me  "stand  and  deliver,"  and  I 
refusing,  he  thereupon  fells  me  to  the  earth  and 
rifles  my  pockets — this  man  has  the  power  to 
rob  me,  but  is  it  right  on  his  part?  Can  an  act, 
which,  when  done  by  an  individual  is  rob- 
bery, change  its  moral  turpitude  when  performed 
Vjy  a  multitude?  The  majority  of  the  men  of 
this  state  are  not  the  owners  of  the  most  valu- 
able portion  of  its  real  estate.  This  majority 
may  meet,  and  in  physical  power  nothing  on 
earth  can  overcome  or  control  them,  and  they 
may  proclaim  a  general  agrarian  law,  and  dis- 
tribute the  lands  equally  among  themselves. 
They  have  no  right  to  do  this,  and  yet  they 
have  the  physical  power  to  do  it,  and  as  much 
right  as  to  wrest  from  the  owners  of  slaves  their 
property.  They  might  establish  a  regulation 
that  no  man  shall  own  more  than  one  hundred 
acres  of  land,  and  that  those  who  have  more, 
shall  surrender  it  in  trust,  and  the  proceeds 
thereof  shall  go  to  establish  a  fund  for  the  sup- 
port of  common  schools,  or  a  great  system  of  in- 
ternal improvements.  There  is  an  immense 
amount  of  money  on  interest  in  this  state.  It  be- 
longs to  people  who  mostly  have  surplus  means. 
Suppose  now,  the  majority  in  this  convention 
.should  make  a  provision  in  the  constitution  that 
the  money  thus  loaned  should  be  forfeited  to 


808 


the  state,  anrl  it  whould  be  distributed  among 
the  poor  to  remedy  pauperism,  and  to  bring 
about  in  some  measure  tliat  democratic  equality 
of  condition  among  our  people,  which  is  so 
congenial  to  our  institutions.  Here  would  be 
ereat  and  enduring  objects  of  general  good,  to 
oe  secured  or  promoted  by  these  measures.  Their 
advocates  could,  with  as  much  truth  as  the 
friends  of  emancipation  in  support  of  that 
scheme,  say,  "the  majority  have  the  right  and 
must  rule,  and  the  minorit}'  must  obey.  Here 
are  important  measures  resolved  upon  by  this 
ina.jority  to  secure  the  greatest  good  to  the  great- 
est number;  and  those  from  whom  their  property 
is  thus  taken,  are  compensated  in  the  general 
advantage  secured  to  tlie  community,  and  no 
wrong  to  them,  no  invasion  of  their  right  of 
property  is  perpetratedV"  Is  there  a  man  in  this 
Dody  of  such  mental  or  moral  obliquity  as  not  to 
tinderstand  and  concede  the  mocking  fallacy  of 
Buch  rea.soning,  and  the  flagitious  injustice  of 
such  measures?  And  I  defy  the  ablest  and 
most  astute  champion  of  eniancipation  to  show 
that  there  is  any  principles  in  our  scheme  of  so- 
ciety which  condemn  those  other  measures,  and 
at  the  same  time  authorized  his  party,  if  it  was 
the  majority,  to  emancipate  the  slaves  Avith- 
out  paying  for  them. 

Let  me  illustrate  this  position.  A.  B.  and  C. 
own  property  individually,  consisting  of  lands, 
slaves,  and  personalty,  the  right  to  all  of  which 
is  sanctioned  and  secured  to  them  by  national 
and  general  law.  They  form  a  social  compact, 
and  they  declare  that  their  rights  of  life  and  lib- 
erty, except  for  crimes  committed,  their  rights  of 
conscience  and  freedom  to  worship  God  accord- 
ing to  its  dictates,  and  their  right  of  property, 
except  so  far  as  it  may  be  taken  for  their  common 
benefit  upon  compensation  being  made  jointly 
by  them  to  the  individual  owner,  shall  be  for 
ever  held  sacred  and  inviolable.  The  property 
held  by  each  of  those  persons  so  changes  that  A. 
becomes  the  owner  of  all  their  slaves,  and  B.  and 
C.  severally  of  all  the  lands  and  personalty  be- 
longing to  them.  The  sentiments  of  B.  and  C. 
change — they  believe  it  to  be  against  natural 
justice  and  religious  morality,  against  the  con- 
venience of  themselves  and  the  permanent  pros- 
perity of  them  all,  that  A.  should  longer  hold 
his  slaves.  Can  they  justly  and  rightfully  take 
them  from  him  without  compensation?  If  they, 
being  the  majority,  will  insist  upon  sending 
those  slaves  out  of  their  comnnmity,  ought  tht^y 
not  to  pay  A.  for  them  out  of  their  common  trea- 
sury? By  the  eternal  principles  of  justice  but 
one  other  alternative  is  left  to  them,  and  that  is 
to  leave  themselves  and  seek  a  new  country  and 
anew  home.  Being  the  most  numerous,  B.  and 
C.  might  by  physical  force  seize  the  slavesof  A., 
in  defiance  of  his  will,  and  deport  them.  But  by 
taking  this  course  thev  would  substitute  might 
for  right.  They  would  subvert  the  original  and 
fundamental  i>rin<rii)les  upon  which  they  had 
planted  their  civil  compact.  They  would  not 
only  change  their  government,  but  they  would 
overthrow  the  order,  forms,  and  rights,  to  se- 
cure which  it  liad  been  framed,  and  with  the 
surrender  and  destruction  of  which  it  never 
■would  have  been  made.  They  would  bring  on 
a  violent  revolution,  and  involve  A.  in  a  state 
•of  force  and  war.     Weakness  might  constrain 


him  to  submit  to  the  oppression:  b\it  by  reason, 
by  right,  by  universal  law,  he  would  be  author- 
ized by  all  liis  means  and  power  to  resist  this 
wrong;  and  if  able,  to  drive  B.  and  C.  from  the 
community,  and  to  seize  upon  all  their  posses- 
sions. 

Our  ancestors  brought  their  slaves  with  them 
into  this  state  when  it  was  a  virgin  wilderness, 
and  all  institutions  and  laws  allowed  them  to  do 
this.  When  Kentucky  became  a  state,  their 
property  in  their  slaves  was  recognized  and  con- 
tinued to  them  by  the  first  constitution.  When 
the  present  constitution  Avas  framed,  the  pledge 
was  solemnly  renewed,  and  the  inviolability  of 
this  property  again  carefully  secured.  Emi- 
grants from  our  sister  states  were  invited  to 
come  and  bring  it  with  them,  and  the  citizen  to 
invest  in  it  his  means.  Its  owners  are  spread 
over  the  face  of  the  commonwealth,  and  they 
consist  of  men  of  all  ages,  of  the  minor,  of  the 
widow,  the  orphan;  and  they  have  those  an- 
cient and  oft  i-enewed  guaranties.  Its  value  is 
now  more  than  a  fourth  of  the  aggregate  wealth 
of  the  state.  Its  owners  are  entitled  to  the  same 
security  and  defence  in  their  possession  of  this 
property  as  those  who  hold  any  other  property, 
and  so  long  as  the  primary  organic  principles  of 
our  society,  as  right,  justice,  and  faith,  are  ob- 
served, they  will  have  it. 

I  am  rea<ty  to  meet  the  question  at  once,  and 
declare  to  the  emancipationists,  <hat  they  have 
no  right,  no  proper  autliority  to  emancipate  the 
slaves  by  any  system,  without  paying  their  own- 
ers for  them.  Their  project  would  be  an  enor- 
mous and  most  calamitous  infraction  of  the  right 
of  property — that  most  essential  principle  of 
civilization,  which  has  contributed  more  than 
all  the  other  forces  wielded  by  man  to  bring  him 
from  a  state  of  naked  and  ignorant  barbarism  to 
the  highest  improvement  in  arts,  science,  and 
letters.  Without  this  mighty  propulsive  princi- 
ple, he  would  now,  in  all  his  races,  be  lower  in 
the  scale,  than  the  Blackfoot  Indian  or  the  Hot- 
entot.  If  his  arch  enemy  could  expel  the  insti- 
tution and  right  of  individual  property  from  the 
face  of  the  earth,  it  would  be  a  curse  far  trans- 
cending the  aggregate  ills  with  which  he  has  af- 
flicted the  whole  race  sincfc  the  fall  of  our  first 
parents  in  Eden.  It  would  bring  back  upon  the 
world  one  long,  never  ending  night  of  liopeless 
barbarism.  The  preservation  of  this  inappre- 
ciable principle,  would  be  cheaply  purchased  by 
paying  a  full  price  for  all  the  slaves  in  Kentuc- 
ky, when,  if  ever,  the  majority  will  emancipate 
them  by  the  physical  power  of  numbers.  To 
escape  the  burthen  of  even  this  great  charge 
would  be  no  sufficient  compensation  to  them 
or  their  children  for  losening  in  its  posi- 
tion, the  chief  corner  .stone  on  which  rests  the 
vast  fabric  of  social  organization,  and  all  the 
achicvtrnents  of  the  industry  and  genius  of  man. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE.  I  should  not  trouble  the 
convention  with  a  word  on  this  additional  sec- 
tion, were  I  not  a  member  of  the  committee  on 
revision;  and  I  dislike  to  incorporate  the  same 
principle  in  several  sections  of  the  constitution. 
To  the  sentiments  contained  in  the  proposition 
of  tlie  genthman  from  Henderson,  I  yield  my 
hearty  support.  It  asserts  doctrines  I  believe  to 
be  true.  The  same  principle  is  clearly  set  forth 
in  the  second  section  of  tne  report  of  the  com- 


809 


mittee.     I  would  ask  gentlemen  to  read  that  sec- 
tion.   No  language  can  cover  broader  ground,  or 
be  more  extensive  in  its  signification.    Where- 1 
fore,  then,   the   necessity  of  repeating  the  same  j 
doctrine  in  a  different  part  of  the  constitution?      j 

Mr.  PRESTOX.  I  am  aware  that  sections  i 
such  as  this  are  often  regarded  as  abstractions. 
An  abstraction  is  sometimes  the  essence  of  ex- 
perience. These  great  principles  are  the  results 
of  long  practical  knowledge  and  of  long  reflec- 
tion upon  acts  of  great  importance  to  the  wel- 
fare and  happiness  of  mankind.  The  declara- 
tion that  all  men  are  free  and  equal,  is  the  broad- 
est political  abstraction.  The  declaration  that 
private  property  shall  not  be  taken  without 
compensation,  and  that  the  freedom  of  the  press 
shall  be  inviolable,  may  be  termed  abstractions, 
but  on  such  the   foundations  of  liberty  repose. 

Two  objections  have  been  pressed  against  the 
proposed  section.  One  by  the  President,  and 
the  other  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr. 
Hardin)  which  I  think  badly  taken. 

This  section  uses  the  words  "  arbitrurv  pow- 
er." Xow  what  is  arbitrary"?  The  word  is  de- 
rived from  arbitrium,  the  will,  the  judgment, 
meaning  the  unlimited  will  of  an  individual,  as 
opposed  to  the  will  of  the  people  expressed  by 
law.  The  will  of  the  Emperor  of  Russia  is  ar- 
bitrarv.  We  declare  that  no  ex  post  facto  law 
shall  he  passed,  that  no  law  may  bypassed  which 
will  render  that  criminal  which  was  not  crimi- 
nal when  perfomed:  a  violation  of  these  rules 
by  power  would  be  arbitrary. 

The  President  says  this  section  does  not  pro- 
vide for  the  case  that  government  may  take  prop- 
erty by  making  compensation.  The  reply  is 
simple"  and  I  think  satisfactory.  Such  an  act  is 
not  arbitrary.  It  is  an  act  sanctioned  by  the  con- 
stitution, and  carried  out  by  law.  It  a  road  is 
to  be  carried  through  a  man's  property,  it  may 
be  done  by  ordering  a  writ  of  ad  quod  damnum. 
Therefore)  this  is  in  conformity  both  to  the  or- 
ganic and  statute  law. 

The  gt'.ntleman  from  Xelson  says  the  act  of 
drafting  is  an  arbitrary  act.  I  deny  it.  It  is  in  j 
conformity  with  the  organic  law  and  statutes  i 
carrying  out  that  law.  It  is  lui  arbitrary  exercise  | 
of  power;  but  a  legitimate  carrying  out  of  ne- 1 
cessary  power.  j 

The  second  section  has  this  language,  and  I 
want  to  show   that  the  language  of  the  gentle-  i 
man  from  Henderson  is  preferable. 

"  That  all  power  is  inherent  in  the  people  and 
all  free  governments  are  founded  on  their  au- 
thority, and  instituted'  for  their  peace,  safety, 
happiness,  security,  and  protection  of  their 
property.  For  the  advancement  of  these  ends, 
tliey  have  at  all  times  an  inalienable  and  inde- 
feasible right  to  alter,  reform,  or  abolish  their 
government,  in  such  manner  as  they  may  think 
proper." 

I  grant  the  people  of  Kentucky  have  a  right 
to  alter  their  organic  law  as  we  are  now  doing, 
but  I  deny  that  we  have  the  right  to  take  the 
property  of  any  citizen  and  appropriate  it  un- 1 
der  our  direction,  or  that  we,  by  the  act  either  of 
the  legislature  or  this  convention,  can  alter  the 
slightest  contract.  Even  if  the  federal  govern- 
ment had  not  declared  we  should  not  violate  the 
obligation  of  a  contract,  we  could  not  strike 
down  the  rights  of  propertv  on  which  society 
102 


rests.  If,  like  the  FrAioh  convention,  we  choose 
to  constitute  ourselves  into  a  tribunal  of  force, 
we  are  in  a  state  of  revolution. 

I  never  will  admit  that  this  convention  has 
such  power  either  over  the  lives,  the  liberties,  or 
the  property  of  the  people  of  Kentucky.  If  we 
chose  to  exercise  it,  it  would  be  repelled  by  eve- 
ry man  in  Kentucky  who  had  a  rifle  in  his  cabin, 
or  an  arm  to  wield  it. 

Do  you  tell  me  we  may  appropriate  property 
beyond  the  limits  prescribed?  If  so,  we  are  in 
a  state  of  revolution.  If  this  convention  con- 
sisted of  anv  other  number  than  one  hundred,  it 
would  not  \>e  a  constitutional  convention.  If 
there  were  one  hundred  and  fifty  instead  of  one 
hundred  members,  we  should  not  be  a  constitu- 
tional bodv.  We  are  now  a  constitutional  body, 
legally  called,  to  revise  the  constitution  in  a  cer- 
tain specified  way.  If  we  had  been  elected  as 
a  mol> — if  one  county  had  sent  twenty  mem- 
bers and  another  but  one,  I  believe  it  would  be 
declared  by  the  sense  of  the  whole  community, 
and  of  the  union,  and  of  all  the  courts  of  jus- . 
tice,  that  this  convention  would  be  a  nullity. 

Imagine  all  the  people  of  Kentucky  assem- 
bled on  one  great  plain,  and  that  they  had  sent 
us  here  to  alter  their  law.  After  the  organic 
law  is  framed,  they  cannot  alter  that  law  except 
by  the  mode  pointed  out,  or  by  going  into  a  state 
of  revolution.  Nor  can  all  combined,  take  by 
right,  one  man's  property.  We  have  therefore, 
no  right  to  interfere  with  the  rights  of  property, 
or  curtail  the  rights  of  life  or  liberty,  without 
revolution.  For  that  reason,  if  the  sergeant-at- 
arms  were  ordered  to  take  property  in  any  other 
than  the  mode  prescribed,  to  seize  an  editor,  or 
destroy  a  press,  it  would  be  criminal.  We  have 
a  mode  pointed  out,  and  that  mode  must  be 
pursued. 

There  is  a  clause  in  the  section  which  I  wish 
was  out  of  it.  It  is  that  contained  in  the  paren- 
thesis ("except for  crimes.")  If  one  is  legally 
punished  for  crime,  he  is  neither  punished  by  an 
exercise  of  absolute  power,  nor  arbitrarily.  I 
think  these  words  mean  nothing  and  should  be 
stricken  out.  I  deny  that  punishment  executed 
in  conformity  to  law,  and  under  the  government 
we  have  constituted  for  ourselves,  is  either  abso- 
lute or  arbitrary.  It  is  legal,  proper,  just,  and 
right,  and  one  sanctioned  by  law,  and  command- 
ed by  the  people. 

I  believe  that  in  point  of  expression,  in  per- 
spicuity, and  in  truth,  this  section  is  preferable 
to  the  one  offered  by  my  friend  from  Fleming, 
that,  "  for  the  advancement  of  these  ends,  they 
have  at  all  times  an  inalienable  and  indefeasi- 
ble right  to  alter,  reform  or  abolish  their  govern- 
ment in  such  manner  as  they  may  think  proper." 

Tiiat  is  all  true.  But  government  cannot  be 
so  framed  as  to  deprive  the  citizen  of  his  prop- 
erty. Grant  the  contrary,  and  the  convention 
might  have  declared  that  all  the  n<;groes  were 
free  when  this  convention  assembled.  Such  a 
principle  would  authorize  the  act  b}-  which  the 
negroes  in  the  French  colonies  in  the  West  In- 
dies were  set  free  under  the  enthusiastic  elo- 
quence of  Brissot. 

That  power  I  deny,  and  I  deny  that  if  the 
whole  people  of  Kentucky  were  to  come  up  here, 
they  could  rightfully  destroy  the  principles  on 
which  our  government  is  based,  that  they  could 


810 


enact  a  general  agrarian  law,  or  tha{  our  slaves 
ahould  be  emancipated  without  compensation. 
That  is  the  point  to  which  the  doctrine  tends, 
and  it  is  for  that  reason  that  I  suggested,  hereto- 
fore, to  the  venerable  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
that  we  are  not  in  a  state  of  revolution. 

He  replied  that  he  was  not  to  be  terrified  by 
that  raw -head -and -bloody-bones  of  revolution 
being  shaken  Iiefore  him.  But  I  still  firmly  as- 
sert, that  no  body  of  men,  nor  all  the  people  in 
Kentucky  could  deprive  a  single  citizen  of  one 
dollar's  w^orth  of  property,  under  any  circum- 
stances, by  convention  or  otherwise,  without 
paying  a  just  compensation.  Sir,  to  what  a  po- 
sition are  we  reduced.  All  on  this  floor  admit 
it  would  be  a  violation  of  the  obligation  of  con- 
tract to  repeal  the  charter  of  the  bank  of  Ken- 
tucky. There  is  not  a  lawyer  who  does  not 
know  that  Avould  be  declared  a  null  act  by  any 
court  fn  Kentucky,  or  in  the  union.  Yet  we  are 
gravely  told  tliat  this  convention  has  power  to 
take  away  all  the  property  of  every  citizen. 
You  cannot  take  away  one  dollar's  worth  of 
bank  stock  or  repeal  a  charter,  but  you  can  take 
away  the  negroes,  and  the  property  of  the  citi- 
zen and  divide  his  lauds.  They  say  this  is  no 
impairment  of  the  obligation  of  contracts.  If  it 
be  no  impairment  of  the  obligation  of  contracts, 
it  is  the  impairment  of  a  still  greater  obligation, 
and  that  is,  the  implied  promise  by  which  a  man 
comes  into  a  community  under  certain  guaran- 
ties. He  conies  with  the  guaranties  of  security 
of  life,  liberty,  and  property.  If  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States  were  to  come  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  Emperor  of  Russia,  and  he  should 
declare,  by  an  arbitrary  edict,  that  his  property 
should  bo  confiscate,  and  that  he  should  be  ex- 
iled to  Siberia,  it  would  be  a  just  cause  of  war. 
"Why?  Simply  because  he  came  into  the  coun- 
try under  the  guaranties  that  no  such  tyranny 
should  be  brought  to  bear  on  him — a  principle 
recognized  by  international  law,  and  the  prac- 
tice of  every  civilized  nation  of  the  earth. 

When  we  came  with  our  slaves  from  A'irginia, 
in  1799,  we  came  under  an  implied  guaranty  tliat 
they  should  not  be  taken  from  us  by  any  law, 
either  pas.sed  by  a  legislature  or  a  convention. 
Not  three  months  have  passed,  sinee  this  com- 
monwealth, by  tlie  agitation  of  the  slavery  ques- 
tion, was  shaken  to  its  centre.  Establish  the 
principle  contained  in  the  proposed  section,  and 
you  cannot  be  legislated  out  of  your  property, 
nor  conventioned  out  of  it.  Assert  the  opposite 
principle,  that  a  majority  may  control  it,  and 
you  vest  a  bare  majority  with  the  rights  of  plun- 
der, rapine,  and  robbery,  and  establish 

"The  good  old  rule,  the  simple  plan, 

1  hat  he  may  take  who  has  the  power, 
That  he  may  keep  who  can." 

The  right  of  property  is  not  coeval  with,  but 
antecedent  to,  government.  The  rights  of  prop- 
erty originate  in  industry  and  labor,  and  are 
antecedent  to  written  constitutions  :  those  con- 
stitutions are  framed  to  declare,  to  define,  and  to 
protect  those  rights. 

If  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  of  the 
United  States,  were  silent  in  regard  to  the  obli- 
gations of  contracts,  and  there  wore  no  such 
clause  in  them,  even  if  they  did  not  exist;  still, 
by  the  great  and  immutable  principles  of  jus- 
tice—that justice  which,  in  the  jurisprudence  of 


the  world,  has   declared    it  is  wTong  to  pass  an 
ex  post  facto  law,  or  to  seize  private  property  on 
those  great  principles  apart  from  any  constitu- 
tion, the  right  is   invulnerable  by  any  civilized 
state.     If  a  difference  exist  between   slaves  and 
other  property,  I  defy  any  man  to  show  the  dif- 
ference.    I  want  to  know  who  those  enemies  of 
justice   are,  and  wliat   sort  of  men  they  be.     I 
i  want  to  know  them  for  all  future  time,  and  that 
j  the  stateshall  know  them.     This,  Mr.  President, 
I  is  no  abstraction;  if  so,  it  is  such  an  abstraction 
!  as  will  affect  our  right  to  our  slaves  and  $60,000,- 
!  000  of  our  property—an  abstraction  tliat  will 
I  give  that  property  security,  and   give  hope  and 
i  unalterable  reliance  in  the  public  justice.     But 
if  Ave  refuse  to  put  it  in  the  constitution,  it  Avill 
carry  uncertainty,  insecurity,  and  dismay  to  all 
the  slaveholders  in  Kentucky. 
I      Mr.  MITCHELL.     I  move  to   amend  the  sec- 
I  tion,  by  striking  out,  in  the   second  line,  after 
j  the  word  "crimes,"  the  words,  "exists  nowhere," 
I  andinsertinginlieu  thereof  the  words,  "and, from 
necessity,   should  not  be  exercised."     Tlie  pro- 
posed section,  so  amended,  would  read  tlius: 
I      "Sec.  2.  That  absolute,  arbitrar\'-  power  over 
j  the  lives,  liberty,  and  property  of  fivemen,  (ex- 
I  ceptfor  crimes,  and.from  necessity,)  should  not  be 

I  exercised  in  a  republic — not  even  in  the  largest 

:  majority." 

i      1  am  one  of  those,  Mr.  President,  who  from  ed- 

'.  ucation,  coiivittion,  and  if  you  please,  from  pre- 
judice, regard  the  institution  of  slavery  not  only 
asiio  cuise,  but  as  a  blessing  to  the  community 
in  which  it  exists.  I  am  one  of  those  who  ac- 
knowledge, to  its  fullest  extent,  the  existence  of 
property  in  slaves;  and  I  will  go  as  far  as  any 
one,  without  sacrificing  principle,  to  give  secu- 
rity to  this  description  of  property.  But,  sir, 
while  I  avow  my  regard  for  this  institution,  I 
must  also  be  permitted  to  say,  that  among  the 

,  earliest  lessons  wJiich  I  learned  in  politics,  was 
j  the  great  maxim,  "coxpopuli,  vox  dei" — the  sove- 
I'cignty  of  the  people.     I  have  been   taught  that 
it  Avas  incompatible  with  popular  rights  to  im- 
pose limits  to  popular  power.     In  my  apprehen- 
sion, the  gentleman  from  Henderson  (Mr.  Dixon,) 
has  permitted   his  zeal  for  the   security  of  slave 
'  property  to  huny  him  into  this  extreme,  in  offer- 
,  ing  the  proposition   now  under  consideration. 

I I  have  proposed   to  amend  it,  because,  sir,  re- 
,  garding  myself  as  afrieud  to   the   institution  of 
I  slavery,  I  should  suppose  I  was  doing  an  inju- 
ry to  that  institution  by  advocating  the  proposi- 

!  tion,  as  it  was  originally  presented  before  the 
I  convention.     I  should    regard  its    adoption  as 
I  putting  an  argument  into  the  mouths  of  the  op- 
'  ponents  of  that   institution — as  giving  a  power- 
!  fill  handle  to  the  advocates   of  emancipation  in 
i  this  stale.     They  would  say,  "  see  the  tendency 
j  of  slavery !  Behold  liow  it  attempts  to  bolster 
j  itself  at  the  expense  of  popular  rights  ! "    I  say 
it  Avould  be  the  ground-work  of  a  powerful  ap- 
I  peal,  and  I  do  not  know  what   might  be  the  re- 
sult of  that  appeal — I  do  not  know  what  might 
be  its  influence  upon   the  people  of  Kentucky. 
I  have  always  been   taught  to  believe  tliat,  in 
popular  governments,  the  citizen  looked  for  the 
security    of  his  rights — whether    of  person    or 
property — to  the  justice  of  the  people — that  that 
justice  was  the  only  sure  foundation  on  which 
individual  rights  repose — that  whenever  popu- 


811 


lar  justice  ceaaei  to  exist,  then  tlie  rights  of  ev- 
ery mau  are  in  jeopardy.  That,  sir,  is  the  view 
I  have  always  entertained,  and  I  want  no  better 
security  than  this  for  my  life  or  property.  Now, 
sir.  what  is  the  proposition  asserted  here?  That 
"absolute,  arbitrary  power  over  the  lives,  liber- 
tv,  and  property  of  freemen  (except  for  crimes,) 
does  not  exist  any  where  in  a  republic."  Does 
not  exist  any  where,  sir — not  on  tne  floor  of  this 
convention — not  in  the  halls  of  our  legislature 
— not  among  the  people  themselves  !  So  lon^ 
as  the  people  of  this  country  stand  associated 
as  a  republic,  no  such  power  exists  anywhere. 
Is  that  the  proposition? 

The  gentleman  from  Bourbon  says,  this  prop- 
osition is  explained  away,  or,  at  least,  that  it  is 
qualified  by  other  propositions  contained  in  the 
constitution,  and  that  it  must  be  taken  in  an  ex- 
plained iind  qualified  sense.  Now,  sir,  I  contend 
that  if  the  principle  asserted  in  this  proposition 
is  wrong  in  itself,  why  then  it  is  a  contradiction 
to  any  other  proposition,  the  principle  of  which 
is  correct.  For  example,  if  in  one  part  of  the 
constitution  a  declaration  of  power  is  made  as 
to  any  given  subject,  and  in  another  part  of  the 
constitution  that  same  power  is  denied  or  quali- 
fied, the  two  propositions  being  inconsistent 
does  not  make  the  one  or  the  other  true.  Such  a 
rule  might  be  appropriate  in  the  construction  of 
an  existing  instrument,  but  could  scarcely  ob- 
tain in  forming  a  new  constitution,  the  provi- 
sions of  which  should  consist  with  one  another. 
The  proposition  under  consideration  is  true,  or 
else  it  is  not  true.  It  is  true,  that  the  same  ef- 
fective power  which  exists  in  other  political  or- 
ganizations has  been  generated  in  the  formation 
of  our  institutions,  or  otherwise — that  the  people 
have  this  power,  or  they  have  not.  If  they  have 
not  this  power,  denied  to  them  in  the  proposition 
under  consideration,  they  must  either  have  yield- 
ed it  up  or  else  it  must  have  been  taken  from 
them;  and  in  either  event  it  belongs  some  where 
else;  for  power  cannot  be  annihilated.  Vliere 
else  does  it  reside?  Xot  with  the  citizens  indi- 
vidually; for  then  the  political  association  would 
be  dissolved  into  its  original  elements.  Not  with 
the  general  government ;  lor  it  is  not  among  the 
powers  ceded  by  the  States.  In  order  to  main- 
tain the  proposition  it  is  neceesary  to  demon- 
strate that  the  attribute  of  sovereignty  does  not 
belong  to  a  republic. 

Now,  sir,  in  regard  to  the  powers  of  this  con- 
vention, are  they  limited,  and  if  so,  by  whom, 
and  what  is  the  nature  of  the  restriction?  Is 
not  all  the  power  residing  in  the  ])eople  for  the 
time  being,  lodged  in  this  body  for  the  purposes 
for  which  they  are  assembled  here?  It  is  true, 
tliey  might  abuse  that  power,  but  that  does  not 
go  to  show  that  it  does  not  exist.  The  liability 
to  abuse  power,  does  not  necessarilv  carrj-  with 
it  a  restriction  of  power.  Gentlemen  talked 
about  "brute  force."  If  you  come  to  the  ques- 
tion of  morality,  sir,  how  is  that  to  be  decided  ? 
How  is  it  to  be  decided  whether  the  popular  ac- 
tion is  right  or  wrong?  How  is  it  to  be  decided 
whether  it  is  just  or  unjust?  What  superior  tri- 
bunal exists?  If  you  say  that  in  the  nature  of 
things,  powers  of  this  character  should  not  be 
exercised — if  gentlemen  will  say  because  it 
would  be  unjust  to  infringe  the  rights  of  indi- 
viduals who  hold  this  description  of  property, 


that  although  the  powers  exist,  they  should  not 
be  exercised,  I  will  go  as  far  as  any  other  gen- 
tleman on  this  floor — I  will  assert  the  moral  ob- 
ligation to  maintain  inviolate  property  of  this 
description.     Every  right  that  belongs   to   the 
people  either  in  their  individual  or  social  capa- 
city, I  will  go  as  far  as  any  one  to  maintain;  but 
when  you  come  to  prescribe  limits  to  popular 
power — to  detract  from  the   sovereignty  of  the 
state — however  it  may  seem  to  interfere  witli  my 
prejudices — however  it  may  seem  to  interfere 
with  an  institution,  the  maintenance   of  which 
involves,  as  I   think,  the  best   interests   of  the 
countrv — however  it  may  be  supposed  to  inter- 
fere wftli  the  general  welfare  of  the   country — 1 
say,  however  the  assertion  of  such  a  principle 
might  tend  to  maintain  this  institution,  or  how- 
ever its  denial  may  seem  to  interfere  with  it,  I 
am  not  prepared  to  go   to  the  extent  which  is 
contemplated    in    that  proposition.      "While   I 
maintain    the  existence   of    absolute  arbitrary 
I  jjower  in  the  people,  in  their  political  relation,  I 
I  firmly  and  confidently  rely  on   their  justice  for 
I  the  security  and   preservation  of  my  rights.      I 
;  want  no  other  guaranty.      I   shall  never  seek 
I  safety  in  attempting  to  abridge  what  I  esteem  to 
be  their  just  rights  and  clear  powers. 
I      The  gentleman  from  Louisville  talked  about 
j  "arbitrary  power."      He  said,  if  I  understood 
'  him,  that  arbitrary  power  was  "  power  exercised 
!  in  accordance  with  law."     I  don't  understand  it 
I  .so. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  said  that  arbitrary  power 
was  the  unlimited  will  of  an  individual. 
j  Mr.  MITCHELL.  The  gentleman  says  that 
arbitrary  power  is  the  unlimited  will  of  an  indi- 
vidual. 1  do  not  perceive  the  force  of  the  defini- 
tion. Arbitrary  power,  in  my  conception,  is  an 
attribute  of  political  sovereignty.  It  may  re- 
side in  a  monarchy  or  in  the  people.  The  will 
of  the  people  in  this  country  is  paramount  to  the 
law,  which  emanates  from  government,  the  crea- 
ture of  the  people.  It  is  to  the  government, 
what  law  is  to  the  individual  citizen,  a  rule  for 
its  action — if  you  please,  an  absolute  arbitrary 
rule.  It  is  in  the  formation  of  government,  that 
the  people  exhibit  their  absolute  and  arbitrary 
power,  by  imposing  restraints  on  delegated  au- 
thority. Politiciil  .association  is  a  compact  en- 
tered into  from  necessity,  and  that  compact  is 
exhibited  in  the  organic  law.  Whatever  it  pro- 
claims as  the  popular  will — that  constitutes  the 
t<;rms  of  the  a.ssociation — that  sets  out,  limits, 
defines  the  powers  which  the  people  propose  to 
delegate  in  their  political  association,  and  de- 
fines the  various  restraints  against  the  abuse  of 
delegated  power.  Now,  sir,  in  our  present  con- 
stitution, on  this  subject  it  was  declared  that 
the  legislature  should  have  no  power  to  emanci- 
pate slaves.  What  was  the  opinion  of  our  fore- 
fathers in  this  matter?  Without  that  provision 
in  the  constitution,  they  conceived  that  this  pow- 
er would  have  existed  in  the  legislature.  The 
E reposition  under  consideration,  on  the  other 
and,  asserts  that  it  exists  neither  in  the  legisla- 
ture nor  the  people.  I  don't  say  that  it  would 
be  right — I  don't  say  that  it  would  conduce  to 
the  interest  of  the  country  to  exercise  this  pow- 
er. Very  far  from  it.  I  think  it  ought  not  to  be 
done;  nay,  I  am  very  sure  that  it  will  not  be  done; 
but  I  am^  not  prepared  to  assert  the  absence  of  a 


812 


power  which  I  believe  exists  with  the  people. 
Why,  sir,  Mr.  Calhoun,  the  great  Ajax  Telemon 
of  slavery,  declares  tliat  the  power  alone  exists 
in  the  states  to  abolish  slavery;  and  if  they  have 
a  right  to  abolish  slavery,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  they  are  fully  vested  with  the  power  of 
prescribing  the  mode  in  which  it  shall  be  abol- 
ished. 

Gentlemen  have  talked  about  contracts.  What 
contract  is  there,  embracing  this  subject,  which 
cripples  popular  sovereignty?  Gentlemen  liave 
talked  of  immigrants  bringing  to  the  state  their 
slaves,  upon  the  pledge  which  the  laws  afforded 
of  security  to  this  property,  and  therefore  any 
change  in  those  laws  would  be  violative  of  this 
pledge.  Sir,  to  indulge  such  an  idea  would  close 
the  door  on  legislation.  Popular  justice  is  the 
only  safeguard,  the  only  reliance  in  popular  gov- 
ernments, for  the  preservation  of  individual 
rights.  Why  sir,  before  the  revolution,  in  Vir- 
ginia the  right  of  primogeniture  existed;  and 
there  was  such  a  thing  as  entailed  estates.  Are 
we  to  suppose  that  the  abolition  of  the  one  and 
the  conversion  of  the  other  into  fee  simple  es- 
tates— that  the  repeal  of  these  pernicious  laws 
was  a  violation  of  individual  rights,  that  the 
heir  in  entail  was  divested  of  his  rights  by  a 
usurpation  of  legislative  authority,  and  that  by 
the  exercise  of  arbitrary  power  not  existing  in 
the  governmeHt,  the  eldest  son  instead  of  acquir- 
ing the  whole  property,  acquired  only  so  much 
ashis  Jyounger  brethren  and  sisters,  (and  this 
was  made,  in  Mrginia,  to  apply  to  slaves  as 
well  as  to  landed  property.)  Why  sir,  could 
they  not,  on  the  principle  attempted  to  be  main- 
tained here,  complain  of  the  exercise  of  arbitra- 
ry power  over  the  rights  of  property;  for  the 
right  to  hold  property  prospectively  is  as  strong 
as  to  hold  that  which  we  already  have, — could 
they  have  complained?  No,  sir;  a  great  reform 
was  accomplished,  but  even  if  it  had  have  been 
otherwise,  individual  judgment  cannot  array  it- 
self against  the  public  will;  the  safety  of  indi- 
vidual rights  is  found  in  the  intelligence  which 
exists  in  the  public  mind.  Shall  wo  then  attempt 
to  place  this  kind  of  property  above  the  sover- 
eign power  of  the  republic?  The  only  powers 
which  the  people  of  Kentucky  liave  parted  with 
are  those  which  have  been  ceded  to  the  national 
government,  or  expressly  relinquished  in  the 
fedeial  constitution;  and  aside  from  this,  they 
have  a  right  to  destroy  this  government  and 
adopt  any  other  form  of  government,  not  incom- 
patiole  with  the  federal  constitution — a  right 
paramount  to  mere  legislation  in  reference  to 
property.  The  idea  of  property  may  exist  by 
the  laws  of  nature;  but  title  to  property  is  con- 
ventional and  the  creature  of  political  associa- 
tion. The  same  power  that  created  it  can  de- 
stroy it.  Is  it  consistent  with  the  laws  of  nature 
that  one  man  should  hold  a  thousand  acres  of 
land,  and  another  man  only  a  hundred,  and  a 
third  none  at  all?  By  what  sanction  does  such 
an  unequal  distribution  exist?  It  is  by  the 
sanction  of  municipal  law,  and  not  by  the  laws 
of  nature.  Can  you  conceive  of  the  existence  of 
property  in  persons  by  the  law  of  nature?  Is  it 
lu  accordance  with  the  law  of  nature  that  one 
man  should  be  held  in  bondage  by  another?  No, 
sir;  it  is  merely  a  conventional  right.  The  same 
power,  then,  which  gives  efficiency  to  that  right 


by  enabling  the  possessor  to  maintain  it,  can  de- 
stroy it. 

Sir,  I  acknowledge  the  title  to  this  description 
of  property  to  be  as  absolute  as  any  other  in 
this  country;  I  am  as  much  in  favor  of  its  being 
perpetuated  as  any  othergcntleman  on  this  floor; 
but  I  don't  regard  it  as  property  acquired  by 
the  laws  of  nature,  but  by  tlie  laws  of  human 
goveniment — the  power  which  created  it,  which 
has  continued  it,  and  which,  I  say,  is  able  to 
destroy  it. 

Gentlemen  have  laid  great  stress  on  the  bind- 
ing efficacy  of  contract,  in  relation  to  this  sub- 
ject, and  I  heard  on  a  former  occasion,  when 
this  question  was  inider  discussion,  that  there 
was  such  a  contract  as  would  bring  any  effort  to 
destroy  this  description  of  property,  within  that 
provision  of  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States,  which  declares  that  no  state  shall  pass 
any  law  impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts. 
I  am  at  a  loss  to  discover  the  application  of  this 
postulate.  A  constitutional  declaration,  accord- 
ing to  my  apprehension,  has  none  of  the  elements 
of  a  contract  about  it.  What  is  a  contract?  It 
is  an  agreement  between  parties,  able  to  con- 
tract and  be  contracted  with, touching  something 
properly  the  subject  of  such  agreement. 

The  government,  in  the  exercise  of  its  legisla- 
tive function,  is  prescribing  a  rule  of  action;  and 
when  an  organic  law  is  being  framed,  that  rule 
has  the  same  relation  to  the  government  that  or- 
dinary legislation  has  to  individuals.  It  is  true 
the  government  may  come  down  froin  its  politi- 
cal elevation,  and  assuming  the  attitude  of  an 
individual,  make  contracts  with  the  citizen;  but 
that  is  a  very  different  affair  from  the  prescrip- 
tion of  a  general  rule  of  action.  The  case  cited 
here  on  a  former  occasion  of  a  grant  of  lands  to 
Henderson  by  the  state  of  Virginia,  and  the 
grant  of  lands  in  the  state  of  Georgia  adjudicated 
upon  by  the  supreme  court  of  the  United  States 
— I  refer  to  the  case  of  Fletcher  vs  Peck — are  of 
the  description  of  wliich  I  speak.  But  to  sup- 
pose now  tliat  the  government  has  made  a  con- 
tract with  each  individual  citizen  of  the  coun- 
try, and  that  any  departure  from  the  terms  of 
this  contract  would  be  a  violation  of  our  com- 
pact with  the  federal  government,  would  be  to 
fasten  upon  the  country  the  original  compact, 
and  deny  to  a  free  people  the  right  to  modify 
their  government.  Suppose  the  original  compact 
to  be  the  present  constitution,  for  as  the  last 
written  expression  of  the  public  will  it  is  the 
only  compact  we  recognize;  according  to  the  ar- 
gument in  this  case,  we  have  assembled  here  in 
vain,  and  any  attempt  to  change  it  would  be  a 
violation  of  private  rights.  Does  not  the  argu- 
ment go  to  that  extent? 

For  these  reasons,  and  for  many  others  which 
might  be  assigned,  I  am  opposed,  utterly  oppo- 
sed, to  the  proposition  under  consideration — not 
because  I  am  opposed  to  the  institution  of  slave- 
ry— not  that  I  would  favor  emancipation — but 
tnatlam  disposed  to  place  that  institution,  as 
well  as  every  other  right  which  I  hold  dear,  upon 
the  justice  of  the  people;  I  am  willing  to  rest  it 
there;  for  whenever  the  people  cease  to  be  just, 
whenever  they  cease  to  be  virtuous,  all  our  rights 
and  liberties  must  cease  to  exist.  Without  any 
regard,  therefore,  to  such  a  proposition  as  this, 
or  the  amendment,  (which  I  regard  as  preferable 


813 


to  the  original  proposition,)  without  feeling  any 
necessity  for  hedging  in  this  institution  witli  ex- 
traordinary laws,  I  shall  rest  satisfied  that  the 
property  of  the  country,  of  every  description,  is 
in  perfect  safetv. 

Mr.  CLARICE.  This  section  has  been  called 
an  abstraction  by  some  gentlemen.  It  is  no 
abstraction  or  I  think  it  would  have  met  with 
more  favor  from  the  gentleman  last  up.  This 
section  contains  a  great  principle,  and  I  ask  the 
convention  to  come  directly  up  to  it  and  act 
upon  it.  When  we  come  to  submit  this  consti- 
tution to  the  people  of  the  state,  it  ought  to  be 
clear  and  distinct,  in  respect  to  the  great  rights 
as-serted  in  tbe  section  proposed.  A  majority  of 
the  people  of  Kentuckv  may  have  no  property 
in  lands  or  slaves,  and  however  sacred  that  ma- 
jority does  and  may  hold  the  rights  secured  by 
the  section,  still  it  is  proper  to  assert  in  the  fun- 
damental law,  that  that  majority  possess  no 
power,  while  this  state  remains  a  republican 
government,  to  divest  those  who  have  property 
inlands  or  slaves  of  that  property.  What  does 
the  section  declare.  The  section  deelai"es  that 
"  absolute,  arbitrary  power  over  the  lives,  liber- 
ty, and  property  of  freemen,  exists  no  where  in  a 
republic.  Xot  even  in  the  largest  majorities." 
Now  the  question  is,  does  absolute  and  arbitrary 
power  exist  in  any  republic,  over  the  lives,  lib- 
berty,  and  property  of  the  citizens? 

If  absolute  and  arbitrary  power  does  not  thus 
exist  in  a  republic,  then  this   section   and   the 

firinciple  contained  in  it  are  true.  Does  it  exist? 
f  it  does  exist,  then  the  converse  is  true.' 
This  is  the  great  question  which  this  convention 
is  now  about  to  settle.  The  very  moment  that  a 
majoritv  of  the  convention  shall  determine  the 
power  does  exist,  that  very  moment  they  destroy 
one  of  the  elements,  the  great  elements,  that  con- 
stitute a  republican  form  of  government.  To 
take  from  me  mv  property  by  a  bare  majority  of 
the  people  of  this  state,  without  crime  or  offence 
being  alledged   against  me,  and  without  com- 

Eensatiou  and  against  mv  consent,  is  a  high 
anded  act  of  tyranny,  tLe  predominance  of 
brute  force  over  right,  and  incompatible  with  all 
forms  or  principles  of  free  government.  The 
exercise  of  such  a  power  would  be  revolutionary 
and  subversive  of  government  itself.  If  you 
take  away  from  me  my  liberty  without  forfeiture 
on  my  part,  or  my  property,  without  making 
compensation  to  me,  that  instant  vou  exercise 
such  a  power,  or  assert  such  a  rigfit — that  mo- 
ment you  sap  the  foumlations  of  all  free  govern- 
ment, and  regulated  liberty.  What  is  a  repub 
lican  government?  It  is  a  free  government  crea- 
ted to  secure  the  citizen  in  the  enjoyment  of  life, 
liberty  and  property. 

But  would  it  be  a  free  government  if  a  bare 
majority  or  any  majority  could  deprive  a  citizen 
of  his  property?  It  would  be  estaolishing  with- 
out offence  on  his  part,  or  compensation  to  him, 
the  very  worst  system  of  agrarianism — a  prin- 
ciple upon  which  the  labors  and  earnings  of  the 
few  might  be  seized  and  divided  out  amongst 
the  many.  Would  that  be  a  free  government? 
Would  it  be  a  republican  goveniment?  Is  that  a 
republican  government  where  ten  men,  who 
have  not  a  dollar  in  their  pockets,  have  a  ri^ht, 
because  they  are  in  a  majoritv,  to  take  ten  dol- 
lars out  of  your  pocket  and  divide  them  among 


I  themselves?    It  may  Iw  the  right  of  the  robber. 
who  claims  might  as  right — but  no  such  power 
j  exists  under  a  republioan  constitution.    It  is 
1  that  government  wnere  the  citizen  is  secured  in 
I  the  accumulation   of  property,  and  the  enjoy- 
ment of  it,   and  of   life  and  liberty,  that  may 
justly  be   denominated    republican.       And   uo 
government   is   free  where   those  rights  are  not 
permanently  secured.     And   the  very  moment 
the  converse  of  this  proposition  is  established, 
we  cease  to  be  a  republic,  we  cease  to  be  freemen. 
Will  any  gentleman   be  so  bold  as  to  assert  that 
absolute  and  arbitrary  power  over  the  lives,  lib- 
j  erty  and  property  of  freemen ,  exists  in  a  repub- 
lic— that  freedom  can  live  and  breathe  and  have  a 
I  being — whenabare  majority  having  the  physical 
j  power  shall  trample  down  life,  liberty,  and  the 
rights   to  property,  at  will   and  pleasure.     Sir, 
such  a  power  exists.    It  has  been, and  may  again 
I  be  exercised,  biit  its  exercise  and  existence  was 
I  in  revolution — and  never  in   accordance   witli 
constitutional  liberty,  and  such  a  power  never 
did  exist  under  a  republican  form  of  government. 
Before  my  constituents  I  took  the  position  ta- 
ken by  this  section.     I  declared  in  upwards  of 
twenty  speeches    that    when     the    convention 
should  assemble,  they  would  have  no  power 
to  emancipate  slaves  either  in  being  or  hereafter 
to  be   born,  without  making  compensation.     I 
went  further,  and  said  that  tney  could  not  do  it 
without  the  consent  of  the  owner.    In  this   I 
may  have  run  the  principle  too  far.     But  I  assert- 
i  ed,  then,  and  I  here  reiterate  the  sentiment,  that 
I  the  majority  of  the   people  of  the  state  have  no 
I  power,  compatible  with  freedom,  to  take  from 
i  the  owner  of  a  slave  his  property  without  ma- 
1  king  him  just,  and  full,  and   ample  compensa- 
I  tion.     I  think  it  is  quite  seasonable,  at  this  time 
to  assert,  yea  and  in   the  constitution,  the  great 
principle  contained  in  the  section,  when  we  find 
a  spirit  pervading,  more  or  less,  some  fifteen 
I  states  of  this  Union,  a  spirit  which  is  calculated 
to  disturb  the  harmony  that  ought  to  exist  in  the 
I  confederacy — when   we   see  congress   thwarted 
;  in  its  organization  at  this  moment  by  this  same 
fell  spirit — when  from  present  indications  this 
Union  may  be  shaken  to  its  verv  foundation — 
when  we  see  that  same  spirit  and  those  feelings 
now  pervade  the  legislative  councils  of  the  na- 
tion, harrowing   up  the  worst  passions  of  the 
human  heart — and  asserting  the  right  of  num- 
bers to  plunder  minorities  of  just  and  sacred 
rights.     I  ask,  in  the  name  of  all  that  is  dear 
and  sacred  to  us  and  our  children,  is  it  not  time 
that  we  should  act,  and  act  promptly  and  de- 
cisively?   When  we  behold  all  these  portentous 
dangers  staring  us   in  the  face,  it  does  seem  to 
me    that    no    ground,    asserting     correct   and 
true  principles  can  be  taken  which  will  be  too 
strong.      That  the  principle   contained  in  the 
proposed     section    is    right,    I     am    prepared 
to    proclaim   and    defend.     That    the    reverse 
would   be    a  violation   of  those    rights   which 
existed    before     the     articles  of   confederation 
were  adopted,  none  will  be  so  bold  as  to  deny. 
They  existed  when  we  composed  a  part  of  the 
state   of   Virginia.      We  brought    those  rights 
with  us,  and  no  absolute  or  arbitrary  power 
under  heaven  can  deprive  us  of  them,  consistent 
with  regulated  freedom.    We  brought  our  slave 
property  here  under  solemn  contract.    We  were 


814 


told  that  we  would  be  secure  in  the  enioyineut  of 
life,  liberty  and  property — that  such  was  the 
object  and  end  of  government;  that  for  the  pro- 
tection of  these  inestimable  rights,  free  govern- 
ments were  first  established.  How  did  we 
acquire  the  lands  upon  which  are  built  vour 
spb.'udid  cities,  your  lovely  cottages — those 
broad  acres,  upon  which  roam  your  herds  of  cat- 
tle— by  the  same  description  of  contract  that 
slaves  were  acquired.  Can  a  bare  majority  of 
this  proud  and  glorious  commonwealth,  now 
liaving  a  voting  population  of  from  150,000  to 
175,00'0,  and  a  slave  population  of  200,000,  esti- 
mated at  sixty  millions  of  dollars  in  value — can 
a  bare  majority  come  up,  and  without  forfeiture 
by,  or  compensation  to  the  owners,  seize  that 
property  and  dispose  of  it  consistent  with  re- 
publicanism; never,  never,  in  my  judgment  with- 
out revolution.  They  can  do  no  such  thing. 
The  moment  such  an  attempt  is  made  by  so- 
ciety, that  moment,  if  it  shall  be  sanctioned  and 
carried  out — that  moment  this  commonwealth 
ceases  to  be  a  republic,  and  it  becomes  a  revo- 
lutionary despotism,  m  violation  of  right  of 
principle,  and  in  violation  of  all  guaranties  by 
which  the  enjoyment  of  life,  liberty  and  proper- 
ty has  been  secured. 

Having,  before  I  was  elected,  taken  the  very 
ground  which  I  have  here  taken,  I  felt  it  my  du- 
tv  to  make  these  remarks.  I  never  can  concede 
the  principle,  that  if  I  enter  into  a  society  with 
ten  men,  Avith  the  express  understanding  that- 1 
am  to  be  protected  by  them,  in  the  enjoyment  of 
life,  liberty  and  property — that  six  of  them,  con- 
sistent with  that  understanding,  have  the  power 
to  deprive  me  of  either  right,  at  will  and  pleasure. 
To  concede  it  would  be  a  base  abandonment  of 
principle — it  would  be  to  resign  tlie  title  of  free- 
man and  to  become  a  slave. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

The  question  was  first  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment of  Mr.  Mitchell,  to  strike  out  "exists  no 
Avhere"  and  insert  "and,  from  necessity,  should 
not  be  exercised." 

Mr.  MITCHELL  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  thev  were  yea  1,  navs  87. 

Yea— William  D.  Mitchell— 1. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Gutlirie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  William 
Chenault.  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  K.  D.  Coleman,  Ben.  Cope- 
lin,  William  Cowp'er,  Edward  Curd,  (Jarrett  Da- 
vis, Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  James 
Dudley,  Cha.steen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Oaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Th(mia.s  J.  Oough,  Ninian 
E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  A. 
Hood,TlioniasJ.  Hood,  Thomas  James,  George 
W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  James  M.  Lackv,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  T. 
N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  WUHhE.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nath- 
an McClurc,  Thomtts  i'.  Moore,  James  M.  Nes- 


bitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah 
F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston, 
Johnson  Price,  Carkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wm. 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washing- 
ton, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  Wiekliffe,  Robert  N.  Wicklifie,  George  W. 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson — 87. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  amend. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  amendment 
of  Mr.  DIXON. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
and  they  were,  yeas  55,  nays  34. 

Yeas — Alfred  Boyd,  Luther  Brawner,  William 
C.Bullitt,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Arch- 
ibald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van, Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Nathan  Gaither,  J. 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke, Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  Geort^e  W.  Mansfield,  Alex- 
ander K.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nath- 
an McClure,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nes- 
bitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Wm. 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thos. 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone, Mich- 
ael L.  Stoner,  Jolin  D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thur- 
man, Howard  Todd,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew 
S.  White,  George  W.  Williams— 55 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wm. 
K.  Bowling,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow, Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  Chenault,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.  Hanulton,  Ben.  Hardin,  A^incent  S. 
Hay,  Richard  L.  Mayes.  David  Meriwether,  Wil- 
liam D.  Mitchell,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  William  R.  Tliompson,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  John  W'heeler,  Charle 
A.  W^ickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wiekliffe,  Silas  Wood 
son — •34. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  A.  K.MARSHALL  moved  a  reconsidera- 
tion of  the  vote,  adopting  the  section  with  the 
avowed  intention  to  move  to  strike  out  the  words 
"except  for  crime." 

The  motion  to  reconsider  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  to  strike  out 
the  words  "except  for  crime." 

Tlie  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  moved  to  amend,  by  inserting 
the  following  as  a  substitute : 

"  That  absolute,  arbitrary,  unconditional  pow- 
er over  the  lives,  liberties,  and  property  of  free- 
men, exists  no  where  in  a  repuolic,  not  even  in 
the  largest  majority." 

The  substitute  was  ruled  out  of  order. 

The  question  again  recurred  on  the  adoption 
of  the  section. 


8lJ 


Mr. BALLIXGER  called  for  the  yeasand  uays,  |  kvesixg  stsaiox. 

audthey  were— yeas  57,  nays  30.'  '     j      The  convention  resumed  the  conslUerallon  of 

Yeas— John  L.  Ballinger,  Alfred  Boyd,  Lu- 1  t},e  report  of   the  committee  on   Keneral  pro- 
ther  Brawner,  Thos.  D.  Brown,  "Wra.  C.  Biillitt, '  visions. 

William  Chenault,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  j  The  first  section,  which  was  heretofore  passed 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Wm. !  over  at  the  request  of  Mr.  BULLITT,  was  taken 
Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  ;  up  and  rend  as  follows  : 

Dudley  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 1  "Sec.  1.  Members  of  the  general  assembly,  and 
wards,  iSathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard.  Thos.  |  all  officers,  executive  and  judicial,  before  they  en- 
J.  Gough,  ^  inian  E.  Gray,  John  Hargis,  William  .  ter  upon  the  execution  of  their  respective  odices, 
Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  <  sii^n  take  the  following  oath  or  affirmation:  I  do 
W.  Irwin,  Thos.  James,  ^^  lUiam  Johnson,  Geo.  solemnly  swear,  (or  atfinn,  as  tJie  case  may  be,) 
W  Johnston,  George  \V  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. ,  that  I  will  be  faithful  and  true  to  the  common- 
Kelly,  Jas.  M  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos. ,  ^-ealth  of  Kentucky,  so  long  a.s  I 
N.  Lindsey,  1  homas  \V .  Lisle,  W  illis  B.  Machen,  ■  -     -     -     -        ^^      .. 

Geo.  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wm. 
N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  Thos.  P.  Moore, 

James  MNesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F.  er  directly  nor  Indirectly,  given,  accepted,  or 
^uttall,  \V  ilham  Preston  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  knowingfy  carried  a  challenge,  to  any  person  or 
J.  Proctor,  Thos.  Kockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ig-  persons,  to  fight  in  single  combat  or  otherwise, 
natius  A.  Spalding,  John  W  .  Stevenson,  James  with  any  deadly  weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the 
T  ;      t"^',  TT-  ^^^r""'  *^''^"  ^-  '^^ylo'"'    state,  sihce  the  adoption  of  the  present  constitu- 

John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  fodd,  Henry  Wash- ^tion  of  Kentucky,  and  that  I  will  neither  di- 
ingtou,  Andrew  S.  \\  hite— a/ .  rectly  nor  indirectly,  give,  accept,  or  knowinglr 

JSays— Mr.  President,  (Guthno,)  Richard  Ap-  carry  a  challenge  to  any  person  or  persons,  to 
person,  Jolm  S.  Barlow,  ^\  m.  K.  Bowling,  Wm.  fight  in  single  combat  or  otherwise,  with  any 
Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bnstow,  Benjamin  Copelin,  deadly  weapon,  either  in  f)r  out  of  the  state,  du- 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Milford  Elliott,  rinc  my  continuance  in  office  " 
Green  Forrest,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  i  Mr.  BULLITT.  I  move  to  strike  out  the 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  ^  ineent  S.  Hay.  Rich-  ^ords  "and  that  I  have  neither  directly  nor  in- 
ard  L  Mayes,  ^  illiam  D.  Mitchell,  Hugh  New-    directly,  given,  accepted,  or  knowingly  carried 


continue 

a  citizen  thereof,  and  that  I  will  faithfully 
execute,  to  the  best  of  my  abilities,  the  office  of 
■—  according  to  law.  and  that  I  have  neith- 


given.  accepted,  or  knowingly  carried 
a  challenge,  to  any  person  or  pei-sons,  to  fight  in 
single   combat  or  otherwise,  with  any  deadly 
weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  state,  since  the 
I  adoption   of  the  present   constitution   of  Ken- 
;  tucky,  and  that  I  Will  neither  directly  nor  indi- 
:  rectly,  accept,  or  knowingly  carry  a  challenge  to 
!  any  person  or  persons,  to  fight  in  single  combat 
I  oi  otherwise,  with  a  deadly  weapon,  either  in  or 
"Sec.  — .  The  right  of  property  is  before  and    out  of  the  state,  during  my  continuance  in  of- 
higher  than    any  constitutional  sanction  ;   and  ;  fice." 

the  right  of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  his  property  i  I  am  opposed  to  that  portion  of  the  first  see- 
is  the  same  and  as  inviolable  as  the  right  of  the  tion  which  provides  that  all  oflicers  of  govern- 
owner  of  any  property  whatever."  !  ment,  before  they  enter  upon  the  execution  of 

Mr.  A.  K.MARSHALL  desired  that  the  .sec- '  >*!'-»'■  office>i,  .shall   stvear  or  afiirm    that  they 
tion  should  lie  over  for  future  consideration.  i  "^^'^^  neither  directly  nor  indirectly  given,  ac- 

cepted, nor  knowingly  carried   a  challengfe  to 


ell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Robin-on,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William 
R.  Thompson,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N 
Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 30. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  DAVIS  offered  the  following  as  an  addi 
tional  section : 


Mr.  DAVIS   assented,   and  the  section   was! 
laid  over.  j 

Mr.  JAMES  said  the  convention  had  for  some 
time  been  laboriously  employed,  and  the  report- 
ers had  necessarily  been  still  more  industrious, 
and  therefore  he  moved  that  the  convention  do 
now  adjourn. 


any  person,  or  persons,  to  fight  in  single  combat, 

or  otiierwise,  with  any  deadly  weapon,  either  in 

or  out   of  the   state,  since  the  adoption   of  the 

])resent  constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  that  they 

Avill  not  during  their  continuance  in  office." 

This  absolutely  excludes  the  offender  from  of- 

Mr.  riARDIN  moved  that  the  convention  do  \  ^^^^  forever  without  the  possibility  of  a  pardon. 

now  take  a  recess.  I  ^^  i*  ^^^  constitutional  provision,  the  executive 

The    last    motion    having    priority,    it  was  i  cannot  relieve  a  person  from  its  penalties  under 

first  put.  '  j  any  circum.stances  whatever,     "i  on  thereby  not 

Mr.  RUDD  called    for   the   yeas   and   nays ' 


any  circumstances  whatever. 

only  select  the  duelist  as  being  the  greatest  of- 


fender of  all  other  criminals,  and  deserving  the 
j)eculiar  vengeance  of  a  constitutional  provision, 
whilst  yon  leave  all  other  crimes  to  legislative 
action.  You  mark  it  out  as  a  crime  so  peculiar- 
.,__„_,T  „„      ,,    ,  .       ,  ,  ly  atrocious  for  a  man  to  challenge  another  to  a 

Mr.  WHEELER  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays,   fair  fight- though  the  quarrel  may  have  been 
id  they  were— yeas  38,  nays  4t.  amicably  compromised— as  to  be  unworthy  of 

executive  clemency  forever,  and  under  all  possi- 
ble circumstances. 

It  is  believed  that  the  power  of  pardoning  ex- 
ists in  every  civilized  government  in  the  world, 
even  in  cases  of  the  most  atrocious  crimes  which 
can  be  committed.    In  the  governments  of  Rus- 


tliereon,  and  they  were— yeas  42,  nays  44 
So  the  convention  refused  to  take  a  recess. 
Mr.  JAMES  then  renewed  his  motion  to  ad 

jouru. 


So  the  convention  refused  to  adjourn 

Mr.  MACHEN  again  moved  that  the  conven- 
tion take  a  recess. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for,  and  were — 
yeas  43,  nays  42. 

So  the  convention  took  a  recess. 


8ir> 


sia  and  Turkey,  the  strongest  military  govern- 
ments known,' the  power  of  pardon  exists  in  the 
monarcli. 

In  every  government,  however  despotic,  this 
power  exists  somewhere.  The  laWs  must  neces- 
sarily be  general,  and  it  is  impossible  for  the 
law-maker  to  foresee  and  provide  for  all  the  ea- 
ses Avhich  ought  to  form  exceptions  ;  hence  the 
necessity  of  vesting  this  power  somewhere.  If 
the  matter  is  left  to  the  legislature,  the  governor 
can  extend  the  executive  clemency  to  all  cases 
deserving  a  pardon. 

The  adoption  of  this  section  would  be  an  in- 
terpolation of  a  criminal  law  into  the  constitu- 
tion. This  convention  has  power  to  establish  a 
form  of  government  for  the  people  of  Kentucky 
— to  declare  what  department  or  body  of  men 
shall  make  tlie  laws — who  shall  adjudicate  on 
and  expound  the  laws^ — and  who  shall  execute 
them — but  you  have  no  power  to  do  either  of 
the  three  yourselves.  Your  po-wers  are  as  sepa- 
rate and  distinct  from  the  law-making  power,  as 
those  of  llie  legislative,  executive  and  judicial 
departments  under  the  existing  constitution  are 
separate  from  each  other.  The  entire  constitu- 
tion, which  we  are  now  making,  is  a  restriction 
on  the  legislative  power;  yet  we  are  asked  to  set 
them  the  example,  in  our  own  action,  of  viola- 
ting the  constitution  under  which  we  are  now- 
acting.  If  we  possessed  the  power  it  ought  not 
to  be  exercised. 

It  violates  all  proportion  between  crimes  and 
punishments,  which  is  necessarily  made  the  ba- 
sis of  every  well  regulated  code  of  criminal  law. 
Why  under  our  laAvs  are  so  few  crimes  capitally 

Jjunished?  Because  the  lighter  punishment  is 
leld  out  as  an  inducement  to  the  aggressor  to 
refrain  from  the  last  attt — that  of  murder.  The 
law  should  always  hold  out  an  inducement  to 
stop  the  perpetration  of  crime.  Hence  robbery 
is  punished  more  slightly  than  murder,  and  con- 
sequently the  robber  does  not  generally  murder: 
but  if  robbery  and  murder  were  each  equally 
capital  offences,  the  robber  would  always  mur- 
der, as  thereby  his  chances  of  escape  would  be 
greater. 

Under  the  exi.sting  laws,  the  man  who  com- 
mits a  highway  robbery  and  murder,  or  poisons 
his  own  wife  and  children,  and  is  cleared  by  a 
bribed  witness  or  juror,  or  is  found  guilty  by  a 
jury,  and  pardoned  by  the  governor,  labors  un- 
der no  disability;  whilst  the  man  who,  under 
the  most  aggravated  insult,  invites  another  to 
fair  and  equal  fight,  is  to  be  forever  disfranchis- 
ed, though  the  moment  after  he  might  regret 
the  act  and  withdraw  the  challenge — thus  pun- 
ishing mere  words,  attended  with  no  overt  act 
of  criminality.as  an  unpardonable  offence.  Here, 
instead  of  holding  out  the  wise  and  humane  in- 
ducement to  its  infractor  to  stop  at  those  mere 
words,  you  invite  t«  the  crime  of  murder  by 
withholding  from  the  executive  the  power  of 
pardoning  the  lighter  offence. 

A  high  principle  of  honor  pervades  society, 
teaching  tnata  man  ought  to  hold  his  character 
and  reputation  as  dearer  to  him  than  his  life. 
This  is  an  ennobling,  high-minded  principle, 
worthy  to  be  cherished  and  encouraged — one 
■vrbich  we  have  derived  by  inheritance  from  our 
ancestors,  and  which  wo  should  inculcate  in  our 
children  and  transmit  unimpaired  to  our  poster- 


ity. Although  it  sometimes  leads  to  excesses 
and  even  crimes,  the  good  far  overbalances  the 
evil. 

Duelling  is  the  fairest  mode  of  fighting  known 
— and  although  perfect  equality  between  the 
parties  is  unattainable  by  this  or  any  other  mode 
— it  more  nearly  approximates  to  equality  than 
any  other.  It  is  a  high  protection  to  females. 
In  the  northern  papers  we  hear  continually  of 
suits  brought  by  females  for  breach  of  marriage 
contracts  and  slander,  whilst  with  ns  they  are 
very  rare.  The  prodigal  young  man,  who  may 
be  wholly  indift'orent  to  a  law  suit,  would  often 
be  kept  under  a  most  wholesome  check  by  a 
fear  of  bodily  chastisement.  A  certain  and  im- 
mediate punishment  is  generally  found  more  effi- 
cacious than  a  much  greater — if  the  last  is  re- 
mote and  contingent,  which  any  punishment 
must  be — where  it  depends  on  the  uncertainties 
of  the  law. 

It  operates  as  a  restraint  on  the  bully  in  high 
life.  With  us  no  man  can  succeed  in  politics 
or  at  the  bar,  if  he  suffers  himself  to  be  insulted 
with  impunity.  The  people  never  respect  a  cow- 
ard. It  is  notorious,  that  the  most  popular  man 
would  be  defeated  in  a  canvass  before  the  peo- 
ple for  any  public  office,  if  he  permitted  himself 
to  be  insulted  and  did  not  in  some  way  resent  it. 
We  sometimes  see  a  large  man,  from  envy  of  the 
superior  merits  and  talents  of  a  rival  bully, 
brow-beat  and  insult  one  smaller  and  more  fee- 
ble in  body  than  himself,  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  taking  his  practice  from  him.  Suppose 
this  is  carried  so  far  as  to  rub  against,  sneer  at, 
insult,  and  spit  in  the  face  of  the  feebler  man; 
and  suppose  the  latter  challenges  and  kills  his 
adversary,  I  would  ask,  would  any  reasonable 
liuman  being  censure  the  act? 

In  this  case  the  challenging  party  finding, 
that  without  any  fault  on  his  oWn  part,  his  op- 
ponent is  resolved  by  an  unceasing  persecution 
to  destroy  his  utility  to  himself,  his  family  and 
countr>%  being  the  more  feebler  of  the  two,  is 
compelled  to  resort  to  deadly  weapons  of  some 
kin(l,  either  in  a  duel  or  street  fight.  In  the  case 
suppposed,  the  challenger  is  strictly  acting  in 
self  defence,  and  doing  from  imperious  necessi- 
ty what  nothing  else  could  excuse. 

That  it  might  distress  a  good  man  to  kill  an- 
other in  a  dtiel  under  even  the  circumstances 
described,  is  admitted.  If  he  permits  himself 
to  be  considered  aii'l  treated  as  a  coward,  he  is 
certain  to  be  miserable;  and  of  the  two  I  would 
prefer  the  first  alternative.  It  is  only  in  extreme 
cases  that  I  consider  the  duel  at  all  justifia- 
ble. The  man  who  fights  for  revenge,  and  not 
for  the  protection  of  his  own  honor,  is  a  mur- 
derer. I  never  did,  nor  can  believe,  that  provi- 
dence designed  tliat  one  man,  because  he  was 
weaker  in  body  than  another,  should  therefore 
submit  to  insult  and  injury,  else  why  permit  the 
invention  of  the  revolver,  which  very  nearly  re- 
duces the  strong  to  the  level  of  the  weak. 

It  is  a  saving  of  human  life.  Out  of  the  pop- 
ulation of  the  city  of  Louisville,  now  number- 
ing 50,000,  there  have  been  but  two  deaths  from 
duels  (which  I  recollect  to  have  heard  of,  and 
I  think  I  am  not  mistaken)  during  tlie  whole 

Feriod  of  its  existence  since  its   foundation  in 
780.    Where  the  duel  is  resorted  to,  men  do 
not  find  it  necessary  to  carry  arms;  and  conso- 


817 


quently,  in  case  of  a  sudden  quarrel,  resort  can- 
not be  had  to  them  on  the  instant.  A  second 
must  be  hunted  up — arms  provided — a  challenge 
sent — time  allowed  the  challenged  party  to  pre- 
pare himself — all  which  usually  occupy  some 
days — thus  giving  time  for  the  passions  to  cool, 
and  for  the  intervention  of  friends,  who  in  nine 
cases  out  of  ten,  effect  a  compromise  ;  whereas, 
in  a  majority  of  similar  cases,  if  the  parties  had 
been  armed  and  a  street  fight  had  taken  place, 
the  result  would  probably  have  been  fatal. 

So  long  as  public  sentiment  remains  unchang- 
ed, you  can  only  succeed  in  suppressing  the  du- 
el by  substituting  in  its  stead,  the  common  prac- 
tice of  carrying  arms,  and  street  fighting,  by  far, 
more  fatal  than  the  duel.  That  feeling  of  ^onor 
or  chivalry,  or  by  whatever  name  it  may  be  cal- 
led, which  impels  to  self-defence,  is  innate  with 
the  Kentuckian,  and  neither  law  nor  constitu- 
tion can  destroy  it.  I  am  authorised  to  protect 
the  clothes  on  my  back,  and  should  I  not  be 
permitted  to  protect  my  honor  and  character  the 
most  important  thing  to  me  in  life? 

Until  public  opinion  undergoes  a  material 
change  on  the  subject  of  dueling,  no  human 
laws  can  suppress  the  practice.  If  mild,  they 
Avill  be  ineffectual — if  disproportionate  and  cru- 
el, juries  will  not  enforce  them. 

Whenever  public  opinion  no  longer  requires 
the  duel,  it  will  wear  out  of  itself,  and  never 
till  then. 

The  only  remedy  must  be  found  in  a  gradual 
amelioration  of  public  opinion,  strengthened 
and  enforced  by  an  able  and  efficient  judiciary, 
with  able  prosecutors  and  upright  jurors.  For 
then,  the  duelist  who  fights  from  motives  of  re- 
venge, or  any  other  insufficient  cause,  and  kills 
his  adversary,  will  be  hung  as  a  murderer.  No 
honest  and  intelligent  jury,  in  such  a  case, 
would  hesitate  to  find  a  verdict  of  guilty  against 
the  accused.  If  a  man,  with  malice  aforethought, 
seeks  and  accomplishes  the  death  of  another  in 
a  duel,  without  just  provocation,  he  is  to  all  in- 
tents as  much  a  murderer,  as  if  he  had  waylaid 
and  murdered  him.  Then  the  puni.shmentwould 
light  on  the  aggressor — and  not  as  would  often 
occur  (under  the  clause  proposed,)  on  the  inno- 
cent equally  with  the  guilty. 

No  punishment  ever  will  be  enforced  if  it  be 
wholly  disproportionate  to  the  crime — nor  will 
this  people  ever  consent  to  inflict  the  same  pun- 
ishment on  the  man  who  is  forced  into  a  duel  in 
defence  of  his  honor,  which  should  fall  on  the 
aggressor.  It  may  be  said  that  you  will  notonly 
suppress  dueling,  but  that  you  will  avert  the  evil 
consequences  of  carrying  concealed  arms.  By 
the  imposition  of  taxes  and  oaths,  you  might 
possibly  succeed  in  suppressing  the  practice 
among  the  upright  and  nonorable,  but  tne  base 
man  and  assassin  would  wholly  disregard  any 
laws  which  you  could  impose ;  the  conse- 
quence would  be  to  put  the  honest  man  wholly 
at  the  mercy  of  the  assassin,  taking  away  from 
the  good  citizen  the  greatest  proteciion  which  he 
has  against  the  bad  and  the  vicious. 

In  a  country  like  ours,  of  a  comparatively 
sparse  population,  where  the  accused  is  necessa- 
rily tried  by  a  jury  of  his  neighbors  and  ac- 
quaintances, it  must  always  be  extremely  diffi- 
cult to  convict,  capitally,  for  almost  any  oflfence 
— not  from  the  want  of  a  proper  moral  sense  in 
103 


the  community  or  detestation  of  crime — ^but  from 
that  sympathy  and  feeling  of  compassion  for 
our  neighbor  in  distress,  common  to  us  all, 
which  renders  us,  to  some  extent,  incompetent 
to  mete  out  to  our  acquaintance  that  even  han- 
ded justice,  which  we  would  do  to  an  entire 
stranger.  For  this  reason  criminal  laws  cannot 
possibly  be  as  rigorously  enforced  with  us  as  in 
crowded  cities,  where  the  jurors  are  unacquain- 
ted with  the  accused.  Hence,  it  is  a  generally 
received  opinion,  that  each  man  amongst  us, 
must  mainly  rely  on  his  own  arm  for  the  protec- 
tion of  his  person. 

Mr.  NUT  TALL.  I  do  not  flatter  myself  that 
I  shall  be  able,  on  the  present  occasion,  to  con- 
vince the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  (Mr.  Bullitt,) 
that  he  occupies  a  wrong  position  and  is  behind 
the  age  in  which  he  lives  on  this  great  question. 
I  look  upon  this  as  pre-eminently  the  ^reat  ques- 
tion of  this  convention,  and  one  which  should 
receive  proportionate  consideration.  I  desire 
to  present  some  information  to  the  convention 
on  the  subject,  in  the  preparation  of  which  I 
am  indebted  to  the  kind  aid  of  another  gentle- 
man, and  for  which  I  desire  here  to  accord  to 
him  my  thanks.  Since  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  so  far  as  history  throws  any  light  upon 
the  subject,  there  have  been  but  four  descrip- 
tions of  duels,  and  modern  duelists  would,  if 
allowed,  trace  back  to,  and  justify  the  practice 
by  the  celebrated  combat  between  David  and 
Goliath,  or  the  famous  one  between  the  Horatii 
or  the  Curatii.  But  there  is  a  marked  distinc- 
tion between  the  motives  upon  which  these  con- 
tests were  based,  and  those  which  govern  and 
influence  those  who  at  this  day  engage  in  the 
duel.  Devotion  to  country  has,  in  ^1  ages,  been 
regarded  as  praiseworthy,  and  such  was  the 
motive  which  influenced  the  participants  in  the 
two  celebrated  combats  to  which  I  have  referred. 
The  Horatii  and  the  Curiatii  stepped  forth  be- 
tween the  hostile  armies  of  the  Romans  and  the 
Latins  and  staked  the  fate  of  the  day  upon 
their  single  prowess,  and  in  so  doing,  thev  were 
not  more  guilty,  in  a  religious  and  moral  point 
of  view,  than  they  would  have  been,  had  they 
remained  in  the  ranks  and  fought  there,  as  tbdv 
undoubtedly  would  have  done,  and  slain  each 
other.  The  ancient  Scandinavians  believed  there 
was  a  providential  control  over  the  affairs  of 
men,  which  especially  decided  between  right 
and  wrong,  and  making  a  direct  app<^al  to  Heav- 
en  to  favor  the  right  they  resorte-i  to  personal 
combat  to  decide  their  controversies  respecting 
property  or  any  other  of  the  rights  recognized 
m  their  communities.  This  I  presume  was  the 
origin  of  the  trial  by  combat  of  the  feudal  ages. 
Was  such  a  controversy  based  upon  personal 
feeling  or  malice?  Nc  sir;  it  was  a  controversy 
between  parties  a.«  to  legal  rights,  and  in  the 
belief  that  an  ovwlooking  and  overruling  provi- 
dence would  de^rmine  the  justice  or  injustice  of 
the  case,  they  resorted  to  a  trial  of  arms.  This 
notion  became  modified  in  the  process  of  time, 
until,  in  the  feudal  ages  what  was  known  as  the 
wao-er  of  battle  was  substituted  in  its  place. 
The  first  mention  of  it  is  in  the  Burgundian 
code  as  earlyas  A.  D.  501.  There  is,  I  presume, 
scarcely  a  gentleman  here — ^the  legal  portion  of 
them  particularly — who  does  not  fully  compre- 
hend the  history  of,  and  the  manner  in  which 


818 


this  wager  by  battle  was  carried  out.  It  applied 
only  to  controversies  as  to  the  riglit  of  property 
in  land,  and  for  some  curious  and  quaint  reasons 
the  parties  never  fought  themselves,  but  always 

E resented  a  champion  to  fight  in  their  stead, 
[ere,  clearly,  the  combat  did  not  arise  from  any 
resentment  of  personal  injury  or  insult.  In  the 
appendix  to  Chitty's  Blackstone  will  be  found  a 
description  of  the  last  effort  made  in  Great 
Britain  to  settle  a  question  of  this  sort  by  an  ap- 
peal to  arras.  The  whole  court  adjourned,  and 
were  cited  to  assemble  in  Tothill  fields,  and 
there  to  witness  a  controversy  as  to  title  to  land 
decided  by  wager  of  battle.  This  was  very 
much  akin  to  the  celebrated  trials  in  the  courts 
of  Knights  Errant,  where  a  certain  knight  pro- 
claiming that  his  fair  mistress  was  the  most 
beautiful  and  handsome  of  any,  would  throw 
down  his  gage  of  battle  to  any  who  dared  dis- 
pute it.  If  any  such,  there  were,  the  challenge 
would  be  accepted,  and  then  in  a  great  tourna- 
ment, they  would  decide  by  force  of  arms,  before 
that  assembly  of  magnates  and  people  of  the 
land,  who  had  the  fairest  mistress.  And  what 
is  most  extraordinary,  this  barbarous,  cruel  and 
bloody  ordeal  of  trial  by  battle — notwithstand- 
ing the  existence  of  the  wise,  learned,  and 
distinguished  men  who  gave  being  to  the  great 
system  of  English  jurisprudence — remained 
the  law  of  the  land  down  to  the  time  of  George 
III,  and  was  not  repealed  until  the  year  1818 
or  1819. 

Now  I  come  to  the  origin  of  the  duel  as  it  is 
now  practiced.  That  is  a  combat  for  the  re- 
dress of  personal  or  family  injuries,  fought 
with  deadly  weapons.  It  is  the  offspring  of  the 
trial  by  battle,  and  is  governed  by  what  is  called 
the  code  of  honor.  This  practice  grew  into 
such  general  use  after  Francis  I  challenged  the 
emperor  Charles  V,  that  in  the  first  eighteen 
years  of  the  reign  of  Henry  IV,  over  four  thou- 
sand gentlemen  fell  in  the  duel.  In  that  day 
the  military  spirit  was  the  ruling  one,  and  men 
were  influenced  largely  by  the  scBtiments  avow- 
ed here  by  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  (Mr. 
Bullitt,)  that  he  preferred  death  to  the  tarnish- 
ing of  his  fair  fame  and  character.  This  was 
the  ground  assumed,  and  thus  the  country  who 
needed  their  services  in  a  military  point  o^  vieAv, 
was  deprived  of  four  thousand  men,  and  not 
only  that,  but  the  number  of  «?idows  and  or- 
phans nect^sarily  created  thereby,  must  necessa- 
rily have  bee\i  considerable. 

I  have  thus  v»ry  rapidly,  and  I  may  add  un- 
satisfactorily to  myself,  given  something  like  an 
epitome  of  the  rise  ijid  progress  of  the  duel,  as 
far  back  as  I  am  able  v?  trace  it,  and  I  will  now 
attempt  a  similar  sket»|i  of  the  legislation  of 
Christendom  with  a  yiev  to  its  suppression. 
The  history  of  legislation  t«sr  five  centuries  past 
is  singularly  uniform,  especidUy  in  the  results 
of  such  legislation.  Ecclesiasthal  and  civil  en- 
actments of  the  most  stringent  djaracter  have 
been  made  to  suppress  it.  The  CouiKiil  of  Trent, 
(section  25,  chapter  19,)  declared  it  to  be  a  de- 
testable custom  introduced  by  the  devil  for  tlie 
destruction  of  soul  and  body,  and  exconnnuni- 
cated  not  only  those  who  fought,  but  their  aRso- 
ciates  and  even  the  spectators.  Philip  the  Fair, 
in  the  13th  century,  tried  to  suppress  it,  but  the 
spirit  of  the  age  was  too  fierce  to  be  restrained. 


Henry  II  of  France  published  the  first  edict  pro- 
hibiting it  in  that  kingdom,  but  this  only  seemed 
to  increase  the  passion  for  it,  and  to  make  meu 
stretch  the  usual  points  of  honor,  on  the  princi- 
ple that  honor  exerts  itself  most  in  satisfying 
those  points  which  are  not  of  legal  obligation, 
or  are  even  in  defiance  of  law.  The  parliament 
of  Paris  in  1599  declared  duelists,  and  all  those 
present  either  as  assistants  or  spectators,  to  be 
rebels  and  transgressors  of  the  law.  Henry  IV 
in  1609  ordained  further,  that  all  in  any  way 
concerned,  all  spectators,  even  those  acciden- 
tally present  who  did  not  strive  to  prevent  blood- 
shed, and  all  carriers  of  challenges,  or  of  offen- 
sive or  provoking  words,  should  sufier  in  va- 
rious degrees,  by  death,  confiscation  of  goods, 
fines,  imprisonment,  loss  of  place,  loss  of  pow- 
er, etc.  But  I  will  not  trouble  the  convention 
with  further  details  of  the  legislation  of  Christen- 
dom, all  of  the  same  character,  from  this  period 
down  to  the  English  statute  oJF  William.  This 
statute  extends  to  seconds,  and  all  concerned, 
the  punishment  of  banishment  and  escheat  of 
moveables,  and  these  statutes  are  still  in  force. 
In  the  case  of  Lt.  Brundell,  in  the  present  cen- 
tury, his  antagonist,  second,  and  two  others 
who  were  held  accessories,  were  all  convicted  of 
murder  and  sentenced  to  death,  though  after- 
wards pardoned.  And  it  will  be  found  that  al- 
most all  the  great  and  good  men  of  Christendom, 
although  in  some  instances  these  were  made  to 
yield  and  fight  duels,  have  always  regarded  it  as 
a  barbarous  custom. 

I  desire  now  to  show  to  the  convention  some 
specimens  of  the  "code"  which  governs  these  san- 
guinary encounters.  I  will  read  from  a  "code 
of  honor"  published  in  Ireland,  which  is  the 
only  one  I  have  ever  seen,  and  which  is  a  very 
curious  affair  indeed.  If  there  is  an  American 
published  "code  of  honor"  I  have  never  yet  had 
the  pleasure  of  seeing  it.  This  purports  to  have 
been  "settled  by  the  gentlemen  delegates  of 
Tipperary,  Galway,  Mayo,  Sligo,  and  Roscom- 
mon, and  prescribed  for  general  use  throughout 
Ireland,"  where  I  presume  it  is  still  in  practice. 
It  contains  36  rules,  of  which  the  following  are 
specimens: 

"1st.  The  first  offence  requires  the  first  apolo- 
gy, although  the  retort  luay  have  been  more  of- 
fensive than  the  insult.  Thus  A.  to  B.:  "You 
are  impertinent."  B.  to  A.:  "Youlie."  A. must 
make  the  first  apology,  and  then,  after  the  Jirst 
fire,  B.  may  explain  away  the  retort. 

"2nd.  But  if  the  parties  would  rather  fight  on, 
then  after  two  shots  each — but  in  no  case  be- 
fore— B.  may  explain  first,  and  A.  apologise  af- 
terAvards. 

"3rd.  If  a  doubt  exist  who  gave  the  first  of- 
fence, the  decision  is  with  the  seconds;  if  they 
cannot  agree,  the  matter  must  proceed  to  two 
shots  or  a  hit,  if  the  challenge  requires  it. 

"4th.  When  the  lie  direct  is  the  first  ofiFence, 
the  aggressor  must,  1st,  beg  pardon  in  express 
terms,  or,  2ud,  exchange  two  shots  previous  to 
apology,  or,  3rd,  three  shots,  followed  by  an  ex- 
planation, or,  4th,  fire  on  till  a  severe  liit  is 
given. 

"5th.  a  blow  is  strictly  prohibited — no  ver- 
bal apology  will  atone  for  it.  The  offender  must, 
Ist,  hand  a  cane  to  the  injured  party,  to  be  used 
on  him  while  he  begs  pardon;  or,  fire  till  one  or 


819 


both  are  disabled;  or,  fire  three  shots,  and  then 
ask  pardon  without  the  cane. 

"6th.  If  A.  give  B.  the  lie,  and  B.  retorts  with 
a  blow — the  two  highest  offences — no  reconcilia- 
tion can  take  place  till  after  two  shots  have  been 
given,  or  a  severe  hit.  B.  may  beg  pardon  for 
the  blow,  and  A.  may  simply  explain  for  the  of- 
fence of  giving  the  lie. 

"7th.  Challenges  for  undivulged  causes  may 
be  reconciled  on  the  ground  after  one  shot.  No 
apology  can  be  received  in  any  case  after  parties 
have  taken  their  ground,  till  after  one  fire. 

"8th.  No  dumb  shooting,  or  firing  in  the  air, 
admissable  in  any  case. 

"9th.  All  imputations  of  cheating  at  play,  ra- 
ces, <fec.,  considered  equivalent  to  a  blow;  but 
may  be  reconciled  after  one  shot,  on  admitting 
the  falsehood,  and  begging  pardon  publicly. 

"10th.  Seconds  must  be  of  equal  grade  and 
rank  with  the  principals,  as  the  seconds  may  be- 
come principals. 

"11th.  When  seconds  disagree,  and  resolve  to 
exchange  shots,  it  must  be  done  at  the  same  time 
and  at  right  angles,  <fec.,  <fec.,  <fec." 

This  is  the  "code,"  though  I  do  not  know  that 
it  governs  the  duel  in  Kentucky. 

The  legislation  of  every  state  of  this  union,  up- 
on this  subject,  has  been  as  uniform  as  that  of 
the  rest  of  Christendom,  to  which  I  have  referred. 
It  is  true,  as  the  gentleman  says,  that  in  the 
vear  1799  there  was  a  law  enacted  against  duel- 
ing. That  law  was  followed  by  the  act  of  1812, 
and  if  gentlemen  will  refer  to  the  preamble  at- 
tached to  it,  they  will  perceive  that  it  was  writ- 
ten by  no  ordinary  man,  and  that  it  embraces 
■within  a  few  lines  as  strong  arguments  as  could 
be  deduced  and  elaborated  in  a  whole  day's 
speaking.     It  is  as  follows: 

"  Whereas,  the  commonwealth  have  repeated- 
ly sustained  great  and  irreparable  injury,  in  the 
loss  of  some  of  her  best  and  most  valuable  citi- 
zens ;  inroads  have  been  made  in  private  fami- 
lies; their  peace,  happiness,  and  domestic  felici- 
ty destroyed,  by  the  present  inhuman  practice  of 
duelling;  a  practice  contrary  to  the  precepts  of 
morality,  religion,  and  civil  obligation,  which 
originated  in  a  barbarous  age,  fostered  by  savage 
policy,  and  only  perpetuated  in  this  enlightened 
era  by  mistaken  iaeasof  honor;  for  remedy  where- 
of," &c. 

The  gentleman  (Mr.  Bullitt)  contends  that  this 
legislation  is  all  that  is  needed,  but  I  must  differ 
with  him.  It  is  true,  that  these  laws  have  exist- 
ed on  the  statute  book  from  the  very  foundation 
of  our  government,  down  to  the  present  time; 
but  there  has  been  a  shameless  and  shameful  vi- 
olation of  them  at  every  session  of  the  legisla- 
ture of  the  commonwealth.  If  there  is  a  class 
in  Kentucky,  who  more  than  any  other,  have 
called  on  the  legislature  to  adopt  provisions  for 
their  especial  use  and  benefit,  I  am  ready  to  ad- 
mit it  is  the  profession  to  which  I  have  the  hon- 
or to  belong — the  lawyers.  But  from  the  first 
time  that  I  had  the  honor  of  a  seat  in  the  legis- 
lature, I  always  opposed,  and  if  I  should  be  thus 
honored  hereafter,  1  shall  ever  oppose  this  spe- 
cial legislation  for  the  purpose  of  restoring  gen- 
tlemen to  privliges  which  they  have  forfeit- 
ed by  infractions  of  these  laws.  I  recollect  an 
instance,  where  one  of  my  particular  and  espe- 
cial friends,  personal  and  political,  who  had  j 


challenged  a  man  to  mortal  combat,  made  an  ap- 
plication of  this  kind  to  the  legislature,  and  I 
spoke  against,  and  calling  the  yeas  and  nays, 
voted  against  them,  and  they  were  not  granted. 
If  you  could  enforce  this  law  against  dueling, 
— if  you  could  in  some  way  inspirit  the  grand 
jurors  of  the  country  with  proper  ideas  of  the 
obligations  of  the  oaths  which  they  take,  and 
they  would  indict,  and  petit  jurors  could  be  in- 
duced to  convict  under  it,  there  would  be  no 
necessity  for  this  constitutional  provision.  And 
I  think  my  friend  from  Jefferson  introduced  a 
strange  argument  here  in  support  of  the  position 
which  he  occupies  on  this  question.  He  says 
that  if  we  have  good  jurors,  able  prosecuting  at- 
tornies,  and  independent  tribunals,  those  who 
commit  murder  will  be  punished,  and  at  the 
same  time  he  goes  on  to  declare,  that  for  certain 
indignities  offered  to  a  roan,  the  privilege  of  de- 
ciding the  matter  by  the  duel,  ought  to  be  al- 
lowed! I  cannot  see  the  consistency  of  such  an 
argument  at  all.  The  killing  of  a  man  in  a  duel 
is  the  most  deliberate,  and  the  most  malicious 
description  of  murder  of  which  I  can  conceive, 
and  every  man  who  thus  takes  the  life  of  his 
fellow  man,  deserves  to  be  hung,  and  if  I  had 
the  power  of  a  court,  I  would  have  no  more 
compunction  of  conscience  in  pronouncing  the 
sentence  of  the  law  upon  him,  than  I  would 
upon  a  dog.  And  the  gentleman's  idea  that 
dueling  is  a  saving  of  human  life,  strikes  me  as 
the  most  extraordinary   one  that  ever  I  heard 

Eramulgated.  It  is  in  fact,  an  argument  against 
imself.  I>ueling  has  been  practiced  in  this 
country  ever  since  its  earliest  settlement  not- 
withstanding the  laws  against  it,  and  does  experi- 
ence show  that  it  has  caused  a  saving  of  human 
life  in  the  way  the  gentleman  contemplates? 
He  states,  that  in  Louisville,  from  its  earliest 
times  down  to  the  present,  but  two  men  have 
been  killed  in  duels,  while  upwards  of  an  hun- 
dred have  been  killed  in  rencontres.  There- 
fore, this  practice  which  has  been  almost  un- 
checked, does  not,  as  he  contends  it  would,  pre- 
vent these  bloody  street  butcheries.  And  1  do 
not  think  with  the  gentleman,  that  we  must  bo 
cursed  with  one  or  the  other  of  these  alterna- 
tives— a  street  fight  or  a  duel.  I  think  that 
legislation  can  be  devised  which  will  suppress 
either  the  one  or  the  other  under  proper  consti- 
tutional direction,  and  oblige  men  to  resort  to 
some  other  means  of  settling  their  personal  con- 
toversies.  The  bill  that  I  introduced  when  in 
the  legislature,  and  which  became  a  law,  is  a 
sufficient  demonstration  of  the  facts,  that  with 
a  little  more  stringent  provisions  in  our  consti- 
tution and  laws,  there  never  will  be  a  duel  fought 
in  Kentucky. 

Duels  formerly  were  of  frequent  occurence  in 
this  state,  between  men  with  families,  dependent 
on  them,  but  since  the  adoption  of  that  which 
made  all  on  the  ground,  spectators  as  well  as 
participants,  responsible  to  the  wife  and  child- 
ren of  the  man  slain,  not  a  married  man  has 
been  engaged  in  a  duel.  It  is  too  great  a  risk 
for  his  antagonist  to  incur.  All  this  is  evidence 
of  what  may  be  effected  in  correction  of  this 
evil.  And  the  experience  in  Tennessee,  Louis- 
iana, Mississippi,  and  Alabama,  are  all  triumph- 
ant examples  of  the  fact,  that  men  can  be  restrain- 
ed in  this  matter,  by  constitutional  enactment, 


820 


without  those  direful  consequences  resulting 
therefrom,  which  seem  to  haunt  the  imagination 
of  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson.  If  dueling 
can  be  suppressed  in  those  states,  by  a  constitu- 
tional enactment,  I  ask  in  the  name  of  high  heav- 
en if  it  cannot  also  be  put  down  in  the  same 
manner  by  the  people  of  Kentucky  ?  The  con- 
stitution of  Louisiana  utterly  disqualifies  every 
man  concerned  in  a  duel,  from  the  principals 
down  to  the  spectators  assembled  to  witness  it, 
for  the  holding  of  office.  "VVliat  has  been  the 
result?  Not  a  duel  has  been  fouglit  by  the  citi- 
zens of  Louisiana,  since  the  adoption  of  that 
constitution.  Nor  have  those  direful  consequen- 
ces anticipated  by  the  gentleman,  resulted 
from  the  prohibition  of  the  duel  there.  Have 
we  heard  of  m<;a  being  slaugtered  in  public  ren- 
contre, or  of  private  assassinations  prevailing 
since  that  time,  to  an  unusual  extent  I  No  sir. 
And  I  will  say  to  the  gentleman,  that  in  my 
opinion,  the  man  who  at  any  time  would  be 
mean,  cowardly  and  dastardly  enough  to  assas- 
sinate his  enemy,  will  assassinate  and  stab  in 
the  dark,  with  or  without  such  a  provision  as  is 
here  proposed  in  the  constitution.  A  high  mind- 
ed, honarable  man,  no  matter  to  what  extent  his 
feelings  have  been  wounded  or  outraged,  would 
rather  submit  to  it,  any  indignity  to  which  he 
might  be  subjected  on  the  face  of  God  Almighty's 
earth,  than  to  have  it  charged  upon  him  with 
truth  that  he  attempted  secretly  and  cowardly  to 
assassinate  his  insulter.  For  myself,  I  would 
rather  be  charged  with  the  most  heinious  offence 
that  blackens  the  long  catalogue  of  sin,  than  to 
lie  under  the  imputation  of  having,  cowardly 
and  secretly  attacked  uiy  enemy  in  tlie  dark. 

And  shall  it  be  said  that  this  convention,  who 
have  noVr  in  their  hands,  the  power  to  cut  up 
this  evil,  by  tlie  very  roots,  has  not  the  moral 
courage  to  march  up  and  perform  this  work.  Will 
they  refuse  to  apply  the  knife  to  this  corroding 
ulcer  that  is  eating  into  the  very  vitals  of  the 
body  politic  ?  Will  they  not  at  once  arrest  this 
deep  and  deadly  poison  that  is  diffusing  itself 
through  every  vein  and  artery  of  the  social  sys- 
tem ?  Have  we  not,  I  ask,  the  moral  courage  to 
do  it,  and  ought  we  not  to  do  it  ?  Who  is  to  be 
injured  by  it  ?  It  is  time,  and  we  now  have  it 
in  ourpower  to  throw  a  bulwark  of  protection 
around  the  citizen,  which  ten  thousand  times 
ten  thousand  vollies  from  the  artillery  of  de- 
traction will  never  be  able  to  batter  down.  All 
that  the  good  and  virtuous  citizen,  the  friend  of 
peace  and  good  order  fears,  is  the  expression  of  a 
misguided  and  mislead  public  opinion,  and  I 
would  in  this  constitution  give  him  a  protection 
behind  which  he  might  entrench  himself,  fearless 
of  the  scorn,  sneers  and  detraction  of  any  man 
on  earth. 

I  would  like  to  know  from  the  advocates  of 
dueling  here,  what  is  gained  by  a  resort  to  that 
practice.  Let  us  take  Uie  case  stated  by  the  gen- 
tleman (Mr.  Bullitt.)  I  am  a  larger  man  uian 
he,  and  I  spit  upon  him  and  offer  such  an  offence 
to  his  sensitive  honor  that  satisfaction  only  can 
be  obtained  by  calling  me  into  the  field  to  fight 
him.  Suppose  he  calls  and  I  do  not  come?  Well, 
lie  would  nave  the  pleasure  of  posting  me  as  a 
coward;  yet  every  body  who  knows  me,  knows 
that  if  lie  would  do  that  he  would  post  liimself 
a  liar.    But  suppose  I  do  go,  and  fight  hlta,  and 


kill  him,  what  has  he  gained  by  it?    Or,  sup- 
pose he  kills  me;  what  has  he  gained  even  then? 
He  has  committed  a  murder  in  the  eyes  of  both 
God  and  man,  and  my  blood  will  cry  to  heaven 
againsthim,  but  he  has  not  acquitted  himself  of 
any  thing  or  convicted  me  of  any  thing.  I  know 
of  no  offence  a  man  can   offer  to   another,  for 
which,  if  he  is  an  honorable  man,  suitable  and 
ample  atonement  cannot  be   made.     The  elder 
gentleman  from  Nelson  (Mr.  Hardin)  may  say 
that  I  am  a  thief.     Well,  1  challenge  him  for  it, 
and  we  go  forth  and  fight.     I  think  I  would  dis- 
play but  little   sense  in  putting  myself  on  an 
equality  with  a  man  who   had  no  more  regard 
for  truth  than  to  make  such  a  charge  against  me. 
A  man  outrages  and   insults  your  (eelings  and 
you  challenge  him,  and  what  do  you  gain?    He 
nas  insulted   you  and  outraged  your  feelings, 
and  yet  you  turn  around   and  invite  him  out  to 
the  nem  and  give  him  an  equal  chance  to  kill 
you  in  the  bargain!     That  is  a  kind  of  philoso- 
phjc^  laying  aside  the    question   of   morality, 
which  I  confess   I  cannot  comprehend.     If  the 
result  of  a  duel  established  any  fact  or  proposi- 
tion, then  1  might  comprehend  the  grounds  upon 
which  gentlemen  support  the  practice.      I  know 
of  but  one  case  under  heaven,  and  that  is  the 
strongest  it  is  possible  to  imagine,  where  blood 
alone  could  atone  for  the  injury.     A  man  insults 
the  wife  and  daughter  of  another,  and  will  gen- 
tlemen say  that  in  such  a  case  a  challenge  ought 
to  be  given?  My  God,  can  it  be  that  public  opin- 
ion will  exact  of  me  that  I  shall  place  myself  on 
a  perfect  equality  with  a  demon  in  human  shape, 
who  could  be  so  base  and  dastardly  as  to  inflict 
an  injury  upon  tlie  feelings  of  a  woman?    A 
man  has  attempted  to  rob  you  of  all  that  is  dear 
and  sacred  in  human  life,  and   in  the  next  mo- 
ment you  are  to  call  him  out  and  give  him  a 
chance  to  kill  you!     It  cannot  be — the  proposi- 
tion is  too  outrageous.     The  only  way  I  would 
treat  such  a  being  as  that,  would  be  to  meet  him 
with  a  gun,  and  shoot  him  down,  with  no  more 
compunction  of  conscience  than   if  he  was  the 
fiercest  wild  beast  that  ever  inhabited  a  forest. 
And  I  would  fearlessly  rest  upon  a  statement  of 
facts  and  appeal  to  the  people   of  the  country 
and  to  the  pardoning  power  to  save  me  from 
degradation  for  that  act,  fori  know  that  such  an 
appeal  would  not  be  in  vain. 

I  say,  then,  that  it  is  our  bounden  duty  to  pro- 
vide in  our  organic  law,  that  any  man  who  fights 
or  is  accessory  in  any  way  to  a  duel,  shall  be 
disfranchised  from  the  holding  of  any  office  of 
profit  and  trust  under  tliis  commonwealth.  I 
can  see  no  danger  that  will  result  from  it.  I 
know  that  many  high  minded,  honorable  men 
differ  with  me  on  this  subject,  but  I  cannot  but 
think  that  if  tliey  will  recur  to  their  recollection 
from  the  earliest  period  to  the  present  time,  of 
the  melancholy  consequences  that  have  result- 
ed from  these  encounters,  they  will  not  hesi- 
tate to  place  a  barrier  in  this  constitution  that 
will  operate  to  prevent  any  such  occurrence  in 
future.  Sir,  very  frequently  has  the  cup  of  con- 
nubial bliss  been  turned  to  gall  and  wormwood 
— the  parents  been  robbed  of  an  estimable  and 

Sromising  son — and  wife  widowed  and  the  chil- 
ren  orphaned  and  tiirown  on  the  cold  charities 
of  the  world — by  tlie  result  of  a  duel.  And  I 
have  known  even  the  virgin  heart  widowed  by 


621 


this  barbarous  and  cniel  practice.  It  is  in  many 
instances,  in  its  results,  like  running  a  red  hot 
plough  share  over  the  human  soul.  It  is  a  prac- 
tice which  had  it«  origin  in  barbarism,  and  in  a 
christian  country  like  this,  should  be  detested 
and  abhorred.  "Let  us  provide  for  its  expulsion 
from  among  us  in  this  constitution,  by  giving 
tone  and  protection  to  a  sound,  and  wise,  and 
christian  public  sentiment  on  the  subject.  That 
is  all  that  is  now  needed,  and  that  is  all  I  desire. 
My  only  desire  is  to  act  for  the  best  interests 
of  tlie  people  of  Kentucky,  and  the  only  reward 
I  look  to  is  the  good  opinion  of  ray  coadjutors 
here,  and  the  commendation  of  that  people. 
Above  all  things  on  earth  do  I  despise  the  ful- 
some adulation  of  the  man,  who  like  a  whining, 
sneaking  spaniel-pup,  crouches  before  me,  hoping 
that  I  may  ca'^t  him  some  vagrant  crumbs;  or  the 
ephemeral  praise  of  some  vulgar,  dirty  black- 
guard, who  is  prompted  only  by  a  fear  that  I 
may  injure  him.  And  if  I  have  the  esteem  of 
my  compeers  in  this  body,  I  shall  be  satisfied, 
notwithstanding  the  slanders  and  traductions 
that  may  be  heaped  upon  me  by  every  little 
whipper-snapper  who  is  so  fortunate  or  unfor- 
tunate as  to  be  the  conductor  of  some  vile 
thumb-paper.  I  have  come  in  with  other  gen- 
tlemen of  this  convention,  for  a  full  share  of  the 
vile  abuse  and  the  mean  and  dirty  calumny 
which  sundry  little  dirty  pups,  who  have  come 
into  this  lobtly  during  the  session,  have  thought 
proper  to  vent  upon  us  in  their  correspondence 
to  certain  newspapers.  I  can  live  down  such 
calumny,  or  else  I  have  lived  to  no  purpose.  If 
I  cannot  live  it  down,  I  am  not  worthy  of  a  seat 
on  this  floor.  And  these  attacks  excite  in  me  no 
other  emotions  than  those  of  mirth.  The  high- 
est reward  I  seek,  is  that  when  the  impartial  his- 
torian comes  to  give  a  full  and  fair  account  of  the 
action  of  this  body,  it  shall  appear  that  I  bore 
some  humble  part  in  bringing  about  this  grand 
and  glorious  revolution  on  this  great  question. 
And  rather  would  I  prefer  that  when  I  am  borne 
to  my  final  resting  place,  a  loving  family  and 
circle  of  friends  and  neighbors  shall  cluster 
around  it,  to  drop  a  tear  to  my  memory,  than 
all  the  fulsome  praise  that  can  now  be  spread 
upon  me. 

I  do  hope  that  the  action  of  this  convention 
on  this  great  question,  will  be  proper,  wise  and 
just,  and  if  I  were  a  righteous  man,  and  it  would 
not  be  mockery  for  me  to  do  it,  I  would  implore 
kind  heaven  to  so  guide  the  deliberations  of  this 
convention  upon  it,  as  to  advance  the  happi- 
ness and  prosperity  of  our  noble  old  common- 
wealth. 

Mr.  CURD  moved  the  previous  question,  but 
it  was  not  sustained. 

The  question  was  then  taken  by  yeas  and 
nays — on  the  call  of  Mr.  WALLER^-on  the  mo- 
tion to  strike  out,  and  it  was  negatived — yeas 
32,  nays  56,  as  follows: 

YsjiS — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett  Davis,  JamesDudley, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan Gaither,  William  Hendri'x, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson.  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, William  C.  Marshall,William D.Mitchell, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Is'esbitt,  William 


Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  John 

D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett, 
Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  X.  Wickliffe.— 32. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Luther 
Brawner,  Charles  Chambers,  James  S.  Chrismau, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henrj-  R.  D.  Coleman,  William 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Chasteeu 
T.  Duuavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  El- 
liott, Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian 

E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Maclien, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Richard  L.Mayes,  Xathan 
McClure,  Jonathan  Newcum,Hugh  Newell,  Eli- 
jah F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbolt,  Wm.  R.  Thompson, 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
John  Wheeler,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Wood- 
son— 56. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  to  amend  .so  as 
to  include  all  members  of  the  bar  within  the 
operation  of  the  provisions  of  the  section. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  hope  the  amendment  will 
be  accepted  by  the  friends  of  the  section.  It  is 
right  and  proper,  and  its  only  object  is  to  in- 
clude the  young  men  of  the  legal  profession. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  moved  to  amend,  so  as  to  re- 
quire all  officers  to  take  the  oath  to  support  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  as  well  as  the 
state. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved  to  extend  the 
prohibition  to  cases  where  an  individual  had 
worn  any  concealed  deadly  weapon  except  for 
self-defence. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  hope  this  amendment  will 
not  be  adopted,  and  I  think  it  is  offered  by  a 
gentleman  who  is  not  very  friendly  to  the  sec- 
tion. Those,  therefore,  iu  favor  of  attempting 
to  put  down  dueling,  ought  to  vote  against  the 
amendment.  I  will  not  say  that  tlie  gentleman 
is  opposed  to  the  section,  but  if  I  may  be  allow- 
ed to  guess,  it  would  be  that  he  is  not  very 
friendly  to  it. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  have  no  hesitation 
in  stating  that  I  am  directly  against  the  section 
as  it  now  stands.  If  the  amendment  I  have 
propo.sed  should  be  adopted,  1  do  not  know  that 
even  then  I  should  be  in  favor  of  the  section, 
but  I  should  be  strongly  in  favor  of  such  a  law, 
I  think  it  is  peculiarly  unfortunate  that  tliis  sec- 
tion is  proposed  to  be  introduced  into  the  con- 
stitution at  all,  as  it  places  members  in  an  ex- 
ceedingly embarrassing  position.  There  are  ma- 
ny of  us  who  not  only  are  not  favorable  to  duels, 
but  desire  to  prevent  and  to  stop  them,  and  yet 
we  do  not  believe  this  to  be  the  proper  way  to 
do  it.  Nor  do  we  believe  that  the  penalty  affix- 
ed to  the  act  of  giving,  sending,  or  bearing  a 
challenge,  is  approximated  at  all  to  the  degree  of 
the  offence.  There  are  other  offences  known  to 
the  laws  infinitely  worse  than  bearing  a  chal- 


^ 


lenge — ^than  giving  and  acceptingachallenge,  or 
than  fighting  a  duel  even,  which  gentlemen  do 
not  pretend  to  provide  for  in  this  constitution,  by 
disfranchising  the  persons  who  shall  be  guilty  of 
them.  What  would  be  thought  of  a  proposition 
in  this  constitution  to  disfranchise  any  man  who 
should  be  convicted  of  seduction — a  crime,  in 
my  estimation,  infinitely  worse  than  a  duel? 
The  punishment  is  not  proportioned  to  the  of- 
fence, and  it  is  the  wrong  place  to  apply  the 
remedy.  And  it  is  extremely  unjust,  unkind, 
and  uncandid  in  the  gentleman  from  Henry, 
(Mr.  Nuttall,)  to  place  all  those  opposed  to  the 
enactment  of  this  section  in  the  constitution  as 
being  in  favor  of  dueling.  I  am  as  much  op- 
posed to  dueling  as  any  man  ought  to  be.  I 
nave  never  fought  a  duel,  nor  do  I  know  that  I 
ever  shall;  but  I  will  go  so  far  as  to  say  that 
there  are  circumstances  and  conditions  in  which 
a  man  might  be  placed  where  he  ought  to  fight. 
And  in  such  a  case  it  would  require  some  strong- 
er inducement  or  restriction  than  this  section  to 
restrain  a  man  from  giving  or  sending  a  chal- 
lenge. 

The  gentleman  has  drawn  a  mournful  pic- 
ture of  the  evils  which  bave  been  brought 
upon  families  by  this  practice — of  widowed 
wives,  children  bereft  of  fathers,  sisters  of  broth- 
ers, and  lovers  weeping  over  their  loss;  and  this 
section  he  intends  as  a  remedy  for  all  these  evils, 
and  to  dry  tip  this  fountain  of  tears.  I  would 
be  glad  to  wipe  the  tears  from  all  eyes,  and  to 
stop  and  stay  the  march  of  crime  in  this  land  of 
ours,  but  I  ask  gentlemen  which  has  produced 
most  misery  and  mourning  in  Kentucky,  the 
duel  or  the  bowie  knife?  Which,  I  ask,  has 
shed  most  blood,  the  fair  and  open  combat  or 
the  knife  of  the  assassin?  I  do' believe  from  my 
heart,  that  if  we  insert  in  our  constitution  a 
clause  such  as  this,  we  shall  compel  men  to  re- 
sort to  some  other  means  of  redressing  grievan- 
ces tlian  the  duel — the  knife  for  instance.  And 
despite  all  the  eloquence  of  the  gentleman,  he 
knows  that  there  are  aggressions  that  may  be 
committed  on  him  or  me  for  which  the  life  of 
the  aggressor  alone  could  atone.  The  world 
could  not  hold  us  both.  What  is  best  to  be  done 
in  such  a  case?  If  we  stop  the  duel,  and  in- 
sults of  this  kind  are  offered — and  we  have  it 
from  tlie  lips  of  Him  who  "spake  as  never  man 
spake" — ^tbat  "[offences  will  come" — sonacthing 
must  be  done  at  once  to  check  the  other  mode  oil 
avenging  grievances — that  of  street  fighting  or 
assassination.  Now,  if  gentlemen  want  to  cor- 
rect the  public  morals,  and  to  stop  the  flow  «)f 
human  bloo<l,if  they  seek  to  dry  np  the  tears  of 
the  widow  and  the  orphan,  and  if  indeed  they 
desire  to  surround  the  citizen  with  a  panoply 
■which  will  be  a  guard  against  the  knife  of  the 
assassin  as  well  as  the  Dullet  of  the  duelist,  I 
beg  of  them  to  insert  this  clause  of  mine  in  the 
canstitution.  I  shall  vote  formy  amendment  sir, 
and  hope  it  will  be  adopted,  out  I  shall  vote 
afjainst  the  section  in  any  event,  believing  it  to 
be  wrong  to  incorporate  it  in  the  constitution, 
and  that  it  must  make,  necessarily,  hundreds  of 
enemies  to  it,  and  because  the  punishment  there 
laid  down  as  falling  upon  that  kind  of  offence 
•with  certainty,  will  not  be  considered  by  the 
people  of  this  country  as  just  and  fair  anci  pro- 
portionate to  the  oflFence  itself. 


Mr.  PRESTON".  Is  it  in  order  to  offer  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  section. 

The  PRESIDENT.    It  is  not  in  order. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  Then  I  will  offer  it  when  it 
will  be  in  order.  It  is  with  some  degree  of  pain 
that  I  have  witnessed  the  vote  upon  this  subject, 
and  I  intend,  as  soon  as  the  pending  amendment 
is  acted  upon,  to  offer  an  amendment  providing 
that  the  legislature  may  take  this  subject,  which 
is  one  that  should  be  regulated  by  legislation, 
under  their  control.  I  deem  it  most  unwise  for 
us  here,  to  place  the  citizen  in  such  a  situation, 
that  in  the  instances  alluded  to  by  the  gentle- 
men from  Jessamine  and  Jefferson,  (Messrs.  A. 
K.  Marshall  and  Bullitt,)  he  will  be  compelled 
to  take  such  an  oath  before  he  can  go  into  office 
under  this  constitution.  I  am  no  advocate  of 
the  duel,  but  it  seems  to  mc  we  are  seeking  to 
apply  a  remedy  against  it  that  will  outrage  hu- 
man nature.  What  is  the  proposition  here?  It 
is  to  incorporate  in  the  organic  law  of  the  state, 
what  the  public  sense  of  justice,  of  clemency, 
and  of  rights,  has  never  permitted  to  rest  in  qui- 
et on  the  statute  book.  Year  after  year  have 
you  seen  your  legislatures  covering  the  statute 
Dook  with  evidences  that  the  laws  on  the  subject 
of  dueling  imposed  penalties  which  the  pub- 
lic opinion  of  our  people  could  not  tolerate. 
And  yet  it  is  here  proposed  to  incorporate  those 
laws  in  the  face  of  that  public  sentiment  in  the 
organic  law!  I  have  now  lived  thirty  two  years. 
Many  of  my  friends  and  the  companions  of  ray 
boyhood  have  grown  up  with  me,  and  many  of 
them  were  men  possessing  erroneous  principles 
with  regard  to  the  taking  of  human  life,  and  the 
revenge  of  insults.  In  that  time  some  twelve 
or  fourteen  have  perished  in  violent  affrays 
in  the  streets,  and  I  have  never  known  but 
one  who  fell  in  fair  and  honorable  duel.  And 
why  is  this?  It  is  because  a  thousand  opportu- 
nities exist  of  effecting  a  reconciliation  between 
parties  where  a  challenge  has  passed  and  a  duel 
IS  proposed,  and  the  difficulty  by  the  interfer- 
ence of  friends  may  be  adjusted;  but  in  the  mur- 
derous street  fight  the  parties  excited  with  pas- 
sion, heed  no  one,',  and  arming  themselves,  go 
forth  in  the  thoroughfares  and  the  by-ways,  and 
there  in  a  bloody  affray,  to  the  terror  of  every 
passer-by,  settle  their  quarrel  with  the  knife  and 
the  pistol.  That  is  the  way  in  which  it  is  done. 
It  is  murder  stalking  abroad.  By  that  section 
in  effect,  it  is  said  that  all  this  is  right  and  prop- 
er, for  human  passions  will  have  vent;  but  if  it 
is  a  duel,  the  participants  shall  be  disfranchised. 
Opportunity  being  thus  denied  for  the  honorable 
adjustment  of  difficulties,  men  are  to  be  driven 
to  resort  to  street  fighting!  How  many  are  they 
in  this  liall  who  have  had  friends  perish  in  fair 
and  open  duel?  Few,  very  few.  But  let  me 
ask,  now  many  of  your  friends  have  been 
butchered  by  the  knife  of  the  assassin?  Are  we 
then  to  be  reduced  to  this  system  of  ruffianibm. 
Are  we  sir,  in  a  spirit  of  false  humanity,  to 
drive  the  torrent  of  human  passion  into  a  foul, 
instead  of  a  fair  and  honorable,  though  repre- 
hensible channel?  I  can  never  consent  to  do  it 
sir.  If  the  wife  of  a  man's  bosom  is  taken  from 
him  and  carried  by  a  seducer  to  a  foreign  land, 
if  his  domesitc  hearth  is  thus  polluted,  it  is  a 
crime  so  far  beyond  that  which  the  duelist  has 
committed,  that  it    will  justify  no  parallel,  ana 


endure  no  comparison.  But  what  would  be  said 
if  we,  the  lawgivers  of  the  land,  should  here  de- 
clare that  the  adulterer  should  be  disfranchised? 
And  are  we  then  to  place  the  men  of  honor,  who 
carry  or  accept  a  challenge,  the  various  great 
aud  distinguished  men  of  this  country  who  have 
given  and  acoepted  challenges — the  Clays,  the 
Jacksons  and  the  Rowans — upon  a  footing  be- 
neath that  of  the  vilest  felon  who  inhabits  the 
penitentiary?  Thev  may  be  pardoned  by  an  ex- 
ercise of  the  executive  clemency,  and  restored  to 
the  rights  of  freemen.  With  this  provision  in 
the  constitution  you  declare  it  to  be  out  of  the 
executive  power  to  restore  to  his  rights  the  dis- 
franchised gentleman  who  has  carried  a  chal- 
lenge or  fought  a  duel.  The  vile  wretch  who 
murders  for  hire,  may  be  pardoned  aud  restored 
to  his  civil  riglits,  but  he  who  meets  his  ad- 
versary fairly  aud  openly  in  the  field,  it  may  be, 
through  a  mistaken  sense  of  honor,  is  to  be  ex- 
cluded forever  from  all  claims  for  mercy.  Be- 
hold your  fine  speeches  about  mercy  and 
executive  clemency;  and  yet  if  a  man,  influ- 
enced by  a  keen  sense  of  honor,  meets  his 
adversary  face  to  face,  and  scorns  the  use  of  the 
bowie  knife  and  concealed  weapons,  where  do 
you  place  him?  Down  below  the  adulterer, 
down  below  the  seducer,  down  below  the  mur- 
derer, and  down  below  the  vilest  felon  in  your 
Erison.  I  tell  vou  the  feelings  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky  wilf  not  tolerate  this  most  extraordi- 
nary injustice.  They  have  not  tolerated  it  to  this 
extent  in  other  states,  and  will  not  in  Ken- 
tucky. 

I  have  never  in  my  life  given  a  vote  with  more 
cheerfulness  than  that  to-day,  to  prohibit  the 
bearing  of  concealed  weapons.  But  if  combats 
take  place  in  this  state — aud  they  are  as  certain 
to  occur  as  any  other  violations  of  law,  arising 
from  misdirected  and  ungovernable  passions — 
let  us  induce  them  to  be  of  a  character  where  op- 
portunities of  reconciliation  may  be  afforded — 
where  difl5culties  may  be  adjusted,  and  in  which 
the  great  and  magnanimous  character  of  the 
people  of  my  native  state  will  not  be  reduced 
to  the  ruffianism  of  the  worst  portions  of  the 
south.  Preserve  and  guard  us  from  the  bloody 
rencontres  which  have  occurred  during  the  last 
summer.  The  same  feeling  which  prompts  a 
man  to  the  duel,  has — as  is  often  the  case  with 
other  misdirected  feelings — given  birth  to  the 
noblest  sentiments  that  elevate  and  adorn  the 
human  character.  It  is  that  feeling,  in  a  great  de- 
gree, which  has  ever  given  dignity,  strength,  and 
manhood  to  our  delegations  in  congress,  and 
made  our  people  among  the  most  gallant  and 
chivalric  of  the  soldiers  ever  engaged  in  the  bat- 
tles of  our  country.  Venerable  age  may  tell  me 
that  I  am  in  favor  of  instituting  a  bloody  code, 
but  I  deny  it.  I  only  desire  to  fall  back  upon 
it,  because  it  is  the  least  of  two  evils,  which  the 
experience  of  the  past,  fraught  with  wisdom, 
has  demonstrated.  I  have  never  borne  a  chal- 
lenge in  my  life — I  have  ever  refused  to  do  so, 
and  I  have  often  attempted,  and  on  some  occa- 
sions with  success,  to  reconcile  differences.  The 
very  procrastination  incident  to  the  aiTangement 
of  a  duel,  gives  an  opportunity  for  its  adjust- 
ment, which  is  never  obtained  under  the  ruffian- 
ly practice  of  street  fighting.  And  this  is  the 
main  reason  why  I  protest  against  the  introduc- 


tion of  such  a  feature  as  this  in  our  constitution. 
If  I  speak  on  this  occasion  with  warmth,  it  is 
because  I  feel  that  I  speak  honestly  and  sincere- 
ly; not  that  I  ever  expect  to  claim  the  benefit  of 
tliis  bloody  code,  for  I  abhor  it.  But  why  should 
we  especially  seek  to  place  the  man  who  com- 
mits a  crime  of  this  character,  utterly  without 
the  pale  of  mercy?  Why  not  leave  the  matter 
to  the  regulation  of  the  legislature,  the  sove- 
reign representatives  of  the  people,  who  may  as- 
semble hereafter?  Suppose  this  provision  had 
existed  in  our  constitution  at  the  time  the  states- 
man of  "Ashland"  engaged  in  a  duel  with 
Humphrey  Marshall,  or  when  he  of  Tennessee 
was  similarly  engaged,  would  not  the  country 
have  been  deprived  of  those  great  services  and 
talents,  the  high  character  of  which  is  conceded 
by  all,  however  opposed  to  them?  Either  this 
would  have  been  the  case,  or  else  they  would 
have  resorted  to  the  barbarous  alternative  of  the 
street  duel. 

But  the  sense  of  justice  of  the  people  would 
have  torn  such  a  provision  from  the  constitution, 
rather  than  to  have  suffered  such  men  to  be  dis- 
franchised and  degraded,  and  deprived  of  all 
the  honors  of  the  state,  for  all  time  to  come.  I 
am  willing  to  let  the  duelist  remain — so  far  as 
regards  the  operation  of  the  law — in  the  same  po- 
sition with  the  seducer  and  the  culprit,  stained 
with  all  the  oflFences  that  blacken  the  catalogue 
of  human  crime — I  am  willing  to  leave  his 
transgression  subject,  like  others,  to  the  control 
of  the  legislature;  but  never  put  such  a  feature 
as  this  in  the  constitution.  Do  it,  and  the  re- 
sult will  be  like  the  laws  of  Massachusetts, 
which,  instituted  by  the  pilgrims,  after  the  Mo- 
saic code,  punished  fornication  and  adultery 
with  death — it  will  never  be  carried  out.  They 
were  too  rigid  for  the  frailties  of  erring  human 
nature,  and  experience  has  demonstrated  the  fu- 
tility of  laws  so  tyrannical  that  mankind  will 
not  execute  them.  Take  the  law  against  duel- 
ing now  on  the  statute  book,  and  you  will  find 
that  year  after  year,  in  obedience  to  the  sense  of 
justice  and  mercy  pervading  the  people,  the  le- 
gislature has  exempted  individuals  from  their 
penalties,  until  the  law  itself  has  almost  been 
virtually  repealed.  Why  then  is  it  now  sought 
to  incorporate  its  provisions  in  the  constitution? 
Do  you  expect  in  this  way  to  compel  or  repress 
public  sentiment  in  Kentucky?  Shall  we  put 
that  in  the  constitution  which  the  people  will 
not  permit  to  remain  on  the  statute  bookV  That 
is  the  point,  and  the  true  point.  Here  is  what  I 
intend  to  offer  and  to  stand  by,  and  what  I  hope 
the  convention  will  accept : 

"  The  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to 
pass  laws  for  the  suppression  of  dueling,  and 
for  excluding  from  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  eli- 
gibility to  all  offices  of  honor  or  profit  under 
this  commonwealth,  all  persons  who  may  here- 
after be  engaged  in  duels." 

This  is  what  I  desire  to  have  done.  I  desire 
that  gentlemen,  and  particularly  the  challenged 
party  in  a  difficulty  of  this  kintl,  shall  be  with- 
in the  reach  of  executive  clemency,  and  not  be 
placed  on  a  worse  footing  than  the  murderer,  the 
adulterer,  and  the  common  felon.  Adopt  this 
provision  in  your  constitution,  and  not  only  will 
this  be  the  result;  but  you  exclude  and  forever 
disfranchise    distinguished    and  talented  inuni- 


824' 


grants  from  other  states  and  other  lands,  who 
might  have  been  engaged  in  affairs  of  this  kind, 
and  who  might  desire  to  settle  in  your  state. 
You  declare  to  them,  that  they  shall  forever  be 
excluded  from  all  stations  of  honor  and  emolu- 
ment in  this  state.  Should  the  heroic  and  cou- 
rageous Kossuth  himself,  he  who  stands  in  the 
front  rank  of  the  advocates  and  defenders  of  hu- 
man freedom,  and  who  would  be  an  acquisition 
of  which  any  country  might  be  proud — proscrib- 
ed and  driven  from  his  crushed  and  bleeding 
country — seek  a  refuge  in  Kentucky,  it  would 
in  effect  debar  him,  had  he,  under  the  sen- 
timents of  honor  which  prevail  in  his  land,  par- 
ticipated in  a  duel.  He  would,  under  this  sec- 
tion, forever  be  deprived  of  the  privilege  of  every 
American  citizen — that  of  eligibility  to  office. 
Away,  then  with  such  a  principle.  I  tell  you 
it  is  wrong.  I  feel  that  it  is  wrong,  and  when  I 
feel  so,  I  know  that  I  can  denounce  it.  My  sense 
of  justice  has  never  been  so  outraged  by  any 
actof  this  convention,  as  by  this  proposition  to 
put  forever  under  the  ban  of  constitutional  dis- 
qualification— without  the  pale  of  repentance — 
tne  hope  of  reprieve,  or  the  power  of  par- 
don, every  unfortunate  gentleman  who  has  been 
forced  into  an  affair  of  honor. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  was  very  much  in  hopes 
that  the  session  would  draw  to  a  close  in  the 
course  of  eightor  ten  days,  and  have  not  been  dis- 
posed to  trouble  the  convention  with  more  than 
a  word  or  two  on  a  subject  at  a  time.  But  to- 
day the  debating  has  taken  a  new  turn  to  my 
mind,  and  every  gentleman  who  makes  a  speech 
puts  me  in  mind  of  the  boy  who  had  a  large 
piece  of  bread,  and  a  small  bit  of  butter;  so  anx- 
ious was  he  to  have  t)read  and  butter,  he  spread 
his  butter  over  his  bread  so  thin,  he  could'nt 
taste  the  butter  at  all.  So  with  the  speeches, 
they  are  so  extended  they  lose  their  whole  force. 

The  act  of  the  assembly  of  1811  on  dueling, 
was  drawn  up  by  myself,  and  carried  through 
the  house  of  representatives  by  the  aid  of  a  gen- 
tleman one  year  younger  than  myself,  Mr.  Solo- 
mon Sharpe,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  eloquent 
men  ever  bom  and  raised  in  Kentucky.  And 
with  the  exception  of  a  single  verbal  error  in  the 
printing — "have"  for  "has" — it  now  reads  pre- 
cisely as  it  was  drawn.  I  thought  then,  and  I 
still  think  it  to  be  a  most  excellent  law.  We 
had,  sir,  ever  since  Great  Britain  and  France 
advanced  a  step  beyond  barbarism,  and  in  this 
country  ever  since  its  foundation,  the  severest 
possible  laws  against  dueling.  In  the  course  of 
my  reading  as  to  the  history  of  mankind,  I  have 
turned  my  attention  some  little  to  this  subject, 
and  sir,  from  the  days  of  Nimrod,  the  mighty 
hunter  of  Babylon,  down  to  about  three  hun- 
dred years  ago,  I  have  not  found  a  single  in- 
stance where  a  private,  personal  quarrel  was  set- 
tled by  a  duel.  In  every  case  where  there  were 
personal  combats,  they  were  for  public  and  not 
privat«  considerations.  The  private  combats 
oefore  the  walls  of  Troy,  and  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem, were  fought  by  men  in  each  of  the  armies 
opposed  to  each  other,  and  in  behalf  of  each 
army.  Such  was  the  character  of  the  case  refer- 
red to  by  the  gentleman  (Mr.  Nuttall)  between 
the  thrie  brothers  of  the  Horatii  and  the  Curia- 
tii.  There  the  fate  of  tlie  battle,  it  was  agreed, 
should  turn  upon  their  Buccess.     Tliere  is  no 


instance  of  the  modem  duel  presented  until 
we  come  down  to  time  when  Francis  I,  of 
France  gave  the  challenge  to  Charles  V,  king  of 
Spain  and  Emperor  of  German}-.  There  the 
practice  took  its  origin,  and  it  has  been  in  exist- 
ence ever  since.  And  Avhy  is  it?  Because  there 
is  a  notion,  a  ridiculous  kind  of  opinion  going 
abroad,  invisible,  intangible,  and  which  no  man 
can  touch,  called  the  code  of  honor,  which  com- 
pels a  man  to  fight  in  certain  cases.  Thus  :  do 
you  want  to  kill  me?  No.  Do  I  want  to  kill 
you?  No.  But  there  is  some  imaginary  insult, 
— some  supposed  injury,  and  some  sickly  sen- 
sibility feels  itself  insulted,  and  asks  for  an  ex- 
planation. The  man  who  is  asked  is  a  little  too 
proud  to  give  it,  and  the  parties  correspond  a 
while,  and  finally  fight — and  all  about  nothing. 
In  a  case  where  a  real  insult  is  offered,  and  a 
man  gives  another  the  lie,  it  ends  generally 
in  a  fist  fight,|and  there  is  an  end  of  it.  If  it  is  an 
outrageous  insult,  such  as  seducing  a  man's 
wife,  or  his  daughter,  the  offender  is  generally 
shot  down  at  once,  and  he  is  served  pretty  near 
right  in  having  the  thing  administered  to  him 
in  that  way.  It  is  only  for  small,  imaginary  and 
idle  insults  that  men  fight  duels. 

But  says  one  gentleman,  we  must  have  a  pro- 
vision ag.ainst  the  carrying  of  concealed  wea- 
pons if  we  desire  to  guard  against  this  terrible 
sheding  of  human  blood.  I  should  have  no  ob- 
jection to  that  if  it  were  possible  to  carry  it  fair- 
ly out,  but  we  all  know  how  indefinite  such  a 
provision  would  be.  Here  is  a  miserable  old 
penknife  that  I  carry,  and  it  is  a  weapon. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  Deadly  weapons 
are  referred  to. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  It  would  be  a  deadly  weapon 
if  used  as  Jesse  Swearengin  did  once  an  old  pen- 
knife upon  Mr.  Gentry.  He  struck  him  with  it 
in  the  breast,  and  it  just  touched  his  heart,  and 
killed  him  instantly.  But  there  is  no  need  to 
make  the  carrying  of  concealed  weapons  a  test 
of  office,  because  the  very  conviction  of  a  man 
for  such  an  offence,  would  be  punishment  enough 
to  deter  him.  But  if  you  arraign  the  duelist 
for  his  offence,  where  will  you  try  him  ?  We  all 
know  what  public  sentiment  is  on  such  a  sub- 
ject. Have  you  ever  heard  of  a  man  in  Ken- 
tucky, being  convicted  of  killing  another  in  a 
duel  ?  No  sir,  and  why  ?  Because  the  public 
sentiment — though  in  the  teeth  of  the  law — will 
not  convict  a  man  for  that  crime.  The  statute  of 
1811,  for  eightor  ten  years  after  its  passage,  did 
a  great  deal  of  good,  but  after  the  legislature  got 
into  the  practice  of  relieving  them  from  the  ef- 
fect of  its  operation,  and  during  the  last  five 
and  twenty  years,  I  think  I  hazard  nothing  in 
asserting  that  every  year  has  witnessed  the  ad- 
dition to  the  statute  book  of  a  relief  law  of  this 
kind.  And  instead  of  requiring  the  oath  to  go 
back  to  the  passage  of  the  law,  the  oath  only  goes 
back  to  a  certain  day  in  the  last  session  of  the 
legislature. 

What  I  desire  is,  that  there  shall  be  created  a 
sufficient  apology  to  public  opinion  for  tin?  man 
who  Avill  neither  give  nor  accept  a  challenge. 
No  man  wants  to  hazard  his  life  or  jeopardise 
that  of  another,  or  to  give  a  challenge,  or  to  ac- 
cept one — but  he  makes  the  sacrifice  in  obedi- 
ence to  a  false  notion  of  honor.  All  I  desire  is, 
then  to  furnish  an  apology  to  public  opinion  for  a 


m 


inaa's  refusing  to  be  bound  by  this  false  notion  of 
honor.  But,  says  the  gentleman,  if  you  do  not  al-  . 
low  challenging,  you  will  have  street  murders. 
Do  we  not  hearof  them  being  committed  now  all 
over  the  country  ?  And  who  are  the  perpetra- 
tors of  them?  Why,  by  the  young  Hotspurs  of , 
the  land.  This  provision  is  not  now  in  the  con- ; 
Btitution,  why  do  they  not  resort  to  the  duel  in 
these  cases.  'Just  because  it  suits  them  better 
to  kill  without  a  duel  than  with  it.  The^  be- 
come excited,  and  under  the  hope  and  confident 
belief  of  being  cleared  from  the  consequences 
through  the  influence  of  their  own  family  and 
powerful  friends,  they  are  tempted  to  commit 
the  crime.  I  could  name  to  you  as  having  oc- 
curred in  the  last  ten  years,  some  of  the  most 
flagrant  and  atrocious  murders  where  the  parties  j 
could  have  fought  it  out  in  a  duel.  But  there 
is  a  desire  in  the  country  on  the  part  of  a  great 
many  men,  to  indulge  their  violent  and  angry 
passions  because  it  gives  them  a  reputation  of 
Deing  brave  men. 

Sir,  there  are  a  great  many  men  who  are  skil- 
led in  the  use  of  weapons,  and  are  ready  to  show 
their  bravery  by  fighting  and  killing  you,  that 
would  not  storm  a  battery  as  quick  as  you,  if 
they  were  at  the  head  of  an  army.    They  practice 
themselves  in  the  use  of  weapons — some  with  the 
small  sword  and  others  with  pistols; — until  they 
become  exceedingly  expert  and  they  are  able  to 
come  on  the  ground  with  a  confidence  in  their 
superior  skill  that  unnerves  their  antagonist  and 
gives   them  additional   nerve.     Xor  are  these 
combats  on   an  equal  footing  in  other  respects.  \ 
Here  is  a  young  gentleman  with  no  wife  and  " 
family,  to  whose  reckless  feelings  life  is  nothing,  j 
and  he  is  rea<iy  enough  to  fight.  Another  young  j 
man  of  five   and  twenty  has  a  wife  and  fam-  | 
ily  of  four  or  five  little  children  so  near  an  age  i 
that  you  can  hardly  tell  which  is  the  oldest,  and  i 
all  dependent  upon  his  daily  exertions  for  their  | 
bread.     The   ri-k  therefore  is   all  on  his  side.  | 
One  of  Alexander  the  Great's  successors  called  | 
Antigonus,  noticed  among  his  soldiers  one  who  i 
was  conspicuous  in  the  army  for  his  daring  cour- 1 
age  and  disregard  of  danger.  Sending  for  him,  he  I 
observed  that  the  soldier  looked  pale  and  sick- ; 
ly,  and  he  asked  him  what  was  the  matter  with  I 
him.     Said  he,  "sire  I  have  long  since  lost  my  j 
health."     The  king  ordered  his  physician  to  at-  ■ 
tend  him,  and  save  his  life  if  possime.     He  com- 1 
plied  with  the   injunction,  and  restored  his  pa-  i 
tient  to  robust  ancl  vigorous  health.     The  king  ; 
observing   that  he    no  longer    exhibited    that ' 
courage  and  dariag  which  previously  character-  j 
ized  him,  sent  for  the  soldier  a  second  time,  and  j 
asked  him  what  had  caused  this  change  in  his  | 
conduct.     "Sire,"  replied  he,   "your  physician 
has  made  me  a  coward.     When  I  was  sick  my 
life  was  a  burthen  to  me,  and  I  did  not  care  how 
soon  I  lost  it,  but  in  giving  me  health,  he  has 
given  me  the  enjovment  of  life,  and  I  fear  to 
lose  it."    This  thing  depends  greatly  on  the 
temperament  of  a  man.    Some  are  reckless  and 
■willing,    at    any  moment,  to  risk  their  lives. 
Others  who  did  not  hesitate  an  instant  to  haz- 
jjard  their  lives  against  an  enemy  of  their  coun- 
try, and  shed  the  last  drop  of  their  blood  in  its 
defence,  would,  in  no  ca.se,  engage  in  a  private 
encounter. 
We  kncvr  that  dueling  does  not  stop  killing 
104 


in  the  streets,  or  asBassii.ation  on  the  highways. 
No  sir,  this  is  a  mistake,  and  nothing  will  stop 
it  but  a  sense  of  certain,  positive,  and  speedy 
punishment.  And  how  are  we  to  stop  the  practice 
of  dueling?  We  are  to  furnish  men  who  are  in 
doubt  as  to  a  point  of  honor,  with  a  competent 
apology  for  avoiding  a  duel.  That  is  all  we 
want.  There  is  not  a  man  in  the  world,  enjoy- 
ing health,  and  who  has  friends  and  connections 
around  him,  that  does  not  love  life.  Look  at  the 
man  in  the  last  agonies  of  death,  and  see  how 
he  clings  to  life.  And  why?  Because  he  loves 
life.  And  yet  a  false  notion  of  honor,  or  rather 
a  false  public  opinion,  will  force  the  man  in  fine 
health  to  hazzard  his  life  to  a  false  notion  of 
honor.  Frederick  the  Great  of  Prussia  was  one 
of  the  ablest  and  bravest  men  who  ever  fought 
at  the  head  of  an  army,  and  yet  what  did  he 
say  to  the  duelist?  Why,  that  if  a  duel  was 
fought,  he  would  hang  all  concerned  in  it,  and 
if  he  could  find  out  where  was  the  place  of 
meeting,  he  would  go  there  himself  with  his 
hangman,  and  hang  up  the  survivor  without  a 
trial.  Has  not  Great  Britain  lately  hung  up  sev- 
eral men  who  killed  others  in  duels.  A  Colonel 
Campbell  there,  killed  a  man  in  a  duel,  not  long 
since,  and  was  hung.  And  other  instances 
might  be  mentioned. 

And  Kentucky  is  the  only  country  where  no 
man  has  ever  been  punished  for  giving,  accept- 
ing, carrying  a  challenge,  or  killing  his  antago- 
nist in  a  duel.  What  inroads  have  been  made  in 
the  family  of  Alek.  Pope,  my  old  friend  with 
whom  I  practiced  law  until  he  died,  by  the  duel- 
ing propensities  of  those  two  young  men,  Henry 
and  Fountain  Pope.  One  was  killed  in  Arkansas, 
and  the  other  near  Louisville,  without  anv  cause, 
if  the  parties  had  understood  each  other.  l"he  par- 
ties fought  at  a  distance  of  tweutv  yards,  with  shot 
guns.  Did  I  not  know,  while  in  Washington,  Bar- 
ron and  Devatur,two  of  the  first  men  atthat  peri- 
od in  America,  come  up  in  mortal  array  within 
sixteen  feet  of  each  other,  because  one  was  near 
sighted,  and  the  rule  was  that  both  should  take 
deliberate  sight  before  the  word  to  fire  was  giv- 
en? They  both  fired  and  fell  with  their  heads 
not  ten  feet  apart  from  each  other.  And  before 
they  were  taken  from  the  ground  each  expecting 
botli  to  die,  they  spoke  to  each  other,  and  a 
reconciliation  took  place.  They  blessed  each 
other,  and  declared  that  there  was  nothing  be- 
tween them.  All  that  was  required  to  have  pre- 
vented the  meeting  was  an  explanation  between 
them.  There  was  the  case  also  of  McCarty  and 
Mason,  own  cousins,  who  fought  one  of  the 
most  murderous  duels  on  record,  because  McCar- 
ty voting  for  another  man.  Mason  being  a  candi- 
date, felt  aggrieved,  and  challenged  his  vote  on 
the  ground  of  not  being  twenty  one.  McCarty 
first  proposed  they  should  sit  over  a  keg  of  pow- 
der and  set  fire  to  it,  but  Mason  declined.  5fext 
he  proposed  thev  should  go  to  the  top  of  the 
Capitol  and  hand  in  hand  jump  from  the  parapet 
wall  to  the  ground,  adistanceofninetyfeet.  Tnis 
Mason  also  declined.  Then  McCarty  proposed 
that  they  should  fight  with  muskets  with  three 
balls  a  piece,  which  Mason  accepted,  and  then 
they  went  out  and  fought  eight  feet  apart — 
about  nothing.  McCarty  has  told  me  that  the 
duel  was  forced  on  him  by  one  of  Mason's 
seconds.    Such  are  the  bloody  scenes  which  11- 


9se 


lustrate  this  code  of  houor,  aa  it  in  Btvled.  In 
the  poems  of  an  old  English  satirist,  Churchill, 
by  name,  is  a  satire  against  dueling,  which  I 
remember  made  a  strong  impression  on  me 
when  I  first  read  it,  many  years  ago.  In  speak- 
ing of  the  duelists'  honor,  he  says: 

"  His  honor  is  !il<e  a  maiiieiihead 

■Which  if  in  private  brought  to  bed 

Flaunts  and  flutters  about  the  town 

And  is  never  missed  until  the  loss  is  known." 

Such  is  just  about  the  chai^acter  of  the  insults 
for  which  men  fight  duels.  A  real  insult  is  re- 
sented at  the  moment,  and  an  uncertain  or  imagi- 
nary one  leads  to  the  duel,  In  the  last  case  the 
parties  correspond  and  consult  tlieir  friends  and 
seconds,  who  generally  are  young  hotspurs,  who 
take  a  great  deal  more  delight  in  acting  as  sec- 
ond than  principal.  A  great  many  of  these  sec- 
onds, no  doubt,  feel  very  much  like  the  lawyers 
in  a  case  in  court;  they  would  a  great  deal  rather 
see  their  clients  pull  their  hair  the  wrong  way 
than  get  at  it  themselves.  And  in  ninety-nine 
cases  out  of  one  hundred,  an  amicable  arrange- 
ment of  the  difficulties  between  the  parties  is 
prevented  by  the  seconds.  In  the  recent  case  of 
young  Pope,  I  have  no  doubt  that  had  my  young 
friend  over  the  way,  (Mr.  Preston,)  been  one  of 
the  seconds,  he  could  have  stopped  it.  The  gen- 
tlemen who  did  act  as  seconds  were  equally  re- 
spectable and  worthy,  butperhaps  they  were  not 
so  prudent  and  discreet  in  going  back  to  the  ori- 
gin of  the  Quarrel,  and  having  it  arranged,  as 
they  might  have  done.  The  evil  is  in  these  con- 
troversies, in  ninety  cases  out  of  a  hundred',  the 
parties  get  into  the  hands  of  men  who  believe 
they  will  be  brought  into  consequence  by  be- 
coming seconds  in  a  duel. 

I  hope  the  convention  will  not  adopt  the 
amendment  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Lou- 
isville, (Mr.  Preston,)  to  leave  this  matter  to  the 
control  of  the  legislature.  Can  there  be  any  law 
proposed  which  does  not  now  exist?  No.  Is  it 
not  death  if  a  man  is  killed,  to  all  the  persons 
concerned?  It  is;  and  if  it  is,  it  is  the  strongest 
kind  of  disqualification  to  hold  any  office  in  the 
future,  I  warrant.  But  is  there  not  a  law  now  in 
existence  disfranchising  from  office  any  one  who 
gives  or  accepts  a  challenge?  There  is;  and 
what  good  can  be  attained  by  the  passage  of  any 
further  laws  on  the  subject?  If  left  to  the  legis- 
lature, they  will  continue  to  pass  .special  laws, 
relieving  men  from  the  penalty,  anci  thus  nulli- 
fy the  statutes.  What  more,  then,  can  you  do? 
"i  ou  can  furnish  to  the  man  who  desires  not  to 
fight,  an  apology  to  public  opinion  for  refusing 
to  give  or  accept  a  challenge.  Let  the  constitu- 
tion contain  this  disqualification,  and  you  will 
attain  this  object  by  putting  it  out  of  the 
power  of  the  legislature  to  absolve  a  man  from 
the  penalty.  These  were  the  sentiments  I  utter- 
ed tnirty -eight  years  ago  in  the  legislative  halls 
of  Kentucky,  and  I  was  supported  in  them  at 
that  time  by  a  young  man  one  year  younger  than 
myself,  ana  one  of  the  most  eloquent  and  able 
men  Kentucky  ever  knew — I  mean  Solomon  P. 
Sharpe. 

I  hope  the  amendment  in  regard  to  the  carry- 
ine  of  concealed  weapons  will  also  be  rejected. 
The  laws  are  sufficient  to  punish  that  practice  in 
a  great  many  ways.  You  are  to  bear  in  mind 
that  it  is  the  proportion  between  the  offence  and 


the  puuiahmeut  that  makes  a  laW  a  living  law. 
Suppose  the  law  punished  men  for  getting  drunk 
or  gambling  by  imprisonment  in  the  penitentia- 
ry— it  would  be  found  that  nobody  would  enforce 
them.  I  have  seen  a  rai'.n  prosecuted,  and  did  it 
myself,  because  the  grand  jury  having  found  an 
indictment  against  him,  I  was  obliged  to  do  it, 
for  Iceeping  a  kind  of  gambling  wheel,  I  had 
bet  on  this  wheel,  and  I  saw  on  the  jury  seven 
men  who  had  done  the  same,  and  the  jury,  with' 
out  leaving  their  box,  found  a  verdict  of  notguil- 
ty,  though  seven  had  the  strongest  evidence  of 
his  guilt.  I  recollect  once  in  Marion  county  that 
some  twenty  men  were  indicted  for  keeping  what 
they  call  a  Spanish  needle.  I  argued  before  the 
jury  that  the  punishment  was  too  violent  and 
disproportionate  to  the  ofience,  and  was  cruel 
ana  inhuman.  The  jury  brought  in  a  verdict 
something  like  this:  "We,  the  jury,  find  the  de- 
fendant not  guilty;  for,  although  we  know  he 
played  the  wheel,  we  consider  the  punishment 
cruel,  extravagant,  and  disproportionate  to  the 
offence."  Judge  Green  sent  them  back,  andthey 
again  returned  with  this  verdict:  "We,  the  jury, 
know  the  man  kept  the  wheel,  but  in  our  con- 
ciences  we  do  not  believe  him  to  be  guilty  under 
the  constitution."  They  were  sent  back  again, 
and  on  the  fourth  day  they  returned  with  an  un- 
qualified verdict  of  not  guilty.  You  must  adapt 
the  scale  of  punishment  to  the  grade  of  the  of- 
fence. If  a  man  kills  another,  it  is  nottoogreat 
a  punishment  to  hang  him;  or  if  he  steals  a  horse, 
it  IS  not  too  great  a  punishment  to  send  him  to  the 

Eenitentiary.  But  if  a  man  gets  drunk,  it  would 
e  a  cruel  punishment  therefor  to  put  him  in  the 
penitentiary.  I  would  not  make  the  punish- 
ment for  the  carrying  of  concealed  weapons  too 
stringent.  A  fine  of  $50,  f  100,  or  $200,  is  quite 
sufficient.  I  am  against  the  carrying  of  con- 
cealed weapons  for  aggressive  purposes,  and  vo- 
ted very  cheerfully  for  the  section  on  the  subject. 
But  I  would  not  here  make  it  a  disqualification 
for  office.  The  same  reason  does  not  exist  for  it, 
as  in  the  case  of  dueling.  In  the  latter  case  the 
object  is  to  give  to  the  friend  of  peace  and  good 
order  a  sufficient  apology  to  public  opinion  for 
refusing  to  have  anything  to  do  with  a  duel. 
Kentucky  is  behind  most  of  the  states  of  this 
union  on  this  subject,  and  I  hope  this  section 
will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  an  adjournment.  The  mo- 
tion was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeaa 
and  nays  on  his  amendment,  and  the  roll  was 
partially  called,  when  lie  asked  and  obtained 
leave  to  withdraw  it. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  section. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  thereon. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  asked  for  a  division 
of  the  qiiestion. 

The  PRESIDENT  replied  tliat  the  section 
was  indivisible. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  said  a  question  was 
always  divisible  when  it  was  susceptible  of  di- 
vison.  He  was  willing  to  take  the  first  part  of 
the  oath,  but  not  the  second. 


827 


Mr.  TRIPLETT  inquired  if  it  could  b<»  dirid- 
td  with  the  general  consent  of  the  house.  As 
it  stood,  it  would  place  several  of  them  in  an 
awkward  position. 

The  PRESIDENT  said  the  section  could  not 
be  divided. 

The  clerk  then  called  the  roll,  and  the  yea.s 
were  62,  nays  28. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Braw- 
ner,  Thos.  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Jas.  Dudley,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Jas.  H.  Garrard,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  J^inianE.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  S. Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  James,  Wm.  Johnson  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  X.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  ilachen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Richard  L.  Maves,  Nathan  McClure, 
Wm.  D.  Mitchell,  Hu»h  ^^ewell.  Elijah  F.  Nut- 
tall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding.J.W.  Stevenson,  Jas. 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  Johe  L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler,  Robt.  N. 
WickliflFe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson 
—62. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  William  C.  Bullitt.  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Benj.  Copelin,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Thos.  J.  Hood,  Jas.  W.  Irwin.  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  George  W.Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wm. 
C.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Thos.  P.  Moore, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  William 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  D.  Tavlor,  John  J. 
Thurmaii,  Philip  Triplett,  Heurv  \N*ashington, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe— 28. 
So  the  section  was  adopted. 
The  convention  then  adiourned. 


FRIDAY,  DECEMBER  7,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Noetos. 

SPECIFIC    AMEXDMENTS. 

Mr.  CHENAL'XT.  Mr.  President,  I  oflFer  the 
following  resolution: 

"Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  revi- 
sion of  the  constitution  and  slaverj'.  be  request- 
ed to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  submitting 
the  constitution,  about  to  be  formed,  once  in 
every  period  of  ten  years,  to  the  qualified  elec- 
tors of  this  state,  and  if  a  majority  of  all  of  said 
electors  shall  vote  for  amending  the  same,  the 
next  ensuing  legislature  shall  pass  an  act  pre- 
senting one,  and  not  more  than  two,  specific 
amendments,  to  be  voted  on  at  the  next  succeed- 
ing election,  and  should  a  majority  of  all  the 
qualified  voters  decide  in  favor  of  said  specific 
amendment  or  amendments,  at  two  successive 


elections,  the  same  shall  be  engrafted  by  th« 
legislature,  as  a  part  of  the  organic  law  of  this 
commonwealth.' 

It  is  known  to  this  house,  that  since  the  for- 
mation of  the  constitution  of  1799,  there  have 
been  serious  objections  to  that  constitution;  and 
had  it  been  in  the  power  of  the  people  to  amend 
that  constitution  in  some  other  way  than  by  the 
mode  therein  specified,  in  my  humSle  judgment, 
this  body  of  delegates  w.oula  not  now  have  been 
assembled  here.  But  as  that  instrument  speci- 
ried  the  p  articular  manner  in  which  any  amend- 
ments should  be  effected,  and  as  there  was  no 
alternative  but  to  comply  with  its  requirements, 
we  are  compelled  to  follow  the  course  prescribed. 
It  seems  to  me,  however,  that  a  plan  might  be 
adopted  which,  while  it  would  answer  all  the 
purposes  of  that  requirement,  would,  in  future, 
obviate  the  necessity  of  our  meeting  together  in 
conventions  similar  to  this.  I  submit  that  once 
in  every  ten  years,  when  any  specific  amend- 
ment is  desired,  it  should  be  presented  to  the 
people  at  their  elections  to  decide  upon  without 
Deing  mixed  up  with  various  exciting  questions, 
and  a  definitive  vote  taken  on  the  matter.  This, 
it  appears  to  me,  would  be  preferable  to  the 
mode  now  provided  for.  There  have  been  va- 
rious propositions  to  this  effect  offered  to  this 
body,  and  some  gentlemen  appear  to  be  startled 
and  afraid  lest  the  question  of  slavery  should, 
by  this  means,  be  made  an  open  question.  I 
think,  however,  that  under  the  old  mode  of  al- 
tering the  constitution  the  question  is  left  equ- 
ally as  open,  and  is  subject,  on  that  ground,  to 
objections  equally  as  forcible.  If  the  conven- 
tion prefer  to  adhere  to  the  old  method  rather 
than  to  adopt  this  plan  of  specific  amendments, 
I  have  no  choice  but  to  submit. 

I  move  that  the  resolution  be  printed  and  re- 
ferred to  the  committee  of  revision  and  slavery. 

The  resolution  was  ordered  to  be  printed  and 
referred. 

DCELIXG. 

Mr.  HAMILTON  gave  notice  of  his  intention 
to  move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  adopting 
the  first  section  of  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  general  provisions. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  moved  to  dispense  with  the 
rule  which  requires  a  motion  to  reconsider  to 
lie  over  one  day. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

The  question  was  then  stated  to  be  on  the  re- 
consideration. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  My  object  in  moving  this 
resolution,  is  to  insert  after  the  word  "chal- 
lenge," in  the  eighth  and  twelfth  lines  in  the 
first  section,  the  words,  "  in  this  state." 

I  hold,  sir,  that  this  is  a  question,  the  consid- 
eration of  which,  by  this  convention,  is  not  at 
all  called  for  by  the  people  of  Kentucky  at  the 
present  time,  it  was  not  discussed  before  the 
people  when  this  convention  was  determined 
upon,  and  from  the  disposition  manifested  in 
this  convention,  it  appears  that  a  large  number 
of  members  are  opposed  to  this  clause.  Under 
the  old  constitution  the  legislature  had  all  power 
in  this  matter  and  could  carry  out  the  will  of  the 
people.  If  you  insert  this  provision  in  your 
constitution  you  are  both  arraying  gentlemen 
against  each  other,  who  believe  that  this  is  a 
matter  on  which  the  legislature  has  sufficient 


82& 


power  to  act,  and  arraying  the  public  mind 
against  the  work  of  your  hands  in  framing  this 
constitution.  You  have  been  told  by  my  friend 
from  Nelson,  who  has  often  told  us  that  we  were 
running  too  much  into  detail,  that  this  ptovision 
will  endanger  the  popularity  of  the  constitu- 
tion. I  am  opposed  to  running  into  detail;  I  am 
opposed  also  to  the  practice  of  dueling.  If  I 
take  the  life  of  a  man  I  do  it  in  action- — on  the 
spur  of  the  moment.  I  never  either  received  or 
gave  a  challenge;  but  I  do  not  believe  a  clause 
ought  to  be  inserted  prohibiting  a  man  frem  go- 
ing into  another  state,  if  insulted,  and  he  should 
have  an  opportunity  of  thus  defending  himself. 
Let  me  put  a  case.  We  send  a  man  to  congress 
where  he  meets  with  men  from  every  state  of  the 
union;  many  of  them  are  aware  that  such  a  pro- 
vision exists  in  the  constitution  of  Kentucky. 
WiU  they  not,  knowing  how  his  hands  are  tied 
down,  seek  every  opportunity  to  insult  him.  I 
do  not  mean  to  speak  disrespectfully  of  the  gen- 
tlemen who  compose  that  body;  but  who  is 
there  that  does  not  know  that  there  are  not  a  few 
of  them  who  would  avail  themselves  of  any  op- 
portunity, under  such  circumstances,  to  insult  a 
Kentuckian?  He  is  not  placed  upon  an  equal 
footing  with  the  members  from  other  states. 
Send  your  delegate  to  congress,  and  let  an  insult 
there  De  pas.sed  upon  him,  and  it  will  be  out  of 
his  power  either  to  defend  himself,  or  his  honor. 
I  am  willing,  if  this  amendment  is  adopted,  to 
go  for  the  section;  but  as  it  is,  I  cannot  give  my 
sanction  to  it;  hence,  I  voted  yesterday  in  favor 
of  reconsidering  this  proposition. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  If  that  amendment  is  adopt- 
ed, all  that  will  be  necessary  when  a  duel  is  de- 
termined upon,  will  be  for  one  gentleman  to  send 
to  another  that  he  wishes  him  to  go  over  into 
Madison,  Indiana,  or  any  where  else  out  of  the 
state,  in  order  that  he  may  send  him  a  particu- 
lar comnmnication.  When  there,  the  communi- 
cation will  be  a  challenge. 

This  is  a  matter  in  which  I  have  no  personal 
interest,  for  no  man  will  ever  challenge  so  old  a 
man  as  I  am,  with  but  one  hand,  and  that  a  left 
hand.  I  think  it  is  no  evidence  of  courage  for 
a  man  to  fight  a  duel;  but  to  go  out  to  fight  the 
enemies  of  the  countiy  I  think  is  evidence  of  it. 
If  a  roan  wanted  to  show  his  courage,  he  could 
have  done  it  in  the  attack  on  Monterev,  on  the 
field  of  Buena  Vista,  or  under  General  Scott  in 
any  one  of  the  seven  battles  he  fought.  I  do  not 
believe  there  is  one  man  in  a  thousand,  in  Ken- 
tucky, who  has  not  courage  enough  to  fight  the 
enemies  of  his  country. 

The  gentleman  says  a  member  of  congress 
may  want  co  fight,  and  must  have  the  liberty  to 
do  It.  A  member  of  congress  must  have  the  lib- 
erty to  do  a  little  fighting!  The  best  way  in 
the  world,  if  one  gentleman  insults  another,  is  to 
end  it  in  a  fist  fight;  or,  if  that  is  too  low,  cane 
him  or  "rock"  hun;  but  do  not  go  into  a  system 
of  diplomatic  negotiations,  each  trying  to  se- 
cure an  advantage  over  the  other.  Talleyrand 
and  Metternich  never  went  into  negociations 
more  fully  than  two  duelists.  They  make  every 
effort  to  get  the  advantage  of  eacli  other  with 
regard  to  weapons  or  distance,  and  when  they 
come  to  the  ground  they  throw  up  for  no.sition. 

When  Decatur  and  Barron  fought,  tney  stood 
within  siztoen  feet  of  each  other,  and  Decatur's 


friend  got  him  killed.  He  took  his  stand  on  the 
right  of  Decatur — Elliott,  Barron's  friend,  went 
and  whispered  to  him,  "now  watch  his  mouth, 
and  you  can  catch  the  words  sooner  than  Deca- 
tur. By  doing  this  he  got  the  fire  on  him,  and 
killed  him.  There  is  no  fairness  in  this  mode  of 
fighting. 

With  regard  to  the  matter  of  going  out  of  the 
state,  it  can  be  done,  and  the  law  be  evaded. 

There  were  once  some  strong  laws  with  re- 
gard to  fighting  a  duel  in  the  vicinity  of  Lon- 
don. The  Marquis  of  Wharton  insulted  the 
Duke  of  Marlboro'  in  the  house  of  lords.  The 
Duke  sent  word  to  the  Marquis  that  he  wanted 
to  take  a  ride  into  the  country  for  an  airing,  and 
he  would  have  a  friend  with  him,  and  would  like 
to  meet  with  him  there.  The  Marquis  understood 
the  object,  and  declined  to  take  the  airing.  It 
was  no  challenge,  but  he  understood  it  so.  If 
you  send  a  note  preparatory  to  the  challenge,  as 
you  can  do  in  this  case,  you  might  as  well  dis- 
pense with  the  law.  I  have  no  particular  ob- 
jection to  the  amendment,  but  I  do  not  want  to 
offer  any  defence  for  men  who  have  been  engaged 
in  duels  at  all.  They  are  never  fought  but  in 
obedience  to  a  sickly,  fastidious  public  senti- 
ment. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  am  no  duelist,  nor 
am  I  an  advocate  of  it;  but  I  have  some  objec- 
tion to  that  section,  because  we  are  not  making 
a  constitution  which  will  apply  to  Kentuckians 
all  over  the  world.  If  it  were  to  be  confined  to 
Kentucky  only,  I  should  have  no  objection.  I 
protest  against  the  adoption  of  the  section.  I 
recollect  that  some  years  ago,  when  several  ofla- 
cers  of  the  navy  of  the  United  States  were  on  a 
foreign  station,  one  of  them  went  ashore  and 
was  insulted  by  some  British  officers.  He  was 
unable  to  knock  all  of  them  down;  and  what  re- 
dress had  he?  Why,  he  challenged  every  offi- 
cer, from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  or  from  the 
lowest  to  the  highest.  He  fought  the  highest  in 
rank,  and  killed  him,  and  the  others  then  re- 
tracted all  that  they  had  said,  and  there  ended 
the  difficulty.  Now,  would  you  disfranchise 
such  a  man,  under  these  circumstances,  who  had 
promptly  taken  up,  when  on  a  foreign  soil,  an 
insult  offered  to  his  country?  It  is  not  at  all 
times  that  we  have  it  in  our  power  to  knock 
down  the  man  who  insults  us.  For  instance,  a 
small  man  insults  me,  would  I  take  a  cudgel 
and  knock  him  down?  I  could  not  do  it.  But 
if  a  large  man  were  to  insult  a  small  one,  a  cud- 
gel in  his  hands  might  not  place  them  on  an 
equality.  It  is  said  public  opinion  sanctions 
dueling.  That  has  been  the  burden  of  the  ar- 
gument on  this  floor.  Did  we  come  here  to 
make  a  constitution  to  control  public  opinion? 
We  came  to  frame  a  constitution  which  is  in  ac- 
cordance with  public  opinion,  and  shall  we  in- 
troduce a  provision  which,  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  says,  is  contrary  to  public  opinion? 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Public  opinion  is  sickly  on 
this  subject. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  It  is  sickly,  the  gen- 
tleman says.  We  do  not  come  here  as  doctors, 
to  cure  it.  Were  we  sent  here  as  physicians,  to 
cure  it?    I  have  stated  my  position. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  will  barely  state  the 
object  of  the  committee  in  framing  this  provi- 
sion.   I  yield  very  cheerfully  U)  the  distinguish- 


fe29 


ed  gentlemen  who  diflfer  with  me,  and  who  I  be- 
lieve differ  honestly.  I  think  I  can  satisfy  the 
gentleman  from  Jefferson,  that  if  his  position  is 
true,  this  provision  ought  to  stand.  The  simple 
question  is,  whether  dueling  is  right  or  wrong. 
Do  the  people  wish  to  see  the  practice  of  dueling 
carried  out?  I  think  I  have  heard  no  gentleman 
on  this  floor,  who  did  not  set  out  with  the  decla- 
ration, that  he  was  opposed  to  dueling,  and  that 
he  would  not  fight  a  duel.  That  section  re- 
quires that  it  should  be  put  down  if  public  opin- 
ion requires  it.  The  statutes  have  failed  to  do 
it.  Is  it  not  the  duty  of  this  convention  to  car- 
ry out  public  sentiment?  I  think  so,  and  such 
was  the  object  of  the  committee.  Such,  I  think 
the  true  policy  of  the  state.  I  am  willing  to 
give  my  vote,  and  trust  the  constitution  upon 
the  single  question,  whether  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky dfesire  to  see  dueling  prevail,  or  dueling 
put  down. 

I  am  opposed  to  the  amendment,  because  I 
know  that  if  it  prevails,  the  constitution  will 
prove  as  inefficacious  as  the  statutes  have  been. 
A  gentleman  can  remove  to  Ohio  temporarilv, 
and  fight  a  duel  while  there,  and  in  two  or  three 
months  remove  back  again  to  Kentucky.  I  have 
seen  the  practice  of  confining  a  statute  of  this 
kind  to  citizens.  We  have  a  statute  now,  that  a 
lawyer  while  practicing  at  the  bar  shall  not  send 
a  challenge  or  fight  a  duel.  But  he  has  only  to 
give  up  his  practice  till  the  legislature  releases 
him  from  the  effect  of  the  statute.  As  soon  as 
a  relief  measure  is  passed,  he  is  released  from 
that  obligation,  ana  he  comes  back  to  his  prac- 
tice again  at  the  bar.  Would  not  precisely  the 
same  state  of  things  exist  in  regard  to  many  men, 
especially  young  men,  if  you  attempt  to  confine 
it  to  a  mere  citizen  of  the  state?  Would  not  a 
mere  temporary  change  of  residence  release 
them?  They  would  not  be  slow  to  remove  their 
residence,  and  after  remaining  a  short  time,  they 
would  come  back. 

The  object  of  this  convention  should  be  to 
reprobate  the  practice  of  dueling,  to  let  our  chil- 
dren be  brought  up  with  the  idea  that  public 
sentiment,  and  the  feeling  of  Kentucky  are 
again.st  it.  There  is  not  a  gentleman  on  this 
floor  who,  if  asked  the  question,  whether  it  is 
not  so,  would  not  give  me  an  affirmative  answer. 
Suppose  my  friend  is  under  bonds  to  keep  the 
peace,  and  I  know  that  fact,  and  go  up  and  in- 
sult him.  What  would  public  opinion  saj'  with 
regard  to  a  man  who  should  do  this?  It  would 
be  to  consider  him  as  worse  than  a  coward.  It 
would  be  like  insulting  a  woman,  aud  public 
opinion  would  fix  on  his  forehead  the  indellible 
mark  of  the  most  miserable  coward  that  ever 
trod  the  earth.  So  it  is  here.  Let  the  constitu- 
tion demand  that  dueling  shall  not  exist  within 
our  borders,  and  those  who  insult  another  would 
have  the  same  sort  of  epithets  heaped  on  them, 
as  they  would  have  if  they  insulted  a  woman. 

The  gentleman  from  Jefferson  has  cited  an  in- 
stance of  a  man  who  boldly  fought  a  duel  abroad, 
in  defence  of  the  honor  of  his  country,  and  asks 
if  this  convention  would  have  disfranchised  him. 
I  say  yes,  sir;  disfranchise  him,  and  it  would  be 
giving  utterance  to  a  high  moral  principle. 
What  great  conservative  principle  is  there,  to 
which  occasionally  there  will  not  be  harsh  ex- 
ceptions?   The  greatest  act  of  that  distinguish- 


ed man  whose  portrait  han^  over  your  chair,, 
(pointing  to  the  portrait  of  Washington,)  when, 
all  the  great  attributes  of  his  character  were  called 
into  display,  was  when  the  amiable  and  accom- 

Slished  Andre  petitioned  him  to  spare  him  the 
isgrace  of  suffering  on  a  gibbet.  Young,  gal- 
lant, ardent,  he  found  himself  condemned  to 
death,  and  he  appealed  to  the  great  leader  of  the 
American  army,  in  whose  bosom  he  knew  ran 
the  milk  of  human  kindness,  to  spare  him,  and 
to  .spare  his  nation  the  disgrace  of  suffering  on  a 
gibbet.  What  were  the  impulses,  and  the  strug- 
gles that  overcame  that  great  man,  when  he  had 
to  answer  that  request?  If  left  to  himself — if 
left  to  his  own  feelings,  and  to  what  he  believed 
the  justice  of  the  appeal,  he  would  have  said  yes. 
But  he  looked  not  to  mere  individual  interests. 
The  interest  of  a  nation  was  in  his  hands,  and 
however  unjust,  however  cruel  and  trying,  he 
said,  Andre  must  suffer,  and  he  must  be  hung. 
He  must  be  hung  as  a  great  example.  That  was 
necessary  to  carry  out  a  great  principle.  What 
patriot  is  tliere,  who  would  not  willingly  be  dis- 
franchised if  the  honor,  the  safety,  or  the  integ- 
rity of  his  country  is  to  be  preserved  by  it? 

Sir,  the  highest  example  a  man  can  give  of 
patriotism,  is  to  be  willing  to  be  disfranchised, 
to  deny  himself  a  seat  on  this  floor  as  a  legisla- 
tor, or  any  other,  that  a  great  moral  principle,  by 
which  his  country  is  to  be  served,  may  be  car- 
ried out. 

I  think  these  individual  examples  prove  noth- 
ing, and  if  we  want  to  act  for  the  public  good 
we  must  not  let  these  individual  examples  affect 
our  judgments.  They  must  give  way  to  public 
justice.  The  simple  question  is  whether  duel- 
ing is  bad,  and  whether  it  should  be  reprobated? 
If  so,  let  us  shut  the  door  to  all  the  little  ave- 
nues which  the  ingenuity  of  man  can  invent  to 
defeat  this  great  object. 

It  is  to  put  down  this  practice,  and  to  show 
our  children  by  our  acts,  as  well  as  by  the  con- 
stitution, that  we  are  determined  to  set  our  faces 
against  it,  and  my  word  for  it,  dueling  will  be 
stopped.  Look  at  the  state  of  Tennessee,  look 
at  Virginia,  and  you  will  see  men  who  are  as 
distinguished  as  any  the  country  has  produced, 
who  bear  their  disfranchisement  cheerfully  and 
patiently.  I  know  one  young  man  in  Virginia, 
who.  although  opposed  to  me  politically,  I  here 
say  is  perhaps  as  promising  a  man  as  tliat  state 
has  produced  within  the  last  half  century.  Let 
him  be  asked,  although  he  has  been  disfranchis- 
ed, would  you  be  willing  to  see  that  anti-duel- 
ing law  struck  out,  and  he  would  say  that  he 
bore  his  disfranchisement  with  pleasure,  and  he 
would  not  strike  it  out.  These  are  the  views 
which  actuated  me,  and  which  I  believe  actuated 
the  committee. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  want  to  ask  my 
friend  from  Kenton  one  question.  He  asks  the 
question,  if  dueling  is  not  reprobated  in  this 
country,  and  if  we  should  not  take  everv'  step  to 
put  it  down?  Is  not  the  murderer  reprobated 
as  much  as  the  duelist?  Why  do  you  not  extend  . 
our  constitution  all  over  the  world  against  the 
murderer? 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  As  far  as  I  know  all 
criminal  laws  do  extend  against  the  murderer, 
to  the  limts  of  their  jurisdiction.  The  murderer 
is  as  much  reprobated  in  another  country,  though 


MO 


■we  could  not  punish  him  here.  He  is  not  dis- 
franchised, because  we  suppose  the  people  of 
Kentucky  would  hardly  send  a  man  known  to 
be  a  murderer,  to  the  legislature. 

Mr.  BARLOW  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

On  the  motion  to  reconsider,  the  yeas  and 
nays  were  called  for,  and  were — yeas  50,  nays 
41.^ 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  "William  K. 
Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C. 
Bullitt,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsay,  Willis  B.  Ma- 
hen,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, William  N.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rogers,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor, John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  Whfte,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliflfe,  Silas  Woodson— 50. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curdf, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selueius  Garfielde,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vin- 
cent S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Rich- 
ard L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Hen- 
ry B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Robinson, Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone.  Mi- 
chael L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William  R. 
Thompson,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
George  W.  Williams — 41. 

So  the  convention  reconsidered,  and  the  ques- 
tion recurred  on  the  adoption  of  the  section. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  moved  to  amend  by  striking 
out  the  words:  "and  that  I  have  neither  direct- 
ly nor  indirectly,  given,  accepted,  or  knowingly 
carried  a  challenge,  to  any  person,  or  persons,  to 
fight  in  single  combat,  or  otherwise,  with  any 
deadly  weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  state, 
since  the  adoption  of  the  present  constitution  of 
Kentucky,  and  tliat  I  will  neither  directly  nor 
indirectly,  give,  accept,  or  knowingly  carry  a 
challenge,  to  any  person,  or  persons,  to  fight  in 
single  combat,  or  otherwise,  with  any  deadly 
weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  state,  during  my 
continuance  in  office" — and  to  insert  the  follow- 
ing— "and  I  do  further  solemnly  swear,  (or  af- 
firm,) that  since  the  adoption  of  tho  present  con- 
stitution, I,  being  a  citizen  of  this  state,  have  not 
fought  a  duel  Avith  deadlj^  weapons,  in  this  state, 
nor  out  of  it,  with  a  citizen  of  this  state,  nor 
have  I  sent  or  accepted  a  challengje  to  figlit  a 
duel,  with  dea<lly  weapons,  with  acitizeu  of  this 
ntate;.  nor  have  I  acted  as  second,  in  carrying  a 


clialleoge,  or  aided,  advised,  or  assisted  any  per- 
son thus  offending.    So  help  me  God." 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  After  the  unanswerable  and 
spirit  stirring  speech  of  my  friend  from  Louis- 
vilie,  yesterday  evening,  it  would  be  an  attempt 
"to  gild  refined  gold  or  paint  the  lilly"  for  me 
to  try  to  add  anything  to  what  he  and  others 
have  said.  It  is  not  so  much  the  principle  con- 
tained in  the  section  adopted,  as  the  language 
in  which  it  is  couched,  that  I  object  to.  It 
brings  men  into  judgment  for  their  thoughts. 
Now  I  had  believed  that  there  was  but  one 
power  that  brought  men  into  judgment  for  their 
thoughts. 

But  here  is  a  tribunal  to  be  set  up  on  earth  to 
bring  men  to  judgment  for  their  thoughts.  By 
this  section  a  man  who  under  peculiar  circum- 
stances may  have  accepted  a  challenge,  Avill  be 
disfranchised  even  though  he  does  not  fight. 
To  this  I  object.  It  is  a  matter  which  should  be 
left  to  the  legislature,  and  with  which  we  should 
not  burthen  the  constitution. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  PRICE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  amendment,  and  being  taken  they  were  yeas 
58,  nays  34. 

Yeas — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  William  K. 
Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D. 
Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett 
Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William 
Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Maehen,  Alexan- 
der K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William 
C.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, Thos.  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James 
M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  NeAvcum  Hugh  Newell, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Rogers,  John  D.  Taylor, 
John.  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  Jno.  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 58. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballin- 
ger, John  S.  Barlow,  Charles  Chambers,  James 
S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Selueius 
Garfielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ben.  Hardin, 
John  Hargis,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Thomas  N.  Lindsev,  George  W.  Mans- 
field. Nathan  McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell. 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, Jas.  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert 
Q.  Talbott,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  Squire  Turn- 
er, John  L.  Waller,  George  W.   Williams— 34. 

So  the  convention  adopted  the  amendment. 

The  section  as  amended  was  then  agreed  to. 

The  eighteenth  section  was  next  read,  as  fol- 
lows: 

"  Skc.    18.    Any  person,  who  shall,  after  the 


sai 


adoptioa  of  thid  coustitution,  «ilb«r  directly  or 
indirectly,  give,  accept,  or  knowingly  carry  a 
challenge  to  any  person,  or  persons,  to  fitjbt  in 
single  combat,  or  otherwise,  with  any  deadly 
weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  state,  shall  be 
deprived  of  the  right  to  hold  any  office  of  honor 
or  profit  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be 
punished  otherwise  in  such  manner  as  the  le- 
gislature may  prescribe  by  law. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  suggested  that  the  sec- 
tion should  be  modified  so  as  to  make  it  agree 
•with  the  first  section. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  to  strike  out  the 
words  "or otherwise"  aft€r  the  words  "single 
combat,"  and  insert  the  words  "with  a  citizen  of 
this  state." 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  asked  if  this  section 
would  prevent  a  person  who  had  fought  in  any 
other  state  from  coming  here  and  enjoying  the 
privilege  of  a  citizen. 

A  brief  conversation  ensued  on  this  point 
which  was  terminated  by  the  previous  question 
on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Dudley. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  on  the  amendment  and  they  were  yeas 
66,  nays  38.  • 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  '' 
John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawuer,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisraan,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  ; 
Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  | 
Benjamin  F.  Edwai'ds,'Milford  Elliott,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, . 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Xinian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Har-  j 
din,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  ; 
Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Wil^ ; 
liam  Johnson,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  N.  i 
Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  i 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Rich-  ( 
ard  L.  Maves,  Nathan  McClure,  William  D.  | 
Mitchell,  H'ugh  Xewell,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  Henry  { 
B.  Pollard,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  James  ■ 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- ! 
son,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  ! 
G.  Talbott,  William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  \ 
Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  John  : 
Wheeler,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  I 
—56. 

Nays— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)   William  K.  j 
Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Thos. ; 
D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, : 
Benjamin  Copelin,  Lucius  Desha,  Green  Forrest, ; 
Nathan  Gaither,  James  P.  Hamilton,  James  W. 
Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter 
Lashorooke,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  William   X.   Marshall,   David  Meri- 
wether, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jas, 
M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  William  Pres- 
ton, Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas 
Rockhold.  John  T.   Rogers,  John   D.  Taylor, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry  W  ash- 
ington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  X.   WickliflFe— 38. 

So  the  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

The  section  was  then  adopted. 

The  convention  next  proceeded  to  consider  the 


amendment  offered  by  Mr.  GRAYj  as  additiobHl 
sections,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  19.  Taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
throughout  this  s-tate.  All  property,  on  which 
taxes  may  be  levied,  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion 
to  its  value,  to  be  ascertained  as  directed  by  law. 
No  one  species  of  property  shall  be  taxed  higher 
than  another  species  of  equal  value :  Pfovided, 
The  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to  tax 
merchants,  brokers,  hawkers,  pedlers,  shows, 
theatrical  performances,  law  process,  seals,  deeds, 
licenses,  stocks,  playing  cards,  corporations,  and 
privileges,  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  pre- 
scribed by  law. 

"Sec.  20.  The  general  assembly  shall  have 
power  to  authorize  the  several  counties,  and  in- 
corporated cities  and  towns,  in  this  state,  to  im- 
pose taxes  for  county  and  corporate  purposes, 
respectively ;  and  all  property  shall  be  taxed 
upon  the  principles  establish  in  regard  to  state 
taxation :  Prottaed,  A  poll  tax  may  be  assessed 
for  county  and  corporate  purposes." 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  amend  the  2d  of  his  pro- 
posed sections,  by  adding  the  following: 

"And  the  expenses  of  grading  and  paving 
streets,  alleys  and  sidewalks,  and  digging  ana 
walling  wells,  may  be  assessed  upon  the  owners 
of  lots  in  cities  and  towns,  under  such  rules  and 
regulations  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law." 

Mr.  HARDIN.'  The  position  I  hold  in  refer- 
ence to  the  state  debt,  imposes  upon  me  the  ne- 
cessity of  making  some  further  explanation. 
The  specific  tax  the  gentleman  proposesto  repeal, 
amounts  to  $14,301  50.  The  tax  on  carriages 
amounts  to  $3,207  ;  the  tax  on  buggies  $1,542  50; 
the  tax  on  pianos  $1,540  ;  the  tax  on  gold  spec- 
tacles $600  50;  the  tax  on  gold  watches,$5,934 ; 
the  tax  on  silver  levers,  $1,418.  * 

This  was  the  taxation  the  year  before  last.  I 
presume  on  account  of  the  increased  number  of 
these  articles,  that  tax  now,  may  be  fairly  set 
down  at  $15,000.  The  auditor  says  tliat  no  por- 
tion of  the  specific  tax  is  appropriated  to  the 
sinking  fund.  He  told  me,  that  he  had  transfer- 
ed  five  parts  out  of  nineteen  of  the  specific  tax, 
thinking  it  would  come  fairly  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  law. 

The  income  of  the  sinking  fund  consists  of 
five  cents  upon  every  hundred  dollars  of  the  to- 
tal valuation,  and  of  five  nineteenths  of  the  spe- 
cific tax  I  have  now  read.  It  will  yield  the 
present  year  $140,000.  The  year  before  last  it 
yielded  $123,000.  The  next  item  of  the  sinking 
fund  is  the  dividend  on  bank  stock.  The  North- 
ern Bank  of  Kentucky  furnished  $13,074  75,  at 
the  last  semi-annual  ciividend,  which  will  make 
something  more  than  $26,000  per  annum.  The 
Bank  of  Kentucky  furnishes  a  dividend  of  $60,- 
000;  the  Louisville  Bank  $1,624;  and  in  addition 
to  that,  the  present  year,  there  will  be  the  rent 
of  the  Lexington  and  Ohio  railroad,  which  is 
$14,635  62.  There  Avill  no  longer  be  any  rent 
coming  from  that  source.  Hereafter  the  road 
may  divide  something.  It  will,  however,  be 
two  or  three  years  before  there  is  any  inconvs 
from  that  source.  There  is  a  rent  from  the  wa- 
ter powers  of  $4S0;  turnpike  roads,  $34,09  564; 
and  there  are  some  other  miscellaneous  receipts. 
There  is  what  is  called  the  Craddock  fund,  the 
history  of  which  is,  an  old  gentleman  named 
Craddock,  left  $20,000  in  the  hands  of  his  ex- 


893 


ccutor.  Judge  UiiJerwood,  to  lay  out  Hi  stocks 
according  to  the  terms  of  his  will;  but  the  judge, 
instead  of  doing  so,  got  the  state  of  Kentucky 
to  take  it  and  pay  interest  on  it.  And  that  is 
•what  is  called  the  Craddock  fund.  There  has 
been  $5,525  paid  in,  and  this  sum  is  placed  to 
the  credit  of  the  sinking  fund.  I  would  remark 
there  will  be  taken  from  this  whole  amount$l4,- 
635,  which  is  now  derived  from  railroad  rent, 
after  this  year.  Last  year  an  act  was  passed 
that  in  1850  the  whole  avails  of  the  slackwater 
should  be  passed  to  the  support  of  the  free 
schools,  ana  the  amount  last  year  was  $10,000. 
The  next  year  it  may  be  more.  And  if  we  take 
away  the  avails  or  the  slackwater,  the  rent  of 
the  railroad,  and  also  take  away  three  or  four 
thousand  dollars,  as  required  by  tlie  gentleman's 
amendment,  what  is  to  become  of  the  sinking 
fund?  I  would  ask  the  very  identical  question 
which  was  asked  in  congress  many  years  since 
by  Mr.  Lowndes,  the  chairman  of  the  committee 
of  ways  and  means.  A  man  came  to  him  and 
very  politely  asked  him  to  dispense  with  a  cer- 
tain item  of"  taxation  from  which  a  revenue  of 
several  millions  was  derived.  Mr.  Lowndes  re- 
plied that  he  had  no  objection  whatever  to  dis- 
pense with  this  item  of  taxation  provided  the 
gentleman  would  provide  a  substitute  for  it. 
And  that  ended  the  subject.  And  no  doubt  my 
friend  here  has  provided  a  substitute  for  the 
sinking  fund.  It  now  yields  the  government 
about  $15,000,  and  the  gentleman  now  proposes 
to  take  away  from  the  government  the  principle 
of  specific  duties.  I  say  it  is  the  easiest  tax 
paid.  We  pay  to  the  United  States  government 
not  less  than  $1,153,000.  Our  duties  at  the  cus- 
tom house  amount  to  not  less  than  a  million  of 
dollars.  There  is  the  profit  of  the  importer  of 
the  articles,  the  profit  of  the  wholesale  merchctnt 
and  the  retail  merchant,  and  when  you  put  these 
three  profits  together,  before  Kentucky  consumes 
the  foreign  article,  we  pay  in  the  shape  of  du- 
ties and  profits  a  sum  of  not  less  than  $1,350,- 
000.  But  we  do  not  seem  to  know  it,  because  it 
operates  on  our  ready  means.  If  you  cannot  pay 
half  a  dollar  for  a  pair  of  gold  spectacles,  ex- 
change them  away  and  get  a  pair  of  silver  ones. 
If  you  cannot  pay  one  dollar  for  a  gold  watch, 
sell  it  and  get  a  silver  one.  A  man  who  rides 
in  a  carriage  is  supposed  to  be  able  to  pay  the 
necessary  tax  upon  it.  A  man  who  rides  in  a 
barouche,  is  expected  to  pay  a  tax.  Many  a  man 
rides  in  his  barouche  and  pays  a  dollar  for  it. 
But  put  it  down  to  forty  cents,  and  he  will  not 
be  so  ready  to  pay  the  tax.  Those  who  enjoy 
luxuries  are  supposed  to  be  able  to  pay  for  them. 
It  may  be  necessary  some  day  or  other  that  we 
should  raise  the  sum  of  $50,000  more  to  add  to 
the  sinking  fund,  instead  of  taking  from  it.  Go 
over  the  list,  and  put  a  fair  valuation  upon  it, 
and  it  now  amounts  to  about  $15,000. 

Every  man  in  the  state  should  contribute  ac- 
cording to  his  means  toward  the  support  of  gov- 
ernment. And  if  it  be  necessary,  I  want  to  re- 
sort to  the  income  of  a  man.  I  can  resort  to  an 
officer's  income.  I  can  tell  the  officer  of  a  bank, 
who  receives  $5,000  a  year,  pay  a  tax  on  your 
salary.  I  can  tell  a  judge  your  salary  is  your 
means,  and  pay  on  that.  I  can  tell  a  lawyer, 
your  profession  is  worth  $3,000  a  year,  and  you 
do  not  pay  a  cent,  you  must  pay  three  or  four 


dollars.  So  I  would  say  to  the  doctor,  your  pro- 
fession is  a  lucrative  one,  you  can  pay  three  or 
four  dollars;  and  to  the  clerks  and  the  sheriffs, 
I  would  address  similar  language.  Give  the 
legislature  the  power  of  selecting  the  articles 
and  objects  to  be  taxed.  You  tax  a  farmer  for 
his  land  and  negroes  which  do  not  yield  three 
per  cent.  A  man  may  have  $10,000  worth  of 
land  and  negroes,  ana  they  will  not  yield  him 
three  hundred  dollars  a  year,  and  he  will  pay 
full  one  per  cent,  of  his  clear  profits.  A  man  may 
have  an  income  of  $3,000,  and  if  it  does  not  con- 
sist of  land  and  negroes,  he  does  not  pay  a  dol- 
lar, not  a  cent.  I  do  not  propose  any  additional 
tax;  but  I  want  to  give  the  legislature,  from  the 
time  of  the  going  into  efi^ect  of  the  new  constitu- 
tion, the  power  to  select  the  articles  to  be  taxed,  as 
I  have  already  said.  Are  not  pianos  a  luxury? 
And  if  a  man  cannot  afford  to  pay  the  tax,  he 
can  afford  to  do  without  the  piano.  It  is  not 
like  taxing  land  and  horses.  A  man  must  have 
his  land  and  his  horses. 

I  again  ask,  is  this  convention  going  to  tell 
the  legislature  that,  in  all  time  to  come,  you  nev- 
er shall  select  any  specific  article  of  property  for 
taxation,  and  you  shall  never  resort  to  taxation 
on  the  income  of  officers  of  this  government?  I 
do  not  propose  such  a  tax,  but  1  propose  leaving 
the  power  to  the  legislature. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  had  supposed  that 
under  the  present  law,  when  a  professional  gen- 
tleman makes  money,  he  is  taxed  as  well  as  any 
other  citizen;  if  not  before  the  money  be  realized 
from  his  profession,  at  least  immediately  after. 
Now,  my  friend  from  Nelson  seems  to  think  that 
professional  men  are  not  taxed;  but  are  they  not 
taxed  in  every  sense  of  the  word  in  the  same 
manner  as  every  other  class  of  citizens?  Have 
they  money  at  interest?  Is  not  that  taxed  like 
every  other  man's  money?  And  surely  you  would 
not  tax  that  money  which  he  has  not  yet  receiv- 
ed. I  hold  that  the  government  of  a  country 
acts  as  a  general  insurance  office,  and  that  each 
man  should  pay  for  the  maintainance  of  that 

Eower  which  secures  him  in  the  enjoyment  of 
is  property  in  proportion  to  the  amount  which 
he  has  at  risk.  If  he  has  property  to  the  amount 
of  $10,000  at  risk,  he  should  pay  in  a  propor- 
tionate ratio  to  the  man  who  nas  only  $5,000. 
This  is  the  principle  involved;  tjix  each  man  ac- 
cording to  the  amount  he  has  at  risk. 

Mr.  GRAY.  This  matter  has  been  agitated  a 
great  many  years,  and  I  suppo.se  every  man's 
mind  is  pretty  much  made  up  on  the  subject. 
My  friend  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  seems 
very  particular  on  this  matter.  He  is  monstrous- 
ly afraid  of  the  legislature,  when  you  talk  of 
allowing  them  to  make  as  many  judges  as  they 
please.  You  must  not  trust  the  legislature  then, 
for  fear  they  run  the  people  too  much  into  debt 
in  trying  causes  for  them ;  but  when  you  come 
to  say  you  must  have  a  revenue  based  upon 
principles  of  eternal  justice  and  equality,  that 
won't  do  for  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  but  we 
must  have  this  specific  taxation,  and  the  partic- 
ular items  selected  upon  which  it  is  to  be  levied. 
Now,  it  seems  to  me  that  there  is  nothing  more 
unjust  than  this.  We  are  taxed  to  support  gov- 
ernment which  guarantees  to  us  the  enjoyment 
of  our  rights,  and  the  right  of  property  is  one  of 
the  greatest  and  most  sacred  of  our  rights.     If 


S33 


th*n  our  property  is  protected,  should  not  all  the 
proj>ertv  of  e&ch  individual  be  taxed,  and  all 
protected  alike?  We  have  said  that  slave  prop- 
erty should  be  rejjarded  as  sacred  as  any  other 
species  of  property.  Now,  if  money  thus  in- 
vested,means  carriages, buggies,  barouches, spec- 
tacles, and  watches,  or  any  thing  else,  should  a 
man  be  deprived  of  this  any  sooner  than  of  any 
other  species  of  property?  No  sir.  If  the  gen- 
tleman is  anxious  to  tax  a  man's  profession  be- 
fore its  protlucts  are  realized,  I  have  nothing  to 
do  with  that.  We  are  met  here  to  tax  property, 
not  imagination.  I  trust  in  God  that  Kentucky 
will  never  be  so  hard  nm  as  to  have  to  resort  to 
any  such  mode  of  taxation  as  that ;  because  I 
think  we  would  have  to  institute  some  other 
kind  of  officers  to  any  yet  known  to  the  law,  to 
ascertain  the  exact  value  of  each  lawyer  or  doc- 
tor's profession.  Some  of  them,  I  pr&sume,  will 
hardly  make  enough  in  a  year  to  support  them- 
selves, much  less  to  pay  out  by  way  of  taxation. 
There  is  no  principle  of  equiility  in  it.     This 

froposition  operates  only  a.s  regards  property, 
t  has  been  a  settled  principle  all  over  the  world, 
that  property  has  been,  and  should  be,  the  basis 
of  taxation;  and  the  revenue  of  a  country  has 
always  been  derived  from  property,  because  it 
was  something  you  could  estimate,  something 
you  could  fix  a  value  upon,  something  that  you 
could  collect  a  tax  from  ;  but  surely  gentlemen 
did  not  think  of  collecting  a  tax  from  a  man's 
intellect,  or  from  any  salaiy  that  might  be  given 
him  for  services.  What  sort  of  a  principle  would 
that  be?  First  of  all,  vou  say  a  man's  services 
are  worth  so  much;  and  then  you  say  you  must 
take  back  so  much  out  of  that  for  taxation.  Had 
we  not  better  say  at  once  "we  will  reduce  his 
salarv  by  so  much,  and  we  will  keep  this  por- 
tion back  in  the  treasury?"  I  hope  never  to  see 
such  a  principle  as  that  advocated  in  this  com- 
monwealth. The  gentleman  says  that  spectacles, 
iratches,  carriages,  buggies,  barouches,  and  what 
not,  should  be  taxed.  1  have  no  objection  to  tax 
them.  But  he  says  that  will  not  be  enough. 
vNow,  I  do  think  the  old  woman  should  not  be 
taxed  fifty  cents  for  her  spectacles  because  they 
■may  happen  to  be  gold  spectacles.  It  is  a  very 
small  raattpr,  and  in  my  opinion  it  is  a  disgrace 
to  a  state  like  that  of  Kentucky. 

Now  he  "wants  to  make  it  ont  that  that  has 
some  connection  with  the  sinking  fund.  The 
iirst  answer  I  have  to  that  is,  that  it  constitutes 
no  part  of  that  fund,  and  that  tlie  sinking  fund 
has  nothing  at  all  to  do  with  it  any  more  than 
Vith  the  revenue  derived  from  any  other  proper- 
ty; but  if  the  sinking  fund  is  not  sufficient, 
tiien  make  it  upon  a  just  principle  of  taxation; 
tax  every  man  according  to  what  his  property  is 
worth.  That  is  the  way  to  supply  a  deficit  if 
there  is  any  deficit.  But  sir,  there  is  no  deficit. 
■There  are  about  eleven  or  twelve  thousand  dol- 
lars derived  from  specific  taxation.  Now  take 
that  on  the  uniform  principle  of  nineteen  cents 
on  the  hundred  dollars,  and  you  would  realize 
vjastly  more  in  proportion  than  you  will  by  get- 
ting occasionally  a  dollar  for  a  carriage  or  fifty 
<sents  for  a  pair  of  spectacles.  And  here  again 
is  the  injustice.  You  tax  the  splendid  carriage 
of  the  millionaire  just  as  much  as  you  do  that 
«f  the  poor  farmer  who  has  a  miserable  two  horse 
affair  to  take  his  wife  to  church.  Is  there  any 
105 


I  equality  in  this?  Not  at  all.  The  old  carriage 
I  that  is  thrown  by,  and  has  not  turned  a  wheel  fo* 
years,  is  taxed  just  as  much  as  that  which  is  run- 
ning in  all  the  splendor  of  novelty.  Is  there  any 
justice  in  that?  Is  there  any  e(juality  in  that? 
Then  a  watch  that  is  worth  $oOO  is'  taxed  the 
same  as  the  one  that  is  worth  but  $50.  Is  there 
any  honesty  in  that? 

Bnt  sir,  the  revenue  is  increasing  and  the  debt 
is  being  diminished.  I  suppose  Aat  is  the  rea- 
son why  the  legislature  took  away  a  part  of  the 
sinking  fund.  The  income  of  the  slack  water 
has  been  taken  firom  the  sinking  fund  and  ap- 
^ied  to  the  school  fund.  I  think  that  is  wrong. 
Whatever  has  been  set  apart  to  the  sinking  fund 
should  be  held  sacred.  I  am  willing  to  rote 
for  that,  and  that  it  should  remain  so  tiU  the 
entire  debt  is  discharged.  But  sir,  I  would  not 
go  to  supply  the  means  of  sustaining  the  sink- 
ing fund  by  any  such  unjust  and  iniquitous 
principle  as  this.  If  it  is  to  be  supplied,  let  it  be 
supplied  by  taxes  from  property  according  to  its 
value.  Now,  if  vou  leave  your  constitution 
open,  what  shall  "be  done?  Some  suppose  our 
slave  property  should  be  taxed.  Well  if  you 
tax  the  old  woman's  spectacles  worth  $5,  why 
not  tax  a  man's  slaves  worth  $5,000?  How  would 
that  operate?  We  must  adopt  some  principle. 
If  the  gentleman  can  embrace  any  other  ideas 
than  those  in  the  article  I  have  proposed,  I  am 
willing  to  submit.  All  I  want  is,  that  taxes 
should  be  equal  and  uniform,  and  that  all  prop- 
erty should  be  taxed  alike,  according  to  its  value. 
That  is  the  great  principle  which  I  think  ought 
to  govern  a  legislature  in  taxing  the  community 
of  a  great  state.  These  are  the  reasons  why  I 
offer  that  amendment.  I  don't  want  to  deprive 
the  sinking  fund  of  anything!  Kentucky  is  in 
debt,  and  she  is  willing  to  pay  that  debt.'  All  I 
ask  is,  that  the  burden  may  fall  alike  upon  all 
according  to  their  means. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Sir,  I  acknowledge  there  is 
sometimes  a  carriage  worth  over  $500;  but  a 
carriage  would  have  to  be  worth  that  sum  to  be 
taxed.  Now  suppose  a  carriage  of  the  value  of 
.$500  was  taxed,  is  there  any  man  in  Kentucky 
that  would  be  likely  to  give  it  in  at  $1,000. 
Some  men,  it  is  true,  might  do  so  for  the  sake  of 
vanity  and  show,  but  in  that  case  there  would 
be  no  oppression — not  even  the  appearance 
of  it.  The  gentleman  may  have  seen  some  car- 
riages in  this  country  worth  more  than  $1,000; 
I  have  never  s«H?n  one.  Sir,  we  know  the  tax 
on  gold  watches  yields  $5,934.  Now  what 
woufd  it  yield  if  given  in,  one  watch  with  an- 
other? Would  they  yield  $100.  What  would 
fold  spectacles  yfeld?  The  gentleman  from 
efferson  says  he  knows  carriages  worth  $1,200; 
bnt  we  know  the  average  value  of  carriages  will 
seldom  be  given  in.  Now  take  barouches  and 
buggies.  We  know  that  these,  which  cost  $275 
will  seldom  be  returned  at  more  than  $150.  I 
venture  to  say  that  if  we  take  the  manner  in 
which  these  articles  are  usually  given  in,  we 
lose  an  income  of  at  least  $ri,(KK)  a  year. — 
They  will  give  in  the  finest  kind  of  agold  watch 
worth,  probably,  $500,  at  not  more  than  $100,  or 
at  most  $120.  '  They  will  give  gold  spectacles 
at  $10,  and  all  other  articles  at  a  similarly  re- 
duced value. 

Th€  most  that  I  object  to  is  the  taking  away 


834 


from  the  legislature  the  i)ower  of  specific  taxa- 
tion. Let  them  exercise  it,  or  not,  as  they  please- 
but  certainly  give  them  the  discretion. 

The  honorable  gentleman  from  Jefferson  pot 
up  and  made  a  wonderful  discovery.  He  dis- 
covered that  if  a  lawyer  or  doctor  had  a  tract  of 
land,  or  money  at  intere.st,  he  was  taxed  accord- 
ing to  its  value  or  amoiint.  Well,  if  the  farmer 
clears  $300  upon  a  capital  of  $10,000,  he  pays 
nineteen  dollars.  I  have  often  enquired  of  far- 
mers, and  they  tell  me  that  three  per  cent,  was 
the  full  amount  they  could  realise  on  their  capi- 
tal. The  amount  of  tax  which  they  pay  is  up- 
wards of  five  per  cent,  upon  what  they  make.  I 
am  therefore  against  going  beyond  the  nineteen 
cents  upon  the  visible,  tangible  farming  proper- 
ty in  this  state.  All  taxation  should,  as  near  as 
possible,  approach  the  income;  and  not  only  so, 
but  it  shoula  be  diversified  as  much  as  possible, 
60  that  every  man  would  pay  according  to  his 
means  of  paying. 

The  gentleman  says  I  was  afraid  to  go  to  the 
legislature  in  relation  to  the  court  of  appeals.  If 
I  recollect  right,  the  gentleman  compromised 
that  matter;  and  when  two  men  have  quarreled, 
and  a  compromise  has  been  entered  into,  I  deny 
the  right  of  going  behind  that  compromise. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  did  not  refer  to  the  court  of  ap- 
peals at  all,  but  to  the  circuit  judges. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  whole  bill  was  compro- 
mised; and  I  lay  it  down,  that  if  two  nations 
quarrel  and  fight,  and  then  enter  into  a  treaty, 
they  are  not  to  go  behind  that  treaty.  And,  sir, 
I  protest  against  the  gentleman  again  referring 
to  what  was  the  subject  of  that  compromise. 
Shall  Brutus'  ghosthaunt  me  eternally,  and  meet 
me  here  and  there,  and  disqualify  me  for  the  last 
battle  with  Mark  Anthony  and  CajsarV  I  com- 
promised my  own  opinion  on  several  occasions; 
I  came  here  to  make  compromises  in  relation  to 
this  constitution;  I  have  been  compromising  from 
the  first  day;  and  with  all  my  compromises,  I 
can,  with  pleasure,  vote  for  this  constitution.  I 
believe  we  are  making  a  good  constitution.  I 
believe  we  shall  save  $27,500  a  year  by  holding 
the  legislature  biennially.  I  can  see  in  the  cir- 
cuit courts  we  have  saved  $7,500;  and  we  have 
only  lost  $1,500 — the  salary  of  one  additional 
judge  of  the  court  of  appeals.  We  are  effecting 
the  great  cardinal  points  for  which  we  came 
here — to  regulate  the  franchise,  to  give  new 
strength,  new  life,  new  vigor  to  the  government, 
and  to  do  it  more  economically;  and  if  ever  an 
expression  has  escaped  me  unfavorable  to  the 
constitution,  it  must  have  been  in  jest;  for,  like 
my  friend  from  Henij,  (.Mr.  Nuttall,)  I  jest  fre- 
quently. But  I  do  firmly  believe  tliat  tlie  great 
ends  for  which  we  were  sent  here  will  Vie  accom- 
plished, even  if  the  gentleman  should  succeed 
with  his  amendmenl.  I  believe  we  have  all  la- 
bored for  the  best.  I  yield  all  I  can,  and  every 
gentleman  here  has  to  yield  something  for  the 
constitutioi)- 

Mr.  TURNER,  after  stating  that,  as  a  general 
thing,  he  was  opposed  to  specific  taxation,  said 
that  it  would  not  be  vcr^  wronar  to  tax  bowie 
knives  and  pistols.  This  he  thought  would  be 
in  accordance  with  what  they  had  done  on  the 
subject  of  dueling.  He  bel  ieved  it  would  be  the 
tnost  wholeeome  exercise  of  power  that  had  yet 
been   exercised  by  the   conTcntion.      It  would 


doubtless  save  many  valuable  lives,  and  have  a 
great  tendency  to  improve  the  morals  of  the  com- 
munity.    He  then  moved  the  previous  question. 

Tlie  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  amend- 
ment offered  by  Mr.  GRAY  to  the  last  section, 
and  it  was  rejected. 

The  question  next  recurred  on  the  substitute 
of  the  gentleman  from  Henry,  as  follows: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  laws  compelling  any  citizen  of  this  com- 
monwealth to  pay  taxes  upon  more  than  he,  she, 
or  they  may  be  intrinsically  worth." 

Mr.  NUTTALL  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays,       J 
and  they  were  yeas  14,  nays  75.  .1 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  Alfred  Boyd,  Bev- 
erly L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Edward  Curd,  J  as. 
Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Michael  L.  Stoner — 14. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
William  Bradlej',  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Thos.  D.Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Henry  R.D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  William  Cowper,  Lucius  Desha,  Green  For- 
rest, Nathan  Gaitner,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J. 
Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Jas.  P.  Hamilton,  Ben. 
Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  J.  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas 
James,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Geo. 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lac- 
key, Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsev, 
Tlios.  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Da- 
vid Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Nt^wcum, 
Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Pres- 
ton, Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone, 
Albert  6.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Wal- 
ler, lienry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew 
S.White,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 75. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  asked  for  a  .livision  of 
the  question,  on  the  adoption  of  the  proposed 
sections,  and  the  question  recurred  on  the  first 
section. 

Mr.  ROGERS  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  first  section,  and  they  were 
yeas  52,  nays  38. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley.  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow, Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Cfionault,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  'V^^illiam  "Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.Garrard,  Thomas  J. 
Gough,  Ninian  E.  GraT.  William  Hendrix,  An- 
drew Hood,   James  W.  Irwin,   Thoma"   Jnme«, 


035 


George  W.  Johnston,  Charlea  C.  Kelly,  James  M. 
Lacker,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, \\'illiam  X.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether, 
Wm.  D.  Mitxihell,  JohnD.  ilorris,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, Wm.  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L. 
"VYaller,  Henrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  Whit«, 
Robert  X.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 52. 

Xats — John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  James 
S.  Chrisman,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben. 
Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsev, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  XathanMcClure, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Xesbitt,  Jonathan 
^'ewcum,  Hugh  Xewell,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall.  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
raan,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John 
Wheeler,  George  W.  Williams  Silas  Woodson — 
38. 

So  the  .section  was  adopted. 

The  second  section  was  adopted  without  a 
division. 

Mr.  ROGERS  moved  the  adoption  of  the  fol- 
lowing as  an  additional  section. 

"That  every  citizen  of  this  state  has  the  right 
to  sell  any  and  every  article  produced,  made,  or 
manufactured  by  him  in  the  state,  witliout  lax  or  - 
license." 

Mr.  CHRISMAX  move<i  to  amend,  by  insert- 
ing after  the  word  "state"  the  words  "except  spi- 
rituous liquors." 

The  amendment  was  not  agreed  to. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for  on  the  pro- 
posed section,  and  being  taken  were — yeas  12, 
navs  77 : 

Veas— William  K.  Bowling,  B.  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Edward  Curd,  Xathan  Gaither, 
James  W.  Irwin,  James  M.  Xesbitt.  Hugh  New- 
ell, John  T.  Rogers,  John  J.  Thurmau,  Philip 
Triplett,  John  Wheeler— 12. 

^AYS — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person.  John  L.  Ballinjer,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradlev.  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis   M'.  Bristow,  Thos."D.  Brown,  William  j 

C.  Bullitt,   Charles  Chambers,    Wm.  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben-  i 
jamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Lucius  De.sha,  ! 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  i 
F.  Edwards,  'Milford  Elliott.  Green  Forrest.  Se-  j 
lucius  Garfielde.  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  i 
Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,   Niuian  E.  Gray,  | 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  i 
Vincent    S.   Hay,   William    Hendrix,    Andrew  j 
Hood,  Thomas' J.  Hood,    Alfred  M.  Jackson,' 
William  Johnson,  George  W^.  Johnston,  George 
W.   Kavanaugh,   Charles  C.   Kelly,    James  M. 
Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  X.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 
"W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  William  N.   Marshall,   Richard  L. 
Maves,   Xathan    McCluro,    David    Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell,   Thomas   P.  Moore,  John 

D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Xewcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,'  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 


Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner.  Albert  § 
Talbott,  JohnD.  Taylor.  William  R.  Thompson, 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  SUas  Wood- 
son— 77. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 
I     Mr.  KELLY  moved  an  additional  section,  a^ 
;  follows: 

j     "  The  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to 
t  tax  bowie  knives,  pistols,  and  incomes." 
I     The  amendment  was  rejected. 
j     Mr.  LINDSEY  moved  tlie  following,  as  an  ad- 
ditional section : 

"That in  all  criminal  prosecutions, the  courts 
having  jurisdiction  thereof  shall  be  judges  of 
the  law,  and  juries  of  the  facts,  as  in  civil  ca- 
ses; and  where  an  impartial  jury  cannot  be  ob- 
tained in  the  county  where  the  o'ffence  was  com- 
mitted, competent  jurors — citizens  of  the  com- 
monwealth— shall  be  summoned  from  other 
counties,  in  such  manner  as  may  be  provided  by 
the  general  a.ssembly." 

Mr.  President :  It  is  known  that  in  some  of 
the  circuit  courts,  the  judges  have  decided  that 
they  have  no  power,  on  the  motion  of  the  com- 
monwealth or  the  accused,  in  a  criminal  ease,  to 
instruct  the  jury  upon  the  law;  while  in  other 
circuits  the  judges  have  decided  that  they  have 
the  power,  under  the  present  constitution,"  to  in- 
struct, and  they  do  instruct  the  jury,  on  the  mo- 
tion of  the  parties.  Uniformity  in  decisions 
and  in  practice,  is  as  important  "in  criminal  as 
in  civil  cases,  and  we  should  have  the  principle 
fixed,  one  way  or  the  other.  If  it  is  the  sense  of 
the  conventio'n  that  juries  shall  be  judges  of  law 
and  fact  in  criminal  ca^es,  and  that  the  judges 
shall  have  no  power  to  interfere  with  counsel  in 
arguing  what  is  the  law  to  the  iury,  so  let  us 
say  in  the  constitution,  as  it  is  the 'only  place 
where  we  can  act  upon  the  subject.  For,  if  the 
legislature  were  to  attempt  its  regulation,  the 
judges,  differing  as  to  the  true  construction  of 
the  constitution,  one  side  would  adjudge  that 
the  legislature  could  give  no  authority  to  the 
court  to  decide  the  law,  as  the  constitution  had 
given  it  to  the  jury,  and  the  other  side  would 
adjudge  the  contraiy,  and  we  would  be  precise- 
ly where  we  are  now. 

I  remember  some  years  ago,  in  a  neighboring 
circuit,  a  man  was  indicted  for  larceny,  and  from 
the  proof  was  undoubtedly  guilty.  "  The  coun- 
sel moved  to  qua.sh  the  inclictment,  for  the  want 
of  such  description  of  the  property  as  the  law- 
required,  in  his  opinion;  the  object  being,  if 
successful,  to  get  delay,  as  the  grand  jury  had 
been  adjourned.  The'  court  overruled  the  mo- 
lion,  and  the  trial  was  had.  In  argument  to  the 
jury,  the  counsel  took  the  ground  before  them,  as 
he  had  taken  it  before  the  judge — that  there  was 
a  defect  in  the  indictment,  for  want  of  proper  de- 
scription of  the  property — and  that  the  law  was 
this:  "if  the  accusation  wjis  not  suflSciently  set 
forth  there  was  as  much  impropriety  in  findingthe 

accused  guilty — although  the  proof  was  clear 

as  there  would  be  to  find  'guilty,'  on  a  good  in- 
dictment without  proof."  Strange  to  tell,  the 
jury  found  a  verdict  of  not  guilty. 

In  a  recent  case,  tried  in  this  circuit,  the  in- 
dictment wsB  for  murder,  under  which  the  law- 


m 


yers  know  man-slaughter  may  be  founci;  a  whole 
day  was  consumed  oy  counsel  in  reading  and 
discussing  law  to  the  jury  and  in  explaijiing 
what  was  the  law  called  murder,  arid  what  man- 
slaughter. The  prisoner  was  acquitted.  A  juror 
giving  a  description  of  what  had  taken  place  in  ' 
the  jury  room,  said  tijey  concluded  first  to  take 
the  question  on  whether  the  accused  had  com- 
mitted murder  or  not,  and  they  voted  by  ballot. 
The  ballot  was  unanimous  that  he  was  not  guil- 
ty of  murder.  They  then  voted  in  the  same 
way  as  to  whether  he  had  been  guilty  of  mau- 
alaughter,  and  there  was  found  two  ballots  that 
he  was  guilty.  One  remarked  that  it  was  im- 
possible to  come  to  any  other  conclusion  than 
that  the  accused  was  insane  when  he  committed 
the  act.  One  of  those  who  voted  guilty,  replied 
that  he  concurred  in  the  opinion  expressed,  that 
the  accused  was  insane,  and  therefore  ought  not 
to  be  found  guilty.  Yet,  as  the  question  taken 
had  been,  whether  manslaughter  had  been  com- 
mitted or  not,  he  had  voted  in  the  affirmative,  as 
a  man  had  been  slaughtered. 

These  are  the  judges  of  law  and  fact  in  some 
circuits.     Is  it  right  that  it  should  be  so? 

For  what  purpose  do  you  have  a  judge,  if  it 
is  not  that  he  may  instruct  the  juries  as  to  the 
law,  and  see  that  the  law  is  properly  adminis- 
tered. Is  it  intended  that  a  judge  shall  sit  upon 
the  bench  and  decide  questions  as  to  the  cona- 
petency  of  witnesses,  and  all  questions  of  evi- 
dence upon  the  sufficiency  of  the  indictments, 
and  that  counsel  may  disregard  his  decisions 
and  make  the  same  questions  to  the  juries?  If 
the  true  constitutional  principle  is,  that  juries 
are  judges  of  law  and  fact,  wliat  right  has  the 
judge  to  interfere  even  on  questions  of  evidence, 
after  the  jury  is  sworn.  If  the  juries  are  to  be 
the  sole  triers  of  law  and  fact,  the  judge's  power 
should  end  after  the  jury  is  sw^orn. 

There  is,  to  my  mind,  much  of  the  ridiculous 
in  requiring  a  grave  judge  to  sit  upon  the  bench 
merely  to  keep  order  in  a  criminal  trial  and  be 
compelled  to  say  nothing,  although  counsel  may 
pervert  the  law  to  the  prejudice  of  the  common- 
wealth, or  the  accused,  in  the  argument  to  the 
jury.  Where  are  the  boasted  protections  to  the 
rignts  of  a  prisoner  in  having  an  impartial  trial, 
when  the  prosecuting  counsel  may  argue  prin- 
ciples to  the  jury,  not  law,  and  the  judge  cannot 
instruct  them  to  the  contrary.  The  court  should 
see  that  the  law,  and  nothing  else,  is  stated  to 
the  jury,  and  should  have  the  power  so  to  state 
the  law,  that  the  jury  may  understand  it,  and 
that  counsel  should  not  travel  outside  of  it  to 
the  prejudice  of  the  commonwealth,  or  the  ac- 
cused. 

I  have  not  as  yet  found  out  where  the  courts 
derive  their  authority  to  grant  new  trials  in 
criminal  cases,  if  the  constitution  gives  to  juries 
the  exclusive  right  of  judging  of  the  law  and 
the  fact,  and  yet  judges  who  have  decided  that 
they  cannot  say  what  the  law  of  a  case  is,  take 
upon  themselves  to  grant  new  trials  in  every 
case  where  the  juries  convict,  as  they  may  deem 
improperly. 

Let  the  law  be  one  way  or  the  other  through- 
out the  whole  commonwealth.  If  we  are  to 
make  a  tribunal  to  determine  law  and  fact  in  the 
jury,  80  let  us  express  it;  or  if  we  mean  to  have 
judges  to  decide  law,  and  juries  facts,  let  us  so 


determine  and  make  the  rule  operate  the  same  in 
everv  circuit. 

Tlie  amendment  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  BOYD  moved  the  following,  as  an  addi- 
tional section: 

'•Xo  charter  shall  be  granted  which  will  con- 
fer banking  or  trading  powers,  without  provid- 
ing that  the  private  proj)erty  of  stockholders,  be 
made  liable  for  all  the  debts  and  obligations  of 
any  such  coi-poration  or  chartered  company;  but 
the  general  assembly  may  submit  such  charters, 
without  any  such  restriction,  to  the  people  at  a 
general  election,  for  their  approval  or  rejection." 

Mr.  HAMILTON  offered  the  following,  as  a 
substitute: 

"All  corporations  hereafter  established  in  this 
commonwealth,  in  case  of  failure,  the  stockhold- 
ers shall  be  liable,  individually,  or  collectively, 
to  an  amount  as  large  as  their  stock  in  such  cor- 
poration. All  banks  which  now  are,  or  may  here- 
after be  incorporated,  shall  forfeit  their  charters, 
wlien  they  refuse  to  pay  their  liabilities  in  gold 
or  silver,  and  they  shall  not  be  re-chartered." 

Mr.  TtlRNER  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  substi- 
tute, and  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  CLARKE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  section  offered  by  Mr.  BOYD, 
and  they  were  veas  29,  nays  55. 

Yeas — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradlev,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Wilfiam  Cow- 

f)er,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Milford  El- 
iott,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Laslibrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jon- 
athan Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ignatius  A.Spald- 
ing, John  Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe— 29. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wil- 
liam K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawn er,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Thomas  D.  BroWn,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Jesse  Cofiey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Jas. 
Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 
Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William 
Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.Jackson,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thos. 
W.  Lisle,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  James 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Heniy' 
Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 55. 

So  the  section  was  rejected, 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  to  reconsider  the 
vote,  rejecting  the  second  of  the  two  sec- 
tions offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Christian, 
(Mr.  Gray.)  He  said  on  reflection  he  was  satis- 
fied that  section  should  be  adopted. 


After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  CLARKE,  and 
Mr.RUDD,  the  motion  to  reconsider  was  agreed 
to. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  section. 

Mr.  A.  K.  "MARSHALL.  I  presume  this  is 
designed  to  compel  individuals  in  cities  and 
towns  to  pave  the  streets  b«;fore  their  own  doors. 
I  move  to  strike  out  the  words  "streets  and  al- 
leys, digging  and  walling  of  wells."  That  leaves 
the  side  walks.  In  a  certain  city  that  I  will 
not  name,  they  claim  the  right  to  make  a  man 
pave  the  streets  m  front  of  his  lot.  That  some- 
times cost.s  more  than  the  lot  is  worth.  It  is  un- 
fair, and  should  be  paid  out  of  the  general  rev- 
enue. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  motion  is  not  now 
in  order. 

Mr.  XESBITT.  I  shall  vote  against  this 
amendment,  because  I  do  not  want  the  constitu- 
tion to  show  that  we  voted  respecting  pumps  and 
side  walks,  and  things  of  that  sort.  If  the  le- 
gislature have  power  to  tax,  that  will  be  suf- 
ficient. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  I  am  opposed  to  the  whole 
section.  We  should  leave  the  matter  in  the 
hands  of  the  people.  If  the  principle  is  to  be 
adopted  in  the  constitution,  that  we  are  to  be 
taxed  to  rai.<e  a  revenue,  and  an  opposition  at 
once  to  our  work  will  arise.  Let  us  fax  on  cor- 
rect and  fundamental  principles,  and  leave  the 
legislature  to  carry  them  out.  I  am  opposed  to 
this  partial  and  local  legislation. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH.  I  do  not  know  where 
this  principle  is  to  apply,  or  what  it  includes. 
It  appears  to  me  to  conflict  with  the  section  in 
which  we  declare  that  the  county  revenue  could 
not  be  assessed  on  slaves. 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  RL'DD,  the  ques- 
tion was  taken  on  the  adoption  of  the  amend- 
ment, which  Mr.  GRAY  had  offered  as  an  ad- 
dition to  his  second  section  which  was  again 
moved  by  Mr.  MERIWETHER,  and  it  was 
agreed  to. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TURNER,  the  word 
"towns"  was  inserted  in  the  proviso,  after  the 
word  "county."  So  that  it  will  read:  "Pro- 
vided, a  poll  tax  may  be  a.ssessed  for  county, 
town,  and  corporate  purposes." 

The  question  again  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
the  proposed  section  as  amended. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  the 
section  was  amended  by  the  insertion  of  the 
words  "  except  titheable  and  poll  tax  on  slaves.". 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  HARDIN  and 
Mr.  GRAY,  Mr.  KAVANAUGH,  called  for  the 
yeas  and  nays  on  the  adoption  of  the  section, 
and  they  were  yeas  49,  nays  36. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  William  K.  Bowl- 
ing, Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coflfey,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dud- 
ley, 'Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott, 
Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  S.  Hav,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J. 
Hood,  James  W.Irwin,  Alfred  M.Jackson,  Thos. 
James,  George  W.Johnston,  James  M.  Lackev, 
Thomas    W.     Lisle,   Alexander    K.    Marshall, 


Martin  P.  Marshall  David  Meriwether,  John  D. 
Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J. 
Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  George 
W.   Williams— 49. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, Jas. 
S.  Chrisman,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  William  Heudrix,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thoma.s  N.  Lindsey, 
WiU'is  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Na- 
than McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell.  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  Jonathan  Ncwcum,  Hugh  Newell,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  James  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson.  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
litfe,  Robert  N.  WickliflV,  Silas  Woodson— 36. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  convention  then  took  a  recess. 

EVEXIXG   SESSIOK. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  call  for  the  previous  ques- 
tion on  the  nineteenth  section,  offered  by  the 
gentleman  from  Christian,  (Mr.  Gray,)  prevented 
me  from  offering  an  amendment  to  it,  and  with 
a  view  to  move  a  reconsideration  I  voted  for  it. 
I  was  a  member  of  the  legislature  in  '42  or  '43, 
and  the  pressing  demands  on  the  treasury,  to 
pay  contractors  and  laborers  on  the  public 
works,  and  the  hbavy  burden  of  taxation  on  the 
people  rendered  it  necessary  that  some  other 
means  should  be  resorted  to,  to  increase  the  pub- 
lic revenue.  In  the  absence  of  any  other  re- 
source, I  voted,  although  satisfied  at  the  time, 
that  I  was  wrong,  and  was  violating  a  great 
!  principle,  for  the  specific  tax  on  watches,  spec- 
I  tacles,  etc.  If  the  motion  for  reconsideration 
prevails,  I  intend  to  move  to  strike  out  of  this 
nineteenth  section,  the  words  "merchants  and 
pedlers."  I  do  not  think  the  legislature  should 
possess  the  power  to  impose  specific  taxes  on 
this  class  of  citizens,  for  they  will  not  pay  it, 
but  the  mass  of  the  people  generally.  They 
would  increase  the  price  of  their  commodities 
so  as  to  reimburse  themselves  for  the  taxes  they 
!  would  have  to  pay,  and  thus  indirectly  the  tax 
would  be  one  on  the  people.  This  no  man 
can  deny,  and  I  am  opposed  to  holding  out  an 
idea  to  the  people  that  we  are  taxing  merchants 
and  pedlers  to  raise  revenue,  when  it  is  only 
the  people  themselves  that  we  are  taxing.  It  is 
upon  the  principle  that  the  consumer  pays  the 
duties  imposed  on  articles  imported  into  the 
United  States.  We  go  against  specific  taxation 
because  it  is  unequal  and  against  the  minimum 
principle,  because  it  is  fixing  a  fictitious  value 
on  property,  and  entertaining  these  views,  I 
cannot  consistently  vote  for  a  section  professed- 
ly imposing  specific  taxes  on  merchants  and 
pedlers,  but  indirectly  levying  it  on  the  people 
themselves.  I  only  consented  to  vote  for  the 
specific  taxes  of  '42  and  '43,  because  I  believed 
the  debt  they  were  to  meet,  had  benefitted  par- 
ticularly those  portions  of  the  state  where  were 
most  of  the  articles  upon  which  the  specific 
taxation  was   levied.     I  believed  it  but  fair  that 


those  who  h.Hil  reo«ived  the  greatest  benefit  I'roiii 
th«  money  borrowed,  should  bear  the  heaviest 
burden  for  its  repayment.  I  yielded  to  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  case  then,  and  voted  for  a  specific 
tax,  believing  then  as  I  now  believe,  that  it  was 
wrong,  and  1  cannotconsent  to  vote  now  for  any 
section  in  the  constitution,  which  gives  thai 
powor  to  the  legislature.  I  move  then,  with  tlie 
views  1  have  indicated,  a  reconsideration  of  the 
vote  by  which  this  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  am  glad  that  the 
gentleman  has  moved  to  reconsider,  and  I  hope 
the  motion  will  prevail;  though  not  particular- 
ly on  the  ground  of  the  policy  or  impolicy  of 
specific  taxation.  On  this  subject,  I  think  a 
sound  public  sentiment  will,  and  must  control 
through  the  tax  imposing  power.  I  am  willing 
to  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  all  taxation  shall  be 
equal  and  uniform,  upon  land  and  negroes,  in 
view  of  the  suggestion  made  by  the  gentleman 
from  Daviess,  (Mr.  Triplett,)  of  any  possible 
danger  at  a  fixture  day  of  so  inordinate  a  specific 
taxation  on  negroes  as  to  render  them  worthless 
to  their  owners.  But,  in  any  other  respect,  I 
would  not  say  to  the  legislature,  that  no  matter 
what  might  be  the  emergency,  they  shall  not 
impose  a  specific  tax  on  any  property.  It  is  a 
matter  for  public  sentiment  to  control,  and  the 
very  fact  that  the  legislatures  have  not  yet  re- 
pealed the  present  specific  tax  is  an  evidence  that 
it  is  not  against  the  general  public  sentiment. 
With  these  views,  I  shall  vote  for  the  motion  to 
reconsider. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  hope  the  motion  to  re- 
consider will  prevail.  As  the  section  now 
stands,  I  am  inclined  to  the  opinion  tliat  it 
would  prevent,  in  cities,  the  exercise  of  that 
species  of  specific  taxation  known  as  assess- 
ments, by  which  only  a  system  of  public  im- 
provement in  cities  can  be  carried  on.  It  was 
a  graduation  of  the  taxation  upon  the  owners  of 
property,  in  proportion  to  the  benefits  they  de- 
rived from  the  improvetnents.  All  gentlemen 
from  cities  would  understand  this,  and  it  would 
be  a  death  blow  to  the  prosperity  of  those  cities 
to  deny  thsm  this  privilege.  As  to  the  general 
question,  it  is  one  which  should  be  left  to  the 
control  of  the  legislature  under  the  influence  of 
public  sentiment  and  public  emergencies. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  hope  the  vote  will  not  be  re- 
considered, and  that  the  convention  will  adhere 
to  the  decision  it  has  so  solemnly  made.  I 
think  we  ought  to  lay  down  in  the  fundamental 
law,  a  certain  general  principle  of  taxation,, 
right  in  itself,  which  should  govern  the  legisla- 
ture. It  would  certainly  be  a  strange  proposi- 
tion to  throw  out  to  the  people,  to  say  that  there 
should  only  be  two  kinds  of  property — land  and 
negroes — on  which  taxntion  should  be  equal  and 
uniform,  as  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr  Wickliffe.)  I  am  for  making  the 
application  of  the  principle  general.  Nor  do  I 
agree  with  the  principle  as  declared  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Simp.son,  (Mr.  Clarke,)  that  when 
you  tax  pedlurs  and  merchants,  it  is  the  peo- 
ple who  pay  the  taxes.  Tax  or  no  tax,  they 
will  a-s  now,  put  as  high  a  price  ou  their  ar- 
ticles as  the  people  will  pay.  As  to  the  effect 
of  the  proposition  on  cities,!  think  the  gentle- 
man from  Kenton,  (Mr.  Stevenson,)  is  mistaken. 
They  could  carry  on  their  improvements  by  gen- 


eral taxation,  aa  is  the  case  in  most  of  the 
towns  now.  I  am  aware  that  some  property 
derives  greater  benefit  from  these  improvements 
than  others,  and  lor  that  reason,  I  was  willing 
to  make  an  exception  in  the  section  to  meet 
such  ca.ses,  but  as  the  section  has  been  adopted, 
I  think  it  hardly  worth  while  to  reconsider  for 
that  purpose. 

Mr.  BKOWN.  I  am  glad  that  the  motion  to 
reconsider  has  been  made,  for  I  am  oppo.sed  to 
the  whole  section,  because  I  believe  tnat  this 
])ower  of  raising  revenue  ought  to  be  confided 
to  thi;  legislature.  What  is  the  use  of  this  sec- 
tion? It  declares  that  the  legislature  shall  pos- 
sess the  power  to  impose  certain  taxes,  but  has 
not  the  legislature  that  power  as  fully  and  com- 
pletely without  that  declaration  as  with  it? 
Most  certainly;  and  why  make  the  declaration 
in  the  constitution  then?  I  voted  for  the  section 
myself,  when  I  saw  the  previous  question  mov- 
ed, with  a  view  of  moving  a  reconsideration, 
and  thus  affording  an  opportunity  for  that  full 
and  free  discussion  which  should  be  given  to  all 
subjects  proposed  to  be  embodied  in  constitu- 
tional law.  I  Jiope  the  motion  to  reconsider 
will  prevail,  and  I  shall  vote  against  the  whole 
section. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  It  is  against  this  inhibi- 
tion of  the  power  of  cities  to  lay  specific  taxa- 
tion, on  the  petition  of  the  owners  of  the  proper- 
ty assessed  themselves,  that  I  protest.  I  have 
nothing  to  say  against  the  general  proposition; 
on  the  contrary,  there  is  no  more  firm  advocate 
of  uniform  taxation  than  myself,  but  I  know  that 
the  cities  cannot  exist  withoutthepowerto  which 
I  have  referred. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  If  the  section  is  reconsider- 
ed, I  shall  move  an  amendment  to  obviate  the 
inconvenience  under  which  the  cities  Avill  be 
placed.  If  not,  then  I  shall  offer  an  additional 
section,  with  the  view  to  the  attainment  of  that 
object. 

'Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  Will  it  strike  the 
people  that  there  is  any  thing  dangerous  in  de- 
claring that  taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform? 
It  seems  to  me  to  be  a  rule  which  it  is  impera 
tively  the  duty  of  this  convention  to  adopt  and 
engraft  in  the  constitution.  Is  there  any  thing 
wrong  or  startling  in  it?  If  there  is,  let  us  try 
the  reverse  of  the  proposition,  and  sav  that  tax- 
ation shall  not  be  equal  and  uniform  t'iiroughout 
Kentucky.  Do  you  think  that  would  look  well 
in  the  constitutitm?  Or  would  it  look  well,  or 
be  calculated  to  give  strength  to  the  constitution, 
to  say  that  all  property  on  which  taxation  is 
levied  sliall  not  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its 
value?  The  object  of  gentlemen  seems  to  be  to 
reach  indirectly  what  the  convention  refused  to 
do  directly  this  morning.  It  is  to  give  to  cities 
and  towns  a  power  which,  in  my  judgment, 
ought  never  to  be  given  to  them,  an<i  which  is 
not  necessary  to  their  prosperity.  I  have  heard 
of  an  instance  in  one  of  our  cities,  where,  for 
the  opening  of  a  street,  a  citizen  was  made  to 
pay  more  than  his  lot  was  worth.  Then  the 
work  formed  a  pond  on  the  lot,  which  was  de- 
clared to  be  a  nuisance,  and  then  he  was  obliged 
to  go  to  the  expense  of  filling  up  his  lot  to  abate 
the  nuisance.  All  this  may  be  very  necessary 
for  ought  I  know  to  the  prosperity  of  cities,  but 
it  looks  wrong  to  me.    I  do  trust  this  conven- 


689 


tion,  to  strike  out  all  of  the  Rection  except  the 
■words,  "taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
throughout  the  state." 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  move  to  strike  out  the 
-whole  of  the  section,  and  to  insert  the  follow- 
ing: 

"The  legislature  shall  have  no  power  to  lay 
taxes  on  land  or  .slaves,  except  on  the  ad  valorem 
principle;  or  a  higher  tax  on  slaves,  in  propor- 
tion to  their  value,  than  on  land:  Provided,  Ihat 
a  poll  tax  may  be  assessed  on  slaves  for  county 
and  corporate  purposes." 

The  amendment  explains  itself,  and  attains  all 


tion  will  not  exhibit  this  disposition  to  change, 
that  will  have  a  tendency  to  give  an  idea  to  the 
public  of  uncertainty  in  reference  to  our  action 
here  bv  this  continual  reconsideration  of  what 
is  done.  I  do  not  like  the  rule  of  the  witness, 
who  having  once  sworn  that  his  horse  was  six- 
teen feet  high,  determined  to  adhere  to  it,  for 
that  is  not  right.  But  there  is  a  rule  which  I 
think  ought  to  be  adopted,  and  that  is  to  meas- 
ure the  horse,  and  know  how  high  he  is  before 
we  swear  to  it. 

Mr.  DAVIS  admitted  the  general  coiTectness 
of  the  principle  contained  in  the  amendment  of 

the  gentleman  from  Christian,  (Mr.  Gray,)  but  |  t]jat  I  ever  sought  to  attain  by  voting  for  the 
doubted  its  practicability  and  policy,  and  main-  !  jg^h  and  20th  sections.  I  believe  the  great  ob- 
tained that  the  public  treasury  might  hereafter  |jej.t;  the  convention  has  in  view,  is  to  protect  slave 
be  in  such  exigency  as  to  require  additional  i  property  from  excessive  taxation,  and  in  this 
revenue,  which  could  only  be  obtained  through  I  there  will  be  no  difficulty,  if  we  link  it  with 
those  sources  which  the  principle  of  the  amend-  j  landed  property.  All  othe'r  subjects  I  am  willing 
ment  would  cut  off.  I  to  leave  in   the  hands   of  the  legislature. ,  The 

ilr.  TURNER  concurred  in  these  views,  and  1  great  object  that  we  have  in  view  is  to  lay  down 
hoped  the  motion  to  reconsider  would  prevail,      j  land-marks  and  general  principles,  the  carrying 

The  question  being  taken — by  yeas  and  nays  i  jnto  execution  of  which  we  must  leave  to  the 
on  the  call  of  Mr.  BROWX — the  motion  to  re-  j  legislature.  All  must  concede  the  impossibili- 
consider  prevailed;  yea.s  75,  nays  16,  as  follows:  |  ty  of  carrying  out  in   the  organic  law  any  prin- 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie.)  John  S.  Bar-  \  c'iple  of  niere  detail.  The  experience  of  this  con- 
low,  William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Luther  |  vention  has  demonstrated  the  difficulty  and  iip- 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  |  possibilitv  of  thus  carrying  out  matters  of  detail. 
Wm.  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  j  Let  us  therefore  confine  ourselves  to  the  laying 
Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman.  Benjamin  Cope-  j  down  of  general  principles  and  land-marks  mere- 
lin,  William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  De- 1  iv,  for  the  guidance  of  legislation.  And  as  such, 
sha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benj.  .  I'hope  that  either  this  pro  po.sition,  or  one  having 
F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Gartielde, '  t^g  same  object  in  view,  will  be  adopted  by  the 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough.  James  i  convention. 

P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  j  y[r.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  Mr.  President:  1  re- 
S.  Hay,  Wra.  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  j  gard  this  as  a  grave  and  important  question.  I 
M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Kava-  i  j^  not  doubt,  no  man  doubts,  the  correctness  of 
iiaugh,  Chas.  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos.  j  the  general  principle  involved  in  the  amendment 
N.  Lindsey,  Thos.  TV  .  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  |  under  con.sideration.  Slaves  are  property,  lands 
G«orge  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm.  I  are  property,  and  they  should  be  taxed  equally. 
C.Marshall,  William  X.Marshall,  Richard  L.  j  This,  as  a  liaked  proposition,  I  mean  not  to  con- 
Maves,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether,  Wm.  test.  But,  sir,  there  spring  out  of  the  institution 
D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  |  of  slavery,  risks,  dangers,  and  expense,  of  a  pe- 
Jas.  M.  Xesbitt,  Jonathan  Xewcum,  Hugh  New-  ;  cnliar  kind;  expense  which,  in  my  judgment, 
ell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  :  oujriit  not  to  be  defrayed  by  the  community  at 
Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, ;  large,  but  should  be  met  by  that  particular  in- 
Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers.  Ira  Root,  Jas. ;  terest,  on  accouut  of  which  it  is  to  be  incurred, 
Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Jas.  W.  Stone,  Mich-  j  and  but  for  which  no  such  danger,  and  no  such 
ael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor, .  charge,  would  impend  or  could  happen.     While 


A.  Wickliffe,' Robert  X.  Wicklitfe,  Geo.  W.  Wil-  still,  sir,  that  institution  should  not  be  permitted 
liams,  Silas  Woodson — 75.  to  become,  not   only  a  source  of  danger,  but  a 

Xays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, '  ground  of  charge  aud  expense,  to  other  and  dis- 
Wm.  Bradley,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Jesse  Cofivy, ;  tinct  interests  of  the  state. 

Milford  Elliott,  Xathau  Gaither,  Jas.  H.  Garrard,  ;  \t  this  particular  period  of  our  history,  the 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, '  whole  subject  of  slavery  presents  matter  of  deeper 
Thomas  Jame.«,  Alexander  K.Marshall,  Johnson 'feeling,  aud  more  excitement,  than  any  other 
Price,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Andrew  S.  White  property  we  possess.  Our  land  we  know  to  be 
— 16.  firm,  and  stable,  and  safe;  our  slaves  we  feel  are 

Mr.  CLARKE  moved  to  strike  out  the  words   not.    Sir,  the  safety  of  that  property  is  depend- 
"merchants  and  pedlers."  ent  first  upon  a  well  ordered  public  sentiment  in 

Sir.  BROWX  asked  for  a  division — ^the  ques- ;  regard  to  it.     It  is  well  known   that  that  senti- 
tion  to  be  first  taken  on  striking  out  the  word    nient  in  Kentucky  is  now  in  favor  of  sustaining 


'merchants." 

The  motion  to  strikeout  the  word  "merchants" 
was  rejected,  as  was  also  the  motion  to  strike  out 
the  word  "pedler." 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  moved,  with  a  view, 
(as  he  paid.)  of  testing  the  sense  of  the   conven- 


the  institution.  The  people,  a  large  majority  of 
whom  hold  no  slaves,  feeling  that  we  have  been 
induced,  by  laws  recognizing  and  founding  the 
institutioiu  to  invest  our  money  in  this  property, 
are  disposed  to  protect  us  in  it;  but  while  they 
are  ready  to  do  this,  they  are  not  prepared  to 


$40 


protect  the  slave  holder  in  the  enjoyment  of  his 
peculiar  property,  at  the  expense  of  their  own.  I 
shall  therefore  be  in  favor  of  this  amenrlnient,  if 
there  shall  be  added  to  it  something  like  tills: 
"And  all  expenses  which  the  commonwealth 
sjiall  incur  for  the  protection  of  the  slave  insti- 
tution, shall  be  assessed  by  a  specific  tax  on  that 
property."  Then  the  gentleman's  amendment 
will  square  with  justice,  and  meet  the  public 
sentiment  of  the  state. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  suppose  the  gentleman's 
object  is,  that  whenever  a  slave  is  executed,  his 
expense  shall  be  borne  by  those  who  own  slaves. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  More  than  that,  sir. 
That,  to  be  sure,  is  one  of  my  objects,  and  one  in 
which,  1  doubt  not,  the  people  of  Kentucky  will 
sustain  me,  as  just  and  proper.  But  farther  tlian 
that;  difficulties,  growing  out  of  this  subject,  are 
occuring  on  our  border,  and  other  questions  will 
arise.  Sir,  I  am  a  slaveholder.  Upon  my  farm 
I  hold  and  work  a  number  of  slaves,  like  the  bal- 
ance of  you.  Interest  should  enable  me  to  view 
this  subject  justly,  at  least  so  far  as  the  rights  of 
the  class  to  which  I  belong  are  concerned.  I 
have  endeavored,  (and  I  think  I  have  succeeded,) 
to  approach  it  with  as  fair  a  purpose  as  can  in 
fluence  the  mind  of  any  man.  Our  border  is  in 
a  disturbed  condition,  stretching  as  it  does  along 
a  river  front  of  near  eight  hundred  miles,  with 
three  free  states  facing  and  coterminous.  Our 
neighbors  beyond  the  Ohio,  with  active  means, 
are  inciting  the  slave  to  leave  his  master;  they 
make  this  property  hard  to  hold.  If  this  state 
of  tilings  continue,  the  burden  will  become  in- 
tolerable to  the  slave  holder,  throughout  the 
long  line  of  that  great  river.  Then  will  be  sug- 
gested and  the  government  of  the  state  will  feel 
the  necessity  of  organizing  an  armed  police,  a 
coast  guard,  to  protect  such  a  number  of  her 
citizens,  and  such  a  mass  of  property,  against 
the  efforts  equally  subtle  and  energetic,  of  this 
abolition  Irenzy.  When  the  occasion  fairly  to 
be  anticipated  sjiall  occur,  it  will  cause  an  ex- 
pense which  no  man  here  can  estimate.  The 
revenue  necessary  to  defray  it  will  be  a  question 
for  the  consideration  of  the  legislature.  I  tell 
you  sir,  that  the  border  counties  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  state  now  hold  their  slaves  by  a  ten- 
ure so  frail,  a  chain  so  slight,  so  fragile,  that  it 
only  wants  the  will  and  the  knowledge  on  the 
part  of  the  slave,  not  to  break,  but  to  glide  from 
nis  fetters.  These  things  are  drawing  to  a  head 
in  the  northern  part  of  the  state.  Tiie  necessity 
has  come  for  the  exertion  of  the  power  of  the 
state  to  protect  this  class  of  her  citizens  and  this 
description  of  property. 

Sir,  I  repeat  it,  for  the  protection  of  a  great 
but  peculiar  interest  in  this  property,  there  must 
soon  be  an  armed  police  along  that  border,  suffi- 
ciently strong  in  numbers  to  guard  this  intere.st, 
and  this  sir,  will  be  placing  the  state  in  armed 
and  hostile  array  against  the  powerful  organiza- 
tion, the  fierce  an. I  "mcthoaieal  madness"  of 
abolition  beyond  the  Ohio.  When  this  thing 
shall  be  done,  are  you  prepared  to  say,  that  the 
lands  and  other  interests  of  this  commonwealih 
shall  be  taxed  to  support  somethinglike  a  stand- 
ing army,  for  the  protection  of  this  institution? 
is  there  a  mind  among  us  that  believes  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky,  a  law-abiding  people,  a«  they 
are,  will  ever  consent  to  ihM    Fir*-8«v«nth«  of 


them  own  no  slaves;  the  other  two-sevenths 
trembled  under  the  call  of  this  convention  for 
the  security  of  this  property,  at  once  great  and 
fet^ble,  vast  in  point  of  interest,  insignificant  al- 
most in  the  numerical  force,  the  political  strength 
directly  interested  in  its  support.  In  this  state 
of  things,  this  overwhelming  majority  of  five- 
sevenths,  forgetting  all  other  feelings,  discard- 
ing, merging  all  other  considerations  of  reason 
or  of  policy,  or  of  a  separate  interest,  in  a  regard 
for  what  they  considered  the  vested  rights  of  a 
minority  thus  feeble,  surrendered  this  conven- 
tion to  their  control.  They  have  excluded  from 
this  hall,  some  of  the  wisest  and  ablest  men  of 
the  state,  merely  because  they  feared  rather  than 
believed,  they  might  desire  to  interfere  with 
these  rights  of  the  weak.  They  havesent  a  pro- 
slavery  convention,  merely  because  of  their 
sense  of  justice  and  honor,  their  respect  to  a 
property  peculiar  in  its  kind,  feeble  and  compar- 
atively limited  as  to  the  number  interested.  Sir, 
in  the  present  state  of  the  question,  in  the  sweep- 
ing tendencies  of  the  age,  could  higher  evidence 
be  found  of  the  sense  of  justice  and  honor,  that 
lofty  sense  of  justice  and  honor,  which  compels 
the  deference  of  power  to  right,  the  proud  sub- 
mission of  strength  to  weakness,  than  is  furnish- 
ed by  the  composition  of  this  assembly?  Sir, 
the  monument  is  here  before  us,  an  everlasting 
monument  of  the  capacity  of  the  non-slavehold- 
ers of  Kentucky,  to  guard  their  own  rights,  to 
protect  their  own  interests;  and  it  is  to  be  found 
in  that  caution,  that  tender  caution,  which  they 
have  shown  for  the  rights  and  interests  of  oth- 
ers, when  ovenvhelming  power  was  in  the  other 
scale.  I  have  said,  sir,  forgetting  all  other  feel- 
ings, discardtng  all  other  considerations  of  rea- 
son or  policy,  save  a  regard  for  vested  rights, 
the  people  of  Kentucky  have  thus  acted.  I  re- 
peat it,  do  not  place  it  in  your  minds  that  the 
people  of  Kentucky  believe  .slavery  to  be  a  bless- 
ing, or  that  they  have  so  decided.  There  are  not 
a  dozen  Well-balanced  minds  in  this  house  that 
believe  slavery  to  be  a  blessing. 

With  few  exceptions,  you  believe  it  to  be  a 
social  and  political  evil.  Few  of  you,  indeed,  un- 
der the  broad  light  which  experience  has  thrown 
on  the  subject,  were  the  question  of  the  intro- 
duction of  slavery  now  open,  few  of  you  indeed, 
I  am  persuaded,  would  impose  it  upon  Kentucky. 
Can  tliese  facts  be  denied?  Can  any  gentleman 
here  look  over  the  population  of  his  own  coun- 
ty, and  fail  to  acknowledge  that  on  the  abstract 
question  of  tlie  social  and  political  evil  of  slave- 
ry, a  large  majority  entertain  the  views  I  have 
stated?  Not  one  of  you  can  do  it.  And  when 
this  people  have  generously  surrendered  to  the 
minority  all  control  over  the  subject.  I  ask  you, 
if  with  that  power  in  your  hands,  thus  obtained, 
you  do  not  make  a  poor,  I  will  not  say  ungrate- 
ful return,  if  you  fail  to  provide,  that  the  insti- 
tution shall  sustain  itself^  I  ask  you  further,  if 
the  matter  is  not  likely  to  force  upon  the  countrv 
other  expenses  besides  those  to  which  I  have  al- 
luded? The  expense  of  executing  slaves  hereto- 
fore has  been  liglit,  and  the  od  riilnrrm  ta?:ation 
has  been  sufficient  to  pay  for  the  capital  punish- 
ment of  condemned  slaves.  But  siiouUl  the  in- 
stitution, either  by  the  influence  of  the  fanatic 
freujy  of  abolitionism,  or  the  mistaken  euthusi- 
Afcm  and  awnkeoed  hope  of  the  slave  himself, 


8vs 


briti^  on  this  lair  laud  the  dark  horrors  of  u  ser- 
vile insurrection,  there  may  be,  independent  of 
the  cost  of  suppressing  the  insurrection  itself,  a 
thousand  slaves  executed  in  one  vear.  These 
must  be  paid  for  under  the  existing  law  of  the 
land,  ana  if  the  gentleman's  amendment  shall 
pass  without  amendment,  in  such  an  emergency 
a  debt  will  be  thrown  upon  the  treasury  which 
it  will  not  be  able  to  defray. 

In  framing  a  constitution  which  is  to  last,  we 
hope  for  all  time  to  come,  we  should  not  be  gov- 
erned solely  by  the  existing  condition  of  things, 
but  should  have  a  due  regard  to  the  possible  con- 
tingencies that  may  arise  in  the  future.  If  such 
an  insurrection  should  occur,  throwing  on  your 
treasury  an  expense,  say  of  $500,000,  would  you 
think  it  fair  to  lay  the  tax  upon  lauds  as  well  as 
negroes,  to  pay  the  slave-owner  for  the  use  of 
his  property?  And  yet  such  is  the  effect  of  this 
amendment.  I  most  solemnly  warn  gentlemen 
of  one  fact,  that  wheneverthe  institution  of  slave- 
ry, from  any  cause,  becomes  obnoxious  to  the 
sentiment  of  the  country,  then  is  it  indeed  in 
danger.  Whenever  injustice  is  perpetrated  wil- 
fully and  plainly  by  the  slaveholders,  upon  the 
other  property-holders,  to  su-stain  the  institu- 
tion, then  will  ihey  feel  themselves  absolved 
from  the  high  obligations  which  have  caused  the 
representation  on  this  floor,  and  at  perfect  liber- 
ty to  take  the  subject  into  their  own  hands.  Ana 
when  they  do,  they  will  not  deal  as  tenderly  with 
it,  as  I  might  think  justice  would  require  them 
to  do.  I  am  proud,  and  justly  proud  of  the  pop- 
ulation whom  I  here  represent,  and  who  although 
slaveholding  in  part, entertain  the  same  vievs  in 
regard  to  this  question  which  I  do.  From  every 
part  of  that  county,  I  was  told  not  to  interfere 
when  here  with  slave  property;  but  to  resist 
everj-  attempt  at  emancipation.  That  although 
they  regarded  it  as  a  social  and  moral  evil,  yet 
they  desired  it  to  be  left  to  the  operation  of  nat- 
ural causes,  to  work  its  own  cure,  and  not  to  be 
subjected  to  legislative  enactments.  I  stand  here 
the  representative  of  the  sentiments  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Fleming  county,  thus  avowed  and  express- 
ed, and  I  challenge  gentlemen  to  point  out  any 
thin  -  more  noble,  elevated,  and  just.  Yet,  sir, 
intelligent  as  they  are,  were  the  question  put  to 
them,  whether  in  all  time  to  come,  they  would 
sustain  the  institution  at  the  expense  of  the  non- 
slaveholding  portion  of  the  community,  they 
would  say  no.  They  would  say  the  men  who 
enjoy  the  property  should  pay  the  public  expen- 
ses of  it;  that  it  was  but  just  and  proper  that  by 
a  positive  law  of  the  state,  the  institution  should 
be  made  to  sustain  itself. 

I  am  not  aware  that  in  any  part  of  this  propos- 
ed constitution,  a  provision  is  made  fortne  pay- 
ment to  the  owner  for  slaves  taken  for  execution. 
If  there  is  not  there  should  be,  and  I  will  vote  I 
for  the  amendment  if  it  shall  be  so  qualified  as  j 
to  provide  that  these  charges  upon  the  treaisurv  I 
shall  be  met  by  a  tax  on  slave  property.    Thfs  ' 
property  now   is  not  taxed  any  more  than  land 
for  such  a  purpose.     A  change  in  this  respect  is 
desired  by  those  who  own  no  slaves,  and  who 
are  paying  an  ad  valorem  tax   necessary  for  the 
extinguishment  of  the  public  debt.     Do  not  un- 
derstand me  as  favoring  the  idea  of  taking  a 
slave  for  public  use  any   more  than  land  or  any 
thing  else,  without  due  compensation.    I  hold 
106 


no  such  principle,  and  will  oocirpy  no  such  attH 
tude.  It  is  most  clearly  the  policy  of  the  state 
to  pay  for  negroes  so  taken.  It  is  a  policy  pur- 
sued ever  since  the  formation  of  the  government, 
and  without  complaint.  The  object  is  to  remove 
the  temptation  from  the  master  to  carry  offenders 
out  of  the  reach  of  justice. 

But  at  the  same  time  I  insist  upon  it  that  ex- 
penses thus  accruing,  should  come  out  of  the 
pockets  of  the  slaveholders.  The  institution  of 
slavery  stands  on  its  own  basis.  The  perma- 
nence and  safety  of  society  does  not  require  its 
introduction,  nor  is  it  at  all  a  necessary  element 
of  civilization.  On  the  contrary,  the  greatest 
advance  of  society,  and  the  highest  grade  of  civ- 
ilization known  to  ancient  or  modern  times,  is 
and  has  been  where  property  in  man  is  unknown. 
It  is  merely  property  by  municipal  regulation, 
and  depends  for  its  existence  upon  the  existence 
of  these  regulations.  All  that  I  ask  is  that  the 
institution  shall  \)e  fitted  to  public  sentiment 
and  not  become  a  burden  and  an  expense  to  those 
not  interested  in  it.  If  my  views  are  understood 
I  have  accomplished  my  purpose. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  am  opposed  to 
the  section  as  it  stands,  and  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Daviess.  I  look  upon  this 
question  as  one  of  great  magnitude,  and  as  I 
should  like  to  give  mv  views  on  the  subject,  I 
move  that  the  convention  adjourn. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  DECEMBER,  8,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Noetox. 

MODE    OF    AMEXDISG   THE   COXSTITTTIOX. 

Mr.  3IERI"WETHER,  from  the  committee  on 
the  revision  of  the  constitution  and  slavery,  re- 
ported the  following  article,  prescribing  the 
mode  of  amending  the  constitution,  and  on  his 
motion,  it  was  laid  on  the  table  and  ordered  to 
be  printed. 

ABTICLE  — . 

When  experience  shall  point  out  the  necessity 
of  amending  this  constitution,  and  when  a  ma- 
jority of  all  the  members  elected  to  each  house 
of  l&e  general  assembly  shall,  within  the  first 
twenty  days  of  any  regular  session,  concur  in 
passing  a  law  for  taking  the  sense  of  the  good 
people  of  this  commonwealth  as  to  the  necessi- 
ty and  expediency  of  calling  a  convention,  it 
sliall  be  the  duty  of  the  several  sheriflfe,  and  oth- 
er officers  of  elections,  at  the  next  general  elec- 
tion which  shall  be  held  for  representatives  in 
the  state  legislature,  after  the  passage  of  such 
law,  to  open  a  poll  for,  and  make  return  to  the 
secretary  of  state,  for  the  time  being,  of  the 
names  of  all  those  entitled  to  vote  for  represen- 
tatives, who  have  voted  for  calling  a  convention; 
and  if,  thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a  majority 
of  all  the  citizens  of  this  state,  entitled  to  vote 
for  representatives,  have  voted  for  calling  a  con- 
vention, the  general  assembly  shall,  at  their  next 
regular  session,  direct  that  a  similar  poll  shall 
be  opened,  and  return  made,  for  the  next  election 


for  representatives;  and  if,  thereupoa,  it  shall 
appear  that  a  majority  of  all  the  citizens  of  this 
state,  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives,  have 
voted  for  calling  a  convention,  the  general  as- 
sembly shall,  at  their  next  session,  pass  a  law 
calling  a  convention,  to  consist  of  as  many  meni» 
bers  as  there  shall  be  in  the  house  of  represen- 
tatives, and  no  more;  to  be  chosen  in  the  same 
manner  and  proportion,  at  the  same  time  and 
places,  and  possessed  of  the  same  qualifications 
that  representatives  are,  by  citizens  entitled  to 
vote  for  representatives;  and  to  meet  within  three 
months  after  their  election,  for  the  purpose  of 
re-adopting,  amending,  or  changing  this  consti- 
tution; but  if  it  shall  appear  by  the  vote  of  eith- 
er year,  as  aforesaid,  that  a  majority  of  all  the 
citizens  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives  did 
not  vote  for  calling  a  convention,  a  convention 
shall  not  be  then  called.  And  for  the  purpose 
of  ascertaining  whether  a  majority  of  the  citi- 
zens, entitled  to  vote  for  representatives,  did  or 
did  not  vote  for  calling  a  convention,  as  above, 
the  legislature  passing  the  law  authorizing  such 
vote  shall  provide  for  ascertaining  the  number 
of  citizens  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives 
within  the  state.  All  cases  of  contested  elec- 
tions, and  where  two  or  more  candidates  for  del- 
egate to  any  convention  which  may  be  called 
under  this  constitution,  shall  have  an  equal 
number  of  votes,  shall  be  decided  in  the  same 
manner  as  may  be  provided  by  law  for  similar 
cases  arising  in  elections  to  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives. 

Mr.  TURNER  presented  the  following  as  an- 
other plan  which  ne  had  prepared,  to  provide  a 
mode  of  amending  the  constitution: 

"article  — . 

"In  the  year it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  sever- 
al sheriffs  and  other  returning  officers,  to  take  the 
sense  of  thegood  people  of  thiscommonwealth,  as 
to  the  necessity  and  expediency  of  calling  a  con- 
vention, at  the  several  places  of  voting  in  their 
respective  counties,  on  the  first  Monday  in  Au- 
gust, by  opening  a  poll  for,  and  making  a  return 
to  the  secretary  of  state,  for  the  time  being, 
of  the  names  of  all  those  entitled  to  vote  for  rep- 
resentatives, who  shall  vote  for  calling  a  conven- 
tion. And,  if  thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a 
majority  of  all  the  citizens  of  this  state,  entitled 
to  vote  for  representatives,  have  voted  for  a  con- 
vention, a  similar  poll  shall  be  opened  and  ta- 
ken for  the  next  year;  and  if  a  majority  of  all 
the  citizens  of  the  state,  entitled  to  vote  for  rep- 
resentatives, shall  a  second  year  vote  for  a  con, 
vention,  the  general  assembly  shall,  at  their 
next  session,  call  a  convention,  to  consist  of  as 
many  members  as  there  shall  be  in  the  house  of 
representatives,  and  no  more;  to  be  chosen  at 
the  same  time,  manner,  and  places,  and  in  the 
same  proportion  that  representatives  are  chosen, 
and  to  meet  in  three  months  after  the  said  elec- 
tion, for  the  purnose  of  re-adopting,  amending, 
or  changing,  this  constitution.  The  quali- 
fication of  delegates  to  the  convention,  shall 
be  the  same  as  members  of  the  liouse  of  rep- 
resentatives, except  that  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel shall  be  eligible  as  members  of  the  con- 
vention. If  it  shall  appear  by  the  vote  of  either 
rear,  as  aforesaid,  that  a  majority  of  all  the  cit- 
zens  entitled  to  voto  for  representatives  did  not 


7 


vote  for  a  convention,  none  shall  be  called;  and  a 

similar  poll  shall  be  opened  every year, 

until  a  majority,  as  aforesaid,  shall,  for  two 
years  in  succession,  vote  for  a  call  of  a  conven- 
tion; and  when  such  vote  shall  be  givtn,  the 
general  assembly  shall,  at  theii-  next  session,  call 
a  convention  as  above  prescribed,  and  pass  such 
laws  for  carrying  the  call  into  effect  as  may  be 
proper." 

He  said  the  old  plan  of  revising  the  constitu- 
tion authorises  the  question  to  be  brought  be- 
fore the  people  everj'  year,  and,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  the  slave  question  can  be  agitated  every 
year,  thereby  keeping  the  public  mind  in  a  state 
of  continued  excitement.  It  goes  into  the  legisla- 
ture, and  if  two  or  tliree  persons  happen  to  be 
there  who  wish  to  agitate  the  question  of  eman- 
cipation, they  can  raise  it  there,  and  debate  it, 
and  thus  keep  the  community  in  a  state  of  con- 
stant anxiety.  I  think,  sir,  the  mode  of  specific 
amendments,  suggested  by  some  gentlemen,  is 
open  to  the  same  objection,  because  it  would  be 
productive  of  the  same  evil.  You  place  it  in 
the  hands  of  the  legislature,  and  on  every  occa- 
sion, when  that  body  is  assembled,  this  question 
of  slavery  may  be  brought  up. 

Now,  the  mode  which  I  propose  is,  that  at 
stated  periods,  the  people  themselves  shall  vote 
whether  they  will  have  a  convention  or  not.  The 
politicians  are  to  have  nothing  at  all  to  do  with 
it.  The  people  vote  upon  it;  and  if  there  is,  for 
the  time  being,  a  majority  of  electors  against 
any  suggested  amendment,  it  is  put  over  until 
the  next  stated  period  when  such  amendment  can 
be  again  agitated. 

The  intervals,  in  the  resolution  I  have  offered, 
are  left  blank;  if  the  general  principle  of  the  res- 
olution should  be  approved  by  the  convention, 
these  intervals  can  be  filled  up  as  they  may  deem 
most  conducive  to  the  general  welfare. 

So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  Mr.  President,  I  am 
anxious  that  this  convention  should  not  appear 
to  give  the  slightest  indication  of  any  idea  that 
the  right  of  property  in  .slaves  is  to  be  abolish- 
ed, but  that  the  fullest  possible  guaranty  should 
be  given  to  everymaiiholdingproperty  ofthisde- 
scription,  that  he  shall  hold  it  inviolate. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  I  am  plea.sed,  at  all  times, 
to  see  gentlemen  offer  different  propositions  for 
amending  our  constitution  ;  but  I  will  say,  that 
some  of  the  gentlemen  upon  the  floor  of  this 
convention,  who  profess  to  be  pro-slavery  men, 
have  taken  a  course  calculated  to  do  more  harm 
than  all  the  preachings  of  all  the  emancipation- 
ists in  the  country.  From  the  course  which  has 
been  adopted  by  some  gentlemen  here,  we  are 
putting  trie  strongest  kind  of  arguments  into 
their  mouths,  and  we  are  strengthening  their 
hands  against  ourselves. 

Every  gentleman  appears  to  have  made  up 
his  mind  as  to  tlie  mode  by  which  the  consti- 
tution, at  any  future  day,  should  be  amended; 
we  are  well  instructed  upon  that  matter;  but  iu 
regard  to  the  question  of  .slavery,  I  do  think  the 
house  have  no  discretion — no  power;  and  I  pro- 
test against  our  taking  such  a  course  as  will 
give  emancipationists  an  oj)portunity  of  draw- 
ing arguments  from  our  words  or  our  proceed- 
ings, to  justify  them  in  their  fanatical  course  on 
this  question.  From  the  discussions  which  have 
taken  place  here,  I  much  fear  that  we  have  sup- 


843 


plied  argument  which  mav  hereafter  be  used  in 
attempts  to  ■weake-n  the  sta"bility  of  this  institu- 
tion. I  am  not  a  slaveholder;  I  came  hereto  rep- 
resent a  constituency  not  holding  slaves  to  any 
large  extent;  but  I  am  a  pro-slavery  man — I  am 
in  tavor  of  slavery  for  the  sake  of  slavery.  But 
when  we  argue  this  question  in  the  mode  in 
which  it  has  hitherto  been  argued  on  this  floor, 
we  are,  I  am  satisfied,  only  putting  weapons  into 
the  hands  of  our  enemies,  which  may  be  used 
against  us.  Let  us  then,  make  a  constitution  to 
meet  the  requirements  and  the  wishes  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  leave  tliis  question  of  slavery  to  be 
settled  by  those  whose  business  it  is  to  settle  it. 
Mr.  T  ALBOTT.  I  will  vote  for  the  printing 
of  the  resolution,  and  its  reference  to  the  appro- 

friate  committee,  as  indicated  by  the  gentleman, 
have  entire  confidence  in  the  intelligence,  integ- 
rity, and  wisdom  of  this  convention,  and  I  have  no 
fftars  that  any  proposition,   no   matter  how  in- 
flamatoiy  in  its  nature,  or  erroneous  in  its  posi- 
tions, will  either  corrupt  or  mislead  them.     But 
sir,   it  does  seem  to  mo,  that   if  we  have  come 
up  here,  instructed  upon  any  one  subject  what- 
ever, it  is  to  settle,  as  far  as  possible,  and  place 
beyond  controversy  and  agitation,  that  most  ex- 
citing of  all   other  questions:   the  question   of 
slavery.     It  seems  to   me,  sir,  to  insert  in  the 
constitution  we  are  about  to  frame,  a  clause,  that 
a  convention  shall  be  called,  or  voted  on  every 
five,  ten,  or  even  twenty  years,  would  be  all  the 
emancipationists  would  want,  or,  under  existing  i 
circumstances,  could  ask.      Insert   this  clause, 
sir,  and  they  would  at  once   proclaim  upon  the 
house  tops,  that  Kentucky,  at  the  expiration  of 
the  time  fixed  in  the  constitution,  should  be  res- 
cued from  what  they  denominate,  the  curee  of 
slaverv.     They  would  bring  up  their  men,  arm-; 
ed  and  equipped  for  battle,  from  the  north  and  i 
from  the  south,  from  the  east  and  from  the  west,  i 
and  you  would  thus  enable  them  to  destroy  the 
verj-  interest  and  institution  we  came  here  to  se- ; 
cure.     All  I  ask,  is  for  gentlemen  to  consider! 
this  proposition  before  thev  vote  upon  it.  • 

Mr.  R.  X.  WICKLIFFE."  There,  sir.  is  a  reso-  i 
lution,  providing  another  mode  of  amending  the  ■ 
constitution,  but  I  think  this  is  not  tne  proper  1 
time  to  discuss  it.  The  subject  will  come  up  in  ' 
a  few  days  on  the  report  of  the  committee,  and  i 
that,  in  my  judgment,  will  be  the  appropriate  i 
time  to  discuss  this  resolution.  I  therefore  move  i 
the  previous  question. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put,  and  the  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  and  print 
was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  WALLER  submitted  the  following  reso- 
lution : 

"Resolved,  That  in  the  constitution  formed  by 
this  convention,  the  same  provisions  in  relation 
to  slavery  should  be  inserted  as  in  the  present 
constitution,  with  an  additional  clause  prohibit- 
ing the  emancipation  of  slaves,  to  remain  in  the 
stale." 

He  moved  that  it  be  laid  on  the  table  and 

Jtrinted,  with  an  intimation  that  he  would  ask 
or  its  consideration  on  Wednesday  next. 

The  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  and  print  was 
agreed  to. 

GEXZRAL   PROVISIOXS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
tke  additional  section  of  Mr.  GRAY  to  tliue  re- 


!  port  of  the  committee  on  general  provisions,  to 
'which  Mr.  TRIPLETT  had  moved  an  amend- 
'  ment. 

!      Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.    Under  somewhat  of 
:  impulse  la.st  evening,  I  requested  this  conven- 
^  tion  to   adjourn,  with  a  view  that  I  might  have 
I  an  opportunity  of  presenting  some  remarks  this 
morning,  on  the  subieci  which  was  then  under 
',  consideration.    If  I  had  felt  then  as  I  do  now,  I 
;  do  not  know  that  I  should  have  been  tempted  to 
I  ofter  one   remark  upon   the  subject,  but  in  all 
!  probability  would  have   contented  myself  with 
j  giving  a  silent  vote  upon  this  question.     The 
I  positions  assumed  by  tne  gentleman  who  closed 
I  the  debate  last  evening,  were  to  me  somewhat 
novel  and  startling,  and  I  candidly  confess,  ex- 
i  cited  me;  and  whilst  laboring  under  that  excite- 
ment, I  asked  the  convention  to  adjourn,  in  or- 
:  der  that  I  might  have  an  opportunity  of  reply- 
I  ing  to  the  positions  assumed  by  the  gentleman 
from  Fleming.     I  had  hoped,  sir,  that  the  inter- 
I  rogatories  propounded  to  the  gentleman  during 
his  remarks,   would  have  caused  him  to  pause, 
and  in  some  degree,  to  retrace  his  steps.     In  this, 
however,  I  was  mistaken. 

Having  asserted  the  proposition,  as  he  did,  in 
a  somewhat  excited  manner — in  a  manner  pecu- 
liar to  himself — (because  the  position  which  he 
occupies  upon  this  floor,  and  elsewhere,  is  of  a 
character  that  gives  him  position  in  society — 
that  gives  him  position  in  a  body  like  this — that 
srives  hira  position  in  any  place} — I  felt,  Mr. 
President,  after  those  propositions  were  assert- 
ed, and  the  manner  in  which  they  were  asserted, 
that  we  were  going  too  far  upon  this  question. 
I  regretted, exceedingly,  that  the  proposition  in- 
troduced by  ray  friend  from  Daviess  had  called 
forth  a  discussion,  out  of  which  no  good  can  ev- 
er grow  to  our  state;  and  I  still  more  regret  that 
it  should  have  become  neces.sary  for  any  gentle- 
man on  this  floor,  entertaining  the  views  that  I 
do,  to  be  constrained  to  oppose  them. 

Mr.  President,  in  the  years  1B41-2,  I  had  the 
honor  of  a  seat  on  this  floor  ;  1  then  occupied 
the  seat  I  now  occupy.  When  a  question  was 
presented  by  the  governor  of  the  commonwealth 
of  Kentuckv,  showing  the  condition  of  the 
finances  of  tlie  state;  when  it  was  discovered 
that  the  treasurj'  was  almost  entirely  exhausted, 
and  that  the  means  which  we  had  to  meet  the 
demands  against  it  were  whoUv  inadiquate. 
The  legislature  was  appealed  to,  by  every  sense 
of  honor  and  justice,  to  save  thestate,  and 
relieve  it  from  its  embarrassments. 

A  proposition  was  introduced  into  this  house 
in  that  year,  with  a  view  to  raise  the  taxes  to 
meet  the  deficit,  but  that  proposition  was  de- 
feated. The  banks  of  Kentucky  came  forward 
and  paid  oif  the  interest  of  the  clebt  due  to  the 
bond  holders.  They  became  the  creditors  at 
home,  instead  of  obliging  us  to  seek  credit 
abroad.  They  stepped  forward  in  this  great 
emergency,  relieving  the  credit  and  character 
of  Kentucky,  and  the  legislature  was  appealed 
to  for  the  purpose  of  paying  off  that  debt  and 
relieving  the  state  of  the  burdens  that  then 
hung  around  it.  In  what  manner  was  the  prop- 
osition received  by  this  body?  A  proposition 
was  made  for  an  increased  taxation  to  the  amount 
of  one  cent  on  the  dollar  upon  a  fair  valuation 
of  all  property,  and  oat  of  one  hundred  mem- 


!(^' 


bers  on  this  floor,  there  -were  only  three  who 
raised  their  voices  to  provide  means  for  paying 
this  debt.  That  proposition  was  opposed  on 
this  floor ;  it  was  asserted  that  the  debt  had 
grown  out  of  a  system  of  extravagance  and  im- 
provident expenditure  in  carrying  out  our  sys- 
tem of  internal  improvements,  and  that  the  peo- 
ple looked  to  these  improvements  now  as  a 
means  whereby  this  debt  should  be  discharged. 
These  improvements  had  failed  to  meet  the  ex- 
pectations of  their  projectors,  and  it  was  thrown 
in  the  teeth  of  every  gentleman  on  that  floor 
who  advocated  that  system  that  they  must  de- 
vise ways  and  means  by  which  this  debt  should 
be  paid;  that  taxation,  for  the  purpose,  was  im- 
proper, and  that  the  people  of  the  state  were  un- 
willing to  bear  it.  1  heard  it  with  pain  and  re- 
gret. I,  who  represented  but  a  small  county, 
whose  people  are  poor — a  county  whose  borders 
are  swept  oy  the  Ohio,  and  looking  to  that  as 
the  natural  outlet  to  our  trade,  having  failed  to 
secureany  ofthebenefitsof  our  system  of  internal 
improvements — not  a  dollar  having  been  expen- 
ded within  its  limits,  still  sir,  I  heard  it  argued 
with  pain  and  regret  that  these  improvements 
should  be  made  to  pay  this  debt,  and  that  no 
means  should  be  resorted  to  to  save  the  state 
from  the  emergency  in  which  it  was  then  plac- 
ed. On  that  occasion  I  stood  upon  this  floor 
representing  a  small  county,  mountainous  in  its 
character  and  sparsely  populated.  But  I  came 
here  not  to  represent  that  county  alone,  I  came 
here  to  represent  the  people  of  Kentucky ;  and  I 
was  proud  to  say  that  when  1  cast  my  vote,  I 
represented  the  unanimous  sentiments  of  the 
people  of  ray  county,  and  sir,  I  was  proud  to 
occupy  the  same  seat  which  I  now  occupy,  be- 
cause'l  had  determined  that  I  would  never  be 
the  willing  instrument  of  disgracing  my  county 
and  my  state.  Yet,  sir,  those  means  were  un- 
provided ;  and  what  were  we  to  do?  In  the 
language  of  the  gentlemen  from  Bourbon  and 
Jefferson,  equality  of  taxation  is  beautiful  in 
the  abstract.  Who  can  object  to  it?  None; 
none  ;  but  I  ask  gentlemen,  and  all  who  hear 
me  on  this  occasion,  let  a  crisis  come  like  that, 
and  place  them  in  the  position  I  occupied  then, 
and  what  would  they  have  done.  Sir,  1  am  proud 
of  that  vote.  The  gentleman  from  Simpson  was 
present  and  voted  with  me.  He  said  he  felt  con- 
strained as  an  honest  man  to  give  that  vote,  and 
yet  he  regrets  it  as  the  worst  vote  he  ever  gave  ; 
•while  1  regard  it  as  a  vote  reflecting  more  credit 
upon  him,  than  any  given  by  him  during  that 
session. 

At  that  time,  sir,  while  Arkansas  and  Missis- 
sippi had  repudiated,  and  Indiana  Avas  on  the 
very  verge  of  repudiation,  Kentucky  stood  high, 
and.  her  bonds  were  held  at  par  all  over  the 
world.  I  ask  that  ffcntlernan,  and  all  who  hear 
me,  if  an  emergeucylike  that  should  arise,  would 
any  gentleman  on  this  floor  be  unwilling  to  pro- 
vide the  necessary  means  to  relieve  the  state 
from  such  an  emoarrassment?  No  man,  I  am 
sure,  would  rise  from  his  seat  and  say,  in  the 
presence  of  the  congregated  gentlemen  on  this 
floor,  that  he  would  be  willing  to  refuse  to  do 
all  in  his  power  to  save  the  credit  and  the  honor 
of  the  state.  Let,  however,  such  a  proposition 
as  this  pass,  and  there  is  no  power  in  the  legis- 
latore;  yonr  government  is  disarmed  and  has  no 


power  to  meet  an  exigency  that  might  come  upon 
us  as  it  did  in  the  year  lt<42.  I  am  as  unwilling, 
sir,  to  tie  up  the  hands  of  the  legislature,  as  I 
am  to  manacle  the  people  of  Kentucky. 

Of  all  subjects,  sir,  that  of  taxation  is  the 
most  delicate;  nothing  but  a  high  sense  of  duty 
and  of  moral  honesty  can  force  a  man  to  come 
up  to  the  mark  that  honesty  and  justice  demands 
at  their  hands;  and  I  ask  you  to  look  at  that 
section,  proposed  to  be  inserted  in  your  consti- 
tution, and  say  whether  wo  are  not  tied  up, 
hand  and  foot,  and  the  legislature  rendered 
powerless.  Tliat  is  the  position  in  which  we 
are  placed,  and  I  see  not  how  it  is  to  be  reme- 
died unless  we  look  to  that  state  of  things  in 
which  Kentucky  never  can  be  in  debt.  While, 
however,  she  is  in  debt,  the  interest  must  be 
provided  for  as  well  as  some  means  of  ulti- 
mately extinguishing  the  principal. 

These  were  the  motives,  sir,  which  induced 
me  then  to  vote  for  this  specific  law,  so  odious 
in  the  estimation  of  many  gentlemen  present.  I 
voted  for  it  then;  and  two  years  afterwards, 
when  I  had  the  Jionor  of  a  seat  on  this  floor,  and 
a  proposition  was  made  to  repeal  that  law,  I  vo- 
ted against  its  repeal.  And  why  did  I  do  so? 
Because  it  was  imperative  that  the  state  should 
provide  for  her  exigencies;  that  she  should  meet 
the  demands  which  were  made  upon  her  treas- 
ury and  her  sinking  fund.  And  on  whom,  and 
on  what  did  that  tax  fall?  Upon  the  wealthy 
citizens  of  our  state;  upon  the  luxuries  of  the 
countrv.  Sir,  of  all  portions  of  Kentuclcy  who 
walked  up  boldly  towards  meeting  the  demands 
upon  the  treasury,  those  who  live  in  the  wealthy 
portions  of  our  state  are  the  first  to  respond  to 
that  call.  It  is  those  who  pay  least  that  complain 
tl»e  most;  while  at  the  same  time  those  who  pay 
the  most,  pay  it  most  cheerfully;  and  tliis  was 
to  meet  a  crisis  whicli,  I  trust  in  God,  may  never 
occur  again. 

Wliilst  I  am  opposed,  sir,  to  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  I  am  equally 
opposed  to  that  of  the  gentleman  from  Daviess. 
I  think  it  is  wrong,  sir;  and  but  for  the  proposi- 
tion submitted  by  my  friend  from  Daviess,  and 
the  remarks  made  by  the  gentleman  from  Flem- 
ing, I  would  not  have  addressed  the  convention 
this  morning. 

Why  all  this  excitement,  Mr.  President,  on 
the  suljjcct  of  slavery  here?  Why  all  this  talk- 
ing about  rebellion  and  insurrection,  and  the  in- 
stability of  our  institutions,  and  about  keeping 
out  the  incendiaries  and  the  fanatics  of  the 
north?  If  our  institutions  are  placed  upon  so 
frail  a  basis  as  this,  if  we  are  to  be  alarmed  at 
every  corner,  and  by  every  brawling  demagogue 
who  takes  it  into  his  head  that  slavery  is  a  great 
moral  and  social  evil — if  our  institutions  stand 
upon  a  foundation  so  precarious  that  every 
breath,  however  foul,  may  sweep  them  into 
oblivion,  why  it  is  better  that  they  should  go  at 
once.  I  ask  my  friend  from  Fleming,  who, 
though  he  says  he  is  a  pro-slavery  man,  yet 
afl^rins  that  slavery  is  a  moral  and  a  social  evil, 
and  that  every  gentleman  on  this  floor  admits  it 
to  be  80,  tliough  I  dift'er  with  him  on  that  sub- 
ject— I  ask  him  why  all  this  talk,  all  this  ex- 
citement, all  this  dread  in  reference  to  this  in- 
stitution? He  regards  it  as  a  moral  and  a  social 
wrong.     I  have  never  regarded  it,  nor  do  I  yet 


( 


«tf 


regard  it  in  that  view.  The  qaestitois  c^ked,  as 
a  ne\r  proposition.  "  if  slavery  had  never  exist- 
ed in  Kentucky  would  you  introduce  it  now?" 
I  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  answer  that  ques- 
tion at  this  time;  but  as  it  exists  now,  I  am  not 
prepared  to  admit  that  it  is  a  moral  and  a  social 
wrong.  Kentucky,  wherever  she  is  known, 
stands  high  in  cliaracter  for  chivalry,  bravery, 
intelligence,  integrity,  honor  and  purity;  and 
what  is  it  that  keeps  her  pure?  In  niy  judg- 
ment it  is  nothing  but  the  institution  of  slavery. 
Strike  that  out  and  what  do  you  get?  A  mongrel 
people;  your  identity  of  character  is  gone;  your 
chivalry  is  gone;  vour  purity  is  gone;  vour 
whole  character  is  destroyed.  These  I  believe, 
are  the  effects  of  the  institution  of  slavery;  and 
so  far  from  its  working  moral  and  social  wrong, 
I  am  of  opinion  it  is  working  moral  and  social  \ 
good.  Tne  gentleman  says.  "  Do  away  with  | 
slavery  and  the  stalwart  sons  of  the  north  will 
supply  the  place  of  the  slave?  What  north? ! 
The  north  of  this  Union?  No  sir,  with  men 
from  the  north  of  Europe.  And  what  are  their 
habits  and  qualifications  for  business?  Is  it  to 
cultivate  your  soil?  Are  they  capable  of  arts  j 
and  manufactures?  No  sir,'  they  are  fit  for 
neither.  Drive  out  your  slaves  and  fill  up  vour 
country  with  a  population  of  this  description 
and  you  have  lost  all,  sunk  all,  thrown  away  all 
tliat  has  ever  contributed  to  give  Kentucky  a 
name  among  the  states  of  this  Union. 

You  have  heard  a  great  deal  said  about  our 
sister  state  of  Ohio,  and  tlie  rapid  progress  she 
has  made  in  civilization,  art,  improvement  and 
wealth;  but  I  tell  you  that  God  has  made  a  wi<le 
differt-nce  btftween  the  state  of  Ohio  and  the 
state  of  Kentucky.  Ohio  has  her  lakes  on  the 
north  and  her  river  on  the  south,  both  affording 
the  most  admirable  outlets  for  her  produce. 
She  has  all  the  facilities  that  a  country  could  de- 
sire, to  promote  her  commercial  prosperity.  On 
the  other  hand,  Kentuckv  may  be  said  to  be  an 
inland,  and  consequentlv,  a  purelv  agricultural 
country— -not  commercial — compelled  to  depend 
entirely  upon  her  own  productions,  the  only  out- 
let for  carrying  off  her  surplus  produce  being 
the  Ohio,  on  ht-r  northern  border.  We  depend 
upon  slaves  for  carrying  on  those  pursuits.  You 
build  up  your  towns  and  cities  in  other  states, 
and  carry  on  your  commerce  with  every  portion 
of  the  civilized  world;  but  in  such  ca.se  your 
great  agricultural  interests  must  be  neglected, 
and  dwindle  into  insignificance.  Such  must  be 
the  result  in  this  state,  if  you  attempt  to  follow 
such  a  course.  Your  lauds  now,  which,  on  an 
average,  are  worth  from  seven  dollars  to  seven 
dollars  and  fifty  cents  per  acre,  would  not  be 
worth  half  that  amount.  Drive  out  vour  slaves, 
and  so  far  from  increasing  the  value  of  your 
lands,  that  value  will  be  wofully  diminished, 
and  a  decrease  in  the  quantity  of  your  produce, 
and  in  the  value  of  j'our  lands,  must,  of  neces- 
sity, bring  about  a  decrease  in  the  revenue. 

I  know  that  these  views  are  not  entertained  by 
8ome;  but  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  bestow 
reflection  on  the  subject,  this  is  the  deliberate 
conviction  of  ray  mind.  I  have  seen  those 
"stalwart  sons' — I  have  been  in  Ohio,  and  seen 
how  business  is  carried  on;  and  so  far  as  I 
have  been  in  Ohio.  lean  tell  ray  friend  that  those 
"gentlemen"    t»  Jio  ronn>  from    Europe  are  not 


qualified  to  carry  on  the  great  agricultural  pUMr 
suits  of  our  country  in  the  manner  in  which  we 
carry  them  on  here;  and  that,  were  we  to  introduce 
them  into  Kentucky,  we  should  be  losers  rather- 
than  gainers  by  the  operation.  But  is  that  all? 
If  the  question  rested  merely  upon  this,  I 
should  not  have  made  a  single  remark. 

But  strange  to  say,  we  hear  of  rebellion  and  insur- 
rection. Living,  as  I  do,  on  the  margin  of  the 
Ohio,  I  think  I  may  safely  say  that  I  understand 
the  feelings  which  operate  upon  the  minds  of  the 
whole  people  of  northern  Kentuckv;  but  I  was 
startled  last  evening  when  I  heard  the  gentleman 
from  Fleming  say  that  if  insurrection  should 
arise,  if  rebellion  should  be  brought  about,  it 
would  come  from  the  north  of  the  state.  Insur- 
rection, sir  I  In  what  way?  brought  about  by 
whom?  Insurrection !  brought  about  by  the  ne- 
groes !  Insurrection  I  brought  about  by  the  citi- 
zens of  our  own  state — by  the  fanatics  of  the 
north  I  But  it  matters  not  from  what  quarter  it 
may  come;  he  tells  you  that  in  such  case — in 
case  of  insurrection,  slavery  must  sustain  itself; 
that  the  whole  cost  of  suppressing  such  an  in- 
surrection must  be  met  by  the  institution  itself. 
Mr.  President,  I  ask  how  does  Kentucky  stand 
in  relation  to  your  slaves  and  taxation?  She 
pays  into  your  state  treasury  every  year,  $70,- 
000  as  part  of  your  revenue — she'  pays  in  her 
counties  about  .$40,000 — she  pavs  to  your  sink- 
ing fund  $.35,000— to  your  school  fund  $14,000. 
independent  of  the  actual  revenue  paid  into  the 
treasury  of  $70,000.  There  is,  besides  this,  a 
poll  tax  on  all  slaves  over  sixteen  years  of  age, 
and  of  these  there  are  eighty-nine  thousand. 
Of  slaves  under  sixteen,  there  are  about  one  hun- 
dred and  eleven  thousand.  They  pay,  then, 
$70,000,  as  revenue;  expenses  of  this  conven- 
tion, $14,000;  school  tax, $14,000;  sinking  fund, 
$35,000;  and  for  county  purposes,  $40,000.— 
Take  the  whole  amount  of  tax  that  they  pay  to 
the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and'  it  will 
reach  $173,000.  And  is  that  all  they  pay?  No. 
Independently  of  this  $173,000,  w'hich'  is  paid 
in  the  shape  of  taxes,  everj-  negro  over  sixteen 
years  of  age  is  bound  to  work  upon  the  roads. 
'Calculate  that,  and  you  will  find  that  the  whole 
amount  of  labor  will'  bring  it  up  to  $40,000  more, 
making  a  total  of  upwards  of  $200,000.  Now, 
what  is  the  amount  realized  from  all  the  lands 
in  the  state?  About  $200,000.  If  the  negrcnis, 
therefore,  pav  a  revenue  into  the  state  treasury 
of  $70,000;  6{  $14,000  to  the  school  fund;  $14,- 
000  for  expenses  of  convention;  of  $35,000  to 
the  sinking  fund,  and  of  $40,000  for  county  pur- 
poses, and  $40,000  more  for  road  purposes,  thev 
nay  a  sum  equivalent  to  $213,000;  making  a 
larger  amount  of  tax  paid  by  the  slave  popula- 
tion of  the  state,  than  is  paid'bv  all  the  lands  iu 
Kentucky.  And  vet,  the  gentleman  says,  if  an 
insurrection  should  come — if  a  rebellion  should 
be  brought  about  bv  the  citizens  of  our  own 
state — if  they  should  invite  the  slaves  to  rebel- 
lion— if  the  man  who  owns  no  slaves  in  your 
state — the  man  who  has  no  interest  in  your 
country,  should  create  an  insurrection — if  such 
a  man  should  create  an  insurrection,  your  lands, 
your  carriages,  your  busies,  your  watehes,  vour 
spectacles,  are  not  to  be  taxed  to  maintain  the 
general  peace!  Oh,  no;  these  mnet  not  pay  a 
cent  of  the  fxpensc— not  a  d<iliar  to  meet  thisde- 


me 


Ulifnd.  I  ask,  is  this  right?  Is  this  ec^uality?  Is 
Ihere  any  fairness  in  such  a  proposition  as  this? 

I  go  further.  A  slave  is  kitlnapped  from  Ken- 
tucky, and  goes  into  Ohio  ;  the  owner  of  the 
slave  follows  him,  (I  saw  an  instance  mentioned 
in  the  papers  the  other  day,  of  a  man  who  went 
to  Cincinnati  in  pursuit  of  a  slave,  and  a  fight 
occurred) — well,  a  slave  is  kidnapped;  the  own- 
er, in  accordance  with  laws  existing  mutually 
between  the  states,  follows  him  ;  a  fight  occurs 
in  his  attempt  to  recover  his  slave,  and  the  white 
man  should  he  the  cause  of  it  in  consequence  of 
this  attempt;  there  are  those  who  say  that  the 
whole  expense  incurred  in  such  case  should  be 
met  by  taxation  upon  the  owners  of  slaves — in 
other  words  upon  the  slave  population  of  Ken- 
tucky. If  his  position  is  true,  he  might  carry 
it  out  in  all  its  bearings,  and  what  would  be  the 
result,  if  brought  about  by  one  of  your  own  cit- 
izens— a  freeman  of  your  own  commonwealth — 
no  matter  that  the  right  to  bring  back  his  slave 
is  guarantied  to  him  by  his  own  constitution, 
and  the  constitution  of  the  United  States — if 
such  a  result  be  brought  about,  these  expenses 
are  to  be  met,  and  to  be  met  alone  in  that  form. 
I  ask  the  gentleman,  in  all  candor,  if  he  intends 
to  go  thus  far? — if  this  is  the  point  at  which  he 
is  driving? — this  the  end  which  he  aims  to  ac- 
complish?    I  trust  not. 

But  again,  if  a  slave  is  executed  in  Kentucky, 
the  gentleman  says  that  this  must  be  a  tax  upon 
the  institution.  And  why,  in  all  conscience? 
Those  who  own  slaves  (and  I  can  hardly  say 
that  personally,  I  am  interested  in  this  matter, 
for  I  do  not  own  slaves  to  any  extent — I  can  only 
boast  of  three — but  it  is  the  interest  I  feel  in 
the  question  as  a  Kentuckian,  that  induces  me 
to  speak) — why,  I  say,  in  case  of  the  execution 
of  a  negro,  is  the  slave  population  of  the  state  to 
be  taxed?  I  ask,  how  is  this  to  be  done?  Are 
you  to  create  a  separate  fund?  And  when,  and 
how  is  this  tax  to  be  levied?  If  an  emergency 
should  arise  in  the  commonwealth,  and  a  neces- 
sity for  taxation  should  arise,  how  are  you  to 
carry  out  that  principle?  Are  vou  to  wait  till 
the  slave  is  executed?  If  you  lay  a  tax  higher 
than  the  emergency  demands,  it  is  an  oppres- 
sion upon  the  slaveholder  without  cause  or  ne- 
cessity. But  he  does  not  propose  to  wait  till  the 
emergency  arises.  If  he  docs,  how  is  he  to  car- 
ry out  the' principle?  It  cannot,  in  mj-^  humble 
judgment,  be  done.  But  simpose  it  could  be 
done,  would  it  be  right?  The  amount  of  the 
slaveholding  population  in  Kentucky  is,  say 
200,000;  the  total  amount  of  population  is,  say 
700,000.  The  lands  and  other  taxable  property 
of  the  500,000  are  to  be  relieved  from  all  partici- 
pation of  the  burden,  and  the  coat  of  these  emer- 
gencies, and  it  is  to  be  placed  on  the  slave  pop- 
ulation alone.  I  say  this  is  wrong.  It  is  un- 
just, impolitic,  impossible.  Why  not  come  out 
at  once,  and  say  to  the  slaveholding  people  of  the 
8tat«,  "these  burdens  shall  fall  upon  you;  there- 
fore, I  propose  to  carry  out  my  peculiar,  notions 
upon  the  subject  of  slavery.  My  notions  are  of 
such  a  character,  that  they  require  you,  in  carry- 
ing tliem  out,  to  make  these  sacrifices.  If  wrong 
is  done  among  you,  you  must  settle  it  among 
yourselves;  if  expenses  are  incurred  by  this  sys- 
tem, those  expenses  must  be  met  by  yourselves." 

I  ask  the  gentleman  to  take  this  back.     I  ask 


if  there  be  either  justice  or  propriety  in  a  posi- 
tion like  this?  W  hile  you  take  away  my  rights 
vou  liold  sacred  your  own;  while  you  are  wil- 
ling to  impose  taxes  upon  this  species  of  prop- 
erty, and  this  class  of  citizens,  you  quietly  fold 
your  arms  and  say,  ''I  am  secure  and  cannot  be 
reached."  1  ask  if  this  is  equality,  if  this  is 
justice.  It  occurs  to  me  sir,  that  there  is  nei- 
ther equality,  nor  propriety,  nor  justice  in  a  de- 
mand of  this  kind.  Sir,  carry  this  principle 
out.  Why  do  you  say  that  the  institution  of 
slavery  should  sustain  these  burdens?  The  an- 
swer is,  that  it  is  based  upon  wrong  to  hold  a 
slave.  I  ask  gentlemen  on  this  floor  who  hear 
me  now — whatdifference  is  therebetween  a  slave, 
and  a  horse,  a  mule  and  land,  or  anything  else, 
so  far  as  property  is  concerned?  The  law  makes 
no  distinction — no  difference.  If  there  be  no  dif- 
ference in  point  of  law,  if  the  law  recognises  all 
equally  as  property,  what  reason  can  be  pro- 
pounded why  we  should  tax  that  species  of 
property  while  we  hold  exempt  all  other  spe- 
cies of  property,  and  say  to  the  owners  of  negroes, 
"these  are  the  demands  we  make  upon  you,  these 
are  the  sacrifices  you  are  required  to  make  if 
you  continue  to  hold  this  species  of  property?" 
Sir,  is  it  right?  Why  does  the  gentleman  ask 
this?  My  mind  can  suggest  no  other  reason  for 
it  than,  as  regarding  the  institution  of  slavery, 
believing,  as  the  gentleman  says  he  does,  "that 
it  is  Avrongin  itself;"  that  it  ought  to  be  strick- 
en down,  that  all  protection;  all  ideaof  property 
in  slaves  should  be  expunged  from  the  constitu- 
tion, and  that  all  the  slaves  in  the  country 
should  go  free.  But  sir,  so  long  as  slavery 
does  exist,  so  long  as  our  institutions  recognize 
it,  so  long  as  the  people  recognize  it  as  it  stands 
upon  your  constitution,  why  make  this  distinc- 
tion— a  distinction  which  neither  in  principle 
nor  practice  can  ever  be  carried  out.  If  my 
land  be  taken  for  turnpike  or  railroad  purposes, 
the  constitution  guaranties  to  me  the  certainty 
of  my  remuneration  whatever  that  may  be.  Is 
it  concluded  then  that  this  species  of  property 
shall  be  taxed  to  support  itself,  as  well  as  to  aid 
in  the  protection  of  all  other  property?  Is  this 
right,  is  it  just,  is  it  proper? 

Mr.  President,  when  you  talk  about  equality, 
and  propriety,  and  justice,  I  say  to  that  gentle- 
man, that  thenMs  neither  equality,  nor  propri- 
ety, nor  justice,  in  a  demand  like  this.  So  long 
as  the  institution  remains,  let  it  remain  upon 
the  same  ecrual  footing  with  other  property;  let 
it  be  taxed  like  your  lands  and  other  species  of 
property,  subject  to  taxation,  and  then,  sir,  there 
will  be  no  cause  of  complaint.  I  say  now — for 
I  deny  that  slavery  is  either  a  moral  or  a  social 
wrong — attemptnot  to  throw  up  any  walls  around 
it;  let  the  institution  stand   as  it  is;  leave  the 

f>ower  of  taxation  in  the  hands  of  the  people,  and 
et  it  be  regulated  through  the  legislature,  and  I 
tell  the  people,  in  such  case,  their  institutions  are 
safe.  Throw  up  no  walls  around  them;  it  is  need- 
less to  do  so  when  no  enemy  is  approaching;  fight 
not  against  phantoms.  'Take  my  word  for  it, 
there  are  those  who  are  standing  at  the  out- posts, 
and  listening  to  and  gathering  all  that  falls  from 
us  here,  and  they  will  catch  it,  and  u.se  it,  too. 
But  let  us  stand  firm,  relying  upon  the  guards 
already  thrown  around  this  institution,  and, 
mark  my  word,  ihat  will  be  the  greatest  security 


I 


that  can  be  given  to  th»  slave  property  in  thia 
country. 

Do  you  believe,  sir,  when  they  talk  about  the 
five  hundred  thousand  of  the  non-slaveholding 
population  of  Kentucky — do  you  believe  when  ; 
they  are  appealed  to  and  told  the  amount  of  tax 
which  is  paid  upon  negroes  in  this  state— -do  you 
believe  that  when  you  tell  them  their  taxes  must 
necessarily  be  increased  as  you  strike  this  vast 
amount  ofi" — d^o  you  bt^lieve  that  when  you  thus 
appeal  \o  their  common  sense  and  judgment, 
they  will  not  soon  see  the  result — and  aid  you, 
for  their  own  sakes,  in  the  maintenance  of  this 
property?  Strike  off  the  slave  and  let  free  pop- 
ulation come  in;  do  so,  if  you  can;  but  I  tell  the 
gentleman  that  the  institution  of  slavery  will 
stand  in  Kentucky  as  long  as  time  shall  last. 
We  require  no  guard,  no  walls  around  this  insti- 
tution. It  addresses  itself  to  the  intelligence, 
the  good  sense,  and  the  pockets  of  the  people  of 
this  country;  and  while  these  are  appealed  to, 
you  may  depend  upon  it  your  institutions  are 
secure. 

Mr.  President,  further  about  this  institution 
permit  me  to  remark.  Strike  out  the  proposi- 
tion of  my  friend  from  Christian,  and  what  is 
the  result  as  it  regards  the  amount  that  goes  in- 
to the  sinking  fund?  Strike  that  out  1  would 
say,  because  if  that  section  is  engrafted  upon 
the  constitution,  tlie  legislature  is  disarmed  of 
all  power;  you  strike  out  $35,000  going  to  the 
sinking  fund,  and  the  demand  must  be  met  from 
some  source;  and  how  I  ask  does  he  propose  to 
meet  the  deficiency?  Is  the  gentleman  willing 
to  strike  out  from  the  resources  of  the  sinking 
fund  the  sum  of  $35,000,  and  propose  no  means 
for  making  up  the  deficit  thus  created?  There 
is  none  proposed;  and  I  trust  no  delegate  in  this 
house  will  feel  authorized  to  vote  forthat  propo- 
sition until  some  feasible  proposition  is  present- 
ed for  meeting  this  deficit. 

I  hope  the  proposition  of  my  friend  from  Da- 
viess will  be  laid  upon  the  table.  I  would  ratlier 
fall  back  upon  the  constitution  as  it  stands. 

I  would  not,  Mr.  President,  have  said  a  word 
to  this  convention  on  the  subject  now  before  it, 
had  it  not  been  for  the  reasons  which  I  stated 
in  the  outset;  and  having  asked  the  convention 
to  adjourn,  and  as  they  were  kind  enough  to  ad- 
journ, I  express  my  thanks  to  them  for  that 
courtesy,  and  also  for  the  patience  with  which 
they  have  heard  me  to-day. 

Mr.  BRI3T0W.  I  regret  to  see  every  ques- 
tion run  into  the  subject  of  slavery  or  cities;  but 
this  question  has  got  into  both.  I  wish  there 
could  be  some  check  put  to  the  tendency  to 
speak  of  slavery  in  connection  with  every  other 
question.  That  is  a  settled  subject;  we  came 
here  instructed  to  leave  it  as  we  found  it. 

The  simple  inquiry  now  before  the  convention 
is,  how  can  we  .settle  in  the  best  manner  a  prin- 
ciple of  taxation?  Shall  we  leave  it  to  the  legis- 
lature, or  shall  we  settle  it?  If  a  tax  has  been 
raised  improperly  on  articles  specified,  that  prin- 
ciple should  be  done  away:  Gentlemen  say 
that  $14,000  has  been  raised  in  this  way,  and 
unjustly,  and  therefore  you  must  not  do  it  away. 
If  the  sum  raised  was'$lOO,000,  the  argument 
I  suppose  would  be  still  stronger,  for  the  diffi- 
culty   of  supplying    the    deficit  would   be  so 


much  greatei-.  If  it  is  right,  go  on  witii  it;  it' 
not,  do  it  away. 

I  know  how  to  appreciate  the  motives  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bracken  when  he  was  operated 
upon  by  a  proper  desire  to  prevent  repudiation 
and  di.^grace  to  the  state.  But  I  would  a.-k  what 
would  have  been  his  condition,  if  the  same  prin- 
ciple had  bfcn  in  our  prc-s«^nt  constitution,  for 
which  he  now  contends?  He  could  not  have 
departed  from  the  straight  forward  principle. 
Where  did  this  principle  start?  I  hold  it  never 
did  start  at  home.  It  commenced  in  the  legis- 
lature, and  would  not  have  started  there,  but 
the  legislature  had  raised  a  debt,  and  they  en- 
deavored to  justify  themselves  for  this  tax  on 
that  ground.  Tell  me  not  it  is  laid  to  protect 
the  yeomen  of  Kentucky.  I  know  how  to 
sympathise  with  that  class.  Thev  do  not  ask 
injustice  to  be  done  for  their  benefit.  The  gen- 
tlemen who  represent  peculiarly  the  mountain 
sectron,  and  the  people  who  live  in  that  portion 
of  the  state  will  tell  you  that  they  do  not  need, 
nor  wish  to  be  considered  objects  of  charity. 
They  want  only  justice.  Can  we  give  it?  I  say 
we  can  do  it  without  interfering  with  the  rights 
respecting  cities  or  slaves. 

Gentlemen  say  we  cannot  do  without  these 
specific  taxes,  and  that  it  is  ea.sier  for  men  of 
wealth  than  for  others.  One  man  vests  his 
means  in  one  species  of  property  which  is  profit- 
able, and  another  in  another  species,  which  is 
not,  and  it  is  .said  it  is  more  convenient  for  the 
man  who  has  vested  his  means  profitably  to  pay 
the  tax  on  specified  articles.  Let  us  not  make 
these  distinctions.  The  fine  carriage  is  taxed 
just  the  same  as  the  mere  convenient  article  of 
the  poor,  worth  perhaps  fifty  dollars.  Legisla- 
tors say  they  do  not  know  how  to  avoid  this  dif- 
ficulty. If  you  must  tax  articles  of  luxury,  let 
it  be  according  to  their  value,  and  then  the  old 
lady  who  owns  the  mere  article  of  convenience, 
the  humble  carriage,  will  pay  only  what  it  i.s 
worth,  and  the  $1,000  carriage  of  the  nabob  for 
what  it  is  worth. 

But  it  is  not  yet  settled  that  this  specific  tax- 
ation is  so  clearly  a  benefit  to  the  poor;  it  de- 
pends on  tlie  feelings  of  the  man,  and  his  own 
tastes  and  inclinations.  If  he  spends  his  prop- 
erty for  luxuries,  he  will  have  to  meet  the  taxes 
on  them,  and  if  he  lays  up  his  money  like  a 
miser,  then  he  will  not  pay  this  specific  tax.  But 
this  tax  will  not  operate  equally.  The  man  who 
is  worth  $100,000  will  own  but  one  carriage  and 
pay  a  tax  on  that.  The  man  who  is  worth  but 
$5,000  or  $10,000,  will  have  his  carriage.  Ten 
men  will  have  more  of  these  articles  than  one 
man  who  is  worth  as  much  as  all  of  them.  Then 
the  old  lady's  spectacles,  a  merememeato  of  some 
friend,  or  the  gift  of  some  friend,  to  accommo- 
date the  old  lady,  must  be  taxed  specifically. 

Gentlemen  say  we  have  had  this  fund  so  long, 
and  gone  so  far,  that  we  cannot  get  clear  of  it, 
and  must  leave  the  matter  to  the  legislature. 
The  gentleman  from  Bracken  would  do  this.  I 
would  settle  it  now,  as  one  of  the  principles  by 
which  the  legislature  should,  in  all  time  to  come, 
be  governed  and  controlled.  We  have  had  all 
these  difficulties  because  that  principle  was  not 
first  settled.  Let  me  show  you  in  what  manner 
the  states  around  us  have  settled  this  principle, 
states  having  larger  cities  than   any  we  have. 


M% 


•  iiark  how  short  aud  succiuct  the  priiicipies 
adopted  by  the  states  around  us.  First,  look  at 
the  state  of  Tonnessee. 

"  All  property  shall  be  taxed  according  to  its 
value." 

That  settles  the  whole  principle,  and  excludes 
the  idea  of  specific  taxation. 

Here  is  Louisiana: 

"Taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform  through - 
o\it  the  state.  Aft.^r  tlie  year  1848,  all  property 
on  wliich  taxes  may  be  levied  in  this  state,  shall 
be  t^ixed  in  proportion  to  its  value,  to  be  ascer- 
tained as  directed  by  law." 

Here  is  the  language  of  the  constitution  of 
Illinois: 

"  Tlie  mode  of  levying  a  tax  shall  be  by  valu- 
ation; so  that  every  person  shall  pay  a  tax  in 
proportion  to  the  value  of  tlie  property  he  or 
she  has  in  his  or  her  possession." 

That  its  very  distinct,  short,  aud  clear.  Here 
is  Missouri  still  shorter. 

•'  All  property  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to 
its  value." 

The  same  principle  is  carried  out  in  Arkan- 
sas, and  in  Texas,  and  other  states.  I  have  not 
looked  over  them  all,  but  I  see  here  the  princi- 
ple is  settled;  the  same  principle  which  I  wish 
to  see  settled.  The  gentleman  says  circumstan- 
ces may  spring  up  that  may  make  it  necessary 
to  tax  the  people  in  this  yvaj.  We  only  lay 
down  the  general  principle.  Kentucky  is  a  state 
of  that  character  that  we  cannot  anticipate  it 
will  be  necessary  to  depart  from  this  principle. 
It  is  an  agricultural  state.  Sliall  wc,  the  farm 
ers,  be  taxed  unequally?  Surely  not.  All  who 
are  protected,  shall  be  protected  in  proportion  to 
the  value  of  their  property. 

I  may  be  peculiarly  situated  in  this  respect. 
I  argued  this  through  my  county,  and  I  did  not 
find  one  man  against  the  principle.  We,  in  my 
county,  are  nut  very  rich  nor  very  poor,  as  a 
■whole,  though  some  are  very  poor.  They  are  all 
in  favor  of  this  principle  of  taxation  in  propor- 
tion to  the  value  of  property  which  a  man  is 
worth.  A  beautiful  speech  may  be  made  on 
taxation  of  incomes  and  that  sort  of  thing,  but 
there  is  no  necessity  for  it  in  Kentucky.  When 
we  leave  the  state,  to  tax  every  man  just  in  pro- 
portion to  what  he  is  wortli,  what  more  can  we 
ask?  We  just  simply  take  away  the  power  to  do 
■wrong.  Every  man  agrees  that  it  is  wrong  that 
this  specific  tax  should  exist,  and  is  only  riglit 
from  necessity.  But  such  a  necessity  can  never 
come,  provided  you  put  it  in  your  fundamental 
law  that  you  shall  not  resort  to  specific  taxa- 
tion. I  have  no  doubt  it  was  the  very  thing 
which  many  in  the  legislature  would  have  re- 
joiced to  have  had  in  the  constitution,  wlien 
driven  to  the  necessity  whicli  was  brouglit  be- 
fore them.  What  else' did  they  do?  They  even 
taxed  collateral  inheritances — a  man's  children, 
brothers,  and  sisters,  to  keep  up  the  revenue.  If 
the  legislatuj-e  niay  do  tliat,  <lo  we  know  how  far 
tiiey  may  go?  Gentlemen  say  they  have  already 
gone  far  enough  to  receive  $14,0l)0  per  annum, 
and  use  that  as  an  argument  to  go  on.  How  far 
will  they  go,  unless  we  restrict  them  from  say- 
ing that  a  class  of  persons,  or  species  of  proper- 
ty, shall  be  taxed  separate  from  the  rest?  I  in- 
tend to  vote  for  taxing  property  according  to  its 
value,  and  no    further,    i  have  a  proposition 


which  I  deoire  to  offer,  by  which  I  propose  to 
provide,  that  after  the  vear  1853,  all  taxes  levied 
for  state  purposes,  shall  be  equal  and  uniform; 
nor  shall  any  one  description  of  property  be  tax- 
ed liigher  than  another,  in  proportion  to  its  val- 
ue. But  the  general  assembly  may  authorize  tlie 
several  towns,  cities,  and  counties  to  impose 
taxes  for  town,  city,  county,  corporate,  and  oilier 

Eurposes,  respectively,  in  such  manner  as  may 
e  authorized  by  law. 

I  put  in  1853,  in  order  to  give  time  to  the  legis- 
lature to  meet  the  loss  of  this  $14,000;  and  1  get 
justice,  at  least  for  the  great  body  of  the  state. 
I  am  willing  to  leave  the  matter  of  taxation 
which  is  peculiar  to  cities  and  corporate  towns, 
to  the  legislature.  I  am  aware  that  we  do  not 
meet  all  the  injustice  that  may  exist.  We  do 
not  go  into  detail,  but  simply  assert  that  taxa- 
tion shall  be  in  proportion  to  the  value  of  prop- 
erty, and  that  counties  and  towns  may  have  poll 
taxes. 

Do  gentlemen  know  what  is  the  practice  with 
regard  to  specific  taxation?  The  general  opin- 
ion is,  that  when  an  article  is  taxed  spicifically 
it  is  not  given  into  the  list,  according  to  its  val- 
ue; but  that  is  not  the  law.  The  attorney  for 
the  state  has  settled  the  question,  and  the  audi- 
tor has  issued  his  instructions  to  that  eftect. 
Tlien,  do  you  see  the  injustice  to  which  the  le- 
gislature went?  They  first  authorized  to  tax  in 
proportion  to  value,  and  then  in  addition  to 
that,  they  were  taxed  specifically.  Tliat  is  the 
law.  Suppose  they  are  not  taxed  now  accord- 
ing to  value,  then  we  shall  not  lose  so  much 
when  that  portion  of  the  revenue  is  taken  away. 
Then,  when  we  do  tax  according  to  value,  the 
carriage  worth  .$1000,  which  now  pays  only  one 
dollar,  if  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  is  correct, 
will  pay  nineteen  cents  on  a  hundred  dollars, 
which  will  make  one  dollar  and  ninety  cents;  so 
tliat  you  will  not  lose  so  mueh  as  has  been  stated 
by  some  gentlemen. 

I  want  the  whole  to  be  raised  in  a  different 
way.  One  cent  upon  every  hundred  dollars 
would  overrun  that  amount  ■vvhich  would  be  lost 
from  specific  taxation,  and  make  something  like 
$30,000.  A  man  worth  a  thousand  dollars  will 
pay  ten  cents.  The  taxes  will  be  paid  by  the 
rich,  and  in  proportion  to  value  of  property,  and 
the  protection  they  receive  from  the  law  of  tlie 
land. 

There  will  be  no  partial  favors  in  regard  to 
the  law,  at  least,  and  if  the  legislature  will 
travel  out  to  reach  licenses,  let  them  do  so. 
There  are  cases  which  1  do  not  know  how  to 
reacli. 

Whilst  I  have  the  floor,  in  order  to  save  time 
— as  I  am  very  anxious  to  complete  the  business 
for  which  we  were  sent  here,  and  adjourn — I 
will  say  a  word  in  regard  to  the  abstract  resolu- 
tions, or  sections,  whieli  have  been,  and  may  here- 
after be,  urged  before  this  convention,  with  the 
design  of  making  them  a  part  of  the  constitu- 
tion. I  shall  vote  against  them,  as  I  have  al- 
ready done,  under  the  firm  conviction  that  we,  as 
practical  men,  should  not  consume  time  in  de- 
bating mere  abstract  questions,  which  can  have 
no  practical  bearing.  I  am  aware  that  it  is  the 
wisn  of  delegates  to  render  more  secure  the 
rights  of  owners  to  certain  property.  I  pledged 
myself  at  home  to  make  no  change  on  that  sub- 


«4# 


j€ut  in  our  «)U»iitutioa,  except  to  provid*:  lor 
colonization,  as  connected  with  future  emanci- 
pation, so  as  to  prevent  the  further  increase  of 
the  free  colored  population  in  our  state.  I  re- 
gret that  excitement  on  that  subject  should  cause 
so  much  discussion  here.  The  people  settled  it 
at  the  polls.  Resting  upon  the  provisions  in 
the  present  constitution,  which  should  nniain 
unchanged,  and  the  justice  aud  magnanimity  of 
our  people,  and  the  rights  of  slaveholders  are 
entirely  secure.  And  my  conviction  is,  that  it  is 
our  dutv  to  resist  every  effort  to  add  to,  or  take 
from,  tlie  present  constitution  on  that  subject. 
And  ■wliilst  gentlemen  may  honestly  believe  that 
they  the  belter  secure  that  property,  by  adding 
sections  and  declaring  against  the  power  of  the 
people  and  future  conventions,  to  interfere  ■with 
It,  1  am  clearly  convinced  that  they  but  weaken 
the  tenure.  They  thus  multiply  and  cliange  is- 
sues, and  place  themselves  in  a  false  attitude; 
and  instead  of  contending  against  the  justice, 
propriety,  and  moral  right  of  interfering  with 
their  property,  they  challenge  the  power  of  the 
people,  by  asserting  that  such  power  does  not 
exist.  Power,  in  the  abstract,  is  innocent,  and 
only  partakes  of  the  qualities  of  good  or  evil  as 
it  may  be  put  in  practice.  Then  make  no  issue 
on  the  abstract  question  of  power,  but  leave  the 
question  as  we  found  it — to  theguards  and  sanc- 
tions of  the  present  constitution,  and  the  justice 
and  magnanimity  of  our  citizens,  and  their  re- 
sponse will  always  be  such  as  will  do  credit  to 
Kentucky  character. 

Mr.  HARDIN".  The  gentleman  from  Todd 
has  made  a  very  strong  speech  ;  when  on  the 
wrong  side  he  can,  like  Belial,  make  the  worse 
appear  tlie  better  side.  The  truth  cannot  be  de- 
nied, that  the  true  principle  of  taxation  is  that 
every  man  should  pay  according  to  his  means. 
The  income  of  the  county  should  be  called  upon 
to  contribute  to  the  support  of  government. 
That  is  true  as  a  general  principle.  As  I  said 
yesterday,  we  pav  a  tax  of  $l,3o0,000  on  im- 
ports, and  yet  we  liardly  know  it.  We  pay  to 
the  customs  about  a  million  of  dollars,  and  we 
pay  a  profit  to  the  importer,  the  wholesale  mer- 
chant, and  tlie  retailer,  all  of  which  comes  out 
of  the  pockets  of  the  consumers;  but  it  is  not 
felt  because  it  falls  on  the  means  of  the  country, 
and  no  man  buys  unless  he  can   afiford   it.      We 

Eay  this  year  by  Avay  of  direct  tax,  about  $562,- 
i)U,  and  we  find  it  Very  inconvenient  and  op- 
pressive. By  the  great  body  of  the  people  it 
will  be  felt  verv"  sensibly ;  they  do  not  feci  the 
indirect  tax,  because  it  Vails  on  those  who  can 
alford  to  pay.  It  will  fall  on  the  man  who  wears 
a  fine  coat,  and  not  on  him  who  makes  his  own 
coat ;  and  it  will  be  admitted,  I  suppose, 
that  if  a  man  will  disguise  himself  in  fine  clothes 
he  should  pay  for  them.  The  tax  on  tea  and 
coflFee  is  small  because  they  have  become  neces- 
saries of  life;  and  we  pay  out  little  tax  on  for- 
eign salt  liecause  it  is  also  a  necessary  ;  but 
whatever  can  be  dispensed  with  enters  into  what 
is  called  the  superfluities  or  the  luxuries  of  life, 
and  upon  it  government  must  have  the  power  to 
raise  revenue. 

I  care  very  little  about  the  specific  tax  of 
$14,242;  but  the  proposition  of  tne  gentleman 
vronld  taie  away  from  the  legislature,  in  all 

107 


time  to  come,  the  power  to  disoritninat«  between 

the  necessities  and  the  luxuries  of  life.  Tht 
constitution  which  we  shall  form,  we  hope  will 
last  somefifty  or  a  hundred  years,  and  does  the  gen» 
tleman  really  sofardistrustthe  taxing  power  as  to 
take  from  it  the  ability  to  distinguish  between  lux- 
uries and  necessities?  Can  the  poor  woman  dis- 
pense witii  her  horse,  or  her  cow,  or  her  bed? 
And  yet  the  gentleman  would  tax  her  as  much, 
according  to  value,  as  you  tax  the  watch  and 
the  carriage  of  the  rich:  that  is,  nineteen  cent? 
on  the  hundred  dollars.  The  gentleman  from 
Todd  shakes  his  head,  but  if  it  does  not  mean 
that  it  means  nothing.  I  contend  tliat  the  pow- 
er should  remain  with  the  legislature  to  discrim- 
inate in  respect  to  the  articles  of  taxation.  Such 
a  discrimination  should  always  be  made,  in  a 
well  regulated  government,  by  diversifying  the 
articles  so  as  to  make  the  tax  fall  upon  the 
means  of  the  county,  and  not  upon  its  visible 
and  tangible  property.  We  know  that  there  is 
a  ta!x  upon  cattle  ;  and  the  gentleman  would 
prevent  any  discrimination  after  1853  in  favor 
of  the  poor  man.  Nor  could  we  exempt  the  sci- 
entific apparatus  of  a  college  or  a  university. 
All  the  college  books — all  the  college  apparatus 
is  to  be  taxed.  Sir,  what  a  strange  spectacle  it 
will  be,  to  tax  the  articles  belonging  to  our 
schools;  but  yet  vou  will  be  able  to  exempt 
nothing.  You  will  not  be  able  to  exempt  a  poor 
woman's  property  to  the  amount  of  $50.  She 
must  pay  at  the  same  rate  that  would  be  paid 
on  a  piano.  I  know  the  tax  falls  veiy  heavy  on 
some  of  us.  It  falls  very  heavy  on  nie.  My  ri- 
diculous pride  makes  me  carry  a  gold  watch. 
My  friend  from  Christian  (Mr.  Gray) — I  will  not 
sa^'  it  is  ridiculous  in  him — also  carries  one, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  he  w'ill  have  a  pair  of  gold 
spectacles.  According  to  the  old  saying,  "  law- 
yers live  well,  work  hard,  and  die  poor."  Some 
of  us  have  not  only  a  gold  watch,  but  a  gold 
guard  chain,  and  if  over  fifty  years  of  age,  a  pair 
of  gold  spectacles.  Our  old  lady  too,  must  have  her 
gold  spectacles,  of  course  ;  and  rich  or  poor, 
we  must  have  our  carriage,  and  if  we  have  a 
daughter,  she  must  have  a  piano  ;  and  to  what 
does  the  tax  amount?  Why,  take  one  lawyer 
with  another,  I  think  this  specific  tax  will  be 
about  four  dollars  per  annum.  I  repeat  then, 
sir,  that  it  is  a  tax  which  falls  upon  those  who 
have  the  means  to  pav  it.  The  gentleman's 
profession  is  worth  $2,000  per  annum  as  his  in- 
come, and  the  farmer's  income  is  not  more  than 
$.300  upon  $10,000  worth  of  property,  and  his 
tax  will  be  about  five  per  cent.  Now  certainly 
you  can  better  tax  the  piano  of  a  rich  man,  than 
the  cow  or  the  liovse  of  a  poor  widow.  I  would 
rather  do  it;  and  I  would  rather  tax  thefine  gold 
watch,  or  the  fine  carriage  of  a  gentleman  of  for- 
tune than  the  college  books.  The  gentlemen 
from  Todd  and  Christian — and  there  are  no  gen- 
tlemen on  this  floor  for  whom  I  entertain  a  high- 
er respect — should  bear  in  inind  that  tlie  speci- 
fic tax  falls  upon  the  means  of  an  individual; 
it  falls  upon  the  vocation  of  professional  men, 
whether  of  medicine  or  of  law.  The  farming 
community  is  unequally  taxed.  It  lacks  but  a 
fraction  of  being  five  per  cent,  on  his  net  in- 
come, for  you  may  take  all  the  lands,  and  ne- 
froes,  and  stock  of  this  country,  and  I  do  not 
elieve  they  yield   a  clear  profit  of  three  per 


uo 


oent.    And  yet  tliey  are  taxed  about  five  percent, 
upon  their  income. 

"Ahl"  but  says  the  gentleman,  "we  can  in- 
crease the  tax."  Yes,  you  can  increase  the  tax. 
-The  British  government  sairl,  "we  will  impose 
«  tax  on  tea."  What  was  tl\e  consequence? 
Why  it  brought  about  the  revolution.  And  in 
levying  and  increasing  taxes  here,  I  would  say 
to  tlie  gentleman,  "take  care,  for  in  overloading 
B  horse,  the  last  feather  may  break  the  horse's 
back." 

A  word  or  two  as  to  the  debt  due  to  the  school 
fund.  The  tax  of  two  cents  on  the  $100, 
which  was  imposed  last  year  will  not  pay  the 
interest  on  the  school  f unci.  It  will  take  three 
cents.  How  much  then  will  raise  the  .f  50,000 
Surplus  to  extinguish  the  debt?  It  will  take 
another  cent;  that  will  be  a  five  per  cent,  tax  on 
the  agricultural  products  of  the  community.  I 
was  down  in  the  second  auditor's  office  when 
the  gentleman  from  Todd,  (Mr.  Bristow,)  came 
to  enquire  whether  the  articles  specifically  taxed, 
tvere  included  in  the  valuation,  and  he  said  he 
could  not  tell,  b\it  Mr.  Page  told  me  that  the  at- 
torney general  said  they  ought  to  be.  If  the  at- 
torney general  has  given  an  incorrect  opinion,  it 
trill  6e  easy  to  leave  it  to  the  legislature  to  say 
that  articles  specifically  taxed,  shall  not  be  in- 
cluded in  the  valuation.  I  do  not  say  anything 
in  regard  to  the  opinions  of  attorney  generals, 
but  I  Avill  say  that  I  have  not  always  a  great  rev- 
erence for  those  opinions.  Why,  we  had  not 
been  here  more  than  ten  days,  before  a  "  bed  of 
justice"  was  held  on  this  convention,  and  an 
opinion  was  given  that  if  we  staid  here  over 
sixty  days,  our  pay  would  be  brought  down  to 
two  dollars  per  day.  "No  you  won't,"  said  I, 
when  this  was  told  tome:  "we  can  unfrock  you 
as  quick  as  queen  Elizabeth  unfrocked  the  arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.  You  had  better  be  a  lit- 
tle careful  what  you  are  about,  and  not  hurt  our 
feelings."  I  considered  the  remark  an  insult  to 
the  convention. 

Such,  sir,  is  the  way  these  opinions  are  given. 
There  was  once  an  opinion  given  by  an  attorney 
general  that  the  governor  had  a  right  to  remove 
his  secretary  of  state,  but  the  court  of  appeals 
decided  diferently,  and  so  did  the  legislature, 
and  the  whole  people  of  Kentucky.  There  was 
once  an  attorney  general  in  France,  Fouquier 
Tinville,  who  gave  his  opinion  on  individual 
cases  that  came  before  him,  that  certain  persons 
should  be  guillotined,  not  because  they  were  guil- 
ty, but  because  it  was  a  matter  of  state  policy. 
When  Danton  and  Desmolines  were  put  upon  their 
trial,  and  the  jury  'hung'  as  we  say  in  Kentucky; 
they  refused  to  convict  until  they  were  told  by  the 
attorney  general  that  conviction  was  necessary  as 
a  matter  of  state  policy,  and  then  they  were  sen- 
tenced to  be  decapitated,  as  it  wa«  a  political 
measure. 

Mr.  President,  attorneys  general  ■were  always 
consulted  when  Caligula  and  Nero  found  or 
thought  it  necessary  to  cut  off  the  head  of  any 
one,  and  they  never  failed  to  do  it.  Isaiah  was 
a  true  prophet  when  he  said,  "The  ox  knoweth 
his  owner,  and  the  ass  his  master's  crib."  He 
told  the  truth,  and  no  wonder  that  he  was  able 
to  prophecy  the  destrnction  of  Babylon,  the 
great  whore  of  the  world.  A  member  of  con- 
grtsB  once  said  of  mankind,  "He  is  a  monstrous 


big  rascal."  [Laughter.]  Th«  scriptures  say 
the  same  thing  when  they  say  "The  heart  is  de- 
ceitful above  all  things,  and  desperately  wick- 
ed." Cromwell  said,  "God  save  me  trom  Sir 
Harry  Vane,"  and  1  say,  "  God  save  me  from 
attorney  generals  opinions." 

If  I  understood  the  gentleman  from  Fleming, 
(Mr.  M.  P.  Marshall,)  last  night,  to  whom  I  lis- 
tened with  great  pleasure,  he  contended  that  ne- 
gro property  should  be  taxed,  to  cover  the  loss 
of  those  negroes  who  absconded.  How  are  you 
to  prevent  the  citizens  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Il- 
linois from  tampering  with  slaves?  Are  you  to 
do  it  by  the  erection  of  block- houses  at  different 
points  from  the  mouth  of  the  Big  Sandy  to  the 
mouth  of  the  Ohio?  Are  you  to  do  it  by  indem- 
nifying a  man  who  runs  to  Ohio,  Illinois,  or  In- 
diana, in  quest  of  his  slave?  That  would  be 
very  difficult.  Are  you  to  do  it  by  contributing 
to  the  expenses?  I  could  make  a  suggestion  to 
my  honorable  friend,  and  I  think  he  will  then 
see  the  fallacy  of  his  argument.  In  181 5,  imme- 
diately after  the  war  closed, there  were  innumer- 
able applications  to  congress  for  indemnity  for 
private  property  destroyed  by  the  enemy.  How 
was  it  destroyed  in  the  city  of  Washington? 
Private  rope-walks,  and  much  other  property 
was  burnt  or  otherwise  destroyed  to  the  amount 
of  millions  of  dollars.  The  committee  of  claims 
had  a  most  important  dutvto  perfonn  in  the  set- 
tlement of  the  great  principle  which  was  involv- 
ed. The  United  States  were  called  upon  to  pay 
all  these  clp.ims,  and  the  committee  of  claims,  of 
which  I  was  a  member,  decided  and  reported 
that  the  United  States  ought  not  to  pay  them, 
for  the  reason  that  if  they  were  to  do  so,  the  ef- 
fect would  be  to  change  the  character  of  war  in 
the  future,  for  if  the  government  was  liable  for 
the  property  thus  destroyed,  the  object  of  the 
enemy  would  be  to  destroy  all  they  could  in  or- 
der to  cripple  the  government.  But  if  we  do  not 
pay  them,  the  enemy  will  not  destroy  it.  All 
nations  set  their  faces  against  the  wanton  de- 
struction of  private  property. 

Now,  I  would  a.sK  if  the  emancipationists 
come  over  here,  and  induce  our  negroes  to  run 
away,  are  we  to  indemnify  every  man,  to  the 
amount,  it  may  be,  of  foOO,  for  every  negro  he 
may  lose?  Sir,  I  regard  this  as  neither  more 
nor  less  than  an  emancipation  law,  in  its  tenden- 
cy. 

Take  the  position  of  the  gentleman  from  Flem- 
ing (Mr.  M.  P.  Marshall)  in  all  its  bearings  upon 
the  slaves  of  this  country,  no  man  could  keep 
his  slaves.  The  taxes  on  them  Avould  be  so 
heavy  as  to  become  insupportable.  The  result 
would  be,  that  men  owning  slaves  would  either 
move  out  of  the  country  with  them  or  sell  them; 
and  in  either  event,  Kentucky,  in  less  than  ten 
years,  would  become  a  non-slaveholding  state, 
and  the  whole  object  of  the  emancipationist 
would  be  fully  accomplished,  and  that  by  our  own 
solicitude,  and  the  over  anxiety  of  the  pro-slave- 
ry men  to  guard  with  unnecessary  vigilance  the 
right  to  retain  their  slaves,  and  protect  them  in 
the  use  and  enjoyment  of  that  kind  of  property. 
If.  by  any  system  of  measures  either  direct  or 
indirect,  Kentucky  was  to  become  a  non-slave- 
holding state,  what  would  be  the  result?  It 
would  giro  to  the  non-slaveholding  states  a  msr 
jority  o?  sixty  or  seventy  members  in  the  house  of 


S51 


r«prefi«>tativee  and  four  in  the  senate  in  the  con- 
gress of  the  United  States.  Th«  political  con- 
sequences would  be  ihis,  that  the  non-slavehold- 
iag  states  would  in  congress  commence  and  car- 
ij  on  such  measures,  so  at  war  with  the  institu- 
tions of  slavery,  as  to  compel  the  slaveholding 
states  either  to  give  up  their  property  or  sepa- 
rate from  the  other  states  and  dissolVe  the  Un- 
ion. The  latter  alternative  would  be  adopted, 
and  the  Union  dissolved.  I  ask  what  would  be 
the  situation  and  condition  of  Kentucky  then, 
would  she  attach  herself  to  the  north  or  south? 
If  she  went  to  the  northern  confederacy,  what 
would  be  the  result?  A  heavy  tax  would  be 
laid  upon  all  her  products  and  manufactures 
sold  to  the  tobacco  planters,  cotton  growers,  and 
sugar  makers.  The  slaveholding  states  in  the 
south  furnish  a  market  for  nearly  all  Kentucky 
has  to  sell ;  she  sells  but  little  elsewhere.  A 
heavy  duty  she  would  not  submit  to,  and  at  the 
same  time  compete  with  Tennessee  and  Missou- 
ri, when  those  states  would  pay  no  duty.  Lou- 
isiana once  belonged  to  Spain,  and  so  did  Flori- 
da. Kentucky  was  the  first  state  formed  on  this 
side  the  mountains — all  our  produce  had  to  be 
sold  to  Spanish  America.  Spain  levied  a  duty 
of  six  per  cent,  upon  all  we  sold  within  her  pos- 
sessions, and  six  percent. — an  export  duty — up- 
on the  money  we  brought  from  there,  amounting 
in  all  to  twelve  per  cent.  Spain  erected  forts — 
one  about  six  miles  below  Memphis,  and  the 
other  at  the  Walnut  Hills.  These  two  forts 
made  all  the  boats,  descending  the  Mississippi, 
land  and  pa\'  the  six  per  cent,  import  duty.  The 
export  duty  was  levied  and  collected  when  our 
traders  atteuipted  to  bring  home  the  avails  of 
their  sales.  These  two  duties — the  import  and 
export — were  too  heavy  and  oppressive.  Ken- 
tucky could  not  bear  it,  and  the  government  of 
the  United  States  failed  to  obtain  better  terms 
and  conditions  from  Spain.  The  people  of  Ken- 
tucky were  much  excited  on  this  subject  during 
lie  years  1793,  '4  and  '5.  In  1795,  the  leading 
men  in  Kentucky  sent  the  late  Judge  Sebastian 
to  Orleans  to  obtain  from  the  governor  of  Or- 
leans a  reduction  in  these  duties,  and  to  procure 
better  terms  and  conditions  in  our  conunercial 
intercourse  with  Spain.  1  have  said — and  I  re- 
peat it — that  the  first  men  in  Kentucky — great 
too  as  any  in  America — concurred  in  sending 
Sebastian  to  Orleans  to  make  the  commercial 
arrangements  with  Spain.  The  original  papers 
connected  with  that  transaction,  were  given  to 
me  near  tw<;nty  years  ago,  either  by  Judge  Se- 
bastian himself,  or  his  son.  Dr.  Charles  Sebas- 
tian. I  have  some  of  tliem  now  in  my  hand — 
one  signed  by  George  Nicholas,  Harry  Inuis, 
William  Murray  and  Benjamin  Sebastian — de- 
claring the  necessity  of  such  a  treaty,  and  ap- 
pointing Sebastian  to  make  and  conclude  such 
a  treaty,  or  commercial  arrangement,  as  the  ne- 
cessities of  Kentucky  required.  I  have  also  a 
copy  of  the  treaty  in  the  hand  writing  of  Judge 
Sebastian. 

The  signatures  of  George  Nicholas,  Harry  In- 
nis,  William  Murray  and  Benjamin  Sebastian, 
are  genuine.  I  liave  shown  tnera  to  their  ac- 
quaintances and  relations,  and  they  recognize 
their  respective  signatures.  I  also  nad  a  paper 
of  a  similar  character,  signed  by  near  one  hun- 
dred gentlemen  of  Kentucky,  to  the  tame  im- 


port, or  nenrly  bo.  I  cannot  now  lay  my  hands 
upon  it;  if  it  is  not  mislaid,  I  have* it  at  home. 
Sebastian  went  to  Orleans,  and  in  pursuance  of 
his  instructions,  he  made  the  treaty.  It  reduced 
the  import  duty  to  four  per  cent.,  and  took  off 
the  export  entirely ;  nay,  the  treaty  went  fur- 
ther— we  had  the  permission  to  trade  to  all 
Spanish  America  on  the  same  terras.  It  is  the 
best  commercial  treaty  we  ever  had  with  Spain. 
I  am.  Mr.  President,  greatly  rejoiced  that  I  have 
this  opportunity  to  vindicate  the  names,  charac- 
ters,and  memories, of  the  illustrious  men  who  fig- 
ured in  this  country  in  the  days  of  other  vears — 
days  that  tried  the  souls  of  men — men  wfio  have 
been  slandered  by  some  of  the  histories  of  this 
country,  in  which  they  are  branded  as  traitors  and 
Spanish  conspirators — men  that  I  feel  proud  of, 
and  so  ought  my  country  to  be  proud  of.  Thir- 
ty or  forty  years  ago  I  knew  most  of  them.  I 
see  in  my  mind,  and  can  recollect  exactlv  how 
they  looked.  They  then  had  the  aged  and  ven- 
erable appearance  of  the  senators  of  Rome,  seat- 
ed in  the  senate  chamber,  when  the  Gauls  took 
and  destroyed  the  city. 

I  will  read  the  papers  I  referred  to  here.  They 
are  genuine,  and  any  person  may  inspect  them: 

"  We  consider  it  as  essentially  necessary  to 
the  interest  of  our  country,  that  the  application 
made  to  Mr.  Sebastian  by  letter  from  the  governor 
of  New  Orleans,  should  be  seriously  attended  to. 
We  are  induced  to  be  of  this  opinion,  from  a 
a  conviction  that,  the  navigation  of  the  Mississip- 
pi is  indispensably  requisite  to  the  prosperity  of 
the  western  country;  and  that  there  is  now  no 
longer  a  hope  of  our  obtaining  it  by  the  inter- 
vention of  tne  general  government.  Situated  as 
this  country  is,  there  is  no  other  mode  in  which 
communications  respecting  this  important  subject 
can  be  made  but  by,  and  to  individuals;  and  as 
we  have  been  addressed  by  the  governor,  we  think 
we  ought  to  meet  his  communication.  It  is 
therefore,  with  our  unanimous  consent  and  de- 
sire, that  Messrs.  Innis,  Murray  and  Sebastian, 
or  any  one  or  more  of  them  should  go  to  New 
Madrid  to  meet  governor  Gayoso,  to  receive  such 
communications  as  he  may  be  disposed  to  make; 
to  know  in  what  manner,  and  upon  what  terms 
his  Catholic  Majesty  is  disposed  to  open  to  us 
that  navigation;  to  point  out  to  him  the  impos- 
sibility, arising  from  our  situation,  of  sending 
agents  empowered  to  negociate  with  him;  that 
it  is  the  most  favorite  object  with  the  citizens  of 
this  country  to  be  on  friendly  terms  with  his 
Catholic  Majesty  and  his  subjects,  and  to  carry 
on  a  free  commerce,  on  terms  of  reciprocal  ad- 
vantage to  both  countries;  that  from  the  extent 
of  our  territory,  and  the  rapid  increase  of  our 
population,  it  will  be  impossible  long  to  pre- 
serve peace,  unless  we  are  permitted  to  enjoy 
that  commerce;  to  make  a  true  representation  of 
the  present  population  of  the  western  country, 
and  of  its  probable  amount  within  a  verj-  few 
years;  of  the  different  articles  of  export,  which 
we  can  now  furnish,  of  the  quantitj'  of  each 
which  could  be  exported  at  present,  and  of  the 
increase  of  each  kind  which  might  be  calculated 
on  in  a  few  years,  if  there  was  a  certain  prospect 
of  a  market  for  them:  of  the  advantages  that 
might  be  derived  to  both  countries,  should  his 
Catholic  Majesty  make  such  relations  as 
\rould  enable  hfs   American  dominions  to  re- 


ceive  their  neceesary  supplies  from  the  western, 
instead  of  the  eastern  part  of  the  United  States; 
and  of  the  opportunity  which  now  occurs,  of  at- 
taching the  inhabitants  of  the  western  country 
to  his  Catholic  Majesty,  and  his  subjects;  by 
-voluntarily  doingthem  that  act  of  justice,  which 
they  no  longer  Jiope  to  be  able  to  obtain  by  the 
aid  of  their  own  government. 

"  In  testimony  of  our  concurrence  in  every 
thing  above  stated,  we  have  hereunto  affixed  our 
signatures  this  19th  day  of  November,  1795,  in 
the  state  of  Kentucky. 

■"  G.  IflCHOLAS, 
"  HARRY  INNIS, 
"WILLIAM  MURRAY, 
"BEN.  SEBASTIAN." 

"His  Catholic  Majesty  having  taken  into  con- 
sideration the  relative  situation  of  his  province 
of  Louisiana  and  its  dependencies,  and  that 
part  of  the  United  States  of  America,  lying 
west  of  the  Apalachian  Mountains,  and  being 
of  opinion  that  a  commercial  intercourse  be- 
tween the  two  countries  will  be  productive  of 
the  harmony  and  reciprocal  interest  thereof,  has 
been  pleased  to  concede  to  the  people  of  the  said 
■western  country,  during  his  pleasure,  the  fol- 
lowing privileges: 

"1st.  The  people  of  the  said  western  country 
shall  henceforth  freely  use,  and  exclusively  en- 
joy, for  the  purpose  of  commerce,  the  navigation 
of  the  river  Mississippi,  and  all  the  ports  and 
places  thereon,  under  the  government  of  his 
Catholic  Majesty,  subject  to  the  same  regula- 
tions and  restrictions,  and  no  other,  by  which 
the  commerce  of  the  subjects  of  his  Catholic 
Majesty  is  now  governed.  And  whereas  the 
people  of  the  said  western  country  are  now  sub- 
ject to  the  payment  of  six  per  centum,  ad 
valorem,  on  all  the  produce  of  the  said  western 
country  imported  into  the  government  of  Louisi- 
ana and  its  dependencies,  and  also  to  tlie  pay- 
ment of  the  same  duty  on  the  exportation  there- 
of, and  his  Majesty,  being  willing  to  remove 
every  obstacle  to  that  friendly  intercourse  which 
he  is  desirous  to  establish  and  maintain  with 
the  said  western  people,  does  hereby  concede, 
that  the  said  western  people  shall  hereafter  be 
subject  to  the  payment  of  a  duty  of  four  per 
centum  onlv,  whether  the  produce  imported  be 
disposed  of  in  the  markets  of  Louisiana,  or  ex- 

Eorted  to  foreign  markets,  and  that  the  duty  to 
e  thus  paid  by  the  said  western  people  shall 
be  regulated  by  the  valuation  of  tlieir  produce 
hereto  annexecf. 

"  2d.  That  there  maybe  no  impediment  or  ob- 
struction to  the  fullest  and  most  advantageous 
enjoyment  of  tlie  privileges  hereby  granted  to  the 

{teople  of  the  said  western  country  by  liis  Catho- 
ic  Majesty,  such  of  the  said  western  people  as 
may  choose  to  reside  in  the  government  of  Loui- 
siana, for  the  purpose  of  carrying  on  commerce, 
shall  henceforth  be  permitted  to  acquire  by  pur- 
chace,  or  otherwise,  both  real  and  personal  pro- 
perty, in  any  port  or  place  on  the  said  river, 
Mississippi,  or  at  any  other  place  within  the 
government  of  the  said  province  of  Louisiana 
and  it«  dependencies,  and  shall  be  protected  by 
the  Hai<l  government  in  tlie  enjoyment  thereof, 
the  said  residents  being  anunablo,  during  their 
residence,  to  the  same  laws  and  regulations,  by 
which    the  subjeotB  of  the  said  province  are 


govenied;  and  should  the  said  residents,  or  any 
of  them,  die  in  the  said  province,  or  think  prop- 
er to  remove  to  the  United  States,  or  elsewhere, 
their  property,  both  real  and  personal  shall,  in 
the  first  case,  be  disposed  of  according  to  the 
will  of  the  decendent,  and,  where  no  will  has 
been  made,  shall  descend  to,  and  be  distributed 
among  the  legal  representatives  of  the  deceased, 
agreeable  to  the  laws  of  the  said  province;  and 
in  the  last  case,  the  removing  resident  shall 
have  the  libertj'  of  disposing  of  the  absolute 
estate  in  the  whole,  or  any  part  of  the  property 
which  he  has  either  carried  to,  or  acquired  in  the 
said  province,  and  to  transport  the  proceeds 
thereof,  free  from  duty  to  any  part  of  the  world. 

"3d.  His  CatholicMajesty,  to  evince  to  the  said 
western  people,  his  disposition  to  encourage  the 
commerce  of  their  country,  hereby  permits  them 
when  they  cannot  get  a  satisfactory  market  for 
their  produce  in  the  province  of  Louisiana  or 
its  dependencies,  to  export  the  same  to  the 
Havanna, 

or  to  any  other  port  or  place  either  in  the  United 
States  or  Europe;  and  the  said  produce,  being 
exported  to  the  Havanna,  or  to  any  of  the  said 
ports  in  the  Spanish  dominions,  having  paid 
the  duty  in  the  province  of  Louisiana,  and  the 
proprietor  thereof,  taking  from  tlie  proper  officer 
in  the  said  province  authentic  documents  of  the 
payment,  sliall  not  again  be  subject  to  the  pay- 
ment of  any  duty  in  any  port  or  place  in  the 
said  Spanish  dominions,  to  which  the  said  pro- 
duce shall  be  exported,  but  thesanie  may  be  dis- 
posed of  in  sucli  port  or  place  under  the  same 
rules  and  regulations  which,  at  present,  govern 
the  disposal  of  the  produce  of  Louisiana. 

"4th.  To  prevent  any  misconstruction,  or  im- 
proper use  of  the  privileges  hereby  granted,  it  is 
explicitly  declared,  that  the  importation  of  all 
articles  of  commerce,  of  what  nature  or  des- 
cription soever,  which  are  not  actually  the  pro- 
duction of  the  said  western  country,  is  abso- 
lutely prohibited;  and  if  any  person  shall  here- 
after attempt,  under  any  pretext  whatsoever,  to 
introduce  into  the  province  of  Louisiana,  or  its 
dependencies,  down  the  Mississippi,  the  pro- 
ducts or  manufactures  of  any  other  country,  (un- 
less specially  permitted  by  the  government,)  the 
same  are  hereby  declared  to  be  contraband,  and 
liable  to  seizure. 

"5th.  As  the  commutation  of  the  products  of 
one  country  for  those  of  anotlier,  is  tlie  founda- 
tion of  commerce,  his  Majesty,  in  order  to  es- 
tablish that  reciprocity  of  interest  between  his 
dominions  and  the  said  western  countrj',  with- 
out which,  no  commercial  intercourse  can  be 
permanent,  will  cause  a  preference  to  be  always 
given  in  his  markets  to  the  products  of  the  said 
western  country,  and  therefore  expects,  that  the 
people  of  the  said  Avestern  countrj',  acting  under 
the  influence  of  the  same  principle,  will,  in  the 
purchase  of  such  articles  of  commerce  as  they 
may  need,  whether  foreign  or  domestic,  prefer 
liis  markets  to  any  otlier.  And  as  a  further  in- 
ducement thereto, his  Majesty,  contrary  to  a  long 
established  rule  of  his  government,  does  hence- 
forth permit  the  people  of  the  said  western 
country  to  carry  out  of  his  dominions  whatever 
money  may  remain  to  them,  after  completing 
their  purchases,  free  from  any  duty  or  impost 
whatsoever."  I'^ik 


S53 


Kentuckr  enioTed  the  benefits  of  the  regula- 
tions made'bv  bebastiaD  until  Spain  transferrt-d 
that  country  to  France,  and  France  to  the  United 
States:  and  after  enjoying  the  benefits  of  Sebas- 
tian's labors  for  years — ■when  t)ie  necessities  for 
those  regulations  had  passed  away — Kentuckr, 
for  a  time,  forgot  his  services,  and  the  ■whole 
legislature  attacked  him  in  lb06.  Those  that 
sent  him  who  were  alive — for  some  were  dead — 

fBve  him  no  aid  or  assistance,  and  he  sunk  un- 
er  the  assault  and  fell  a  victim  to  the  rage  of 
popular  fury.  I  trust  in  God  that  the  present 
generation  will  do  his  memory  justice  for  the 
consolation  of  his  posterity. 

Mr.  President,  I  would  Vote  very  che<»rfully 
for  the  amendment  of  my  honorable  friend  from 
Daviiiss,  if  I  did  not  think  like  my  friend  from 
Lewis,  (ilr.  Proctor,}  that  we  are  making  a  little 
too  much  noise  about  slavery. 

I  protest  against  wrapping  up  negro  property 
as  some  midwife  would  wrap  up  a  woman  in 
sixteen  blankets,  because  she  has  had  a  hard  la- 
hour.  Just  let  us  put  in  the  constitution  what 
my  friend  from  Woodford,  (Mr.  Waller,)  propos- 
ecf  to  day.  That  is  my  doctrine.  Your  negroes 
should  not  be  set  free,  pay  or  no  pay,  unless 
they  leave  the  state ;  and  what  is  more,  no  free  ne- 
gfro  should  comehere.  Slave  property  must  be  pro 
tected  in  this  country.  I  am  for  protecting  it 
upon  another  great  principle,  and  here  I  know 
I  shall  be  met  hand  to  hand,  by  my  friend  from 
Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis.)  Whenever  the  foreigner 
comes  here  from  Europe,  I  would  say, naturalize 
him,  and  give  him  all  the  rights  to  which  he 
may  be  entitled,  but  do  not  encourage  foreign- 
ers to  come  to  this  state.  New  York  has  in- 
creased in  her  population, by  reason  of  immigrants 
from  Europe,  at  the  rate  of  twenty  per  cent. 
Ohio  at  fiftei^n,  and  Pennsylvania,  at  fifteen.  I 
thank  God  that  the  negroes  keep  them  out  of 
Kentucky,  and  that  the  northern  states  keep  the 
foreign  convicts  and  paupers  generally,  within 
their  borders. 

I  have  another  reason  ;  it  is  that  the  slavehold- 
ing  population  is  the  finest  population  the  world 
ever  saw.  In  a  non-slaveholaing  country  they 
view  liberty  as  a  political  right :  but  in  a  slave- 
holding  country  they  view  it  as  a  personal  priv- 
ilege, and  would  die  sooner  than  surrender  it. 

I  heard  the  gentleman  from  Bracken,  to-day, 
and  he  spoke  very  much  to  my  satisfaction. 
Like  when  Tom  Owens  tried  the  question  wheth- 
er a  government  could  condemn  a  town  for  pub- 
lic purposes  by  paying  the  owner  therefor — that 
question  wastrie<l  as  to  Bardstown,  in  this  fed- 
eral court.  Martin  D.  Hardin,  and  myself  ap- 
peared for  the  town,  and  we  argued  the  case 
three  or  four  days.  Judge  Trimble  delivered 
the  opinion,  and  he  was  the  clearest,  most  dis- 
tinct judge  in  giving  an  opinion  that  I  ever 
heard.  He  divided  the  subject  out  so  handsome- 
ly, and  with  such  perspicuity  and  order.  While 
ife  was  giving  his  opinion,  one  or  two  of  the 
people  of  Bardstown,  went  up  to  him,  crowded 
up  very  close,  and  stood  there  with  their  mouths 
wide  open.  (Laughter,)  So  it  was  with  respect 
to  the  argument  of  the  gentleman  from  BracKen, 
to-day.  I  was  aflFected  much  in  the  same  wav, 
except  that  I  did  not  open  my  mouth.  (Laugh- 
ter.) He  presented  the  argument  truly,  but  he 
did  not  go  far  enough.     He  made  a   mistake  in 


one  thing,  and  that  is,  that  tlie  negros  pay  more 
than  one-fourtli  of  the  revenue.  They  pny'nearlv 
one-third.  The  negroes  work  the  roads,  while 
the  whites  are  talking  polities.  I  recollect  go- 
ing on  a  road  in  my  county,  where  I  saw  six- 
teen hands,  eleven  of  them  were  whites  and  five 
of  them  were  blacks,  and  the  whiteswere  sitting 
on  the  bank  on  the  road  side,  talking  politics, 
while  the  negroes  were  working,  (Laughter.) 
That  was  the  wav  they  spent  their  time.  I  re- 
collect a  mud  hole  in  a  fifteen  feet  road  was  to 
be  stopped  up  in  my  neighborhood,  and  the 
overseer  called  out  my  hands  to  work,  and  I 
liked  to  have  lost  my  whole  crop  of  corn  by  it, 
(Laughter,)  after  that  I  petitioned  the  county  to 
appoint  me  overseer,  and  I  was  overseer'  for 
twenty-five  years,  and  I  never  called  on  a  single 
hand  all  that  time  for  work,  for  I  did  it  with  my 
own  hands.  Ifo  man  can  run  against  me  for 
overseer  in  that  neighborhood.  (Renewed  laugh- 
ter.) 

I  say,  the  negro  population  do  pay  for  three- 
fourths  of  the  work  done  on  the  highway.  They 
pay  nearly  one-half  of  the  county  levy,  and 
within  a  fraction  of  one-third  of  the  revenue.  I 
hope  I  have  not  given  auv  offence  on  the  subject 
of  taxation,  to  any  gentfemaji.  3Iany  a  man's 
fire  has  burnt  over  into  another  man's  barrens. 
May  be  the  speech  of  the  gentleman  from  Todd, 
has  burnt  into  the  gentleman  from  Christian's 
barrens.      Laughter.) 

Mr.  President,  Before  I  take  ray  seat,  I  will  in 
part  recapitulate  what  I  have  said,  and  correct 
some  inaccuracies  I  perhaps  fell  into.  The  speci- 
fic duties  of  last  year  were  as  follows : 
Carriages  and  Barouches  -         -    $3507 
Buggies        ...        -  1,54250 

Pianos, 1,540 

Gold  Spccticles,        ...  600  50 

Gold  Watches.  -        -        -        5,934 

Silver  Watches,         ...         1,418 


Total. 


$14,242 


The  specific  duties  for  this  year,  are  as  follows: 
Total  number  of  carriages,   buggies,  pianos, 
gold  watches,  gold  specticl-irs,  and  silver  watch- 
es, listed  for  taxation  in  Kentuckv.  for  the  year 
1849: 

Xumber.        Tax. 
Carriages  and  Barouches,   3,411         $3,41100 
Buggies,        -        -        -     3,576  1,788  00 

Pianos,        -         -         -         1.628  1,628  00 

Gold  Spectacle-s      -        -    1 ,289  644  50 

Gold  Watches,        -         -     6,242  6,242  00 

Silver  Lever  Watches.     -     2,933  1.466  50 


19.079     $15,180  00 

One  third  of  this  belongs  to  the  sinking  fund, 

the  remainder  to  the  common  revenue.     Take  off 

j  the  specific  duties,  and   tax  the  same  property 

'according  to  its   valuation,   and   it  wotdd  not 

i  yield  a  revenue  of  $4,000.     There  may  be  a  few 

I  carriages  valued  at  more  than  $500,  yet  out  of 

'  the 3,411,  the  number  now  given  in,  there  would 

not  be  ten  but  would  be  valued  by  the  a.ssessors 

'at  less   than  $500.     They  would   not  average 

,  more  than  $200.     Take  the  3,576  buggies,  and 

thev  "Would  not  be  valued  at  more  than  $100 

each.     Take  the  6,242  gold  watches,  tliev  would 

:  not  Im?  valued  at   more  than   $100  eacfc.     The 


ei4 


3,933  silver  xraUhes  would  not  be  vnhied  at  more 
than  $40  each.  The  1,289  gold  specticles  would 
not  be  valued  at  more  than  $10  each.  The  1,620 
pianos  would  not  bo  valued  at  more  than  $200 
each,  and  it  is  in  vain  to  tell  us,  a?;  some  have 
done,  that  to  take  off  the  specific  dutie.s  atid  to 
prevent  the  legi.slature  in  future  from  ever  im- 
posing duties  on  the  luxuries  and  superfluities 
of  life,  will  be  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor  man  ; 
such  an  a.ssertion  Davy  Crockett  would  have 
called  "not  good  nonsense." 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  I  have  ascertained  that  I 
can  accomplish  my  object  in  another  way.  I 
therefore  move  to  amend  the  section,  and  in  this 
I  have  the  approval  of  the  mover  of  the  original 
section,  by  striking  out  all  after  the  words, 
"taxation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform  through- 
out this"  and  inserting  the  following,  "com- 
monwealth, and  after  the  year  1853,  all  tax  lev- 
ied for  state  purposes  shall  be  equal  and  uni- 
form, nor  shall  any  one  description  of  property 
be  taxed  higher  than  another  in  proportion  to  its 
value.  But  the  general  assembly  may  authorize 
the  several  towns,  cities,  and  counties,  to  impose 
taxes  for  town,  city,  county,  and  corporate,  and 
other  purposes,  respectively,  in  such  manner  as 
may  be  authorized  by  law.  ' 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  have  no  objection  to  the  lan- 
guage of  that  amendment.  My  object  is  to  in- 
troduce into  the  constitution  a  just  mode  of  tax- 
ation. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  There  should  be  some  way 
by  which  we  can  accomplish  two  objects,  pro- 
vided both  are  good.  If  I  understand  the  prop- 
osition of  the  gentleman  from  Christian,  (Mr. 
Gray.)  it  aims  at  that  at  which  I  have  been  aim- 
ing since  I  first  took  my  seat  here.  I  think  there 
are  at  least  eighty  four  members  of  this  body  in 
fa\or  of  the  object  which  I  would  accomplish, 
and  there  are  not  more  than  thirteen  who  have  a 
different  object  in  view.  We  are  placed  in  a  pe- 
culiar situation  indeed,  when  by  the  rules  of  this 
house  or  otherwise,  the  will  and  settled  determi- 
nation, as  I  believe,  of  three  fourths  of  this  con- 
vention cannot  be  carried  into  execution.  It 
ought  not  to  be  so.  Delegates,  wh  tever  is  our 
■will,  we  should  have  the  power  to  execute.  It  is 
demanded  at  our  hands  oy  our  constituents.  I 
am  opposed  txi  the  taxation  of  slaves  for  improp- 
er purposes,  but  I  am  willing  they  should  be 
taxed  for  proper  purposes,  as  high  as  other  prop- 
erty. If  any  man  will  oppose  that  principle,  let 
him  rise  now.  Then  how  many  are  there  who 
wish  slaves  taxed  for  improper  purposes?  Would 
not  that  be  to  deprive  the  owners  of  their  slaves 
by  legislation?  It  is  emancipation  bv  direct  tax- 
ation. Let  me  not  be  mistaken.  The  object  I 
aim  at,  and  at  which  you  aim,  if  you  are  honest 
and  mean  what  you  say,  is  the  same.  If  men 
are  not  honest,  and  do  not  mean  what  they  say, 
then  it  is  our  duty  to  head  them.  (A  voice, 
amen.)  Amen.  Yes,  every  gentleman  in  this 
house  will  say  amen. 

Does  this  Jiouse  wish  to  place  itself  in  a  posi- 
tion by  which  they  cannot  attain  that  object?  I 
do  not  believe  tht-y  will  do  it.    I  have  made  one 

firoposition  to  the  house.  If  gentlemen  do  not 
ike  that,  still  I  say,  attain  your  end  before  you 
stop.  Is  it  possible  this  convention  will  deter- 
mine, that  although  the  slaveholder  cannot  now 
be  deprived  of  his  property  without  compensa- 


tion, it  may  hereafter  be  done?  Does  the  gentle- 
man from  Christian  deny  that  he  aims  at  the 
same  end  which  I  would  attain?  Why  do  you 
introduce  that  proposition  if  not  for  this?  Turn 
down  all  but  the  first  line,  and  it  aims  at  the 
same  end.  But  1  have  learned  to  speak  out, 
and  the  difference  between  me  and  some  other 
men  is,  that  I  have  learned  to  speak,  and  do 
speak  in  plain  English.  Is  there  any  difference 
between  the  propositioi^  of  the  gentleman  from 
Christian  anci  mine,  except  th.at  mine  authorizes 
the  legislature  to  tax  luxuries  or  articles  which 
are  not  the  necessaries  of  life,  which  his  does 
not  ?  Then  what  do  you  aim  at?  It  is  to 
protect  slave  property.  We  all  aim  at  that 
end.  And  I  cannot  and  do  not  believe  we 
have  so  trammeled  ourselves  by  rules  of  order, 
which  were  made,  or  should  have  been  made, 
to  facilitate  the  transaction  of  business  in 
the  convention,  instead  of  embarrassing  it,  that 
we  cannot  attain  that  object,  and  at  the  same 
time  attain  another  but  minor  object,  by  leaving 
the  legislature  at  liberty  to  tax,  at  their  reasona- 
ble discretion,  the  luxuries,  or  such  articles  as 
they  may  deem  to  be  the  luxuries,  as  contra- 
distinguished from  the  necessaries  of  life — such 
as  carriages,  pianoes,  gold  watches,  <fec.  My 
amendment,  at  the  same  time  that  it  accomplish- 
es the  first  object,  of  preventing  any  future  legis- 
lature that  might  be  so  disposed,  hereafter,  from 
laying  specific  or  special  taxes  on  slaves  for  the 
illegitimate  purpose  of  rendering  them  of  no 
value  to  their  owners,  leaves  them  subject  to  all 
legitimate  taxation  for  the  purposes  of  revenue; 
and,  also,  leaves  the  power  with  the  legislature 
to  tax  the  luxuries  I  before  mentioned;  whereas, 
the  original  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Christian,  (Mr.  Gray,)  deprives  the  legislature 
of  til  is  latter  power  entirely — and  to  that  I  ob- 
ject, and  I  believe  a  large  majority  of  this  house 
will  object. 

But,  before  I  leave  this  subject,  I  want  to  get 
the  vote  and  aid  of  my  friend  from  Fleming,  (Mr. 
M.  P.  Marshall.)  my  old  friend  and  only  school- 
mate now  living  in  Kentucky.  I  want  his  vote; 
and  he  says  he  concurs  with  me  in  the  main 
great  object  I  wish  to  accomplish,  and  he  will 
willingly  vote  with  me,  provided  another  object 
is  attainable  which  he  thinks  justice  requires — 
and  that  is:  that  all  expences  incurred  by  the 
state  in  preventing  the  escape  of  slaves  from  the 
state  may  be  taxed  on  the  slave  property;  be- 
cause he  believes  the  institution  of  slavery 
should  maintain  itself ;  and  his  plan  is,  that 
such  a  police  force  shall  be  stationed  along  the 
Ohio  river,  as  will  prevent  the  escape  of  the 
'slaves  from  their  masters.  Now  sir,  a  cordon  of 
sixteen  thousand  troops,  reaching  six  hundred 
and  twenty  four  miles — for  that  is  the  estimated 
length  of  the  frontier  of  Kentucky  on  the  Ohio 
river — could  not  protect  this  property,  even  in 
day  light,  because  one  man  could  not  see  all  the 
way  to  another;  and,  unless  they  are  in  sight, 
or  nearly  so,  of  each  other,  they  could  not  pre- 
vent the  escape  of  the  fugitive  slaves  between 
them;  and  at  night,  ten  times  that  number  would 
not  be  sufficient  to  afford  efficient  protection  to 
this  property.  And  if  you  were  to  place  your 
police,  or  otner  force,  on  the  river,  I  tell  you  the 
whole  navy  of  Great  Britain  extended  on  the 
Ohio  river  wonld  be  unavailing  to  attain   that 


^55 


end.  You  therefore  aim  at  an  impossibilitr. 
When  it  is  demonstrated  to  be  so,  neither  taxa- 
tion on  slaves  or  all  the  balance  of  the  property 
of  the  cominonrrealth  can  attain  the  objVct. 

What  is  the  other  position  of  the  gentleman 
from  Fleming  in  relation  to  slaves  exi-cutfd  for 
crimes?  I  am  perfectly  sati>*fied  that  ray  friend 
from  Fleming  is  the  last  man  who  would  claim 
that  the  commonwealth  should  pay  for  a  slave- 
executed  for  crime  from  slave  property  only. 
Why  is  the  life  of  tho  slave  taken?  Is  it  not 
for  public  security?  Five  sevenths  of  the  voters 
in  Kentucky  are  land  holders.  And  all  who  are 
land  owners,  and  a  large  proportion  of  those  who 
are  not  land  holders,  are  interested  in  that  public 
security — indeed  all  the  settled  population  of 
the  state  have  the  sam«*  interest;  then  by  no  cal- 
culation can  you  show  that  slave  holders  alone 
should  pay  for  securing  the  public  safety  and  se- 
curity, which  requires  the  execution  of  a  slave. 
The  slave  is  private  property,  and  the  constitu- 
tion, as  it  now  stands,  as  well  as  every  princi- 
ple of  justice  and  common  honesty,  requires  that 
private  property  should  not  be  taken  without 
full  compensation  to  the  owner.  And  the  state 
pays  for  the  slave  because  the  slave  is  executed 
for  the  public  good.  I  hope  therefore,  I  shall 
attain  his  vote.  I  think  1  have  a  proposition 
which  will  attain  the  object  aimed  at  by  the 
convention.  Is  there  no  way  by  which  we  can 
prevent  slaves  from  being  taxed  for  improper 
purposes?  When  gentlemen  see  that  this  is  one 
of  tne  means  propose!  to  accomplish  emancip.i- 
tion,  directly  or  indirectly,  bv  driving  the  slaves 
from  the  stat*-;  will  they  hesitate  what  course  to 
pursue?  If  we  do  not  interpose  this  provision 
m  the  constitution,  by  and  by.  the  course  taken 
will  be  this:  You  tax  them  twenty  dollars  this 
year,  and  by  and  by  a  hundred,  and  when  a 
specifie  tax  to  that  amount  is  laid  xipon  them, 
they  cea?e  to  be  of  value,  and  are,  at  least,  real- 
ly driven  from  the  state.  If  we  have  the  power, 
ought  we  not  to  exercise  that  power?  \  es  sir; 
and  now  or  never  is  the  time  to  do  it.  Just  this 
day  you  must  exercise  the  power  you  have,  if 
you  want  to  protect  your  slave  property  from 
improper  taxation;  for  if  the  .sun  of  this  day 
sets  without  this  power  having  been  t-xercised, 
it  is  gone,  and  gone  forever.  Let  us  exercise  it 
by  some  means  or  other  by  placing  the  necessary 
restraint  on  the  powers  of  the  legislature,  on  the 
subject  of  taxation,  which  is  the  only  power 
they  can  exercise  under  this  constitution  to  at- 
tain their  end.  should  they  aim  at  driving  the 
slaves  from  the  state. 

My  object  is  to  leave  to  the  legislature  also  the 
power  to  tax  incomes.  I  agree  with  my  friend 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  that  no  means  of 
raising  a  tax  is  bonie  more  willingly  by  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky,  than  the  tax  on  incomes,  direct 
or  indirtfct.  Instead  of  taxing  interest  on  notes, 
we  now  tax  notes  themselves.  This  is  an  indi- 
rect income  tax.  I  would  go  further,  and  would 
tax  incomes  as  incomes.  Shall  we  deprive  the 
legislature  of  that  power?  No.  I  am  opposed 
to  that.  Then  shall  we  go  further,  and  deprive 
the  legislature  of  the  right  of  taxingthesuperflui- 
ties  of  life?  So  sir;  because  all  who  buy  them 
do  it  with  the  understandingthat  they  are  to  pay 
the  tax  which  is  upon  them.  There  is  no  injus- 
tic«  in  regard  to  them.     When   I  bonght  my 


watch,  my  spectacles,  or  my  carriatre,  I  knew 
there  was  a  tax  on  them.  I  tfiought  with  myself 
in  this  manner:  Am  I  willing,  iu  order  to  enjoy 
the  luxury  of  a  piano  for  my  family,  to  pay,  in 
addition  to  the  price  of  the  piano,  one  dollar  per 
annum  to  the  state  as  a  specific  tax?  So  all  rea- 
son with  regard  to  these  articlt^s,  and  a  hundred 
others,  which  the  legislature  might  tax.  It  is  a 
part  of  the  contract  when  the  article  is  bought, 
and  of  which  the  purcha-ser  has  no  right  to  com- 
plain. 

The  specific  tax  amounts  to  abont  $15,000  per 
annum.  That  is  a  matter  of  some  importance. 
A  portion  of  this  goes  to  the  sinking  fund,  and  I 
do  not  want  to  deprive  that  fund  of  one  dollar. 
Here  is  an  argument  which  I  will  address  to  the 
gentleman  from  Fleming.  What  has  become  of 
the  money  raised  by  the  taxes  on  slaves,  when 
they  have  for  years  past  paid  one-third  of  all  the 
taxes  raised  in  the  state?  What  has  become  of 
the  $3,000,000  borrowed  on  the  faith  of  the  state, 
for  the  purposes  of  internal  improvement?  It 
never  came  into  the  treasury.  It  lias  gone  to  add 
to  the  value  of  the  lands  of  the  state,  through 
these  internal  improvements.  Look  and  see  how 
the  lands  along  the  line  of  these  improvements, 
whether  by  rail  roads,  slack  water,  or  other 
means,  have  increased  in  value.  Those  improve- 
ments have  more  than  doubled  the  value  of  your 
lands,  and  what  have  we  got  for  it?  Not  one  soli- 
tary cent.  Our  slaves  paid  one-third  of  the 
money,  or  will  have  to  pay  it;  and  your  lands 
got  the  benefit.  We  did  not  complain  of  that. 
All  that  we  now  a.sk,  all  that  I  ask  for  my  con- 
stituents is,  that  you  will  not  vleprive  the  legis- 
lature of  the  power  of  laying  any  kind  of  tax 
hereafter  on  tlie  luxuries  and  superfluities  of  life, 
for  the  purpose  of  paying  off  tne  principal  and 
interest  of  tliat  debt,  as  far  as  it  will  go.  Five 
nineteenths  of  the  money  now  raised  bv  the  spe- 
cific tax  goes  into  the  sinking  fund.  It  is  not 
right  nor  just  to  deprive  that  fund  of  this  money 
without  supplying  some  other  means.  If  it  is 
taken  off  from  these  luxuries,  j'ou  must  put  it  on 
lands,  or  .slaves,  or  some  of  the  necessaries  of 
life.  This  specific  tax  is  not  complained  of  so 
far  as  I  know. 

The  objects  at  which  I  aim  I  think  can  be  ob- 
tained by  my  proposition ;  but  on  the  request  of 
my  friends,  I  have  agreed  to  withdraw  it  for  the 
present,  in  order  to  know  whether  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Todd  will  be  adopted 
by  this  house.  If  that  is  adopted,  then  I  want 
to  provide  also,  that  the  legislature  may  lay  a 
tax  on  the  luxuries  of  life. 

It  is  my  habit  when  I  have  a  proposition,  to 
go  for  success,  and  I  care  not  who  furnishes  the 
means.  Accordingly,  I  shall  withdraw  my  pro- 
position, and  shall  vote  for  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Todd,  and  then  it  will  be 
our  duty  to  add  the  section  which  will  give  pow- 
er to  the  legislature  to  tax  the  luxuries  of  life. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  A  good  deal  has  been 
said  here  about  the  poor  man,  and  many  geirtle- 
men  have  professed  very  great  love  for  him;  but 
I  ask  those  gentlemen  to  examine  the  principle 
of  specific  taxation  and  see  whether  it  acts  on 
the  poor  and  the  rich  alike.  Take  the  instance 
of  a  carriage.  If  an  individual  rides  in  a  car- 
riage that  cost  $1,200  or  $1,300,  and  pays  a  spe- 
cific tax,  he  paj's  no  more  than  an  indiridnal 


sac 


who  ridos  in  One  of  l«ss  ralue.  Tttke  the  luag- 
niticent  barouoh  and  tiie  costly  buggy,  and  you 
will  see  that  they  pay  uo  more  tax  than  those 
of  small  value. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  his  amendment,  and  they  Were — yeas  53, 
nays  :ib. 

Vea5 — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Rieliard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Wiliam  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholsou.  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  William 
Hendrix,  Andr<.'W  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Alexander 
K.  Mar.shall,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  MoitIs, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh  Newell,  William  Pres- 
ton, Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry 
Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 53. 

Nats — -John  9.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  Jas. 
S.  Chrisman,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William 
Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Thomas 
J.  Hood,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kav- 
anaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Mar- 
tin P.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan 
McClure,  Jonathan  Mewcuni,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  James  W.  Stone, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  How- 
ard Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller.  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wiekliffe,  Silas  Woodson-— 
35. 

So  the  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  amend  by  striking  out 
all  after  the  word  "  value,"  and  inserting  the 
following: 

"Provided,  That  the  general  assembly  may 
impose  specific  taxes;  And  provided  further,  That 
said  specific  taxes  be  graduated  according  to 
the  value  of  things  taxed;  and  that  slaves 
Khali  not  be  specifically  taxed,  except  the  poll 
tax  for  county,  city,  and  town  purposes,  and 
that  cities  and  towns  may  be  allowed  to  tax  spe- 
cifically for  corporate  purposes." 

The  PRESIDENT  decided  that  it  was  not  in 
order  to  move  to  strike  out  that  which  the  con- 
vention, by  a  vote,  had  in.serted. 

Mr.  C.  A.  W I CKLIFFE  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays  on  tlie  adoption  of  the  section,  as 
amended. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  moved  to  amend  by  ad- 
ding a  provision  to  tax  corporate  stock  specific- 
ally. 

After  a  few  words  of  e::planation  from  Messrs. 
HARDIN, DAVIS,  MERIWETHER  and  PRES- 
TON, 

Mr.  MERIWEMHER  modified  his  amendment 
so  that  it  would  read  as  iollowB: 

Provided,  That  corporate    stock,    privileges, 


licenses,  and  franohisei,  may  be  taxed  specific- 
ally. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  adoption 
of  the  section,  and  the  result  was — veas  39,  nays 
50.  ^  ■      i 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Je.sse  Coffey,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius 
Desha,  James  Dudlev,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.  EdwarcTs,  Milford  Elliott,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Tliomas  James, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wil- 
liam N.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris,  William  Preston, 
Johnson  Price,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  Pliilip  Triplett, Henry  Washington, 
Andrew  S.  White,  George  W.  Williams— 39. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  Jas. 
S.  Chrisman,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copolin,  William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Green 
Forrest,  Selucius  Gariielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben. 
Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas 
J.  Hood,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  New- 
cum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.Robinson, 
Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  James  W. 
Stone.  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wil- 
liam R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller.  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wiekliffe,  Robert  N.  Wiek- 
liffe, Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 50. 

So  the  section  was  rejected. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  then  gave  notice  of  his 
intention  to  move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote 
adopting  the  twentieth  section,  which  had  be- 
come inapplicable  since  the  rejection  of  the  nine- 
teenth section.  He  moved  that  the  rule  be  dis- 
pensed with,  which  required  a  motion  to  recon- 
sider to  lie  over. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Tlie  vote  adopting  the  section  was  then  recon- 
sidered, and  the  section  Avas  rejected. 

The  amendment  submitted  by  Mr.  DAVIS  on 
Thursday  was  then  taken  up  for  consideration, 
as  follows: 

"Sec. —  The  right  of  property  is  before  and 
higher  than  any  constitutional  sanction;  and  the 
right  of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  his  property  is 
the  same,  and  as  inviolable  as  the  right  of  the 
owner  of  any  property  wliatever." 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  want  to  ask  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon  if  we  should  make  a  constitution, 
and  say  in  it  that  involuntary  servitude  shall  not 
exist  except  for  crime,  whether  slavery  will  still 
exist  in  this  cominonwealtli?  If  he  contends  for 
that,  I  shall  understand  where  he  is,  and  what  is 
his  position. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  did  not  intend  to  solve  that 
proposition,  but  I  will  use  this  language — that 
this  convention  has  no  right  to  pass  an  agrarian 
law.  It  has,  however,  as  mut  h  right  to  maie  a 
provision  to  take  and  distribute  our  property  in 


857 


land,  as  it  has  to  take  away  our  property  in 
slaves,  -without  paying  for  them.  They  have  as 
much  right  to  take  away  our  property  and  apply 
it  to  a  system  of  common  schools,  as  to  take 
awav  our  slaves  -without  oursancrion. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  This  section  contains  two 
propositions,  and  I  therefore  ask  for  a  division 
of  the  question.  For  the  first  I  cannot  vote;  the 
second  I  am  prepared  to  support. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Before  the  question  is  taken,  I 
desire  to  modify  my  proposition  by  the  addition 
of  the  words,  "and  its  increase,"  after  the  words, 
"and  the  right  of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  his 
property." 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  gentleman  has  the 
right  to  modify  his  proposition. 

It  was  so  modified  accordingly. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  hope  there  will  be  no  di- 
vision of  this  proposition,  but  that  the  question 
will  be  taken  upon  it  as  it  stands.  If  there  is 
any  proposition  that  is  true — if  there  is  truth  in 
the  declaration  that  man  has  certain  inalienable 
rights,  of  which  he  cannot  be  deprived  but  by 
violence — then  this  must  be  true.  I  hope,  there- 
fore, there  will  be  no  division  upon  it,  and  that 
it  will  be  adopted  unanimously. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  This  proposition  meets  my 
entire  approbation.  I  am  perfectly  satisfied  that 
the  right  to  obtain  and  to  enjoy  property  is  a 
right  that  has  existed,  and  that  will  always  ex- 
ist, indepemlent  of  any  constitution  that  may  be 
made;  and  that  to  deprive  citizens  of  the  enjoy- 
ment of  that  right,  would  be  to  deprive  them  of 
the  means  to  sustain  life.  I  am  also  well  satis- 
fied that  no  distinction  can  be  made  in  Kentucky, 
or  in  any  other  slave  .state  of  this  Union,  between 
property  in  a  slave,  and  property  in  land,  or  in 
a  horse.  And  I  think  it  proper  and  fitting  under 
all  the  circumstances  by  which  we  are  surround- 
ed, that  we  should  declare  that  such  property 
does  exist,  and  that  every  citizen  of  Kentucky 
has  the  right  to  acquire  and  enjoy  it.  I  hope 
the  section  will  be  adopted. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  again  asked  for  a  division  of 
the  question. 

The  PRESIDENT.  Before  putting  the  ques- 
tion, with  the  consent  of  the  convention,  I  will 
state  the  principles  upon  which  I  shall  cast  my 
vote  against  both  branches  of  the  .section.  We 
have  already  provided  that  private  property,  in- 
cluding slaves,  shall  not  be  taken  for  public  use 
without  compensation  to  the  owner  first  made; 
and  we  have  a  report  upon  the  subject  of  slavery 
for  which  I  intend  to  vote,  declaring  that  the 
general  assembly  shall  not  emancipate  slaves 
without  the  consent  of  the  owner,  or  without 
full  compensation  being  first  made.  Such  is  the 
justice  and  the  security  I  am  prepared  to  give 
the  slaveholder  They  should,  in  my  opinion, 
be  satisfied  with  that.  I  think  the  proposed 
section  not  necessary  to  the  security  of  that  kind 
of  property  and  the  rights  of  the  slaveholder, 
and  that  there  is  no  necessity  to  put  the  section 
in  the  constitution.  The  provisions  made,  and 
to  be  made,  will  restrain  the  power  of  the  legis- 
lature over  private  property  and  slaves,  and  but 
for  those  provisions  the  legislature  might  enact 
laws  to  take  private  property  without  paying 
the  owner  for  it,  and  might  emancipate  .slaves 
without  the  consent  of  the  owner  and  without 
paving  for  them. 
108 


I  believe  the  right  to  all  property  is  conven-  S 


I  tional,  and  that  a  people,  in  forming  their  or 
ganic  or  constitutional  law,  have  a  right  to  de- 
clare what  shall  and  what  shall  not  be  property, 
and  the  mode  of  passing  it  ^rom  one  to  another, 
and  if  they  do  not  restrain  the  legislative  power, 
that  the  legislature  will  h^ve  the  whole  power 
over  property;  therefore,  I  do,  not  believe  the  sec- 
tion declares  a  correct  principle.  I  can"  imagine 
a  case,  where  it  would  b<?  the  right  of  a  people, 
for  self-preservation,  to  djrive  out  slave  property 
without  the  consent  of  the  owner  and  without 
compensation.  The  law  pf  self-defence  belongs 
to  a  nation  as  well  as  to  individuals.  The  dec- 
laration contained  in  the  section  does  the  slave- 
holder no  good,  and  will  not  bind  the  majority  of 
the  people  when  that  majority  shall  believe  the 
peace  and  ]>?^ppiness  of  the  state,  or  the  protec- 
tion of  the  lives  of  the  cijtizens,  shall  demand  the 
slaves  to  be  driven  out. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  On  this  question  I  call  for 
the  yeas  and  nays. 

mV.  THOJsIPSON.  I  can  see  no  necessity  for 
encumbering  the  constitution  with  such  a  pro- 
vision. As  I  understand  it,  it  is  proposed  to  in- 
corporate this  section  in  the  Bill  of  Rights.  To 
this  I  am  opposed,  for  I  t^iink  it  is  so  perfect  that 
we  need  not  cross  a  T  nor  dot  an  I.  Have  we 
not  every  guaranty  that  private  property  cannot 
be  taken  unless  compensation  be  made  for  it? 
Why  then  are  we  to  throw  down  the  gauntlet  to 
the  adversary?  How  do  we  hold  our  property? 
Is  it  not  under  the  sanctions  of  law?  And  what 
greater  security  .shall  we  h,ave  if  this  provision 
be  adopted?  Of  what  value  will  any  paper  con- 
stitution be  when  a  majority  of  the  people  shall 
be  arrayed  against  it?  I  am  a  native  born  Ken- 
tuckian,  and  a  large  part  of  the  property  I  pos- 
sess consists  of  slaves,  but  I  subscribe  to  no  such 
doctrine  as  that  which  assumes  that  the  people 
have  no  right  to  change  their  institutions. 

The  previous  question  was  moved  and  the 
.main  question  was  ordered. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  first 
branch  of  the  proposed  section,  in  these  words: 

'•■  The  right  of  property  is  before  and  higher 
than  any  constitutional  sanction,"  and  it  was 
adopted — yeas  65,  nays  23. 

1  EAs — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad- 
ley, William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Jas. 
S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman"  William  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dud- 
ley, Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Andrew  Hood.  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis 
B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Wm.  C.  Mar- 
shall, William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure, 
Thos.  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jas.  M.  Nesbitt, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  La'rkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhoid, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  ilichael  L.  Stoner, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.    Taylor,  John  J. 


«>58 


Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry 
Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Rooert  In  .  Wickliffe, 
George  W.  Williams — 65. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Benj. 
Copelin,  Ciiasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben. 
Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Alexan- 
der K.  Marshall,  Wm.  D.  Mitchell,  Hugh  Newell, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  William  R.  Thompson, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Chas.  A.  Wick- 
litfe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 23. 

The  question  was  next  taken  on  the  se- 
cond branch  of  tlie  proposition,  as  follows : 
"  and  the  riglit  of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  his 
property  and  its  increase  is  the  same,  and  as  in- 
violable as  the  right  of  the  owner  of  any  prop- 
erty whatever,"  and  it  was  adopted,  yeas  77, 
navs  10. 

I^'eas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred 
Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  William 
C.Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copeliu,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
P.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
■Ben.  Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  Tlioraas  P.  Moore,  John 
D.  Morris,  James  M.Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  Jas.  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
.  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  Henrv  Washing- 
ton, John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  WieklifFe,  Robert 
N.Wickliffe,  Geo.  W.  Williams— 77. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Milford  Elliott,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 10. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  move  to  reconsid- 
er the  vote  just  given,  and  I  do  so,  Mr.  President, 
to  do  what  the  demand  of  the  previous  question 

{>revented.     It  is  to  state  tlie  reason  why  I  voted 
or  the  last  clause  and  against  the  first  clause. 

The  last  clause  declares  that  the  right  of  the 
owner  to  his  slave  and  the  increase  of  the  fe- 
males, is  protected,  and  as  secure  as  other  prop- 
erty. There  is  no  increase  till  born;  when  corn, 
under  the  constitution,  the  increase,  like  all  oth- 
er property,  is  protected  by  the  constitution  and 
laws  just  to  the  same  extent  as  other  property; 
and  I  deny  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  eman- 
cipate future  increase. 

But  do  gentlemen  intend  to  declare  by  the 
fin»t  clause  in  this  section,  that  there  is  no  power 
in  tbe  people  of  Kentucky,  by  constitutional 


provision,  noW'  and  in  all  time  to  come,  to  declftr* 
that  no  person  born  in  Kentucky  after  the  year 
1900  shall  be  held  to  involuntary  servitude  with- 
out crime.  Though  a  pro-slavery  man,  the  own- 
er of  slaves,  and  opposed  to  emancipation,  pres- 
ent or  prospective,  in  any  shape  or  mode  which 
has  been  suggested,  I  cannot  deny  the  existence 
of  such  a  power.  1  must  leave  my  eountr^'men 
free  to  exercise  it  by  changing  their  organic  law 
or  form  of  government.  Whenever  the  majority 
shall  will  such  a  change,  and  to  exercise  such  a 
power,  they  will  do  so  by  a  change  of  their  con- 
stitution and  form  of  government,  and  will  re- 
gard your  declarations  of  abstractions  as  idle 
wind" 

Having  given  the  reasons  for  my  vote,  I  with- 
draw my  motion. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  Mr.  President,  I  of- 
fer the  following  as  an  additional  section: 

"jThat  neither  this  convention,  or  any  hereaf- 
ter to  be  assembled  by  the  people  of  this  com- 
monwealth, has  any  right  or  power  to  either  eman- 
cipate the  slaves  now  in  this  .state,  or  their  des- 
cendants; or  to  authorise  the  legislature  to  pass 
laws  for  their  emancipation." 

My  vote,  sir,  on  the  section  just  disposed  of, 
is  expressive  of  my  opinions,  and  therefore,  I 
need  say  but  little  on  that  which  I  have  now  of- 
fered. I  believe,  sir,  I  shall  vote  against  my 
own  proposition,  but  I  desire  some  gentleman 
here  clearly  to  express  their  opinions  by  their 
votes  on  the  subject.  If  they  think  it  possible, 
permanently  to  fix  slavery  in  this  common- 
wealth, I  wish  them  to  say  so. 

There  is  not  a  man  in  Kentucky  who  is  more 
thorough,  and  a  more  ultra  pro-slavery  man  than 
I  am.  I  go  further  than  the  furthest.  Instead 
of  holding  that  slavery  is  either  a  moral  or  a  po- 
litical evil,  I  believe  that  it  is  a  moral  and  po- 
litical blessing.  If  Kentucky  were  a  free  state, 
and  slavery  existed  in  any  other  state  of  this 
Union,  I  would  give  my  vote  to  introduce  it 
into  this  state.  Yet,  sir,  I  cannot  say  that  the 
people  of  this  commonwealth  have  not  entire 
control  over  it,  and  that,  if  they  think  it  an  evil, 
th^  cannot  remove  it  from  amongst  them. 

There  are  gentlemen  liere,  however,  who  have 
professed  to  believe  that  the  right  to  this  proper- 
ty exists  above  all  constitutional  provisions; 
and  if  so,  it  may  be  well  perhaps,  to  stick  in  a 
little  constitutional  provision,  and  say  to  future 
generations  that  it  is  fixed  on  them  ibrever.  I 
hope  tliat  those  gentlemen  who  voted  for  tlie  first 
clause  of  the  section  just  adopted,  will  vote  for 
my  proposition,  for  I  cannot  do  it  myself. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE.  I  do  not  see  any  necessi- 
ty for  these  additional  sections.  That  which 
has  been  just  adopted  covers  the  whole  ground. 
The  proposition  has  been  asserted  that  the  right 
of  property  in  the  increase  of  slaves  in  futuro, 
is  just  as  much  "before,  and  higher  than  any 
constitutional  sanction,"  and  is  "as  inviolable 
as  the  right  of  the  owner  of  any  property  what- 
ever," as  in  those  that  are  in  actual  existence. 
That,  I  understand,  has  been  adopted,  and  if  so, 
that  covers  the  whole  ground  of  the  amendment 

Eropo.sed  by  the  gentleman  from  Jessamine,  and 
ence  I  see  no  necsssity  for  his  additional  section. 
It  wps  a  matter  of  regret  wiib  me  that  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson, (Mr.  C.  A.  Wicklifie.)  with- 
drew  his  motion    to  reconsider,  -for    the  rote 


8d9 


which  some  of  us  were  called   upoi^  to  give  on  '■ 
the    adoption   of  that  section,  if  unexplained,  j 

f  laced  us  in  a  wrong  attitude  before  the  public. ; 
t  has  become  the  practice,  I  believe,  when  a 
question  is  before  the  convention  to  speak  on 
any  other  subject,  and  I  shall  therefore  take  this 
opportunity  to  set  myself  right. 

In  the  first  place,  by  my  vote  against  that  sec- 1 
tion,  I  neither  affirmed  nor  denied  its  truth.  I  j 
but  simply  say  what  my  constituents  told  me  to  I 
say,  ami  that'is  to  sustain  the  same  provision  ' 
that  is  in  the  old  constitution  respecting  slave- ! 
rv,  with  one  exception,  and  that  is  respecting! 
the  removal  of  the  emancipated  slaves  out  of 
the  state.  It  was  therefore  in  obedience  to  the  ', 
instructions  of  a  pro-slavery  county  that  I  voted,  i 
and  not  because  I  believed  the  proposition  either  j 
true  or  false  in  itself. 

Mr.  CLARKE.     Mr.   President,  I  offer  this  as 
an  amendment  to  the  section  of  the  gentleman  I 
from  Jessamine:  i 

"Unless  all  the  people  owning  that  species  of  j 
property  in  the  state,  shall  sanction  such  eman-  j 
cipation,  or  just  compensation  be  made  for  the  i 
slaves  emancipated."  j 

Mr.  DAVIS.  My  own  sentiments  are  em-  j 
bodied  in  the  proposition  which  I  submitted  to 
the  convention.  I  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  i 
iterate  and  reiterate  principles  that  are  substan- 1 
tially  the  same  on  this  subject,  and  for  that  | 
reason  I  shall  vote  against  the  proposition  of[ 
the  gentleman  from  Jessamine;  and  if  my  opin-  j 
ion  should  hereafter  be  asked  for,  which  I  do  I 
not  expect,  because  that  can  be  a  matter  of  so  ] 
little  moment,  I  will  refer  to  the  section  sub- 1 
mitted  by  me  to  show  wliat  it  is.  i 

The  proposition  which  I  presented  "was  two- j 
fold.  In  the  first  place  it  sets  forth  the  general  j 
principle  that  the  right  of  property  was  anterior  i 
to  the  constitution,  and  that  it  was  before,  and  i 
higher  than  constitutional  sanction — that  it  ex- 
isted before  there  was  any  constitutional  sanc- 
tion :  and  whether  or  not  it  had  anv.  Such  is 
the  first  position  which  I  occupy,  isovr  I  say, 
without  reservation,  that  this  convention  has  no 
right  to  abrogate,  to  annihilate  all  property  in 
the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  suppose  this 
convention  were  to  frame  a  constitution,  to  go 
into  effect  at  once  and  absolutely,  a  provision 
which  should  declare,  that  individual  prop- 
erty should  no  longer  exist  in  Kentucky.  Sucli  a 
provsion  would  have  no  effect,  no  legal  force, 
but  would  be  void.  If  you  concede  that  general 
position,  yon  yield  all  I  ask,  in  relation  to  slaves; 
for  if  this  convention  has  not  the  power  to  abol- 
ish all  individual  property,  it  has  no  anthority 
to  expunge  the  right  and  the  ownership  of  indi- 
viduals in  upwards  of  200,000  slaves.  If  this 
convention  could,  bv  a  scheme  of  emancipation, 
without  paying  fort  te  slaves,  wrest  them  from 
their  owners,  what  is  there  to  prevent  it  from 
inserting  a  clause  in  the  constitution,  that  the 
estate  and  right  of  all  individuals  to  lauds, 
should  be  abolished,  and  no  longer  have  any  le- 
gal existence  whatever.  No  delegate  I  presume 
will  controvert  the  position,  that  this  conven- 
tion might  make  a  new  constitution,  to  go  into 
effect  without  its  being  submitted  to  the  people, 
but  at  once,  upon  its  being  agreed  to  and  pro- 
mulged  by  this  body.  Suppose  that  course  was 
taken,  and  a  mast  explicit  and  complete  provis 


ion,  abolishing,  as  effectually  as  language  could 
express  it,  all  right  and  property  in  i-eal  estate 
for  every  purpose,  was  incorporated  in  it ;  and 
when  each  gentleman  here  reached  his  home, 
he  found  his  family  expelled  from  his  domicil, 
by  an  intruder,  would  we  all  be  without  legal 
remedy  in  the  premises?  Would  our  rights  have 
been  annihilated  by  such  a  provision  in  the  con- 
stitution, and  we  forever  be  cut  off  and  exiled 
from  our  comfortable  possessions?  No,  upon 
an  appeal  for  redress  against  the  wrongdoer  in 
the  ordinary  form  of  suit,  the  courts  would  de- 
cide such  a  provision,  even  in  a  constitution," 
utterly  null  and  void,  as  being  in  subversion  of 
the  right  of  property,  to  secure,  and  not  to  des- 
troy which,  the  government  and  constitution 
were  formed.  Suppose  we  make  a  constitution 
emancipating  the  slaves  without  compensation, 
to  have  immediate  and  absolute  effect.  Would 
that  extinguish  the  right  of  every  slavtiholder  of 
200,000  .slaves,  and  strip  the  owners  of  $70,000,- 
000  of  property,  of  their  rights?  If  such  a  reg- 
ulation would  be  void  as  to  land,  what  princi- 
ple, what  magic  power  would  make  it  legal  and 
valid  as  to  slaves.  Such  a  provision  as  to  both 
subjects  must  be  conceded  or  rejected  ;  otherwise 
there  is  a  distinction  between  property  in  slaves 
and  other  subjects,  by  which  a  man  may  be  le- 
gally and  rightfully,  against  his  will  and  with- 
out compensation,  deprived  of  his  slave,  when 
his  right  to  his  other  property  would  be  impreg- 
nable. There  is  no  escape  from  this  dilemma.  I 
pronounce  that  we  hold  both  our  lands  and  slaves 
by  the  same  right  and  title,  and  that  such  a  con- 
.stitutional  provision  in  relation  to  both  would 
be  equally  void. 

This  convention  is  a  constitutional  body, call- 
ed and  organized  according  to  the  forms  prescrib- 
ed by  the  existing  constitution,  and  circumscrib- 
ed by  its  provisions  and  principles,  so  far  as  they 
are  limitations  and  restrictions  upon  the  power 
of  government  generally. 

Art.  10  in  the  existing  constitution,  declares 
among  other  things  :  "that  all  power  is  inherent 
in  the  people,  and  all  free  government  are  foun- 
ded on  their  authority,  and  instituted  for  their 
peace,  safety  and  happine.ss. 

"That  all  men  have  a  natural  and  indefeasible 
right  to  worship  Almighty  God  according  to  the 
distates  of  their  own  consciences. 

"  That  in  all  criminal  prosecutions  the  accused 
hath  a  right  to  be  heard  by  himself  and  counsel; 
to  demand  the  nature  and  the  cause  of  the  pros- 
ecution against  him;  to  meet  the  witnesses  face 
to  face;  to  have  compulsory  process  for  obtain- 
ing witnes.ses  in  his  favor;  and,  in  prosecutions 
by  indictment  or  information,  a  speedy  public 
trial  by  an  impartial  jury  of  the  vicinage;  that 
he  cannot  be  compelled  to  give  evidence  against 
himself,  nor  can  he  be  deprived  of  his  life,  lib- 
erty, or  prtiperty,  unless  by  the  judgment  of  his 
peers,  or  the  law  of  the  land. 

"  Nor  shall  anv  man's  property  be  taken  or 
applied  to  public  use,  without  the  consent  of 
his  representatives,  and  without  just  compensa- 
tion being  previously  made  to  him. 

"  The  free   communication  of  thoughts   and 
opinions  is  one  of  the  invaluable  riglits  of  man, 
and  every  citizen  may  freely  speak,  write,  and 
print,  on  any  subject,  being  responsible  for  the  « 
abuse  of  that  libertv."  .a 


8W 


The  tw«jty-eighih  section  of  this  article  (10.) ; 
reads : 

"To  guard  against  transgressions  of  the  higli 
powers  which  we  have  delegated,  \ve  declare, 
that  every  thing  in  this  article  is  excepted  out  of 
the  general  powers  of  goverament,  and  shall 
forever  remain  inviolate;  and  all  laws  contrary 
thereto,  or  contrary  to  this  constitution,  shall  be 
void." 

Some  gentl-emen  claim  for  this  convention  il- 
limitable authority-^all  power.  Let  us  tfest 
that  position.  Suppose  we  were  to  m^ke  a  con- 
stitution to  go  into  full  effect  iminediateiy, 
without  being  submitted  to  the  people  for  th'eir 
ratification-^that  this  constitution  declared  and 
provided  that  no  po'wer  whatever  is  inherent  in 
the  people,  but  all  power,  by  divine  right,  be- 
longed to  some  individual,  and  naming  as  abso 
lute  king  him  and  his  hei.s  in  succession;  abol- 
ishing popular  government,  and  declaring  that 
the  life  and  liberty  of  every  individual  was  held 
subject  to  the  will  of  this .  king;  that  private 
property  no  longer  existed,  but  every  subject  of 
property  was  vestctl  absolutely  in  the  monarch; 
that  there  should  be  no  worship  of  Almighty 
God  whatever,  but  all  adoration  should  be  paid 
to  the  king;  and  that  no  person  should  speak, 
write,  or  print  any  thing  whatever  upon  govern- 
ment, politics,  or  religion.  Would  a  constitu- 
tion formed  and  promulged  by  this  convention, 
containing  these  provisions,  he  of  valid  and  of 
binding  obligation  upon  the  people  of  Kentutjky? 
I  have  put  a  strong  case,  but  all  its  branches  are 
modes  of  the  exercise  of  power  which  mig?it  be 
connected  with  political  government,  anxi  all 
such  power  is  claimed  by  some  for  this  conven- 
tion. Power  in  the  purposes  of  the  government 
of  man,  has,  among  one  people  or  another,  and 
in  some  ages  of  the  world,  been  exercised  in 
forms  quite  as  oppressive  and  revolting  as  it 
would  be  in  such  a  constitution-*-indeed,  in  ex- 
actly the  same  features.  Gentlemen  may  an- 
swer, that  no  convention  would  ever  be  so  wick- 
ed or  mad  as  to  devise  and  establish  so  mon- 
strous a  constitution.  But  that  would  be  an  eva- 
sion of  the  question  between  us.  Your  propo- 
sition is,  that  in  this  convention  dwells  all  the 
fulness  of  power  as  it  might  be  exercised  in  hu- 
man government.  I  have  presented  you  some 
supposititious  examples,  such  as  by  historical 
record  have  often  existed,  and  as  may  again  ex- 
ist, and  many  of  which  are  now  bowing  down 
into  hopeless  slavery  numerous  communities  of 
civilized  man.  Were  this  convention  to  imbody 
such  p€r\'ersion  of  power  in  a  constitution)  and 
throw  it  upon  the  people,  would  those  revolting 
provisions  be  the  supreme  law?  I  say,  no;  anal 
there  will  be  none  to  take  the  affirmative  of  the 
proposition.  Then,  what  great  truths,  what] 
fundamental  and  overruling  principles  wotild  j 
arrest  such  a  constitution  and  nullify  it?  The 
tenth  article  of  the  present  constitution,  and  the! 
imprescriplable  and  enduring  rights  and  liber- 
ties of  the  people  therein  proclaimed,  which  are 
excepted  out  of  the  general  powers  of  govern- 
ment, and  proclaimed  to  remain  inviolate  :  the 
inviolability  of  the  rights  of  person,  of  proper- 
ty, of  adoration  to  Almighty  God,  and  others  of 
only  secondary  importance: — tlie.se  inapprecia- 
ble rights  and  liberties,  that  so  far  from  being 
created  or  instituted  by  the  constitutioo,  existed 


and  were  feftjoyed  by  the  citizen  bpfore  we  had 
constitutions,  and  to  secure  which  in  peace  and 
perpetuity,  the  constitution  itself  was  formed, 
can  never  be  destroyed  by  it  or  in  it;  and  any  of 
its  provisions  having  such  purposes  and  effect, 
would  be  absolutely  void. 

I  will  advance  another  step  in  this  view  of 
the  subject.  Suppose  such  a  constitution  formed 
and  imposed  upon  the  people,  even  with  the 
sanction,  and  its  validity  upheld  by  the  majori- 
ty— ^V'ould  it  have  a  legal  and  rigjitful  obliga- 
tion upon  the  minority^  I  reply  no!  Attacking 
and  destroying  all  the  essential  rights  and  ends 
for  which  society  and  government  in  this  coun- 
try has  ever,  and  does  now  exist,  it  would  be  a 
revolution  brought  about  Avithout  rightful  au- 
thority, violent,  wrongful,  and  oppressive  ;  and 
the  minority  would  have  an  unquestionable 
right  to  resist  it  forcibly.  It  would  be  the  most 
flagrant  tyranny  and  oppression,  and  will  free- 
men ever  concede  tliat  they  have  not  the  un- 
alienable, eternal  right  to  resist  oppression? 

It  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  attempt  to  define 
what  character  and  extent  of  encroachment  up- 
on exi.sting  rights  and  liberties,  by  this  conven- 
tion, would  amount  to  unauthorized  revolution, 
and  which  those  opposed  to  it  might  rightfully 
resist — it  is  enough  for  me  to  say,  that  all  the 
changes  which  I  have  suggested  would  amount 
to  such  a  case.  That  the  total  and  uncondition- 
al abolition  of  the  worship  of  God  ;  that  the  de- 
nial of  any  political  power  in  the  people  and 
the  investiture  of  all  of  it  in  one  man  ;  tliat  tlie 
abrogation  of  all  constitutional  and  legal  pro- 
visions for  the  security  of  person  and  personal 
liberty;  that  the  denial  and  annihilation  of  in- 
dividual property  in  the  lands  of  the  state,  be- 
ing of  the  value  of  $127,000,  and  belonging 
to  90,000  persons  ;  that  the  emancipation  of 
more  than  200,000  slaves  without  compensation, 
worth  $80,000,000,  and  the  property  of  30,000  per- 
sons, would  each  and  all  be  the  usurpation  of  un- 
authorized and  tyrannical  power,  and  in  subver- 
sion of  the  primary  and  chief  objects  of  our  gov- 
ernment and  our  constitution;  and  any  attempt 
to  enforce  them  would  be  a  violent  and  lawless 
revolution  Which  every  good  citizen  might,  and 
every  friend  of  liberty  would  resist  to  his  ut- 
most. Such  resistance,  in  some  of  the  cla.sses 
of  cases  at  least,  all  would  acknowledge  to  be 
the  highest  duty  and  patriotism,  and  its  success 
the  greatest  blessing  to  the  whole  countrj'. — 
Among  the  whole  people,  the  free  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  the  parties  to  our  social  compact, 
whose  honor  and  faith  are  mutually  pledged  to 
each  other  for  the  maintenance  and  inviolabil- 
ity of  those  great  rights  and  liberties,  the  prin- 
ciples which  apply  to  an<l  govern  each  case  are 
the  same.  If  there  be  different  principles  of 
right  or  law,  which  apply  to  property  in  slaves, 
and  which  give  to  this  convention  a  greater  pow- 
er over  them,  than  all  other  subjects  of  property, 
I  challenge  any  gentleman,  who  maintains  such 
difference,  to  name  specifically  and  distinctly 
those  different  principles  of  right  and  law.  The 
natural  right  of  the  slave  himself  to  his  liberty 
is  a  very  different  question,  and  is  one  between 
liimself  and  his  owner.  It  may  be  a  question 
between  the  slave  and  the  government  and  the 
whole  people  of  Kentucky.  But  slavery  having 
existed  from   the  earliest  traditions  of  history; 


»«- 


and  iu  all  the  furms  and  with  all  the  rights  as 
we  have  it,  first  in  the  colouies  and  then  in  the 
United  States,  for  tJiree  hundred  years;  estab- 
lished by,  and  until  lately  existing  under  the  au- 
thority of  almost  every  civilized  nation  of  the 
earth;  recognized  and  enforced  by  treaties  be- 
tween sovereign  powers,  by  national  and  gener 
al  law,  by  constitutions,  by  municipal  and  stat- 
utory law;  and  in  Kentucky  its  sanctions  and 
inviolability,  exisiting  precisely  as  those  of  all 
other  property,  neither  this  convention,  nor  a 
majority  of  the  people  can  emancipate  them 
without  a  proper  compensation  to  their  owners. 
I  conce<le  that  a  majority  of  the  people  can 
rightfully,  by  the  agency  of  a  convention,  take 
all  the  slaves  in  the  state  and  emancipate  them ; 
but  not  in  the  rightful  exercise  of  power,  except 
on  the  condition  of  paying  for  them  out  of  the 
public  treasuiy.  Whenever  a  clear  and  decided 
majority  of  the  people,  in  my  day,  determine  to 

{)ut  into  execution  a  system  of  emancipation, 
)ased  upon  this  principle,  1  am  ready  to  go  with 
them.  But  I  am  opposed  to  forcing,  or  attempt- 
ing prematurely  any  such  scheme.  I  am  for 
awaiting  the  spontaneous  and  general  action  of 
the  people  in  its  favor.  If  to  this  it  be  objected, 
that  the  people  will  never  consent  to  pay  for  the 
slaves,  I  answer,  they  cannot  emancipate,  with 
a  due  observance  of  justice  and  right  to  the  own- 
ers, without  it.  If  it  be  said  that  any  scheme 
of  emancipation,  upon  the  principle  of  paying 
for  them,  would  necessarily  be  so  difficult'and 
tardy  in  its  execution  as  to  continue  through 
generations,  it  might  be  answered,  that  would 
be  for  the  better;  for  then  it  would  be  so  grad- 
ual as  to  introduce  no  great  disorders  or  sudden 
changes  in  societv,  and  the  institution  would 
disappear  so  gradually  as  to  produce  no  shock, 
no  great  popular  commotion. 

But  it  appears  to  me,  that  any  intelligent  and 
carefully  reflecting  mind,  must  come  to  the  con- 
clusion, that  slavery  is  to  have  but  a  transitory 
existence  in  Kentucky.  The  general  sentiment 
of  the  world  is  against  it,  before  which,  in  fifty 
years  it  has  receded  vastly;  and  this  sentiment  is 
deeply  and  widely  formed  in  our  limits  and 
among  our  own  people.  In  all  the  free  states  it  is 
universal,  and  it  exists  in  such  intensity  and  ac- 
tivity, that  hereafter,  it  will  be  an  accident  for 
a  fugitive  slave  to  be  reclaimed  from  any  of 
them.  The  climate  and  productions  of  Ken- 
tucky do  not  peculiarly  require  slave  labor;  in 
the  southern  states  it  is  different,  and  there  a 
great  demand  exists  for  slaves,  and  must  con- 
tinue until  their  vacant  lands  are  settled.  The 
insecurity  of  the  property  in  our  state,  the  great 
and  continual  demand  for  it  in  the  cotton  and 
sugar  states,  the  extending  disposition  among 
our  people  individually  to  emancipate — these 
and  other  causes  which  are  now  powerfully 
acting,  and  which  will  continue  to  act  with  in- 
creasing force,  will,  in  the  course  of  a  few  gene- 
rations, remove  slavery,  in  its  existing  form, 
from  Kentucky.  If  left  to  itself  and  the  forces 
now  acting,  and  which  must  continue  to  act 
upon  it,  the  remedy  for  it  will  be  more  proper, 
peaceable  and  effective  than  any  the  meddling  of 
the  day  would,  or  could,  apply  to  it.  The  his- 
tory of  slavery,  as  we  have  it,  proves  in  all  the 
pages  of  the  past,  that  it  is  progressing  to  its 
ond.    That  consummation  is  in  the  course  of 


event*,  and  when  men  throw  thcfn»elve«  in  the 
current  of  events  to  hasten  or  to  retard,  they 
are  but  straws.  Let  all  straws  be  kept  out  of 
that  section  of  this  resistless  current  which 
flows  through  Kentucky,  and  let  it  roll  on  in  its 
undisturbed  power. 

In  any  thing  which  I  have  advanced,  I  do  not 
intend  to  controvert  the  right  of  every  people 
and  state  to  adopt  all  and  any  measures  which 
shall  be  necessary  for  their  self-preservation. 
That  is  the  paramount  and  immutable  law  of 
man  and  nature,  and  cannot  be  controlled  by 
any  human  regulations;  If  the  slaves  were  to 
revolt  and  the  insurrection  could  be  brought  to 
an  end  only  by  driving  the  slaves  out  of  our 
limits,  it  wouli  be  right  thus  to  expel  them.  Be- 
cause this  would  be  a  measure  necessary  for  the 
protection  and  preservation  of  the  whole  commu- 
nity. If  the  slaves  could  not  be  kept  among  us 
without  bringing  upon  our  social  organization 
certain  ruin  and  dissolution,  and  the  state  and  all 
itscitizens  had  not  the  means  to  pay  for  them,  the 
commonwealth  might  throw  them  from  her  with- 
out paying  for  them.  This  principle  was  illus- 
trated some  days  since  by  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin)  in  putting  the  case  of  a 
boat  being  wrecked  in  the  Ohio  river,  and  two 
passengers  being  thrown  into  the  stream  on  the 
same  plank,  which  was  suflScient  to  save  but 
one.  The  stronger  would  have  the  natural  right 
to  push  the  weaker  off,  even  inevitably  to  per- 
ish, that  he  might  save  himself.  But  if  that 
plank, plainly  and  obviouslv,  had  size  and  buoy- 
ancy to  float  them  both,  and  carry  them  to  shore, 
the  strong  man  would  have  no  right  to  force  the 
other  from  the  plank;  and  if  he  did  so,  and  the 
other  was  drowned,  he  would  be  guilty  of  a 
crime,  and  that  crime  would  be  no  less  than 
murder.  So,  as  long  as  the  slaves  may  remain 
here  without  bringing  into  imminent  danger  the 
white  population,  or  tlie  continuance  of  the  so- 
ciety; and  so  long  as  there  are  means  besides  in 
the  state  to  pay  for  them,  no  convention,  no  ma- 
jority however  great  and  overwhelming  in  num- 
nerS)  can  rightfully  emancipate  the  slaves  with- 
out making  a  fair  compensation  for  them. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


MONDAY,  DECEMBER  10,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Wabdeb. 

SPECI.4L    COIET    OF    APPEALS. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  submit  to  the  convention 
the  following  resolutions: 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  court  of 
appeals  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  authori- 
zing the  general  assembly  to  proviiie  in  ceilaia 
cases  for  a  special  court  of  appeals. 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  circuit 
courts  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  permitting 
the  general  assembly  to  provide,  bylaw,  for  the 
holding  of  circuit  courts  oy  others  flhan  the  judg- 
es thereof. 

I  will  make  an  explanation  of  the  object  of 
these  resolutions.    It  might  happen  in  electing 


809 


ajuJge  of  tlie  court  of  appeals,  that  a  circuit 
court  judge  would  be  placed  upon  the  beuc-h  of 
that  court.  It  has  beeTi  so  frequently,  and  a  case 
has  oomo  up  which  could  not  be  deieruiined  for 
the  want  of  a  majority  of  judges  to  sit  on  the 
bench.  It  may  happen  also,  that  a  case  is  deci- 
ded iu  the  circuit  court  affecting  the  interest  of 
one  of  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or 
some  of  his  relations.  This  resolution,  relating 
to  that  court,  is  onlv  one  of  inquiry,  whether  in 
such  ca.se  as  either'of  the  above,  it  may  not  be 
expedient  to  provide  for  a  special  court  of  ap- 
peals, so  that  the  legislature  might  make  some 
provision  that  a  portion  of  the  judges  of  the  cir- 
cuit court  should  come  in  and  form  a  part  of  the 
appellate  court.  ,    u- 

The  second  resolution  provides  for  holding 
the  circuit  court  in  case  of  the  illness  of  a  judge 
of  that  court.  This  has  been  done  in  other  states, 
and  I  hope  the  resolutions  will  be  adopted. 

The  resolutions  were  adopted. 

MODE   OF    AMEKDIXG   THE   CONSTITUTION. 

Mr.  EDWARDS.  I  offer  the  following  reso- 
lution: 

Resolved,  Thatany  amendment  or  amendments 
to  this  constitution,  may  be  propo.*ed   in  either 
house  of  the  general  assembly,  and  if  the  same 
be  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of  the  members  elect- 
ed to  each  house,  within  ten  days  after  the  meet- 
ing of  the  same,  such  proposed   amendment  or 
amendments  shall  be  entered  on  their  journal, 
with  the  yeas  and  nays  taken  thereon;  and  the 
secretary  of  state  shall  cause  the  same  to  be  pub- 
lished three  months  before  the  next  general  elec- 
tion, in  at  least  one  newspaper  in  every  county 
in  which  a  newspaper  is  published,  and  if  a  ma- 
jority of  ail  the  voters  in  the  state  shall  vote  for 
such  amendment  or  amendments,  then  the  secre- 
tary of  state  shall  cause   die  same  again  to  be 
published,  in    the   manner    aforesaid,  at  least 
three  months  previou.-i  to  the    next  general  elec- 
tion for  representatives;  an<l  if  a  majority  of  all 
the  voters  in  the  stato  shall  again  vote  fur  such 
amendment  or  amendments,  the  general  assem- 
bly shall,   at  its   next  session,   incorporate  the 
same'  into  the  constitution.     If  more   than  one 
amendment  is  submitted  at  a  time,  they  shall  be 
submitted  in  such   manner  and  form,  that  the 
people  may  vote  for  or  against  each  amendment 
Heparately:  Provided,  That  no  such  amendment 
or  amenclments  shall  be  made   to  the  article  on 
slavery,  or  the  article  for  the  revision   of  this 
constitution. 

I  will  remark  that  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  revision  of  the  constitution,  meets  my  ap- 
probation as  far  as  it  goes.  But,  in  addition  to 
that  mode,  I  prefer  specific  amendments.  Yet  I 
■would  remark  that  I  cannot  consent  to  any  mode 
of  specific  amendment,  which  will  give  rise  to 
the  agitation  of  slavery,  by  the  legislative  pow- 
er I  therefore  will  move  that  the  resolution  be 
printed,  and  that  it  be  taken  up  when  the  report 
of  the  committee  on  slavery  comes  up  for  con- 
sideration. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

SUBMISSION   TO   THE   PEOPLE. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  offered  the  following  res- 
olution, and  it  was  adopted-  . 

Retoloed,  That  the  committee  on  the  iniscella- 
neouB  provi-^ions take  into  consideration  tb^time. 


mode,  and  manner  of  submitting  the  new  consti- 
tution to  the  people  of  the  state,  for  their  sanc- 
tion or  rejection,  and  that  said  committee  report 
thereon  to  the  convention. 

GENERAL  PROVISIONS. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  general  provi- 

The  pending  question  was  on  Mr.  CLARKE'S 
amendment  to  Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL'S  addi- 
tional section. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  A  great  deal  has  been  said 
here,  sir,  about  "abstractions,"  and  no  little  rail- 
ery  has  been  indulged  in,  at  the  expense  of  those 
who  have  attempted  to  trace  back  proposed  mea- 
sures to  their  first  principles.  Everything,  sir, 
is  regarded  as  abstract,  which  does  not  compose 
a  feature  palpably  distinct  in  our  present  condi- 
tion; and  any  inferential  effort  to  exhibit  the 
tendencies  of  a  proposition,  by  examining  it  in 
connection  with  the  leading  principles  which 
constitute  the  substruction  of  popular  govern- 
ment, is  regarded  by  some  as  a  useless  excursion 
into  the  regions  of  ideality. 

The  revolution— the  glorious  revolution  which 
gave  birth  to  our  nationality— wasfounded  upon 
an  abstraction.  Did  the  stamp  act— did  the  in- 
considerBble  tax  upon  tea,  when  that  article  sold 
cheaper  in  the  American  market  after  the  duty 
had  been  imposed  than  it  did  in  Great  Britain — 
cause  the  sword  of  America  to  be  drawn,  which 
was  not  sheathed  until  the  hour  of  her  triumph? 
Was  it  not,  sir,  the  detection  of  aviolated  princi- 
ple in  the  imposition  of  taxation  without  repre- 
sentation, which  led  to  the  disruption  of  those 
cherished  ties  that  bound  the  colonies  to  the 
mother  country?  There  was  nothing,  sir,  of  ac- 
tual, tangible  oppression;  the  burdens  of  the 
colonial  population  were  less  than  those  of  Brit- 
ish subjects  at  home.  That  clear  perception  of 
political  right,  which  results  from  a  vision  un- 
dazzled  by  the  splendors  of  royalty— from  a 
spirit  nursed  amid  the  wild  grandeur  of  nature, 
and  therefore  unawed  by  the  "pomp  and  circum- 
stance" of  regal  power,  at  once  detected  the  vio- 
lation of  principle;  and  the  wisdom  bornof  siich 
knowledge,  di-scovered  in  an  unjust  beginning 
the  fearful  portent  of  a  ruinous  end. 

This,  sir,  is  the  proud  characteristic  that  dis- 
tinguishes ours  from  every  other  political  strug- 
gle which  has  marked  the  annals  of  revolution; 
It  is  a  characteristic  that  commends  itself  to  the 
American  citizen  as  the  means  of  perpetuating 
those  blessings  which  it  was  so  mainly  instru- 
mental in  achieving. 

Entertaining  these  sentiments,  I  hope  to  be 
pardoned  for  attaching  somewhat  of  importance 
to  the  abstract  enunciations  emanating  from  a 
body  clothed,  in  its  representative  character, 
with  the  sovereignty  of  the  state.  I  say,  sir,  a 
body  clothed  with  the  sovereignty  of  the  state. 
Let  us,  sir,  for  a  moment  examine  this  question. 
What  I  ask,  are  the  origin  and  object  of 
written  constitutions?  They  originated,  sir,  in 
the  necessity  which  exists  in  popular  representa- 
tive governments  of  imposing  a  limit  on  popu- 
lar agents.  The  offspring  of  political  progress, 
they  were  born  amid  revolutionary  travail.  It 
is  the  boast,  sir,  of  Virginia— that  proud  old 
commonwealth,  the  mother  of  states— it  is    her* 


88S 


boast,  accordiog  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  to  have  origi- 
nated the  first  written  constitution  that  was  ever 
kno\rn  to  the  world.  She,  sir,  amid  the  storms 
and  perils  incident  to  invasive  warfare,  ou  the 
29th  of  June,  1776,  framed  her  original  sj-stem 
of  organic  laws.  Written  constitutions,  sir,  are 
intended  not  to  define  popular  sovereignty,  but 
to  erect  bulwarks  against  tlie  abuse  of  delegated 
power.  They  do  not  proclaim,  as  some  gentle- 
men seem  to  think,  that  the  popular  will,  which 
can  only  be  ascertained  through  a  convention,  is 
incapable  of  achieving  the  attributes  of  sover- 
eignty— they  do  not  proclaim  what  the  people 
cannot  do;  but  they  proclaim  what  the  people's 
government  shall  not  do.  Their  great  object  is 
to  define,  limit,  circumscribe,  the  operations  of 
representative  government.  In  a  pure  democra- 
cy, where  all  action  is  taken  by  the  people  pri- 
marily, there  can  be  no  necessity  for  a  written 
constitution;  but,  ou  the  other  hand,  in  a  repre- 
sentative democracy,  from  this  very  necessity 
resulting  from  the  impracticability  of  direct  pop- 
ular action,  springs  the  further  necessity  of 
clothing  a  convention  with  the  sovereignty  of 
the  state — with  the  whole  power  of  the  people. 
I  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  asserting 
that  this  convention  has  unlimited  power;  1 
would  say,  sir,  that  its  powers  are  co-extensive 
with  those  of  the  people,  and  are  only  restricted 
by  the  national  constitution.  Can  gentlemen 
find  any  other  restriction — any  other  limitation 
to  these  powers?  Surely  sir,  it  is  not  to  be  found 
in  the  constitution  of  the  state;  and  here,  sir,  I 
take  issue  with  my  honorable  friend  from  Bour- 
bon. If  I  understood  him  correctly  on  this 
point,  he  maintained  that  this  is  a  constitutional 
convention,  called  by  the  authority  of  the  pre- 
sent constitution,  and  subject  to  be  controlled  by 
its  principles  as  much  as  is  the  legislature.  It 
is,  sir,  called  a  "constitutional  convention," 
not  because  it  is  subject  to  be  controlled  by  the 
principles  of  the  existing  constitirtion,  but  be- 
cause it  was  called  to  frame  a  constitution.  It 
is  so  denominated  to  distinguish  it  from  a  con- 
vention called  for  other  purposes.  To  prevent 
confusion,  to  facilitate  the  ascertainment  of  the 
public  will,  the  present  constitution  has  a  pro- 
vision inserted  in  it  for  the  calling  of  a  conven- 
tion; but  when  the  delegates  to  that  convention 
had  once  been  selected,  being  clothed  with  the 
same  power  that  resided  in  the  convention 
which  framed  the  present  constitution,  all  pow- 
er over  them,  so  far  as  the  existing  constitution 
is  concerned,  was  at  an  end.  The  framers  of  the 
present  constitution  intended  to  do  nothing  with 
respect  to  a  future  convention,  but  to  provide 
for  the  mode  of  its  appointment. 

But  if  this  convention  is  to  be  controlled  by 
the  principles  of  the  existing  constitution,  its 
powers  are  narrowed  down  to  a  mere  modifica- 
tion of  details — it  shrinks  away  under  the  ap- 
filication  of  this  stringent  rule  into  a  mere  legis- 
ative  assembly,  and  does  not  pos-sess  the  power 
to  effect  and  carry  ont  any  of  the  radical 
changes,  indicated  by  public  sentiment,  because 
they  involve  an  overthrow  of  existing  principles; 
■when  therefore  delegates  upon  this  floor  pro- 
posed any  material  alteration — any  new  and  im- 
portant measure — such  for  instance  as  the  abo- 
lition of  tJie  life  tenure  of  office,  or  such  an  ex- 
tension of  the  elective  franchise  as  to  embrace 


I  all  the  functionaries  of  government — if  my  friend 
;  from  Bourbon  be  correct  in  his  views,  the  ex- 
i  isting  constitution  would  have  risen  up  in  judg- 
ment against  the  fell  spirit  of  unlicensed  inno- 
ivation,  and  rebuked  them  into  silence.  It  is, 
i  sir,  a  well  settled  principle  that  the  acts  of  one 
I  legislature  are  not  binding  upon  succeeding 
j  legislative  bodies;  and  why  .so?  Because  they 
I  are  supposed  to  reflect  the  popular  will;  and 
i  that  will  is  as  potential  at  one  time  as  at  another. 
1  If  one  generation  can  legislate  for  another,  irre- 
■  spective  of  its  will,  then,  sir,  that  potent  influ- 
j  ence  which  we  denominate  popular  sovereignty 
I  would  be  like  the  fosforescent  light  which  arises 
I  from  the  charnel  house — a  delusive  brilliancy, 
I  an  empty  seeming,  the  merest  mockery  of  pow- 
1  er;  and  popular  intelligence  devitalized  would 
i  perish  in  the  cold  embraces  of  political  power, 
i  exercised  by  a  by-gone  race. 
I  My  remark,  sir,  is  not  made  in  a  spirit  of  ir- 
I  reverence  to  the  memory  of  the  illustrious  dead. 
I  If  any  state  in  this  Union  has  cause  to  be  proud 
i  of  her  political  fathers,  it  is  Kentucky.  When 
j  her  present  govermental  charter  was  framed,  a 
;  step  in  the  progress  of  political  science  was  ac- 
I  complished,  by  which  she  was  placed  far  in  ad- 
!  vance  of  her  sisters;  and  now,  after  the  lapse  of 
I  half  a  century,  when  we  are  desirous  of  profit- 
j  ing  by  the  teachings  of  experience — when  we 
:  propose  to  infuse  a  greater  amount  of  popular 
activity  into  our  government,  regardful  of  those 
sacred  associations  connected  with  this  instru- 
i  ment,  we  approach  it  not  to  desecrate,  but  to 
j  amend.  Our  fathers  inscribed  not  upon  their 
work  "noli  metangere"  as  a  warning  against 
'  the  innovations  of  posterity.  We  do  but  realize 
their  patriotic  wishes  by  conforming  the  organic 
I  law  to  the  changes  which  time  has  effected  in 
j  the  popular  will,  and  the  popular  character. 

But  sir,  to  return  to  the  point.     It  is  true,  that 

this  convention  might  misrepresent  the  people — 

it  is  true,  it  might  abuse  the  trust  which  has  been 

confided  to  it;  but  such   misrepresentation  and 

j  abuse  of  power,  would  only  display  wrong  ac- 

!  tion,  and  not  the  inability  to   act.     It    is  also 

I  true,  that  public  opinion  may  have  indicated — 

j  as  it  has  certainly   done — the   extent  to   which 

'  the  exercise  of  the  powers  confided  to  this  con- 

j  vention  should  be  carried ;  but  sir,  if  there  was 

anv  action  by  this  body  in  contravention  of  that 

Eu^lic  opinion,  although  it  would  involve  a 
reach  of  trust — although  it  would  render  this 
j  convention  obnoxious  to  the  charge  of  faithless- 
i  ness,  yet  it  would  not,  by  this  departure  from 
1  the  popular  will,  become  amenable  to  the  charge 
j  of  usurpation — of  exceeding  the  limits  of  that 
I  power  which  the  people  have  confided  to  its 
I  charge.  Let  me  for  a  moment,  illustrate  this 
'  position.  Public  sentiment  has  decreed  that 
!  there  shall  be  an  elective  judiciary.  If  this  con- 
i  vention  were  to  bestow  the  appointing  power 
'  elsewhere — if  it  were  to  vest  it  in  other  hands 
i  than  those  of  the  people,  it  would  have  abused 
j  the  trust  confided  to  it — it  would  have  been  dis- 
i  regardful  of  the  pledges  which  it  Iiad  made  to 
!  the  country;  but  still  it  could  not  be  said  that 
I  the  convention  had  exercised  a  power  which  did 
i  not  legitimately  reside  in  it.  Public  sentiment 
■has  also  required  that  the  constitution,  when 
I  framed,  should  be  submitted  to  the  people  for 
their  ratificstion,  and  this  convention  would  be 


3nt< 


acting  in  bad  faith,  if  il  did  not  respond  to  that 
sentiment.  But  it  will  not  be  urged  here,  that  it 
has  not  the  power  .to  make  a  constitution  with- 
out conditions.  Suppose  tliat  such  were  its  ac- 
tion, and  the  new  constitution  did  not  meet  the 
public  expectations,  the  remedy  would  consist 
in  the  calling  of  another  convention. 

If,  sir,  public  sentiment  does  not  impose  a 
limit  upon  the  powers  of  this  body  in  the  in- 
stances which  have  been  given,  then  public  sen- 
timent does  not  impose  a  limit  in  any  other  sup- 
posable  case,-  nor  can  it  be  inferred  that  there  js 
any  restriction  upon  the  powers  of  the  conven- 
tion imposed  by  the  disposition  of  the  public 
mind.  Its  ability  is  like  that  derived  from  a 
general  power  of  attorney  given  to  an  individu- 
al, with  instructions  to  act  only  in  a  particular 
case.  The  transaction  of  business  beyond  the 
instructions,  but  within  the  power,  might  well 
raise  the  question  of  propriety,  but  certainly 
could  not  bring  up  the  question  of  authority. 
If,  then,  sir,  the  powers  of  this  convention  are 
undefined  and  unlimited,  all  the  powers  which 
reside  in  the  people  reside  in  it. 

If  it  be  true,  as  I  have  endeavored  to  sHow, 
that  the  powers  of  this  convention  are  the  pow- 
ers of  the  people,  the  enquiry  arises  as  to  what 
is  the  extent  of  popular  power — as  to  what  is 
popular  sovereignty.  I  take  it,  sir,  that  the  quan- 
tum of  power  is  the  same  in  every  political  as- 
sociation ;  that  all  states  have  the  same  amount 
of  power  residing  somewhere.  In  an  autocracy 
it  is  centered  in  the  will  of  one  individual  who 
is  endowed  with  despotic,  absolute,  uncontrolled 
power.  In  a  republic  it  resides  in  the  whole 
people  in  their  political  capacity.  With  us  sir. 
a  portion  of  the  pupular  power  has  been  yielded 
up  by  the  federal  compact;  but  the  residue  re- 
sides in  the  people.  Ihe  people  of  Kentucky 
in  their  political  capacity — as  a  political  asso- 
ciation, have  the  same  powers  as  the  emperor  of 
Russia,  or  any  other  sovereign,  where  the  exer- 
cise of  these  powers  would  not  conflict  witli  the 
national  constitution.  They  can,  at  pleasure, 
amend,  change,  or  abolish  their  government, 
and  institute  another  system  in  its  .stead,  pro- 
vided that  the  government  so  substituted,  be  not 
in  conflict  with  the  limitation  imposed  by  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States.  Their  pow- 
er over  property  is  as  absolute  as  the  power 
of  any  government;  and  unless  property  pos- 
sesses an  attribute  which  elevates  it  above 
all  law  and  all  eon.stitutional  sanction,  it  is  as 
much  within  the  grasp  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky, asof  any  other  political  association  or  sov- 
ereignty. What  sir  is  the  right  of  property?  It 
is  the  right  to  hold,  to  enjoy,  to  dispose  of  du- 
ring life,  and  to  transmit  to  whom  we  may  choose 
after  death,  anything  which  is  legitimately  the 
subject  of  ownership.  This  I  take  it  is  a  full 
and  fair  definition  of  the  right  of  property  as  it 
exists  among  us — a  right  which  will  be  held 
sacred  and  inviolate  so  long  as  the  sense  of  jus- 
tice in  the  public  mind  is  adequate  to  the  ends 
of  government.  This  right  sir,  might  be  as 
completely  destroye<l  by  the  repeal  of  the  laws 
in  wnich  it  originates,  and  by  which  it  is  secured, 
as  it  can  be  by  a  positive  announcement  declar- 
ing that  it  shall  no  longer  exist.  By  what  sanc- 
tion does  the  heir  enjoy  the  estate  of  his  ances- 
tor if  it  be  not  under  the  law  of  descent.    Uc- 


peal  that  law,  and  the  right  to  all  that  class  of 
property  derived  by  descent  is  at  an  end;  it 
either  vests  in  the  government  by  escheat,  or  it 
falls  back  upon  its  original  state  to  be  appro- 
priated in  the  natural  mode  of  acquisition 
which  is  by  occupancy.  By  what  right  does  a 
devisee  claim  to  hold  property  which  has  been 
willed  to  him  if  not  by  the  law  which  sanctions 
and  prescribes  the  mode  of  such  transfer?  Re- 
peal the  laws  which  regulate  estates,  and  what 
becomes  of  the  right  of  property?  This  it  is 
competent  for  the  legislature  to  do  if  there  be  no 
constitutional  inhibition;  and  if  such  an  inhi- 
bition does  exist,  it  is  competent  for  this  con- 
vention to  remove  it.  But  if  gentlemen  are 
right  in  the  position  which  they  have  assumed; 
nay,  if  the  amendments  of  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson  and  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon, 
which  have  been  adopted,  assert  the  truth,  the 
repeal  of  all  laws  could  scarcely  effect  the  com- 
munity, as  rights,  whether  of  person  or  property, 
are  above  the  sanction  of  law  and  constitution, 
reposing  on  some  airy  substratum  generated,  as 
I  suppose,  in  the  eternal  fitness  of  things. — 
Constitutional  inhibitions  to  prevent  legislative 
encroachments  upon  the  rights  of  property,  are 
presumptuous  assertions  of  power  over  a  subject 
entirely  above  their  sanction,  and  hence  all  con- 
stitutional guards  being  unnecessary,  constitu- 
tions themselves  sinking  from  the  paramount 
importance  heretofore  attached  to  them,  become 
political  supererogations. 

But  let  us  look  at  the  right  of  property  in  its 
simpler  form,  as  the  right  to  hold  a  thing.  Now, 
my  honorable  friend  from  Bourbon,  in  delivering 
his  sentiments  on  this  subject  last  Saturday,  con- 
tended that  this  right  of  property  was  above  and 
anterior  to  all  constitutional  sanction,  and  yet  he 
admitted  that  the  stat«  had  a  right  to  take  it  up- 
on making  compensation  to  the  owner.  Now,  I 
ask,  is  the  right  of  property  complete  if  it  can 
be  taken  at  all,  under  any  circumstances,  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  owner?  What  signifies 
compensation  if  his  will  is  not  consulted?  Is 
not  the  strong  arm  of  the  law  employed  to 
wrench  it  from  him  against  his  will?  'And  I 
ask  if  it  does  not  involve  the  same  principle,  so 
far  as  the  question  of  power  is  concerned,  wheth- 
er compensation  be  given  or  not?  Totakeagainst 
the  owner's  will,  is  toviolate  that  owner's rightof 
property.  If  the  right  of  property  be  inviola- 
l)le — if  it  be  above  and  anterior  to  all  constitu- 
tional sanction — then,  compensation  or  no  com- 
pensation, it  cannot  be  touched  by  the  law  or 
the  constitution  without  violating  that  right. 
Compensation,  sir!  What  compensation  could 
atone  f<)r  the  desecration  of  the  spot  of  earth 
rendered  dear  by  the  memories  of  chihlhood, 
consecrated  by  the  joys  and  sorrows  of  life — by 
the  sports  of  our  youth  and  by  the  graves  of  our 
fathers?  I  say,  sir,  that  the  right  of  property, 
when  it  is  conceded,  that  it  can  be  taken  by  the 
government  for  public  purposes,  even  when  com- 
pensation is  made,  is  not  above  legal  sanction; 
for  the  right  to  take  and  the  right  to  enjoy  are 
propositions  incompatible  with  eadi  other.  So 
far  as  the  right  to  hold  is  concerned — a  right  in- 
separable from  the  idea  of  absolute  ])roperty — 
compensation  does  not  cure  the  violence  done  to 
the  will  in  taking;  and  if  the  right  to  property 
be  above  all  constitutional  sanction,  then  the 


865 


act  of  taking  it  awar  is  an  assertion  of  power 
irreconcilable  with  the  tenure  by  which  it  is  held. 
If  this  be  no  impairment  of  the  right  of  property, 
then  I  can  enter  upon  the  land  of  my  neignbor; 
cause  a  valuation  to  be  made  of  it;  tender  him 
compensation;  avoid  an  action;  and  by  that  course 
possess  myself  of  his  estate,  whether  he  is  wil- 
ling or  not.  If  taking  without  regard  to  the 
owner's  will  does  not  impugn  the  right  of  prop- 
erty— if  the  offer  of  compensation  is  an  equiva- 
lent for  the  absence  of  consent,  he  has  no  cause 
of  complaint — has  sustained  no  injury,  and 
therefore  has  no  remedy.  And  yet,  sir,  it  is  a 
matter  of  every  day  occurrence,  when  the  pub- 
lic convenience  '  requires  the  onstruction  of  a 
railroad  or  a  turnpike,  that  private  property  is 
taken  even  without  the  will  of  the  owner,  al- 
though a  compensation  may  be  made.  That 
compensation  is  made,  sir,  because  of  the  requi- 
sition of  the  constitution,  that  no  private  prop- 
erty shall  be  taken  without  compensation  to  the 
owner;  and  yet  there  are  legislative  enactments 
which  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  that  compensation 
shall  in  part  or  in  whole  be  composed  of  the 
collateral  advantages  that  may  be  derived  from 
the  improvement,  except  so  far  as  the  mere  value 
of  the  soil  which  is  appropriated  may  be  con- 
cerned. Will  gentlemen,  in  the  face  of  these 
facts  and  these  admissions,  still  contend  that 
the  right  of  property  is  above  the  sanction  of 
the  law? 

Mr.  President,  civilization  is  the  offspring  of 
law;  its  rights  originate  in  law,  and  its  incidents 
are  secured  bv  it.  Like  every  other  earthly 
thing,  it  is  a  mixed  blessing;  but  it  may  be  safe- 
ly asserted,  that  as  that  condition  is  more  appro- 
priate to  the  rational  existence  of  man,  the  good 
it  dispenses  predominates  over  its  evil.  It  is  an 
artificial  system  which  is  based  upon  municipal 
law;  and,  according  to  my  humble  apprehen- 
sion, whenever  there  is  an  attempt  to  jostle  it 
from  its  true  basis,  the  whole  structure  is  in  dan- 
ger. Why  sir,  attempt  this  thing?  If  the  pow- 
exists,  the  mere  denial  of  it  in  a  constitution 
will  not  secure  the  right,  and  if  the  power  does 
not  exist,  still  we  accomplish  nothing.  In  de- 
parting from  the  beaten  tract,  we  are  treading 
Upon  dangerous  ground.  Cui  bonot  Will  any 
gentleman  explain  the  practical  benefits  that  are 
to  result?  Does  the  occasion  demand  such  a 
course?  Is  there  such  a  crisis  in  the  proprietary 
affairs  of  the  country? 

"  !7on  tali  auxilio,  non  defensoribus  istis, 
Terapuseget."     *•♦*«*** 

I  see  nothing  in  the  occasion  which  justifies 
these  hooks,  upon  which  the  enemies  of  consti- 
tutional reform — the  enemies  of  the  institution 
of  slavery  will  hang  their  opposition.  I  am  op- 
posed to  the  whole  series  of  propositions  on  thifi 
subject — ab  oto,  ad  pomum — from  the  egg  to  the 
apple — from  the  beginning  to  the  end;  because  I 
regard  them  as  intrinsically  wrong  in  princijile 
— -Decduse  I  regard  them  as  dangerous  and  mis- 
chievous in  their  practical  results.  If  we  would 
secure  the  institution  of  slavery,  let  us  guard 
jigainst  legislative  infraction, "by  placing  the 
suWect  beyond  such  control. 

Sir,  there  is  no  eentleman  on  this  floor  whose 
fwlin^  are  more  deeply  involved  in  theqoffition 
of  slavery  than  mine.  I  have  been  associated 
109 


with  it  from  my  earliest  recollections.  I  am 
now  the  owner  of  slaves  who  are  connected  with 
an  hereditary  vassalage,  which  has  subsisted  in 
my  family  for  more  than  a  hundred  years.  I 
would  not  sell  them — I  would  not  dissolve  the 
relation  existing  between  us — a  relation  which  I 
am  constrained  to  believe  has  been  of  mutual 
benefit.  If  it  should  so  happen  that  this  cli- 
mate becomes  injurious  to  the  existence  of  such 
f)roperty,  I  can  seek  a  home  elsewhere.  I  should 
ook  upon  any  necessity  which  might  constrain 
me  to  dispose  of  this  property,  as  a  great  calam- 
ity to  me — a  greater  to  the  slaves;  and  yet,  as 
much  as  I  value  it — as  much  as  I  am  attached  to 
it,  I  rest  it,  and  every  other  right  which  I  pos- 
sess, with  perfect  security  upon  the  firm  basis  of 
public  justice. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  will  ask  the  indulgence 
of  the  house  but  for  a  short  time.  I  agree  with 
the  gentleman  from  Oldham,  (Mr.  Mitchell,) 
that  much  has  been  said  here,  and  elsewhere, 
about  abstractions.  If  not  in  this  house,  there 
has  been  out  of  it,  a  constant  effort  to  show  that 
the  right  the  citizen  has  in  every  other  species 
of  property  is  a  glorious  reality, "while  the  right 
he  has  in  his  slave  is  a  glorious  abstraction. 
Much  excitement  seemed  to  have  sprung  up  here, 
on  Saturday,  while  the  amendment  offered  by 
the  delegate  from  Bourbon  (Mr.  Davis,)  was  un- 
der discussion;  and  gentlemen  seemed  anxious 
to  know  the  reasons  why  delegates  had  voted 
for  it.  Sir,  I  voted  for  both  branches  of  that 
section,  and  I  voted  for  them  because  I  believed 
them  to  contain  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and 
nothing  but  the  truth.  Sir,  I  esteem  that  sec- 
tion one  of  paramoant  importance.  Its  princi- 
ples and  positions  form  the  very  basis  and  foun- 
dation pillars  upon  which  our  government 
stands.  It  is  the  only  proposition,  in  my  judg- 
ment, which  meets  dlirectly,  fully,  fairly,  and 
perfectly,  the  great  question  now  at  issue  between 
the  emancipationist  and  the  pro-slavery  man. 
Sir,  there  is  a  party  in  this  country,  weak  it  is 
true,  in  numbers,  but  powerful  in  fntellect.  A 
party  of  great  intelligence,  integrity,  and  piety; 
organized,  skillful,  enthusiastic,  an&  determined 
upon  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  Kentucky.  A 
party  who  contend  that  this  convention  has  plen- 
ary power  or  right,  if  we  wish  to  exercise  it,  to 
emancipate  the  slaves  on  any,  on  our  own  terras. 
And  here,  sir,  I  take  issue  with  them. 

The  first  branch  of  that  section  asserts  that 
the  right  of  property  is  before,  and  higher  than 
all  constitutional  .sanction.  The  second  asserts 
that,  the  right  the  citizen  has  in  his  slaves,  and 
their  increase,  to  be  the  samcjhe  has  in  any  and 
every  other  species  of  property  whatever.  I  be- 
lieve the  first,  and  I  believe  the  la.st  declaration 
in  this  section  to  be  true.  I  voted  for  them  sir, 
and  I  voted  for  them  cordially.  I  voted  for  them 
with  all  my  heart.  I  am  willing  for  gentlemen, 
I  am  willing  for  this  convention,  and  sir,  I  am 
willing  for  the  whole  world  to  know,  how  and 
why  1  have  thus  voted.  They  are  right  in  prin- 
ciple and  right  in  policy,  u  pon  them  I  take 
mv  stand,  and  with  them  I  intend  to  stand  or 
fall.  I  voted  for  them  sir,  and  I  voted  for  them 
because  1  believe  them  to  be  true. 

They  may  be  disregarded,  broken  down,  and 
abandoned,  for  a  season,  by  revolution,  by  vio- 
lence, by  brute  force  ;  but  sir,  they  are  principlM 


666 


and  positions,  as  incontroV^ertible,  in  my  jud^- 1 
ment,  as  the  truth  of  heaven,  the  justice  of  Goa,  j 
or  the  existence  of  man.  They  will  rise  up  in 
judgment  in  after  days  against  the  reckless,  ruth- 
less revolutionist,  who  attempts  to  disregard  and 
trample  them  under  his  feet.  They  will  stand 
the  test  of  time — pass  unscathed  through  the 
fiery  strife  and  conflicts,  the  clash  and  crash  of 
contending  and  crumbling  empires  and  repub- 
lics. Ana  when  the  storm  of  revolution  shall 
have  passed,  and  reason  and  justice  again  en- 
throned, the  principles  set  forth  in  this  sec- 
tion, will  then  stand,  acknowledged  and  revered, 
firm  and  unshaken  as  the  hills  of  eternity,  and 
serve  as  the  pillars,  upon  which  to  found  new 
republics,  and  new  states.  The  first  branch  of 
this  section  asserts  that  the  right  to  property  is 
before,  and  above  all  constitutional  sanction. 
The  question  then  is  :  is  this  true  or  false?  Now 
sir,  let  us  suppose  a  case.  I  would  ask  gentle- 
men, if  there  was  no  liberty,  no  property,  no 
rights,  no  interests  to  secure,  nothing  to  protect 
before,  where  would  be  the  necessity  of  govern- 
ment? Where  the  inducement  to  organize?  Man 
is  the  creature  of  motive,  always  actuated  and 
impelled  by  interested  motive.  It  seems  to  me 
sir,  to  be  axiomatic,  a  self-evident  proposition, 
that  if  men  had  no  liberty  or  rights  to  be  lost 
without,  no  interest  or  property  already  held 
and  enjoyed,  to  be  secured  and  protected  by 
government,  there  never  would  have  been  one 
framed  upon  the  face  of  the  whole  earth. 

Why,  sir,  God,  wlien  he  made  the  first  man 
that  ever  lived,  (Adam,)  and  placed  him  in  the 
garden  of  Eden,  gave  him  certain  rights  and 
privileges,  which  might  have  been  lost  without, 
before  he  gave  him  a  law,  or  instituted  a  govern- 
ment by  which  he  could  be  protected  and  se- 
cured in  their  enjoyment.  Why,  sir,  the  pream- 
ble to  everv  constitution  in  the  union,  positively 
declares,  tliatthe  very  object  of  the  constitution, 
is  to  secure  to  the  citizen  the  enjoyment  of  life, 
liberty,  property,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness 
— all  of  which  he  enjoys  before  the  constitution 
is  framed.  Sir,  neither  the  constitution  of  the 
country,  nor  the  law  of  the  land,  gives  the  citi- 
zen a  right  to  any  property  he  owns.  He  pur- 
chases the  right,  by  his  labor  or  his  money.  The 
government  only  secures  and  protects  him  in 
the  enjoyment  of  that  right,  and  gives  him  a 
formal  evidence  of  title. 

It  seems  clear,  sir,  to  my  mind,  that  the  very 
existence  of  government  argues  the  necessity  of 
it,  a«nd  the  necessity  goes  to  show,  conclusively, 
the  anterior  right  contended  for.  There  could 
bo  no  such  imperious  necessity  in  the  absence  of 
all  right. 

The  second  branch  of  this  proposition,  sir, 
affirms,  that  the  right  the  citizen  has  in  his 
slaves,  and  their  increase,  to  be  tlie  same  he  has 
in  any  and  every  other  species  of  property  what- 
ever. There  is  nothing  in  the  constitution  and 
laws  of  this  state — nothing  in  the  constitution 
and  laws  of  the  United  States — nothing  in  the 
laws  of  God,  that  I  have  ever  seen,  which  denies 
this  declaration.  It  is  then  true.  And  I  afiirm 
again,  that  he  can  only  be  deprived  of  that  right 
in  the  same  manner,  and  for  the  same  purposes 
of  government,  on  the  same  tennrf,  and  by  the 
same  authority,  he  can  of  his  right  in  any  and 
;^T«r9    pecieuof  property  he  may  possess.  While 


I  admit  that  wc,  as  a  convention,  have  plenary 
and  unlimited  power  to  prohibit  the  further  im- 
portation of  slaves  into  this  state,  as  merchan- 
dise, or  for  the  use  of  our  own  citizens — while 
we  have  the  power  to  declare  that  all  the  chil- 
dren, born  of  bond  women,  purchased  and 
brought  into  this  state,  from  and  after  tlie  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  shall  be  free  from  their 
birth,  without  the  consent  of  tlie  owner  of  the 
mother,  and  without  one  cent  of  compensation 
from  the  commonwealth,  or  any  other  source — 
while  I  admit  tliis,  I  deny  that  this  convention, 
or  any  convention  hereafter  to  assemble,  has,  or 
will  have,  the  power  or  right,  by  any  principle 
we  may  incorporate  in  the  constitution  we  are 
about  to  frame,  or  any  constitution  hereafter  to 
be  framed,  to  emancipate  the  slaves,  or  their  in- 
crease, now  owned  by  our  citizens,  without  their 
consent,  or  without  paying  therefor,  a  full  and 
fair  equivalent  in  money.  This,  sir,  as  I  stated 
on  a  former  occasion,  is  a  constitutional  conven- 
tion, assembled  for  purposes  of  protection — not 
plunder — to  secure  the  rights  and  property  of 
our  citizens — and  not  to  destroy  them. 

We  have  been  called  together  under  the 
mandate  and  according  to  the  provisions  of 
the  constitution,  and  if  we,  as  delegates,  have 
a  right,  under  the  existing  constitution  and 
laws  of  the  state,  to  claim  our  seats  and  recover 
payment  for  our  services,  it  seems  to  me  clear, 
that  the  farmer  is  under  the  same  constitution 
and  laws,  and  to  the  same  extent  entitled  to  his 
land,  the  merchant  to  his  merchandise,  the  law- 
yer to  his  books,  the  doctor  to  his  medicines, 
the  banker  to  his  stocks,  and  the  slaveholder  to 
his  slaves.  If  we  have  the  right,  as  a  conven- 
tion, to  destroy  the  right  of  property  in  one,  we 
have  in  all.  If  we  have  the  power  or  right,  (and 
I  understand  power  and  right  to  be  synonymous, 
for  legally  and  properly  speaking,  where  there 
is  no  right,  there  is  no  power,)  then  I  affirm,  if 
we  have  the  right  to  say  that  one  species  of  the 

firoperty  of  a  citizen  shall  be  taken  for  the  pub- 
ic use  without  compensation,  we  have  the  same 
rtght  to  say  all  may  be  taken  for  the  same  pur- 
pose and  on  the  same  terms.  Sir,  we  have  no 
such  right — we  can  do  no  such  thing.  The  very 
moment  government  ceases  to  protect  the  lives, 
the  liberty,  and  the  happiness  of  her  citizens, 
that  moment  it  ceases  to  exist  for  the  very  end 
for  which  it  was  established  and  has  been  main- 
tained. The  very  moment  a  majority,  no  matter 
how  great,  meet,  and  arbitrarily,  and  uncondi- 
tionaly  declare,  regardless  of  the  rights  and  in- 
terests of  the  minority,  that  without  compensa- 
tion a  certain  species  of  property,  hitherto  and 
at  present  held  by  the  minority,  shall  be  forever 
confiscated  or  distroyed — that  very  moment, 
sir,  the  government  ceases  to  exist — the  people 
are  in  a  state  of  revolution — life,  liberty,  and 
property,  stand  insecure  and  unprotected  by  law, 
and  the  citizen  then  has  a  right  to  assume  his 
own  defence,  to  a.ssume  his  own  protection. 

Sir,  I  have  taken  the  position  here  assumed, 
and  avowed  the  sentiments  here  expres-sed,  un- 
der the  full  conviction  that  I  am  to  be  held  re- 
sponsible here  and  before  the  country  for  what 
I  now  say  and  do.  I  may  be  contemned — I  may 
be  a.ssailed  and  put  down  by  the  spirit  of  revo- 
lution for  advocating  such  principles — but,  sir. 
they  are   the    honest  convictions  of  my  judg- 


8G7 


meat,  and  I  would  rather  perish  with  them,  than 
live  without  theru. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  Mr.  President:  The  fol- 
lowing amendment  offered  by  the  delegate  from 
Jessamine,  (Dr.  A.  K.  Marshall)  is,  I  believe,  the 
immediate  subject  before  the  convention.  It 
reads  as  follows: 

"  That  neither  this  convention,  nor  any  here- 
after to  be  assembled  by  the  people  of  this  com- 
monwealth, ha.s  any  fight  or  power,  to  either 
emancipate  the  slaves  now  in  the  state,  or  their 
descendants,  or  to  authorize  the  legislature  to 
pass  laws  for  their  emancipation." 

From  the  fact  that  the  mover  of  the  amend- 
ment, just  read,  announced  his  intention  to  vote 
against  it  himself,  and  as  no  one  seems  inclined 
to  urge,  its  favorable  consideration,  I  apprehend 
that  it  will  shortly  be  given  the  go-bye,  and 
that  we  will  pass  to  the  consideration  of  some- 
thing else. 

I  have  not  arisen,  sir,  for  the  purpose  of  dis- 
cussing the  proposition  of  the  delegate  from 
Jessamine;  but  for  the  purpose  of  explaining 
to  the  convention,  the  constituency  I  immedi- 
ately represent  upon  this  floor,  an3  the  world, 
the  reasons  which  induced  me  to  vote  as  I  did 
upon  the  amendment  presented  some  days  ago 
by  the  delegate  from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis.)  As 
the  vote  I  then  gave,  without  an  explanation, 
might  lead  to  misconstruction  on  the  part  of 
some,  I  desire,  therefore,  to  express  my  views 
fullv  in  regard  thereto. 

The  amendment  offered  to  the  report  of  the  1 
committee,  as  an  additional  section  to  which  I 
have  reference,  reads  as  follows: 

"  The  right  of  property  is  before  and  higher 
than  any  constitutional  sanction;  and  the  right 
of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  his  property  is  the 
same,  and  as  inviolable,  as  the  right  of  the  ow- 
ner of  any  property  whatever." 

Now,  sir,  I  voted  against  the  section  I  have 
just  read — the  reasons  for  so  doing,  I  propose  to 
give. 

Mr.  President,  I  recognize  no  legal  difference 
in  adman's  right  to  his  slave  and  any  other  prop- 
erty. We  hold  our  slaves  by  legal  and  constitu- 
tional sanctions.  When  they  are  improperly 
injured  or  taken  from  us  without  our  consent, 
and  without  legal  authority,  the  laws  of  the 
country  afford  us  redress,  just  as  they  do  when 
our  lands  are  trespassed  upon,  or  our  horses 
taken  from  us.  This  is  all  as  it  should  be.  I 
■wish  not  to  interfere  with  the  constitution  or 
laws  as  they  now  stand  upon  the  subject. 

Yet,  sir,!  voted  against  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon.  First,  because  I  can 
see  no  necessity,  earthly,  for  it.  We  have  al- 
ready secured  to  the  slaveholder  his  property  in 
his  slaves  as  fully  as  we  have  secured  our  lands, 
our  houses,  and  our  homes,  or  any  description  of 
property  whatever;  and,  sir,  when  I  have  placed 
the  slave  property  of  the  conntrj'  upon  an  equal 
footing,  so  far  as  the  protection  of  the  constitu- 
tion is  concerned,  with  all  other  property,  I 
have  done  as  much  as  I  am  willing  or  intend  to 
do,  for  its  protection.  When  I  recognize  the 
legal  right  to  slaves  to  be  as  perfect  as  the  legal 
right  to  my  homestead.  I  have  done  all  that  I 
am  expectecl  to  do,  and  have  gone  as  far  as  I  in- 
tend to  go. 

Notwithstanding  all  I  have  said,  sir,  I  cannot 


subscribe  to  the  doctrine  attempted  to  be  estab- 
lished by  the  amendment — for  aie  great  reason, 
sir,  thai  it  is  false  in  fact,  and  founded  rather 
upon  the  strong  pro-slavery  proclivities  of  the 
times  in  Kentucky,  than  upon  reason  or  pro- 
priety. I  say  this  with  all  inijiginable  deference 
to  the  great  mind  that  conceived  it,  and  present- 
ed it  to  this  convention. 

Look  at  the  proposition,  sir.  What  does  it 
assert?  Nothing  more  nor  less,  than  that  slave 
property  is  before  and  higher  than  any  constitu- 
tional sanction.  This,  if  true,  I  would  sub- 
scribe to,  but  as  it  is  false,  I  will  endeavor  to  ex- 
pose it. 

All  questions  of  doubtful  import,  arising  un- 
der the  constitution  and  laws  of  the  United 
States,  when  they  do  arise,  are  referred  to  the 
judicial  department  of  the  government  for  set- 
tlement; and  after  they  are  settled  by  the  su- 
preme court  of  the  United  States,  the  country 
must  submit  to  the  settlement  thus  made.  Now, 
sir,  I  regard  the  question  presented  as  no  longer 
a  mooted  one,  as  having  been  long  ago  deter- 
mined bv  the  highest  and  only  authoritative 
tribunal  known  to  our  constitution  and  laws. 

The  supreme  court  of  the  United  States  in 
the  case  of  Prigg  against  the  commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania,  16  Peters,  611,  says: 

"  T&e  state  of  slavery  is  deemed  to  be  a  mere 
municipal  regulation,  founded  upon  and  limited 
to  the  range  of  territorial  laws." 

Now,  sir,  what  does  this  decision  assert?  That 
.slavery  is  founded  upon  and  limited  to  the  range 
of  laws — ^that  it  is  the  creature  of  municipal 
regulation — and  not,  sir,  as  the  amendment  as- 
serts, "  before  and  higher  than  any  constitutional 
sanction." 

I  have  now  said  as  much  as  I  intended  saying 
when  I  arose,  but  as  the  subject  of  slavery  and 
emancipation  has  occupied  much  of  the  time  of 
the  convention,  and  as  there  are  still  many  im- 
portant propositions  connected  with  these  sub- 
jects, upon  your  table,  I  propose  now,  sir,  by 
the  indulgence  of  the  convention,  to  say  all  I 
have  to  say,  in  regard  to  them;  and  if  I  sliould 
not  confine  myself  to  the  immediate  subject  of 
discussion  now  pending,  I  shall  at  least  not 
wander  further  from  the  issue  than  has  been  cus- 
tomary with  all  who  have  preceded  me  in  the 
discus.sion  of  the  great  questions  to  which  I  pro- 
pose addressing  myself. 

The  resolutions  of  the  delegate  from  Madison, 
(Mr.  Turner) — the  preamble  and  resolution  of 
the  delegate  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,)  and 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  slavery,  present 
four  practical  questions. 

First,  is  it  expedient  to  invest  the  legislature 
with  the  power  to  emancipate  slaves  hereafter  in 
Kentucky,  under  any  circumstances,  without 
the  consent  of  the  owner?  Secondly,  the  expe- 
diency being  granted,  have  we  the  right  and 
power  to  do  so?  Thirdly,  has  the  master  the 
same  perfect  right,  in  the  offspring  of  his  slaves, 
that  he  has  to  those  in  esse?    And  fourthly,  the 

f)ropriety  of  incorporating  the  provisions  of  the 
aw  of  1833,  in  the  amended  constitution,  is 
presented. 

The  foregoing  questions  have  been  extensively 
discussed  by  delegates  upon  this  floor,  as  well 
as  the  abstract  proposition,  is  slavery  right  and 
proper  in  and  of  itself? 


^ft 


-  v^hat  the  kgulatur«  ought  to  have  the  pow«r 
to  emancipate  slaves  without  the  consent  of  their 
owners,  I  have  no  doubt,  and  I  shall,  with- 
out any  hesitancy,  vote  to  give  it  the  power — 
first,  because  I  believe  it  to  be  right;  and  sec- 
ondly, because  I  regard  it  as  essential  to  the  re- 
ception and  ratification  of  any  constitution  we 
may  make,  by  the  people. 

A  great  many  considerations  have  brought  my 
mind  to  the  conclusions  just  indicated — a  few 
of  them  I  propose  submitting  to  the  convention. 
In  the  first  place,  the  power  is  delegated  in 
the  present  constitution,  and  I  do  not  believe 
that  the  people  have  demanded  any  change. 

The  first  clause  of  the  first  section  of  the 
eighth  article  of  the  existing  constitution,  reads: 
.  "  The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves, 
without  the  consent  of  their  owners,  or  without 
paying  their  owners,  previous  to  such  emanci- 
pation, a  full  equivalent  in  money  forthe  slaves 
so  emancipated." 

As  the  power  lias  been  lying  dormant  for  the 
last  fifty  years  in  the  constitution,  I  am  told  that 
time  has  demonstrated  that  there  is  no  necessity 
for  its  retention.  And  I  grant,  sir,  that  if  pub- 
lic sentiment  continues  in  Kentucky,  throughout 
all  coming  time,  as  it  now  is,  that  this,  as  well 
as  all  other  constitutional  provisions  having  the 
ultimate  extinction  of  slavery  in  view,  with 
great  propriety  might  be  omitted.  I  Avould  ask 
though,  what  assurances  we  have  that  such  will 
be  the  case?  How  do  we  know  that  the  succeed- 
ing generation  may  not  be  as  zealous  for  the  eX' 
termination  of  slavery  as  we  are  for  its  preser- 
vation? Liberty  has  one  day  in  France  been 
the  idol  of  every  heart,  and  in  its  defence  everv 
Frenchman  would  have  poured  out  his  blood. 
The  next,  the  same  same  precious  treasure,  with 
equal  devotion,  would  have  flowed  like  rivers  in 
the  effort  to  extinguish  the  hallowed  fires  of 
freedom  and  rivet  the  chains  of  tyranny,  oppres- 
sion, and  de.spotism.  Whether  Kentucky  is  des- 
tined at  any  time,  proximate  or  remote,  to  re- 
verse the  decision  recently  given  with  unparal- 
ed  unanimity,  in  favor  of  the  institution  of 
slavery,  time  alone  can  determine.  The  framers 
of  the  constitution  under  which  we  have  lived 
so  long,  and  under  the  influence  of  which  Ken- 
tucky has  acquired  her  world-wide  reputation, 
thought  that  the  day  might  come  when  policy 
and  interest,  as  well  as  humanity,  might  sanction 
emancipation.  And  if  it  were  not  so  much  out 
of  taste — if  the  sentiment  were  not  so  much  at 
war  with  that  breathed  by  all  who  have  prece- 
ded me  in  this  discussion,  I  would  venture  the 
expression  of  the  hope,  and  hazard  the  declara- 
tion of  the  opinion,  that  the  time  will  come 
when  all  who  have  been  cursed  and  devoted  to 
slavery,  ignorance,  and  degradation,  will  be 
banished  to  other  lands  and  other  climes,  more 
in  accordance  with  their  condition  than  Ken- 
tucky. 

Fifty  years  ago,  sir,  our  ancestrv  made  provi- 
sion for  emancipation,  to  the  full  extent  that  I 
propose  to  go  now.  All  I  wish  is,  to  give  to 
those  who  are  to  come  after  us  the  same  power 
to  judge  of,  and  act  in  reference  to,  this  matter, 
that  we  possess.  We  have  judged  of  the  pro- 
priety of  the  abolition  of  slavery,  and  have  de- 
cidea  it  to  suit  ourselves.    Let  us  leave  the 


same  high  privilege  to  our  children — let  us  eon- 
tent  ourselves  with  proclaiming  the  inalienalfla 
rights  of  freemen — let  us  endeavor  to  perpetuate 
liberty,  and  leave  slavery  to  perpetuate  itself. 

Suppose,  however,  sir,  that  we  take  from  the 
legislature  the  power  it  now  posst^sses  to  act  in 
reference  to  this  subject,  and  that  at  a  future  day 
the  voice  of  Kentucky  is  as  united  in  favor  of 
emancipation  as  it  now  is  against  it,  what  will 
be  the  effect?  Can  the  object,  even  then,  be  at- 
tained without  manifest  injustice  to  those  who 
then  own  slaves,  and  are  opposed  to  giving  them 
up  for  the  purposes  of  emancipation?  Clearly 
not;  and  for  the  plainest  and  most  palpable  rea- 
son :  it  would  be  violative  of  the  pledge  we  give 
the  slaveholder,  when  we  tell  him  that  his  slaves 
shall  not  be  taken  from  him  without  his  consent. 
Property  is  purchased,  inherited,  and  enjoyed, 
subject  to  the  existing  constitution  and  laws. 
The  laws  of  the  land  are  to  be  regarded  when 
we  atquire  property,  because  it  is  an  universal 
principle  of  law,  and  one  that  holds  in  every  ci- 
vilized state,  that  property  is  held  subject  to  the 
demands  of  law.  If  you  have  purchased  a 
slave,  sir,  since  1799,  at  the  time  you  made  the 
purchase  you  were  aware  that  the  legislature  had 
the  power  to  deprive  you  of  the  slave  so  pur- 
chased, by  paying  you  a  fair  equivalent  for  such 
slave.  And  if  the  legislature  should  think 
proper  to  purchase  and  emancipate  your  slaves, 
you  cannot,  in  justice,  complainof  the  act;  sim- 
ply because  all  slaves  have  been  acquired  and 
held  in  Kentucky  subject  to  the  exercise  of  the 
unlimited  discretion  of  the  legislature,  under 
the  clause  above  quoted.  Will  any  one  deny 
that  the  legislature  has  not  only  the  power,  but 
an  undisputed  constitutional  and  moral  right, 
to  take  all  of  our  slaves  from  us.  by  paying  us  a 
fair  compensation  for  them?  Certainly  no  one 
will  deny  the  power,  because  the  constitution 
guaranties  it  in  express  terms. 

For  a  single  moment  though,  sir,  let  us  sup- 
pose that  the  constitution  had  vested  no  such 
power  in  the  legislature,  and  that  without  the 
consent  of  the  owner  the  legislature  were,  in 
obedience  to  the  unmistakable  voice  and  wishes 
of  three-fourths  of  all  the  voters  in  Kentucky, 
to  pass  a  general  law,  emancipating  all  the  slaves 
in  the  state,  without  the  consent  of  the  owners, 
and  providing  for  the  prompt  payment  of  the 
proprietors  a  full  equivalent  for  every  slave 
emancipated,  I  ask  you,  sir,  and  I  put  the  ques- 
tion to  honorable  delegates,  if  the  equivalent 
Eaid  would  not  be  a  poor  compensation  for  the 
igh-handed  invasion  of  the  private  rights  of 
the  citizen  committed,  and  for  an  act  perpetrated 
directly  in  violation  of  the  plighted  faith  of  the 
government?  We  are  taught  to  love  and  respect 
the  government  of  our  country,  on  account  of 
its  justice  and  high  sense  of  honor,  and  because 
it  throws  the  broad  and  comprehensive  shield  of 
protection  over  and  around  the  life,  reputation, 
and  property  of  the  humblest  citizen. 

The  framers  of  the  present  constitution  thought 
it  not  improbable  that  their  descendants  might 
wish  to  abolish  slavery;  hence  they  vested  the 
legislature  with  the  power.  This  was  done,  sir, 
fifty  years  ago.  Shall  we,  instead  of  consum- 
mating the  object  they  had  in  view — instead  of 
advancing  the  cause  of  universal  liberty — de- 
stroy the  very  foundation  stone  of  emancipation 


869 


— strike  from  the  constitution  a  provision  that 
will  enable  the  legislature  to  carry  into  effect 
the  wishes  ol  the  people  without  doing  injus- 
tice to  any  one,  and  rivet  the  institution  of  slave- 
ry in  Kentucky  until  the  last  slaveholder  volun- 
tarily surrenders  him?  Shall  we  take  from  our 
children  the  power  and  right  to  judge  of  this 
matter  for  themselves,  and  give  liberty,  even  to 
slaves,  when  they  desire  to  do  so?  The  voice  of 
humanity  forbids  it,  religion  forbids  it,  interest 
forbids  it,  the  warning  voices  of  the  illustrious 
dead  forbid  it.  Thomas  Jefferson,  as  late  as  in 
1614,  in  a  letter  to  Edward  Coles,  says  : 

"  The  hour  of  emancipation  is  advancing  in 
the  march  of  time.  It  shall  have  all  my  prayers, 
and  these  are  the  only  weapons  of  an  old  man. 
It  is  an  encouraging  observation,  that  no  good 
measure  was  ever  proposed,  which  if  duly  pur- 
sued, failed  in  the  end." 

Patrick  Henry,  in  a  letter  to  R.  Pleasants, 
makes  the  following  prophecy  : 

"  The  time  will  come,  when  an  opportunity 
will  be  offered  to  abolish  this  lamentable  evil. 
I  shall  honor  the  Quakers,  for  their  noble  efforts 
to  abolish  slavery." 

Listen,  sir,  also,  to  the  language  of  Washing- 
ton himself.  In  a  letter  to  Robert  Pleasants,  lie 
says: 

"  There  is  not  a  man  living  who  wishes  more 
sincerely  than  I  do,  to  see  a  plan  adopted  for  the 
abolition  of  slavery;  but  there  is  only  one  prop- 
er and  effectual  mode  by  which  it  can  be  accom- 
plished, and  that  is  by  legislative  authority;  and 
this,  so  far  as  my  suffrage  will  go,  shall  not  be 
wanting."  In  a  letter  to  Sir  John  St.  Clair,  he 
also  uses  the  following  strong  and  decided  lan- 
guage :  "  I  never  mean,  unles.s  some  particular 
circumstances  should  compel  me  to  it,  to  possess 
another  slave,  by  purchase,  it  being  among  my 
first  wishes  to  see  some  plan  adopted,  by  which 
slavery,  in  this  country,  may  be  abolished  by 
law." 

Do  not  understand  me  sir,  as  favoring  emanci- 
pation at  this  time,  or  wishing  to  see  this  conven- 
tion intermeddling  with  it  in  any  manner  what- 
ever— far  from  it.  I  know  sir,  that  the  public 
mind  in  Kentucky  is  not  prepared  for  emancipa- 
tion, and  that  slavery  will  exist  among  us  until 
we  shall  be  thoroughly  satisfied  (I  mean  a  ma- 
jority of  the  people)  that  it  is  no  longer  the  in- 
terest of  the  state  to  uphold  it.  And  when 
that  time  does  come.  I  for  one,  do  not  wish  to  see 
injustice  done  the  slaveholder  by  taking  his 
property  from  him  without  constitutional  au- 
thority to  do  so,  nor  do  I  wish  to  see  him  hold- 
ing it  in  defiance  of  the  wishes  of  the  great  body 
of  the  people,  when  they  are  ready,  in  pursu- 
ance of  the  present  constitution,  to  pay  him  an 
ample  equivalent  therefor.  Whether  the  time 
will  ever  come,  when  the  power  desired  to  be 
conferred,  will  be  exercised,  no  one  can  tell ;  if  it 
never  does,  no  harm  can  result  from  it.  Anoth- 
er idea:  have  the  people  of  Kentucky  demanded 
that  the  constitution  shall  be  altered  in  the  man- 
ner  indicated?  I  think  not.  Public  sentiment, 
every  where,  among  the  warmest  pro-slavery 
men  in  my  region  of  country,  is  in  favor  of  al- 
lowing the  subject  of  slavery  to  remain  as  it  is 
at  present  in  the  constitution  ;  and  my  decided 
impression  is,  that  if  the  institution  of  slavery 
is  either  weakened  or  strengthened  by  os,  that 


all  we  do  will  b«  rejected  by  the  people  when  we 
submit  our  labors  to  them  for  final   ratification. 
Will  that  respectable  and  philanthropic  cla.ss  of 
our  fellow  citizens  who  so  much  desire  the  entire 
abolition  of  slavery,  rote  to  receive  our  amend- 
ed  constitution.    I  care  not  how  many  substan- 
tial reforms  may  be  inserted  bj'  us,  or  how  fullv 
they  may  concur  with  us  in  regard  to  their  ne- 
cessity, if  We  have  done  any  thing  which  may 
have  a  tendency  to  retard  emancipation,  and  cast 
more  insuperable  obstacles  in  the  way  of  the  fi- 
nal extinction  of  slavery  tlian   now   exist?     No 
one  can,  ought,  or  will  expect  it.      On  the  other 
hand.  Were  we  to  weaken  the  tenure  by   which 
slaves  are  held  and  enjoyed  as  property,  no  one 
could  expect  the  excited,  victorious  pro-slavery 
party  to  receive  it.     Xo  sir,  there  is  not   a  pro- 
slavery  man  in  Kentucky  who  would  vote  to  re- 
ceive the  amended  constitution,  were  we   to   in- 
flict the  slightest  blow  upon  the   institution  of 
slavery.     True  wisdom  then,  it  seems  to  me, 
ought  to  induce  us  to  allow  this  subject  to  rest 
where  we  found  it.    I  am  opposed  to  slaverv',  sir, 
as  much  as  any  man;  and  no  one  in  America 
would  feel  more  rejoiced  than  myself  to  see  the 
la.st  vestige  of  it  destroyed.     Yet  I  have  never 
seen  the  time,  and  I  never  expect  to  see  it,  when 
j  I  would  be  willing  to  see  the  legislature  paying 
i  for,  and  emancipating  the  slaves   of  Kentucky. 
i  The  condition   of  the  country  has  never  been 
I  such  as  to  justify  it,  and  I  think   it  probable  it 
j  will  not  be  for  a  great  while.      Yet,  sir,  as  sure 
i  as  time  la.sts,  and  our  free  institutions  last,  and 
j  we  continue  to  respect  the  christian  religion,  the 
I  time  will  come  when  it  will  be  considered  a  high 
I  privilege,  to   pay  for.   liberate,  and  send  from 
I  amongst  us,  every  slave  in  the  state.     But  I  am 
I  told  that  if  it  should  ever  become  expedient  to 
i  rid  the  country  of  slavery  by   paying  for  the 
'  slaves,  that  their  owners  will  conse'nt,  and  that 
j  unless  they  do,  no   stat«  of  the  case  whatever, 
'would justify  the  legislature  in  forcing  them  to 
give  uu  their  pioperty.     This  is  a  doctrine,  how- 
ever, that  I  can  never  subscribe  to,  and  one  which 
strikes  at  the  very  vitals  of  all   republican  gov- 
ernment.    The  doctrine  that  majorities  have  the 
right  to  rule,  within  the  limits  of  the  constitu- 
tion and  laws,  and  to  settle  the  public  policy  of 
every  free  government,  is  so  palpably  plain  and 
just,  that  it  need  but  be  stated,  to  be  sanctioned 
oy  all.    Have  gentlemen  reflected  for  what  they 
are  contending,  when  they  asSert  that  the  institu- 
tion of  slavery  shall  exist  until  the   masters  of 
all  the  slaves  in  the  state   consent  to  part  with 
them?    Six-sevenths  of  all  the  voters  of  Kentuc- 
ky are  non-slaveholders.     Shall  this  overwhelm- 
ing majority  agree  that  they'll  have  no  right  to 
have  any  part  or  lot  in  the  settlement  of  this  great 
question?     And  shall  one-seventh  of  the  voters 
of  Kentucky  arrogate  to  themselves  the  right,  re- 
gardless of  the  wishes   of  every  body  else,  to 
dictate  the  time  and  the  terms  upon  which  this 
great  question  shall  be  settled?      Yes  sir,  six  out 
j  of  every  seven  men  in  the  whole  state,  may  de- 
I  sire  to  put  an  end  to  the  institution  of  slaverv, 
;  yet  they  are  not  to  have  the  power  to  do  so.     One 
seventfi  of  the  voters  of  Kentucky   are  to  have 
more  power  than  six  sevenths.     This  is  republi- 
canism truly!     This  is  a  demonstration   of  the 
equal  rights  of  all,  in  our  free  and  highly  privi- 
leged country!    This  is  a  total  disregard,  in  Twr- 


S70 


Jtv,  of  a  property  qualification  lor  ihe  exercise 
of  political  rights!  A  man  must  own  slaves,  be- 
fore he  is  allowed  to  express  the  opinion  at  the 
polls,  that  slavery  is  wrong,  and  that  he  desires 
Jts  extermination!  Well,  I  have  heard  my  friend 
from  Plenry  (Mr.  Nuttall)  talking  a  good  deal 
about  slaveocracies;  but  if  this  is  not  practically 
one,  I  hope  one  may  never  be  found. 

The  foregoing  sentiments,  Mr.'  President,  I 
imbibed  in  early  life.  I  have  uniformly  main- 
tained them,  thus  far  in  my  career,  as  a  man,  as 
a  citizen,  and  as  a  politician  ;  and  they  shall 
never  leave  me  until  I  forget  the  regard  I  now 
have  for  the  equal  rights,  privileges,  and  im- 
munities of  my  fellow  countrymen. 

But,  sir,  I  have  other  reasons  for  supposing 
that  Kentucky  will  'ere  long  desire  the  extinc- 
tion of  8la%'ery,  and  hence,  I  am  for  the  retention 
of  the  clause  in  the  constitution  as  it  now  ex- 
ists. 

As  a  state,  Kentucky  has  as  much  reputation 
as  any  other,  for  her  enlightened  public  policy; 
and  she,  at  all  times,  has  been  devoted  to  her  in- 
terests, in  regani  to  every  thing  except  the  per- 
Eetuation  of  slavery ;  in  this  respect  she  has 
een  indulging  in  a  suicidal  policy,  and  one 
which  has  greatly  retarded  her  greatness,  her 
prosperity,  and  her  glory.  I  cannot  believe, 
however,  that  she  will  much  longer  persist  in 
her  course,  when  .slie  opens  her  eyes  to  manifest 
facts,  and  sees  that  her  interest  requires  a  change. 
Interestisa  magic  word — individuals,  states,  and 
nations  are  intluenced  by  it.  There  is  not  a 
Kentuckian  living,  who  does  not  desire  the  pros- 
perity and  advancement  of  his  country.  We  all 
feel  a  personal  devotion  to  our  titate,  and  desire 
to  see  her  true  glory  and  lasting  prosperity  pro- 
moted. "We  want  to  see  Kentucky,  as  she  de- 
serves to  be,  one  of  the  first  states  of  the  Union. 
Her  numbers,  her  wealth,  her  intelligence,  her 
prosperity,  and  her  happiness  are  subjects  dear 
to  the  heart  of  every  Kentuckian.  for  they  con- 
stitute the  true  elements  of  greatness.  And  I  am 
fully  satisfied  myself,  that  these  great  interests 
— these  elements  of  power  and  greatness,  must 
languish  and  suffer,  as  long  as  slavery  exists 
among  us;  and  when  a  majority  of  the  people 
of  Kentucky  concur  in  the  opinion,  shall  they 
not  have  the  power  to  act  and  pursue  that  course 
of  policy  which  they  deem  best  calculated  to  re- 
move the  evil,  and  benefit  the  state? 

I  hope  that  tiie  convention  will  bear  with  me 
for  a  short  time,  until  I  present  a  few  of  the 
facts  and  reasons  upon  wnich  the  opinion  is 
founded,  that  slavery  is  an  injury  to  us  as  a 
state,  and  consequently  that  those  who  come  af- 
ter us  will  desire  to  remove  it. 

Let  us  first  inquire  how  does  the  institution 
of  slavery  affect  the  population  of  Kentucky? 
For.  independent  of  numbers,  no  state  can  be 
said  to  be  great.  To  show  the  effect,  I  propose 
to  read  an  extract  from  an  address  recently  sub- 
raitte<l  to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  which  is 
familiar  to  us  all. 

"Virginia  has  a  larger  territory  than  New 
England ;  has  one  of  the  finest  climates,  one  of 
the  best  soils  on  tlie  continent,  and  is  rich  in 
raiueral  wealth.  And  yet  in  1840  the  popula- 
tion of  New  England  is  double  that  of  Virginia, 
including  her  slaves,  the  per  centag<^  of  increase 
during  the  last  fifty  years,  in  the  former,  with 


all  her  emigration,  having  been  twice  that  of  the 
latter." 

As  another  pregnant  proof  of  the  assertion 
that  slavery  is  a  drawback  upon  the  population 
of  the  state,  let  us  contrast  Ohio  and  Kentucky. 
Ohio,  sir,  sixty  years  ago,  was  the  home  of  the 
Indian — the  xinglo-American  had  not  penetra- 
ted and  settled  upon  her  bosom.  At  that  time, 
Kentucky  had  a  free  white  population  of  61,247, 
and  a  black  population  of  12,4.30 — making  her 
entire  population.  73,671.  But  what  do  we  sea 
in  1840?  Ohio  has  a  population  of  1,519,467— 
Kentucky  a  white  population  of  590,253,  and  a 
slave  population  of  182,258 — and  an  aggregate 
population  of  779,828,  including  free  negroes. 
What  a  contrast  in  sixty  years!  When  we  com- 
pare Kentucky  with  Indiana  or  Illinois,  the  same 
marked  difference  is  found  to  exist  in  popula- 
tion. 

But,  as  I  am  sure  all  will  admit  that  slavery 
has  been  a  serious  obstacle  to  the  increase  of  our 
population,  let  us  for  a  short  time  examine  the 
effects  slavery  has  had  upon  the  wealth  of  those 
states  in  which  it  exists;  and  we  can  only  do 
this  by  contrasting  the  slave  states,  and  Ken- 
tucky amongst  the  rest,  with  the  free.  I  find 
from  official  sources,  that  the  property  of  Ohio 
is  estimated  at  $421,067,991— that  of  Kentucky 
at  .$272,847,696— excess  in  favor  of  Ohio,  $148,- 
220,295;  and  if  wededuct  $76,000,000.  the  value 
of  the  slaves  in  Kentucky  at  $400  per  head,  it 
only  leaves  the  entire  wealth  ot  the  state,  .$224,- 
220,295.  Each  citizen  of  Ohio,  upon  an  aver- 
age, is  worth  $276 — in  Kentucky,  exclusive  of 
slaves,  $249.  Virginia,  Ave  have  stated,  is  larger 
than  all  New  England,  and  has  a  more  produc- 
tive soil,  and  greater  natural  advantages  for  agri- 
culture, and  all  the  elements  of  natural  great- 
ness. Yet  look  at  the  contrast  as  presented  by 
the  following  statistical  table: 

Virginia.  N.  England. 

18-JO.  1840. 
Capital  employed  in 

manufactures,  $11,360,861  $86,824,229 
Ciipital  employed  in 

foreign  commerce,  4,299,500  19,467,793 
Capital  employed  in 

fisheries,       -       -             28,.383  14,691,291 

Banking  capital,   -         3,6.37,400  62,1.34,850 

Agricultural  products,  59,085,821  74,749,8t9 

In  1840,  the  annual  agricultural  products  of 
the  south  were  estimated  at  $312,380,151— those 
of  the  free  states,  at  $342,007,446.  Yet  in  the 
south  there  Were  1,984.886  persons  engaged  in 
apiculture,  and  in  the  north  only  1,735,086. 
1  he  cotton,  sugar,  rice,  and  tobacco,  the  chief 
products  of  southern  labor,  exported  to  foreign 
countries,  as  shown  by  the  census  of  1840,  were 
valued  at  $74,866,310— the  single  state  of  New 
York  exported  agricultural  products  to  the  value 
of  $108,275,281.  Here  we  see  that  the  agricul- 
tural exports  from  a  single  free  state  in  1840, 
exceeds  the  exports  from  all  the  south,  in  value, 
$23,408,971.  The  south,  in  1840,  manufactured 
articles  to  the  value  of  $42,178,184— the  free 
states  to  the  value  of  $197,658,040:  The  joint 
earnings  of  all  the  slave  states  was  $403,429,718 
—of  the  free,  $658,705,108.  The  annual  earn- 
ings of  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Oeoi^ 
gia,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Louisian«, 
amount  to  $189,321,719— those  of  the  state -^if 


871 


New  York  to  193,506,433 — exccediug  more  than  I 
four  millions  the  income  of  six  ?reat  southern 
states.     The  annual  earnings  of  Massachusetts  i 
alone,  are  more  than  $9,000,000  greater  than  the 
united  earnings  ol  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  | 
Florida.     The  earnings  of  South  Carolina,  with 
a  population   of  549,389,  is  about  equal  to  that 
of  the  county  of  Essex  in  Massachusetts,  with  a 
population   of  less  than  95,000.     (See  Parkers! 
letter  to  the  people  of  the  United  States.)  j 

I  will  again  read  extracts  taken  from  a  late  ad-  i 
dress  to  the  people  of  Kentucky:  "Ohio  pos- 
sesses double  the  agricultural  wealth  of  Ken- 
tucky. Her  Indian  com  and  wheat  alone,  are 
worth  the  whole  of  the  products  of  Kentucky. 
The  aggregate  value  of  all  the  products  of  Ken- 
tucky, exceed  by  one-fourth  only  the  value  of 
the  simple  article  of  hay  in  Ohio."  Sir,  I  need 
make  no  comments  upon  the  facts  just  exhibi- 
ted. We  all  can  but  see  that  slavery  has  retard- 
ed our  wealth  as  much  as  our  population. 

I  propose  now,  to  examine  the  influence  .slave- 
ry has  nad  upon  popular  intelligence  in  Ken- 
tucky. And.  sir,  dark  as  the  pictures  just  drawn 
may  appear — as  humiliating  to  our  pride  as  they 
shoxild  be — they  are  bright,  dazzling,  glorious 
pictures  for  us,  when  contrasted  with  the  one 
that  facts,  ah!  sir,  stubborn  facts,  compel  me  to 
present  now. 

The  census  of  1840  shows  that  in  the  fifteen 
slave  states  and  territories,  there  were  at  the  va- 
rious primary  schools,  201,085  scholars;  at  the 
primarv  schools  in  the  free  states,  there  were 
l,626,0iS8  scholars.  The  single  state  of  Ohio 
had  at  her  primarj'  schools  218,609  scholars; 
17,524  more  than  all  of  the  slave  states!  South 
Carolina  had  12,520— New  York,  502,367.  In 
the  high  schools,  there  were  in  tne  .south  35,935 
scholars  at  the  public  charge — in  the  north, 
432,388  similar  sc-holars.  Virginia,  the  largest 
of  all  the  slave  states,  had  9,791  such  scholars — 
Rhode  Island,  the  smallest  of  the  free  states, 
10,749.  Massachusetts  alonehad  158,.351 — more 
than  four  times  as  many  as  all  the  slave  states. 
In  the  slave  states,  at  academies  and  grammar 
schools,  there  were  52,906  scholars — in  the  free 
states,  97,174.  In  the  slave  states,  there  are  I 
1 ,368,325  free  white  children,  between  the  ages 
of  five  and  twenty — in  the  free  states,  3,536,666 
such  children.  In  the  slave  states,  at  schools 
and  colleges,  there  are  301,172  pupils — in  the 
free  states,  2,213,444  pupils  at  schools  and  colle- 
ges. Thus  in  the  slave  states,  out  of  twenty-five 
free  white  children,  between  five  and  twenty, 
there  are  not  five  at  school  or  college;  while  out 
of  twenty-five  such  children  in  the  free  states, 
there  are  more  than  fifteen  at  school  or  college. 
In  the  slave  states,  of  the  free  white  population 
over  twentv-one  years  of  age,  there  is  almost 
one-tenth  tLat  are  unable  to  read  and  write; 
while  in  the  free  states  there  is  not  quite 
one  in  one  hundred  and  fifty -six  who  is  deficient 
to  that  degree.     (See  Parker's  address.) 

I  desire,  sir,  that  Kentuckians  may  consider 
and  ponder  well  the  facts  connected  with  the  in- 
stitution of  slavery.  And  if  the  voice  of  Ken- 
tucky is  destine<i  to  \)e  forever  on  the  side  of  an 
institution  that  atfccLs  her  population,  her  wealth, 
«Qd  her  intelligence,  as  1  have  shown  slavery 
does,  why,  sir,  all  I  have  to  say  i»,  "ier  will, 
not  mine,  be  done." 


But,  Mr.  President,  we  have  been  repeatedly 
told  during  this  discussion  that  slavery  is  aji 
unmixed  blessing — an  institution  of  Heaven — 
and  its  endless  perpetuity  is  ardently  praved  for 
by  the  delegates  from  Simpson,  Jeflfefson,  llenry, 
<fcc.  I  mu.<t  be  pardoned  for  entering  my  solemn 
protest  against  these  new,  and  as  I  must  be  per- 
mitted to  say,  with  all  imaginable  deference, 
abominable  doctrines.  I  boldly  proclaimed 
whilst  I  was  canvassing  before  the  people  for  the 
seat  I  now  occupy,  that  I  regarded  slavery  in 
and  of  itself  an  evil,  but  thai  I  was  for  taking 
no  violent  steps  to  rid  the  country  of  it;  that 
time  must  solve  the  great  question,  how  is  the 
country  to  be  rid  of  slaverj*?  And  I  now  pro- 
pose to  do  nothing  sir,  but  to  call  public  atten- 
tion to  this  matter.  I  intend  to  give  Jio  vote,  or 
do  any  act  to  the  injury  of  a  slaveholder  in  Ken- 
tucky. But,  sir,  when  I  am  required  to  recog- 
nize slavery  as  a  divine  institution,  and  to  sing 
its  praises,  I  rebel;  and  when  I  am  required  to 
go  further  than  our  fathers  went,  to  provide  for 
the  protection  and  perpetuation  of  the  institu- 
tion, I  will  not  do  it.  And  I  had  thought,  sir, 
until  this  subject  was  discus.sed  some  weeks  ago 
in  this  convention,  that  there  w^as  scarcely  a 
man  in  all  Kentucky,  who  diifered  with  me, 
provided  he  were  a  pro-slavery- man.  Audi 
would  like  to  know  the  antiquity  and  origin  of 
the  idea  in  this  country,  that  slavery  is  a  bless- 
ing socially  or  politically.  Such  sir,  was  not  the 
opinion  of  the  fathers  of  the  republic,  because 
their  speeches  and  writings  aU  go  to  show  that 
they  regarded  it  in  a  diflferent  light,  and  looked 
forward  to  the  day  when  itshould  be  annihilated. 
Xeed  I  adduce  evidence  of  this?  If  so  it  is  at 
hand,  and  I  will  read  from  the  speeches  and 
writings  of  the  most  prominent  of  our  disting- 
uished ancestry,  as  a  set  off  against  the  speeches 
and  opinions  of  those  who  have  expressed  dif- 
ferent views  during  this  diseu.ssion.  And  I 
hope,  that  when  I  say  that  the  moral  perception 
of  a  Wesley,  a  Henry,  a  Mason,  aPinckney,  and 
a  Jefiferson,  as  well  as  their  political  sagacity, 
were  quite  equal  to,  and  is  still  as  high  authori- 
ty with  me  as  the  opinions  of  a  Talbott,  a  Clarke, 
a  Bullitt,  and  a  jfuttall,  that  the  remark  will 
not  be  considered  as  a  disparagement,  notwith- 
standing the  progress  we  have  made  in  the 
science  of  government,  religion,  <fec.,  since  their 
day.  John  Wesley  in  a  letter  to  Wilberforce. 
dated  24th  February,  1791,  says:  "Be  not 
weary  of  well  doing.  Go  on  in  the  name  of 
God,  and  in  the  power  of  his  might,  till  even 
American  slavery,  the  vilest  that  ever  saw  the 
sun,  shall  vanish  away  before  it."  It  would 
seem  that  Mr.  Wesley,  o'ne  of  the  ablest  theolo- 
gians the  world  has  ever  produced,  differed  in 
opinion  with  our  political  theologians  as  to  the 
divinity  of  this  institution,  and  that  he  at  least 
did  not  regard  it  as  flourishing  under  the  ap- 
proving smiles  of  God.  For  he  exhorts  Wilber- 
force to  go  on,  and  in  the  name  of  God  and  in 
the  power  of  his  might,  till  slavery  sho\ild  van- 
ish away  before  it.     Says  Wilberforce: 

"Never  was  a  system  so  big  with  wickedness 
and  cruelty.  In  whatever  part  of  it  yoii  direct 
your  view,  the  eye  finds  no  relief.  Slavery  is 
the  /uU  measure  of  pure,  unmixed,  unsophisti- 
cated wickedness;  and  scorning  all  competition 
and    compari.*on,  it  stands  without  a  rival  in 


^72 


the  secure,  nnflisputeJ  possession  of  its  detest- 
able pre-eminence." 

Says  Paley:  "Slavery  is  a  dominion  and 
system  of  laws  the  most  merciless  and  tyranni- 
cal that  men  ever  tolerated." 

Says  Breckinridge:  "Just  and  equal!  What 
care  1,  whether  my  pockets  are  picked  or  the 
proceeds  of  my  labor  taken  from  me?  The  man 
■who  cannot  see  that  involuntary  domestic  slave- 
ry, as  it  exists  among  us,  is  founded  upon  the 
principle  of  taking  by  force  that  whicn  is  an- 
other's, has  simply  no  moral  sense — nature  and 
reason,  and  religion  unite  in  their  hostility  to 
this  system  of  folly  and  crime." 

These  men  did  not  regard  slavery  sir,  as  my 
friends  from  Boyle,  (Mr.  Talbott,)  and  Jefferson, 
(Mr.  Bullitt)  do",  as  one  of  God's  favorite  institu- 
tions; but  rather  sir,  as  the  object  of  his  wrath, 
and  meriting  the  execrations  of  man. 

President  Monroe  in  a  speech  in  the  Virginia 
convention  says: 

"We  have  found  that  this  evil  has  preyed  upon 
the  verv  vitals  of  the  Union.    It  has  been  pre- 
judicial to  all  the  states  in  which  it  has  existed." 
Says   William    Pinkney  in  a  speech  in  the 
Maryland  House  of  Delegates,  in  1789: 

"Never  will  our  country  be  productive,  never 
will  its  agriculture,  its  commerce  or  its  manu- 
factures, ifourish  so  long  as  they  depend  upon 
reluctant  bondmen  for  their  progress.  '  Even  the 
earth,'  says  Montesquieu,  'which  teems  with  pro 
fusion  under  the  cultivating  hand  of  the  free 
laborer,  shrinks  into  barrenness  from  the  con- 
taminating sweat  of  the  slave.'  This  sentiment 
is  not  more  figuratively  beautiful  than  substan- 
tially just." 

Mr.  Custis  in  a  speech  in  the  Virginia  legisla- 
ture in  1832,  says: 

"  There  is  a  malaria  in  the  atmosphere  of 
slavery.  See  the  wide  spreading  ruin  which  the 
avarice  of  our  ancestral  government  has  pro- 
duced in  the  south,  as  witnessed  in  a  sparce 
population  of  freemen,  deserted  habitations,  and 
fields  without  culture.  Strange  to  tell,  even 
the  wolf,  driven  back,  long  since  by  the  ap- 
proach of  man,  now  returns,  after  the  lapse  of 
an  hundred  years,  to  howl  over  the  desolations 
of  slavery." 

Says  Thomas  Jefferson : 

"Indeed  I  tremble  for  my  country,  when  I 
reflect  that  God  is  just,  and  that  his  justice  can- 
not sleep  forever.  Doubtless  a  God  of  justice 
■will  awake  to  their  (the  slaves')  distress,  and  by 
diffusing  a  light  and  liberality  among  their  op- 
pressors, or  at  length  by  his  exterminating  thun- 
der, manifest  his  attention  to  the  things  of  this 
■world,  and  that  they  are  not  left  to  the  guidance 
of  blind  fatality."     Notes  on  Virginia. 

But  say  gentlemen,  slavery  protects  the  me- 
chanics of  the  countiy  and  the  laboring  poor 
generally,  because  if  the  .slaves  were  driven 
away  the  Irish  and  Dutch,  Ac,  would  overrun 
the  country.  Mr.  President,  I  deny  that  the  in- 
stitution of  slavery  is  of  service  to  the  laboring 
population.  I  might  adduce  thousands  of  argu- 
ments going  to  show  that  so  far  from  benefiting, 
it  is  ruinous  to  them.  Who  so  competent,  how- 
ever, sir,  as  the  working  men  ana  mechanics 
themselves,  to  judge  of  this  malt«r.  It  is  not 
the  interest  Of  the  slavebolder  fo  study  the  in- 
terest of  th«  non  slaveholder  or  laboring  man  in 


reference  to  this  matter.  Hence  sir,  I  will  not 
receive  their  evidence  as  authority;  but  let  those 
who  have  studied,  suffered  by,  and  who  have 
practically  felt  the  evils  resulting  therefrom  be 
heard-r-and  I  must  here  be  permitted  to  say,  sir, 
that  I  would  not  give  the  opinions  and  judgment 
of  one  intelligent,  reflecting  mechanic  upon  this 
subject,  for  the  speculations  and  theories  of  a 
thousand  men,  who  are  wedded  by  interest,  edu- 
cation, and  association  to  the  institution.  Read 
the  following  resolution  embodying  the  deliber- 
ate sentiments  of  many  most  worthy  and  intel- 
ligent working  men  and  mechanics  of  Louisville, 
and  we  will  then  see  to  what  extent  the  asser- 
tions of  gentlemen  upon  this  subject  are  corrobo- 
rated by  those  who  best  understood  their  interests. 
"Resolved,  That  the  institution  of  slavery  is 
prejudicial  to  every  interest  of  the  state,  and  is 
aliKc  injurious  to  theslaveholder,  and  non-slave- 
holder ;  that  it  degrades  labor,  enervates  indus- 
try, interferes  with  the  occupations  of  free  la- 
boring citizens,  separates  too  widely  the  poor 
and  the  rich,  shuts  out  the  laboring  classes  from 
the  blessings  of  education,  and  tends  to  drive 
from  the  state,  all  who  depend  upon  manual  la- 
bor for  support." 

I  have  shown  that  the  fathers  of  the  republic 
looked  forward  to  the  end  of  slavery — that  our 
population  is  retarded  by  it — that  our  wealth,  as 
a  state  in  consequence  of  it,  is  not  half  as  great 
as  it  otherwise  would  have  been — that  the  intel- 
ligence of  the  country  has  suffered  and  languish- 
ed beneath  its  influences — and  that  when  it  is 
abolished,  religion  has  suffered  no  injury,  and 
that  the  church  need  not  put  on  the  weeds  of 
mourning,  provided  a  Wiloerforce,  or  a  Wesley 
understood  her  true  interests  and  her  true  glory  ; 
these  things  all  considered,  and  many  others 
which  I  would  like  to  present  if  I  had  time,  I 
am  fully  persuaded  that  it  is  expedient  to  make 
no  alterations  in  reference  to  the  power  the  gen- 
eral as.sembly  now  has  over  the  subject. 

I  propose  now  sir,  to  examine,  for  a  short  time, 
the  question  of  power  presented  in  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  delegate  from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dix- 
on.) The  gentleman  denies  positively,  that  we 
have  any  power  or  right  to  delegate  to  the  legis- 
lature upon  this  subject. 

The  present  constitution  declares  that  "no 
person  shall,  for  the  same  offence,  be  twice  put 
in  jeopardy  of  his  life  or  limb;  nor  shall  any 
man's  property  be  taken  or  applied  to  public 
use  without  the  consent  of  his  representatives, 
and  without  just  compensation  being  previously 
made  to  him."  See  sec.  12  art.  10. 

The  clause  just  (juotcd,  it  has  been  contended 
in  the  course  of  this  debate,  and  particularly  by 
the  very  distinguished  delegate  from  Henderson, 
is  to  be  considered  as  a  contract  between  the 
state  and  the  citizen,  and  that  we,  by  a  fair  con- 
struction of  that  clause  of  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States,  which  declares  that  iio  state 
shall  pass  "any  expoat  facto  law,  orlaw  imparing 
the  obligation  of  contracts,"  and  a  just  appli- 
cation of  the  decision  of  the  supreme  court,  in 
the  case  of  Fletcher  against  PecK,  are  precluded 
from  emancipating  slaves  ourselves,  or  delegat- 
ing the  power  to  llie  legislature.  Now,  without 
stopping  to  analize  the  clause  of  the  federal  con- 
stitution, or  the  decision  of  the  court  just  refered 
to,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  their  applica- 


•73 


bility  to  the  right*  and  powers  of  the  state  and 
oitixeii,  let  me  enquire  if  a  lawyer  can  be  found 
ID  Kentucky,  who  will  not  at'  once  admit  that 
the  first  section  of  the  seventh  article  removes 
all  doubt  upon  the  subject,  and  wholly  demol- 
ishes the  specious  and  ingenious  argument  of 
the  gentleman,  for  it  declares  expressly  that  the 
legislature  has  the  power. 

I  submit  it  to  the  convention  however,  sir,   if 
the  construction  is  not  a  forced   one,  put  by  the 

fentleman  upon  the  constitution  of  the  United 
tates,  and  tne  decision  refered  to  under  its  auth- 
ority? But  grant  that  the  clause  just  quoted 
does  constitute  a  contract,  as  the  gentleman  con- 
tends, how  long  is  that  contract  to  last?  How 
is  it  to  be  avoided?  Or  is  it,  as  the  arguments  of 
the  gentleman  indicate,  to  last  forever,  notwith- 
standing, by  the  express  stipulations  contained 
in  it,  there  is  a  certain  method  pointed  out  by 
which  said  contract  is  to  be  altered,  changed, 
and  made  tosuitthewant^,  interests,  and  feelings 
of  both  the  high  contracting  parties?  Xowthat 
the  contract  entered  into  by  the  mutual  consent 
of  the  parties,  has  also  by  like  mutual  consent 
been  submitted  to  this  convention  for  "altera- 
tion, amendment  and  revision,"  and  all  power 
that  the  original  parties  thereto  possessed  dele- 
gated to  it,  the  discovery  is  made  that  the 
E resent  constitution  is  still  a  sacred  compact,  and 
inding  upon  both  parties  thereto  irrevocably 
for  some  purposes  at  least.  Xow,  if  it  be  re- 
strictive in  some  things,  why  not  in  every  thing? 
Where  is  this  doctrine  to  stop?  Why  is  it,  that 
the  right  to  hold  and  enjoy  slaves  is  more  pecu- 
liarly and  specifically  protected  than  any  other 
of  tfie  many  political  and  civil  rights  of  the 
citizen?  If  this  right  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  con- 
tract and  protected  by  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States  and  the  decision  of  the  supreme 
court,  I  ask  the  gentleman  if  every  single  right 
guarantied  by  the  present  constitution  on  the 
part  of  the  state  to  the  citizen,  is  not  also  a  con- 
tract according  to  the  same  rule  of  construction. 


I  had  thought,  sir,  with  th«  rary  distinguiah 
ed  delegate  from  Nelson,  until  the  meeting  of 
the  convention,  that  when  we  assembled  here, 
we  would  be  restricted  by  nothing  save  the  con- 
stitution, treaties,  and  laws  of  the  national 
government — that  we  were  sovereign,  except  so 
far  as  express  limitations  and  restrictions  were 
placed  upon  our  action,  in  tenns,  and  not  by 
implication.  And  I  know  of  no  provision  of 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  or  of  any 
treaty  or  law,  that  denies  the  power,  as  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson  supposed.  I  admit  that 
the  legislature  has  not  the  power  to  emancipate 
slaves,  independent  of  the  express  right  given 
in  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  I  agree 
that  if  it  were  not  for  the  power  delegated  in 
express  terms,  that  its  exercise  would  not  only 
be  an  outrage  upon  the  tenure  of  property,  but 
might  be  with  justice  regarded  as  an  infringe- 
ment of  the  federal  constitution— and  for  the 
plainest  of  all  reasons,  the  legislature  only  en- 
joys delegated  powers.  It  can  only  do  what  we 
authorize  it  to  do.  We  are  soTereign.  We  are 
exercising  unrestricted  and  unlimited  powers, 
except  so  far  as  I  have  stated  the  exceptions. 
And  can  not  gentlemen  see  this  difference  be- 
tween the  rights  and  powers  of  this  convention, 
and  the  rights  and  powers  of  the  legislature? 
The  legislature  are  limited  and  circumscribed 
by  the  constitution  of  Kentucky— they  have  to 
support  it — they  take  an  oath  to  do  'so.  The 
contract  between  the  citizens  and  the  state  is  to 
be  respected  and  strictly  regarded  by  the  legis- 
lature. But  I  ask  gentlemen  to  tell  me  what  ef- 
ficacy there  is  in  the  constitution  of  Kentucky 
to  resist  this  convention?  Absolutely  there  is  no 
contract  now  existing  between  the  state  and  the 
citizens  to  be  protected  by  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States.  If  so  I  cannot  see  it.  I 
know  not  where  to  find  it.  I  know  that  if  the 
constitution  of  Kentucky  is  the  depository  of 
that  contract,  that  both 'of  the  parties  thereto 
have  rescinded,  or  given  us  the  full  power  to 


and  equally  secure  under  the  protecting  jegis  :  rescind  it.  If  these  great  rights  contended  for, 
of  the  federal  constitution?  Most  assuredly  no  i  »re  derived  from  the  constitution  of  Kentucky, 
distinction  can  be   drawn.     As   an  illustra'tion.  |  ^pd  gentlemen  say  that  they  are,  it  occurs  to  me 


Suppose  the  convention  should  declare,  in  the 
amended  constitution  that  no  citizen  shall  here- 
after be  eligible  to  a  seat  in  the  lower  branch  of 
the  state  legislature  until  he  arrives  at  the  age 
of  thirty  years. 

Now,  1  ask  if  such  an  alteration  of  the  pres- 
ent constitution  would  not  be  equally  violative 
of  the  rights  of  the  citizen,  and  equally  an  in- 
fringement of  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States?  The  contract  between  the  state  and  all 
of  her  free  white  citizens,  is  that  at  an  earlier  age 
than  thirty  they  shall  be  eligible  to  a  seat  in  one 
branch  of  the  state  legislature.  This  is  a  very 
precious  right.  Bv  its  guaranty  to  the  citizens 
of  other  states,  under  few  other  restrictions,  we 
have  lured  them  to  Kentucky.  We  have  assured 
them  by  an  express  provision  of  our  organic 
law,  that  they  shall  be  entitled  to  the  political 
privilege  just  indicated;  and  I  now  put  it  to  the 
convention,  if  we  were  to  extend  the  time  or 
residence,  or  require  greater  maturity  of  years, 
if  we  would  not  evidently  infringe  upon  the  eon- 
tract  entered  into  with  him,  and  incur  the  high 
crime  of  a  violation  of  the  constitution  of  the 
IJnited  States? 

110 


sir,  that  when  the  constitution  giving  the  rights 
is  itself  destroyed  in  the  manner  designated  by 
those  who  formed  it,  that  those  rights  that 
sprang  from  and  were  supported  by  it,  and  by  it 
alone,  must  have  passed  awav  also.  It  seems  to 
me  to  be  more  plain  and  explicit,  that  those  who 
regard  the  right  to  hold  slaves  as  a  contract  em- 
braced in  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  and 
who  admit  that  we  have  the  same  unres'tricted 

Eowers  that  the  convention  of  1799  had.  are  also 
ound  to  admit  tliat  the  contract  no  longer  ex- 
ists, because  we  have  now  surrendered  into  our 
hands  all  the  rights  of  the  government  and  the 
people  of  Kentucky  that  they  possessed  before 
and  at  the  time  of  the  creation  of  the  constitu- 
tion, and  the  contract  contended  for.  The  "•ov- 
emment  has  surrendered  into  our  hands  alf  the 
power  delegated  to  it  by  the  constitution,  and 
the  people  have  clothed  us  with  their  own  un- 
limited sovereignty,  reserving  nothing  which 
they  themselves  possessed.  Where  then,  1  ask 
is  this  great  contract  about  which  so  much  has 
been  said,  and  for  the  preservation  of  which 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States  is  so  zeal- 
ously invoked?    I  call  upon  gentlemen  to  show 


S74 


it  to  me — and  what  do  I  see?  A  clause  of  a 
constitution  that  no  longer  has  vitality  in  it,  and 
over  which  we  have  as  ample  control,  collec- 
tively, representing  the  sovereignty  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Kentucky,  as  we  as  individuals  have 
over  our  persons  in  a  state  of  nature.  Talk  not 
to  me  any  lono;er  about  the  preservation  of  that 
that  has  no  existence — tliat  has  been,  by  the  only 
competent  power,  destroyed  and  thrown  into 
its  original  elements,  and  which  may  be  mould- 
ed and  fashioned  as  we  think  proper. 

The  convention,  Mr.  President,  will  perceive 
that  I  have  discussed  together,  to  some  extent, 
the  questions  of  expediency  and  power-  I  will 
amplify  no  further,  leaving  the  convention,  the 
country,  and  posterity,  to  judge  of  the  correct- 
ness of  the  arguments  and  opinions  advanced. 

I  come  now,  Mr.  President,  to  examine,  for  a 
single  moment,  the  proposition,  that  the  slave- 
holder has  the  same  perfect  right  to  the  offspring 
of  slaves  yet  unborn,  that  he  has  to  those  now  in 
being.  There  are  perfect  and  inchoate  rights 
recognized  by  law,  and  many  material  and  im- 
portant diflferences  now  exist,  and  still  more  may 
DC  made  to  exist  between  them,  without  any  vi- 
olation of  the  individual  rights  of  the  citizen. 
If  I  have  a  moneyed  capital,  for  instance,  I  have 
a  perfect  right  thereto,  and  no  convention  or  le- 
gislature, without  manifest  injustice,  can  de- 
{)rive  me  of  it.  I  now  have  the  legal  right  to 
oan  my  money  and  collect  six  per  cent,  interest 
by  law,  for  its  use.  I  ask  you,  now,  if  there  is 
no  difference  between  the  right  to  the  capital, 
and  the  interest  accruing  therefrom?  The  capi- 
tal I  have — independent  of  law — a  natural  right 
to;  the  interest  is  given  me  by  operation  of  law, 
as  well  as  the  right  to  coerce  principal  and  in- 
terest, when  payment  is  refused.  The  power  to 
abolish  the  remedy  for  the  collection  of  debts 
exists  in,  and  may  be  exercised  by,  the  sove- 
reign power  of  all  governments  at  will.  The 
regulation  of  interest  is  a  subject  over  which  the 
sovereign  power  has  undoubted  control.  Public 
policy  must,  as  a  matter  of  course,  determine  the 
rat«  of  interest  in  all  governments.  Who  will 
deny  the  power  of  this  convention  to  authorize 
the  legislature  to  increase  or  diminish  the  rate  of 
interest,  or  to  abolish  it  altogether?  If  you  ad- 
mit this  power,  it  occurs  to  me  that  you  also  ad- 
mit the  power  of  this  convention  to  provide  that 
all  slaves  born  after  a  certain  age,  snail  !>€  free. 
The  same  argument  applies  to  the  future  profits 
resulting  from  the  increase  of  slaves,  tliat  is  ap- 
plicable to  the  regulation  of  interest.  Public 
policy  must  determine  both  subjects;  and  the 
power  to  determine  the  one  is  as  plenary  as  the 
other.  If  you  lessen  the  rate  of  interest  you  in- 
jure the  money  lender — if  you  take  away  the  in- 
crease of  a  man's  slaves  you  injure  the  slave- 
holder. I  do  not  desire  this  convention  to  do 
either;  and  I  would  not,  for  all  the  gold  in  Cali- 
fornia, vote  to  insert  a  clause  providing  for  im- 
mediate or  gradual  emancipation  in  the  consti- 
tution; because  I  have  promised  not  to  do  so, 
and  because  the  voice  of  Kentucky  is  against  it 
But  there  is  a  great  difference  between  the  exer- 
cise of,  and  the  possession  of  a  power.  I  assert 
that  we  have  full  power  to  emancipate  all  slaves 
hereafter  born  in  Kentucky,  or  to  delegate  the 
but  I  will  vote  to  do 
V*  have  full  power 


power  to  do  so  elsewhere, 
neither.    I  hold,  also,  that 


to  emancipate  all  daves  now  in  Kentucky,  by 
paying  their  owners  for  them,  and  to  emancipate 
all  born  hereafter  without  paying  for  them.  But, 
sir,  I  will  not  vote  to  do  either.  The  reasons 
have  been  incidentally  given. 

I  come  now,  sir,  to  notice  for  a  short  time  the 
law  of  1833,  which  prohibits  the  importation  of 
slaves  into  Kentucky  from  sister  states  and  from 
foreign  governments  under  certain  restrictions 
and  penalties,  and  the  propriety  of  inserting  that 
law,  or  the  spirit  of  its  provisions  in  the  amend- 
ed constitution.  The  objects  of  the  law  of  1833 
were  manifold — first,  to  prevent  the  increase  of 
slaves,  and  particularly  badslaves,in  Kentucky. 
Secondly,  to  stop  the  trade  in  slave  property 
that  was  going  on  between  our  citizens  and  tiie 
south.  Thirdly,  to  receive  money  in  exchange  for 
our  surplus  products  instead  of  negroes.  The 
foregoing  were  among  the  chief  reasons  offered 
in  support  of  the  law  in  question  at  the  time  of 
its  enactment,  and  in  support  of  it  whenever  an 
attempt  was  made  to  repeal  it.  They  are  argu- 
ments which  address  themselves  to  the  mind  and 
conscience  of  every  man,  and  seem  to  have  met 
with  the  approbation  and  approval  of  the  peo- 

{)le  of  Kentucky  for  sixteen  consecutive  years — 
ong  enough  to  have  impressed  every  body  with  the 
conviction  that  the  law  in  question  reflected  the 
settled  policy  and  wishes  of  our  people  in  refer- 
ence thereto.  And  I  now  suppose  that  few  men 
can  be  found  who  are  not  in  favor  of  fostering 
the  vital  principles  of  the  act  of  1833,  because 
all  of  us  nave  seen  the  good  effects  resulting 
from  it — all  of  us  fully  concur  in  the  wisdom 
and  philanthropy  of  its  provisions.  These  mat- 
ters, however  sir,  have  been  so  repeatedly  the 
subjects  of  discussion  in  Kentucky,  that  I  do  not 
feel  disposed  to  amplify  them  at  this  time;  es- 
pecially as  I  have  it  in  my  power  to  refer  all 
who  desire  information  in  reference  thereto  to 
the  able,  eloquent,  and  demonstrative  speech  of 
lionorable  George  Robertson,  delivered  in  the 
house  of  representatives  last  winter;  and  he  who 
doubts  the  policy  of  the  law  of  1833,  after  read- 
ing that  great  effort,  (I  feel  inclined  to  say  the 
greatest  uiat  great  mind  ever  produced,)  could, 
if  he  were  disposed,  doubt  whether  two  and  two 
make  four.  I  would  jlike  very  much  to  see  the 
provisions  of  this  law  engrafted  in  the  constitu- 
tion we  are  about  to  make,  and  thereby  prevent 
the  continual  agitation  thereof  in  the  legislature; 
and  if  I  were  to  consult  my  feelings  or  my  judg- 
ment or  the  wishes  of  those  who  sent  me  here,  I 
should  unhesitatingly  vote  to  give  them  a  place 
in  our  organic  law.  But,  Mr.  President,  I  desire 
to  do  notJiing  that  will  have  a  tendency  to  de- 
feat our  labors  and  cause  the  people  to  reject  the 
amendments  we  are  about  malcing  to  onr  consti- 
tution; nor  will  I  give  any  vote  which  will  tend 
to  such  a  result.  And  from  all  the  lights  before 
me,  I  am  fully  satisfied  that  if  we  were  to  pro- 
hibit the  importation  of  slaves  into  Kentucky  for 
domestic  u.se,  or  in  exchange  for  our  export ations 
to  the  south,  that  the  people  would  refuse  to  rati- 
fy the  con.stitution.  Not  that  I  believe  that  a  ma- 
jority of  the  people  of  Kentucky  are  opposed 
thereto,  but  because  many  are.  Yes,  sir,  sucli  a 
provision  would  cause  thousands  to  vote  for  the 
rejection  of  the  amended  constitution— enough, 
perhaps,  when  combined  with  the  standing  army 
of  uueompromising  opponents  of  the  amended 


S7& 


•uDstitutiou,  to  render  ita  defeat  absolutely  cer-  j  men  as  tli«  Bouthem  statea  have  produced  Biace 
lain.  Such  beiug  my  deliberate  judgment,  and  j  we  have  achieved  our  liberties.  Look  at  the 
knowing  that  if  the  people  of  Kentucky  desire  i  great  men  of  Virginia,  South  Carolina,  and  Ken- 
to  continue  the  policy  of  the  law  of  1833,  they  |  tucky,  and  where  are  the  men  who  are  worthy  to 
can  do  so  by  legislative  enactment,  I  shall  vote    be  comp^ed  with  them  in  the  free  states  of  the 


against  its  incorporation  into  the  constitution 

lu  the  course  of  the  discussion  of  the  institu- 
tion of  slavery  some  weeks  ago,  gentlemen  took 
occasion  to  refer  to  slavery  in  the  District  of 
Columbia  and  to  the  "Wilmot  proviso. 

I  desire  upon  this  occasion  to  remark,  sir,  that 
I  do  not  believe  congress  has  any  power  over 

slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  and  that  its        ^^ „^, ^  .„, 

abolition  in  the  district  would  be  a  violation  of  I  tion  of  the  talents,  the  learning,  and  the  claims 


north.  We  have  had,  it  is  true,  an  Adams  or 
two,  a  Webster  and  a  Wright,  but  they  are  few 
and  far  between.  Sir,  there  is  a  nobleness  of 
spirit,  a  feeling  above  littleness,  a  greatness  of 
soul  that  grows  up  where  the  institution  of  slave- 
ry exists,  that  is  scarcely  to  be  found  in  any 
other  country." 

Sir,  I  am  behind  no  man   in  a  just  apprecia- 


the  rights  of  the  citizens  of  the  district,  as  se 
cured  by  the  deeds  of  cession  from  Maryland 
and  Virginia.  Xor  do  I  believe  that  congress 
has  any  moral  right  to  apply  the  Wilmot  proviso 
to  the  territories  of  the  Lnited  States.  Slavery 
as  it  exists  in  the  states  and  territories,  is  a  sub 


of  Kentuckians,  to  distinction  in  any  and  all 
respects.  And  I  am  fully  aware  that  when  we 
look  to  the  intellectual  jewels  of  our  country, 
Kentucky,  thank  God,  can  boast  the  possession 
of  some  that  shine  with  peculiar  briliancy,  and 
will  sparkle  throughout  all  coming  time  upon 


jeet  over  which  the  states  and  territories  alone  i  the  brightest  pages  of  American  historv,  and 
where  it  exists  have  any  right  to  exercise  control,  j  ^rill  be  the  pride  and  boast  of  every  American 
I  deny  that  congress  has  any  moral  or  legal  ri^ht  1  heart  and  tongue.  Yet,  sir,  I  fear  tfiat  when  the 
to  dictate  to  the  states  or  territories  of  the  Union  j  intellectual  and  literary  claims  of  the  south  are 
what  their  policy  shall  be  in  reference  to  this  |  contrasted  with  those  "of  the  north,  that  the  bal- 
great  subject.  The  states  and  territories  alone  |  ance  will  not  preponderate  in  our  favor.  I  need 
have  th.-  power  to  determine  whether  they  will  j  not  sir,  institute  the  comparison — every  intelli- 
permit  slavery  to  exist  within  them  or  not.  But  |  gent  Kentuckian  knows  what  the  result  woiild 
sir,  I  do  not  intend  to  discuss  these  great  ques-  j  be.  Admit  that  our  statesmen  are  equal  to  those 
tions,  and  I  have  only  referred  to  them  for  the  I  of  the  north;  vet,  sir,  the  south  gave  not  to  fame 
purpose  of  expressing  the  foregoing  opinions.      \  a  Story,  a  Kent,   a  Greenleaf  and  an   Irvine— 

I  wish  now  to  notice  a  few  of  the  arguments  names  that  are  imperishablv  interwoven  with  the 
and  observations  of  gentlemen  upon  the  abstract  j  laws  and  standard  literature,  not  only  of  Ameri- 
question  of  slavery  as  an  institution,  and  I  ca,  but  the  civilized  world.  This  sir,  I  am  sure, 
will  close.  I  is  a  branch  of  the  subject  that  we  need  not  de- 

The  following  remarkable  language  occurs  in  i  sire  to  see  investigated,  and  consequently  I  will 
the  speech  of  the  delegate  from  Madison,  (Mr.  I  leave  it. 
Turner,)  of  the  10th  of  October,  viz  :  j      The  following  beautiful,    metaphorical,  and 

"  We  all  know  that  the  institution  of  slavery  \  eloquent  language  occurs  in  the  speech  of  the 
is  the  best  in  the  world  to  keep  society  from  be- 1  delegate  from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor,)  of  the  11th 
coming  fixe<i  and  settled.  Look  at  those  who  '  of  October:  "Did  you  ever,  sir,  in  midsummer, 
were  originally  overseers  in  Virginia  and  Ken-  about  night-fall,  look  upon  a  clover  field  and 
tucky  at  their  first  settlement.  They  have  be-  j  see  the  fire-flies  rising  out  of  it?  Just  so  when 
come  the  proprietors  of  the  verv  estates  upon  |  the  people  had  determined  to  have  constitution- 
which  they  were  first  employed  as  overseers,  j  al  reform,  were  our  emancipation  friends  seen 
And  their  descendants  now  fill'the  halls  of  legis-  j  springing  up  and  giving  light  and  hope  to  each 
lation  and  the  courts  of  judicature  of  the  eoun- 1  other." 


try,  whilst  the  descendants  of  the  original  pro- 
prietors have  descended  to  a  different  level  in  the 
scale  of  society." 

Mr.  President,  we  read  a  melancholy  lesson 
truly  in  the  above  remarks.  What  higher  evi- 
dence of  the  evils  of  slavery  can  mortal  man 
adduce  than  are  presented  in  the  short  para- 
graph quoted.     Wliat  does  it  say  sir?    What  is 


Sir,  to  whom  did  the  gentleman  refer?  Was 
it  to  Clay,  to  Underwood,  to  Breckinridge? 
the  most  gifted  spirits  that  Kentucky  boasts! 
Clay,  Underwood,  and  Breckinridge,  bear  fire-fly 
lights!  Rather  say  sir,  that  they  burst  forth  like 
brilliant  suns  upon  the  world,  and  that  the  light 
they  then  shed  upon  the  blind  and  benighted 
eyes  of  Kentucky  will  not  be  lost  to  humanity. 


i 


the  moral  that  we  are  to  learn  from  it?  It  is  i  but  that  after  they  shall  be  gathered  to  their  f& 
sir,  that  slavery  encourages  laziness,  extravi-  j  thers,  the  words  of  wisdom  they  uttered  at  the 
gance  and  prodigality  in  our  children — that  it ;  time  referred  to,  shall  be  seized  upon  by  a  grate- 


unfits  them  for  the  cares  and  labors  of  life — that 
those  who  are  born  to  affluence  and  reared  and 
educated  amidst  the  enervating  dissipations  of 
Blavery,  live  to  see  not  only  their  slaves,  but 
their  homes,  and  the  homes  of  their  fathers  pass 
away  from  them  and  into  the  hands  of  strangers, 
and  themselves  cast  out  upon  the  world  house- 
less and  homeless. 

Again:  the  gentleman  remarks  in  the  same 
spech,  "I  believe  that  they  who  are  raised  up 
where  the  institution  of  slavery  exists,  with 
some  exceptions,  are  uniformly  distinguished. 
Who  has  ever  seen  such  a  constellation  of  great 


ful  and  admiring  country,  and  in  their  names  the 
shackles  of  slavery  shall  fall,  and  universal 
freedom  be  proclaimed. 

I  was  forciby  struck  with  a  remark  that  fell 
from  the  President  of  this  conveniion,  in  a 
speech  upon  this  floor  some  weeks  ago.  He 
said:  "there  is  a  time  when  slavery  will  cease. 
The  Indian  has  receded  before  the  Saxon  and 
still  recedes." 

Gentlemen,  cast  your  eyes  forward  to  the  time 
when  the  prediction  is  to  be  verified.  I  take  it 
for  granted  that  if  another  generation  passes  by 
without  the  preliminary  steps  being  taken  to 


076 


emancipate  &u4  aeud  off  our  slaves,  that  there 
will  be  only  one  practical  mode  left  by  which 
they  are  to  be  relieved  from  their  bonds.  Sir, 
slavery  must  constantly  increase  in  Kentucky — 
it  is  inevitable  unless  tne  two  hundred  thousand 
slaves  now  in  the  state  are  used  to  rear  supplies 
for  southern  markets;  and  I  will  not,  I  cannot 
believe,  that  those  who  are  to  shape  the  destiny 
of  my  country  will  devote  her  energies  to  any 
such  unhallowed  purpose.  A  few  days  since,  I 
heard  a  distinguisned  member  of  this  body  re- 
mark that  twenty  years  ago,  twenty  eight 
happy  and  prosperous  families  were  living 
upon  a  tract  of  land  in  the  county  of  Clarke, 
that  is  now  owned  by  a  single  man;  and  that 
he  is  the  only  voter  now  living  upon  the  entire 
tract.  As  a  man's  slaves  increase  he  must  ex- 
tend his  possessions  for  their  employment;  and 
thus  it  is  that  slaves  drive  from  your  country  the 
poorer  white  population,  and  this  process  will 
continue  to  go  on  and  to  grow  worse  and  worse, 
until  whole  counties  in  the  end,  which  now  sup- 
port hundreds  of  freemen,  will  be  owned  by  a 
lew  nabobs  and  occupied  by  their  innumerable 
slaves;  and  sir,  when  such  comes  to  be  the 
case,  the  cessation,  the  end  of  the  institution 
will  indeed  be  at  hand.  I  shall  never  live  to 
see  that  day,  thank  God,  Mr.  President,  but  your 
children  and  my  children's  blood  may  enrich 
the  soil  we  are  consecrating  to  slavery  in  its  de- 
fence. Our  graves,  the  graves  of  our  fathers, 
when  our  posterity  shall  have  died  in  their  de- 
fence, may  be  trodden  over  and  dishonored  by 
the  descendants  of  the  degraded  race  we  now 
hold  in  bondage,  and  this  glorious  land  of  ours, 
(old  Kentucky,)  become  the  home  and  heritage 
of  the  slave.  May  Heaven  avert  such  a  catas- 
trophe and  incline  the  hearts  of  those  who  are 
to  come  after  us  to  wisdom's  ways. 

Mr.  PRESTON.  I  will  not  vote  for  the  two 
resolutions  now  before  the  house,  for  the  simple 
reason,  that  I  believe  the  true  principles  are  al- 
ready contained  in  the  sections  to  the  bill  of 
rights,  which  have  been  added  by  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,)  and  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis.) 

I  will  not  undertake  to  answer  the  arguments 
of  the  gentleman  who  has  preceded  me,  as  they 
relate  rather  to  the  wisdom  of  retaining  the  slave 
property  of  Kentucky  than  to  the  subject  of  the 
propriety  or  impropriety  of  inserting  these  clau- 
ses in  the  constitution.  He  has  drawn  a  com- 
parison invidious  to  the  state  of  my  birth,  in- 
vidious to  her  mother,  Virginia,  invidious  to  all 
the  slave  states,  and  has  chosen  to  compare  the 
greater  wealth  of  Mivssachusetts  and  Connecticut, 
their  greater  population,  and  all  the  greater  ad- 
vantages which  he  alledges  they  possess,  when 
f  laced  in  the  balancewith  our  state  of  Kentucky, 
feel  in  no  spirit  to  enter  into  controversy  with 
him  on  this  subject  ;but  I  will  ask  him  to  turn  to  the 
twenty  thousand  paupers  ofMassacliusetts.astate 
smaller  than  Kentucky;  to  the  one  hundred  and 
thirty  or  forty  thousand  paupers  of  the  state  of 
New  York,  where  every  individual  is  compelled 
to  contribute  to  the  maintenance  of  this  large 
amount  of  poverty,  the  support  of  which  costs 
half  a  million  a  year.  He  nas  drawn  an  alluring 
picture  of  the  staite  of  their  public  education,  but 
tte  has  not  thought  fit  to  show  us  the  reverse  of 
the  medal.    He  has  not  shown  us  the  squalid 


misery  and  degradation,  and  lh«  absolute  sub- 
jugation of  labor  to  the  iron  tyranny  of  capital. 
N"o%v,  sir,  it  has  been  my  good  or  baa  fortune,  (1 
dont  know  which  to  call  it,)  to  have  spent  five 
years  in  these  states.  I  obtained  my  education 
in  these  states,  which  have  elicited  the  gentle- 
man's admiration  to  so  great  an  extent;  and  I 
never  would  consent  to  exchange  the  condition 
of  the  people  I  now  see  around  me  for  that  of  the 
people  whose  condition  has  been  dwelt  upon  in 
such  glowing  colors  by  the  gentleman  from  Knox. 
I  do  not  say  that  the  wise  and  great  men  of  the 
North  have  not  done  all  that  they  could  do  to 
relieve  and  alleviate  distress  and  prevent  misery 
and  poverty  from  springing  up  around  them;  but 
I  do  assert  that  it  would  be  the  most  difficult 
thing  in  the  world  to  go  into  one  of  the  counties 
of  Kentucky,  and  find  anything  to  be  compared 
for  a  moment  with  that  degradation  and  misery 
which  meet  you  at  every  step  in  the  North.  If 
you  see  a  house  you  think  it  is  a  palace;  you 
ask  what  it  is,  and  they  tell  you  it  is  a  "poor 
house."  Does  the  inmate  fare  like  the  inmate 
of  a  palace?  Does  he  enjoy  the  comfort  and  the 
luxury  which  the  exterior  of  the  building  would 
seem  to  indicate  might  be  the  happy  lot  of  him 
who  dwells  within?  No,  sir.  The  town  officer 
is  there;  and  he  obtains  the  greatest  reputation 
as  an  economist  who  solves  the  grand  problem 
upon  how  little  the  soul  and  body  of  man  can  be 
kept  together.  The  greatest  proof  of  ability  in 
a  town  officer  is  when  he  is  able  by  his  schedule 
to  show  at  how  little  costthe  pauper  can  be  kept; 
and  thus  he  goes  on  till  the  miserable  pauper 
stands  trembling  on  the  brink  of  starvation,  un- 
der the  legalized  system  which  is  pursued  in 
these  states  towards  their  poor. 

Sir,  there  was  one  Miss  Dix,  an  Englishwo- 
man, who,  some  three  or  four  years  ago,  came 
into  the  state  of  Kentucky  to  inquire  into  the 
statistics  of  poverty  and  jails;  and  I  recollect  an 
anecdote  that  occurred  which  may  serve  to  illus- 
trate the  point  under  discussion.  She  went  to 
the  town  of  Danville;  and,  among  other  enqui- 
ries of  the  landlord  of  the  hotel,  she  asked  where 
was  the  poor  house  of  the  county.  He  replied 
that  there  was  none.  She  asked  if  there  were 
no  poor  in  the  county.  The  landlord  replied 
that  there  were  a  great  many  very  poor  persons. 
She  enquired  what  was  their  condition;  and  was 
informed  by  the  landlord  that  the  poorest  of  them 
lived  upon  seventy  or  eiglity  acres  of  land,  not 
worth  more  than  from  three  to  four  dollars  an 
acre;  that  they  raifcd  their  two  or  three  hun- 
dred bushels  of  corn,  and  as  many  bushels  of  po- 
tatoes; that  they  kept  their  horses  and  their  cows, 
and  if  they  did  live  in  a  log  house,  they  gener- 
ally contrived  to  keep  out  the  cold  and  have 
enough  to  eat  and  wear.  Said  she,  "are  these 
your  poor?"  "Yes,"  replied  the  landlord;  "and 
as  for  a  poor  house,  we  hsiv'nt  such  a  thing  in  the 
county.  That  degree  of  poverty,  sir,  is  about 
the  greatest  we  ever  see  in  Kentucky.  You  will 
find  that  the  "poor  man"  has  his  horse  to  ride  to 
court  on;  you  will  find  that  his  corn  crib  is  filled 
with  corn;  and  yon  will  find  that  we  are  not  re- 
duced to  that  miserable  system  which  prevails 
in  the  Northern  states,  of  calculatingonliow  little 
the  miserable  peoplecan  live.  Let  the  gentleman 
then,  examine  closely  that  part  of  the  machinery 
of  the  state  of  Massachusetts,  before  he  makes 


877 


this  invidiouiiliistinetiou  belwceii  it  aii.l  hii»  ua- 
tiva  state.    In  looking  at  the  coiulbrt  of  the  pt;o- 

Ele  I  feel  proud;  I  feci  prouJ  in  reiuembeiing 
er  patriotism,  for  everv  battle  field  in  the  coun- 
tiy  can  count  among  the  slain  the  patriotic  sous 
of  Kentucky.  I  feel  a  degree  of  pride,  sir,  in 
looking  at  our  chief  magistrate  who  no^vr  fills  the 
presidential  chair  of  this  union — a  sea  of  Ken- 
tucky. And  notwithstanding  all  our  alledgcd 
■want  of  intelligence,  our  delegations  to  congress 
have  been  the  boast  and  the  pride  of  this  union. 
I  repeat  it,  sir,  that  1  feel  a  degree  of  pride  in 
looking  at  that  gallant  old  soldier  who  now  fills 
the  hignest  office  in  this  republic;  and  that  pride 
swelled  still  more  when  I  remembered  that,  de- 
spite all  the  boasted  education  and  intelligence 
of  the  men  of  the  North,  they  have  had  to  look 
to  the  South  and  the  West  for  men  to  fill  the 
highest  and  most  responsible  oflRces  of  state — to 
leaid  their  armies,  protect  the  country,  and  ad- 
minister the  government. 

Sir,  there  are  then,  two  sides  to  this  picture; 
and  when  we  come  to  examine  them  both,  and 

Slace  them  side  by  side,  I  must  confess  that  it 
oes  not  appear  to  me  that  we  are  placed  in  that 
inferior  position  which  the  gentleman  seems  to 
suppose.  I  for  one  am  contented  with  the  con- 
dition of  Kentucky.  I  for  one  am  content  to  let 
a  comparison  be  instituted  between  Indiana,  Il- 
linois, Ohio  and  Kentucky  ;  and  what  man  in 
this  hall,  what  citizen  of  Kentucky,  if  he  were 
put  upon  a  northern  railroad,  or  canal  boat,  if  a 
promiscuous  company  of  gentlemen  were  togeth- 
er, and  the  question  were  asked  of  each,  "to  what 
state  do  you  belong," — what  man  among  you, 
what  citizen  of  this  state  would  hesitate  to  an- 
nounce "I  am  a  Kentuckian."  What  man  among 
you  would  deny  his  state  to  claim  a  birthright 
from  Indiana  or  Illinois?  What  man  among  you 
who  would  not  rather  hail  from  this,  his  native 
state,  as  the  more  favoured  spot  of  the  Union. 

Sir,  we  are  not  in  a  condition  so  unfortunate ; 
the  prosperity  of  a  free  and  happy  people  around 
us  falsifies  the  statement ;  the  gallantry  of  the 
people  among  whom  we  live,  is  the  best  test  of 
their  education.  Cyrus  boasted  that  he  taught 
his  people  three  things — to  speak  the  truth, 
to  ride,  and  to  draw  the  bow  ;  Kentucky  may 
equally  boast  that  she  teaches  her  sons  to  speak 
the  truth,  to  shoot  the  rifle,  and  to  stand  by  the 
state  in  peril.  We  may  not  be  so  well  educated 
in  regard  to  this  or  that  particular  sunday  school 
tract ;  but  if  ever  the  Union  is  in  danger,  my 
word  for  it,  if  the  shock  of  arras  should  come, 
and  Kentucky  should  be  called  upon  for  troops, 
vou  will  not  see  our  young  men  shrinking  and 
tiding  themselves,  to  avoid  the  contest;  no  sir, 
you  will  see  them  in  front  of  this  hall,  con- 
tending for  the  honor  of  being  first  on  the  list 
to  answer  their  country's  call.  If  five  thousand 
are  wanted  you  mav  rely  upon  it  that  fifteen  or 
twenty  thousand  will  be  oflfered,  as  was  the  case 
in  the  recent  war. 

But  sir,  I  will  not  pursue  this  subject;  I  say 
this  much  only  in  defence  of  our  actual  condi- 
tion, and  in  order  to  destroy  the  invidious  com- 
parison my  friend  has  drawn  between  the  north 
and  the  south. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  would  ask  the  gentleman, 
if  he  denies  the  truth  of  the  statistical  8tatem*>nts 
I  have  made. 


!  Mr.  PRESTOX.  I  do  not  deny  the  accuracy 
'  of  your  statistics,  but  I  deny  the  deductions  you 
j  have  di"awn.  When  the  firet  resolution  of'ih^ 
gentleman  from  Henderson,  was  presented,  I 
j  happened  to  make  a  statement  which  I  wish  to 
j  refer  to  again.  I  observed,  about  the  first  of 
i  October,  when  it  was  presented,  that  I  did  not 
I  believe  that  full  and  plenary  power  was  posses- 
i  sed  by  this  convention  ;  that  I  did  not  believe 
j  we  came  here  invested  with  all  the  power  of  a 
I  sovereignty  ;  that  if  we  came  here  one  hundred 
i  and  fifty  in  number,  instead  of  one  hundred,  we 
;  would  not  come  as  a  legally  constituted  conven- 
tion.    This  is  what  I  said  : 

"I  do  not  believe  myself  that  we  are  in  a  state 
of  revolution.     I  do  not  believe  myself  that  full 
and  plenary  power  is  possessed  by   this   house. 
I  do  not  believe  that  we  came  here  with  all   the 
powers  of  sovereignty.     I  do  not  believe,  but  if 
this  house  consisted  of  one  hundred   and   fifty 
delegates  instead  of  one  hundred,  we  could  come 
here  as  a  legally  constituted  convention.    I   be- 
lieve we  were  called  here  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  constitution,  which  provides 
for  its  amendment,  which  stipulates  that  it  should 
be  done  in  a  certain  manner,  and  that  when  we 
do  come  together  for  that  purpose,  we  are  not  in 
a  state  of  revolution,  not  at  liberty  to  carry  pow- 
i  er  to  the   extreme  limit   which   the   gentleman 
i  from  Nelson  seems  to   think ;  but   that   we   do 
I  come  here  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the 
views  of  the  people,  under  the  implied  obliga- 
I  tion  which  is  set  forth  in  the   resolution    of  the 
j  gentleman  from  Henderson." 

But  the  gentleman   from  Nelson    took    this 
I  ground — that  this  convention  was  supreme,   un- 
'  controllable  and    uncontrolled,    except  by  the 
I  constitution  of  the  United  States.     That  propo- 
!  sition  I  differed  from  at  the  time,   and   I   differ 
from  it  yet ;  and  I  think  I  can  show   that   I   am 
right,  if  not  I  am  willing  to  be  convinced.    The 
gentleman   from    Nelson,    (Mr.    Hardin,)   took 
issue  upon  that  proposition,  at  that  time,   thus: 
"We  come  here  to  make  our  government  just 
as  we  please — and  how  shall  we  do  it.     We  can 
adopt  the  present  constitution  as  it  now  stands  ; 
we  can  alter  and  change  it  as  we  please,  or  make 
a  new  one  out  and  out.     I  do  not  care  if  we  are 
in  a  state  of  revolution,  still  we  retain  that  pow- 
er, and  I  shall  not  be  driven  under  the  bed   like 
a  cross  child  by  this  raw  head  and  bloody  bones 
outcry." 

The  idea  I  then  had  was  this  :  that  there  are 
two  sorts  of  conventions,  one  a  constitutional 
convention,  such  as  I  hold  we  are,  the  other 
a  revolutionary'  convention  such  as  I  hold  that 
of  France  was.  I  believe  that  if  we  were  to  or- 
der the  seizure  of  any  man's  private  property, 
and  the  public  sentiment  of  a  majority  were  to 
acquiesce  in  such  a  seizure,  I  believe  that  single 
act,  if  carried  out,  would  put  us  in  exactly  the 
same  situation  as  when,  in  the  great  revolution 
in  France,  every  man's  property  was  seized,  and 
in  a  moment  of  infatuation,  liberty  was  pro- 
claimed to  all  the  West  India  negroes  iu  the  Frenuh 
colonies;  that  that  would  make  us  a  revolution- 
ary convention;  that  if  we  were  to  order  our 
seirgeant-at-arms  to  seize  upon  the  property  of 
any  citizen  as  a  lawful  prize ;  if  we  were  to  or- 
der any  physical  force  under  our  control  to  take 
possession    of   a  single  man's  property,  even 


»78 


though  it  waa  done  by  tltfi  unanimous  order  of 
this  ci)n\ I'll! ion;  I  believe  tliat  tliat  vs^ouid  be  a 
revolutionary  act,  that  we  sliould  then  transcend 
our  power,  and  that  every  citizen  in  this  state 
■would  be  justified  jn  resisting  even  to  the  death. 
I  said  so  before,  and  I  say  so  now.  I  recognise, 
then,  two  sorts  of  conventions — a  constitutional 
eonvoution,  and  a  revolutionary  convention. 
God  forfend  that  we  should  become  tlie  last. 

Sir,  I  maintain  that  wlien,  under  the  inflama- 
atory  appeals  of  Brissot.  every  slave  in  the  West 
Indies  was  declared  free — I  maintain  that  that  act 
constituted  revolution ;  and  I  say  now,  that  if 
"we  were  here  as  an  emancipation  body,  instead 
of  a  constitutional  body  under  the  law,  if  we 
were  to  confiscate  that  property,  and  declare 
that  we  could  destroy  it  by  our  arbitrary  act,  I 
do  declare  that  such  an  act  would  throw  Kentuc- 
ky into  a  state  of  revolution;  and  though  eighty 
thousand  of  the  citizens  of  Kentucky  were  to 
declare  in  favor  of  such  an  act,  and  a  minority 
of  seventy  thousand  were  against  it,  that  minor- 
ity would  have  a  perfect  right  to  take  up  arms, 
to  do  battle  for  the  principle.  What,  sir,  is  it 
asserted  here  that  this  convention  has  absolute 
control  over  the  lives,  liberty,  and  pr9perty  of 
the  people  of  Kentucky!  It  cannot  be  that  any 
one  can  put  forth  a  proposition  so  monstrous 
with  any  degree  of  seriousness.  Put  the  case  in 
another  point  of  view.  Here  is  a  convention 
composed  of  a  hundred  members:  say  you  are 
fifty-two  democrats  and  forty -eight  whigs.  Sup- 
pose the  majority  order  that  every  member 
should  take  a  test  oath  in  support  of  the  princi- 
ples of  democracy,  (and  the  thing  is  not  unpre- 
cedented, for  we  have  heard  of  test  oaths  even 
in  late  times  in  England,)  would  not  such  a  reso- 
lution be  a  restraint  upon  our  liberty?  Would 
we  not  have  the  right  of  resistance?  Would  it 
not  be  a  restraint  upon  one  of  those  fundamen- 
tal principles  upon  which  our  liberty  rests  ?  In 
the  resolutions  of  tlie  gentlemen  from  Henderson 
and  Bourbon,  we  assert  the  great  principle  of 
the  security  of  property,  another  of  those  fun- 
damental principles  on  wliich  the  tripod  of  lib- 
erty is  erected.  It  is  one  of  the  chief  ends  for 
which  civilized  government  was  established. 
Invade  it  and  the  social  contract  is  violated. 
The  right  of  property  is  based  in  the  exertions 
of  labor  and  industry,  and  is  antecedent  to 
written  constitutions.  Robinson  Crusoe,  on  his 
island,  was  entitled,  and  had  property  in  his 
fields,  his  flocks, and  his  harvests,  which  no  sub- 
sequent community  could,  in  the  establishment 
of  government,  rightfully  rob  him  of,  nor  plun- 
der, without  giving  him  the  right  of  resistance. 

Sir,  I  am  not  unsupported  in  these  views.  I 
have  a  book  here,  and  good  authority  to  sustain 
me.  Here  is  an  author  who  could  not  have  been 
influenced  by  the  institution  of  slavery.  I  speak 
of  Vattei.  Let  us  see  what  he  says  of  the  right 
to  change  constitutions.     He  says : 

"In  virtue  of  the  same  principles,  it  is  certain 
that  if  the  nation  is  uneasy  under  its  constitu- 
tion, it  has  a  right  to  change  it. 

"  There  can  be  no  difficulty  in  the  case,  if  the 
whole  nation  be  unanimously  inclined  to  make 
this  change.  But  it  is  asked,  what  is  to  be  done 
if  the  people  are  divided?  In  the  ordinary 
management  of  tlie  state,  the  opinion  of  tlie  ma- 
jority must  pass  without  dispute  for  that  of  the 


whole  nation,  otherwise  it  would  be  almost  im- 
possible for  the  society  ever  to  take  any  resolu- 
tion. It  appears  then,  by  parity  of  reasoning, 
that  a  nation  may  change  the  constitution  of  the 
state  by  a  majority  of  votes;  and  whenever  there 
is  nothing  in  this  change  that  can  be  considered 
as  contrary  to  the  act  of  civil  association,  or  to 
the  intention  of  tho.se  united  under  it,  the  whol>i 
are  bound  to  conform  to  the  resolution  of  the  . 
majority.  But  if  the  question  be,  to  quit  a  form 
of  government,  to  which  alone  it  appeared  that 
the  people  were  willing  to  submit  on  their 
entennginto  the  bonds  of  society, — if  the  great- 
er part  of  a  free  people,  after  the  example  of  the 
Jews  in  the  time  of  Samuel,  are  weary  of  liber- 
ty, and  resolve  to  submit  to  the  authority  of  a 
monarch, — those  citizens  who  are  more  jealous 
of  that  privilege,  so  invaluable  to  those  who 
have  tested  it,  though  obliged  to  sufi"er  the  ma- 
jority to  do  as  they  please,  are  under  no  obliga- 
tion at  all  to  submit  to  the  new  government; 
they  may  quit  a  society  which  seems  to  have  dis- 
solved itself  in  order  to  unite  again  under  an- 
other form ;  they  have  a  right  to  retire  elsewhere, 
to  sell  their  lands,  and  take  with  them  all  their 
effects." 

"By  the  fundamental  laws  of  England,  the 
two  houses  of  parliament,  in  concert  with  the 
king,  exercise  the  legislative  power;  but  if  the 
two  houses  should  resolve  to  suppress  them- 
selves, and  to  invest  the  king  with  full  and  ab- 
solute authority,  certainly  the  nation  would  not 
sufier  it.  And  who  would  dare  to  assert  that 
they  would  not  have  a  right  to  oppose  it?  But 
if  the  parliament  entered  into  a  debate  on  ma- 
king so  considerable  a  change,  and  the  whole 
nation  was  voluntarily  silent  upon  it,  this  would 
be  considered  as  an  approbation  of  the  act  of  its 
representatives. 

•'  But  in  treating  here  of  the  change  of  the 
constitution,  we  treat  only  of  the  right:  the  ques- 
tion of  expediency  belongs  to  politics." 

This,  sir,  is  in  regard  to  the  word  introduced 
by  my  friend  from  Henderson,  that  we  have  no 
right,  <fec.  Vattel's  remarks  are  not  in  regard  to 
the  expediency  but  in  regard  to  the  right  of  the 
tiling.  Now,  sir,  underthe  authority  there  read, 
the  right  of  resistance  is  warranted,  if  we,  un- 
curbed by  the  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
were  to  erect  ourselves  into  a  monarchy.  I  de- 
clare, that  if  the  whole  people  of  the  United 
States  were  to  go  for  a  change  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  federal  government  and  declare  for  a 
monarchy,  the  right  of  resistance  would  belong 
to  the  minority.  When  the  whole  fundamental 
principles  of  the  act  of  association  is  assailed,  I 
say  that  the  constitution  does  not  bind  us.  Adopt 
a  different  principle,  and  you  wrong  yourselves  in 
all  time  to  come.  The  free  states  are  growing. 
Suppose  they  grow  large  enough  to  change  the 
constitution  in  the  prescribed  method,  and  then 
some  northern  senator  gets  up  and  says,  "we  are 
uncurbed  by  the  world — we  are  sovereign — and 
we  do  declare  that  from  this  hour  henceforth 
slavery  shall  not  exist  in  the  United  States  ;"  in 
other  words,  should  abolish  slavery  by  an  act 
perfectly  constitutional  in  the  manner  in  which 
it  is  done,  but  destructive  of  the  objects  for  which 
we  entered  the  confederacy.  Suppose  the  requi- 
site number  of  three  fourths  of  the  states  have 


8t9 


assented  to  the  change,  have  the  remaining  fourth 
atiy  right  of  resistance?  I  say  we  hare,  for  by 
that  act  they  have  stricken  down  the  fundamen- 
tal right  wliich  society  was  made  to  guard;  and, 
amend  it  as  they  may,  to  Kentucky  and  every 
other  slave  state  remains  the  right  of  resistance. 
These  are  my  reasons  for  having  gone  for  the 
two  clauses  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from 
Henderson  and  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon. 
I  tell  gentlemen  again  that  this  whole  book 
(Yattel.)  is  nothing  but  a  series  of  principles, 
higher  than  written  constitutions  andabovethem, 
and  an  evidence  that  all  civilized  nations  acknow- 
ledge and  obey  them.  I  say  that  the  great  prin- 
ciple of  the  right  to  life,  liberty,  and  property, 
cannot  be  interfered  with.  I  assert  it  to  be  true, 
'hat  we  have  no  more  right  to  interfere  with 
slave  property  than  we  have  to  interfere  with 
inv  other  kind  of  property  in  Kentucky.  Grant 
ihis,  sir,  and  you  carry  confidence  to  every  slave 
owner  in  Kentucky.  Grant  that  the  will'of  the 
majority  has  a  right  to  take  away  your  slave, 
ana  you  grant  that  it  has  a  right  to  take  away 
your  land;  grant  this,  and  you  grant  that  it  has 
a  right  to  imprison  you  without  oifence — nay, 
even  to  deprive  you  of  liberty  and  life  without 
a  cause.  I  deny  that  they  have  any  right  unless 
•t  be  bv  an  act  of  tyranny.  Let  them  fix  it  bv 
law.  'They  have  a  right  to  make  laws;  and  if 
a  man  with  his  eyes  open  incurs  the  penalty  he 
must  bear  the  penalty.  But  no  right  exists  to 
make  an  ex  poste  facto  law;  no  right  exists  in  the 
Jnited  States  to  interfere  with  the  principle  act- 
ed upon  by  everj- civilized  community.  I  there- 
tore  firmly  believe  that  this  convention  is  not  an 
unlimited,  imcontroUed  sovereign  power.  How 
far  is  it  curbed?  I  say  it  iscurbed  by  the  consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  and  by  a  code  of  laws 
still  higher — the  custom  of  civilized  states  in 
establishing  governments.  You  ask  me  where 
ihat  custom  is;  I  tell  you  these  commenta- 
ries and  the  practice  of  the  world  are  the  evi- 
dences of  it.  If  a  man,  for  instance,  should 
jfo  to  Russia  on  the  faith  of  these  established 
rules  and  law,  and  his  property  be  seized  and 
he  be  sent  to  Siberia  by  the  Emperor,  that  would 
be  a  breach  of  customs  existing  between  nations 
and  would  be  a  just  cause  of  war.  If  some  sub- 
ject of  tlie  United  States  has  had  his  property 
confiscated  without  cause  and  is  sent  to  Siberia', 
will  our  government  not  demand  redress?  And 
how  will  it  demand  it?  By  the  recognized  cus- 
toms and  established  laws  of  the  civilized  world. 
Now,  sir,  these  are  the  reasons  why  I  believe 
that  the  doctrines  asserted  in  these  two  resolu- 
tions are  true — that  the  arbitrary  absolute  right 
to  take  life  and  property  exists  no  where  in  a 
republic — not  even  in  the  largest  majority. ,  I 
also  believe  in  the  corollary  deduced  from  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon — 
that  slave  property  stands  upon  the  same  basis 
as  all  other  property  in  this  commonwealth,  and 
that  to  invade  it,  by  seizing  it,  is  unjust  and 
contrary  to  the  fundamental  purposes  for  which 
iiociety  was  constituted.  I,  however,  do  not 
deem  it  necessary  to  go  further.  So  far  as  I  have 
g'one,  I  am  willing  to  abide.  I  want  to  say  to 
those  who  entertain  abolition  views,  who  assert 
that  tihe  people  of  this  state  have  no  right  to 
hold  this  species  of  property — I  want  to  say  to 
them  that  we  have  asserted  in  the  two  feat\ire» 


we  have  put  upon  the  constitution,  that  the  "ab- 
solute and  arbitrary  right "  does  not  exist;  and 
that  slave  property  is  upon  precisely  the  same 
footing  as  all  other  property.  If  you  a-vsert  that 
this  absolute  arbitrary-  power  does  exist,  you 
assert  the  right  to  seize  the  property  of  everv 
citizen,  and  that  slave  property,  and  its  increase, 
are  not  upon  the  same  footing.' 

These  are  the  rea.sons  which  induced  me  to 
give  my  vote — a  vote  I  will  stand  by,  both  here 
and  before  the  people  of  this  state,  and  any- 
where, where  law  is  recognized  and  justice  pur- 
sued. I  believe  that  I  am  right;  i)ut  if  I  were 
convinced,  this  moment,  that  I  aiii  wrong,  no 
man  would  more  willingly  retire  fro6;i  his  posi- 
tion than  I  would  do.  l' challenge  u  reply;  I 
ask  if  it  is  not  in  conformity  with  the  princi- 
ples established  by  the  act  of  association?  I 
say  again,  sir,  that  if  I  am  wrong,  no  man  will 
more  readily,  more  cheerfully,  retrace  his  st«ps 
than  I;  but  until  I  am  convinced,  I  must  retain 
and  advocate  the  sentiments  to  which  I  have 
given  utterance  tiis  day. 

Mr.  TURXER  moved  the  previous  qnestion, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  no'w 
put. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Simpson;  and  it  was  re- 
jected. 

The  qnestion  recurred  on  the  amendment  of 
the  gentleman  from  Jessamine. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays,  and  they  were — yeas  2,  nays  75. 

Yeas— Jas.  W.  Irwin,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall— 2. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Brad- 
ley, Luther  Brawner,  Francis  'M.  Bristow,  Thos. 
D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Cof- 
fej,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowpej,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha, 
Jas.  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E. 
Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  William 
Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thos.  J.Hood,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Alexander 
K.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Xathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
Wm.  D.  Mitchell,  Thos.  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Mor- 
ris, James  M.  Xesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh 
Xewell.  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston, 
Johnson  Price',  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thos.  Rock- 
hold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John 
D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip'  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
John  Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 
75.  ^ 

So  the  section  was  rejected. 

Mr.  GHOLSOS"  moved  the  following,  as  an 
additional  section: 

"  Atthe  first  session  after  the  adoption  of  this 
constitution,  the  legislature  shall  appoint  not 
less  than  three,  nor  more  than  five  persons, 
learned  in  the  law,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  re- 


wo 


vifi«  and  arrange  the  statute  laws  of  this  coni- 
moiiwealth,  both  civil  and  criminal,  so  as  to 
have  but  one  law  on  any  one  subject,  all  of 
which  shall  be  in  plain  englisli.  Also,  three 
other  persons,  learned  in  the  law,  whose  duty  it 
shall  be  to  prepare  a  code  of  practice  for  "the 
courts,  both  civjl  and  criminal,  in  this  common- 
wealth, by  abridging  and  simplifying  the  rules 
of  practice  and  laws  in  relation  thereto;  all  of 
whom  shall  act  at  as  early  a  day  as  practicable, 
report  the  result  of  their  labors  to  the  legislature 
for  their  adoption  and  modification,  from  time 
to  time." 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  the  previous  question 
on  the  reports,  and  the  main  question  was  or- 
dered to  be  now  put. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  called  for  a  division,  as  the 
proposed  section  wtis  susceptible  of  division. 

Tlie  yeas  and  nays  were  taken  on  the  first 
branch,  as  foliows: 

"At  the  first  session  after  the  adoption  of  this 
constitution,  the  legislature  shall  appoint  not 
less  than  three  nor  more  than  five  persons  learn- 
ed in  the  law,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  revise 
and  arrange  the  statute  laws  of  this  common- 
wealth, both  civil  and  criminal,  so  as  to  have 
but  one  law  on  any  one  subject,  all  of  which 
shall  be  in  plain  english." 

And  were,  yeas  68,  nays  11,  as  follows: 

Yeas— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
liam Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Jesse  CoflFey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  El- 
liott, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
6on,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J. 
Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  William  N.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  John 
J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett, 
John  L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffc,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 68. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Ben.  Copelin,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall  .Nathan  McClure,  Wil- 
liam D.  Mitchell,  Hugh  Newell,  Wm.  R.  Thomp- 
son, Squire  Turner — 11. 

So  that  the  first  branch  was  adopted. 

The  question  was  next  taken  on  the  con- 
cluding portion  of  the  section,  and  the  result 
was,  yeas  48,  nays  31. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Wm.  K.  Bow- 
ling, Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradlev,  Luther  Braw- 
ner, Wm.  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  Wil- 
liam Chenault,  Wm.  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Jaraes  Dudley,  Beryamiu  F.  Ed- 


wards, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
James  W.Irwin,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thos.  N.  Lindsey,  Tlumias  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Maves,  David  Meriwether,  Thos.  P. 
Moore,  John  1).  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William 
Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Mi- 
chael L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  Howard  Todd,  John  L.  Waller,  John 
Wheeler,  Robert  N.Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
—48. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos.  D. 
Brown,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Lucius  De- 
sha, Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  William  Hendrix, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jack- 
son, William  Johnson,  Wm.  N.  Marshall,  Na- 
than McClure,  William  D.  Mitchell,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Hugh  Newell,  Johnson  Price,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Trip- 
lett, Squire  Turner,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson — 31. 

So  that  the  residue  of  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  question  was  next  taken  on  the  reports  of 
the  committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions,  and 
they  were  adopted  as  amended. 

EDUCATION. 

The  convention  next  proceeded  to  the  consid- 
eration of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  educa- 
tion. 

The  first  section  was  read,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  1.  The  diffusion  of  knowledge  and  learn- 
ing among  men  being  essential  to  the  preserva- 
tion of  liberty  and  free  government,  and  the  pro- 
motion of  human  virtue  and  happiness,  it  snail 
be  the  duty  of  the  general  assembly  to  establish, 
within  years  next  after  the  adoption  of 

this  constitution,  and  forever  thereafter  keep  in 
existence,  an  efiicient  system  of  common  schools 
throughout  this  commonwealth,  which  shall  be 
equally  open  to  all  the  white  children  thereof." 

Mr.  TAYLOR  moved  to  fill  the  blank  with 
the  word  "two." 

Mr.  PRESTON  moved  to  substitute  "five." 

The  substitute  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  did  expect  to  have  heard 
from  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  (Mr.  Tay- 
lor,) some  explanation  of  this  system  of  com- 
mon schools,  anditmay  bethathc  de.signsto  give 
us  one  yet.  I  am  as  much  a  friend  to  the  diffu- 
sion of  education,  and  perhaps,  according  to  my 
means,  have  done  as  much  towards  that  end,  as 
any  man  in  the  state;  not  only  in  educating 
those  I  feel  bound  from  nature  to  educate — my 
own  children — but  others.  Yet  I  am  unwilling 
to  have  any  provision  of  this  kind  adopted  in 
the  constitution.  We  have  now  packed  it  very 
heavy,  and  I  do  not  believe  it  will  carry  this  ad- 
ditional load;  particularly  after  what  we  did  a 
few  moments  since,  in  relation  to  tliese  commis- 
sioners to  revise  the  laws. 

I  desire  to  offer,  for  the  cousideration  of  the 
convention,  a  few  facts  and  figures,  in  explana- 
tion of  my  coui-se  upon  this  subject.    Wlien  th« 


681 


United  States  distributed  to  Kentucky  her  pro- 
portion of  the  surplus  revenue,  amounting  to 
$1,433,757  39,  Kentucky  pledged  herself  to  her- 
self, that  she  would  set  'apart  $850,000  of  that 
money  for  common  school  purposes.  The  school 
fund,  as  a  fund,  never  had  an  existence,  except 
in  that  mere  pledge  of  the  state  to  herself;  there 
never  Avas  a  aollar  appropriated  to  the  common 
school  fund,  except  in  this  instance  of  $650,000. 
That  money  we  borrowed — we  call  it  borrowing 
— for  thirty-five  years.  The  following  table  ex- 
plains how  this  was  done : 

SCHOOL   FO'D. 

Composed  as  follows,  viz :  seven  bonds  of  the 

commonwealth  of  Kentucky : 

No.  1 — At  30  years  date,  bearing 
6  per  cent,  interest,  and  da- 
ted August  9,  1640,  -       $24,000  00 

No.  20 — At  30  years  date,  bear- 
ing 6  per  cent,  interest,  and 
dated  January  16,  1S40,         -        21,500  00 

No.  21 — At  30  years  date,  bear- 
ing 6  per  cent,  interest,  and 
dated  January  1,  1840,  -        22,000  00 

No.  22 — At  35  years  date,  bear- 
ing 5  per  cent,  interest,  and 
dated  January  18,  1840,        -      500,000  00 

No.  23 — At  35  years  date,  bear- 
ing 5  per  cent,  interest,  and 
dated  January  22,  1840,         -      170,000  00 

No.  24 — At  35  years  date,  bear- 
ing 5  per  cent,  interest,  and 
dated  January  22,  1840,        •       180,000  00 

No.  —  Bearing  5  per  cent,  in- 
terest from  January  1,  1848, 
and  made  payable  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  legislature, 
and  dated  Dec.  20,  1848  ,       -      308,268  42 


Total  bonds, 

BAXK   STOCK. 

735  shares  of  stock  in  the  Bank 
of  Kentucky,   at  $100  each. 


$1,225,768  42 


73,500  00 


Total  school  fund. 

Interest  due  school  fund,  Janu- 
ary 1,  1849,  and  not  inclu- 
ded in  above. 

There  was  appropriated  out  of 
the  surplus  revenue,  which 
was  laid  out  in  bonds  Nos. 
22,  23,  and  24, 

Bonds  Nos.  1,  20,  21,  and  — , 
dated  December  20,  1848, 
are  all  given  for  interest, 
amounting  to,        -         - 

Surplus  revenue  received  from 
the  Uuited  States  govern- 
ment, .... 


$1,299,268  42 


$51,223  29 


850,000  00 


375,768  42 


$1,433,757  39 


The  amount  of  interest  upon  the  whole  debt 
would  be  something  like  $72,000  or  $73,000. 
Some  at  five  per  cent,  and  some  at  six  per  cent. 
I  give  it  round  numbers,  not  having  stopped  to 
make  an  accurate  calculation.  Now,  under  a 
vote  of  the  state,  we  levied  last  year  a  tax  of  two 
cents  on  the  taxable  property'  in  favor  of  the 
school  fund,  which  will  fall,  perhaps,  about 
ill 


two-thirds  or  three-fourths  of  one  cent  below  the 
sum  required;  a  tax  of  one  cent  would  vield 
about  $25,000  or  $26,000.  The  gross  amount 
would  be  perhaps  near  $30,000;  but  the  sheriflfe' 
fees  for  collecting  and  the  delinquencies  are  to  be 
!  deducted  from  it,  however.  To  raise  the  amount 
this  section  proposes  would  require  a  tax  of  near 
three  cents,  ^ow,  has  there  been  any  vote  in 
the  state  upon  this  additional  tax"?  I  know  of 
none;  and  for  my  own  part,  I  should  prefer  this 
matter  should  be  left  open  to  legislation.  It  is 
not  worth  while  for  the  convention  to  do  all  the 
legislation  of  the  country  right  at  once.  Let  us 
leave  some  little  for  the  legislature  to  do.  Are 
you  afraid  of  the  legislature?  Surely  not.  If  it 
13  necessary,  they  will  do  it — if  not,  they  will 
do  as  much  as  is  convenient.  According'to  this 
report,  we  are  to  have  an  addition  to  the  present 
tax  of  one  cent,  or  perhaps  more;  and  as  the  result 
of  what  we  have  already  done,  we  shall  have  to 
put  on  another  cent  to  pay  the  state  debt.  So 
we  may  fairly  calculate,  that  taking  the  two 
sums  together,  our  taxes  will  reach  twenty  cents 
on  the  hundred  dollars.  It  is  nineteen  cents  now, 
but  two  cents  of  this  were  levied  last  year,  for 
this  convention,  which  is  of  course  only  tempo- 
rary. Now,  I  know  that  the  people,  or  a  majori- 
ty of  them  in  the  whole  state,  did  vote  for  the 
two  cents  for  school  purposes;  but  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  they  fairly  understood  the  question.  I 
saw  the  sheriffs  when  they  opeued  the  polls,  and 
a  man  came  up,  put  the  question  to  nim,  "do 
you  vote  for  the  schools?"  He  would  say  "yes," 
unless  he  was  taken  out,  and  the  matter  explain- 
ed to  him.  In  another  county,  I  understood  it 
was  in  the  county  of  Hardin,  the  sheriff  put  the 
question  fairly,  and  it  was  the  only  county  in 
which  it  was  fairly  put  to  the  people,  as  far  as 
I  know,  and  that  was,  "are  you  willing  to  vote 
for  an  increase  of  two  cents  on  your  taxes  for 
free  schools?"  A  dead  majority  there  voted 
against  it:  and  whenever  and  wherever  I  saw 
the  question  fairly  put  to  each  man,  a  large  ma- 
jority said  no.  I  believe,  then,  that  the  large  ma- 
jority of  the  people  did  not  understand  the  ques- 
tion. In  my  county,  the  sheriff  never  put  the 
question  fair,  until  some  time,  I  think,  about  the 
latter  part  of  the  second  day.  I  then  went  up  to 
him,  and  told  him  to  put  the  question  fairly  to 
the  people,  and  let  them  understand  it.  I  voted 
no,  and  a-s  soon  as  I  did,  I  turned  around  and  ex- 
plained the  matter  to  the  people,  and  divers  men 
said  to  me,  that  they  regretted  they  had  not  un- 
derstood it  before  they  voted.  And  I  think  a 
majority  after  that  went  against  it.  I  know  my 
constituents  do  not  want  this  in  the  constitution, 
and  I  know  they  did  not  understand  the 
question.  I  am  as  perfectly  certain  of  it  as  a 
man  can  be  of  anything,  in  regard  to  which  he 
has,  to  a  certain  extent,  to  indulge  in  conjecture. 
On  the  three  cents  proposed  to  be  levied,  we 
would  pay  perhaps  $1500  or  $2000;  and  yet  we 
have  never  had  a  free  school,  nor  will  we  ever 
have  one  in  Nelson  county;  and  I  will  challenge 
any  county  in  the  state,  to  produce  an  equal  pop- 
ulation, with  only  equal  means,  that  expends 
more  money  on  colleges  and  schools  of  various 
kinds,  than  we  do  in  Nelson  county.  I  am  bold 
to  say,  there  is  not  a  county  equal  to  it.  We 
have  the  catholic  college  of  St.  Joseph,  the  cath- 
olic incorporated  school  of  Nazareth,  a  first-rate 


6811 


Presbyterian  school,  on  which  8om«  $10,000  or 
$15,000  have  been  expended,  and  a  first-rate 
Methodist  school;  we  have  also  another  catholic 
school  establishment,  carried  on  by  the  nuns; 
and  I  will  add  that  to  the  honor  of  these  schools, 
khd  it  ought  to  be  to  the  pride  of  the  people  of 
Nelson  county,  there  are  not  now,  1  believe, 
less  than  fifty  free  scholars  in  the  schools  at 
Bardstown.  Some  are  in  the  Catholic,  Metho- 
dist, Presbyterian,  and  some  are  in  the  primary 
schools;  and  I  never  knew  or  heard  of  a  poor 
child  being  refused  admittance  in  either  of  these 
schools,  when  a  little  Mexican  boy,  who  was 
left  by  a  captain,  and  whom  I  picked  up,  poor, 
rtakea,  and  hungry  at  a  tavern,  carried  him  home 
and  clothed  him,  fell  into  my  possession,  my 
good  lady  sent  word  to  the  president  of  St.  Jo- 
seph's college,  that  if  they  would  teach  him  for 
nothing,  we  would  board  and  clothe  him  for 
nothing;  he  said  that  he  could  not  exactly  do 
that,  but  that  if  the  boy  would  dress,  and  make 
himself  clean,  and  come  to  church  before  the 
service  eomnienced  on  Sunday,  then  they  would 
teach  him.  And  the  boy  pays  for  himself  on 
Sunday,  and  commences  even  on  Monday  morn- 
ing. And  I  verily  believe  in  that  college,  and 
in  the  Nazareth  school,  and  the  female  catholic 
school  at  Bardstown,  there  are  not  less  than  fifty 
free  scholars;  and  I  have  never  heard  of  a  single 
instance  where  they  refused  a  free  scholar,  that 
could  not  pay.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the 
Presbyterian  and  Methodist  schools.  They  nev- 
er refuse  a  free  scholar.  I  know  we  never  had 
a  free  school;  and  I  for  one  am  unwilling  to  put 
it  in  this  constitution,  that  my  constituents  shall 
be  taxed  for  their  support. 

I  have  no  opinion  of  free  schools  any  how — 
none  in  the  world.  They  are  generally  under 
the  management  of  a  miserable  set  of  humbug 
teachers  at  best.  The  very  first  teacher  that  a 
child  has,  when  he  starts  with  his  A.  B.  C — or 
is  learning  to  spell  bla,  or  baker,  or  absolute, 
should  be  a  first  rate  scholar  He  should  know 
exactly  how  to  spell  and  pronounce  the  English 
language;  and  should  understand  the  art  of 
composition,  and  the  construction  of  sentences. 
In  the  language  of  Dean  Swift,  he  should  have 
"  tooper  words,  and  they  should  be  put  in  proper 
jpkices."  The  worst  taught  child  in  the  world. 
Is  he  who  is  taught  by  a  miserable  country  school 
master;  and  I  will  appeal  to  the  experience  of 
6very  man  here  who  ever  went  to  those  schools, 
to  say  how  hard  it  is,  to  get  clear  of  the  habits 
of  incorrect  reading  and  pronouncing,  they  have 
contracted,  at  these  country  schools.  For  my- 
self, T.  will  say,  it  cost  me  nearly  as  much  labor 
as  the  study  of  the  legal  profession  itself,  to  get 
clear  of  this  miserable  mode  of  pronouncing,  con- 
tracted before  I  went  to  a  collegiate  school — at 
the  age  of  17— your  wonZd,  and  cou/d,  and 
shbuZd,  and  all  of  that.  I  knew  a  man  in  Gray- 
son who  was  to  prove  a  settlement  between  tWo 
litigants,  in  a  cdSe  were  a  small  amount,  some 
thirty,  forty,  or  fifty  dollars  were  involved;  he 
gave  in  his  testimony,  and  every  now  and  then 
he  Would  throw  in  a  word  of  four,  five,  or  six  syl- 
ablcs,  utterly  inappropriate  to  the  sense;  like 
butting  a  magnificent.guilted  saddle,  and  splen- 
did bridle,  Mnth  plated  bit  and  curb  on  a  mis- 
erkbl^  broken  down  ponev,  or  kH  tijt;  there  vbb 
jiist  l.t)6ut  8»  mtKJh-prTJiJnety  iti  hiH  applicatibn 


of  these  words;  and  I  saw  at  once  he  was  a  coun- 
try school  master;  he  had  proved  the  making  of 
the  settlement  and  said  1,  "when  did  it  take 
place?"  "On  the  39th  of  October,"  said  he. 
•'  Oh!  the  39th  of  October  you  say."  "Yes  sir." 
"Are  you  not  mistaken;  was  it  not  the  29th?" 
"  No  sir.  I  know  the  use  of  words  as  well  as 
you  do,  Mr.  Hardin,  and  say  it  was  the  39th."  I 
then  asked  him  how  many  days  there  were  in 
October.  He  said,  he  did  not  exactly  recollect, 
but  somewhere  between  forty  and  fifty.  "How 
many  months  are  there  in  the  year?"  "  Oh!  there 
you  are  a  little  ahead  of  me,  but  I  know  there 
are  over  ten  and  under  fifteen."  You  are  a 
school  master?  "  Yes" — said  he,  placing  his 
hands  on  his  hips,  and  looking  very  self-inrpor- 
tant — "thank  God  that  is  my  vocation,  and!  am 
making  an  application  for  a  free  school  up  here, 
and  I  wan't  you  to  help  me  if  you  will."  "  Sir," 
said  I,  "  I  will  do  it  with  all  my  heart,  for  you 
come  exactly  up  to  my  notion  of  a  free  school 
teacher."  Delegates  will  perhaps  talk  to  us 
of  the  free  schools  of  New  England,  Massachu- 
setts, for  instance;  she  has  a  greater  white  popu- 
lation than  we,  but  viewing  the  number  of  our 
slave  population,  we  have  about  as  many  repre- 
sentatives, as  she  has.  She  does  not  cover  a 
space  of  more  than  about  seven  thousand  square 
miles;  and  her  population  is  crowded  together, 
so  as  to  render  her  schools  accessible  to  all; 
there  she  had  large  donations  set  apart  by  in- 
dividuals of  great  and  overwhelming  wealth  to 
that  object;  while  we  have  no  such  means — we 
must  collect  by  direct  tax,  from  the  labor  of  the 
people  every  year;  at  an  expense  and  loss  inci- 
dent to  passing  through  the  sheriff's  hands,  of 
from  ten  to  twelve  per  cent.  I  once  made  out 
an  estimate  of  what  it  cost  to  get  direct  taxes 
into  the  treasury  of  the  United  States,  and  I  had 
a  table  made  out  showing  that  it  would  take 
$14  72  on  the  $100,  to  cover  the  delinquencies 
and  defalcations  and  collecting  commissions  of 
the  revenue  officers.  Now  and  then  it  will  hap- 
pen in  Kentucky,  as  the  same  thing  happens  else- 
where, that  the  sheriff  sends  his  money  up  to 
this  place  and  the  man  he  sends  it  by  unfortu- 
nately gets  robbed.  Nobody  knew  who  did  it; 
but  it  is  so  reported,  and  sooner  than  break  the 
sheriff  up  the  legislature  indemnifies  him.  This 
thing  may  happen  again,  and  I  have  no  objec- 
tion to  its  happening  again,  to  save  as  clever  a 
man  as  any  on  this  floor  from  utter  ruin. 

After  this  money  had  been  raised  at  a  loss  of 
ten  or  twelve  per  cent,  how  is  it  to  be  laid  out? 
I  know  it  can  be,  to  the  advantage  of  towns, 
and  that  as  you  increase  the  size  of  the  town, 
there  is  a  greater  demand  for  it.  And  I  do  not 
blame  my  friend  who  is  taking  notes,  (Mr.  Root,) 
for  what  I  suppose  will  be  his  position.  He 
lives  in  a  town  that  needs  these  free  schools  ; 
the  increase  of  population  proportionately  of 

Eoor  children  entails  a  tax  upon  the  towns  ;  un- 
;ss  you  can  collect  it  from  the  people  of  the 
country,  and  oblige  them  to  aid  m  supporting 
the  poor  children  that  are  thrown  there,  some- 
times by  the  death  of  parents,  who  depend  upon 
their  daily  work  for  a  living  ;  and  Hometimes  in 
one  way  and  sometimes  in  another.  But  as  to 
how  the  teachers  of  these  free  schools  in  thsse 
toMfc^ns  and  cities,  take  care  of  the  morals  of  the 
noholan  nial«  and  female,    I    would    lik*  my 


friend  iiom  Louisvilk,  (Mr.  Rudd.)  iv  gW^  his 
erperience.  According  to  what  he  has  told  m*  it 
would  be  a  most  raelancholy  tale  that  he  would 
relate.  Xow,  Kentucky  embraces  over  40,500 
square  miles,  and  free  schools  cannot  educate 
scholars,  upon  a  larger  theatre  than  nine  square 
miles  ;  ana  if  we  scatter  them  all  over  the  state 
fairly,  it  would  require  a  number  of  schools  be- 
yond what  the  means  of  the  state,  after  paying 
the  expenses  of  government,  could  provide.  Xot 
less  than  4,500  free  schools  would  be  required  ; 
or  if  we  do  not  do  that,  the  result  will  be,  that 
the  poor  and  thinly  peopled  counties,  although 
taxed  for,  would  not  have  the  benefit  of  those 
free  schools ;  that  will  be  the  result.  I  would 
not  send  a  child  to  a  free  school,  and  would 
rather  pay  for  his  education  myself.  At  this 
dav  I  send  some  half  dozen  onildren  to  the 
Methodist,  or  Catholic  colleges,  and  would  far 
rather  do  that,  than  see  the  poor  children  thrown 
into  these  miserable  free  schools ;  and  every 
body  who  knows  me,  knows  that  besides  my 
own  children,  I  am  at  all  times  educating  not 
less  llian  five  or  six  others.  Not  even  the  gen- 
tleman from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor,)  is  a  firmer 
advocate  of  the  doctrine,  that  the  dissemina- 
tion of  a  good  education,  is  necessary  to  tlie  pros- 
perity and  perpetuity  of  a  free  government  like 
ours.'  In  the  reports  that  have  been  made  upon 
this  subject,  most  manifest  and  palpable  injus- 
tice has  been  done  the  state  of  Kentucky.  We 
heard  to  dav,  and  I  was  glad  to  hear  the  young 
delegate  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston,)  disdain- 
ing a  comparison  between  the  talents  of  the 
northern  states  and  the  state  of  Kentucky.  I 
do  not  believe  that  there  is  a  state  in  the  Union, 
that  possesses  so  great  an  amount  of  talent  and 
information  as  Kentucky.  I  recollect  very  well 
that  some  thirty-seven  or  thirty-eight  years  ago, 
that  the  celebrated  James  Buchanan,  late  secre- 
tary of  state  under  Mr.  Polk,  commenced  the  prac- 
tice of  law,  in  the  town  of  Elizabeth,  and  county 
of  Hardin.  There  I  became  acquainted  with 
him,  and  at  that  time  I  discovered  in  him  a  man 
of  fine  educatiou  and  respectable  talents.  In 
the  course  of  a  few  months  he  began  to  look  un- 
happv,  and  as  if  he  was  experiencing  some  dis- 
appointment, nis  father  had  given  him  a  large 
landed  estate  in  Hardin  county,  about  which 
there  was  some  difficulty  ;  and  at  last  he  made 
me  his  attorney  at  law,  and  aftomey  in  fact,  and 
went  back  and  settled  in  Pennsylvania,  where 
he  was  raised.  Ten  or  fifteen  years  afterwards,  I 
met  him  in  congress,  and  overand  over  again  have 
we  laughed  when  he  told  me  this  remarkable 
story.  "I  went  to  Kentucky,"  said  he  "expect- 
ing to  be  a  great  man  there  ;  and  every  lawyer 
I  met  at  the  bar  there  was  my  equal,  and  more 
than  half  of  them  my  superiors,  and  I  gave  it 
up." 

I  recollect  the  first  time  I  eyer  saw  Daniel 
"Webster,  and  heard  him  speak.  And  the  con- 
yersation  we  had  about  it,  we  have  laughed  over 
twenty  times  since;  and  we  did  so  the  last  time 
I  saw'him.  He  went  oflF  as  cold  as  an  icicle  and 
as  pure,  as  if  it  hung  from  the  temple  of  the 
maiden  goddess  Diana.  His  language  was  pure, 
his  manner  was  cold ;  and  I  remarked  to  nim, 
"Sir,  if  you  will  come  and  settle  in  Kentucky, 
and  learn  our  mode  of  speaking,  you  will  be  an 
orator  equal  to  any  Greece  or  Rome  ever  pro- 


duced." And  I  heard  Lim  aay,  th<  la^t  time  I 
eyer  saw  him,  "would  to  God  I  had  taken  your 
.  advice."  We  are  a  iiappy  medium  between  the 
north  and  the  south.  The  soutliem  men  go  off 
something  like  the  fellow  in  the  doggerel  *ong, 
Jim  Crow,  I  believe: 

"Tbere  was  a  hoosier  come  to  town. 

And  swallowed  a  hogshead  of  molassw  down; 

The  hoops  flew  off,  the  hogshead  bust. 

And  he  went  off  in  a  thundergust."  (Laughter.) 

I  do  think  that  Kentucky  has  produced,  not 
only  the  best  and  happiest  style  of  oratory  of 
any  state  in  the  union,  but — I  may  be  mistaken — 
the  best  in  the  world.  And  I  do  think  there  i^ 
as  general  a  diffusion  of  education  among  the 
j  people  of  Kentucky  as  in  anv  other  state.  T  re- 
I  collect  a  gentleman,  and  I  tliink  his  name  was 
I  Smith,  who  was  taking  notes  as  to  the  number 
I  of  those  who  could  not  read  and  write,  and  he 
i  had  reported  every  man  on  a  certain  grand  jury, 
as  not  being  able  to  write  his  own  name.  They 
i  had  been  quizzing  him,  for  there  was  not  a  man 
■  among  them  who  could  not  read  and  write.  I 
said  to  him,  "These  men  are  quizzing  you,  dont 
j  put  it  in  your  book;  for  if  you  do,  I  shall  have 
to  make  a  speech  and  tell  the  people  they  are 
quizzing  you." 

This  thing  will  be  manifestly  unjust  in  its  op- 
i  rations  upon  the  country,  as  compared  with  tne 
j  towns  and  cities,  on  the  Ohio  border  particular- 
I  ly.     It  is  manifestly  unjust  as  to  a  large  portion, 
iof  the  people  of  Kentucky,   in  a  religious  point 
of  view.     There  is  a  chatholic  population  of  per- 
ihaps  sixty  thousand  in  Kentucky.     We  know 
!  that  they  clevote  more  money,  time,  and  energy, 
I  to  the  education  of  their  children,  than  any  other 
i  religious  denomination  in  the  state;  and  I  say  it, 
!  because  coming  from  a  protestant,  Ihope  the  ad- 
I  mission  will  be  taken  as  true.     Do  you  believe 
I  that  they  will  ever  have  the  management  of  our 
free  school  sy.stem?    Do  you  believe   that  they 
I  will  ever  send  their  children   to  a  free  school? 
j  Xo,  never,  never.     I  talked  to  the   leading  cath- 
I  olics,  and  they  protested  against  it.     And  yet, 
I  some  sixty  thousand  people  are  to  be  taxed   for 
{ free  schools,  to  which  they  will   never  send  a 
child.     And  I  ask   who  are    to   control   these 
schools?    Perhaps  the  men  are  to  be  appointed 
by  the  legislature;  perhaps  to  be  elected  by  the 
people;  I  do  not  know  which,  as  I  havenotseen 
that  portion  of  the  constitution  providing  for  it. 
If  the  choice  is  to  be  by  either,  we  know  that 
the  catholics  stand  no  chance;  and  yet  that  de- 
nomination comprise  one  third   of  the   popula- 
tion of  the  county  I  represent,  and  one  third  of 
the  counties  of  Marion  and  Washington.     And  I 
venture  to  say  that  in  the  counties  of  Nelson, 
Washington,  Marion.  Spencer,  Hardin,  Larue, 
Grayson,  Meade,  and  Breckinridge,  there  is  not 
less  than  three  thousand  voters  who  are  members 
of  the  catholic  denomination;  and  yet  they  are 
to  be  taxed  for  the  support  of  this  system  without 
realizing  the  least    possible  benefit  therefrom. 
And  I  will  tell  you  more;  you  will  not  get  good 
teachers,  and  tke  teachLng  will   be  thrown  into 
the  hands  of  men,  perhaps,  that  even  we  Metho- 
dists would  not  like  to  stand  to.    I  am  not  a 
methodist,  but  I  am  a  lobby  member,  and   I  be- 
lieve a  good  deal   in  that  doctrine.    I  believe 
good  works  go  a  great  way  towards  getting  a 
man  Into  heaven ;  and  that  they  are  the   best 


turupikeg  and  railroads  npon  which  they  can 
travel  to  it.  There  is  a  doctrine,  once  elected, 
always  elected ;  that  I  do  not  understand.  I  do 
not  believe  a  methodist  would  ever  be  elected  to 
the  post  of  superintendent  of  these  schools. 
And  who  wouldbe?  Why,  perhaps  only  such 
a  class  of  men  as  Robert  J.  Breckinridge,  who, 
instead  of  attending  to  the  duties  for  which  he 
was  elected,  and  paid  by  the  people,  is  going 
about  making  speeches,  the  tendency  of  which 
is  to  incite  our  negroes  to  cut  our  throats,  and 
to  burn  our  houses  and  villages.  That  is  the 
tendency  of  the  doctrine  preached  by  the  super- 
intendent of  education  during  the  last  year. 

Will  the  members  of  this  convention,  by  the 
adoption  of  this  report,  fix  its  provisons  upon 
the  people  as  long  as  this  constitution  shall  lastV 
You  are  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  several  sums 
to  which  1  have  referred,  amounting  to  some- 
thing like  75  or  $76,000,  for  all  time  to  come,  if 
you  do  that.  Then,  no  matter  how  unpopular 
or  how  objectionable  it  may  be  to  the  people,  they 
cannot  get  rid  of  it  without  calling  another  con- 
vention. I  beg  of  the  convention  to  bear  this  in 
mind,  and  not  put  it  in  the  constitution.  Leave 
it  open  to  the  legislature.  In  the  name  of  God, 
are  we  to  leave  nothing  open  to  the  legislature? 
We  have  taken  from  thera  their  last  quarry-— the 
granting  of  divorces.  They  were  powerful  in 
that.  A  certain  gentleman  in  a  lower  county 
was  once  pleading  a  chancery  suit,  in  which  he 
had  to  demur  to  a  part,  and  plead  to  a  part,  and 
answer  to  a  part,  and  in  making  his  speech  he 
got  very  much  tangled  up  in  it.  At  last,  clap- 
ping his  finger  to  his  nose,  he  said,  may  it  please 
your  honor,  this  chancery  business  is  a  little  over 
my  hooks,  but  I  am  terrible  upon  petitions  and 
summons'.  So  with  the  legislature — they  were 
terrible  on  divorces,  and  Ave  have  taken  that 
away  from  them.  They  were  equally  good  in 
changing  Betsy  to  Polly,  and  Tom  to  Harry, 
and  Dick  to  Tommy.  They  were  perfect  mas- 
ters of  that  subject,  and  yet  we  have  taken  that 
away  from  them.  And  we  have  also  taken  away 
from  them  the  right  to  say  that  a  stream  is  nav- 
igable, which  God  Almighty  said  was  not. 
Leave  them  a  little  to  do— let  thera  decide  what 
shall  hereafter  be  done  as  to  these  free  schools. 
I  had  far  rather  that  this  tax  of  three  cents 
should  be  appropriated  to  the  endowment  of 
colleges  and  academies,  for  the  education  of 
young  men  capable  of  teaching,  than  see  it 
thrown  away,  as  is  here  proposed.  Some  of  us 
I  know,  have  taken  up  the  idea  that  the  people 
are  remarkably  well  educated  in  the  New  Eng- 
land states,  inMassachusetts,  Connecticut,  Rhooe 
Island,  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  and  Vermont, 
or  as  the  yankees  call  it,  "Varmount;"  but  it  is 
a  mistake.  And  to  sustain  the  idea,  there  come 
to  us  from  those  states  numbers  of  young  ladies 
as  teachers.  I  know  what  brings  them  here — 
ostensibly  for  teaching — it  is  really  for  hus- 
bands. And  they  are  generally  successful  too  in 
getting  very  respectable  husbands.  Teaching  is 
the  pretext,  but  a  husband  is  the  object.  Like 
your  professed  gamblers,  who  come  to  town 
dressed  in  their  fine  clothes  and  jewelry,  gam- 
bling is  their  pretext,  but  it  is  only  until  they 
can  discover  wnere  the  atrike  is  to  be  made,  for 
robbery  and  plunder  is  their  real  object. 

For  my  own  part,  I  am  against  this  system 


being  adopted  in  the  coiistituiion,  and  so  far  aa 
I  can  collect  the  public  sentiment  of  my  county 
and  the  counties  in  the  neighborhood,  it  is  a- 
gainst  it  also.  I  do  not  believe  we  can  carry  the 
constitution  with  it  in.  Already  to-day  have 
we,  on  the  motion  of  my  friend  over  the  way, 
(Mr.  Gholson,)  adopted  a  provision  which  will 
entail  on  the  people  an  expense  of  $30,000  or 
$40,000,  before  we  get  through  with  it.  If  we 
go  on  to  pack  the  constitution  in  this  way,  do 
you  believe  we  can  carry  it  before  the  people? 
I  do  not,  and  I  know  we  cannot.  How  can  I, 
when  I  go  home,  commend  this  constitution  to 
my  people,  and  to  those  of  the  neighboring  coun- 
ties where  I  am  in  the  habit  of  speaking,  and 
where  a  large  portion  of  the  people  have  some 
faith  in  me.  I  cannot  do  it,  if  it  shall  contain 
a  clause  taxing  tliem  at  least  three  cents  on  the 
$100,  and  from  which  they  cannot  get  clear  of,  so 
long  as  this  constitution  may  last.  When  the 
gentleman  first  stated  this  thing — I  do  not  know 
whether  it  was  my  friend  from  Carter  or  from 
Mason — I  thought  it  was  all  a  kind  of  a  joke. 
I  felt  a  good  deal  like  the  gamblers  at  Vicks- 
burg,  when  the  people  were  going  to  hang  them 
up.  They  thought  first  that  the  whole  proceed- 
ings on  that  occasion  were  a  joke,  merely  in- 
tended to  scare  them  off.  "When  they  were 
placed  into  the  wagons  that  were  to  carry  them 
to  execution,  they  asked,  "come  boys,  hav'nt 
you  carried  this  joke  far  enough?"  "A  little 
further,"  was  the  reply.  When  the  music  struck 
up,  and  the  wagons  moved  on,  and  they  in  them, 
they  asked,  "  in  the  name  of  God  where  are  you 
going?'"  "To  the  top  of  the  hill,"  was  told 
thorn.  "Oh,  hav'nt  you  carried  the  joke  far 
enough  now?"  said  they.  "A  little  further," 
was  again  the  reply.  When  they  got  to  the  top 
of  the  hill,  and  saw  the  gallows,  "Lord  Jesus," 
they  exclaimed!  "  have  you  not  carried  this  joke 
far  enough?  "  "  A  little  further,"  was  again  the 
reply;  and  when  they  were  made  to  mount  the 
cart,  and  the  rope  was  around  their  necks,  they 
were  told  "  the  joke  had  gone  just  far  enough," 
and  cracking  the  whip,  the  wagon  started  ahead 
and  there  they  swung. 

I  had  thought  gentlemen  were  merely  joking 
in  this  matter  and  had  carried  it  far  enough,  but 
it  seems  now  as  if  they,  too,  were  disposed  to 
crack  the  whip  and  leave  us  all  swinging  to- 
gether. I  am  confident  tnat  the  country  will 
not  approve  of  the  system.  It  may  be  an  ad- 
vantage to  the  towns,  but  it  will  be  a  great  bur- 
den on  the  country,  to  which  they  should  not  be 
asked  in  justice  to  yield.  The  towns  should  re- 
member, as  the  old  saying  is  among  the  women, 
"if,  when  you  go  to  market  you  expect  to  get 
meat,  you  must  expect  to  get  bones  also;"  and 
they  must  expect  to  get  their  share  of  inconven- 
iences as  well  as  advantages,  by  living  in  town. 
I  hope,  therefore,  we  shall  not  adopt  this  report. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  beg  leave  to  correct  my 
friend.  He  sometimes  charges  us  with  going  off 
half-cocked,  but  I  think  he  has  erred  on  this  oc- 
casion. He  seems  to  think  that  I  am  in  favor  of 
engrafting  this  section  which  has  been  reported 
by  the  gentleman  from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor,)  od 
the  constitution  of  this  state. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  do  not  mean  any  thing  of 
the  sort. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.     If  the  gentleman   does  not 


88S 


mean  that,  I  am  at  a  loaa  to  know  what  he  does  I 
mean.  He  either  means  that,  or  he  means  no- 
thing. I  am  as  much  in  favor  of  common  school 
education  as  any  gentleman  on  this  floor,  but  it 
is  well  known  that  we  have  no  school  fund,  un- 
less we  take  it  out  of  the  pocksts  of  the  people. 
If  we  put  into  this  constitution  the  provision 
now  before  us,  the  money  will  have  to  be  raised 
by  additional  taxation;  and  to  this  I  cannot  eon- 
sent.  But  I  am  willing  to  leave  it  to  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people,  to  say  what  shall  be 
done  on  the  subject  of  education. 

It  is  true, — and  it  is  perhaps  to  that  that  the 
gentleman  from  !Xelson  alluded — that  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  a  revision  of  the  law.  I  hope  the  gentle- 
man from  Nelson  does  not  mean  to  move  a  re- 
consideration of  the  vote  adopting  the  reports 
of  the  committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions, 
for  the  purpose  of  getting  rid  of  the  section  that 
was  adopted  on  ray  motion,  to  provide  for  a  cod- 
ification of  the  laws,  which  is  so  necessary  to 
the  state  at  large.  The  laws  now  in  existence 
are  so  complex,  and  scattered  over  so  many 
books,  that  the  farmers  of  the  countrv  are  not 
able  to  ascertain  what  the  laws  are.  This  being 
the  case,  I  trust  the  gentleman  will  not  meddle 
with  the  provision  which  we  have  adopted,  for 
if  there  is  anything  for  which  ray  constituents 
are  willing  to  be  taxed,  each  his  respective  pit- 
tance, it  is  to  know  what  are  the  lawa  under 
which  they  live. 

On  the  subject  of  education,  it  cannot  surely 
be  that  this  convention  will  tax  the  people 
against  their  will.  Let  us  pa.ss  it  by,  and  leave 
it  to  the  people's  representatives. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  next  obtained  the  floor,  and 
on  his  motion  the  convention  took  a  recess. 

Evi:xncG  SESSiox. 
Mr.  PROCTOR.  Whatever  has  been  often 
said,  when  repeated,  I  am  aware,  falls  like  snow 
upon  the  water,  and  is  soon  blotted  from  the 
recollection  of  man;  and  I  know,  sir,  that  in 
days  past  and  gone,  there  has  been  so  much  said 
by  politicians  when  candidates  before  the  people 
for  office,  in  favor  of  education  and  common 
schools,  that  any  thing  that  could  now  be  said 
in  favor  of  the  system,  is  apt  to  be  looked  upon 
by  the  people  as  a  familiar  story,  only  re-told  to 

full  and  deceive  them.  But,  Mr.  President,  as 
promised  my  constituents,  when  a  candidate 
for  a  seat  in  this  convention,  that  if  elected,  I 
would  use  my  bt«t  exertions  to  secure  the  incor- 
poration of  a  clause  in  the  constitution,  which 
would  permanently  secure  to  the  people  of  this 
commonwealth  not  only  the  fund  set  apart 
by  the  general  government  for  the  purposes  of 
education  to  the  State  of  Kentucky,  but  that 
also,  which  the  people,  in  their  magnanimity, 
had  voted  to  tax  them.selves  with  at  the  August 
election,  1843.  for  that  purpose.  I  will,  there- 
fore, ask  the  indulgence  of  the  convention,  for  a 
short  time,  while  I  make  a  few  remarks  upon 
the  report  of  the  committee  of  education,  and 
while  I  attempt  to  reply  to  some  of  the  remarks 
advanced  bv  my  venerable  and  talented  friend 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin.)  I  know,  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, the  difficulties  a  young  man  like  myself 
has  to  contend  against,  when  attempting  to  re- 
ply to  arguments  emanating  from  a  gentleman  of 
his  age  and  experience.    I  know,  too,  sir,  the 


ingenuity  of  that  gentleman's  mind  when  brought 
to  bear  against  any  proposition  which  he  is  op- 
posed to  seeing  engrafted  in  the  constitution 
which  we  are  engaged  in  making;  and,  sir,  I 
have  not  been  a  little  amused  to  ^ce  the  adroit- 
ness of  that  gentleman  when  any  proposition 
wa=J  introduced  into  this  convention  which  was 
not  in  keeping  with  his  own  peculi.-ir  views. 
No  sooner  is  a  proposition  brought  forward  here, 
to  which  the  g^-ntleman  is  opposed,  than  all  the 
mighty  powers  of  his  intellect  are  brought  to  bear 
against  it,  and  that,  too,  upon  the  ground  that 
it  will  encumber  and  endanger  the  adoption  of 
the  constitution  bv  the  people.  Now,  sir,  I  do 
not  believe  that  t5ie  adoption  of  this  report  in 
the  constitution  will  at  all  endanger  the  adop- 
tion of  the  constitution  by  the  people,  for  I  be- 
lieve that  if  there  is  any  one  question  that  has 
been  settled  by  the  people,  and  any  one  subject 
upon  which  they  require  prompt  action  on  the 
part  of  this  convention,  it  is,  that  the  school 
fund  shall  be  permanently  secured  bv  a  consti- 
tutional provision;  and  my  venera'ble  friend 
who  has  in  his  remarks  to-day  so  much  dreaded 
our  entering  into  detail  in  the  constitution  upon 
this  subject,  has,  upon  former  occasions,  urged, 
with  all  the  powers  of  his  great  mind,  the  adop- 
tion of  propositions  in  the  constitution  whicii, 
in  ray  humble  judgment,  were  not  demanded  by 

{mblic  sentiment,  and  which  should  have  been 
eft  to  be  settled  by  the  legislature  of  the  coun- 
try. Yet,  sir,  whenever  any  gentleman  brings 
forward  any  proposition  which  does  not  meet 
with  his  ow'n  peculiar  views  of  propriety,  that 
gentleman's  voice  is  ready  to  raise  the  alarm, 
and  to  warn  this  convention  of  the  danger  of 
entering  into  detail  in  the  formation  of  the  con- 
stitution that  we  are  engaged  in  making.  For 
my  own  part,  I  am  not  to  be  frightened  from 
what  I  consider  to  be  my  duty  upon  this  or  any 
other  subject,  by  any  such  a  course  of  reason- 
ing. 

Sir,  the  position  of  my  venerable  friend  upon 
this  subject,  reminds  me  forcibly  of  an  anecdote 
told  by  a  distinguished  friend  of  mine  during 
last  summer,  of  an  old  bachelor  who  was  in  love 
with  two  very  beautiful  girls,  one  of  which  had 
black  and  the  other  blue  eyes,  and  being  anxious 
to  conceal  from  each  his  partiality  for  the  other. 
Happening  to  be  in  company  with  them  both 
one  dav,  he  first  remarked  to  his  black  eyed 
Mary  tliat  his  heart  was  with  her;  then  turning 
to  Kis  blue  eved  Susan,  he  remarked  that  his 
heart  was  witli  her.  In  a  short  time  afterwards 
the  girls  walked  into  the  garden  to  pick  roses, 
and  while  there  they  compared  notes  and  found 
out  where  the  old  fellow's  heart  was.  So,  re- 
turning to  the  parlor,  they  walked  up  to  him 
and  demanded  to  know  of  him  where  his  heart 
then  was.  Glancing  an  eve  of  devoted  love  first 
to  one,  and  then  to  the  otlier,  he  exclaimed — 

"The  modest  black,  and  the  pierciDg  blue, 
I  cannot  decide  betwixt  ye  two." 

Said  he,  my  heart  is  just  like  the  pendulum  of 
a  clock — now  tishere,  now  tis  there,  and  as  you 
are  fair  and  lovely,  if  you  have  no  objections  I 
will  take  you  both. 

Just  so  it  is,  Mr.  President,  with  mv  venera- 
ble friend.  (Laughter.)  One  day  wlien  some 
favorite  project  comes  up  for  the  consideration  of 


S86 


this  conveution,  which  he  approves,  though  it 
inaj'  enter  ever  so  much  into  (letail,  we  find  him 
battling  with  all  tht^  powers  of  his  great  intel- 
lect, in  support  of  his  proposition.  But  sir,  no 
sooner  is  the  proposition  submitted  to  this  con- 
vention to  secure  to  the  people  of  this  common- 
wealth the  scliool  fund  of  the  state  from  the  con- 
trol of  the  legislature,  than  the  herculean  voice 
of  my  venerable  friend  is  raised  in  opposition  to 
that  proposition;  and  because  the  proposition 
does  not  meet  the  views  of  that  gentleman,  he 
is  ready  to  proclaim  at  once,  that  its  adoption 
will  be  fatal  to  tlie  adoption  of  the  constitu- 
tion. 

Mr.  President,  I  believe  that  the  adoption  of 
a  provision  in  the  constitution,  for  the  perma- 
nent security  of  the  school  fund  of  this  com- 
monwealth is  demanded  by  the  people  of  the 
state;  and,  sir,  I  have  the  strongest  arguments 
to  predicate  this  belief  upon;  for  if  you  will 
turn  to  the  vote  cast  in  favor  of  the  additional 
tax  of  two  cents,  in  1848,  you  will  find  that 
there  were  seventy-four  thousand  six  hundred 
and  twenty  eight  votes  cast  in  favor  of  this  prop- 
osition, and  but  thirty-seven  thousand  seven 
hundred  and  forty-six  votes  against  it;  being  a 
majority  in  favor  of  the  tax,  of  thirty-six  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  eighty-two  votes.  By 
a  reference  to  that  vote  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
county  which  I  have  the  honor  of  representing 
in  this  convention  cast  one  thousand  and  fifty- 
seven  votes  in  favor,  and  but  two  hundred  and 
seven  against  this  proposition;  and  in  support- 
ing the  report  of  the  committee,  I  feel,  therefore, 
that  I  am  but  obeying  the  will  of  my  constitu- 
ents, as  expressed  by  them  at  the  polls.  But 
my  venerable  friend  tells  us  that  the  people  vo- 
ted upon  this  subject  ignorantly,  and  that  they 
did  not  understand  the  nature  of  the  votes  which 
they  were  giving;  and  that  if  they  had  under- 
stood the  effect  of  it,  they  neverwould  have  cjist 
their  votes  in  favor  of  this  additional  tax.  Sir, 
if  that  argument  of  the  gentleman  is  correct,  it 
is  one  of  the  strongest  reasons,  to  my  mind,  why 
we  should  adopt  in  this  constitution  a  clause 
providing  for  a  system  of  general  education.  If, 
sir,  the  people  of  Kentucky  were  so  ignorant  as 
to  be  gulled  and  deceived  in  voting  for  a  propo- 
sition that  they  did  not  understand,  it  is  high 
time  that  the  representatives  of  the  people  were 
taking  some  steps  to  enligliteu  their  understand- 
ings. But.  sir,  I  believe  that  the  people  did  un- 
derstand this  measure,  and  that  they  require  and 
expect  of  this  convention,  that  we  will  secure, 
by  a  constitutional  provision,  not  only  the  fund 
set  apart  by  the  general  government  to  the  state, 
for  the  purposes  of  education 

Mr.  HAKDIN.  The  gentleman  is  mistaken. 
Congress  did  not  declare  to  what  purpose  this 
fund  was  to  be  applied. 

Mr.  PROCTOR.  Mjr  friend  informs  me  that 
congress  did  not  designate  the  object  of  this 
fund,  at  the  time  of  setting  it  apart  to  the  states. 
"Well,  sir,  it  is  known  to  all  that  it  was  the  gen- 
eral understanding  of  congress  at  the  time  of 
setting  apart  to  the  states  the  surplus  revenue, 
that  it  was  to  be  applied  to  the  purposes  of  edu- 
cation; and  our  legislature,  acting  upon  this  un- 
derstanding, at  its  first  session  after  congress  set 
this  fund  apart  to  us,  dedicated  it,  by  a  solemn 
act,  for  that  purpose  alone.     But,  sir,  in  viola- 


tion of  every  principle  of  justice  and  equality, 
we  have  seen  that  the  legislature  has  disregarded 
her  own  solemn  acts,  and  instead  of  appropria- 
ting this  fund,  as  it  was  originally  intended  it 
should  be,  they  have  squandered  it  in  wasteful 
and  extravagant  expenditures  for  internal  im- 
provements, which  have  been  local  and  partial 
in  their  beneficial  iniiuences.  And  now,  sir, 
when  my  constituents  come  up  and  demand  of 
this  convention  that  justice  may  be  done  to  them, 
they  are  to  be  told  by  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son that  they  must  be  left  to  the  mercy  of  the 
legislature — that  body  which,  in  days  that  are 
past,  has  been  so  just  in  all  its  acts.  For  my 
part,  Mr.  President,  I  am  anxious  to  see  this  re- 
port adopted  in  the  constitution,  and  1  shall,  by 
every  act  of  mine,  endeavor  to  secure  this  school 
fund  by  a  permanent  provision  in  the  constitu- 
tion. 

That  all  free  governments,  Mr.  President,  are 
based  upon  the  intelligence  and  virtue  of  the 
people,  IS  an  almost  universally  admitted  truth; 
for  we  all  know,  sir,  that  constitution  and  laws, 
which  are  intended  to  protect  the  weak  and  well 
meaning  against  the  strong  and  unprincipled, 
are  but  feeble  barriers  in  communities  where 
vice  and  ignorance  usurps  the  place  of  wisdom 
and  learning.  But  as  1  have  remarked,  while 
these  general  truths  are  admitted  by  all,  it  is  to 
be  greatly  feared  that  we  are  not  practically 
alive  to  the  importance  of  these  great  truths  on 
the  operation  of  government;  and  the  success  of 
our  great  experiment  in  carrying  on  a  republican 
form  of  government  will  depend  in  a  great  meas- 
ure, upon  the  cultivated  intelligence  of  the  peo- 
ple. While,  sir,  we  are  engaged  in  making  a 
constitution,  which  is  to  be  tlioroughly  demo- 
cratic in  all  its  operations,  and  while  we  are 
throwing  back  into  the  hands  of  the  people  all 
political  power,  the  solemn  obligation  is  resting 
upon  us  as  their  representatives,  to  secure  to 
them  and  their  posterity  the  means  of  securing 
to  their  children  the  blessings  of  an  education, 
in  order  that  they  may  be  qualified  to  discharge 
the  duties  that  may  devolve  upon  them.  For 
one,  I  believe,  with  the  first  eminent  law-giver 
of  Pennsylvania  who  took  care  to  incorporate 
in  the  frame  of  the  government  itself,  which  he 
prepared  for  that  state  so  early  as  the  year  1682, 
"that  men  of  virtueand  intelligence  are  requisite 
to  preserve  a  good  constitution,  and  that  these 
qualities  do  not  descend  with  worldly  inheritance, 
but  are  to  be  carefully  propagated  by  a  virtuous 
education  of  the  rising  generation."  And  never, 
Mr.  President,  did  man  speak  more  truly  than 
did  that  old  quaker  law-giver  of  Pennsylvania; 
and  believing  with  him,  tJiat  men  of  intelligence 
are  requisite  to  preserve  a  good  government,  and 
that  all  attempts  to  build  up  free  institutions 
without  them  must  virtually  fail,  I  shall  vote 
for  every  proposition  that  will  tend  to  the  promo- 
tion of  learning,  and  the  diffusion  of  knowledge 
throughout  the  state,  and  that  will  be  calculated 
to  secure,  upon  a  permanent  foundation,  a  system 
of  common  schools.  Sir,  while  we  are  making 
a  constitution  that  confers  ontlie  people  the  pow- 
er of  choosing  all  the  officers  of  tne  government, 
both  civil  and  political,  how  important  is  it  that 
we  should  also  extend  to  them,  as  far  as  we  can, 
the  means  by  which  they  may  inform  themselves 
a*  to  tlic  nature  and  responsibilities  of  tliose  high 


887 


trusts  thus  confided  to  their  charge.  Much,  Mr. 
President,  has  been  said  upon  the  floor  of  this 
convention  about  the  capacity  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky  for  self-government;  and  ^vhile  I  be- 
lieve that  the  people  of  Kentucky  will  compare 
with  any  upon  the  globe  for  virtue,  patriotism, 
and  hospitality;  and  that  they  are  perhaps,  pos- 
sessed of  more  native  genius,  and  fertility  of  in- 
tellect than  any  people  who  have  ever  lived  in 
any  age  or  clime;  yet,  sir,  the  fact  is  not  to  be 
disguised,  that  there  are  a  large  number  of  per- 
sons in  Kentucky  who  are  both  ignorant  and  un- 
educated, and  subject  to  be  controlled  by  the 
vicious  and  unprincipled.  It  appears  by  the 
census  of  1840,  that  there  were  in  Kentucky,  of 
males  and  females  over  the  age  of  five  and  un- 
der twenty  years  of  age,  233,710  persons.  Of 
this  number,  there  were  in  colleges  and  univer- 
sities 1 ,419;  in  academies  and  grammar  schools 
4,906;  in  common  schools  24,641;  making  a  to- 
tal of  30,966,  leaving  over  200,000  children  be- 
tween the  ages  of  five  and  twenty  not  at  school. 
And  most  deplorable  of  all,  Mr.  President,  is  the 
fact,  that  there  was  at  the  same  period  of  time 
in  this  proud  old  commonwealth  of  ours,  of 
which  we  boast  so  much,  over  forty  thousand  free 
white  citizens  over  the  age  of  twenty  vears,  who 
could  neither  read  nor  write;  a  fact  that  is  not 
verv  flattering  to  our  vanity  as  Kentuckians. 

!N  ow,  sir,  while  I  would  go  as  far  as  any  gen- 
tleman in  this  convention  in  extending  to  the 
people  all  political  power  and  sovereignty,  I  am 
not  one  of  those,  who  will  either  natter  the 
vices  or  the  ignorance  of  tlie  people,  for  I  hold 
that  extravagant  and  fulsome  adulation  is  as 
false  and  ridiculous,  when  applied  to  the  people, 
as  it  is  when  applied  to  tne  monarch  on  his 
throne.  Let  me  say  to  this  convention,  that  the 
labors  of  the  divine,  the  moralist,  and  the  legis- 
lator, will  avail  but  little  in  this  country  to- 
wards the  preservation  of  liberty,  unless  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  themselves  are  made 
intelligent.  If  they  are  not  educated,  the  dema- 
gogue and  political  aspirant  to  office  will  still 
continue  to  inflame  their  pa.ssions,  and  excite 
their  prejudices. 

While,  however,  these  great  and  important 
truths  are  recognized  and  admitted  by  all,  it  is 
to  be  feared  that  gentlemen  are  not  practically 
alive  to  the  important  influence  of  these  truths 
on  the  operation  of  our  government.  The  grad- 
ual extension  of  the  privilege  of  free  suffrage, 
in  the  provisions  of  the  constitution  which  we 
are  about  to  adopt,  and  which  is  to  place  in  the 
hands  of  the  people  the  selection  of  every  officer 
of  the  government,  imposes  on  the  members  of 
this  convention;  the  solemn  duty  of  making  a 
corresponding  effort  to  extend  with  these  great 
privileges  the  lights  of  knowledge,  and  the 
means  of  cultivating  the  minds  of  those  who  are 
to  come  after  us.  For,  sir,  if  we  mean  to  pre- 
serve our  free  institutions,  we  must  watch  over 
them;  we  must  learn  to  know  and  number  our 

freat  political  rights;  we  must  study  the  tenure 
y  which  we  hold  them;  and  we  must  also  qual- 
ify ourselves  to  discern  from  afar  off,  the  dangers 
that  threaten  us — for  the  rights  and  liberty  of 
man  are  always  in  danger  from  some  quarter; 
they  are  always  a  prey  to  the  worst  passions  of 
the'liuman  heart.  Ambition,  in  its  «agle  flight, 
19  always  hovering  over  the  ntst  wh«re  onr  dear- 


est blessings  are,  and  ready  at  anv  unguarded 
moment  to  seize  upon  them;  and  the  serpent 
guile  of  avarice,  is  ready  at  any  unguarled  mo- 
ment, to  invade  the  asylum  of  our  mo^t  sacred 
rights.  If,  then,  we  would  guard  those  rights, 
we  must  qualify  ourselves  and  those  who  are  to 
come  after  us,  to  discern  from  "afar  off"  the 
dangers  that  threaten  us;  and  we  must  learn  "to 
trace  the  serpent  by  his  slime,  and  to  know  the 
eagle  by  his  portentous  scream."  I  therefore, 
Mr.  President,  stand  here  demanding  it  as  but 
an  act  of  justice  to  my  constituents,  that  the  fund 
mentioned  in  the  report  of  the  committee,  be  se- 
cured to  them  by  a  constitutional  provision. 
And  when  I  make  this  demand — a  demand  so 
just — am  I  to  be  told  that  we  must  look  to  the 
legislature  for  our  rights;  and  that  we  are  to  be 
denied  the  protection  of  the  constitution?  Sir, 
is  it  right  that  my  constituents,  who  have  con- 
tributed to  the  expense  of  your  government — who 
have  been  taxed  to  build  your  railroads  and  your 
turnpikes — who  have  contributed  towards  the 
slack  watering  of  your  beautiful  Kentucky  and 
Green  rivers — and  who  will  be  compelled  to 
contribute  to  the  payment  of  your  state  debt, 
which  was  created  for  the  purpose  of  comple- 
ting these  works — in  plain  terms,  are  we  of  the 
mountains,  who  are  poor,  to  be  taxed  to  improve 
the  rivers  and  roads  of  you  who  are  wealthy? 
And  then,  sir,  when  the  general  government  has 
set  apart  to  us  a  fund,  for  the  purpose  of  general 
and  equal  education,  and  when  we,  by  our  gen- 
erosity, have  voted  to  lax  ourselves  for  the  pur- 
pose of  raising  an  additional  sum,  for  this  same 
purpo.se,  is  it  right  for  us  to  be  told  that  there  is 
no  constitutional  security  for  us,  and  that  our 
rights  are  to  be  disregarded?  I  hope,  sir,  that 
this  convention  will  act  with  that  wisdom  and 
foresight,  that  have  controlled  the  action  of  near- 
ly all  the  conventions  which  have  met  for  the 
purpose  of  amending  the  different  state  consti- 
tutions, for  the  last  ten  or  twenty  years;  and 
that  we  will,  by  a  provision  in  our  constitution, 
place  the  school  fund  beyond  legislative  control. 
We  are  creatures  of  imitation  and  example. 
It  was  the  example  of  Washington  and  Bona- 
parte, that  made  them  so  successful  in  their  bat- 
tles. They  did  not,  on  the  eve  of  some  great 
battle,  harangue  their  soldiers  on  the  importance 
of  valor,  and  the  necessity  of  victory,  and  then 
return  to  the  rear,  and  send  on  their  men  to  brave 
I  danger  alone,  and  toil  in  the  conflict  of  battle. 
j  Xo,  sir;  but  with  a  nerve  and  valor  commensu- 
j  rate  to  the  occasion,  they  braced  themselves  up 
I  to  the  great  emergency,  and  with  an  eye  that 
j  beamed  hope,  and  courage,  and  confidence,  they 
j  marched  to  the  front  ranks,  and  bade  their  sol- 
I  diers  to  follow.  Sir,  there  was  not  a  soldier  in 
I  their  ranks  that  did  not  feel  the  electric  influ- 
ence of  their  noble  example;  and  who  did  not 
grasp  his  sword  with  a  double  vigor,  and  swear 
come  life  or  death,  to  follow  his  glorious  leader? 
Let  us,  then,  show  to  the  people  of  Kentucky, 
that  we,  as  their  chosen  representatives,  delega- 
ted by  them  to  perform  the  high  and  honorable 
duty  of  makingfor  themaconstitution,  estimate 
and  prize  intelligence  and  virtue.  For,  sir,  if 
the  representatives  of  the  people  exhibit  an  in- 
difference upon  this  great  subject,  it  cannot  be 
expected  that  the  people  will  manifest  anything 
but  indifference  themselves. 


888 


In  the  report,  which  the  committee  has  pre- 
sented to  the  consideration  of  the  convention, 
thev  have  entered  as  little  into  detail  as  possible; 
and  for  my  own  part,  I  am  willing  to  leave  to 
the  legislature  the  power  of  carrying  into  prac- 
tical operation  this  system.  But,  sir,  I  shall 
ever  be  opposed  to  leaving  to  the  legislature  the 
control  and  management  of  the  fund  itself, 
without  throwing  around  them  those  restrictions 
which  will  prevent  them  from  appropriating  one 
dollar  of  this  fund  for  any  other  purpose  tlian 
for  that  of  education.  And  let  me  ask  the  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson,  what  objection  can  he  have 
to  incorporating  the  article  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee in  the  constitution.  By  that  report  we 
do  not  propose  to  tax  the  people  of  Kentucky 
one  dime.  We  merely  propose  to  set  apart  and 
dedicate  forever  what  has  already  been  raised  by 
a  tax  for  that  purpose,  together  with  the  fund 
which  has  heretofore  been  set  apart  by  legisla- 
tive enactment,  for  educational  purposes.  But 
the  gentleman  insists  that  we  must  leave  the 
whole  matter  to  the  control  and  management  of 
the  legislature,  and  why?  Because  gentlemen  say 
that  it  will  encumber  and  endanger  the  constitu- 
tion. Is  this  the  argument,  Mr.  President,  that 
we  are  to  be  gravely  met  with,  by  old  and  ex- 
perienced statesmen?  If  it  is  right  that  the 
people  should  be  educated — if  it  is  right  that  the 
fund  which  the  people  of  the  state  have  so 
generously  voted  to  tax  themselves  with,  for  the 
purposes  of  sustaining  a  system  of  common 
schools,  should  be  sacredly  applied  to  that  pur- 
pose— if  sir,  it  is  right  that  the  money  which 
was  set  apart  to  the  state  of  Kentucky — by  the 
general  government,  and  which  was  originally 
intended  for  the  purposes  of  education,  should 
be  applied  to  that  purpose  alone — why  1  ask, 
should  we  leave  the  matter  to  the  future  control 
and  management  of  the  legislature?  If  the 
thing  is  right,  why  should  we  not  take  the  re- 
sponsibility and  act  upon  it?  Why  leave  to 
others  to  do  that  which  we  are  required  to  do 
ourselves?  Why  put  off  the  good  work,  a  work 
in  which  our  children  and  our  children'schildren 
are  most  deeply  and  most  vitally  interested. 
Mr.  President,  tnere  is  no  doubt  this  day — many 
a  "  mute  Milton"  in  the  mountains  of  Kentucky, 
the  energies  and  powers  of  whose  mind  have 
been  repressed  and  checked  by  "  chill,  penury, 
and  want,"  yes  sir,  minds  which  if  early  culti- 
vated, might  have  "  commanded  the  applause 
of  listening  senates"  and  who  might  have  raised 
themselves  above  the  common  level  of  mankind, 
and  have  achieved  honor  for  themselves  and 
glory  for  their  country.  But  from  the  situation 
in  which  they  have  been  placed,  the  grandure  of 
nature  has  availed  them  nothing,  and  their 
mountain  homes,  which  under  the  proper  state 
of  intellectual  improvement  might  have  echoed 
the  song  of  the  poet,  or  the  eloquence  of  the 
orator,  has  remained  as  a  sterile  and  unculti- 
vated waste. 

There  is,  Mr.  President,  abroad  in  this  goodly 
land  of  ours,  a  spirit  of  inquiry  and  investiga- 
tion, mysterious  and  all  powerful  in  its  opera- 
tion, which  hears  the  sigh  of  the  oppressed  in 
every  land,  and  who.se  march  is  from  nation  to 
nation,  dispensing  joy  and  life  to  all,  and  which 
is  setting  the  prisoner  and  cajitive  of  ignorance 
and  idolatry  free.     Already  has  this  spirit  of  in- 


quiry freed  our  religion  of  its  century-grown 
corruption.  Already  haslit  started  into  being, a 
principle  of  freedom  in  Europe,  which  is  doing 
Its  work,  and  has  erected  its  glorious  monu- 
ments of  freedom  on  the  out  post  of  Oregon 
and  California;  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the 
day  is  fast  approaching,  when  the  tree  of  liberty 
which  was  planted  by  our  fathers  upon  Ameri- 
can soil,  will  take  deep  root,  until  it  shall  rise 
and  spread  over  the  face  of  the  habitable  globe. 
But  tnis  great  day  in  the  history  of  man  will 
be  remote,  unless  our  people  are  instructed  and 
qualified  to  discharge  the  duties  which  in  the 
remote  history  of  their  country,  may  devolve 
upon  them. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  thought  it  due  to  my- 
self, and  to  those  whom  I  represent,  to  say  this 
much.  And  sir,  whatever  may  be  the  action  of 
this  convention,  I  shall  console  myself  by  the 
reflection  that  in  my  humble  efforts,  in  behalf  of 
a  system  of  common  schools,  to  the  best  of  my 
ability,  I  have  discharged  my  duty,  to  myself, 
my  constituents,  and  posterity. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  hope  whatever  the 
decision  of  this  convention  may  be, we  shall  be 
able  to  settle  this  question  to  night,  in  some 
shape  or  other.  I  am  extremely  anxious  that 
we  shall  close  our  labors  by  the  seventeenth.  I 
think  we  can  do  so  by  devoting  our  time  to  the 
few  objects  which  are  now  before  us.  One  of 
them  which  seems  to  excite  a  great  degree  of  in- 
terest is  this  of  common  schools.  I  am  the  friend 
of  education,  and  claim  the  responsibility  of  an 
agency  in  setting  apart  the  $850,000  from  the 
United  States  revenue,  for  the  purposes  of  edu- 
cation, when  the  country  is  prepared  to  appro- 
priate it. 

The  gentleman  from  Lewis,  (Mr.  Proctor,)  is 
wrong  in  supposing  that  there  was  any  setting 
apart  of  this  revenue  for  the  purpose  of  educa- 
tion by  the  general  government.  It  was  left  free 
for  the  states  to  decide,  and  as  I  remarked  the 
other  day,  when  the  fund  was  subject  to  the  con- 
trol of  our  treasurer,  there  was  a  contest  in  the 
legislature,  at  a  time  when  I  occupied  a  seat  in 
the  other  end  of  this  capital,  as  to  the  disposition 
of  that  fund. 

There  was  a  strong  disposition  on  the  part  of 
some,  to  throw  the  whole  in  the  fund  for  in- 
ternal improvement.  Others  were  disposed  to 
invest  it  in  Bank  stocks.  A  compromise  was 
made  by  which  $850,000  was  set  apart  for  the 
school  fund.  The  balance  was  invested  in  stocks. 
What  has  become  of  the  school  fund  since  that 
time,  I  do  not  know.  But  I  am  opposed  to 
adopting  as  a  part  of  the  constitution,  this  com- 
mon school  system,  sometimes  called  the  free 
school  system.  I  use  the  term  common,  as  op- 
posed to  individual  or  private  schools. 

As  I  know  the  chairman  of  the  committee  de- 
sires to  be  heard  on  this  subject,  I  will  only  of- 
fer an  amendment  which  I  .snail  propose  for  the 
whole  of  the  report.  If  we  have  a  school  fund 
secured,  and  set  apart  by  the  legislature  of  the 
country,  I  want  to  leave  that  fund  to  the  disposi- 
tion or  the  legislature  for  educational  purposes. 
If  they  shall  hereafter  create  a  fund  by  the  con- 
tinuance of  this  two  cent  tax,  or  by  additional 
taxation,  or  in  any  other  manner,  I  want  tlie  con- 
stitution to  lay  hold  of  it  and  devote  it  to  educa- 
tion. But  the  mode  and  manner,  and  time  when, 


889 


andtbe  possibility  of  carrying  iioutiaevery  coun- 
ty in  the  commonwealth  at  the  same  time,  seems 
to  me  to  be  questions  which  it  is  utterly  impos- 
sible for  us  to  decide.  I  see  by  one  of  the  sections 
of  the  report  that  if  a  county  shall  fail  within 
ten  years,  to  place  herself  in  the  position  which 
has  been,  or  may  be  provided  in  the  school  law, 
and  fails  to  draw  the  fund,  and  appropriate  it 
to  educational  purposes,  it  is  to  be  witJidrawn 
from  her  and  her  population  forever,  and  thrown 
back  into  the  original  fund.  Thus  everv  ten 
years,  a  portion  of  each  county  whose  population 
is  not  prepared  to  appropriat*  the  fund,  is  to  lose 
the  benefit  of  it,  and  cannot  have  it  when  pre- 
pared to  appropriate  it.  I  wish  to  secure  the 
fund  from  legislative  distraction,  or  abstraction, 
and  for  that  purpose  I  offer  the  following  sub- 
stitute : 

"All  the  funds  which  have  been,  or  which 
may  be  collected,  and  which  have  been  set  apart 
for  common  school  purposes,  shall  be  held  sacred, 
subject  to  be  regulated  by  the  general  assembly, 
and  applied  and  disbursed  as  shall  seem  best  to 
effect  the  object  of  general  education." 

Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  announced  to  the  conven- 
tion when  I  first  addressed  it,  that  I  was  now, 
for  the  first  time  in  my  life  in  a  legislative  as- 
sembly. I  come  here  from  the  humble,  and  to 
me  fascinating  obscurity  of  private  life,  and  I 
ask  of  this  convention  that  they  will  not  judge 
of  the  importance  of  the  subject  now  under 
consideration,  nor  of  its  inherent  justice  by  the 
humble  and  unpretending  weakness  of  its  ad- 
vocate. Exclamations  of  surprise  and  astonish- 
ment have  been  so  frequently  made  in  reference 
to  the  course  and  conduct  of  some  gentlemen 
here,  that  they  have  indeed  become  common 
substantives.  I  sir,  too,  have  to-day  been  in- 
deed greatly  surprised  by  the  action  of  some 
gentlemen  in  reference  to  the  great  subject  now 
under  consideration.  When  the  president  rose 
from  his  seat  to  put  the  question  upon  the  adop- 
tion of  the  first  section  of  the  report,  I  firmly 
believed  it  would  be  passed  "nemine  conira- 
dicente  ;"  I  so  believed  because  I  thought  the 
same  feeling  pervaded  the  representative  which 
did  the  represented.  But  in  an  expectation  so 
'ust  and  reasonable,  so  consonant  with  the 
opes  and  interest  of  our  common  constitutency, 
I  am  likely  to  be  sadly  disappointed. 

The  gentleman  from  Xelson  (Mr.  Hardin,)  pro- 
pounded to  us  a  singular  question,  one  which  I 
dare  answer,  and  which  I  will  make  the  record 
before  me  answer.  Said  he,  are  you  afraid  to 
trust  the  legislature? — I  am.  He  asked  it  with 
great  emphasis  and  confidence — I  answer  it  in 
the  same  spirit — I  am  afraid  to  trust  the  legisla- 
ture; and  the  reasons  for  that  distrust,  I  will 
give,  drawn  from  legislative  records  on  this  sub- 
ject. I  hope  the  convention  will  bear  with  me 
whilst  I  unfold  the  reasons  of  that  distrust,  and 
defend  the  action  of  the  committee,  of  which  I 
am  chairman,  from  the  most  singular  arguments 
with  which  it  has  been  assailed  by  the  elder  gen- 
tleman from  Is'elson.  You  may  talk  to  me  about 
the  changes  which  we  are  making  in  the  existing 
constitution,  great  as  they  are,  and  demanded 
as  they  are,  alike  by  public  necessity  and  senti- 
ment;'you  may  hold  up  to  the  people  the  elec- 
tive principle  which  we  are  about  to  incorporate 
in  the  new  organic  law;  but  I  t«ll  you,  in  the 
112 


t 


,  language  of  holy  writ,  "the  last  shall  be  first, 
and  the  first  shall  be  last;"  and  although  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  on  education  is  the  last  on 
the  calendar,  yet  you  will  find  that  this  subject 
of  education  is  tne  first  in  the  affections  and 
hopes  of  the  people  of  this  commonwealth.  I 
resided  for  many  years  in  one  of  the  new  and 
western  states  of  this  confederacy;  and  when  I 
moved  to  it,  my  first  object  and  duty  was  to  be- 
come acquainted  with  its  constitution,  its  polit- 
ical history,  and  internal  polity.  Among  the 
matters  which  attracted  my  attention  was  the 
fact  tliat  the  general  government  had  given  to 
the  state  every  sixteenth  section  of  land  for  the 

Eromotion  of  knowledge,  and  consequently  of 
umau  virtue  and  happiness.  Congress  had  not 
only  given  to  Indiana,  but  to  all  the  new  states 
most  liberally  of  the  public  domain  for  the  pur- 
poses of  education,  while  Kentucky  and  most  of 
the  elder  states  of  this  confederacy  had  not  re- 
ceived any  thing.  In  the  year  1836  there  had 
accumulated  in  the  treasury  of  the  United  States 
about  twenty  eight  millions  of  dollars  beyond 
the  demands  against  it,  the  most  of  whicH  had 
arisen  from  the  sales  of  the  public  lands,  the 
common  property  of  the  people.  Congress  de- 
termined that  this  large  amount  of  surplus  rev- 
enue should  not  lay  there  idle  and  unproduc- 
tive; nay,  sir,  fearing  perhaps  that  it  might  be 
devoted  to  bad  and  sinister  purposes,  passed  an 
act  ordering  it  to  be  distributed  among  the  sev- 
eral states  in  the  ratio  of  their  representation  in 
that  body,  and  thus,  sir,  the  most  singular  spec- 
tacle was  exhibited  to  the  world,  of  a  government 
making  among  the  governed,  a  parental  distri- 
bution of  twenty  eight  millions  of  dollars  which 
had  accumulated  in  its  coffers,  a  spectacle  never 
before  seen,  and  which  I  fear  will  never  be  seen 
again,  at  once  the  noblest  and  most  cheering 
commentary  upon  free  government,  and  the  in- 
tegrity and  justice  of  its  administration. 

Kentucky  accepted  her  share  upon  the  condi- 
tion imposed  by  congress;  and  upon  the  23d  day 
of  February,  1837,  passed  an  act  in  which  I  find 
the  following  section: 

"Be  it  further  enacted,  That  the  profits  arising 
from  one  million  of  dollars  of  the  surplus  revenue 
of  the  United  States,  deposited  and  to  be  depos- 
ited with  the  state  by  virtue  of  the  act  of  con- 
gress of  the  11th  of  June  1836,  be  and  is  hereby 
set  apart  and _^eccr  dedicated  to  founding  and 
sustaining  a  general  system  of  public  instruc- 
tion in  this  state." 

Sir,  to  what  nobler  purpose  could  such  a  fund 
have  been  dedicated.  The  legislature  of  Ken- 
tucky felt  then  as  we  now  feel;  being  the  just 
and  proper  reflex  of  public  sentiment,  what  did 
the  representatives  of  the  people  do?  They  set 
apart  one  million  dollars  &na  forever  dedicated 
it  to  a  general  system  of  public  instruction.  In 
the  tenth  section  of  this  act  it  is  further  provi- 
ded "that  until  such  system  shall  have  been  de- 
vised by  law,  the  profits  shall  be  placed  under 
the  direction  and  control  of  the  commissioners 
of  the  sinking  fund,  who  are  thereby  directed  to 
discriminate  the  same  from  the  other  ingredients 
of  said  fund,  with  a  view  to  the  abstraction  there- 
of, together  with  the  accumulations  thereupon,  as 
soon  as  the  same  shall  be  required  under  the  con- 
templated system."  Now,  sir,  this  looks  most 
beautiful  and  fascinating  on  paper.    This  term 


690 


farevr  is  a  strong  on«,  but  tuuch  I  fear  'tis  like 
lover's  vows,  written  on  a  running  stream.  It 
exhibits  a  great  deal  of  legislative  anxiety  for 
the  safe  custody  of  this  fund.  It  is  to  be  kept 
always  ready — they  want  no  days  of  grace  for 
its  payment.  The  commissioners  of  the  sinking 
fund  are  required  to  discriminate  it  from  the 
other  ingredients,  with  a  view  to  its  abstraction. 
They  are  to  keep  it  in  a  separate  stocking,  just 
as  the  frugal  and  provident  old  woman  keeps 
her  garden  seed  ready  to  plant  in  the  spring ; 
nay,  the  accumulations — meaning  as  I  presume 
the  interest — that  too  is  to  be  kept  separate  and 
apart;  one  would  infer  that  the  children  of  the 
commonwealth  had  but  to  knock  and  it  should 
be  opened  unto  them — that  'twas  but  necessary 
to  cry  "open  sessame,"  and  the  cave  in  which 
was  placed  this  sacred  deposit,  would  give  its 

f olden  treasures  to  the  promotion  of  numan 
nowled^e.  Well,  sir,  what  has  become  of  this 
fund  and  of  its  accumulations'l  Permit  me  to 
read  from  the  report  of  the  superint«ndent  of 
public  instruction: 

"In  the  midst  of  such  circumstances  as  these, 
the  state  of  Kentucky  found  herself  embarked 
in  an  extensive  system  of  internal  improvements, 
designed  to  develope  her  resources  and  increase 
the  general  wealth.  The  funds  necessary  to  car- 
ry on  her  extensive  operations,  were  raised  by 
the  public  credit,  exhioited  in  the  form  of  state 
bonas,  which  were  issued  and  sold  to  a  large 
amount;  and  in  order  to  sustain  the  credit  of 
these  bonds,  and  provide  the  means  for  the  regu- 
lar payment  of  interest  accruing  on  them,  and 
the  final  discharge  of  the  bonds  themselves,  a 
sinking  fund  was  created,  and  a  large  portion  of 
the  proceeds  of  the  taxes,  annually  handed  over 
to  the  commissioner  of  that  fund.  The  bonds 
held  by  the  board  of  education  represented 
$850,000,  which  the  state  having  first  consecra- 
ted to  the  cause  of  education,  subsequently  used 
in  prosecuting  its  plans  of  internal  improvement. 
The  board  of  education  stood,  in  regard  to  the 
bonds  it  thus  held,  precisely  in  the  relation  of 
any  other  fair  holder  of  these  internal  improve- 
ment bonds;  unless,  indeed,  the  peculiar  nature 
and  origin  of  the  school  fund,  thus  invested, 
should  have  given  a  peculiar  sacredness  to  the 
debt  thus  held  by  that  board.  Yet,  it  is  most 
painful  to  be  obliged  to  state,  that  the  legisla- 
ture of  the  state,  for  the  year  1844-5,  took  a  view 
of  this  matter  so  entirely  different,  that  by  the 
4th  section  of  the  act,  approved  February  10, 
1845— -chapter  264,  of  the  laws  of  that  session — 
it  required  all  the  state  bonds  held  by  the  board 
of  education,  to  be  delivered  to  the  governor  ol 
the  commonwealth,  and  to  be,  by  him,  burnt  in 
the  presence  of  the  high  officers  of  state !  As  if 
to  mock  the  great  cause  which  had  thus  been  be- 
trayed, the  act  proceeded  to  declare,  that  lists 
should  be  made  out  of  the  evidences  of  debt  thus 
burnt,  and  that  these  lists,  though  deprived  by 
the  act  itself  of  all  value  in  the  way  of  delivery, 
transfer,  or  assignment,  and  practically  robbed 
of  all  advantage,  thenceforth,  from  the  sinking 
fund,  which  had  been  created  to  sustain  and  fi- 
nally discharge  just  such  bonds,  should,  never- 
theless, be  held  and  taken,  as  in  the  place  of  the 
bonds  that  had  been  burnt,  and  be  as  sacred  as 
they  had  been!  Practically,  that  is,  sacred 
•nonghto  b«  burnt  themseives,  whenever  th«  ex- 


igences of  the  public  credit  might  seem  to  ren- 
der such  a  proceeding  desirable  agaitist  the  de 
fenceless  creditors." 

So  sir,  we  see  this  fund  was  first  dedicated  to 
the  improvement  of  the  head  and  heart,  the  mor- 
als and  the  intellect  of  the  country,  to  the  noblest 
of  all  improvements — to  the  accumulation  of  that 
wealth  "  which  taketh  no  wings  and  flyeth  not 
away" — of  which  no  adverse  fortune  can  ever 
deprive  us,  and  against  which  no  commission  of 
bankruptcy  can  ever  issue.  "Who  so  knoweth 
the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  the  man 
that  is  in  him?"  The  legislature  have  not 
spread  on  the  record  the  reasons  which  induced 
them  to  order  those  bonds  to  be  burnt.  They 
were  afraid,  I  infer,  that  they  would  be  put  in 
market.  They  directed  them  to  be  listed,  and  if 
the  auditor's  office  should  be  burned,  the  tangi- 
ble evidences  of  this  large  debt  to  the  children 
of  the  state  would  be  gone;  there  are  no  bonds 
as  I  understand  in  existence.  Has  the  interest 
on  this  eight  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars 
been  paid,  and  kept  ready  (to  use  the  language 
of  the  act  of  18.37,)  for  abstraction?  No  sir.  On 
the  20th  day  of  December,  1848,  a  bond  for  $308,- 
768  42  cents,  being  the  arrears  of  interest  due 
upon  said  $850,000,  was  executed  by  the  state. 
There  is  also  $51,223  29  cents  of  interest  due  for 
the  year  1848.  So  it  will  be  seen  that  the  in- 
terest has  not  been  paid;  and  this  large  interest 
bond  of  $308,768  42  cents  is  payable  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  legislature.  Should  not,  I  ask, 
the  people  be  justly  jealous  of  the  legislature? 
Have  they  not  a  right  to  be  so  on  this  subject; 
and  being  so,  I  as  one  of  the  friends  of  educa- 
tion, am  for  placing  in  the  constitution  which  we 
are  now  forming  a  clause,  dedicating  this  great 
fund  to  this  still  greater  cause.  It  is  honor 
enough  to  be  a  delegate  on  this  floor;  but  it  is  a 
still  higher  honor  to  have  been  instrumental  in 
securing  this  fund  to  the  glorious  cause  of  edu- 
cation. 

Mr.  President,  in  the  year  1848  the  legislature 
passed  an  actauthorizingtlie  governor  of  the  state 
to  execute  a  bond,  payable  to  the  board  of  educa- 
tion, for  the  interest  and  dividends  which  was 
due  from  the  state  to  said  board  up  to  the  1st  of 
January,  1848,  and  that  bond,  as  I  have  stated 
before,  amounted  to  $308,768  42  cents,  payable 
at  the  pleasure  of  the  legislature.  I  once  read  of 
a  man  who  bound  himself  to  build  a  house  of 
given  dimensions  for  a  widow,  and  after  setting 
forth  in  the  written  contract  the  style  and  ma- 
terial in  and  of  which  it  was  to  be  built,  he  add- 
ed, that  in  the  construction  of  said  house  "he 
was  not  to  be  hastened" — so  in  the  payment  of 
this  large  sum  the  legislature  i.s  not  to  be  hasten- 
ed. Sir,  am  I  again  to  be  asked  if  I  am  unwil- 
ling to  trust  the  legislature?  I  do  distrust  them, 
when  they  order  their  bonds  to  be  burned; 
when  they  give  one  for  the  interest,  and  say  it 
shall  not  be  assignable,  and  make  it  payable 
when  they  please;  when  they  play  the  ^anie  of 
tie  and  loose.  Credulity  is  folly — nay,  'tis  moral 
and  official  treason  against  the  children  of  this 
commonwealth.  I  promised  an  old  friend  of 
mine  when  I  came  here  not  to  vote  for  a  divorce, 
(ho  thinking  we  had  the  power  and  right  to  do 
so.)  I  promised  him  I  would  not;  but  I  am  go- 
ing to  violate  that  promise,  and  to  vote  to  di- 
vorce the  legislature  from  the  power  to  control 


891 


or  destroy  thii  fund.  I  know  my  old  friend 
will  excuse  me;  he  was  an  intelligent  man  and 
a  good  democrat,  but  he  had  the  good  sense  and 
patriotism  to  vote  for  me,  whig  as  I  am. 

The  legislature  sustains,  (or  rather  the  state 
in  reference  to  this  fund,)  the  singular  position 
of  debtor  and  creditor.  They  have  made  their 
bonds  payable  to  tho  board  of  education.  They 
have  ordered  them  once  to  be  burned.  They 
hare  not  paid  the  interest,  nor  provided  the 
means  for  its  payment.  They  may  destroy,  for 
aught  I  know,  the  creditor — the  board  of  educa- 
tion, the  corporate  body  who  hold  their  bonds 
in  trust  for  the  children  of  the  state — and  I  have 
cause  to  be  jealous  of  legislative  integrity  and 
honor.  The  gentleman  from  Xelson  (Mr.  Har- 
din) has  attributed  to  me  the  paternity  ol  this 
movement  here  upon  the  subject  of  common 
schools.  Js'ot  so.  The  gentleman  from  Carter 
(Mr.  T.  J.  Hood)  introduced  the  resolution  for 
the  appointment  of  the  committee  by  whom  this 
report  is  made.  Sir,  I  honor  the  gentleman  from 
Carter  for  it,  and  shall  forever.  When  this  con- 
vention first  met,  I  took  ray  seat  where  I  now 
am,  and  looked  out  of  the  loop-holes  of  retreat, 
(for  I  am  on  the  outer  tier  of  soats,)  at  the  dele- 
gates, talking  to  myself  about  men  and  things. 
1  was  appointed  by  the  president,  most  unex- 
pectedly to  myself,  chairman  of  the  committee 
on  education,  an  honorable  position,  and  I  am 
trying  to  merit  his  confidence,  and  that  of  my 
constituency,  by  the  protection  of  our  common 
right  to  and  interest  in  this  great  matter  of  edu- 
cation. What  does  this  report  propose?  First, 
it  enjoins  it  on  the  legislature  to  establish  and 
keep  in  existence  a  system  of  common  schools 
throughout  the  state,  open  to  all  the  free  white 
children  thereof;  2nd,  to  secure  the  fund  hereto- 
fore mentioned  by  me;  3rd,  to  prevent  the  legis- 
lature from  diverting  the  interest  which  may  be- 
come due  on  said  fund  to  any  other  purpose  than 
common  schools.  It  further  provides  for  the 
election  by  the  people  of  a  superintendent  of 
public  instruction.  This  is  a  profile  of  the  re- 
port. It  has  been  denied  on  this  floor  that  there 
IS  any  necessity  for  interference  by  this  conven- 
tion 'with  this  .subject.  Let  the*  report  of  the 
auditor,  in  reply  to  a  resolution  whicn  I  had  the 
honor  to  introduce,  answer: 

"A  statement  showing  the  total  number  of  pa- 
rents and  guardians,  with  the  amount  of  their 
property,  and  the  number  of  children  between 
0  and  16  years  of  age,  taken  from  the  com- 
missioners' books  returned  to  the  second  audi- 
tor for  the  year  1849: 

Parents.  ChiWu. 

l8t,  Those  thai  have  no  property  enter 
ed  for  taxation  and  number  of  chil- 
dren, ....  S.OCe      19,467 

2d.  Those  who  are  worth  less  than  -SlOO 
in  property  and  number  of  children,       13,T55      36,764 

3d.  Those  who  are  worth  from  81(X)  to 
«4(KI  in  property  and  number  of  chil- 
dren, ....  12,757      35,035 

4th.  Those  who  are  wotth  from  $400  to 
$600  in  property  and  number  of  chil- 
dren, -  •  •  5,904      16,409 

5tb.  Those  who  are  worth  over  $600  in 
property  and  number  of  children       •     30,363     85,315 

Total,  70,707    192,990 

There  are  in  Kentucky  ninety-one  thousand 
children  whose  parents  are  mostly  unable  to  ed- 


ucate them,  and  yet  we  are  beseeched  not  to  in- 
terfere. Great  God,  can  it  be  possible  that  we 
shall  be  non-combatants  in  the  great  battle  of 
life — for  knowledge  is  life.  I  ask,  if  gentlemen 
can  look  upon  this  barren  and  unproductive  field, 
and  not  desire  to  plant  and  nurture  within  it  the 
tree  of  knowledge,  (perhaps  of  life  adso,) — to  lead 
through  it  those  fountains  of  living  water,  which 
slake  not  but  rather  increases  the  thirst  of  him 
who  drinketh;  who  does  not  desire  to  cast  upon 
this  still  and  unfruitful  pool  bread  with  the 
cheering  assurance  that  it  .shall  indeed  be  gath- 
ered after  many  days;  to  sow  broad-cast  over  this 
land  the  seeds  of  knowledge,  which  shall  germi- 
nate and  produce  forever.  With  the  startling 
facts  presented  in  this  report  of  the  second  audi- 
tor, how  can  gentlemen  hesitate  about  the  abso- 
lute necessity  of  constitutional  provision  for  some 
system  of  general  education?  It  cannot  be  that 
this  convention  will  adjourn  without  the  ex- 
pression of  some  solicitude  on  this  great  mat- 
ter. 

Mr.  President,  I  threaten  no  gentleman  on  this 
floor  with  his  constituents — I  point  no  one  to 
the  reckoning  which  will  be  made  with  him  in 
reference  to  the  custody  and  use  of  this  great 
fund.  Home  sir;  'tis  the  most  beautiful  and  fas- 
cinating word  in  the  English  language,  doubt- 
less on  account  of  its  association.s — grouping 
within  its  circle,  wife,  children,  and  fnends.  I 
dare  any  man  here  to  go  home  and  look  the 
mother  of  his  children  in  the  face,  and  tell  her, 
who  is  the  partner  of  his  joys,  his  troubles,  and 
anxieties,  that  he  opposed  tne  constitutional  de- 
votion and  security  of  this  money  for  the  educa- 
tion of  her  children.  I  want  every  mother  to 
know  that  if  the  father  of  her  children  shall  be 
taken  away,  that  there  is  a  fund  set  apart  by  the 
constitution  of  her  country,  for  their  education 
— that  though  they  are  indeed  orphans,  yet  their 
moral  and  intellectual  culture  has  been  provi- 
ded for  by  the  state,  whose  rulers  they  are  to  be 
in  a  feAv  short  years.  Yes,  gentlernen,  when 
you  shall  return  home,  and  sit  down  at  your 
own  firesides,  rendered  festive  by  your  presence, 
and  secure  and  happy  by  your  presence,  when 
your  children — ^the  buds  and  blossoms  along  the 
pathway  of  human  life — shall  be  throwing  their 
little  arms  around  your  neck,  and  telling  you, 
in  their  artless  simplicity,  the  little  domestic 
incidents  that  have  occurred  in  your  absence, 
can  you,  in  such  an  hour,  tell  the  wife  and 
mother  that  you  have  had  an  opportunity  of  pro- 
viding a  system  of  schools  for  them,  and  have 
not  done  it?  Will  you  throw  over  this  sunshine 
of  the  heart  the  pall  of  neglected  and  violated 
social  obligation  and  duty,  by  your  failure  to 
protect  and  secure  this  fund  from  legislative  ra- 
pacity and  duplicity? 

No  man  can  estimate  the  value  of  knowledge. 
I  would  not  exchange  my  opportunities  of  infor- 
mation, and  the  means  of  its  acquirement,  for 
all  else  this  world  can  give.  Knowledge  is,  in- 
deed, power,  every  where;  but  in  a  government 
organized  as  ours,  'tis  so  socially  and  politically. 
The  right  of  suifrage,  as  a  mere  right  in  itself, 
is  not  of  such  inestimable  value.  It  is  as  the 
guaranty  of  the  safety  and  security  of  other 
rights  that  its  value  and  power  is  demonstra- 
ted : 


893 


"  It  is  a  weapon  sharper  set 
Than  either  sword  or  bayonet; 
It  comes  down  as  light  and  still, 

As  snow  flake  on  the  sod; 
And  executes  the  freeman's  will. 

As  lightning  does  the  will  of  God." 

Its  intell igent  exercise  is  every  thing ;  'tis  indeed 
the  sword  of  the  spirit  of  freemen,  and  itmay,  in- 
deed, be  used  as  well  for  "Wo  as  weal.  Intelli- 
fence  generally  diffused  is  necessary  to  the  sta- 
ility  of  free  government.  Patriotism  is  part 
and  parcel  of  the  moral  and  social  inheritance  of 
our  people;  'tis  a  noble  and  common  virtue;  it 
may  DC  said  "to  grow  with  our  growth,  and 
Strengthen  with  our  strength."  But  'tis  the  ed- 
ucated patriotism  of  the  country  that  is  to  walk 
amid  the  conflict  of  the  social  and  political  ele- 
ments, and  amid  the  winds  and  waves  of  human 
prejudice  and  passion,  and  bid  them  be  still. 
We  have  been  told  by  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
Ban  (Mr.  Hardin,)  that  the  catholics  are  opposed 
to  this  system  of  common  schools,  and  that  if 
■we  put  it  in  the  constitution  they  will  oppose  its 
adoption.  And  he  has  conjured  up  "spirits 
from  the  vasty  deep,"  for  the  purpose  of  fright- 
ning  us  from  our  duty  on  this  subject.  He  seems 
tJ  think  it  will  array  the  "whole  catholic  popula- 
tion against  the  new  organic  law.  Sir,  I  do  not 
believe  it.  I  will  not  do  them  the  injustice  to 
balieve  this  imputation  upon  theirpatriotism  and 
intelligence.  I  understand  they  have  some  of 
the  best  schools  in  Kentucky — I  know  they  have 
been  esteemed  the  steadfast  friends  of  educa- 
tion. They  will  not  send  their  children,  'tis 
said,  to  free  schools.  Be  it  so.  Let  them  edu- 
cate their  own  children;  they  have  the  right  to 
do  so,  and  the  ability,  too.  Is  that  any  reason 
why  the  friends  of  education  should  neglect  to 
provide  for  such  a  system  of  public  instruction 
as  will  hang  up,  at  every  man's  fireside,  the 
lamp  of  knowledge?  We  bring  it  within  the 
reacn  of  all — saint  and  sinner,  protestant  and 
catholic;  and  if  the  latter  does  not  choose  to 
embrace  the  advantages  of  the  system,  the  fault 
is  not  ours.  We  have  erected  the  lamp — if  I 
may  use  the  figure — like  the  brazen  serpent  in 
the  wilderness,  and  invited  every  man  to  look 
and  live;  and  if  he  will  not,  we  have  the  conso- 
lation that  it  is  not  our  fault,  or  our  neglect. 
But,  sir,  if  the  catholics  oppose  a  constitutional 
system  of  public  instruction,  that  very  opposi- 
tion is,  witli  me,  the  strongest  reason  why  the 
system  should  exist;  and  the  very  declaration 
that  they  oppose  it,  has  but  increased  my  anxie- 
ty to  incorporate  it  in  the  constitution. 

Sir,  what  an  immense  and  frightful  amount  of 
ignorance  there  is  in  this  country.  The  profes- 
sion, of  which  I  am  a  member,  brings  me  into 
contact  with  a  great  many  persons  who  can 
neither  read  or  write.  Not  long  since  I  was  up- 
on a  visit  to  a  friend  in  a  county  not  far  dis- 
tant from  mine,  when  a  man,  who  had  purcha- 
sed a  small  tract  of  land  of  him,  came  to  pay 
for  it;  he  paid  a  portion  of  the  purchase  money 
and  gave  his  note  for  the  balance.  When  he 
came  to  sign  the  note,  he  placed  to  it  his  mark, 
and  I  attested  it.  My  friend  told  me  that  the 
father  of  that  man  kept  him  whilst  a  boy  at 
home  at  work,  whilst  he,  tlie  father,  taught  oili- 
er people's  children.  What  a  singular  and  mor- 
tifying spectacle  is  here  presented  of  a  parent  be- 
stowing knowledge  upon  the  children  of  others 


and  denying  it  to  his  own.  I  hope  for  the 
honor  of  human  nature  that  such  instances  ar» 
rare.  Why,  sir,  if  I  believed  in  total  annihila- 
tion after  death,  still  I  would  do  all  I  could  for 
the  diffusion  of  knowledge,  because  of  its  pres- 
ent value  and  enjoyment;  but  believing  as  I  do 
"that  this  spirit  of  oui-s  is  not  as  perishable  as 
the  telescope  through  which  it  looks,  as  'twere, 
into  the  very  gates  of  heaven ;"  believing  as  I 
do  that  it  carries  with  it  beyond  the  grave  all 
its  acquisitions  and  its  powers  of  acquisition, 
it  becomes  doubly  important  and  interesting  to 
me.  I  know  'tis  a  trite  remark  that  education  is 
the  ladder  which  leads  "from  barbarism  to  civ- 
ilization, from  ignorance  to  knowledge,  from 
darkness  to  light,  from  earth  to  heaven."  If  so, 
'tis  our  duty  to  furnish  that  ladder  to  every  man, 
and  while  we  have  an  opportunity  let  us  do  it. 
I  know  that  in  the  rich  counties  of  the  state  'tis 
difiicult  to  establish  a  system  of  common  schools; 
there  has  been  in  the  county  which  I  have  the 
honor  in  part  to  represent,  but  a  partial  adop- 
tion of  the  present  system — in  many  of  the  coun- 
ties no  organization  whatever  has  been  had.  A 
friend  who  sits  by  my  side — the  intelligent  and 
sensible  delegate  from  Green — informed  me  a 
few  days  ago  that  in  the  county  of  Pulaski  there 
has  been  quite  an  extensive  organization  of 
schools  under  the  present  law.  She  has  1264 
parents  and  3590  children.  She  is  a  democratic 
county,  but  she  has  sent  to  the  senate  of  Ken- 
tucky a  whig — a  northern  man  by  birth  and  ed- 
ucation, and  who  has  devoted  much  time  and 
attention  to  the  promotion  and  organization 
of  these  schools  in  Pulaski,  and  the  best  return 
which  the  people  could  make  to  him  for  his  in- 
terest in  their  welfare  was  to  elevate  him  to  a 
more  extended  theatre  for  usefulness.  Sir,  the 
election  of  this  man  from  a  democratic  county, 
(and  he  a  whi^,)  is  honorable  to  my  democratic 
friends.  It  exhibits  that  there  are  interests  and 
motives  above  party  success  and  party  triumph; 
and  that  though  in  a  minority  in  the  state,  that 
they  can  forget,  yea,  sir,  elevate  themselves 
above  party  prejudices  and  come  up  to  the  rescue 
of  their  children  and  the  country  from  the  con- 
sequences of  ignorance  and  folly. 

1  feel,  sir,  that  I  have  trespassed  on  the  at- 
tention and  indulgenue  of  the  convention.  I 
could  not  have  said  less — perhaps  I  ought  not 
to  have  said  so  much. 

This  is  a  subject  which  comes  home  to  every 
citizen  :  it  so  commends  itself  to  our  kind  con- 
sideration and  regard;  it  so  challenges  our  at- 
tention now,  and  so  inspires  our  hopes  for  the 
future.  Sir,  if  you  desire  to  engraft  in  the  con- 
stitution, which  we  are  now  making,  an  element 
of  success  and  triumph  over  all  opposition,  you 
cannot  better  do  it  than  by  the  adoption  of  the 
principlesof  the  report  of  the  committee.  Ithank 
the  house  again  for  their  kind  indulgence.  I 
attribute  their  patient  attention  not  to  the  manner 
in  which  my  remarks  have  been  presented,  but 
to  the  intrinsic  importance  of  the  subject  now 
under  consideration,  and  of  which  I  have.ever 
been  the  faithful  friend  and  humble  and  zealous 
advocate. 

Mr.  ROOT.  I  rise  to  make  a  few  remarks,  not 
tliat  I  expect  to  shed  any  light  on  the  subject 
before  the  convention,  but  because  1  feel  that  if 
I  do  not  avail  myself  of  this  opportunity,  it 


893 


may  never  occur  to  me  again  to  make  the  pecu- 
liar views  of  the  people  of  my  county  known  to 
this  convention.  I  feel  that  if  I  were  to  let  this 
opportunity  pass,  I  should  disappoint  the  ex- 
pectations of  a  respectable  portion  of  the  peo- 
ple of  this  commonwealth.  If  there  was  any 
one  subject  on  which  I  was  thoroughly  and  ful- 
ly instructed,  it  was  to  rescue  from  the  vacilla- 
tion of  the  legislation  of  the  state,  the  common 
school  fund,  solemnly  dedicated  to  the  purposes 
of  education  by  the  representatives  of  the  peo- 
ple in  1837,  and  place  it  beyond  the  control  of 
the  legislature  of  the  country.  I  know  a  little 
about  the  legislation  of  the  commonwealth,  and 
its  changeable  character,  as  exhibited  in  1844- 
5-6,  when  the  question  of  common  schools  was 
under  consideration.  Strange  to  say,  there  was 
a  majority  of  the  members  then  on  this  floor,  in 
those  years,  who  were  disposed  to  vote  more 
money  to  procure  wolf  scalps  or  wild  cat  skins, 
than  for  the  purposes  of  promoting  general  edu- 
cation. The  people,  with  all  their  virtue,  intel- 
ligence, and  chivalry,  are  not  fully  and  fairly 
represented  by  their  representatives.  The  hon- 
orable representative  from  Fayette,  a  few  years 
ago,  introduced  a  bill  imposing  a  tax  of  two 
cents  on  each  $100  worth  of  property  in  the 
commonwealth  in  aid  of  common  schools,  pro- 
vided the  people  should,  at  the  next  election 
thereafter,  vote  for  the  tax.  The  people  did 
most  freely  ratify  and  confirm  that  law  by  an 
overwhelming  niaiority — a  two-thirds  vote.-— 
From  the  whispering  1  have  observed  in  this 
house,  1  think  there  are  some  gentlemen  here  who 


tion  shall  we  render  permanent  and  perpetuate 
American  liberty.  Liberty  is  a  jewel  which 
cannot  be  preserved  without  education.  Educa- 
tion enlightens,  ennobles,  and  elevates  man,  and 
qualifies  nim  for  that  sphere  he  wa.s  destined  to 
occupy. 

Would  to  God  that  the  powerful  talents  of  the 
gentleman  from  kelson — for  his  talents  must  be 
felt  wherever  he  shall  take  a  part — could  have 
been  exerted,  at  this  late  hour  of  his  life,  upon 
one  of  the  greatest  and  most  ennobling  theatres, 
that  would  crown  every  other  act  of  his  honora- 
ble career.  Sorry  am  I,  as  he  is  about  to  de- 
scend to  his  grave  in  the  due  course  of  nature, 
that  that  venerable  man  should  endeavor  to  put 
out  the  lights  which  are  destined  to  cheer  us 
along  our  pathway.  And,  for  what  reason?  Is 
it  to  oe  borne  with;  is  it  to  be  tolerated,  that 
in  this  crisis  of  afifairs  in  Kentucky,  that,  by 
mere  fun,  or  the  recital  of  anecdotes,  that  may 
be  true — for  if  the  gentleman  vouches  for  it,  t 
am  bound  to  believe  it — we  are  to  be  diverted 
from  the  fulfilment  of  our  purpose?  Because 
the  gentleman  has  found  one  solitary  school- 
master who  supposed  there  were  thirty  nine 
days  in  September — which  fact  is  enough  to  cre- 
ate laughter  among  the  unthinking;  and  it 
might  do  to  relate  at  some  cross  road,  by  way 
of  perpetrating  a  joke — but  would  it  be  right  if 
it  were  to  have  the  effect  of  cheating  the  great 
mass  of  the  children  now  born,  and  to  be  boru 
in  the  commonwealth,  out  of  their  birthright? 
If  there  be  one  subject  higher  than  another,  one 
subject  holier  than  another,  one  subject  that  calls 


are behindthesoundintelligenceof  their  constitu- 1  f^^  more  intellectual  exertion  than  another,  it  is 
ency,  and  prepared  to  throw  the  common  school  i  ^^  plant  the  common  school  system  in  Kentucky 
fund  overboaid,  floating  as  it  were,  upon  the  at-  j  permanently,  and  upon  a  sure  basis.  What  "l 
lantic  waves  of  uncertainty,  without  a  rudder  i  may  say,  being  unknown  to  fame,  may  have 
or  helm  to  guide  it,  save  the  periodical  whims  i[^i\q  weight  or  force  here.  But  I  will  read  what 
or  ignorance  of  the  representatives  who  come  j  deem  an  offset  to  the  opinions  of  the  gentle- 
here,  disregarding  the  best  interests  of  the  state.  1  man  from  Ifelson,  with  all  his  weight  of  charac- 


For,  is  it  not  its  best  interest,  and  do  they  not 
mi-stake  that  interest  when  they  vote  against  the 
establishment  of  the  common  school  system— 
when  they  throw  their  influence  against  it? 
Why  is  it  that  here,  to-dajr,  we  are  assembled 
in  a  free  government?  ^hy  was  it  that  the 
thirteen  colonies  were  enabled  to  obtain  their 
independence?  Why  was  it  they  were  able  to 
throw  off  the  shackles  of  Great  Britain,  and  de- 
clare themselves  free  and  independent?  Because 
the  Puritan  fathers,  who  landed  on   Plymouth 


ter  and  powerful  talents.  The  father  of  his 
country,  after  he  had  fulfilled  the  measure  of  his 
country's  glory,  in  his  parting  address  to  his 
countrymen,  held  the  following  language: 

"We  should  promote,  as  an  object  of  primary 
importance,  institutions  for  the  general  diffusion 
of  knowledge." 

Again:  I  will  give  you  another  good  authori- 
ty. And  I  proclaim  here  in  my  place,  there  is 
not  a  revolutionary  patriot  among  all  the  patri- 
ots of  the  land,  greater  than  the  good  old  John 
Adams.     That  great  patriot,  seeing  the  impor- 


rock,  and  those  pioneers  who  came  to  Virginia 

were  educated  men.     It  was  because  the  fathere  ,  generafeduc'ation,  declared  this  seuti 

of  this   country   understood  their  rights,    and  ..      ^ 

understanding  those  rights,  were  prepared   to ,  •  r  .v,     i     •  i  <.         •  ,  • 

vindicate  them.  Why  il  it  that  the  dark  man-  ,.  "The  wisdom  of  the  legislature  in  making 
tie  of  superstition  and  tvranny  hangs  over  the  liberal  appropriations  for  the  benefit  of  the  pub- 
Russians,  one  of  the  mo'st  powerful   nations  of  lie  schools,  is  portentous  of  great  and  lasting 


the  earth,  who  are  governed  by  the  arbitray  will 
of  the    Czar?    It  is  that  universal   ignorance. 


good." 

Again:  I  will  say  to  my  democratic  friends  on 


darker  than  Egyptian  night,  predominates  in  this  and  that  side  of  the  house,  that  I  will  bring 
that  land.  Why  was  it  that  in  1789,  Ireland,  a  up  high  authority,  authority  to  which  they  have 
proud  and  chivalrous  nation,  was  not  able  to  been  accustomed  to  bow  in  adoration,  the  great 
obtain  her  independence  and  throw  off  the  j  apostle  of  the  democratic  party,  Thomas  Jeffer- 
shackles  of  Britain?  It  was  on  account  of  the  j  son,  the  bright  morning  star  of  the  democracy 
igorance  and  superstition  that  prevail  among  of  the  land — the  man  who  penne<l  the  immortal 
that  people.  And  it  is  ignorance,  in  short,  that  |  declaration  of  independence,  and  knew  upon 
upholds  thrones  and  all  the  tyrants  of  the  eartli.  1  what  basis  that  declaration  rested.  What  does 
In  proportion,  therefore,  as  we  advance  in  es-  i  he  say? 
tablishing  universal  education,  in  that  proper-  ]      «  ^hat  education  is  mostly  to  be  relied  on  for 


894 


promoting  the  wisdom,  virtue,  and  happiness  of 
the  people." 

A^ain:  Mr.  Madison  said,  and  he  was  another 
patriot,  whose  authority  oiis^ht,  at  least,  to  have 
some  weight  in  this  assembly: 

"Learning  affords  the  best  security  against 
crafty  and  dangerous  encroachments  on  our  pub- 
lic liberty." 

Again:  James  Monroe  says: 

"We  should  promote  intelligence  among  the 
people,  as  the  best  means  of  preserving  our  lib- 
erties." 

Again:  That  great  oracle  of  the  law,  chief 
justice  Marshall,  says: 

"Intelligence  is  the  basis  of  our  independ- 
ence." 

Is  not  this  sentiment  true?  Intelligence  is  the 
basis  of  American  independence.  Xow,  have 
all  these  men  conspired,  these  worthy  patriots, 
these  learned  statesmen — have  all  these  worthy 
men  conspired  to  bear  testimony  to  a  certain 
fact,  and  are  they  all  deceived?  Is  intelligence 
"  the  basis  upon  which  American  liberty  rests? 
Is  it  the  onlv  basis?  Is  it  the  sure  basis?  Is 
this  the  northern  star  to  which  every  eye  must 
turn  in  time  of  greatest  peril  to  republican  free- 
dom? It  must  be  admitted  by  all,  and  yet  I  am 
afraid  you  will  find  some  delegates  here  so  cow- 
ardly as  to  shrink  from  the  contest  of  freedom 
and  fall  back  in  reserve.  These  men  would  not 
have  done  to  have  entered  a  breach  on  the  bloody 
field  wliere  our  fathers  achieved  our  liberties. 

Again:  Dr.  Benjamin  Rush  says: 

"We  can  only  prevent  crime  and  render  our 
republican  form  of  government  durable  by  es- 
tablishing and  supporting  public  schools  in  ev- 
ery part  of  the  state." 

I  was  struck  with  the  remarks  of  the  learned 
gentleman  from  Nelson,  as  he  may  be  called, 
when  he  supposes  he  could  substitute  two  hun- 
dred thousand  children,  now  in  the  common- 
wealth, to  be  educated,  as  a  fair  offset,  because 
now  and  then  a  gentleman  chooses  to  take  three 
or  four  orphan  children  and  educate  them.  Is 
this  meeting  the  question  like  a  statesman,  like 
a  philosopher?  Is  this  coming  up  to  the  ques- 
tion, and  meeting  the  expectations  of  the  people 
of  Kentucky?  I  will  venture,  for  one,  to  proph- 
ecy, if  there  are  anv  gentleman's  constituents 
opposed  to  establishing  a  fund  for  universal  ed- 
ucation, the  reason  is,  they  are  ignorant  of  its 
value.  And  if  the  gentleman  himself  under- 
stands the  wants  of  liis  constituents,  he  should 
f:o  it  blind,  and  in  less  than  ten  years,  when  the 
itlle  prattlers  lliroughout  the  commonwealth 
shall  begin  to  prattle,  the  little  things  which 
they  have  learned  in  the  common  schools,  then 
there  will  be  a'statute  erected  to  that  gentleman's 
memorj',  in  the  hearts  of  the  children  of  the 
coramouwealth.  He  ought  to  lead  public  senti- 
ment, and  if  he  is  not  prepared  to  do  it,  he 
ought  not  to  have  come  here. 

Here  are  assembled  a  hundred  wise  men,  not 
of  the  east,  but  of  the  west,  engaged  in  a  work 
which  is  to  aff  ct  the  destinies,  for  good  or  evil, 
of  the  people  of  this  commonwealth,  perhaps  for 
a  century  U/ come.  They  have  the  great  public 
interests  in  their  hands.  Will  tJiey  let  the  op])or- 
tunity  paiis  of  acting  in  accordance  with  it? 
Will  they  do  it?  Is  there  a  roan  here  who  is 
prepared  to  do  it?    I  believe  that  the  people  are 


prepared  for  a  general  system  of  education.  1 
believe,  according  to  the  report  of  the  honorable 
chairman  of  the  committee  on  education,  we 
ought  to  dedicate  that  entire  fund  to  the  found- 
ing of  a  system  of  general  education.  I  think 
the  people  will  concur  in  the  adoption  of  that 
measure,  and  I  believe  that  every  man  who  votes 
for  it  will  be  hailed  by  his  constituents  as  a  ben- 
efactor of  his  race. 

I  look  upon  a  system  of  general  education  as 
the  very  Kremlin  of  American  liberty,  without 
which  there  is  no  hope  of  perpetuating  the  liber- 
ties of  this  country.  Think  you  that  the  little 
band  of  patriots  who  fought  at  Bunker's  hill,  or 
Saratoga,  or  Yorktown,  or  wherever  our  victo- 
ries were  achieved  against  England's  military 
f»ower,  would  have  succeeded,  but  for  the  intel- 
igent  and  patriotic  spirit  of  the  people  of  this 
country?  It  was  owing  to  their  being  educated 
and  well  informed.  It  was  their  ministers  who 
educated  them — the  Puritan  ministers,  who 
brought  school-masters  from  England,  and 
whose  first  act  was  to  establish  a  church  ded- 
icated to  the  worship  of  Almighty  God.  Their 
next  act  was  to  look  to  the  intellectual  growth 
of  the  rising  generation;  and  looking  to  that, 
they  made  themselves  and  their  descendants 
impregnable  to,  and  unconquerable  by  the 
mighty  hosts  of  England.  There  has  been  a 
ban  placed  here  on  quoting  anything  from 
Greece  or  Rome,  but  the  struggle  of  Thermopy- 
lae, the  battles  and  victories  at  Marathon,  Pla- 
t£Ea,Micalle,  and  Salamis  will  stand  as  imperish- 
able monuments  to  show  what  a  virtuous  and 
enlightened  people  can  achieve.  The  time  will 
soon  pass  by — it  will  be  gone  from  us,  in  which 
to  lay  the  foundation  for  the  future  grandeur, 
glory,  and  prosperity  of  our  beloved  state.  Let 
us  therefore  address  ourselves  to  the  work — 
dedicate  the  fund.  Let  the  fostering  fiat  of  our 
new  constitution  go  forth,  announcing  to  the 
people,  that  ample  provision  has  been  made  to 
bedeck  the  old  commonwealth  with  those  jewels 
of  prosperity,  intelligence,  and  religion,  com- 
mon scnools,  and  my  word  for  it,  the  great 
heart  of  Kentucky  will  welcome  and  sustain 
them. 

I  call  on  the  democrats  now  in  the  majority 
in  this  body,  and  I  call  upon  the  whigs,  who  in 
times  gone  by  stood  up  for  education,  and  I  call 
in  the  name  of  the  mighty  dead,  whose  senti- 
ments I  have  uttered  to-day,  to  come  up  and 
dedicate  the  fund.  You  will  make  your  con- 
stituents all-powerful,  you  will  make  them  rich 
in  all  that  is  virtuous  and  glorious,  and  you 
will  aid  in  the  perpetuation  of  human  liberty. 
Let  him  who  chooses  dodge  this  question. 

In  conclusion,  permit  me  to  say  if  there  is  a 
dele^jatc  here  who  wishes  to  erect  a  monument 
to  his  name  more  enduring  than  brass,  more  last,- 
ing  than  the  eternal  hills,  let  him  devote  the 
few  hours  remaining  of  this  session,  if  it  be  ne- 
cessary, to  the  advocacy  of  the  establishment  of 
a  school  fund,  whidi  shall  throw  light  and 
knowledge  to  the  darkest  corners  of  the  common- 
wealth, and  gladden  the  heart  of  eveiy  mother 
and  child  in  this  land.  Vote  this  dedication, 
and  you  will  have  done  something  for  the  poor. 
It  is  the  duty  of  a  republican  government  to  ed- 
ucate its  children.  It  is  said  by  all  writers  upon 
republics,  that  education   is  the   birth  right  Of 


895 


everr  child  born  in  a  republic.  Leave  this  Bub-  loosen  their  purse-strings,  and  diffuse  edueatirn 
jectto  the  legislature,  judging  from  the  past,  through  every  nook  and  comer  of  the  land;  tui 
the  schools  will  never  go  into  operation,  and  the  I  am  for  letting  them  do  it  for  themselves.  I 
funds  will  be  squandered  and  re-squandered,  suppose  the  $73,500  of  stock  in  the  bank  of 
abstracted  and  re-abstraeted,  and  nothing  will  Kenruekv  is  available.  I  also  suppose  that  the 
be  permanent.  And  finallv,  as  ignorance  al-  $51,223  59  is  available,  but  I  suppose  the  other 
wavs  grows  with  ignorance,'  and  there  being  no  sum  is  not  available,  and  I  am  not  willing  to  say 
light  in  the  commonwealth,  save  and  except  that  the  people  shall  pay  $60,000  or  $70,000  an- 
that  which  is  confined  to  the  colleges  and  acade-  nually  without  consulting  them  on  the  subject, 
mies,  the  great  body  of  the  people  will  become  When  it  is  their  will,  thev  will  in.struct  their 
so  ignorant  as  not  to  appreciate  the  benefit  of  a  representatives  to  do  it.  W^hen  we  have  secured 
common  school  education,  and  their  representa-  the  common  stock,  we  have  done  all  that  we 
lives  will  be  but  the  re-echo  of  their  ignorance,  shall  be  justified  in  doing;  and  this  they  have 
What  a  state  of  thingsl  What  political  doctor  required  to  be  done.  We  are  here  to  make  an 
will  undertake  then  to  cure  the  evil,  when  the  organic  law,  and  not  to  impose  taxation, 
representatives  but  reflect  the  ignorance  of  their  i  There  is  another  objection  to  this.  Although 
constituents.  |  the  people  are  in  favor  of  education,  this  system 

Here  we  have  a  learned  body  of  men,  under-  i  has  not  worked  well.  It  has  certainly  not  worked 
standing  the  great  interests  of  the  common- ;  well  in  my  county.  It  does  not  accomplish  the 
wealth;  now  strike  for  the  inrerests  of  your  con-  purpose  that  was  expected.  It  is  true  that  this 
Btituents,  and  my  word  for  it,  if  you  do  die  may,  in  some  measure,  be  attributable  to  the 
politically  in  the  attempt  to  do  the  people  good,  smallness  of  the  sura  disbursed;  but  we  should 
your  praises  will  be  echoed,  and  your  names  not  exercise  a  powerwhich  has  not  been  confided 
eternized,  when  a  new  generation  shall  arise  to  us.  Let  us  not  go  beyond  that  which  the  peo- 
and  call  you  blessed.  '  pie  have  delegated  to  us.  Let  us  leave  the  subject 

Mr.  BARLOW  moved  to  amend  U»e  amend- |  of  education  to  the  legislature,  for  they  can  either 
ment  bv  adding  the  following;  ;  accomplish  the  object  or  leave  it  alone,  as  the 

"Prodded,  That  each countv  in  this  state,  un-  people  may  determine;  for  the  representatives 
deranv  general  svstem  of  education,  shall  be  en- i  will  be  bound  to  obey  the  instructions  of  the 
titled  to  the  due'proportion  of  the  school  fund  People.  Let  us  secure  the  sum  which  remains, 
thus  dedicated,  according  to  the  number  of  chil-:  and  do  no  more.  Because  Washington  and 
dren  therein;  and  each  district  in  each  countv  ^ladison,  and  Monroe,  were  m  lavor  of  educa- 
shall  be  entitled  to  the  due  proportion  of  saicl  tion,  will  not  justify  us  in  taxing  the  people 
fund  according  to  the  number  of  children  there- '  "^^^^e  thev  have  not  authorized  us  to  do  it. 
j„  "  *  I      Mr.  BOWLIXG.     I  have  been  a  most  pat 


patient 


3Ir.   MACHEX 
one  of  deep  and  abiding 


The  subject  of  education  is    listener,  and  I  will  add   a  most  inter^ted  one, 
ling  interest  with  all  of  us. '  S'l^*^'*  ^^^^  assemblage  of  this  body     I  think  I  may 


turetime;  but  I  ask  where  that  fund  is?  Is  it  in 
the  vaults  of  the  treasury?  Is  it  in  a  tangible 
shape  anywhere?  If  not,  are  we  to  levy  a  tax 
on  the  people  of  Kentucky,  without  their  man- 
date to  do  It?  I  stand  here  with  as  little  fear  as 
any  gentleman  on  this  floor,  but  I  wish  the  all- 
powerful  voice  of  the  people  to  come  up  on  this  j 


have  derived  no  ordinary  pleasure  and  instruc- 
tion from  this,  to  me,  new  and  varied  source  of 
knowledge,  and  1  feel  grateful  to  the  various 
gentlemen  who  have  participated  in  the  discus- 
sions for  whatever  each  has  contributed  to  the 
general  fund. 

I  had  not  intended  sir,  to  trouble  the   conven- 


subject  to  their  representatives  in  a  legislative  j  tion  with  any  remarks,  but  being  a  member  of 
capacity.  I  am  not  willing  to  sav  to  the  people  i  the  committee  on  education,  and  feeling  a  deep 
of  Caldwell  county,  I  have  fixed' a  tax  of  three  and  abiding  interest  in  its  promotion,  I  could 
cents  on  the  $100  upon  vou,  without  consulting  M'ot  forego  the  opportunity  offered  bv  the  occa- 
you  about  it.  I  know  they  feel  an  interest  in  sioo  to  put  in  requisition  my  humble  abilitirt 
education;  and  when  I  see  the  children  of  my  i  m  aid  of  that  sacred  cause, 
constituents,  from  five  to  fifteen  years  of  age.  j  Sir,  however  high  the  claims  of  education  to 
destitute  of  an  education,  I  feel  willing  to  come  '  the  profound  consideration  of  the  philanthropist, 
up  and  give  them  the  means  of  education.  But  |  yet,  to  the  politician  in  a  government  like  ours, 
shall  we,  without  giving  them  an  opportunity  !  these  claims  are  enhanced  a  hundred  fold,  and 
to  say  a  word  upon  the  subject,  fasten  upon  them  |  in  a  government,  such  as  we  now  propose  for 
a  tax  from  which  they  will  not  be  able  to  extri-  j  this  commonwealth,  it  become.^  a  sine  qua  non 
cate  themselves?  I  trust  no  gentleman  will  be  i  to  the  intelligent  discharge  of  the  high  political 
deluded  into  such  an  act.  I  am  not  prepared  to  !  duties  which  is  conferred  upon  the  citizen.  It 
do  it.  I  am  unwilling  to  vote  this  three  cent  |  is  a  government  which  presupposes  an  exalted 
tax,  and  rivet  it  on  the  people,  without  leaving  j  patriotism  and  intelligence  blended  in  happy 
them  the  privilege  to  .shake  it  off.  I  know  the  !  association  in  the  electors,  and  as  education  is 
people  have  votecl   a  two  cent  tax,  but  in  that  i  the  only  recognized  substratum  of  these  conser 


case  it  was  left  to  their  free  volition.  They  came 
up  and  did  it  for  themselves;  and  I  am  willing 
to  leave  it  to  them  in  the  future.  When  theysee 
that  we  have  secured  that  which  has  already 
been  provided.  I  believe  they  will  come  up  and 


vative  elements,  it  is  peculiarly  to  that  basi^i 
that  the  eye  of  the  far-seeing  politician  should 
be  directed. 

It  shall  be  no  part  of  my  purpose  in  my  dis- 
cussion of  rhis  hacknied  subject,  to  analyze  the 


896 


beauties  of  education  in  the  abstract,  nor  to  dwell 
in  rapturous  eulogy  upon  those  fitful,  but  gor- 
geous, those  evanseent  but  intensely  brilliant  in- 
tellects which  it  has  gemmed  and  embelished, 
as  with  light  from  Heaven,  for  the  wonder  and 
admiration  of  mankind.     These  chef  douvers ,  re- 
sulting from  a  felicitous  combination  of  God's 
mightiest  touch,  and  man's  noblest  effort,  I  shall 
leave  undisturbed  in  their  glory,   and   confine 
myself  to  the  less  ambitious,  but  more  pleasing 
task  of  pointing  attention  to  common  sense,   in 
the  common  and  multifarious  affairs   of  man, 
disciplined  alone  by  common  school  education. 
Mr.  President,   a  government  which  entrusts 
the  appointing  power  of  all  of  its  departments, 
its  checks,  its  ballances,  its  agents,   its  vis  con- 
servairix,  or  innate,  inherent  power  of  self-pro- 
tection, or  self-preservations,  directly  to  the  dis- 
cretionary excercise  of  unrestricted  electors,  and 
which  at  the  same  time  makes  no  provision  for 
the  common  education,  and   consequent  eleva- 
tion of  this  appointing  power,  surely  acts  as 
unwisely  as  the  man  who  built  his  house  upon 
the  sand.    The  house,  when  the  winds  are  shut 
up  in  their  northern  home,  and  sunshine  cheers 
and  gilds,  its  fair  proportion  will  be  hailed   by 
the  superficial  as  an  emanation   from  the  most 
skillful  of  architects — its  massive  masonry  pro- 
tected by  a  garniture  of  corrinthian  pillars  sur- 
mounted witli  elaborate  capitals,pointsignficant- 
ly  to  a  durability  of  ages.     But  when  Boreas  un- 
leashes the  demons  of  storm  from  their  polar  caves, 
and  Neptune  lashes  the  seainto  wild  commotion, 
and  Jupiter  belches  liquid  fire  from  his  throne, 
and  the  world  is  threatened  with  a  second   de- 
luge, then  the  foundation  of  sand   is  dissolved 
and  the  noble  superstructures   tumble  headlong 
into  a  mighty  mass  of  ruins.     So  of  such  a  gov- 
vernment.     When  party  fury  shall  be  lashed  in- 
to madness,  and  demagogues,  like  the  storm-de- 
mons, shall  penetrate  eveiy  hill  and  hollow  and 
cranny  of  the  commonwealth,  and   infused   into 
the  wildly  excited  inhabitants  their  own   fell 
spirit  of  disorder  and  desolation — if  the  conser- 
vatism of  educated  intellect  is  not  there  to  resist 
androllback  the  threatening  tide, the  foundation 
gives  wav,  and  the  government  is  a  thine  that 
was,  but  Is  not !  To  guard  against  such  political, 
and  consequently   such  social  disaster,  sober- 
minded  men  ought  not  to  hesitate  to  introduce 
into  the  government  that  sole  basis   of  conser- 
vatism which  wisdom  and  experience   conspire 
to  indicate  as  alone  adequate  to  meet  the  emer- 
gency. This  element  of  safety  is  common  school 
education    diffused    throughout    the   common- 
wealth.    The   children   of    the   commonwealth 
are  the  most  sacred  of  her  possessions,  and  de- 
mand her  fondest  solicitude.    It  is  her  first  du- 
ty to  provide  for  them,  not  gold,  but  that  which 
gold  cannot  purchase,  omnipotent  as  it  is,  vir- 
ture  and  intelligence. 

When  a  wise  man  undertakes  to  build  a  house, 
said  one  who  was  the  impersonation  of  wisdom, 
he  first  estimates  the  cost,  and  if  he  find  his 
means  insufiicient  to  accomplish  that  object,  he 
abandons  it:  and  in  like  manner  wise  statesmen 
will  not  undertake  any  improvement  or  public 
charity  in  the  absence  of  the  means  to  prosecute 
it  to  a  successful  completion.  In  obedience  to 
ibis  wise  rule,  I  have  collected  some  statistics, 
and  made  some  ostimates  in  elucidation  of  the 


practicability  of  estaBliahrng  a'svsi^m  of  free 
schools  in  this  commonwealtli,  and  I  propose  to 
invoke  their  aid  to  enable  me  to  prove  the  fol- 
lowing propositions: 

1st.  That  it  is  Utopian  to  hope  for  a  general 
deffusion  of  school  instruction  in  the  common- 
wealth of  Kentucky,  unaided  by  the  govern- 
ment. 

The  report  of  the  second  auditor,  now  upon 
the  journal  of  this  body,  shows  the  whole  num- 
ber of  parents  in  the  state  to  be  70,707.     Of  this 
number  34,540,  or  nearly  one  half,  do  not  aver- 
age in   worth  $100 — eight  thousand  are  worth 
nothing,  and    21,783  less  than  $100,  and   none 
of  them    worth  as    much  as  $400.     These    pa- 
rents have  an  aggregate  of  children  between  the 
ages   of  five  and  sixteen,  amounting  to  91,266. 
Now  so  long  as  the  rule  is  true,  that  nothing 
can  produce  something,  I  hold  it  to  be  utterly 
impossible  for  parents  so  circumstanced  to  pro- 
vide education  for  their  children,  and  in  the  ab- 
sence of  a  munificent  provision  upon  the  part  of 
the  government,  they  must  of  necessity  be  per- 
mitted to  grow  up  in  ignorance.     Allowing  one 
half  of  these  children  to  be  males,  and  we   have 
the  basis  of  a  voting  population   amounting  to 
45,633,  or  more  than  a  third  of  the  entire  voters 
of  the  state,  who   in  a  few  years  are  to  be  en- 
trusted with  the  selection  of  officers  at  the  polls, 
upon  whose  integrity  depend  the  life  and  liberty 
of  a  million  of  people   and  two  hundred   and 
seventy  millions  of  property.     These  statistics 
need   no  illustration.     They  exhibit  upon  their 
surface  an  argument  that  he  who  runs  may  read. 
Sir  we  are  not  to  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact,  that 
largely  over  a  moity  of  our  people   are  totally 
without  the  means  of  educating  their  children, 
and  a  majority  of  the  future  voters  of  the  com- 
monwealth, to  whom  I,  and  you,  sir,  propose  to 
restore  the  power  of  appointing  at  the  polls  all 
the  functionaries  of  a  complicated  apparatus  of 
government,  are  threatened  from  the  adverse  cir- 
cumstances by  which  they  are  encompassed  with 
abject  ignorance.     To  avoid  the  political  calam- 
ities necessitously  incident  to  such   a  condition 
of  things,  can   any  of  us  say  we  have  done  our 
whole  duty  to  the  commonwealth,  who  has   not 
to  his  utmost,  endeavored  to  provide  the  only 
means  of    prevention?     Social   compacts  have 
existed  for  ages,  and  are  now  struggling  in  the 
old  world,  like  a  condemned  felon  for  a  few  ad- 
ditional days  forfeited  by  a  long  career  of  crime 
and  infamy,  where  the  ignorance  of  the  govern- 
ed was  so  great  as  to  blind  them  to  oppression, 
and  whose  only  knowledge  existed  in  the  tra- 
ditionary records  of  unrequited  toil  and  patient 
endurance.     But  in  the  new  world   freedom  is 
the  birth-right  of  man,  and  he  instinctively  com- 
prehends the  right  which  it  confers,  though  he 
may  be  ignorant  of  the  duties  which  it  imposes, 
and  in  his  ardour  to  avail  himself  of  the  one  he 
may  trample  ruthlessly  upon  the  other.    Now  as 
he  is  compelled  by  a  necessity  of  his  very  nature 
to  exercise  those  rights,  how  important  is  it  that 
wise  legislators  should  provide  schools  for  train- 
ing and  desciplening  him,  to  enable  him  so  to 
use  as  not  to  abuse  them.    Sir,  we  know  that 
they  will  be   exercised,  and  in  the   absence  of 

Erevious  training  we  can  have  no  reasonable 
ope  that  they  will  be  exercis.^d   with  prudence 
and  discretion. 


S97 


I  know,  sir,  that  exalted  patriotism,  associa-  [those  factories,  \rhich  add  more  to  the  glory,  the 
ted  TTith  a  kind  heart  and  sound  liead,  in  the  ab-  '  political  andsocial  blessings  of  acommonwealth, 
sence  of  anv  training,  will  point  the  correct  path; !  than  all  the  mules,  and  jennies,  and  throstles, 
and  the  subjects  of  this  happy  combination  are  \  that  have  been  invented  since  the  discovery  of 
above  an  V  position  that  schools  or  any  other  con-    cotton  seed.     I   mean,    sir,    the   county  school 


trivance  of  man  could  secure,  and  of  such  of  na- 
ture's noblemen  I  do  not  speak.  I  know  further 
more,  that  patriotism  and  honor  in  the  humblest 
Kentuckian,  are  always  prominent,  being  the 
common  inheritance  from  a  glorious  ancestrj', 
and  which  have  made  their  lovely  home  a  theme 
of  oratory,  of  poetry,  and  of  song  throughout 
the  civilized  world — yet  those  lustrous  elements 
which  now  enter  so  largely  into  the  composition 
of  our  people,  and  make  glorious  the  very  name 
of  Kentuckian,  unless  cherished  by  a  diffusion 
of  knowledge,  and  thus  perpetuated,  cdunot  be 
expected  to  endure  forever.  Darkness  iu  all 
ages  ajid  in  all  countries,  when  protracted 
through  successive  generations,  has  been  found 
fatal  to  these  ennobling  qualities  of  humanity, 
and  our  sa^es  and  patriots  ought  not  to  hope  that 
our  beloved  commonwealth  would  miraculously 
prove  an  exception  to  the  general  rule.  I  en- 
quire, secondly.  Can  this  moiety  of  the  fathers 
of  the  future  voters  of  Kentucky,  under  the  cir- 


houses.  But  it  requires  means  to  erect  these 
factories  of  embryo  statesmen,  patriots,  and  di- 
vines, and  means  to  keep  the  school  master 
housed,  not  abroad.  These  statistics  show  that 
our  state  is  fitted  with  peculiar  adaptation  to  a 
system  of  free  schools,  and  that  the  only  reason 
why  her  children  ever  grow  up  in  ignorance  is, 
that  the  condition  of  the  parents  is  such  as  to 
deny  them  the  happiness  of  educating  them: 
and  it  is  to  supply  this  desideratum  that  I  plead 
in  their  behalf. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  extent  of  the  provis- 
ion already  made  by  the  state  towards  the  accom- 
plishment of  this  object,  and  enquire  to  what  ex- 
tent it  is  capable  of  accomplishing  it. 

The  fund  called  and  known  as  the  school 
fund,  consists  of  $1,225,768  42,  secured  by 
bonds  given  by  the  state,  and  payable  to  the 
board  ot  education;  $72,500  of  stock  in  the 
Bank  of  Kentuck,  and  $51,223  29,  balance  of 
interest  on  the  school   fund  for  the  year  1848, 


cumstances  which  retard  and  embarrass  their  [making,  in  the  aggregate,  the  sum  $1,350,491  71 
will,  bestow  upon  their  children  even  the  rudi-  Tlie  interest  upon  this  fund,  on  which  the  stat« 
ments  of  the  humblest  education?  I  am,  sir,  pays  five  per  cent.,  amounting  to  $67,524  58, 
not  unapprised  of  the  thousand  and  one  excep-  when  added  to  the  two  cent  tax  voted  by 
tions  to  the  argument  which  associates  poverty  j  the  state  upon  ecich  $100  worth  of  taxable 
and  ignorance,  and  no  one  knows  better  than  |  property,  which  amounts  to  $56,000,  would 
myself  tJiat  many  of  the  parents  of  this  list  are  j  constitute  an  annual  school  revenue  of  $123,- 
aiiiong  tlie  most  learned,  worthy,  and  accora-  \  524  58.  This  sum  when  divided  among  192,- 
plished  of  our  citizens,  and  in  the  list  of  the  j  999  children,  the  total  number  of  the  common- 
wealthy  many  will  appear  of  pitiable  ignorance,  '  wealth,  would  give  to  each  per  annum,  64  cents 
not  being  able  to  read  or  write.  But  my  inquiry  '  only.  At  first  blush  it  would  appear  that  a  sum 
is  in  reference  to  the  ability  of  poor  fathers  to  so  inconsiderable  was  too  small  to  lay  even  the 
educate  their  children.  Now,  sir,  the  facilities  comer  stone  of  this  benign  system.  Yet  a  fur- 
frir  the  acquisition  of  book  learning,  with  a  ru-  l  ther  enquirj'  will  demonstrate  its  suflaciency  to 
ral  population,  is  precisely  iu  proportion  to  its  perpetuate  an  efficient  system  of  free  schools  in 
density.  If  the  proximity  of  thirty  families  to  a  !  the  commonwealth,  for  nearly  five  months  in 
central  point  be  within  the  traveling  distance  of  j  every  year.  Allowing  an  area  of  six  miles 
children  to  school,  there  each  parent  will  enjoy  i  square  to  a  school  district,  it  would  require,  in 
double  the  opportunity,  of  his  procuring  some    the  whole  state,  twelve  hundred  and  fifty  teach- 


school  instruction  for  his  children ,  of  his  less  for 
tunate  neighbor,  who  resides  in  a  district  of 
equal  territorial  extent,  but  just  half  as  densely 
populated,  because  the  former  districts  will  pos- 
sess double  the  means  to  build  a  school  house 
and  employ  a  teacher. 

T)ie  State  of  Kentucky  contains  forty  five  thou- 
sand square  miles;  seventy  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred and  seven  parents,  with  one  hundred  and 
ninety  two  thousand  nine  hundred  and  ninety 
nine  children  between  the  ages  of  five  and  sixteen. 
But  when  the  number  of  parents  resident  in  large 
towns  and  cities  is  deducted  from  the  aggregate 
number  of  the  state,  the  latter,  it  will  be  found, 
will  suffer  a  reduction  of  ten  per  cent.,  leaving 
sixty  three  thousand  parents  to  be  diffused 
over  fourty  five  thousand  square  miles — a  faac- 
tion  less  than  one  and  a  half  families  for 
each  square  mile.  Now  the  area  of  a  school 
district  ought  not  much  exceed  four  miles  square, 


ers;  whose  services  at  $20  per  month,  (and  that 
amount,  when  it  was  known  to  be  certain,  at  the 
end  of  the  session,  would  procure  good  ones,) 
for  five  months,  would  amount  to  $125,000 — a 
sum  only  $1,475  42  over  and  above  the  annual 
.school  revenue — so  that  if  the  state  were  to  seal 
hermetrically,  her  eoflFers  to  the  cries  of  her 
children  for  mental  bread  and  the  light  which 
shineth  in  darkness,  the  system  of  free  schools 
would  still  find  an  efficient  basis  in  the  national 
donation,  and  the  charity  voted  by  the  people, 
if  once  this  holy  fund  was  secured  against  the 
fingers  of  a  time-serving  legislature. 

But  the  gentleman  from  Caldwell,  (Mr.  ila- 
chen,)  would  not  force  the  state  to  pay  the  in- 
terest on  this  national  gift,  made  sacred  by  a 
solemn  act  of  the  legislature  forever,  to  educa- 
tional purposes.  He  thinks  it  might  be  incon- 
venient. That  is  her  concern,  not  mine.  It 
will  not  be   denied  that  she  justly  owes   the 


and  could  not,  with  any  pretensions  to  con  ven-  i  money,  for  .she  has,  through  her  legislature,  or 
ience,  exceed  six  miles  square.  This  area,  on  an  j  dered  the  evidences  of  the  debt  to  be  listed.  A 
average,  would  contain  mty  four  families,  with  a  j  listed  debt,  I  understand  from  the  lawyers,  is 
fraction  less  than  one  hundred  and  sixty  two  '  not  assignable,  and  does  not,  therefore,  require 
children.  Here,  sir,  I  am  pleased  to  acknowledge,  !  the  baptism  of  fire  to  stave  off  its  payment  un- 
that  the  raw  material  exists  in  abundance  for  i  til  a  more  convenient  season.  But  my  friend 
113 


898 


further  thinks  that  the  phraseology  of  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  might  make  it  obligatory 
upon  the  legislature  to  lay  an  additional  tax  to 
keep  up  an  efficient  system  of  common  schools. 
I  think  sir,  his  fears  are  groundless,  and  that  he 
totally  miscomprehends  the  object  of  the  com- 
initte'e.  If  the  school  fund  in  practice  was 
found  insufficient  for  the  achievement  of  the 
beneficent  purposes  contemplated  by  the  com- 
mittee, I  should  think  there  ought  to  be  noth- 
ing startling  to  the  guardians  of  the  people's 
rights,  in  the  proposition  to  compel  the  legisla- 
ture politely  to  ask  the  people  if  they  would 
submit  to  an  additional  tax.  There  could  be 
nothing  alarming  or  extraordinary  in  constrain- 
ing the  legislature  to  doff  their  beavers  to  the  sov- 
ereign and  enquire,  "by  your  leave,  gentlemen." 

But  suppose  sir,  upon  trial,  to  make  the  school 
all  that  tlie  ardent  friends  of  the  universal  dif- 
fusion of  knowledge  desired,  an  additional  tax 
of  from  four  to  six  cents  upon  the  $100  worth 
of  property  was  demanded,  is  it  probable  the 
state  would  vote  it?  Why,  sir,  the  state  of  In- 
diana, on  our  border,  has  just  voted  a  tax  of  ten 
cents  upon  each  $100,  to  give  additional  tone 
and  energy  to  her  system  of  free  schools.  Will 
Kentucky  consent  to  take  rank  in  the  rear  of 
Indiana,  and  submit  to  have  it  thrown  in  her 
face  that  her  institution  of  slavery  presses  her 
down  to  that  point  of  humiliation?  I  wot  not: 
her  legislature  might  do  it,  her  people  never.  Let 
our  people  no  longer  be  mocked  by  the  legisla- 
tive legerdemain  of  free  schools  upon  paper. 
They  have  had  enough  of  the  shahow,  and  as  it 
is  said  coming  events  cast  their  shadows  before, 
let  this  body  now  take  of  the  legislature  a  forth- 
coming bond  for  the  substance. 

I  know  very  well  that  thousands  of  poor  boys 
will  cut  their  way  through  all  these  inexorable 
difficulties;  and  it  rejoices  my  heart  that  it  is  so 
— set  fate  itself  at  defiance,  and  carve  for  them- 
selves a  proud  niche  in  the  temple  of  Pytho;  for 
the  genius  of  our  institutions  is  filled  with  pe- 
culiar and  characteristic  relevency  to  the  gener- 
ous aspirations  of  man,  and  to  nerve  him  for  the 
achievement  of  mighty  ends,  to  essay  which 
would  be  madness,  in  less  favored  lands.  But, 
of  the  myriads  of  the  noble  and  generous,  who, 
inspired  Dy  the  enthusiasm  of  hope  and  youth, 
enlist  in  this  forlorn  hope  against  the  opposing 
asperities  of  a  cold,  calculating  world,  we  hear 
alone  of  those  who  have  made  for  themselves  a 
history  and  a  name — of  the  unnumbered  throng 
who  perish  by  the  wayside,  "unwept,  unhonor- 
ed,  and  unsung,"  unsustained  even  by  the 
smiles  of  that  country  for  wliose  glory  they 
would  at  any  time  have  offered  up  thir  hearts' 
warm  blood — of  them,  of  their  struggles,  their 
hopes,  their  disappointments,  the  world  hears 
Bot;  nor  does  the  eye  of  man  trace  in  the  dura- 
ble witchery  of  the  sculptor's  art  the  wreath  for 
which  the  heart  so  ardently  panted  in  life,  to 
find  oblivion  in  the  charitable  mantle  of  the  un- 
-urned  sepulchre. 

Sir,  it  is  utterly  absurd  to  expect — unless,  in- 
"deed,  honest  Do^bOiry  is  right  in  supposing 
""reading  and  writing  comes  by  nature" — that  it 
is  within  the  pale  of  conceivable  things  that  a 
population  surrounded  by  such  circumstances 
cao,  as  a  general  rule,  secure  the  blessinss  of  ed- 
trcition  to  their  children,  unaided  by  toe  state. 


They  cannot,  and  they  must,  of  necessity,  grow 
up  in  ignorance.  We  all  know  that  the  wealthy 
themselves  cannot,  in  rural  districts,  from  the 
size  of  their  landed  estates,  and  their  conse- 
quent remoteness  from  each  other,  support  a 
good  school  for  any  length  of  time,  and  that 
they  have  to  send  their  children  from  home  and 
board  them  near  acadamies  and  colleges,  at  an 
enormous  expense,  to  secure  to  them  an  educa- 
tion. 

But  the  convenience  to  a  school  house  is  not 
the  only  difficulty  with  the  poor  man.  The  loss 
to  him  of  the  labor  of  a  son  while  at  school,  is 
enormous,  and  greatly  enhances  his  own  labors 
and  difficulties,  and  diminishes  his  ability  to 
pay  the  fee  of  tuition.  And  let  no  one  imagine 
that  this  trifling  fee  of  five  or  six  dollars  is  with 
that  father  a  small  matter.  Sir,  I  tell  you,  to  a 
poor  man,  who  is  straining  every  nerve  to  pay 
nis  rent,  and  to  provide  the  absolute  necessaries 
of  life  for  a  growing  family,  it  is  an  estate.  Yes 
air,  an  estate  nearly  five  fold  greater,  as  I  have 
shown  by  indisputable  statistics,  tiian  the  son 
for  whom  the  outlay  is  contemplated  is  heir  to. 
Many  a  poor  boy  has  been  denied  the  blessings 
of  a  tolerable  education,  and  been  compelled  to 
grope  his  way  through  the  world  in  ignorance 
and  self-abasement,  because  it  was  impossible 
for  his  parents  to  spare  the  means  to  pay  the  fees 
of  the  teacher  in  his  neighborhood. 

I  know  that  wealth,  especially  in  a  slave  state, 
is  constantly  and  rapidly  changing  hands— one 
blessing,  at  least,  which  looms  up  amid  the 
evils  which  gentlemen  imagine  incident  to  slave- 
ry, like  an  oasis  of  the  desert;  but  the  rule  will 
still  prevail,  though  I  know  its  tendency  will  be 
manfully  resisted  by  those  who  have  felt  and 
know  the  power  and  influence  of  learning,  but 
have  lost  the  means  of  securing  it  to  their  de- 
scendants :  still,  to  "that  complexion  must  it 
come  at  last" — an  association  of  ignorance  and 
poverty. 

Mr.  President,  aside  from  interest,  should  it 
not  be  the  glory  of  the  empowered  deputies  of  a 
great  and  chivalrous  people,  to  fix  beyond  the 
power  of  evanescent  legislation,  a  means  of  res- 
cuing their  unfortunate  descendants  from  the 
evils  of  ignorance,  and  its  kindred  associations? 
But,  sir,  an  appeal  to  interest,  it  is  ray  experi- 
ence, touches  much  more  eloquently,  the  deli- 
cate, responsive  chords  in  the  moral  mechanism 
of  our  fallen  nature,  when  braced  and  indurated 
by  that  resisting  tonicity  which  wealth  so  con- 
spicuously imparts,  than  when  addressed,  even 
in  accents  of  the  most  euphonious  pathos,  to  pa- 
triotism and  philanthropy — those  rare,  but  most 
ennobling  attributes  of  man. 

Sir,  in  any  government  not  a  despotism,  it  is 
emphatically  the  interest  of  the  ricn  to  employ 
their  best  endeavors  to  elevate  the  character  of 
their  less  fortunate  fellow-citizens,  but  in  a  gov- 
ernment not  only  elective  in  the  technical  inter- 
pretation of  the  political  theorist,  but  in  very 
truth,  as  will  be  the  government  that  Kentucky 
now  demands  of  this  body,  in  a  voic<!  that  we 
dare  not  miscomprehend,  it  should  be  tin;  object 
Of  sensible  men,  to  make  ample  provisions  to 
enable  awery  voter  to  discharge  faithfully  those 
high  trusts  confided  to  him.  1  maintain,  in  the 
absence  of  reasonable  mental  culture,  thab  this 
is  impossible.    All  the  fine-spun  speeches  that 


?9y 


have  beeu  utteroil  iu  this  liall  in  th«?  last  two 
months,  in  reference  to  the  virtue  and  intelli- 
gence of  the  people,  and  their  name  is  legion, 
and  all  that  inaj  follow,  though  they  go  on  "till 
the  crack  of  doom,"  can  have  no  other  effec 
than  to  excite  the  pity  of  the  wise,  and  to  pan- 
der to  that  vain-glory  and  self-sufficiency  which 
so  peculiarly  and  characteristically  distinguish 
the  ignorant,  but  will  never  fit  one  poor  and 
friencless  boy  for  the  discriminating  exercise  of 
the  elective  franchise.  I  know,  sir,  that  this 
method  of  treating  this  subject,  may  betray  to 
some  timid  gentlemen,  upon  my  part,  to  indulge 
a  much  hacKnied  expression,  a  distrust  of  the 
intelligence  of  the  people  for  self-government. 
But  that  is  a  very  superficial  view  of  the  matter. 
My  object  is,  by  the  elevating  influence  of  edu- 
cation, to  place  the  most  unfortunate  of  thera 
beyond  the  suspicion  of  the  most  fastidious 
stickler  for  patrician  supremacy.  Our  people  are, 
I  do  most  conscientiously  believe,  amply  quali- 
fie-l  to  discharge  those  high  trusts  involved  in 
the  exercise  of  the  appointing  power,  and  the 
summoning  of  this  convention,  charged  to  re- 
store back  that  exalted  privilege  which  they  had 
by  contract  delegated  to  agents  for  half  a  centu- 
ry, may  be  cited  in  demonstration  of  the  assump- 
tion. But,  sir,  your  qualifications,  or  mine,  in 
this  behalf,  cannot  be  plead  in  favor  of  the  qual- 
ifications of  our  descendants.  Their  qualifica- 
tion.s,  like  ours,  will  depend  upon  their  oppor- 
tunities or  exertions.  It  is  to  provide  for  them 
the  former  that  I  plead. 

I  have  said,  sir,  it  was  the  interest  of  the  rich 
to  provide  means  for  the  education  of  the  poor. 
If  It  be  conceded  that  knowledge  conduces  to 
virtue,  and  to  the  development  and  elaboration 
of  that  sentiment  of  the  human  mind  called  hon- 
or, and,  conversely,  that  ignorance  is  the  fruitful 
source  of  vice,  immorality,  and  licentiousness, 
it  follows  that  those  who  have  most  to  lose  by 
the  prevalence  of  the  latter  among  a  voting  and 
tax-laying  people,  are  most  interested  iu  the  dis- 
semination of  the  former. 

And,  sir,  in  thus  providing  these  means  it 
may  be  that  we  are  entertaining  an  angel  una- 
wares— it  may  be  that  we  shall  be  engaged  in 
rearing  a  bulwark  against  the  ignorance  of  the 
descendants  of  the  rich.  How  immeasurably 
would  it  add  to  the  sum  total  of  human  happi- 
ness, in  any  given  organized  municipality,  for 
each  individual  to  know  that  the  main-spring  of 
that  organization,  secured  his  offspring  against 
that  frightful  train  of  vices,  of  which  ignorance 
is  the  common  parent. 

Sir,  in  the  long  exercise  of  the  healing  profes- 
sion, it  has  been  my  misfortune  often  to  be  com- 
pelled to  perform  the  sadly  soothing  rites  of 
jEsculapius  over  the  dying  pillow  of  the  parent 
of  a  numerous  and  helpless  offspring.  'Tis  tlien, 
ere  tottering  reason  forsakes  forever  its  crum- 
bling throne,  that  the  observer  sees  man  as  he 
is,  as  God  fashioned  hira  for  his  own  wi.se  pur- 
poses. 'Tis  there  aJone  can  he  be  studied,  unas- 
sociated  with  the  hopes,  the  fears,  the  ambition, 
the  patriotism,  the  heroism,  the  daring,  the 
worla,  and  all  that  for  which  the  world  strug- 
gles with  wary,  sleepless  energy;  these,  one  by 
one,  fade  from  the  kailedescope  of  his  mental 
vision  as  death  approaches,  until  but  one  sole, 
absorbing  passion  remains  of  that  huge  bnndle 


I  of  wliich  he  i»  composed,  in  the  pride  of  his 
i  health  and  the  pomp  of  his  power,  and  that  is  a 
love  of  his  offspring,  blended  in  harmoniouH 
j  union,  with  a  single  desire,  that  they  may  be 
1  saved  from  the  vices  of  an  immoral  world," and 
'  fitted  for  a  felicitous  a.ssociation  with  redeemed 
i  and  kindred  spirits  in  the  home  of  a  common 
j  father. 

!  'Tis  in  that  dread  hour  thatpoverty  is  felt  in  all 
i  of  its  biting  and  blasting  force,  because  the  suf- 
'  ferer  feels  that  he  leaves  nothing  to  secure  his 
children  against  the  world's  vices.  Had  his 
country,  iu  the  exercise  of  an  enlarged  philan- 
throphv,  provided  means  for  the  education  of 
his  children,  and  thus  secured  them  against  the 
grosser  immoralities  of  a  wicked  world,  oh  how 
it  would  have  soothed  and  supported  his  depart- 
ing spirit,  and  smoothed  his  passage  to  the 
grave! 

Was  patriotism  not  an  instinct,  as  it  is,  it 
were  impossible  for  one  to  feel  much  love  for  a 
country  that  could  thus  coldly  neglect  its  beg- 
gared orphans.  Surely  nothing  were  better  cal- 
culated to  fan  and  enlarge  that  noble  instinct 
than  a  permanent  provision  to  foster,  to  protect, 
to  educate,  the  whole  people  of  the  country. 

Let  it  not  be  said  it  cannot  be  done:  for  what- 
ever man  has  done,  man  can  do,  and  we  know 
that  in  many  of  the  sovereignties  of  this  proud 
confederacy  this  has  beeu  done,  and  an  educa- 
tion secured  to  all,  and  there,  whatever  remorse 
or  regret  may  haunt  the  dying  father,  this  suffo- 
cating night-mare,  of  children  grown  up  in  ig- 
norance and  vice,  which  makes  death  hideous, 
is  at  least  removed. 

It  has  been  said,  and  a  truer  observation  was 
never  made,  that  the  people  are  more  generous 
than  those  who  repres^-nt  them;  and  the  true  rea- 
son of  this  is  not  to  be  sought  for  in  the  abstract, 
parsimony  of  the  representatives,  but  in  the  fact 
that  the  representative  feels  that  he  is,  in  making 
appropriations,  operating  upon  funds  not  his, 
and  therefore  that  he  ought  to  consult  riged 
economy.  But  the  people  operate  on  their  own, 
and  are  always  generous.  We  have  every  rea- 
son to  believe  that  the  people  of  this  great  state 
desire  a  well  regulated  system  of  free  schools. 
In  every  way  in  which  the  question  has  been 
tested,  they  have  so  decided;  and  even  when  the 
question  was  put  to  them  by  the  legislature, 
whether  or  no  they  were  so  much  in  love  with 
the  contemplated  system  as  to  vote  a  direct  tax 
upon  themselves  for  its  maintenance,  they  voted 
aye  with  great  promptness  anAunanimity.  It 
is  true  tlie  tax  was  small,  but  it  was  all  that  they 
were  required  to  lay,and  it  ought  not  to  be  doubt- 
ed that  it  would  have  been  quadrupled  with  the 
same  generous  promptne.ss  if  it  had  been  re- 
quired of  them. 

Sir,  we  ought  not  to  hope  to  raise  a  fund  so 
large  by  legislative  legerdemain,  as  that  the  bare 
interest  would  suffice  for  the  accomplishment  of 
this  great  and  generous  object.  It  cannot  be 
done.  The  committee  on  education  have  repor- 
ted that  the  school  fund  amounting  now  to  $1,- 
350,491  75,  should  be  consecrated  to  educational 
purposes,  and  remain  a  perpetual  fund,  and  that 
the  interest  thereof  alone  should  be  employed. 
All  over  this,  required  for  this  great  and'hu- 
mane  object,  must  be  raised  by  a  tax  upon  the 
property  of  the   commonwealth,  for  it  is  mani- 


906' 


fArfy'^tbpian  to  hope  to  raise  it  iu  any  other 
way. 

I  have  shown  that  if  we  secure  what  we  have, 
it  will  be  sufficient  to  keep  a  complete  system  of 
free  schools  in  operation  tor  nearly  five  months 
in  every  year.  This  is  not  so  long  by  a  month, 
as  I  would  have  desired;  but  as  the  property  of 
the  commonwealth  is  constantly  increasing  and 
the  number  of  school  houses  will  remain  sta- 
tionary, in  a  few  years  the  same  tax  will  enable 
the  scnools  to  be  kept  open  an  additional  month. 
I  have  not  entered  upon  details — it  is  not  my 
province.  I  have  desired  to  show  that  it  was 
entirely  practicable;  and  it  is  my  honest  convic- 
tion that  the  people  desire  that  a  system  of  free 
schools  should  be  fixed  in  the  constitution.  It 
has  been  the  fashion  of  gentlemen  in  this  hall  to 
volunteer  prognoses  as  to  what  would  gain  votes 
for  the  new  constitution,  or  militate  against  ^its 
reception  by  the  people.  But,  sir,  let  these  hun- 
drecf  chosen  delegates  go  home  and  tell  the  anx- 
ious thousands  that  will  greet  their  return,  that 
a  part  of  our  labors  here,  insures  to  the  descen- 
dants of  this  land  of  heroes  and  of  song,  the 
keys  to  the  temple  of  knowledge.  That  hence- 
forth, under  the  new  organization,  schools  are 
to  spring  up  in  every  neighborhood,  and  to  be 
as  free  as  the  gush  of  waters  from  the  mountain 
rock.  In  the  beautiful  language  of  my  friend 
from  Mason,  (Mr.  Taylor,) — who  is  indeed  im- 
bued with  the  spirit  of  the  beautiful — that  they 
will  arise  like  fire-flies  at  summer  sunset,  giving 
life  and  hope  to  each  other — light  to  the  young, 
hope  to  the  middle-aged,  and  consolation  to  the 
old.  That  their  light  will  discover  the  mons- 
ter vice, 

■" of  such  hideous  mien, 

"Which  to  be  hated  needs  but  to  be  seen," 

and  exterminate  hiiu. 

Tell  them  that  the  mountains  and  the  valleys 
and  the  plains  of  this  heavenly  heritage  are  to 
be  studded  with  school  houses,  which  like  the 
temples  of  the  living  God,  are  to  be  free  to  all, 
without  money  and  without  price. 

Tell  the  chddren  of  the  poor  and  unfortunate 
that  hope,  heretofore,  that  mystic  shauow  of 
good,  which  receded  as  they  advanced,  and 
whose  home  was  the  fabled  terminus  of  tlie  rain 
bow  has  been  made  to  receive  substantive  pro- 
portions, and  to  become  a  smiling  reality. 

Tell  them  that  fountains  of  living  water  have 
been  opened  up,  in  which  the  budding  desire  for 
knowledge  ma^  lave  its  thirst,  and  where  all 
are  invited  to  come  and  pertake  freely.  Let 
this  be  told  them  sir,  and  a  voice  redolent  of 
thanksgiving  and  benediction  will  go  up  from 
half  a  million  of  the  best  of  our  people,  to  the 
God  of  the  widow  and  the  fatherless. 

Sir,  I  endorse  every  word  of  tlie  following, 
from  a  deep  thinker  and  pungent  writer:  "We 
should  make  no  distinctions,  but  the  banner  of 
education  should  be  proudly  unfurled 

"Like  the  wild  winds  free," 
allowing  all  alike  to  enjoy  its  advantages.  The 
child  of  the  woodland  cottage,  and  that  of  the 
princely  mansion  should,  if  possible,  be  educa- 
ted together,  that  all  might  have  an  equal  op- 
portunity of  rising  to  eminence  and  fame.  It  is 
a  cardinal  principle  of  republicanism  that  there 
is  no  royal  road  to  distinction;  it  is  held  to  be 
accessible  to  all — none  are  born  to  command  or 


to  obey.  In  the  order  of  nature  God  ha?  made 
no  distinctions;  lie  has  not  provided  for  the 
poor  a  coarser  earth,  a  thiner  air,  or  a  paler  sky. 
The  same  glorious  sun  pours  down  its  golden 
flood  as  cheerily  upon  the  poor  man's  liome  as 
the  rich  man's  palace.  The  cottager's  children 
have  as  keen  a  sense  of  all  the  freshness,  ver- 
dure, fragrance,  melody  and  beautv  of  luxuriant 
nature,  as  the  pale  sons  of  the  wealthy.  Neither 
has  he  stamped  the  imprint  of  baser  birth  upon 
the  poor  man's  child  tlian  that  of  the  rich,  by 
which  it  knows  with  a  certainty  that  its  lot  is  to 
crawl,  not  to  climb.  Mind  is  immortal.  It  is 
imperial.  It  bears  no  mark  of  high  or  low,  of 
rich  or  poor;  it  heeds  no  bounds  of  time  or  place, 
of  rank  or  circumstance.  It  requires  but  light." 
Yes,  sir,  it  requires  but  light.  The  delicate 
mechanism  of  intellection  is  but  a  series  of  men- 
tal processes.  In  the  educated  brain  they  are 
combined  in  wondrous  harmony  and  multiplied 
to  infinity;  and  systematized  thought  is  the  re- 
sult of  their  operations.  Thought,  that  mysteri- 
ous essence  which  connects  man  with  the  spirit 
world,  has  its  laws,  to  which  it  is  as  obedient  as 
IS  the  lightning,  in  obedience  to  its  laws,  in  bear- 
ing the  messages  of  man,  by  a  flash,  across  the 
continent.  The  latter  is  an  illustration  of  the 
former,  and  the  former  suggested  the  latter.  If 
thought,  when  disciplined,  was  capable  of  plan- 
ning mighty  deeds,  and  a  complicated  system  of 
means  which  pointed  prophetically  to  their 
achievement,  why  should  not  its  type  in  the 
physical  world,  which  had,  when  untrained,  but 
shown  the  omnipotence  of  its  power  in  the  des- 
olation that  marked  its  path.  So,  also,  the 
thoughts  of  man,  which  were  evil  continually, 
when  unsvibdued  and  unchastened  by  educa- 
tional discipline  sought,  glory  in  the  desolation 
of  the  works  of  his  fellow-man  and  of  God. 
But  the  latter,  under  the  ameliorating  influences 
of  education,  found  increased  power  for  good, 
with  diminished  desire  for  evil,  and,  perhaps, 
attained  its  acme  in  discovering  the  laws  of  its 
great  physical  type,  and  compelling  it,  in  obe- 
dience to  them,  to  become  subservient  to  man's 
uses.  And  that  mighty  and  terrific  power,  whose 
appalling  displays  the  ancients  confided  to  Ju- 
piter, the  chief  of  their  gods,  and  of  Avhom  their 
greatest  poet  sung, 

" ah  qui  res  hominumque  Deunique 

Aeternis  regis  imperils,  et  fulmine  terres," 

is  now,  by  educated  mind,  disarmed  of  it*  ter- 
ror, and  made  to  bear  soft  messages  of  love  from 
absent  swain  to  tlie  confiding,  anxious  heart  of 
his  ladylove  in  another  and  far  distant  common- 
wealth. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  T  barely  desire  to 
explain  the  amendment  which  I  have  offered, 
and  I  return  the  gentlemen  who  have  so  ably 
and  so  nobly  advocated  the  cause  of  education 
ray  thanks.  I  subscribe  in  the  main  to  all  that 
has  been  said,  or  can  be  said,  in  favor  of  the  ne- 
cessity and  the  importance  of  such  a  duty. 

Some  of  the  expressions  of  the  gentleman  from 
Campbell  might  perhaps  have  been  somewhat 
softened,  because  they  seem  to  imply  that  all 
gentlemen  who  difi^er  with  him,  fall  within  his 
universal  condemnation. 

There  is  no  substantial  difference  between  the 
amendment  I  off^er  and  the  second  clause  of  the 
report.      I  go  with  the   committee,  and  every 


901' 


friend  ot"  e-lu cation  on  this  floor,  to  set  apart 
and  dedicate  the  fund  for  edui-ational  purposes, 
which  has  either  been  accumulated  br  taxation,  I 
or  which  was  originally  set  apart  by  the  law  of 
1837.  A  part  of  this  fund  is  composed  of  the 
interest  on  the  bank  stock,  when  interest  was 
paid  on  the  bonds.  As  the  fund  accumulated, 
the  system  Ment  into  operation,  the  commission- 
ers of  the  sinking  fund  having  charge  of  it  at 
first,  and  the  commissioners  of  the  school  fund 
vested  the  interest  accruing  from  the  $s50, 000, 
in  the  purchase  of  bank  stock  in  our  own  state. 
Hence,  there  is  the  item  of  .$73,000  bank  stock 

There  has  been  levied  by  the  approbation  of 
the  people,  two  cents  upon  a  hundred  dollars, 
which  constitutes  a  part  of  the  school  fund. 

What  does  the  amendment  which  I  propose 
contemplate?  It  is,  that  the  fund  which  has 
been  colle.;ted,  the  $850,000,  the  $73,000  of  bank 
stock,  and  any  other  and  every  other  fund  which 
may  be  collected  for  educational  purposes,  shall 
be  devoted  by  the  legislature  to  that  object,  and 
when  so  devoted,  it  shall  remain  secure,  and  be 
appropriated  to  no  other  purpose  or  object  than 
the  diffusion  of  a  general  system  of  education. 
When  Vie  have  thus  secured  the  fund,  and  pro- 
vided, as  in  the  latter  clause  of  the  committee's 
report,  that  the  superintendent  of  the  school 
system  shall  be  elected  by  the  people,  I  propose 
then  by  my  amendment,  to  leave  that  fund  to 
the  legislature,  to  be  directed,  regulated,  and 
disbursed  as  may  seem  best  to  that  body  for  the 
purposes  for  which  it  was  set  apart. 

If  I  understand  the  report  of  the  committee, 
it  is,  that  while  they  do  the  same  thing  which  I 

J»ropo3e,  they  make  it  obligatory  upon  the  legis- 
ature  to  establish  and  keep  in  existence  this 
system  throughout  the  commonwealth.  If  that 
is  complied  with,  taxation  will  be  necessarily 
involved  in  it  to  the  extent  stated  by  my  friend 
from  Logan,  (,Mr.  Bowling,)  or  nearly  to  that  ex- 
tent. I  am  unwilling  to  impose  that  on  the  legis- 
lature. I  would  leave  that  to  the  tax  paying 
power  in  the  commonwealth.  The  amount  of 
this  income  now  is  wholly  inadequate  to  estab- 
lish a  system  of  common  schools  throughout  the 
length  and  breadth  of  this  commonwealth,  and 
the  legislature  must  adopt  sueh  a  plan  as  will 
invite  to  the  support  and  aid  of  the  fund  local 
contributions,  by  a  system  such  as  they  have  in 
New  York,  and  in  some  other  northern  and  east 
em  states.  I  know  that  in  some  states  the  whole 
fund  is  furnished. 

If  you  will  secure  the  fund,  and  allow  the 
counties  adopting  the  provisions  submitted  to 
them  from  time  to  time,  to  appropriate  whatever 
may  be  distributed  to  them,  and  others  who  do 
not  wish  to  appropriate  their  proportion  to  have 
it  reinvested,  you  will  do  all  that  ourmeans  will 
allow  at  present,  and  all  that  our  constituents 
have  a  right  to  expect  of  this  convention.  But 
if  you  adopt  the  whole  report  of  the  .committee, 

{'ou  impose  necessarily  the  duty  upon  the  legis- 
ature,  from  which  they  cannot  escape,  to  put 
into  operation  this  system  within  five  years  af- 
ter the  adoption  of  this  constitution. 

I  oflFer  no  hostility  to  education  in  my  amend- 
ment, for  I  appeal  to  the  zeal  I  manifested  origi- 
nally in  setting  apart  the  sum  of  $850,000.  But 
lam   unwilling  to   impose  the  taxation  which 


must  be  imposed,  to  put  this  in  operation  in  five 
years. 

Tlien  the  convention  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  DECEMBER  11,  1849. 

COKEECTIOX  AND  EXPLAXATIOX. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  convention 
will  indulge  me  for  a  moment,  I  shall  be  glad  to. 
have  an  opportunity  of  correcting  an  error 
which  has  by  a  very  easy  mistake  crept  into  the 
report  of  our  proceedings.  Had  there  been  any 
other  mode  of  making  the  correction  I  would 
certainly  have  adopted  it  ;  but  the  debates  hav- 
ing been  transferred  to  the  volume  of  reports  be- 
fore I  discovered  the  error,  it  is  now  too  late  to 
make  the  correction  in  any  other  way  than  by  a 
note.  When  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman 
from  Henderson  wa.s  under  consideration,  the 
other  day,  in  which  it  is  declared  that  "abso- 
lute, arbitrary  power  over  the  lives,  liberty,  and 
[)roperty  of  freemen  exists  nowhere  in  a  repub- 
ic,"  I  was  necessarily  absent,  being  called  to 
other  duties.  I  weis  not  present  when  the  vote 
was  taken.  The  reporter  has  ascribed  to  me  a 
remark  made  by  my  kinsman.  Mr.  R.  Jf.  Wick- 
liffe.  I  do  not  disclaim  the  sentiment,  but  if  any 
credit  is  due  for  it,  I  wish  it  to  be  ascribed  to 
the  right  source. 

While  I  am  up  I  will  take  the  liberty  of  sa^  - 
ingthati  should  have  voted  against  that  section, 
had  I  been  present,  for  two  reasons — ^first,  be- 
cause a  mob,  however  large  it  may  be,  has  no 
right  to  take  away  my  property,  and  therefoie 
there  was  no  necessity  for  declaring  this  prin- 
ciple in  the  constitution;  and  secondly,  if  that 
section  means  what  some  of  the  gentlemen  say 
it  means,  I  should  have  voted  against  it,  bt- 
cause  I  do  not  agree  with  the  position  which 
they  take,    I  hope  the  correction  will  be  made. 

COMMITTEE   OF   REVISION' 

Mr.  MOORE  said  he  was  directed  by  the  com- 
mittee on  revision  and  arrangement  of  the  ar- 
ticles of  the  constitution  to  ask  leave  to  sit  dur- 
ing the  session  of  the  house. 

Leave  was  granted  accordingly. 

CODIFICATIOX    OF    LAWS,   PRACTICE,  AXD   PLEADINGS. 

Mr.  MAYES  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the 
vote,  by  which  the  convention  adopted  the  re- 
ports? of  the  committee  on  miscellaneous  pro- 
visions, with  the  view  of  moving  a  reconsider- 
ation of  the  vote  by  which  the  convention  adop- 
ted the  secti<m,  offered  by  the  gentleman  from 
Ballard  and  McCracken,  (Mr.  Gholson,)  to  ap- 
point commissioners  to  codify  the  law. 

In  order  to  act  upon  that  subject  at  once  he 
moved  to  dispense  witli  the  rule  by  which  a 
motion  to  reconsider  was  required  to  lie  over  for 
one  day. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

The  PRESIDENT  stated  the  question  to  be 
on  the  motion  to  reconsider  the  vote,  adopting 
the  report  of  the  committee. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 


903 


Tlie  PRESIDENT  then  stated  the  queatign  to 
be  on  the  vote  adopting  the  latter  clause  of  the 
section. 

Mr.  MAYES.  Mr.  President,  together  ^rith 
raaiiy  other  fjentlemen,  I  voted  for  tlie  adoption 
of  the  article  offered  by  the  gentleman  from 
Ballard,  as  an  additional  section  to  the  report 
of  the  committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions. 
I  gave  this  vote  without  having  given  to  the 
subject  much  reflection,  and  I  suppose  others 
supported  it,  regarding  it  as  a  matter  of  but  lit- 
tle consequence.  I  have,  since  the  adoption  of 
that  section  thought  somewhat  upon  the  subject 
and  am  satisfied  that  the  vote  by  which  the  lat- 
ter branch  of  the  section  was  adopted,  should  be 
reconsidered  and  even  should  the  first  part  of 
the  section  be  retained,  which  I  am  sure  should 
not  be  done,  that  part  ought  unquestionably  to 
be  rejected.  1  therefore  move  a  reconsideration 
of  that  vote.  The  firet  part  of  the  section  pro- 
vides that  the  legislature  shall  at  its  first  session 
after  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  we  are  at- 
tempting to  make,  appoint  not  less  than  three 
nor  more  than  five  persons  learned  in  the  law, 
to  arrange  and  revise  all  the  statute  laws  of  this 
state,  wliether  of  a  criminal  or  civil  character, 
and  sir,  that  the  revised  code  shall  be  in  plain 
English.  I  do  not  suppose  that  it  is  intended 
that  this  revised  code  snail  become  the  law  of 
Kentucky,  unless  it  be  first  submitted  to  the  le- 
gislature for  adoption,  nor  until  it  be  in  fact 
adopted  as  such  by  that  body,  for  if  these  three 
or  five  pei-sons  are  to  enact  the  laws,  then  we 
would  do  well  to  do  away  with  the  legislature 
altogether,  and  appoint  at  once  some  three  per- 
sons to  enact  all  such  laws  as  may  be  necessary 
for  the  good  government  of  the  state.  But  sir, 
■why  make  a  constitutional  provision  declaring 
it  to  be  the  absolute  duty  of  the  legislature  to 
do  this  thing?  Has  not  the  legislature  now  the 
right  to  appoint  persons  to  arrange  and  revise 
the  statutes  for  readoption.  It  has  that  right, 
and  has  exercised  it.  That  body  in  time  to  come 
will  have  the  same  right  and  will  no  doubt  exer- 
cise it  if  it  shall  bethought  prudent  so  to  do. 
During  the  session  of  1844-5,  I  believe  it  was , 
two  eminent  gentlemen,  ("learned  in  the  law") 
Ben.  Hardin  and  Owen  G.  Gates,  Esqs.  were  ap- 
pointed by  the  legislature,  to  revise  and  get  to- 
gether the  whole  law  of  the  state  pertaining  to 
Its  revenue — these  gentlemen  performed  the  du- 
ty assigned  them,  and  reported  the  fruit  of  their 
labor  to  the  succeeding  legislature,  of  which 
1  had  the  honor  to  be  a  member,  for  readoption. 

This  report,  containing  as  it  did  the  whole  of 
the  revenue  law  of  the  state,  and  having  been 
prepared  at  the  cost  of  much  time  and  labor, 
was  referred  by  the  house  of  representatives  to 
the  appropriate  committee,  and  was  considered 
in  committee,  was  reported  back  to  the  house 
with  that  committee's  opinion,  that  the  work 
had  been  well  done  ;  the  result,  however,  was 
that  the  legislature  declined  to  act  upon  it,  and 
it  lies  now  among  the  matter  unacted  upon  by 
the  legislature.  An  appropriation,  however, 
was  made — and  properly  too — of  three  hundred 
dollars,  topayforthe  revision  ofthe  revenue  laws, 
and  wasdrawn  from  the  trea.sury.  The  gentlemen 
engaged  in  the  work  thought  il  too  little.  So,  I 
presume,  that  should  tliis  section  be  retained, 
the  three  or  five  gentlemen  must,  under  it,  neces- 


,  sarily  be  appoiiited  by  the  legislature,  and  they 
must  go  on  and  arrange  and  revise  the  three 
large  volumes  containing  our  statute  laws,  and 
there  are  session  acts  undigested  since  Lough- 
borough's digest  was  published,  suflficient  to 
j  make  a  fourth  volume  perhaps  as  large  as  either 
j  of  the  three,  and  after  all  this  has  been  done, 
I  they  are  to  report  the  arranged  and  revised  stat- 
I  utes  to  the  legislature,  that  they  may  be  re-enact- 
j  ed  or  not,  as  may  be  thought  best;  for  I  repeat 
I  that  it  surely  cannot  be  intended,  that  these  re- 
vised statutes  shall  constitute  the  law  of  Ken- 
tucky, unless  they  first  have  the  sanction  of 
legislative  enactment.  But,  sir,  whether  this 
work  shall  be  re-enacted  or  not,  it  must  be  paid 
for.  We  had  better,  I  think,  count  the  cost  be- 
fore we  place  this  section  permanently  in  the 
constitution.  I  am  satisfied  that  no  good  will 
come  of  it,  and  the  cost  will  be  very  considera- 
ble. It  will  no  doubt  be  a  lucrative  business 
for  the  gentlemen  "learned  in  the  law"  who  may 
receive  the  appointment;  it  will  certainly  be  a 
losing  business  for  our  constituents.  The  legis- 
lature has  ever  had  and  ever  will  have  the  pow- 
er to  revise  and  arrange  the  law.  There  are  at 
all  times,  gentlemen  in  that  body  possessed  of 
high  legal  attainments,  and  of  such  are  the  com- 
mittees on  the  judiciary  of  both  houses  usually 
composed^  The  second  branch  of  the  section  is, 
in  nvyjudgment,  still  more  objectionable  than 
the  first.  It  proposes  that  three  persons,  learn- 
ed in  the  law,  shall  be  appointed  to  prepare  a 
code  of  practice  for  the  courts;  and  these  gentle- 
men are  to  abridge  and  simplify  the  rules  of 
practice,  but  they  are  to  report  to  the  legislature 
from  time  to  time,  the  result  of  their  labors,  for 
its  adoption  or  modification.  We  all  know  that 
the  legislature  now  has,  and  ever  has  had  the 
power  to  abridge  and  simplify  the  rules  of  prac- 
tice in  our  courts. 

It  is  here,  however,  made  imperative  on  the 
legislature  to  appoint  these  persons,  and  it  will 
become  their  duty  to  abridge  and  simplify  the 
rules  of  practice;  but  the  legislature  may  re- 
fuse to  adopt  such  rules  as  they  may  ilirect  to  be 
observed,  or  it  may  modify  or  change  them  in 
any  way  it  may  think  proper.  And  these  gen- 
tlemen are,  from  time  to  time,  to  report  their  la- 
bors to  the  legislature.  This  looks  to  me  as  if 
their  appointment  is  to  be  permanent,  and  the 
state  is  every  year  to  pay  them  for  suggesting  to 
the  legislature  sucli  changes  as  they  may  think 
should  be  made  in  the  rules  of  practice.  Tliese 
suggestions,  I  apprehend,  would  cause  endless 
discussion  in  the  legislature,  as  to  the  propriety 
of  the  changes  proposed  to  be  made  in  the  rules 
of  practice — Avould  operate  as  a  constant  drain 
upon  the  treasury,  and  would  result  in  no  good 
to  our  common  constituency.  I  am  decidedly  in 
favor  of  the  principle  contained  in  the  .section, 
but  am  satisfied  that  it  cannot,  with  propriety, 
be  introduced  and  made  part  of  the  constitution. 
It  shoidd  bj3  left  with  the  legislature,  where  it 
properly  belongs.  The  slate  should  not  be  com- 
pelled to  employ,  at  an  enormous  expense,  some 
six  or  seven  gentlemen,  "learned  in  tne  law,"  to 
do  this  service,  and  still  let  it  be  left  with  the 
legislature  to  approve  or  disapprove  it.  For, 
although  it  may  cost  the  state  thousands  to  have 
the  work  done,  yet  after  it  lias  been  accomplishr 
ed,  it  may,  and  probably  will,  be  rejected;  ana 


903 


the  only  persons  who  will  have  been  benefitted 
by  it  will  be  such  persons,  "learned  in  the  law;" 
as  may  receive  from  the  legislature  the  appoint- 
ment indicated  in  the  section.  I  trust,  sir,  that 
the  vote  by  which  the  section  was  adopted  will 
be  reconsidered,  and  that  the  section  will  be  re- 
jected, and  the  state  save  the  heavy,  and  as  I  am 
satisfied,  useless  cost,  which  will  inevitably  re- 
sult, if  it  be  retained  as  part  of  the  constitution. 
I  do  not  know  or  believe,  that  the  people,  our 
constituents,  desire  that  any  such  principle  be 
incorporated  into  the  constitution. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  regret  that  the  gentleman 
from  Graves  should  now  attempt  to  impose  ob- 
stacles to  the  accomplishment  of  a  work  which 
is  so  loudly  called  for.  "What  possible  objection 
can  there  be  to  a  provision  like  this?  I  appeal 
to  the  farmers  of  this  body,  who  know  the  ne- 
cessity of  a  codification  ot  the  laws,  to  sustain 
it.  I  appeal  to  the  magnanimity  of  the  lawyers 
of  this  house  to  sustain  a  provision  which  is 
clearly  for  the  benefit  of  the  commonwealth. 
When  I  charged  it  upon  the  gentleman  from 
2felson  (Mr.  Hardin)  the  other  day,  that  with 
all  his  ability  he  could  not  find  many  of  the  stat- 
utes of  this  commonwealth,  he  did  not  deny  it 
then,  nor  will  he  do  it  now.  How  then  can  the 
farmers  and  common  plain  citizens  be  expected 
to  do  that  which  an  eminent  lawyer  admits  his 
inability  to  do?  With  respect  to  the  expense  to 
be  incurred,  to  which  allusion  has  been  made  by 
the  gentleman  from  Graves,  I  desire  to  say  that 
I  am  willing  to  pay  a  proper  compensation  for 
the  work  that  may  be  performed,  and  so  I  doubt 
not  are  my  constituents.  It  cannot  cost  a  tythe 
of  what  the  gentleman  supposes:  but  if  it  does 
cost  it  all  sir,  there  is  nothing  that  my  constitu- 
ents will  more  readily  pay  for  than  laws  which 
they  can  find,  and  understand  when  found. 
And  even  if  the  legislature  sliall,  as  it  is  intima- 
ted they  may,  reject  the  digest  that  may  be  pre- 
pared, under  this  provision,  we  shall  have  the 
confidence  of  our  fellow  citizens  for  the  attempt 
we  may  have  made  to  make  the  laws  plain  and 
intelligible. 

I  protest  against  any  alteration  of  this  provi- 
sion. I  hope  that  all  foreign  and  heathenish 
words  will  be  dispensed  with,  and  that  the  En- 
glish language  alone  will  be  used.  I  wish  also 
that  every  law  shall  relate  but  to  one  subject. 
Our  code  of  laws  will  then  be  readily  referred  to, 
and  easily  understood,  and  justice  may  be  dealt 
out  equafly  to  all.  If  it  is  the  desire  of  gentle- 
men here  that  the  laws  shall  be  simplified,  I 
trust  they  will  sustain  this  section.  I  ad- 
mit that  the  retention  of  this  section  may 
militate  against  the  interests  of  lawyers,  but  it 
will  enable  the  plain,  unlettered  men  of  the  com- 
monwealth to  know  what  are  the  laws  under 
which  they  live.  Besides  this,  it  will  aid  the 
administrator  of  justice,  inasmuch  as  it  will  be 
the  means  of  removing  the  difficulties  under 
which  justices  of  the  peace,  and  even  the  judges 
on  the  bench,  labor  in  consequence  of  the  many 
conflicting  laws  and  decisions  which  now  per- 
plex and  annoy  them,  and  render  justice  so 
uncertain. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  Chitty  I  believe  is  the  best 
■writer  on  pleadings,  and  if  he  has  not  been  able 
to  lav  down  clear,  intelligible  knd  useful  rules 
I  shall  dispair  of  obtaining  them  from  any  com- 


mission thaf  we  may  appoint.  Eminent  as 
many  of  our  lawyers  are,  the  task  will  be  a  her- 
culean one  to  whoever  may  undertake  it.  As 
to  the  use  of  certain  Latin  words,  I  am  of  opinion 
that  they  have  become  so  common  and  so  well 
undei-stood,  and  are  from  their  use  so  very  ex- 
pressive, that  we  had  better  not  interfere  with 
them,  and  create  confusion  by  the  change. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  My  principal  object  in  ris- 
ing now  is,  to  correct  an  error  into  which  the 
gentleman  from  Graves  appears,  unintentionally, 
to  have  fallen.  I  remarked,  when  this  question 
was  before  the  convention  on  a  former  occasion, 
that  I  would  vote  for  this  resolution.  The  ques- 
tion is  an  important  one,  but  in  consequence  of 
the  previous  question  being  called  before  the 
discussion  was  fairly  opened,  I  had  not  then  an 
opportunity  of  saying  what  I  intended. 

I  do  not  believe  that  there  are  many  members 
of  this  house  who  would  not  agree  that  the  ob- 
ject aimed  at  is  desirable,  provided  it  can  be  at- 
tained without  too  much  expense  and  labor. 
But  are  gentlemen  aware,  when  they  vote  for 
that  proposition,  of  the  expense  and  labor  it 
will  cost?  I  will  stale  a  fact  which  is  within 
the  knowledge  of  more  lawyers  than  myself, 
that  the  legislature  of  Louisiana,  many  years 
ago,  under  a  clause  similar  to  the  one  now  under 
consideration,  made  a  contract  with  Mr.  Living- 
ston, one  of  the  mo.st  distinguished  jurists  in  the 
United  States,  requiring  Jhim  to  prepare  a  code 
of  practice  for  that  state.  Mr.  Livingston  was 
engaged  in  this  work  for  three  years.  The  ori- 
ginal contract  between  him  and  the  commission- 
j  ers  appointed  by  the  legislature,  was,  that  he 
i  should  perform  this  duty  for  the  sum  of  $25,000; 
I  but  in  consequence  of  the  immense  labor,  and 
i  the  commissioners  being  satisfied  that  the  com- 
pensation was  wholly  inadequate  to  the  work 
which  he  had  performed,  and  looking  also  to  the 
probable  benefit  which  tlie  state  would  derive 
from  that  work,  they  agreed  afterwards  to  give 
him  the  additional  sum  of  $15,000;  and  the 
legislature  ratified  that  agreement  by  a  majority 
of  four  to  one.  Forty  thousand  dollars,  then, 
were  given  for  what  is  now,  in  Louisiana,  called 
the  "Livingston  code."  He  revised,  it  is  true, 
the  civil  code. 

The  gentleman  has  made  some  remarks  about 
special  pleading.  If  he  supposes  that  lawyers 
are  more  in  favor  of  special  pleading  than  other 
men,  he  is  greatly  mistaken.  The  great  object 
that  all  lawyers  have  in  view  is  to  come  at  the 
truth.  How  are  you  to  do  it?  Can  you  do  it 
better  by  the  civil  code?  If  you  can,  take  the 
plan  of  Mr.  Livingston  and  adopt  the  civil 
code. 

I  will  now  tell  the  house  what  can  be  done  at 
a  very  small  expense.  I  would  suggest  a  modi- 
fication of  the  clause  now  under  consideration 
to  do  away  with  the  difference  between  chan- 
cery and  common  law  proceedings,  which  can 
easily  be  got  through  with  in  three  or  four 
months.  Take  now  the  simplest  kind  of  action 
— that  of  assumpsit.  For  example,  A  files  in 
court  a  claim  against  B  for  the  sum  of  $500 
for  goods  and  merchandise.  He  calls  upon  B  to 
say,  "  did  you  buy  all  the  property  named  in 
that  account,  and  at  what  price?  If  you  did  not 
buy  it  all,  how  much,  and  what  articles  did  you 
buy?    If  you  did  not  buy  it  at  the  price  therein 


904 


stated,  then  at  ■what  price  did  you  h\ij  it?  If 
you  did  not  buy  it  at  any  specified  price,  did 
you  buy  it  with  ihe  understanding  to  pay  what 
It  is  worth,  and,  if  so,  how. much  is  it  Avorth?" 

Now,  B  acknowledges  that  he  bought  all  the 
articles,  but  without  a  fixed  price  on  all.  Very 
well;  take  a  judgment  for  that.  He  acknowl- 
edges that  he  bought  all  except  a  pair  of  boots, 
which  are  charged  seven  dollars,  for  which  he 
only  agreed  to  pay  five.  Then  you  take  a  judg- 
ment so  far.  Now  what  would  be  the  result  of 
such  a  course  as  this?  Why,  you  save  a  vast 
amount  of  time  and  expense,  and  you  narrow 
down  the  question  in  dispute  to  the  mere  matter 
of  two  dollars.  I  only  give  this  as  a  sample  of 
the  method  by  which  our  pleadings  might  be  im- 
proved. Do  away  with  the  general  issue,  and  i 
require  a  man  to  an.swer  to  each  particular  of 
a  bill.  You  compel  the  plaintiff  to  file  a  bill  of  j 
particulars,  and  the  defendant  to  make  a  state- 1 
ment  of  how  much  is  true,  and  how  much  is  not  | 
true.  Can  that  be  attained  under  the  resolution 
now  suggested?  That  will  depend  upon  the  con- 
struction which  the  legislature  may  give  to  the 
clause.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  legisla- 
ture will  adopt  some  similar  plan.  Surely  the 
gentleman  does  not  intend  that  we  should  do 
away  with  our  whole  system  of  pleadings?  I 
am  inclined  to  think,  sir,  that  if  we  wish  to  at- 
tain the  great  ends  of  justice,  they  will  be  much 
better  attained  by  special  pleading  than  by  gen- 
eral pleading. 

There  is  a  law  now  on  the  statute  book  called 
Bob  Johnson's  law,  which  was  framed  especial- 
ly for  the  purpose  of  reaching  the  ends  proposed 
by  the  gentleman  from  Ballard.  You  cannot 
frame  a  broader  or  a  simpler  law  than  this.  But 
has  it  ever  been  acted  upon?  No.  Whv?  Be- 
cause when  it  struck  out  one  .system  of  plead- 
ing it  did  not  furnish  another  in  its  place;  and 
we  lawyers  are  generally  safe,  practical  men. 

Now,  if  I  understand  the  gentlemen  correctly, 
lie  complains  not  that  the  ends  of  justice  are  not 
attained,  but  that  they  are  attained  in  a  manner 
iinintelligible  by  the  great  mass  of  the  people. 
But,  sir,  the  gentleman  will  certainly  admit  that 
it  is  better  they  should  be  thus  attained  than  not 
attained  at  all.  If  you  strike  out  one  plan,  give 
us  another,  that  will  be  equally  as  intelligible, 
and  more  simple;  otherwise  you  gain  nothing  by 
the  change.  Give  us  a  plan  thatwill  answer  the 
purposes  of  justice,  and  be  more  simple  than 
that  now  in  use,  and  I  will  go  for  it,  provided 
that  while  you  simplify  the  rules  of  practice, 
you  render  them  equally  certain  in  their  opera- 
tion. Certainty  is  more  necessary  than  simpli- 
city; in  point  of  fact,  Mr.  President,  the  special 
pleading  of  the  present  day,  is  done  as  much  as 
anything  for  the  purpose  of  saving  expense  to 
the  litigants,  and  the  time  of  courts.  What  do 
you  mean  by  special  pleading?  If  you  take  an 
issue  upon  a  fact,  you  must  set  it  forth  so  that  a 
court  and  jury,  and  the  plaintiff  and  defendant, 
may  understand  what  fact  is  to  be  tried — how 
much  is  admitted,  and  how  much  is  denied.  No 
man  will  deny  that  that  end  ought  to  be  attain- 
ed; all  admitthat  it  is  attained  by  special  plead- 
ing. Letthegentlernan  then  takeaplain, straight- 
forward course,  and  leave  this  matter  in  the  hands 
of  the  legislature,  whose  proper  business  it  is  to 
attend  to  such  a  matter  as  this.    I  stated  when 


I  was  on  my  feet  before,  that  I  voted  against  the 
second  section,  because  I  was  afraid  that,  like 
the  state  of  Louisiana,  the  legislature  might  go 
to  great  expense  in  this  matter,  which  I  think  is 
altogether  unnecessary. 

Mr.  TURNER.  This  is  a  matter  which  will 
never  interest  me  much  as  a  lawyer,  as  my  days  of 
practice  are  pretty  much  over;  but  I  do  regard 
this  proposition  as  one  of  the  most  mischievous 
that  nas  yet  been  brought  under  the  considera- 
tion of  this  convention.  The  gentleman  declines 
against  latin  phrases  which  are  common  to  law 
books;  but  I  would  ask  him,  has  not  every  art 
and  profession  its  peculiar  technicalities?  Does 
not  the  doctor  label  his  medicines  in  a  language 
known  only  to  himself?  Does  not  the  house  car- 
penter and  the  ship  builder  each  use  terms  pe- 
culiar to  his  vocation,  which  he  alone,  as  a  gen- 
eral rule  at  least,  understands?  If  the  gentle- 
man will  read  the  Bridgewater  treatises,  he  will 
find  in  the  various  branches  of  science  that  he 
must  study  the  technicalities  peculiar  to  each, 
and  he  must  understand  them  too,  or  he  cannot 
understand  the  science  to  which  thej-^  apply. 

Something  has  been  said,  sir,  about  revising 
the  code,  and  putting  all  law  phrases  into  plain 
English.  The  people  of  New  York  undertook 
to  do  this,  and  how  did  they  define  a  writ  of 
ne  exeat?  Why  sir,  they  said  it  was  a  writ  of 
"no  go;"  (laughter,)  and  no  man  understands 
what  "'no  go"  means  any  better  than  he  under- 
stood a  "ne  exeat." 

Language,  sir.is  in  a  great  measure  arbitrary, 
and  we  may  as  well  learn  the  meaning  of  one 
word  as  of  another.  But  I  would  ask,  why 
should  we  go  down  into  this  little  business 
which  the  legislature  have  never  descended  to? 
Are  we,  the  groat  constitution  makers  of  the 
state  of  Kentucky,  to  spend  our  time  here  in  de- 
termining how  a  man's  boots  shall  be  blacked, 
or  in  what  manner  his  house  should  be  swept? 
Sir,  if  we  pass  this  resolution,  we  have  not  the 
power  to  carry  it  into  effect.  The  legislature 
nave  all  power  to  do  this,  and  it  appears  to  mo 
that  this  interference  is  useless  and  unnecessa- 
ry. If  ever  we  are  to  fini.sh  the  business  of  this 
session,  it  is  time  that  we  refrained  from  dwell- 
ing on  these  little  matters,  and  set  ourselves  se- 
riously to  work  to  embody  the  general  princi- 
ples of  the  constitution  which  we  are  sent  here 
to  make. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  So  far  from  regarding 
this  as  a  matter  of  small  importance,  I  think  sir, 
it  is  a  question  demanding  our  serious  considea- 
tion.  We  have  met  to  put  the  ship  of  state  up- 
on a  new  tack.  We  have  said  that  the  legisla- 
ture shall  meet  but  once  in  every  two  years, 
and  we  have  confined  their  duties  to  the  passing 
only  of  general  laws.  We  have  made  great  al- 
terations already  in  the  jurisprudence  of  the 
state,  and  I  think  it  is  but  wise  that  the  ques- 
tion now  before  us  should  have  the  calm  consid- 
eration of  this  body,  and  that  with  our  new 
courts  and  new  judges,  we  should  have  a  new 
code  and  a  new  system  of  practice.  One  argu- 
ment that  has  been  used  here  in  opposition  to 
this  course,  is  that  it  will  involve  the  state  in  too 
much  expense;  but  sir,  in  my  opinion,  it  will 
not  involve  half  so  much  expencc  as  the  present 
mode,  besides  obviating  much  delay  and  disap- 
pointment.    There  is  a  case  reported  in  the  pa- 


905 


pers  to-day,  wltich  may  -sorve  to  illuslnite  this 
assertion— the  case  of  Graves  v  Graves.  The 
case  is  somethins:  like  this:  The  raau  died  leav- 
ing a  ■will  by  which  he  disposed  of  liis  proper- 
ty; the  wife  renounced  the  will  and  demanded 
that  the  executors  should  set  apart  a  portion  of 
the  property  for  her  benefit.  Xow,  here  are  law- 
yers feed  at  high  rates;  the  cost  of  witnesses 
and  jury,  and  all  for  what?  Siraph'  to  decide 
•what  tlie  rule  of  law  is  in  such  cases.  'Sow, 
how  many  hundreds  of  dollars  are  often  spent 
in  deciding  this  simple  question;  and  how 
often  do  we  find  the  very  best  judges  and  law- 
yers in  the  land  differing  most  widely  on  the 
simple  question  as  to  whether  one  statute  has 
the  effect  of  repealing  another. 

I  have  no  doubt,  many  gentlemen  recollect  a 
distitiguished  case  from  the  city  of  Louisville, 
in  wliich  a  suit  was  instituted  for  the  recovery 
of  a  large  amount  of  property.  The  case  was 
carried  to  tlie  supreme  court  of  the  United 
States,  after  having  been  tried  in  several  of  the 
courts  below.  The  whole  question  was  whether 
the  mayor  had  ihe  right  to  take  the  relinquish- 
ment of  a  feme  covert,  and  the  particular  point 
decided  by  tlie  supreme  court,  was  whether  one 
statute  law  of  Kentucky  had  repealed  another. 
The  supreme  court  reversed  the  decisions  of 
several  courts  here  affirming  that  the  law  was 
not  repealed;  that  so  much  of  it   only  was  re- 

fealed  as  was  repugnant  to  the  last  enactment, 
merely  mention  this  to  show  that  in  the  mul- 
tiplication of  statutes  there  is  great  difficulty 
in  determining  what  the  law  really  is,  and  hence 
the  necessity  of  having  some  competent  per- 
sons to  arrange  and  classify,  and  digest  our 
statutes  This  is  what  I  understand  by  the 
proposition  of  my  friend;  and  I  think  there  could 
not  be  a  more  appropriate  time  than  the  present 
to  take  this  subject  into  our  serious  considera- 
tion, engaged  as  we  now  are  in  making  a  new 
constitution. 

Mr.  HAMILTON.  A  similar  resolution  to 
the  one  now  under  consideraticn  was  introduced 
by  myself,  in  the  early  part  of  the  session  of 
this  convention;  and  if  I  mistake  not,  one  of 
like  import  was  introduced  in  the  legislature  of 
1821  or  '22,  but  it  fell  in  the  senate,  because,  as 
some  said,  it  was  unconstitutional,  and  has  nev- 
er since  been  revived.  Some  gentlemen  have 
spoken  of  what  they  term  the  great  and  enor- 
mous expense  to  be  incurred  by  this  revision, 
and  they  even  go  so  far  as  to  insinuate  that  the 
revisers  would  be  clothed  with  the  power  of  law- 
givers. It  is  unnecessary  to  combat  such  a  no- 
tion as  this.  All  that  is  asked  for  is,  that  they 
should  revise  and  classify  the  .statutes,  and  di- 
gest them  if  thought  expedient,  their  labor  to  be 
submitted  to  the  Itgislatiu-e  for  its  approval  or 
rejection.  It  is  not  going  to  cost  the  fearful  sum 
■which  gentlemen  imagine;  and  when  we  remem- 
ber that  Tennessee,  and  Louisiana,  and  Xew 
York  (vrith  the  exception  of  the  "no  go,"  spo- 
ken of  by  the  gentleman  from  Madison,)  have 
adopted  this  course,  and  are  enjoying  the  bene- 
fit of  the  change,  surely  the  consideration  of  a 
little  expense  ought  not  to  deter  the  state  of 
Kentucky  from  adopting  an  arrangement  which 
I  do  believe  will  contribute  so  much  to  facilitate 
legal  business,  and  satisfy  the  community  at 
large. 

114 


Mr.  GHOLSON.  When  I  introduced  this 
proposition  I  heard  no  objection  to  it.  It  was 
so  undeniably  right,  that  I  did  not  saj'  a  word 
in  its  support.  I  did  not  expect  this  stern  op- 
position to  it  even  now.  Why  the  parliament 
of  Great  Britain,  that  country  from  which  all 
our  laws  have  come,  has  recently  caused  the 
laws  of  that  country  to  be  codified,  for  which 
purpose  ten  judges  were  appointed,  and  they  are 
now  practicing  under  their  new  code,  while  we 
adiiere  to  that  which  is  regarded  as  outlandish, 
and  is  discarded  in  the  land  of  its  birth.  If  it 
were  now  in  order,  I  am  prepared  to  remedy  the 
defect  in  "Bob  Johnson  s  law,"  to  which  allu- 
sion has  been  made,  by  another  imperative  pro- 
vision. I  am  anxious  to  cause  a  reform  in  our 
present  system  because  I  am  satisfied  that  it  does 
obstruct  the  course  of  justice.  The  previous 
question  was  moved  and  cut  off  several  other 
important  provisions  that  I  intended  to  offer, 
one  of  which  was  that  every  citizen  of  this 
commonwealth  should  have  his  cause  tried  upon 
its  merits,  and  not  be  driven  out  of  court,  how- 
everjust  his  claim,  on  a  mere  technicality  which 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  justice  of  the  case. 
So  exceedingly  uncertain  is  our  system  of  bring- 
ing suits  and  conducting  pleadings,  that  even 
our  best  lawyers  sometimes  dififer  as  to  the  form 
in  which  suits  should  be  brought  or  pleadings 
conducted.  This  is  the  day  of  reform.  Our 
sister  states  have  set  us  a  glorious  example  of  le- 
gal reform;  our  constituents  expect  it,  they  de- 
mand it  at  our  hands,  and  therefore  I  appeal  to 
this  convention  to  enforce  a  thorough  reform 
and  improvement  of  our  laws,  of  our  practice, 
and  our  pleadings. 

Mr.  PRESTOi^'^.  I  concur  in  the  object  -which 
the  gentleman  from  Ballard  seeks  to  attain. 
There  are  only  two  considerations  which  ought 
to  influence  the  house  in  adopting  or  rejecting 
the  proposition.  If  it  is  right  it  should  be  done,, 
and  the  expense  of  a  few  thousand  dollars  should 
not  deter  us,  from  adopting  a  plan  which  would 
render  our  legal  proceedings  more  simple,  and 
by  which  justice  might  be  more  cheaply  and 
better  administered.  This  convention  should 
not  start  back  from  the  sound  of  the  word  dol- 
lar, a<  if  it  were  a  spectre,  to  terrify  and  affright 
us  from  effecting  a  great  good. 

The  codification,  sir,  of  the  law,  is  no  new 
thing.  It  has  been  done  in  many  parts  of  the 
world,  and  the  advancing  wealth  and  popula- 
tion of  countries,  and  the  mutations  of  civiliza- 
tion, will  always  render  it  periodically  necessa- 
ry. Lord  Bacon  tells  us  that  when  laws  accu- 
mulate so  as  to  render  it  necessary  to  revise  them 
and  collect  their  spirit  into  a  new  and  intelligi- 
ble system,  that  those  who  accomplish  it  are 
among  the  benefactors  of  mankind.  In  the  pro- 
fession of  law  there  are  two  classes.  One  seek- 
ing to  make  the  rules  of  justice  exalted,  and 
their  application  simple,  and  the  other  seeking 
to  involve  it  in  a  labyrinth  of  perplexities.  We 
know  that  when  the  laws  of  Rome  became  so 
immensely  voluminous  that  justice  was  lost  in 
its  vast  e'xtent  of  rules,  that  Justinian  directed 
the  compilation  of  that  code,  which  did  more 
than  any  other  single  work,  to  restore  Europe 
from  the'  darkness  of  the  middle  ages,  and  shed 
abroad  the  illumination  of  legal  science,  and  still 
forms  the  basis  of  European  jurisprudence. 


906 


Napoleon,  wLeu  he  ruled  the  destinies  of 
France,  ordered  that  the  laws  should  be  codified 
and  digested,  and  calling  to  his  aid  Tronchet.that 
courageous  and  illustrious  lawyer,  who  intrep- 
idly defended  his  monarch  when  all  France  de- 
clared his  doom,  and  summoning  Portalis  and 
other  distinguished  jurists,   entered  upon  this 

freat  undertaking.  It  was  then,  sir,  that  the 
irst  Consul,  in  tlie  sessions  held,  displayed  in 
the  discussions  that  arose,  a  power  and  ability 
that  astonished  his  associates  and  added  new 
glory  to  his  illustrious  reputation.  The  code 
Napoleon  was  produced — a  work  that  already 
constitutes  the  basis  of  the  jurisprudence  of 
more  than  half  of  Europe — a  work  that,  as  he 
himself  said,  will  do  more  to  perpetuate  his 
name  to  posterity,  than  the  ever  memorable  and 
brilliant  campaigns  in  northern  Italy,  and  Ger- 
many— a  work  that  will  survive,  when  the  re- 
membrance of  all  his  victories,  shall  dwell  dim- 
ly on  the  memory  of  after  ages. 

The  progress  of  law-reform  did  not  stop  here. 
Lord  Brougham,  the  most  renowned  orator,  and 
one  of  the  most  accomplished  jurists  and  states- 
men of  England,  within  the  last  ten  years,  un- 
dertook to  procure  in  the  House  of  Lords  a 
similar  reform.  England  has  found  the  old  and 
cumbrous  forms  of  administering  justice,  trans- 
mitted from  the  darkness  of  the  feudal  ages,  un- 
suited  to  the  present  progress  of  society,  and 
"within  that  time  her  code  of  practice  and  plead- 
ing has  been  revised,  and  simplified,  and  we  in 
Kentucky,  at  this  hour,  cling  with  fondness  to  a 
system  tinged  with  feudal  barbarism  after  it  has 
been  exploded  in  the  mother  countrJ^  Statutory 
enactments  and  judicial  decisions  have  done 
something  to  give  it  form  and  symmetry,  and 
adapt  it  to  our  wants,  but  it  still  retains  most  of 
the  crude  features  and  barbarous  characteristics 
of  its  origin. 

Louisiana,  which  adopted  the  civil  law  as  the 
basis  of  its  jurisprudence,  with  great  wisdom  se- 
cured the  services  of  Edward  Livingston,  in  the 
arrangement  of  her  laws,  and  what  has  been  the 
eflfect?  The  minds  of  the  jurists  of  America  are 
gradually  turning  to  the  civil  law,  and  they  be- 

fin  to  give  it  the  preference  to  the  common  law. 
he  common  law  is  not  less  enlightened  than 
the  civil,  in  the  great  principles  of  equity  and 
justice,  on  which  it  is  founded — is  not  less  no- 
ole  in  morality;  but  the  more  simple  mode  in 
which  justice  is  administered,  the  more  philoso- 
phical apparatus  for  the  application  of  reme- 
dies under  the  civil  law,  causes  it  to  gain  ground, 
day  by  day,  upon  the  common  law,  which  in  the 
end  will  be  destroyed  and  superseded  by  it,  if  it 
does  not  allow  a  simpler  and  less  technical  mode 
of  procedure  and  practice.  This  has  been  the 
mam  reason  of  the  increasing  popularity  of  the 
civil  law  within  the  last  few  years,  in  the  Mis- 
sissippi valley. 

In  the  state  of  New  York,  in  the  year  1846,  a 
feature  similar  to  the  one  now  under  considera- 
tion was  engrafted  on  its  constitution,  appoint- 
ing a  commission  to  report  to  the  leffisiature 
fiuch  reforms  as  were  necessary  in  tlie  law. 
Those  gentlemen,  who  rank  among  the  first  ju- 
rists in  the  nation,  executed  that  order.  The  re- 
Bultof  their  labors  has  been  adopted  by  the  le- 
gislature, and  the  people  have  derived  the  most 
solid  benefit*  from  it.    They  removed  many  of 


theold  inconvenienc<es,  destroyed  many  of  the, 
old  obstructions  which  clogged  the  avenues  of 
justice,  and  have  substituted  reforms  which  the 

Eeople  of  that  state  will  never  relinquish.  I 
ave  looked  at  that  report,  in  which  the  whole 
present  code  of  procedure  and  practice  does  not 
occupy  more  than  a  fourth  of  the  space  occupied 
by  one  of  our  volumes  of  the  statutes,  and  it 
contains  many  great  and  wise  alterations;  but 
those  alterations  are  now  generally  approved, 
both  by  the  people  and  the  profession.  One, 
Avhich  I  will  give  by  way  of  illustration,  is  a 
change  effected  in  the  law  of  evidence.  In  a 
common  law  court  the  plaintiff  cannot  require 
the  defendant  to  be  sworn  as  a  witness.  In  a 
chancery  court  you  can.  In  both  courts  the  ob- 
ject is  the  ascertainment  of  truth.  If  the  rule 
IS  right  in  one  case,  it  should  be  in  the  other. 
Yet  a  judge  in  one  case  regards  the  proceeding 
as  entirely  right,  and  in  the  other  as  entirely 
wrong.  Such  is  the  effect  of  arbitrary  prece- 
dent— such  its  inconsistency.  This  rule  they 
have  destroyed,  and  the  chancery  rule,  of  the 
right  of  the  litigants  to  each  other's  testimony  is 
established  in  its  stead.  The  rule  was  an  anom- 
aly in  reason,  and  they  have  abolished  it.  Ma- 
ny other  great  and  valuable  improvements  have 
been  made — improvements  demanded  by  the 
spirit  of  the  age,  in  accordance  with  the  opin- 
ions of  the  most  learned  lawyers — in  accordance 
with  the  wishes  of  the  people,  and  in  accor- 
dance with  common  sense  and  true  philosophy. 

In  Ohio,  this  subject  has  been  urged  with 
great  zeal,  ability,  and  perseverance,  by  Judge 
Walker,  an  eminent  jurist,  through  the  columns 
of  the  American  LaAv  Journal.  And  the  atten- 
tion of  the  legal  profession  in  the  west  has  been 
urgently  and  eloquently  invoked,  for  codifica- 
tion and  reform,  resulting  from  the  necessity 
which  day  after  day  presses  itself  upon  the  con- 
sideration of  the  public;  and  I  venture  to  pre- 
dict that  it  will,  at  no  distant  day,  be  carried  out 
in  most  of  the  states  of  the  confederacy. 

I  have  .said  thus  much.  Mr.  President,  to  de- 
scribe the  progress  of  law  reform  in  other  coun- 
tries and  in  the  United  States,  and  to  show  that 
by  the  adoption  of  a  provision  such  as  that  un- 
der consideration,  we  may  attain  some  of  those 
benefits  which  other  governments  have  secured. 
I  do  not  anticipate,  however,  by  such  a  provision 
to  obtain  a  panacea  for  legal  diflSculties,  or  strip 
the  law  of  tnose  technicalities  which  have  pre- 
vailed, and  will  ever  prevail  in  a  science  so  com- 
plex. But  that  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not 
do  all  in  our  power  to  revise,  arrange  and  sim- 
plify it,  to  make  it  as  accessible  as  possible  to 
the  common  understandings  of  men,  and  to 
make  the  administration  of  justice  as  plain  as 
we  can.  It  is  desirable  to  remove  the  rubbish 
and  set  the  house  in  order,  thoogh  it  is  scarcely 
to  be  expected  that  it  will  alrt'ays  remain  so.  It 
is  for  these  reasons  I  advocate  the  commission, 
and  believe  in  its  utility. 

But,  sir,  the  agitation  in  the  convention  this 
morning  seems  to  spring  not  from  a  belief  in  the 
inutility  of  the  measure,  but  from  an  apprehen- 
sion of  its  costliness.  Now,  in  my  opinion,  the 
mode  indicated  is  not  only  the  best,  but  greatly 
the  cheapest.  We  do  not  propose,  as  some  seem 
to  imagine,  to  delegate  the  powers  of  legislation 
to  these  commissioners;  but  we  merely  authorize 


907 


them  to  report  such  reforms,  in  a  digested  and 
convenient  form,  as  are  proper,  for  the  consider- 
ation of  the  legislsture;  this  report  ■will  be  sub- 
ject to  legislative  sanction  or  disapprobation. 
Tfow,  sir,  Tvhat  is  the  present  mode  of  accom- 
plishing this  revision?  The  legislature  is  the 
committee,  consisting  of  one  hundred  and  thir- 
ty-eight members  ana  their  officers,  costing  the 
state  six  hundred  dollars  a  day,  in  order  to  get 
the  contemplated  reforms  into  shape,  "when  a 
committee  such  as  is  proposed,  would  do  the 
same  preliminary  work  far  more  skilfully,  far 
more  learnedly,  and  far  more  efficiently,  for 
about  twenty  dollars  a  day.  Is  it  better  and 
cheaper  then,  for  a  commission  of  three  men,  or 
one  hundred  and  thirty-eight,  to  do  this  prelim- 
inary work  of  revision?  I  believe  that  three 
good  commissioners  with  a  clerk,  would  be  am- 
ply sufficient :  that  all  the  details  should  be 
left  to  the  discretion  of  the  legislature,  and  that 
provision  should  be  made  in  this  constitution 
for  its  commencement  and  completion. 

It  is  my  intention,  Mr  President,  while  I  con- 
cur in  the  object,  to  vote  for  a  reconsideration  of 
the  question,  but  merely  for  the  purpose  of  curing 
some  objections  in  the  details  of  tne  provision, 
as  it  at  present  stands,  and  not  for  the  purpose  of 
as.«ailing  the  principle  it  asserts. 

Mr.  MAYES.  I  am  not  yet  convinced  that  the 
section  should  form  part  of  our  constitution.  I 
ask  for  the  yeas  and  nays  upon  the  question  of 
reconsideration. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  taken,  and  were  yeas 
46,  nays  44. 

\"eas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D. 
Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Cha.steen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  "W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
William  C.  Marshall.WilliamX.  Marshall,  Ricli- 
ard  L.  Mayes,  XathanMcClure,  William  D.Mitch- 
ell, Hugh  Xewell,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  William 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ja--. 
W.  Stone.  Michael  L.  Stoner  John  D.  Taylor, 
Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  Squire  Turner,  Andrew  S.  White,  George 
W.  Williams — 46. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  K. 
Bowling,  Alfred  Bovd,  William  Bradley,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  William  C.  Bullitt.  William  Che- 
nault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  Philip 
Triplett,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Wa.shington, 
John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,Silas  Wood- 
son, Wesley  J.  Wright — 44. 


So  the  latter  clause  of  the  sectloQ  was  recon- 
sidered. 

Mr.  MAYES  moved  to  reconsider  another  and 
kindred  branch  of  the  same  provision,  which 
was  not  reached  by  the  vote  just  taken. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  was  anxious  that  this 
clause  should  be  reconsidered,  although  he  had 
voted  against  the  reconsideration  of  the  other. 
He  desired  it  to  be  reconsidered,  that  two  or 
three  words  might  be  stricken  from  it,  which,  if 
they  were  retained,  might  embarrass  the  com- 
missioners to  be  appointed  under  it.  The  sec- 
tion was  designed  to  provide  that  the  commis- 
sioners should  strike  out  all  technical  terms  from 
our  laws  and  our  pleadings.  He  was  of  opinion 
that  words  more  intelligible  could  not  be  used. 
He  inquired  what  term  could  be  substituted  for 
"replevin?"    What  would  be  so  expressive? 

Mr.  GHOLSON  undertook  to  find  terms  in  the 
English  language  that  would  answer  every  pur- 
pose, or  they  might  hang  him  as  high  as  Haman. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  reconsidering 
the  other  clause,  and  the  result  was — yeas  46, 
nays  44. 

Ye.is — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person, John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bri.stow,  Thom- 
as D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Che- 
nault,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Lucius  Desha,  James 
Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F. 
Eklwards,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vin- 
cent S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomns  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
William  C.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Maves.  Nathan  McClure,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  ifugh  Newell,  William  Preston, 
John  T.  Robinson.  James  W.  Stone,  John  D. 
Taylor.  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man, Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner.  John  L. 
Waller,  Henrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Charles  A.  Wiickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wes- 
ley J.  Wright — 46. 

Nats — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Lu- 
ther Brawner,  William  C.  Bullitt,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman.  William  Cowper,  Ed- 
ward" Curd,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson  .Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  P.  Hamilton.  William  Hendrix,  Thomas 
J.  Hood.  James  W.  Irwin,  Charles  C.  Kelly, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
Howard  Todd,  John  Wheeler,  Silas  Woodson — 
44. 

So  the  convention  agreed  to  reconsider  the  en- 
tire section. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  then  moved  to  amend  by  stri- 
king out  "three  nor  more  than  five,"  and  insert- 
ing "not  more  than  three  persons."  The  object 
of  the  amendment  was  to  limit  to  three  the  num- 
ber of  commissioners  to  be  appointed. 


908 


^  Mr.  GHOLSON  said  he  had  no  objection  to  the  I 
ain^ndmeftt.  | 

The  amendment  was  adopted.  i 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  then  moved  to  strike  out  the  ! 
words  "■which  shall  be  in  plain  English."  Many  j 
terms  in  common  use  had  become  the  baptismal  I 
names  of  things.  He  defied  the  mover  of  this  j 
section  to  provide  names  for  writs  more  appro-  i 

f)riate  and  expressive.  The  gentleman  from  Bal- 
ard  and  McCracken  said  he  could  not  under- 
stand the  terms  that  were  used.  Well,  let  him 
go  into  a  doctor's  shop,  and  he  would  not  be 
able  to  understand  the  labels.  Why  were  such 
terms  used?  Because  they  were  expressive  of 
that  which  would  require  a  long  sentence  to  ex- 
press in  any  other  way.  Writs  take  sometimes 
the  two  first  words  as  their  name — for  instance, 
ne  exeat  and  non  assumpsit.  You  may  say  for  the 
latter,  '•!  did  not  assume,"  but  that  would  not 
be  sufficient.  You  must  say,  "I  did  not  assume 
to  pay  the  debt,"  «fec.,  and  that  becomes  a  long 
sentence.  It  will  be  much  better  to  retain  these 
technicalities,  which  are  well  understood,  than 
to  risk  greater  evil  in  attempting  to  find  a  reme- 
dy for  the  existing  evil,  if  evil  it  is. 

'  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLTFFE.  And  if  you  dispense 
with  the  Avord  "replevin,"  which  is  well  under- 
stood, you  must  say,  "an  action  to  take  property 
from  the  defendant  and  give  it  to  the  plaintiff." 

Mr.  TAYLOR  suggested  that  gentlemen 
should  prepare  a  glossary  to  accompany  law 
books,  to  explain  unusual  terms  after  the  fashion 
of  the  glossarvjthat  accompanied  Burns'  Poems. 
He  also  stated,  that  when  he  resided  in  Indiana, 
a  young  lady  called  upon  a  judge  to  commence 
a  suit  for  her,  and  she  said  she  wislied  him  to 
issue  a  "writ  of  disappointment."  (Laughter.) 
Doubtless  the  word  came  from  her  heart. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  regret,  sir,  that  it  is  ne- 
cessary for  me  to  consume  further  the  valuable 
time  of  this  body.  As  to  tlie  applicability  of 
the  insinuation  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison, 
(Mr.  Turner,)  that  being  incapable  of  reaching 
up  to  the  law,  I  am  therefore  attempting  to 
bring  it  down  to  me,  I  leave  others  to  judge. 
The  reference  of  the  gentleman  from  Mason, 
(Mr.  Taylor,)  to  Burns'  glossary,  reminds  me 
sir,  of  a  saying  of  that  inimitable  author,  which 
I  will  repeat  for  the  general  benefit  of  all  con- 
cerned, and  my  humble  self  in  particular.  It 
runs  thus: 

"  Oh  wad  some  Pow'r  the  giftie  gie  us 

To  see  oursels  as  ithers  ser  us! 

It  wad  frae  monie  a  blunder  free  us. 

And  foolish  notion; 
What  airs  in  dress  an'  gait  wad  lea'e  us, 

And  ev'ii  Devotion!" 

Often,  sir,  have  I  put  up  this  petition,  and 
could  1  now  see  myself  as  others  see  7iie  in  this 
house,  I  doubt  not  it  would  be  of  great  service 
to  me,  and  perhaps,  sir,  a  like  of  themselves 
might,  for  uught  I  can  say,  be  of  some  small 
service  to  other  honorable  gentlemen  on  this 
floor.  It  might  have  cut  short  many  speeches 
and  saved  much  valuable  time  in  debate  here. 
Perhaps,  sir,  even  now,  I  might  be  silent.  But 
Mr.  President,  although  T  know  I  am  not  an  in- 
teresting speaker,  (and  few  farmers  are,)  yot  I 
do  not  Kiel  disposed  to  remain  silent,  whether  I 
am  the  sole  guardian  of  the  farmers  or  not,  and 
let  this  important  measure  be  mutilated  or  de- 
feated.    The  remarks  of  the  gentlemen  of  the 


bar  show  whence  this  opposition  in  reality 
springs.  It  is  not  the  expense  alone.  No  sir, 
this  is  the  ostensible,  but  not  the  real  cause;  no 
sir,  far  from  it.  It  is  the  effect,  (as  shown  by 
the  remarks  of  honorable  gentlemen,)  which 
they  see  this  is  to  have  upon  that  darling  pet  of 
the  profession,  "special  pleading."  It  is  1  fear, 
because  it  seeks  the  abolition  of  that  fruitful 
source  of  profit  to  the  lawyers,  and  intolerable 
expense  to  all  other  classes  of  society,  that 
causes  it  to  be  so  violently  opposed  here  by 
most  of  that  class  of  the  delegates.  I  did  not 
propose,  sir,  in  the  clause  as  presented  and 
adopted,  to  do  away  all  outlandish  phrases 
in  pleading,  as  the  section  itself  will  show,  the 
first  part  of  it  is  as  follows: 

"At  its  first  session  after  the  adoption  of  this 
constitution,  the  general  assembly  shall  appoint 
not  less  than  three  nor  more  than  five  persons 
learned  in  the  law,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  re- 
vii^e  and  arrange  the  statute  laws  of  this  state, 
both  civil  and  criminal,  so  as  to  have  but  one 
law  on  any  one  subject,  all  of  which  shall  be  in 
plain  English." 

The  second  reads  thus: 

"  And  also  three  other  persons  learned  in  the 
law,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  prepare  a  code  of 

Eractice  for  the  courts  in  this  commonwealth, 
oth  civil  and  criminal,  by  abridging  and  simpli- 
fying the  rules  of  practice  and  law,  in  relation 
thereto,  all  of  whom  shall  report,  <fec." 

From  this  it  will  be  seen  most  clearly,  that 
the  laws  only,  and  not  both  laws  and  pleadings 
that  are  to  be  in  "  plain  English."  I  knew  full 
well,  sir,  tliat  it  would  not  do  to  ask  the  law- 
yers in  this  body  to  do  their  pleadings  in  a  plain, 
common  sense,  truthful  English  style.  I  knew 
they  would  not  give  up  their  fictions,  falsehoods, 
and.  to  all  but  themselves,  unintelligible  lingo. 
Hence  all  that  I  asked  for  w^as  that  the  laws 
should  be  in  "  plain  English." 

I  ask  sir,  Avho  can  object  to  this  that  does  not 
intend  to  keep  the  people  in  ignorance  of  what 
the  laws  really  are?  I  ask,  emphatically  ask 
gentlemen  who  propose  to  strike  out  this  pro- 
vision, why  they  do  it?  Why  it  is  that  they  will 
f>resent  to  the  common  fanner  or  mechanic,  a 
aw  which,  as  an  oflicer  he  must  be  called  upon 
to  administer,  in  a  language  which  he  does  not, 
cannot  understand?  The  thing  is  unjust  and 
unreasonable,  and  can  have  no  other  effect  (and 
for  this  it  is  intended,)  but  to  produce  erroneous 
decisions  which  lawyers  will  get  fees  to  reverse. 
It  is  the  interest  of  all  others  but  lawyers,  that 
the  laws  should  be  plain  and  easily  understood. 
That  justice  shall  ill  all  cases  be  done  in  the 
first  instance.  It  is  their  interest  that  justice  be 
notdone,thatlitigationbe  multiplied  and  increas- 
ed, that  the  laws  shall  be  doubtful,  dark,  mysteri- 
ous, and  uncertain,  this  sir,  is  their  meat  and  their 
drink;  from  this  source  it  is  that  they  amass 
their  princely  fortunes.  But  sir,  the  day  of  re- 
tribution is  at  hand,  a  spirit  of  reform  is  abroad 
in  the  land.  Some  ol  our  sister  states  have 
wipea  these  foul  blots  from  their  statute  books, 
ami  Uod  speed  the  day  when  Kentucky ;  my 
glorious  old  mother  commonwealth;  sliall  rise  in 
her  majesty,  shake  off  the  iron  shackles  which 
were  forged  in  the  dark  days  of  feudalism  and 
are  now  imposed  by  lawyer  craft,  anil  take  her 
own  true,   proud,  and  republican   stand   along 


909 


Bide  of  New  York  and  Missouri.    Sir,  I    have 
said  it  elsewhere  and  I  repeat  it  here,  that  the  ob- 
ject and  inevitable  effect  of  the  present  mode  of 
§  leading,  and  the  rules  of  evidence  is  to  narrow- 
own  the  case   and  prevent  justice  from   being 
done.     From  the  moment  a  case   is  docketed  in 
court,  the  whole  object  of  the  lawyers  on   both 
sides,  is  to  get  the  advantage  in  pleading,  narrow- 
down  the  case,  exclude  testimony,   and  prevent 
justice  being  done.     So  uncertain   are  the   dis- 
tinctive lines  that  mark  the  difference  between 
trespass,  and  trespass  on  the  case,  and  between 
common  law  and  chancery  suits,  that  the  best 
lawyers  in  the  land,   are'  often  at  a  loss,   and 
bring  tlieir  suits  wrong.     This  is  notorioui^,  it  is 
undeniably  true  sir,  and   yet  honorable  gentle- 
men,   sensible    men,    oppose    "legal    reform." 
Again  sir,  a  plaintiffs  own  witness,  when  show- 
ing as  clear  a  case  of  wrong  as  words  can  show, 
often  drive  him  out  of  court  with  all  the  bill   of 
costs  to  pay;  and  for  what   sir,   not  because  he 
has  not  been  wronged,  not  because  justice  is  not 
on  his  side,  but  because   some  old   Britisli  form 
had  not  been  complied  with,   or  because  an   ig 
norant  or  inattentive  lawyer  had  misapplied  one 
of    the    various  outlandish  phrases   by   which 
suits  at  law  are  designated.  And  does  these  things 
need  no  reform  sir?    How  long  are  we  to  bear 
these  impositions?    For  one  sir,  in  the  name   of 
the  si.xtt-en   hundred  freemen  who  sent  me  here, 
against  their  longer  continuance  I  solemnly  pro- 
test. These  various  fonns  of  actions,  these  meta- 
physical distinctions  between  those  forms,  togeth- 
er with  the  various  arbitrary  and  senseless  rules 
of  evidence,  stand  like  driftwood  in  the  channel 
of  what  should  be  the  pure  stream  of  justice. 
They  pollute  its  limped  waters.     They  obstruct 
its  current.  I^ay,  sir,  they  often  turn  it  back  and 
cause  it  to  flow  the  wrong  way.     These  things 
sir,  destroy  the  confidence  of  the  people   in  the 
courts  of  the  country.     To  the  common  citizen, 
when  he  enters  a  circuit  court  all  is  as   dark   as 
the  gloom  of  midnight;    he    neither    does  nor 
can  comprehend  what  is  going  on  before  him. 
Ask  for  a  reformation  of  tliese  things,  and  what 
is  the  reply?    It  is,  touch  not  the  wisdom    of  a 
thousand  years.     Yes,  sir, 'tis  the  wisdom  of  a 
thousand  years  devoted  to   the  np-building  of 
lawyer  craft ;  to  the  manufacture  of  hair  split- 
ting   and    undefinable   legal   distinctions  that 
have  no  common  sense  in  them,  that  never  was  in- 
tended to,  neverdid,  never  will, nor nevercan pro- 
mote and  facilitate  the  administration  of  justice. 
Take  for  instance,  the  case  above  stated.    The 
plaintiff,  after  having  paid  out  an  amount  equal 
to  the  sum  in  controversy,  he  ha-<  a  new-  suit  to 
begin,  and  tlie  same  chances  to  run   over  again, 
in  order  to  get  ju.stice,  if  perchance  he  ever  does. 
And  this,  sir,  is  the  glorious  system  of  jurispru- 
dence which  honorable  gentlemen  on  this  floor 
advocate.     This  is  the   aggregate  ivisdom  of  a 
thousand  years  of  which  gentlemen  boast,  and 
which  they  would  make   us   believe  cannot  be 
improved;  and  this,  sir,  is  that  glorious,  nay,  sir, 
venerated  .system  upon  w  hich  honorable  gentle- 
men w-ill  admit  of  no  innovation,  and  which  they 
seek  to  fa.sten  down  and  perpetuate  upon  a  people, 
that  some  at  least  of  those  same  legal  gentlemen 
are  wont  to  tell  us  are  tlie  most  talented,  patriot- 
ic, chivalrous,  high-toned  souls,  that  the  sun 
ever  shined  upon  in  this 


"Landof  the  free  ami  home  of  Ihehiavc.''. 

Yes  sir,  high-toned  they  are,  and  chivalrous  they 
be,  their  mettle  is  up,  their  watch-cry  is  refomi.- 
and  they  will  cease  not  until  the  last  vestige  of 
these  out-landish  phrases,  these  legal  forms,  fic- 
tions and  falsehoods  are  swept  from  our  statute 
books,  disowned  by  all  true-hearted  Kentuck- 
ians,  and  our  courts  become  in  reality,  what 
thev  are  now  onlv  in  name,  courts  of  justice. 

At.  MERIWETHER  suggested  that  if  the 
words  proposed  to  be  stricken  out  w^ere  retained, 
the  words  "as  far  as  practicable,"  should  be  in- 

Mr.  PRESTON  and  Mr.  TRIPLETT  briefly 
explained. 

Mr.  APPERSOJf  thouglit  they  had  wasted 
much  time  on  this  subject.  It  was  a  matter  that 
might  have  been  acted  upon  by  the  legislature, 
and  yet  from  1792  to  1849  it  ha3  been  passed  by; 
and  why  then  had  it  become  necessary  that  it 
should  now  be  put  in  the  constitution?  He 
moved  the  previous  question. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

Mr.  GHOLSON  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  motion  to  strike  out  the  words  "which 
shall  be  in  plain  English,"  and  they  were  yeas 
45,  nays  43. 

Y'eas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thos.  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles 
Chambers,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Chasleen  T.  Dunavan,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Alfred  M"  Jackson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  JST.  Lindsey. 
Willis  B.  ilachen,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Mar- 
tin P.  Marshall,  Wm.  C.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, William  D.  Mitchell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Wm.  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, John  T.  Rogers,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert 
G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  W'm.  R.  Thom- 
pson, John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  Jno.  L.  Waller,  An- 
drew S.  White,  C.  A.  Wickliffe.  George  W.Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 15. 

Nats — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
W'm.  Chenault,  Beverly  L.  'Clarke,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Ricliard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas 
James,  W^m.  Johnson,  Ciiarles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos.  W.  Lisle, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thos.  Rock- 
hold,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Henry  Wash- 
ington, Jno.  W' heeler,  W^es ley  J.  Wright — 43. 
So  the  words  were  stricken  out. 
The  question  then  recurred  on  the  re-adoption 
of  the  section. 

A  division  was  vailed  for,  and  the  first  branch 
was  adopted. 

Mr.  MAYES  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  second  branch,  and  ihey 
were  yeas  4d,  navs  40. 


DIO 


Yeas— Mr.  Presiaent,  (Guthrie)  William  K. 
Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradlev,  Wil- 
liam C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.   CoU-man,   William  Cow- 

f)er,  Edward 'Curd,  Cliasteen  T.  Dunavau,  Mil- 
ord Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  XathanGaither,  Selu- 
eius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamil- 
ton, William  Hendrix,  Thomas  James,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Gaor^e  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas 
P.  Moore,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Tliomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Tal- 
bott,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L. 
Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Chas. 
A.  Wickliffe,' Wesley  J.  Wright— 48. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers, 
Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  William  C.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Na- 
than McClure,  William  D.Mitchell, Hugh  New- 
ell, Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Johnson  Price,  James  W. 
Stone,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Squire  Turner,  Andrew  S. 
White,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson 
—40. 

So  the  second  branch  was  agreed  to. 

Tlie  report  as  amended  was  again  adopted. 

SPECIFO   AMENDMENT. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  offered  the  following  res- 
olution: 

"Resolved,  That  reason  and  experience  teach 
that  every  constitution  should  be  subject  to  some 
mode  of  specific  amendment:  That  the  consti- 
tution, now  being  formed  by  this  convention, 
should  contain  a  clause  providing  for  specific 
amendments  on  all  subjects  but  that  of  slavery; 
and  that  said  clause  should  be  submitted,  sepa- 
rately, to  a  vote  of  the  people  at  the  same  time 
the  constitution  itself  is  voted  upon." 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH.    A  single  word  of  ex- 

Slanation.  I  and  the  constituency  I  have  the 
onor  to  represent,  are  in  favor  of  specific 
amendments  to  the  constitution,  and  when  can- 
vassing that  subject  before  them,  I  took  no  dis- 
tinction between  slave  property  and  any  other 
kind  of  property,  because  I  believed  all  would 
be  perfectly  safe  under  that  mode  of  amend- 
ment, and  am  still  of  that  opinion.  It  is  now 
obvious,  however,  that  no  specific  clause  of 
amendment  can  pass  the  convention  which  will 
authorize  any  change  in  the  con.stitution,  unless 
the  subject  of  slavery  be  excluded.  Seeing  that 
a  general  clause  for  specific  ameDdment*i,  not 
even  with  the  proper  guards  cannot  pass,  I  liavc 
submitted  the  subject  in  a  qualified  form,  being 
willing  to  take  a  specific  clause  in  that  form, 
sooner  than  not  have  it  at  all.  If  I  cannot  get 
all  that  I  ain  for,  I  will  take  all  that  I  can  get. 


As  a  number  of  other  resolutions  have  been 
submitted  on  the  same  subject,  I  should  have 
offered  none  myself,  if  any  of  them  had  con- 
tained one  of  the  propositions  in  those  I  have 
had  the  honor  to  submit;  and  that  is  to  submit 
a  specific  clause  for  a  direct  vote  of  the  people, 
at  the  same  time  of  submitting  the  constitution. 
I  admit  that  the  people  seem  to  have  decided 
against  any  mode  of  specific  amendments  in  all 
matters  touching  the  subject  of  slavery,  but  I 
deny  that  they  have  so  decided  as  to  that  part 
of  the  constitution  not  concerning  slavery. 
Hence  it  is,  that  I  am  for  a  direct  vote  of  the 
people  on  that  subject,  and  have  submitted  tlie 
resolutions  for  the  consideration  of  the  conven- 
tion with  that  view. 

He  moved  that  it  be  laid  on  the  table  for  future 
consideration  and  printed. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

The  resolution  was  then  passed  over  for  the 
present. 

EDUCATION. 

The  convention  again  resumed  the  considera" 
tion  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  edu" 
cation. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  do  not  think  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C.  A. 
Wickliffe,)  is  sufficiently  specific.  I  desire  that 
this  convention  shall,  hj  the  constitution,  adopt 
such  a  provision  as  will  clearly  recognize  the 
school  fund  which  is  in  existence,  as  a  fund  for 
common  school  purposes;  and  I  wish  it  to  do 
that  in  a  way  tnat  shall  definitely  point  out 
what  it  is. 

The  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
does  not  embrace  all  the  funds  that  belong  to 
the  board  of  education,  and  therefore  I  wish  to 
offer  a  substitute,  which  I  apprehend  will  meet 
the  views  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson.  My 
proposition  will  be  a  substitute  for  the  whole 
bill  of  the  committee;  and  if  it  should  be  adopt- 
ed, and  the  three  sums  set  forth  in  the  first  sec- 
tion of  this  article  shall  be  clearly  and  definite- 
ly recognized  by  this  convention  as  a  fund  to  be 
set  apart  for  the  purposes  of  education  in  Ken- 
tucky, I  shall  be  willing  to  leave  further  action 
to  the  legislature. 

The  PRESIDENT  informed  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon  that  his  amendment  was  not 
yet  in  order. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  briefly  explained  his 
amendment,  and  vindicated  the  legislature  from 
the  imputations  which  had  been  cast  upon  it  in 
relation  to  this  school  fund. 

Mr.  T.  J.  HOOD.  I  introduced  the  resolution 
requiring  the  appointment  of  a  committeeon  the 
educational  fund,  and  had  the  honor  of  being 
placed  upon  that  committee,  as  one  of  the  ar- 
dent friends  of  common  schools;but  owing  to  cir- 
cumstances beyond  my  control,  I  was  prevent- 
ed from  meeting  and  consulting  much  with  tliat 
committee  while  makingup  this  report,  and  I  do 
not  concur  altogether  in  its  details, yet  its  general 
principles  meet  my  entire  approbation.  It  was 
my  good  fortune,  or  my  foible,  to  have  taken  my 
seat  in  this  body,  impressed  with  a  deep,  strong 
sense  of  the  propriety  and  importance  of  more 
securely  establishing  and  protecting  the  fund 
heretofore  set  apart  for  common  school  purposes 
— of  throwing  about  it  that  constitutional  secu- 
rity and   sanctity   which   seemed  necessary  to 


911 


render  it  effectual  iu  accomplishing  the  high 
purposes  to  "which  it  was  originally  dedieat«d. 
The  policy  of  establishing  free  or  common 
schools  throughout  the  state,  which  should  be 
accessible  to  the  children  of  all  classes  of  society, 
has  taken  a  strong  hold  upon  the  feelings  and 
affections  of  that  portion  of  the  citizens  of  Ken- 
tucky whom  I  have  the  the  honor  to  represent; 
and  they  testified  their  solicitude  for  the  success 
of  the  enterprize  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote 
for  the  two  cents  additional  tax  in  aid  of  the 
school  fund.  So  I  shall  feel  authorized  in  lend- 
ing ray  feeble  assistance  to  every  proposition 
which  has  for  its  object  the  security  and  pro- 
tection of  that  fund,  and  the  building  up  of  an 
enlarged  and  liberal  system  of  common  schools 
in  this  state.  The  scheme  of  educating  all  the 
children  of  the  country  by  means  of  such  a  sys- 
tem of  schools  is  certainly  a  most  magnificent 
one,  and  peculiarly  marks  the  progress  of  the 
age  in  morals  and  in  civilization.  One,  which 
if  carried  into  successful  operation,  would  con- 
tribute more,  perhaps,  than  any  other,  to  the  ad- 
vancement of  the  prosperity  and  true  glory  of 
our  country.  For  1  regard  a  developement  of 
the  moral  energies  and  intellectual  resources  of 
a  people  as  conducing,  far  more  to  the  purity 
and  preservation  of  civil  liberty  than  any  other 
single  enter  prise,  and  productive  of  more  true 
happiness  and  contentment  to  society  at  large. 
In  reference  to  education  generally,  as  it  af- 
fects the  happiness  of  man  in  his  individual  ca- 
pacity, I  need  not  detain  this  house.  I  need  not 
speak  of  the  agreeable  relaxation  it  affords  from 
the  perplexing  cares  and  toils  of  business  life, 
or  fashionable  dissipation.  I  need  not  speak 
of  the  consolation — the  pure  and  elevated  en- 
joyments to  be  derived  from  it  when  the  dearest 
affections  of  the  heart  are  wounded  or  depressed 
by  adversity.  The  character  of  this  body  ren- 
ders it  unnecessary  that  I  should  dwell  on  these 
merits.  Besides,  I  am  persuaded  that  an  enter- 
prize like  that  shadowed  forth  in  tlie  report  of 
the  committee,  which  embraces  within  its  com- 
prehensive policy  the  social  happiness — the 
civil  and  political  well-being  of  all  classes  of 
society — will  commend  itself  to  the  favorable 
consideration  of  this  convention  upon  far  more 
disinterested  and  patriotic  grounds.  Sir,  what 
is  this  scheme,  and  what  great  ends  do  we  pro- 
pose accomplishing  bv  it?  It  is  one  which  seeks 
the  amelioration  of  tKe  condition  of  the  rising 
generation — those  who  shall  come  after  us  to 
supply  our  places  in  all  the  varied  relations  of 
life.  It  seeks  to  eidarge  their  minds,  to  liberal- 
ize their  sentiments,  and  to  elevate  them  to  a 
just  appreciation  of  the  true  dignity  and  privi- 
leges of  freemen.  But  there  is  another  idea  con- 
nected witli  this  matter,  which,  it  appears  to 
me,  must  strike  the  mind  of  every  delegate  on 
this  floor.  Sir,  we  are  about  embarking  on  a 
system  of  universal  elections.  Those  who  shall 
hereafter  fill  all  the  various  offices  of  govern- 
ment— those  who  shall  exercise  authority  over 
the  people — must  be  such  as  the  virtue  and  in- 
telligence of  the  people  shall  select.  Is  not  the 
general  diffusion  of  knowledge  among  the  peo- 
ple then,  an  essential  pre-requisite  to  the  safe 
and  discreet  exercise  of  this  hiirh  privilege?  I 
maintain  that  it  is.  And  could  the  curtain  of 
the  future  be  raised — and  the   veiled  pages  of 


our  country's  undeveloped  history  be  revetilevl 
to  our  visions — the  political  convulsions — the 
conflicts  and  struggles  of  factions — the  tri- 
umphs, disasters,  and  mutations  of  policy,  that 
must,  and  will  arise  under  this  new  order  of 
things — we  should,  in  my  opinion,  clearly  see 
that  the  future  prosperity  and  happiness  of  our 
common  country  must  depend  upon  the  su- 
premacy of  reason — upon  the  general  diii'usion 
of  virtue  and  intelligence,  not  only  among  a 
chosen  few — the  favored  sons  of  fortune  and  of 
birth — but  among  that  vast  multitude  who  will 
hold  in  their  hands,  all  the  prerogatives  of  pow- 
er. Sir,  this  universal  elective  system  which 
I  came  here  prepared  to  support,  and  which  a 
decided  majority  of  this  body  have  concurred 
in  adopting,  is  fraught  with  much  of  good  or  of 
evil  to  our  state;  and  which  of  these  shall  pre- 
ponderate, will  depend  upon  the  prudence,  the 
discretion,  and  the  purity  with  which  these 
privileges  are  exercised.  If  we  would  insure 
the  success  of  this  experiment,  we  must  furnish 
every  possible  facility  to  our  citizens  for  exer- 
cising them  aright.  Sir,  in  an  arbitrary  or  des- 
potic government,  where  the  people  neither 
make  the  laws,  nor  are  permitted  to  select  those 
who  legislate,  the  general  diffusion  of  knowl- 
edge is  not  essential  to  the  preservation  of  peace; 
but  in  republican  governments,  where  the  people 
fill  all  the  branches  or  offices  of  government, 
their  peace,  liberty,  and  prosperity  hang  upon 
their  intelligence  and  virtue.  Who  tlien  are  inter- 
ested in  the  dissemination  of  knowledge  among 
all  classes  of  society'  through  some  system  of 
general  education?  Are  they  merely  those 
whose  poverty  affords  no  other  means  of  ac- 
quiring it?  Surely  not;  but  every  citizen  who 
would  preserve  the  institutions  of  his  country 
pure  and  unimpaired.  So,  sir,  I  maintain  that 
the  true  policy  of  every  republican  government 
requires  the  establishment  of  some  such  .system. 
What  is  the  leading  idea  in  the  theory  of  repub- 
licanism? It  is  based  upon  the  presumed 
equality  of  all  its  citizens.  And  the  true  poli- 
cy of  such  a  government  aims  at  the  realization 
of  that  idea  in  its  practical  operations — the  ex- 
emplification of  that  civil  and  political  equality 
among  its  citizens,  by  opening  up  the  road  to 
professional  or  political  preferment,  to  genius 
and  merit  however  humble  in  its  origin.  It  in- 
vites and  encourages  the  bantling  of  the  hovel 
to  consecrate  the  energies  of  his  mind  to  the 
attainment  of  eminence  and  distinction  no  less 
than  the  pampered  cion  of  the  palace.  It  holds 
the  pride  of  birth  and  the  arrogance  of  wealth 
j  as  despicable  distinctions  when  brought  in  com- 
petition Avith  true  nobility  of  heart  or  virtuous 
elevation  of  character  and  sentiment.  Without 
any  invidious  distinctions,  its  comprehensive 
policy  invites  all  to  enter  the  arena,  it  proscribes 
none — ^but  encourages  all  by  diffusing,  as  far  a.s 
practicable,  equal  opportunities  to  all,  and  hon- 
or's merit,  wherever  displayed,  according  to  the 
degree  of  its  excellence.  Such  sir,  is  the  genius 
of  republicanism — such  the  perfections  of  its 
theory — and  yet  its  golden  promises  will  vanish 

f)hantom-like,  and  cTieat  our  fondest  hopes  un- 
ess  guided,  sustained  and  invigorated  by  a 
sound  wholesome  public  sentiment.  How  shall 
tliat  healthy  public  sentiment  be  engendered 
and  kept  alive.'    It  can  only  be  don«  by  the  dif- 


91iJ 


t"a«on  of  virtuM  anil  int«lligei)ee  aiiiong  the  peo- 

f>le.  But  according  to  the  auditor's  report,  a 
arge  number  of  our  citizens  liaw  not  the  means 
of  acquiring  an  education.  Public  policy  then 
dictates  the  establishment  of  a  liberal  system  of 
common  schools  sustained  at  the  public  expense, 
that  shall  be  accessible  to  the  children  of  this 
class  of  citizens. 

l^ow,  I  appeal  to  every  gentleman  upon  this 
floor,  if  the  permanent  success  of  the  constitu- 
tion we  are  about  adopting,  does  not  depend  up- 
on the  intelligence  and  moderation  of  the  people? 
We  are  about  confiding,  or  as  the  more  popu- 
lar phrase  has  it,  restoring  to  them  all  the  pow- 
ers of  sovereignty.  We  are  about  entrusting  to 
every  citizen  alike  equal  rights  and  privileges 
in  the  appointment  of  all  the  agents  of  govern- 
ment. These  are  high  and  responsible  powers — 
upon  the  judicious  and  discreet  execise  of  which 
the  future  purity  and  prosperity  of  our  institu- 
tions depend.  Should  we  not  therefore,  along 
with  this  surrender  of  all  power  back  into  their 
liands,  also  furnish  them  with  every  possible  fa- 
cility for  exercising  it  with  safety  to  themselves 
and  to  the  country? 

Sir,  this  project  of  common  schools  has  taken 
a  much  stronger  hold  upon  popular  feeling  than 
some  gentlemen  seem  disposed  to  think.  And  I 
believe,  when  we  shall  have  once  thoroughly  em- 
barked in  the  prosecution  of  it,  publicsentiment 
will  exhibit  a  loftiness  of  tone,  alike  worthy  of 
the  enterprise  and  creditable  to  the  state.  But 
gentlemen  pretend  that  we  arenot  authorized,  by 
any  expression  of  the  people,  in  incorporating  any 
provision  on  the  subject  in  the  constitution.  I 
would  ask  what  clearer  indication  of  popular 
feeling  can  they  demand,  than  is  to  be  found  in 
the  overwhelming  majority  who  vovted  for  the 
twocents  additional  tax  in  aid  of  theschool  fund? 
Near  thirty-seven  thousand  majority  of  our  citi- 
zens, by  that  vote,  showed  their  willingness  to 
progress  with  this  work.  All  they  ask  at  our 
hands  is  some  guaranty  that  the  voluntary  tax 
which  they  impose  upon  themselves  shall  not  be 
diverted  to  any  other  purpose.  And  I  have  no 
doubt  but  that  an  equal  majority  would  submit 
to  a  much  greater  tax — ay,  to  five  times  the 
amount  of  that  tax — rather  than  see  so  noble  an 
enterprise  abandoned,  if  they  could  but  be  as- 
sured that  it  wouM  be  faithfully  applied,  and 
would  come  back  in  the  blessings  of  education  to 
their  children. 

Yet  we  are  gravely  told,  by  the  senior  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  that  if  weadopt 
any  provision  rendering  the  school  fund  perma- 
nent and  secure,  and  the  proceeds  of  the  school 
tax  inviolable,  it  will  defeat  the  constitution  be- 
fore the  people.  Sir,  I  cannot  believe  it.  I  can- 
not believe  that  a  mere  act  of  good  faith  on  the 
part  of  the  state,  towards  its  poor  children,  in 
securing  to  them  the  enjoyment  of  tliat  fund, — 
not  one  dollar  of  which  was  ever  collected  from  a 
citizen  of  Kentucky, — or  of  thatschool  tax  which 
their  fathers  have  paid  for  their  benefit,  will 
ever  drive  the  citizens  of  this  magnanimous  old 
commonwealth  from  the  support  of  our  constitu- 
tion. I  cannot  believe  that  the  incorporation  of 
a  provision,  so  deeply  afftctingtho  interests  and 
happiness  of  the  rising  generation,  will  ever  en- 
danger our  work  in  the  hands  of  the  fathers  and 
relatives  of  those  children.    On  the  contrary,  T 


believe  that  a  provision  of  this  character  would 
recommend  our  constitution  to  the  confidence  and 
patronage  of  a  generous  constituency,  and  would 
give  strength  and  favor  to  it  beyond  that  of  any 
other  single  proposition. 

We  are  also  admonished  by  that  same  gentle- 
man, and  others  upon  this  floor,  to  leave  the 
school  fund,  and  the  proceeds  of  the  school  tax, 
to  the  guardian  care  and  tender  mercies  of  the 
legislature.  Sir,  the  experience  of  some  eleven 
years  has  demonstrated  to  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky the  necessity  of  placing  that  fund  upon 
more  elevated  grounds,  and  of  securing  itagainst 
that  rapacious  spirit  of  legislation  which  has  not 
hesitated  to  lay  violent  hands  upon  it,  whenever 
an  emergency  seemed  to  require  a  prostitution  of 
its  means.  Besides,  a  rumor  has  gotten  out,  and 
obtained  some  credence  among  the  people,  that 
once  upon  a  time,certainsc/ioo//»on(/swere burned 
by  order  of  that  same  legislature,  without  any 
sufficient  reason  ever  having  been  assigned  to 
thecountry  for  the  act;  and  that  the  interest  up- 
on that  fund  has  frequently  been  permitted  to 
accumulate  foryears,  without  any  provision  hav- 
ing been  made  either  to  secure  or  pay  it;  while 
at  the  same  time  the  whole  school  system  has 
been  crippled  and  retarded  in  its  usefulness  for 
the  want  of  adequate  means.  So,  sir,  the  pub- 
lic have  lost  confidence  in  the  stability  or  efli- 
ciency  of  a  sj^stem  which  depends  for  a  support, 
from  year  to  year,  upon  the  pleasure  of  a  vacilla- 
ting legislature.  The  people  have  now  volunta- 
rily imposed  upon  themselves  a  tax  in  aid  of  the 
school  fund,  and  demand  that  high  constitution- 
al guarantees  shall  be  given  for  the  faithful  ap- 
plication of  its  proceeds.  Justice  requires  that 
these  should  be  afforded,  in  as  much  as  it  would 
be  a  flagrant  violation  of  the  faith  of  the  state, 
and  a  gross  fraud  upon  the  citizens,  to  divert  this 
tax  to  any  other  purpose. 

But  as  a  last  argument  by  the  learned  gentle- 
man from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  against  any 
constitutional  provision,  securing  and  establish- 
ing the  scliool  fund  heretofore  set  apart,  we  are 
met  with  the  startling  annunciation  that  there  is 
no  school  fund;  that  at  most  it  is  but  a  debt 
which  the  state  owes  to  lierself,  and  which  she 
may  at  any  time  cancel;  that  the  money  has  all 
been  expended,  and  so,  in  truth,  and  in  fact, 
there  is  no  scliool  fund.  That  is,  when  the  ar- 
gument is  analyzed  and  translated  into  plain 
english,  (about  which  we  have  heard  so  much 
to-day,)  we  are  to  be  told  that  the  dedication  of 
$850,000,  some  years  ago,  to  common  school  pur- 

Eoses,  and  its  subsequent  investment  in  state 
onds,  bearing  interest,  so  that  the  fund  might 
become  productive,  and  the  schools  sustained, 
without  trenching  upon  or  destroying  the  prin- 
ciple, was  all  a  splendid  farce,  to  amuse  and  de- 
lude the  people — while  the  money  was  being 
sunk  in  the  bottoms  of  your  rivers,  and  spread 
along  your  roads  in  various  works  of  inttrual 
improvement;  and  now,  sir,  when  the  play  is 
through,  and  the  money  all  gone,  the  delusion 
is  to  be  brushed  away,"and  the  eyes  of  the  peo- 
ple to  be  opened  to  the  fact  that  there  is  no 
school  fund.  This  is  a  system  of  specious  rea- 
soning which,  I  trust,  the  great  state  of  Ken- 
tucky will  not  subscribe  to.  Sir,  those  bonds 
were  executed  in  good  faith,  and  the  honor  and 
credit  of  the  state  were  pledged  to  their  pay- 


913 


uient,  and  to  the  payment  of  the  iuterest  upon  '  efficiency  and  vigor,  as  veil  as  stability,  to  the 
them.  The  character  of  every  citiaen  is,  to  I  common  school  system.  This  being  done,  pub- 
some  extent,  identified  with  the  honor  and  good  1  lie  confidence  in  the  success  of  the  enterprise 
faith  of  the  state,  and  Kentucky  will  not,  in  my  j  will  be  restored,  and  we  shall  exhibit  to  the 
humble  opinion,  be  true  to  hereelf  and  her  past !  world,  in  the  thousands  of  institutions  of  learn- 
distinguished  reputation,  if  she  does  not  fully  '  ing  scattered  over  the  country,  the  magnificent 
redeem  the  pledge  given  by  these  bonds  to  the  !  spectacle  of  a  state  marching  on,  with  giant 
poor  children  of  her  citizens.     She   must  either    strides,  in  the  high   career  of  morals,  civuiza- 


pay  those  bonds  or  repudiate  them.     There  is  no 
other  alternative.     If  she  should  choose  the  lat- 


tion,  and  religion.     Under  the  benign  auspic«B 
of  these  extended   means  for  intellectual  devel- 


ter,  then  I  confess  the  rising  generation  will  be  opement,  we  shall  see  loom  out  from  city  and 
without  a  remedy.  But  wnat  becomes  of  the  |  country,  from  lowland  and  mountains,  many  an 
fair  fame  of  this  good  old  commonwealth?  Sir,  j  intellectual  giant,  with  names  guilded  bv  no 
Kentucky  will  not  repudiate  these  bonds  or  any  |  phosphoretie  aureola  borrowed  from  a  distiq- 
other  honest  debts  she  has  ever  contracted.  Who  I  gui.shed  ancestry,  but  with  "minds  swelling 
in  this  hou.se  will  rise  up  in  his  place  and  main-  j  with  energies,"  fresh,  free,  native,  and  vigorous, 
tain  that  she  should?  Repudiation  has  ever  been  j  and  owing  their  attractions  and  power  alone  to 
regarded  as  odious  in  her  sight.  And  how  in-  i  their  owu  masculine  proportions.  Then,  in- 
finitely more  so  would  this  appear  when  it  is  !  deed,  will  Kentucky  become  what  I  would  have 
remembered  that  the  poor  children  within  her  :  her — as  distinguished  for  the  virtue  and  intelli 
own  borders  are  the  ones  who  would  most  deep-  |  genee  of  her  citizens  as  she  is  for  the  chivalry 
Iv  suffer  from  the  calamity?  So  I  maintain  that  j  of  her  sons  and  the  beauty  of  her  daughters, 
there  is  a  school  fund — one  too  secured  by  the  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  entered  into  some  fur- 
highest  of  all  pledges — the  faith  of  a  generous  |  ther  explanations,  and  then  withdrew  his  amend- 
and  chivalrous  state.     It  is  about  this  fund,  now  i  ment  (with  which   Mr.   Barlow's  also  fell,)  and 


amounting  to  upwards  of  $1,300,000,  that  the 
committee  propose^  by  their  report,  throwing  a 
constitutional  mantle,  which  will  perpetuate  and 
protect  it  against  the  caprice,  extravagance,  and 
incendiarisms  of  the  legislature:  and  this  report, 
if  adopted,  will  accomplish  that  purpose  much 
more  effectually  than  any  of  the  substitutes  that 
have  been  offered.  . 

But  some    of  the    gentlemen  who   favor  the  i  any  sum  which  may  hereafter  be  raised  in  the 
measure,  yet  find  fault  with  that  portion  of  this  j  state,  by  taxation  or  otherwise,   for  purposes  of 


submitted  a  modified  amendment,  as  follows : 

"  The  capital  of  the  fund,  called  and  known 
as  the  common  school  fund,  consisting  of  $1,- 
225,768  42,  for  which  bonds  have  been  executed 
by  the  state  to  the  board  of  education,  and  $73,- 
500  of  stock  in  the  Bank  of  Kentucky;  also,  the 
sum  of  $51,223  29,  balance  of  interest  on  the 
school  fund  for  1843,  unexpended;  together  with 


report  which  refere  to  the  tax  now  paid,  or 
which  may  hereafter  be  imposed  for  school  pur- 
poses by  legislative  enactment.  They  have  con- 
strued It  to  prohibit  the  legislature  from  remov- 
ing the  present  two  cents  tax,  or  from  repealing 
any  law  which  may  ever  hereafter  be  enacted, 
imposing  further  tax  for  school  purposes.     Thev 


education,  shall  be  held  inviolate,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  sustaining  a  system  of  common  schools; 
the  interest  and  dividends  of  said  fund,  togeth- 
er with  any  sum  which  may  be  producdea  by 
taxation,  may  be  appropriated  in  aid  of  com- 
mon schools,  but  for  no  other  purpose.  The 
general  assembly  shall  invest  said  $51,223  29  in 


fear,  that  under  it,  the  present  law,  and  all  similar  I  some  safe  and  profitable  manner,  and  anypor- 
laws  hereafter  passed,  once  being  placed  on  the  i  tion  of  the  interestand  dividends  of  said  school 
statute  book,  will  be,  like  the  laws  of  the  Medes  i  fund,  which  may  not  be  needed  in  sustaining 
and  Persians — fixed  and  unalterable — however ;  common  schools,  shall  be  invested  in  like  man- 
unnecessary  or  oppressive  they  may  become,  i  ner.  The  general  assembly  shall  make  provis- 
Such,  I  maintain,  is  not  the  fair  construction  of;  ion,  by  law.  for  the  payment  of  the  interest  of 
the  report;  and  such,  I  am  assured  by  members  j  said  school  fund:  Provided,  that  each  county 
of  that  committee,  was  not  their  intention.  They  j  shall  be  entitled  to  their  proportion  of  the  in- 
intended  rendering  the  proceed  of  the  present  ^  come  of  said  fund,  and  if  not  called  for,  for 
school  tax,  and  of  every  similar  law  which  may  !  school  purposes,  it  shall  be  reinvested  for  the 
be  passed  in  future,  inviolable  for  any  other  pur-  j  benefit  of  each  county,  from  time  to  time." 

Eose,  so  long  as  those  laws  remain  in  force;  but ,      Mr.  TURXER  moved  the  previous   question, 
y  no  means  to  interfere  with  the  right  of  the   and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  nov 
legislature  to   alter,  amend,  or  abrogate  those  i  put. 


laws  whenever  the  public  good  might  require  it. 
The  general  principles  of  this  report,  as  I  be- 
fore remarked,  meet  my  cordial  approbation.  It 
consecrates  and  forever  establishes  the  school 
fund,  and  places  its  principal  beyond  the  reach 
of  legislative  abuse,  while  at  the  same  time  it 
secures  the  faithful  application  of  the  interest  to 


The  amendment  of  the  gentleman   from  Nel- 
son was  then  adopted. 

EVE.VIXG   SESSION. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  education. 

Mr.  TAYLOR,  on  behalf  of  the  committee, 
the  education  of  the"  children  of  all  classes  of  j  asked  leave  to  withdraw  the  second,  third, 
society;  giving  to  each  county  its  fair  propor- !  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth  sections,  which  were  ren- 
tion,  according  to  the  number  of  its  children,  j  dered  unnecessary,  by  the  adoption  of  the  sub- 
It  likewise  sanctifies  the  proceeds  of  all  laws  im-  j  stitute  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  for  the 
posing  tax  for  school  purposes,  and  guaranties  j  first  section. 
Its  disbursement  upon  the  same  equitable  prin- 1     Leave  was  granted. 

ciples.     These  are  the  great  principles  for  which  j      The  seventh  section  was  then  read,   as  fol- 
I  contend,  and  which,  if  established,  will  give  !  lows  : 
115 


dl4 


"Skc.  7.  There  shall  be  elected,  by  ths  quali- 
fied electors  in  this  commonwealth,  a  superin- 
dent  of  public  instruction,  who  shall  hold  his 
office  for  years,   and  whose  duties  and 

salary  shall  be  prescribed  and  fixed  by  law." 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  TRIPLETT  the  blank 
■was  filled  with  "four." 

The  section,  and  afterwards  the  entire  report, 
as  amended,  were  then  adopted. 


The  convention  proceeded  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  re- 
vision of  the  constitution  and  slavery. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  that  each  mem- 
ber be  limited  to  twenty  minutes  in  the  discus- 
sion of  that  report.  It  involved  a  subject  with 
which  they  were  all  familiar,  which  had  been 
amply  discussed,  both  here  and  elsewhere,  and 
hence  a  long  discussion  was  unnecessary. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  intimated  a  wish  to  oc- 
cupy a  longer  time. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  was  willing  to  exempt 
the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  he  being  the  chair- 
man of  the  committee  from  which  the  report 
had  come. 

Mr.  WALLER  expressed  his  opposition  to  the 
adoption  of  the  resolution. 

Mr.  DUDLEY  said  that  subject  had  been  dis- 
cussed at  very  great  length  during  the  ten  or 
eleven  weeks  that  the  convention  had  been  in 
session,  and  it  was  now  necessary  that  they 
should  act,  rather  than  talk,  that  they  might  ad- 
journ at  an  early  day.  He  saw  no  reason  for  in- 
dulging each  gentleman  in  more  than  a  few  re- 
maps. 

Mr.  CURD  moved  to  amend  the  motion,  by 
striking  out  "twenty,"  and  inserting  "ten." 

Mr.  BALLINGER  saw  no  reason  why  the 
chairman  of  the  committee  should  have  greater 
latitude  than  the  other  members  of  the  same 
committee,  who  entertained  opposing  views. 

Mr.  WALLER  opposed  the  adoption  of  the 
resolution,  because  ne  was  opposed  to  the  appli- 
cation of  a  gag. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  withdrew  his  mo- 
tion. 

The  secretary  then  read  the  first  section  of  the 
report,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  1.  The  general  assembly  shall  have  no 
power  to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of 
slaves,  without  the  consent  of  their  ownera,  or 
without  paying  their  owners,  previous  to  such 
emancipation,  a  full  equivalent  in  money  for 
the  slaves  so  emancipated;  nor  shall  they  exer- 
cise any  other  or  greater  power  over  the  after- 
bom  children  of  slave  mothers  than  over  the 
slaves  then  in  being." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Before  the  vote  is  ta- 
ken on  the  first  section,  I  propose  to  make  a  few 
remarks  on  the  general  question  of  slavery.  Per- 
mit me  to  remark,  that  1  should  not  have  occu- 
pied the  time  of  the  convention  at  all  upon  this 
question,  but  for  the  fact  that  the  arguments  and 
doctrines  which  have  been  employed  here,  have 
been  seized  on  by  the  abolitionists  of  the  north, 
for  the  purpose  of  advancing  their  views,  and 
but  for  the  remarks  of  my  friend  from  Knox, 
ivbich  will  no  doubt  be  cited  for  the  same  pur- 
pose. 

My  Ariend  from  Knoz,  contended  that  slavery 


retarded  our  population,  without  inquirinr 
whether  there  might  not  be  other  causes  which 
would  produce  the  same  effect,  and  which  did 
produce  it.  I  have  been  taught  that  like  causes 
produce  like  effects,  everywhere,  and  I  ask,  if 
slavery  has  retarded  population  in  Kentucky, 
why  has  it  not  done  it  in  Missouri  and  Alabama, 
and  other  states. 

The  gentleman  drew  a  comparison  between 
the  states  of  Kentucky  and  Ohio,  with  reference 
to  the  increase  of  their  population.  If  he  will 
turn  his  attention  to  Missouri,  and  Alabama,  he 
will  find  that  they  have  increased  in  a  greater 
ratio  than  Ohio.  If  slavery  be  the  cause  which 
has  retarded  the  population  of  Kentucky,  why 
has  not  that  cause  produced  the  same  effect  in 
these  states?  Will  not  the  gentleman  see  that 
there  are  other  causes  which  might  produce  it? 
I  could  refer  to  the  condition  of  the  land  titles 
in  Kentucky,  in  by  gone  days,  and  I  might  assure 
him  that  probably  it  will  be  found,  every  acre  of 
land  has  been  shingled  over  with  as  many  as 
three  different  titles.  I  presume  there  is  not  a 
man  in  this  body,  who  cannot  point  to  some 
neighbor,  who  has  lost  his  land,  and  who,  fear- 
ful lest  the  same  fate  might  await  him  again  if 
he  bought  in  this  state,  has  gone  to  the  western 
states.  How  many  have  thus  gone,  and  how 
many  emigrants  have  passed  through  Kentucky, 
without  locating  themselves,  for  fear  of  the  land 
titles,  it  is  hard  to  tell. 

Here  are  causes  enough  to  produce  the  effect 
claimed  by  the  gentleman,  when  we  recollect 
that  in  those  western  states,  a  citizen  having  lost 
land  here,  could  get  good  land  cheap,  and  have 
a  good  title.  Some  few  years  since,  congress 
commenced  holding  out  abountyforimmigration 
from  the  older  states  to  the  new,  where  the  Uni- 
ted States  held  nearly  all  the  land  for  sale.  If  I 
recollect  rightly,  the  price  of  the  public  land 
was  fixed  at  two  dollars  per  acre,  and  the  pur- 
chaser was  required  to  pay  only  twenty -five  cents 
annually  per  acre  till  it  was  paid  for,  thus  giv- 
ing eight  years  to  pay  the  whole.  Congress  af- 
terwards reduced  the  price  to  one  dollar  and 
twentv-five  cents  per  acre,  and  as  an  additional 
stimulus  to  immigration  they  provided  that 
the  public  lands,  when  entered,  should  be  exempt 
from  taxation  for  five  years,  so  that  the  immi- 
grant, instead  of  locating  in  Kentucky,  and  the 
citizen  of  Kentucky,  who  had  lost  his  land,  went 
west  and  acquired  good  land  with  a  good  title 
and  free  from  taxation  for  five  years  after  he 
had  become  a  purchaser. 

I  have  been  asked  why  Louisville,  did  not  in- 
crease as  fast  as  Cincinnati.  And  I  have  been 
told  it  is  because  she  is  within  a  slave  state. 
But  if  gentlemen  will  cast  their  ej'esto  St.  Louis, 
they  will  find  that  she,  though  in  a  slave  state, 
has  increased  faster  than  Cincinnati.  I  again 
ask,  if  slavery  has  been  the  cause,  why  has  it 
not  produced  this  effect  elsewhere?  But  Ken- 
tuck}' has  been  no  laggard  in  population. 

In  1790,  when  the  first  census  of  the  United 
States  was  taken,  there  were  eight  free  states 
having  a  larger  population  than  Kentucky,  one, 
Rhode  Island,  having  a  little  less.  There  are 
now  but  two  of  these  old  states  which  have  so 
large  a  population  as  Kentucky.  These  are 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania. 

The  gentleman  pointed  to  Ohio  as  a  wilder- 


915 


n^ss  sixty  years  affo,  while  Kentucky  had  60,000 

Seople,  and  now  Ohio  is  in  advance.  In  1790 
[assachusetts  had  a  population  of  370,000,  and 
now  Kentucky  has  more  than  she.  Kentucky 
started  in  this  race  with  eight  free  states  in  ad- 
vance, but  slie  has  passed  six  of  them,  two  only 
are  ahead  of  her. 

I  maintain  there  are  other  causes  which  pre- 
vent the  settlement  of  Kentucky.  The  pre- 
mium offered  to  immigration  west,  and  the  diffi- 
culties in  our  land  titles,  have  been  the  great 
causes  which  have  retarded  our  population. 

But  it  has  been  said,  that  slavery  has  retarded 
our  internal  improvements.  Sir,  if  Kentucky 
had  been  as  prodigal  as  Ohio,  we  should  not 
have  been  behind  her  in  internal  improvements. 
Kentucky  has  a  debt  of  between  four  and  five 
millions,  and  Ohio  has  one  of  twenty  millions. 
I  ask  those  who  have  been  opposed  to  internal 
improvements,  if  they  can  find  no  cause  of  re- 
joicing in  that  fact?  Had  we  chosen  to  go  into 
debt  to  that  extent,  we  too  could  have  had  our 
railroads  and  canals.  But  is  it  better  to  have 
gone  into  debt  as  she  did,  or  to  have  progressed 
upon  a  firmer  foundation?  What  would  be  the 
situation  of  a  farmer  who  would  tear  down  an 
old,  but  comfortable  house,  and  borrow  money 
to  pay  for  the  erection  of  a  more  showy  edifice 
to  adorn  and  embellish  his  possessions,  and  in 
doing  so  deprive  himself,  by  the  payment  of  in- 
terest, of  the  means  of  carrying  on  his  farm, 
having  spent  all  on  his  dwelling?  Would  it  not 
have  been  better  to  reside  in  the  old  fashioned, 
but  comfortable  dwelling  until  he  had  the  means 
to  erect  a  new  one,  than  to  subject  himself  to  the 
payment  of  the  interest  upon  the  money  borrow- 
ed to  erect  the  new  house? 

Much  has  been  said  about  taxation  here.  In 
Oliio  the  average  tax  for  the  last  five  years,  has 
been  fifty-five  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars.  We 
have  got  ours  up  to  nineteen  cents,  which  we 
think  is  an  enormous  sum,  while  Ohio  is  taxed 
nearly  three  times  as  high  as  Kentucky,  more 
than  half  of  one  per  cent,  to  maintain  her  sys- 
tem. 

But  my  friend  from  Knox  said  slavery  had 
prevented  education,  and  he  alluded  to  the  nu- 
merous free  schools  in  the  free  states,  and  their 
want  in  Kentucky.  In  answer  to  that  argument, 
permit  me  to  say,  if  Ohio  was  wholly  indebted 
to  her  own  resources  for  her  prosperity  witli  re- 

fard  to  schools,  she  would  have  been  behind 
[entucky.  Where  did  she  derive  her  means? 
Not  from  her  own,  but  from  external  sources. 
The  general  government  treated  Ohio  as  its  own, 
and  Kentucky  as  a  step-child,  and  we  could  not 
be  expected  to  keep  pace  with  her.  What  has 
the  general  government  done  for  Kentucky?  The 
gentleman  will  find  that  a  portion  of  the  pros- 
perity of  Ohio  is  owing  to  the  liberality  of  Vir- 
§inia,  that  mother  of  states,  when  she  surren- 
ered  her  title  to  such  a  domain  as  no  other 
state  ever  surrendered.  This  is  now  thrown  out 
as  a  matter  of  reproach  to  Kentucky  by  one  of 
her  own  sons,  that  she  has  not  kept  pace  with 
Ohio.  Let  me  "give  the  sources  of  the  means 
which  Ohio  has  enjoyed. 

These  are:  the  Virginia  military  school  fund, 
the  United  States  military  school  fund,  the  great 
western  reserve  school  fund,  school  sections 
number   sixteen,  ministerial    sections  number 


twenty-nine,  the  Moravian  school  fund,  given 
by  the  Moravian  society.  In  addition  to  that, 
Ohio  received  numerous  donations  of  land  from 
the  general  government;  at  one  time  500,000 
acres  of  land,  and  $2,000,000  of  the  surplus  rev- 
enue. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  If  the  gentleman  will  al- 
low me  to  explain,  I  will  state  that  I  said  there 
was  a  diffierence  between  the  number  of  children 
in  schools  in  Ohio  and  Kentucky,  but  the  great- 
est difference  was  between  Massachusetts  and 
Kentucky  in  proportion  to  the  population.  The 
gentleman  has  gone  on  to  show  that  Ohio  has 
had  extraneous  aid.  I  would  be  glad  to  have 
him  state  what  extraneous  aid  Massachusetts 
has  had,  if  any. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  have  not  been  able  to 
obtain  documents  with  relation  to  that  point. 
But  does  the  gentlemen  expect  a  new  state  like 
Kentucky,  unaided,  to  keep  pace  -^ith  the  older 
states  in  these  respects.  Why  does  he  take  an 
old  state,  densely  populated,  and  with  means 
and  resources  which  a  new  state  cannot  have 
and  compare  them?  I  have  chosen  Ohio,  be- 
cause the  comparison  would  be  more  just,  as  the 
two  states  are  nearly  of  the  same  age  and  of  the 
same  size,  the  same  climate,  and  similar  produc- 
tions; the  only  difference  being  the  institution 
of  slavery  in  Kentucky,  and  not  in  Ohio.  As  I 
before  said,  the  general  government  has  acted  to- 
ward the  younger  states  the  part  of  a  step-father; 
whilst  prodigal  toward  the  younger  portion  of 
the  family,  we  have  been  left  to  struggle  for  our- 
selves. In  addition  to  the  benefits  I  have  nam- 
ed as  given  to  Ohio,  look  to  the  donations  given, 
the  colleges  and  academies  founded,  and  the  aid 
to  internal  improvements.  Has  Kentucky  de- 
rived any  aid  from  the  general  government,  save 
the  pittance  from  the  surplus  revenue?  No,  not 
one  farthing. 

I  have  adduced  these  arguments  to  show  that 
there  are  other  reasons  besides  slavery,  which 
may  have  produced  this  effect.  In  addition  to 
those  advantages  named,  which  Ohio  has  derived 
from  the  general  government,  there  is  three  per 
cent,  on  the  sale  of  public  lands  in  Ohio,  which 
is  given  for  educational  purposes  and  internal 
improvement.  All  togetner,  as  well  as  I  can 
estimate  it,  the  sum  received  by  Ohio,  amounts 
in  land  and  money  together,  to  some  ten  mil- 
lions of  dollars.  Had  Kentucky  received  one 
tythe  of  these  benefits,  had  the  difficulties  of 
our  land  titles  not  existed,  I  imagine,  the  gentle- 
man could  have  had  no  cause  to  reproach  his  na- 
tive state  with  her  laggard  movements.  But 
the  arguments  which  struck  me  as  singular,  were 
that  at  the  first  commencement  of  his  arguments 
he  said  slavery  retarded  population,  and  before 
he  closed,  he  alluded  to  tne  time  when  popula- 
tion would  be  so  dense  that  we  would  nave  to 
force  the  negroes  off  or  give  up  the  state  to  them. 
If  slavery  retards  this  evil  day,  let  us  keep  it 
up. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  The  gentleman  did  not 
understand  me.  I  said  I  did  not  think  the 
white  population  would  increase  in  Kentucky, 
but  the  black  population  would,  and  as  they  in- 
crease, they  would  force  away  the  poor  whites, 
and  the  lands  would  come  into  the  possession  of 
the  rich. 
Mr.  MERIWETHER.    I  stand  corrected  un- 


916:^ 


1«M  I  misunderstand  the  gentleman  again.  But 
now  I  will  answer  his  present  argument,  and 
tell  him  that  the  white  population  has  for  the 
last  ten  years  been  increasing  faster  than  the 
black,  ana  therefore,  the  black  population  never 
can  outnumber  the  white. 

It  has  been  said  on  more  than  one  occasion, 
that  slavery  retards  our  wealth.  In  answer  to 
this,  permit  me  to  make  a  few  remarks.  I  re- 
collect to  have  seen  in  the  report  of  the  com- 
missioner of  patents  for  1847,  and  a  comparison 
between  the  distributive  wealth  of  two  slave 
states,  and  two  free  states.  The  commissioner 
being  a  northern  man  with  northern  feelings  in- 
stituted the  comparison,  and  did  not  select  from 
the  slave  states  tnose  which  would  have  made 
the  most  favorable  comparison,  perhaps.  He 
took  Kentucky  and  Maryland.  Maryland  is 
not  one  of  the  most  prosperous  slave  states.  He 
took  New  York,  and  I  think,  Pennsylvania,  cer- 
tainly not  the  least  prosperous  of  the  free  states. 
Taking  the  wealth  of  the  two  last  and  dividing 
it  by  the  amount  of  the  population,  each  indi- 
vidual in  those  states  would  have  $269  69  per 
head.  Taking  Kentucky  and  Maryland  and 
dividing  the  wealth  by  the  number,  as  before, 
and  each  person  will  have  over  $400. 

Upon  this  point  I  have  gone  into  some  calcul- 
ations myself.  I  have  taken  Ohio,  as  certainly 
not  the  least  prosperous  of  the  free  states,  and  I 
find  if  you  take  the  taxable  property  of  Ohio — 
and  they  tax  as  great  a  variety  of  property  as  we 
do — and  divide  by  the  population,  and  each  per- 
son will  receive  $270.  Take  the  property  of 
Kentucky,  and  divide  by  the  whole  population, 
including  slaves,  and  each  individual  will  have 
$349,  making  a  difference  of  $79  for  each  person, 
in  favor  of  Kentucky.  This  is  including  the 
value  of  the  slaves  as  property  and  enumerating 
them  as  persons.  Excluding  them  as  property 
at  an  aggregate  of  $60,000,000,  and  excluding 
them  as  persons  and  then  each  person  will  have 
$350.  Then  count  them  as  property  and  ex- 
clude them  in  the  distribution,  and  each  person 
will  receive  $454,  making  a  difference  in  favor 
of  Kentucky  of  $180  per  head. 

I  wish  it  borne  in  mind  that  every  figure,  and 
every  extract  I  shall  quote,  unless  otherwise 
stated,  will  be  from  official  documents.  I  find 
some  statistics  in  a  paper  published  in  Cincin- 
nati, whose  editor  cannot  be  supposed  to  be 
partial  to  Kentucky,  which  show  the  products 
of  different  states  of  the  Union  per  head.  I 
have  taken  and  separated  the  slave  from  the  free 
states,  and  I  find  the  actual  produce  of  labor  in 
the  slave  states,  is  fifty  cents  greater  than  in  the 
free  states.  This  is  a  small  amount  in  a  single 
cane,  but  in  the  aggregate  it  is  about  four  mil- 
lions of  dollars.  1  have  taken  for  a  comparison 
Ohio  and  Kentucky,  similar  in  productions  and 
climate,  but  in  point  of  soil  Ohio  has  the  ad- 
vantage. The  produce  of  labor  per  head  for 
every  soul  in  Ohio,  is  set  down  at  $42.  In  Ken- 
tucky it  is  $49,  giving  us  an  excess  of  $7  per 
head.  The  aggregate  produce  of  labor  in  Ken- 
tucky, at  this  rate,  is  $3,000,000  more  than  in 
Ohio.  I  have  institiited  a  comparison  between 
Tennessee  and  Indiana,  and  I  find  the  compari- 
son is  still  more  favorable  toward  the  slave 
states.  Then  I  have  taken  them  jointly,  Ken- 
tucky and  Tennessee  on  one  side,  and  Indiana 


and  Ohio  on  the  other;  and  taking  the  two,  the 
difference  is  about  eleven  millions  of  dollars  in 
favor  of  the  slave  states. 

But  let  us  go  to  the  auditor's  report  in  relation 
to  two  states.  I  made  some  remarks  in  the  early 
part  of  the  session  on  this  subject,  and  I  wish 
now  to  be  precise.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind 
that  Ohio  has  double  the  population  of  Ken- 
tucky. She  should  produce  double  the  amount 
of  wealth  wliich  Kentucky  produces,  yet  I  find 
that  the  increased  value  of  taxable  property 
within  the  last  year  has  been  $18,131,545  in 
Kentucky.  Now"  Ohio  ought,  at  the  same  ratio, 
to  have  increased  her  taxable  property  $36,000,- 
000,  in  round  numbers;  but  so  far  from  it,  the 
state  of  Ohio,  with  double  the  population,  and 
double  the  hands  to  labor  of  Kentucky,  has  only 
increased  $10,304,831.  Kentucky  has  increased 
$9,826,714  over  Ohio.  Then  take  Indiana,  hav- 
ing about  the  same  population,  and  about  the 
same  number  of  hands  to  produce  as  Kentucky, 
how  much  has  her  wealth  increased?  Only  $4,- 
351,831.  Kentucky  with  one  third  of  the  popu- 
lation and  one  third  of  the  hands  to  labor  that 
Indiana  and  Ohio,  has  increased  her  wealth  to 
the  amount  of  $5,474,883  more  than  both  of 
these  states  together.  I  have  been  unable  to  get 
an  official  statement  respecting  Illinois,  but  I 
am  informed  that  her  increase  is  a  little  over 
$4,000,000.  If  that  be  correct,  all  three  of  these 
states,  have  not  increased  their  wealth  as  much 
as  Kentucky,  with  all  the  evils  within  her  bor- 
ders to  which  the  gentleman  has  alluded. 

It  has  been  said  that  slavery  has  been  ruinous 
to  our  morals. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  As  tlie  argument  I  adduced 
may  be  misunderstood,  I  would  ask  how  is  it, 
if  Kentucky  increases  her  annual  wealth  faster 
than  all  these  states,  that  Ohio,  being  a  much 
younger  state  than  Kentucky,  has  now  more  than 
double  her  wealth? 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Wealth  has  increased 
in  this  way  in  Ohio.  Heretofore,  as  congress 
owned  and  controlled  land  there,  it  was  not  val- 
ued at  all  till  five  years  after  their  entry.  It  has 
since  come  into  the  estimate,  and  is  valued.  Now 
the  whole  land  is  valued,  which  was  not  the 
fact  at  first.  I  take  the  present  time,  because 
the  land  is  now  principally  occupied  in  both 
states. 

I  have  been  at  some  trouble  to  collect  some 
statistics  on  the  subject  of  crime  to  show  the  ef- 
fect of  slavery  on  the  morals.  I  find  that  Ohio 
has  thirty  seven  per  cent,  more  convicts  in  her 
penitentiary  than  Kentucky.  Illinois  has  nine 
per  cent,  more;  Michigan  has  ninety  three  per 
cent,  more,  and  New  York  ninety  nine  per  cent, 
more.     The  only  free  state  from  which  I  could 

fet  a  return  which  has  less  than  Kentucky  is 
ndiana;  and  she  has  I  think  eleven  per  cent, 
less,  in  proportion  to  population,  than  Ken- 
tucky. 

I  have  collected  some  statistics  also  with 
respect  to  pauperism.  That  has  been  alluded 
to  to-day.  My  gleanings  upon  this  point  have 
been  only  on  a  small  scale,  for  but  few  states 
keep  statistics  on  that  subject.  In  Kentucky 
we  have  nothing  of  that  sort.  I  have  taken 
Shelby  county  as  an  average  county.  She  has 
two  representatives,  and  not  quite  the  ratio  of 
population  for  two.    I  find  from  information, 


917 


derived  from  the  delegates  from  that  county 
in  thia  hall,  that  on  that  basis  the  paupers 
in  Kentucky  are  about  400.  I  have  taken  the 
counties  of  Jefferson,  Bullitt,  and  Shelbv,  and 
added  them  together,  and  on  the  basis  derived 
from  these,  the  -whole  number  in  the  state  will 
be  about  1000.  How  is  it  in  Massachusetts? 
Last  year  there  were  in  Massachusetts  28,510 
paupers.  For  these  she  had  to  erect  174  alms 
nouses,  and  tax  the  people  for  their  erection  to 
the  amount  of  $1,056,000,  whilst  the  annual 
cost  of  their  maintenance  was  $372,749  75,  a 
sura  nearly  equal  to  the  "whole  expense  of  the 
government  of  Kentucky. 

Now,  if  I  were  to  argue  as  my  friend  from 
Knox  has  done,  in  saying  that  because  slavery 
exists  in  Kentucky,  therefore  population  has 
been  prevented,  if  it  is  prevented  at  all,  might  I 
not  say  that  the  absence  of  slavery  is  the  cause 
of  the  pauperism  in  Massachusetts? 

But  I  think  I  can  show  that  where  emancipa- 
tion has  taken  place,  it  has  not  produced  the 
good  effects  expected  from  it.  I  will  read  an 
extract  or  two  from  a  lecture  delivered  in  the 
hall  of  the  house  of  representatives  in  Ohio,  by 
David  Christy,  an  agent  of  the  American  col- 
onization jsociety — a  resident  of  the  state  of 
Ohio,  with  all  his  feelings  in  favor  of  emancipa- 
tion, truth  has  forced  him  to  acknowledge  what 
I  shall  read: 

"These  results  of  emancipation  in  the  north- 
em  states  were  watched  with  great  interest  by 
the  philanthropic   citizens   of  the  slave  states. 
The  liberation  of  the  slaves   in  the   free  states 
had  fallen  so  far  short  of  securing  the  amount  of 
good  anticipated,  that  the  friends  of  the  color- 
ed man  became  less  urgent  and  zealous  in  their 
efforts  to  secure  further  legislative  action." 
Well  he  goes  on  and  says  that  from 
"1790  to  1800  emancipations  were       37,042 
1800  to  1810  emancipations  were         56,414 
1810  to  1820  emancipations  were         14,471 
1820  to  1830  emancipations  were         33,772 

1830  to  1840  emancipations  were 

"From  1790  to  1810  some  of  the  most  power- 
ful minds  in  the  nation  were  directed  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  enormous  evils  of  slavery,  and 
the  effects  of  their  labors  are  exhibited  in  the 
number  of  emancipations  made  during  that  pe- 
riod. The  decline  of  emancipations  after  1810, 
we  believe  to  be  due  to  the  cause  assigned  above 
— the  little  benefit,  apparently,  which  had  re- 
sulted from  the  liberation  of  the  slaves,  and  the 
consequent  relaxation  of  effort  by  the  friends 
of  emancipation." 

Now,  I  will  give  the  remarks  of  the  same  au- 
thor as  to  the  effects  in  England. 

"But  the  investigations  which  had  led  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  enormities  of  the  slave  trade, 
necessarily  exhibited  the  evils  of  slavery  itself. 
Public  opinion  decreed  the  annihilation  of  both, 
and  the  British  government  had  no  other  alterna- 
tive but  to  comply.  The  means  to  wliicli  she  re- 
sorted for  the  suppres-sion  of  the  slave  trade,  and 
their  failure  hitherto,  have  been  already  noticed. 
The  measures  adopted  for  the  emancipation  of 
her  West  India  slaves,  have  resulted  still  more 
unfavorably  to  her  interests,  than  those  for  the 
extinction  of  the  slave  trade. 

"It  was  considered  absolutely  necessary  to 
the  prosperity  of  England,  that  she  should  re- 


gain the  advantageous  position  which  she  had 
occupied,  in  being  the  chief  producer  of  tropical 
commodities.  But  to  effect  this,  it  was  necessa- 
ry that  she  should  be  able  to  double  the  exports 
from  her  own  islands,  and  greatly  diminish 
those  of  her  rivals.  This  could  be  accomplished 
only  by  an  increase  of  laborers  from  abroad,  or 
by  stimulating  those  on  the  islands  to  double 
activity  in  their  work.  An  increase  of  laborers 
from  abroad  could  only  be  secured  by  a  resort  to- 
the  slave  trade,  which  was  impossible;  or  to  vol-  » 
untary  immigration,  from  other  countries  to 
the  islands,  which  was  improbable.  The 
only  remaining  alternative  was  to  render  the  la- 
bor already  in  the  islands  more  productive.  This 
could  not  "be  done  by  the  whip,  as  it  had  alreadv 
expended  its  force,  and  could  not  afford  the  re- 
lief demanded.  This  position  of  affairs  made 
the  government  willing  to  listen  to  the  appeals 
of  the  friends  of  West  India  emancipation.  They 
bad  long  argued  that  free  labor  was  cheaper  than 
slave  labor — that  one  freeman,  under  the  stimulus 
of  wages,  would  do  twice  the  icork  of  a  slave,  com- 
pelled to  industry  by  the  whip — that  the  govern-  ! 
raent,  by  immediate  emancipation,  could  demon-^t 
strate  the  truth  of  this  proposition,  and  thus  fur- 
nish a  powerful  argument  against  slavery — that 
the  world  should  be  convinced  that  the  employ- 
ment of  slave  labor  is  a  great  economic  error — and 
that  this  truth,  once  believed,  the  abolition  of 
slavery  would  everywhere  take  place,  and  the 
demand  for  slaves  being  thus  ciestroyed,  tlie 
slave  trade  must  cease. 

"Parliament,  yielding  to  these  arguments, 
passed  her  West  India  emancipation  act,  1833. 
with  certain  restrictions,  by  which  the  liberated 
slaves  were  to  be  held  by 'their  old  masters  as 
apprentices,  partly  until  August  1.  1838,  and 
partly  until  August  1,  1840.  This  apprentice- 
ship system,  however,  being  productive  of  great- 
er cruelties  than  even  slaverv,  the  legislative 
councils  of  the  islands,  coerced^  by  public  senti- 
ment in  England,  were  forced  to  precipitate  the 
final  emancipation  of  the  slaves,  and  on  August 
1,  1838,  they  were  declared  free.  This  act  at 
once  brought  on  the  crisis  in  the  experiment. 
The  results  in  the  following  official  table,  taken 
from  the  Westminster  Review,  1844: 


1  Average  of  1831,1  Average  of  1835, 
(     1832,  1833.             1836, 1837. 
SUGAR  KXFORTKDi    Three  years  of)    Three  -/ears  of 
1     slavery                  appr'ticesliip. 

From  SI.  Vincent,    -|    23,40O,nO0  lbs.      i.2,500,0l)0  lbs. 
From  Trinidad,         -              ]8,9'23  tons           18,255  tons 
From  Jamaica,         -)           86.080  iihd.           O.J,960  hhd. 
From  total  W.  Indies.:      .3,841,1.53  cwt      3.477,592  cwt. 

[Average  of  1839, 

SUGAR  EXPORTED.               :    l^^"''^!^'     „, 
1    Three  years  of 

fieedoni, 

From  St.  Vincent,       -        .                -    j  14,100,000  ibs. 
FroraTrinidad,            •        .        .        -    :         14,828  tons. 
From  Jamaica,             .....         :M,415hhd. 
From  total  West  Indies,     -        -        -   j    2.396,784  cwt.  i 

"This  immense  and  unexpected  reduction  of 
West  India  products  under  the  system  of  free- 
dom was  the  cause  of  great  alarm.  The  experi- 
ment which  was  to  prove  the  superiority  of  free 
labor  over  that  of  slave   labor  had  failed.     The 


91S 


hope  of  doubling  the  exports  by  that  means  ^rtfa 
blasted.  Five  hundred  millions  dollars  of  British 
capital,  invested  in  the  islands,  says  McQueen, 
was  on  the  brink  of  destruction,  for  want  of  la- 
borers to  make  it  available.  The  English  gov- 
ernment found  her  commerce  greatly  lessened, 
and  her  home  supply  of  tropical  products  falling 
below  the  actual  wants  of  her  own  people.  This 
diminution  rendered  her  unable  to  furnish  any 
surplus  for  the  markets  of  those  of  her  colonies, 
and  her  countries  which  she  formerly  supplied. 
These  results  at  once  extended  the  market  for  slave 
grown  products,  and  gave  a  new  impulse  to  the  slave 
trade. 

"The  government  and  its  advisers  now  found 
themselves  in  the  mortifying  position  of  having 
blundered  miserably  in  their  emancipation 
scheme,  and  of  having  landed  themselves  in  a 
<lilemma  of  singular  perplexity." 

Here  is  evidence  sufficient  to  establish  the 
propof-ition  with  which  I  set  out,  "  that  eman-' 
cipation  has  not,  either  in  England  or  our  north- 
ern states,  produced  the  good  results  expected 
from  it."  Why  need  we  look  for  better  or  other 
results  here  in  our  own  state? 

By  a  reference  to  the  table  which  I  have,  it 
will  be  found  that  the  products  of  these  islands 
were  reduced  more  than  half,  and  they  still  re- 
main so.  I  will  read  an  extract  from  a  paper 
published  at  Barbadoes  last  year.  This  de- 
scribes their  condition  at  this  time.  This  island 
is  said  to  be  the  most  fruitful  of  all  the  West 
India  Islands,  so  much  so  by  way  of  ditiuction, 
they  call  it  Little  Britain  : 

"Here  plenty  of  laborers  can  be  employed  for 
field  labor  at  fifteen  cents  per  day.  They  have 
now  been  free  twelve  years,  and  they  find  that 
the  only  way  to  get  a  living  is  to  work.  Even 
here  the  evidences  of  decay  and  coming  ruin  are 
conspicuous.  One  half  of  the  estates  In  the 
island  are  in  the  hands  of  the  provost  marshal, 
who,  as  a  sheriff,  proceeds  to  sell  them  on  judg- 
ment to  pay  creditors." 

One  half  the  estates  in  the  hands  of  the  sheriff, 
and,  under  execution,  because  of  emancipation, 
and  that  too  when  laborers  can  be  employed  at 
fifteen  cents  per  day.  Is  that  the  state  of  things 
you  wish  to  see  m  Kentucky— labor  at  fifteen 
cents  a  day  and  one  half  the  estates  in  the  hands 
of  the  sheriff? 

I  will  read  an  article  from  the  London  Times, 
further  descriptive  of  the  effects  which  emanci- 
pation has  Iiad  upon  England  : 

"  The  will  of  tlie  people  of  England  and  the 
resources  of  the  British  nation  liave  been  applied, 
with  absolute  authority  and  ungrudging  munifi- 
cence, to  the  extinction  of  slavery  in  the  British 
dominions.  The  northern  states  of  America 
have  no  such  power  of  altering  the  institutions, 
and  the  tenures  of  property  in  the  slaveholding 
states  of  the  Union :  congress  itself  has  no  such 
power;  but  if  it  had,  and,  besides  the  power,  if 
It  liad  the  will  and  the  means  to  carry  a  general 
measure  of  abolition,  we  are  constrained  to  admit 
that  the  experiment  made  by  the  British  gowrmnent, 
and  the  state  in  which  the  British  West  Indies  are 
now  placed  by  it,  would  be  invoked  by  the  most  un- 
answerable argument  against  such  a  scheme." 

If  congress  (and  the  same  argument  will  apply 
to  a  state,)  had  the  power  to  abolish  slavery,  we 
are  constrained  to  admit,  (says  this  organ  of 


England,)  that  the  experiment  made  by  us  would 
furnish  the  most  unanswerable  argument  against 
such  a  scheme — that  is,  the  scheme  of  emanci- 
pation. 

I  will  read  one  more  short  extract  froa  the  ad- 
dress before  quoted  from,  and  then  conclude. 
Speaking  of  the  effects  of  emancipation  in  Eng- 
land, the  writer  says  : 

"While  therefore  the  ease,  comfort,  and  wel- 
fare of  the  colored  man  was  secured,  the  inter- 
ests of  the  planters  were  almost  ruined  by  eman- 
cipation, and  the  influence  and  power  of  Eng- 
land put  in  jeopardy."  • 

Then,  if  we  emancipate  the  slaves  here,'will  it 
not  produce  the  same  result?  Although  it  may 
secure  to  the  slave  ease  and  comfort,  may  we  not 
expect  that,  as  in  the  British  islands,  tne  white 
farmer  will  be  ruined,  and  the  influence  and 
power  of  Kentucky  destroyed?  If  this  effect 
was  produced  by  this  cause  there,  why  should  it 
not  produce  the  same  effect  here?  If  England 
was  by  it  brought  to  the  brink  of  ruin,  why 
may  we  not  also?  Sir,  these  are  the  effects  of 
emancipation  in  other  countries.  Need  I  ask, 
are  we  to  expect  a  different  result  here  if  it  is 
resorted  to?  England  was  shaken  to  its  foun- 
dation. The  gentleman,  from  whose  address 
I  have  quoted,  says,  that  in  the  northern 
states  they  have  not  realized  their  anticipations. 
Shall  we  hope  they  will  realize  our  expectations 
from  such  a  procedure?  Is  emancipation  practi- 
cable? Is  there  a  man  here  who  is  willing  to  see 
emancipation  without  colonization?  Is  that  prac- 
ticable? They  point  to  New  York  and  some 
other  states.  But  did  either  of  those  states  that 
have  emancipated  their  slaves  colonize  them? 
New  York,  with  all  her  power  and  wealth,  could 
not  colonize  twenty  thousand.  Pennsylvania 
had  less  than  fifteen  thousand,  and  could  not 
colonize  them.  Why  is  it  expected  then  that 
Kentucky  can  colonize  two  hundred  thousand? 

Seven  states  of  this  union  have  abolished 
slaveiy.  These  states  had  less  than  fifty  thou- 
sand slaves,  and  they  had  upwards  of  two  mil- 
lions of  white  population.  But  they,  with  all 
their  wealth  ana  power,  could  not  colonize  this 
small  number.  I  again  repeat,  how,  then,  is 
Kentucky  to  colonize  two  hundred  thousand? 
England,  with  an  empire  on  which  it  is  said  the 
sun  never  sets — so  that  while  it  is  broad  noon 
day  in  one  portion  it  is  pitcliy  midnight  in  an- 
other— though  she  may  emancipate  her  slaves, 
cannot  colonize  them.  France,  a  nation  that 
could  whip  all  Europe  combined,  dare  not  un- 
dertake it.  And  can  we  do  it?  I  know,  whatev- 
er man  can  do,  Kentuckians  can  do;  but  he  who 
accomplishes  tliis,  is  either  more  or  less  than 
man.  It  is  not  within  the  grasp  of  man  to  do 
it. 

My  friend  from  Knox  referred  to  the  opinions 
of  Mr.  Madison  and  others.  Would  lie  have  us 
follow  the  example  of  Mr.  Madison  in  all  things? 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  would,  so  far  as  he  is 
right. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Then,  if  he  be  wrong, 
his  example  or  opinion  is  worth  nothing.  Do 
we  not  find  that  Mr.  Madison  and  General  Wash- 
ington both  advocated  a  power  in  tlie  President 
of  the  United  States  to  veto  a  bill  passed  by  con- 
gress, unless  pa-ssed  by  a  majority  of  three- 
fourths  of  each   house  of  congress?    And  Mr. 


919 


Madison  advocated  the  right  of  the  federal  gov- 
ernment to  veto  the  laws  passed  by  state  legis- 
latures. Will  the  gentleman  travel  with  him 
thus  far?  These  great  men  often  committed 
great  errors,  ily  friend  alluded  to  Mr.  Monroe, 
as  well  as  Mr.  Madison.  These  gentlemen  were 
members  of  the  convention  which  made  a  con- 
stitution for  Virginia,  recently.  Can  the  gentle- 
man find  one  proposition  which  these  gentlemen 
offered  in  that  convention,  for  the  emancipation 
of  the  slaves?  They  refrained  from  making 
such  a  proposition,  and  it  is,  therefore,  fair  to 
presume  they  entertained  the  idea  that  I  do  : 
that  it  is  impracticable.  I  have  as  great  a  ven- 
eration for  the  memories  of  these  great  men  as 
any  gentleman  can,  or  ought  to  have;  yet  I  can- 
not follow  them  when  in  error,  as  I  believe. 

My  friend  referred  to  the  amount  of  manufac- 
tures in  the  northern  states,  and  inferred  that  all 
these  articles  were  produced  in  those  states.  If 
he  had  carried  his  investigation  a  little  further, 
he  would  have  found  that  the  manufacturers  de- 
pended on  the  slave  states  for  a  large  share  of 
the  raw  material.  Where  does  their  cotton  come 
from?  They  get  it  from  the  south,  and  it,  when 
they  return  it,  goes  as  so  much  of  their  manufac- 
ture. Take  out  the  expense  of  the  cotton, 
hemp,  and  tobacco  which  they  get  from  the  south, 
and  you  will  then  reduce  the  amount  about  three- 
fourths. 

My  friend  also  alludes  to  the  exports  from 
the  city  of  New  York,  as  being  greater  than  all 
the  exports  of  the  southern  states.  Does  my 
friend  not  know  that  about  one-third  of  the  ex- 
ports from  New  York  are  sent  there  from  other 
states? 

Mr,  WOODSON.  I  did  not  say  that  the  ex- 
ports from  New  York  were  greater  than  from  all 
the  southern  states.  I  said,  I  believe,  that  all 
the  tobacco,  rice,  and  cotton  from  the  south  was 
not  equal  to  the  exports  from  New  York. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  will  not  make  a 
question  with  the  gentleman,  as  to  what  his 
position  was.  He  may  be  correct.  But  were 
all  these  articles  produced  in  New  York.  One- 
third  of  the  cotton  raised  in  Louisiana  is  ship- 
ped to  foreign  ports  from  New  York; — our  corn 
and  hemp  goes  from  New  York.  Then,  though 
her  exports  are  so  great,  the  question  is,  does 
she  produce  the  articles  exported  herself? 

Mr.  WOODSON.  I  do  not  wish  to  interrupt 
the  gentleman. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  It  will  give  me  pleas- 
ure to  receive  any  information. 

Mr.  WOODSON.  It  is  true  that  many  arti- 
cles are  exported  from  New  York  which  are  sent 
from  the  Mississippi  valley.  But  all  these  arti- 
cles are  valued  before  they  are  sent.  This  shows 
that  there  is  not  an  equal  amount  produced  in 
the  southern  states. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  I  imagine  my  friend 
is  in  error.  There  is  no  value  put  on  them  till 
they  leave  the  United  States.  Is  there  any  valu- 
ation put  on  them  at  Louisville  or  New  Orleans? 
When  a  vessel  leaves  for  a  foreign  port,  then  a 
valuation  is  taken,  but  not  when  engaged  in  the 
coasting  trade.  There  are  no  statistics  which 
will  give  the  amount  of  the  coasting  trade.  But 
if  it  is  otherwise,  and  you  value  these  articles 
at  New  Orleans,  and  then  again  when  re-shipped 


from  New  York,  will  not  this  process  tend  to 
swell  the  exports  from  the  latter  city? 

My  friend  concluded  his  speech' with  a  little 
anecdote.  If  he  had  told  the  whole,  1  would 
not  have  noticed  it.  He  compared  the  slave- 
holders to  a  boy  who  was  late  at  school,  and  on 
being  questioned  as  to  the  reason,  said  that  it 
was  so  slippery  that  he  went  two  steps  back,  to 
one  forward,  and  my  friend  concluded  we  were 
sliding  back  in  the  same  way.  Now,  if  I  recol- 
lect rightly,  the  school-master  inquired  of  the 
boy  how  he  finally  got  there,  and  he  told  him 
that  he  turned  round  and  went  backwards.  If 
my  friend  will  just  turn  right  around,  I  think  he 
will  come  to  the  right  position  on  this  subject. 
When  the  little  boy  to  whom  he  alluded  found 
that  he  never  would  get  to  school  if  he  contin- 
ued to  travel  as  he  had  done,  he  at  once  turned 
about  and  succeeded.  Let  the  gentleman,  and  all 
who  travel  with  him,  follow  the  boy's  example, 
retrace  their  steps,  witdraw  all  which  has  been 
said  in  disparagement  of  the  institutions  of  their 
own  state,  and  laudatory  of  others,  and  then, 
and  not  till  then,  will  they  arrive  at  the  goal  of 
truth,  and  their  country's  welfare. 

Mr.  A.  K.  M  ARSAALL.  I  move  the  follow- 
ing as  a  substitute  for  the  first  section: 

"  The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves  with- 
out the  consent  of  their  owners.  They  shall 
pa.ss  laws  to  permit  the  owners  of  slaves  to 
emancipate  them,  saving  the  rights  of  creditors, 
and  providing  for  their  permanent  removal  from 
this  commonwealth;  they  shall  pass  laws  to  pre- 
vent slaves  being  brought  into  this  state  as  mer- 
chandise: they  shall  have  no  power  to  prevent 
immigrants  to  this  state  from  bringing  with  them 
such  persons  as  are  deemed  slaves  by  the  laws 
of  any  one  of  the  L^nited  States,  or  to  prevent 
citizens  of  this  state  from  bringing  in  such  as 
are  obtained  by  marriage,  gift,  inheritance,  or  de- 
vise, so  long  as  any  person  of  the  same  age  or 
description,  shall  be  continued  in  slavery  by  the 
laws  of  this  state;  and  they  shall  have  full  pow- 
er to  pass  such  laws  as  may  be  necessary  to  oblige 
the  owners  of  slaves  to  treat  them  with  human- 
ity, to  provide  for  them  necessary  clothing  and 
provisions,  to  abstain  from  all  injuries  to  them — 
extending  to  life  or  limb — and  in  case  of  their 
neglect  or  refusal  to  comply  with  the  direction 
of  such  laws,  to  have  such  slave  or  slaves  sold 
for  the  benefit  of  their  owner  or  owners." 

It  will  be  obser\-ed  that  the  substitute  I  have 
offered  varies  very  slightly  from  the  provision  in 
the  present  constitution  in  relation  to  slavery. 
Gentlemen  will  remark  that  I  have  there  stric- 
ken out  the  involuntary  feature  of  it.  If  my 
proposition  should  be  adopted,  it  will  not  per- 
mit the  emancipation  of  slaves  in  Kentucky  even 
by  the  payment  of  their  value  first  to  the  owner. 
If  we  have  been  commanded  to  do  any  thing  by 
our  constituents — and  I  have  understood  the 
wants  of  the  people  in  regard  to  the  framing  of 
a  constitution — it  is,  that  on  the  subject  of  slave- 
ry, we  should  so  guard  that  property  that  neith- 
er in  nor  under  the  constitution  there  could  be 
devised  anv  plan  of  immediate  or  gradual  eman- 
cipation. I  have  no  disposition  to  argue  the 
question  of  slavery  even  if  I  felt  the  propriety 
of  doing  so.  It  seems  to  me  useless  to  argue  it. 
It  cannot  do  any  good,  and  public  sentiment  haa 


920 


shown  there  is  every  disposition  to  adhere  to 
slavery.  There  can  be  no  legal  mode  of  eman- 
cipating slaves.  It  is  absolutely  necessary  that 
■we  should  remove  the  power  out  of  the  hands  of 
the  legislature,  by  which  they  can  emancipate 
slaves  by  payment.  And  this  telling  me  it  never 
•will  be  done,  amounts  to  nothing  in  mv  mind. 
We  know  what  may  be  done  by  those  who  have 
the  power.  Under  the  first  section  of  the  old 
constitution,  a  system  of  emancipation  can  be 
devised  and  carried  out,  and  from  what  we  see 
and  what  we  hear,  it  is  not  an  idle  fear  to  enter- 
tain that  from  the  frenzied  state  of  feeling  in 
this  state,  they  may  attempt  to  emancipate  the 
slaves  of  Kentucky.  Fanaticism  does  not  stop ; 
it  knows  no  stopping  place.  Although  they  say 
they  would  not  be  in  favor  of  emancipation, 
without  paying  the  owners  of  the  slaves  for 
them,  I  believe  the  great  aim  and  object  they 
have  in  view  is  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves, 
and  they  will  obtain  it  by  any  means.  Leave 
that  clause  in  the  constitution,  and  the  slaves 
can  be  emancipated  without  seeming  injustice 
to  the  owner.  It  is  absolutely  necessary  in  a  re- 
public, that  the  power  of  special  taxation  and 
discrimination  should  be  left  to  the  legislature. 
If  the  emancipation  party  should  get  in  the  as- 
cendant in  the  legislature,  taxes  can  be  levied, 
and  the  money  appropriated  to  pay  the  owners 
of  slaves.  Suppose  the  legislature  of  Kentucky 
■were  to  pass  a  law  to  this  effect:  that  all  female 
slaves  born  in  this  state  should,  at  the  age  of  six 
years  be  valued,  and  apprenticed  out  until  they 
were  twenty-five.  It  is  perfectly  competent 
for  the  legislature  to  apprentice  out  these  female 
children  for  their  value.  Last  summer  I  was 
traveling  in  Pennsylvania  with  a  gentleman 
from  Ohio,  who  wanted  to  buy  a  negro  boy.  He 
astonished  me,  and  I  said,  "why  do  you  wish  to 
buy  one?"  He  replied  that  he  would  take  him 
to  Ohio  and  have  nim  apprenticed  to  him,  as  he 
knew  he  would  be  worth  as  much  as  his  price 
before  he  was  twenty-one  years  of  age.  Now, 
if  you  let  the  emancipationists  have  the  power 
they  desire,  they  might  adopt  a  plan  of  this  sort 
to  emancipate  our  slaves.  I  do  not  apprehend 
it  will  be  done,  but  all  I  know  is,  it  can  be  done 
unless  there  is  some  prohibition  placed  upon  tsh 
legislature.  My  constituents  have  commanded 
me  not  to  vote  for  any  constitution  unless  pro- 
vision was  made  in  it  against  the  probability  of 
exercising  such  power.  Hence  it  is,  I  have  of- 
fered my  amendment  or  substitute. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER,  The  ouly  difference  I 
can  detect  from  hearing  the  report  and  the  gen- 
tleman's proposition  read,  is, that  the  latter  pro- 
poses to  take  from  the  legislature  the  power  of 
granting  compensation  to  the  owners  of  slaves. 
That  power  is  contained  in  the  old  constitution, 
and  I  am  in  favor  of  it.  There  will  be  no  danger 
of  the  legislature  emancipating  the  slaves,  while 
they  are  required  to  pay  for  them. 

Mr.  GRAY.  So  far  as  I  know  the  sentiments 
of  the  people  in  my  section  of  the  state  on  this 
subject,  they  are  as  much  opposed  to  emancipa- 
tion as  any  body  can  be.  They  were  satisned 
with  the  old  constitution  as  it  stood,  with  one 
exception,  and  that  was  that  there  should  bo  a 
provision  inserted,  that  if  any  slaves  were  eman- 
cipated, they  should  be  removed  from  the  state. 
I  therefore  move  the  following  substitute  for  the 


amendment  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Jes- 
samine (Mr.  A.  K.  Marshall.) 
"Sec.  l.Thegeneral  assemblyshallhaveno pow- 
er to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves  with- 
out the  consent  of  their  owners,  or  without  pay  i  ng 
their  owners,  previous  to  such  emancipation,  a  full 
equivalent  in  money  for  the  slaves  so  emancipa- 
ted, and  providing  for  their  removal  from  the 
state.  They  shall  have  no  power  to  prevent  im- 
migrants to  this  state  from  bringing  with  them 
such  persons  as  are  deemed  slaves  by  the  laws 
of  any  of  the  United  States,  so  long  as  any  per- 
son of  the  same  age  or  description  shall  be  con- 
tinued in  slavery  by  the  laws  of  this  state. 
They  shall  pass  laws  to  permit  the  owners  of 
slaves  to  emancipate  them,  saving  the  rights  of 
creditors,  and  preventing  them  from  remaining 
in  this  state  after  they  are  emancipated.  They 
shall  have  full  power  to  prevent  slaves  being 
brought  into  this  state  as  merchandise.  They 
shall  have  full  power  to  prevent  any  slaves  be- 
ing brought  into  this  state  who  have  been,  since 
the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  seven 
hundred  and  eighty  nine,  or  may  hereafter  be 
imported  into  any  of  the  United  States  from  a 
foreign  country.  And  they  shall  have  full  pow- 
er to  pass  such  laws  as  may  be  necessary  to 
oblige  the  owners  of  slaves  to  treat  them  with 
humanity;  to  provide  for  them  necessary  cloth- 
ing and  provision;  to  abstain  from  all  injuries 
to  them,  extending  to  life  or  limb;  and  in  case  of 
their  neglect,  or  refusual  to  comply  with  the  di- 
rections of  such  laws,  to  have  such  slave,  or 
slaves,  sold  for  the  benefit  of  their  owner,  or 
owners." 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  certainly  am  very 
well  satisfied  with  the  old  constitution,  but  I 
prefer  the  proposition  I  have  offered.  The  prop- 
osition of  the  gentleman  will  permit  the  impor- 
tation of  slaves  to  Kentucky.  I  am  opposed  to 
that,  except  those  which  are  obtained  oy  inher- 
itance, marriage,  gift,  or  devise.  It  •«'ill  cer- 
tainly lead  to  the  agitation  of  slavery.  There 
is  a  legal  constitutional  mode  pointed  out  by 
which  the  gentleman  can  attain  his  object.  I 
am  opposed  to  the  gentleman's  proposition. 

After  some  conversation,  in  which  Messrs. 
WICKLIFFE,  MORRIS,  A.  K.  MARSHALL, 
and  GRAY,  participated. 

Mr.  GRA  Y  asked  for  the  ayes  and  noes  on  his 
substitute,  and  tliey  were  taken,  and  were  ayes 
74,  nays  14. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

f)erson,  John  L.  Ballinger.  John  S.  Barlow,  Wil- 
iam  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D. 
Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dud- 
ley, Cliasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James 
W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  John- 
ston, Geo.W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Jas. 
M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos.  N.  Lind- 
sey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machcn,  Geo. 
W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McOlure, 
David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jouatlian 


931 


Neweum,  Hugh  Newell,  Heurv  B.  Pollard,  Wm. 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rog- 
ers, Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Mi- 
chael L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner.  John  L.  Wal- 
ler, Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew 
S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams. Wesley  J.  Wright — 74. 

Nats — Alfred  Bovd,  Luther  Brawner,  William 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Nathan  Gaither,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Vincent  S. 
Hav,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  William  D.  Mitchell, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttalli  Silas  Woodson— 14. 

So  the  substitute  was  adopted. 

Mr.  IRWIN  asked  for  the  ayes  and  noes  on 
the  adoption  of  the  substitute  for  the  first  sec- 
tion of  the  report  of  the  committee,  and  they 
were  taken,  and  were — ayes  55,  noes  36. 

Teas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

ferson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  Bradley, 
raneis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Charles 
Chambers.  William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Garrett  Davis, 
James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  T&os.  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Grav, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  &. 
Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W. 
Irwin.  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Wil- 
liam Johnson.  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P  Marshall, 
William  C.  Marshall,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John 
D.  Morris, .  Hugh  Newell,  William  Preston, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Wal- 
ler, Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 56. 

NAYS—John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Lu- 
ther Brawner,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  B.  F. 
Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  William  Hendrix,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Wilis  B.  Ma- 
chen,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Da- 
vid Meriwether,  W.  D.  Mitchell,  Jonathan  New- 
eum, Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  H.  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Andrew  S.   White,  Silas  Woodson — 36. 

So  the  question  was  determined  in  the  affirma- 
tive. 

Mr  WALLER  moved  that  the  convention  do 
now  adjourn. 

Mr.  HARDIN  asked  for  the  ayes  and  noes, 
and  they  were  taken, and  were — ayes  61,  noes  29. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


WEDNESDAY.  DECEMBER  12,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  6.  W.  Brush. 

BASIS  OF  REPEESEXTATIOX. 

Mr.  L.\CKEY  submitted  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  it  was  laid  upon  the  table  and  ordered 
to  be  printed: 

Resolved,  That  representat  ion  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  for- 
ever regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of 
representative  inhabitants  therein.  At  the  first 
session  of  the  general  assenibly  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  and  every  four  years 
thereafter,  provision  shall  be  made  by  law  that 
in  the  year ,  and  every  four  years  thereaf- 
ter, an  enumeration  of  all  the  representative  in- 
habitants of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The  num- 
ber of  representatives  shall  be  one  hundred,  and 
apportioned  among  the  several  counties  in  the 
following  manner:  Counties  having  the  ratio 
shall  have  one  representative;  those  having  three 
fourths  of  the  ratio  shall  have  one  representative; 
those  having  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  less  than 
one  half  the  ratio  over,  .shall  have  but  one  repre- 
sentative; those  having  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction 
of  one  half  over,  shall  have  two  representatives; 
those  having  twice  the  ratio,  shall  have  two 
representatives;  those  having  twice  the  ratio,  and 
a  fraction  of  less  than  one  half  the  ratio  over, 
shall  have  but  two  repiesentatives;  those  having 
twice  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  one  half  the 
ratio  over,  shall  have  three  representatives;  and 
so  on.  Counties  having  less  than  three  fourths 
of  the  ratio,  shall  be  joined  to  a  similar  adjacent 
county,  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  representa- 
tive district:  Provided,  That  if  there  be  no  such 
adjacent  county,  then  the  countv  having  les8 
than  three  fourths  of  the  ratio,  sliall  be  united 
with  that  adjacent  county  having  the  smallest 
number  of  representative  inhabitants,  provided 
that  their  united  numbers  do  not  excf-edthe  ratio, 
and  a  fraction  of  one  half  the  ratio  over;  but  is 
they  do,  the  county  having  less  than  three  fourthf 
of  the  ratio  shall  have  a  separate  representative. 
The  remaining  representatives,  (if  any,)  shall  be 
allotted  to  those  counties  having  the  largest 
unrepresented  fractions;  but  in  no  case  shall 
more  than  two  counties  be  united  for  the  purpose 
of  forming  a  representative  district;  but  if  tnere 
shall  ever  be  an  excess  of  districts,  they  shall  be 
reduced  to  the  proper  number,  by  taking  from 
those  counties  having  a  separate  representative, 
with  the  smaller  number  of  representative  in- 
habitants, their  separate  representation. 

Counties  that  will  be  entitled  to  one  represen- 
tative each,  with  an  average  vote  of  1,680: 

Adair, 1,560        1 

Allen, 1,346         1 

Boyle, 1,168        1 

Bracken,  ...  -  1,606  1 
Bullitt,  -        -        -        -        1,218        1 

Bourbon,  -  -  -  -  1,914  1 
Breckinridge,        -        -        -        1,757        1 

Boone, 1,958        1 

Bath, 1,8S6        1 

Campbell,  -  -  -  -  2.182  1 
Caldwell,  -  -  -  -  2,016  1 
Clarke,  -        -        -        -        1.691        1 

Daviess,  .  -  -  -  2,112  1 
Franklin,  -  -  -  -  2,024  1 
Graves,         .        •        .        -        1,665        1 


116 


933 


Greenup, 
Grant,  - 
Garrard, 
Green,  - 
Hopkins, 
Henderson,  • 
Henry, 
Hart,    ■ 
Harrison, 
Jessamine,    - 
Lewis,  - 
Lincoln, 
Logan, 
Munlenburg, 
Montgomery, 
Mercer, 
Marion, 
Morgan, 
Nicholas, 
Nelson,         , 
Owen,  - 
Ohio,    - 
Pendleton,    - 
Scott,    - 
Todd,  - 
Trigg,  - 
Union, 
Woodford,    - 
Wayne, 
Washington, 


1,936 
1,212 
1,624 
1,352 
1,886 
1,589 
1,862 
1,436 
2,150 
1,335 
1,409 
1,453 
2,179 
1,625 
1,459 
2,093 
1,762 
1,261 
1,792 
2,035 
1,796 
1,576 
1,336 
1,891 
1,499 
1,417 
1,448 
1,314 
1,443 
1,847 


75,620      45 
Counties  that  will  be  necessary  to  join  two  to- 
gether to  form  a  representative  district,  with  an 
average  vote  of  1,706: 


average 
Lawrence, 
Carter,     - 

Johnson, 
Floyd,      - 

Pike, 

Letcher,  - 

Breathitt, 
Perry, 

Estill,      - 
Owsley,    - 

Clay, 
Harlan,    - 

Rockastle, 
Laurel,     - 

Hickman, 
Fulton.     - 

Ballard,    - 
McOracken, 

Livingston, 
Crittenden, 

Grayson, - 
Hancock, 

Butler,     - 
Edmonson, 


967 
1025 
1 

599 

986 
1 

812 

381 

612 

502 

1018 
671 

] 

866 
648 

1 

842 
865 

1 

758 
705 

1 

825 
986 

1 

952 

1059 

2 

1108 
555 


-1992 


-1585 


-1193 


-1123 


-1689 


-1514 


-1707 


-1463 


-1811 


-2011 


948 
681 


-1662 


-1629 


Taylor,    - 
Casey, 

Russell,    - 
Clinton,    - 

Anderson, 
Spencer, 

Carroll,    ' 
Gallatin,  - 


1097 
1051 


-2148 


940 

812 

1 

1119 
1022 

2 

993 

883 


-1752 


-2141 


-1876 


1 


27,296      16 
Counties  with  less  than  three  fourths  of  the 
ratio,  which  will  be  entitled  to  a  separate  repre- 
sentative, with  an  average  vote  of  1,048: 
Simpson,       -         -         -         -         1,017         1 

Larue, 1.013        1 

Meade,  ...        -        1,114        1 


3,144 


Counties  that  would  be  entitled  to  two  repre- 
sentatives, with  an  average  vote  of  1,392: 
Barren,  ....         2,959 

Fayette,  -  .  -  -  2,649 
Fleming,  -  -  -  -  2,316 
Hardin,  ,  -  -  -  2,419 
Kenton,  .  -  -  -  3,406 
Madison,  .  -  -  .  2,563 
Mason,  -        -        -        -        3,114 

Pulaski,  -  -  -  -  2,392 
Shelby,  ...  -  2,321 
Jefferson  and  Louisville,     -        9,283 


33,422      24 
Counties  that  would  be  entitled  to  two  repre- 
sentatives, by  the  provision  in  favor  of  counties 
having  the  largest  unrepresented  fraction,  with 
an  average  vote  of  1,115: 

Christian,  -  -  -  -  2,248  2 
Warren,        -        -        -        .        2,215        2 

4,463        4 

Counties  having  less  than  three  fourths  of  the 
ratio,  that  would  be  entitled  to  one  member  each, 
by  the  provision  in  favor  of  counties  having  the 
largest  unrepresented  fraction,  with  an  average 
vote  of  1,098: 

Calloway,  -  -  -  -  1,323  1 
Marshall,     -        .        -        -  870        1 

Cumberland,        ...  973        1 

Monroe,  .  .  -  -  1,247  1 
Oldham.  ....  1.104  1 
Trimble,  .  -  -  -  1,084  1 
Knox,  ....        1,130        1 

Whitley,      ....        1,058        1 

8,789        8 
The  foregoing  tables  are  based  upon  the  num- 
ber of  free  white  males  over  twenty  one  years 
old,  which  will  not  vary  far  from  the  legal 
voters. 

SPECIAL   COURT    OF    APPEALS. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  from  the  committee 
on  the  court  of  appeals,  in  obedience  to  a  reso- 
lution of  the  convention,  reported  the  following 
section,  which  was  adopted: 

"  Sec.  — .  Whenever  an  appeal  or  writ  of  er- 
ror may  be  pending  in  the  court  of  appeal8,'on 


923 


the  trial  of  which  a  majority  of  tlie  judges  there- 
of cannot  sit;  or  on  account  of  interest  in  the 
event  of  the  cause;  or  on  account  of  their  rela- 
tion to  either  party;  or  \rhere  the  judge  may 
have  decided  the  cause  in  the  inferior  court,  the 
general  assembly  shall  provide,  by  law,  for  the 
organization  of  a  temporary  and  special  court, 
for  the  trial  of  such  cause  or  causes." 


Mr.  CLARKE  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion: 

"Resolved,  That  the  general  assembly  shall 
have  no  power  to  pass  laws  prohibiting  the  citi- 
zens of  this  state  from  importing  slaves  for  their 
own  use,  but  may  pass  laws  requiring  the  im- 
porter of  a  slave  or  slaves  to  take  an  oath  that 
said  slave  or  slaves  are  for  his  or  her  own  use, 
and  not  for  merchandise;  and  that  he  or  she  will 
not  sell  said  slave  or  slaves,  within  this  com- 
monwealth, within  years  after  such  slave  or 
slaves  are  imported,  under  such  penalties  as 
may,  from  time  to  time,  be  provided  bv  law: 
Provided,  That  the  slaves  thus  imported!  shall 
not  be  such  as  have  been  charged  with  crime  in 
other  States." 

This,  Mr.  President,  is  a  resolution   of  com- 
promise  between  those  who  are  of  opinion  that 
slaves  ought  not  to  be  imported,  ana  those  who 
think  that  the  citizens  of  Kentucky  ought  to  in- 
troduce them   for  their  own  use.     It  requires  an 
oath  to  be  taken  by  the  importer  that  he  imports 
them  for  his  own  use,  and  that  he  will  not  dis- 
pose of  them  for  years.     It  goes  further,  and 
provides  that  thev  are  not  to  be  imported  from 
the  prisons  of  other  states,  or  from   under  the 
gallows.     I  offer  it  to  test  the  .sense  of  the  con- 
vention, whether  the  citizens  of  Kentucky  are  to 
be  allowed  to   import  slaves  for  their  own  use. 
Before  the  passage  of  that  resolution — which  I ' 
will   assume — it   may  be  possible  that  I   may  , 
make  some  remarks.     So  much  has  been  said,  so  i 
many  speeches  have  been  made,  the  subject  has  ' 
been  so  thoroughly  examined,  that  I  may  not  be 
inclined  to  make  a  speech,  unless  it  may  become  [ 
necessary  in  ray  judgment.     But  as  I  have  here- ; 
tofore  stated,  I  am  convinced  that  the   institu- 
tion of  slavery,   both  here   and  elsewhere,  is  a 
blessing  to  both  races — the  whites  and  the  Afri-  ■ 
can  rac#.     I  am  satisfied,  so  far  as  prnpercy   in  i 
slaves  is  concerned,  that  there  is  no  distinction 
between  property  in  slaves  and  propertv  in  land.* 
or  in  horses.     And  while  a  citizen  of  kentucky 
has  the  right  to  go  to  Virginia  and  to  Tennessee 
and  purchase  horses  or  any  merchandise  for  his 
own  use,  I  can  see  no  reason  why  he  should  not 

fo  there  to  purchase  slaves,  unless  we  are  bor  | 
ering  on  a  spirit  of  emancipation,  which  seems  [ 
to  me  to  animate  the  bosoms  of  some  gentlemen  i 
on  this  floor.  I  repeat,  that  I  see  not,  while  we  j 
are  establishing  in  our  bill  of  rights  the  elements  | 
of  freedom,  why  a  citizen  of  Kentucky  should  j 
not  go  wherever  he  pleases  to  purchase  slaves  and  ; 
merchandise  for  his  own  use  and  his  own  enjoy- 
ment. I 
The  motion  to  lay  on  the  table  and  print  was  j 
then  agreed  to.  | 
Mr.  MITCHELL  offered  the  following  resolu-  j 
tion,  and  on  his  motion  it  \ras  laid  on  the  table  i 
.  and  ordered  to  be  printed: 

"Resolved,  That  the  general   assembly  shall  I 


have  no  power  to  prohibit  the   introduction   of 
slaves   into  this  state,  by  the   citizens  thereof, 
from  other  states,  for  their  own  use;  but  their 
introduction  for  traffic  or  merchandise,  whether 
openly  or  covertly,  by  the  citizens  of  this  or  any 
[  other  state,  shall  be  prohibited  by  the  passage  of 
such  laws  as  the  legislature  may  deem  most  con- 
I  ducive  to  secure  that  end." 
I     The  convention  then  resumed  the  considera- 
j  tion  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  re- 
vision of  the  constitution  and  slavery. 
i     Mr.  BULLIITT.      Whilst  I  am   disposed  to 
yield  to  the  master  the  power  of  emancipation, 
:  the  public  good  demands  that  this  right  should 
■  not  be  exercised  to  the  injury  of  the  community, 
of  which  he  is  a  member.     It  is  a  cardinal  prin- 
ciple of  the  common  law,  that  no  man  shall  so 
use  his  property   as  to  injure   another.     This 
principle  is  peculiarly  applicable  to  property  in 
slaves.     By  the  action   of  the  master,  they  are 
capable  of  being  rendered  more  detrimental  to 
the   community  than  any  other  description  of 
property  known  to  the  law.    Hence   arises  the 
necessity  of  a  peculiar  constitutional  provision 
on  this  subject.     For  con.stitutional  and  legisla- 
tive action,  slaves  are  to  be  viewed  in  a  double 
aspect — as  persons,  and  as  property.     The  mas- 
:  ter  should  not  be  permitted,  whilst  exercising 
his  rights  over  the  slave,   as  property,  to  enable 
him,  as  a  person,  to  become  a  nuisance  to  soci- 
ety.    From   this  peculiarity  of  slave  property, 
also  arises  the  necessity  of,  in  some  slight  de- 
gree, deviating  from  what   is  clearlv  a  correct 
general  principle,  that  no   law  should  be  inter- 
polated into  the  constitution. 

This  convention  have,  (save  those  of  justice 
and  humanity,)  no  restrictions  to  their  action 
over  free  negroes,  except  such  as  are  imposed  by 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  This  is 
not  only  the  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
but  that  of  each  state;  and  Kentucky,  when  she 
entered  the  union  as  a  sovereign  state,  adopted  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  as  the  para- 
mount constitution  of  the  State  of  Kentucky; 
and  if  there  be  any  provision  in  that  instru- 
ment, which  confers  citizenship  on  the  free  ne- 
gro, it  is  binding  on  us; 

The  only  provision  which  has  tlie  slightest 
bearing  on  the  subject  is  contained  in  the  fourth 
article,  section  the  second,  declaring,  "the  citi- 
zens of  each  state  shall  be  entitled  to  all  the 
privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens  in  the 
several  states." 

The  only  inquiry  is,  what  constitutes  citizen- 
ship, or,  in  other  words,  what  is  the  true  consti- 
tutional meaning  of  the  word  citizen?  If  the 
free  negro  be  not  a  citizen,  although  he  may  be 
a  subject,  he  is  not  embraced  within  thisjprovis- 
ion.  The  term  citizen,  is  derived  from  the  Ro- 
man civil  law.  In  the  proconsular  governments 
of  the  Roman  commonwealth,  the  provincial 
subjects  were  governed  by  the  arbitrarv  edicts 
of  the  governors.  A  Roman  citizen  wno  was 
entitled  to  the  privileges  of  the  city,  carried 
with  him,  into  all  the  provinces  of  the  republic, 
his  peculiar  privileges  of  the  protection  of  the 
Roman  laws.  In  accordance  with  this  princi- 
ple, a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  goin|^  into 
any  state  of  this  union,  carries  wiui  him  the 
same  right  of  protection,  under  the  laws  of  the 
state,  to  which  its  own  citizens  are  entitled. 


924 


In  the  progress  of  a^es,  after  the  downfall  of 
the  repuDlic,  Roman  citizenship  was  gradually 
imparted  to  the  provinces,  and  finally  extended 
to  the  Barbarians,  who  had  made  lodgments  in 
her  territories.  These,  in  their  turn,  inviting  in 
others  of  their  friends  and  relations,  gradually 
acquired  the  ascendant,  and  finally  overturn- 
ed the  empire.  And  to  this  abuse  of  citizen- 
ship is  mainly  attributable  the  destruction  of  the 
greatest  power  of  ancient  times. 

In  the  dark  ages  succeeding  the  fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  the  population  consisted  of  the 
Feudal  Barons,  with  their  vassals  and  villiens, 
of  slaves  residing  in  the  country,  and  the  free 
artizans  and  merchants  of  the  towns.  The  rural 
population  were  under  the  uncontrolled  and  ab- 
solute sway  of  the  Barons,  who  maintained  an 
almost  uninterrupted  warfare  with  the  Princes. 
The  latter  found  it  to  their  interest  to  rear  up  a 
power  of  the  middle  classes  in  the  towns,  in  op- 
position to  the  power  of  the  nobility.  To  effect 
this  object,  the  citizens  of  the  towns  were  incor- 
porated, with  extensive  privileges,  exempting 
them  from  the  arbitrary  exaction  of  the  Barons; 
and  the  term  citizen,  or  citizenship,  carried 
with  it  not  only  the  right  of  exemption  from  op- 
pression, but  the  right  of  sovereignty,  in  tne 
town  of  which  he  was  a  member,  in  controlling 
its  municipal  regulations.  From  that  class  arose 
the  British  house  of  commons.  Hence,  in  Eng- 
land, sovereignty  has  always  been  attached  to 
the  term  "citizen,"  as  contradistinguished  from 
inhabitant  or  subject.  An  alien  is  a  subject,  but 
not  a  citizen. 

At  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  free  negros  were  not 
citizens  of  any  state  in  the  Union.  A  large 
portion  of  the  population  was  composed  of 
African  slaves  and  Indians.  The  broad  and 
comprehensive  terms  used  in  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States,  "we  the  people  &c."  must  be 
construed  to  embrace  whites  alone,  otherwise  it 
would  embrace  all  the  slaves,  free  negroes,  and 
Indians,  within  the  then  limits  of  the  United 
States;  thus  making  citizens  of  all  the  slaves  of 
the  southern  states,  in  whom  the  right  of  prop- 
erty is  guarantied  by  that  instrument  itself,  and 
who,  as  propertv  are  made  the  basis  of  taxation 
and  representation. 

At  the  period  of  the  adoption  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  United  States,  free  negroes  were  not  citi- 
zens of  any  state.  The  constitution  was  made 
by  whites  for  their  own  benefit,  and  that  of  their 
own  race.  Some  of  the  states  then  contained 
more  Indians  than  whites;  none  of  the  Indians 
were  citizens ;  and  from  a  view  of  the  entire 
context  of  the  constitution,  the  conclusion  is  ir- 
resistible, that  no  power  was  intended  to  be 
granted  to  congress  to  make  citizens  of  any  oth- 
ers than  white  persons. 

Congress,  in  carrying  into  effect  that  clause 
which  provides  that  "congress  shall  have  power 
to  establLsh  a  unii'orm  rule  of  naturalization" 
apply  the  power  to  white  persons  alone,  exclud- 
ing all  otliers  ;  thus  giving  a  clear  indication  of 
their  opinion — that  to  them  alone  it  wa.s  applica- 
ble, according  to  the  true  meaning  of  the  eon- 
stitutioD. 

The  states  have  most  of  them  given  the  same 
construction  ;  for  very  soon  after  the  adoption 
of  th«  federal  constitution,  they  began  to  pass 


laws  restrictive  of  the  free  migration  from  one 
state  to  another  of  the  free  blacks,  showing  that 
they  were  not  then  considered  citizens.  This 
practice  has  been  continued  to  the  present  time. 
The  executive  of  the  United  States  has  given 
the  same  construction,  by  a  uniform  refusal  of 
passports  to  free  negroes. 

Congress  alone  have  power  of  naturalization, 
and  a  state  cannot  manufacture  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States. 

It  is  a  universal  principle  of  construction 
adopted  by  our  courts — that  whenever  the  w^ord 
"person"  IS  used  in  the  constitution  or  laws,  it 
must  be  considered  as  applicable  to  white  per- 
sons alone,  and  cannot  be  applied  to  blacks  un- 
less specially  named. 

Females  and  minors  follow  the  condition  oi 
their  husbands  and  parents,  and  are  entitled  to 
all  the  civil  rights  of  the  latter.  The  rights 
secured  to  the  citizen,  are  wholly  civil  rights 
and  not  political. 

The  congress  of  the  United  States  alone,  have 
the  power  of  making  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  and,  although  a  state  may  grant  every 
state  right,  civil  and  political,  to  an  African, 
she  cannot  thereby  make  him  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  .so  as  to  entitle  him  to  the  privi- 
leges secured  by  that  instrument  to  the  citizen. 

The  reason  why  thestate  cannot  exclude  white 
foreigners  from  their  borders,  is,  that  the  right 
of  naturalization  necessarily  carries  with  it,  the 
right  of  residence  and  protection,  during  the 
terra  of  their  probation. 

The  free  negroes  of  other  states  having,  under 
the  constitution  of  the  Uniied  States  no  right  of 
citizenship,  are  left  to  the  discretionary  action 
of  this  convention,  without  restriction,  except 
such  as  are  imposed  by  humanity;  he  maybe  a 
subject;  he  cannot  be  a  citizen. 

It  has  been  decided  that  free  negroes  are  not 
citizens,  within  the  provision  of  the  constitution 
of  the  United  States  before  alluded  to.  For  freo 
negroes  are  not,  in  any  of  the  states  entitled  to 
all  the  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens, 
and  a  state  may  constitutionally  prohibit  free 
persons  of  color  from  removing  into  the  state  to 
reside.  State  of  Tennessee  vs.  Claybourne,  1 
Meigs.  .332—1  Litt.  327.  Judge  Bullock's  prin- 
ted opinions — also  2  Kent "0-71,  Hobbs  vs.  Fogg 
6  Watts.  556. 

Mr.  WALLER.  Laboring  under  serious  indis- 
position, nothing,  sir,  but  a  deepsense  of  duty  to 
my  constituents  and  myself  could  induce  me  to 
encounter  the  manifest  impatience  of  the  conven- 
tion to  hear  any  more  speeches  upon  this  sub- 
ject. My  constituents  are  content  to  abide  by 
the  old  provisions  of  the  constitution  with  an 
additional  clause  yjroviding  that  no  slave  shall 
be  emancipated  to  remain  in  the  state.  They 
have  as  deep  an  interest  in  this  matter  as  any 
county  in  the  commonwealth;  and  they  are  sat- 
isfied with  the  protection  which  their  slave  pro- 
perty has  hitherto  received.  This  is  all  they 
ask — it  is  all  that  is  necessary. 

But  I  am  actuated  by  a  personal  reason  for 
a.sking  your  attention.  My  position  is  more  pe- 
culiar than  that  of  any  delegate  here.  Some 
have  expressed  a  surprise  that  one  of  my  profes- 
sion should  entertain  the  sentiments  I  do  on  this, 
emphatically  the  great  question  of  the  age.  That 
the  reasons  tor  the  rotes  I  hare  giren  and  which 


925 


I  may  give  on  this  subject  may  appear,  I  now, 
uTider  all  the  disadvantages  which  surround  me, 
arise  to  speak.  I  trust,  then,  my  offence,  if  it 
is  so  esteemed,  in  trespassing  upon  time  which 
I  know  to  be  precious,  will  be  considered  in 
charity  and  forgiven  I  do  not  speak  because  I 
love  to  speak.  I  would  rather  hear  the  voice  of 
any  gentleman  here  than  my  own.  My  conduct 
heretofore  is  my  witness  to  justify  this  statement. 
I  am  not  prepared,  sir,  to  go  the  full  lengths 
which  the  language  of  some  gentlemen  would 
seem  to  imply.  Indeed  I  feel  confident  they 
have  not  themselves  critically  considered  the 
full  force  of  their  expressions.  I  cannot  per- 
suade myself  that  when  gentlemen  call  slavery 
a  blessing,  that  they  intend  to  convey  the  im- 
pression that  they  consider  it  a  blessing  in  the 
abstract — a  blessing  per  se.  If  this  were  true, 
the  necessary  deduction  would  be,  that  freedom 
was  a  curse: — that  the  condition  of  all  men 
would  be  better  in  a  state  of  menial  servitude! 
For  it  must  be  manifest  to  every  mind,  that  if 
slavery  is  a  blessing  per  se,  that  its  opposite, 
freedom,  must  be  a  curse.  And  if  we  confine 
this  remark  exclusively  to  the  negro  race — if  it 
be  a  blessing  in  the  abstract  to  them,  then  every 
dictate  of  religion  and  philanthropy  would  urge 
us  to  use  all  possible  means  for  the  enslavement 
of  the  entire  black  population  of  the  earth!  A 
position  so  monstrous,  I  am  persuaded,  no  mem- 
ber of  this  convention  is  prepared  to  assert,  much 
less  maintain. 

But  while  I  do  not  believe  that  slavery  in  the 
abstract  is  a  blessing,  I  do  affirm  that  slavery  in 
the  south,  and  in  Kentucky  especially,  has  been 
a  great  blessing  to  the  negro — that  the  negroes 
now  in  slavery  in  the  United  States  are  in  far 
better  condition — more  elevated  in  the  scale  of 
intellectual  and  moral  being — than  tiie  same 
number  of  negroes,  to  be  found  any  where  upon 
earth,  or  that  ever  had  a  habitation  or  home  in 
any  other  clime  or  country,  in  this  or  any  ()ther 
age.  And  if  wrong  has  been  done  to  the  negro 
by  bringing  him  from  his  iVfrican  home,  that 
wrong  do.s  not  lie  at  the  door  of  the  south. 
The  south  did  not  bring  him  from  his  native 
land.  We  found  him  on  the  slave  ship  of  the 
European  or  tlie  New  Englander.  He  was  in 
chains,  in  the  hole  of  the  vessel,  emaciated  by 
disease  and  hunger.  We  protested  against  his 
being  brought  amongst  us:  but  the  cupidity  of 
the  mother  country  forced  us  to  receive  him. 
From  the  condition  mentioned,  we  bought  him. 
We  clothed  and  we  fed  him  as  he  had  never  been 
clothed  and  fed  before.  He  was  treated  Avith  a 
kindness  and  a  consideration  which  he  never 
supposed  that  persons  wearing  the  complexion 
of  tnose  who  had  brought  him  across  the  ocean, 
could  manifest.  He  felt  indeed  in  a  new  world. 
His  new  bondage,  contra.sted  with  the  heartless 
tyranny  from  which  he  had  just  escaped,  was 
almostlike  the  fruition  of  perfect  liberty. 

This  is  no  fancy  sketch.  It  is  said,  that  when 
the  poor  negroes  would  be  brought  ashore  from 
the  vessels  of  the  slave  traders,  they  would  often 
run  and  kneel  to  the  planters,  and  with  stream- 
ing eyes  and  imploring  jestures — in  the  most 
meaning  and  eloquent  langjuage  by  which  suffer- 
ing and  agonized  humanity  could  give  utter- 
ance to  its  wishes — would  bes-eech  them  to  buy 
them  and  thus  save   them  from  returning  ti)  tlie 


chains  and  prisons  and  sufforinga  from  which 
they  liad  just  been  delivered. 

"i  es,  sir,  I  repeat  it :  the  abused  and  slandered 
south  have  been  the  great  benefactors  of  the  ne-  , 
gro  race.  Compare  the  condition  of  that  race 
here  with  their  condition  in  Africa.  And  what 
was  their  condition  in  their  native  country?  In 
every  respect,  they  Avere  the  most  degrade'!  or 
all  the  human  family.  Dwarfish  in  stature,  ur.- 
gainly  in  person,  in  intellect  but  a  remove  above 
the  ourang-outaug,  without  law,  without  social 
comforts,  cannibals,  and  sunk  below  idolatry  in- 
to absolute  feticism.  In  this  country,  they  have 
been  improved,  physically  and  inlellectually; 
all  of  them  have  been  taught  the  true  religion, 
and  many  of  them  are  among  the  most  pious 
christians  in  the  land. 

And  as  a  general  thing — if  indeed  it  is  not 
universally  true  of  all  brought  into  the  United 
States — they  were  not  taken  from  a  state  of  free- 
dom. A  strange  ignorance  prevails  on  this 
point.  The  white  slave  trader  obtained  his 
slaves  in  Africa,  from  the  black  slave  trader 
there.  By  the  law  of  war  every  where  recog- 
nized among  the  African  tribes,  the  captive  ta- 
ken in  battle  was  doomed  to  perpetual  slavery. 
It  was,  then,  in  accordance  witli  one  of  their 
own  immemorial  customs — by  a  law  to  which 
they  had  given  their  consent — that  they  were 
brought  into  bondage.  Many  of  them  were  born 
in  slavery.  These  were  the  persons  usually  pur- 
chased and  brought  into  the  south  for  sale,  by 
the  European  and  New  England  slave  dealers. 
But  scarcely  had  a  stop  been  put  to  the  impor- 
tation of  slaves  to  this  country — scarcely  had 
the  last  New  England  slaver  disgorged  its  con- 
tents on  the  shores  of  the  south,  ere  New  Eng- 
land moralists  began  to  discourse  most  sagely 
about  the  enormities  of  southern  slavery.  And 
I  understood  the  distinguished  gentleman  from 
Fleming  (Mr.  M.  P.  Marshall,)  to  say,  in  liis 
speech  a  few  evenings  since,  that  lie  esteemed 
slavery,  as  he  supposed  almost  every  delegate 
here  did,  to  be  a  moral  and  social  wrong  ! 
,  Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  If  the  gentleman 
will  allow  me,  1  will  correct  him.  I  did  not  say 
that  slavery  was  a  moral  and  a  social  wrong; 
but  a  social  and  apolitical  evil. 

Mr.  WALLER.  I  stand  corrected;  and  am 
most  happy  to  be  thus  corrected.  At  all  events, 
the  eloquent  gentleman  from  Knox  (Mr.  Wood- 
son,) quoted — I  do  not  know  that  he  endorsed — 
some  Doctor  of  Divinity  who  maintained  that 
slavery  was  contrary  to  the  teachings  of  Holy 
Writ,  and  was  a  sinful  relation.  I  do  not  in- 
tend, and  in  this  perhaps  I  .shall  disappoint  the 
expectations  of  some,  to  enter  into  any  elabo- 
rate argument  in  relation  to  the  Bible  doctrine 
on  this  subject.  It  is  certain,  that  many  aboli- 
tionists of  the  north  have  discarded  the  Bible, 
because  they  could  find  in  it  nothing  to  sustain 
their  wild  extravagance  on  the  subject  of  slave- 
ry. Besides,  the  Bible  is  in  every  body's  hands, 
and  the  most  ordinary  capacity  may  readily 
comprehend  what  it  teaches  respecting  this  rela- 
tion. I  am  not  prepared,  like  my  friend  from 
Boyle,  (Mr.  Talbott,)  to  establish  the  connec- 
tion between  the  slavery  originating  in  the  curse 
of  Noah,  just  this  side  of  the  flood,  and  the 
slavery  exi  ting  in  this  country.  Nor  do  I  feel 
it  at  all  ii<-ce.=5.sarv    tliat  I  should   do  so.     I  meet 


926 


the  charge  that  the  relation  between  master  and 
sJave  is  a  sinful  relation,  on  broader  grounds. 
Taking  the  Bible  as  a  standard  of  morals,  and 
I  affirm  it  inculcates  no  such  sentiment.  It  tells 
lis  that  many  of  the  holy  men  of  old  were  slave- 
holders; and  it  does  not  intimate  that  their  be- 
ing so  involved  them  in  peculiar  guilt.  Abra- 
ham, the  father  of  the  faithful  and  the  friend  of 
God,  was  a  larger  slaveholder,  by  far,  than  any 
in  our  country.  When  the  Almighty  descended 
\ipon  Mount  Sinai,  attended  by  the  flash  of  the 
lightning  and  the  roar  of  the  thunder,  he  did 
not  esteem  slavery  a  sinful  relation;  for  then  how 
could  he  have  said,  in  the  only  document  he  ev- 
er wrote  for  man  with  his  own  hand — in  the 
decalogue — that  it  was  wrong  to  covet  your 
neighbor's  man-servant  or  his  maid-servant?  In 
the  constitution  which  He  gave  to  the  children 
of  Israel,  if  the  relation  was  sinful,  would  He 
•whose  name  is  Holiness,  have  allowed  them,  as 
he  did  by  express  grant,  to  obtain  bond-men  and 
bond-maids  of  tlie  heathen  round  about,  which 
were  to  remain  as  the  possession  of  themselves 
and  their  children  forever?  Aye,  and  when  the 
Son  of  God,  in  the  fullness  of  time  came  into 
the  world,  he  found  slavery  existing  throughout 
the  then  known  world.  He  met  it  wherever  he 
went.  In  his  every  day  associations,  it  was  be- 
fore him.  Did  he  denounce  it  as  sinful?  Did 
he  at  any  time  make  an  abolition,  or  even  an 
emancipation  speech?  Did  he  tell  the  master 
that  he  was  living  in  sin?  Did  he  denounce  it 
as  a  social  and  a  moral  wrong?  Never,  sir,  nev- 
••r.  Nor  did  his  holy  apostles.  They  were  com- 
missioned of  him  to  set  up  his  kingdom  in  the 
earth — a  kingdom  into  which  nothing  impure  or 
unholy  was  to  enter.  From  that  kingdom,  by 
express  statute,  the  drunkard,  the  liar,  the 
swearer,  the  debauchee,  and  all  that  w-ere  un- 
righteous were  excluded;  and  yet  into  it  were 
Remitted  the  slaveholder  and  his  slaves.  In 
view  of  these  facts,  whatever  Doctors  of  Divini- 
ty may  say,  is  it  not  most  monstrous  to  suppose 
that  slaveholding  is  a  sinful  relation?  If  so, 
why  did  not  the  Redeemer  abolish  it?  If  a  mor- 
al and  a  social  wrong,  why  did  not  He  who  is 
head  over  all  things  to  the  church,  in  banishing 
the  idolater,  the  liar,  the  drunkard,  <fec.,  from 
the  church,  not  also  banish  the  slaveholder? 

But,  sir,  it  falls  in  "horrible  discord"  upon 
my  ears,  to  hear  gentlemen  here  or  elsewhere  in- 
sinuate, that  slavery  is  sinful,  and  yet  remain 
slaveholders.  If  I  believed  it  a  sin,  I  would  not 
retain  the  relation  one  hour,  for  all  the  glittering 
ore  of  earth.  What!  persist  in  a  known  and 
admitted  sin — to  sin  wilfully  after  that  we  have 
attained  to  a  knowledge  of  the  truth — with  a 
life  evanescent  as  the  morning  vapor  and  as  the 
early  dew — liable  in  a  moment,  in  the  twinkling 
of  an  eye,  to  be  summoned  before  the  judgment 
seat  of  God !  What  madness  to  remain  an  hour 
wittingly  in  a  sin  from  which  we  might  so  easily 
disburden  ourselves!  If  it  be  a  sin,  it  is  one  we 
have  no  excuse  to  remain  in.  We  may  easily  rid 
ourselves  of  it.  We  should  prove  our  faith  by 
our  works.  God  jibhors  those  who  merely  draw 
nigh  him  with  their  mouths,  and  honor  him  w  ith 
their  lips.  This  is  a  sin  in  which  no  one  need 
remain.  If  his  conscience  isoppressed  by  it,  he 
can  and  he  ought  to  relieve  himself  of  the  bur- 
den under  which  he  groans.     He  should  not 


think  to  excuse  himself  by  urging  the  example 
of  others.  They  are  not  so  enlihgtened  as  he  pre- 
fe.sses  to  be.  Besides,  he  must  give  an  account 
for  himself,  and  not  for  another. 

Nor  does  the  charge  of  the  sinfulness  of  slave- 
ry come  with  any  better  grace  from  the  other 
side  of  Ma.son  and  Dixon's  line.  The  worthy 
denizens  of  "the  land  of  steady  habits,"  with 
more  than  wonted  nasal  twang  in  the  utterance, 
are  accustomed  to  call  the  slaveholders  of  the 
south  "man-stealers,"  and  to  quote  as  applica- 
ble to  their  circumstances,  the  denunciations  of 
scriptures  applied  to  that  class  of  evil  doers. 
If  negroes  were  stolen  from  Africa,  sir,  the  peo- 
ple of  the  north  were  the  thieves,  so  far  as  this 
country  ever  furnished  any  such  persons.  True, 
as  the  present  New  Englanders  say,  it  was  their 
fathers  and  not  themselves  who  were  engaged  in 
the  African  slave  trade.  Admit  the  excuse  and  al- 
low itall  its  force,  and  what  then?  Why  like  those 
of  old  who  lamented  the  sins  of  their  ancestors, 
and  built  the  tombs  of  the  prophets  and  gar- 
nished the  sepulchres  of  the  righteous,  our 
northern  friends  bear  testimony  that  they  are  the 
children  of  men-stealers!  It  is  like  th«  admis- 
sion of  those  who  confess,  that 

-their  ancient  but  ignoble  blood. 


Has  crept  through  scoundrels  evei  since  the  flood." 

And  as  their  fathers  did,  so  do  they  unto  this 
day.  They  prove  themselves  worthy  sons  of 
such  sires.  For  the  citizens  of  the  north  even  to 
this  present  speaking,  will  steal  negroes,  as  all 
the  south  can  testify'. 

But  it  is  not  only  thus  that  the  charge  recoils 
upon  them.  Much  of  the  wealth  of  New  Eng- 
land was  obtained  in  the  negro  trade.  This 
"price  of  blood,"  to  use  one  of  their  own  patent 
expressions,  has  entered  into  all  the  business 
and  institutions  of  the  north.  It  has  aided  in 
building  their  cities,  their  colleges,  and  their 
churches.  Their  whole  land  is  tainted  with  it, 
and  its  impurity  adheres  to  the  very  garments  of 
the  abolition  lecturers  themselves.  They  have 
sold  us  the  sin,  and  now  want  to  force  us  to  give 
it  up  while  they  retain  the  price!  Whilst  they 
are  luxuriating  in  the  profits  of  their  iniquities, 
we  hurl  back  their  charges  into  thtir  teeth,  and 
t«ll  them  to  learn  that  great  lesson  of  Christiani- 
ty, to  first  cast  the  beams  out  of  their  own  eyes, 
that  they  may  see  clearly  how  to  cast  the  motes 
out  of  their  brethren's  eyes. 

The  gentleman  from  fi[nox  (Mr.  Woodson)  in- 
dulges in  comparisons  between  Kentucky  and 
certain  of  the  so  called  free  states,  show- 
ing their  superiority  in  education,  population 
and  wealth.  The  gentleman  from  Jefferson, 
(Mr.  Meriewther)  so  successfully  and  triumph- 
antly met  and  exposed  that  argument,  as  to  ren- 
der It  wholly  unnecessary  furtiier  to  allude  to  it. 
It  is  n  trite  saying,  that  "comparisons  are 
odious."  For  one,  however,  I  am  bold  to  say, 
that  I  know  nothing  in  her  present  condition  or 
in  her  past  history,  that  would  call  a  blush  to 
my  cheek  in  contrasting  this  my  native  state 
with  any  state  of  the  west  or  with  any  state  in 
this  Union.  She  occupies  a  proud  eminence  in 
this  glorious  confederacy  of  .states.  The  halo  of 
her  glory  is  as  bright  and  as  beautiful  as  that 
which  encircles  the  brow  of  the  first  and  the  no- 
bl<^fit  of  her  sisters. 

Look  at  Kentucky.    Where  are  those  eviden- 


Wi 


c«3  of  decay  and  desolation,  iu  morale,  iutelli- 
gence,  or  wealth,  which  some  imagine  to  exist? 
Where  is  that  moral,  or  social,  or  political  bliglit 
which  it  is  intimated  prevails  in  our  borders? 
Where  upon  the  face  of  the  whole  earth  can  you 
find  a  people  more  prosperous,  enjoying  more 
of  the  comforts  of  life — more  hospitable,  gene- 
rous and  brave — more  virtuous  and  intelligent, 
than  in  Kentucky? 

True,  we  have  not  increased  in  population  so  j 
fast  as  our  neighbors.  Many  of  our  citizens  j 
have  emigrated  to  other  states ;  but  it  was  not  j 
slavery  that  drove  them  away.  This  my  friend  ' 
from  Jefferson  (Mr.  Meriwetner)  has  incontesti-  ! 
bly  shown.  Kentucky  is  now  the  mother  of  i 
states,  but  her  children  did  not  leave  her  because  j 
they  abhorred  this  "peculiar  institution."  For  1 
if  so,  why  did  they  not  go  to  the  states  where  it  j 
did  not  exist?  Why  did  nine-tenths  of  them  go 
to  slave  states?  This  meets  and  refutes  the  j 
charge  that  slavery  has  driven  many  from  our  j 
borders. 

But  population  and  prosperity  are  not  always  } 
synonymous  terms.  If  some  of  our  neighbors 
are  outstripping  us  in  population,  so  they  are  iu  ' 
pauperism  and  crime.  In  several  of  the  free  j 
states,  pauperism  is  increasing  in  a  ratio  appal-  I 
lingly  in  advance  of  that  of  population.  But  sir,  ' 
what  sort  of  population  does  slavery  keep  out  of  | 
Kentucky?  Why,  I  suppose  the  abolitionists,  j 
who  are  so  superlatively  pure  that  they  fear  con-  | 
lamination  if  brought  in  contact  with  the  slave-  j 
holder.  And  perhaps,  too,  we  are  deprived  j 
of  those  liordes  ot  European  paupers,  vaga-  j 
bonds,  cind  criminals,  who  constitute  so  large  j 
a  portion  of  the  boasted  population  of  the 
free  states.  If  so,  I  am  content.  I  prefer  | 
that  Kentucky  soil  should  be  owned  by  Ken- ', 
tucky's  sons.  At  least,  I  am  content  with  the  j 
character  of  the  population  which  we  now  have.  ■ 

We  have  been  told  that  in  almost  every  thing, 
the  north  is  superior  to  the  south.  Sir,  I  love  \ 
and  honor  the  north.  I  envy  not  her  greatness,  i 
I  would  detract  nothing  from  the  excellency  of  j 
her  institutions.  The  men  of  the  north  are  our  j 
brethren — our  fellow-countrymen;  and  we  should  I 
all  rejoice  in  the  prosperity  of  any  portion  of ' 
our  country.  But  a  necessity  is  placed  upon  us 
to  defend  the  south,  especially  when  her  own 
children  assail  and  misrepresent  her.  I  denv 
southern  inferiority,  as  some  have  asserted  it 
here.  The  north  and  the  south  have  each  their 
excellencies  and  their  deficiencies.  I  need  not 
now  pause  to  point  these  out,  and  to  present 
them  in  contrast.  It  is  enough  for  all  present 
purposes  that  we  attempt  to  show  from  tne  his- 
tory of  our  country,  that  the  south  is  not  that 
insignificant  and  unimportant  portion  of  this 
confederacy,  which  northern  fanatics  and  their 
sympathisers  have  a»iserted.  What  part  of  this 
country  has  contributed  more  than  the  south,  to 
fashion  and  form  this  great  republic,  and  to  ele- 
vate her  to  that  exalted  eminence  which  she  now 
occupies?  The  eloquent  statesman  who  moved, 
and  he  who  penned  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence, were  southern  men  and  slaveholders. 
The  commander-in-chief  of  the  armies  of  the 
revolution — "first  in  war,  first  in  peace,  and  first 
in  the  hearts  of  his  countrymen," — was  a  south- 
em  man  and  a  slaveholder.  All  the  great  presi- 
dert=  *'"><">  •»r^'»»"  the  D€OT>le  deli<»ht«d  to  honor. 


were  soulliern  men  and  slaveholders.  For  fifty 
years,  the  reins  of  government  of  this  great  na- 
tion have  been  held  by  southern  men  and  slave- 
holders. Only  twelve  years  were  thev  held  by 
northern  men,  and  in  every  instance  tie  people 
snatched  them  from  their  hands  at  the  first  op- 
portunity. The  mo.st  illustrious  generals  of  the 
last  war  with  Great  Britain,  as  well  as  of  the 
war  with  Mexico,  were  men  born  and  nurtured  in 
the  south.  No  man  acquainted  with  our  histo- 
rv,  but  must  be  constrained  to  confess  that  the 
slave  states,  more  than  any  other  states,  have 
contributed  to  render  our  country  great  at  home, 
and  illustrious  abroad,  both  upon  tie  battle-field 
and  in  the  halls  of  legislation — that  southern 
men  have  done  most  to  make  us  the  great  and 
the  renowned  nation  that  we  are.  In  what,  then, 
consists  that  southern  inferiority,  of  which  so 
much  has  been  said?  Sir,  the  history  of  our 
country  teaches  no  such  inferiority.  It  has  no 
foundation  in  truth — it  is  but  the  vision  of  a 
dream. 

I  do  not  profess  to  be  blessed  with  a  Seer's 
vision.  I  cannot  tell,  therefore,  by  what  inspira- 
tion gentlemen  speak,  who  so  oracularly  predict 
the  certain  downfall  of  slavery.  I  suspect,  how- 
ever, that  the  "wish  is  father  to  the  thought" — 
that  they  are  but  giving  utterance  to  the  warm 
desires  of  their  hearts.  But  I  am  wholly  un- 
moved by  those  spectres  of  danger  so  terriole  in 
the  eves  of  some.  Kentuckians  never  take  coun- 
sel of  their  fears.  It  is  in  vain  then  to  tell  them, 
that  their  state  lies  upon  the  border  of  the  slave 
states;  and  that  if  a  disruption  of  this  Union 
should  occur,  (which  God  forbidi)  that  here 
would  be  the  battle  field,  and  that  this  would 
become  again  the  dark  and  blooily  ground.  Sup- 
pose Kentucky  were  to  become  a  free  state, 
would  she  not  still  be  a  border  state?  Would 
she  not  be  surrounded  on  three  sides  by  slave 
states,  and  be  separated  from  them  in  the  main, 
by  only  imaginary  lines;  while  now  she  has  free 
states  only  one  side,  and  they  divided  from  her 
by  the  Ohio  river?  Her  position  would  not  be 
at  all  changed  then,  by  this  change  of  her  in- 
stitutions. She  still  would  be  on  the  borders. 
She  would  still  have  to  mingle  in  the  conflict 
supposed.  And  would  she  then  more  than  now 
seek  the  sympathy  and  alliance  of  the  north, 
and  especially  to  subdue  and  destroy  her  sisters 
of  the  south?  Would  she  ever  enlist  under  the 
fanatical  banner  of  abolitionism  to  wage  war 
upon  southern  institutions?  No,  sir,  she  will 
not  de-sert  in  the  hour  of  danger  the  warm  and 
generous  south,  bound  to  her  by  so  many  ties 
and  dear  to  her  by  so  many  fond  recollections. 
If  that  terrible  conflict  must  come,  and  the  south 
must  fall,  Kentucky  will  perish  with  her.  The 
blood  of  the  last  of  her  sons  will  moisten  the 
soil  beneath  which  sleeps  the  bones  of  Washing- 
ton, Jefferson,  Marion  and  Jackson.  Who  that 
knows  the  character  of  our  state  can  indulge  a 
doubt  respecting  this  prediction?  Dead  must 
be  her  heart  to  all  its  past  impulses,  to  beat  in 
unison  with  any  other  sentiment. 

Even  granting  slavery  to  be  an  evil  to  the  ex- 
tent contended  for  by  certain  delegates,  it  is  an 
evil  into  which  the  citizen  has  been  involved  by 
the  action  of  the  state.  And  I  hold  it  to  be  a 
correct  political  maxim,  that  the  state  has  no 
ri«»ht  to  remove  an  evil  of  her  own  creation,  at 


9^8 


the  expense  auJ  to  the  injury  of  InJiViJual  citi 
ztns.  Inasmuch  then,  as  Hy  express  grant  of 
law,  prirate  property  to  the  aiin)nht  of  more 
than  160,000,000  has  been  suffered  to  vest  in 
slaves,  it  would  be  unjust,  it  would  be  iniqui- 
tous to  deprive  those  citizens  of  that  property, 
without  their  consent  or  without  compensation. 
It  would  1)6  legalized  robbery.  By  the  laws  of 
our  state  and  of  our  nation,  the  citizen's  title  to 
slave  property,  is  as  perfect  as  that  to  any  other 
description  of  property  whatever.  The  right  of 
property  in  slaves  has  been  too  long  and  to3 
well  settled  to  be  called  in  question  now.  As 
before  shown,  it  is  recognized  in  the  sacred 
scriptures.  Great  Britain  acknowledged  it,  in 
providing  compensation  to  the  owners  when 
she  emancipated  the  slaves  in  the  West  Indies. 
The  same  doctrine  has  been  recently  asserted  in 
the  Frencli  Assembly,  respecting  the  slaves 
lil)erated  in  the  French  colonies.  It  was  admit- 
ted by  the  states  that  enacted  emancipation  laws; 
for  in  all  of  them  the  citizen  was  permitted  to 
sell  or  else  to  remove  with  his  slaves  to  another 
state.  Very  few  negroes  have  ever  been  eman- 
cipated by  northern  philanthropy.  They  rid 
themselves  of  slavery  by  selling  into  the  south. 
While  more  than  two  hundred  thousand  negroes 
have  been  voluntarily  emancipated  by  the  south, 
a  far  greater  number  have  been  enslaved  by  the 
north,  and  few,  very  few,  if  any  at  all,  have  ever 
Ijeeu  emancipated  there. 

Without  multiplying  examples,  let  these  suf- 
fice to  show  that  the  right  to  slave  property  is 
unquestionable — it  is  guarantied  oy  all  the 
sanctions  of  law.  Thus  far  I  feel  safe  in  going. 
I  am  not  prepared  to  lend  ray  approval  to  cer- 
tain sublimated  abstractions  which  have  been 
80  warmly  and  eloquently  advocated  here.  They 
are  new  to  me.  I  can  see  very  little  benefit  to 
accrue  to  the  individual,  before  a  court  of  jus- 
tice who  has  no  other  title  to  his  property  than 
that  which  he  claims  to  be  above,  and  anterior 
to  all  law.  It  is  enough  for  all  practical  pur- 
poses, to  prove  that  the  owner  has  a  legal  right 
to  his  slaves,  to  furnisli  this  convention  with  a 
justification  in  saying,  that  he  shall  not  be  de- 
prived of  that  property  without  his  consent — 
that  he  shall  be  protected  in  it;  and  that  it  shall 
not  be  forced  from  him,  either  suddenly  or  grad- 
ually. Such  I  have  hitherto  supposed  to  be  the 
true  doctrine  on  this  subject. 

Sir,  if  emancipation  ever  occurs  in  this  state 
it  must,  if  righteously  done,  be  by  the  operation 
of  moral  causes.  The  voluntarv  principle  is  the 
only  just  and  safe  principle.  Moral  power  is 
the  mighty  engine  which  moves  America  on  to 
greatness.  It  is  that  which  gives  stability  to 
our  government  without  standing  armies.  It  is 
that  which  hiis  riiised  and  beautified  our  social, 
civil,  religious  and  political  institutions.  It  is 
the  power  which  is  fast  marching  to  the  empire 
of  the  world.  It  will  regulate  slavery  in  the 
way  it  ought  to  be  regulated,  and  nothing  else 
■will  or  ought. 

We  have  very  few  emancipationists  in  Ken- 
tucky. The  world  has  been  greatly  imposed 
upon  in  this  respect.  It  has  fallen  to  my  lot  to 
meet  with  very  few  Kentucky  emancipationists 
or  even  to  hear  of  them.  To  emancipate  the 
negro,  is  to  make  the  negro  a  freeman.  Now, 
who  among  all  our  prominent  emauoipationists, 


8o  called,  r<eoommended  any  such  measure?   Not 
one  of  them,  sir.     Nothing  of  the  kind  was  sug- 

fested  by  the  emanciJDation  convention,  assem- 
led  in  this  hall  last  spring.  On  the  contrary, 
their  project  of  "gradual  prospective  emancipa- 
tion coupled  with  colonization,"  was  a  most 
magnificent  scheme  of  wholesale  negro  trading 
to  tne  south.  Besides,  sir,  nearly  all  of  the  re- 
doubtable emancipation  champions  in  Kentucky 
are  slaveholders — some  of  them  very  large  slave- 
holders. Have  any  of  them  emancipated  their 
slaves?  Do  you  suppose  that  any  of  them  will? 
Judging  of  the  fountain  by  the  stream,  who 
can  possibly  discern  any  appearance  of  emanci- 
pation in  thi.«  very  extraordinary  gushing  forth 
of  purpose?  Tliey  might  ere  this  have  set  their 
negroes  free.  Nothing  but  their  own  will  has 
hindred  them.  They  are  left  without  excuse. 
With  most  remarkable  complacency,  they  have 
asked  you  to  become  emancipationists,  while 
they  have  carefully  abstained  from  becoming  so 
themselves!  They  wished  to  force  you  into  the 
system,  while  they  would  not  take  a  step  to- 
wards it.  They  would  lay  burdens  upon  your 
shoulders,  and  would  not  touch  with  the  tips  of 
their  fingers!  Never  in  the  whole  history  of  the 
language  has  a  word  been  so  perverted  and  abus- 
ed, as  this  word  emancipation,  by  the  self-styled 
emancipationists. 

It  was  no  love  of  the  negro  which  prompted 
this  movement  in  Kentucky.  No  philanthrophy 
or  religion  entered  into  its  conception,  or  was  to 
control  its  operations.     It  was  a  mere  matter  of 

f)olitical  economy — a  cold  and  heartless  calcu- 
ation  of  profit  and  loss.  It  is  to  redound  to 
the  benefit  of  the  few  at  the  expense  of  the  ma- 
ny. The  rich  champion  of  emancipation  would 
convert  his  slaves  into  cash.  The  operations  of 
his  system  would  for  a  time  at  least,  so  it  was 
granted,  reduce  the  value  of  land.  He  would 
vest  the  price  of  his  negroes  in  land— enlarge 
his  domains — surround  himself  with  a  depen- 
dent and  cringing  tenantry — and  then  what  a 
man  of  consequence  he  would  become! — what  a 
number  of  votes  he  could  control  at  an  election! 
His  poor  negroes  in  the  meantime,  over  whom 
he  had  shed  so  many  tears  of  sympathy,  would 
be  laboring  as  slaves  upon  the  cotton  fields  and 
sugar  plantations  of  the  far  south! 

I  appeal  to  you  if  these  are  not  legitimate  in- 
ferences from  the  facts  in  the  case.  The  whole 
f)lan  was  cruelty  to  the  negro  and  injustice  to 
lis  owner: — cruel  to  the  former, because  it  would 
result  in  his  being  torn  away  from  those  with 
whom  he  had  been  brought  up  and  with  whom 
he  had  many  sympathies,  and  sent  off  to  be  a 
slave  among  strangers;  and  unjust  to  the  latter, 
because  it  robbed  him  of  property  to  which  he 
was  as  rightfully  entitled  as  to  any  ho  pos- 
sessed. 

The  colonization  feature  was  all  a  mere  pre- 
tence— calculated  merely  to  mislead  and  bewil- 
der. It  was  ridiculously  visionary.  To  colo- 
nize in  Africa  some  five  thousand  persons  annu- 
ally, for  fifty  or  a  hundred  years,  would  exhaust 
the  revenues  of  the  nation.  Besides  to  send  that 
number  there  to  encounter  a  wilderness  and  an 
unfamiliar  climate — Avithout  any  reference  to 
character  or  constitution — would  be  but  to  send 
them  to  inevitable  destruction.  I  am  the  friend 
of  African  colonization.     The  success  which 


929 


thus  far  has  attended  that  enterprise,  to  nie  fur- 
nishes unmistakable  evidence  of  its  future  pros- 
perity. Already  the  printing  press  is  tnere. 
The  forrest  has  been  felled,  and  farms  opened. 
Towns  and  villages  have  been  erected.  Com- 
mon schools  and  churches  abound  there  ;  and 
the  high  road  to  wealth  and  greatness  lies  open 
before  them.  I  hope  the  time  may  come  when 
all  the  liberated  slaves  of  America  will  find  a 
home  in  the  land  of  their  fathers — that  they  will 
return  freemen  and  christians  to  those  shores 
from  which,  in  days  gone  by,  their  fathers  were 
brought  in  slavery  and  heathenism — and  thus 
become  pioneers  in  the  redemption  and  regener- 
ation of  that  long  lost  and  benighted  continent. 
But  the  colonization  enterprize  is  still  in  its  in- 
fancy. We  cannot  yet  forsee  its  exact  future 
destiny.  I  believe,  however,  it  is  pregnant  with 
good  to  the  negroes  of  this  country,  many  of 
whom  are  rapidly  becoming  qualified  for  citi- 
zenship there. 

It  is  certain  the  negro  can  never  be  free  in  this 
country,  and  I  trust  that  this  constitution  will 
forbid  the  mockery  of  his  being  called  so  again 
in  this  state.  It  is  better  for  the  negroes  and 
for  the  whites,  that  while  they  stay  amongst  us 
they  should  remain  in  slavery.  Their  welfare 
and  our  own  imperiously  demand  this.  Let  fa- 
natics talk  as  they  may  about  the  natural  rights 
of  man,  they  cannot  make  the  negro  free  in  the 
United  States.  They  may  read  to  him  the  Dec- 
laration of  Independence  until  they  become 
hoarse,  and  still  tliey  cannot  change  the  Ethopi- 
an's  skin.  He  is  no  where  free  in  this  country. 
In  the  north,  he  scarcely  enjoys  any  other  liber- 
ty but  that  of  starving  and  dying.  He  is  not 
admitted  into  the  social  circle  of  the  whites. 
He  cannot  eat  at  the  same  table,  or  ride  in  the 
same  coach  with  them.  He  is  assigned  a  sepa- 
rate seat  in  the  church  and  worships  at  a  difter- 
ent  altar;  and  when  he  dies,  his  body  is  placed 
in  a  graveyard  at  a  distance  from  that  in  which 
repose  the  ashes  of  the  whites.  He  is  in  a  far 
worse  condition  in  every  respect  than  his  broth- 
er in  slavery  at  the  south.  No  state  wants  the 
free  negroes.  Most  of  them  have  stringent  laws 
against  their  admission.  Every  where  they  are 
spurned  and  trodden  under  foot.  They  are  an 
unmitigated  curse,  as  a  general  thing,  in  our 
state.  There  are  honorable  exceptions  it  is 
true;  but  even  those  exceptions  do  not  furnish 
instances  where  they  are  free  in  any  correct  ac- 
ceptation of  that  term.  Policy  and  humanity 
then  combine  in  urging  that  if  the  negro  be  eman- 
cipated, lie  should  be  sent  beyond  our  borders. 

I  wish  now  to  say  a  few  words  to  the  advocates 
of  the  law  '33  and  to  those  who  are  opposed 
to  it.  If  I  understood  the  views  of  my  distin- 
guished friend  from  Madison,  (Mr.  Turner,)  he 
wishes  to  prohibit  the  importation  of  slaves,  by 
declaring  all  free  who  may  be  imported.  This 
is  not  the  law  of  '33 — it  is  more  like  the  "Wilmot 
proviso."  It  might  prevent  the  importation  of 
slaves,  but  it  would  certainly  favor  tne  importa- 
tion of  free  negroes.  For  instance,  a  man  in  a 
neighboring  state,  having  a  negro  he  wished  to 
emancipate,  all  he  need  do  would  be  to  send  him 
to  Kentucky,  and  he  would  be  free !    *Now  I  am 

*I  think  it  due  to  Mr.  Turner  to  state,  that  there  was 
a  provision  in  his  plan  which  had  escaped  my  memory 
at  the  time  of  speaking.    It  is  as  follows:  "But  any 

117 


opposed  to  all  this.  And  I  am  equally  opposed 
to  a  constitutional  prohibition  of  the  passage  of 
such  a  law.  Let  trie  constitution  remain  un- 
changed on  this  point.  Leave  it  to  be  regulated, 
by  the  people  through  their  representatives.  I 
hope,  therefore,  that  my  friend  from  Simpson, 
(Mr.  Clarke.)  will  not  press  his  motion  to  grant 
liberty  in  the  constitution  to  any  citizen  to  im- 
port slaves  for  his  own  use.  It  is  important  that 
Kentucky  should  not  be  distracted  and  divided 
now  upon  the  slave  question.  It  is  important 
that  our  state  sliould  stand  firm  upon  lier  old 
platform.  The  slavery  question  is  now  shaking 
our  national  government  to  its  foundation. 
Hitherto  Kentucky  has  acted  as  a  mediator  be- 
tween the  contending  parties  of  the  north  and 
the  south.  Her  voice  has  more  than  once  been 
potent  in  staying  the  agitation  of  the  waters  of 
strife,  discord  and  disunion.  If  she  would  main- 
tain her  position  as  peace  maker,  she  must  stand 
firm  where  she  has  ever  stood  in  relation  to  this 
question — avoiding  alike  northern  and  southern 
extremes. 

We  are  particularly  interested  in  maintaining 
the  integrity  of  our  national  government,  as 
handed  to  us  by  our  fathers.  Let  us  unite  our 
voices  with  that  of  the  hero  of  New  Orleans,  in 
vindication  of  the  sentiment:  "the  Union — it 
must  be  preserved."  The  states  of  this,  no  lon- 
ger western,  but  central  valley,  are  united  to- 
? ether  by  the  indissoluble  bonds  of  nature, 
"he  ''father  of  waters"  flowing  through  its 
midst,  stretches  his  arms  from  the  Rocky  moun- 
tains to  the  Alleghennies,  and  encircles  in  one 
fond  embrace  all  the  states  of  this  great  valley. 
Our  disseverance  then  cannot  be  accomplished 
without  political  suicide.  The  slave  question 
and  no  other  question  can  separate  the  western 
states.  It  seems  then  a  sacred  duty  of  ours  not 
to  let  this  question  divide  other  states. 

All  the  recollections  of  our  history  ought  to 
endear  this  Union  to  every  American  heart. 
Look  at  the  declaration  of  our  independence;  and 
to  that  document  are  signed  promiscuously  the 
names  of  northern  and  southern  men.  Go  to 
the  battle  fields  of  the  revolution,  and  in  the 
same  grave  mingles  the  dust  of  northern  men 
with  the  dust  of  southern  men,  and  there  let 
them  rest  in  quietude  until  aroused  at  the  resur- 
rection. The  same  historic  page  which  records 
the  deeds  of  Washington,  Sumpter  and  Marion, 
of  the  south,  in  the  war  of  the  revolution,  also 
records  those  of  Putnam,  Warren  and  Greene, 
their  illustrious  compatriots  of  the  north.  Let 
him  who  would  destroy  this  confederacy  first 
obliterate  the  evidences  of  the  union  which  ex- 
isted among  those  who  gave  us  our  liberties  and 
founded  this  government.  Let  him  tear  the  dec- 
laration of  independence  so  as  to  separate  its 
northern  from  its  southern  signers.  Let  hiiu 
violate  the  graves  of  the  illustrious  dead,  and  per- 
mit no  longer  the  soldiers  who  died  for  our  liber- 
ties to  sleep  in  the  same  grave.  Let  him  read  the 
page  of  historj'  on  which  are  the  recorded  deeds 
of  Warren  and  Washington — of  northern  and 
southern  heroes — so  that  the  one  shall  not  stand 
connected  with  the  other;  and  then  let  him  de- 
molish the  work  of  their  hands!    Who  would 


slave  who  shall  hecome  free  by  being  brought  to  Ken- 
tucky shall  be  sold  into  slavery,  and  the  proceeds  paid 
into  the  public  treasury." 


930 


have  torn  asunder  the  "star  spangled  banner" 
which  has  waved  so  long  over  -'the  land  of  the 
free  and  the  home  of  the  brave?"  1h"o  sir,  if  that 
proud  eagle,  the  emblem  of  our  country's  union 
and  liberty,  wliich  has  soared  so  high  and  so  glo- 
riously, the  wonder  and  admiration  of  the  world, 
is  ever  to  be  struck  down,  God  forbid,  that  a 
Kentuckian's  arm  should  wing  tlie  shaft  which 
is  to  arrest  the  noble  bird  in  his  etherial  flight. 
I  beseech  gentlemen  to  yield  their  preferences 
on  the  law  of  '33  and  its  opposite;  that  we  may, 
as  in  times  past,  speak  peace  to  the  troubled  ele- 
ments of  the  country.  Let  us  say  to  the  north, 
we  occupy  now  on  this  subject,  the  ground 
which  we  did  when  our  fathers  on  the  battle 
field  fought  and  bled  for  northern  rights;  and 
let  us  make  the  same  appeal  to  the  south,  and  it 
may  be,  our  voice  will  do  heard.  For  one,  I  am 
content  that  this  subject  shall  remain  as  it  has 
ever  been  in  the  organic  law  of  our  state.  Let 
who  else  may,  I  am  not  ashamed  of  my  state, 
no  matter  with  what  other  state  compared. — 
Twice  I  have  stood  upon  other  soil  than  that 
over  which  floated  the  stars  and  the  stripes  of 
my  native  land;  and  I  trod  tlie  ground  of  the 
stranger,  feeling  prouder  tlian  ever,  that  I  was 
an  American.  I  have  been  in  nearly  all  the 
free  states  of  this  union;  I  have  scanned  in- 
quiringly, their  moral,  social,  and  political  con- 
dition— ^I  have  walked  the  streets  of  their  great- 
est cities,  and  examined  the  elements  of  their 
wealth  ana  prosperity,  and  never  yet  did  I  feel 
the  least  disposed  to  shrink  from  the  declara- 
tion, that  I  was  a  Kentuckian.  Kentucky  is  no 
mean  state  in  the  estimation  of  her  neighbors. 
The  chivalry  of  her  heroes  and  the  eloquence  of 
her  statesmen  have  carried  her  fame  to  the  utmost 
bounds  of  civilization.  There  is  nothing  in  her 
present  condition,  nothing,  I  am  sure,  in  her 
past  history,  which  sliould  make  her  sons 
ashp.med  to  call  her  mother.  I  Avould  not  dis- 
turb her  social  relations.  I  want  her  still  to 
remain  the  land  of  hospitality,  and  of  noble  and 
generous  impulses.  In  behalf  of  my  constitu- 
ents then,  I  beseech  you  let  this  institution 
stand  Avholly  undisturbed,  without  any  change. 
Mr.  CLARKE.  I  should  not  at  this  time  de- 
tain the  convention  with  any  remarks,  were  it 
not  that  the  gentleman  la.st  up,  (Mr.  Waller,) 
and  others  who  have  recently  spoken,  gentle 
men  who  claim  to  be  pro-slavery  men,  say — and 
they  look  over  in  this  direction  when  tliey  do 
say  it — that  upon  the  subject  of  slavery  they  can- 
not go  so  far  as  some  other  gentlemen  go,  but 
that  they  are  still  pro-slavery  men,  and  profess 
to  argue  for  the  perpetuation  of  the  institution 
in  the  state  of  Kentucky. 

The  gentleman  from  Fleming,  (Mr.M.  P.  Mar- 
shall,) a  few  days  ago,  stated  that  he  regarded 
the  institution  of  slavery  as  a  moral  and  a  social 
evil.  That  gentleman,  Mr.  President,  declined 
voting  for  tlie  resolution  otfered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Henderson;  he  also  declined  voting 
for  the  resolution  offered  by  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon;  in  both  of  which  the  principle  was  as- 
serted that  property  existed  anterior  t<)  govern- 
ment* or  the  formation  of  constitutions;  that  "ar- 
bitrary and  absolute  power  over  the  lives,  prop- 
erty, and  liberty  of  freemen,  existed  nowhere  m 
a  republic,  not  even  in  Uie  largest  majority." 
That  gentleman   declined  voting  for  either  of 


these  propositions,  both  embracing  the  same 
principle;  and  having  declined  voting  for  either 
of  these  propositions,  it  seems  that  that  gentle- 
man believes  that  the  power  does  exist  in  a  re- 
publican government  to  take  away,  bv  a  majori- 
ty, the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  ihc  citizen, 
against  his  consent,  and  without  making  him 
compensation.  Now,  if  the  gentleman  from 
Fleming  entertains  opinions  of  that  sort,  and 
does  believe  that  the  institution  of  slavery,  as  it 
exists  in  Kentucky,  is  a  moral  and  a  social  evil, 
then,  if  I  were  he,  I  would  stand  up  in  this  con- 
vention, and  before  the  Avorld  proclaim  that  there 
was  power  in  this  convention  to  get  rid  of  that 
evil,  and  that  it  ought  to  be  exercised.  I  would 
go  for  emancipation,  direct  and  immediate,  if  I 
entertained  such  principles.  The  gentleman  last 
up,  (Mr.  Waller,)  declares  that  he  cannot  go  so 
far  as  other  gentlemen  go;  that  he  does  not  be- 
lieve that  the  institution  of  slavery,  in  the  ab- 
stract, is  a  blessing  to  both  races.  Now,  sir,  I 
have  never  attempted  in  this  house  to  advance 
any  opinion  on  the  subject  of  slavery  in  the  ab- 
stract. I,  for  one,  have  expressed  no  opinion  on 
that  subject.  "SuflRcient  I'or  the  iay  is  the  evil 
thereof."  When  it  beco  nes  necessary  for  me  to 
express  an  opinion  upon  that  subject,  I  will  do 
so;  but  I  will  say,  as  I  have  said  time  and  again, 
that  the  institution  x)f  slavery,  as  it  exists  in 
Kentucky  and  the  other  slave  states  of  the  union, 
is  a  blessing  to  both  the  white  and  the  African 
race.  I  will  not,  sir,  after  so  much  has  been  said 
upon  the  subject  of  slaveiy,  and  at  a  time  when 
the  opinion  of  every  gentleman  has  V>ecome  a 
"fixed  fact,"  detain  this  convention  with  an  ar- 
gument to  prove  that  the  institution  of  slavery, 
as  it  exists  in  Kentucky  and  in  every  slave  state 
in  the  union,  is  a  blessing  to  both  races.  I  will 
content  myself  by  refering  the  gentleman  from 
Woodford,  (Mr.  Waller,)  to  the  able  lecture  of 
Mr.  Elwood  Fisher,  of  Ohio,  "on  the  north  and 
south,"  a  lecture  to  wliieh,  if  I  understood  his 
speech  aright,  lie  is  indebted  for  most  of  the  facts, 
arguments,  and  figures,  which  compose  the  vciy 
lengthy  speech  just  delivered  by  him. 

If  the  historical  facts  and  statistics  embraced 
in  that  able  lecture,  are  not  sufiicicnt  to  convince 
one  who  professes  to  be  a  pro-slavery  man,  that 
the  African  slave  in  Kentucky  is  happier  and 
better  than  in  any  other  condition  in  which  the 
same  race  has  ever  been  placed  or  can  be  placed — 
if  the  same  admirable  address  does  not  incon- 
testibly  show  the  superiority  of  the  Kentuckian, 
in  self-sacrificing  patriotism,  in  -norals,  in  chiv- 
alry, and  in  wealtli,  over  the  white  race  in  any 
free  state  in  the  union,  then,  sir,  I  will  not  tax 
myself,  or  this  convention,  by  "casting  pearl" 
b  .'fore  such  pro-slavery  men. 

Mr.  DUNAVAN  moved  the  previous  question 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  adoption  of 
the  section,  and  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  off'ered  the  following, 
to  supply  the  place  of  the  section  just  stricken 
out. 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  power  to 
pass  laws  to  punish  free  negroes,  for  crime  or 
misdemeanors,  in  such  mode  as  is  now  prescribed 
by  law.  Or,  may  substitute  as  punishment  for 
crime  or  misdemeanors,  banislunent  and  trans- 


931 


portation  out  of  the  state,  or  a  sale  into  involun- 
tary servitude." 

Mr.  HARDIN.  There  is  a  difficulty  in  this, 
Mr.  President,  which  I  do  not  see  hoV  we  can 
overeouie.  How  can  we  send  these  negroes  out 
of  the  state?  Wc  have  no  jurisdiction  in  this 
mutter.  We  know  that  if  a  man  commits  mur- 
der in  Virginia  or  Tennessee,  by  a  requsition 
from  the  governor  of  either  of  tliese  states  upon 
the  governor  of  Kentucky,  the  criminal  would 
have  to  be  surrendered;  but  1  do  not  see  that  we 
have  any  power  to  banish  a  man,  and  if  -ft-e  had 
wc  liaveno  place  to  which  to  send  him. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  sliould  suppose 
Mr.  President,  that  although  we  have  not  exer- 
cised the  same  power  which  some  of  the  states 
of  this  Union  have  by  the  purchase  of,  and  the 
maintaining  a  colony  upon  the  coasts  of  Africa, 
it  is  not  because  we  do  not  possess  that  power, 
but  because  no  emergency  has  hitherto  arisen 
rendering  it  expedient  that  such  a  power  .should 
be  exercised  by  Kentucky.  It  may  have  been 
thought  by  some,  that  under  the  existing  consti- 
tution of  the  state,  this  power  is  not  vested  in 
the  legislative  department.  We  know  that  Mary- 
land, as  a  sovereign  state  of  this  Union  has 
owned  and  governed  a  colony  upon  the  coast  of 
Africa,  which  for  a  series  of  years,  was  called  the 
"Marvland  colony."  I  am  Jiot  prepared  to  say, 
and  Twill  not  go  into  a  discussion  on  the  point 
at  this  moment,  that  the  state  of  Kentucky  can- 
not, in  her  sovereiOT  capacity,  own  and  control 
sucli  a  colony,  if  she  choses  to  do  so.  I  cannot 
admitthat  she  is  not  able,  as  a  sovereign  state, 
to  own  property,  real  and  pereonal,  within  any 
territory  but  her  own  state.  She  may  acquire 
and  own  real  estate  on  the  Rocky  mountains  if 
she  pleases;  she  may  own  real  estate  in  any  of 
the  governments  of  Europe,  if  there  is  no  law 
in  such  government  against  it.  subject  to  the 
emmiuent  domain  of  the  foreign  government. 
There  is  no  inhibition  in  the  nature  and  struc- 
ture of  our  government  against  such  a  power; 
but  what  my  amendment  contemplates  is  this: 
without  undertaking  to  decide  whether  there 
can  or  cannot  be  exercised,  a  power,  by  any  le- 
gislative enactment,  of  holding  a  territory  be- 
yond our  own  state,  is  to  give  the  general  as- 
sembly power  to  adopt  some  means  of  transport- 
ing beyond  the  jurisdiction  of  this  common- 
wealth, a  free  negro  convicted  of  crime.  I  want 
to  leave  the  field  open  to  future  legislative  ac- 
tion upon  this  subject.  If  the  legislature  does 
not,  and  cannot  possess  such  power,  then  it  only 
remains  for  them  to  make  such  regulations  for 
the  punishment  of  crime,  as  may  come  within 
the  limit  of  tlieir  power — such  as  have  hereto- 
fore been  exercised.  Sir,  we  deny  to  this  portion 
of  the  population  of  Kentucky — free  negroes — 
the  enioyment  of  any  political  or  social  rights, 
nevertheless  they  are  human  beings,  they  have 
civil  rights;  and  it  is  the  duty  of  government 
not  to  invade  those  rights,  or  to  treat  them  with 
cruelty.  But  if,  when  the  evil  of  crime  has 
grown  so  intolerable  as  to  render  it  necessaiy'  for 
us  to  take  some  steps  towards  eifectingaremedy; 
if,  under  these  circumstances,  we  cannot  exercise 
the  power  of  banishment  as  a  punishment,  let 
us  at  least  give  to  the  law-making  power  the 
choice  of  determining  whether  this  cuiss,  when 
guilty  of  crime,  shall,  upon  the  second,  third  or 


fourth  conviction,  either  be  punished  by  banish- 
ment or  sale  into  involuntary  servitude,or  wheth- 
er by  impri.sonment  in  the  penetentiary  for  life. 
Confinement  in  the  penetcntiarv,  of  a  free  negro, 
presents  but  little  terrorto  a  dishonest  free  negro; 
and  we  all  know,  that  with  him  at  least,  it  is 
not  considered  any  degradation  of  character. 
Let  it  be  understood  that  if  a  free  negro  should 
be  convicted  of  any  crime  he  will  be  liable  to 
be  seized  and  sold  into  involuntary  servitude,  or 
be  banished  to  some  other  country,  beyond  the 
United  States.  Let  that  be  understood  as  the 
law  of  Kentucky,  and  instead  of  being  annoyed 
with  free  negroes  coming  into  the  state,  they  will 
be  very  apt  to  keep  away,  and  all  the  vicious 
ones  we  may  now  have,  will  leave  the  state  as 
fast  as  the^  can.  That  is  my  amendment.  I 
leave  it  with  the  convention  to  adopt  or  reject 
it  as  it  may  deem  best. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  move  to  amend 
the  amendment,  by  striking  out  the  words  "ban- 
ishment and  transportation  out  of  the  state." 

The  objection  urged  against  this  proposition 
by  the  gentleman  from  A^elson,  (Mr.  Hardin,) 
that  Kentucky  has  no  power  to  banish  her  fel- 
ons to  another  state,  is  met  by  the  mover  of  the 
section  with  the  suggestion  that  Kentucky  might 
establish  a  colony  upon  the  coast  of  Africa,  or 
use  some  of  those  already  in  existence  as  a  place 
of  banishment;  and  seems  to  indicate  that  the 
colony  of  Liberia  would  be  a  fit  receptacle  and 
an  appropriate  place  of  punishment  for  the  ne- 
gro felons  of  Kentucky. 

The  colony  of  Liberia,  sir,  was  established  by 
the  philanthropist  and  the  christian  to  afford  to 
the  free  blacks  of  the  United  States  an  asylum 
from  that  state  of  degradation,  inevitable,  so 
long  as  they  remain  in  this  country,  and  to  fur- 
nish a  home  in  the  land  of  their  fathers  where, 
while  we  are  relieved  from  the  course  of  their 
presence  amongus,  they  can  enjoy  the  blessings 
of  civil  and  religious  Tibertv.  It  w-ould  not  be 
possible  to  induce  the  free  Slacks  to  goto  that 
country — a  thing,  in  my  opinion,  much  to  be 
desired,  and  that  which  would  be  of  infinite 
advantage  to  both  white  and  black,  to  bond  and 
free — if  we  convert  it  into  a  place  of  punishment 
instead  of  a  place  of  refuge,  a  countiy,  and  a 
home. 

The  christian  looks  to  this  colony  as  tending 
to  the  fulfillment  of  that  promise,  "that  I  will 
give  thee  the  heathen  for  an  inheritance  and  the 
uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  a  possession." 
And  it  is  true,  that  to  shed  the  light  of  religion 
and  civilization  upon  the  dark  sons  of  Africa, 
has  been  the  most  difficult  task  of  the  christian 
minister.  They  have  ever  known  the  white  man 
as  the  enemies  of  their  race,  and  cannot,  and 
will  not,  receive  them  as  ministers  of  mercy. 
From  those  of  their  own  color  w^ho  even  in  their 
degraded  condition — the  condition  of  slaves — 
have  been  elevated  in  intellect  and  morals  far, 
very  far,  above  them,  they  must  receive  their 
first  lessons  in  civilization  and  Christianity. 

And  when  we  see  the  sons  of  the  desert,  can- 
nibals, whose  fathers  were  forced  from  their  home 
— if  home  it  could  be  called — returning  to  their 
father  laml,  fitted  by  their  n^sters  for  the  work, 
carrying  the  "glad  tidings"  to  their  benighted 
brethren,  well  may  we  exclaim,  "just  and  true 
are  all  thy  way.?  thou  King  of  saints." 


933 


I  cannot,  for  one,  agree  to  do  that  which  TS'ould 
have  a  tendency  to  defeat  the  objects  for  which 
this  colony  was  instituted;  and  it  cannot  be 
questioned,  that  to  send  the  worst  of  our  black 
population — men  destitute  of  all  moral  restraint 
— criminals — to  force  these  upon  the  colony, 
would  subvert  the  great  ends  of  its  institution; 
and  I  desire  to  see  the  free  blacks  remove  from 
this  country;  I  wish  them  to  be  willing  to  go; 
and  I  cannot  say  to  them  in  our  laws,  that  the 
home  to  which  we  invite  them  is  woi"se  than  a 
penitentiaiy.  Sir,  it  is  not  so.  I  look  upon 
these  colonies  as  the  only  bright  spots  on  that 
benighted  coast — Oases,  from  which  the  streams 
moral  and  intellectual  may  flow,  to  make  the 
"  desert  bloom  and  blossom  as  the  rose" — a  home 
for  the  black  man  in  that  climate  congenial  to 
Lis  nature,  where  alone  he  can  enjoy  those  so- 
cial, civil,  and  religious  blessings,  which  here 
he  has  loved  and  wishes  for,  though  not  fully 
enjoyed.    I  cannot  cast  a  shade,  a  suspicion  up- 

f)on  these  colonies,  by  pointing  to  them   in  our 
aws  as  fit  only  for  criminal  stations. 

I  hope  that  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  who 
is  both  a  statesman  and  a  christian,  will  agree  to 
strike  out  of  the  section  the  words  I  have  pro- 
posed to  strike  out. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  want  to  strike  out  those 
words  because  I  do  not  think  we  have  the  power 
to  expel  a  free  negro  from  this  state.  The  free 
negro,  sir,  has  a  vested  right  to  his  freedom,  and 
a  vested  right  to  his  residence  here.  You  may 
pass  laws  prohibiting  a  man  from  setting  the 
slaves  he  may  now  own,  or  their  increase,  free; 
you  may  pass  laws  providing  that  if  he  does, 
that  they  shall  not  remain  in  Kentucky;  you 
may  pass  laws  prohibiting  free  negroes,  from 
other  states,  from  coming  in  here;  but  you  can- 
not pass  a  law,  according  to  my  understanding, 
to  compel  a  free  negro  who  is  here  to  leave;  and, 
to  convict  him  for  refusing  to  do  that,  is,  in  my 
opinion,  to  convict  him  for  what  is  no  offence. 
He  has,  it  is  true,  no  political  rights  in  Ken- 
tucky; and  we  know  that  he  is  excluded  by 
f)ublic  sentiment  from  many  social  rights;  but 
le  owes  us  allegiance,  and  we  owe  him  the  cor- 
responding right  of  protection.  He  is  bound  to 
obey  our  laws;  he  is  bound  to  contribute  to- 
wards the  support  of  our  government  according 
to  his  property,  and  we  owe  him,  in  return,  what 
is  called  locaf  protection. 

Sir,  the  Spanish  government  once  put  in  jail 
a  man  of  the  iiame  of  Richard  Meade:  they  had 
no  right  to  do  this,  because  he  had  been  a  long 
time  a  resident  of  Spain,  and  Spain  owed  him 
protection.  He  had  not  become  a  subject  of 
Spain,  but  she  owed  him  local  protection  be- 
cause he  owed  to  that  government,  while  there, 
local  allegiance;  and  upon  that  state  of  the  case 
being  represented  to  Spain,  they  released  him. 
If  you  look  into  the  decisions  of  the  supreme 
courts  of  the  United  States,  and  those  of  the  ad- 
miralty of  Great  Britain,  you  will  find  that  an 
American  citizen,  domiciled  in  Great  Britain 
when  war  is  declared,  is  entitled  to  protection, 
and  their  vessels  then  in  British  ports  cannot  be 
captured,  because  Great  Britain  owed  them  local 
protection;  and  the  same  rule  applies  to  British 
subjects  and  British  vessels  in  this  country  un- 
der similar  circumstances. 
Now  we  owe  to  the  free  negro,  local  protc«- 


tion,  and  he  owes  us  local  allegiance.  That  al- 
legiance is  to  submit  to  our  laws,  to  obey  our 
laws,  and  to  pay  taxes  according  to  the  proper- 
ty he  may  possess.  I  would  submit  to  this  hon- 
orable convention  that  these  negroes  are  poor 
human  beings,  and  upon  the  score  of  humanity, 
I  would  ask,  would  you  treat  them  thus?  Pre- 
vent, if  you  choose,  the  owner  from  setting  his 
negro  free;  but  every  precept  of  humanity,  every 
law  of  Christianity  forbids  that  we  should  treat 
them  worse  than  we  would  treat  dogs.  They 
have  a  right  to  enjoy  their  freedom,  when  free, 
as  we  have  to  enjoy  ours.  They  have  no  politi- 
cal rights,  but  they  have  every  civil  right  that 
we  have;  and  what  is  more,  their  skin  will  not 
be  black  when  they  go  to  heaven,  and  stand  be- 
fore the  judgment  seat  of  Christ;  there  sir,  they 
will  be  robed  as  white  as  we  aic,  and  we  are  to 
answer  for  our  treatment  to  them  here.  I  hope 
my  coUeage  will  not  press  that  amendment;  it 
is  at  war  with  every  feeling  of  my  heart.  They 
have  the  same  inheritance  in  the  tlood  of  Christ 
that  we  have,  and  we  are  bound  to  treat  them 
with  humanity. 

Sir,  what  does  the  amendment  propose?  That 
you  have  a  right  to  send  them  it\to  banishment, 
or  involuntary  servitude  for  crime.  Then  sir, 
if  you  carry  that  amendment  we  have  a  right  to 
define  crime.  Now,  I  deny  the  policy  of  that, 
and  I  deny  the  right  of  it.  And  you  are  to  sell 
them  out  of  the  state,  not  as  a  punishment  to 
keep  them  from  crime  hereafter,  but  you  are  to 
subject  them  to  slavery  upon  what  we,  the 
whites,  call  crime.    Sir,  I  object  to  this. 

But  it  is  said  we  may  transport  them.  I  deny 
it.  Can  you  send  your  officers  with  a  human 
being  beyond  the  limits  of  this  state?  Have  you 
jurisdiction  to  send  a  gang  of  negroes  to  any 
place  in  the  United  States?  No  sir.  But  the 
gentleman  says  we  may  send  them  to  some 
country  which  we  may  acquire.  But  we  cannot 
acquire  any  country.  If  we  acquire  any  coun- 
ry  from  foreign  nations,  it  is  foroid  by  the  con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  which  provides 
that  "no  state  shall  enter  into  any  treaty,  alli- 
ance, or  confederation,  grant  letters  of  marque 
and  reprisal,  coin  money,  omit  bills  of  credit, 
make  anything  but  gold  and  silver  coin  a  tender 
in  payment  of  debts;  pass  any  bill  of  attainder, 
ex  post  facto  law,  or  law  impairing  the  obliga- 
tion of  contracts,  or  grant  any  title  of  nobility." 
Now  sir,  no  state  can  make  any  treaty  with 
any  foreign  nation.  There  is  no  reservation  of 
power.  Can  we  make  any  negotiations  with 
any  lawful  prince  or  king  of  Africa  to  which 
we  may  banish  negroes  and  make  it  a  kind  of 
Botany  Bay?  No  sir,  we  cannot  do  it  at  all. 
This  is  a  matter  which  congress  itself  cannot  i 
do.  Congress  cannot  appropriate  money  for 
the  purpose  of  colonizing  negroes;  it  is  not 
within  tne  power  of  congress  to  do  it;  and  that 
is  the  reason  why  the  federal  government  hiis 
never  taken  up  tlie  subject.  It  is  provided  in 
the  federal  coiutitution  that  "congress  shall  liavo 
power  to  levy  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts, 
and  excises,  to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for 
tlie  common  defence  and  general  welfare  of  the 
United  States,  but  it  has  no  power  to  ajjpropri- 
ate  money  for  the  purposes  of  colonization  at 
all;  and  tliat  sir,  has  been  decided  over  and  over 
again.     She  can  pay  debts  and  provide  for  tlic 


OSS 


general  welfare  of  the  uation.  By  the  "gener- 
al welfare  of  the  nation"  is  meant  an  implied 
power  given  to  the  general  government  for  the 
purpose  of  carying  the  expressed  powers  into 
effect.  That  is  the  whole  of  it;  and  whenever 
you  go  beyond  that,  congress  is  as  omnipotent 
as  the  British  Parliament  consisting  of  king 
lords  and  commons. 

But,  sir,  congress  has  no  power  to  appropriate 
money  to  send  negroes  to  Liberia.  I  again  re- 
peat, I  beg,  1  beseech,  I  conjure  my  colleague 
not  to  press  this  amendment.  He  may  have  the 
power,  and  the  house  may  agree  with  him,  but  I 
do  think  it  would  be  a  reproach  to  this  conven- 
tion in  the  eyes  of  postt-rity  for  hundreds  of 
years  to  come.  Suppose,  sir,  a  ne^ro  gets  drunk; 
you  call  it  a  crime,  and  3'ou  sell  him  into  servi- 
tude. Suppose  he  steals  a  chicken  ;  you  call  it 
a  crime,  and  you  sell  him  into  servitude  for  life. 
Suppose  he  goes  a  fishing  on  the  sabbath;  you 
call  it  a  crime,  and  you  sell  him  into  servitude. 
Why,  sir,  you  may  make  anything  a  crime  if  you 
please.  Let  the  free  negroes  take  the  same  laws 
that  we  have.  If  they  commit  murder  let  them 
be  hung;  if  they  conmiit  other  crimes  let  them 
go  to  jail  or  the  penitentiary.  Debar  them  of 
any  f)olitical  rights — I  am  against  that;  debar 
them  of  social  rights — I  am  against  their  inter- 
mixing with  the  white  population  at  all.  When 
you  have  done  that,  you  have  done  all.  They 
have  no  political  rights  or  power;  and  when  we 
have  the  power  we  are  bound  to  protect  them. 
In  the  language  of  Ulvsses,  when  lie  bowed  in 

ho       o  .  > 

IS  rags, 

"A  suppliant  bends,  Oh!  pity  human  woe, 
'Tis  what  the  happy  to  the  unhappy  owe," 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  would  go  for  striking  out 
the  word  "misdemeanor"  in  that  resolution,  and 
also  part  of  what  the  gentleman  from  Jessamine 
has  gone  for — the  selling  into  perpetual  servi- 
tude. Jfow,  sir,  it  is  known  that  we  hang  ne- 
groes for  a  great  many  crimes  for  which  a  white 
man  is  only  sent  to  the  penitentiary.  I  would 
chose  the  least  of  the  two  evils.  If  a  man  com- 
mits a  crime,  send  him  into  banishment;  get 
clear  of  him  in  this  way  in.stcad  of  hanging  him. 
Now  it  is  true,  that  the  state  of  Kentucky  has 
no  jurisdictton  beyond  her  limits;  but  as  there 
is  a  colony  organized  by  a  society  in  the  United 
States,  a  man  has  a  right  to  transfer  his  negro  to 
that  society,  and  they  have  power  to  transport 
him.  The  younger  gentleman  from  Nelson 
maintains  nothing  more  tJian  this.  The  court  of 
appeals  has  decided  that  an  individual  wishing 
to  emancipate  his  slaves  has  a  right  to  do  so; 
and  the  government  has  power  to  see  that  that 
■will  is  executed,  and  th.it  the  slaves  are  sent  off. 
If  the  government  has  power  to  do  that,  certain- 
ly it  has  power  to  avert  a  greater  evil  by  giving 
a  negro  to  this  society  instead  of  hanging  him. 

The  elder  gentlemen  from  Nelson  h.is  taken  a 
position  which  I  deny.  How  does  tlie  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  get  the  power  to  pur- 
chase, and  man,  and  sustain  vessels  to  catch  those 
engaged  in  the  slave  trade?  Would  not  the  same 
power  which  autliorizes  them  to  do  this,  author- 
ize them  to  take  away  slaves  from  every  state  of 
the  Union  if  they  were  willing  to  go?  This 
would  comport  with  the  gooa  of  tlie  whole 
states  if  congress  would  exercise  the  power,  of 
sending  all  free  negroes  to  the  coast  of  Africa. 


How  would  the  government  get  the  power  to  ap- 
propriate half  a  million  of  dollars  to  relieve  the 
distress  of  Ireland ;  and  yet  it  passed  one  branch 
of  congress.  Much  might  be  said  of  this  provi- 
sion if  we  had  time  to  discuss  it;  but  I  will  ask, 
sir,  what  arewe  to  do  with  free  negroes  here?  I 
do  not  wish  to  act  unkindly  towards  them, 
but  they  are  not  entitled  to  the  protection  of  the 
constitution  against  their  crimes.  I  am  opposed 
to  their  being  sold  into  slaverj'  for  a  mere  misde- 
meanor, but  1  am  in  favor  of  using  the  banishing 
power  by  framing  laws  to  suit  the  state  of  tlie 
case,  and  to  deliver  them  over  to  a  society  recog- 
nized by  the  federal  governraont.  I  have  no 
doubt  that  such  a  course  would  be  productive  of 
good,  and  I  sincerely  hope  we  shall  have  some 
such  provision  adopted  in  the  constitution. 

Mr.  BRISTOW.  If  the  legislature  have  not 
already  the  power  to  banish  free  negroes  guilty 
of  crime,  it  occurs  to  me  that  we  cannot  confer 
that  power.  I  understand  that  under  our  gov- 
ernment the  legislature  have  all  power  where 
they  are  not  restricted.  If  we  could  confer  this 
power,  I,  as  one  of  the  delegates  to  this  conven- 
tion, would  be  willing  to  do  so ;  but  it  is  my 
opinion  that  this  is  a  subject  which  we  ought 
not  to  interfere  with.  I  am  sure  if  the  delegates 
to  this  convention  ever  intend  to  go  home  they 
will  see  the  propriety  of  confining  tliem.selves  to 
legitimate  business.  We  have  been  adop^isg 
measures  not  unfrequently,  and  then  in  a^day  or 
two,  having  seen  their  impropriety,  have  rejected 
them.  This  does  not  appear  to  me  to  be  a  mat- 
ter of  that  crying  importance  which  renders  it 
necessaiy  to  make  a  provision  for  it  in  the  con- 
stitution. I  do  not  think  the  country  demands 
it;  and  I  would  say  thatmy  feelings  of  justice  cor- 
responds with  those  of  the  elder  gentleman  from 
Nflson.  They  are,  as  he  has  said,  a  poor  degra- 
ded race  in  our  country;  but  they  are  hero,  and 
it  is  our  duty  to  protect  them.  I  would  not, 
therefore,  put  such  a  clause  into  the  constitution. 
There  is  no  necessity  for  it.  We  would  not 
make  a  provision  in  the  constitution  that  a  man 
should  be  hanged  for  any  particular  crime;  this 
is  distinctly  the  province  of  the  legislature. 
That  body  has  ample  power  to  pass  all  necessary 
laws;  and  therefore,  I  hold  it  to  be  wholly  unne- 
cessary for  us  to  make  any  such  provision  as  this 
resolution  appears  to  contemplate. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  From  the  remarks 
that  have  have  been  made,  it  might  be  supposed 
tJiat  I  was  anxious  to  hang  or  transport  every 
free  negro  in  Kentucky,  honest  or  dishonest  ; 
and  that  I  have  attempted  to  deny  free  negroes 
the  blessings  of  the  christian  religion.  No  sir; 
I  mean  no  such  thing.  What  is  the  proposition 
I  have  offered?  I  do  not  propose  to  create  crime 
or  define  it;  I  leave  that  with  the  legislative  de- 
partment of  this  government,  acting  under  the 
influence  of  the  high  obligations  which  rest  up- 
on them  as  men  and  as  christians.  They  will 
not  deal  with  the  subject  of  crime  in  the  manner 
indicated  by  the  opponents  of  this  amendment; 
they  will  not  declare  that  fishing  on  the  Stib- 
batli  day  by  any  one,  bond  or  free,  is  an  offence 
for  which  a  man  should  be  subject  to  expatria- 
tion or  hanging,  as  my  colleague  apprehends. 
Our  legislatures  have  not  heretofore  so  legisla- 
ted; and  if  we  could  imagine  such  a  spirit  of 
legislation  to  spring  up  in  this  commonwealth 


|S4 


tincler  tEe  iinlTmited  poTv^r  oTtKat  oody— limlt- 

C'i  only  in  this  respect  by  a  general  clause  ■which 
says  tliat  cruel  punishments  sliall  not  be  inflict- 
ed— they  niiglit  apply  the  same  wild  definition 
of  the  word  cruel,  as  applicable  to  the  white 
man,  if  unrestricted  bytliis  clause  in  the  consti- 
tution? Now  sir,  as  to  the  free  negro  popula- 
tion, no  man  has  mori;  firmly  and  uniformly  de- 
nounced it,  than  my  colleague,  as  thievish,  dis- 
lionest  and  corrupting.  I  do  not  propose  to  lay 
violent  hands  upon  them  by  the  powers  of  the 
law,  and  without  crime  thrust  them  into  prison, 
the  good  and  tJie  bad;  or  drive  them  from  the 
commonwealtli,  and  deprive  them  of  institu- 
tions of  the  state  under  Avhich  they  have  ac- 
quired their  freedom  and  tlieir  property.  No 
sir;  1  propose  merely  to  give  to  the  legislative 
power  of  this  commonwealth,  the  power  of  pro- 
viding for  the  punishment  of  crime,  and  the 
constitutional  privilege  of  discrimin.ating  be- 
tween theft  or  felony  committed  by  the  free 
white  man,  and  the  same  committed  by  the  free 
black  man.  You  now  punish  a  free  black  man 
under  the  same  law  by  which  you  punish  a 
white  man;  and  you  do  so  because  he  is  free. 
He  is  hanged  for  no  other  offences  than  those 
for  which  you  would  hang  a  white  man.  Not 
so  with  the  slave. 

Now  I  propose  to  leave  to  the  legislature  the 
power,  under  our  constitution,  of  discriminating 
between  the  punishments  to  be  inflicted  in  sucli 
ca.ses,  and  instead  of  sending  a  free  negro  to  the 
penitentiary  for  a  tenn  of  years,  or  for  life,  to 
send  him  into  banishment.  If  the  word  "mis- 
demeanor" is  in  the  .proposition  which  I  have 
made,  I  desire  it  may  be  stricken  out,  as  it  was 
not  my  intention  to  use  it. 

Mr.  President,  I  had  supposed  that  at  this 
time  of  day,  there  was  no  necessity  for  a  dis- 
cussion on  the  high  political  question  that  a 
sovereign  state  oftliis  union  had  no  power  to  make 
treaties,  or  enter  into  alliances  with  any  foreign 
power  or  state.  I  had  supposed  that  American 
jurists  understood  tlie  difference  between  a  con- 
tract and  a  treaty  and  an  alliance.  The  article  of 
the  federal  constution,  read  by  my  colleague, 
denies  the  power  of  the  state  to  make  a  political 
treaty  or  alliance.  It  never  has  been,  and  never 
could  be  considered  by  any  jurist,  tliat  a  state 
cannot  make  a  contract  with  an  individual  or  a 
Bovereign,  eitlierin  or  out  of  tlie  commonwealth, 
in  reference  to  a  subject  matter  of  contracts.  Mj 
friend  before  mc,  (Mr.  Nuttall,)  has  just  suggested 
that  if  the  construction  of  my  colleague  on  this 
section  of  the  constitution  is  right,  we  cannot 
sell  a  bond  to  an  individual  out  of  this  common- 
wealth. If  so  how  can  this  commonwealtli  en- 
ter into  a  contract  to  pay  tliese  bonds  after  she 
has  sold  them?  How  can  she  transact  the  va- 
rious business  of  tliis  comuKmwealth  under  our 
institutions?  I  will  not  waste  the  time  of  tliis 
convention  in  discussing  this  matter,  because  I 
know  there  is  too  much  intelligence  in  this  body 
to  believe  that  the  power  is  denied  to  a  state  to 
make  a  contract  with  a  foreign  nation  or  power 
upon  a  matter  whicJi  can  be  the  subject  matter 
of  contract;  and'itis  under  that  power — under 
that  incidental  sovereign  power  which  belongs 
to  any  sovereign — that  tne  btate  of  Maryland  has 
had  ner  colony  before  Liberia  was  in  exist- 
ence. 


Nor  do  1  projjo.'^c,  as  the  gentleman  supposes, 
that  we  should  make  a  sort  of  Botany  Bay  colo- 
ny of  Liberia.  I  have  not  said  they  should  be 
banished  to  Liberia,  or  to  any  particulai-  spot,  or 
state,  or  territory;  I  leave  all  that  within  legis- 
lative discretion,  if  they  should  deem  it  neces- 
sary to  exercise  the  power,  when  the  crisis  in  our 
history  has  arrived  that  shall  make  it  a  matter 
of  self-defence  to  protect  our  slaves  from  the  cor- 
rupting influences  of  free  negroes.  Is  there  any 
thing  in  this  so  monstrous  as  to  call  forth  so 
much  eloquence,  and  to  bring  down  even  the 
tears  from  theeyes  of  my  colleague  in  this  house? 
I  propose  to  banish  free  negroes  for  crimes  for 
which  your  legislature  may  in  mercy  hang  them. 
I  would  sena  them  out  of  the  country,  if  I 
could,  instead  of  confining  them  in  penitentia- 
ries for  life,  or  for  a  term  of  years.  I  would 
give  the  legislature  the  power,  if  they  can  find 
the  means  to  do  so,  to  transport  them — to  send 
tliem  off  somewliere.  If  it  cannot  be  done  then 
comes  up  the  question,  to  be  presented  to  the 
legislature,  whether"  we  will  continue  the  present 
mode  of  punishment  of  free  negroes  for  such  of- 
fences as  burglary  and  arson,  or  whether  you 
will  not  permit  the  legislature  to  see  what  effect 
it  will  have  on  the  morals  of  the  free  negro  pop- 
ulation, to  sell  an  ofl'ender  into  involuntary  ser- 
vitude.    I  will  not  detain  the  convention  longer. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  hope  gentlemen  will  vote 
against  tliis  amendment.  Are  we  here,  I  Avould 
ask,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  more  enlarged 
powers  to  the  legislature  of  Kentucky,  or  of  re- 
stricting and  confining  them?  I  deny  that  the 
legislature  either  can  be  or  ought  to  be  trammel- 
ed, by  powers  of  this  sort.  Will  the  gentleman 
deny  that  the  legislature  have  now  the  poAvcr  to 
do  what  this  section  permits?  He  is  too  good  a 
lawyerto  deny  it.  The  legislature  have  all  power, 
except  that  of  which  it  is  deprived  by  the  consti- 
tution of  tlie  United  States,  or  the  state  of  Ken- 
tucky. I  ask  that  gentleman  to  point  out  any 
provision  in  either  of  these  constitutions  prohib- 
iting the  legislature  from  the  exercise  of  the 
power  he  seeks  to  confer  upon  them;  and  if  they 
have  all  power  except  wherein  they  are  restrict- 
ed, and  if  in  this  respect  they  are  unrestricted, 
where  tlie  necessity  of  engrafting  upon  the  con- 
stitution such  a  provision  as  this?  Was  not  tliis 
jiower  used  under  the  laws  of  England?  Was 
it  ever  prohibited  in  Virginia;  and  when  Ken- 
tucky Avas  separated  from  Virginia,  was  there 
any  provision  prohibiting  the  legislature  from 
punishing  crime  by  transportation?  The  very 
name  of  Botany  Bay  ought  to  have  recalled  to 
his  mind  the  fact  that  transportation  for  crime 
was  a  noted  punishment  in  England,  and  the 
well  known  fact,  that  up  to  the  present  daj',  the 
legislature  has  never  been  deprived  of  that  pow- 
er, should  have  satisfied  him  they  have  it,  with- 
out our  conferring  it  on  them  by  this  section, 
lam  opposed  to  this  proposition,  because  I  re- 
gard it  as  an  entering  wcdgo  to  open  an  inter- 
ininsble  field  of  discussion.  If  you  eo  on  this 
way,  where  will  you  end?  If  you  give  thelegis- 
lature  power  to  transport  a  free  negro,  why  not 
at  the  same  time  give  them  powertohangawliite 
man?  We  are  here  not  for  the  purjiose  of  ex- 
tending, but  of  curtailing  their  powiis — of  fix- 
ing the  barrier  beyond  which  they  sliall  not  go, 
but  not  to  define  to  them  the  extent  and  limits  of 


935 


Oiose  powers,  within   their  legitimate  sphere  of 
action. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  that  is  the  princi- 
ple by  wliich  we  are  to  be  governed  in  this  in- 
stance, wliy  did  not  the  gentleman  apply  his 
own  principle  yesterday,  when  he  spoke  so  elo- 

?[uently  in  reference  to  the  codification  of  the 
aws? 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  If  I  answer  that  question 
to  the  gentleman's  satisfaction,  will  he  withdraw 
his  amendment,  and  promise  not  again  to  pester 
the  convention  with  abstract  propositions?  I 
will  proceed  to  answer  him.  I  proposed  to  put 
that  provision  in  the  constitution  forthe  purpose 
of  compelling  the  legislature  to  perform  a  duty 
which  tliey  have  liitherto  neglected;  not  because 
thev  had  not  the  power,  but  as  a  compulsory  pro- 
vision, to  compel  the  legislature  to  discharge  a 
duty  which  thev  ought  to  have  discharged  twen- 
ty years  ago.  'That  is  a  sufficient  reason;  and 
the  gentleman  must  now  resort  to  some  ulterior 
reason  for  inserting  such  a  provision  as  this. 
Leave  to  the  legislature  some  discretion,  for 
God's  sake,  in  the  exercise  of  the  almost  uidim- 
ited  power  you  give  them.  There  is  one  other 
idea  I  would  suggest.  If  you  go  into  detail  here, 
you  must  go  into  detail  on  this  question,  you 
must  go  into  detail  on  every  other  subieet.  Why 
go  into  this  subject?  "Why' waste  the  time  of  the 
convention  in  such  unprofitable  discussion?  Are 
free  negroes  of  more  importance  than  your  Avhite 
population,  or  your  slaves,  that  vou  must  thus 
legislate  .so  specially  for  them?  1  say  again,  for 
God's  sake,  leave  to  the  legislature  some  discre 
tion,  and  let  us  proceed  with  the  legitimite  busi- 
ness for  which  tue  country  has  sent  us  here. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  modified  his  amend- 
ment, by  striking  out  the  word  •'misdemeanors." 
Mr.  DESHA    moved  the  previous   question, 
and  the   main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays,  on  his  amendment  to  the  amendment,  and 
tliey  were  taken,  and  were — yeas  57,  nays  33. 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  Che'iault,  James  S.  Chrismau,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward  Curd, 
Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwaids,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Ben.  Hardiu,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
AV'illiam  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.Johnston, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey.  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall, 
Ricliard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Ro- 
ger.^, Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L.  Walk-r, 
Henrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White,  George 
W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 57. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Gutluie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Luther  Brawuer,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  William 
Cowper,  Chasteeu  T.   Duuavan,  James  H.  Gar- 


rard, Tliomas  J.  Cough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James 
P.  Hamilton.  Andrew  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Da- 
vid Meriwether,  Tnomas  P.  Moore,  John  D. 
Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  ■ 
Larkin,  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Roekhold,  James 
Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Jolui  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wicklifl'e,  Silas  Woodson— 33. 

So  the  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  adopting  Mr. 

C.  A.  WICKLIFFE'S  proposed  section,  as 
amended,  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  they  were — 
yeas  34,  nays  56. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther 
Brawner,  William  C.  Bullitt,  James  S.  Chris- 
man,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Garrett  Davis,  James 
Dudley,  C.  IT.  Dunavan,  J.  H.  Garrard,  Andrew 
Hood,"T.  J.  Hood,  J.  W.  Ii-wiu,  G.  W.  Johnston, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Ak-xander  K.  Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  Davitl  Meriwether,  William 

D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Thomas  Roekhold,  Igcatius 
A.  Spalding,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor, William  R.  Thompson,  John  Wheeler,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,   George  W.  Williams— 34. 

Nays — John  L.  Ballinger,  Jolin  S.  Barlow, 
Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bri.stow,  Thomas 
D.Brown,  Charles  Chambers, William  Chenanlt, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Ben- 
jamin F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  For- 
rest, Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas  James,  Wra. 
Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kel- 
ly, James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field,William  N.  Marshall,  Ricliard  L.  Mayes, 
Nathan  McClure,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugli 
Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Lar- 
kin J.  Proctor,  John  T.Robinson,  Jolin  T.  Rogers, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  J. 
Thunuan,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett.  Squire 
Turner,  John  Jj.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 56. 

So  the  proposed  section  was  rejected. 

EVESlXG  SESSION. 

The  sections  from  the  second  to  the  ninth  hav- 
ing been  withdrawn  by  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, (Mr.  Meriwether,)  tlie  ninth  section  now 
became  the  second,  and  it  was  read,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  2.  They  shall  pass  laws  providing  that 
any  free  negro  or  mulatto  hereafter  immigrating 
to,  or  being  emancipated  in,  and  refusing  to 
leave  this  state,  or  having  left,  shall  return  and 
settle  within  this  state,  shall  be  deemed  guilty 
of  felony,  and  puni.shed  by  confinement  in  the 
penitentiary  tliereof." 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  called  for  the  yeas  and 
nays  on  the  adoption  of  that  section,  and  they 
were — yea-s  72,  nays  8. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bi-adley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 


93§ 


William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wm. 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James 
Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards', Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J. 
Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Tlioraas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.Mansfield,  William 
N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John 
D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell, 
Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius 
A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W. 
Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurraan,  How- 
ard Todd,  Pliilip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George 
W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 72. 

Nays — William  K.  Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  Ninian  G.  Grav,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Ira  itoot,  James 
Rudd— 8. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

The  third  section  (the  tenth  in  the  report,) 
■was  read  and  adopted,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  3.  In  the  prosecution  of  slaves  for  felo- 
ny, no  inq  uest  by  a  grand  jury  shall  be  necessa- 
ry; but  the  proceedings  m  such  prosecutions 
shall  be  roguiated  by  law,  except  that  the  gener- 
al assembly  shall  have  no  power  to  deprive  them 
of  the  privilege  of  an  impartial  trial  by  a  petit 
jury." 

Mr.  GAITHER  moved  the  following  as  an  ad- 
ditional section: 

"  The  general  assembly  shall  not  have  power 
to  prohibit  the  introduction  of  slaves  into  the 
state  by  the  citizens  thereof,  from  other  states 
for  their  own  use,  but  their  introduction  by  the 
citizens  of  this  or  any  other  state,  whether  open- 
ly or  covertly  for  traffic,  or  merchandize,  may  be 
f>rohibited  by  the  passage  of  such  laws  as  the 
egislature  shall  deem  most  conducive  to  secure 
that  end." 

Mr.  CLARKE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were,  yeas  32,  nays  53. 

Ykas — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley, Beverly 
L.Clarke,  Henrj-  R.  D.  Cftleman,  William  Coav- 
per,  Edward  Curd,  James  Dudley,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaitlier,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas  J. 
Hood,  Thomas  James,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke, Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  William  N.  Mal-shall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Thos.  Rockhold,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  Philip  Triplett,  John  Wheeler,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe  Wesley  J.  Wriglitr-32. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Wm. 
K.  Bowling,  Lutber  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  Thomas    D.  Brown,  William    Chenault, 


James  S.  Chrisnian,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett 
Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Cha.steen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  J.  H. 
Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  AVm.  Preston, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd, 
James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  HoAvard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washing- 
ton, Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
George  W.  Williams — 53. 

So  the  amendment  Avas  rejected. 

Mr.  CLARKE  offered  the  following  as  an  ad- 
ditional section: 

"  Sec.  — .  That  the  general  assembly  shall 
have  no  power  to  pass  laAvs  prohibiting  the  citi- 
zens of  this  state  from  importing  slaves  for  their 
oAvn  use,  but  may  pass  laws  requiring  the  im- 
porter of  a  slave  or  slaves  to  take  an  oath  that 
said  slave  or  slaves  are  for  his  or  her  own  use, 
and  not  for  merchandise;  and  that  he  or  she  will 
not  sell  said  slave  or  slaves,  within  this  Com- 
monwealth, within years  after  such  slave  or 

slaves  are  imported,  under  such  penalities  as 
may,  from  time  to  time,  be  provided  by  law  : 
Provided,  That  the  slaves  thus  imported  shall 
not  be  such  as  have  been  charged  AVith  crime  in 
other  states. 

Mr.  BxVRLOW.  I  profess  to  be  a  pro-slavery 
man.  The  contest  in  my  county  turned  on  that 
Question,  and  I  came  here  with  a  majority  of 
three  hundred  and  fifteen  A'otes.  I  came  here 
opposed  to  the  act  of  1833  or  any  thing  like  it, 
and  to  oppose  a  principle,  such  as  is  contended 
for  by  my  friend  from  Simpson.  I  am  gratified 
to  see  the  zeal  with  Avhich  he  insists  on  his  pro- 
position, and  I  have  no  doubt  he  is  authorized 
to  take  the  stand  he  does,  and  that  he  takes  it 
because  he  has  been  instructed  to  do  it.  I  have 
been  differently  instructed;  and  for  one,althougli 
I  haA'e  received  the  disapprobation  of  a  portion  of 
my  fellow  citizens,  and  perhaps  a  portion  of  this 
body.  I  took  it  on  myself  last  winter,  wlien  it 
was  said  this  act  Avas  not  just  to  different  sec- 
tions of  the  state,  to  vote  for  its  repeal,  so  that 
persons  might  bring  in  negroes  for  their  own 
use,  and  that  alone.  I  take  pleasure  in  voting 
with  the  pro-slavery  portion  of  this  body,  but 
I  cannot  vote  for  the  gentleman's  amendment. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  offered  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  proposed  section: 

"No  persons  shall  be  slaves  in  this  state  ex- 
cept those  who  are  iioav  slaves  and  their  descen- 
dants :  Provided,  That  persons  removing  to  tlie 
state,  and  citizens  inheriting  slaves  out  of  the 
state,  may  import  them  into  the  state." 

The  previous  question  was  called  for,  and  the 
main  question  Avas  ordered  to  be  noAV  put. 

Mr.  NUTTALL  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were — yeaa  9,  nays  79  : 

Yeas— Francis  M.Bristow,  Garrett  Davis,  Se- 
lucius  Garfielde,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Ira  Root,  Squire  Turner,  George 
W.  Williams— 9. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 


^®7 


person,  Jobn  L.   Ballinger,   John    S.    Barlow,  | 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad-  ' 
ley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Wil- 
liam C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Che- 
nault,  James   S.   Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Wm.  \ 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,    Lucius  Desha,  James 
Dudley,  Chasteeu  T.  Dunaran,  Bejaminn  F.  Ed- : 
wards,  Milford  Elliott,   Green  Forrest,  Xathan 
Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  i 
Ninian  E.  Grav,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 1 
din,  Wm.  Hendrix,  Thos.  J.  Hood,  Thos.  James, 
Wra.  Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaush,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,   Thomas  W.  Lisle,  WiUis 

B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. ; 
Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  William  X.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Xathan  MoClure,  Da- : 
vid  Meriwether,  Wm.  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  ' 
Moore,  John  D.Morris,  Jonathan  Xewcum,  Hugh  ! 
Newell,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, ! 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc-  j 
tor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  ■ 
T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, ! 
John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. ' 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wm. ! 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  i 
Philip  Triplett,  John  L.  Waller,  Henrj'  Wash- 
ington, John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  ■ 
A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  X.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.; 
Wright— 79.  i 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected.  j 

Mr.  GAITHER  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  ! 
on  Mr.  CLARKE'S  amendment,  and  they  were —  ' 
yeas  32,  navs  55:  i 

Yeas — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Bever- ' 
lyL.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Wm.  Cow-! 
per,  Edward  Curd,  James  Dudley,  Green  Forrest, '. 
Xathan  Gaither,  W^m.  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  ■ 
Thos.  James,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Jams.  M.  Lack- : 
ey,  Peter  Lashbooke,  Willis  l5.  Machen,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  William  X.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  > 
Mayes,  Xathan  McClure,  WiUiam  D.  Mitchell, ' 
Joh'n  D.  Morris,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  Henry  B.  j 
Pollard,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- ! 
ing,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Philip  Triplett,  John  Wheeler,  Robert  X.Wick-  ■ 
liflfe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 32. 

X.\TS — Mr.    President,    (Guthrie,)    Richard 
Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.   Barlow, 
William  K.   Bowling,   Luther  Brawner,  Francis  , 
M.  Bristow,Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bul- 
litt, Charles  Chambers,   William  Chenault,  Jas. 
S.  Chrisman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Selucius  Garfielde,  I 
James  H.  Garrard,   Thomas  J.   Gough,  Xinian 
E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Yin- 1 
cent  S.' Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  William  Johnson,  I 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,   Thomas    X.  Lindsey, ' 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Wm. ; 

C.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  Thos.  P.  Moore, ; 
Jonathan  Xewcum,  Hugh  Xewell,  Wm.  Pres-  i 
ton,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  [ 
Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Jas.  Rudd,  I 
James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  | 
Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman, ! 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  I 
Henry  Wa-sbingtou,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles 
A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  W^illiams— 55.  ; 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected.  1 

119 


OEGAX12ATIOS   OF    NEW    COUSTIEB. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  ths 
committee  of  the  whole  was  discharged  from  the 
further  consideration  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  organization  of  new  counties. 

THE    LEGISLATIVE    DEI>ARrME>'T. 

The  convention  next  proceeded  to  the  consid- 
eration of  the  unfinished  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  legislative  department. 

The  pending  section  was  the  sixth,  as  follows: 
"Sec.  6.  Representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  for- 
ever regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of 
aualified  voters  therein.  At  the  first  session  of 
le  general  assembly,  after  the  adoption  of  this 
constitution,  and  every  eighth  year  thereafter, 
provision  shall  be  made  bylaw,  fliat  in  the  year 
,  and  everv eighth  year  thereafter,  an  enu- 
meration of  all  tlie  quali&ed  voters  of  the  stale 
shall  be  made.  The  number  of  representatives 
shall,  in  the  several  years  of  making  these  enu- 
merations, be  so  fixed  as  not  to  be  less  than  sev- 
enty-five nor  more  than  one  hundred;  and  they 
Rhall  be  apportioned  for  eight  years  next  follow- 
ing, thus:  counties,  cities,  and  towns,  having 
more  than  two  thirds  and  less  than  the  full  ratio, 
shall  have  one  representative;  those  having  the 
full  ratio  and  a  fraction  less  than  two  thirds  over, 
shall  have  but  one  representative;  those  having 
the  full  ratio  and  a  fraction  of  more  than  two  thirds 
over,  shall  have  two  representatives,  and  increase 
their  number  in  the  same  proportion;  counties 
having  le.ss  than  two  thirds  of  the  ratio,  shall 
be  joined  to  similar  adjacent  counties  for  the 
purpose  of  sending  a  representative:  Provided, 
That  if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county,  then 
such  county  having  less  than  two  thirds  of  the 
ratio,  shall  be  united  to  that  contiguous  county- 
having  the  smallest  numberof  qualified  voters, 
and  the  remaining  representatives,  if  any,  shall 
be  allotted  to  those  counties,  cities,  or'  towns, 
having  the  largest  unrepresented  fractions." 

When  last  before  the  convention,  this  section 
Mr.  Hardin  moved  to  amend,  by  striking  out  the 
words,  "number  of  qualified  voters  there- 
in," and  inserting  the  following:  "the  number 
of  free  white  inhabitants  of  such  county,  town, 
or  city,  and  who  shall  be  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  and  residents  of  the  state  two  years,  or  of 
the  county,  town,  or  city,  one  year  next  prece- 
ding the  enumeration,  or  children  bom  within 
one  year,  of  mothers  who  are  entitled  to  be  enu- 
merated." 

Mr.  PRESTOX  moved  to  amend  the  amend- 
ment, by  striking  out  all  after  the  words,  "the 
number  of  fre  ?  white  inhabitants  of  such  county, 
town,  or  city." 

Mr.  President,  I  am  willing  to  take  the  qxiea- 
tion  as  it  now  stands.  There  are  only  three  ba- 
ses of  representation  that  I  know  of.  We  might 
have  a  fourth  possibly.  I  was  willing,  at  first, 
to  stand  by  the  old  rule  of  qualified  electors,  bat 
some  seemed  to  think  it  better  to  have  a  larger 
basis.  I  desired  to  have  one  of  those  three  basis 
acted  upon  in  the  United  States.  The  federal 
basis  is  property  and  numbers,  including  three- 
fifths  of  the  negroes.  The  second  may  be  called 
the  federal  white  basis.  There  is  a  third  basis, 
which  is  that  of  the  free  white  citizens  of  the 
country.    The  objection  I  had  to  the  amendment 


938 


of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson  was,  as  I  stated 
several  days  since,  that  it  was  of  an  heteroge- 
ous  character.  We  all  know  we  have  taken 
white  males  above  twenty-one  years  of  age,  from 
the  impossibility  of  ascertaining  what  was  the 
qualification  of  citizenship.  Now,  if  we  adopt 
fliis  plan,  a  plan  I  am  unwilling  to  vote  for,  you 
invest  the  censor  with  unwarranted  powers.  We 
know  the  census  taker  has  difficulties  enough 
without  this.  And  we  all  know  that  many  a 
censor  gets  his  head  broken  for  being  too  in- 
q^uisitive  whilst  in  the  performance  of  his  du- 
ties. 

A  friend  of  mine  says  he  once  took  the  census, 
and  had  much  difficulty.  Another  gentleman 
from  another  county  says  there  is  an  oldladj^there 
who  has  broken  the  officers  head  three  times,  on  ac- 
count of  the  inquiry  about  the  number  of  her  chil- 
dren for  she  is  unfortunate  enough  not  to  have  any 
children;  and  when  asked  how  many  children 
she  has,  she  turns  the  question  into  an  a.ssault 
and  battery.  We  cannot  make  the  census  taker 
a  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  our  citizens. 
The  term  qualified  electors  is  sufficiently  plain. 
I  therefore,  shall  come  down  to  one  of  the  three 
bases.  First,  if  you  are  willing  to  go  the 
whole  length,  let  us  have  free  white  inhabitants. 
Secondly,  if  we  cannot  have  that,  let  us  have 
free  Avhite  citizens.  If,  not,  let  us  stay  where 
we  are  upon  the  basis  of  qualified  electors.  I 
probably  have  as  much  interest  as  any  man  in 
this  house  in  this  question,  and  I  wanted  a  more 
extended  basis,  but  so  far  as  the  welfare  of  this 
constitution  is  concerned,  and  its  subsequent 
adoption,  I  feared  we  might  have  great  difficul- 
ty in  some  of  the  interior  counties.  If  we  think 
it  will  give  dissatisfaction  on  account  of  its 
taking  some  strength  from  them,  we  had  better 
take  Uie  section  as  the  committee  have  reported 
it.  I  want  the  yeas  and  nays  on  "white  inhabi- 
tants," for  by  a  parity  of  reasoning  alone  you 
cannot  say  that  Paddy  and  Larry  shall  not  be 
counted;  the  men  who  make  your  railroads,  or 
labor  on  the  public  highways,  and  who  may  not 
be  entitled  to  a  vote,  are  to  be  counted  as  well 
as  women  and  children.  There  are  fourteen 
states  of  the  Union,  whose  representative  basis 
is  on  population,  and  the  rest  are  arbitrary 
plans.  I  want  the  free  white  people  of  the  com- 
monwealth to  form  the  basis  of  representation, 
if  we  vary  from  the  old  plan  of  enumeration 
which  we  have  been  accustomed  to,  and  with 
which  the  people  of  the  state  have  found  no 
fault. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  offered  an  amendment  to 
the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson 
on  this  subject,  because  he  wished  me  to  draw 
the  attention  of  the  convention  to  it.  That  is 
the  way  I  came  to  offer  the  amendment.  To  be 
sure  some  gentleman  was  kind  enough  to  say 
that  I  had  suggested  the  thing  to  liim.  I  had 
no  communication  with  him.  He  was  the  first 
gentleman  that  suggested  it  to  me,  and  asked 
me  if  I  would  vote  for  it,  and  I  said  I  would. 
I  would  much  rather  have  the  basis   as  it  was 

Sroposed  by  the  committee  than  as  my  friend 
om  Jefferson  (Mr.  Meriwether)  proposes,  that 
is,  the  qualified  voters,  instead  of  the  white 
.population.  If  the  white  population  is  to  be 
tfaiB  basis,  it  certainly  should  be  that  vhite  popu- 
Istion  that  art  called  citizens  in  th6  estimation 


of  our  laws.  It  in  the  voting  population,  if  you 
take  the  voters  as  a  basis;  and  if  you  take  the 
white  population,  it  should  be  those  who  are 
citizens.  The  gentleman  from  Louisville  (Mr. 
Preston)  has  always  at  hand  the  acts  and  doings 
of  other  states.  It  is  the  readiest  change  in  this 
house. 

Yesterday,  wlien  there  was  something  said 
about  appointing  some  of  the  commissioners, 
he  alluded  to  the  code-Napoleon.  And  now  he 
says  the  practice  of  this  state  is  so  and  so,  and 
the  practice  of  that  state  is  so  and  so.  I  care 
not  what  the  practice  of  any  state  is,  the  ques- 
tion comes  up  to  this;  if  you  take  as  a  basis, 
voters,  they  must  be  citizens,  or  naturalized  cit- 
izens. If  you  take  white  population,  give  it 
the  same  basis.  The  reason  wny  the  gentleman 
from  Simpson,  offered  the  amendment  was,  that 
on  the  river,  and  in  towns  and  cities  upon  the 
river  bank,  there  was  a  very  large  disproportion 
of  foreigners  from  what  there  were  in  the  interior 
of  the  state,  because  if  it  were  not  for  that,  yon 
might  as  well  have  taken  the  basis  of  voters  ou 
once.  There  is  a  greater  proportion  of  men  at 
the  river,  that  is,  the  number  of  voters  comes 
nearer  to  the  number  of  white  people  than  in 
any  other  part  of  the  state. 

Bnt  tlie  gentleman's  argument  is  based  upon 
two  objections,  one  beingjthe  insuperable  difficul- 
ty of  taking  the  number.  Where  is  the  difficul- 
ty? Tlie  assessor  has  to  ascertain  who  are  qual- 
ified voters  and  who  are  not.  Las  year,  in  Jef- 
ferson county  there  was  a  difference  of  five  hun- 
dred and  twenty. 

There  is  no  Sifficulty  in  the  commissioners 
asking  how  many  white  children  there  are  about 
this  house.  How  long  will  it  take  to  ask,  what 
is  your  white  family.  He  would  have  to  go  in- 
to an  investigation  as  to  the  ages  of  the  children. 
If  you  inquire  as  to  the  men,  whether  they  are 
natural  bom  citizens  or  not,  have  you  not  to  do 
it  now?  You  have  to  take  a  man's  word  now 
whether  he  is  naturalized  or  not.  The  only  oth- 
er difficulty  is  that  of  the  old  lady,  and  the  last 
account  I  had  of  her  she  was  dead.  However, 
I  do  not  know  whether  it  will  make  a  serious  dif- 
ference whether  you  take  qualified  voters  or  citi- 
zens. I  am  very  anxious  to  be  done  withthis  sub- 
ject. I  have  been  charged  with  too  much  speaking; 
and  I  think  I  have  talked  too  much.  If  I  have 
troubled  the  house  too  frequently,  I  beg  pardon. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Mr.  President:  Before  the 
final  vote  is  taken  on  this  section,  I  propose  to 
submit  some  remarks. 

The  basis  of  representation,  which  I  had  the 
honor  to  submit  in  this  convention,  has  been 
denounced  by  many  as  novel  in  its  character, 
and  hence  I  suppose  wrong. 

For  the  purpose  of  furnishing  the  convention 
and  the  country  with  the  policy  which  has  been 

fursued  by  other  states  in  establishing  a  basis, 
have  examined  the  constitution  of  every  state 
in  the  union  upon  this  point,  and  the  followpig 
is  the  result  of  my  investigations. 

There  are  but  three  slave  states  in  this  union 
which  have  adopted  "  qualified  voters  "  as  the 
basis  of  representation,  and  those  are  Kentucky 
(by  her  old  constitution,)  Tennessee  and  Louisi- 
ana. 

The  states  of  Mississippi,  Alabama  and  Texas 


939 


have  adopted  "free  white  inhabitants  "  as  their 
basis  of  representation. 

The  states  of  Maryland,  Florida,  Geoi^ia, 
and  North  Carolina,  have  adopted  federal  num- 
bers as  the  basis  of  representation. 

The  states  of  Arkansas  and  Missouri  make 
"free  white  male  inhabitants"  the  basis  of  rep- 
resentation, without  regard  to  age. 

The  states  of  South  Carolina,  Virginia  and 
Delaware  make  "territory  and  property"  the 
principal  basis  of  representation. 

Thus,  it  will  be  seen,  though  the  basis  fur- 
nished by  my  resolution  is  declared  a  departure 
from  a  great  principle,  twelve  of  the  fifteen  slave 
states  have  adopted  a  basis  different  from  the 
one  I  propose  to  change;  and  whilst  many  of 
them  have  adopted  the  liberal  basis  which  I 
have  suggested,  a  number  have  gone  further,  and 
planted  themselves  upon  the  basis  of  "federal 
numbers." 

Now  let  us  see  how  this  great  principle,  a  de- 
parture from  which  is  to  ruin  the  country  and 
endanger  the  new  constitution,  (according  to  the 
opinions  of  some  gentlemen,)  has  been  estimated 
in  the  fifteen  states. 

And  first:  The  states  of  Maine,  Rhode  Island. 
New  York,  with  some  restrictions,  and  New 
Jersey,  have  made  population,  or  tlie  inhabit- 
ants, the  basis  of  representation. 

The  states  of  Massachusetts,  New  Hampshire 
and  Vermont,  make  territory  and  those  who  pay 
taxes  on  property,  the  basis  of  represt^utation. 

The  state  of  Connecticut,  which  seems  to  be 
laid  off  into  towns,  gives  to  each  town  a  repre- 
sentative without  much  regard  to  numbers  or 
property,  thus  seeming  to  make  municipalities 
or  territory  the  basis. 

The  stat<3  of  Pennsylvania  makes  taxable  in- 
habitants the  basis. 

The  states  of  Illinois,  Michigan,  and  Iowa, 
make  "  white  inhabitants  "  the  basis. 

Whilst  the  states  of  Ohio  and  Indiana  alone, 
make  "white  male  inhabitants,  abovt-  tlie  age  of 
twenty  one  years,"  the  b.asis  of  representation. 

Showing  but  five  states  out  of  uie  thirty,  that 
have  made  "  qualified  voters"  or  "male  inhabi- 
tants above  the  age  of  twenty  one  years,"  the 
basis  of  representation,  whilst  a  number  of  the 
very  best  states  in  the  union  have  gone  far  be- 
yond that  which  I  propose,  by  making  federal 
numbers  the  basis. 

So  far,  then,  as  precedents  go,  I  am  quite  as 
■well,  yea  infinitely  better  sustained  than  gentle- 
men who  cling  with  so  much  tenacity  to  the  old 
basis. 

Mr.  President:  immediately  upon  the  passage 
of  the  resolution  by  the  legislature  at  its  session 
of  1847-8,  submitting  the  question  of  a  conven- 
tion or  no  convention  to  the  people,  a  number  of 
persous,  particularly  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
state,  who  were  sensible  of  the  many  manifest 
defects  in  our  present  organic  law,  entertained 
fears  that  the  tenure  by  which  slave  property 
■was  holden,  would  be  weakened,  if  the  consti- 
tntion  were  submitted  to  a  convention.  There 
•were  those,  nevertheless,  who  had  an  abiding 
I  confidence  in  the  justice  and  moral  honesty  of 
the  ^eat  mass  of  the  people,  and  who  believe 
that  It  was  impossible  that  a  majority  of  the 
states  could  so  far  forget  the  rights  of  a  Ken- 
tucky citizen,  and  the  ties  which   infancy  have 


bound  us  to  our  sister  states  of  the  soutli,  as  to 
countenance,  for  one  moment,  any  system  of 
emancipation,  or  other  act,  by  which  property 
in  slaves  could,  in  any  manner,  be  rendered  in- 
secure. 

This  latter  class  stepped  forward,  and,  by  pub- 
lic addresses,  and  tnrough  the  press,  exerted 
themselves  to  allay  every  apprehension  of  dan- 
ger. Their  efforts  were  crowned  with  unparal- 
leled success.  A  more  complete  and  overwhel- 
ming victory  over  the  friends  of  a  radically  de- 
fective constitution,  never  was  achieved  by  any 
body  of  men  in  any  age. 

At  two  successive  elections,  by  unprecedented 
majorities,  the  people  declared  in  favor  of  the 
call  of  a  convention;  and  in  confirmation  of  the 
judgment  of  those  who  had  confided  so  much  to 
the  public  justice,  the  very  legislature  which  de- 
clared that  a  convention  was  demanded,  meas- 
ureably  wiped  away  the  last  foul  stain  of  eman- 
cipation from  your  statute  book.  I  allude,  sir, 
to  the  modification  of  the  law  of  1833,  by  the 
last  legislature  of  Kentucky. 

No  sooner  had  the  act  of  1833  been  modified, 
than  the  emancipation  party  in  the  state  seemed 
to  have  received  a  new  impetus.  In  some  parts 
of  the  state  they  declared  in  favor  of  engrafting 
upon  the  new  constitution  the  provisions  of  that 
law;  in  other  parts  they  declared  in  favor  of 
leaving  the  constitution  open  upon  that  subject, 
and  for  perpetual  agitation  until  the  law  was 
restored  or  some  policy  of  emancipation  adopted . 
Backed  by  many  powerful  minds  in  the  state, 
occupying  high  places  in  the  public  confidence, 
during  the  last  summer  that  party  came  to  the 
charge  with  an  apparent  well-founded  hope  of 
success.  They  held  a  convention  at  this  capi- 
tal, displayed'their  colors,  and  in  some  sections 
of  the  state  inscribed  upon  it  this  execrable  mot- 
to :  "  If  we  can't  force  the  strong  to  bow  at  our 
feet,  we  will  throw  our  weight  in  favor  of  the 
weak,"  and  thus  disgrace  the  state  by  securing 
an  imbecile  constitutional  convention. 

Under  circumstances  like  these  I  was  nomin- 
ated— without  distinction  of  party,  in  a  nation- 
al point  of  view — as  a  candidate  for  the' seat  I 
now  have  the  honor  to  hold  on  this  floor.  In 
accepting  that  nomination,  I  avowed  my  unal- 
terable hostility  to  the  principles  of  the  law  of 
1833,  either  in  the  new  constitution  or  in  our 
statutes,  together  with  every  species  or  descrip- 
tion of  emancipation  whatever.  Thus  going 
forth,  as  I  believed  armed  with  truth,  and  fired 
with  the  lovc  of  equal  justice,  I  was  placed  in 
my  present  position. 

Vi  hen  I  examined  the  returns,  after  the  Au- 
gust election,  I  felt  satisfied,  from  the  political 
complexion  of  the  delegates  returned,  that  the 
conlidence  of  the  pro-slavery  party  had  not 
been  misplaced,  and  that  the  relation  that  exist- 
ed between  master  and  slave  would  in  no  wise 
be  disturbed.  I  had  supposed,  Mr.  President, 
that  there  would  not  be  twenty  dissenting  voices 
in  the  convention  to  securing  to  the  citizen,  by 
constitutional  guaranty,  the  right  to  bring  into 
this  state,  for  his  own  use,  property  from  another 
state.  Under  this  conviction,  I  consented  to 
that  part  of  the  report  from  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department  which  so  changed 
the  present  constitution  as  to  allow  to  cities  a 
representation  in  the  senate  of  the  state  upon 


940 


the  basis  of  "qualified  voters."  When  that  sec- 
tion came  up  for  action  in  convention,  I  made  a 
few  remarks  in  its  favor;  but,  sir,  when  upon 
further  examination  I  ascertained  that  the  law  of 
1833  had  invariably  received  its  warmest  sup- 
port from  the  existing  cities,  and  such  points 
upon  the  Ohio  river  as  will,  in  the  course  of  a 
snort  period,  grow  up  into  cities;  I  deemed  it 
but  just  to  my  constituents,  and  to  the  whole 
pro-slavery  party  in  the  state  to  pause,  and  give 
uo  further  assistance  to  such  an  increase  of  pow- 
er in  the  law-making  department  of  the  govern- 
ment, until  the  rights  of  property  were  secured 
against  invasion.  Influenced  by  considerations 
of  this  sort — believing  that  in  no  other  way 
could  I  redeem  my  solemn  pledges  to  my  confi- 
ding constituents,  and  carry  out  my  own  con- 
victions of  propriety  and  justice,  I  offered  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  section  which  conferred  this  ad- 
ditional power  upon  cities.  By  my  substitute  I 
allowed  a  city  as  many  as  two  senators,  when 
her  voting  population  would  justify  it;  whereas 
under  the  present  constitution  she  is  entitled  to 
none.  At  the  same  time,  I  provided  that  the  cit- 
izens of  the  state  should  be  secured  in  the  right 
of  importing  slaves  for  lAieir  own  use,  under  cer- 
tain regulations  and  restrictions.  I  did  this 
with  a  view,  that  whilst  a  power  hostile  to  slave 
importation  was  strengthened,  it  would  be  impo- 
tent to  do  mischief  to  my  constituents.  Before 
the  final  vote  was  taken  upon  the  section  to 
which  I  have  referred,  I  saw  indications  of  dis- 
approbation of  the  substitute  I  had  proposed, 
and  in  some  instances,  from  quarters  where  I 
had  least  expected  it. 

I  could  never  get  a  vote  on  my  substitute.  By 
some  strange  fatality  it  was  never  in  order,  and 
it  slept  the  sleep  of  death  upon  your  table.  Its 
spirit  was  resurrected  this  morning,  but  was 
again  folded  in  the  cold  embrace  of  defeat.  The 
vote  was  ultimately  taken  upon  the  original  sec- 
tion without  amendment,  and  it  passed.  I  voted 
against  it.  I  saw  at  a  glance  that  you  had 
strengthened  that  party  in  the  state  who  had  al- 
ways favored  the  law  of  1833,  and  1  believed 
that  unless  the  rights  for  which  I  had  contended 
■were  secured  by  constitutional  provision,  that 
law  would  again  disgrace  the  state  in  less  than 
three  years.  It  was  then,  Mr.  President,  that  I 
cast  about  for  some  plan  to  avert  the  impending 
calamity.  I  availea  myself  of  the  thought  and 
investigation  of  my  esteemed  friend  from  Cald- 
well, (Mr.  Machen.)  I  examined  the  most  ac- 
credited authorities,  upon  the  laws  which  govern 
population,  its  increase  and  diminution,  and  I 
found  it  to  be  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all 
countries,  in  all  ages,  that  a  people  spread  over 
a  large  territory  of  country,  and  engaged  in  ag- 
ricultural pursuits,  increase  their  population  in 
a  much  greater  ratio,  than  those  confined  to  ci- 
ties, and  pent  up  in  narrow  circles.  From  these 
high  authorities,  and  the  very  nature  of  things, 
I  knew  that  there  must  be  more  Qualified  voters 
(in  proportion  to  the  white  population)  in  cities 
than  in  the  rural  districts.  I  knew  it,  for  the 
reasons,  among  many  others,  which  I  assigned  a 
few  days  since  in  this  convention.  No  one  can 
shut  his  eyes  to  the  fact,  that  hundreds,  yea 
thousands  flock  to  our  cities  and  engage  in  day 
labor,  whose  income  will  not  justify  them  in 
bringing,  or  in  accumulating  ii  family,  nor  do 


the  morals  of  cities  generally  impose  restraints 
so  rigid  as  to  encourage  marriage. 

In  tlie  country  the  case  is  different.  Both 
sexes,  as  soon  as  they  arrive  at  sufficient  age,  en- 
ter into  the  matrimonial  state  and  soon  become 
tax  payers  and  the  heads  of  families.  Not  more 
than  one  in  ten,  fifteen,  or  twenty,  who  are  en- 
gaged in  labor  upon  your  streets,  your  wharves, 
and  in  your  heavy  manufacturing  establishments 
in  cities,  have  families  at  all;  whilst  if  "quali- 
fied voters"  be  retained  as  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation, they  in  a  short  time  are  enumerated, 
not  only  in  ascertaining  the  number  of  repre- 
sentatives to  which  a  county,  city,  or  town  may 
be  entitled,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  wives,  daugh- 
ters, and  sons  of  our  sturdy  farmers,  but  they 
actually  control  the  election  of  those  representa- 
tives at  the  ballot  box.  To  be  added  to  these, 
sir,  all  the  young  men,  men  without  families,  en- 
gaged in  merchantile  pursuits,  and  laborers  em- 
ployed upon  your  public  works. 

I  but  assert  a  fact  known  to  all,  that  a  country 
life  is  more  conducive  to  the  connubial  state 
than  a  city  life;  that  with  a  given  number,  pop- 
ulation will  increase  more  rapidly  where  the  in- 
stitution of  marriage  is  encouraged,  than  where 
it  is  not.  The  experience  of  past  ages  comes 
down  to  us  pregnant  with  incontestible  eviden- 
ces of  the  truth  of  this  declaration.  Then,  with 
a  knowledge  of  the  further  fact,  that  the  immigra- 
tion to  cities  was  composed  principally  of  male 
adults,  I  offered  the  resolution  which  recognizes 
white  inhabitants  as  the  true  basis,  believing 
that  to  be  the  only  means  by  which  the  rural 
districts,  or  agricultural  portions  of  the  .state, 
and  particularly  their  peculiar  institutions,  could 
be  shielded  from  the  overshadowing  power  of 
the  cities,  and  many  of  the  Ohio  river  counties 
in  the  legislature.  The  number  of  slaves  at 
those  points  is  already  greatly  disproportioned 
to  the  number  in  most  other  parts  of  Kentueky, 
and  with  few  exceptions,  the  number  of  women 
and  children  is  much  below  the  number  of  male 
adults,  the  latter  of  whom  flock  thither  from  the 
neighboring  free  states  to  engage  in  the  labors  of 
exportation  and  importation,  in  building  ships, 
steamboats,  flatboats,  and  other  craft;  in  wood 
chopping,  and  in  making  actual  or  temporary 
improvements  in  navigation. 

I  think  I  cannot  be  mistaken,  when  I  state, 
here  in  my  place,  that  the  basis  of  white  popu- 
lation, as  I  nave  proposed,  will  accomplish  the 
end  at  which  I  aim,  and  meet  the  approbation  of 
ninety-nine  hundredths  of  the  true  pro  slavery 
party  in  this  glorious  commonwealth. 

Mr.  President,  I  am  aware  that  what  is  called 
the  "blue  grass"  section  of  the  state  has  been  called 
upon  to  resisttheproposedbasisof  representation. 
It  has  been  argued  that  upon  the  basis  of  white 
population,  they  lose  a  part  of  their  political  in- 
fluence and  power  in  the  law-making  branch  of 
the  government.  To  some  extent  this  is  true; 
but  It  is  equally,  if  not  more  certainly  true,  that 
they  must  lose  as  much,  if  not  a  greater  amount 
of  their  power,  if  the  basis  of  "qualified  votera" 
shall  be  established;  and  what  is  still  worse  for 
them,  if  the  latter  basis  shall  bo  adopted,  the 
power  which  leaves  the  blue  grass  region  will  be 
transferred  to  that  very  portion  of  the  state,  in 
which  their  slave  property  (upon  the  security  of 


941 


which  depends  their  pecuniary  salvation,)  will 
Ixj  rendered  less  secure. 

There  is  no  basis  except  the  basis  of  "federal 
numbers,"  which  can  enable  that  part  of  the 
state  to  retain  its  present  power,  and  in  all  can- 
dor, I  submit  to  tneir  sense  of  justice,  and  their 
sense  of  self-preservation,  if  it  be  not  best  to 
leave  the  permanent  security  of  their  slave  prop- 
erty in  the  hands  of  the  rural  districts,  than  in 
the  hands  of  the  cities  and  such  counties  border- 
ing upon  the  free  states,  as  may  in  a  short  period 
be  supplied  in  population  by  those  states,  aiid 
■who  are  now,  many  of  them,  leaning  to  emanci- 
pation. Sir,  it  is  for  the  representatives  of  that 
?ortiou  of  the  state,  to  make  their  own  choice, 
'hat  they  will  make  a  judicious  choice — one 
cousistent  with  the  preservation  of  their  rights, 
and  their  best  interests,  I  will  not  allow  myself 
to  doubt  for  one  moment. 

Mr.  President,  there  is  yet  another  great  prin- 
ciple that  enters  into  this  question  of  fixing  the 
basis  of  representation.  The  fact  does  exist, 
that  you  have  so  changed  the  old  constitution  as 
to  give  to  cities  and  towns  an  increased  power 
in  the  state  legislature.  I  have  assumed  the  fact 
that  the  basis  proposed  by  me,  will  operate  as  a 
check  upon  tnat  increased  power.  Now,  sir, 
suppose  you  refuse  this  restraint  upon  the  in- 
creased and  growing  power  of  cities  and  towns 
in  the  law-making  body.  Have  gentlemen 
weighed  the  effect,  the  consequences  of  this 
power,  unrestrained  in  legislation?  Why,  sir, 
all  know,  the  fact  is  incontrovertible,  that  cities 
subsist  principally  upon  the  product  or  interest 
of  capital;  whereas  the  agricultural  districts  of 
the  state  subsist  by  labor.  Labor  and  capital 
have  in  all  ages,  and  in  all  countries,  been  antag- 
onistic the  one  to  the  other.  Whenever  capital 
gains  the  ascendancv  over  labor,  in  the  power  to 
create  laws,  then  it  is  that  jou  see  the  avarice  of 
capital;  and  its  demands  upon  labor  become  so 
great  in  cities,  under  municipal  or  police  regu- 
lations, where  capital,  by  its  concentration, 
wields  all  power,  that  the  operatives,  the  labor- 
ers, are  often  constrained  to  strike  for  higher  wa- 
ges, abandon  the  city,  suffer  indescribable  want, 
or  revolutionize.  Even  here,  in  our  own  Amer- 
ica, where  the  demands  of  capital  have  not  been 
gratified  by  legal  plunder,  as  in  the  old  world, 
reducing  tnousands,  and  tens  of  thousands,  to  a 
degree  of  destitution,  want,  and  starvation,  at 
the  very  contemplation  of  which  humanity  sick- 
ens, and  from  which  the  most  savage  heart  would 
turn,  if  not  with  pity,  with  loathing  and  dis- 
gust— even  here,  within  the  circle  of  this  glori- 
ous Union,  we  have  melancholy  instances  of 
mobs  springing  up  in  your  large  cities  to  resist 
the  oppressions  of  a  monied  power,  erected  into 
an  engine  of  tyranny  by  operation  of  law.  This 
is  not  at  all  strange,  sir.  Capital  and  monopo- 
lies have  no  souls.  Capital  sympathises  not 
with  human  want,  nor  feels  for  human  misery, 
if  that  want  or  that  misery  can  but  increase  its 
power. 

Agricultural  labor  asks  no  protection  at  the 
hands  of  law-makers,  excepttobe  secured  in  the 
enjoyment  of  the  fruits  of  its  honest  industry; 
nor  can  they  render  any.  No  law  can  stay  the 
hand  of  a  blighting  frost,  prevent  the  destruc- 
tive ravages  of  the  ny,  furnish  reviving  showers 
to  a  famishing  earth,  or  preserve  the  herds  of  cat- 


tle from  the  effects  of  disease.  Such  is  not  cap- 
ital. Capital,  sir.  is  always  asking,  yea,  and 
when  it  has  power,  demanding  the  prostitution 
of  labor  to  its  iron  will. 

This  principle  was  illustrated  by  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  senior  gentleman  from  the  city  of 
Louisville,  (Mr.  Rudd,)  offered  in  this  conven- 
tion some  days  since.  Whilst  upon  one  occa- 
sion he  contended  with  his  accustomed  ability 
that  cities  should  be  entitled  to  an  equal  repre- 
sentation in  the  senate  of  the  state,  he  declared 
by  his  resolution  that  laborers  who  had  but  lit- 
tle means  in  the  city,  should  not  be  allowed  to 
vote  upon  any  question  involving  city  taxation 
under  her  corporation  laws. 

This  is  no  new  feature  in  the  history  of  cap- 
ital. It  only  shows  its  object  and  design, 
where  it  has  the  legal  license  to  oppress  labor 
by  a  restriction  upon  its  privileges.  I  was 
struck  by  a  remark  made  by  another  gentleman 
from  the  city  of  Louisville,  a  few  days  ago — I. 
allude  to  the  remarks  of  my  esteemed  friend,  the 
younger  delegate,  (Mr.  Preston.)  He  stated  that 
cities  had  always  taken  the  lead  in  struggles  for 
liberty,  and  instanced  several  cases.  Now,  sir, 
this  is  true,  to  a  great  extent,  but  this  fact  does 
not  grow  out  of  any  exclusive  intrinsic  love  that 
the  oppressed  in  ci'ties  have  for  liberty.  Not  at 
all.  That  gentleman  would  not  for  one  moment 
maintain  that  those  who  inhabit  your  moun- 
tains and  your  vallies,  would  be  less  willing  to 
offer  up  life,  and  all  that  is  dear  and  sacred  in 
existence  upon  the  altar  of  their  country's  free- 
dom. No,  sir;  upon  the  first  sound  of  the  war 
tocsin,  the  plow  is  left  in  the  furrow,  and  the 
hardy  planter  followed  by  his  patriotic  offspring 
rushes  to  the  scene  of  conflict,  there  to  maintain 
the  honor  and  glory  of  his  country,  or  perish 
with  them.  Mr.  President,  if  ever  the  freedom 
of  this  people  shall  be  lose,  which  God  in  his 
mercy  forbid,  the  last  clang  of  arms  in  the  dead- 
ly conflict  will  resound  from  your  rural  plain.s, 
and  the  last  shriek  of  expiring  liberty  will  re- 
verberate from  your  mountain  tops. 

These  revolutionary  outbreaks  in  cities  may 
be  referred  to  another  and  a  different  cause  al- 
togetlier.  They  spring  from  the  concentrated 
power  of  capital  in  cities,  which  by  its  perpetual 
oppressions  upon,  and  exactions  of  labor,  reduces 
the  latter  to  want  and  misery,  and  in  the  dispair 
of  destitution  tlie  unfortunate  sufferers  are 
driven  to  madness,  to  insurrection,  to  rebellion. 
In  many  instances,  those  who  engage  in  those 
tumultous  outbreaks  have  no  conception  of 
regulated  liberty;  and  hence  it  is  that  in  a  short 
time  you  see  them  blindly  following  the  blazing 
star  of  some  military  genius,  who  in  the  end 
conducts  them  into  a  state  of  despotism  and  op- 
pression, perhaps  almost  equal  to  that  from 
which  they  had  just  emerged.  Sir,  such  calami- 
ties never  mark  the  cool  and  deliberate  action  of 
a  people  spread  over  an  agricultural  region,  se- 
cured as  they  are  from  tlie  never  ceasing,  never 
satisfied  requisitions  of  an  accumulated  monied- 
influence.  When  they  strike,  they  move  with  a 
matured  but  determined  step,  with  a  thorough 
knowledge  of  the  end  to  be  attained,  and  that 
end  is  regulated  liberty  with  all  its  blessings, 
with  all  Its  glories. 

Mr.  President:  in  the  remarks  which  I  have 
had  the  honor  to  submit  to  the  convention,  I 


942 


have  attfinpte'l  to  show  that  tlie  basis  of  repre- 
sentation for  which  I  contend  is  not  a  novel 
one  in  this  country. 

To  "  Maltlius  on  population."  to  which  in- 
valuable work  I  invite  the  special  attention  of 
gentlemen,  I  am  indebted  in  part  for  the  laws 
wjiich  govern  population,  and  the  causes  which 
in  all  ages  and  countries  either  restrain  or  en- 
tourage its  increase.  I  have  atteinpted  to  show 
that  whilst  the  basis  of  qualified  voters  will  in- 
crease legislative  power  in  the  cities  and  coun- 
ties bordering  upon  the  free  states,  the  basis  of 
white  population  would  hold  in  check  that  pow- 
er which  in  another  part  of  this  constitution  we 
have  augmented,  by  strengthening  the  arm  of 
the  rural  districts. 

Ihave  undertaken  to  show  that  the  institution 
of  slavery,  and  the  right  of  the  citizen  to  im- 
port that  species  of  property  for  his  own  use, 
would  be  more  secure  upon  my  proposed  basis 
of  representation  than  that  contended  for  by 
other  gentlemen.  I  have  attempted  to  show  that 
capital  is  continually  striving  to  enslave  labor, 
and  that  the  means  to  accomplish  this  end  is  in- 
creased just  in  proportion  as  you  shall  concen- 
trate it,  and  give  it  a  preponderance  of  power  in 
the  law-making  department  of  the  government. 

That  cities  are  reared  upon  and  sustained  by 
capital — that  you  have  increased  city  represen- 
tation already  in  the  legislature,  and  that  with 
the  present  basis,  the  day  is  not  far  distant  when 
the  labor  of  the  state  will  be  brought  trembling  and 
in  rags  at  the  feet  of  a  monied  aristocracy,  pam- 

ftered  into  power  and  consequence  by  those  very 
aws  itself  shall  enact.  To  avert  this  calamity 
to  public  liberty,  to  the  best  interests  and  dearest 
rignts  of  a  generous  constituency,  whose  kind- 
ness has  bourn  me  to  every  position  to  which  I 
have  aspired,  I  have  offered  the  basis  of  white 
population.  If  adopted  I  believe  it  will  avert 
the  evil  I  apprehend.  I  trust  in  God  it  may  do 
so.  Having  now  said  all  that  I  intend  to  say  I 
leave  to  the  good  sense  and  better  judgment  of 
the  convention  its  adoption  or  rejection  as  in 
their  wisdom  they  shall  determine. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  had  hoped  when  the 
debate  on  this  question  was  resumed,  as  I  es- 
teemed it  one  of  great  importance,  there  would 
liave  been  some  discussion  of  the  principles,  some 
answer  to  the  arguments  which  were  advanced 
by  several  gentlemen,  when  the  subject  was  here- 
tofore under  consideration,  in  support  of  the 
existing  basis.  So  far,  I  do  not  regard  the  re- 
marks which  have  been  made  by  either  of  the 
delegates  who  have  addressed  the  convention  as 
tending  to  that  point.  It  seems  to  me  that  this 
effort  to  change  the  basis  of  representation 
lias  resolved  itself  into  a  mere  struggle  for 
political  power ;  and  indeed  the  gentleman 
from  Simpson  who  has  just  resumed  his  seat, 
Bays  he  was  induced,  from  the  fact  that  the  ter- 
ritory along  theriver  was  increasing  in  popula- 
tion, to  cast  about  for  some  means  of  enanling 
the  interior  rural  districts  to  sustain  tlieir  in- 
fluence irrespective, as  I  understood  him, of  their 
political  power,  regarding  the  existing  basis. 

If  that  be  true,  if  that  be  the  motive  which 
actuates  him  and  others  to  sustain  the  princi- 
ples contained  in  the  resjlution  which  was 
adopted  by  this  convention,  and  which  I  must 
still  esteem  to  be  a  novelty — if  that  be  their  ob- 


ject, I  say,  we  should  look  well  into  the  matter. 
If  sir,  it  has  not  been  shown  that  injustice  will 
spring  out  of  the  continuance  of  the  present  ba- 
sis, if  it  has  not  been  proved  that  it  is  predica- 
ted upon  false  principles,  if  it  has  not  been  de- 
monstrated that  the  true  basis  of  representation 
is  generated  bv  other  influences  than  the  polit- 
ical power  of  the  country,  if  it  has  not  been  dis- 
proved that  the  political  power  resides  in  the 
voting  population,  then,  before  we  adopt  what 
I  still  call  a  novelty,  Ave  should  look  well  into  it 
and  examine  its  consequences;  we  should  look 
around  and  see  whether  it  is  sanctioned  by  the 
experience  of  other  countries.  Something  is  due 
to  the  existing  state  of  things. 

According  to  the  showing  of  the  gentleman 
himself,  his  proposition  is  a  novelty.  He  says 
twelve  states  have  adopted  population  as  a  basis 
of  representation,  but  that  is  not  the  rule  pre- 
scribed in  the  resolution  offered  by  the  gentle- 
man. His  is  a  complicated  proposition.  He 
does  not  propose  population  as  a  basis.  You 
are  to  abstract,  first  the  aliens.  It  does  not  stop 
there.  You  are  to  take  out  of  the  free  white 
population  those  who  having  been  citizens  of 
other  states,  have  not  acquired  aresidence  by  liv- 
ing one  year  in  Kentucky.  Has  the  gentleman 
found,  among  the  thirty  states  of  this  Union,  a 
proposition  tallying  with  his?  He  says  there 
are  three  states  which  have  adopted  the  princi- 
ple upon  which  Kentucky  is  represented.  Has 
he  shown  that  one  state  has  adopted  his  plan? 
If  not,  his  proposition  is  a  novelty. 

To  exclude  aliens,  to  exclude  a  portion  of 
the  white  inhabitants,  nay,  to  exclude  a  portion 
of  those  who  are  born  within  the  limits  of  the 
United  States,  and  who  have  come  into  the  state 
with  an  avowed  purpose  of  making  their  resi- 
dence in  it,  but  have  not  been  living  here  long 
enough  to  entitle  them  to  vote — when  you  ex- 
clude them,  and  permit  a  child  just  born,  to 
be  represented — to  do  that,  is,  in  my  judg- 
ment to  present  to  this  convention,  a  novelty. 
But,  like  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson, 
I  am  disposed  to  look  at  a  proposition  when 
it  comes  up,  and  see  what  are  its  intrinsic 
merits.  If  I  believe  it  correct,  if  I  regard  it  as 
founded  on  correct  principles,  and  for  the  good 
of  the  country,  it  receives  my  support. 

One  great  difficulty  growing  out  of  tlie  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson,  is,  that 
it  places  too  much  power  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
individuals — those  whose  business  it  would  be 
to  enumerate  the  population.  They  would  have 
in  their  hands,  to  some  extent,  the  political  des- 
tiny of  the  country.  How  could  frauds,  in  the 
enumeration  made  under  such  a  rule  be  detec- 
ted. A  hundred,  five  hundred,  nay,  a  thousand 
of  representative  population  in  some  counties 
might  be  put  down,  or  abstracted  by  way  of  in- 
crease or  aiminution  as  might  suit  the  purposes 
of  the  officer,  and  yet  the  fraud  could  not  be  de- 
tected. There  is  no  check,  no  means  by  which 
this  thing  could  be  detected. 

But  under  the  simple  plan  which  now  exists, 
if  tlie  vote  at  the  polls  does  not  correspond  with 
the  voting  population  reported  by  theofficer,  the 
fraud  would  be  immediately  detected,  as  in  the 
nature  of  things,  the  one  must  nearly  apjiroxi- 
mate  to  the  other.  Not  alone  because  opportu- 
nity is  afforded  to  practice  frauds  without  detec- 


943 


tion;  not  alone  becanse  a  door  is  opened  vide 
for  the  foulest  abuses  and  corruptions  to  intrude 
themselves  and  destroy  the  purity  of  our  repre- 
senative  system,  so  essential  to  popular  liberty; 
not  alone  because  it  might  change  the  complex- 
ion of  political  parties  irrespective  of  their 
strength,  and  thus  defeat  the  popular  will;  not 
alone  for  these  reasons,  but  for  many  others,  is 
it  objectionable. 

I  think  there  are  difficulties  on  all  hands 
■which  would  beset  the  individuals  employed  in 
their  efforts  to  carry  out  this  enumeration.  The 
elder  gentleman  from  Nelson,  in  speaking  of 
this  matter,  says  there  would  be  no  difficulty. 
All  the  enumerator  would  have  to  do  would  be 
to  inquire  how  many  children  the  man  or  the 
woman  might  have.  Would  it  be  proper  that 
irresponsible  statements,  made  as  these  would 
be,  snoukl  be  assumed  to  possess  statistical  ac- 
curacy and  become  the  basis  on  which  we  should 
predicate  the  representation  of  the  state?  Are 
we  to  place  the  political  power  of  the  state  upon 
so  uncertain  a  foundation? 

But  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  goes  further.  The  enu- 
merating officer  is  to  investigate  and  ascertain 
who  are  aliens  and  who  are  citizens.  Is  he  to 
take  the  word  of  every  man  he  meets  as  to  his 
citizenship?  Must  he  not  examine,  in  order  to 
exclude  aliens,  documentary  evidence  as  to 
whether  foreigners  are  naturalized?  Must  he 
not  institute  enquiries  in  order  to  ascertain  the 
identity  of  the  individual  holding  them,  with 
the  one  described  in  the  naturalization  papers? 
Must  he  not  be  erected  into  a  judge  to  be  able  to 
determine  whether  these  papers  are  properly  au- 
thenticated or  not,  for  tney  are  obtaineci  and 
brought  from  every  section  of  the  Union?  Nay, 
he  must  go  on  and  inquire  as  to  the  residence  of 
every  individual;  he  must  know  whether  that 
individual  has  had  such  a  residence  as  by  law 
may  entitle  him  to  vote.  Upon  this  subject  he 
must  take  testimony — must  be  empowerea  to  in- 
vestigate facts,  or  else  he  and  the  country  w^ill 
be  left  to  the  vague  and  frequently  untruthful 
statements  of  irresponsible  persons.  These  are 
objections  which  ought  to  constitute  an  insu- 
perable difficulty  to  this  new  plan  when  con- 
trasted with  the  simple  one  which  now  exists. 

But  the  gentleman  from  Simpson  says,  that  by 
the  laws  of  population,  as  derived  from  the  his- 
tory of  nations  for  ages  past,  it  can  be  demon- 
strated that  the  population  of  the  rural  districts 
is  greater  in  proportion  to  the  voting  population 
than  is  the  population  of  the  cities;  and  this  he 
assigns  as  a  leading  reason  for  proposing  this 
new  basis.  Other  gentlemen  entertain  the  same 
opinions.  Statistical  arguments  and  tabular 
statements  have  been  introduced  here  to  prove 
that  the  population  of  the  interior  comprises 
rateably  a  greater  number  of  children ;  or  that 
the  representative  population  upon  tlie  plan 
proposed  in  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  is  greater  in  pro- 
portion to  the  unmber  of  voters  in  the  interior 
and  rural  districts  than  in  the  cities  and  along 
the  river  border. 

I  have  made  some  examination  into  this  sub- 
ject, the  result  of  which  is  a  decided  opinion 
that  no  certain  and  reliable  conclusions  can  be 
drawn  as  to. the  amount  of  the  representative 


population  from  the  number  of  children.  I  be- 
lieve that  it  is  altogether  uncertain  what  effect 
would  be  produced  on  the  distribution  of  politi- 
cal power  by  the  adoption  of  the  amendment. 
I  believe  that  it  might  vary  that  distribution 
from  year  to  year  as  the  uncertain  tide  of  popu- 
lation ebbed  or  flowed,  and  that  there  is  no  tix- 
edness  about  it.  As|  a  proof  of  this  position,  I 
will  read  from  some  lists  which  I  have  prepar- 
ed, showing  a  comparison  between  the  increase 
and  diminution  of  the  voting  population  in 
1847  and  1848,  and  the  like  changes  in  the  juve- 
nile population  for  these  years.  These  lists  de- 
monstrate that  the  children  do  not  increase  in 
the  same  ratio  as  the  voting  population  does, 
and  that  there  is  no  certain  relation  between 
them.  Sometimes  the  voting  population  falls 
off,  and  the  number  of  children  increases,  and 
sometimes  the  number  of  children  falls  off,  and 
and  the  voting  population  increases. 

From  this  list,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  counties 
of  Bourbon,  Boone,  Bath,  Caldwell,  Casey,  Cum- 
berland, Edmonson,  Fayette,  Fleming,  Greenup, 
Logan,  Livingston,  Pendleton,  Spencer  and  Un- 
ion, while  they  loose  in  their  voting  population, 
increase — and  some  of  them  very  greatly — in  the 
number  of  their  children.  On  tl>e  other  hand, 
it  will  be  discovered  that  the  counties  of  Crit- 
tenden, Franklin,  Floyd,  Grant,  Hardin,  Han- 
cock, Letcher,  Lewis,  Marion, Marshall,  Monroe, 
Morgan,  Rockcastle,  Todd,  Trimble,  Woodford, 
and  Washington  show  an  increase  of  voters  and 
a  decrease  of  children.  It  will  also  be  observed, 
from  an  examination  of  the  whole  table,  that  it 
presents  so  much  irregularity,  as  to  forbid 
the  construction  of  any  rule  byWhich  the  whole 
population  could,  with  any  approximation  to 
accuracy,  be  estimated  from  a  knowledge  of  the 
numbers  comprising  any  particular  class  or  de- 
scription, or  by  which  the  whole  could  be  re- 
solved into  its  parts,  so  as  to  exhibit  to  us  the 
effect  of  the  new  basis  proposed,  on  the  distribu- 
tion of  political  power. 

Table  exhibiting  a  comparison  between  the  in- 
crease and  diminution  of  voting  population, 
and  the  increase  and  diminution  of  juvenile 
population,  in  the  years  1847  and  1848,  in  each 
county  of  Kentucky: 

Voters.         Children. 


Adair, 

1507 

55 

307 

Allen, 

1413 

185 

108 

Anderson, 

1086 

88 

72 

Boyle, 

11.36 

24 

79 

Bracken, 

1586 

76 

14 

Bullitt, 

1160 

30 

71 

Bourbon, 

1769 

50 

118 

Barren, 

2939 

68 

228 

Breckinridge, 

17.38 

49 

245 

Boone, 

1861 

2 

295 

Breathitt, 

588 

41 

242 

Ballard, 

726 

27 

202 

Bath, 

1823 

38 

112 

Campbell, 
Caldwell, 

1447 

165 

47 

1859 

27 

45 

Christian, 

2132 

46 

83 

Clarke, 

1715 

5a 

4i 

U4 


Casey, 

Clinton, 

Cumberland, 

Carter, 

Crittenden, 

Calloway, 

Clay, 

Edmonson, 

Estill, 

Franklin, 

Fayette, 

Floyd, 

Fleming, 

Fulton, 

Gallatin, 

Graves, 

Greenup, 

Grant, 

Grayson, 

Garrard, 

Green, 

Henderson, 

Hardin, 

Hancock, 

Henry, 

Harlan, 

Harrison, 

Hickman, 

Jessamine, 

Jefferson, 

Johnson, 

Kenton, 

Knox, 

Larue, 

Letcher, 

Laurel, 

Lincoln, 

Lewis, 

Lawrence, 

Logan, 

Livingston, 

Muhlenburg, 

Madison, 

Montgomery, 

Mercer, 

Marion, 

Marshall, 

McCracken, 

Meade, 

Monroe, 

Morgan, 

Mason, 

Nicholas, 

Nelson, 

Owen, 

Oldham, 

Owsley, 

Perry, 

Pulaski, 

Pike, 

Pendleton, 

Rockcastle, 

Russell, 

Simpson, 

Shelbv, 

Scott," 

Spencer, 

Todd, 

Trigg, 

Trimble, 

Union, 


937 

807 

971 

908 

945 

1206 

750 

646 

1011 

1713 

2584 

961 

2310 

631 

818 

1576 

1581 

1098 

1127 

2357 
1453 
2376 
557 
1849 
661 
2056 
656 
1323 
6774 
569 
2559 
1091 
981 
365 
777 
1436 
1324 
956 
2016 
822 
1529 
2549 
1391 
2093 
1755 
824 
735 
1022 
1230 
1225 
2845 
1713 
2007 
1774 
1073 
566 
463 
2305 
807 
1207 
798 
916 
919 
2317 
1839 
1003 
1382 
1375 
994 
1264 


47 

80 

40 

even 

53 

51 
120 

41 

29 
27 
53 

47 
52 

44 

45 

34 

9 

30 
55 
23 
43 
37 
20 

479 
55 
62 
26 
61 

121 
96 
79 


52 
32 
39 

45 

31 

132 

16 

78 

58 

116 

126 

40 

47 

35 

40 

6 

149 

26 

8 
48 

18 
32 

60 
48 
73 


23 
14 

27 

19 
11 


13 
23 


16 

86 

33 

215 

543 
136 

88 
130 

240 

167 

163 

11 

3 

183 

113 

7 


13 

21 

142 

88 

123 

41 

66 

443 

84 

74 

144 
111 

76 

161 

77 

74 

249 

155 


176 
116 


338 
70 

115 

152 
99 

339 
54 

490 
7 

7  23 

129 
33 

41 
497 

8  126 

45 
36   759 


31 
14 


25 


118 

29 

3 
1 
3 


Woodford, 
Wayne, 
Warren , 
Washington, 
Whitley, 


1255 

1423 
2121 
1750 
1021 


11 

21 

78 
36 


13 


49 
241 


54 

264 

22 


49 
120 


16 

128 

95 


52 


These  statements  go  to  show  that  there  is  no 
certainty  from  the  number  of  children,  as  to  the 
entire  population,  or  as  to  any  of  its  parts. 
Sometimes  we  see  them  falling  off  while  the 
voters  increase,  and  sometime  they  increase 
while  the  votes  fall  off;  sometimes  we  find  the 
increase  of  the  one  altogether  out  of  proportion 
with  the  other  description  of  population,  and 
vice  versa;  so  no  inference  can  be  drawn  from  the 
data  in  our  possession  by  which  to  determine 
what  might  be  the  representative  population 
under  the  system  proposed  here.  You  have  no 
certain  basis  upon  which  to  predicate  a  calcula- 
tion by  which  you  can  approximate  to  anything 
like  accuracy  as  to  the  result   of  this  system. 

The  gentleman  from  Caldwell  presented  an 
array  of  specious  tables  with  which  he  attempt- 
ed to  show  by  a  comparison  between  Louisville 
and  various  counties,  how  Louisville  would  gain 
and  the  counties  embraced  in  his  tables  %yould 
lose  under  the  present  system;  and  how,  if  the 

E resent  system  were  changed,  and  that  em- 
raced  in  the  amendment  adopted,  Louisville 
would  lose  and  these  counties  would  gain.  I 
have  taken  the  gentleman's  own  figures  and 
based  my  calculations  upon  them,  producing 
very  different  results.  According  to  that  gen- 
tleman's showing,  the  representative  population 
of  Louisville  in  1840,  when  the  last  census 
was  taken,  was  17,161. 
By  reference  to  the  auditor's  report  for  that  year, 
we  find  the  voting  population  of  Louisville  3,086. 
Now  take  the  first  block  of  counties  contain- 
ed in  the  table  comprising  Adair,  Allen  and 
Barren.  The  representative  population,  accord- 
ing to  the  table,  is  26.292,  their  voting  popula- 
tion for  the  same  year  is  put  down  in  the  au- 
ditor's report  at  4,548.  Now  institute  a  propor- 
tion as  26,292,  the  representative  population  of 
these  counties  is  to  4,548,  their  voting  popula- 
tion, so  is  17,161,  the  representative  pojpulation 
of  Louisville  to  2,968,  the  voting  population  to 
which  Louisville  would  be  entitled.  But  as 
Louisville,  at  that  time,  had  3,086  voters,  she 
looses  by  this  comparison  118  votes,  or  not  quite 
four  per  cent. 

TaKe  the  second  block  of  counties  and  insti- 
tute the  same  proportion  assuming  the  figures  of 
the  gentleman  from  Caldwell,  (Mr.  Maehen,) 
and  us  result  as  shown  in  ray  table,  is  145  votes 
in  favor  of  Louisville,  as  she  would  be  entitled 
to  3,231  votes,  or  nearly  five  per  cent,  increase. 
In  the  third  block,  Henderson,  Daviess,  Ohio, 
and  Union,  pursuing  the  same  course  of  calcu- 
lation, Louisville  would  be  entitled  to  3,037,  or 
49  less  than  her  number,  about  1}^  per  cent. 

The  fourth  block,  Washington,  Slarion,  Frank- 
lin and  Anderson,  gives  Louisville  3,165  votes — 
a  gain  of  79,  or  more  than  2'.i  per  cent. 

The  fifth  block,  Callowayr  Graves,  Hickman, 
McCracken,  gives  Louisville  2,916,  which  is  a 
loss  of  170,  or  a  little  over  5  per  cent. 

The  sixth  block,  Bourbon,  Clarke,  Jessamine, 
and  Woodford  gives  Louisville  3,429,  an  exoesH 
over  her  actual  vote  of  455,  being  upwards  of  14 
per  cent. 


94» 


Thp  seventh  block,  Nelson,  Shelby,  and  Spen- 
cer, gives  Louisville  3,386  voters  which  is  a  gain 

of  300,  or  about  ten  per  cent. 

The  eighth,  Caldwell,  Hopkins,  Livingston, 

and  Trigg,  give  Louisville  2,933,  which  is  a  loss 

of  153,  or  about  five  per  c«nt. 

The  ninth,  Wayne,  Clinton,  Cumberland   and 

Pulaski,  give  Louisville  2,717,  a  loss  of  369,  or 

about  12  per  cent. 

The  tenth.  Christian  Todd,  and  Logan,  give 

Louis\ille  3,172,  a  gain  of  66,  or  about  2>^  per 

cent. 

The  eleventh  block,  Madison,  Garrard,  and 

Lincoln,  give  Louisville  3,334,  a  gain  of  248, 

or  about  8  per  cent. 

The  whole  table  shows  an  excess  of  gain  over 

loss  of  434  votes  in  favor  of  Louisville. 

Statement,  showing  the  relative  difiference  be- 
tween the  voting  population  and  the  represen- 
tative population,  under  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Simpson,  and  the  eflfect  of  this 
change  of  basis  as  applied  to  the  table  of  the 
gentleman  from  Caldwell,  calculated  from  the 
census  of  1840 : 


Counties. 
Adair, 
Allen, 
Barren, 

Voters. 
1,138] 
1,033 
2,377 

Repr 
:  :  17 

esentative  pop 
26,292 

Louisville, 

26,292 
Bracken, 
Pendleton, 
Harrison, 
Nicholas, 

4,548 
3,086 
:  4,548 
1,134^ 

733 
1,696 
1,309 

17,161 

,161  :  2,968 

25.870 

25,870 

Henderson, 
Daviess, 
Ohio, 
Union, 


4,872^ 
4,872  :  :  17,161  :  3,231. 

i,iin 

1,112 

1,019 

896 


23,374 


4,138, 
23,374  ;  4,138  :  :  17,161  :  3.037 


Washington, 
Marion, 
Franklin, 
Anderson, 


1,371 
1,369 
1,233 

789 


25,812 


4,762, 
25,818  :  4,762':  :  17,161  ;  3,165. 


Calloway, 
Graves, 
Hickman, 
McCracken, 


26,893 

Bourbon, 
Clarke, 
Jessamine, 
Woodford, 


1,544] 
1,072 
1,225 
729  ■ 


4,570^ 
4,571'         I' 

1,630] 
1,461 
1,198 
1,153 


26,893 


61  :  2,916. 


26,233 


5,442, 
26,233  :  5,442 
119 


Nelson, 
Shelby, 
Spencer, 


24,784 

Caldwell, 
Hopkins, 
Livingston, 
Trigg. 


28,500 

Wayne, 
Clinton, 
Cumberland. 
Pulaski, 


27.405 

Christian, 

Todd, 

Logan, 


24.040 

Madison, 
Garrard, 
Lincoln, 


1 .761 

2,199 

931 


34,784 


4,891 

4,891  :  :  U.161 

1,380] 
1,267 
1,235 
990 

4,872, 
4,872 

1,171] 

632 

795 
1,741 


3,386. 


28,500 


I7,m  :  2,933, 


27,405 


4,339, 
4,339 

1,682- 

1,058 

1,703 

4,443 
4,443 

2,143] 

1,403 

1,294 


4,840, 
24,730  :  4,840  ; 


17,161  :  2,717. 


24,040 


17,161   ;  3,172. 


24.730 


17,161   :  3,334. 


17,161  :  3,429. 


In  this  colocation,  Louisville,  by  the  new  prop- 
osition, assuming  the  census  of  1840  as  the  oasis 
of  the  calculation, gains  aggregately  1 ,293  votes. 
Loses  aggregately,  -         -  859      " 

Excess  of  gain  over  loss,  -  434     " 

In  1840,  as  I  have  before  stated,  the  voting 
population  of  Louisville  was  3,086,  and  that  of 
the  whole  state  108,539,  a  little  over  one  thirty- 
fifth  of  which  belonged  to  Louisville.  Her  free 
white  population  was  17,161,  and  that  of  the 
whole  state  590,253 — one  thirty-fourth  part  and  a 
fraction  less  than  a  half  over,  belonged  to  Louis- 
ville. So  that  population  would  have  given  her 
more  power  than  political  numbers. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  I  have  a  state- 
ment  showing  that  twenty  three  counties,  hav- 
ing a  slave  population  of  only  5,191,  would  be 
entitled  to  fourteen  representatives,  making  the 
qualified  voters  the  basis,  but  assuming  the  ju- 
venile population  as  the  basis,  and  fixing  the 
ratio  at  1,834,  these  same  counties  would  be  en- 
titled to  sixteen  representatives. 


Breathitt, 

Clinton, 

Campbell, 

Carter, 

Floyd, 

Harlan, 

Johnson, 

L«tch«r, 


Slaves. 

Voters. 

Children 

146 

588 

966 

230 

807 

1,320 

205 

1,447 

1,974 

256 

908 

1,480 

167 

961 

1.599 

88 

661 

1.030 

21 

569 

923 

49 

365 

S50 

946 


Laurel, 

Lawrence, 

Marshall, 

Morgan, 

Owsley, 

Perry, 

Pike, 

Whitley, 

Clay, 

Estill, 

Grant, 

Grayson, 

Pendleton, 

Rockcastle, 

Russell, 


161 

777 

1,266 

91 

956 

1,590 

221 

824 

1,344 

157 

1,225 

1,815 

99 

566 

878 

125 

463 

762 

91 

807 

1,308 

155 

1,021 

1,692 

448 

750 

1,340 

492 

1,011 

1,583 

475 

1,098 

1,395 

293 

1,172 

1.730 

469 

1,207 

1,072 

395 

798 

1,066 

377 

916 

1,493 

5,191  19,852(14      30,195(16 

This  table  is  exhibited  not  from  any  belief 
that  these  counties  are  more  inclined  to  emanci- 
pation than  other  counties  of  the  state,  but  to 
meet  the  assertion  that  the  present  basis  has  an 
anti-slavery  aspect. 

These  tabular  statements  which  I  have  pre- 
pared with  care  and  accuracy,  show  that  no  reli- 
ance can  be  placed  upon  the  number  of  children, 
as  given  in  the  auditor's  report,  in  digesting  a 
plan  for  the  distribution  of  political  power,  and 
that  in  stepping  off  the  ground  we  now  occupy, 
we  take  a  leap  in  the  dark. 

The  laws  of  population,  as  they  have  been 
deduced  from  ooservation  and  study  of  the  pro- 
gress of  nations  in  the  old  world,  or  even  from 
the  condition  of  that  portion  of  our  own  coun- 
try which  lies  along  the  Atlantic  slope,  and  was 
therefore  the  earliest  peopled,  aiford  no  certain 
criteria  by  which  to  estimate  the  popular  growth 
and  increase  of  a  country,  so  recently  settled  as 
Kentucky.  Any  attempt  at  analysis,  of  the 
component  parts  of  population  conducted  in 
accordance  with  these  rules,  and  predicated  upon 
a  knowledge  of  the  numerical  wnole,  would  ex- 
hibit results,  in  all  probability,  at  war  with  the 
truth.  On  the  other  hand,  an  effort  to  calculate 
tlie  entire  population  from  an  enumeration  of 
one  particular  description,  or  to  ascertain  the 
strength  of  the  remaining  parts  by  collation  or 
comparison  with  such  as  are  known,  would  be 
equally  futile.  The  social  elements  are  thrown 
together  too  loosely,  social  combination  is  too 
much  the  result  of  extraneous  agencies  to  admit 
of  the  application  of  theories  eliminated  from 
popular  phenomena  exhibiting  themselves  under 
circumstances  altogether  different. 

This  country  has  increased  in  population  be- 
yond the  previous  experience  of  mankind,  and 
18,  in  this  respect,  without  a  parallel  among  the 
nations  of  the  earth.  Agencies  have  been  at 
work  to  bring  about  these  results,  which  do  not 
exist,  and  which  never  did  exist,  in  any  other 
country.  It  has  been  the  grand  rallying  point 
on  which  immigration  from  all  parts  of  Europe 
has  centered.  Kentucky  is  even  now  in  tne 
transition  state  so  far  as  population  is  concern- 
ed. Wiiere  is  the  pioneer  race  which  wrested 
this  couirtry,  wh«Jn  it  was  a  wilderness,  from  the 
stern  grasp  of  the  savage?  WTiere  are  the  strong 
hands  and  bold  hearts,  who,  planting  the  stan- 
dard of  civilizatiofi  in  a  virgin  soil,  clothed  in 
the  habiliments  of  its  primeval  grandeur,  amid 
the  wild  war  whoop  of  the  merciless  Indian  and 
the  death  groans  trf  his  murdered  victim,  laid 


the  foundations  of  Kentucky  v^nivalry?  They 
are  gone,  sir;  they  have  passed  away  with  the 
heroic  circumstances  which  generated  and  de- 
veloped their  noble  peculiarities.  Their  daunt- 
less courage,  their  peerless  daring,  their  self- 
sacrificing  spirit  consecrated  in  blood,  are  the 
proud  memories  which  survive  them,  and  the 
rich  heritage  which  has  descended  to  their  pos- 
terity. These  are  the  leaves — the  green,  the  un- 
fading leaves  which  compose  that  glorious  chap- 
let  that  encircles  the  brow  of  Kentucky. 

They  are  gone — the  race  which  won  this  fair 
land  from  the  savage  dominion  of  nature — a  land 
now  teeming  with  population,  now  studded  with 

Eroud  cities,  whose  christiaa  spires  pierce  the 
eavens— where  is  heard  the  welcome  sound  of 
the  church-going  bell,  and  where  industry  and 
commerce  are  achieving  their  wonderful  results. 
They  are  gone,  sir,  I  say — swept  away  by  the 
mighty  tide  of  population  which  has  been  roll- 
ing onward  to  the  far  west,  and  whose  waves 
will  continue  to  roll  till  they  break  on  the  shores 
of  the  great  Pacific.  Here,  nothing  is  stationa- 
ry. Every  swell  of  the  flood  brings — not  a  new 
generation — but  a  race  as  different  from  the  one 
which  preceded  it,  as  one  generation  is  different 
from  another.  And  now,  months  and  years  are 
accomplishing  results  in  social  transformation, 
which  generations  and  centuries  scarcely  achiev- 
ed in  the  old  world.  The  surging  torrent,  bear- 
ing race  after  race,  and  class  after  class  on  its 
heaving  breast,  rushes  onward,  and  under  its  re- 
sistless influence  countless  thousands  are  swept 
away,  to  be  succeeded  by  other  thousands,  who 
in  turn  give  place  to  others,  and  "the  cry  is,  still 
they  come!  "  Verily,  sir,  it  may  be  said  of  us, 
thai  the  places  which  now  know  us,  will  short- 
ly know  us  no  more,  forever. 

What  though  a  few  may  linger  on  the  green 
islets  that  gem  this  sea  of  population;  they 
stand  in  a  clianged  and  changing  scene,  them- 
selves unchanged — monuments  of  the  past, 
strange  and  curious  specimens  of  an  extinct  race 
in  the  antiquity  of  progress — Salathiels,  who, 
with  the  visage  of  youth  bear  the  impress  of 
age — of  age  not  counted  by  time,  but  by  the 
lapse  of  progress  and  change. 

Our  country  is  unlike  any  other  on  the  face  of 
the  globe.  It  is,  emphatically,  a  moral,  and  po- 
litical, and  a  social  anomaly.  Leaping  as  it 
were  into  existence,  like  Minerva  from  the  brain 
of  Jupiter,  fully  grown  and  fully  armed,  at  a  pe- 
riod when  all  Europe  was  shrouded  in  political 
darkness,  was  down-trodden  under  the  iron  heel 
of  conscript patricianism,shedared,  in  theface  of 
all  the  adverse  circumstances  by  which  she  was 
surrounded,  to  proclaim  the  rights  of  man.  A  new 
star  arose  above  the  horizon  of  nations,  and 
flocking  myriads,  guided  by  its  light,  came  from 
the  east,  as  did  the  wise  men  of  old,  to  worship 
at  the  shrine  of  this  new  political  divinity, 
which  had  been  indicated  by  the  rising  light. 
Her  onward  progress  has  outstripped  tlie  wildest 
dream  of  enthusiasm,  and  no  rule  lias  yet  been 
elaborated  by  which  the  problem  of  her  destiny 
can  be  solved.  Her  popular  increase  is  not  re- 
stricted to  her  own  self-creating  energies.  She 
draws  her  resources  from  the  whole  area  of  civil- 
ization. Her  population  is  not  divided  into 
castes.  Hereditanr  serfdom  and  hereditary  de- 
gfadatioD,  from  which  no  energy,  no  ability  can 


947 


«<?ape,  are  unknowu.  Men  here  do  not  come  B9  to  "basts  oi  representation^"  would  be  at 
into  the  world  with  the  stamp  of  their  destiny  oncesettle\l.  I  voted  for  a  resolution  some  day» 
upon  them.  We  have  not  among  us  those  who  since,  which  by  some  iscalled  the  "baby  basis;" 
are  born  peasants,  and  therefore  must  die  peas-  and  so  far  a?  I  can  see,  there  seems  to  be  great 
ants;  uor  is  it  the  case  here,  as  in  Europe,  that  difficulty  in  the  house  coming  to  anv  definiie  ac- 
men,  born  in  the  crowded  precincts  of  a  city,  tion  on  the  subject.  I  would  be  willing  to  cora- 
inust  almost  necessarily  breathe  its  fetid  atmos-  promise  upon  this  subject,  and  if  my  report 
phere  during  their  whole  lives.  The  scope  for  shall  be  adopted,  I  think  it  would  be  perhaps 
enterprise  is  so  great,  and  the  means  of  living  so  the  most  satisfactory  arrangement  that  at  present 
easily  attained,  that  men  may  vary  their  loca-  can  be  secured.  I  wish  it  to  lie  on  the  table, 
tions  or  their  pursuits  at  the  prompting  of  in-  \  There  is  no  use  in  its  being  printed,  as  it  can  be 
clination,  or  even  caprice.  Hence  mobility  is  a  ;  had  by  any  gentleman  in  the  old  constitution, 
striking  characteristic  of  our  population,  and  !  The  report  was  as  follows: 
hence  our  cities,  unlike  the  cities  of  the  old  I  Sec. —  Representation  shall  beequal  and  uni- 
word,  resemble  those  straits  hard-by  the  pillars  j  form  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  forever 
of  Hercules,  where  there  are  two  currents,  the  :  regulated  by  the  number  of  qualified  electors 
one  setting  to  the  sea  and  the  other  to  the  ocean.  ,  therein.  In  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and 
The  country  is  continually  pouring  into  the  city  >  ,  and  everj'  fourth  year  thereafter,  an 

and  the  city  pouring  out  its  population  upon  the  ;  enumeration  of  all  the  free  male  inhabitants  of 
country.  These  changes  are  going  on  so  con- ^  the  state  above  twenty-one  years  of  age,  shall  be 
stantly  as  to  defy  all  effort  at  ejaculation,  based  \  made  in  such  manner  as  shall  be  directed  by 
on  the  statistics  of  other  countries,  or  even  those  I  law.  The  number  of  representatives  shall,  in 
of  our  own.  j  the  several  years  of  making  these  enumerations, 

Whv.  then,  should  gendemen  talk  about  Mai-  I  ^e  so  fixed  as  not  to  be  le^ss  than  seventy -five, 
thus,  and  about  the  laws  of  population?  Why  ;  ^^^  "^^^^  than  one  hundred;  and  they  shall  be 
should  they  attempt  to  establish  a  rule,  the  ef-  apportioned  for  the  four  years  next  following, 
feet  of  whfch  cannot  be  anticipated?  Why  take  |  ^^  ^^^^  ^^  may  be,  among  the  several  counties 
this  leap  in  the  dark?  Whv  depart  from  the  ^°'i  t"'^"'' i"  Proportion  to  the  number  of  quali- 
known  and  simple,  to  adopt  tfie  complicated,  the  !  ^'^^  electors;  but  where  a  county  may  not  have  a 


difficult,  the  untried,  and  the  unknown?  Shall 
we  abandon  the  firm  ground  on  which  our  fa- 
thers stood — upon  which  they  reared  their  rep- 
resentative system,  that  powerful  element  in  pop- 
ular liberty?  a  system  so  simple,  and  so  beauti- 
fully appropriate — simple,  because  easily  ascer- 
tained and  promptly  acted  upon — ^beautifully 
appropriate,  as  exhibiting  at  one  view,  not  only 
the  measure  of  political  power,  but  the  just 
scope  of  representation.  Until  something  can 
be  shown  as  a  reason  for  abandoning  the  high 
ground  which  our  fathers  took  when  they  framed 
the  present  constitution — a  ground  which  placed 
them  far  in  advance  of  the  other  states — when 
they  declared  the  great  truth,  that  political  pow- 
er, which  resides  in  political  numbers,  should  be 
the  measure  of  representation — I  say,  unless  it 
can  be  shown  that  that  ground  is  false,  I  shall 
protest,  by  mv  vote,  against  the  change. 
And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


THURSDAY.  DECEMBER  13,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stcart  Robixsox. 

APPORTIOXilEXT. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  Mr.  President:  I  desire  this 
morning  to  present  a  minority  report  from  the 
committee,  raised  by  a  resolution  presented  some 
days  since,  bv  the  honorable  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr.C.  A.  Wlckliffe.)  The  report  of 
that  committee  is  so  objectionable,  so  unequal  in 
its  operations,  that  I  cannot  find  it  in  my  heart 
to  sustain  it.  I  feel  satisfied  that  if  the  report 
which  I  now  offer,  and  which  I  intend  at  the 
proper  time  to  offer  as  a  substitute  for  the  report 
of  tiie  majority,  could  be  adopted,  the  question 


sufficient  number  of  qualified  electors,  to  entitle 
it  to  one  representative,  and  when  the  adjacent 
county,  or  counties,  may  not  have  a  residuum,  or 
residuums,  which  when  added  to  the  small  coun- 
ty, would  entitle  it  to  a  separate  representation, 
it  shall  be  in  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  join 
two  or  more  together  for  the  purpose  of  sending 
a  representative:  Provided,  That  where  therie 
are  two  or  more  counties  adjoining,  which  have 
residuums,  over  and  above  the  ratio  then  fixed 
by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when  added  together, 
will  amount  to  such  ratio,  in  that  case,  one  rep- 
resentative shall  be  added  to  that  county  having 
thelargest  residuum:  And  provided  further.  That 
the  general  assembly,  in  making  said  apportion- 
ment, shall  commence  either  at  the  county  of 
Fulton,  or  the  county  of  Greenup. 

The  minority  report  was  laid  upon  the  table. 

MODE   OF   REVISING   THE  COXSTITUTIOX. 

Mr.  TALBOTT  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion, and  moved  that  it  be  laid  on  the  table  and 
printetl: 

Resolved,  That  whenever  two-thirds  of  both 
branches  of  the  general  assembly  shall  deem  it 
necessary  to  call  a  convention  to  revise  this  con- 
stitution, or  agree  in  the  ueceesity  of  making  a 
specific  change,  alteration,  or  amendment,  such 
proposed  call  for  a  convention,  or  specific  change, 
alteration,  or  amendment,  shall  be  read  and 
passed  by  a  majority  of  two-thirds  of  each  house 
respectively,  on  each  day,  for  three  several  days, 
ana  for  two  successive  sessions.  Public  notice 
shall  then  be  given  thereof  by  the  secretary  of 
state,  at  least  six  monthsprecedingth«  next  gen- 
eral election,  at  which  the  qualified  electors  shall 
vote  directh'  for  or  against  such  call  of  a  con- 
vention, or  specific  change,  alteration,  or  amend- 
ment; and  if  it  shall  appear  that  a  majority  of  all 
the  qualified  electors  m  the  state,  shall  have  vo- 
ted for  such  proposed  call  of  a  cx)nvention,or  spe- 
cific, change,   alteration,  or  amendment,  then. 


049 


but  not  x)therwis«,  the  general  Jissembly,  at  its  j 
oext  session,  shall  insert  the  specitic  change,  al- 
teration, or  amendment,  so  approved,  as  part  of! 
this  constitution,  or  call  a  convention,  so  voted 
for,  to  consist  of  as  many  members  as  there  shall 
be  in  the  house  of  representatives,  and  no  more; 
to  be  chosen  in  the  same  manner,  at  the  same 
places,  and  at  the  same  time  that  representatives 
are  to  be  voted  for,  by  citizens  entitled  to  vote 
for  representatives,  who  shall  meet  within  three 
months  after  said  election,  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
vising, changing,  or  amending  this  constitution: 
Provided,  fiowever,  That  no  specific  change,  alter- 
ation, or  amendment,  shall  ever  be  made  Co  any 
article,  section,  or  part  of  a  section  in  this  con- 
stitution, involving  the  right  of  the  citiieu  in 
his  life,  liberty,  or  propetty,  without  the  call  of 
a  convention. 

Mr.  TALBOTT.  I  hate  never  been  in  the 
habit  of  public  speaking,  Mr.  President,  and  it 
is  always  embarrassing  to  me  to  attempt  it.  But 
It  is  peculiarly  so  on  the  present  occasion,  as  I 
am  consciovls  cf  my  inability  to  do  that  justice 
to  this  great  subject,  which  1  feel  its  importance 
demands.  I  would  not  attempt  to  say  a  word  at 
this  time,  in  favor  of  the  proposition  presented 
in  the  resolution  just  submitted,  but  for  the  fact 
that  I  know  there  eiists,  in  the  minds  of  dele- 
gates, a  prejudice  against  this  mode  of  amend- 
ment whi'ch  is  wholly  unfounded  and  erh^tieous. 
I  have  the  honor  to  tepres'ent  a  district  here  where 
the  two  great  parties — the  emancipation  and  the 
pro-slavery  party-^ave  as  nmCh  zeal,  energy, 
and  discrimination,  as  any  wther^  and  where  eve- 
ry position  and  proposition  has  been,  throughout 
the  late  canvass  for  seats  on  this  floor,  as  cau- 
tiously and  as  thoroughly  investigated  and  scru- 
tinized, as  in  any  section  of  the  State.  After  I 
had  been  a  candidate  for  about  five  months,  and 
after  many  warm  and  enthusiastic  speeches  had 
been  made  on  both  sides,  party  spirit  aroused  to 
tlie  highest  pitch,  victory  desired  by  all,  every 
mind  upon  the  alert,  I  was  called  on  to  give  my 
positions  in  writing.  I  did  so.  I  assumed  the 
position  set  forth  in  Ihis  resolution.  I  was 
immediately  assailed  by  my  opponents,  and  by 
the  whole  eniancipation  partv,  as  drawing  in- 
vidious distinctions,  andgranting  exclusive  priv- 
ileges. But,  sir,  before  the  subject  had  been  in- 
vestigated a  week,  there  seemed  to  be  a  unani- 
mous concurrence  of  opinion  among  pro-slaveiy 
men,  that  the  ground  was  not  only  just  and  fair 
to  all  parties,  but  that  it  was  the  strongest  pro- 
slavery  ground  in  the  world;  and  I  wa.s  elected, 
beating  my  emancipation  competitor  upwards  of 
four  hundred  votes,  with  other  pro-slavery  can- 
didates upon  the  track.  This  much,  sir,  1  have 
thought  it  necessary  to  premise,  before  I  proceed- 
ed to  the  full  investigation  of  the  subjects  em- 
braced in  the  resolution,  in  order  to  snow  that 
the  same  objections  do  not  lie  everywhere  to  thi.s 
mode  of  amendment,  as  seema  tx>  rest  in  the 
mindsof  some  gentlemen  in  this  house.  I  de- 
sire, Mr.  President,  to  embrace,  in  the  remarks 
I  am  about  to  make,  the  whole  ground  occupied, 
and  the  plan  contemplated  by  the  emancipation- 
ists, for  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  Kentucky 
without  CO  npensation;  and  show,  if  1  can,  as 
briefly  as  possible,  how,  by  incorporating  any 
portion  of  that  plan  in  the  constitution  we  are 
about  to  frame,  the  institution  of  Mavery,  a.s  I 


believe,  will  be  placed  in  their  hands  and  sub- 
ject to  their  disposal.  Their  plan  is,  first  to  get 
inserted  in  the  new  constitution  the  law  of  '33; 
then  specific  amendments  upon  all  subjects,  or 
the  old  mode  of  calling  a  convention.  I  know, 
sir,  there  Avill  be  in  some  of  my  remarks  a  slight 
digression  from  the  point  immediately  before  the 
mind,  as  presented  in  this  resolution;  but  as  I 
will  not  be  able  to  show  its  full  force  and  effect 
without,  I  hope  the  house  will  indulge  me  for  a 
very  short  time,  while  I  attempt  to  examine  their 
whtole  ground. 

Before  I  proceed,  sir,  to  show  the  great  advan- 
tages, as  I  think,  to  be  derived  to  the  pro-slavery 
interest,  by  adopting  the  mode  of  amendment  in- 
dicated in  the  resolution  I  have  had  the  honor  to 
present,  I  will  endeavor  to  show,  very  briefly, 
sOme  of  thte  very  great  disadvantages  that  will, 
in  my  judgment,  necessarily  grow  out  of  the 
adoption  of  any  other  mode,  hitherto  presented. 
Take  then,  first,  specific  amendments  upon  all 
subjects.  Say  that  your  constitution  may  be 
amended  at  any  time  specifically  upon  any  and 
every  subject.  Say  it  shall  require  a  majority, 
and  if  you  please,  say  the  largest  majority;  say 
two-thirds  of  the  legislature  and  a  majority  of 
all  the  qualified  voters  in  the  state;  and  what, 
sir,  would  be  the  practical  result?  Put,  then,  a 
clause  in  your  constitution,  that  slaves  shall  not 
be  taken  from  tlieir  owners,  except  upon  any 
comiition  you  please — put  it  upon  the  hardest 
terms.  Then,  sir,  make  it  amendable  specifical- 
ly upon  all  subjects,  and  what  would  your  pro- 
hibitory clause  avail?  What  protection  would 
it  extend  to  the  slave  properly,  or  how  would 
it  tend,  in  the  slightest  degree,  to  the  suppression 
of  agitation  upon  that  subject?  Put  any  condi- 
tion you  please  in  the  constitution  in  regard  to 
slavery.  Throw  around  it  such  guards  as  you 
deem  best;  protect  it  in  any  way  you  think  pro- 
per; say  they  shall  not  be  taken  for  one  hundred 
or  one  thousand  years;  require  emancipation  up- 
on the  hardest  possible  terms.  The  very  mo- 
ment you  admit  the  constitution  may  be  amend- 
ed specifically  upon  all  subjects,  by  even  the 
largest  majority,  you  have  opened  the  field  for 
and  invited  the  agitation  of  the  very  question  we 
came  here  to  settle,  and  if  possible,  to  place  be- 
yond the  reach  of  controversy. 

Say  what  you  please  sir,  in  the  constitution 
about  slavery,  but  the  very  moment  you  agree 
and  insert  in  it,  this  mode  of  amendment,  you 
have  done  all  the  emancipationists  now  wish  or 
ask,  and  you  yield  for  ever,  tlie  question,  the 
great  question,  the  question  I  never  intend  to 
yield,  that  they  may  take  our  slaves  without  our 
consent,  or  without  compensation.  Sir,  the  most 
ultra  emancipationist  in  Kentucky,  has  never 
asked,  has  never  dared  to  ask,  to  set  the  negroes 
free,  uponany  plan,  oratany  time  whatever,  un- 
less a  majority  of  the  whole  people  of  the  com- 
monwealth were  in  favor  of  it.  And  I  ask  you 
sir,  if  it  would  make  any  difference  with  them, 
or  if  it  would  protect  the  slaveholder  for  a  mo- 
ment, no  matter  what  was  said  about  it  in  the 
constitution,  if  they  had  tlie  privilege  to  cliangu 
that  clause,  as  soon  as  they  could  procure  the 
majority  required  by  the  constitution.  Not  a 
monaent  sir.  It  is  all  tliey  ask.  Thev  have  nev- 
er asked  more  than  to  say,  they  mignt  free  the 
slaves,  if  they  could  get  a  majority  in    favor  of 


049 


it,  and  a  clause  of  this  sort  would  certainly  give 
them  that  privilege.  Sir,  what  is  the  difterenee 
in  effect,  befween  saying  to  a  gentleman,  "1  ^vill 
not  invite  you  into  my  house,"  and  saying 
"the  door  is  open, you  can  do  as  you  please  about 
going  in."  What  is  the  difference  I  ask,  be- 
tween saying  to  the  north,  we  will  not  put  it  in 
the  constitution,  that  you  shall  set  our  negroes 
free,  but  here  is  the  constitution  with  a  clause, 
that  you  may  change  it  as  you  please.  What  I 
a.sk  vou  sir,  would  be  the  cfifference  in  effect,  be- 
tween the  two  propositions,  in  their  practical 
results?  No  difference  whatever.  Then  sir, 
the  mode  of  specific  amendment  upon  all  sub- 
jects is  objectionable  on  another  account.  It 
would  invite  discussion,  agitation,  and  eternal 
contention,  on  this  most  dangerous  and  excit- 
ing subject,  the  subject  of  slavery.  All  officers, 
now,  are  to  be  elected  by  the  people,  directly. 
The  emancipation  party  throughout  the  state 
would  therefore  have  their  candidates  in  the 
field  for  every  office  in  the  commonwealth.  Their 
plan  would  be,  to  keep  up  agitation,  for  organiza- 
tion, and  organization  for  effect  and  ultimate 
success.  Hence  they  would  keep  a  candidate 
in  the  field  every  where,  in  order  to  circulate  their 
abolition  and  intlamatory  documents  throughout 
the  state,  and  thus  excite  discontent  and  insu- 
bordination on  the  part  of  the  slave,  and  in- 
security and  uncertainty  upon  the  part  of  the 
master.  This  sir,  would  be  their  plan  under 
this  clause.  I  ask  you  sir,  if  it  would  not  be 
so?  If  it  would,  how  long  I  ask  you  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, could  we  live  under  such  a  state  of  things? 
Let  us  suppose  a  state  of  case,  sir.  Let  us  sup- 
pose for  a  moment  that  ministers  of  the  gospel, 
of  the  best  talents  and  first  respectability  in  the 
country,  to  be  constantly  preaching,  in  private 
and  from  the  pulpit,  to  the  master  and  to  the 
slave,  to  one  and  to  all,  that  slavery  is  a  sin  in 
the  sight  of  God,  a  great  moral  and  social  evil, 
a  corroding  cancer,  and  ruinous  to  the  best  in- 
terests of  the  state?  Then  sir,  in  addition  to 
that,  suppose  the  abolitionist  to  be  thus  licensed, 
going  forth  and  sowing  broadcast,  throughout 
the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land,  the  seeds  of 
dissension,  insurrection,  rebellion  and  revolution, 
into  the  ignorant  minds  and  corrupt  hearts  of 
our  slaves.  Teaching  them  that  they  were  bom 
as  free  as  their  masters — that  they  were  held  in 
bondage  improperly,  and  by  no  other  law  than 
the  law  of  tyrrauny  and  oppression — that  God, 
religion  antl  the  abolitionists,  were  all  for 
theni — to  strike,  and  strike  now  for  their  liber- 
ty— that  heaven  would  smile  upon,  and  crown 
tiiem  with  success,  and  that  the  whole  civilized 
world  would  justify  their  effort  at  freedom  up- 
on any  terms  and  at  all  hazards?  Sir,  I  a«k  you 
how  long  we  could  live  under  such  a  state  of 
case?  Where  would  be  the  guaranty  for  human 
life?  Where  the  security  andprotection  of  prop- 
erty? There  would  be  no  security,  no  protec- 
tion. The  slave  who  is  now  in  many  instances 
your  best  friend,  might  then  and  thus  be  induced 
and  stimulated  to  become  your  deadliest  enemy. 
Insurrection,  rebellion  and  revolution  would  en- 
sue, and  the  whole  affair  would  wind  up  in  a 
tragedy  too  horrible  even  to  contemplate — one 
that  would  cause  even  the  stoutest  heart  to 
shrink  and  weep  over  the  bloody  scene.  I  ask 
you  sir,  and  I  ask  this  house,  if  they  will,  when 


they  have  coma  up  here  to  grille  this  great  ques- 
tion, and  have  it  in  their  power  to  do  so,  thus 
afford  to  the  emancipationist,  the  men  and  mo- 
ney to  prosecute  a  war  of  extermination  against 
an"  institution,  involving  an  interest  of  sixty 
millions  of  dollars,  and  the  lives  and  destiny  of 
two  hundred  thousand  slaves.  I  urge  you  sir, 
and  I  urge  this  house  to  think  seriously  upon 
this  subject  before  you  act.  There  is  much  to  be 
gained,  or  much  to  be  lost  by  our  decision  upon 
this  mode  of  amendment. 

Now  sir,  I  will  consider  but  for  a  moment 
another  mode  of  amendment.  The  mode  adopt- 
ed in  our  present  constitution. 

The  objection  I  have  to  the  mode  there  pre- 
scribed is,  that  combinations  will  be  formed  be- 
tween the  fragments  of  all  parties,  similar  to 
those  that  have  called  this  convention,  and  thus 
emancipationists  will  be  able  to  form  new  and 
strong  alliances,  by  running  candidates  for  everj' 
oflice  in  the  country,  and  keep  up  the  same 
ceaseless  agitation,  as  under  the  mode  of  specific 
amendments  upon  all  subjects  or  the  open  clause 
— and  by  coalescing  and  fraternising  with  all 
the  Iragments  of  all  the  different  minority  par- 
ties in  the  country,  they  would  soon  be  atle  to 
call  a  new  convention,  with  the  full  determina- 
tion and  for  the  express  purpose  upon  their  part, 
of  destroying  the  very  interest  we  came  here  to 
secure.  Is  there  any  way,  do  you  ask  sir,  to  pre- 
vent this?  There  is  a  way  to  "settle  this  question 
in  my  judgment,  and  settle  it  forever  without 
doing  injustice  to  any,  while  we  distribute  equal 
justice  to  all  parties;  and  that  is  by  inserting,  in 
the  new  constitution  the  specific  mode  of  amend- 
ment which  I  have  had  the  honor  to  present.  By 
incorporating  in  the  constitution  a  clause  to 
amend  it  specifically  upon  all  subjects,  not  invol- 
ving the  right  of  life,  liberty,  or  property,  upon 
the  recommendation  of  at  least  two  thirds  of  both 
branches  of  the  legislature  for  two  successive 
sessions,  and  then  a  direct  vote  of  all  the  quali- 
fied electors  in  the  state,  a  majority  of  all  voting 
for  it,  you  would  give  sufficient  strength  and 
stability  to  the  constitution,  upon  all  other  sub- 
jects, and  put  to  rest  forever,  the  great  question 
of  slavery.  The  emancipationist  coul<l  then 
free  the  negroes,  at  any  time,  with  compensation, 
without  a  convention,  and  they  never  should, 
and  they  never  shall,  by  my  consent  or  my 
vote,  free  them  without  compensation,  Avith  a 
convention.  I  ask  you,  sir,  and  I  ask  the  house 
if  this  is  not  the  time  to  settle  this  question? 
How,  then  sir,  do  you  ask  me,  will  this  mode 
accomplish  that  great  and  so  much  desired  end. 
Why  sir,  if  you  have  the  constitution  amendable 
in  the  manner  indicated,  the  politician  would 
never  want  a  convention,  he  could  accomplish 
nis  object  by  specific  amendment.  The  anti- 
elective  party  would  want  no  convention,  they 
could  accomplish  their  end  in  the  same  way. 
No  minority  party  or  fragment  of  a  party,  would 
wish  a  convention,  for  they  could  not  hope  to 
gain  anything  by  a  convention,  which  could  not 
be  obtained  without.  The  pro-slavery  man 
would  not  wish  a  convention,  for  he  could 
not  possibly  gain  by  it;  he  would  have  every- 
thing to  loose  and  nothing  to  gain.  For  slavery 
would  thus  be  settled,  and  settled  forever,  with- 
out a  convention.  Who  then  sir,  would  want  a- 
convention?    There  certainly  would  be  no  ne- 


950 


<'«i9ity  for  any.  The  emancipationist  would  not  | 
ami  could  not  complain,  unless  he  wanted  our 
slaves  for  nothing.  They  could  reach  them  at 
any  time,  when  they  could  get  a  majority  in 
favor  of  paying  a  fair  and  full  compensation  for 
them.  Surely,  sir,  there  is  no  one  here  who 
wishes  them  freed  without.  Sir,  while  I  might 
be  willing  to  give  them  up  at  any  time  with 
compensation,  I  would  not  be  willing  to  say 
that  they  might  call  a  convention  in  two  thou- 
sand or  two  hundred  thousand  years,  to  take 
them  for  nothing  without  the  consent  of  the 
owner.  Where  then  the  necessity  of  a  conven- 
tion? Where  the  objection  to  this  mode  of 
amendment?  How  could  a  convention  be  called? 
There  could  be  no  improper  combinations,  for 
none  would  be  necessary.  All  could  reach  their 
ends,  except  the  emancipator,  by  specific 
amendment.  And  so  could  the  emancipator  if 
he  would  only  pay— -he  never  should  without. 
Will  it  not  then,  I  ask,  settle  this  question  for- 
ever, and  settle  it  justly. 

But,  sir,  I  have  been  told  that  this  mode  of 
amendment  is  objectionable — that  it  draws  an  in- 
vidious distinction  between  the  different  inter- 
ests in  the  country.  Sir,  I  deny  that  it  makes 
any  such  invidious  distinction.  It  places  every 
man  of  every  party,  and  every  principle  of  every 
party,  and  every  species  of  property  of  every 
party,  upon  an  equal  footing  in  the  new  consti- 
tution. Is  that  wrong,  sir;  is  that  drawing  in- 
A-idious  distinction?  Is  it  drtiwing  invidious 
distinctions,  to  say  to  thepeople  of  this  common- 
wealth, that  if  they  do  not  like  electing  judges 
by  the  people,  you  may  change  that  mode  to 
some  other  you  think  better,  and  to  the  emanci- 
pationist, you  shall  not  have  the  negroes,  bought 
and  paid  for  by  the  toil  and  sweat  of  the  owner, 
unless  you  compensate  him  for  them?  Is  that 
drawing  invidious  distinctions?  I  think  not,  sir. 
I  think  the  man  who  comes  to  me  and  demands 
all  the  property  I  have,  without  money  and 
■without  price,  and  attlie  same  time  declares  that 
the  constitution  should  and  does  protect  all  his; 
I  think,  sir,  that  is  the  man  who  is  drawing  in- 
vidious distinctions,  and  drawing  them  with  a 
vengeance.  I  ask  you  if  it  is  right  to  take  a 
man's  property  of  any  kind  for  nothing?  Is  it 
doing  unto  others  as  you  would  have  others  do 
unto  you?  Is  it  loving  your  neighbor  as  your- 
self? Is  it  doing  good  for  evil,  or  evil  for  good? 
Is  it  not,  sir,  a  total  perverson  and  subversion  of 
all  God's  holy  law?  Is  it  not,  sir,  after  men  have 
formed  a  social,  religious,  and  political  compact, 
and  pledged  themselves  to  each  other  to  protect 
every  man,  in  life,  liberty,  property,  and  the 
pursuit  of  liappiness,  a  violation  of,  and  an  out- 
rage to  every  principle  of  moral,  religious,  and 
political  justice,  under  such  circumstances,  to 
deprive  tlie  citizen  of  his  property  of  any  kind 
•without  his  consent,  or  without  compensation? 
1  ask  you,  sir,  if  it  would  not  be  an  outrage  of 
all  a  man's  natural  and  legal  rights,  thus  to  strip 
him  of  the  fruit  of  the  toil  ana  sweat  of  many 
years.  It  may  chance  to  be,  sir,  that  a  father 
dies  and  leaves  two  sons;  to  tlie  one  he  gives 
ten  thousand  dollars  in  monev,  to  the  other  ten 
thousand  dollars  in  lands.  "The  one  who  gets 
the  money  vests  it  all  in  slnves,  the  otiier  retains 
his  in  lands,  all  acquired  and  held  under  the 
same  government  and  laws,  and  paying  tax  for 


the  same  guarantee  of  pj'otection.      Now,  sir, 
suppose  the  majority,  under  a  wild   and  fanati 
cat  delusion,  start  up,  and  in  a  freak ,  impelled 
by  the  spirit  of  revolution,   declare  that  it   is 
wrong  for  any  man  to  hold   the  right,  title,  or 

fiossession  to  any  particular  tract  or  parcel  of 
and  Avhatever,  aim  that  as  far  as  land  is  concern- 
ed, it  shall  all  be  in  common,  and  actually  rob 
this  man  of  his  land  without  his  consent,  or 
without  compensation,  and  leave  his  brother  in 
the  full  enjoyment  of  all  his  slaves.  I  ask  you,  sir, 
if  this  would  be  right?  Suppose  then,  sir,  we  re- 
verse it.  Suppose  the  same  majority  under  the 
influence  of  the  same  mad  delusion,  rise  up  in  a 
similar  freak,  impelled  by  the  same  spirit  of  rev- 
olution, and  declare  that  slavery  is  a  sin,  a  great 
moral  and  social  evil,  a  blight  and  mildew  on 
the  body  politic,  and  ruinous  to  the  best  inter- 
ests of  the  state;  then  swear  that  every  slave- 
holder should  surrender  up  his  slaves  without 
money  and  without  price,  immediately  or  pro- 
spectively, and  actually  take  the  slaves  from  the 
other  man,  and  leave  his  brother  in  the  full  en- 
joyment of  all  his  lands.  I  ask  you,  sir,  if  this 
would  not  be  wrong?  Would  it  not  be  a  viola- 
tion of  every  thing  that  is  pure  in  religion,  cor- 
rect in  morals,  and  just  in  government.  If  so, 
then  I  ask  sir,  where  is  the  injustice  done,  where 
the  invidious  distinction  drawn  by  my  mode  of 
amending  the  constitution  we  are  about  to  frame? 
It  draws  no  such  invidious  distinction.  It  puts 
all  lives  in  the  same  category,  all  liberty  in  the 
same  category,  all  property  in  the  same  category, 
all  parties  upon  an  equality,  and  settles  forever 
the  much  vexed  and  all  absorbing  question  of 
slavery.  It  w^ill  put  it  forever  beyond  the  reach 
of  the  emancipation  party  unless  they  change 
their  position,  and  go  for  emancipation  with 
compensation.  If  they  do  this,  sir,  then  I  say 
yea  and  amen.  We  live  in  a  republican  govern- 
ment, where,  if  there  is  no  violation  of  right,  no 
violation  of  justice,  no  compromise  of  truth  and 
principle,  no  outrage  of  morality  and  religion, 
no  sacrifice  of  human  life  or  human  liberty,  ma- 
jorities should  rule,  and  all  should  submit  with- 
out a  murmur. 

I  do  hope  Mr.  President,  the  house  will  sus- 
tain the  proposition  I  have  had  the  honor  to 
present.  But  while  I  am  up,  I  will  say  a  few 
words  upon  another  branch  of  this  subject — the 
law  of  '33.  I  am  opposed  to  its  insertion  into 
the  constitution.  I  hope  it  will  not  be  done.  I 
do  not  believe  sir,  that  public  sentiment  de- 
mands it.  The  people,  so  far  as  I  know  any- 
thing about  public  sentiment,  desire  to  see  in 
the  constitution,  neither  the  law  of  '33.  nor  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Simpson, 
(Mr.  Clarke.)  I  think,  so  far  as  both  proposi- 
tions are  concerned,  they  desire  to  see  the  con- 
stitution left  as  it  is.  There  has  been  much 
said  here  Mr.  President,  in  the  course  of  debate, 
about  parties  and  party  ties — about  the  whig, 
and  about  the  democratic  party — the  convention 
and  tlie  anti-convention  party — the  elective  and 
anti-elective  party.  There  nas  been  sir,  some 
crimination  and  r(?crimination,  all  of  which  I 
have  been  pained  to  witness;  but  sir,  I  liope, 
before  this  convention  adjourns,  to  see  all  the 
belligerents  convert  their  spears  into  pruning 
hooks,  their  swords  into  plowshares,  and  study 
war  DO  more,    I  hope  to  see  the  lion  lie  doKU 


951 


MTith  the  lamb  and  the  leopard  with  kid,  so  be  tool  and  calm,  upright  and  honest,  wc  are 
that  when  we  adjourn  and  submit  our  work  the  men,  this  is  the  subject, and  now  is  the  time, 
to  the  people,  we  may  come  up,  as  one  man  By  our  decisions  here,  we  may  fix  the  fate  and 
with  one  voice  and  one  hand,  against  the  com-  sealforever  the  destiny  of  both  the  Anglo-Saxon 
raon  enemy,  to  the  labor  of  our  Lands.  I  trust ;  and  the  African  race.  Kentucky  is  the  great 
Mr.  President,  that  while  we  all  know  there  are  i  key-stone  southern  slave  state.  It  is  here,  sir, 
parties  existing  in  the  country  at  war  upon  the  :  sooner  or  later,  the  great  battle  is  to  be  fought 
great  principles  that  separate  them,  I  hope  sir,  between  abolitionists, emancipationists,  and  pro- 
there  is  but  one  party  and  one  feeling  here — a  slavery  men.  The  banner  has  be  n  unfurled  al- 
party  and  a  feeling  for  the  country — a  party  de-  ready,  and  although  the  passing  breeze  has,  for 
termined  to  secure  to  every  citizen  in  the  com-  ]  the  present,  rolled  it  out  of  sight,  it  still  rustles 
monwealth,  protection  in  his  life,  liberty,  proper-  in  the  distance.  We  should  let  no  syren  song 
ty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  So  far  as  it '  of  peace  on  the  one  hand,  or  note  of  policy  on 
concerns  myself  Mr.  President,  I  came  here  un- 1  the  other  lull  us  to  sleep  on  our  post.  We  should 
trammeled  by  party  ties,  and  unbiased  by  party  |  come  up  to  the  charge  like  men.  If  the  proposi- 
prejudices.  1  have  no  spleen  to  vent,  no  politi- ,  tion  1  have  submitted  draws  an  invidious  dis- 
cal  ambition  to  gratify;  no  int^Test  to  secure  but  j  tinction,  it  is  to  meet  an  invidious  distinction, 
the  rights  of  our  citfzens,  no  end  in  view  but  |  There  can,  therefore,  be  nothing  improper  or  ini- 
the  happiness  of  our  people,  and  nothing  to  '  politic  in  it  in  any  aspect  of  the  case.  Emanei- 
serve  but  our  common  country.  I  stand  here  '.  pate  the  slaves  of  Kentucky,  and  you  ruin  and 
sir,  pledged  to  no  party  but  the  people,  to  no  i  shake  hands  with  the  soutli  forever.  Incorpo- 
being  but  God,  to  no  principle  but  truth  and  j  rate  the  law  of  1833,  or  the  resolutions  of  the 
justice.  I  stand  pledged  to  do  that  which  I  i  gentleman  from  Madison,  which  were  offered 
th"nk  is  right  in  itself,  and  I  intend  to  discharge  I  some  weeks  since,  and  you  have  taken  the  first 
that  pledge  firmly  and  fearlessly,  regardless  of  step  towards  it.  Insert  then  specific  amend- 
all  party  ties.  I  intend  to  do  nothing  for  whicli  ments  upon  all  subjects,  and  the  work  is  com- 
I  do  not  expect,  and  am  not  willing  to  be  held  plete.  It  is  all  that  is  asked  now.  If  they  want 
re.sponsil)le  here  and  hereafter.  Sir,  I  feel,  as  I ,  more,  give  them  these  and  they  will  soon  get 
trust  every  delegate  here  feels,  ready  and  willing  ;  all  they  want.  I  know  honorable  delegates  pro- 
to  lay  my  hand  upon  my  heart  and  ratify  and  test  and  say  it  is  not  so;  but  they  are  mistaken, 
confirm  the  just  judgment  of  our  blessed  re- 1  and  the  emancipationists  know  it.  Theyknow, 
deemer  when  he  said,  "render  unto  Caesar  the  if  you  wish  to  dry  up  the  stream,  you  must  first 
things  that  are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  cut  off  the  fountain.  If  you  wish  to  abolish 
that  are  God's."  These  sir,  are  the  motives  slavery  in  Kentucky,  you  must  first  stop  the  ira- 
by  which  I  hope  to  be  actuated — these  the  ,  portation  which  the  honorable  delegate's  resolu- 
principles  by  which  I  intend  to  be  governed.  |  lion  proposed  to  do.  Get  it  a  fixed  fact  in  the 
We  have  a  great  task  to  perform,  iraportaut  in  ,  constitution  that  no  more  slaves  at  any  time,  or 
terests  to  secure.  We  are  here,  not  as  school-  ;  under  any  circumstances,  are  to  be  purchased 
fellows,  to  decide  upon  same  favorite  amuse- !  and  brought  here,  and  you  have  unlocked  the 
ment — not  as  lawyers  to  wrangle  and  dispute  •  door  of  the  ante-chamber.  Then,  sir,  insert 
about  silly  and  absurd  technicalities — nor  yet  as  j  specific  amendments  on  all  subjects,  and  you 


politicians  to  divide  and  devour  the  spoils.  We 
are  here  .sir,  as  men,  I  trust  as  patriotic  christian 
men,  with  the  fear  of  God  before  our  eyes  and  the 
love  of  our  common  country  in  our  hearts,  to 
decide  questions  at  once  great  and  grave,  ex- 
citing and  absorbing,  and  fraught  with  the  most 
important  consequences  to  ourselves  and  our 
posterity.  Questions,  which  in  their  bearings 
and  effects,  not  only  involve  the  interest  and  fu- 
ture destiny  of  our  own  state,  and  of  this  great 
republic;  but  sir,  questions  which  involve  also, 
the  future  destiny,  for  weal  or  for  woe,  now  and 
forever,  of  two  whole,  distinct  and  separate 
races  of  men.  Surely  then  sir,  we  should  not 
talk  about  party  spirit  or  party  ties;  but  should 
come  up  to  the  charge  in  this  peaceful  struggle 
for  trutn  and  ju.stice,  regardless  of  party,  coolly 
and  calmly,  with  none  other  than  the  spirit  of 
kindness, moderation,  and  forbearance.  I  know 
sir,  the  great  questions  of  man's  natural  and  le- 
gal rights  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  of  slave- 
ry and  emancipation,  or  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
are  questions  at  all  times  fraught  with  the  deep- 
est and  most  intense  interest;  and  when  discuss- 
ed by  persons,  and  in  a  community  irterested 
on  fcotn  sides,  are  calculated  to  produce  the 
deepest  and  most  dangerous  excitement. 

But,  sir,  if  ever  there  were  men  who  should,  if 
ever  there  was  a  subjectfepon  which  they  should, 
and  if  ever  there  was  a  time  when  thev  should 


have  completed  the  entrance,  and  thrown 
open  the  halls.  This  is  all  the  emancipa- 
tionists now  want — this  is  all  they  are  now 
contending  for.  Give  them  these,  and  what  then 
would  be  their  policy.  Why,  sir,  give  these, 
and,  as  I  have  said  before,  you  yield  the  princi- 
ple, and  settle  forever  the  question  that  they 
may  take  the  slave  without  the  pay  or  consent 
of  the  owners,  provided  they  can  only  get  the 
majority  required  to  change  the  constitution. 
Give  these  and  what  then  would  be  the  policy. 
They  would  at  once  go  to  work  to  secure  the  de- 
sired majority,  and  get  it  they  would.  And 
how?  W  hy  sir,  the  first  step  would  be  agita- 
tion— agitation  at  home  and  agftation  abroad 
— agitation  in  the  north — agitation  in  the  south 
— agitation  in  the  east — and  agitation  in  the 
west.  Why  sir,  all  this  agitation — this  con- 
stant, ceaseless,  eternal  agitation?  To  pro- 
duce first  disobedience  and  insubordination  on 
the  part  of  the  slaves,  and  then  to  let  the  en- 
vying abolition  world  know  that  Kentucky  was 
in  the  market,  and  could,  in  this  respect,  be  pur- 
cha.sed  for  nothing — yes  sir,  for  nothing.  The 
two  clauses  referred  to  would  give  the  money. 
All  then  they  would  want  would  be  the  men. 
Yes  sir,  Kentucky  with  the  law  of  1833  and  the 
open  clause  in  ner  constitution,  with  all  her 
s^ves,  though  allied  to  tie  south  by  both  inter- 
est  and   institutions,  would   thus  m  offered  to 


052 


the  north,  without  money  and  without  price. 
What  air,  do  you  suppose  would  be  their  decis- 
ion? They  would  come  here  not  by  scores,  not 
by  thousands,  but  by  scores  of  thousands,  and 
in  ten  years,  in  my  judgment,  Kentucky  would 
be,  at  least,  on  the  very  verge  of  a  free  state,  and 
that,  sir,  without  any  sort  of  compensation  for 
the  slave.  Who,  sir,  I  ask,  could  or  would  be 
willing  to  live  under  such  excitement  for  ten 
years.  You  may  say  there  will  be  no  excitement, 
you  may  cry  peace,  peace,  but,  sir,  there  will  be 
no  peace  under  the  circumstances  I  have  named. 
Gentlemen  may  think  .so,  but  they  are  mistaken. 
Sir,  a.s  I  said  a  feAv  days  since,  there  is  a  party 
in  this  country — a  formidable  party — a  party 
weak  in  numbers  it  is  true— but  powerful  m  in- 
tellect. A  party  organized,  skilful,  enthusias- 
tic, and  determined  on  the  abolition  of  slavery 
in  Kentucky.  Give  them  the  law  of  1833,  as  a 
fixed  fact,  and  then  specific  amendments  on  all 
subjects  in  the  new  constitution,  and  my  word 
for  it,  sir,  the  days  of  slavery  would  be  num- 
bered in  our  state.  If  so  the  whole  south  might 
clothe  herself  in  mourning  and  sound  the  knell  of 
slavery.  Adopt  these  measures,  and  we  will  soon 
get  rici  of  our  slaves,  willing  or  unwilling,  pay  or 
no  pay.  Sir,  to  borrow  a  term  from  my  honorable 
friend  from  Madison,  a  homely  term — a  term  in 
which  there  is  very  little  music — and  under  the 
head  of  agitation,  they  would  "bedevil"  us  so, 
that  we  would  soon  be  willing  to  give  up  our 
filaves.  and  be  glad  to  get  rid  of  them.  This  is 
theirobject,  and  these  their  measures  forattaining 
it.  I  will,  therefore,  sir,  vote  against  them  both. 
But  sir,  1  have  said  there  was  a  formidable 
party  in  this  country  determined  on  these  meas- 
ures'and  in  favor  of  emancipation.  I  will  cite 
you  sir,  to  some  of  its  members,  and  leave  you 
to  say  yourself  if  it  is  not  a  formidable  one. 
Look  then  sir,  to  Lexington,  to  Louisville,  and 
to  Danville,  and  you  will  there  see  three  intel- 
lectual giants,  all  leaders  of  a  church,  learned, 
enlightened,  pious;  truly  great  in  goodness  and 
good  in  greatness.  Look  again,  and  you  will 
see  a  Tomasson,  a  Taylor  and  a  Tompkins. 
Look  again,  sir,  and  you  will  see  a  Dudley,  a 
Pirtle,  aYid  a  Nicholas,  a  Robinson,  a  Beaty, 
and  a  BoVle,  and  a  host  of  similar  spirits,  all 
men  of  gteat  ability  and  unexceptionable  char- 
acters— men  of  fortune,  reputation,  and  influ- 
ence— calm,  cool,  collected,  firm,  energetic,  and 
determined  on  success.  But  sir,  these  are  not 
all.  Where  then  shall  I  bid  you  look?  Shall  I 
cite  you  to  Ashland?  I  wish  I  could  not,  but  I 
will.  Look  there,  then  sir,  and  what  do  you 
see?  A  frame — weak  it  is  true,  and  somewhat 
on  the  wane,  and  in  the  eventide  of  life.  But 
sir,  you  see  the  sage  of  Ashland,  the  star  of  the 
west,  a  bright  a  glittering  star,  far  above  them 
all.  An  intellectual  sun,  and  centre  of  the 
Ameriean  system,  who,  when  in  his  meridian 
altitude,  was  the  light,  the  heat,  the  glory  of 
the  world.  One  sir,  whose  systems  and  princi- 
ples will  live  to  do  lionor  to  their  great  projec- 
tor long  after  the  sceptre  shall  have  passed  from 
the  throne  of  his  intellect,  and  his  mighty  mind 
gone  down  o'er  the  hills  of  eternity.  He  too  sir, 
18  against  us;  he  is  with  the  emancipationists. 
In  this  1  think  he  has  erred.  I  will  not  cen- 
sure. He  is  passing  away.  All  I  will  add,  is, 
gic  tran$it  gloria  mundi. 


Mr.  PROCTOR.  Mr.  President,  I  have  pro 
pared  a  substitute  for  the  resolution  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Boyle,  which  I  now  submit  for  the 
consideration  of  the  convention,  and  on  these 
propositions  I  move  the  previous  question. 

Wheeeas,  the  people  are  looking  to  the  time 
when  this  convention  shall  bring  to  a  speedy 
close  their  labors:  and  Avhereas,  the  time  of  this 
convention  has  heretofore  been  taken  up  by  the 
discussion  of  abstractions — therefore, 

Resolved,  That  every  member  of  this  conven- 
tion who  may  have  a  desire  of  presenting  his 
abstract  views  to  the  convention  be  permitted  to 
write  out  his  views  and  hand  them  to  the  report- 
er, which  shall  be  published  in  a  separate  book 
of  debates  to  be  called  a  "Book  of  Abstractions." 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  motion  to 
print  and  lay  on  the  table,  and  it  was  negatived. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  the 
several  propositions  were  referred  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  by  a  majority  of  38  to  24. 

KENTCCKY    RIVER   NAVIGATION. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  Mr.  President,  I  rise  to  give 
notice  of  my  intention,  at  the  proper  time,  to 
move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  rejecting  the 
sections  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from  Chris- 
tian, (Mr.  Gray,)  in  relation  to  specific  taxation. 
I  will  however  frankly  admit  that  my  intention 
is  simply  to  obtain  an  opportunit}^  to  make  an 
explanatory  statement  to  the  convention. 

On  the  eight  hundred  and  thirty-second  page 
of  the  debates  the  elder  delegate  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  has  made  an  error,  in  stating  the 
amount  paid  into  the  treasury  from  the  slack- 
water  improvements.  I  here  give  an  accurate 
table  of  the  amounts  received  from,  and  paid  out 
for,  the  Kentucky  river  navigation,  from  the  open 
ing  thereof,  in  1843 : 

For  1843,  collections,        -        -        $7,852  49 
Expenditures,      -        $1,658  26 
Paid  into  treasury,     -     6,194  33 

$7,852  49 


For  1844,  collections. 

Expenditures,     -      $10,475  12 
Paid  into  treasury,      8,569  22 


For  1845,  collections. 
Expenditures,     -      $8,888  65 
Paid  into  treasury,    25,456  96 


For  1846,  collections. 

Expenditures,     -     $13,446  55 
Paid  into  treasury,     22,531  08 


For  1847,  collections, 
Expenditures,     -    $17,746  75 
Paid  into  treasury,    31,892  02 


For  1848,  collections, 
up  to  Dec.  19, 
Expenditures,  same 

time,         -        $13,531  22 
Paid  into  treasury,    32,747  79 


$19,044  34 

$19,044  34 
$34,345  61 

$34,345  61 
$35,977  63 

$35,977  63 
$49,638  77 

$49,638  77 

$46,279  01 

$46,279  01 


953 


It  will  be  seen  that  the  Kentucky  river  navi  j  amending,  or  changing  this  constitution.  But 
gatioD,  alone,  paid  into  the  treasury  more  than  if  it  shall  appear  by  the  vot«  of  either  year,  a*- 
three  times  the  amount  stated  by  him.  i  aforesaid,  tiiat  a  majority  of  all  the  qualified 

In  my  friend's  speech,  piiblished  in  the  pro- 1  electors  voting  at  such  election,  did  not  vote  for 


ceedings  of  the  eighth  of  December,  he  alludes 
to  opinions  given  by  attorneys  general  of  the 
stat*,  and  uses  this  sentence: 

"  There  was  once  an  opinion  given  by  an  at- 
torney general,  that  the  governor  had  a  right  to 
remove  his  secretary  of  state,  but  the  court  of 
appeals  decided  differently,  and  so  did  the  le- 
gislature and  the  whole  people  of  Kentucky." 

This  allusion  is  understood  to  apply  to  an  act 
of  the   administration    immediately    precedin 
the  present.     Permit  me  to   say  that  my  frien 


a  convention,  a  convention  shall  not  be  called. 
All  cases  of  contested  elections  of  delegates, 
and  where  two  or  more  candidates  for  delegate  to 
any  convention,  that  may  be  called  under  this 
constitution,  shall  have  an  equal  number  of 
votes,  shall  be  decided  in  such  manner  as  may 
be  provided  by  law." 

CIECUIT   COURTS. 

Mr.  APPERSON  submitted  the  following  sec- 
tion, and  having  briefly  stated  its  object  and  ne- 


has  been  wholly  misinformed,  in  relation  to  the  cessity,  it  was  adopted  : 
action  of  the  then  attomev  general.  He  gave  no  I  "  Sec.  — .  In  case  of  the  sickness  of  any  cir- 
opinion,  nor  was  he  calleii  upon  for  one,  as  I  am  !  <^"it.  court  judge,  or  for  other  good  cause,  which^ 
authorised  to  say.  When  the  question  was  i  ™ay  prevent  his  attending  any  of  his  courts,  th^  , 
made  between  the  secretary  of  state  attempted  i  general  assembly  shall  be  authorized  to  make- 
to  be  removed,  and  the  auditor  as  to  a  balance  j  P^o^ision  by  the  general  laws  for  the  appoint-! 
of  salarv,  the  attorney  general,  as  it  was  his  du- '  "^^nt  of  a  special  judge  to  attend  such  courts, 
ty  to  do',  attended  to  the  mandamus  on  the  part  i  ^^^  ^^^^  ^'^^  t'»e  trial  of  such  causes  as  the  cir- 
of  the  auditor,  in  the  circuit  court  and  court  of:  cuit  judge,  when  present,  cannot  try  from  any 
appeals.     These  errors  I  have  thought  it  my  du-  {  cause." 

ty  to  the  gentleman  from  Jfelson,  to  the  attorney  '  the  legislative  dzpaetme>t. 

general,  a  personal  friend,  as  well  as  to  the  truth  j  The  convention  asain  resumed  the  considera- 
of  history,  to  correct.  I  made  the  motion  I  did  |  tion  of  the  report  on  the  legislative  department, 
in  order  to  make  the  statements  submitted,  and  j  Mr.  KAYANAUGH.  At  this  late  day  of  the 
1  now  Withdraw  it.  ,  session,  I  am  exceedingly  reluctant  to  consume 

,,^^o.^x.  „    the  time  of  the  convention,  with  any  remarks  of 

EEVISIOX   OF   THE    COXSTXTUTIOX.  I        ■  u  n  •  i.      t    •  i 

mine,  because  we  are  all  anxious  to  bring  our  la- 
Mr.   THOMPSON   submitted    the    following  i  bors  to  a  close,  and  return  to  our  homes,  and  the 
resolution,  and  on  his  motion  it  was  laid  on  the   bosoms  of  our  families.    Besides,  sir,  there  may 


table,  and  ordered  to  be  printed : 

"Resolved,  That  when  experience  shall  point 
out  the  necessity  of  amending  this  constitution, 
and  when  a  majority  of  all  the  members  elected 
to  each  house  of  the  general  assembly  shall, 
within  the  first  twenty  days  of  their  stated  bi- 
ennial session,  concur  in  passing  alaw  for  taking 
the  sense  of  the  good  people  of  this  state,  as  to 
the  necessity  and  expediency  of  calling  a  con- 
vention, it  shall  be  the  dutv  of  the  several  sher- 
iffs, and  other  returning  odicers,  at  the  next  gen- 


be  some  danger  of  getting  into  the  book  of  ab- 
stractions, we  have  just  heard  proposed.  Nev- 
ertheless, on  a  question  of  this  Kind,  I  am  for  at 
least  enough  of  examination  and  discussion,  to 
enable  us  to  vote  understandingly.  I  am  aware 
that  some  complaint  has  been  indulged  in,  in 
some  quarters,  against  the  convention,  because 
of  the  length  of  the  session.  Well  sir,  we  have 
been  here  about  seventy  five  days,  and  will,  I 
am  well  convinced,  be  ready  to  adjourn,  by  this 
time  next  week,  unless  something  may  hereafter 


eral  election  which  shall  be  held  for  representa-  j  occur  to  prevent  it;  if  so,  we  will  have  revised 
tives  after  the  passage  of  such  law,  to  open  a  poll  ■■  the  constitution  in  a  shorter  time  than  the  same 
in  which  the  qualified  electors  of  this  state  shall  I  work  has  been  done  by  any  convention  of  any 
express,  by  vote,  whether  they  are  in  favor  of !  one-of  the  other  states,  which  has  recently  been 
calling  a  convention  or  not;  and  said  sheriffs  j  called — at  least  as  far  as  my  recollection  now 
and  returning  officers  shall  make  return  to  the  ]  serves  me.  Quite  a  number  of  the  states  have 
secretary,  for  the  lime  being,  of  the  names  of  all  i  lately  called  conventions,  all  of  which,  I  be- 
those  electors  voting  at  such  election;  and  if, ;  lieve,  have  taken  more  time  than  this  body  has 
thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a  majority  of  i  done.  It  may  have  been  that  debate  on  some 
the  qualified  electors  of  this  state,  voting  at  j  subjects,  was  to  some  ext^'nt,  unnecessarily 
such  election,  have  voted  for  calling  a  conven-  '•  lengthened,  yet  I  have  at  no  time  called  the  pre- 
tion,  the  general  assembly  shall,  at  their  next  I  vious  question.  In  fact,  have  never  called  it  in 
regular  ses.sion,  direct  that  a  similar  poll  shall !  my  life;  for  lam  for  giving  all  an  equal  op- 
be  opened  and  taken  at  the  next  election  for  re-  portunity  of  being  heard.  But  I  take  this  oc- 
presentatives;  and  if,  thereupon,  it  shall  appear  casion  to  remark,  that  if  we  should  be  so  un- 
that  a  majority  of  all  the  ejectors  of  this  state, :  fortunate  as  to  be  detained  till  Christmas,  which 
voting  at  such  election,  have  voted  for  calling  a  1 1  hope  and  trust  will  not  be  the  case,  I  shall 
convention,  the  general  assembly  shall,  at  fheir  vote  against  taking  a  recess,  even  on  Christmas 
next  session,  cafl  a  convention,  to  consist  of  a.s  :  day.  It  would  make  no  difference  with  me  per- 
many  members  as  there  shall  be  in  the  house  of  i  sonally,  for  I  live,  as  it  were,  under  the  shadow 
representatives,  and  no  more,  to  be  chosen  in  j  of  the  capital;  but  I  would  do  so,  for  the  ac- 
the  same  manner  and  proportion,  at  the  same  i  commodation  of  those  members  who  live  at  a 
places,  and  at  the  same  time  that  representatives  |  distance. 

are,  by  the  electors  qualified  to  vote  for  repre-  \     I  shall,  Mr.  President,  vote  against  the  amend- 
sentatives,  and  to  meet  within  three  months  af- '  ment   of  the    gentleman   from  Louisville,  (Mr. 
t€r  said  election,  for  the  purpose  of  re-adopting,  i  Preston,)  and   in  favor  of  that  offered  by  the 
120 


954 


gentkmau  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  HarJin.)  la  op- 
position to  that  vote,  it  is  urged,  that  this  thing, 
of  changing  the  basis  of  representation  was 
never  discussed  before  the  people,  and  has  never 
been  demanded  by  them.  I  admit  that  the 
question  presented  by  the  amendment,  was  not 
in  that  precise  form  made  before  the  people,  yet 
the  subject  of  apportionment  was  mentioned, 
and  it  was  known  that  it  would  be  before  this 
body,  and  that  and  the  basis  of  representation  go 
together.  There  was  another  question  connected 
with  this  subject  which  was  not  discussed  before 
the  people,  except  in  some  particular  localities, 
which  has,  nevertheless,  been  acted  upon  by  the 
convention.  I  allude  to  that  clause  in  the  old 
constitution,  providing  that  no  countv  shoiild 
have  more  than  one  senator.  That  fias  now 
been  changed,  and  each  section  of  the  state  is 
now  to  have  full,  equal,  and  fair  representation 
in  both  branches  of  the  legislature,  according  to 
whatever  basis  may  be  established.  This  has 
been  done,  though  it  was  never  contemplated  by 
the  people  at  large,  when  they  were  voting  a 
year  or  two  since,  for  calling  the  convention.  I 
make  no  doubt,  it  was  looked  to  in  the  city  of 
Louisville,  and  in  some  other  portions  of  the 
Ohio  border,  and  perhaps  had  a  strong  influence 
in  those  places  in  favor  of  calling  the  convention. 
But  it  was  not  looked  to  by  the  people  at  large, 
yet  when  the  question  was  presented,  and  the 
justice  of  the  convention  appealed  to,  the  change 
was  made  by  a  large  majority.  I  was  among 
those  who  voted  for  it.  I  did  so,  because  I  came 
to  the  convention  to  do  equal  and  even  handed 
justice  to  all,  as  far  as  my  votes  would  go,  irre- 
spective of  country  or  town,  and  I,  witli  a  ma- 
jority of  the  convention,  considered  it  right  to 
give  each  section  of  the  state,  unifonn  and 
equal  representation,  upon  whatever  basis  might 
be  established.  We  are  now  to  fix  that  basis; 
and  are  to  meet  the  question,  as  to  making  it 
the  qualified  voters  of  the  state,  as  in  the  old 
constitution,  or  the  whole  white  population,  ex- 
cluding aliens.  If  the  voting  population  of 
each  part  of  the  state  bears  the  same  proportion 
to  the  women  and  children,  as  it  does  in  every 
other  part,  there  is  no  necessity  for  making  any 
change,  for  then  the  qualified  voters  of  a  county 
■would  always  be  a  fair  index  to  the  whole  popu- 
lation, so  that  whether  the  old,  or  the  new  basis 
were  adopted,  each  county  would,  in  either  case, 
have  the  same  relative  political  weight.  On 
examination  it  is  found  that  this  is  not  the  case, 
but  that  in  one  section  of  the  state,  the  adult 
males  bear  a  much  larger  proportion  to  the  wo- 
men and  children,  than  they  do  in  another,  and 
different  section.  Are  those  parts  of  the  state, 
thus  having  the  greater  number  of  women  and 
children  entitled  to  a  correspondingly  greater 
voice  in  the  legislative  counsels  of  the  state?  It 
is  insisted  by  gentlemen  that  they  are  not,  and 
that  the  qualified  voters  of  a  state,  holding  and 
exercising  as  they  do,  all  political  power,  ought 
alone  to  be  represented. 

The  provision  in  the  old  constitution  is  point- 
ed to,  and  invoked,  a.s  authority  on  this  subject. 
It  will  be  recollected,  however,  that  there  are 
now  two  important  reasons  in  favor  of  apopu- 
hition  basis,  not  then  existing.  First,  at  the 
time  of  the  adoption  of  the  present  constitution, 
the  number  of  ndnlt  male*  was,  relatively,  about 


the  same  to  the  Women  and  children  in  one  part 
of  the  state,  as  in  any  other  part.  Qualified  vo- 
ters were  consequently  made  the  basis,  as  they 
then  presented  a  fair  index  to  the  whole  popula- 
tion. If  that  were  the  case  now,  it  would  be 
right  and  proper  to  continue  the  provision  un- 
changed, for  1  admit  that  it  may  be  slightly 
more  convenient.  Secondly,  that  tide  of  foreign 
population  which  is  now  pouring  into  one  part 
of  the  state,  and  which  has  caused  a  difference 
in  the  relative  numbers  of  men,  women  and 
children,  did  not  then  exist.  The  circumstances 
now  meeting  us  on  this  subject,  are  hence  mate- 
rially different  from  those  surrounding  the  fra- 
mers  of  the  old  constitution,  and  must  be  met 
and  treated  as  they  now  present  themselves.  I 
would  not  favor  a  change  of  this  sort,  if  no  ma- 
terial and  substantial  difference  resulted  from 
it.  Nor  would  I  favor  it,  if  I  did  not  believe  it 
was  demanded  by  right  and  justice.  I  would 
seek  no  advantage  of  any  part  of  the  state,  but 
would  endeavor  to  do  justice  to  all,  according  to 
equal  and  correct  principles,  right  within  them- 
selves. 

For  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  whether  there 
is  in  fact  a  necessity  for  this  change,  I  have  ta- 
ken some  pains  in  comparing  the  number  of  wo- 
men and  children  with  the  number  of  men;  first 
in  some  of  the  Ohio  border  counties,  where  this 
foreign  population  is  chiefly  found,  and  then 
comparing  their  relative  numbers  in  the  inte- 
rior and  southern  counties  of  the  state.  My  in- 
vestigation of  this  subject  has  brought  me  to 
conclusions  widely  different  from  those  of  the 
gentleman  from  Oldham,  (Mr.  Mhitchell,)  who 
addressed  the  convention  last  night.  He  labored 
to  show  that  the  returns,  as  to  the  children  and 
voters  of  the  state,  which  we  have  before  us,  are 
inaccurate  and  uncertain,  and  not  to  be  relied  on. 
I,  however,  could  not  well  comprehend  how  tiis 
tables  and  figures  had  any  practical  bearing  on 
this  question,  or  that  any  thing  was,  in  point  of 
fact,  proven  by  them.  For  the  benefit  of  my 
own  judgment,  I  too  have  made  out  a  set  of  ta- 
bles which,  by  the  indulgence  of  the  conven- 
tion, I  will  notice  for  a  moment.  These  tables 
are  made  Avith  the  view  of  ascertaining  the  rela- 
tive number  of  women  and  children,  when  com- 
pared with  the  qualified  voters  in  the  different 
sections  of  the  state.  The  auditor's  report  for 
1849,  shows  the  number  of  children  between  the 
ages  of  five  and  sixteen  in  every  county  of  the 
state,  as  well  as  the  white  males  over  twenty  one 
in  each  county:  and  I  take  it  as  true,  that  the 
children  under  twenty  one,  and  not  included  be- 
tween these  different  ages,  are  relatively  the 
same.  But  there  is  no  means  of  ascertaining 
the  proportion  of  adult  females,  when  coinparea 
with  the  adult  males  of  the  different  counties  of 
the  state,  except  by  the  census  of  1840.  I  have, 
therefore,  consulted  the  census  of  that  year  for 
this  purpose,  assuming,  as  fairly  may  be  done, 
that  the  proportions  now  are  the  same  as  then. 
By  these  means  we  may  arrive  at  results  with 
sufficient  certainty  for  present  purposes. 

The  first  block  of  counties  lie  on  the  Ohio  and 
include  the  counties  of  Jefferson,  and  five  others 
immediately  below.    They 


955 


Males over21,    Child'ii  bei'n 


ID  1849. 

and  16  iu  1849 

Breckinridge,  - 

1 ,757 

2,250 

Daviess, 

2,112 

2,240 

Hancock, 

554 

747 

Henderson, 

1 ,589 

2,003 

Jefferson, 

9,2a3 

y,598 

Meade, 

1,114 

1.620 

16,409  17,458 

In  this  district  tlie  children  equal  the  males 
over  21,  with  1,043  only  over.  In  other  -words, 
the  children  equal  the  males  of  21  years  of  age, 
with  a  gain  of  six  and  four  tenths  per  cent,  over 
onlv. 

l*ake  another  district,  containing  about  an 
equal  number  of  males  over  21  vears  of  age,  and 
lying  on  or  near  the  Tennessee  border,  and  op- 
posite to  the  above  district,  consisting  of  coun- 
ties, and  having  males  and  children,  as  follows, 
to  wit: 


AUen,  - 
Barren,  - 
Butler.  - 
Christian, 
Cumberland, 
Logan,  - 
Monroe,  - 
Simpson, 
Todd,  - 
"Warren,   - 


16,631  22,405 

In  this  district  the  children  equal  the  adult 
males,  with  5,774  over,  or  again  upon  the  voting 
population,  of  thirty-four  and  eight-tenths  per 
cent. 

The  latt^  district  has  4,715  children  more 
than  the  fonner,  and  consequently  gains,  in  the 
single  item  of  children  between  the  ages  of  five 
and  sixteen,  more  than  half  the  ratio  of  a  repre- 
sentative. 

Pursue  the  inquiry  a  step  further,  and  compare 
the  adult  male  with  the  adult  female  population  of 
the  same  districts.  To  do  this,  it  will  be  necessary 
to  resort  to  the  census  of  1840,  that  being  the  only 
source  of  infonnation  we  have  on  this'  subject. 
I  have,  accordingly,  made  a  table  showing  sepa- 
rately, the  whole  number  of  white  males  and  fe- 
males over  twenty  years  of  age  in  1840,  in  these 
two  districts  respectively. 

The  table  is  as  follows: 


lies  over  21 , 

Child'a  bet'n  5 

iu  1849. 

and  16  in  1849. 

1,346 

2,225 

2,959 

3,664 

948 

1,437 

2,248 

2,801 

973 

1,502 

2,179 

2,822 

1,247 

1,737 

1,017 

1,375 

1,499 

2,048 

2,215 

2,794 

White  males 

White  feme 

over  20. 

over  20. 

Breckinridge, 

1,503 

1,335 

Daviess, 

1 ,402 

1,209 

Hancock, 

485 

392 

Henderson,    - 

1 ,466 

1,144 

JeflFerson, 

7,881 

5,871 

Meade, 

901 

749 

13,638 

10,700 

Excess  of  males,  2,938. 

AUen,    - 

1,248 

1,170 

Barren,  - 

2,704 

2,627 

Butler,   - 

691 

657 

Christian, 

1 ,959 

1,836 

Cumberland,  - 

902 

871 

Logan, 

1,877 

1,860 

Monroe, 

1.136 

i.m 

Simpson, 

963 

978 

Todd,     - 

1 .330 

1,231 

Warren, 

2,004 

1,816 

14,814  14,101 

Excess  of  nulles  713  only  in  1840. 

It  is  here  shown,  that  in  the  Tennessee  border 
counties,  there  is  but  a  very  slight  difference 
between  the  adult  male  and  female  population, 
while  in  the  Louisville  district, there  is  a  marked 
and  wide  difference.  This  great  difference, 
is  owing  chiefly  to  the  city  of  Louisville  itself ; 
for  the  difference  in  the  single  county  of  Jeffer- 
son is  2,010.  By  a  reference  to  the  census,  any 
gentleman  will  see  that  it  is  made  up  in  the  city 
of  Louisville,  and  no  where  else. 

In  that  city,  it  stood  thus  in  1840: 
Males  over  twenty,  5,341 

Females  over  twenty,  3,880 

Difference  1 ,461 

It  is  but  fair  to  conclude,  that  the  number  of 
these  two  classes  of  population  is  relatively  the 
same  now  as  in  1840.  If  so,  as  the  population 
of  the  city  has  more  than  doubled  in  the  last 
nine  years,  so,  proportionally,  will  this  differ- 
ence be  increased,  and  the  next  census  will  show 
it. 

It  will  be  further  seen  by  reference  to  these 
tables,  that  in  every  county  in  the  Louisville 
district  except  Jefferson,  the  number  of  children 
is  greater  than  the  number  of  adult  males.  In 
that  county  they  are  685  less ;  and  while  the 
number  of  children  in  the  whole  district,  as  be- 
fore stated,  only  equal  the  number  of  males,  with 
six  and  four  tenths  per  cent,  over,  the  children 
in  the  Tennessee  border  counties  equal  the  num- 
ber of  adult  males,  with  thirty-four  and  eight 
tenths  per  cent,  over;  and  that,  according  to  the 
figures  of  1849. 

Compare  now  the  white  males  over  twenty 
one  years  of  age,  with  the  children  between  the 
ages  of  five  and  sixteen  in  two  other  sections  of 
the  state,  also,  according  to  the  reports  of  1849. 
Begin  with  a  block  of  river  counties  above  Lou- 
isville, to-wit : 


Ma.son 

PendletonJ 

Campbell, 

Kenton, 

Boone, 

Gallatin, 

Carroll, 

Trimble, 

Oldham, 


16,060  17,160 

Difference,  1 ,100.  Here  the  children  equal  the 
adult  males,  with  six  and  eight-tenths  per  cfent. 
over. 

We  will  now  take  a  block  of  mountain  coun- 
ties: 

Adult  males.    Children. 
Morgan,        -        -        -        1,261  2,014 

Breathitt,      -        -        -  621  1,019 

Floyd,  -        .        -  986  1,754 

Pike,     -        -        .        •  812  1,^0 

Johiuon,  -        -  599  992 


lales  over  21. 

Chnd'nbetw'n 

5  and  16. 

3,114 

3,340 

1,336 

1,219 

2,182 

2,204 

3,406 

3,413 

1,958 

2,323 

883 

859 

993 

1,080 

1,084 

1,406 

1,104 

1,316 

956 


Pewy, 

Knoz, 

Harlan, 

Whitley, 

Clay,    - 

Laurel, 

Rockcastle, 

Letcher, 

Wayne, 

Casey, 

Russell, 

Adair, 

Clinton, 


503 

807 

1,130 

1,760 

648 

1,086 

1,058 

1,735 

866 

1,384 

865 

1,414 

842 

1,219 

381 

611 

1,443 

2,387 

1,057 

1,592 

940 

1.479 

1,560 

2,323 

812 

1,371 

16,381        26,267 


These  counties,  either  of  the  mountains  or  con- 
tiguous, come  out  with  children,  equal  to  the 
adult  males  and  fifty  five  and  six-tenths  per 
cen.  over. 

These  two  blocks  of  counties  contain  about 
an  equal  number  of  adult  males;  but  in  compar- 
ing the  children.the  river  counties  are  distanced, 
being  only  9,107  behind!  Which,  to  the  moun- 
tains, is  considerably  over  one  representative, 
in  the  item  of  children  alone  between  five  and 
sixteen. 

The  gain  of  the  mountain  on  the  river  coun- 
ties in  women,  is  as  great  proportionally,  or 
nearly  so,  as  in  children.  According  to  the  cen- 
sus of  1840,  these  counties,  respectively,  had 
men  and  women  over  the  age  of  twenty,  as 
shown  in  the  following  table: 

MalesoverSO,  Females  over 20. 


Adair,    - 

. 

1,357 

1,351 

Breathitt, 

386 

347 

Clay,      -        - 

747 

695 

Casey,    - 

821 

852 

Clinton, 

714 

713 

Floyd, 

1,070 

1,011 

Harlan, 

529 

513 

Johnson,  (formed 

since  1840.) 

Laurel,  - 

602 

580 

Letcher,  (formed  since 

1840.) 

Knox,    - 

968 

938 

Morgan, 

877 

747 

Pike,      - 

636 

595 

Peny,    - 
Rockcastle,    - 

480 

486 

630 

570 

Russell, 

742 

735 

Whitley, 

842 

835 

Wayne, 

1,271 

1,214 

12,612 

12,182 

Excess  of  males  430 

Boone,  - 

'  1 ,887 

1,549 

Campbell, 

1,339 

907 

Carroll, 

779 

651 

Kenton, 

1,710 

1,358 

Oallatin, 

775 

624 

Mason, 

2,811 

2,375 

Oldham, 

1,210 

997 

Pendleton,     - 

938 

732 

Trimble, 

833 

746 

9,939 


12,282 

Excess  of  males,  2,343. 

In  the  mountain  counties,  the  women  nearly 
equal  the  men,  while  in  the  river  counties  just 
enumerated, they  fall  2,343  behind. 

There  is  no  means  of  ascertaining  the  relative 
difference  betweep    th«,^umber  of  minors  in 


these  different  sections  of  the  state,  not  embrac- 
ed, between  the  ages  of  five  and  sixteen.  But 
it  is  obvious,  that  when  they  too  are  enumera- 
ted and  taken  into  the  estimate,  that  the  interior 
will  be  still  more  strengthened,  and  the  cities  on 
the  Ohio  border  correspondingly  weakened. 

Why  is  it,  that  the  women  and  children,  on 
our  northern  border,  are  fewer  than  in  the  inter- 
ior? It  is  because  that  border  receives  the  foreign 
population  with  which  our  common  country  is 
teeming,  and  a  less  number  of  that  population 
have  wives  and  children.  It  can  be  accounted 
for  in  no  other  way. 

Some  of  the  counties  on  the  Ohio  border,  and 
included  in  the  above  tables,  will  lose  nothing, 
but  will  rather  gain,  by  making  population  the 
basis  of  representation,  as  the  counties  of  Da- 
viess, Meade,  Hancock,  Boone  and  Trimble. 

I  admit  that  my  section  of  the  state  would 
gain  something  more  of  weight,  in  an  apportion- 
ment on  the  population  basis;  for  example,  the 
counties  of  Anderson,  Marion,  and  Washington, 
are  swarming  with  women  and  children. 

Males  over    Females  over 
20.  in  1840.     20, in  1840. 

Anderson,  -  -        924  843 

Marion,        -     -        -         1672  1637 

Washington,        -        -      1576  1548 


4142 
Nearly  as  many  females  as  males. 

4128 

Adult  males 
in  le49. 

Children 
in  1849 

Anderson,        -        -      1,119 
Marion,        -        -     -     1,762 
Washington,        -     -      1,847 

1,473 
2,221 
2,456 

4,728  6,150 

Difference  in  favor  of  children,  1422. 
It  hence  seems  clear,  that  the  effect  of  the 
population  basis,  will  be  to  lessen  the  weight  in 
the  legislature,  only  of  those  sections  of  the  state 
holding  our  foreign  population — one  or  two  of 
the  blue  grass  counties  may  lose  something  by 
it. 

The  interior,  the  new,  and  the  southern  border 
counties,  will  correspondingly  gain. 

For  the  purpose  of  perfecting  these  tables,  I 
have  made  an  estimate  of  the  present  white  pop- 
ulation of  the  state  in  this  way. 
In  1840,  the  white  males  over  21 

in  the  state  numbered  109,360 

Whole  white  population  590,253 

We  have  now  adult  males  152,234 

If  the  male  population  over  21,  now  bears  the 

same  proportion  to  the  whole  population,   as  in 

1840,  our  present  white  population   would  be 

812,000,  and  a  fraction  over. 

But  owing  to  the  influx  of  the  foreigner,   the 
male  population  now  bears  a  greater  proportion 
than  in  1840,  so  that  our  present  white  popula- 
tion cannot  be  over  800,000. 
The  ratio  would  then  be  to  a 
representative  8,000 
In  this  way  we  may,  with  sufficient  certainty, 
get  the  present  population  of  any  county,  or  sec- 
tion of  the  state. 

Take  for  example,  the  mountain  counties  al- 
ready mentioned,  with  the  county  of  Lawrence, 
which  I  add,  because  Johnson  was  partially  ta- 


957 


825 

1,270 

1 ,323 

2,207 

1,059 

1,336 

2,016 

2,491 

705 

974 

1,665 

2,816 

758 

902 

1,886 

2,868 

952 

1,090 

870 

1,507 

986 

1,215 

1,417 

1,947 

1,448 

1,545 

ken  from  it.     In  these  counties  the  white  males  I 
over  21,  in  1840,  was  12,243     | 

White  population  in  1840,  71,886      ! 

Adult  males  in  1849,  17,344      | 

This  would  give  a  present  population  I 

of  101,837      I 

Make  qualified  voters  the  basis,   and    these 
counties    would  have  eleven   members,  with  a  } 
residuum  of  602.     Make   population  the  basis,  I 
and  the  same  counties  would  have   12  members,  ] 
with  a  residuum  of  5,837.     In   other  words,   in 
the  one  case  they  would  have  a  fraction  over  11 
members,  in  the  other,  a  fraction  under  13. 

These  tables  conclusively  show  that  the 
number  of  males  over  twenty  one  in  that  part  of 
the  state,  now  receiving  our  foreign  population, 
for  the  reasons  already  given,  is  much  greater  in 
proportion  to  the  females  and  children  than  in 
the  other  sections  of  the  state.  That  the  differ- 
ence is  attributable  to  this  cause,  is  further 
shown  by  taking  another  block  of  counties, 
some  of  which  lie  on  the  Ohio,  but  in  which 
there  are  but  few  foreigners.  The  first  congres- 
sional district,  for  example,  to-wit: 

Males  over  21    Children  between 
in  1847.  5  and  16—1849. 

Ballard,  -    -  - 

Calloway,     -  - 

Crittenden,  -  - 
Caldwell, 

Fulton,     -     -  - 

Graves,    -    -  - 

Hickman,      -  - 

Hopkins,       -  - 

Livingston,  -  - 

Marshall,      -  - 

McCracken,  -  - 

Trigg,      -     -  - 

Union,     -    -  - 

15,910  22,168 

Difiference,  six  thousand  two  hundred  and  fifty 
eight;  or  a  gain  of  thirty  nine  and  one  third  per 
cent.  The  children  in  this  district  equal  the 
males  over  twenty  one,  with  a  gain  of  thirty 
nine  and  one  third  per  cent.  This  district,  in 
the  way  of  children,  comes  nearer  to  the  moun- 
tain counties  than  any  other  in  the  state,  and  is 
consequently  entitled  to  the  second  premium. 
The  mountain  counties  of  course  get  the  first. 
For  want  of  time,  I  have  not  ascertained  the 
number  of  women,  when  compared  with  the 
men  in  this  district,  but  they  are  undoubtedly 
about  as  numerous  as  the  men,  for  it  will  be 
seen  that  in  every  county  where  the  children  are 
numerous,  there  the  women  are  numerous. 
Wherever  you  find  children  in  abundance,  there 
the  women  abound.  And  in  this  state,  wherever 
you  find  the  women  numerous,  there  you  have 

flenty  of  children.  It  is  not  so  every  where, 
n  some  countries  the  condition  of  the  female 
population  is  such  that  the  number  of  children 
raised  by  them  is  much  less  than  in  this.  In  our 
own  state,  however,  such  is  the  happy  condition 
of  the  masses  of  the  people,  as  far  as  average 
wealth  and  prosperity  are  concerned,  that  all  may, 
with  safety,  in  obedience  to  one  of  he  first  com- 
mands of  heaven,  "multiply  and  replenish 
the  earth." 

The  gentleman  from  Oldham,  (Mr.  Mitchell,) 
iobists  that  we  have  no  example  for  this  popula- 


tion basis.  Such  is  not  the  c«ser  The  constitn- 
tion  of  New  York  has  the  following  provision 
on  this  subject: 

"The  members  of  assembly  shall  be  apportion- 
ed as  nearly  as  may  be,  according  to  the  number 
of  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens  and  persons  of 
color  not  taxed." 

Mr.  MITCHELL  explained. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH.  The  constitution  of 
Pennsylvania  has  a  similar  provision.  They  af- 
ford examples  at  once,  and  show  at  least,  this 
much:  that  there  is  not  that  difficulty  in 
taking  the  enumerations,  as  contended  for  by 
both  the  gentleman  from  Oldham  and  the  gentle- 
man from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston.)  Why  sir, 
there  are  examples  in  many  of  the  constitutions  of 
■\\{e  union,  perhaps  a  majority  of  them  make 
whit«  population  the  basis  of  representation. 
But  if  no  other  state  in  the  union  had  adopted 
this  basis,  it  would  afford  no  reason  why  Ken- 
tucky should  not,  if  the  thing  is  right  within 
itself.  The  question  is  presented  to  us  and  must 
be  decided.  In  that  decision,  justice  should  be 
done.  But  the.se  gentlemen  urge,  as  an  objec- 
tion, that  the  assessor,  or  otherofficer  who  makes 
the  enumeration  is  made  a  judge,  as  to  who 
should  be  enumerated  and  who  not — as  to  who 
is  the  alien,  and  who  the  naturalized  citizen. 
Why  sir,  does  not  the  present  constitution  make 
qualified  voters  the  basis  of  representation;  and 
are  not  these  oflicers  required  to  distinguish  be- 
tween those  who  are  qualified  voters,  and  those 
who  are  not?  Such  has  been  the  constitution 
and  laws  up  to  this  time.  If  the  officer  does 
his  duty  under  the  present  constitution,  he  re- 
ports the  naturalized  citizen  as  a  qualified  voter, 
and  the  aliens  not  qualified.  Nor  does  that  in- 
convenience result  which  has  been  urged.  It 
is  now  the  duty  of  the  assessor  to  take  down 
every  male  over  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and 
every  unmarried  female  of  that  age,  if  for  noth- 
ing else,  to  take  a  list  of  her  property.  It  is 
also  his  duty  to  take  lists  of  the  children  be- 
tween five  and  sixteen.  The  only  additional 
trouble  would  be  to  have  another  column  to  take 
down  the  whole  number  of  children  under 
twenty  one.  It  might,  perhaps,  require  two  ad- 
ditional columns.  But  in  neither  case  would  it 
require  more  than  one  minute  of  time  for  each 
list,  because  of  these  additional  columns. 

Mr.  President,  the  effect  of  the  new  basis, 
when  the  population  of  the  whole  state  is  con- 
sidered, will  be  to  transfer  a  part  of  the  politi- 
cal power  enjoyed  by  those  counties  now  receiv- 
ing the  foreign  population  to  the  inlerior,and,in 
short,  to  those  parts  of  the  state  on  which  that 
tide  is  not  pouring.  We  are  told  that  the  blue 
grass  counties  will  lose  by  it.  It  is.true,  that  a 
few  of  them  would  not  number  quite  so  high, 
yet  they,  in  point  of  fact,  would  lose  nothing, 
^he  county  of  Franklin  would  always  have  a 
representative;  for  she  has  a  large  residuum. 
The  county  of  Fayette  will  always  have  two. 
Bourbon  will  lo.se  one  with  either  fcasis,  but  will 
always  have  one  left.  Woodford  will  always 
have  one,  because  surrounded  by  residuums. 
So  that  these  blue  grass  counties,  as  they  are 
called,  will,  in  point  of  fact,  lose  nothing,  let 
the  question  be  decided  either  way.  My  own 
county,  in  this  respect,  is  most  happily  situated, 
for  she  also  is  surrounded  by  resiauums,  which 


958 


will  always  give  hera  representative.  But  I  do 
not  deny  but  that  my  section  of  the  state  would 
be  something  the  gainer,  for  as  the  gentleman 
frora  Logan  has  told  us,  women  and  children  are 
there  found  in  abundance.  But,  sir,  I  do  not 
want  any  thing  at  the  expense  of  justice;  but  I 
maintain  that  every  part  of  the  state  should  be 
represented  according  to  its  whole  population.  It 
is  contended  that  qualified  voters  only  should  be 
represented,  because  they  exercise  the  whole  po- 
litical power  of  the  state.  It  is  true,  that  they 
have  assumed  and  exercised  that  power,  and 
this  lias  been  so  in  every  country.  But  do  they 
exercise  that  power  for  their  own  benefit  only,  or 
for  the  benefit  of  the  women  and  children  who  are 
excluded  from  its  exercise,  as  well  as  for  them- 
selves? If  they  exercise  that  power  for  the  ben- 
efit of  the  women  and  children,,  with  whom 
they  are  surrounded,  as  well  as  for  themselves, 
then  those  women  and  children  should  be  taken 
into  the  basis  of  representation. 

Sir,  when  I  go  to  tlie  polls  and  cast  my  vote, 
if  I  am  governed  by  the  principles  which  ought 
to  control  a  patriot  and  lover  of  his  country,  I 
will  in  that  vote  as  much  represent  the  interests 
of  the  women  and  children  by  whom  I  am  sur- 
rounded, and  with  whom  I  am  connected,  as  I, 
upon  this  floor,  am  bound  to  represent  the  inter- 
ests of  the  voters  themselves  who  have  honored 
me  with  a  seat  here.  These  women  and  children 
are  properly  excluded  from  the  exercise  of  po- 
litical power,  but  they  have  interests  and  civil 
rights  as  dear  and  as  sacred  to  them  as  ours,  and 
which  ought,  therefore,  to  be  protected  and  re- 
presented. If  this  is  just  and  right,  why  deny 
it  to  them?  For  illustration,  take  this  case, 
which  in  point  of  fact  does  not  exist:  Suppose 
the  eastern  part  of  the  state  were  engaged  in 
such  mining  operations  as  required  male  labor 
chiefly,  and  that  they  had  but  few  women  and 
children  among  them,  but  half  the  voters  of  the 
state,  while  the  western  part  was  engaged  in 
such  pursuits,  as  in  some  parts  of  Massachu- 
setts, as  required  cliiefly  female  labor,  and 
though  not  liaving  a  majority  of  voters  had 
double  the  population,  ana  double  the  interests 
to  be  protected  and  represented;  would  it  not  be 
right,  in  a  case  of  that  kind,  to  give  representa- 
tion according  to  population,  and  the  interests 
to  be  protected?  If  so,  that  is  the  principle  here 
contended  for,  and  nothing  else.  Sir,  a  {e\f 
days  since,  we  saw  the  Louisville  delegation 
struggling  for  equal  representation  in  the  senate, 
and,  as  well  they  might,  manifesting  great  zeal 
on  behalf  of  their  constituents.  The  question 
liere  presented  is  greatly  more  important  than 
that;  for  the  mountain,  interior,  and  southern 
counties  will  gain  by  carrying  it,  much  more 
than  if  they  had  placed  in  the  new  constitution 
the  restriction  by  which  no  county  could  have 
more  than  one  senator,  as  it  is  in  tne  old.  That 
restriction  was  changed,  because  in  apparent 
conflict  with  principle.  The  change  operates 
to  the  advantage  of  that  part  of  the  state  on  the 
Ohio,  having  the  greatest  foreign  population, 
and  that  only. 

The  proposed  basis  would,  on  the  other  side 
of  the  question,  give  the  other  parts  of  the  state 
additional  representative  strength.  They  insist 
on  that  basis,  not  to  deprive  any  county  of  its 
just  rights,  but  to  give  all  equal  representation, 


according  to  the  entire  white  population,  aliens 
excepted.  It  would  be  only  carrying  out  a  prin- 
ciple, just  and  equitable  to  all  alike.  It  is  no 
struggle  tor  political  power,  at  the  expense  of 
principle.  IS  or  need  it  be  for  the  purpose  of 
strengthening  the  institution  of  slavery,  though 
such,  to  some  extent,  would  be  its  effect.  That 
institution  is  already  sustained  by  public  opin- 
ion, and  will  continue  as  it  is.  But  the  propo- 
sition presents  itself  as  one  of  sheer  justice.  I 
am  not  for  it  because  of  any  unkind  feeling  to 
the  naturalized  citizen.  Such  is  not  the  case. 
As  I  regard  the  question  as  of  some  importance, 
and  as  it  has  not  been  discussed  before  the  peo- 
ple, I  considered  it  as  proper  to  give  here,  and 
to  my  constituents,  the  reasons  for  the  vote  I 
shall  give. 

Mr.  HAY  moved  the  previous  question,  and 
the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now   put. 

The  question  first  in  order  was  on  the  motion 
of  Mr.  PRESTON  to  strike  out  all  after  the 
wor  "cities." 

Mr.  CLARKE  desired  that  the  roll  might  be 
called,  and  it  was  called  accordingly. 

Mr.  CLARKE  then  moved  that  the  absent 
members  be  sent  for. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HARDIN  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were  yeas  10,  nays  84. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  C. 
Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  George  W.  Johnston, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William 
Preston,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson— 10. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballin^er, 
John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred 
Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  Che- 
nault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett 
Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Ghol 
son,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J. 
/flood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lind- 
sey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Geo. 
W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.*Rob- 
inson,  Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wil- 
liam II.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner.  John  L. 
Waller,  Henry  Wa.shington,  John  Wheeler,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Charieii  A.  Wiekliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 84. 

So  the  amenaraent  to  the  amendment  was  re- 
jected. 

Mr.  HAY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  ■on 


959 


Mr.  HARDIX'3  amendment,  and  they  were— 
yeas  47,  nays  48. 

YEAS--John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlo'w, 
Wiliam  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  K.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson.  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Wil- 
liam Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Tliomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  \V^. 
Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes.  Xathan  McClure,  Jonathan  Kewcum, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  J.  Thurmau,  Philip  Triplett,  John 
Wheeler,  Silas  Woodson-— 47. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Ghenault,  Jas.  S.  Chrir^man,  Garrett  Davis,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred  M.  Jack- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  X.  Lindsey,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm. 

C.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Monis, 
Hugh  Xewell,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall,  William  Pres- 
ton, Larkiu  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira 
Root,  James  Rudd,  John  W^.  Stevenson,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washing- 
ton, Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wes- 
ley J.  Wright — 48.- 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption 
of  the  sixth  section. 

Mr.  DESHA  moved  to  reconsider  the  vote  by 
■which  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  was  rejected. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  moved  to  lay  the  mo- 
tion to  reconsider  on  the  table. 

Mr.  HARDIN  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were — yeas  48,  nays  47. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Ghenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  Jas.  Dudley, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Alfred  M.  Jactc- 
son,  George  W.  Johnston,  Peter  La-shbrooke, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm. 
G.  Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchell,  Tliomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  William  Pres- 
ton, Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira 
Root,  James   Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson,  John 

D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson, Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Wash- 
ington, Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wes- 
ley J.  Wright— 48. 


Nays — Jolm  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Boijamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Gretn  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Wil- 
liam Hendrix,  Thomas  J.Hood,  James  W.Irwin, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding, 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett/ 
John  Wheeler,  Silas  Woodson — 47. 

So  the  motion  to  re-consider  was  laid  upon 
the  table. 

The  question  again  recurred  on  the  adoption 
of  the  section. 

Mr.  APPERSON  suggested  that  it  was  sus- 
ceptible of  division,  and  to  the  second  branch 
amendments  would  be  desirable.  He  also  sug- 
gested that  it  might  be  found  necessary  to  debate 
the  principle  involved  in  that  branch,  and  he  ex- 
pressed a  hope  that,  by  common  consent,  the 
previous  question  be  understood  as  not  apply- 
ing to  it. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  called  for  a  division 
of  the  question. 

It  was  divided  accordingly,  and  the  first 
branch,  fixing  the  basis  of  representation,  was 
adopted. 

By  unanimous  consent  the  previous  questiost> 
was  not  applied  to  that  branch  of  the  section.     ^ 

Mr.  APPERSON  then  offered  the  following, 
as  a  substitute  for  the  residue  of  the  section  : 

"Atthe  first  session  of  the  general  assembly  af 
terthe  adoption  of  this  constitution,  provision 
shall  be  made  by  law,  that  in  the  year  l85c!,  and  ev- 
ery eighth  year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all 
the  representative  population  of  the  state  shall 
be  made.  The  house  of  representatives  shall 
consist  of  one  hundred  members,  and  to  secure 
unifonnity  and  equality  of  representation,  th« 
state  is  hereby  laid  off  into  ten  districts. 

"The  first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Fulton,  Hickman,  Ballard,  McCrack- 
en.  Graves,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Livingston, 
Crittenden,  Union,  llopkins,  Caldwell,  and 
Trigg. 

"The  second  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
countiesof  Christian,  Muhlenburg,  Henderson, 
Daviess,  Hancock,  Ohio,  Breckinridge,  Meade, 
Grayson,  Butler,  and  Edmonson. 

"  The  third  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Todd,  Logan,  Simpson,  Warren,  Al- 
len, Monroe,  Barren,  and  Hart. 

"  The  fourth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Cumberland,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor, 
Clinton,  Russell,  Wayne,  Pulaski,  Casey,  Boyle, 
and  Lincoln. 

"  The  fifth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Hardin,  Larue,  Bullitt,  Spencer,  Nel- 
son, Washington,  Marion,  Mercer,  and  Anderson. 

"  The  sixth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
comities  of  Oarrard,  Madison,  Estill,  Owsley, 


960 


Rockoastl<',  Laurel,  Clay,  Whitley,  Kuox,  Har- 
lan, Perry,  Letcher,  Pike,  Floyd,  and  Johnson. 

"  The  seventli  district  shall  be  composed  of  tlie 
counties  of  Jefferson,  Oldham,  Trimble,  Carroll, 
Henry  and  Shelby,  and  the  city  of  Louisville. 

"  The  eighth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
countiesof  Bourbon,  Fayette,  Scott,  Owen,  Frank- 
lin, Woodford,  and  Jessamine. 

"  The  ninth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Clarke,  Montgomery,  Bath,  Fleming, 
Lewis,  Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  Morgan  and 
Breathitt. 

"  The  tenth  di.strict  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Mason,  Bracken,  Nicliolas,  Harrison, 
Pendleton,  Campbell,  Grant,  Kenton,  Boone,  and 
Gallatin. 

"The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the 
several  sessionsof  the  general  assembly,  next  af- 
ter the  making  of  these  enumerations,  be  appor- 
tioned among  the  ten  several  districts,  pi'opor- 
tioned  according  to  the  respective  qualified 
voteres  in  each;  and  the  representatives  shall 
be  apportioned,  as  near  as  may  be,  among 
the  counties,  towns  and  cities  in  each  district; 
and  in  making  such  apportionment  the  follow- 
ing rules  shall  govern,  to  wit:  Every  county, 
town  or  city  having  the  ratio  shall  have  one 
representative;  if  double  the  ratio,  two  represen- 
tatives, and  so  on.  Next,  the  counties,  towns  or 
cities  havingoneor  more  representatives,  and  the 
largest  number  of  qualified  voters  above  the 
ratio,  and  counties,  towns  and  cities  having  the 
largest  number  of  qualified  voters  under  the  ratio, 
regard  being  always  had  to  the  greatest  number 
of  qualified  voters:  Provided,  hoicever,  That 
if  there  should  be  any  county  not  having  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  qualified  voters  to  entitle 
it  to  one  representative,  yet  it  shall  have  a 
representative,  if  all  the  adjacent  counties  in  the 
same  district  have  a  sufficient  number  of 
qualified  voters  to  entitle  them  respective- 
ly to  one  representative:  And,  provided  further , 
That  when  a  county  may  not  have  a  sufficient 
number  of  qualified,  voters  to  entitle  it  to 
one  representative,  then  such  county  may  be 
joined  to  some  adjacent  county  or  counties  to 
send  one  representative,, provided  such  adjacent 
county  has  not  a  full  ratio.  When  a  new  coun- 
ty shall  be  formed  of  territory  belonging  to 
more  than  one  district,  it  shall  form  a  part  of 
that  district  having  the  least  number  of  qual- 
ified voters." 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  move  to  amend  the  amend- 
ment, by  striking  it  out  and  inserting  the  minor- 
ity report,  which  I  presented  this  morning. 

Havinw  had  the  honor  of  presenting  the  sub- 
stitute which  will  shortly  have  to  be  voted  upon 
by  the  convention,  I  feel  it  an  imperative  duty  to 
draw  a  comparison  between  its  merits  and  the 
merits  of  the  one  presented  by  the  committee  on 
apportionment.  1  have  examined  the  bearing  of 
that  report.  I  think  I  understand  what  will  be 
its  results,  and  I  confess  that  of  all  the  proposi- 
tions to  apportion  the  representation  of  the  state, 
it  is  the  most  unjust,  and  of  course  the  most  un- 
equal. Now,  our  great  object  is  to  apportion  the 
representation  among  the  several  counties  of  the 
state  as  nearly  equal  as  may  be,  without  regard 
to  political  results,  and  acknowledging  the  diffi- 
culty of  doing  this  with  anything  like  exacti- 
tude, and  in  fact  knowing  that  in  some  particu- 


lar places  it  is  almost  impossible,  I  have  only 
changed  the  section  of  the  old  constitution,  so 
as  to  make  it  imperative  on  the  part  of  the  legis- 
lature to  start  at  a  particular  point  or  points  that 
shall  be  most  agreeable  to  the  convention.  Now, 
if  the  legislature  shall  undertake  to  apportion 
the  state  according  to  the  substitute  which  I 
have  offered,  1  think  one  of  the  greatest  difficul- 
ties resulting  from  the  present  mode  of  appor- 
tionment will  be  avoided,  and  as  the  public  men 
of  the  state  are  accustomed  to  the  present  mode 
I  incline  to  the  opinion  that  it  should  be  adopt- 
ed. 

What  objectionable  principles  are  contained 
in  the  substitute,  that  do  not  exist  to  a  greater 
degree  in  the  report  of  the  committee  ?  Is  there 
more  equality?  Is  there  more  justice?  I  ask 
gentlemen  to  show  me  in  what  particular  has 
the  report  the  advantage  over  my  substitute  ?  I 
venture  to  affirm,  that  in  the  application  of  the 
principles  of  the  report,  it  will  be  clearly  seen 
that  an  inequality  exists  which  has  never  exist- 
ed under  the  old  constitution,  and  which  is  so 
manifestly  unjust,  that  its  adoption  would  do 
more  towards  preventing  the  adoption  of  the 
new  constitution  than  any  principle  which,  up 
to  this  period,  has  been  incorporated  in  it. 

To  show  the  inequality  of  the  committee's  re- 
port, I  shall  give  the  result  of  the  principles 
when  applied  to  the  counties,  and  I  feel  sure  that 
it  will  conclusively  prove  to  the  convention, 
that  the  committee's  report  should  not  be  adopt- 
ed. Let  us  take  the  first  district.  Caldwell  gets 
one  member  with  2,016;  Crittenden  gets  a  mem- 
ber with  1,059.     The  difference  is  957. 

Again,  Hopkins  gets  a  member  with  1,886 
votes,  Calloway  gets  one  with  1,32.3,  and  the  dif- 
ference is  563. 

Let  us  examine  the  second  district,  where 
there  are  some  cases  of  inequality  of  much  great- 
er magnitude.  Christian  gets  one  member  with 
2,248  voters,  and  Hancock  gets  one  with  554  vo- 
ters; the  difference  is  1,694.  This  is  a  startling 
inequality.  Daviess  gets  a  member  with  2,112 
voters,  Meade  one  with  1,114  voters;  the  differ- 
ence is  998.  Breckinridge  gets  a  member  with 
1,757  voters,  Grayson  one  with  1,108  voters  ;  the 
difference  is  649  voters.  Now,  let  us  look  at  the 
third  district — the  one  in  which  I  live.  Lo- 
gan— according  to  the  report,  with  2,179  votei-s 
gets  but  one  member,  while  Simpson  gets  a 
member  with  1,017;  the  difference  is  1,162  voters. 
Warren  with  2,215  voters  gets  but  one  member, 
Monroe  gets  a  member  with  1,247  voters;  the 
difference  is  968  voters.  These  startling  ine- 
qualities are,  I  tliink,  sufficient  to  justify  the 
convention  in  rejecting  the  report,  whether  they 
shall  adopt  my  substitute  or  not.  I  will  barely 
remark,  that  similar  inequalities  run  through 
the  entire  report. 

What  are  the  chief  merits  of  the  substitue? 
In  the  first  place,  the  mode  of  its  operation  is 
well  understood.  You  commence  at  a  given 
point  in  the  state,  and  as  soon  as  theratio  is  sup- 
plied, you  move  on  with  your  residuum,  until 
the  apportionment  is  completed.  Does  not  every 
gentleman  see  that  at  what  point  soever  the  vo- 
ters reside,  there  the  representative  will  sure  to 
be. 

It  has  been  objected  to  this  system,  that  the 
state  will  be  gerrymandered  so  as  to  suit  the  prin- 


961 


ciples  of  the  dominant  part)-,  by  throwing  the 
residuums  into  those  counties  where  the  politi- 
cal opinions  of  the  voters  shall  coincide  with 
the  majority  making  the  apportionment.  Now, 
to  some  extent  this  may  be  true,  but  I  ask  gen- 
tlemen to  show  me  how  this  matter  can  be  avoid- 
ed. Suppose  you  adopt  the  system  of  district- 
ing the  state,  will  not  residuums  have  to  be  roll- 
ed about  in  the  districts?  And  will  not  the 
same  principle  be  put  in  practice,  although  the 
territory  over  which  the  application  is  to  be 
made  will  be  of  smaller  extent?  I  ask  again, 
what  is  gained  by  a  departure  from  the  old  sys- 
tem? Some  gentleman  here  indicate,  that  I 
make  this  struggle  because  my  county  is  likely 
to  loose  a  member.  Well  sir,  is  there  any  thing 
wrong  in  that?  The  county  of  Logan — than 
which  there  is  not  in  the  whole  state,  one  more 
to  be  relied  on  for  the  correctness  of  her  political 
sentiments — is  about  to  be  shorn  of  her  political 
power,  by  the  application  of  principles  in  the 
mode  of  apportionment,  and  gentlemen  taunt 
me  with  the  remark,  that  I  am  only  for  Logan. 
I  do  not  deny,  sir,  that  I  feel  that  she  is  about 
to  be  wronged,  and  I  shall  do  all  I  can  to  pre- 
vent the  application  of  a  principle  which  is  to 
militate  in  the  least  degree  against  her  political 

Sower.  Sir,  she  has  honored  me  long  ;  she  has 
one  every  thing  for  me,  and  I  will  stand  by  her 
<i3  long  as  I  can  raise  my  voice  in  her  defence; 
and  if  she  must  loose  her  political  strength,  it 
shall  be  against  my  solemn  protest,  and  my  ear- 
nest appeal  for  justice.  It  is  all  I  ask.  I  de- 
mand it  not  only  for  Logan,  but  for  Warren,  for 
Christian,  Nelson,  Shelby,  and  all  that  large 
class  of  whig  counties  whose  political  strength 
is  to  be  demolished  by  this  report,  and  whose 
strength  is  to  be  transferred  to  Scott,  Hancock, 
and  as  I  believe,  ultimately  to  democratic  coun- 
ties, with  less  political  strength,  merely  because 
they  are  more  favorably  situated  in  the  districts 
in  the  committee's  report.  Sir,  I  have  not  much 
hope  that  my  proposition  will  be  adopted,  but 
having  done  my  duty  to  my  constituents  and  to 
my  country,  I  shall  leave  the  subject  with  the 
convention. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  have  been  here  in  the  legis- 
lature when  representation  has  been  apportion- 
ed, and  I  understand  perfectly  all  the  difficulties 
that  exist  in  the  matter.  The  old  constitution 
required  the  residuums  to  be  rolled  from  one 
county  to  another,  and  thus  it  depended  upon 
the  point  of  commencement,  whether  justice  was 
done  throughout  the  state  or  not.  It  was  under 
that  principle  that  Warren  had  two  members 
and  Pulaski  one,  while  the  latter  had  three  hun- 
dred more  vote^  Unless  prevented  by  the  con- 
stitution, the  dominant  party  in  the  legislature 
will  always  exercise  the  power  to  their  own  ad- 
vantage. This  can  be  prevented  by  tlie  adop- 
tion of  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Logan,  (Mr.  Irwin,)  with  the  addition  af  a  slight 
amendment,  which  I  shall  propose.  It  is,  that 
the  representative  shall  go  with  the  largest  re- 
siduum, wherever  it  may  be  situated.  Thus  no 
county  will  be  entitled  to  a  member,  if  its  popu- 
lation is  less  than  that  of  some  residuum  in  any 
portion  of  the  state,  and  no  county  will  get  an 
additional  member,  unless  its  residuum  is  the 
largest  in  the  state.  The  old  system  of  appor- 
tionment was  well  enough,  if  controUed  oy  a 
121 


principle  of  this  kind,  and  would  secure  the 
nearest  approach  to  equality  of  representation 
that  can  be  attained. 

Mr.  IRWIN.  I  will  accept  of  the  gentleman's 
amendment. 

Mr.  GARFIELDE.  Mr.  President,  I  have  a 
proposition  which  I  desire  may  he  read  for  the 
information  of  the  convention. 

The  secretary  read  it  as  follows: 

"The  house  of  representatives  shall,  at  all 
times,  consist  of  as  many  members  as  there  may 
be  counties  in  the  stat€,  and  each  county  shall 
be  entitled  to  a  separate  representative,  who 
shall  be  chosen  by  the  qualified  voters  thereof. 
The  state  shall  be  divided  into  senatorial 

districts,  in  each  of  which  a  senator  shall  be 
chosen  by  the  qualified  voters  thereof:  Provided, 
That  each  representative  and  each  senator  shall 
be  entitled  to  one  vote  for  every  one  hundred 
electors  in  his  county  or  district." 

While  up,  sir,  I  Avill  avail  myself  of  this  op-, 
porlunity  to  investigate  the  report  of  the  select 
committee,  appointed  to  report  a  system  of  ap- 
portionment to  this  house,  as  also  the  report  of 
the  standing  committee  upon  the  same  subject. 

These  reports  set  out  with  the  broad  principle 
that  representation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform 
throughout  the  commonwealth.  This  principle 
should  govern  us  in  our  efforts  to  lay  the  foun- 
dation of  apportionment.  It  should  be  our  com- 
pass and  polar  star  to  guide  us  to  correct  results. 
But  we  may  assert  one  thing  and  practice 
another.  We  may,  in  the  same  instrument,  de- 
clare the  rights  of  the  people  and  take  them 
away.  The  declaration  of  a  principle,  then,  un- 
less it  be  carried  out  in  practice,  remains  a  dead 
letter.  Indeed  it  is  worse  than  a  dead  letter,  for 
it  declares  rights  which  it  does  not  protect. 

The  plan  reported  by  the  committee  upon  the 
legislative  department,  is  defective  in  this  re- 
spect, as  I  have  shown  on  a  former  occasion.  It 
gives  the  small  counties  an  undue  power,  as  also 
some  of  the  large  ones,  leaving  the  medium 
counties  to  be  the  sufferers.  By  that  plan,  one 
thousand  voters  in  one  section  of  the  state,  exer- 
cise as  much  power  as  two  thousand  do  in  anoth- 
er section. 

One  county  will  have  largely  over  its  due 

f)ower,  while  another  will  be  stripped  of  what 
ittle  it  is  entitled  to.  A  system  thus  radically 
defective  cannot  meet  the  approbation  of  the 
people  of  the  state,  and  should  not  be  incorpor- 
ated into  the  constitution,  loading  it  down,  not 
only  with  an  unpopular  principle,  but  with  an 
unjust  one.  I  trust,  sir,  that  the  sense  ofiustice 
which  exists  in  this  house,  will  not  suffer  the 
members  to  entertain  such  an  objectionable 
proposition.  I  should  regret  to  see  the  pro- 
tracted and  laborious  efforts  of  this  house  termin- 
ate in  such  a  monstrosity. 

But,  sir,  the  subject  more  particularly  before 
my  mind,  is  the  report  of  the  select  committee 
chosen  fVom  each  congressional  district  to  re- 
port a  plan  of  apportionment  to  this  body.  I 
regarded  the  organization  of  that  committee  as 
likely  to  produce  favorable  results,  and  was, 
consequently,  prepared  to  regard  the  offspring 
of  their  labors  with  favor.  I  expected  to  see  a 
system  proposed  which  would  do  credit  to  the 
originators.  In  this  I  have  been  sadly  disap- 
poioted.    What  is  their  plan?    It  is  a  mongrel, 


962 


neither  fish  nor  flesh.  It  is  the  union  of  the  sys- 
tems of  the  gentleman  from  Montgomery,  (Mr. 
Apperson,)  and  the  gentleman  from  Harrison, 
(Mr.  Desha.)  It  proposes  to  divide  the  state  by 
counties,  into  ten  districts  and  give  each  dis- 
trict its  proportion  of  members  according  to  its 
aggregate  voting  population,  which  shall  be  dis- 
tributed among  the  counties  of  the  district  ac- 
cordingly. Now,  sir,  let  us  examine  the  work- 
ings of  this  plan,  and  ascertain  whether  it  metes 
out  equal  justice  to  each  county  and  section  of 
the  state.  In  my  estimate,  I  have  taken  the 
number  of  white  males  over  twenty  one  years  of 
age,  as  that  was  the  most  convenient  basis,  and 
would  not  materially  affect  the  result.  I  wish 
to  show  the  inequality  which  will  exist  among 
the  counties  composing  the  different  districts. 

I  shall  confine  myself  to  a  few  counties  in 
each  district,  so  as  to  take  as  little  time  as  pos- 
sible. I  have  examined  eight  out  of  the  ten  dis- 
tricts, which  will  clearly  show  the  injustice  of 
the  report. 

FIBST   DISTRICT. 


SEVENTH   mSTEl 


Counties. 

Caldwell, 
Crittenden, 

Meiiibeis. 

1 

1 

Voters. 

2016 
1059 

Differ- 
ence. 

957 

Hopkins, 
Calloway, 

1 
1 

1886 
1323 

564 

Caldwell  and  Hopkins, 
Crittenden  and  Galloway, 

2 
2 

3902 
2382 

1520 

SECOND 

DI8TBICT. 

Christian, 
Hancock, 

1 
1 

2248 
554 

1694 

Daviess, 
Meade, 

1 

1 

2112 
1114 

998 

Christian  and  Daviess, 
Hancock  and  Grayson, 

2 

2 

4360 
1662 

2698 

THIKD 

DI8TEICT. 

Logan, 
Simpson, 

1 
1 

2179 
1017 

1162 

"Warren, 
Monroe, 

1 
1 

2215 
1247 

968 

Logan  and  "Warren, 
Simpson  and  Monroe, 

2 

2 

4349 
2264 

2130 

FOUETH 

DISTRICT. 

Pulaski, 
Taylor, 

1 
1 

2392 
1097 

1295 

EusscU  and  Casey, 
Boyle, 

1 

1 

1991 
1168 

823 

.FlfTU 

DISTRICT. 

Nelson  and  Mercer, 
Hardin, 

2 
S 

4148 
2419 

1729 

M«rcer, 
8j»encer, 

r 
1 

9093 
1092 

1071 

Henry  and  Shelby, 
Jeflferson, 

Shelby, 
Carroll, 


Henry, 
Trimble, 


EIGHTH   DISTRICT. 


Bourbon  and  Scott, 
Fayette, 

Bourbon  and  Scott, 
Franklin, 


Greenup, 
Lawrence, 

Bath, 
Carter, 


NINTH   DISTRICT. 
1 


4183 
2800 


1862 
1084 


3805 
2649 

3805 
2024 


1936 
967 


1383 


1328 


778 


1156 


1781 


969 


861 


3822 
2316 


Bath  and  Greenup,       2 
Fleming,  2 

1506 

I  have  thus  shown  the  great  inequality  of  the 
plan  proposed  by  the  select  committee.  It 
works  injustice  in  every  district.  I  have  not 
shown  one  fourth  of  its  enormities,  but  sufficient 
has  been  shown  to  demonstrate  its  great  injus- 
tice. I  have  selected  the  counties  almost  at 
random,  yet  every  comparison  writes  condemna- 
tion upon  the  face  of  the  proposition. 

By  reference  to  the  table  above,  it  will  be  seen 
t^at  the  little  county  of  Hancock,  in  the  second 
district  will  have  the  same  power  of  Christian, 
and  yet  Christian  has  1694  voters  more  than 
Hancock.  So  Greenup,  with  a  voting  popula- 
tion of  1936  has  no  more  power  than  Lawrence, 
with  967.  Thus  the  969  voters  in  Greenup, 
comparatively  exercise  no  power.  It  is  not  ne- 
cessary to  give  any  more  illustrations.  By  re- 
ference to  9ie  table,  any  one  can  see  the  opera- 
tion of  the  system  at  a  glance. 

I  am  satisfied  the  committee  did  not  carry  out 
the  plan,  and  ascertain  its  mode  of  operation  or 
they  would  never  have  reported  it.  Their  own 
sense  of  justice  would  have  prevented  them  from 
liaving  advocated  a  system  which  has  no  equal- 
ity in  it  and  which  strikes  directly  at  the  decla- 
ration in  the  first  part  of  the  report  which  says 
that  "representation  shall  be  equal  and  uniform." 

The  plan  proposed  by  the  gentleman  from 
Tri^g,  presents  tne  same  inequality  and  is  ob- 
noxious to  the  same  objection.  He  increases 
the  number  of  districts  to  twelve,  and  thereby 
increases  the  inequality.  I  am  satisfied  sir, 
that  the  district  system,  while  it  obviates  one 
difficulty,  produces  another  of  still  greater  mag- 
nitude. 

1  did  not  rise  to  make  a  speech,  but  to  have 
my  plan  read  for  the  information  of  the  house, 
and  to  present  some  of  the  operations  of  the 
system  of  apportionment  reported  by  the  select 
committee.  I  may,  at  a  proper  time,  discuss  the 
subject  more  at  large,  but  for  th«  present  am  sat- 


063 


isfied  •with  having  barehr  shown  the  great  and 
crying  injustice  which  would  be  produced  by 
the  adoption  of  this  report.  I  hope  sir,  the  eon- 
veation  will  vote  down  a  proposition  which  is 
fraught  with  so  much  injustice  to  the  country 
generally. 

Mr.APPERSON.  The  gentleman  last  np 
(Mr.  Garfielde,)  says,  that  his  proposition  is  the 
only  one  that  meets  out  equal  justice.  Now,  I 
shall  be  greatly  disappointed  if  it  gets  a  vote 
except  his  own,  and  if  it  does,  I  am  quite  cer- 
tain it  will  be  very  few.  As  for  the  gentleman 
from  Logan,  (Mr.  Irwin,)  I  shall  convince  him 
out  of  his  own  mouth,  that  the  joint  proposition 
of  himself  and  the  gentleman  from  Madison, 
(Mr.  Turner,)  presents  quite  as  great  inequalities 
as  the  plan  of  the  committee.  Caldwell  having 
1860  voters,  and  Crittenden  having  947  voters, 
my  friend  from  Logan,  first  refers  to,  as  present- 
ing a  most  striking  inequality;  and  yet  they 
have  the  same  number  of  representatives,  one 
each,  and  under  the  gentleman's  own  plan,  they 
would  stand  precisely  the  same.  Where  then  is 
the  greater  equalitv  of  his  system  of  apportion- 
ment. The  examples  given  by  him,  prove  his 
argument,  therefore,  to  be  worthless.  The'gen- 
tleman  from  Fleming,  (Mr.  Garfielde,)  looked  up- 
on the  first  district  a.s  arranged  by  the  commit- 
tee as  perfectly  startling  in  its  inequalities.  Let 
us  examine  it : 

The  representation  in  the  first  district  will  be 
as  follows : 

Fulton  <fe  Hickman,  1,287  voters,  1  representa- 
tive. 

Graves,  1,576  voters,  1  representative. 

McCracken  «fe  Ballard,  1,470  voters,  1  repre- 
sentative. 

Crittenden,  947  voters,  1  representative. 

Colloway,  1 ,206  voters,  1  representative. 

Marshall  <fe  Livingston,  1,632  voters,  1  repre- 
sentative. 

Trigg,  1,381  voters,  1  representative. 

Caldwell,  1,860  voters,  1  representative. 

Hopkins,  1,813  voters,  1  representative. 

Union,  1,264  voters,  1  representative. 

Thus  showing  a  most  striking  instance  of 
equality  in  representation  under  the  report  of 
the  committee.  The  gentleman  said  that  in  this 
district  the  inequality  was  so  great  as  to  be 
startling;  he  certainly  did  not  examine  the  mat- 
ter, or  else  he  is  an  indifferent  judge  of  this  mat- 
ter. 

Go  a  little  further,  to  thefifth  district,  to  which 
the  gentleman  from  Fleming,  also  referred,  as 
presenting  great  inequalities.  He  says  that  An- 
derson (b  bpencer,  with  2,093  voters,  get  a  repre- 
sentative each,  whilst  Nelson  <fc  Mercer,  with  a 
voting  population  of  4,132,  get  but  two  repre- 
sentatives, or  one  to  each  countv.  By  what  rule 
the  gentleman  thought  himself  authorized  to 
take  these  two  large  counties  to  put  together  to 
prove  his  position,  I  know  not,  tney  are  not  ad- 
jacent, the  county  of  Wa.shington  lies  directly 
Detween  them.  Suppose  the  gentleman  had  saici 
that  Nelson  and  Spencer,  united,  had  3,014  vo- 
ters, and  the  report  gave  them  two  representa- 
tives— that  Mercer  it  Anderson,  when  united 
had  3,211  voters,  and  the  report  gave  them  two 
representatives — had  he  presented  the  state  of 
case  in  this  way,  it  would  have  been  apparent, 
even  to  himself,  that  be  was  as  unfortuoate  in  hid 


complaints  of  the  inequality  of  the  fifth  as  he 
was  of  the  first  district.  I  Wlieve  that  Spencer, 
Avas  taken  from  Nelson,  or  at  least  in  part,  an'' 
that  Anderson,  or  a  great  part  of  it,  was  taken 
from  Mercer,  and  the  feelings  and  wishes  of  the 
people  of  these  small  counties,  coincide  to  a  great 
extent  with  the  larger  ones  to  which  I  have  at- 
tached them. 

Some  gentlemen  have  been  led  into  mistakes, 
by  taking  as  a  basis  the  white  males  over  twen- 
tv-one,  as  reported  by  the  auditor,  instead  of 
tne  qualified  voters,  who  are  less  numerous  than 
the  wliite  males,  as  they  will  notice  when  they 
come  to  see  the  figures  written  down.  Under 
that  svstem,  Jefferson,  including  Louisville, 
wouldliave9  or  10,000  voters,  when  if  the  basis 
of  qualified  voters  was  taken  it  would  be  but 
6,774,  a  considerable  difference  certainly. 

So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  I  am  not  wedded  to 
this  report,  and  the  committee  who  reported  it, 
so  far  as  the  number  of  districts  is  concerned, 
were  far  from  being  unanimous.  But  I  will  fur- 
ther say,  that  there  cannot  be  any  system  of  ap- 
portionment devised  but  there  will  be  hard  ca- 
ses occuring  under  it.  Allusion  has  been  made 
to  Hancock,  as  having  a  separate  representation 
on  a  voting  population  of^  not  more  than  five 
hundred  and  sixty.  The  counties  of  Daviess, 
Ohio  and  Breckinridge,  are  the  only  counties 
adjacent  to  Hancock,  and  they  have  all  over 
the  ratio;  and  would  it  be  just  to  say  to  Ohio, 
Breckinridge,  or  Daviess,  with  the  residuums 
thev  possess,  that  they  should  also  take  Han- 
coclc  under  their  wing  without  an  additional 
representative?  Why,  the  residuums  of  these 
three  counties  will  be  vastly  more  than  enough 
to  give  Hancock  a  member,  when  they  are 
added  to  her  voting  population.  What  are 
you  to  do  with  Hancock  if  she  should  not  get  a 
member?  Her  electors  must  be  represented  in 
some  way;  and  it  is  clearly  not  fair  to  Ohio  to 
attach  Hancock  to  her.  How  would  it  be  under 
the  proposition  of  the  gentlemen  from  Logan? 
Why  the  two  counties  of  Ohio  and  Hancock 
would  be  continued  together,  in  all  time  to  come, 
as  they  have  been  since  the  last  apportionment 
of  representation. 

It  will  be  found,  that  in  adopting  the  district 
system,  as  you  increase  the  number  of  districts, 
so  do  you  increase  the  number  of  these  hard 
cases. 

Mr.  TURNER.  With  the  gentleman's  per- 
mission, I  will  present  the  proposition  of  the 
gentleman  from  Logan,  as  I  have  modified  it 
with  his  consent. 

The  Secretary  then  read  it  as  follows : 

"Provided,  That  after  th«  apportionment  is 
ascertained,  as  above,  it  shall  oe  modified  and 
changed  as  follows  :  Those  counties  having  a 
smaller  voting  population  which  shall  be  enti- 
tled to  one  representative,  under  the  above  mode, 
than  other  counties  not  having  one,  shall  yield 
up  the  same  to  the  latter,  and  the  former  shall 
be  attached  to  adjacent  counties.  Those  coun- 
ties having  a  smaller  voting  population  which 
shall  be  entitled  to  two  representatives,  under 
the  above  mode,  than  other  counties  not  having 
two,  shall  yield  up  one  of  the  same  to  the  latter, 
so  that  no  county  with  a  smaller  voting  popula- 
tion shall  ever  have  a  representative  where  a 
county  of  larger  voting  population  has  not,  and 


1)64 


%6  that  \\o  colmty.witl^  a  smalleV  voting  popula- 
tion, shall  ever  have  two  representatives  vrnen  a 
Pounty  of  a  larger  voting  pojJulation  shall  have 
but  one  representative." 

Mr.  APPERSON.  What  becomes  of  Han- 
cock under  that  proposition? 

Mr.  TURNER.  Can  she  not  be  joined  to  any 
smaller  county? 

Mr.  APPERSON.    No. 

Mr.  TURNER.  Then  she  will  have  to  be  at- 
tached to  some  larger  county.  If  then  the  re- 
siduum of  the  county  to  Which  she  was  attached 
was  larger  than  her  number  of  voters,  ot  if  the 
two  united  came  nearer  to  the  ratio  than  any 
other  cotinty  or  union  of  counties,  they  would 
get  an  additional  member  under  my  proposi- 
tion. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  am  glad  the  gentleman 
has  made  this  explanation,  as  now  there  is  pre- 
sented some  justice  in  his  proposition.  But  to 
swallow  up  a  small  county  in  that  way  would 
be  unjust  to  it,  and  the  large  county  to  which  it 
may  be  attached,  would  always  have  the  control 
if  it  desired  to  do  so. 

I  was  going  on  to  say  that  as  jon  increase  the 
number  of  districts,  so  you  incfease  the  number  of 
hard  points  or  inequalities.  For  instance,  Gal- 
latin will  have  a  representative  because  she  is 
adjacent  to  no  county  in  the  tenth  congressional 
district  but  what  has  a  residuum.  She  has  but 
813  voters,  and  yet  she  must  have  a  representa- 
tive, because  she  has  a  greater  number  of  voters 
than  would  be  included  in  the  residuum  of  anji- 
of  the  counties  in  that  district. 

Again:  the  little  county  of  Breathitt,  with  a 
little  more  than  five  hunared  and  sixty  voters, 
(just  five  hundred  and  ninety.)  will  be  entitled 
In  a  short  time  to  a  member,  and  M'hy?  Because, 
being  in  the  9th  congressional  district,  she  lies 
adjacent  to  Morgan  only  of  all  the  counties  in 
that  district  which  is  increasing  rapidly,  and  be- 
fore a  second  apportionment  shall  be  made,  will, 
in  all  probability,  possess  the  full  ratio  for  a 
Jmember.  Then  we  shall  have  to  give  a  member 
to  Breathitt,  because  she  lays  adjacent  to  no  other 
county  to  which  she  can  be  attached.  And  by 
laying  the  state  oflF  into  four  districts,  I  know  of 
but  one  solitary  case  of  great  inequality,  that  of 
Hancock,  which  could  occur.  The  rule  in  the 
legislature  in  the  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion has  been  to  lay  oflf  the  state  into  tnree  dis- 
tricts, the  northern,  middle,  and  southern,  and  to 
divide  the  representation  among  them.  But  even 
then  it  has  always  been  a  matter  of  great  diffi- 
culty to  getthrough  with.  One  other  hard  case, 
if  you  lay  oflf  the  state  into  small  districts,  that 
•will  occur  is  this:  the  county  of  Scott,  with  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty  nine  voters, 
■will  be  entitled  to  two  representatives,  because 
the  residuums  over  the  ratio  which  slio  has  is 

greater  than  any  other  in  that  district,  whilst 
ulaski  with  two  thousand  three  hundred  and 
five  voters  will  have  but  one  representative, 
because  her  residuum  is  not  equal  to  the  vote 
of  several  small  counties  in  that  district.  This 
will  occur  when  districts  are  small.  This  is 
an  extreme  case  perhaps,  and  I  instance  it  only 
to  show  that  whatever  mode  gentlemen  may 
adopt,  the  hard  and  the  soft  .spots  will  occur. 
Why,  according  to  the  resolution  and  mode  of 
apportionment  of  the  gentlemau  from  Harrison, 


that  county  would  have  two  rppresentatives  witli 
only  two  thousand  ami  sixty  voters,  because  it 
would  have  a  residuum  greater  than  any  other  of 
the  adjacent  counties  or  any  other  county  in  tho 
district.  But  byadding  Gallatin  to  that  district, 
she  having  a  greater  number  of  votes  than  that 
residuum,  she  would  have  the  representative,  and 
Harrison  would  have  but  one. 

I  believe  it  best  to  have  the  state  laid  oflf  into 
districts,  and  that  the  fewer  the  districts  are  the 
nearer  equality  can  be  attained.  I  prefer  the 
system  of  districts,  because  if  you  take  the  state 
at  large  there  will  ever  be  complaints  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  apportioimient  is  made. 
Accompanying  the  proposition  which  is  submit- 
ted by  the  committee,  a  principle  is  laid  down 
that  representation  should  be  equalized  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  voters.  The  proposition 
is,  that  in  the  first  instance  all  the  counties  hav- 
ing the  full  ratio  should  have  a  representative; 
next,  that  those  counties  having  a  full  ratio  and 
the  largest  residuum  compared  with  the  number 
of  voters  any  county  has  under  the  ratio,  should 
have  an  additional  representation,  but  if  a  smal- 
ler county  has  more  voters  than  such  residuum, 
then  she  shall  have  the  member.  This  principle 
was  proposed  in  reference  to  four  districts,  but  it 
governs  with  equal  justice  whatever  may  be  the 
number.  By  adopting  four  districts,  as  I  first 
proposed,  each  would  have  between  thirty  five 
and  thirty  six  thousand  voters,  and  there  would 
not  in  any  one  of  them  be  three  hundred  voters 
more  than  in  another,  and  I  still  think  it  would 
be  preferable.  However.  I  prefer  the  report  of 
the  committee  to  any  proposition  yet  presented 
as  an  amendment  to  it,  and  shall  adhere  to  it  as 
lagainst  them. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  rise  to  point  out  an  in- 
congruity in  the  gentleman's  own  report,  and  to 
show  that  it  is  impossible  to  carry  it  out.  If  he 
will  turn  his  attention  to  the  thirteenth  line,  he 
will  find  that  it  reads  thus: 

'•Provided,  however.  That  if  there  should  be 
any  county  not  having  a  suflficient  number  of 
representative  population."  What  is  to  be  done 
with  it?     "Yet  it  shall  have  a  representative." 

But  to  come  to  the  second  proviso.  It  is  as 
follows: 

"And  provided  further.  That  when  a  county 
may  not  have  a  sutficient  number  of  representa- 
tive population  to  entitle  it  to  one  representa- 
tive, then  such  county  may  be  joined  to  some 
adjacent  county  or  counties  to  send  one  repre- 
sentative, provided  such  adjacent  county  has 
not  a  full  ratio." 

Now  it  turns  out  that  in  the  second  district 
there  are  counties  which  are  under  the  ratio. 
Therefore  they  would  not  be  provided  for  by  the 
first  proviso,  because  there  are  three  different 
counties  under  the  ratio.  Two  would  be  pro- 
vided for  by  the  second  proviso.  That  covers 
the  counties  of  Butler  and  Edmondson.  Han- 
cock does  not  join  either  of  them,  but  is  still  in 
the  same  district. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  Hancock  is  adjacent  to 
three  counties,  and  all  three  have  a  ifuU  ratio. 
Hancock  gets  one  representative,  because  the 
adjacent  counties  are  entitled  to  one.  Butler 
cannot  get  one.  Why?  Because  she  lies  adja- 
cent to  a  county  not  entitled  to  one.  Butler 
and  Edmonson  neither  being  entitled  to  one. 


96i 


Mr.  TRIPLETT.  The  explanation  is  right, 
but  the  bill  is  wrong,  and  if  the  explanation  is 
put  down  in  the  bill,  it  -will  be  right.  But  there 
is  another  difficulty.  Suppose  Butler  shall  come 
up  to  the  full  ratio,  what  will  become  of  Ed- 
monson? There  will  be  two  in  the  same  district 
trict  not  provided  for.  The  first  is  provided 
for  by  the  first  section,  and  yet  there  is  another 
in  the  same  district  not  provided  for. 

Mr.  GRAY.  Notwithstanding  the  argument 
of  the  gentleman  from  Montgomery,  and  the  es- 
timation in  which  he  holds  his  proposition,  I 
must  say  I  think  that  proposition  one  of  the 
most  abominable  and  objectionable  that  ever 
was  presented  for  the  consideration  of  any  de- 
liberative body.  My  friend  from  Daviess  is 
right  in  his  statement  of  the  character  and  opera- 
tion of  the  proposition.  It  gives  a  certain  num- 
ber of  representatives  to  a  district.  Suppose  there 
are  ten  districts,  and  each  has  eleven  counties, 
then  suppose  Butler  or  Edmonson  come  up  to 
the  ratio,  where  will  you  get  a  representative  to 
give  to  either?  Hancock  is  .surrounded  by  three 
counties  which  have  the  ratio,  therefore  Han- 
cock must  have  one.  Then  if  '.Butler  or  Ed- 
monson comes  up  to  to  the  ratio,  can  you  give  a 
representative  to  the  other  if  it  should  come  up 
to  the  ratio?  Such  a  difficultv  may  occur  sooner 
or  later  in  every  district  in  tlie  state.     Shall  we 

f)ut  in  the  constitution,  which  we  hope  to  have 
ast  forages,  a  proposition  so  absurd.  Of  all  the 
propositions  which  have  been  presented,  this  is 
the  most  abominable  and  the  most  unequal,  be- 
cause a  county,  if  it  has  only  representative 
population  of  five  hundred,  will  have  a  repre- 
sentative. Does  that  correspond  with  the  prin- 
ciple of  an  equal  representation  for  all.  It 
would  be  a  perfect  contradiction  of  the  principle 
in  that  very  district,  and  would  be  in  many  oth- 
ers. There  is  no  equality  in  it  at. all.  That 
district  runs  from  the  Tennessee  line  to  the 
mouth  of  Salt  river,  nearly  one  hundred  and 
fifty  miles.  How  is  the  voting  population  of 
that  di.strict  distributed.  In  the  northern  end, 
the  gentleman  gives  the  counties  of  Meade, 
Hancock,  and  Grayson,  three  counties  which  do 
not  join.  To  these  counties  with  a  population 
of  males  over  tw<  nty  one  years  of  age  of  two 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  seventy  six,  he 
gives  three  repre.sentatrves.  He  gives  to  the 
county  of  Christian  with  two  thousand  two 
hundred  and  twenty  eight  voters  one  representa- 
tive. Is  not  that  beautiful  equality?  Is  not  that 
representation  according  to  population  with  a 
vengeance?  I  trust  in  God  this  convention  will 
never  disgrace  itself  with  anything  so  unjust  as 
that.  Take  Hancock  and  Grayson,  and  how  ma- 
ny males  over  twenty  one  have  they?  They  have 
one  thousand  six  hundred  and  sixty  two,  and  by 
this  gentleman's  beautiful  plan  they  have  two 
representatives  in  one  end  of  the  district,  and  in 
the  other  eud,  two  thousand  two  hundred  and 
twenty  eight  voters  have  but  one.  That  would 
be  beautilul  justice,  beautiful  equality  of  repre- 
sentation. Apply  this  proposition  all  over  the 
state,  and  the  same  results  will  be  seen.  Cum- 
berland, Casey,  and  Boyle,  with  three  thousand 
one  hundred  and  ninety  two  voters  have  three 
representatives,  but  Pulaski  with  two  thousand 
three  hundred  and  ninety  two  has  but  one.  I 
trust  this  oonvention  never  will  adopt  such  a 


propoeitioli  as  thjtt.  I  cantiot  vote  for  the  con- 
stitution with  such  a  proposition  in  it.  We  pro- 
pose to  have  qualified  voters  the  basis,  and  if  so, 
let  us  carry  it  out.  I  hope  we  .shall  adopt  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Logan,  or 
that  of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg,  or  that  of  the 
gentleman  from  Floyd,  or  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee as  it  first  came  forward.  I  can  take  any 
other  proposition  that  has  been  offered  sooner 
than  this. 

The  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Lo- 
gan, at  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICK- 
LlFFE,  was  so  modified  as  to  have  the  district- 
ing commence  with  the  county  of  Greenup,  and 
the  apportionment  to  take  place  once  in  ei^ht 
years. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  think  the  gentle- 
man's proposition  now  will  be  more  likely  to  do 
justice  than  any  proposition  we  have,'  if  the 
gentleman  will  just  say  that  the  legislature,  in 
making  the  apportionment,  shall  divide  the 
state  into  three  districts,  as  near  equal  as  may 
be,  commencing  and  resting  on  the  Ohio  river. 
In  this  way,  I  think  you  will  control  this  wild, 
and  I  will  sity  unjust,  method  of  laying  off  the 
state,  ivhich  has  been  practiced. 

Mr.  TURNER.  If  you  go  by  districts,  you 
may  still  leave  some  one  county  with  a  represen- 
tative, which  has  not  as  many  voters  as  some 
other  county  in  the  district.  According  to  my 
proposition  this  cannot  happen  in  any  part  of 
the  state. 

Mr,   GHOLSON      If  the  latter  clause  of  the 

Sroposition  submitted  by  the  gentleman  from 
[adison  is  added  to  the  proposition  of  the  gen- 
tleman from  Logan,  there  can  be  no  gerrvman- 
dering.  I  see  no  necessity  for  the  first  part.  I 
think  it  is  settled  that  the  largest  county  shall 
always  have  the  representative,  and  not  that  one 
havinn;  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  voters 
shall  have  one,  while  one  having  one  thousand 
does  not. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  will  show  the  necessity  of 
the  former  part.  According  to  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  from  Logan,  residu urns  will  be 
produced.  My  proposition  is,  to  apply  those 
residuums  so  that  no  small  county  shall  get  a 
representative,  Avhile  a  large  one  has  not  any. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  feel  no  disposition  to  occu- 
py the  time  of  the  house,  when  I  do  not  feel  that 
duty  requires  me  to  speak.  But  as  this  ques- 
tion is  one  of  the  most  important  of  any  we 
have  had  before  us,  and  is  particularly  impor- 
tant to  my  constituents,  I  feel  it  incumbent  on 
me  to  say  a  few  words  respecting  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  select  committee,  and  that  submitted 
by  the  gentleman  from  Logan. 

At  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  IRWIN,  Mr.  Morris 
gave  way  for  a  motion  to  take  a  recess. 

EVENIXG   SE^flO.V. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Having  voted  for  that  portion 
of  the  sixth  section  of  the  report,  I  now  give 
notice  that  I  will  move  a  reconsideration  of  that 
vote.  I  do  it  for  this  reason:  that  it  establishes 
the  basis  of  representation,  and  makes  the  qual- 
ified voters  that  basis.  This  morning,  the  vote 
was  taken  upon  the  amendment  offered  by  the 
senior  gentleman  from  Nelson,  which  amend- 
ment embraced  the  principle  in  regard  to  the  ba- 
sis of  representation  which  I  had  had  the  honor 


9G6 


to  submit,  and  which  had  once  been  adopted  by 
this  convention.  The  vote  stood — ayes  47,  noes 
48.  Immediately  upon  the  annunciation  of  the 
vote,  a  motion  was  made  to  reconsider  it,  and 
then  a  motion  was  made  to  lay  that  motion  up- 
on the  table.  Thure  were  but  four  members  ab- 
sent at  the  time  the  vote  was  taken,  who  have 
been  here  during  the  session.  I  will  not  pre- 
tend to  say  that  those  who  have  attempted  to 
preclude  any  further  action  upon  any  branch  of 
this  section  hereafter,  were  aware  that  three  of 
those  absent  members  were  in  favor  of  the 
amendment;  but  I  do  undertake  to  say,  with  a 
personal  knowledge  of  the  fact,  that  three  of 
the  four  were  in  favor  of  the  amendment  offered 
by  the  gentleman  from  Hardin. 

A  minority  of  this  convention,  then,  have 
committed  a  direct  and  flagrant  violation  of  the 
rights  of  the  majority,  and  fastened,  as  far  as  the 
vote  of  to-day  can  fasten,  upon  this  constitution 
a  principle  wnich  the  majority  of  this  body  is 
opposed  to.  I  assert  if  every  gentleman  who 
voted  for  the  amendment  shall  adhere  to  his 
vote,  that  there  are  yet  three  gentlemen,  who  are 
in  town,  but  absent  from  sickness,  who  will  vote 
for  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son, and  thus  make  the  vote  in  favor  of  it  fifty, 
clearly  showing  a  majority  in  favor  of  the  ba.sis 
of  white  population,  and  against  the  basis  adopt- 
ed. I  am  aware  that  the  motion  I  have  made 
must  lie  on  the  table  till  to-morrow.  I  would 
not  have  made  it  if  there  had  been  a  clear,  pal- 
pable, and  satisfactory  indication  of  disappro- 
bation of  the  proposition.  But  when  I  was  con- 
vinced there  was  a  majority  of  the  convention 
again.st  the  basis  established  by  the  vote  to-day, 
and  saw  the  attempt  made  to  stifle  their  will,  I 
could  not,  in  justice  to  myself  and  that  majori- 
ty, forbear  moving  to  reconsider  the  vote  by 
which  the  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  On  this  question 
of  basis  of  representetion,  I  admit  that  the  con- 
vention is  nearly  equally  divided.  Without 
having  any  particular  feeling  with  regard  to  its 
operation  on  that  part  of  the  state  which  I  rep- 
resent, I  still  rejoice  that  the  vote  resulted  as  it 
did,  because  I  tliought  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion which  had  been  fixed  by  our  fathers  in  1792, 
and  again  in  1799,  and  which  had  been  approved 
by  the  people  of  Kentucky  for  sixty  years  with- 
out murmur  or  complaint,  was  just  and  right. 
I  challenge  anymeniber  of  this  convention,  even 
the  delegate  from  Simpson,  to  say  whether  he 
ever  heard  in  the  halls  of  legislation  of  Ken- 
tucky, or  out  of  them,  from  the  citizens  of  this 
commonwealth,  any  complaint  of  the  principle 
upon  which  our  political  power  was  apportion- 
ed. Was  it  a  cause  (if  calling  this  convention; 
■was  it  a  grievance;  and  does  it  operate  as  a 
grievance?  Then  why  change?  The  object  of 
the  change,  as  avowed  by  the  mover  and  its  ad- 
vocates, 18  for  the  purpose  of  operating  upon 
one  particular  section  oi  the  state  injudiciously. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  beg  to  inquire  whether  it  is 
in  order  to  debate  this  question  now. 

The  PRESIDENT  declared  it  to  be  in  order. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  do  not  intend  to 
go  into  any  extended  argument  as  to  the  propri- 
ety of  the  change.  The  alteration  proposed  is 
calculated,  in  my  humble  judgment,  in  the  pro- 
gress of  time,  to  do  great  injustice  to  portions  of 


the  country,  not  designed  now  to  be  injured. 
The  great  tax  paying  portion  of  the  common- 
wealth will  feel  its  effects.  We  may  as  well  call 
things  by  their  right  names.  Gentlemen  speak 
of  strengthening  the  rural  districts  by  this  ope- 
ration. Our  fathers  made  a  basis  of  the  free  vo- 
ting population, with  which  I  am  content.  Our 
habits  and  agricultural  pursuits,  and  the  situa- 
tion of  our  agricultural  region  are  such,  that  the 
tendency  of  our  population  is  to  the  extremes. 
Natural  causes — our  agricultural  pursuits — are 
forcing  the  political  power  from  the  centre  of 
the  state.  While  I  disclaim  the  idea  of  uniting 
property,  either  land  or  any  other  kind  of  estate, 
as  an  element  of  the  basis  of  representation,  as 
unjust  in  a  free  and  equal  government,  I  dis- 
claim the  idea  of  uniting  any  matter,  though 
animated,  which  is  inactive  in  the  expression  of 
sentiments,  necessary  to  the  choice  of  arepresen- 
tative  in  the  legislative  department  of  this  gov- 
ernment. Why  should  I,  because  I  may  be 
worth  five  thousand  dollars  more  than  my  neigh- 
bor, in  casting  my  vote  at  the  polls,  exercise  a 
greater  political  weight  in  this  government?  I 
do  not  exercise  it,  and  will  not  give  a  vote  that 
shall  authorize  it.  But  shall  I  exercise  less 
weight?  No.  Why  should  one  man  exercise 
more  political  power  than  I  do,  because  his  lot 
has  been  cast  in  a  part  of  the  country  which  God 
has  blessed  with  children,  not  his  own,  and 
over  whom  they  would  not,  if  permitted  to  vote, 
select  him  as  a  guardian  or  public  agent?  Why 
should  my  accidental  residence  among  women 
and  children,  to  whom  I  am  bound  by  no  ties  of 
blood,  kindred,  or  relationship,  give  me  more 
political  power  in  this  Union  than  a  man  who 
may  not  be  blessed  or  surrounded  by  that  de- 
scription of  population? 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  will  withdraw  ray  motion 
to  reconsider  now,  and  I  give  notice  that  I  shall 
make  amotion  to  reconsider  to-morrow. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Very  good,  sir,  I 
will  be  present  whenever  it  is  made. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  It  is  with  great  reluctance 
that  I  ask  the  attention  of  the  house  to  a  few  re- 
marks which  I  deem  it  my  duty  to  make  upon 
this  system  of  apportionnient  reported  by  the 
committee.  It  is  one  of  the  most  important  and 
delicate  subjects  which  has  occupied  the  atten- 
tion of  the  convention;  one  whicli  has  attracted 
the  attention  and  occupied  the  time  of  some  of 
the  ablest  men  in  our  Dody;  and  I  can  venture 
with  safety  to  say,  that  no  man  has  yet  been 
able  to  fix  up  a  plan  of  apportionment  which 
even  to  himself  would  seem  to  be  entirely  just 
and  impartial.  I  was  a  member  of  the  legisla- 
tive committee  to  which  this  subject  was  refer- 
red. The  committee  worked  at  it  faithfully  and 
for  a  long  time;  and  the  plan  submitted  in  the 
report  was  adopted  as  the  best  we  could  make, 
though  not  entirely  satisfactory  to  any  of  us. 

I  should  not  say  one  word  upon  this  question, 
and  should  have  submitted  it  to  the  vote  of  the 
convention  without  a  remark,  but  for  the  fact 
that  this  report  of  the  select  counnittee  presses 
more  heavily,  and,  as  I  believe  unjustly,  upon 
the  immediate  interests  and  rights  of  my  con- 
stituents than  any  thing  which  has  been  pre- 
sented to  us.  It  would  seem,  sir,  that  the  com- 
mittee had  traveled  out  of  the  regular  course  of 
their  report  and   attached  »  proviso,  with   no 


967 


earthly  object  but  to  strike  a  blow  at  the  rights 
of  the  people  in  my  county.  Indeed,  sir,  the 
whole  system,  independent  of  this  peculiar  act 
of  injustice,  seems  to  me,  by  far,  the  most  une- 
qual and  oppressive  of  all  the  various  plans 
which  have  been  submitted.  The  report  sets  out 
with  the  broad  declaration  that  "representation 
shall  be  equal  and  uniform  throughout  the  com- 
monwealth, and  shall  be  forever  regulated  by 
the  number  of  representative  population ;"  and 
yet  when  we  look  into  its  details,  it  would  seem 
that  the  last  of  all  objects  which  was  sought  to 
be  accomplished,  was  that  of  representation  in 
proportion  to  the  number  of  qualified  electors. 

A  plan  of  apportionment  has  been  submitted 
by  the  gentleman  from  Logan,  and  amended  by 
the  gentleman  from  Madison.  This  plan,  as  1 
understand  it,  is  pretty  much  the  same  with  that 
of  the  old  constitution,  except  that  an  attempt 
is  made  to  prevent  the  rolling  residuums  from 
bein^  made  to  fall  so  heavily  upon  those  who 
may  happen  to  be  in  a  minority,  and  to  estab- 
lish some  permanent  rule  by  which  the  legisla- 
ture shall  hereafter  be  governed.  It  fixes  a  point 
at  which  the  legislature  shall  hereafter  be  com- 
pelled to  start,  in  apportioning  the  state;  and  the 
amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison  pro- 
vides, that  after  traversing  the  whole  state,  and 
giving  to  each  county,  with  the  full  ratio  of  qual- 
ified electors,  the  representative  to  which  it  is  en- 
titled— it  shall  then  take  a  survey  and  fix  the 
remaining  representatives  upon  those  counties, 
either  single  or  double,  having  the  largest  un- 
represented residuum  of  qualified  electors.  The 
plan  submitted  by  the  select  committee,  lays  the 
state  off  into  ten  districts,  and  not  only  sanc- 
tions but  absolutely  enforces  a  system  of  gerry- 
mandering in  those  districts  upon  the  legisla- 
ture. The  question  now  before  us  is,  which 
one  of  these  two  plans  shall  be  adopted?  For 
my  own  part,  altnough  I  am  not  particularly 
pleased  with  either  of  them,  I  think  the  plan  of 
the  gentleman  from  Logan  by  far  the  most  just 
and  desirable.  Indeed,  sir,  I  should  much  pre- 
fer the  plan  of  the  old  constitution,  odious,  op- 
pressive, and  unjust,  as  it  has  been  acknowl- 
edged to  be,  to  this  plan  of  the  committee.  The 
convention  which  framed  the  old  constitution, 
conferred  the  power  upon  the  legislature  to  ger- 
rymander the  state,  and  thereby  inflict  an  act  of 
gross  injustice  upon  whatever  party  might  per- 
chance be  in  the  minority.  They  placed  it  in 
the  power  of  that  legislature,  by  acting  honest- 
ly and  fairly,  to  render  an  act  of  justice  to  every 
part  of  the  commonwealth.  The  convention 
now  assembled,  proposes  by  the  bill  reported  by 
the  select  committee,  to  do  the  act  themselves, 
and  place  it  in  all  time,  beyond  the  power  of 
the  legislature,  to  remedy  the  wrong  which 
thereby  they  will  have  inflicted,  to  stamp  it 
upon  the  constitution  itself.  The  plan  of  the 
old  constitution,  by  suffering  the  residuums  to 
be  rolled  in  any  and  every  direction  through  the 
state,  placed  it  in  the  hands  of  the  legislature  to 
confer  the  power,  at  discretion,  upon  any  par- 
ticular portion  of  the  country  which  they  knew 
to  be  most  inclined  to  carry  out  the  particular 
objects  they  might  have  in  view.  It  was  made 
to  operate  like  the  old  woman's  elder  stalk, 
which,  according  to  her  idea,  was  the  greatest 
medicine  in  the  world — a  great  panacea  foreve- 


ery  disease.  If  scraped  up,  it  operated  as  an 
emetic;  if  scraped  down,  it  acted  as  a  purge: 
and  truly,  in  the  hands  of  a  skilful  legislature*, 
its  medicinal  qualities  have  been  so  potently  ap-t 
plied  as  to  keep  the  poor  patient,  tne  minority 
party,  in  a  most  woful  state  of  depletion.  That 
system  which  was  thus  injuriously  applied,  was 
tfce  act  of  our  ancestors,  who,  in  the  nonesty  of 
their  hearts,  believed  the  legislature  to  be  as 
honest  as  themselves.  They  had  no  intention  of 
doing  an  act  of  injustice;  thev  knew  that,  un- 
der their  plan,  justice  could  be  done,  and  they 
believed  it  would  be  done.  They  were  mistaken.- 
We  have  assembled  here,  and  one  thing  imperi- 
ously demanded  of  us  by  the  people  is,  that  we 
establish  a  certain,  permanent  basis  of  appor- 
tionment, which  will  render  it  unlawful,  in  all 
after  time,  for  the  legislature  to  act  unfairly,  and 
yet  it  would  seem  that  we  are  prepared  to  fix  an 
apportionment  immutably  upon  our  constitu- 
tion, as  unjust  and  unfair,  as  any  which  could 
be  devised  by  the  legislature.  It  seems  to  me 
that  I  would  rather  entrust  the  power  to  an  un- 
holy agent  to  do  the  unholy  deed,  whilst  he 
had,  at  the  same  time,  the  opportunity  to  do 
right,  than  to  myself  commit  the  wrong.  To 
prove  that  I  am  not  mistaken — that  I  do  not 
complain  without  ample  cause  of  the  report  of 
the  select  committee,  I  will  refer  you  to  some 
calculations  I  have  taken  the  trouble  to  make, 
which  will,  I  think,  most  conclusively  prove 
that  this  plan  must  operate  with  great  inequali- 
ty and  injustice. 

We  find  that  the  county  of  Caldwell,  in  the 
first  district,  with  a  population  of  2,016  voters, 
is  entitled  to  one  representative.  The  county  of 
Crittenden,  in  the  same  district,  with  1,059  vo- 
ters, is  likewise  entitled  to  one  representative — 
difference  in  population  951.  Hopkins  has  one 
member,  with  1,886  voters.  Calloway,  with 
1,323,  has  one — difference  563.  Caldwell  and 
Hopkins,  with  3,902  voters,  have  two  represent- 
atives. Crittenden  and  Calloway,  with  2.382, 
have  two— difference  1,520 — quite  enough,  un- 
der the  ratio,  for  one  additional  representative. 
Would  this  seem  to  be  just  and  equitable?  Does 
this  indicate  that  representation  is  ba-sed  upon 
numbers?  I  should  say  not.  Yet  this  is  the 
system  which  is  sought  to  be  forced  upon  us. 

Again,  sir;  if  we  go  into  the  second  district, 
we  find  that  Christian,  with  2,248  voters,  has 
but  one  representative.  Hancock,  with  554,  has 
one— difference  1,694 — more  than  100  over  the 
ratio.  Daviess,  with  2,110,  has  one  representa- 
tive. Meade,  with  1,114,  has  one — difference 
993.  Christian  and  Daviess,  with  4,360  voters, 
are  entitled  to  two  representatives.  Hancock 
and  Grayson,  with  1,662,  to  two  representatives 
— difference  2,698.  These  are  some  of  the  as- 
tounding developments  made  by  a  very  slight 
examination  of  tnis  most  just  and  fair  system  of 
apportionment,  recommended  to  this  convention 
by  the  select  committee. 

If  we  go  to  the  third  district,  we  will  see  that 
Logan,  with  2179  voters,  has  but  one  representa- 
tive— Simpson,  with  1017,  to  the  same— differ- 
ence, 1162.  Warren,  with  2215,  has  one — Mon- 
roe, with  1247,  the  same.  Logan  and  Wanen, 
with  4394  voters,  have  two  representatives — 
Simpson  and  Monroe,  with  2264,  have  the  same 
number — difference  2130.    In  the  fourth  district, 


969 


Pulaski,  'vritJi  2392,  ha?  one  member — Taylor, 
with  1097,  the  same — ditference,  1295.  Russell 
and  Casey,  with  1991,  to  one — Boyle,  with  1168, 
to  one — 823  difference.  Pulaski,  Russell,  and 
Casey,  with  4383,  have  two — Taylor  and  Boyle, 
with' 2265,  have  two — 2118  difference.  I  could 
go  on,  and  by  reference  to  the  tables  I  have  made 
out,  show  you  that  the  same,  and  perhaps  even 
more  startling  instances  of  injustice  and  ine- 
quality will  be  found  to  exist  m  the  other  dis- 
tricts. But  I  will  not  weary  the  patience  of  the 
house,  by  going  further  with  these  details,  when 
enough  has  been  shown  to  convince  any  reason- 
able man,  that  the  inequalities  are  too  enormous 
to  permit  him  to  establish  them  in  this  constitu- 
tion— that  the  attempt  is  made  to  fix  the  repre- 
sentation upon  territory,  bounded  by  imaginary 
lines,  and  not  upon  the  number  of  voting  popu- 
lation. 

Some  few  weeks  ago  an  effort  was  made  to  throw 
the  representative  strength  of  the  state  from  those 
counties  and  sections  which  have  heretofore,  and 
should  still  possess  it,  on  account  of  the  larger 
amount  of  representative '  population  which 
they  contain,  and  the  immense  amount  of  reve- 
nue which  they  pay,  into  the  smaller  and  poorer 
counties  of  the  state.  It  was  presented  in  the 
garb  of  this  "baby  basis"  as  it  is  called,  making 
women  and  children,  and  not  the  free  white  male 
citizens  over  twenty-one,  the  basis  of  represen- 
tation. It  would  seem  that  the  report  of  the 
committee,  is  but  a  continuation  of  the  same 
plan — an  effort  to  carry  the  power  of  the  state 
from  the  wealthier  and  more  populous  counties 
to  the  poorer  ones,  which  have  been  ascertained 
to  have  a  larger  proportion  of  women  and  chil- 
dren. I  find  under  this  plan,  that  Christian, 
with  2248  voters,  will  lose  a  representative-^that 
the  counties  of  Logan,  Russell,  Nelson,  and 
Bourbon,  will  each  be  deprived  of  a  member  in 
the  legislature — and  that  these  members  will  be 
transferred  to  the  smaller  counties  with  a  less 
proportionate  population.  My  friend  from  Hen- 
ry proposed  the  other  day,  that  territory  and  not 
population  should  bethe  hasisof  representation; 
that  each  county  should  be  entitled  to  a  separate 
representative.  His  plan  was  at  once  rejected 
with  singular  unanimity.  An  effort  was  made 
to  restrict  the  cities,  and  after  a  long  and  fiery 
debate,  this  convention  decided  that  they  could 
deprive  no  portion  of  our  voting  citizens  of  the 
right  to  be  represented.  A  vote  was  taken  on 
yesterday  upon  the  "baby  basis,"  and  the  con- 
vention decided  that  men,  and  not  women  and 
children,  should  be  represented.  An  attempt  is 
again  indirectly  made  by  the  apportionment,  to 
secure,  to  a  great  extent,  these  principles  which 
have  been  rejected — to  transfer  the  power  from 
the  voting  population  into  territoriallimits,  and 
into  the  hanas  of  women  and  children,  and  I 
sincerely  hope  this  indirect  effort  will  meet  with 
the  same  fate  at  the  hands  of  this  convention, 
with  those  more  direct  in  their  objects. 

It  has  been  found  to  be  absolutely  impossible, 
by  any  plan,  to  render  entire  justice  to  every 
part  of  the  state — to  present  a  system  which 
shall  give  to  every  section  the  exact  number  of 
representatives  to  which  it  is  rightfully  entitled. 
This  plan  of  districting  was  suggested  as  a  rem- 
edy to  the  evil.  It  was  supposed  that  by  laying 
oflf  the  state  into  districts,  each  nearly  approxi- 


mating the  others  in  population,  that  though  in 
those  districts  the  counties  might  not  have  their 
proper  representation,  yet  the  same  sectional  in- 
terests would  be  fully  represented.  Certainly, 
if  we  will  look  at  these  districts,  we  will  find 
that  the  different  parts  of  them  are  as  widely 
separated  in  interests,  as  the  remotest  sections 
of  the  state  can  be.  Take  away  the  representa- 
tive from  the  county  of  Christain,  and  transfer 
him  to  Hancock,  and  he  will  no  more  represent 
the  views  and  interests  of  the  people  of  Chris- 
tian, than  he  would  if  transferred  to  Greenup  or 
Fulton.  By  this  plan  of  the  committee,  a  great 
gain  will  accrue  to  the  northern  districts  at  the 
expense  of  the  southern.  No  provision  is  made 
for  future  alleviation.  The  districts  are  made 
permanent,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  evils 
now  great,  will  increase  as  the  country  grows. 

I  much  prefer  the  plan  proposed  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  Logan.  I  think  that,  as  amended, 
no  great  injustice  can  be  done;  and  that  it  is 
mucli  better  calculated  to  secure  the  rights  of  the 
people,  than  this  ten  district  plan,  which  I  sin- 
cerely hope  will  be  rejected  by  the  convention. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  want  as  a  basis  of  apportion- 
ment, that  principle  adopted,  which  will  secure 
the  nearest  approach  to  equal  justice  to  all  the 
counties  in  the  state,  and  leave  the  least  discre- 
tionary power  to  the  legislature.  A  great  abuse 
heretofore,  in  relation  to  the  subject  of  appor- 
tionment, has  been,  that  the  whole  state  has 
been  a  field  upon  which  to  gerrymander.  I  think 
a  remedy  may  be  applied  by  taking  a  part  of  the 
project  of  the  honorable  gentleman  from  Mont- 
gomery. If  you  make  ten  districts,  and  make 
no  apportionment,  but  leave  it  for  the  legisla- 
ture, it  seems  to  me  that  such  a  system  would 
work  pretty  well,  because  the  gerrj'mandering 
must  he  on  a  small  scale  if  done  at  all,  being 
limited  to  each  district.  Then  let  the  first  ap- 
portionment be  made  agreeably  to  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Montgomery.  This 
will  prevent  the  inequality  pointed  out  by  the 
gentleman  from  Christian. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  want  to  say  a  word  to 
the  younger  gentleman  from  Christian.  He 
seems  much  alarmed  with  the  committee's  re- 
port on  the  apportionment.  The  one  introdu- 
ced by  the  gentleman  from  Logan  he  approves. 
Let  us  see  how  it  works. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  did  not  state  that  the  propo- 
sition of  the  gentleman  from  Logan  met  my  ap- 
probation, but  that  I  preferred  it  to  the  report  of 
the  committee. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  want  to  go  on  and  see  if 
I  could  do  worse  than  that  proposition  would 
do.  The  first  county  the  gentleman  takes  in  his 
fault-finding  of  the  committee's  report  is  Cald- 
well. He  says  Caldwell  has  but  one,  and  Crit- 
tenden would  have  one  ;  and  yet  she  has  only 
half  as  many  voters  as  Caldwell.  How  would 
it  be  under  the  amendment  which  he  advocates? 
Just  as  the  report  of  the  committee  would  make 
it.  Caldwell  one,  Crittenden  one.  This  ground 
of  his  complaint  is  therefore  unfounded.  The 
old  ratio  fixed  it  the  same  way.  But  this  is  the 
gentleman's  first  illustration.  I  can  tell  you 
where  the  shoe  pinches.  It  is  the  principle  of 
taking  away  from  the  large  counties.  The  gen- 
tleman has  been  but  little  in  legislative  bodies, 
or  else  he  would  not  have  talked  about  sweeping 


969 


away  the  representation  from  the  counties 
Trhere  the  xrealth  is.  Woodford  pays  annually 
into  the  treasury,  upwards  of  $2,000  more  than 
Christian.  If  wealth  is  to  receive  representa- 
tion, and  not  voters,  why  not  go  to  Woodford 
instead  of  Christian?  Christian  with  2,138  vo- 
ters will  get,  he  says,  but  one  member,  accord- 
ing to  the  report,  and  yet  the  small  county  of 
Hancock  will  get  one.  The  county  of  Hancock 
is  a  solitary  instance,  when  you  take  the  whole 
state,  thereis  no  other  county  similarly  situated. 
If  he  insist  that  Christian  shall  have  two,  Da- 
viess and  Hancock  will  get  but  one,  yet  their 
united  vote — and  they  are  adjacent — is  nearly 
2,500.  Suppose  you  allow  Christian  to  have 
one,  it  is  ail  she  ever  will  get  unless  Daviess 
and  Hancock  should  have  two.  If  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  Logan  shoula  be 
adopted,  with  the  provisos  of  the  gentleman 
from  Madison  added,  you  will  find  that  Chris- 
tian is  cut  down  to  one  representative.  Is  it  not 
more  equitable  that  Daviess  and  Hancock  with 
2,500  voters  should  have  two,  rather  than  Chris- 
tian. Grayson  with  1,127  voters  has  a  member. 
Is  there  any  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  gen- 
tleman to  take  away  that  one  from  Grayson  and 
give  it  to  Christian? 

Let  us  see  what  the  other  gentleman  from 
Christian  says.  He  selects  some  counties  which 
he  supposes  will  have  too  great  a  representation, 
and  contrasts  them  with  some  which  he  says 
will  have  too  small  a  representation.  Let  me 
call  the  attention  of  gentlemen  to  the  apportion- 
ment as  it  now  stands  under  the  present  consti- 
tution, and  which  the  elder  gentleman  from 
Christian  advocates  above  all  others.  Five  coun- 
ties to-wit:  Bourbon,  Harrison,  Logan,  Christian, 
and  Nelson,  with  nine  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  ninety  two  voters  have  ten  representatives, 
and  five  other  counties  to-wit:  Mercer,  Pu la.sk i, 
Warren,  Daviess,  and  Caldwell,  with  ten  thou- 
sand three  hundred  and  forty-four  voters  have 
only  five  representatives.  This  is  the  apportion- 
ment which  suits  my  friend,  but  can  any  thing 
be  more  unequal  than  this?  The  five  latter 
counties  have  three  hundred  and  fifty  voters 
more  than  the  five  former,  and  vet  have  only  one 
half  the  number  of  representatives. 

The  gentleman  from  Bourbon  suggests  that  we 
lay  off  the  state  into  ten  districts  without  adopt- 
ing any  other  principle,  and  leave  the  legislature 
to  make  the  apportionment.  So  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned, I  have  no  objection  to  this  proposition. 
The  committee  believed  it  best  to  lay  off  districts 
and  then  to  lay  down  certain  principles  for  the 
action  of  the  legislature,  so  that  they  would 
have  no  discretionary  power  in  making  an  equi- 
table and  fair  apportionment.  When  I  asked 
what  would  be  done  with  Hancock,  according  to 
the  proviso  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  I 
was  told  it  would  be  joined  to  some  other  coun- 
ty, and  the  two  counties  together  would  have 
two  repre.sentatives ;  but  upon  an  examination 
of  the  proviso  there  is  no  such  provision  what- 
ever— indeed  there  is  no  provision  for  the  union 
of  two  counties  to  send  two  representatives.  I 
want  to  call  attention  to  the  effect  of  putting 
counties  entitled  to  one  representative  into  one 
class,  and  those  entitled  to  two  into  another 
class.  Take  Christian  with  two  thousand  one 
hundred  and  thirty  eight  voters,  and  Taylor  with 
122 


one  thousand  and  forty  Reven.  There  is  to  be 
no  comparison  between  Taylor  and  Christian, 
according  to  the  proviso  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison,  because  Christian  is  a  competitor  for 
two  representatives,  and  Taylor  for  but  one; 
and  there  is  to  be  no  competition  except  be- 
tween the  large  counties  belonging  to  one  class 
among  themselves.  The  small  counties  of  the 
other  class  may  compete  among  themselves. 
The  effect  may  be  that  two  thousand  two  hun- 
dred voters  can  get  two  representatives,  when  a 
small  county  with  one  thousand  cannot  get  one. 
Under  the  system  proposed  by  the  committee, 
the  county  having  one  thousand  Voters  will  have 
a  representative  before  the  other  can  get  two. 
The  county  with  nine  hundred  will  get  one 
sooner  than  the  county  with  two  thousand  two 
hundred  will  get  two,  because  nine  hundred  is 
greater  than  the  residuum  of  the  large  county 
over  the  ratio — the  ratio  being  one  thousand  four 
hundred  and  sixteen.  The  county  of  Montgom- 
ery which  I  represent,  will  not  be  affected  by 
any  proposition,  for  she  has  just  the  ratio.  But 
it  seems  to  me  the  smaller  counties  are  deserving 
of  something  at  our  hands  which  I  would  be 
glad  to  give  them.  I  will  only  add,  with  re- 
spect to  the  report  of  the  committee,  that  we  laid 
down  certain  principles  from  which  the  legisla- 
ture could  not  depart.  If  the  state  should  be 
divided  into  four  districts,  which  I  believe  to  be 
the  best,  I  acknowledge  there  will  be  less  oppor- 
tunity for  the  evils  which  hare  been  complain- 
ed of. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  think  the  proposition  of 
the  gentleman  from  Madison  is  the  most  just 
which  has  been  presented,  and  I  intend  to  go 
for  it.  Many  counties  have  two  repre-sentatives 
with  less  voters  than  others  have  which  have 
but  one.  I  think  this  will  prevent  anything  of 
that  sort. 

Mr.  DESHA.  It  is  not  my  purpose  to  inflict 
upon  the  house  a  speech  at  this  late  period;  and 
if  I  were  inclined  to  do  it,  the  fact  that  I  witness 
inattention  to  the  speeches  which  have  been  made 
for  some  days  past,  would  prevent  me  from  ma- 
king the  attempt.  But  having  submitted  the 
plan  of  ten  districts,  and  having  been  a  member 
of  the  select  committee  whicn  reported  this 
back  to  the  convention,  I  feel  that  I  should  say 
something  of  the  motives  which  influenced  me 
in  submitting  this  plan. 

Much  has  been  said  by  both  of  the  gentlemen 
from  Christian,  as  to  the  injustice  of  this  report. 
I  have  endeavored  to  divest  myself  of  preju- 
dice, and  they  have  failed  to  convince  me  that 
the  system  we  propose  will  operate  unjustlv;  but 
on  the  contrary',  it  is  my  opinion  that  it  will  op- 
erate more  justly  than  any  other  which  has  been 
presented.  What  does  it  propose  ?  It  lays  oflF 
the  state  into  ten  districts.  The  gentleman  from 
Logan  seemed  to  insinuate  that  political  motives 
may  have  governed  the  committee  and  those  who 
favor  this  report. 

I  wish  to  say  that  when  I  came  here,  I  dives- 
ted myself  of  political  prejudices.  I  came  not 
to  represent  one  party,  but  both  ;  and  I  regretted 
to  hear  the  terms  democrat  and  whig  uttered  in 
this  hall,  as  often  as  they  have  been.  I  should 
consider  myself  unworthy  of  a  seat  here,  if  I  could 
be  influenced  by  such  motives.  I  have  seen  the 
system  of  gerrymandering  carried  on  in  this 


wm 


state,  and  in  other  states,  so  much,  that  my  at- 
tention was  called  to  the  qu<;stion,  whether  we 
could  not  prevent  it.  I  do  not  say  that  the  party 
in  power  for  many  years  past,  have  done  it,  more 
than  their  adversaries  would  liavc  done,  if  they 
had  been  in  power.  It  is  far  from  me  to  say  so. 
The  object  is  not  to  inquire  what  party  may  have 
a  majority  in  the  legislature,  but  to  secure  the 
best  method  of  apportioniaeHt  to  each  county. 

So  far  as  this  report  respects  ray  county,  it  is 
a  proof  that  I  had  no  selfish  object  in  view. 
Harrison  has  a  large  residuam,  anci  if  this  report 
is  adopted,  she  will  be  shoni  of  one  memDer. 
When  I  first  proposed  the  plan  often  districts, 
with  a  view  that  Harrison  should  retain  her 
member,  I  presented  the  district  system  in  a  dif- 
ferent form.  I  proposed  that  Carroll  should 
be  thrown  to  the  seveaith  district,  for  Carroll 
and  Gallatin  have  always  been  united,  and 
sent  one  member.  The  vote  of  the  two  counties 
is  only  a  little  above  the  ratio.  Carroll  was 
struck  off  a  short  time  since,  and  the  two  togeth- 
er, had  one  representative.  I  put  them  togeth- 
er, because  they  would  be  nearer  on  an  equality. 
I  am  not  particularly  anxious  about  this  plan.  If 
a  better  plan,  one  which  will  secure  to  all  parts 
of  the  state,  a  fair  aud  Just  system  of  apportion- 
ment can  be  presented,!  will  vote  for  it.  But  it 
will  have  yet  to  be  presented. 

The  gentlemen  from  Christian,  deal  in  the 
terms  abominable,  unjust,  and  other  opprobrious 
epithets  as  applied  to  this  report.  If  it  secured 
to  the  county  of  Christian,  two  members,  I  pre- 
sume it  would  not  have  been  so  atboniinable  and 
unjust.  The  position  of  Hancock  is  a  peculiar 
one.  It  is  bounded  on  one  side  by  the  Ohio  riv- 
er, and  is  adjacent  to  three  counties,  all  of  Avhieh 
have  a  ratio,  and  more  than  the  ratio.  We  pro- 
vided especially  for  Hancock,  and  I  would  sug- 
gest that  there  he  a  provision  so  that  where  a 
county  is  situated  as  Hancock  is,  having  less 
than  the  ratio,  and  surrounded  by  counties  hav- 
ing the  ratio,  it  could  be  joined  to  one  having 
more  than  the  ratio. 

I  think  the  amendmeaat  of  ike  gentleman  from 
Logan,  as  amended  by  the  gentl^enian  from  Mad- 
ison, is  worse  than  theald constitution,  because 
they  did  occa.sionally  place  residuums  near  the 
place  whence  they  were  drawn.  I  do  »ot  think 
that  plfin  practicable,  but  if  it  is,  I  consider  it 
worse  than  the  old  constitution.  I  have  taken 
five  counties  different  from  those  selected  by  the 
gentleman  from  Montgomery,  and  having  a  vot- 
ing population  of  9,208,  and  having  six  mem- 
bers, making  a  ratio  of  1,524  to  a  representative. 
Five  others  with  a  voting  population  of  11,608 
have  nine  members,  with  an  average  ratio  of 
1,289.  Is  this  just?  Will  it  be  just?  I  call  at- 
tention to  the  question,  whether,  when  different 
sections,  having  different  and  antagonistical  in- 
terests upon  a  particular  issue,  are  affected, 
you  will  not,  by  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Logan,  take  residuums  and  give  thera 
to  sections,  which  are  not  entitled  to  them  ac- 
cording to  their  numb(;r8. 

The  plan  proposed  by  the  committee  sets  out 
with  tne  proposition  that  each  portion  shall 
have  the  representatives  to  which  it  is  entitled, 
and  I  prefer  the  report  of  the  select  committee, 
to  the  suggestion  of  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon, notwitbstaudiut;  it  may  shear  Uarxison  of 


a  member,  still  as  I  believe  I  represent  a  ju.st 
people,  if  I  cannot  get  a  better  system,  I  shall 
vote  for  the  report  of  the  committee  as  it  is. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  would  not  speak  again  on 
this  subject,  but  for  the  remarks  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbou.  Madison  county  is  not  in- 
terested, and  I  say  this  proposition  will  bring 
about  more  justice  than  any  otlier,  which  has 
been  presented.  The  gentleman  from  Logan  pro- 
posed to  take  the  old  constitution.  I  proposed 
to  add  to  it  the  principle  of  taking  residuums 
and  giving  first  to  the  smaller  counties  and  go- 
ing through  with  them.  His  proposition  would 
give  two  representatives  to  a  county,  while 
some  oth.er  counties  had  but  one.  I  only  say 
that  the  larger  of  two  small  counties  should  have 
the  representative  instead  of  the  smaller  of  the 
two,  and  I  say  the  same  as  to  the  large  counties 
which  are  entitled  to  two  representatives.  Where 
is  the  injustice  of  this.  I  nave  seen  in  rolling 
residuums  every  injustice  done,  and  the  propo- 
sition I  brought  forward  was  presented  to  pre- 
vent the  power  of  doing  injustice  to  a  minority. 

As  respects  dividing  the  state  into  ten  dis- 
tricts, you  will,  if  that  is  done,  have  to  carry 
residuras,  and  there  will  be  the  same  difficulty 
there  was  under  the  old  constitution,  and  the 
smaller  counties  may  get  a  representative,  when 
the  larger  does  not,  and  the  larger  will  get  two 
sometimes  when  the  smaller  does  not  get  any. 
This  is  not  justice.  Any  principle  which  will 
give  a  small  county  a  representative  when  a 
large  one  has  not  any  is  a  violation  of  justice, 
and  any  principle  that  will  give  two  represen- 
tatives, when  another  county  having  a  hundred 
more,  only  gets  one,  is  injustice.  But  the  principle 
reported  Dy  the  committee  brings  about  this  ra- 
sult.  It  is  admitted  tliat  it  does  it,  and  there  is 
no  opportunity  to  correct  it,  for  you  fix  it  in  the 
constitution.  According  to  my  proposition,  if 
there  is  injustice  you  may  go  over  it  again  and 
correct  it.  If  any  gentleman  can  prove  that  to 
be  unjust,  he  can  out  cypher  me. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  I  dislike  to  trespass  upon 
the  time  of  the  convention,  but  the  remarks  of 
the  gentleman  from  Madison  makes  it  my  duty 
to  say  a  few  words.  The  gentleman  says,  he  is 
fond  of  sm.ill  counties,  aiwl  in  making  that  as- 
sertion I  have  not  the  least  hesitation  in  saying 
he  has  spoken  the  trutJa.  His  amendment,  so 
far  as  it  is  intended  to  operate,  proves  conclu- 
sivel}'  that  he  is.  But,  as  a  friend  of  small 
counties,  and  is  one  representin-g  three  on  this 
floor,  I  trust  «ny  friend  from  Madison  will  let 
me  say  a  word  in  defence  of  small  counties. 
Tie  operation  of  his  proviso  is  decidedly  worse 
than  tlie  old  constitution,  on  small  counties. 
In  the  congressional  district  in  which  I  reside, 
there  are  twelve  counties,  represented  on  this 
floor  by  five  members,  they  having  at  one  time 
enough  for  .six.  Take  the  old  constitution  as  it 
is,  and  you  can  hope  for  nothing  better;  but 
take  it  with  the  proviso  of  the  gentleman  from 
Madison,  and  I  unhesitatingly  say  it  would  be 
much  worse.  Work  out  the  first  proposition  of 
the  gentleman's  proviso,  and  you  take  from  Liv- 
ington  one  member  and  give  it  to  Morgan.  Liv- 
ingston then  would  go  to  Crittenden  with  per- 
fect propriety.  But  what  becomes  <rf  Breathitt? 
You  may  add  it  to  Estill  and  Owsley,  or  you 
may  add  it  to  Clay,  Letcher  and  rucry.     That  is 


0^r 


the  first  proposition.  An^yoii  til^  tlTingstfw 
because  it  is  the  smallest  county  under  tlie  pre- 
sent apportionment,  and  I  take  it  if  you  roll  tlie 
residuums,  it  will  be  hereafter  as  it  was  beftwe. 

Mr.  TURNER.  My  propositioo  does  not  in- 
terfere with  the  counties  that  arc  too  small  for  a 
representative. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  The  explanation  is  the 
same  as  the  gentleman  gave  in  relation  to  Han- 
cock. The  county  of  Harlan,  under  the  work- 
ing of  his  amendment,  must  go  to  the  counties 
of  Clay,  Perry,  and  LettUer,  or  Tennessee,  or 
Virginia.  The  gentleman  can  fix  it  aes  he  plea- 
ses. 

Mr.  MAYES.  It  seems  to  me,  from  the  re- 
marks of  many  gentlemen  wJio  have  discussed 
this  propasition,  that  they  have  mistaken,  ornot 
comprehended  it  correctly.  We  are  endeavor- 
ing to  settle  the  principle  by  which  the  appor- 
tionment shall  hereafter  be  made.  Gentlemen 
have  spoken  of  their  own  counties,  and  sho'wn 
the  position  in  which  they  would  be  placed,,  the 
object  of  all  of  us  being  to  arrive  at,  and  do  jms- 
tice  to,  the  whole  state. 

I  thought  the  proposition  of  the  gentleman 
from  Trigg,  to  lay  off  the  state  into  districts, 
would  be  l>etter  calculated  to  do  justice  to  both 
the  large  and  small  counties  than  any  otlier 
proposition  that  has  been  offered.  I  have  lis- 
tened witli  a  great  deal  of  attention  to  the  de- 
bates on  this  question,  and  I  have  been  trying 
to  make  up  my  mind  in  regard  to  the  plan  we 
ought  to  adopt  If  the  state  be  laid  off  into  tea 
or  twelve  districts,  I  am  not  convinced  that  i»- 
justice  will  grow  out  of  that  system.  On  the 
contrary,  it  appears  to  me,  we  can  arrive  More 
nearly  at  justice,  taking  the  whole  state  into 
view,  than  by  anv  other  principle  of  apptHlion- 
nient.  The  re.si.fuum  of  one  county  in  a  district 
ought  to  be  taken  to  the  next  county  within  the 
district.  Xo  injury  can  grow  out  of  it.  I  in- 
tend to  vote  for  the  district  principle,  and  I  do 
not  think  a  better  plan  can  be  devised.  It  does 
seem  to  me  that  the  question  has  been  sufficient- 
ly debated,  and  that  gentlemen  have  made  up 
their  minds  upon  it.  1  should  be  glad  if  it  were 
settled. 

Mr.  IRWIX.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  district 
system.  If  it  is  adopted  in  lieu  of  the  report  of 
the  select  committee,  I  will  try  to  get  up  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  modification  of  the  report 
of  the  committee,  I  propose,  is  as  follows : 

"  The  number  of  representatives  to  which 
each  district  may  be  entitled,  shall  be  appor- 
tioned among  the  counties  in  such  district  ac- 
cording to  the  voting  population,  as  near  as  may 
be:  Provided,  That  when  any  county  may  be  en- 
titled to  a  representative,  and  shall  have  a  re- 
siduum of  two-fifths,  and  may  adjoin  a  county 
not  having  three-fourths  of  the  ratio,  such  large 
county  and  the  small  one  shall,  together,  be  en- 
titled to  elect  a  representative." 

Every  gentleman  will  seethe  effect  and  opera- 
tion of  such  a  provision.  For  instance,  if  Han- 
cock adjoins  a  county  in  a  district  whose  voting 
population  entitles  the  county  to  one  represen- 
tative, and  if  there  is  a  residuum  of  two-fifths 
over  in  the  large  county,  Hancock  and  the  large 
county  shall  elect  a  second  representative.  If 
Hancock  shall  not  have  this,  concession  should 


jbemeiile  ^Iftie' small  county,  which  shall  enli- 
I  tie  it  to  a  representative.  Here  are  the  counties 
of  Beurbon,  Scott,  and  Owen,  each  of  which 
j  will  Jiave  a  considerable  residuum,  and  their  ag- 
gregate residuum  would  entitle  them  to  a  fourtn 
representative.  There  would  be  nothing  in  this 
bill  wliich  would  prevent  the  legislature  from 
directing  that  these  three  counties  might  consti- 
tute a  district  to  elect  a  fourth  representative. 
I  tlkink  in  this  way  ju.stice  will  be  better  ob- 
tained, and  there  will  be  less  chance  for  juggling 
and  gerrymandering,  for  I  believe  the  terms  are 
synonymous. 

'Mr.  TRIPLETT.  Hancock,  which  lies  ad- 
joining Daviess,  seems  to  have  caused  more  dif- 
ficulty than  anv  other  county  in  the  state.  But 
there  is  little  difficulty  when  you  come  to  reflect 
upon  it.  Suppose  you  were  a  citizen  of  Han- 
cock, you  would  ask  yourself,  would  I  prefer  to 
be  added  to  Ohio,  and  let  the  two  counties  have 
one  representative,  or  be  added  to  Daviess,  and 
let  the  two  counties  have  two  representatives? 
If  you  add  Hancock  and  Daviess  together,  thej 
will  have  two  representatives,  but  if  Hancock  is 
added  to  Ohio,  they  will  together  be  entitled  to 
only  one. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  You  cannot  devise  any  system 
but  what  there  must  be  some  discretion  left  to 
the  legislature.  And  when  you  a.«certain  the 
principle  which  operates  as  near  as  may  be  ac- 
cording to  equal  numbers,  that  principle  would 
join  Hancock  to  Daviess. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT-  There  is  no  question  about 
that,  and  there  is  no  great  difficulty  about  it  if 
you  will  establish  a  principle  and  let  it  alone. 
The  difiiculty  is,  tliat  when  you  have  establish- 
ed one  principle  and  attempt  to  establish  a 
second,  you  destroy  the  first.  Now  establish 
the  principle  that  numbers  are  to  be  represented, 
and  never  depart  from  it,  and  where  do  you  ar- 
rive? Whereas  Daviess  and  Hancock  together 
will  be  entitled  to  two  representatives;  if  Han- 
cock is  added  to  Ohio,  you  will  have  a  large  re- 
siduum. Why?  Because  Ohio  has  a  residuum 
without  Hancock.  When  Hancock  is  added  to 
Ohio,  what  has  Ohio  gained,  and  what  has  Han- 
cock gained?  Nothing?  Because  Ohio  was 
strong  enough  without  Hancock,  and  do  not  give 
another  representative.  But  if  added  to  Da- 
viess it  makes  these  two  counties  rich  enough  to 
claim  two  representatives,  therefore  the  princi- 
ple contended  for  by  my  friend  from  Bourbon 
IS  carried  out  in  letter  and  in  principle.  There 
you  do  not  leave  it  to  the  legislative  discre- 
tion, because  you  fix  it  in  the  constitution  that 
Hancock  must  be  added  to  Daviess,  and  that 
those  added  together  must  be  entitled  to  two 
representatives.  It  is  a  principle  just  in  itself, 
and  the  question  is,  would  Hancock  object  to  it? 
Surely  she  ought  to  be  heard.  Do  you  believe 
that  if  you  lived  there  you  would  object  to  it? 
Then  it  is  right  it  should  be  so.  Then  apply- 
ing the  same  principle  of  reasoning  whicn  is 
applied  to  Daviess  and  Hancock  ou^ht  to  make 
other  parts  of  the  state  agree  to  it,  and  the  princi- 
ple being  right  in  itself,  ought  to  make  us  adopt  it 
in  the  constitution.  I  think  if  we  establish  the 
principle  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
Don,  it  will  be  one  that  nobody  ought  to  object 
to,  and  that  nobody  will  object  to. 

Mr.  GAITHER.    I  rise  to  give  notice  that  I 


972 


shall  move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  by 
which  the  fifth  section  of  the  report  on  the  legis- 
lative department  was  adopted. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  adoption 
of  the  amendment  of  Mr.  IRWIN,  as  modified 
by  the  proviso  of  Mr.  TURNER. 

The  yeas  and  nays  being  demanded  by  Mr. 
IRWIN,  there  were,  yeas  29,  nays  59. 

Yeas— John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bow- 
ling, Francis  M  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Wm.  Chenault,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford 
Elliott,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  George 
W.  Johnston,  Thos.  N.  Lindsey,Thos.  W.  Lisle, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm.  C.  Marshall,  William 
N.  Marshall,  John  D.  Morris,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  Jas.  Rudd, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Andrew  S.  White,  Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Geo. 
W.  Williams— 29. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

gerson,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
radley,  Luther  Brawner,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cow- 

Jer,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  De.sha, 
ames  Dudley,  Benj.  F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Jas.  H. 
Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Wm.  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavauaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Richard 
L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Larkin  J  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  Jas.  vV.  Stone,  Michael 
L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Tavlor,  Wm.  R.  Thompson, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L. 
Waller,  Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Rob- 
ert N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 59. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  will  oflfer  as  an  amendment  to 
the  report  of  the  select  committee,  of  which  the 
gentleman  from  Montgomery  is  chairman,  the 
following,  to  be  added  after  the  naming  of  the 
di.stricts  in  the  original  report : 

"The  number  of  representatives  to  which  each 
district  may  be  entitled,  shall  be  apportioned 
among  the  counties  in  such  district  according  to 
the  voting  population  as  near  as  may  be:  Provi- 
ded, that  when  any  county  may  be  entitled  to  a 
representative  and  shall  have  a  residuum  of  two- 
fifths  and  may  adjoin  a  county  not  having  three- 
fourths  of  the  ratio,  such  large  county  and  the 
small  one,  shall,  together,  be  entitled  to  elect  a 
representative." 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON.  I  do  not  think  the  gen- 
tleman from  Bourbon  understands  the  eflfect  of 
his  amendment.  According  to  this  proposition, 
Daviess  will  have  the  sole  right  to  elect  one  rep- 
resentative, and  a  portion  of  the  right  in  elect- 
ing a  second.  Will  any  one  contend  that  this 
is  right? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  exactly  what  I  want; 
that  a  county  entitled  to  one  representative  shall 
have  her  separate  representative;  that  the  small 
county  having  three-fourths  of  the  ratio,  shall 


herself  have  a  representative;  but  when  there  is 
a  larger  county  having  a  ratio  and  two-fifths 
and  joins  a  county  not  having  three-fourths, 
that  the  two  shall  oe  thrown  together,  and  the 
second  representative  shall  be  elected  by  a  com- 
mon vote.  Suppose  Hancock  has  a  whig  ma- 
jority almost  unanimous;  and  suppose  the  vote 
of  Daviess  is  such,  that  by  adding  Hancock, 
she  would  control  the  election  of  both  represen- 
tatives, would  it  be  just  tliat  Hancock,  with  her 
small  vote  but  large  majority  in  a  party  point  of 
view,  should  have  the  right  to  control  the  entire 
vote  of  both  counties?  Can  there  be  any  objec- 
tion that  every  full  ratio  shall  elect  a  separate 
representative?  And  can  there  be  any  objection 
if  she  has  over  a  ratio,  to  uniting  that  ratio  with 
Hancock,  and  allowing  Hancock  and  that  resid- 
uum to  be  thrown  together  and  elect  a  repre- 
sentative? 

Mr.  W.  JOHNSON.  I  have  waited  for  an  ex- 
planation, and  what  is  it?  That  the  people  of 
Daviess  shall  elect  by  themselves  a  representa- 
tive without  the  assistance  of  Hancock,  and  that 
then  the  people  of  Daviess  shall  vote  with  Han- 
cock for  another  representative.  In  that  case, 
the  people  of  Daviess  vote  twice,  and  the  peo- 
ple of  Hancock  but  once,  and  that  in  company 
with  a  county  which  has  a  much  larger  number 
of  voters.  Would  it  not  be  as  well  to  put  Han- 
cock over  into  Indiana?  Surely  that  principle 
will  not  be  adopted  here.  Every  part  of  the 
community  should  have  equal  rights  and  privi- 
leges. This  would  be  a  palpable  violation  of 
that  principle. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  adoption 
of  tlie  amendment,  and  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  LACKEY.  I  will  offer  the  following  as 
a  substitute  for  the  sixth  section  of  the  report  of 
the  select  committee : 

"That  the  representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  for- 
ever regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of 
representative  inhabitants  therein.  At  the  first 
session  of  the  general  assembly  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  and  every  four  years 
thereafter,  provision  shall  be  made  by  law  that 
in  the  year ,  and  every  four  years  there- 
after, an  enumeration  of  all  the  representative 
inhabitants  of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The 
number  of  representatives  shall  be  one  hun- 
dred, and  apportioned  among  the  several  coun- 
ties in  the  following  manner:  Counties  having 
the  ratio  shall  have  one  representative;  those 
having  three  fourths  of  the  ratio  .shall  have  one 
representative;  those  having  the  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  less  than  one  half  tlie  ratio  over,  shall 
have  but  one  representative;  those  having  the 
ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  one  half  over,  shall  nave 
two  represenatives;  those  having  twice  the  ra- 
tio, shall  have  two  representatives;  those  hav- 
ing twice  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  less  than 
one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have  but  two  repre- 
sentatives: those  having  twice  the  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  of  one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  liave 
three  representatives;  and  so  on.  Counties  hav- 
ing less  than  three  fourths  of  the  ratio,  shall  be 
joined  to  a  similar  adjacent  county,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  forming  a  representative  district:  Proti- 
ded,  that  if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county, 
then  the  county  having  less  than  three  fourths 
of  the  ratio  shall  be  united  with  tliat  adjacent 


973 


county  having  the  smallest  number  of  represen- 
tative inhabitants,  provided  that  their  united 
numbers  do  not  exceed  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction 
of  one  half  the  ratio  over;  but  if  they  do,  the 
county  having  less  than  three  fourths  of  the 
ratio  shall  have  a  separate  representative.  The 
remainining  representatives,  (if  any,)  shall  be 
allotted  to  those  counties  having  the  largest  un- 
represented fractions;  but  in  no  case  shall  more 
than  two  counties  be  united  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  a  representative  district;  but  if  there 
shall  ever  be  an  excess  of  districts,  they  shall  be 
reduced  to  the  proper  number,  by  taking  from 
those  counties  naving  a  separate  representative, 
with  the  smallest  number  of  representative  in- 
habitants, their  separate  representation." 

The  question  being  taken  on  the  adoption  of 
the  substitute,  it  was  rejected. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  move  a  reconsideration  of  the 
vote  by  which  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman 
from  Logan  was  rejected. 

The  question  on  reconsidering  was  taken,  and 
the  convention  refused  to  reconsider. 

Mr.  BOYD.  I  will  offer  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  that  part  of  the  sixth  section  of 
the  report  of  the  select  committee,  which  is  now 
pending: 

"  The  house  of  representatives  shall  consist 
of  one  hundred  members,  and  to  secure  uniform- 
ity and  equality  of  representation  as  aforesaid, 
the  state  shall  be  districted  into  twelve  districts. 

First  District — Fulton,  Hickman,  Graves,  Bal- 
lard, McCracken,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Living- 
ston. 

Second  District — Trigg,  Christian,  Caldwell, 
Crittenden,  Union,  Henderson,  Hopkins. 

Third  District — Daviess,  Ohio,  Hancock, 
Grayson,  Breckinridge,  Hart,  Larue,  Hardin, 
Meade. 

Fourth  District — Todd,  Muhlenburg,  Logan, 
Simpson,  Allen,  Warren,  Butler,  Edmonson. 

Fifth  District — Monroe,  Barren,  Cumberland, 
Clinton,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor,  Casey,  Russell. 

Sixth  District — Jefferson 'Bullitt,  J»  elson,  Shel- 
by, Spencer,  Washington,  Marion. 

Seventh  District — Oldham,  Trimble,  Henry, 
Franklin,  Owen,  Carroll,  Gallatin,  Grant, 
Boone. 

Eighth  District — Scott,  Harrison,  Pendleton, 
Kenton,  Campbell,  Nicholas,  Mason,  Bracken. 

Ninth  District — Lewis,  Fleming,  Bath,  Mont- 
gomery, Morgan,  Greenup,  Lawrence,  Carter. 

Tenth  District — Fayette,  Woodford,  Bourbon, 
Clarke,  Jessamine,  Anderson,  Mercer,  Boyle. 

Eleventh  District — Madison,  Garrard,  Lincoln, 
Hockcastle,  Laurel,  Pulaski,  Whitley,  Wavne. 

Twelfth  Disirict — Estill,  Owsley,  Clay, "Perry, 
Letcher,  Floyd,  Breathitt,  Johnson,  Pike,  Knox, 
Harlan. 

When  a  new  county  shall  be  formed  of  terri- 
tory belonging  to  more  than  one  district,  that 
county  shall  be  added  to,  and  form  a  part  of  the 
district  out  of  which  the  largest  amount  of  ter- 
ritory was  taken  to  form  such  new  county. 

In  the  year  ,  and  every  year 

thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified 
electors  of  the  state  shall  be  made,  in  such  man- 
ner as  shall  be  directed  by  law. 

In  the  several  years  of  making  such  enumera- 
tion, each  district  shall  be  entitled  to  representa- 
tives equal  to  the  uumber  of  times  the  ratio  is 


contained  in  the  whole  number  of  qualified 
electors  in  said  districts:  Provided,  That  the  re- 
maining representatives,  after  making  sueh  ap- 
Eortionment,  shall  be  given  to  those  districts 
aving  the  largest  unrepresented  fractions. 

Representatives  to  which  each  district  may  be 
entitled  shall  be  apportioned  among  the  several 
counties,  cities,  and  towns  of  the  district,  as 
near  as  may  be,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
qualified  electors;  but  when  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  qualified'electors  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and  when  the  ad- 
jacent county  or  counties,  within  the  district, 
may  not  have  a  residuum  or  residuums,  which, 
when  added  to  the  small  county,  would  entitle  it 
to  a  separate  representation,  it  shall  then  be  in 
the  power  of  the  legislature  to  join  two  or  more 
tv>gether,  for  the  purpose  of  sending  a  represent- 
ative: Provided,  That  when  there  are  two  or 
more  counties  adjoining,  and  in  the  same  dis- 
trict, which  have  residuums  over  and  above  the 
ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when 
added  together,  will  amount  to  such  ratio,  in  that 
case,  one  representative  shall  be  added  to  the 
county  having  the  largest  residuum." 

I  have  but  little  to  say  in  respect  to  that  prop- 
osition. It  varies  but  little  from  the  one 
which  I  had  the  honor  to  present  to  the  conven- 
tion some  weeks  ago.  It  will  be  seen  and  recol- 
lected by  gentlemen,  that  I  leave  the  apportion- 
ment among  the  several  counties  within  the  dis- 
trict, in  accordance  with  the  principles  in  the 
old  constitution,  confining  to  each  district  its 
own  residuums,  so  that  the  legislature  shall  not 
have  power  to  roll  residuums  from  one  district 
to  another.  It  will  be  impossible  under  this 
plan  for  any  great  injustice  to  be  done. 

The  question  being  taken  on  the  adoption  of 
the  substitute,  Mr.  BOYD  demanded  the  yeas 
and  nays,  which  were  yeas  46,  nays  40. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha, 
James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Chailes  C.  Kelly, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  William  N. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  D.  Morris, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira 
Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  Jolin  L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler,  Charles 
A.  Wickliflfe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 46. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas 
D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Cowper, 
Garrett  Davis,  Chasteen  T.  Duuavan,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, James  W.  Irwin,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Nathan  McClure,  David  iferiwether,  Jon- 
athan Newcum,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robin- 
son,   Thos.  Rockhold,    James  Rudd,  Jas.  W. 


974 


Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  How- 
ard Todd,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Geo.  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson — 40. 

So  tlie  substitute  was  adopted. 

The  question  recurred  on  the  adoption  of  the 
substitute  as  a  part  of  the  sixth  section. 

Mr.  TURNER.     I  move  the  previous  question. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

Mr.  WALLER  demanded  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  there  were  yeas  47,  nays  41. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  31.  Bristow,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
William  Ghenault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R. 
D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copeliu,  Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix, 
Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William 
Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanau^h,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  Peter Laslibrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Mar- 
tin P.  Mai-shall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard 
L.  Mayes,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  Newell,  Eli- 
jah F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Philip  Triplett, 
Squire  1  urner,  John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
litte— 47. 

Nays — -Richard  Appersou,  William  K.  Bow- 
ling, Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Browa,  Chas. 
Chambers,  William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Jas. 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Andrew  Hood, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, George  W.  Johnston,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  William 
C.  Marshall,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriweth- 
er, Jonathan  Ncwcum,  William  Preston,  John- 
son Price,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
James  RudJ,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Sto- 
ner,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson, 
John  J,  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  John  L. 
Waller,  Hejjrv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 41. 

So  tlie  section  was  adopted. 

The  convention  then  adjuuraed. 


FRIDAY,  DECEMBER  14,  1849. 

Prayer  by  the  Rev.  SftAur  Robinson. 

ELECTIONS  ANO  RETURNS  OF  OFFICERS  &C. 

Mr.  TURNER  submitted  the  followingsections 
and  on  his  motion  they  were  laid  on  the  table 
and  ordered  to  be  printtid  : 

.<gji;4;.  — .  The  general  assembly  shall  direct, by 
law,  tiie  mode  and  manner  of  conducting  and 
making  due  returns  to  the  secretary  of  state,  of 
the  election  of  attorneys  for  tlie  commonwealth, 
judges  of  the  county  courts,  and  sheriflfs,  and  all 
other  ministerial  and  executive  ofHcers  except 
tkose  hereinafter  specified;  and  shall,  iu  like 


manner,  direct  the  mode  and  manner  of  conduct- 
ing and  making  due  returns  to  the  respective 
county  courts,  of  the  election  of  justices  of  the 
peace,  constables,  coroners,  surveyors,  county 
attorneys,  jailers,  a.ssessors,  and  other  officers, 
whose  duties  shall  be  confined  to  counties,  or 
parts  of  counties,  or  to  towns. 

Sec.  — .  Clerks  of  all  other  courts  shall  be 
proceeded  against  and  removed  from  office  for 
good  cause,  in  the  same  manner  that  is  provided 
for  the  removal  of  the  clerk  of  tlie  court  of  ap- 
peals :  Provided,  That  when  a  vacancy  shall 
occur,  from  any  cause,  or  the  clerk  shall  be 
under  charges,  upon  information,  the  judge 
or  judges  of  the  respective  courts  shall  have 
power  to  appoint  a  clerk  pro  tern.,  to  perforin 
the  duties  of  clerk,  until  such  vacancy  shall 
be  filled,  or  the  clerk  shall  be  acquitted:  And 
provided.  That  the  legislature  shall  provide  for 
the  appointment,  pro  tempore,  of  a  county  as» 
sessor,  in  case  of  a  vacancy. 

LEGISLATIVE   DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  GAITHER,  pursuant  to  notice  heretofore 
given,  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote, 
adopting  the  fifth  section  of  the  report  on  the 
legislative  department,  with  the  view  of  moving 
to  amend  tliat  portion  of  it  in  relation  to  cities. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  to  lay  the  motion  on  the 
table.  At  this  late  period  of  the  session  he  was 
unwilling  to  open  every  question  anew,  which 
had  been  fully  discussed  and  deliberatelv  set- 
tled. 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for  thereon 
and  were  yeas  51,  nays  38. 

Yeas — ^Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  W'illiam 
Ciienault,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cow- 
per, Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  II.  Gar- 
rard, Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Mark 
E.Huston,  James  W.  Invin,  George  W.  John- 
ston, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
wether, Win.  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
JohnD.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  New- 
ell, Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Wm.  Preston,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor.  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  Jas.  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Sp.nlding,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 
R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner, 
John  L.  Waller,  Andr<;w  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  WicklifTe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 51. 

Nays —  John  L.  Ballinger,  Luther  Brawner, 
James  S.  Chriaraan,  Beverlv  L.  Clarke,  Jesse 
Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  l^dward  Curd,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, MiJford Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaitiier,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendri-\,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jack- 
son, Thomas  Jani«s,  William  Johnson,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Willia/n  N.  Marsliall, 
Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Thomas  Rockhohi,  John 
T.  Rogers,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoaer, 
John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett— 38. 


975 


.     So   the   coDTentioQ  laid  the  motion  on  the 
table. 

APPORTIOVJtEXT  OF  REPBESE>TATIOX. 

Mr.  BALLI^GER  gave  notice  of  his  intention 
to  move  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote  by  which 
the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from  Trigg, 
(Mr.  Bovd,)  was  substituted  for  a  part  of  the 
sixth  section  of  the  report  of  the  committee  on 
the  legislative  department. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  to  dispense  with  the 
rule  which  requires  amotion  to  reconsider  to  lie 
over. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  the  vote  was 
reconsidered. 

A  conversation  ensued  on  the  subject  under 
consideration,  which  resulted  in  its  postpone- 
ment to  to-morrow,  and  in  the  mean  lime,  that  the 
following  propositions  which  gentlemen  desired 
to  submit,  should  be  printed: 

Mr.  WOODSOX'S  substitute  for  the  latter 
clause  of  sixth  section  of  tlie  legislative  report. 

"At  the  first  session  of  the  general  assembly 
after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  provision 
shall  be  made  by  law,  that  in  the  year  1658,  and 
every  eighth  year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of 
all  the  representative  population  of  the  state 
shall  be  made.  The  House  of  Representatives 
shall  consist  of  one  hundred  members,  and  to 
secure  uniformity  and  equality  of  representation, 
the  state  is  hereby  laid  oflF  into  ten  districts. 

The  first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Fulton,  Hickman,  Ballard,  McCrack- 
en.  Graves,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Livingston, 
Crittenden, Union,  Hopkins,  Caldwell  and  Trigg. 

The  second  district  shall  be  compo.sed  of  the 
counties  of  Christian,  Muhlenburg,  Henderson, 
Daviess,  Hancock,  Ohio,  Breckinridge,  Meade,  \ 
Grayson,  Butler,  and  Edmonson.  ', 

The  third  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Todd,  Logan,  Simpson,  Warren, 
Allen,  Monroe,  Barren,  and  Hart. 

The  fourth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Cumberland,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor, 
Clinton,  Russell,  Wayne,  Pulaski,  Casey,  Boyle, 
and  Lincoln. 

The  fifth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties    of  Hardin,    Larue,    Bullit,    Spencer, . 
Nelson,  Washington,  Marion,  Mercer,  and  An- 
derson. 

The  sixth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Garrard,  Madison,  Estill,  Owshy, 
Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Clay,  Whitley,  Knox,  Hau:- 
lan,  Peny,  Letcher,  Pike,  Floyd  and  Johnson. 

The  seventh  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Jefferson,  Oldham,  Trimole,  Carroll, 
Henry,  and  Shelby,  and  the  city  of  Louisville. 

The  eighth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Bourbon,    Fayette,    Scott,    Owen, . 
Franklin,  Woodford,  and  tfessamine. 

The  ninth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Clarke,  Montgomery*,  Bath,  Fleming, 
Lewis,  Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  Morgan,  and 
Breathitt. 

The  tenth  district  shall  be  composed   of  the 
counties  of  Mason,  Bracken,  Nicholas,  Harrison, 
Pendleton,  Campbell,  Grant,    Kenton,    Boone,  ■ 
and  Gallatin.  | 

The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the 
several  sessions  of  Uxe  general  assembly,  next 
after    the     making   of  these  enumerations,   be  j 
apportioned    among  the  ten   several   districts,  < 


proportioned  according  to  the  respective  rep- 
resentative population  of  each;  and  the  rep- 
resentatives shall  be  apporti«»ned,  as  near  as 
may  be,  among  the  counties,  towns  and  cities 
in  each  district;  and  in  making  such  appor- 
tionment the  following  rules  shall  govern 
to-wit:  Every  county,  town  or  city  having  the 
ratio,  shall  have  one*  representative;  if  double 
the  ratio,  two  representative.-;,  and  so  on.  Next, 
the  counties,  towns  or  cities  having  one  or  more 
representatives,  and  the  largest  representative 
population  above  the  ratio,  and  counties,  towns, 
ana  cities  having  the  largest  representative  pop- 
ulation under  the  ratio,  regard  oeing  always  had 
to  the  greatest  representative  population :  Pro- 
vided, That  when  a  county  may  not  have  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  representative  population  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  then  such  county 
may  be  joined  to  some  adjacent  county  or  coun- 
ties to  send  one  representative.  When  a  new 
county  shall  be  form<Ki  of  territory  belonging 
to  more  than  one  district,  it  shall  form  a  part  of 
that  district  having  the  least  number  of  repre- 
sentative population." 

Mr.  PRESTON'S  substitute  for  the  latter 
clause  of  the  sixth  section  of  the  legislative  re- 
port. 

"In  the  year  1851,  and  every  eighth  year 
thereafter,  an  enumeration  shall  be  made  of  all 
the  qualified  electors  of  this  commonwealth. 
After  each  enumeration,  representatives  and  sen- 
ators shall  be  apportioned  as  fairly  as  practica- 
ble, among  the  several  counties,  cities,  and 
towns,  of  this  commonwealth,  according  to  the 
number  of  qualified  electors  therein. 

In  making  the  apportionment,  all  counties 
having  less  than  two  thirds  of  the  ratio,  shall 
be  joined  to  such  adjacent  counties  as  will  make 
the  sum  of  their  oleetors  approximate  most  near- 
ly the  ratio.  Af\er  this  is  done,  all  fractions  or 
residuums  shall  b»  apportioned  upon  the  prin- 
ciple of  absorbing  the  smallest  in  the  largest 
fraction,  and  so  on,  successively,  until  the  ap- 
portionment is  completed;  but  no  fraction  shall 
be  attached  to  give  representation  to  any  county 
outside  of  the  appellate  district  in  which  it  ori- 
ginates." 

Mr.  ROGERS'  substitute  for  the  latter  clause 
cf  the  sixth  section  of  tie  legislative  report. 

"  which  shall  be  first  ascertained  in  the  year 
1850.  At  the  first  session  of  the  general'  as- 
sembly, after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution, 
provision  shall  be  made,  by  law,  that  in  the 
}-ear  1858,  and  every  eighth  year  thereafter,  an 
enumeration  of  all  the  qualified  voters  of  the 
state  shall  be  made.  The  house  of  representa- 
tives shall  consist  of  one  hundred  members;  and 
to  secure  uniformity  and  equality  of  representa- 
tion, the  representatives  shall  l>e  apportioned 
amone  the  districts  of  the  court  of  appeals,  in 
proportion  to  the  number  of  qualified  voters  in 
eacn.  In  making  such  apportionment,  the  fol- 
lowing rules  shall  govern,  to-wit:  Every  county, 
town,  or  city,  having  the  ratio,  shall  have  one 
representative,  and  if  double  the  ratio,  two  rep- 
resentatives; and  so  on,  until  the  ratio  is  ex- 
hausted. Next,  the  chanties,  towns,  or  cities, 
having  one  or  more  representatives,  and  the 
largest  number  of  voters  above  the  ratio,  and 
the  counties,  towns,  and  cities,  having  the  larg- 
est number  of  voters  under  the  ntiu,  regard  be- 


970 


ing  always  had  to  the  greatest  number  of  quali- 
ified  voters:  Provided,  That  if  there  should  be 
any  county  not  having  a  sufficient  number  of 
q^ualified  voters  to  entitle  it  to  a  representa- 
tive, it  shall  be  added  to  the  adjoining  county 
having  the  largest  residuums,  provided  that 
said  residuum,  with  the  vote  of  the  added  coun- 
tj'  will  amount  to  two  thirds  of  the  ratio,  in 
which  event  the  two  counties  shall  have  two  or 
more  representatives,  as  the  ease  may  be.  And 
if  the  addition  of  such  county  to  the  county  hav- 
ing the  largest  residuum,  will  not  entitle  said 
two  counties  to  an  additional  representative, 
then  said  county  not  having  a  sufficient  number 
of  qiialified  voters,  shall  be  added  to  the  adjoin- 
ing county  or  counties  having  the  smallest  re- 
siauum,  to  form  a  representative  district." 

Mr.  TURNER'S  substitute  for  the  latter 
clause  of  the  sixth  section  of  the  legislative  re- 
port: 

"Sec.  — .  Representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  for- 
ever regulated  by  the  number  of  qualified  elect- 
ors therein.  In  the  year  and  every  eighth 
year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  free 
male  inhabitants  of  the  state  above  twenty-one 
years  of  age  shall  be  made,  in  such  manner  as 
shall  be  directed  by  law.  The  number  of  rep- 
resentatives shall,  in  the  several  years  of  making 
these  enumerations,  be  so  fixed  as  not  to  be  less 
than  seventy-five,  nor  more  than  one  hundred  ; 
and  they  shall  be  apportioned  for  the  four  years 
next  following,  as  near  as  may  be,  among  the 
several  counties  and  towns  in  proportion  to  the 
number  of  qualified  electors;  out  when  a  coun- 
ty may  not  liave  a  sufficient  number  of  qualified 
electors  to  entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and 
when  the  adjacent  county  or  counties  may  not 
have  a  residuum  orresiduums,  which,  when  add- 
ed to  the  small  county,  would  entitle  it  to  a  sep- 
arate representation,  it  shall  be  in  the  power  of 
the  general  assembly  to  join  two  or  more  togeth- 
er, for  the  purpose  of  sending  a  representative  : 
Provided,  That  when  there  are  two  or  more  coun- 
ties adjoining,  which  have  residuums  over  and 
above  the  ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residu- 
ums, when  added  together,  will  amount  to  such 
ratio,  in  that  ca.se  one  representative  shall  be 
added  to  that  county  having  the  largest  residu- 
um; and  the  general  assembly,  in  making  said 
apportionment,  shall  commence  at  the  county  of 
Greenup:  Provided,  That  no  county  having  a 
less  voting  population  shall  liave  a  separate  rep- 
resentative, when  another  county  having  a  great- 
er number  of  voting  population  has  no  represen- 
tative: Andprovided,  Tiiat  no  county  having  a 
less  population  shall  have  two  representatives, 
■when  another  county  having  a  greater  number  of 
voting  population  has  but  one  representative." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE'S  substitute  for  the 
latter  clause  of  the  sixth  section  of  the  legisla- 
tive report. 

"Sec.  — .  At  each  apportionment  of  represen- 
tation, it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  General  assem- 
'  bly  to  divide  the  state,  by  counties  which  are  co- 
terminus,  commencing  at  the  state  line  on  the 
Ohio  river,  into  three  districts,  binding  on  said 
river,  (extending  southward  to  the  state  line,) 
as  nearly  equal  in  representative  population  as 
maybe,  ana  allot  to  each  of  said  districts  the 
number  of  representatives  to  which  its  repre- 


sentative population  shall  entitle  it,  according 
to  the  ratio  fixed.  The  number  of  representa- 
tives in  each  district  shall  be  apportioned  among 
the  several  counties  in  such  mode  as  will  best 
preserve  the  principle  of  equal  and  fair  represen- 
tation. In  doing  which,  the  following  rules 
shall  be  observed : 

First.  Each  county  shall  be  entitled  to  a  rep- 
resentation equal  to  its  representative  popula- 
tion. 

Second.  The  fraction  of  any  county  shall  be 
transferred  to  an  adjoining  county,  when  such 
adjoining  county  has  a  representative  popula- 
tion under  the  ratio,  but  greater  than  such  frac- 
tion, and  when  such  fraction  or  fractions,  added 
to  the  representative  population  of  the  adjacent 
county,  shall  be  equal  to  the  ratio,  such  county 
shall  be  entitled  to  a  separate  representation. 

Third.  When  the  representative  population  of 
such  adjacent  county  is  less  than  the  fraction  of 
the  adjoining  county,  the  two  shall  be  united, 
and  form  one  representative  district. 

Fourth.  Two  or  more  coterminus  counties,  each 
having  a  representative  population  under  the 
ratio,  shall  be  united,  and  shall  constitute  a  rep- 
resentative district. 

Fifth.  When  there  shall  be  a  fraction  or  frac- 
tions not  absorbed  by  an  adjoining  county  or 
counties,  the  same  shall  be  transferred  to  that 
county  in  the  district  having  the  largest  repre- 
sentative population  under  the  ratio,  which  shall 
constitute  a  representative  district." 

Mr.  THOMPSON'S  substitute  for  the  latter 
clause  of  the  sixth  section  of  the  legislative 
report: 

"An  enumeration  of  the  qualified  voters,  and 
an  apportionment  of  the  representatives  in  the 
general  assembly  shall  be  made  in  the  year  1852, 
and  within  every  subsequent  term  of  eight  years. 
The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the  first 
session  of  the  general  assembly  after  the  enu- 
meration aforesaid,  be  apportioned  among  the 
several  counties,  cities,  ana  towns,  according  to 
the  number  of  qualified  voters  in  each,  and  shall 
not  exceed  one  hundred,  or  be  less  than  seventy 
five:  Provided,  That  any  county  having  two 
thirds  of  the  ratio  shall  be  entitled  to  one  mem- 
ber." 

Mr.  CHAMBERS'  substitute  for  the  latter 
clause  of  the  sixth  section  of  the  legislative 
report: 

"In  apportioning  representation  among  the 
several  counties  in  this  commonwealth,  every 
county  which  is  not  entitled  to  a  separate  repre- 
sentative shall  be  attached  to  tliat  adjoining 
county  which  contains  the  least  voting  popula- 
tion; and  counties  thus  attached  shall  vote  in 
conjunction  for  representative  or  representatives. 
The  full  ratios  shall  be  first  filled,  and  the  re- 
maining representative,  (if  any,)  shall  be  given 
to  the  counties  or  attached  counties,  having  the 
largest  residuums:  Provided,  Tliat  not  more  than 
two  counties  shall  in  any  case  be  attached  for 
electing  a  representative;  and  where  the  residu- 
ums of  any  two  counties  thus  attached  shall  ob- 
ain  an  additional  representative  each  county 
shall  have  one,  and  vote  separately." 

Mr.  APPERSON  gave  notice  that  he  should 
move  the  plan  of  the  select  committee. 

The  eleventh  section  of  the  report  of  the  com- 


977 


» 


mittee  on  the  legislative  departmeDt  was  next 
read  as  follows: 

"Sec.  11.  The  senate  shall  consist  of  not  less 
than  thirty,  nor  more  than  thirty  eight  members." 

Mr.  BRiSTOW  moved  to  strike  out  the  entire 
section,  and  insert  the  following: 

"In  the  apportionment  of  representation,  the 
number  of  representatives  in  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives shall  be  seventy  five;  and  the  number 
of  senators  twenty  five." 

Mr.  CLARKE  opposed  the  amendment  in  a 
few  remarks. 

Mr.  GHOLSOX  moved  to  amend  the  amend- 
ment by  striking  out  "seventy-five,"  and  insert- 
ing "one  hundred;"  also,  by  strikingout  "twen- 
ty-five," and  inserting  "thirty-eight." 

A  division  was  called  for,  and  the  first  branch 
was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  BRISTOW  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  second  branch,  and  they  were — ^yeas  62, 
nays  28. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Al- 
fred Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, 
Thos.  £).  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cow- 
per,  Lucius  Desha,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J. 
Gough,  Jas.  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Mark  £.  Huston,  Thomas  James,  Wm.  Johnson, 
Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  Gteorge  W. 
Mansfield,  William  C.  Marshall,  William  X. 
Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitch- 
ell, Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh 
Xewell,  Elijah  F.  ]S'uttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone, 
Albert  6.  Talbott,  John  D.  Tavlor,  William 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  Heniy  Wash- 
ington, John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 62. 

Nats — Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  C.  Bul- 
litt, Henry  R.D.  Coleman,  Edward  Curd,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  Jas.  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gai- 
ther,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  J.  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.Kelly, 
Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Richard 
L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John  D.  Morris, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  Michael  L.  Sto- 
ner,  Andrew  S.  White,  Georee  W.  Williams, — 
28. 

So  t&e  amendment  to  the  amendment  was 
adopted. 

The  amendment  was  then  adopted  for  the  ori- 
ginal section. 

The  twelfth  section  was  read  and  adopted  as 
follows: 

"Sec.  12.  The  same  namber  of  senatorial  dis- 
tricts shall,  from  time  to  time,  be  established  by 
the  general  as.sembly,  as  there  may  be  senators 
allotted  to  the  state,  which  shall  be  so  formed  as 
to  contain  as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  number 
of  <]^aalified  voters,  andso  that  no  county  shall  be 
divided  in  the  formation  of  a  senatorial  district, 
123 


except  such  county  shall  be  entitled,  under  th^ 
enumeration,  to  two  or  more  senators." 

Mr.  GARRARD  offered  the  following  as  an 
additional  section,  and  it  was  adopted: 

"Senators  and  representatives  shall  be  elect- 
ed under  the  first  apportionment,  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  in  the  year  185^,  and 
every  two  years  thereafter,  unless  changed  by 
law." 

Mr.  JAMES  called  the  attention  of  the  con  - 
yention  to  a  resolution  which  he  offered  at  an 
early  period  of  the  session,  and  said  that  as  he 
believed  such  a  provision  was  necessary  and  im- 
portant, he  would  test  the  sense  of  the  conven- 
tion upon  it,  by  offering  it  again.  He  now 
moved,  therefore,  that  it  be  printed,  and  he 
would  call  it  up  on  a  future  day. 

It  was  read  as  follows,  and  ordered  to  be 
printed: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  ppwer 
to  pass  any  act  or  resolution  for  the  appropria- 
tion of  money,  or  creating  any  debt  against  the 
state,  or  for  the  payment  of  money  in  any  way 
whatever:  Proviaei,  The  debtcreated,  or  money 
appropriated,  may  exceed  dollars,  un- 

less the  act  or  resolution  creating  tl^e  debt  or 
appropriating  the  money,  shall  be  voted  for  by 
a  majority  of  all  the  members  then  elected  to 
each  branch  of  the  general  assembly;  said  vote 
i  to  be  taken  by  the  yeas  and  nays,  which  shall 
be  entered  upon  the  journals  of  each  house." 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  offered  the  following  as 
an   additional  section. 

"  The  proceeds  of  the  slackwater  navigation 
of  the  state  are  to  form  part  of  the  sinking  fund, 
nor  is  the  said  sinking  fund  in  any  manner 
to  be  chargeable  with  the  payment  of  the  inter- 
est or  principal  of  the  school  fund,  nor  due  by 
the  state  to  tne  board  of  education." 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  IRWIN,  Mr. 
BROWN,  and  Mr.  KAVANAUGH,  the  motion 
to  print  was  not  agreed  to. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption 
of  the  section. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  avails  of  slackwater 
were  set  apart  for  the  sinking  fund,  and  last 
year  we  voted  that  two  cents  should  be  levied 
upon  every  hundred  dollars  of  property  and  ap- 
plied to  the  school  fund ;  but  the  legislature  ex- 
ceeded this,  for  they  transferred  the  avails  of  the 
sinking  fund  to  the  school  fund.  Now  I  under- 
stand tie  gentleman  from  Anderson,  in  offering 
the  proposition,  to  mean  nothing  more  nor  less 
than  this — that  the  avails  of  the  slackwater 
shall  be  and  remain  where  it  was  originally  de- 
signed— as  a  part  of  the  sinking  funcL 

The  gentleman  from  Franklin  brought  here 
a  book  yesterday  in  relation  to  the  auditor's  re- 
port. I?pon  looking  into  that  report,  I  find  it  is 
a  very  different  year;  the  year  he  read  was  1648, 
beginning  with  October,  1847,  and  ending  vritk 
1848.  The  document  made  out  by  the  auditors, 
begins  with  the  first  of  October,  1848,  and  ends 
with  1849.  It  is  a  different  document  idto- 
gether. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  Mr.  President:  It  will  be 
seen  that  the  language  used  on  the  832d  page  of 
the  debates,  by  3ie  delegate  from  Nelson,  (Mr. 
Hardin,)  conveys  the  idea  that  the  proceeds  paid 
into  the  treasury  last  year,  from  feiuokwater  im- 
prbvemeBto,  netted  only  $10,000.    This  will  be 


978 


understood  by  every  one  to  mean  the  business 
year,  from  January  to  January,  as  the  accounts 
are  kept  by  the  board  of  internal  improvement; 
when  in  fact  the  net  sum  was  over  tnree  times 
that  amount,  as  stated  by  me  yesterday.  The 
auditor's  statement,  (as  the  fiscal  year  of  the 
commonwealth  is  from  October  to  October,)  era- 
braces  three  months  of  last  year,  and  leaves  out 
three  months  of  this  year,  and  includes  the  pe- 
riod when  business  was  almost  entirely  sus- 
pended by  reason  of  the  cholera,  and  afterwards 
by  low  water. 

I  have  learned  that  the  business  year,  to  31st 
December,  will  realize  on  the  Kentucky  river, 
from  $40,000  to  $41,000,  as  the  gross  receipts  of 
this  year. 

There  have  been  some  extraordinary  expen- 
ditures in  securing  dams  one  and  two,  on  the 
Kentucky  river,  amounting  to  perhaps  $6,000  or 
$7,000;  but  the  ordinary  expenditures  will  not 
be  increased,  still  the  net  amount  to  be  paid  into 
the  treasury  for  the  year  1849,  will  go  much  over 
$10,000.  My  whole  object  has  been  to  place 
facts  and  figures  aright. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  The  expense  of  the  Kentucky 
river  navigation  last  year  was  $26,600.  I  have 
here  a  document,  setting  forth  the  avails  and 
expenditures  for  a  series  of  years,  and  other  in- 
formation in  relation  to  the  public  debt,  which 
may  possess  some  interest. 

The  table  I  present  shows  the  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures for  the  year  ending  in  1849.  The 
table  the  gentleman,  (Mr.  Lindsey,)  referred  to 
the  other  day,  is  for  the  year  1848.  The  re- 
markable increase  of  expenditures  for  the  year 
1849,  to  ray  mind,  demand  an  investigation.  It 
is  as  follows: 

Auditoe's  Office,  Fkankfoht,  Oct.  1849. 
SiE ;  In  compliance  with  your  verbal  request, 
I  submit  the  following  statements,  which  are 
supposed  to  embrace  the  information  desired  by 
your  committee,  to-wit : 

1.  Statement   showing  the   condition  of  the  public 
debt  of  the  State  of  Kentucky,  from  the   18th  of 
October,  1848,  to  the  lOth  of  October,  1849. 
Whole   amount  of  public  debt 

outstanding,  October  10,  1848,       $4,552,313  81 
Amount  paid  into  the  treasury 

by  trustee  of  Craddock  fund,  June 

l5, 1849,        ...  -  500  00 


Of  this  sum,  $3,661,152  81  bear  6  percent, 
interest;  $836,000  bear  5  per  cent,  interest,  and 
$1,690  of  the  6  per  cent,  debt  are  due. 

2.  Statement  of  receipts  and  disbursement  of  the 
Treasury  on  account  of  the  Sinking  Fund,  from 
October  10,  1848,  to  October  10,  1849. 

RECEIPTS. 

Balance  to  the  cred- 
it of  the  sinkingfund, 
October  10,  1848,         $124,967  05 

Deduct  this  amount 
in  hands  of  James 
Davidson,  late  Treas- 
urer, and  not  account- 
ed for,  50,511  71 

$74,455  34 

Revenue  transferred  by  2d  Audi- 
tor,       -        -        -        -  123,036  44 
Northern    Bank   dividends,  July, 

1848,        ....  13,074  75 

Northern  Bank  dividends,  for  Jan- 
uary and  July,  1849,  -         26,100  00 
Bank    of  Kentucky  dividends  for 

January  and  July,  1849,         -        61,093  50 
Bank  of  Louisville,  dividend    for 

January,    1849,  -        -  1,624  00 

Rent  of  Lexington  and  Ohio  rail- 
road, -        .        .        .         14,635  62 
Tax  on  Banks,  -        -        -         35,150  00 
Kentucky  river  tolls,  (gross,)     -  41,688  38 
Green    and     Barren    river     tolls, 

(gross,)        -        -        .        -  7,932  06 

Rent  of  water  power  on  Kentucky 

river, 480  00 

Turnpike  roads,  -        .        -      34,095  67 

Commonwealth's    Bank,         .        •         1,400  00 
Miscellaneous  receipts,  -        •        2,353  20 

Craddock  fund,  -        -  500  00 

Revenue  to  the  credit  of  the  sinking 
fund,  in  the  2d  Auditor's  o^ 
fice,  and  subject  to  transfer,  23,930  26 
Taxes  on  Broker's  and  Insurance 
offices,  to  the  credit  of  sinking 
fund,  in  the  2d  Auditor's  of 
fice,  and  subject  to   transfer,  9,505  19 

Total  resources,  -         •      $471,054  41 


Amount  redeemed, 
from  the  10th  October 
to  December  31,  1848,  $19,400  00 

Amount  redeemed, 
from  1st  January  to 
10th  October,  1849,       36,231  00 

Error  in  original 
•statement  of  amount 
of  internal  improve- 
ment and  rail-road 
scrip,  outstanding,  30  00 


4,552,813  81 


55,661  00 


Whole  debt  (which  is  exclusive 
.of  school  bonds,)  outstanding,  Oc- 
tsbtf  10, 1849, 


$4,497,152  81 


DI8BUBSEHENT8. 

Interest  on  the  public  debt. 
Redemption  of  public  debt. 
This  amount,  paid  in  as  part  of  the 
rent    of  railroad,    balance    of 
principal   and     interest   of  a 
bond  to  the  citizens  of  Lexing- 
ton, payable  out  of  ordinary 
revenue,        .... 
Expense  of  Kentucky  river  navi- 
gation,       .... 
Expense  of  Green  and  Barren  river 

navigation. 
Contingent  expenses, 

Total  disbursements. 
Amount  to  the  credit  of 
the  sinking  fund,  in 
the  treasury,        -    $70,110  17 


Amounts  carri«(i  over,    $70,110  17  $367,508  79 


$271,287  35 
55,631  00 


1,413  50 

26,600  00 

12,532  06 
44  88 

$367,508  79 


979 


Am'ta  brought  forward,  fTO.l  10  17  $367,503  79  i 
Amount  to  the  credit  of 

the    sinking    fund, 

with  2d  Auditor,       33,435  45 

103,545  62 


$471,054  41 


3.  Statement  of  the  proceeds  of  Kentucky  river 
natigation,  for  each  year,  from  1845,  ending  on 
the  10th  of  October :  Also,  the  amount  of  money 
drawn  for  repairs  of  said  navigation,  so  far  as 
appears  from  the  books  of  this  office. 

Xett. 
$17,244  15 
29,173  48 
29,070  30 
33,261  75 
15,088  38 

The  year  1845  is  incomplete,  and  for  the  fur- 
ther information  of  the  committee,  I  subjoin  a 
similar  statement  to  tlie  above,  made  by  the 
board  of  internal  improvement,  in  their  annual 
report  for  1848,  commencing  with  the  opening 
of  navigation,  in  1843,  and  ending  December 
19,  1848  : 


Receipts. 

Expenditures 

1845 

$17,244  15 

* 

$ 

1846 

36,680  18 

7,506  70 

1847 

44,516  85 

15,446  55 

1848 

47,761  75 

14,500  00 

1849 

41,688  38 

26,600  00 

Collections. 

Expenditures. 

Kett. 

1843 

$7,852  49 

$1,658  26 

$6,194  33 

1844 

19,044  34 

10,475  12 

8,569  22 

1845 

34,345  61 

8,888  65 

25,456  96 

1846 

35,977  63 

13,446  55 

22,531  08 

1847 

49,638  77 

17,746  75 

31.892  02 

1848 

46,279  01 

13,531  22 

32,747  79 

These  statements  are  from  January  1st  to  last 
of  December,  except  the  last  year,  which  is  to 
December  19. 

4.  Statement  of  receipts  and  disbursements  on  ac- 
count of  Green  and  Barren  river  navigation. 
Keceipts.       Expenditures. 

1846  $8,737  13      $4,500  00    >'eti,  $4,227  13 

1847  12,080  88      12,939  67    Loss,       858  79 

1848  10,562  25        6,525  17    Xett,    4,037  08 

1849  7,932  06  12,532  06  Loss,  4,600  00 
It  should  be  observed  that  in  giving  the  pro- 
ceeds of  Kentucky  river,  to  the  10th  of  Octooer, 
1849,  a  warrant  drawn  for  expenses  of  current 
quarter,  amounting  to $7,000,  is  deducted,  which 
is  the  fifth  quarterly  requisition  for  that  year. 

Riespectfullv, 

J.  B.  T'EMPLE, 
Auditor  Public  Accounts. 
Hon.  Bex.  Haedix, 

Chairman  of  Committee  on  the  public  debt. 

Mr.  LISLE.  I  am  the  friend  of  common 
schools  and  education.  I  believe  that  the  con- 
tinuance of  our  free  institutions  depends  on  the 
virtue  and  intelligence  of  tlie  people,  and  I  had 
inten  led  submitting  some  remarks  to  the  cou- 
vention  on  these  subjects,  but  there  had  been  so 
much  time  consumed  in  discussion,  that  I  for- 
bore doing  so,  while  they  were  under  considera- 
tion. Our  action  here  is  to  aflfect  this  state  vitally 
for  weal  or  for  woe.  I  drew  up  the  first  section 
of  the  article  on  education,  which  has  been 
adopted  by  the  convention,  and  I  am  under  ob- 
ligations to  the  younger  gentleman  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe)  for  presenting  it  in  lieu  of 
the  substitute  which  he  had  offered  for  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  on  education.      I  could 


not  support  the  report  of  that  committee,  be- 
cause it  made  it  imperative  on  the  legislature 
within  five  years  to  establish,  and  forever  there- 
after keep  in  existence  an  efficient  system  of 
common  schools  in  the  state.  To  accomplish 
this,  -night,  and  wonld  probably,  have  led  to  op- 
pressive taxation  against  the  wishes  of  the  peo- 
ple. If  the  system  is  sustained  in  the  state,  it 
must  be  by  an  enlightened  public  sentiment.  I 
entreat  the  friends  of  education  to  do  nothing 
which  may  tend  to  set  public  sentiment  against 
it.  I  am  unwilling  to  force  on  the  people  of  the 
state  a  system  of  common  schools  which  must 
be  sustained  by  taxation  levied  on  them  against 
their  consent.  Such  a  course,  instead  of  pro- 
moting the  cause  of  education,  would,  as  I  be- 
lieve, be  an  injury  to  it.  The  section  which  has 
been  adopted,  secures  tlie  present  school  fund  of 
the  state  inviolate  for  the  purposes  of  common 
schools,  and  it  also  provides  that  the  interest 
on  said  fund  shall  be  paid  and  appropriated  in 
aid  of  common  schools,  and  for  no  other  pur- 
pose. 

Sir,  the  income  on  the  sinking  fund  will  be 
amply  sufficient  to  pay  the  ordinary  expenses  of 
the  state,  the  interest  on  our  public  debt,  the  in- 
terest on  the  school  fund,  and  leave  a  considera- 
ble sum  to  be  applied  annually  to  the  extinguish-^- 
ment  of  the  principal  of  the  public  debt,  with-^* 
out  any  increase  of  taxation. 

Public  sentiment  in  the  state,  on  the  snbject 
of  education,  is  moving  in  the  proper  direction, 
as  was  shown  at  the  election  before  the  last, 
when  the  people  voted  an  additional  tax  of  two 
cents  for  the  purpose  of  sustaining  common 
schools.  Sir,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the 
delegates  on  this  floor  reflected  truly  the  wishes 
of  their  constituents,  when  they  aaopted,  with 
great  unanimity,  the  section  securing  the  school 
fund,  and  requiring  the  interest  on  it  to  be  paid. 

The  section  which  was  offered  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Anderson,  (Mr.  Kavanaugh,)  was  de- 
signed to  prohibit  the  application  of  any  por- 
tion of  the  income  of  the  sinking  fund  to  the 
payment  of  the  interest  on  the  school  fund.  I 
do  not  assert  that  such  is  the  intention  of  the 
gentleman  who  moved  this  section,  but  most  as- 
suredly, if  adopted,  it  would  be  a  fatal  stab  to 
the  system  of  common  schools. 

Sir,  is  there  any  gentleman  on  this  floor,  whoe 
will  venture  openly  to  advocate  the  repudiation 
of  the  debt  due  to  the  board  of  etlucation?  This 
school  fund  was  not  raised  from  the  people  of 
the  state  by  taxation;  it  was  a  munificent  gift, 
if  I  may  use  the  expression,  by  the  general  gov- 
ernment to  the  state,  and  has  been  solemnly  set 
apart  and  dedicated  by  the  state,  to  purposes  of 
education.  It  is  a  fund  which  justly  belongs  to 
the  children  of  the  country,  many  of  whom  are 
poor  and  destitute.  Sir,  the  repudiation  of  this 
debt  would  be  most  manifestly  unjust;  it  would 
be  a  stain  on  the  fair  fame  of  the  state;  no  gen- 
tleman will  assert  that  he  desires  to  see  an  in- 
crease of  taxation  in  the  state;  yet,  sir,  adopt 
this  section,  and  you  must  either  repudiate  the 
debt  or  pay  the  interest  on  it  by  an  increase  of 
taxation.  Are  gentlemen  prepared  for  either  ? 
Sir,  we  are  attempting  to  do  too  much.  We  are 
going  too  much  into  detail.  A  constitution 
should  fix  and  settle  great  and  leading  princi- 
ples, and  leave  to  the  legislature  to  carry  out 


dse 


ttie  details.  Adopt  the  section  now  under  con- 
sideration, and  we  are  not  only  going  too  much 
into  detail,  but  we  shall  do  that  which  will  not 
meet  the  approbation  of  our  constituents.  By 
the  adoption  6i  tlie  section,  we  virtually  repeal 
an  act  passed  by  the  last  legislature.  By  that 
act  the  income  arising  from  slack  water  improve- 
ments on  the  Kentucky,  Green,  and  Barren  riv- 
ers, was,  after  the  year  1850,  to  be  applied  to  the 
payment  of  the  interest  on  the  school  fund. 

Sir,  a  large  portion  of  the  school  fund  has 
been  unjustly  and  improperly  applied  to  the 
improvement  of  our  roads  ana  rivers,  and  it  i^ 
right  and  proper  that  the  legislature  should  have 
the  power  of  applying  the  income  arising  from 
these  roads  and  rivers  to  the  payment  of  the  in- 
terest on  that  fund.  The  section  now  under 
consideration,  is  not  6nly  uncalled  for,  but  im- 
proper, and  I  hope  the  convention  will  reject  it. 

Mr.  MAYES  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  now  ordered  to  be 
put. 

Mr.  TAYLOR  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  adoption  of  the  section,  and  they  were — 
yeas  11,  nays  77. 

.  Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradley,  Green  Forrest,  Ben.  Hard, in, 
Thomas  James,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Wm.  D. 
Mitchell,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Squire  Turner, 
Chas.  A.  Wickliffe-^ll. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger. 
John  S.  Barlow,  Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Luther 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos.  D.  Brown, 
"William  0.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Jas.  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin, 
William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  Jas.  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thos. 
J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Jas.  W.  Irwin,  Alfred 
M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thom- 
as W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen.  Martin  P.  Mar- 
shall, William  C.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
David  Meriwether,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.Nuttall,  Henry 
B.  Pollard,  Wm.  Pre.ston,  Johnson  Price,Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Jas.  Rudd,  John  W.  Ste- 
Venson,  James  W.Stone,  Michael L.Stoner,  John 
D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry 
Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Robert  N.  Wicklifife,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson— 77. 

So  the  section  was  rejected. 

OKGANIZATION  Or   NEW  COUNTIES. 

The  convention  proceeded  to  the  consideration 
of  the  article  in  relation  to  the  organization  of 
Oew  counties,  as  follows: 

"Sec.  1.  No  new  county  shall  be  formed  witli 
Bn  area  of  less  than  three  liundred  and  fifty 
■qn&re  miles;  nor  shall  such  new  county  he 
fonued,  if  by  doing  go  it  reduces  any  county 


out  of  which  it  shall  be  formed,  in  whole  or-in 
part,  below  an  area  of  four  hundred  square 
miles;  and  in  running  the  lines  or  boundary  of 
such  new  county,  no  such  line  shall  run  nearer 
than  ten  miles  of  the  county  seat  of  any  county." 

Mr.  MAYES.  Being  a  member  of  the  select 
committee  whose  report  is  now  under  considera- 
tion, I  respectfully  ask  the  attention  of  gentle- 
men to  the  reasons  by  which  I  was  influenced,  as 
a  member  of  that  committee,  to  give  my  assent 
to  the  report,  and  by  which  I  am  now  induced  to 
advocate  the  adoption  of  it  by  the  convention, 
as  a  part  of  the  constitution  which  we  are  at- 
tempting to  frame  for  the  future  government  of 
Kentucky.  Did  I  not  believe  that  some  such 
principle  as  that  indicated  by  the  report,  was 
demanded  by  the  people,  and  absolutely  neces- 
sary, I  certainly  would  not  be  found  insisting 
upon  its  adoption.  But  being  thoroughly  satis- 
fied from  experience  and  observation,  as  well  as 
the  history  of  the  state  upon  this  subject,  that 
some  such  principle  is  essentially  necessary  to 
the  well-beiug  of  the  state  and  her  interests,  as 
well  as  to  the  people  whose  misfortune  it  is  to 
reside  in  counties  where  questions  of  disorgani- 
zation and  division  of  the  counties  exist.  I  am 
impelled  not  only  to  advocate  the  adoption  of 
the  restrictive  principle,  contained  in  the  report; 
but  feel  most  anxious  that  some  such  feature  be 
incorporated  as  a  part  of  the  constitution,  assur- 
ed as  I  am,  that  by  it  much  evil  will  be  prevent- 
ed, and  if  we  can  prevent  evil,  to  that  extent 
we  do  good. 

The  report  proposes  first  that  no  new  county 
shall-  hereafter  be  formed  in  Kentucky  if  by  its 
creation  the  county  or  counties,  or  either  of 
them,  from  which  it  may  be  taken  in  whole  or  in 
part,  shall  be  left  with  an  area  of  less  than  four 
hundred  square  miles  of  territory,  and  secondly 
that  no  new  county  shall  be  formed  having  less 
than  three  hundred  and  fifty  square  miles;  and 
in  the  third  place  it  is  proposea  that  the  county 
line  of  any  county  which  may  hereafter  be 
created,  shall  not  be  run  nearer  than  within  ten 
miles  of  any  county  seat.  An  amendment  has 
been  proposed  by  the  honorable  chairman  of  the 
committee,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wickliffe,)  which  pro- 
poses to  provide  that  no  new  county  shall  here- 
after be  created,  when  by  so  doing  the  county  or 
counties  or  either  of  them  from  which  it  may  be 
taken,  will  thereby  be  reduced  in  voting  popu- 
lation to  a  less  number  than  the  then  existing 
ratio  of  representation.  When  this  proposition 
was  under  consideration  some  Aveeks  ago,  I 
could  but  be  surprised  by  the  interest  manifest- 
ed by  some  gentlemen  in  opposition  to  it,  and  I 
was  especially  astonished  that  mv  friend  from 
Caldwell,  (Mr.  Machen,)  should  fiave  been  ex- 
cited as  he  evidently  then  was.  That  gentle- 
man seemed  to  think  that  the  adoption  of  the 
principle  indicated  by  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee would  be  fraught  with  the  most  dangerous 
consequences  to  the  constitution  which  we  are 
attempting  t«  frame.  He  warned  us  that  if  we 
should  dare  to  restrain  the  legislature  in  its 
future  action  upon  this  subject,  wild  and  im- 
politic as  we  all  do  know  that  action  heretofore 
to  have  been,  such  restraint,  whatever  may  l>e  tha 
necessity  for  it,  would  inevitably  weigh  down 
the  instrument  and  cause  its  defeat,  when  it 
sliall  be  submitted  to  the  people  for  approval  or 


981 


rejection.  That  gentleman,  by  vray  of  making 
clear  to  the  minds  of  delegates  the  truth  of  this 
prediction,  asserted  without  qualification  that 
should  the  principle  contained  in  the  report 
which  we  are  now  considering  be  adopted  and 
become  part  of  the  constitution,  more  than  one 
half  of  nis  constituents  would  for  that  cause 
alone  refuse  to  give  to  it  their  sanction,  and 
would  in  fact  vote  against  its  adoptiou-==^l- 
tliough  it  may  contain  all  those  vastly  import- 
ant changes,  so  loudly  and  almost  universally 
demanded  by  our  constituents  from  one  end  of 
the  commonwealth  to  the  other.  That  portion 
of  the  gentleman's  constituents  who  voted 
against  and  opposed  the  call  of  this  convention, 
will  no  doubt  vote  against  any  constitution  we 
may  make,  be  the  provisions  of  it  what  they  may 
— because  they  are  satisfied  with  the  existing  in- 
strument and  desire  no  change;  but  sir,  can  it  be 
possible  that  more  than  a  moiety  of  the  voters 
of  Caldwell  county  who  voted  for  and  advocated 
the  call  of  this  convention,  will  condemn  and 
vote  against  the  instrument  we  may  frame  ind 
offer  to  them  as  the  future  constitution  of  Ken- 
tucky; if  in  it  they  are  secured  the  right  to  se- 
lect for  themselves  by  vote  all  the  officers  of  the 
government,  great  and  small — if  by  it  also  that 
excessive  legislation  which  has  been  and  which 
the  people  well  know  to   have  been   one  of  the 

treat  est,  if  indeed  not  the  verv  greatest  evil  un- 
er  which  they  have  labore<£  and  groaned  for 
nearly  fifty  years  past,  shall  be  checked,  and  if 
by  it5  provisions  the  legislature  shall  hereafter 
be  convened  not  oftener  than  once  in  two,  three, 
or  four  years,  and  if  the  common  school  fund  be 
secured  so  that  it  cannot  be  misapplied,  that 
fund  which  I  do  trust  in  God  will  at  last  bless 
and  secure  to  the  penniless,  unprotected,  father- 
less children  of  our  highly  favored  coniraon- 
wealtli,  at  least  a  common  education;  and  there- 
by place  the  offices  and  honors  of  the  state  with- 
in tlieir  reach;  I  repea.t  can  it  be  possible  that 
more  than  one  half  of  the  gentleman's  constitu- 
ents will  vote  against  the  new  constitution,  con- 
taining, as  I  am  well  assured  it  will  do,  those 
together  with  other  provisions,  deemed  generallv 
to  be  of  paramount  importance,  and  fall  bacic 
on  the  present  constitution  with  all  its  acknow- 
ledged defects  and  imperfections,  and  that  too 
for  the  reason,  and  that  only,  that  this  convention 
may  think  proper  to  say  that  in  time  to  come 
some  restriction  shall  exist  as  matter  of  consti- 
tutional law  upon  the  subject  of  creating  new 
counties,  surely  not.  It  cannot  be  possible  that 
such  would  be  the  case.  The  gi-ntleman  will 
pardon  me  when  I  say  that  in  this  he  surely  must 
be  mistaken.  A  portion  of  the  people  of  Cald- 
well may  be  and  doubtless  are  and  long  have 
been  most  anxious  to  bring  about  the  division 
of  that  county  as  the  journals  of  the  legislature 
made  at  different  sessions,  abundantly  attest. 
Still,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  cannot  believe  that  any 
gentleman,  be  his  residence  where  it  may,  who 
was  sincerely  in  favour  of  the  call  of  this  con- 
vention, that  the  constitution  might  be  amended 
in  the  important  particulars  to  wliich  I  have  al- 
luded, as  well  as  in  other  respects,  will  ever  vote 
against  the  new  one  for  a  cause  so  very  tiivial. 
Indeed,  one  might  well  doubt  the  sincerity  of 
any,  who  might  say,  that  they  had  been  in  fa- 
vor of  a  convention,  but  had  voted  against  the 


new  constltation  because  of  such  a  provision  as 
the  one  proposed.  1  should  incline  strongly  to 
believe  that  such  liad  never  been  dissatisfied 
witii  the  constitution  which  we  are  attempting 
to  amend.  The  pe<jple  of  Caldwell,  no  doubt, 
voted  for  the  call  of  this  convention,  for  the 
same  reasons  that  citizens  of  other  portions  of 
the  state  voted  for  it — they  were  sensible  that 
the  existing  constitution  was  defective  in  raanvs 
very  important  particulars,  and  that  by  its 
amendment  in  those  particulars,  the  great  end 
and  aim  of  government,  human  happiness  and 
prosperity  would  be  promoted.  If  those  great 
changes  6e  made,  which  we  all,  or  nearly  all  of 
us  acknowledge  should  be  made,  in  our  form  of 
government,  then  sir,  I  have  no  fear,  no,  not  the 
shadow  of  a  doubt,  that  our  work  will  be  re- 
ceived by  Our  constituents,  and  will  be  by  tliem 
most  triumphantly  adopted  as  the  future  consti- 
tution of  our  state.  ?« o  sir,  it  will  not  be  rejec- 
ted bt  any  portion  of  the  people,  because  we 
have'lionestly  thought  that  the  common  good 
demanded  that  some  limit  should  be  fixed  in  it 
upon  the  subject  under  consideration.  The  man 
must  be  timid  indeed,  if  he  be  not  labouring  un- 
der a  kind  of  mental  aberation,  who  does,  or  can 
believe  that  the  old  constitution  will  be  perfer- 
red  to  the  new,  for  the  ab.surd,  and  to  my  mind 
most  ridiculous  reason  that  the  convention  have 
said,  or  may  sir,  that  an  old  county  shall  not 
be  reduced  to  less  than  four  hundred  square 
miles,  nor  a  new  one  created  containing  less 
than  an  area  of  three  hundred  and  fifty.  If 
it  be  true,  that  persons  will  condemn  and  vote 
against  the  new  constitution,  if  it  contain  the 
proposed  restriction,  why  may  I  not  argue  on 
the  other  hand,  that  tliere  are  as  many,  not  to 
say  a  greater  number  who  will  vote  against  it  if 
it  contain  no  such  restrictive  principle?  Surely 
sir,  I  might  with  just  as  much  reason  and  pro- 
priety insist  that  the  constitution  will  be  defeat- 
ed if  it  contain  no  such  provision,  as  gentlemen 
have  for  saving  that  such  a  provision  will  op- 
erate as  a  dead  weight  upon  it,  and  will  crush 
it.  I  do  not  however  so  argue,  for  the  simple, 
and  to  myself  very  satisfactory  reason,  that 
whether  the  principle  for  which  T  now  contend 
become  part  of  the  constitution  or  not,  will  not 
in  the  least  degree  aflFeet  either  its  reception  or 
rejection — ^when  it  shall  be  submitted  to  the  or- 
deal of  the  people.  Suppose  the  question  we 
are  now  considering  was  submitted  to  the  voters 
of  Kentucky,  for  their  decision,  what  sir,  would 
that  decision  be?  Can  any  gentleman  doubt, 
but  that  their  votes  would  be  at  least  twenty  for 
it  to  one  against  it?  2fo  one  wUl  doubt  this. 
Then  sir,  if  a  majority  of  the  voters  of  the  state 
would  sanction  the  amendment  proposed  by  the 
report  of  the  committee,  shall  we  hesitate  to  do 
that  which  they  would  do  if  here,  and  acting 
for  themselves,  and  especially  so,  wheu  we  must 
know,  that  by  the  incorporation  of  this  princi- 
ple in  the  constitution,  we  shall  greatly  promote 
the  general  happiness,  contentment  and  pros- 
perity of  the  slate  and  people,  and  check,  to  some 
extent  at  least,  the  dram  upon  the  treasury,  re- 
sulting from  the  mistaken  and  runious  policy 
heretofore  pursued  on  this  subject,  at  the  same 
time  we  give  quiet  and  peace  to  the  people  of 
such  counties  as  are  afflicted  by  one  of  those 
vexatious  and  profitless  questions  of  division. 


982 


Sir,  I  aJvooated  the  call  of  this  convention,  be- 
caii^ie  I  thought  important  changes  should  be 
made  in  our  organic  law.  I  am  still  for  consti- 
tutional reform,  and  I  expect  and  intend  to  do 
battle  for  the  new  constitution,  if  it  contains 
those  great  principles  of  reform  for  which  we 
have  been  contenaing  so  long.  If  we  should 
unfortunately  fail  to  secure  the  whole  and  only 
succeed  in  part,  still  I  will  be  found  for  the  new 
constitution,  upon  the  groujid  that  any  improve- 
ment is  better  than  none.  I  am  not  to  be  deter- 
red from  doing  that  which  ray  honest  judgment 
tells  me  is  rignt,  by  the  note  so  often  sounded 
here,  that  if  this  principle  or  that,  be  adopted, 
the  consequence  will  be,  the  defeat  of  the  con- 
stitution? Wlienever  gentleriien  are  at  fault, 
and  can  find  no  reasonable  argument  to  bring  to 
their  aid,  by  way  of  sustaining  their  opposition 
to  any  proposition  made  here,  they  hold  in  ter- 
rorem  over  the  heads  of  the  friends  of  such 
proposition  what  they  suppose  to  be  a  "knock 
down"  argument,  and  that  is,  if  you  dare  to  do 
this,  the  constitution  will  be  defeated. 

Sir,  if  propositions  are  made  here,  and  my 
judgment  be  satisfied,  that  by  their  adoption  the 
general  prosperity  and  happiness  will  be  pro- 
moted, 1,  for  one,  shall  be  found  in  the  support 
of  such  propositions  and  will  trust  to  the  good 
sense  of  my  constituents  to  sustain  me  when  I 
return  home  to  mingle  with  them.  If  the  people 
of  Kentucky  have,  by  an  experience  of  fifty 
years,  which  they  have  had  under  the  existing 
constitution,  learned  the  deficiency  of  that  in- 
strument, and  if  they  have  felt  a  necessity  for 
its  amendment  in  any  one  particular,  they  un- 
questionably have  ascertained  the  fact  that  it  is 
exceedingly  defective  in  not  having  in  it  some 
such  principle  of  restriction  as  the  one  which  the 
committee  propose  to  incorporate  in  the  new 
one — such  a  feature  as  will,  in  some  degree,  re- 
strain the  legislature  in  that  wild  and  reckless 
course  of  policy  heretofore  indulged  in  in  the  cre- 
ation of  new  counties — such  a  feature  as  will 
five  peace  to  the  state  and  to  the  people  of  tlie 
ifi"erent  counties  upon  these  vexatious,  disturb- 
ing, and  distracting  questions  of  division — such 
a  principle,  sir,  as  will  save  to  the  state  treas- 
ury, and  consequently  to  the  people,  large  sums 
of" money  which  will  otherwise  be  uselessly  and 
most  improvidently  expended  and  taken  from 
the  tr'^asury,  and  from  tne  expenditure  of  which 
no  earthly  good  will  arise,  either  in  a  public  or 
private  point  of  view,  but  much,  very  much,  of 
evil. 

Sir,  the  practice  heretofore  so  extensively, 
and,  as  all  must  confess,  so  very  improperly  in- 
dulged in  by  our  legislature,  calls  most  loudly 
for  constitutional  remedy,  and  the  question  now 
before  us  is,  shall  we  apply  the  remedy  and  place 
a  check  upon  this  great  evil,  or  shall  we  leave  it 
unchecked,  although  all  of  us  confess  that  it 
has  been,  and  now  is,  an  evil,  and  that  we  have 
it  fully  in  our  power  to  apply  the  remedy. 

The  gentleman  from  Caldwell  says  that  the 
old  counties  are  satisfied,  being  conveniently 
situated,  and  having  but  little  teri'itory.  How 
does  it  happen  that  the  old  counties  are  satis- 
fied? (if  such  be  the  ca.se.)  Simply  for  the  rea- 
son that  they  have  no  earthly  power  to  increuse 
their  territory,  and  thereby  to  add  to  their  re- 
spectability.     How  has  it  happened  that  those 


old  counties,  such  as  Woodford  and  others,  are 
so  small  in  point  of  territory  as  they  are,  and 
are  now  pointed  to  by  such  as  desire  the  division 
of  a  county,  or  counties,  as  examples  and  pre- 
cedents in  favor  of  the  system  of  division  here- 
tofore indulged  in.  It  is,  sir,  the  result  of  the 
unfortunate  legislation  of  Kentucky  upon  this 
subject.  Those  old  counties,  reduced  as  they 
have  been  in  territory,  and  consequently  shorn 
of  much  of  the  influence  they  otherwise  would 
have  exercised,  are  prepared,  I  doubt  not,  by 
their  representatives  here,  to  condemn  that 
course  ot  policy  which  has,  in  a  great  measure, 
stript  them  of  many  important  advantages,  and 
which  has  resulted  in  evil,  nothing  but  evil,  to 
the  state,  and  to  individuals,  for,  sir,  whenever 
one  individual  has  been  benefitted  by  it,  at  least 
ten  have  been  seriously  injured — some  in  a  pe- 
cuniary point  of  view  have  been  almost  ruined. 

The  committee  do  not  propose,  Mr.  President, 
that  no  new  county  shall  hereafter  be  establish- 
ed in  the  state — no  such  thing.  It  is  only  pro- 
posed to  fix  in  the  constitution  a  rule  by  which 
the  legislature  shall,  in  time  to  come,  be  con- 
trolled and  governed  upon  this  subject.  "Will 
any  gentleman  contend  that  the  old  counties  in 
Kentucky,  or  any  one  of  them,  should  be  reduced 
in  territory  to  less  than  four  hundred  square 
miles?  Will  gentlemen  contend  that  the  good 
of  the  citizens  of  any  county  demands  that  the 
legislature  should  have  the  constitutional  power 
to  reduce  them  below  that  size?  And,  sir,  will  it 
be  contended,  I  ask,  that  the  legislature  should 
be  permitted  to  create  a  county  Avith  an  area  of 
less  than  three  hundred  and  fifty  square  miles? 
Surely  not.  Divide  the  whole  territory  of  the 
state  into  one  hundred  counties,  of  equal  size, 
and  we  have  exactly  that  number  of  counties 
now,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  each  county  will 
contain  only  some  four  hundred  square  miles. 
Then  it  is  proposed  that  new  counties  shall  not 
hereafter  be  formed,  containing  less  than  three 
hundred  and  fifty  square  miles,  so  that  the  legis- 
lature will  have  the  power  to  create  a  new  coun- 
tv  with  less  tenitory,  by  fift}'  thousand,  than 
the  counties  of  tJie  state  now  average. 

Surely  sir,  this  ought  to  satisfy  gentlemen;  no 
gentleman  would,  I  presume,  wish  to  live  in  a 
county  having  less  territory.  Mr.  President,  un- 
less some  constitutional  barrier  be  thrown  in 
the  way  of  the  legislature  upon  this  subject,  I 
hazard  but  little  when  I  say  that  no  county  in 
the  state,  I  care  not  what  the  extent  of  its  terri- 
tory may  be,  is  or  will  be  safe  against  the  spirit 
of  disorganization,  which  sometimes  exists  in 
counties  and  in  the  legislature.  Gentlemen  may 
feel  safe  now,  sir — they  may  flatter  themselves 
that  their  counties  are  so  very  small  that  no  man 
but  a  madman  could  think  of  division.  Let 
the  constitution  remain  as  it  now  is  upon  this 
subject,  and  if  there  be  gentlemen  who  deem 
their  seats  of  justice  and  their  counties  safe  from 
disorganization  for  the  reason  that  they  have 
but  little  territory,  they  will  find  themselves 
mistaken.  No  man  can  tell  Avheii  one  of  those 
vexatious  and  distracting  questions  will  be  rais- 
ed in  his  county;  and  it  is,  sir,  a  singular  fact, 
that  when  such  a  question  has  been  once  made, 
it  has  rarely  ever  been  suffered  to  sleep.  There 
are  those,  who  from  motives  of  self-agrandize- 
lueiit,  are  always  and  at  all  times  reuuy  to  fan 


983 


the  flame  of  dissatisfaction  and  to  keep  alive 
the  strife,  regardless  of  the  injury  which  raay 
result  to  the  state  at  large  or  to  individuals.  All 
such  persons  aim  at — all  they  care  for  is  the  pro- 
motion of  their  own  fortunes;  they  care  not 
what  the  sacrifice  may  be  to  others.  There  are 
but  few,  very  few  counties,  Mr.  President,  where 
such  persons  do  not  live. 

The  gentleman  from  Caldwell  tells  us  that 
there  has  been  a  disinclination  upon  the  part  of 
the  legislature  for  years  past  to  organize  new 
counties.  Well  sir,  I  do  not  agree  with  the  gen- 
tleman. As  great  as  that  disinclination  may 
have  been,  if  that  gentleman  will  take  the  trou- 
ble to  examine,  he  will  find  that  within  the  last 
nine  years  the  legislature  has  created  and  given 
life  and  existence  to  ten  new  counties.  This  is 
true,  what  does  it  prove?  Unquestionably  that, 
instead  of  a  disinclination  upon  the  part  of  the 
legislature  so  to  act,  a  very  strong  inclination 
has  existed,  and  doubtless  will  continue  to  exist 
in  that  body,  by  which  it  will  be  impelled,  un- 
less restrained  as  proposed,  to  the  creation  of 
new  counties,  and  that  too  without  any  real  ne- 
cessity for  so  doing.  The  fact  that  within  so 
short  a  time  there  has  been  created  such  a  num- 
ber of  counties — most  of  them  as  I  contend  be- 
ing unnecessary — satisfies  me  that  some  whole- 
some restraint  upon  this  subject  is  absolutely 
necessary.  View  this  question  in  any  aspect  in 
which  it  is  susceptible  of  being  presented,  we 
shall  see  that  some  such  provision  as  the  one 
contemplated  by  the  report  under  consideration 
is  essentially  necessary  to  the  public  good.  If 
the  question  be  one  purely  of  state  policy,  then 
some  such  provision  is  unquestionably  demand- 
ed. If  it  be  a  question  of  a  local  character,  still 
this  convention  is  bound  to  act  on  the  subject; 
and  if  it  be  a  question  partaking  both  of  a  gen- 
eral and  local  character,  we  are  called  upon  to 
act  upon  the  subject,  and  place  in  the  constitu- 
tion such  provision  as  will  in  future,  in  some 
manner,  protect  the  state  and  the  different  coun- 
ties from  the  positive  evils  which  otherwise  will 
result  to  both  if  we  fail  to  act  affirmatively  upon 
this  subject.  Why,  I  ask,  should  we  not  so  act, 
if  there  be  counties  in  the  state  with  territory 
sufiicient  to  render  their  division  at  all  reasona- 
ble? Such  division  may  be  had,  notwithstand- 
ing the  proposed  restriction  be  made.  If  there 
be  a  county  in  the  state  with  set'en  hundred  and 
fifty  square  miles,  it  may  be  divided.  I  have 
said,  sir,  that  if  this  be  a  question  of  state  poli- 
cy, apart  from  local  considerations,  then  we  are 
called  upon  by  that  duty  which  we  owe  to  the 
state,  to  act  upon  this  subject.  I  have  also  said 
that  the  question  under  consideration  partakes 
both  of  a  state  and  local  character.  And  now  I 
proceed  to  show  the  state  aspect  of  the  question. 
All  admit  it  to  be  the  interest  of  the  people  that 
the  government  be  carried  on  and  administered 
at  the  least  possible  cost.  It  is  expected — and 
our  fellow-ciitizens  have  a  right  to  expect — that 
no  expense  will  be  incurred,  unless  it  shall  be 
absolutely  necessary,  topromote  thepublic  good; 
not  that  private  interests  may  be  advanced  to 
the  detriment  of  the  general  prosperity — and  by 
the  general  prosperity  I  mean  the  welfare  of  the 
people  of  the  whole  state — not  such  as  happen 
to  inhabit  any  particular  county  to  the  exclusion 
of  others. 


Well  sir,  here  the  question  arises — docs  the 
creation  of  a  new  county  cost  the  people  of  the 
state  at  large  anything?  Does  it  subtract  from 
the  general  wealth,  and  sir,  are  the  people  of 
the  state  at  large  taxed  to  any  extent  by  its  crea- 
tion? I  maintain  that  no  countv  ever  was  or 
ever  will  be  made  unless  at  consi'derable  cost  to 
the  state.  The  organization  of  each  new  coun- 
ty, when  formed,  costs  the  people  of  Kentucky 
not  less  than  from  $700  to  $1,000.  Taylor 
county,  the  last  one  created,  and  which  com- 
pletes the  hundred.  I  see  from  the  second  au- 
ditor's report,  cost  the  state  for  record  books 
alone,  $2iS  25.  There  are  forty  five  volumes 
of  the  reported  decisions  of  the  court  of  ap- 
peals. The  state  is  bound  to  furnish  the  circuit 
and  county  court  clerk's  offices  each  with  a  set 
of  those  reports — making  ninety  volumes. — 
They  cannot  be  had  at  a  cost  of  less  than  $5 
per  volume — making  $450.  The  offices  must  be 
furnished  each  with  a  copy  of  Morehead  and 
Brown's  digest,  and  with  f  irtle's  digest — these 
at  $10  a  copy,  amount  to$40.  Andsir,  the  offices 
must  be  supplied  with  furniture — such  as  tables 
and  desks — which  I  put  down,  I  think,  low 
enough  at  $75 — making,  when  added  togetlier, 
the  considerable  sum  of  $843  25.  These ^e  all 
the  essential  articles  to  the  organization,  and 
putting  into  operation  a  new  county.  There 
are,  doubtless,  other  incidental  expenses  which 
do  not,  at  this  time,  occur  to  me;  but  which  will, 
no  doubt,  be  thought  of  by  gentlemen.  Up  to 
the  year  1840,  there  were,  in  Uie  state,  but  nine- 
ty countie-s — enough,  one  would  suppose,  in 
all  conscience.  Since  that  time,  however,  we 
find  that  there  has  been  formed  ten  others.  If 
the  organization  of  each  one  of  these  ten  coun- 
ties cost  the  state  $843 — as  I  maintain  is  the 
fact — then  the  organization  of  new  counties  by 
the  legislature  has,  within  the  last  nine  years, 
cost  the  people  of  Kentucky  the  large  sum  of 
$8,430.  This  is  not  all  there  is  annually  paid 
to  the  clerk  and  sheriff  of  every  county  out  of 
the  common  treasure,  $80  for  ex-qfficio  services. 
These  are  positive  annual  burthens  on  the  statej 
incurred  whenever  a  new  county  is  formed! 
There  are,  doubtless,  others.  Then  sir,  does  not 
the  public  interest  imperiously  demand  that 
some  restriction,  some  constitutional  rule  be 
adopted  upon  this  subject,  beyond  which  the 
legislature  shall  not,  in  future,  go.  Examine 
them  sir,  as  a  question  of  state  policy,  and  in 
that  view,  it  certainly  must  strike 'all  most 
forcibly.  No  gentleman  here  can,  it  does  appear 
to  me,  fail  to  see  that  he  must  favor  the  report  of 
the  committee.  But  sir,  I  propose  still  further 
to  show  that  the  unnecessary  multiplication  of 
new  counties  has  otherwise  materially  affected 
the  revenue  of  the  state,  and  has,  consequently, 
operated  most  unfavorably  upon  the  public 
treasury. 

If  gentlemen  will  take  the  trouble  to  examine 
the  last  report  made  by  the  second  auditor,  they 
will  find  that  some  fifty  counties  pay  the  entiie 
expenses  of  the  government,  and  that  the  other 
fifty  take  from  the  treasury  as  much  as  they  pay 
into  it.  It  will  then  be  seen  that,  for  the  year 
1848,  the  counties  of  Breathitt,  Cumberland, 
Clinton,  Floyd,  Grayson,  Johnson,  Knox,  Letch- 
er, Laurel,  Lawrence,  Livingston,  Marshall,  Mor- 
gan, Owsley,  Perry,  Pulaski,  Russell.  Rockcas- 


994 


tie,  Wajne,  Whitley,  anu  llarlan,  being  twenty 
one  counties,  took  from  the  treasury  $9,506  cl4 
more  than  they  paid  into  it.  We  learn  from  the 
same  report,  that  the  counties  of  Monroe,  Pike, 
Adair,  Ballard,  Crittenden,  Graves,  Hickman, 
Meade,  McCracken,  Hancock,  Estill,  Allen,  But- 
ler, Casey,  Carter,  Clay,  Edmonson,  and  Larue, 
sixteen  in  number,  for  that  year  paid,  altogether, 
into  the  treasury,  only  $4,712  71  more  than  they 
took  from  it.  Many  of  the  counties  •which  i 
have  mentioned,  it  will  be  observed,  are  }iew, 
others  of  them  are  old;  yet  if  you  will  inquire 
it  will  be  found  that  the  old  ones  have  been  so 
divided  and  curtailed  as  to  reduce  them  from 
counties  of  the  first  respectability  and  impor- 
tance, to  their  present  condition .  N'ow,  jyfr. 
President,  take  the  sums  paid  by  the  counties 
■whioli  pay  the  smallest  amounts  iqto  the  treasu- 
ry, and  add  these  sums  together  until  you  have 
an  amount  equal  to  the  sum  taken  from  the 
treasury  by  the  counties  first  named,  and  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  whole,  or  very  nearly  the  whole 
revenue,  paid  for  the  support  of  the  government, 
is  derived  from  about  fifty  counties,  and  that 
the  other  fifty  afford  little  or  no  aid  in  support 
of  the  government. 

This  state  of  things  is  mainly  and  legitiroate- 
ly  attributable  to  that  mistaken  policy  hereto- 
fore indulged  in  by  the  legislature,  and  wjiich 
we  now  propose  in  some  measure  to  remedy.  It 
is  insisted,  however,  sir,  notwithstanding  all 
this,  that  this  question  properly  belpngs  to  the 
people  of  such  counties  as  ruay  4esire  their  di- 
vision, and  that  this  convention  woulfl  do  wrong; 
in  laying  down  any  rule  upon  this  subject.  And 
it  is  further  insisted,  that  a  oiajority  of  the 
people  of  a  county  should  be  permitted,  with- 
out restriction,  to  divide  it  whenever  they  see 
proper  to  do  so.  I  deny  that  the  people  of  any 
county  have  the  right,  or  should  have  the  right 
to  divide  their  county  when  they  see  proper  to 
do  so,  regardless  of  consequences  to  the  state. 
If  this  doctrine  be  true,  then  whenever  a  ma- 
jority of  the  people  of  a  cqupty  conclude  to  di- 
vide it,  it  must  be  done,  be  the  si?e  and  situa- 
tion of  the  county  what  it  may,  be  it  large  or 
email.  If  this  question  be  local  to  the  people 
of  the  different  counties,  and  I  have  said  tnat  in 
some  respects  it  may  be  regarded  as  local,  then  I 
contend  that  we  are  positively  instructed  by  our 
constituents  to  apply  sqme  such  restriction 
upon  this  subject  as  is  proposed  by  the  report 
which  we  are  considering.  One  of  the  greatest 
evils  of  which  the  people  of  tlie  state  complain- 
ed, and  which  exercised  as  great  and  powerful  an 
inftuence  in  bringing  about,  and  in  inducing  the 
people  to  call  this  convention,  was  the  fact,  that 
under  the  existing  state  of  things,  there  was 
excessive  and  improper  legislation  upon  local 
subjects,  greatly  to  tlie  detriment  of  the  public 
interest — suWects  in  which  the  people  of.  the 
state  generally  had  and  felt  no  interest  wliatev- 
er.  The  people  at  large  have  no  earthly  benefi- 
cial interest  in  the  division  of  a  county.  They, 
sir,  are  deeply,  most  deeply  interested  that  the 
impolitic  legislation  such  as  has  heretofore  been 
indulged  in  on  this  subject,  be  checked.  Yes, 
fcir,  cnecked  at  least.  It  tends  to  no  general 
good,  and  the  peoj)le  know  it.  Its  only  tenden- 
cy is  to  impoverish  the  state,  as  well  as  indi- 
viduals.   How  many  thousands  of  dollars  has 


there  in  the  last  ten  years  been  expended  in  use- 
less legislation  upon  this  subject,  in  discussions 
as  to  whether  a  county  or  counties  should  be  di- 
vided, and  upon  the  subject  of  removing  seats 
of  justice? 

The  legislature  sits  at  a  cost  to  the  people  of 
more  than  five  hundred  dollars  per  day;  and  it 
has  been  known  to  be  engaged,  repeatedly,  for 
weeks,  upon  a  question  as  to  whether  or  not  a 
county  should  be  divided,  or  a  seat  of  justice 
removed.  I  have  said,  sir,  that  excessive  and 
unncessarj'  legisiution  upon  this  subject,  had 
operated  most  unjustly  and  oppressively  upon 
private  interests.  This  is  true,  and  all  know  it 
to  be  so.  If  you  will  examine  the  different  acts 
establishiu]^  counties,  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
legislature  in  the  law  or  act,  by  which  the  coun- 
ty is  established,  generally,  if  not  in  all  cases, 
fix  the  seat  of  justice  permanently  (as  the  act 
reads)  at  some  point  named  in  the  act,  thus  vol- 
untarily giving  a  legal  promise  that  if  persons 
see  proper  to  expend  their  money  in  tne  pur- 
chase and  improvement  of  property  at  the  seat 
of  justice,  such  expenditure  shall  not  be  sacri- 
ficed by  a  removal  of  that  seat  of  justice,  yet 
how  often  have  we  seen  this  legal,  this  volunta- 
ry promise,  wantonly  and  grossly  violated,  and 
the  poor  mechanic  who  upon  the  faith  of  this 
promise  had  expended  his  all  in  the  purchase 
and  improvement  of  a  lot  at  one  of  those  seats 
of  justice  permanently  located  by  legislative  en- 
actment, stripped  of  all  he  has  by  an  act  of  a 
succeeding  legislature,  which  either  divides  the 
county  or  removes  the  seat  of  justice;  and  if  a 
county  be  divided,  it  genrally  follows  that  the 
seat  of  justice  is  removed,  and  when  this  is  done 
the  town  is  deserted,  and  property  in  it  is  at 
once  rendered  valueless.  Such  was  the  case  in 
Calloway  county,  which  was  but  a  few  years  ago 
divided  by  legislative  enactment.  The  people 
were  informed  by  the  act  of  the  legislature  by 
which  that  county  was  created,  that  the  seat  of 
justice  was  permanently  located  at  Waidsboro', 
and  upon  the  faith  of  this  legislative  promise — 
voluntarily  made — many  good  citizens  in  hum- 
ble circumstances  were  induced  to,  and  did  ex- 
pend their  all  in  the  purchase  and  improvement 
of  property  at  that  place.  What  is  now  the 
fact?  The  legislature  some  few  years  past,  as  I 
Ijave  before  said,  passed  an  act  by  wnich  that 
coimty  was  divided  ;  the  division  line  being  run 
just  so  as  to  miss  the  town,  in  consequence  of 
which  the  seat  of  justice  was  immediately  re- 
moved from  Waidsboro' ;  in  consequence  of 
which  that  place  has  been  almost  entirely  de- 
serted, and  the  property  of  its  citizens  renaered 
worthless;  all  this  was  done  in  defiance  of  the 
just  and  united  opposition  of  the  citizens  of  that 
town  and  a  large  portion  of  the  people  of  the 
county.  This,  sir,  is  onrfy  one  instance  out  of 
many  that  I  could  name  of  the  flagrant  injustice 
and  wrong  done  to  private  pereons  under  such 
circumstances.  Look,  sir,  at  Salem,  destroyed 
by  the  division  of  Livingston  county,  some  two 
or  three  years  ago.  Fulton  county  was  organ- 
ized by  the  division  of  Hickman  but  a  snort 
time  since.  Why  was  this  neAV  county  made? 
Not  because  Hickman  had  too  much  territoiy, 
but  because  so  much  of  her  territory  had  been 
taken  to  aid  in  the  formation  of  Ballard,  that  it 
threw  Clinton  out  of  the  centre,  and  it  became 


nftn 


necessary,  either  to  divide  the  county  or  remove 
the  seat  of  justice,  and  break  up  the  people  of 
Clinton.  I  could,  if  I  had  time  sir,  refer  to  al- 
most innumerable  cases  of  wanton  and  unneces- 
sary injustice  done  to  privat«  rights  by  the  policy 
heretofore  pursued  by  the  legislature  upon  this 
subject,  and  from  which  no  corresponding  private 
or  public  benefit  ever  has  or  ever  will  result. 
Thensir.is  it  singular,  or  at  all  to  be  wondered  at 
when  it  is  seen  that  the  legislature  has  time  and 
again  violated  those  legal  pledges,  voluntarily 
made  to  the  people,  that  it  should  have  forfeited 
theirconfidence  and  esteem.  It  is  not.  When  our 
neighbor  disregards  and  violateshis  promise  made 
to  another,  he  looses  the  confidence  of  that  neigh- 
bor; so  with  the  legislature,  when  it  violates 
and  disregards  its  pledges  made  to  the  people, 
and  made  too  in  the  solemn  form  of  law,  that 

f)ecple  so  deceived  and  abused,  must  and  will 
oose  confidence  in  the  person  or  body  by  whom 
they  may  have  been  deceived.  I  repeat  that 
there  is  nothing  in  the  proposition  of  the  com- 
mittee, so  strange  and  new,  that  gentlemen  need 
be  startled  by  it.  If  gentlemen  will  examine,  they 
will  find  that  the  new  constitution  of  Tennessee 
provides  that  "new  counties  may  be  formed  not 
to  contain  less  than  three  hundred  and  fifty 
square  miles  of  territory,  such  new  county  must 
at  the  time  it  is  created  contain  four  hundred 
and  fifty  qualified  voters,  that  no  line  of  such 
new  county  shall  approach  nearer  to  the  court 
house  of  the  county  from  which  it  may  have  been 
taken  than  twelve  miles,  nor  shall  the  old  coun- 
ty be  reduced  to  less  than  six  hundred  and 
twenty  five  square  miles,"  more  than  a  third 
larger  than  the  committee  propose  to  leave  the 
old  counties  of  Kentucky. 

Now  turn  to  the  constitution  of  Ohio.  There 
we  find  that  no  new  county  can  be  made,  having 
less  than  four  hundred  square  miles  of  territory, 
nor  can  the  old  county  or  counties,  or  either  of 
them,  from  which  it  may  be  taken,  be  reduced  to 
a  less  number  of  square  miles.  We  find  that  by 
the  constitution  of  Texas,  no  county  can  be 
formed,  when  by  so  doing,  the  county  or  counties, 
or  either  of  them,  from  which  it  may  be  taken, 
shall  be  reduced  in  area  to  less  than  nine  hun- 
dred square  miles,  unless  by  consent  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  legislature;  nor  shall  a  new  county 
be  established,  unless  it  has  as  much  territo- 
ry. The  constitution  of  Michigan  has  this  pro- 
vision: "No  countv  now  organized  by  law, 
shall  ever  be  reduced  by  the  organization  of  new 
counties,  to  less  than  four  hundred  square 
miles."  The  constitution  of  Missouri  has  this 
provision:  "No  county  now  established,  shall 
ever  be  reduced  by  the  establishment  of  new 
counties,  to  less  than  twenty  miles  square;  nor 
shall  any  county  hereafter  be  established,  which 
shall  contain  less  than  four  hundred  square 
miles."  Now,  sir,  look  at  the  constitution  of 
Alabama.  In  it  we  find  this  provision:  "No 
uew  county  shall  be  laid  off  hereafter,  nor  old 
county  reduced  to  less  contents  than  four  hun- 
dred and  thirty-two  square  miles."  We  find  in 
the  constitution  of  Indiana  this  provision:  "The 
general  assembly,  when  they  lay  off  any  uew 
county,  shall  not  reduce  the  old  county,  or  coun- 
ties, from  which  the  same  shall  be  taken,  to  a 
less  content  than  four  hundred  square  miles." 
In  the  constitution  of  Mississippi,  this  provision 
124 


is  found:  "No  new  county  shall  be  established 
by  the  legislature,  which  shall  reduce  the  coun- 
ty, or  counties,  or  section  of  others,  from  which 
it  may  be  taken,  to  less  contents  than  five  hun- 
dred and  seventy-six  square  miles;  nor  shall  any 
new  county  be  laid  off  of  less  contents."  When 
we  look  into  the  constitution  of  Arkansas,  we 
find  this  provision:  "No  county  now  established 
by  law,  shall  ever  be  reduced  by  the  establish- 
ment of  any  new  county,  or  counties,  to  less 
than  nine  hundred  square  miles,  nor  to  a  less 
population  than  its  ratio  of  representation ;  nor 
shall  any  county  be  hereafter  established  which 
shall  contain  less  than  nine  hundred  square 
miles,  or  a  less  population  than  would  entitle 
such  county  to  a  member  in  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives." i  will  now  read  from  the  constitu- 
tion of  Iowa,  which  has  this  provision:  "No 
new  county  shall  be  laid  off  hereafter,  nor  old 
county  reduced  to  less  contents  than  four  hun- 
dred and  thirty-two  square  miles."  So  we  find 
that  ten  of  the  states  of  this  Union  have  incor- 

f)orated  into  their  constitutions  provisions  simi- 
ar  to  those  proposed  to  be  inserted  in  the  con- 
stitution of  Kentucky.  Most  of  the  states  men- 
tioned are  new.  Some  of  them,  however,  are 
old,  and  have  remodeled  their  constitutions,  and 
adopted  this  principle.  Why  have  they  done 
so?  For  the  reason,  I  presume,  that  they  have 
all  seen,  and  some  of  them  have  felt,  a  positive 
necessity  for  it.  They  have  seen,  as  we  must 
now  see,  that  it  is  the  only  means  by  which 
peace  and  quiet  can  ever  be  hoped  for  upon  this 
disturbing  subject;  for,  unless  some  such  princi- 

Ele  be  adopted,  questions  of  division  will  ever 
e  present  in  the  legislature,  and  by  them  the 
time  of  that  body  will  be  consumed  in  useless 
discussion,  and  the  money  of  the  people  wasted. 
Shall  we  not,  then,  at  least,  confine  tne  legisla- 
ture within  reasonable  limits  upon  this  subject. 
The  people  expect  us  to  adopt  some  such  princi- 
ple as  the  one  indicated  by  the  select  committee; 
they  wish  to  know  where  this  thing  is  to  end. 
If  our  present  constitution  had  such  a  provision, 
the  advantages  to  the  state,  which  would  have 
resulted  from  it,  are  incalculable. 

I  wish  now,  Mr.  President,  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  convention  to  the  territorial  size  of 
each  state  in  this  Union — their  population  in 
the  year  1840,  and  the  number  of  counties  in 
each  state.  It  will  be  seen  that  states  with  large- 
ly over  double  the  population  of  Kentucky,  and 
with  greatly  more  territory,  have  but  little  over 
half  the  number  of  counties  we  have.  New 
York  has  46,000  square  miles  of  territory,  has 
a  population  of  2,428,921  souls,  she  has  only  58 
counties.  Pennsylvania  has  the  same  territory 
as  New  York,  with  a  population  of  1,724,033 
souls,  and  only  55  counties,  ilaryland  13,959 
square  miles,  with  a  population  of  469,232  and 
but  20  counties.  Massachusetts,  7,500  square 
miles,  with  a  population  of  737,699  and  only  14 
counties.  Delaware,  2,120  square  miles  of  ter- 
ritory, with  a  population  of  78,085  and  3  coun- 
ties. Connecticut  has  4,674  squre  miles,  with 
a  population  of  300,015  and  8  counties.  (Geor- 
gia, has  58,000  square  miles,  with  a  population 
of  691,392  and  she  has  93  counties.  North  Car- 
olina has  48,000  square  miles,  with  a  population 
of  753,419  and  she  has  68  counties.  South  Car- 
olina has  25,000  square  miles,  with  a  population 


986 


of  594,398  and  she  has  only  29  counties.  Vir- 
ginia has  64,000  square  miles,  with  a  population 
of  1,239,797  and  has  119  counties.  Our  state, 
Kentucky,  has  40,500  square  miles,  with  a  pop- 
ulation of  779,828  and  she  has  100  counties. 
Tennesee  has  45,000  square  miles,  with  a  popu- 

■?}Btion  of  829,210  souls,  and  she  has  72  counties. 
Ohio  has  40,000  square  miles,  with  a  population 
of  1,519,466  and  she  has  79  counties.  Indiana 
has  36,000  square  miles,  with  a  population  of 
685.866  souls,  and  she  has  87  counties.  Illinois 
has  50,000  square  miles,  with  a  population  of 
476,183  and  she  has  87  counties.  Alabama  has 
46,000  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  590,- 
756  souls,  and  she  has  49  counties.  Florida  has 
57,000  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  54,- 
477  and  she  has  20  counties  only.  Arkansas  has 
54,500  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  97,- 
574  and  she  has  40  counties.  Louisana  has  45,- 
350  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  352,411 
and  she  has  38  counties  or  parishes.  Mississippi 
has  45,760  square  miles,  with  a  population  of 
375,651  and  she  has  56  counties.  Missouri  has 
64,000  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  383,- 
702  and  she  has  62  counties.  Maine  has  30,000 
square  miles,  with  a  population  of  501,793  and 
she  has  only  13  counties.  New  Jersey  has 
8,320  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  373,306 
and  she  has  18  counties.    Kew  Hampshire  has 

•■9,280  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  284,574 

•^and  she  has  10  counties.  Rhode  Island  has 
•1,360  square  miles,  with  a  population  of  108,830 
tod  she  has  5  counties.  Vermont  has  10,212 
square  miles,  with  a  population  of  291,948  and 
she  has  14  counties.  Michigan  has  66,000  square 
miles,  with  a  population  of  212,267  and  she  has 
32  counties.  Iowa  has  150,000  square  miles  of 
territory,  with  a  population  of  43,111  and  she 
has  only  18  counties;  and  Wisconsin  has  90,000 
square  miles,  with  a  population  of  30,945  and 
she  has  22  counties.  I  am  not  informed  as  to 
the  extent  of  the  territory  of  Texas,  or  her  pop- 
ulation, but  this  we  do  know  sir,  that  she  has  had 
the  prudence  and  forecast  to  lay  certain  restric- 
tions on  her  legislature  upon  the  subject  of  crea- 
ting new  counties.  We  see  that  Virginia  is  the 
only  state  in  the  Union,  composed  as  it  is,  of 
thirty  states,  that  has  as  many  counties  as  Ken- 
tucky has,  and  that  state  has  about  one  third 
more  of  territory  and  something  like  twice  our 
population.  If,  sir,  we  are  called  upon  as  the 
delegates  of  the  people  in  convention,  to  amend 
the  existing  constitution  in  any  respect,  we  mu^fe' 
unquestionably  feel  that  this  is  one  of  the  de- 
fects which  calls  most  loudly  for  remedy.  I 
have  witnessed  the  rise  and  progress  of  these 
districting  questions  of  division  nearly  all  my 
life,  and  I  do  here  declare  that  I  never  have 

•known  good,  but  evil,  nothing  but  evil,  unmiti- 
Igated  evil,  to  result  from  them.    I  might  go  on 

■i9.nd  show  how  they  are  generally  gotten  up  and 
the  common  object  had  in  view  by  such  as  or- 
ignate  them.  It  might  be  shown  that  the  object 
in  view  is  not  at  all  times  in  truth  the  promotion 
of  the  convenience  of  the  people  who  inhabit 
the  county,  the  division  of  which  is  desired,  but 
that  the  object  of  thoM  generally,  who  originate 
and  advocate  such  questions  is  in  fact  to  pro- 
mote their  own  personal  interest. 

But,  sir,  there  nas  been  so  much  strife  and  con- 
tention in  the  different  countiea  upon  this  sub- 


ject, that  all  understand  it,  and  therefore,  it 
would  be  a  useless  consumption  of  time  to  en- 
quire into  the  causes  which  bring  about  and 
cause  these  questions  to  spring  up  and  afflict  the 
people;  for  tne  existence  of  a  question  of  divi- 
sion in  a  county,  is  indeed  a  sore  affliction  to 
the  citizens  of  that  county.  It  impairs  the  value 
of  lands  and  other  property.  It  prevents  the 
improvement  and  settlement  of  the  county.  It 
paralizes,  in  a  great  measure,  the  energies  of  the 
people.  It  prevents  the  growth  and  improve- 
ment of  the  towns  located  in  counties  where 
such  questions  unfortunately  exist.  Many  good 
citizens  are,  in  consequence  of  it,  driven  from 
the  county,  and  others  who  would,  if  no  such 
question  existed,  settle  in  it,  decline  doing  so  in 
consequence  of  the  existence  of  such  a  state  of 
things.  Divide  a  county  and  what  follows  as 
an  inevitable  consequence?      The  taxes  of  the 

Eeople  of  that  county  are  increased  fourfold, 
itigation  receives  a  fresh  impetus.  You  will 
find  vice,  immorality,  and  crime,  greatly  in- 
creased, besides  other  evils  al  nost  or  quite  in- 
numerable growing  out  of  it.  The  people  of  the 
divided  territory  have  been  disappointed;  some 
of  them  in  the  location  of  the  seat  of  justice, 
others  because  they  wanted  office,  and  hoped 
from  the  division  to  obtain  it,  but  have  failed. 
In  fact,  sir,  dissatisfaction  is  one  of  the  certain 
results  of  division  ;  it  never  produces  content- 
ment and  peace. 

But,  sir,  I  presume  that  gentlemen  will,  in 
giving  their  votes  upon  this  proposition,  act 
upon  the  general  principle,  and  so  far  as  their 
action  shall  be  concerned,  they  will  not  enquire 
or  know  whether  there  be  a  question  in  any  coun- 
ty in  the  state  in  relation  to  its  division.  Our 
votes  will  not,  and  should  not  be  influenced 
either  way  from  the  fact  that  the  people  or  a 
part  of  the  people  of  any  county  in  the  state 
may  desire  its  division.  We  should  be  actuated 
alone  in  this  matter  by  the  simple  and  plain 
proposition:  Will  it  be  right  to  fix  some  rule 
upon  this  subject,  beyond  which  the  legislature 
in  future  sliall  not  go?  I  for  one,  am  thorough- 
ly satisfied  that  the  principle  contained  in  this 
report  should  be  adopted  as  part  of  the  constitu- 
tion, and  that  its  adoption  will  meet  with  the 
hearty  approbation  of  the  people. 

Mr.  NEWELL.  This  is  a  subject  which  has 
been  heretofore  before  the  convention.  It  is  a 
subject  in  relation  to  which  I  presume  every 
mind  is  made  up.  It  is  a  subject  which  I  am 
willing  to  leave  to  the  legistature,  and  therefore, 
I  move  to  lay  it  on  the  table. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Before  the  vote 
upon  that  motion  is  taken,  I  desire  the  roll  to  be 
called. 

The  roll  was  called  accordingly. 

Mr.  MAYES  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  motion  to  lay  on  the  table,  and  they  were 
yeas  53,  navs  39. 

Ykas— John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
liam Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D. 
Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Lucius  Desha,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest, 
Nathan  (Jaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D. 
Oholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
John  Hargis,  Vincent  8.  Hay,  William  Hendriz, 


987 


Thomas  J.  Hood.  Alfred  M.  Jackson.  William 
Johnson,  Geo.  W.  Kavanaiigh,  Charles  C.  Kellv, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  "Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  William  C.  Marshall,  David  Meri- 
•wether,  William  D.  Mitchell.  John  D.  Morris. 
Jonathan  Newcum.  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  John 
T.  Robinson,"  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W. 
Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  John  Wheeler, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 53. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Luther  Brawner,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James 
Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards* Selucius  Garfielde,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Thomas  James,  Geo.  W.  Johnston, 
James  M.  Laekev,  Thomas  N.  Lindsev,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Wil- 
liam Preston,  Larkin  J.  Procter,  James  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  Squire  Tur- 
ner, Heurv  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Chas.  A.  WickliflFe,  George  W.  Williams— 39. 

So  the  whole  subject  was  laid  on  the  table. 

VOTE   OF    AX   ABSE>TEK. 

Mr.  HARGIS  asked  leave  to  record  his  vote  on 
the  subject  of  the  basis  of  representation,  which 
was  disposed  of  in  his  absence  yesterday. 

Leave  was  refused. 

MODE   OF    AMENDING   THE   COXSTITUTIOX. 

The  convention  next  proceeded  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  following  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  revision  of  the  constitution  and 
slavery: 

"  Sec.  1.  When  experience  shall  point  out  the 
necessity  of  amending  this  constitution,  and 
when  a  majority  of  all  the  members  elected  to 
ea.'h  house  of  the  general  assembly  shall,  within 
the  first  twenty  days  of  any  regular  session, 
concur  in  pa<5sing  a  law  for  taking  the  sense  of 
the  good  people  of  this  commonwealth  as  to  the 
necessity  and  expediency  of  calling  a  conven- 
tion, it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  several  sheriffs, 
and  other  oflacers  of  elections,  at  the  next  gene- 
ral election  which  shall  be  held  for  representa- 
tives to  the  general  assembly  after  the  passage 
of  such  law,  trt  open  a  poll  fur,  and  make  return 
to  the  secretary  of  state,  for  the  time  being,  of 
the  names  of  all  those  entitle«l  to  vote  for  repre- 
sentatives, who  have  voted  for  calling  a  conven- 
tion; and  if,  thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a 
majority  of  all  the  citizens  of  this  state,  en- 
titled to  vote  for  representatives,  have  voted  lor 
calling  a  convention,  the  general  assembly  shall, 
at  their  next  regular  session,  direct  that  a  simi- 
lar poll  shall  be  opened,  and  return  made,  for 
the  next  election  for  representatives;  and  if, 
thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a  majority  of  all 
the  citizens  of  this  state,  entitled  to  vote  for 
representatives,  have  voted  for  calling  a  conven- 
tion, the  general  assembly  shall,  at  their  next 
session,  pass  a  law  calling  a  convention,  to  con- 
sist of  as  many  members  as  there  shall  be  in  the 
house  of  representatives,  and  no  more;  to  be 
chosen  in  the  same  manner  and  proportion,  at 


the  same  time  and  places,  and  possessed  of  the 
same  qualifications  of  a  qualified  elector,  by 
citizens  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives;  ancl 
to  meet  within  three  months  after  their  election, 
for  the  purpose  of  re-adopting,  amending,  or 
changing  this  constitution;  out  if  it  shall  appear 
by  the  vote  of  either  year,  as  aforesaid,  tnat  a 
majority  of  all  the  citizens  entitled  to  vote  for 
representatives  did  not  vote  for  calling  a  con- 
vention, a  convention  shall  not  then  be  called. 
And  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  whether  a 
majority  of  the  citizens,  entitled  to  vote  for 
representatives,  did  or  did  not  vote  for  calling  a 
convention,  as  above,  the  legislature  passing  the 
law  authorizing  such  vote  shall  provide  for  as- 
certaining the  number  of  citizens  entitled  to 
vote  for  representatives  within  the  state." 

"  Sec.  2.  All  cases  of  contested  elections,  and 
where  two  or  more  candidates  for  delegate  to 
any  convention  which  may  be  called  under  this 
constitution,  shall  have  an  equal  number  of 
votes,  shall  be  decided  in  the  same  manner  as 
may  be  provided  by  law  for  similar  cases  arising 
in  elections  to  the  house  of  representatives." 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  substitute  the  follow- 
ing for  the  report  of  the  committee: 

"  In  the  year  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 

several  sheriffs,  and  other  returning  officers,  to 
take  the  sense  of  the  good  people  of  this  com- 
monwealth, as  to  the  necessity  and  expediency  of 
calling  a  convention,  at  the  several  places  of  vo- 
ting in  their  respective  counties,  on  the  first  Mon- 
day in  August,  by  opening  a  poll  for,  and  ma- 
king a  return  to,  the  secretary  of  state,  for  the 
time  being,  of  the  names  of  all  those  entitled  to 
vote  for  representatives,  who  shall  vote  for  call- 
ing a  convention.  And  if.  thereupon,  it  shall 
appear  that  a  majority  of  all  the  citizens  of  this 
state,  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives,  have 
voted  for  a  convention,  a  similar  poll  shall 
be  opened  and  taken  for  the  next  election ;  and  if 
a  majority  of  all  the  citizens  of  the  state,  enti- 
tled to  vote  for  representatives,  shall  a  second 
year  vote  for  a  convention,  the  general  assembly 
shall,  at  their  next  session,  call  a  convention,  to 
consist  of  as  many  members  as  there  shall  be  in 
the  house  of  representatives,  and  no  more;  to  be 
chosen  at  the  same  time,  manner,  and  places,  and 
in  the  same  proportion  that  representatives  are 
chosen,  and  to  meet  in  three  mouths  after  the  said 
election,  for  the  purpase  of  re-adopting,  amend- 
ing, or  changing,  this  constitution.  The  quali- 
fication of  delegates  to  the  convention  shall  be 
the  same  as  members  of  the  house  of  representa- 
i  lives,  except  that  ministers  of  the  gospel  shall  be 
I  eligible  as  members  of  the  convention.  If  it 
shall  appear  by  the  vote  of  either  vear,  as  afore- 
said, that  a  majority  of  all  the  citizens  entitled 
to  vote  for  representatives  did  not  vote  for  a 
convention,  none  shall  be  called;  and  a  similar 
poll  shall  be  opened  every  year,  until  a 

majority,  as  aforesaid,  shall,  for  two  years  in 
succession,  vote  for  the  call  of  a  convention; 
and  when  such  vote  shall  be  given,  the  general 
assembly  shall,  at  their  next  session,  call  a  con- 
vention as  above  prescribed,  and  pass  siich  laws 
for  carrying  the  call  into  effect  as  may  be 
proper." 

Mr.  TURNER.  This  propasition  is  not  de- 
signed to  provide  for  specific  amendments,  but 
it  proposes  to  take  the  subject  out  of  the  haada 


988 


of  the  legislature  and  of  pollticiahs,  dtid  hence 
to  avoid  the  frequent  discussion  of  excitable 
topics. 

Mr.  GRAY.  I  beg  leave  to  offer  the  follow- 
ing as  a  substitute  for  the  proposltton  of  the 
gentleman  from  Madison: 

"The  mode  of  revising  and  ametiding  the  con- 
stitution shall  be  as  follows:  Any  specific  amend- 
ment 01  amendments  to  the  constitution,  may  be 
proposed  in  the  senate  or  house  of  representa- 
tives, and  if  the  same  shall  be  agreed  to  by  a 
majority  of  the  members  elected  to  each  of  the 
t\^o  houses,  such  proposed  amendment  or  amend- 
ments shall  be  entered  on  their  journals,  with 
the  yeas  and  nays  taken  thereon,  and  published 
for  three  months  previous  to  the  next  succeed- 
ing election  for  representatives  to  the  general 
assembly,  in  at  least  one  newspaper  of  each 
county,  if  any  be  published  therein,  and  shall  be 
submitted  to  the  people  at  said  election,  in  such 
manner  as  the  general  assembly  may  prescribe; 
and  if  the  people  shall  approve  such  amend- 
ment or  amendments,  or  any  of  them,  by  a  ma- 
jority of  all  the  electors  of  the  state  qualified  to 
vote' for  members  of  the  general  assembly,  such 
amendment  or  amendments,  so  approved,  shall 
be  referred  to  the  general  assembly  chosen  at 
said  election;  and  if,  in  said  general  assembly, 
such  proposed  amendment  or  amendments,  or 
any  of  them,  shall  be  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of 
all  the  members  elected  to  each  house,  then  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general  assembly  to 
again  submit  such  proposed  amendment  or 
amendments,  or  such  of  them  as  may  have  been 
agreed  to,  as  aforesaid,  by  the  two  general  as- 
semblies, to  the  people,  at  the  next  election  for 
judicial  officers,  or  members  of  the  general  as- 
sembly, and  if  the  people,  at  said  second  elec- 
tion, snail  approve  and  ratify  such  amendment  or 
amendments,  or  any  of  them,  by  a  majority  of 
all  the  electors  of  the  state  qualified  to  vote  for 
members  of  the  general  assemby,  such  amend- 
ment or  amendments,  so  approved  and  ratified, 
shall  become  part  of  the  constitution :  Provided, 
That  if  more  than  one  amendment  be  submitted, 
they  shall  be  submitted  in  such  manner  and 
form  that  the  people  may  vote  for  or  against 
each  amendment  separately  and  distinctly;  but 
no  amendment  or  amendments  shall  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  people  oftener  than  once  in 

years:  And,  provided  further.  That  the  article  of 
the  constitution  concerning  slaves,  this  article 
and  the  portion  which  provides  that  no  man's 
property  shall  be  taken  or  applied  the  public  use 
witnout  the  consent  of  his  representatives,  and 
without  just  compensation  being  previously 
made  to  him,  shall  never  be  amended  or  chang- 
ed, without  the  concurrence  of  two  thirds  of  all 
the  members  elected  to  each  house  of  the  gener- 
al assembly,  at  two  successive  sessions,  and  a 
majority  of  all  the  electors  of  the  state  qualified 
to  vote  for  members  of  the  general  a-ssembly,  at 
two  successive  elections." 

That  sir,  is  the  same  proposition  I  presented 
to  the  •onvention  early  in  the  session,  and  it 
was  printed  and  submitted  to  the  committee  on 
the  revision  of  the  constitution  and  slavery.  It 
is  not  my  purpose,  at  this  time,  to  detain  the  con- 
vention with  any  protracted  remarks  on  this 
subject;  for  it  is  a  question  on  which,  I  presume, 
the  mind  of  every  member  is  made  up. 


The  mode  i!»  which  our  constitution  shall 
henceforth  be  revised  is  certainly  a  question  of 
the  greatest  mt)ment.  It  was  a  question  sii, 
that  excited  the  coiuiuunity  as  much,  probably 
more,  than  all  others  prior  to  the  election  of 
the  delegates  to  this  convention.  Almost  every 
other  amendment  proposed  to  the  constitution 
was  lost  sight  of,  or  overshadowed  by  the  high 
wrought  feeling  and  excited  interest  thrown 
around  this  question  by  the  action  of  the  eman- 
cipationists of  the  state.  There  are  few  mem- 
bers of  this  body  who  do  not,  in  some  degree, 
owe  their  elevation  to  their  peculiar  views  in 
relation  to  this  matter.  And,  all  so  far  as  I 
know,  are  committed,  as  well  as  inclined,  to 
provide  in  the  constitution  we  are  about  to  make, 
as  strong,  safe,  and  certain  guaranties,  for  the 
enjoyment  and  security  of  slave  property,  and 
all  other  property,  as  are  to  be  found  in  the  ex- 
isting constitution.  To  insure  the  stability,  se- 
curity and  uninterrupted  enjoyment  of  property, 
and  all  other  rights  dear  to  freennen,  much,  very 
much,  depends  on  the  mode  provided  for  revising 
the  constitution;  yet  I  am  aware  that,  on  this 
subject,  great  diversity  of  opinion  exists  amongst 
the  members  of  this  convention. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison  appears  to  think 
that  the  mode  of  specific  amendments  will  be  so 
uncertain,  and  will  result  in  so  much  instability 
to  our  institutions,  as  to  keep  us  in  a  state  of 
perpetual  excitement  and  fear.  So  far  from  this 
being  the  case,  sir,  I  am  convinced  that  it  will 
have  a  tendency  directly  the  reverse — that  it 
will  be  more  certain  in  its  operation,  more  sta- 
ble and  satisfactory  in  its  results.  If  the  gentle- 
man will  attend  to  the  reading  of  the  amend- 
ment I  propose,  he  will  find  that  no  provision  of 
the  constitution  can  be  altered  or  amended  with- 
out the  approval  of  the  legislature  at  two  ses- 
sions, by  a  majority  of  all  the  members,  and  that 
the  changes  thus  decided  upon  by  the  legisla- 
ture, must  have  the  consent  and  ratification  of  a 
majority  of  all  the  qualified  voters  of  the  state, 
at  two  elections,  before  such  changes  can  go  in- 
to operation.  The  same  deliberation,  the  same 
precaution,  the  same  time,  will  be  required,  to 
change  any  single  article,  or  section  of  the  con- 
stitution, as  will  be  neceesary,  by  the  plan  of 
the  committee,  to  change,  or  modify  the  whole 
instrument.  The  same  certainty,  the  same  secu- 
rity, the  same  guarantee  of  stability  is,  by  this 
means,  thrown,  like  a  shield,  around  eacn  arti- 
cle of  the  constitution,  separately,  and  by  itself, 
which  you  now  propose  to  throw  around  the 
whole  instrument;  and  I  hold  that  these  advan- 
tages will  be  much  more  effectually  secured  by 
the  mode  of  specific  amendments,  thus  suggest- 
ed, than  by  the  plan  proposed  by  the  gentleman 
from  Madison,  or  the  report  of  the  committee. 
From  what  source  does  the  gentleman  anticipate 
the  danger  he  appears  so  much  to  dreadV  Is  it 
from  the  legislature? — is  it  from  the  people?  I 
presume  not.  The  gentleman  admits  that  at 
first  he  was  in  favor  of  specific  amendments,  .ind 
says  he  was  almost  caught  in  the  snare.  I  have 
no  doubt  he  has  retrograded  a  little  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  I  have  as  little  doubt  that  most  of  the 
gentlemen  in  this  hall,  if  they  would  speak 
their  sentiments,  would  make  similar  confes- 
sions. And  what  has  produced  this  wondrous 
change?    Why,  sir,  there  wasaceitain  emanci- 


989 


pation  convention  assembled  here;  and  but  for 
the  propositions  mooted  in  tliat  assembly,  I 
have  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  most  of  the 
members  of  this  convention  would  have  been 
■warmly  in  favor  of  specific  amendments. 

I  would  ask  gentlemen,  if  they  believed,  prior 
to  the  assembling  of  that  convention,  that  spe- 
cific amendments  were  wise  and  expedient,  right 
and  proper,  what  has  taken  place,  so  fearful  in 
its  aspect,  to  cause  this  almost  universal  change 
of  sentiment"?  If  this  principle  was  right  be- 
fore, how  can  it  be  wrong  now'?  If  it  was  true 
before,  how  can  it  be  false  now?  If  it  was  safe 
and  secure  before,  what  has  taken  place  to  ren- 
der it  unsafe  and  dangerous  in  its  character  now? 
Why,  sir,  there  was  nothing  in  the  proceedings 
of  that  convention  which  should  have  led  gen- 
tlemen to  adopt  this  singular  change  of  senti- 
ment. There  were  only  two  propositions  that 
convention  proposed  to  have  engrafted  upon  the 
constitution — one,  "  the  absolute  prohibition  of 
the  importation  of  any  more  slaves  to  Ken- 
tucky"— ^the  other,  "  the  complete  power  in  the 
people  of  Kentucky  to  enforce,  and  to  perfect,  in 
or  under  the  new  constitution,  a  system  of  grad- 
ual prospectiv(!  emancipation." 

Tnese  were  the  objects — the  principles  which 
were  contended  for;  and  because  the  emancipa- 
tionists were  in  favor  of  specific  amendments,  or 
a.s  some  termed  it,  "  an  open  clause  "  in  the  con- 
stitution by  which  the  people  might  amend  or 
alter  it  by  a  bare  majority  of  their  number,  the 
hue  and  cry  was  posted  over  the  whole  state,  as 
though  it  were  on  the  wings  of  the  wind,  that 
the  institution  of  slavery  would  be  in  danger. 
Thus  gentlemen  were  induced  to  turn  ronud  and 
oppose  a  principle  right  in  itself,  and  which 
commended  itself  to  their  better  understand- 
ings,  merely  through  fear  of  an  imaginary  evil. 

Now,  sir,  I  would  ask,  can  we  not  provide  for 
this  specific  mode  of  amending  the  constitution, 
and  yet  throw  as  strong  a  safe-guard,  as  certain 

fuaranties,  around  the  institution,  by  this,  as 
y  any  other  means?  I  think  we  can;  and  that, 
we  can  do  it  much  better  by  this  plan  than  we 
can  either  by  the  mode  suggested  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Madison,  or  by  that  suggested  by  the 
committee. 

I  propose  to  guard  against  any  emancipation, 
without  the  consent  of  the  owner,  or  without 
full  compensation,  and  the  removal  of  the  eman- 
cipated slaves  from  the  state.  And  that  that 
provision  of  the  constitution,  as  well  as  the  pro- 
vision that  secures  to  every  man  the  enjoyment 
of  all  his  property,  and  tuat  provides  it  shall 
not  be  taken,  even  for  public  pumoses,  without 
compensation  first  paid  to  him,  sliall  never  be 
changed,  without  the  concurrence  of  two  thirds 
of  the  members  of  the  legislature,  at  two  ses- 
sions, and  a  majority  of  all  the  qualified  elec- 
tors of  the  state  at  two  elections.  Will  not  this 
place  the  institution  on  .safe  ground,  and  beyond 
danger? 

The  gentleman  says,  that  if  you  allow  the 
constitution  to  be  amended  by  any  proposition 
originating  with  the  legislature,  there  will  beso 
many  propositions  for  a  change  that  it  will  be 
necessary,  by  and  bye,  to  have  a  digest  of  the 
constitution.  Have  not  most  of  the  states  in 
the  union  power  to  amend  their  constitutions  in 
this  mode?    Certainly  they  have;  and  even  in 


the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  there  is  a 
provision  for  the  amending  of  that  instrument 
by  the  action  of  congress,  with  the  concurrence 
of  three  fourths  of  the  states.  That  instrument 
has  been  amended;  and  does  he  no"*"  require  a 
digest  to  determine  what  is  the  constitution  of 
the  United  States?  Sir,  it  is  true,  there  have 
been  but  few  amendments  adopted,  and  this 
proves  the  gentleman's  fears  are  without  founda- 
tion, and  I  conceive  the  gentleman  is  perfectly 
able  to  find  them  without  a  digest.  Ihe  same 
principle  which  I  here  suggest  has  prevailed  in 
twenty  three  out  of  the  thirty  states  of  this 
union,  and,  sir — 

Mr.  TURNER.     I  beg  to  inform  the  gentle-  ; 
man  that  it  is  disputed  even  now  what  the  con-  ► 
stitution  of  the  United  States  is.     This  specific  ;, 
amendment  system  has  been  so  loosly  carried  in-  i 
to  effect  that  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States    have   doubted   whether  two   important 
amendments  pa.ssed  by  congress  are  parts  of  that 
constitution. 

Mr.  GRAY.  The  gentleman  may  doubt  any 
thing  he  plea.ses;  he  may  say  that  the  supreme 
court  of  the  United  States  may  have  a  doubt 
about  these  amendments,  but  I  never  have  heard 
any  doubt  as  to  what  were  the  amendments  of 
the  coBstitutiou  of  the  United  States.  Some 
have  entertained  doubts  about  portions  of  our 
present  constitution,  and  in  relation  to  the  mode 
of  amending  it.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky  may  entertain  similar  doubts 
about  the  amendments  we  are  about  to  make 
here  in  the  constitution  of  the  state.  The  gen- 
tleman may  also  doubt  whether  these  amend- 
ments are  parts  of  the  constitution  or  not;  but 
sir,  there  can  be  no  more  doubt  about  amend- 
ments made  in  the  way  I  propose,  than  there  can 
be  about  those  made  in  any  other  way;  an<l  I 
will  say  more,  that  every  slave  state  in  this 
Union,  except  Virginia  and  Kentucky,  has 
adopted  this  specific  mode  of  amending  their 
constitutions.  Is  there  any  reason  then  on  the 
score  of  danger  to  the  institution  of  slavery, 
to  prevent  us  from  adopting  a  similar  provi's- 
ion?  Did  the  gentleman  ever  hear  of  a  single 
slave  state  that  had  adopted  this  mode,  aban- 
doning it  in  revising  their  constitutions?  In 
some  of  the  states  it  was  adopted  as  early  as 
1776,  and  continued  to  be  approved  of  to  the 
present  time.  Have  they  not  all  stood  by  it  to 
the  present  time?  We  find,  sir,  that  wherever 
this  mode  has  been  adopted  and  tried,  it  has 
given  universal  satisfaction.  Does  not  expe- 
rience leach  us  that  it  is  a  practicable,  a  proper 
mode,  and  that  it  is  suited  to  the  prosperity, 
;  the  liberty,  the  happiness,  ot  our  citizens,  and 
that  it  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  genius  of 
our  institutions?  It  seems  to  me  that  gentle- 
men allow  their  fears  to  carry  them  away  with- 
out reason. 

'  Now  sir,  according  to  the  plan  which  I  pro- 
;  pose,  I  contend  that  the  institution  of  slavery  or 
I  any  other  institution,  is  safer  than  when  you 
i  throw  the  whole  constitution — the  entire  rna- 
I  chinery  of  government — open  to  the  revision 
and  amendment  of  a  convention  like  this.  Here 
I  we  are  voting  and  managing  to  get  things  to 
{  suit  us,  and  when  we  have  done  all  this,  I  ask 
I  you  if  the  people  can  take  one  part  of  this  iit-w 
I  constitution  which  they  may  approve,  and  re- 


990 


jeot  that  wliich  they  disapprove?  No  sir.  They 
must  take  it  as  a  wliole,  as  we  have  made  it, 
«r  not  at  all.  But  by  the  mo<le  of  specific 
araeinlments,  you  may  take  it  section  by  section, 
and  in  this  way  have  it  ratified  by  the  people. 
Is  not  tliis  a  matter  highly  desirable?  Here 
there  can  be  no  combination  among  the  people 
for  any  ulterior  political  purpose,  but  they  take 
each  proposition  by  itself.  They  weigh  and 
consider  it  deliberately  and  calmly,  and  it 
stands  or  falls,  according  as  it  receives  their  ap- 
probation or  disapprobation.  But  sir,  is  that 
the  case  now?  'When  the  call  of  a  convention 
is  desired,  every  man  who  has  an  objection  to  any 
particular  part  of  the  constitution,  combines  and 
co-operates  with  every  other  man  who  has  an  ob- 
jection to  any  other  part.  And  thus  the  chances 
of  calling  a  convention  are  multiplied  in  propor- 
tion to  the  various  articles  or  sections  that  in- 
dividuals may  desire  to  have  changed.  At  the 
same  time  that  no  one  proposition  for  a  change 
could  secure  a  majority  of  the  voters  by  this 
combination  of  various  subjects,  you  involve  the 
state  in  the  agitation,  excitement,  hazard,  and 
expense  of  calling  a  convention,  and  throwing 
the  whole  fundamental  law  in  their  hands,  to  be 
altered,  modified,  or  abolished,  as  they  in  their 
wisdom  or  folly  may  think  proper.  Is  this  wise, 
is  it  prudent,  is  it  good  policy? 

Our  experience  here  amply  proves,  that  the 
people  cannot  tell  what  changes  will  be  made 
by  a  convention,  for  we  have  to  take  things  just 
as  we  can  get  them;  and  there  are  propositions 
thrown  in,  and  amendments  carried,  that  were 
never  spoken  of  before  the  people,  or  even 
dreamed  of  by  them;  and  we  have  to  take  these 
amendments  and  propositions,  just  as  a  majori- 
ty of  this  body  may  shape  them.  And,  sir, 
when  they  are  submitted  to  the  people,  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  there  may  be  a  vast  deal  in  the 
constitution  which  they  would  reject,  if  each 
part  could  be  taken  separately.  There  may,  sir, 
ue  many  provisions  in  this  constitution  that  the 
people  will  not  approve  of.  And  how  are  you 
to  remedy  the  evil?  Will  you  call  another  con- 
vention? Will  you  again  unsettle  the  whole 
state,  and  come  here  to  revise  and  amend,  to 
rescind  and  curtail  your  own  handiwork  for  the 
last  three  months?  Will  you  again  call  a  con- 
vention, at  the  cost  and  expense  of  forty  or  fifty 
thousand  dollars,  have  the  ship  of  state  again 
cut  loose  from  her  moorings,  and  cast  upon  the 
boisterous  and  foaming  sea  of  political  excite- 
ment and  agitation?  The  fear  of  this  ought.sir, 
to  deter  gentlemen  from  refusing  to  engraft  such 
a  provision  as  I  have  proposed  upon  the  consti- 
tution. If  gentlemen  will  only  take  up  the 
question  ana  examine  it  under  the  dictates  of 
reason  and  past  experience,  I  feel  satisfied  they 
■will  no  longer  hesitate  in  coming  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  a  specific  mode  of  amendment  ought  to 
be  provided  in  some  shape  or  other. 

I  am  not  wedded  to  the  particular  phraseolo- 
gy of  the  amendment.  If  any  better  can  be  sug- 
gested that  will  secure  the  specific  mode  and 
guard  the  riglits  of  property,  I  am  willinjj  to 
support  it.  lam  as  mudi  in  favor  of  continu- 
ing and  protecting  our  slave  institutions  as  any 
gentleman.  And  if  thert  be  any  other  plan  by 
which  it  can  be  more  surely  guarded  I  would  be 
willing  to  adopt  it.    By  this  mode  any  portion 


of  the  constitution  that  fails  to  secure  the  rights 
of  the  people,  to  answer  the  ends  and  purposes 
for  which  it  was  instituted;  any  portion  that 
"experience  points  out  the  necessity  of  chang- 
ing, may  be  changed  by  the  legislature  and  the 
proposed  alteration,  singly  and  separately,  sub- 
mitted to  the  investigation  and  consideration  of 
the  people,  for  their  ratification  or  rejection. 
This  can  be  done  too  without  that  feverish  ex- 
citement, that  restless  anxiety,  that  tumult  and 
violence,  that  commotion  and  agitation,  that  in- 
variably, unavoidably  and  necessarily  attends 
the  putting  to  hazard;  the  subversion  and  over- 
throw of  the  fundamental  rules  and  principles 
that  seciire  the  citizens  in  the  enjoyment  of  their 
inappreciable  and  inviolable  rights  and  privi- 
leges, for  the  preservation  of  which  civil  govern- 
ments are  founded  and  instituted. 

Does  not  experience  teach  us  that  this  is  right 
and  proper — that  it  is  safe,  judicious,  and  wise — 
and  that  no  evil  can  result  from  it?  Then  I  beg 
of  gentlemen  to  suffer  their  reason  to  operate;  let 
them  pass  over  those  ghosts  of  emancipation 
which  they  appear  so  much  to  dread;  let  them 
discard  these  imaginary  evils;  let  reason  resume 
the  throne;  let  them  look  at  this  matter  in  its 
true  light;  and  if  they  will  do  this,  I  am  persua- 
ded they  will  at  once  come  to  the  conclusion 
with  me,  that  the  mode  of  specific  amendments 
is  the  very  best  that  can  be  adopted. 

There  is  also  great  economy  in  this  plan. 
Many  gentlemen  of  this  body  are  rigid  and 
strict  economists.  1  trust  I  shall  have  the  aid 
and  co-operation  of  all  such.  Economy  is  a 
matter  of  great  moment — and  iu  a  govern- 
ment of  the  people,  like  ours,  entitled  to 
due  weight  and  consideration.  It  should  have 
due  regard  and  attention,  both  in  private  and 
public  affairs.  Without  it  in  private  affairs,  es- 
tates the  most  magnificent,  and  fortunes  the  most 
princely,  are  soon  dissipated  and  squandered, 
and  utter  ruin,  bankruptcy,  and  distress,  are 
brought  upon  individualsand  families.  Without 
it  in  public  affairs,  the  highest  prosperity  and 
greatest  happiness  are  soon  lost,  and  insolvency, 
repudiation,  and  disgrace  are  fastened  upon  the 
state  and  government.  This  proposition  will 
enable  the  people,  whenever  they  desire  it,  to 
change,  alter,  or  modify  any  portion  of  their 
fundamental  law,  without  cost  or  expense.  It 
is  only  necessary  for  the  legislature  to  propose 
the  amendment,  and  submit  it  to  be  voted  upon 
by  the  people,  at  the  general  elections. 

And,  sir,  I  think  the  question  of  slavery,  and 
the  security  of  all  other  property,  is  guarded 
there  in  as  ample  a  manner  as  any  gentleman 
can  desire.  The  proposition  I  make  is  one  that 
I  contended  for  before  my  constituents  at  home, 
and  I  believe  it  meets  their  approbation.  But, 
sir,  I  am  willing  to  compromise  that  matter,  if 
you  will  only  give  us  some  way  of  reaching  tlie 
evils  which  we  may  have  incorporated  in  our 
constitution,  without  the  trouble,  expense,  and 
agitation  of  a  convention.  Sir,  we  have  launch- 
ed out  into  an  unknown  sea. 

We  have  adopted  some  features  and  principles 
iu  this  constitution  that  are  new  and  untried 
with  the  people  of  Kentucky.  We  know  not 
how  they  will  operate.  Expt-rience  may  point 
out  the  necessity  of  their  change  or  modification. 
Y<'t  no  power  is  reserved  to  the  people  ;  no  mode 


991 


provided  to  make  such  changes — to  secure  such 
modifications,  without  the  expense  and  excite- 
ment of  another  convention.  The  increase, 
growth,  and  business  of  the  state,  may  require 
the  addition  of  another  circuit  iudpe,  and  judi- 
cial district;  it  cannot  be  proviaed  for,  without 
a.  convention.  Calamities  or  misfortune  may 
render  it  necessary  to  borrow  a  few  hundred 
thousand  dollars.  A  convention  must  be  called. 
The  people  may  desire  to  change  the  mode  of 
appointing  the  auditor,  register,  or  any  other 
officer  of  the  government;  a  convention  is  the 
only  means  of  securing  it.  They  may  desire  to 
place  some  restriction  on  the  taxing  power  of  the 
general  assembly.  A  convention  is  the  only 
remedy.  Will  you,  sir,  deny  to  the  people  the 
power  to  make  any — the  slightest,  the  most  un- 
important change  or  modification  of  their  fun- 
damental law,  without  the  expense  of  a  conven- 
tion? Certainly  it  would  not  be  wise  to  adopt 
any  such  principle.  If  I  could  see  any  danger 
in  the  world  tliat  would  be  likely  to  arise  from 
the  adoption  of  the  principle  which  I  suggest,  I 
would  have  much  hesitation  in  coming  forward 
with  it;  but  when  the  experiment  has  been  tried 
in  every  section  of  the  Union,  alike  where 
slavery  does  not  exist,  and  where  it  does  exist; 
whenit  has  been  tried  all  over  the  Union,  in 
the  sunny  south  and  in  the  frigid  north;  in  every 
climate  and  where  every  kind  of  property  ancl 
every  kind  of  right  exists;  when  it  has  thus 
been  tried  and  approved  by  all.  And  not  only 
have  other  states,  in  all  times  since  the  forma- 
tion of  our  government  approved  of  this  plan; 
but  the  friends  of  a  convention  and  constitution- 
al reform  in  Kentucky,  assembled  in  conven- 
tion in  this  hall  in  1847  and  1848  have  recom- 
mended and  approved  this  same  principle. 
In  their  manifesto  published  to  the  world 
as  containing  the  changes  and  amendments  they 
desired  to  see  engrafted  on  our  old  constitution, 
they  unanimously  say  upon  this  subject,  "  By 
the  ninth  article  of  the  present  constitution,  the 
whole  instrument  must  be  submitted,  to  make 
the  most  unimportant  amendments.  We  think, 
rather  than  put  the  whole  machinery  and  form 
of  government  to  hazard  for  the  purpose  of  cor- 
recting an  isolated  error,  it  would  be  better  to 
submit  a  single  proposition  for  amendment  to 
the  consideratiou,  first  of  the  legislature,  and 
then  of  the  people,  under  such  restrictions  as 
shall  be  deemed  advisable  and  safe.  Public 
opinion  may  then  be  consulted  upon  a  single 
proposition  witliout  the  danger  of  combinations 
on  other  subjects."  Several  members  of  this 
body,  Mr.  President,  signed  that  manifesto,  and 
under  that  banner  the  battle  of  reform  was 
fought  and  won;  and  now  we  see  the  victors 
ready  to  abandon  their  own  standard. 

I  ask  if  we  ought  now,  in  revising  this  con- 
stitution, to  abandon  it?  la-it  not  cowardly? 
I  hope  the  good  sense  of  this  body^-  notwith- 
standing the  prejudice  which  has  been  cheated 
against  this  plan,  will  induce  them  to  consider 
the  proposition  calmly  and  seriously;  and  tljat 
before  we  finally  separate  we  shall  have 
adopted  some  plan  Dy  which  .some  por- 
tions of  our  constitution  may  be  amended, 
when  experience  shall  prove  it  to  be  neces- 
sary, without  putting  to  hazard  the  whole  in- 
Btrument.    Are  not  gentlemen  fully  aware  that 


ha<l  we  had  such  a  provision  in  our  old  consti- 
tution, there  would  never  have  been  the  agita- 
tion in  the  state  which  we  have  recently  wit- 
nessed? We  should,  sir,  have  had  no  excite- 
ment, no  expense,  no  convention,  and  very  prob- 
ably a  much  better  constitution  than  we  will 
have  when  all  our  labore  have  terminated  here. 

If  then,  sound  policy,  common  sense,  and  a 
proper  regard  for  economy,  require  it — if  rea- 
son supports  and  justifies  it — if  authority  the 
most  unquestionable  favors  it — if  time  and  ex- 
perience sanction  and  approve  it,  as  the  best, 
most  economical,  and  safest  mode  of  revising 
the  constitution,  why  sir,  will  you  hesitate  to 
adopt  it? 

I  felt  it  to  be  my  duty,  sir,  to  present  this  mat- 
ter to  the  convention  for  its  adoption;  and  I  will 
only  add,  that  if  any  other  mode  of  specific 
amendment  should  be  suggested,  more  in  accor- 
dance with  the  views  of  a  majority  of  the  con- 
vention, and  that  will  secure  the  rights  of  the 
people,  I  will,  most  cheerfully,  accord  it  my 
support. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Mr.  President,  I  have  no 
speech  to  make,  but  I  have  a  resolution  to  offer 
when  a  fitting  time  shall  present  itself,  to  test 
the  sense  of  this  convention  on  the  question  in- 
volved in  the  article  before  us,  on  which,  I  pre- 
sume the  mind  of  every  gentleman  is  made  up. 
I  will  send  my  resolution  to  the  secretary's  desk 
that  it  may  be  read  for  information. 

The  secretary  read  it  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  this  convention  is  opposed  to 
any  and  all  specific  modes  of  amendment,  and 
will  not  adopt  any  specific  mode  of  amending 
the  constitution." 

The  PRESIDENT  said  it  was  not  now  in  or- 
der to  offer  the  resolution. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  to  amend  the  original 
report,  by  inserting  the  words  "except  ministers 
of  the  gospel  who  shall  be  eligible,"  in  the 
twenty  second  line.  The  object  of  the  amend- 
ment was  to  render  ministers  of  the  gospel  eligi- 
ble to  seats  in  any  future  convention  that  may 
be  called  to  amend  the  constitution. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  said  the  words  were 
omitted  in  his  report  by  accident,  and  he  in- 
tended to  supply  them. 

Mr.  CLARKE  moved  the  postponement  of 
the  further  consideration  of  this  article,  that  he 
might  take  the  sense  of  the  convention  on  the 
resolution  which  he  had  caused  to  be  read.  He 
thought  much  time  might  be  saved  if  this  course 
were  taken,  as  the  sense  of  the  convention 
would  be  indicated  on  a  very  important  principle. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  DESHA  appealed  to  the  convention  to 
pass  over  the  business  before  it,  that  the  course 
suggested  by  the  gentleman  from  Simpson  might 
be  tried. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  for  that  purpose, 
moved  that  the  article  under  consideration  be 
laid  upon  tlie  table  for  the  present. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  CLARKE  then,  by  general  consent,  sub- 
mitted his  resolution. 

Mr.  R.  N.  WICKLIFFE  moved  the  previous 
question  upon  it,  and  the  main  question  was  or- 
dered to  be  now  put. 

Mr.  GRAY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays,  and 
they  were,  yeas  60,  nays  29. 


'J  92 


Ykas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Wm.  Bradley,  Tlios.  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bul- 
litt, Charles  Chambers  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Bev- 
erly L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Green  Forrest,  James  H.  Gar- 
rard, Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hendrix, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  George 
W.  Johnston,  Chas.  C.  Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  N.  Liudsey,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Wil- 
liam N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
MeChlte,  David  Meriwether,  Wm.  D.  Mitchell, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijali  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lara,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John 
J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett, 
Squire  Turner,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  W^ick- 
liffe— 60. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Luther 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  Chenault, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Benj.  Copelin,  Lucius  Desha,  Jas. 
Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  NinianE. 
Gray,  Vincents.  Hay,  M.  E.  Huston,  W.Johnson, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Wil- 
lis B.  Machen,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  John  D.  Mor- 
ris, Jonathan  Newcum,  Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira 
Root,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  Wheeler,  George 
W.  William,  Silas  Woodson — 29. 

So  the  convention  declared  itself  opposed  to 
all  specific  modes  of  amendment. 

EVENING   SESSION. 

Mr.  BROWN  withdrew  the  amendment  which 
he  offered  at  the  morning  session,  as  it  was  now 
unnecessary. 

Mr.  GRAY  also  withdrew  his  amendment, 
the  vote  on  Mr.  CLARKE'S  resolution  having 
settled  the  principle  which  it  contained. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  substitute 
of  the  gentleman  from  Madison,  and  it  was  re- 
jected. 

Mr.  THOMPSON.  I  beg  to  offer  the  follow- 
ing as  a  substitute  for  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee: 

"When  experience  shall  point  out  the  necessi- 
ty of  amending  this  constitution,  and  when  a 
majority  of  all  the  members  elected  to  each 
house  of  the  general  assembly  shall,  within  the 
first  twenty  days  of  their  stated  biennial  seesion, 
concur  in  passing  a  law  for  taking  the  sense  of 
the  good  people  of  this  state,  as  to  the  necessity 
and  expeaiency  of  calling  a  convention,  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  several  sheriffs,  and  other  re- 
turning officers,  at  the  next  general  election 
which  shall  be  held  for  representatives  after 
the  passage  of  such  law,  to  open  a  poll  in 
which  the  qualified  electors  of  this  state  shall 
express,  by  vote,  whether  they  are  in  favor  of 
calling  a  convention  or  not ;  and  said  sheriffs 
and  returning  officers  shall  make  return  to  the 
secretary,  for  the  time  being,  of  the  names  of  all 
those  electors  voting  at  such  election;  and  if, 
thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a  majority  of  the 
qualified  electors  of^  this  state,  voting  at  such 


election,  have  voted  for  calling  a  convention, 
the  general  assembly  shall,  at  their  next  regular 
session,  direct  that  a  similar  poll  shall  be  open- 
ed and  taken  at  the  next  election  for  representa- 
tives; and  if,  thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a 
majority  of  all  the  electors  of  this  state,  voting 
at  such  election,  have  voted  for  calling  a  con- 
vention, the  general  assembly  shall,  at  their  next 
session,  call  a  convention,  to  consist  of  as  many 
members  as  there  shall  be  in  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives, and  no  more,  to  be  chosen  in  the 
same  manner  and  proportion,  at  the  same  places, 
and  at  the  same  time  that  representatives  are, 
by  the  electors  qualified  to  vote  for  representa- 
tives, and  to  meet  within  three  months  after  said 
election,  for  the  purpose  of  re-adopting,  amend- 
ing, or  changing  this  constitution.  But  if  it 
shall  appear  by  the  vote  of  either  year,  as  afore- 
said, that  a  majority  of  all  the  qualified  electors 
voting  at  such  election,  did  not  vote  for  a  con- 
vention, a  convention  shall  not  be  called." 

I  will  briefly  state  the  difference  between  this 
proposition  and  that  of  the  committee.  Under 
the  old  mode,  all  the  qualified  voters,  according 
to  the  last  enumeration,  who  did  not  vote — no 
matter  whether  they  were  in  the  state  or  out  of 
it — would  be  counted  as  against  a  convention. 
For  instance,  if  a  man  died  or  removed  out  of 
the  state,  his  name  still  being  on  the  roll,  he 
would  be  counted  as  against  a  convention.  This 
was  the  case  in  1847,  when  many  of  our  voters 
were  in  Mexico.  My  proposition  is  that  you 
should  only  count  the  votes  which  are  polled. 
This  is  the  principle  pursued  throughout  the 
country  in  other  respects.  In  amending  our 
constitution  here,  all  our  decisions  are  made  by 
the  actual  vote;  we  do  not  count  the  votes  of  the 
absentees;  and  I  well  know  that  if  you  did, 
there  are  many  sections  that  have  passed,  which 
would  have  oeen  rejected,  and  many  rejected 
which  would  have  been  carried.  The  law,  sir, 
should  go  into  effect  by  the  vote  which  is  cast. 
When  we  come  to  submit  this  constitution  to 
the  vote  of  the  people,  whose  ratification  or  re- 
jection is  to  be  final  as  to  all  that  is  done  here, 
1  presume  we  will  test  that  question  bv  the  vote 
polled,  and  that  we  will  not  permit  these  votes 
to  be  counted  against  the  constitution,  which 
have  not  been  cast.  This  is  the  only  difference 
between  my  proposition  and  that  of  the  com- 
mittee. I  am  opposed  to  specific  amendments. 
There  are,  no  doubt,  many  provisions  in  this 
constitution,  which  the  people  may  wish  to 
change.  Under  my  proposition,  they  will  have 
ample  time  to  consider  any  proposed  change;  for 
from  its  first  agitation  till  its  final  decision,  will 
be  a  period  of  about  four  years.  I  think,  there- 
fore, that  we  ought  to  carry  out  the  same  prin- 
ciple which  governs  us  in  all  other  things. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER,  This  is  a  plain  propo- 
sition, and  the  convention  can  easily  decide  it. 
The  principle  is  not  changed  at  all;  and  the 
committee  adopted  the  old  provision  in  the  be- 
lief that  it  was  the  most  just  and  equal  in  its 
operations.  If  it  be  the  wish  of  this  conven- 
tion to  let  another  convention  be  called,  wJien- 
ever  those  voting  at  the  polls  should  go  for  it, 
they  will  adopt  the  gentleman's  proposition; 
but  if  they  deem  it  necessary  that  there  should 
be  a  full  expression  of  opinion,  and  that  a  ma- 
jority of  all  the  votes  should  bo  required,  they 


Will  sustain  the  proposition  of  the  committee. 

The  gentleman  mentioned  the  circumstance  of 
the  votes  of  absentees  being  counted  against  the 
convention;  but  he  did  not  consider  the  votes  of 
those -who  had  attained  their  twenty -first  year, 
and  of  those  who  had  migrated  into  the  state.  I 
think,  taking  the  two  things  together,  the  mat- 
ter will  stand  about  equal. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  his  proposition,  and  they  were — ^yeas  9,  nays 
77". 

Yeas— Milford  Elliott,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  Wm. 
Hendrix,  James  M.  Lackey,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall, 
Ira  Root,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Silas  Woodson — 9. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie.)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad- 
lev.  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos. 
D'  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Cham- 
bers ^'m.  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Bev- 
frly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  ColFey,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edward's, 
Gretn  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Gar- 
rani,  Richard  D.  Gliolson,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
,lRine5  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis, 
Vincent  3.  Hav,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E. 
Huston,  James  t\^.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C. 
Kelly,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin 
P.  Marshall.  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan 
Neweum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henrv  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T. 
Robinson,  Th(mias  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner, 
Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S. 
W'hite,  Cha.s.  A.  Wickl^^ffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
Georgf  W.  Williams — 77. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

The  questicm  then  recurred  on  the  adoption  of 
lh<-  section  reported  bv  the  committee,  as  modi- 
fied. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALlJ.  I  move  to  amend 
by  striking  out  the  following  words;  "atilie 
u'fxt  regular  session,  direct  that  a  similar  poll 
shall  be  opened,  and  return  made,  for  the  next 
election  for  representatives;  and  if,  thereupon, 
it  shall  appear  that  a  majority  of  all  tlie  citizens 
of  this  .-tate,  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives, 
have  voted  for  calling  a  convention,  the  general 
assembly  shall." 

I  am  m  favor  of  retaining  as  much  of  the  old 
constitution  as  possible,  and  averse  to  making 
anv  change,  except  such  as  are  absolutelv  re- 
quired upon  principle;  and  if  there  had  been 
no  change  maao  in  the  present  constitution  by 
the  one  we  are  about  to  propose  to  the  people,  I 
should  not  have  moved  for  any  change  at  all.  I 
like  the  spirit  of  the  present  constitution,  and 
also  the  .spirit  of  the  report  of  the  committee. 
It  is  that  the  people  in  amending  their-constitu- 
tion  shall  do  it  under  calm  reflection;  and  that 
125 


I  it  shall  notSe'dorie   under  Qie  Influence  of  pas- 
sion,  or  any  sudden  dissatisfaction  with  the  in- 
'  strument  itself,  at  the   time  it  shall  be  given  to 
i  them  for  consideration.     I  should   not  have  of- 
^  fered  any  amendment,  if  the  carrying  out  of  the 
plan  proposed  by  the  committee  3id  not  depend 
upon  other  parts  of  the  constitution  which  have 
been  made  different.    We  have  changed  our  time 
of  holding  elections.     We  now  elect  our  repre- 
sentatives  every  second   year  instead  of  every 
year.     If  we  adopt  the  report  of  the  committee 
just  as   it  is,  it   will   require   six  years  to  call  a 
convention.     We  have  our  elections  but  once  in 
two  years;  the  legislature  will  meet  and  direct 
whether  there  shall  be  a  call  for  a  convention  or 
not.     The  election  does   not  happen   till   two 
j  years  afterwards;  that  will  be  four  years  before 
jthe  action   of  the   jjeople  will  be  known,  and 
there  will  be  a  period  of  two   years  more  before 
I  the  legislature  will  meet  to  call  a  convention.    I 
j  think  this  is  rather  too  long.     In  my  judgment, 
i  it  is  true,  in  a  somewhat  qualified  sense,  that  the 
\  people  have  at  all  times  the  right  to  abolish 
!  their  form  of  government;  and  I  think  that  in  a 
j  measure  this  right  is  taken  away,  by  putting  it 
out  of  their  power,  except  after  six  years'  delay. 
If  it  had  been  contemplated  in  the  report  of  the 
I  committee,  that  those  elections  should  have  been 
':  held    everv    year,    as   under  the  present   con- 
jstitution,  I  would  not  have  been  in  favor  of  the 
i  people  speaking  but  once  upon  the  subject;  but 
i  as  it  requires  two  years   between  each  election, 
I  think  it  is  attempting  to  fasten  too  decided- 
'  ly  upon  the  community  tlie  work  of  our  hands, 
to  say  that  however  much  they  may  be  dissatis- 
I  fied   with    it,  however  much   it   may  militate 
I  against  the  prosperity  of  the  people,  and  instead 
j  of  being  a  shield  to   guard   and   protect  their 
{rights,  takes  away  those  rights  which  they  have 
I  already  enjoyed.     I  think   under  these  circum- 
stances, that  we  are  fixing  too  long  a  period  of 
probation  in  requiring  six  years  before  their  will 
;  shall  be  carried  into  effect.      I  do  hope  that  the 
i  mere  statement  of  the  fact  will  convince  every 
i  gentleman   here  of  the  impropriety  of  keeping 
the  people  so   long  without  an   opportunity  of 

■  amending  our  work. 

;  Mr.  GHOLSON.  I  should  like  to  vote  under- 
•' standingly  upon  this  question.  If  by  the  term 
"general  election  for  representatives"  it  is  meant 
i  to  be  confined  to  the  time  at  which   representa- 

■  tives  to  the  legislature  are  to  be  elected,  tlie  gen- 
i  tleman's  remarks  would  be  true.  If  I  under- 
j  derstand  the  provision  made  by  the  convention 
:  on   this  subject,  the  election  for  judicial   and 

■  other  officers  is  to  come  oflt  one  year,  and  that  of 
1  members  of  congress  and  the  legislature  another 

year.  I  should  like,  when  a  majority  are  to  vote 
for  any  alteration  of  the  constitution,  that  it 
should  be  done  the  next  year,  without  the  inter- 
vention of  a  year  in  which  there  is  no  election. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER.  Instead  of  providing 
that  the  legislature  shall  act  a'  second  time,  the 
general  assembly  shall  direct  tliat  it  shall  be 
done  at  two  successive  elections.  Strike  out 
the.se  words,  if  you  please,  which  direct  that 
the  general  assembly  shall  direct  the  alteration. 

Mr.  TURNER.  Xre  we  then  to  have  the  peo- 
ple consulted  at  one  election  when  they  vote  fpr 
their  representatives,  and  again  at  another 
election  when  they  vote  for  their  judicial  offi- 


C94 


cers,  and  thus  have  this  matter  agitated  a  thou- 
sand times?  I  for  one,  sir,  have  no  wish  to  live 
under  so  unstable  a  form  of  government. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  I  saw  very  well  that 
the  convention  oould  have  the  matter  so  altered; 
fcut  I  understood  that  it  was  the  desire  of  this 
convention  to  separate  as  far  as  possible  from 
the  judicial  elections  of  the  state  all  questions 
of  an  exciting  political  character;  and  as  the 
proposition  I  nave  made  appears  to  meet  the  case 
exactly,  and  cannot  be  objected  to  as  forming  an 
element  of  agitation  in  the  civil  elections  of  the 
state,  I  think  it  is  better  that  it  should  be  done. 
If  the  house  is  of  a  different  opinion  I  must  of 
course  acquie-^ce.  I  am  far  from  being  anxious 
that  anything  that  is  done  here  should  bear  the 
impress  of  my  hand;  so  that  the  object  is  at- 
tained, it  is  to  me  a  matter  of  perfect  indiffer- 
ence by  whose  instrumentality  it  is  effected. 

Mr.  ROOT  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  motion  to  strike  out,  and  they  were  yeas  5, 
nays  81. 

Yeas — Vincent  S.  Hav,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, Ira  Root,  Wm.  R.  'f liompson,  Silas  Wood- 
son— 5. 

Nays — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,    John   L.    Ballinger,  John  S.   Barlow, 
William    K.    Bowling,  Alfred   Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  William 
Chenault,  James    S.    Ohrisman,    Jesse    Coffey, 
Henry    R.    D.    Coleman,    Benjamin     Copelin, 
William  Cowper,   Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,   Benjamin  F.   Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H.   Garrard,  Richard 
D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Grav, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargfs, 
William    Heaidrix,    Andrew     Hood,    Mark    E. 
Huston,   Alfred   M.   Jackson,    Thomas  James, 
Wm.  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kellv,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  5^.  Lindsey,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Martin   P.   Marshall,    William   N.  Mar- 
shall,   Richard   L.   Mayes,    Nathan     McClure, 
David  Meriwether,  William   D.  Mitchell,  John 
D.  Morris,  Jonathan   Ncwcum    Hugh   Newell, 
fclijah   F.   Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William 
Preston,    Johnson    Price,    John  T.  Robinson, 
Thomas    Rockhold,  John    T.   Rogers,    James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John   W.  Steven- 
son, Jas.  W.   Stone,  John   D.  Taylor,  John.  J. 
Thurman,    Howard     Todd,     Philip    Triplett, 
3quire  Turner,  Henrv  Washington,  Jno.  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams— 81. 
So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 
Mr.  BARLOW  moved  the  previous  question 
on  the  section.     The  main  question  was  ordered 
to  be  now  put,  and  the  first  section  was  adopted. 
Th«  question  was  next  taken  on  the  second 
aection,  and  it  was  agreed  to,  and  the  entire  re- 
port ira8  adopted. 

DEBATES  AND  JOVRNALS. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  offered  a  resolution, 
vfhich  after  receiving  some  modifications  was 
idopted,  as  follows : 

"K€»*lt(d,  That  one  copy  of  thejoamal,  and 


one  copy  of  the  debates  of  the  convention  b» 
deposited  in  the  county  clerk's  office  of  each 
county,  to  be  kept  as  other  public  books  are 
kept  by  the  clerk,  that  one  copy  of  each  be  pre- 
sented to  the  delegates  and  officers  and  reporter 
of  this  convention,  and  to  the  ministers  of  the 
gospel  in  attendance  on  the  convention,  and  that 
the  remainder  of  the  five  hundred  be  deposited 
in  the  public  library." 

On  tne  motion  of 'Mr.  GHOLSON  the  commit- 
tee of  the  whole  was  discharged  from  the  furth- 
er consideration  of  the  series  of  resolutions  in  re- 
lation to  the  quieting  of  land  titles,  <fec.,  which 
he  introduced  at  an  early  period   of  the  session. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


SATURDAY,  DECEMBER  15,  1849 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Stuart  Robixsox. 

XEW    MEMBER. 

Mr.  ROBERT  D.  MAUPIN,  delegate  from 
the  county  of  Barren,  took  his  seat  this  day. 
The  oath  was  administered  to  him  by  chief  jus- 
tice Marshall. 

COMMITTEE    OF   REVISION. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL, 
Mr.  TURNER  wais  added  to  the  committee  to 
arrange  and  revise  the  several  articles  of  the 
new  constitution. 

MISCELLANEOUS  PROVrSTONS. 

Mr.  STEVENSON,  from  the  committee  on 
miscellaneous  provisions,  made  the  following 
report,  and, on  his  motion,  it  was  laid  on  the  ta- 
ble and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

SCHEDULE. 

That  no  inconvenience  may  arise  from  the  al- 
terations and  amendments  made  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  this  commonwealth,  and  in  order  to  carry 
the  same  into  complete  operation,  it  is  hereby 
declared  and  ordained: 

Sec.  1.  That  all  the  laws  of  this  common- 
wealth, in  lorce  at  the  time  of  making  tlie  .said 
alterations  and  amendments,  and  all  rights,  ac- 
tions, prosecutions,  claims,  and  contracts,  as 
well  of  individuals  as  of  bodies  corporate,  shall 
continue  as  if  the  said  alterations  and  amend- 
ments had  not  been  made. 

Sec.  2.  The  oaths  of  office  herein  directed  to 
be  taken  mav  be  administered  by  any  judge 
or  justice  of  the  peace,  until  the  legislature  shall 
otherwise  direct. 

Sec.  3.  No  office  shall  be  superceded  by  the 
alterations  and  amendments  made  in  the  con- 
stitution of  this  commonwealth,  but  the  laws 
of  the  state  relative  to  the  duties  of  the  sev- 
eral officere,  executive,  judicial,  and  military, 
shall  remain  in  full  force,  though  the  .same  5e 
contrary  to  said  alterations  and  amen<lment.s. 
and  the  several  duties  shall  be  performed  by  the 
respective  officers  of  the  state,  according  to  the 
existing  laws,  until  the  organization  of  the  gov-, 
eminent,  as  provided  for  under  this  new  consti- 
tution, and  the  entering  into  offico  of  the  new 


M 


officers  to  be  elected  or  a^Jpointed  under  said 
government,  and  do  longer. 

Sec.  4.  Immediately  after  the  adiournroent  of 
the  convention,  the  governor  shall  issue  his 
proclamation,  directing  the  several  sheriff's  and 
other  returning  officers  of  the  several  counties 
of  this  state,  authorized  by  law  to  hold  elections 
for  members  of  the  general  assembly,  to  open 
and  hold  a  poll  in  every  county  of  the  state,  and 
in  the  city  of  Louisville,  at  the  places  and  pre- 
cincts designated  by  law  for  the  holding  the 
presidential  election  in  1843,  upon  the  first  Mon- 
day of  May,  1850,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  the 
sense  of  the  good  people  of  this  state,  in  regard 
to  the  adoption  or  rejection  of  this  constitution: 
and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  said  officers,  to 
receive  the  rotes  of  all  persons  entitled  to  vote 
for  members  of  the  general  assenobly  under  the 
present  constitution.  The  said  ofecers  shall 
open  a  poll  with  two  separate  columns:  "For 
the  new  Constitution,"  "  Against  the  new  Constitu- 
tion," and  shall  address  each  voter  presenting 
himself,  the  question:  "Are  you  in  favor  of 
adopting  the  new  constitution?"  and  if  he  shall 
answer  in  the  affirmative,  his  vote  shall  be  re- 
corded in  the  column  for  the  new  constitution; 
and  if  he  shall  answer  in  the  negative,  his  an- 
swer shall  be  set  down  in  the  column  against 
the  new  constitution.  The  said  election  shall 
be  conducted  for  one  day,  and  in  every  other 
respect,  as  the  state  election  for  representatives 
to  the  general  a'isembly  are  now  conducted ;  and 
■on  the  Thursday  succeeding  the  said  election, 
the  various  sheriffs  conducting  said  election  at 
the  different  preciuct.«,  shall  assemble  at  the 
county  seat  of  their  respective  counties,  and 
compare  the  polls  of  said  election,  and  shall 
furthwith  make  due  returns  thereof  to  the  secre- 
tary of  state,  in  conformity  to  the  provisions  of 
the  existing  laws  upon  the  subject  of  elections 
of  members  of  the  general  assembly.  The  coun- 
ty courts  of  the  various  counties  of  the  common- 
wealth shall,  at  their  March  or  April  terms  of 
their  said  courts,  appoint  two  judges,  a  clerk, 
and  deputy  sheriff,  to  superintend  and  conduct 
said  elections. 

Sec.  5.  Upon  the  receipt  of  the  said  returns, 
lo-wit:  on  tne  first  Monday  in  June,  1850,  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  governor,  the  secretary 
"of  State,  the  second  auditor,  ana  attorney  gen- 
eral, in  the  presence  of  all  such  persons  as  may 
•choose  to  attend,  to  compare  the  votes  given  at 
the  said  poll,  for  the  ratification  or  rejection  of 
ithis  constitution;  and  if  it  shall  appear  from 
^aid  returns  that  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  giv- 
^n  are  for  ratifying  and  adopting  this  constitu- 
tion, tiien  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  governor  to 
inafce  proclamation  of  that  fact,  and  thenceforth 
this  canstitution  shall  be  ordained  and  estab- 
lished as  the  constitution  of  the  commonwealth 
•of  Kentucky.  If  it  shall  appear  from  said  re- 
turns that  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  given  is  for 
ithe  rejection  of  the  new  constitution,  then  it 
shall  be  tke  duty  of  the  governor  to  make  proc- 
lamation af  that  fact,  and,  in  that  event,  the 
ipresent  cosstitution  shall  be  re-adopted  as  the 
constitution  of  the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 
"Whether  the  new  constitution  be  accepted  or 
rejected,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  governor  to 
cause  to  be  published  in  the  newspapers  called 
the  Commonwealth,  and  Yeoman,  published  in 


Frankfort,  the  it-sults  of  the  polls,  showing fbe 
numlxr  of  votes  cast  in  eacn  county,  for  and 
against  the  said  constitution. 

Sec.  6.  Should  the  constitution  be  accepted 
by  the  people,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  gov- 
ernor, as  soon  as  the  official  vote  is  published,  to 
issue  his  proclamation,  declaring  the  legislature 
elected  under  the  old  constitution  to  be  dis- 
solved, and  directing  the  several  sheriffs  of  all 
the  counties  in  this  state  to  hold  an  election  at 
the  places  designated  by  law,  upon  the 
of  ,  1850,  for  members  of  the  general  as- 

sembly. And  the  said  election  shall  continue 
i  for  one  day,  and  shall  be  conducted,  and  the 
returns  thereof  made,  in  all  other  respects,  in 
conformity  with  the  existing  laws  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  state  elections. 

Sec.  7.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general  as- 
sembly elected  under  this   constitution,  at  its 
first  session,  to  order  and  provide  for  an  election 
to  be  held  in  every  county  of  this  state,  on  the 
day  of  for  all  state  and  county 

officers  under  this  constitution,  except  those 
whose  election  have  been  already  provided  for 
and  designated  ic  this  constitution. 

Sec.  8.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general  as- 
sembly elected  under  this  constitution,  at  its 
first  session,  to  make  an  apportionment  of  the 
representation  of  this  state,  upon  the  principle 
set  forth  in  this  constitution;  and  until  the  first 
apportionment  shall  be  made  as  herein  directed, 
the  apportionment  of  senators  and  representa- 
tives aincHjg  the  several  districts  and  counties  in 
this  state,  shall  remain  as  at  present  fixed  by 
law. 

Sec.  9.  All  recognizances  heretofore  taken,  or 
which  may  be  taken  before  the  organization  of 
the  judicial  department  under  this  constitution, 
shall  remain  valid,  and  shall  pass  over  to,  and 
may  be  prosecuted  in  the  name  of  the  common- 
wealth. All  criminal  prosecutions  and  penal 
actions  which  have  arisen,  or  may  arise,  before 
the  re-organization  of  the  judicial  department 
under  this  constitution,  and  which  shall  then  be 
depending,  may  be  prosecuted  to  judgment  and 
execution,  in  the  name  of  the  state. 

Sec.  10.  In  the  trial  of  any  criminal  ease,  the 
jury  shall  be  judges  of  law  and  fact. 

Sec.  11.  The  general  assembly  shall  provide, 
by  law,  for  the  trial  of  any  contested  election  of 
auditor,  register,  treasurer,  attorney  general, 
judges  of  circuit  courts,  and  all  other  officers, 
not  otherwise  herein  specified. 

Sec.  12.  The  general  assembly  shall  provide, 
by  law,  for  the  making  of  the  returns  by  th^ 

E roper  officers,  of  the  election  of  all  officers  to 
e  elected  under  this  constitution;  and  the  gov- 
ernw  shall  issue  commissions  to  the  auditor, 
register,  and  treasurer,  as  soon  as  he  has  ascer- 
tained the  result  of  the  election  of  those  officers 
respectively. 

Sec.  13.  'That  the  sheriffs  and  other  officers  of 
the  election  shall  be  liable  to  all  such  fines  and 

Senalties  for  a  failure  to  discharge  the  several 
uties  imposed  on  them  in  this  schedule,  as  are 
now  imposed  upon  them  by  law,  for  a  failure 
to  perform  their  duty  in  conducting  other  gen- 
eral and  state  elections. 

Sec.  14.  Should  the  county  court  of  any  of 
the  counties  of  this  commonwealth  fail  or  refusfe 
to  appoint  judges,  clerks,  or  sheriffs  to  superio- 


996 


tend  the  election,  as  provided  for  in  article  four 
of  this  schedule,  the  high  sheriff  of  said  county 
shall  appoint  such  clerks  and  deputy  sheriifs. 
: ,:  S:ec.  15-.  Should  any  of  the  sheriffs  or  depu- 
ties in  any  of  the  counties  of  this  common- 
wealth, die,  resign,  or  from  any  other  cause  be 
Srevented  from  attending  with  the  poll  books,  as 
irected  in  article  four  of  this  schedule,  for  the 
comparison  of  tlie  votes  on  the  adoption  or  re- 
jection of  the  new  constitution,  it  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  county  court  clerk,  or  his  deputy  in 
such  county,  to  attend  with  said  poll  books,  and 
aid  in  said  comparison. 

COURTS   OK   CONCILIATION. 

Mr.  IRWIN,  from  a  select  committee,  made 
the  following  report : 

"The  general  assembly  may  provide,  by  law, 
for  the  election  in  each  civil  or  magistrate's  ju- 
risdiction in  the  several  counties,  cities,  and 
towns  of  this  state,  two  judges  of  conciliation 
for  the  amicable  adjustment  of  all  causes  of  dis- 
pute, under  such  rules  and  regulations  as  may 
be  prescribed  by  law.  The  judges  of  concilia- 
tion shall  have  the  same  qualification  as  justices 
of  the  peace,  and  hold  their  offices  for  two  years, 
and  until  their  successors  shall  be  elected  and 
qualified.  The  first  election  of  judges  of  concil- 
iation .shall  be  held  on  the  second  Monday  in 
May,  1851,  and  every  two  years  thereafter." 

On  motion,  the  consideration  of  the  report 
was  indefinitely  postponed. 

NATIVE   AMERICANISM. 

Mr.  DAVIS  offered  the  following  resolution, 
and  on  his  motion  it  was  made  the  special  order 
for  three  o'clock  this  day : 

"Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  the  legisla- 
tive department  be  instructed  to  report  the  fol- 
lowing proviso  to  the  eighth  section  of  the  re- 
port of  that  committee  on  the  legislative  depart- 
ment : 

•'Provided,  That  foreigners  of  the  following 
descriptions  and  classes,  only,  shall  be  entitled 
to  vote  for  any  civil  officer,  or  shall  be  eligible 
to  any  civil  office,  or  place  of  trust  or  profit  un- 
der the  commonwealth  of  Kentucky:  1.  Those 
who,  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  this  amended 
constitution,  shall  be  naturalized  citizens  of  tlie 
United  States.  2.  Those  who,  at  the  time  of  the 
adoption  of  this  amended  constitution,  shall 
have  declared  their  purpose  to  become  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  in  conformity  to  the  laws 
thereof,  and  who  shall  have  become  citizens.  3. 
Those  who,  twenty-one  years  previously  there- 
to, shall  have  declared  their  purjposp,  according 
to  the  existing  provisions  of  the  laws  of  the 
United  States,  to  become  citizens  thereof ;  and 
who  then  shall  be  citizens  of  the  United  States. 
4.  Minors,  who  shall  have  migrated  with  their 
parents,  or  parent,  to  the  United  States,  twenty- 
one  years  after  their  names,  ages,  and  a  particu- 
lar description  of  their  persons,  shall  liave  been 
entered  on  the  records  of  some  court  of  record  of 
the  state  of  Kentucky,  or  some  other  of  the  Uni- 
ted SUtes:  such  foreigners,  having  also,  in  eve- 
ry case,  the  like  qualifications  of  residence,  and 
on  all  other  points,  that  are  required  of  native 
bom  citizens;  and  a  properly  authenticated  copy 
of  the  record  being  in  all  cases  required  for  tne 
verification  of  the  facts." 


MODE  or  Ktvisjsa  the  constitution. 

Mr.  BROWN  movetl  are-consideration  of  th# 
vote  adopting  the  first  section  in  the  article  on 
Uie  "mode  of  revising  the  constitution,"  for  the 
purpose  of  offering  the  following  amendment. 

Strikeout  the  Avords,  "the  general  assembly 
shall,  at  their  next  regular  session,  direct  that  a 
similar  poll  shall  be  opened,  and  return  made 
for  the  next  election  for  representatives,"  and  in- 
sert in  lieu  thereof  the  following: 

"  The  governor  shall  direct  that  a  similar  poll 
shall  be  opened  the  succeeding  year,  and  return 
made  in  same  manner." 

Mr.  BROWN.  Under  the  provision  of  this  sec- 
tion, and  Avith  biennial  sessions  of  the  general  as- 
sembly, provided  for  in  this  constitution,  one 
year  must  necessarily  intervene  between  taking 
the  vote  on  calling  a  convention.  My  object  in 
moving  the  re-consideration  is,  to  provide  by 
this  amendment  that  the  second  vote  of  the  peo- 
ple shall  be  taken  the  succeeding  year;  and  this 
could  be  accomplished  by  authorising  the  gov- 
ernor, instead  of  the  general  assembly,  to  direct 
a  similar  poll  to  be  opened  the  succeeding  year 
for  that  purpose. 

Mr.  MERIWETHER  suggested  that  they 
might  dispense  witli  the  rule  which  requires  a 
motion  to  re-consider  to  lie  over  one  day,  and 
dispose  of  this  question  at  once. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  to  dispense  with  the 
rule. 

Tlie  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  GARRARD  moved  to  lay  the  motion  to 
re-consider  on  the  table. 

Mr.  BROWN  asked  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
thereon,  and  they  were — ^yeas  54,  nays  36. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Luther  Brawner, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Beverly 
L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William  Cow- 

Ber,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Archibald 
lixon,  Chasteen  Tj  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  William  Johnson, 
George  W.  Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Nathan  Mo- 
Clure,  David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Michell, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Wlliam 
Preston,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Robnson, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard  Todd,  Phil- 
ip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J. 
Wright— 54. 

Nays — John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.Brown, 
Charles  Chambers,  Jesse  Coffey,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  Lucius  Desha,  JamesDudlev,  Milford  Elliott, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Wil- 
liam Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Thomas  James, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thos. 
W.  Lisle,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, Jas.  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  O. 


mi 


Tftlbott,  Wra.  R.  Thoinpon,  John  J.  Thuriiian, 
John  li.  Waller,  Silas  Woodson — 36. 
So  the  motion  ■was  laid  on  the  table. 

COMMITTEE   OF   CLALMS. 

Mr.  HARDIN,  from  the  select  committee  of 
claims,  made  the  follo-vving  report : 

Resolved  by  the  Convention,  That  the  following 
sums  of  money,  not  otherwise  appropriated,  be 
paid  out  of  the  public  treasury,  to  the  several 
persons  named  and  entitled  to  the  same,  viz  : 

1.  To  the  members  of  the  convention,  the  same 
mileage  and  travelling  expenses  allowed  to 
members  of  the  general  assembly. 

2.  To  the  President  of  the  convention,  six 
dollars  per  day,  during  the  present  session. 

3.  To  each   member   of  the  convention,  who 

Sualified  and  took   his  seat  in  the  convention, 
iree  dollars  per  day  during  the  present  session. 

4.  To  the  Secretary  of  the  convention,  ten 
dollars  per  day  during  the  present  session. 

5.  To  tlie  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  conven- 
tion, seven  dollars  per  day  during  the  present 
session. 

6.  To  the  Sergeant-at-Arms  of  the  convention, 
four  dollars  per  day  during  the  present  session. 

7.  To  the  Doorkeeper  of  the  convention,  four 
dollars  per  day  during  the  present  session. 

8.  To  Selby  Dixon  Knott,  an  assistant  to  the 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  one  dollar  and  fifty  cents  per 
day  during  the  present  session. 

y.  To  Culvin  Sanders,  jr.,  an  assi.stant  to  the 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  one  dollar  and  fifty  cents  per 
day  during  the  present  session. 

10.  To  Geo.  W.  Gwin,  as  per  voucher,  marked 
A,  four  dollars  and  three  cents. 

11.  To  William  M.  Todd,  as  per  voucher, 
marked  B,  five  dollars  and  fifteen  cents. 

12.  To  Michael  Barstow,  as  per  voucher, 
marked  C,  sixty-five  cents. 

13.  To  Joseph  Taylor,  as  per  voucher,  mark- 
ed D,  nineteen  dollars. 

14.  To  Doxon  &  Graham,  as  per  voucher, 
marked  E,  twenty-three  dollars  and  fifty  cents. 

15.  To  Joseph  Taylor  &  Co.,  as  per  vouoher, 
marked  F,  four  dollars. 

16.  To  William  Tanner  tfe  Co.,  one  hundred 
and  twelve  dollars  and  fifty  cents,  for  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  copies  of  the  weekly  Yeoman, 
furnished  the  convention.     (No.  1.) 

17.  To  A.  G.  Hodges  <fe  Co.,  three  hundred  and  : 
seventy-five  dollars,  for  one  hundred  and  fifty  i 
copies  of  the  Daily  Commonwealth,  furnished  ■ 
the  menibei-s  of  the  convention.     (No.  2.)  | 

18.  To   the  Revs.  Stuart   Robinson,  John  N. 
Norton,  James  M.  Lancaster,  George  W.  Brush,  ! 
and   William  Warder,  twenty  dollars  each,  for 
their  services  in   opening  the  daily  sessions  of ; 
this  convention  with  prayer.  i 

19.  To  Henry,  a  free  man  of  color,  for  his  at-  ! 
tendance  on  the  convention,  one  dollar  per  day 
during  the  present  session. 

20.  To  Dennis,  a  free  man  of  color,  for  his  at- 
tendance on  the  convention,  fifty  cents  per  day 
during  the  present  session. 

21.  To  Culvin  Sanders,  .seventy  cents,  for  ex- , 
penses  incurred  in  executing  the  summons  of  ■ 
this  convention  on  A.  P.  Cox. 

A  brief  conversation  ensued,  in  relation  to  the 
power  of  the  convention  to  adopt  such  a  resolu- 
tion, in  which   Mr.   CHAMBERS,  Mr.  LISLE, 


and  Mr.  H.\MILTOX  spoke  in  opposition  to  the 
appropriation  of  money  by  the  convention.  Mr. 
HARDIN  defended  the  report. 

The  resolution  was  theu  agreed  to. 

Mr.  HARDIN  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion; 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  on  claims  be  in- 
structed to  enquire  into  the  expediency  of  provi- 
dingfor  the  payment  of  the  expenses  of  the  con- 
tested election  from  Henry  county. 

Mr.  CHRISMAN  moved  to  lay  the  resolution 
on  the  table,  and  on  that  motion  he  called  for 
the  yeas  and  nays,  and  being  called,  they  were 
yeas  13,  nays  75. 

YKAS^-Ilichard  Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Lucius  Desha,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Thomas  James,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Michael  L.  Stouer, 
John  Wheeler— 13. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrif)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther 
Brawner,  Francis  3d.  Bristow,  Thomas  £).  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenault,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  William  Cow'per,  Edward  Curd,  Archibald 
Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Benjamin  F.  Edwarcls,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Nathan Gailher,  James H.  Garrard,  Thos. 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W. 
Irwin,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James 
M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lind- 
sey,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, Martin  P.  Marshall,  W^illiam  C.  Marehall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin,  Ri.di- 
ard  L.  Mayes,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meri- 
wether, WMliam  D.  Mitchell,  John  D.  Morris, 
Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Pres- 
ton, Johnson  Price, 'Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James 
Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, James  W.Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John 
D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  W'aller,  Henry  W'ashington,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Chas.  A.  Wlckliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wkkliffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J,  Wright 
— 75. 

The  resolution  Avas  then  adopted. 

KNOROSSMENT   OF   THE   COXSTITUTlOJf. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  APPERSON,  the  fol- 
lowing resolution  was  agreed  to: 

Resolved,  That  two  copies  of  the  new  consti- 
tution be  prepared  by  the  secretary,  one  on 
parchment  and  the  other  in  a  book  to  be  prepar- 
ed for  that  purpose. 

LEGISLATIVE  DEPARTMENT. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  unfinished  section  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee on  the  legislative  department,  which  pro- 
vides for  the  apportionment  of  representation. 

Mr.  CLARKE,  who  had  given  notice  of  a  mo-, 
tiou  to  reconsider  the  vote  by  which  the  first 
branch  of  the  sixth  .section,  fixing  the  basis  of 
representation  had  been  adopted,  consented,  on 
consultation  with  friends,  not  to  press  the  re- 
consideration. 


998 


The  latter  el.au>>e  of  the  sixth  section  was  llie 
pending  quest  ion,  as  follows: 

"At  the  first  session  of  the  general  assembly 
after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  and  every 
eight  years  tnereafter,  provision  shall  be  made 
by  law,  that  in  the  year  and   every  eighth 

year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  quali- 
fied voters  of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The  num- 
ber of  representatives  shall,  in  the  several  years 
of  infiking  these  enumerations,  be  so  fixed,  as  not 
to  be  less  than  seventy  five,  nor  more  than  one 
hundred;  and  they  shall  be  apportioned  for  the 
eight  years  next  following,  thus  :  Counties, 
cities,  and  towns,  having  more  than  two  thirds 
and  less  than  the  full  ratio,  shall  have  one  rep- 
resentative; those  having  the  full  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  less  than  two  thirds  over,  shall  have  but 
one  representative;  those  having  the  full  ratio, 
and  a  fraction  of  more  than  two  thirds  over, 
shall  have  two  representatives,  and  increase  their 
number  in  the  same  proportion  ;  counties  hav- 
ing less  than  two  thirds  of  the  ratio,  shall  be 
Joined  to  similar  adjacent  counties  for  the  pur- 
pose of  sending  a  representative:  Provided,  That 
if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county,  then  such 
county  having  less  than  two  thirds  of  the  ratio, 
shall  be  united  to  that  coniiguous  county  having 
the  smallest  number  of  qualified  voters;  and  the 
remaining  representatives,  if  any,  shall  be  allot- 
ted to  those  counties,  cities,  or  towns  having  the 
largest  unrepresented  fractions." 

Mr.  BOYD  had  offered  the  following  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  latter  clause  of  the  sixth  section 
of  the  legislative  report: 

"The  house  of  representatives  shall  consist  of 
one  hundred  members,  and  to  secure  uniformity 
and  equality  of  representation  as  aforesaid,  the 
state  shall  be  districted  into  twelve  districts. 

FiusT  District.  Fulton,  Hickman,  Graves, 
Ballard,  McCracken,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Liv- 
ingston. 

Skcoxd  District.  Trigg,  Christian,  Caldwell, 
Crittenden,  Union,  Henderson,  Hopkins. 

Third  District.  Daviess,  Ohio,  Hancock, 
Grayson,  Breckinridge,  Hart,  Larue,  Hardin, 
Meade. 

Fourth  District.  Todd,  Mulenburg,  Logan, 
Simpson,  Allen,  Warren,  Butler,  Edmonson. 

Fifth  District.  Monroe,  Barren,  Cumber- 
land, Clinton,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor,  Casey, 
Russell. 

Sixth  District.  Jefferson,  Bullitt,  Nelson, 
Shelby,  Spencer,  "Washington,  Marion. 

Seventh  District.  Oldham.  Trimble,  Henry, 
Franklin,  Owen,  Carroll,  Gallatin,  Grant,  Boone. 

Eighth  District.  Scott,  Harrison,  Pendleton. 
Kenton,  Campbell,  Nicholas,   Mason,   Bracken. 

Ninth  District.  Lewis,  Fleming,  Bath, 
Montgomery,  Morgan,  Greenup,  Lawrence,  Car- 
ter. 

Tenth  District.  Fayette,  Woodford,  Bour- 
bon, Clarke,  Jessamine,  Anderson,  Mercer, 
Boyle. 

Eleventh  District.  Madison,  Garrard,  Lin- 
coln, Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Pulaski,  Whitley, 
Wayne. 

Twelfth  Di.strict.  Estill,  Owsley,  Clay, 
Perry,  Letcher,  Floyd,  Breathitt,  Johnson,  Pike, 
Knox,  Harlan. 

"When  a  new  county  shall  be  form«d  of  terri- 
tory belonging  to  more  than  one  district,  that 


county  shall  be  added  to,  and  form  a  part  of  the 
district  out  of  which  the  largest  amount  of  ter- 
ritory was  taken  to  form  such  new  county. 

"In  the  year        and  every  year  thereaf- 

ter, an  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified  electors 
of  the  state  shall  be  made  in  such  manner  as 
shall  be  directed  by  law. 

"In  the  several  years  of  making  such  enumera- 
tion, each  district  shall  be  entitled  to  represen- 
tatives equal  to  the  number  of  times  the  ratio  is 
contained  in  the  whole  number  of  qualified 
electors  in  said  districts:  Provided,  That  the  re- 
maining representatives,  after  making  such  ap- 
portionment, shall  be  given  to  those  districts 
having  the  largest  unrepresented  fractions. 

"Representatives  to  which  each  district  maybe 
entitled  shall  be  apportioned  among  the  several 
counties,  cities,  and  towns  of  the  district,  as 
near  as  may  be,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
qualified  electors;  but  Avhen  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  qualified  electors  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and  wlien  the  ad- 
jacent county  or  counties,  within  the  district, 
may  not  have  a  residuum  or  residuums,  which, 
when  added  to  the  small  county,  would  entitle 
it  to  a  separate  representation,  it  shall  then  be 
in  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  join  two  or 
more  together,  for  the  purpose  of  sending  a  rep- 
resentative: Provided,  That  when  there  are  two 
or  more  counties  adjoining,  and  in  the  same  dis- 
trict, which  have  residuums  over  and  above  the 
ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when 
added  together,  will  amount  to  such  ratio,  in 
that  case,  one  representative  shall  be  added  to 
the  county  having  the  largest  residuum." 

Mr.  WOODSON  moved  to  substitute  the  fol- 
lowing for  the  amendment  of  the  gentleman  from 
Trigg: 

"At  the  first  session  of  the  General  Assembly 
after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  provision 
shall  be  made  by  law,  that  in  the  year  and 

every  eighth  year  thereafter,  an  enumeration  of 
all  the  representative  population  of  the  state 
shall  be  made.  The  house  of  representatives 
shall  consist  of  one  hundred  members,  and  to 
secure  uniformity  and  equality  of  representation, 
the  state  is  hereby  laid  off  into  ten  districts. 

The  first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Fulton,  Hickman,  Ballard,  McCrac- 
ken, Graves,  Oallowav,  Marshall,  Livingston, 
Crittenden,  Union,  llopkins,  Caldwell,  and 
Trigg. 

The  second  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Christian,  Muhlenburg,  Henderson, 
Daviess,  Hancock,  Ohio,  Breckinridge,  Meade, 
Grayson,  Butler,  and  Edmonson. 

The  third  district  shall  be  composed  of  tlie 
counties  of  Todd,  Logan,  Simpson,  Warren,  Al- 
len, Monroe,  Barren,  and  Hart. 

The  fourth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Cumberland,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor, 
Clinton,  Russell,  Wayn**,  Pulaski,  Casey,  Boyle, 
ami  Lincoln. 

The  fifth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Hardin,  Larue,  Bullitt,  Spencer, 
Nelson,  Washington,  Marion,  Mercer,  and  An- 
derson. 

The  sixth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Garrard,  Madison,  Estill,  Owsley* 
Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Clay,  Whitley,  Knox,  Har- 
lan, Perry,  Letcher,  Pike,  Floyd,  and  Johnson. 


999 


The  seventh  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Jefferson,  Oldham,  Trimble,  Carroll, 
Henry,  and  Shelby,  and  the  oity  of  Louisviik. 

The  eighth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Bourbon,  Fayette,  Scott,  Owen, 
Franklin,  Woodford,  and  Jessamine. 

The  ninth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Clarke,  Montgomery,  Bath,  Fleming, 
Lewis,  Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  Morgan,  and 
Breathitt. 

The  tenth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Mason,  Bracken,  Nicholas,  Harrison, 
Pendleton,  Campbell,  Grant,  Kenton,  Boone,  and 
Gallatin. 

"The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the 
several  sessions  of  the  General  Assembly,  next 
after  the  making  of  tliese  enumerations,  be  ap- 
portioned among  the  ten  several  districts,  pro- 
portioned according  to  the  respective  representa- 
tive population  of  each;  and  the  representatives 
shall  be  apportioned,  as  near  as  may  be,  among 
the  counties,  towns  and  cities  in  each  district ; 
and  in  making  snch  apportionment  the  follow- 
ing rules  sliall  govern,  to-wit:  Every  county, 
town  or  city  liaving  the  ratio  shall  have  one  rep- 
resentative; if  double  the  ratio,  two  representa- 
tives, and  so  on.  Next,  tlie  counties,  towns,  or 
cities  having  one  or  more  representatives,  and 
the  largest  representative  population  above  the 
ratio,  and  counties,  towns  and  cities  having  the 
largest  representative  population  under  the  ra- 
tio, regard  being  always  had  to  the  greatest  rep- 
resentative population,  shall  have  one  represen- 
tative: Provided,  That  wlien  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  representative  pop- 
ulation to  entitle  it  to  one  representative,  then 
such  county  may  be  joined  to  some  adjacent 
county  or  counties  to  send  one  represeneative. 
When  a  new  county  shall  be  formed  of  territo- 
ry belonging  to  more  than  one  district,  it  shall 
form  a  part  of  that  district  having  the  least 
number  of  representative  population." 

Mr.  WOODSON  briefly  explained  the  effect 
of  his  substitute,  and  a  conversation  ensued  in 
which  Mr.  HAMILTON,  Mr.  BRISTOW,  Mr. 
M.  P.  MARSHALL,  Mr.  PROCTOR  and  Mr. 
APPERSON   took  part. 

Mr.  GARRARD  offered  the  following  proviso 
as  an  addition  to  the  original  section  of  the  se- 
lect committee,  and  it  was  agreed  to: 

"  Provided,  That  whenever  the  operation  of  the 
foregoing  rules  will  give  more  than  one  hundred 
members,  the  smallest  counties  of  the  two  thirds 
class  shall  be  attached  to  contiguous  counties  to 
send  a  member,  so  as  to  reduce  the  number  to 
one  hundred." 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for  on  the  sub- 
stitute of  Mr.  WOODSON,  and  were  yeas  52 
navs  42. 

Ve.^s — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Garrett 
Davis,  James  Dudley,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas 
J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomns  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W,  Lisle, 


Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether,  William 
D.  Mitchell,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
ard,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,"  John  T. 
Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Ruddj 
James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  AlberfO; 
Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  J.  Thurnian,  Howard  Todd,  John  L. 
Waller,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
Silas  Woodson — 52. 

Navs — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M. 
Bristow,  VVilliam  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T. 
Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Nathan  Gaith- 
er,  Selucius  Gariielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  Jolin  Hargis  Thomas  James, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George 
W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin 
P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  William 
N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  John  H.  McHenrv',  John  D.  Morris, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John 
Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Wesley  J.  Wright — 42. 

So  the  substitute  was  adopted  for  the  amend- 
ment to  the  original  clause  of  the  section. 

Mr.  LACKEY  moved  to  amend,  by  adding  to 
the  section  the  following: 

•'That  representation  shall  be  equal  and  uni- 
form in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  forever 
regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of  rep- 
resentative inhabitants  therein.  At  the  first  ses- 
sion of  the  general  assembly  after  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  and  every  four  vcars  there- 
after, provision  shall  l)e  made  by  law,  that  in 
the  year  ,  and  every  four  years  thereaf- 

ter, an  enumeration  of  all  the  representative  in- 
habitants of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The  num- 
ber of  representatives  shall  be  one  hundred,  and 
apportioned  among  the  several  counties  in  the 
following  manner:  Counties  having  the  ratio 
.shall  have  one  representative;  those  having  three 
fourths  of  tlie  ratio  shall  have  one  representa- 
tive; those  having  tlie  ratio,  and  a  fraction  less 
than  one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have  but  one 
represent.itive;  tlio.se  having  the  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  of  one  half  over,  shall  have  two  repre- 
sentatives; those  having  twice  the  ratio,  shall 
have  two  representatives;  those  having  twice 
the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  less  than  one  half 
the  ratio  over,  shallhave  but  two  representatives; 
those  having  twice  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of 
one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have  three  repre- 
sentatives; and  so  on.  Counties  having  less 
than  three  fourths  of  the  ratio,  shall  be  joined 
to  a  similar  adjacent  county,  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  a  representative  district :  Provided,  that 
if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county,  tlieii  the 
county  liaving  les.s  than  three  fourths  of  the  ra- 
tio, shall  be  united  with  that  adjacent  county 
having  the  smallest  number  of  representative 
inhabitants,  provided  that  their  united  numbers 
do  not  exceed  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  one 
half  the  ratio  over;  but  if  they  do,  the  county 
having  less  tlian  three  fourths  of  the  ratio  shall 
have  a  separate  representative.  The  remaining 
representatives,  (if  any,)  shall  be  allotted  to 
those  counties  having  the  largest  unrepresented 


1000 


frnctioiis;  hut  in  no  case  sliall  more  than  two 
aountie8  be  united  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a 
representative  district;  but  if  there  shall  ever  be 
anexcess  of  districts,  they  shall  be  reduced  to 
the  proper  number,  by  taking  from  those  couu- 
ties  having  a  separate  rej)resentative,  with  the 
smalle.jt  number  of  representative  inhabitants, 
their  separate  representation." 

The  yeas  and  nays  were  called  for,  and  were 
—yeas  45,  nays  49. 

Yeas — William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner, 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrismau,  William 
Cowper,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Gar- 
tielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
John  Hargis,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thos.  James, 
William  Johnson,  Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh,  Charles 
C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Tliomas  W.  Lisle, 
Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Manslield,  Alex- 
ander K.Mar!,hall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Rob- 
ert D.Maupin,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Jonathan  New- 
cum,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John 
T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold.  Ira  Root,  Ig- 
natius A.  Spalding,  James  W.  Stone,  W^illiam 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  John  W^heeler, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Si- 
las Woodson — 45. 

N.vva — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos.  D.  Brown,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  Beverly  L.Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius 
Deslia,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, 
Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Wm. 
Hendrix,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  George  W.  John.ston,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
William  C.  Marshall,  John  H.  McHenry,  David 
Meriwether,  John  D.  Morris,  William  Preston, 
John  T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd,  Michael  L.  Sto- 
ner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard 
Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L. 
Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 49. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  amend,  by  adding 
the  following  proviso : 

*'  Frooided,  That  no  county  having  a  less  vo- 
ting population,  in  any  district,  shall  have  a 
separate  represtntativo,  when  another  county  in 
that  district,  having  a  greater  number  of  voting 
population,  has  no  representative:  And  provi- 
ded, That  no  county  in  any  district,  having  a 
less  voting  population  shall  have  two  represen- 
tatives, when  another  county  in  that  district, 
having  a  greater  number  of  voting  population 
has  but  one  representative." 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  APPERSON  moved  to  amend,  by  adding 
the  following  proviso : 

"  Provided  further.  That  any  county  which 
has  not  the  full  ratio,  when  all  the  adjacent 
counties  have  the  full  ratio,  may  be  added  to  an 
adjacent  county  having  more  than  a  full  ratio, 
when  the  two  may  have  two  members,  pro- 
vided that  two  counties  have  a  greater  popula- 
tion than  any  one  county  in  the  divtrict." 


On  this  amendment,  a  conversation  ensued 
between  Mr.  APPERSON.  Mr.  GRAY,  Mr, 
MORRIS,  Mr.  TRIPLETT,  and  Mr.  McHEN- 
RY.  The  delegates  from  Christian  county  op- 
posed it,  on  the  ground  that  it  would  operate 
unjustly  to  that  county;  and  the  other  gentle- 
men defended  it.     Ultimately, 

Mr.  JAMES  moved  the  previous  question,  and 
the   main  question  was  ordei'ed   to  be  now  put. 

Mr.  GRAY  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays,  and 
they  were — yeas  19,  n<ays  71. 

\  EAS — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  TJios.  D. 
Brown,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Thos. 
N.  Lind.sey,  John  H.  McHenry.  John  1 .  Roeers, 
William  R.  Thompson,  Howard  Todd,  Philip 
Triplett,   Henrj'  Washington — 19. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad- 
lev,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
\^'*^tn.  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  I).  Coleman, 
Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward 
Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dud- 
ley, Chasteen  T.  Dunavan, Benjamin  F.Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  ForreJst,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
drix, Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas 
James,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackcv,  Petei" 
Lashbrooke,  Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.^Maehen, 
(Jeorge  W.  Mansfield,  x\lexander  K.  Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm.  C.  Marshall.  William 
N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard  L, 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  New- 
ell, Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rybinson, 
Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spal- 
ding, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone.  Mi- 
chael L.  Stoner,  AlbertG.  Talbott,  John  D.  Tay- 
lor, Squire  Turner,  J.  L.  Waller,  Jno.  Wheeler, 
Andrew  S.  White,  R.  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W. 
Williams,  Silas  Woodson,  W.  J.  Wright— 71. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  DUNAVAN  called  for  the  yeas  and  nayH 
on  adopting  the  substitute  of  Mr.  WOODSON 
for  the  original  section,  and  they  were — yeas  33, 
nays  60. 

Yeas — John  L.  Ballinger,  Wm.  K.  Bowling, 
Thos.  D.  Brown,  Wm.  C.  Bullitt,  Wm.  Cowper, 
Lucius  Desha,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas  James, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N. 
Lindsey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  David  Meriwether, 
Hugh  Newell,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price, 
Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Stevenson, 
James  W.  Stone,  Albert  O.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor, Howard  Todd,  Henry  Washington.  John 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S,  Whiee,  Silas  Woodson — 33. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

Berson,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
radley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Charles  Chambers,  William  Chenault,  Jas.  8. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Hen- 
ry R.  D.  Colemau,   Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward 


1001 


Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Cliastecn 
T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwari'is,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin.  John  Harris,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew- Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  il.  Jackson,  Chas. 
C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Gkorge  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Wm. 
N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  Mc- 
Clure,  John  H.  McHenry,  John  D.  Morris,  Jon- 
athan Newcuni,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding.  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Wm.  R.  Thomp- 
son, Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L. 
Waller,  Charles  A.  Wiclkiffe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liflfe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 
60. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

The  question  then  recurred  on  the  adoption 
of  the  latter  clause  of  the  section,  as  amended. 

Mr.  DESHA  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays,  and  j 
(hev  were — yeas  43,  nays  48.  I 

Teas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap-  j 
person,    John  L.    Ballinger,    Luther    Brawner,  i 
Thomas  D.  Brown,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  I 
L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffev,  William  Cowper,  EcT-  j 
ward  Curd,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Jas. ' 
H.  Garrard,   Ri«:hard  D.    Gholson,  Thomas  J. ' 
Gough,  James    P.   Hamilton,  John  Hargis,  Wil- 
liam Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  George  W.  Kav- 
anaugh,    Charles  C.  Kelly,   Thomas   W.  Lisle, 
"Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William 
X.  Marshall,  John   H.  McHenr}-,  David  Meri- 
wether,   John   D.  Morris,    Jonathan    Newcum, 
Elijah  F.   Nuttall,  Henry   B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Jas. 
Rudd,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael   L.  Stoner,  Wil- 
liam R.  Thompson,   Philip   Triplett,    John  L. 
Waller,    Henry    Washington,    Silas    Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 43. 

If  AYS — John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 
Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers, 
William  Chenault,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha, 
James  Dudlev,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  George  W.  Johnston, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
N.  Lindsey,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Maves,  Nathan  McClure,  Hugh  Newell,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root;,  Ig- 
natius A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven.son,  Al- 
bert G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard  Todd, 
Squire  Turner,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S"  White, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wicklifife, 
George  W.  Williams— 48. 

So  the  clause  was  rejected. 

Mr.  DAVIS  then  moved,  as  an  additional  sec- 
tion, the  following,  which  was  originally  sub- 
mitted by  Mr.  LACKEY: 

"  That  representation  shall  be  equal  and  uni- 
form in  this  commonwealth,  and  shall  be  for- 
ever regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of 
representative  inhabitants  therein.  At  the  first 
session  of  the  general  assembly  after  the  adop- 
126 


tion  of  this  constitution,  and  ever}*  four  years 
thereafter,  provision  shall  be  made  by  law  that 
in  the  year  ,  and  every  four  years  there- 

after, an  enumeration  of  all  the  representative 
inhabitants  of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The 
number  of  representatives  shall  be  one  hundred, 
and  apportioned  among  the  several  counties  in 
the  following  manner:  Counties  having  the  ra- 
tio shall  have  one  representative;  those  having 
three  fourths  of  the  ratio  shall  have  one  repre- 
resentative;  those  having  the  ratio,  and  a  frac- 
tion less  than  one  half  of  the  ratio  over,  shall 
have  but  one  representative;  those  having  the 
ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  one  half  over,  shall  have 
two  representatives;  those  having  twice  the 
ratio,  shall  have  two  representatives;  those  hav- 
ing twice  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  less  than 
one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have  but  two  rep- 
resentatives; those  having  twice  the  ratio,  and 
a  fraction  of  one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have 
three  representatives;  and  so  on.  Counties  hav- 
ing less  than  three  fourths  of  the  ratio,  shall  be 
joined  to  a  similar  adjacent  county,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  forming  a  representative  district:  Pro- 
vided, That  if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county, 
then  the  county  having  less  than  three  fourths 
of  tlie  ratio,  sliall  be  united  with  that  adjacent 
county  having  the  smallest  number  of  represent- 
ative inhabitants,  provided  that  their  united 
numbers  do  not  exceed  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction 
of  one  half  the  ratio  over;  but  if  they  do,  the 
county  having  less  than  three  fourths  of  the 
ratio  shall  have  a  separate  representative.  The 
remaining  representatives,  (if  any,)  shall  be  al- 
lotted to  those  counties  having  the  largest  un- 
represented fractions;  but  in  no  case  shall  more 
than  two  counties  be  united  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  a  representative  district;  but  if  there 
shall  ever  be  an  excess  of  districts,  they  shall 
be  reduced  to  the  proper  number,  by  taking  from 
those  counties  having  a  separate  representative, 
with  the  smallest  number  of  representative  in- 
habitants, their  separate  representation." 

Pending  this  amendment,  the  convention  took 
a  recess. 

EVEXIXG   SESSIONS. 

CoKRECTio.v. — The  brief  remarks  of  Mr.  A.  K. 
Marshall,  delivered  on  Tuesday  evening,  Decem- 
ber 11,  as  published  in  the  volume  of  debates, 
page  920,  do  not  correctly  convey  that  gentle- 
man's views.    They  should  read  as  follows: 

I  am  pretty  well  satisfied  with  the  present 
constitution  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  but  still  I 
prefer  the  proposition  I  have  offered'.  The  pres- 
ent clause  (which  is  proposed  by  the  gentleman 
from  Christian,)  gives  to  the  legislature  the  right 
to  prevent  the  importation  of  slaves  into  this 
state,  except  by  bona  fide  immigrants.  I  am  op- 
posed to  this,  and  wish  to  except  from  legisla- 
tive action,  such  as  citizens  of  Kentucky  may 
become  possessed  ofby  gift,  inheritance,  marriage, 
or  devise.  Again,  sir,  it  will  allow  the  subject 
of  slavery  to  be  agitated.  It  affords  a  legal  con- 
stitutional mode  of  emancipation,  and  those 
who  choose  to  press  that  dangerous  question, 
are  not  agitators,  but  citizens,  exercising  a  con- 
stitutional right.  I  desire  to  deny  them  any 
such  right,  under  this  constitution,  and   shall. 


1002 


therefore,  oppose  the  proposition  of  the  gentle- 
man from  Christian. 

APPORTIONMENT  OF  REPRESENTATION. 

Mr.  JACKSON  submitted  to  the  convention  a 
plan  for  the  apportionment  of  representation, 
sad  on  his  motion  it  was  ordered  to  be  printed, 
and  laid  on  the  table: 

"Sec.  — .  In  1850,  and  ev<'ry  eighth  year  there- 
after, an  enumeration  shall  be  made  of  all  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  state.  The  house  of  rep- 
resentatives shall  consist  of  one  hundred  mem- 
bers, and  shall,  at  each  enumeration,  be  appor- 
tioned among  the  several  counties  of  the  state  in 
such  manner  that  each  county  having  the  ratio 
of  representation,  shall  have  one  representative, 
and  each  county  having  double  the  ratio  shall 
have  two,  and  .so  on.  All  qualified  voters  of  the 
Btate,  not  included  in  such  ratio,  shall  be  regard- 
ed as  residuums,  and  shall  be  apportioned  among 
the  counties  in  such  manner,  that  the  county 
having  the  largest  residuum  in  the  state,  shall 
have  attached  to  it  adjoining  residuums,  until 
the  ratio  is  obtained;  then  the  county  having  the 
next  highest  residuum  in  the  state,  shall  likewise 
receive  adjoining  residuums,  until  the  ratio  is 
obtained,  and  so  on,  until  all  residuums  are  con- 
sumed: Provided,  That  in  thus  adjusting  the  re- 
siduums among  adjoining  counties,  the  smallest 
residuums  shall  be  taken  first,  and  so  on,  in  suc- 
cession, until  the  ratio  desired  shall  be  com- 
pleted; and  the  county  from  which,  in  this  order 
the  last  number  shall  be  taken,  is  still  entitled  to 
her  residuums  less  by  the  necessary  number  so 
withdrawn." 

NATIVE    AMERICANISSr. 

The  convention  proceeded  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  resolutions  offered  this  morning  by 
Mr.  DAVIS,  which  were  then  made  the  special 
order  for  this  afternoon. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Mr.  President:  The  resolution 
on  this  subject  which  I  submitted  to  the  conven- 
tion at  an  early  day  of  its  session,  has  been  so 
long  suspended,  as  to  have  lost  in  a  good  de- 
gree its  animation.  The  truth  is,  thati  now  feel 
somewhat  awkward  on  this  subject,  and  but  for 
my  avowal  to  debate  it,  so  distinctly  made  about 
that  time,  I  should  not  at  this  late  day  obtrude 
myself  upon  the  time  and  patience  of  this  bodv. 
But,  omitting  to  discuss  tlie  subject.  I  should 
not  be  less  a  Native  American,  than  if  I  were  to 
attempt  the  most  earnest  and  elaborate  examina- 
tion of  it.  However,  I  will  proceed;  and  before 
I  resume  my  seat,  I  will  endeavor  to  revive  the 
life  and  interest  of  my  proposition. 

Mr.  President,  in  asking  the  attention  of  the 
convention  and  the  country  to  this  subject,  it 
was  no  part  of  my  purpose  to  win  any  notoriety, 
or  any  popular  favor,  general  or  party,  or  to  en- 
deavor to  niake  it  the  means  of  reachinir  any  of- 
fice or  distinction  whatever.  Were  I  possessed 
of  youth  and  strength,  it  is  possible  I  might  have 
Connected  such  vaulting  hopes  with  it;  but  I  feel 
tOi  inexplicable  consciousness  that  my  years  are 
to  be  so  few,  as  to  constrain  me  to  take  a  view  of 
things  more  personal  and  more  sober,  and  to 
throw  far  from  me  such  exciting  aspirations. 

Since  mv  first  examination  of  tne  matters  in- 
volved in  tliis  momentous  question,  I  have  been 
a  Native  Amorican;  atid  auring  eight  years  of 
^tti'itt  in  congreas,  I  tru  plMgM,  antl  ever 


8to«d  ready  to  vote  for  any  extension  of  the  time, 
which  is  required  to  entitle  the  naturalized  for- 
I  eigner  to  the  right  of  suffrage.  The  rea-son  why 
I  did  not  move  upon  the  subject  myself  was,  my 
thorough  conviction,  during  the  whole  period,, 
that  in  congress  I  would  do  no  good  to  the  cause, 
immediate  or  prospective,  by  bringing  it  for- 
1  ward. 

j  But,  I  was  firmly  resolved,  if  the  time  should 
ever  come,  and  I  should  be  thrown  upon  a  thea- 
tre where  the  effort  would  seem  more  practical, 
and  the  auspices  more  favorable,  I  would  ask 
the  attention,  not  only  of  the  people  of  Ken- 
tucky, but  all  ray  countrymen,  to  what  I  deem 
to  be  the  greatest  question  of  the  day.  I  believe 
that  time  and  that  theatre  are  now  here.  I  know 
that  the  number  of  foreigners  in  Kentucky  is 
small,  when  compared  with  other  states;  but  they 
are  yet  numerous  and  rapidly  increasing,  partic- 
ularly on  the  line  of  the  Ohio  and  Slississip- 
pi  rivers;  and  there  is  wisdom  in  the  old  pro- 
I  verb:  "an  ounce  of  preventive  is  better  than  a 
j  pound  of  cure.'" 

i     If  we  adopt  such  a  provision  in  the  constitu- 
I  tion,  its  influence  will  not  only  pervade  our 
I  whole  state  government  and  policy;  it  will  have 
I  a  small  but  direct  influence  upon  congress,  in  the 
I  election  of  our  representatives  in  that  body;  and 
I  it  will  operate  with  great  moral  power  upon  oth- 
i  er  states,  especially  when  they  go  into  conven- 
i  tion    for  the  alteration   of  their  constitutions. 
Has  not  this  state  felt,  and  is  not  this  body  now 
acting  under   the  power  of  similar    examples? 
Who,  five  years  ago,   in  Kentucky,  was  there  to 
advocate  the  principle  of  the  judges  of  courts 
being  elected  by  popular  vote;  and  if  no  state 
had  yet  adopted  this  system,  who  believes  we 
would  be  now  incorporating  it  in  our  constitu- 
tion?   Would   it  not  be  rea.sonable  to  conclude 
that  the  example  of  Kentucky,  deciding  and  in- 
corporating as  a  fundamental  provision  in  her 
constitution,  that  her  government  belonged  to, 
and  should  be  administered  by,  her  native  born 
sons,  and  not  by  foreigners,  would  have  a  most 
powerful  and  salutary  influence  upon  our  sister 
states? 

I  presume, Mr.  President,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
upon  the  point  of  our  competency  and  rignt  to 
act  upon  this  subject;  and  also  of  our  duty  to  act 
upon  it,  if  by  so  doing  we  can  effect  any  essen- 
tial good  for  the  country.  Congress  has  the  power 
and  has  passed  naturalization  laws ;  and  it  has  been 
assumed  that  it  would  infringe  the  rights  of  the 
]  foreigners,  who  have  been  naturalized  in  confor- 
I  mity  to  the  provisions  of  those  laws,  for  the  states 
!  to  prescribe  any  other  or  additional  restrictions 
to  their   exercise   of  the  right  of   suffrage  in 
the  state  governments.    It  appears  to  me  that 
this  position  is  wholly  fallacious  and  untenable. 
The  states  hare  the   right  to  confer  upon  for- 
eigners the  elective  franchise,  and  to  make  them 
eligible  to  all  the   offices  of  their  governments 
before  naturalization,  and  they  have  the  un- 
doubted power  to  exclude  them,  although  they 
have   become  citizens  of  the  United  States;  be- 
cause such  citizenship  confers  upon  them  only 
tlie  rights  of  that  government,  conceded  by  the 
federal  constitution,  and  not  a  single  one  under 
any  state  government.     This  power  of  the  states, 
I  to  withhold  from  Tiaturalized  citizens  of  the 
1  United  8tit«»,  the  right  to  vote,  has  been  often 


1003 


«xercis«<l,  and  is  now  in  practical  operation  in 
many  of  them — indirectly  in  declaring  the  pay- 
ment of  taxes,  being  a  housekeejjer,  owning  a 
freehold,  <fec.,  ic,  as  qualifications.  But  in 
many  states,  and  in  Kentucky,  the  higher  power 
is  exercised  of  excluding  the  Tiaturalized  citizen 
from  the  more  important  right  of  eligibility  to 
certain  offices  for  long  terms.  A  man  must  have 
been  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  and  an  in- 
habitantof  this  state  also,  "at  least  six  years," 
to  be  eligible  to  the  office  of  governor,  lieuten- 
ant governor,  or  senator.  The  states  are  sove- 
reign in  forming  and  administering  their  own 
governments.  They  may  deny  to  naturalized 
foreigners,  whoUv,  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  the 
privilege  of  holdling  office;  or  they  may  confer 
Doth  class  of  rights  fully,  or  with  such  restric- 
tions, as  to  time  and  other  circumstances,  as  they 
mav  will. 

'fhey  have  often  circumscribed  and  denied 
these  rights  to  their  own  native  born  citizens, 
and  it  would  be  preposterous  to  assume  they 
had  not  the  same  power  over  persons  born  in 
foreign  countries,  merely  because  they  had  been 
admitted  to  citizenship  under  the  government  of 
the  United  States.  The  point  in  debate  is  a  ques- 
tion of  expediency  and  policy  only,  and  not  of 
power;  and  as  such,  I  freely  admit,  it  should 
not  be  exercised  without  grave  and  sufficient 
reason,  of  which  the  people  and  the  conventions 
of  the  stat«s,  alone,  have  the  right  to  determine. 

The  proposition  which  I  have  submitted,  de- 
prives no  man  of  any  right  which  belongs  to 
liim,  be  it  perfect  or  incnoate;  for  it  concedes 
to  all  foreigners  who  now  have  the  right  of  suf- 
frage, or  who  have  taken  the  first  step  towards 
naturalization,  or  who  may  hereafter  be  brought 
as  minors  to  the  United  States,  that  right. — 
Have  others  any  just  claim  to  it?  Europe  has 
280,000,000  of  population.  As  relates  to  the  gov- 
ernment and  people  of  the  United  States,  all  now 
have  the  right  to  come  to  our  country,  and  mil- 
lions upon  millions  of  them  will  come.  If  all 
the  male  adult  population  of  Europe  have  a 
vested  and  perfect  right,  on  reaching  our  shores, 
to  be  admitted,  aft«r  naturalization,  under 
the  laws  of  congress,  to  share  all  the  politi- 
cal sovereignty,  rights,  and  offices  of  all  the 
states,  each  one  of  all  tlie  teeming  millions  across 
the  Atlantic,  now  resident  not  only  in  Europe, 
but  in  Asia  and  Australasia,  and  all  the  isles  of 
the  sea,  if  not  in  Africa,  have  also  the  same 
right,  it  is  true,  imperfect  and  conditional,  be- 
cause any  and  all  may  come.  In  the  universe, 
was  ever  before  heard  of  so  expansive  and  rami- 
fied a  right,  spreading  over  so  manv  countless 
millions,  not  of  tlie  living  only,  But  of  their 
multitudinous  posterity  for  all  time,  of  all  climes 
and  countries,  races  and  colors,  languages,  reli- 
gions, and  heathenisms,  unless,  indeed,  the  ne- 
gro be  excluded.  The  thing  is  absurdity  itself 
No  foreigner  has  any  right  to  any  portion  of  the 
political  sovereignty  of  a  country  in  which  he 
may  choose  to  make  his  residence,  except  so  far 
as  it  may  be  given  to  him  by  the  people  and  gov- 
«mment'of  that  country;  and  then  only  to  t\\e 
extent,  and  upon  the  conditions  which  tney  may- 
prescribe.  Congress  might  rightfully  repeal  all 
laws  for  the  naturalization  of  foreigners,  and  re- 
fuse to  enact  any  others. 

Having  made  these  preliminary  remarks,  Mr. 


President.  I  »tat*  th«  fact  that  Native  Am«ric»i^.- 
ism  is  not  a  mushroom  of  yesterday.  It  date* 
back  in  the  United  States  several  generations; 
and  has  the  weight  of  illustrious  names  to  sanc- 
tion it.  To  repel,  in  some  degree,  the  imputa- 
tions cast  upon  it, that  it  originated  in  small  and 
factious  motives,  and  among  insignificant  adven- 
turers, I  will  read  to  the  convention  a  few  ex- 
tracts. First,  from  a  letter  addressed  to  Gov. 
Morris,  dated  White  Plains,  July  24,  1778: 

"Baron  Steuben,  I  now  find,  is  also  wanting 
to  quit  his  inspectorship,  for  a  command  in  th$ 
line.  This  will  be  productive  of  much  discon- 
tent. In  a  word,  though  I  think  the  baron  an 
excellent  officer,  I  do  most  devoutly  wish  we  ha4 
not  a  single/orct^ncr  amongst  us  except  the  Mar- 
quis de  Lafayette,  who  acts  upon  very  different 
principles  from  those  which  govern  the  rest." 

From  another,  dated  Philadelphia,  Nov.  17, 
1794,  and  addressed  to  John  Adams,  the  elder: 

"My  opinion  with  respect  to  immigration  is, 
except  of  useful  mechanics,  and  some  particular 
descriptions  of  men  and  professions,  there  is  ni) 
need  of  encouragement." 

A  letter  dated  from  his  residence,  Jan.  20, 1790, 
in  reply  to  a  letter  applying  for  office,  has  this 
passage: 

"It  does  not  accord  with  the  policy  of  this 
government,  to  bestow  offices,  civil,  or  military, 
upon  foreigners,  to  the  exclusion  of  our  citi- 
zens." 

These  extracts  are  taken  from  letters  written 
bj'  the  father  of  his  country,  George  Washington; 
the  first  from  amidst  the  conflicts  of  our  war  of 
independence;  and  the  other  whilst  he  was  presi- 
dent; and  in  his  life  by  Sparks,  will  not  only 
they  be  found,  but  several  others,  with  passages 
on  the  same  subject,  of  equal  distinctness  and 
force. 

I  will  read  the  sentiments  of  another  on  the 
subject  of  foreign  immigration: 

"Civil  government,  being  the  sole  object  of 
forming  societies,  its  administration  must  be 
conducted  by  common  consent.  Every  species 
of  government  has  its  specific  principles.  Ours 
are  more  peculiar  than  those  of  any  other  in  the 
universe.  It  is  a  composition  of  the  freest  prin- 
ciples of  the  English  constitution,  with  others 
derived  from  natural  right,  or  natural  reason. 
To  these  nothing  can  be  more  opposed  than  the 
maxims  of  absolute  monarchies.  Yet,  from  such, 
we  are  to  expect  the  greatest  number  of  immi- 
grants. They  will  bring  with  them  the  princi- 
ples of  the  governments  they  leave,  imbibed  in 
their  early  youth;  or,  if  able  to  throw  them  off, 
it  will  be  in  exchange  for  anunbounded  licentious- 
ness, passing,  as  is  usual,  from  on"  extreme  to 
another.  It  would  be  a  miracle  were  they  to  stop 
precisely  at  the  point  of  temperate  liberty.  These 
principles,  with  their /a/i^ua5rf,  thev  will  trans- 
mit to  their  children.  In  proportion  to  their 
numbers,  they  will  share  with  us  in  the  legisla- 
tion. They  will  infuse  into  it  their  spirit,  warp 
and  bias  its  direction,  and  render  it  a  heteroge- 
neous, incoherent,  distracted  mass.  I  may  ap- 
peal to  experience  during  the  present  contest,  for 
a  verification  of  these  conjectures.  But,  if  they 
be  not  certain  in  event,  are  they  not  possible, 
are  they  not  probable?  Is  it  not  safer  to  wait  with 

{)atience  twenty-seven  years  and  three  months 
onger  for  the  attainment  of  any  degree  of  pop- 


1004 


ttlatiolj'&esireJf  or  expebtecf?"  JUay  uot  our  gov- 
ernment be  more  homogeneous,  Tjiore  peaceable,  more 
durable?" 

Thus  speaks  Mr.  Jeffersan  in  his  notes  on  Vir- 
ginia. I  presume  that  these  two  men  of  death- 
less names,  had  quite  as  much  patriotism  and 
■wisdom  as  any  clamorous  advocate  of  the  for- 
eigner in  this  convention;  and  it  might  be  safely 
assumed,  that  what  they  believed  to  be  wise  and 
wholesome,  could  not  prove  very  pernicious.  In 
the  terrible  throes  of  our  revolutionary  struggle, 
and  when  our  young  institutions  were  in  their 
cradle,  and  the  country  contained  a  population 
hardly  adequate  to  its  protection  against  foreign 
and  Indian  aggression,  these far-seeingsages  dep- 
recated and  condemned  a  heavy  foreign  immigra- 
tion; and  Mr.  Jefferson  .said  with  a  thorough 
philosophical  and  practical  knowledge  of  man, 
they  would  bring  with  them  the  maxims  of  des- 
potism, or  unbounded  licentiousness,  and  produce 
"a  heterogeneous,  incoherent,  distracted  mass." 
If  we  wanted  more  numbers,  he  invoked  us  to 
await  the  slower,  but  so  much  more  safe  princi- 
ple of  natural  increase,  rather  than  hazard  the 
great  dangers  with  which  foreign  immigration 
was  fraught. 

But  why  am  I  opposed  to  the  encouragement 
of  foreign  immigration  into  our  country,  and  dis- 
posed to  apply  any  proper  checks  to  it?  Why 
do  I  propose  to  suspend  to  the  foreigner, 
for  twenty  one  years  after  he  shall  have  signi- 
fied formally  his  intention  to  become  a  citi- 
zen of  the  United  States,  the  right  of  suflFrage, 
the  birth-right  of  no  man  but  one  native  born? 
It  is  because  the  mighty  tides  of  immigration, 
each  succeeding  one  increasing  in  volume,  bring 
to  us  not  only  different  languages,  opinions, 
customs,  and  principles,  but  hostile  races,  re- 
ligions, and  interests,  and  the  traditionary  pre- 
judices of  generations,  with  a  large  amount  of 
the  turbulence,  disorganizing  theories,  pauper- 
ism, and  demoralization  of  Europe,  in  her  re- 
dundant population  thrown  upon  us.  This 
multiform  and  dangerous  evil  exists  and  will 
continue,  for  "  the  cry  is  still  they  come."  Large 
numbers  in  a  short  time,  a  few  months  or  weeks, 
after  getting  into  the  country,  and  veiy  many 
before  they  have  remained  the  full  time  of  pro- 
bation, fall  into  the  hands  of  demagogues  and 
unscrupulous  managers  of  elections,  and  by  the 
commission  of  perjury  and  other  crimes  are 
made  to  usurp  against  law  a  portion  of  the  pol- 
itical sovereignty  of  the  country.  They  are  ig- 
norant of  our  institutions  and  the  principles 
upon  which  they  are  founded;  of  the  great  in- 
terests of  the  country,  and  the  questions  of 
policy  which  devide  our  people;  of  the  can- 
didates for  office,  and  their  capacities,  views, 
fitness  and  former  course  of  life.  Instead  of  be- 
ing qualified  to  aid  in  the  great  and  difficult 
business  of  upholding  the  most  complicated 
structure  of  government  that  ever  had  existence, 
and  of  successfully  administering  it  for  tlie  good 
and  happiness  of  the  people  and  its  own  perpetu- 
ation, they  constitute  an  uninformed,  unreason- 
ing, and  to  a  great  extent  immoral  power, wield- 
ed almost  universally  by  desparate  and  profli- 
gate men,  who  by  this  agency  oecome  enabled  to 
carry  into  success  their  own  bold,  mercenary 
and  pernicious  purposes;  and  to  defeat  tho.se 
which  the  wise  and  tne  good  devise  for  the  bena- 


fit  of  the  country  and  tlie  preservation  of  con- 
stitutional liberty.  We  cannot,  with  any  safety, 
continue  to  admit  with  such  lavish  liberality 
those  ever  coming  and  ever  increasing  masses 
of  immigrants  into  full  political  partnership,  and 
share  with  them  the  sovereignty  of  government. 
We  are  taught  this  truth  no  less  by  nature  and 
reason  tlian  by  fact  and  experience.  Let  me 
give  an  illustration.  There  is  no  member  of  tliis 
body,  and  probably  no  man  in  Kentucky,  who, 
if  placed  any  where  on  the  earth  in  a  civilized 
community,  but  who  could  aid  in  upholding 
and  advancing  the  civilization  of  that  country. 
He  would  have  a  general  knowledge  of  tne 
modes  of  thought  and  feeling,  of  the  manners 
and  customs,  of  the  wants  and  desires,  and  of 
the  means  of  ministering  to  them,  physicallj, 
morally,  and  intellectually,  appertaining  to  civil- 
ized life.  All  this  he  has  been  learning  every 
day  of  his  life  from  his  infancy.  In  tliese  re- 
spects he  would  be  qualified  to  perform  his  duty 
with  the  members  of  the  new  society  of  which 
he  had  become  a  member.  But  bring  among  us 
a  son  of  the  forest,  a  Wyandott  or  a  Chippewa, 
and  how  would  he  get  along  in  performing  the 
same  part  in  our  society  and  civilization?  He 
would  be  in  a  slate  of  utter  and  savage  isolation. 
The  most  of  those  European  immigrants,  hav- 
ing been  born  and  having  lived  in  the  ignor- 
ance and  degradation  of  despotisms,  without 
mental  or  moral  culture,  with  out  a  vague  con- 
sciousness of  human  rights,  and  no  knowledge 
whatever  of  the  principles  of  popular  constitu- 
tional government,  their  interference  in  the  po- 
litical administration  of  our  affairs,  even  when 
honestly  intended,  would  be  about  as  successful 
as  that  of  the  Indian  in  the  arts  and  business  of 
civilized  private  life;  and  when  misdirected,  as 
it  would  generally  be,  by  bad  and  designing 
men,  could  be  productive  only  of  mischief,  and 
from  their  numbers,  of  mighty  mischief.  The 
system  inevitably  and  in  the  end  will  fatally  de- 
preciate, degrade  and  demoralize  the  power 
which  governs  and  rules  our  destinies. 

I  freely  acknowledge,  that  among  such  mas- 
ses of  immigrants,  tliere  are  men  of  noble  intel- 
lect, of  high  cultivation,  and  of  great  moral 
worth — men  every  way  adequate  to  the  difficult 
task  of  free,  popular,  and  constitutional  govern- 
ment. But  the  number  is  lamentably  small. 
There  can  be  no  contradistinction  between  them 
and  the  incompetent  and  viscious;  and  their  ad- 
mission would  give  no  proper  compensation,  no 
adequate  security  against  tne  latter,  if  they,  too, 
were  allowed  to  share  political  sovereignty.  The 
country  could  be  governed  just  as  wisely  and  as 
well  by  the  native  born  citizens  alone,  by  which 
this  baleful  infusion  would  be  wholly  excluded. 

I  propose,  Mr.  President,  before  I  close,  to 
make  a  more  particular  application  of  these 
general  views  to  the  points  of  my  proposition; 
and  in  the  meantime,  as  having  a  general,  but 
important  and  interesting  bearing  upon  it,  I  will 
present  some  statements  and  tables  of  immigra- 
tion  and  population,  the  most  recent  and  the  fl 
most  authentic  that  I  have  been  enabled  to  com-  ^ 
niand  from  the  limited  sources  of  information 
within  my  reach.  Though  by  no  means  full 
and  entirely  satisfactory,  this'examinatioii  has 
convinced  me  that  the  great  body  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  indeed  of  intelligent  men,  have  no  in- 


1005 


formation  or  belief,  approxiniRting  the  truth,  of 
the  fearful  and  growing  numbers  of  immigranis, 
of  their  general  destitution  and  pauperism,  of 
their  ignorance  and  demoralization,  and  of  the 
vices  and  crimes  of  very  manv  of  tliem,  and  of 
the  enormous  frauds  ■which,  through  them,  are 
perpetrated  upon  the  elective  franchise.  At 
least  such  was  my  situation,  and  to  the  mass  of 
the  American  people,  this  whole  subject  seems 
to  me  to  be  a  sealed  book. 

In  1790,  the  white  population  in  the  United 
States  was  3,172,464.  The  rate  of  increase  as- 
certained by  the  latest  and  most  reliable  calcu- 
lations, upon  the  principleof  compound  increase, 
is  about  2.39  per  cent,  by  which  the  population 
would  bo  doubled  in  somewhat  more  than  29 
years.  Make  an  estimate  by  this  rule  upon 
29  years,  and  in  1840  there  was  a  white  popula- 
tion of  11,104,659.  But  the  census  returns  show 
a  white  population  of  14,189,218,  in  1840;  so 
that  there  were  then  in  the  United  States  up- 
wards of  four  millions  of  persons,  immigrants 
and  their  progeny.  During  the  decennial 
period  indicated  by  each  of  the  named  years 
following,  I  present  the  aggregate  number 
of  immigrants:  1800,  160,305—1610,  229,755— 
1820,  321,064—1830,  494,491—1840,862,040.— 
Since  1840,  the  rate  and  aggregate  of  increase 
has  been  greatly  beyond  any  prior  period. 
These  numbers  here  given,  I  presume  are  made 
up  from  the  custom  house  returns :  for  the  lat- 
ter years,  I  have  no  doubt  they  are.  I  have 
been  able  to  get  the  custom  house  returns  for 
two  years  only  since  1840  ;  that  of  1846  showing 
158,648,  and  1847  an  increase  on  the  former  year 
of  about  47  per  cent,  and  an  aggregate  of  239,256. 
2fo  returns  are  made  by  any  ships  under  20  tons 
burthen,  and  from  some  cause,  nouefrora  the  ports 
of  New  Jersey.  It  is  well  known  that  a  great 
many  vessels  neglect  to  make  any  returns  ;  and 
also  that  most  of  ihe  itnmigrants  who  land  at 
Halifax  and  Quebec,  come  through  the  British 
provinces  into  the  United  States.  The  great 
number  of  timber  ships  which  sail  annually 
from  England  to  Quebec,  afford  large  and  cheap 
facility  to  the  immigrants  by  that  vovage,  ana 
great  numbers  annually  come  by  it.  It  is  esti- 
mated that  one  fourth  of  the  immigrants  to  the 
United  States,  are  either  through  the  British 
provinces,  or  through  our  ports  and  not  reported ; 
and  the  actual  white  pop\ilation  reported  upon 
each  general  return  of  the  census,  above  the 
combined  aggregate  natural  increase  and  custom 
house  numbers,  shows  this  estimate  to  be  under 
the  truth.  I  have  however  made  some  prospec- 
tive estimates  upon  the  supposition  that  20  per 
cent,  of  the  annual  immigrants  through  all  chan- 
nels were  not  comprehended  in  the  custom  house 
returns.  Upon  these  principles,  I  estimate  the 
total  white  population  of  the  United  Stales  in 
1650  to  be  the  rise  of  21.000,000,  of  which  up- 
wards of  5,000,000  will  be  foreigners  by  birtn, 
being  about  one  fourth.  Thirty  years  ago  only 
one  in  forty  of  our  population  was  estimated  to 
be  of  foreign  birth.  In  1843  one  in  ftve,  and  this 
disproportion  is  rapidly  decreasing.  Take  158,- 
648,  the  custom  house  returns  in  1846,  add  20 
per  cent,  to  it  for  immigrants  not  reported,  and 
upon  the  product  put  47  per  cent.,  the  actual 
rate  of  increase  upon  the  custom  house  returns 
of  those  years  from  one  to  the  other,  and  vouwill 


htfve 287,107  forthet.^talof  1^47 .and  for  I e48,total 
422,056;  and  by  continuing  the  calculation  for 
1849,  total  620,422,  and  1850,  total  9l2.020: 
This  rate  of  increase  may  not  continue,  and  the 
figures  for  the  two  last  named  years  may  be  too 
large ;  otherwise  they  would  authorise  a  larger 
estimate  than  5,000,000  of  foreigners  in  the 
countrj-  in  the  year  1850.     But   620,422   immi- 

■  grants  for  the  year  1849,  when  the  custom  house 

i  returns  shall  be  made  out,  and  20  per  cent,  ad- 
ded to  their  aggregate  numbers  will  probably  be 
shown  not  to  be  much  above  the  mark.     I  have 

!  seen  a  statement  that  the  immigrants  from  the 
port  of  Bremen,    for   the    past    year,  exceeded 

'  56,000  ;  and  of  something  like  the  same  number 
from   Liverpool,  that  four-fifths   of  them   were 

fermans.      The    same    rate  of  increase   would 
ring  immigrants  to  the  country  in  1851,  1,340,- 
;  669— in  18o2,  1,970,783— in   r853,  2,897,051— 
and  1854,  4,188,664.     So  that  it  becomes  obvious 
that  this  rate  of  increase  caimot  continue  through 
I  many  years.     Xevertheless  the  increase  will  be 
steady,  great,   and  continuous — and   I   believe 
may  be  safely  assumed  at  more  than  1,000,000 
yearly  for  the  decennial  period  between  1850,  and 
1860. Upon  this  hypothesisi  assume  the  total  pop- 
ulation  of  the  United  states  in  1860,  will  be  36,- 
606,178,  of  which,  allowing  for  their  decrease bj 
death,  about  14,000,000   will   be   foreigner^  by 
i  birth  :  and  the  slaves  being  then  about  4,000,00(J 
i  added  to  the  foreigners  will    make   nearly   one 
half  of  the  aggregate  population  of  the  United 
:  States.     The  census   returns   of  1870,  will   un- 
I  questionably  exhibit  the  native  white  population 
to  be  less    than   the  foreigners  and  the  slaves 
I  united,  a  state  of  fact  which  must  fill  every  pa- 
j  triotic  and  sober  mind  with  grave  reflection. 
j      This  view  of  the  subject  is  powerfully  corrob- 
orated by  a  glance  at  the  state  of  things  in  Eu- 
]  rope.     The  aggregate  population  of  that  conti- 
|nent,   in    1807,  was    183,000,000.     Some    years 
since  it  was  reported  to  be  260,000,000,  ancf  now 
it  is  reasonably  but  little  short  of  283,000,000; 
showing  an   increase  within  a  period   of  about 
forty  years  of  100,000,000.     The  area  of  Europe 
is  but  little  more  than  that  of  the  United  Stales, 
and  from  its  higher  northern  position,  and  greater 
proportion  of  sterile  lands,  has  a  less  natural  ca- 
pability of  sustaining  population.     All  her  west- 
ern, southern,  and  middle  states  labor  under  one 
of  the  heaviest  afflictions  of  nations — they  have 
a  redundant  population.     The   German   state* 
have  upwards  of  70,000,000,  and  Ireland  8,000,- 
000 — all  Germany  being  not  larger  than  three  of 
our  largest  states,  and  Ireland  about  the  size  of 
Kentucky.     Daniel  G'Connell,  in  1843,  reported 
2,385,000    of   the  Irish   people    in    a  state  of 
destitution.     The  annual  increase  of  population 
in  Germany   and   Ireland  is.  in   the   aggregate, 
near  2,000,000;  and  in  all   Europe  it  is  near  7,- 
000,000.     Large  masses  of  this  people,  in  many 
countries,  not  only  want  the  comforts  of  life,  but 
its  subsistence,  its  necessaries,  and  are  literally 
starving.     England, "many  of  the  German  pow- 
ers, Switzerland  and   other  governments,  have 
put  into  operation  extensive  and  well   arranged 
systems  of  emigrating  and  transporting  to  Amer- 
ica their  excess  of  population,  and  particularly 
the  refuse,  the  paupers,  the  demoralized  and  the 
criminal.    Very  many  who  come  are  stout  and 
industrious,  and  go  to  labor  steadily  and  thrifti- 


lOOtt 


ly.  They  send  to  their  fiiemls  in  the  old  coun- 
try true  and  glowing  aceounts  of  ours,  and  with 
it  tlie  means  which  they  have  garnered  here,  to 
bring,  too,  those  friends.  Thus,  immigration  it- 
self increases  its  means,  and  constantly  adds  to 
its  swelling  tides.  Suppose  some  mighty  con- 
vulsion of  nature  should  loosen  Europe,  the 
smaller  country,  from  her  ocean  deep  founda- 
tions, and  drift  her  to  our  coast,  would  we  be 
ready  to  take  her  teeming  myriads  to  our  frater- 
nal embrace,  and  give  them  equally  our  political 
sovereignty?  If  we  did,  in  a  few  fleeting  years, 
where  would  be  the  noble  Anglo  American  race, 
where  their  priceless  heritage  of  liberty,  where 
their  free  constitution,  where  the  best  and 
brightest  hopes  of  men?  All  would  have  per- 
ished !  It  is  true  all  Europe  is  not  coming  to 
the  United  States,  but  much,  too  much  of  it  is; 
and  a  dangerous  disproportion  of  the  most  ig- 
norant and  worst  of  it,  without  bringing  us  any 
territory  for  them — enough,  if  they  go  on  increas- 
ing and  to  increase,  and  are  to  share  with  us  our 
power,  to  bring  about  such  a  deplorable  result. 
The  question  is,  shall  they  come  and  take  pos- 
session of  our  country  and  our  government,  and 
rule  us,  or  will  we,  who  have  the  right,  rule 
them  and  ourselves?  I  go  openly,  manfully, 
and  perseveringly  for  the  latter  rule,  and  if  it 
cannot  be  successfully  asserted  in  all  the  United 
States,  I  am  for  taking  measures  to  maintain  it  in 
Kentucky,  and  while  we  can.  Now  is  the  time 
— preventive  is  easier  than  cure. 

The  governments  of  Europe  know  better  than 
we  do  that  they  have  a  great  excess  of  popula- 
tion. They  feel  more  intensely  its  great  and 
manifold  evils,  and  for  years  they  have  been  de- 
vising and  applying  correctives,  which  have  all 
been  mainly  resolved  into  one — to  drain  off  into 
America  their  surplus,  and  especially  their  des- 
titute, demoralized,  and  vicious  population.  By 
doing  so,  they  not  only  make  more  room  and 
eomfort  for  the  residue,  but  they  think — and 
■with  some  truth — that  they  provide  for  their 
own  security,  and  do  sometning  to  avert  explo- 
sions which  might  hurl  kings  from  their  thrones. 
After  the  allied  sovereigns  had  conquered  the 
mighty  Corsican  on  the  field  of  Waterloo,  and 
had  him  safe  on  the  rock  of  St.  Helena,  these 
crowned  tyrants  of  Europe,  impiously  denomin- 
ted  the  "holy  alliance,"  had  a  breathing  time; 
and  they  began  to  cast  around  themselves  to  de- 
vise means  to  attack,  indirectly,  slowly,  and 
stealthily,  our  institutions  and  our  principles  of 
popular  government,  which  they  not  unreasona- 
t)ly  concluded  had  been  the  primary  cause  of  the 
tremendous  assaults  which  men,  in  their  strug- 
gles to  free  themselves  from  the  slavery  of  cen- 
turies, had  made  against  their  despotic  thrones. 
Hear  what  the  Duke  of  Richmond  said  on  this 
subject : 

"  The  following  language  of  the  Duke  of  Rich- 
mond, while  Governor  of  the  Canadas,  and  is  re- 
ported by  Mr.  H.  G.  Gates,  of  Montreal,  who 
■was  present  when  it  wa-s  uttered. 

"The  Duke,  a  short  time  prior  to  his  death, 
in  speaking  of  the  government  of  the  United 
States,  said:  "it  was  weak,  inconsistent,  and 
bad,  and  could  not  long  exist."  "It  will  be  de- 
stroyed; it  ought  not,  and  will  not  be  permitted 
to  exist;  for  many  and  great  are  the  evils  that 
have  originated  from  the  existence  of  that  gov- 


ernment. The  curs*  of  th«  French  revolution, 
and  subsequent  wars  and  commotions  in  Eu- 
rope, are  to  be  attributed  to  its  example;  and  so 
long  as  it  exists,  no  prince  will  be  safe  upon  his 
throne;  and  the  sovereigns  of  Europe  are  awara 
of  it,  and  they  have  been  determined  upon  its  de- 
struction, and  have  come  to  an  understanding 
upon  thissubject,  and  havedtcided  on  the  means 
to  accomplish  it;  and  they  ■will  eventually  suc- 
ceed bg  subversion  rather  than  conquest."  "All 
the  low  and  surplus  population  of  the  different 
nations  of  Europe  will  be  carried  into  that  coun- 
try; it  is  and  will  be  a  receptacle  for  the  bad  and 
disaffected  population  of  Europe,  when  they  are 
not  wanted  for  soldiers,  or  to  supply  the  navies; 
and  the  European  governments  will  favor  such 
a  course.  This  will  create  a  surplus  and  a  ma- 
jority of  low  population,  who  are  so  very  easily 
excited;  and  they  -will  bring  with  them  their 
principles,  and  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  adhere 
to  their  ancient  and  former  governments,  laws, 
manners,  customs,  and  religion,  and  will  trans- 
mit them  to  their  posterity,  and  in  many  cases 
propagate  them  among  the  natives.  These  men 
will  become  citizens,  and  by  the  constitution 
and  laws  will  be  invested  with  the  right  of  suf- 
frage. The  different  grades  of  society  will  then 
be  created  by  the  elevation  of  a  few,  and  by  de- 
grading many,  and  thus  a  heterogeneous  popu- 
lation will  be  formed,  speaking  different  lan- 
guages, and  of  different  religions  and  senti- 
ments, and  to  make  them  act,  think,  and  feel 
alike,  in  political  affairs,  will  be  like  mixing  oil 
and  water;  hence,  discord,  dissension,  anarchy, 
and  civil  war  will  ensue,  and  some  popular  in- 
dividual will  assume  the  government,  and  re- 
store order,  and  the  sovereigns  of  Europe,  the 
immigrants,  and  many  ofthe  natives  will  sustain 
him."  "The  Church  of  Rome  has  a  design  up- 
on that  country,  and  it  will,  in  time,  be  the  es- 
tablished religion,  and  will  aid  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  that  republic."  "I  have  conversed  with 
many  of  the  sovereigns  and  princes  of  Europe, 
and  they  have  unanimously  expressed  these 
opinions  relative  to  the  government  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  and  their  determination  to  subvert 
it." 

Schlegel  was  a  learned  historian,  and  profes- 
sor of  history  in  Vienna,  and  high  in  favor  with 
the  Emperor  of  Austria.  At  the  close  of  one  of 
his  public  lectures  in  that  capital,  against  free 
governments,  he  declared  :  "  The  true  nursery  of 
all  these  destructive  principles,  the  revolutionary 
school  for  France,  and  the  rest  of  Europe,  has 
been  North  America.  Thence  the  evil  has 
spread  over  many  lands,  either  by  natural  con- 
tagion, or  by  arbitrary  communication."  About 
the  same  time,  Francis,  the  Emperor  of  Austria, 
at  the  instigation  of  that  arch  minister  of  des- 
potism, Melternich,  and  with  the  co-operation  of 
the  other  allied  sovereigns,  established  "the  Le- 
opold Foundation,"  the  object  of  which  was  "to 
promote  emigration,  and  the  greater  activity  of 
the  catholic  mi-ssions  to  the  United  States."  To 
send  out  the  civil  and  religious  despotism  of 
Europe  to  supplant  the  principles  which  Schle- 
gel denounced  as  destructive,  and  which  made 
kings  tremble  upon  their  thrones.  That  same 
emperor  proclaimed  :  "As  long  as  I  live,  I  will 
oppose  a  will  of  iron  to  the  progress  of  liberal 
principles.     The  present  generation   is  lost,  bu^ 


1007 


tre  must  labor  -with  zeal  and  earnestness  to  im- 
prove the  spirit  of  that  \vhich  is  to  come.  It 
Way  require  an  hundred  years;  I  am  not  unrea- 
sonable— I  give  you  a  whole  age,  but  vou  must 
Vork  without  relaxation."  You  see  tnose  men 
know  that  popular  institutions  in  this  country 
are  not  to  be  put  down  bv  military  operations, 
or  by  direct  attacks;  but  t^ey  expect  to  achieve 
it  by  other  modes;  by  sending  forth  in  alliance 
the  agents  of  civil  and  religious  despotism,  and 
only  by  such  means  in  the  course  of  ages;  and 
they  look  to  it  patiently,  as  a  distant  but  certain 
consummation. 

The  government  of  England  had  powerfully 
co-operated  with  the  monarchs  of  the  Continent 
in  putting  down  Bounaparte;  and  but  for  the 
unconquerable  fortitude  and  courage  of  those 
'bull-doglslanders,'  the  work  had  probably  never 
been  done.  Her  government  then  refused  to  co- 
operate in  the  schemes  of  absolutism  which  the 
allies  were  devising,  and  drew  oflF  from  them. 
The  long  slumbering  energies  of  Spain  had  been 
deeply  stirred,  by  iTapoleon  driving  Ferdinand 
VII  from  her  throne,  and  placing  in  his  stead 
his  brother  Louis.  The  chivalry  and  heroism  of 
Spain  revived  in  transient  splendor,  and  the 
Castilian  again  buckling  on  his  ancient  armor, 
drove  Soult  and  the  legions  of  France  from  the 
Peninsula,  and  the  miscreant  tyrant,  Ferdi- 
nand, regained  his  sceptre.  The  spirit  of  liber- 
ty having  been  re-awatened,  it  would  not  pas- 
sively and  at  once  fall  to  sleep  again  in  the  be- 
numbing embrace  of  despotism.  The  regenera- 
ted Spaniards  convoked  a  Cortes,  and  began  the 
reconstruction  of  liberal  institutions.  Ferdi- 
nand resisted,  and  wa.s  the  second  time,  by  his 
own  people,  driven  into  exile.  He  called  upon 
the  holy  alliance  for  succor,  and  they  assigned 
the  work  of  liis  restoration  to  Louis  X\  III, 
whom  they  had  so  lately  restored.  The  Duke  of 
Angouleme  entered  Spain  at  the  head  of  a  strong 
and  well  appointed  army — all  resistance  was  put 
down,  after  obstinate  and  bloody  combat — Fer- 
dinand was  brought  back,  and  even  the  throbs 
of  liberty  stifled,  from  the  Pyrenees  to  the  ocean. 

But  Ferdinand  had  lost  more  than  half  his 
possessions  by  the  revolutions  and  independence 
of  Mexico  and  the  South  American  possessions 
of  Spain;  and  he  invoked  the  allied  sovereigns 
of  Europe  to  re-conquer  those  countries  for  him 
too,  and  to  bring  them  back  under  his  galling 
yoke.  They  were  ready  to  go  to  the  oloody 
work,  but  at  that  momentous  crisis,  upon  which 
hung  for  centuries  the  destiny  of  the  world, 
England  and  the  United  States  united  in  coun- 
sels, in  policy  and  purpose,  and  declared  to  the 
allied  powers  and  to  mankind,  that  in  such  a 
war,  such  a  crusade  by  them  against  the  Spanish 
American  Republics'  and  their  liberties,  their 
cause  would  be  made  the  cause  of  them,  the  glo- 
rious mother  and  daughter.  '"The  holy  alli- 
ance" desisted  from  its  diabolical  and  bloody 
scheme;  and  England  and  America  stood  glori- 
ously before  the  world  as  the  bulwarks  of  civil 
and  religious  freedom.  Their  noble  interposi- 
tion was  not  more  generous  and  hum-ine  than  it 
was  wise  and  timely,  because  the  fall  of  the  lib- 
erties of  the  new  republics  would  have  been  but 
the  precursor  of  the  exterminating  war  which  the 
propaganda  power  of  the  civil  and  religious  ihM- 
Intism  of  Europ«,  were  even  then  me<iitating  up- 


on the  spiritual  and  political  freedom  of  England 
and  America— for  though  England  had  so  much 
less  than  we, still  she  liad  a  priceless  amount,  and 
the  other  nations  of  Europe  comparatively  none. 

England  is  our  glorious  mother,  and  I  look  to 
her  with  ranch  of  affection,  gratitude,  and  rev- 
erence. She  has  oppressed  and  wronged  her 
daughter,  but  that  account  is  long  since  settled, 
and  I  trust  forever.  We  have  inherited  from  her 
much  of  our  best  blood,  our  language,  most  of 
our  science  and  literature,  our  religion,  and 
many  of  the  most  valuable  principles  of  human 
liberty.  She  commenced  to  rear  her  fabric  of 
freedom,  as  it  exists,  in  the  reign  of  her  John, 
at  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.  She 
has,  at  distant  intervals,  added  to  the  propor- 
tions and  beauty  of  the  edifice,  and  is  still  mov- 
ing on  according  to  her  tenor  towards  its  per- 
fection. She  has  in  this  long  train  of  time 
achieved  much — she  has  still  much  to  do.  but  in 
her  own  way  and  in  God's  good  time,  will  she 
do  it,  I  trust.  But  the  other  day,  Hungary  had 
been  crushed  by  the  combined  arms  of  two  iron 
despots,  and  the  immortal  Kossuth  and  his  com- 
rade exiles  fled,  conquered,  but  not  subdued, 
from  their  enslaved  country  and  an  ignominious 
death,  and  found  protection  in  the  territory  and 
from  the  power  of  the  Moslem.  And  when'these 
frozen  hearted  tyrants  of  the  north  demanded 
those  noble  men  from  the  Ottoman  Porte,  that 
they  might  be  offered  up  on  the  scaff'old  to  ap- 
pease a  bloody  Moloch,  and  the  Turk  refused 
this  barbarian  requisition  of  christian  kings, 
though  war  was  denounced  against  him;  and 
England  stood  forth  and  made  with  him  an  al- 
liance, oS'ensive  and  defensive,  to  arrest  greater 
barbarians  than  he  in  their  aggression  upon  his 
rights  and  independence,  and  upon  the  rights  of 
nations,  of  humanity  and  christian  civilization, 
I  could  not  read  the  story  without  my  blood 
tingling  in  my  veins.  I  thought  of  the  lion- 
hearted  Richard  and  Saladin — of  their  combats 
upon  the  field  of  death— of  the  union  of  their 
successors,  and  of  the  cause  in  which,  and  the 
powers  against  which,  they  were  united;  and 
my  swelling  heart  could  not  withhold  its  tri- 
bute to  England  and  Turkey.  In  such  passages 
as  those,  what  American  does  not  proudly  feel 
that  England  and  America  are  kindred? 

Mr.  President,  I  have  some  documents  and 
facts  in  addition,  to  show  with  what  system 
many  European  states  are  throwing  upon  us 
their  destitute  and  refuse  population.  I  have 
not  time  to  present  them  all,  but  I  will  a  portion. 
In  England,  Ireland,  Switzerland,  Saxonv,  Ba- 
varia, Swabia,  Brunswick,  Hanover,  and  other 
states,  those  operations  are  carried  out  upon  a 
large  scale. 

In  1843,  a  society,  composed  of  wealthy  in- 
dividuals of  London  and  Dublin,  was  formed  for 
the  objects:  "1st.  Tosend  intothe  western  states 
of  America  the  surplus  population  of  Britain, 
Ireland,  and  the  continent.  2d.  To  open  a  new- 
market  for  British  manufactures.  3d.  To  extend 
and  to  consolidate  the  Roman  Catholic  religioa 
in  the  United  States." 

The  accredited  immigrant  agent  at  Montreal, 
in  a  report  baringjdate  1843,  says,  "of  9,507  Irish 
paupers  8,625  came  up  the  St.  Lawrence  along 
the  borders  of  New  York." 

"Th€  cotnmissioneTs  of  the  poor  in  England 


1008 


recommended  that  parliament  pass  an  act  au- ! 
thorizing  the  uifferent  parishes  in  England  to 
raise  money  for  the  purpose  of  sending  the  most 
vicious  and  worthless  of  their  parishioners,  such 
as  are  irreclaimable,  out  of  that  country  to 
America."  So  says  Niles'  Register.  A  few 
towns  in  England  raised  the  sum  of  $11,820  to 
defray  the  expenses  of  three  hundred  and  twen- 
ty paupers  to  this  country. 

In  an  official  letter  from  our  consul,  F.  List, 
from  Leipsic,  to  the  secretary  of  the  treasury, 
he  says:  "A  Mr.  De  Stain,  formerly  an  officer  in 
the  service  of  the  Duke  of  Saxe  Gotha,  has  late- 
ly made  propositions  to  the  smaller  German 
states  of  Saxony,  for  transporting  their  criminals 
to  the  port  of  Bren)en,  and  embarking  them 
from  thence  for  the  United  States,  at  $75  per 
head,  which  offer  has  been  accepted  by  several 
of  them.  The  first  transport  of  criminals,  who, 
for  the  greater  part,  have  been  condemned  to 
hard  labor  for  life,  (among  them  two  notori- 
ous robbers,  Pfifier  and  AUbrecht,)  will  leave 
Gotha  on  the  16th  of  this  month;  and  it  is  in- 
tended by  and  by,  to  empty  all  the  work-houses 
and  jails  in  this  manner.  There  is  little  doubt 
that  several  other  states  will  imitate  the  nefari- 
ous practice." 

The  mayor  of  Baltimore,  in  a  letter   to  the 
President,  said,  "that  fourteen   criminals   from 
Bremen    had  been    landed   there.     They   were 
shipped  in  irons  which  were  not  taken  off  till 
they  were  near  Fort  M'Henry."     I  could  bring 
forward,  Mr.  President,  a  volume  of  evidence  to 
the  sjime  effect.     In  corroboration  of  the  general 
conclusions  to  which  it  leads  all  unprejudiced 
minds,  the  commissioners  of  the  alms-house  of 
the  city  of  New  York,  in  a  report  of  1843,  say; 
"There  are  not  more  than  one  fourth  of  the  immi- 
grants who  come  to  this  country  who   possess 
the  means  to  obtain  a  comfortaole  support  for 
themselves  and   their  families  on  their  arrival 
here."    Most  of  them,  of  course,   are  disposed 
to  labor,  and  who,  as  soon  as  they   can  obtain 
employment,  cease  to  be  paupers.     But  many  of 
them  are  unable,  and  more  still  of  them  indis- 
posed,  and  who   never  will    work.      But  this 
source  of  pauperism  is  a  constant  and  ever  in- 
creasing stream.     Of  one  thousand  two  hundred 
persons   admitted   in   the  year    1843,   into   the 
hospital,  two  hundred  and  six  only  were  native 
born  Americans;  and  of  three  thousand   three 
hundred  and  thirty  two   persons  in  Bridewell, 
the  alms-house,  and  the  penitentary,  two  thou- 
sand and  forty  five  were   foreigners.     The  dis- 
bursements of  the  city  in  support  of  the  alms- 
house amounted,  for  the  current  year,  to  $250,- 
068.     The   number  of  paupers   in   the  United 
States  in  1830,  was  calculated  to  be  one  hundred 
and  three   thousand  one  hundred  and  seventy 
eight,  and  the  number  of  foreign  immigrants  for 
that  year  was  only  thirty  thousand  two  hundred 
and  twenty  four  oy  the  custom   house  returns; 
but  add  twenty   per  cent,  for  those  not  reported, 
and  it  will  make  thirty  six  thousand  two  hun- 
dred and  sixty  six.     As  American  pauperism  is 
the  numerous    spawn  of  foreign   immigration, 
many  of  the  immigrants  of  former  years  were 
paupers  in  1830;  and  as  the  total  number  in  the 
United  States  for  that  year,  was  one  hundred 
and  three  thousand  one  hundred  and  seventy 
eight,  how  much  must  it  have  been,  and  be  now 


increased  when  immigration  has  increased  ten 
fold.  The  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  (Mr.  Meri- 
wether,) told  us  in  a  speech  a  few  days  since, 
which  seemed  to  be  very  carefully  prepared, 
that  the  paupers  in  Boston  at  the  present 
time,  exceeded  twenty  eight  thousand.  Nei- 
ther Massachusets  nor  Boston  give  the  great 
Lazar  houses  of  American  pauperism.  The  peo- 
ple of  the  old  Bay  State  all  work  and  are  gener- 
ally thrifty;  and  Boston,  or  any  of  her  haibors, 
are  not  the  great  highways  of  immigration. 
Its  great  streams  are  through  New  York,  New 
Orleans,  and  Quebec,  and  from  those  ports,  the 
foreigners  seek  other  localities  than  Massachu- 
setts. The  present  permanent  average  number  of 
foreign  paupers  in  the  United  States,  must  exceed 
two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand;  and  according  to 
the  rate  of  co.stof  the  paupers  of  Massachusetts, 
as  stated  by  the  gentleman  from  Jefferson,  they 
must  produce  a  charge  of  upwards  of  $5,000,000. 
The  amount  paid  towards  them  by  privato 
charity,  in  all  its  forms,  is  large,  and  the  grand 
total  not  less,  but  much  more  than  $6,000,000. 
What  a  tax  this  matter  brings  upon  our  people, 
and  how  our  own  native  born  are  often  deprived 
of  their  birth  right,  the  charity  of  their  own  coun- 
try, by  the  enormous  demand  upon  it  by  aliens, 
I  have  seen  the  reports  of  some  years  ago,  from 
the  principal  cities  of  the  United  States;  and 
the  proportion  between  the  native  and  foreign 
classes  oc  paupers  were  about  the  same  exhibit- 
ed by  the  reports  from  the  city  of  New  York, 
and  showed  that  swarms  of  foreigners  crowded 
out  from  the  hospitals,  and  other  eleemosynary 
institutions,  those  who  had  the  first  right  to  be 
there,  Americans  by  birth — men  who,  or  whose 
ancestors,  took  possession  of  this  land  when  it 
was  a  howling  wilderness,  reared  in  it  cities  and 
towns  and  temples  dedicated  to  the  worship  of 
the  living  God — opened  and  cultivated  its 
teeming  fields,  fought  for  and  established  its 
liberties,  upheld  its  institutions  in  our  days  of 
weakness,  trial  and  peril — all  of  which  is,  now 
that  we  are  strong  and  rich,  coveted  and  almost 
claimed  by  the  stranger.  The  whole  of  this 
fair  heritage  belongs  first  and  peculiarly  to  the 
native,  and  it  his  right  to  claim,  and  the  duty 
of  the  government  to  protect  it,  to  keep  him  in 
its  peaceful,  secure,  and  pennanent  enjoyment; 
and,  so  far  as  it  may  be  necessary  to  those  ends, 
to  ward  off  the  foreigner.  It  is  his  duty  to  share 
it  witli  the  poor  and  the  down-trodden  of  other 
lands,  only  to  the  extent  its  safety  and  his 
proper  enjoyment  of  it  will  allow. 

I  have  in  my  possession,  Mr.  President,  nu- 
merous ofiicial  reports,  some  made  to  both 
houses  of  Congress,  and  others  xinder  the  au- 
thorities of  some  of,  the  Atlantic  cities,  all  go- 
ing to  show  extensive  and  flagitious  invasion  of 
the  elective  franchise  by  these  foreigners;  and 
the  abuses  to  which  it  is  subjected  by  un- 
principled men  through,  often,  tlieir  unwitting 
agency — for  vast  numoers  of  them  are  made  the 
dupes  and  tools  of  more  designingand  worse  men 
than  themselves.  Before  every  general  election, 
thousands  of  them,  but  just  arrived  in  the 
country  are  purchased  by  party  managers  and 
brought  up  to  conniving  courts,  and  by  tlie  false 
oaths  of  themselves  and  others,  are  spuriously 
naturalized  in  violation  of  law.  This  nefari- 
oun  work  is  largely  done  before  every  election  io 


1009 


iLe  priatipal  cities:  an«l  great  numbers  arc  luade  bullion;  that  all  authority  in  cburi.h  or  state 
to  vote  without  even  a  formal  naturalization,  which  did  not  profess  to  be  under  him,  and  to 
upon  purjury  alone.  By  these,  and  similar  aot  in  strict  conformity  to  his  commands  vrsa 
frauds,  general  elections  have  been  carried  in  |  unlawful  and  "wicked;  that  all  religious  opinions 
New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  Louisiana;  and  :  different  from  the  dogmas  of  the  Roman  Church 
the  voice  of  the  citizens  of  those  states,  the  con-  j  were  heretical,  aud  those  who  professed  them 
stitutional  sovereign  power,  is  iniquitously  su-  i  heretics,  with  whom  no  faith  was  to  be  kept, 
perceded,  and  a  spurious  and  corrupt  power  in-  j  whether  plighted  by  contract  or  by  oath;  that  it 
troduced  in  its  sied  to  give  law  and  aestiiiy  to  j  was  the  highest  duty  of  Roman  Catholics  to 
this  great  country.  '         God,  to  extirpate  this  heresy  and  these  heretics 

But,  Mr.  President,  I  will  pass  on  to  another  by  sword,  fire  and  faggot;  and  by  the  same 
view  of  this  subject — tme  peculiarly  delicate  to  I  means  to  bring  the  political  authorities  to  sub- 
touch  upon — of  deep  interest  to  all  our  people,  i  mit  to  the  Pope  in  all  things,  and  every  hu- 
and  probably  connected  with  greater  and-  more  i  man  being  to  profess,  and  conform  to  the  Romish 
fatal  consequences  in  the  remote  future  than  j  faith;  and  to  these  ends  they  intended  to  devote 
any  one,  or  even  all  which  I  have  presented.         |  their  time,  their  labors,  all  their  energies   and 

t  have  heard  it  said  by  a  member  of  this  body,  '■  powers,  and  even  expend  their  lives,  which 
a  gentleman  of  great  experience  and  extensive  i  would  be  glorious  and  happy  martyrdom.  "Would 
information,  that  eight  ninths  of  the  foreign  im-  j  not  the  convention  have  the  right  to  withhold 
migrants  are  Roman  Catholics.  We  all  know  |  from  foreigners  coming  to  our  country,  whom 
that  they  greatly  preponderate,  and  I  suppose  !  the  preceding  picture  would  truly  characterize, 
that  to  take  three  fourths  of  them  to  be  of  that  j  any  power  and  agency  in  our  government? 
persuasion,  would  be  quite  within  the  limits  of  j  There  have  been  such  Romanists,  who,  aided  by 
the  truth.  When  I  speak  of  Roman  Catholics,  I  despotic  monarchs  and  their  armed  myrmidons, 
I  mean  as  well  those  raised  in  that  faith  as  those  I  have,  to  a  great  extent,  given  efifect  to  such  mon- 
who  profess  it.  [  strous   tloctrines   and   purposes,   and  desolated 

The  latest  tables  of  the  nurabere  of  christians  i  la^^ge  portions  of  the  earth  with  fire  and  sword, 
in  the  United  States,  by  denominations,  which  i  And  what  has  been,  however  terrible,  may  be 
have   come  to  my   knowledge,   state   the  total  |^^'"- 

to  be  4,334.972,  and  that  of  these  1,231,300  are  j  Many  years  since,  I  heard,  traditionally,  as  a 
Roman  Catholics,  being  more  than  one  fourtli  of  \  asking  of  a  French  philosopher,  "man  says  God 
the  iiggregate — all  of  all  denominations  being  j  made  him  after  his  own  image:  the  truth  is,  man 
told.  J  do  not  know,  and  have  no  means  to  form  inakes  God  after  his  image."  This  savors  of 
an  opinion  to  be  relied  upon,  what  portion  of  |  inipietv,  but  nevertheless  embodies  a  good  deal 
the  Romanists  are  native,  and  what  foreigners  j  of  truth.  Man  is  very  apt  to  assign  some  of  his 
by  birth;  but  I  would  conjecture  the  latter  class  own  properties  to  his  God,  or  to  give  to  his  attri- 
to  be  much  the  stronger  in  numbers.  Over  the  {  butes  a  character  and  hue  conforming  to  his  own 
subject  of  the  religion  of  the  Catholics,  or  of  j  particular  moral  nature  and  conformation.  I 
anj'  other  persuasion,  as  a  rule  of  moral  conduct !  Have  known  Roman  Catholics  resident  of  Ma- 
in private  life,  as  a  matter  of  faith  an<l  a  means  i  ryland,  of  Louisiana,  and  of  our  state,  excellent 
of  man's  salvation,  1,  as  a  member  of  the  con  ven-  |  people — so  far  as  I  could  judge  the  heart  of  man, 
tiou,  have  no  cognizance,  nor  do  I  presume  to  at-  |  as  good  as  any  whatever.  I  have  had  the  hap- 
tempttoexercise  any  whatever.  But  so  far  as  that,  j  piness  to  make  the  acquaintance  of  several  gen- 


orauy  other  sect  of  religionists,  in  tlie  principles  of 
its  religious  doctrines,  or  in  their  practice,  in  the 
present  or  to  be  in  the  future,  does  activelj'  or 
supinely — so  far  as  the  general  opinion  of  the 
people  of  this  country,  and  all  other  circumstan- 
ces may  render  prudent  and  practicable,  or  to 
any  extent  whatever,  claim  for  the  particular 
sect  temporal  power,  or  attempt  to  exercise  it.  or 
to  mix  itself  up  with  the  politics  of  the  country 
to  get  possession  of  the  governmental  authority 
and  control  it,  directly  or  indirectly,  with  a 
view  to  the  acquisition  of  power  and  rule  gene- 
rally, or  to  promote  any  particular  church  vit-ws, 
to  that  extent  and  within  that  scope,  I,  as  a  mem- 
Vjer  of  this  convention,  have  a  proper  and  legiti- 
mate jurisdiction  over  it.  It  would  be  within 
the  power  and  duty  of  this  convention,  by  prop- 
er provisions,  to  exclude  as  far  as  practicable, 
such  pernicious  matters  from  our  political  sys- 
tem— as  much  .so  as  to  keep  out  of  it  any  other 
mischievous  and  dangerous  principle  or  power. 
Suppose,  in  a  word,  that  the  Pope  of  Rome  was 
asserting  himself  to  be  the  vicegerent  of  God, 
and  infallible;  that  all  power  on  earth,  spiritual 
and  temporal,  was  given  to  him  by  divine  ap- 
pointment; that  all  countries  and  governments 
oelonged  to  him,  and  were  either  subject  to  his 
will  and  command,  or  in  a  state  of  criminal  re- 
127 


tleinen.  members  of  this  body,  who,  I  am  inform- 
ed, are  of  that  faith;  and  none  here  have  a  larger 
share  of  my  esteem  and  confidence.  My  belief 
is,  I  know  no  better  men  any  where — none  more 
fit  to  assume  the  responsibilities  of  self-govern- 
ment, or  to  discharge  the  duties  of  good  citizens, 
both  public  and  private.  These  men,  and  all 
Catholics  born  and  educated  in  this  country  of 
light  and  liberty,  are,  and  were,  by  me,  intended 
to  remain  far  from  the  operation  of  any  princi- 
ple which  I  have  submitted  to  the  convention; 
oecause  our  country  and  its  institutions  were  as 
much  their  birth-right  as  mine,  and  they,  as  well 
qualified  to  take  charge  of  both  as  myself,  or 
any  others.  But  not  so  the  foreigner.  The  Ro- 
manism of  Europe,  and  of  its  followers  there, 
who  come  here,  is  a  very  different  religion  in 
the  fonnation  of  character  and  in  practical  life, 
from  that  to  which  native  Catholics  are  born, 
and  in  which  they  are  trained,  so  far  as  I  under- 
stand the  matter.  The  Romanism  of  Europe, 
from  mv  reading,  is,  in  its  constitution  and  prin- 
ciples. Its  essence,  spirit,  policy  and  administra- 
tion, past  and  present,  throughout  its  whole  du- 
ration, a  grreat,  all-ambitious,  all-grasping  reli- 
gious politico  institution,  claiming  the  whole 
earth's  sceptre,  spiritual  and  temporal,  and  wa- 
ging perpetual  war  in  difFerent  forms  according 


loid 


to  difference  of  cireuiustancea,  to  break  all  oth- 
ers. It  is  a  hierarchy,  and  the  Pope  a  hierareh, 
a  spiritual  and  temporal  despot.  Such  is  my 
understanding  of  the  religion  which  the  Catho- 
lic immigrant  brings  with  him  to  our  land, 
cherishes Tiere  as  his  life's  blood,  and  endeavors, 
perseveringly,  to  propagate  among  our  people; 
and  to  this  religion,  so  far  as  it  is  political,  and 
its  object  temporal  p<»wer,  I  avow  utter  hostility. 
I  will  attempt  now  to  establish,  by  creditable 
proofs,  all  the  points  which  I  have  stated  as  being 
parts  of  it.  But  men,  who  have  seceded  from  it, 
inform  us,  that  all  books  and  documents  which 
purport  to  reveal  its  hidden  principles  and  its 
true  interior  nature  and  spirit,  are  sought  to  be 
discredited  by  its  followers  and  defenders,  pro- 
nouncing them  to  be  false.  So  says  Giustianiani, 
formerly  a  Roman  priest,  now  a  minister  in  the 
Lutheran  church,  and  many  others. 

The  title  and  assumptions  of  the  Pope  are  thus 
set  out  by  one  of  them,  Martin  V,  in  his  des- 
patches to  his  minister  at  Constantinople:  "  The 
most  holy  and  most  happy,  who  is  the  arbiter  of 
Heaven,  and  the  Lord  of  the  earth,  tlie  succes- 
Hor  of  St.  Peter,  the  anointed  of  the  Lord,  the 
master  of  the  luiiverse,  the  father  of  kings,  the 
light  of  the  world,"  &c.  Most  of  the  Popes 
have  not  set  forth  their  style  so  pompously,  but 
all  have  claimed  to  be  the  Lord  of  the  earth, 
the  vicegerent  of  God,  to  whom  all  power  is 
given,  to  be  holy  and  infallible;  and  to  whom 
all  authority,  spiritual  and  temporal,  is  abso- 
lutely subject.  ThaC  they  have  the  right  to  de- 
pose kings,  and  give  their  kingdoms  to  whom 
they  will;  to  put  down  all  governments,  and  all 
authority,  political  or  religions,  which  does  not 
Submit  to  them;  to  condemn  as  heretical,  all  re- 
ligions, doctrines  and  faith  that  may  be  opposed 
to,  or  inconsistent  with  theirs,  and  to  extirpate, 
as  heretics,  those  who  profess  them  ;  to  release 
every  person  from  all  faith  with  heretics  and  all 
obedfienceto  any  other  authority;  to  grant  abso- 
lution for  sins;  and  they  and  their  priests  to 
pray  souls  out  of  purgatory.  Such  are  the  lead- 
ing features  of  Romanism,  and  none  of  its  coun- 
cils, or  infallible  pontiffs  have  denied  or  attempt- 
ed to  reform  any  of  them,  as  it  was  for  centuries 
propounded  to  the  world,  and  it  has  in  innume- 
rable instances  been  enacted  with  the  concur- 
rence of  the  Christendom  of  western  Europe  in 
all  these  terrible  forms  with  resistless  power. 
This  is  no  exaggerated  statement  of  the  claims  of 
Romanism  and  its  head,  however  startling  and 
incredible  it  may  be  to  most  persons  in  this  coun- 
try. During  the  period  between  the  first  and 
the  seventh  century,  there  were  five  bishops, 
tvhose  dioceses  were  of  so  much  power,  wealth, 
or  dignity,  as  to  have  prompted  them  to  assume 
the  title  of  patriarchs,  and  these  were  the  bish- 
ops of  Rome,  Alexandria,  Antioch,  Jerusalem ,  and 
CS)nstantinople;  which  claim  and  title  come  grad- 
ually to  be  acquiesced  in,  and  at  length  to  be  uni- 
versally accorded  to  thtni.  These  patriarchs 
were  entirely  independent  of  each  other,  and  of- 
ten had  con&icting  claims  and  warm  disputes. 
An  obscure  council  held  at  Sardis  in  347,  con- 
ferred on  the  Bishop  of  Rome  a  limited  authori- 
ty to  direct  a  re-hearing  of  the  case  of  a  provin- 
cial bishop  ;  and  in  372,  the  emperor  Valenti- 
ni»h  enacted  a  decree  empowering  the  bishop  of 
ftoineto  examine  and  judge  other  bishops.     But 


hoaupremaay  was  conceded  to  him  by  the  em- 
peror, or  by  the  other  patriarchs,  or  by  the  pro- 
vincial  bishops  generally,  until  near  150  years 
afterwards;  and  prior  to  that  time,  John,  bishop 
of  Constantinople,  in  a  council  held  in  588,  had 
assumed  the  title  of  univeral  bishop.  Gregory, 
called  the  Great,  was  then  bishop  of  Rome,  and 
he  opposed,  with  signal  ability  and  vehement 
spirit,  this  usurpation  of  him  of  Constantinople, 
and  denounced  his  title  of  "universal  bishop,"  as 
"vain,"  "execrable,"  "anti-christian,"  "infernal," 
and  "diabolical."  Mauritius  was  emperor,  but 
Phocas.an  obscure  officerin  his  army, seduced  the 
soldiefy  and  marched  upon  Constantinople  to  de- 
thronehim.  Mauritius  fled,  Phocas  entered  the 
capitol,  and  the  emperor  having  been  brought 
back,  he  and  six  sons  were  put  to  death  by  the 
usurper,  who  hail  already  seized  upon  tlie  pur- 
ple. The  wife  of  Mauritius  and  his  three  daugh- 
tei"s  had  fled  to  a  sanctuary,  to  which  Phocas 
despatched  ruffian  soldirs  to  drag  them  hence 
and  murder  them.  John  interposed  his  spiritu- 
al authority,  and  successfully  resisted  these 
forcible  attempts  against  the  empress  and  her 
daughters;  but  the  new  emperor  at  length  de- 
coyed the  women  away  by  sacred  pledges, 
whioh  he  basely  violated,  and  they  were  inhu- 
manly murdered.  Boniface  was  then  third  bish- 
op of  Rome  of  that  name,  and  he,  with  promp- 
titude and  alacrity,  acknowledged  the  new  em- 
peror, and  earnestly  besought  him  for  the  title 
and  dignity  of  universal  bishop.  Phocas,  piqued 
with  John  for  having  protected  the  wife  and 
daughters  of  Mauritius,  granted  the  title  to  Bon- 
iface and  his  successors,  ordered  John  to  discon- 
tinue it,  and  declared  the  church  of  Rome  to  be  j 
head  over  all  other  churches.  This  was  the  ori-  I 
gin  of  popery,  which  was  established  by  the  ^ 
arbitrary  decree  of  one  temporal  despot  who  had 
just  murdered  another,  upon  the  solicitation  of 
a  supple  and  ambitious  prelate;  and  it  was  done 
to  depress  another,  because  he  had  recognized 
the  claims  of  humanity  against  the  demands  of 
a  cruel  tyrant.  The  character  of  this  beginning 
of  popery  is  strongly  illustrated  in  all  its  subse- 
quent history. 

This  newly  acquired  power  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  now  Pope,  was  resisted  by  many  of  the 
provincial  Bishops  and  some  of  the  succeeding 
Emperors  for  several  ages;  but  by  the  policy  of 
favoring  the  projects  of  the  Emperors,  and  bring- 
ing their  church  authority  to  sustain  them,  they 
at  length  were  fully  established  in  their  spiritu- 
al supremacy.  They  then  began  to  cast  around 
them  for  opportunities  to  attain  the  same  enii-  1 
nence  in  temporal  affairs;  and  it  was  not  very  1 
long  before  their  steady  ambition,  great  talents, 
and  untiring  exertions  were  attended  with  en- 
couraging success.  About  the  year  760,  Grego- 
ry II  required  the  bishops  and  legates  to  take  a 
solemn  oath  of  allegiance  to  him,  the  Pope,  in 
which  the  adjurant  solemnl}'  acknowledged 
him  as  the  successor  of  St.  Peter — promised  by 
the  Holy  Trinity  "  to  maintain  to  the  last  the 
purity  and  unity  the  holy  Catholic  faith;  to  con- 
sent to  nothing  contrary  to  either;  to  consult  in 
all  things  the  interest  ol  your  church,  and  in  all 
things  to  concur  with  you,  to  whom  power  has 
been  given  of  binding  and  loosing; '  and  after 
acknowledging  the  Pojse  to  be  his  Lord,  con- 
cludes with  an  emphatic  impreeation  of  a  terri- 


1011 


ble  paniAhment  to  be  viaited  upon  hi»  faithless- 
ness. In  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  century 
began  the  debasing  custom  of  kissing  the  Pope's 
foot;  it  was  submitted  to  by  the  Emperor  Jus- 
tinian in  TlO,  and  has  been  continued  to  the 
present  day.  This  was  the  darkest  period  of  the 
dark  ages. 

But,  before  this  time.  Pope  Theodore,  who 
succeeded  John  in  642,  had  condemned  as  he- 
retical the  Monothalit*  doctrine,  and  ex-commu- 
nicated Pyrrhus,  patriarch  of  Constantinople  for 
embracing  and  upholding  it.  Paul  having  suc- 
ceeded Pyrrhus,  and  not  abandoning  the  new 
doctrine,  was  formally  ex-communicated  by  Pope 
Theodore,  and  deposed  from  all  his  ecclesiasti- 
cal powti-s  and  dignitv,  by  the  authority  of  St. 
Peter.  But  Paul  having  died,  Pyrrhus,  who 
survived  him,  was  reinstated  by  the  Emperor  to 
his  former  dignity,  and  his  authority  again  ac- 
knowledged by  the  Bishops  and  people  of  the 
eastern  empire.  Theodore  died  in  649,  and  was 
succeeded  by  Pope  Martin,  who  speedily  as- 
sembled a  council  at  Rome,  and  condemned 
not  onlv  the  Monothalite  doctrine,  but  also  "the 
most  wicked  type,  lately  published  against  the 
catholic  church,  by  the  most  serene  Emperor, 
Constant] ne,  at  the  instigation  of  Paul,  the  pre- 
tended Bishop  of  Constantinople."  This  was 
the  first  open  attack  of  the  Pope  upon  the  su- 
preme political  authority  of  any  country;  and 
It  was  at  once  put  down,  for  the  time,  by  the 
degradation  of  Martin  from  the  papacy,  juicl  his 
banishment  to  a  distant  couutrj-;  in  which  exile 
he  died.  His  fate  rendered  more  moderate  and 
prudent  his  two  immediate  successors.  In  680, 
the  Emperor,  by  advice  of  Agatho,  the  Roman 
Pontiflf,  convened  another  general  council ,  which 
pioceeded  to  excommuncatethe  Monothalite  doc- 
trne  of  one  will  of  Christ,  and  its  approval  bv  Pope 
Honorius,  so  long  before  as  638;  and  by  t^e  de- 
cree of  this  council,  it  was  condemned  as  hereti- 
cal, and  Honorius  as  a  heretic;  and  both  were 
anatharaatized. 

For  the  period  of  near  one  hundred  years  pre- 
vious to  to  the  coronation  of  Charlemagne  in 
800,  the  western  empire  had  been  administered 
nominally  by  the  authority  of  the  emperors,  who 
for  some  centuries  had  resided  at  Constantinople; 
but  sustained  by  an  ignorant  and  superstitious 
multitude,  the  real  power  was  vested  in  and  ex- 
ercised by  the  Popes.  In  734,  the  emperor  sent 
a  military  expedition  to  reduce  the  Pope  and  tlie 
refractory  Romans  to  submission;  but  the  most 
of  his  ships  being  lost  in  a  storm  at  s^a,  the  ex- 
pedition was  abandoned.  The  western  posses- 
sions of  the  empire  had  been  formed  into  an  Ex- 
archy,  after  the  repeated  capture  of  Rome  by  the 
Goths,  the  viceroy,  or  exarch  residing  at  Ravan- 
na;  and  from  the  failure  of  the  attempt  of  the 
emperor  to  reduce  the  Pope,  Rome  had  more  for- 
mally but  not  yet  fully,  become  subject  to  his 
authority.  In  740,  Lusit'prand,  king  of  the  Lom- 
bards, invaded  and  laid  waste  the  territories  of 
Rome;  and  in  this  need  Pope  Gregory  III.   ap- 

?lied  to  the  renowned  Charles  Martel  for  succor, 
he  appeal  was  first  made  to  his  piety  to  come 
to  the  rescue  of  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  but 
being  disregarded  in  that  form,  the  wily  priest 
then  addressed  his  ambition  and  his  thirst  for 
dominion,  proposing  to  renounce  for  himself  and 
the  Romans,  all  allegiance  to  the  emperor,  to  take 


I  him  as  their  protector,  under  the  title  of  consul, 
j  upon  his  undertaking  to  defend  the  Pope  and  the 
church.     Those   overtures  were  acceded  to  bv 
i  the  iron  warrior;  but  before  thev  could  be  carried 
out,  he,   the  emperor,  and  the"i*ope,  all,   in  the 
j  course  of  this  year,  741,  sunk   into  the  grave. 
Childerio  III,  a  man  of  feeble  mind,  was  at  the 
time,  king  of  France,  and  Charles  Martel,  under 
the   name  of  Mayor  of  the  palace,  had  been  his 
i  prime    ninister,  and  in  truth  exercised  all  his 
j  power.     Pepin,  the  son  of  Charles,  succeeded  to 
I  the  dignity  and  power  of  his   father;  and  soon 
I  foniied  the  design  of  seizing  upon  the  throne  of 
I  the  degenerate  monarch.  He  submitted  the  ques- 
tion, as   a  case  of  conscience,  to  Zachary,  who 
was  then  Pope,  "who  best  deserved  to  be  called 
'  king,  he  who  was  possessed  of  the  title  without 
j  the    power,    or    he   who  possessed  the    power 
I  without  the  title."     Exposed  on   the  one  hand 
I  to  the   emperor's  claim   of  supremacy,  and  his 
j  indignant  hostility  for  its  rejection  ;andontheoth- 
[  er  to  the  warlike  fncursions  of  the  Lombards,  the 
j  question  had  no  difficulty  in  the  mind  of  Zacha- 
ry; and  he  promptly  decided  that   he  who   had 
the  potter  was  entitled  to  the  name  of  kirtff.     The 
I  clear  and  irresistible  argument,  which  brought 
I  the  mind  of  the  worldly-minded  and  ambitious 
I  prelate  to  this  conclusion,  was  his  consciousness 
I  that  he  could  not  maintain  his  own  vast  preten- 
I  sions  against  his  assailants;  and  that  this  man  of 
I  power  could  and  would,  because  they  could  mu- 
!  tuallv  serve  each  other.     Pepin  at  once  toppled 
1  Childeric  from  his  throne,  and  was  immediately 
j  crowned    and   anointed  king  by  Boniface,  the 
I  Pope's  legate,  and  two  vears  afterwards.  Pope  Ste- 
•  phen,  thesuccessorof  J^achan.-,having Journeyed 
j  to  France  to  obtain  aid   against  the  Lombards, 
performed  again  in  greater  pomp  the  ceremony 
I  of  the  coronation  of  Pepin,  to  render  still  more 
sacred  and  imposing  his  title  to  the  crown.  The 
king  and  his  court  went  three  miles  out  to  meet 
the  Pope,  and  lavished  upon  him  the  most  ex- 
travagant honors,  Pepin  alighting  from  his  horse 
and  attending  him  on  foot  a  part  of  the  way,  and 
performina:  the  office  of  his  groom  or  equery.  In 
j  753,  Aistulphus,  kingof  the  Lombards,  invaded 
I  the  Exarchate,  laid  siege  to  and  took  its  capitol, 
the  city  of  Ravanna,  and  consummated  the  con- 
quest of  all  tlie  remaining  possessions  of  the 
empire  in  the  west.     Flushed  by  his  successes, 
the  conquering  Lombard  despatched  heralds  to 
the  Pope,  demanding  the  submission  of  Rome 
and  all   her  dependencies — asserting  that  they 
had  l)elonged  to  the  emperor,  and  were  his  by  the 
I  right  of  conquest.     In  this  extremity,  Steplien 
!  applied  first,  but  unavailingly,  to  the  enoperor; 
!  and  then  revisited  France  to  see  in  person,  Pepin, 
'  for  his  protection.     The  French  king  sent  a  pow- 
erful  array  to   accompany  him  across  the  Alps 
into  Italy,  and  to  beat  back  from  the  eternal  city 
its  warlike  invaders.     The  wily  Pope,  in  the 
midst  of  the  honors  showered  upon  him  by  the 
court  of  Pepin,  had  the  address  to  obtain  from 
him  a  promise  that  the  cities  and  countrywhich 
might  be  conquered  from  Aistulphus,  should  not 
be  restored  to  the  emperor;  but  should  be  freely 
possessed  by  St.  Peter  and  his  successors.     The 
invincible  arms  of  Pepin  scattered  the  power  of 
the  Lombards,  and  he  sat  down  in  siege  before 
their  metropolis,  Pavia.    Aistulphus  was  forcad 
to  sign  a  treaty,  which  bound  hini  to  deliver  up 


1012 


to  the  Pope  the  Exarcnate,  "witli  all  the  cities, 
castles  and  territories  thereunto  belonging;  to  be 
forever  held  and  possessed  by  the  most  holy 
Pope  Stephen  and  his  successors  in  the  apostolic 
see  of  St.  Peter."  After  hesitation  and  further 
resistance,  the  Lombard  was  forced  by  the  resist- 
less Pepin,  to  execute  this  treaty  literally, and  the 
Pope  was  put  in  possession  of  all  that  it  ceded 
to  nim  as  the  successor  of  St.  Peter;  and  thus  to 
his  spiritual,  he  united  a  temporal  crown.  The 
first  was  acquired  through  the  instrumentality 
of  Phoceus,  the  second  of  Pepin;  and  botli  by 
an  unchristian  and  wicked  combination  with 
usurpers  and  men  of  blood. 

This  was  the  midnight  of  the  world,  and  the 
little  learning  of  Western  Europe  was  confined 
almost  wholly  to  the  Monks;  its  people  besides, 
with  inconsiderable  exceptions,  were  sunk  in 
seemingly  hopeless  ignorance  and  snperstition. 
The  Popes,  the  monks,  and  all  orders  of  its  cler- 
.ey,  made  available  every  opportunity  to  enlarge 
Its  territory  and  its  spiritual  and  temporal  au- 
thority; and  the  papacy  went  on  steadily  in- 
creasing in  wealth,  intluence  and  power  to  the 
accession  of  Gregory  VII,  in  1073,  when  it 
reached  its  culminating  point.  For  centuries, 
yet  it  receded  not,  but  continued  to  perfect  and 
consolidate  its  vast  powers.  It  spread  over  J^u- 
rope,  and  in  every  country  exhibited  itself  with 
a  grandeur  which  dazzled  the  imagination,  and 
a  strength  against  which  no  power  could  stand. 
It  exercised  a  direct  and  absolute  cognizance  in 
all  matters  of  church  and  religion,  and  one  par- 
amount and  discretionary  over  all  temporal  gov- 
ernments, and  claimed  both  to  be  of  divine  au- 
thority and  infallible.  Kings  upon  their  thrones 
trembled  under  the  frowns  of  its  displeasure, 
and  the  world  of  mankind  sunk  in  dispair  un- 
der its  terrible  excommunications.  Ciregory  II 
excommunicated  Leo  the  Isurian  Emperor;  Greg- 
ory VII  denounced  a  sentence  of  deposition 
against  Henry  IV,  one  of  the  most  puissant  of 
the  German  Caesars;  and  forced  the  proud  mon- 
arch to  perform  a  pilgrimage  across  the  appa- 
nines  and  to  await  bare-footed  in  his  anti-cham- 
ber at  Rome  for  three  days  before  he  would  deign 
to  notice  the  penitent.  Celestine  III  excommu- 
nicated Henry  VI,  Emperor  of  Germany,  Leo- 
pold, Duke  of  Austria,  and  Alphonso  }C,  King 
of  Gallicia  and  Leon.  Leo  III,  thundered  an 
excommunication  against  Philip  Augustus,  King 
of  France,  because  he  hesitated  to  execute  tlie 
command  of  that  Pope,  that  he  should  take 
back  his  wife,  whom  he  had  divorced.  Two 
successive  Popes  excommunicated  Henry  II,  the 
ablest  and  one  of  the  best  of  the  German  Em- 
perors, because  he  would  not  submit  himself  and 
his  power  to  them,  and  to  enforce  thtir  decrees, 
they  arraved  against  him  other  raonarchs  in 
long  and  desolating  wars.  Boniface  VIII  pro- 
nounced a  decree  deprivingPhilip  the  Fair,  King 
of  France,  of  his  kingdom;  as  Julius  II  did 
Louis  XII.  Henry  II,  one  of  the  ablest  men  that 
ever  sat  upon  England's  throne,  was  constrained 
bythepowerofPope  Alexander  to  be  scurged  with 
rods  upon  Becket  s  tomb.  Paul  III  and  Pius  V, 
respectively,  thundered  bulls  of  exconomunica- 
lion  and  deprivation  of  crown  and  kingdom 
against  Henry  VIII,  and  Elizabeth  of  England; 
but  the  refonuation  had  dawned  upon  that  proud 
i^and,  and  her  disenthralled  monarcbfi  threw 


back  their  contempt  upon  the  arrogant  preten- 
sions of  the  successors  of  St.  Peter.  But  these 
imperial  pontiffs  invoked  the  Catholic  Pliilip 
II,  of  Spain,  to  their  subjection,  and  England 
and  the  reformation  successfully  withstood  tho 
shock  of  the  Grand  Armada.  Urban  II,  inter- 
dicted bishops  and  priests  from  promising  alle- 
giance to  kings  and  princes.  Martin  V  awed 
the  Emperor  Sigismund  into  a  violation  of  his 
-safe  conduct  to  Huss,  on  the  argument  that  faith 
is  not  to  be  kept  with  heretics;  and  against  the 
violated  word  of  that  sovereign,  and  with  his 
extorted  consent,  had  the  great  reformer  burned 
as  a  heretic  by  the  order  of  the  council  of  Con- 
stance. In  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
turv.  Pope  Innocent  III,  compelled  John,  King 
of  England,  to  surrender  to  him  his  crown,  and 
then  to  receive  it  back,  as  the  vassal  of  him  and 
his  successors.  TJie  same  Pope  had,  by  his 
power,  given  the  empire  to  Philip,  Duke  of 
Brunswick;  he  constrained  the  emperor,  setup 
by  him,  to  take  an  oath  in  this  form:  "  I  promise 
to  honor  and  obey  Pope  Innocent  as  my  prede- 
cessors have  honored  and  obeyed  him."  "Ap- 
peals to  Rome  shall  be  made  freely,  and  freely 
pursued."  "I  promise  to  extirpate  all  heresies, 
and  to  restore  to  the  Roman  church  all  her  pos- 
sessions," (fee. 

In  1204,  Peter  II,  of  Arragon,  traveled  to 
Rome  and  received  his  crown  from  the  Pope,  and 
on  being  crowned,  swore  "  to  he  faithful  and  obe- 
dient to  my  Lord  Innocent,  to  his  Catholic  suc- 
cessors, and  the  Roman  church,  and  faithfully 
to  preserve  my  kingdom  in  his  obedience,  de- 
fending the  Catholic  faith,  and  persecuting  he- 
retical pravity."  A  Pope  deposed  a  king  of  Po- 
land and  granted  his  kingdom  to  another. 

I  have  given  some  specimens  of  the  manifes- 
tation of  papal  power,  and  the  spirit  of  the  re- 
ligion of  which  the  Pope  is  the  infallible  head; 
and  which  all  true  catholics  believe  is  to  over- 
come and  absorb  all  others,  and  again  to  be  the 
universal  faith.  Its  long  and  eventful  career, 
and  its  present  existence,  with  more  followers 
than  in  any  former  age,  without  any  purification 
or  reformation  of  its  vices  and  deformities,  fill 
the  mind  with  curiosity  and  astonishment.  It 
has  never  allowed  any  question  of  its  authority, 
truth,  or  divinity.  ,Jree  inquiry  and  discussion 
it  denounces  and  punishes  as  the  blackest  crime 
against  itself,  because  it  knows  full  well,  that  it 
would  crumble  and  fall  before  them;  and  it 
therefore  seeks  to  fetter  the  souls  of  its  children 
in  ett^rnal  chains  of  ignorance,  sup^-rstition,  and 
despotism.  In  every  generation  of  its  being, 
the  mind  and  moral  sense  of  man  has  risen 
again.st  it,  and  grappled  with  it  in  mighty  bat- 
tle. It  was  always  prompt  in  putting  into  re- 
quisition its  own  temporal  and  spiritual  authori- 
ty— to  raise  armies  and  thunder  its  anathemas — 
to  ravage  heretical  countries  and  to  extirpate 
heretics  with  fire,  faggot,  and  sword;  and  when 
it  was  unequal  to  the  work,  it  called  upon  the 
political  despots  of  the  earth  to  come  to  the  res- 
cue of  it,  the  great  impersonation  of  the  uni- 
versal despotism  of  the  mind,  the  soul,  and 
tlie  body;  and  the  combination  was  always  vic- 
torious. 

The  first  light  of  general  learning  and  civili- 
zation that  dawned  upon  Europe,  to  bring  to  a 
termination  the  dark  age.*,  waff  among  the  Albi- 


1013 


gen8«s,  inhabiting  Laneucdoc  and  Provence,  in 
the  south  of  France.  They  rejeotfed  the  suprem- 
acy of  the  Pope,  and  the  benighting  and  be- 
numbing dogmas  and  spirit  of  his  faith.  Being 
undisturbed  for  many  years,  truth,  and  peace, 
and  the  religion  of  the  Saviour  of  the  world 
flourished  among  them.  The  facultie.s  and  pow- 
ers of  men  there,  after  having  been  enchained 
for  ages,  rapidly  regained  their  innate  strength 
and  activity.  Learning  and  the  arts  flourished 
— comforts,  and  wealth,  and  refinement,  and 
happiness  blessed  their  toil  and  their  assiduity; 
and  a  pure,  charitable,  and  holy  faith  shed  upon 
them  its  hallowed  influences.  They  became  the 
admiration  of  the  surrounding  people,  and  their 
religious  principles  and  freedom  began  rapidly 
to  spread.  The  Albigenses  have  no  sin  to  an- 
swer for  but  that  of  their  bright  example  to  a 
benighted  world.  They  resided  far  from  Rome, 
but  the  fears  and  apprefiensionsof  the  Pope  were 
thoroughly  aroused,  for  he  saw  in  them  arising 
itellectual,  moral,  and  religious  power,  danger- 
ous to  the  universal  dominion  which  he  claim- 
ed. He  called  upon  the  mailed  warriors  of  the 
north,  whose  arms  in  every  field,  from  the  wes- 
tern oceaji  to  the  holy  sepulchre,  had  never 
known  defeat,  and  sent  them  on  the  bloodiest  of 
crusades  against  the  Albigenses;  and  thev  were 
crushed  in  one  of  the  most  savage  and  desola- 
ting wars  that  ever  blasted  any  portion  of  the 
earth.  Prone  to  the  earth,  made  red  by  its  blood, 
Albigensism,  sustained  by  the  immortal  truth 
and  right  of  it.s  principles,  would,  for  genera- 
tions, flame  up  in  holy  beauty  and  brightness, 
far  illuminating  the  gloom  of  the  surrounding 
darkness;  but  as  often  the  inexorable  Pope 
would  march  his  armed  myrmidons  and  have  it 
again  quenched  in  tlie  blood  of  its  martyrs. 

About  1380,  Wickilff  began  his  vigorous  refor- 
mation in  England.  He  denied  the  powerof  the 
Pope,  denounced  his  usurpations,  exposed  the 
interpolations  and  corruptions  of  the  catholic  re- 
ligion, and  interpreted  the  scriptures,  and  placed 
them  in  the  hands  of  the  people  as  the  rule  of 
their  life  and  their  faith.  The  Lollards  increased 
greatly  in  England,  spread  into  Germany,  and 
soon  almost  possessed  Bohemia.  But  the  inde 
fatigable  and  unrelenting  Pope,  brought  down 
upon  them,  too,  all  manner  of  persecutions,  and 
the  armed  power  of  his  dependent  kings.  Anoth- 
er religious  and  exterminating  war  swept  them 
from  the  earth. 

Papacy  seemed  now  to  be  all-dominating  and 
invincible.  Its  corruptions,  and  the  scandalous 
immoralities  of  the  Popes  and  its  clergy,  went 
on  increasing.  One  of  them  denied  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul.  That  faith  was  not  necessary 
for  the  remissii)n  of  sins,  had  become  an  estab- 
lished principle  of  Romanism;  and  the  sale  of 
written  indulgencies  for  the  commission  of  sin, 
one  of  the  sources  of  the  Pope's  revenue.  Tetzal 
was  pushing  a  traffic  in  those  indulgencies  for 
Leo  X,  and  all  the  priesthood  inculcating  that 
tenet  throughout  Germany,  when  Luther  negau 
the  great  refonuation.  The  truths,  which  he 
thundered  in  strong  and  burning  words  against 
Romanism,  seemed  to  be  the  tichos  of  God's  spir- 
it, and  the  hoary  ignorance  and  superstitions  of 
centuries,  receded  before  him  as  from  the  touch  of 
the  spear  of  Ithuriel.  At  the  instigation,  often 
repeated,  of  the  Pope,  Charles  V  summoned  him 


to  appear  before  (he  Diet  of  ^Tortus,  to  answer 
for  his  heresies,  for  which  Leo  demanded  that 
he  should  be  burnt,  as  Huss  had  been  more  than 
a  century  b»-fore.  The  greatest  spirit  of  the 
world,  confronting  its  greatest  monarch,  in  such 
an  assembly  of  warriors,  nobles  and  bishops,  to 
(Question  and  expose  the  errors  and  power  of  the 
time-honored  hierarch,  in  the  cause  of  truth, 
liberty,  religion,  and  salvation,  was  one  of  the 
sublimest  spectacles  that  has  ever  Vjeen  exiiibited 
upon  the  -^arth.  Gtni  held  Luther  under  his  pro- 
tection, and  he  was  saved  for  an  immortal  work. 
Bv  his  teachings, aided  bv  Melancthon  and  Swin- 
gfe,  and  other  great  and  faithful  men,  the  light 
and  liberty  of  the  Bible,  and  of  religious  truth, 
spread  rapidly,  and  promised  at  once  to  regener- 
ate Christendom.  In  less  than  fifty  years,  it 
swept  from  the  Baltic  to  the  Mediterranean,  and 
was  going  on,  "conquering  and  to  tonqyer." 
The  danger  to  the  Pope  was  mighty,  nnprec<v 
dented.  He  summoned  to  the  rescue  everj'  pow- 
er, every  tributary  which  he  could  command; 
and  soon  all  his  host,  which  had  continued  faith- 
ful, manifested  extraordinary  spirit  and  activity. 
Self-preservation,  continuance,  or  annihilation, 
was  the  issue,  and  the  spiritual  portion  of  his 
forces  in  every  branch  Seemed  to  De  electrified. 
The  great  catliolic  powers  flew  to  arms  in  this 
common  cause  of  despotism,  and  every  energy 
and  faculty  of  Romani.sm  came  up  to  the  event- 
ful conflict.  The  newly  instituted  order  of 
Jesuits  brought  genius,  lejiming,  enthusiasm, 
and  an  industry,  perseverance,  devotion,  and 
endurance,  that  were  never  surpassed.  All  caught 
their  spirit,  and  the  trembling  fabric  of  the  pa- 
pacy, over  the  largest  portion  of  its  domain,  was 
upheld  and  become  steady. 

The  state  of  things  was  different  with  the 
protestants.  They  had  rapidly  become  strong 
and  comparatively  secure;  and  withdrawing 
much  of  their  attention  from  their  conmion  foe, 
they  divided  into  sects,  and  weakened  their 
union  and  strength  by  mutual  persecution.  The 
voices  of  the  first  great  reformers  were  hushed 
in  the  tomb,  and  there  were  no  equal  men  to  suc- 
ceed them.  Ferdinand,  the  second  Emperor  of 
that  name,  Philip  II,  of  Spain,  ancf  Maxi- 
millian  of  Bavaria,  espoused  the  cause  of  Ro- 
manism, with  no  less  zeal  than  the  Pope.  Again, 
and  again,  they  charged  with  their  armed  legions 
on  the  protestants  and  the  powers  that  defended 
them,  and  re-conquered  half  that  Romanism 
had  lost,  and  as  far  as  they  overcome,  the  new 
faith  was  suppressed  by  the  most  relentless  per- 
secutions. The  Pope,  by  every  incentive,  was 
constantly  urging  these  bloody  champions  of 
his  church  on  in  their  conquering  career,  and  the 
reformers  had  probably  met  the  sad  fate  of  the 
Albigenses,  if  God  had  not  raised  up  Gustavus 
Adolphus  to  defend,  as  he  did  Luther  to  estab- 
lish, the  reformation.  The  councils  of  the  Pope, 
the  Emperor  and  the  French  King,  too,  were  dis- 
tracted oy  mutual  jea.ousies,  and  their  conflict- 
ing claims  for  the  highest  power.  Protestantism 
got  rest  from  the  terrible  persecutions  of  its  nat- 
ural enemies,  by  the  thirty  years'  war  being 
brought  to  an  end  by  the  treaty  of  Westphalia. 
But  in  effort.s  to  extinguish  forever  its  faith,  its 
liberty,  its  pure  christian  morals,  and  the  eternal 
life  wtich  it  gives,  seas  of  innocent  blood  had 
been  shed.    Besides  the  wars  in   Germany  and 


1014 


the  nortli-enut  of  EurojX',  in  that  of  the  leajjue 
to  suppress  the  Huguenots  in  Franco,  a  milliou 
of  persons  are  computed  to  Jiave  perished.  Du- 
ring the  terrific  nignt  of  St.  Bartholomew,  niuety 
thousand  Huguenots  are  related  to  have  been 
put  to  dt-ath,  in  cold  blood,  by  their  destroying 
persecutors,  in  different  Catholic  countries.  In 
the  Netherlands,  the  Duke  of  Alva,  as  the  chief 
captain  of  PhilipII,  raged  like  a  wild  beast,  nev- 
er were  sated  with  blood,  although  he  boasted 
of  having  put    twenty   thousand    unoffending 

f)rotestatits  to  death.  But  I  retire,  in  disgust  and 
lorror,  from  presenting  any  more  of  these  per- 
secuting and  bloody  sketches  of  Romanism, 
with  which  liistory  teems  in  frightful  fecundity. 
At  the  close  of  the  last  century,  the  papacy 
seemed  to  be  at  last  overthroAvn,  amidst  the 
atheism  and  the  destruction  of  old  systems  and 
institutions  brought  about  by  the  French  revolu- 
tion. But  after  some  years,  it  arose  from  the 
ruin,  perfect  in  all   its  proportions,  and  in  the 

Sossession  of  all  its  capabilities  and  faculties. 
!ear  what  Macauley,  an  Episcopalian,  says  of  it: 
"  The  papacy  remains,  not  in  decay,  not  a 
mere  antique;  but  full  of  life  and  youthful  vigor. 
The  Catholic  church  is  still  sending  forth  to  the 
furtherest  ends  of  the  world,  missionaries  as 
zealous  as  those  who  landed  in  Kent  with  Au- 
gustin;  and  still  confronting  hostile  kings  with 
the  same  spirit  with  which  she  confronted  At- 
tilla."  "  Nor  do  Ave  see  any  sign  which  indicates 
that  the  term  of  her  long  dominion  is  approach- 
ing. She  saw  the  commencement  of  all  the  gov- 
ernments, and  of  all  the  ecclesiastical  establish- 
ments that  now  exist  in  the  world;  and  we  feel 
no  assurance  that  she  is  not  destined  to  see  the 
end  of  them  all.  She  was  great  and  respected 
before  the  Saxon  had  set  foot  on  Britain — before 
the  French  had  crossed  the  Rhine — when  Gre- 
cian eloquence  still  flourished  at  Antioch — when 
idols  were  still  worshipped  in  the  temple  of 
Mecca.  And  she  may  still  exist  in  undiminish- 
ed vigor  wlien  some  traveller  from  New  Zeland 
shall,  in  the  midst  of  a  vast  solitude,  take  his 
stand  on  a  broken  arch  of  London  Bridge  to 
sketch  the  ruins  of  St.  Paul's."' 

It  lias  not  for  generations  attempted  to  claim, 
practically,  any  political  or  temporal  power 
outside  of  the  papal  dominions,  to  depose  kings, 
to  control,  by  direct  interferance,  politics,  or  to 
burn  heretics.  But  still,  in  its  constitution  and 
principles  the  papacy  adheres  to  these  and  all 
Its  other  powers.  It  has  renounced  none — it 
does  not  intend  to  renounce  any  of  them.  None 
of  her  adhering  children  repudiate  any  of  them; 
and  if  they  did,  they  would  be  brought  to  re- 
cant by  priestly  visitation,  or  even  now  they 
would  near  the  spiritual  thunder  of  excommu- 
nication denounced  against  themselves.  These 
powers  are  only  not  active,  because  the  condi- 
tion of  human  affairs,  the  light,  and  liberty,  and 
moral  power  of  the  world  will  not  suffer  them  to 
be  put  in  execution.  It  is  not  the  advance  and 
elevation  of  principle,  of  morals,  and  christian 
charity  inthatchurch  and  among  its  priesthood, 
which  has  purified  it  of  these  enormities.  Let 
the  state  of  the  world  favor  it,  and  other  Grego- 
rys and  Innocents  would  arise  to  enforce  the 
powers  of  the  papacy  in  their  utmost  amplitude, 
and  their  most  inexorable  spirit.  She  believes 
that  sbe  is  to  be  coeval  with  man,  and  ultimate- 


ly to  have  his  whole  and  perfect  obedience.  She 
has  seen  the  great  flux  and  reflux  of  her  authori- 
ty through  many  centuries,  and  she  is  looking 
forward  patiently  through  other  centuries,  in 
confidence,  when  its  strength  in  full  tide  is  to 
come  again  to  her.  Ever  watchful,  the  priest- 
hood, for  whom  mainly  this  wonderful  edifice 
has  been  constructed,  and  been  progressing  to 
perfection  in  its  way  for  fifty  generations,  will 
patiently  bide  their  time;  and  when  it  comes,  if 
come  it  ever  does,  they  will  move  with  a  policy, 
a  courage,  and  a  perseverance  to  command  suc- 
cess; and  the  grandest  and  most  awe-inspiring 
scenes  of  the'"papal  drama  will  be  again  re-en- 
acted on  the  tJieatre  of  the  world. 

But  whether  it  is  the  destiny  of  man  to  re- 
volve back  to  papal  supremacy  in  all  his  affairs 
or  not,  that  is  the  consummation  to  which  its 
whole  priesthood  devote  themselves,  their  time, 
their  energies,  and  their  lives.  That  is  their 
one  great  object,  compensating  and  supplying 
the  subjects  of  their  affections,  hopes,  and  am- 
bitions; wife,  children,  friends,  and  country; 
wealth,  social  position,  station,  honors,  fame, 
and  distinction  in  the  arts,  sciences,  politics, 
and  war.  This  measurably  lost  ascendancy  is 
their  glorious  tradition,  and  to  regain  it  is  the 
permanent,  immutable,  ever  present  policy  of 
the  papacy  in  all  its  parts.  That  the  rope  is  a 
heirarch,  and  they  a  portion  of  the  heirarchy,  is 
a  part  of  the  education,  mind,  soul,  and  person- 
al identity  of  every  me  nber  of  the  priesthood; 
and  not  less  so,  that  the  business  and  end  of 
their  lives  and  labors,  is  to  expend  themselves  ac- 
cording to  times  and  circumstances,  for  the  res- 
toration of  the  authority  and  splendor  of  both  ; 
and  never  to  be  disheartened  or  discouraged, 
whether  or  not  there  be  any  perceivable  result. 
These  are  objects  for  which  the  foreign  priests, 
especially,  labor  in  this  country.  They  sum- 
mon every  papist,  upon  his  reaching  the  coun- 
try, to  his  fealty,  and  hold  them  united  and 
faithful  to  their  religion,  their  priest,  and  their 
sovereign  heirarch.  They  get  possession  of  all 
the  children  they  can,  by  means  of  schools,  and 
of  their  parents,  where  even  but  one  of  them  is 
a  catholic,  and  they  attend,  and  keep  these  chil- 
dren from  the  cradle  to  the  grave.  In  every 
country  where  this  priesthood  has  located  itself, 
with  signal  flexibility  and  cunning,  it  has  ad- 
dressed itself  to  the  ruling  power,  and  paid  it 
court  and  adulation,  or  used  otlier  means  to  win 
it;  and  when  won,  it  may  do  what  it  will,  on 
condition  that  it  becomes  subservient  to  the  pe- 
culiar views  of  this  priesthood  and  its  heirar- 
chy. They  know  that  in  our  country  the  main 
spring  of  political  power  is  the  ballot-box,  and 
the  object  of  their  unceasing  efforts,  is  there  to 
collect  and  consolidate  strength.  The  members 
of  all  other  sects  divide  in  their  politics  and 
votes,  but  foreign  catholics  never,  and  the  priest 
controls  their  votes  with  absolute  will;  and  his 
calculation  is,  how  can  they  be  best  turned  to 
the  account  of  priest-craft  and  Romanism.  They 
never  fail  to  make  themselves  felt  in  elections; 
and  a  few  years  since,  he  whom  they  denomi- 
nate "The  Lord  Bishop  of  New  York,"  John 
Hughes,  was  said  truly  to  hold  in  his  hands 
the  issue  of  a  presidential  election. 

That  I  have  stated  truly  the  obiects  and  poli- 
cy of  Uie  foreign   catholic  priestnood,  in  this 


1015 

(iountrv,  will  be  proved  bv  an  exUaet  or  two  I  cuss,  then,  not  whether  papacy  be  or  not  corn- 
ftota  oie  ef  their  principal  organs,  "Fret-man's  patible  withrtfubllcan  g<nxTTinunt,h\\ltc}uihrr  it  be 
Journal  and  the  Catholic  Herald,"  published  in  ■  or  be  not  founded  in  dirine  right?  If  the  papai-y 
I^'ew  York.  I  have  been  informed  that  it  is  the  j  be  founded  in  dicine  right,  it  is  supreme  over 
organ  also  of  Bishop  Hughes,  and  is  edited  bv  j  whatever  be  founded  only  in  human  right,  and 
his  brother.  The  number  of  iTth  March,  1843,  l  then  your  institutions  should  be  made  to  harmonize 
makes  this  quotation  from  Bronson's  Review,  iciih  it,  and  not  it  with  your  instUutions.  The  re- 
another  catholic  publication:  "Our  readers  will  |  al  question  then  is,  not  the  compatibility  or  in- 
perceive  from  this  number,  that  we  are  prepar-  1  compatibility  of  the  catholic  church  witfi  demo- 
ing  to  give  our  Review  a  more  popular  charac-  !  cratic  institution.?,  but  is  the  catholic  church  the 
ter,  of  entering  more  largely  into  the  discussion  '  church  of  God?    Settle  this  question  first.     But 


of  the  great  political  questions  of  the  day,  and 
are  aiming  to  adapt  it  to  the  interests  of  a  wider 
class  of  readers.  We  cannot,  as  catholics,  blink 
the  great  political  and  social  questions  which 
are  now  agitating  the  public  mind,  both  at  home 
and  abroad;  and  these  questions  will  receive 
more  attention  hereafter  than  we  have  hereto- 
fore given  them.  It  is  of  great  importance  to 
our  community  that  these  should  be  fully  and 
boldly  discussed  in  the  light  of  catholic  fath  and 


in  point  of  fact,  democracy  is  a  mischievioua 
dream,  wherever  the  catholic  church  does  not 
predominate,  to  inspire  the  people  with  rever- 
ence, and  to  teach  and  accustom  them  to  obedi- 
ence to  authority.  The  first  lesson  for  all  to 
learn,  the  last  tliat  should  be  foigotten,  is,  to 
obey.  You  can  have  no  government  where  there 
is  no  obedience;  and  obedience  to  law,  as  it  is 
called,  will  not  be  long  enforced,  where  the  fali- 
bility  o(  law  is  clearly  seen  and  freely  admitted. 


morals,  and  we  are  sure  that  a  catholic  journal  But  it  is  the  intention  of  the  Pope  to  possess  this 
that  will  so  discuss  them,  will,  if  it  finds  here  !  country?  Undoubtedly.  In  this  intention  he. is 
and  there  an  enemy,  never  want  friends.  The  j  aided  hj  tlie  Jesuits,  and  all  the  catholic  pre- 
time  has  come  when  catholics  must  begin  to  make  I  lates  and  priests.  Undoubtedly,  if  they  are 
their  principles  tell  upon  the  public  sentiment  of  the  !  faithful  to  tlieir  religion." 

country.  Heretofore  we  have  taken  our  politics  j  Mr.  Brownson  thus  concludes:  "That  the 
from  one  or  another  of  the  parties  which  divide  j  policy  of  the  church  is  dreaded  and  opposed  by 
the  country  ,'and  have  suffered  the  enemies  of  our  I  all  prote.stants,  infidels,  demagogues,  tyrants, 
religion  to'  impose  their  political  doctrines  upon  and  oppressors,  is  also  unquestionably  true, 
us;  out  it  is  time  for  wa  to  begin  to  teach  the  coun-  \  Save  then,  in  the  discharge  of  our  civil  duties, 
fry  itself  those  mora/ anrfpo/i/icaZ  dortrjnes  which  j  and  in  the  ordinary  busines  of  life,  there  is, 
flow  from /Ae  teachings  of  our  otcn  church.  "Vi'e  land  can  be  no  harmony  among  the  Catholics  and 
are  at  home  here  wherever  we  may  have  been  1  Protestants." 

born;  this  is  our  country,  and  as  it  is  to  become  Those  extracts  avow,  most  distinctly,  all  the 
thoroughly  catholic, vrehave  Rdeeper  inierestinpub-  IriQ^igi^ii  which  I  have  imputed  to  the  Roman 
lie  affairs  than  any  other  of  our  citizens.  The  priesthood  in  this  country.  The  discussion  of 
sects  are  only  for  a  day,  the  church  forever.  We  j  the  great  practical  political  questions  of  the  day, 
care  little  how  the  elections  go,  for  that  is  a  |  fuHv  and  holdU  iu  the  light  of  Catholic  faith  and 
small  affair,  but  we  can  never  as  catholics,  be  in-  [morals,  that  this  country  itself  may  be  taught  the 
different  to  the  moral  principles  which  enter  into  :  tnoral  and  political  doctrines  which  "flow  from  the 


Jbrfcer;  and  that  our  republi 
of  Bronson's  Review,  past  as  well  as  future,  <fcc.  j  tutions  may  be  made  to  conform  to  the  papacy,  by 
The  same  paper,  in  the  number  28th  of  March,  it5  principles  being  made  xo  enter  into  tlie  laws, 
1849,  says  in  an  editorial:  "Is  it  not  possible  for  and  to  shape  the  public  policy  of  this  country— &Te 
us  catholics  to  do  something  to  prepare  our  j  aU  here  boldly  avowed;  and  also  that  every 
brethren  for  the  trials  that  await  them?  Can  we  ;  Jesuit,  Cathofic  Prelate,  and  Priest,  who  is 
do  nothing  to  direct  and  to  shape  the  course  of  :  faithful  to  his  religion  will  aid  the  Pope,  their 
the  new  comers  in  a  way  that  may  afford  more  '■  hierareh,  to   possess  himself  of  this   countrv-. 

Erotection  to  their  faith?  Can  we  do  nothing  to  '  The  means  by  which  they  expect  to  achieve  ^1 
eep  them  united  to  one  another,  and  to  make  ■  this,  is,  by  tlhe  slow  and  cautious  movements, 
the  cross  the  centre  and  object  of  their  union?  i  the  profound  dissimulation  and  arts,  which  have 
Can  we  not  unite  ourselves  more  firmly,and  make  !  ^yer  characterized  the  operations  of  this  priest- 
fcbnegation  of  some  of  our  personal  opinions,  '  hood,  to  get  possession  of  the  political  power 
pursuits  and  wishes,  for  the  sake  of  securing  our  by  controlling  the  ballot  box.  That  is  their 
brethren  as  they  reach  us,  to  the  catholic  church,  ,  sl'eepless  effort,  whether  thev  ever  succeed  or 
and  of  making  them  instruments ^  her  more  com-  j  not;  and  so  subtle  are  they  in  their  operations, 
_i.^         I  (..  *  .„  *  .  thousands  and  thousands  are  unconsciously  mad© 

their  agents  who  would  never  knowingly  submit 


fdete  and  speedy  triamph  in  the  land.' 

In  the  number  of  Bronson's  Review  of  April 
1845,  which  is  a  catholic  oracle  of  such  high  au- 
thority, are  the  following  passages:  "But  would 
you  have  this  country  come  under  the  authority 
of  the  Pope?  Why  not?  But  the  Pope  would 
take  away  our  free  institutions !  Nonsense.  But 
kow  do  you  know  that?  From  what  do  you  in- 
fer it?  After  all  do  you  not  commit  a  slight 
blunder?  Are  vour  free  institutions  infallible? 
Are  they  founcfed  on  divine  right?  This  you 
deny.    Is  not  the  proper  question  for  you  to  dis- 


themselves  to  any  such  purposes  of  mischief. 
The  priesthood  are  encouraged  by  their  own 
strong  faith,  that,  if  they  do  not  succeed  in  this 
century,  their  successors  may  in  the  next.  What- 
ever may  be  the  results  of  these  great  projects, 
their  prosecution  is  utterly  opposed  and  hostile 
to  the  design,  spirit,  and  practical  ends  of  our 
system  and  institutions.  Our  ancestors  came  to 
this  new  world  to  enjoy,  themselves  and  their 
posterity   forever,   perfect  civil    and  jelj^ious 


1016 


ff«^J«)in,  and  ih^  tight  of  ijKjuiry.  thought  and 
the  expression  of  opinioji  upon  subjects,  short 
of  invasion  of  the  rights  of  others,  uufottered 
as  the  winds  of  Heaven.  The  divorce  of  church 
and  state,  of  politics  and  religion,  of  temporal 
and  spiritual  affairs,  they  have  provided  for  in 
our  constitutions,  and  it  was  intended  to  be  abso- 
lute, complete,  and  forever.  In  the  scheme  of 
the  hierareh  of  Rome  and  his  emissaries — spread 
and  spreading  over  the  face  of  this  country,  to 
revolutionize  silently  and  stealthily  tliis  or- 
<ler  of  things,  they  now  have  more  than  fifty 
thousand  voters,  l^gal  and  illegal,  in  America. 
At  every  election,  local  or  general,  this  mighty 
force  is  made  to  act  with  a  view,  present  or  re- 
mote, to  the  grand  objects  of  those  who  control 
It.  The  certain  and  the  promptest  way  to  get 
large  accessions — accessions  which,  in  another 
generation,  may  give  them  the  mastery  at  tJie 
polls,  is,  to  permit  no  restriction  upon  immigra- 
tion or  upon  the  faculty  of  the  immigrant  to 
vote  and  exercise  a  full  share  of  political  sover- 
eignty. All  attempts  to  put  upon  them  any  re- 
striction will  meet  the  inflexible  opjjosition,  the 
anathemas  of  every  Roman  priest,  and  probably 
of  every  Catholic  in  America. 

All  this  host  of  foreign  Catholics,  now  here 
and  coming,  are  brought  up  to  the  confessional. 
By  their  faith,  that  is  sinful  which  the  priest 
tells  them  is  sin ;  and  so  of  religious  duty,  which 
they  are  to  perform,  or  be  lost.  To  him,  who, 
in  this  matter  Avith  daring  impiety,  presetits 
himself  as  per.^^o.nating,  the  Almigiity,  the  sinnej 
tells  his  tale  of  guilt  and  contrition.  The  father 
confessor  grants  him  absolution,  and  claims  too, 
the  power  to  pray  his  soul,  when  he  dies,  out  of 
the  fires  of  purgatorv.  When  this  dread  man 
bids  that  confessing  sinner  how  to  vote,  Charles 
XII,  Frederick  the  Great,  or  Bonaparte,  never 
received  a  prompter  or  so  willing  an  obedience 
from  their  best  trained  veteran. 

It  is  only  as  a  hierarchy,  as  a  religious  politi- 
co institution,  having  vast  political  projects, 
and  organi7<ed  for  political  action;  and  be- 
cause its  principles,  purposes  and  operations, 
are  utterly  inimical  to  popular  and  American 
eonstitutional  liberty,  to  all  civil  and  religious 
freedom,  that  I  stand  up  in  opposition  to  it. 
When  Roman  American  catholics  call  their  gene- 
ral councils,  and  purge  their  system  of  its  in- 
terior and  only  quiescent  political  despotism; 
■when  they  announce  to  the  Pope  and  the  world 
that  his  supremacy  is  only  spiritual,  and  out  of 
his  papal  dominions  in  Italy,  he,  nor  his  priests 
have  light  to  interfere  in  politics  or  temporal 
affairs;  that  they  owe  him  or  his  hierarchy  no 
dut^  or  obedience,  incompatible  with  their  full 
ancl  perfect  allegiance  to  the  United  States,  or 
any  of  the  states,  or  that  is  hostile  to  any  of  the 
principles  of  their  governments;  that  they  are 
opposed  to  and  will  ever  resist  the  union  of 
church  and  state,  and  any  mixing  of  their  affairs; 
when  they  bid,  and  will  comj>el  their  priesthood 
to  cea.se  tneir  meddling  with  the  government  and 

f>olitics  of  the  country,  with  a  view  to  shape  its 
aws  and  policy,  and  to  desist  from  their  efforts 
to  control  the  entire  Roman  catholic  vote  of 
America;  then,  and  not  until  then,  should  every 
native  born  American,  every  true  friend  of 
American  liberty,  wherever  born  or  whatever' 
be  hia  religion,  whoso  paramount  object  is  the 


seeuritv  and  preservation  of  that  liberty,  cease 
from  his  assaults  upon  thii  great  religious  poli- 
tico institution. 

Mr.  President,  the  information  which  I  pos- 
sess, and  have  endeavored  to  give  partially  to 
the  convention  on  this  branch  of  the  subject,  I 
have  derived  from  "Papal  Rome,  as  it  is,  by 
Giustiania,"  "Elliott  on  Romanism,"  "Dowl- 
ing'.s  History  of  Romanism,"  and  from  general 
reading. 

We  have,  Mr.  President,  a  country  of  vast  ex- 
tent, with  a  great  variety  of  climate,  soil,  pro- 
duction, industry  and  pursuit.  Competing  in- 
terests and  sectional  questions  are  a  natural  and 
fruitful  source  of  jealousies,  discords  and  fac- 
tions. We  have  about  four  millions  of  slaves, 
and  the  slavehoWing  and  free  states  are  nearly 
equally  divided  in  number,  but  the  population 
of  the  latter  greatly  preponderating,  and  every 
portion  of  it  deeply  imbued  with  inflexible  hos- 
tility to  slavery  as  an  institution.  Even  now  the 
conflict  of  opinion  and  passion  of  the  two  great 
sections  of  the  Union,  upon  the  subject  of  slave- 
ry, is  threatening  to  rend  this  Union  and  change 
confederated  states  and  one  people  into  hostile 
and  waring  powers.  Cession  has  recently  given 
to  us  considerable  numbers  of  the  Spanish 
race,  and  a  greatly  increasing  immigration  is 
constantly  pouring  in  upon  us  the  hordes  of 
Europe,  with  their  hereditary  national  animos 
ities,  their  discordant  races,  languages,  and  re- 
ligious faiths,  their  ignorance  and  their  pauper- 
ism, mixed  up  with  a  large  amount  of  idleness, 
moral  degradation,  and  crime;  and  all  this 
"  hetreogeneous,  discordant,  distracted  mass,"  to 
use  Mr.  Jefferson's  language,  "sharing  with  us 
the  legislation,"  and  the  entire  political  sover- 
eignty. My  word  for  it.  we  are  nursing  in 
rapid  growth,  a  blind  political  Sampson,  and 
sooner  or  later,  he  will  grapple  with  the  pillars 
of  our  temple  of  liberty  and  pull  it  down  in 
ruins  upon  us. 

W^ashington  and  Jefferson,  and  their  associ- 
ates, tlioiigh  among  the  wisest  and  most  far  see- 
ingof  mankind,  couldnot  but  de.sery  in  the  future 
many  formidable  difficulties  and  dangers,  and 
thus  be  premonished  to  provide  against  them, 
in  fashioning  our  institutions.  If  they  had 
foreseen  the  vast,  the  appalling  increase  of  im- 
migration upon  us  at  the  present,  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt  that  laws  to  naturalize  the 
foreigners  and  to  give  up  to  them  the  country, 
its  liberties,  its  destiny,  would  not  have  been 
authorized  by  the  constitution.  The  danger, 
though  great,  is  not  wholly  without  remedy. 
]  W^e  can  do  something  if  we  do  it  quickly.  The 
I  German  and  Slavonic  races  are  combining  in  the 
I  state  of  New  York  to  elect  candidates  of  their 
own  blood  to  congress.  This  is  the  beginning  of 
'  tlie  conflict  of  races  on  a  large  scale,  and  it  must, 
I  in  the  nature  of  things,  continue  and  increase. 
It  must  be  universal  and  .severe  in  all  the  fields 
of  labor,  betw'een  the  native  and  the  stranger; 
and  from  the  myriads  of  foreign  laborers  coming 
to  us,  if  it  does  not  become  a  contest  for  bread 
and  subsistence,  wages  will  at  least  be  brought 
down  so  low  as  to  hold  our  native  laborers  and 
their  families  in  hopeless  poverty.  They  cannot 
adopt  the  habits  of  life,  and  live  upon  the 
stinted  meager  supplies,  to  which  the  foreigner 
will  restrict  hi^ejjt,  and  which  is   bounteoun 


1017 


plenty  to  wliat  he  has  been  accustomed  in  the 
old  country.  Already  these  results  are  taking 
place  in  many  of  the  mechanic  aits.  Duty,  pa- 
triotism, and  wisdom,  all  require  us  to  protect 
the  labor,  and  to  keep  up  to  a  fair  scale  the  wa- 
ges of  our  native  born  people,  as  far  as  by  laws 
and  measures  of  public  policy  it  can  be  done. 
The  foreigner  too  is  the  natural  foe  of  the  slave- 
ry of  our  state.  He  is  opposed  to  it  by  all  his 
past  associations,  and  when  he  comes  to  our 
state  he  sees  two  hundred  thousand  laborers  of 
a  totally  diflferent  race  to  himself,  excluding  him 
measurably  from  employment  and  wages.  He 
hears  a  measure  agitated  to  send  these  200,000 
competitors  away.  Their  exodus  will  make 
room  for  him,  his  kindred  and  race,  and  create 
such  a  demand  for  labor,  as  he  will  reason  it,  to 
give  him  high  wages.  He  goes  naturally  for 
tlie  measure,  and  becomes  an  emancipationist. 
While  the  slave  is  with  us,  the  foreigner  will 
not  crowd  us,  which  will  postpone  to  a  long 
day  the  affliction  of  |>ations,  an  excess  of  popu- 
lation ;  the  slaves  away,  the  great  tides  of  immi- 
gration will  set  in  upon  us,  and  precipitate  upon 
our  happy  land  this  the  chief  misery  of  most  of 
the  countries  of  Europe.  Look  at  the  myriads 
who  are  perpetually  pouring  into  the  nortli  wes- 
tern states  from  the  German  hives — making  large 
and  exclusive  settlements  for  themselves,  which 
in  a  few  yeai-s  will  number  their  thousands  and 
tens  of  thousands;  living  in  isolation,  speaking 
a  strange  language,  having  alien  manners,  hab- 
its, opinions,  and  religious  faiths,  and  a  total 
ignorance  of  our  political  institutions;  all  handed 
down  with  German  phleghm  and  inflexibility  to 
their  children  through  generations.  In  less  tnan 
fifty  years,  northern  Illinois,  parts  of  Ohio  and 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Iowa,  and  Minesota,  will 
be  literally  possessed  by  them;  they  will  num- 
ber millions  and  millions,  and  they  will  be 
essentially  a  distinct  people,  a  nation  within  a 
nation,  a  new  Germany.  We  cant't  keep  these 
people  wholly  out,  and  ought  not  if  we  could; 
but  we  are  getting  more  than  our  share  of  them. 
I  wish  they  would  turn  their  direction  to  South 
America,  quite  as  good  a  portion  of  the  world 
as  our  share  of  the  hemisphere.  Thev  could 
there  aid  in  bringing  up  the  slothful  ana  degen- 
erate Spanish  race;  here  their  deplorable  office 
is  to  pull  us  down.  Our  proud  boast  is,  that  the 
Anglo  Saxon  race  is  the  first  among  all  the 
world  of  man,  and  that  we  are  a  shoot  from  this 
noble  stock;  but  how  long  will  we  be  as  things 
are  progressing?  In  a  few  years,  as  a  distinctive 
race,  the  Anglo  Americans  will  be  as  much  lost 
to  the  world  and  its  future  history  as  the  lost 
tribes  of  Israel.  But  let  us  avert  such  a  fate, 
let  us  postpone  it  at  least.  Let  us  withdraw 
from  the  new  comers  the  premium  of  political 
sovereignty.  These  strangers  have  neither  the 
right  nor  the  competency  to  govern  the  native 
born  people,  nor  ought  they  to  be  allowed  the 
power  to  misgovern  them.  It  is  our  right  and 
our  duty  to  govern  ourselves,  and  them  too  when 
they  come  among  us;  and  it  is  best  for  all  par- 
ties that  it  should  be  so;  and  this  difficult  and 
important  work  can  be  better  performed  without 
their  taking  part  in  it,  even  when  theirintentions 
are  good;  but  misdirected  and  perverted  by  de- 
signing and  wicked  men,  it  is  fatal  infatuation 
to  allow  it.     This  truly  foreign  power,  nestled 

128 


fn  the  bosom  of  our  country,  may  in  its  arch  and 
crooked  policy,  occasionally  act  with  one  or  an- 
other of  the  parties  that  spring  up  inherent  in 
this  republic.  But  it  has  its  own  paramount 
ends  to  circumvent;  and  when  it  seems  to  ally  it- 
self to  any  party,  it  is  only  a  ruse;  and  the  true 
motive  is  the  belief  that  it  helps  on  to  the  con- 
summation of  those  ends.  With  every  civil 
right  and  liberty  secured  to  the  immigrant,  and 
a  full  share  of  political  sovereignty  to  be  the 
heritage  of  his  children,  if  he  is  not  satisfied  to 
come  and  remain  with  us,  let  him  go  to  other 
lands. 

Mr.  President,  no  well-informed  and  observant 
man,  can  look  abroad  over  this  wide-spread  and 
blessed  country,  without  feeling  deep  anxiety  for 
the  future.  Some  elements  of  discord  and  disu- 
nion are  even  now  in  fearful  action.  Spread  out 
to  such  a  vast  extent,  filling  up  almost  in  geo- 
metrical progression,  withcommunities  and  col- 
onies from  many  lands,  various  as  Europe  in  per- 
sonal and  national  characteristics,  in  opinions, 
in  manners  and  customs,  in  tongues  and  religious 
faiths,  in  the  traditions  of  the  past,  and  the  ob- 
jects and  the  hopes  of  the  future — the  United 
States,  can  no  more  than  Europe,  become  one 
homogeneous  mass — one  peaceful,  united,  har- 
monizing, all  self-adhering  people.  When  the 
country  shall  begin  to  teem  with  people,  these 
jarring  elements  being  brought  into  proximity, 
their  repellant  and  explosive  properties  will  be- 
gin to  act  with  greater  intensity ;  and  then,  if  not 
before,  will  come  the  war  of  geographical  sec- 
tions, the  war  of  races,  and,  the  most  relentless 
of  all  wars,  of  hostile  religions.  This  mourn- 
ful catastrophe  will  have  been  greatly  hastened 
by  our  immense  expansion,  ana  our  proclama- 
tion to  all  mankind  to  become  a  part  of  us.  Less 
limits,  and  the  slow,  but  safe  growth  of  natural 
increase,  would  have  given  us  not  so  magnificent 
and  striking,  but  a  much  more  perfect  and  endu- 
ring republican  empire.  Hope  may  ofi'er  us  the 
delusion  that  American  liberty,  Won  by  th« 
swords,  and  secured  by  a  constitution  devised 
by  the  wisest  and  best  men  of  the  earth,  will  be 
immortal.  But  that,  like  man  and  all  his  crea- 
tions, will  pass  away;  it  is  the  law  of  his  desti- 
ny. May  the  time  be  far,  far  in  the  dim  and 
distant  future,  and  may  the  people  of  America, 
to  heave  it  further  oif,  confide  the  preservation 
of  that  liberty  to  those  only  who  are  competent 
and  worthy  of  being  trusted  with  the  best  hope 
of  mankind! 

Mr.  PRESTOJf.  I  cannot,  Mr.  President, 
without  proving  recreant  to  the  trust  reposed  in 
me  by  the  constituency  I  have  the  honor  to  rep- 
resent, permit  the  remarks  which  have  fallen 
from  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  to  pass  un- 
answered in  this  hall.  They  have  been  received 
with  marked  attention  by  the  house,  and  the  ap- 
plause of  the  galleries  at  the  utterance  of  senti- 
ments so  pernicious,  when  eloquently  urged, 
makes  me  tn  mble  for  the  fate  of  my  country. 
But,  sir,  I  will  tell  them  before  they  applaud 
this  proposition,  to  tear  away  the  right  of  suf- 
frage from  the  unfriended  an<l  defenceless  immi- 
grant, to  pause,  for  if  it  be  accomplished,  the 
time  is  not  far  distant,  when  the  pauper  will  be 
disfranchised,  and  by  degrees  the  privilege  wil 
be  alone  enjoyed  by  the  landlord  and  the  capi* 
talist.    When  that  inauspicious  day  shall  arrive 


WIS 


when  labor  lies  suppliant  aud  niajiaeled  at  the 
feet  of  capital,  when  the  immigrant  and  poor  cit- 
izen are  alike  enslaved  and  enthralled,  then 
your  loud  applauses  will  be  turned  into  wailings 
and  lamentations,  and  you  will  curse  the  day  on 
which  you  permitted  the  elective  franchise  to  be 
invaded. 

Mr.  President,  this  is  a  question  which  is  not 
alone  confined  to  the  realm  of  politics,  but  tran- 
scends it  and  interferes  with  the  rights  of  con- 
science. It  offers  two  stabs  at  liberty,  one  at 
the  rights  of  the  foreigner,  the  other  at  freedom 
of  religious  opinion:  if  carried  out  it  will  lead 
to  the  establishment  of  religious  intolerance, 
and  destroy  the  equal  political  privileges  of  the 
poorer  classes  of  .society.  Politics  and  religion 
are  blended,  and  the  gentleman  raises  his  warn- 
ing voice,  to  persuade  us  to  forbid  the  foreigner 
from  landing  on  our  shores,  from  enjoying  that 
equality  which  should  belong  to  every  freeman 
on  our  soil,  and  by  the  power  of  eloquence 
arouses  the  passions  of  the  worst  classes  of  the 

Erotestant  persuasion  against  their  catholic 
rethren.  1  will  not  say  such  is  his  design,  but 
I  do  say  it  is  the  inevitable  result  of  his  doctrine. 
O,  how  unnecessary,  how  uncalled  for!  Wliere 
around  us  are  the  evidences  of  the  mischievous 
power  of  the  poor  foreigner.  There  are  numbers 
of  them  citizens  of  the  state,  yet,  when  we  gaze 
around  this  hall,  we  behold  no  single  delegate 
bom  in  a  foreign  land.  Has  ever  a  foreigner 
filled  the  executive  chair,  from  the  hour  when 
Isaac  Shelby  was  chosen  governor  of  Kentucky? 
Have  they  ever  filled  great  and  lucrative  offices 
of  honor  and  profit  among  us?  Thousands  have 
been  naturalized  among  us,  and  have  passed 
their  lives  in  unobtrusive  obscurity  and  peace. 
They  have  lived  quietly  and  honestly  among  us; 
they  have  contributed  to  the  burthens  of  the 
state  in  peace,  and  they  have  fought,  shoulder 
toshoulder  with  their  adopted  brethren  in  the 
battles  of  our  common  country.  They  have  as- 
sisted us  in  subduing  forests,  draining  marshes, 
and  building  up  our  stately  cities  ;  they  liave 
fought  for  us  in  battle,  they  have  increased  our 
prosperity  in  peace,  yet  how  rarely  do  we  ever 
see  them  aspiring  to  offices  of  importance  and 
value  in  the  state.  These  are  facts  which  no 
statistics  are  necessary  to  establish,  which  none 
can  disprove;  for  when  we  look  around  us,  is 
there  a  delegate  on  this  floor  a  foreigner?  Not 
one.  Is  there  a  member  of  congress  from  this 
state  a  foreigner?  ISTot  one.  A  member  of  our 
legislature?  Not  one.  A  minister  to  any  foreign 
court?  Not  one.  The  danger  then,  exist,s  only 
in  the  imagination,  and  these  apprehensions  are 
mere  phantoms  of  the  brain. 

My  friend  from  Simpson, (Mr.  Clarkc)whispers 
that  General  Shields  is  a  foreigner  by  birth.  It 
is  true,  and  I  am  indebted  to  hira  for  the  sugges- 
tion. He  was  baptized  in  blood  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  on  the  field  of  Cerro  Gordo.  In 
that  memorable  battle  he  earned  his  title  to  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  an  America::  citizen. 
He  fell  gallantly  leading  a  portion  of  his  own 
brigade  in  a  charge  upon  a  batterv  of  the  enemy, 
shot  through  the  body,  a  handkerchief  might 
have  been  drawn  through  the  wound,  yet  it  was 
his  fortune  to  survive.  He  returned  to  the  state 
of  his  adoption  and  the  gratitude  of  its  people 
has  caused  him  to  be  elected  to  the  senate  of  the 


Unitfed  states.  However  we  may  differ  from  him 
in  opinion,  never  let  our  voices  "be  lifted  against 
him,  for  if  lie  had  a  thousand  faults  he  has  wip- 
ed them  off  by  the  generosity  of  his  conduct 
and  gallantry  of  his  bearing  in  behalf  of  our 
country. 

But,  Mr.  President,  the  tendency  of  the  prop- 
osition of  the  |,-entleman  from  Bourbon,  is  not 
merely  to  assail  th**  rights   of  the   alien,  but  it 
will  terminate  in  tearing  away  from  the   poorer 
classes  of  our  own  people  the  inestimable   priv- 
elege  of  the  right  of  suffrage.     Permit  this  prin- 
ciple to  find  favour  among  us,  and  war  will  next 
be  declared  against  the  pauper  as  it  is   in    Mas- 
sachusetts, and  the  other  states   of  the  atlantic 
border,  where  Native  Americmism  flourishes  in 
full  vigor.     As  Kentucky  was  the  first  state   of 
the  confederacy  that  extended  the   privilege  of 
universal  suffrage,  to  every  freeman  upon  hersoil, 
I  trust  in  God  slie  will  be  the  last  to   commence 
the   process  of  curtailing  that  right.     She  was 
the  first  to  break  loose  fl-om  the  shackles  of 
feudalism.     I  trust  she  will   be   the   last  to  re- 
adopt  them.     She  extended   to  all   classes  this 
franchise,  in   the  constitution   of  1799.     Let   it 
never  be  said  that  she  was  the  first  to  abandon 
I  that  noble  determination,  in  the  constitution   of 
j  1849.     This  great  principle  asserted  at  Danville, 
I  and  confirmed  in  tne  constitution   of  1799,  has 
I  pervaded  the  confederacy  and  mitigated  the  con- 
!  dition  of  the  citizen  in  almost  every  one   of  our 
I  sister  states.    It  has  not  stopped  here.    Borne  to 
I  Europe  by  La  Fayette,  and  those  other  foreign 
I  patriots  who   assisted  tis   in   our  revolutionary 
i  struggle,  it  was  the  principal  element  in  produc- 
jing  the  first  French  revolution,   that  goal  from 
j  whence  sprung  the  germ   of  human   liberty  in 
:  Europe.     The  popular  thirst  for  this  very  right 
was  one  of  the  chief  causes  of  the  revolution  of 
!  1830  which  established  the  throne  of  Louis  Phil- 
I  ippe.  It  was  also  at  the  foundation  of  the  move- 
j  ment  which  dethroned  him,  and  established  the 
I  French  Republic.     Never,   sir,  will  I  agree  in 
I  this   age  of  progress  and  political  science,   to 
abandon  this  principle,  or  seek   to   curtail  the 
right  of  suffrage  by  invading  it  in  the  slightest 
degree,  never  will  I  agree  that  America,   fright- 
ened by  chimerical  dangers,  should  be  the  first 
to  retrace  her  steps,  and  destroy  that  very  prin- 
ciple which  has  been  our  glory,  our  support,  our 
ornament  and  our  strength. 

Nations  have  their  fits  of  insanity  like  men. 
We  know,  in  England,  after  the  usurpation  of 
Oliver  Cromwell,  and  the  abdication  of  the  Stu- 
arts, the  cry  of  "popery"  would  throw  the  whole 
people  into  the  most  violent  agitation.  The 
dread  of  the  Pope  of  Rome,  was,  at  that  time  a 
national  madness.  All  classes  were  terrified  at 
the  imaginary  peril  of  the  power  of  the  pontiff, 
and  shuddered  at  the  prospect  of  a  restoration 
of  papal  supremacy.  No  class  or  condition  was 
exempted  from  this  fear,  hoAvever  idle  in  reality. 
Now,  sir,  when  I  heard  the  gentleman,  this 
evening,  conjure  up  the  imaginary  dangers, 
which  threatened  the  institutions  o'f  America, 
from  the  catholic  religion  and  the  power  of  the 
Pope  in  America,  it  seemed  to  me  a  similar  in- 
sanity had  seized  him,  and  as  if  the  cry  of  "no 
popery"  was  again  uttered  for  the  purpose  of 
stimulating  the  angry  passions  of  the  protestant 


1019 


' 


multitude,  and  of  crushing  to  earth  everj'  prin- 
ciple of  religious  toleration  in  the  land. 

If  it  be  the  wish  of  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon to  proscribe  the  catholic  religion  as  detri- 
mental to  the  institutions  of  our  country,  he  does 
not  propose  a  remedy,  aJe(juate  to  the  object. 
Let  nim  introduce  the  laws  imposing  disabilities 
on  catholics,  -which  sixty  years  since  encumber- 
ed, and  yet  partially  encumber,  the  statutes  of 
England;  those  laws  framed — skilfully  framed 
— for  the  proscription  and  oppression  of  the  un- 
fortunate people  of  Ireland.  Import  these  laws, 
and  engraft  them  here,  if  you  wish  Kentucky  to 
occupy  a  similar  attitude — an  attitude  so  envia- 
ble. *rhese  are  the  statutes  against  which  the 
oppressed  people  of  Irelan  1  have  lifted  their 
wailing  voices  "till  they  have  reached  to  heaven; 
these  are  the  statutes  that  have  forced  from  her  I 
tears  of  blood ;  these  are  the  statutes  whose  iron  des- 
potism has  imposed  a  bondage  so  bitter  that  the 
sense  of  the  civilized  world  has  compelled  Eng- 
land, obdurate  as  she  is,  to  relax  their  vigor,  and 
jnitigate  their  severity.  To  our  shame  be  it  said, 
these  are  tlie  principles  which  this  evening  have 
been  welcomed  with  applause  by  a  Kentucky  au- 
dience, in  the  capitol  of  Kentucky. 

Sir,  establish  tnis  principle,  and  we  have  pro- 
scribed the  freedom  of  religious  opinion  in  this 
state.  Establish  this,  and  we  have  struck  down  ! 
religious  toleration  and  freedom  of  conscience  ;| 
establish  this,  and  you  have  laid  the  founda-  • 
tion  of  religious  wars,  to  convulse,  to  distract, ' 
and  to  ruin  our  common  country.  I 

To  a  stranger,  there  are  two  remarkable  fea- 1 
tures  in  our  government.     "We  are  the  only  civil- 
ized state  in  the  world  which  allows  a  foreigner  I 
to  acquire  rights  of  citizenship   within   it,  and  j 
we   are  the    only  enlightened    government    in ' 
which  the  rich  and  the  poor,  the  strong  and  the  I 
weak,  have  equal  political  rights  and  privileges,  I 
and   enjoy  the  benefits  of  substantial   liberty. ' 
The  reason  is.  we  are  the   only  people   of  the  j 
world    who   have  erected   our  government    on 
broad  and  just  foundations — on  those  principles  j 
of  inflexible  justice  on  which  liberty  alone  can  j 
safely  repose.     But  when  we  commence  narrow-  j 
ing  that  foundation — when  we  commence  quali-  i 
fving  those  principles — when   we  undertaKe  to 
depart  from   those   truths,  the  pursuit  of  which 
have  ensured  us  prosperity  and  happiness,  we 
have  sapped  the  foundations  on  wliicn  the  edi- 
fice rests.     When  this  is  done,  the  thraldom  of 
labor  to  capital  is  again  renewed,  the  degrada- 
tion of  the  poorest  citizen  is   insured,  and  so- 
ciety will  return  to  that  barbarism  from  whence 
it  emerged. 

Accurate  as  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  usu- 
ally is,  there  must  be  some  mistake  in  his  state- 
ments relative  to  the  views  entertained  in  regard 
to  naturalization,  by  some  of  the  prominent  pa- 
triots of  the  revolution.  He  cites  Washington 
as  concurring  in  his  views,  and  quotes  from  his 
correspondence  in  regard  to  Baron  Steuben. 
Washington  was  the  President  of  the  conven- 
tion which  framed  our  federal  constitution,  and 
that  constitution  provides  for  the  naturalization 
of  foreigners.  I  am  not  now  prepared  with  ref- 
erences on  this  subject,  but  if  ray  memory  serves 
me,  it  will  be  found,  by  reference  to  the  debates 
of  that  convention,  that  his  warning  voice  was 
never  raised  in  remonstrance  against  the   inser- 


tion of  that  feature  in  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  and  I  appeal  to  all  ^ho  hear  me, 
if  he  ever  did. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  will  refer  the  gentleman  to 
Sparks'  life  of  Washington,  in  which  are  the 
letters  I  read  and  many  more. 

Mr.  PKESTON.  I  have  no  doubt  of  the  accu- 
rac}'  of  the  transcript — none ;  but  I  say  Wash- 
ington wa.s  the  president  of  the  convention 
which  provided  in  our  constitution  for  the  nat- 
uralization of  foreigners,  and  lifted  no  warning 
voice  against  it,  and  that  the  naturalization  laws  ' 
were  first  passed  in  conformity  to  his  first  mes-  ' 
sage  to  congress  in  which  he  says: 

"Various  considerations  also  render  it  expe-  ■ 
dient  that  the  terms  on  which  foreignere  may  be 
admitted  to    the    right  of  citizens,  should   be 
speedily  a-scertainedoy  a  uniform  ruleofnatu-' 
ralization." 

The  gentleman  has  also  quoted  from  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson's notes   on  Virginia  in   relation   to  this ' 
matter,  but  I  will   refer  him  to  more  authentic 
evidence  of  Mr.  Jeiferson's  political  views.     In 
speaking  of  the  existing  laws  in  regard  to  nat- 
uralization, he  deemed  a  mitigation  of  them  ne-' 
cessary,  and  in  his  first  annual  message  to  con-* 
gress,  he   commends  the  subject  to  their  atten- 
tion in  the  following  language  : 

"I  cannot  omit  recommending  a  revisal  of  the 
laws  on  the  subject  of  naturalization.  Consid- 
ering the  ordinary  chances  of  human  lif«',  a  de- 
nial of  citizenship  under  a  residence  of  fourteen: 
years,  is  a  denial  to  a  great  proportion  of  those " 
who  ask  it,  and  controls  a  policy  pursued  from 
their  first  settlement  by  many  of  these  states, 
and  still  believed  of  consequence  to  their  pros- 
perity. And  shall  we  refuse  the  unhappy  fugitives 
from  distress,  that  hospitality  which  the  sava- 
ges of  the  wilderness  extended  to  our  fathers  ar- 
riving in  this  land?  Shall  oppressed  humanity  ' 
find  no  a.sylum  on  this  globe?  The  constitution, 
indeed,  has  wisely  provided  that,  for  admission 
to  certain  offices  of  important  trust,  a  residence 
shall  be  required  sufficient  to  develope  charac-  _ 
ter  and  design.  But  might  not  the  general  char- 
acter and  capabilities  of  a  citizen  be  safely  com- 
municated to  every  one  manifesting  a  bona  Jide 
purpose  of  embarking  his  life  and  fortunes  per- 
manently with  us?  With  restrictions,  perhaps, 
to-gjrard  against  the  fraudulent  usurpation  of 
our  flag." 

The  recommendation  of  Mr.  Jefferson  led  to 
the  enactment  of  that  system  of  naturalization 
laws  under  which  we  have  lived  for  half  a  cen-  ' 
tury.  At  the  time  of  their  adoption  it  required 
a  residence  of  fourteen  years  before  an  alien ; 
could  be  admitted  to  the  privileges  of  citizen- 
ship. By  those  enactments  the  period  of  resi- 
dence was  reduced  to  five  years,  and  under  these 
laws  we  have  lived  from  the  year  1801  to  the 
present  day  without  inconvenience,  injury  or 
complaint.  About  seven  or  eight  years  since, 
however,  a  murmur  arose  against  them — a  move- 
ment called  native  Americanism  began.  Wliere 
was  the  principle  of  this  new  party  born?  Was 
it  born  in  the  closet  of  the  philanthropist,  the 
study  of  a  philosopher,  or  the  library  of  the 
statesman?  No  sir.  It  was  conceived  in  ie:no- 
rance  and  begotten  in  inquity;  it  was  ushered  in- 
to existence  from  amid  the  vilest  purlieus  of 
Philadelphia;  it  was  amid  profaned  altars,  and 


1020 


by  the  red  blaze  of  catholic  churches;  amid  the 
drunken  orgies  of  au  infuriated  mob,  amid  riot, 
robbery,  sacrilege,  murder,  and  civil  bloodshed, 
that  this  monstrous  bantling  was  born.  I  leave 
to  others  the  task  of  tracing  its  progress.  From 
time  to  time  attempts  have  been  made  to  renew 
and  revive  it;  but  it  has  always  in  the  end  been 
scorned,  repudiated,  and  denounced,  by  the 
good  sense  of  the  country.  The  arch-priest  of 
the  faith.  Levin — he  who  fed  this  unholy  flame 
after  all  the  agitation — is  the  sole  representative 
of  this  party  in  the  halls  of  congress.  Long 
statistical  tables  of  European  pauperism  and 
crime  have  been  prepared  and  disseminated  to 
irritate  the  popular  mind  against  the  defence- 
less foreigner;  the  worst  passions  of  the  human 
heart  have  been  stimulated  to  urge  the  ignorant 
to  persecution  and  injustice,  but  the  whole  at- 
tempt has  been  rejected  by  the  good  sense  ef  the 
people  of  America,   and  the  whole  party  has 

f  roved  a  political  abortion,  and  their  principles 
ave   sunk  back  to  the  obscurity  from   whence 
they  emanated. 

The  gentleman  has  chosen  to  allude  to  the  for- 
mation of  the  legion  of  St.  Patrick  in  Mexico, 
composed  of  deserters  from  the  American  army. 
As  a  fellow  to  the  picture,  I  will  mention  that 
when  the  war  commenced,  a  gentleman  of  Phila- 
delphia, a  leader  of  the  Native  American  party, 
intelligent,  upright,  brave,  and  enthusiastic,  but 
injudicious  and  zealous — Captain  Naylor — re- 
cruited a  large  company,  almost  a  regiment  in 
itself,  exclusively  of  Native  Americans.  It  was 
one  of  the  most  tumultuous  and  disorderly  in  the 
service,  and  its  lieutenant.  Hare,  disgraced  it  and 
the  American  army,  by  one  of  the  most  horrid 
murders  on  record.  In  company  with  some  ruf- 
fians in  the  city  of  Mexico,  he  murdered  a  Span- 
ish clerk  for  the  sake  of  a  few  doubloons  in  his 
strong  box.  The  circumstances  of  the  assassina- 
tion, almost  equalled  in  atrocity  the  murder 
which  recently  occurred  in  Boston.  He  was  ar- 
rested, tried,  and  condemned  to  death,  but  to  the 
regret  of  the  army,  General  Butler,  after  the 
treaty  of  peace,  granted  him  a  pardon.  I  know 
that  there  are  many  worthy,  upright,  and  honest 
men,  who  entertain  views  favorable  to  the  Native 
American  party;  but  I  have  alluded  to  this  mat- 
ter to  show  the  fallacy  of  using  such  instances 
in  argument,  or  of  stigmatizing  a  party  or  a  peo- 
ple by  citing  such  isolated  cases. 

The  gentleman  from  Bourbon  must  be  mista- 
ken in  his  statistical  statements.  He  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  more  than  half  a  million  of  for- 
eigners immigrated  to  America  during  the  last 
year.  This  estimate  is  vastly  too  great.  I  now 
hold  in  my  liand  the  returns  taken  from  a  letter 
from  the  secretary  of  State  to  the  speaker  of  the 
house  of  representatives,  showing  the  number  of 
passengers  who  arrived  in  the  United  States  du- 
ring the  year  ending  the  30th  of  September,  184i^, 
anu  it  seems  they  amounted  to  229,492.  But  it 
is  an  error  to  suppose  that  all  of  these  were  immi- 
grants. Passengers  of  all  countries  are  included 
in  the  estimate.  American  citizens  returning 
from  abroad,  and  foreigners  visiting  us  who  sub- 
sequoDtjy  return,  and  those  traveling  through  the 
United  States  on  their  way  to  other  lands,  are  all 
included  in  the  statement.  The  number  of  iiii- 
migrantshas  apparently  increased,  as  the  facili- 
ties of  travel  between  tlic  United  States  and  Eu- 


rope have  progressed,  and  to  tliis  cause,  in  a 
great  measure,  is  to  be  attributed  the  seeming 
enormous  increase  of  immigration.  I  will  read 
from  the  American  almanac  some  comments  on 
this  subject: 

"It  is  an  object  of  considerable  importance  to 
ascertain  how  rapidly  the  population  of  this 
country  increases  from  natural  causes  alone,  or 
what  would  be  the  rate  of  increase  if  no  immi- 
grants came  hither.  There  is  reason  to  believe 
that  great  mistakes  have  been  committed  in  this 
respect;  that  writers  on  the  law  of  population — 
the  Malthusians  particularly,  who  wish  to  make 
out  the  human  race  as  prolific  as  possible — 
have  not  made  allowance  enough  for  the  effects 
of  immigration,  and  therefore  have  greatly  over- 
estimated the  rapidity  of  increase  here,  where  it 
is  certain  that  the  growth  of  the  population  is 
not  checked  by  a  deficiency  of  food.  A  census 
of  the  people  is  taken  every  ten  years,  and  these 
decennial  returns  would  show  very  clearly  what 
the  rate  of  increase  is,  if  it  were  not  for  the  dis- 
turbing and  fluctuating  effect  of  the  tide  of  re- 
moval, which  constantly  sets  westward,  and 
the  magnitude  of  which  it  is  impossible  to 
ascertain  from  official  returns  with  any  approach 
to  correctness.  A  list  is  made  up  from  year  to 
year,  of  the  number  of  passengers  who  arrive  in 
our  Atlantic  and  southern  ports,  and  the  total  is 
published  in  the  official  documents,  with  an  air 
of  precision  and  minuteness,  as  if  the  informa- 
tion were  of  some  value.  But  it  is  notorious,  that 
the  enumeration  is  carelessly  made,  at  many 
points  of  arrival  no  record  is  kept,  no  account  is 
taken  of  those  who  subsequently  return  to  the 
old  world,  and  the  multitude  who  yearly  cross 
the  Canada  frontier,  arenot  counted  at  all.  Over- 
looking these  causes  of  error,  these  yearly  re- 
turns are  held  to  prove  that  the  effect  of  immi- 
gration was  very  slight,  and  during  certain  peri  - 
ods  of  out  history,  that  it  might  be  left  out  of 
the  calculation  altogether,  without  materially 
vitiating  the  result." 

These  are  the  reflections  on  this  subject  con- 
tained in  the  most  authentic  statistical  work  in 
the  Union  for  the  present  year,  and  they  exhibit 
the  falsity  of  many  of  the  data  from  which  many 
statistical  deductions  on  this  subject  are  drawn. 

The  true  extent  of  the  immigration  or  the  true 
statistics  cannot  be  accurately  ascertained  from 
such  means,  and  you  might  as  well  endeavor  to 
ascertain  the  population  of  a  city  bv  the  number 
of  arrivals  at  its  hotels.  After  this  immense 
over  estimate,  for  the  immigration  cannot  be 
placed  at  above  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand 
a  year,  under  any  circumstances,  he  assumes 
that  it  will  proceed  in  sort  of  compound  ratio, 
so  that  in  1850,  nearly  1,000,000  will  arrive;  in 
1851,  1,340,000;  in  1852,  1,970,783;  in  1853. 
2,897,510;  in  1854, 4,188,064;  and  so  on .  He  how- 
ever admits  that  there  are  causes  which  would 
prevent  the  population  increasing  to  that  ex- 
tent, but  he  assumes  that  the  immigrant  popu- 
lation will  advance  at  something  like  this  ratio. 
The  fact  is  that  after  population  sliall  have 
reached  a  certain  density  the  immigration  must 
constantly  decrease  instead  of  increasing;  I  liave 
merely  alluded  to  these  statistics  for  the  purpose 
of  showing  that  the  fear  of  over  populatiim  from 
innnigration  Avas  groundless.  We  liave  a  large 
and  Uiinly  settled^ territory,  and  immense  unde- 


1021 


veloped  resources  which  requife  labor,  and  tliis 
tide  of  immigration  is  uot  an  injury  but  a 
benefit. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  examine  statistics  to  see 
hovr  foreign  immigration  has  affected  the  welfare 
and  prosperity  of  our  own  state,  and  what  ef 
feet  It  has  had  on  our  political  institutions. 
"When  we  look  around  us,  we  see  no  such  evils — 
we  behold  no  such  detrimental  influences  flow- 
ing from  the  privileges  we  award  to  those  of 
foreign  birth;  and  when  we  look  at  our  legisla- 
tive bodies,  we  do  not  behold  them  subjected  to 
any  such  injurious  influences.  During  the  la.st 
canvass,  this  state  was  agitated  on  the  subject 
of  emancipating  the  slaves.  The  constituency 
I  have  the  honor  to  represent  has  a  larger  num- 
ber of  foreign  voters  than  any  other  portion  of 
Kentucky — some  eight  hundred  or  one  thou- 
sand— vet  when  this  struggle  came  on,  these 
men  who  we  are  now  told  are  so  dangerous  to 
the  institutions  of  the  state,  when  others  sup- 
ported the  emancipation  cause,  and  were  about 
to  violate  the  sacred  rights  of  property — these 
men,  when  they  were  told  that  it  was  not  just  to 
deprive  any  citizen  of  his  property  without 
compensation — these  adopted  children  of  our 
laud — coming  from  a  clime  where  slavery  was 
not  tolerated — with  every  prejudice  against  it — 
cast  a  majority  of  .some  two  hundred  votes  on 
the  side  of  the  rights  of  property,  and  in  favor 
of  the  institutions  of  the  people  who  had  af- 
forded them  a  shelter  from  the  oppressions  of 
Europe,  and  given  them  a  welcome  to  the  land 
in  which  we  live. 

We  have  but  few  aliens  upon  our  soil.  We 
have  a  large  and  thinly  settled  territory.  We  are 
not  encumbered  with  them.  There  are  not  four 
thousand  foreign  votes  in  the  state.  The  power 
to  regulate  the  matter  resides  in  congress.  It 
was  repo-sed  there  by  the  constitution.  I  grant 
we  may  exercise  it  if  we  choose,  as  I  am  unwil- 
ling to  concede  the  general  government  pos- 
sess this  power  to  the  exclusion  of  the  states,  but 
it  interferes  in  spirit  with  the  federal  compact, 
and  when  we  have  experienced  so  little  incon- 
venience or  annoyance,  when  we  are  so  remote 
from  the  Atlantic  border,  where  the  pressure  of 
the  foreign  population — if  it  be  a  pressure — 
exists,  why  is  it  necessary  for  Kentucky,  first  of 
all  the  thirty  states  of  the  confederacy,  to  take 
the  alarm  and  pass  naturalization  laws,  when  no 
otlier  state  has  dcme  it,  to  the  exclusion  of  those 
laws  passed  under  the  administration  of  Jefter- 
son,  and  acquiesced  in  by  every  other  state  of 
the  Union?  Sir,  we  are  the  last  state  of  the 
Union  that  ought  to  be  terrified  at  such  illusory 
dangers.  Have  we  countless  thousands  of  these 
foreigners  among  us?  No!  When  we  visit  the 
interior  counties,  or  the  mountains,  or  the  green 
river  region,  we  find  but  few,  very  few.  Asmall 
number  dwell  in  our  towns  and  cities  and  along 
the  river  border  to  which  they  are  principally 
confined.  Shall  we  then  in  Kentucky,  be  the 
first  to  manifest  a  timidity  so  unnecessary  on  the 
subject  of  the  foreign  vote? 

The  city  of  Boston  has,  as  we  are  informed, 
one  fourth  of  her  population  composed  of  for- 
eigners— three  fifths  of  the  inhabitants  of  New 
York  city  are  of  foreign  birth,  and  when  con- 
venience suits,  tliese  noble  cities  with  their  vast 
wealth,  magnificent   edifices,  great  commerce. 


and  forests  of  shipping,  are.  pointed  to  as  ex- 
emplars for  imitation.  If  the  foreign  vole  be 
so  fatal  to  a  state,  whence  their  prosperity, 
whence  their  wealth? 

No  sir,  those  calumniated  foreigners  have 
brought  new  arts,  new  modes  of  industry,  and 
new  inventions  to  our  country.  The  cotton  and 
woollen  manufactures  have  arisen  among  us, 
the  culture  of  the  vine  is  in  progress,  the  looms 
of  northern  Italy  will  soon  develope  the  silk 
manufacture  of  Piedmont  and  Lombardy,  and  if 
we  pursue  the  policy  we  have  heretofore  follow- 
ed, wealth  and  power  will  be  the  result.  As 
manufactures  and  the  arts  have  received  a  won- 
derful stimulus  from  this  concentration  of  the 
experience,  knowledge  and  ingenuity  of  Europe, 
so  I  believe  that  the  admixture  of  the  various 
bloods  of  the  Caucasian  varieties  of  the  human 
species,  has  produced  a  nobler  and  more  vigor- 
ous race.  Look  over  the  list  of  names  of  the 
delegates  on  this  floor.  We  are  sprung  from 
various  races. 

The  blood  of  the  Italian,  the  German,  the  Cas- 
tilian,  the  chivalrous  Frenchman,  the  sturdy 
Englishman,  and  the  generous  Irishman,  circu- 
lates in  our  veins.  Are  we  improved  or  degen- 
erated from  this  commingled  current?  Will  our 
descendants  be  inferior  to  our  ancestors?  Will 
this  admixture  be  injurious?  A  comparison  was 
made  between  the  negro  defenders  of  New  Or- 
leans and  our  foreign  population  to  justify  the 
exclusion  of  the  latter  from  the  right  of  suffrage. 
The  comparison  is  unjust.  Is  there  no  difference 
between  the  European  and  the  African?  If  our 
own  countrymen  had  sprung  from  such  a  source 
they  would  have  been  a  very  different  nation. 
When  Cortez  conquered  Mexico,  the  Castilian 
blood  was  intermingled  with  that  of  the  Aztec, 
and  we  see  the  effects  of  that  polluted  current 
in  the  lepers,  whom  the  pure  blooded  descendant 
of  the  Spaniard  moves  aside  with  his  foot  as  he  ob- 
structs the  street  through  which  he  walks.  Such 
would  be  our  fate  if  we  amalgamated  with  the 
negro.  But  admixture  with  our  kindred  Euro- 
pean races  has  improved  and  benefited  our  own. 

We  have  been  told  that  Napoleon  first,  and  af- 
terwards the  Emperor  of  Austria,  incited  by  pro- 
fessor Schlegel.  determined  to  expel  those  who 
thirsted  for  freedom  from  the  face  of  Europe.  I 
know  nothing  of  it,  but  if  it  be  so,  this  is  the 
true  home  for  such  refugees.  It  is  said  that  it 
was  part  of  the  plan  to  plant  Catholicism  in 
America.  Do  then  Catholicism  and  liberty  go 
together?  If  so,  let  it  come,  for  that  religion 
cannot  be  so  hurtful  which  inculcates  the  prin- 
ciples of  freedom.  I  am  no  advocate  of  any 
E articular  sect,  but  I  wish  religious  toleration  to 
e  extended  to  all. 

We  have  had  a  graphic  picture  drawn  of  the 
wretched  poverty  of  the  emigrants  from  Europe 
who  land  upon  our  shores.  I  know  full  well 
that  misery  has  driven  hundreds  and  thousands 
from  Europe  to  America,  and  that  many  are  pau- 
pers when  they  land  among  us;  but  in  a  year  or 
so  those  very  men  are  no  longer  paupers.  They 
engage  in  mechanical  and  manufacturing  indus- 
try. They  apply  themselves  to  cultivating  our 
fertile  and  unoccupied  lands — they  acquire  com- 
petency, and  finally  they  come  in  a  few  years  to  be 
citizens  and  freemen.  Are  we  the.n  at  this  day 
to  declare  we  will  uo  longer  czleud  such  an  a&y- 


1022 


Inm  to  the  oppressed  and  uiifortuiiatc?     Are  we  ' 
t«  adopt  the  jKjliuy  of  China,  and  forbid  forever 
tlie  entrance  of  these  outwide  barbarians,  so  as  to  ' 
preserve  ourselves  free  and  uncontarainatedV     If 
we  imitate  sucli  an  example,  we  will  gradually 
sink  into  the  unsocial  barbarism  that  marks  that 
people,  and  instead  of  a  liberal,  civilized  and 
just  government,  such  as  we  now  liave,  we  will  : 
iiave  a  semi-civilized  race  such  as  Chinacontains.  I 
But  if  it  be  desirable  to  prevent  foreigners  from 
entering  our  country,  let  us  pass  a  law  efficient 
to  the  end.     We  know  that  by  merely  disfran-  | 
chising  aliens,  we  will  not  keep  them  out.  Thej  | 
will  still  come  to  this  country  for  bread,  even  if 
we  deny  them  liberty.     Necessity  drives   them,  | 
and  they  must  coine.     If  they  are   to  affect  us 
so  detrimentally,  let  us  draw  a  sanitary  cordon 
around  our   country,  and  proclaim  that  lience-  ! 
fortii  no  foreigner  shall  ever  come  to  America — 
let  us,  like  the  Duke,  decree,  I 

'• If  any  Syracusan  born. 

Come  to  the  bay  of  Ephesus,  be  dies." 

If  Catholicism  be  the  evil  we  seek  to  redress, 
this  will  not  reach  it,  for  tlie  catholic  will  still 
enter  the  country,  and  still  worship  after  the 
manner  of  his  fathers.  Let  us,  at  once,  declare 
the  catholic  religion  shall  no  longer  be  tolerated. 
Let  lis  spread  upon  our  statute  book  those  ini- 
quitous laws  which  so  long  disgraced  the  legis- 
lation of  England.  Let  as  copy  the  test  acts, 
and  fetter  conscience  by  every  legal  contrivance 
and  device,  and  then  we  have  indeed  struck  at 
the  root  of  the  evil.  But  I  maintain  that  this 
proposition  contains  no  remedy.  You  still  per- 
mit, you  invite  the  alien  to  seek  refuge  in  our 
country;  you  subject  him  to  tlie  burthens  of  tax- 
ation, you  lioldhim  liable  to  the  laws,  you  leave 
liim  free,  but  yet  you  disfranchise  him,  you 
deny  liim  political  privileges,  and  you  create  a 
turbulent,  ostracised,  and  disaffected  class  of 
freemen  in  the  state. 

Let  the  principle  that  poverty  is  a  crime  be 
establishea  among  us,  so  as  to  disfranchise  the 
foreigner,  and  not  long  after,  it  will  be  declared 
a  crime  in  the  native  born  citizen.  It  will  soon 
be  declared  as  criminal  in  him,  as  in  the  unfor- 
tunate Irishman  who  dared  to  stand  by  Smith 
O'Brien,  or  Mitchell,  for  his  country's  rights. 
Poverty  is  a  crime  of  which  such  are  already 
guilty.  How  long,  my  country,  will  it  be  before 
poverty  is  a  crime  in  Kentucky?  But  you  tell 
me  such  a  supposition  is  extravagant;  that  it  is 
impossible;  that  it  exists  only  in  the  fancy,  and 
that  no  advocate  for  su<;h  a  principle  could  be 
found  on  the  soil  of  America.  If  so,  I  point 
you  to  the  condition  of  the  poor  ^j)n  in  Virgin- 
ia, to  Massacliusetts,  to  Maryland,  and  I  point 
you  to  wiierever  landed  property  has  accumula- 
ted in  past  times,  and  to  wherever  an  agricultu- 
ral aristocracy  exists.  At  this  hour,  the  pauper 
iu  New  York  is  disfranchised,  native  tjiough  he 
be,  while  tlie  free  negro,  if  he  has  property,  may 
vote.  The  right  of  suffrage  cann^be  too  strict- 
ly, too  jealously  guarded.  EvtT  permit  it  to  be 
infringed  by  the  pretexts  of  power,  and  the  loss 
is  never  regained.  I  remember  an  Italian  story 
of  a  duke  of  Milan — a  Sforza — wlio  in  the  pun- 
ishment of  his  victims,  tortured  not  only  the 
body,  but  the  mind.  Tlie  objects  of  liis  ven- 
geance were  placed  witliin  an  iron  cliamber 
whose  walls  and  ceiling  gradually  contracted  by 


the  movement  of  secret  machinery.  Seven  win- 
dows admitted  the  light.  Day  after  day  the 
wretched  prisoner  beheld  a  window  disappear; 
the  walls,  the  ceiling,  and  the  floor  contract. 
Filled  with  agony,  he  awaited  his  doom,  and  at 
length  crushed  by  the  slow,  but  steady  pressure 
of  the  machine,  he  sunk,  a  mangled  ana  lifeless 
mass  within  it.  Let  me  then,  tell  the  freemen 
of  America,  that  there  is  a  natural  love  of  power, 
and  lust  of  dominion  in  the  great,  which,  if 
once  tasted,  is  never  willingly  relinquished,  and 
that  if  ever  the  rights  of  the  people  are  brought 
within  the  grasp  of  aristocratic  power,  that  they 
will  be  slowly,  but  certainly  crushed.  Sucn 
was  the  history  of  Venice,  and  such  will  be  the 
history  of  all  governments  where  a  privileged 
class  exercise  unlicensed  rule. 

For  myself  I  will  meet  this  question  at  the 
I  threshhold.  Let  us  resist  it  in  the  beginning. 
I  Let  us  strangle  the  serpent  when  it  is  young,  or 
j  when  it  is  old  it  will  strangle  us. 

Sir,  is  there  any  necessity  for  this  measure,  or 
is  it  a  pretext?  It  is  a  pretext,  and  the  real  ob- 
i  ject  is  hidden  from  scrutiny.  This  is  but  the 
1  outwork.  Wait  till  the  columns  of  wealth  and 
j  power  rush  over  the  rampart,  and  then  too  late 
will  the  freemen  of  America  know  the  impor- 
tance of  the  measure.  Tolerate  this  assault  on 
the  right  of  suffrage;  tolerate  it  as  they  tell  you 
it  is  for  its  protection;  tolerate  its  being  torn 
from  the  foreigner  who  settles  among  us  in  good 
faith,  with  his  wife,  his  children  and  his  kin- 
dred, and  you  have  commenced  a  career  of  in- 
justice which  will  terminate  in  burying  not  on- 
ly the  rights  of  the  alien,  but  of  the  poor  native 
American  also,  in  that  grave  in  which  the  liber- 
ties of  all  free  countries  have  been  entombed. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Mr.  President,  I  see 
that  my  friend  Mr.  Rudd  is  anxious  to  obtain 
the  floor.  I  will  yield  it  to  him  in  a  few  minutes. 
When  the  delegate  from  Bourbon  first  introduced 
this  subject  at  the  commencement  of  the  session, 
I  submitted  a  resolution  declaring  that  it  was 
the  settled  purpose  of  the  convention  not  to  dis- 
turb the  right  of  suffrage  as  it  was  fixed  in  the 
old  constitution.  My  object  was  to  prevent  mis- 
conception and  alarm  in  the  public  mind.  The 
promised  discussion  between  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbcm  and  the  delegat  ?  from  Henderson 
(Mr.  Dixon)  was  postponed,  and  since  the  con- 
vention has  settled  the  right  of  suffrage  as  it 
was  fixed  in  the  old  constitution,  I  have  no  dis- 

fiosition  to  waste  the  time  of  the  convention  in 
urtlier  discussion  on  nativeisra.  It  is  true,  I 
had  promised  to  be  present  when  the  two  cham- 
pions met. 

Mr.  President,  when  the  motion  to  restrict  and 
limit  the  representation  of  Louisville,  because  of 
her  foreign  population,  was  under  consideration, 
I  took  occasion  to  express  my  opinion  upon  this 
native  American  question.  Those  opinions  are 
before  the  public — I  am  willing  to  abide  by  them 
here  and  elsewhere. 

I  will  not  again  obtrude  them  upon  the  con- 
vention in  opposition  to  the  resolution  of  the 
gentleman  from  Bourbon,  for  which  I  do  not  be- 
lieve a  single  member  of  the  convention  save 
him.self  will  vote. 

I  rise.  Mr.  President,  not  to  do  myself  an  act 
of  justice,  as  is  often  said  in  debate,  but  to 
discharge  a  duty  I  owe  to  those  who  sent   me 


1023 


here.  I  am  one  of  the  delegates  from  a  county 
which  contains  a  greater  catholic  population 
than  anv  county  in  thestate.  I  representthe  native 
born  an<l  the  naturalized  catholic.  In  the  office 
I  now  fill,  I  enjoy  their  confidence,  though  a 
large  majority  of  tnem  are  opposed  to  me  on  na- 
tional politics.  I  should  be  unfaithful  to  my 
duty,  and  ungrateful  to  them,  if  I  remain  silent 
under  the  denunciations  against  tliem  as  citi- 
zens, dangerous  to  the  institutions  of  their  coun- 
try. If  I  were  to  fail  to  deny  in  my  place,  the 
chiarge  that  they  owed  civil  allegiamje  to  the 
Pope  of  Rome — to  deny  that  the  Pope  of  Rome 
controlled,  or  could  control  their  civil  conduct, 
I  would  be  unworthy  their  confidence.  They 
owe  him  that  respect  and  obedience  only,  as  I 
have  always  believed,  which  is  due  from  them  as 
members  of  the  catholic  church,  to  one  who,  in 
church  government,  is  acknowledged  by  them 
to  be  the  temporal  head  of  the  church. 

Mr.  President,  I  was  born  and  brought  up  in 
the  first  catholic  settlement  west  of  the  Allegha- 
ny mountains.  I  have  associated  with  them, 
priest  and  laity,  from  that  time  to  this,  and  I 
must  do  them  the  justice  to  say,  that  I  have  wit- 
nessed in  no  portion  of  our  population,  more 
devotion  to  the  true  interests  of  our  common 
country,  a  stronger  allegiance  and  attachment 
to  her  laws  and  institutions  than  among  the 
catholics,  native  and  naturalized.  As  a  whole, 
they  are  a  law-loving  and  a  law-abiding  people. 

I  have  seen  them  tried  in  political  commotion, 
and  when  our  country  was  engaged  in  war, 
their  patriotism  and  love  of  liberty,  bespoke 
them  true-hearted  American  citizens. 

"With  their  religion,  their  faith,  so  unneeessa- 
rilj  introduced  into  this  discussion,  I  have  no- 
thing to  do.  That  is  a  subject  which  belongs  to 
a  higher  tribunal;  it  is  one  between  them  and 
their  God,  and  I  thank  my  God  this  convention 
has  nothing  to  do  with  it.  We  have,  in  this  free 
government  of  ours,  d(»nounced  all  interference 
with  the  religious  opinions  of  the  citizen,  and 
proclaimed  the  right  of  all  to  worship  God  ac- 
cording to  the  dictates  of  their  conscience. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  no  false  alarms  upon  the 
subject  of  the  admission  to  the  rights  of  citizens, 
those  who  have  come  to  our  shores,  and  elected 
to  become  citizens  of  our  country.  Their  de- 
portment in  peace  and  war,  give  evidence  of 
their  attachment  to  free  government.  After  the 
fugitive  from  oppression,  aye  sir,  if  you  will 
have  it,  the  fugitive  from  starvation  in  the  old 
vorld,  shall  give  evidences  he  is  required  to  do 
under  our  naturalization  laws,  that  he  is  of  good 
character,  has  lived  five  years  in  the  United 
States,  I  am  willing  to  take  him  in  to  the  Amer- 
ican family,  and  permit  him  to  enjoy  with  me 
the  blessings  of  free  government  and  equal  po- 
litical rights. 

Mr.  President,  I  said  the  other  day,  and  now 
repeat  the  remark,  here  is  not  the  forum  to  com- 
mence this  work  of  ostracizing  the  foreign  pop- 
ulation. If  the  evil,  present  and  future,  be  what 
the  mover  of  this  resolution  has  represented  it  to 
be,  I  would  advise  him  to  make  his  appeals  to 
the  congress  of  the  United  States.  I  would  ad- 
vise him  to  appeal  to  the  State  governments  to 
change  the  federal  constitution,  and  adopt  his 
Chinese  policy  of  total  exclusion  from  this  land 
of  liberty  and.  law  the  oppressed  foreigner.    Let 


him  close  llie  porU  of  the  Unitt^d  ymtes,  an.l 
drive  back  the  teeming  millions  of  paupers 
which  he  says  Europe  is  pouring  into  the  United 
States.  Kentucky  has  no  control  over  this  sub- 
ject. As  the  constitution  and  laws  now  stand, 
a  foreigner  who  has  resided  in  the  United  States 
for  five  years  has  a  right  to  become  a  citizen  of 
the  Unito<l  States.  Shall  we  <lcny  to  a  citiz<:u 
of  the  United  States  who  has  resided  in  Ken- 
tucky five  years,  or  two  years,  the  political 
rights  Avhich  every  other  citizen  enjoys,  because 
of  his  birth?  Let  us  act,  Mr.  President,  consis- 
tently on  this  subject;  let  us  rather  take  counsel 
from  the  past,  and  the  wisdom  of  our  fathers, 
than  our  fears — fears  gendered  by  partizan  feel- 
ing. 

So  long  as  foreigners  are  permitted  to  come  to 
the  United  States,  my  policy  is — and  it  is  the 
true  policy  of  the  country — after  they  have  given 
evidence  of  their  good  character,  and  manifest- 
ed a  desire  to  become  citizens,  to  admit  them  to 
the  enjoyment  of  political  as  well  as  civil  rights. 
They  become  attached  to  the  country  and  gov- 
ernment of  their  adoption.  They  feel  and 
breathe  the  spirit  of  freemen,  and  will  render 
more  willing  obedience  to  the  laws  of  the  coun- 
try when  they  know  they  participate  in  the  po- 
litical power  of  their  government. 

I  cannot  look  upon  a  mass  of  foreign  popula- 
tion, denied  for  half  a  life  time  the  privileges  of 
citizens,  but  with  serious  apprehension  for  the 
quiet  of  society.  They  will  not  feel  that  regard 
and  reverence  for  the  laws  and  the  rights  of  so- 
ciety, if  denied  the  privileges  of  citizens,  as 
when  they  are  made  to  feel  the  majesty  of 
American  citizens. 

The  policy  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon, 
(Mr.  Davis,)  is  to  invite  by  the  laws  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  the  foreigner  to  land,  but  if  he  comes 
to  Kentucky,  to  place  him  for  twenty-one  years, 
so  far  as  political  rights  are  concerned,  beside 
the  free  negro.  His  policy  would  exclude  every 
foreigner  fit  to  be  a  citizen  from  Kentucky.  He 
would  drive  from  his  state  the  enterprising  and 
industrious,  the  honorable  and  high-minded, 
the  wealthy  and  talented  foreigner,  and  only 
permit  the  worthless  vagabond,  the  man  incapa- 
ble of  appreciating  liberty,  or  the  rights  of  a 
freeman.  He  would  leave  the  good  to  settle  in 
other  states,  and  take  the  bad  as  Kentucky's  por- 
tion. His  policy  would  indeed  srive  us  the  "off- 
scourings not  only  of  Europe,"  feut  the  rejected 
of  other  states.  Against  this  policy,  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, I  protest.  I  desire  the  yeas  and  nays  oil 
the  motion. 

Mr.  RUDD.  The  gentleman  from  Bourbon 
has  again  and  again,  in  the  course  of  his  long 
speech,  spoken  of  the  political  or  temporal  al- 
legiance which  he  asserts  the  catholics  of  this 
and  other  countries  owe  to  the  Pope.  Now,  I 
deny  that  they  acknowledge  or  owe  this  allegi- 
ance to  him.  It  is  untrue;  it  is  entirely  a  mis- 
take on  the  part  of  the  gentleman;  and  if  he  had 
half  as  diligently  sought  from  the  proper  sour- 
ces correct  information  on  this  point,  as  he  has 
studied  the  means  to  misrepresent  the  catholic 
religion,  he  would  long  since  have  learned  his 
mistake.  It  is  not  the  first  time  that  this  charge 
has  been  made  against  catholics  and  their  reli- 
gion, but  whenever  and  wherever  made,  it  has 
been  denied  and  fully  refuted. 


10-24 


The  enemies  uf  oatlidliilsm  have  been  over 
and  again  challenged  to  briiiK  forward  one  single 
proof  or  correct  quotation  from  any  of  our  doc- 
trines, practices,  actions,  or  stanaard  writers, 
either  controversial  or  dogmatic,  to  substantiate 
this  charge.  They  never  have,  nor  never  can  ao 
it,  because  no  such  thing  exists.  But,  on  the  con- 
trary, proof  without  end— enough  to  fill  vol- 
umes— such  as  no  man  in  his  .senses  can  deny — • 
has  been  adduced  to  show  that  the  charge  made 
by  the  gentleman  is  entirely  groundless.  If  he 
seeks  for  correct  information,  I  refer  him  to  these 
works — the  standard  authors  of  our  church — 
wherein  the  whole  body  of  catholics  acknowl- 
edge that  the  religious  tenets  which  they  pro- 
fess are  contained.  But,  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon  does  not  relish  .these  authorities;  they 
don't  suit  his  purpose.  His  authorities  are  the 
writings  of  the  bitterest  enemies  of  Catholicism, 
such  as  "  Elliott  on  Romani.sm,"  "  Dowling's 
History  of  Romanism,"  illustrated  by  engra- 
vings— pictures  the  most  hideous — a  book  that 
was  recently  ushered  into  the  world,  as  the  gen- 
tleman will  certainly  recollect,  by  handbills, 
stuck  up  in  every  town,  and  at  every  public 
thoroughfare,  wherein  was  printed  in  large  capi- 
tals: "  DOWLING'S  EXPOSURE  OF^  THE 
MYSTERIES  OF  ROMANISM."  These  are 
the  works  which  the  gentleman  so  pompously 
parades  before  this  convention,  to  tell  us  what  is 
catholocism.  Let  me  ask  him,  would  he  go  to  a 
declared  enemy  to  get  a  correct  statement  of  his 
character  or  reputation'?  Would  he  abide  by  a 
history  of  his  past  life,  coming  from  such  a 
source,  or  would  he  not  cry  out  injustice  and 
persecution,  if  the  world  were  to  admit  the 
truth  of  such  evidence?  Judge  him  accordingly, 
and  refuse  to  hear  any  other  testimony?  And 
yet  this  is  precisely  the  way  the  gentleman  acts 
towards  the  catholic  religion.  He  takes  the  evi- 
dence of  her  known  enemies — of  those  who  have 
sworn  against  her  eternal  hatred  and  ill-will.  He 
reads  their  books,  brings  them  into  this  conven- 
tion, quotes  them  as  authority,  and  turns  with  a 
holy  horror  from  every  work  and  every  statement 
which  gives  a  fair,  candid,  and  truthful  exposi- 
tion of  the  doctrines  and  practices  of  the  catholic 
church. 

Mr.  President,  I  would  ask  the  gentleman  if 
that  is  honorable  and  fair  dealing?  Is  that  the 
fulfilment  of  the  great  precept  of  the  Bible — that 
Book  Avhich  he  has  talked  about  so  much  in  the 
course  of  his  speech;  "Do  unto  others  as  you 
would  that  they  should  do  unto  yon?" 

The  gentleman  has  read  from  these  books  con- 
taining "the  exposures  of  Romanism."  extracts 
from  councils,  bulls  of  the  Popes,  and  other 
catholic  writers,  to  prove  what  lie  has  said.  I 
say  these  extracts  are  garbled,  unfairly  made, 
falsely  colored,  and  do  not  give  a  correct  version 
of  the  meaning  and  belief  of  the  authors.  On 
the  same  principle,  I  can  take  any  book  or  docu- 
ment, and  garble  it  so  as  to  make  it  say  the  most 
absurd  things. 

I  say,  what  we  have  heard  from  the  gentleman 
is  nothing  more  than  a  groundless  tirade  against 
Catholicism,  and  does  not  originate  in  any  well- 
founded  danger,  that  the  foreigners  who  are  daily 
coming  to  our  shores,  will  over  runour  country 
and  siibvert  our  institutions.  Nearljr  one-third 
of  the  foreigners  who  come  to  the  Uaited  States 


are  protestants,  not  cathoHes.  The  catholics,  as 
'  a  political  body,  know  what  they  are  about,  and 
i  do  not  suffer  themselves  to  be  lea  by  any  man,  or 
!  body  of  men.  The  Pope  has  not  half  as  much 
I  influence,  politically  speaking,  over  the  catho- 
j  lies  in  the  United  States,  as  the  gentleman  has 
I  over  his  Native  American  brethren.  No,  not 
I  one-tenth  part.  I  entertain  a  high  regard  for  the 
j  gentleman,  and  I  am  sorry  that  he  has  wounded 
the  feelings  of  some  of  the  delegates  by  his  re- 
marks. It  may  be  that  he  had  no  intention  of 
■  doing  so;  at  least  I  do  not  wish  or  intend  to  im- 
peach his  motives.  But,  when  I  heard  the  doc- 
trines of  my  religion — that  which  I  hold  most 
sacred,  misrepresented — that,  too,  under  such 
august  circumstances  as  are  thrown  around  this 
body,  assembled  here  to  remodel  the  organic  law 
of  my  country,  I  cannot  help  expressing  my  un- 
feigned regret  that  such  an  attack  should  have 
been  made  by  a  member  of  this  convention — one 
whose  name  I  have  heretofore  cherished.  I  say 
his  speech  will  have  the  effect  to  array  the  pro- 
testant  community  against  the  catholic,  and  I 
should  have  thought  that  a  man  of  his  education 
and  discernment  would  have  seen  that  this  must 
be  the  inevitable  result.  His  speech  is  inflam- 
matory in  its  tendency,  and  under  certain  cir- 
cumstances would  have  tlie  effect  to  arouse  the 
worst  feelings  of  perverse  nature.  Catholics 
have  done  much  for  this  country,  and  I  rather 
suspect  that  one  of  my  blood  connexions  did 
more  for  it,  or  as  much,  as  any  other  man  in  it, 
except  perhaps  in  the  heat  of  battle,  and  I  can- 
not permit  any  reflections  to  be  cast  on  the  reli- 
gion professed  by  such  men,  without  speaking  a 
word  in  its  defence. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  endeavored  to  make  a  distinc- 
tion between  the  catholic  religion  as  it  exists 
in  this  country  and  in  Europe,  and  not  between 
the  catholic  and  the  protestant  religion.  I  did 
not  know  before  I  commenced  iny  speech  that 
there  were  more  than  two  catholics  in  the  house. 

Mr.  SPALDING.     There  are  six. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  There  are  six  I  understand. 
But  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  express  my  views  on 
the  subject,  and  I  deeply  regret  that  any  thing  I 
have  said  has  had  the  effect  of  hurting  the  feel- 
ings of  auv  gentleman  present. 

Mr.  RUDD.  I  am  sorry  the  gentleman  is  not 
a  catholic — a  good  catholic — for  if  I  know  him, 
and  I  think  I  do,  he  would  be  a  better  man  than 
he  is.  I  know  he  would  be.  He  knows  as  much 
about  Catholicism  as  that  boy,  (pointing  to  one 
of  the  pages.)  (Laughter.)  His  authorities  are 
bad,  and  his  quotations  from  catholic  works  are 
garbled  and  distorted — made  to  suit  the  preju- 
diced views  of  the  enemies  of  Catholicism.  They 
do  not  contain  a  word  of  truth.  The  catholic 
church  has  produced  such  men,  I  mean  among 
the  Popes,  for  learning,  piety,  and  intelligence, 
as  the  rest  of  the  world  has  never  equalled,  and 
but  few  bad  men — and  very  few.  I  will  refer  the 

fentleman  to  books  and  documents  to  prove  what 
say.      What  he  has    said   is    all  false — all 
false. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  presume  the  gentleman  does 
not  mean  to  say  I  spoke  falsely. 

Mr.  RUDD.  No,  I  do  not  say  that  the  gen- 
tleman has  told  a  falsehood.  But  I  say  his  quo- 
tations tire  false,  his  charges  are  false,  and  his 
authorities  filled  with  falsehoods.    If  the  gen- 


1025 


tlenian  wishes  to  learn  tie  trutli  with  r«gard  to 
the  catholic  faith,  let  hira  examine  ainonest  oth- 
er works:  "The  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent." 
Boswett's  "Expo.sitions,"  and  others  of  hi.s  wri- 
tings; Milner's  "End  of  Controversy,"  &c.,  <tc. 

Mr.  President,  I  will  conclude  by  saying  that 
I  am  sorry  that  the  gentleman  was  not  engaged 
in  a  better  cause.  Let  the  German  and  the  Irish 
come,  and  receive  them  on  our  shores,  and  give 
them  a  christian  reception,  for  they  have  done 
much  for  our  country,  and  let  religion  stand  on 
its  own  foundation.  The  catholic  religion  wants 
no  props.  It  stands  on  the  eternal  word  of  God, 
anci  does  exist,  and  will  exist,  to  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  world,  notwithstanding  the  gentle- 
man's opposition  and  calumny. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  was  necessarily  absent  dn- 
ring  the  speech  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon. 
I  have  been  advised  by  a  friend  that  he  desires 
to  address  the  convention  before  the  question  is 
taken  on  the  pending  resolution.  I  know  that 
gentlemen  are  anxious  that  the  vote  should  be 
taken  now.  But,  sir,  I  appeal  to  the  conven- 
tion— I  appeal  to  their  sense  of  right  and  justice, 
if,  after  indulgence  at  tliis  late  hour  of  our  la- 
bors has  been  extended  to  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon  ^Mr.  Davis)  to  consume  three  hours  in 
the  delivery  of  a  speech,  after  a  preparation  of 
months — a  speech  which  strikes  at  the  right  of 
suffrage — a  speech  which  inflames  and  harrows 
up  the  very  worst  feelings  of  the  human  heart, 
and  arrays  one  portion  of  the  citizens  of  our 
liappy  state  against  the  other — I  ask  if  it  be  not 
right  and  just  that  such  a  speech  should  be  re- 
plied toV  I  have  stated,  sir,  that  I  did  not  hear 
the  speech  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  ;  but 
if  I  have  been  correctly  informed  as  to  his  posi- 
tions and  historical  references,  an  honest  vindi- 
cation of  the  truth  of  historv  demands  a  refuta- 
tion, for  I  know  that  part  at  least,  if  not  all  his 
history,  and  the  deductions  therefrom,  are  false. 

Mr.rresident,  in  making  this  appeal,  I  cannot 
refrain  from  tendering  to  mv  much  esteemed 
friend  from  Louisville,  (Mr.  Preston,)  my  sin- 
cere thanks,  for  his  able  and  eloquent  vindica- 
tion of  the  rights  of  conscience,  humanity,  and 
the  true  spirit  of  republicanism. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  know  the  gentle- 
man to  whom  he  (Mr.  Clarke)  alludes.  I  there- 
fore move  to  postpone  the  further  consideration 
of  this  subject  'till  3  o'clock  on  Monday  next. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to,  and  then  the  con- 
vention adjourned. 


MONDAY,  DECEMBER  17,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  L.^xcASXEa. 

DISTEIBUTION    OF    THE   XEW   COXSTITUTIOX. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  JAMES,  it  was 
Resolved,  That  the  printers  to  the  convention 
print  sixty  thousanacopiesof  the  new,  or  amend- 
ed constitution,  for  distribution  among  the  peo- 
ple of  the  state;  to  be  distributed  to  each  county 
according  to  the  number  of  qualified  voters 
therin. 

129 


PHKilBEXT  OF  THE  BOAED  OF  ISTKENAL  IMPEOVEMKHJ. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  offered  the  following  as  an 
additional  section  to  the  general  provisions: 

"So  long  as  the  Board  of  Internal  improve- 
ment shall  be  continued,  the  president  thereof 
shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  of  this 
commonwealth;  and  hold  the  oflSce  for  the  term 
of  four  years,  and  until  another  be  duly  elected 
and  qualified.  The  first  election  shall  be  held 
at  the  same  ttme,  and  be  conducted  in  the  same 
manner,  as  the  first  election  of  governer  of  this 
commonwealth  under  this  constitution,  and 
every  four  years  thereafter;  and  the  general  as- 
sembly shall  provide  bv  law ,  the  method  of  fill- 
ing vacancies  and  settling  contested  elections  for 
this  office.  But  nothing  herein  contained,  shall 
prevent  the  general  a.ssembly  from  abolishing 
said  board  of  internal  improvement,  and  the  of- 
fice  of  president  thereof." 

Mr.  GHOLSOX  moved  the  following  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  section: 

"The  board  of  internal  improvement  is  here- 
by abolished,  and  its  duties  devolved  upon  the 
auditor's  ofiice." 

Mr.  TURNER  moved  to  lay  both  the  section 
and  the  substitute  on  the  table. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were  yeas  23,  nays  66. 

Teas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas 
D.  Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  Garrett  Davis, 
James  Dudley,  Selucius  Garfielde,  James  H. 
Garrard,  Andrew  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  "Wil- 
liam C.  Marshall,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Johnson  Price,  James  Rudd,  Howard 
Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Wesley 
J.  Wright— 23. 

Nays — Alfred  Bovd,  William  Bradley,  Fran- 
cis M.  Bristow,  "W'illiam  C.  Bullitt,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverh'  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  "Thomas  J. 
Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix, 
Thomas  J.  Hood,  Thos.  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall. Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  John 
H  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  WiUiam  D. 
Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Pres- 
ton, Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James 
\\ .  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Tavlor,  William  R.  Thompson.  John  J. 
Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 66. 
So  the  convention  refused  to  lay  upon  the  table. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  substi- 
tute, and  it  was  rejected. 

Some  conversation  arose  on  this  section  la 
which  Messrs.  TRIPLETT,  TURNER,  and 
GHOLSON  took  part. 


1026 


Mr.  BARLOW  moved  the  previous  question 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
and  they  were,  yeas  56,  nays  34. 

Yeas — Alfrea  Boyd,  Wm.  Bradley,  William 
Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 


ford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James 
P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  Vincent 
S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas  J.  Hood, 
Thomas  James,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wil- 
liam N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenrv,  Wm.  D.  Mitchell, 
Thos.  P.  Moore,  James  M.  Jfesbitt,  Hugh  Newell, 
Henry  B.  Pollard,  William  Preston,  Larkin  J. 
Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  Jas.  W.  Stone,  Mi- 
chael L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett, 
Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Silas  Wood- 
son— 56. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard 
Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis 
M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bul- 
litt, Charles  Chambers,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett 
Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  James 
H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Andrew  Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall,  David  Meriwether  John  D.  Morris, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Johnson 
Price,  James  Rudd,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  How- 
ard Todd,  Squire  Turner,  Johff  L.  Waller,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 34. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

KNGEOSSMENT   OF   THE   CONSTITUTIOX. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  APPERSON  the  vote 
on  Saturday  last  adopting  a  resolution  directing 
two  copies  of  the  new  constitution  to  be  en- 
grossed, one  of  them  on  parchment,  was  re- 
considered, and  so  much  as  related  to  the  en- 
grossment on  parchment  was  stricken  out  in  con- 
sequence of  a  difficulty  experienced  in  procur- 
ing parchment  of  a  good  quality.  With  that 
amendment  the  resolution  was  again  adopted. 

EXPENSES   OF    A    GONTFSTEn    ELECTION. 

Mr.  HARDIN  from  the  committee  on  claims 
made  the  following  report: 

The  committee  on  claims  to  whom  was  refer- 
red a  resolution  to  inquire  into  the  expediency 
of  providing  for  the  payment  of  the  expenses 
of  the  contested  election  from  Henry  county,  re- 
port: 

That  your  committee  is  of  opinion  that  this 
commonwealth  is  bound,  in  justice,  to  indemni- 
fy Elijah  F,  Nuttall  in  all  reasonable  expenses 
incurred  by  him  in  said  contest,  but  the  com- 
mittee is  opposed  to  the  expenses  and  cost  of 
Joseph  Lecompte,  being  reimbursed  to  him  by 
the  state.   Therefore, 

Reiolved  by  the  Convention,  That  the  follow- 
ing sumfi  of  money,  not  otlK^rwise  appropriated 


be  paid  out  of  the  public  treasury  to  the  follow- 
ing persons  entitled  to  the  same,  who  attended 
as  witnesses  on  behalf  of  said  Nuttall,  viz: 

1st.  To  Samuel  Eddy,  Charles  Allen.  John 
Roberts,  F.  Roberts,  Uriah  Edwards,  A.  W. 
Pritchet,  James  Johnson,  M.  Luckett,  Wm.  Har- 
ris, Johh  Shrvock,  James  Hawkins,  Gideon 
King,  B.F.  Owen,  Thos.  L.  Martin,  S.  T.  Drane, 
Ed.  Ransd.ile,  J.  C.  Shephard,  John  Radford, 
T.  J.  Bruce,  R.  Shockensey,  Richard  Neale, 
Thos.  B.  Posey,  James  Pearce  and  Thos.  Han- 
cock, three  dollars  each. 

2d.  To  Ed.  P.  Thomas,  for  bringing  up  the 
poll  book,  under  a  subpoena  duces  tecum,  three 
dollars  and  fifty  cents. 

3d.  To  Henry  Wingate,  ten  dollars  to  be  paid 
to  the  Baptist  church  for  the  use  of  their  bell 
during  the  present  session. 

4th.  To  Perry  Ellis,  three  dollars  and  twenty 
five  cents  for  summoning  witnesses  in  said  con- 
tested election. 

After  a  few  words  from  Mr.  CHAMBERS  in 
opposition  to  the  appropriation  of  money  by 
the  convention,  the  report  was  adopted. 

NIGHT  SESSIONS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  DUNAVAN,  it  was 
Resolved,  That  the  convention  will  henceforth 

hold  night  sessions,  meeting  for  that  purpose  at 

7  o'clock,  P.  M. 

APPORTIONMENT. 

Mr.  GARRARD  submitted  the  following  sec- 
tion as  an  addition  to  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee on  the  legislative  department,  and  on  his  mo- 
tion it  was  laid  on  the  table  and  ordered  to  be 
printed. 

"Sec.  — .  An  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified 
voters  shall  be  made,  first  in  the  year  lb50,  and 
again  in  the  year  1857,  and  every  eighth  year 
thereafter.  The  number  of  representatives  shall 
be  one  hundred,  and  they  shall  be  apportioned 
at  the  first  session  of  the  general  assembly  after 
each  enumeration,  among  the  several  counties, 
cities,  and  towns,  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  qualified  voters  therein  :  Provided,  Two  or 
more  adjacent  counties  may  be  joined  to  form  a 
representative  district;  but  in  no  event  shall  a 
representative  district  have  more  members  than 
another  district  with  a  greater  number  of  qual- 
ified voters;  nor  shall  any  county  with  a  less 
number  of  qualified  voters  than  another  have  a 
member." 

LIMITATION  OF  DEBATE. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  WHEELER  it  was 
Resolved,  That  no  person  shall  be  allowed  to 
speak  more  than  ten  minutes  upon  any  subject 
during  the  sitting  of  this  convention,  except  on 
the  naturalization  question  and  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions. 

LEGISLATIVE    DEPARTMENT, 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  unfinished  report  of  the  committee  on  the 
legislative  department. 

The  pending  question  was  the  additional  sec- 
tion offered  on  Saturday  by  Mr.  DAVIS,  as  fol- 
lows : 

"That  the  representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  tliis  commonwealth,  and  shaJl  be  for- 
ever regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number  of 
representative   inlmbitantfl  therein.     At  the  first 


1027 


session  of  tlie  general  assembly  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution,  and  every  four  years 
thereafter,  provisioii  shall  be  made  by  law  that 
in  the  year ,  and  every  four  years  there- 
after, an  enumeration  of  all  the  representative 
inhabitants  of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The 
number  of  representatives  shall  be  one  hun- 
dred, and  apportioned  among  the  several  coun- 
ties in  the  following  manner:  Counties  having 
the  ratio  shall  have  one  representative;  those 
having  three  fourths  of  the  ratio  shall  have  one 
representative;  those  having  the  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  less  than  one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall 
have  but  one  representative;  those  having  the 
ratio,  and  a,  fraction  of  one  half  over,  shall  have 
two  represenatives;  those  having  twice  the  ra- 
tio, shall  have  two  representatives;  those  hav- 
ing twice  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction  of  less  than 
one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have  but  two  repre- 
sentatives: those  having  twice  the  ratio,  and  a 
fraction  of  one  half  the  ratio  over,  shall  have 
three  representatives;  and  so  on.  Counties  hav- 
ing less  than  three  fourths  of  the  ratio,  shall  be 
joined  to  a  similar  adjacent  county,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  forming  a  representative  district:  Provi- 
ded, that  if  there  be  no  such  adjacent  county, 
then  the  county  having  less  than  three  fourths 
of  the  ratio  shall  be  united  with  that  adjacent 
county  having  the  smallest  number  of  represen- 
tative inhabitants,  provided  that  their  united 
numbers  do  not  exceed  the  ratio,  and  a  fraction 
of  one  half  the  ratio  over;  but  if  they  do,  the 
county  having  less  than  three  fourths  of  the 
ratio  shall  have  a  separate  representative.  The 
remainining  representatives,  (if  any,)  shall  be 
allotted  to  those  counties  having  the  largest  un- 
represented fractions ;  but  in  no  case  shall  more 
than  two  counties  be  united  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  a  representative  district;  but  if  there 
shall  ever  be  an  excess  of  districts,  they  shall  be 
reduced  to  the  proper  number,  by  taking  from 
those  counties  having  a  separate  representative, 
with  the  smallest  number  of  representative  in- 
habitants, their  separate  representation." 

Mr.  KAV  AXAUGH  offered  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  section  : 

"  The  house  of  representatives  shall  consist 
of  one  hundred  members,  and  to  secure  uniform- 
ity and  equality  of  representation  as  aforesaid, 
tlie  state  snail  be  districted  into  twelve  districts. 

First  Dvstrict — Fulton,  Hickman,  Graves,  Bal- 
lard, McCracken,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Living- 
ston. 

Second  District — Trigg,  Christian,  Caldwell, 
Crittenden,  Union,  Henderson,  Hopkins. 

Third    District — Daviess,    Ohio,     Hancock, 
Grayson,  Breckinridge,  Larue,  Hardin,  Meade. 

Fourth  District — Todd,  Muhlenburg,  Logan, 
Simpson,  Allen,  Warren,  Butler,  Edmonson, 
Hart. 

Fifth  District — Monroe,  Barren,  Cumberland, 
Clinton,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor,  Casey,  Russell. 

Sixth  District — Jeffer8on,'Bullitt,  Nelson,  Shel- 
by, Spencer,  Washington,  Marion. 

Seventh  District — Oldham,  Trimble,  Henry, 
Owen,  Carroll,  Gallatin,  Grant,  Boone,  Kenton. 

Eighth  District — Scott,  Harrison,  Pendleton, 
Campbell,  Nicholas,  Mason,  Bracken. 

Ninth  District — Lewis,  Fleming,  Bath,  Mont- 
gomery, Morgan,  Greenup,  Lawrence,  Carter. 

Tenth  District— FeLjetXe,  Woodford,.  Bourbon, 


Clarke,  Jessamine,  Anderson,  Mercer,  Boyle, 
Franklin. 

Eleventh  District — Madison,  Garrard,  Lincoln, 
Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Pulaski,  Whitley,  Wayne. 

Twelfth  Disirict — Estill,  Owsley,  Clay,  Perry, 
Letcher,  Floyd,  Breathitt,  Johnson,  Pike,  Knox, 
Harlan. 

When  a  new  county  shall  be  formed  of  terri- 
tory belonging  to  more  than  one  district,  that 
county  shall  be  added  to,  and  form  a  part  of  the 
district  out  of  which  the  largest  amount  of  ter- 
ritory was  taken  to  form  such  new  county. 

In  the  year  ,andeverv  year 

thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified 
electors  of  the  state  shall  be  made,  in  such  man- 
ner as  shall  be  directed  by  law. 

In  the  several  j'ears  of  making  such  enumera- 
tion, each  district  shall  be  entitled  to  representa- 
tives equal  to  the  number  of  times  the  ratio  is 
contained  in  the  whole  number  of  qualified 
electors  in  said  districts:  Provided,  That  the  re- 
maining representatives,  after  making  such  ap- 
Eortionment,  shall  be  given  to  those  districts 
aving  the  largest  unrepresented  fractions. 

Representatives  to  which  each  district  may  be 
entitled  .shall  be  apportioned  among  the  several 
counties,  cities,  and  towns  of  the  district,  as 
near  as  may  be,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
qualified  electors;  but  when  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  qualified  electors  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and  when  the  ad- 
jacent county  or  counties,  within  the  district, 
'  may  not  have  a  residuum  or  residuums,  which, 
when  added  to  the  small  countv,  would  entitle  it 
to  a  separate  representation,  it  shall  then  be  in 
the  power  of  the  legislature  to  join  two  or  more 
together,  for  the  purpose  of  sending  a  represent- 
ative :  Provided,  That  when  there  are  two  or 
more  counties  adjoining,  and  in  the  same  dis- 
trict, which  have  residuums  over  and  above  the 
ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residuums,  when 
added  together,  Avill  amount  to  such  ratio,  in  that 
case,  one  representative  shall  be  added  to  the 
county  having  the  largest  residuum." 

Mr.'  KAVANAUGH  explained  wherein  this 
amendment  differed  from  others  which  had  been 
submitted. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL,  Mr.  APPERSON, 
Mr.  BRADLEY,  Mr.  IRWIN,  and  Mr.  BROWN, 
participated  in  a  brief  conversation  in  relation 
to  it. 

Mr.  BROWN  moved  to  amend  by  transferring 
Hardin  from  the  third  to  the  fourth  district. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  JA3IES  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  substitute,  and  there  were 
yeas  31,  nays  57. 

YEAS-^ohn  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Bovd,  William 
Bradley,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  "R.  D.  Cole- 
man, fienjamin  Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius 
De-sha,  Benj.  F.  Edwards,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  John  Har- 
gis,  Wm.  Hendrix,  Thoma-s  James,  George  W. 
Kavanaugh,  Willis  B.  Machen ,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Martin  P.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Hugh  New- 
ell, Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira  Root, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  John 
L.  Waller,  John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  WickliflFe 
—31. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 


1028 


person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Luther  Brawner, 
Francis  M  Bristow,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  Wil- 
liam C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  Wm.;  Cho- 
nault,  James  M.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey ,|Wil- 
liam  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Green 
Forrest,  Ifathau  Gaither,  Jas.  H.  Garrard,  Thos. 
J.  Gough,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,Mai-k  E.  Huston,  James 
W.Irwin,  William  Johnson,  James M.  Lackey, 
Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Alexander 
K.  Marshall,  Wm.  C.  Marshall,  William  N.Mar- 
shall, Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  Da- 
vid Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Jame.s  M. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proc- 
tor, John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Jas. 
Rudd,  Jas.  W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert 
G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  Henry  Washington,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 57. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

Mr.  GARRARD  oflfered  the  following  as  a 
substitute  for  the  section  proposed  by  Mr.  DA- 
VIS: 

"Sec.  — .  An  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified 
voters  shall  be  made,  first  in  the  year  1850,  and 
again  in  the  year  1857,  and  every  eighth  year 
thereafter.  The  number  of  representatives  snail 
be  one  hundred,  and  they  shall  be  apportioned 
at  the  first  session  of  the  general  assembly  after 
each  enumeration,  among  the  several  counties, 
cities,  and  towns,  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  qualified  voters  therein:  Provided,  Two  or 
more  adjacent  counties  may  be  joined  to  form  a 
representative  district;  but  in  no  event  shall  a 
representative  district  have  more  members  than 
another  district  with  a  greater  number  of  quali- 
fied voters  ;  nor  shall  any  county  with  a  less 
number  of  qualified  voters  than  another  have  a 
member:  Provided,  That  two  or  more  counties 
shall  not  be  attached,  except  to  form  a  single 
representative  district,  or  from  the  necessity  of 
their  location." 

Mr.  MORRIS  moved  to  lay  the  pending  sub- 
ject on  the  table  with  the  view  of  offering  a  res- 
olution to  test  the  sense  of  the  convention  on 
the  question  of  "districts  or  no  districts." 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

Mr.  PROCTOR  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  the  substitute  of  the  gentleman  from  Clay, 
and  there  were  yeas  42,  nays  46. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas D. 
Brown,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Ja.s.  Dud- 
ley, Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Selu- 
ciu8  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J. 
Gough,  John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew 
Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James 
W.  Irwin,  George  W.  Kavanaugh,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  William  C.  Marshall,  John  H.  McHenry, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  William  Preston,  Johnson 
Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
John  T.  Rogers,  James  Rudd,  James  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D. 
Taylor,  William  R.  Thomp.son,  John  J.  Thur- 
man, Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  John  L. 
Waller,  Henry  Washington,  Silas  Woodson, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 42. 

NATS'-'llr.  President,  (Quthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 


low, Alfred  Bovd,  William  Bradley,  William  C. 
Bullitt,  Chas.  Cliambers,  William  Chenault,  Jesse 
Coffev,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Cope- 
lin,  \V"m.  Cowper,  Lucius  Desha,  Benjamin  F. 
Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Niuian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Ham- 
ilton, Ben.  Hardin,  William  Hendrix,  Thomas 
James,  William  Johnson,  James  M.  Lackey,  Pe- 
ter Lashbrooke,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  N. 
Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure, 
David  Meriwether,  William  D.  Mitchell,  Thos. 
P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, John  T.  Robinson,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Squire  Turner, 
John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe— 46. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

Mr.  MITCHELL  offered  the  following  substi- 
tute for  Mr.  DAVIS'  section  : 

"The  number  of  representatives  shall  be  one 

hundred.     In  the  year and  every 

year  tliereafter  an  enumeration  of  all  the  electors 
in  the  state  shall  be  made  in  such  manner  as 
shall  be  decided  by  law.  The  representatives 
shall  in  the  several  years  of  making  these  enu- 
merations, be  apportioned  for  the years  next 

following,  as  near  as  may  be,  among  the  several 
counties,  cities,  and  towns,  in  proportion  to  the 
number  of  qualified  electors;  but  when  a  coun- 
ty may  not  have  a  sufficient  number  of  quali- 
fied electors  to  entitle  it  to  one  representative, 
and  when  the  adjacent  county,  or  counties,  may 
not  have  a  residuum,  or  residuums,  whicli,  when 
added  to  the  small  county,  would  entitle  it  to  a 
separate  representative,  it  shall  then  be  in  the 
power  of  the  legislature  to  join  two  or  more  to- 
gether for  the  purpose  of  sending  a  representa- 
tive: Provided,  That  when  there  are  two  or  more 
counties  adjoining,  each  of  which  has  a  residuum 
over  and  above  the  ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said 
residuums,  when  added  together,  will  amount 
to  such  ratio,  in  that  case,  one  representative 
shall  be  added  to  that  county  having  the  largest 
resiiiuura:  Provided  further.  That  a  separate  rep- 
resentative shall  in  no  instance  be  given  to  a 
county  having  a  less  number  of  qualified  voters 
than  another  county  not  separately  represented, 
unless  a  residuum,  or  residuums,  from  a  county 
or  counties,  immediately  adjoining  to  it,  suffi- 
cient to  make  up  the  ratio,  be  added;  nor  shall 
any  county  have  two  or  more  representatives 
when  anotner  county  witli  a  greater  number  of 
qualified  voters  has  a  less  number  of  representa- 
tives, unless  the  first  named  county  shall  receive 
from  the  county,  or  counties,  immediately  ad- 
joining it  a  residuum,  or  residuums,  which, 
when  added  to  the  qualified  voters  of  said  coun- 
ty, shall  entitle  it  under  the  ratio  to  the  number 
of  representatives  given:  Provided  further.  That 
the  following  rules  and  restrictions  shall  be  ob- 
served by  and  control  the  legislature  in  appor- 
tioning representation : 

1.  The  principle  of  adjacency  shall  be  so  as  to 
prevent  tne  rolling  of  a  residuum  from  one 
county  to  another  not  in  juxtaposition. 

2.  Where  two  or  more  small  counties  adjoin  a 
iBrge  county  having  a  sufficient  residuum,  that 
residuum  shall  be  divided  so  as  to  give  a  sepa- 
rate representation  to  each  of  the  small  counties 


1029 


unless  the  residuum  be  greater  than  the  number 
of  qualified  voters  iu  either  of  the  small  coun- 
ties, in  \rhich  event  two  of  the  small  counties 
may  be  joined  as  a  representative  district,  and 
its  excess,  if  any,  bestowed  on  the  larger  county. 

3.  When  a  residuum  is  to  be  given  to  one  of 
several  counties,  it  shall  be  bestowed  on  that 
having  the  largest  number  of  qualified  voters. 

Mr.  STEYENSOX  called  for  the  yeas  and 
navs,  and  there  were  yeas  34,  nays  57. 

ITeas — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos.  D.  Brown,  William 
Chenault,  Edward  Curd,  Milford  Elliott,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Niniau  E. 
Gray,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  James  W.  Irwin,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  "Willis  B.  Machen,  Martin  1*. 
Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Wm.  X.  Mar- 
shall, Nathan  McGlure,  John  H.  McHenry,  Wm. 
D.  Mitchell,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Elijah  F.  Xuttall, 
Johnson  Price,  Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rog- 
ers, James  Rudd,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D. 
Taylor,  John  J.  Thurman, Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe— 34. 

Nats — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm. 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  William  C.  Bullitt, 
Charles  Chambers,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman, 
Benj.  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Garrett  Davis, 
Lucius  Desha,  Jas.  Dudley,  CLasteen  T.  Dun- 
avan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Green  Forrest,  Na- 
than Gaither,  Selucius  Garfielde,  JamesP.  Ham- 
ilton, Ben.  Hardin,  John  Hargis,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  MarkE. 
Huston,  Thomas  James,  W.  Johnson,  James  M. 
Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  David 
Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris, 
Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Ira 
Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, James  W.  Stone,  Albert  G.  Talbott,  Wil- 
liam R.Thompson, Philip  Triplett,  John  Wheel- 
er, Andrew  S.  White,  Silas  Woodson,  Weslev  J. 
Wright — 57. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS  moved  to  amend  the  amend- 
ment of  Mr.  DAVIS  by  adding  thereto  the  fol- 
lowing: 

"In  apportioning  representation  among  the 
several  counties  in  this  commonwealth,  every 
county  which  is  not  entitled  to  a  separate  repre- 
sentative shall  be  attached  to  that  adjoining 
county  which  contains  the  least  voting  popula- 
tion ;  and  counties  thus  attached  shall  vote  in 
conjunction  for  representative  or  representatives. 
The  full  ratios  shall  be  first  fiUecf,  and  the  re- 
maining representatives,  (if  any,)  shall  be  given 
to  the  counties  or  attached  counties,  having  the 
largest  residuums:  Provided,  That  not  more  than 
three  counties  shall  in  any  case  be  attached  for 
electing  a  representative;  and  where  the  residu- 
ums of  any  two  counties  thus  attached  shall  ob- 
tain an  additional  representative  each  county 
shall  have  one,  and  vote  separately." 

Mr.  McCLURE  offered  the  following  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  Mr.  D  AVIS'  amendment: 

"In  theyear  ,  and  every  eighth  ycarthereaf- 
t«r,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified'voters  of  the 


state  shall  be  made  in  such  manner  as  shall  b« 
directed  bv  law.  The  number  of  representatives 
shall,  in  the  several  years  of  making  these  enu- 
merations, be  so  fixed  as  not  to  be  less  than  sev- 
enty five  nor  more  than  one  hundred,  and  they 
shall  be  apportioned  for  the  eighth  year  next  fol- 
lowing as  near  as  may  be  among  the  several 
counties  and  towns  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  qualified  electors;  but  when  a  county  may  not 
have  a  sufficient  number  of  qualified  electors  to 
entitle  it  to  one  representative,  and  when  the  ad- 
joining county  or  counties  may  not  have  residu- 
um or  residuums,  which,  when  added  to  the 
small  county,  would  entitle  it  to  a  separate  rep- 
resentation, it  shall  be  in  the  power  of  the  gener- 
al assembly  to  join  two  or  more  together,  for  the 
?urpose  of  sending  a  representative:  Provided, 
hat  when  there  are  two  or  more  counties  ad- 
joining which  have  residuums  over  and  above 
the  ratio  then  fixed  by  law,  if  said  residuums, 
when  add^d  together,  "will  amount  to  such  ratio, 
in  that  case  one  representative  shall  be  added  to 
that  county  having  the  largest  residuum;  and  re- 
siduums shall  not  l)e  carried  beyon<l  the  coun- 
ties adjoining  the  county  in  which  the  residaum 
shall  originate."  * 

Mr.  McCLURE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays, 
and  they  were — yeas  22,  nays  64. 

Yeas — Richard  Apperson,  William  K.  Bow- 
ling, Francis  M.  Bristow,  Garrett  Davis,  James 
Dudley,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Andrew  Hood,  Jas.  W. 
Irwin,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall. 
William  N.  Marshall,  Robert  D. Maupin,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenrj- Johnson  Price, Thos. 
Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Michael  L.  Stoner, 
Albert  G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor— 22. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger, John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William 
Bradlev,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.  Brown, 
Wm.  C'.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William  Che- 
nault, James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Chas- 
teeu  T.  Dunavan,  Bejaminn  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son, Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
John  Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Wm.  Hendrix, 
Thos.  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Thos.  James, 
William  Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaueh,  James 
M.  Lackev,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Wifliam  C.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
David  Meriwether,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh  Newell,  Hen- 
ry B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robin- 
son, Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spald- 
ing, John  W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Wm. 
R.  Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S. 
Whiti;,  Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 64. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

Mr.  THOMPSON  offered  the  following  as  a 
substitute: 

"An  enumeration  of  the  qualified  voters,  and 
an  apportionment  of  the  representatives  in  the 
geuenil  assembly  shall  be  made  in  the  year  , 
and  within  every  subsequent  term  of  eight  years. 
The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the  first 
session  of  the  general  assembly  after  each  enti- 


1030 


meration  aforesaid,  be  apportioned  among' the 
several  counties,  cities,  and  towns,  according  to 
the  number  of  qualified  voters  in  each,  and  the 
number  of  repre.senlatives  shall  be  one  hundred: 
Provided,  That  any  county  having  two  thirds  of 
the  ratio  shall  be  entitled  to  one  member." 

The  substitute  was  rejected. 

Mr.  BARLOW  submitted  the  following  as  a 
substitute,  whicli  was  Mr.  WOODSON'S  propo- 
sition slightly  modified. 

"At  the  first  session  of  the  general  assembly 
after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  provision 
shall  be  made  by  law,  that  in  the  year  ,  and 
in  the  year  ,  and  every  years  there- 

after, an  enumeratioji  of  all  the  representative 
population  of  the  state  shall  be  made.  The 
House  of  Representatives  shall  consist  of  one 
hundred  members,  and  to  secure  uniformity 
and  equality  of  representation,  the  state  is  here- 
by laid  off  into  ten  districts. 

The  first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Fulton,  Hickman,  Ballard,  McCrack- 
en,  Graves,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Livingston, 
Crittenden, LTnion,  Hopkins,  Caldwell  and  Trigg. 

The  second  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Christian,  Muhlenburg,  Henderson, 
Daviess,  Hancock,  Ohio,  Breckinridge,  Meade, 
Grayson,  Butler,  and  Edmonson. 

The  third  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Todd,  Logan,  Simpson,  Warren, 
Allen,  Monroe,  Barren,  and  Hart. 

The  fourth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Cumberland,  Adair,  Green,  Taylor, 
Clinton,  Russell,  Wayne,  Pulaski,  Casey,  Boyle, 
and  Lincoln. 

The  fifth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Hardin,  Larue,  Buliit,  Spencer, 
Nelson,  Washington,  Marion,  Mercer,  and  An- 
derson. 

The  sixth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Garrard,  Madison,  Estill,  Owsh^y, 
Rockcastle,  Laurel,  Clay,  Whitley,  Knox,  Har- 
lan, Perry,  Letcher,  Pike,  Floyd  and  Johnson. 

The  seventh  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Jefferson,  Oldham,  Trimole,  Carroll, 
Henry,  and  Shelby,  and  the  city  of  Louisville. 

The  eighth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Bourbon,  Favctte,  Scott,  Owen, 
Franklin,  Woodford,  and  jessamine. 

The  ninth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Clarke,  Montgomery,  Bath,  Fleming, 
I^ewis,  Greenup,  Carter,  Lawrence,  Morgan,  and 
Breathitt. 

The  tenth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Mason,  Bracken,  Nicholas,  Harrison, 
l^endleton,  Campbell,  Grant,  Kenton,  Boone, 
and  Gallatin. 

The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at  the 
several  sessions  of  the  general  assembly,  next 
after  the  making  of  these  enumerations,  be 
apportioned  among  the  ten  several  districts, 
proportioned  according  to  the  respective  rep- 
resentative popidation  of  each;  and  the  rep- 
resentatives shall  be  apportioned,  as  near  as 
may  be,  among  the  cAunties,  towns  and  cities 
ill  each  district;  and  in  making  such  appor- 
tionment the  following  rules  shall  govern 
to-wit:  Every  county,  town  or  city  having  the 
ratio,  shall  have  one  representative;  if  double 
the  ratio,  two  representatives,  and  so  on.  Next, 
the  counties,  towns  or  cities  liaving  one  or  more 


representatives,  and  the  largest  representative 
population  above  the  ratio,  and  counties,  towns, 
and  cities  having  the  largest  representative  pop- 
ulation under  the  ratio,  shall  have  a  repre- 
sentative, regard  being  always  had  to  the  great- 
est representative  population:  Provided,  That 
when  a  county  may  not  have  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  representative  population  to  entitle  it 
to  one  representative,  then  such  county  may 
be  joined  to  some  adjacent  county  or  coun- 
ties to  send  one  representative.  When  a  new 
county  shall  be  formed  of  territory  belonging 
to  more  than  one  district,  it  shall  form  a  part  of 
that  district  having  the  least  number  of  repre- 
sentative population." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  called  for  the  yeas 
and  nays,  and  there  were,  yeas  52,  nays  37. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad- 
lev,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt. 
William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Bever- 
ly L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Cofiey,  Henry  R.  D.  Cole- 
man, Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  James 
H.  Garrard,  James  P.  Hamilton,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W . 
Lisle,  Geo.  W.  Mansfield,  William  N.  Marshall, 
Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  David  Meriwether,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
Jonathan  Newcura,  Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F. 
Nuttall,  Henrv  B.  Pollard,  Larkin  J.  Proctor, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thos.  Rockhold,  Ira  Root, 
James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W. 
Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor, 
Howard  Todd,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White, 
Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson — 52. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  William  K.  Bow- 
ling, Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Charles  Chambers,  Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley. 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J. 
Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas 
J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Mar- 
tin P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall,  John  H. 
McHenry,  John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  Michael  L. 
Stoner.  Albert  G.  Talbott,  William  R.  Thomp- 
son, John  J.  Thurman,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  Henry  Washington,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
—37. 

So  the  convention  substituted  Mr.  WOOD- 
SON'S for  Mr.  DAVIS'  proposition. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  WOODSON,  the  blanks 
were  filled  with  "1850,"  and  "1857,  and  every 
eiglit  years  thereafter." 

The  section  was  then  agreed  to  as  a  part  of 
the  report  on  the  legislative  department. 

Mr.  JAMES  offered  the  following  as  an  addi- 
tional section: 

"The  general  assembly  shall  have  no  power 
to  pass  any  act  or  resolution  for  the  appropria- 
tion of  money,  or  creating  any  debt  against  the 
state,  or  for  the  payment  of  money  in  any  way 
whatever:  Provided,  The  debt  created,  or  money 
appropriated,  may  exceed  one  hundred  dollars, 
unless  the  act  or  resolution  creating  the  debt  or 
aj)propriating  the  money,  shall  be  voted  for  upon 


1031 


its  formal  passage  by  a  inaiority  of  all  the  mem- '  art!    L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,   Thom-s    P. 


bers  then  elected  to  each  orarlch  of  the  general 
assembly;  said  vote  to  be  taken  by  the  yeas  and 
nays,  wfiich  shall  be  entered  upon  the  journals 
of  each  house." 

I  feel  satisfied  if  this  is  adopted,  the  conven- 
tion could  not  throw  around  the  treasury  a  bet- 
ter guard.  There  is  a  similar  provision  in  the 
New  York  constitution,  and  in  that  of  Wiscon- 
sin. And  the  executive  of  Indiana,  in  recom- 
mending the  call  of  a  convention  of  that  state, 
very  strongly  recommended  the  insertion  of  such 
a  provision  in  their  constitution.  We  know  that 
the  legislature  have  frequently,  on  the  eve  of 
final  adjournment,  when  there  was  scarcely  a 
quorum  present,  passed  bills  making  large  ap- 
propriations by  a  minority.  And  I  take  the 
ground,  if  the  claim  is  just,  it  can  get  a  majori- 
ty of  each  branch  of  the  legislature;  and  if  not, 
it  ought  not  to  pass.  If  my  proposition  is  adop- 
ted, it  will  prevent  the  representatives  of  the 
people  from  putting  their  hands  into  the  treasury 
without  proper  authority  and  due  reflection. 
For,  when  one  legislature  creates  a  debt,  another 
has  to  make  up  the  deficiency.     And  how  is  it 


Moore,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Jonathan  Xewcum, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall.  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, Johnson  Price,  LarkinJ.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Robinion,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers, 
Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Jas.  W.  Stone, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  William 
R.  Ihompon,  John  J.  Thurman,  Henr^  Wash- 
ington, John  Wheeler,  Charles  A.  Wickliflfe, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 62. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  Thos.  D.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha, 
Jas.  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  Kinian  E.  Gray,  Vincent  S.  Hay, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J. "Hood,  Mark  E.  Hus- 
ton, Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether,  John  D. 
Morris,  Wm.  Preston,  James  Rudd.  John  W. 
Stevenson, Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Andrew  S.  White — 
28. 

So  the  section  was  adopted. 

Mr.  PRESTON  moved  the  previous  question 
on  the  adoption  of  the  report  of  the  committee 


The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put, 
and  the  report  was  adopted. 

The  convention  then  took  a  recess. 

EVZXIXG   SESSION. 
EXUMER.tTION    OF    VOTEKS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER  it  was 

Resolned,  That  the  second  auditor  be  directed 

to  cause  the  commissioners  of  revenue  for  the 


done?  It  is  ik>ne  by  taxation.  I  do  not  object  |  onjhe  legislative  department,  as^ame^nded 
to  allowing  just  claims,  but  the  people  want  to 
know  who  they  are  that  vote  for  them.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  every  gentleman,  when  he  votes 
for  a  claim,  will  be  able  to  satisfy  his  constitu- 
ents as  to  the  reasons  that  induced  him  to  do  it. 
Mr.  THOMPSON.  I  hope  the  section  will  be 
adopted.  I  do  not  think,  as  the  gentleman  has 
said,  that  the  convention  could  throw  a  stronger 
guard  around  the  treasury.     It   is  true  we  have 

restricted  the  legislature  in  their  power  to  con-  .  !_•«-, 

tract  debts;  but  I  consider  that  no  restriction  in  j  y*^.^'"J'l^"j\°:!^r!.i"  1°?  ^5J^"r"i?_.i:_^.^J._ 
relation  to  an  appropriation  of  money.  They 
can  at  one  session  of  the  legislature,  as  I  con- 
ceive, make  an  appropriation  exceeding  the 
amount  of  the  revenue  $1,000,000.  If  the  amend- 
ment is  adopted,  the  people  will  know  who  has 
voted  for  these  appropriations.  If  you  will  turn 
back  to  the  historv  of  Kentucky,  you  will  find 
tliat  in  1837,  the  legislature  passed  a  law  crea- 
ting the  office  of  chief  engineer  of  this  state, 
with  a  salary  of  $4000,  wliich  is  $1500  more 
than  the  salary  of  the  governor.  In  1839-40,  this 


number  of  legal  voters  in  their  respective  coun- 
ties. 

X.\TIVE   AMEEICAXISM. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
Mr.  DAVIS'  resolution,  on  which  the  debate 
was  postponed  from  Saturday  night  to  the  eve- 
ning session  this  day. 

Mr.  SPALDING.'  When  canvassing  for  the 
seat  I  have  the  honor  to  occupy  in  this  conven- 
tion, I  told  my  constituents  that  I  expected  to 
be  a  silent  member,  and  up  to  the  present  time 


salary  was  reduced  to  $2500;  at  the  same  time  1 1  have  been  so,  not  having  attempted  to  address 


there  were  a  number  of  assistant  engineers,  who 
received  a  salarj'  of  $3000.  I  do  tnist  the  con- 
vention will  adopt  the  section.  Then,  if  in  after 
times,  such  an  office  should  be  created,  we  shall 
know  the  names  of  those  who  voted  for  it. 

Mr.  JAMES  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays,  and 
they  were — veasG^,  nays  28. 

\  EAS — Jolin  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling, 


it  before.  I  promised  them  that  I  Avould  cast 
my  votes  with  as  much  propriety  and  justice  as 
the  most  talented  and  learned  orator  in  the  body. 
So  far  I  have  reedemed  my  pledge.  And,  had  it 
not  been  for  the  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon,  and  the  manner  in  which  he  spoke 
on  the  subject  of  it,  I  would  not  have  troubled 
the  house  now.     I  shall  not  detain  the  conven- 


Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley,  Luther  Brawner, ;  tion  long,  for  I  have  but  little  to  say,  and  speak 


Francis  M  Bristow,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Ohenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Chas- 
teen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott  Green  For- 
rest, Nathan  Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Rich- 
ard D.  Gholson,  Thos.  J.  Gough,  Jas.  P.  Ham- 
ilton, Ben.  Hardin,  John  Harris,  William  Hen- 
drix,  Thomas  James,  Wm.  Johnson,  Geo.  W. 
Kavanaugh,  James  M.  Lackev,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
Greorge  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
William   N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin,  Rich- 


ing  is  not  my  forte,  having  been  more  accustom- 
ed to  handle  the  plough.  I  am  aware  of  the 
heavy  metal  before  me — a  gentleman  who  is 
learned,  and  one  of  the  best  and  most  skilful 
debaters  in  this  country,  whose  experience  as 
well  in  the  councils  of  this  state  as  in  those  of 
the  nation,  have  been  great — and  therefore  I 
stand  no  chance  of  competing  with  him  in  those 
respects.  I  shall,  howevt-r,  express  myself  in  a 
plain  and  simple  manner,  so  that  every  gentle- 
man will  comprehend  ray  remarks. 

The  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from  Bour- 
bon proposes,   if  I  understand   it,  that  persons 


1032 


coruing  from  Europe  to  this  country  to  settle 
shall  not  be  entitled  to  the  right  of  suftVage  un- 
til they  shall  have  been  here  twenty-one  years 
from  the  time  of  declaring  their  intention  to  be- 
come citizens.  I  object  to  the  gentleman's  prop- 
osition and  cannot  give  it  my  support.  I  regard 
this  happy  laud  as  an  asylum  ana  refuge  for  the 
oppressed  of  all  nations.  We  have  plenty  of  room 
formillions  and  millions  of  people.  If  wereceive, 
as  we  (mght,  in  my  opinion,  those  who  come  to 
our  shores,  without  exacting  tJiis  long  probation 
from  them,  many  of  whom  bring  money  with 
them,  we  shall  be  increasing  the  wealth  of  the 
country,  and  at  the  same  time  putting  money 
into  the  treasury.  Whilst  the  gentleman  from 
Bourbon  and  myself  are  citizens  of  Kentucky 
by  the  accident  of  birth,  there  are  thousands 
who  come  here  from  choice,  their  object  being  to 
seek  a  permanent  residence  in  the  "land  of  the 
free  and  the  home  of  the  brave."  Why  is  it, 
when  we  have  an  almost  boundless  country, 
with  a  territory  extending  from  the  Atlantic  to 
the  Pacific  ocean,  we  should  refuse  to  afford 
lliem  a  home  amongst  us  unless  they  comply 
with  the  harsh  requirements  set  forth  in  the  res- 
olution of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  Is  the 
gentleman  afraid  that  these  foreigners  will  over- 
run the  country?  I  cannot  attempt  to  notice  all 
tlie  apprehensions,  misgivings,  and  objections 
expressed  and  entertained  by  him,  more  particu- 
larly in  relation  to  the  Roman  catholic  immi- 
grants from  Europe.  He  seems  to  be  seriously 
alarmed  indeed.  And  whyV  Because  he  is 
afraid  tliey  will  subvert  the  government,  as  they, 
he  says,  owe  allegiance  to  the  Pope  of  Rome. 
Now,  this  is  a  fact  Avhich  I  deny,  and  I  will,  in 
support  of  the  position  I  assume,  avail  myself 
of  tills  occasion  to  read  some  authorities  on  the 
subject.  I  will  read  an  extract  from  a  speech  of 
the  late  Judge  Gaston,  delivered  in  the  conven- 
tion of  North  Carolina,  called  to  amend  the  con- 
stitution of  that  state,  and  held  in  1835: 

"Oppressors  in  all  ages  and  in  all  countries. 
Ret  up  pretexts  for  oppression,  and  among  the 
excuses  under  which  the  exclusion  of  Irish  cath- 
olics from  a  share  of  political  power  was  sought 
to  be  justified,  the  calumnies  that  catholics  own 
a  foreign  allegiance  and  admit  a  dispensing 
power  from  oaths,  were  most  impudently  insis- 
ted on.  The  late  Mr.  Pitt,  as  prime  Minister  of 
England,  contemplating  an  act  of  justice  to 
these  abused  men,  solmnly  proposed  a  set  of  in 
terrogatories  to  these  charges  to  several  of  the 
most  celebrated  catholic  Theological  Univer- 
sities in  Europe.  Suffer  me  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  some  of  these,  and  to  their  answers.  The 
following  questions  were  proposed:  First,  has 
the  Pope,  or  have  the  Cardinals,  or  any  body  of 
men,  or  has  any  individual  of  the  church  of 
'Rome,  any  civil  autliority,  power,  jurisdiction  or 
pre-eminence  whatever,  within  the  realm  of 
England.  Second,  Can  the  Pope,  or  Cardinals, 
or  any  body  of  men,  or  any  individual  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  absolve  or  dispense  his  Majes- 
ty's subjects  from  their  oath  of  allegiance,  upon 
any  pretence  whatever?  Third,  Is  there  any 
principle  in  the  tenents  of  the  catholic  faith,  by 
which  catholics  are  ju.stified  in  not  keepinir  faith 
with  heretics,  or  otlier  persons  differing  from 
them  in  religious  opinions,  in  any  transactions 
either  of  a  public  or  private  nature?    To  these 


questions  the  Universities  of  Paris,  Louvain, 
Alcala,  Salamanca  and  Valad olid, after  express- 
ing their  astoni.shment  that  it  could  be  thought 
necessary  at  the  close  of  the  18th  century,  and 
in  a  country  so  enlightened  as  England,  to  pro- 
pose such  enquiries,  severally  and  unanimously 
answered  :  1st.  That  the  Pope,  or  Cardinals,  or 
anybody  of  men,  or  any  individual  of  the  church 
of  Rome,  has  not  and  have  not  any  civil  authori- 
ty, power,  jurisdiction  or  pre-eminence  whatev- 
er within  the  realm  of  England.  2dly.  That  the 
Pope,  or  Cardinals,  or  any  body  of  men,  or  any 
individual  of  the  church  of  Rome,  cannot  ab- 
solve or  dispense  his  Majesty's  subjects  from 
their  oath  of  allegiance  upon  any  pretext  what- 
soever; and  3dly.  That  their  is  no  principle  in 
the  tenets  of  the  catholic  faith,  by  which  catho- 
lics are  justified  in  not  keeping  faith  with  here- 
tics, or  other  persons  differing  from  them  in  re- 
ligious opinions,  in  transactions  either  of  a  pub- 
lic or  a  private  nature." 

I  think  this  is  conclusive  evidence  against 
the  gentleman's  declaration  that  we  owe  civil 
allegiance  to  the  Pope  of  Rome.  Where,  I 
would  ask,  did  the  gentleman  get  his  authority? 
He  obtained  it,  I  suppose,  from  some  protestant 
jontroversial  work.  I  have  nothing  to  say 
against  the  protestants,  but  I  wish  equal  rights 
and  privileges  to  be  extended  to  all.  And  I  did 
not  feel  authorized,  as  I  represented,  in  part,  a 
country  Avhich  has  a  considerable  number  of 
catholics  in  it,  to  sit  here  and  hear  their  tenets 
misrepresented,  abused,  and  vilified  as  they  were 
by  the  quotations  which  the  gentleman  has  read 
in  support  of  his  argument.  W^ith  regard  to 
publications  in  the  newspapers  in  relation  to  the 
controversies  between  the  catholics  and  protes- 
tants, I  have  been  used  to  them  all  my  life.  Let 
the  two  squabble  and  quarrel  as  they  may,  for 
then  there  is  less  danger  of  uniting  church  and 
state.  And  I  would  not  care  if  they  wrangled 
even  more  than  they  now  do.  I  believe  the  gen- 
tleman said  he  would  rather  have  the  Mormons 
here,  and  he  compared — 

Mr.  DAVIS  (interupting.)  I  did  not  compare 
the  Mormons  with  the  Catholics.  I  said  if  the 
Mormons  were  disposed  to  settle  here,  as  many 
of  them  were  foreigners,  I  should  be  in  favor  of 
excluding  them. 

Mr.  SPALDING.  Well,  it  is  pretty  near  com 
paring  us  with  them.  I  owe  no  allegiance  to 
any  man,  or  set  of  men,  under  heaven,  save  the 
commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  and  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  only  in  so  far  as  this 
state  has  delegated,  or  given  up  some  of  her 
powers  to  it.  I  owe  no  allegiance  to  the  Pope 
of  Rome,  or  to  the  cardinals,  bishops,  or  priests; 
and  they  have  no  right  to  send  any  persons  here 
to  cut  our  throats.  The  Pope  has  no  more  au- 
thority to  alter  or  change  the  principles  of  the 
church  of  Rome  than  has  the  president  to  alter 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  If  he 
dared  to  do  it,  he  might  be  called  to  account  by 
me  or  any  body  else  belonging  to  the  church. 
The  gentleman  quoted  from  Washington,  and  I 
do  not  recollect  all  his  quotations,  there  were 
so  many  of  them,  probably  he  has  been  prepar- 
ing for  months,  perhaps  for  years,  and  I  aont 
know  but  all  his  life.  I,  however,  shall  make 
another  extract  from  Judge  Gaston's  speech  : 

"Sir,  although  this  alliance  of  refigion  and 


1033 


the  civil  power  did  not  take  place  for  many  cen- !  all  present  and  future  liege  people  of  the  Eng- 
turies  after  Christianity  wa^  nrst  promulgated  to  '  lish  King,  without  distinction  of  sect  or  party, 
the  world,  it  became  at  length  so  general,  that  free  leave  to  transport  themselves  and  their  fam- 
when  the  American  colonics  were  settled,  there,  ilies  to  Maryland.  Christianitywas  by  the  charter 
■was  no  country  in  Europe  which  had  not  its  ^  made  the  law  of  the  land,  but  no  preference  was 
established  church.  In  tne  train  of  this  estab- '  given  to  any  sect,  and  equality  in  religious  rights, 
lishment,  followed  all  the  usual  consequences  of  I  not  less  than  in  civil  freedom,  wa^s  assured."' 
intolerance  and  persecution.  He  who  did  not !  [1  Bancroft's  History,  260.] '"Calvert  deserves  to 
believe  according  to  law,  was  punished  as  a  dis- ;  be  ranked  among  the  most  wise  and  benevolent 
loyal  subject.  Degraded,  fined,  imprisoned, '  law-givers  of  all  ages.  He  was  the  first  in  the 
plundered  and  proscribed  at  home,  because  of ,  history  of  the  christian  world  to  seek  for  relig- 
the  exercise  of  man's  noblest  prerogative,  the  j  ious  security  and  peace  by  the  practice  of  jus- 
right  to  worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  tice ;  to  plan  the  establishment  of  popular  in- 
of  his  conscience,  diiferent  sects  of  European  stitutions  with  the  enjoyment  of  liberty  of  con- 
christians  fled  from  this  detested  tyranny  to  the  i  science  :  to  advance  the  career  of  civilization  by 
"Western  side  of  the  Atlantic.  And  here  it  was  ;  recognizing  the  rightful  equality  of  all  christian 
that  religion  was  emancipated  from  her  thraldom  sects.  The  asylum  of  papist  was  the  spot,  where 
to  princes  and  rulers,  and  the  principle  of /ree- ;  in  a  remote  corner  of  the  world,  on  the  banks  of 
dom  o/"  conscience  adopted  as  a  political  axiom, !  rivers  which  had  been  as  yet  unexplored,  the 
and  placed  at  the  very  foundation  of  civil  in-  mild  forbearance  of  a  proprietary  adopted  re- 
stitutions. Sir,  the  honor,  the  immortal  honor  ;  ligious  freedom  as  tlie  basis  of  the  state.'"  [Dit- 
of  being  the  first  to  assert  this  noble  truth,  be-  to,  262.]  •' Memorable  was  the  character  of  the 
longs  to  the  illustrious  founders  of  the  catholic  Maryland  institutions.  Every  other  country  had 
colony  of  Maryland.  Every  friend  of  freedom  i  persecuting  laws."  "I  will  not,"  (such  was  the 
throughout  the  world  owes  a  large  debt  of  grat- !  oath  of  the  governor  of  Maryland,)  "I  will  not 
itude  to  these  benefactors  of  the  human  race.  ■  by  mvself,  or  any  other,  directly  or  indirectly 
Let  me  avail  myself  of  the  occasion  to  lay  be- '  trouble,  molest,  or  discountenance  any  person 
fore  the  committee  some  notices  of  them  and  of  professing  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  for  or  in  re- 
their  doings,  well  worthy  to  be  remembered,  and  I  spect  of  religion."'  "'Under  the  mild  institu- 
which  I  have  taken  chiefly  from  a  highly  re-  i  tions  and  munificence  of  Baltimore,  the  dreary 
spectable  work,  "Bancroft's  history  of  the  United  !  wilderness  soon  bloomed  with  the  swarming 
States."  Theresearch,  love  of  truth  and  ability,  I  life  and  activity  of  prosperous  settlements;  the 
by  which  this  work  is  characterized,  render  it !  romau  catholics  oppressed  by  the  laws  of  Eng- 
an  authority  on  all  matters  of  our  early  history, ;  land,  were  sure  to  fand  a  peaceful  asylum  in  the 
and  on  this  subject  especially,  there  is  nothing  to  :  quiet  harbors  of  the  Chesapeake  ;  and  there,  too, 
fear  from  any  prejudice  or  partiality  of  theauth- ;  protestants  were  sheltered  against  protestant  intol- 
or.  ierance."'    [Do.  266.]     Yes,  sir,  while  the  puri- 

"At  the  head  of  thefoundere  of  Maryland  was  i  tans  persecuted  the  Episcopalians  in  New  Eng- 
George  Calvert,  Lord  Baltimore.  He  was  a '  la°^'  ^^'^  ^^^  Episcopalians  persecuted  the  Pu- 
gentleman  of  high  character,  talents  and  ac- '  "tans  in  \  irginia,  the  oppressed  of  every  Pro- 
complishments,  who,  from  the  purest  motives, '  »"'<=«  fo"n<i  freedom  and  security  m  3Iar}-land. 
had  embraced  the  principles  of  tiie  roman  catho-  I  "  'The  disfranchised  fnends  of  prelacy  from 
olic  faith.  He  made  an  open  profession  of  his  i  Massachusetts,  and  the  puritans  from  \  irginia, 
conversion,  and  was  consequentlv  obliged  to !  ^ere  welcome  to  an  equality  of  political  rights 
surrender  the  high  office  which  he  "held  as  one  i  »«  '"«  ^J^^^  ^^}^°^^'^,  province  of  Maryland'" 
of  the  two  Secretaries  of  state  to  James  the  ,  [Ditto,  2/7.]  The  early  history  of  Maryland  is 
first.  While  secretary,  he  had  obtained  a  patent  «"«  on  which  the  eye  delights  to  dwell ;  it  is  the 
for  the  southern  promontory  of  Newfound-  M^'^t^T  of  benevolence,  gratitude  and  toleration, 
land,  and  had  expended  much  money  in  a  fmit-  The  biographer  of  Baltimore  could  with  truth 
less  attempt  to  settle  its  rugged  and  sterile  I  assert,  '"that  his  government,  in  conformity 
shores.    He  afterwards  obtained   a  patent  for  a !  ^^^^  ^^  strict  and  repeated  injunctions  had  nev- 


tract  of  country  north  of  the  Potomac,  then  un 
inhabited,  except  by  scattered  hordes  of  Indians. 
The  patent  was  drawn  up  according  to  his  sug- 
gestions, although  it  was  finally  issued  after  his 
death  in  favor  of  his  son,  Cecil  Calvert.  In 
this  fundamental  charter  of  the  colony  of  Mary 


er  given  disturbance  to  any  pi^-rson  in  Maryland, 
for  matters  of  religion ;  that  the  colonists  enjoy- 
ed freedom  of  conscience  not  less  than  freedom 
of  person  and  estate,  as  amply  as  ever  did  any 
people  in  any  place  of  the  world.'"  [Ditto,  277.] 
There  was  one  attempt,  a  most  ungrateful   at- 


land  were  to  be  found  the  most  admirable  pro- 1  tempt,  to  mar  the  scene  of  harmony  and  moral 
visions  for  civil  and  iMigious  freedom.  "Unlike  M>«a"ty,  and,  for  a  short  time,  it  unfortunately 
any  patent  which  had  hitherto  passed  the  great  I  succeeded.  After  the  dissolution  in  England  of 
seal  of  England,  it  secured  to  the  emigrant  an  !  the  long  parliament,  and  the  assumption  of  all 
independent  share  in  the  legislation  of  the  pro-  i  power  by  the  lord  protector  Cromwell,  some  of 


vince,  of  which  the  st<itut€S  were  to  be  establish- 
ed with  the  advice  and  approbation  of  the  majori- 
ty of  the  freemen  or  their  deputies."  Sir  George 
Calvert,  '"far  from  guarding  his  territory  against 
any  but  those  of  his  persuasion,  as  he  had  taken 
from  himself  and  his  successors  all  arbitrary 
power,  by  establishing  the  legislative  franchises 
of  the  people,  so  he  took  from  them  the  means 
of  being  iatolerant  in  religion,  by  securing  to 
130 


iiis  followers  in  this  country  .seized  tlie  govern- 
ment of  Maryland, and  administered  the  aSairs 
of  the  province  by  a  board  of  commissioners. 
The  result  is  thus  described  by  the  Historian : — 
'  "Intolerance  followed  upon  this  arrangement ; 
for  parties  in  Maryland  had  beii^oiue  identifiied. 
with  religious  sects.  The  puritans,  ever  the 
friends  to  popular  liberty,  hostile  to  a  monarchy, 
aad  equally  so  to  a  hereditary  proprietary,  coa- 


1034 


tended  earnestly  for  civil  liberty ;  but  had  neith- 
er the  gratitude  to  respect  the  rights  of  the  gov- 
ernment by  which  they  had  been  received  and 
fostered,  nor  magnanimity  to  continue  the  toler- 
ation to  which  alone  they  were  indebted  for  their 
continuance  in  the  colony.  A  new  assembly 
convened  at  Patuxent,  acknowledged  the  autho- 
rity of  Cromwell,  but  it  also  exasperated  the 
whole  Romish  party  by  their  wanton  disfran- 
chisement. An  act  concerning  religion  confirm- 
ed the  freedom  of  concience,  provided  the  liber- 
ty were  not  extended  to  J9t»pcry,preiacy,  or  licen- 
tiousness of  opinwn."  '  (Pretty  extensive  excep- 
tions!) *  "Yet  Cromwell,  remote  from  the  scene 
of  strife,  was  not  betrayed  by  his  religious  pre- 
judices into  an  approbation  of  the  ungrateful 
decree.  He  commanded  the  commissioners  not 
to  busy  themselves  about  religioa,  but  to  settle 
the  civil  government.'"  Ditto,  281. 

I  think  Oliver  Cromwell  was  right  in  saying 
they  should  attend  to  the  civil  government  and 
let  religioa  alone.  Here  we  sc-e  our  forefathers 
fled  from  the  oppressions  and  intolerance  of  Eu- 
rope in  regard  to  religion,  and  came  to  the  new 
world — our  puritanical  forefathers,  Avho  were 
protestants.  And  how  long  had  they  been  here 
themselves,  before  they  raised  the  standard  of 
persecution  against  the  Episcopalians  and  the 
Quakers,  and  banished  Roger  Williams,  one  of 
the  best  men  the  world  ever  produced,  from  the 
face  of  civil  society  into  the  savage  world,  where 
he  planted  the  colony  of  Rhode  Island,  and  es- 
tablished in  it  free  principles? 

Now,  I  do  not  bring  up  this  thing  of  protes- 
tant  intolerance  for  the  purpose  of  giving  any 
offence  to  any  one  here,  however  humble  he  may 
be.  But,  I  merely  mention  it  to  prove  that  nei- 
ther party  can  be  trusted.  The  trouble  in  Eng- 
land began  with  the  church  and  state  united. 
But  the  gentleman  need  not  tell  me  that  the 
catholics  were  the  first  to  practice  intolerance; 
for  I  have  shown  here  that  that  is  not  the  fact. 
As  to  the  tenets  of  the  catholics,  it  is  not  my 
purpose  to  expound  them.  I  was  reared  a  cath- 
olic, and  I  am  as  firm  as  the  rock  of  ages  in  that 
faith;  but  I  do  not  practice  it  as  I  ought  to  do, 
and  more  the  shame  for  me.  The  gentleman 
quoted  a  little  from  Washington,  and  I  will  also 
do  so;  his  language  being  contained  in  the  fol- 
lowing extracts  from  Judge  Gaston's  speech: 

"But  it  has  been  objected,  that  the  catholic  re- 
ligion is  unfavorable  to  freedom — nay,  even  in- 
compatible with  republican  institutions.  Ingen- 
ious speculation  on  such  matters  ar«  worth  lit- 
tle, and  prove  still  less.  Let  me  ask  who  ob- 
tained the  great  charter  of  English  freedom,  but 
the  catholic  prelates,  and  Barons,  at  Runnymede? 
The  oldest — the  purest  democracy  on  earth,  is 
the  little  catholic  republic  of  St.  Marino,  not  a 
day's  journey  from  Rome.  It  has  existed  now 
for  fourteen  hundred  years,  and  is  90  jealous  of 
arbitrary  power,  tliat  the  executive  authority  is 
divided  between  two  governors,  wha  are  elected 
every  three  montJis.  Was  William  Tell,  the 
founder  of  Swiss  liberty,  a  royalist?  Are  the 
catholics  of  the  swiss  cantons  in  love  with  ty- 
ranny? Are  the  Irish  catholics  friends  to  pas- 
sive obedience  and  non-resistanoe?  Was  La- 
fayette, Pulaski,  or  Kosciusko,  a  foe  to  civil 
freedom?  Was  Charles  Carroll,  of  Carrolton, 
unwilling  to  jeopard  fortune  in  the  cause  of  lib- 


erty ?    Let  me  give  you,  however,  the  testimony' 
of  George  Washington.     On  his  accession  to  the 
Presidency,  he  was  addressed   by  the  American 
catholics,  who,  adverting  to   the  restrictions  on 
their  worship,  then  existing  in  some  of  the  states, 
express  themselves  thus :     '  "The  prospect  of 
national  prosperity  is  peculiarly  pleasing  to  us 
on  another  account ;  because,  while  our  country 
preserves  her  freedom   and   independence,   we 
shall  have  a  well-founded  title  to  claim  from  her 
justice  the  equal  rights  of  citizenship,  as  the  pnce   of 
our  blood  spilt  under  7jour  eye ,  and  of  our  common 
exertions  for  her  defence,  under  your  auspicious  con- 
duct."'    This  great  man,  who  was  utterly   inca- 
pable of  flattery  and  deceit,  utters  in  answer  the 
following  sentiments,  which  I  give  in  his  owiv 
words :    '  "As  mankind  become  more  liberal, 
they  will  be  more  apt  to   allow   that  all  those 
who  conduct  themselves  ais  worthy  members   of 
the  community,  are  equally  entitled  to  the  pro- 
tection of  civil  government.     I  hope  ever  to  see 
America  among  the  forcTnost  nations  in  examples 
of  justice   and  liberality :  and   I  presume  that 
your    fellow-citizens   will    not  forget  the  patri- 
otic part  which  you  took  in  the  accomplishment  of 
their  revolution  and  the  establishment   of  their  gov- 
ernment, or  the  important  assistance  which  they 
received  from  a  nation  in  which  the  Roman  cath- 
olic faith   is  professed."'     By  the  bye,  sir,   I 
would  pause  for  a  moment  to  call  the  attention 
of  this  committee  to  some  of  the  names  subscrib- 
ed to  this  address.     Among  them  are  those  of 
John  Carroll,  the  first  Roman  catholic  bishop  in 
the  United  States,  Charles  Carroll,  of  Carrollton, 
and  Thomas   Fitzsimmons.     For   the   character 
of    these    distinguished    men,   if  they  needed 
vouchers,  I  Avould  confidently  call  on  the  vener- 
able president  of  this  convention.     Bishop  Car- 
roll was  one  of  the  best  of  men  and  most  humble 
and  devout  of  christians.     I  shall   never   forget 
a  tribute  to  his  memory  paid  by  the   good  and 
venerable  protestant  bisnop  White,  when   con- 
trasting the    piety    with   which   the   christian 
Carroll  met  death,  with  the   cold  trifling  that 
characterized  the  last  moments  of  the   sceptical 
David  Hume.    I  knew  not  whether  the  tribute 
was  more  honerable  to  the  piety  of  the  dead,  or 
to  the   charity  of  the  living  prelate.     Charles 
Carroll,  of  Carrollton,  the  last  survivor  of  the 
signers   of   American   Independence — at  whose 
death  both  houses   of  the   legislature   of  North 
Carolina  unanimously  testified  their  grief,  as  at 
a  national  bereavement!     Thomas  Fitzsimmons, 
one  of  the   illustrious   convention  that  framed 
the  constitution  of  United  States,  and  for  sever- 
al years   the  representative   in  congress  of  the 
city  of  Philadelphia.    Were  these,  and  such  as 
these,  foes  to  freedom  and  unfit  for  republicans? 
Would  it  be  dangerous  to  j^ormitsuch  men  to  be 
sherifi^s  or  constables   in  the  land?    Read   the 
funeral  eulogium  of  Charles  Carroll,   delivered 
at  Rome  byuishop  England  — one  of  the  great- 
est ornaments  of  the  American  catholic  church  ; 
a  foreigner  indeed  by  birth,  but  an  American  by 
adoption,  and  who,  on  becoming  an   American, 
solemnly  abjured  all  allegiance  to  every  foreign 
king,  prince,  and  potentate  whatever — that  eulo- 
gium  which  was  .so  mu^h  carped  at  bv  English  roy- 
alists and  English  tories — and   I  tliink  you  will 
find  it  democratic  enough  to  suit  the   taste   and 
find  an  echo  in  the  heart  of  the  sternest  repub- 


I 


I^S5 


lican  amongst  us.  Catholics  are  of  all  coun- 
tires — of  all  governmenba — of  all  political  creeds. 
In  all,  thev  are  taught  that  the  kingdom  of 
Christ  is  not  of  this  -world — and  that  it  is  their 
duty  to  render  unto  Caesar  the  things  whi^h  are 
Csesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  which  are 
God's." 

I  shall  read  no  more.  The  misfortune  of  the 
church  and  state  being  united  in  Europe  has  fur- 
nished the  gentleman  with  some  truths;  but  he 
must  recollect  a  great  many  of  them  originated 
out  of  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew.  Judg- 
ing from  the  manner  in  which  he  recited  them 
here,  one  would  suppose  that  the  Pope  had  com- 
manded those  horrible  and  inhuman  atrocities 
to  be  committed,  or  that  if  he  did  not  do  that, 
he  was  cognizant  and  covertly  encouraged  those 
deeds  to  l^  done.  Now,  I  deny  the  fact;  he  has 
been  misinformed.  He  has  been  reading  from  the 
wrong  book.  I  hare  not  the  authorities  bv  me,  but 
I  know  those  assertions  are  denied  bythe  catho- 
lics. Sir,  the  catholic  bishops  have  never  authoriz- 
ed crime.  And,inthiscountry,  I  think  if  the  gen- 
tleman was  as  well  acquainted  with  the  catholics 
as  manv  other  protestant  gentlemen  on  this  floor 
are,  he  would  say  they  are  as  good  citizens  as  any 
in  this  state  or  in  the  tlnited  States.  They  are  pa- 
triotic and  faithful  to  this  country,  and  discharge 
all  their  duties  with  alacrity  and  honesty,  and 
are  as  ready  to  fight  our  battles  as  anv  other 
class  of  citizens  in  the  United  States.  1  have 
many  catholic  relatives  who  participated  in  the 
war  of  1812,  and  also  in  that  with  Mexico.  I 
ask,  does  it  follow  that  because  there  happen  to 
be  a  few  rogues  and  paupers  among  the  catho- 
lics who  come  here  from  Lurope,  that  the  Pope 
has  taught  them  to  be  rogues  and  wicked  men? 
2s  ot  at  all ;  it  is  the  misfortune  of  the  times.  I 
have  shown  that  during  the  revolutionary  strug- 
gle, the  catholics  bore  as  noble  a  part  as  any 
other  set  of  men  in  this  country.  1  have  been 
told  that  almost  the  whole  of  the  regular  army 
of  the  United  States  that  were  in  Mexico  during 
the  war,  were  foreigners.  I  presume,  according 
to  the  statement  of  the  elder  gentleman  from 
Louisville,  (Mr.  Rudd,)  one-third  of  the  immi- 
grants that  come  to  the  United  States  are  protes- 
tonts,  and  two-thirds  catholics. 

I  did  not  name  the  persecutions  of  the  protes- 
tants  against  the  catholics,  to  show  that  they 
were  not  fit  to  be  received  here  from  Europe. 
Not  at  all.  It  was  the  misfortune  of  the  times. 
But  now,  that  we  live  in  a  liberal  and  enlight- 
ened age,  when  steamboats  and  railroads  and 
telegraphs  have  taken  the  places  of  other  medi- 
ums of  communication — when  the  march  of 
mind  has  kept  pace  in  an  equal  ratio — and  when, 
too,  the  arts  of  printing  and  paper  making  have 
increased  a  thousand  per  cent.,  as  well  in  the  old 
world  as  the  new — we  may,  I  think,  regard  the 
days  of  religious  intolerance  and  bigotry  as 
passed  and  gone  forever. 

In  Europe,  of  late  years,  liberty  of  conscience 
has  made  rapid  strides  in  most  of  the  countries 
of  that  hemisphere.  Can  there  be  any  danger 
apprehended  from  the  catholics  that  now  come 
from  Europe — any  alarm  felt  that  they  will  sub- 
vert this  government?  I  imagine  not.  There 
cannot  be.  There  is  no  danger  while  the  gen- 
tleman from  Bourbon  stands  ready  on  the  watch- 
tower,  to  sound  the  tocsin  of  alarm.    There  is 


no  danger  where  he  is;  and  when  he  is  gone 
there  will  be  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands 
of  Presbyterian  preachers  ready  to  sound  the 
tocsin.  But, I  repeat,  there  is  no  danger  on  the 
face  of  the  earth.  The  checks  and  balances  in 
our  form  of  government  are  too  many,  to  admit 
of  a  doubt  as  to  its  stability.  I  am  astonished 
at  the  extraordinary  speech  of  the  gentleman 
from  Bourbon.  I  came  here  to  the  legislature 
once,  and  I  was  very  much  prepossessed  in  favor 
of  the  gentleman  tliien,  and  I  was  almost  indu- 
ced to  vote  for  him  as  a  senator  of  the  United 
States.  If  there  had  not  been  a  democrat  to  vote 
for,  I  would  have  voted  for  him;  but  it  happened 
there  was  a  democrat,  and  I  was  glad  of  it.  And 
I  would  vote  for  a  democrat  again  from  first  to 
last.  Xow,  when  I  came  here.  I  still  entertained 
the  same  opinion;  for,  I  believe  he  is  a  high- 
minded  and  honorable  gentleman,  and  I  think 
no  one  will  doubt  his  talents.  But  he  is  like  an 
old  man  I  knew  once,  that  went  to  his  lawyer 
to  ask  his  advice  in  relation  to  the  rights  his 
daughter  would  have  in  her  deceased  husband's 
estate.  The  lawyer  read  from  a  book.  "Well," 
said  the  old  gentleman,  "that's  not  the  book  out 
of  which  I  read."  Jfow,  I  can  say  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon  has  read  out  of  the  wrong 
book  all  the  time. 

I  thank  the  convention  for  the  kind  attention 
with  which  thev  have  listened  to  the  few  desul- 
torv  remarks  I  tave  made.  I  will  trouble  them 
no  longer. 

Mr.  KELLY.  Mr.  President,  we  listened  on 
Saturday  last  to  one  of  the  noost  remarkable 
speeches,  which  it  has  ever  been  the  misfortune 
of  a  deliberative  body  to  hear.  Had  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  (Mr.  Davis,)  confined  him- 
self to  the  political  character  of  native  Ameri* 
canism,  I  should  have  been  content  to  have  suf- 
fered it  to  pass  unreplied  to,  though  I  am  the 
son  of  an  Irishman;  but  he  has  thought  proper 
to  interweave  with  it  an  unjustifiable  assault 
upon  the  religion  of  a  respectable,  honest,  and 
loyal  portion  of  this  great  community — misled 
doubtless  by  authorities  to  which  he  trusted,  to 
quotations  which  he  had  not  sifted  thoroughly, 
he  has  thrown  himself  upon  a  sea  of  declama- 
tion, calculated  to  arouse  the  worst  pa.ssions  of 
the  human  heart,  to  engender  a  fanatical  spirit, 
which,  if  carried  out,  will  lead  ultimately  to  the 
overthrow  of  our  liberties.  As  was  eloquently 
said  by  my  young  friend  from  Louisville,  in  his 
reply,  (for  which  reply,  with  the  warm  feelings 
of  an  Irish  and  catholic  heart  I  thank  him,)  the 
tendency  of  the  whole  of  the  gentleman's  speech 
is  a  stab  at  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  though 
the  foreign  catholic  may  first  fall  a  victim  to 
this  modern  political  religion,  the  poor  man  of 
all  denominations,  must  follow  him  to  the  grave 
of  a  nation's  liberties. 

When,  sir,  was  this  new  system  first  ushered 
into  light.  Born  of  fanaticism,  watered  with 
blood,  and  lighted  on  its  path  of  destruction  by 
the  flames  which  consumed  the  Charlestown 
convent,  it  would  long  since  have  made  the  east 
mad  with  its  infernal  orgies,  but  even  crime 
stands  aghast  at  its  own  enormity,  and  public 
sentiment  the  ultima  ratio  retepublioB  withheld  its 
progress  for  awhile.  It  lay  dormant,  until  some 
eight  or  nine  years  since,  a  certain  faction  in  the 
purlieus  of  Philadelphia,  lead  by  Louis  C.  hf 


1<536 


vin,  evoked  its  spirit  to  preside  over  biiniing 
churches,  and  libraries,  and  niidnioflit  murder. 
There  sir,  wliile  the  sanctuary  of  the  living 
God  blazed,  and  devils  in  tlie  form  of  men 
shouted  on  to  the  work  of  death  and  arson,  the 
poor  immigrant,  the  citizen  of  a  free  land  by 
choice,  and  not  by  the  accident  of  birth,  was 
marked  as  the  expiatory  sacrifice,  to  be  offered 
upon  the  altar  of  this  modern  political  high 
priest,  who,  if  I  mistake  not,  is  a  Jew  by  descent. 
Yes,  sir,  of  the  tribe  of  Caiphas — he  who  clam- 
ored that  a  God  might  die,  lest  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Herods  of  Juda  should  pass  to  the 
meek  Nazarene — he,  Louis  C.  Levin  shouted 
on  the  mob.  Great  God!  that  such  an  enormity 
should  have  been  enacted  in  a  land  set  apart 
and  consecrated  as  the  home  of  the  oppress- 
ed. 

It  may  be  that  my  notions  are  peculiar,  but  in 
them  I  Jiave  all  faith.  I  believe  that  this  land 
was  made  to  receive  the  teeming  millions  of  the 
old  world,  and  that  when  population  treads 
closely  hereafter  on  the  heels  of  subsistence,  the 
same  wise  providence,  which  created  this  conti- 
nent, will,  from  the  hollow  of  his  Almightyhand, 
in  the  broad  Pacific,  upheave  another,  to  receive 
the  redundant  population  of  this  hemisphere. 
God's  providence  must  afford  to  the  suffering 
millions  of  his  creatures  a  refuge  from  want,  or 
he  has  made  the  laws  of  increase  in  population 
to  contravene  his  other  work. 

But  to  return  to  native  Americanism  proper. 
Where  do  you  suppose  it  had  its  first  origin?  I 
will  tell  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  though,  if 
he  be  descended  of  an  Irish  family,  his  own 
family  traditions  may  furnish  him  the  same. 
Native  Americanism  is  but  Orangeism  trans- 
ferred from  the  north  and  east  of  Ireland  to  the 
free  land  of  America.  'Tis  the  same  foul  spirit, 
which,  on  the  12th  of  May  iu  each  year  since 
the  battle  of  the  Boyne,  has  congregated  its 
thousands  in  Ireland,  with  their  Orange  sashes 
and  muskets,  to  provoke  the  catholic  to  con- 
flict, backed  as  those  Orangemen  have  been  by 
an  Orange  magistracy — an  Orange  nobility — and 
to  a  great  extent,  an  Orange  church  of  England 
hierarchy.  It  was  this  spirit  which,  in  the  year 
1828,  when  O'Connell  was  canvassing  the  coun- 
ty of  Clare,  for  a  seat  in  the  Imperial  Parlia- 
ment, and  the  entire  mass  of  the  Orange  party 
was  stirring  heaven  and  earth  to  defeat  his  re- 
turn, because  he  was  a  catholic,  and  Sir  Vesey 
Fitzgerald,  the  worst  landlord  that  ever  Ireland 
produced — a  hell-hound  of  party^a  fanatic, 
and  extortioner — was  liis  opponent — that  a  party 
of  Orange  police,  headed  by  an  English  Major, 
passed  a  cabin  inhabited  by  a  poor  widow  and 
seven  chihlren — only  one  of  whom  was  old 
enough  to  assist  his  mother  in  maintaining  her 
family — and  witliout  provocation,  fired  upon 
these  children,  innocently  playing  on  the  green, 
and  killed  three  of  them,  among  whom  was  the 
poor  widow's  stay.  Sir,  thespirits  that  fired  the 
party  above  alluded  to,  animates  the  native 
American  party  here.  Of  course  I  do  not  in- 
clude the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  He  has 
been  seized  with  a  certain  political  madness, 
■whose  effects  he  does  not  see,  nor  fully  comprc- 
liend;  but  yet,  even  he  would  scorn  such  cruelty. 
I  could  multiply  instances  of  tliis  kind — I 
«oul4.talco  you  back  to  the  year  1690,  and  from 


that  time  up  to  the  present,  I  could  present  you 
with  a  series  of  horrors,  such  as  no  people,  save 
the  sons  of  the  lone  sea-girt  isle,  ever  had  to 
endure. 

What  occurred  in  last  May  in  the  county 
Down,  in  the  kingdom  of  Ireland.  In  violation 
of  the  queen's  proclamation,  issued  in  virtue  of 
the  act  of  1st  Victoria,  to  suppress  secret  politi- 
cal societies,  directed  both  against  the  Orange- 
men and  Ribbonnien,  the  Orangemen  of  Down 
assembled  at  the  Earl  of  Roden's,  and  after  an 
inflamable  address  delivered  by  the  Earl,  and 
free  libations  to  the  "glorious,  pious,  and  im- 
mortal memory  of  William  the  Third, '  they 
marched  upon  Dollys  Brae,  guarded  by  the  bay- 
onets of  a  whole  regiment  of  queen's  troops,  and 
the  magistrates  of  the  country,  and  slaughtered 
without  cause  forty  poor  catholics.  They  fell 
unresisting  before  the  bayonets  of  the  infuriated 
Orangemen,  and  a  fanatic  soldiery,  and,  as  yet, 
no  one  of  the  officers,  civil  or  military,  who  as- 
sisted at  that  murder,  has  been  brought  to  jus- 
tice. 

I  do  not  attribute  this  to  protestantism ;  no,  sir. 
Far  be  it  from  me  to  do  such  a  thing.  I  give  it 
as  a  cause  why  the  Irishman  loves  liberty  for  it- 
self, and  not  involuntarily  as  the  gentleman  and 
myself  do,  both  being  native  born.  We  are  citi- 
zens of  a  republic,  because  our  mothers  lived 
here;  they,  because  the  holy  fire  of  freedom 
burned  freely  in  their  bosoms,  and  because  in 
their  native  homes  they  were  slaves.  The  gen- 
tleman says  they  do  not  understand  the  genius 
of  our  government — nor  does  he,  I  fear.  They 
comprehend  the  true  genius  of  liberty — they 
love  liberty  for  herself,  as  a  true  man  loves  the 
wife  of  his  heart.  He  loves  it  because  it  minis- 
ters to  his  ambition.     Such  is  human  nature. 

Will  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  examine 
critically  the  history  of  England,  and  he  will 
find  there,  on  every  page  from  the  time  of  Strong- 
bow,  the  general  of  Henry  II,  to  the  year  1829, 
(when  catholic  emancipation  became  a  laAv,)  the 
wrongs  and  oppressions  of  poor  Ireland  written 
in  her  blood.  Sir,  under  all  circumstances  she 
has  suffered — and  suffering,  she  has  rebelled,  she 
has  fought,  and  she  has  fallen,  but  her  spirit, 
the  national  mind,  remains  uncrushed. 

Famine,  it  is  true,  in  the  last  few  years,  has 
made  her  desolate,  and  death  has  enthroned  him- 
self on  her  green  hills.  A  population  which, 
three  years  ago,  was  estimated  at  8,000,000,  is 
now  stated  by  tlie  London  Times  at  a  little  up- 
wards of  5,000,000. 

"The  Niobe  of  nations,  there  she  stands 
Childless  and  crownlessin  her  voiceless  woe." 

And  when  she  appeals  for  a  home  to  those  who 
inhabit  a  great  country  for  which  the  Irishman 
fought,  and  many  died,  shall  it  be  said  to  him, 
go  back  to  your  eartlily  charn«l  house !  Ameri- 
ca, when  the  storm  of  war  hovered  over  her,  re- 
ceived you  with  embraces,  but  now  that  she  is 
strong  and  vigorous,  she  luis  forgotten  her  char- 
ity.    Such,  sir,  i.s  not  tlie  spirit  of  this  people. 

Tlie  Sabines,  introduced  to  Rome  after  tlie 
fight  between  the  Horatii  and  the  Curiatii,  felt 
more  profoundly  the  spirit  of  licr  government 
than  tlie  Romans  themselves,  because  they  were 
new  to  her  liberties — the  Romans  felt  it  less  be- 
cause it  is  the  nature  of  man  to  be  satiated  with 
what  he  enjoys.      So,  sir,  with  the  foreigner;  he 


ii(m 


looks  from  his  continental,  or  his  island  home, 
upon  the  beautiful  and  gorgeous  government 
•which  our  fathers  of  1776  have  provided,  as  the 
wanderer  does  on  an  oasis  iu  the  desert — an 
island  of  palms,  betokening  a  refreshing  spring. 
But,  sir,  shall  those  springs  be  dried  up — shall 
those  waters  be  turned  to  the  bitter  salt  that 
pervades  the  sea — shall  those  palms  be  hewn 
down,  and  no  landmark  of  liberty  be  left  upon 
the  desert  waste  of  life? 

Such  is  the  tendency  of  the  gentleman's  doc- 
trine. We  would  rationally  suppose  he  was  one 
of  those  pilgrim  fathers,  who,  escaping  persecu- 
tion at  home,  persecuted  the  Quaker  upon  the 
virgin  soil  of  America. 

I  would  ask  the  gentleman,  who  was  the  first 
to  proclaim,  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic,  civil 
and  religious  liberty.  I  will  tell  him — Mary- 
land! a  colouy  of  catholics,  founded  by  a  catholic 
Irish  lord,  and  composed,  at  the  time  the  cove- 
nant of  St.  Mary's  was  made,  almost  exclusive- 
ly of  Irishmen;  and  yet  the  gentleman  fears 
Catholicism. 

Strange  perversion!  Strange  derangement  of 
a  great  mind ;  for  I  yield  my  tribute  to  that  of 
the  many,  that 

"He  was  born  for  much  more, 
And  ID  happier  hours." 

I  would  ask  this  convention  to  look  back  upon 
the  history  of  this  country.  Go  back  to  1774. 
Whose  voice  was  first  raised  to  cheer  the  colonies 
in  their  work  of  political  redemption?  It  was 
that  of  Irishmen,  assembled  in  the  city  of  Dub- 
lin, under  the  patriotic  O'Connor  and  the  elo- 
quent Flood.  They  cheered  us  to  the  conflict. 
"Not  did  they  stop  at  this;  they  shipped  to 
America  stalwart  men  who,  from  Lexington  to 
Monmouth,  proved  in  the  language  of  blood, 
that  they  loved  liberty  and  hated  oppression. 

Sir,  the  gentleman  has  quoted  from  Washing- 
ton to  show  that  he  did  not  favor  foreign  immi- 
gration. Who  protected  this  gallant  and  good 
man — this  cynosure  in  the  political  world,  at  the 
battle  of  Brandywine?  MarylandersI  who  were 
foreign  catholics  in  a  great  measure.  ,Who  is 
said  to  have  written  the  song  called  the  Irish- 
man? Washington;  and  a  prouder  tribute  was 
never  paid  to  a  gallant  people.  Who  secured 
the  southern  army  after  Gates  had  fled  at  Cam- 
den? DeKalb,  the  gallant,  the  noble,  the  cath- 
olic Prussian,  from  Coblintz.  Who  stood  by  his 
side  after  the  southern  militia  had  fled  ?  The 
Penn.sylvanians;  who,  according  to  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  could  not  speak  the  English 
language,  and  the  Irishmen  of  the  Maryland 
line.  May  God  grant  me,  that  in  all  difficulties 
of  this  life,  I  may  find  Dutchmen  and  Irishmen 
like  them. 

The  gentleman  has  forgotten  the  republics  of 
the  middle  ages  in  his  enthusiasm.  He  has  for- 
gotten that  they  were  catholic.  Milan,  Ven- 
ice, Padua,  Genoa,  Pisa,  Piacenza  or  Placentia, 
Modena,  Lucca,  Florence,  and  many  others. 
Who  headed  these  people  against  oppression? 
I  answer,  their  bishops  and  their  priests.  Let 
him  read  Muratori's  Annals,  and  he  Avill  teach 
him,  that  catholics  never  opposed  the  diflfusion 
of  human  liberty. 

Has  the  delegate  from  Bourbon  ever  read  the 
history  of  the  little  republic  of  San  Marino, 
with  only  twelve  miles  square,  and  a  population 


of  23,000?  Who  pT(?>te6teJtt?  The  Pope.  Did 
Napoleon  attack  it?  Xo,  sir,  he  did  not.  It 
had  stood  for  fourteen  hundred  years,  a  monu- 
ment of  catholic  tolerance,  and  ain  attack  upon 
it,  would  have  outraged  the  moral  sentiment  of 
the  world.  Has  he  heard  of  the  republic  of 
Andorra,  in  the  Spanish  Pyrenees?  Doubtless 
he  has.  That  republic  is  catholic — a  pure  de- 
mocracy— presided  over  by  officers  of  its  own 
choice,  ana  protected  by  the  Bishop  of  Urgil. 
Yet,  forsooth,  Catholicism  is  inimioal  to  human 
liberty.  There  is  a  prudery  in  the  gentleman's 
political  fears  I  cannot  comprehend. 

From  the  birth  of  Christ — the  delivery  of  the 
gentile — to  the  present  day,  that  church  has 
]  taught  liberty.  In  all  ages,  from  the  time  the 
!  manger  cradled  God — attracted  the  w  ise  men  of  the 
I  east — to  the  time  whose  sands  are  now  wasting 
i  fast  before  us,  her  tenets  have  been  the  same. 
I  She  has  taught  one  God,  one  faith,  one  baptism, 
and  universal  love. 

The  gentleman  has  charged  Catholicism  with 
being  cruel.  I  admit,  sir,  there  have  been  times 
when  princes,  who  professed  the  catholic  faith, 
have  been  oppressive  to  their  protestant  subjects. 
This  I  deplore.  No  man  feels  more  sensibly  than  I 
do,  the  cruelties  inflicted  by  the  Frenct  under 
Ltiuis  XIV,  after  the  revocation  of  the  edict  of 
Xantz.  They  were  unju.st  and  uncalled  for;  but 
they  sprung  not  from  the  religion,  but  the  heart 
of  the  minister. 

The  gentleman  has  spoken  of  Frederic  II, 
of  Germany,  (one  of  the  latter  Kaisirs.)   being 
compelled  to  vield  allegiance   to  the  Pope.      I 
would  call  his  attention   to  Sismondi's   Italian 
Republics,  to  prove,  most  satisfactorily,  that  the 
Pope  warred  with  Frederic  to  secure  Italian   in- 
dependence— to  save  Lombardy  from   what  she 
now  suffers    from  the  house   of   Austria,   and 
against  which,   in   the  last  two  years,  she  has 
freely  shed  her  blood,  headed  and" led  on  by  the 
catholic  Archbishop  of  Milan.      He  spoke"  also 
of  the  Bavarian,  Henr}-  IV,  who  secured  the  em- 
pire by  fraud,  and  sought  to  do  what  his  great- 
er predecessor  failed  in  doing,  the  subjugation 
of  the   Lombard  states;  and   failed,    because   a 
Pope,  who  loved  liberty,  headed  the  armies  of 
independence,  and  at  the  battle  of  Alessandria, 
beat  him  and  took  him,  and  restored  him  to  his 
I  empire  on  condition  he  would  not  further  molest 
;  the  Lombards.     By  this,  the  Pope,  in   his   tem- 
1  poral   domain,    profitted    nothing  ;  the  people 
j  gained  much,  and  the  world  learned  a  sense  of 
:  right;  and  yet  the  gentleman   urges  this  act  of 
!  the  Pope  as  a  violation  of  his  pastoral  duty. 
j      Sir,  since  Christianity  began,  from   Peter,  first 
j  Pope,  to  the  present,  they  have  been  friends   of 
I  rational  liberty.     They  have  not  been  agrarian 
i — they  have  not  been   eutopiaii;  but  they  have 
looked  to  the  substantial  blessings  which   each 
scheme  of  liberty  promised.      Catholics  do  not 
deny  but  that  there  have  been  a  few  bad  Popes ; 
men  who,  though  vested  with  the  tiara,   have 
looked  alone  to  the  influence  of  temporal  power. 
Of  this   number    is   Alexander  VI,  one  of  the 
Borgias.     But  I  defy  the  gentleman,  or  any  one 
else,  to  point  to  one  change  in   doctrine  during 
their  reigns — one    variation   from   the    ancient 
faith,  wliich  was  promulgated  from  the  time 
Christianity  had  birtli  in  the  east.      The  gentle- 
man says  it  is  a  gigantic  structure.     True,  sir; 


1038 


baptised  in  the  tears  and  blood  of  a  God,  in 
Gc'thsemine,  and  on  Calvary,  it  opens  its  mater- 
nal arms  to  receive  into  its  sanctuary  all  people, 
all  kindred,  and  all  races.  It  says  to  the  protes- 
tant,  if  you  act  up  to  the  lights  before  you,  and 
discharge  all  tlie  duties,  faithfully,  of  your  civil 
and  religious  station,  you  Avill  reap  the  reward 
accordingly.  It  says  the  same  to  the  heathen. 
It  spreads  wide  the  portals  of  heaven  to  all  who 
diligently  seek  the  truth,  and  secure  it,  or  fail — 
for  its  fundumental  principle  is,  that  God  is  just. 
The  gentleman  says  we  owe  civil  and  reli- 
gious obedience  to  the  Pope.  Sir,  I  doubt  not 
he  believes  so;  but  I  know  the  reverse.  I  am  a 
catholic  in  faith.  I  Avould  die  before  I  would 
yield  it — like  most  Irishmen  I  am  better  prepar- 
ed to  die  for  it,  than  to  live  for  it — but  1  know 
what  the  faith  is,  for  I  have  been  reared  a  catho- 
lic by  an  educated  Irishman — my  fatlier — a  man 
who  understood  his  faith,  who  taught  it  to  his 
children  without  constraint,  and  who  left  them 
free  to  choose  among  the  six  hundred  and  sixty- 
six  faiths  that  now  exist  in  the  world.  He  did 
not  say  to  me,  be  a  catholic;  but  told  me  to  read, 
not  alone  histories,  of  which  he  had  many,  cath- 
olic and  protestant,  but  the  dogmas  of  the 
churches,  to  acquaint  myself  thoroughly  with 
their  arcana,  and  not  to  stick  in  the  bark.  I 
think  I  have  done  so.  He  has  gone  to  receive 
the  reward  of  a  life  spent  in  the  service  of  his 
adopted  country,  and  the  maintenance  of  the 
faith,  while  I,  of  his  sons,  stand  alone;  but  the 

Erinciples  of  right  and  wrong,  I  learned  under 
im,  shall  never  leave  me,  and  his  memory  shall 
be  as  a  pole  star  to  me  through  the  wanderings 
and  cares  of  this  life. 

It  will  be  recollected  by  this  body  that  in 
1828,  Daniel  O'Connell  was  elected  to'  the  Brit- 
ish parliament  from  the  county  of  Clare.  Sir 
Vesey  Fitzgerald  contested  his  election,  and 
■when  O'Connel  was  required  to  swear  that  cath- 
olicity, taught  rebellion,  and  disorder,  and  sedi- 
tion, he  refused  the  vile  oath.  What  was  the 
result?  Though  one  of  the  greatest  lawyers  of 
the  world,  he  was  ejected  from  parliament,  and 
a  new  writ  of  election  was  issued.  He  offered 
again;  was  again  elected,  and  the  house  of  com- 
mons, fearing  the  people,  caused  a  committee  to 
be  raised,  and  directed  them  to  enquire  of  the 
catholic  college  of  Maynooth,  in  Ireland;  the 
the  college  of  Louvain,  in  Belgium;  of  Bologna, 
in  Italy,  and  the  college  of  Cologne,  in  Prussia, 
and  I  think  the  Propaganda  of  Rome,  if  the 
catholics  owed  civil  or  temporal  allegiance 
to  the  Pope;  and  they  all  answered  no.  Dr. 
Doyle,  one  of  the  most  distinguished  catholic 
theologians  who  ever  lived,  asserted  the  same; 
and  further,  that  such  a  doctrine  had  never  ex- 
isted in  the  church.  And  yet,  the  gentleman, 
on  tlie  authority  of  Elliott,  an  American,  asserts 
the  reverse.  As  did  the  senior  gentleman,  of 
Louisville,  I  would  advise  him  to  read  more,  and 
to  feel  that  the  same  God  made  us  all.  I  claim 
nothing,  as  a  catholic,  from  him,  which  I  do  not 
fully  and  freely  accord  to  him  as  a  protestant. 
In  the  language  of  the  song  of  the  pilgrim  fa- 
thers— 

"I  leave  untouched  what  here  I  found, 
FreeJora  to  worship  God." 

What  matters  it  to  me  if  the  gentleman  be  a  So- 
cialist, a  Fourierite,  or  a  Moslem,  il',  in  the  ex- 


I  ercise  of  his  civil  duties,  he  be  a  good  citizen? 
Nothing.  What  if,  as  the  Pariah  on  bended 
knee  at  sunrise  and  sunset,  he  worships  the  eter- 
nal fire  which  he  dreams  to  be  a  GodV  Nothing. 
j  What  sir,  if  at  the  call  of  the  Muezzium,  on  the 
rising  of  the  sun  and  the  going  down  thereof, 
he  shout  aloud,  with  his  face  towards  Mecca, 
I  "there  is  no  God  but  God,  and  Mahomet  is  his 
prophet?"  Nothing.  Sir,  we  here  are  all  equals. 
The  aegis  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  is  over 
us  all.  While  ever  one  star  of  the  proud  galaxy, 
which  has  lighted  American  valor  to  victory, 
remains  undimued — while  ever  a  stripe  remains 
untarnished  on  our  national  colors,  the  great 
truth  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  will  remain 
enthroned  in  the  hearts  of  the  people,  though 
demagogues  may  endeavor  to  destroy  its  effica- 
cy- 

Who  was  General  Jackson — to  name  whom  is 
enough  to  excite  the  liveliest  emotions  of  the 
Amercan  heart?  The  son  of  an  Irishman.  Who 
was  Richard  Montgomery,  who  watered  one  of 
the  earliest  fields  of  the  revolutionary  struggle 
with  his  blood,  and  offered  up  his  life  as  a  sac- 
rifice to  his  adopted  countrymen?  He,  too,  was 
an  Irishman.  Who  was  the  Baron  Steuben?  An 
exiled  Prussian,  who  sought  a  home  in  the  wil- 
derness, and  fought  for  its  liberties.  Who  was 
De  Kalb?  A  Prussian  also,  who  upon  the  plains 
of  Camden  gave  out  his  life  for  us  all,  as  freely 
as  if  it  were  for  the  liberties  of  his  own  loved 
home.  And  who,  sir,  was  La  Fayette?  A  French 
marquis,  with  wealth,  with  hereditary  renown, 
with  every  earthly  enjoyment.  He  gave  them 
all  up  to  make  our  country  free.  Go  to  every 
battle  field,  from  Lexington  to  Monmouth,  dur- 
ing the  war  of  the  revolution,  and  if  the  mute 
earth  could  speak,  she  would  tell  you  how  en- 
riched her  broad  bosom  had  been  with  the  life- 
blood  of  the  poor  foreigner,  shed  for  the  sacred 
cause  of  human  liberty.  Go,  sir,  to  the  fields 
of  battle  of  the  last  war — beginning  at  Tippe- 
canoe, where  the  most  eloquent  man  the  west 
ever  saw,  (I  mean  Jo.  Daviess,)  fell  at  tlie  head 
of  his  gallant  blues,  and  pursue  the  history  of 
that  struggle  through  the  bloody  Raisin,  where 
the  great  and  gallant  Allen  perished — Bridge- 
water,  Queenstowu,  Chippewa,  to  Orleans — and 
you  will  find  that  wherever  a  native  born  Amer- 
can.fell,  an  adopted  citizen  died  beside  him. 
There  is  no  period  in  the  history  of  this  great  na- 
tion, which  is  not  pregnant  with  examples  of  pa- 
triotism displayed  by  the  foreigner. 

Who  was  Charles  Carroll,  of  Carrollton — he 
who  signed  the  declaration  of  independence,  and 
pledged,  witli  John  Adams,  Tliomas  Jefferson, 
and  the  other  immortal  men  who  affixed  their 
names  to  that  in.strument,  their  "lives,  their  for- 
tunes, and  their  sacred  honor,"  for  the  redemp- 
tion of  an  oppressed  land?  He  was  a  catholic. 
And  I  would  ask,  also,  who  was  John  Carroll, 
who  under  the  recommendation  of  Gen.  Wash- 
ington, was  appointed  by  the  continental  con- 
gress to  a  mission  among  the  Canadians,  to  per- 
suade them  to  join  with  our  country  in  the 
struggle  for  freedom ;and  who  fufiUed  that  mis- 
sion in  such  a  manner  as  to  command  the  unani- 
mous thanks  of  congress?  He  too  was  a  cath- 
olic, and  the  first  Ardibishop  of  Baltimore. 

Sir,  I  will  go  further,  I  will  ask  the  gentleman 
what  WHS  the  faith  of  Christopher  Columbus — 


103V 


the  Genoese— who,  under  the  auspices  of  Ferdi- 
nand and  Isabella,  the  sovereigns  of  Spain,  cast 
himself  upon  a  trackless  ocean,  and  discovered 
a  western  land,  as  a  refuge  to  the  oppressed, 
both  protestant  and  catholic?    He  was  a  catholic. 
And  who,  sir,  was  Sebastian  Cabot?    He,  it  is 
true,  sailed    under  the    flag  of   then   catholic 
England,   but  he  was   a  catholic.     And  from 
whom  is  the  name  of  the  western  hemisphere —  I 
North  and  South  America — derived?  From  Amer- 1 
icus  Vespucius,  an  Italian,  and  a  catholic.    Do  j 
these  things  argue  nothing?    If  catholic  science, , 
catholic  zeal,  catholic  mind,  have  done  so  much  | 
for  mankind,  are  catholics  to  be  proscribed — are 
thev  to  be  assailed  as  felons  to  the  spirit  of  civil  j 
ana  religious  liberty?     Sir,  it  is  unjust — a  vio- 
lation of  the  truth  of  history — and,  to  "vindi- 
cate that  truth,"  I  have  made  this  effort. 

The  gentleman  has  said  that  there  was  an  af- 
filiation among  the  catholics;  that  the  priests 
control  the  multitude,  and  that  a  nod  was  only  i 
necessary  from  the  priest  to  make  the  laymen  | 
obev  his  will.  Sir,  I  will  use  a  mild  term,  the  I 
gentleman  is  mistaken.  I  am  a  catholic,  and  | 
run  this  year  against  a  distinguished  and  chival-  ] 
rous  gentleman,  who  was  a  protestant,  and  the  I 
catholics  were  my  most  decided  opponents.  I 
Some  of  them,  it  is  true,  vot«d  for  me;  but  the  I 
mass,  who  were  whigs,  voted  for  my  adversary.  I 
The  mass  of  the  catholics  of  Kentucky  are ' 
whigs,  which  proves  that  the  gentleman  calcula-  j 
ted  without  his  host,  when  he  said  "he  would  [ 
like  them  better  if  they  differed  more  in  national 
politics." 

It  has  been  my  interest,  as  well  as  my  desire, 
to  look  into  the  discordancies  of  faith.  I  have 
read  on  both  sides.  I  have  read  with  charity, 
and  while  I  have  always  respected  the  opinions 
of  my  protestant  friends,  I  have  never  sought  to 
enforce  mine  upon  them.  To  the  full,  I  have 
ever  recognized  the  true  spirit  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  which  guarantees  free- 
dom of  religious  worship;  and  in  my  county  I 
number  no  truer  friends  than  the  Presbyterian, 
the  Methodist,  the  Baptist,  the  Reformer,  and 
the  various  protestant  religionists.  But,  sir,  it  | 
seems  to  me,  that  a  theological  discussion  be- 
tween the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  and  myself 
is  like  a  discussion  on  points  of  faith  between  j 
Belial  and  Azrael.  Neither  of  us,  I  presume,  is  | 
a  member  of  a  church.  I  am  not.  He  may  be 
however.  I  have  defended  the  faith  of  my  an- 
cestors. I  have  no  ambition  in  this.  I  feel  that 
the  catholic  has  as  many  liberties  under  the  con- 
stitution and  laws  of  this  Union,  and  of  Ken- 
tucky, as  the  protestant.  and  no  more.  What 
will  be  the  effect  of  Native  American  principles? 
John  Mitchell,  and  Smith  O'Brien,  protestants; 
Thos.  F.  Meagher,  Patrick  O'Donoho,  and  Bel- 
lew  McManus,  catholics,  who  fought  for  the  lib- 
erty of  Ireland,  will  be  ostracised  by  it.  Does 
the  gentleman  wish  such  a  consummation  as 
this?  I  believe  he  does;  and  I  grieve  to  think 
so.  1  would  welcome  with  as  much  warmth  to 
tliese  shores  Dembinski,  the  protestant,  as  Kos- 
suth, Klapka,  or  Guion,  the  catholic.  As  a 
catholic,  I  know  no  shade  of  opinion,  so  that 
all,  politically,  love  libertv,  and  hate  oppression. 

The  gentleman  has  spofeen  of  the  St.  Leopold 
society,  and  he  has  talted  largely  of  what  the 
emperor  Francis  II  said  in  regard  to  the  conver- 


sion of  AmeHca  to  Catholicism.  That,  to  me, 
sir,  is  an  old  tale.  I  saw  it  when  I  was  a  boy, 
in  the  paper  published  at  Albany,  New  York,  by 
seventy-two  parsons,  araon^  whom  was  one  of 
my  own  cousins — Stephen  ZS .  Rowan.  Upon  it 
they  rung  the  charges  for  years,  until  the  truth 
leaked  out,  and  it  was  discovered  that  this  so- 
ciety was  formed  to  relieve  the  poor  catholic  of 
America  from  the  charge  of  maintaining  his 
bishop  and  his  curate.  This  is  an  awful  bug- 
bear. Yet,  we  find  every  day,  men  who  are  beg- 
f;ing  for  the  heathen — and  we  give  to  them  free- 
y — and  I,  as  a  catholic,  say  it — I  have  given 
more  to  support  protestant  churches,  than  Thave 
given  to  catholic  ones.  My  means  are  small, 
but  I  have  never  yet  turned  a  deaf  ear  to  the 
voice  which  sought  alms;  for  my  church  has  ever 
taught  me  to  beware,  lest  in  refusing  charity,  I 
turned  an  angel  from  my  door. 

This,  sir,  is  the  spirit  in  which  I  have  replied 
to  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  He  knows  not 
my  faith — he  feels  not  my  spirit — and,  though 
he  mi»ht  malign  me,  were  I  a  political  catholic, 
I  would  yet  ask  him  to  be  redeemed.  Does  he 
know  our  faith?  He  does  not.  He  says  we  keep 
no  faith  with  heretics.  I  will,  in  refutation  of 
that,  keep  faith  with  him.  He  seemed  to  assume 
for  himself  the  place  of  heretic.  I  did  not  place 
him  there.  I  measure  not  God's  mere  v.  He  is 
omnipotent,  omnipresent,  and  omniscient;  and 
when  we  meet,  as  surely  we  shall,  at  the  bar  of 
the  Great  Judge,  to  that  time  will  I  defer  the  final 
settlement  of  our  difficulties. 

Sir,  the  gentleman  has  spoken  of  the  legion  of 
St.  Patrick,  in  Mexico.  It  was  composed  of 
something  near  two  hundred  men — thirty-six  of 
whom  were  Irishmen,  ten  Germans,  two  French- 
men, and  one  Englishman — (I  refer,  sir,  to  the 
letters  of  Lieut.  Denman,  of  the  U  S.  army, 
and  Lieut.  Cantwell,  who  fell  at  the  Guata,  a 
gallant  son  of  the  palmetto  state.)  Who  were 
the  remainder?  Native  born  Americans,  I  blush 
to  own  it. 

The  gentleman  from  Bourbon  says  that  native 
catholics  entertain  different  opinions  from  the  for- 
eigner. In  this  he  is  mistaken.  We  all  hold  the 
same  ideas.  It  matters  not  whether  the  catholic 
vegetates  in  the  cold  north;  lives  a  life  of  ease  in 
the  temperate  zones,  or  suffers  under  the  tropics, 
his  religion  is  the  same.  Its  substance — its  out- 
ward form — everything  pertaining  to  it,  is  the 
same— one  and  indivisible.  It  looks  to  (Jod  for 
its  author,  and  to  man  for  the  fruition  of  its 
blessings. 

The  gentleman  has  spoken  much  of  the  in- 
crease of  the  foreign  population.  He  has  count- 
ed every  soul  who  arrived  upon  these  shores,  and 
allowed;  nothing  for  the  ravages  of  death,  nor  for 
re-migration.  If  he  will  examine,  carefully,  the 
returns  of  the  alms-houses,  and  other  public 
charities,  he  will  find  that  death  destroys  at 
least  ten  per  cent,  of  the  immigrants,  while  ro- 
migration  takes  oft"  at  least  ten  per  cent.  more. 
I  know  it  is  said  that  the  vast  majority  of  the 
immigrants  are  paupers;  but  I  have  looked  into 
this  thing  from  1828  up  to  the  present,  and  I  af- 
firm that  the  returns  to  tlie  British  parliament, 
show  that  each  Irishman  brings  with  him  an  av- 
erage of  £10,  or  $50.  Two  years  ago  this  mat- 
ter was  caused  to  be  investigated  by  Harvie,  a 
merchant  of  New  York,  a  man  of  wealth  and 


1040 


reputation,  and  a  protestant;  and  what  I  hare 
stated  above  is  the  result  often  years' experience. 
What  has  tended,  sir,  more  tlian  anything  else, 
to  keep  up  a  wholesome  condition  in  the  mone- 
tary affairs  of  this  government — I  mean  the  spe- 
cieV  I  answer  immigration.  It  has  brought  the 
gold  and  silver  of  the  old  world  to  the  new. 

The  gentleman  has  also  alluded  to  Orestes  A. 
Brownson,  who,  after  being  a  member  of  almost 
all  other  churches,  became  a  catholic.  He  has  talk- 
ed largely  of  what  Brownson  has  said.  I  answer,  as 
a  catholic,  I  believe  as  much  of  Brownson  as  I 
please.  Bishop  Hughes  recommended  him,  as  a 
catholic,  and  a  man  of  very  great  genius;  and 
these  he  certainly  is;  and  no  more.  Brownson 
is  a  layman.  No  catholic  is  bound  to  yield  obe- 
dience to  him. 

He  also  alluded  to  the  Freeman's  Journal,  pub- 
lished in  New  York,  and  charged  Bishop  Hughes 
with  being  its  editor.  I  say  he  is  not.  Eugene 
Casserly  andMcMaster,  the  former  an  Irishman, 
and  the  latter  a  native  born  American,  are  the 
true  editors,  and  Bishop  Hughes  has  no  control 
over  the  paper  whatever;  and  is  not  any  more 
responsible  for  its  editorials  than  I  am.  These 
editors  are  both  young  men — wild  and  fiery — 
with  the  blood  of  the  Celt,  they  feel  its  flow — 
and  if  at  times  they  yield  to  it,  and  speak  wild- 
ly, is  the  church  to  be  made  liable  for  it. 

Sir,  in  the  broadest  terms,  I,  a  catholic,  assert, 
that  the  church,  whose  faith  I  profess,  but  of 
which  I  am  not  a  member,  loves  liberty,  and 
hates  oppression;  that  she  teaches  perfect  faith 
with  all  people,  and  despises  and  contemns  the 
doctrine  of  temporal  allegiance  to  the  Pope, 
save  in  the  Papal  territories. 

The  gentleman  has  read  Hallam's  Middle 
Ages.  He  certainly  is  good  authority  with  him. 
If  he  has  read  and  studied  him,  as  that  great 
author  deserves,  he  will  yet  feel  that  his  speech 
of  Saturday  was  a  libel  on  the  catholic  faith. 

Does  the  gentleman  know  who  invented  print- 
ing? He  does,  doublets.  A  German  monk,  in 
the  reign  of  Richard  III.  Who  invented  gun- 
powder? A  German  monk,  in  the  reign  of  Hen- 
ry IV.  And  though  it  is  asserted  that  Catholi- 
cism forbids  the  bible  to  her  people,  the  catholic 
press  has  published  two  thirds  more  of  that  holy 
book  than  the  protestant.  But,  sir,  I  would  not 
be  understood  as  maligning  the  protestants. 
They  have  published  many  editions  of  the  scrip- 
tures, and  have  displayed  a  very  great  zeal  in 
spreading  its  tidings  among  men.  Tliough  op- 
posed to  them  in  faith,  I  see,  and  admire  the 
spirit  of  love,  which  animates  them  in  the  strug- 
gle for  dominion  over  the  human  heart. 

The  gentleman  has  thouglit  proper,  perhaps  to 
be  fashionable,  to  attack  the  Jesuits.  Who  are 
they?  Priests  set  apart,  by  the  ordinances  of 
their  order,  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen; 
for  encountering  the  pestilence  in  the  hovels  of 
the  poor,  and  for  the  education  of  the  masses.  I 
know  there  exists  a  wide  spread  prejudice 
against  them,  even  in  catholic  Europe.  1  know 
that  the  order  was  suppressed  by  the  Pope  Gan- 
ganelli  Clement  XIV ;  but  I  will  tell  you  why 
the  clamors  of  the  kings  and  princeH,  who  gov- 
erned Europe,  were  such  tliat  this  good  old  man 
had  to  give  way  to  them.  Tlie  real  cause  why 
they  becanut  obnoxious  to  kings  and  princes, 
aro.se  fro  n  the  fact  that  they  taught  the  Uoctriue 


of  the  Carmelite  Friar  of  Spain,  "that  all  power 
was  inherent  in  the  people,  and  that  they  liad 
a  right  to  bring  their  rulers  to  punishment,  even 
to  that  of  death."  Out  of  tnis  doctrine  has 
grown  their  unpopularity.  As  a  man,  I  say  there 
IS  nothing  in  their  canons  or  tlieir  statutes  inim- 
ical to  civil  and  religious  liberty. 

I  have  asserted  that  catholics  owe  no  tempo- 
ral allegiance  to  the  Pope,  and  in  proof  of  this, 
I  refer  to  Charles  Butler's  book  of  the  catholic 
church,  287  to  289;  and,  as  the  gentleman  is  a 
lawyer,  to  the  oath  of  allegiance  required  by  the 
Engli-sh  statutes  of  English  catholics.  This 
oath,  sir,  was  not  refused  by  Mr.  O'Connell, 
when,  though  elected  by  a  most  triumphant  ma- 
jority, he  was  stopped  at  the  bar  of  the  house  of 
commons.  I  would,  also,  refer  to  the  published 
opinions  of  all  the  catholie  universities  of  Eu- 
rope. 

The  gentleman  has  referred  to  the  writings  of 
Cardinal  Bellarmine.  He  was  a  great  man,  and 
whenever  he  treats  of  matters  of  faith,  I  accord 
him  as  much  credence  as  to  any  learned  and 
plus  writer  of  the  church;  but  his  political  opin- 
ions never  were  endorsed  by  catholics.  If  the 
gentleman  will  read  the  controversy  of  Hughes 
and  Breckinridge — and  Pope  and  McGuire,  or 
Campbell  and  Purcell,  he  will  be  set  right  on 
this  subject. 

Why,  the  gentleman's  ideas,  as  expressed  in 
this  body  in  regard  to  reform,  might,  with  as 
much  propriety,  be  quoted  hereafter  against  his 
party,  (which,  as  a  part}',  has  labored  faithfully 
to  correct  and  purify  the  government  of  our  state,) 
as  the  political  opinions  of  catholic  writers 
against  the  chvirch.  with  whose  faith  those  opin- 
ions have  no  connection.  Would  I  do  so,  I  could 
recriminate;  but  that  I  will  never  do.  Abiding 
in  the  purity,  the  integrity,  the  heaven  born 
character  of  my  faith.  I  will  rely  upon  its  merits, 
and  will  never  assail  adversary  churches,  be- 
cause some  of  their  members  hold  opinions 
which  politically  do  not  square  with  mine.  He 
has  cilso  quoted  "from  the  writings  of  Antoninus, 
Archbishop  of  Florence,  to  prove  that  the  cath- 
olic owes  civil  allegiance  to  the  Pope.  Sir,  I 
again  affirm,  that  as  a  catholic,  I,  nor  any  other 
man  who  understands  the  faith,  is  bound  by  the 
said  archbishop's  opinion.  On  this  point,  and 
in  reply  to  all  the  stale  and  oft  refuted  calumnies 
which  the  gentleman  has  extracted  from  "El- 
liott's Romanism,"  and  "Dowling's  Romanism," 
I  would  refer  him  to  Butler's  book  of  the  catho- 
lic church;  the  controversies  above  cited,  and 
the  works  of  the  late  distinguished  bishop  of 
Charleston,  the  Rt.  Rev.  John  England. 

He  will  also  find  in  the  above  authorities, 
ample,  full,  and  irresistible  proofs,  to  an  un- 
prejudiced mind,  that  the  faith  of  the  catholic  is 
fiure,  strictly  consistent  with  civil  and  religious 
iberty — the  duties  of  the  citizen  or  subject,  and 
that  it  teaches  perfect  faith  with  all  men,  as  we 
hope  to  be  saved.  He  has  said  the  catliolic 
church  withholds  the  bible  from  the  laiety.  If 
he  will  go  back  to  those  ages,  mis-called  dark, 
when  the  monk  toiled  for  years  in  transcribing 
the  word  of  God,  that  tlie  people  might  liave  its 
light — if  he  will  only  examine  D'lsraeli's  Curi- 
osities of  Literature — if  he  will  read  attentively 
D'Aubigue  reviewed  by  the  present  coadjutor 
bisliop  of  Louisville,  he  will  find  that  before- 


1041 


the  days  of  Lntlier,  there  was  scarcely  a  coun- 
try in  which  the  bible  had  not  been  published 
in' the  vernacular.  The  light  of  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures never  was  denied  by  the  church  to  her  peo- 
ple. She,  on  the  contrary,  commanded  it  to  be 
read — to  be  read  with  prayer. 

Sir,  who  determined  the  canonicity  of  the 
bible?  The  catholic  church.  Who  preserved  it 
through  long  ages  of  most  cruel  oppression,  in- 
flicted by  the  pagan?  The  catholic  church. 
"Who  beat  back  tlie  fierce  Saracen,  when  he 
swept  like  a  flood  from  Western  Asia,  and 
threatened  to  visit  Europe  with  worse  desolation 
than  that  which  followed  in  the  footsteps  of  the 
Hun  and  the  Vandal?  Catholic  Poland,  head- 
ed by  her  glorious  Sobieske,  and  Catholic  Hun- 
gary. To  preserve  in  tact  the  faith  bequeathed 
from  the  cross,  her  capacious  bosom  has  bled 
for  ages. 

"  Time,  war,  flood  and  fire. 

Have  dealt  ruin  upon  the  seven  hilled  city." 

The  dominions  of  the  pagan  has  passed  away. 
The  splendour  of  the  empire  lives  only  in  his- 
tory. The  tread  of  the  legion  is  no  longer 
heard.  The  eagle  has  stooped  from  his  proud 
eyrie,  and  yet  the  church  lives — bright,  vigorous, 
young — eighteen  hundred  years  old;  but  her 
step  is  as  elastic  as  if  her  patent  was  still  wet 
with  the  blood  of  Calvarj'. 

Who  christianized  the  world?  The  gentle- 
man can't  deny  the  fact — the  catholic  church. 
Who  traversed  the  wild  steeps  of  Tartary — 
crossed  the  trackless  and  burning  deserts — en- 
countered the  Bedouin,  the  Turcoman,  the  Bash- 
kier,  and  the  Tartar,  to  spread  the  blessings  of 
the  gospel?  The  catholic  priest — the  calumni- 
ated, and  reviled.  Who  first  taught  the  Chinese 
the  truth  of  Christ's  mission?  The  slandered 
Jesuits.  Why,  sir,  without  the  efforts  of  the 
priesthood — a  knowledge  of  the  earth — her  in- 
stitutions and  her  people,  would  be  a  sealed 
book  even  to  my  learned  adversary.  He  is  deep- 
ly read,  and  yet  he  strikes  at  the  liand  that 
brought  food  and  raiment  to  his  own  mind. 

He  has  charged  us  with  having  a  different 
faith  in  different  nations.  Let  him  read  the 
fathers  of  the  church — let  him  read  Tertullian, 
St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Cyril,  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Au- 
gustine, and  the  eloquent  and  beautiful  Lactan- 
tius.  Yea.  sir,  the  works  of  the  founder  of  the 
society  of  Jesus,  a  Spaniard;  Drs.  Lingard  and 
Wiseman,  who  are  Englishmen;  Bourdaloe, 
Fenelon,  and  Bassuet,  Frenchmen;  Moehler,  a 
German;  England,  Doyle,  and  McGuire,  Irish- 
men;) Hughes,  Purcell,  and  Spaldino;,  of  Ameri 
ca;  and  his  own  candor  will  compel  him  to  ad- 
mit that  he  has  wronged  us. 

The  gentleman  has  enlarged  upon  indulgen- 
ces. Sir,  he  does  not  understand  this  doctrine. 
He  has  vilified  the  church  by  asserting  that  it 
was  a  license  to  commit  sin.  There  is  not  now 
and  never  was  such  a  doctrine.  And  I  am  sorry 
that  a  distinguished  Kentucky  lawyer  has  de- 
tracted from  the  prestige  of  the  profession,  by 
discovering  a  culpable  ignorance  of  the  doc- 
trines of  the  oldest  church  of  the  world.  In- 
dulgences never  were  granted  to  authorise  sin. 
They  are  a  remission  of  temporal  penalties,  or 
penances.  And  if  the  gentleman  were  a  catho- 
fic,  and  had  assailed  the  faith  of  tlie  great  pro- 
131 


testant  commnnity  with  the  malignancy,  with 
which  he,  a  protestant.  has  attacked  the  faith  of 
the  catholic,  his  confessor  would  give  him 
such  a  practical  illustration  of  the  doctrine  of 
penance  that  he!  even  he  might  feel  that  an  in- 
dulgence would  be  valuable. 

He  asserted,  also,  that  the  priest  professed,  of 
his  own  authority,  to  forgive  sin,  past,  present, 
and  future.  Such  never  was  the  doctrine  of  the 
church ;  and  he  will  pardon  me,  when  I  say,  that 
the  charge  is  the  result  of  a  distempered  Imagi- 
nation— the  mere  fiction  of  a  brain,  which  has 
trifled  with  itself,  until  'tis  mad.  The  church 
has  ever  taught  that  confession  was  neces- 
saiy,  because  Christ  commanded  it;  that  the 
priest  interposed  as  the  agent  of  God;  and  that 
to  the  remission  of  sin,  contrition,  a  resolte  to  re- 
form, and  restitution,  (a  doctrine  in  which  the 
gentleman  don't  believe,)  were  absolute  prere- 
quisites. And  yet,  sir,  with  a  spirit  which 
would  far  better'have  become  Exeter  Hall,  with 
its  fanatic  rabble,  led  by  the  right  reverend  John 
Philpots,  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon  has  con- 
verted this  hall  (consecrated  to  the  defence  of 
civil  and  religious  liberty,)  into  an  arena  for  po- 
lemical controversy.  If  he  will  pardon  me,  I 
would  suggest  to  him,  in  all  candor,  and  charity, 
the  reading  of  Milner's  End  of  Religious  Contro- 
j  versy,  and  Challoner's  Meditations.  In  the  one 
I  he  would  meet  a  doctrinal  disputant,  an  over- 
match for  himself,  wliile  in  the  other  he  would 
encounter  the  balm  of  Gilead — charity — brother- 
ly love — gentleness — every  attribute  of  Christi- 
anity. 

He  has  praised  some  of  the  Popes — Leo  the 
lOth,  for  his  literature;  Adrain  the  2d,  for  his 
spirit;  Gregory  the  Great,  for  that  pervading 
genius,  which  was  felt  so  deeply  in  his  own 
times,  and  which,  like  the  voiceless  but  deep 
current  of  a  great  river,  sweeps  on  through  au 
ages,  resistless  and  calm.  His,  sir,  was  the  sub- 
timation  of  genius.  In  the  language  of  Grattan, 
applied  to  the  great  Chatham,  "he  sDuck  a  blow 
in  the  Avorld  which  resounded  through  the  uni- 
verse." There  is  something  mysterious  in  the 
inspiration  of  those  great  men,  -who,  in  violation 
of  a  world's  k-arning,  committed  themselves  with 
the  Palinurus  to  the  tempest-tossed  deep,  and 
discovered  new  worlds.  The  catholic  Portu- 
guese, headed  by  the  great  Alberquerque,  braved 
the  storms  of  tlie  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  and  flung 
his  little  argosy  on  the  billow-washed  shore  of 
southern  Africa.  Tc  him — ^yes,  sir — to  him  the 
world  owes  the  .spi,;es  of  the  Moluccas,  and  the 
"odors  of  Araby  the  blessed."  And  who  was  it 
first  trusted  the  irail  barque  to  the  iron-bound 
shore  of  Patagonia,  on  whose  relentless  bosom 
the  wailing  tempests  never  cease  to  play — Ma- 
gellan— ano.'her  catholic,  who  died  for  science  on 
the  shores  jf  Terra  del  Fuego. 

Sir,  who  discovered  the  mariner's  compass — 
the  voic-4ess,  but  unerring  spirit  which  in  every 
clime  points  to  the  pole,  and  shows  to  the  wan- 
derer on  the  heaving  ocean  the  pathway  to  his 
homi — though  upon  her  broad  bosom  earth's 
teeming  millions  never  yet  have  left  a  trace?  A 
catholic  and  an  Italian. 

I  a.ssert,  sir,  science  owes  more — genius  owes 
more  to  Catholicism,  than  to  all  the  world  be- 
side. She  walked  with  the  Saviour  in  Judea 
and  Gallilec;  she  agonized  with  him  in  Geth- 


1042 


sstnine,  and  she  sprang  full  fledged  into  vigor, 
when,  with  his  expiring  breath  ou  Calvary,  he 
commissioned  her  to  save. 

The  gentleman  has  boasted  of  his  Anglo  Sax- 
onism.  I  do  not  know  how  it  is.  Whether  he 
was  a  descendant  of  the  heavy  Dutchman  of  the 
ZuyderZee,  or  of  the  imflamable  and  mercurial 
Irishman,  depends  on  the  spelling  of  his  name — 
whether  his  ancestors  were  a  part  of  the  hoards 
who  followed  Schomberg,  or  were  of  the  old 
stock  who  bared  the  bosom  to  the  foeman  of 
Beuburb,  the  Boyne,  Aughrim,  Limerick,  and 
Londonderry,  I  will  not  attempt  to  determine. 
My  name  bespeaks  my  lineage.  I  am  an  ancient 
Irishman — Milisian — Celt.  No  Saxon  blood  dis- 
turbs the  current  which  flows  through  my  heart. 
'Tis  true,  there  are  many  of  Saxon  lineage  in 
English  history  whom  1  reverence;  the  great 
catholic  Alfred  who  secured  to  you  and  me,  sir, 
trial  by  jury;  and  Mary,  ycleped  the  bloody,  Celt 
and  Saxon,  who  first  of  England's  sovereigns, 
guarantied  to  the  criminal  the  right  to  be  heard 
by  his  counsel.     Yet,  this  is  nothing. 

In  conclusion,  I  will  call  the  gentleman's  at- 
tention to  the  speech  delivered  by  the  "forest 
born  Demosthenes" — Henry  Clay — in  the  market 
house  in  Lexington,  during  the  Mexican  war. 
What  did  he  say  of  Pins  the  IX,  the  present 
Pope?  "That  he  was  now  the  most  interesting 
person  on  the  earth." 

Sir,  I  do  not  recollect  his  words,  but  the  spirit 
of  his  speech  was,  that  Catholicism  was  not,  and 
never  had  been,  inimical  to  liberty.  I  would 
also  remind  him  of  the  rich  and  fervid  elo- 
quence of  our  present  governor,  when  the  prop- 
osition to  succor  Ireland  was  before  the  sen- 
ate of  the  United  States.  When  reading  it,  I 
felt  as  though  the  spirit  of  Grattan,  of  Flood, 
and  of  Curran,  had  taken  up  their  abode  in  his 

freat  mind,  for  he  poured  upon  the  subject  of 
reland's  wrongs  an  eloquence  such  as  has  rare- 
ly, if  ever,  been  heard  on  this  side  the  Atlantic. 
Sir,  thus  imperfectly  I  have  endeavored  to  an- 
swer the  gentleman  from  Bourbon.  According  to 
my  poor  ability  I  have  discharged  my  duty  to  my 
country,  my  religion,  and  my  God,  without  secta- 
rian feeling,  without  bigotry  and  without  any  feel- 
ing except  charity.  If  there  be  upon  the  earth's 
face  a  religion,  against  which  I  entertain  bad 
feelings,  I  know  it  not.  If  towards  the  gentle- 
man from  Bourbon,  who  has  assailed  my  faith 
with  such  virulence,  I  liaTc  any  bad  feeling,  I 
am  not  conscious  of  it;  and  though  unworthy 
to  offer  a  prayer,  I  ask  that  hi  may  be  forgiven 
for  the  contumely  he  has  heaped  upon  a  religion 
he  does  not  understand,  and  a  Saith,  I  fear,  he 
has  been  taught  to  hate. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  entertain  no  prejudice  against 
the  catholic  church  as  a  system  of  religious 
faith,  notwithstanding  my  total  dissenVfrom  ma- 
ny of  its  dogmas  and  doctrines.  I  fed  myself 
free  from  this  offence.  I  avow  that  I  am  no  big- 
ot, and  if  I  had  no  sins  to  answer  for  but  those 
which  I  have,  as  yet  at  least,  committed  ag&inst 
the  Roman  catholic  church,  I  should  feel  no  ap- 
prehension to  be  now  summoned  to  the  bar  of 
my  maker  and  omniscient  judge.  I  make  no  war 
against  the  religion  of  any  sect  as  a  matter  of 
faith  and  salvation — not  even  against  the  Mor- 
mons. It  is  only  in  its  political  i)hascs,  and  its 
spiritual  connections  inseparably  blended  with 


them,  that  I  attempt  any  exposure,  or  indulge  in 
any  denunciation  of  Romanism.  To  that  extent 
I  have  the  right,  and  mean  with  freedom  in  the 
spirit  of  truth,  to  animadvert  upon  it.  Its  ef- 
forts to  connect  itself  with  the  politics  of  the 
country,  and  to  control  the  measures  and  policy 
of  government,  to  imbue  them  with  the  spirit 
and  doctrines  of  its  peculiar  faith,  I  will  never 
cease  to  oppose  while  I  have  life;  because  though 
not  so  immediately  threatening,  I  deem  these 
machinations  to  be  the  most  insidious,  the  most 
potent,  and  the  most  comprehensive,  in  their 
hostility  to  our  system  of  civil  and  religious 
freedom  of  all  the  dangers  which  beset  it.  If 
that  sect  and  faith  in  which  my  parents  lived 
and  died,  and  that  other  sect  and  faith  which 
has  been  embraced  by  my  wife  and  children, 
and  to  which  I  am  most  inclined,  should  assume 
the  religious  politico  character,  and  commence 
systematic  operations  to  control  the  politics  of 
the  country,  I  would  oppose  them  with  as  firm 
a  resolution,  and  denounce  them  as  unsparing- 
ly as  I  do  Romanism  in  the  same  connection. 
■Jlie  union  of  politics  and  religion,  of  church 
and  state,  has  ever  proved  itself  to  be  one  of  the 
most  direful  curses  of  man;  and  in  every  pulsa- 
tion of  my  heart,  every  ray  of  my  reason,  every 
emotion  of  my  soul,  I  will  make  war  against 
any  religious  association  that  seeks  such  an  al- 
liance in  any  form. 

The  eloquent  gentleman  from  Louisville,  how- 
ever, (Mr.  Preston,)  has  fallen  into  one  error  in 
relation  to  "Native  Americanism."  He  exhibi- 
ted it  to  us  as  the  combination  of  the  spirits  of 
fanaticism  and  lawlessness,  committing  their 
excesses  in  outrageous  aggressions  upon  the  for- 
eigner and  the  burning  of  Roman  catholic 
churches  by  low  and  infuriated  mobs.  This 
point  is  somewhat  illustrated  by  an  occurrence 
which  first  met  my  eyes  about  two  hours  since. 
A  Roman  catholic  monk,  of  the  order  of  La 
Trappe,  has  been  traveling  and  lecturing  in  the 
state  of  Ohio,  on  Romanism  in  general,  and  ex- 
posing the  mysteries,  the  immoralties,  and  vices 
of  that  and  other  orders  of  monks.  I  read  from 
the  Louisville  Courier,  of  the  13tli  instant: 

"We  copy  the  following  telegraphic  dispatch 
from  the  Cincinnati  Commercial  of  yesterday, 
received  from  Sandusky,  Ohio: 

"Sandusky,  Dec.  12,  1849. 

"Riot  in  Sandusky. — Our  peaceful  city,  this 
evening,  about  7  o'clock,  was  the  scene  of  a  dis- 
graceful riot.  The  celebrated  Monk  of  La 
"Trappe  had  announced  a  lecture  on  Priestcraft, 
<fec.,  for  to-night.  Just  as  ho  was  entering  the 
hall,  he  was  surrounded  and  seized  by  a  band  of 
Irish  and  others,  dragged  into  the  street,  and  se- 
verely beaten  with  bludgeons.  He  was  eventu- 
ally rescued  by  the  Mayor  and  others.  One  or 
two  others  were  injured,  being  taken  for  the 
Monk.  It  is  reported  that  some  pistols  were 
fired.    No  arrests." 

As  I  have  read  the  facts,  the  native  Ameri- 
cans who  perpetrated  the  excesses  alluded  to  by 
the  gentleman  from  Louisville,  had  previously 
received  from  foreigners  similar,  but  greater  and 
more  atrocious  wrong  and  outrage  than  even  the 
monk  of  La  Trappe.  They  have  seen  daily  the 
coming  and  increasing  multitudes  of  immigrants 
to  our  country.    Many  of  tliem  laborers  and  me- 


M>48 


chanics,  have  been  crowded  out  of  their  busi- 
ness, and  their  means  of  subsistence  rendered 
precarious  bv  the  competition  of  these  strangers. 
The  wages  of  all  were  likely  to  be  seriously  af- 
fected and  reduced  from  this  cause.  The  pau- 
perism, the  vices,  the  moral  degradation  of  ma- 
ny of  the  immigrants,  and  their  criminal  inva- 
sion of  the  right  of  suffrage,  had  struck  deep 
into  the  native  mind.  Their  general,  arrogant 
and  domineering  bearing,  but  particularly  at  the 
polls;  and  the  political  management  and  schem- 
ings  of  the  Roman  catholic  priesthood,  and 
their  designs  upon  the  government  and  religion 
of  the  country,  were  daily  made  manifest  to 
these  native  Americans.  'They  united  and  or- 
ganized to  endeavor  by  peaceable  and  legal 
means  to  put  limits  upon  immigration,  and  to 
restrict  the  political  power  of  those  who  might 
come,  as  they  had  the  natural  and  constitutional 
right  to  do.  They  met  in  a  quiet  and  orderly 
manner  in  public  assemblies  to  devise  measures 
to  carry  out  their  purposes;  and  in  many  in- 
stances, while  thus  engaged,  large  mobs  of  armed 
ruffian  foreigners  would  rush  in  upon  them,  over- 
power them  with  numbers,  knock  them  down 
with  bludgeons,  stab  them  with  knives,  make  a 

feneral  melee  and  break  up  their  meetings, 
uch  I  understand  to  be  the  deep  provocation 
which  caused  the  excesses  of  the  native  Americans 
against  the  foreigners,  and  partieularlv  against 
foreign  catholics  and  their  churches.  Such  out- 
rages even  upon  the  native  Americans  do  not 
justify  the  acts  to  which  they  were  impelled. 
Those  acts  were  violent,  lawless  and  deeply 
reprehensible;  but  there  was  much,  very  much 
to  excuse  them,  and  whQe  the  honorable  gentle- 
man from  Louisville  was,  in  vehement  and  in- 
dignant strains,  denouncing  the  conduct  of  his 
own  native  bom  countrymen,  I  was  surprised, 
that  he  uttered  not  a  word  in  extenuation,  even 
in  explanation  of  what  he  was  holding  up  to 
the  unmitigated  condemnation  of  the  world.  I 
thought  he  ought  to  have  presented  both  sides 
of  the  picture,  and  in  his  glowing  language 
have  told  the  wrongs  received  as  well  as  those 
which  had  been  inflicted  by  his  countrymen. 

I  stated  distinctly,  in  my  former  speech  upon 
this  subject,  that  I  had  known  personallv,  Ro- 
man Catholics,  natives  of  Maryland,  of  Louisi- 
ana, and  of  my  own  state;  that  they  were  good 
citizens  and  excellent  people — as  truly  devoted 
to  civil  and  religious  liberty,  in  my  own  belief, 
as  I  was,  and  as  capable  of  taking  charge  of  and 
preserving  both.  To  the  gentlemen  of  that  faith 
in  this  body,  and  particularly  to  my  friends  from 
Louisvile,  (Mr.  Rudd,)  and  Union,  (Mr.  Spald- 
ing,) with  whom  I  am  best  acquainted,  and  I 
hope  they  will  allow  me  so  to  call  them,  I  take 
no  manner  of  exception.  Xo  men  here  have  a 
larger  share  of  my  esteem  and  confidence,  both 
as  men  and  citizens;  and  if  they  were  asking  of- 
fice, and  my  position  would  allow  me  to  be  of 
their  constituents,  and  their  political  sentiments 
accorded  with  mine,  as  those  of  one  of  them  do 
in  the  main,  I  would  give  them  a  hearty  and  a 
trusting  support.  Their  religious  profession 
would  never  enter  my  mind  as  an  objection  to 
them  for  office.  If  we  were  neighbors,  we  would 
not  harmonize  on  the  doctrinal  points  which 
distinguish  particular  religious  persuasions, 
and  occasionally,    on  a  political  question  or 


measure;  on  all  beside,   I  feel    assured  there 
would  be  no  discord  between  us. 

My  friend  from  Louisvile,  (Mr.  Rudd,)  says 
I  know  notliing  about  the  religious  faith  of  his 
church.  One  thing  is  certain,  from  his  speech 
on  Saturday  night,  he  and  myself  know  it  very 
differently  on  many,  and  very  essential  points. 
By  its  own  constitution  and  principles,  it  is  the 
only  true  and  infallible  church,  and  all  the  dis- 
tinctive faiths  of  the  sects  are  damnable  here- 
sies, and  those  who  adhere  to  them  doomed 
inevitably  to  hell  as  heretics.  The  Pope  is  the 
infallible  head  of  the  church,  the  surcessor  of 
St.  Peter,  holding  the  keys  of  Heaven  by  divine 
appointment,  the  vicegerent  of  God,  Lord  of  all 
the  earth,  with  all  power,  temporal  as  well  as 
spiritual,  to  declare  what  is  and  what  is  not 
scripture — to  grant  indulgences  for  sins,  to  pray 
souls  out  of  the  fires  of  purgatory,  and  his 
priests  under  him  have  the  two  latter  powers. 
The  authority  of  the  Pope,  in  spiritual  matters, 
being  direct  and  supreme,  he  regulates  all  of 
them  by  his  infallible  will ;  and  may  proscribe 
all  heresies,  and  punish  and  extirpate  all  here- 
tics, by  sword,  by  stake,  and  faggot,  by  the  in- 
quisition, its  judgments  and  racks,  or  in  such 
other  manner  as  he  may  select.  To  sustain  his 
spiritual  power  and  infallibility,  and  the  purity 
of  the  church,  the  pope,  to  those  ends,  has  a  su- 
preme indirect  power  in  all  temporal  affairs,  and 
over  all  temporal  governments.  Within  this 
scope,  he  may  put  down,  depose,  excommuni- 
cate, and  re-grant.  Is  this  the  Romanism,  the 
Catholicism  of  my  friend?  If  it  is  not,  he  is 
not  the  Romanist  of  the  papacy  in  its  days  of 
glory;  nor  is  he  the  Romamst  of  Europe  at  the 
present,  nor  the  immigrant  Romanist,  nor  the 
Romanist  which  Bishop  Hughes  and  all  the 
priesthood  of  America  would  have  him  to  be. 

I  will  proceed,  Mr.  President,  to  establish  by 
proofs,  each  constituent  of  what  I  have  here 
presented  as  the  picture  of  Romanism.  In  the 
catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent,  there  is  this 
passage:  "But  as  this  one  church,  because  gov- 
erned by  the  Holy  Ghost,  cannnoi  err  in  faith  and 
morals,  it  necessarily  follows  that  all  other  so- 
cieties arrogatinif  to  themselves  the  name  of 
church,  because  guided  by  the  spirit  of  darkness, 
are  sunk  in  the  most  pernicious  errors,  both  doc- 
trinal and  moral." 

The  Jesuits,  Canonists,  Italians,  and  others, 
maintain  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  personal- 
ly. In  the  Romanish  confession  of  faith  im- 
posed on  proselytes  to  popery  in  Hungary, 
drawn  up  by  tlie  Jesuits  in  lb28,  the  second 
article  reads:  "We  confess  and  believe  that  the 
Pope  of  Rome  is  the  head  of  the  church  and 
that  he  cannot  err."  Lewis  Capsenses  affirms: 
"We  can  beliece  nothing  if  we  do  not  believe 
with  a  divine  faith  that  the  Pop)e  is  the  successor 
of  Peter,  and  infallible."  Cardinal  BaUarmine, 
one  of  the  highest  Catholic  authorities  says: 
"But  if  the  Pope  should  should  err,  by  enjoining 
vices  or  prohibiting  virtues,  the  church,  unless  she 
should  sin  against  conscience,  would  be  bound  to  be- 
lieve vices  to  be  good,  and  virtues  evil." 

The  Romanists  claim  that  St.  Peter  was  the 
first  bishop  of  Rome,  although  there  is  no  evi- 
dence, sacred  or  profane,  that  he  ever  was  in  that 
city ;  and  that  the  Pope  is  his  successor  by  di- 
vine appointment.  Every  Pope,  in  all  his  oMciai 


1044 


acts,  so  styles  himself;  andthe  church,  its  coun- 
cils, all  its  functionaries,  so  denominate  him. 
The  creed  and  oath  of  Pius  the  IV,  made  in 
conformity  to  the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent, 
is  received  by  all  Romanists  as  undoubted  au- 
thority. The  thirteenth  article  reads :  "I  ac- 
knowledge the  holy  catholic  and  Roman  apos- 
tolic church,  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  church- 
es ;  and  I  promise  and  swear  true  obedience  to  the 
holy  bisJwp,  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  the  prince 
of  apostles  and  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ."  Article 
fifteen  reads :  "Tliis  true  catholic  faith,  out  of 
which  none  can  be  saved,  I  now  freely  profess  and 
truly  hold"  <fec. 

The  bishop's  oath  of  allegiance  is  long  but  of 
the  most  expressive  obligation.  It  was  origina- 
ted by  Gregory  VII  in  the  eleventh  century  ;  and 
in  form  and  authority  is  far  more  ancient  than 
Pius  IV.  Some  of  its  parts  run,  "I,  N.  elect 
of  the  church  of  N.  from  henceforward  will  be 
faithful  and  obedient  to  St.  Peter  the  apostle, 
and  to  the  holy  Roman  church,  and  to  our  Lord 
Gregory,  Pope  Gregory  IX,  and  to  his  success- 
ors," (fee.  "I  will  help  them  to  keep  and  defend 
tlae  Roman  papacy,  and  regalities  of  St.  Peter, 
saving  my  order,  against  all  men."  "The  rights, 
honors,  privileges  and  authority  of  the  holy  Ro- 
man church,  of  our  Lord  the  Pope,  and  his  afore- 
said successors,  I  will  endeavor  to  preserve,  de- 
fend, increase,  and  advance."  "Heretics,  schis- 
matics, and  rebels  to  our  said  Lord,  or  his  aforesaid 
successors,  I  will  to  my  utmost  persecute  and  op- 
pose." The  existence  of  the  Pope's  supreme  and 
universal  power,  in  all  matters  and  over  all  per- 
sons, is  a  claim  so  arrogant,  so  daring,  so  in- 
iquitous and  impious,  as  in  our  age  and  country 
to  appear  incredible.  But  there  is  no  truth  in 
history  better  attested,  or  that  is  blended  with  a 
greater  amount  of  human  misery  and  crime.  It 
was  first  claimed  to  that  extent  by  Gregory  II 
in  730,  and  was  fully  established  by  Gregory  VII 
in  1080,  has  been  asserted  by  all  Popes  and  Ro- 
man catholic  authorities  to  the  present  day :  and 
in  its  diabolical  and  terilic  execution  for  centur- 
ies, by  means  of  remorseless  and  exterminating 
wars  and  every  manner  of  cruel  persecutions,  it 
desolated  and  cursed  the  fairest  portions  of  the 
globe.  The  Lateran  council  under  Innocent  III; 
that  of  Lyons  under  Innocent  IV,  and  the 
Lateran  council  under  Leo  X,  have  asserted 
this  doctrine  of  the  universal  supremacy  of  the 
Pope  ;  and  the  decrees  containing  it  stand  in  the 
canon  law  and  in  their  collections  of  synods. 
The  infallible  Popes,  and  their  great  controver- 
sial autliorities,  have  often  declared  and  defined 
it  in  express  terms.  "Leo  X,  by  a  decree, 
asserted  ail  power  in  earth  and  heaven  is  given 
to  the  Pope,  ana  consequently  the  civil  power  is 
subject  to  the  papal  jurisdiction.  Another  Pope 
decrees:  "The  autnority  given  to  St.  Peter  and 
his  successors  excels  all  the  powers  of  earthly 
kings  and  princes ;  it  passes  uncontrollable  sen- 
tence upon  all."  Boniface  VIII  decreed:  "We 
declare,  say  and  pronounce  it  to  be  of  necessity 
to  salvation  for  every  human  crwituro  to  be  sub- 
ject to  the  Roman  Pontiif."  I  shall  not  multi- 
ply examples  of  the  assertion  of  this  power — 
they  exist  to  an  indefinatc  extent;  but  I 
■will  give  an  instance  or  two  of  its  execution. 
The  Province  of  Thoulou^e,  in  France,  was  one 
of  the  strong  beats  of  the  Albigenses.    In  1207,  j 


the  reigning  count,  Raimond  VI,  was  required 
by  Innocent  III  to  take  part  in  the  war  of  ex- 
termination against  his  own  subjects,  which  the 
Pope  had  ordered  Pliilip  Augustus,  king  of 
France  to  undertake  against  them.  The  Pope 
after  having  directed  the  king  to  undertake  this 
war  in  person,  further  addressed  him  :  "We  ex- 
hort you,  that  you  would  endeavor  to  destroy 
that  wicked  heresy  of  the  Albigenses,  and  to  do 
this  with,  more  vigor  than  you  would  use  towards 
the  Saracens  themselves  :  persecute  them  with  a 
strong  hand :  deprive  them  of  their  lands  and 
possessions  ;  bani.sh  them  and  put  Roman  cath- 
olics in  their  room." 

Raimond  would  not  undertake  the  butchery  of 
his  own  unoifending  people,  and  in  aletter  which 
the  Pope  wrote  to  him,  is  this  passage: 

"If  you  could  open  your  heart  we  should  find, 
and  would  point  out  to  you,  the  detestable 
abominations  that  you  have  committed;  but  as 
it  is  harder  than  the  rock,  it  is  vain  to  strike  it 
with  the  sword  of  salvation ;  we  cannot  penetrate 
it.  Pestilential  man  !  what  pride  has  seized 
your  heart,  and  what  is  your  folly  to  refuse  peace 
with  your  neighbors,  and  to  brave  the  divine 
laws  by  protecting  the  enemies  of  your  faith!" 

Peter  Castleman,  the  Pope's  legate,  sought  out 
Raimond,  reproved  him  for  his  negligence,  which 
he  termed  baseness,  denounced  him  as  perjured, 
as  a  favorer  of  tyrants  and  heretics,  and  excom- 
municated him.  The  legate  met  with  a  friend 
and  supporter  of  the  count,  to  whom  he  used  the 
most  insulting  epithets,  who  thereupon  drew  his 
poignard  and  slew  him.  The  Pope  caused  Rai- 
mond to  be  publicly  anathematized  in  all  church- 
es, and  published  liis  proclamation  which  closed 
in  these  words: 

"As  following  the  canonical  sanctions  of  the 
holy  fathers,  we  must  not  observe  faith  towards 
those  who  keep  not  faith  towards  God,  or  who  are 
separated  from  the  communion  of  the  faithful:  -we 
discharge,  by  apostolical  authority,  all  those  who 
believe  themselves  bound  towards  this  Count  by  any 
oath,  either  of  allegiance  or  ^fidelity;  we  pennit 
every  catholic  man,  saving  the  right  of  his  prin- 
cipal lord,  to  pursue  his  person,  to  occupy  and  re- 
tain his  territories,  especially  for  the  purpose  of  ex- 
terminating heresy." 

A  crusade  against  Raimond  and  his  province 
was  published  by  the  legates  aud  monks  through- 
out Europe,  under  orders  from  the  Pope,  offering 
to  those  wiio  would  engage  in  the  plunder  and 
extermination  of  the  Albigenses,  "the  utmost  ex- 
tent of  indulgence  which  li is  predecessors  had 
ever  granted  to  those  who  labored  for  tlie  deliv- 
erance of  tlie  Holy  Land."  Raimond  was  over- 
whelmed with  terror  and  submitted,  and  was 
made  "to  strip  himself  naked  from  head  to  foot, 
with  only  a  linen  cloth  around  his  waist  for  de- 
cency's sake,  the  legate  throwing  a  priest's  stole 
around  his  neck,  and  leading  him  by  it  into  the 
church  nine  times  around  the  pretended  martyrs 
grave,  he  inflicted  the  discipline  of  the  churcli 
upon  the  naked  shoulders  of  the  humbled  prince 
with  the  bundle  of  rods  he  held  in  his  hand." 
But  this  degrading  submission  saved  not  Rai- 
mond or  the  Albigenses.  He  made  and  contin- 
ued every  observance  of  penance  imposed  upon 
him,  an<i  strictly  conformed  to  the  rites  of  the 
Homisli  faith,  but  was  suspected, contemned  and 
debased  by  the  Pope  and  his  adherents,  as  long 


1045 


he  lived,  and  in  his  life  time,  after  makinga  pil- 
grimage to  Rome,  he  was  stripped  of  his  heredi- 
tary possessions,  and  thev  were  conferred  upon 
his  relentless  persecutor,  t>e  Montfort.  TheAlbi- 
genses  were  oppi'essed  with  the  most  savage  war 
and  merciless  persecutions  for  many  years,  con- 
ducted also  by  the  bloody  Simon  de  Montfort, 
and  other  barbarians  sent  against  them  by  Philip 
Augustus,  and  at  last  were  nearly  wholly  extir- 
pated from  the  face  of  the  earth. 

My  friend  from  Union  (Mr.  Spalding)  tells  us 
that  the  magna  charta,  the  beginning  of  Eng- 
lish liberty,  was  extorted  from  King  John  by  his 
barons,  who  were  Roman  Catholics;  and  he  ad- 
duces that  fact  as  evidence  that  this  religion  is 
not  unfriendly  to  freedom.  At  that  time  all 
Christendom,  except  the  Greek  church  and  the 
Albigenses,  were  catholics,  and  there  were  no 
doubt  many  good  people  among,  them.  But  let 
us  look  a  little  more  at  the  history  of  John.  The 
Pope  claimed  the  right  to  elect  and  consecrate 
all  bishops  in  England,  which  was  violently  re- 
sisted by  John.  The  controversy  became  so  vi- 
olent, that  "Pandulph,  the  Pope's  legate,  plain- 
ly told  the  king,  even  in  the  face  of  his  parlia- 
ment, that  he  was  bound  to  obey  the  Pope  in 
temporals  as  well  as  spirituals!  And  when  John 
refused  to  submit  to  the  will  of  his  holiness 
without  reserve,  the  legate  Avith  shameless  ef- 
frontery, published  the  sentence  of  excommuni- 
cation against  him,  with  a  loud  voice,  absolving 
all  his  subjects  from  their  oath  of  allegiance,  degra- 
ded himfro/m  his  royal  dignity,  and  declared  that 
neither  he  nor  any  of  his  posterity  should  ever 
reign. iu  England."  In  the  following  year.  In- 
nocent solemnly  ratified  the  acts  of  his  legate, 
and  afterwards  proceeded,  with  great  solemnity, 
to  pronounce  a  sentence  of  deposition  against 
King  John;  and  of  excommunication  against  all 
who  should  obey  him  or  have  any  connection  with 
hira;  and  he  appointed  Philip,  King  of  France, 
to  put  his  sentence  in  execution,  and  promised 
him  the  pardon  of  all  his  sins,  and  the  kingdom 
of  England  for  his  reward.  The  awe-stricken 
John  submitted.  He  not  only  acknowledged 
that  the  Pope  had  the  power  to  appoint  all  bish- 
ops, and  indemnified  them  for  all  damage  which 
they  had  sustained  in  the  contest,  but  even  sur- 
rendered his  crown  to  the  Holy  See,  received  it 
back  as  a  vassal,  swore  fealty  to  the  Pope,  and 
agreed  to  pay  him  an  annual  tribute  of  seven 
hundred  marks  of  silver  for  England  and  three 
hundred  marks  for  Ireland.  And  what  was  the 
judgment  of  Innocent,  a  predecessor  of  the  pre- 
sent Pope,  who  is  the  successor  of  St.  Peter  and 
the  Lord  of  my  friend  from  Union,  (Mr.  Spal- 
ding,) of  this  conduct  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
barons  who  extorted  the  charter  from  John, 
which  my  friend  so  much  and  so  properly  ex- 
tols. He  took  part  with  John,  and  thundered 
his  excommunicatioir  against  these  sturdy  barons 
from  the  council  of  Lateran;  and  in  writing  to 
some  eclesia-stics  about  this  matter  shortly  after- 
wards, he  thus  magesterially  delivers  himself : 
"We  will  have  you  to  know,  that  in  general 
council  we  have  excommunicated  and  anathe- 
matized, in  the  name  of  the  father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  holy  Ghost,  in  the  name  of  the 
holy  apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  and  in  our  own 
name,  the  barons  of  England,  with  their  parti- 
zans  and  abettors,  for  persecuting  John,  the  illus- 


trious king  of  England,  who  hastaken  the  cross, 
and  is  a  vassal  of  the  Roman  church,  for  striving 
to  deprive  him  of  a  kingdom  which  is  known  to 
belong  to  the  Roman  church."  It  this  haughty 
and  imperial  Pope  could,  with  his  stormy  spirit, 
burst  from  his  tomb,  and  appear  in  this  hall,  he 
Avould  thunder  an  excommunication  against  my 
friend  as  an  abettor  of  those  bold  barons  who 
impiously  defied  his  divine  authority. 

Is  any  more  evidence  needed  to  establish  the 
claims  of  the  Roman  catholic  church,  and  its 
head,  the  Pope,  to  be  infallible;  that  it  has  the 
power,  by  its  general  councils,  and  by  the  Pope, 
to  condem  what  it  wills,  to  be  heretical,  and  to 
call  upon  all  temporal  powers  to  extirpate  the 
heresy  and  the  heretics?  Look  to  the  decrees  of 
the  councils  of  Lateran,  and  the  third  chapter 
begins:  "  We  excommunicate  and  anathematize  ev- 
ery heresy  extolling  itself  against  this  Itoly  ortho- 
dox catliolic  faith,  ichich  we  before  expounded,  con- 
demning all  heretics,  by  whatever  names  called. 
And  being  condenmed,  let  them  be  left  to  the 
Secular  Power,  or  to  their  bailiffs,  to  be  punish- 
ed by  due  animadversion.  And  let  the  Secular 
Power  be  warned  and  induced,  and  if  need  he, con- 
demned by  ecclesiastical  censure,  what  offices 
soever  they  are  in,  that  a.s  they  desire  to  be  repu- 
ted and  taken  for  believers.so"  they  publiclytake 
an  oath  for  the  defence  of  the  faith,  that  they 
will  study  in  good  earnest  to  exterminate,  to  their  ut- 
most power,  from  the  lands  subject  to  their  jurisdic- 
tion, all  heretics  denoted  by  the  church."  "So  that 
every  one  that  is  henceforth  taken  in  any  power, 
either  spiritual  or  temporal,  shall  be  bound  to  con- 
firm this  chapter  by  his  oath."  "But  if  the  tem- 
poral Lord,  required  and  warned  by  the  church, 
shall  neglect  to  purge  his  territory  of  this  here- 
tical filth,  let  him,  by  the  metropolitan  and 
comprovincial  bishops,  be  tied  by  the  bond  of 
excommunication;  and  if  he  scorn  to  satisfy  with- 
in a  year,  let  that  be  signified  to  the  Pope, that  he 
may  denounce  his  vassals  thenceforth  absolved  from 
his  fidelity,  and  may  expose  his  country  to  be  seized 
on  by  catholics,  who,  the  heretics  being  excommuni- 
cated, may  possess  it  without  any  contradiction." 
"And  the  catholics  that,  taking  the  badge  of  the  cross, 
shall  gird  themselves  for  the  exterminating  of  here- 
tics, shall  enjoy  that  indulgence,  and  be  fortified 
with  that  lioly  privilege  which  is  granted  them  that 
go  to  the  Holy  Land."  "And  we  decree  to  sub- 
ject to  excommunication,  the  believers  and  receiv- 
ers,  defenders  and  favorers  of  heretics,  firmly  or- 
daining, that  when  any  such  person  is  noted  by 
excommunication,  if  he  disdain  to  satisfy  with- 
in a  year,  let  him  be,  ipso  jure,  made  infamous." 
Pope  Gregory  VII  in  his  maxims,  declares:  "It 
is  lawful  for  the  Pope  to  depose  emperors.  The 
Pope  can  absolve  subjects  from  their  oath  of  al- 
legiance which  they  have  taken  to  a  bad  prince. 
His  judgment  no  man  can  reverse,  but  he  can  re- 
verse all  other  jiulgments.  He  is  to  be  judged 
by  no  man."  Pope  Pius  V,  in  his  proclamation 
of  deposition  and  excommunication  of  Eliza- 
beth, Queen  of  England,  begins:  "Pius,  <tc.,  for 
a  future  memorial  of  the  matter.  He  that  reign- 
eth  on  high,  to  whom  is  given  all  power  in  hea- 
ven and  on  earth,  committed  one  Holy,  Catho- 
lic, and  Apostolic  Church,  out  of  which  there  is 
no  salvation  to  one  alone  upon  earth,  to  Peter,  the 
Prince  of  the  apostles,  and  to  Peter's  successor 
the  Bishop  if  Rome,  to  be  governed  in  fullness  of 


1040 


power.  Him  alone  he  made  prince  over  all  people, 
and  all  kingdoms,  to  pluck  up,  destroy,  scatter,  con- 
sume, plant,  and  build,"  &c.  "We  do,  therefore, 
out  of  the  fulness  of  the  apostolic  power,  declare 
the  aforesaid  Elizabeth,  being  a  heretic  and  a  fa- 
vorer of  heretics,  and  for  her  adherence  in  the 
matter  aforesaid,  to  have  incurred  the  sentence 
of  Anathema,  and  to  be  cut  off  from  unity  of  the 
body  of  Christ.  And  moreover,  we  do  declare 
her  to  be  deprived  of  her  pretended  title  to  the 
kingdoTn  aforesaid,  and  of  all  dominion,  dignity, 
and  privilege  yvhn.tsoever;  and  also  the  nobility, 
subjects,  and  people  pf  the  said  kingdom,  and 
all  others  of  any  sort  which  have  sworn  unto  her, 
tohe  forever  absolved  from,  any  such  oath,  and  all 
manner  of  duty,  of  dominion,  allegiance,  and  of  obe- 
dience; as  we  also  do,  by  the  authority  of  these 
presents,  absolve  them,  and  do  deprive  the  said  Eliz- 
abeth of  her  pretended  title  to  tfie  kingdom  and  all 
other  things  aforesaid.  And  we  do  command  and 
interdict  all  and  every  one  of  the  noblemen,  sub- 
jects, people,  and  others  aforesaid,  that  they  pre- 
sume not  to  obey  her,  or  her  admonitions,  mandates, 
and  laws;  and  those  who  shall  do  the  contrary, 
we  do  inodiate  with  the  like  sentence  of  Ana- 
thema." 

The  true,  but  partial  deliverance  of  the  world 
from  its  long  thraldom  to  the  darkness,  wicked- 
ness, and  despotism  of  Romanism,  began  in  the 
fifteenth  century.  An  Englishman  led  it  on; 
Wickliff  is  justly  called  the  "morning  star"  of 
the  Reformation.  The  orient  dawn  of  that 
bright  luminary  from  its  insular  horizon,  was 
unmarked  even  by  the  Argus  eyes  of  the  Pope, 
though  every  priest  was  to  him  an  orb  that 
never  closed.  The  losing  luminary  had  shed  its 
light  broadly  over  Britain  before  the  aroused 
papacy  attempted  its  extinction,  but  it  was  then 
too  late,  that  light  was  established  forever. 
Wickliff  was  shielded  against  all  the  attacks  of 
his  enemies  by  the  powerful  protection  of  John 
of  Gaunt,  and  he  died  in  his  bed.  In  a  prevoius 
sickness,  some  mendecant  friars  obtruded  them- 
selves upon  him,  and  after  reminding  him  that 
he  mast  die,  exhorted  him  to  retract  what  he  had 
said  against  them.  He  directed  his  attendants 
to  raise  him  up  in  his  bed,  and  the  intrepid  re- 
former summoning  all  his  strength,  exclaimed 
in  a  loud  voice,  "1  shall  not  die,  but  live,  and 
shall  again  declare  the  evil  deeds  of  the  friars." 
His  appalled  visitors  hastily  with  irew.  The 
immortal  truths  which  he  garnered  pure  from 
the  book  of  life,  he  threw  out  in  his  writings  to 
mankind,  and  also  gave  to  his  countrymen  that 
book  in  their  own  tongue.  His  doctrines  not 
only  struck  wide  and  deep  in  England,  but  they 
spread  rapidly  in  the  north  of  (Jermany,  and  in 
Bohemia  became  prevalent.  Huss  and  Jerome 
of  Prague,  confirmed  them  at  the  stake,  to  whicli 
they  were  condemned  by  the  council  of  Con- 
stance; and  from  the  flames  that  consumed  them, 
they  handed  the  torch  of  truth  to  Germany,  and 
heralded  on  the  great  reformation  of  Luther. 
The  enraged  council  of  Hiearchs  at  Constance, 
tracing  the  movement  back  to  its  author,  Wick- 
liff. decreed  that  his  Inmes  sliould  be  disintered 
and  hung  upon  a  gibbet;  but  his  immortal  spi- 
rit and  immortal  doctrines  were  equally  beyond 
the  reach  of  their  insane  malice.  Let  me  pause 
here,  and  say  to  my  respected  friend  from  tfnion, 
(Mr,  Spalding,)  tliat  English  freedom,  civil  or 


religious,  owes  nothing  to  the  Popes  or  to  Ro- 
manism. On  the  contrary,  if  the  power  of  the 
papacy  had  been  re-established  in  England,  that 
ancient  tree  of  liberty,  which  was  planted  in  the 
noble  Isle  in  the  reign  of  John,  and  which 
struck  such  deep  and  vigorous  root  in  her  soil 
as  to  live  and  nourish  through  all  the  storms 
that  have  since  rocked  her,  had  probably,  cen- 
turies ago,  withered  and  perished  ;  and  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  there  had  been  no  parent 
stock  from  which  to  transplant  noble  shoots  to  a 
new  world. 

Another  power  claimed,  and  daily  pretended 
to  be  exercised  by  the  church  of  Rome,  and  her 
priestcraft,  is  to  grant  absolution  for  sins.  The 
council  of  Trent  declared  this  doctrine  very  ex- 
plicitly.    Canon  3  says: 

"Whoever  shall  affirm  that  the  words  of 
the  Lord  our  Savior,  'Receive  ye  the  Holy 
Ghost,'  (fee,  are  not  to  be  understood  of  the  pow- 
er of  forgiving  and  retaining  sins,  in  the  sacra- 
ment of  penance,  <fec.,  let  him  be  accursed." 

Canon  9  says:  "Whoever  shall  affirm  that  the 
priests'  sacramental  absolution  is  not  a  judicial 
act,  but  only  a  ministry,  to  pronounce  and  declare 
that  the  sins  of  the  party  confessing  are  forgiv- 
en, so  that  he  believes  jfiimselfto  oe  absolved, 
even  though  the  priest  should  not  absolve  seri- 
ously, but  be  in  jest,  let  him  be  accursed." 

This  power  of  the  priest,  of  himself  to  forgive 
sins,  "to  the  believing  sinner,"  is  one  of  tlie  most 
mysterious  and  important;  and  is  another  strong 
link  in  the  chain  which  fetters  his  mind  and  his 
soul.  To  the  eye  of  truth,  the  daring  of  the  im- 
piety, and  the  weakness  of  the  credulity,  are 
equally  the  subjects  of  indignant  amazement. 

Kindred  to  the  power  of  granting  absolution 
for  sins,  Romanism  claims  for  the  Pope  that  of 
granting  indulgences.  Peter  Dens  thus  defines 
an  indulgence: 

"What  is  an  indulgence?  It  is  the  remission 
of  the  temporal  punishment  due  to  sins,  remit- 
ted as  to  their  guilt,  by  tlie  power  of  the  keys, 
without  the  sacrament,  by  the  application  of  the 
satisfactions  which  are  contained  in  the  treasury 
of  the  church." 

Tlie  same  author  classifies  indulgences  into 
local,  real  and  personal;  into  plenary,  more  ple- 
nary, and  most  plenary;  and  into  perpetual  and 
temporal.  The  creed  of  Pius  IV  contains  this 
article  on  indulgences: 

"I  also  affirm,  that  the  power  of  indulgences 
was  left  by  Christ  to  the  church,  and  the  use  of 
them  is  most  wholesome  to  cliristian  people." 

The  council  of  Trent  passed  a  decree  relating 
to  indulgences,  from  which  the  following 
tract  is  taken: 

"Since  the  power  of  granting  indulgences  has 
been  bestowed  by  Christ  upon  his  churcli,  and 
this  power  divinely  given  has  been  used  from 
the  earliest  antiquity,  the  holy  council  teaches 
and  enjoins,  that  the  uses'  of  indulgences,  so 
salutary  to  christian  people,  and  approved  by 
the  autnority  of  venerable  councils,  shall  be  re- 
tained in  the  church;  and  it  anathematizes  those 
who  assert  that  they  are  iiseless,  or  deny  that 
the  church  has  the  power  of  granting  them." 

Indulgences  were  granted  by  different  Popes, 
to  the  crusaders  of  Palestine,  to  the  destroyers  of 
the  Albigenses,  t«  the  members  of  the  Council  of 
Constance,  who  condemned  as  heretical  the  doc- 


1047 


trine  of  the  Lollards,  and  Huss  and  Jerome  to  be 
burned,  and  the  bones  of  WicklifF  to  be  disin- 
humed  and  exposed  upon  a  gallows.  It  has  been 
granted  and  promised,  and  publicly  sold  for  mo- 
ney in  innumerable  instances;  and  this  most 
abused,  sinful  and  demoralizing  practice  is  still 
kept  up  by  the  church  in  Rome.  Robertson,  in 
his  life  of  Charles  V,  gives  this  translation  of 
the  form  of  the  indulgences,  which  Leo  X  was 
vending  by  his  agents  over  Italy  and  Germany 
in  the  time  of  Luther. 

The  form  of  the  indulgences  sold  by  Tetzal 
in  Germany  for  Leo  X: 

"May  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  have  mercy  upon 
thee,  and  absolve  thee  by  the  merits  of  his  most 
holy  passion.  And  I,  by  his  authority,  that  of 
his  blessed  apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  and  of  the 
most  holy  Pope,  granted  and  committed  to  me 
in  these  parts,  do  absolve  thee,  first  from  all  ec- 
clesiastical censures,  in  whatever  manner  they 
have  been  incun^ed,  and  then  from  all  thy  sins, 
transgressions  and  excesses,  how  enormous  soev- 
er they  may  be,  even  from  such  as  are  reserved  for 
the  cognizance  of  the  holy  see,  and  as  far  as  the 
keys  of  the  holy  church  extend,  I  remit  to  you 
all  punishment  which  you  deserve  in  purgatory 
on  their  account,  and  I  restore  vou  to  the  holy 
sacraments  of  the  church,  to  the  unity  of  the 
faithful,  and  to  that  innocence  and  purity  which 
you  possessed  at  baptism,  so  that  when  you  die 
the  gates  of  punishment  shall  be  sliut,  and  the 
gates  of  the  paradise  of  delight  shall  be  opened; 
and  if  you  shall  not  die  at  present,  this  grace 
shall  remain  in  full  force  when  you  are  at  the 
point  of  death.  In  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost." — Robert- 
son's Charles  V,  page  126,  note. 

These  indulgences,  aside  from  all  the  other 
usurpations  and  crimes  of  the  papacy,  were  suffi- 
cient to  have  moved  not  only  Luther,  but  the 
world  to  the  reformation;  and  the  only  wonder 
is  that  it  had  not  proved  universal,  complete  and 
enduring. 

Another  source  of  the  absolute  and  despotic 
dominion,  which  this  faith  enables  its  priesthood 
to  exert  over  the  will,  imagination,  and  souls,  of 
especially  its  ignorant  followers,  is  its  doctrine 
of  purgatory.  Here  is  the  concise  teaching  of 
the  creed  of  Pius  IV  on  this  point: 

"I  constantly  hold  there  is  a  purgatory,  and 
that  the  souls  therein  iletained  are  helped  by  the 
suffrages  of  the  faithful." 

The  council  of  Trent  asserted  it  in  an  article 
which  concludes  thus: 

"This  holy  council  commands  all  bishops  dil- 
igently to  endeavor  that  the  wholesome  doctrine 
concerning  purgatory,  delivered  to  us  by  venera- 
ble fathers  and  sacred  councils,  be  believed,  held, 
taught,  and  everywhere  preached  by  Christ's 
faithful." 

The  teaching  is  that  all  venial  sins  are  punish- 
ed, not  in  eternal  hell,  but  in  purgatorj';  and  the 
pains  and  punishments  of  purgatory  are  repre- 
sented in  the  highest  decree  gloomy,  dreadful, 
and  tormenting;  all  of  which  maybe  broughtto 
a  termination  by  mass,  and  other  means,  and  the 
freed  soul  translated  immediately  to  eternal  hap- 
piness. The  ignorant  and  superstitious  areever 
prone  to  think  all  the  sins  of  themselves  and 
their  friends  venial.  The  doctrine  of  purgatory 
seizes  upon  them  at  once  and  grapples  them  with 


hooks  of  steel;  and  the  ascendency  which  this 
terrible  phantom,  and  the  modes  by  which  it  may 
be  divinely  charmed  away,  gives  to  the  priest- 
hood over  the  ignorant  masses  of  catholics  almost 
incredible  power. 

Allied  to  it,  is  auricular  confession,  which  is 
the  private  confession  of  sins  to  a  priest,  by 
whispering  them  into  his  ear.  This  is  to  be 
done  at  least  once  a  year,  and  whoever  omits  it 
is  to  be  excommunicated  out  of  the  church,  and 
if  he  die,  is  not  to  be  allowed  a  christian  burial. 
This  is  the  function  of  the  priesthood,  which 
brings  up  before  it  all  the  liegemen  of  the  catho- 
lic empire,  and  bows  all  in  utter  subjection  and 
submission  to  it.  When  the  noviciate  for  the 
first  time,  with  convulsive  excitement,  breathes 
into  the  ear  of  the  listening  priest  the  deep  and 
criminal  secrets  of  the  heart,  the  soul  is  enslaved 
forever;  a  chain  of  adamant  is  thrown  around 
it,  and  that  chain  is  held  by  this  priest.  Even 
then  he  may  grant  or  withhold  absolution  and 
forgiveness.  Such  are  the  mighty  spells  which 
Romanism  brings  over  all  her  sons  and  daugh- 
ters; and  those  who  work  them,  control  not  only 
their  acts  and  conduct,  but  their  thoughts  and 
emotions.  And  how  often  is  this  puissance  of 
the  priesthood,  exhibited  strikingly  in  our  coun- 
try. Bands  of  rude  and  stormy  foreign  catho- 
lics, who  have  traditionary  feucls,  are  loitering 
in  the  same  neighborhood.  They  meet  in  bloody 
aflfray.  The  civil  officer  of  the  law  interposes 
and  IS  unheeded.  He  calls  to  his  aid  a  large  con- 
stabulary force,  which  is  laughed  to  scorn  by  the 
infuriated  mob.  The  military  is  summoned  to 
uphold  the  civil  authority,  and  blank  cartridges 
are  fired  among  the  combatants,  but  no  more  re- 
garded than  the  whistling  of  the  winds.  At 
length  death-dealing  bullets  begin  their  fatal  of- 
fice, and  men  fall,  but  the  fight  still  rages.  Lol 
the  priest  makes  his  appearance,  the  contending 
mass  of  men  pause  at  once,  and  give  attention. 
He  speaks  a  few  words,  the  tempest  of  excited 
passion  ceases,  and  savage  men  are  subdued  as 
children  under  the  rebuke  of  a  firm  father.  These 
men  all  vote,  but  not  their  will,  it  is  the  will  of 
the  priest. 

I  have,  Mr.  President,  I  think,  brought  for- 
ward enough  of  testimony  to  sustain  fully  my 
statement  of  the  general  constituents  of  Roman 
Catholicism.  If  more  were  needed,  I  could  pro- 
duce volumns  to  the  same  effect,  of  equal  dis- 
tinctness and  force;  and  my  presentation  of  it  is 
true,  or  all  history  is  false.  I  have  brought  for- 
ward only  a  few  of  the  innumerable  instances  of 
the  enactment  of  its  principles  and  powers  on  a 
public  and  large  scale,  in  which  the  papacy  con- 
trolled kings  and  all  the  forces  of  civil  govern- 
ment, made  war,  ravaged  the  earth,  put  down 
conflicting  religions,  and  extirpated  communi- 
ties, proscribed  by  it  as  heretical.  But  in  its 
more  private  and  secret  operations  and  persecu- 
tions, its  burnings  at  the  stake,  its  imprison- 
ments in  deep  dungeons  for  long  years,  its  racks 
and  tortures  in  the  gloomy  recesses  of  its  mur- 
derous inquisitions,  of  men,  women,  and  chil- 
dren, for  no  other  offence  tlian  thinking  and  ex- 
pressing a  different  religious  faith,  is  to  be  found 
the  horrid  acme  of  its  cruelty  and  its  crimes. 
This  narrative,  verified  by  every  thing  that  is 
authentic  in  history,  is  enough  to  produce 
against  it  a  universal  revolt,  except  with  such  as 


1048 


are  possessed  of  the  very  demon  of  Romauism. 
If  this  most  mysterious  religious  politico  insti- 
tution, ill  all  its  principles  and  their  true  signifi- 
cance, in  its  interior  and  mystical  administra- 
tion, in  all  its  history,  public  and  private,  in  the 
collected  immoralities,  crimes  and  guilt  of 
twelve  centuries,  could  he  presented  visibly  to 
all  the  living  at  one  view,  mankind  would  rise 
•np  together  and  drive  it  from  the  face  of  God's 
earth. 

Here,  Mr.  President,  I  will  call  the  attention 
of  the  convention  to  the  Jesuits,  Avhom  all 
catliolics  acknowledge  to  compose  a  part  of  the 
Romish  church.  My  friend  from  Washington, 
(Mr.  Kelly,)  concedes  that  Romanism  is  the 
same  in  this  day  that  it  ever  was,  and  insists 
that  it  was  the  same  identical  existence  in  the 
days  of  the  Saviour.  But  Jesuitism  was  a  crea- 
tion of  Ignatius  Loyola,  and  his  associates,  in 
the  sixteenth  century;  and  the  all-poweiful  and 
infallible  Pope  Paul  III,  in  1546,  ingrafted  this 
order  upon  the  infallible  church.  I  will  read 
the  Jesuits  oath. 

"I,  A.  B.,  now  in  the  presence  of  Almighty 
God,  tlie  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  the  blessed 
Michael  the  Archangel,  the  blessed  St.  John  Bap- 
tist, the  holy  apostles,  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul, 
and  the  saints  and  sacred  host  of  Heaven,  and 
to  you  my  Ghostly  Father,  do  declare  from  my 
heart,  without  mental  reservation,  that  Pope 
Gregory  is  Christ's  Vicar  General,  and  is  the  true 
and  only  Head  of  the  universal  church  through- 
out the  earth;  and  that  by  virtue  of  the  keys  of 
binding  and  loosing,  given  to  Holiness  by  Jesus 
Christ,  he  hath  power  to  depose  heretical  kings, 
princes,  states,  commonwealths,  and  governments, 
all  being  illegal,  witlwut  his  sacred  confirmation, 
and  that  they  may  safely  be  destroyed;  therefore, 
to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  1  will  defend  this 
doctrine  and  his  Holiness's  rights  and  customs 
against  all  usurpers  of  the  heretical  or  protest- 
ant  authority  whatsoever,  especially  against  tlie 
now  pretended  authority  and  church  in  Eng- 
land, and  all  adherents,  in  regard  that  they  be 
usurped  and  heretical,  opposing  the  sacred 
mother  church  of  Rome. 

"  I  do  renounce  and  disown  any  allegiance  as 
due  to  any  heretical  king,  prince,  or  state,  named 
protestant,  or  obedience  to  any  of  their  inferior  mag- 
istrates or  officers.  I  do  further  declare  tlie  doc- 
trine of  the  church  of  England,  of  the  Calvin- 
ists,  Huguenots,  and  other  protestants,  to  be 
damnable,  and  those  to  be  damned  who  will  not 
forsake  the  same.  I  do  furtlier  declare,  that  I 
will  help,  assist,  and  advise,  all  or  any  of  his 
Holiness's  agents  in  anyplace  wherever  I  shall  he; 
and  do  my  utmost  to  extirpate  the  heretical  pro- 
testant's  doctrine,  and  to  destroy  all  their  pre- 
tended power,  legal  or  otherwise.  I  do  further 
promise  and  declare,  that  notwithstanding  I  am 
aispeTised  with  to  assume  any  religion  heretical,  for 
the  propagation  of  the  mother  church "s  interest, 
to  keep  sacred  and  private  all  her  agent*,  coun- 
sels, as  tliey  entrust  me,  and  not  to  divulge  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  by  word,  writing  or  circum- 
stance whatsoever,  but  to  execute  all  which  sliall 
be  proposed,  given  in  charge,  or  discovered  un- 
to me,  by  you  my  Ghostly  Father,  or  by  any  one 
of  this  convent.  All  which  I,  A.  B.,  do  swear 
by  the  blessed  Trinity,  and  blessed  sacrament, 
which  I  am  now  to  receive,  to  perform  and  keep 


on  ray  part  inviolably,  and  do  call  all  the  heav- 
enly and  glorious  host  of  Heaven,  to  witness 
my  real  intentions  to  keep  this  my  oath.  In 
testimony  hereof,  I  take  this  most  holy  and  bles- 
sed sacrament  of  the  eucharist,  and  witness  the 
same,  further  with  my  hand  and  seal,  in  the 
face  of  this  holy  convent." 

Was  there  ever  such  a  piece  of  iniquity,  un- 
der the  garb,  and  ostensibly  to  aid  the  cause  of 
pure  and  holy  religion,  devised  by  man?  What 
other  pursuasion  of  cliristians,  than  the  Roman 
catholics,  have  revolting  oaths,  with  horid  and 
impious  imprecations?  The  achievements  of 
the  Jesuits  more  than  paralleled  the  enormity  of 
theirjuramentary  obligation.  I  will  present  a 
true  and  most  masterly  sketch  of  their  syjirit, 
their  character,  and  tlieir  operations,  from  Ma- 
caulay. 

"In  the  order  of  Jesus  was  concentrated  the 
quinteseence  of  the  catholic  spirit,  and  the  his- 
tory of  the  order  of  Jesus  is  the  history  of  the 
great  catholic  reaction.  That  order  possessed 
itself  at  once  of  all  the  strongholds  wliich  com- 


mand the  public  mind — of  the  pulpit,  of  the 
press,  of  the  confessional,  of  the  academies. 
Wherever  the  Jesuit  preached,  the  church  was 
too  small  for  the  audience.  The  name  of  Jesuit 
on  a  title-page,  secured  the  circulation  of  abook. 
It  Avas  in  the  ears  of  a  Jesuit  that  the  poAverful, 
the  noble,  and  the  beautiful  breathed  the  secret 
history  of  their  lives.  It  was  at  the  feet  of  the 
Jesuit  that  the  youth  of  the  higher  and  middle 
classes  were  brought  up  from  their  first  rudi- 
ments to  the  courses  of  rhetoric  and  philosophy, 
literature  and  science,  lately  associated  Avith  in- 
fidelity or  Avith  heresy,  now  became  the  allies  of 
othodoxy. 

"Dominant,  in  the  south  of  Europe,  the  great 
ordersoon  Avent  forth  conquering  and  to  conquer. 
In  spite  of  oceans  and  deserts,  of  hunger  and 
pestilence,  of  spies  and  penal  laAvs,  of  dungeons 
and  racks,  of  gibbets  and  quartering  blocks,  Je- 
suits Avere  to  be  found  under  every  disguise,  and 
in  every  country — scholars,  physicians,  merch- 
ants, serving-men  ;  inthehostilecourtof  Sweden, 
in  the  old  manor  houses  of  Cheshire,  among  the 
hovels  of  Connaught,  arguing,  instructing, 
consoling,  stealing  aAvay  the  hearts  of  the  young, 
animating  the  courage  of  the  timid,  holding  up 
the  crucifix  before  the  eyes  of  the  dying. 

"Nor  Avas  it  less  their  office  to  plot  against 
the  thrones  and  lives  of  apostate  kings,  to  spread 
evil  rumors,  to  raise  tumults,  to  inflame  civil 
Avars,  to  arm  the  hand  of  the  assassin.  Inflexi- 
ble in  nothing  but  in  their  fidelity  to  the  church, 
they  Avere  equally  ready  to  appeal  to  the  spirit 
of  loyalty,  and  "to  the  .spirit  of  freedom.  Ex- 
treme doctrines  of  obedience  and  extreme  doc- 
trines of  liberty — the  right  of  rulers  to  misgov- 
ern their  people,  the  right  of  every  one  of  the 
people  to  plunge  his  knife  in  the  heart  of  a  bad 
ruler — were  inculcated  by  the  same  man,  accord- 
ing as  headdrcssed  himself  to  thesubjectof  Phil- 
ip or  the  subject  of  Elizabeth.  Some  described 
these  men  as  the  most  rigid,  others  as  the  most 
indulgent  of  spiritual  directors.  And  both  dis- 
criptions  Avere  correct.  The  truly  d  evout  listen- 
ed with  awe,  to  the  high  and  saintly  morality 
of  the  Jesuit.  The  gay  cavalier,  who  had  run 
his  rival  tJirough  the  body,  the  frail  beauty,  who 
had  forgotten  her  marriage  vow,  found   in  the 


1049 


Jesuit,  an  easy  well  bred  raau  of  the  world,   tol- 1 
•erant  of  the  little  irregularities  of  the  people  of  | 
fashion .     The  confessor  was  strict  or  lax  accord-  i 
ing  to  the  temper  of  the  penitent.    His  first  ob-  j 
ject  was  to  drive  no  person  out  of  the  pale  of  the 
church.     Since  there  were  bad  people,   it  "was  j 
better  that  they  should   be  bad  catholics  than  | 
protestants.     If  a  person  was  so  unfortunate  as 
to  be  a  bravo,  a  libertine,  or  a  gambler,  that  was 
no  reason  for  making  hira  a  heretic  too." 

The  machinations  and  crimes  of  the  Jesuits 
reached  such  a  pitcli,  that  they  were  at  length 
by  the  civil  power,  driven  out  of  most  of  the 
states  of  Europe,  including  those  strongly  cath- 
olic; and  on  the  21st  July  1773,  Pope  Clement, 
XIV  issued  his  bull,  entirely  abolishing  the  or- 
der. This  measure  was  not  hastly  adopted,  for 
before  he  r  solved  upon  it  the  Pope  was  engaged 
four  years  in  the  patient  examination  of  tlieir 
history.  When  he  signed  the  order,  he  is  repor- 
ted to  have  said  :  "The  suppression  is  accomp- 
lished. I  do  not  repent  of  it,  having  only  re- 
solved on  it  after  examining  and  weighina: every 
thing,  and  because  I  thought  it  necessary  for 
thechurch.  If  it  were  not  done  I  would  do  it  now, 
but  this  suppression  will  be  my  death."  Short- 
ly afterwards  the  Pope  died,  with  every  symp- 
tom of  having  been  poisoned.  But  in  1814, 
Pope  Pius  VII  i.ssued  his  bull,  by  which  he  re- 
stored and  established  the  order  of  the  Jesuits. 
Since  then  they  have  revived,  and  have  been 
busy  in  Europe.  They  have  come  to  America, 
and'  •established  sundry  colleges  in  difiFerent 
states,  and  are  scattering  themselves  over  the 
land.  They  are  dc-eraed  to  be  effective  and  ne- 
cessaiy  allies  in  reducing  our  government  and 

geople  under  the  dominion  of  Komanism.  The 
omish  Priesthood  in  >'ew  York,  a  few  years 
ago,  in  the  public  newspapers,  declared  their 
-ardent  admiration  of  the  illustrious  order  of 
the  Jesuits,  whicli  death  alone  would  be  able 
to  extinguish  in  their  bosoms."  Fit  auxilieries, 
these  Jesuits,  of  bishop  Hughes  aud  bishop  Pur- 
cell,  and  the  foreign  priests,  in  the  execution  of 
their  designs  iu  this  country. 

The  Romanism  of  the  dark  and  middle  ages 
is  the  Romanism  of  this  day.  A  part  of  it  only 
is  active  and  controlling;  but  all  will  be  if  its 
hierarchy  can  bring  back  the  world  to  enough 
of  ignorance,  superstition,  and  slavery,  to  sub- 
mit to  it.  That  is  the  great  consummation  for 
which  the  Pope,  Bishop  Hughes,  and  Purcell, 
and  Brownson,  and  all  labor.  There  has  never 
been  any  expurgation  of  the  usurpations  aud 
corruptions  of  the  Roman  catholic  church  by 
any  of  its  councils,  or  Popes;  and  the  necessary 
conclusion  is  that  they  do  not  admit  that  there 
is  any.  Every  principle,  power  and  feature 
whiclii  I  have  attributed  to  it,  and  many  more 
of  kindred  nature,  are  found  in  the  body  of  the 
canon  law.  That  law  is  defined  bj  Benedict 
XIV,  who  was  elected  Pope  in  li40,  thus: 
''Those  coostit\itions  are  properly  called  canons 
'which  bind  the  whole  church;  such  are  those 
which  emanate  from  the  chief  pontiff  or  a  gen- 
eral council;  because  if  the  statute  of  a  bishop 
be  confirmed  by  the  Pope,  and  extended  to  the 
•whole  church,' then  it  is  properly  called  a  ca- 
non, as  it  is  now  anthorizea  by  the  Pope."  And 
in  no  form,  either  by  decree  of  council  or  Pope, 
is  their  any  renunciation  or  abandonment,  in 
132 


modern  times,  of  any  right  or  power  ever  claim- 
ed by  the  hierarchy. 

Ferdinand  VII,  on  his  restoration,  re-estab- 
lished the  inquisition  in  1814;  but  when  the 
despot  was  again  expelled  by  the  republican 
Cortes  in  1820,  it  was  the  second  time  suppres- 
sed, and  has  never  been  again  re-established  in 
Spain.  In  the  Papal  States  it  still  exists,  though 
its  operations  are  shrouded  in  a  great  deal  of 
secrecy.  The  Pope  and  his  priests  in  every 
country  exercise  all  the  power,  and  persecute  to 
every  extent  which  the  present  opinions  and 
condition  of  the  world  will  allow.  The  follow- 
ing curse  is  annually  pronounced,  with  all  the 
solemnity  of  "bell,  'book  and  candle  '  by  the 
Pope  and  other  church  dignitaries: 

"In  the  name  of  God  Almighty.  Father,  Son, 
aud  Holy  Ghost,  and  by  the  authority  of  the 
blessed  Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  and.  by  our 
own,  we  excommunicate  and  anathematize  all 
Hussites,  Wickliffites,  Lutherans,  Zuinglians, 
Calvinists,  Huguenots,  Anabaptists,  Trinitari- 
ans, and  all  other  apostates  from  the  faith;  and 
all  other  heretics  by  whatsoever  name  they  are 
called,  or  of  whatever  sect  they  may  be.  And 
also  tbeir  adherents,  receivers,  favorers,  and 
generally  any  defenders  of  them ;  with  all  who, 
without  our'  authority,  or  that  of  the  aptstolic 
See,  knowingly  read  or  retain,  or  in  any  way, 
or  from  any  cause,  publicly  or  privately,  or  from 
any  pretext,  defend  their  books  containing  her- 
esy, or  treating  of  religion;  as  also  schismatics, 
and  those  who  withdraw  themselves,  or  recede 
obstinately  from  their  obedience  to  us,  or  the  ex- 
isting Roman  Pontiff." 

Even  in  our  country,  a  catholic  procession 
was  moving  along  the  public  streets  of  Cincin- 
nati, and  a  quiet  spectator  standing  on  the  high- 
way, and  not  pulling  his  hat  off  as  the  proces- 
sion passed,  had  it  knocked  from  his  head  by 
one  of  the  attendants. 

The  advocates  of  Romanism  have,  in  this  de- 
bate, claimed  that  she  is  the  patron  of  learning 
and  of  freedom.     Free  thought,  freeopinion,  and 
their  free  expression,  and  interchange,  are  essen- 
tial to  learning,  and  the  essence  of  liberty  ;  and 
against  those  Rome  draws  the  sword  and  throws 
away  the  scabbard.     In  relation   to  doctrines 
propounded  by  the  council  of  Trent,  it  decreed: 
"If  any  one  shall  presume  to  teach,  or  <o  think 
differently  from   those  decrees,  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed."   But  let  us   hear  what  the   Popes   of 
j  Rome  have  said  of  the  freedom  of  opinion,  and 
I  of  the  press,  and  the  free  circulation  of  the  Bible 
j  within  afew  years  past.    In  1832,  Gregory  XVII, 
published  his  famous  Encyclical  letter,  in  which 
I  will  be  found  the  following  passages:  "From 
j  that  polluted  fountain  of  indifference,  flow.s  the 
i  absurd  and  erroneous  doctrine,  or  rather  raving, 
!  in  favor  and  in  defence  of  "liberty  of  conscience," 
for  which  most    pestilential  error,    the  course 
opened  by  that  entire  and  wild  liberty  of  opin- 
ion, which  is  every  where  attempting  the  over- 
throw of  civil   and   religious  institutions;   and 
which  the  unblushing  impudence  of  some  has 
held  forth  as  an  advantage  of  religion."    "From 
hence  arise  those  revolutions  in  the  minds  of 
men,  hence  this  aggravated  corruption  of  youths, 
hence  the  contempt  among  the  people  of  sacred 
things,  and  of  the  most  holy  institutions  and 
laws;  hence  in  one  word,  that  pest  of  all  others  most 


1050 


ft)  be  dreaded  in  a  state,  unbridled  liberty  of  opin- 
ion." This  Pope  saw  full  well,  that  the  hoary 
superstitions  of  Romanism  could  not  stand  the 
test  of  free  inquiry  audliberty  of  opinion.  Hence 
his  trembling  apprehension  of  them,  and  his  zeal 
to  stifle  them  forever. 

Some  years  ago  what  is  termed  the  Christian 
Alliance  was  formed  in  the  city  of  New  York, 
the  object  of  which  was  to  circulate  the  Bible 
without  note  or  comment,  in  catholic  countries 
in  their  own  language.  The  same  Gregory  in 
1844,  fulminated  a  bull  against  this  association, 
from  which  this  passage  is  taken: 

"Moreover,  venerable  brothei"s,  we  recommend 
the  utmost  watelifulness  over  the  insidious  meas- 
ures and  attempts  of  the  Christian  Alliance,  to 
those  who,  raised  to  the  dignity  of  your  order, 
are  called  to  govern  the  Italian  churches,  or  the 
countries  which  Italians  frequent  most  common- 
ly, especially  the  frontiers,  and  parts  whence 
travellers  enter  Italy.  As  these  are  the  points 
on  which  the  sectarians  have  fixed  to  commence 
the  realization  of  their  projects,  it  is  highly  ne- 
cessary that  the  bishops  of  those  places  should 
mutually  assist  each  other  zealously  and  faith- 
fully, in  order,  with  the  aid  of  God,  to  discov- 
er and  prevent  their  machinations. 

"Let  us  not  doubt  butyour  exertions  added  to 
our  ovrn,  will  be  seconded  by  the  civil  autJiorities ,  and 
especially  by  the  most  influential  sovereigns  of  Ita- 
ly, no  less  by  reason  of  their  favorable  regard 
for  the  catholic  religion,  than  that  they  plainly 
perceive  how  much  it  concerns  them  to  prostrate 
these  sectarian  combinations.  Indeed,  it  is  most 
evident  from  past  exprience,  that  there  are  no 
means  more  certain  of  rendering  the  people  disobe- 
dient to  their  princes  than  rendering  them  indiffer- 
ent to  religion,  under  the  mask  of  religious  liberty. 
The  members  of  the  Christian  Alliance  do  not 
conceal  this  fact  from  themselves,  although  they 
declare  that  they  are  far  from  wishing  to  excite 
disorder;  but  they  notwithstanding  avow  that, 
once  liberty  of  interpretation  attained,  and  with  it 
what  they  term  liberty  of  conscience  among  Italians, 
these  last  will  naturally  soon  acquire  political  lib- 
erty." 

Here  is  palpably  revealed  the  natural  connec- 
tion and  alliance  between  the  despotism  of  the 
Papal  See  and  the  monarchs  of  Europe.  The 
only  object  of  the  Christian  Alliance  was  to  give 
unadulterated  the  Holy  Scriptures  to  the  people 
of  Italy.  And  how  it  excited  the  fears  of  the 
Pope.     He  knew  that  the  light  and  power  of  the 

f;ospel  would,  wherever  it  was  admitted,  estab- 
ish  religious  liberty,  and  that  would  be  the  pre- 
cursor of  civil  liberty;  and  he  knew  full  well 
that  civil  and  religious  deposits  were  its  natu- 
ral enemies,  and  therefore  he  invoked  his  natu- 
ral allies  to  aid  him  in  his  attempts  to  exclude 
it  from  all  their  dominions. 

The  last  bull  of  Gregory  XVI,  dated  8th  May, 
1844,  is  a  long  document,  and  shows  throughout 
the  greatest  hostility  and  dread  of  the  circula- 
tion of  the  Bible  in  Italy,  and  in  Catholic  coun- 
tries. I  will  read  one  or  two  more  passages 
from  it: 

"Subsequently,  when  heretics  still  por- 
msted  in  their  frauds,  it  became  necessary  for 
Benedict  XIV  to  superadd  the  injunction  that  no 
versions  whatever  (of  the  Bible)  should  be  suffered 
to  be  read  but  thoee  which  should  be  approved  of  by 


the  Holy  See,  accompanied  by  notes  derived  from 
the  writings  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  or  other  learned 
Catholic  authors." 

"As  for  yourselves,  my  venerable  brethren, 
called  as  you  are  to  divide  our  solicitude,  we 
recommend  you  earnestly  in  the  Lord,  to  an- 
nounce and  proclaim,  in  convenient  time  and 
place,  to  the  people  confided  to  your  care,  these 
apostolical  orders,  and  to  labor  carefully  to  sep- 
arate the  faithful  sheep  from  contagion  of  the 
christian  alliance,  from  those  who  have  become 
its  auxiliaries,  no  less  than  those  who  belong  to 
other  Bible  societies,  and  from  all  who  have  any 
communication  with  them.  You  are  conse- 
quently enjoined  to  remove  from  the  hands  of 
the  faithful  alike  the  Bibles  in  the  vulgar  tongue 
which  may  have  been  printed  contrary  to  the 
decrees  above  mentioned  of  the  sovereign  Pon- 
tiffs, and  every  book  proscribed  and  condemned, 
and  see  that  they  learn,  through  your  admonition 
and  authority,  what  pasturages  are  salutary, 
and  what  pernicious  and  mortal.  Watch  at- 
tentively over  those  who  are  appointed  to  ex- 
pound the  Holy  Scriptures,  to  see  that  they  ac- 
quit themselves  faithfully  according  to  the  ca- 
pacity of  their  hearers,  and  that  they  dare  not, 
under  any  pretext  whatever,  interpret  or  explain 
the  holy  pages  contrary  to  the  tradition  of  the  Holy 
Fathers,  and  to  the  service  of  the  Catholic  church." 

"Let  me  know  then,  the  enormity  of  the  sin 
against  God  and  his  church  which  they  are 
guilty  of  who  dare  associate  themselves  with 
any  of  these  societies,  or  abet  them  in  any  way. 
Moreover,  we  confirm  and  renew  the  decrees  recited 
above,  delivered  in  former  iinws  by  apostolic  au- 
thority, against  the  publication,  distribution,  read- 
ing and  possession  of  books  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
translated  into  the  vulgar  tongue." 

What  a  spectacle  is  here  exhibited.  The  in- 
fallible head  of  the  only  true  church,  attempt- 
ing most  zealously  and  industriously,  to  exclude 
from  the  mass  of  mankind,  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
the  book  of  light  and  life.  The  ablest  minds  in 
the  Protestant  world  could  offer  no  refutation  of 
the  errors  of  Romanism,  equal  in  point,  force, 
and  the  power  of  conviction,  to  this  conduct  of 
the  Pope.  The  sense  of  mankind  will  be,  that 
it  could  have  been  .suggested  only  by  the  spirit 
of  darkness.  But  this  has  been  paralleled  in 
our  country  of  gospel  light  and  liberty.  In  the 
town  of  Champlain,  State  of  New  York,  in 
1842,  a  Mr.  Teimont,  a  missionary  of  the  Je- 
suits, held  a  protracted  meeting,  which  was  at- 
tended by  a  great  number  of  Catholics  from 
some  distance;  and  they,  who  had  any,  were  re- 
quired to  bring  in  their  Bibles  and  testaments. 
Many  were  brought,  and  by  this  Jesuit,  and 
other  Catholics,  publicly  burned.  How  long 
before  we  may  expect  similar  scenes  in  Ken- 
tucky where  tne  gentleman  from  Washington, 
(Mr.  Kelly,)  says  there  are  sixty  thousand 
Catliolics? 

The  example  of  France,  in  the  subversion  of 
her  monarchy  and  the  establishment  of  republi- 
can institutions,  has  been  held  up  to  us  a.s  a  testi- 
mony that  Popery  and  Romanism  favors  lil)erty. 
France  always  resisted  the  assumptions  and  ag- 
gressions of  the  Pope  more  perseveringiy  than 
other  Catholic  countries,  her  kings  making  with 
him  the  question,  that  they  had  tne  right,  to  his 
exclusion,  of  the  appointment  of  all  Bishops  for 


1051 


France.  LouU  XIV,  and  her  monarchs  most 
imbued  with  Romanism,  were  her  greatest  ty- 
rants. That  had  always  been  her  national  reli- 
gion, and  all  other  faiths  were  generally  pei-se- 
cuted  and  proscribed  by  her.  Of  late  years,  as 
the  light  of  true  liberty  and  religion  began  to" 
make  further  encroachments  upon  the  dark  do- 
main of  popery  and  despotism,  other  sects  be- 
come to  be  partially  tolerated;  and  one  of  the 
first  fruits  of  the  late  popular  revolution  was, 
the  proscription  ot  Romanism  as  the  establish- 
ed religion,  and  the  free  toleration  of  all  reli- 
fious  persuasions.  But  still  the  example  of 
ranee,  as  asserting  and  upholding  freedom, 
cannot  be  quoted  with  triumph,  or  indeed  with- 
out shame  to  her. 

A  few  months  ago,  and  Rome  heipelf  awoke 
from  her  long  night  of  slavery,  and  declaring 
herself  free,  her  spiritual  and  temporal  despot, 
the  Pope,  fled  from  her  walls  and  took  refuge  in 
Gaeta.  The  tyrant  of  enslaved  Spain,  and  he 
of  2>^aples.  having  but  just  re-subjugated  her  af- 
ter a  convulsive  effort  for  freedom,  and  republi- 
can France,  undertook  the  overthrow  of  the 
Roman  Republic,  and  the  restoration  of  the 
Pope  to  his  spiritual  and  temporal  throne.  The 
regenerate  Romans  offered  to  receive  the  Pope  as 
their  spiritual  head,  but  resolutely  insisted  on 
the  abolition  of  his  tempoi-al  power  and  that  of 
his  college  of  cardinals.  The  overture  was 
scorned,  the  work  of  subjugation  to  despotism 
was  assigned  to  France,  she  marched  her  armi&s 
upon  Rome,  bombarded  and  carried  the  city  by 
assault,  and  crushed  the  new  Republic  and  that 
liberty,  for  which  France  herself  had  taught  by 
her  example,  the  Romans  to  strike.  Shade  of 
Brutus,  why  didst  thou  not  rise  up  to  confound 
these  bastard  republicans  of  France'  At  the 
same  time  Hungary  was  heroically  combatting 
against  the  destruction  of  her  nationality  and  of 
her  ancient  rights.  In  the  days  of  the  trouble  of 
the  Hapsburgs,  that  great  race  of  people  had 
upheld  their  totering  throne,  and  tne  requital 
they  were  to  receive  from  those  they  had  saved, 
was  slavery.  But  the  love  of  liberty  with  these 
sturdy  northerns  was  manly,  vigorous,  deep,  and 
enthusiastic.  They  rose  upon  .their  oppressors, 
overthrew  the  armies  of  Austria,  menaced  Vi- 
enna, and  the  trembling  emperor  called  upon 
the  Russian  Czar  to  save  him;  and  to  quell  this 
tempestuous  spirit  of  northern  freedom  which 
seemed  to  threaten  the  destruction  of  every 
throne.  Too  promptly,  and  too  well,  the  impe- 
rial despot  of  the  north  answered  to  the  call; 
and  he  and  Austria  poured  in  upon  Hungarv 
armies  numerous  as  all  her  men.  The  triumph 
of  despotism  was  completed,  and  Hungarian 
liberty  is  the  noblest  ruin  of  the  age.  Her  he- '' 
roic  struggle,  with  which  every  heart,  all  over 
the  world,  devoted  to  the  rights  and  liberty  of 
man,  was  held  in  convulsive  sympathy,  these 
miserable  French  republicans  turned  coldly 
from,  and  marched  in  a  crusade  against  a  kin- 
dred cause  in  Rome. 

But,  Mr.  President,  of  all  the  strange  and  ex- 
travagant claims  which  ever  fell  upon  my  ear, 
this,  that  the  papacy  and  Romanism  favored  the 
liberty  of  mankind,  is  to  me,  the  most  remarka- 
ble. Her  dark  mantle  still  hangs  like  a  pall 
over  the  most  of  Europe.  Schlegel  says  truly, 
that  Romanism  favors  monarchy — Protestantism, 


republican  liberty;  and  such  is  the  history  of 
both  faiths.  The  one  is  genial  to  the  advancing 
rights  and  civilization  of  man,  the  tendency  of 
the  other  is  to  fetter  him  in  ignorance,  supersti- 
tion, and  sloth.  Compare  England  with  Spain, 
Prussia  with  Italy,  the  United  States  with  Mexi- 
co and  the  South  American  countries.  In  each 
case,  the  Catholics  have  the  greater  natural 
advantages  of  country,  but  how  striking  the 
present  inferiority  of  people  in  everything  which 
constitutes  the  power,  dignity,  and  happiness 
of  man.  Nor  does  this  result  from  any  infe- 
riority of  race.  In  the  sixteenth  century  the 
Spaniards  were  the  first  people  of  Europe. — 
Tliat  race  had  been  formed  in  a  conflict  of  eight 
centuries  with  the  Moors,  and  the  world  never 
knew  superior  meu  narurally  than  to  the  con- 
querors of  the  Astecs  and  the  Incas,  and  those 
missionaries  that  established  themselves  as  ear- 
ly as  the  fifteenth  century  in  the  Celestial  Em- 
pire, and  on  the  bay  of  California.  It  is  the 
spirit  and  tendency  of  their  religion  which  has 
degraded  them  to  their  present  position. 

I  freely  admit  the  good  and  the  wise  are  now 
to  be,  and  have  in  every  age,  been  found  with- 
out number  among  the  Catholics  even  of  Europe. 
It  could  not,  nor  cannot  be  otherwise.  The 
children  of  this  church  for  many  centuries  con- 
stituted almost  the  whole  of  Christendom;  and 
number  something  like  180,000,000  more  than 
all  christians  besides,  in  the  aggregate;  and  ex- 
cluding the  Greek  church,  probably  three  times 
as  numerous  as  all  the  other  sects.  As  long  as 
this  faith  endures,  if  it  be  throughout  time,  it 
will  have  among  its  followers  myriads  of  ex- 
cellent christians  doubtless.  But  this  only 
proves  that,  even  great  and  gross  corruptions, 
interpolated  in  any  religions  faith  founded  up- 
on the  Bible,  cannot  prevent  many,  very  many, 
from  being  good  and  pious.  But  Romanism  in 
America,  practically — at  least,  is  greatly  modi- 
fied by  the  general  intelligence,  spirit  of  inqui- 
ry, and  religious  liberty  and  privileges  of  the 
the  whole  people.  In  the  purity  of  morals,  ex« 
emption  from  superstition  and  bigotry,  and  in- 
dependence of  the  priesthood,  the  native  born 
Catholics  are  immeasurably  elevated  above  the 
Catholics  of  Europe.  All  our  countrymen  who 
travel  abroad  into  Catholic  countries,  so  inform 
us,  and  we  see  it  verified  every  day  in  the  per- 
son of  the  immigrant  Catholic.  Against  those 
who  have  been  born  amongst  us,  I  make  no 
move.  And  against  those  who  come  from 
abroad,  if  they  and  their  priests  will  cease  to 
connect  their  religion  with  the  politics  and  gov- 
ernment of  the  country;  to  indoctrinate  the  peo- 
ple with  the  moral  and  political  doctrines  which 
flow  from  the  teachingsof  the  Catholic  church; 
and  through  political  combinations  and  the 
power  of  the  ballot-box  to  make  the  country 
wholly  catholic,  and  bring  it  under  the  domin- 
ion ot  the  Pope  and  Romanism;  if  they  will 
drive  their  Bishop  Hughes  and  their  other  po- 
litical missionaries  from  political  machinations 
to  advance  the  triumphs  of  their  church  by 
spiritual  means  and  dropping  as  churchmen,  their 
temporal  projects  and  aspirations  in  the  country 
to  which  they  are  by  birth  aliens,  will  attend 
only  to  spiritualities,  and  in  any  way  they  may 
please,  for  one  humble  individual,  I  will  promise 
never  to  molest  them.    But  whilst  they  continu* 


1053 


their  political  labors  in  the  cause,  of  what  they 
claim  is  to  become  a  universal  hierarchy,  and  of 
a  supreme  and  infallible  bierareh  resident  in  an- 
other hemisphere,  I  stand  up  in  opposition  to 
them,  and  will  to  life's  end. 

Mr.  WOODSON  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

Mr.  CLARKE  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays  on 
the  adoption  of  the  resolution,  and  they  were 
yeas  6,  nays  69. 

Yeas — Garrett  Davis,  James  Dudley,  Andrew 
Hood,  Johnson  Price,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  George 
W.  William.s— 6. 

Nats — Mr.  President  (Guthrie,)  John  S.  Bar- 
low, William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
liam Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bris- 
tow,Thos.  D.Brown,  Wm.  C.Bullitt,  Chas.  Cham- 
bers. Wm.  Chenault,  Jas  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L. 
Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Ben- 
jamin Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd, 
Lucius  Desha,  Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin 
F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Jsis. 
H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
J.  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hav,  W. 
Hendrix,  Thos.  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  ^Thos. 
James,  Wm.  Johnson,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Martin  P.  Marshall,  Wm.  C.  Marshall, 
William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Na- 
than McClure,  David  Meriwether,  William  D. 
Mitchdl,  John  D.  Morris,  Jonathan  Newcum, 
Hugh  Newell,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Wm.  Preston, 
John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rockhold,  John  T. 
Rogers,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ignatius  A. 
Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  Jas.  W.  Stone, 
John  D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thompson,  Howard 
Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  Jno. 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wick- 
liffe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 69. 

So  the  resolution  was  rejected. 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


TUESDAY,  DECEMBER  18,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

POSTPOXEMEXT   OF   PENAL   LAWS. 

Mr.  JAMES  offered  the  following: 

Resolved,  That  no  penal  law  shall  be  in  force 
or  take  effect  until  six  months  after  its  passage. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  DAVIS  the  resolution 
■was  laid  on  the  table — yeas  47.  nays  30. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  John  S.  Barlow,  William  Bradley,  Lu- 
ther Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thomas  D. 
Brown,  Charles  Chambers,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  William 
Cowper,  Garrett  Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Duna- 
van, Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Selucius  Garfielde, 
Thoma-s  J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Vincent  S. 
Hay,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield, 
Wm.  C.    Marshall,  David  Meriwether,  William 


D.  Mitchell,  Jonathan  Xe^eum,  HugK  Newell, 
John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
Michael  L.  Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd, 
Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  Charles  A. 
WicklifTe,  Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 
47. 

Nays — Alfred  Boyd,  William  Chenault,  Bev- 
erly L.  Clarke,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Edward 
Curd,  Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan 
Gaither,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson, 
James  P.Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  William  Hen- 
drix, Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  James,  Wil- 
liam Johnson,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Alexander  K. 
Marshall,  William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  Thomas  P.  Moore, 
James  M.  Nesbitt,  Henry  B.  Pollard,  Johnson 
Price,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Steven- 
son, Albert  G.  Talbott,  Squire  Turner,  John 
Wheeler— 30. 

nati\*e  ameeicanism. 
The  following  gentlemen,  who  were  absent 
last  night  wheji  the  vote  Avas  taken  on  Mr. 
DAVIS'S  resolution,  this  morning  obtained  per- 
mission to  record  their  votes,  viz:  Messrs,  Dixon, 
Gaither,  Gholson,  Jackson,  Machen,  M.  P.  Mar- 
shall, Moore, Nesbitt,  Talbott,  Thurman, Turner, 
and  R.  N.  Wickliife,  who  all  voted  in  the  nega- 
tive. 

THE    WILMOT    PROVISO. 

Mr.  KELLY  moved  to  take  up  the  preamble 
and  resolutions  on  the  subject  of  the  Wilmot 
Proviso,  which  he  presented  on  the  5tli  instant, 
when  they  were  laid  on  the  table. 

The  yeas  and  nays  being  taken  on  the  motion 
were,  yeas  29,  nays  58. 

Yeas — Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffey, 
William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Richard  D. 
Gholson,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson, 
Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey,  Alexander 
K.  Marshall,  "William  N.  Marshall,  Richard  L. 
Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
James  M.  Ne.sbitt,  Hugli  Newell,  Henry  B. 
Pollard,  Johnson  Price,  John  T.  Rogers,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James 
W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor.  John  J.  Thurman, 
Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe— 29. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 
person,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
William  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm.  Brad- 
ley. Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Thos. 
D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Cham- 
bers Wm.  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Henry 
R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  Garrett 
Davis,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Chas- 
teen T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Mil- 
ford Elliott,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thos.  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Vincent  S.  Hav,  VVm.  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  Tomas  J.  Hooci,  Mark  E.  Huston,  George 
W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mans- 
field, Martin  P.  Marshall,  William  C.  Marshall, 
John  H.  McHenry  Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jonathan 
Newcum,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  Thomas  Rockhold, 
Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Wm. 
R.  Thompson.  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett, 
Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henrv  Wash- 
ington, John  Wheeler,   Andrew  S.  White,  G. 


1053 


W.  Williami,  Silas  WooJaon,  Wesley  J.  Wright  |  bly  are   now  couJucted  ;  and  on  the   Thursday 
— ^-  succeeding  the  said  election,  the  various  sherifto 

conducting  said  election  at  the  different  precinot*>/ 
shall  assemble  at  the  county  seat  of  their  respec- 
tive counties,  and  compare  the  polls  of  said  elec- 
tion, and  .shall  forthwith  make  due  returns  there- 
of to  the  Secretarv  of  state,  in  conformity  to  the 
provisions  of  the  eiistinj^  laws  upon  the' subject 
of  elections  of  members  of  the  general  assembly. 
The  county  courts  of  the  various  counties  of 
the  commonwealth  shall,  at  their  March  or  April 
terras  of  their  said  courts,  appoint  two  judges,  a 
clerk,  and  deputy  sheriff,  to  superinteua  and 
conduct  said  elections." 

Mr.  WOODSOX.     Mr.  President,  I  will  pro- 
pose an  amendment  for  the   purpose  of  testing 


So  the  conTention  refused  to  take  them  up. 

MISCELL.\XE0C8    PEOVISIONS. 

Tlie  convention  proceeded  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  last  report  of  the  committee  on  mis- 
cellaneous provisions. 

The  first,  second  and  tJiird  sections  were  read 
and  adopted  as  follows,  without  amendment: 

" SCHEDULE. 

"That  no  inconvenience  may  arise  from  the  al- 
terations and  amendments  made  in  the  consti- 
tution of  this  commonwealth,  and  in  order  to 
carry  the  same  into  complete  operation,  it  is 
hereby  declared  and  ordained: 


"Sec.  1.  That  all  the  laws  of  this  common-  the  sense  of  the  convention  on  the  mode  by 
wealth,  in  force  at  the  time  oi  making  the  said  j  which  this  constitution  is  to  be  ratified.  I  be- 
alterations  and  amendments,  and  all  rights  ac-  lieve  it  was  the  universal  opinion  that  when 
tions,  prosecutions,  claims,  and  contracts,  as  this  convention  finished  their  business  here,  they 
well  of  individuals  as  of  bodies  corporate,  shall  rwould  adjourn  sine  die.  I  would  wish  tliat  the 
continue  as   if  the  said  alterations  and   amend-    sense  of  the  people  should  be  taken  on  the  ques- 


ments  had  not  been  made 

"Sec.  2.  The  oaths  of  office  herein  directed  to 
be  taken  may  be  administered  by  any  judge  or 
justice  of  the  peace,  until  the  legislature  shall 
otherwise  direct. 

"Sec.  3.  No  office  shall  be  superceded  by  the 
alterations  and  amendments  made  in  the  con- 
stitution of  this  commonwealth,  but  the  laws 
of  the  state  relative  to  the  duties  of  the  several 
officers,  executive,  judicial,  and  military,  .shall 
remain  in  full  force,  though  the  same  be  con- 
trary to  said  alterations  and  amendments,  and 
the  several  duties  shall  be  performed  by  the  re- 
spective officers  of  the  state,  according  to  the 
existing  laws,  until  the  organization  of  the  gov 
ernment,  as  provided  for  under  this  new  consti 


tion  of  adopting  the  new  constitution  or  re- 
adopting  the  old  one.  And  for  that  purpose  I 
■would  move  to  amend  this  section  of  the  report 
of  the  committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions, 
by  striking  out  the  words  "the  new  constitu- 
tion" in  the  thirteenth  line,  and  substituting  the 
words,  "for  the  old  constitution." 

Mr.  HARDIX.  The  people  have  already  <le- 
cided  against  the  old  constitution  by  calling  this 
convention.  The  old  constitution  was  promul- 
gated in  1799,  and  the  people  of  our  day  have 
declared,  by  an  overwhelming  majority, "that  it 
should  be  amended. 

Mr.  STEVEX'SOX.  It  is  but  right  to  state, 
that  when  this  report  was  drawn  up,  a  large  ma- 
jority of  the  committee  thought   it  would   be 


tution,  and  tne  entering  into  office  of  the  new  i  neces-sary  for  this  convention  to   re-assemble  to 
officers  to   be  elected  or  appointed  under  said  ;  put  this  constitution  in  operation.     If  it  be  the 


government  and  no  longer." 

The  fourth  section  was  read  as  follows : 

"Sec.  4.  Immediately  after  the  adjournment  of 
the  convention,  the  governor  shall  issue  hi?  proc- 
lamation, directing  the  several  sherifis  and  oth- 
er returning  officers  of  the  several  counties  of 
this  Slate,  authorized  by  law  to  hold  elections 
for  members  of  the  general  assembly,  to  open 
and  hold  a  poll  in  every  county  in  the  state,  and 

in  the  city  of  Louisville,  at  the  places  and  pre-  j  motion  of  Mr.  TAYLOR, 
cincts  designed  by  law  for  the  holding  the  pres-  |  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  With  the  view  of 
idential  election  in  1848,  upon  the  first  Monday  |  ascertaining  the  sense  of  the  convention  on  the 
of  May,  1850,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  the  sense  !  question  whether  we  shall  dissolve  this  conven- 
of  the  good  people  of  this  state,  in  regard  to  the  '  tion  and  submit  tlie  constitution  in  the  mode  in- 
adoption  or  rejection   of  this  constitution  ;  and    dicated  bv  that  report,  and  thus  make  the  con- 


determination  of  the  conventi()n  to  re-assemble, 
then  the  question  will  not  be  between  the  'new* 
and  the  'old'  constitution,  but 'for'  or 'against' 
the  new  constitution.  The  committee  having 
directed  me  to  make  a  report,  are  not  vet  deter- 
mined how  they  will  vote  upon  the  subject. 

Mr.  WOODSOX  then  withdrew  his  amend- 
ment. 

Some  verbal  amendments  were  made  on  the 


it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  said  officers,  to  re- 
ceive the  votes  of  all  persons  entitled  to  vote  for 
members  of  the  general  a.ssembly  under  the  pre- 
sent constitution.  The  said  officers  shall  open 
a  poll  with  two  separate  columns  :  '•Forthe  new 
constitution,"  "Against  the  new  constitution,"  and 
shall  address  each  voter  presenting  himself,  the 
question  :  "Are  you  in  favor  of  adopting  the 
new  constitution?"  and  if  he  shall  answer  in 
the  affirmative,  his  vote  shall  be  recorded  in  the 
column  for  the  new  constitution,  and  if  he  shall 
answer  in  the  negative,  his  answer  shall  be  set 
down  in  the  column  against  the  new  constitu- 
tion. The  said  election  shall  be  conducted  for 
one  day,  and  in  every  other  respect,  as  the  state 
election  for  representatives  to  the  general  asswn- 


stitution  of  Kentucky  depend  upon  a  contingen- 
cy, over  which  this  convention  has  no  control, 
or  whether  we  shall  finish  this  work  and  pro- 
claim the  constitution  from  our  hands  as  a  con- 
vention; and,  if  we  cannot  do  that,  perform  the 
other  duty  imposed  upon  us  by  the  article  of  the, 
constitution  in  the  re-adoption  of  the  old  one. 
and  then  go  home — with  a  view  of  testing  the 
feelings  of  the  convention  on  this  question,  I  de- 
sire to  offer  a  resolution,  which  will  bring  the 
subject  immediately  before  tiie  consideration  of 
this  house.  It  Would  accord  with  my  wishes, 
personally,  not  to  return  to  this  hall  again  as  a 
member  of  the  convention,  if  my  absence  could 
take  place  consistently  with  the  duty  I  owe  to 
my  constituency;  and'if  I  could  sati.-^fy  mvself 


1054 


that  we  ought  to  permit  this  constitution  to  Je- 
pen<l  upon  a  contiDgency;  but  I  believe  it.  is  the 
duty  of  the  convention  to  proclaim  this  consti- 
tution; and  I  am  unwilling  to  transfer  the  busi- 
ness and  power  of  proclaiming  what  is  the  con- 
stitution of  Kentucky  to  any  agency — whether 
select  conimitlee,  governor  of  the  commonwealth, 
legislature,  or  any  officer  of  state.  We  have,  in 
my  opinion,  the  right  of  consulting  the  wishes 
of  our  constituents,  either  before  we  came  here, 
while  we  are  here,  or  hereafter;  and  I  am  in  fa- 
vor of  submitting  our  work  to  their  judgment. 
If  the  majority  of  them  should  approve  of  it, 
then  it  is  the  duty  of  this  convention  to  proclaim 
it  from  this  hall  as  the  organic  law  of  the  land, 
and  then  to  put  the  government  of  the  state  un- 
der this  constitution.  These  are  the  views  I  hold 
on  this  matter,  and  I  wish  to  test  the  sense  of 
the  house  on  this  question.  For  that  purpose,  I 
move  to  lay  down  the  report  of  the  committee, 
row  under  consideration,  with  the  view  of  ta- 
king up  the  resolution  which  I  am  prepared  to 
oflFer. 

The  question  being  taken,  it  was  decided  in 
the  affirmative. 

The  resolution  of  the  gentleman  from  Nelson 
was  then  reported  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  convention  will  take  a  re- 
cess and  submit  the  constitution  as  agreed  upon, 
and  proposed  to  be  adopted,  to  the  people  for 
their  approval  or  rejection;  and  that  the  conven- 
tion will  re-assemble  to  ascertain  the  result  of 
the  vote,  and  to  close  the  labors  and  duties  de- 
volved upon  the  convention,  by  proclaiming  the 
new  constitution,  and  providing  for  putting  the 
government  into  operation,  or  to  re-adopt  the 
old  constitution. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  am  very  happy  to  say  that 
I  entirely  concur  with  my  colleague  in  this  mat- 
ter. I  have  a  few  words  to  say  on  the  subject, 
but  shall  wait  until  some  other  gentleman  has 
spoken. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  hope  this  report  will 
be  acted  upon  now.  The  committee  has  drawn 
up  a  report  with  the  view  of  settling  this  ques- 
tion and  I  think  we  ought  immediately  to  set 
about  its  settlement.  I  feel  as  sensibly'  as  any 
gentleman  on  this  floor,  that  the  sands  of  this 
convention  are  ebbing  fast,  and  I  am  as  anxious 
as  any  gentleman  to  get  through  with  business 
so  as  to  let  us  get  home.  But,  sir,  this  is  one  of 
the  nicest  questions  that  has  yet  come  before  this 
body.  When  it  is  remembered  that  the  people 
have  called  this  convention,  that  it  has  as- 
sembled in  obedience  to  their  will,  and  passed 
through  the  greater  part  of  the  task  that  lias  de- 
volved upon  it,  and,  further,  that  the  success  of 
the  constitution  depends  upon  our  action  here, 
■we  cannot  but  feel  how  deeply  important  it  is 
that  this  question  should  have  a  careful  consid- 
eration. 

I  should  like  to  understand,  sir,  what  the 
mover  of  this  resolution  proposes  to  da  when  we 
re-assemble.  The  object  for  which  we  are  to  re- 
assemble must  have  some  weight  in  determining 
the  policv  of  the  step.  Is  it  proposed  that  this 
convention  shall  re-assemble  simply  for  the  pur- 
pose of  declaring  that  this  constitution  is  the 
work  of  our  hands,  and  that  we  approve  of  our 
own  work?  Or  is  it  proposed  that  the  conven- 
ioa  shall  re-assemble  for  the  purpose  of  district- 


ing the  state,  and  of  putting  this  constitution 
into  practical  operation?  If  the  latter  is  the 
object  of  the  gentleman,  I  can  see  some  sense  in 
it;  but  I  cannot  see  any  propriety  in  re-assem- 
bling here  merely  to  assert  that  this  paper, 
which  everybody  knows  to  be  our  work,  is  our 
work.  We  have  already  imposed  a  great  deal  of 
work  upon  the  legislature,  and  why  not  the  duty 
of  proclaiming  this  constitution?  1  think,  sir, 
we  ought  to  know  definitely  and  distinctly,  what 
we  are  to  do  when  we  re-assenible. 

Mr.  GHOLSON.  In  proposing  to  submit  this 
constitution  to  the  vote  of  the  people,  the  ques- 
tion comes  up  "when  is  this  constitution  to  take 
effect?"  If  it  is  not  to  take  effect  until  after  the 
day  it  is  to  be  voted  upon,  I  ask  in  what  way 
any  obligation  is  placed  upon  the  state  to  hole! 
an  election;  or,  if  the  proper  officers  should  re- 
fuse to  hold  such  election,  how  will  they  be 
punished?  How  can  you  enforce  such  an  election 
unless  you  declare  now  that  this  constitution  is 
the  paramount  law  of  the  land?  When  I  first 
came  here  I  was  as  much  in  favor  of  a  sine  die 
adjournment  as  any  man.  I  believe  that  the 
convention  have  the  power  to  put  a  contingent 
clause  into  the  constitution  to  submit  it  to  the 
people;  but  then  how  comes  the  question  that  it 
shall  not  be  the  permanent  law  of  the  laud  until 
the  first  of  May.  It  seems  to  me  to  be  a  mere 
matter  of  courtesy  to  the  people,  and  that  it 
might  as  well  be  ratified  by  the  convention  now. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  a  few  remarks  to  make 
upon  this  question,  and  I  may  just  as  well  make 
them  now  as  at  any  other  time.  I  understand 
sir,  that  we  are  assembled  for  tlie  following 
purpose:  "And  to  meet  within  three  months 
after  the  said  election  for  the  purpose  of  re-adopt- 
ting,  amending,  or  changing  this  constitution." 

We  are  to  meet,  and  when  we  meet,  we  have 
the  power  to  readopt  the  whole  of  the  old  con- 
stitution if  it  so  please  us — we  are  to  meet,  and 
when  we  meet,  we  are  to  amend  that  constitu- 
tion if  we  please,  or  to  make  a  new  one  out  and 
out;  but  whatever  is  done,  we  are  to  do  it.  The 
act  of  assembly  which  was  passed  last  year  en- 
deavored to  conform  to  the  constitution,  but  it 
did  not  do  it  exactly  in  so  many  words. 

That  constitution  was  made  fifty  years  ago, 
when  our  state  was  in  its  infancy.  We  had  not 
then  a  population  of  over  twenty  five  thousand 
voters.  After  a  lapse  of  nearly  fifty  years,  the 
people  became  greatly  dissatisfied  with  the  con- 
stitution made  for  us,  and  the  question  being 
put  to  the  people  whether  they  would  have  a 
convention  to  amend  that  constitution,  it  was 
decided  by  a  majority  of  forty  eight  thousand 
votes.  In  pursuance  of  that  vote,  the  legisla- 
ture again  put  the  question  to  the  people,  and 
by  a  majority  of  ninety  thousand  votes,  they  de- 
clared in  favor  of  calling  a  convention  to  amend 
this  constitution,  and  we,  Mr.  President,  have 
been  elected  in  pursuance  of  that  call.  We  are 
sent  here  to  make  a  new  constitution  or  to 
change  or  alter  the  old  one.  The  people,  in  the 
strongest  manner  have  proclaimed  to  us  and  to 
the  world  at  large,  that  they  are  opposed  to  the 
old  constitution. 

Well,  sir,  we  are  sent  here  by  them,  for  what 
purpose?  To  alter  or  change  the  old  constitu- 
tion, or  to  promulgate  a  new  one.  Well  now 
have  we  the  power  to  adjourn  until  the  first  of 


1055 


June,  as  some  gentlemen  think  it  to  be  neeessa-  i 
ry?    I  say  that  we  have  the  power;  that  we  can  ] 
adjourn  from  day  to  day,  if  we  choose;  that  we  \ 
can  adjourn  for  a  month  if  we  choose,  or  for  six 
months  if  we  choose;  but  if  ever  we  dissolve 
then  there  is  an  end  of  it.     If  ever  we  adjourn 
without  a  day  fixed   in  our  adjournment,  then 
there  is  an  end  of  the  vitalitv  of  this  convention. 
I  suppose  there  is  no  question  of  our  power  to 
adjourn  till  the  first  of  June.     I  came  here,  sir, 
with  a  full  determination  to  submit  the  new  or 
altered   constitution  to   my   constituents.     But 
•when  it  is  submitted  to  them,  are  they  to  make 
it?  No,  sir,  we  are  to  take  their  advice  and  opin- 1 
ion  upon  it;  aud  when  that  is  done,  we  are  to  j 

E renounce  the  final  action  of  the  convention,  j 
ecause  it  is  the  convention  alone  that  is  to  make  j 
the  constitution.  Sir,  to  use  a  legal  illustration, 
we  are  like  a  court  of  chancery,  when  the  chan- 
cellor sends  his  interlocutory  decree  to  a  com- 
missioner; the  commissioner  is  to  make  out  his 
report,  and  the  chancellor  acts  upon  it  and  gives 
his  final  judgment.  It  is  not  the  commissioner 
who  furnishes  the  decision;  he  furnishes  but 
the  facts  on  which  the  chancellor  pronounces. 
We  present  the  new  constitution  to  the  people, 
but  do  they  make  it?  No,  sir.  We  have  framed 
a  set  of  laws  and  submitted  them  to  the  people 
for  their  examination  and  approval;  and  when 
they  have  given  or  withheld  that,  we  act  under- 
standingly  in  relation  to  their  opinion  on  the 
subject.  They  don't  make  the  constitution,  we 
are  to  make  it;  we  are  to  publish  it;  we  are  to 
promulgate  it  to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  and  to 
the  world,  that  they  may  know  what  we  do. 
But,  sir,  how  is  it  by  the  present  regulation? 
We  are  to  submit  it  to  the  people;  a  vote  is  to 
be  taken,  and  the  several  county  courts  are  to 
appoint  judges.  If  they  don't  appoint  them, 
the  sheritfis  to  appoint  them  The  regulation 
is  most  excellent.  The  polls  are  to  be  opened 
in  every  county  and  in  all  the  precincts  of  the 
counties.  Returns  of  the  sheriffs  are  to  be  made 
on  the  Thursday  afterwards;  and  when  the  vote 
is  ascertained  each  sheriff  of  each  county  is  to 
certify  to  the  secretary  of  state.  That  is  afl  very 
well,  but  what  then?  After  that  is  done,  it 
puts  in  the  aggregate  vote  ot  the  people,  and  the 
governor,  secretary  of  state,  attorney  general, 
and  auditor,  are  to  count  and  compare  the  polls, 
and  they  are  to  proclaim  what  is  the  constitu- 
tion, and  not  us.  They  are  the  men  to  whom  we 
thus  delegate  the  power  to  make  the  constitu- 
tion; they  are  to  give  it  life  and  vitality.  Xow 
I  say  it  is  our  duty  to  do  it;  and  I  will  here  re- 
mark, in  reply  to  the  gentleman  from  Knox,  that 
I  don't  think  it  was  universally  agreed  not  to 
come  back  here.  I  never  heard  of  any  such 
universal  agreement.  I  verily  believe  tnat,  in 
some  states,  conventions  have  published  their 
constitutions  without  submitting  them  to  the 
people  at  all.  We  did  so  in  1799;  in  other  states 
constitutions  have  been  so  submitted.  Well,  be 
it  so;  but  I  do  think  it  is  our  duty  to  meet  here 
and  compare  the  polls  for  and  against  the  con- 
stitution, and  say  whi-ther  the  majority  of  all 
the  votes  cast  are  for  the  constitution  or  against 
it;  to  say  whether  the  election  has  been  rightly 
conduct«d,  and  whether  every  county  has  cast 
its  vote.  Suppose  one  or  two  counties  have  not 
voted,  what  then?  We  are  to  do  whatever  we  may 


think  advisable  to  be  done.  I  believe,  Mr.  Pre- 
sident, that  it  is  our  bounden  duty  to  appear 
here  at  some  convenient  time  after  the  election 
to  ascertain  what  the  people  say  on  the  subject, 
and  then  to  act  accordingly.  That  this  is  within 
our  power  no  man  denies.  Kow  as  to  the  pro- 
priety of  doing  that,  I  think  it  is  our  bounden 
duty. 

As  there  appears  to  be  a  difference  of  opinion 
in  the  house,  whether  this  is  a  matter  of  duty  jo 
expediency,  I  will  call  the  attention  of  the 
house  for  a  few  moments  to  the  question  of  ex- 
pediency. The  people  have  called  us  together 
to  make  a  constitution,  and  we  have  assembled 
pursuant  to  that  call.  The  .state  has  expended, 
up  to  yesterday,  inclusive,  forty  thousand  dol- 
lars, in  this  convention,  and  before  we  adjourn 
the  expenses  will,  in  all  probability,  amount  to 
forty  five  thousand  dollars.  The  people  expect  a 
constitution  at  our  hands  ;  they  look  for  it,  they 
demand  it,  and  we  are  not  to  break  up  here  and 
leave  our  work  unfinished.  Sir,  if  we  adjourn 
without  a  day  for  re-assemblage,  then  we  have 
no  power;  and  then  will  come  on  the  death 
struggle ;  then  the  great  object  of  this  conven- 
tion is  to  be  defeated,  and  again  all  the  discor- 
dant elements  of  the  state  will  close  in  and  put 
down  this  constitution.  The  abolitionists,  or 
call  them  by  the  tenderest  name  you  will,  and 
say  "emancipationists,"  of  whom  there  are  not 
less  than  30  or  40,000  in  Kentucky,  will  use 
every  exertion  in  their  power  to  put  down  this 
constitution,  and  they  will  do  it,  because  we 
have  then  no  power  left.  And  what  is  to  be  the 
result  ?  The  same  battle  which  we  fought  last 
year  will  have  to  be  fought  over  again,  with  new 
and  increased  violence.  Efforts  will  be  made  in 
Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  otherstates  to  throw 
a  vast  amount  of  this  kind  of  influence  into  this 
state.  Men  are  to  take  the  stump  again,  and 
then  when  the  vote  comes,  they  will  say  they  did 
not  vote  because  they  saw  they  could  not  carry 
the  election.  They  will  poll  every  vote,  ani 
exhibit  a  force  of  40,000  votes.  But  in  addition 
to  that,  what  more  will  they  show?  They  will 
produce  the  same  spirit  of  insubordination,  out- 
rage, and  violence  among  the  black  population 
which  there  was  before  the  election  for  this  con- 
vention, if  we  now  finally  adjourn.  Your  cele- 
brated preaching  men,  in  their  black  coats,  ded- 
icated to  the  service  of  God,  but  alas !  too  many 
of  them  in  the  service  of  the  devil,  will  endeav- 
or to  serve  the  negro  population,  and  the  same 
distracting  battle  will  have  to  be  fought  over 
again.  What  else  is  to  be  done?  Your  oflice 
holders,  your  judges,  your  sheriflfe,  your  magis- 
trates, wiio  are  to  succeed  the  next,  and  the  next, 
and  your  constables  who  are  lo^-ing  their  places, 
your  oflice  holders  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest 
will  start  into  the  field,  and  show  their  hands, 
and  will  make  every  exertion;  what  for? 
For  the  purpose  of  defeating  this  constitution. 
The  constitution  defeated,  the  convention  ad- 
journed, and  what  then  ?  Why  you  are  thrown 
oack  upon  tlie  old  constitution. 

Who  was  it  that  called  this  convention  and 
for  what  purpose  was  it  called?  It  was  called 
by  the  people  of  Kentucky  for  the  purpose  of 
bringing  down  the  appointing  power  of  the  gov- 
ernment and  bestowing  it  upon  those  to  whom 
it  legitimately  belongs — the  people.    And  for 


1056 


M-hat  other  purpose?  Why  for  the  purpose  of 
bringing  down  the  life-tenuies  of  office,  and  the 
scandalous  sale  of  offices.  To  all  this  the  eman- 
cipationists and  office-holders  are  keenly  alive. 
And  what  more'?  At  least  sixty  thousand  of 
this  class  Avere  against  calling  the  convention, 
and  they  were  well  united.  You  will  find  the 
houses  of  Austria  and  Russia  uniting  once  more 
to  crush  the  Hungarians  and  to  put  us  back 
where  we  were  before.  And  who  is  to  take  the 
field  for  this  new  constitution?  Nobody  that 
I  know  of.  Who  is  to  raise  the  sinews  of  war? 
Nobody.  Thousands  and  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands Avill  be  raised  to  put  down  this  constitu- 
tion. Do  you  ask  who  are  to  raise  it?  Your 
emancipationists  in  the  adjoining  states  and 
your  officeholders  will  raise  it;  and  the  great 
object  of  the  people  "will  be  defeated.  But,  sir, 
if  we  a'ljourn  to  meet  on  the  first  Monday  of 
June,  then  there  will  be  a  fair  voting;  no  eman- 
cipationists will  be  interested  in  sowing  the 
seeds  of  discord,  because  we  have  to  meet  again, 
and  we  have  the  power  to  carry  it  into  effect. 
There  will  be  no  chance  then  to  fall  back  upon 
the  old  constitution;  and  if  such  an  event  should 
happen  by  any  possibility,  the  people  will  be  so 
dis.satisfied  with  the  old  constitution, that  in  less 
than  ten  years  they  would  call  another  conven- 
tion. 

But  one  gentleman  says,  what  are  we  to  do 
when  we  come  back  here?  I  am  not  mealy- 
mouthed  about  what  I  intend  to  do  if  I  get  here; 
other  gentlemen  can  do  as  they  please,  1  am  but 
one.  I  will  endeavor  for  myself,  and  I  trust  it 
•will  be  so  with  the  other  ninety-nine  delegates, 
to  confirm  and  promulgate  the  constitution,  if 
the  people  are  willing;  to  come  here  and  shake 
hanas,  and  say  "well  done  thou  good  and  faith- 
ful servant."'  "if  the  people  should  not  approve 
it  in  all  its  provisions,  v  e  can  see  what  is  the 
matter,  and  rectify  it,  and  endeavor  to  conform 
to  public  opinion.  There  is  no  paper  in  the 
■world,  that  ingenious  men  cannot  find  fault 
with;  there  is  no  language  used  that  they  can- 
not pick  holes  in;  even  the  Almighty  himself, 
when  he  delivered  his  divine  laws  to  the  Jews, 
■was  not  always  understood.  They  misunder- 
stood him  occasionally,  and  not  unfrequently  de- 
parted from  his  commands.  The  best  language 
that  ever  was  used — not  Webster  himself — and 
he  was  a  perfect  master  of  ours — can  use  lan- 
guage that  cannot  be  misinterpreted.  But  the 
opponents  of  this  constitution  can  have  no  mo- 
tive of  this  kind,  if  we  adjourn  over  their  heads. 
No  ingenious  sophist  can  then  undo  our  work, 
because  we  have  power  to  meet  again,  and  cor- 
rect an\'thing  we  may  have  done  wron^;  and  the 
people  will  not  cavil  at  anything  -which  is  not 
wrong. 

I  have  given  in  a  few  words  what  my  views 
are.  First,  that  we  have  power  to  adjourn;  sec- 
ondly, that  we  are  either  to  abolish  the  old  con- 
stitution and  make  a  new  one,  or  we  are  to  alter 
and  amend  it.  We  cannot  delegate  that  power. 
But,  thirdly,  and  most  of  all,  we  owe  it  to  our- 
selves to  see  that  litis  constitution  is  properly 
ratified.  Sir,  we  have  met  here  to  make  a  con- 
stitution, and  it  is  not  unknown  to  gentlemen 
that  thare  are  some  persons  in  this  state  who 
have  done  all  in  their  power  to  traduce  us  by 
stating  that  we  were  spendingour  time  needless- 


ilyand  wasting  public  money.  Some  of  these 
persons  are  probably  now  preparing  the  public 
mind  to  crush  our  labors;  and  I  will  say  this — 
that  I  have  never  seen  a  set  of  men  labor  more 
I  assiduously,  more  honestly,  more  earnestly  than 
have  the  members  of  this  convention.  They 
I  have  gone  into  no  dissipation,  no  frolics;  they 
have  labored  almost  day  and  night  to  make  the 
best  constitution  they  could,  and  that  would 
suit  the  wishes  of  their  constituents.  The  great 
body  of  the  intelligence  of  Kentucky  is  here; 
and  we  owe  it  to  ourselves,  to  posterity,  to  our 
constituents,  that  we  should  never  adjourn  until 
we  have  made  them  a  constitution.  If  we  should 
do  so,  -what  will  be  the  result?  Why,  we  will 
be  a  laughing  stock,  a  scoff,  and  the  scorn  not 
only  of  Kentucky,  but  of  all  the  surrounding 
states.  Self-respect,  the  high  consideration  of 
this  convention,  the  duty  which  we  owe  to  our 
constituents,  tell  us  not  to  quit  till  we  have  made 
a  constitution  which  will  be  satisfactory  to  the 
people.  Some  objection,  I  believe,  has  been 
made  to  our  constitution,  on  account  of  its  run- 
ning a  little  too  much  into  detail.  Be  that  as  it 
may,  we  have  fulfilled  the  expectations  of  the 
people;  we  have  taken  away  the  appointing 
power  from  the  governor;  we  have  changed  the 
tenures  of  office;  we  have  given  them  an  elective 
judiciary.  And,  sir,  what  instrument  is  there  in 
the  world  that  is  without  defects?  We  have  done 
all  we  could  do,  and  I  do  hope  we  shall  never 
consent  finally  to  leave  here,  until  we  have  pro- 
claimed this  as  the  new  constitution  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky. 

Mr.  MAUPIN.  The  duty  -which  I  owe  to  my 
constituents  is  parambunt  to  everything.  I 
came  here  at  a  late  season,  but  I  promised  my 
constituents  that  I  would  endeavor  to  make 
them  a  constitution,  and  that  -we  would  submit 
it  to  them  when  finished,  for  their  approbation. 

My  friend's  proposition  is  one  of  great  mo- 
ment, and  one  that  we  are  bound  to  look  to.  I 
heard  a  great  deal  said  when  I  "was  at  home 
about  the  wisdom  of  the  hundred  men  who  were 
making  this  constitution,  and  not  a  little  too 
about  their  delaying  their  business  so  long  and 
spending  the  people's  money;  but  to  this  I  re- 
plied that  it  was  difficult  to  get  a  hundred  men 
to  think  alike,  and  that  every  man  had  his  opin- 
ion and  would  express  it  too,  as  he  was  bound 
to  do.  The  proposition  of  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson  is  nothing  more  than  what  ■we  promised 
the  people  we  would  do.  Adjourn  -without  a 
day,  and  the  constitution  incomplete,  or  not 
brought  into  effect,  and  the  people  will  say, 
"you  have  tantalized  us."  Thev  did  not  want 
a  great  deal  done;  the  chief  thing  which 
they  were  anxious  to  see  abolished  was  this  life 
tenure  of  office,  and  the  power  of  filling  offices 
vested  in  the  proper  hands.  This  has  been  ef- 
fected in  a  manner  highly  satisfactory.  The 
convention  has  broken,  as  it  were,  into  a  hor- 
net's nest,  and  though  there  may  be  a  little 
stinging,  the  mischief  lias  been  effectually  eradi- 
cated. Our  fathers  gave  us  a  constitution  and 
loft  us  their  example;  and  from  both  we  may 
learn  that  they  were  anxious  our  government 
should  be  established  in  as  independent  a  basis 
as  possible.  The  right  of  acq^uiring  property, 
of  having  open  courts,  of  the  liberty  of  speecn, 
of  justice  without  sale,  denial,  or  delay,  were 


1«57 


«acre<l  privileges  secured  to  U8  by  our  fathers  in 
.  making  their  constitution;  they   thus   gave   us 
the:>e  lour  pillars  of  polished  marble,   aud   all 
they  required  of  us  was  to  turu  agood  arch  over  , 
the'm.    Here,  then,  area  hundred  men,  influenc- i 
,  ed  bv  the  most  patriotic  motives,    neglecting 
their^usiness,  away  from  their  families,  work-  j 
; .  ing  like  a  baud  of  brothers,  harmonizing  on  all  i 
'  great  subjects  of  interest,  compromising  their  | 
feelings,  come  together  for  the  purpose  of  laying , 
down — and   they  have  laid   down — the  founda- 
tion of  our  government,  giving   to  every   man 
.  equal  rights  and  privileges.     Do  notf  talk  to  me 
of  the  government  becoming  unwieldy.     All  we 
want  is   unanimity  of  feeling,  and- concert  of 
action,  to  destroy  what  is  called  de  ngoguism. 
Let  us  throw  self  out  of  doors,   aud  come  here 
with  hearts  declaring  that  we  love  our  country 
better  than  every  thing  else.     This  constitution 
is  to  last,  not  like  a  rope  of  sand,   but  I  trust  it 
will  continue  forever.     Then  let  us  take  action 
.  At  once,  and  give  our  enemies  no  occasion  to  at- 
tempt to  destroy  the  work   that  we  have   done. 
Let  us   act  with   caution   and  judgment.     We 
liave  erected  a  pillar  which  we  hope  will  stand, 
and   not  be  thrown   down  in   a   night.     Close 
your  business  now  and  adjourn  sine  die,  and  the 
people  will  say  you  have  neglected  your  work, 
you  have  refused  to  do  what  they  sent  you  here 
to  accomplish. 

Let  me  say  to  this  proud  bodjr  of  men,  that 
I  cannot  say  enough  in  their  praise  when  I  re- 
turn to  my  constituents.  It  is  true  that  I  have 
had  comparatively  no  hand  in  their  delibera- 
tions, but  my  heart  has  been  with  them.  They 
have  discharged  their  duty  with  great  ability — 
I  have  never  seen  anvthing  like  it  in  my  life; 
and  to  the  honor  of  fi^entucky,  I  say  that  two- 
thirds  of  the  people  will  receive  this  constitu- 
tion with  open  arms. 

G4>itlemt-)i,  you  liave  done  great  honor  to  your 
country.  Now  carry  out,  fulfill,  accomplish  to 
its  perfection,  what  you  have  already  done.  Do 
not  leave  that  unfinished,  which  was  a  sine  qua 
non  with  the  people.  Adjourn  without  a  day, 
and  leave  this  matter  to  the  people,  and  how 
can  they  settle  it?  They  care  not  for  the  expense 
so  that  the  work  is  completed;  and  they  have 
K'ft  it  to  you  to  begin  and  to  end  it.  Finally,  I 
trust  that  no  gentleman  will  go  home  and  speak 
against  the  constitution,  to  his  constituents. 
There  may  be  points  to  which  some  would  ob- 
ject, and  others  to  which  others  would  object; 
out  we  have  acted  with  comparative  unanimity 
here,  and  have  compromised  many  of  our  feel- 
ings, and  perhaps  some  of  our  local  interests, 
or  the  general  good;  let  us  keep  up  that  spirit, 
let  us  cultivate  it  among  our  constituents,  and  if 
w-e  do  this,  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  a  doubt 
that  the  constitution  will  be  accepted  by  an  over- 
whelming majority,  and  that  all  vou  will  have 
to  do  when  you  return  to  this  hall,  will  be  to  af- 
fix your  names  to  the  instniment  and  proclaim 
ii  to  the  people  as  the  organic  law  of  the  state 
of  Kentucky. 

I  leave  the  subject,  hoping  that  the  proposi- 
tion of  the  gentleman  from  ^"elson  will  be  car- 
ried by  acclamation. 

Mr.M.  P.  MARSHALL.     The  question  which 
this  resolution  presents,  involves  two  proposi- 
tions, of  whieli  the  first  is,  "stall  we   submit 
133 


this  constitution  to  the  people  of  Kentucky  for 
their  adoption'?"  The  old  constitution  author-- 
izes  us  to  submit  the  constitution  we  may  notr 
make,  to  the  votes  of  the  people  of  Kentucky; 
but  I  conceive  that  whether  such  authority  is, 
or  is  not  given  by  the  old  constitution,  matt^'rs 
nothing  in  the  determniation  of  the  first  ques- 
tion involved  in  the  resolution.  The  people 
who  have  sent  us  here,  and  who  have  imposed 
upon  us  the  sole  agency  of  making  ari  organic 
law,  have  given  us  the  power  of  disposing  of 
that  proposition  according  to  our  wise  discre- 
tion. Wisdom  and  experience  teach  us  that  pub- 
lie  sentiment  should  be  adopted  by  this  body. 
I  therefore,  cannot  discover  a  dissenting  voice  m 
this  house  to  diat  part  of  the  proposition  which 
relates  to  the  reference  of  the  constitution  to  the 
people.  The  elder  gentleman  from^  Nelson  in 
nis  remarks,  introduced  a  legal  illustration 
which  I  do  not  think  he  applied  with  very 
happy  effect;  certainly  I  cannot  coincide  with 
his  application  of  it,  and  must  take  the  liberty 
of  placing  it  in  direct  contrariety  with  his  posi- 
tion. The  people  of  Kentucky,  sir,  in  this  case, 
constitute  the  high  chancellor  who  have  institu- 
ted an  interlocutory  decree  to  this  house  as  com- 
missioners, to  carry  out  at  discretion.  The  prin- 
ciple of  that  decree,  devolves  upon  us  the  duty 
of  making  a  constitution,  iis  the  result  of  the  la- 
bors, in  which  we  have  been  engaged  during  the 
last  three  months.  We  have  made  a  report  upon 
which  is  to  be  based  the  decree  of  this  great 
high  chancellor,  the  people  of  the  state  af  Ken- 
tucky. This  report  is  embodied  in  the  c-onstitu- 
tion  which  is  to  be  submitted  to  the  sovereigns 
of  this  state.  They  are  to  consider  it  in  all  its 
bearings,  and  to  say  whether  it  accords  with  the 
principles  laid  down  in  that  decree;  and  if,  upon 
examination  of  the  labors  of  this  house,  they 
can  say  that  this  principle  is  fairly  carried  out, 
it  becomes  then  the  decree  of  this  great  high 
chanc*;llor,  and  goes  forth  the  law  and  constitu- 
tion of  Kentucky.  Is  not  that  tJie  correct  posi- 
tion, and  the  state  of  the  fact,  in  reference  to  this 
question?  If  it  is,  we  have  been  engaged  for 
three  months  past  in  doing  that  duty  wliich  we 
ought  to  be  proud  to  say  was  confided  to  us  by 
this  high  cliancellor,  and  we  refer  to  it  the  in- 
quisition into  the  truth  of  the  statement  we 
make,  when  we  ask  him  to  put  his  name  to  this 
as  his  final  decree;  au'l  wh<-n  his  name  is  afiSxed 
to  this  decree  there  is  be  an  execution;  and  the 

auestion  arising  on  this  second  proposition  is 
lis:  "in  executing  this  final  decrc-e,  are  we  bound 
to  come  back  here  to  sign  our  names  to  it,  and 
give  it  efficiency,  or  whether,  by  the  powers  con- 
ferred upon  us  as  a  convention,  we  have  a  right 
to  assign  this  duty  to  som»^  other  agency  less  ex- 
pensive to  the  stale  and  equally  solemn  in  its  of- 
fice." I  insist  that  this  power  can  be  as  legiti- 
mately exercised  through  the  agency  created  in 
this  fifth  section  of  the  report,  as  it  can  be 
through  the  agency  of  this  house. 

We  delegate  solemnly  the  power  of  proclaim- 
ing the  result  of  the  popular  vote,  as  to  the  ac- 
ceptance or  non-acceptance  of  the  constitution, 
to  the  governor  of  Kentucky.  Cannot  tliis  be 
effected  as  well  through  that  medium  as  through 
the  re-assemblage  of  this  house?  And  does  not 
.the  assemblage  of  this  house,  to  perform  an  act 
which  can  be  as  well  done  tluough  the  execu- 


1058 


live  of  the  commonwealth,  involve  a  little  ab- 
surdity and  ridicule  in  itself?  Shall  the  con- 
gregated respectability  and  intelligence  of  the 
state — for  I  will  not  subscribe  to  the  idea  which 
some  gentlemen  entertain  of  the  magnificent 
abilities  of  this  assembly,  (I  believe  it  is  a  fair 
sample  of  the  honesty  and  intelligence  of  Ken- 
tncky,  but  I  believe  it  falls  far  short  of  the  in- 
tellect of  which  this  state  so  proudly  boasts;  I 
believe  that  some  of  the  highest  order  of  intel- 
lect in  this  state  has  been  excluded  from  this 
convention,  but  I  believe  also  that  this  house  is 
a  fair  representation  of  the  virtue,  intelligence 
and  honesty  of  the  good  people  of  this  country, 
and  I  am  proud  of  the  character  of  the  state) — 
but,  sir,  shall  the  congregated  intelligence  and 
wisdom  of  Kentucky  re-assemble  here  for  the 
purpose  of  doing  an  act  which,  in  my  opinion, 
can  oe  as  well  pt^rfonned  by  any  delegated  agen- 
cy? The  re-assemblage  of  this  body  for  such  a 
purpose  appears  to  me  to  be  wholly  without  ne- 
cessity, buppose  that  resolution  requiring  us  to 
assemble  here  again  is  to  be  adopted,  what  is  to 
be  the  effect?  What  are  we  to  do?  Are  we  to 
do  more  than  ratify  the  will  of  the  people  who 
have  passed  their  votes  upon  the  subject,  or  are 
we  to  constitute  ourselves  into  a  permanent 
body  which  shall  go  again  and  again  into  oper- 
ation? Were  we  elected  with  any  view  of  re- 
assembling after  we  once  adjourned?  Did  it  en- 
ter at  all  into  the  minds  of  the  people  that  we 
were  to  constitute  ourselves  a  perpetual  body;  or 
was  it  not  merely  to  do  what  we  were  sent  to  do, 
and  then  adjourn?  If  we  were  assembled  for 
any  other  purpose  except  to  register  the  will  of 
our  masters,  what  is  that  purpose?  To  make  an- 
other constitution?  If  when  we  have  been 
found  wanting  in  ability  to  make  one,  are  we  to 
come  back  to  do  it — to  tiy  again  to  do  that  in 
which  we  have  already  failed?  Will  the  people 
have  unlimited  confidence?  If  when  once  we 
have  failed,  will  they  trust  us  again?  If  we  are 
to  come  here  again  and  go  to  making  a  new  con- 
stitution, I  ask  you  whether  that  is  consistent 
with  the  original  design  of  the  electors  who  sent 
us  here?  Well,  we  assemble  again  and  make 
another  constitution,  what  is  to  be  done  with  it? 
Have  you  considered  what  is  to  be  done  in  a  se- 
cond convention?  You  have  already  expended 
from  forty  to  fifty  thousand  dollars,  you  are  to  as- 
semble again  in  June  and  make  another  consti- 
tution and  expend  forty-five  thousand  dollars 
more?  And  what  is  to  be  done  then  when  you 
have  made  another  constitution?  Will  you  say 
that  shall  be  the  constitution  of  the  state?  No 
-•ir;  you  will  have  to  submit  it  again  to  the  peo- 
ple, and  thus  you  will  go  on,  like  a  drowning 
man  grasping  at  a  straw,  holding  on  to  the  of- 
fice to  which  you  were  elected  in  1849,  and  you 
assemble  and  re-assemble,  and  assemble  again, 
■  until  the  people  become  indignant  and  they 
come  here  in  a  body  and  push  you  out  of  the 
doors  of  this  hall. 

Is  this  drawing  too  strong  a  picture?  I  tliink 
not.  I  do  not  think  tlio  elder  gentleman  from 
Nelson  will  agree  to  come  here  without  llie  di- 
rection of  the  people;  and  if  lie  would  so  agree, 
would  the  house  agree  to  it?  But  he  says  if 
you  do  not  agree  to  meet,  you  will  weaken  the 
♦etiroation  in  which  the  people  will  hold  this 
eonstitntion.    I  ask  you  gentlemen  who  sent 


you  here?  The  people  of  Kentucky.  Are  you 
to  control  them  or  they  you?  But  the  gentle- 
man says  there  are  forty  thousand  emancipa- 
tionists in  the  state.  And  what  if  there  are? 
Are  they  not  to  be  here  for  all  time.  If  he  sub- 
mits the  constitution  to  them  now  he  has  to 
meet  them;  and  if  he  submits  it  a  second  time 
he  has  still  to  meet  them.  They  have  as  much 
right  as  he  to  tlie  freedom  of  their  opinions,  and 
there  is  not  a  bold  spirit  in  this  hall  that  will 
challenge  them  to  show  why  our  constitution 
should  not  be  accepted. 

But,  sii* this  constitution  is  going  to  be  ac- 
cepted. It  has  pushed  some  things  to  extremes, 
and  in  my  opinion,  beyond  propriety;  but  I 
think  it  will  meet  with  the  sanction  of  the  great 
majority  of  the  people.  They  are  going  to  ac- 
cept it,  and  when  they  have  accepted  it,  I  will 
observe  that  it  can  be  as  well  proclaimed  through 
the  agency  of  the  governor,  as  through  this 
house.  It  is  not  denied  that  this  house  has  the 
power  of  conferring  such  agency  upon  the  gov- 
ernor, and  in  my  opinion  it  ought  to  be  done. 
If  we  come  back  for  no  other  purpose,  that  pur- 
pose is  ridiculous;  if  for  any  other  purpose  then 
we  are  transgressing  the  warrant  of  attorney  un- 
der which  we  have  assembled  here. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Under  the  ninth  section  of 
the  constitution  of  the  state  of  Kentucky,  after 
repeated  efforts  within  my  recollection,  the  peo- 
ple have  called  this  convention  by  a  majority  of 
over  forty  thousand  of  the  legal  voters  of  the 
state,  taken  against  the  commissioners  report 
the  year  before  last,  and  by  ninety  thousand 
polled  last  year.  By  this  overwhelming  majori- 
ty of  the  vote  of  this  state,  the  people  have  sent 
us  here  to  make  those  changes  m  the  old  consti- 
tution which  they  desired,  or  to  adopt  an  en- 
entirely  new  one,  should  we  deem  it  expedient. 
Now  I  ask  this  convention,  what  does  this  sec- 
tion propose?  We  are  assembled  here,  a  hun- 
dred delegates  from  different  parts  of  the  state, 
to  do  what?  To  cure  those  defects  that  exist  in 
the  old  constitution,  or  to  make  a  new  instru- 
ment altogether.  I  appeal  to  the  gentlemen  com- 
posing this  convention,  whether  it  is  not  a  mat- 
ter of  impossibility  that  we  could  have  known 
every  change  which  the  people  might  desire 
should  be  made  in  that  instrument;  and  whether 
it  was  not  next  to  impossible  that  we  should 
come  here  entertaining  similar  views  and  opin- 
ions us  to  all  these  charges.  Now,  sir,  if  after 
the  labor  of  three  months  we  should  present  a 
constitution  to  the  people  which  should  fail  to 
satisfy  a  majority  of  them — say  by  ten,  twenty 
or  thirty  thousand  votes,  is  it  right  and  proper, 
after  the  struggle  that  has  taken  place  within 
the  last  four  or  five  years,  that  we  should  part 
with  the  power  tliey  have  wretited  from  the  pre- 
sent office  holders,  oy  their  action  at  previous 
elections?  Adjourn  without  a  day  and  all  the 
labors  both  of  the  people  in  that  struggle  and 
the  labors  of  this  convention  will  be  endanger- 
ed. I  maintain  that  we  have  no  authority  to  lay 
down  that  power,  when  we  adjourn  here,  for  the 
moment  we  adjourn  sine  die,  without  having  re- 
ceived the  approbation  of  the  people  and  pro- 
claimed the  constitution,  that  moment  we  have 
done  what  the  convention  party  never  intended 
we  should  do,  and  what  they  will  not  sanction 
even  if  we  should  do  it. 


1059 


I  will  ask  my  friend  from  Fleming,  if  he  was 
originally  a  convention  man? 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  _The  people  of  my 
county  gave  a  majoritv  of  1,700  votes  for  a  con- 
vention in  1847.     I  did  not.^ive   my  vote  at  all. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  will  ask  him,  does  he  intend 
when  he  goes  before  his  constituents,  to  support 
the  eonstitution? 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  intend  to  do  so, 
for  several  reasons — but  for  none  more  strong 
than  this — ^that  I  do  believe  if  the  convention 
decides  to  meet  again,  and  goes  to  tinkering  up 
the  constitution  we  have  now  been  making,  they 
will  make  a  worse  one  than  we  have  now.  This 
constitution  does  not  meet  my  views  in  every 
respect,  but  still  with  one  or  two  exceptions  it 
accomplishes  most,  if  not  all  that  the  people  de- 
sired— and  perhaps  a  little  more  than  they  de- 
sired. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  think  the  gentleman  has 
answered  the  question  sufficiently,  he  need  not 
proceed  further. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  Yes,  but  the  gen- 
tleman having  asked  a  question  I  beg  to  tellnim 
he  must  please  to  wait  till  I  give  him  the  whole 
answer.  (Laughter,)  Sir,  I  nave  said  that  with 
one  or  two  slight  exceptions  the  constitution  has 
my  approbation.  I  wish  to  say  further,  that  I 
take  no  impracticable,  theoretic,  high  sounding 
views  in  relation  to  my  position  here;  I  am  not 
disposed  to  put  myself  in  opposition  to  the  cat- 
aract of  Niagara,  and  fill  this  house  with  the 
roar  of  declamation,  (laughter.)  but  I  come  here 
as  a  plain  sensible  man,  entertaining  sensible 
opinions,  and  wishing  to  submit  this  constitu- 
tion to  the  decision  of  the  sensible  people  of  the 
sensible  state  of  Kentucky.  I  do  not  wish  this 
convention  to  return  here  with  high  and  imprac- 
ticable notions  of  power ;  but  I  wish  to  serve 
my  country  as  a  plain  honest  country  gentleman, 
and  then  go  home  to  my  constituents  and  sus- 
tain the  constitution.  Xow  sir,  the  gentleman 
has  my  answer  in  full.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  will  not  say  that  the  ex- 
planation is  more  difficult  to  understand  than 
the  thing  explained ;  but  this  I  will  say,  that 
the  gentleman  would  have  been  as  well  un- 
derstood with  half  the  response  he  has  made. 

I  am  aware  of  the  anxiety  of  the  convention 
to  close  their  labors  so  as  to  return  to  their  fam- 
ilies ;  but  I  am  sensible  no  question  has  yet  been 
presented  to  our  consideration,  of  equal  impor- 
tance to  this.  While  I  am  in  favor  of  taking 
the  sense  of  the  people  upon  the  adoption  or  re- 
jection of  this  constitution,  I  am  unwilling  to 
part  with  all  the  power  which  the  people  have 
▼on  during  a  struggle  of  three  years  past,  by  that 
submission.  A  majority  of  90,000  again.st  the 
poll  books  have  declared  against  the  old  con- 
stitution of  this  state.  Now  suppose  you  sub- 
mit the  new  constitution  to  the  people  and  a 
majority  of  10,000  should  decide  against  it, 
'What  do  we  do?  Why,  if  we  do  not  ratify  this 
constitution,  we  permit  that  10,000  to  overrule 
a  majority  of  90,000.  This  constitution  has  been 
framed  in  a  spiritof  compromise  and  concession. 
It  may  possibly  contain  within  it,  sections,  pro- 
visions, or  principles  that  may  be  obnoxious  to 
the  people  of  this  or  that  region  ;  it  would  be  a 
miracle  if  it  did  not ;  but  I  say  again  that  if  you 
submit  this  constitution  to  the  people  and  then 


part  with  all  the  power  they  have  given  you, 
you  will  see  an  opposition  raised  to  it  that  you 
little  expect.  Every  emancipationist  in  the 
state,  every  man  in  favor  of  the  old  constitution, 
every  office  holder,  past  and  present,  will  unite 
in^jrotherly  love  and  friendshij));  and  thus  you 
will  have  a  combination  of  the  most  discoraant 
elements  coming  up  in  favor  of  the  old  constitu- 
tion, and  against  the  new  one.  I  want  to  sub- 
mit this  constitution  to  the  people ;  I  want  them 
to  come  up  in  the  exercise  oi  their  sovereign 
will  and  say  whether  they  are  satisfied  or  not, 
with  the  work  we  have  performed.  And  if  they 
should  not  be  satisfied,  where  can  be  the  harm, 
where  the  danger  of  the  delegates  returning  to 
their  constituents  and  consulting  with  them? 
When  we  go  back  to  our  people  from  here,  we 
can  ask  them  what  particular  opinions  they  en- 
tertain on  this  or  that  section;  we  can  thus  learn 
what  they  want,  and  if  their  be  any  thing  radi- 
cally wrong  when  we  return  here  in  May  or 
June,  it  can  be  remedied ;  for  we  should  re- 
turn clothed  with  full  power  to  effect  such  chang- 
es as  the  people  may  have  determined  upon. 

Now, sir,  mark  my  prediction  here  to-day — that 
the  very  moment  we  part  with  this  power  to  so 
change  the  work  of  our  hands  as  to  meet  with 
the  people's  wishes,  just  so  surely  will  all  the  dis- 
cordant elements  in  this  state  unite  to  destroy 
the  work  in  which  we  have  been  engaged  during 
the  last  three  montfis.  Every  man  opposed  to 
change  will  throw  in  his  mite;  and  millions  of 
dollars  will  be  raised  to  defeat  this  constitution. 
Part  with  the  power  you  now  have,  and  the  peo- 
ple will  be  thrown  back  to  where  they  were  four 
years  ago,  and  cannot  make  any  change  in  the 
constitution  unless  they  can  overrule  a  dead  ma- 
jority against  them  of  twenty  or  thirty  thous- 
and. 

Now  let  me  ask,  suppose  the  present  office 
holders  should  refuse  to  hold  any  election  at  all., 
where  is  your  power  to  compel  them?  Have  you 
affixed  any  penalty  for  such  refusal?  None 
whatever.  And  if  they  should  refuse,  then  the 
whole  work  of  three  months  goes  by  the  board, 
and  the  old  constitution  is  re-adopted.  There 
can  be  no  danger,  Mr.  President,  in  submitting 
this  constitution  to  the  people  with  the  reserva- 
tion of  power  on  the  part  of  their  servants  on 
this  floor  to  meet  here  again,  if  what  we  have 
done  does  not  accord  with  their  will  and  pleas- 
ure. The  very  act  itself  will  display  mutual 
confidence  between  the  people  and  the  conven- 
tion. There  can  be  no  question,  that  so  far  as 
we  are  concerned,  there  has  been  a  full  inten- 
tion to  their  will,  and  that  our  labors  will  meet 
with  their  full  approbation  throughout  the  state, 
I  have  but  little  doubt.  •  Adopt  the  resolution 
of  either  of  these  gentlemen,  (and  I  must  say  I 
prefer  that  of  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson,) 
and  we  can  go  back  home  and  meet  our  constit- 
uents and  say  to  them,  we  want  to  talk  with  you 
in  reference  to  the  various  changes  in  the  consti- 
tution; we  have  not  parted  with  the  power  which 
you  entrusted  to  us,  but  we  want  to  exercise  it 
m  accordance  with  your  will.  And  then,  sir. 
when  we  meet  here  again  in  June,  all  we  have 
to  do  is,  to  submit  to  each  other  those  improve- 
ments suggested  by  our  constituents,  and  in- 
stead of  entrusting  the  matter  to  the  governor, 
or  any  other  officer  of  the  state,  we  establish 


1060 


this  constitution  at  once  as  the  paramount  law 
of  the  land.  I  will  not  consent,  sir,  that  a  mere 
majority  of  ten,  twenty,  or  fifty,  or  a  thousand, 
or  ten  tlioiisaiul,  shall  declare  and  decide  against 
what  a  majority  of  ninety  thousand  have  al- 
ready determined  upon.  If,  so  far  as  I  am  con 
cerned,  I  have  not  carried  out  the  will  of  the 
people  who  sent  me  here,  I  have  mistaken  their 
will.  I  have  no  authority  to  part  with  the  pow- 
er which  the  people  gave  me  until  the  work 
they  delegated  me  to  perform  is  completed;  it  is 
their  power,  not  mine;  they  have  said  those 
changes  should  be  made;  and  if  the  manner  in 
which  we  have  made  them  does  not  suit  their 
approbation,  they  ought  to  have  the  right  to  in- 
struct us  to  come  back  and  make  such  altera- 
tions as  Avill  meet  with  their  approbation.  I 
am  opposed  to  the  old  constitution;  and  I  have 
been  so  since  I  was  old  enough  to  read  a  consti- 
tution. Sir,  save  only  in  the  name,  there  is  not 
a  constitution  in  the  United  States  that  contains 
the  elements  of  the  old  British  laws,  conferring 
titles  of  nobility  in  so  high  a  degree,  as  the  pres- 
ent constitution  of  the  State  of  Kentucky.  True, 
'tis  said  that  there  shall  be  no  titles  of  nobility; 
but,  sir,  with  the  mere  exception  of  the  name  all 
the  advantages  connected  with  lordly  titles  were 
kept  up  and  have  been  sustained.  This,  sir,  in 
our  new  constitution,  we  have,  I  apprehend, 
effectually  prevented.  I  shall  go  for  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson;  and  if 
that  resolution  does  not  meet  with  the  views  of 
the  convention,  and  this  fifth  section  should  be 
adopted,  I  predict  that  you  will  again  see  such 
an  array  in  opposition  to  this  new  constitution 
as  has  never  been  known  to  exist  in  any  land  as 
will  exist  in  April  or  June  next,  if  one  or  other 
of  these  propositions  be  not  adopted  for  the  de- 
termination of  the  question. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  To  my  mind,  sir,  it  is  im- 
portant that  we  should  re-assemble  here,  and 
finally  adopt  the  constitution  when  it  shall  have 
been  submitted  to  the  people.  We  are  assembled 
here  for  the  purpose  of  re-adopting,  amending, 
or  changing,  the  old  constitution.  T  would  ask 
if  there  is  in  that  provision  any  power  to  sub- 
mit this  constitution  as  a  complete  instrument  to 
the  people,  with  the  qualification,  that  if  they 
adopt  it,  it  shall  be  the  constitution  of  Kentucky? 
If,  when  it  is  presented  to  the  members,  they 
sign  this  instrument,  the  matter  is  ended;  and 
neither  we  nor  the  people,  have  any  further  con- 
trol over  it.  We  submit  it  to  the  people  merely 
as  an  advisory  measure;  and  if,  after  it  has  been 
submitted  to  them  and  approved,  we  come  back 
here  and  sign  and  proclaim  it,  then  it  becomes 
the  constitution  of  the  country.  All  the  power 
that  was  delegated  to  us  will  have  been  officially 
exercised  when  we  sign  this  instrument.  We 
have  no  qualified  power;  it  is  absolute  uncon- 
ditional. Much  has  been  said  here  about  as- 
sembling anjl  uniting  all  the  discordant  elements 
of  the  state  against  the  new  constitution;  but, 
sir,  I  would  have  those  discordant  elements  to 
understand  that  the  power  of  the  people  has  not 
been  parted  with,  and  that  when  wedogohome, 
if  in  their  judgment  and  sober  deliberation,  af- 
ter examining  the  result  of  our  labors,  they,  in 
their  primary  assemblies  should  give  us  advice 
upon  the  subject,  we  are  not  going  to  put  our- 
sAves  in  suen  a  poBition  an  to  ne  unable  to  carry 


out  their  wishes.  We  ought  to  act  with  all  pos- 
sible discretion  on  this  subject,  and  clear  the 
constitutio-n  of  every  difficulty  which  may  stand 
in  the  way  or  be  attcm]>tod  to  be  thrown  around 
it.  1  have  no  doubt  it  will  be  received  by  the 
people  with  acclamation;  but  let  us  not  put  our 
names  to  it  until  we  have  received  the  acknowl- 
edgment of  the  people;  and  when  we  have  re- 
ceived that  acknowledgment  we  can  meet  again 
and  ratify  the  whole.  I  hope  and  trust  this  res- 
olution will  be  adopted.' 

Mr,  TAYLOR.  I  very  much  question  wheth- 
er wo  have  the  power  to  adjourn  as  is  suggest- 
ed, and  if  we  have,  there  is  a  question  about  its 
policy.  I  will  not,  however,  discuss  this  ques- 
tion, for  1  am  not  prompted  to  do  so  either  from 
inclination  or  a  sense  of  duty.  But  grant  that 
we  have  the  power.  I  would  like  to  a.sk  some 
two  or  three  homely  questions.  It  is  provided 
in  one  section  that,  immediately  after  the  ad- 
journment of  the  convention,  the  governor  shall 
issue  his  proclamation,  <fec.  Now,  I  do  not  pre- 
tend to  say  that  the  present  governor  would  re- 
fuse to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  con- 
vention, yet,  have  you  any  guaranty  that  he 
would  comply;  or  that  his  mandate  would  be 
obeyed  by  the  subordinate  officers  of  the  state? 
Suppose  the  governor  of  Kentucky  should  re- 
pudiate your  power,  and  say  you  have  no  au- 
thority to  impose  such  duty  upon  him,  and  re- 
fuse to  obey  you,  what  would  become  of  all  your 
labor?  You  go  home,  and  you  stand  a  monu- 
ment of  the  scorn  and  contempt  of  every  honest 
man  of  this  country.  And  why?  Because  in 
framing  this  constitution  you  will  have  left  a 
loop  hole  through  Avhich  vour  adversaries  may 
effect  an  entrance.  What  else?  You  have  called 
upon  the  county  officers  to  appoint  judges  of  elec- 
tion, and  the  sheriffs  are  commanded  to  make 
the  returns.  But  suppose  some  of  the  great  an- 
ti-reforming counties  should  refuse  to  hold  any 
election;  in  that  case,  too,  the  great  object  of  this 
convention  would  be  defeated.  The  magistrates 
and  justices  of  the  peace  are  next  called  upon 
to  support  the  new  constitution,  and  what  is 
their  answer?  They  will  say,  '"oh,  no;  I  cannot 
do  anything  of  the  kind.  I  have  sworn  to  sup- 
port the  constitution  of  the  state  of  Kentucky  as 
it  now  exists,  and  I  cannot  violate  my  oath." 
(Laughter.)  This  was  said  by  some  of  the  mag- 
istrates in  the  state  of  Indiana;  and  I  should  not 
be  surprised  if  some  in  this  state  were  found  ma- 
king tne  same  objection.  Now,  I  ask  if  this 
would  be  right?  I  ask  if  we  are  to  place  our- 
selves and  the  trust  confided  to  us  by  the  people, 
in  the  power  of  any  men  that  God  ever  nade, 
except  it  be  the  people  themselves,  acting  in 
their  aggregate  capacity?  You  will  place  it  in 
the  hands  of  our  justices  of  the  peace  will  you? 
No,  sir;  no,  sir.  And,  sir,  Avhether  wehave  the 
power  or  pot,  the  question  is,  whether  we  are 
going  to  place  the  adoption  of  this  constitution 
upon^  mere  contingency,  as  it  would  be,  if  the 
provision  contained  in  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee should  be  finally  adoptect.  These  officers  to 
whom  you  would  entrust  this  business,  may  or 
may  not  obey  you;  and  thus,  in  (Consequence  of 
a  species  of  fraud,  we  may  be  driven  back  to  the 
old  constitution,  and  be  compelled  to  sit  under 
the  old  "vine  and  fig  tree,"  with  none  but  the 
office  holders  to  make  us  afraid.    (Laughter.) 


1061 


But  now  to  tlie  policy  of  this  matter.  While  :  government shoiilJ  remain  at  Frankfort.  (Lauffb- 
I  have  sat  here  day  after  day  looking  upon  the  :  ter.)  But  I  can  tell  gentlemen  if  they  want  this 
proceedings  of  this  assembly  my  heart  has  felt  constitntion  to  stand,  they  will  have  to  gird  i»n 
deeply  tliankful  to  tht-  great  governor  of  the  ;  their  armor  and  fight  as 'a  father  fights  for  lti» 
universe  that  my  lot  lias  boen  east  in  this  good-  •  offspring;  they  will  have  to  "fi»ht  on,  figlit  ev- 
ly  land.  Look  sir,  now,  when  we  are  about  to  er,"  until  this  constitution  is  hrmly  settled  a.s 
close  our  labors,  at  the  cheering  exhibition  ofjlhelaw  of  the  land;  for  until  that  is  done,  all 
popular  power  as  here  manifested;  we  have  these  opposing  elements  will  be  combined  to  the 
come  here  from  all  parts  of  this  commonwealth, '  extent  of  their  power  to  effeot  the  downfall  »f 
and  where  can  W  found  a  more  spirit-stirring  this  constitution.  Thank  God  the  sceptre  has 
display  of  the  influence  of  our  institutions  than  ;  not  vet  departed  from  Judah:  we  have  it  yet  in 
in  this'  assembly,  when  now  we  are  about  to  sub-  our  hands;  and  I  trust  we  will  not  permit  it  to 
mit  the  work  of  our  hands  to  the  people  who  '  go  out  of  our  hands  until  we  have  perfected  the 
sent  us  here?  We  came  here  to  do  the  people's  great  work  which  the  people  sent  us  here  to  per- 
will;  and  I  would  ask  is  there  any  thing  wrong  fonn;  and  that  cannot  be  coraplet^l  until  the 
in  coming  back  to  perfect  that  which  we  have  constitution  has  been  refeired  to  the  people  and 
already  done,  and  proclaim  the  will  of  the  peo-    we  have  come  back,  in  conformity  with  public 

fie  as  "it  will  then  have  been  declared?  Ah,  Mr.  sentiment,  and  proclaimed  it.  As  my  friend 
resident,  have  you  ever  thought  of  the  eJements  from  Simpson  remarked  a  little  while  ago  about 
of  opposition  that  are  to  combine  against  this  having  been  in.  favor  of  constitutional  reform 
constitution?  Proud  as  we  are  of  it,  sir,  the  eversinc-ehewas  able  to  read  a  constitution,  so 
mortifying  spectacle  may  be  exhibited  of  its  re- '  has  it  been  with  me.  I  have  been  in  favor  of 
jection,  notwithstanding  the  102,000  votes  in  the  constitutional  reform  ever  since  I  could  read  a - 
year  1847  cast  in  favor  of  constitutional  reform;  constit\ition  and  understand  for  myself.  I  can 
sir,  the  sad  spectacle  mav  be  exhibited  of  our  conceive  nothing  so  horrible  as  to  be  remitted 
being  rem ittted  to  the  oli  constitution.  Who  back  to  the  old  constitution,  because  if  once  re- 
do we  expect  to  be  arrayed  against  us?  The  en-  initted  we  are  there  forever.  That  may  be  a 
tire  oifice-holders  of  the  country-.  They  are  men  strong  assertion,  btit.  sir,  I  believe  it  is  true.  I 
of  intelligence  and  power  ;  they  have  too  their  ask  the  friends  of  constitutional  reform,  if  I  dare 
aiders  and  abetters;  everv  man  among  them,  no  make  an  appeal  of  that  sort  to  them — and  per- 
matter  how  small  his  oAce,  has  his  influence,  haps  it  may  be  going  too  far,  but  it  results  from 
just  as  though  vou  would  throw  the  smallest  the  common  interest  I  feel  in  the  common  suc- 
pebble  into  the  largest  pool,  and  you  will  see  the  '  cess  of  our  labors — I  ask  gentlemen  to  take  coun- 
circles  on  the  water  to  the  very  verge.  So  is  it  sel  from  their  fears,  and  never  to  suffer  the  scep- 
with  these  men.  They  have  their  friends  an-i  tre  to  depart  from  Judah  until  the  constitution 
relations,  their  sons  and  their  sons  in-law,  and  is  made  the  law  of  the  land,  and  the  old  one  is 
sons-in-law  in  expectation,  and  their  daughters  !  forever  abolished.  Take  counsel  from  vour 
too  all  arrayed  against  this  constitution,  not  be- '  hopes  also,  and  the  time  may  come,  and  I  nope 
cause  it  does  not  accord  with  popular  sentiment, '  it  will  come,  when  we  shall  convene  here,  and — 
but  because  it  strikes  at  the  root  of  their  monop-  j  thougli  not  like  thepro<ligal  son  in  having  was- 
oly.  Well,  sir.  besides  these,  you  will  have  the  ted  our  substance — that  the  fatted  calf  shall  be 
ernancipationist-s  against  you,  and  it  has  been  killed,  and  we  shall  have  j<»y  and  dancing  over 
represented  that  there  are  a  great  many  of  them  j  the  strongest  opposition  to  the  most  useful  and 
in  this  commonwealth.  Thev  are  manv;  thevj  necessarv  measure  ever  proposed  in  our  state, 
are  intelligent;  they  are  powerful  and  ^^'ealthv,  '       ^^^^^  ^^  eevision. 

and — though  I  do   not  sav  it  with  anv  unkind  I      ..^     .         ,  ,.  ,.  . 

feeling  towards  them— thev  are,  on  t&is  ques- 1  During  the  preceding  proceedings  the  eom- 
tion  at  least,  fanatical;  and  this  verv  fanaticism  \  '"'"ee  of  revision  and  arrangement  of  the  consti- 
would  induce  them  to  work  hard",  and  spend  i  tution  reported  the  preamble  and  several  arti- 
monev  in  this  cause.  You  will  have  them  1  d^  which  they  had  revised,  and  the  verbal 
against  vou  in  conjunction  with  the  oflice-hold- 1  changes,  alteration  of  construction,  and  the 
era.  Now  who  else  have  vou?  1  speak  itin  no  i  amendments,  which  they  had  deemed  it  necessary 
mood  of  disrespect,  but  it'ls  afactthat  a  gentle-  i  to  make,  were  acted  upon  by  the  conventiou. 
man  came  here  one  morninsj  with  a  whole  con-  EECOXsinEBAXiox 

.  stitution  ready  made      (Laughter.)     Tj^^'-^.^'jf.'^       Mr.  MITCHELL  gave   notice  tiiat  he  would 

reat  many  constitution  makers  outside  of  this  ^  reconsideration  of  the  vote  of  yesterday. 

all,  and  if  the   new  constitution  does  not  an-      j     ••       ^i,  j        ,.    t  \t     tixcVc!  ♦    »i  . 

'   ,    .  .  ^.  ^•,,  £    J  *!        J.  ]     adopting  the  amendment  of  Mr.  JAMES,  to  the 

swer  their  expectations,  you  will  nud  them  fol- 1        t'      ',  .,  ■  .  .,      ,     :-i„;;^     i„ 

,      .  r^    1  -  i  report   of  the  committee  on   the  legislative  ae- 

lowing  vou  closely  up.  .      r-  « 


f 


Besides  these  yon  will  find  some  men,  who 
who  hav*  peculiar  notions,  which  they  want 
engrafted  into  the  constitution — and,  as  my 
friend  from  Nelson  said,  insprignated  into  it — 
and  when  all  these  elements  are  combined,  you 
may  depend  upon  it  they  will  make  a  formida- 
ble'array.  I  know  that  many  gentlemen  snp- 
po3  thev  will  have  nothing  to  do  but  go  home 
and  tell  th-:-  old  woman  and  the  children  what 
fine  things  th«y  had  seen,  and  what  fine  eating 
and  drinTcing  they  had  had,  especially  since 
the  convention  had  determined  that  the  seat  of 


I 


port 
partment. 

The  rule  requiring  notice  of  a  reconsideration 
to  lie  over  one  day  having  been  dispensed  with, 
the  question  was  taken  on  reconsidering:,  an4.it^, 
was  decided  in  the  negative. 

EVEXlXG    SESSION'. 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.     I  hold  in  my  hand  a  reso- 
lution which  I  wish  to  submit  to  the  considera^ 
tion    of  the  convention.    I  will  present  it  as  a ' 
substitute  for  the  resolution  now  before  the  con- 
vention: 

"Resdvfd,  That  the  convCTition  will  take  the- 


106^ 


Reuse  of  ihf  people  of  this  commonwealth  as  to  the 
propriety  of  iidoptiiigthe  new  constitution  which 
they  have  formed,  or  re-adopting  the  present 
constitution,  and  will  provide  for  the  adoption 
of  the  ij'jw  constitution,  or  the  re-adoption  of  the 
pres<'nt  constitution,  in  accordance  witli  a  ma- 
jority of  the  qualified  votes  which  shall  be  cast 
in  favor  of  the  one  or  the  other." 

This  resolution  is  offered  for  the  purpose  of 
testing  the  Avishes  of  this  convention  upon  the 
isolated  proposition  as  to  whether  or  not  we  in- 
tend to  submit  the  new  constitution  to  the  people. 
The  first  proposition  which  arises,  is,  whether  or 
no  this  convejition  is  compelled  by  absolute 
necessity — and  by  absolute  necessity,  I  mean 
lawful  compulsion — for  I  take  it  for  granted  if 
there  be  one  member  of  the  house  who  believes 
it  to  be  his  duty  to  come  back  here  lie  will  come 
back  here — to  return  here  and  ratify  the  consti- 
tution after  it  bas  been  approved  by  the  people. 
There  is  no  man  more  opposed  to  coming  back 
than  I  am,  and  perhaps  there  are  few  who  will 
Buffer  so  much  as  I  would  do. 

But  I  wish  to  say  one  word  on  the  question 
now  before  the  house.  The  argument  shall  be 
short,  and  I  would  like  to  have  it  an.swered. 
We  are  assembled  here  for  the  purpose  of  adopt- 
ing, or  changing,  or  amending  the  constitution. 
If  this  was  an  original  convention  under  God, 
•we  would  have  omnipotent  power.  Under  God 
the  constitution  of  Kentucky  was  first  framed; 
and  the  convention  framing  that  constitution 
■would  have  all  power.  Under  the  constitution 
of  the  United  States,  and  that  of  the  state  of 
Kentucky,  this  convention  is  omnipotent  unless 
restrained  by  the  old  constitution.  We  are  re- 
Btrained,  what  for?  We  are  restrained  to  three 
things:  you  are  to  assemble  within  three  months 
after  your  election,  to  re-adopt  the  old  constitu- 
tion, or  change  it;  and  beyond  that,  you  have  no 
power  of  attorney.  You  have  assembled  under 
that  power  of  attorney,  knowing  that  it  was; 
you  have  assembled  at  the  call  of  the  people, 
knowing  that  it  was.  You  have  no  right,  after 
you  liave  assembled,  and  before  you  have  dis- 
charged your  work  to  adjourn  sine  die,  and  leave 
to  somebody  else  to  decide  whether  you  have 
discharged  your  work  or  not.  I  can  best  illus- 
trate this  by  a  legal  argument,  that  cannot  fail  to 
be  comprehended  by  the  most  ordinary  under- 
standing. 

Are  we  to  leave  this  constitution  as  it  stands 
now  upon  a  contingency?  If  we  have  a  right  to 
do  so,  have  we  a  right  to  go  one  step  further, 
and  bind  somebody  else  besides  oui-selves,  to  de- 
termine whether  that  contingency  has  happened 
or  not?  I  say  we  have  not,  because  that  power 
•was  Jiot  delegated  to  us.  We  did  not  assemble 
here  under  a  power  of  attorney,  in  which  that 
power  was  contained;  and  why?  Because  we 
•were  to  "adopt  the  old  constitution,  or  to  amend 
or  change  it.  We  were  to  do  this,  and  not  an- 
other person. 

One  other  idea,  and  it  appears  to  me  to  be  a 
strong  one.  How  much  of  tiie  new  constitution 
is  imperative,  and  how  much  of  it  is  not  impera- 
tive, if  you  should  adjourn  to-morrow?  A  part 
of  it.  every  man  will  say,  must  be  imperative,  or 
you  le&ve  the  taking  of  the  vote  of  the  people  to 
a  contingency.  How  much  of  this  new  consti- 
tutioa  is  active  or  passive,  between  tliis  day  and 


the  day  the  people  shall  vote,  and  have  the  ma- 
jority of  them  voting  one  way  or  another?  Un- 
derstand me.  Here's  to-day;  there's  the  day  the 
people  have  voted.  What  is  the  state  of  the  new 
constitution  in  tlie  meantime?  Is  it  partly  pas- 
sive, and  partly  active,  or  is  it  all  active,  or  all 
passive?  It  is  either  one  or  the  other;  it  is 
either  all  active,  or  none  of  it  is  active.  Then, 
sir,  what  becomes  of  this  clause  in  which  you 
require — it  is  not  a  request,  it  is  mandatory — 
but  what  becomes  of  this  clause  that  "requires" 
if  you  will,  that  your  county  courts  and  your 
sheriffs  shall  perform  particular  duties  in  order 
that  the  vote  snail  be  taken?  Suppose  the  coun- 
ty courts  and  sheriffs  fail  to  perform  the  duties 
you  have  required  them  to  discharge,  Avhat  is  the 
result?  It  may  be  replied  that  there  is  no 
danger  of  their  doing  so.  So  far  as  many  of 
them  are  concerned,  there  may  not  be  any  dan- 
ger, but  you  know,  and  I  know,  that  there  are 
counties  in  the  state  which  were  opposed  to  call- 
ing any  convention  at  all;  and  for  the  purpose  of 
defeating  tlie  constitution  adopted  by  the  con- 
vention, some  fifteen  or  tAventy  counties,  folloAV- 
iiig  out  their  original  designs,  will  fail  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  required  of  them.  What  will 
be  the  result?  We  may  re-assemble  or  not;  if 
not,  the  governor  must  settle  the  question  as  to 
whether  the  vote  of  part  of  the  state  shall  settle 
the  question  or  not.  If  we  re-assemble,  we  will 
have  to  settle  that  question.  But  there  is  this 
difference  between  the  convention  upon  one  side, 
and  the  governor,  and  attorney  general,  and  sec- 
retary of  state,  upon  the  other.  We  have  au- 
thority to  settle  that  question;  they  have  none, 
or  ought  to  have  none.  What  will  be  the  argu- 
ment used  before  the  people?  It  will  be  that  we 
have  neglected  to  discharge  our  duties,  and  have 
thrown  the  responsibility  from  our  shoulders  to 
the  shoulders  of  others.  This  is,  however,  mere- 
ly an  argument  as  to  propriety.  The  legal  ar- 
gument is  the  one  which  1  Avish  to  press  upon 
the  attention  of  the  house,  and  I  hope  it  will  be 
intelligible  and  produce  the  effect  desired. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  suppose  I  might  as  Avell 
commence  by  stating  my  position  under  Avhich 
this  constitution  is  being  made.  I  am  in  favor 
of  the  constitution  Vjeing  ratified  by  the  people. 
I  am  in  favor  of  an  elective  government;  and 
taking  the  constitution  as  a  whole,  I  am  decided- 
ly in  favor  of  it  Avhen  compared  with  the  old 
one.  Having  defined  my  position,  I  will  now 
address  a  few  remarks  to  the  convention.  We 
are  about  to  .separate,  and  I  do  trust  that  we  will 
separate  in  that  same  good  friendship  which  has 
marked  our  deliberations,  and  that  we  will  seal 
this  constitution  in  peace. 

Mr.  President,  I  am  not  convinced  that  it  is 
necessaiy  for  us  to  re-assemble,  and  I  do  not 
want  to  do  so  unless  it  is  absolutely  necessary. 
If  we  have  the  power  to  make  a  constitution, 
have  we  not  the  power  to  settle  the  particular 
manner  in  whicn  it  shall  be  ratified?  The 
attorney  general,  a  man  of  great  legal  al)ility,  is 
of  opinion  that  we  can  do  so,  and  1  think  so  too. 
Before  I  came  here,  this  subject  Avas  mooted  with 
the  distinguished  gentleman  at  the  head  of  the 
government  of  Kentucky.  He  ha<i  no  doubt 
Avhatever  of  the  poAver  to  do  it;  it  was  what  he 
denominated  an  incidental  power,  growing  out 
of  the  maw  power  delegated  to  us,  and  that  it 


KN^ 


conld  in  that  ^a.f\>6  carried  into  operation. 
Possibly  I  may  be  trespassing  upon  private  con- 
versation and  opinion  to  make  those  statements 
here,  for  neither  of  these  gentlemen  expected  I 
should  say  a  word  about  it  here.  Kow,  there  is 
no  vast  drflferenee  between  a  convention  like  this 
and  a  convention  of  revolution.  We  came  into 
existence  by  virtue  of  the  old  constitution,  and 
coming  thus  into  existence,  our  powers  are  lim- 
ited. 

If  I  have  power  to  make  a  government  have  I 
not  all  the  incidental  powers  to  say  what  part 
shall  be  carried  into  operation  now,  and  what 
part  then?  Have  we  not  power  over  all  the  legal 
officers  of  the  country?  TV  e  have  unlimited  pow- 
er— power  to  do  anything.  The  federal  consti- 
tution does  not  interfere  with  any  of  our  acts 
here,  in  relation  to  this  matter  of  making  a  con- 
stitution, and  upon  what  contingency  it  shall  go 
into  operation.  Now,  to  illustrate  this,  let  me 
tell  vou  what  happened  some  years  ago.  A  man 
of  tfte  name  of  John  Anderson,  undertook  to 
bribe  a  member  of  congress.  The  attempt  was 
discovered  and  the  speaker  ordered  the  sergeant 
at  arms  to  arrest  the  delinquent  and  bring  him 
before  the  house.  He  was  arrested  and  thrown 
into  jail.  Now,  congress  is  a  limited  body,  hav- 
ing limited  powers;  we  on  the  contrary  are  in 
possession  of  unlimited  powers.  Anderson  af- 
terwards sued  the  sergeant  at  arms;  but  the  su- 
preme court  decided  that  the  action  of  congress 
was  right,  and  that  that  action  was  taken  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  incidental  powers  possessed 
bv  that  body.  Well,  if  the  attorney  general  is 
rfght,  we  are  in  possession  of  all  powers,  and 
can,  if  we  please,  ordain  that  we  should  pay  our- 
selves ten  dollars  a  day  for  our  services.  We 
can,  if  we  please,  put  part  of  the  constitution 
into  operation  to-day.  Have  we  not  been  putting 
it  into  operation  ever  since  we  came  here?  Have 
we  not  been  directing  the  auditors  of  the  state  as 
to  what  they  should  do?  Now  1  take  it,  that  as 
we  have  the  power  of  turning  out  every  officer  to- 
morrow, so  we  have  the  power  to  appoint  to  any 
office,  which  does  not  interfere  witn  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  We  have  within  the 
scope  of  these  powers,  the  power  of  addressing 
any  officer  of  our  government;  and  if  he  refuses 
to  perform  what  is  required  of  him,  he  may  be 
brought  up  and  punished,  and  the  courts  would 
recognize  our  power,  and  command  him  to  per- 
form what  he  was  desired  to  do.  I  think,  sir, 
upon  this  subject  there  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt. 

Now,  I  will  go  on  to  another  proposition.  The 
gentleman  from  Nelson  made  a  very  ingenious 
argument  this  morning,  and  he  always  conjures 
up  some  tremendous  despot  to  come  in  and  whip 
people  into  his  notions.  It  was  a  very  artful 
address;  but  the  sura  and  substance  of  it  was 
this:  and  I  ask  gentlemen  here  whether  they  are 
prepared  to  go  the  length  of  the  argument  which 
the  honorable  and  distinguished  gentl  .'man  has 
made.  He  says  that  the  people  are  a  good  deal 
like  a  commi.ssioner  in  chancery  under  the  chan- 
cellor; that  they  are  the  commi.ssioner  and  we 
the  high  court  of  chancery.  What!  is  that  the 
position  of  things.'  The  people  alittle  commis- 
sioner, and  we  the  high  court  of  chancerv  to  do 
as  we  please!  But  that  is  the  sum  and  substance 
of  his  argument.   It  smelt  to  me  a  little  like  Na- 


poleon ■vrhen  the  whole  people  were  under  arras. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  beg  you  will  not  put  words 
into  my  mouth  which  I  never  used. 

Mr.  TURNER.  Well,  that  is  the  effect  of  your 
words;  if  not  get  up  and  answer  it.  When  the 
whole  French  people  were  under  arms,  and  Na- 
poleon was  anxious  to  be  made  emperor,  what 
did  he  do?  Why  he  threatened  to  shoot  every 
man  who  would  not  vote  for  him.  We  send  the 
people  a  constitution,  and  if  they  arenot  plea.sed 
with  it,  we  are  to  come  back  here  and  force  it 
upon  them. 

Well,  then,  the  gentleman  raises  a  bug-bear 

about  the  emancipationists.  I  don't  believe  there 

are  15,000  emancipationists   in  the  state;  and  as 

to  the  office  holders,  we  have  fought  them,  and 

I  can  fight  them  again  if  need  be.     I  believe,  sir, 

that  this  constitution  will  be  adopted  by  a  more 

overwhelming  majoritv  than  we  had  in  1848  for 

a  convention.    Yi  e  shall   see   the  people  who 

have  been  kept  out  of   office  coming  forward 

and  shouting  for  the  constitution,   and  the  old 

!  aristocracy  will  be  thrown  ofiF  who  have  been 

i  hanging  like  a  mill  stone  about  the  neck  of  the 

}  treasury.    They  will  come  and  shout  "hosannah" 

for  the  new  constitution.     And  the  office  holders 

too  will  say  that  this  change  is  good  for  them- 

' selves. 

j  Well,  the  gentleman  said  that  our  position  was 
I  something  like  that  of  Hungary,  in  relation  to 
!  Austria  and  Russia,  and  that  our  enemies  would 
!  come  and  attempt  to  crush  our  constitution.  Do 
■  not  vou  suppose  that  the  people  who  called  for 
it  will  defena  it?  They  will  rise  like  a  giant  in 
their  majesty,  and  there  is  no  power  that  will 
be  able  to  resist  them;  and  I  put  it  to  the  honor- 
able gentleman  from  Nelson,  and  the  other  gen- 
tleman from  Nelson  too,  as  they  are  togetner, 
whether  we  have  not  got  Austria  and  Russia 
here,  and  whether  we  who  oppose  this  measure 
are  not  the  Hungarians?  (Laughter.)  Now,  I 
asked  the  younger  gentleman  from  Nelson  what 
liis  view  was  of  his  own  proposition.  He  said, 
we  are  to  come  back  and  see  whether  the  people 
have  adopted  or  rejected  the  constitution,  or 
adopted  the  old  one,  or  to  do  any  thing  else  we 
please.  Now,  what  does  that  mean  but  that  we 
are  to  put  it  in  force  against  the  will  of  the  peo- 
ple; and  to  that,  sir,  I  never  will  consent? 
When  the  people  elected  us,  did  thev  believe  our 
sessions  were  to  be  permanent?  tVhen  are  we 
to  settle  it?  When  are  we  to  resign  the  power 
with  which  the  people  have  entrusted  us?  There 
is,  there  must  be,  a  limit  somewhere.  There  was 
a  mutual  understanding  on  the  part  of  thepeople, 
that  when  we  finished  our  labors  we  should  quit, 
and  not  come  here  from  time  to  time.  And  when 
are  we  to  give  up?  We  make  a  constitution;  the 
people  object  to  it;  we  come  back  and  amend  it; 
the  people  say  "we  don't  like  this,"  and  we 
come  back  again;  and  thus  we  go  on  from  time 
to  time,  and  never  get  done. 

But  there  is  another  view  of  the  question. 
Does  any  gentleman  here  suppose  that  the  gov- 
ernor, and  attorney  general  and  the  auditor  will 
refuse  to  carry  this  constitution  into  effect? 
We  all  know  these  officers  well,  and  who  sus- 
pects that  they  will  refuse?  Neither  of  the  gen- 
tlemen whosay  we  are  to  come  back  and  require  a 
majority  of  all  the  votes  in  the  state;  but  it  is 
tbi6>  we  are  to  come  here,  and  the  governor  is  to 


1064 


issue  his  proclamatiaii,  if  a  majority  of  the  mem- 
bers should  not  come,  and  in  that  Avay  tlie  con- 
fititutioii  is  to  be  ratified.  But  take  it  the  other 
■^^^■y;  you  submit  this  to  the  people  and  tliey  do 
not  accept  it,  what  will  be  the  result?  Why  you 
would  have  your  delegates  fronj  this  couivty  and 
from  tliat  county  yoling  ag:xiinst  the  constitution 
la  its  various  sections.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
if  you  put  it  before  tlie  people  entire,  it  is  for 
them  to  say  wliether  they  will  have  it  or  not.  I 
would  ask  the  people'  this  question:  "Do  you 
believe  it  is  bett<'r  than  the  old  constitution,  and 
will  yo\i  sustain  it,  taking  the  good  and  the  evil 
together?  Wliy,  sir,  by  this  mode,  you  will 
have  all  the  people  voting  for  it  together.- 

Now,  gentlemen,  is  not  this  true?  If  you  go 
home  and  are  decided,  and  don't  go  to  fighting, 
yon  will  carry  the  constitution;  but  you  cannot 
expect  to  carry  it  unless  you  go  to  voting  in  a 
body.  If  we  go  home  and  vote  in  a  body,  our 
success  is  as  certain  as  that  the  sun  is  shining  on 
yonder  hill. 

Finally,  the  gentleman  said  he  hoped  they 
would  all  coateback  and  shake  hands  once  more 
in  the  completion  of  their  work.  It  will  be  un- 
pleasant for  me  to  part  witJi  the  members  of  this 
convention.  I  will  admit  that  there  is  a  great 
deal  of  talent  and  gentlemanly  deportment  here; 
I  respect  every  man  in  this  house,  and  desire  to 
take  every  man  by  the  hand;  but  it  is  scarcely 
within  the  scone  of  human  probability,  that  we 
shall  all  live  till  next  June.  If  tliere  are  not  ex- 
ceeding half  a  dozen  called  to  their  long  home 
before  that  time  we  shall  be  lucky.  And  would 
you  desire  to  come  here  and  decide  this  great 
question  by  a  mere  majority  of  one  or  two  votes, 
us  some  questions  have  been  decided  here?  And 
in  case  of  death,  are  you  to  issue  your  own 
writ,  and  Avait  till  the  people  elect  another  ivp- 
]-esentative?  Taking  the  question  in  the  way 
vou  propose,  a  hundred  difiiculties  will  arise; 
but  if  y<ni  leave  the  matter  entirely  to  the  peo- 
ple, it  will  glad<  leu  their  hearts,  and  there  can 
be  no  question  that  it  would  be  most  gratefully 
accepted.  Every  provision  of  the  constitution 
may  be  altered  before  we  come  back,  and  the 
convention  will  not  be  in  any  better  position  to 
decide  then  than  it  is  noAV. 

For  these  reasons,  I  shall  vote  against  the  res- 
olution, and  in  favor  of  the  rei)ort  of  tlie  com- 
mittee. 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  shall,  of  all  nien  here,  feel 
in  the  most  awkward  position,  if  the  constitu- 
tion goes  to  the  people  and  is  rejected.  1  am  in 
favor  of  the  constitution,  .and  intend  to  devote 
whatlittlcabilities  I  possess, tohavethisconstitu- 
tion  aclopted.  But  although  I  am  decidedly  in  fa- 
vor of  theadoptionof  theconstitution.IwilltHke 
occasion  to  announce  that  I  am  not  in  favor  of 
coming  back  here  to  proclaim  to  the  people  that 
we  have  adopted  it,  because  I  do  not  believe  it 
is  necessary,  and  because  we  can  juat  as  well  do 
vhat  we  were  sent  to  do  without  coming  back 
here.  If  I  entertained  any  doubt  as  to  the  con- 
tingency, I  would  come  back;  but  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  there  is  any  contingency,  except  the 
approval  of  the  people;  and  if  they  do  not  ap- 
prove it,  why  then  let  it  go.  Should  tliey  reject 
It,  I  am  not  in  favor  of  coming  baclc  to  make 
another  constitution;  and  I  think  I  would  say  I 
could  not  be  induced,  under  any  circumstances, 


to  come  back.  I  should  think  myself  sufficient' 
ly  disgraced  by  the  rejection  of  this  constitution, 
without  coming  back  to  have  the  disgrace  re- 
peated. 

Now,  sir,  if  I  understand  the  whole  force  of 
the  argument  of  the  gentlema)(  from  Simpson, 
it  is,  that  if  tlic  constitution  is  not  approved  of 
by  the  people,  we  are  to  reserve  to  ourselves  the 
power  of  making  a  good  constitution,  or  chang- 
ing this  one  in  sucli  form  or  manner,  as  will 
meet  the  approval  of  the  people.  If  that  is  not 
so,  I  Avill  readily  stand  corrected. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  The  gentleman  quotes  me 
correctly.  I  hold  it  Avould  be  wrong  to  reject 
the  new  constitution,  because  five  hundred  peo- 
ple rejected  it,  when  ninety  thousand  were  oppo- 
sed to  the  old  one. 

Mr.  DIXON.  Well  I  don't  see  that  the  matter 
is  changed-  If  the  people  reject  this  constitu- 
tion, then  Ave  are  to  come  back  liere  either  to 
amend  this  constitution,  or  to  do  something  else. 
NoAV,  if  Ave  come  back  to  amend  this  jConstitu- 
tion,  are  the  amendments  Avhich  Ave  adopt  to  bo 
absolute,  or  are  they  again  to  be  submitted  to 
the  people?  The  gentleman,  I  apprehend,  will 
not  insist  that  they  are  to  be  absolute;  and  if 
not,  Avhat  Avill  be  the  consequence?  We  come 
back  not  Avith  the  sanction  of  the  people,  and 
then  AvheriAVe  re-assemble,  Ave  are  to  make  a  neAV 
start  for  another  constitution  sucli  as  Avill  meet 
AvIth  the  approbation  of  the  people.  Well,  sir, 
it  comes  back;  it  is  amended  in  its  form,  and 
we  proclaim  it;  not  being  approved  by  the  peo- 
ple, Ave  amend  it  agaiii,  and  so  it  goes  on  ad  in- 
jinitum.  Does  the  gentleman  mean  to  tell  me 
that  Ave  arc  to  sit  liere  for  the  next  twenty  years 
to  make  this  constitution?  Are  Ave  to  assemble 
and  re-assemble;  are  Ave  to  make  a  constitution 
any  how,  and  drive  it  down  the  people's  throat? 
xVre.we  to' stultify  ourselves  by  making  a  con- 
stitution Avhich  the  people  will  not  ratify;  and 
when  they  refuse,  and  refuse,  and  refuse,  are  we 
to  go  on  mending  up,  mending  up,  mending  up? 
I  will  not  go  for  any  such  measure  or  proposi- 
tion, unless  I  believe  that  Ave  have  not  the  pow- 
er to  submit  it  to  the  people  without  coming 
back.  And  if  any  gentleman  will  convince  me 
that  we  have  not  the  poAver,  and  that  this  is  the 
organic  law  of  the  land,  I  Avill  vote  to  come 
back  again. 

Now,  have  the  convention  or  the  people  tlie 
poAver  to  declare  this  as  the  constitution,  provi- 
ded that  the  people  of  the  state  should  ratify  it. 
We  make  this  constitution,  each  man  signs  his 
name  to  it  and  he  attaches  to  his  signature  this 
proviso,  that  it  shall  not  be  the  organic  laAV  of 
the  state,  until  the  people  of  Kentucky  shall 
have  ratified  it. 

Now,  am  I  to  understand  the  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  that  this  power  does  not  exist?  If  I  un- 
derstand him,  it  does  nor ;  that  we  have  no  poAV- 
er  under  tlie  old  constitution  to  declare  that  this 
shall  be  the  law  of  the  land,  upon  condition 
tliat  the  people  accept  it.  Now,  I  understand 
my  friend  to  maintain  another  position,  which 
is,  that  the  poAver  of  this  conv<>ntion  is  absolute, 
except  so  fir  as  it  is  controlled  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States. 

Mr.  HARDIN.    And  acts  of  congress  passed 

in  pursuance  of  that  constitution, and  of  treaties. 

Mr.  DIXON.    Now  i»  there  any  thing  in  the 


KHSd 


constitution  of  the  Unit«U  States,  which  limits 
HS  in  the  exercise  of  this  particular  power?-.  I 
put  the  question  to  him,  to. show  me  any  clause 
in  the  coustitutiou  of  the  United  States,  under 
which  there  is  any  inhibition  to  the  exercise  of 
this  power.  Where  is  this  povrer?  Let  any  man 
point  it  out  if  ho  can.  The  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  limiting  us  here  in  declaring  the 
mode  of  revising  the  constitution  of  Kentucky  I! 
Surely  the  gentleman  cannot  be  in  earnest.  Sir, 
what  law,  made  under  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  imposes  any  limit  upon  us,  as  to 
the  manner  in  which  we  shall  make  this  consti- 
tution? Sir,  the  gentleman  will  not  pretend  that 
such  restraints  are  i-uposed  upon  us,  either  by 
tlie  constitution  or  the  law,  or  by  any  treaties; 
and  if  not,  then  the  power  is  an  absolute  one. 
Now.  there  being  no  restraint  upon  us,  the 
next  consideration  is,  what  are  the  powers  which 
we  derive  under  the  constitution  of  Kentucky? 
Sir,  tlie  great  proposition  which  1  maintain  to 
be  true  is  this — that  wherever  the  power  is  am- 
ple, all  acts  done  under  that  power,  and  in  pur- 
suance of  that  power,  are  valid.  It  is  only 
when  you  transcend  the  power  conferred  upon 
you  that  it  ceases  to  be  obligatory.  Turn  then 
to  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  see  what 
the  power  is.  It  is  so  perfectly  clear,  that  there 
cannot  be  a  cavil  about  it.  If  I  understand  any- 
thing of  the  power  here  conferred,  it  is  full  and 
ample.  You  have  power  to  re-adopt  the  old 
constitution,  to  amend  it,  or  to  make  a  new  con- 
stitution. You  have  ample,  full,  uncontrolled 
power,  excepting  only  thos**  powers  which  lie  at 
the  foundation  of  the  laws  of  independent  col- 
onies. "Sow,  the  power  being  given  to  us  to 
make  a  constitution,  are  we  prescribed  in  the 
manner  of  doing  it?  There  is  the  question. 
What  is  the  limit  ?  As  a  convention,  we  have 
the  power  to  do  it,  and  mav  we  not  prescribe  to 
ourselves  the  manner  and  form  of  doing  it? 
The  convention  shall  a.ssemble — for  what?  To 
amend  the  constitution.  Is  not  that  precisely 
what  is  left  to  our  decision  ?  It  seems  to  me  so ; 
1  cannot  see  how  we  can  doubt  it.  What  is  the 
proposition  now  before  us?  It  is  that  we  shall 
sign  this  document,  provided  that  a  majority  of 
people  of  the  state  of  Kentucky  shall  ratifv  it. 
That  is  the  proposition.  It  is'to  be  ratified  by 
the  people,  in  a  particular  way  attlie  polls.  But 
the  gentlemen  say  we  have  no  such  power  to 
submit  it ;  we  have  no  right  to  makesuch  a  pro- 
vision And  why?  Not  because  the  constitu- 
tion restricts  it.  Can  we  not  act  to  the  extreme 
limit  of  our  power.  If  you  can  go  to  the  ex- 
treme limits  of  your  power,  there  can  be  no  con- 
troversy about  it,  ana  the  gentleman  does  not 
dispute  it ;  but  if  you  keep  within  the  extreme 
limits,  then  the  gentleman  .says  the  power  do«s 
not  exist.  You  can  do  all,  but  you  cannot  do  a 
part.  You  mav  make  a  deed  in  fee  simple;  but 
you  cannot  malce  a  deed  with  a  condition.  You 
give  him  the  power,  and  can  a  man  exercise  the 
major  power,  and  yet  not  exercise  the  minor 
power?  Suppose,  Mr.  President,  you  give  me  a 
power  of  attorney  to  convev  your  land,  in  the 
county  of  Henderson,  and  1  made  a  deed  with 
tliis  proviso — '"that  you  approve  of  it."  Does 
any  body  believe  that  if  I  have  made  such  a 
deed  as  that  to  the  gentleman  from  Kenton,  if 
that  condition  be  complied  with  by  you — does 
134 


any  body  b«Ii«ve  that  such  a  deed  is  not  bind- 
ing upon  you,  and  upon  all  the  paities  concern- 
ed? It  is  true,  you  gave  me  absolute  power  to 
make  a  deed  without  condition,  and  then  I  make 
it  with  a  condition  that  you  shall  ratify  it ;  and 
3'ou  do  ratify  it ;  where  is  the  diflference.  jf  ow, 
we  are  the  agents  of  the  people  of  Kentucky. 
The  power  is  ample  and  complete.  We  can 
proclaim  the  constitution  here,  ii  we  please,  and 
where  is  the  man  that  will  say  "it  shall  not  be 
so."  The  power  is  complete ;  but  we  do  not 
choo.se  to  exercise  that  power,  without  referring 
the  constitution  back  to  the  people  for  their  ap- 
probation. We  exercise  the  power  amply  and 
fully,  and  will  any  gentleman  question  that  this 
coiistiution,  if  not  approved  by  the  people  is  still 
binding  upon  them.  This  is  the  great  qiiestion 
in  the  case,  but  I  do  not  believe  any  gej^Ofeman 
will  maintain  that  the  constitution  sh^OTd  be 
established  without  the  sanction  of  the  people. 
Now  some  gentlemen  argue  that  the  sheriffs  or 
judges  may  refuse  to  call  the  election.  That  is 
a  thing  within  the  range  of  possibility;  but  I 
would  not  sink  to  such  a  level  of  dishonesty 
and  corniption,  any  portion  of  the  people  of  this 
state,  as  to  suppose  for  a  moment,  that  when 
this  convention  assembled  in  obedience  to  the 
authority  of  the  people,  they  will  shrink  from 
carrying  into  effect  the  express  wishes  of  the 
people  of  Kentucky.  But  if  it  be  necessary  to 
attach  any  penalties  to  the  neglect  of  these  du- 
ties, why  not  impose  suuh  penalties  as  would  at 
once  insure  prompt  obedience?  I  will  not  re- 
ply to  that  portion  of  the  argument  further  than 
to  say,  that  if  the  executive  should  refuse  to  is- 
sue their  proclamation  whenever  the  voice  of 
the  people  of  this  state  had  proclaimed  that  this 
is  the  organic  law  of  the  land,  you  had  better 
call  upon  the  rocks  and  mountains  to  fall  upon 
you,  and  hide  you  from  the  anger  of  the  people. 
Sir  I  would  sign  it,  and  write  it  in  my  blood, 
that  no  officer  of  distinction  will  be  so  recreant 
to  the  high  dutie-s  imposed  upon  him  by  the 
new  constitution.  I  see  no  manner  of  objection, 
none  whatever,  to  our  leaving  the  constitution 
now  in  the  hands  of  the  people;  and  I  should 
like  to  hear  some  argument  on  this  matter  if 
there  is  any  to  be  adduced. 

Mr.  A.  K.  MARSHALL.  This  question 
having  already  been  fully  debated  by  gentle- 
men learned  in  the  law,  I  should  not  have  felt 
I  myself  justified  in  addressing  the  convention, 
!  had  I  not  been  on  the  committee  which  had 
charge  of  this  subject.  As  the  house  has  been 
informed,  this  question  was  debated  in  commit- 
tee, and  the  voice  of  its  members  heard  upon  it. 
I  do  not  now  remember  the  number  who   were 

t (resent.  I  think  there  were  eight — certainly  a 
arge  majority;  and  I  think  there  were  but  two 
who  were  in  favor  of  a  final  adjournment.  I 
had  supposed  that  there  would  have  been  two 
reports  made  to  the  convention.  That  was  the 
understanding  when  the  committee  adjourned; 
but  the  chairman  has  informed  the  house  that  he 
was  induced  to  pursue  a  different  course,  upon, 
the  members  of  the  committee  expressing  to 
him,  in  private,  a  change  of  opinion,  whic-h  in 
his  judgment  authorised  him  to  hand  in  the  re- 
port before  us,  as  emanating  from  a  majority  of 
the  committee. 
I  am  not  of  the  number  ^rho  changed  position 


1066 


on  this  question.  I  entertain  now  the  opinion 
which  I  expressed  in  committee,  thai  it  was  not 
only  right  and  proper,  but  absolutely  necessary 
that  this  convention  should  reassenilSle  to  learn 
the  decision  of  the  people  upon  the  constitution 
submitted  to  them  by  us,  that  we  might  then  do 
that  for  which  we  were  called  together — that 
•which  we  are  commanded  to  do  in  the  present 
constitution,  under  which  we  are  assembled,  and 
from  wliich  we  derive  our  authority. 

This  is  to  me  no  new  question.  In  the  coun- 
ty which  I  have  the  honor  to  represent,  the  ene- 
mies of  constitutionol  reform,  urged  that  it 
would  be  impossible  for  the  convention  to  sub- 
mit its  work  to  the  people,  that  the  new  consti- 
tution must  be  "adopted"  by  the  convention, 
and  to  submit  it  to  the  people  for  adoption  was 
not  permitted  in  the  present  constitution,  in 
which  the  duties  of  the  convention  were  clearly 
defined — duties  which  could  not  be  delegated  or 
intrusted  to  any  other  body. 

The  answerto  this  was  simple  and  plain.  Ad- 
mitting, as  I  was  compelled  to  do,  that  to 
^'adopt"  was  no  less  the  peculiar  duty  of  the 
convention  than  to  "amend,"  or  "change"  the 
constitution,  yet  the  power  to  frame  and  sub- 
mit the  instrument  to  the  people — to  adjourn  un- 
til the  public  will  had  been  expressed — to  then 
re-assemble  and  confonn  its  action  to  that  ex- 
pressed will,  could  not  be  questioned.  Such 
power  has  not  been  denied  either  here  or  else- 
where. Now,  sir,  I  know  that  I  have  not  the 
legal  acumen  to  catch  the  very  nice  distinctions 
which  have  been  drawn  by  gentlemen  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  question  now  before  the  house. 
I  am  not  sufficiently  "learned  in  the  law"  to  see 
no  difference  between  doing  a  thing  myself,  and 
allowing  another  to  do  that  for  me.  I  have  but 
a  plain  common  sense  way  of  looking  to  these 
matters,  and  when  clothed  with  delegated  pow- 
ers, and  directed  to  do  certain  things,  I  am  not 
more  bound  to  do  them  than  I  am  to  do  tJiem  in 
the  way  directed.  The  constitution  of  Ken- 
tucky is  submitted  to  us  for  amendment  or 
change.  I  grant  that  we  can  alter  every  line, 
every  word,  every  letter,  in  that  constitution, 
and  "adopt"  that  which  we  make.  But  we 
alone  can  "amend" — we  alone  can  "adopt." — 
Sir,  we  are  a  constitutionally  assembled  body — 
we  are  here  under  the  constitution  of  Kentucky 
—it  is  still  the  supreme  law  of  this  land,  bind- 
ing upon  every  individual  in  the  state,  and  es- 
pecially binding  upon  the  members  of  this 
convention;  and  the  provisions  of  that  constitu- 
tion which  bear  upon  us,  we  are  SAVorn  to  ob- 
serve. How  can  we  expect  the  work  of  our 
hands  to  be  held  sacred  and  inviolable  if  we 
disregard  the  injunction.s  of  that  constitution 
fjrom  which  we  receive  our  political  existence? 
JTot  only  should    we   observe  the  spirit  of  the 

S resent  law^,  but  the  very  letter  of  that  law. 
.nd  if  we  err,  it  should  be  in  the  abundant  care 
we  take  to  do  nothing  doubtful  or  uncertain. 
BTow,  sir,  what  are  the  provisions  of  the  present 
constitution  which  bear  upon  our  conduct;  and 
which  should  control  our  action?  What  power 
ft  conferred  upon  us  by  it.  and  in  what  Inn- 
^age  does  it  address  itwelf  to  this  convention? 
"To  re-adopt,  to  amend,  or  to  change,"  the  coii- 
Btitution.  This  we  are  to  do.  It  is  as  much 
A«  peculiar  pr«»vinc«  of  this  body  to  "adopt" 


as  it  is  to  "amend"  or  "change"  the  instrument. 
And  as  no  other  body  of  men  can  alter  or 
"amend"  the  constitution,  so  no  other — no,  sir- 
not  all  the  people  of  the  state  can  legally 
"adopt"  what  Ave  may  propose.  The  gentleman 
from  Henderson,  (Mr.  Dixon,)  has  said  that  we 
liave  a  kind  of  power  of  attorney — plenary 
powers — and  that  as  we  have  full  power  to  do 
all,  we  can  do  a  part — power  to  do  our  duty, 
and  power  to  leave  that  duty  but  half  perform- 
ed! I  can  scarcely  think  so.  I  would  ask  the 
gentleman,  have  we  any  authority  to  transfer 
or  delegate  these  powers,  or  any  part  of  them, 
to  another?  If  I  am  employed  as  your  agent  or 
attorney  to  do  certain  things,  and  in  a  certain 
way,  does  that  give  me  the  right  to  do  a  part 
ana  leave  a  part  undone;  and  can  I  transfer  the 
authority  with  which  you  have  clothed  me  to 
another?  I  think  not.  Granting,  then,  all  that 
the  gentleman  has  said  to  be  true,  that  we  have 
the  power  to  do  a  part  and  leave  a  part  undone, 
we  cannot  empower  others  to  finish  up  tliat 
which  we  have  neglected  to  do.     So  far   as  we 

fo,  the  work  is  ours — that  which  is  left  cannot 
e  legally  done  by  any  other.  It  is  competent 
for  us  to  sign  this  constitution  conditonally,  but 
that  condition  compels  us  to  return  and  rfo  that 
which  will  not  be  done  at  all  unless  we  do  it.  And 
if  that  condition  be  not  complied  with,  we  must 
return  and  "re-adopt"  the  present  constitution. 
Suppose,  sir,  the  people  reject  the  instrument 
we  submit  to  them.  What  constitution  have  we 
then  for  Kentucky?  Sir,  we  have  none.  The 
life,  if  I  may  so  speak  of  the  present  constitu- 
tion, is  suspended  upon  the  action  of  this  body. 
Upon  llie  dissolution  of  this  convention  it  dies, 
unless  it  be  "re-adopted."  It  dies  by  its  own 
provisions.     Now  let  the  people  reject — 

Mr.  DIXON.  I  fully  agree  with  my  friend 
from  Jessamine,  that  we  cannot  transfer  our 
power  to  any  agency;  but  that  is  not  what  I  pro- 
pose to  do.  I  do  not  propose  to  transfer  any 
Sower  from  this  convention  to  any  body  else, 
ut  what  do  I  propose  to  do?  You  have  made 
me  your  agent;  all  the  power  is  vested  in  you, 
and  all  the  power  I  have  is  derived  from  you. 
Now  you  give  me  ample  power  to  convey;  and 
although  I  cannot  give  my  friend  from  Jes.sa- 
mine  the  power  to  convey,  I  take  it  that  you,  in 
whom  all  the  power  resides,  may  give  me  au- 
thority to  exercise  that  power  with  your  appro- 
bation.    That  is  my  position. 

Mr.  MARSHALL.  For  one  so  unused  to 
public  discussion  as  myself,  to  attempt  to  meet, 
m  debate,  the  very  able  gentlemen  who  are  op- 
posed to  me,  may  appear  almost  impertinent; 
but  I  will  try  to  answer  the  arguments  of  my 
friend.  I  do  not  understand  that  the  cases  are 
at  all  parallel.  We  are  empowered  by  the  peo- 
ple not  only  to  frame  a  constitution,  but  to 
"adopt"  it.  We  have  met  here  to  confer  to- 
gether— to  agree  upon  the  great  principles  whieh 
will  best  secure  the  citizen  in  all  his  rights — to 
fix  these  principles  and  express  them  in  appro- 
priate language.  But  this  is  not  all;  the  last, 
the  most  important  act  is,  to  "adopt,"  and  we 
alone  can  do  this.  Could  the  legislature  of 
Kentucky  authorize  any  body  of  men,  or,  if  you 

f)lea8e,  the  Avhole  people  of  the  state  to  pass 
aw5?  And  would  laws,  thus  enacted,  be  bind- 
ing?   Is  it  competent  for  this  convention,  called 


1067 


"together  by  the  people,  to  delegate  to  any  man, 
or  body  of  men,  the  power  to  frame  a  constitu- 
tion? Could  we  authorize  the  governor,  attor- 
ney general,  and  secretary  of  state,  to  make  a 
constitution — to  say  what  should  constitute  this, 
that,  or  the  other  article?  There  is  not  a  man  in 
this  house  who  would  so  far  stultify  himself  as 
to  say  that  we  could  have  met,  elected  our  pres- 
ident, secretary,  «tc.,  and  resolved  "that  the 
governor,  auditors,  attorney  general,  and  a  sec- 
retary of  state,  should  "amend"  or  "change" 
the  constitution — submit  it  to  the  people — re- 
ceive their  opinions,  and  either  puolish  their 
work  as  the  constitution  or  "  re-adopt"  the  pres- 
ent one."  If  we  could  not  delegate  all  our 
powers,  how  can  we  delegat<i  a  part  of  them? 
To  "  adopt,"  is  as  important  and  necessary  as  to 
frame;  and  both  must  be  the  act  of  the  conven- 
tion, or  our  work  is  unfinished,  and  of  no  force 
or  effect  wliatever.  1  am  aware,  sir,  that  some 
gentlemen  claim  for  this  convention  unlimited 
power;  while  others  have  intimated  limits  which 
rob  it  of  its  sovereignty  and  absolve  the  citizen 
from  all  allegiance  to  the  constitution  we  may 
make.  I  am  of  opinion  that  within  our  proper 
sphere  we  have  all  power  not  denied  to  us  by 
the  constitution  of  tne  United  States.  But  this 
power  can  only  be  exerted  to  frame  and  adopt 
a  constitution,  and  in  its  exercise  we  must  oo- 
serve  the  requisitions  of  the  present  constitu- 
tion, so  far  as  its  provisions  bear  upon  us.  What- 
ever we  may  choose  to  "  adopt"  as  the  constitu- 
tion of  Kentucky,  is  the  law  of  the  land,  and, 
unless  it  militates  against  the  general  govern- 
ment, every  officer  and  citizen  is  Dound  to  obey 
it.  But  our  "resolves, "  outside  of  that  instru- 
ment, are  as  impotent  as  though  they  came  from 
a  body  of  fish-women  in  the  common  market 
place. 

But,  gentlemen  say,  "we  will  affix  penal- 
ties." Well,  sir,  who  is  there  to  enforce  them? 
Have  we  an  executive  officer?  Is  any  one  re- 
sponsible to  this  body  after  we  dissolve?  Can 
•we  punish  any  one  for  disobeying  our  mandate, 
when  that  mandate  forms  no  portion  of  the  law 
of  the  land?  That  constitution  is  as  powerless 
as  a  blank  sheet  until  it  is  formally  "adopted." 
Like  that  dust  of  Eden  when  fashioned  into 
man,  e'er  he  became  a  living  soul,  to  hold  do- 
minion "  over  tlie  fish  of  the  sea.  and  over  the 
fowls  of  the  air,  and  over  every  living  thing 
that  moveth  upon  the  earth,"  it  awaits  in  weak- 
ness this  life-imparting  act  at  our  hands.  And 
gentlemen  would  entrust  this  last  important  act 
to  the  doubtful  authority  of  the  office-holders! 
Would  Satan,  think  you,  even  if  he  had  possess- 
ed the  power,  have  given  life  to  that  glorious 
mould  destined  so  soon  "to  bruise  the  serpent's 
head?"  Would  these  gentry  of  the  gown  and 
staff  be  more  apt,  could  they  be  endowed  with 
authority  to  do  so,  to  give  effect  to  that  which 
dooms  ttem  to  political  banishment?  Like  my 
friend  from  Mason,  I  would  rather  not  trust 
them.  They  might  think  they  were  "  sworn  to 
support  the  old  constitution."  .  And  suppose 
they  say — and  they  have  a  right  to  say  it — to 
disregard  any  resolution  we  may  pass.  It  is  in 
vain  for  us  to  command,  all  the  homage  and  obe- 
dience they  choose  to  render  us  is  through  court- 
esy, they  may  disobey  every  command,  until 
those  commands    reach    them    as    imperative, 


speaking  the  authoritative  language  of  the 
"adopted"  constitution  of  the  state — suppose 
they  disregard  our  reque.st,  and  say,  we  will  not 
appoint  judges  of  elections — we  are  very  well 
satisfied  with  the  constitution  we  have  sworn  to 
observe,  and  we  doTi't  find  that  it  confers  upon 
you  legislative  powers — ^you  were  a  convention 
to  make  and  "adopt"  a  constitution,  and  if  you 
have  failed  to  do  so,  that  is  your  business,  not 
ours — we  have  no  power  to  correct  your  errors, 
and  would  not  do  it  if  we  had — we  are  magis- 
trates under  the  good  old  constitution,  and  no 
convention  to  "adopt"  anew  one."  Suppose 
they  were  to  act  thus,  and  we  "  shorn  of^  oux 
strength,"  what  sort  of  position  would  we  be  in? 
Why,  sir,  it  is  madness  to  risk  it.  All  here 
know  that  this  may  happen.  The  gentleman 
from  Hendersion  admits  that  it  is  pos.sible.  And 
the  moment  of  that  admission  he  should  have 
given  up  the  argument. 

Sir,  it  is  enough  for  me  to  know  that  it  is  pos- 
sible; for  after  all  the  labor,  time  and  money  this 
convention  has  cost  the  people  of  Kenluc£y,  in 
framing  a  constitution,  so  far  as  I  can  prevent 
it,  there  shall  be  no  possibility  of  its  loss  except 
by  the  rejection  of  the  people  tiiemselves.  I  will 
submit  the  work  of  our  hands  to  them — hear 
their  verdict,  and  act  in  obedience  to  their  com- 
mands. 

The  gentleman  from  Madison  (Mr.  Turner)  is 
in  extacies,  and  joins  in  anticipation  those  hal- 
lahijahs  which  are  to  resound  from  one  end  of 
Kentucky  to  the  other  upon  the  reception  of  this 
constitution.  I  hope  the  gentleman  may  be  dis- 
appointed, though  I  fear  some  fault  will  be 
found  with  our  work.  lam  not  quite  so  san- 
guine as  he  seems  to  be.  And  yet,  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, if  this  convention  fail  to  make  a  constitu- 
tion, it  is  our  own  fault.  If  we  do  not  place  be- 
fore the  people  an  instrument  which  they  are 
willing  to  accept  and  approve,  I  cannot  but  be- 
lieve, that  never  before  in  the  history  of  legis- 
lation, has  the  confidence  of  a  people  been  so 
cruelly  abused.  And  why?  Because,  sir,  there 
came  not  up  to  this  assembly  one  single  man 
who  did  not  understand  distinctly  and  fully 
what  would  satisfy  his  constituents'.  All  knew 
what  gave  rise  to  the  call  of  this  convention. 
All  knew  what  were  the  objections  to  the  pres- 
ent constitution.  I  do  not  pretend  to  say  that 
we  all  knew  how  much  the  people  would  bear. 
How  far  we  could  go  in  unexpected  and  uncal- 
led for  changes  of  principle  and  elaborate  de- 
tail without  danger  to  the  constitution  we  have 
made;  but  there  was  not  a  man  returned  to  this 
convention,  unless  he  wt-re  wilfully  ignorant, 
who  did  not  well  understand  what  he  was  com- 
manded lo  do.  In  most  things  I  think  we  have 
come  up  fully  to  the  commands  of  our  constitu- 
ents. In  some  things  I  fear  we  have  gone  be- 
yond their  permission.  And  woe  to  that  man 
who  has,  from  personal,  sectional,  or  profession- 
al considerations,  (if  indeed  any  such  motives 
have  operated  here,)  been  induced  to  press  into 
this  constitution  any  rule  or  detail  uncalled  for 
and  unexpected  which  may  militate  strongly 
against  its  acceptance.  The  people  required 
that  w'e  should  cnange  the  tenure  of  office  ;  that 
we  should  strike  from  the  constitution  every 
aristocratic  feature,  and  place  the  servants  of  die 
people  within  the  pale  of  a  practicable  respoo- 


1068 


tibility.  This  we  have  done;  but  we  have  gone 
a  KftZc' further.  Thev  required  us  to  take  I'rora 
the  executive  the  appointing  po-wer  and  give  to 
the  real  sovereigns  the  authority  to  select  their 
own  officers.  This  has  been  almost  done;  but 
we  have  done  a  little  more.  Thev  required  us 
to  change  the  sessions  of  the  legislature,  and  to 
place  that  department  of  the  government  under 
wholesome  restraints.  We  have  done  this  also; 
but  this  is  not  all  we  have  done.  They  required 
that  we  should  give  to  every  n}an  ample  securi- 
ty for  the  peaceable  possession  of  his  property 
— and  especially  for  that  species  of  property 
which  is  the  object  of  attack  at  home  as  well  as 
abroad.  That  we  should  throw  around  it  all 
the  guaranties  of  legal  protection  and  constitu- 
tional sanction.  Sir,  I  cannot  but  fear  that  we 
have  fallen  far  short  of  our  duty  on  this  subject. 
Vaporous  and  abstract  declarations  of  rigr.ts, 
claims  based  on  neither  law  nor  constitution, 
but  placed  above  both,  may  nerve  and  stimulate, 
but  will  never  serve  to  check  or  restrain  fanati- 
cism. God  grant  that  we  may  not  soon  feel  the 
need  of  a  more  practical  and  living  law. 

But,  sir,  I  have  said  already  much  more  than 
1  intended,  and  ask  pardon  of  the  house  for  hav- 
ing detained  it  so  long.  I  shall  be  compelled, 
from  a  sense  of  duty,  so  far  as  my  vote  will  go, 
to  place  this  constitution,  when  it  leaves  the 
hands  of  this  convention,  beyond  the  reach  of 
any  power  but  that  of  the  people  themselves.  I 
cannot,  ar.d  I  will  not,  place  it  in  other  hands 
than  theirs.  And  when  this  body  is  dissolved, 
I  desire  that  it  shall  dissolve  either  under  the 
old  constitution  "re-adopted,"  or  under  one 
which  having  met  the  full  approbation   of  the 

Feople,  shall  have  been  "adopted"  in  its  stead, 
n  reference  to  what  I  shall  deem  my  duty  when 
we  return  here,  though  I  know  that  is  a  matter 
of  little  moment  to  any  but  myself,  I  will  say, 
that  if  the  people  refuse  our  work,  like  the  gen- 
tleman from  Henderson,  I  shall  not  want  to 
come  back,  and  shall  return  in  sorrow  and  in 
shame,  for  although  I  have  very  often  voted  with 
the  minority  in  this  house,  there  is  much  in  the 
new  constitution  which  meets  my  most  hearty 
approbation.  But  if  it  be  rejected  uncondition- 
ally, I  shall  vote  to  "re-adopt"  the  present  con- 
stitution. But  if — and  such  I  hope  and  believe 
will  be  the  case — our  work  is  accepted,  I  shall 
return  to  "adopt"  and  sign  it ;  and  do  whatever 
else  may  be  right  and  proper  to  put  the  govern- 
ment to  work  under  it.  If,  however,  in  talking 
with  my  people,  they  say  to  me,  "we  prefer  this 
new  constitution  to  the  old  one,  but  would  rath- 
er have  this  or  that  provision  out  of  it" — for 
there  is  no  fear  that  they  will  want  any  thing 
added — there  is  enough  already  and  to  spare — 
but  if  my  people  tell  me,  "we  will  take  the  in- 
strument as  it  is,  but  would  rather  this  provis- 
ion or  detail  was  out ;"  when  we  meet  again,  I 
will  endeavor  to  have  the  parts  objected  to  ta- 
ken out.  And  if  you,  gentlemen,  nave  learned 
the  same  thing  from  your  people,  why  then  Ave 
will  be  able  to  make  the  constitution  more  per- 
fect, more  acceptable,  than  it  now  is.  But  if  a 
majority  of  tlie  state  say  we  take  it  as  it  is,  1 
shall  gladly  admit  that  I  have  been  mistaken, 
and  rejoice  to  learn  that  our  work  is  more  per- 
fect than  I  now  believe  it  to  be. 

Mr.  MORRIS.     I  stand   forward,  sir,  w  the 


friend  of  this  constitution,  to  entreat  its  friends, 
that  they  will  not,  by  their  closing  act,  smother 
the  offspring  which  has  cost  us  so  much  labor, 
even  before  it  has  been  fairly  usliered  into  the 
world;  that  they  will  not  lay  the  axe  at  the  root 
of  the  tree  before  it  has  commenced  to  blossom, 
and  bear  fruit.  Sir,  I  look  upon  the  resolution 
introduced  by  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  sus- 
taint.'d  as  it  has  been  by  its  friends  upon  this 
floor,  as  calculated  to  inflict  the  most  deadly 
wound  upon  the  instrument  which  we  are  about 
to  promulgate  to  the  world.  They  have  told  us 
that  their  object  in  taking  this  recess  is  not,  alone, 
that  they  may  return  and  certify  the  will  of  the 
people  by  placing  this  instrument  in  operation, 
out  that  when  they  return  home,  they  may  be 
enabled  to  collect  and  ascertain  the  sentiments 
and  wishes  of  their  constituents,  and  upon  their 
return,  make  such  alterations  as  will  confonn  to 
their  wishes.  They  say  that  they  are  unwilling 
to  surrender  the  power  which  they  now  have 
again  into  the  hands  of  the  people — unwilling 
to  trust  this  work,  which  they  have  made,  fully 
and  fairly  to  their  decision.  That  they  have 
determined  to  hold  on  to  the  power  which  has 
been  confided  to  them,  until  such  an  instru- 
ment as  they  will  accept  sliall  be  made.  I  should 
have  no  particular  objection  to  returning  here 
for  the  simple  and  sole  purpose  of  putting  this 
work  into  operation — of  ratifying  what  we  have 
already  done — was  there  the  least  necessity  for 
such  a  proceeding — could  this  power  not  be 
properly  and  safely  delegated  to  others.  But  I 
do  most  solemnly  protest  against  the  idea  of 
returning  here  in  order  to  make  such  alterations 
as  our  constituents  maj  desire.  Such  an  avowal 
must  prove  absolutely  destructive  to  the  end 
which  we  as  friends  of  this  constitution  should 
ardently  desire,  its  adoption. 

I  presume,  sir,  that  there  is,  perhaps,  not  one 
solitary  man  in  this  house  who  has  succeeded  in 
obtaining  all  those  reforms  and  amendments  in 
our  constitutional  law,  which  he  could  have 
wished,  had  his  individual  inclinations  been 
consulted — too  much  has  been  done  to  meet  the 
tastes  of  some  gentlemen — too  little  for  others. 
I  can  well  imagine,  that  such  is  likewise  the 
case  with  all  the  thinking  convention  men  of  the 
state.  The  wishes  and  opinions  of  men  upon 
these  points  are  as  various  and  as  widely  dif- 
ferent as  it  is  possible  to  conceive.  My  own 
plans  for  constitutional  reform  have  by  no  means 
been  carried  out.  There  were  certain  prominent 
features  of  reform  upon  which  nearlv  all  of  us 
united,  which  were  demanded  by  the  people. 
These  we  have  adopted,  and  by  mutual  compro- 
mises and  concessions  we  have  harmonised  the, 
many  conflicting  opinions  of  our  fellow  mem- 
bers, and  have  produced  an  instrument  with 
which,  in  the  mam,  I  am  satisfied,  and  which  I 
doubt  not,  will  meet  the  decided  approbation  of 
the  great  mass  of  the  convention  party,  pro- 
videoi  it  be  placed  fairly  before  them  on  its  own 
merits.  But  when  we  go  home  and  say  that  the 
door  is  still  open  for  amendments;  there  is  still 
an  opportunity  for  further  changes;  all  the  pe- 
culiar sentiments  of  all  the  poople  will  be 
brought  to  bear  against  it,  and  a  party  will  be 
arrayed  in  opposition  to  its  adoption  which  no  • 
instrument,  nowever  perfect,  could  withstand.' 
You  will  have  it»  natural  enemies,  the  friends  of 


1060 


the  old  constitution,  forming  a  very  imposing 
phalanx.  You  will  have  alllhe  office  holders  of 
the  country,  with  all  their  interests.  Emancipa- 
tion will  again  play  its  mighty  aud  all-absorb- 
iuggame.  Those  opposed  to  an  elective  judi- 
ciary will  then  stand  boldly  forward.  Our 
county  court  system  will  not  meet  the  views  of 
a  great  many;  and  a  thousand  matters  of  minor 
consequence,  which  have  their  peculiar  advo- 
cates upon  this  floor,  and  before  the  people,  will 
again  be  brought  forward,  aud  the  friends  or 
enemies  of  each  particular  measure  will  all 
unite  in  opposition  to  our  constitution.  It  was 
this  union  of  various  and  conflicting  sentiments 
which  broke  down  the  old  constitution  by  such 
an  overwhelming  vote.  It  is  this  same  union, 
which,  if  it  be  brought  to  bear,  will  blast  the 
work  of  our  hands. 

"We  pledged  ourselves  that  this  constitution 
should  be  submitted  to  the  people;  that  they 
should  have  the  opportunity  of  selecting  be- 
tween this  and  the  old  one;  and  whether  the 
changes  be  made  now,  or  hereafter,  it  will  be 
equally  imperative  upon  us  to  submit  them. 
How  will  it  be  possible  for  us  to  advocate  this 
constitution  before  our  constituents.  I  can  say 
to  them — this  is  what  we  have  done — these  are 
the  amendments  we  have  made — but  I  cannot 
say  that  these  changes  are  permanent,  that  furth- 
er alterations  will  not  be  made.  No  sir,  if  this 
resolution  be  adopted,  we  shall  have  the  same 
mightv  fijrht  before  the  people  which  character- 
ized tlie  last  summer's  canvass,  and  the  same 
terrible  conflict  which  has  just  been  concluded 
upon  this  floor. 

And  should  any  alterations  in  our  work  be 
made,  shall  we  not  again  submit  them  to  the 
people?  They  certainly  will  demand  it  at  ou  r 
nands;  and  should  we  again  submit,  we  will 
perhaps  again  change,  and  so  on  until  there 
would  be  no  end  to  our  labors.  The  people 
sent  us  here  to  abolish  lifetime  offices.  But  they 
had  not  the  least  expectation,  that  in  electing  us, 
they  had  established  a  hundred  officers  for  life — 
whose  business  it  would  be,  to  be  forever  tinker- 
ing at  their  constitution.  They  had  no  idea 
they  were  establishing  a  perpetual  parliament — 
"Rump  Parliament,"  I  believe  it  was  called — 
upon  which  no  power  could  be  brought  to  act. 
Sir,they  never  dreamed  of  such  thing.  They 
intended  that  the  old  and  the  new  constitution 
should  be  submitted  to  them,  and  between  these 
they  expected  to  select  the  least  objectionable. 

Should  the  people  decide  that  our  labours  for 
the  last  three  months  are  not  satisfactory,  I 
think  it  would  be  but  right  that  we  throw  up 
our  commissions,  and  place  it  in  their  power  to 
select  others  more  competent  to  carry  out  their 
wishes.  Sir,  with  this  meeting  of  our  conven- 
tion my  work,  as  a  constitution  maker,  clo-ses. 
Should  the  majority  so  declare,  and  the  people 
accept  what  we  now  tender  to  them,  I  will  return 
and  put  the  new  wheel  in  motion,  but  I  will  do 
no  more.  Not  one  solitary  change  will  I  con- 
sent to  hereafter. 

Mr.  W.  C.  MARSHALL.  I  have  been  labour- 
ing to  bring  this  session  to  a  close,  and  when  it 
is  brought  to  a  close.  I  trust  we  shall  submit  the 
work  of  our  hands  to  the  people  of  the  country, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  will  be  approved;  for 
after  all  I  have  heard.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the 


people  will  approve  what  wc  haTe  done.  But 
while  I  am  convinced  of  this,  there  is  a  question, 
and  I  and  there  have  been  a  great  variety  of 
opinions  expressed  on  this  floor,  in  relation  to 
it — there  is  a  question  which  ought  to  induce 
every  gentleman  to  reflect  seriously  upon  what 
we  cU-e  about  to  do.  I  ask  the  last  gentleman 
who  has  taken  his  seat,  if  he  believes  that  any 
member  of  this  convention  entertains  a  doubt 
as  to  what  is  tlie  safer  course  to  take  on  this  mat- 
ter. 

Mr.  MORRIS.  I  stated  that  I  should  have  no 
objection  to  come  back  if  it  tvas  found  to  be  ne- 
cessary. 

Mr.  MARSHALL.  And  if  the  gentleman 
cames  back,  does  he  not  come  back  clothed  with 
all  the  power  which  he  now  possesses.  I  ask 
him  if  the  people  reject  this  constitution,  have 
we  not  the  power  to  go  over  all  we  have  done, 
and  to  meet,  as  far  a.s  possible,  the  views  of  the 
people  of  this  commonwealth?  If  he  comes 
back  at  all,  I  ask  him  is  he  willing  to  place  re- 
strictions upon  the  action  of  this  body?  1  tell 
him  that  whattfVcr  we  do  in  this  respect  is  ut- 
terly powerless.  The  people  have  delegated  to 
us  the  power  to  make  a  constitution.  If  we 
fail  to  make  it  when  the  people  have  passed 
theirAotes  upon  it,  and  leave  the  ratification  of 
it  to  some  other  power,  what  have  we  done? 
We  have  conferred  upon  others  the  power  to  do 
that  which  We  have  been  required  to.  We 
have  the  power  to  perfect  this  instrument,  but 
how  is  it  to  be  carried  out?     We  are  to  open  the 

Soils  and  ascertain  the  will  of  the  people. — 
ow,  what  power  has  this  convention  to  pa-ss 
an  act  or  resolution  which  would  require  action 
on  the  part  of  the  officers  of  the  commonwealth? 
Suppose  the  magistrates  should  refuse  to  open 
the  polls,  and  there  is  no  election,  I  ask  have 
we  then  a  constitution?  No;  it  will  be  made  in 
such  case  to  depend  entirely  upon  a  condition. 
Suppose  on  the  other  hand  that  the  election 
should  be  conducted,  and  a  large  majoritv  should 
sny  this  shall  be  the  constitution  of  Kentucky, 
you  require  it  to  be  proclaimed:  and  suppose 
when  the  returns  are  made,  the  govenior  finds  a 
majority  in  favor  of  the  constitution,  I  ask  vou 
if  the  governor  refuse  to  make  the  proclamation, 
is  it,  or  is  it  not  the  constitution  of  the  state? 
You  have  said  the  people  are  to  ratify  it,  yet 
there  is  another  condition  which  is  to  be  cou- 
pled with  that — a  condition  resting  in  the  mere 
will  of  an  individual;  and  thus  after  all,  when 
the  people  have  voted  you  leave  it  to  another 
power,  and  that  power  is  unwilling  to  carry  it 
out.  Where  do  you  stand  in  such  case — under 
the  old  or  under  the  new  constitution?  It  is 
not  under  the  new  constitution  which  the  people 
have  ratified  that  the  magistrate  holds  his  of- 
fice, but  it  is  under  the  old  constitution;  and 
under  that  he  stands  responsible  to  the  people. 
These  are  suggestions  that  have  caused  me  to 
doubt;  and  if  they  couhl  be  removefl;  1  am 
anxious  that  they  should  be  removed,  and  till 
they  are  removed,  I  shall  be  constrained  to  take 
a  different  course  from  that  which  I  anticipated. 
But  I  would  go  further — the  gentleman  from 
Christian  says  he  is  willinp^  to  come  back  and 
endorse  what  the  people  will  do.  He  says  the 
office-holders  and  emancipationists  will  be  arm- 
ed against  it;  but  I  say  submit  this  constitution 


1070 


to  the  people,  and  you  will  neutralize  both  the 
office  holclera  and  einancipationists. 

1  expect  to  go  home  and  sustain  this  eonstitu- 
tiou.  Although  it  does  not  meet  -with  ray  en- 
tire approbation,  yet  as  a  whole,  as  a  matter  of 
compromise,  I  am  willing  to  take  the  stump 
and  stand  by  my  constituents  and  maintain  this 
constitution. 

Reserve  the  privilege  to  come  back,  and  if 
the  people  should  refuse,  of  which,  thank  God 
there  is  no  danger,  the  power  is  still  vested  in 
us  to  come  back  and  ratify  this  constitution  our- 
selves; but  once  let  us  adjourn  indefinitely  and 
all  power  is  lost  forever.  Here  we  can  exercise 
the  power,  liere  we  can  enforce  it  'ere  our  op- 
ponents have  the  power  to  stifle  the  action  of 
this  convention.  That  is  the  condition  in  which 
it  would  be  placed.  If  any  gentleman  can  sat- 
isfy my  mind  that  it  is  unn>?cessary  to  return,  I 
shall  be  most  happy,  for  I  do  not  wish  to  return. 
To  me  it  will  be  a  great  inconvenience;  but 
I  will  most  willingly  inake  any  sacrifice  to  se- 
cure the  stability  of  "this  constitution,  believing 
as  I  do,  that  in  securing  it,  we  are  securing  the 
welfare  of  our  citizens  at  large. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Mr.  President,  as  I 
remarked  in  the  early  part  of  the  day,  when 
this  debate  first  commenced,  I  read  my  authority 
for  the  step  suggested,  in  the  constitution  of 
Kentucky — that  this  convention  is  to  make  and 
proclaim' that  constitution.  I  believe,  sir,  that 
we  have  no  power  to  authorise  any  other  human 
agency  to  perform  that  act;  that  we  cannot,  and 
ought  not  to  place  this  instrument,  and  its  ta- 
king effect,  upon  any  contingency  whatever, 
which  we,  as  a  convention,  cannot  control  and 
correct.  With  a  view  of  testing  the  sense  of  the 
house  on  this  matter,  I  will  ask  the  previous 
question. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 
Mr.  PRESTON  called  for  the  yeas   and  nays 
on  the  adoption  of  the  substitute  of  Mr.  TRIP- 
LETT,  and  they  were  yeas  27,  nays  67. 

Yeas— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  William  K. 
Bowling,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  William  Chenault, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Archibald  Dixon,  Thomas 
J.  Gough.  Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton, 
Vincent  S.  Hay,  James  W.  Irwin,  William 
Johnson,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  William  N.  Mar- 
shall, John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
Thomas  P.  Moore,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rogers,  Jas.  Rudd,  Albert  G. 
Talbott,  William  R.Thompson,  John  J.  Thur- 
man,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  Sibis 
Woodson — 27. 

Nays— Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballin^er, 
John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  William  Bradley, 
Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D.Brown,  William  C. 
Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  Beverly  L.  Clarke-, 
Jesse  Coffey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Gar- 
rett Davis,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chas- 
teen  T.Dunavan, Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford 
Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selu- 
cius  Garfielde,- James  H.  Garrard,  Ricliard  D. 
Gholson,  Ben.  Hardin,  William  Hendrix,  An- 
drew Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Thomas  James, 
George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kavanaugh, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P. 
Manhall,  William  C.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Mau- 


Bin,  Richard  L.  Maves,  Nathan  McClurc,  Wm. 
'.  Mitchell,  John  T).  Morris,  James  M.  Nesbitt, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, Wm.  Preston,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas 
Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John 
W.  Stevenson,  James  W.  Stone,  Michael  L. 
Stoner,  John  D.  Taylor,  Howard  Todd,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller.  John  Wheeler,  Andrew 
S.White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe,  George  W.  Williams,  Wesley  J.  Wright 
—67. 

So  the  substitute  was  rejected. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  the  adoption 
of  the  resolution  proposed  by  Mr.  C.  A.  WICK- 
LIFFE, by  yeas  and  nays,  on  the  call  of  Mr. 
PROCTOR,  and  there  were  yeas  55,  nays  38. 
Several  gentlemen  were  afterwards  permitted  to 
record  their  votes,  and  then  the  result  was,  yeas 
56,  nays  41. 

Yeas— John  S.  Barlow,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wil- 
liam Bradley,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwarcls, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Selucius  Garfielde,  Thomas  J.  Gough,  James  P. 
Hamilton,  Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.Hay,  William 
Hendrix,  Mark  E.  Huston,  Thomas  James,  Wil- 
liam Johnson,  Geo.  W.  Johnston,  Geo.  W.  Kav- 
anaugh, James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke, 
Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W. 
Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  William  C. 
Marshall.  William  N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Mau- 
pin,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  William  D.  Mitchell, 
James  M.  Mesbitt,  Jonathan  Newcum,  Hugh 
Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Al- 
bert G.  Talbott,  John  D.  Taylor,  William  R. 
Thompson,  Philip  Triplett,  John  Wheeler,  An- 
drew S.  White,  Chas.  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N. 
Wickliffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 56. 

Nays — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

Eerson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  William  K.  Bowling, 
uther   Brawner,  Francis   M.  Bristow,  Thomas 

D.  Brown,  William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenault,  James  S.  Chrisman, 
Jesse  Coffev,  Garrett  Davis,  Archibald  Dixon, 
James  H.  6arrard,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Ninian 

E.  Gray,  Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James 
W.  Irwin,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
Nathan  McClure,  John H.  McHenry,  David  Meri- 
wether, Thomas  P.  Moore,  John  D.  Morris,  Wil- 
liam Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Procter, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson, James  W.  Stone,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson — 41. 

So  the  resolution  was  adopted. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  it 
was 

Ordered,  That  the  portion  of  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions,  noade  on 
the  15th  inst.,  not  adopted,  oe  recommitted  to 
the  committee  on  miscellaneous  provisions. 

And  then  the  convention  adjourned. 


lOYl 


WEDNESDAY,  DECEMBER  19,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lancaster. 

RECESS   OF   THi;    OONVEXTIOX. 

Messrs.  T.  J.  HOOD,  PRICE  and  KELLY, 
asked  and  obtained  leave  to  vot^e  on  the  resolu- 
tion of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  which  T\-as 
adopted  last  night,  by  which  the  couveutiou 
agreed  to  take  a  rece.«s  until  the  first  Monday  in 
June.  They  severally  voted  "  nay,"  and  the 
final  result  therefore  stands,  yeas  56,  nays  41. 

COMMITTEE   OF   REVISION. 

Mr.  McHEN RY,  from  the  comraittee  of  revis- 
ion, made  a  further  report,  and  the  amendments 
and  modifications  in  the  articles  of  the  constitu- 
tion which  they  suggested,  were  agreed  to. 

CONTESTED   ELECTION   FOR  CASET  COUNTY. 

Mr.  HARDIN,  from  the  committee  to  which 
was  referred  the  petition  of  sundry  citizens  of 
Casey  county,  in  relation  to  the  election  of  the 
delegate  from  that  county,  asked  that  the  com- 
mittee be  discharged  from  the  further  consider- 
ation of  the  subject,  which  was  agreed  to. 

DEPOSIT    OF   THE   CONSTITUTION. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER,  it  was 
Resolved,  That  one  copy  of  the  constitution, 
which  the  secretary  is  direct<^d  to  prepare,  shall 
be  deposited  with  the  president  of  this  conven- 
tion, and  the  other  with  the  secretary,  during 
the  recess. 

POWER   TO   FILL   VACANCIES. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  GARRARD,  it  was 
Resolved,   That  the   president   be,   and  he  is 
hereby,  authorized  to  issue  a  writ  of  election  to 
fill  any  vacancy  that  may  occur  in  this  conven- 
tion before  the  final  adjournment. 

RECONSIDERATION. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  The  vote  given  by  me  for 
the  nineteenth  section   of  the  report  on  general 

J)rovisions,  I  am  not  satisfied  with,  and  there- 
ore  do  now  move  a  re-consideration  of  the  vote 
by  which  that  section  was  adopted.  In  making 
this  motion,  I  have  no  expectation  that  a  re- 
consideration will  be  obtained,  but  being  satis- 
fied that  my  vote  was  wrong,  I  desire  to  place 
myself  right  on  the  record.  The  proposition  is 
an  abstract  one,  having,  in  my  judgment,  no 
right  to  a  place  in  the  constitution.  Nothing 
practical  can  grow  out  of  it,  even  though  the 
proposition  be  assumed  as  true,  which  I  do,  by 
no  means,  admit.  For  the  first  time  during  the 
session  of  this  convention,  I  call  for  the  ayes 
and  noes  on  the  motion  to  re-consider. 

On  motion,  the  rule  which  requires  a  notice  to 
re-consider  to  lie  over,  was  dispensed  with,  and, 
on  the  motion  to  re-consider,  the  vote  was — yeas 
25,  nays  64. 

Yeas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard 
Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
Ohasteen  T.  Dunavan,  Milford  Elliott,  Ben. 
Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  An- 
drew Hood,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas  N. 
Lindsey,  Alexander  K.  Marshall,  John  H.  Mc- 
Henry,  David  Meriwether,  Wra.  D.  Mitchell, 
Tbos'  P.  Moore,  Hugh  Newell,  Ira  Root,  Wil- 
liam R.   Thompson,   Squire  Turner,  John  L. 


Waller,  Charlea  A.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson — 25. 

Nats — .John  L.  Ballinger,  Alfred  Boyd,  Wm. 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Thomas  D'.  Brown, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  James  S. 
Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coifey.  Hen- 
ry R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William 
Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lucius  Desha,  Archi- 
bald Dixon,  James  Dudley,  Benjamin  F.  Ed- 
wards, Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius 
Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Richard  D.  Ghol- 
son,  Thomas  J.  Gougli,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Thos. 
J.  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irwin, 
Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  George  W. 
Johnston,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey, 
Peter  La.shbrooke,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B. 
Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  William  C.  Mar- 
shall, William  N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin, 
Richard  L.  Maves,  Nathan  MeCiure,  James  M. 
Nesbitt,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Rob- 
inson, Thos.  Rockhold,  John  T.  Rogers,  Igna- 
tius A.  Spalding,  John  W.  Stevenson,  James 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  John  J.  Thurman,  Howard 
Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Henry  Washington,  John 
Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Robert  N.  Wickliffe, 
Wesley  J.  Wright— 64. 

So  the  convention  refused  to  re-consider. 

COMMITTEE   OF   ENROLLMENT. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BRADLEY,  it  was 
Resolved,  That  a  comraittee  of  enrollment,  to 
consist  of  five  delegates,  be  appointed  by  the 
president,  for  the  purpose  of  comparing  the  en- 
rolled constitution  with  the  engro.ssedcopy;  and 
that  said  committee  report  their  action  to  the 
convention. 

The  President  appointed  Messrs.  Bradley, 
Boyd,  Apperson,  G.  W.  Johnston,  and  Preston, 
as  that  committee. 

MISCELLANEOUS   PROVISIONS. 

Mr.  STEVENSON,  from  the  committee  on 
miscellaneous  provisions,  to  which  was  re-com- 
mitted the  report  of  that  committee,  made  on 
the  15th  instant,  reported  the  same  back  to  the 
convention,  with  an  amendment,  in  accordance 
with  the  decision  of  the  convention  on  the  adop- 
tion of  the  resolution  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE. 
The  sections  reported  were  as  follows: 

"  That  the  general  assembly  of  the  common- 
wealth of  Kentucky  about  to  assemble,  be,  and 
they  are  hereby,  requested  t  >  make  all  necessary 
provisions,  by  law,  for  the  proper  carrying  out 
of  the  submission  of  the  new  constitution  to  the 
people  of  this  commonwealth,  as  provided  for 
in  section  four,  of  this  schedule. 

"That  when  this  convention  adjourns  it  will 
adjourn  to  re-assemble  in  the  town  of  Frankfort 
on  the  first  Monday  of  June,  1850,  with  the  view, 
and  for  the  purpose,  of  ascertaining  the  result  of 
the  vote  upon  the  new  constitution.  If  the  same 
shall  have  been  rn.tified  by  a  majority  of-  all 
those  voting  for  and  against  it,  this  convention 
will  then  publish  or  proclaim  the  new  constitu- 
tion as  the  "Constitution  of  Kentucky;"  and 
proceed  further  to  provide  for  putting  the  new 
government  into  operation.  If  it  shall  be  found 
that  a  majority  of  all  those  voting  for  or  against 
it,  has  been  cast  against  it,  then  said  cunstitu- 


1072 


tion  shall  W  (.Wdarod  rejecleci,  and  thi^  conven- 
tion will  forthwith  ic-aJopt  and  re-publish  the 
present  constitution  as  tne  constitution  of  the 
state." 

Mr.  JAMES  moved  to  amend  the  fourth  sec- 
tion of  tlio  report  by  adding  "Tuesday"  after 
the  word  "  Monday  "  so  as  to  provide  that  the 
poll  shall  be  opened  two  days  instead  of  one,  in 
the  month  of  May,  to  take  the  sense  of  the  peo- 
ple on  the  new  constitution. 

A  brief  conversation  ensueil  on  the  amend- 
ment, in  which  Mr.  STEVENSON,  Mr.  C.  A. 
WICKLIFFE,  Mr.  JAMES,  Mr.  BRADLEY, 
and  others  took  part. 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  POLLARD  moved  to  strike  out  the  words 
"first  Monday  and  Tuesday  of  May"  and  insert 
the  words  "second  Monday  and  Tuesday  of 
April." 

The  amendment  was  rejected. 

Mr.  GRAY  moved  to  amend  tlie  fourth  sec- 
tion by  inserting  after  the  words  "general  assem- 
bly" in  the  26th  line,  the  following: 

"At  the  same  time  and  places,  and  in  the 
same  manner,  the  sense  of  the  people  of  the 
state  shall  be  taken,  in  regard  to  the  mode  of  re- 
vising the  constitution,  and  regulating  taxation. 
It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  several  sheriffs  and 
officers  conducting  the  election,  to  propound  to 
each  voter  the  following  questions:  "Are  youfor 
or  against  the  specific  mode  of  revising  the  constitu- 
tion?" " Are  you  far  or  aganist  the  provision,  that 
taxation  shall  he  equal  and  uniform,  and  imposed 
upon  property  in  proportion  to  its  value?"  And  said 
officers  shall,  in  the  same  manner,  make  due  re- 
turn to  the  secretary  of  state,  of  all  the  votes 
cast,  for  and  against  each  of  said  propositions." 

The  amendment  was  not  Agreed  to. 

Mr.  BROWX  moved  to  amend  the  section,  by 
adding  the  following: 

"And  any  sheriff,  or  other  acting  officer,  who 
shall  fail  to  perform  the  duties  herein  prescribed, 
such  sheriff  or  other  returning  officer  so  failing, 
shall  be  liable  to  all  the  fines  and  penalties,  now 
prescribed  by  law  for  failing  to  perform  their 
respective  duties." 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  may  as  well  ask 
the  indulgence  of  the  house,  to  make  a  few  re- 
marks which  it  is  proper  I  should  make,  cir- 
cumstanced as  1  am  in  relation  to  the  vote  of 
last  night.  I  do  not  think  we  can  set  ourselves 
up  to  prescribe  penalties  and  enforce,  by  judg- 
ments of  law,  fines  and  imprisonments  and  make 
them  obligatory  ;  neither  do  we  possess  the  pow- 
er to  refer  the  question  to  any  one  to  say  what 
shall  be  the  constitution  of  Kentucky,  to  any 
man,  save  the  people  themselves,  speaking 
through  this  convention.  It  was  therefore,  un- 
der this  opinion,  that  I  ventured  to  offer  the  res- 
olution I  did,  that  the  convention  should  take  a 
recess  as  it  proposes,  and  meet  again  and  perform 
the  last  and  final  official  act  required  at  our 
hands — the  proclaiming,  as  the  immediate  dele- 
gated organs  of  the  people,  the  constitution  that 
shall  govern  them  and  their  posterity,  when  we 
shall  be  satisfied  that  that  constitution  shall 
have  met  the  approbation  of  the  people  for 
•whom  it  was  made.  I  entertain  theopinion  that 
the  constitution  of  Kentucky  must  emanate  from 
the  people,  and  that  the  only  liuman  agency  or 
organ  to  proclaim  that  fact,  assembled  as  we 


were,  was  the  delegates  chosen  by  the  people  to 

f)erform  this  work.  That  we  could  not,  in  the 
anguage  of  the  gentleman  from  Jessamine,  any 
more  delegate  this  high  and  final  act  to  any  hu- 
man tribunal  over  whose  oflicial  action  we  had 
no  control  after  our  adjournment,  any  more  than 
we  could  delegate  the  whole  poAver  with  wliich 
we  were  clothed  by  the  people.  Could  I,  had  I 
brought  my  mind  to  the  conclusion  that  we 
could  do  this  and  comply  with  the  solemn  duty 
imposed  on  me,  I  should  have  most  cheerfully 
closed  my  labors  not  only  in  this  convention, 
but  in  all  other  public  assemblies  that  may  here- 
afterassemble  in  this  commonwealth.  The  house 
decided  this  question  u])on  its  best  judgment. 
They  sustained  that  resolution.  I  know  some 
gentlemen  were  influenced  by  the  appreliension, 
that  if  this  convention  were  dissolved  by  final 
adjournment,  certain  combinations  would  be 
gotten  up,  and  the  labors  of  this  convention 
Would  be  xiltimately  defeated  by  a  vote  of  the 
people.  These  considerations,  however,  did  not 
influence  my  action,  or  control  my  judgment  in 
the  vote  I  gave  on  that  resolution.  I  had  no 
Avant  of  confidence  in  the  public  functionaries.  I 
did  not  distrust  their  fidelity,  or  their  disposi- 
tion to  carry  out  what  might  seem  to  be  the 
wishes  of  the  convention,  and  the  final  action  of 
the  people,  but  I  was  unwilling  to  transfer,  be- 
yond the  control  of  this  convention,  the  power 
to  do  that  which  I  believed  was  required  to  he 
done  at  my  hands,  the  final  act  of  proclaiming 
the  constitution. 

But  we  have  had  read  to  us  a  lecture  on  our 
conduct  last  evening,  which  I  confess  I  do  not 
very  well  relish.  Coming  from  the  high  source 
and.  respectable  quarter  it  does,  I  have  thought 
it  propiir  to  state  the  reasons  and  grounds  upon 
which  I  acted.  The  editor,  after  speaking  of 
tiie  resolution,  and  proclaiming  as  a  fact  known 
in  this  commonwealth,  that  there  were  organiz- 
ed arrangements  to  defeat  the  new  constitution, 
brings  to  our  minds  the  promises  made  by  the 
convention  party,  that  the  constitution  should 
be  submitted  to  the  people  for  their  ratification 
or  rejection,  and  to  choose  between  the  old  and 
new  constitution,  and  reminds  us  of  the  promis- 
es made  during  the  canvass  for  seats  on  this 
floor.  We  are  told  that  all  these  promises  and 
pledges  are  about  to  be  violateci,  that  by  tlie 
resolution  which  was  adopted,  the  people  we 
represent  are  about  to  be  defrauded  and  cheated 
by  the  delegates  of  this  house  ;  that  submis- 
sion is  a  "mere  form,  an  idle  mockery."  The 
mode  and  manner  in  which  this  convention  is 
to  submit  this  constitution  to  the  people;  the 
mode  and  manner  in  which  we  have  advocated 
the  carrying  out  of  that  judgment,  whatever  it 
may  be,  is  announced  by  tlie  printer  to  this 
house,  as  a  "mere  form,  as  an  idle  mockery,"  as 
a  violation  »»f  the  high  pledges — the  sacred 
pledges — we  owe  the  people.  What  do  you  pro- 
pose to  do  by  the  resolution?  That  the  people 
shall  meet  in  the  most  solemn  form  known  to  a 
free  people,  fully  informed,  so  far  as  we  can  in- 
form them  by  throwing  out  our  work  before 
them,  in  order  that  thev  shall  decide  by  their 
votes,  whether  they  will  accept  the  work  pro- 
posed, as  the  constitution  of  this  commonwealth. 
Is  this  an  idle  ceremony?  Is  this  mere  inockorv? 
Is  this  to  be  proclaimed  from  the  capital  of  the 


1073 


commonwealth,  before  we  disperse,  as  a  viola- ]  enoe  to  that  expression  of  public  opinion,  to 
tion  of  the  pledges  we  have  made?  What  else  ;  that  public  sentiment,  to  that  inalienable  right 
could  we  propose?  Had  we  adjourned,  and  sup- ,  whicn  belongs  to  the  great  sovereigns  of  the 
pose  the  result  of  that  vote  should  have  been  '  commonwealth,  to  determine  for  themselves  the 
left  to  the  chances  of  human  agency,  as  I  re-  principles  of  government,  -iud  rules  of  proprie- 
marked,  over  which  we  have  no  control — had  we  ty,  and  rules  of  right,  personal  and  political, 
have  left  the  result  to  chances,  since  I  admit  that  shall  govern  them  and  their  posterity, 
there  is  a  remote  possibility  of  equal  votes  in  ^  Why,  then,  this  alarm?  Why  this  denuncia- 
determining  this  question,  then  we  nave  no  pow-  tion,  immedi.ately  upon  the  eve  of  our  departure 
er  to  settle  the  controversey  between  the  old  and  for  home,  by  the  accredited  organ  of  this  assem- 
new  constitution  ;  had  we  adjourned,  leaving  bly?  Does  the  proposition  I  submitted  yester- 
this  contest  to  be  affected  by  spurious  and  ille-  day  make  that  constitution  we  have  adopted 
gal  votes,  with  no  power  to  purge  the  polls,  with  better  or  worse?  Does  it  change  its  features  in 
no  persons,  save  the  office-holders,  to  look  out  |  principle  or  detail?  Can  any  man — will  any 
the  spurious  votes,  on  one  side  or  the  other,  j  sane  man  who  approves  of  the  constitution,  vote 
"With  no  power  to  make  such  provision  as  is  i  against  it,  because   the  majority  of  this  body 


necessary  to  ascertain  the  final  result — I  sup 
pose,  then,  we  would  have  been  consider- 
ed as  having  faithfully  carried  out  our  pledges, 
and  the  people  would  have  had  a  fair  chance  to 
vote  for  the  adoption  of  the  new  constitution, 
or  for  the  retention  of  the  old  one.  But  what  is 
this  conjecture?  What  are  the  apprehensions  of 
gentlemen?  That  if  the  people  of  Kentucky, 
after  they  have  looked  at  our  work,  shall  become 
satisfied  that  the  change  of  the  tenure  of  office, 
and  the  mode  of  appointment,  that  the  whole 
principles  of  the  constitution   are  wrong — that 


thought  it  was  their  duty  to  meet  here,  at  great 
private  and  personal  inconvenience,  to  fulfil  the 
high  duty  they  had  voluntarily  sought  to  be  im- 
posed upon  them  by  their  constituents? 

You  may  blame  me,  as  an  individual  member, 
for  incurring  what  some  may  deem  an  unneces- 
sary expense;  but  certainly,  whether  we  meet 
and  proclaim  the  constitution,  or  whether  we 
leave  it  to  the  governor,  or  the  secretary  of  state, 
to  do  it,  does  not  change  the  constitution,  or  al- 
ter the  judgment  of  any  man  upon  this  floor,  or 
in  this  country.     Agaiu,  I  have  heard  it  said  the 


the  old  system  of  appointment  and  the  tenure  of  I  effect  of  that  resolution  is,  that  when  this  con- 
office — the  frame  work  and  principles  of  the  |  vention  re-assembles  in  June  next,  they  will  go 
construction  of  government,  as  prescribed  by  j  to  work,  in  violation  of  the  constitution  which 
the  old  constitution,  were  now  preferred  by  them  I  the  people  themselves  had  approved,  which 
— that  we  should  come  back  as  a  set  of  usurp- 1  point  out  certain  duties  to  be  performed  by  the 
ers,  as  corrupt  delegates,  as  men  unworthy  the  I  legislature — those  districting  the  state  for  circuit 
places  V  e  occupy,  and  again  and  again  attempt  'jurisdiction,  and  appellate  jurisdiction,  and  ap- 
to  re-establish   the  same   principles  of  the  same    portionment  of  representation,  because  of  a  dem- 


constitution,  forcing  it  upon  the  people  against 
their  will,  and  proclaiming  it  as  the  constitu- 
tion, or  again  to  re-submit   it  to  the  people  for 


ocratic  majority  on  the  political  side  of  this 
house  in  regard  to  national  politics,  for  party 
and    political  purposes,   lay    their  sacriligious 


approval  or  condemnation.  I  act  in  public  life  j  hands  upon  the  constitution  which  the  people 
as  I  do  in  private  life,  upon  the  presumption  had  approved,  in  order  to  gerrymander  this  state 
that  my  fellow-men  are  honest  till  the  contrary  in  its  districts  and  apportionment,  to  prejudice 
appears;  and  that  man,  that  delegate  on  this  i  the  whig  party  in  this  commonwealtn.  It  is 
floor,  who,  after  the  people  shall  Lave  proclaim-  I  hardly  necessary  for  me  to  disavow,  for  myself  or 
ed  their  judgment  against  this  constitution,  and  associates,  such  an  intention.  I  only  regret  that 
their  preference  for  the  old,  who  shall  dare  to  such  an  idea  ever  entered  the  imagination  of  the 
get  up  and  propose  to  re-enact  the  same  consti-  most  violent  and  heated  partizan  out  of  this 
tution,  in  principle  if  not  in  detail,  would  not  i  house.  I  am  here,  as  is  well  known,  elected  by 
only  manifest  a  degree  of  political  boldness  and  a  constituency  with  whom  I  differ  politically, 
de.=5'peration  which  could  not  find  approval  in  a    and  in  reference  to  questions  of  party  politics  I 


majority  of  a  bundled  delegates,  constituted  as 
this  house  is.  He  would  be  condemned  as  un- 
worthv  a  seat  on  this  floor.  Xo,  I  for  one  ap- 
proved that  resolution,  and  as  one  who  voted  for 
it,  as  one  who  intends,  as  far  as  his  feeble  abili- 
ties will  enable  him,  to  explain  the  constitution 
to  the  people  who  have  honored  him  with  their 
confidence,  I  will  maintain  it  in  its  whole  as  the 
best  that  could  be  expected  to  emanate  from  the 
hands  of  a  hundred  men  who  necessarily  had  to 
compromise  much  of  individual  opinion  and 
thought. 

If,  after  this  is  done,  and  a  majority  of  the 
people  of  Kentucky  shall  reject  that  constitu- 
tion, because  of  a  preference  for  the  principles  of 
the  old  one,  I  should  return  here  not  feeling, 
in  the  language  of  some  gentlemen  who  spoke 
of  themselves  yesterday,  a  disgraced  man,  but  as 
one  who  feels  disappointed  with  reference  to  the 
fruits  of  his  humble  labors,  but  one  who  will 
bow  with  submission  and  yield  a  willing  obedi- 
135 


have  endeavored  to  discharge  the  cTuty  which 
was  confided  to  me  without  feeling  or  knowing 
on  which  side  of  the  political  questions  of  the 
union  I  stand.  And  I  should  feel  myself  a  dis- 
honored man,  and  I  think  I  may  say  there  is 
not  one  here  who  would  not  feel  himself  adis- 
honared  man,  to  attempt  to  violate  the  provis- 
ions of  that  eonstitution  by  thus  usurping  pow- 
er to  promote  party  purposes. 

As  I  have  remarked  before,  I  labored  to  bring 
my  mind  to  a  right  conclusion  on  this  subject, 
and  would  have  been  glad  to  be  relieved  from 
the  necessity  of  re-assembling,  if  I  could  liave 
believed  it  right — if  I  could  have  brought  my- 
self to  the  conclusion  to  risk  that  constitution 
against  all  attacks  and  all  machinations  to  de- 
feat it.  I  undertake  to  say  that  the  article  which 
I  have  referred  to,  which  declares  the  act  of  yes- 
terday an  idle  mockery,  is  undeserved,  and  is  a 
false  judgment  upon  the  action  of  this  house. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.    I  desired  last  evening  to 


1074 


have  stated  the  reasons  which  operated  upon  the 
committee  in  bringing  forward  the  report  upon 
which  the  house  was  then  acting.  I  had  hither- 
to deferred  mingling  in  this  debate,  because  I 
desired  all  gentlemen  who  wished  to  attack  the 
report  to  have  an  opportunity  of  doing  so,  and 
then  I  designed  to  reply  in  a  brief  and  humble 
manner  to  such  assaults  as  should  have  been 
made  upon  it.  I  had  suppo.sed  that  parliamen- 
tary usage  would  have  entitled,  and  extended  to 
me  the  privilege  of  such  a  position!  It  was,  I 
thought,  due  to  the  committee,  due  to  myself,  I 
thought  it  was  due  to  you  Mr.  President,  who 
had  placed  me,  an  humble,  young  and  obscure 
individual,  at  the  head  of  so  important  a  com- 
mittee, to  have  given  its  chairman  at  the  close  of 
the  debate  at  least  an  opportunity  to  state  the 
reasons  upon  which  that  report  was  founded.  I 
therefore  confess  I  was  surprised  when  the  dis- 
tinguished gentleman  from  Nelson  rose  last 
nightto  deny  me  that  privilege. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  certainly  did  not 
deny  that  privilege.  I  offered  the  gentleman  the 
floor,  and  said  if  he  chose  to  o;cupy  iti  would 
not  call  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  STEVENSON".  I  am  still  constrained  to 
think  I  am  right.  These  are  the  facts:  I  remark- 
ed that  I  wished  to  addr-ess  the  convention. 
The  gentleman  told  me  I  must  address  it  then 
if  I  did  so  at  all.  I  told  him,  as  chairman  of 
the  committee,  I  wished  to  address  the  conven- 
tion after  he  should  have  made  his  assault.  He 
went  back  to  his  seat  and  called  the  previous 
question.  Was  not  myposition  the  same  as  that 
of  the  distinguished  gentleman  himself,  when 
the  elder  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,) 
moved  to  amend  his  report  on  the  appellate 
court?  Did  he  not  then  cla'im  the  privilege  of 
closing  that  debate?  I  thought  the  same 
courtesy  would  be  extended  to  me,  but  it  seemed 
the  rule  in  the  gentleman's  opinion,  at  least,  was 
altered,  and  when  he  was  chairman,  and  when  I 
happened  to  be,  I  was  plainlv  told  I  must  either 
speak  before  him  or  not  at  all. 

I  have  felt  no  peculiar  or  personal  interest  in 
the  adoption  of  this  report,  and  the  only  reason 
why  I  desired  to  speak  at  all,  was,  to  justify 
the  committee  and  myself  before  the  convention 
and  the  country,  that  I  had  not  proved  recreant 
to  your  confidence  or  that  of  the  commonwealth, 
by  making  a  report  without  full  examination  of 
every  principle  contained  in  it.  I  was  clearly 
satisfied  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  come  back. 
I  was  thoroughly  convinced  that  we  possessed 
the  power  of  saying  when,  how,  and  upon  what 
contingency,  tlie  new  constitution  sliould  go  into 
effect.  I  honestly  thought  that  this  convention 
ought  not  to  re-assemble  for  the  mere  idle  cere- 
mony of  proclaiming  the  constitution  to  be  "the 
constitution."  When  the  report  wa.s  made  con- 
taining these  views,  with  the  power  of  the  con- 
vention to  enforce  a  compliance  with  its  terms 
was  denied,  but  the  impolicy  of  a  final  adjourn- 
ment was  eloquently  pourtrayed — for  myself,  if 
I  know  myself,  all  that  I  desired  was  to  meet 
fairly  this  question  of  the  power  of  the  conven- 
tion.' I  desired  briefly  to  offer  a  few  remarks, 
{mtting  this  question  on  its  true  ground,  and 
eaving  the  expediency  of  our  coming  back  to 
the  good  sense  of  the  convention.  I  did  not  de- 
sire to  change  tiie  opiuioa  of  a.nj  mezaber  of 


this  house.  It  was  a  question  of  expediency,  on 
which  honest  minds  might  well  differ.  I  ques- 
tioned no  delegate's  honesty  who  differed  from 
me.  I  measured  no  man's  devotion  to  constitu- 
tional reform,  by  his  opposition  to  this  report. 
I  was  willing,  after  justifying  the  report,  to  have 
left  the  whole  question  to  the  good  sense  of,  this 
house;  and  I  shall  now  proceed  to  do  wSat  I 
should  have  done  last  night,  if  I  could  have 
gotten  the  floor — state  the  grounds  upon  which 
It  is  founded. 

I  differ  with  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr. 
C.  A.  Wickliffe,)  toto  ccelo,  as  to  his  proposi- 
tion broadly  laid  down,  that  this  convention 
has  no  power  to  enforce  any  thing  that  it  does. 
I  understand  him  to  rest  his  proposition  to  re- 
assemble on  that  ground.  I  understand  him 
boldly  to  assert  that  we  possess  no  power  to  en- 
force any  ordinance  we  adopt.  If  there  is  any- 
thing in  precedent  and  authority,  I  would 
point  him  to  almost  every  convention  that  has 
ever  assembled  to  form  a  constitution,  as  con- 
tradicting his  position,  I  would  point  to  the 
Virginia  convention,  where  this  very  question 
arose  and  was  decided.  In  that  body  the  propo- 
sition to  fine  the  sheriff  for  a  failure  to  open  the 
polls,  five  thousand  dollars,  was  offered  and  was 
adopted.  Of  the  character  of  that  convention  it 
is  not  necessary  for  me  to  speak  here.  It  is 
known  to  us  all.  In  it  I  believe  were  the  most 
distinguished  lawyers,  and  the  most  exalted 
statesmen  the  world  has  ever  seen  collected  to- 
gether. There  was  a  Marshall,  a  Madison,  a 
Barbour,  a  Tazewell,  a  Leigh,  a  Johnson,  with 
a  host  of  other  imperishable  names — men  who 
have  passed  in  glory  to  the  grave,  but  the  light 
of  whose  genius  has  formed  a  sort  of  milky 
way  in  the  galaxy  of  legal  talent,  that  has  not 
and  never  will  disappear.  The  proposition 
proposed  here  was  introduced  and  adopted 
there,  and  not  a  word  was  heard  there,  from  any 
man  in  that  distinguished  assembly  in  opposi- 
tion to  it. 

In  Tennessee,  which  was  a  later  convention — 
if  new  lights  have  recently  dawned  on  the  world, 
and  if  our  ancestors  were  such  dark,  benighted 
creatures  as  not  to  understand  the  powers  of 
conventions — Tennessee,  our  neighbor,  has  thi.i 
provision.  In  the  schedule  of  her  constitution  I 
find  the  following  provision: 

"  Be  it  further  ordered.  That  if  any  sheriff  or 
other  acting  officer  shall  fail,  within  the  time 
prescribed  by  this  ordinance,  to  dischange  any 
of  the  duties  hereby  required,  such  sheriff  or 
other  returning  officer  so  failing  as  aforesaid, 
shall  forfeit  and  pay  the  sum  of  $5000,  to  be  re- 
covered by  action  of  debt  in  any  of  the  courts  of 
record  in  this  state;  to  be  sued  for  in  the  name 
of  the  governor  for  the  use  and  benefit  of  com- 
mon schools." 

Look,  I  beseecTi  gentlemen  who  are  question- 
ing this  power,  to  all  the  modern  constitutions, 
and  (hey  Avill  at  once  perceive,  that  the  various 
conventions  adopting  tliem  have  submitted  their 
work  to  the  approval  of  the  people,  and  upon 
its  ratification,  have  required  the  governor  and 
legislature  to  put  it  into  operation.  To  declare 
the  constitution  the  work  of  our  hands,  and  that 
it  is  the  constitution  of  the  commonwealth  of 
Kentucky,  upon  the  happening  of  a  particular 
contingency  is  onething^to  put  the  government 


1075 


into  operation  under  it  is  another.  Now,  we 
have  already,  in  our  report,  declared  that  the 
constitution  submitted  is  the  constitution,  as 
soon  as  ratified  by  the  people.  We,  having  the 
power,  declare  it  to  be  the  constitution,  to  take 
effect  at  a  future  time.  We  do  not  deligate,  as 
some  gentlemen  have  supposed,  our  power  to 
the  governor,  nor  do  we  delegate  it  to  any  one 
else '7  We  exercise,  ourselves,  legitimate  power 
in  declaring  either  the  old  or  new  constitution  to 
be  the  constitution  of  the  coramonwealtb  of 
Kentucky,  upon  the  happening  of  a  peculiar 
contingency;  and  we  select  the  governor  as  the 
organ  to  make  known  the  happening  of  that  con- 
tingencv,  and  the  promulgiug  of  our  declara- 
tions. "Why  cannot  this  be  done?  Why  have 
we  not  the  power?  Why  have  so  many  conven- 
tions pursued  the  same  course,  and  why  has  not 
this  objection  been  hitherto  raised? 

I  considered  that  there  was  not  a  doubt  on 
this  subject.  Sir,  who  are  we,  and  for  what 
have  we  assembled  ?  Do  we  represent  here  the 
sovereignty  of  Kentucky  ?  We  do.  Is  this  con- 
vention a  collection  of  people  unrestrained  by 
law ;  or  are  we  a  legally  existing  convention. 
We  must  be  one  or  the  other,  for  sovereignty  can 
express  itself  but  by  two  ways  ?  It  must  be  ex- 
pressed, either  by  a  constitutional  convention, 
assembled  as  we  are,  by  color  and  sanction  of 
law,  or  by  revolution,  when  the  people  them- 
selves, tired  and  oppressed,  determine  to  take 
the  power  into  their  own  hands, and  by  physical 
force  overturn  the  existing  government.  We  con- 
stitute the  former,  I  apprehend,  and  we  repre- 
sent the  sovereignty  of  Kentucky.  How  were 
we  assembled?  We  were  called  into  existence 
by  the  law  of  the  last  legislature — which  was 
enacted  in  response  to  the  voice  of  the  same 
sovereignty,  expressed  at  the  polls !  The  legis- 
lature, four  years  ago,  passed  an  act  that  the 
people  should  be  consulted  to  know  whether 
they  desired  a  convention.  That  question  was 
submitted  under,  and  in  accordance  with,  the 
provisions  of  the  present  constitution.  That 
organic  law  required  it  to  be  twice  submitted, 
and  it  was  twice  submitted.  The  people  respon- 
ded that  they  desired  a  convention;  that  same 
sovereignty,  through  the  legislature,  provided 
for  the  assembling  of  this  convention ;  and  it 
is  to  that  law  that  we  owe  our  existence  as  a 
convention ;  and  it  is  that  law  which  distin- 
guishes us  from  the  wild  and  mad  revolutions 
which  have  blotted  and  disgraced  the  world. 

It  was  thus,  through  legetiraate  legislative  ac- 
tion, sanctioned  by  me  provisions  of  the  exist- 
ing constitution ;  further  sanctioned  for  the  two 
succeeding  years  by  the  voice  of  the  people  of 
this  old  commonwealth,  (with  a  unanimity  too, 
never  before  equalled,)  that  we  found  ourselves 
assembled,  some  eighty  days  ago,  in  this  hall, 
representing  the  entire  sovereignty  of  the  state. 
The  legislative  act  which  called  us  into  existence 
did  not  attempt  to  limit  the  power  of  this  con- 
vention. It  did  not  attempt  to  clog  popular  suf- 
frage by  attaching  qualifications,  as  requsites, 
for  membership  to  this  body.  It  fixed  the  pay 
of  members  of  this  body.  It  designated  the 
time  of  meeting.  It  provided,  by  appropriate 
provisions,  for  our  election ;  but  was  in  all  other 
respects  silent.  The  election  came  on— dele- 
gates were  elected,  and  we  found  ouiselyes  a  reg- 


ularly  organized  convention  on  the  first  Monday 
in  October — met  together  for  the  purpose  of 
framing  a  new  constitution.  This  convention, 
as  I  have  before  stated,  owed  its  existence  to 
legislative  enactment ;  but  when  it  was  organ- 
ized, that  law  had  no  longer  any  binding  in- 
fluence upon  it.  If  the  act  which  called  us  in- 
to existence  had  have  attempted  to  restrain  us  in 
the  exercise  of  our  power  as  delegates,  by  set- 
ting out  particular  defects  in  the  present  con- 
stitution, restricting  our  power  to  those  amend- 
ments, is  it  contended  that  we  would  have  been 
bound  by  such  an  act.  Unquestionably  not. 
Our  acts  as  members  of  this  convention  already 
contradict  such  a  supposition.  We  have  seen 
this  body  auditing  their  accounts,  and  fixing 
their  pay  at  three  dollars  per  day  for  the  whole 
session,  instead  of  three  dollars  for  the  first  six- 
ty days  and  two  dollars  for  the  remainder.  We 
did  this  in  express  violation  of  the  legislative 
act,  as  construed  by  the  attorney  general — fixing 
our  pay.  By  what  authority  was  this  done, 
except  by  the  power  of  this  body?  Indeed,  I 
am  told  the  attorney  general  did  not  doubt  our 
power  to  fix  our  pay.  His  construction  of  the 
act  of  the  legislature  fixed  our  pay  at  three  dol- 
lars for  the  first  sixty  days  and  two  dollars  for 
the  remainder  of  the  session ;  but  I  am  credily 
informed  he  did  not  doubt  our  power  to  change, 
and  so  informed  the  second  auditor!  Sir,  did 
we  not  exercise  that  power.  Have  we  not,  as  our 
journal  shows,  acted  upon  it  ?  And  shall  we 
now  be  told,  that  we  have  no  power  to  do  any- 
thing, until  this  constitution  is  ratified?  If 
this  oe  true,  of  what  utility  will  be  the  action 
of  this  assembly  ?  If  we  can  do  nothing  with- 
out re-assembling — possess  no  power  to  get  our 
work  before  the  people — have  no  authority  for 
asking  either  the  governor  or  the  legislature  to 
aid  us  in  putting  this  constitution  into  esse — it 
strikes  me  that  our  labours  are  fruitless — a  mere 
rope  of  sand,  which  crumbles  away  and  is  in- 
operative as  soon  as  made.  Mr.  President,  I 
ask  you  how  can  such  a  doctrine  be  maintained? 
Are  we  to  go  home  and  tell  our  constituents  that 
after  all  their  labor  and  toil  for  four  long  years 
in  the  cause  of  constitutional  reform — after  all 
their  money  expended  for  this  convention  and 
in  the  calling  of  it — we  have  no  power  either  to 
coerce  a  sheriff  to  receive  the  expression  of  the 
popular  voice  upon  the  result  of  our  labors, 
and  no  power  to  ask  the  legislature  or  executive 
to  aid  us  in  bring  this  result  about?  Why  may 
not  the  present  legislature,  about  to  assemble, 
enforce,  by  ample  penalties,  the  provision  that  wa 
have  made  for  submission?  Have  we  any  reason 
to  doubt  they  would  not ;  and  if  they  do,  why 
need  we  come  back  ?  I  have  always  under- 
stood that  when  there  was  a  clear  grant  of 
power  given  to  any  body,  that  such  a  grant  car- 
ried with  it  all  implied  and  necessarj'  authority 
requisite  for  its  full  and  complete  execution?  1 
had  always  supposed — 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  should  be  glad  to 
hear  the  gentleman  discuss  this  question.  Does 
the  gentleman  undersand  that  this  convention 
has  the  power,  by  resolution,  to  declare  a  crime 
or  misdemeanor  and  prescribe  punishment  for  it; 
not  by  organic  law,  but  by  resolution? 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  will  bef9re  I  get  through 
most  cheerfully  anrw^er  my  disuog-^iaLied  friend 


1076 


and  give  him  my  opinion.  I  am  particularly 
desirous  of  defining  my  position,  especially  as 
I  do  not  go  as  far  as  the  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son, who  has  so  ably  and  clearly  argued  this 
question  and  defended  my  report,  nor  hcilf  as 
far  as  my  venerable  friend  from  Nelson,  (Mr. 
Hardin,)  who  stated  that  the  powers  of  this  con- 
vention were  absolute  and  unlimited  except  so 
far  as  restrained  by  the  federal  constitution;  but 
before  I  get  through,  I  will  endeavor  to  make 
myself  understood.  I  stand  supported  in  my 
opinion  as  to  the  powers  of  this  convention  and 
the  principles  of  this  report  by  the  action  of 
nearly  all  the  conventions  which  have  assembled 
in  this  country.  When  you,  Mr.  President, 
placed  me  at  the  head  of  this  committee,  under- 
standing that  some  doubt  had  been  expressed 
by  distinguished  gentlemen  as  to  the  power  of 
this  convention  finally  to  adjourn,  I  made  it  my 
duty  to  investigate  it.  I  have  consulted  and 
conferred  with  some  of  the  ablest  lawyers  in  the 
state,  and  with  but  one  exception,  I  have  found 
none  who  doubt.  I  have  carefully  examined 
the  proceedings  of  otherstate  conventions, and  al- 
though most  of  them  have  submitted  their  con- 
stitutions to  the  people  for  ratification,  I  know 
of  but  one  that  deemed  it  necessary  to  re-assem- 
ble. They  have  invariably  left  it  to  the  govern- 
or and  legislature,  coupled  with  their  own  ordi- 
nances, to  put  the  new  government  into  opera- 
tion, when  it  should  have  received  the  sanction 
of  the  people.  The  position  of  the  gentleman 
from  Nelson  is  contradicted  by  the  practice  of 
almost  every  state  in  the  union. 

Nor  will  it  do  for  gentlemen  to  do  away  with 
the  force  of  precedent  and  the  practice  of  other 
states,  in  this  particular,  by  attempting  to  show 
that  the  statutes  calling  the  convention  in  those 
states  have  caused  their  action  as  to  the  mode  of 
the  submission  of  the  constitution  and  theirsub- 
sequent  proceedings.  To  do  so,  would  be  to 
make  a  legislative  act,  calling  a  convention,  the 
charter  of  its  rights!  This  I  deny!  It  is  wholly 
at  war  with  what  I  believe  to  be  the  nature  and 
power  of  sovereignty  as  represented  in  a  legally 
called  convention.  I  have  already  admitted  that 
Ave  owe  our  existence  to  the  law  of  the  last  legis- 
lature, but  I  have  shown  by  our  action  here  in 
regard  to  our  pay,  that  we  were  not  limited  in 
our  power  by  it.  Could  that  act  have  limited 
us  to  action  on  the  judiciary  alone,  by  enacting 
that  our  action  should  be  confined  to  that  sub- 
ject? Is  there  a  gentleman  who  will  contend  for 
it?  I  apprehend  not;  and  yet  if  the  act  is  to 
have  an  effect  upon  us,  and  we  possess  no  pow- 
er ourselves,  we  should  be  forced  to  this  conclu- 
sion! Sir,I  cannot  subscribe  to  this  doctrine.  As 
representatives  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  people, 
we  are  bound  by  no  restrictions  of  a  mere  legisla- 
tive enactment.  No  provision,  it  occurs  to  me,  of 
any  act  of  the  legislature  requiring  a  constitution 
to  DC  carrried  into  effect  in  a  given  way,  would  be 
binding  on  a  legally  organized  convention  cal- 
led under  it.  The  convention  might  recommend 
a  different  mode  to  the  people,  and  they  niiglit 
choose  to  adopt  it.  I  believe  the  exercise  of 
sovereignty  by  this  convention  ison  a  more  exten- 
ded sphere  than  that  by  the  legislature;  and  yet 
I  do  not  agree  with  the  gentleman  from  Nelsoii, 
(Mr.  Hardin,)  and  the  gentleman  from  Madison, 
(Mr.  Turner,)  that  the  powers  of  this  convention 


are  unlimited,  save  so  far  as  they  are  restrained 
by  the  federal  government.  I  believe  the  pow- 
ers of  this  convention  are  great  and  plenary;  but 
I  deny  that  they  have  not  a  just  and  natural  lim- 
it. It  possesses  delegated  power,  and  like  all 
other  delegated  power,  is  limited  by  the  legiti- 
mate object  for  which  it  was  delegated.  I  prom- 
ised I  would  refer  to  this  restriction  of  power, 
and  I  will  now  do  so.  What  is  it?  I  believe 
that  it  confines  the  power  of  this  convention 
within  the  objects  of  republican  government! 
We  were  elected  and  sent  here  to  frame  such  a 
government,  and  are  confined  to  that  object! 
This  restriction  is  as  natural  as  it  is  just!  Our 
delegated  power,  great  as  it  may  be,  does  not 
authorise  us  to  overstep  then  the  protection  of 
life,  liberty  and  property.  If  we  do  so,  we  are 
usurping  power  not  delegated.  If  this  conven- 
tion were  to  ordain  that  any  one  should  be  hung 
by  the  neck  who  should  hereafter  make  an  abo- 
lition speech,  or  that  property  might  be  taken 
without  compensation,  is  it  contended  that  even 
if  the  constitution  was  ratified,  that  such  provis- 
ions could  be  enforced?  Would  not  such  an  or- 
dinance be  declared  by  any  able  and  upright 
judge  the  vilest  usurpation?  The'glorious  writ 
of  habeas  corpus  must  have  lost  its  efficacy,  if 
any  citizen  could  be  thus  ruthlessly  dealt  with, 
under  the  specious  but  hollow  pretence  of  con- 
stitutional enactment.  Away  with  such  a  here- 
sy, and  strike  it  away  from  any  arch  on  which 
we  propose  to  build! 

While  we  act  within  the  objects  of  a  republi- 
can government,  then  we  are  sovereign,  then  we 
are  supreme,  and  have  power  to  carry  this  thing 
out.  It  was  for  this  reason  that  I  voted  for  the 
proposition  of  the  gentleman  from  Bourbon,  in 
which  he  declared  that  the  right  of  property  is 
before  and  higher  than  all  constitutions.  I  vo- 
ted for  it  with  all  my  heart,  for  I  believe  the  na- 
ked savage,  where  no  human  constitution  exists, 
when  he  shall  kill  his  dear,  or  his  bear,  is  enti- 
tled, as  the  husbandman  is  to  his  axe,  to  the 
skins;  and  when  they  are  attempted  to  be  taken 
away  from  him,  it  is  a  violation  of  his  natural 
rights.  If  he  goes  into  a  compact  with  others, 
J  believe  that  he  will  go  for  safety  to  himself 
and  protection  to  his  property.  I  believe  gov- 
ernment is  intended  for  the  protection  of  life,  lib- 
erty and  property,  and  when  any  attempt  to  vio- 
late any  of  them,  they  overstep  that  compact 
and  become  usurpers.  Such  are  my  crude  views 
of  the  limitations  of  the  powers  of  this  conven- 
tion! Look  into  this  book  of  thirty  constitu- 
tions of  thirty  states  and  see  how  many  of  them 
re-assembled  according  to  the  proposition  of  my 
friend  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wiekliffe,)  to  re- 
adopt  that  constitution  or  to  proclaim  it. 

Examine  them  still  further,  and  see  how  many 
of  them,  after  a  submission,  have  entrusted  to 
the  legislature,  (after  the  ratification  by  the  peo- 
ple of  the  constitution.)  the  duty  of  putting  the 
new  govemment  into  operation.  Does  it  not  oc- 
cur to  the  gentleman  from  Nelson,  that  it  is 
strange  that  none  of  these  states  foresaw  the 
danger  and  difficulty  that  has  occurred  to  him? 
I  know  that  my  distinguislied  friend  is  actuated 
by  the  purest  motives  in  offering  his  resolution. 
I  should  be  the  last  man  upon  this  floor  to  ques- 
tion his  zealous  devotion  to  the  cause  of  consti- 
tutional reform,  or  the  ardent  interest  whfch  he 


1077 


feels  in  the  triumphant  success  of  the  new  con- 1 
stitution;  but  he  ■will  pardon  me  for  saying  that  i 
I  think  it  springs  rather  from  his  fears  than  his  i 
judgment.  I 

Look  to  Virginia.  There  they  submitted  it,  t 
having  first  provided,  by  appropriate  penalties,  j 
for  the  selection  of  a  new  legislature  under,  and  , 
requesting  the  old  legislature  to  provide,  by  ad- 1 
quate  penalties,  for  the  proper  submission  to  the  i 
people.     Did  they  transcend  their  power?     The  ! 

freat    men    then    thought    they    possessed    it. ! 
hey  provided  for  the  election  of  members  of  ^ 
legislature  under  the  new  constitution  before  it ; 
■was  adopted   and  inflicted  penalties!     Yet  we  i 
are  told  we  have  not  the  power  to  put  this  cnn-  i 
stitution  into  operatiou.     My  friend  from  Da- 
viess said,  if  we  adopted  this  report  a  part  of  | 
the  constitution  would  be   active,   and  a  part  | 
passive;  that  we  would  be  acting  under  the  old  i 
constitution  till   the  new   one  is  adopted.     We 
attach  a  schedule  to  it  to  sav  how  it  shall  be  put 
into  operation,  and  I  wov.ld  ask  my  friend  from  i 
Daviess  this  question.     Suppose  we  should  say 
this  constitution  shall  not  take  eflfect  till  the 
year  1870? 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  will  ask  the  gentleman 
in  turn,  suppose  we  sav  it  shall  not  go  into  ef- 
fect till  the  year  1870,  but  in  the  meantime  ap- 
point officers  to  discharge  particular  duties,  how 
shall  we  punish  tliera  for  a  failure? 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  will  endeavor  to  an- 
swer. If  we  say  it  shall  not  go  into  effect  till 
1870,  we  of  course  shall  have  the  old  constitu- 
tion in  existence;  and  if  we  request  the  present 
legislature  to  provide,  by  adequate  penalties,  for 
submission,  and  if  they  disobey,  can  we  iiot 
under  these  laws  thus  passed  punish  them  under 
the  old  constitution? 

Mr.  TRIPLETT.  I  would  like  to  have  the  1 
gentleman  answer  me  this  question.  The  old 
constitution  is  in  force  till  the  new  one  is  adopt- 
ed, but  the  old  constitution  does  not  contain  any 
clause  requiring  duties  of  clerks  and  sheriffs, 
which  we  require  them  to  perform.  Where  do 
you  derive  power  to  punish  at  all?  It  is  not  in 
the  old  constitution,  and  the  neW  does  not  go 
into  operation. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  will  answer  my  friend 
with  great  pleasure,  and  I  will  show  that  both 
the  gentlemen  from  Nelson  have  acted  on  what  I 
regard  mistaken  principle.  What  have  we  said 
in  the  judiciary  report  ?  We  have  delegated 
power  to  the  legislature  to  keep  four  or  three  of 
the  judges  of  the  appellate  court  in  office  if 
they  please.  We  have,  I  say,  also  fixed  the 
time  of  the  election  of  these  judges,  which  will 
be  twelve  months  after  the  new  constitution  is 
adopted,  and  some  months  after  the  new  legisla- 
ture, under  the  new  constitution,  iselected.  Will 
we  not  have  a  portion  of  the  old  and  new  con- 
stitution working  at  the  same  time?  Unques- 
tionably. But  ray  friend  would  say  that  this 
has  been  provided  for  in  the  new  constitution. 
Equally  true;  but  this  very  provision  answers 
mv  friend's  objection,  of  the  positive  and. nega- 
tive action  of  the  old  and  new  con.stitution  at 
the  same  time.  It  takes  place  by  one  provision 
in  the  new  constitution.  Have  we  not  the  right 
to  put  it  there?  But  my  friend  from  Daviess 
wishes  again  to  know,  how  is  it  we  can  fine  an 
officer  for  tailing  to  perform  a  duty  before  the 


new  constitution  goes  into  effect,  which  is  not 
provided  for  by  the  old?  Cannot  the  legislature, 
about  to  assemble,  at  our  request,  provide  by 
adequate  penalties  for  the  plan  of  submis- 
sion as  directed  by  us?  Have  they  not  this 
power  under  the  old  constitution?  Would 
they  not  do  it?  Did  they  not  do  it  on 
a  former  occasion;  and  if  they  did,  would  noc 
our  object  be  achieved  and  a  return  here  un- 
necessary? So,  in  regard  to  opening  the  polls 
for  members  of  the  general  assembly  under  the 
new  con.stitution  in  1650.  We  direct  it  to  be 
done  in  this  con.stitution,  and  we  declare  penal- 
ties against  the  officers  who  fail  to  comply. 
This  duty  will  not  be  required  of  these  officers 
until  August,  1850,  which  will  be  three  months 
after  the  ratification  of  the  new  constitution. 
If  they  fail,  would  they  not  be  subject  to  penal- 
ties of  the  new  constitution?  At  the  time  of 
their  failure,  the  said  constitution  has  been  rati- 
fied by  the  people — our  acts  sanctioned — and  I 
am  at  a  loss  to  know  why  said  officers  would 
not  be  rendered  amenable?  In  both  cases  then, 
suggested  by  my  friend,  ample  provision  can  be 
provided  for  the  contingencies  suggested,  and  in 
HO  event  could  our  re-assemblage  be  absolutely 
necessary.  So  at  least  thought  the  committee, 
or  a  majority  of  them.  At  our  first  meeting  my 
friend  from  Wavne  and  myself  stood  alone  on 
this  report;  but  liefore  it  was  made,  a  majority  of 
the  committee  came  over  and  concurred  in  its 
suggestions.  The  committee,  like  all  humanity, 
are  finite  and  short-sighted.  They  may  have 
overstepped  the  mark;  but  they  cannot  see,  that 
in  the  power  claimed  for  this  convention  in  the 
recommendations  of  that  report,  that  they  have 
introduced  any  new  and  novel  principle  into 
the  Science  of  government,  or  that  their  claim  is 
not  sanctioned  both  by  truth,  authority,  and 
precedent. 

There  is  another  ground  on  which  the  opposi- 
tion to  the  report  is  strenuously  insisted  on.  On 
that  ground,  I  shall  not  have  a  great  deal  to  say. 
That  is  a  ground  which  comes  home  to  every 
man's  own  heart,  and  must  be  decided  by  his 
own  judgement. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFE.  Did  I  understand  tlie 
gentleman  to  say  part  of  the  judiciary  report  is 
to  go  into  eiFect  now? 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  No  sir.  You  misunder- 
stood me.  I  replied  in  answer  to  my  friend  from 
Daviess,  that  we  should  have  old  judges  acting 
and  holding  offices  now  held  by  them  for  a  year 
after  the  adoption  of  the  new  constitution,  in 
consequence  of  the  time  fixed  in  the  constitu- 
tion for  their  election. 

With  regard  to  the  erpediency  of  this  ques- 
tion, I  was  about  to  remark,  when  I  was  inter- 
rupted, that  I  have  not  so  much  to  say.  I  sup- 
Eosed  that  every  delegate  on  this  floor  would 
ave  examined  the  subject  with  the  lights  which 
come  nearest  home  to  his  own  conscience  and 
his  own  constituents;  but  there  are  one  or  two 
reasons  which,  as  a  matter  of  expediency,  strike 
me  with  some  force.  While  I  believe  that  every 
man  on  this  floor  desires  this  constitution  shall 
be  approved,  it  may  be  an  important  question 
whether  we  shall,  oy  coming  back  here,  give 
strength  to  the  new  constitution.  I  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  we  should  weaken  it  by  coming 
back.     I  maybe  wrong;  but  I  will  state  the  rea- 


1078 


BODR  of  nljy  opinion.  If  we  re-assemble,  -we  re- 
assemble the  same  body,  with  the  same  alle- 
giance to  our  coustitueuts  ■which  now  binds  us. 
Suppose  that  some  six,  or  eight,  or  ten,  should 
find  out  we  had  honestly  mistaken  what  our  peo- 
ple desired.  Would  not  they  be  compelled  to 
rise  up  and  move  a  reconsideration  of  that  por- 
tion of  the  constitution?  If  I  recollect  right, 
the  report  on  the  judiciary  passed  by  a  vote  of 
two  or  four  otdy.  On  other  subjects,  there  were 
still  closer  votes.  Gentlemen  will  return  here 
with  express  injunctions  that  they  shall  change 
their  votes,  and  it  is  done.  We  then  really 
change  the  constitution.  Does  any  gentleman 
suppose  we  would  not  be  obliged  to  re-submit 
it  when  we  had  changed  it  in  any  important 
point?  It  is  no  longer  the  constitution  which 
we  first  submitted.  It  is  a  new  constitution, 
changed  in  some  important  feature.  Two  or 
three  votes  would  do  this.  Does  not  honesty 
and  good  faith  recjuire  that  if  we  change  it,  we 
should  re-submit  it.  To  fail  to  do  so,  woud  be 
but,  by  our  present  submission,  "to  keep  the 
word  of  promise  to  the  ear,  but  break  it  to  the 
hope."  Well,  suppose  it  re-submitted,  and  a 
second  re-assembling.  Further  changes  in  pub- 
lic sentiment  would  require  re-submission,  and 
the  only  possible  limit  to  our  re-assembling 
would  be  the  improbable  contingency  of  adopt- 
ing a  constitution  so  perfect  in  itself,  and  so  ac- 
ceptable to  our  constituents,  as  not  to  demand 
any  change.  Suppose,  again,  some  of  the  pres- 
ent convention  were  to  die,  or  be  absent,  and  the 
convention  should  think  proper  to  introduce  a 
proposition  of  amendment  on  some  important 
subject  which  passed  by  a  close  vote,  would  not 
this  require  a  re-submission;  and  if,  in  every 
submission,  the  ground  is  taken  that  we  must 
come  back,  where  is  it  to  end?  May  not  this 
very  argument  be  used  by  skilled  and  talented 
oppponents  with  great  force  in  their  crusade 
against  the  new  constitution. 

Again:  how  many  votes  will  not  this  new 
constitution  lose,  should  we  come  back,  by  men 
who,  although  they  prefer  it  to  to  the  old  one, 
yet  in  consequence  of  some  objectionable  feature, 
will  vote  against  it,  hoping  that  upon  our  re- 
turn, that  objectionable  feature  will  be  amended? 
These  are  some  of  the.  views  which  led  me  to 
my  conclusion  of  the  impolicy  of  our  return. 

The  gentleman  from  Nelson,  (Mr.  C.  A.  Wick- 
liffe,)  seems  worried  and  excited  at  an  article  in 
the  Commonwealth,  on  which  he  has  severely 
commented,  and  which  he  thinks  was  aimed 
at  him. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  Not  at  me,  but  at 
the  whole  body. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  do  not  understand  the 
article  as  offensive  to  the  whole  house.  I  did 
not  regard  it  as  personally  offensive  to  any  indi- 
vidual in  this  house.  I  differ  in  politics  with 
that  paper,  and  it  is  not  my  business  to  defend 
it.  There  are  able  men  prepared  to  do  that  who 
agree  in  politics  with  the  paper.  But  while  I 
differ  with  the  editor  of  that  paper  politically, 
he  is  my  warm,  personal,  ana  devoted  friend. 
I  have  Known  him  long  and  well.     I  had  the 

food  fortune  to  serve  witn  him  on  this  floor,  and 
e  stood  by  me,  battling  with  me  for  this  con- 
vention. And  from  that  time  to  this  his  voice 
has  n«r«r  eeas«d,  nor  has  bis  p«a  8topp«<I  tend- 


ing forth  articles  in  favor  of  this  convention.  I 
say  that,  because  it  might  be  inferred  that  he 
had  some  sinister  motive  in  wishing  to  defeat 
the  constitution.  This  is  not  so.  I  know  him 
to  be  as  warm  a  convention  man  as  any  that 
treads  the  sod  of  old  Kentucky.  I  know  him  to 
be  as  chivalrous,  enlightened,  and  liberal  as  any 
among  the  gallant  sons  of  this  proud  old  com- 
monwealth. I  know  him  to  be  above  under- 
taking, indelicately,  unjustly,  or  improperly,  to 
wound  the  sensibilities  of  any  living  man  upon 
this  floor.  I  know  this  from  long  intimacy  with 
him.  He  felt  as  a  convention  man,  and  I  pre- 
sume, under  some  excitement,  he  wrote  the  arti- 
cle. I  say  this,  without  seeing  him,  and  with- 
out the  slightest  knowledge  that  the  piece  was 
to  come  out.  r~kave  not  seen  him  since  it  ca;Rie 
out;  but  I  make  tht^  statement  from  my  knowl- 
edge of  the  man.  I'ljm  ready  to  vouch  he  did 
not  mean  any  disrespect  to  this  convention.  As 
an  editor  he  thought  he  had  the  right,  and  as  a 
convention  man  he  thought  he  was  doing  his 
duty  to  censure  or  advise  what  he  thought  might 
injure  the  constitution.  I  admire  his  coldness, 
and  I  love  the  man,  though  I  may  and  do  differ 
with  him  wholly  in  his  political  views. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  Have  you  ever  seen  an  ar- 
ticle in  the  Commonwealth  in  favor  of  the  con- 
stitution, before  the  meeting  of  this  convention? 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  know  nothing  about 
the  course  of  the  Commonwealth  before  that 
time,  and  what  I  have  said,  I  have  said  to  vin- 
dicate my  personal  friend,  believing  he  did  not 
intend  to  insult  tliis  convention.  But  I  did  hear 
the  editor  of  that  paper  say  he  intended  to  pat- 
ronize the  constitution,  and  I  know  he  did  that 
in  the  legislature.  He  is  not  a  man  who  can  fal» 
sify  his  word.     Mr.  President,  I  am  done. 

Mr.  MAUPIN.  We  told  tlie  people  that  we 
would  refer  the  new  constitution  to  them  to  ac- 
cept or  reject.  There  was  no  occasion  for  mak- 
ing any  sucTi  promise,  as  all  power  is  inherent 
in  them.  If  they  reject  the  new  constitution, 
then  they  fall  back  upon,  and  re-adopt  the  old 
one.  Every  sensible  man  must  know  that  when 
we  adjourn  and  go  home,  we  neither  lose  all  our 
powers,  nor  have  we  any  more  conferred  upon 
us.  There  is  no  interregnum  in  this  govern- 
ment— the  old  constitution  stands,  or  the  new 
one  goes  into  operation. 

Mr.  MACHEN.  The  question  now  before 
the  house  is  one  of  great  moment.  Is  it  one 
upon  which  there  is  no  doubt?  Is  it  not  such 
a  question  as  requires  our  careful  consideration 
and  cautious  action?  I  came  here  with  no  dispo- 
sition to  return.  My  opinion  was  and  is,  tnat 
we  have  the  power  to  submit  our  work  to  the 
people  for  their  approval  or  rejection,  and  if  ac- 
cepted by  them,  to  declare  that  it  shall  then  be 
the  organic  law  of  the  land.  But  is  it  a  ques- 
tion upon  which  there  is  no  doubt  rationally  en- 
tertained? We  have  the  evidences  in  this  house 
of  not  only  doubt,  but  settled  conviction,  that 
we  have  no  such  power.  When  I  see  gentlemen 
of  great  legal  learning  and  experience  occupy- 
ing this  position,  it  is  enough  to  satisfy  me,  as 
one  of  this  body,  as  to  the  prudent  course  to  be 
taken.  If,  upon  a  question  of  so  much  import- 
ance, there  is  doubt  as  to  the  legality  of  a  pro- 
posed action,  and  another  course  can  be  taken, 
upoD  which  there  is  no  doubt,  it  stems  to  me 


1079 


that  we  should  not  hesitate  as  to  our  duty.  Take 
that  course  which  is  plain  and  certain,  and  en- 
sure the  "work.  If,  with  the  doubts  in  and  out  of 
this  house,  as  regards  our  power  to  delegate 
authority  to  any  other,  of  promulgating  our 
work  as  the  organic  law  of  the  land — if  we  sep- 
arate and  go  hence  to  return  no  more,  what  diffi- 
culties may  be  drawn  upon  tlie  commonwealth. 
Suppose  that  the  office-holders  of  this  state,  op- 
posed to  a  convention,  should  refuse  to  yield  up 
their  offices  under  the  pretence  that  our  work, 
from  the  manner  of  its  submission,  was  void;  in 
what  condition,  I  ask  you,  would  our  state  be 
placed?  Commotion,  confusion,  and  strife  would 
necessarily  be  the  result.  I  differ  with  some  gen- 
tlemen here  as  to  our  powers.  They  are  restrict- 
ed in  some  respects,  and  the  gentleman  from 
Kenton  in  quoting  from  the  action  of  the  con- 
vention of  Virginia,  has  not  produced  a  case 
in  point.  Let  me  read  from  the  preamble  to  the 
constitution  of  Virginia,  the  authority  under 
which  they  acted.  It  proceeds  as  follows,  to  re- 
cite their  powers: 

"And  whereas,  the  general  assembly  ot  Vir- 
ginia, by  an  act  passed  on  the  tenth  day  of  Feb- 
ruary, in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  twenty-nine,  entitled,  'An 
act  to  organise  a  convention,'  did  authorize  and 
provide  for  the  election  by  the  people,  of  dele- 
gates and  representatives  to  meet  and  assemble 
in  general  convention,  at  the  capitol  in  the  city 
of  Richmond,  on  the  first  Monday  of  October, 
in  the  year  last  aforesaid,  to  consider,  discuss, 
and  propose  a  new  constitution,  or  alterations 
and  amendments  to  the  existing  constitution  of 
this  commonwealth,  to  be  submitted  to  the  peo- 
ple, and  to  be  by  them  ratified  or  rejected." 

Such  is  the  authority  under  which  the  Virgin- 
ia convention  assembled.  I  ask  you,  if  such 
power  was  delegated  to  this  body  by  the  legisla- 
tive action  under  which  we  a.ssembled?  None 
will  contend  that  it  was.  One  of  the  requisi- 
tions of  the  legislature  of  Virginia  was,  that  the 
work  of  the  convention  should  be  submitted  to 
the  people  of  Virginia  for  their  adoption  or  re- 
jection. That  requisition  carried  with  it  all  ne- 
cessary powers,  to  be  exercised  in  order  to  ac- 
complish that  which  was  required  of  the  conven- 
tion; and  hence  they  might,  with  propriety,  im- 
pose fines  and  punishment  upon  officers  failing 
to  do  their  duty.  But  our  directions  are,  by  the 
legislation  of  last  winter,  to  alter,  amend,  or  re- 
adopt  the  old  constitution;  and  the  submission 
to  the  people,  is  only  in  obedience  to  the  de- 
mands of  those  from  whom  we  received  authori- 
ty to  assemble  here.  We  may  claim  obedience 
to  our  mandate,  but  have  no  power  to  enforce  it. 
Under  these  circumstances,  our  only  safe  policy 
is  to  return  here  and  adopt  the  work   we  have 

Sut  together,  or  re-adopt  the  old  constitution,  as 
irected  by  our  constituents.  I  am  for  taking 
that  course  as  the  course  of  safety,  and  trust  that 
this  house  will  so  determine. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  If  we  cannot  delegate  to  the 
governor  and  the  second  auditor  the  power  to 
make  a  constitution,  surely  I  cannot  delegate  to 
my  friend  from  Ballard  to  make  my  speech. 
I  rose  and  read  from  this  book  to  show  that  we 
cannot  delegate  our  power  which  is  given  on  ac- 
count of  our  skill.  "When  an  apprentice  is. 
bound  to  a  master  oq  account  of  uia  skill,  and 


the  master  dies,  he  is  free;  because  he  was  bound 
for  a  particular  purpose.  A  judge  cannot  act 
by  deputy,  because  he  is  appointed  on  account 
of  his  skill.  A  clerk  can,  oecause  his  is  a  mere 
ministerial  act;  but  a  judge  cannot  appoint  a 
deputy.  A  legislator  cannot  act  by  his  deputy. 
Whv?  Because  he  is  sent  here  on  account  of  his 
skill.  How  absurd  would  it  be  for  one  of  the 
representatives  of  Nelson  county  to  send  his  de- 

?uty  here.  I  have  a  son-in-law,  by  the  name  of 
homas  "W.  Riley,  who  is  a  representative.  If 
he  was  to  give  me  a  power  of  attorney  to  take 
his  seat  could  I  do  it?  Or  if  my  other  son-in- 
law  was  to  direct  me  to  take  his  seat  in  the  sen- 
ate, it  could  not  be  done.  Mr.  Helm  cannot  act 
by  deputy.  We  are  sent  here  to  amend,  alter,  or 
re-adopt  the  old  constitution.  What  do  we  pro- 
pose to  do?  Why,  we  propose  to  appoint  anoth- 
er set  of  gentlemen  to  make  this  very  thing 
which  we  are  sent  here  to  make.  We  are  to  sub- 
mit our  work  to  the  people,  and  they  vote  on  it. 
Can  they  make  a  constitution?  jSo  sir.  Can 
the  people,  in  their  primary  assemblies,  make 
laws?  No  sir.  Have  they  power  under  the  or- 
ganic laws,  rules,  and  regulations,  for  future 
government?  No  sir.  But  under  the  great  prin- 
ciple, that  the  voice  of  the  people  must  be  heard, 
and  when  heard  respected  and  attended  to,  we 
ask  them  for  their  opinion  on  this  subject;  and, 
as  faithful  representatives,  we  are  bound  to  con- 
form to  that  opinion.  But  we  are  the  power 
which  is  to  make  the  constitution.  Yet,  under 
the  great  republican  principle  of  instruction,  we 
call  on  thera  for  advice,  for  instruction;  and 
what  they  advise  and  instruct,  I  have  no  doubt 
the  whole  hundred  members  here  will  conform 
to. 

Well,  we  propose  getting  the  opinion  of  the 
people.  What  next?  The  sheriffs  are  to  com- 
pare the  polls  in  each  county  where  they  have 
a  precinct,  and  the  returns  sent  to  the  secretary 
of  state.  What  next?  The  governor  is  to  call 
a  council,  composed  of  the  secretary,  the  attor- 
ney general,  and  second  auditor.  And  whoever 
may  choose  to  attend  as  spectators,  can  attend 
and  look  on.  Very  well;  tliey  look  on,  and  tlie 
governor,  the  attorney  general,  and  the  auditor 
count  the  polls.  Suppose  it  comes  to  a  hard 
contest  whether  votes  are  good  or  bad,  cast  for 
or  against  the  constitution,  who  is  to  decide? 
Why,  the  governor,  I  suppose,  and  his  secretary 
to  help.  Is  the  attorney  general  to  throw  in  hfs 
weight,  and  the  second  auditor,  too?  Suppose 
it  comes  to  within  ten  votes,  and  there  are  spuri- 
ous votes,  or  supposed  alterations  in  the  record 
— the  governor  and  his  officers  are  to  judce  of 
this,  and  when  the  result  is  ascertained  they  are 
to  make  proclamation  to  the  world.  I  say  that 
in  this  we  should  delegate  to  these  officers  the 
very  thing  we  were  sent  here  to  do.  We  are  to 
come  here,  we  are  to  count  the  votes  given,  and 
we  are,  by  a  faithful  comparison  and  addition  of 
the  votes,  to  ascertain  whether  the  constitution 
is  adopted.  If  it  is,  then  we  are  to  announce  it, 
and  proclaim  it  to  the  world  as  our  constitu- 
tion. 

The  honorable  chairman  (Mr.  Stevenson ) — who 
is  a  man  of  great  ability,  and  is  a  very  fair  new 
edition  of  a  most  illustrious  father,'  and  if  I 
should  say  a  little  improved,  I  hope  I  would  not 
be  offe&siVe,  because  all  new  books  should  be 


ibScT 


_i..i»  ...^  _j  _, 


an  improvement — says  the  committee  had  great 
trouble  on  this  subject.  He  says  they  were  all 
against  him,  save  the  gentleman  from  Wayne, 
v'ho  stood  up  to  hira  most  manfully.  Very  well, 
and  how  did  you  change  them?  They  directed 
hira  to  make  a  report  to  present  to  the  commit- 
tee when  they  met  again,  and  he  talked  to  them 
and  talked  to  them,  till  they  were  willing  he 
should  make  this  report. 

He  says  the  Virginia  convention  did  not  re-as- 
semble, and  the  Tennessee  convention  did  not. 
Very  well,  the  proposition  may  not  have  occur- 
red to  them.  But  the  gentleman  paid  but  a  just 
tribute  to  the  illustrious  gentlemen  he  named, 
who  framed  the  Virginia  constitution,  and  every 
compliment  he  paid  them  I  subscribe  to,  and  I 
bow  with  profound  reverence  to  the  very  names 
as  they  are  mentioned.  The  names  of  Madison, 
Munroe,  Marshall,  Johnson,  and  Tazewell,  I 
bow  to,  but  I  hold  we  are  bound  to  come  back 
and  count  the  votes  for  and  against  the  constitu- 
tion, and  then  if  there  is  a  controversy,  we  are 
bound  to  decide  that  question  ourselves. 

I  have  had  this  question  very  much  at  heart 
for  a  longtime — a  long  time.  I  repeatedly  men- 
tioned it  in  public  speeches  made  last  summer, 
and  wherever  I  named  it,  it  met  with  universal 
approbation.  I  knew  the  opposition  which  the 
constitution  would  have  to  encounter.  When  I 
first  started  this  question  of  a  convention,  it  was 
doubtful  whether  we  would  have  a  majority  or 
not,  but  it  was  a  growing  question,  and  as  it 
grew  it  gained  prosolytes  and  became  stronger 
and  stronger,  and  the  prospect  brighter  and 
brighter,  just  like  the  sun  in  rising,  the  fox-fire  of 
the  opposition  seemed  to  disappear,  and  at  last 
the  ofiice-holders — the  first  year,  great  God,  how 
they  followed  me  round  and  spoke.  When  I 
first  went  to  Washington,  there  was  William 
Booker,  and  the  judge,  his  brother,  who  moun- 
ted the  rostrum  and  spoke  against  me.  In  Green 
Judges  Buckner  was  present,  and  I  expected  they 
would  mount  me.  But  at  last  they  all  agreed 
with  me,  except  the  clerk  and  his  family.  Then 
I  spoke  the  whole  week  in  Nelson  county,  and 
on  Saturday  night  at  Bardstown  I  was  liaunted 
by  the  clerks  and  their  families.  On  Monday 
morning  a  clerk  asked  the  judges  at  a  precinct 
to  open  the  polls  at  8  o'clock,  and  Avhen  the 
judge  asked  "what  is  the  reason,"  he  answered 
to   prevent  Hardin  from  speaking,  for  he  will 

fet  the  people  to  vote  for  a  convention.     After 
spoke,  every  man  but  three  voted  for  a  conven- 
tion. 

Now  we  have  done  all  the  people  claimed. 
We  have  taken  the  appointing  power  from  the 
governor  and  restored  it  to  the  people,  where  of 
right  it  belongs.  We  have  taken  away  the  life 
tenure  of  office,  which  is  an  anti-republican  fea- 
ture in  the  present  constitution.  We  have  done 
more.  By  our  whole  regulations  put  together, 
we  shall  save  from  $30,000  to  ,$35,000  a  year. 
Every  great  object  of  the  people  is  answered. 
But  yet  we  know  there  is  a  party  greatly  dissat- 
isfied. There  are  not  less  than  thirty  or  forty 
thousand  men  against  any  constitution  we  may 
make,  and  in  favor  of  the  present.  To  be  sure 
there  were  not  so  many  tlie  second  year  as  the 
first.  Why?  Because  the  office-holders  saw  we 
■would  carry  the  convention,  and  then  they 
pilched  in,  and  swore  they  Wcr«  in  the  hunt 


far 


■.  ■  ,     ■■  S    -■-  -.      ■  .    .O    1         .  ..     •  .,■.  .     , 

from  the  start,  (laughter,)  although  we  know 
they  came  in  after  the  first  year's  voting.  0, 
they  were  the  greatest  men  for  a  convention; 
like  Falstaff,  when  he  found  Hotspur  dead,  who 
was  killed  by  the  prince,  he  picked  him  up  and 
he  waddled  off  with  him,  the  old  fat  drunkard, 
and  threw  him  down  before  the  king,  and  said 
I  expect  to  be  made  a  duke  or  an  earl,  if  not  the 
king  may  kill  the  next  Percy  himself.  So  witli 
these  men.  The  second  year  they  swore  they 
had  killed  Hotspur  themselves,  when  they  had 
not  stuck  a  lance  in  him.  (Laughter.)  Nay  sir, 
more.  I  saw  men  who  at  first  stood  off  and  nev- 
er put  their  names  to  it  till  they  saw  the  state  of 
the  weather  out  of  doors.  But  when  they  saw 
the  convention  was  a  beautiful  trade  wind,  how 
they  spread  their  sails — great  God  how  they 
pitched  in!    (Renewed  laughter.) 

We  have  all  the  opposers  of  the  constitution 
to  fight.  We  have  all  the  emancipationists  and 
all  the  officeholders  for  life,  or  a  great  body  of 
them  to  fight.  These  will  all  combine,  and 
thousands  and  thousands  will  be  raised  to  de- 
feat it. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  May  I  ask  the  ques- 
tion; suppose  the  people  should  reject  this  con- 
stitution, and  this  convention  assemble  in  June, 
do  you  think  it  competent  for  this  convention 
to  make  a  new  constitution  or  make  amend- 
ments to  the  work?  And  if  you  think  it  com- 
petent, would  you  be  in  favor  of  it? 

Mr.  HARDIN.  We  should  meet  with  the 
same  powers  as  at  first. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  Will  we  make  any 
change? 

Mr.  HARDIN.  Nothing  material.  I  was 
saying  these  three  classes  of  opposers  we  shall 
have.  First  the  emancipationists,  then  those 
who  prefer  the  old  constitution,  and  next  the 
old  hunkers.  Thank  God,  I  am  a  barnburner, 
for  I  understand  the  old  hunkers  to  be  those 
who  hold  on  to  office  until  God  takes  them 
away,  and  as  Jefferson  said,  "they  scarcely  ever 
die."  I  understand  barnburners  to  be  those  who 
are  opposed  to  those  in  office,  and  are  as  anxious 
to  get  rid  of  them  as  the  old  trapper  when  he 
said  if  he  could  not  get  rid  of  the  rats,  he  would 
burn  the  barn,  rats  and  all. 

How  long  may  a  man  hold  on  to  office?  Fifty 
or  sixty  years  I  suppose.  I  know  men  in  office  who 
have,by  themselves  ortlieir  vendees,  been  in  office 
sixty  years,  and  are  now  precisely  like  old  broth- 
er Dobson.  Dobson  is  represented  as  a  handsome 
young  man  who  was  married  at  the  age  of 
twenty  one.  On  the  night  of  the  wedding  there 
was  a  knocking  at  the  door,  and  a  servant  went 
and  came  back  and  told  his  master  that  a 
stranger  who  wished  to  see  him  was  at  the  door. 
Dobson  went  and  enquired  who  lie  was,  and 
what  ho  wanted.  The  stranger  replied,  "I  am 
death,  and  I  have  come  for  you."  "My  God" 
said  Dobson,  "you  have  called  out  of  time." 
[Laughter.]  Said  death,  "I  know  I  have  called 
in  rather  a  bad  time;  I  will  wait  a  little."  In 
sixty  years  he  came  again,  and  again  he  was 
asked  what  he  wanted,  and  he  said,  "I  have 
come  for  you  Mr.  Dobson."  "Good  God"  said 
Dobson,  "have  you  come  so  soon?  I  did  not  ex- 
pect you  so  soon  as  this."  [Renewed  laughter.] 
So  it'is  with  the  office-holders;  when  tliey  have 
been  in  sixty  years,  they  say  they  have  only 


1081 


been  in  a  short  time.  Jacob  said  his  days  had 
been  a  hundred  and  twenty  and  five  years,  and 
they  had  been  few  and  evil;  so  it  is  with  the 
office-holders — they  think  after  sixty  years  they 
have  been  in  office  only  a  few  days. 

I  want  to  see  rotation  in  office,  and  the  cor- 
rupt sale  of  sheriff's  offices  at  the  court  house 
door,  or  in  the  court  yard,  taken  from  this  gov- 
ernment; when  you  leave  it  to  the  people  Jyou 
can  do  that.  My  dear  friend,  you  cannot  sell 
a  clerkship  then  for  $3,000,  nor  for  $14,000,  as 
was  done  in  Lexington;  nor  in  the  streets,  cry 
out  the  offices  from  one  end  of  the  street  to  the 
other. 

Sir,  I  was  unhappy  from  the  day  this  conven- 
tion was  called  till  fast  night.  I  was  afraid  all 
these  discordant  interests,  the  emancipationists, 
the  old  hunkers,  and  the  old  constitution  men, 
would  combine  and  raise  money — which  is  the 
sinews  of  war  politically  as  well  as  civilly — and 
no  man  would  subscribe  one  dollar  for  the  con- 
stitution, and  that  they  would  mash  it  up.  A 
dark  cloud  hung  over  our  prospects  till  last  night. 
The  lightning  seemed  to  flash,  and  the  thunder 
to  roll;  but  thank  God,  it  is  past,  and  I  see  the 
bright  sun  of  Austerlitz  now  bursting  on  the 
people.  Yes,  sir,  the  bright  sun  is  shining  on 
us,  and  as  sure  a.s  the  Lord  liveth  we  will  have  a 
constitution,  and  the  people  will  take  it.  Where 
will  be  the  emancipationists?  Will  they  under- 
take to  kill  you,  friend  Meriwether?  (Laughter.) 
Never.  They  will  not  be  a  thorn  in  your  side. 
Where  will  be  the  old  hunkers?  They  will 
swear  they  were  with  us  from  the  first.  Where 
will  be  the  old  constitution  men?  Like  the  rest 
of  the  horses  when  they  ran  against  Flying 
Childers,  they  will  be  no  where  in  the  race. 
We  will  have  an  easy  time  of  it  if  we  determine 
to  come  back  here.  Did  not  the  world  say  that 
Sampson  was  afoolfor  permitting  his  hair  to  be 
cut  off  by  that  woman  Delilah?  Why?  He  was 
shorn  of  his  strength.  If  we  adjourn  sine  die, 
we  shall  be  like  Sampson  with  his  hair  cut  off. 
For  what  power  have  we  then?  Xone,  not  even 
to  kick  a  dog  from  our  feet;  and  like  a  dog  we 
shall  go  sneaking  home.  And  when  asked  what 
you  have  done — "nauthin,  nauthin,  nauthin." 
(Laughter.)  Have  you  made  a  constitution?  Xo. 
We  have  left  it  to'  the  sheriffs  and  our  county 
courts,  whose  very  offices  under  the  old  consti- 
tution will  depend  on  not  doing  the  very  thing 
■we  ord.T  them  to  do.  We  have  left  it  to  the 
governor  and  his  council,  and  theyare  either  to 
make  it  or  not,  as  they  please.  Wliy,  we  shall 
feel  as  if  we  have  no  power  at  all — none. 

We  can  pass  resolutions,  and  they  are  to  be 
enforced  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  into  effect 
the  great  principles  we  establish  here,  but  we 
cannot  make  laws.  To  be  sure,  I  see  there  is  an 
amendment  for  fixing  a  penalty,  and  whether 
right  or  wrong  I  will  go  for  it;  any  thing  in  the 
world  to  get  a  good  constitution  adopted. 

Sir,  I  regret  very  much  a  proposition  offered 
last  evening  which  was  misunderstood,  and  that 
time  was  not  given  by  my  colleague  to  the 
chairman  of  the  committee.  He  has  been  a  very 
able  man,  and  I  may  say  more — ^he  is  a  modest 
one.  I  am  sorry  I  cannot  get  some  one  to  pay 
me  the  same  compliment.  (Laughter.)  I  know 
I  have  spoken  a  great  deal,  but  I  think  the  gen- 
tleman from  Madison  speaks  as  long  as  I  do; 
136 


and  what  is  more,  be  speaks  better  than  I,  ex- 
cept that  he  said  his  proposition  was  as  clear  as 
the  sunshine  on  the  hill  yonder,  when  I  took 
two  or  three  witnesses  to  the  window,  and  the 
sun  did  not  shine  at  all,  but  was  covered  with 
clouds.     (Laughter.) 

I  was  sorry  to  see  an  article  which  appeared 
in  the  Commoniceatth  to-day.  I  have  known  Mr. 
Hodges  a  great  many  years,  and  I  have  had  a 

freat  deal  of  experience  in  public  printing,  and 
will  t£ike  this  occasion  to  say,  that  as  an  execu- 
tive officer  he  is  the  best  I  have  ever  known,  ex- 
cept one  mail  I  knew  in  the  National  Intelligencer 
office.     The  execution  of  his  work  is  of  such  a 
character,  and   it  is  so  promptly  done,  that  he 
would  always  get  my  vote,  no  matter  what 
might  be  his  political  principles.    He  does  his 
work  well,  and  that  is  the  reason  why  1  would 
vote   for  him.     I  have,  however,  thought  that 
I  that  paper  should  lon^  ago  have  stepped  for- 
j  ward  and  vindicated  the  members  of  this  con- 
j  vention  from   the  foul  aspersions   heaped  upon 
them  by  the  press  of  Kentucky.    It  has  not  done 
so.     I  would  to  God  these  expressions  were  not 
in  that  paper.    But  this  has  nothing  to  do  with 
I  the  public  work.    He  does  his  work  better,  and 
I  prints  better  than  any  man  I  ever  saw,  and  if  he 
j  was  a  democrat  this  day,  the  most  rabid  one 
j  that  ever  lived,  knowing  his  skill,  I  would  vote 
j  for  him. 

My  friend  from  Shelby  was  at  the  court  in 
!  that  county  the  other  day,  and  the  opposers  of 
I  the  constitution  there  were  overjoyed,  m  hopes 
!  that  we  should  adjourn  without  putting  the  con- 
}  stitution  into  operation.  And  so  earnest  was  he 
!  that  when  he  was  telegraphed  as  to  what  was 
j  doing  here,  he  hired  a  horse  and  buggy  and 
came  to  the  rescue  in  good  time.  There  is  an 
I  earnest  wish  by  those  opposed  to  the  constitu- 
[  tion,  that  we  shall  adjourn  without  an  opportu- 
:  nity  to  return.  I  know  it,  and  I  beg  of  you 
who  are  in  favor  of  the  new  constitution,  to 
I  work  for  its  adoption.  You  are  staked  upon 
it.  We  are  bound,  in  vindication  of  our  reputa- 
tion, and  in  honor  to  the  people,  to  see  that  they 
have  their  will  carried  out  before  we  quit.  But 
if  we  do  not,  we  shall  be  the  scorn  and  ridicule 
;  of  every  man,  from  Maine  to  the  mouth  of  the 
I  Rio  Del  Norte.  We  shall  be  their  laughing 
I  stock  and  scorn.  I  hope  we  shall  comeback, 
!  and  that  we  shall  not  have  to  do  much  more 
,  than  dot  an  i  or  cross  a  t.  When  wiU  it  suit  you 
!  to  come  back?  No  day  will  suit  me;  but  let  us 
I  hold  a  recess,  to  keep  the  old  constitution  men 
I  in  order,  and  to  keep  the  emancipationists  in 
I  order,  and,  above  all  things,  to  keep  the  old 
hunkers  down. 

;  Mr.  PROCTOR.  I  am  not  in  favor  of  the 
i  course  suggested,  because  I  am  not  willing  to 
I  coerce  the  freemen  of  Kentucky  by  holding  this 
;  thing  over  them  in  terrorem.  If  the  people  de- 
I  cide  not  to  accept  this  constitution,  I  cannot 
I  consent  to  return  here  and  make  another  consti- 
i  tution  in  opposition  to  the  wishes  of  the  people. 
■  I  shall  go  home  and  do  all  I  can  to  have  the  new 
j  constitution  carried  into  effect.  But  I  cannot 
!  return  to  my  constituency,  and  say  to  them,  "I 
i  have  assisted  in  making  a  constitution,  and 
I  voted  to  submit  it  to  you  for  your  adoption,  or 
I  rejection,  but  if  you  do  not  coincide  with  my 
i  peculiar  views,  and  do  not  endorse  our  work,  I 


1082 


will  return  to  Frankfort  and  lend  my  aid  in 
framing  another  constitution."  I  cannot  con- 
sent to  lend  my  approval  to  the  adoption  of  any 
such  doctrine,  or  such  course  of  proceeding.  I 
would  consider  myself  recreant  to  the  high  trust 
and  confidence  reposed  in  me  by  those  whom  I 
have  the  honor  to  represent  on  this  floor.  If  the 
people  reject  the  constitution,  I  shall  bow  with 
deference  and  respect  to  their  will. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  I  rise  to  make  a  motion  to 
re-commit  this  report,  but  before  I  do  so  I  desire 
to  submit  two  resolutions,  which  will  elucidate 
my  object.  I  desire  to  submit  them  as  instruc- 
tions to  the  committee,  if  the  report  be  re-com- 
mitted. 

The  Secretary  read  them,  as  follows  : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  constitution  adopted  by 

this  convention  shall  go  into  effect  on  the 

day  of  June,  1850,  unless  by  a  vote  to  be  cast  by 
the  qualified  voters  of  the  state  on  the  first  Mon- 
day of  May,  and  the  Tuesday  thereafter,  of  said 
year,  it  shall  be  determined  by  said  vote  to  re- 
ject said  constitution. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  legislature  next  to  as- 
semble do  pass  such  laws  as  may  be  necessary 
to  take  the  vote  proposed  in  the  foregoing  reso- 
lution, and  for  due  returns  and  a  correct  account 
and  publication  thereof;  said  laws  to  contain  a 
provision  providing  that  a  majority  of  the  votes 
cast  shall  decide  upon  the  rejection  or  adoption 
of  this  constitution." 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  The  diflSculty  in  the  minds 
of  a  great  many  delegates  in  relation  to  the 
pending  proposition  arises,  it  seems  to  me,  from 
the  fact  that  if  tlie  convention  adjourns  now,  and 
does  not  return  to  adopt  the  new  constitution,  it 
will  have  done  notliing.  This  is  the  principal 
argument  enforced  by  the  gentleman  from  Nel- 
son, in  the  remarks  he  has  just  made.  If  we 
adopt  the  principle  contained  in  these  resolu- 
tions, the  convention  will  not  have  to  meet  again 
in  June  and  adopt  this  constitution,  but  if  it 
should  be  rejected  by  the  people,  then  the  old 
constitution  remains  in  force,  and  is  the  organic 
law  of  the  commonwealth.  According  to  the 
principle  I  have  laid  down,  we  shall  be  acting 
effectively,  and  it  then  cannot  be  said  that  we 
have  done  nothing.  If  the  legislature  fail  to 
provide  for  the  taking  of  the  vote  on  the  new 
constitution,  it  will  not  be  our  fault,  and  it  will 
go  into  effect  notwithstanding,  and  the  argu- 
ment respecting  the  failure  of  officers  to  do  their 
duty,  will  amount  to  nothing. 

COMMITTEE    OF   REVISION. 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  the  postponement  of 
the  pending  question,  to  enable  the  committee 
of  revision  to  make  another  report. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  McHENRY  then  made  his  report,  and  the 
amendments  suggested  were  agreed  to. 

EVENING   SESSION. 

The  convention  resumed  the  consideration  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  miscellaneous 
provisions. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  called  for  the  yeas  and  nays 
on  his  motion  to  recommit  the  report. 

Mr.  HARDIN  asked  that  the  roll  be  called, 
*nd  it  was  called  accordingly. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  will  inquire  of  the  honor- 
able mover  of  that  proposition,  as  he  does  not 


propose  that  the  convention  shall  come  back 
again,  if  he  proposes  to  have  the  legislature 
designate  how  tne  constitution  shall  be  pro- 
claimed? We  shall  be  through  with  it  soon. 
The  house  last  night  decided  to  come  back. 
The  gentleman  says  it  will  go  into  effect  if  some- 
thing does  not  happen.  But  the  legislature 
may  make  something  happen,  and  then  we  shall 
be  what  may  be  called  functus  officio. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  The  proposition  offered  by 
me  adopts  the  constitution  as  our  work  at  this 
time,  but  to  take  effect  at  a  certain  day  hereaf- 
ter, unless,  in  the  mean  time,  the  people  shall 
cast  a  vote  that  it  shall  not  be  the  constitu- 
tion. I  propose  that  the  legislature  shall  pass 
such  laws  as  may  be  necessary,  in  the  mean  time, 
to  provide  for  taking  such  a  vote  as  will  be  ne- 
cessary to  decide  whether  tlie  people  will  receive 
or  reject  the  constitution.  Suppose  the  legisla- 
ture pass  no  such  law,  the  constitution  will  be 
the  law  of  the  land,  because  we  have  adopted 
it,  and  had  the  power  to  do  so.  Suppose  there 
should  be  no  vote  taken,  even  if  the  legislature 
should  provide  for  it  by  law,  we  have  adopted 
the  constitution,  and  it  will  be  the  constitution 
of  the  country.  I  am  not  unwilling  to  trust  the 
legislature.  I  have  no  such  apprehensions  as 
the  gentleman  from  Nelson.  If  upon  my  plan, 
as  he  says,  we  shall  be  functus  officio,  upon  his 
plan,  if  the  people  reject  the  constitution,  the 
convention,  1  think,  will  be  non  est  inventus  in 
June. 

Gentlemen  seem  to  have  some  doubt  as  to  the 
power  of  this  convention.  Upon  what  is  that 
doubt  founded?  I  think  it  must  be  on  this, 
if  any  thing :  that  the  constitution,  if  not  adop- 
ted by  the  people,  can  have  no  binding  force 
before  it  is  adopted  by  this  convention.  I 
humbly  conceive  that  my  proposition  does 
away  with  that  doubt;  because  we  adopt  the 
constitution,  and  it  is  the  constitution,  unless 
the  people  reject  it.  Where  is  there  room  for 
doubt?  Is  not  our  power  complete?  If  there 
can  be  a  doubt,  I  cannot  see  whence  it  can  come. 
If  gentlemen  are  determined  to  come  back  here, 
I  think  it  will  be  to  do  nothing,  because  every 
thing  we  can  then  do,  we  can  do  now.  Every 
thing  we  ought  to  do,  if  the  people  reject  it,  we 
can  do  now. 

Permit  me  to  say,  there  is  no  one  more  sin- 
cerely desires  that  this  constitution  should  be 
adopted  than  myself.  I  will  work  as  hard  as 
any  other  man  to  secure  that  end,  and  my  great 
objection  to  returning  here,  is,  that  it  will  put 
into  the  hands  of  the  opposers  of  the  constitu- 
tion a  most  powerful  weapon. 

Mr.  TURNER.  The  gentleman  from  Nelson 
has  argued  this  question  ingeniously.  The  con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  was  adopted  just 
in  this  way.  The  ratification  of  the  federal 
constitution  by  nine  states  was  required,  and 
when  given  it  became  the  con.stitution  of  tlie 
United  States.  The  states  ratified  it  and  reptnt- 
ed  to  congress.  The  convention  dissolved  and 
gave  up  all  authority  to  congress,  and  left  con- 
gress to  proclaim  the  constitution  if  adopted  by 
nine  stales,  which  was  done.  Cannot  we  give 
the  legislature  the  power  of  declaring  whether 
the  people  will  consent  to  have  this  constitution 
put  into  operation?  I  think  there  is  no  doubt 
that  we  have  the  power. 


loss 


Mr.  HARDIX.  I  once  met  with  William  T. 
Willis,  an  eminent  lawyer,  at  Marion  court,  and 
there  never  was  a  case  occurred  but  he  had  had 
one  in  Green,  or  Adair,  or  Cumberland,  which 
would  just  fit  it.  So  my  friend  from  Madison. 
He  alwavs  has  some  ca^e  to  fit,  exactly.  We 
cannot  ilelegate  our  power,  because  we  are  sent 
h^re  on  account  of  our  capacity.  The  states 
which  adopted  the  federal  constitution  were  a 
set  of  sovereignties,  and  their  whole  power,  as 
states,  had  to  be  surrendered.  But  here  are  no 
sovereignties  to  be  surrendered. 

My.  worthy  friend  from  Bourbon  (Mr.  Wil- 
liams,) says  he  has  labored  hard  for  the  conven- 
tion. I  Icnow  he  has,  and  I  hope  he  will  not 
give  out  just  now.  We  have  made  the  constitu- 
tion in  a  spirit  of  compromise,  and  I  hope  we 
shall  hold  on  to  it  till  it  becomes  the  glorious 
constitution  of  Kentucky,  and  not  let  it  go  out 
of  our  hands  till  then. 

Mr.  KELLY.  I  have  been  opposed,  from  the 
first,  to  our  meeting  here  a  second  time.  I 
think  there  is  a  time  when  there  should  be  an 
end  to  our  voting  and  our  talking;  and,  for  the 
first  time  since  I  have  been  here,  1  will  usurp  the 
peculiar  privilege  of  the  gentleman  from  Madi- 
son, and  call  for  the  previous  question. 

The  main  question  wrus  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  re-commit- 
ting the  report,  with  instructions,  and  the  yeas 
and  nays  being  demanded  by  Mr.  IRWIN,  there 
■were  yeas  31,  nays  59  : 

Teas — Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  John  L.  Bal- 
linger,  Wm.  K.  Bowling,  Luther  Brawner,  Fran- 
cis M.  Bristow,  Wm.  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Cham- 
bers, William  Chenault,  Jas.  S.  Chrisman,  Ed- 
ward Curd,  James  H.  Garrard,  Ninian  E.  Gray, 
Andrew  Hood,  Thomas  J.  Hood,  James  W.  Ir- 
win, Chas.  C.  Kelly,  John  H.  McHenry,  Thos. 
P.  Moore,  William  Preston,  Johnson  Price, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  James  Rudd,  John  W.  Ste- 
venson, James  W.  Stone,  John  J.  Thurman, 
Howard  Todd,  Squire  Turner,  John  L.  Waller, 
Henry  Washington,  George  W.  Williams,  Silas 
Woodson — 3] . 

Nats — Richard  Apperson,  John  S.  Barlow, 
Alfred  Bovd,  William  Bradley,  Thos.  D.  Brown, 
Beverly  £.  Clarke,  Jesse  Coffev,  Henry  R.  D. 
Coleman,  Benjamin  Copelin,  William  Cowper, 
Lucius  Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chasteen  T.  Dun- 
avan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwarcls,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  Richard  D.  Gholson,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ben.  Hardin,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  Thomas  James,  William  John- 
son, George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.Kavanaugh, 
James  M.  Lackey,  Peter  Lashbrooke,  Thomas 
N.  Lindsey,  Thos.  W.  Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen, 
George  W.  Mansfield,  Alexander  K.  Marshall, 
Wm.  N.  Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard 
L.  Mayes,  Nathan  McClure,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  James  M.  Nesbitt,  Hugh 
Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pollard, 
John  T.  Robinson,  John  T.  Rogers,  Ira  Root, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Al- 
bert G.  Talbott,  J.  D.  Taylor,  Wm.  R.  Thomp- 
son, Philip  Triplett,  John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S. 
White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert  N.  Wick- 
liffe,  Wesley  J.  Wright— 59. 

So  the  house  refused  to  re-commit. 


The  aiueudment  offered  by  Mr.  BROWN  was 
then  agreed  to. 

The  question  was  next  taken  on  the  section, 
and  it  was  adopted. 

Mr.  STEVENSON,  on  behalf  of  the  commit- 
tee, withdrew  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  sec- 
tions of  the  report,  which  were  rendered  unne- 
cessary by  the  adoption  of  the  amendment  to 
the  fourth  section. 

The  eighth  and  ninth  sections  were  next  read, 
as  follows,  and  adopted : 

"  Sec.  8.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  general 
assembly  elected  under  this  constitution,  at  its 
fii-st  session,  to  make  an  apportionment  of  the 
representation  of  this  state,  upon  the  principle 
set  forth  in  this  constitution;  and  until  the  first 
apportionment  shall  be  made  as  herein  directed, 
the  apportionment  of  senators  and  representa- 
tives among  the  several  districts  and  counties 
in  this  state,  shall  remain  as  at  present  fixed  by 
law. 

"  Sec.  9.  All  recognizances  heretofore  taken, 
or  which  may  be  taken  before  the  organization 
of  the  judicial   department  under  this  constitu- 
tion, shall  remain  valid,  and  shall   pass  over  to, 
and  may  be  prosecuted  in  the  name  of  the  com- 
monwealth.    All  criminal  prosecutions  and  pe- 
nal actions  which   have  arisen,  or  may  arise  be- 
fore the  re-organization  of  the  judicial  depart- 
ment under  this  constitution,   and  which  shall 
'  then  be  depending,  may  be  prosecuted  to  judg- 
i  ment  and   execution,   in  the  name  of  the  com- 
i  monwealth." 

I      The  tenth  section  was  read,  as  follows : 
I      "Sec.  10.  In  the  trial  of  any  criminal  case, 
the  juiy  shall  be  judges  of  law  and  fact." 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  I  move  to  strike  out  the  en- 
tire section,  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof  the  fol- 
lowing : 

"  In  all  criminal  trials,  the  courts  having  ju- 
risdiction thereof  shall  be  judges  of  the  law, 
and  the  juries  of  the  facts." 

Mr.  APPERSON.  According  to  my  recoUeci 
tion,  the  same  proposition  has  been  once  reject- 
ed, and  I  would  ask  if  it  can  be  brought  in 
again? 

The  PRESIDENT.  If  it  has  been  once  offer- 
ed, it  cannot  again  be  offered. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  I  supposed  it  was  proper  to 
offer  it  in  this  place.  I  offered  it  some  weeks 
ago  as  an  original  proposition,  when  another 
branch  of  the  constitution  was  under  considera- 
tion. There  is  now  a  principle  reported  by  the 
committee  which  involves  a  portion  of  the  same 
proposition,  and  I  desire  now  to  offer  it  as  an 
amendment. 

The  PRESIDENT.  The  proposition  is,  to 
strike  out  the  section  offered  oy  the  committee, 
and  insert  this.  If  this  amendment  has  been 
once  rejected,  the  chair  is  still  of  opinion  it  is 
not  in  order. 

Mr.  LINDSEY.  Then  I  will  move  to  strike 
out  the  section,  as  reported  by  the  committee. 
It  contains  a  strange  principle,  to  my  mind,  to 
be  incorporated  in  the  constitution  of  the  state. 
It  is  true,  judges  now  differ  as  to  the  power  of 
expounding  the  law  in  criminal  cases  under  the 
existing  constitution.  Some  have  held  that  it 
was  their  right  and  duty,  when  asked,  to  state 
the  law  to  the  jury,  and  some  have  maintained 
that  the  power  of  the  jury  was  just  what  is  de- 


1084 


clared  in  the  section  proposed  to  be  stricken 
out.  The  convention  certainly  have  not  reflect- 
ed on  the  effect  of  this  section,  and  the  hi^h 
principles  it  involves,  or  I  am   sure  they  will 

Eauseoefore  they  will  declare  that  juries  shall 
e  exclusively  judges  of  the  law  in  cases  involv- 
ing liberty  or  life.  So  particular  have  we  been 
that  we  have  provided  that  no  person  shall  be 
eligible  to  the  ofllice  of  judge  of  the  circuit 
court,  or  court  of  appeals,  until  he  has  been  a 
regular  practicing  attorney  for  eight  years;  and 
yet  after  this  provision,  which  is  intended  to 
secure  persons  sufficiently  acquainted  with  the 
law  of  the  land  to  enable  them  to  say  what  it 
is,  and  apply  it  to  all  questions  in  civil  cases 
involving  property,  we  are  to  conclude  our  great 
work  by  cieclaring  that  those  learned  and  ex- 
perienced as  we  require,  and  provide  they  shall 
ibe,  are  not  to  be  trusted  in  criminal  cases,  but 
we  are  to  have  juries  composed  of  men  selected 
as  they  can  be  picked  up  from  the  court  house 

J'^ard,  having  the  least  acquaintance  with  the 
aw,  to  make  another  tribunal  before  whom  the 
judge  is  to  bow,  and  on  whose  decisions  life  and 
liberty  are  to  be  determined.  Sir,  I  cannot  value 
the  constitution,  with  such  a  provision  in  it,  as 
worth  having. 

Too  high  do  I  value  the  personal  rights  of  the 
subject  to  be  ready  or  willing  to  place  them  un- 
der the  entire  control  of  men  not  sufficiently  ac- 
quainted with  legal  forms  to  know  when  they 
are  right,  or  why  they  are  required. 

Will  the  gentlemen  of  the  committee  inform 
the  convention,  if  the  section  is  adopted,  Avhere 
they  contemplate  the  duty  of  the  judge  ends, 
and.  the  power  and  authority  of  the  jury  begins? 
Will  it  DC  when  the  jury  is  empannelled  and 
sworn,  or  after  the  evidence  is  heard?  The  com- 
petency of  witnesses — the  admissibility  of  proof 
offered,  are  questions  in  every  cause  of  great 
moment.  If  the  jury  is  to  be  judges  of  law  and 
fact,  necessarily  they  should  determine  upon 
these  questions  suggested,  and  then  the  whole 
power  of  the  learned  judge  will  be  to  preside 
over  the  assembly  and  keep  order,  or  cause  his 
officers  to  keep  it. 

What  power  will  the  judge  have  to  grant  a 
new  trial,  if  an   accused  is  improperly  found 
guilty,  either  through  the  prejudice  and  passion 
that  operate  unjustly  against  him,  or  the  errone- 
ous determination  of  the  law?    I  have  never,  as 
I  remarked  upon  a  previous  occasion,  been  able 
i.  to  find  out  on  what  grounds  judges  who  hold 
1- that  juries  are  judges  of  law  and  fact  in  crim- 
inal cases,  justify   the   power  they  exercise  in 
)  granting  new  trials,  after  a  jury  has  returned  a 
verdict  of  guilty. 

The  judge,  sir,  must  sit  and  quietly  hear 
propositions  urged  upon  the  jury,  which  he 
Knows  not  to  be  the  law  of  the  land — see  coun- 
sel use  books  as  authority  that  are  not  recogni- 
zed, and  if  the  section  is  retained,  he  is  to  be 
powerless  in  correcting  such  flagrant  wrong — 
such  terrible  injustice. 

I  know,  sir,  there  are  greater  chances  of  escape 
to  the  criminal,  if  the  jury  is  to  decide  the  law 
in  Kentucky,  as  the  impulses  of  our  people  are 
averse  to  the  higher  and  more  ignominious  pun- 
ishments allowed  by  our  laws.  But  now  and 
then  spring  up  unaccountable  cases,  where  con- 
demnation is  in  advance  of  trial  in  the  public 


mind,  and  the  prejudiced  and  undisciplined  cit- 
izen is  left  to  cletermine  the  fate  of  an  unfortu- 
nate person,  and  there  is  to  bo  no  power  to  stay 
the  tempest,  or  arrest  the  sacrifice. 

To  those  who  know  how  long  it  takes  to  learn 
even  the  grades  of  offences,  and  how  to  distin- 
guish,on  facts, the  particular  class  to  which  they 
belong,  no  argument  need  be  offered  of  the  utter 
fallacy,  of  expecting,  at  any  time,  to  procure 
twelve  jurors,  in  any  court,  who  could  of  them- 
selves, unaided,  say  what  crime  an  offender  they 
were  trying  had  committed.  And  when  the 
counsel  prosecuting  shall  argue  one  way,  and 
the  counsel  defending  another,  such  a  tribunal 
is  an  unsafe  one  to  decide  between  them. 

I  have  no  disposition  to  extend  my  remarks, 
though  I  could  give  examples  where  juries, 
under  the  excitements  improperly  awakened 
amongst  the  people,  have  Tbeeu  led  unjustly  to 
condemn,  and  but  for  the  action  of  the  judges 
in  arresting  their  verdicts  and  granting  new  tri- 
als, the  victims  of  their  prejudices  would  have 
been  sacrificed  of  character  or  of  life. 

As  much,  Mr.  President,  as  I  prize  the  right  of 
trial  by  jury,  and  as  unwilling  as  I  would  be  to 
see  it  abolished,  I  am  still  for  confining  the  jury 
to  the  trial  of  fact,  and  of  letting  those  whose 
time  is  devoted  to  study,  and  whom  we  select 
for  their  learning,  be  judges  of  the  law.  I  hope, 
sir,  the  motion  will  prevail,  and  the  section  be 
stricken  out. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  desire  to  see  this  set- 
tled, one  way  or  the  other.  With  my  experi- 
ence, I  have  been  in  tlie  habit  of  seeing  the  law 
read  to  a  jury,  and  sometimes  I  have  known 
lawyers  forbidden  by  the  judge  to  read  law.  I 
do  not  consider  the  man  who  may  be  a  judge,  in 
all  instances  the  best  lawyer.  There  may  be 
those  equally  good  at  the  bar  as  the  one  on  the 
bench.  But  in  addition  to  that,  the  common- 
wealth is  supposed  to  have  an  able  man  to  act 
for  her.  We  have  also  in  this  state  no  appellate 
jurisdiction,  so  far  as  criminal  cases  go.  1  think 
this  should  be  settled,  and  I  am  in  favor  of  it  as 
our  ancestors  adopted  it,  and  as  it  is  practiced 
throughout  the  United  States. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WI CKLIFFE.  We  had  better  leave 
this  question,  Mr.  President,  where  we  find  it. 
The  right  of  trial  by  jury  is  well  understood,  I 
think,  in  the  country,  and  if  we  undertake  to 
remedy  the  defects  of  the  human  intellect,  or  of 
the  legal  attainments  of  our  judges — if  we,  for 
the  purpose  of  producing  harmony  or  uniformi- 
ty in  the  opinions  of  the  judicial  incumbents, 
by  constitutional  provision  on  this  delicate  ques- 
tion of  the  rights  of  tlie  jury  in  a  criminal  tri- 
al, I  fear  we  may  jeopard,  in  some  degree,  the 
value  of  the  trial  by  jury,  both  to  the  common- 
wealth and  the  citizen. 

The  right  to  decide  the  law  in  a  criminal  case 
is  one  of  joint  possession,  by  court  and  jury.  If 
the  jury  mistake  the  law  and  convict  the  accu- 
sed, the  judge  has  the  right  to  award  a  new  tri- 
al. The  amendment  proposed  as  a  section  to 
the  constitution  would  deprive  the  judge  of  that 
all-important  power — a  power  necessary  to  pro- 
tect the  unfortunate  against  the  improper  excite- 
ment of  the  public  feeling,  which  always,  more 
or  less,  infuses  itself  into  the  jury  box. 

I  hope  the  new  mode  of  appointing  our  judg- 
es •will  improve  the  judicial  manners  of  the  in- 


1085 


cumbents  eoiuplaiiied  of;  if  not,  that  othei-s  will  I  wlio  jnav  be  a  much  more  learned  jurist  than  the 
be  selected,  whose  minds  will  look   upon  this  |  judge  hi'mself. 

question  with  an  eye  single  to  the  pure  adniinis-  j  j  gee  no  injury  to  the  commonwealth  in  this, 
tration  of  public  justice,  and  the  constitutional  The  judge  may  rule  the  law  as  he  honestly 
rights  of  the  citizen.  _  !  thinks  it  to  e.xist.     The  prit^oner's  counsel  may 

1  had  supposed  that  since  the  trial  of  Fries,  i  ^ebut  it,  and  the  attorney  for  the  commonwealth 
by  Judge  Chase,  and  the  trial  of  the  Judge  him-  [  has  the  opportunity,  in'conclusion,  of  showing 
self,  for  his  opinions  and  conduct  on  that  trial,  i  the  fallacv  and  error — if  it  exist — in  the  argu- 
the  question  of  the  rights  of  the  jury  in  a  crini- ;  ment  of  the  prisoner's  counsel.  I  have  no  peeu- 
inal  trial,  as  well  as  the  duty  and  power  of  the  ;  Jiar  solicitude  in  this  matter;  my  great  object 
judge,  had  been  understood.  In  that  case.  Judge  ;  ^vas  to  secure  uniformity  in  the  practice  through- 
Chase  and  his  associate  instructed  the  jury  up-  j  out  the  state.  If  it  is  not  settled,  as  proposed 
on  the  law  of  treason,  and  left  the  jury  to  decide  by  the  committee,  adopt  the  proposition  of  my 
the  law  and  fact.  The  counsel  for  the  prisoner  !  friend  from  Franklin.  In  either  event,  we  shall 
complained  and  protested  against  the  right  of ,  have  a  uniform  practice.  I  submit  the  whole 
the  court  to  decide  the  law;  the  court  told  the  !  matter  to  the  better  judgment  of  the  convention, 
counsel  that  they  had  instructed  the  jury  what,  |  Mr.  TURNER.  1  think  this  an  exceedingly 
in  their  opinion,  was  the  law  of  the  case— they  i  mischievous  provision.  If  the  whole  law  of  the 
had  a  right  to  do  so,  and  the  counsel  had  the  ;  case  is  to  be  decided  by  a  jury,  every  question 
right  to  argue  to  the  jury,  and  satisfy  them  that  i  of  evidence  will  have  to  be  submitted  to  them, 
the  law  was  not  as  the  court  had  decided.  So  I  j  Qn  questions  of  law,  running  back  to  English 
have  understood  the  law  to  be.  If  by  constitu- :  la-s^,  should  they  not  rely  on  the  opinion  of  tlie 
tional  provision,  such  as  that  now  proposed,  you  j  judge?  When  he  gives  his  reasons,  and  reads 
make  the  jury  judges  of  law  and  fact,  you  open  ,  the  law  to  them,  that  respect  should  be  paid  to 
the  door  by  which  a  popular  criminal  will  cer-  j  his  opinion  which  his  station  entitles  him  to. 
tainly  escape,  and  the  unfortunate  victim  of  un- 1  Suppose  a  jury  convict  contrary  to  law,  shall 
just  prejudice  will  be  denied  the  protection  of '  there  be  no  power  to  grant  a  new  trial— no  pow- 
the  impartial  judge,    in  the    exposition   of  the    er  to  overrule  the  mistake? 


law.  Better,  in  the  language  of  our  bill  of 
rights,  hold  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury 
sacred. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.   The  honorable  gentleman 
from  Nelson  (Mr.  C.A.Wickliffe,)  has  referred  us 
to  the  instance  of  Judge  Chase,  a  judge  who,  al- 
though he  instructed  the  jury  in  a  criminal  case, 
yet  permitted  the    counsel    of  the    prisoner  to 
c-orabat  the  law  as  expounded  by  the  court.     If 
the  judiciary  of  Kentucky  would  invariably  fol- 
low the  example  of  Judge  Chase  in  this  partic- 
ular instance,  then  I  frankly  admit  there  would 
be  no  necessity  for  this  provision.     But,  is  such 
the  fact?    Far  from  it.     There  are  scarcely  two 
judicial  circuits  in  the  state  where  there  is  any 
uniformity  in  the  practice  and  management  of 
criminal  cases.    In  one  circuit  we  see  the  coun- 
sel of  the  prisoner  permitted  to  read  and  combat 
the  law;  in  another,  the  judge,  upon  the  motion 
of    the  attorney  for  the   commonwealth,   rules 
what  the   law   is,  and   the  prisoner's  counsel  is 
not  allowed  to  combat  or  contradict  it !     Now,  if 
we  had  an  appellate  jurisdiction  in   criminal  ca- 
ses, where  errors  committed  by  a  nisiprius  judge 
could  be  corrected,  I  should  not  be  disposed  to 
doubt  the  correctness  of  the  rule  by  which  the 
judge  should  always  expound  the  law  in  crimi- 
nal cases.     But  we  have  no  such  appellate  tri- 
bunal for  criminal  cases.    If  the  judge  rules  the 
law  improperly,  it  is  as  immutable   as  the  laws 
of  the   Medes   and   Persians,  in   those  circuits 
where  the  prisoner's  counsel  is  not  allowed  to 
combat  the  law  as  laid  down.     Now,  I  have  as 
high   an   opinion  of  the  judiciary  of  my  own 
state  as  any  gentleman  upon  this  floor.     In  my 
own  circuit  we  have  in  our  judge  an  exemplar 
of  judicial  integrity,  learning,  and  worth,  which 
would   adorn  tue  highest  supreme  tribunal  in 
this,  or  any  other  state.     But  while  I  admit  all 
this,  I  am  unwilling  that  where  a  man's  life  and 
liberty  are  at  stake,  the  mere  private  and  fallible 
opinion  of  one  man  as  to  what  the  law  is,  should 
not  be  controverted  by  the  prisoner's  counsel. 


This  is  one  of  the  most  important  provisions 
in  the  whole  constitution.  There  is  nothing 
that  reaches  the  citizens  so  deeply  and  power- 
fully as  this,  because  it  makes  the  jury  the  whole 
judge  of  the  case,  and  allows  them  to  take  the 
life  of  a  man  under  the  influence  of  prejudice. 

Mr.  STEVENSON.  I  move  to  amend,  by 
adding  the  following : 

"Except  as  to  the  admissibility  of  evidence; 
but  the  right  of  the  court  to  grant  a  new  trial 
on  the  application  of  the  accused,  shall  not  be 
questioned." 

The  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I  agree  with  thegentleman 
from  Franklin  in  urging  the  convention  to  come 
to  some  conclusion  upon  this  very  important 
matter.  He  knows  that  the  criminal  law  is  ad- 
ministered differently  in  different  circuits  in  the 
state.  When  we  declare  that  the  ancient  mode 
of  trial  by  jury  shall  remain  as  heretofore,  the 
question  arises,  what  has  been  that  ancient 
mode?  The  answer  is,  one  judge,  at  the  in- 
stance of  the  commonwealth  or  the  accused, in- 
structs the  jury  as  to  the  law  of  that  case,  and 
will  not  permit  his  instructions  and  expositions 
of  the  law  to  be  called  in  question,  nor  a  book 
to  be  read  to  the  jury,  whether  to  sustain  or  to 
overturn  his  instructions.  Another  judge  will 
expound  the  law  to  the  jury,  but  will  tell  them 
that  they  have  the  right  to  find  the  law  to  be 
different  from  his  instructions,  and  hence  the 
prosecution  and  the  defence  have  the  right  to 
argue  against  the  instructions  of  the  court,  and 
of  course  to  read  the  law  to  the  jury  from  the 
lawbooks.  Another  set  of  judges  (who  com- 
pose the  greatest  number,  from  all  that  I  have 
neard,)  will  not  instruct  the  jury,  unless  the 
prisoner,  as  well  as  the  commonwealth,  agrees 
for  the  court  to  give  instructions  to  the  jury. 

I  ask  gentlemen  if  we  ought  not  to  have  this 
que-stiou  settled?  The  gentleman  from  Nelson 
(Mr.  Wickliffe,)  states  the  law  and  the  practice 
to  be  one  way — ^the  gentleman  from  Madison 


1086 


(Mr.  Turner,)  another  way.  They  diflVr  most 
widely,  and  iioiwithstanding  tliat  difference, 
they  both  oppose  any  action  by  this  convention 
on  this  subject.  The  senior  gentleman  from 
Nelson,  (Mr.  Hardin,)  in  a  conversation  which 
I  had  with  him,  some  days  ago,  on  this  subject, 
said  to  me  that  it  was  unnecessary  to  put  any 
provision  in  the  constitution  as  to  this  matter,  be- 
cause he  was  satisfied  that  no  judge  would  so 
far  leave  the  old  beaten  track  of  the  criminal 
law  as  to  forbid  the  discussion  of  the  law  to  the 
jury,  and  to  read  authority  from  the  books. 

The  chairman  of  the  committee  (Mr.  Steven- 
son,) has  just  told  us  of  the  mode  of  a  jury  trial, 
■which  he  recently  witnessed,  in  which  the  court 
instructed  the  jury,  at  the  instance  of  the  com- 
monwealth, without  the  assent  of  the  accused, 
and  that  no  law  was  permitted  to  be  read  to  the 
jury.  When  gentlemen  find  the  contrariety  of 
opinion  is  so  great,  it  does  seem  to  me  that  they 
must  feel  the  necessity  of  having  the  mattor  set 
tied;  and  I  cannot  see  how  gentlemen,  enter- 
taining views  so  different,  should  still  insistthat 
it  is  wholly  unnecessary  for  us  to  declare  what 
was  "the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  jury." 

For  myself,  I  believe  that  the  jury  should 
judge  of  the  law  as  well  as  of  the "  facts.  As  a 
lawyer  I  have  been  brought  up  under  this  mode 
of  administration  of  thelaAv,  and  I  believe  con- 
victions are  quite  as  common  in  those  ciicuits 
■where  the  law  is  tried  by  the  jury,  as  well  as 
facts,  as  in  those  in  which  the  court  assumes  the 
prerogative  of  the  jury,  and  expounds  the  law 
to  them. 

If  the  proposition  submitted  by  the  commit- 
tee, as  amended,  declaring  that  "the  jury  have 
the  right  to  try  the  law  and  facts,  except  on  the 
admissibility  of  evidence,  and  leaving  to  the 
court  the  right  to  grant  a  new  trial  to  the  pris- 
oner, if  improperly  found  guilty,  be  not  in  ac- 
cordance with  "the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by  ju- 
ry," let  us  say  ■what  that  mode  was,  so  that  in 
all  time  to  come,  there  may  be  uniformity  in  the 
administration  of  the  criminal  laws.  Although 
it  is  late  in  the  session,  I  do  hope  that  gentle- 
men will  come  up  to  the  question,  and  not  dodge 
it.  It  is  very  important  to  the  rights  of  the 
citizen,  that  he  should  know  what  the  law  is. 
Let  it  be  settled  a.s  the  convention  may  deem 
right,  but  I  do  insist  that  it  shall  be  settled  in 
some  way. 

The  PRESIDENT.  I  ask  leave  to  make  a  few 
remarks  on  this  question.     (Leave,  leave.) 

There  are  periods  of  time  when  there  are  ex- 
citements which  are  strong  and  prejudices  exist 
against  a  criminal.  If  the  jury  are  to  be  the  ex- 
clusive judges  of  the  law,  through  their  preju- 
dices the  most  innocent  man  in  the  community 
may  fall,  while  the  judge  who  is  acquainted 
■witli  the  law  and  in  the  habit  of  deciding  upon 
it  will  not  be  influenced  by  it.  There  may  be 
certain  descriptions  of  crime  which  if  commit- 
ted the  jury  will  lean  toward  the  criminal,  and 
under  the  pretence  of  deciding  law  and  fact  will 
find  out  a  way  to  excuse,  when  if  the  judge  de- 
clared the  law,  under  the  evidence  thoy  could 
not  fail  to  conyict.  We  have  had  a  constitution 
■without  any  such  provision.  an<l  in  making  it 
imperative  on  a  jury  to  decide  law  you  will  open 
a  way  for  the  greatest  criminals  to  escape,  or  for 
prejudice  to  strike  down    any  mnn  in  the  com- 


munily.  My  opinion  Is,  decidedly,  that  we 
should  not  put  this  in  the  constitution. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  It  seems  to  me  we  are  ta- 
king dangerous  ground.  We  all  know  that  even 
with  a  judge  to  instruct  a  jury  there  is  little 
chance  to  convict  a  man,  and  the  greater  the  of- 
fense, the  less  chance  is  there.  Such  a  princi- 
ple as  is  in  that  section  will  do  away  with  the 
effectof  all  criminal  laws  in  the  country.  Crime 
is  stalking  abroad  now.  I  want  to  know  if  we 
are  to  trammel  a  court  in  this  way?  Of  what 
use  will  it  be  to  have  judges  if  this  section  is 
adopted?  It  is  a  monstrous  principle,  that  I 
hope  will  be  rejected. 

Mr.  MITCHELL.  I  move  the  previous  ques- 
tion. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

The  question  was  then  taken  on  striking  out, 
and  it  was  agreed  to. 

Sections  eleven,  twelve,  thirteen,  fourteen  and 
fifteen  were  adopted  without  amendment,  as  fol- 
lows : 

"Sec.  11.  The  general  assembly  shall  provide, 
by  law,  for  the  trial  of  any  contested  election  of 
auditor,  register,  treasurer,  attorney  general, 
judges  of  circuit  courts,  and  all  otHer  officers, 
not  otherwise  herein  specified. 

"Sec.  12.  The  general  assembly  shall  provide, 
by  law,   for  the  making  of  the  returns  by  the 

E roper  officers,  of  the  election  of  all  officers  to 
e  elected  under  this  constitution;  and  the  gov- 
ernor shall  issue  commissions  to  the  auditor, 
register,  and  treasurer,  as  soon  as  he  has  ascer- 
tained the  result  of  the  election  of  those  officers 
respectively. 

"Sec.  13.  That  the  sheriffs  and  other  officers 
of  the  election  shall  be  liable  to  all  sueh  fines 
and  penalties  for  a  failure  to  discharge  the  sev- 
eral duties  imposed  on  them  in  this  schedule,  as 
are  now  imposed  upon  them  by  law,  for  a  failure 
to  perform  their  duty  in  conducting  other  gener- 
al and  state  elections. 

"Sec.  14.  Should  the  county  court  of  any  of 
the  counties  of  this  commonwealth  fail  or  refuse 
to  appoint  judges,  clerks,  or  sheriffs  to  superin- 
tend the  election,  as  provided  for  in  article  four 
of  this  schedule,  theiiigh  sheriff  of  said  county 
shall  appoint  such  judges,  clerks,  and  deputy 
sheriffs. 

"Sec.  15.  Should  any  of  the  sheriffs  or  deputies 
in  any  of  the  counties  of  this  commonwealth,  die, 
resign,  or  from  any  other  cause  be  prevented  from 
attending  with  the  poll  books,  as  directed  in  ar- 
ticle four  of  this  schedule,  for  the  comparison  of 
the  votes  on  the  adoption  or  rejection  of  the  new 
constitution,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  county 
court  clerk,  or  his  deputy  in  sucli  county,  to  at- 
tend with  said  poll  books,  and  aid  in  such  com- 
parison." 

The  convention  then  adjourned. 


Note. — In  the  course  of  the  preceding  re- 
marks of  Mr.  Hardin,  he  alluded  to  the  circum- 
stance of  Mr.  Meriwether's  having  been  .shot  at 
during  the  canvass  of  last  summer,  in  a  manner 
to  create  the  impression  that  the  attack  was  made 
or  instigated  by  the  emancipation  party.  Mr. 
Meriwether  was  unable  at  the  time  to  obtain  the 
floor  for  explanation,  and  he  desires  us  to  say  tliat 
he  isofopinioH  Ihat  Mr.  TIardin  has  done  injustjoe 


1087 


to  the  party  alluded  to,  iu  supposing  them  capa- 
ble of  such  an  act.  It  may  have  been  the  act  of 
a  mono  maniac,  or  some  deluded  enthusiast,  but 
he  believes  the  emancipationists,  as  a  party,  are 
as  incapable  as  any  other  set  of  men  on  earth,  of 
committing  or  instigating  so  foul  a  crime. 


THURSDAY,  DECEMBER  20,  1849. 
Prayer  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Noetox. 

WITHDRAWAL   OF   PAPEES. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  BALLINGR,  it  was 
Ordered,  That   Mr.    COFFEY  have  leave  to 
withdraw  the  papers,  <fec.,  presented  by  him  in 
relation  to  the  election  of  tne  delegate  from  the 
county  of  Casey. 

PEE   DIEM   IN   THE   RECESS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  HARDIX,  it  was 
Resolved,  That  the  members  of  this  conven- 
tion shall  not  be  entitled  to  any  per  diem  during 
the  recess  which  the  convention  may  take  after 
the  end  of  the  present  session,  until  the  first 
Monday  in  June,  1850. 


Mr.  TAYLOR.  I  move  to  add  to  the  twelfth 
article  on  the  general  provisions  of  the  constitu- 
tion, the  following: 

"  The  governor  shall  have  power,  after  five 
years,  to  pardon  all  persons  who  shall  in  any 
wise  participate  in  a  duel,  either  as  principal  or 
seconds,  and  restore  him,  or  them,  to  all  the 
rights,  privileges,  and  immunities  to  which  he, 
or  they,  were  entitled  before  such  participation." 

I  am  in  the  condition  of  one  who  is  about  to 
leave  an  important  matter  with  the  feeling  that 
he  has  not  done  all  he  ought  to  have  done.  Thai 
idea  keeps  boiling  up  in  my  heart  and  my  head. 
We  know  that  if  a  man's  "sins  be  as  scarletthey 
shall  be  as  wool,"  and  I  ask  if  this  convention 
will  incorporate  in  the  constitution  that  there  is 
one  sin  which  shall  not  be  pardonable?  When 
General  Root  was  on  the  northern  frontier  in  the 
last  war.  General  Scott  sent  him  with  a  flag  of 
truce  to  the  British  camp.  When  there,  one  of 
the  British  officers  drank  as  a  toast,  "  here  is  to 
James  Madison,  dead  or  alive."  Root  immedi- 
ately responded,  "here  is  to  the  Prince  Regent, 
drunk  or  sober."  Who  could  find  it  in  his  heart 
to  disfranchise  such  a  man,  if  the  result  of  that 
act  had  been  a  duel?  When  the  ofiicer  asked  if 
he  meant  to  insult  him,  he  replied,  he  meant  to 
answer  that  which  was  intended  for  an  insult. 
Shall  we  say  there  is  one  crime  for  which  there 
is  no  pardon?  If  I  understand,  there  is  no  mode 
of  trying  the  accused,  nor  any  court  of  concilia- 
tion. I  hope  there  will  be  no  offence  which  the 
arm  of  mercy  cannot  reach. 

Mr.  WOODSON  moved  the  previous  question. 

The  main  question  was  now  ordered  to  be  put. 

The  yeas  and  nays  being  demanded  by  Mr. 
NUTT  ALL,  were  yeas  50,  nays  39  : 

Yeas— Mr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Alfred  Boyd, 
William  Bradlev,  Thomas  D.  Brown,  William 
C.  Bullitt,  William  Chenault,  Beverly L.  Clarke, 
H«nry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin  Copel in,  Wil- 
liam Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Garrett  Davis,  Lu- 


cius Desha,  James  Dudley,  Chastecn  T.  Duna- 
van,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards,  Milford  Elliott, 
Green  Forrest,  JTathau  Gaitlier,  Thos.  J.Hood, 
Mark  E.  Huston,  James  W.  Irw'in,  Alfred  M. 
Jackson,  Thomas  James,  William  Johnson,  6. 
W.  Johnston,  Geo.  W.  Kavanaugh,  Peter  Lash- 
brooke,  Thos.  N.  Lindsev,  Alexander  K.  Mar- 
shall, William  N.  Marshall,  David  ^Meriwether, 
John  D.  Morris,  James  M.  Xe.sbitt,'Hugh  New- 
ell, Johnson  Price,  Larkin  J.  Proctor,  John  T. 
Rogers,  James  W.  Stone,  John  D.  Taylor,  John 
J.  Thurman,  Howard  Todd,  Philip  Triplett, 
Squire  Turner,  Henn-  Washington,  John  Wheel- 
er, A.  S.  White,  Charles  A.  Wickliffe,  Robert 
N.  Wickliffe,  Silas  Woodson— 50. 

Nays — Richard  Apperson,  John  L.  Ballinger, 
John  S.  Barlow,  William  K.  Bowling,  Luther 
Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow,  Chas.  Chambers, 
James  S.  Chrisman,  Jesse  Coffey,  Selucius  Gar- 
fielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas  J.  Gough, 
Ninian  E.  Gray,  James  P.  Hamilton,  Ben.  Har- 
din, Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  Andrew 
Hood,  James  M.  Lackey,  Thomas  W.  Lisle,  Wil- 
lis B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield,  Martin  P. 
Marshall,  Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard  L.  Mayes, 
Nathan  McClure,  John  H.  McHenrv,  Thomas  P. 
Moore,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  John  f.  Robinson, 
Thomas  Rockhold,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd,  Ig- 
natius A.  Spalding,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert 
G.  Talbott,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  L.  Wal- 
ler,  George  W.  Williams — 39. 

So  the  amendment  was  adopted. 

Mr.  NUTTALL.  I  move  a  re-consideration 
of  the  vote  adopting  the  clause  of  the  constitu- 
tion on  the  subject  of  dueling,  for  I  think  the 
vote  just  given  has  destroyed  its  eflicacy. 

Mr.  WOODSON  moved  to  dispense  with  the 
rule  requiring  a  motion  to  re-consider  to  lie  over 
one  day. 

The  motion  was  not  agreed  to. 

ADDRESS   TO    THE    PEOPLE. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  I  am  instructed  bv  tlie  com- 
mittee, to  whom  the  duty  of  preparing  an  ad- 
dress to  the  people  of  Kentucky  was  assigned, 
to  make  the  following  report : 

TO   THE   PEOPLE    OF    KEXTLCKY. 

Fellow  Citizens: — We,  your  delegates  in  con- 
vention assembled,  in  submitting  to  your  con- 
sideration the  constitution  we  have  framed, deem 
it  necessary  to  announce  the  chief  alterations  in 
that  organic  law  under  which  you  and  your  pos- 
terity will  live.  The  progress  of  political  sci- 
ence, and  the  advancement  of  popular  privi- 
letjes,  have  demonstrated,  in  the  half  century 
which  has  elapsed  since  the  adoption  of  our 
present  Constitution,  that  the  people  could  more 
safely  and  wisely  exercise  many  of  those  powers 
which  were  formerly  delegated  to  others. 

The  restoration  of  this  power  to  the  source 
whence  it  emanated,  has  been  a  controlling 
principle  of  the  convention. 

We  nave  boldly,  but  we  trust  not  incautious- 
ly, removed  those  barriers  which  our  ancestors 
deemed  necessary  to  impose  on  the  direct  exer- 
cise of  popular  sovereignty;  and  this  we  have 
done  without  apprehension,  as  we  felt  an  abid- 
ing confidence  m  the  wisdom  and  moderation 
with  which  these  great  powers  would  be  exer- 
cised by  the  freemen  of  Kentucky. 

The  people,  anxious  as  th^y  are  for  reforin. 


1088 


have  been,  nevertheless,  extremely  jealous  of  the 
exercise  of  this  power  in  reference  to  the  judi- 
cial department;  republican  experience  has, 
however,  taught  that  the  selection  of  the  judi- 
ciary, directly  by  the  people,  though  the  most 
important  of  all  other  departments — one  which 
directly  controls  the  lives,  the  property,  and  the 
liberty  of  the  citizen,  can  as  well  be  exercised 
by  the  people  themselves;  and  hence  to  your 
hands,  after  mature  deliberation,  we  confide  it. 
The  great  object  of  all  governments  should  be 
to  improve  and  elevate  the  condition  of  the  gov- 
erned— this  can,  in  no  wise,  be  better  or  more 
profitably  done  than  by  opening  to  all  the  door 
to  social,  civil,  and  political  preferment;  the 
result  will  be  honorable,  and  crowded  competi- 
tion for  office  and  thorough  preparation  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  incumbent  on  its  possession — 
hence  the  elective  power  by  the  people  has  been 

freatly  extended,  whilst  the  just  and  proper  in- 
ependence,  and  yet  frequent  and  salutary  ac- 
countability of  the  officer  secured. 

Among  the  changes  made  in  the  Constitution, 
are  the  following:  Biennial  sessions  of  the  legis- 
lature, limited  in  their  duration  to  sixty  days. 
The  protection  of  the  public  credit,  by  expressly 
prohibiting  the  legislature  from  contracting  any 
debt,  save  for  the  expenses  of  the  government, 
without  the  assent  of  the  people,  given  at  the 
polls.  Private  aud  special  legislation  is  forbid- 
den, and  this  hitherto  fruitful  source  of  expense, 
including  the  grant  of  manifold  divorces,  so 
long  borne  and  so  strongly  condemned,  is  en- 
tirely removed. 

The  power  of  selecting  the  agents  necessary 
to  the  just  and  proper  administration  of  the  gov- 
ernment in  its  several  departments  having  been 
vested  directly  in  the  people,  has  necessarily 
shorn  the  Governor  of  much  of  the  power  and 
patronage  hitherto  entrusted  to  him;  it  is  still, 
however,  his  duty  to  enforce  the  faithful  execu- 
tion of  the  laws,  and  to  secure  and  maintain,  by 
executive  authority,  the  safety  and  dignity  of 
the  commonwealth. 

The  mode  of  appointing  the  judges  has  been 
altogether  changed,  and  for  the  first  time  in  the 
history  of  this  commonwealth,  been  given  di- 
rectly to  the  people.  The  court  of  appeals  is  to 
consist  of  four  iudges.  The  state  is  to  be  di- 
vided into  four  aistricts,  in  each  of  which  an  ap- 
pellate judge  is  to  be  elected  for  the  period  of 
eight  years;  with  the  power,  on  behalf  of  the 
legislature,  to  reduce  the  number  to  three,  should 
it  DC  deemed  expedient.  The  number  of  circuit 
judges  is  reduced  from  nineteen  to  twelve,  and 
they  are  to  be  elected  every  six  years  in  their  re- 
spective circuits. 

The  old  county  court  system  is  entirely  abol- 
ished. The  judges,  one  president  aud  two  asso- 
ciates, are  to  be  elected  by  the  people  of  the  sev- 
eral counties,  having  the  same  jurisdiction,  in 
all  respects,  which  has  heretofore  been  exercised 
by  county  courts,  as  organized  by  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1799,  except  when  the  county  levy  is  to 
be  imposed,  or  county  debts  created,  when  the 
General  Assembly  may  require  the  justices  of 
the  peace,  also  elected  by  the  people,  to  form  a 
part  of  the  court  in  the  exercise  of  the  great 
power  of  county  taxation. 

The  clerks  of  the  several  courts,  sheriffs,  jus- 
tices of  the  peace,  and  constables,  and  all  other 


county  officers,  and  officers  of  the  militia,  are  to 
be  elected  by  the  people  at  stated  periods. 

The  public  credit,  that  great  element  of  social 
and  political  power,  has  been  still  further  sus- 
tained, by  rendering  inviolable  the  resources  of 
the  sinking  fund,  and  by  requiring  the  faithful 
application  thereof  to  the  payment  of  the  interest 
on,  as  well  as  the  principal  of,  the  public  debt. 

The  promotion  and  diffusion  of  knowledge 
among  our  citizens,  has  been  secured  by  the  ded- 
ication of  the  school  fund  to  a  system  of  public 
instruction  in  primary  schools,  which,  if  prop- 
erly fostered  and  managed  by  the  legislature, 
will,  we  hope,  in  time,  as  each  county  is  secured 
by  the  Constitution  in  its  due  proportion  of  that 
fund,  bring  the  means  of  a  common  education 
within  the  reach  of  all  the  children  in  the  com- 
monwealth. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  relation  between  mas- 
ter and  slave  remains  as  it  was  under  the  old 
Constitution.  Public  sentiment,  so  far  from  de- 
manding any  change,  expressly  rebuked  any 
constitutional  action  thereon.  Hence  it  has  been 
untouched;  and  this  great  element  of  wealth, 
and  of  social  and  political  power,  will  remain 
undisturbed  and  secure,  so  long  as  this  Consti- 
tution shall  continue  the  paramount  law  of  the 
land. 

The  free  negro  population  among  us  is  con- 
ceded by  all  to  be  worthless,  and  highly  detri- 
mental to  the  value  of  our  slaves,  as  -well  as  the 
security  of  the  owner.  The  new  Constitution 
provides  that  no  slave  shall  be  emancipated  but 
upon  condition  that  such  emancipated  slave  be 
sent  out  of  the  state. 

The  mode  of  amending  the  new  Constitution 
is  the  same  as  in  the  old.  Various  plans  were 
presented  to  the  consideration  of  the  conven- 
tion, upon  this  deeply  interesting  and  impor- 
tant subject.  It  was  one  which  received,  as  it 
deserved,  the  attention  of  the  people,  and  was 
ably  discussed  throughout  this  Commonwealth 
— a  mode  sanctioned  by  time,  and  irrespective  of 
approval  by  the  people,  commending  itself  to  our 
consideration  by  the  stability  that  it  imparts  to 
the  organic  law — a  stability  so  necessary  to  the 
safety  and  security  of  private  rights,  and  to  a 
fair  and  proper  trial,  and  consequently  to  a  just 
appreciation  of  the  new  Constitution. 

Tlie  great  personal,  civil,  and  political  rights 
which  were  declared  and  secured  by  the  old, 
have  been  still  further  secured  in  the  new  Con- 
stitution. 

It  may  be,  that  we  have  been  engaged  longer 
in  this  great  work,  than,  in  the  estimation  of  ma- 
ny, was  deemed  proper.  But  amid  the  conflict 
of  opinions  and  interests,  so  diverse  and  antago- 
nistic in  their  character,  time,  patience,  anddis- 
cussion  were  necessary,  and  produced  a  spirit  of 
conciliation  and  compromise — one  so  fruitful  of 
good  in  all  the  relations  and  avocations  of  hu- 
man life,  and  not  less  so  in  the  political  pur- 
suits and  in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the 
citizen. 

This  Constitution,  the  product  of  concession 
and  compromise,  may  not  oe  in  all  its  parts  per- 
fect; yet  we  hope  the  same  spirit  which  actua- 
ted us  will  pervade  you,  and  procure  for  it  your 
support  and  approval. 

The  article  of  the  Constitution  under  which 
the  convention  was  assembled,  makes  it  the  im- 


1089 


perative  dutv  of  the  convention,  '*  to  re-adopt, 

change,  or  alt«r  the  present  Constitution."  We 
have  changed  and  altered  that  Constitution,  but 
before  we  proclaim  it  as  the  organic  law  of  the 
Commonwealth,  we  have  determined  to  submit 
the  same  to  you  for  your  approval  or  rejection. 

"We  would  prefer  to  have  closed  the  labors  of 
the  convention,  by  adjournment  without  day, 
and  leave  the  duty  of  ascertaining  the  result  of 
your  judgment  upon  the  new  Constitution,  and 
the  annunciation  of  it  as  the  supreme  law  of  the 
land,  to  some  other  agency,  did  we  believe  we 
had  the  rightful  power  to  require  this  duty  to 
be  performed  by  others;  and  more  especially  by 
officers  over  whose  official  conduct  the  conven- 
tion, after]adjournment,  would  have  no  control; 
whose  obedience  it  could  not  command,  and 
whose  disobedience  it  could  not  punish. 

The  Constitution  must  emanate  from  the  con- 
vention as  the  only  constitutional  organ  of  the 
people  to  carry  into  effect  their  will,  upon  the 
vital  question,  whether  they  will  retain  the  old 
Constitution  or  adopt  the  one  which  is  proposed. 
This  issue  should  not  be  placed  upon  a  contin- 
gency beyond  the  control  of  the  convention  and 
the  people.  The  convention  thought  they  were  not 
permitted  to  leave  the  question  of  what  shall  be 
the  Constitution  of  Kentuckv,  to  be  finally  de- 
cided by  any  other  human  tribunal  than  the  peo- 
ple themselves,  through  their  delegates  in  con- 
vention assembled.  We  will,  therefore,  re-as- 
semble on  the  first  Monday  in  June,  under  the 
hope  that  our  laboi-s  will  be  approved,  and  with 
a  determination  to  submit  to  the  expressed  will 
of  the  people,  and  faithfully  to  give  that  will 
whatever  it  mav  be,  its  full  power  and  effect. 

BEVERLY  L.  CLARKE,  of  Simpson. 

C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  of  Nelson. 

R.  APPERSOX,  of  Montgomery. 

ARCH.  DIXON,  of  Henderson. 

JN'O.  D.  TAYLOR,  of  Mason. 
Mr.  CLARKE.  I  will  just  remark,  that  this 
address  met  the  approbation  of  all  the  gentlemen 
whose  duty  it  was  to  prepare  it.  It  contains 
barely  a  statement  of  the  facts  as  that  committee 
believed.  Not  facts  entertained  by  any  particu- 
lar member  of  the  convention,  but  those  which 
we  believed  to  exist  in  the  action  of  the  conven- 
tion down  to  the  present  moment. 

"We  have  not  been  unanimous  in  the  adoption 
of  every  article  of  the  constitution,  and  this  ad- 
dress is" predicated  on  what  is  supposed  to  be  the 
sense  of  the  convention  a.s  determined  by  a  ma- 
jority. Though  I  am  opposed  to  some  things 
Avhich  it  contains,  I  am  prepared  to  say  that  I 
intend  to  support  the  new  constitution,  and  to 
use  every  honorable  effort  in  my  power  to  se- 
cure its  adoption  by  the  people.  I  hope  and 
trust  the  address  will  meet  the  favorable  consid- 
eration of  this  convention. 

Mr.  M.  P.  MARSHALL.  I  concur  in  the  main 
features  of  that  address,  but  I  think  it  has  failed 
to  embody  my  sentiments  and  that  of  others,  on 
a  very  important  matter.  Whilst  I  wish  slavery 
to  stand  as  it  does,  and  that  there  should  oe 
no  interference  with  master  and  slave,  I  cannot 
concur  in  the  sentiraentthat  slavery  is  a  source  of 
wealth  or  of  political  power.  I  wish  it  to  be  un- 
derstood that  I  believe  slavery  is  a  social  and 
political  evil,  and  not  a  source  of  political  pow- 
er or  wealth. 

137 


I      There  is  another  thing  in  which  I  cannot  con- 
I  cur.    I  believe  we  had  the  power  to  submit  the 
constitution  to  the  people,  and  there  was  no  ne- 
cesitv  of  returning  here  again. 

Mr.  HARDIN.  I  have  not  attended  to  the 
reading  of  the  address.  I  have  got  to  go  to 
heaven  by  faith;  and  as  I  have  great  confidence 
in  the  committee,  I  am  willing  to  take  the 
address  in  the  same  way.  I  shall  do  what  I 
can  to  get  the  constitution  adopted. 

Mr.  TURNER.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  institu- 
tion of  slavery  as  it  now  exists  in  Kentucky, 
and  about  that  part  of  the  address  I  have  no 
scruples.  Where  it  speaks  of  our  not  having 
power  to  put  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  on 
a  contingency,  I  cannot  agree  with  the  address. 
I  desire  the  word  majority  should  be  put  in  so 
that  it  shall  not  go  out  that  we  all  agreed  to  that 
principle.  This  will  not  weaken  the  constitu- 
tion, but  give  it  power  before  the  people.  1 
cannot  sign  the  principle  that  I  believed  it  was 
necessary  to  come  back. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  If  the  address  pur- 
ported to  be  the  individual  views  of  members, 
if  the  subject  of  it  was  to  go  out  as  the  expres- 
sion of  the  opinion  of  each  member,  perhaps  the 
remarks  of  the  gentleman  from  Madison  would 
be  entitled  to  consideration.  But  it  will  be  ob- 
served that  the  address  speaks  in  the  name  of 
the  convention  and  of  the  act  of  the  convention. 
It  was  in  contemplation  by  the  committee,  if  the 
address  should  be  adopted,  to  move  that  it  be 
signed  by  the  president  of  the  convention. 
Therefore  it  speaks  as  it  does  upon  the  point  al- 
luded to.  It  will  certainly  appear  that  there  was 
a  division  of  this  house  on  the  question  referred 
to.  We  thought  as  we  were  preparing  an  ad- 
dress, and  as  part  thereof,  an  abstract  of  the  de- 
cisions of  the  convention,  we  could  not  employ 
other  language  than  we  did. 

Perhaps  I  have  more  cause  to  regret  the  parti- 
cipation I  have  had  in  this  portion  of  our  action 
than  any  member  on  this  floor.  Yesterday  morn- 
ing I  took  occasion  to  allude  to  an  article  pub- 
lished in  "Tlie  Commonwealth,"  which  I  thought 
reflected  in  terms  too  strong  on  the  action  of  this 
convention.  I  did  that  without  any  expression, 
without  the  feeling  of  any  emotion  of  unkind- 
uess  toward  the  conductors  of  that  print.  And 
I  alluded  to  the  fact,  that  from  the  high  source 
in  which  the  condemnation,  so  strongly  express- 
ed, of  the  action  of  the  majority  of  the  conven- 
tion, was  published  to  the  world,  from  the  re- 
spectability of  the  organ,  and  from  the  further 
fact  of  the  confidence  of  this  house  in  it  as  its 
printer  and  organ,  I  felt  myself  more  justified 
in  the  remark  I  made,  in  giving  the  reasons 
which  influenced  me  and  a  majority  of  the  con- 
vention in  the  course  we  have  taken. 

Sir,  am  I  alone,  in  this  house,  of  the  opinion 
that  the  remarks  made  in  that  paper  were  too 
strong  in  their  condemnation  of  the  action  of 
this  convention.  If  I  am,  then  perhaps  I  de- 
serve to  be  selected  as  the  peculiar  object  of  severe 
denunciation.  I  have  been  used  to  the  vulgar 
assaults  of  editors,  and  therefore,  personally, 
the  one  in  the  morning's  "Commonwealth," 
does  not  affect  me;  and  the  only  reason  why  I 
have  obtruded  on  the  house  a  notice  of  it  is, 
that  the  article  seems  to  present  me  as  having 
expected  from  the  conductors  of  that  press,  be- 


1090 


cause  of  their  being  public  printers,  a  species  of 
subserviency  to  the  wishes  of  this  convention, 
of  which  if  they  were  guilty,  I  should  scorn  and 
contemn  them.  The  long  personal,  social,  and 
friendly  relations  between  myself  and  the  senior 
conductor  of  that  press,  would  forbid  me  to  en- 
tertain such  an  opinion  of  him.  My  opinion  of 
him  as  a  gentleman  and  christian  have  been  fa- 
vorable. Amid  all  the  conflict  and  abuse  of 
party,  our  friendships  have  remained  unbroken, 
and  I  hope  will  ever  so  remain. 

"With  tne  junior  editor,  my  acquaintance  has 
been  more  limited  and  less  familiar,  and  respect 
for  myself  and  this  house  would  have  prevented 
me  from  using  expressions  calculated  in  the 
slightest  degree  to  authorize  the  impression  to 
be  made,  that  my  object  was  to  stifle  the  freedom 
of  debate,  thought,  or  action  of  that  press.  I 
am  a  lover  of  the  freedom  of  the  press;  I  toler- 
ate its  abuse  and  vituperation  even  of  myself, 
for  the  sake  of  that  freedom.  Upon  this  subject 
I  have  nothing  more  to  say,  nor  shall  I  dread  its 
threatened  assaults.  I  consider  that  this  con- 
vention have  decided  that  it  was  necessary  and 
appropriate  to  submit  this  constitution  to  the 
people,  and  take  a  recess  in  the  meantime,  and 
then,  if  it  should  be  adopted,  to  meet  and  pro- 
claim it  as  the  organic  law.  And,  sir,  you  will 
allow  me,  in  taking  leave  of  any  further  active 
discussions  upon  this  floor,  to  return  my  thanks 
to  the  convention  for  the  kindness  and  liberality 
with  which  they  have  treated  me,  and  to  say  to 
each  member,  that  if  in  word  or  deed  I  have  giv- 
en offence,  or  wounded  the  feelings  of  any  one, 
it  was  not  intended,  and  that  I  deeply  regret 
having  done  so. 

Mr.  APPERSON.  I,  like  the  gentleman  from 
Madison,  thought  we  had  a  right  to  submit  this 
constitution  to  the  people,  and  there  were  many 
who  agreed  with  me.  Whilst  we  give  reasons, 
let  us  give  the  reasons  of  a  majority.  Whatever 
a  majority  have  determined  on,  I  design  to  sup- 
port. I  believe  what  we  have  done  will  redound 
to  the  general  good.  There  are  things  in  the 
constitution  which  I  did  not  admire,  and  did  not 
advocate;  but,  on  the  whole,  I  think  we  have 
done  as  well  as  the  people  expected;  indeed, 
admirably  well.  I  think  the  address  embodies 
the  sentiments  of  a  majority,  and  as  such  I  yield 
to  it. 

Mr.  MAUPIN.  I  hope  this  address  will  be 
unanimously  adopted,  and  that  we,  like  a  band 
of  brothers,  shall  go  home  determined  to  do  all 
we  can  to  secure  the  adoption  of  the  constitu- 
tion. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  I  hope  delegates  will  not 
set  up  their  individual  opinions  against  the  ac- 
tion of  the  majority  of  the  convention.  I  believe 
no  good  can  come  from  a  further  discussion  of 
the  subject,  and  I  move  the  previous  question. 

Mr.  BALLINGER.  I  hope  the  gentleman 
will  withdraw  that  motion  for  a  moment.  I  wish 
to  say  a  word  or  two. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  I  will  do  so  to  accommo- 
date the  gentleman. 

Mr.  BALLINGER.  I  am  not  willing  to  sign 
this  address  without  the  alteration  suggested 
by  the  gentleman  from  Madison.  I  am  oppo- 
sed to  saying  it  was  neeessary  for  this  conven- 
tion to  return  here.  There  is  another  matter  that 
I  do  not  entirely  wish  to  endorse;  and  that  is, 


when  we  say  there  has  been  no  unnecessary  time 
spent  here  in  debate.  That  I  do  not  believe.  I 
cannot  go  for  the  address  without  the  alteration 
I  proposed. 

Mr.  GARRARD.  My  view  is,  that  the  mem- 
bfers  will  not  sign  the  address,  and  I  think  we 
may  adopt  it  with  propriety.  I  renew  my  mo- 
tion for  the  previous  question. 

The  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now  put. 

The  question  was  taken  on  the  adoption  of 
the  address,  and  it  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE.  I  wish  to  offer  a 
resolution  that  the  address  be  signed  by  the  pres- 
ident of  the  convention. 

Mr.  CHAMBERS.  I  move  to  amend  by  ad- 
ding, "and  countersigned  by  the  secretary." 

The  amendment  was  agreed  to,   and   it  was 

Ordered,  That  the  address  be  signed  by  the 
President,  and  countersigned  by  the  Secretary, 
and  that  the  printers  to  the  convention  print  six- 
ty thousand  copies  of  said  address,  to  be  appen- 
ded to  the  copies  of  the  new  constitution  hereto- 
fore ordered  to  be  printed. 

EESOLUTION  TO  ADJOURN. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MERIWETHER,  it  was 
"Resolved,  That  when  this  convention  adjourn 

on  Friday  the  21st,  inst.  it  will  adjourn  to  meet 

on  the  first  Monday  in  June  next." 

DELEGATES  TO  SIGN  THE    CONSTITUTION. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  ifc 
was. 

Resolved,  That  the  constitution,  as  enrolled,  be 
signed  by  the  president  and  delegates  of  the 
convention,  and  countersigned  by  the  secretary. 

BINDING  OF   JOURNAL. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MITCHELL,  it  was 
Resolved;  That  the  printers  to  the  convention 
be  directed  not  to  bind  the  journal  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  body,  until  its  final  adjournment 
in  June  next,  so  as  to  have  it  complete  in  one 
volume. 

COMMITTEE    OF   REVISION. 

The  committee  of  revision,  by  Mr.  McHEIfRY, 
its  chairman,  reported  other  articles  of  the  con- 
stitution, and  the  convention  approved  of  the 
arrangement  and  amendments  which  had  been 
made  in  them. 

FEDERAL  AND  STATE  POWERS. 

Mr.  GAITHER  gave  notice  that  the  select 
committee,  of  which  lie  was  chairman,  to  whom 
"vf^as  referred  a  resolution  on  the  subject  of  the 
powers  of  the  general  and  state  governments, 
would  be  ready  to  report  to  the  convention  when 
it  re-assembled  in  June. 

SLACKWATER  NA VACATION. 

Mr.  KAVANAUGH  desired  the  views  which 
he  entertained  in  reference  to  the  section  he  had 
the  honor  of  offering  a  few  days  ago,  declaring 
the  proceeds  ofthe  slackwater  navagation  of  the 
state,  part  of  the  sinking  fnnd,  to  be  placed  on 
record,  especially  as  a  speech  was  publish  in 
this  mornings  paper,  (Mr.  Lisle's,)  on  the  other 
side. 

In  offering  that  section  he  said,  I  wish  it  to 
be  distintly  understood  that  I  am  the  friend  of 
common  schools.  I  have  been  favorable  to  se- 
curing the  school  fund  by  a  constitutional  pro- 


1091 


vision,  and  I  have  voted  accordingly,  I  hold  that 
that  fund  has  been  already  set  apart  and  secur- 
ed, an.l  cannot  be  infringed  or  violated  by  the 
adoption  of  the  section  which  I  offered,  because 
the  legislature  in  any  state  of  case,  is  bound  to 
pay  the  interest  on  that  fund. 

The  proceeds  of  the  slackwater  navigation  of 
the  state  have  always  rightfully  and  properly 
been  part  of  the  sinking  fund;  but  the  legisla- 
ture last  year  directed  and  set  apart  their  pro- 
ceeds to  pay  the  interest  on  the  school  fund. 
This  provision  was  intended  to  go  into  effect 
next  year,  and  the  interest  on  the  school  fund, 
by  the  provision  in  the  constitution,  must  be 
paid,  no  matter  what  may  be  done  with  the 
avails  of  our  slackwater  navigation.  As  the 
constitution  has  set  apart  the  sinking  fund  to 
pay  the  public  debt,  doubt  might  arise  as  to 
whether  it  was  intended  that  the  slackwater  nav- 
igation was  to  be  part  of  the  sinking  fund.  I 
believe  it  was  so  intended.  My  object  then  in 
offering  the  section  was  to  carry  out  the  inten- 
tion of  the  provision  setting  apart  the  sinking 
fund  for  the  payment  of  the  state  debt.  I  am 
for  paying  that  debt,  and  holding  the  sinking 
funa  for  that  purpose.  But  if  that  fund  is  to  be 
taken  for  other  purposes,  the  provision  in  the 
constitution  setting  it  apart  to  pay  our  debt, 
will  amount  to  nothing,  and  the  debt  will  re- 
main unpaid.  If  that  fund  is  held  and  sacred- 
ly applied  to  the  payment  of  the  debt,  it  will 
accomplish  it ;  and  that  is  what  I  am  for,  and 
that  was  the  reason  of  my  offering  the  section. 
I  again  say  that  good  faith  also  requires  the 
payment  of  the  interest  on  the  school  fund;  and 
that  I  am  for  it,  and  have  so  voted  ;  and  so  far 
from  being  against  common  schools,  I  am  for 
them,  and  would,  individually,  be  willing  to  be 
taxed  ten  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  if  it 
would  bring  a  good  education  within  the  reach 
of  all  the  children  in  the  state;  but  I  would  lay 
no  tax  on  the  people  for  that  purpose  without 
their  consent.  This  is  what  I  have  always  said. 
Any  tax  which  the  people  themselves  require 
for  educational  purposes,  will  always  be  cordi- 
ally and  cheerfully  met  and  paid  by  me  without 
a  murmer.  In  justice  to  myself  I  have  thought 
it  proper  to  make  this  statement. 

ENGROSSMENT    OF    THE    CONSTITUTION. 

The  convention  having  disposed  of  every  ar- 
ticle as  it  was  reported  from  the  committee  of 
revision  and  arrangement,  and  as  it  was  being 
engrossed,  an  adjournment  to  9  o'clock,  P.  M., 
was  moved  and  agreed  to. 
"     It  was  subsequently  discovered  that  the  en- 

Eos-sment  would  not  be  accomplished  until  a 
te  hour  of  the  night,  and  therefore  the  conven- 
tion adjourned  to  to-morrow  morning  at  7  o'clock. 


FRIDAY,  DECEMBER  21,  1849. 
The  convention  as.semblsd  at  7  o'clock,  A.  M. 

VOTE   OF   THANKS  TO   THE   PRESIDENT. 

The  President  having  retired  from  the  chair, 
Mr,  WALLER  moved  the  following  resolu- 
tion, which  waa  unanimously  adopted. 


Resolved,  That  the  thanks  of  this  convention 
be  presented  to  the  honorable  James  Guthrie, 
for  the  able,  dignified,  and  impartial  manner  in 
which  he  has  presided  over  the  deliberations  of 
this  body;  and  that  in  retiring  therefrom  he  car- 
ries with  him  the  best  wishes  of  every  delegate. 

VOTE   OF    THAKKS   TO    THE   REPORTERS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  MITCHELL,  it  was 
unanimously 

Resolved,  That  the  thanks  of  this  convention 
are  due  and  are  hereby  tendered  to  Richard  Sut- 
ton, Esq.,  the  reporter  of  this  convention,  and  his 
associates,  for  the  able  and  faithful  manner  in 
which  they  have  discharged  their  arduous  duties. 

VOTE    OF   THANKS  TO    THE    OFFICERS   AND    CHAPLAINS. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  G.  W.  JOHiS'STOX,  it 
was  unanimously 

Resolved,  That  the  thanks  or  this  convention 
be  and  they  are  hereby  tendered  to  Thomas  J. 
Helm,  secretary;  Thomas  D.  Tilford,  assistant 
secretary;  Culvin  Sanders,  sargeant-at-arms;  and 
John  M.  Helms,  door-keeper,  for  the  faithful 
discharge  of  their  duties  as  officers  of  the  same. 

Resolved,  Tliat  the  thanks  of  this  convention 
are  also  tendered  to  the  ministers  of  the  gospel 
of  the  city  of  Frankfort  for  opening  its  daily 
session  with  prayer  to  a  thi-one  of  grace. 

SIGNING   OF    THE   CONSTITUTION. 

Mr.  BRADLEY  from  the  committee  on  enroll- 
ment, presented  the  constitution  correctly  en- 
grossed, as  follows : 

PREAMBLE. 

"We,  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  the 
State  of  Kentucky,  in  Convention  assembled,  to 
secure  to  all  the  citizens  thereof  the  enjoyment 
of  the  rights  of  life,  liberty,  and  property,  and 
of  pursuing  happiness,  do  ordain  and  establish 
this  Constitution  for  its  government. 

ARTICLE   FIRST. 

Concerning  the  distribution  of  the  powers  of  the 
Government. 

Section  1.  The  powers  of  the  Government  of 
the  State  of  Kentucky  shall  be  divided  into 
three  distinct  departments,  and  each  of  them  be 
confided  to  a  separate  body  of  magistracy,  to- 
wit :  those  which  are  Legislative  to  one;  those 
which  are  Executive  to  another,  and  those 
which  are  Judiciary  to  another. 

Section  2.  No  person,  or  collection  of  per- 
sons, being  of  one  of  those  departments,  shall 
exercise  any  power  properly  belonging  to  either 
of  the  others,  except  in  the  instances  hereinafter 
expressly  directed  or  permitted. 

ARTICLE  SECOND. 

Concerning  the  Legislative  Department. 
Section  1.  The  Legislative  power  shall  be 
vested  in  a  House  of  Representatives  and  Sen- 
ate, which  together  shall  be  styled  the  General 
Assembly  of  the   Commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 

Section  2.  The  members  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  shall  continue  in  service  for  the 
term  of  two  years  from  the  day  of  the  general 
election,  and  no  longer. 

Section  3.  Representatives  shall  be  chosen  on 
the  first  Monday  in  August,  between  the  hours 
of  six  o'clock  in  the  morning  and  seven  o'clock 


1092 


in  the  evening,  in  every  second  year;  and  the 
mode  of  holding  the  elections  shall  be  regula- 
ted by  law. 

Section  4.  No  person  shall  be  a  Representa- 
tive, who,  at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a 
citizen  of  the  United  States,  and  hath  not  at- 
tained to  the  age  of  twenty-four  years,  and  re- 
sided in  this  State  two  years  next  preceding  his 
election,  and  the  last  year  thereof  in  the  county, 
town,  or  city,  for  which  he  may  be  chosen. 

Sectiox  5.  The  General  Assembly  shall  di- 
vide the  several  counties  of  this  Commonwealth 
into  convenient  precincts,  or  may  delegate  such 
power  to  such  county  authorities  as  they  may 
by  law  provide;  and  elections  for  Representa- 
tives for  the  several  counties  entitled  to  repre- 
sentation, shall  be  held  at  the  places  of  holding 
their  respective  courts,  and  in  the  several  elec- 
tion precincts  into  which  the  counties  may  be 
divided:  Provided,  that  when  it  shall  appear  to 
the  General  Assembly  that  any  city  or  town 
hath  a  number  of  qualified  voters  equal  1o  the 
ratio  then  fixed,  such  city  or  town  shall  be  in- 
vested with  the  privilege  of  a  separate  represen- 
tation, in  either  or  both  houses  of  the  General 
Assembly,  which  shall  be  retained  so  long  as 
such  city  or  town  shall  contain  a  number  of 
qualified  voters  equal  to  the  ratio  which  may, 
from  time  to  time,  be  fixed  bylaw;  and,  there- 
after, elections  for  the  county  in  which  such  city 
or  town  is  situated,  shall  not  beheld  therein; 
but  such  city  or  town  shall  not  be  entitled  to  a 
separate  representation,  unless  such  county,  af- 
ter the  separation,  shall  also  be  entitled  to  one 
or  more  Representatives.  That  whenever  a  city 
or  town  shall  be  entitled  to  a  separate  represen- 
tation in  either  house  of  the  General  Assembly, 
and  by  her  numbers  sliall  be  entitled  to  more 
than  one  Representative,  such  city  or  town  shall 
be  divided,  by  squares  which  are  contiguous,  so 
as  to  make  tne  most  compact  form,  into  Repre- 
sentative Districts,  as  nearly  equal  as  may  be, 
equal  to  the  number  of  Representatives  to  which 
such  city  or  town  may  be  entitled;  and  one  Rep- 
resentative shall  be  elected  from  each  district. 
In  like  manner  shall  said  city  or  town  be  di- 
vided into  Senatorial  Districts,  when,  by  the 
apportionment,  more  than  one  Senator  shall  be 
allotted  to  such  city  or  town;  and  a  Senator 
shall  be  elected  from  each  Senatorial  District; 
but  no  ward  or  municipal  division  shall  be  di- 
vided by  such  division  of  Senatorial  or  Repre- 
sentative Districts,  unless  it  be  necessary  to 
equalize  the  Elective,  Senatorial,  or  Representa- 
tive Districts. 

Section  6.  Representation  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform  in  this  Commonwealth,  and  shall  be 
forever  regulated  and  ascertained  by  the  number 
of  qualified  voters  therein.  In  the  year  1850, 
again  in  the  year  1857,  and  every  eighth  year 
thereafter,  an  enumeration  of  all  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  State  shall  be  made;  and  to  secure 
uniformity  and  equality  of  representation,  the 
State  is  hereby  laid  off  into  ten  districts.  The 
first  district  shall  be  composed  of  the  coun- 
ties of  Fulton,  Hickman,  Ballard,  McOracken, 
Graves,  Calloway,  Marshall,  Livingston,  Crit- 
tenden, Union.  Hopkins,  Caldwell,  and  Trigg. 
The  second  district  shall  be  composed  of  the 
counties  of  Christian,  Muhlenburg,  Henderson, 
Daviess,  Hancock,  Ohio,  Breckinridge,  Meade, 


Grayson,  Butler,  and  Edmonson.  The  third 
district  shall  be  composed  of  the  counties  of 
Todd,  Logan,  Simpson,  Warren,  Allen,  Monroe, 
Barren,  and  Hart.  The  fourth  district  shall  be 
composed  of  the  counties  of  Cumberland,  Adair, 
Green,  Taylor,  Clinton,  Russell,  Wayne,  Pu- 
laski, Casey,  Boyle,  and  Lincoln.  The  fifth 
district  shall  be  composed  of  the  counties  of 
Hardin,  Larue,  Bullitt,  Spencer,  Nelson,  Wash- 
ington, Marion,  Mercer,  and  Anderson.  The 
sixth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the  counties 
of  Garrard,  Madison,  Estill,  Owsley,  Rockcastle, 
Laurel,  Clay,  Whitley,  Knox,  Harlan,  Perry, 
Letcher,  Pike,  Floyd,  and  Johnson.  The  sev- 
enth district  shall  be  composed  of  the  counties 
of  Jefferson,  Oldham,  Trimble,  Carroll,  Henry, 
and  Shelby,  and  the  city  of  Louisville.  The 
eighth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the  counties 
of  Bourbon,  Fayette,  Scott.  Owen,  Franklin, 
Woodford,  and  Jessamine.  The  ninth  district 
shall  be  composed  of  the  counties  of  Clarke, 
Montgomery,  Bath,  Fleming,  Lewis,  Greenup, 
Carter,  Lawrence,  Morgan,  and  Breathitt.  The 
tenth  district  shall  be  composed  of  the  counties 
of  Mason,  Bracken,  Nicholas,  Harrison,  Pendle- 
ton, Campbell,  Grant,  Kenton,  Boone,  and  Gal- 
latin. The  number  of  representatives  shall,  at 
the  several  sessions  of  the  General  Assembly, 
next  after  the  making  of  the  enumerations,  be 
apportioned  among  the  ten  several  districts,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  qualified  voters  in 
each;  and  the  Representatives  shall  be  apportion- 
ed, as  near  as  may  be,  among  the  counties, 
towns  and  cities  in  each  district;  and  in  making 
such  apportionment  the  following  rules  shall 
govern,  to-wit:  Every  county,  town  or  city  hav- 
ing the  ratio  shall  have  one  representative;  if 
double  the  ratio,  two  representatives,  and  so  on. 
Next,  the  counties,  towns  or  cities  having  one  or 
more  Representatives,  and  the  largest  number  of 
qualified  voters  above  the  ratio,  and  counties 
having  the  largest  number  under  the  ratio  shall 
have  a  Representative,  regard  being  always  had 
to  the  greatest  number  of  qualified  voters:  Pro- 
vided, That  when  a  county  may  not  have  a  suf- 
ficient number  of  qualified  voters  to  entitle  it  to 
one  Representative,  then  such  county  may  be 
joined  to  some  adjacent  county  or  counties  to 
send  one  Representative.  When  a  new  county 
shall  be  formed  of  territory  belonging  to  more 
than  one  district,  it  shall  form  a  part  of  that  dis- 
trict having  the  least  number  of  qualified  vo- 
ters. 

Section  7.  The  House  of  Representatives  shall 
choo.se  its  Speaker  and  other  officers. 

Section  8.  Every  free  white  male  citizen,  of 
the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  who  has  resided  in 
the  State  two  years,  or  in  the  county,  town,  or 
city,  in  which  he  offers  to  vote,  one  year  next 
preceding  the  election,  .shall  be  a  voter;  but  such 
voter  shall  have  been,  for  sixty  days  next  prece- 
ding the  election,  a  resident  of  the  precinct  in 
which  he  offers  to  vote,  and  he  shall  cast  his  vote 
in  said  precinct,  and  not  elsewhere. 

Section  9.  Voters,  in  all  ca.ses  except  treason, 
felonv,  breach  or  surety  of  the  peace,  shall  be 
privileged  from  arrest  during  their  attendance  at, 
going  to,  and  returning  from  elections. 

Section  10.  Senators  shall  be  chosen  for  the 
term  of  four  years,  and  the  Senate  shall  have 
power  to  choose  its  officers  biennially. 


1093 


Sectiox  11.  Senatorsand  Representatives  shall 
be  elected,  under  the  first  apportionment  after 
the  adoption  of  this  Constitution,  in  the  year 
1851,  and  every  two  years  thereafter. 

Sectiox  12.  !A.t  the' session  of  the  General  As- 
sembly next  after  the  first  apportionment  under 
this  Constitution,  the  Senators  shall  be  divided 
by  lot,  as  equally  as  may  be,  into  two  classes  ; 
the  seats  of  the  first  class  shall  be  vacated  at  the 
end  of  two  years  from  the  day  of  the  election, 
and  those  of  the  second  class  at  the  end  of  four 
years,  so  that  one  half  shall  be  chosen  every  two 
years. 

Section  13.  In  the  apportionment  of  repre- 
sentation, the  number  of  Kepresentatives  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  shall  be  one  hundred, 
and  the  number  Senators  thirty-eight. 

Sectiox  14.  At  everj-  apportionment  of  repre- 
sentation, the  State  shall  be  laid  off  into  thirty- 
eight  Senatorial  Districts,  which  shall  be  so 
formed  as  to  contain,  as  near  a.?  may  be,  an  equal 
number  of  qualified  voters,  and  so  that  no  coun- 
ty shall  be  divided  in  the  formation  of  a  Sena- 
torial District,  except  such  county  shall  be  enti- 
tled, under  the  enumeration,  to  two  or  more  Sen- 
ators. 

Section  15.  One  Senator  for  each  district  shall 
be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  therein,  who 
shall  vote  in  the  precincts  where  they  reside,  at 
the  places  where  elections  are  by  law"  directed  to 
be  held. 

Section  16.  ISTo  person  shall  be  a  Senator  who, 
at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  not  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States;  has  not  attained  the  age  of  thirty 
years,  and  who  has  not  resided  in  this  State  six 
yeare  next  preceding  his  election,  and  the  last 
year  thereof  in  the  district  for  which  he  may  be 
cho.sen. 

Section  17.  The  election  for  Senators,  next  af- 
ter the  firet  apportionment  under  this  Constitu- 
tion, shall  be  general  throughout  the  State,  and 
at  the  same  time  that  the  election  for  Represen- 
tatives is  held,  and  thereafter  there  shall  be  a  bi- 
ennial election  for  Senators  to  fill  the  places  of 
those  whose  term  of  service  may  have  expired. 

Section  18.  The  General  Assembly  shall  con- 
vene on  the  first  Monday  in  November,  after  the 
adoption  of  this  Constitution,  and  again  on  the 
first  Monday  in  November,  1851,  and  on  the 
same  day  of  every  second  year  thereafter,  unless 
a  different  day  be  appointed  by  law,  and  their 
sessions  shall  be  held  at  the  seat  of  Government; 
but  if  the  public  welfare  require,  the  Governor 
may  call  a  special  session. 

Section  19.  Not  less  than  a  majority  of  the 
members  of  each  house  of  the  General  Assembly 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business,  but  a 
smaller  number  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day, 
and  shall  be  authorized  by  law  to  compel  the  at- 
tendance of  absent  members  in  such  manner  and 
under  such  penalties  as  may  be  prescribed 
thereby. 

Section  20.  Each  house  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly shall  judge  of  the  qualifications,  elections, 
and  returns  of  its  members;  but  a  contested  elec- 
tion shall  be  determined  in  such  manner  as  shall 
be  directed  by  law. 

Sectiox  21.  Each  house  of  the  General  As- 
sembly may  determine  the  rules  of  its  proceed- 
ings, punish  a  member  for  disorderly  behavior, 
and  with  the  concurrence  of  two-thirds,  expel  a 


member;  trat  not  a  second  time  far  the  same 
cause. 

Sectiox  22.  Each  house  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly shall  keep  and  publish,  weekly,  a  journal  of 
its  proceedings,  and  the  yeas  an<i  nays  of  the 
members  on  any  question  shall,  at  the'  desire  of 
any  two  of  them,  te  entered  on  their  journal. 

Skctiox  23.  Neither  house,  during  the  session 
of  the  General  Assembly,  shall,  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  other,  adjourn  for  more  than  three 
days,  nor  to  any  other  place  than  that  in  which 
they  may  be  sitting. 

Sectiox  24.  The  members  of  the  General  As- 
sembly shall  severally  receive  from  the  public 
treasury  a  compensation  for  theirs^rvices,  which 
shall  be  three  dollars  a  day  during  their  attend- 
ance on,  and  twelve  and  a  half  cents  per  mile 
for  the  necessary  travel  in  going  to,  and  return- 
ing from,  the  sessions  of  their  respective  houses: 
Provided,  That  the  same  may  be  increased  or  di- 
minished by  law;  but  no  alteration  shall  take 
effect  during  the  session  at  which  such  alteration 
shall  be  made ;  nor  shall  a  session  of  the  Gener- 
al Assembly  continue  beyond  sixty  days,  ex- 
cept by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  each  house,  but 
this  shall  not  apply  to  the  firet  session  held  un- 
der this  Constitution. 

Sectiox  25.  The  members  of  the  General  As- 
sembly shall,  in  all  cases  except  treason,  felony, 
breach  or  surety  of  the  peace,  be  privileged  from 
arrest  during  their  attendance  at  the  sessions  of 
their  respective  houses,  and  in  going  to,  and  re- 
turning from,  the  same ;  and  for  any  speech  or 
debate  in  either  house,  they  shall  not  be  ques- 
tioned in  any  other  place. 

Section  26.  No  Senator  or  Representative 
shall,  during  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected, 
nor  for  one  year  thereafter,  be  appointed  or  elect- 
ed to  any  civil  office  of  profit  under  this  Com- 
monwealth, which  shall  have  been  created,  or 
the  emoluments  of  which  shall  have  been  in- 
creased, during  the  said  term,  except  to  such 
offices  or  appointments  as  may  be  filled  by  the 
election  of  the  people. 

Section  27.  No  person,  while  he  continues  to 
exercise  the  functions  of  a  clergyman,  priest,  or 
teacher  of  any  religious  persua.sion,  society  or 
sect,  nor  while  he  holds  or  exercises  any  office 
of  profit  under  this  Commonwealth,  or  under  the 
government  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  General  Assembly,  except  attorneys  at 
law,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  militia  officers: 
ProToukd,  That  attorneys  for  the  Commonwealth, 
who  receive  a  fixed  annual  salary,  shall  be  in- 
eligible. 

Section  28.  No  person  who,  at  any  time, 
may  have  been  a  collector  of  taxes  or'  public 
moneys  for  the  State,  or  the  assistant  or  deputy 
of  such  collector,  shall  be  eligible  to  the  General 
Assembly,  unless  he  shall  have  obtained  a  quie- 
tus, six  months  before  the  election,  for  the  amount 
of  such  collection,  and  for  all  public  moneys  for 
which  he  may  have  been  responsible. 

Section  29.  No  bill  shall  have  the  force  of  a 
law,  until,  on  three  several  days,  it  be  read  over 
in  each  house  of  the  General  As.sembly,  and  free 
discussion  allowed  thereon,  unless,  in  cases  of 
urgency,  four-fifths  of  the  house,  where  the  bill 
shall  be  depending,  may  deem  it  expedient  to  dis- 
pense with  this  rule. 

Section  30.  All  bills  for  raising  revenue  shall 


1094 


originate  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  but 
the  Senate  may  propose  amenameuts,  as  in  other 
bills  :  Provided,  That  they  shall  not  introduce 
any  new  matter,  under  the  color  of  an  amend- 
ment, which  does  not  relate  to  raising  revenue. 

Section  31.  The  General  Assembly  shall  reg- 
ulate, by  law,  by  whom  and  in  what  manner 
writs  of  election  shall  be  issued  to  fill  the  va- 
cancies which  may  happen  in  either  branch 
thereof. 

Section  32.  The  General  Assembly  shall  have 
no  power  to  gVant  divorces,  to  change  the  names 
of  individuals,  or  direct  the  sales  of  estates  be- 
longing to  infants,  or  other  persons  laboring  un- 
der legal  disabilities,  by  special  legislation;  but 
by  general  laws  shall  confer  such  powers  on  the 
courts  of  justice. 

Section  33.  The  credit  of  this  Commonwealth 
shall  never  be  given  or  loaned  in  aid  of  any 
pei-son,  association,  municipality,  or  corpora- 
tion. 

Section  34.  The  General  Assembly  shall  have 
no  power  to  pass  laws  to  diminish  the  resources 
of  the  Sinking  Fund,  as  now  established  by 
law,  but  may  pass  laws  to  increase  it ;  and  the 
whole  resources  of  said  fund,  from  year  to  year, 
shall  be  sacredly  set  apait  and  applied  to  the 
payment  of  the  interest  and  principal  of  the 
State  debt,  and  to  no  other  use  or  purpose,  until 
the  whole  debt  of  the  State  is  fully  paid  and 
satisfied. 

Section  35.  The  General  Assembly  may  con- 
tract debts  to  meet  casual  deficits  or  failures  in 
the  revenue,  but  such  debts,  direct  or  contingent, 
singly  or  in  the  aggregate,  shall  not  at  any  time 
exceed  five  hundred  thousand  dollars ;  and  the 
moneys  arising  from  loans  creating  such  debts, 
shall  be  applied  to  the  purposes  for  which  they 
■were  obtained,  or  to  repay  such  debts:  Provided, 
That  the  State  may  contract  debts  to  repel  inva- 
sion, suppress  insurrection,  or,  if  hostilities  are 
threatened,  provide  for  tlie  public  defence. 

Section.  36.  No  act  of  the  General  Assembly 
shall  authorize  any  debt  to  be  contracted  on  be- 
half of  the  Commonwealth,  except  for  the  purpo- 
ses mentioned  in  the  thirty-fifth  section  of  this  ar- 
ticle, unless  provision  be  made  therein  to  lay 
and  collect  an  annual  tax  suflicient  to  pay  the 
interest  stipulated,  and  to  discharge  the  debt 
within  thirty  years  ;  nor  shall  such  act  take  ef- 
fect until  it  shall  have  been  submitted  to  the 
people  at  a  general  election,  and  shall  have  re- 
ceived a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  for  and 
agiiinst  it :  Provided,  That  the  General  Assem- 
bly may  contract  debts  without  submission  to 
the  people,  by  borrowing  money  to  pay  any  part 
of  the  public  debt  of  the  State,  and  without 
making  provision  in  the  act  authorising  the  same 
for  a  tax  to  discharge  the  debt  so  contracted,  or 
the  interest  thereon. 

Section  37.  No  law,  enacted  by  the  General 
Assembly,  shall  embrace  more  than  one  object, 
and  that  shall  be  expressed  in  the  title. 

Section  38.  The  General  Assembly  shall  not 
change  the  venue  in  any  criminal  or  penal  pros- 
ecution, but  shall  provide  for  the  same  by  gen- 
eral laws. 

Section  39.  The  General  Assembly  may  pass 
laws  authorising  writs  of  error  in  criminal  or 

{)enal  cases,  and  regulating  the  right  uf  chal- 
enge  of  jurors  therein. 


Section  40.  The  General  Assembly  shall  have 
no  power  to  pass  any  act,  or  resolution,  for  the 
appropriation  of  any  money,  or  the  creation  of 
any  debt,  exceeding  the  sum  of  one  hundred 
dollars,  at  any  one  time,  unless  the  same,  on  its 
final  passage,  shall  be  voted  for  by  a  majority  of 
all  tlie  members  then  elected  to  each  branch  of 
the  General  Assembly,  and  the  yeas  and  nays 
thereon  entered  on  the  journal. 

ARTICLE   third. 

Concerning  the  Executive  Department. 

Section  1.  The  Supreme  Executive  power  of 
the  Commonwealth  shall  be  vested  in  a  Chief 
Magistrate,  who  shall  be  styled  the  Governor  of 
the  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky. 

Section  2.  The  Governor  shall  be  elected  for 
the  term  of  four  years,  by  the  qualified  voters  of 
the  State,  at  the  time  when,  and  places  where, 
they  shall  respectively  vote  for  Representatives. 
The  person  having  the  highest  number  of  votes 
shall  be  Governor;  but  if  two  or  more  shall  be 
equal  and  highest  in  votes,  the  election  shall  be 
determined  by  lot,  in  such  manner  as  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  may  direct. 

Section  3.  The  Governor  shall  be  ineligible 
for  the  succeeding  four  years  after  the  expiration 
of  the  term  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elect- 
ed. 

Section  4.  He  shall  be  at  least  thirty-five 
years  of  age,  and  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
and  have  been  an  inhabitant  of  this  State  at 
least  six  years  next  preceding  his  election. 

Section  5.  He  shall  commence  the  execution 
of  the  duties  of  his  office  on  the  fourth  Tuesday 
succeeding  the  day  of  the  commencement  of 
the  general  election  on  which  he  shall  be  cho- 
sen, and  shall  continue  in  the  execution  thereof 
until  the  end  of  four  weeks  next  succeeding  the 
election  of  his  successor,  and  until  his  successor 
shall  have  taken  the  oaths,  or  affirmations,  pre- 
scribed by  this  Constitution. 

Section.  6.  No  member  of  Congress,  person 
holding  any  office  under  the  United  States,  nor 
minister  of  any  religious  society,  shall  be  eligi- 
ble to  the  ofiice  of  Governor. 

Section  7.  The  Governor  shall,  at  stated 
times,  receive  for  his  services  a  compensation, 
which  shall  neither  be  increased  nor  diminished 
during  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected. 

Section  8.  He  shall  be  Commander-in-Chief 
of  the  army  and  navy  of  this  Commonwealth, 
and  of  the  militia  thereof,  except  when  they 
shall  be  called  into  the  service  of  the  United 
States;  but  he  shall  not  connuand  personally  in 
the  field,  unless  he  shall  be  advised  so  to  do  by 
a  resolutionof  the  General  Assembly. 

Section  S).  He  shall  have  power  to  fill  vacan- 
cies that  may  occur,  by  granting  commissions, 
which  shall  expire  when  sucli  vacancies  shall 
have  been  filled  according  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Constitution. 

Section  10.  He  shall  have  power  to  remit  fines 
and  forfeitures,  grant  reprieves  and  pardons,  ex- 
cept in  cases  of  impeachment.  In  cases  of  trea- 
son, he  shall  have  power  to  grant  reprieves  until 
the  end  of  the  next  session  of  the  General  As- 
sembly, in  which  the  power  of  pardoning  shall 
be  vested;  but  shall  have  no  power  to  remit  the 
fees  of  the  Clerk,  Sheriff,  or  Commonwealth's  At- 
tornuy,  in  penal  or  criminal  cases. 


1095 


Section  11.  He  may  require  information,  in 
writing,  from  the  officers  in  the  executive  de- 
partment, upon  any  siibject  relating  to  the  duties 
of  their  respective  offices. 

Section  12.  He  shall,  from  time  to  time,  give 
to  the  General  Assembly,  information  of  the 
state  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  recommend  to 
their  consideration  such  measures  as  he  may 
deem  expedient. 

Section  13.  He  may,  on  extraordinary  occa- 
sions, convene  the  General  Assembly  at  the  seat 
of  government,  or  at  a  different  place  if  that 
should  have  become,  since  their  last  adjourn- 
ment, dangerous  from  an  enemy,  or  from  conta- 
gious disorders;  and  in  case  of  disagreement 
between  the  two  houses,  with  respect  to  the  time 
of  adjournment,  adjourn  them  to  such  time 
as  he  shall  think  proper,  not  exceeding  four 
months. 

Section  14.  He  shall  take  care  that  the  laws 
be  faithfully  executed. 

Section  15.  A  Lieutenant  Governor  shall  be 
chosen  at  every  election  for  Governor,  in  the 
same  ra.inner,  continue  in  office  for  the  same 
time,  and  possess  the  same  qualifications.  In 
voting  for  Governor  and  Lieutenant  Governor, 
the  electors  shall  di.stinguish  for  whom  they 
vote  as  Governor,  and  for  whom  as  Lieutenant 
Governor. 

Section  16.  He  shall,  by  virtue  of  his  office, 
be  Speaker  of  the  Senate,  have  a  right,  when  in 
committee  of  the  whole,  to  debate  and  vote  on 
all  subjects,  and  when  the  Senate  are  equally 
divided,  to  give  the  casting  vote. 

Section  17.  Should  the  Governor  be  impeach- 
ed, removed  from  office,  die,  refuse  to  qualify, 
resign,  or  be  absent  from  the  State,  the  Lieutt-n- 
ant  Governor  shall  exercise  all  the  power  and 
authority  appertaining  to  the  office  of  Governor, 
until  another  be  duly  elected  and  qualified,  or 
the  Governor  absent  or  impeached,  shall  return 
or  be  acquitted. 

Section  18.  Whenever  the  government  shall 
be  administered  by  the  Lieutenant  Governor,  or 
he  shall  fail  to  attend  as  Speaker  of  the  Senate, 
the  Senators  shall  elect  one  of  their  own  members 
as  Speaker  for  that  occasion.  And  if,  during  the 
vacancy  of  the  office  of  Governor,  tlie  Lieutenant 
Governor  shall  be  impeached,  removed  from  of 
fice,  refuse  to  qualify,  resign,  die,  or  be  absent 
from  the  State,  the  Speaker  of  the  Senate  shall, 
in  like  manner,  administerthe  government :  Pro- 
vided, That  whenever  a  vacancy  sliall  occur  in 
the  office  of  Governor,  before  the  first  two  years 
of  the  term  shall  have  expired,  a  new  election 
for  Governor  shall  take  place,  to  fill  such  vacan- 
cy. 

Section  19.  The  Lieutenant  Governor,  or 
Speaker  ;)ro  tempore  of  the  Senate,  while  he  acts 
as  speaker  of  the  Senate,  shall  receive  for  his 
services  the  same  compensation  which  shall,  for 
the  same  period,  be  allowed  to  tlie  Speaker  of 
the  House  of  Representatives,  and  no  more;  and 
during  the  time  ne  administers  the  government, 
as  Governor,  shall  receive  the  same  compensa- 
tion which  the  Governor  would  have  received, 
had  he  been  emploved  in  the  duties  of  his  office. 

Section  20.  If  t&e  Lieutenant  Governor  shall 
be  called  upon  to  administ€r  the  government, 
and  shall,  while  in  such  administration,  resign, 
die,  or  be  absent  from  the  State  during  the  recess 


of  the  General  Assembly,  it  shall  be  the  duty 
of  the  Secretary,  for  the  time  being,  to  convene 
the  Senate  for  the  purpose  of  choosing  a  Speaker. 

Section  21.  The  Governor  shall  nominate, 
and,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate,  appoint  a  Secretan'  of  State,  who  shall 
be  commissioned  during  the  term  for  which  the 
Governor  was  elected,  if  he  shall  so  long  behave 
himself  well.  He  shall  keep  a  fair  register,  and 
attest  all  the  official  acts  of  tlie  Governor,  and 
shall,  when  required,  lay  the  same,  and  all  pa- 
pers, minutes,  and  vouchers,  relative  thereto, be- 
fore either  house  of  the  General  Assembly;  and 
shall  perform  such  other  duties  as  may  be  re- 
quired of  him  by  law. 

Section  22.  Every  bill  which  shall  have  pass- 
ed both  houses,  shall  be  presented  to  the  Gov- 
ernor. If  he  approve,  he  shall  sign  it;  but  if 
not,  he  shall  return  it,  with  his  objections,  to 
the  house  in  which  it  originated,  who  shall  en- 
ter the  objections  at  large  upon  their  journal, 
and  proceed  to  reconsider  it.  If,  after  such  re- 
consideration, a  majoritv  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  that  house  shall  agree  to  pass  the  bill, 
it  shall  be  sent,  with  the  objections,  to  the  other 
house,  by  which  it  shall  likewise  be  considered, 
and  if  approved  by  a  majority  of  all  the  mem- 
bers elected  to  that  house,  it  shall  be  a  law;  but 
in  such  cases,  the  votes  of  both  houses  shall  be 
determined  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  the  names  of 
the  members  voting  for  and  against  the  bill,  shall 
be  entered  upon  the  journals  of  each  house,  re- 
spectively. If  any  bill  shall  not  be  returned  by 
the  Governor,  within  ten  days  (Sundays  except- 
ed.) after  it  shall  have  been  presented  to  him,  it 
shall  be  a  law,  in  like  manner  as  if  he  had 
signed  it,  unless  the  General  Assembly,  by  their 
adjournment,  prevent  its  return ;  in  which  case 
it  shall  be  a  law,  unless  sent  back  within  three 
davs  after  their  next  meeting. 

Section  23.  Every  order,  resolution,  or  vote,  to 
which  the  concurrence  of  both  houses  may  be 
necessary,  except  on  a  question  of  adjournment, 
shall  be  presented  to  the  Governor,  and  before  it 
shall  take  effect,  be  approved  by  him;  or  being 
disapproved,  shall  be  re-passed  by  a  majority  of 
all  the  members  elected  to  both  houses,  accord- 
ing to  the  rules  and  limitations  prescribed  in 
case  of  a  bill. 

Section  24.  Contested  elections  for  (Jovernor 
and  Lieutenant  Governor  shall  be  determined 
by  both  houses  of  the  General  Assembly,  accord- 
ing to  such  regulations  as  may  be  established 
by  law. 

Section  25.  A  Treasurer  shall  be  elected  bi- 
enniallv,  by  the  qualified  voters  of  the  State;  and 
an  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts,  Register  of  the 
Land  Office,  Attorney  General,  and  such  other 
State  officers  as  may  be  necessary,  for  the  terra 
of  four  years,  whose  duties  and  responsibilities 
shall  be'prescribed  by  law. 

Section  26.  The  first  election,  under  this  Con- 
stitution, for  Governor,  Lieutenant  Governor, 
Treasurer,  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts,  Regis- 
ter of  the  Land  Office,  and  Attorney  General, 
shall  be  held  on  the  first  Monday  in  August  in 
the  year  1&51. 

AETICLE   FOtETH. 

Concemivg  the  Judicial  Department. 
Section  I.  The  judicial  power  of  this  Com- 


1096 


mon wealth,  both  as  to  matters  of  law  and  equi- 
ty, shall  be  vested  in  one  Supreme  Court,  (to  be 
styled  the  Court  of  Appeals,)  the  Courts  estab 
lished  by  this  Constitution,  and  such  inferior 
Courts  as  the  General  Assembly  may,  from  time 
to  time,  erect  and  establish. 

Section  2.  The  Court  of  Appeals  shall  have 
appellate  jurisdiction  only,  which  shall  be  co- 
extensive with  the  State,  under  such  restrictions 
and  regulations,  not  repugnant  to  this  Constitu- 
tion, as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  prescribed 
by  law. 

Sectiox  3.  The  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Ap- 
peals shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of 
eight  years,  from  and  after  their  election,  and 
until  their  successors  shall  be  duly  qualified, 
subject  to  the  conditions  hereinafter  prescribed; 
but  for  any  reasonable  cause,  the  Governor  shall 
remove  any  of  them  on  the  address  of  two  thirds 
of  each  house  of  the  General  Assembly:  Provi- 
ded, however,  That  the  cause  or  causes  for  which 
such  removal  may  be  required,  shall  be  stated  at 
length  in  such  address,  and  on  the  journal  of 
each  house.  They  shall,  at  stated  times,  receive 
for  their  services  an  adeqiiate  compensation,  to 
be  fixed  by  law,  which  shall  not  be  diminished 
during  the  time  for  which  they  shall  have  been 
elected. 

Section  4.  The  Court  of  Appeals  shall  con- 
sist of  four  Judges,  any  three  of  whom  may  con- 
stitute a  Court  for  the  transaction  of  business. 
The  General  Assembly,  at  its  first  session  after 
the  adoption  of  this  Constitution,  shall  divide 
the  State,  by  counties,  into  four  districts,  as 
nearly  equal  in  voting  population,  and  with  as 
convenient  limits  as  may  be,  in  each  of  Avhich 
the  qualified  voters  shall  elect  one  Judge  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals:  Provided,  That  whenever  a 
vacancy  shall  occur  in  said  Court,  from  any 
cause,  the  General  Assembly  shall  have  the  pow- 
er to  reduce  the  number  of  Judges  and  districts; 
but  in  no  event  shall  there  be  less  than  three 
Judges  and  districts.  Should  a  change  in  the 
number  of  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals 
be  made,  the  term  of  office  and  number  of  dis- 
tricts shall  be  so  changed  as  to  preserve  the 
principle  of  electing  one  Judge  every  two  years, 
and  the  term  for  which  the  Clerk  shall  hold  his 
office,  shall  be  made  to  correspond  with  that  of 
the  Judges. 

Section  5.  The  Judges  shall,  by  virtue  of  their 
offices,  be  conservators  of  the  peace  throughout 
the  State.  The  style  of  all  process  shall  be, 
"The  Commonwealth  of  Kentucky."  All  pros- 
ecutions shall  be  carried  on  in  the  name  and  by 
the  authority  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Ken- 
tucky, and  conclude  "against  the  peace  and  dig- 
nity of  the  same." 

Section  6.  The  Judges  first  elected  shall  serve 
as  follows,  to-wit :  one  shall  serve  until  the  first 
Monday  in  August,  1852;  one  until  the  first 
Monday  in  August,  1854  :  one  until  the  first 
Monday  in  August,  1856,  and  one  until  the  first 
Monday  in  August,  1858.  The  Judges,  at  the 
first  term  of  the  Court  succeeding  their  election, 
shall  determine,  by  lot,  the  Icnglh  of  time  whicli 
each  one  shall  serve ;  and  at  the  expiration  of 
the  service  of  each,  an  election  in  the  proper 
district  shall  take  place  to  fill  the  vacancy.  Tliu 
Judge  having  the  shortest  time  to  serve  shall  be 
styled  the  Chief  Justice  of  Kentucky, 


Section  7.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  said 
Court  from  any  cause,  the  Governor  shall  issue  a 
writ  of  election  to  the  proper  district  to  fill  such 
vacancy  for  the  residue  of  the  term. 

Section  8.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
office  of  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  who  is 
■not  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  a  resident  of 
the  district  for  which  he  may  be  a  candidate  two 
years  next  preceding  his  election,  at  least  thirty 
years  of  age,  and  who  has  not  been  a  practicing 
laAvyer  eight  years,  or  whose  service  upon  the 
bench  of  any  Court  of  record,  when  added  to 
the  time  he  may  have  practiced  law,  shall  not  be 
equal  to  eight  years. 

Section  9.  The  Court  of  Appeals  shall  hold 
its  sessions  at  the  seat  of  government,  unless 
otherwise  directed  by  law;  but  the  General  As- 
sembly may,  from  time  to  time,  direct  that  said 
Court  shall  hold  sessions  in  any  one  or  more  of 
said  districts. 

Section  10.  The  first  election  of  the  Judges  of 
the  Court  of  Appeals  shall  take  place  on  the 
second  Monday  in  May,  1851,  and  thereafter,  in 
the  district  as  a  vacancy  may  occur,  by  the  expi- 
ration of  the  term  of  office;  and  the  Judges  of 
the  said  Court  shall  be  commissioned  by  tho 
Governor. 

Section  11.  There  shall  be  elected,  by  the 
qualified  voters  of  this  State,  a  Clerk  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals,  who  shall  hold  his  office,  at 
the  first  election,  until  the  first  Monday  in  Au- 
gust, 1858,  and  thereafter  for  the  term  of  eight 
years  from  and  after  his  election;  and  should  the 
General  Assembly  provide  for  holding  the  Court 
of  Appeals  in  any  one  or  more  of  said  districts, 
they  shall  also  provide  for  the  election  of  a  Clerk 
by  the  qualified  voters  of  such  district,  who 
shall  hold  his  office  for  eight  years,  possess  the 
same  qualifications,  and  be  subject  to  removal  in 
the  same  manner  as  the  Clerk  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals. 

Section  12.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
office  of  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  unless 
he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  a  resident  of 
the  State  two  years  next  preceding  his  election, 
of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  and  have  a  cer- 
tificate from  a  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Appeals, 
or  a  Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court,  that  he  has  been 
examined  by  the  Clerk  of  his  Court,  under  his 
supervision,  and  that  he  is  qualified  for  the  office 
for  which  he  is  a  candidate. 

Section  13.  Should  a  vacancy  occur  in  the 
office  of  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  the  Gov- 
ernor shall  issue  a  writ  of  election,  and  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  State,  or  of  the  district  in 
which  the  vacancy  may  occur,  shall  elect  a  Clerk 
of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  to  serve  until  the  end 
of  the  term  for  which  such  Clerk  was  elected  : 
Provided,  That  when  a  vacancy  shall  occur  from 
any  cause,  or  the  Clerk  be  under  charges  upou 
information,  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals 
shall  have  power  to  appoint  a  Clerk  jrro  tan.,  to 
perfornuthe  duties  of  Clerk  until  such  vacancy 
shall  be  filled,  or  the  Clerk  acquitted. 

Section  14.  Tho  General  Assembly  shall  di- 
rect, by  law,  tlie  mode  and  manner  of  conduct- 
ing and  making  due  returns  to  the  Secretary  of 
State,  of  all  elections  of  the  Judges  and  Clerk 
or  Clerks  of  tho  Court  of  Appeals,  and  of  deter- 
mining contested  elections  of  any  of  these  offi- 
cers. 


109: 


Sectiox  15.  Whenever  an  appeal  or  ■writ  of 
error  may  be  pending  in  the  Court  of  Appeals, 
on  the  trial  of  i»:hich"  a  majority  of  the  Judges 
thereof  cannot  sit ;  or  on  account  of  inltrest  in 
the  event  of  the  cause  ;  or  on  account  of  their 
relation  to  eitlior  party  ;  or  where  tlie  Judge  may 
have  decided  the  cause  in  the  inferior  Court,  tlie 
General  Assembly  shall  provide,  by  law,  for  the 
organization  of  a  temporary  and  special  Court, 
for  the  trial  of  such  cause  or  causes. 

Section  16.  A  Circuit  Court  shall  be  estab- 
lished in  each  county  now  existing,  or  which 
may  hereafter  be  erected  in  this  Commonwealth. 

Section  17.  The  jurisdiction  of  said  Court 
shall  be,  and  remain  as  now  established,  hereby 
giving  to  the  General  Assembly  the  power  to 
change  or  alter  it. 

Section  18.  The  right  to  appeal  or  sue  out  a 
writ  of  error  to  the  Court  of  Appeals  shall  re- 
main as  it  now  exist*,  until  alter e<i  by  law,  here- 
by giving  to  the  General  Assembly  the  power  to 
change,  alter,  or  modify  said  right. 

Section  19.  At  the  first  session  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  Constitution,  the  Greneral  Assembly 
'hall  divide  the  State  into  twelve  judicial  dis- 
;ricts,  having  due  regard  to  business,  territory, 
and  population:  Provided,  That  no  county  shall 
be  divided. 

Section  20.  They  shall,  at  the  same  time  that 
the  judicial  districts  are  laid  off,  direct  elections 
to  be  held  in  each  district,  to  elect  a  Judge  for 
>?aid  district,  and  shall  prescribe  in  what  man- 
ner tJio  elections  shall  be  conducted,  and  how 
the  Governor  filial!  be  notified  of  the  result:  and 
the  first  election  of  the  Judges  of  the  Circuit 
Court  shall  take  plac-e  on  the  second  Monday  in 
May,  1851. 

SEcrroN  21 .  All  persons  qualified  to  vote  for 
members  of  the  General  Assembly,  in  each  dis- 
trict, shall  have  the  right  to  vote  tor  Judges. 

Section  22.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  as 
Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court,  who  is  not  a  citizen 
of  the  United  States,  a  resident  of  the  district 
for  which  he  mav  be  a  candidate,  two  years  next 
preceding  his  election,  at  least  thirty  years  of 
asic  and  who  has  not  been  a  practicing  lawyer 
eight  years,  or  whose  service  upon  the  bemh  of 
any  Court  of  record,  when  added  to  the  time  he 
may  have  practiced  law,  shall  be  equal  to  eight 
years. 

Section  23.  The  Judges  of  the  Circuit  Court 
shall  hold  their  office  for  the  terra  of  six  years 
from  the  day  of  their  election.  They  shall  be 
commissioned  by  the  Governor,  and  continue  in 
office  until  their  successors  be  qualified,  but 
shall  be  removable  from  office  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals;  and 
the  removal  of  a  Judge  from  his  aistrict  shall 
va<:ate  his  office  :  Promded,  That  their  first  terra 
of  office  shall  expire  on  the  first  Monday  in  Au- 
gust, 1856. 

Section  24.  The  General  Assembly,  if  they 
deem  it  necessary,  may  establish  one  additional 
district  every  four  years,  but  the  judicial  dis- 
tricts shall  not  exceed  sixteen,  until  after  tlie 
population  ol  this  State  shall  exceed  one  mil- 
lion five  hundred  thousand. 

Section  25.  The  Judges  of  the  Circuit  Courts 

shall,  at  stated  times,  receive  for  tiicir  services 

an  adequate  compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  lav;, 

which  shall  be  equal  and  uniform  throughoat 

138 


:  the  State,  and  which  ahall  not  be  diminished 
,  during  the  time  for  which  they  were  elected. 

Section  26.  If  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  Xke  of- 
!  fice  of  Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court,  the  Governor 
j  shall  issue  a  writ  of  election  to  fill  such  vacan- 
,cy,  for  the  residue  of  the  term:  Provided,  That 
:  if  the  unexpired  term  be  less  than  one  year,  the 
j  Governor  shall  appoint  a  Judge  to  fiU  such  va- 
cancy. 

Skction  27.  The  Judicial  Districts  of  this  State 
shall  not  be  changed  except  at  the  first  session 
after  every  enumeration,  unless  when  new  Dis- 
tricts may  be  established. 

Section  28.  The  General  Assembly  shall  pro- 
vide by  law  for  some  person  to  preside  in  each  of 
the  Circuit  Courts,  when  from  any  cause,  the 
Judge  shall  fail  to  attend,  or,  if  in  attendance, 
cannot  properly  preside. 

Section  29.  A  County  Court  shall  be  estab- 
lished in  each  county  now  existing,  or  which 
may  hereafter  be  erected  within  this  Common- 
wealth, to  consist  of  a  Presiding  Judge,  and  two 
Asjiociate  Judges,  any  two  of  whom  shall  con- 
stitute a  court  for  the  transaction  of  business: 
Provided,  The  General  Assembly  may  at  any 
time  abolish  the  office  of  the  Associate  Judges, 
whenever  it  shall  be  deemed  expedient ;  in  which 
event  they  may  associate  with  said  Court,  any 
or  all  of  the  Justices  of  the  Peace  for  the  trans- 
action of  business. 

Section  30.  The  Judges  of  the  County  Court 
shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters  in  each 
j  county,  for  the  term  of  four  years,  and  shall  con- 
I  tinue  in  office  until  their  succ-essors  be  duly 
qualified,  and  shall  receive  such  rompensatioa 
for  their  services  as  may  be  provided  by  law. 

Section  31.  The  first  election  of  County  Court 
Judges  shall  take  place  at  the  .same  time  of  the 
election  of  Judges  of  the  Circuit  Court.  The 
Presiding  Judge,  first  elected,  shall  hold  his  of- 
fice until  the  first  Monday  in  August,  1854.  The 
!  Associate  Judges  shall  hold  their  offices  until  the 
first  Monday  in  August,  1852,  and  until  their 
successors  be  qualified. 

Section  32.  So  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
office  of  Presiding  or  Associate  Judge  of  the 
Connty  Court, unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  over  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  shall 
have  been  a  resident  of  the  county  in  which  he 
shall  be  chosen,  one  year  next  preceding  the 
election. 

Section  33.  The  juris-iiction  of  the  County 
Court  shall  be  regulated  by  law;  and,  until 
changed,  shall  he  the  same  now  vested  in  the 
County  Courts  of  this  State. 

Section  34.  Each  county  in  this  State  shall 
belaid  off  into  districts  of  convenient  size,  as 
the  Greneral  Assembly  may.  from  time  to  time, 
direct.  Two  Justices  of  the  Peace  shall  be 
elected  in  each  district,  by  the  qualified  voters 
therein,  for  the  term  of  four  years,  whose  juris- 
diction shall  be  co-extensive  with  the  connty; 
no  person  shall  be  eligible  as  a  Justice  of  the 
Peace,  unless  he  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  a  resident  of  the 
district  in  which  he  may  be  a  candidate. 

Section  35.  Judges  of  the  County  Court,  and 
Justices  of  the  Peace,  shall  be  conservators  of 
the  Peace.  They  shall  be  commissioned  by  the 
Governor.  County  and  district  officers  shall  va- 
cate their  offices  by  removal  from  the  district  or 


lOM 


eotMity  in  which  they  shall  be  appointed.  The 
General  Assembly  shall  provide,  by  law,  the 
manner  of  conducting  and  making  aue  returns 
of  all  elections  of  Judges  of  the  County  Court 
and  Justices  of  the  Peace,  and  tor  determining 
contested  elections,  and  provide  the  mode  of  fill- 
ing vacancies  in  these  oitices. 

Section  36.  Judges  of  the  County  Court  and 
Justices  of  the  Peace,  shall  be  subject  to  indict- 
ment or  presentment  for  malfeasance  or  misfeas- 
ance in  office,  or  wilful  neglect  in  the  discharge 
of  their  official  duties,  in  such  mode  as  may  be 
prescribed  by  law,  subject  to  appeal  to  the  Court 
of  Appeals;  and,  upon  conviction,  their  offices 
shall  become  vacant. 

Section  37.  The  General  Assembly  may  pro- 
vide, by  law,  that  the  Justices  of  the  Peace  in 
each  county  shall  sit  at  the  Court  of  Claims  and 
assist  in  laying  the  county  levy  and  making  ap- 
propriations only. 

Section  38.  When  any  city  or  town  shall  have 
a  separate  representation,  such  city  or  toAvn,  and 
the  county  in  which  it  is  located,  may  have  such 
separate  Municipal  Courts,  and  executive  and 
ministerial  offices  as  the  General  Assembly  may, 
from  time  to  time,  provide. 

Section  39.  The  Clerks  of  the  Court  of  Ap- 
peals. Circuit,  and  County  Courts,  shall  be  re- 
movable from  office  by  the  Court  of  Appeals, 
upon  information  ana  good  cause  shown.  The 
Court  shall  be  judges  of  the  fact  as  well  as  the 
law.  Two-thirds  of  the  members  present  must 
concur  in  the  sentence. 

Section  40.  The  Louisville  Chancery  Court 
shall  exist  under  this  Constitution,  subject  to  re- 
peal, and  its  jurisdiction  to  enlargement  and 
modification  by  the  General  Assembly.  The 
Chancellor  shall  have  the  same  qualifications  as  a 
Circuit  Court  Judge,  and  the  Clerk  of  said  Court 
as  a  Clerk  of  a  Circuit  Court,  and  the  Marshal  of 
said  Court  as  a  Sheriff;  and  the  General  Assembly 
shall  provide  for  the  election,  by  the  qualified 
voters  within  its  jurisdiction,  of  the  Chancellor, 
Clerk,  and  Marshal  of  said  Court,  at  the  same 
time  that  the  Judge  and  Clerk  of  the  Circuit 
Court  are  elected  for  the  county  of  Jefferson, 
and  they  shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  same 
time :  Provided,  That  the  Mar.shal  of  said  Court 
shall  be  ineligible  for  the  succeeding  term. 

Section  41.  The  City  Court  of  Louisville,  the 
Lexington  City  Court,  and  all  other  Police  Courts 
established  in  any  city  or  town,  shall  remain 
until  otherwise  directed  by  law,  with  their  pres 
ent  powers  and  jurisdictions;  and  the  Judges, 
Clerks,  and  Marshals  of  such  Courts  shall  have 
the  same  qualifications,  and  shall  be  elected  by 
the  qualified  voters  of  such  cities  or  towns,  at 
the  same  time,  and  in  the  same  manner,  and 
hold  their  offices  for  the  same  term  as  County 
Judges,  Clerks,  and  Marshals,  respectively,  and 
shall  be  liable  to  removal  in  the  same  manner. 
The  General  Assembly  may  vest  judicial  pow- 
ers, for  police  purposes,  in  Mayors  of  cities,  Po- 
lice Judges,  and  Trustees  of  towns. 

article  fifth. 

Concerning  Impeachmentt. 

Skotioj*  1.  The  House  of  Representatives  shall 
have  the  sole  power  of  impeachment. 
Sictiok  3.  All   irap«a«nments  shall  be  tried 


by  the  Senate.  When  sitting  for  that  purpose, 
:  the  Senators  shall  be  upon  oath  or  affirmation, 
I  No  person  shall  be  convicted  without  the  con- 
currence of  two-thirds  of  the  members  present. 
1  Section  3.  The  Governor  and  all  civil  officers, 
shall  be  liable  to  impt-achment  for  any  misde- 
i  meanor  in  office  ;  but  judgment  in  snch  cases, 
I  shall  not  extend  further  than  to  removal  from 
I  office,  and  disqualification  to  hold  any  office 
of  honor,  trust,  or  profit,  under  this  Common- 
wealth ;  but  the  party  convicted  shall,  neverthe- 
less, be  subject  and  liable  to  indictment,  trial, 
and  punishment  by  law. 

article  sixth. 

Concerning  Executive  and  Ministerial   Officers  for 
Counties  and  Districts. 

Section  1.  A   Commonwealth's  Attoniey  for 

each  circuit,  and  a  Circuit  Court  Clerk  for  each 

countv,  shall  be  elected,  whose  term   of  office 

shall  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  Circuit  Judges  ; 

also  an  Attorney,  Clerk,  Surveyor,  Coroner,  and 

,  Jailer,  for  each  county,  whose  term  of  office  shall 

j  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  Presiding  Judge  of  the 

I  County  Court. 

i      Section  2.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the 
I  offices  mentioned  in  this  article,  who  is  not  at 
I  the  time  twenty-four  years  old,  (except  Clerks  of 
i  County  and  Circuit  Courts,  Sheriffs,  Constables, 
!  and  county  Attorneys,  who  shall  be  eligible  at 
the  age  of  twenty-one  years.)  a  citizen  of  the 
United   States,  and  Avho   has  not  resided  two 
years  next  preceding  the  election,  in  the  State, 
and  one  year  in  the  county  or  district  for  which 
he  is  a  candidate.     No  person  shall  be  eligible 
to  the  office  of  Commonwealth's  or  County  Attor- 
ney, unless  he  shall  have  been  a  licensed  prac- 
ticing Attorney  for  two  years.     No  person  shall 
be  eligible  to  the  office  of  Clerk  unless  he  shall 
have  procured  from  a  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Ap- 
peals, or  a  Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court,  a  certifi- 
cate that  lip  has  been  examined  by  the  Clerk  of 
his  Court,  under  his  supervision,  and  that  he  is 
qualified  for  the  office  for  which  he  is  a  can- 
didate. 

Section  3.  The  Commonwealth's  Attorney 
and  Circuit  Court  Clerk,  shall  be  elected  at  the 
same  time,  and  in  the  same  manner,  as  the  Cir- 
cuit Judge.  The  County  Attorney,  Clerk,  Sur- 
veyor, Coroner,  and  Jailer,  shall  be  elected  at 
the  same  time,  and  in  the  same  manner,  as  the 
Presiding  Judge  of  the  County  Court. 
Section  4.  A  Sheri  ff  shall  be  elected  i  n  each  coun  • 
ty,  at  the  same  time  and  manner  that  the  Pre- 
siding or  Associate  Judges  of  tlie  County  Court 
are  elected,  whose  term  of  office  shall  be  two 
years,  and  he  shall  be  re-eligible  for  a  second 
term;  but  no  Sheriff  shall,  after  the  expiration 
of  the  second  term,  be  re-eligible,  or  act  as  dep- 
uty for  the  succeeding  term. 

Section  5.  A  Constable  shall  be  elected  in  ev- 
ery Justice's  District,  who  shall  be  chosen  for 
two  vears,  at  such  time  and  place  as  may  be 
provided  by  law,  whose  jurisdiction  shall  be  co- 
extensive with  the  county  in  which  he  may  re- 
side. 

SECTioif  6.  Officers  for  t«wns  and  cities  shall 
be  elected  for  such  terms,  and  in  such  manner, 
and  wiih  such  qualifications,  as  may  be  pre- 
scribed by  law. 


109f 


&£CTios  7.  Vaoanci***  iu  offices  under  this  ar- 
ticle shall  be  filled,  until  the  next  annual  elec- 
tion, in  such  manner  as  the  General  Assembly 
may  provide. 

Section  8.  When  a  new  county  shall  be  erect- 
ed, officers  for  the  same,  to  serve  until  the  next 
stated  election,  shall  be  elected  or  appointed  in 
such  way  and  at  such  times  as  the  Legislature 
may  prescribe. 

Section-  9.  Clerks,  Sheriflfs,  Surveyors,  Coro- 
ners, Constables,  and  Jailers  shall,  before  they 
enter  upon  the  duties  of  their  respective  offices, 
and  as  often  thereafter  as  may  be  deemed  proper, 
give  such  bond  and  security  as  shall  be  pre- 
scribed by  law. 

Sectiox  10.  The  General  Assembly  may  pro- 
vide for  the  election  or  appointment  of  such 
other  county  or  district  ministerial  and  execu- 
tive officers  as  shall,  from  time  to  time,  be  ne- 
cessary and  proper. 

Sectiox  II.  A  County  Assessor  shall  be  elect- 
ed in  each  county  at  the  same  time  and  for  the 
same  term  that  the  Presiding  Judge  of  the  Coun- 
ty Court  is  elected,  until  otherwise  provided  for 
by  law,  who  shall  have  power  to  appoint  such 
assistants  as  may  be  necessary  and  proper. 

article  seventh. 
Concerning  the  Militia. 

Sectiox  1  The  Militia  of  this  Commonwealth 
shall  consist  of  all  free,  able-bodied  male  per- 
sons (negroes,  mulattoes,  and  Indians  excepted,) 
resident  in  the  same,  between  the  ages  of  eigh- 
teen and  forty-five  years;  except  such  persons  as 
now  are,  or  hereafter  may  be,  exempted  by  the 
laws  of  the  United  States  or  of  this  State;  but 
those  who  belong  to  religious  societies,  whose 
tenets  forbid  them  to  carry  arms,  .shall  not  be 
compelled  to  do  so,  but  shall  pay  an  equivalent 
for  personal  services. 

Sectiou  2.  The  Governor  shall  appoint  the  Ad- 
jutant General,  and  his  other  staff  officers;  the 
Majors  General,  Brigadiers  General,  and  Com- 
mandants of  Reeiments  shall,  respectively,  ap- 
point their  staflF  officers;  and  Commandants  of 
Companies  shall  appoint  their  non-commission- 
ed officers. 

Section  3.  All  other  militia  officers  shall  be 
elected  by  persons  subject  to  military  d  uty ,  within 
the  bounds  of  their  respective  companies,  battaJ- 
ions.  regiments,  brigades,  and  divisions,  under 
such  rules  and  regulations,  and  for  such  terms, 
as  the  General  Assembly  may,  from  time  to 
time,  direct  and  establish. 

aeticle  eighth^ 
General  Provisions. 
Section  1.  Members  of  the  General  Assembly, 
and  all  officers,  before  they  enter  upon  the  execu- 
tion of  the  duties  of  their  respective  offices,  and 
all  members  of  the  bar,  before  they  enter  upon 
the  practice  of  their  profession,  shall  take  the 
following  oath  or  affirmation  :  I  do  solemnly 
swear,  (or  affirm,  as  the  case  may  be,)  that  I  will 
support  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
and  be  faithful  and  true  to  the  Commonwealth 
of  Kentucky,  so  long  as  I  continue  a  citizen 
thereof,  and^  that  I  will  faithfully  execute,  to  th« 
best  of  my  abilities,  the  office  of  ac- 

cording to  law  ;  and  I  do  further  solemnly  swear, 
(or  affirm,)  that  since  the  adoption  of  uie  pres- 


ent Constitution,  I  being  a  citizen  of  this  Stat«. 
have  not  fought  a  duel,  with  deadly  weapons, 
within  this  State  nor  out  of  it,  with  a  citizen  of 
this  State,  nor  have  I  sent  or  accepted  a  chal- 
lenge to  fight  a  duel  with  deadly  weapons,  with 
a  citizen  of  this  State;  nor  have  I  acted  as  sec- 
ond in  carrying  a  challenge,  or  aided,  advised, 
or  assi.sted  any  person  thus  offending — so  help 
me  God. 

Section  2.  Treason  against  the  Commonwealth 
shall  consist  only  in  levying  war  against  it,  or  in 
adhering  to  its  enemies,  giving  them  aid  and 
comfort.  No  person  shall  be  convicted  of  trea- 
son, unless  on  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses  to 
the  same  overt  act,  or  his  own  confession  in  open 
court. 

Section  3.  Every  person  shall  be  disqualified 
from  holding  any  office  of  trust  or  profit  for  the 
term  for  which  lie  shall  have  been  elected,  who 
shall  be  convicted  of  having  given  or  ofiFered  any 
bribe  or  treat  to  procure  his  election. 

Section  4.  Laws  shall  be  made  to  exclude  from 
office  and  from  suffrage,  those  who  shall  thereaf- 
ter be  convicted  of  bribery,  perjury,  forgery,  or 
other  crimes  or  high  misdemeanors.  The  privilege 
of  free  suffrage  shall  be  supported  by  laws  regu- 
lating elections,  and  piohibiting,under  adequat« 
penalties,  all  undue  influence  thereon  from  pow- 
er, bribery,  tumult,  or  other  improper  practices. 

Section  5.  No  money  shall  be  drawn  from  the 
Treasury,  but  in  pursuance  of  appropriations 
made  by  law,  nor  shall  any  appropriations  of 
money  for  the  support  of  an  army  be  made  for  a 
longer  time  than  two  years,  and  a  regular  state- 
ment and  account  of  the  receipts  and  expendi- 
tures of  all  public  money  shall  oe  published  an- 
nually. 

Section.  6.  The  General  Assembly  may  direct, 
by  law,  in  what  manner,  and  in  what  Courts, 
suits  may  be  brought  against  the  Common- 
wealth. 

Section  7.  The  manner  of  administering  an 
oath  or  affirmation,  shall  be  such  as  is  most  con- 
sistent with  the  conscience  of  the  deponent,  and 
shall  be  esteemed  by  the  General  Assembly  the 
most  solemn  appeal  to  God. 

Section  8.  All  laws  which,  on  the  first  day  of 
June,  one  thou.sand  seven  hundred  and  ninety 
two,  were  in  force  in  the  state  of  Virginia,  and 
which  are  of  a  general  nature,  and  not  local  to 
that  State,  and  not  repugnant  to  this  Constitu- 
tion, nor  to  the  laws  which  have  been  enacted 
by  the  General  Assembly  of  this  Commonwealth, 
shall  be  in  force  within  this  State,  until  they 
shall  be  altered  or  repealed  by  the  General  As- 
sembly. 

Section  9.  The  compact  with  the  State  of 
Virginia,  subject  to  such  alterations  as  may  be 
made  therein  agreeably  to  the  mode  prescribed 
by  the  said  compact,  shall  be  considered  as  part 
of  this  Constitution. 

Section  10.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly  to  pass  such  laws  as  shall  be  ne- 
cessary and  proper  to  decide  differences  by  arbi- 
trators, to  be  appointed  by  the  parties  who  may 
choose  that  summary  mode  of  adjustment. 

Section  11.  All  civil  officers  for  the  Common- 
wealtli.  at  large,  shall  reside  within  the  State, 
and  all  district,  county,  or  town  officers,  within 
their  respective  districts,  counties,  or  towns, 
(trustees  of  towiis  excepted,)  and  shall  keep  their 


1100 


offices  at  such  places  therein  as  may  be  required 
by  law;  and  all  militia  officers  shall  reside  in 
the  bounds  of  the  division,  brigade,  regiment, 
battalion,  or  company,  to  which  they  may  seve- 
rally belong. 

Section-  12.  Absence  on  the  business  of  this 
State,  or  the  United  States,  shall  not  forfeit  a  res- 
idence once  obtained,  so  as  to  deprive  any  one  of 
the  right  of  suflfrage,  or  of  being  elected  or  ap- 
pointed to  any  office  under  this  Commonwealth, 
under  the  exceptions  contained  in  this  Constitu- 
tion. 

Section  13.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  General 
Assembly  to  regulate,  by  law,  in  what  eases, 
and  what  deductions  from  the  salaries  of  public 
officers  shall  be  made,  for  neglect  of  duty  in 
their  official  capacity. 

Section  14.  Keturns  of  all  elections  by  the 
people,  shall  be  made  to  the  Secretary  of  State, 
for  the  time  being,  except  in  those  cases  other- 
wise provided  for  in  this  Constitution,  or  which 
shall  be  otherwise  directed  by  law. 

Section  15.  In  all  elections  by  the  people,  and 
also  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives, 
jointly  or  separately,  the  votes  shall  be  person- 
ally and  publicly  given,  viva  voce:  Provided, 
That  dumb  persons,  entitled  to  suffrage,  may 
vote  by  ballot. 

Section  16.  No  member  of  Congress,  nor  per- 
son holding  or  exercising  any  office  of  trust  or 
profit  under  the  United  States,  or  either  of  them, 
or  under  any  foreign  power,  shall  be  eligible  as 
a  member  of  the  General  Assembly  of  this  Com- 
monwealth, or  hold  or  exercise  any  office  of  trust 
or  profit  under  the  same. 

Section  17.  The  General  Assembly  shall  di- 
rect, by  law,  how  persons  who  now  are,  or  who 
may  hereafter  become  securities  for  public  offi- 
cers, may  be  relieved  or  discharged  on  account  of 
such  securityship. 

Section  18.  Anj'  person  who  shall,  after  the 
adoption  of  this  Constitution,  either  directly  or 
indirectly,  give,  accept,  or  knowingly  carry  st 
challenge  to  any  person,  or  persons,  to  fight  in 
single  combat,  with  a  citizen  of  this  Stale,  with 
any  deadly  weapon,  either  in  or  out  of  the  State, 
shall  be  deprived  of  the  right  to  hold  any  office 
of  honor  or  profit  in  this  Commonwealth,  and 
shall  be  punished  otherwise  in  such  manner  as 
the  General  Assembly  may  prescribe  by  law. 

Section  19.  The  Governor  shall  have  power, 
after  five  yeare,  to  pardon  all  persons  who  shall 
in  any  wise  participate  in  a  duel,  either  as  prin- 
cipals or  second,  and  to  restore  liim  or  them  to  all 
the  rights,  privileges,  and  immunities  to  which 
he  or  they  were  entitled  before  such  participa- 
tion. 

Section  20.  Tlie  right  of  property  is  before 
and  higher  than  any  constitutional  sanction;  and 
the  right  of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  such  slave, 
and  its  increase,  is  the  same,  and  as  inviolable 
as  the  right  of  the  owner  of  any  property  what- 
ever. 

Section  21.  At  its  first  session  after  the  adop- 
tion of  this  Constitution,  the  General  Assemhly 
sliall  appoint  not  more  than  three  persons,  learn- 
ed in  the  law,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  revise 
and  arrange  the  statute  laws  of  this  Commiin- 
■wealth,  both  civil  and  criminal,  so  as  to  have 
but  one  law  on  any  one  subject;  and  also,  throe 
other  perHons  learned  in  the  law,  whose  duty  it 


shall  be  to  prepare  a  codo  of  practice  for  th« 
Courts,  both  civil  and  criminal,  in  this  Common- 
wealth, by  abridging  and  simplifying  the  rules 
of  practice  and  laws  in  relation  thereto ;  all  of 
whom  shall,  at  as  early  a  day  as  practicable,  re- 
port the  result  of  their  labors  to  the  General  As- 
sembly, for  their  adoption  and  modification,  from 
-ime  to  time. 

Section  22.  So  long  as  the  Board  of  Internal 
Improvement  shall  be  continued,  the  President 
thereof  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters 
of  this  Commonwealth,  and  hold  the  office  for 
the  term  of  four  years,  and  until  another  be  du- 
ly elected  and  qualified.  The  first  election  shall 
be  held  at  the  same  time,  and  be  conducted  iu 
the  same  manner,  as  the  first  election  of  Gover- 
nor of  this  Commonwealth  under  this  Con.stitu- 
tion,  and  every  four  years  thereafter ;  and  the 
General  Assembly  shall  provide,  by  law,  the 
method  of  filling  vacancies  and  settling  contes- 
ted elections  for  this  office ;  but  nothing  herein 
contained,  shall  prevent  the  General  Assembly 
from  abolishing  said  Board  of  Internal  Improve- 
ment, and  the  office  of  President  thereof. 

article  ninth. 

The  seat  of  government  shall  continue  in  the 
town  of  Frankfort,  until  it  shall  be  removed  by 
law:  Provided,  however.  That  two  thirds  of  all 
the  members  elected  to  each  house  of  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly  shall  concur  in  the  passage  of  such 
law. 

article  tenth. 
Concerning  Slaves. 

Section  1.  The  General  Assembly  shall  have 
no  power  to  pass  laws  for  the  emancipation  of 
slaves  without  the  consent  of  their  owners,  or 
without  paying  their  owners,  previous  to  such 
emancipation,  a  full  equivalent  in  money  for 
the  slaves  so  emancipated,  and  providing  for 
their  removal  from  the  State.  They  shall  have 
no  power  to  prevent  immigrants  to  this  State 
from  bringing  with  them  such  persons  as  are 
deemed  slaves  by  the  laws  of  any  of  the  United 
States,  so  long  as  any  pei-son  of  the  same  age  or 
description  shall  be  continued  in  slavery  by  the 
laws  of  this  Slate.  They  shall  pass  laws  to 
permit  owners  of  slaves  to  emancipate  them, 
saving  the  rights  of  creditors,  and  to  prevent 
them  from  remaining  in  this  State  after  they  are 
emancipated.  They  shall  have  full  power  to 
prevent  slaves  being  brought  into  this  State  as 
merchandise.  They  shall  have  full  power  to 
prevent  any  slaves  beingbrought  into  this  State, 
who  have  "been,  since  the  first  day  of  January, 
one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty  nine, 
or  may  hereafter  be  imported  into  any  of  the 
United  States  from  a  foreign  country.  And  they 
shall  have  full  power  to  pass  such  laws  as  may 
be  necessary  to  oblige  the  owners  of  slaves  to 
treat  them  with  humanity;  to  provide  for  them 
necessary  clothing  and  provision;  to  abstain 
from  all  injuries  to  them,  extending  to  life  or 
limb;  and  in  case  of  their  neglect  or  refusal  to 
comply  with  the  directions  of  such  laws,  to  liave 
such  slave  or  slaves  sold  for  the  benefit  of  their 
owner  or  owners. 

Section  2.  The  General  Assembly  shall  pass 
laws  providing  that  any  free  negro  or  mulatto 
hereafter  immigrating  to,  or  being  emancipated 
in,  and  refusing  to  leave  this  State,  or  having 


1101 


left,  sliall  return  and  settle  witLin  lhi!»  State,  t  of  the  natneti  of  all  those  eutitled  to  vote  l^r 
shall  be  deemetl  guilty  of  felony,  and  punished  (representatives,  who  have  voted  for  calling  a 
by  confinement  in  the  Penitentiary  thereof.  j  Convention;  and  if,  thoreuptni,  it  sliall  appear 

Sectiox  3.  In  the  prosecution  of  slaves  for  i  that  a  majority  of  all  the  citizens  of  this  State, 
felony,  no  inquest  by  a  grand  jury  shall  be  ne-  j  entitled  to  vote  for  representatives,  have  voted 
cessa'ry;  but  the  proceedings  m  such  prosvcu- j  for  calling  a  Convention,  the  General  Assembly 
tions  shall  be  regulated  by  law,  except  that  the  I  shall,  at  tneir  nvxt  regular  session,  direct  that  a 
General  Asi^embiy  shall  hare  no  power  to  de- j  similar  poll  shall  be  opened,  and  return  ma«lp, 
prive  them  of  the  privilege  of  an  imparaal  trial  |  tor  the  next  election  for  representatives;  and  if. 


by  a  petit  jur}-. 

AETICLK  ELEVENTH. 

Concerning  Education. 
Sectiox  1.  The  capital  of  the  fund  called  and 
known  as  the  "Common  School  Fund,"  consis- 
ting of  one  million  two  hundred  and  twenty 
five  thousand  seven  hundred  and  sixty-eight 
dollars  and   forty-two  cents,  for  which  bonds 

have  been  execute^l  by  the  State  to  the  Board  of  [same  qualifications  of  a  qualified  elector,  by 
Education,  and  seventy-three  thousand  five  hun-  j  citizens  entitleil  to  vote  for  representatives  ;  and 
dred  dollars  of  stock  in  the  Bank  of  Kentucky ;  |  to  meet  within  three  months  after  their  election, 
also,  the  sum  of  fifty-one  thousand  two  hundred  j  for  the  purpose  of  re-adopting,  amending,  or 
and  twenty-three  dollars  and  twentv-nine  cents,  |  changing  this  Constitution;  but  if  it  shall  ap 
balance  of  interest  on  the  School  F'^und  for  the 
year  1S48,  unexpended,  together  with  any  sura 
which  may  be  hereafter  raised  in  the  State  by 
taxation,  or  otherwise,  for  puiposes  of  education, 
shall  be  held  inviolate,  for  the  purpose  of  sus- 
taining a  system  of  Common  Schools.  The  in-  j  ity  of  the  citizens,  entitled  to  vote  for  repre^en- 
terest  and  dividends  of  said  funds,  together  !  tatives,  did  or  did  not  vote  for  calling  a  Conven- 
■with  any  sum  which  may  be  produced  for  that    tion,  as  above,   the  General   Assembly  passing 


thereupon,  it  shall  appear  that  a  majority  of  all 
the  citizens  of  this  State,  entitled  to  vote  for 
representatives,  have  voted  for  calling  a  Con- 
vention, the  General  Assembly  shall,  at  their 
next  session,  pass  a  law  calling  a  Convention,  to 
consist  of  as  many  members  as  there  shall  be  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  and  no  more;  to 
be  chosen  in  the  same  manner  and  proportion,  at 
the  same  time  and  places,  and  possessed  of  the 


pear  by  ttie  vote  of  either  year,  as  aforesaid,  tliat 
a  majority  of  all  the  citizens  entitled  to  vote  for 
representatives  did  not  vote  for  calling  a  Conven- 
tion, a  Couventionshall  not  then  be  called.  And 
for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  whether  a  major- 


tne  p 
of  th 


purpose  by  taxation,  may  be  appropriated  in  aid 
of  Common  Schools,  but  for  no  ocher  purpose. 
The  General  Assembly  shall  invest -said  fifty-one 
thousand  two  hundreil  and  twenty-three  dollars 
and  twenty-nine  cents  in  some  safe  and  profita- 
ble manner;  and  any  portion  of   the   interest 


the  law  authorizing  such  vote  shall  provide  for 
ascertaining  the  number  of  citizens  entitled  to 
vote  for  representatives  within  the  State. 

Section  2.  The  Convention,  when  assembled, 
shall  judge  of  the  election  of  its  members  and 
decide  contested  elections,  but  the  General  As- 


and  dividends  of  said   School   Fund,  or  other  isembly  shall,  in  calling  a  Convention,  provide 

money  or  property  raised  for  school  purposes,    for  taking  testimony  in  such  cases  and  for  issu- 

which  may  not  be  needed  in  sustaining  Common  i  big  a  writ  of  election  in  case  of  a  tie. 

Schools,  shall  be  invested  in  like  manner.     The 

General  Assembly  shall   make    provision,    by  article  thirteenth. 

law,   for  the   payment  of  the   interest  of  said        That  the  general,  great,  and  essential  princi- 

School  Fund  :  Prooided,  That  each  county  shall  j  ^\q^  of  liberty  and  free  government  may  be  re- 


be  entitled  to  its  proportion  of  the  income  of  said 
fund,  and  if  not  called  for,  for  common  school 
purposes,  it  shall  be  re-invested  from  time  to 
lime  for  the  benefit  of  each  county 


cognized  and  established;  we  declare. 

Section  1.  That  all  freemen,  when  they  form 

a  social  compact,  are  equal,  and  tliat  no  man,  or 

set  of  men,  are  entitled  to  exclusive,  separate 

Section  2.    A  Superintendent  of  Public    In-    public  emoluments  or  privileges  from  the  com- 

ruction  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  voters    munity,  but  in  consideration  of  public  services. 


struct 


of  this  Commonwealth,  at  the  same  time  the 
Governor  is  elected,  who  shall  hold  his  office 
for  four  years,  and  his  duties  and  salary  shall 
be  prescribed  and  fixed  by  law. 

article  twelfth. 
Mode  of  revising  the  Constitution. 


Section  2.  That  absolute,  arbitrary  power  over 
the  lives,  liberty,  and  property  of  freeman,  ex- 
ists no  where  in  a  republic — not  even  in  the  lar- 
gest majority. 

Sections.  That  all  power  is  inherent  in  .the 

people,  and  all  free  governments  are  founded  on 

their  authority,  and  instituted  for  their  peace. 

Section  1.  When  experience  shall   point  out  i  safety,  happines.s,  security,  and  the  protection 

the  necessity  of  amending  this  Constitution,  and  j  of  property.    For  the    advancement   of   these 


when  a  majority  of  all  the  members  elected  to 
each  house  of  the  General  Assembly  shall,  with- 
in the  first  twenty  days  of  any  regular  session, 
concur  in  passing  a  law  for  taking  the  sense  of 
the  good  people  of  this  Commonwealth  as  to  the 
necessity  and  expediency  of  calling  a  Conven- 
tion, it  shall  be  the  duty" of  the  several  SherifiFs, 
and  other  oflicers  of  elections,  at  the  next  gene- 
ral election  which  shall  be  held  for  representa- 
tives to  th  ■  General  Assembly,  after  the  passage 
of  such  law,  to  open  a  poll  for,  and  make  re- 
turn to  the  Secretary  of  State,  for  the  time  being. 


ends,  they  have  at  all  times  an  inalienable  and 
indefeasaole  right  to  alter,  reform,  or  al>olish, 
their  government,  in  such  maimer  as  they  may 
think  proper. 

Section  4.  That  all  men  have  a  natural  and 
indefeasable  right  to  worship  Almighty  God  ac- 
cording to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences; 
that  no  man  shall  be  compelled  to  attend,  erect, 
or  support  any  place  of  worship,  or  to  maintain 
any  ministry  against  his  consent;  that  no  human 
authority  ought,  in  any  ca.«e  whatever,  to  control 
or  interfere  with  the  rights  of  conscience;  «nd 


IIOQ 


that  no  pr«4*erence  shall  ever  htf  given,  by  law, 
to  any  religions  societies  or  modes  of  worship. 

Section'  5.  That  the  civil  rights,  privileges,  or 
capacities,  of  any  citizen,  shall  in  no  wise  be  di- 
minished or  enlarged  on  account  of  his  religion. 

Sectio.v  6.  That  all  elections  shall  be  free  and 
equal. 

Sectiox  7.  That  the  ancient  mode  of  trial  by 
jury  shall  be  held  sacred,  and  the  right  thereof 
remain  inviolate,  subject  to  such  modifications 
a.^  maybe  authorized  by  this  Constitution. 

Section  8.  That  printing  presses  shall  be  free 
to  every  person  who  undertakes  to  examine  the 
proceedings  of  the  General  Assembly,  or  any 
Dranch  of  government,  and  no  law  shall  ever  be 
made  to  restrain  the  right  thereof.  The  free 
communication  of  thoughts  and  opinions  is  one 
of  the  invaluable  rights  of  man,  and  every  citi- 
zen may  freely  speak,  write,  and  print,  on  any 
subject,  being  responsible  for  the  abuse  of  that 
liberty. 

Section'  9.  In  prosecutions  for  the  publication 
of  papers  investigating  the  official  conduct  of 
officers  or  men  in  a  public  capacity,  or  -where 
the  matter  published  is  proper  for  public  informa- 
tion, the  truth  thereof  may  be  given  in  evidence; 
and  in  all  indictments  for  libels,  the  jury  shall 
have  a  right  to  determine  the  law  and  the  facts, 
under  the  direction  of  the  Court,  as  in  other 
cases. 

Section  10.  That  the  people  shall  be  secure  in 
their  persons,  houses,  papers,  and  possessions, 
from  unreasonable  seizures  and  searches,  and 
that  no  warrant  to  search  any  place,  or  to  seize 
any  person,  or  thing,  shall  issue,  without  des- 
crilsing  them  as  nearly  as  may  be,  nor  without 
probable  cause,  supported  by  oath  oraffirmation. 

Section  11.  That  in  all  criminal  prosecutions, 
the  accused  hath  a  right  to  be  heard  by  himself 
and  counsel  ;  to  demand  the  nature  and  cause  of 
the  accusation  against  him ;  to  meet  the  wit- 
nesses face  to  face  ;  to  have  compulsory  process 
for  obtaining  witnesses  in  his  favor;  and  in 
prosecutions  by  indictment  or  information,  a 
speedy  public  trial  by  an  impartial  jury  of  the 
vicinage  ;  that  he  cannot  be  compelled  to  give 
evidence  against  himself  ;  nor  can  he  be  depri- 
ved of  his  life,  liberty,  or  property,  unless  by 
the  judgment  of  his  peers,  or  the  law  of  the  land. 

Section  12.  That  no  person  shall,  for  any  in- 
dictable offence,  be  proceeded  against  criminal- 
ly, by  information,  except  in  cases  arising  in  the 
land  or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia  when  in 
actual  service,  in  time  of  war  or  public  danger, 
or  by  leave  of  the  Court,  for  oppression  or  mis- 
demeanor in  office. 

Section  13.  No  person  shall,  for  the  same  of- 
fence, be  twice  put  in  jeopardy  of  his  life  or 
limb  ;  nor  shall  any  man's  property  be  taken  or 
applied  to  public  use,  without  the  consent  of  his 
representatives,  and  without  just  compensation 
being  previously  made  to  him. 

Section  14.  T'hatall  Courts  shall  be  open,  and 
every  person,  for  an  injury  done  him  in  his 
lands,  goods,  person,  or  reputation,  shall  have 
remedy  by  the  due  course  of  law,  and  right  and 
justice'  administered,  without  sale,  denial,  or  de- 
lay. 

Section  15.  That  no  power  of  suspending  laws 
shall  be  exercised,  unless  by  the  General  Assem- 
bly, or  its  authority . 


Section  16.  That  excessive  bail  shall  not  be 
required,  nor  excessive  fines  imposed,  nor  cruel 
punishments  inflicted. 

Section  17.  That  all  prisoners  shall  be  baila- 
ble by  sufficient  securities,  unless  for  capital  of- 
fences, when  the  proof  is  evident  or  presumption 
great;  and  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  shall  not  be  suspended,  unless  when  in 
cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion  the  public  safety 
may  require  it. 

Section  18.  That  the  person  of  a  debtor,  where 
there  is  not  strong  presumption  of  fraud,  shall 
not  be  continued  in  prison  after  delivering  up 
his  estate  for  the  benefit  of  his  creditors,  in  such 
manner  as  shall  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Section  19.  That  no  ex  post  facto  law,  nor  any 
law  impairing  contracts,  shall  be  made. 

Section  20.  That  no  person  shall  be  attainted 
of  treason  or  felony  by  the  General  Assembly. 

Section  21.  That  no  attainder  shall  work  cor- 
ruption of  blood,  nor,  except  during  the  life  of 
the  offender,  forfeiture  of  estate  to  the  Common- 
wealth. 

Section  22.  That  the  estates  of  such  persons 
as  shall  destroy  their  own  lives,  shall  descend 
or  vest  as  in  case  of  natural  death;  and  if  any 
person  shall  be  killed  by  casualty,  there  shall  be 
no  forfeiture  by  reason  thereof. 

Section  23.  That  the  citizens  have  a  right,  in 
a  peaceable  manner,  to  assemble  together  for 
their  common  good,  and  to  apply  to  those  invest- 
ed with  the  powers  of  Government,  for  redress 
of  grievances,  or  other  proper  purposes,  by  peti- 
tion, address,  or  remonstrance. 

Section  24.  That  the  rights  of  the  citizens  to 
bear  arms  in  defence  of  themselves  and  the  State, 
shall  not  be  questioned;  but  the  General  Assem- 
bly may  pass  laws  to  prevent  persons  from  car- 
rying concealed  arms. 

Section  25.  That  no  standing  army  shall,  in 
time  of  peace,  be  kept  up,  without  the  consent 
of  the  General  Assembly;  and  the  military  shall, 
in  all  cases,  and  at  all  times,  be  in  strict  subor- 
dination to  the  civil  power. 

Section  26.  That  no  soldier  shall,  in  time  of 
peace,  be  quartered  in  any  house  without  the 
consent  of  the  owner;  nor  in  time  of  war,  but  in 
a  manner  to  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Section  27.  That  the  General  Assembly  shall 
not  grant  any  title  of  nobility,  or  hereditary 
distinction,  nor  create  any  office,  the  appoint- 
ment to  which  shall  be  for  a  longer  time  than 
for  a  term  of  years. 

Section  28.  That  emigration  from  the  State 
shall  not  be  prohibited. 

Section  29.  To  guard  against  transgressions 
of  the  high  powers  which  we  have  delegated, 
WEDECLAEE,  that  everything  in  this  article  is  ex- 
cepted out  of  the  general  powers  of  government, 
and  shall  forever  remain  inviolate;  and  that  all 
laws  contrary  thereto,  or  contrary  to  this  Consti- 
tution, shall  be  void. 

SCHEDULE. 

That  no  inconvenience  may  arise  from  the  al- 
terations and  amendments  made  in  the  Consti- 
tution of  this  Commonwealth,  and  in  order  to 
carry  the  same  into  complete  operation,  it  is 
hereby  declared  and  ordained: 

Section  1.  That  all  the  laws  of  this  Common- 
wealth, in  force  at  the  time  of  making  the  said 


1103 


alteratiofls  and  amenJments.  and  all  right*', 
aotioDS,  prosecutions,  claims,  and  contracts,  as 
well  of  individuals  as  of  bodies  corporate,  shall 
continue  as  if  the  said  alterations  and  amend- 
ments had  not  beer  made. 

Section  2.  The  oaths  of  office  herein  directed 
to  be  taken  may  be  administered  by  any  Judge 
or  Justice  of  the  Peace,  until  the 'General  As- 
sembly shall  otherwise  direct. 

Sectio.v  3.  No  office  shall  be  superceded  by 
the  alterations  and  amendments  made  in  the 
Constitution  of  this  Commonwealth,  but  the 
laws  of  the  State  relative  to  the  duties  of  the 
several  officers.  Executive,  Judicial,  and  Mili- 
tary, shall  remain  in  full  force,  though  the  same 
be  contrary  to  said  alterations  and  amendments, 
and  the  several  duties  shall  be  performed  by  the 
respective  officers  of  the  State,  according  to  the 
existing  laws,  until  the  organization  of  the  Gov- 
ernment, as  provided  for  under  this  new  Con- 
stitution, and  tlie  entering  into  office  of  the  new 
officers  to  be  elected  or  appointed  under  said 
Government,  and  no  longer. 

Section  4.  Immediately  after  the  adjournment 
of  the  Convention,  the  Governor  shall  issue  his 
proclamation,  directing  the  several  Sheriffs  and 
other  returning  officers  of  the  several  counties 
of  this  State,  authorized  by  law  to  hold  electioJis 
for  members  of  the  General  Assembly,  to  open 
and  hold  a  poll  in  every  county  of  the  State,  and 
in  the  city  of  Louisville,  at  the  places  and  pre- 
cincts designated  by  law  for  the  holding  the 
Presidential  election  in  1848,  upon  the  first 
Monday  and  Tuesday  of  May,  1850,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  taking  the  sense  of  the  good  people  of 
this  State,  in  regard  to  the  adoption  or  rejection 
of  this  Constitution;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  said  officers  to  receive  the  votes  of  all  per- 
sons entitled  to  vote  for  members  of  the  General 
Assembly  under  the  present  Constitution.  The 
said  officers  sh.ill  open  a  poll  with  two  separate 
columns :  "For  the  new  Constitution,"  "Against 
the  new  Constitution,"  and  shall  address  each 
voter  presenting  himself,  the  question:  "Are 
you  -n  favor  of  adopting  the  new  Constitution?" 
and  if  he  shall  answer  in  the  affirmative,  his 
vote  shall  be  recorded  in  the  column  for  the  new 
Constitution,  and  if  he  shall  answer  in  the  neg- 
ative, his  answer  shall  be  set  down  in  the  col- 
umn against  the  new  Constitution.  The  said 
election  .«hall  be  conducted  for  two  days  .ind  in 
every  other  respect,  as  the  State  election  for 
Eep'resentatives  to  the  General  Assembly  are 
now  conducted;  and  on  the  Thursday  succeed- 
ing the  said  election,  the  various  Sheriffs  con- 
ducting said  election  at  the  different  precincts, 
shall  assemble  at  the  court  houses  of  their  re- 
spective counties,  and  compare  the  polls  of  said 
election,  and  shall  forthwith  make  due  returns 
thereof  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  in  conformity 
to  the  provisions  of  the  existing  laws  upon  the 
subject  of  elections  of  members  of  the  General 
Assembly.  The  County  Courts  of  the  various 
counties  of  the  Commonwealth  shall,  at  their 
March  or  April  terms  of  their  said  Courts,  ap- 
point as  many  Judges,  Clerks  and  Deputy 
Sheriffs  to  superintend  and  conduct  said  elec- 
tions 38  shall  be  necessary. 

Sectio.v  5.  That  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  about  to  assemble, 
be  and  they  are  hereby  requested  to  tnake  all 


necessary  provisions,  by  law,  for  the  proper  car- 
rying out  of  the  submission  of  the  new  Consti- 
tution to  the  people  of  this  Commonwealth,  as 
provided  for  in  section  four  of  this  schedule. 

Section  6.  That  when  this  Convention  ad- 
journs, it  will  adjourn  to  re-assemble,  in  the 
town  of  Frankfort,  on  the  first  Monday  of  June, 
1850,  with  the  view  and  for  the  purpose  of 
ascertaining  the  result  of  the  vote  upon  the  new 
Constitution.  If  the  same  shall  have  been  rati- 
fied by  a  majority  of  all  those  voting  for  and 
against  it,  this  Convention  will  then  publish  and 
proclaim  this  Constitution  as  the  Constitution 
of  Kentucky,  and  proceed  further  to  provide  for 
putting  the  new  Government  into  operation.  If 
it  shall  be  found  that  a  majority  of  all  those  vo- 
ting for  or  against  it,  has  been  cast  against  it, 
then  said  Constitution  shall  be  declared  rejected, 
and  this  Convention  will  forthwith  re-adopt  and 
republish  the  present  Constitution  as  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  State. 

Section  7.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly,  which  shall  convene  in  the  year 
1850,  to  make  an  apportionment  of  the  repre- 
sentation of  this  State,  upon  the  principle  set 
forth  in  this  Constitution;  and  until  the  first  ap- 
portionment shall  be  made,  as  herein  directed, 
the  apportionment  of  Senators  and  Represen- 
tatives among  the  several  districts  and  coun- 
ties in  this  State,  shall  remain  as  at  present 
fixed  by  law;  Provided,  Tliat  upon  the  adop- 
tion of  this  Constitution  all  Senators  shall  go  out 
of  office,  and  in  the  year  1850,  an  election  for 
Senators  and  Representatives  shall  be  held,  and 
those  elected  shall  hold  their  offices  for  one 
year  and  no  longer. 

Section  8.  All  recognizances  heretofore  taken, 
or  which  may  be  taken  before  the  organization 
of  the  judicial  department  under  this  Constitu- 
tion, shall  remain  valid,  and  shall  pass  over  to, 
and  may  be  prosecuted  in  the  name  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. All  criminal  prosecutions  and 
Eenal  actions  which  have  arisen,  or  may  arise, 
elbre  the  re-organization  of  the  judicial  de- 
partment under  this  Constitution,  and  which 
shall  then  be  depending,  may  be  prosecuted  to 
judgment  and  execution,  in  the  name  of  the 
Commonwealth. 

Section  9.  The  General  Assembly  shall  pro- 
vide, bv  law,  for  the  trial  of  any  contested  elec- 
tion of  Auditor,  Register,  Treasurer,  Attorney 
General,  Judges  of  Circuit  Courts,  and  all  other 
officers,  not  otherwise  herein. specified. 

Section  10.  The  General  Assembly  shall  pro- 
vide by  law  for  the  making  of  the  returns  by  the 
E roper  officers,  of  the  election  of  all  officers  to 
e  elected  under  this  Constitution;  and  the 
Governor  shall  issue  commissions  to  the  Audi- 
tor, Register,  and  Treasurer,  as  soon  as  he  haa 
ascertained  the  result  of  the  election  of  those 
officers  respectively. 

Section  11.  That  the  Sheriffs  and  other  offi- 
cers of  the  election  sliall  be  liable  to  all  such 
fines  and  penalties  for  a  failure  to  discharge  the 
several  duties  imposed  on  them  in  this  schedule, 
as  are  now  imposed  upon  them  by  law,  for  a 
failure  to  perform  their  duty  in  conducting 
other  general  and  State  elections. 

Section  12.  Should  the  County  Court  of  any 
of  the  countie  s  of  this  Commonwealth  fail  or 
refuse  to  appoint  Judges,  Clerks,  or  Sheriffs,  to 


1104 


superintend  the  election,  as  provided  for  in  arti- 
cle four  of  this  schedule,  the  high  Sheriff  of 
said  county  shall  appoint  such  Judges,  Clerks, 
and  deputy  Sheriffs. 

Section  13.  Should  any  of  the  Sheriffs  or 
deputies  in  any  of  the  counties  of  this  Com- 
monwealth die,  resign,  or  from  any  other  cause 
be  prevented  from  attending  witli  the  poll  books, 
as  directed  in  section  four  of  this  schedule,  for 
the  comparison  of  the  votes  on  the  adoption  or 
rejection  of  the  new  Constitution,  it  shall  l>e  the 
duty  of  the  County  Court  Clerk,  or  his  deputy 
in  such  county,  to  attend  with  said  poll  books, 
and  aid  in  such  comparison. 

JAMES  GUTHRIE,  Pres.  of  the 
Convention,  and  member  from 
the  City  of  Louisville. 

ATTEST  : 

THO.  J.  HELM, 

Secretary  (if  the  Convention. 
THO.  1).  TlLFORl), 

A«sislaul  Secretary. 

From  the  countv  of  Adair, 

NATHAN  GAITHER. 
From  the  countv  of  Allen, 

GEORGE  W.  MANSFIELD. 
From  the  County  of  Anderson, 

GfiORGE  W.  KAVANAUGH. 
From  the  counties  of  Ballard  and  McCracken, 

RICHARD  D.  GHOLSON. 
From  the  county  of  Barren, 

ROBERT  D.  MAUPIN, 

JOHN  T.  ROGERS. 

From  the  county  of  Bath, 

JiVMES  M.  NESBITT. 
From  the  countv  of  Boone, 

CflARLES  CHAMBERS. 
From  the  countv  of  Bourbon, 

GEORGE  W.  WILLIAMS. 
From  the  county  of  Boyle, 

ALBERT  G.  TALBOTT. 
From  the  county  of  Bracken,  • 

WILLIAM  C.  MARSHALL. - 
From  the  counties  of  Breatliitt  and  Morgan,. 

JOHN  HARGIS. 
From  the  county  of  Breckinridge, 

HENRY  WASHINGTON. 
From  the  county  of  Bullitt, 

WILLIAM  R.  THOMPSON. 
From  the  counties  of  Butler  and  Edmonson, 

VINCENT  S.  HAY. 
Prom  the  county  of  Caldwell. 

WILLIS  B.  MACHEN. 

From  the  counties  of  Calloway  and  Marshall, 
EDWARD  CURD. 

From  the  county  of  Campbell, 

IRA  ROOT. 
From  the  counties  of  Carroll  and  Gallatin. 

JOHN  T.  ROBINSON. 
From  the  counties  of  Carter  and  Lawrence. 

THOMAS  J.  HOOD. 

From  the  county  of  Casey, 

JESSE  COFFEY. 

From  the  countv  of  Christian, 

NtNIAN  E.  GRAY, 
JOHN  D.  MORRIS. 


From  the  countv  of  Clarke, 

ANDREW  HOOD. 
From  the  counties  of  Clay,  Letcher  and  Perry, 

JAMES  H.  GARRARD. 
From  the  counties  of  Cumberland  and  Clinton, 

MICHAEL  L.  STONER. 
From  the  countv  of  Crittenden, 

HENRY  R.  D.  COLEMAN. 
From  the  countv  of  Daviess, 

PHILIP  TRIPLETT. 
From  the  counties  of  Estill  and  Owsley, 

LUTHER  BRAWNER. 
From  the  county  of  Fayette, 

JAMES  DUDLEY, 

ROBERT  N.  WICKLIFFB, 
From  the  county  of  Fleming, 

MARTIN  P.  MARSHALL, 

SELUCIUS  GARFIELDE. 
From  the  counties  of  Floyd,  Pike  and  Johnson, 

JAMES  M.  LACKEY. 
From  the  county  of  Franklin, 

THOMAS  N.  LINDSEY. 
From  the  countv  of  Garrard, 

JOHNSON  PRICE. 
From  the  county  of  Grant, 

WILLIAM  HENDRIX. 
From  the  county  of  Graves, 

RICHARD  L.  MAYES, 
From  the  county  of  Grayson, 

JOHN  J.  THURMAN. 
From  the  countv  of  Green, 

TflOMAS  W.  LISLE. 
From  the  county  of  Greenup, 

HENRY  B.  POLLARD. 
From  the  countv  of  Hardin, 

JAMES  W.  STONE, 

THOMAS  D.  BROWN. 
From  the  county  of  Harrison, 

HUGH  NEWELL, 

LUCIUS  DESHA. 
From  the  county  of  Hart, 

BENJAMIN  COPELIN. 
From  the  county  of  Henderson, 

ARCHIBALD  DIXON. 
From  the  county  of  Henry, 

ELIJAH  F.'NUTTALL. 
From  the  counties  of  Hickman  and  Fulton, 

THOMAS  JAMES. 
From  the  countv  of  Hopkins, 

WILLIAM  BRADLEY. 
From  the  county  of  Jefferson, 

DAVID  MERIWETHER, 

WILLIAM  C.  BULLITT, 

From  the  countv  of  Jessamine, 

ALEX.  K.  MARSHALL, 

From  the  countv  of  Kenton, 

JOHN  W.  STEVENSON, 

From  the  counties  of  Knox  and  Harlan, 
SILAS  WOODSON. 

From  the  county  of  Larue, 

JAMES  P.  HAMILTON. 

From  the  counties  of  Laurel  and  RockcastlC/ 
JONATHAN  NEW CUM. 


1105 


From  the  countv  of  Lewis, 

LARKIN  J.  PROCTOR. 

From  the  countv  of  Lincoln, 

JOHN  L.  BALLIXGER. 

From  the  countv  of  Livingston, 

WILLIAM  COWPER. 

From  the  countv  of  Lognn, 

JAMES  W.  IRWIX, 
WILLIAM  K.  BOWLING. 

From  the  city  of  Louisville, 
JAMES  RUDD, 
WILLIAM  PRESTON. 

From  the  county  of  Madison, 

SQUIRE  TURNER, 
WILLIAM  CHENAULT. 

From  the  countv  of  Marion, 

GREEN  FORREST. 

From  the  countv  of  Mason, 

PETER  LASHBROOKE, 
JOHN  D.  TAYLOR. 

From  the  countv  of  Meade, 

T&OMAS  J.  GOUGH. 

From  the  county  of  Mercer, 

THOMAS  P.  MOORE. 

From  the  county  of  Monroe. 

JOHN  S.  BARLOW. 
From  the  countv  of  Montgomerv, 

RICHARD  APPERSON. 
From  the  countv  of  Muhlenburg, 

ALFRED  M.  JACKSON. 

From  the  countv  of  Nelson, 

B£n.  HARDIN, 

CHARLES  A.  WICKLIFFE. 
From  the  county  of  Nicholas, 

BENJAMIN  F.  EDWARDS. 

From  tlie  countv  of  Oldham, 

WILLIAM  D.  MITCHELL. 

From  the  county  of  Owen, 

HOWARD  TODD. 

From  the  counties  of  Ohio  and  Hancock, 
JOHN  H.  McHENRY. 

From  the  countv  of  Pendleton, 

JO'HN  WHEELER. 

From  the  county  of  Pula.sk"i, 

MILFORD  ELLIOTT.. 

From  the  countv  of  Russell, 

NATHAN  McCLURE. 

From  the  county  of  Simpson, 

BEVERLY  L.  CLARKE. 

From  the  county  of  Shelby, 

ANDREW  S.  WHITE, 
GEORGE  W.  JOHNSTON. 

From  the  countv  of  Spencer, 

MARK  E.  HUSTON. 

From  the  county  of  Taylor, 

WILLIAM  N.  MARSHALL. 

From  the  county  of  Todd, 

FRANCIS  M.  BRISTOW. 

From  the  county  of  Trigg, 

ALFRED  BOYD. 

From  the  countv  of  Trimble, 

W£SLEY  J.  WRIGHT. 

From  the  countv  of  Union, 

IGNATIUS  A.  SPALDING. 
138 


From  the  county  of  Warren, 

OHASTEEN  T.  DUNAVAN. 

From  the  county  of  Wayne, 

JAMES  S.  CHRISMAN. 

From  the  county  of  Whitl*^v, 

THOMAS  RdCKHOLD. 

From  the  county  of  Wa^liingrton, 

CHARLES  COOPER  KELLY. 

From  the  county  of  Woodford, 

JOHN  L.  WALLER. 

Mr.  McHENRY  oiFered  the  following  resolu- 
tion: 

Resolved,  That  tliis  convention  adopt,  and  that 
the  delegates  present  do  now  proceed  to  sign, 
the  constitution  as  now  presented  by  the  commit- 
tee on  enrollment. 

Mr.  McHENRY  moved  the  previous  question, 
and  the  main  question  was  ordered  to  be  now 
put. 

The  question  then  recurred,  "shall  the  resolu- 
tion be  adopted." 

Messrs.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE  and  STEVEN- 
SON called  for  the  ye<is  and  nays  thereon,  and 
they  were  yeas  95,  nays  1. 

Yeas — ilr.  President,  (Guthrie,)  Richard  Ap- 

?erson,  John  L.  Ballinger,  John  S.  Barlow, 
rilliara  K.  Bowling,  Alfred  Boyd.  William 
Bradley,  Luther  Brawner,  Francis  M.  Bristow, 
William  C.  Bullitt,  Charles  Chambers,  William 
Chenauit,  James  S.  Chrisman,  Beverly  L.  Clarke, 
Jesse  Cofifey,  Henry  R.  D.  Coleman,  Benjamin 
Copelin,  William  Cowper,  Edward  Curd,  Lu- 
cius Desha,  Archibald  Dixon,  James  Dudley, 
Chasteeu  T.  Dunavan,  Benjamin  F.  Edwards, 
Milford  Elliott,  Green  Forrest,  Nathan  Gaither, 
Sclucius  Garfielde,  James  H.  Garrard,  Thomas 
J.  Gough,  Ninian  E.  Gray,  Ben.  Hardin,  John 
Hargis,  Vincent  S.  Hay,  William  Hendrix,  An- 
drew Hood,  Thomas  J .  Hood,  Mark  E.  Huston, 
James  W.  Irwin,  Alfred  M.  Jackson,  Thomas 
James,  George  W.  Johnston,  George  W.  Kava- 
naugh,  Charles  C.  Kelly,  James  M.  Lackey.  Peter 
Lashbrooke,  Thomas  N.  Lindsey,  Thomas  W. 
Lisle,  Willis  B.  Machen,  George  W.  Mansfield, 
Alexander  K.  Marshall,  Martin  P.  Marshall, 
William  C.  Marshall.  William  N.  Marshall, 
Robert  D.  Maupin,  Richard  L.  Mayes,  Nathan 
McClure,  John  H.  McHenry,  David  Meriwether, 
William  D.  Mitchell,  Thomas  P.  Moore,  John 
D.  Morris,  James  M.  Ncsbitt,  Jonathan  Newcura, 
Hugh  Newell,  Elijah  F.  Nuttall,  Henry  B.  Pol- 
lard, William  Preston,  Johnson  Price,  Larkin 
J.  Proctor,  John  T.  Robinson,  Thomas  Rock- 
hold,  John  T.  Rogei-s,  Ira  Root,  James  Rudd, 
Ignatius  A.  Spalding,  John  \V.  Stevenson,  Jas. 
W.  Stone,  Michael  L.  Stoner,  Albert  G.  Talbott, 
John  D.  Taylor,  William  R.  Thompson,  John  J. 
Thurman,  floward  Todd,  Philip  Triplett,  Squire 
Turner,  John  L.  Waller,  Henry  Washington, 
John  Wheeler,  Andrew  S.  White,  Charles  A. 
Wickliffe.  Robert  N.  Wickliffe,  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Silas  Woodson,  Wesley  J.  Wright — 95. 
Nay — Garrett  Davis — 1. 
So  the  resolution  was  adopted. 
The  delegates  present  then  proceeded  to  sign 
the  constitution,  m  the  order  they  are  printed  m 
the  preceding  pages. 


1106 


PRESEXTATIOX   OF   BOORS. 

Oil  the  motion  of  Mr.  C.  A.  WICKLIFFE,  the 
Resolution  adopted  a  few  days  sinco  directing  a 
copy  of  the  journal  and  debates  of  the  conven- 
tion to  be  presented  to  delegates,  officers,  report- 
er, and  chaplains,  was  so  amended  as  to  direct 
that  additional  copies  be  delivered  to  the  re- 
porter to  the  convention,  for  presentation  to  his 
assistants. 

pbesidznt's  talkdictoey. 

The  PRESIDENT  having  resumed  the  chair, 
and  the  business  of  the  convention  having  been 
accomplished  he  rose  to  deliver  his  valedictory 
adrdess,  and  spoke  nearly  as  follows: 

Gentlemen  Of  the  Convention: 

I  congratulate  you  upon  the  completion  of 
your  labors. 

I  also  avail  myself  of  this  opportunity  to  re- 
turn vou  my  thanks  for  the  kind  manner  in 
■which  you  have  given  your  assistance  to  the 
chair  in  preserving  order,  and  the  forbearance 
Vith  which  you  have  treated  the  waywardness 
of  my  temper  upon  sudden  emergencies. 

When  I  was  elected  to  this  situation,  I  was 
conscious  how  much  I  should  require  your  in- 
dulgence. To  you,  then,  I  am  deeply  indebted 
for  being  enabled  to  get  through  the  duties  with 
so  little  difficulty  to  myself.  And  if,  at  any 
time  during  the  period  I  have  presided  over  you, 
there  has  appeared  any  thing  harsh  in  my  con- 
duct, I  beg  to  say,  that  it  was  not  indicative  of 
unkindness  towards  any  one,  and  that  I  Was  in- 
fluenced only  by  a  desire  to  enforce  the  rules  of 
order  and  decorum  which  are  so  essential  to  the 
progress  of  business.  I  hope  every  gentleman 
in  this  convention  will  be  satisfied  that  I  was  in' 
fluenced  by  no  other  motive. 

I  will  take  this  occasion  further  to  remark, 
that  it  has  been  my  fortune  to  have  taken  part 
in  tlio  proceedings  of  twelve  or  thirteen  sessions 
of  the  legislature  of  this  state,  and  I  have  never 
seen  so  much  order  and  decorum  observed  as  I 
have  witnes.sed  in  the  deliberations  of  this  con- 
vention. 

I  might  say  to  this  convention  something  in 
relation  to  the  constitution  itself,  but  I  feel  it 
would  be  scarcely  necessary  upon  this  occasion. 
I  am  glad,  however,  that  m  laying  the  founda- 
tions of  this  government,  we  have  walked  in 
the  footsteps  of  those  who  preceded  us,  and  laid 
them  injustice,  to  the  preservation  of  the  lives, 
the  liberties,  and  the  property  of  the  citizens. 
Having  done  this,  all  else  in  relation  to  the  or- 
ganization of  the  government  is  but  a  matter 
of  expediency,  to  be  tested  by  time. 

A  representative  democracy,  like  ours,  is 
based  upon  the  will  of  the  people,  and  as  all 
caimot  participate  in  the  government,  we  select 
the  free  white  male  inhabitants  over  the  age  of 
twenty  one  years,  and  give  them  the  riglits  of 
suffrage.  They  elect  our  executive,  they  elect 
our  legislature,  and  now  we  liavo  connded  to 
them  the  election  of  all  our  judicial  and  minis- 
terial officers. 

The  government  being  divided  into  three  dis- 
tinct sets  of  offices,  the  executive,  the  legisla- 
tive, and  tlie  judicial,  the  officers  who  will  fill 
these  several  departments  will  receive  their  ap- 
pointment from  the  hands  of  the  people  them- 


selves; and  this  system  of  self-government  works 
beautifully  in  its  operations  upon  society,  and 
is  scarcely  seen,  or  scarcely  felt.  The  state  is 
divided  into  counties,  and  tney  have  municipal 
powers  for  the  government  of  their  internal  af- 
fairs. In  these  counties  there  are  cities  and 
towns,  and  they  also  have  municipal  regulation.s 
to  govern,  direct,  and  control  their  peculiar  in- 
terests, while  the  executive  and  legislative  de- 
partments control  the  matters  appertaining  to 
the  state  at  large,  anu  at  the  same  time  the  judi- 
ciary enforces  the  public  justice  of  the  country, 
and  the  rights  of  individuals  as  they  arise  un- 
der the  constitution  and  the  laws.  In  our  con- 
stitution we  instruct  the  executive  and  legisla- 
tive departments  in  relation  to  the  great  and 
essential  principles  of  liberty,  wliich  we  tell 
them  they  .shall  not  touch;  We  instruct  the  judi- 
ciary in  regard  to  those  great  and  essential  prin- 
ciples, and  to  take  care  that  neither  the  execu- 
tive nor  the  legislative  departments  interfere 
with  them  to  the  prejudice  of  private  right;  and 
in  the  laws  passed  by  the  legislature  and  execu- 
tive, we  further  instruct  the  judiciary  in  refer- 
ence to  all  matters  of  contract  and  private  right; 
and  they  will  go  forth  with  the  Varrant  of  the 
people  to  decide  upon  the  public  justice  of  the 
country,  and  the  rights  of  private  individuals. 

In  this  scheme,  the  judiciary  is  the  groat  ex- 
ecutive branch  of  the  government  which  brings 
the  constitution  and  the  laws  in  direct  operation 
upon  the  people;  and,  for  the  preservation  of  the 
private  rights  of  the  citizen,  it  is  essential  that 
this  body  of  magistracy  should  be  learned,  able, 
and  upright  men;  and,  I  believe,  the  success  of 
the  scheme  of  an  elective  judiciary  will  depend 
essentially  upon  our  being  able  to  obtain  such 
men. 

I  could  liave  wished,  personally,  that  we  had 
provided  adequate  compensation  in  order  that 
we  mightprocure  competent  men  to  till  these 
offices.  We  have  left  these  salaries  to  the  legis- 
lature; and  in  going  back  to  the  people  with 
this  constitution,  it  will  be  our  duty  to  impress 
upon  them  the  necessity  and  importance  of  giv- 
ing sufficient  salaries,  in  order  that  the  best  tal- 
ents of  the  state  may  be  brought  into  our  tribu- 
nals, so  that  public  justice  sliall  be  administered 
correctly,  and  the  private  rights  of  the  citizen 
be  properly  cared  for,  and  promptly  decided.  If 
adequate  salaries  should  not  be  given,  the  poor 
man,  with  talents,  will  not  be  able  to  take  these 
offices,  and  they  will  necessarily  fall  into  the 
hands  of  a  secondary  order  of  men  who  have 
some  property  inherited,  and  who  are  not  in 
possession  of  the  requisite  abilities  for  the  dis- 
charge of  these  high  duties.  It  is  essential  in 
a  government  like  ours,  tliat  due  encouragement 
should  be  given  to  all  the  talents  of  every  por- 
tion of  the  community,  so  that  they  may  fill  the 
highest  offices  of  government.  1  beg,  there- 
fore, to  impress  upon  you  tliat  the  success  of  this 
experiment  of  an  elective  judiciary  will  mainly 
depend  upon  giving  the  best  compensation  for 
tlie  best  talent,  thus  calling  the  best  men  to  fill 
these  situations. 

I  have  no  earthly  doubt  that  this  constitution 
Avill  be  accepted  oy  the  people.  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  the  emancipationists,  as  a  body,  will 
risftup  and  battle  against  the  will  of  the  people 
of  Kentucky,  expressed  by   this  convention  in 


1107 


relation  to  that  particular  matter.  They  are  in 
a  minority,  and  many  of  them  are  intelligent 
men,  and  men  of  property,  and  standing.  I  do 
not  believe  they  will  be  willing  to  agitate  the 
country  again  on  that  subject,  and  attempt  to 
create  <iiscord  and  dissatisfaction  in  the  commu- 
nity; but  that,  as  good  citizens  and  republicans, 
they  will  bow  to  the  will  of  the  majority. 

I  do  not  believe  that  the  office  holders,  as  a 
body,  will  go  against  this  constitution.  Those 
of  them  who  are  men  of  talents  and  standing 
will  consider  that  thev  have  as  fair  a  chance  for 
office  as  any  other  individuals,  and  will  not  at- 
tempt to  set  up  their  individual  interests  against 
those  of  the  great  majority  of  the  people.  I 
doubt  not  that  we  will  find  that  portion  of  them 
using  their  best  influences  to  sustain  this  consti- 
tution. Those  of  them  who  have  not  high  at- 
tainments and  influential  friends  will  be  able  to 
do  but  little  to  resist  the  great  popular  will. 
For  these  reasons  I  fear  nothing,  either  from  the 
emancipationists  or  the  office  holdere,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  success  of  this  constitution.  There 
are  some  individuals  who  come  to  this  question 
of  selecting  judges  from  the  people  with  reluc^ 
tance;  and,  twelve  months  ago,  how  many 
doubted  on  this  subject  who  are  with  the  move- 
ment now?  And  how  many,  who  doubted  up  to 
the  time  of  the  assembling  of  this  convention, 
will  cease  to  doubt  when  this  constitution  has 
been  presented  to  them ;  especially  when  they 
consider  the  immense  majority  of  the  people  of 
Kentucky  who  are  in  favor  of  it,  and  have  lis- 
tened to  the  argument  and  experience  that  have 
been  had  upon  this  subject?  The  volume  of  in- 
telligence in  the  great  ma<^  of  the  people,  is 
greater  than  the  volume  of  intelligence  that  ex- 
ists in  any  number  of  individuals  you  can  se- 
lect, in  relation  to  the  appointment  of  officers; 
the  volume  of  integrity  of  purpose,  in  relation 
to  public  right,  is  far  greater  in  the  districts, 
where  the  laws  are  to  be  applied,  than  in  any 
body  of  men  we  can  select;  and  hence  I  believe 
that  those  who  have  doubted  and  hesitated  will 
come  in  and  support  this  constitution,  because 
they  will  see  the  impossibility  of  rolling  back 
the  great  tide  of  popular  feeling  that  has  been 
exhibited  in  favor  of  restoring  these  offices  to 
the  people,  and  I  trust  that  this  constitution 
will  be  sustained  by  a  large  and  overwhelming 
vote. 

We  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  this  con- 
stitution will  be  adopted.  From  this  place  I 
have  seen  cast  almost  every  vote  that  has  been 
given  in  making  this  constUution.  The  people 
were  not  governed  by  party  considerations,  in 
selecting  the  delegates  to  this  convention,  and 
in  this  convention  I  have  witnessed  no  vote  in 
making  this  constitution  that  I  could  trace  ta 


party.  Every  vote,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to 
observe,  has  been  the  act  of  both  paities,  com- 
ing up  singly  to  the  purpose  of  doing  the  will 
of  the  people  in  relation  to  the  fnudamental  law 
of  the  land;  and  if  these  two  parties  should 
unite  as  heartily  and  zealously  in  carrying  this 
constitution  into  effect  as  this  l)ody  have  united 
in  framing  it,  there  can  be  no  possible  doubt 
about  the  result. 

Gentlemen,  we  are  about  to  separate.  We 
shall,  perhaps,  never  all  meet  again.  If  we 
j  should  it  will  be  a  rare  occurrence.  When  we  re- 
turn to  our  constituents,  I  have  no  doubt,  we 
I  shall  be  received  with  kindness  It  has  not  un- 
frequently  happened  that  concessions  have  been 
made,  and  the  people  will  see  the  necessity  of 
making  concessions  themselves.  You  have  dis- 
charged your  duties  to  the  country  zealously  and 
impartially,  and  have  entitled  yourselves  to  the 
favor  of  your  constituents. 

Gentlemen,  I  hope  on  your  return  to  your 
homes,  you  will  find  that  your  families  have 
been  graciously  preserved  during  your  absence 
by  a  kind  providence,  and  that  you  will  be  long 
spared  to  be  useful  to  them,  and  to  your  coun- 
try in  the  various  stations  you  may  be  called 
upon  to  fill;  and  that  none  of  you  may  ever  have 
reason  to  regret  the  part  you  have  taken  in 
framing  this  constitution. 

CLOSniG   PRATEK. 

The  Rev.  G.  W.  Beush,  offered  up  the  follow- 
wing  prayer: 

AotiGHTT  God,  our  Heavenly  Father;  at  the 
close  of  the  labors  of  this  convention,  during 
j  which  Thou  hast  granted  unto  us  so  many  bles- 
sings, we  desire  to  lift  up  our  hands,  our  liearts, 
i  and  our  tongues  in  a  united  expression  of  grati- 
I  tude  and  thanksgiving.  Thou  hast  preserved 
j  the  lives  and  the  health  of  the  members  of  this 
Iconventiou;  and  Thou  hast  given  ns  peace, 
I  quiet,  harmony,  and  friendship.  We  are  there- 
•  fore  greatly  indebted  to  Thee;  imd  we  pray  that 
1  Thy  blessing,  may  go  with  the  labors  of  this 
I  convention  to  the  people  of  the  commonwealth, 
:  and  that  this  reorganization  of  the  government 
i  may  be  a  blessing  to  us,  and  to  our  children  af- 
j  ter  us.  Grant  us  now  thy  pardoning  mercy 
i  wherein  we  may  have  acted  amiss,  that  we  may 
I  leave  this  place  with  the  blessing  of  our  God. 
I  Hear  us  in  these  our  imperfect  petitions;  accept 
i  our  humble  acknowledgments,  and,  ultimately, 
!  through  thy  great  mercy,  bring  each  one  of  us 
j  to  reign  with  Thee  in  everlasting  life:  and  to 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  shall  be  eternal 
and  everlasting  praises;  Amen. 

i  The  PRESIDENT  then  proclaimed  that  this 
I  convention  stands  adjourned  to  the  first  Monday 
'in June  ne^. 


INDEX  TO  DEBATES. 


Absence,  leave  of    167,  178,  221,  245.  246,  279 
363,  420,  434,  685 

Account^  commmissioners  of — 

resolution  to  appoint  420 

Act  calling  the  convention  9 

Address  of  the  President  on  his  election  15 

valedictory      1106 

Address  to  the  people — 

ilr.  Clarke's  resolution  to  appoint  com- 
mittee to  draft  729 
Committee  appointed  to  draft  788 
Reported  to  the  convention                     1087 

Amendments  to  constitution,  how  made— 

M.  P.  Marshall's  proposition  800 

W.  Chenault's  proposition  827 

Report  of  committee  on  841 

Turner's  plan  842 

Edwards'  plan  862,  989 

Kavanaugh's  proposition  910 

Thompson's  proposition  992 

Talbott's  proposition  947 

Report  of  committee  on  987 

Appeals  in  criminal  cases — 

Turner's  prxjpositioii  652 

Taylor's  proposition  674 

Apportionment  of  representation — 

Committee  announced  719 

Apportionment  and    basis    of  represe^ita- 
tion — 
Clarke's  amendment  to  report  on  455 

Triplett's  amendment  to  report  on  456,  585 
Morris'  proposition  479 

Woodson's  proposition  502,  632 

Boyd's  proposition  528 

Irwin's  proposition  540 

Turner's  proposition       541,  963,  976,  1000 
Carfielde's  proposition  558 

Hargis'  proposition  560 

Dixon's  substitute  561,  617 

Irwin's  second  proposition  570 

Rudd's  amendment  583 

Clarke's  proposition  587 

Gholson's  proposition  596 

Gray's  proposition  598 

Boyd's  proposition  699 

Apperson's  propositioa  618 

Desha's  proposition  637 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's  resolution  684,  1000 

Apperson's  report  from  select  com- 
mittee "^99 
Lackey's  proposition  921,  972,  999 
Irwin's  amendment  947 
Davis'  amendment  972 
.  Preston's  substitute  975 
Rogers'  substitute  .  975 
Thompson's  substitute  976 


Apportionment    and   basis  of    representa- 
tion— 

Chambers'  substitute  976 

Garrard's  proviso  to  Woodson's  amend- 
ment 999 

Davis'  renewal  of  Lackey's  amend- 
ment 1001,  1026 

Jackson's  proposition  1002 

Garrard's  amendment  to  report  of  com- 
mittee 1026 

Kavanaugh's  amendment  1027 

Garrard's  substitute  for  Davis'  proposi- 
tion 1029 

Mitchell's  substitute  for  Davis'  propo- 
sition 1028 

Chambers'  substitute  for  Davis'  amend- 
ment 1023 

McClure's  substitute  for  Davis'  amend- 
ment 1 029 

Thompson's  substitute  for  Davis'  a- 
mendment  1029 

James'  substitute  for  Davis'  amend- 
ment 1030 

Mitchell's  motion  to  re-consider  vote 
adopting  James'  amendment  1061 

Appropriations  by  committee  on  claims  997 

Apperson,  Richard,  12,  15,  16,  54,  58,  221.  230 

234,  236,  301,  305,  327,  332,  :J43,  345,  362 

378,  398,  414,  433,  438,  443,  548,  553,  616 

618,  628,  635,  643,  656,  678,  769.  788,  794 

799,  861,  909,  953,  959,  963,  964,  968,  976 
997,  1000,  1026,  1071,  1083,  1085,  1090 

Resolution  designating  committees  58 

Speech  on  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, and  appointment  and  removal 
of  Judges  230,  234,  240,  345 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 548,  799 

Resolution  and  remai-ks  on  the  basis  of 
representation  618,  635 

Speech  on  Uie  report  concerning  circuit 
courts  656 

Proposition  concerning  appeals  in  crim- 
inal cases  678 

Remarks  on  restricting  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  create  debt  769 

Resolution  providing  for  special  court 
of  appeals  861 

Amenaraent  to  circuit  court  report  953 

Amendment  on  the  subject  of  appor- 
tionment 959 

Speech  on  tlie  apportionment  of  repre- 
sentation 963,  968 

Resolution,  enrolling  constitution  997,  1026 

Proviso  to  Turner's  amendment,  touch- 
ing the  representation  of  counties      1000 


uio 


^^pperson,  Richard — 

Motion  to  re-consider  the  I9th  section  of 

the  report  on  general  provisions         1071 
Remarks    on     Lindsey  s    amendment, 
concerning  the  duty  of  Judges  and 
juries  in  criminal  cases  1085 

Arrest,   members   of  the  Legislature  privi- 
leged from  622 
Arms,  the  right  of  the  citiaen  to  bear             803 
Article  reported — 

Court  of  appeals  60,  127 

Slavery  69 

Executive    and    ministerial  offices  for 

counties  and  districts  111 

County  courts  127 

Select  committee,  codification,  legisla- 
tion, (fee,  127 
Militia  144 
Preamble  and  Article  1  168,  356 
Circuit  courts  232 
New  counties  262 
Concerning  impeachments  292 
Legislative  department  319 
General  provisions  350,  377 
Louisville  chancery  court  377 
Corqnion  schools  377 
Executive  department  434 
Court  of  appeals,  from  joint  committee  435 
Circuit  courts,  from  joint  committee  436 
County  courts,  from  joint  committee  437 
Assistant  Secretary,  election  of  16 
Auditor  of  accounts — 

^ow  elected  and  term  of  office  734 

Ballinger,  John  L.,    66,  219,  308,  363,  463,  618 
653.  671,  814,  975,  1087,  1090 
Remarks  oxi  the  proposition  to  restrict 

the  representation  of  cities  and  towns  463 
Remarks  on  the  report  concerning  cir- 
cuit courts  654 
Motion  to  permit  the  withdrawal  of  the 
papers  in   Casey  contested  election    1087 
Ballot-— Mr.  Preston's  resolution  68 
Election  of  appellate  judges  and  clerks 
by                                                    312,  318 
Barlow,  John   S.,     16,  19,  64,  71.  80,  92,  103 
123,  138,  156,  167,  178,  279,  331,  357,  437 
558,  571,  618,  620,  765,  800,  839,  895.  936 

1026,  1030 
Chairman   of  committee  of  the  whole, 
on    Turner's    slaverv    resolutions — 

71,  8t),  92,  103,  123,  138 
Resolution  on  franchise  of  immigrants 

from  States  80 

Amendment  to  report  on  legislative  de- 
partment 438 
Resolution  to  hold  evening  sessions        558 
Remarks  on  restricting  the  power  of  the 

legislature  to  create  debt  765 

Amendment  to  education  report  895 

Remarks  on  Clarke's  proposition  in  re- 
gard to  slavery  936 
Substitute  for  Woodson's  proposition 
for  apportioning  the  State                   10.30 
Bill  of  Rights — Dixon's  amendment  to  377 
Article  reported  by  committee  consid- 
ered in  convention                        794,  804 
Mitchell's  amendment                               810 
Talbott's  substitute                                  814 
Davis'  additional  section  815 
Binding  of  Journal — 

Instructions  to  printer  1090 


Bowling.  "William  K.,  68,  895 

Resolution  on  equal  taxation  68 

Speech  on  the  education  report  895 

Boyd,  Alfred,  17,  167,  191,  207,  221,  279,  312 

330,  332,  356,  363,  385,  402,  528,  529,  554 

599,  619,  630,  639,  643,  651,  719,  732,  738 
758,  791,  792,  796,  836,  973,  998 

Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole 
on  preamble  and  Article  1  356 

Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole 
on  county  courts  332 

Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole 
on  county  and  district  offices        356,  363 

Resolution,  legislative  propositions  to 
amend  the  constitution  279 

Resolution,  individual  liability  279 

Motion  to  reduce  the  term  of  appellate 
judges  to  six  years  .330 

Resolution  relative  to  representation        528 

Amendment  to  report  on  legislative  de- 
partment 599 

Remarks  on  amendment  to  report  on 
legislative  department  599 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 554,  599,  973 

Remarks  on  the  court  of  appeals  643 

Appointed  chairman  of  the  committee 
of  the  wliole,  on  the  -:r-  Article  of  the 
legislative  report  759 

Proposition  in  regard  to  corporations. 
Banks,  &o.,  836 

Substitute  fur  report  on  apportionment 
of  representation  998 

Bradley,  William,  330,  428,  585,  601,  704,  733 
734,  7.37,  761.  772,  777,  1071,  1091 

Chairman  of  committee  pf  the  whole, 
on  Louisville  chancery  court  428 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 601 

Remarks  on  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee on  county  courts  704 

Remarks  on  restricting  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  contract  debt.  761,  772,  777 

Motion  to  constitute  committee  on  en- 
rollments 1071 

Report  from  committee  an  enrollments  1091 
Branching  of  court  of  appeals — 

[See  court  of  appeals] 
Brawner,  Luther,  10,  413 

Bristow,  Francis  M..    41,  58,  68.  127.  207,  272 

280,  332,  333.  334.  362.  392,  397.  398,  Gil 
628,  697,  715,  847,  854,  856,  933,  977 

Resolution  on  mode  of  amending  con- 
stitution, slavery,  and  free  negroes       41 

Resolution  on  commissioners  to  codify 
laws  68 

Reports   from  committee  on  co.  courts  127 

Speech  on  the  elective  judiciary  272 

Speech  on  the  basis  of  representation      611 

Amendment  and  remarljs  concerning 
divorces  628 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  county 
courts  697,  715 

Remarks  oq  specific  taxation  847 

Remarks  on  the  power  to  banish  free 
negroes  9.33 

Brown,  Thomas  D.,    14,  50,  103,  301,  302,  313 

314,  355,  357,  371,  372,  373,  394,  397,  415 

419,  579,  580,  582,  610,  683,  691,  693,  714 

726,  731,  781,  838.  839.  974,  977,  991,  992 
<»96,  1027,  1072,  1083 


liil 


Brown,  Thomas  D.^— 

Resolution— school  fund  103 

Remarks  on  election  of  appellate  judg- 
es, <fcc..  bv  ballot  314 
Offered  LinSsey's  amendment  to  report 
concerning     the     representation    of 
cities                                                          579 
Proposed  further  amendment  to  report 

concerning  representation  of  cities      582 
Remarks  on  the  article  concerning  new 

counties  419 

Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole, 

on  county  and  district  offices  425 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representfltion  610 

Bullitt,  William  C,  15,27,31,  59,  65,  153,  291 

313,  314,  420,  423,  534,  752,  792,  801,  815 

923 
Remarks  on   Turner's  slavery  resolu- 
tions 85,  117 
Remarks  on  Dixon's  resolution— inrio- 

lability  of  slave  property  117 

Remarks  on  the  removal  df  appellate 

judges  153 

Remarks  on  elections  by  ballot  313 

Remarks  on  county  and  district  offices  420 
Remarks  on  equality  of  representation  534 
Remarks  on   the    provision  excluding 

clergymen  from  the  legislature  752 

Remarks  on  dueling  815 

Remarks  on  slavery  and  emancipation    923 
Capital  of  the  State—  ' 

Article  fixing  passed  793 

Certificate    of  election    best    certificate    of 

qualification  for  ofl[ice  144,  147,  411 

Chairman   of  committee  of  the  whole,  on 
Turner's    slavjry    resolution — Barlow,    71 
80,  92,  103,  123,  138 
Chairman   of  committee  of  the    whole,  on 
article       ,  court  of  appeals,  George  W. 
Johnston  148 

Chairman  of  committee   of  the    whole,    on 

article         ,  court  of   appeals,  Huston,  156 
168, 178,  191,  207,  222,  234,  246,  263,  280 
292,  303,  321 
Chairman  of  commiteee  of  the  whole,  on 

county  courts,  Boyd  332 

Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole,  on 

preamble  and  article  1.  Boyd  356 

Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole,    on 

county  and  district  offices,  Boyd     356,  363 
Chairman   of  committee  of  the  whole,  on 

county  and  district  offices,  Brown  425 

Chairman   of  committee  of  the    whole,  on 

new  counties,  James  417 

Chairman  of   committee  of  the  whole,  on 

Louisville  chancery  court,  Bradley  428 

Chairman  of  com  nittee    of  the  whole,  on 
legislative  department.    Meriwether      437 
455,  503,  560,  570 
Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole,  on 
legislative    department — power  of  the 
legislature  to  contract  debt — Boyd  758 

Chambers,  Charles,  25,  27,  36,  54,  57,  155,  192 
355,356,  364,  369,  378,  396.  401,  583,  612 
659,    673,   711,   731,   732,  976,  1026,  1029 

1090 
Resolution  to   appoint   standing  com* 

mittees  25 

Resolution   on  referring  to  committees, 

daily  sessions,  dec,  36,  57 

Resolution  on  time  of  holding  elections. 


Chambers,  Charifes— 

and  sufl"rage  155 

Resolution  of  instrudtibh^^tlutobfer  bf 

appellate  judges  378 

Speech  on   removal  of  appellate  court 

judges  192 

Remarks  on  branching  court  of  appeals  355 
Leave  of  absence  to  420 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 583 
Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  612 
Remarks  on  the  report  concerning  cir- 
cuit courts  659 
Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  Crovemor 

to  remit  fines  673 

Remarks  on  tlie  county  court  report        711 
Remarks  on  substitute  for  part  of  legis- 
lative report— representation  976 
Amendment  to  the  amendment  of  Davis 
on  apportionment  of  representation  1029 
Chancery,  Louisville — section  reported           377 
Report  considered  in  committee  of  the 
whole                                                      428 
Chaplains,  resolution  to  invite  30 
Vote  of  thanks  to                                      1091 
Chenault,  William,                          138,  699,  827 
Speech  on  Turner's  slavery  resolution     138 
Resolution    and    remarks    on    specific 
amendments                                              827 
Chrisman,    James    S.,    80,   362,   372,  521,  523 
527,  528,  621,  643,-  707,  784,  835.  997 
Resolution,  ineligibility  for  office,  of 

defaulters  80 

Resolutions  of  instructions  to  close  de- 
bate 522 
Remarks  on  the  necessity  of  closing  the 

debate  521,  522 

Rejoinder  to  C.  A.  WickliflFe— political 

inconsistency  528 

Remarks  on  biennial  sessions  of  the 
legislature  621 

Cities  and  towns,  representation  of  414,  479 
Citizens  naturalized- 
Resolution  respecting  29,  996 
Discussion  on  Davis'  resolution  1002,  42 
Circuit  Courts- 
Report  of  committee  of  thirty  437 
Report  considered  in  coDVention  654,  667 

685 
Discussion  on  the  number  of  judicial 

districts  654 

How  and  when  elections  to  be  held  660 
Qualification  of  electors  of  judges  of  661 
Who  are  eligible  as  judges  661 

Ineligibility  of  judges  663 

Term  of  ofSce  of  judges  667 

Power  of  general  assembly  to  increase 

the  number  of  districts  669 

Compensation,  by  whom  fixed  670 

How  removed  from  office  671 

Vacancy,  how  filled  674 

Appeals  from,  in  criminal  cases  674 

Taylor's  proposition  674 

Apperson's  proposition  678 

Triplett's  proposition  682 

Committee's  report  concerning  the  conf- 

monwealth's  right  of  challenge  in      674 
Davis'  proposition  686 

Mayes'  proposition  689 

Eavanaugh's  proposed  addition  to  re- 
port 693 


1112 


Circuit  Courts — 

Lindsey's  proposition  to  make  Judges 

judges  of  the  law,  in  criminal  cases     835 
Proposition   to  provide  for  terms  of,  to 
be  held  by   others  than  the  judges 
thereof  861,  953 

Clarke,  Beverly  L.,  16,  23,  27,  36,  51,  58,  82 
88,  89,  110,  123,  145,  146,  154,  280,  288 
292,  294,  299,  307,  308,  311,  319,  337,  338 
340,341,  346,  357,  359,  360,  361,  362,  365 
366,367,  374,  376,  380,  381.  385,  388,  389 
392,  393,  395,  396,  398,  403,  411,  412,  428 
437,  438,  444,  446,  454,  455,  485,  486,  497 
556,  585,  587,  590,  610,  614,  620,  621,  622 
623,  626,  641,  649,  661,  677,  701,  729,  734 
735,  757,  762,  783,  784,  785,  788,  793,  794 
795,  813,  836,  837,  839,  857,  859,  923,  930 
936,  938,  958,  965,  966,  977,  991,  997,  1025 
1052,  1064,  1087,  1089 
Explanation  of  a  newspaper  statement  58 
Remarks  on  Turner's  slavery  resolu- 
tions 82,  88,  90 
Remarks  on  Gholson's  resolution — cer- 
titicate    of   qualification    for    ofiice  145, 

146,  412 
Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  court 

judges  154 

Report — article  on  the   legislative  de- 
partment 319 
Speech   on  branching  appellate  court  337 

340,  346 
Various  remarks,  on  article  on  county 
and   district  offices,   qualification  of 
clerks,  re-eligibilit}'  of  sheriffs,  com- 
petency  of  the   people  to   elect,  <fec. 
[See  county  and  district  offices.] 
Remarks  on  Gholson's  resolution — com- 
petency of  the  people,  <fec.,  412 
Amendment  proposed  to  report  on  legis- 
lative department  455 
Resolution  concerning  the  basis  of  rep- 
resentation                                             587 
Remarks  on  proposition  to  restrict  the 

representation  of  cities  and  towns        446 
Remarks    on  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion 485,  585,  590,  611,  938,  965 
Remarks  on  the  qualifications  of  voters  614 
Remarks  on   biennial   sessions  of  the 

legislature  621 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  divorces         626 
Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  circuit 

judges  661 

Remarks  on  the  right  of  the  common- 
wealth to  challenge  jurors,  in  crimin- 
al cases  675 
Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  contract  debt             757,  762,  783 
Remarks  on  Lindsey's  proposition,  in 

regard  to  juries  795 

Remarks  on  the  amendments  proposed 

to  the  bill  of  rights  813 

Remarks  on  specific  taxation  837 

Remarks  on  resolution,  restricting  le- 
gislature from  prohibiting  the  impor- 
tation of  slaves  923,  936 
Remarks  on  slavery,  in  reply  to  Waller  930 
Remarks  on   Davis'  resolution  (nativ- 

iem)  1025 

Reports  the  "address  to  the  people  of 

Kentucky"  1087 

Remarks  on  the  address  to  the  peopl«    1089 


Claims — committee  on,  constituted  729 

Committee  on,  appointed  729 

Committee  on,  report  997 

Claims  against  the  Commonwealth — 

Williams'  amendment  629 

Clerical  representatives — memorial  630 

Proposition  to  exclude  considered  738 

Clerks — certificate  of  qualification  of,    362,  373 

379,  380 
Clerks  of  Courts — 

Resolution  in  regard  to  fees  of  420 

Of  court  of  appeals,  how   elected  and 

term  of  offict;  652 

Of  certificate  of  qualification  652 

Of  vacancy,  how  filled  652 

[See  circuit  and  county  courts.] 
Codification — article  reported  127 

Codify  tlie   laws  and  simplify  the  practice 
and  pleadings — 
Gholson's  proposition  f-'80 

Triplett's  proposition  880 

Mayes'  motion  to  re-consider  vote  upon  901 
Coffey,  Jesse,      14,  15,  35,  279,  616,  684,  718 
Admitted  .  14 

Election  of,  considered  34 

Select  committee  on  election  appointed     36 
Select  committee  on  election  reported    496 
Coleman,  Henry  R.  D.,  II 

Committees — 

On  rules,  appointed  19 

On  rules,  report  of  27 

Select  committee,  on  purchasing  news- 
papers 30 
Select  committee  on  purchasing  news- 
papers, report  of  30 
Appointed  on  Casey  county  election        36 
Standing,     versus    committee    of   the 

whole,  debate  thereon  39,  40,  43,  54 

Standing  appointed  55 

Change  in  number  of  members  of  55 

On  State  debts,  resolution  to  appoint      55 
On  contested  elections  56,  66 

Special,  appointed  on  Gholson's  resolu- 
tions, special  pleading,  ic,  58 
Apperson's  resolution  to  designate  58 
On  arrangement  and  revision  434 
On  apportionment  719 
On  claims  729 
To  address  the  people  729 
Committees  appointed — 

To  wait  on  the  secretary  of  state,  for 

list  of  delegates  10 

On  purchasing  newspapers  30 

On  rules  19 

On  courts  of  conciliation  206 

On  Casey  county  contested  election  36 

On  organization  of  new  counties  221 

On  public  debt  279 

On  Gliolson's  resolution,  special  plead- 
ing, (fee,  58 
On  Gailher's  resolution,  powers  of  gen- 
eral and  state  government                     411 
Of  arrangement  and  revision                   434 
On  enrollments                                         1077 
Committees,  Standing,  report  of — 

Court  of  appeals  60,  127 

Slavery  69 

Executive    and    ministerial  officers        111 
County  courts  127 

Militia  144 

Preamble  and  article  1  168,  356 


1118 


Committees,  Standing,  report  of — 

Concerning  impeachments 

Legislative  department 

General  provisions 

Louisville  chancery 

Education  and  common  schools 

Executive  department 

Joint,  on  courts  of  justice 

On  miscellaneous  provisions 

Henry  county  contested  election 
Committee  of  the  Whole — 

On  Turner's  slavery  resolutions,  71,  80 
91,  92,  103,  103,  111,  123,  126,  138, 

Court  of  Appeals,  148,  155,  156,  166, 

178,    178,    190,  191,   206,    207,  218, 

232,   234.  245,   246,   261,   263,  279, 

292,  292,  303,  303,  319,  321, 

County  Court  332, 

Preamble  and  Article  1 

County  and  district  offices  356, 

Leave  to  sit  again  refused 

Leave  to  sit  again  granted 

Xew  counties 

Louisville  chancery  court 

Legislative  department,  437,  4S5,  497, 

544, 
Conciliation,  courts  of — 

Irwin's  resolution 

Report  of  committee  on 
Constables,  jurisdiction  of  392, 

Constitution,  mode  of  amending — 

Thompson's  resolution  on  correct  57, 

Ameudnieuts    to,    submission    to    the 
people 

Amendments  by  the  legislature,  Jack- 
son's resolution 

Talbott's    resolution   on   the  mode  of 
amending 

Clarke's  resolution,    in  opposition   to 
all  modes  of  specific  amendment 

Thompson's    substitute    for    report   of 
committee 

M.  P.  Marshall's  proposition 

Chenault's  proposition 

Report  of  the  committee  on 

Turner's  substitute 

Edwards'  plan 

Kavanaugh's  plan 
Convention,  Act  calling 

Organization  of 

Officers  of,  debate  concerning 
Copelin,  Benjamin, 
Corporations — Banks  of  issue — 

Machen's  amendment 

Liability  of  stockholders  (Boyd's) 

Liability  of  stockholders  (Hamilton's) 
County  Courts — article  reported 

Report  of  the  committee  of  thirty 

Considered  in  convention         695,  700, 

Meriwetlier's    proposed   substitute  for 
the  report 

Lisle 's  proposed  substitute  for  the  re- 
port 696, 

Proctor's  amendment 

G.  W.  Johnston's  amendment 

Turner's  amendment  706, 

Gray  renewed  Turner's  proposition 

Hamilton's  proposition 

Talbott's  proposition 

Number  of  judges 

How  appointed  and  when 

140 


841, 
842, 


292 
319 

350 
377 
377 
434 
435 
994 
190 

,  80 
144 
168 
222 
280 
332 
334 
356 
363 
377 
425 
417 
428 
529 
560 

206 
996 
403 

953 

25 

403 

947 

991 

992 

800 

827 

987 

987 

989 

910 

9 

10 

11 

10 

640 
836 
836 
127 
437 
713 

695 

718 
698 
702 
707 
713 
716 
716 
716 
716 


County  Courts — Article  reported — 

Who  are  eligible  716 

Jurisdiction  716 

State  to  be  divided,  and  how  716 

How  the  office  may  be  vacated  717 

Judges  subject  to  indictment,  dec,  717 

GhoTson's  amendment  717 

Rudd's  amendment  717 

"When  towns  may  have  separate  courts    718 
County  Courts,  construction  of — 

Rogers'  resolution  399 

Meriwether's  substitute  offered  for  ar- 
ticle 391 
County  Attorney                              356,  361,  363 
County  and  District  Offices — 

Article  reported  111 

Considered  in  committee  of  the  whole  356 

363,  363,  377 

Leave  to  sit  again,  refused  377 

Article   amended  in    convention,  379,  391 

392,  403,  413,  420 

Counties,  restriction  in  the  formation  of,  56,  980 

Committee  appointed  thereon  221 

Article  reported  262 

Article  considered  in  committee  of  the 

whole  417 

Courts  of  Justice — 

Report  of  the  committee  on  435 

Courts  of  Conciliation — 

Irwin's  resolution  206 

Report  of  select  committee  996 

Court  of  Appeals — 

Turner's  resolution,  respecting  25 

Article  reported  60,  127 

Article  considered,  148,  155,  156,  166,  163 

178,   178,   190,    191.    206,  207,  218,  219 

220,    221,   222,    232.   234,  245,  246,  261 

263,    279.   280,   292,   292,  303,  303,  319 

321,    332,    334,    350,   352,  356,  640,  650 

Motion  to  re-consider  vote  making  four 

judges  699 . 

Motion  to  close  debate  on  amendment  to  167 
Resolution  to  close  debate  in  commit- 
tee of  the  whole  262 
Triplett's  suggestion  to  refer  to  joint 

committee  353 

Referred  to  joint  committee  on  courts 

of  justice  355 

Report  of  joint  committee  on  435 

Judges  of,  term  of  office,  and  how  re- 
moved 640 
Judges,  number  of  641 
Judges,  how  elected  651 
Judges'  vacancy,  how  filled  651 
Judges,  qualification  of  651 
Where  held  651 
Clerk  of,  how  elected,  term  of  office  653 
Clerk,  certificate  of  qualification  652 
Clerk,  vacancy,  how  filled  652 
Proposition    to  provide  for  a  special 

term  of  861 

Provision  for  special  term  of  922 

Curd,  Edward,  821 

Cowper,  William,  11 

Davis,  Garrett,  18,    19,   20,  24,  29,  36,  39,  41 

4S,    53,    220.  250,  288,  297,  318,  325,  345 

361,  491,  494,  521.  553,  556,  586,  596,  606 

622,  624,  630,  685,  690,  691,  702,  722,  724 

730,  785.  787.  796,  806,  814,  839,  856,  857 

859,  867,   868,   971,  972,   973,  996.  1001, 

1002,  1024,  1026,  1043 


1114 


686 
690 


702 


785 


787 
856 
859 


Davis,  Garrett — 

Resolution  to  disqualify  delegates  for 

office  19 

Resolution  respecting  naturalized  citi- 
zens 29 

Resolution  on  circuit  and  other  courts      41 

Amendment  proposed  to  court  of  ap- 
peals article,  and  remarks  on  inde- 
pendent judiciary  220,  318 

Speech  on  independent  judiciary,  250,  261 

Amendments  proposed  to  report  on  le- 
gislative department  556,  596 

Remarks  on  tlie  proposition  to  district 
cities  491,  586 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  606 

Amendment  to,  and  remarks  on,  circuit 
court  report— writs  of  error  in  crim- 
inal cases 

Remarks  on  writs  of  error  and  appeals 
in  criminal  cases 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  county 
courts 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  the  executive 
department  723,  724 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  create  debt 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 
cities  and  towns  in  the  creation  of 
debt  > 

Amendment,  asserting  property  in 
slaves 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  conven- 
tion over  property 

Amendment  to  the  report  on  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation,  972, 1001, 1026 

Resolution  of  instruction,  in  relation 
to  foreigners  996 

Remarks  on  his  resolution  in  regard  to 
right  of  suffrage  to  foreigners  1002 

Rejoinder  on  same  subject  1042 

Debates,  official  report  of — 

Motion  to  subscribe  for  considered  28 

Debate — 

Resolution  toclose,on  Hardin's  amend- 
ment to  court  of  appeals  article  167 

Resolution  to  close  on  the  article  in 
committee  of  the  whole  262 

Debts  of  Cities — 

Rudd's    resolution    on   power  to  con- 
tract 59,  112 
Debts- 
Resolution  to  limit  power  of  general 
assembly  to  contract  36,  69 

James'  proposition  in  relation  to  power  977 

State,  resolution  to  appoint  select  com- 
mittee on  55 
Delegates,  list  of  10 

Oath  of  11 

Davis'  resolution   to  disqualify  for  of- 
fice 19 
Desha,  Lucius,   10,  17,  144,  245,  305,  401,  402 

601,  614,  616,  617,  620,  637,  639,  777,  935 
959,  969,  1001 

Reported  article  on  militia  144 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 601 

Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  voters  617 

Resolution  and  remarks  on  representa- 
tion 637 

Remarks  on  his  proposition  for  appor- 
tioning representation  969 


Discussion  of 'propositions  not  referred — 

Resolution  respecting  25 

Disqualify  Delegates  for  Office — 

Resolution  to  19 

Divorces,  section  in  regard  to  625 

Dixon,  Archibald,  19,  24,  25,  36,  44,  53,  57,  79 

80,82,85,  97,  103,  112,  113,  115,  130,  131 

135,  136,  1S7,  138,  184,  219,  221,  240,  244 

295,  297,  302,  309,  331,  332,  357,  375,  376 

377,  378,  393,  394,  39H,  400,  410,  433,  434 

450,  481,  491,  561,  564,  565,  566,  567,  605 

613,  617,  629,  630,  668.  675,  679,  691,  722 

725,  731,  732,  733,  735,  779.  780,  787,  794 

796,  804,  805,  1064,  1066 

Resolution   on  discussing  propositions 

before  reference  25 

Resolutions  on  elective  judiciary        36,  58 
Resolution,    substitute   for  Davis'   on 

naturalization  36 

Resolutions,      inviolability     of    slave 
property,   debate  thereon,   112,  123,  128 

138 
Speech  on  130,  138 

Remarks  on   Turner's  slavery  resolu- 
tions 80,  82 
Remarks  on  Turner's   slavery    resolu- 
tions                                                 97,  101 
Vote  for,  for  the  office  of  President  of 

the  convention  15 

Speech  on  the  removal    and  appoint- 
ment of  appellate  judges  184 
Speech  on  the  appellate  court  judiciary  240 
Amendment  proposed  to  bill  of  rights     377 
Discharged  from  select  committee  on 
the  powers  of  the  general  and  state 
governments  434 
Remarks  on  proposition  to  restrict  the 

representation  of  cities  and  towns  450 
Remarks  on  Morris' proposition  to  dis- 
trict cities  481,  561,  567 
Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  605 
Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  voters  617 
Claims    against    the    state — Williams' 

amendment  629 

Remarks  on  the  re-eligibility  of  circuit 

judges  668 

Remarks  on  appeals    in  criminal  cases  675 

679 
Remarks  on  the  right  of  challenge  in 

the  commonwealth,  in  criminal  cases  690 
Remarks  on  the  report  on  the  executive 

department  722 

Remarks  on  James'  proposition  in  re- 
gard to  tolls  779 
Remarks  on  trial  by  jury                           796 
Remarks  on  his  proposition  to  add  to 

the  bill  of  rights  804,  805 

Remarks  in  opposition  to  returning  to 
the  capital  to  meet  again  10o4,  1066 

Doorkeeper — Election  of  17 

Vote  for  re-examined  17 

Dudley,  James,  207,  733,  914 

Suggestions  on  the  slavery  question        914 
Dueling — Root's  resolution  on  36 

Thompson's  resqlution  on  57 

James  resolution  on  67 

Report  of  the  committee  concerning        790 
Bullitt's  amendment  to  report  815 

Motion  to  re-consider  vote  adopting  ar- 
ticle in  regard  to  827 
Proctor's  amendment  830 


1115 


Dneling — 

Penalty  for  being  engaged  in  831 

Taylor's  amendment  1087 

Dunavan,  Chasteen  T.,  68,  717,  798,  930,  1000 

1026 
Resolution  on  ad  valorem  taxation  68 

Resolution  to  hold  night  sessions  1026 

Education — Report  of  Committee  on  377 

Considered  in  convention  880,  910 

Edwards,  Benjamin  F.,  434,  862 

Resolution,  mode  of  amending  the  con- 
stitution 862 
Election— Of  President  15 
Of  secretary  and  assistant  secretary  16 
Of  sergeant-at-arms  '  16 
Of  doorkeeper  17 
Of  appellate  judges,  time  of  305 
Of  appellate  judges,  by  ballot  312,  318 
Of   officers    of    government.    Turner's 

resolutions  respecting  24 

Turner's  amendment  respecting  974 

Proposition   to  change   day  of  holding  438 

Time  of  electing  representatives      438,  442 

Election  districts  435 

Manner  of  holding  801 

Return  of  officers  in  974 

Suffrage,  C.  A.  Wickliffe's  resolution  36,  57 

Elliott,  Milford,  11 

Enrollment— Committee  on  appointed  1071 

Evening  and  morning  sessions — 

Resolution  to  hold  37,  166 

Executive  and  ministerial  offioes — 

Article  reported  111 

Executive  Department — 

Report  of  the  committee  on 
Report  considered  in  convention     719, 
Executive,  how  elected  and  term  of  of- 
fice 
Executive,  ineligible 
Power  to  fill  vacancies 
Concerning  his    power  of  pardon — T. 

J.  Hood's  amendment 
Power  to  convene  legislature 
When  the  office   of  Governor  becomes 

vacant,  how  filled 
Contested  election  for  Governor,  how 
decided 
Exemption  from  execution — 
Proctor's  resolution 


434 

729 

719 
719 
720 

720 
729 

729 

733 

206 


16.  673 


80 


Forrest,  Green, 

Franchise  of  Immigrants  from  States — 

Barlow's  resolution 
Freedom  of  the  Press — 

Article  securing  796 

James'  amendment  802 

Gaither,  Nathan,    55,    56,    144,   403,  410,  719 

730,  936,  937,  971,  974,  1090 

Resolution  and  speech  on  the  powers  of 

the  general  ana  state  governments        403 
Amendment  concerning  power  of  legis- 
lature to  prohibit  the  importation  of 

Garfielde,  Selucius,  90,  401,  484,  558,  619,  747 
790,  808,  858.  961 
Remarks  on  Turner's  slavery  resolution    90 
Resolution  and  remarks  relative  to  le- 
gislative representation  '558 
Remarks  on  Morris'  proposition  to  dis- 
trict cities  484 
Remarks    on    the   report    on    county 
courts                                                    706 


Garfielde,  Selucius — 

Remarks  on  the  provision  excluding 
ministers  of  the  gospel  from  the  le- 
gislature 747 
Amendment  and  remarks  on  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation                     961 
Garrard,  James  H.,  28.  29,  66,  69,  80,  280,  314 
321,  334,  392,  396,  402.  428,  497,  502,  600 
637,  714,  737,  753,  793,  794,  830,  831,  970 
975,  977,  996,  999,  1026,  1028,  1071,  1090 
Resolution  calling  for  list  of  voters    69,  80 
Reply  to   Lindsey,  on  the  question  of 

city  representation  502 

Remarks  and  propositions  on  the  ap- 
portionment of  representation  600,  637 
970,  999,  1026,  1028 
Resolution,  giving  power  to  President 
to  issue  a  writ  of  election  to  fill  va- 
cancies, should  any  occur  before  final 
adjournment  1071 

General  Assembly — time  of  meeting  789 

Qualification  of  members  790 

Oath  of  members  790 

Who  are  eligible  as  members  792 

Powers  and  duties  792 

Governor — 

Proposition  limiting  his  power  to  re- 
mit fines  and  forfeitures  671,  720 
Liable  to  impeachment  789 
How  elected  719 
When  vacant,  how  filled  729 
In  case  of  contested  election,  how  de- 
cided 733 
Power  to  pardon,  persons  convicted  for 

dueling  1087 

Power  to  veto  legislative  resolution  to 
remove  judges  216 

Grovemment,  receipts  and  expenditures  of — 

Resolution  calling  for  246,  262 

Gough,  Thomas  J.,  H 

Gholson,   Richard  D.,   28,  30,   31,  36,  58,  65, 
127,  144,  147,  181,  184,  207,  279,  280,  293 
297,  308,  309,  310,  332,  356,  358,  362,  379 
381,  383,  385,  394,  397,  400,  403,  411,  413 
439,  570.  595,  596,  610,  613,  615,  642,  651 
652,  671,  691,  694,  717,  731,  753,  758,  779 
780,  806,  857,  879,  884,  905,  907,  908,  909 
965,  977,  993  1025,  1054 
Resolution   on   courts,   special  plead- 
ings, «tc.,  36 
Resolution  referred  to  special  committee    57 
Report  from  committee,  article  codifi- 
cation, <te.,                                               127 
Resolution,  certificate  of  election  best 

certificate  of  qualification  for  office    144 
Remarks  thereon  147 

Motion  to  discharge  committee  of  the 

whole  therefrom  411,413 

Amendment  proposed  to  report  on  le- 
gislative department  596 
Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  610 
Remarks  on  the  qualifications  of  voters  615 
Remarks  on  the  court  of  appeals  642 
Remarks  on  appeals  in  criminal  cases  678 
Amendment    and   remarks  on  county 

court  report  717 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  contract  debt  758 
Remarks  on  James'  proposition  in  re 

gard  to  tolls  779 

Proposition  on  law  reform  880 


1116 


Gholson,  Richard  D. — 

Remarks  on  common  schools  884 

Remarks  on  his  proposition  of  law  re- 
form 905,  908 
Amendment  to  proposition  fixing  num- 
ber of  senators  and  representatives       977 
Proposition  to  abolish  the  board  of  in- 
ternal improvement  1025 
Remarks  on    proper  mode  of  submit- 
ting the  constitution  to  the  people  1054 
Gray,  Ninian  E.,  10.  28,  30,  32,  54,  61,  67,  171 
219,  262.  298,  379,  397,  398,  439,  442,  544 
580,  584,  598,  615,  619,  620,  623,  625,  627 
630,  639,  641,  649,  650.  659,  669,  683,  707 
713,  775,  792,  799,  826,  831,  832,  834,  837 
838,  854,  920,  965,  988,  989,  992,  1000,  1072 
Resolution  on   mode  of  amending  the 

constitution  67 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges     171 
Amendment  to  report  on  legislative  de- 
partment 598 
Remarks  on  apportionment  of   repre- 
sentation                       580,  584,  598,  965 
Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  voters  615 
Remarks  on  the  subject  of  divorces         627 
Resolution,  ad  valorem  taxation  639 
Remarks  on  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals 649 
Remarks  on  the  report  concerning  cir- 
cuit courts                                               659 
Remarks  on  county  court  report             707 
Amendment  to  county  court  report  713 
Remarks  on  restricting  the  power  of 

the  legislature  to  contract  debt  775 

Amendment  prohibiting  specific  tax      831 
Remarks  on  prohibiting  specific  taxa- 
tion _        832,  838 
Remarks  on  the  slave   question,   (his 

substitute  for  A.  K.  Marshall's)  920 

Remarks  on  mode  of  amending  the  con- 
stitution 989 
Proposition    to    submit   the    mode   of 
amending,  <fec.,  to  the  people              1072 
Guthrie,  James,  11,  12,  13,  15,  39.  92,  155,  156 
157,  168,  217,  219,  267,  289,  294,  298,  305 
310,  318,  338,  358,  364,  365,  373,  379,  394 
398,413,  415,  420,  424,  428,  431,  433,  444 
446,469,  471,  478,  479,  497,  502.  521,  522 
523,  543,  554,  557,  560,  570,  579,  586,  613 
640,  685,  719,  758,  766,  777,  799,  805,  854 
856,  857,  1083,  1086 
Elected  President  15 
Address  on  his  election  15 
Speech  on  Turner's  slavery  resolution      92 
Speech  in  committee  of  the  whole,  on 

the  appellate  judiciary  267 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges  155 

156 
Speech  on  the  power  of  the  Governor 
to  veto  legislative  resolution  to  re- 
move judges  217 
Speech  on  election  of  appellate  judges 

by  ballot  317 

Amendment  proposed  to  report  on  Lou- 
isville chancery  court  429 
Remarks  in  regard  to  county  and  dis- 
trict offices  425 
Remarks  on  the  article  concerning  the 

Louisville  chancery  court    429,  431,  433 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 
the  representation  of  cities,  «kc.,         446 


Guthrie,  James — 

Remarks  on  the  same  subject,  in  reply 

to  Hardin  468 

Remarks  on  the  apportionmeot  of  rep- 
resentation and  slavery,  in  reply  to 
Turner  554 

Speech  on  Morris'  proposition   restrict- 
ing the  representation  of,  and  to  dis- 
trict the  cities  557,  586 
Speech  on  the  basis  of  representation, 

and  qualification  of  voters  613 

Speech  on  the  public  debt — the  power 
of  the  legislature  to  create  a  new 
debt  758,  766 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  define 
the  duties  of  judges  and  juries  in 
criminal  cases  1086 

Made  the   depositoiy  of  one  of  the  en- 
rolled constitutions  during  the  recess  1071 
Valedictory  address  1106 

Vote  of  thanks  to,  as  President  1091 

Hall,  Legislative — 

Use  of  granted  for  a  lecture  80 

Hamilton,  James  P..  68,  69,  167.  383,  400,  420 
616,  639,  640,  705,  716,  801,  827,  836,  905 
Resolution  on  digest  of  laws  68,  69 

Proposition  to   digest  and   revise  the 

statutes,  and  remarks  thereon  639 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  county  courts  705 
Resolution   in  regard  to  fees  of  clerks 

and  sheriffs  420 

Proposition    in  regard  to  liability  of 

holders  of  bank  stock  836 

Remarks  on  his  proposition  to  codify 
and  revise  the  statute  laws  of  the 
Stat€  905 

Hardin,  Ben.,  10,  11,  13,  14,  15,  16,  17,  24,  25 
27,  28,  30,  31,  34,  36,  55,  56,  57,  61,  63 
64,  65,  66,  67,  80,  91,  110,  113,  118,  145 
146,149,  151,  157,  167,  168,  191,  199,  216 
218,  219,  232,  234,  262,  279,  280,  287,  291 
292,  293,  294,  301,  303,  304,  306,  307,  314 
315,319,  321,  322,  325,  326,  327,  330.  331 
332,334,  339,  354,  364,  377,  379,  381,  382 
385,  413,  419,  428,  438,  439,  443,  445,  455 
468,  475,  479,  571,  588,  589,  602,  603,  604 
607,  620,  627,  628,  629,  630.  640,  641,  647 
649,  653,  654,  661,  667,  668,  670.  671,  672 
673,  674,  675,  680,  685,  693.  714,  715.  718 
722,  727,  729,  734,  735,  737,  750,  753,  756 
762,  788,  777,  792,  806,  815,  821,  824,  828 
834,  837,  849,  856,  880,  931,  932,  938,  958 
959,  977,  978,  997,  1026,  1054,  1079,  1080 
1082,  1083,  1087,  1089 
Resolution  to  appoint  select  committee 

on  state  debt  55 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  resolution — invio- 
lability of  slave  property  113,  118 
Remarks  on  Gholson's  resolution,  cer- 
tificate of  qualification  for  office  145,  146 
Remarks  and  motion,  removal  of  judg- 
es by  address  149 
Speech  thereon                  151,  199,  321,  322 
Speech  on  power  of  the  Governor  to  ve- 
to resolution  of  the  legislature  to  re- 
move judges                                           216 
Report    of  article   from  committee  on 

circuit  courts  232 

Remarks  thereon  234 

Remarks  on  eleotion  of  judges  by  bal- 
lot 314,  315 


1117 


629 
647 
654 


661 
675 


Hardin,  Ben. — 

Motion  and  speech,  removal  of  judges 
bv  address  322,  330 

Motion  and  speech,  to  strike  out  two- 
thirds  and  insert  majority  of  legisla- 
ture to  remove  judges  322,  329 

Motion  to  reduce  number  of  judges  331 

Reply  to  Clarke,  on  branching  court  of 
appeals  339 

Remarks  in  favor  of  referring  judiciary 
articles  to  joint  committee  534 

Report  fronicommitt«eon  circuit  courts, 
Louisville  chancery  377 

Amendment  to  report  of  legislative  de- 
partment proposed  468 

Remarks  on  article  concerning  new 
counties  419 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  restriction 
of  the  representation  of  cities  and 
towns  468 

Rejoinder  to  Guthrie  475 

Remarks  on  his  proposition  to  limit 
city  representation  580 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  588 
589,  603,  604,  607 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  divorces        627 

Remarks  on  claims  against  the  com- 
monwealth, Williams'  proposition 

Remarks  on  the  court  of  appeals — clas- 
sihcation  of  delegates 

Remarks  on  the  report  concerning  cir- 
cuit courts 

Remarks  on  qualification  for  circuit 
judge 

Remarks  on  appeals  in  criminal  cases 

Remarks  on  the  right  of  the  common- 
wealth to  challenge  in  criminal  cases  680 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  the  executive 
department  723,  735 

Remarks  on  the  provision  excluding 
clergymen  from  the  legislature  750 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  contract  debt  753 

Remarks  on  the  present  state  debt  762 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  dueling  824,  828 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  specific  tax- 
ation 831,  833 

Specific  taxation,  slavery,  the  Spanish 
affair,  <fec.,  849 

Remarks  on  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee on  education  880 

Remarks  on  giving  the  legislature  the 
power  to  expel  free  negroes  from  the 
state  932 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  933 

Remarks  on  avails  of  slackwater    977,  978 

Reported  claims  allowed  997 

Report  on  claims  for  If  uttall,  in  con- 
tested election  1026 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  take  a 
recess  till  first  day  of  June        1054,  1079 

Resolution  concerning  per  diem  during 
recess  1087 

Hargis,  John,  15,  18,  22,  27,  35,  41.  52,  63,  66 

206,  246,  262,  286,  288.  291,  299,  302,  305 

311,  314,  335,  362,  396,  523,  560,  583,  670 
702,  781,  790,  987 

Resolution — preamble  and  articles  of  a 
constitution  41 

Resolution  calling  for  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures of  government  262 


Hargis,  John — 

Remarks  on  branching  the  appellate 

court  286,  335 

Resolution  and  remarks   relative  to  the 

representation  of  cities  560 

Remarks  on   Chrisman's  resolution  to 
close  the  debate  on  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  legislative  depart- 
ment 523 
Remarks  on  providing  for  the  payment 
of  the  state  debt                                      781 
Hay,  Vincent  S.,                               80,  398,  958 
Resolution   on  the  mode  of  amending 
the  constitution  80 
Helm,  Thomas  J.,  Secretary  16 
Made  the  depository  of  one  of  the  en- 
rolled constitutions                                1071 
Vote  of  thanks  to                                      1091 
Helms,  John  M.,  elected  Doorkeeper  17 
Vote  of  thanks  to                                     1091 
Hendrix,  William,                                            334 
Hood,  Andrew,                                279,  730,  793 
Hood,  Thomas  J.,  33,  34,  54,  63,  92,  434,  585 
625.  627,  628,  669,  692,  716,  720,  722,  726 

910 
Resolution  on  the  pardoning  power  92 

Leave  of  absence  granted  to  434 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 585 
Remarks  on  the  subject  of  divorces  625,  626 
Remarks  on  the  re-eligibility  of  circuit 

judges  669 

Amendment  and  remarks  on  the  report 

on  the  legislative  department  720 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  the  executive 

department  726 

R  .'marks  on  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  education  910 

Hour  of  meeting — 

Rudd's  resolution  respecting  221 

Changed  279 

Huston,  Mark  E.,    15,   66,   156,   168,  178,  191 

207,  222,  234,  263,  272,  280,  292,  303 

Chairman   of  committee  of  the  whole 

on  article  court  of  appeals,  156,  168,  178 

191,  207,  222,  234,  246,  263,  280,  292,  303 

Inviolability  of  slave  property — 

Dixon's  resolution  debated,  112,  123,  128 

138 

[See  slaves  and  slavery.] 

Impeachments — article  concerning  789 

How  tried  789 

Irwin,  Jamts  W.,  10,  11.  12,  17,  19.  43,  54,  56 

57,  67.  70,  92,  101,  145,  147,  167,  206,  207 

262,  306,  354,  364.  396,  397,  398,  399,  401 

444,  445,  540,  558,  570,  579.  584,  594,  596 

597,  616.  619.  620,  635,  668,  716,  770,  777 

786,  947,  960,  971,  977,  996,  1083 

Resolution  on  the  formation  of  new 

counties  56 

Resolution  and  remarksoncivildistricts 

— magistracy  and  revenue  collectors    92 
Remarks  on  his  nomination  of  Greenup 

Keene  for  doorkeeper  17 

Speech  on  Turner's  slavery  resolution     101 
Remarks    on     Gholson's    resolution — 

certificate  of  qualification   for  ofiice    145 
Resolution  and  remarks  on  courts  of 

conciliation  206 

Resolution  and  remarks  on  senatorial 
representation  of  cities,  towns,  <kc.,    540 


1118 


Irwin,  Jaraes  W. — 

Resolution  and  remarks  on  representa- 
tion of  towns  and  cities  570 
Amendments  proposed  to  the  report  on 

legislative  department  444,  697 

Remarks  on   the   basis   of  representa- 
tion 595,  635 
Remarks  on  the  state  debt,  and  power 

of  the  legislature  770 

Report  on  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion 947 
Remarks   in  favor  of  the   minority  re- 
port, concerning  apportionment  960 
Report  on  the  subject  of  courts  of  con- 
ciliation 996 
Jackson.  Alf.  M.,  292,  403,  413,  584,  601,  1002 
Resolution,  common  school  fund  292 
Resolution,   legislative  amendments  to 

constitution  403 

Remarks  on  the  bnsis  of  representation  602 
Plan  for  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion 1002 
James,  Thomas,  16,  17,  67.  Ill,  218,  312,  417 
424,571,  671,  699,  713,  729,  737,  766,  769 
777,  778,  784,  789,  796,  802,  814,  977,  1000 
1025,  1027,  1031,  1052,  1072 
Resolutions  on  dueling  and  lotteries         67 
Resolution  on  retrospective  laws  111 
Resolution  on  appropriations  by  legis- 
lative majorities                                        218 
Chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole 
on  the  proposition  in   regard  to  new 
counties                                                     417 
Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation, 

the  law  of  1833,  and  slavery  573 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  create  debt,  and  the  general 
subject  of  internal  improvement  766 

Proposition  in  regard  to  tolls  777 

Remarks  thereon  778 

Remarks  on  the  liberty  of  the  Press        802 
Remarks  on  his   proposition  in  regard 
to  the  debt-creating  pover  of  the  le- 
gislature 977 
Resolution  to  print  new  constitution     1025 
Resolution  to  postpone  the  effect  of  pe- 
nal laws                                                 1052 
Johnson,  William,  64,  227,  461,  580,  594,  597 
620,  661,  651,  733,  972 
Speech  on  independent  judiciary              227 
Amendment  to  report  on  legislative  de- 
partment, proposed  697 
Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion                                                594,  972 
Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  circuit 
judges  661 
Johnston,    George    W.,   10,    16,   148,  221,  361 
648,  702,  707,  709,  1091 
President,  pro  tempore  10 
Chairman   of  committee  of  the  whole 

on  article  court  of  'appeals  148 

Remarks  on  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals 648 
Remarks  on  the  county  court  report        709 
Amendment  to  county  court  report          713 
Journal  of  proceedings — order  to  print     25,  27 
Judges — 

Qualification  for,  «fec..  Turner's  resolu- 
tion respecting  25 
Appellate,  removal  of  by  address  149,  216 


216 


669 
663 


Judges — 

Removal  of  by  legislative  majority 
Power  of  the  Governor  to  veto  legisla- 
tive resolution  removing  216 
Electioneering  by,  Nuttall's   resolution 

to  prohibit  220 

Qualifications  of  293,  302 

Term  of  service  330,  331 

Hardin's  motion  to  reduce   number  of    331 
Salaries  of  291,  292,  293 

Qualification  of  circuit  661 

Proposition  to  fix  minimum  salary  of      670 
Proposition  to  give  the  legislature  pow 

er  to  increase  the  number  of 
Ineligibility  of 
Of  circuit  court  to  decide  the  law  in 
criminal    cases — Lindsey's    amend- 
ment 835 
Jurors — 

Right  of  the   commonwealth  to  chal- 
lenge in  criminal  cases  675 
Kavanaugh,    George  W.,  26,  68,  175,  283,  291 
312,  334,  360,  508,  589,  620,  639,  650,  692 
693,  709,  716,  773,  788,  789,  837,  862,  953 
977,  1027,  1090 
Resolution  on  committees  26 
Resolution    on    probate    and     county 

courts,  and  justices  of  the  peace  68 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges    175 
Speech  on  court  of  appeals  283 

Speech  on  slavery,   and  the  restriction 

of  the  representation  of  cities 
Remarks  on  biennial  sessions  of  the  le- 
gislature 
Amendment   and  remarks  on  the  com- 
monwealth's   right  of  challenge    in 
criminal  cases 
Remarks  on  the  county  court  report 
Remarks  on  restricting  the  legislature 

in  contracting  debts 
Resolution  for  submitting  the  constitu- 
tion to  the  people,  «fec.. 
Resolution    and    remarks    on   specific 

amendments 
Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  953 
Amendment  in  regard  to  sinking  fund     977 
Proposition  for  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 1027 
Remarks  on  appropriating  proceeds  of 
slack  water  navigation  1090 
Kelly,  Charles  C,    10,    16,  29,  30,  59,  61,  167 
326,  353,  354,  355,  363,  373,  379,  380,  382 
384,  385,  391,  423,  433,  628,  668,  684,  699 
704,  718,  719,  733,  737,  788,  800,  835,  856 
1035,  1052,  1083 
Secretary,  pro  tempore  10 
Resolutions,  series  of  provisions                29 
Resolution,   codification  of  laws,   and 

court  of  appeals  59 

Resolution  to  close  debate  on  Hardin's 

amendment  167 

Resolutions   on    the  Wilmot  Proviso    788 

1052 
Reply  to  Davis,  on  his  Native  Ameri- 
can propositions  1035 
Kentucky  Kiver  Navigation  952 
Lackey,  James  M.,                          921,  972,  999 
Resolution  fixing  the  basis  and  apoor- 

tioning  representation  921,972 

Proposition  for  the  apportionraent  of 
representation  999 


508 
621 


693 
709 

773 

862 
910 


1119 


Lashbrooke,  Peter  363 

Leave  of  absence,  167,  178,  221,  245,  24G.  279 

363,  420,  434 
Legislative  Expenses — 

Resolution  calling  for  auditor's  report 
concerning  707 

Legislature — 

Turner's  resolution  to  prescribe  pow- 
ers of,  ifcc,  24 
Root,s  resolution  to  limit  power  of  to 

contract  debts  36 

Irwin's  resolution  to  limit  members  of    56 
Its    sessions,    pay    of   members,    «tc.. 

Mares'  resolution  56 

Its  sessions,  pay  of  members,  <tc.,  Mer- 
iwether's resolution  57 
Thompson's  resolution  to  limit  power 

of  to  contract  debt  69 

Majority  of  all  elected  to  appropriate — 

James'  resolution  218 

Limitation  of  power  to  borrow  money 

— Boyd's  resolution  279 

Moore's  resolution   concerning  the  ap- 
portionment of  representation  279 
Legislative  Department — 

Report  of  the  committee  on  319 

Report  considered   in  committee  of  the 

whole  437.  455,  497,  529,  544,  560 

Report  considered  in   convention,  596,  603 
618,  639,  738,  769 
Day  of  election  438 

Qualification  of  representatives  444 

Payment  of  state  debt  766 

Power  of  legislature  to  contract  debts    781 
If  debts  are  contracted,  a  tax  shall  be 

laid  to  pay  785 

Power  of  cities  and  towns  to  tax  786 

In  regard  to  re-enacting  laws  788 

Time  of  meeting  of  legislature  789 

Basis  of  representation  937 

James'  proposition  to  restrict  the  power 
of  the  legislature  to  contract  debt        977 
Lindsey,    Thomas  X.,    27,  28,  68,  46,  69,  128 
289,  340,  341,  343,  346,  362,  370,  445,  447 
497,  501,  508,  540,  556,  770,  794,  796,  835 
952,  977,  1083 
Resolutions  on  trial  by  jury,  and  carry- 
ing concealed  weapons  69 
Leave  of  absence                                       128 
Speech  on   branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals                                              340,  346 
Amendment  p/oposed  to  report  of  com- 
mittee on  legislative  department          445 
Remarks  on  the  subject  of  city  repre- 
sentation                                                  497 
Remarks  on  restricting  the  power  of 

the  legislature  to  create  debt  770 

Remarks  on  his  proposition  in  regard 

to  juries  794 

Remarks  on  the  practice,  in  criminal 

cases  835,  1083 

Replvto  Hardin,  on  the  subject  of  the 
Kentucky  river  tolls  952.  977 

Lisle,    Thomas    W.,    279,   438,  440,  644.  663, 
658,  695,  705,  718,  979 
Amendment  proposed  to  report  of  the 
commmittee    on   legislative   depart- 
ment 438 
Remarks  on  the  court  of  appeals  645 
Resolution  and  remarks  on  the  ineligi- 
bility of  circuit  judges  663 


Lisle,  Thomas  W.— 

Remarks  on  report  on  county  courts        C95 
Substitute  for  pan   of  the'  report  on 

county  courts  696,  7l8 

Remarks  on  the  subject    of   common 

schools  979 

List  of  Members  lO 

Louisville  Chancery — resolution  147 

Report  considered  428 

Machen,  Willis    B.,  32,  34,  61,  62,  63,  64,  65 

164,  166,  279.  302,  303,  305,  330,  369,  390 

418,455,  502,  503,  521,  535,  578,  594,  613 

614,  617,  619,  623,  624,  633,  640,  660.  670 
689,  706,  781,  815,  895.  1078 

Speech   on  the  removal  of   appellate 
judges  165,  166 

Resolution — ^book  of  forms  279 

Remarks  on  the  article  concerning  new 
counties  418 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 
city  representation  535 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion 594.  633 

Amendments   concerning  corporations 
— Banks  of  issue  640 

Remarks  on  the  right  of  the  common- 
wealth to  challenge,  in  criminal  cases  681 

Remarks  on  report  on  county  courts        706 

Remarks  on  restricting  the  debt-crea- 
ting power  of  the  legislature  781 

Remarks  on  education  895 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  for  a  recess 
till  first  of  June  1078 

[Mansfield.  George  W.,  352,  528,  641,  719,  729 

730,  733 

Remarks  on  the  eonrt  of  appeals  641 

j  Marshall.  Alexander  K.,  13,  16.  20,  24,  30,  53 
j         66,   189,  311.  321.  334,  337,  338,  354.  355 

556,597,  620,  623,  641.  642.  647.  651,  660 

669,  785,  787,  790,  792.  793.  796,  797,  798 
!         801,  814,  821,  831,  837,  838,  839,  858,  679 
919,  920,  931,  993,  994.  1001.  1065 

Amendment    to  sections  of  article  on 
court  of  appeals  321 

Amendment  to  article  on  court  of  ap- 
peals considered  334.337.354,355 

Remarks  on  restricting  the  representa- 
tion of  cities  597 

Remarks    on   the   organization  of  the 
court  of  appeals  641 

Personal  explanation  669 

Remarks  on  trial  by  jury  798 

Resolution  in  regard  to  the  time  of  elec- 
tions 801 

Remarks  on  the  provision  in  regard  to 
dueling  821 

Remarks  on  specific  tajration  on  slaves, 
for  the  supjwrt  of  slavery  839 

Amendment  and  remarks  in  regard  to 
slavery  858 

Amendment  and  remarks  in  regard  to 
emancipation  919 

Remarks  on  C.  A.  Wickliffe's  proposi- 
tion conaeniing  free  negroes  931 

Remarks  on  the  mode  of  calling  anoth- 
er convention  993 

Correction  of  remarks,  as  reported  on 
the  slave  question  1001 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  take  a 
recess  till  first  of  June  1065 


1120 


Msu-.sliiill,  Martin  P.,  33,  49,  120,  185,  189,  191 

279,  653,  685,  751,  788,  800,  839,  840,  1057 

1080,  1089 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  resolution — invio- 
lability of  slave  property  120 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges  185 

191 

Speech  on  the  report  concerning  circuit 
courts  655 

Leave  of  absence  to  685 

Remarks  on  the  provision  excluding 
clergymen  from  the  legislature  751 

Resolution  and  remarks  on  the  mode  of 
amending  new  constitution  800 

Remarks   on   the  proposition  to  re-as- 
semble on  the  first  of  June  1057 
Marshall.  William  C,   149,  316,  354,  643,  650 

668,  670,  671,  684,  685,  689,  692,  703,  706 
724,  790,  841,  843,  1069 

Remarks  on  election  of  appellate  judges 
by  ballot  316 

Remarks  on  the  court  of  appeals  643 

Remarks  on  the  re-eligibility  of  circuit 
judges  668 

Remarks  on  the  commonwealth's  right 
of  challenge  in  criminal  cases  689 

Remarks  on  report  on  county  courts         703 

Remarks  on  specific  taxation  and  slave- 
ry 843 

Remarks    on  the  proposition  to  re-as- 
semble on  the  first  of  June  1069 
Marshall,  William  N.,                       16,  111,  246 

Resolution,  homestead  exemption  111 

Maupin,  Robert  D.,  994,  1056,  1078,  1090 

Appeared  and  took  his  seat  994 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  re-as- 
semble on  the  first  of  June  1057 
Mayes,  Richard  L.,  28,  34,  56,  59,  64,  65,  193 

221,288,  300,  302,  318,  359,  360,  361,  362 

392,  398,  402,  420,  440,  592,  672,  673,  675 

689,  699,  704,  719,  734,  761,  790,  901,  902 
907,  909,  971,  980,  986 

Resolution  on  the  legislature,  its  ses- 
sions, pay  of  members,  justices  of 
the  peace,  and  county  courts  56 

Resolution  in  opposition  to  printing  59 

Speech  on  the  removal  of  appellate 
judges  193 

Remarks  on  the  article  concerning  new 
counties  419 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  592 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  Governor 
to  remit  fines  673 

Remarks  on  the  commonwealth's  right 
of  challenge  in  criminal  cases  673 

Resolution  to  adjourn  on  Thanksgiving 
day  699 

Remarks  on  report  on  county  courts        705 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  law-reform, 
and  a  codification  of  the  statutes         902 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 971 

Remarks  on  the  organization  of  new 
counties  980 

McClure,  Nathan,  69,  271,  730,  1029 

Resolution  ou  filling  vacant  executive 
chair  69 

Resolution  on  the  death  of  Bryan  Y. 
Owsley  261 

Proposition  for  the  opportionment  of 
representation  ' 


1029 


McHenry,   John  H.,  12,  17,  19,  25,  29,  39,  41 
50,  51,  59,  80,  168,  279,  280,  292,  299,  306 
356,361,  362,  363,  370,  380,  420,  440,  444 
466,521,  592,  614,  616,  620,  714,  720.  788 
790,  791,  1071,  1082,  1090 
Resolution  on  mode  of  amending  con- 
stitution, and  slavery  41 
Resolution   on  representation,  and  ses- 
sions of  legislature                                  59 
Report  from   committee  on  miscellane- 
ous   provisions — preamble  and  arti- 
cle 1                                                         168 
Report  from  committee  on  miscellane- 
ous   provisions — article    concerning 
impeachments                                           272 
Amendment  to  report  of  committee  on 

legislative  department  444 

Amendment  to  report  on  representation 

of  cities  582 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 
representation  of  cities  and  towns        466 
Members,  seats  of — 

Resolution  to  ballot  for  25 

List  of  10 

Oath  of  11 

Memorial  of  Clergymen — 

Robinson  and  Brush  630 

Ministers  of  the  Gospel — 

Proposition  to  exclude  from  the  legisla- 
ture discussed  738 
Meriwether,   David,    10,  14,  16,  17,  18,  19,  27 
28,   29,  30,   31,   33,  37,  38,  39,  48,  55,  56 
57,  59,  69,  70,  76,  79.  88,  89,  144,  218,  262 
363,  279,  291,  293,  296,  297,  300,  301,  391 
397,  398,  399,  414,  415,  417,  420,  423,  427 
428,  437,  453,  454,  455,  497,  503,  544,  561        J 
570,  571,  583,  596,  615,  622,  670,  671,  685 
695,  700,  701,  786,  792,  800,  828.  829,  831 
832,  835,  836,  837.  841,  855,  856,  909,  914 
920,   935,  991,  993,   996,  1031,  1071,  1090 
Resolution  on  the  legislature,  terms  of 
members,  their  pay,  day  of  general 
election,  and  manumission  of  slaves      57 
Reported  article  on  slavery  69 
Speech    on    Turner's    resolutions    on 

slavery  76,  77,  79,  88,  89 

Substitute  for  article  on  county  courts    391 
Amendment,     separate    representation 
and  municipal  regulation  of  cities    414 

415 
Amendment  to  report  concerning  coun- 
ty and  district  offices  420 
Chairman   of  committee   of  the  whole 
on  legislative  department.  437,  455,  497 
503,  529,  544,  560,  570 
Resolution  in  regard  to  order  of  busi- 
ness                                                        453 
Remarks  on  proposition  in  regard  to 

county  and  district  offices  423,  427 

Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  voters    615 
Substitute  for  the  report  of  the  joint 

committee  on  county  courts  695 

Remarks  on  dueling  828 

Report  on  the  mode  of  amending  the 

constitution  841 

Remarks  on  slavery  914 

Resolution  for  taking  the  legal  voters 

in  1850  1031 

Resolution  for  depositing  the  new  en- 
rolled constitutions  with  the  Presi- 
dent and  Secretary  1071 


i 


1121 


Messenger — motion  to  appoint  56 

Militia — article  reportea  144 

Article  considered,  amended  and  pass- 
ed 789 
Mitchell,  William    D.,  17,   18,  19,  43,  63,  139 

147.  245,  246,  ?59,  360,  371.  o72,  373,  380 

392,  399,  494.  578,  585,  5?9,  607.  651,  654 

662,  671,  683,  692,  693,  699.  791,  804,  810 

814,  857,  863,  923,  942,  1061,  10S6,  1090 

1091 

Speech  on  Turner's  slavery  resolution     139 

Remarks  on  Gholson's  resolution — 
certificate  of  qualification  for  office     147 

Speech  on  judicial  re-eligibility  246 

Resolution,  submission  to  the  people      392 

Remarks  on  Morris'  proposition  to  dis- 
trict cities  494,  585 

Remarks  en  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion 607,  942 

Remarks  on  the  qualification  for  circuit 
judges  662 

Remarks  on  the  right  of  the  common- 
wealth to  challenge  in  criminal  cases  694 

Remarks  on  the  bill  of  rights  810 

Remarks  on  the  powers  of  the  conven- 
tion 862 

Resolution  touching  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  prohibit  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves  923 
Mode  of  proceeding  preliminary  19 
Moore,  Thomas  P.,                            279,  652,  901 

Resolution  to  limit  legislative  power 
to  borrow  money  279 

Representation  of  counties  279 

Morris,   John  D.,  304,  378,  479,  556,  565,  566 

579,  587,  596,  621,  668,  965,  966,  968,  1028 

1068 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  amendment  to  the 
bill  of  rights  378 

Resolution  in  regard  to  the  representa- 
tion of  towns  and  cities  479 

Renewed  his  proposition  in  regard  to 
representation  of  cities,  <fec.,  579 

Remarks  on  his  resolution  to  district 
cities  and  towns  479 

Remarksinexplanationof  his  resolution  557 

Remarks  in  reply  to  Dixon  on  the  reso- 
lution to  district  cities,  and  to  the 
Louisville  Journal  565 

Remarks  on  biennial  sessions  621 

Remarks  on  the  committee's  report,  ap- 
portioning representation  966 

Remarks   on  the   proposition  to  re-as- 
semble on  first  of  June  1068 
Naturalized  citizens — 

Who  qualified  to  vote,  <te., — Davis' 
resolution  29,  996 

Dixon's  substitute  for  Davis'  resolution    36 
Kesbitt,   James  M.,  32,  92,  177,  295,  301,  359 

401,402,  403,  597,  616,  6l7,  670,  671,  702 
707,  802,  837 

Resolution  on  probate  courts  92 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges    177 

Speech  on  restricting  representation  of 
cities  597 

Speech  on  the  qualification  of  voters      616 

Speech  on  report  on  county  courts  703,  707 
Newcum,  Jonathan  279 

Newspapers — 

Motion  to  subscribe  for  considered      28,  30 

34,  61,  66 

141 


Newspapers — 

Select  committee  on,  appointed  30 

Report  of  30 

Newell,  Hugh.  58,  59,  371,  389,  398,  401,  441 

539,  594,  620,  725,  730,  734.  735,  986 

Opposition  to  printing  58,  59 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  539 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  the  executive 

department  725 

Nuttall,  Elijah  F.,  14,  19,  20.  21,  27,  66,  67, 
77,  90.  92,  103,  162.  163,  164,  165,  191 
218,  220,  228,  293,  306,  311,  318,  S58,  368 
369,  373,  364,  595.  609,  620,  658,  724,  730 
731,  777,  792,  817,  857,  936,  969,  1060 
1078,  1086,  1087 
Election  contested  55,  55,  56 

Remarks  on  his  election  contested  66 

Speech    on    Turner's     resolutions    on 

slavery  77,  78,  90,  103,  106 

Speech  on  trial  by  jury,  and  change  of 

venue  99 

Speech    on   the   removal   of  appellate 

judges  162,  163,  164,  165 

Speech    on    report  from  committe  on 

elections,  respecting  seat  of  190 

Amendment  to  court  of  appeals  article 

—electioneering  judges  220,  318 

Speech  on  branching  appellate   court    228 
Speech  on  restricting  the  representation 

of  cities  519 

Speech  on  the  basis  of  representation    595 

610 
Speech  on  circuit  court  report  658 

Speech  on  dueling  817 

Speech  on  the  proposition  to  re-assem- 
ble on  first  of  June  1060 

Oath  of  Members  11 

Of  members  of  the  general  assembly      790 

Office- 
Davis'  resolution    to  disqualify    dele- 
gates for,  considered  19,  24 

Officers  of  the  Convention — 

Discussion  thereon  11 

Resolution  to  elect  15 

Election  of  15,  16,  17 

Resolution  regulating  ballot  for  16 

Order,  Rules  of — 

Resolution  to  appoint  committee  on  17 

Resolution  considered  18 

Committee  on,  appointed  19 

Report  from  committee  27 

Report  considered  37,  40,  43,  55 

Report  amended,  as  to  quorum  55 

Of  business— Meriwether's  proposition 
to  regulate  453 

Organization  of  Convention  10 

Owsley,  Bryan  Y. — 

Adjourned  to  attend  funeral  of  261 

Parents  and  Guardians- 
Resolution   calling  for  return  of  chil- 
dren and  property  246 
Resolution  answered  261 

Petition— common  schools  246 

Pollard,  Henry  B.,  363,  1072 

Power  to  send  for  persons  and  papers — 

Coiumittitee  on  public  debt  292 

Powers  of  the  General  and  State  Govern- 
ments— 

Gaiiher's  resolution  and  speech  403 

Select  committee  thereon  411 

Leave  to  defer  report  till  Jun,e  1090 


1122 


Prayer — resolutiou  to  invite  clergy  30 

Closing  prayer  1107 

President — election  of  15 

Address  on  his  election  15 

Valedictory  1106 

Vote  of  thanks  to  1091 

Right  to  participate  in  debate  consid- 
ered 37,  39 
Preston,  William,  15,  26,  27,  29,  43,  68,  114 
115,  152,  244,  291,  297,  302,  315,  316,  317 
398,  399,  400,  401,  414,  415,  417,  420,  424 
427,  430,  432,  433,  443,  444,  445,  453,  456 
485,  486,  579,  580,  586,  596,  604,  614,  617 
622.  623,  626,  693,  718,  754,  764,  781,  783 
784,786,  787,  788,  791,  792,  809,  810,  822 
838,  856,  876,  905,  937,  958,  975,  1017,  1031 
Resolution,  classification  of  officers  43 
Resolution  on  elections  by  ballot  68 
Remarks  on  Dixon's  resolution — invio- 
lability of  slave  property  114 
Remarks  on  Hardin's  motion,  removal 

of  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  152 
Remarks  on  re-eligibility  of  judges  244 
Remarks  on   the  election  of  appellate 

judges  by  ballot  315,316,317 

Remarks  on  Meriwether's  amendment 
— separate  reprssentation  and  muni- 
cipal regulation  of  cities  414,  415 
Amendment  to  report  concerning  coun- 
ty and  district  offices  423 
Remarks  in  regard  to  Louisville  chan- 
cery court                                       430,  432 
Remarks  in  reply  to  Turner,  on  the  're- 
striction of  cities  and  towns'               453 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 

representation  of  citias  and  towns  456 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  district 

cities  586 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  604 

605,  937 
Remarks  on  voting  in  precincts  615 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  divorces         626 
Amendment   to  report   on    Louisville 

chancery  court  718 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  create  debt  764,  782 
Amendment  in  regard  to  the  power  of 

cities  and  towns  to  create  debt  786 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  proposed  amend- 
ment to  the  bill  of  rights  809 
Remarks  on  the  proposition   in  regard 

to  dueling  822 

Remarks    on    the    bill  of  rights — the 

right  of  property  876 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  for  a  codifi- 
cation of  the  laws  905 
Substitute  for  part  of  committee's  re- 
port on  the  apportionment  of  repre- 
sentation 975 
Remarks  in  reply  to  Davis,  on  Native 
Americanism                                         1017 
Price,  Johnson,         17,  683.  699,  719,  735,  830 
Motion  to  re-consider  the  vote  adopting 
fourth  section  of  the  report  on  the 
court  of  appeals                                     699 
Printers — election  of  24 
Instructions  to,  in  regard  to  journal      1090 
Printing  of  Resolutions — 

Opposition  to  58,  59,  59,  60 

Proceedings,  Journal  of — 

Order  to  print  25 


Proceedings,  Journal  of — 

Order  to  delay  the  binding  of  1090 

Proctor,  Larkin  J.,  16,  166,  167,  206,  279,  280 
359,  360,  363,  585,  692,  698,  700,  717,  727 
780,  827,  830,  837,  842,  952,  1028,  1081 
Resolution  to  hold  evening  sessions  166 
Resolution  to  change  hour  of  meeting, 

adopted  279 

Resolution,  exemption  from  execution    206 
Speech  on  the  court  of  appeals  280 

Speech  in  favor  of  the  restriction  of  city 

representation  531,  585 

Amendment  and  remarks  on  the  report 

on  county  courts  698 

Amendment   and  remarks  on  the  pro- 
vision in  regard  to  dueling  827 
Remarks  on  the  mode  of  amending  the 

constitution  842 

Remarks  on  the  subject  of  education        885 
Resolution  providing  for  book  of  ab- 
stractions 952 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  re-as- 
semble on  first  of  June                          1081 

Punishment  by  Expatriation — 

Of  colored  felons  103 

Quorum — two-thirds  rule  amended  55 

Qualifications  for  Office — 

Certificate  of  election  best  certificate  of  144 

147,  411 
Of  appellate  judges  293 

Clerks'  certificate  of         362,  373,  379,  380 
Of  judges  of  circuit  courts  661 

Register  of  Land  Office — 

How  elected,  and  term  of  office  734 

Religious  Test — 

Turner's  resolution  respecting  25 

Reporter — resolution  to  admit  26,  29 

Clarke's  explanation  respecting  58 

Reports  of  Debates — 

Motion  to  subscribe  for  28 

Reports  from  Committees — 

On  rules  27 

On  court  of  appeals  60,  127 

On  slavery  69 

On  executive  and  ministerial  offices         111 
On  county  courts  127 

On  militia  144 

On  legislative  department  319 

On  preamble  and  article  1  168,  356 

On  circuit  courts  232 

On  organization  of  new  counties  262 

Select  committee — codification,  legisla- 
tion, &c.,  127 
On    contested    election    from     Henry 

county  190 

On  article  on  general  provisions  350 

On  executive  department  434 

Joint  committee  on  courts  of  justice        435 
On  miscellaneous  provisions  994 

On  courts  of  conciliation  996 

On  claims  997 

Representatives — time  of  electing  438 

Qualification  of  444 

Memorial  concerning  proposition  to  ex- 
clude ministers,  «fec.,  630 
Discussion  thereon  738 

Representation,  Basis    and   Apportionment 
of— 

Clarke's  amendment  455 

Triplett's  amendment  456,  585 

Morris'  proposition  479 


# 


i%-i 


1123 


Representation,  basis  and apporlionmtsit  of — 
Boyd's  proposition  528,  599,  973,  998 

Woodson's  proposition    502,  632,  975,  998 
Irwin's  proposition  540,  576 

Turner's  proposition  541 

Garfielda  s  proposition  558 

Hargis'  proposition  560 

Dixon's  substitute  561,  617 

Rudd's  amendment  583 

Clarke's  proposition  587 

Oholson's  proposition  596 

Gray's  amendment  598 

Apperson's  proposition  618 

Desha's  proposition  637 

C.  A.  WicklifFe's  resolution  684,  976 

Lackey's  proposition  921,  972,  999 

Report  of  committee  on  937 

Irwin's  proposition  947 

Turner's  proposition  963,  976,  1000 

Davis'  amendment  972 

Preston's  substitute  975 

Rogers'  substitute  975 

Thompson's  substitute  976 

Chambers'  substitute  976 

Garrard's  proviso  to  Woodson's  amend- 
ment 999 
Apperson's  amendment                            1000 
Davis'  amendment   [Lackey's]    1001,  1026 
Jackson's  proposition           '                    1002 
Garrard's  amendment  to  report  of  com- 
mittee                                                      1026 
Kavanaugh's  amendment                         1027 
Garrard's  substitute  for  Davis'  proposi- 
tion                                                       1029 
Mitchell's  substitute  for  Davis'  amend- 
ment                                                     1028 
Chambers'    amendment    to    Davis'    a- 

nieudraent  1029 

McClure's  substitute  for  Davis'  amend- 
ment 1029 
Thompson's    substitute   for   Davis'  a- 

mendraent  1029 

James'  amendment  1030 

Mitchell's  motion  to  re-consider   vote 
adopting  James' amendment  1061 

Reporters,  Official — 

Vote  of  thanks  to  1091 

Resolutions — 

To  elect  officers  15 

To  regulate  ballotting  for  16 

C.  A.  WiekliflFe's,  to  appoint  standing 

committees  19 

Waller's,  mode  of  proceeding  19 

Davis',   to  disqualify  delegates  for   of- 
fice 19 
Turner's  proposing  amendments               24 
Dixon's,  aiscussion  of  propositions  not 

referred  25 

Chambers',  to  appoint  standing  com- 
mittees 25 
Kavanaugh's,  to  appoint  standing  com- 

raititees  25 

Thompson's,  to  refer  articles  of  consti- 
tution to  committees  26 
Davis',  respecting  naturalized  citizens    29 

996 
Kelly's,  series  of  provisions  29 

Root's,  respecting  common  school  fund    30 
Dixon's,  on  elective  judiciary  36,  58 

Root's,  on  dueling,  and  state  debts  36 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's,  suffrage  ,  36 


Resolutions — 

Dixon's,  substitute  for  Davis"  on  natu- 
ralization 36 
Gholson's,  series  of,  on  courts,  special 

pleading,  <kc.,  36 

Chambers',  on  referring  to  committees, 

daily  sessions,  «fcc.,  36 

Davis',  on  circuit  courts,  <fec.,  41 

McHenry's,  amending  constitution,  and 

slavery  41 

Bristol's,  mode  of  amending  constitu- 
tion, and  slavery  41 
Harris',  preamble  and  articles  of  a  con- 
stitution 41 
Preston's,  classification  of  officers             43 
Irwin's,  on  the  formation  of  new  coun- 
ties, and  limitation  of  the  members 
of  the  general  assembly                           56 
Mayes',  legislature,  its  sessions,  pay  of 
members,  justices  of  the  peace,  and 
county  courts                                           56 
Thompson's,    on    future    conventions, 

and  dueling  56,  57 

Meriwether's,  legislature,  term  of  mem- 
bers, pay,  day  of  general  election, 
and  manumission  of  slaves  57 

McHenry's,  for  the  appointment  of  a 
committee  of  arrangement  and  revi- 
sion 420 
Apperson's,  designating  committees  58 
Talbott's,    specific     amendments    and 

slavery  58,  69 

Rudd's,  contracting  of  debts  by  cities      59 
McHenry's,  representation,  and' legisla- 
tive sessions  59 
Kelly's,  codification  of  laws,  and  court 

of  appeals  59 

Mayes  ,  against  printing  59 

James',  dueliufi:  and  lotteries  67 

Triplett's,  pardoning  power  67 

Gray's,  mode  of  amending  the  consti- 
tution 67 
Preston's,  elections  by  ballot  68 
Kavanaugh's,  probate  courts,  justices  of 

the  peace,  and  county  courts  68 

Dunavan's,  ad  valorem  taxation  68 

Bowling's,  equal  taxation  68 

Hamilton's,  digest  of  laws,  <fcc.,  68 

Bristow's,  commissioners  to  codify  68 

McClure's,  ou  filling  vacant  executive 

chair  69 

Lindsey's,  trial  by  jury,  and  concealed 

weapons  69 

Garrard's,  calling  for  return  of  voters  69,  80 
Thompson's,  ou   restricting  the  power 

of  the  legislature  to  contract  debts        69 
Barlow's,  franchise  of  immigrants  from 

states  80 

Chrisman's,  ineligibility  for  office,  of 

defaulters  80 

Hay's,  mode  of  amending  constitution    80 
Williams',  trial  by  jury,   peremptory 

challenge  91 

Irwin's,  civil  districts,  magistracy,  and 

revenue  collector  92 

T.  J.  Hood's,  pardoning  power  92 

Nesbitt's,  probate  courts,  92 

O.  A.  WicKliffe's,  punishment  of  color- 
ed felons  103 
Brown's,  school  fund  103 
James',  retrospective  laws'                      111 


1124 


Resolutions — 

W.  N.  Marshall's,  homestead  exemption  112 
Dixon's,  inviolability  of  slave  property  112 
Gholson's,  certificate  of  election  best 

certificate  of  qualification  for  oflSee      144 
Rudd's,  Louisville  chancery  147 

Chambers',  time   of  holding  elections 

and  suffrage  155 

Thompson's,  special  legislation  156 

Proctor's,  exemption  from  execution  206 
Irwin's,  court:*  of  conciliation  206 

James',   appropriation  by   majority  of 

the  legislature  218 

Rudd's,  hour  of  meeting  221 

Taylor's,  returns  of  parents  and  guar- 

dlians,  <fcc.,  246,  261 

Hargis',    expenditures  and  receipts  of 

government  264,  262 

Taylor's,   returns   of   parents,   guardi- 
ans, (fee,  246,  261 
McClure's,  death  of  B.  Y.  Owsley  261 
Moore's,  limitation  of  legislative  pow- 
er to  borrow  money                                  279 
Moore's,  representation  of  counties  279 
Boyd's,  individual  liability  279 
Boyd's,  legislative  amendments  of  con- 
stitution                                                 279 
Machen's,  book  of  forms                           279 
Jackson's,  common  school  fund  292 
Mitchell's,  submission  to  the  people        392 
Rogers',  constitution  .  of  county  courts    392 
Jackson's,    legislative   amendments  to 

constitution  403 

Gaither's,  powers  of  the  general   and 

state  governments  403 

Triplett's,  jurisdiction  of  constables  403 
Chambers',  instruction  of  committees, 

number  of  appellate  judges  378 

Hamilton's,  in  relation  to  fees  of  clerks 

and  sheriffs  420 

Williams',  in  regard  to  board  of  com- 
missioners of  public  accounts  420 
Meriwether's,  in  regard  to  the  order  of 

business  453 

Irwin's,  on  representation  of  towns  and 

cities  540.  570 

Clarke's,  to  appoint  committee  to  pre- 
pare address  to  the  people  729 
Hardin's,    to    appoint    committee    on 

claims  729 

Morris',  on  the  representation  of  towns 

and  cities  479 

Woodson's,  on  senatorial  districts  502 

Chrisman's,  of  instruction  to  close  de- 
bate 522 
Boyd's,  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion                                                         528 
Irwin's,  relative  to  representation   of 

cities,  <fec.,  540 

Turner's,  s^ubstitute  for  Irwin's   reso- 
lution relative  to  representation  541 
Barlow's,  to  hold  evening  sessions           558 
Garfieldtj's,  concerning  legislative  rep- 
resentation                                             558 
Hargis',  restricting  the  representation 

of  cities  560 

C.  A.  WicklifTe's,  to  restrict  debate  on 
report  concerning  legislative  depart- 
ment 571 
Clarke's,  concerning  the  basis  of  refpre- 
•entation  587 


Resolutions — 

Apperson's,  concerning  the  basis  of 
representation  618 

Woodson's,  concerning  the  basis  of  rep- 
resentation 632 

Desha's,  concerning  the  basis  of  repre- 
sentation 637 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's,  concerning  the  basis 
of  representation  684 

Thompson's,  for  information  in  regard 
to  legislative  sessions,  expenses  of    684 

Kelly's  on  the  Wilmot  proviso  788 

M.  P.  Marshall's,  mode  of  amending 
the  constitution  800 

Chenault's,  mode  of  amending  the  con- 
stitution 827 

Apperson's,  for  special  term  of  court  of 
appeals,  <fec.,  861 

Edwards',  mode  of  amending  the  con- 
stitution 862 

Kavanaugh's,  submitting  new  constitu- 
tion to  the  people  862 

Waller's,  on  the  subject  of  slave  prop- 
erty 843 

Kavanaugh's,  mode  of  amending  the 
constitution  910 

Clarke's,  concerning  slavery  923 

Mitchell's,  in  regard  to  the  power  of  the 
legislature  to  prevent  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves  923 

Talbott's,  mode  of  revising  th«  consti- 
tution 947 

Clarke's,  opposition  to  all  modes  of  spe- 
cific amendment  of  the  constitution     991 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's  concerning  distribu- 
tion of  Debates  and  Journals  994 

Hardin's,  from  committee  on  claims, 
appropriating  certain  money  997 

Hardin's,  to  inquire  into  the  expedien- 
cy of  paying  expenses  of  Henry 
county  contested  election  997 

Apperson's,  for  the  engrossment  of  the 
new  constitution  997 

James',  to  print  60,000  copies  of  the 
new  constitution  1025 

Hardin's,  to  pay  Nuttall's  expenses  in 
Henry  county  contested  election        1026 

Dunavan's,  to  hold  night  sessions  1026 

Wheeler's,  limiting  debate  1026 

James',  postponing  the  time  of  taking 
effect  of  penal  laws  1052 

Kelly's,  on  the  Wilmot  proviso,  taken 
up  1052 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's,  to  submit  the  consti- 
tution to  the  people  and  re-assemble  1054 

Triplett's,  on  submitting  new  constitu- 
tion to  the  people  1061 

Meriwether's,  disposition  to  be  made  of 
enrolled  constitutions  1071 

Garrard's,  giving  power  to  the  Presi- 
dent to  issue  writs  of  election  1071 

Bradlev's,  constituting  a  committee  on 
enrollment  1071 

Williams',  submitting  new  constitu- 
tion to"  the  people  1082 

Hardin's,  delegates  shall  not  be  entitled 
to  per  diem  during  recess  1087 

Meriwether's,  to  adjourn  1090 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's,  to  sign  and  attest 
constitution  1090 

Mitchell'H,  in  reg^ard  to  binding  journal  1090 


# 


1125 


Resolotions — 

Of  thanks  to  officers  1091 

Retrospective  laws — James'  resolutioa  111 

Robinson,  John  T.,  434 

Leave  of  absence  granted  to  434 

Rockhold,  Thomas  11 

Rogers,   John   T.,    33,   65,    191,  312,  313,  364 

374,  376,  392,  714,  835,  975 

Remarks  on  the  removal  of  appellate 

judges  191 

Remarks  on  the  election  of  appellate 

judges,  b}-  ballot  312 

Resolution   and  remarks  on  the  con- 
struction of  county  courts  392 
Remarks  on  the  report  on  county  courts  714 
Amendment  to  report  of  committee  on 
apportionment  of  representation  975 
Root,  Ira,    17,  27,  30,  36,  64.  66,  90,  173,  178 
190,  280,  293,  294,  296,  302,  414,  438,  441 
461,  669,  708,  788,  815,  994 
Resolation  respecting  school  fund  30 
Resolution     respecting     dueling,    and 

state  debts  36 

Remarks  on  Turner's  slavery    resolu- 
tions 90 
Remarks  on  the  removal  of  appellate 

judges  173 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 

representation  of  cities  and  towns        461 

Remarks  on  oountv  court  report  709 

Rudd,   James,    16,   51,  "59,  112,  147,  221,  330 

358,  400,  416,  424,  439,  441,  567,  583,  5^ 

585,  567,  596,  617,  648,  683,  715,  717,  731 

788,  815,  837,  1023,  1024 

Resolution  on    contracting   debts,   by 

cities  59,  112 

Resolution  on  Louisville  chancery  147 

Resolution  on  the  hour  of  meeting  221 

Remarks  on  the  removal  of  appellate 

judges  330 

Remarks  on  Meriwether's  amendment — 
separate  representation,  and  munici- 
pal regulation  of  cities  416 
Amendment  to  report  in  regard  to  rep- 
resentation of  cities  584 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  concerning 

county  and  district  offices  424 

Remarks  on  the  proposition   to  restrict 

cities  567,  585 

Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  voters    617 
Remarks  in  reply  to  Davis,   on  his  Na- 
tive American  resolutions  1023 
Boles  of  Order — 

Resolution  to  appoint  committee  on  17 

Resolution  considered  18 

Committee  on,  appointed  19 

Reported,  by  committee  27 

Report  considered  37,  40,  43,  55 

Amended,  astoquonim  55 

Proposition  to  amend  319 

Amended  334 

Seats  of  Members — 

Resolution  to  ballot  for  2b,  29 

Seat  of  Gevemment — article  fixing  793 

Secretary— election  of  16 

Assistant,  election  of  16 

Sergeant-at-Anns — election  of  17 

Separate    Representation,    and    Mnnicipal 

Regulation  of  Cities  414 

Sheriffs — resolution  concerning  fees  of  420 

Re-eligibility  of  392,  403 


Slaves  and  Slavery — 

Turner's  resolution  respecting  25,  58 

Resolution  considered,    70,    80,  80,  91,  92 
103,  103,  111.  123,  126,  138,  144 
Slavery — article  reported  69 

Slaves,  Manumission  of,  <fec. — 

Meriwether's  resolution  57 

Slave  Property.  Inviolability  of — 

Dixon's  refolutions  112,  123,  128,  138 

Slavery — 

Resolutions   by    Turner,    referring    to 
emancipation,  <fec.,  24 

Resolution  by  Kelly,  referring  to  eman- 
cipation, <fec.,  30 

Resolutions  by  MoHenry,  referring  to 
free  persons  of  color,  &q.,  41 

Resolutions   by    Hargis,    referring    to 
emancipation,  &c.,  42 

President  announced  committee  on  55 

Resolution  by  Meriwether — manumis- 
sion, <fce.,  57 

Turner's  sixth  resolution  made  special 
order  58 

Talbott's  resolution,  referring  to  spe- 
cific aineudiueuts  58 

Gray's   resolution,  referring  to  specific 
amendments  67 

Talbott'e  correction,  third  resolution        69 

Report  of  committee  69 

Report  referred  committee  of  the  whole    70 

Turner's   resolutions  taken  up  for  con- 
sideration 70 

Convention  in  committee  of  the  whole, 
on  Turner's  sixth  rest)lution  71 

2f  uttall  proposed  to  amend  sixth  reso- 
lution 77 

All  resolutions  referring  to  slavery  re- 
ferred to  committee  of  the  whole  80 

Convention  in  committee  of  whole  on       80 

Convention  in  committee  of  whole  on      92 

Nuttail's   amendment  to  sixth  resolu- 
tion adopted  92 

Amendment  proposed   to  sixth   resolu- 
tion, bv  the  President  92 

C.  A.   WickliflFe's  resolution — punish- 
ment of  free  negroes  103 

Convention  in   committee  of  whole  on  103 

Dixon's  resolution — rights  of  a  major- 
ity, ic,  112 

Convention  in  committee  of  whole,  on    123 

Debate  on  Dixon's  resolution  128,  138 

Dixon's  resolution  referred  to  commit- 
tee of  the  whole  138 

Convention  in  committee  of  whole,  on     138 

Boyd's     resolutions — emancipation    of 
slaves  279 

Dixon's  proposed  amendment  to  com- 
mittee of  general  provisions  378 

Dixon's  proposed  amendment  referred 
to  committee  of  the  whole  378 

Jackson's  preamble   and  resolutions — 
specific  amendments  403 

Clarke's  substitute  for  Lindsey's  amend- 
ment to  legislative  report  455 

Taylor's  motion  to  strike  out  Clarke's 
amendment  556 

Taylor's  motion  rejected  556 

Clarke's  amendment  ruled  out  of  order  579 

Kelly's  resolutions  on  the  Wilmot  pro- 
viso 788 

Waller's  resolution  843 


1126 


Slavery — 

A.  K.  Marshall's  ametidinent,  on  the 
power  of  the  Convention  over  858 

Clarke's  ainiendment  859 

Considerea  in  convention  914 

A.  K.  Marshall's  substitute  for  first  sec- 
tion of  committee's  report  919 

Clarke's  resolution  concerning  923 

Mitchell's  resolution  in  regard  to  pow- 
er of  the  legislature  to  prevent  the 
importation  of  923 

Spalding,  Ignatius  A.,  16,  1034 

Remarks  in  reply  to  Davis,  on  his  Na- 
tive American  resolutions  1034 
Sanders,  Culvin — elected  Sergeant-at-Arms    17 

Vote  of  thanks  to  1091 

State  Debts — 

Resolution  to  appoint  select  commit- 
tee on  55 

Resolution  to  limit  the  power  of  the 
general  assembly  to  contract  36 

Statutes — proposition  to  revive  639 

Stevenson,  John   W.,  16.  17,  83,  159,  164,  347 

350,  378,  467,  494,  514,  517,  650,  668,  684 

689,  691,  727,  780,  787,  791,  795,  797,  798 

799,  806,  828,  829,  838,  904,  994,  1029,  1053 
1054,  1071.  1073,  1077,  1083,.  1084,  1085 

Remarks  on  Turner's  slavery  resolu- 
tions 83 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges  159 

164 

Speech  on  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals 347 

Report,  articles  general  provisions  350 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  amendment  to  bill 
of  rights  378 

Remarks  in  reply  to  Root,  on  represen- 
tation of  cities,  and  slavery  467 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  515 

Remarks  on  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals 650 

Remarks  on  the  re-eligibility  of  circuit 
judges  658 

Remarks  on  the  commonwealth's  right 
of  challenge  in  criminal  cases  689 

Remarks  on  the  right  of  cities  to  cre- 
ate debt  787 

Remarks  on  the  ancient  trial  by  a  jury 
of  the  vicinage  797,  798 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  amendment  to  the 
bill  of  rights  806 

Remarks  on  dueling — Proctor's  amend- 
ment 828 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  codify 
the  laws  904 

Reported  from  the  committee  on  mis- 
cellaneous provisions  994 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  re-us- 
semble  1054 

Report,  in  conformity  to  order  of  con- 
vention, on  C.  A.  Wickliffe's  resolu- 
tion 1071 

Reply  to  C.  A.  Wickliffe,  on  the  resolu- 
tion to  re-a«8emble  1073 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  modify 
the  practice  in  criminal  cases  1085 

Stone,  James  W.,  16 

Stoner,  Michael  L., — took  his  seat  26 

Submisiiion  of  Constitution  to  the  people — 

Turner's  resolution  25 

Mitchell's  resolution  392 


Submission  of  Constitution  to  the  people — 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's  resolution  1054 

Suffrage — 

C.  A.  Wickliffe's  resolution  on  36 

Talbott,  Albert  G.,  13,  14,  32,  58,  59,  69,  84 
85,  106,  113,  119,  123,  126,  295,  296,  438 
439,  716,  731,  804,  805,  814,  843,  865,  947 
Resolutions  on    specific    amendments, 

and  slavery  58,  69 

Remarks  on   Turner's  slavery  resolu- 
tions 84,  85.  106,  110,  123,  126 
Leave  of  absence  128 
Remarks  on  Dixon's  amendment  to  the 

bill  of  rights  804 

Remarks  on  the  mode  of  amending  the 

constitution  843 

Remarks  on  the  slave  question  865 

Resolution,  mode  of  revising  constitu- 
tion 847 
Taxation — Gray's  resolution  639 
Subject  considered  831 
Gray's  amendment  to  report  831 
Nuttall's  amendment  834 
Rogers'  amendment  835 
Kelly's  amendment  835 
Subject  further  considered  837 
Triplett's  amendment  839 
Kelly's  proposition  856 
Meriwether's  proposition  856 
Davis'  amendment,  considered  856 
Taylor,  John  D.,  85,  178.  246,  292,  300,  302 
377,  556,  621.  674,  678,  683,  700,  715.  744 
747,  750,  830,  880,  889.  908,  913,  980,  1060 

1087 
Speech  on  Turner's  slavery  resolution,  85,  88 
Speech   on  the   removal   of  appellate 

judges  178 

Resolution  calling  for  returns  of  pa- 
rents and  guardians,  tfec,  246,  261 
Report  from  the  committee  on  educa- 
tion 377 
Leave  of  absence  to  420 
Remarks  on  the  representation  of  cities  582 
Remarks  on  biennial    sessions   of  the 

legislature  621 

Remarks  on  writs  of  error  and  appeals 

in  criminal  cases  674,  678 

Remarks  on  report  on  county  courts         700 
Remarks  on   the  provision    excluding 

clergymen  from  the  legislature     745,  750 
Remarks  on  the  report  of  the  commit- 
tee on  education  889 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  take  a 

recess  till  the  first  of  June  1060 

Amendment  to  the  clause  concerning 

dueling,  giving  power  of  pardon  to 

the  Governor  1087 

Thanksgiving  day — resolution  to  adjourn      699 

Thompson.  William.  R.,  26,  33.  56.  66,  69,  156 

166.  293,  356.  529,  621,  652,  663.  672,  684 

717,  718,  732,  733,  857,  953,  976,  992,  1029 

1031 
Resolution  to  refer  articles  of  consti- 
tution to  committees  26 
Resolution  ou  future  conventions,  and 

dueling  56,  57 

Resolution  on  restricting  the  power  of 

the  legislature  to  contract  deut  69 

Resolution  on  special  legislation  156 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges  166 
Speech  on  equality  of  representation    523 


U-27 


Thompson,  "William  R. — 

Remarks  on  biennial  sessions  of  the  le- 
gislature C2l 
Remarks  on  qualification  forjudges        663 
Resolution  calling  for  information  in 

regard  to  legislative  sessions  684 

Resolution  on  mode  of  revising  consti- 
tution 953 
Amendment  to  report  of  the  committee 
on  the  apportionment  of  representa- 
tion                                              976,  1029 
Proposition  for  providing  for  changes 

in  the  constitution  992 

Remarks  on  tlie  pover  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  contract  debt  1031 
Thurman,  John  J.,  11 
Tilford,  Thomas  D.,— 

Elected  assistant  secretary  16 

Vote  of  thanks  to  1091 

Todd,  Howard,  11 

Tolls— James'  proposition  in  regard  to  777 

Treason,  vrhat  constitutes  790 

Treasury,  how  money  to  be  drawn  from  790 

Treasurer — 

How  elected,  and  term  of  office  737 

Trial  by  jury,  and  peremptory  challenge  91 

Article  reported,  securing  794 

Lindsey's  proposition  to  amend  794 

Article  adopted  796 

Tribune  for  debaters,  proposed  27 

Triplett,  Philip,  58.  o9,  67,  116,  144,  197,  198 
199,262,  290,  291,  299,  306,  327,  331,  353 
356,  366,  387,  388,  400,  408,  419,  429,  430 
431,433,  438,  456,  510,  517,  522,  544,  556 
582,  584,  594.  603,  604,  619,  622,  640,  652 
660,  682,  683,  685,  692,  713,  727,  728,  731 
733,  827,  839,  840,  854,  880,  907,  934,  935 
964,  971,  1025,  1061,  1077 
Resolution  on  pardoning  power  67 

Remarks  on  Dixon's  resolution — invio- 
lability of  slave  property  116 
Remarks  on  Gholson's  resolution— cer- 
tificate of  qualification  for  office  144 
Remarks  on   the  removal   of  appellate 

judges  19/,  198,  199 

Remarks  on  branching  court  of  ap- 
peals, and  suggestion  of  a  joint  judi- 
ciary committee  of  thirty  ,  354 
Remarks  on  Oaither's  resolution  and 
speech — ^powers  of  the  general  and 
state  government  408 
Amendment    to  report    on    Louisville 

chancery  court,  proposed  430 

Amendment  to  report  on  legislative  de- 
partment, proposed  456 
Amendment  to  report  in  regard  to  rep- 
resentation of  cities  and  towns  584 
Remarks    on    the    article    concerning 

new  counties  419 

Remarks    on    the  Louisville  chancery 

court  429,  43(5,  431 

Remarks  on  the  restriction  of  city  rep- 
resentation 510 
Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 582 
Remarks   on   the    basis    of  representa- 
tion                               594,  603,  604.  971 
Amendment  and  remarks  on  the  right 
of  the  commonwealth  to  challenge  in 
criminal  cases  682 
Remarks  on  circuit  court  report               685 


Triplett,  Philip- 
Remarks  on  report  on  the  executive  de- 
partment 727 
Remarks  on  county  court  report  738 
Resolutions  in  regard  to  specific  taxa- 
tion                                                839,  854 
Remarks  on  the  codification  of  laws        908 
Remarks  on  tlie  proposition  to  give  the 
legislature  power  to  banish  free  ne- 
groes 934 
Proposition  in  regard  to  board  of  inter- 
nal improvement                                   1025 
Resolution  and  remarks  on  submitting 
new  constitution  to  the  people            1061 
Turner,   Squire,    10,  13,  14,  24,  25,  27,  30,  34 
36,  37,  38,  58,  65,  70,  71,  78,  79,  80,  81 
82,    85,    89,   110,    111,    112,  113,  115,  128 
131,  138,  144,  218,  219,  222,  236,  287.  288 
291,292,  302,  303,  306,  310.  311,  331,  332 
334,  355,  356,  358.  360,  361,  362,  363,  367 
369,  373,  379,  388,  389,  397,  398,  399,  400 
401,  402,  403,  413,  414.  424,  428,  433,  448 
453,  522,  541,  543,  544,  546,  564.  586,  615 
618,  619.  620,  624,  648,  652,  653,  663,  669 
672,  684,  700,  704,  706,  707,  713,  737.  765 
777,  784,  785,  786,  787,  791,  814,  826,  829 
836,  837,  839,  841,  856,  879,  880,  904,  933 
961,  963,  970,  974,  976,  987,  989,  993,  1000 
1062,  1062,  1085,  1089 
Resolution  suggesting  provisions  24 
Resolutions  on  slaverv,  24,  25,  53,  70.  80 
'      92,  103,  123.  128 
Speech  on  his  resolutions  on  slaverv,  70.  76 
79,  81,  82,  85 
Report  of  article  from  committee  on 

executive  and  ministerial  offices  111 

Correction  of  introductory  remarks  on     144 
Speech  on  Dixon's  resolution — inviola- 
bility of  slave  property  128 
Speech  on  the  power  of  the  Governor 
to  veto  legislative  resolutions  to  re 
move  judges                                           218 
Series  of  amendments  to  court  of  ap- 
peals article                                            219 
Speech  on  branching  the  court  of  ap- 
peals, «fec.,                                       222,  227 
Resolution  and  remarks  relative  to  rep- 
resentation of  cities  and  towns              541 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  concerning 

county  and  district  offices  424 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  restrict 

representation  of  cities  and  towns  448 
Remarks  on  the  qualification  of  voters  615 
Speech  against  branching  the  court  of 

appeals  648 

Amendment  authorizing  writs  of  error 

in  criminal  cases  652 

Remarks  on  county  court  report  700 

Amendment  to  the  report  on  county 

courts  707,  713 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  executive  af- 
fairs 736 
Remarks  on  restricting  the  legislature 

in  creating  debt  765 

Amendment  touching  power  of  legisla- 
ture to  create  debt  785 
Plan  for  amending  constitution                842 
Remarks  on  GhoLson's  plan,  law  reform  904 
Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  give  to 
the  legislature  power  to  sell  or  ban- 
ish free  negroes  933 


1128 


Turner,  Squire — 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  rep- 
resentation 961,  963,  970,  976 
Proposition  roncerning  elections,  and 

returns  of  officers,  <fec.,  974 

Amendment  proposed  on  the  subject  of 

county  representation  1000 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  re-as- 
serable  in  June  1062 

Vacancies — 

Power  to  issue  writs  to  fill  107l 

Valedictory  address  of  President  1106 

Venue  in  criminal  cases — how  changed  674 

Vote  on  election  of  President  15 

Voters,  qualified — 2d  Auditor's  report       69,  80 

Waller,  John  L.,  19,  25,  28,  246,  625,  670,  684 

720,  738,  747,  750,  843,  914,  924,  1091 

Resolution  on  mode  of  proceeding  19 

Remarks  on  the  proposition  to  exclude 

clergymen  from  tlie  legislature  738 

Resolution  on  slavery  843,  924 

Resolution  of  thanks  to  President  of 
convention  l09l 

Washington,  Henry  11 

Wheeler,  John  178,  434,  815,  1026 

Leave  of  absence  granted  to  434 

Resolution  limiting  debate  1026 

White,  Andrew  S.,  16,  207 

WicklifiFe,  Charles  A.,  11,  12,  14,  19,  20,  24,  26 
27,  28,  36,  39,  44,  54,  57,  58,  60,  61,  66 
67,  69,  79,  80,  85,  86,  91,  103,  110,  115 
127,  135,  136,  137,  138,  143,  148,  149,  163 
167,  168,  171,  175,  191,  198,  206,  207,  216 
218,  219,  221,  232,  262,  280,  286,  287,  291 
292,  293,  295,  300,  301,  302,  303,  304,  305 
306,  307,  308,  312,  313,  314,  318,  319,  321 
322,329,  330,  331,  332,  334,  337,  352,  354 
355,  357,  363,  364,  379,  388,  394,  413,  414 
417,418,  423,  424,  431,  435,  443,  445,  453 
471,497,  501,  502,  503,  508,  521,  522,  524 
528,  546,  557,  575,  571,  578,  580,  584,  586 
587,  588,  594,  596,  597,  602,  604,  612,  619 
622,  623,  625,  628,  637,  6^9,  644,  651,  652 
670,  683,  684,  707,  717,  718,  725,  727,  730 
731,  733,  734,  735.  738.  753,  755,  758,  766 
768,  776,  777,  780,  781,  783,  789,  793,  796 
804,  826,  837,  838,  856,  858,  888,  900,  901 
907,  908,  913,  914,  922,  930,  931,  933,  935 
937,  952,  959,  965,  966,  976,  986,  994,  1022 
1025,  1030,  1053,  1070,  1072,  1084 
Resolution  to  appoint  standing  com- 
mittees 19 
Resolution  on  free  suffrage  36 
Report  from  com.  on  court  of  appeals  60,  127 
Resolution  on   punishment  of  colored 

felons  103 

Speech  on  Dixon's  resolution— inviola- 
bility of  slave  property  136 
Remarks  on   Turner's  slavery  resolu- 
tions                                            80,  81,  85 
Speech   on  the  removal   of   appellate 

judges  198,  206,  207 

Sj)eeeh  on  power  of  Governor  to  veto 

resolution  of  removal  216 

Motion  for  select  committee  on  organi- 
zation of  new  counties  221 
Report  from  select  cominitte  on  262 
Remarks  on  the  election  of  judges  and 

clerks,  by  ballot  148,  314 

Remarks  on  Hardin's  motion  to  remove 
judges  by  address  149 


Wickliffe,  Charl<»9  A.— 

Remarks  on  Hardin's  speech'— personal 
allusions  329 

Remarks  in  favor  of  referring  judiciary 
article  to  joint  committee  354,  355 

Amendment  to  report  of  committee  on 
new  counties  418 

Resolution  to  restrict  debate  on  report 
concerning    legislative   department    571 

Remarks — county  and  district  offices  422, 423 

Remarks  in  regard  to  Louisville  chan- 
cery court  431 

Remarks  on  the  policy  of  restricting 
the  representation  of  cities  503 

Remarks  in  reply  to  Chrisman's  char- 
ges of  political  inconsistency  524 

Remarks  on  Morris'  proposition  in  re- 
gard to   representation  of  cities  557,  587 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  588 
602,  604,  612,  966 

Remarks  on  the  judiciary  644 

Resolution  and  remarks  on  the  appor- 
tionment of  representation  684 

Remarks  on  the  report  on  the  execu- 
tive department  725 

Remarks  on  the  power  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  contract  debt  755,  776,  783 

Remarks  on  specific  taxation  838 

Remarks  on  education  888,  900,  913 

Personal  explanation,  and  correction 
of  error  in  report  of  the  debates  901 

Reported  amendment  to  report  on  court 
of  appeals  922 

Amendment,  giving  power  to  legisla- 
ture to  punish  free  negroes,  by  ban- 
ishment, <fec.,  932 

Motion  to  discharge  committee  on  new 
counties  937 

Proposition — apportionment  of  repre- 
sentation 976 

Resolution,  distributing  copies  of  de- 
bates and  journals  to  clerks,  <fec.,  994 

Remarks  in  reply  to  Davis,  on  Native 
Americanism  1022 

Remarks  and  resolution  prescribing 
mode    of  submitting  constitution      1053 

Remarks    in    relation  to   strictures  of 
'•Commonwealth"  upon   the   action 
of  the   convention,   in  regard  to   re- 
assembling in  June  1072,  1089 
Wickliflfe,  Robert  N.,   168,  171,  291,  311,  332 
411,  797,  843,  991 

Speech  on  removal  of  appellate  judges  168 

Motion—removal  of  judges  by  legisla- 
tive majorities  291 

Speech  on  Oholson's  resolution,  in  ex- 
planation of  votes  411 

Remarks  on  article  concerning  new 
counties  418 

Williams,   George  W.,   27,  28,  40,  91,  92,  219 

289,  400,  420,  483,  629,  630,  793,  797,  801 
910,  936,  1082 

Resolution    and  remarks  on  trial   bj' 

jury,  and  peremptory  challenge  91 

.  Remarks  on  Morris'  proposition  to  dis- 
trict cities  483 

Amendment  and  remarks  in  relation  to 
claims  against  the  state  629,  630 

Remarks  on  C.  A.  Wickliffe's  amend- 
ment to  report  of  committee  on  edu- 
cation 910 


1129 


Williams,  George  W. —  ; 

Substitute  for  Clarke's  proposition  con- 
cerning slave  importation  936 

Resolution  and  remarks,  touching  the 
submission  to  the  people,  &c.,  1082 

Wilmot  Proviso — Kelly's  proposition  788,  1052 
Woodson,   Silas.  29,  263,  280,  311,  356,   359 

360,  364.  367,  373,  376,  385,  403,  420,  441 

442.  443.  502,  578,  608,  623,  632,  637,  642 

672,  700,   716,   867,   915,   975,  1031,  1052: 

1053,  1087  i 

Reply  to  Davis  on  the  appellate  judi- 
ciary 263  : 

Amenclment  proposed  to  report  of  the         | 
committee  on  legislative  department  442  i 

Resolution  relative  to  senatorial  dis-         i 
tricts  502 1 

Remarks  on  the  apportionment  of  .sen-         | 
atorial  representation  502  | 

Remarks  on  the  basis  of  representation  632 

Remarks  on  the  organization  of  the 
court  of  appeals  642 

Remarks  on  the  exercise  of  the  power         ' 
of  remitting  fines  and  forfeitures  672  , 

Remarks  on  me  slave  question        867,  915  ; 

142 


Woodson,  Silas — - 

Proposition  for  the  apportionment  of 

representation  97S 

Moved  that  when  the  convention  ad- 
journed it  would  adjourn  *ine  die. 
submitting  the  new  constitution  to. 
the  people  1053 

Wright,  Wesley  J.,  221 

Writs  of  error  in  criminal  cases — 

Tiirner's  amendment  652 

Taylor's  amendment  674 

Yeas  and  nays,  13,  330,  331,  355,  380,  391,  397 
398,  402,  413,  417,  428,  543,  581,  583,  584 
587,  595,  596,  597,  598,  602,  617,  624,  625 
650,  651,  652,  660,  663,  669,  671,  673,  674 
683,  684,  692,  694,  699,  706,  713,  714,  716 
717,  718,  719,  726,  728,  730,  731,  732,  733 
737,  753,  777,  780,  781,  784,  785,  789,  790 
791,  792,  793,  794,  797,  798,  800,  801,  814 
815,  821,  827,  830,  831,  834,  835,  836,  837 
839,  856,  857,  858,  879,  880.  907,  909,  920 
921,  935,  936,  937,  958,  959,  972,  973,  974 
977,  980,  986,  992,  993,  994,  996,  997,  999 
1000,  1001,  1025,  1026,  1027,  1028,  1029 
10.30,  1031,   1052,   1070,  1071,  1083,  1087 


Ma 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 

University  of  California  Library 

or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
BIdg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 


ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 
2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 

(415)642-6233 
1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books 

to  NRLF 
Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days 

prior  to  due  date 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


SE^OattrL 


dm^<o^^ 


B^.-fe  tT^uirv — - 


MAR  2  7  2004 


JUL  2  0  2005 


^»ySmmitm^3^4 


>'D  08536 


\^ 


4. 


\     { 


iWfe; 


m 


m!>f^. 


